Skip to main content

Full text of "A Dictionary of the Bible : comprising its antiquities, biography, geography, and natural history"

See other formats 


FROM-THE-  LIBRARY-OP 
TR1NITYCOLLEGE  TORONTO 


TRINITY  UNIVERSITY 

L! 


DICTIONARY    OF   THE    BIBLE 


COMPRISING    ITS 


ANTIQUITIES,   BIOGRAPHY,   GEOGRAPHY, 
AND    NATURAL   HISTORY. 


EDITED 


BY  WILLIAM  SMITH,  D.C.L.,  LL.D., 

EDITOR  OF   THE   DICTIONARIES  OF  "GREEK   AND   ROMAN   ANTIQUITIES,"   "  BIOGRAPHV    AND   MYTHOLOGY, 

AND    "  GEOGRAPHY." 


IN  THEEE  VOLUMES.— YOL.  II. 
KABZEEL -RED-HEIFER. 


LONDON: 
JOHN    MURRAY,    ALBEMARLE    STREET. 

1863. 

The  right  of  Translatian  is  reserved. 


8 
>3 
^ 


DIRECTIONS  TO  BINDER. 


Plate  1.,  Specimens  of  Greek  MSS.  from  the  1st  to  the   Vlth  century,  to  be 
placed  between  pages  516  and  517. 

Plate  II.,  Specimens  of  Greek  MSS.  from  the  Xth  to  the  XlVth  century,  to  be 
placed  between  pages  518  and  510. 


PKIXIED   BY    WILLIAM   CLOWES   AND  SoXS,    LIMITEU, 
AN1>  CHA1UM. 


LIST    OF    WRITEKS. 


INITIALS.  NAMES. 

II.  A.  Very  Rev.  HENRY  ALFOIID,  D.D., 

Dean  of  Canterbury. 

H.  B.  Eev.  HENRY  BAILEY,  B.D., 

Wai'den  of  St.  Augustine's  College,  Canterbury ;  late  Fellow 
of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 

II.  B.  Eev.  HORATIUS  BONAR,  D.D., 

Kelso,  N.  B. ;  Author  of  '  The  Land  of  Promise.' 

[The  geographical  articles,  signed  H.  B.,  are  written  by  Dr.  Bonar:  those  on  other  subjects, 
signed  H.  B.,  are  written  by  Mr.  Bailey.] 

A.  B.  Eev.  ALFRED  BARRY,  B.D., 

Principal  of  Cheltenham  College ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

W.  L.  B.     Eev.  WILLIAM  LATHAM  BEVAN,  M.A., 
Vicar  of  Hay,  Brecknockshire. 

J.  W.  B.     Eev.  JOSEPH  WILLIAMS  BLAKESLEY,  B.D., 

Canon  of  Canterbury ;  Vicar  of  Ware ;  late  Fellow  and  Tutor 
of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge. 

T.  E.  B.       Eev.  THOMAS  EDWARD  BROWN,  M.A., 

Vice-Principal  of  King  William's  College,  Isle  of  Man  ;  late 
Fellow  of  Oriel  College,  Oxford. 

E.  W.  B.     Ven.  EGBERT  WILLIAM  BROWNE,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Bath ;  Canon  of  Wells ;  Eector  of  Weston- 
super-Mare  ;  Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Bath 
and  Wells  ,  Chaplain  to  Her  Majesty's  Forces. 

E.  H.  B.      Eev.  EDWARD  HAROLD  BROWNE,  B.C., 

Norrisian  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge ;  Canon  of  Exeter. 

W.  T.  B.     Eev.  WILLIAM  THOMAS  BULLOCK,  M.A., 

Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 

S.  C.  Eev.  SAMUEL  CLARK,  M.A., 

Vicar  of  Bredwardine  with  Brobury,  Herefordshire. 

F.  C.  C.       Eev.  F.  C.  COOK,  M.A., 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  one  of  Her  Majesty's 
Inspectors  of  Schools ;  Preacher  to  the  Hon.  Society  of 
Lincoln's  Inn ;  Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of 
Lincoln. 

G.  E.  L.  C.  Eight  Eev.  GEORGE  EDWARD  LYNCH  COTTON,  D.D., 

Lord  Bishop  of  Calcutta  and  Metropolitan  of  India. 

J.  LI.  D.       Eov.  JOHN  LLEWELYN  DA  VIES,  M.A., 

Eector  of  Christ  Church,  Marylebone ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 


iv  LIST  OF  WRITERS. 

INITIALS.  NAMES. 

E.  D.  EMANUEL  DEUTSCH,  M.R.A.S., 

British  Museum. 

G.  E.  D.      Rev.  G.  E.  DAY,  D.D., 

Lane  Seminary,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

W.  D.          Rev.  WILLIAM  DRAKE,  M.A., 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  Hon.  Canon  of  Worcester ; 
Rural  Dean  ;  Vicar  of  Holy  Trinity,  Coventry 

E.  P.  E.      Rev.  EDWARD  PAROISSIEN  EDDRUP,  M.A., 

Prebendary  of  Salisbury ;  Principal  of  the  Theological 
College,  Salisbury. 

C.  J.  E.       Right  Rev.  CHARLES  JAMES  ELLICOTT,  D.D., 
Lord  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol. 

P.  W.  F.     Rev.  FREDERICK  WILLIAM  FARRAR,  M.A., 

Assistant  Master  of  Harrow  School  ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

J.  F.  JAMES  FERGUSSON,  F.R.S.,  F.R.A.S., 

Fellow  of  the  Royal  Institute  of  British  Architects. 

E.  S.  Ff.      EDWARD  S.  FFOULKES,  M.A., 

late  Fellow  of  Jesus  College,  Oxford. 

W.  F.          Right  Rev.  WILLIAM  FITZGERALD,  D.D., 
Lord  Bishop  of  Killaloe. 

F.  G.  Rev.  FRANCIS  GARDEN,  M.A., 

Subdean  of  Her  Majesty's  Chapels  Royal. 

F.  W.  G.     Rev.  WILLIAM  GOTCH,  LL.D., 

late  Hebrew  Examiner  in  the  University  of  London. 

G.  GEORGE  GROVE, 

Crystal  Palace,  Sydenham. 

II.  B.  II.      Rev.  H.  B.  HACKETT  D.D., 

Professor  of  Biblical  Literature,  Newton,  Massachusetts. 

E.  II — s.      Rev.  ERNEST  HAWKINS,  B.D., 

Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's ;  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the 
Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 

II.  H.          Rev.  HENRY  HAYMAN,  B.D., 

Head  Master  of  the  Grammar  School,  Cheltenham ;  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Oxford. 

A.  C.  H.      Yen.  Lord  ARTHUR  C.  HERVEY,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Sudbury,  and  Rector  of  Ickworth. 

J.  A.  H.      Rev.  JAMES  AUGUSTUS  HESSEY,  D.C.L., 

Head  Master  of  Merchant  Taylors'  School ;  Preacher  to  the 
Hon.  Society  of  Gray's  Inn;  Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's  ; 
Bampton  Lecturer  for  1860. 

J.  D.  II.      JOSEPH  D.  HOOKER,  M.D.,  F.R.S., 
Royal  Botanic  Gardens,  Kcw. 


LIST  OF  WRITERS. 

INITIALS.  NAMES. 

J.  J.  H.       Rev.  JAMES  JOHN  HORNBY,  M.A., 

Fellow  of  Brasenose  College,  Oxford  ;  Principal  of 
Cosin's  Hall ;  Tutor  in  the  University  of  Durham. 

W.  H.          Kev.  WILLIAM  HOUGHTON,  M.A.,  F.L.S., 

Rector  of  Preston  on  the  Weald  Moors,  Salop. 

J.  S.  H.       Rev.  JOHN  SAUL  HOWSON,  D.D., 

Principal  of  the  Collegiate  Institution,  Liverpool ;  Hulsean 
Lecturer  for  1863. 

E.  H.  Rev.  EDGAR  HUXTABLE,  M.A., 

Subdean  of  Wells. 
W.  B.  J.      Rev.  WILLIAM  BASIL  JONES,  M.A., 

Prebendary  of  York  and  of  St.  David's ;   late  Fellow  and 

Tutor    of    University    College,    Oxford  ;    Examining 

Chaplain  to  the  Archbishop  of  York. 

A.  H.  L.      AUSTEN  HENRY  LAYARD,  D.C.L.,  M.P. 

S.  L.  Rev.  STANLEY  LEATHES,  M.A.,  M.R.S.L., 

Hebrew  Lecturer  in  King's  College,  London. 
J.  B.  L.       Rev.  JOSEPH  BARBER  LIGHTFOOT,  M.A., 

Hulsean  Professor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge  ;  Fellow  dt 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge;  Examining  Chaplain  to 
the  Bishop  of  London. 

D.  W.  M.     Rev.  D.  W.  MARKS, 

Professor  of  Hebrew  in  University  College,  London. 

F.  M.  Rev.  FREDERICK  MEYRICK,  M.A., 

One  of  Her  Majesty's  Inspectors  of  Schools ;  late  Fellow 
and  Tutor  of  Trinity  College,  Oxford. 

Oppert.        Professor  OPPERT,  of  Paris. 

E.  R.  O.       Rev.  EDWARD  REDMAN  ORGER,  M.A., 

Fellow  and  Tutor  of  St.  Augustine's  College,  Canterbury. 
T.  J.  0.       Yen.  THOMAS  JOHNSON  ORMEROD,  M.A., 

Archdeacon  of  Suffolk ;  late  Fellow  of  Brasenose  College, 
Oxford. 

J.  J.  S.  P.   Rev.  JOHN  JAMES  STEWART  PEROWNE,  B.D., 

Yice-Principal  of  St.  David's  College,  Lampeter  ;  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich. 

T.  T.  P.       Rev.  THOMAS  THOMASON  PEROWNE,  B.D., 

Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge ; 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich. 

H.  W.  P.     Rev.  HENRY  WTRIGHT  PHILLOTT,  M.A.,  i 

Rector  of  Staunton-on-Wye,  Herefordshire ;  VJural  Dean; 
late  Student  of  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

E.  H.  P.      Rev.  EDWARD  HAYES  PLUMPTRE,  M.A., 

Professor  of  Divinity  in  King's  College,  London  ;  Examining 
Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol. 

E.  S.  P.       EDWARD  STANLEY  POOLE,  M.R.A.S., 
South  Kensington  Museum. 


vi  LIST  OF  WRITERS. 

INITIALS.  NAMES. 

R.  S.  P.        REGINALD  STUABT  POOLB, 
British  Museum. 

J.  L.  P.       Rev.  J.  L.  POSTER,  M.A., 

Author  of  '  Handbook  of  Syria  and  Palestine,'  and  « Fivo 
Years  in  Damascus.' 

C.  P.  Rev.  CHARLES  PRITCHAED,  M.A.,  F.R.S., 

Hon.  Secretary  of  the  Royal  Astronomical  Society;  late 
Fellow  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge. 

G.  R.  Rev.  GEORGE  RAWLINSON,  M.A., 

Camden  Professor  of  Ancient  History,  Oxford;  Bampton 
Lecturer  for  1859. 

H.  J.  R.      Rev.  HENRY  JOHN  ROSE,  B.D., 

Rural  Dean,  and  Rector  of  Houghton  Conquest,  Bedfordshire. 

W.  S.  Rev.  WILLIAM  SELWTN,  D.D., 

Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen ;  Lady  Margaret's  Pro 
fessor  of  Divinity,  Cambridge  ;  Canon  of  Ely. 

A.  P.  S.       Rev.  ARTHUR  PENRHYN  STANLEY,  D.D., 

Regius  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  and  Canon  of 
Christ  Church,  Oxford;  Deputy  Clerk  of  the  Closet; 
Chaplain  to  His  Royal  Highness  the  Prince  of  Wales ; 
Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  London. 

C.  E.  S.       Rev.  CALVIN  E.  STOWE,  D.D., 

Professor  of  Sacred  Literature,  Andover,  Massachusetts. 

J.  P.  T.        Rev.  J.  P.  THOMPSON,  D.D., 
New  York. 

W.  T.          Most  Rev.  WILLIAM  THOMSON,  D.D., 
Lord  Archbishop  of  York. 

S.  P.  T.       S.  P.  TREGELLES,  LL.D., 

Author  of  '  An  Account  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament.' 

H.  B.  T.      Rev.  H.  B.  TRISTRAM,  M.A.,  F.L.S., 

Master  of  Greatham  Hospital. 
J.  F.  T.       Rev.  JOSEPH  FRANCIS  THRUPP,  M.A., 

Vicar  of  Barrington ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Carnb. 
E.  T.  Hon.  EDWARD  T.  B.  TWISLETON,  M.A., 

Late  Fellow  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford. 
E.  V.  Rev.  EDMUND  VENABLES,  M.A., 

Bonchurch,  Isle  of  Wight. 

B.  F.  W.      Rev.  BROOKE  Foss  WESTCOTT,  M.A., 

Assistant  Muster  of  Harrow  School ;  late  Fellow  of  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge. 

C.  W.  Rev.  CHRISTOPHER  WORDSWORTH,  D.D., 

Canon  of  Westminster. 
W.  A.  W.     WILLIAM  ALOIS  WRIGHT,  M.A., 

Librarian  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge  ;  Hebrew  Examiner 
in  the  University  of  London. 


DICTIONARY 


BIBLICAL  ANTIQUITIES,  BIOGRAPHY,  GEOGRAPHY, 
AND  NATURAL  HISTORY. 


K 


K  ABZEE'L 

Kaj8a<rai7\  ;  Alex.  Kacr6ffi\  :  Cabseel,  Capsael), 
one  of  the  "  cities  "  of  the  tribe  of  Juclah  ;  the  first 
named  in  the  enumeration  of  those  next  Edom,  and 
apparently  the  farthest  south  (Josh.  xv.  21). 
Taken  as  Hebrew,  the  word  signifies  "  collected  by 
God,"  and  may  be  compared  with  JOKTHEEL,  the 
name  bestowed  by  the  Jews  on  an  Edomite  city. 
Kabzeel  is  memorable  as  the  native  place  of  the 
great  hero  BENAiAH-ben-Jehoiada,  in  connexion 
with  whom  it  is  twice  mentioned  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20  ; 
1  Chr.  xi.  22).  After  the  captivity  it  was  rein- 
habited  by  the  Jews,  and  appears  as  JEKABZEEL. 

It  is  twice  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon  —  as 
Ko$<re^\  and  Capseel  ;  the  first  time  by  Eusebius 
(inly,  and  apparently  confounded  with  Carmel,  un 
less  the  conjecture  of  Le  Clerc  in  his  notes  on  the 
passage  be  accepted,  which  would  identify  it  with 
the  site  of  Elijah's  sleep  and  vision,  between  Beer- 
sheba  and  Horeb.  No  trace  of  it  appears  to  have 
been  discovered  in  modern  times.  [G.] 

KA'DESH,  KA'DESH  BAKNEA  (EHJ5, 

j:>  :  KdSris,  KciSjjs  Eapv-f,,  Kc£Syjs  roS 
).  This  place,  the  scene  of  Miriam's  death,  was 
the  farthest  point  to  which  the  Israelites  reached  in 
their  direct  road  to  Canaan  ;  it  was  also  that  whence 
the  spies  were  sent,  and  where,  on  their  return,  the 
people  broke  out  into  murmuring,  upon  which  their 
strictly  penal  term  of  wandering  began  (Num.  xrii. 
3,  26,  xiv.  29-33,  xx.  1  ;  Deut.  ii.  14).  It  is  pro 
bable  that  the  term  "  Kadesh,"  though  applied  to 
signify  a  "  city,"  yet  had  also  a  wider  application 
to  a  region,  in  which  Kadesh-Meribah  certainly, 
and  Kadesh-Barneri  probably,  indicates  a  precise 
spot.  Thus  Kadesh  appears  as  a  limit  eastward  of 
the  same  tract  which  was  limited  westward  by 
Shur  (Gen.  xx.  1).  Shur  is  possibly  the  same  as 
Sihor,  "which  is  before  Egypt"  (xxv.  18  ;  Josh. 
xiii.  3  ;  Jer.  ii.  18),  and  was  the  first  portion  of  the 
wilderness  on  which  the  people  emerged  from  the 
passage  of  the  Red  Sea.  [SHUR.]  "  Betwewi  Ka 
desh  and  Bered  "  is  another  indication  of  the  site  of 
Kadesh  as  an  eastern  limit  (Gen.  xvi.  14),  for  the 
|K>int  so  fixed  is  "  the  fountain  on  the  way  to  Shur" 
v.  7),  and  the  range  of  limits  is  narrowed  by  se 
lecting  the  western  one  not  so  far  to  the  west,  while 
the  eastern  one,  Kadesh,  is  unchanged.  Again,  we 
have  Kadesh  as  the  point  to  which  the  1'on.y  of 
VOL  II, 


KAUESH 

Chedorlaomer  "  returned  " — a  word  which  does  nol 
imply  that  they  had  previously  visited  it,  but  that 
it  lay  in  the  direction,  as  viewed  from  Mount  Seir 
and  Paran  mentioned  next  before  it,  which  was 
that  of  the  point  from  which  Chedorlaomer  had 
come,  viz.  the  North.  Chedorlaomer,  it  seems, 
coming  down  by  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea 
smote  the  Zuzims  (Ammon,  Gen.  xiv.  5  ;  Deut.  ii. 
20),  and  the  Emims  (Moab,  Deut.  ii.  11),  and  the 
Horitos  in  Mount  Seir,  to  the  south  of  that  SCR, 
unto  "  El-Paran  that  is  by  the  wilderness."  He 
drove  these  Horites  over  the  Arabah  into  the  Et- 
Tih  region.  Then  "  returned,"  i.  e.  went  north 
ward  to  Kadesh  and  Hazazon  Tamar,  or  Engedi 
(comp.  Gen.  xiv.  7  ;  2  Chr.  xx.  2).  In  Gen.  xiv.  7 
Kadesh  is  identified  with  En-Mishpat,  the  "  foun 
tain  of  judgment,"  and  is  connected  with  Tamar,  or 
Hazazon  Tamar,  just  as  we  find  these  two  in  the 
comparatively  late  book  of  Ezekiel,  as  designed  to 
mark  the  southern  border  of  Judah,  drawn  through 
them  and  terminating  seaward  at  the  "  River  to,' 
or  "  toward  the  Great  Sea."  Precisely  thus  siauds 
Kadesh-Barnea  in  the  books  of  Numbers  and  Joshua 
(comp.  Ezek.  xlvii.  19,  xlviii.  28;  Num.  xxxiv.  4; 
Josh.  xv.  3).  Unless  then  we  are  prepared  to  make 
a  double  Kadesh  for  the  book  of  Genesis,  it  seems  idle 
with  Reland  (Palestine,  p.  114-7)  to  distinguish 
the  "En-Mishpat,  which  is  Kadesh,"  from  that  to^ 
which  the  spies  returned.  For  there  is  an  identity 
about  all  the  connexions  of  the  two,  which,  if  not 
conclusive,  will  compel  us  to  abandon  all  possible 
inquiries.  This  holds  especially  as  regards  Paran 
and  Tamar,  and  in  respect  of  its  being  the  eastern 
limit  of  a  region,  and  also  of  being  the  first  point  of 
importance  found  by  Chedorlaomer  on  passing  round 
the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea.  In  a  strik 
ingly  similar  manner  we  have  the  limits  of  a  route, 
apparently  a  well-known  one  at  the  time,  indicated 
by  three  points,  Horeb,  Mount  Seir,  Kadesh-Barnea, 
in  Deut.  i.  2,  the  distance  between  the  extremes 
being  fixed  at  "11  days' journey,"  or  about  165 
miles,  allowing  15  miles  to  an  average  day's 
journey.  This  is  one  element  for  determining  the 
site  of  Kadesh,  assuming  of  course  the  .position  ot 
Horeb  ascertained.  The  name  of  the  place  to 
which  the  spies  returned  is  "  Kadesh"  simply,  in 
Num.  xiii.  26,  and  is  there  closely  connected  with 
the  "  wilderness  of  Paran;"  yet  the  "wilderness 
of  Zin "  stands  in  near  conjunction,  as  the  point 
whence  the  "  search  "  of  the  spies  commenced  (vcr. 
2  1).  Again,  in  Num.  xxxii.  8,  we  find  that  it  wat 


2  KADKSII 

from  K:xlt>.sli-r>;ini<';i  that  the  mission  of  the  spies 
commenced,  and  in  the  rehearsed  narrative  of  the 
same  event  iu  Deut.  i.  19,  and  ix.  23,  the  name 
''  Barnea"  is  also  added.  Thus  far  there  seems  no 
reasonable  doubt  of  the  identity  of  this  Kadesh  with 
that  of  Genesis.  Again,  in  Num.  xx.,  we  find  the 
people  encamped  in  Kadesh  after  reaching  the  wil 
derness  of  Zin.  For  the  question  whether  this  was 
a  second  visit  (supposing  the  Kadesh  identical  with 
that  of  the  spies),  or  a  continued  occupancy,  see 
WILDERNESS  OF  WANDERING.  The  mention  of 
the  "  wilderness  of  Zin  "  is  in  favour  of  the  identity 
of  this  place  with  that  of  Num.  ziii.  The  reasons 
which  seem  to  have  fostered  a  contrary  opinion  are 
the  absence  of  water  (ver.  2)  and  the  position  as 
signed — "  in  the  uttermost  of"  the  "  border  "  of 
Edom.  Yet  the  murmuring  seems  to  have  arisen, 
or  to  have  been  more  intense  on  account  of  their 
having  encamped  there  in  the  expectation  of  finding 
water ;  which  affords  again  a  presumption  of  iden 
tity.  Further,  "the  wilderness  of  Zin  along  by 
the  coast  of  Edom "  (Num.  xxxiv.  3 ;  Josh,  xv.) 
destroys  any  presumption  to  the  contrary  arising 
from  that  position.  Jerome  clearly  knows  of  but  one 
and  the  same  Kadesh — "  where  Moses  smote  the 
rock,"  where  "  Miriam's  monument,"  he  says,  "  was 
still  shown,  and  where  Chedorlaomer  smote  the 
rulers  of  Amalek."  It  is  true  Jerome  gives  a  dis 
tinct  article  on  Kuourjs,  tvOa  f)  iHj-yr;  rijs  Kpi- 
fffus,  i.e.  En-mishpat,a  but  only  perhaps  in  order  to 
record  the  fountain  as  a  distinct  local  fact.  The 
apparent  ambiguity  of  the  position,  first,  in  the 
wilderness  of  Paran,  or  in  Paran ;  and  secondly  in 
that  of  Zin,  is  no  real  increase  to  the  difficulty. 
For  whether  these  tracts  were  contiguous,  and  Ka 
desh  on  their  common  border,  or  ran  into  each 
other,  and  embraced  a  common  territory,  to  which 
the  name  "  Kadesh,"  in  an  extended  sense,  might 
be  given,  is  comparatively  unimportant.  It  may, 
however,  be  observed,  that  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
commences,  Num.  x.  12,  where  that  of  Sinai  ends, 
and  that  it  extends  to  the  point,  whence  in  ch.  xiii. 
the  spies  set  out,  though  the  only  positive  identifi 
cation  of  Kadesh  with  it  is  that  in  xiii.  26,  when 
on  their  return  to  rejoin  Moses  they  come  "  to  the 
wilderness  of  Paran,  to  Kadesh."  PARAN  then  was 
evidently  the  general  name  of  the  great  tract  south 
of  Palestine,  commencing  soon  after  Sinai,  as  the 
people  advanced  northwards, — that  perhaps  now 
known  as  the  desert  Et-TVi.  Hence,  when  the  spies 
are  returning  southwards  they  return  to  Kadesh, 
viewed  as  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran ;  though,  in 
the  same  chapter,  when  stalling  northwards  on 
their  journey,  they  commence  from  that  of  Zin.  It 
seems  almost  to  follow  that  the  wilderness  of  Zin 
must  have  overlapped  that  of  Paran  on  the  north  side;  j 
or  must,  if  they  were  parallel  and  lay  respectively  east  i 
and  west,  have  had  a  further  extension  northwards 
than  this  latter.  In  the  designation  of  the  southern  j 
border  of  the  Israelites  also,  it  is  observable  that 
the  wilderness  of  Zin  is  mentioned  as  a  limit,  but 
nowhere  that  of  Paran b  (Num.  xxxiv.  3;  Josh.  xv. 


*  /nother  short  article  of  Jerome's,  apparently 
referred  to  by  Stanley  (S.  $  P.  93  note),  as  relating 
likewiEe  to  En-mishpat,  should  seem  to  mean  some 
thing  wholly  different,  viz.,  the  well  of  Isaac  and 
ibirr.elech  in  Gcrar  :  <J>peop  Kpurecos  eij  fri  vvv  «ori 
(Cji/riT  BTJP&U'  (plUeus  judicit)  xoAovfic'ci)  iv  rfj  Tepa- 

rwn. 

b  There  is  a  remarkable  interpolation  in  the  LXX., 
or  (as  seems  less  probable)  omission  in  the  preneiit 
llcb.  text  of  Num.  xxxiii.  £6,  where,  in  following  the 


KADESH 

1),  unless  the  dwelling  of  Ishn.aei  "in  the  wi'ulrt 
ness  of  Paran"  (Gen.  xxi.  21)  indicates  that,  on 
the  western  portion  of  the  southern  border,  which 
the  story  of  Hagar  indicates  as  his  dwelling-place, 
the  Paran  nomenclature  prevailed. 

If  it  be  allowed,  in  the  dearth  of  positive  testi 
mony,  to  follow  great  natural  boundaries  in  suggest 
ing  an  answer  to  the  question  of  the  situation  of 
these  adjacent  or  perhaps  overlapping  wildernesses,  it 
will  be  seen,  on  reference  to  Kiepert's  map  (in  Robin 
son,  vol.  i.  ;  see  also  Russeger's  map  of  the  same 
region),  that  the  Arabah  itself  and  the  plateau  west- 
ward  of  it  are,  when  we  leave  out  the  commonly 
so-called  Sinaitic  peninsula  (here  considered  as  cor 
responding  in  its  wider  or  northerly  portion  to  "  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai"),  the  two  parts  of  the  whole 
region  most  strongly  partitioned  off  from  and  con 
trasted  with  one  another.  On  this  western  plateau 
is  indeed  superimposed  another,  no  less  clearly 
marked  out,  to  judge  from  the  map,  as  distinct 
from  the  former  as  this  from  the  Arabah;  but 
this  higher  ground,  it  will  be  further  seen,  probably 
corresponds  with  "  the  mountain  of  the  Amorites." 
The  Arabah,  and  its  limiting  barrier  of  high  ground* 
on  the  western  side,  differ  by  about  400  or  500  feet 
in  elevation  at  the  part  where  Robinson,  advancing 
from  Petra  towards  Hebron,  ascended  that  barrier 
by  the  pass  el  Kh&rar.  At  the  N.W.  angle  of  the 
Arabah  the  regularity  of  this  barrier  is  much  broken 
by  the  great  wadys  which  converge  thither;  but 
from  its  edge  at  el  Kkiirar  the  great  floor  stretches 
westward,  with  no  great  interruption  of  elevation, 
if  we  omit  the  superimposed  plateau,  to  the  Egyp 
tian  frontier,  and  northward  to  Khinocolura  and  Gaza. 
Speaking  of  it  apparently  from  the  point  of  view  at 
el  Khurar,  Robinson  (ii.  586-7)  says  it  is  "  not 
exactly  a  table-land,  but  a  higher  tract  of  country, 
forming  the  first  of  the  several  steps  or  offsets  into 
which  the  ascent  of  the  mountains  in  this  pirt  is 
divided."  It  is  now  known  as  the  wilderness  Et- 
Tih.  A  general  description  of  it  occurs  in  Robinson 
(i.  261-2),  together  with  a  mention  of  the  several 
travellers  who  had  then  previously  visited  it  :  its 
configuration  is  given,  ib.  294.  KtiiisEt-Tt/t  region 
represent  the  wilderness  of  Paran,  then  the  Arabah 
itself,  including  all  the  low  ground  at  the  southern 
and  south-western  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea,  may 
stand  for  the  wilderness  of  Zin.  The  superimposed 
plateau  has  an  eastern  border  converging,  towards 
the  north,  with  that  of  the  general  elevated  tract 
on  which  it  stands,  i.  e.  with  the  western  barrier 
aforesaid  of  the  Arabah,  but  losing  towards  its  higher 
or  northern  extremity  its  elevation  and  predseness, 
in  proportion  as  the  general  tract  on  which  it  stands 
appears  to  rise,  till,  near  the  S.W.  curve  of  the 

various  stages  of  the  march,  we  find  lespectively  as 
follows  :  — 

HEBREW. 

urn  -oa 


xin 


GREEK. 

(tai  dn-Tjpaj'  e»c  Tcviloir  Taflep  «ai  irapere/SaAoy  in  rf 
«PW<C  'StV,  (tat  amjpai>  «  rijs  «pij/iov  2iV,  «al  napttrt- 
£aAoi/  cU  T7IV  ipniiov  bdpav  avnj  (cm.  Koto^. 

The  LXX.  would  make  them  approach  the  wilderness 
of  Sin  first,  and  that  of  Paran  secondly,  thus  reversing 
the  effect  of  the  above  observations. 

•  Called,  at  least  throughout  a  portion  of  its  court*. 
Jvbel  el  Devanfh. 


KADESH 

Dead  Sea,  the  higher  platen u  and  the  generd  tract 
appear  to  blond.  The  convergency  in  question  arises 
from  the  general  tract  having,  on  its  eastern  side, 
i.  c.  where  it  is  to  the  Arabah  a  western  limit,  a 
barrier  running  more  nearly  N.  and  S.  than  that  of 
the  superimposed  plateau,  which  runs  about  E.N.E. 
and  W.S.W.  This  highest  of  the  two  steps  on 
which  this  terrace  stands  is  described  by  Williams 
(Holy  City.,  i.  463-4),  who  approached  it  from 
Hebron — the  opposite  direction  to  that  in  which 
Hobinson,  mounting  towards  Hebron  by  the  higher 
Bass  Es-Sufdh,-*  came  upon  it — as  "  a  gigantic  na 
tural  rampart  of  lofty  mountains,  which  we  could 
distinctly  trace  for  many  miles6  E.  and  W.  of  the 
spot  on  which  we  stood,  whose  precipitous  promon 
tories  of  naked  rock,  forming  as  it  were  bastions  of 
Cyclopean  architecture,  jutted  forth  in  irregular 
masses  from  the  mountain-barrier  into  the  southern 
wilderness,  a  confused  chaos  of  chalk." '  Below  the 
traveller  lay  the  Wady  Murreh,  running  into  that 
(tailed  El-Fikreh,  identifying  the  spot  with  that  de 
scribed  by  Robinson  (ii.  587)  as  "  a  formidable 
barrier  supporting  a  third  plateau  "  (reckoning  ap 
parently  the  Arabah  as  one),  rising  on  the  other, 
i.  e.  northern  side  of  the  Wady  el-Fikreh.  But 
the  southern  face  of  this  highest  plateau  is  a  still 
more  strongly  defined  wall  of  mountains.  The 
Israelites  must  probably  have  faced  it,  or  wandered 
along  it,  at  some  period  of  their  advance  from  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai  to  the  more  northern  desert  of 
1'aran.  There  is  no  such  boldly-marked  line  of  clirls 
north  of  the  Et-Tili  and  El-Odjmek  ranges,  except 
perhaps  Mount  Seir,  the  easterri  limit  of  the  Arabah. 
There  is  a  strongly  marked  expression  in  Deut.  i. 
7,  19,  20,  "the  mountain  of  the  Amorites,"  which 
besides  those  of  Seir  and  Hor,  is  the  only  one  men 
tioned  by  name  after  Sinai,  and  which  is  there  closely 
connected  with  Kadesh  Bariiea.  The  wilderness 
(that  of  Paran)  "  great  and  terrible,"  which  they 
passed  through  after  quitting  Horeb  (vers.  6,  7, 
19),  was  "  by  the  way  of"  this  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites."  "  We  came,"  says  Moses,  "  to  Kadesh 
Barnea ;  and  I  said  unto  you,  ye  are  come  unto  the 
mountain  of  the  Amorites."  Also  in  ver.  7,  the 
adjacent  territories  of  this  mountain-region  seem 
not  obscurely  intimated ;  we  have  the  Shephelah 
("  plain ")  and  the  Arabah  ("  vale "),  with  the 
"  hills"  ("  hill-country  of  Judah  ")  between  them  ; 
and  "  the  South  "  is  added  as  that  debateable  out 
lying  region,  in  which  the  wilderness  strives  with 
the  inroads  of  life  and  culture.  There  is  no  natural 
feature  to  correspond  so  well  to  this  mountain  of 
the  Amorites  as  this  smaller  higher  plateau  super 
imposed  on  Et-Tth,  forming  the  watershed  of  the 
two  great  systems  of  wadys,  those  north-westward 
towards  the  great  Wady-el-Arish,  and  those  north 
eastward  towards  the  Wady  Jerafeh  and  the  great 
Wady-el-Je*b.  Indeed,  in  these  converging  wady- 
systems  on  either  side  of  the  "  motintain,"\ve  have 
a  desert-continuation  of  the  same  configuration  of 
country,  which  the  Shephelah  and  Arabah  with 
their  interposed  watershedding  highlands  present 
further  north.  And  even  as  the  name  AKABAII 
is  plainly  continued  from  the  Jordan  valley,  so  as 
to  menu  the  great  arid  trough  between  the  Dead 
Sea  and  Elath ;  so  perhaps  the  Shet'elah  ("  vale  ") 


KADESH  3 

might  naturally  be  viewed  as  continued  to  the 
"  river  of  Egypt."  And  thus  the  ••  mountain  of  the 
Amorites"  would  merely  continue  the  mountain- 
mass  of  Judah  and  Ephraim,  as  forming  part 
of  the  land  "which  the  Lord  our  God  doth  give 
unto  us."  The  south-western  angle  of  this  higher 
plateau  is  well  defined  by  the  bluff  peak  of 
Jebel  'Ardif,  standing  in  about  30°  22'  N.,  by 
34°  30'  E.  Assuming  the  region  from  Wady 
Feiran  to  the  Jebel  Mousa  as  a  general  basis 
for  the  position  of  Horeb,  nothing  farther  south 
than  this  Jebel  'Ardif  appears  to  give  the  neces 
sary  distance  from  it  for  Kadesh,  nor  would  any 
point  on  the  west  side  of  the  western  face  of  this 
mountain  region  suit,  until  we  get  quite  high  up 
towards  Beersheba.  Nor,  if  any  site  in  this  direc 
tion  is  to  be  chosen,  is  it  easy  to  account  for  "  the 
way  of  Mount  Seir  "  being  mentioned  as  it  is,  Deut. 
i.  2,  apparently  as  the  customary  route  "  from 
Horeb"  thither.  But  if,  as  further  reasons  will 
suggest,  Kadesh  lay  probably  near  the  S.W.  curve 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  then  "  Mount  Seir"  will  be  with 
in  sight  on  the  E.  during  all  the  latter  part  of  the 
journey  "  from  Horeb "  thither.  This  mountain 
region  is  in  Kiepert's  map  laid  down  as  the  territory 
of  the  AzAzimeh,  but  is  said  to  be  so  wild  and 
rugged  that  the  Bedouins  of  all  other  tribes  avoid 
it,  nor  has  any  road  ever  traversed  it  (Robinson, 
i.  186).  Across  this  then  there  was  no  pass ;  the 
choice  of  routes  lay  between  the  road  which  leading 
from  Elath  to  Gaza  and  the  Shephelah,  passes  to 
the  west  of  it,  and  that  which  ascends  from  the 
northern  extremity  of  the  Arabah  by  the  Ma'aleh 
Akrabbim  towards  Hebron.  The  reasons  for  think 
ing  that  the  Israelites  took  this  latter  course  are, 
that  if  they  had  taken  the  western,  Beersheba  would 
seem  to  have  been  the  most  natural  route  of  their 
first  attempted  attack  (Robinson,  i.  187).  It  would 
also  have  brought  them  too  near  to  the  land  of  the 
Philistines,  which  it  seems  to  have  been  the  Divine 
purpose  that  they  should  avoid.  But  above  all,  the 
features  of  the  country,  scantily  as  they  are  noticed 
in  Num.,  are  in  favour  of  the  eastern  route  from 
the  Arabah  and  Dead  Sea. 

One  site  fixed  on  for  Kadesh  is  the  Ain  es  Shey- 
dbeh  on  the  south  side  of  this  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites,"  and  therefore  too  near  Horeb  to  fulfil 
the  conditions  of  Deut.  i.  2.  Messrs.  Rowlands  and 
Williams  (Holy  City,  i.  463-8)  argue  strongly  in 
favour  of  a  site  for  Kadesh  on  the  west  side  of  this 
whole  mountain  region,  towards  Jebel  Helal,  where 
they  found  "  a  large  single  mass  or  small  hill  of  solid 
rock,  a  spur  of  the  mountain  to  the  north  of  it, 
immediately  rising  above  it,  the  only  visible  naked 
rock  in  the  whole  district."  They  found  salient 
water  rushing  from  this  rock  into  a  basin,  but  soon 
losing  itself  in  the  sand,  and  a  grand  space  for  the 
encampment  of  a  host  on  the  S.W.  side  of  it.  In 
favour  of  it  they  allege,  1,  the  name  K&des  or 
KMes,  pronounced  in  English  K&ddase  or  KMddse, 
as  being  exactly  the  form  of  the  Hebrew  name 
Kadesh  ;  2,  the  position,  in  the  line  of  the  southern 
boundary  of  Judah  ;  3,  the  correspondence  with 
the  order  of  the  places  mentioned,  especially  the 
places  Adar  and  Azmon,  which  these  travellers  re 
cognize  in  Adeirat  and  Aseimeh,  otherwise  (as  in 


d  There  are  three  nearly  parallel  passes  leading  to 
the  same  level  :  this  is  the  middle  one  of  the  three. 
Schubert  (Reise,  ii.  441-3)  appears  to  have  taken  the 
came  path  ;  Bcrtou  that  on  the  W.  side,  El  Yemen. 

*  This  is  only  the  direction,  or  apparent  direction, 


of  the  range  at  the  spot,  its  general  one  being  as  above 
stated.     See  the  maps. 

*  So  Robinson,  before  ascending,  remarks  (ii.  58ft) 
that  the  hills  consisted  of  chalky  stone  and  conglo 
merate. 

B  2 


4  KADESH 

Kiepert's  map)  Kadeirat  and  Kaseimeh ;  4,  its  po 
sition  with  regard  to  Jebel  el-ffalal,  ovJebal  Helal; 
5,  its  position  with  regard  to  the  mountain  of  the 
Amorites  (which  they  seem  to  identify  with  the 
western  face  of  the  plateau) ;  6,  its  situation  with 
regard  to  the  grand  S.W.  route  to  Palestine  by 
Beer-lahai-roi  from  Egypt ;  7, its  distance  from  Sinai, 
and  the  goodness  of  the  way  thither ;  8,  the  accessi 
bility  of  Mount  Hor  from  this  region.  Of  these, 
2,  4,  5,  and  8,  seem  of  no  weight  ;S  1  is  a  good  deal 
•weakened  by  the  fact  that  some  such  name  seems 
to  have  a  wide  range h  in  this  region  ;  3  is  of  con 
siderable  force,  but  seems  overbalanced  by  the  fact 
that  the  whole  position  seems  too  far  west ;  argu 
ments  6  and  7  rather  tend  against  than  for  the  view 
iu  question,  any  western  route  being  unlikely  (see 
text  above),  and  the  "  goodness"  of  the  road  not 
being  discoverable,  but  rather  the  reverse,  from  the 
Mosaic  record.  But,  above  all,  how  would  this 
accord  with  "  the  way  of  Mount  Seir "  being  that 
from  Sinai  to  Kadesh  Barnea?  (Deut.  i.  2.) 

In  the  map  to  Robinson's  last  edition,  a  Jebel  el 
Kudcis  is  given  on  the  authority  of  Abeken.  But 
this  spot  would  be  too  far  to  the  west  for  the  fixed 
point  intended  in  Dout.  i.  2  as  Kadesh  Barnea. 
Still,  taken  in  connexion  with  the  region  endea 
voured  to  be  identified  with  the  "  mountain  of  the 
Amorites,"  it  may  be  a  general  testimony  to  the 

Erevalence   of    the   name    Kadesh   within    certain 
mits  ;  which  is  further  supported  by  the  names 
given  below  (h). 

The  indications  of  locality  strongly  point  to  a  site 
near  where  the  mountain  of  the  Amorites  descends 
to  the  low  region  of  the  Arabah  and  Dead  Sea. 
Tell  Arad  is  perhaps  as  clear  a  local  monument  of 
the  event,  of  Num.  xxi.  1,  as  we  can  expect  to 
find.  [ARAD].  "  The  Canaanitish  king  of  Arad  " 
found  that  Israel  was  coming  "  by  the  way  of  the 
spies,"  and  "  fought  against "  and  "  took  some  of 
them  prisoners."  The  subsequent  defeat  of  this 
king  is  clearly  connected  with  the  pass  Es-S&fa, 
between  which  and  the  Tell  Arad  a  line  drawn 
ought  to  give  us  the  direction  of  route  intended 
by  "by  the  way  of  the  spies ;"  accordingly,  within 
a  day's  journey  on  either  side  of  this  line  pro 
duced  towards  the  Arabah,  Kadesh-Bamea  should 
be  sought  for.  [HORMA  H]  .  Nearly  the  same  ground 
appears  to  have  been  the  scene  of  the  previous  dis 
comfiture  of  the  Israelites  rebelliously  attempting 
to  force  their  way  by  this  pass  to  occupy  the 
"mountain"  where  "the  Amalekites  and  Amo 
rites"  were  "before  them"  (Num.  xiv.  45;  Judg. 
i.  17) ;  further,  however,  this  defeat  is  said  to  have 
been  "in  Seir"  (Deut.  i.  44).  Now,  whether  we 
admit  or  not  with  Stanley  (8.  $  P.  94  note)  that 
Edom  had  at  this  period  no  territory  west  of  the 
Arabah,  which  is  perhaps  doubtful,  yet  there  can 
be  no  room  for  doubt  that  "  the  mountain  of  the 
Amorites"  must  at  any  rate  be  taken  as  their 


c  What  is  more  disputable  than  the  S.  boundary 
line  1  Jebel  Helal  derives  its  sole  significance  from 
a  passage  not  specified  in  Jeremiah.  The  "mountain 
of  the  Amorites,"  as  shown  above,  need  not  be  that 
western  face.  Mt.  Hor  is  as  accessible  from  elsewhere. 

k  Seetzen's  last  map  shows  a  Wady  Kid/cue  corre 
sponding  in  position  nearly  with  Jcbel  el  Kude'isc 
given  in  Kiepert's,  on  the  authority  of  Abeken. 
Zimmermann'-  Atl;i-,  Kct.  N.,  gives  el  Cadcssah  as 
another  name  for  the  well-known  hill  Madurnh,  or 
Moderah,  lying  within  view  of  the  •point  described 
above,  from  Williams's  Huh/  t'ity,  i.  463-4.  This  is 
toward"  the  Katt,  a  goo;l  dcv.l  mam-  the  Dead  Sea 


KADESH 

western  limit.  Hence  the  overthrow  in  Sell 
must  be  east  of  that  mountain,  or,  at  furthest,  on 
its  eastern  edge.  The  "Seir"  alluded  to  may  be 
the  western  edge  of  the  Arabah  below  the  Es-S&fa 
pass.  When  thus  driven  back,  they  "  abode  in 
Kadesh  many  days"  (Deut.  i.46).  The  city,  whe 
ther  we  prefer  Kadesh  simply,  or  Kadesh-Bamea, 
as  its  designation,  cannot  have  belonged  to  the 
Amorites,  for  these  after  their  victory  would  pro 
bably  have  disputed  possession  of  it ;  nor  could  it, 
if  plainly  Amoritish,  have  been  "  in  the  uttermost 
of  the  border"  of  Edom.  It  may  be  conjectured 
that  it  lay  in  the  debateable  ground  between  the 
Amorites  and  Edom.  which  the  Israelites  in  a  mes 
sage  of  courtesy  to  Edom  might  naturally  assign  to 
the  latter,  and  that  it  was  possibly  then  occupied  in 
fact  by  neither,  but  by  a  remnant  of  those  Horites 
whom  Edom  (Deut.  ii.  12)  dislodged  from  the 
"mount"  Seir,  but  who  remained  as  refugees  in 
that  arid  and  unenviable  region,  which  perhaps 
was  the  sole  remnant  of  their  previous  possessions, 
and  which  they  still  called  by  the  name  of  "  Seir," 
their  patriarch.  This  would  not  be  inconsistent 
with  "  the  edge  of  the  land  of  Edom  "  still  being 
at  Mount  Hor  (Num.  xxxiii.  37),  nor  with  the 
Israelites  regarding  this  debateable  ground,  after 
dispossessing  the  Amorites  from  "  their  mountain," 
as  pertaining  to  their  own  "  south  quarter."  If  this 
view  be  admissible,  we  might  regard  "  Barnea  "  as 
a  Hebraized  remnant  of  the  Horite  language,  or  of 
some  Horite  name. 

The  nearest  approximation,  then,  which  can  be 
given  to  a  site  for  the  city  of  Kadesh,  may  be 
probably  attained  by  drawing  a  circle,  from  the  pass 
£s-Sufa,  at  the  radius  of  about  a  day's  journey , 
its  south-western  quadrant  will  intersect  the  "  wil 
derness  of  Paran,"  or  Et-Tik,  which  is  there  over 
hung  by  the  superimposed  plateau  of  the  mountain 
of  the  Amorites;  while  its  south-eastern  one  will 
cross  what  has  been  designated  as  the  "  -wilderness 
of  Ziu."  This  seems  to  satisfy  all  the  conditions 
of  the  passages  of  Genesis,  Numbers,  and  Deuter 
onomy,  which  refer  to  it.  The  nearest  site  in  har 
mony  with  this  view,  which  has  yet  been  suggested 
(Robinson,  ii.  175),  is  undoubtedly  the  Ain  cl- 
Wcibe/i.  To  this,  however,  is  opposed  the  remark 
of  a  traveller  (Stanley.  S.  find  P.  95)  who  went 
probably  with  a  deliberate  intention  of  testing  the 
local  features  in  reference  to  this  suggestion,  that 
it  does  not  afford  among  its  "  stony  shelves  of  three 

or  four  feet  high  "  any  proper  "  cliff"  (JPD),  such 

as  is  the  word  specially  describing  that  "  rock " 
(A.  V.)  from  which  the  water  gushed.  It  is  how 
ever  nearly  opposite  the  Wady  Ghuweir,  the  great 
opening  into  the  steep  eastern  wall  of  the  Arabah, 
and  therefore  the  most  probable  "highway"  bj 
which  to  "  piss  through  the  border "  of  Edom 
But  until  further  examination  of  local  featuies  has 


and  so  far  more  suitable.  Further,  Robertson's  map 
in  Stewart's  The  Tent  and  the  Khan  places  an  'Ain 
KJiades  near  the  junction  of  the  iTady  Afaad,  with 
the  Wady  r.l  Arish ;  but  in  this  map  arc  tokens  ol 
some  confusion  in  the  drawing. 

'  Kiirst  has  suggested  JM3^3,  "  son  of  wander 
ing  "=  Bedouin  ;  but  ^3  does  not  occur  as  "son" 
in  the  writings  of  Moses.  The  reading  of  the  I.XX. 
in  Num.  xxxiv.  4,  Ka«7)s  TOV  Bopri),  seems  to  favour 
the  notion  that  it  was  regarded  by  them  as  a  nian'i 
name.  The  name  "  Mcribah  "  is  accounted  for  in 
Num.  xx.  13.  [MKHIHAII., 


KADESH 

been  made,  which  owing  to  the  frightfully  desolate 
character  of  the  region  deems  very  difficult,  it  would 
be  unwise  to  push  identification  further. 

Notice  is  due  to  the  attempt  to  discovei  Kadesh 
in  Petra,  the  metropolis  of  the  Nabathaeans  (Stan 
ley,  S.  and  P.  94),  embedded  in  the  mountains  to 
which  the  name  of  Mount  Seir  is  admitted  by  all 
authorities  to  apply,  and  almost  overhung  by 
Mount  Hor.  No  doubt  the  word  Seld,  "  cliff,''  i-s 
useJ  as  a  proper  name  occasionally,  and  may  pio- 
bably  in  2  K.  xiv.  7;  Is.  xvi.  1,  be  identified  with 
a  city  or  spot  of  territory  belonging  to  Edom.  But 
the  two  sites  of  Petra  and  Mount  Hor  are  surely  far 
too  close  for  each  to  be  a  distinct  camping  station,  as 
in  Num.  xxxiii.  36,  37.  The  camp  of  Israel  ^ould 
have  probably  covered  the  site  of  the  city,  the 
mountain,  and  several  adjacent  valleys.  But,  fur 
ther,  the  site  of  Petra  must  have  been  as  thoroughly 
Edomitish  territory  as  was  that  of  BOZKAH, 
the  then  capital,  and  could  not  be  described 
as  being  "in  the  uttermost"  of  their  border. 
"  Mount  Seir  "  was  "  given  to  Esau  for  a  posses 
sion,"  in  which  he  was  to  be  unmolested,  and  not 
a  "  foot's  breadth "  of  his  land  was  to  be  taken. 
This  seems  irreconcileable  with  the  quiet  encamp 
ment  of  the  whole  of  Israel  and  permanency  there 
tor  "  many  days,"  as  also  with  their  subsequent 
territorial  possession  of  it,  for  Kadesh  is  always 
reckoned  as  a  town  in  the  southern  border  belong 
ing  to  Israel.  Neither  does  a  friendly  request  to  be 
allowed  to  pass  through  the  land  of  Edom  come 
suitably  from  an  invader  who  had  seized,  and  was 
occupying  one  of  its  most  difficult  passes ;  nor, 
again,  is  the  evident  temper  of  tho  Edomites  and 
their  precautions,  if  they  contemplated,  as  they 
certainly  did,  armed  resistance  to  the  violation  of 
their  territory,  consistent  with  that  invader  being 
allowed  to  settle  himself  by  anticipation  in  such  a 
position  without  a  stand  being  made  against  him. 
But,  lastly,  the  conjunction  of  the  city  Kadesh  with 
"the  mountain  of  the  Amorites,"  and  its  connexion 
with  the  assault  repulsed  by  the  Amalekites  and 
Canaanites  (Deut.  i.  44 ;  Num.  xiv.  43),  points  to 
a  site  wholly  away  from  Mount  Seir. 

A  paper  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature, 
April,  1860,  entitled  A  Critical  Enquiry  into  the 
Route  of  the  Exodus,  discards  all  the  received  sites 
for  Sinai,  even  that  of  Mount  Hor,  and  fixes  on  Elusa 
(El  Kalesali)  as  that  of  Kadesh.  The  arguments  of 
this  writer  will  be  considered,  as  a  whole,  under 
WILDERNESS  OF  WANDERING. 

Kadesh  appears  to  have  maintained  itself,  at  least 
us  a  name  to  the  days  of  the  prophet  Ezekiel, 
(7.  c.)  and  those  of  the  writer  of  the  apocryphal  book 


KADMONITES,  THE  5 

of  Judith  (i.  9).  The  "wilderness  of  Kad,,sh" 
occurs  only  in  Ps.  xxix.  8,  and  is  probably  uudis- 
tinguishable  from  that  of  Zin.  As  regards  the 
name  "  Kadesh,"  there  seems  some  doubt  whether 
it  be  originally  Hebrew.  k 

Almost  any  probable  situation  for  Kadesh  on  the 
grounds  of  the  Scriptural  narrative,  is  equally  op 
posed  to  the  impression  derived  from  the  aspect  of 
the  region  thereabouts.  No  spot  perhaps,  in  the 
locality  above  indicated,  could  now  be  an  eligible  site 
for  the  host  of  the  Israelites  "  for  many  days."  Je 
rome  speaks  of  it  as  a  "  desert"  in  his  day,  and 
makes  no  allusion  to  any  city  there,  although  the 
tomb  of  Miriam,  of  which  no  modern  traveller  has 
found  any  vestige,  had  there  its  traditional  site.  It 
is  possible  that  the  great  volume  of  water  which  in 
the  rainy  season  sweeps  by  the  great  El-Jeib  and 
other  wadys  into  the  S.W.  comer  of  the  Ghor, 
might,  if  duly  husbanded,  have  once  created  an  arti 
ficial  oasis,  of  which,  with  the  neglect  of  such  in 
dustry,  every  trace  has  since  been  lost.  But,  as 
no  attempt  is  made  here  to  fix  on  a  definite  site  for 
Kadesh  as  a  city,  it  is  enough  to  observe  that  the 
objection  applies  in  nearly  equal  force  to  nearly  all 
solutions  of  the  question  of  which  the  Scriptural 
narrative  admits.  [H.  H.] 

KAJD'MIEL  ('pK'Knp  :  Katfufa:  Cedmtiiel), 
one  of  the  Levites  who  with  his  family  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel,  and  apparently  a 
representative  of  the  descendants  ot'  Hodaviah,  or, 
as  he  is  elsewhere  called,  Hodaveh  or  Judah  (Ezr. 
ii.  40  ;  Neh.  vii.  43).  In  the  first  attempt  which 
was  made  to  rebuild  the  Temple,  Kadmiel  and 
Jeshua,  probably  an  elder  member  of  the  same 
house,  were,  together  with  their  families,  appointed 
by  Zerubbabel  to  superintend  the  workmen,  and 
officiated  in  the  thanksgiving-service  by  which  the 
laying  of  the  foundation  was  solemnized  (Ezr.  iii.  9). 
His  house  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  confession  of 
the  people  on  the  day  of  humiliation  (Neh.  ix.  4,  5), 
and  with  the  other  Levites  joined  the  princes  and 
priests  in  a  solemn  compact  to  separate  themselves 
to  walk  in  God's  law  (Neh.  x.  9).  In  the  parallel 
lists  of  1  Esdr.  he  is  called  CADMIEL. 


k  It  may  be  perhaps  a  Horite  -word,  corrupted  so 
M  to  bear  a  signification  in  the  Heb.  and  Arab. ;  but, 
assuming  it  to  be  from  the  root  meaning  "  holiness," 
which  exists  in  various  forms  in  the  Heb.  and  Arab., 
there  may  be  some  connexion  between  that  name, 
supposed  to  indicate  a  shrine,  and  the  En-Mishpat  = 
Fountain  of  Judgment.  The  connexion  of  the  priestly 
and  judicial  function,  having  for  its  root  the  regard 
ing  us  sacred  whatever  is  authoritative,  or  the  de 
ducing  all  subordinate  authority  from  the  Highest, 
would  support  this  view.  Compare  also  the  double 
.  functions  united  in  Sheikh  and  Cadi.  Further,  on  this 
supposition,  a  more  forcible  sense  accrues  to  the  name 
Kadesh  Heribah  =  strife  or  contention,  being  as  it 
wer«  a  perversion  of  Nishpat  =  judgment — a  taking 
it  in  par/I'm  deterwrem.  For  the  Heb.  and  Arab,  de 
rivatives  from  this  same  root  see  Gesen.  Lex.  s.  v. 
JHp,  varying  in  senses  of  to  be  holy,  or  (piel)  10 


KAD'MONITES,  THE  OAngn,  i.e.  "the 
Kadmonite  ;"  rovs  KeS/juwaiovs  ;  Alex,  omits: 
Cedmonaeos),  a  people  named  in  Gen.  xv.  19  only; 
one  of  the  nations  who  at  that  time  occupied  the 
land  promised  to  the  descendants  of  Abram.  The 
name  is  from  a  root  Kedem,  signifying  "  eastern," 
and  also  "ancient"  (Ges.  Thes.  1195). 

Bochart  (Chan.  i.  19  ;  Phal.  iv.  36)  derives  tho 


sanctify,  as  a  priest,  or  to  keep  holy,  as  the  sab- 
bath,  and  (pual)  its  passive  ;  also  Golii  Lex.  Arab. 

Lat.  Lugd.  Bat.  1553,  s.  v.  iy.^3-  The  derived 
sense,  KHp,  a  male  prostitute,  fern.  i"|{^*lp,  a  harlot, 

does  not  appear  to  occur  in  the  Arab.  :  it  is  to  be 
referred  to  the  notion  of  prostitution  in  honour  of  an 
idol,  as  the  Syrians  in  that  of  Astarte,  the  Babylonians 
in  that  of  Mylitta  (Herod,  i.  199),  and  is  conveyed 
in  the  Greek  Upo&wAos.  [IDOLATRY,  vol.  i.  8586.]  This 
repulsive  custom  seems  more  suited  to  those  populous 
and  luxurious  regions  than  to  the  hard  bare  life  of  the 
desert.  As  an  example  of  Eastern  nomenclature 
travelling  far  west  at  an  early  period,  Cadiz  may 
perhaps  be  suggested  as  based  upon  Kadesh,  and 
carried  to  Spain  by  the  Phoenicians. 


tf  KALLAI 

•\admonite8  from  C.admus,  and  further  identifies 
them  with  the  Hivites  (whose  place  they  fill  in  the 
above  list  of  nations),  on  the  ground  that  the 
Hivites  occupied  Mount  Hermon,  "  the  most  easterly 
part  of  Canaan."  But  Hermon  cannot  be  said  to 
be  on  the  east  of  Canaan,  nor,  if  it  were,  did  the 
Hivites  live  there  so  exclusively  as  to  entitle  them 
to  an  appellation  derived  from  that  circumstance  (see 
vol.  i.  820).  It  is  more  probable  that  the  name 
Kadmonite  in  its  one  occurrence  is  a  synonym  for 
the  BENE-KEDEM — the  "  children  of  the  East,"  th'e 
general  name  which  in  the  Bible  appears  to  be  given 
to  the  tribes  who  roved  in  the  great  waste  tracts  on 
the  east  and  south-east  of  Palestine.  [G.] 

KALLA'I(^>D:  KaX/\?f:  Celal),  a  priest  in 
the  days  of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua.  He  was 
one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  fathers,  and  represented  the 
family  of  Sallai  CNeh.  xii.  20). 

KA'NAH(n3£:  Kcwfcij/;  Alex.K<m{:  Cane), 
one  of  the  places  which  formed  the  landmarks  of 
the  boundary  of  Asher ;  apparently  next  to  Zidon- 
labbah,  or  "great  Zidon"  (Josh.  xix.  28  only).  If 
this  inference  is  correct,  then  Kanah  can  hardly  be 
identified  in  the  modern  village  Kana,  six  miles 
inland,  not  from  Zidon,  but  from  Tyre,  nearly  20 
miles  south  thereof.  The  identification,  first  pro 
posed  by  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  456),  has  been  gene 
rally  accepted  by  travellers  (Wilson,  Lands,  ii. 
230 ;  Porter,  Handbook,  395  ;  Schwarz,  192;  Van 
de  Velde,  i.  180).  Van  de  Velde  (i.  209)  also 
treats  it  as  the  native  place  of  the  "  woman  of 
Canaan"  (yvrii  ~X.ava.vala)  who  cried  after  our 
Lord.  But  the  former  identification,  not  to  speak 
of  the  latter — in  which  a  connexion  is  assumed  be 
tween  two  words  radically  distinct — seems  un 
tenable.  An  Ain-Kana  is  marked  in  the  map  of 
Van  de  Velde,  about  8  miles  S.E.  of  Saida  (Zidon), 
close  to  the  conspicuous  village  Jurjua,  at  which 
latter  place  Zidon  lies  full  in  view  (Van  de  Velde, 
ii.  437).  This  at  least  answers  more  nearly  the 
requirements  of  the  text.  But  it  is  put  forward  as 
a  mere  conjecture,  and  must  abide  further  investi 
gation.  [G.] 

KA'NAH,   THE  EIVEB  (H3D  ^m  =  the 

T  'T       -  - 

torrent  or  wady  K. :  Xf  \Kavd,  q>apay£  Yia.pa.vd.  ; 
Alex.  xcfpaj}/}os  Kewet  and  j>dpay£  Kavd :  Valiis 
arundinetf), a  stream  falling  into  the  Mediterranean, 
which  formed  the  division  between  the  territories 
of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  the  former  on  the  south, 
the  latter  on  the  north  (Josh.  xvi.  8,  xvii.  9).  No 
light  appears  to  be  thrown  on  its  situation  by  the 
Ancient  Versions  or  the  Ouomasticon.  Dr.  Robin 
son  (iii.  135)  identifies  it  "  without  doubt"  with  a 
wady,  which  taking  its  rise  in  the  central  moun 
tains  of  Ephraim,  near  Akrabeh,  some  7  miles 
S.E.  of  Nablus,  crosses  the  country  and  enters  the 
sea  just  above  Jaffa  as  Nahr-el-Aujeh ;  bearing 
during  part  of  its  course  the  name  of  Wady  Kanah. 
But  this,  though  perhaps  sufficiently  important  to 
serve  as  a  boundary  between  two  tribes,  and  though 
the  retention  of  the  name  is  in  its  favour,  is  surely 
too  far  south  to  have  bwn  the  boundary  between 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh.  The  conjecture  of  Schwarz 
(51)  is  more  plausible — that  it  is  a  wady  which 
commences  west  of  and  close  to  Nablus,  at  Ain-el- 
Khassab,  and  falls  into  the  sea  as  Nahr  Falaik, 
and  which  bears  also  the  name  of  Wady  al-Khassab 
— the  reedy  stream.  This  has  its  more  northerly 
position  in  its  favour,  and  also  the  agreement  in 
•.ignificaliou  of  the  n.-.mes  i  Ka  jali  meaning  also 


KARTAH 

reedy).  But  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  thi 
name  Khassab  is  borne  by  a  large  tract  of  the  maii 
time  plain  at  this  part  (Stanley,  8.  &  P-  260). 
Porter  pronounces  for  N,  Akhdar,  close  below 
Caesarea.  [G.] 

KARE'AH  (!r)j5  :  KcfpTje  :  Carei),  the  father 

of  Johanan  and  Jonathan,  who  supported  Gedaliah's 
authority  and  avenged  his  murder  (Jer.  xl.  8,  13, 
15,  16,  xli.  11,  13,  14,  16,  xlii.  1,  8,  xliii.  2,  4,  5). 
He  is  elsewhere  called  CARE  AH. 


KARKA'A   (with  the  def.   article,  i'^ipn  ; 

Ka§7)s,  in  both  MSS.  ;  Symm.  translating,  &a<pas  : 
Carcaa),  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  south  boun 
dary  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  3),  and  there 
fore  of  the  Holy  Land  itself.  It  lay  between  Addar 
and  Azmon,  Azmon  being  the  next  point  to  the 
Mediterranean  (  Wady  el-ArisK).  Karkaa,  however, 
is  not  found  in  the  specification  of  the  boundary  in 
Num.  xxxiv.,  and  it  is  worth  notice  that  while  in 
Joshua  the  line  is  said  to  make  a  detour  (23D)  to 
Karkaa,  in  Numbers  it  runs  to  Azmoii.  Nor  does 
the  name  occur  in  the  subsequent  lists  of  the 
southern  cities  in  Josh.  xv.  21-32,  or  xix.  2-8,  or  in 
Neh.  xi.  25,  &c.  Eusebius  (Onomasticon,  "A(capKa?) 
perhaps  speaks  of  it  as  then  existing  (/co^tTj  ftniv), 
but  at  any  rate  no  subsequent  traveller  or  geo 
grapher  appears  to  have  mentioned  it.  [G.] 

KAR'KOR   (with  the   def.  article,   "IJT^n  : 

Ka.pKap  ;  Alex.  Kapita.  :  Vulg.  translating,  re- 
quiescebanf),  the  place  in  which  the  remnant  of  the 
host  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  which  had  escaped  the 
rout  of  the  Jordan  valley  were  encamped,  when 
Gideon  burst  upon  and  again  dispersed  them 
(Judg.  viii.  10).  It  must  have  been  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan,  beyond  the  district  of  the  towns,  in 
the  open  wastes  inhabited  by  the  nomad  tribes  — 
"  them  that  dwelt  in  tents  on  the  east  of  Nobah 
and  Jogbehah"  (ver.  11).  But  it  is  difficult  to 
believe  that  it  can  have  been  so  far  to  the  south  as 
it  is  placed  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomast. 
KapKO.  and  "Carcar  "),  namely  one  day's  journey 
(about  15  miles)  north  of  Petra,  where  in  their 
time  stood  the  fortress  of  Carcaria,  as  in  ours  the 
castle  of  Kerek  el-Shobak  (Burckhardt,  19  Aug. 
1812).  The  name  is  somewhat  similar  to  that  of 
CHAUACA,  or  Charax,  a  place  on  the  east  of  the 
Jordan,  mentioned  once  in  the  Maccabean  history  ; 
but  there  is  nothing  to  be  said  either  for  or  against 
the  identification  of  the  two. 

If  Kunawat  be  KEXATH,  on  which  Nobah  be 
stowed  his  own  name  (with  the  usual  fate  of  such 
innovations  in  Palestine),  then  we  should  look  for 
Karkor  in  the  desert  to  the  east  of  that  place  ; 
which  is  quite  far  enough  from  the  Jordan  valley, 
the  scene  of  the  first  encounter,  to  justify  both 
Josephus's  expression,  irAppoi  TTO\V  (Ant.  vii.  6, 
§5),  and  the  careless  "  security  "  of  the  Midianites. 
But  no  traces  of  such  a  name  have  yet  been  disco 
vered  in  that  direction,  or  any  other  than  that  above 
mentioned.  [G.] 


KARTAH(nFn£:  ^  K<i5^  ;  Alex. 
Chartha),  a  town  of  Zebulun,  which  with  its 
"  suburbs  "  was  allotted  to  the  Merarite  Levites 
(Josh.  xxi.  34).  It  is  not  mentioned  either  in  the 
general  list  of  the  towns  of  this  tribe  (xix.  10-16), 
or  in  the  parallel  catalogue  of  Levitical  cities  ill 
1  Clir.  vi.,  nor  does  it  appear  to  have  beeD  recog 
nised  sinrc.  ("G."] 


KAKTAN 
KAli'TAN  (JPnp  :  &e^cav;   Alex.  No 

Carthan),  a  city  of  Naphtali,  allotted  with  its 
"suburbs"  to  the  Gershonite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi. 
32).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  vi.  the  name 
appears  in  the  more  expanded  form  of  KIRJA- 
TIIAIM  (ver.  76),  of  which  Kartan  may  be  either 
a  provincialism  or  a  con  traction.  A  similar  change 
is  observable  in  Dothan  and  Dothaim.  The  LXX. 
evidently  had  a  different  Hebrew  text  from  the 
present.  [G.] 

KATT'ATH  (T\®\> :  Karavdd ;  Alex.  Karrde : 
Cateth),  one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun 
(Josh.  xix.  15).  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Ono- 
ma«ticon.  Schwarz  (172)  reports  that  in  the  Je 
rusalem  Megillah,  Kattath  "  is  said  to  be  the  mo 
dern  Katunith,"  which  he  seeks  to  identify  with 
Kana  el-Jelil, — most  probably  the  CAN  A  OF  GA 
LILEE  of  the  N.  T. —  5  miles  north  of  Seffurieh, 
partly  on  the  ground  that  Cana  is  given  in  the 
Syriac  as  Katna,  and  partly  for  other  but  not  very 
palpable  reasons.  [G.] 

KE'DAR  (Tip,  "  black  skin,  black -skinned 
man,"  Ges. :  KijSdp :  Cedar),  the  second  in  order 
of  the  sons  of  Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.  29), 
and  the  name  of  a  great  tribe  of  the  Arabs,  settled 
on  the  north-west  of  the  peninsula  and  the  confines 
of  Palestine.  This  tribe  seems  to  have  been,  with 
Tema,  the  chief  representative  of  Ishmael's  sons  in 
tne  western  portion  of  the  land  they  originally  peo 
pled.  The  "glory  of  Kedar"  is  recorded  by  the 
prophet  Isaiah  (xxi.  13-17)  in  the  burden  upon 
Arabia ;  and  its  importance  may  also  be  inferred 
from  the  "  princes  of  Kedar,"  mentioned  by  Ez. 
(xxvii.  21),  as  well  as  the  pastoral  character  of  the 
tribe :  "  Arabia,  and  all  the  princes  of  Kedar,  they 
occupied  with  thee  in  lambs,  and  rams,  and  goats : 
in  these  [were  they]  thy  merchants."  But  this 
characteristic  is  maintained  in  several  other  remark 
able  passages.  In  Cant.  i.  5,  the  black  tents  of 
Kedar,  black  like  the  goat's  or  camel's-hair  teuts  of 
the  modem  Bedawee,  are  forcibly  mentioned,  "  I 
[am]  black,  but  comely,  0  ye  daughters  of  Jeru 
salem,  as  the  tents  of  Kedar,  as  the  curtains  of  So 
lomon."  In  Is.  Ix.  7,  we  rind  the  "  flocks  of  Kedar," 
together  with  the  rams  of  Nebaioth ;  and  in  Jer. 
xlix.  28,  "  concerning  Kedar,  and  concerning  the 
kingdoms  of  HAZOR,"  it  is  written,  "  Arise  ye,  go 
up  to  Kedar,  and  spoil  the  men  of  the  East  [the 
BENE-KEDEM].  Their  tents  and  their  flocks  shall 
they  take  away ;  they  shall  take  to  themselves  their 
tent-curtains,  and  all  their  vessels,  and  their  camels  " 
(28,  29).  They  appeal-  also  to  have  been,  like  the 
wandering  tribes  of  the  present  day,  "  archers  "  and 
"  mighty  men"  (Is.  xxi.  17 ;  comp.  Ps.  cxx.  5).  That 
they  also  settled  in  villages  or  towns,  we  find  from 
that  magnificent  passage  of  Isaiah  (xlii.  11  ),  "  Let 
the  wilderness  and  the  cities  thereof  lift  up  [their 
voice],  the  villages  [that]  Kedar  doth  inhabit:  let 
the  inhabitants  of  the  rock  sing,  let  them  shout 
from  th(  top  of  the  mountains  ;" — unless  encamp 
ments  are  here  intended.*  But  dwelling  in  more 
permani.-nt  habitations  than  tents  is  just  what 
we  should  expect  from  a  far-stretching  tribe  such 
as  Kedar  certainly  was,  covering  in  their  pasture- 
lands  and  watering  places  the  great  western  desert, 
settling  on  the  borders  of  Palestine,  and  penetrating 


"  D'H^n.    Comp.  usage  of  Arabic,  x>  O>  Karyeh. 

b  Hence  Tip  ]"\&b,   Rabbin,   use   of  the  Arabic 
language  (Ges.  Lex.  ed.  Tregelles). 


KEDEMOTH  7 

into  the  Arabian  peninsula,  where  they  wore  to  be 
the  fathers  of  a  great  nation.  The  archers  and 
warriors  of  this  tribe  were  probably  engaged  in  many 
of  the  wars  which  the  "  men  of  the  East "  (of  whom 
Kedar  most  likely  formed  a  part)  waged,  in  alliance 
with  Midianites  and  others  of  the  Bene-Kedem, 
with  Israel  (see  M.  Caussin  de  Perceval's  Essai,  i. 
180-1,  on  the  war  of  Gideon,  &c.).  The  tribe 
seems  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  conspicuous  of 
all  the  Ishmaelite  tribes,  and  hence  the  Rabbins 
call  the  Arabians  universally  by  this  name.b 

In  Is.  xxi.  17,  the  descendants  of  Kedar  a"e 
called  the  Bene-Kedar. 

As  a  link  between  Bible  history  and  Mohammadan 
traditions,  the  tribe  of  Kedar  is  probably  found  in 
the  people  called  the  Cedrei  by  Pliny,  on  the  con 
fines  of  Arabia  Petraea  to  the  south  (N.  H.  v.  11)  ; 
but  they  have,  since  classical  times,  oecome  merged 
into  the  Arab  nation,  of  which  so  great  a  part  must 
have  sprung  from  them.  In  the  Mohammadau  tra 
ditions,  Kedar  c  is  the  ancestor  of  Mohammad  ;  and 
through  him,  although  the  genealogy  is  broken  for 
many  generations,  the  ancestry  of  the  latter  from 
Ishmael  is  carried.  (See  Caussin,  Essai,  i.  175, 
seqq.}  The  descent  of  the  bulk  of  the  Arabs  from 
Ishmael  we  have  elsewhere  shown  to  rest  on  in 
disputable  grounds.  [ISHMAEL.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

KE'DEMAH  (n»nj5,t.  e.  "eastward:"  KfSftd: 
Cedma\  the  youngest  of  the  sous  of  Ishmael  (Gen. 
xxv.  15  ;  1  Chr.  i.  31). 

KE'DEMOTH  (in  Deut.  and  Chron.  niOlp ; 
in  Josh.  flblp :  KeSa/jiwO,  BaKeS/juad,  i)  AeK.u^j-, 
f]  KaSfj.did ;  Alex.  Kftipovd,  KeSrj/tcofl,  Ka/j.i)$(a6. 
reSercij/:  Cedemoth,  Cademotli),  one  of  the  towns 
in  the  district  east  of  the  Dead  Sea  allotted  to  the 
tribe  of  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii.  18)  ;  given  with  its 
"suburbs"  to  the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  37  ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  79  ;  in  the  former  of  these  passages  the 
name,  with  the  rest  of  verses  36  and  37,  is  omitted 
from  the  Rec.  Hebrew  Text,  and  from  the  Vulg.). 
It  possibly  conferred  its  name  on  the  "  wilderness, 
or  uncultivated  pasture  land  (Midbar},  of  Kede- 
moth,"  in  which  Israel  was  encamped  when  Moses 
asked  permission  of  Sihon  to  pass  through  the 
country  of  the  Amorites;  although,  if  Kedcmoth  be 
treated  as  a  Hebrew  word,  and  translated  "  Eastern," 
the  same  circumstance  may  have  given  its  name 
both  to  the  city  and  the  district.  And  this  is  more 
probably  the  case,  since  "  Aroer  on  the  brink  of 
the  torrent  Arnon "  is  mentioned  as  the  extreme 
(south)  limit  of  Sihon's  kingdom  and  of  the  territory 
of  Reuben,  and  the  north  limit  of  Moab,  Kede- 
moth,  Jahazah,  Heshbon,  and  other  towns,  being 
apparently  north  of  it  (Josh.  xiii.  16,  &c.),  while 
the  wilderness  of  Kedemoth  was  certainly  outside 
the  territory  of  Sihon  (Deut.  ii.  26,  27,  &c.),  and 
therefore  south  of  the  Aruon.  This  is  supported  by 
the  terms  of  Num.  xxi.  23,  from  which  it  would 
appear  as  if  Sihon  had  come  out  of  his  tcnitory 
into  the  wilderness ;  although  on  the  other  hand, 
from  the  fact  of  Jahaz  (or  Jahazah)  being  said  to 
be  "in  the  wilderness"  (Num.  xxi.  23),  it  seems 
doubtful  whether  the  towns  named  in  Josh.  xiii. 
16-21,  were  all  north  of  Arnon.  As  in  other  cases 
we  must  await  further  investigation  on  the  east  ol 
the  Dead  Sea.  The  place  is  but  casually  men 
tioned  in  the  Onomasticon  ("  Cademoth"),  but  ye1 


Keydar, 


8 


KKDESH 


so  as  to  imply  a  distinction  'uetween  the  town  and 
the  wilderness.  No  other  traveller  appears  to  have 
noticed  it.  (See  Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  271.)  [JAHAZ.] 
KE'DESH  (KHJ5),  the  name  borne  by  three 
cities  in  Palestine. 

1.  (KttSijs;  Alex.  BeXe'0:  Cedes)  in  the  extreme 
south  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  23).     Whether  this  is 
identical  with  Kadesh-Barnea,  which  was  actually 
Jne  of  the  points  on  the  south  boundary  of  the  tnbe 
(xv.  3 ;   Num.  xxxiv.  4),  it  is  impossible  to  say. 
Against  the  identification  is  the  difference  of  the 
name, — hardly  likely  to  be  altered  if  the  famous 
Kadesh  was  intended,  and  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
elsewhere  showing  that  it  was  of  common  use. 

2.  (Kc'5«;   Alex.  Ke5e«:  Cedes),  a  city  of  Issa- 
char,  which  according  to  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr. 
vi.  was  allotted  to  the  Gershonite  Levites  (ver.  72). 
In  the  parallel  list  (Josh.  xxi.  28)  the  name  is 
KISHON,  one  of  the  variations  met  with  in  these 
lists,   for  which  it  is  impossible  satisfactorily  to 
account.     The  Kedesli  mentioned  among  the  cities 
whose  kings  were  slain  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  22), 
in  company  with  Megiddo  and  Jokneam  of  Carmel, 
would  seem  to  have  been  this  city  of  Issachar,  and 
not,  as  is  commonly  accepted,  the  northern  place  of 
the  same  name  in  Naphtali,  the  position  of  which 
in  the  catalogue  would  naturally  have  been  with 
Hazor  and  Shimron-Meron.     But  this,  though  pro 
bable,  is  not  conclusive. 

3.  KEDESH  (K(£5es,    KaSys,   Ke'5es,a   KeWC; 
Alex,  also  K« f5es  ;  Cedes) :  also  KEDESH  IN  GA 
LILEE  (S^JI3  '£,  i.  e. "  K.  in  the  Galil ;"  y  KdSys  tv 
rf;  ra\t\al(f, ;  Cedes  in  Galilaea) :  and  once,  Judg. 
iv.  6,  KEDESH-NAPHTALI  (*7RB3'J5;  KrfSijsNecp- 
Oa\i ;  Cedes  Ncphthalf).    One  of  the  fortified  cities 
of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  named  between  Hazor  and 
Edrei  (Josh  six.  37)  ;  appointed  as  a  city  of  refuge, 
and  allotted  with  its  "suburbs"  to  the  Gershonite 
Levites   (xx.    7,  xxi.   32  ;    1  Chr.   vi.    76).      In 
Josephus's  account  of  the  northern  wars  of  Joshua 
(Ant.  v.  1,  §18),    he   apparently  refers  to  it  as 
marking  the  site  of  the  battle  of  Merom,  if  Merom 
be  intended  under  the  form  Beroth.b     It  was  the 
residence  of  Barak  (Judg.   iv.   6),  and  there  he 
and  Deborah  assembled  the  tribes  of  Zebulun  and 
Naphtali  before  the  conflict  (9,  10).     Near  it  was 
the  tree  of  Zaananim,  where  was  pitched  the  tent 
of  the  Kenites  Heber  and  Jael,  in  which  Sisera  met 
his  death  (ver.  11).     It  was  probably,  as  its  name 
implies,  a  "  holy  c  place"  of  great  antiquity,  which 
would  explain  its  seltction  as  one  of  the  cities  of 
refuge,  and  its  being  chosen  by  the  prophetess  as 
the  spot  at  which  to  meet  the  warriors  of  the  tribes 


KEDKSII 

before  the  commencement  of  the  straggle  '  Cor  Je 
hovah  against  the  mighty."  It  was  one  of  the 
places  taken  by  Tiglath-Pileser  in  the  reign  of 
l'ekah(Jos.  Ant.'n.  11,  §1,  KuS«ra;  2  K.xv.  29); 
and  here  again  it  is  mentioned  in  immediate  con 
nexion  with  Hazor.  Its  next  and  last  appearance 
in  the  Bible  is  as  the  scene  of  a  battle  between 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus  and  the  forces  of  Demetrius 
(1  Mace.  xi.  63,  73,  A.  V.  CADES;  Jos.  Ant. 
xiii.  5,  §6,  7).  After  this  time  it  is  spoken  of 
by  Josephus  (B.  J.  ii.  18,  §1;  iv.  2,  §3,  irpot 
KvSvffffois)  as  in  the  possession  of  the  Tyrians — 
"  a  strong  inland"1  village,"  well  fortified,  and  with 
a  great  number  of  inhabitants ;  and  he  mentions 
that  during  the  siege  of  Giscala,  Titus  removed  his 
camp  thither — a  distance  of  about  7  miles,  if  the 
two  places  are  correctly  identified — a  movement 
which  allowed  John  to  make  his  escape. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomast.  "Cedes") 
it  is  described  as  lying  near  Paneas,  and  20  miles 
( Eusebius  says  8 — 4\ — but  this  must  be  wrong)  from 
Tyre,  and  as  called  Kudossos  or  Cidissus.  Brc- 
cardus  (Descr.  ch.  iv.),  describes  it,  evidently  from 
personal  knowledge,  as  4  leagues  north  of  Safet, 
and  as  abounding  in  ruins.  It  was  visited  by  the 
Jewish  travellers,  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (A.D.  1170), 
and  ha-Parchi  (A.D.  1315).  The  former  places  it 
one  day's,  and  the  latter  half-a-day's,  journey  from 
Banias  (Benj.  of  Tudela  by  Asher,  i.  82,  ii.  109, 
420).  Making  allowances  for  imperfect  knowledge 
and  errors  in  transcription,  there  is  a  tolerable  agree 
ment  between  the  above  accounts,  recognisable  now 
that  Dr.  Robinson  has  with  great  probability  iden 
tified  the  spot.  This  he  has  done  at  Kades,  a 
village  situated  on  the  western  edge  of  the  basin  of 
the  Ard-el-ffuleh,  the  great  depressed  basin  or 
tract  through  which  the  Jordan  makes  its  way  into 
the  Sea  of  Merom.  Kades  lies  10  English  miles 
N.  of  Safed,  4  to  the  N.W.  of  the  upper  part  of  the 
Sea  of  Merom,  and  12  or  13  S.  of  Banias.  The 
village  itself  "  is  situated  on  a  rather  high  ridge, 
jutting  out  from  the  western  hills,  and  overlooking 
a  small  green  vale  or  basin.  .  .  Its  site  is  a 
splendid  one,  well  watered  and  surrounded  by  fertile 
plains."  There  are  numerous  sarcophagi,  and  other 
ancient  remains  (Rob.  iii.  366-8  ;  see  also  Van  de 
Velde,  ii.  417  ;  Stanley,  365,  390). 

In  the  Greek  (Kj/SIas)  and  Syriac  {Kedesh 
de  Naphtali)  texts  of  Tob.  i.  2, — though  not  in  the 
Vulgate  or  A.  V. — Kedesh  is  introduced  as  the 
birthplace  of  Tobias.  The  text  is  exceedingly  cor 
rupt,  but  some  little  support  is  lent  to  this  reading 
by  the  Vulgate,  which,  although  omitting  Kedesh, 
mentions  Safed — post  viam  quae  ducit  ad  Occi- 
dentem,  in  sinistro  habens  civitatem  Saphet. 


*  Some  of  the  variations  in  the  LXX.  are  remark- 
Able.  In  Judg.  iv.  9,  10,  Vat.  has  KaSijs,  and  Alex. 
Kei'Ses ;  but  in  ver.  11,  they  both  have  Ke'Ses.  In 
2  K.  xv.  29,  both  have  Kcve'f.  in  Judg.  iv.  and  else 
where  the  Peschito  Version  has  Recem-Naphtali  for 
Kedesh,  Recem  being  the  name  which  in  the  Targums 
is  commonly  used  for  the  Southern  Kadesh,  K.  Bar- 
r.ea.  (Sea  Stauley,  S.  $  P.  94  note.) 

*>  Ilpbs  Bi;pu07j  ToXti  T7J5  roAiAou'as  rrp  avia,  KeSe'crrj? 
ovr  iroppu>.  J.  D.  Micbaelis  (Orient,  und  Exegr.t. 
Bibliothek,  1773,  No.  84)  argues  strenuously  for  the 
identity  of  Beroth  and  Kedes  in  this  passage  with 
Berytus  (Beirut)  and  Kedesh,  near  Emessa  (see 
dbove) ;  but  interesting  and  ingenious  as  is  the  at 
tempt,  the  conclusion  cannot  be  tenable.  (See  also  a 
iiibpequent  paper  in  17J4,  No.  116.) 

'•  From   the   root   fc?"lp,   common    to    the  Scmit it- 


languages  (Gesenius,  Viet.  1195,  8).  Whether  there 
was  any  difference  of  signification  between  Kadesh 
and  Kedesh  does  not  seem  at  all  clear.  Gesenius 
places  the  former  in  connexion  with  a  similar  word 
which  would  seem  to  mean  a  person  or  thing  devoted 
to  the  infamous  rites  of  ancient  heathen  worship — 
"  Scortum  sacrum,  idque  masculum ;"  but  he  does  act 
absolutely  say  that  the  bad  force  resided  in  the  name 
of  the  place  Kadesh.  To  Kedesh  he  gives  a  favour 
able  interpretation — "  Sacrarium."  The  older  in 
terpreters,  as  Killer  and  Simonis,  do  not  recognise 
the  distinction. 

d  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  ch.  xix.,  has 
some  strange  comments  on  this  passage.  He  has  taken 
Whiston's  translation  of  nt<r6yeios —  "  mediterranean  '• 
—  as  referring  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea !  and  ha« 
drawn  hi.s  inferences  accordingly. 


KEHELATHAH 

The  name  Kedesh  exists  much  farther  north  than 
the  possessions  of  Naphtali  would  appear  to  have 
extended,  attached  to  a  lake  of  considerable  size  on 
the  Orontes,  a  few  miles  south  of  Hums,  the  ancient 
Kmessa  (Rob.  iii.  549  ;  Thomson,  in  Hitter,  Da 
mascus,  1002,  4).  The  lake  was  well  known  under 
that  name  to  the  Arabic  geographers  (see,  besides 
the  authorities  quoted  by  Robinson,  Abulfeda  in 
Schultens'  Index  Geogr.  "  Fluvius  Orontes"  and 
"Kudsum"),  and  they  connect  it  in  part  with 
Alexander  the  Great.  But  this  and  the  origin  of 
the  name  are  alike  uncertain.  At  the  lower  end  of 
the  lake  is  an  island  which,  as  already  remarked,  is 
possibly  the  site  of  Ketesh,  the  capture  of  which  by 
.Sethee  I.  is  preserved  in  the  records  of  that  Egyp 
tian  king.  [JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  989  note.]  [G.] 

KEHE'LATHAH  (iin^np  :  MaKeAAafl  :  Ce- 


KENATH 


9 


clatha),  a  desert  encampment  of  the  Israelites  (Num. 
xxxiii.  22),  of  which  nothing  is  known."     [H.  H.] 

KEI'LAH  (nVj,  but   in  1  Sam.  xxiii.  5, 


:  KeeiAa/i,  y  Ket'Aa;  Alex.  KeeiAa  ;  Joseph. 

KiAAa,  and  the  people  ol  KiAAcwof  and  ol  KiAA«rat  : 
Ceila  :  Luth.  Kegila),  a  city  of  the  Shefelah  or 
lowland  district  of  Judah,  named,  in  company  with 
NEZIB  and  MARESHAH,  in  the  next  group  to  the 
Philistine  cities  (Josh.  xv.  44).  Its  main  interest 
consists  in  its  connexion  with  David.  He  rescued 
it  from  an  attack  of  the  Philistines,  who  had  fallen 
upon  the  town  at  the  beginning  of  the  harvest 
(Jos.  Ant.  vi.  13,  §1),  plundered  the  corn  from  its 
threshing-floor,  and  driven  off  the  cattle  (1  Sam. 
yxiii.  1).  The  prey  was  recovered  by  David  (2-5), 
who  then  remained  in  the  city  till  the  comple 
tion  of  the  in-gathering.  It  was  then  a  fortified 
place,b  with  walls,  gates,  and  bars  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  7, 
and  Joseph.).  During  this  time  the  massacre  of 
Nob  was  perpetrated,  and  Keilah  became  the  re 
pository  of  the  sacred  Ephod,  which  Abiathar  the 
priest,  the  sole  survivor,  had  carried  off  with  him 
(ver.  6).  But  it  was  not  destined  long  to  enjoy  the 
presence  of  these  brave  and  hallowed  inmates,  nor 
indeed  was  it  worthy  of  such  good  fortune,  for  the 
inhabitants  soon  plotted  David's  betrayal  to  Saul, 
then  on  his  road  to  besiege  the  place.  Of  this 
intention  David  was  warned  by  Divine  intimation. 
He  therefore  left  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  7-13.) 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  word  Baali  is  used  by 
David  to  denote  the  inhabitants  of  Keilah,  in  this 
passage  (ver.  11,  12;  A.  V.  "men");  possibly 
pointing  to  the  existence  of  Canaanites  in  the  place 
[BAAL,  p.  1466]. 

We  catch  only  one  more  glimpse  of  the  town,  in 
the  times  after  the  Captivity,  when  Hashabiah,  the 
ruler  of  one  half  the  district  of  Keilah  (or  whatever 
the  word  Pelec,  A.V.,  "part"  may  mean),  and 
Bavai  ben-Henadad,  ruler  of  the  other  half,  assisted 
Nehemiah  in  the  repair  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  17,  18).  Keilah  appears  to  have  been 
known  to  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  They  describe  it  in 
the  Onomasticon  as  existing  under  the  name  KT/AO, 
or  Ceila,  on  the  road  from  Eleutheropolis  to  Hebron, 


at  8C  miles  distance  from  the  former.  In  Ihe  map  of 
Lieut.  Van  de  Veide  (1858),  the  name  Kila  occurs 
attached  to  a  site  with  ruins,  on  the  lower  road  from 
Beit  Jibrin  to  Hebron,  at  very  nearly  the  right 
distance  from  B.  Jibrin  (almost  certainly  Eleu 
theropolis),  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Beit  Nusib 
(Nezib)  and  Maresa  (Mareshah).  The  name  was 
only  reported  to  Lieut.  V.  (see  his  Memoir,  p. 
328),  but  it  has  been  since  visited  by  the  inde 
fatigable  Tobler,  who  completely  confirms  the  iden 
tification,  merely  remarking  that  Kila  is  placed  a 
little  too  far  south  on  the  map.  Thus  another  is 
added  to  the  list  of  places  which,  though  specified 
as  in  the  "  lowland,"  are  yet  actually  found  in  the 
mountains :  a  puzzling  fact  in  our  present  ignorance 
of  the  principles  of  the  ancient  boundaries.  [JiPH- 
TAH  ;  JUDAH,  p.  11566.] 

In  the  4th  century  a  tradition  existed  that  the 
prophet  Habbakuk  was  buried  at  Keilah  (Onomas 
ticon,  "  Ceila ;"  Nicephorus,  If.  E.  xii.  48  ;  Cas- 
siodorus,  in  Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  29) ;  but  an 
other  tradition  gives  that  honour  to  HUKKOK. 

In  1  Chr.  iv.  19,  "  KEILAH  THE  GARMITE  "  is 
mentioned,  apparently — though  it  is  impossible  to 
say  with  certainty— as  a  descendant  of  the  great 
Caleb  (ver.  15).  But  the  passage  is  extremely  ob 
scure,  and  there  is  no  apparent  connexion  with  the 
town  Keilah.  [G.] 

KELAI'AH  (!T6jp:  KaAi'o;  Alex.  Ku\da: 
Cod.  Fred.  Aug.  Ka>Ae£a,  and  KwAfeu  :  Celaw)  = 
KELITA  (Ezr.  x.  23).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Esd. 
his  name  appears  as  COLIUS. 

KE'LITA  (KO^pj  KcoAfras;  Ka\ndv  in 
Neh.  x.  10 :  Celita ;  Calita  in  Ezr.  x.  23),  one  of 
the  Levites  who  returned  from  the  captivity  with 
Ezra,  and  had  intermarried  with  the  people  of  the 
land  (Ezr.  x.  23).  In  company  with  the  other 
Levites  he  assisted  Ezra  in  expounding  the  law 
(Neh.  viii.  7),  and  entered  into  a  solemn  league  and 
covenant  to  follow  the  law  of  God,  and  separate 
from  admixture  with  foreign  nations  (Neh.  x.  10). 
He  is  also  called  KELAIAH,  and  in  the  parallel  list 
of  1  Esdr.  his  name  appears  as  CALITAS. 

KEM'UEL  (WlEj?:  Ko/*oi^A :  Camuel}. 
1.  The  son  of  Nahor  by  Milcah,  and  father  of  Aram, 
whom  Ewald  (Gesch.  i.  414,  note)  identifies  with 
Ram  of  Job  xxxii.  2,  to  whose  family  Elihu  belonged 
(Gen.  xxii.  21). 

2.  The  son  of  Shiphtan,  and  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Ephraim  ;  one  of  the  twelve  men  appointed  by 
Moses  to  divide  the  land  of  Canaan  among  the  tribes 
(Num.  xxxiv.  24). 

3.  A  Levite,  father  of  Hashabiah,  prince  of  the 
tribe  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  17). 

KE'NAN  (]y\) :  KaiVaj/ :  Cainan)  =  CAINAN 

the  son  of  Enos  (1  Chr.  i.  2),  whose  name  is  also 
correctly  given  in  this  form  hi  the  margin  cl 
Gen.  v.  9. 

KEN'ATH  (nij? :   ft  Kad6  ,  Alex,  i)  Kaa.vd.6 
in  Chron.  both  MSS.  KavdB  :  Chanath,  Canath),  one 


•  The  name  may  possibly  be  derived  from  n?!"lp; 
a  congregation,  with  the  local  suffix  !"1,  which  many 
of  these  names  carry.  Compare  the  name  of  another 
place  of  encampment,  Fl/HpO,  which  appears  to  be 
from  the  same  root. 

b  This  is  said  by  Gesenius  and  others  to  be  the  sig 
nification  of  the  name  "  Keilah."  If  this  be  so,  there 
would  almost  appear  to  be  a  reference  to  this  and 


the  contemporary  circumstances  of  David's  life,  in  Pa. 
xxxi. ;  not  only  in  the  expression  (ver.  21),  "mar 
vellous  kindness  in  a  strong  city"  ("11 VD  "VJJ),  but 
also  in  ver.  8,  and  in  the  general  tenour  of  the  Psalm 

c  This  IK  Jerome's  correctior  .}f  Eusebius,  who  gives 
17 — manifestly  wrong,  as  theivhole  distance  between 
Hebron  anJ  Beit-Jibrin  is  not  more  than  .5  Komau 
miles. 


10 


KENAZ 


cf  the  cities  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  with  its 
" d.iughter-towns "  (A.  V.  "  villages")  taken  pos 
session  of  by  a  certain  NOBAH,  who  then  called 
it  by  his  own  name  (Num.  xxxii.  42).  At  a  later 
period  these  toTns,  with  those  of  Jair,  were  recap 
tured  by  Geshur  and  Aram  (1  Chr.  ii.  23 a).  In 
the  days  of  Eusebius  (Onom.  "  Canath  ")  it  was 
still  called  Kanatha,  and  he  speaks  of  it  as  "  a 
village  of  Arabia  ....  near  Bozra."  Its  site  has 
been  recovered  with  tolerable  certainty  in  our  own 
times  at  Kenawdt,  a  ruined  town  at  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  Lejah,  about  20  miles  N.  of 
B&srah,  which  was  first  visited  by  Burckhardt  in 
1810  (Syria,  83-86),  and  more  recently  by  Porter 
(Damascus,  ii.  87-1 15 ;  Handbk.  512-14),  the  latter 
of  whom  gives  a  lengthened  description  and  identi 
fication  of  the  place.  The  suggestion  that  Kenaudt 
was  Kenath  seems,  however,  to  have  been  first  made 
by  Gesenius  in  his  notes  to  Burckhardt  ( A.D.  1823, 
p.  505).  Another  Kenawat  is  marked  on  Van  de 
Velde's  map,  about  10  miles  farther  to  the  west. 

The  name  furnishes  an  interesting  example  of 
the  permanence  of  an  original  appellation.  NOBAH, 
though  conferred  by  the  conqueror,  and  apparently 
at  one  time  the  received  name  of  the  spot  (Judg. 
viii.  11),  has  long  since  given  way  to  the  older 
title.  Compare  ACCHO,  KIRJATH-ARBA,  &c.  [G.j 

KE'NAZ  (TJp:    Kei/e'f:    Cenez).      1.  Son  of 

Kliphaz,  the  son  of  Esau.  He  was  one  of  the  dukes 
of  Edom,  according  to  both  lists,  that  in  Gen. 
xxxvi.  15,  42,  and  that  in  1  Chr.  i.  53,  and  the 
founder  of  a  tribe  or  family,  who  were  called  from 
him  Kenezites  (Josh.  xiv.  14,  &c.).  Caleb,  the  son 
of  Jephunneh,  and  Othniel,  were  the  two  most  re 
markable  of  his  descendants.  [CALEB.] 

2.  One  of  the  same  family,  a  grandson  of  Caleb, 
according  to  1  Chr.  iy.  15,  where,  however,  the 
Hebrew  text  is  corrupt.  Another  name  has  possibly 
fallen  out  before  Kenaz.  .  [A.  C.  H.] 

KE'NEZITE  (written  KENIZZITE,  A.  V. 
Gen.  xv.  19 :  ^T3j?  :  Kfi>e£dios  :  Cenezaeus},  an 
EJomitish  tribe  (Num.  xxxii.  12 ;  Josh.  xiv.  6, 
14).  [KENAZ.]  It  is  difficult  to  account  for  the 
Kenezites  existing  as  a  tribe  so  early  as  before  the 
birth  of  Isaac,  as  they  appear  to  have  done  from 
Gen.  xv.  19.  If  this  tribe  really  existed  then,  and 
the  enumeration  of  tribes  in  ver.  19-21  formed  a 
part  of  what  the  Lord  said  to  Abram,  it  can  only 
be  said,  with  Bochart  (Phaleg,  iv.  36),  that  these 
Kenezites  arc  mentioned  here  only,  that  they  had 
ceased  to  exist  in  the  time  of  Moses  and  Joshua, 
and  *hat  nothing  whatever  is  known  of  their  origin 
or  place  of  abode.  But  it  is  worth  consideration 


KENITE,  THE 

whether  the  enumeration  may  not  be  a  later  ei- 
planatory  addition  by  Moses  or  some  later  editor, 
and  so  these  Kenezites  be  descendants  of  Kenaz , 
whose  adoption  into  Israel  took  place  in  the  time 
of  Caleb,  which  was  the  reason  of  their  insertion 
in  this  place.  [A.  C.  H.] 

KE'NITE,  THE,  and  KE'NITES,   THE 

Ol'j5n  and  *3j5i1,  i.  e.  "  the  Kenite ;"  in  Chron. 
Q*3'jpn ;  but  in  Num.  xxiv.  22,  and  in  Judg.  iv. 
116,  pp,  A'nin  :  ot  Kfvaiot,  6  Kivouos,  ol  Ktvatot : 

Cinaeus)^  a  tribe  or  nation  whose  history  is 
strangely  interwoven  with  that  of  the  chosen  people. 
In  the  genealogical  table  of  Gen.  x.  they- do  not 
appear.  The  first  mention  of  them  is  in  company 
with  the  Kenizzites  and  Kadmonites,  in  the  list  of 
the  nations  who  then  occupied  the  Promised  Land 
(Gen.  xv.  19).  Their  origin,  therefore,  like  that 
of  the  two  tribes  just  named,  and  of  the  Awim 
(AviTES)  is  hidden  from  us.  But  we  may  fairly 
infer  that  they  were  a  branch  of  the  larger  nation 
of  MIDIAN — from  the  fact  that  Jethro,  the  father 
of  Moses's  wife,  who  in  the  records  of  Exodus  (see 
ii.  15,  16,  iv.  19,  &c.)  is  represented  as  dwelling 
in  the  land  of  Midian,  and  as  priest  or  prince  of 
that  nation,  is  in  the  narrative  of  Judges  (i.  16, 
iv.  1 1  c)  as  distinctly  said  to  have  been  a  Kenite. 
As  Midianites  they  were  therefore  descended  imme 
diately  from  Abraham  by  his  wife  Keturah,  and  in 
this  relationship  and  their  connexion  with  Moses  we 
find  the  key  to  their  continued  alliance  with  Israel. 
The  important  services  rendered  by  the  sheikh  of 
the  Kenites  to  Moses  during  a  time  of  great  pressure 
and  difficulty,  were  rewarded  by  the  latter  with  ,1 
promise  of  firm  friendship  between  the  two  peoples 
— "  what  goodness  Jehovah  shall  do  unto  us,  the 
same  will  we  do  to  thee."  And  this  promise  was 
gratefully  remembered  long  after  to  the  advantage 
of  the  Kenites  (1  Sam.  xv.  6).  The  connexion 
then  commenced  lasted  as  firmly  as  a  connexion 
could  last  between  a  settled  people  like  Israel  and 
one  whose  tendencies  were  so  ineradicably  nomadic 
as  the  Kenites.  They  seem  to  have  accompanied 
the  Hebrews  during  their  wanderings.  At  any  rate 
they  were  with  them  at  the  time  of  their  entrance  on 
the  Promised  Land.  Then-  encampment — separate 
and  distinct  from  the  rest  of  the  people — was  within 
Balaam's  view  when  he  delivered  his  prophecy d 
(Num.  xxiv.  21,  22),  and  we  may  infer  that  they 
assisted  in  the  capture  of  Jericho,'  the  "  city  of  palm- 
trees"  (Judg.  i.  16  ;  comp.  2  Chr.  xrviii.  15).  But 
the  wanderings  of  Israel  over,  they  forsook  the  neigh 
bourhood  of  the  towns,  and  betook  themselves  to 
freer  air — to  "the  wilderness  of  Judah,  which 


*  This  passage  is  erroneously  translated  in  the 
A.  V.  It  should  be,  "  And  Geshur  and  Aram  took 
the  Havvoth-Jair,  with  Kenath  and  her  daughters, 
sixty  cities."  See  Bertheau,  Chronik ;  Zunz's  version  ; 
Targura  of  Joseph,  &c.  &c. 

b  Josephus  gives  the  name  Kei/ertSes  (Ant.  v.  5,  §4) ; 
but  in  his  notice  of  Saul's  expedition  (vi.  7,  §3)  he  hag 
TO  TMV  SucijuuTwi'  <f0ro« — the  form  in  which  he  else 
where  gives  that  of  the  Shechemites.  No  explanation 
of  this  present*  itself  to  the  writer.  The  Targums  of 
Onkelos,  Jonat  an,  and  Pseudojon.  uniformly  render 
the  Kenite  hy  HNO/'K'  =  Salmaite,  possibly  because 
in  the  genealogy  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  55)  a  branch  of 
tne  Kenites  come  under  Salma,  son  of  Caleb.  The 
Kime  name  is  introduced  in  the  Samarit.  Vers.  before 
"the  Kenite"  in  Gen.  xv.  19  only. 

0  This  passage  is  incorrectly  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
U  should  be,  "  And  Ilelicr  the  Ketiite  hud  severed 


himself  from  Kain  of  the  children  of  Ilobab,  the 
father-in-law  of  Moses,  and  pitched,"  &c. 

d  If  it  be  necessary  to  look  for  a  literal  "  fulfilment " 
of  this  sentence  of  Balaam's,  we  shall  best  find  it  ir. 
the  accounts  of  the  latter  days  of  Jerusalem  under 
Jehoiakim,  when  the  Kenite  Rechabites  were  so  far 
"  wasted  "  by  the  invading  army  of  Assyria  as  to  be 
driven  to  take  refuge  within  the  walls  of  the  city,  a 
step  to  which  we  may  be  sure  nothing  short  of  actual 
extremity  could  have  forced  these  Children  of  the 
Desert.  Whether  "  Asshur  carried  them  away  cap 
tive  "  with  the  other  inhabitants  we  are  not  told,  but 
it  is  at  least  probable. 

e  It  has  been  pointed  out  under  HOBAB  that  one 
of  the  wadys  opposite  Jericho,  the  same  by  which, 
according  to  the  local  tradition,  the  Bene-Israol  de 
scended  to  the  Jordan,  retains  the  name  or  Sho'ril: 
tl.r  MuMiUiniiin  version  of  Ilobab 


KEVIZZITE 

is  to  the  south  of  Arad"  (Judg.  i.  16),  where 
"  they  dwelt  among  the  people  "  of  the  district1 — 
Ihe  Amalekites  who  wandered  in  that  dry  region, 
and  among  whom  they  were  living  centuries  later 
when  Saul  made  his  expedition  there  (1  Sam. 
xv.  6).  Their  alliance  with  Israel  at  this  later 
date  is  shown  no  less  by  Saul's  friendly  warning 
than  by  David's  feigned  attack  (xxvii.  10,  and  see 
xxx.  29). 

But  one  of  the  sheikhs  of  the  tribe,  Heber  by 
name,  had  wandered  north  instead  of  south,  and  at 
the  time  of  the  great  struggle  between  the  northern 
tribes  and  Jabin  king  of  Hazor,  his  tents  were 
pitched  under  the  tree  of  Zaanaim,  near  Kedesh 
(Judg.  iv.  11).  Heber  was  in  alliance  with  both 
the  contending  parties,  but  in  the  hour  of  extremity 
the  ties  of  blood-relationship  and  ancient  com 
panionship  proved  strongest,  and  Sisera  fell  a 
victim  to  the  hammer  and  the  nail  of  Jael. 

The  most  remarkable  development  of  this  people, 
exemplifying  most  completely  their  characteristics 
— their  Bedouin  hatred  of  the  restraints  of  civiliza 
tion,  their  fierce  determination,  their  attachment 
to  Israel,  together  with  a  peculiar  semi-monastic 
austerity  not  observable  in  their  earlier  proceedings — 
is  to  be  found  in  the  sect  or  family  of  the  RECH- 
ABITES,  founded  by  Rechab,  or  Jonadab  his  son, 
who  come  prominently  forward  on  more  than  one 
occasion  in  the  later  history.  [JEHONADAB ; 
RECHABITES.] 

The  founder  of  the  family  appears  to  have  been 
a  certain  Hammath  (A.  V.  HEMATH)  and  a  sin 
gular  testimony  is  furnished  to  the  connexion  which 
existed  between  this  tribe  of  Midianite  wanderers 
and  the  nation  of  Israel,  by  the  fact  that  their 
name  and  descent  are  actually  included  in  the  ge 
nealogies  of  the  great  house  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  ii.  55). 

No  further  notices  would  seem  to  be  extant  of  this 
:'uteresting  people.  The  name  of  Ba-Kain  (abbre 
viated  from  Bene  el-Kairi)  is  mentioned  by  Ewald 
(Gesch.  i.  337  note)  as  borne  in  comparatively 
modern  days  by  one  of  the  tribes  of  tne  desert ;  but 
little  or  no  inference  can  be  drawn  from  such 
similarity  in  names.  [G.] 

KE'NIZZITE.     Gen.  xv.  19.     [KENEZITE.] 

KE'REN-HAPTUCH  0]-1Srrjl?  =  >AM«*- 
Baias  Kepas :  Cornustibii),  the  youngest  of  the 
daughters  of  Job,  born  to  him  during-  the  period  of 
his  reviving  prosperity  (Job  xlii.  14),  and  so  called 
probably  from  her  great  beauty.  The  Vulgate  has 
correctly  rendered  her  name  "  horn  of  antimony," 
the  pigment  used  by  Eastern  kdies  to  colour  their 
eyelashes ;  but  the  LXX.,  unless  they  had  a  different 
reading,  adopted  a  current  expression  of  their  own 
age,  without  regard  to  strict  accuracy,  in  repre 
senting  Keren-happuch  by  "  the  horn  of  Amalthaea," 
or  "  horn  of  plenty." 

KE'EIOTH  (ni»-)j?,  i.  e.  Kertyoth).  1.  (at 
ir6\fis  ;  Alex.  iro\is  :  Carioth),  a  name  which 
occurs  among  the  lists  of  the  towns  in  the  southern 
district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  25).  According  to 
the  A.  V.  ("Kerioth,b  and  Hezron")  it  denotes  a 
distinct  place  from  the  name  which  follows  it ;  but 
this  separation  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  ac- 


KEEIOTH 


11 


centuation  of  the  Rec.  Hebrew  text,  and  is  now 
;enerally  abandoned  (see  Keil,  Josua,  ad  loc.  and 
Reland,  Pal.  700,  708 ;  the  versions  of  Zuiiz,  Cahen, 
&c.),  and  the  name  taken  as  "  Keriyoth-Hezron, 
which  is  Hazor,"  i.  e.  its  name  before  the  conquest 
was  Hazor,  for  which  was  afterwards  substituted 
Keriyoth-Hezron — the  "  cities  of  H." 

Dr.  Robinson  (B.  E.  ii.  101),  and  Lieut.  Van  de 
Velde  (ii.  82)  propose  to  identify  it  with  Kurye- 
tein  ("the  two  cities"),  a  ruined  site  which  stands 
about  10  miles  S.  from  Hebron,  and  3  from  Main 
(Maon). 

Kerioth  furnishes  one,  and  that  perhaps  the 
oldest  and  most  usual,  of  the  explanations  proposed 
for  the  title  "  Iscariot,"  and  which  are  enumerated 
under  JUDAS  ISCARIOT,  vol.  i.  11606.  But  if 
Kerioth  is  to  be  read  in  conjunction  with  Hezron, 
as  stated  above,  another  difficulty  is  thrown  in  the 
way  of  this  explanation. 

2.  (KapuaO ;  Carioth),  a  city  of  Moab,  named  in 
the  denunciations  of  Jeremiah — and  there  only — iu 
company  with  Dibon,  Beth-diblathaim,  Bethmeon, 
Bozrah,  and  other  places  "far  and  near"  (Jer. 
xlviii.  24).  None  of  the  ancient  interpreters  ap 
pear  to  give  any  clue  to  the  position  of  this  place. 
By  Mr.  Porter,  however,  it  is  unhesitatingly  iden 
tified  with  Kureiyeh,  a  ruined  town  of  some  extent 
lying  between  Busrah  and  Sulkhad,  in  the  southern 
part  of  the  Haurdn  (Five  Years  &c.  ii.  191-198; 
Handbook,  523,  4).  The  chief  argument  in  favour 
of  this  is  the  proximity  of  Kureiyeh  to  Busrah, 
which  Mr.  Porter  accepts  as  identical  with  the 
BOZRAH  of  the  same  passage  of  Jeremiah.  But 
there  are  some  considerations  which  stend  very 
much  in  the  way  of  these  identifications.  Jere 
miah  is  speaking  (xlviii.  21)  expressly  of  the  cities 
of  the  "  Mishor  "  (A.  V.  "  plain-country  "),  that  is, 
the  district  of  level  downs  east  of  the  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea,  which  probably  answered  in  whole  or  in 
part  to  the  Belka  of  the  modern  Arabs.  In  this 
region  were  situated  Heshbon,  Dibon,  Elealeh, 
Beth-meon,  Kir-heres — the  only  places  named  in 
the  passage  in  question,  the  positions  of  which  are 
known  with  certainty.  The  most  northern  of  these 
(Heshbon)  is  not  farther  north  than  the  upper  end 
of  the  Dead  Sea ;  the  most  southern  (Kir)  lay  near 
its  lower  extremity.  Nor  is  there  anything  in  the 
parallel  denunciation  of  Moab  by  Isaiah  (ch.  xvi.)  to 
indicate  that  the  limits  of  Moab  extended  farther  to 
the  north.  But  Busrah  and  Kureiyeh  are  no  less 
than  60  miles  to  the  N.N.E.  of  Heshbon  itself, 
beyond  the  limits  even  of  the  modem  Belka  (see 
Kiepert's  map  to  Wetzstein's  Hauran  und  die  Trach- 
onen,  1860),  and  in  a  country  of  an  entirely  oppo 
site  character  from  the  "  flat  downs,  of  smooth  and 
even  turf"  which  characterise  that  district — "a 
savage  and  forbidding  aspect  .  .  .  nothing  but 
stones  and  jagged  black  rocks  .  .  .  the  whole 
country  around  Kureiyeh  covered  with  heaps  of 
loose  stones,"  &c.  (Porter,  ii.  189,  193).  A 
more  plausible  identification  would  be  Kureiyat, 
at  the  western  foot  of  Jebel  Attarus.  and  but 
a  short  distance  from  either  Dibon,  Bethmeon,  or 
Hesh-bon. 

But  on  the  other  hand  it  should  not  be  over 
looked  that  Jeremiah  uses  the  expression  •'  far  and 


•  A  plaM  named  KINAH,  possibly  derived  from  the 
same  root  as  the  Kenites,  is  mentioned  in  the  lists  of 
the  cities  of  "  the  south "  of  Judah.  But  there  is 
nothing  to  imply  any  connexion  between  the  two. 

[KlNAH.] 

b  In  tLe  A.  V.  of  1611  the  punctuation  was  still 


more  marked — "  and  Kerioth  :  and  Hezron,  which  is 
Hazor."  This  agrees  with  the  version  of  Junius  and 
Tremellius — "  et  Kcrijothae  (Chet/ron  ea  cst  Chat- 
zor),"  and  with  that  of  Luther.  Castcllio,  on  the 
other  hand,  has  "  CariotheBron,  quue  alias  Hasor." 


12 


KEROS 


near"  (ver.  24),  and  also  that  if  liusrah  and 
Kureiyah  arc  not  Bozrah  and  Kerioth,  those  im 
portant  places  have  apparently  flourished  without 
any  notice  from  the  Sacred  writers.  This  is  one 
of  the  points  which  further  investigation  by  com 
petent  persons,  east  of  the  Jordan,  may  piobabiy 
set  at  rest. 

Kerioth  occurs  in  the  A.  V.,  also  in  ver.  41.  Here 
however  it  bears  the  definite  article  (Di'lipn  :  Alex. 
'AKKapuaO :  Carioth),  and  would  appear  to  signify  not 
anyone  definite  place,  but  "  the  cities"  of  Moab" — 
as  may  also  be  the  case  with  the  same  word  in 
Amos  ii.  2.  [KiRiOTH.]  [G.j 

KE'ROS  (D'lj5  :  KdSjjs  ;  Alex.  Kfyaos  in  Ezr. 
ii.  44,  DTp  :  KtpJis;  Alex.  Kfipds  in  Neh.  vii.  47: 
Gems'),  one  of  the  Nethinim,  whose  descendants 
returned  with  Zerubbabel. 

KETTLE  (1-11 :  Xe'07/s :  caldaria),  a  vessel 
for  culinary  or  sacrificial  purposes  (1  Sam.  ii.  14). 
The  Hebrew  word  is  also  rendered  "basket"  in 
Jer.  xxiv.  2,  "caldron"  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13,  and 
"  pot "  in  Job  xli.  20.  [CALDRON.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

KETU'KAH  (fniBp,  "  incense,"  Ges. :  Xer- 
roiipa:  Cetura),  the  ''wife"  whom  Abraham 
"  added  and  took "  (A.  V.  "again  took")  besides, 
or  after  the  death  of,  Sarah  (Gen.  xxv.  1 ;  1  Chr. 
i.  32).  Gesenius  and  others  adopt  the  theory  that 
Abraham  took  Keturah  after  Sarah's  death;  but 
probability  seems  against  it  (compare  Gen.  xvii. 
17,  xviii.  11  ;  Rom.  iv.  19  ;  and  Heb.  xi.  12),  and 
we  incline  to  the  belief  that  the  passage  commencing 
with  xxv.  1,  and  comprising  perhaps  the  whole 
chapter,  or  at  least  as  far  as  ver.  10,  is  placed  out 
ot  ;ts  chronological  sequence  in  order  not  to  break 
the  main  narrative ;  and  that  Abraham  took  Keturah 
during  Sarah's  lifetime.  That  she  was  strictly  speak 
ing  his  wife  is  also  very  uncertain.  The  Hebrew 
word  so  translated  in  this  place  in  the  A.  V.,  and 
by  many  scholars,  is  /sAaA,b  of  which  the  first 
meaning  given  by  Gesenius  is  "  a  woman,  of  eveiy 
age  and  condition,  whether  married  or  not;"  and 
although  it  is  commonly  used  with  the  signification 
of  "wife,"  as  opposed  to  husband,  in  Gen.  xxx.  4, 
it  occurs  with  the  signification  of  concubine,  "  and 
she  gave  him  Bilhah  her  handmaid  to  wife."  In 
the  record  in  1  Chr.  i.  32,  Keturah  is  called  a 
"  concubine,"  and  it  is  also  said,  in  the  two  verses 
immediately  following  the  genealogy  of  Keturah, 
that  "  Abraham  gave  all  that  he  had  unto  Isaac. 
But  unto  the  sons  of  the  concubines,  which  Abra 
ham  had,  Abraham  gave  gifts,  and  sent  them  away 
from  Isaac  his  son,  while  he  yet  lived,  eastward, 
unto  the  east  country"  (Gen.  xxv.  5,  6).  Except 
Hagar,  Ketuiah  is  the  only  person  mentioned  to 
whom  this  passage  can  relate;  and  in  confirmation 
of  this  supposition  we  find  strong  evidence  of  a  wide 
spread  of  the  tribes  sprung  from  Keturah,  bearing 
the  names  of  her  sons,  as  we  have  mentioned  in 
other  articles.  These  sons  were  "  Zimran,  and 
Jokshan,  and  Medan,  and  Midian,  and  Ishbak,  and 
Shuah"  (ver.  2);  besides  the  sons  and  gi-andsons 
of  Jokshan,  and  the  sons  of  Midiaii.  They  evi 
dently  crossed  the  desert  to  the  Persian  Gulf  and 
occupied  the  whole  intermediate  country,  where 
traces  of  their  names  are  frequent,  while  Midian 
•attended  south  into  the  peninsula  of  Arabia  Proper. 


•  So  Ewald,  Prophet m,  "  Die  Stadte  Moabs.' 
k 


KEY 

The  elder  branch  of  the  "  sons  of  the  concubines,* 
however,  was  that  of  Ishmael.  He  has  er«;r  stood  as 
the  representative  of  the  bondwoman's  sons  ;  and  uc 
such  his  name  has  become  generally  applied  by  the 
Arabs  to  all  the  Abrahamic  settlers  north  of  the 
Peninsula  —  besides  the  great  Ishmaelite  element  of 
the  nation. 

In  searching  the  works  of  Arab  writers  for  any 
information  respecting  these  tribes,  we  must  be 
contented  to  find  them  named  as  Abrahamic,  or 
even  Ishmaelite,  for  under  the  latter  appellation 
almost  all  the  former  are  confounded  by  their  de 
scendants.  Keturah  c  herself  is  by  them  mentioned 
veiy  raiely  and  vaguely,  and  evidently  only  in  quot 
ing  from  a  rabbinical  writer.  (In  the  Kdmoos  the 
name  is  said  to  be  that  of  the  Turks,  and  that  of  a 
young  girl  (or  slave)  of  Abraham  ;  and,  it  is  added, 
her  descendants  are  the  Turks!)  M.  Caussin  cle 
Perceval  (Essai,  i.  179)  has  endeavoured  to  identify 
her  with  the  name  of  a  tribe  of  the  Amalekites  (the 
1st  Amalek)  called  Katoora?  but  his  arguments  are 
not  of  any  weight.  They  rest  on  a  weak  etymology, 
and  are  contradicted  by  the  statements  of  Arab 
authors  as  well  as  by  the  fact  that  the  early  tribes 
of  Arabia  (of  which  is  Katoori)  have  not,  with  the 
single  exception  of  Amalek,  been  identified  with  any 
historical  names  ;  while  the  exception  of  Amalek 
is  that  of  an  apparently  aboriginal  people  whose 
name  is  recorded  in  the  Bible  ;  and  there  are 
reasons  for  supposing  that  these  early  tribes  were 
aboriginal.  [E.  S.  P.] 


KEY  (nna»,  from  rmS,  "to  open,"  Ges.  p. 
1  138  :  K\fls  ;  clavis).  The  key  of  a  native  Oriental 
lock  is  a  piece  of  wood,  from  7  inches  to  2  teet  in 
length,  fitted  with  wires  or  short  nails,  which,  being 
inserted  laterally  into  the  hollow  bolt  which  serves 
as  a  lock,  raises  other  pins  within  the  stapb  so  as 
to  allow  the  bolt  to  be  drawn  back.  But  it  is  iiot 
difficult  to  open  a  lock  of  this  kind  even  without 
a  key,  viz.  with  the  finger  dipped  in  paste  or  other 
adhesive  substance.  The  passage  Cant.  v.  4,  5,  is 
thus  probably  explained  (Harmer,  06s.  iii.  31  ;  vol. 
i.  394,  ed.  Clarke;  Kauwollff,  ap.  Kay,  Trav.  ii. 
17).  [LOCK.]  The  key,  so  obvious  a  svmbol  of 
authority,  both  in  ancient  and  modern  times,  is 
named  more  than  once  in  the  Bible,  especially  Is. 
xxii.  22,  a  passage  to  which  allusion  is  probably 
made  in  Rev.  iii.  7.  The  expression  "  bearing  the 
key  on  the  shoulder  "  is  thus  a  phrase  used,  some 
times  perhaps  in  the  literal  sense,  to  denote  pos 
session  of  office  ;  but  there  seems  no  reason  to  sup 
pose,  with  Grotius,  any  figure  of  a  key  embroidered 
on  the  garment  of  the  office-bearer  (see  Is.  ix.  6). 
In  Talmudic  phraseology  the  Almighty  was  repre 
sented  as  "  holding  the  keys  "  of  various  operations 
of  nature,  e.  g.  rain,  death,  &c.,  i.  e.  exercising 
dominion  over  them.  The  delivery  of  the  key  is 
therefore  an  act  expressive  of  authority  conferrei], 
and  the  possession  of  it  implies  authority  of  some  kind 
held  by  the  receiver.  The  term  "  chamberlain," 
an  officer  whose  mark  of  office  is  sometimes  in  modern 
times  an  actual  key,  is  explained  under  EUNUCH 
(Grotius,  Calmet,  Knobel,  on  Is.  xxii.  22;  Ham 
mond  ;  Lightfoot,  /Tor.  Hebr.  ;  De  Wette  on  Matt. 
xvi.  19;  Carpzov  on  Goodwin,  Moses  and  Aaron,  pp. 
141,  «H2  ;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  art.  "  Matrimonium  ;"' 
Ovid,  Fust.  i.  99,  118,  125,  139;  Hofmann,  Lex. 


KEZIA 

••Cair.erarius;"  Chambers,  Diet.  "  Chamberlain;" 
E;knd,  Ant.  Hebr.  li.  3,  5.)  [H.  W.  P.] 


Iron  Key.     (From  Tbebe».) 

KEZI'A  (nyyp:  Kao-i'a;  Alex.  Kcurffia  : 
Cassia),  the  second  of  the  daughters  of  Job,  born 
to  him  after  his  recovery  (  Job  xlii.  14). 

KEZI'Z,  THE  VALLEY  OF  Q"yp  p»J?  : 
AueKaffis  ;  Alex.  'AjueKKOurefs  :  FaWis  Casis),  one 
of  the  "cities"  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  21).  That 
it  was  the  eastern  border  of  the  tribe,  is  evident  from 
its  mention  in  company  with  BETH-HOGLAH  and 
BETH-HA-ARABAH.  The  name  does  not  re-apppear 
in  the  0.  T.,  but  it  is  possibly  intended  under  the 
corrupted  form  BETH-BASI,  in  1  Mace.  ix.  62,  64. 
The  name,  if  Hebrew,  is  derivable  from  a  root 
meaning  to  cut  off  (Ges.  Thes.  1229  ;  Simonis, 
Onotn.  70).  Is  it  possible  that  it  can  have  any 
connexion  with  the  general  circumcision  which  took 
place  at  Gilgal,  certainly  in  the  same  neighbourhood, 
after  the  Jordan  was  crossed  (Josh.  v.  2-9)?  [G.] 


KIB'ROTH  -  HATTA'AVAH 

niXnn  :  p-v^a-ra.  TTJS  iTuOvnias  :  sepulchra  con- 
cupiscentiae),  Num.  xi.  34  ;  marg.  "  the  graves  of 
lust"  (comp.  xxxiii.  17).  From  there  being  no 
change  of  spot  mentioned  between  it  and  Taberah 
in  xi.  3,  it  is  probably,  like  the  latter,  about  three 
days'  journey  from  Sinai  (x.  33)  ;  and  from  the  sea 
being  twice  mentioned  in  the  course  of  the  narrative 
(xi.  22,  31),  a  maritime  proximity  may  perhaps  be 
iiiterred.  Here  it  seems  they  abode  a  whole  month, 
during  which  they  went  on  eating  quails,  and  perhaps 
suffering  from  the  plague  which  followed.  If  the 
conjecture  of  Hudherd  (Burckhardt,  p.  495  ;  Robin 
son,  i.  151)  as  a  site  forHazeroth  [see  HAZEROTH] 
be  adopted,  then  "  the  graves  of  lust  "  may  be 
perhaps  within  a  day's  journey  thence  in  the  direc 
tion  of  Sinai,  and  would  lie  within  15  miles  of  the 
Gulf  of  Akabah  ;  but  no  traces  of  any  graves  have 
ever  been  detected  in  the  region."  Both  Schubert, 
between  Sinai  and  the  Wady  Hurrah  (Reisen,  360), 
and  Stanley  (8.  $  P.  82),  just  before  reaching 
Hudherd,  encountered  flights  of  birds  —  the  latter 
says  of  "  red-legged  cranes."  Ritter  b  speaks  of  such 
flights  as  a  constant  phenomenon,  both  in  this  penin 
sula  and  in  the  Euphrates  region.  Burckhardt, 
Travels  in  Syria,  406,  8  Aug.,  quotes  Russell's 


•  Save  one  of  a  Mahommedan  saint   (Stanley,   S. 
$  P.  78),  which  does  not  assist  the  question. 

b  He  remarks  on  the  continuance  of  the  law  of 
nature  in  animal  habits  through  a  course  of  thousands 
of  years  (xiv.  261). 

c  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist.  x.  33,  says  quails  settle  on  the 
sails  of  ships  by  night,  so  as  to  sink  sometimes  the 
ships  in  the  neighbouring  sea.  So  Diod.  Sic.  i.  p.  38: 
T<is  Oripas  tiav  bpTvytav  eTroiovi'TO,  efyfpovro  re  OUTOI 
ICU.T  a-ye'Aas.  ftei^ous  eic  TOU  7T-\a-yous  (Lepsiug,  Thelt 
to  Sinai,  23).  Comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  Hi.  1,  £5 ;  and  Yrr.y- 

Ug,  Lex.  Arab.  s.  v.  IUV  ;   also  Kalisch  on  Ex.  xvi. 

13,  where  an  incidental  mention  of  the  bird  occurs. 
The  Linnean  name  appears  to  be  Tetrao  Alchata. 

*  The  name  is  derived  by  Gesunius  and  others  from 
VIp,  "  black  ;"  either,  according  to  Robinson,  from 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK  13 

Aleppo,  ii.  194,  and  says  the  bird  Katta  \t  found 
in  great  numbers  in  the  neighbourhood  of  T'ufi.leh. 
[ToPHEL.]  He  calls  it  a  species  of  partridge,  01 
"  not  improbably  the  Selaua  or  quail. c  Boys  not 
uncommonly  kill  three  or  four  of  them  at  one  throw 
with  a  stick."  [H.H.] 

KIBZA'IM  (D?V^p  :  Vat.  omits ;  Alei.  i)  Ka/3- 
iflfj. :  Cebsaim],  a  city  of  Mount-Ephraim,  not 
named  in  the  meagre,  and  probably  imperfect,  lists 
of  the  towns  of  that  great  tribe  (see  Josh,  xvi.), 
but  mentioned  elsewhere  as  having  been  given  up 
with  its  "  suburbs"  to  the  Kohathite  Levites  (xxi. 
22).  In  the  parallel  list  of  1  Chr.  vi.  JOKMEAM 
is  substituted  for  Kibzaim  (ver.  68),  an  exchange 
which,  as  already  pointed  out  under  the  former 
name,  may  have  aiisen  from  the  similarity  between 
the  two  in  the  original.  Jokmeam  would  appear 
to  have  been  situated  at  the  eastern  quarter  of 
Ephraim.  But  this  is  merely  inference,  no  trace 
having  been  hitherto  discovered  of  either  name. 

Interpreted  as  a  Hebrew  word,  Kibzaim  signifies 
"  two  heaps,"  [G.] 

KID.     [GOAT :  see  Appendix  A'.] 

KID'RON,  THE  BROOK  (flTlp  bmd:  6 

Xfipa.p'pos  K.t$pwv  and  TOIV  KfSpcav  ;  in  Jer.  only 
Nd^aA.  tifSptav,  and  Alex,  xetfuappos  No^oX  K.  : 
torrens  Cedrori),  a  torrent  or  valley — not  a  "  brook," 
as  in  the  A.  V. — in  immediate  proximity  to  Jeru 
salem.  It  is  not  named  in  the  earlier 'records  of 
the  country,  or  in  the  specification  of  the  boundaries 
of  Benjamin  or  Judah,  but  comes  forward  in  con 
nexion  with  some  remarkable  events  of  the  history. 
It  lay  between  the  city  and  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  was  crossed  by  David  in  his  flight  (2  Sam.  xv. 
23,  comp.  30),  and  by  our  Lord  on  His  way  to 
Gethsemane  (John  xviii.  1 ;  e  comp.  Mark  xiv.  26  ; 
Luke  xxii.  39).  Its  connexion  with  these  two  oc 
currences  is  alone  sufficient  to  leave  no  doubt  that  the 
Nachal-Kidron  is  the  deep  ravine  on  the  east  of 
Jerusalem,  now  commonly  known  as  the  "  Valley 
of  Jehoshaphat."  But  it  would  seem  as  if  the 
name  were  formerly  applied  also  to  the  ravines 
surrounding  other  portions  of  Jerusalem — the  south 
or  the  west ;  since  Solomon's  prohibition  to  Shimei 
to  "  pass  over  the  torrent  Kidron  "  (1  K.  ii.  37 ; 
Jos.  Ant.  viii.  1,  §5)  is  said  to  have  been  broken  br 
the  latter  when  he  went  in  the  direction  of  Gath 
to  seek  his  fugitive  slaves  (41,  42).  Now  a  person 
going  to  Gath  would  certainly  not  go  by  the  way 
of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  or  approach  the  eastern  side 
of  the  city  at  all.  The  route — whether  Gath  were 
at  Beit-Jibrtn  or  at  Tell  es-Safieh — would  be  by  the 


the  turbidness  of  its  stream  (comp.  Job  vi.  16  ;  though 
the  words  of  Job  imply  that  this  was  a  condition  of  all 
brooks  when  frozen)  ;  or  more  appropriately,  with 
Stanley,  from  the  depth  and  obscurity  of  the  ravine 
(S.  $  P.  172) ;  possibly  also — though  this  is  proposed 
with  hesitation — from  the  impurity  which  seems  to 
have  attached  to  it  from  a  very  early  date. 

We  cannot,  however,  too  often  insist  on  the  great 
uncertainty  which  attends  ihe  derivations  of  these 
ancient  names ;  and  in  treating  Kidron  as  a  Hebrew 
word,  we  may  be  making  a  mistake  almost  as  absurd 
as  that  of  the  copyists  who  altered  it  into  r<av  ice&ptav, 
believing  that  it  arose  from  the  presence  of  cedars. 

*  Here,  and  here  only,  the  form  used  in  the  A.  V. 
is  CEDRON.  The  variations  in  the  Greek  text  are 
very  curious.  Codex  A  has  rov  Kt&piav ;  B,  riav  xeSptov ; 
D,  rov  xeSpov,  arid  in  some  cursive  MSS.  quoted  by 
Tischendorf  we  even  find  ruv  SevSpiav 


14 


KIDRON.  THE  BROOK 


Bethlehem-gate,  and  then  neai-ly  due  west.  1'erhups 
the  prohibition  may  have  been  a  more  general  one 
than  is  implied  in  ver.  37  (comp.  the  king's  reitera 
tion  of  it  in  ver.  42),  the  Kidron  being  in  that  case 
specially  mentioned  because  it  was  on  the  road  to 
Bahurim,  Shimei's  home,  and  the  scene  of  his  crime. 
At  any  rate,  beyond  the  passige  in  question,  there 
;s  no  evidence  of  the  name  Kidron  having  been 
applied  to  the  southern  or  western  ravines  of  the  city. 
The  distinguishing  peculiarity  of  the  Kidron 
valley — that  in  respect  to  which  it  is  most  fre 
quently  mentioned  in  the  0.  T. — is  the  impurity 
which  appears  to  have  been  ascribed  to  it.  Ex 
cepting  the  two  casual  notices  already  quoted,  we 
firet  meet  with  it  as  the  place  in  which  King  Asa 
demolished  and  burnt  the  obscene  phallic  idol  (vol.  i. 
S49a)  of  his  mother  (1  K.  xv.  13 ;  2  Chr.  xv. 
16)  Next  we  find  the  "wicked  Athaliah  hurried 
thither  to  execution  (Jos.  Ant.  ix.  7,  §3;  2  K.  xi. 
16).  It  then  becomes  the  regular  receptacle  for 
'  the  impurities  and  abominations  of  tha  idol-worship, 
when  removed  from  the  Temple  and  destroyed  by 
the  adherents  of  Jehovah*  (2  Chr.  xxix.  16,  xxx. 
14;  2  K.  xxiii.  4,  6,  12).  In  the  course  of  these 
narratives  the  statement  of  Josephus  just  quoted 
as  to  the  death  of  Athaliah  is  supported  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  time  of  Josiah  it  was  the  common 
cemetery  of  the  city  (2  K.  xxiii.  6 ;  comp.  Jer. 
xxvi.  23,  "  graves  of  the  common  people"),  perhaps 
the  "  valley  of  dead  bodies"  mentioned  by  Jeremiah 
(xxxi.  40)  in  close  connexion  with  the  •'  fields  "  of 
Kidron ;  and  the  restoration  of  which  to  sanctity 
was  to  be  one  of  the  miracles  of  future  times  (»6ic?.). 
How  long  the  valley  continued  to  be  used  for  a 
burying-place  it  is  very  hard  to  ascertain.  After 
the  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  1 099  the  bodies  of  the 
slain  were  buried  outside  the  Golden  Gateway 
(Mislin,  ii.  487;  Tobler,  Umgebungen,  218) ;  but 
what  had  been  the  practice  in  the  interval  the 
writer  has  not  succeeded  in  tracing.  To  the  date 
of  the  monuments  at  the  foot  of  Olivet  we  have 
at  present  no  clue ;  but  even  if  they  are  of  pre- 
Christian  times  there  is  no  proof  that  they  are 
tombs.  From  the  date  just  mentioned,  however, 
the  burials  appear  to  have  been  constant,  and  at 
present  it  is  the  favourite  resting-place  of  Moslems 
and  Jews,  the  former  on  the  west,  the  latter  on  the 
east  of  the  valley.  The  Moslems  are  mostly  con 
fined  to  the  narrow  level  spot  between  the  foot  of 
the  wall  and  the  commencement  of  the  precipitous 
slope ;  while  the  Jews  have  possession  of  the  lower 
part  of  the  slopes  of  Olivet,  where  their  scanty 
tombstones  are  crowded  so  thick  together  as  literally 
to  cover  the  surface  like  a  pavement. 

The  term  Nachal*  is  in  the  0.  T.,  with  one 
single  exception  (2  K.  xxiii.  4),  attached  to  the 
name  of  Kidron,  and  apparently  to  that  alone  of 
the  valleys  or  ravines  of  Jerusalem.  Hinnom  is 
always  the  Ge.  This  enables  us  to  infer  with 
great  probability  that  the  Kidron  is  intended  in 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  4,  by  the  "brook  (Nachal)  which 
ran  through  the  midst  of  the  land;"  and  that 
Hezekiah's  preparations  for  the  siege  consisted  in 
sealing  the  source  of  the  Kidron — "  the  upper 


K1CRON,  THE  BROOK 

springhead  (not '  watercourse,'  as  A.  V.)  of  Gihon  r 
where  it  burst  out  in  the  waily  some  distar  ce  north 
of  the  city,  and  leading  it  by  a  subterranean  channe* 
to  the  interior  cf  the  city.  If  this  is  so,  there  is  no 
difficulty  in  accounting  for  the  fact  of  the  subse 
quent  want  of  water  in  the  ancient  bed  of  the 
Kidron.  In  accordance  with  this  also  is  the  speci 
fication  of  Gihon  as  "  Gihon-in-the-Nachal  " — that 
is,  in  the  Kidron  valley — though  this  was  probably 
the  lower  of  two  outlets  of  the  same  name. 
[GIHON.]  By  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasttcon,  it  is 
mentioned  as  "  close  to  Jerusalem  on  the  eastern 
side,  and  spoken  of  by  John  the  Evangelist."  But 
the  favourite  name  of  this  valley  at  the  time  of 
Jerome,  and  for  several  centuries  after,  was  "tha 
valley  of  Jehoshaphat,"  and  the  name  Kidron,  or, 
in  accordance  with  the  orthography  of  the  Vulgate, 
Cedron,  is  not  invariably  found  in  the  travellers 
(see  Arculf,  E.  Trav.  1 ;  Saewulf,  41 ;  Benjamin 
of  Tudela;  Maundeville,  E.  Trav.  176;  Thietmar, 
27 :  but  not  the  Bordeaux  Pilgrim,  the  Citcz  de 
Jherusalem,  Willibald,  &c.). 

The  following  description  of  the  valley  of  Kidron 
in  its  modern  state — at  once  the  earliest  and  the 
most  accurate  which  we  possess — is  taken  from 
Dr.  Robinson  (B.  E.  i.  269)  >— 

"  In  approaching  Jerusalem  from  the  high  mosk 
of  Neby  Samwtt  in  the  N.W.  the  traveller  first 
descends  and  crosses  the  bed  of  the  great  Wad;,' 
Beit  Hantna  already  described.  He  then  ascends 
again  towards  the  S.E.  by  a  small  side  wady  and 
along  a  rocky  slope  for  twenty-five  minutes,  when 
he  reaches  the  Tombs  of  the  Judges,  lying  in  a 
small  gap  or  depression  of  the  ridge,  still  half  an 
hour  distant  from  the  northern  gate  of  the  city. 
A  few  steps  further  he  reaches  the  watershed  be 
tween  the  great  wady  behind  him  and  the  tract 
before  him ;  and  here  is  the  head  of  the  Valley  of 
Jehoshaphat.  From  this  point  the  dome  of  the 
Holy  Sepulchre  bears  S.  by  E.  The  tract  arouna 
this  spot  is  very  rocky ;  and  the  rocks  have  been 
much  cut  away,  partly  in  quarrying  building-stone, 
and  partly  in  the  formation  of  sepulchres.  The 
region  is  full  of  excavated  tombs;  and  these  con 
tinue  with  more  or  less  frequency  on  both  sides  of 
the  valley,  all  the  way  down  to  Jerusalem.  The 
valley  runs  for  15  minutes  directly  towards  the 
city ; c  it  is  here  shallow  and  broad,  and  in  some 
parts  tilled,  though  very  stony.  The  road  follows 
along  its  bottom  to  the  same  point.  The  valley 
now  turns  nearly  east,  almost  at  a  right  angle,  and 
passes  to  the  northward  of  the  Tombs  of  the  Kings 
and  the  Muslim  Wely  before  mentioned.  Here  it 
s  about  200  rods  distant  from  the  city ;  and  the 
tract  between  is  tolerably  level  ground,  planted 
with  olive-trees.  The  NdtnUus  road  crosses  it  in 
this  part,  and  ascends  the  hill  on  the  north.  The 
valley  is  here  still  shallow,  and  runs  in  the  same 
direction  for  about  10  minutes.  It  then  bends 
again  to  the  south,  and,  following  this  general 
course,  passes  between  the  city  and  the  Mount  of 
Olives. 

"  Betoie  reaching  the  city,  and  also  opposite  its 
northern  part,  the  valley  spreads  out  into  a  basin 


"  The  Targum  appears  to  understand  the  obscure 
passage  Zeph.  i.  11,  as  referring  to  the  destruction  of 
the  idolatrous  worship  in  Kidron,  for  it  renders  it, 
"  Howl  all  ye  that  dwell  in  the  Nachal  Kidron,  for  all 
the  people  are  broken  whose  works  were  like  the  works 
t.f  the  people  of  the  land  of  Canaan."  [MAKTKSH.] 

b  jfachal  is  untrunslatoablc  in   English  unions  by 


"  Wady,"  to  which  it  answers  exactly,  and  which  liids 
fair  to  become  shortly  an  English  word.  It  does  not 
signify  the  stream,  or  the  valley  which  contained  the 
bed  of  the  stream,  and  was  its  receptacle  when  swollen 
by  winter-rains — but  both.  [RIVK.R.] 

•  Sec  u  slight  correction  of  this  by  Tobler,   I'm-j-s- 
himgcn,  32. 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 

of  come  breadth,  which  is  tilled,  and  contains 
^lantr.tions  of  olive  and  other  fruit-trees.  In  this 
part  it  is  crossed  obliquely  by  a  road  leading  from 
the  N.E.  corner  of  Jerusalem  across  the  northern 
part  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  to  'Andta.  Its  sides 
are  still  full  of  excavated  tombs.  As  the  valley 
descends,  the  steep  side  upon  the  right  becomes 
more  and  more  elevated  above  it;  until,  at  the 
gate  of  St.  Stephen,  the  height  of  this  brow  is 
about  100  feet.  Here  a  path  winds  down  from 
the  gate  on  a  course  S.E  by  E.,  and  crosses  the 
valley  by  a  bridge;  beyond  which  are  the  church 
with  the  Tomb  of  the  Virgin,  Gethsemane,  and 
ether  plantations  of  olive-trees,  already  described. 
The  path  and  bridge  are  on  a  causeway,  or  rather 
terrace,  built  up  across  the  valley,  perpendicular 
on  the  south  side ;  the  earth  being  rilled  in  on  the 
northern  side  up  to  the  level  of  the  bridge.  The 
bridge  itself  consists  of  an  arch,  open  on  the  south 
side,  and  17  feet  high  from  the  bed  of  the  channel 
below ;  but  the  north  side  is  built  up,  with  two 
subterranean  drains  entering  it  from  above ;  one  of 
which  comes  from  the  sunken  court  of  the  Virgin's 
Tomb,  and  the  other  from  the  fields  further  in  the 
north-west.  The  breadth  of  the  valley  at  this 
point  will  appear  from  the  measurements  which  I 
took  from  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  Gethsemane,  along 
the  path,  via. — 

Eng.  feet. 

1.  From  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  brow  of  the 

descent,  level 135 

2.  Bottom  of  the  slope,  the  angle  of  the  descent 

being  16i°       415 

3.  Bridge,  level      140 

4.  N.W.  corner  of  Gethsemane,  slight  rise       . .  145 

5.  N.E.  corner  of         do.  do 150 

The  last  three  numbers  give  the  breadth  of  the 
proper  bottom  of  the  valley  at  this  spot,  viz.  435 
feet,  or  145  yards.  Further  north  it  is  somewhat 
broader. 

"  Below  the  bridge  the  valley  contracts  gradually, 
and  sinks  more  rapidly.  The  first  continuous  traces 
of  a  vrater-course  or  torrent-bed  commence  at  the 
bridge,  though  they  occur  likewise  at  intervals 
higher  up.  The  western  hill  becomes  steeper  and 
more  elevated;  while  on  the  east  the  Mount  of 
Olives  rises  much  higher,  but  is  not  so  steep.  At 
the  distance  of  1000  teet  from  the  bridge  on  a 
course  S.  10°  W.  the  bottom  of  the  valley  has 
become  merely  a  deep  gully,  the  narrow  bed  of  a 
torrent,  from  which  the  hills  rise  directly  on  each 
side.  Here  another  bridge  d  is  thrown  across  it  on 
an  arch ;  and  just  by  on  the  left  are  the  alleged 
tombs  of  Jehoshaphat,  Absalom,  and  others ;  as 
also  the  Jewish  cemetery.  The  valley  now  con 
tinues  of  the  same  character,  and  follows  the  same 
course  (S.  10°  W.)  for  550  feet  further;  where  it 
makes  a  sharp  turn  for  a  moment  towards  the 
right.  This  portion  is  the  narrowest  of  all ;  it  is 
here  a  mere  ravine  between  high  mountains.  The 
S.E.  corner  of  the  area  of  the  mosk  overhangs  this 
part,  the  corner  of  the  wall  standing  upon  the  very 
brink  of  the  declivity.  From  it  to  the  bottom,  on 
a  couree  S.E.  the  angle  of  depression  is  27°,  and 
the  distance  450  feet,  giving  an  elevation  of  128 
feet  at  that  point ;  to  which  may  be  added  20  feet 
or  more  for  the  rise  of  ground  just  north  along  the 
w.11;  making  in  all  an  elevation  of  about  150  feet. 
This,  however,  is  the  highest  point  above  the  val 
ley  ;  for  further  south  the  narrow  ridge  of  Ophel 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 


16 


slopes  down  as  rapidly  as  the  valley  itself.  In  this 
part  of  the  valley  or.s  would  expect  to  find,  if  any 
where,  traces  of  ruins  thrown  down  from  above, 
and  the  ground  raised  by  the  rubbish  thus  accu 
mulated.  Occasional  blocks  of  stone  are  indeed 
seen ;  but  neither  the  surface  of  the  ground,  nor 
the  bed  of  the  torrent,  exhibits  any  special  appear 
ance  of  having  been  raised  or  L  terrupted  by  masses 
of  ruins. 

"  Below  the  short  turn  above  mentioned,  a  line 
of  1025  feet  on  a  course  S.W.  brings  us  to  thi- 
Fountain  of  the  Virgin,  lying  deep  under  the 
western  hill.  The  valley  has  now  opened  a  little ; 
bnt  its  bottom  is  still  occupied  only  by  the  bed 
of  the  torrent.  From  here  a  course  S.  20°  W. 
carried  us  along  the  village  of  Siloam  (Kefr  Selwan) 
on  the  eastern  side,  and  at  1170  feet  we  were 
opposite  the  mouth  of  the  Tyropoeon  and  the  Pool 
of  Siloam,  which  lies  255  feet  within  it.  The 
mouth  of  this  valley  is  still  40  or  50  feet  higher 
than  the  bed  of  the  Kidron.  The  steep  descent 
between  the  two  has  been  already  described  as  built 
up  in  terraces,  which,  as  well  as  the  strip  of  level 
ground  below,  are  occupied  with  gardens  belonging 
to  the  village  of  Siloam.  These  are  irrigated  by 
the  waters  of  the  Pool  of  Siloam,  which  at  this 
time  were  lost  in  them.  In  these  gardens  the 
stones  have  been  removed,  and  the  soil  is  a  fine 
mould.  They  are  planted  with  fig  and  other  fruit- 
trees,  and  furnish  also  vegetables  for  the  city. 
Elsewhere  the  bottom  of  the  valley  is  thickly 
strewed  with  small  stones. 

"  Further  down,  Jie  valley  opens  more  and  is 
tilkd.  A  line  of  685  feet  on  the  same  course 
(S.  20°  W.)  brought  us  to  a  rocky  point  of  the 
eastern  hill,  here  called  the  Mount  of  Offence,  over 
against  the  entrance  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom. 
Thence  to  the  well  of  Job  or  Nehemiah  is  275  feet 
due  south.  At  the  junction  of  the  two  valleys  the 
bottom  forms  an  oblong  plat,  extending  from  the 
gardens  above  mentioned  nearly  to  the  well  of  Job, 
and  being  150  yards  or  more  in  breadth.  The 
western  and  north-western  parts  of  this  plat  are  in 
like  manner  occupied  by  gardens ;  many  of  which 
are  also  on  terraces,  and  receive  a  portion  of  the 
waters  of  Siloam. 

"  Below  the  well  of  Nehemiah  the  Valley  of 
Jehoshaphat  continues  to  run  S.S.W.  between  the 
Mount  of  Offence  and  the  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  so 
called.  At  130  feet  is  a  small  cavity  or  outlet  by 
which  the  water  of  the  well  sometimes  runs  off. 
At  about  1200  feet,  or  400  yards,  from  the  well 
is  a  place  under  the  western  hill,  where  in  the 
rainy  season  water  flows  out  as  from  a  fountain. 
At  about  1500  feet  or  500  yards  below  the  well 
the  valley  bends  off  S.  75°  E.  for  half  a  mile  or 
more,  and  then  turns  agaiu  more  to  the  south,  and 
pursues  its  way  to  the  Dead  Sea.  At  the  angle 
where  it  thus  bends  eastward  a  small  wady  comes 
in  from  the  west,  from  behind  the  Hill  of  Evil 
Counsel.  The  width  of  the  main  valley  below  the 
well,  as  far  as  to  the  turn,  varies  from  50  to  100 
yards ;  it  is  full  of  olive  and  fig-trees,  and  is  in 
most  parts  ploughed  and  sown  with  grain.  Further 
down  it  takes  the  name  among  the  Arabs  of  Wady 
er-Rakib,  '  Monks'  Val.ey,'  from  the  convent  of 
St.  Saba  situated  on  it ;  And  still  nearer  to  the  Dead 
Sea  it  is  also  called  Wady  cn-Ndr,  '  Fire  Valley.' « 


d  For  a  minute  account  of  the  two  bridges,  see 
Tobler,  Umgebungcn,  35-39. 

•  A  lift  of  some  of  the  plants  found  in  this  valley 


is  given  by  Mislin  (iii.  209) ;  and  some  scraps  of  in 
formation  about  the  valley  itself  at  p.  199. 


16 


KIDRON,  THE  BROOK 


"  The  channel  of  the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  the 
Brook  Kidron  of  the  Scriptures,  is  nothing  more 
than  the  dry  bed  of  a  wintry  torrent,  bearing  marks 
of  being  occasionally  swept  over  by  a  large  volume 
of  water.  No  stream  flows  here  now  except  during 
the  heavy  rains  of  winter,  when  the  waters  descend 
into  it  from  the  neighbouring  hills.  Yet  even  in 
winter  there  is  no  constant  flow  ;  and  our  friends, 
who  had  resided  several  years  in  the  city,  had 
never  seen  a  stream  running  through  the  valley. 
Nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  there  was  anciently 
more  water  in  it  than  at  present.  Like  the  wadys 
of  the  desert,  the  valley  probably  served  of  old, 
as  now.  only  to  drain  oif  the  waters  of  the  rainy 
season.'' 

One  point  is  unnoticed  in  Dr.  Robinson's  de 
scription,  sufficiently  curious  and  well-attested  to 
merit  further  careful  investigation — the  possibility 
that  the  Kedron  flows  below  the  present  surface 
of  the  ground.  Dr.  Barclay  (City,  &c.  302)  men 
tions  "  a  fountain  that  bursts  forth  during  the 
winter  in  a  valley  entering  the  Kedron  from  the 
north,  and  flows  several  hundred  yards  before  it 
sinks ;"  and  again  he  testifies  that  at  a  point  in 
the  valley  about  two  miles  below  the  city  the 
nurmurings  of  a  stream  deep  below  the  ground 
may  be  distinctly  heard,  which  stream,  on  excava 
tion,  he  actually  discovered  (ibid.~).  His  inference  is 
that  between  the  two  points  the  brook  is  flowing 
in  a  subterraneous  channel,  as  is  "  not  at  all  un- 
frequent  in  Palestine"  (p.  303).  Nor  is  this  a 
modern  discovery,  for  it  is  spoken  of  by  William 
of  Tyre ;  by  Brocardus  (  Descr.  cap.  viii. ) ,  as  audible 
near  the  "  Tomb  of  the  Virgin ;"  and  also  by  Fabri 
^i.  370),  Marinus  Sanutus  (3,  14,  9),  and  others. 

That  which  Dr.  Robinson  complains  that  neither 
he  nor  his  friends  were  fortunate  enough  to  witness 
lias  since  taken  place.  In  the  winter  of  1853-4  so 
heavy  were  the  rains,  that  not  only  did  the  lower 
part  of  the  Kidron,  below  the  so-called  well  of 
Nehemiah  or  Joab,  run  with  a  considerable  stream 
for  the  whole  of  the  month  of  March  (Barclay,  515), 
but  also  the  upper  part,  "  in  the  middle  section  of 
the  Valley  of  Jehoshaphat,  flowed  for  a  day  or  two" 
(Stewart,  Tent  $  Khan,  316).  The  Well  of  Joab 
is  probably  one  of  the  outlets  of  the  mysterious 
spring  which  flows  below  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and 


KINDRED 

its  overflow  is  comparatively  common  ;f  but  tht 
flowing  of  a  stream  in  the  upper  part  of  the  valley 
would  seem  not  to  have  taken  place  for  many  years 
before  the  occasion  in  question,  although  it  oc 
curred  also  in  the  following  winter  (Jewish  Intelli 
gencer,  May  1856,  p.  1 37  note),  and,  as  the  writer  is 
informed,  has  since  become  almost  periodical.  [G.] 

KI'N AH  (PI3»J5 :  'IK(£M;  Alex.  K.wi:  Cina),  » 
city  of  Judah,  one  of  those  which  lay  on  the  ex 
treme  south  boundary  of  the  tribe,  next  to  Kdom 
(Josh.  xv.  22).  It  is  mentioned  in  the  Onomas- 
ticon  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  but  not  so  as  to 
imply  that  they  had  any  actual  knowledge  of  it. 
With  the  sole  exception  of  Schwarz  (99),  it  appears 
to  be  unmentioned  by  any  traveller,  and  the  "  town 
Cinah  situated  near  the  wilderness  of  Zin  "  with 
which  he  would  identify  it,  is  not  to  be  found  in  hi* 
own  or  any  other  map. 

Professor  Stanley  (S,  fy  P.  160)  very  ingeniously 
connects  Kinah  with  the  Kenites  (^J5),  who  settled 
in  this  district  (Judg.  i.  16).  But  it  should  not 
be  overlooked  that  the  list  in  Josh.  rv.  purports  to 
record  the  towns  as  they  were  at  the  conquest, 
while  the  settlement  of  the  Kenites  probably  (though 
not  certainly)  did  not  take  place  till  after  it.  [G.] 

KINDRED.8  I.  Of  the  special  names  denoting 
relation  by  consanguinity,  the  principal  will  be 
found  explained  under  their  proper  heads,  FATHER, 
BROTHER,  &c.  It  will  be  there  seen  that  the 
words  which  denote  near  relation  in  the  direct  line 
are  used  also  for  the  other  superior  or  inferior 
degrees  in  that  line,  as  grandfather,  grandson,  &c. 

On  the  meaning  of  the  expression  Sh'er  basar 
(see  below  1  and  2)  much  controversy  has  arisen. 
Sh'er,  as  shown  below,  is  in  Lev.  xviii.  6,  in  marg. 
of  A.  V.,  "  remainder."  The  rendering,  however, 
of  Sh'er  basar  in  text  of  A.  V.,  "  near  of  kin,"  ma} 
be  taken  as  correct,  but,  as  Michaelis  shows,  with 
out  determining  the  precise  extent  to  which  the 
expression  itself  is  applicable  (Mich.  Laws  of  Moses, 
ii.  48,  ed.  Smith;  Knobel  on  Leviticus:  see  also 
Lev.  xxv.  49 ;  Num.  xxvii.  11). 

II.  The  words  which  express  collateral  consan 
guinity  are — 1.  uncle ;b  2.  aunt;c  3.  nephew;1 
4.  niece  (not  in  A.  V.)  ;  5.  cousin.* 


'  "  During  the  latter  rains  of  February  and  March 
the  well  Ain  Ayub  is  a  subject  of  much  speculation 
and  interest  to  all  dwellers  in  the  city.  If  it  over 
flows  and  discharges  its  waters  down  the  Wady-en- 
Nar,  the  lower  part  of  the  Kidron,  then  they  are 
certain  that  they  will  have  abundance  of  water  during 
the  summer  ;  if  there  is  no  overflow,  their  minds  are 
filled  with  forebodings."  (Stewart,  316.) 

*  1.  (a)  1KB*,  "flesh;"  ouceuw;  caro.  (b)  PIKC^ 
"kinswoman,"  also  "kindred,"  olictia,  corf,  from 
"1KK*.  "  to  swell,"  also  "  to  remain,"  t.  e.  "  be  super 
fluous."  Whence  comes  "IKE*,  "  remainder,"  Ges. 
1349-50.  Hence,  in  Lev/iviii.  6,  A.  V.  has  in 
margin^  "  remainder." 

2.  1^3,   "  flesh,"    arapt,   caro,   from  ~lb>3,   "  be 

joyful,"  i.  e.  conveying  the  notion  of  beauty,  Ges. 
p.  248. 

3.  nnSkJTD,  "  family,"  <f>vAi),  familia,  applied  both 
to  races  and  single  families  of  mankind,  and  also  to 
animals. 

4.  (a)    jn'llD,    JHb,    and    in    Keri   VTIO,    from 
y*1*,   "  see,"   "  know."      (b)  Also,  from   same  root, 

kindred ;"    and    hence    "  kinsmar,"    or 


"  kinswoman,"  used,  like  "  acquaintance,"  in  both 
senses,  Ges.  p.  574.  But  Buxtorf  limits  (b)  to  the 
abstract  sense,  (a)  to  the  concrete,  yvwptfios,  pro- 
pinquus. 

5.  ninX,     "  brotherhood,"    Jia&jitT),    germanitas, 

T  -:  - 

Ges.  p.  63. 

Nearly  allied  with  the  foregoing  in  sense  arc  the 
following  general  terms  : — 

6.  31~li5,   "  near,"   hence   "  a   relative,"  o  cyyus, 

"T 

propinqitiis,  Ges.  p.  1234. 

7.  7X3,    from    ?K3,    "  redeem,"    Ges.    p.  25c, 
o    ayxitrrcvtav,    "a  kinsman,"   «'.  e.   the  relative    to 
whom  belonged  the  right  of  redemption  or  of  vcn- 
geance. 

b  li'H.  a.Sf\<t>o<;  rov  irarpb?,  cUtto9  ;  patruus. 

c  mi't  or  m'<!I>  ^  "VYY*"*!*!  uxor  patrui. 

d  pj,  in  connexion  with  13 J,  "  offspring ;"  but  sc€ 
JOCHEBED.  It  is  rendered  "nephew"  in  A.  V.,  bi:l 
Indicates  a  descendant  in  general,  and  is  usually  sr 
rcndcied  by  LXX.  and  Vulg.  See  Ges.  p.  861. 

e  <rvyy(tvrj<;,  coynatu.t,  Luke  i.  3C,  58. 


KINK 

III.  The  terms  of  affinity  are— 1.  (a)  father-in- 
law/  (6)  mother-in-law  ;  e  2.  (a)  son-in-]aw,h  (6) 
daughter-in-law ; '  3.  (a)  brother-in-law,11  (6)  sister- 
in-law.1" 

The  relations  of  kindred,  expressed  by  few  words, 
and  imperfectly  defined  in  the  earliest  ages,  ac 
quired  in  course  of  time  greater  significance  and 
wider  influence.  The  full  list  of  relatives  either 
by  consanguinity,  ».  e.  as  arising  from  a  common 
ancestor,  or  by  affinity, »'.  e.  as  created  by  marriage, 
may  be  seen  detailed  in  the  Corpus  Juris  Civ.  Digest. 
lib.  xxxviii.  tit.  10,  de  Gradibus ;  see  also  Corp. 
Jur.  Canon.  Deer.  ii.  c.  xxxv.  9,  5. 

The  domestic  and  economical  questions  arising 
out  of  kindred  may  be  classed  under  the  three  heads 
of  MARRIAGE,  INHERITANCE,  and  BLOOD-RE- 
VKNGE,  and  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  articles  on 
those  subjects  for  information  thereon.  It  is  clear 
that  the  tendency  of  the  Mosaic  Law  was  to  increase 
the  restrictions  on  marriage,  by  defining  more  pre 
cisely  the  relations  created  by  it,  as  is  shown  by  the 
cases  of  Abraham  and  Moses.  [IsCAH  ;  JOCHEBED.] 
For  information  on  the  general  subject  of  kindred 
and  its  obligations,  see  Selden,  de  Jure  Naturali, 
lib.  v.;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  ed.  Smith, 
ii.  36 ;  Knobel  on  Lev.  xviii. ;  Philo,  de  Spec.  Leg. 
iii.  3,  4,  5,  vol.  ii.  301-304,  ed.  Mangey ;  Burck- 
hardt,  Arab  Tribes,  i.  150 ;  Keil,  Bibl.  Arch.  ii. 
p.  50,  §106,  107.  [H.  W.  P.] 

KINE.     [Cow:  See  Appendix  A.] 

KING  ("&£>,  melek :  /3o<nAet5s :  rex),  the 
name  of  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  Hebrews  during 
a  period  of  about  500 a  years  previous  to  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  586.  It  was  borne 
first  by  the  Ruler  of  the  12  Tribes  united,  and  then 
by  the  Rulers  of  Judah  and  Israel  separately. 

The  immediate  occasion  of  the  substitution  of  a 
regal  form  of  government  for  that  of  the  Judges, 
seems  to  have  been  the  siege  of  Jabesh-Gilead  by 
Nahash,  king  of  the  Ammonites  (1  Sam.  xi.  1,  xii. 
12),  and  the  refusal  to  allow  the  inhabitants  of  that 
city  to  capitulate,  except  on  humiliating  and  cruel 
conditions  (1  Sam.  xi.  2,  4-6).  The  conviction 
seems  to  have  forced  itself  on  the  Israelites  that 
they  could  not  resist  their  formidable  neighbour 
unless  they  placed  themselves  under  the  sway  of  a 
'  king,  like  surrounding  nations.  Concurrently  with 
this  conviction,  disgust  had  been  excited  by  the 
corrupt  administration  of  justice  under  the  sons  of 
.Samuel,  and  a  radical  change  was  desired  by  them 
iu  this  respect  also  (1  Sam.  viii.  3-5).  Accord 
ingly  the  original  idea  of  a  Hebrew  king  was  two 
fold  :  first,  that  he  should  lead  the  people  to  battle 
in  time  of  war ;  and,  2ndly,  that  he  should  ex- 


KINO 


17 


ecute  judgment  and  justice  tc  them  in  war  ana  in 
peace  (1  Sam.  viii.  20).  In  both  respects  the 
desired  end  was  attained.  The  righteous  wrath 
and  military  capacity  of  Saul  were  immediately 
triumphant  over  the  Ammonites ;  and  though  ulti 
mately  he  was  defeated  and  slain  in  battle  with  th 
Philistines,  he  put  even  them  to  flight  on  more 
than  one  occasion  (1  Sam.  xiv.  23,  xvii.  52),  and 
generally  waged  successful  war  against  th*  sur 
rounding  nations  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  His  successor, 
David,  entered  on  a  series  of  brilliant  conquests 
over  the  Philistines,  Moabites,  Syrians,  Edomites, 
and  Ammonites  [see  DAVID,  vol.  i.  410] ;  and  the 
Israelites,  no  longer  confined  within  the  narrow 
bounds  of  Palestine,  had  an  empire  extending  from 
the  river  Euphrates  to  Gaza,  and  from  the  entering 
iu  of  Hamath  to  the  river  of  Egypt  (1  K.  iv.  21). 
In  the  meanwhile  complaints  cease  of  the  corrup 
tion  of  justice ;  and  Solomon  not  only  consolidated  and 
maintained  in  peace  the  empire  of  his  father,  David, 
but  left  an  enduring  reputation  for  his  wisdom  as  a 
judge.  Under  this  expression,  however,  we  must  re 
gard  him,  not  merely  as  pronouncing  decisions,  pri 
marily,  or  in  the  last  resort,  in  civil  and  criminal 
cases,  but  likewise  as  holding  public  levees  and  trans 
acting  public  business  "  at  the  gate,"  when  he  would 
receive  petitions,  hear  complaints,  and  give  summary 
decisions  on  various  points,  which  in  a  modem 
European  kingdom  would  come  under  the  cogni 
zance  of  numerous  distinct  public  departments. 

To  form  a  correct  idea  of  a  Hebrew  king,  we 
must  abstract  ourselves  from  the  notions  of  modern 
Europe,  and  realise  the  position  of  Oriental  sove 
reigns.  It  would  be  a  mistake  to  regard  the 
Hebrew  government  as  a  limited  monarchy,  in  the 
English  sense  of  the  expression.  It  is  stated  in 
1  Sam.  x.  25,  that  Samuel  "  told  the  people  the 
manner  b  of  the  kingdom,  and  wrote  it  in  the  book 
and  laid  it  before  the  Lord,"  and  it  is  barely  pos 
sible  that  this  may  refer  to  some  statement  respect 
ing  the  boundaries  of  the  kingly  power.  But  no 
such  document  has  come  down  to  us;  and  if  it  ever 
existed,  and  contained  restrictions  of  any  moment 
on  the  kingly  power,  it  was  probably  disregarded 
in  practice.  The  following  passage  of  Sir  John 
Malcolm  respecting  the  Shahs  of  Persia,  may,  with 
some  slight  modifications,  be  regarded  as  fairly 
applicable  to  the  Hebrew  monarchy  under  David 
and  Solomon: — "The  monarch  of  Persia  has  been 
pronounced  to  be  one  of  the  most  absolute  in  the 
world.  His  word  has  ever  been  deemed  a  law : 
and*he  has  probably  never  had  any  further  restraint 
upon  the  free  exercise  of  his  vast  authority  than 
has  arisen  from  his  regard  for  religion,  his  respect 
for  established  usages,  his  desire  of  reputation,  and 


1  DH.  fe 


vepa.,  socrus. 
h  jnn,  W0po«,  socer,  from  }Hn,   "give  in  mar- 

1     T     T  -  T 

riage,"  whence  come  part,  in  Kal.  jnn,  m.,  and 
fibrin,  f-  father-in-law  and  mother-in-law,  i.  e. 
purer,  ts  who  give  a  daughter  in  marriage. 

'   H?3>  vvp't"!,  nurtts. 
Q3V  &&tfaf>°*  TO^  av&pos,  levir. 

m  HOIIV  yvril  TOW  dSeA</>oC,  uxor  fratris. 

m  The  precise  period  depends  on  the  length  of  the 

reign  of  Saul,  for  estimating  which  there  are  no  cer 

tain  data.     In  the  O.  T.  the  exact  length  is  nowhere 

•.jieiitionetl.     In  Acts  xiii.  21  forty  years  are  specified  ; 

VOL.  II. 


but  this  is  in  a  speech,  and  statistical  accuracy  may 
have  been  foreign  to  the  speaker's  ideas  on  that  occa 
sion.  And  there  are  difficulties  in  admitting  that  be 
reigned  so  long  as  forty  years.  See  Winer  sub  voc., 
and  the  article  SAUL  in  this  volume.  It  is  only  in 
the  reign  of  David  that  mention  is  first  made  of  the 
"  recorder  "  or  "  chronicler  "  of  the  king  {2  Sam.  viii. 
16).  Perhaps  the  contemporary  notation  of  dates  may 
have  commenced  in  David's  reign. 

b  The  word  tiBtW,  translated  "manner"  in  tht 
A.  V.,  is  translated  in  the  LXX.  SiK<xi'u>/aa,  i.  e. 
statute  or  ordinance  (see  Ecclus.  iv.  17,  Bar.  ii.  12, 
iv.  13).  But  Josephus  seems  to  have  regarded  the 
document  as  a  prophetical  statement,  read  before  th« 
king,  of  the  calamities  which  were  to  arise  from  tht 
kingly  power,  as  a  kind  of  protest  recorded  for  sue 
ceeding  ages  (see  Ant.  vi.  4,  §C). 

C 


18 


KING 


hi*  fear  of  exciting  an  opposition  that  might  be 
dangerous  to  his  power,  or  to  his  life"  (Malcolm's 
Persia,  v«l.  ii.  303  ;  compare  Elphinstone's  India, 
or  the  Indian  Mahometan  Empire,  book  viii.  c.  3). 
It  must  not,  however,  be  supposed  to  have  been 
either  the  understanding,  or  the  practice,  that  the 
novereign  might  seize  at  his  discretion  the  private 
property  of  individuals.  Ahab  did  not  venture  to 
seize  the  vineyard  of  Naboth  till,  through  the  testi 
mony  of  false  witnesses,  Naboth  had  been  convicted 
of  blasphemy ;  and  possibly  his  vineyard  may  have 
be;n  seized  as  a  confiscation,  without  flagrantly 
outraging  public  sentiment  in  those  who  did  not 
know  the  truth  (1  K.  xi.  6).  But  no  monarchy 
perhaps  ever  existed  in  which  it  would  not  be  i 
regained  as  an  outrage,  that  the  monarch  should 
from  covetousness  seize  the  private  property  of  an 
innocent  subject  in  no  ways  dangerous  to  the  state. 
And  generally,  when  Sir  John  Malcolm  proceeds  as 
follows,  in  reference  to  "  one  of  the  most  absolute  " 
monarchs  in  the  world,  it  will  be  understood  that 
the  Hebrew  king,  whose  power  might  be  described 
in  the  same  way,  is  not,  on  account  of  certain 
restraints  which  exist  in  the  nature  of  things,  to  be 
regarded  as  "  a  limited  monarch  "  in  the  European 
use  of  the  words.  "  We  may  assume  that  the 
power  of  the  king  of  Persia  is  by  usage  absolute 
over  the  property  and  lives  of  his  conquered  enemies, 
^j's  rebellious  subjects,  his  own  family ,  his  ministers, 
over  public  oncers  civil  and  military,  and  all  the 
numerous  train  of  domestics;  and  that  he  may 
punish  any  person  of  these  classes,  without  exami 
nation  or  formal  procedure  of  any  kind:  in  all 
other  cases  that  are  capital,  the  forms  prescribed 
by  law  and  custom  are  observed  ;  the  monarch  only 
commands,  when  the  evidence  has  been  examined 
and  the  law  declared,  that  the  sentence  ^hall  be  put 
•it  execution,  or  that  the  condemned  culprit  shall 
L-e  pardoned"  (vol.  ii.  306).  In  accordance  with 
such  usages,  David  ordered  Uriah  to  be  treacher 
ously  exposed  to  death  in  the  forefront  of  the  hottest 
battle  (2  Sam.  xi.  15);  he  caused  Rechab  and 
Baanah  to  be  slain  instantly,  when  they  brought 
him  the  head  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  iv.  12)  ;  and 
he  is  represented  as  having  on  his  death-bed  recom 
mended  Solomon  to  put  Joab  and  Shimei  to  death 
(IK.  ii.  5-9).  In  like  manner,  Solomon  caused  to 
be  killed,  without  trial,  not  only  his  elder  brother 
Ador.iiah,  and  Joab,  whose  execution  might  be  re 
garded  as  the  exceptional  acts  of  a  dismal  stute- 
policy  in  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  but  likewise 
Shimei,  after  having  been  seated  on  the  throne  three 
years.  And  King  Saul,  in  resentment  at  their  con 
nivance  with  David's  escape,  put  to  death  85 
priests,  and  caused  a  massacre  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Nob,  including  women,  children,  and  sucklings 
(1  Sam.  xxii.  18,  19;. 

Besides  being  commander-in-chief  of  the  army, 
supreme  judge,  and  absolute  master,  as  it  were,  of 
the  lives  of  his  subjects,  the  king  exercised  the 
power  of  imposing  taxes  on  them,  and  of  exacting 
from  them  personal  service  and  labour.  Both  these 
]K>ints  seem  clear  from  the  account  given  (1  Sam. 
viii.  11-17)  of  the  evils  which  would  arise  from 
the  kingly  power;  and  are  confii-med  in  various 
ways.  Whatever  mention  may  be  made  of  con- 


KING 

suiting  "  old  men,"  or  "  elders  of  Israel,"  we  IIPVCI 
read  of  their  deciding  such  points  as  these.  When 
Pul,  the  king  of  Assyria,  imposed  a  tribute  on  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  "  Menahem,  the  king,"  exacted 
the  money  of  all  the  mighty  men  of  wealth,  of  each 
man  50  shekels  of  silver  (2  K.  xv.  19).  And  wheii 
Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  gave  his  tribute  of  silvei 
and  gold  to  Pharaoh,  he  taxed  the  luid  to  give  thf 
money ;  he  exacted  the  silver  and  gold  of  the  people 
of  every  one  according  to  his  taxation  (2  K.  xxiii. 
35).  And  the  degree  to  which  the  exaction  of  per 
sonal  labour  might  be  earned  on  a  special  occasion, 
is  illustrated  by  King  Solomon's  requirements  for 
building  the  temple.  He  raised  a  levy  of  30,000 
men,  and  sent  them  to  Lebanon  by  courses  of  ten 
thousand  a  month ;  and  he  had  70,000  that  bare 
burdens,  and  80,000  hewers  in  the  mountains  (1  K. 
v.  13-15).  Judged  by  the  Oriental  standard,  there 
is  nothing  improbable  in  these  numbers.  In  oui 
own  days,  for  the  purpose  of  constructing  the  Mah- 
moodeyeh  Canal  in  Egypt,  Mehemet  Ali,  by  orders 
given  to  the  various  sheikhs  of  the  provinces  of 
Sakarah,  Ghizeh,  Mensourah,  Sharkieh,  Menouf, 
Bahyreh,  and  some  others,  caused  300,000  men, 
women,  and  children,  to  be  assembled  along  the  site 
of  the  intended  canal.*  This  was  120,000  more 
than  the  levy  of  Solomon. 

In  addition  to  these  earthly  powers,  the  King  of 
Israel  had  a  more  awful  claim  to  respect  and  obe 
dience.  He  was  the  vicegerent  of  Jehovah  (1  Sam. 
x.  1,  xvi.  13),  and  as  it  were  His  son,  if  just  and 
holy  (2  Sam.  vii.  14;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  26,  27,  ii.  6,  7). 
He  had  been  set  apart  as  a  consecrated  ruler.  Upon 
his  head  had  been  poured  the  holy  anointing  oil, 
composed  of  olive-oil,  myrrh,  cinnamon,  swept  ca 
lamus,  and  cassia,  which  had  hitherto  been  reserved 
exclusively  for  the  priests  of  Jehovah,  espechlly 
the  high-priest,  or  had  been  solely  used  to  anoint 
the  Tabernacle  of  the  Congregation,  the  Ark  of  the 
Testimony,  and  the  vessels  of  the  Tabernacle  (Ex. 
xxx.  23-33,  xl.  9;  Lev.  xxi.  10;  IK.  i.  39).  He 
had  become,  in  fact,  emphatically  "  the  Lord's 
Anointed."  At  the  coronation  of  sovereigns  in 
modern  Europe,  holy  oil  has  been  frequently  used, 
as  a  symbol  of  divine  right ;  but  this  has  been 
mainly  regarded  as  a  mere  form  ;  and  the  use  of  it 
was  undoubtedly  introduced  in  imitation  of  the 
Hebrew  custom.  But,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy,  a  living  real  signi 
ficance  was  attached  to  consecration  by  this  holy 
anointing  oil.  From  well-known  anecdotes  related 
of  David, — and  perhaps,  from  words  in  his  lamen 
tation  over  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i.  21) — it 
results  that  a  certain  sacredness  invested  the  person 
of  Saul,  the/rstf  king,  as  the  Lord's  anointed  ;  and 
that,  on  this  account,  it  was  deemed  sacrilegious  to 
kill  him,  even  at  his  own  request  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  6, 
10,  xxvi.  9,  16;  2  Sam.  i.  14).  And,  after  the 
destruction  of  the  first  Temple,  in  the  Book  of  La 
mentations  over  the  calamities  of  the  Hebrew 
people,  it  is  by  the  name  of  "  the  Lord's  Anointed  " 
that  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  .Judah,  is  bewailed 
(Lam.  iv.  20).  Again,  more  than  600  years  after 
the  capture  of  Zedekiah,  the  name  of  the  Anointed, 
though  never  so  used  in  the  Old  Testament — yet 
suggested  probably  by  Ps.  ii.  2,  Dan.  ix.  26 — had 


e  R«e  The  Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  by  Mrs.  PooJe, 
vol.  ii.  p.  219.  Owing  to  insufficient  provisions,  bad 
treatment,  and  neglect  of  proper  arrangements,  30,000 
of  this  number  perished  in  seven  months  (p.  220).  In 
itompulsory  levies  of  labour,  it  is  probably  difficult  to 


prevent  proas  instance*  of  oppression.  At  the  rebel- 
lion  of  the  ten  tribes,  Adoniram,  called  also  Adorain, 
who  was  over  the  levy  of  30,000  men  for  Lebanon, 
was  stoned  to  death  (1  K.  xii.  18;  1  K.  v.  It;  2  S:un' 
xx.  24). 


KING 

become  appropriated  to  the  expected  king,  who  was 
*o  restore  the  kingdom  of  David,  and  inaugurate  a 
period  when  Edom,  Moab,  the  Ammonites,  and  the 
Philistines,  would  again  be  incorporated  with  the 
Hebrew  monarchy,  which  would  extend  from  the 
Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea  and  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth  (Acts  i.  6  ;  John  i.  41,  iv.  25  ;  Is.  xi. 
12-14;  Ps.  Ixxii.  8).  And  thus  the  identical  He 
brew  word  which  signifies  anointed,d  through  its 
Aramaic  form  adopted  into  Greek  and  Latin,  is  still 
preserved  to  us  in  the  English  word  Messiah.  (See 
Gesenius's  Thesaurus,  p.  825.) 

A  ruler  in  whom  so  much  authority,  human  and 
divine,  was  embodied,  was  naturally  distinguished 
by  outward  honours  and  luxuries.  He  had  a  court 
of  Oriental  magnificence.  When  the  power  of  the 
kingdom  was  at  its  height,  he  sat  on  a  throne  of 
ivory,  covered  with  pure  gold,  at  the  feet  of  which 
were  two  figures  of  lions.  The  throne  was  ap 
proached  by  6  steps,  guarded  by  12  figures  of 
lions,  two  on  each  step.  The  king  was  dressed  in 
royal  robes  (1  K.  xxii.  10;  2  Chr.  xviii.  9);  his 
insignia  were,  a  crown  or  diadem  of  pure  gold,  or 
jMirhaps  radiant  with  precious  gems  (2  Sam.  i. 
10,  xii.  30 ;  2  K.  xi.  12  :  Ps.  xxi.  3),  and  a  royal 
sceptre  (Ez.  xix.  11  ;  Is.  xiv.  5  ;  Ps.  xlv.  6;  Am. 
i.  5,  8).  Those  who  approached  him  did  him 
obeisance,  bowing  down  and  touching  the  ground 
with  their  foreheads  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  8  ;  2  Sam.  xix. 
24)  ;  and  this  was  done  even  by  a  king's  wife,  the 
mother  of  Solomon  (1  K.  i.  16).  Their  officers  aud 
subjects  called  themselves  his  servants  or  slaves, 
though  they  do  not  seem  habitually  to  have  given 
way  to  such  extravagant  salutations  as  in  the  Chal- 
daean  and  Persian  courts  (1  Sam.  xvii.  32,  34, 
30,  xx.  8  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  20  ;  Dan.  ii.  4).  As  in  the 
East  at  present,  a  kiss  was  a  sign  of  respect  and 
homage  (1  Sam.  x.  1,  perhaps  Ps.  ii.  12).  He 
lived  in  a  splendid  palace,  with  porches  and  columns 
(1  K.  vii.  2-7).  All  his  drinking  vessels  were  of 
gold  (1  K.  x.  21).  He  had  a  large  harem,  which 
in  the  time  of  Solomon  must  have  been  the  source 
of  enormous  expense,  if  we  accept  as  statistically 
accurate  the  round  number  of  700  wives  and  300 
concubines,  in  all  1000,  attributed  to  him  in  the 
Book  of  Kings  (1  K.  xi.  3).  As  is  invariably  the 
;ase  in  the  great  eastern  monarchies  at  present,  his 
harem  was  guarded  by  eunuchs;  translated  "officers" 
in  the  A.  V.  for  the  most  part  (1  Sam.  viii.  15 ; 
2  K.  xxiv.  12,  15  ;  IK.  xxii.  9 ;  2  K.  viii.  6,  ix. 
J2,  33,  xx.  18,  xxiii.  11 ;  Jer.  xxxviii.  7). 

The  main  practical  restraints  on  the  kings  seem 
to  have  arisen  from  the  prophets  and  the  pro 
phetical  order,  though  in  this  respect,  as  in  many 
,  others,  a  distinction  must  be  made  between  different 
periods  and  different  reigns.  Indeed,  under  all  cir 
cumstances,  much  would  depend  on  the  individual 
character  of  the  king  or  the  prophet.  No  trans 
action  of  importance,  however,  was  entered  on  with 
out  consulting  the  will  of  Jehovah,  either  by  Urim 
and  Thurnmirr.  01  by  the  prophets ;  and  it  was  the 
general  jjersuasion  that  the  prophet  was  in  an 
tspecial  sense  the  servant  and  messenger  of  Jehovah, 
to  whom  Jehovah  had  declared  his  will  (Is.  xiiv.  26  ; 
Am.  iii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  6,  ix.  6  :  see  PROPHETS). 

d  It  is  supposed  both  by  Jahn  (Archtiol.  Bib.  §222) 
and  Bauer  (in  his  Heb.  Aiterthtimer,  §20)  thut  a  king 
was  only  anointed  when  a  new  family  came  to  the 
throne,  or  when  the  right  to  the  crown  was  disputed. 
It  is  usually  on  such  occasions  only  that  the  anointing 
is  specified ;  as  in  1  Sam.  x.  1,  2  Sam.  ii.  4,  1  K.  i.  39, 
2  K.  ix.  3,  2  K.  xi.  12  :  but  this  is  not  inrarially 


KING 


19 


The  prophets  not  only  rebuked  the  king  with 
boldness  for  individual  acts  cf  wickedness,  as  after 
the  murders  of  Uriah  and  of  Naboth ;  but  also,  b\ 
interposing  their  denunciations  or  exhortations  at 
critical  periods  of  history,  they  swayed  permanently 
the  destinies  of  the  state.  When,  after  the>  revolt 
of  the  ten  tribes,  Rehoboam  had  under  him  at  Je 
rusalem  an  army  stated  to  consist  of  180,000  men, 
Shemaiah,  as  interpreter  of  the  divine  will,  caused 
the  army  to  separate  without  attempting  to  put 
down  the  rebellion  (1  K.  xii.  21-24).  When  Judah 
and  Jerusalem  were  in  imminent  peril  from  the 
invasion  of  Sennacherib,  the  prophetical  utterance 
of  Isaiah  encouraged  Hezekiah  to  a  successful  re 
sistance  (Is.  xxxvii.  22-36).  On  the  other  hand, 
at  the  invasion  of  Judaea  by  the  Chaldees,  Jeremiah 
prophetically  announced  impending  woe  and  cala 
mities  in  a  strain  which  tended  to  paralyse  patriotic 
resistance  to  the  power  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  4,  2).  And  Jeremi:-»h  evidently  produced 
an  impression  on  the  king's  mind  contrary  to  the 
counsels  of  the  princes,  or  what  might  be  called  the 
war-party  in  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xxxviii.  14-27). 

The  law  of  succession  to  the  throne  is  somewhat 
obscure,  but  it  seems  most  probable  that  the  king 
during  his  lifetime  named  his  successor.  This  was 
certainly  the  case  with  David,  who  passed  over  his 
elder  son  Adonijah,  the  son  of  Haggith,  in  favour 
of  Solomon,  the  son  of  Bathsheba  (1  K.  i.  30,  ii. 
22)  ;  and  with  Rehoboam,  of  whom  it  is  said  that 
he  loved  Maachah  the  daughter  of  Absalom  above 
all  his  wives  and  concubines,  and  that  he  made 
Abijah  her  son  to  be  ruler  among  his  brethren,  to 
make  him  king  (2  Chr.  xi.  21,  22).  The  succession 
of  the  first-born  has  been  inferred  from  a  passage 
in  2  Chr.  xxi.  3,  4,  in  which  Jehoshaphat  is  said 
to  have  given  the  kingdom  to  Jehoram  •'  because 
he  was  the  first-born."  But  this  very  passage  tends 
to  show  that  Jehoshaphat  had  the  power  of  naming 
his  successor ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  Jeho 
ram,  on  his  coming  to  the  throne,  put  to  death  all 
his  brothers,  which  he  would  scarcely,  perhaps, 
have  done  if  the  succession  of  the  first-bcm  had 
been  the  law  of  the  land.  From  the  conciseness  of 
the  narratives  in  the  books  of  Kings  no  inference 
either  way  can  be  drawn  from  the  ordinary  formula 
in  which  the  death  of  the  father  and  succession  of 
his  son  is  recorded  (1  K.  xv.  8).  At  the  same 
time,  if  no  partiality  for  a  favourite  wife  or  son 
intervened,  there  would  always  be  a  natural  bias 
of  affection  in  favour  of  the  eldest  son.  There 
appears  to  have  been  some  prominence  given  to  the 
mother  of  the  king  (2  K.  xxiv.  12,  15 ;  1  K.  ii.  19), 
and  it  is  possible  that  the  mother  may  have  been 
regent  during  the  minority  of  a  son.  Indeed  some 
such  custom  best  explains  the  possibility  of  the 
audacious  usurpation  of  Athaliah  on  the  death  of 
her  son  Ahaziah :  an  usurpation  which  lasted  six 
years  after  the  destruction  of  all  the  seed-royal 
except  the  young  Jehoash  (2  K.  xi.  1,  3). 

The  following  is  a  list  of  some  of  the  officers  of 
the  king : — 

1.  The  Recorder  or  Chronicler,  who  was  perhaps 
analogous  to  the  Historiographer  whom  Sir  John 
Malcolm  mentions  as  an  officer  of  the  Persian  court, 

the  case  (see  2  K.  xxiii.  30),  and  there  does  not  seem 
sufficient  reason  to  doubt  that  each  individual  king 
was  anointed.  There  can  be  little  doubt,  likewise, 
that  the  kings  of  Israel  were  anointed,  though  this  ia 
not  specified  by  the  writers  of  Kings  and  Chronicles, 
who  would  deem  such  anointing  invalid. 

C  2 


20 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


whose  duty  it  is  to  write  the  annals  of  the  king's 
reign  (History  of  Persia,  c.  23).  Certain  it  is 
that  there  is  no  regular  series  of  minute  dates  in 
Hebrew  history  until  we  read  of  this  recorder,  or 
remembrancer,  as  the  word  mazkir  is  translated  in 
a  marginal  note  of  the  English  version.  He  sig 
nifies  one  who  keeps  the  memory  of  events  alive, 
in  accordance  with  a  motive  assigned  by  Herodotus 
for  writing  his  history,  viz.  that  the  acts  of  men 
might  not  become  extinct  by  time  (Herod,  i.  1 : 
2  Sam.  viii.  16;  IK.  iv.  3;  2  K.  xviii.  18;  Is! 
xxxvi/3,  22). 

2.  The  Scribe  or  Secretary,  whose  duty  would 
be  to  answer  letters  or  petitions  in  the  name  of  the 
King,  to  write  despatches,  and  to  draw  up  edicts 
(2  Sam.  viii.  17,  xx.  25 ;    2  K.  xii.  10,  xix.  2, 
xxii.  8). 

3.  The  officer  who  was  over  the  house  (Is.  xxxii. 
15,  xxxvi.  3).     His  duties  would  be  those  of  chief 
steward  of  the  household,  and  would  embrace  all 
the  internal  economical  arrangements  of  the  palace, 
the  superintendence  of  the  king's  servants,  and  the 
custody  of  his  costly  vessels  of  gold  and  silver.     He 
seems  to  have  worn  a  distinctive  robe  of  office  and 
girdle.    It  was  against  Shebna,  who  held  this  office, 
that  Isaiah   uttered   his   personal   prophecy  (xxii. 
15-25),  the  only  instance  of  the  kind  in  his  writings 
(see  Ges.  Com.  on  Isaiah,  p.  694-). 

4.  The  king's  friend  (1  K.  iv.  5),  called  like 
wise  the  king's  companion.      It   is   evident   from 
the   name   that   this   officer   must   have  stood  in 
confidential  relation  to  the  king,  but  his  duties  are 
nowhere  specified. 

5.  The  keeper  of  the  vestry  or  wardrobe  (2  K. 
x.  22). 

6.  The  captain  of  the  body-guard  (2  Sam.  xx. 
23).     The  importance  of  this  officer  requires  no 
comment.      It.  was   he   who   obeyed   Solomon    in 
putting  to  death  Adonijah,  Joab,  and  Shimei  (1  K. 
li.  25,  34,  46). 

7.  Distinct  officers  over  the  king's  treasures — his 
storehouses,  labourers,  vineyards,  olive-trees,  and 
sycamore-trees,  herds,  camels,  and  flocks  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  25-31). 

8.  The  officer  over  all  the  host  or  army  of  Israel, 
the  commander-in-chief  of  the   army,  who  com 
manded   it    in   person   during   the   king's  absence 
(2  Sam.  xx.  23;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  34;  2  Sain.  xi.  1). 
As  an  instance  of  the  formidable  power  which  a 
general  might  acquire  in  this  office,  see  the  narra 
tive  in  2  Sam.  iii.  30-37,  when  David  deemed  him 
self  obliged  to  tolerate  the  murder  of  Abner  by 
Joab  and  Abishai. 

9.  The  royal  counsellors  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  32 ;  Is. 
iii.  3,  xix.  11,  13).     Ahithophel  is  a  specimen  of 
how  much  such  an  officer  might  effect  for  evil  or 
for  good ;  but  whether  there  existed  under  Hebrew 
kings  any  body  corresponding,  even  distantly,  to  the 
English  Privy  Council,  in  former  times,  doss  not 
appear  (2  Sam.  xvi.  20-23,  xvii.  1-14). 

The  following  is  a  statement  of  the  sources  of 
the  royal  revenues: — 

1.  The  royal  demesnes,  corn-fields,  vineyards,  and 
olive-gardens.  Some  at  least  of  these  seem  to  have 
been  taken  from  private  individuals,  but  whether  as 
the  punishment  :f  rebellion,  or  on  any  other  plausible 
pretext,  is  not  specified  (1  Sum.  viii.  14;  1  Chr. 
xxvii.  26-26).  2.  The  produce  of  the  royal  flocks 
'  I  Sarn.  xxi.  7  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  23  ;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10  ; 
I  Chr.  xxvii.  25).  3.  A  nominal  tenth  of  the  pro 
duce  of  coin-land  and  vineyards  and  of  sheep  ( 1  Sam. 
eiii.  15,  17).  4.  A  tribute  from  merchant*  who 


passed  through  the  Hebrew  territory  (1  K.  x.  14) 
5.  Presents  made  by  his  subjects  (1  Sam.  xvi.  2l> 
1  Sam.  x.  27  ;  1  K.  x.  25 ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  10).  There 
is  perhaps  no  greater  distinction  in  the  usages  of 
eastern  and  western  nations  than  on  whal  relates  to 
the  giving  and  receiving  of  presents.  When  rnad« 
regularly  they  do  in  fact  amount  to  a  regular  tax. 
Thus,  in  the  passage  last  referred  to  in  the  book  of 
Kings,  it  is  stated  that  they  brought  to  Solomon 
"  every  man  his  present,  vessels  of  silver  and  ves 
sels  of  gold,  and  garments,  and  armour,  and  spices, 
horses  and  mules,  a  rate  year  by  year."  6.  In  the 
time  of  Solomon,  the  king  had  trading  vessels  of  his 
own  at  sea,  which,  starting  from  Eziougeber,  brought 
back  once  in  three  years  gold  and  silver,  ivory, 
apes,  and  peacocks  (1  K.  x.  22).  It  is  probable 
that  Solomon  and  some  other  kings  may  have 
derived  some  revenue  from  commercial  ventures 
(1  K.  ix.  28).  7.  The  spoils  of  war  taken  from 
conquered  nations  and  the  tribute  paid  by  them 
(2  Sam.  viii.  2,  7,  8,  10;  1  K.  iv.  21  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvii.  5).  8.  Lastly,  an  undefined  power  of  exact 
ing  compulsory  labour,  to  which  reference  has  been 
already  made  (1  Sam.  viii.  12,  13, 16).  As  far  as 
this  power  was  exercised  it  was  equivalent  to  so 
much  income.  There  is  nothing  in  1  Sam.  x.  25, 
or  in  2  Sam.  v.  3,  to  justify  the  statement  that 
the  Hebrews  defined  in  express  terms,  or  in  iny 
terms,  by  a  particular  agreement  or  covenant,  for 
that  purpose,  what  services  should  be  rendered 
to  the  king,  or  what  he  could  legally  require. 
(See  Jahn,  Archaologia  Biblica ;  Bauer,  Lehr- 
buch  der  Hebrdischcn  Alterthiimer ;  Winer,  s.  v. 
Konig.) 

It  only  remains  to  add,  that  in  Deuteronomy  xrii. 
14-20  there  is  a  document  containing  some  direc 
tions  as  to  what  any  king  who  might  be  appointed 
by  the  Hebrews  was  to  do  and  not  to  Jo.  The 
proper  appreciation  of  this  document  would  m..inly 
depend  on  its  date.  It  is  the  opinion  of  many 
modern  writers — Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Winer, 
Ewald,  and  others — that  the  book  which  contains 
the  document  was  composed  long  after  the  time  of 
Moses.  See,  however,  DEUTERONOMY  in  the  1st 
vol.  of  this  work ;  and  compare  Gesenius,  Ges* 
chichte  der  Hebraischen  Sprache  und  Schrift, 
p.  32  ;  De  Wette,  Einleitung  in  die  Bibel,  "  Deu- 
teronomium " ;  Winer,  s.  v.  Konig  ;  Ewald,  Ge- 
sckichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  iii.  381.  [E.  T.] 

KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS 

OF,  originally  only  one  book  in  the  Hebrew  Canon, 
and  first  edited  in  Hebrew  as  two  by  Bomberg, 
after  the  model  of  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate 
(De  Wette  and  0.  Thenius,  Einleitung).  They  are 
called  by  the  LXX.,  Origen,  &c.,  Ba<ri\fiiai>  rpini 
and  Tfrdprti,  third  and  fourth  of  the  Kingdoms 
(the  books  of  Samuel  being  the  first  and  second), 
but  by  the  Latins,  with  few  exceptions,  tertius  et 
quartus  Regum  liber.  Jerome,  though  in  the  head 
ing  of  his  translation  of  the  Scriptures,  he  follows 
the  Hebrew  name,  and  calls  them  Liber  Malachiro 
Primus  and  Secundus,  yet  elsewhere  usually  follows 
the  common  usage  of  the  church  in  his  day.  In 
his  Prologus  Galeatus  he  places  them  as  the  fourth 
of  the  second  order  of  the  sacred  books,  t.  e.  of  the 
Prophets: — "  Quartus,  Malachim,  i.  e.  Regum,  qui 
tertio  et  quarto  Regum  volumine  continetur.  Me- 
liusque  multo  cst  Malachim,  i.  e.  Regum,  quaru 
Mamolachoth,  i.  e.  Rcgnorum,  dicere.  Non  enim 
multaruin  gentium  describit  regna ;  sed  unius  Is- 
raelitici  populi,  qui  tribubus  duodecim  continetur." 
l-i  liis  epistle  to  Paulinus  he  thus  describes  th* 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


21 


contents  of  these  two  books: — "  Malachim,  i.e. 
tertius  et  quartue  Regum  liber,  a  Salomone  usque 
id  Jechoniam,  et  a  Jeroboam  filio  Nabat  usque  ad 
Osee  qui  ductws  est  in  Assyrios,  regiium  Juda  et 
regnum  describit  Israel.  Si  historiam  respicias, 
verba  simplicia  sunt :  si  in  literis  sensum  lateulem 
jnspexeris,  Ecclesiae  paucitas,  et  hereticorum  contra 
ecclesiam  bella,  narrantur."  The  division  into  two 
books,  being  purely  artificial  and  as  it  were  me 
chanical,  may  be  overlooked  in  speaking  of  them  ; 
and  it  must  also  be  remembered  that  the  division 
between  the  books  of  Kings  and  Samuel  is  equally 
Artificial,  and  that  in  point  of  fact  the  historical 
books  commencing  with  Judges  and  ending  with 
2  Kings  present  the  appearance  of  one  work,* 
giving  a  continuous  history  of  Israel  from  the  times 
of  Joshua  to  the  death  of  Jehoiachin.  It  must 
suffice  here  to  mention,  in  support  of  this  assertion, 
the  frequent  allusion  in  the  book  of  Judges  to  the 
times  of  the  kings  of  Israel  (xvii.  6,  xviii.  1,  xix.  1, 
xxi.  25) ;  the  concurrent  evidence  of  ch.  ii.  that  the 
writer  lived  in  an  age  when  he  could  take  a  retro 
spect  of  the  whole  time  during  which  the  judges 
ruled  (ver.  16-19),  ».  e.  that  he  lived  after  the 
monarchy  had  been  established ;  the  occurrence  in 
the  book  of  Judges,  for  the  first  time,  of  the  phrase 
"  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  "  (iii.  10),  which  is  repeated 
often  in  the  book  (vi.  54,  xi.  29,  xiii.  25,  xiv.  6, 
&c.),  and  is  of  frequent  use  in  Samuel  and  Kings, 
(e.  g.  1  Sam.  x.  6,  xvi.  13, 14,  xix.  9  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
2 ;  1  K.  xxii.  24 ;  2  K.  ii.  1 6,  &c.)  ;  the  allusion  in 
i.  21  to  the  capture  of  Jebus,  and  the  continuance 
of  a  Jebusite  population  (see  2  Sam.  xxiv,  16)  ;  the 
reference  hi  xx.  27  to  the  removal  of  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  from  Shiloh  to  Jerusalem,  and  the  expres 
sion  "  in  those  days,"  pointing,  as  in  xvii.  6,  &c.,  to 
remote  times;  the  distinct  reference  in  xviii.  30  to 
the  captivity  of  Israel  by  Shalmaneser ;  with  the 
fact  that  the  books  of  Judges,  Ruth,  Samuel,  Kings, 
form  one  unbroken  narrative,  similar  in  general 
character,  which  has  no  beginning  except  at  Judg.  i., 
while,  it  may  be  added,  the  book  of  Judges  is 
not  a  continuation  of  Joshua,  but  opens  with  a 
repetition  of  the  same  events  with  which  Joshua 
closes.  In  like  manner  the  book  of  Ruth  clearly 
forms  part  of  those  of  Samuel,  supplying  as  it 
does  the  essential  point  of  David's  genealogy  and 
early  family  history,  and  is  no  less  clearly  connected 
with  the  book  of  Judges  by  its  opening  verse,  and 
the  epoch  to  which  the  whole  book  relates.1*  Other 
links  connecting  the  books  of  Kings  with  the  pre 
ceding  may  be  found  in  the  comparison,  suggested 
by  De  Wette,  of  1  K.  ii.  26  with  1  Sam.  ii.  35 ; 
li.  11  with  2  Sam.  v.  5 ;  IK.  ii.  3,  4,  v.  17,  18, 
viii.  18,  19,  25,  with  2  Sam.  vii.  12-16;  and  1  K. 
fv.  1-6  with  2  Sam.  viii.  15-18.  Also  2  K.  xvii. 
41  may  be  compared  with  Judg.  ii.  19 ;  1  Sam.  ii. 
27  with  Judg.  xiii.  6 ;  2  Sam.  xiv.  17,  20,  xix.  27, 
with  Judg.  xiii.  6  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  21  with  Judg.  vi. 
15,  and  xx. ;  1  K.  viii.  1  with  2  Sam.  vi.  17,  and 
r.  7,  9 ;  1  Sam.  xvii.  12  with  Ruth  iv.  17  ;  Ruth 
i.  1  with  Judg.  xvii.  7,  8,  9,  xix.  1,  2  (Bethlehem- 
Judah) ;  the  use  in  Judg.  xiii.  6,  8,  of  the  phrase 
''the  maji  of  God"  (in  the  earlier  books  applied  to 
Moses  only,  and  that  only  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  1  and  Josh. 
riv.  6),  may  be  compared  with  the  very  frequent 


use  of  it  in  the  books  .»f  Samuel  and  Kingc  as  the 
common  designation  of  a  prophet,  whereas  onlj 
Jeremiah  besides  (xxxv.  4)  so  uses  it  before  thf 
captivity.0  The  phrase,  "  God  do  so  to  me,  and 
more  also,"  is  common  to  Ruth,  Samuel,  and  Kings, 
and  "  till  they  were  ashamed  "  to  Judges  and  Kings 
(iii.  25 ;  2  K.  ii.  17,  viii.  11).  And  generally  the 
style  of  the  narrative,  ordinarily  quiet  and  simple,  but 
rising  to  great  vigour  and  spirit  when  stirring  deeds 
are  described  (as  in  Judg.  iv.,  vii.,  xi.,  &c. ;  1  Sara. 
iv.,  xvii.,  xxxi.,  &c. ;  1  K.  viii.,  xviii.,  six.,  &c.), 
and  the  introduction  of  poetry  or  poetic  style  in 
the  midst  of  the  narrative  (as  in  Judg.  v.,  1  Sam. 
ii.,  2  Sam.  i.  17,  &c.,  1  K.  xxii.  17,  &c.),  consti 
tute  such  strong  features  of  resemblance  as  lead  to 
the  conclusion  that  these  several  books  form  but 
one  work.  Indeed  the  very  names  of  the  books 
sufficiently  indicate  that  they  were  all  imposed  by 
the  same  authority  for  the  convenience  of  division, 
and  with  reference  to  the  subject  treated  of  in  each 
division,  and  not  that  they  were  original  titles  of 
independent  works. 

But  to  confine  ourselves  to  the  books  of  Kings. 
We  shall  consider — 

I.  Their  historical  and  chronological  range ; 
II.  Their   peculiarities    of  diction,   and   other 
features  in  their  literary  aspect ; 

III.  Their  authorship,  and  the  sources  of  the 

author's  information ; 

IV.  Their  relation  to  the  books  of  Chronicles ; 
V.  Their  place  in  the  canon,  and  the  references 

to  them  in  the  New  Testament. 
I.  The  books  of  Kings  range  from  David's  death 
and  Solomon's  accession  to  the  throne  of  Israel, 
commonly  reckoned  as  B.C.  1015,  but  according  to 
Lepsius  B.C.  993  (KSnigsb.  d.  Aegypt.  p.  102),  to 
the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  and  the 
desolation  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  burning  of  the 
Temple,  according  to  the  same  reckoning  B.C.  588, 
(B.C.  586,  Lepsius,  p.  107) — a  period  of  427  (or 
405)  years:  with  a  supplemental  notice  of  an  event 
that  occurred  after  an  interval  of  26  years,  viz. 
the  liberation  of  Jehoiachin  from  his  prison  at 
Babylon,  and  a  still  further  extension  to  Jehor- 
achin's  death,  the  time  of  which  is  not  known,  but 
which  was  probably  not  long  after  his  liberation. 
The  history  therefore  comprehends  the  whole  time 
of  the  Israelitish  monarchy,  exclusive  of  the  reigns 
of  Saul  and  David,  whether  existing  as  one  kingdom 
as  under  Solomon  and  the  eight  last  kings,  or  di 
vided  into  the  two  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah. 
It  exhibits  the  Israelites  in  the  two  extremes  of 
power  and  weakness ;  under  Solomon  extending 
their  dominion  over  tributary  kingdoms  from  the 
Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean  and  the  border 
of  Egypt  (1  K.  iv.  21) ;  under  the  last  kings  re- 
ducal  to  a  miserable  remnant,  subject  alternately 
to  Egypt  and  Assyria,  till  at  length  they  were 
rooted  up  from  their  own  land.  As  the  cause  of 
this  decadence  it  points  out  the  division  of  Solo 
mon's  monarchy  into  two  parts,  followed  by  the 
religious  schism  and  idolatrous  worship  brought 
about  from  political  motives  by  Jeroboam.  How 
the  consequent  wars  between  the  two  kingdoms 
necessarily  weakened  both  ;  how  they  led  to  calling 
in  the  stranger  to  their  aid  whenever  their  power 


•  De  Wette'g  reasons  for  reckoning  Kings  as  a 
separate  work  seem  to  the  writer  quite  inconclusive. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  book  of  Joshua  seems  to  be  an 
independent  book.  Ewald  classes  these  books  together 
eziotly  us  is  done  db^ve  (Gesch.  i.  175),  and  calls  them 


"  the  great  Book  of  the  Kings." 

6  Eichhorn  ittributes  Kuth  to  the  author  of  ths 
books  of  Samuel  (Tli.  Parker's  De  Wette,  ii.  320). 

c  In  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nebcmiah,  it  rcpeat';fllj 
occurs. 


22 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


was  equally  balanced,  of  which  the  result  was  the 
destruction  first  of  one  kingdom  and  then  of  the 
other ;  how  a  further  evil  of  these  foreign  alliances 
was  the  adoption  of  the  idolatrous  superstitions  of 
the  heathen  nations  whose  friendship  and  protection 
they  sought,  by  which  they  forfeited  the  Divine 
protection  —  all  this  is  with  great  clearness  and 
simplicity  set  forth  in  these  books,  which  treat 
equally  of  the  two  kingdoms  while  they  lasted. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Theocracy  is  also  clearly 
brought  out  (see  e.g.  1  K.  xiv.  7-11,  xv.  29,  30, 
xvi.  1-7),  and  the  temporal  prosperity  of  the  pious 
kings,  as  Asa,  Jehoshaphat,  Hezekiah,  and  Josiah, 
stands  in  contrast  with  the  calamitous  reigns  of 
Rehoboam,  Ahaziah,  Ahaz,  Manasseh,  Jehoiachin, 
and  Zedekiah.  At  the  same  time  the  continuance 
'of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  the  permanence  of 
the  dynasty  of  David,  are  contrasted  with  the  fre 
quent  changes  of  dynasty,  and  the  far  shorter  dura 
tion  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  though  the  latter  was 
the  more  populous  and  powerful  kingdom  of  the  two 
(2  Sam.  xxiv.  9).  As  regards  the  affairs  of  foreign 
nations,  and  the  relation  of  Israel  to  them,  the  his 
torical  notices  in  these  books,  though  in  the  earlier 
times  scanty,  are  most  valuable,  and,  as  has  been 
lately  fully  shown  (Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lectures, 
1859),  in  striking  accordance  with  the  latest  addi 
tions  to  our  knowledge  of  contemporary  profane 
history.  Thus  the  patronage  extended  to  Hadad  the 
Edomite  by  Psinaches  king  of  Egypt  (1  K.  xi.  19, 
20) ;  the  alliance  of  Solomon  with  his  successor 
Psusennes,  who  reigned  35  years ;  the  accession  of 
Shishak,  or  Sesonchis  I.,  towards  the  close  of  Solo 
mon's  reign  (IK.  xi.  40),  and  his  invasion  and  con 
quest  of  Judaea  in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  of  which 
a  monument  still  exists  on  the  walls  of  Kamac 
'Kdnigsb.  p.  114);  the  time  of  the  Aethiopian 
kings  So  (Sabak)  and  Tirhakah,  of  the  25th  dynasty ; 
the  rise  and  speedy  fall  of  the  power  of  Syria ;  the 
rapid  growth  of  the  Assyrian  monarchy  which  over 
shadowed  it ;  Assyria's  struggles  with  Egypt,  and 
the  sudden  ascendancy  of  the  Babylonian  empire 
under  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  the  destruction  both  of 
Assyria  and  Egypt,  as  we  find  these  events  in  the 
books  of  Kings,  fit  in  exactly  with  what  we  now 
know  of  Egyptian,  Syrian,  Assyrian,  and  Baby 
lonian  history.  The  names  of  Omri,  Jehu,  Mena- 
hem,  Hoshea,  Hezekiah,  &c.,  are  believed  to  have 
been  deciphered  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  which 
also  contain  pretty  full  accounts  of  the  campaigns 
of  Tiglath-Pileser,  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esar- 
haddon :  bhalmaneser's  name  has  not  yet  been  dis 
covered,  though  two  inscriptions  in  the  British 
Museum  are  thought  to  refer  to  his  reign.  These 
valuable  additions  to  our  knowledge  of  profane  his 
tory,  which  we  may  hope  will  shortly  be  increased 
both  in  number  and  in  certainty,  together  with  the 
fragments  of  ancient  historians,  which  are  now  be 
coming  better  understood,  are  of  great  assistance  in 
explaining  the  brief  allusions  in  these  books,  while 
they  afford  an  irrefragable  testimony  to  their  his 
torical  truth. 

Another  most  important  aid  to  a  right  under 
standing  of  the  history  in  these  Iwoks,  and  to  the 
filling  up  of  its  outline,  is  to  be  found  in  the 
prophets,  and  especially  in  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah. 
In  the  former  the  reigns  of  Ahaz  and  Hezekiah,  and 


of  the  contemporary  Israelitish  and  foreign  poten 
tates,  receive  especial  illustration  ;  in  the  latter,  anV 
to  a  still  greater  extent,  the  reigns  of  Jehoiakiic 
and  Zedekiah,  and  those  of  their  heathen  contempo 
raries.  An  intimate  acquaintance  with  these  pro 
phets  is  of  the  utmost  moment  for  elucidating  the 
concise  narrative  of  the  books  of  Kings.  The  two 
together  give  us  a  really  full  view  of  the  event* 
of  the  times  at  home  and  abroad. 

It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  the  chrono 
logical  details  expressly  given  in  the  books  of  Kings 
form  a  remarkable  contrast  with  their  striking  his 
torical  accuracy.  These  details  are  inexplicable, 
and  frequently  entirely  contradictory.  The  very 
first  date  of  a  decidedly  chronological  character 
which  is  given,  that  of  the  foundation  of  Solomon's 
temple  (1  K.  vi.  1)  is  manifestly  erroneous,  as 
being  irreconcileable  with  any  view  of  the  chrono 
logy  of  the  times  of  the  Judges,  or  with  St.  Paul's 
calculation,  Acts  xiii.  20.d  It  is  in  fact  abandoned 
by  almost  all  chronologists,  whatever  school  they 
belong  to,  whether  ancient  or  modern,  and  is  utterly 
ignored  by  Josephus.  [CHRONOLOGY,  vol.  i.  323, 
324  a,  325."]  Moreover,  when  the  text  is  examined, 
it  immediately  appeai-s  that  this  date  of  480  years 
is  both  unnecessary  and  quite  out  of  place.  The 
reference  to  the  Exodus  is  gratuitous,  and  alien  to 
all  the  other  notes  of  time,  which  refer  merely  to 
Solomon's  accession.  If  it  is  left  out,  the  text  will 
be  quite  perfect  without  it,«  and  will  agree  exactly 
with  the  resume  in  ver.  37,  38,  and  also  with  the 
parallel  passage  in  2  Chr.  iii.  2.  The  evidence 
therefore  of  its  being  an  interpolation  is  wonderfully 
strong.  But  if  so,  it  must  have  been  inserted  by  a 
professed  chronologist,  whose  object  was  to  reduce 
the  Scripture  history  to  an  exact  system  of  chrono 
logy.  It  is  likely  therefore  that  we  shall  find  traces 
of  the  same  hand  in  other  parts  of  the  books.  Niw 
De  Wette  (Einleit.  p.  235),  among  the  evidences 
which  he  puts  forward  as  marking  the  books  of 
Kings  as  in  his  opinion  a  separate  work  from  those 
of  Samuel,  mentions,  though  erroneously,  as  2  Sam. 
v.  4,  5  shows,  the  sudden  introduction  of  "  a  chro 
nological  system"  (die  genauere  zeit-rcchnung'). 
When  therefore  we  find  that  the  very  first  date 
introduced  is  erroneous,  and  that  numerous  other 
dates  are  also  certainly  wrong,  because  contradictory, 
it  seems  a  not  unfair  conclusion  that  such  dates 
are  the  work  of  an  interpolator,  trying  to  bring  the 
history  within  his  own  chronological  system:  a 
conclusion  somewhat  confirmed  by  the  alterations 
and  omissions  of  these  dates  in  the  LXX.f  As 
regards,  however,  these  chronological  difficulties,  it 
must  be  observed  they  are  of  two  essentially  different 
kinds.  One  kind  is  merely  the  want  of  the  data 
necessary  for  chronological  exactness.  Such  is  tho 
absence,  apparently,  of  any  uniform  rule  for  dealing 
with  the  fragments  of  years  at  the  beginning  and 
end  of  the  reigns.  Such  might  also  be  a  deficiency 
itf  the  sum  of  the  regnal  years  of  Israel  as  com 
pared  with  the  synchronistic  years  of  Judah,  caused 
by  unnoticed  interregna,  if  any  such  really  oc 
curred.  And  this  class  of  difficulties  may  pro 
bably  have  belonged  to  these  books  in  their  original 
state,  in  which  exact  scientific  chronology  was  not 
aimed  at.  But  the  other  kind  of  difficulty  is  of  a 
totally  different  character,  and  embraces  dates  which 


d  The  MSS.  A.  B.  C.  have,  however,  a  different 
rending,  which  is  adopted  by  Lachmann  and  Words 
worth. 

•  ".And  it  came  to  ras»  ....  in  the  ("ninth  year  of 


Solomon's  reign  over  Israel,  in  the  month  Zif,  \»hirh 
is  the  second  month,  that  he  began  to  build  the  Louse 
of  the  Lord." 

'  See  1  K.  xvi.  8,  15,  29;  TJ.  1. 


KINGS,  FIKST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


23 


arc  vcrif  exact  in  their  mode  of  expression,  but  are 
eiToneous  and  contradictory.  Some  of  these  are 
pointed  out  below ;  and  it  is  such  which  it  seems 
reasonable  to  ascribe  to  the  interpolation  of  later 
professed  chronologists.  But  it  is  necessary  to  give 
specimens  of  each  of  these  kinds  of  difficulty,  both 
with  a  view  to  approximating  to  a  true  chronology, 
and  also  to  show  the  actual  condition  of  the  books 
under  consideration. 

(1 .)  When  we  sum  up  the  years  of  all  the  reigns 
of  the  kings  of  Israel  as  given  in  the  books  of  Kings, 
and  then  all  the  years  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings 
of  Judah  from  the  1st  of  Rehoboam  to  the  6th  of 
Hezekiah,  we  find  that,  instead  of  the  two  sums 
agreeing,  there  is  an  excess  of  19  or  20  years  in 
Judah — the  reigns  of  the  latter  amounting  to  261 


The  two  first  of  the  above  periods  may  then  be 
said  to  agree  together,  and  to  give  95+61  =  15b 
years  from  the  accession  of  Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam 
to  the  15th  of  Amaziah  in  Judah,  and  the  death 
of  Jehoash  in  Israel,  and  we  observe  that  the  dis 
crepance  of  12  years  first  occurs  in  the  third  period, 
in  which  the  breaking  up  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
began  at  the  close  of  Jehu's  dynasty.  Putting  aside 
the  synchronistic  arrangement  of  the  years  as  we 
now  find  them  in  2  K.  xv.  seq.,  there  would  be 
no  difficulty  whatever  in  supposing  that  the  reigns 
of  the  kings  of  Israel  at  this  time  were  not  con 
tinuous,  and  that  for  several  years  after  the  death 
of  Zachariah,  or  Shallum,  or  both,  the  government 
may  either  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the  king  of 
Syria,  or  broken  up  amongst  contending  parties,  till 


years,  while  the  former  make  up  only  242.     But    at  length  Menahem  was  able  to  establish  himself  on 


we  are  able  to  get  somewhat  nearer  to  the  seat  of 
this  disagreement,  because  it  so  happens  that  the 
parallel  histories  of  Israel  and  Judah  touch  in  four 
or  five  points  where  the  synchronisms  are  precisely 
marked.  These  points  are  (1)  at  the  simultaneous 
accessions  of  Jeroboam  and  Rehoboam  ;  (2)  at  the 
simultaneous  deaths  of  Jehoram  and  Ahaziah,  or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  the  simultaneous  acces 
sions  of  Jehu  and  Athaliah ;  (3)  at  the  15th  year 
of  Amaziah,  which  was  the  1st  of  Jeroboam  II. 
(2  K.  xiv.  17) ;  (4)  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  which 
was  contemporary  wif.h  some  part  of  Pekah's,  viz. 
according  to  the  text  of  2  K.  xvi.  1,  the  three 
first  years  of  Ahaz  with  the  three  last  of  Pekah  ; 
and  (5)  at  the  6th  of  Hezekiah,  which  was  the 
9th  of  Hoshea ;  the  two  last  points,  however,  being 
less  certain  than  the  others,  at  least  as  to  the  pre 
cision  of  the  synchronisms,  depending  as  this  does 
on  the  correctness  of  the  numerals  in  the  text. 

Hence,  instead  of  lumping  the  whole  periods  of 
261  years  and  242  years  together,  and  comparing 
their  difference,  it  is  clearly  expedient  to  compare 
the  different  sub-periods,  which  are  defined  by  com 
mon  termini.  Beginning  therefore  with  the  sub- 
period  which  commences  with  the  double  accession 
of  Kehoboam  and  Jeroboam,  and  closes  with  the 
double  death  of  Ahaziah  and  Jehoram,  and  summing 
up  the  number  of  years  assigned  to  the  different 
reigns  in  each  kingdom,  we  find  that  the  six  reigns 
in  Judah  make  up  95  years,  and  the  eight  reigns  in 
Israel  make  up  98  years.  Here  there  is  an  excess 
of  3  years  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  may, 
however,  be  readily  accounted  for  by  the  frequent 
changes  of  dynasty  there,  and  the  probability  of 
fragments  of  years  being  reckoned  as  whole  years, 
thus  causing  the  same  year  to  be  reckoned  twice 
over.  The  95  years  of  Judah,  or  even  a  less  num 
ber,  will  hence  appear  to  be  the  true  number  of 
whole  years  (see  too  Clinton,  F.  H.  ii.  314,  &c.). 

Beginning,  again,  at  the  double  accession  of  Atha 
liah  and  Jehu,  we  have  in  Judah  7+40+14  first 
years  of  Amaziah  =  61,  to  correspond  with  28+17 
+  16  =  61^  ending  with  the  last  year  of  Jehoash  in 
Israel.  Starting  again  with  the  15th  of  j\maziah  = 
1  Jeroboam  II.,  we  have  15+52+16  +  3  =  86  (to 
the  3rd  year  of  Ahaz),  to  correspond  with  41  + 1  + 
10+2+20  =  74  (to  the  close  of  Pekah's  reign), 
where  we  at  once  detect  a  deficiency  on  the  part  of 
Israel  of  (86-74  =  )  12  years,  if  at  least  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  really  corresponded  with  the  20th  of  Pekah. 
And  lastly,  starting  with  the  year  following  that 
last  named,  we  have  13  last  years  of  Ahaz+7  first 
of  Hezekiah  =  20,  to  correspond  with  the  9  years 
of  Hoshea,  where  we  find  another  deficiency  in  Israel 
of  II.  yearc. 


the  throne  by  the  help  of  Pul,  king  of  Assyria,  and 
transmit  his  tributary  throne  to  his  son  Pekahiah. 

But  there  is  another  mode  of  bringing  this  third 
period  into  harmony,  which  violates  no  historical 
probability,  and  is  in  fact  strongly  indicated  by  the 
fluctuations  of  the  text.  We  are  told  in  2  K.  xv.  8 
that  Zachariah  began  to  reign  in  the  38th  of 
Uzziah,  and  (xiv.  23)  that  his  father  Jeroboam 
began  to  reign  in  the  15th  of  Amaziah.  Jeroboam 
must  therefore  have  reigned  52  or  53  years,  not 
41 :  for  the  idea  of  an  interregnum  of  11  or  12 
years  between  Jeroboam  and  his  son  Zachariah  is 
absurd.  But  the  addition  of  these  12  years  to 
Jeroboam's  reign  exactly  equalizes  the  period  in  the 
two  kingdoms,  which  would  thus  contain  86  years, 
and  makes  up  242  years  from  the  accession  of 
Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam  to  the  3rd  of  Ahaz  and 
20th  of  Pekah,  supposing  always  that  these  last- 
named  years  really  synchronize. 

As  regards  the  discrepance  of  11  years  in  the 
last  period,  nothing  can  in  itself  be  more  probable 
than  that  either  during  some  part  of  Pekah's  life 
time,  or  after  his  death,  a  period,  not  included  in 
the  regnal  years  of  either  Pekah  or  Hoshea,  should 
have  elapsed,  when  there  was  either  a  state  of 
anarchy,  or  the  government  was  administered  by  an 
Assyrian  officer.  There  are  also  sever.il  passages 
in  the  contemporary  prophets  Isaiah  and  Hosea, 
which  would  fall  in  with  this  view,  as  Hos.  x.  3. 
7;  Is.  ix.  9-19.  But  it  is  impossible  to  asseit 
peremptorily  that  such  was  the  case.  The  decision 
must  await  some  more  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
chronology  of  the  times  from  heathen  sources.  The 
addition  of  these  last  20  years  makes  up  for  the 
whole  duration  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  261  or 
262  years,  more  or  less.  Now  the  interval,  ac 
cording  to  Lepsius's  tables,  from  the  accession  of 
Sesonchis,  or  !?hishak,  to  that  of  Sabacon,  or  So 
(2  K.  xvii.  4),  is  245  years.  Allowing  Sesonchis 
to  have  reigned  7  years  contemporaneously  with 
Solomon,  and  Sabaco,  who  reigned  12  years,s  to 
have  reigned  9  before  Shalmaueser  came  up  the 
second  time  against  Samaria  (245  +  7  +  9  =  261), 
the  chronology  of  Egypt  would  exactly  tally  with 
that  here  given.  It  may,  however,  turn  out  that 
the  time  thus  allowed  for  the  duration  of  th« 
Israelitish  monarchy  is  somewhat  too  long,  atd 
that  the  time  indicated  by  the  years  of  the  Israelitish 
kings,  without  any  interregnum,  is  nearer  the  truth. 
If  so,  a  ready  way  of  reducing  the  sum  of  the 
reigns  of  the  kings  of  Judah  would  be  to  assign 
41  years  to  that  of  Uzziah,  instead  of  52  (as  ii 
the  numbers  of  Uzziah  and  Jeroboam  had  b>er. 


LepsiUR,  Fonigsb.  p.  37. 


24 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


accidentally  inter  changed) :  an  arrangement  which 
interferes  with  no  known  historical  truth,  though  it 
would  disturb  the  doubtful  synchronism  of  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  with  the  20th  of  Pekah,  and  make  the  3rd 
of  Ahaz  correspond  with  about  the  9th  or  10th  of 
Pekah.  Indeed  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  if  we 
jieglect  this  synchronism,  and  consider  as  one  the 
period  from  the  accession  of  Athaliah  and  Jehu  to 
the  7th  of  Hezekiah  and  9th  of  Hoshea,  the  sums 
of  the  reigns  in  the  two  kingdoms  agree  exactly, 
when  we  reckon  41  years  for  Uzziah,  and  52  for 
Jeroboam,  viz.  155  years,  or  250  for  the  whole 
time  of  the  Israelitish  monarchy.  Another  advan 
tage  of  this  arrangement  would  be  to  reduce  the  age 
of  Uzziah  at  the  birth  of  his  son  and  heir  Jotham 
from  the  improbable  age  of  42  or  43  to  31  or  32. 
It  may  be  added  that  the  date  in  2  K.  xv.  1 ,  which 
assigns  the  1st  of  Uzziah  to  the  27th  of  Jeroboam, 
seems  to  indicate  that  the  author  of  it  only  reckoned 
41  years  for  Uzziah 's  reign,  since  from  the  27th  of 
Jeroboam  to  the  1st  of  Pekah  is  just  41  years  (see 
Lepsius's  table,  KSnigsb.  p.  103  h).  Also  that  2  K. 
xvii.  1.  which  makes  the  12th  of  Ahaz  =  1st  of 
Hoshea,  implies  that  the  1st  of  Ahaz  =  9th  of 
Pekah. 

(2.)  Turning  next  to  the  other  class  of  difficulties 
mentioned  above,  the  following  instances  will  per 
haps  be  thought  to  justify  the  opinion  that  the 
dates  in  these  books  which  are  intended  to  establish 
a  precise  chronology  are  the  work  of  a  much  later 
hand  or  hands  than  the  books  themselves. 

The  date  in  1  K.  vi.  1  is  one  which  is  obviously 
intended  for  strictly  chronological  purposes.  If  cor 
rect,  it  would,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  sub 
sequent  notes  of  time  in  the  books  of  Kings,  sup 
posing  them  to  be  correct  also,  give  to  a  year  the 
length  of  the  time  from  the  Exodus  to  the  Baby 
lonian  captivity,  and  establish  a  perfect  connexion 
between  sacred  and  profane  history.  But  so  little 
is  this  the  case,  that  this  date  is  quite  irreconcileable 
with  Egyptian  history,  and  is,  as  stated  above,  by 
almost  universal  consent  rejected  by  chronologists, 
even  on  purely  Scriptural  grounds.  This  date  is 
followed  by  precise  synchronistic  definitions  of  the 
parallel  reigns  of  Israel  and  Judah,  the  effect  of 
which  would  be,  and  must  have  been  designed  to 
be,  to  supply  the  want  of  accuracy  in  stating  the 
length  of  the  reigns  without  reference  to  the  odd 
months.  But  these  synchronistic  definitions  are  in 
continual  discord  with  the  statement  of  the  length 
of  reigns.  According  to  1  K.  xxii.  51  Ahaziah  suc 
ceeded  Ahab  in  the  17th  year  of  Jehoshaphat.  But 
according  to  the  statement  of  the  length  of  Ahab's 
reign  in  rvi.  29,  Ahab  died  in  the  18th  of  Jeho 
shaphat;  while  according  to  2  K.  i.  17,  Jehoram 
the  son  of  Ahaziah  succeeded  his  brother  (after  his 
2  yeare'  reign)  in  the  second  year  of  Jehoram  the 
son  of  Jehoshaphat,  though,  according  to  the  length 
of  the  reigns,  he  must  have  succeeded  in  the  18th 
or  19th  of  Jehoshaphat  (see  2  K.  iii.  1),  who 
reigned  in  all  25  years  (xxii.  42).  [JEHORAM.] 
As  regards  Jehoram  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  the 
statements  are  so  contradictory  that  Archbishop 
Usher  actually  makes  three  distinct  beginnings  to 
his  regnal  aera :  the  first  wheu  he  was  made  prorex, 
to  meet  2  K.  i.  17;  the  second  when  lie  was  asso 
ciated  with  his  father,  5  years  later,  to  meet  2  K. 
'i'm.  16;  the  third  when  his  sole  reign  commenced, 


to  meet  1  K.  xxii.  50,  compared  with  42.  But  at 
the  only  purpose  of  these  synchronisms  is  to  give 
an  accurate  measure  of  time,  nothing  can  be  more 
absurd  than  to  suppose  such  variations  in  the  time 
from  which  the  commencement  of  the  regnal  year 
is  dated.  It  may  also  here  be  remarked  that  the 
whole  notion  of  these  joint  reigns  has  not  the 
smallest  foundation  in  fact,  and  unluckily  does  not 
come  into  play  in  the  only  cases  where  there  might 
be  any  historical  probability  of  their  having  oc 
curred,  as  in  the  case  of  Asa's  illness  and  Uzziah's 
leprosy.  From  the  length  of  Amaziah's  reign,  as 
given  2  K.  xiv.  2,  17,  23,  it  is  manifest  that  Jero 
boam  II.  began  to  reign  in  the  15th  year  of  Ama- 
ziah,  and  that  Uzziah  began  to  reign  in  the  16th 
of  Jeroboam.  But  2  K.  rv.  1  places  the  com 
mencement  of  Uzziah's  reign  in  the  27th  of  Jero 
boam,  and  the  accession  of  Zachariah  =  the  close  of 
Jeroboam's  reign,  in  the  38th  of  Uzziah — state 
ments  utterly  contradictory  and  irrecoucileable. 

Other  grave  chronological  difficulties  seem  to 
have  their  source  in  the  same  erroneous  calculations 
on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  chronologist.  For  ex 
ample,  one  of  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  tells  us 
that  Menahem  paid  tribute  to  Assyria  in  the  8th 
year  of  Tiglath-Pileser  (Rawl.  Herod,  i.  469),  and 
the  same  inscription  passes  on  directly  to  speak  of 
the  overthrow  of  Rezin,  who  we  know  was  Pekah's 
ally.  Now  this  is  scarcely  compatible  with  the 
supposition  that  the  remainder  of  Menahem 's  reign, 
the  2  years  of  Pekahiah,  and  18  or  19  years  of 
Pekah's  reign  intervened,  as  must  have  been  the 
case  according  to  2  K.  xvi.  1,  xv.  32.  But  if  the 
invasion  of  Judea  was  one  of  the  early  acts  ot 
Pekah's  reign,  and  the  destruction  of  Rezin  fol 
lowed  soon  after,  then  we  should  have  a  veiy 
intelligible  course  of  events  as  follows.  Menahem 
paid  his  last  tribute  to  Assyria  in  the  8th  of 
Tiglath-Pileser,  his  suzerain  (2  K.  xv.  19),  which, 
as  he  reigned  for  some  time  under  Pul,  and  only 
reigned  10  years  in  all,  we  may  assume  to  have 
been  his  own  last  year.  On  the  accession  of  his 
son  Pekahiah,  Pekah,  one  of  his  captains,  rebelled 
against  him,  made  an  alliance  with  Rezin  king  of 
Syria  to  throw  off  the  yoke  of  Assyria,  in  the 
course  of  a  few  months  dethroned  and  killed  Pe 
kahiah,  and  reigned  in  his  stead,  and  rapidly  fol 
lowed  up  his  success  by  a  joint  expedition  against 
Judah,  the  object  of  which  was  to  set  up  a  king 
who  should  strengthen  his  hands  in  his  rebellion 
against  Assyria.  The  king  of  Assyria,  on  learning 
this,  and  receiving  Ahaz's  message  for  help,  imme 
diately  marches  to  Syria,  takes  Damascus,  conquers 
and  kills  Rezin,  invades  Israel,  and  carries  away  a 
large  body  of  captives  (2  K.  xv.  29),  and  ^ver 
Pekah  to  reign  as  tributary  king  over  the  enfeebled 
remnant,  till  a  conspiracy  deprived  him  of  his  life. 
Such  a  course  of  events  would  be  consistent  with 
the  cuneiform  inscription,  and  with  everything  in 
the  Scripture  narrative,  except  the  synchronistic 
arrangement  of  the  reigns.  But  of  course  it  is 
impossible  to  affirm  that  the  above  was  the  true 
state  of  the  case.  Only  at  present  the  text  and 
the  cuneiform  inscription  do  not  agree,  and  few 
people  will  be  satisfied  with  the  explanation  sug 
gested  by  Mr.  Rawlinson,  that  "  the  official  whc 
composed,  or  the  workman  who  engraved,  the  As 
syrian  document,  made  a  mistake  in  the  name," 


h  Lepsitw  suggests  that  Azariah  and  Uzziah  may    beyond  the  confusion  of  the  names  there  is  nothing 


possibly  be  different  and  successive  kings,  the  former 
-jf  whom  reigned  11  years,   and  the  latter  41.     But 


to  support  such  a  notion. 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


in<i  y.ut  Menahem  when  he  should  have  put  Pekah 
(Dampt.  Lect.  pp.  136,  409;  Herod,  i.  468-471). 
Again :  "  Scripture  places  only  8  yeare  between 
Ihe  fall  of  Samaria  and  the  first  invasion  of  Judaea 
by  Sennacherib  "  (»'.  e.  from  the  6th  to  the  14th  of 
Hezekiah).  "  The  inscriptions  (cuneiform)  assign 
ing  the  fall  of  Samaria  to  the  first  year  of  Sargon, 
giving  Sargon  a  reign  of  at  least  15  years,  and 
assigning  the  first  attack  on  Hezekiah  to  Senna 
cherib's  third  year,  put  an  interval  of  at  least  18 
years  between  the  two  events"  (Rawl.  Herod,  i. 
479).  This  interval  is  further  shown  by  reference 
to  the  canon  of  Ptolemy  to  have  amounted  in  fact 
to  22  years.  Again,  Lepsius  (KSnigsb.  p.  95-97) 
shows  with  remarkable  force  of  argument  that  the 
14th  of  Hezekiah  could  not  by  possibility  fall 
earlier  than  B.C.  692,  with  reference  to  Tirhakah's 
accession ;  but  that  the  additional  date  of  the  3rd 
of  Sennacherib  furnished  by  the  cuneiform  inscrip 
tions,  coupled  with  the  fact  given  by  Berosus  that 
the  year  B.C.  693  was  the  year  of  Sennacherib's 
accession,  fixes  the  year  B.C.  691  as  that  of  Senna 
cherib's  invasion,  and  consequently  as  the  14th  of 
Hezekiah.  But  from  B.C.  691  to  B.C.  586,  when 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  an 
interval  of  only  105  years  ;  whereas  the  sum  of  the 
regnal  years  of  Judah  for  the  same  interval  amounts 
to  125  years.'  From  which  calculations  it  neces 
sarily  follows,  both  that  there  is  an  error  in  those 
figures  in  the  book  of  Kings  which  assign  the 
relative  positions  of  the  destruction  of  Samaria  and 
Sennacherib's  invasion,  and  also  in  those  which  mea 
sure  the  distance  between  the  invasion  of  Senna 
cherib  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  should 
however  be  noted  that  there  is  nothing  to  fix  the 
fall  of  Samaria  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  but  the 
statement  of  the  synchronism;  and  2  Chr  xxx.  6, 
18,  &c.,  seems  rather  to  indicate  that  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  had  quite  ceased  in  the  1st  of  Hezekiah. 
Many  other  numbers  have  the  same  stamp  of 
incorrectness.  Rehoboam's  age  is  given  as  41 
at  his  accession,  1  K.  xiv.  21,  and  yet  we  read 
at  2  Chr.  xiii.  7  that  he  was  "  young  and  tender 
hearted  "  when  he  came  to  the  throne.  Moreover, 
if  41  when  he  became  king,  he  must  have  been 
born  before  Solomon  came  to  the  throne,  which 
seems  improbable,  especially  in  connexion  with 
his  Ammonitish  mother.  In  the  apocryphal 
passage  moreover  in  the  Cod.  Vat.  of  the  LXX , 
which  follows  2  K.  xii.  24,  his  age  is  said  to 
have  been  16  at  his  accession,  which  is  much 
more  probable.  According  to  the  statement  in 
2  K.  xv.  33,  compared  with  ver.  2,  Uzziah's 
son  and  heir  Jotham  was  not  bom  till  his  father 
was  42  years  old;  and  according  to  2  K.  xxi.  1, 
compared  with  ver.  19,  Manasseh's  son  and  heir 
Amon  was  not  born  till  his  father  was  in  his  45th 
year.  Still  more  improbable  is  the  statement  in 
2  K.  xviii.  2,  compared  with  xvi.  2,  which  makes 
Hezekiah  to  h^ve  been  born  when  his  father  was 
11  years  old:  a  statement  which  Bochart  has  en 
deavoured  to  defend  with  his  usual  vast  erudition, 
but  with  little  success  {Opera,  i.  921).  But  not 
only  docs  the  incorrectness  of  the  numbers  testify 
against  their  genuineness,  but  in  fome  passages  the 
structure  of  the  sentence  seems  to  betray  the  fact 
of  a  later  insertion  of  the  chronological  element. 
We  have  seen  one  instance  in  1  K.  vi.  1.  In  like 


manner  at  1  K.  xiv.  31,  xv.  1,  2,  we  car.  see  (hat 
at  some  time  or  other  xv.  1  h;is  been  inserted  IIP- 
tween  the  two  other  verset  So  again  ver.  9  has 
been  inserted  between  8  and  10;  and  xv.  24  must 
have  once  stood  next  to  xxii.  42,  as  xxii.  50  did  to 
2  K.  viii.  17,  at  which  time  the  corrupt  ver.  16 
had  no  existence.  Yet  more  manifestly  viii.  24,  26, 
were  once  consecutive  verses,  though  they  are  new 
parted  by  25,  which  is  repeated,  with  a  variation 
in  the  numeral,  at  ix.  29.  So  also  xvi.  1  has  beeu 
interposed  between  sv.  38  and  xvi.  2.  xviii.  2  ii 
consecutive  with  xvi.  20.  But  the  plainest  instamj 
of  all  is  2  K.  xi.  21,  xii.  1  (xii.  1,  seq.,  Heb.), 
where  the  words  "  In  the  seventh  year  of  Jehu, 
Jehoash  began  to  reign,"  could  not  possibly  have 
formed  part  of  the  original  sentence,  which  may  be 
seen  in  its  integrity  2  Chr.  xxiv.  1.  The  disturb 
ance  caused  in  2  K.  xii.  by  the  intrusion  of  this 
clause  is  somewhat  disguised  in  the  LXX.  and  the 
A.  V.  by  the  division  of  Heb.  xii.  1  into  two  verses, 
and  separate  chapters,  but  is  still  palpable.  A 
similar  instance  is  pointed  out  by  Movers  in  2  Sam. 
v.,  where  ver.  3  and  6  are  parted  by  the  introduc 
tion  of  ver.  4,  5  (p.  190).  But  the  difficulty  re 
mains  of  deciding  in  which  of  the  above  cases  the 
insertion  was  by  the  hand  of  the  original  compiler, 
and  in  which  by  a  later  chronologist. 

Now  when  to  all  this  we  add  that  the  pages  or 
Josephus  are  full,  in  like  manner,  of  a  multitude 
of  inconsistent  chronological  schemes,  which  prevent 
his  being  of  any  use,  in  spite  of  Hales's  praises,  in 
clearing  up  chronological  difficulties,  the  propei 
inference  seems  to  be,  that  no  authoritative,  correct, 
systematic  chronology  was  originally  contained  in 
the  books  of  Kings,  and  that  the  attempt  to  supply 
such  afterwards  led  to  the  introduction  of  many 
erroneous  dates,  and  probably  to  the  corruption  ot 
some  true  ones  which  were  originally  there.  Cer 
tainly  the  present  text  contains  what  are  either 
conflicting  calculations  of  antagonistic  chronologists, 
or  errors  of  careless  copyists,  which  no  learning  or 
ingenuity  has  ever  been  able  to  reduce  to  the  con 
sistency  of  truth. 

II.  The  peculiarities  of  diction  in  them,  and  other 
features  in  their  literary  history,  may  be  briefly  dis 
posed  of.  The  words  noticed  by  De  Wette,  §185,  as 
indicating  their  modern  date,  are  the  following : — 
^X  for  flX,  1  K.  xiv.  2.  (But  this  form  is  also 
found  in  Judg.  xvii.  2,  Jer.  iv.  30,  Ez.  xxxvi.  13,  and 
not  once  in  the  later  books.)  IH^K  for  IfiX,  2  K.  i. 
15.  (But  this  form  of  flK  is  found  in  Lev.  xv.  18, 
24;  Josh.  xiv.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24  ;  Is.  lix.  21 ; 
Jer.  x.  5,  xii.  1,  xix.  10,  xx.  11,  xxiii.  9,  xxxv.  2; 
Ez.  xiv.  4,  xxvii.  26.)  DB»  for  DB»,  1  K.  ix.  8. 
(But  Jer.  xix.  8,  xlix.  17,  are  identical  in  phrase 
and  orthography.)  fin  for  D*V>2K-xi- 13-  (But 
everywhere  else  in  Kings,  e.  g.  2  K.  xi.  6,  &c.,  D*^"^ 
which  is  also  universal  in  Chronicles,  an  avowedly 
later  book;  and  here,  as  in  fOhX,  1  K.  xi.  33,  there 
is  every  appearance  of  the  }  being  a  clerical  error 
for  the  copulative  1 ;  see  Thenius,  /.  c.)  flfa^p, 
1  K.  xx.  14.  (But  this  word  occurs  Lam.  i.  1,  and 
there  is  every  appearance  of  its  being  a  technical 
word  in  1  K.  xx.  14,  and  therefore  as  old  as  the 
reign  of  Ahab.)  ib  for  lOPI,  1  K.  iv.  22.  (Buffij 


1  Lepsius  proposes  reducing  the  reign  of  Manasseh 
to  35  years.  He  observes  with  truth  the  improba 
bility  of  Amon  having  been  born  in  the  45th  year 


of  his  father's  life.  Mr.  Bosauquet  would  lower  th« 
date  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  to  the  year  B.O. 
555. 


26  KINGS,  FIRST  AND 

is  mod  by  Ez.  xiv.  14,  and  homer  seems  to  have  been 
then  already  obsolete.)  DnH,  1  K.  xxi.  8,  11. 
^Occurs  in  Is.  and  Jer.)  31,  2  K.  xxv.  8.  (But 
as  the  term  evidently  came  in  with  the  Chaldees, 
as  seen  in  Rab-shakeh,  Rab-saris,  Kab-mag,  its  ap 
plication  to  the  Chaldee  general  is  no  evidence  of  a 
time  later  than  the  person  to  whom  the  title  is 
given.)  D^tP,  1  X.  vm.  61,  IK.  (But  there  is 
Mt  ft  shadow  of  proof  that  this  expression  belongs 
to  late  Hebr.  It  is  found,  among  other  places,  in 
Is.  xxxviii.  3  ;  a  passage  against  the  authenticity  of 
which  there  is  also  not  a  shadow  of  proof,  except 
upon  the  presumption  that  prophetic  intimations 
and  supernatural  interventions  on  the  part  of  God 
are  impossible.)  ?*3B>n,  2  K.  xviii.  7.  (On  what 
grounds  this  word  is  adduced  it  is  impossible  to 
guess,  since  it  occurs  in  this  sense  in  Josh.,  Is., 
Sam.,  and  Jer. :  vid.  Gesen.)  jil"lt32,  2  K.  xviii. 
19.  (Is.  xxxvi.  4,  Ecoles.  ix.  4.)  'fl^H*,  2  K. 
xviii.  26.  (But  why  should  not  a  Jew,  in  Hezekiah's 
reign,  as  well  as  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  have 
called  his  mother-tongue  "  the  Jews'  language,"  in 
opposition  to  the  Aramean  ?  There  was  nothing  in 
the  Babylonish  captivity  to  give  it  the  name,  if 
it  had  it  not  before ;  nor  is  there  a  single  earlier 
instance  —  Is.  xix.  18  might  have  furnished  one 
— of  any  name  given  to  the  language  spoken  by 
all  the  Israelites,  and  which  in  later  times  was 
called  Hebrew :  'Efipaiorrl,  Prolog.  Ecclus. ;  Luke 
xxiii.  38  ;  John  v.  2,  &c.)k  J1K  BBIptt  TjH,  2  K. 
xxv.  6.  (Frequent  in  Jer.  iv.  12,  xxxix.  5,  &c.) 
Theod.  Parker  adds  HHB  (see,  too,  Thenius,  Einl. 
§6),  1  K.  x.  15,  xx.  T24 ;  2  K.  xviii.  24,  on  the 
presumption  probably  of  its  being  of  Persian  de 
rivation  ;  but  the  etymology  and  origin  of  the 
word  are  quite  uncertain,  and  it  is  repeatedly  used 
in  Jer.  li.,  as  well  as  Is.  xxxvi.  9.  With  better 
reason  might  XT3  have  been  adduced,  1  K.  xii. 
33.  The  expression  "lilS!!  "QV,  in  1  K.  iv.  24  is 

also  a  difficult  one  to  form  an  impartial  opinion 
about.  It  is  doubtful,  as  De  Wette  admits,  whether 
the  phrase  necessarily  implies  its  being  used  by  one 
to  the  east  of  the  Euphrates,  because  the  use  varies 
in  Num.  xxxii.  19,  xxxv.  14;  Josh,  i,  14  seq.,  v.  1, 
xii.  1,  7,  xxii.  7  ;  1  Chr.  xxvi.  30 ;  Deut.  i.  1,  5, 
&c.  It  is  also  conceivable  that  the  phrase  might  be 
used  as  a  mere  geographical  designation  by  those  who 
belonged  to  one  of  "  the  provinces  beyond  the  river" 
subject  to  Babylon :  and  at  the  time  of  the  destruc 
tion  of  Jerusalem,  Judaea  had  been  such  a  province 
for  at  least  23  years,  and  probably  longer.  We  may 
safely  affirm  therefore,  that  on  the  whole  the  pecu 
liarities  of  diction  in  these  books  do  not  indicate  a 
time  after  the  captivity,  or  towards  the  close  of  it, 
tut  on  the  contrary  point  pretty  distinctly  to  the 
age  of  Jeremiah.  And  it  may  be  added,  that  the 
marked  and  systematic  differences  between  the  lan 
guage  of  Chronicles  and  that  of  Kings,  taken  with  the 
fact  that  all  attempts  to  prove  the  Chronicles  later 
than  Ezra  have  utterly  failed,  lead  to  the  same  conclu 
sion.  (See  many  examples  in  Movers,  p.  200,  seq.) 
Other  peculiar  or  rare  expressions  in  these  books  are 
the  proverbial  ones :  Tp2  pRK'D,  found  only  in 
them  and  in  1  Sam.  xxv.  22,  34,  "  slept  with  his 
fathers,"  "  him  that  dieth  in  the  city,  the  dogs 


k  Pee  Kodigcr's  Qeten.  Htb.  Ovamm.  Eng.  tr.  p.  6  ; 
Keil,  Chron.  p.  40. 


SECOND  BOOKS  OF 

shall  eat,"  &c. ;  "fo  nbj£  H3,  1  K.  ii.  23,  Ac.  ; 
also  i"P"lj5,  1  K.  i.  41,  45;  elsewhere  only  in  poetry, 
and  in  the  composition  of  proper  names,  except 
Deut  iL  36.  jY?nT,  i.  9.  Dn2T2,  "fowl,"  iv.  2f» 
WIN, "  stalls,"  V.  6 ;  2  Chr.  ix.  25.  DD  n^H,  T. 
13,  ix.  15, 21.  VDO,  "  a  stone-quarry,"  (Gesen.)  vi. 

7.  <>to(?,vi.n.  jnr6, 19.  D^i?s  and  niy^s, 

"  wild  cucumbers,"  vi.  18,  vii.  24,  2  K.  iv.  39. 
Hipp,  x.  28 ;  the  names  of  the  months  D^riN, 
viii'.  2,  IT,  ^13,  vi.  37,  38.  tH2,  "  to  invent," 
xii.  33,  Neh.  vi.  8,  in  both  cases  joined  with 
nV^D,  "an  idol,"  xv.  13.  1J72  and 
followed  by  ^PIK,  "  to  destroy,"  xiv.  10,  xvi.  3, 
xxi.  21.  D*p3"i,  "joints  of  the  armour,"  xxii.  34. 
rE>,  "  a  pursuit,"  xviii.  27.  TH3,  "  to  bend  one- 
self,"  xviii.  42,  2  K.  iv.  34,  35.  T  D3E>,  "  to  gird 
up,"  xviii.  46.  1QN,  "  a  head-band,"  xx.  38,  42. 
pBb,  "  to  suffice,"  xx.  10.  B7PI,  incert.  signif. 
xx.33.  na-lbp  Defy  "  to  reign,"  xxi.  7.  HTT^V, 
"  a  dish,"  2  K.'ii.  M.  D^>3,  "  to  fold  up,"  ib.  8. 
T£3,  "  a  herdsman,"  iii.  4,  Am.  i.  1.  "ij-IDK,  "  an 
oil-cup,"  iv.  2.  7K  Tin,  "  to  have  a  care  for," 
13  ;  TIT,  "  to  sneeze,"  35  ;  f6py,  "  a  bag,"  42. 
OHPl,  "  a  money-bag,"  v.  23.  iTjnn,  "  an  en 
camping  "  (?)  vi.  8  ;  rri3,  "  a  feast,"  23  ;  Jiri3, 
"  descending,"  9  ;  2£,  "  a  cab,"  25  ;  D'JV  *nn, 
"  dove's  dung,"  ib.  TjpO,  perhaps  "  a  fly-net," 
viii.  15.  D13  (in  sense  of  "  self,"  as  in  Chald.  and 
Samar.),  ix.  13.  1-12  V,  "  a  heap,"  x.  8 ;  iTTiri^D, 
"  a  vestry,"  22  ;  flXITO,  "a  draught-house,"  27. 
1T3,  "  Cherethites,"  xi.  4,  19,  and  2  Sam.  xx.  23, 
cethib.  riDD,  "  a  keeping  off,"  xi.  6.  "13D,  "  an 
acquaintance,"  xii.  6.  The  form  "iV,  from  iTVt 
"  to  shoot,"  xiii.  17.  niTtyFin  \32,  "  hostages/' 
xiv.  14,  2  Chr.  xxv.  24.  iWBnn'  IV2,  "  sick- 
house,"  xv.  5,  2  Chr.  xxvi.  21.  ?3P,  "before," 

TV 

xv.  10.  pEW-ll,  "  Damascus,"  xvi.  10  (perhaje 
only  a  false  reading).  nBX'lO,  "  a  pavement." 
xvi.  17.  1JD-1D,  or  ^JD'D,  "  a  covered  way,*  xvi. 
18.  NBn  in  Pih.  "  to  do  secretly,"  xvii.  9. 
HTK'N,  with  i,  16,  only  besides  Deut.  vii.  5,  Mic.  v. 

i4T.  trn,  t.  q.  nnj,  xvu.  21  (Cethib).  nv'ipb', 

"  Samaritans,"  29.  JPlK'rU,  "  Nehustan,"  xviii.  4. 
njO'K,  "  a  pillar,"  16.'  ^TOIQ  ilby,  "  to  make 
peace,"  31,  Is.  xxxvi.  16.  B^flD,  "  that  which 
grows  up  the  third  year,"  xix.  29,  Is.  xxxvii.  30. 
T133  JV3,  "  treasure-house,"  xx.  13,  Is.  xxxix.  2. 
K'p,  part  of  Jerusalem  so  called,  xxi.  14,  Zeph. 
i.  10,  Neh.  xi.  9.  ni^O,  "  signs  of  the  Zodiac," 
xxiii.  i  TT1B,  "a  suburb,"  xxiii.  11.  D'23, 
"  ploughmen,"  xxv.  12,  cethib.  NSC',  for  HSC?. 
"  to  change,"  xxv.  9.  To  which  may  be  added 
the  architectural  terms  iu  1  K.  vi..  vii.,  and 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


27 


the  names  of  ftmwu  idols  in  2  K.  xvii.  The 
general  chiracter  of"  the  language  is,  most  dis 
tinctly,  that  of  the  time  Itetbre  the  Babylonish 
captivity.  But  it  is  worth  cfldskleration  whether 
some  traces  of  dialectic  varieties  hi  Jiulah  and 
Israel,  and  of  an  earlier  admixture  of  Syri*a»s  i« 
the  language  of  Israel,  may  not  be  discovered  in 
those  portions  of  these  books  which  refer  to  the 
kingdom  of  Israel.  As  regards  the  text,  it  's  far 
from  being  perfect.  Besides  the  errors  in  numerals, 
some  of  which  are  probably  to  be  traced  to  this 
source,  such  passages  as  1  K.  xv.  6  ;  v.  10,  compared 
with  v.  2  ;  2  K.  xv.  30,  viii.  16,  xvii.  34,  are  mani 
fest  coiTuptions  of  transcribers.  In  some  instances 
the  parallel  passage  in  Chronicles  corrects  the  error, 
as  1  K.  iv.  26  is  corrected  by  2  Chr.  ix.  25  ;  2  K. 
xiv.  21,  &c.,  by  2  Chr.  xxvi.  1,  &c.  So  the  pro 
bable  misplacement  of  the  section  2  K.  xxiii.  4-20 
is  corrected  by  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  3-7.  The  substitution 
of  Azariah  for  Uzziah  in  2  K.  xiv.  21,  and  through 
out  2  K.  xv.  1-30,  except  ver.  1  3,  followed  by  the  use 
of  the  right  name,  Uzziah,  in  vers.  30,  32,  34,  is  a 
very  curious  circumstance.  In  Isaiah,  in  Zechariah 
(xiv.  5),  and  in  the  Chronicles  (except  1  Chr.  iii. 
12),  it  is  uniformly  Uzziah.  Perhaps  no  other  cause 
is  to  b*  sought  than  the  close  resemblance  between 
n"TV  and  nnty,  and  the  fact  that  the  latter 
name,  Azariah,  might  suggest  itself  more  readily 
to  a  Levitical  scribe.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  Uzziah  was  the  king's  true  name,  Azariah 
that  of  the  high-priest.  (But  see  Thenius  on  1  K. 
xiv.  21.) 

In  connexion  with  these  literary  peculiarities  may 
be  mentioned  also  some  remarkable  variations  in  the 
version  of  the  LXX.  These  consist  of  transpositions, 
omissions,  and  some  considerable  additions,  of  all 
which  Thenius  gives  some  useful  notices  in  his 
Introduction  to  the  book  of  Kings. 

The  most  important  transpositions  are  the  history 
of  Shimei's  death,  1  K.  ii.  36-46,  which  in  the  LXX. 
(Cod.  Vat.)  comes  after  iii.  1,  and  divers  scraps  from 
chs.  iv.,  Y.,  and  ix.,  accompanied  by  one  or  two 
remarks  of  the  translators. 

The  sections  1  K.  iv.  20-25,  2-6,  26,  21,  1,  are 
strung  together  and  precede  1  K.  iii.  2-28,  but  are 
many  of  them  repeated  again  in  their  proper  places. 

The  sections  1  K.  iii.  1,  ix.  16,17,  are  strung 
together,  and  placed  between  iv.  34  and  v.  1. 

The  section  1  K.  vii.  1-12  is  placed  after  vii.  51. 

Section  viii.  12,  13,  is  placed  after  53. 

Section  ix.  15-22  is  placed  after  x.  22. 

Section  xi.  43,  xii.  1,  2,  3,  is  much  transposed 
and  confused  in  LXX.  xi.  43,  44,  xii.  1-3. 

Section  xiv.  1-21  is  placed  in  the  midst  of  the 
long  addition  to  Chr.  xii.  mentioned  below. 

Section  xxii.  42*50  is  placed  after  xvi.  28. 
Chaps,  xx.  and  xxi.  are  transposed. 

Section  2  K.  iii.  1-3  is  placed  after  2  K.  i.  18. 

The  omissions  are  few. 

Section  1  K.  vi.  11-14  is  entirely  omitted,  and 
37,  38,  are  only  slightly  alluded  to  at  the  opening 
of  ch.  iii.  The  erroneous  clause  1  K.  xv.  6  is  omitted  ; 
and  so  are  the  dates  of  Asa's  reign  in  xvi.  8  and  15  ; 
and  there  are  a  few  verbal  omissions  of  no  con- 
yequence. 

The  chief  interest  lies  in  the  additions,  of  which 
the  principal  are  the  following.  The  supposed 
mention  of  a  fountaiu  as  among  Solomon's  works  in 
the  Temple  in  the  passage  after  1  K.  ii.  35  ;  of  a 
paved  causeway  on  Lebanon,  iii.  46  ;  of  Solomon 
ointing  to  the  sun  at  the  dedication  of  the  Temple, 
efore  he  uttered  fie  prayer,  "The  Lord  said  he 


po 
be 


would  dwell  in  the  thick  darkness,"  &c.,  viii.  12, 
13  (after,  53  LXX.),  with  a  reference  to  tli€ 
fil8\tov  TTJS  <fSijs,  a  passage  on  which  Thenius 
relies  as  proving  that  the  Alexandrian  had  access 
to  original  documents  now  lost  ;  the  information 
that  "  Joram  his  brother  "  perished  with  Tibni, 
xri.  22  ;  an  additional  date  "  in  the  24th  year 
of  Jeroboam,"  xv.  8  ;  numerous  verbal  additions. 
as  xi.  2D,  !*$.  1,  &c.  ;  and  lastly,  the  long 
passage  concerning  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat. 
inserted  between  xii.  24  and  ^S.  "Owe  «re  also 
many  glosses  of  the  translator,  explanatory,  or 
necessary  in  consequence  of  transpositions,  as  c.  g. 
1  K.  ii.  35,  viii.  1,  xi.  43,  xvii.  20,  xix.  2,  &c.  6l 
the  above,  from  the  recapitulatory  character  of  the 
passage  after  1  K.  ii.  35,  containing  in  brief  the  sum 
of  the  things  detailed  in  ch.  vii.  21-23,  it  seems  far 
more  probable  that  KPHNHN  TH2  AYAHS  is  only 
a  corruption  of  KP1SON  TOY  AIAAM,  there  men 
tioned.  The  obscure  passage  about  Lebanon  offer 
iii.  46,  seems  no  less  certainly  to  represent  what  in 
the  Heb.  is  ix.  18,  19,  as  appears  by  the  triple  con 
currence  of  Tadmor,  Lebanon,  and  Swaff-rfii^a.-ra, 


representing  IfDK'foD.    The  strange  mention  of  the 

sun  seems  to  be  introduced  by  the  translator  to 
give  significance  to  Solomon's  mention  of  the  House 
which  he  had  built  for  God,  who  had  said  He  would 
dwell  in  the  thick  darkness  ;  not  therefore  under 
the  unveiled  light  of  the  sun  ;  and  the  reference  to 
"  the  book  of  song"  can  surely  mean  nothing  else 
than  to  point  out  that  the  passage  to  which  Solo 
mon  referred  was  Ps.  xcvii.  2.  Of  the  other  addi 
tions  the  mention  of  Tibni's  brother  Joram  is  the 
one  which  has  most  the  semblance  of  an  historical 
fact,  or  makes  the  existence  of  any  other  source  of 
history  probable.  See  too  1  K.  xx.  19,  2  K.  xv.  25 
There  remains  only  the  long  passage  about  Jero 
boam.  That  this  account  is  only  an  apocrypha) 
version  made  up  of  the  existing  materials  in  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures,  after  the  manner  of  1  Esdras, 
Bel  and  the  Dragon,  the  apocryphal  Esther,  the 
Targums,  &c.,  may  be  inferred  on  the  following 
grounds.  The  frame-work  of  the  story  is  given 
in  the  very  words  of  the  Hebrew  narrative,  and 
that  very  copiously,  and  the  new  matter  is  only 
worked  in  here  and  there.  Demonstrably  therefore 
the  Hebrew  account  existed  when  the  Greek  one 
was  framed,  and  was  the  original  one.  The  prin 
cipal  new  facts  introduced,  the  marriage  of  Jero 
boam  to  the  sister  of  Shishak's  wife,  and  his  request 
to  be  permitted  to  return,  is  a  manifest  imitation 
of  the  story  of  Hadad.  The  misplacement  of  the 
story  of  Abijah's  sickness,  and  the  visit  of  Jero 
boam's  wife  to  Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  makes  the 
whole  history  out  of  keeping  —  the  disguise  of  the 
queen,  the  rebuke  of  Jeroboam's  idolatry  (which  is 
accordingly  left  out  from  Ahijah's  prophecy,  as  is 
the  mention  at  v.  2  of  his  having  told  Jeroboam  he 
should  be  king),  and  the  king's  anxiety  about  the 
recovery  of  his  son  and  herr.  The  embellishments 
of  the  story,  Jeroboam's  chariots,  the  amplification 
of  Ahijah's  address  to  Ano,  the  request  asked  of 
Pharaoh,  the  new  garment  not  washed  in  water, 
are  precisely  such  as  an  embroiderer  would  add,  as 
we  may  see  by  the  apocryphal  books  above  cited. 
Then  the  fusing  down  the  three  Hebrew  names 

,  and  fi  -Hty  into  one  2opipa,  thug 


giving  the  same  name  to  the  mother  of  Jeroboam, 
and  to  the  city  where  she  dwelt,  shows  how  com 
paratively  modern  the  story  is,  and  how  completely 
of  Greek  growth.  A  yet  plainer  indication  is  tin 


28 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OP 


confounding  Shemaiah  of  1  K.  xii.  22,  with  She- 
maiah  the  Nehelamite  of  Jer.  xxix.  24,  31,  and 
putting  Ahijah's  prophecy  into  his  mcuth.  For 
beyond  all  question  'Ei/Xa/K/,  1  K.  xii.,  is  only  an 
other  form  of  A.l\<tfjiirijs  (Jer.  x*xvi.  24,  LXX.). 
Then  again  the  story  is  self-contradictory.  For  if 
Jeroboam's  child  Abijam  was  not  born  till  a  year 
or  so  after  Solomon's  death,  how  could  "  any  good 
thing  toward  the  Lord  God  of  Israel "  have  been 
found  in  him  before  Jeroboam  became  king  ?  The 
one  thing  in  the  story  that  is  more  like  truth  than 
the  Hebrew  narrative  is  the  age  given  to  Kehoboam, 
16  years,  which  may  have  been  preserved  in  the 
MS.  which  the  writer  of  this  romance  had  before 
him.  The  calling  Jeroboam's  mother  yvi^j  ir6pvr), 
instead  of  ywtf  x^Pa>  was  probably  accidental. 

On  the  whole  then  it  appears  that  the  great  va 
riations  in  the  LXX.  contribute  little  or  nothing  to 
the  elucidation  of  the  history  contained  in  these 
books,  nor  much  even  to  the  text.  The  Hebrew 
text  and  arrangement  is  not  in  the  least  shaken  in 
its  main  points,  nor  is  there  the  slightest  cloud  cast 
on  the  accuracy  of  the  history,  or  the  truthfulness 
of  the  prophecies  contained  in  it.  But  these  varia 
tions  illustrate  a  characteristic  tendency  of  the 
Jewish  mind  to  make  interesting  portions  of  the 
Scriptures  the  groundwork  of  separate  religious 
tales,  which  they  altered  or  added  to  according  to 
their  fancy,  without  any  regard  to  history  or  chro 
nology,  and  in  which  they  exercised  a  peculiar  kind 
of  ingenuity  in  working  up  the  Scripture  materials, 
or  in  inventing  circumstances  calculated  as  they 
thought  to  make  the  main  history  more  probable. 
The  story  of  Zerubbabel's  answer  in  1  Esdr.  about 
truth,  to  prepare  the  way  for  his  mission  by  Darius ; 
of  the  discovery  of  the  imposture  of  Bel's  priests  by 
Daniel,  in  Bel  and  the  Dragon  ;  of  Mordecai's  dream 
in  the  Apocr.  Esther,  and  the  paragraph  in  the 
Talmud  inserted  to  connect  1  K.  xvi.  34,  with 
xvii.  1  (Smith's  Sacr.  Ann.,  vol.  ii.  p.  421),  are 
instances  of  this.  And  the  reign  of  Solomon,' 
and  the  remarkable  rise  of  Jeroboam  were  not  un 
likely  to  exercise  this  propensity  of  the  Hellenistic 
Jews.  It  is  to  the  existence  of  such  works  that 
the  variations  iu  the  LXX.  account  of  Solomon  and 
Jeroboam  may  most  probably  be  attributed. 

Another  feature  in  the  literary  condition  of  our 
books  must  just  be  noticed,  viz.  that  the  compiler, 
in  arranging  his  materials,  and  adopting  the  very 
words  of  the  documents  used  by  him,  has  not  always 
been  careful  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  contradic 
tion.  Thus  the  mention  of  the  staves  of  the  ark 
remaining  in  their  place  "  unto  this  day,"  1  K. 
viii.  8,  does  not  accord  with  the  account  of  the  de 
struction  of  the  Temple  2  K.  xxv.  9.  The  mention 
of  Elijah  as  the  only  prophet  of  the  Lord  left,  1  K. 
iviii.  22,  xix.  10,  has  an  appearance  of  disagree 
ment  with  xx.  13,  28,  35,  &c.,  though  xviii.  4, 
xix.  18,  supply,  it  is  true,  a  ready  answer.  In 
1  K.  xxi.  13,  'only  Naboth  is  mentioned,  while  in 


2  K.  ix.  26,  his  SODS  are  added.  The  prediction 
in  1  K.  xix.  15-17  has  no  perfect  fulfilment  in  the 
following  chapters.  1  K.  xxii.  38,  does  not  seem 
to  be  a  fulfilment  of  xxi.  19."  The  declaration  in 
1  K.  ix.  22  does  not  seem  in  harmony  with  xi.  28. 
Theie  are  also  some  singular  repetitions,  as  1  K. 
riv.  21  compared  with  31 ;  2  K.  ix.  29  with  viii. 
25  ;  xiv.  15,  16  with  xiii.  12,  13.  But  it  if 
enough  just  to  have  pointed  these  out,  as  no  real 
difficulty  can  be  found  in  them. 

III.  As  regards  the  authorship  of  tncse  books, 
but  little  difficulty  presents  itself.  The  Jewish 
tradition  which  ascribes  them  to  Jeremiah,  is  borne 
out  by  the  strongest  internal  evidence,  in  addition 
to  that  of  the  language.  The  last  chapter,  espe 
cially  as  compared  with  the  last  chapter  of  the 
Chronicles,  bears  distinct  traces  of  having  been 
written  by  one  who  did  not  go  into  captivity,  but 
remained  in  Judea,  after  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple.  This  suits  Jeremiah.0  The  events  singled 
out  for  mention  in  the  concise  narrative,  are  pre 
cisely  those  of  which  he  had  personal  knowledge, 
and  in  which  he  took  special  interest.  The  famine 
in  2  K.  xxv.  3  was  one  which  had  nearly  cost  Jere 
miah  his  life  (Jer.  xxxviii.  9).  The  capture  of  the 
city,  the  flight  and  capture  of  Zedekiah,  the  judg 
ment  and  punishment  of  Zedekiah  and  his  sons  at 
Riblah,  are  related  in  2  K.  xxv.  1-7,  in  almost  the 
identical  words  which  we  read  in  Jer.  xxxix.  1-7. 
So  are  the  breaking  down  and  burning  of  the  Temple, 
the  king's  palace,  and  the  houses  of  the  great  men, 
the  deportation  to  Babylon  of  the  fugitives  and  the 
surviving  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  and  Judea.  The 
intimate  knowledge  of  what  Nebuzar-adan  did,  both 
in  respect  to  those  selected  for  capital  punishment, 
and  those  carried  away  captive,  and  those  poor 
whom  he  left  in  the  land,  displayed  by  the  writer 
of  2  K.  xxv.  11,  12,  18-21,  is  fully  explained  by 
Jer.  xxxix.  10-14,  xl.  1-5,  where  we  read  that  Je 
remiah  was  actually  one  of  the  captives  who  fol 
lowed  Nebuzar-adan  as  far  as  Ramah,  and  was  very 
kindly  treated  by  him.  The  careful  enumeration 
of  the  pillars  and  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple 
which  were  plundered  by  the  Chaldaeans,  tallies 
exactly  with  the  prediction  of  Jeremiah  concerning 
them,  xxvii.  19-22.  The  paragraph  concerning  the 
appointment  of  Gedaliah  as  governor  of  the  rem 
nant,  and  his  murder  by  Ishmael,  and  the  flight  of 
the  Jews  into  Egypt,  is  merely  an  abridged  account 
of  what  Jeremiah  tells  us  more  fully,  xl.-xliii.  7, 
and  are  events  in  which  he  was  personally  deeply 
concerned.  The  writer  in  Kings  has  nothing  more 
to  tell  us  concerning  the  Jews  or  Chaldees  in  the 
land  of  Judah,  which  exactly  agrees  with  the  hypo 
thesis  that  he  is  Jeremiah,  who  we  know  was  carried 
down  to  Egypt  with  the  fugitives.  In  fact,  the 
date  of  the  writing  and  the  position  of  the  writer, 
seem  as  clearly  marked  by  the  termination  of  the 
narrative  at  v.  26,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles.P  It  may  be  added,  though  the  argument 


•  A  later  tale  of  Solomon's  wUdom,  in  imitation  of 
ihe  judgment  of  the  two  women,  told  in  the  Talmud, 
may  be  seen  in  Curiosities  of  Literature,  i.  226.    The 
Talmud  contains  many  more. 

•  For  a  discussion  of  this  difficulty  see  [NABOTH] 
[JEZBEEL,].     The  simplest  explanation  is  that  Naboth 
was  stoned  at  Samaria,  since  we  find  the  elders  of 
Jezreel  at  Samaria,  2  K.  x.  1.     Thus  both  the  spot 
where  Naboth's  blood  flowed,  and  his  vineyard  at 
Jezreel,  were  the  scene  of  righteous  retribution. 

0  De  Wette   cites   from    Havernick    and   Mover*, 
I  K.  ix   8,  9,  comp.  witb  'er.  xxii.  8;  2  K.  xvii.  13, 


14,  comp.  with  Jer.  vii.  13,  24 ;  2  K.  xxi.  12,  comp. 
with  Jer.  xix.  3 ;  and  the  identity  of  Jer.  Hi.  -with 
2  K.  xxiv.  18,  seq.  xxv.,  as  the  strongest  passages 
in  favour  of  Jeremiah's  authorship,  which,  however, 
he  repudiates,  on  the  ground  that  2  K.  xxv.  27-30 
could  not  have  been  written  by  him.  A  weaker  ground 
can  scarcely  be  imagined.  Jer.  xv.  1  may  also  be  cited 
as  connecting  the  compilation  of  the  books  of  Samuel 
with  Jeremiah.  Compare  further  1  K.  viii.  51  with 
Jer.  xi.  4. 

t  The  four  last  verses,  relative  to  Jehoiachin,  arc 
equally  a  supplement  whether  added  by  the  author  or 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOK  01? 


29 


re  of  less  weight,  that  the  ai.nexation  of  this  chapter 
to  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  so  as  to  form  Jer.  lii. 
(with  the  additional  clause  contained  28-30)  is  an 
evidence  of  a  very  ancient,  if  not  a  contemporary 
lolief,  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  it.  Again, 
the  special  mention  of  Seraiah  the  high-priest,  and 
Zephar.iah  the  second  priest,  as  slain  by  Nebuzar- 
adan  (v.  18),  together  with  three  other  priests,q  is 
very  significant  when  taken  in  connexion  with  Jer. 
xxi.  1,  xxix.  25-29,  passages  which  show  that  Ze- 
phaniah  belonged  to  the  faction  which  opposed  the 
prophet,  a  faction  which  was  headed  by  priests  and 
false  prophets  (Jer.  xxvi.  7,  8,  11,  16).  Going 
back  to  the  xxivth  chapter,  we  find  in  ver.  14  an 
enumeration  of  the  captives  taken  with  Jehoiachin 
identical  with  that  in  Jer.  xxiv.  1;  in  ver.  13,  a 
reference  to  the  vessels  of  the  Temple  precisely 
similar  to  that  in  Jer.  xxvii.  18-20,  xxviii.  3',  b', 
and  in  ver.  3,  4,  a  reference  to  the  idolatries  and 
bloodshed  of  Manasseh  very  similar  to  those  in  Jer. 
ii.  34,  xix.  4-8,  &c.,  a  reference  which  also  con 
nects  ch.  xxiv.  with  xxi.  6,  13-16.  In  ver.  2  the 
enumeration  of  the  hostile  nations,  and  the  re 
ference  to  the  prophets  of  God,  point  directly 
to  Jer.  xxv.  9,  20,  21,  and  the  reference  to 
Pharaoh  Nocho  in  ver.  7  points  to  ver.  19,  and  to 
xlvi.  1-12.  Brief  as  the  narrative  is,  it  brings 
out  all  the  chief  points  in  the  political  events  of 
the  time  which  we  know  were  much  in  Jeremiah's 
mind ;  and  yet,  which  is  exceedingly  remarkable, 
Jeremiah  is  never  once  named  (as  he  is  in  2  Chr. 
xxxvi.  12,  21),  although  the  manner  of  the  writer 
is  frequently  to  connect  the  sufferings  of  Judah 
with  their  sins  and  their  neglect  of  the  Word  of 
God,  2  K.  xvii.  13,  seq.,  xxiv.  2,  3,  &c.  And  this 
leads  to  another  striking  coincidence  between  that 
portion  of  the  history  which  belongs  to  Jeremiah's 
times,  and  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  himself.  De 
Wette  speaks  of  the  superficial  character  of  the 
history  of  Jeremiah's  times  as  hostile  to  the  theory 
ot  Jeremiah's  authorship.  Now,  considering  the 
nature  of  these  annals,  and  their  conciseness,  this 
criticism  seems  very  unfounded  as  regards  the  reigns 
of  Josiah,  Jehoahaz,  Jehoiachin,  and  Zedekiah.  It 
must,  however,  be  acknowledged  that  as  regards 
Jehoiakim's  reign,  and  especially  the  latter  part  of 
it,  and  the  way  in  which  he  came  by  his  death,  the 
narrative  is  much  more  meagre  than  one  would 
have  expected  from  a  contemporary  writer,  living 
on  the  spot.  But  exactly  the  same  paucity  of  in 
fo  rmation  is  found  in  those  otherwise  copious  notices 
of  contemporary  events  with  which  Jeremiah's  pro 
phecies  are  interspersed.  Let  any  one  open,  e.  g. 
Townshend's  "  Arrangement"  or  Geneste's  "  Pa 
rallel  Histories"  and  he  will  see  at  a  glance  how 
remarkably  little  light  Jeremiah's  narrative  or  pro 
phecies  throw  upon  the  latter  part  of  Jehoiakim's 


reign.  The  cause  of  this  silence  may  le  difficult 
to  assign,  but  whatever  it  was,  whether  absence 
from  Jerusalem,  possibly  on  the  mission  described, 
Jer.  xiii.,r  or  imprisonment,  or  any  other  impedi 
ment,  it  operated  equally  on  Jeremiah  and  on  thf 
writer  of  2  K.  xxiv.  When  it  is  borne  in  /lind  that 
the  writer  of  2  K.  was  a  contemporary  writer,  and, 
if  not  Jeremiah,  must  have  had  independent  means 
of  information,  this  coincidence  will  have  grcrt 
weight. 

Going  back  to  the  reign  of  Josiah,  in  the  xxiii. 
and  xxii.  chapters,  the  connexion  of  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  with  Manasseh's  transgressions,  and 
the  comparison  of  it  to  the  destruction  of  Samaria, 
ver.  26,  27,  lead  us  back  to  xxi.  10-13,  and  that 
passage  leads  us  to  Jer.  vii.  15,  xv.  4,  xix.  3, 
4,  &c.  The  particular  account  of  Josiah'b  pass- 
over,  and  his  other  good  works,  the  reference  in 
ver.  24,  25  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  finding  of 
the  Book  by  Hilkiah  the  priest,  with  the  fullei 
account  of  that  discovery  in  ch.  xxii.,  exactly  suit 
Jeremiah,  who  began  his  prophetic  office  in  the 
1 3th  of  Josiah ;  whose  xith  chap,  refers  repeatedly 
to  the  book  thus  found ;  and  who  showed  his  attach 
ment  to  Josiah  by  writing  a  lamentation  on  his 
death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25),  and  whose  writings  show 
how  much  he  made  use  of  the  copy  of  Deutero 
nomy  so  found.  [JEREMIAH,  HILKIAH.]  With  Jo- 
siah's  reign  (although  we  may  even  in  earlier  times 
hit  upon  occasional  resemblances,  such  for  instance 
as  the  silence  concerning  Manasseh's  repentance  in 
both),  necessarily  cease  all  strongly  marked  cha 
racters  of  Jeremiah's  authorship.  For  though  the 
general  unity  and  continuity  of  plan  (which,  as 
already  observed,  pervades  not  only  the  books  oi 
Kings,  but  those  of  Samuel,  Ruth,  and  Judges  like 
wise)  lead  us  to  assign  the  whole  history  in  a 
certain  sense  to  one  author,  and  enable  us  to  carry 
to  the  account  of  the  whole  book  the  proofs  derived 
from  the  closing  chapters,  yet  it  must  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  authorship  of  those  parts  of  the  his 
tory  of  which  Jeremiah  was  not  an  eye-witness, 
that  is,  of  all  before  the  reign  of  Josiah,  would 
have  consisted  merely  in  selecting,  arranging,  in 
serting  the  connecting  phrases,  and,  when  necessary, 
slightly  modernising  (see  Thenius,  Einleit.  §  2) 
the  old  histories  which  had  been  drawn  up  by  con 
temporary  prophets  through  the  whole  period  of 
time.  See  e.  g.  1  K.  xiii.  32.  For,  as  regards  the 
sources  of  information,  it  may  truly  be  said  that 
we  have  the  narrative  of  contemporary  writers 
throughout.  It  has  already  been  observed 
[CHRONICLES]  that  there  was  a  regular  series 
of  state-annals  both  for  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
and  for  that  of  Israel,  which  embraced  the 
whole  time  comprehended  in  the  Books  of  Kings, 
or  at  least  to  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim, 


by  some  later  hand.  There  is  nothing  impossible  in 
the  supposition  of  Jeremiah  having  survived  till  the 
37th  of  Jehoiachin's  captivity,  though  he  would  have 
been  between  80  and  90.  There  is  something  touch 
ing  in  the  idea  of  this  gleam  of  joy  having  reached 
the  prophet  in  his  old  age,  and  of  his  having  added 
these  few  words  to  his  long-finished  history  of  his 
nation. 

'  These  priests,  of  very  high  rank,  called  ^'TOB' 
f|Bn,  "keepers  of  the  door,"  i.  e.  of  the  three  prin 
cipal  entrances  to  the  Temple,  are  not  to  he  con 
founded  with  the  porters,  who  were  Levites.  "We  are 
.xpressly  told  in  2  K.  xii.  10  (9,  A.  V.)  that  these 
"keepers"  were  priests.  2  K.  xxii.  4,  xxiii.  4,  witii 
<ii.  10  and  xxv.  18,  clearly  point  out  the  rank  of 


these  officers  as  next  in  dignity  to  the  second  priest,  or 
sagan.  [HIOH-PEIEST,  vol.  i.  p.. 808.]  Josephus  calls 
them  TOIIJ  <|>vA<x<r<7oi'Tas  TO  lepov  riyepovas .  The  ex 
pression  PlDH  ^QK^  is  however  also  applied  to  the 
Levites  in  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9,  1  Chr.  ix.  19.  [KORAHITE.] 
*  The  prophet  does  not  tell  us  that  he  returned  to 
Jerusalem  after  hiding  his  girdle  in  the  Euphrates. 
The  "  many  days  "  spoken  of  in  ver.  6  may  have  been 
spent  among  the  captivity  at  Babylon.  [  JKREMIAH,  p. 
969  a.]  He  may  have  returned  just  after  Jehoiakim't 
death ;  and  "  the  king  and  the  queen,"  in  ver,  18, 
may  mean  Jehoiachin  and  his  mother.  Comp.  2  K. 
xxiv.  12,  15,  which  would  be  the  fulfilment  of  Jer. 
xiii.  18,  i" 


JO 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


2  K.  zxiv.  5.  These  annals  are  constantly  cited 
by  name  as  "  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon," 
I  K.  xi.  41  ;  and,  after  Solomon,  "  the  Book  of  the 
Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Juclah,  or,  Israel,"  e.  g. 
1  K.  xiv.  29,  xv.  7,  xvi.  5, 14,  20 ;  2  K.  x.  34,  xxiv. 
5,  &c.,  and  it  is  manifest  that  the  author  of  Kings 
had  them  both  before  him,  while  he  drew  up  his  his 
tory,  in  which  the  reigns  of  the  two  kingdoms  are 
harmonised,  and  these  annals  constantly  appealed 
to.  But  in  addition  to  these  national  annals,  there 
were  also  extant,  at  the  time  that  the  Books  of 
Kings  were  compiled,  separate  works  of  the  several 
prophets  who  had  lived  in  Judah  and  Israel,  and 
which  probably  bore  the  same  relation  to  the  annals, 
which  the  historical  parts  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
bear  to  those  portions  of  the  annals  preserved  in  the 
Books  of  Kings,  »'.  e.  were,  in  some  instances  at 
least,  fuller  and  more  copious  accounts  of  the  cur 
rent  events,  by  the  same  hands  which  drew  up  the 
more  concise  narrative  of  the  annals,  though  in 
ethers  perhaps  mere  duplicates.  Thus  the  acts  of 
Uzziah,  written  by  Isaiah,  were  very  likely  iden 
tical  with  the  history  of  his  reign  in  the  national 
chronicles ;  and  part  of  the  history  of  Hezekiah 
we  know  was  identical  in  the  chronicles  and  in  the 
prophet.  The  chapter  in  Jeremiah  relating  to  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple  (Hi.)  is  identical  with 
that  in  2  K.  xxiv.,  xxv.  In  later  times  we  have 
supposed  that  a  chapter  in  the  prophecies  of  Daniel 
was  used  for  the  national  chronicles,  and  appears  as 
Ezr.  ch.  i.  [EZRA,  BOOK  OF.]  Compare  also  2  K. 
xvi.  5,  with  Is.  vii.  1  ;  2  K.  xviii.  8,  with  Is. 
xiv.  28-32.  As  an  instance  of  verbal  agreement, 
coupled  with  greater  fullness  in  the  prophetic  ac 
count,  see  2  K.  xx.  compared  with  Is.  xxxviii.,  in 
which  latter  alone  is  Hezekiah's  writing  given. 

These  other  works,  then,  as  far  as  the  memory  of 
them  has  been  preserved  to  us,  were  as  follows  (see 
Keil's  Apolog.  Vers.).  For  the  time  of  David,  the 
book  of  Samuel  the  seer,  the  book  of  Nathan  the 
prophet,  and  the  book  of  Gad  the  seer  (2  Sam. 
xxi.-xxiv.  with  1  K.  1,  being  probably  extracted 
from  Nathan's  book),  which  seem  to  have  been 
collected — at  least  that  portion  of  them  relating 
to  David — into  one  work  called  "the  Acts  of 
David  the  King,"  1  Chr.  xxix.  29.  For  the  time 
of  Solomon,  "  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon," 

1  K.  xi.  41,  consisting  probably  of  parts  of  the 
"  Book  of  Nathan-  the   prophet,  the    prophecy  of 
Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  the  visions  of  Iddo  the 
seer,"  2  Chr.  ix.  29.     For  the  time  of  Rehoboam, 
"  the    words    of  Shemaiah    the   prophet,  and    of 
Iddo  the  seer  concerning  genealogies,"  2  Chr.  xii. 

15.    For  the  time  of  Abijali,  "  the  story  (fcn*l»)  * 

of  the  prophet  Iddo,"  2  Chr.  xiii.  22.  For  the 
time  of  Jehoshaphat,  "  the  words  of  Jehu  the 
son  of  Hanani,"  2  Chr.  xx.  34.  For  the  time  of 
Uzziah,  "  the  writings  of  Isaiah  the  prophet," 

2  Chr.  xxvi.  22.      For  the    time    of  Hezekiah, 
"  the  vision    of   Isaiah  the    prophet,   the   son   of 
Amoz,"  2  Chr.  xxxii.  32.     For  the  time  of  Man- 
asseh,  a  book  called  "  the  sayings  of  the  seers," 
as  the  A.  V.,  following  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Kimchi, 
&c.,   rightly   renders   the    passage,  in    accordance 
with  ver.    18,  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  19,   though   others, 
following  the  grammar  too  servilely,  make  Cltozaia. 
proper  name,  because  of  the  absence  of  the  article. 


[CHRONICLES,  vol.  i.  p.  31 0.*]  For  the  time  of  Jero 
boam  II.,  a  prophecy  of  "  Jonah,  the  son  of  Arnittai 
the  prophet,  of  Gath-hepher,"  is  cited,  2  K.  xiv. 
25 ;  and  it  seems  likely  that  there  were  books  con 
taining  special  histories  of  the  acts  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha,  seeing  that  the  times  of  these  prophets  are 
descriled  with  such  copiousness.  Of  the  latter  Gehazi 
might  well  have  been  the  author,  to  judge  from  2  K. 
viii.  4,  5,  as  Elisha  himself  might  have  been  of  the 
former.  Possibly  too  the  prophecies  of  Azariah 
the  son  of  Oded,  in  Asa's  reign,  2  Chr.  XT.  1,  and 
of  Hanani  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7),  (unless  this  latter  i» 
the  same  as  Jehu  son  of  Hanani,  as  Oded  is  put  for 
Azariah  in  rv.  8),  and  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
in  Ahab's  reign ;  and  Eliezer  the  son  of  Dodavah, 
in  Jehoshaphat 's ;  and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Je- 
hoiada,  in  Jehoash's ;  and  Oded,  in  Pekah's ;  and 
Zechariah,  in  Uzziah 's  reign ;  of  the  prophetess 
Huldah,  in  Josiah's,  and  others,  may  have  been 
preserved  in  writing,  some  or  all  of  them.  These 
works,  or  at  least  many  of  vheirt,  must  have  been 
extant  at  the  time  when  the  Books  of  Kings  were 
compiled,  as  they  certainly  were  much  later  when 
the  Books  of  Chronicles  were  put  together  by  Ezra. 
But  whether  the  author  used  them  all,  or  only 
those  duplicate  portions  of  them  which  were  em 
bodied  >n  the  national  chronicles,  it  is  impossible  to 
say,  seeing  he  quotes  none  of  them  by  name  except 
the  acts  of  Solomon,  and  the  prophecy  of  Jonah. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  infer  from  his  silence 
that  these  books  were  unused  by  him,  seeing  that 
neither  does  he  quote  by  name  the  Vision  of  Isaiah 
as  the  Chronicler  does,  though  he  must,  from  its 
recent  date,  have  been  familiar  with  it,  and  that  so 
many  parts  of  his  narrative  have  every  appearance 
of  being  extracted  from  these  books  of  the  prophets, 
and  contain  narratives  which  it  is  not  likely  would 
have  found  a  place  in  the  chronicles  of  the  kings. 
(See  1  K.  xiv.  4.  &c.,  xvi.  1,  &c.,  xi. ;  2  K. 
xvii.,  &c.) 

With  regard  to  the  work  so  often  cited  in  the 
Chronicles  as  "  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah,"  1  Chr.  ix.  1 ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  11,  xxvii.  7, 
xxviii.  26,  xxxii.  32,  xxxv.  27,  xxxvi.  8,  it  has 
been  thought  by  some  that  it  was  a  separate  col 
lection  containing  the  joint  histories  of  the  two 
kingdoms ;  by  others  that  it  is  our  Books  of  Kings 
which  answer  to  this  description  ;  but  by  Eichhorn, 
that  it  is  the  same  as  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings 
of  Judah  so  constantly  cited  in  the  Books  of  Kings , 
and  this  last  opinion  seems  the  best  founded.  For 
in  2  Chr.  xvi.  11,  the  same  book  is  called  "  tha 
book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel,"  which  in 
the  parallel  passage,  1  K.  xv.  23,  is  called  "  the 
Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah."  So 
again,  2  Chr.  xxvii.  7,  comp.  with  2  K.  xv.  36; 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  26,  comp.  with  2  K.  xvi.  19; 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  32,  comp.  with  2  K.  xx.  20; 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  27,  with  2  K.  xxiii.  28 ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
8,  with  2  K.  xxiv.  5.  Moreover  the  book  so 
quoted  refers  exclusively  to  the  affairs  of  Judah  ; 
and  even  in  the  one  passage  where  reference  is  made 
to  it  as  "the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,"  2  Chr. 
xx.  34,  it  is  for  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  that  it  is 
cited.  Obviously  therefore  it  is  the  same  work 
which  is  elsewhere  described  as  the  Chr.  of  Israel 
and  Judah,  and  of  Judith  and  Israel.*  Nor 
is  this  an  unreasonable  title  to  give  to  these  chro- 


•~  Movers  thinks  the  term  BT1E  implies  transla 
tion  from  older  works. 

1  Thcniiis  comes  to  the  same  conclusion  (Einlcit. 


§3).     It  is  cited  in  2  Chr.  xxiv.  27  as  "  the  story 
—the  Midrash  —  {J'TlD,  >f  the  book  of  the  Kii^s 
Comp.  2  K.  xii.  19. 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


31 


nicies.  Saul,  David,  Solomon,  and  in  some  sense 
Hezeki:ih,  2  Chr.  xxx.  1 ,  5,  6,  and  all  his  successors 
77ere  kings  of  Israel  as  well  as  of  Judah,  and  there 
fore  it  is  very  conceivable  that  in  Ezra's  time  the 
chronicles  of  Judah  should  have  acquired  the  name 
of  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah. 
Even  with  regard  to  a  portion  of  Israel  in  the  days 
of  Rehoboam,  the  chronicler  remarks,  apparently  as  a 
matter  of  gratulation,  that  "  Rehoboam  reigned  over 
them,"  2  Chr.  x.  1 7  ;  he  notices  Abijah's  authority 
in  portions  of  the  Israelitish  territory,  2  Chr.  xiii. 
18,  19,  xv.  8,  9 ;  he  not  unfrequently  speaks  of 
Israel,  when  the  kingdom  of  Judah  is  the  matter 
m  hand,  as  2  Chr.  xii.  1,  xxi.  4,  xxiii.  2,  &c.,  and 
even  calls  Jehoshaphat  "  King  of  Israel,"  2  Chr. 
ssi.  2,  and  distinguishes  "  Israel  and  Judah,"  from 
"  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,"  xxx.  1 ;  he  notices  He- 
zekiah's  authority  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  2  Chr. 
xxx.  5,  and  Josiah's  destruction  of  idols  through 
out  all  the  land  of  Israel,  xxxiv.  6-9,  and  his  pass- 
over  for  all  Israel,  xxxv.  17,  18,  and  seems  to  pa 
rade  the  title  "  King  of  Israel "  in  connexion  with 
l>avid  and  Solomon,  xxxv.  3,  4,  and  the  relation  of 
the  Levites  to  "  all  Israel,"  ver.  3 ;  and  therefore 
it  is  only  in  accordance  with  the  feeling  displayed 
in  such  passages  that  the  name,  "  the  Book  of  the 
Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  "  should  be  given  to  the 
chronicles  of  the  Jewish  kingdom.  The  use  of  this 
term  in  speaking  of  the  "  Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah 
who  were  carried  away  to  Babylon  for  their  trans 
gression,"  1  Chr.  ix.  1 ,  would  be  conclusive,  if  the 
construction  of  the  sentence  were  certain.  But 
though  it  is  absurd  to  separate  the  words  "  and 
Judah "  from  Israel,  as  Bertheau  does  (Kurzgef. 
Exeg.  Handb.),  following  the  Masoretic  punctua 
tion,  seeing  that  the  "  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel 
and  Judah,"  is  cited  in  at  least  six  other  places  in 
Chr.,  still  it  is  possible  that  Israel  and  Judah 
might  b.e  the  antecedent  to  the  pronoun  understood 
before  -1^3n.  It  seems,  however,  much  more  likely 
that  the  antecedent  to  1K>K  is  "nC|1  "K»  '3^». 
On  the  whole  therefore  there  is  no  evidence  of  the 
existence  in  the  time  of  the  chronicler  of  a  history, 
since  lost,  of  the  two  kingdoms,  nor  are  the  Books 
of  Kings  the  work  so  quoted  by  the  chronicler, 
seeing  he  often  refers  to  it  for  "  the  rest  of  the  acts  " 
of  Kings,  when  he  has  already  given  all  that  is  con 
tained  in  our  Books  of  Kings.  He  refers  therefore 
to  the  chronicles  of  Judah.  From  the  above  au 
thentic  sources  then  was  compiled  the  history  in  the 
books  under  consideration.  Judging  from  the  facts 
that  we  have  in  2  K.  xviii.  xix.,  xx.,  the  history  of 
Hezekiah  in  the  very  words  of  Isaiah,  xxxvi.-xxxix. ; 
that,  as  stated  above,  we  have  several  passages  from 
Jeremiah  in  duplicate  in  2  K.,  and  the  whole  of 
Jer.  Hi.  in  2  K.»xxiv.  18,  &c.,  xxv. ;  that  so 
large  a  portion  of  the  Books  of  Kings  is  repeated  in 
the  Books  of  Chronicles,  though  the  writer  of  Chro 
nicles  had  the  original  Chronicles  also  before  him, 
as  well  as  from  the  whole  internal  character  of  the 
narrative,  and  even  some  of  the  blemishes  referred 
to  under  the  2nd  head  ;  we  may  conclude  with 
certainty  that  we  have  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  not 
only  in  the  main  the  history  faithfully  preserved 
to  us  from  the  ancient  chronicles,  but  most  fre 
quently  whole  passages  transferred  verbatim  into 
them.  Occasionally,  no  doubt,  we  have  the  com 
piler's  own  comments,  or  reflexions  thrown  in,  as 
,\t  2  K.  xxi.  10-16,  xvii.  10-15,  xiii.  23,xvii.  7-41, 


•  V.  32.     The  phrase  "  the  cities  of  Samaria  "  of 
cc-.irst  cannot  belong  to  th»  age  -jf  Jeroboam. 


&c.  We  connect  the  insertion  af  the  prophecy  in 
1  K.  xiii.  with  the  fact  that  the  compiler  himself 
was  an  eye-witness  of  the  fulfilment  of  it,  and  can 
even  see  how  the  words  ascribed  to  the  old  prophet 
are  of  the  age  of  the  compiler.11  We  can  perhaps 
see  his  hand  in  the  frequent  repetition  on  the  review 
of  each  reign  of  the  remark,  "  the  high  places  were 
not  taken  away,  the  people  still  sacrificed  and  burnt 
incense  on  the  high  places,"  1  K.  xxii.  43 ;  2  K. 
xii.  3,  xiv.  4,  xv.  4,  35 ;  cf.  1  K.  iii.  3,  and  in  the 
repeated  observation  that  such  and  such  things, 
as  the  staves  by  which  the  ark  was  borne,  the 
revolt  of  the  10  tribes,  the  icbellion  of  Edom, 
&c.,  continue  "  unto  this  day,"  though  it  may 
be  perhaps  doubted  in  some  cases  whether  these 
words  were  not  in  the  old  chronicle  (2  Chr.  v.  9). 
See  1  K.  viii.  8,  ix.  13,  21,  x.  12,  xii.  19;  2  K.  ii. 
22,  viii.  22,  x.  27,  xiii.  23,  xiv.  7,  xvi.  6,  xvii.  23, 
34,  41,  xxiii.  25.  It  is  however  remarkable  that 
in  no  instance  does  the  use  of  this  phrase  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  it  was  penned  after  the  destruction  of 
the  Temple :  in  several  of  the  above  instances  the 
phrase  necessarily  supposes  that  the  Temple  and 
the  kingdom  of  Judah  were  still  standing.  If  the 
phrase  then  is  the  compiler's,  it  proves  him  to  have 
written  before  the  Babylonish  captivity  ;  if  it  was  ?. 
part  of  the  chronicle  he  was  quoting,  it  shows  how 
exactly  he  transferred  its  contents  to  his  own  pages. 

IV.  As  regards  the  relation  of  the  Books  of  Kings 
to  those  of  Chronicles,  it  is  manifest,  and  is  univer 
sally  admitted,  that  the  former  is  by  far  the  older 
work.  The  language,  which  is  quite  free  from  the 
Persicisms  of  the  Chronicles  and  their  late  ortho 
graphy,  and  is  not  at  all  more  Aramaic  than  the 
language  of  Jeremiah,  as  has  been  shown  above  (II.), 
clearly  points  out  its  relative  superiority  in  regard 
to  age.  Its  subject  also,  embracing  the  kingdom 
of  Israel  as  well  as  Judah,  ist  another  indication  of 
its  composition  before  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was 
forgotten,  and  before  the  Jewish  enmity  to  Sa 
maria,  which  is  apparent  in  such  passages  as  2  Chr. 
xx.  37,  xxv.,  and  in  those  chapters  of  Ezra  (i.-vi.) 
which  belong  to  Chronicles,  was  brought  to  ma 
turity.  While  the  Books  of  Chronicles  therefore 
were  written  especially  for  the  Jews  after  their 
return  from  Babylon,  the  Book  of  Kings  was 
written  for  the  whole  of  Israel,  before  their  common 
national  existence  was  hopelessly  quenched. 

Another  comparison  of  considerable  interest  be 
tween  the  two  histories  may  be  drawn  in  respect 
to  the  main  design,  that  design  having  a  marked 
relation  both  to  the  individual  station  of  the  sup 
posed  writers,  and  the  peculiar  circumstances  of 
their  country  at  the  times  of  their  writing. 

Jeremiah  was  himself  a  prophet.  He  lived  white 
the  prophetic  office  was  in  full  vigour,  in  his  own 
person,  in  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  and  many  others, 
both  true  and  false.  In  his  eyes,  as  in  truth,  the 
main  cause  of  the  fearful  calamities  of  his  country 
men  was  their  rejection  and  contempt  of  the  Word 
of  God  in  his  mouth  and  that  of  the  other  pro 
phets  ;  and  the  one  hope  of  deliverance  lay  in  their 
hearkening  to  the  prophets  who  still  continued  to 
speak  to  them  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  Accord 
ingly,  we  find  in  the  Books  of  Kings  great  promi 
nence  given  to  the  prophetic  office.  Not  only  are 
some  fourteen  chapters  devoted  more  or  less  to  the 
history  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  the  former  of  whom  is 
but  once  named,  and  the  latter  not  once  in  the 
Chronicles  ;  but  besides  the  many  passages  in  which 
the  names  and  sayings  of  prophets  are  recorded 
alike  in  both  histories,  the  foil  >wirg  may  be  cited 


32 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


as  instances  in  which  the  compiler  of  Kings  has  no 
tices  of  the  prophets  which  are  peculiar  to  himself. 
The  history  of  the  prophet  who  went  from  Judah 
to  Bethel  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam,  and  of  the  old 
prophet  and  his  sons  who  dwelt  at  Bethel,  1  K. 
xiii. ;  the  story  of  Ahijah  the  prophet  and  Jero 
boam's  wife  in  1  K.  xiv. ;  the  prophecy  of  Jehu  the 
son  of  Hanani  concerning  the  house  of  Baasha,  1  K. 
xvi. ;  the  reference  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  Word 
of  God  in  the  termination  of  Jehu's  dynasty,  in 
2  It,  xv.  12  ;  the  reflexions  in  2  K.  xvii.  7-23 ;  and 
above  all,  as  relating  entirely  to  Judah,  the  narra 
tive  of  Hezekiah's  sickness  and  recovery  in  2  K.  xx. 
as  contrasted  with  that  in  2  Chr.  xxxii.,  may  be 
( ited  as  instances  of  that  prominence  given  to  pro 
phecy  and  prophets  by  the  compiler  of  the  book  of 
Kings,  which  is  also  especially  noticed  by  De  Wette, 
§18:3,  and  Parker,  transl.  p.  233. 

This  view  is  further  confirmed  if  we  take  into  ac 
count  the  lengthened  history  of  Samuel  the  prophet, 
in  1  Sam.  (while  he  is  but  barely  named  two  or 
three  times  in  the  Chronicles),  a  circumstance,  by 
the  way,  strongly  connecting  the  books  of  Samuel 
with  those  of  Kings. 

Ezra,  on  the  contrary,  was  only  a  priest.  In  his 
days  the  prophetic  office  had  wholly  fallen  into 
abeyance.  That  evidence  of  the  Jews  being  the 
people  of  God,  which  consisted  in  the  presence  of 
prophets  among  them,  was  no  more.  But  to  the 
men  of  his  generation,  the  distinctive  mark  of  the 
continuance  of  God's  favour  to  their  race  was  the 
rebuilding  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  the  restora 
tion  of  the  daily  sacrifice  and  the  Levitical  worship, 
and  the  wonderful  and  providential  renewal  of  the 
Mosaic  institutions.  The  chief  instrument,  too,  for 
preserving  the  Jewish  remnant  from  absorption 
into  the  mass  of  Heathenism,  and  for  maintaining 
their  national  life  till  the  coming  of  Messiah,  was 
the  maintenance  of  the  Temple,  its  ministers,  and 
its  services.  Hence  we  see  at  once  that  the  chief 
cart  of  a  good  and  enlightened  Jew  of  the  age  of 
Ezra,  and  all  the  more  if  he  were  himself  a  priest, 
would  naturally  be  to  enhance  the  value  of  the  Le 
vitical  ritual,  and  the  dignity  of  the  Levitical  caste. 
And  in  compiling  a  history  of  the  past  glories  of  his 
race,  he  would  as  naturally  select  such  passages 
.s  especially  bore  upon  the  sanctity  of  the  priestly 
office,  and  showed  the  deep  concern  taken  by  their 
ancestors  in  all  that  related  to  the  honour  of  God's 
House,  and  the  support  of  His  ministering  servants. 
Hence  the  Levitical  character  of  the  Books  of  Chro 
nicles,  and  the  presence  of  several  detailed  narratives 
not  found  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  and  the  more  fre 
quent  reference  to  the  Mosaic  institutions,  may 
most  naturally  and  simply  be  accounted  for,  without 
resorting  to  the  absurd  hypothesis  that  the  cere 
monial  law  was  an  invention  subsequent  to  the  cap 
tivity.  2  Chr.  xxix.,  xxx.,  xxxi.  compared  with 
2  K.  xviii.  is  perhaps  as  good  a  specimen  as  can  be 
selected  of  the  distinctive  spirit  of  the  Chronicles. 
See  also  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10-21,  comp.  with  2  K.  xv. 
5;  2  Chr.  xi.  13-17,  xiii.  9-20,  xv.  1-15,  xxiii. 
2-8,  comp.  with  2  K.  xi.  5-9,  and  vers.  18,  19, 
comp.  with  ver.  18,  and  many  other  passages. 
Moreover,  upon  the  principle  that  the  sacred  writers 
were  influenced  by  natural  feelings  in  their  selec 
tion  of  their  materials,  it  seems  most  appropriate 
th.it  while  the  prophetical  writer  in  Kings  deals 
very  fully  with  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  in  which  the 
prophets  were  much  more  illustrious  than  in  Judah, 
the  Levitical  writer,  on  the  contrary,  should  con 
centrate  :ill  his  thoughts  round  Jerusalem  where 


alone  the  Levitical  caste  had  all  its  power  and 
tions,  and  should  dwell  upon  all  the  instances  pre 
served  in  existing  muniments  of  the  deeds  and  even 
the  minutest  ministrations  of  the  priests  and  Levites, 
as  well  as  of  their  faithfulness  and  sufferings  in  th« 
cause  of  truth.  This  professional  bias  is  so  true  to 
nature,  that  it  is  surprising  that  any  one  should  be 
found  to  raise  an  objection  from  it.  Its  subserviency 
in  this  instance  to  the  Divine  purposes  and  the  in 
struction  of  the  Church,  is  an  interesting  example  01 
the  providential  government  of  God.  It  may  be 
further  mentioned  as  tending  to  account  simply  and 
naturally  for  the  difference  in  some  of  the  nar 
ratives  in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  re 
spectively,  that  whereas  the  compiler  of  Kings 
usually  quotes  the  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the 
Kings  of  Judah,  the  writer  of  Chronicles  very  fre 
quently  refers  to  those  books  of  the  contemporary 
prophets  which  we  presume  to  have  contained 
more  copious  accounts  of  the  same  reigns.  This 
appears  remarkably  in  the  parallel  passages  h  1  K. 
xi.  41  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  29,  where  the  writer  of  jKings 
refers  for  "the  rest  of  Solomon's  acts"  to  the 
"  book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon,"  while  the  writer 
of  Chronicles  refers  to  "  the  book  of  Nathan  the 
prophet "  and  "  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah  the  Shi- 
lonito,"  and  "  the  visions  of  Iddo  the  seer  against 
Jeroboam  the  sou  of  Nebat ;"  and  in  1  K.  xiv.  29, 
and  2  Chr.  xii.  15,  where  the  writer  of  Kings  sums 
up  his  history  of  Rehoboam  with  the  words,  "  Now 
the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Rehoboam  and  all  that  he 
did,  are  they  not  written  in  the  Book  of  the  Chro 
nicles  of  the  Kings  of  JudaJi  ¥'  whereas  the  chro 
nicler  substitutes  "  in  the  Book  of  Shemaiah  the 
prophet,  and  of  Iddo  the  seer  concerning  genea 
logies ;"  and  in  1  K.  xxii.  45,  where  "the  Book  of 
the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  stands  instead 
of  "  the  Book  of  Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani,"  in  2  Chr. 
xx.  34.  Besides  which,  the  very  formula  so  fre 
quently  used,  "the  rest  of  the  acts  of  so  and  so, 
and  all  that  he  did,"  &c.,  necessarily  supposes  that 
there  were  in  the  chronicles  of  each  reign,  and  in 
the  other  works  cited,  many  things  recorded  which 
the  compiler  did  not  transcribe,  and  which  of  course 
it  was  open  to  any  other  compiler  to  insert  in  his 
narrative  if  he  pleased.  If  then  the  chronicler, 
writing  with  a  different  motive  and  different  pre 
dilections,  and  in  a  different  age,  had  access  to  the 
same  original  documents  from  which  the  author  of 
Kings  drew  his  materials,  it  is  only  what  was  to 
be  expected,  that  he  should  omit  or  abridge  some 
things  given  in  detail  in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and 
should  insert,  or  give  in  detail,  some  things  which  the 
author  of  Kings  had  omitted,  or  given  very  briefly. 
The  following  passages  which  are  placed  side  by  side 
are  examples  of  these  opposite  methods  of  treating 
the  same  subject  on  the  part  of  the  two  writers : — 

Full  in  Kingt. 

1  K.  i.  ii.  give  In  detail 
the  circumstances  of  Solo 
mon's  accession,  the  con 
spiracy  of  Adonijah,  Joab, 
Abiathar,  &c.,  and  substi 
tution  of  Zadok  in  the 
priest's  office  in  room  of 
Abiathar,  the  submission 
of  Adonijah  and  all  hi? 
parly,  Joab's  death,  kc. 


Short  in  Chronidet. 

1  Obr.  xxix.  22-24. 
"  And  they  made  Solomc  n 
the  son  of  David  king  the 
second  time,  and  anointed 
him  unto  the  Lord  to  be  the 
chief  governor,  and  Zadok 
to  be  priest.  Then  Solo, 
mon  sat  on  the  throne  oi 
the  Lord  as  king  instead 
of  David  bis  father,  and 
prospered,  and  all  Israel 
obeyed  him.  And  all  the 
princes  and  the  might} 
men,  and  all  the  sons  like 
wise  of  king  David,  sub 
mitted  themselves  cnU 
Solomon  the  king." 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


Full  in  Kings. 

1  K.  ill.  5-14. 

Vtr.  C.  "  And  Solomon 
said,  Thou  hast  showed  unto 
'x»  servant  David  my  father 
groat  mercy,  according  as 
he  walked  before  Thee  in 
truth,  and  in  righteousness, 
and  in  uprightness  of  heart 
with  Thee ;  and  Thou  hast 
kept  for  him  this  great 
kindness,  that  Thou  hast 
given  him  a  son  to  sit  on 
his  throne,  as  it  is  this  day." 

7,  «,  9,  10  "  And  the 
speech  pleased  the  Jjord, 
that  Solomon  had  asked 
tbU  thing." 

11.  "  And  God  said  unto 
him,"  &c. 

13.  "...  like  unto  thee 
all  thy  days." 

14.  "  And  if  thou  wilt 
nalk  in  my  ways,  and  keep 
my  statutes  and  my  com 
mandments  as   thy  father 
David  did  walk,  then  I  will 
lengthen  thy  days." 

15.  "And  Solomon  a  woke, 
and  behold  it  was  a  dream. 
And  he  came  to  Jerusalem, 
and  stood  before  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord, 
and  offered  up  burnt-offer 
ings,    and    offered    peace 
offerings,  and  made  a  feast 
to  all  hia  servants." 

16-28.  Solomon's  judg 
ment. 

iv.  1.  "So  king  Solomon 
was  king  over  all  Israel." 

2-19.  Containing  a  list  of 
Solomon's  officers. 

xi.  1-40.  Containing  his 
tory  of  Solomon's  idolatry, 
and  the  enmity  of  Hadad, 
and  Rezon,  and  Jeroboam 
against  him. 

xii.  2.  "  Who  was  yet  in 
Kgypl."  The  omission  of 
the  word  "  yet "  in  Chron. 
is  of  course  accounted  for 
by  his  flight  to  Egypt  not 
having  been  narrated  by  the 
chronicler. 

1  K.  xiv.  22-24. 
A  detailed  account  of  the 
idolatries  of  Judah  in  the 
reign  of  Rchoboam. 


1  K.  xv.  18. 

"  Then  Asa  took  all  the 
silver  and  the  gold  that 
were  left  in  the  treasures 
<if  the  house  of  the  Lord, 
and  the  treasures  of  the 
king's  house,  and  del?"  ere 
them  into  th*  hand  of  his 
servants ;  and  king  Asa  sent 
them  to  Benhadad  the  sou 
of  Tabrimon,  the  son  of 
Hezion,  king  of  Syria,  that 
dwelt  at  Damascus,  saying, 
There  is  a  league,"  &c. 

2  K.  xvi.  10-16. 
A    detailed    account    of 
Ahaz's  visit  to  Damascu: 
and  setting  up  an  altar  iii 
the    temple    at  Jerusalem 
after  the  pattern  of  one  at 
Damascus.      Urijah's   sub- 
••fcrvlency,  Sec. 


Short  in  Chronicles. 

Full  in  Kings.                     Sliort  in  Cxroniclea 

2  Chr.  i.  7-12. 

xx.  1-19.                                xxxii.  24-26. 

n         Yer.  8.    "  And   Solomon 

Hezekiah's        sickness,         "  In  those  days  Hezekiah 

to     said  unto  God,  Thou  hast 

prayer,  and  recovery,  with     was  sick  to  the  death,  and 

)T     shewed  great  mercy  unto 

Isaiah's  prophecy,  and  the     prayed  unto  the  Lord,  and 

is     David  my  father, 

sign  of  the  shadow  on  the     He  spake  unto  him  and  gave 

n 

dial  ;  the  visit  of  the  Baby-     him  a  sign.    But  Hezekiab 

8, 

lonish  ambassadors  ;  Heze-     rendered  not  again  accord- 

rt 

kiah's    pride,    Isaiah's    re-     Ing  to  the  benefit  done  untc 

It 

buke,  and  Hezekiah's  flub-     him  ;    for    his    heart    was 

it 

mission.     Throughout  the     lifted  up:    therefore   there 

st 

history    of    Hezekiah    the     was  wrath  upon  him,  and 

n         and   hast   made   me    to 

narrative  in  2  K.  and  Isaiah     upon  Judah  and  Jerusalem 

."     reign  in  his  stead." 

is    much    fuller    than    in     Notwithstanding,  Hezekiah 

e 

Chronicles.                                humbled   himself   for    the 

pride  of  his  heart,  both  he 

d 

and  the  inhabitants  of  Jeru 

salem,   so   that  the  wrath 

o         11.    "  And  God    said  to 

of  the  Lord  came  not  txpon 

Solomon,"  &c. 

them  in  the  days  of  Heze 

e         12.  "...  any  after  thee 

kiah."     Ver.  31.  "  Howbeit 

have  the  like." 

in  the  business  of  the  am 

It 

bassadors  of  the  princes  of 

P 

Babylon,  who  sent  unto  him 

i- 

to   enquire  of  the  wonder 

;r 

done  In  the  land,  God  left 

11 

him   to  try  him,   that  he 

might  know  all  that  was  in 

e. 

his  heart." 

1. 
i,         13.  "Then  Solomon  came 

xxl.  10-16.                           2  Chr.  xxxiii.  10. 

if     from  his  journey  to  the  high 
1,     place  that  was  at  Gibeon  to 
r-     Jerusalem,  from  before  the 

Message    from    God    to         "  And  the  Lord  spake  to 
Manasseh  by  His  prophets.     Manasseh  and  his  people  : 
Manasseh's  sin.                        but  they  would  not  hearken. 

;•      tabernacle  of    the  congre- 

2  K.  xxiii.  4-25.                      2  Chr.  xxxiv.  32,  33. 

st     gation, 

Detailed  account  of  the         "And  the  inhabitants  of 

destruction  of  Baal-worship     Jerusalem  did  according  to 

;- 

and  other  idolatrous  rites     the  covenant  of  God,   the 

n     and  reigned  over  Israel." 

and  places   in  Judah   and     God  of  their  fathers.    And 
Israel,  by  Josiah,  "  that  he     Josiah  took  away  all  the 

>f         Omitted  in  Chronicles. 

s-         Wholly  omitted  in  Chro- 
Y,     nicies,  except  the  allusion 

might  perform  the  words  of     abominations  out  of  all  the 
the  law  which  were  written     countries  that  pertained  to 
in  the  book  that  Hilkiah  the     the  children  of  Israel,  and 
priest  found  in  the  house     made  all  that  were  present 
of  the  Lord."                             in  Israel  to  serve,  even  to 

i,     in  2  Chr.  x.  2,  "  It  came  to 
m     pass,   when  Jeroboam   the 

serve  the  Lord  their  God." 

son  of  Nebat,  who  was  in 
n     Egypt,  whither  he  had  fled 
of     from  the  presence  of  Solo- 

In  like  manner  a  comparison  of  the  history  of  the 
reigns  of  Jehoahaz,  Jehoiakim,  Jehoiachin,  and  Ze- 

n.     nion  the  king,"  &c. 

dekiah,  will   show,  that,  except  in  the  matter  of 

jr 

Jehoiakim's  capture  in  the  4th  year  of  his  reign, 

Dt 

and  deportation  to  (or  towards)  Babylon,  in  which 

the  author  of  Chronicles  follows  Daniel  and  Ezekiel 

(Dan.  i.  1  ,  2  ;  Ez.  xix.  9),  the  narrative  in  Chronicles 

2  Chr.  xii.  1. 
>e         "  And   it   came  to  pass 

is  chiefly  an  abridgment  of  that  in  Kings.    Compare 

le     when  Rehoboam  had  esta 

2  K.  xxiii.  30-37,  with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  1-5  ;  2  K. 

blished  the  kingdom,   and 

xxiv.  1-7,  with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  6-8  ;  2  K.  xxiv.  10-17, 

had    strengthened  himself, 
he  forsook  the  law  of  the 
Lord,  and  all  Israel  with 

with  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  10.      From  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  13, 
however,  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  is  rather  a  com 

him." 

ment  upon  the  history  in  2  K.  xxv.  1-21,  than  an 

2  Chr.  xvi.  2. 

abridgment  of  it. 

ie         "  Then  Asa  brought  out 
ixt     silver  and  gold  out  of  the 

Under  this  head  should  be  noticed  also  what  may 
be  called  systematic  abridgments  ;  as  when  the  state 

PS     treasures  of  the  house  of 
d,     ihf  Lord,  and  of  the  king's 
ie     house,  and 

ments  in  Kings  concerning  high-place  worship  in  the 
several  reigns  (2  K.  xii.  2,  3  ;  xiv.  3,  4  ;  xv.  3,  4, 

35)  are  either  wholly  omitted,  or  more  cursorily 

is 

glanced  at,  as  at  2  Chr.  xxv.  2,  xxvii.  2;  or  when 

it 
>u     sent  to  Benhadad 

the  name  of  the  queen-mother  is  omitted,  as  in  the 

of 

case  of  the  seven  last  kings  from  Manasseh  down 

at     king  of  Syria,  that  dwelt  at 

wards,  whose  mothers  are  given  by  the  author  of 

g,     Damascus,  saying,  There  is 
a  league,"  Sic. 

Kings,  but  struck  out  by  the  author  of  Chronicles/ 

2  Chr.  xxviii.  22,  23. 

*  The  annexed  list  of  kings'  mothers  shows  which  art 

of        "  And  in  the  time  of  his 

named  in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  which  in  Kings  alone  :  — 

s,     distress  did  he  trespass  yet 

Solomon     son  of  Bathsheba,  K.  and  Chr.  (1.  iii.  5). 

in     more  agiiinst  the  Lord:  this 

Rehoboam      „       Naumah,  K.  and  Chr. 

m     is  that  king  Ahaz.    For  he 

Abijah            „       Maachah  or  Altchaiah,  K.  and  Chr. 

at     sacrificed  unto  the  gods  of 

Asa                 „       Maachah,  da  of  Absalom,  K.  and  Ch/ 

b-     Damascus  which  smote  him. 

Jehoshaphat  „       Azubab,  K.  and  Chr. 

gods  of  Syria  help  them, 

Ahaziah                 Athallah,  K.  and  Chr. 

therefore  will  I  sacrifice  to 

Joash              „       Zibiah,  K.  and  Chr. 

them,  that  they  may  ln-lp 

Amaziah         „      Jehoaddan,  K.  and  Chr. 

me." 

L'zzlah 

1                                                                D 

KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


Short  in  Kingt. 

I  K.  viii. 

Ver  10.  "  And  it  came  to 
pose  when  the  priests  were 
como  ont  of  the  holy  place, 


34 

There  is  something  systematic  also  in  the  omitted 
or  abbreviated  accounts  of  the  idolatries  in  the  reigns 
of  Solomon,  Kehoboam,  and  Ahaz.  It  may  not 
always  be  easy  to  assign  the  exact  motives  which 
influence  a  writer,  who  is  abbreviating,  in  his  selec 
tion  of  passages  to  be  shortened  or  left  out ;  but  an 
obvious  motive  in  the  case  of  these  idolatries,  as  well 
as  the  high-places,  may  be  found  in  the  circumstance 
that  the  idolatrous  tendencies  of  the  Jews  had  wholly 
ceased  during  the  captivity,  and  that  the  details  and 
repetition  of  the  same  remark  relating  to  them  were 
therefore  less  suited  to  the  requirements  of  the  age. 
To  see  a  design  on  the  part  of  the  Chronicler  to  de 
ceive  and  mislead,  is  to  draw  a  conclusion  not  from 
the  facts  before  us,  but  from  one's  own  prejudices. 
It  is  not  criticism,  but  invention. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  subjoined  passages  present 
some  instances  in  which  the  Books  of  Kings  give 
the  short  account,  and  the  Books  of  Chronicles  the 
full  one. 

Full  in  Chronicles. 

2  Chr.  v 

Ver.  11.  "  And  it  came  to 
pass  when  the  priests  were 
come  out  of  the  holy  place  : 
(for  all  the  priests  that  were 
present  were  sanctified,  and 
did  not  then  wait  by  course : 

12.  "  Also    the   Levites 
which  were  the  singers,  all 
of  them  of  Asaph, of  Heman, 
of  Jeduthun,    with    their 
sons   and    their    brethren, 
being    arrayed    in    white 
linen,  having  cymbals  and 
psalteries  and  harps,  stood 
at  the  east  end  of  the  altar, 
and  with  them  120  priests, 
sounding  with  trumpets :) 

13.  "  It   came   even   to 
pass,  as  the  trumpeters  a»d 
singers    were    as   one,    to 
make  one  sound  to  be  heard 
in  praising   and   thanking 
the  Lord ;  and  when  they 
lifted  up  their  voice  with 
the  trumpets  and  cymbals 
and  instruments  of  musics 
and  praised  the  Lord,  say 
ing,  For  He  is  good,  for  His 
mercy  endureth  for  ever , 
that  then   the  house  was 
tilled  with  a  cloud,  even  the 
house  of  the  Lord. 

14.  "  So  that  the  priests 
could  not  stand  to  minister 
by  reason  of  the  cloud  :  for 
the  glory  of  the  Lord  had 
lilled    the   house    of  God. 
Then  said  Solomon,"  &c. 


that    the    cloud  filled  the 
house  of  the  Lord, 

11.  "So  that  the  priests 
could  not  stand  to  minister 
because  of  the  cloud :   for 
the  glory  of  the  Lord  had 
rilled  the  house  of  the  Lord. 

12.  "  Then  said  Solomon," 

to. 

1  K.  viii. 

Ver.  52  corresponds  with 
2  Chr.  vl.  40.  Ver.  53  is 
arnitted  in  Chr. 


2  Chr.  vi.,  vii. 

Ver.  41.  "  Now  therefore 
arise,  0  Ix>rd  God,  into  thy 
resting  place,  them,  and  the 
ark  of  thy  strength :  let 
thy  priests,  0  Lord  God,  be 
clothed  with  salvation,  and 
thy  saints  rejoice  in  good 
ness. 

42,  "  0  Lord  God,   turn 


Short  in  Kings. 


54.  "  And  it  was  so  that 
when  Solomon  had  made  an 
end  of  praying  all  this 
prayer  and  supplication 
unto  the  Lord  he  arosa 
from  before  the  altar  of  the 
Lord,  from  kneeling  on  his 
knees  with  his  hands  spread 
up  to  heaven." 


55-61.  "And  he  stood 
and  blessed  all  the  congre 
gation,"  &c. 

62.  "And  the  king,  and 
all  Israel  with  him,  offered 
sacrifices  before  the  Lord." 


Full  in  Chronicles. 

not  away  the  face  of  thint 
anointed ;  remember  the 
mercies  of  David  thy  ser 
vant. 

1.  "  JVoic  when  Solomon 
had  made  an  end  nf  pray 
ing,  the  fire  came  down  from 
heaven,  and  consumed  ibc 
burnt-offering  and  the  sacri 
fices,  and  the  glory  of  the 
Lord  filled  the  house,  and 
the  priests  could  not  enter 
into  the  boose  of  the  Lord, 
because  the  glory  of  the 
Lord  had  filled  the  Lord's 
house.1  An:!  when  all  tne 
children  of  Israel  saw  how 
the  fire  came  down,  and  the 
glory  of  the  Lord  upon  the 
house,  they  bowed  them 
selves  with  their  faces  to 
the  ground,  upon  the  pave 
ment,  and  worshipped  and 
praised  the  Lord,  saying, 
For  He  is  good,  for  Hia 
mercy  endureth  for  ever. 

4.  "Then  the  king  and 
all  the  people  offered  sacri 
fice  before  the  Lord.'1 


1  K.  xii.  24  corresponds  with  2  Chr.  xi.  4. 


Wholly  omitted  in  Kings, 
where  from  xii.  25  to  xiv. 
20  is  occupied  with  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  and 
seems  to  be  not  impro 
bably  taken  from  the  book 
of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite. 

xiv.  25,  26. 

A  very  brief  mention  of 
Shishak's  invasion,  and 
plunder  of  the  sacred  and 
royal  treasures. 


1  K.  xv. 

Ver.  1.  "And  there  was 
war  between  Abijam  and 
Jeroboam.'1 


Uzziah        son  of  Jecoliah,  K.  and  Chr. 

Jotbam           „ 

Jerusha,  K.  and  Chr. 

Aha/               „ 
Hezekiah 

Abi,  K.  and  Chr. 

Manasseh       „ 

Hepuzi-bah,  K. 

Anion                , 

Meshullemeth,  K. 

Josiah              , 

Jedidah,  K. 

Jehonhaz 

Hamutal,  K. 

Jehoiakim 

Zebudah,  K. 

Jehoiachin 

Nelmshta,  K. 

2*dckiah 

Hamtital,  K. 

7.  "  And  the  rest  of  the 
acts  of  Abijam,  and  all  that 
he  did,  are  they  not  written 
in  the  book  of  tl  e  Chronicles 
of  the  Kings  of  Judah,"  &c. 

8.  "  And    Abijam    slept 
with  his  father*."  &c. 

1  K.  xv. 

12.  (Asa)    "  took    away 
the  sodomites  out  of  the 


2  Chr.  xi.  5-23. 
Containing  particulars  of 
the  reign  of  Kehoboam,  and 
the  gathering  of  priests  and 
Levites  to  Jerusalem,  dur 
ing  his  three  first  years, 
very  likely  from  the  book 
of  Iddo,  as  this  passage  has 
a  genealogical  form. 

xii.  2-9. 

A  more  detailed  account 
of  Sbishak's  invasion,  of  the 
number  and  nature  of  big 
troops,  the  capture  of  the 
fenced  cities  of  Juduli,  and 
the  propbecying  of  She- 
maiah  on  the  occasion ; 
evidently  extracted  from 
the  book  of  Sheuiaiah. 

2  Chron.  xiii. 

Ver.  2.  "  And  there  was 
war  between  Abijah  and 
Jeroboam." 

3-21  contains  a  detailed 
account  of  the  war  between 
the  two  kings ;  of  Abijah'a 
speech  to  the  Israelites-, 
upbraiding  them  with  for 
saking  the  Levitical  wor 
ship,  and  glorying  in  the 
retention  of  the  same  by 
Judah ;  his  victories,  and 
his  family. 

22.  "  And  the  rest  of  the 
acts  of  Abijah,  and  his  ways 
and  his  sayings,  are  written 
in  the  story  (midrasb)  of 
the  prophet  Iddo." 

23.  -  And   Abviah   slept 
with     his     fathers,      &c. 
(xiv.  1,  A.  V.) 

xiv.  3-15,  xv.  1-16. 

A  detailed  account  of  the 

removal  of  the  idols ;  the 


T  A  curious  incidental  confirmation  of  the  fact  of  thii 
copious  use  of  musical  instruments  in  Solomon's  time 
may  be  found  in  1  K.  x.  11,  12,  where  we  read  that  Solo 
mon  made  of  the  "  great  plenty  of  almug-trees  "  which 
came  from  Ophir  "  harps  and  psalteries  for  singers.'1 
Several  able  critics  (as  Ewald)  have  inferred  from  the 
frequent  mention  of  the  Levitical  musical  services,  that 
the  author  of  Chronicles  was  one  of  the  singers  of  the  tril* 
of  I*vi  himself. 

«  This    is  obviously   repeated   here,   because   at    thi< 
moment  th>>  priests  ought  to  liave  entered  into  t|,. 
but  co'.iM  not  Ix-raux1 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


Short  in  Kings. 

land,  and  removed  all  the 
idols  that  his  fathers  had 
made." 

Entirely  omitted. 

16-23.  His  war  with 
Baasha. 

23.  "  Nevertheless  in  the 
time  of  his  old  age  he  was 
diseased  in  his  feet" 


Full  in  Clironiiii.-i. 
fortifying     the     cities 


of 


Judah;  of  A  sa's  army ;  the 
invasion  of  Zerah  the  Ethio 
pian;  Asa's  victory;  Aza- 
riah  the  son  of  Oded's  pro 
phecy;  Asa's  further  re 
forms  in  the  15th  year  of 
his  reign. 

xvi.  7-14. 

Hanani's  prophecy  against 
Asa.  for  calling  in  the  aid 
of  Tabrimon  king  of  Syria : 
Asa's  wrath,  disease,  death 
embalming,  and  burial. 

"  And  Asa  slept  with  his 
fathers,  and  died  In  the  41st 
year  of  his  reign." 

2  Chr.  xvli. 

1.  "  And  Jehoshaphat  his 
son  reipied  in  his  stead." 

2-19  describes  how  the 
King  strengthened  himself 
against  Israel  by  putting 
garrisons  in  the  fortified 
towns  of  Judah,  and  some 
in  Ephraim;  his  wealth; 
his  zeal  in  destroying  ido 
latry  ;  his  measures  for  in 
structing  the  people  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord  by  means 
of  priests  and  Levites;  his 
captains,  and  the  numbers 
of  his  troops. 

1  K.  xxii.  (from  history  of  Israel)  =  2  Chr.  xviii. 
2  Chr.  xix. 

All  omitted  in  Kings.  Jehoshaphat's  reproof  by 

Jehu  the  son  of  Hanani. 
His  renewed  zeal  against 
idolatry.  His  appointment 
of  judges,  and  his  charge  to 
them.  Priests  and  Levites 
appointed  as  judges  at  Jeru 
salem  nnder  Amariah  the 
high-priest. 

2  Chr.  xx.  1-30. 
Invasion  of  Moabites  and 
Ammonites.  Jehoshaphat's 
fast;  his  prayer  to  God  for 
aid.  The  prophecy  of  Jaha- 
ziel.  Ministration  of  the 
Levites  with  the  army. 
Discomfiture  and  plunder 
of  the  enemy.  Return  to 
Jerusalem.  Levitical  pro 
cession. 

1  K.  xxii.  48,  49,  50  =  2  Chr.  xx.  35,  36,  xxi.  1. 


24.  "  And  Asa  slept  with 
his  fathers.'' 


1  K.  xxii.  41-50. 
"  Jehoshaphat  was  35 
years  old  when  he  began 
to  reign,"  £c.  These  few 
versea  are  all  the  account 
of  Jehosbaphat's  reign,  ex- 
tept  what  is  contained  in 
Uv;  history  of  Israel. 


Alt  omitted  in  Kings. 


All  oB.Hte.l  in  Kings. 


Omitted  in  Kings.     The 
tefusal  of  JehoBhaphat  was 

yfter  the  prophecy  of  Eli- 
ezer. 

Omitted  in  Kings. 


Omitted  in  Kings. 


2  1C.  ix.  27. 

"  And  when  Ahaziah  the 
king  of  Judah  saw  this,  he 
tied  by  the  way  of  the 
garden-house.  And  Jehu 
followed  after  him,  and 
said,  Smite  him  also  in  the 
chariot.  And  they  did  so 
at  the  going  up  to  Gnr, 
which  is  by  Iblcam.  And 
ho  llfd  to  Megiddo,  and 
died  there.  And  his  ser 
vants  carried  him  in  a 
chariot  to  Jerusalem,  and 
i.mrk'il  him  in  ':is  sepulchre 


2  Chr.  xx.  37. 
Prophecy  of  Eliezer. 


2  Chr.  xxi  2-4. 
Additional     history     of 
Jehoshaphat's  family. 
2  Chr.  xxi.  11-19,  xxii.  1. 
Idolatries    of    Jehoram. 
Writing  of  Elijah.  Invasion 
of  Judah  by  Philistines  and 
Arabians.    Slaughter  of  the 
king's  sons.  Miserable  sick 
ness  and  death  of  Jehoram. 

2  Chr.  xxii.  7-9. 
"  And  the  destruction  of 
Aha/.iah  was  of  God  by 
doming  to  Joram:  for  when 
he  was  come,  he  went  out 
with  Jehoram  against  Jehu 
the  son  of  Nimshi,  whom 
the  Lord  had  anointed  to 
cut  off  the  house  of  Ahab. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that 
when  Jehu  was  executing 
judgment  upon  the  house 
of  Ahab,  and  found  the 
princes  of  Judah  and  the 
sons  of  the  brethren  ol 


Short  in  Kings. 

with  his  fathers  in  the  city 
of  David." 


Full  in  Chronicles. 

Ahaziah,  that  ministered 
to  Ahaziah,  he  slew  them 
And  he  sought  Ahaziah 
and  they  caught  him  (for 
he  was  hid  in  Samaria), 
and  they  brought  him  U 
Jehu;  and  when  they  had 
slain  him  they  buried  him, 
because  said  they  he  is  the 
sun  of  Jehoshaphat,  who 
sought  the  Lord  with  all 
his  heart.  So  the  house  ol 
Ahaziah  had  no  power  still 
to  keep  the  kingdom." 

With  reference  to  the  above  two  accounts  of  the 
death  of  Ahaziah,  which  have  been  thought  irre- 
concileable  (Ewald,  iii.  529;  Parker's  Be  Wette, 
270;  Thenius,  &c.),  it  may  be  here  remarked,  that 
the  order  of  the  events  is  sufficiently  intelligible  if 
we  take  the  account  in  Chronicles,  where  the  king 
dom  of  Judah  is  the  main  subject,  as  explanatory 
of  the  brief  notice  in  Kings,  where  it  is  only  inci 
dentally  mentioned  in  the  history  of  Israel.  The 
order  is  clearly  as  follows: — Ahaziah  was  with 
Jehoram  at  Jezreel  when  Jehu  attacked  and  killed 
him.  Ahaziah  escaped  and  fled  by  the  Beth-gan 
road  to  Samaria,  where  the  partisans  of  the 
house  of  Ahab  were  strongest,  and  where  his  own 
brethren  were,  and  there  concealed  himself.  But 
when  the  sons  of  Ahab  were  all  put  to  death  in 
Samaria,  and  the  house  of  Ahab  had  hopelessly  lost 
the  kingdom,  he  determined  to  make  his  submission 
to  Jehu,  and  sent  his  brethren  to  salute  the  children 
of  Jehu8  (-2  K.  x.  13),  in  token  of  his  acknow 
ledgment  of  him  as  king  of  Israel.  Jehu,  instead 
of  accepting  this  submission,  had  them  all  put  to 
death,  and  hastened  on  to  Samaria  to  take  Ahaziah 
also,  who  he  had  probably  learnt  from  some  of  the 
attendants,  or  as  he  already  knew,  was  at  Samaria. 
Ahaziah  again  took  to  flight  northwards,  towards 
Megiddo,  perhaps  in  hope  of  reaching  the  dominions 
of  the  king  of  the  Sidonians,  his  kinsman,  or  mere 
probably  to  reach  the  coast  where  the  direct  road 
from  Tyre  to  Egypt  would  bring  him  to  Judah. 
[CAESAKEA.]  He  was  hotly  pursued  by  Jehu  and 
his  followers,  and  overtaken  near  Ibleam,  and  mor 
tally  wounded,  but  managed  to  get  as  far  as  Me 
giddo,  where  it  should  seem  Jehu  followed  in  pur 
suit  of  him,  and  where  he  was  brought  to  him  as 
his  prisoner.  There  he  died  of  his  wounds.  In 
consideration  of  his  descent  from  Jehoshaphat, 
"  who  sought  Jehovah  with  all  his  heart,"  Jehu, 
who  was  at  this  time  very  forward  in  displaying 
his  zeal  for  Jehovah,  handed  over  the  corpse  to  his 
followers,  with  permission  to  carry  it  to  Jerusalem, 
which  they  did,  and  buried  him  in  the  city  of 
David.  The  whole  difficulty  arises  from  the  ac 
count  in  Kings  being  abridged,  and  so  bringing 
together  two  incidents  which  were  not  consecutive 
in  the  original  account.  But  if  2  K.  ix.  27  had 
been  even  divided  into  two  verses,  the  first  ending 
at  "  garden-house,"  and  the  next  beginning  "  and 
Jehu  followed  after  him,"  the  difficulty  would  al 
most  disappear.  Jehu's  pursuit  of  Ahaziah  •vould 
only  be  interrupted  by  a  day  or  two,  and  there 
would  be  nothing  the  least  unusual  in  the  omission 
to  notice  this  interval  of  time  in  the  concise  abridged 
narrative.  We  should  then  understand  that  the 
word  also  in  the  original  narrative  referred  not  to 
Jehoram,  but  to  the  brethren  of  Ahaziah,  who  had 


•  Not,  as  Thenius  and  others,  the  children  of  J« 
horani,  ami  of  Jezebel  the  queen-mother. 

D  U 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


just  before  been  smitten,  ami  the  death  of  Aha/iah 
would  fall  under  2  K.  x.  17.  If  Beth-gan  (A.  V. 
"  garden-house")  be  the  same  as  En-gannim,  now 
Jeuin,  it  lay  directly  on  the  road  from  Jezreel  to 
Samaria,  and  is  also  the  place  at  which  the  road  to 
Megiddo  and  the  coast,  where  Caesurea  afterwards 
stood,  turns  off  from  the  road  between  Jezreel  and 
Samaria.b  In  this  case  the  mention  of  Beth-gan  in 
Kings  as  the  direction  of  Ahaziah's  flight  is  a  con 
firmation  of  the  statement  in  Chronicles  that  he 
concealed  himself  in  Samaria.  This  is  also  sub 
stantially  Keil's  explanation  (p.  288-9).  Movers 
proposes  an  alteration  of  the  text  (p.  92,  note), 
hut  not  very  successfully  QrVMflv  N-1H  K3*l  in- 
•tead  o 


The  other  principal  additions  in  bhe  Books  of 
Chronicles  to  the  facts  stated  in  Kings  are  the  fol- 
.owing.  In  2  Chr.  xxiv.  17-24  there  is  an  account 
of  Joash's  relapse  into  idolatry  after  the  death  of 
Jehoiada,  of  Zechariah's  prophetic  rebuke  of  him, 
and  of  the  stoning  of  Zechariah  by  the  king's  com 
mand  in  the  very  court  of  the  Temple  ;  and  the 
Syrian  invasion,  and  the  consequent  calamities  of 
the  close  of  Joash's  reign  are  stated  to  have  been 
the  consequence  of  this  iniquity.  The  Bock  of 
Kings  gives  the  history  of  the  Syrian  invasion  at 
the  close  of  Joash's  reign,  but  omits  all  mention  of 
Zechariah's  death.  In  the  account  of  the  Syrian 
invasion  also  some  details  are  given  of  a  battle  in 
which  Jehoash  was  defeated,  which  are  not  men 
tioned  in  Kings,  and  repeated  reference  is  made  to 
the  sin  of  the  king  and  people  as  having  drawn 
down  this  judgment  upon  them.  But  though  the 
apostasy  of  Jehoash  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Book 
of  Kings,  yet  it  is  clearly  implied  in  the  expression 
(2  K.  xii.  2),  "  Jehoash  did  that  which  was  right 
in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah  all  his  days,  wherein 
Jehoiada  the  priest  instructed  him."  The  silence 
of  Kings  is  perhaps  to  be  accounted  for  by  the 
author  following  here  the  Chronicle  of  the  Kings, 
in  which  Zechariah's  death  was  not  given.  And 
the  truth  of  the  narrative  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles 
is  confirmed  by  the  distinct  reference  to  the  death 
of  Zechariah,  Luke  xi.  49-51. 

2  Chr.  xxv.  5-16  contains  a  statement  of  a  ge 
nealogical  character,0  and  in  connexion  with  it  an 
account  of  the  hiring  of  100,000  mercenaries  out 
of  Israel,  and  their  dismissal  by  Amaziah  on  the 
bidding  of  a  man  of  God.  This  is  followed  by  an 


by 
ngs) 


account  (in  greater  detail  than  that  in  Kings)  of 
Amaziah's  victory  over  the  Edomites,  the  plunder 
of  certain  cities  in  Judah  by  the  rejected  mer 
cenaries  of  Israel,  the  idolatry  of  Amaziah  with  the 
idols  of  Edom,  and  his  rebuke  by  a  prophet. 

2  Chr.  xxvi.  5-20  contains  particulars  of  the 
reign  of  Uzziah,  his  wars  with  the  Philistines,  his 
towers  and  walls  which  he  built  in  Jerusalem  and 
Judah,  and  other  statistics  concerning  his  kingdom, 
somewhat  of  a  genealogical  character;  and  lastly, 
of  his  invasion  of  the  priestly  office,  the  resistance 
of  Azariah  the  priest,  and  the  leprosy  of  the  king. 
Of  all  this  nothing  is  mentioned  in  Kings  except 
Jie  fact  of  Uzziah's  leprosy  in  the  latter  part  of  his 
reign  ;  a  fact  which  connrms  the  history  in  Chro 
nicles.  The  silence  of  the  Book  of  Kings  may  most 


b  See  Van  de  Velde's  map  of  the  Holy  Land,  and 
Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  342. 

•  From  1  Chr.  ix.  1,  it  appears  that  "The  Book  of 
the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  contained  a 
ccpic  as  collection  of  genealogies. 


probably"  be  explained  here  on  the  mere  principle  ol 
abridgment. 

2  Chr.  xxvii.  2-6  contains  some  particulars  of  the 
reign  of  Jotham,  especially  of  the  building  done  by 
him,  and  the  tribute  paid  by  the  Ammonites,  which 
are  not  contained  in  Kings. 

2  Chr.  xxviii.  17-19  gives  details  of  invasions  by 
Edomites  and  Philistines,  and  of  cities  of  Judah 
taken  by  them  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  which  are  not 
recorded  in  Kings.  2  K.  xvi.  5  speaks  only  of  the 
hostile  attacks  of  Rezin  and  Pekah.  But  2  Chr. 
xxix.-xjxi.  contains  by  far  the  longest  and  most 
important  addition  to  the  narrative  in  the  Book  of 
Kings.  It  is  a  detailed  and  circumstantial  account 
of  the  purification  of  the  Temple  by  Hezekiah's 
orders  in  the  first  year  of  his  reign,  with  the  names 
of  all  the  principal  Levites  who  took  part  in  it,  and 
the  solemn  sacrifices  and  musical  services  with 
which  the  Temple  was  reopened,  and  the  worship 
of  God  reinstated,  after  the  desuetude  and  idolatries 
of  Ahaz's  reign.  It  then  givei  a  full  account  of  the 
celebration  of  a  great  Passover  at  Jerusalem  in  the 
second  month,  kept  by  all  the  tribes,  telling  us  that 
"  since  the  time  of  Solomon  the  son  of  David  king 
of  Israel  there  was  not  the  like  in  Jerusalem  ;"  and 
goes  on  to  describe  the  destruction  of  idols  both  in 
Judah  and  Israel ;  the  revival  of  the  courses  of 
priests  and  Levites,  with  the  order  for  their  proper 
maintenance,  and  the  due  supply  of  the  daily, 
weekly,  and  monthly  sacrifices  ;  the  preparation  of 
chambers  in  the  Temple  for  the  reception  of  the 
tithes  and  dedicated  things,  with  the  names  of  the 
various  Levites  appointed  to  different  charges  con 
nected  with  them.  Of  this  there  is  no  mention  in 
Kings :  only  the  high  religious  character  and  zeal, 
and  the  attachment  to  the  law  of  Moses,  ascribed 
to  him  in  2  K.  xviii.  4-6,  is  in  exact  accordance 
with  these  details. 

2  Chr.  xxxii.  2-8  supplies  some  interesting  facts 
connected  with  the  defence  of  Jerusalem,  and  its 
supplies  of  water,  in  He7ekiah's  reign,  which  are 
not  mentioned  in  2  K.  xviii. 

2  Chr.  xxxiii.  11-19  contains  the  history  of  Ma- 
nasseh's  captivity,  deportation  to  Babylon,  repent 
ance  and  restoration  to  his  throne,  and  an  account 
of  his  buildings  in  Jerusalem  after  his  return.  The 
omission  of  this  remarkable  passage  of  history  in 
the  Book  of  Kings  is  perhaps  one  of  the  most  diffi 
cult  to  account  for.  But  since  the  circumstances 
are,  in  the  main,  in  harmony  with  the  narrative  in 
Kings,  and  with  what  we  know  of  the  profane  his 
tory  of  the  times  (as  Keil  has  shown,  p.  427),  and 
since  we  have  seen  numerous  other  omissions  of 
important  events  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  to  distalkve 
or  reject  it  on  that  account,  or  to  make  it  a  ground 
of  discrediting  the  Book  of  Chronicles,  is  entirely 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  sound  criticism.  Indeed 
all  the  soberer  German  critics  accept  it  as  truth, 
and  place  Manasseh's  captivity  under  Esarhaddon 
(Bertheau,  in  foc.).d  Bertheau  suggests  that  some 
support  to  the  account  may  perhaps  be  found  in 
2  K.  xx.  17,  seq.  Movers,  while  he  defends  tha 
truth  of  Manasseh's  exile  to  Babylon,  seems  to  giv;< 
up -the  story  of  his  rejientance,  and  reduces  it  to 
the  level  of  a  moral  romance,  such  as  the  books  of 
Tobit  and  Judith.  But  such  a  mode  of  explaining 

d  In  like  manner  the  Book  of  Kings  is  silent  con- 
corning  Jehoiakim's  heing  carried  to  Babylon  ;  and 
yet  Dan.  i.  2,  Kz.  xix.  9,  hoth  expiessly  mention  it, 
in  accordance  with  2  Chr.  xxxri.  6. 


KINGS,  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OF 


37 


away  plain  historical  statements  of  a  trustworthy 
historian,  who  cites  contemporary  documents  ns  his 
authority  (let  alone  the  peculiar  character  of  the 
Bible  histories  as  "  given  by  inspiration  of  God  "), 
cannot  reasonably  be  accepted.  There  is  doubtless 
.some  reason  why  the  repentance  of  Manasseh  for 
his  dreadful  and  heinous  wickedness  was  not  re 
corded  in  the  Book  of  Kings,  and  why  it  was 
recorded  in  Chronicles ;  just  as  there  is  some  reason 
why  the  repentance  of  the  thief  on  the  cross  is  only 
recorded  by  one  evangelist,  and  why  the  raising  of 
Jjazarus  is  passed  over  in  silence  in  the  three  first 
Gospels.  It  may  be  a  moral  reason :  it  may  have 
been  that  Manasseh's  guilt  being  permanent  in  its 
fatal  effects  upon  his  country,  he  was  to  be  handed 
down  to  posterity  in  the  national  record  as  the 
BINFUL  KING,  though,  having  obtained  mercy  as  a 
penitent  man,  his  repentance  and  pardon  were  to 
have  a  record  in  the  more  piivate  chronicle  of  the 
church  of  Israel.  But,  whatever  the  cause  of  this 
silence  in  the  Book  of  Kings  may  be,  there  is 
nothing  to  justify  the  rejection  as  non-historical 
of  any  part  of  this  narrative  in  the  Book  of 
Chronicles. 

Passing  over  several  other  minor  additions,  such 
as  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12-14,  xxxv.  25,  xxxvi.  6,  7,  13, 
17,  it  may  suffice  to  notice  in  the  last  place  the  cir 
cumstantial  account  of  JOSIAH'S  PASSOVER  in 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  1-19,  as  compared  with  2  K.  xxiii. 
21-23.  This  addition  has  the  same  strong  Levi- 
tical  character  that  appears  in  some  of  the  other 
additions ;  contains  the  names  of  many  Levites,  and 
sspecially,  as  in  so  many  other  passages  of  Chro 
nicles,  the  names  of  singers  ;  but  is  in  every  respect, 
except  as  to  the  time,8  confirmatory  of  the  brief 
account  in  Kings.  It  refers,  curiously  enough,  to  a 
great  Passover  held  in  the  days  of  Samuel  (thus 
defining  the  looser  expressions  in  2  K.  xxiii.  22, 
"  the  days  of  the  judges  "),  of  which  the  memorial, 
like  that  of  Joab's  terrible  campaign  in  Edom  (1  K. 
xi.  15,  16),  has  not  been  preserved  in  the  books  of 
Samuel,  and  enables  us  to  reconcile  one  of  those 
little  verbal  apparent  discrepancies  which  are  jumped 
at  by  hostile  and  unscrupulous  criticism.  For  the 
detailed  account  of  the  two  Passovers  in  the  reigns 
of  Hezekiah  and  Josiah  enables  us  to  see,  that,  while 
Hezekiah's  was  most  remarkable  for  the  extensive 
feasting  and  joy  with  which  it  was  celebrated,  Jo- 
siah's  was  more  to  be  praised  for  the  exact  order  in 
which  everything  was  done,  and  the  fuller  union 
of  all  the  tribes  in  the  celebration  of  it  (2  Chr.  xxx. 
26,  xxxv.  18 ;  2  K.  xxiii.  22).  As  regards  discre 
pancies  which  have  been  imagined  to  exist  between 
the  narratives  in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  besides  those 
already  noticed,  and  besides  those  which  are  too 
trifling  to  require  notice,  the  account  of  the  repair 
of  the  Temple  by  King  Joash,  and  that  of  the  in 
vasion  of  Judah  by  Hazael  in  the  same  reign  may 
be  noticed.  For  the  latter,  see  JOASH.  As  regards 
the  former,  the  only  real  difficulty  is  the  position 
of  the  chest  for  receiving  the  contributions.  The 
writer  of  2  K.  xii.  9,  seems  to  place  it  in  the  inner 
court,  close  to  the  brazen  altar,  and  says  that  the 
priests  who  kept  the  door  put  therein  all  the  money 
that  was  brought  into  the  house  of  Jehovah.  The 
Writer  of  2  Chr.  xxiv.  8,  places  it  apparently  in  the 


outer  court,  at  the  entrance  into  the  inner  court, 
and  makes  the  princes  and  people  cast  the  money 
into  it  themselves.  Bertheau  thinks  there  were  two 
chests.  Lightfoot,  that  it  was  first  placed  by  the 
altar,  and  afterwards  removed  outside  at  the  gate 
(ix.  374-5),  but  whether  either  of  these  be  the  true 
explanation,  or  whether  rather  the  same  spot  be 
not  intended  by  the  two  descriptions,  the  point  is 
too  unimportant  to  require  further  consideration  in 
this  place. 

From  the  above  comparison  of  parallel  narratives 
in  the  two  books,  which,  if  given  at  all,  it  was  neces 
sary  to  give  somewhat  fully,  in  order  to  give  them 
fairly,  it  appears  that  the  results  are  precisely  what 
would  naturally  arise  from  the  circumstances  of  the 
case.  The  writer  of  Chronicles,  having  the  books 
of  Kings  before  him,f  and  to  a  great  extent  making 
those  books  the  basis  of  his  own,  but  also  having 
his  own  personal  views,  predilections,  and  motives 
in  writing,  writing  for  a  different  age,  and  for 
people  under  very  different  circumstances;  and, 
moreover,  having  before  him  the  original  autho 
rities  from  which  the  books  of  Kings  were  com 
piled,  as  well  as  some  others,  naturally  rearranged 
the  older  narrative  as  suited  his  purpose,  and  his 
tastes ;  gave  in  full  passages  which  the  other  had 
abridged,  inserted  what  had  been  wholly  omittal. 
omitted  some  things  which  the  other  had  inserted, 
including  everything  relating  to  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  and  showed  the  colour  of  his  own  mind,  no< 
only  in  the  nature  of  the  passages  which  he  selecte  i 
from  the  ancient  documents,  but  in  the  reflections 
which  he  frequently  adds  upon  the  events  which 
he  relates,  and  possibly  also  in  the  turn  given  to 
some  of  the  speeches  which  he  records.  But  tc 
say,  as  has  been  said  or  insinuated,  that  a  different 
view  of  supernatural  agency  and  Divine  interposition, 
or  of  theMosaic  institutions  and  the  Levitical  worship, 
is  given  in  the  two  books,  or  that  a  less  historical  cha 
racter  belongs  to  one  than  to  the  other,  is  to  say  what 
has  not  the  least  foundation  in  fact.  Supernatural 
agency,  as  in  the  cloud  which  filled  the  temple  of  Solo 
mon,  1  K.  viii.  10,  11,  the  appearance  of  the  Lord 
to  Solomon,  iii.  5,  11,  ix.  2,  seq. ;  the  withering  of 
Jeroboam's  hand,  xiii.  3-6  ;  the  fire  from  heaven 
which  consumed  Elijah's  sacrifice,  xviii.  38,  and 
numerous  other  incidents  in  the  lives  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha ;  the  smiting  of  Sennacherib's  army,  2  K. 
xix.  35  ;  the  going  back  of  the  shadow  on  the  dial 
of  Ahaz,  xx.  11,  and  in  the  very  frequent  prophe 
cies  uttered  and  fulfilled,  is  really  more  often  ad 
duced  in  these  books  than  in  the  Chronicles.  The 
selection  therefore  of  one  or  two  instances  of  mira 
culous  agency  which  happen  to  be  mentioned  iu 
Chronicles  and  not  in  Kings,  as  indications  of  the 
superstitious  credulous  disposition  of  the  Jews  after 
the  captivity,  can  have  no  effect  but  to  mislead. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  a  selection  of  pa-vages  in 
Chronicles  in  wnich  the  mention  of  Jewish  iMa',ry 
is  omitted.  It  conveys  a  false  inference,  because 
the  truth  is  that  the  Chronicler  does  expose  the 
idolatry  of  Judah  as  severely  as  the  author  of 
Kings,  and  traces  the  destruction  of  Judah  to  such 
idolatry  quite  as  clearly  and  forcibly  (2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
14,  seq.}.  The  author  of  Kings  again  is  quite  as 
explicit  in  his  references  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and 


*   See  above,  under  II. 

r  This  appears  by  comparing  the  parallel  passages, 
and  especially  noticing  how  the  formula,  "  Now  the 
rest  of  the  acts,"  &c.,  comes  in  in  both  books.  See, 
t.g.  1  K.  xv.  23,  24,  and  2  Chr.  xvi.  11,  12.  Of 


this  1  K.  xiv.  31,  xv.  1,  compared  with  2  Chr.  xii.  16, 
xiii.  1 ,  2,  is  another  striking  proof.  So  is  the  repetition 
of  rare  words  found  in  K.  by  the  Chronicler.  Comp, 
2  xiv.  14  with  2  Chr.  xxv.  24,  xv.  5,  with  xxvi.  21. 
1  *-.  6,  with  2  ix.  25. 


38 


KINGS.  FIRST  AND  SECOND  BOOKS  OP 


has  many  allusions  to  the  Levitical  ritual,  though 
he  does  not  dwell  so  copiously  upon  the  details. 
See  e.g.  1  K.  ii.  3,  iii.  14,  viii.  2,  4,  9,  53,  56,  ix. 
9,  20,  x.  12,  xi.  2,  xii.  31,  32;  2  K.  xi.  5-7, 
12,  xil.  5,  11,  13,  16,  xiv.  6,  xvi.  13,  15,  xvii. 
7-12,  13-15,  34-39,  xviii.  4,  6,  xxii.  4,  5,  8,  scq.. 
xxiii.  21,  &c.,  besides  the  constant  references  to 
the  Temple,  and  to  the  illegality  of  high-place  wor 
ship.  So  that  remarks  on  the  Levitical  tone  of 
Chronicles,  when  made  for  the  purpose  of  supporting 
the  notion  that  the  law  of  Moses  was  a  late  inven 
tion,  and  that  the  Levitical  worship  was  of  post- 
Babylonian  growth,  are  made  in  the  teeth  of  the 
testimony  of  the  books  of  Kings,  as  well  as  those  of 
Joshua,  Judges,  and  Samuel.  The  opinion  that  these 
books  were  compiled  "  towards  the  end  of  the  Baby 
lonian  exile,"  is  doubtless  also  adopted  in  order  to 
weaken  as  much  as  possible  the  force  of  this  testi 
mony  (De  Wette,  ii.  p.  248  ;  Th.  Parker's  transl.). 
As  regards  the  weight  to  be  given  to  the  judgment 
of  clitics  "of  the  liberal  school,"  on  such  questions, 
it  may  be  observed  by  the  way  that  they  com 
mence  every  such  investigation  with  this  axiom  as 
a  starting  point,  "  Nothing  supernatural  can  be 
true."  All  prophecy  is  of  course  comprehended 
under  this  axiom.  Every  writing  therefore  con 
taining  any  reference  to  the  captivity  of  the  Jews, 
as  1  K.  viii.  46,  47,  ix.  7,  8,  must  have  been 
written  after  the  events  referred  to.  No  events  of 
a  supernatural  kind  could  be  attested  in  contempo 
rary  historical  documents.  All  the  narratives  there 
fore  in  which  such  events  are  narrated  do  not  belong 
to  the  ancient  annals,  but  must  be  of  later  growth, 
aixl  so  on.  How  far  the  mind  of  a  critic,  who  has 
such  an  axiom  to  start  with,  is  free  to  appreciate 
the  other  and  more  delicate  kinds  of  evidence  by 
which  the  date  of  documents  is  decided  it  is  easy  to 
perceive.  However,  these  remarks  are  made  here 
solely  to  assist  the  reader  in  coming  to  a  right  deci 
sion  on  questions  connected  with  the  criticism  of  the 
books  of  Kings. 

V.  The  last  point  for  our  consideration  is  the 
place  of  these  books  in  the  Canon,  and  the  references 
to  them  in  the  N.  T.  Their  canonical  authority 
having  never  been  disputed,  it  is  needless  to  bring 
orward  the  testimonies  to  their  authenticity  which 
may  be  found  in  Josephus,  Eusebius,  Jerome,  Au 
gustine,  &c.,  or  in  Bp.  Cosin,  or  any  other  modern 
work  on  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  [CANON.]  They 
are  reckoned,  as  has  been  already  noticed,  among  the 
Prophets  [BIBLE,  vol.  i.  211a],  in  the  threefold  divi 
sion  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ;  a  position  in  accordance 
with  the  supposition  that  they  were  compiled  by 
Jeremiah,  and  contain  the  narratives  of  the  different 
prophets  in  succession.  They  are  frequently  cited 
by  our  Lord  and  by  the  Apostles.  Thus  the  allu 
sions  to  Solomon's  glory  (Matt.  vi.  29) ;  to  the 
queen  of  Sheba's  visit  to  Solomon  to  hear  his  wis 
dom  (xii.  42)  ;  to  the  Temple  (Acts  vii.  47,  48)  ; 
to  the  great  drought  in  the  days  of  Elijah,  and 
the  widow  of  Sarepta  (Luke  iv.  25,  26)  ;  to  the 
cleansing  of  Naamau  the  Syrian  (ver.  27) ;  to  the 
charge  of  Elisha  to  Gehazi  (2  K.  iv.  29,  comp. 
with  Luke  x.  4) ;  to  the  dress  of  Elijah  (Mark  i. 
ti,  comp.  with  2  K.  i.  8) ;  to  the  complaint  of 
Elijah,  and  God's  answer  to  him  (Rom.  xi.  3, 
4) ;  to  the  raising  of  the  Shunamite's  son  from 
the  dead  (Heb.  xi.  35);  to  the  giving  and  with- 


*  The  miracle  of  the  loaves  and  fishex  (Luke  ix.  13, 
2  K.  iv.  42.  John  vi.  9,  2  K.  iv.  43),  and  the  catch 
ing  away  of  Philip,  Acts  ix.  39,  -10,  as  compared  with 


holding  the  rain  in  answer  to  Elijah's  prayer  ( Jam 
v.  17,  18  ;  Kev.  xi.  6);  to  Jezebel  (Rev.  ii.  20) 
are  all  derived  from  the  Books  of  Kings,  and,  with 
the  statement  of  Elijah's  presence  at  the  Transfi 
guration,  are  a  striking  testimony  to  their  value 
for  the  purpose  of  religious  teaching,  and  to  their 
authenticity  as  a  portion  of  the  Woi~d  of  God.8 

On  the  whole  then,  in  this  portion  of  the  history 
of  the  Israelitish  people  to  which  the  name  of  the 
Books  of  Kings  has  been  given,  we  have  (if  we 
except  those  errors  in  numbers,  which  are  either 
later  additions  to  the  original  work,  or  accidentil 
corruptions  of  the  text),  a  most  important  and  ac 
curate  account  of  that  people  during  upwards  of 
four  hundred  years  of  their  national  existence,  deli 
vered  for  the  most  part  by  contemporary  writers, 
and  guaranteed  by  the  authority  of  one  of  the  most 
eminent  of  the  Jewish  prophets.  Considering  the 
conciseness  of  the  narrative,  and  the  simplicity  of 
the  style,  the  amount  of  knowledge  which  these 
books  convey  of  the  characters,  conduct,  and  man 
ners  of  kings  and  people  during  so  long  a  period  is 
truly  wonderful.  The  insight  they  give  us  into 
the  aspect  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  both  natural 
and  artificial,  into  the  religious,  military,  and  civil 
institutions  of  the  people,  their  arts  and  manu 
factures,  the  state  of  education  and  learning  among 
them,  their  resources,  commerce,  exploits,  alliances, 
the  causes  of  their  decadence,  and  finally  of  their 
ruin,  is  most  clear,  interesting,  and  instructive.  In 
a  few  brief  sentences  we  acquire  more  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  affairs  of  Egypt,  Tyre,  Syria, 
Assyria,  Babylon,  and  other  neighbouring  nations, 
than  had  been  preserved  to  us  in  all  the  other  re 
mains  of  antiquity  up  to  the  recent  discoveries  in 
hieroglyphical  and  cuneiform  monuments.  If  we 
seek  in  them  a  system  of  scientific  chronology,  we 
may  indeed  be  disappointed  ;  but  if  we  are  content 
to  read  accurate  and  truthful  history,  ready  to  fit 
into  its  proper  place  whenever  the  exact  chronology 
of  the  times  shall  have  been  settled  from  other 
sources,  then  we  shall  assuredly  find  they  will 
abundantly  repay  the  most  laborious  study  which 
we  can  bestow  upon  them. 

But  it  is  for  their  deep  religious  teaching,  and  for 
the  insight  which  they  give  us  into  God's  provi 
dential  and  moiai  government  of  the  world,  that  they 
are  above  all  valuaole.  The  books  which  describe 
the  wisdom  and  the  glory  of  Solomon,  and  yet  record 
his  fall ;  which  make  us  acquainted  with  the  painful 
ministry  of  Elijah,  and  his  translation  into  heaven 
and  which  tell  us  how  the  most  magnificent  temple 
ever  built  for  God's  glory,  and  of  which  He  vouch 
safed  to  take  possession  by  a  visible  symbol  of  His 
presence,  was  consigned  to  the  flames  ;uid  to  desola 
tion,  for  the  sins  of  those  who  worshipped  in  it,  read 
us  such  lessons  concerning  both  God  and  man,  as  are 
the  best  evidence  of  their  divine  origin,  and  make 
them  the  richest  treasure  to  every  Christian  man. 

On  the  points  discussed  in  the  preceding  article 
see  Ussher's  Chronologia  Sacra  ;  Hales'  Analysis ; 
Clinton's  Hist.  Hellen.  vol.  i. ;  Lepsius,  KSnigsbuch 
d.  JSgypt.;  Berth eau's  Bitch,  d.  Chronik. ;  Keil, 
Chronik;  Movers,  Krit.  Untersuch.  ii.  d.  Bibl. 
Chronik ;  De  Wette,  Einleitung ;  Ewald's  GcS' 
chichte  des  Isr.  Volk. ;  Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place  i» 
Hist.;  Geneste's  Parallel  Histories;  Rawlinson's 
Herodotus,  and  Bampton  Led. ;  J.  W.  Bosan- 


1    K.  xviii.   12,  2  K.  ii.   16,  aro  also,  in  a   diflcrint 
way,  N.  T.  references  to  the  Books  o!  Kint;s. 


KIR 

quet,  Cfa'onology  of  Times  of  Ezr.,  Transact,  of 
'Jhronolog.  Instit,  No.  iii.  ;  Maurice,  Kings  and 
Propkets.  [A.  C.  H.] 

KIR  ("VJ5  :  Xapfrdv  :  Gyrene)  is  mentioned  by 
Amos  (is.  7)  as  the  land  from  which  the  Syrians 
(Aramaeans)  were  once  "brought  up;"  i.e.  ap 
parently,  as  the  country  where  they  had  dwelt 
before  migrating  to  the  region  north  of  Palestine. 
It  was  also,  curiously  enough,  the  land  to  which 
the  captive  Syrians  of  Damascus  were  removed  by 
Tiglath-Pileser  ou  his  conquest  of  that  city  (2  K. 
xvi.  9  ;  comp.  Am.  i.  5).  Isaiah  joins  it  with 
Elam  in  a  passage  where  Jerusalem  is  threatened 
with  an  attack  from  a  foreign  army  (xxii.  6). 
These  notices,  and  the  word  itself,  are  all  the  data 
we  possess  for  determining  the  site.  A  variety  of 
conjectures  have  been  offered  on  this  point,  grounded 
on  some  similarity  of  name.  Rennell  suggested 
Kurdistan  (Geography  of  Herodotus,  p.  391)  ; 
Vitringa,  Carine,  a  town  of  Media  ;  Bochart 
(Phaleg,  iv.  32,  p.  293),  CW-ena  or  Curna.,  like 
wise  in  Media.  But  the  common  opinion  among 
recent  commentators  has  been  that  a  tract  on  the 
river  Kur  or  Cyrus  (Kvpos)  is  intended.  This  is 
the  view  of  Rosenmuller,  Michaelis,  and  Gesenius. 
Winer  sensibly  remarks  that  the  tract  to  which 
these  writers  refer  "  never  belonged  to  Assyria," 
and  so  cannot  possibly  have  been  the  country 
whei-eto  Tiglath-Pileser  transported  his  captives 
(JBealwBrterbuch,  i.  658).  He  might  have  added, 
that  all  we  know  of  the  Semites  and  their  migra 
tions  is  repugnant  to  a  theory  which  would  make 
Northern  Armenia  one  of  their  original  settlements. 
The  Semites,  whether  Aramaeans,  Assyrians,  Phoe 
nicians,  or  Jews,  seem  to  have  come  originally  from 
lower  Mesopotamia  —  the  country  about  the  mouths 
of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  rivers.  Here  exactly 
was  Elam  or  Elymais,  with  which  Kir  is  so  closely 
connected  by  Isaiah.  May  not  Kir  then  be  a 
variant  for  Kish  or  Rush  (Gush),  and  represent 
the  eastern  Ethiopia,  the  Cissia  (Kiffffla)  of  He 
rodotus?  [G.  R.] 

KIR-HARA'SETH  (Win  *Vj3n  :  rovs  \l- 

/  '•'  T-:        '•  - 

Oovs  rov  Toi\ov  KaOijprift.ei'ovs  ',  Alex.  .  .  .  Ko07j- 
atvovs  :  murus  fictilis),  2  K.  iii.  25. 

KIR-HA'RESH  (CHH  'p,  i.  e.  Kir-hares  : 
"ei\os  evfKaiviffas  ;  Alex.  T?X.OS  &  fveKtviffas  : 
ad  murum  cocti  lateris),  Is.  xvi.  11. 

KIR-HARE'SETH  (nbnn  'p  :  TO?S  KO.TOI- 
Kovfft  tie  2*0  |ueA.e'Hj<reis  :  murus  cocti  lateris), 
Is.  xvi.  7. 


KIRJATH 


39 


K.IR-HERES  (K^H  'p  :  xetpdSes  avxnov  '• 
murus  fictilis),  Jer.  xlviii.  31,  36.  This  name  and 
the  three  preceding,  all  slight  variations  of  it,  are 
all  applied  to  one  place,  probably  Kiu-MoAB. 
Whether  Cheres  refers  to  a  worship  of  the  sun 
carried  on  there  is  uncertain  ;  we  are  without  clue 
to  the  meaning  of  the  name. 

KIB'IAH  (HHp),  apparently  an  ancient  or 
arehai-  word,  meaning  a  city  or  town.  The  grounds 
irr  considering  it  a  more  ancient  word  than  IR  ("VJ?  ) 
or  AR  (^JJ)  are  —  (1.)  Its  more  frequent  occurrence 
in  the  names  of  places  existing  in  the  country  at  the 
time  of  the  conquest.  These  will  be  found  below. 
(2.)  Its  rare  occurrence  as  a  mere  appellative, 
.\\cept  in  poetry,  where  old  words  and  forms 
are  often  preserved  after  they  become  obsolete  in 


ordinary  language.  Out  of  the  36  times  that  it 
is  found  in  the  O.  T.  (both  in  its  original  and  its 
Chaldee  form)  4  only  are  in  the  narrative  of  the 
earlier  books  (Deut.  ii.  36,  iii.  4  ,  I  K.  i.  41,  45), 
24  are  in  poetical  passages  (Num.  xxi.  28 ;  Ps, 
xlviii.  2 ;  is.  i.  26,  &c.  &c.),  and  8  in  the  book 
of  Ezra,  either  in  speaking  of  Samaria  (iv.  10),  or 
in  the  letter  of  the  Samaritans  (iv.  12-21),  imply 
ing  that  it  had  become  a  provincialism.  In  this  it 
is  unlike  Ir,  which  is  the  ordinary  term  for  a  city 
in  narrative  or  chronicle,  while  it  enters  into  the 
composition  of  early  names  in  a  far  smaller  propor 
tion  of  cases.  For  illustration — though  for  that 
only — Kiryah  may  perhaps  be  compared  to  the 
word  "  burg,"  or  "  bury,"  in  our  own  language. 

Closely  related  to  Kiryah  is  Kereth  (fOp),  appa 
rently  a  Phoenician  form,  \which  occurs  occasion 
ally  (Job  xxix.  7  ;  Prov.  viii.  3).  This  is  familiar 
to  us  in  the  Latin  garb  of  CarfAago,  and  in  the 
Parthian  and  Armenian  names  Cirta.  Tigrano  Certa 
(Bochart,  Chanaan,  ii.  cap.  x ;  Gesenius,  Thes. 
1236-7). 

As  a  proper  name  it  appears  in  the  Bible  under 
the  forms  of  Kerioth,  Kartah,  Kartan ;  besides  tho*e 
immediately  following.  [G.] 

KIRIATHA'IM  (D?nnp,  but  in  the  Cethib 
of  Ez.  xxv.  9,  amp:  Kap<a0e>,  in  Vat.  of  Jer. 
xlviii.  1 ;  elsewhere  with  Alex.  Kaptadaifj. :  Car- 
iathaim),  one  of  the  towns  of  Moab  which  were  the 
"  glory  of  the  country ;"  named  amongst  the  de 
nunciations  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1,  23)  and  Ezekiel 
(xxv.  9).  It  is  the  same  place  as  KIRJATHAIM,  in 
which  form  the  name  elsewhere  occurs  in  the  A .  V. 
Taken  as  a  Hebrew  word  this  would  mean  "  double 
city ;"  but  the  original  reading  of  the  text  of  Ez. 
xxv.  9,  Kiriatham,  taken  with  that  of  the  Vat. 
LXX.  at  Num.  xxxii.  37,  prompts  the  suspicion 
that  that  may  be  nearer  its  original  form,  and  that 
the  aim — the  Hebrew  dual — is  a  later  accommoda 
tion,  in  obedience  to  the  ever-existing  tendency  in 
the  names  of  places  to  adopt  an  intelligible  shape. 
In  the  original  edition  (A.D.  1611)  of  the  A.  V.  the 
name  Kirjath,  with  its  compounds,  is  given  as 
Kiriath,  the  yod  being  there,  as  elsewhere  in  that 
edition,  represented  by  f.  Kiriathaim  is  one  of  the 
few  of  these  names  which  in  the  subsequent  editions 
have  escaped  the  alteration  of » to  j.  [G.] 

KIRIATHIA'RIUS  (KaptaOipl ;  Alex.  Ko- 
piaOidpios:  Crearpatros) ,  1  Esd.  v.  19.  [KlR- 
JATH-JEARIM,  and  K.  ARIM.] 

KIR'IOTH  (JTinpn,  with  the  definite  article, 
i.  e.  hak-Keriyoth :  at  ir6\eis  avrrjs :  Carieth), 
a  place  in  Moab  the  palaces  of  which  were  de 
nounced  by  Amos  with  destruction  by  fire  (Am.  ii 
2) ;  unless  indeed  it  be  safer  to  treat  the  word  as 
meaning  simply  "  the  cities  " — which  is  prohably 
the  case  also  in  Jer.  xlviii.  41,  where  the  word  is 
in  the  original  exactly  similar  to  the  above,  thoual 
given  in  the  A.  V.  "  Kerioth."  [KERIOTH.]  [G".  j 

KIR'JATH  (Jin? :  'lopf/u;  Alex.  -K&\I j  'lapip. : 

Cariath),  the  last  of  the  cities  enumerated  as  be 
longing  to  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  28). 
one  of  the  group  which  contains  both  Gibeon  and 
Jerusalem.  It  is  named  with  Gibeath,  but  with 
out  any  copulative — "  Gibeath,  Kirjath,"  a  circum 
stance  which,  in  the  absence  of  any  further  men 
tion  of  the  place,  has  given  rise  to  several  explana 
tions.  (1.)  That  of  Eusebius  in  the  Onomasttcon 
(KaptdO),  that  it  was  under  the  protection  of  Gibeeh 


*0  KIRJATHAIM 

(farb  MTjTpoirJA.ij'  Ta^ada).  This,  however,  seems 
to  be  a  mere  supposition.  (2.)  That  of  Schwarz 
and  others,  that  the  two  names  form  the  title  of 
one  place,  "Gibeath-Kirjath"  (the  hill-town). 
Against  this  is  the  fact  that  the  towns  in  this 
group  are  summed  up  as  14;  but  the  objection  has 
not  much  force,  and  there  are  several  considerations 
in  favour  of  the  view.  [See  GIBEATH,  6896.]  But 
whether  there  is  any  connexion  between  these  two 
names  or  not,  there  seems  a  strong  probability  that 
Kirjath  is  identical  with  the  better-known  place 
KIRJATH-JEARIM,  and  that  the  latter  part  of  the 
name  has  been  omitted  by  copyists  at  some  very 
early  period.  Such  an  omission  would  be  very 
likely  to  arise  from  the  fact  that  the  word  for 
"  cities,"  which  in  Hebrew  follows  Kirjath,  is  al 
most  identical  with  Jearim  ;a  and  that  it  has  arisen 
we  have  the  testimony  of  the  LXX.  in  both  MSS. 
(the  Alex,  most  complete),  as  well  as  of  some  Hebrew 
MSS.  still  existing  (Davidson,  Jlebr.  Text,  ad  loc.). 
In  addition,  it  may  be  asked  why  Kirjath  should  be 
in  the  "  construct  state  "  if  no  word  follows  it  to 
be  in  construction  with  ?  In  that  case  it  would  be 
Kiriah.  True,  Kirjath-jearim  is  enumerated  as  a 
city  of  Judah  b  (Josh.  xv.  9,  60,  xviii.  14),  but  so 
are  several  towns  which  were  Simeon's  and  Dan's, 
and  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  these  places  never 
changed  hands.  [G.] 

KIRJATHA'IM  (D^nnp),  the  name  of  two 
cities  of  ancient  Palestine. 

1.  (Kapia6dfj.c  (in  Num.),  KapiaBatfi:  Caria- 
thaim.)  On  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  one  of  the 
places  which  were  taken  possession  of  and  rebuilt 
by  the  Reubenites,  and  had  fresh  names  conferred  on 
them  (Num.  xxxii.  37,  and  see  38).  Here  it  is 
mentioned  between  Elealeh,  Nebo,  and  Baal-meon, 
the  first  and  last  of  which  are  known  with  some 
tolerable  degree  of  certainty.  But  on  its  next 
occurrence  (Josh.  xii.  19)  the  same  order  of  men 
tion  is  not  maintained,  and  it  appears  in  company 
with  MEPHAATH  and  SIBMAH,  of  which  at  present 
nothing  is  known.  It  is  possibly  the  same  place 
as  that  which  gave  its  name  to  the  ancient  Shaveh- 
Kiriathaim,  though  this  is  mere  conjecture.  It 
existed  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1,  23)  and 
Ezekiel  (xxv.  9 — in  these  three  passages  the  A.  V. 
gives  the  name  KIUIATHAIM).  Both  these  prophets 
include  it  in  their  denunciations  against  Moab,  in 
whose  hands  it  then  was,  prominent  among  the 
cities  which  were  "  the  glory  of  the  country" 
(Ez.  xxv.  9). 

By  Eusebius  it  appears  to  have  been  well  known. 
He  describes  it  (Onom.  Kapiadieifj.)  as  a  village 
entirely  of  Christians,  10  miles  west  of  Medeba, 
"  close  to  the  Baris  "  (M  r'bv  Edpiv).  Burckhardt 
(p.  367,  July  13)  when  at  Madeba  (Medeba)  was 


KIRJATH-AUUA 

told  by  his  guided  of  a  place,  et-Tei/m.  about  half  aa 
hour  (1^  mile  English,  or  barely  2  miles  Komai.; 
therefrom,  which  he  suggests  Aras  identical  with 
Kirjathaim.  This  is  supported  by  Gesenius  (see 
his  notes  on  Burckhardt  in  the  Germ,  transl. 
p.  1063),  who  passes  by  the  discrepancy  in  the  dis 
tance  by  saying  that  Eusebius's  measurements  are 
seldom  accurate.  Seetien  also  names  half  an  hour 
as  the  distance  (Reisen,  1.  408). 

But  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  .evidence  for 
the  identity  of  the  two  is  not  veiy  convincing,  and 
appeal's  to  rest  entirely  on  the  similarity  in  sound 
between  the  termination  of  Kirjathaim  and  the 
name  of  et-Teym.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  the 
name  was  Karias — having  retained,  as  would  b« 
expected,  the  first  and  chief  part  of  the  word. 
Porter  (Hdbook,  300)  pronounces  confidently  for 
Kureiyat,  under  the  southern  side  ofJebel  Attants, 
as  being  identical  both  with  Kiijathaim  and  Kirjath- 
Huzoth ;  but  he  adduces  no  arguments  in  support 
of  his  conclusion,  which  is  entirely  at  variance 
with  Eusebius;  while  the  name,  or  a  similar  one 
(see  KEKIOTH,  KIRIOTH,  in  addition  to  those  named 
already),  having  been  a  common  one  east  of  the 
Jordan,  as  it  still  is  (witness  Kureiych,  Kureiyetein, 
&c.),  Kureiyat  may  be  the  representative  of  some 
other  place. 

What  was  the  "  Baris  "  which  Eusebius  places 
so  close  to  Kirjathaim  ?  Was  it  a  palace  or  fortress 
(!"IT2,  Bdpis).  or  is  it  merely  the  corruption  of  a 
name  ?  If  the  latter,  then  it  is  slightly  m  accord 
ance  with  Beresha,  the  reading  of  the  Targum 
Pseudojon.  at  Num.  xxxii.  37.e  But  where  to  find 
Beresha  we  do  not  at  present  know.  A  village 
named  Bitrazin  is  marked  in  the  maps  of  Robinson 
(1856)  and  Van  de  Velde,  but  about  9  miles  east 
of  ffesbdn,  and  therefore  not  in  a  suitable  position. 

2.  (ri  Kaptadaf/i.)  A  town  in  Naphtali  not 
mentioned  in  the  original  lists  of  the  possession 
allotted  to  the  tribe  (see  Josh.  xix.  32-39),  but 
inserted  in  the  list  of  cities  given  to  the  Gershoiiite 
Levites,  in  1  Chr.  (vi.  76),  in  place  of  KARTAN  in 
the  parallel  catalogue,  Kartan  being  probably  only  a 
contraction  thereof.  [G.J 

KIK'JATH-AB'BA  (J/21N  'j?,  and  once,  Neh. 
xi.  25,  'NH  'p  :  iroA«$  *Ap/3<fo,  *.  'Apy60  ;  Alex. 

'Ap/3o  and  'A/>/3<>o ;  T;  Kat*n8ap/36K  ;  Ka.pta.9up- 
fioKfftfytp,  but  Mai  Kapia£d£  't^)e'p  ;  Alex.  Kaptap- 
&6it  fftfytp :  Civitas  Arbee,  Cariat-Arbe),  an  early 
name  of  the  city  which  after  the  conquest  is  gene 
rally  known  as  HEBRON  (Josh.  xiv.  15;  Judg.  i. 
10).  Possibly,  however,  not  Kirjath-arba,  but 
MAMRE,  was  its  earliest  appellation  (Gen.  xxxv. 
27),  though  the  latter  name  may  have  been  that 
of  the  sacred  grove  near  the  town,  which  would 


•  The  text  now  stands  D^V  JV"lp ;  in  the 
above  view  it  originally  stood  D*"iy  D'Hi?*  J"lHp- 

b  It  is  as  well  to  observe,  though  we  may  not  be 
able  yet  to  draw  any  inference  from  the  fact,  that  on 
both  occasions  of  its  being  attributed  to  Judah,  it  is 
called  by  another  name, — "KIKJATH-BAAI,,  which  is 
Kirjath-jearim." 

0  This  reading  of  the  LXX.  suggests  that  the  dual 
termination  "aim"  may  have  been  a  later  accom 
modation  of  the  name  to  Hebrew  forms,  as  was  pos 
sibly  the  case  with  Jerushalaim  (vol.  i.  982n).  It  is 
supported  by  the  Hebrew  text :  cf.  Ez.  xxv.  9,  and 
the  Vat.  LXX.  of  Jer.  xlviii.  1.  [KIRIATHAIM.] 

«  There  is  some  uncertainty  about  Burckhardt'6 
KT4t«  :*t  this  part  Ir.  order  to  see  Madeba,  which  is 


shewn  on  the  maps  as  nearly  S.  of  Hetban,  he  left 
the  great  road  at  the  latter  place,  and  went  through 
Djeboul,  es-Sameh,  and  other  places  which  are  shewn 
as  on  the  road  eastward,  in  an  entirely  different 
direction  from  Madeba,  and  then  after  8  hours, 
without  noting  any  change  of  direction,  he  arrives 
at  Madeba,  which  appears  from  the  maps  ta  be  only 
about  Ij  hour  from  Hesbdn. 

*  The  following  is  the  full  synonym  of  this  Targum 
for  Kirjathaim : — "  And  the  city  of  two  streets  puvo.l 
with  marble,  the  same  is  Beresha"  (NK'H'Q)-  This 

T    ••    : 

is  almost  identical  with  the  rendering  given  in  the 
same  Targuin  011  Num.  xxii.  39,  for  Kirjath-Huzoth. 
Can  Beresha  contain  an  allusion  to  Gerasa,  the 
modern  Scrash ' 


KIRJATH-ARBA 

rxxrationally  transfer  its  title  to  the  whole  spot. 
.] 


KIRJATH-HUZOTH 


41 


The  identity  of  Kirjath-Arba  with  Hebron  is 
constantly  asserted  (Gen.  xxiii.  2,  xxxv.  27;  Josh. 
xiv.  15,  xv.  13,  54,  xx.  7,  xxi.  ll),a  the  only  men 
tion  of  it  without  that  qualification  being,  as  is 
somewhat  remarkable,  after  the  return  from  the 
captivity  (Neh.  xi.  25),  a  date  so  late  that  we 
might  naturally  have  supposed  the  aboriginal  name 
would  have  become  extinct.  But  it  lasted  far 
longer  than  that,  for  when  Sir  John  Maundeville 
\isitcd  the  place  (cir.  1322)  he  found  that  "the 
Saracens  call  the  place  in  their  language  Karicarba, 
but  the  Jews  call  it  Arbotha"  (Early  Trav.  161). 
Thus  too  in  Jerome's  time  would  Debir  seem  to 
have  been  still  called  by  its  original  title,  Kirjath- 
Sepher.  So  impossible  does  it  appear  to  extinguish 
the  name  originally  bestowed  on  a  place  !  b 

The  signification  of  Kirjath-Arba  is,  to  say  the 
least,  doubtful.  In  favour  of  its  being  derived 
from  some  ancient  hero  is  the  statement  that  "  Arba 
was  the  great  man  among  the  Anakim  "  (Josh.  xiv. 
15)  —  the  "father  of  Anak"  (xxi.  11).  Against  it 
are  (a)  the  peculiarity  of  the  expression  in  the 
first  of  these  two  passages,  where  the  term  Adam 
(7*13n  D"1N!"I)  —  usually  employed  for  the  species, 
the  human  race  —  is  used  instead  of  Ish,  which 
commonly  denotes  an  individual.  (6)  The  con 
sideration  that  the  term  "father"  is  a  metaphor  fre 
quently  employed  in  the  Bible  —  as  in  other  Oriental 
writings  —  for  an  originator  or  author,  whether  of 
a  town  or  a  quality,  quite  as  often  as  of  an  indi 
vidual.  The  LXX.  certainly  so  understood  both 
the  passages  in  Joshua,  since  they  have  in  each 
urirpAirQKis,  "  mother  -city."  (c)  The  constant 
tendency  to  personification  so  familiar  to  students 
of  the  topographical  philology  of  other  countries 
than  Palestine,  and  which  in  the  present  case  must 
have  had  some  centuries  in  which  to  exercise  its 
influence.  In  the  lists  of  1  Chron.  Hebron  itself  is 
personified  (ii.  42)  as  the  son  of  Mareshah,  a  neigh 
bouring  town,  and  the  father  of  Tappuah  and 
other  places  in  the  same  locality  ;  and  the  same 
thing  occurs  with  Beth-zur  (ver.  45),  Ziph  (42), 
Madimannah  and  Gibea  (49),  &c.  &c.  (d)  On  more 
than  one  occasion  (Gen.  xxxv.  27  ;  Josh.  xv.  13  ; 
Neh.  xi.  25)  the  name  Arba  has  the  definite  article 
prefixed  to  it.  This  is  very  rarely,  if  ever,  the 
case  with  the  name  of  a  man  (see  Reland,  Pal. 
724).  (e)  With  the  exception  of  the  Ir-David— 
the  city  of  David,  Zion  —  the  writer  does  not  recal 
any  city  of  Palestine  named  after  a  man.  Neither 
Joshua,  Caleb,  Solomon,  nor  any  other  of  the 
heroes  or  kings  of  Israel,  conferred  their  names  on 
places;  neither  did  Og,  Jabin,  or  other  Canaanite 
leaders.  The  "  city  of  Sihon,"  for  Heshbon  (Num. 
xxi.  27),  is  hardly  an  exception,  for  it  occurs  in  a 
very  fervid  burst  of  poetry,  differing  entirely  from 
the  matter-of-fact  documents  we  are  now  considering. 
(/)  The  general  consent  of  the  Jewish  writers  in  a 
different  interpretation  is  itself  a  strong  argument 
against  the  personality  of  Arba,  however  absurd 


*  In  Gen.  xxxv.  27,  the  A.  V.  has  "the  city  of 
Arbah;"  in  Josh.  xv.  13,  and  xxi.  11,  "the  city  of 
Arba." 

b  A  curious  parallel  to  this  tenacity  is  found  in  our 
own  country,  where  many  a  village  is  still  known  to 
its  rustic  inhabitants  by  the  identical  name  by  which 
it  is  inscribed  in  Domesday  Book,  while  they  are 
actually  unaware  of  the  later  name  by  which  the 
place  has  been  currently  known  in  maps  and  docu- 


(according  to  our  ideas)  may  be  their  ways  of  ac 
counting  for  that  interpretation.  They  take  Arba 
to  be  the  Hebrew  word  for  "  four,"  and  Kirjath- 
Arba  therefore  to  be  the  "  city  of  four;"  and  this 
they  explain  as  referring  to  four  great  saints  who 
were  buried  there  —  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  and 
Adam  —  whose  burial  there  they  prove.  by  the  words 
already  quoted  from  Josh.  xiv.  15  (Beresh.  rabba. 
quoted  by  Beer,  Leben  Abrahams,  189,  and  cy 
Keil,  ad  loo.  ;  Bochart,  Phaleg,  iv.  34,  &c.).  In 
this  explanation  Jerome  constantly  concurs,  not 
only  in  commentaries  (as  Quaest.  in  <7enesMn,xxiii. 
2;  Comm.  in  Matt,  xjvii.  ;  JEpit.  Paula,?,  §11; 
Onomast.  "  Arboch"  and  "  Cariatharbe,"  &c.),  but 
also  in  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  at  this  passage  — 
Adam  maximus  ibi  inter  Enacim  situs  est.  With 
this  too  agrees  the  Veneto-Greek  version,  v6\fi  rwv 
rerrdpuv  (Gen.  xxiii.  2,  xxxv.  27).  It  is  also 
adopted  by  Bochart  (Chanaan,  i.  1),  in  whose 
opinion  the  "  four  "  are  Anak,  Ahiman,  Sheshai, 
and  Talmai. 

The  fact  at  the  bottom  of  the  whole  matter  pro 
bably  is,  that  Arba  was  neither  a  man  nor  a 
numeral,  but  that  (as  we  have  so  often  had  occa 
sion  to  remark  in  similar  cases)  it  was  an  archaic 
Canaanite  name,  most  likely  referring  to  the  situa 
tion  or  nature  of  the  place,  which  the  Hebrews 
adopted,  and  then  explained  in  their  own  fashion. 
[See  JEGAR-SAHADUTHA,  &c.] 

In  Gen.  xxiii.  2,  the  LXX.  (both  MSS.)  insert 
fj  kffnv  Iv  ry  Koi\<a^a.n  ;  and  in  xxxv.  27  they 
render  K.  Arba  by  els  ir6\.iv  TOV  treSiov.  In  the 
former  of  these  the  addition  may  be  an  explanation 
of  the  subsequent  words,  "  in  the  land  of  Canaan  " 
—  the  explanation  having  slipped  into  the  text  in 
its  wrong  place.  Its  occurrence  in  both  MSS. 
shows  its  great  antiquity.  It  is  found  also  in  the 
Samaritan  Codex  and  Version.  In  xxxv.  27  irfStov 
may  have  arisen  from  the  translators  reading  !"Q"1K 
for  JJ3-1K.  [GT.]": 

KIR'JATH-A'RIM  (DnST'i?:  Kopme.opi>, 
Alex.  Kapiadiapti/j.  :  Cariathiarini),  an  abbreviated 
form  of  the  name  KIRJATH-JEARIM,  which  occurs 
only  in  Ezr.  ii.  25.  In  the  parallel  passage  of 
Nehemiah  the  name  is  in  its  usual  form,  and  in 
Esdras  it  is  KIRIATHIARIUS.  [G.] 

KIR'JATH-BA'AL  6»-'    =  town  of  Baal; 


KapiaO  Bda\  :  Cariathbaal),  an  alternative  name 
of  the  place  usually  called  Kirjath-jearim  (Josh,  xv 
60,  xviii.  14),  but  also  BAALAH,  and  once  BAALE- 
OF-JuDAH.  These  names  doubtless  point  to  the 
existence  of  a  sanctuary  of  Baal  at  this  spot  before 
the  conquest.  They  were  still  attached  to  it  con 
siderably  later,  for  they  alone  are  used,  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  (probably)  newly-bestowed  nam« 
of  Kirjath-jearim,  in  the  description  ;£  the  removal 
of  the  ark  thence  (2  Sam.  vi.).  [G.] 


KIR'JATH-HU'ZOTH  (JTIXn  'j?  :  *6\m 
lirav\(uv  '.  urbs  qaae  in  extremis  regni  ejus  fini- 
bus  erat),  a  place  to  which  Balak  accompanied 


ments,  and  in  the  general  language  of  all  but  their 
own  class  for  centuries.  If  this  is  the  case  with  Kir- 
jath-Arba  and  Hebron,  the  occurrence  of  the  former 
in  Nehemiah,  noticed  above,  is  easily  understood. 
It  was  simply  the  effort  of  the  original  name  to  as 
sert  its  rights  and  assume  its  position,  as  soon  as  the 
temporary  absence  of  the  Israelites  at  Babylon 
left  the  Canaanite  rustics  to  themselves. 


42  KIU.JAT11-JKAKIM 

Balaam  immediately  after  his  arrival  in  Moab 
vNum.  xxii.  :>y),  and  which  is  nowhere  else  men 
tioned.  It  appeai-s  to  have  lain  between  the  ARNON 
^  Wady  Mojeb)  and  BAMOTH-BAAL  (comp.  ver.  36 
and  41),  probably  north  of  the  former,  since  there 
is  some,  though  only  slight,  ground  fot  supposing 
that  Bamoth-Baal  lay  between  Dibon  and  Beth- 
baal-meon  (see  Josh.  xiii.  17).  The  passage  (Num. 
xxii.  39)  is  obscure  in  every  way.  It  is  not  obvious 
why  sacrifices  should  have  been  offered  there,  or 
how,  when  Balaam  accompanied  Balak  thither, 
Balak  could  have  "  sent"  thence  to  him  and  to  the 
princes  who  were  with  him  (40). 

No  trace  of  the  name  has  been  discovered  in  later 
times.  It  is  usually  interpreted  to  mean  "  city  of 
streets,"  from  the  Hebrew  word  |*-in,  c/iutz,  which 
has  sometimes  this  meaning  (Gesenius,  Thes.  456a ; 
margin  of  A.  V. ;  and  so  Luther,  die  Gassenstadt ; 
so  also  the  Veneto-Greek) ;  but  Jerome,  in  the 
Vulgate,  has  adopted  another  signification  of  the 
root.  The  LXX.  seem  to  have  read  JTnvn,  "  vil 
lages,"  the  word  which  they  usually  render  by 
£irav\fts,  and  which  is  also  the  reading  of  the 
I'eschito.  The  Samaritan  Codex  and  Version,  the 
former  by  its  reading  JTlPn,  "  visions,"  and  the 
latter,  *|"1,  "  mysteries,"  seem  to  favour  the  idea — 
which  is  perhaps  the  explanation  of  the  sacrifices 
there — that  Kirjath-Chutzoth  was  a  place  of  sacred 
or  oracular  reputation.  The  Targum  Pseudojon. 
gives  it  as  "  the  streets  of  the  great  city,  the  city 
of  Sihon,  the  same  is  Birosa,"  apparently  identifying 
it  with  Kirjathaim  (see  note  to  p.  406).  [G.] 

KIR'JATH-JEA'RIM  (Dnjf?  'j?:  irS^s'lapt/j. 
and  'lapiv,  Kapiadiapi/j.,  and  once  TTO'AIS  Kapia.6- 
tapifi ;  Alex,  the  same,  excepting  the  termination 
fi/j. ;  Joseph.  Kapiadidpipa :  Cariathiarim),  a  city 
which  played  a  not  unimportant  part  in  the  history 
of  the  Chosen  People.  We  first  encounter  it  as  one 
of  the  four  cities  of  the  Gibeonites  (Josh.  ix.  17) :  it 
next  occurs  as  one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  northern 
boundary  of  Judah  (xv.  9),  and  as  the  point  at 
which  the  western  and  southern  boundaries  of  Ben 
jamin  coincided  (xviii.  14,  15);  and  in  the  two 
last  passages  we  find  that  it  bore  another,  perhaps 
earlier,  name — that  of  the  great  Canaanite  deity 
Baal,  namely  BAALAH*  and  KIRJATH-BAAL.  It  is 
included  among  the  towns  of  Judah  (xv.  60),  and 
there  is  some  reason  for  believing  that  under  the 
shortened  form  of  KIRJATH  it  is  also  named  among 
those  of  Benjamin,  as  might  almost  be  expected 
from  the  position  it  occupied  on  the  confines  of 
each.  Some  considerations  bearing  on  this  will  be 
found  under  KIRJATH  and  GIBEAH.  It  is  included 
in  the  genealogies  of  Judah  (I  Chr.  ii.  50,  52)  as 
founded  by,  or  descended  from,  SHOBAL,  the  son  of 
Ciilebben-Hur,  and  as  having  in  its  turn  sent  out 
the  colonies  of  the  Ithritcs,  Puhites,  Shumathites, 
and  Mishraites,  and  those  of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 
"  Behind  Kii jath-jearim "  the  band  of  Danites 
pitched  their  camp  before  their  expedition  to  Mount 
Ephraim  and  Laish,  leaving  their  name  attached 
to  the  spot  for  long  after  (Judg.  xviii.  12). 
[MAHANEH  DAN.]  Hitherto,  beyond  the  early 

•  In  1  Chr.  xiii.  6,  the  Vulgate  has  collis  Cariath- 
itn-im  for  the  Bnalah  of  the  Hebrew  text. 

•  Kirjath-jearim  is  not  stated  to  have  been  allotted 
to  the  Levites,  but  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  Abi- 
T.idiih  and  Klea/ar  were  not  Levitos.     This  question, 
>uul  the  force  of  the  word  rendered  "  sanctified  "  (vii. 
1  \  will  be.  noticed  under  I.KVII  KS.    (in  the  other  hiind 


K1KJATH-JEAKJM 

sanctity  implied  in  its  bearing  the  name  of  BAAL, 
there  is  nothing  remarkable  in  Kirjath-jearim.  It 
was  no  doubt  this  reputation  for  sanctity  which 
made  the  people  of  Beth-shemesh  appeal  to  its  in 
habitants  to  relieve  them  of  the  Ark  of  Jehovah, 
which  was  bringing  such  calamities  on  their  un 
tutored  inexperience.  From  their  place  in  the 
valley  they  looked  anxiously  for  some  eminence, 
which,  according  to  the  belief  of  those  days,  should 
be  the  appropriate  seat  for  so  powerful  a  Deit.v — 
"  Who  is  able  to  stand  before  the  face  of  Jehovah, 
this  holy  God,  and  to  whom  shall  He  (or,  LXX., 
the  ark  of  Jehovah)  go  up  from  us  ?  "  "  And 
they  sent  to  the  inhabitant*  of  Kirjath-jearim,  say 
ing,  the  Philistines  have  brought  back  the  ark  of 
Jehovah,  come  ye  down  and  fetch  it  up  to  you " 
(1  Sam.  vi.  20,  21).  -n  tnis  high-place — "  the 
hill "  (ny33H) — under  the  charge  of  Eleazar,  son 

of  Abinadab,b  the  ark  remained  for  twenty  years 
(vii.  2),  during  which  period  the  spot  became  the 
resort  of  pilgrims  from  all  parts,  anxious  to  offer 
sacrifices  and  perform  vows  to  Jehovah  (Joseph. 
Ant.  vi.  2,  §1).  At  the  close  of  that  time  Kirjat.h- 
Jearim  lost  its  sacred  treasure,  on  its  removal  by 
David  to  the  house  of  Obed-edom  the  Gittite 
(1  Chr.  xiii.  5,  6 ;  2  Chr.  i.  4;  2  Sam.  vi.  2, 
&c.).  It  is  very  remarkable  and  suggestive  that  in 
the  account  of  this  transaction  ihe  ancient  and 
heathen  name  Baal  is  retained.  In  fact,  in  2  Sam. 
vi.  2 — probably  the  original  statement — the  name 
Baale  is  used  without  any  explanation,  and  to  the 
exclusion  of  that  of  Kirjath-jearim.  In  the  allusion 
to  this  transaction  in  Ps.  cxxxii.  6,  the  name  is 
obscurely  indicated  as  the  "wood" — yaar,  the 
root  of  Kiijath-jearim.  We  are  further  told  that 
its  people,  with  those  of  Chephirah  and  Beeroth, 
743  in  number,  returned  from  captivity  (Neh.  vii. 
29 ;  and  see  Ezra  ii.  25,  where  the  name  is 
K-ARIM,  and  1  Esdr.  v.  19,  KIRIATHIARIUS). 
We  also  hear  of  a  prophet  URiJAH-ben-Shemaiah, 
a  native  of  the  place,  who  enforced  the  warnings 
of  Jeremiah,  and  was  cruelly  murdered  by  Jehoiakitn 
(Jer.  xxvi.  20,  &c.),  but  of  the  place  we  know  nothing 
beyond  what  has  been  already  said.  A  tradition  is 
mentioned  by  Adrichomius  (Descr.  T.  S.  Dan. 
§17),  though  without  stating  his  authority,  that 
it  was  the  native  place  of  "  Zechariah,  son  of 
Jehoiada,  who  was  slain  between  the  altar  and  th« 
Temple."  c 

To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onom.  Cariathiarim) 
it  appears  to  have  been  well  known.  They  describ> 
it  as  a  village  at  the  ninth  (or,  s.  v.  "Baal,"  tenth; 
mile  between  Jerusalem  and  Diospolis  (LydJa). 
With  this  description,  and  the  former  of  these  two 
distances  agrees  Procopius  (see  Keland,  503).  It 
was  reserved  for  Dr.  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  11)  to 
discover  that  these  requirements  are  exactly  ful 
filled  in  the  modern  village  of  Kuriet-el-Enab — 
now  usually  known  as  Abu  Gosh,  from  the  robber- 
chief  whose  head-quarters  it  was — at  the  eastern  end 
of  the  Wady  Aly,  on  the  road  from  Jalla  to  Jeru 
salem.  And,  indeed,  if  the  statement  of  Kusebius 
contained  the  only  conditions  to  be  met,  the  identi 
fication  would  be  certain.  It  does  not,  however  so 


it  is  remarkable  that  Beth-shemesh,  from  which  the 
Ark  was  sent  away,  was  a  city  of  the  priests. 

c  The  mention  of  KopiafliajxiV  (Alex.  Kapiafliapi» 
in  the  LXX.  of  Josh.  iii.  lf>,  possibly  proceeds  from 
a  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  Kirjath-Adain,  "the  city 
Adam,"  as  has  been  pointed  out  under  AI>AM,  vol  i 
WK 


KIRJATH-SANNAH 

\voll  agree  with  the  requirements  of  1  S:im.  vi. 
The  distance  from  Bethshemesh  (Ain  S/unns)  is  con 
siderable — -not  less  than  10  miles — through  a  very 
uneven  country,  wkh  no  appearance  of  any  road 
ever  having  existed  (Hob.  iii.  157).  Neither  is  it 
*.t  all  in  proximity  to  Bethlehem  (Ephratah),  which 
would  seem  to  be  implied  in  Ps.  cxxxii.  6 ;  though 
this  latter  passage  is  very  obscure.  Williams  (Holy 
City)  endeavours  to  identify  Khjath-jearim  with 
Dcir-el-Howa,  east  of  A  in  Slicms.  But  this,  though 
sufficiently  near  the  latter  place,  does  not  answer  to 
the  other  conditions.  We  may  therefore,  for  the 
present,  consider  Kuriet-el-Enab  as  the  representa 
tive  of  Kirjath-jearim. 

The  modem  name,  differing  from  the  ancient  only 
in  its  latter  portion,  signifies  the  "  city  of  grapes ;" 
the  ancient  name,  if  interpreted  as  Hebrew,  the  "city 
of  forests."  Such  interpretations  of  these  very 
antique  names  must  be  received  with  great  caution 
on  account  of  the  tendency  which  exists  universally 
to  alter  the  names  of  places  and  persons  so  that 
they  shall  contain  a  meaning  in  the  language  of 
the  country.  In  the  present  case  we  have  the  play 
on  the  name  in  Ps.  cxxxii.  6,  already  noticed,  the 
authority  of  Jerome  (Comtn.  in  Is.  xxix.  1),  who 
renders  it  villa  silvarum,  and  the  testimony  of  a 
a  recent  traveller  (Tobler,  Dritte  Wanderuny,  178. 
187),  who  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood,  on  the 
ridge  probably  answering  to  MOUNT  JEARIJI,  states 
that,  "  for  real  genuine  (cchtes)  woods,  so  thick  and 
so  solitary,  he  had  seen  nothing  like  them  since  he 
left  Germany." 

It  remains  yet  to  be  seen  if  any  separate  or  defi 
nite  eminence  answering  to  the  hill  or  high-place 
on  which  the  ark  was  deposited  is  recognisable  at 
Kuriet-el-Enab.  [G.] 

KIB'JATH-SAN'NAH  (H3D  'p:  iroA<s  ypap- 

uA-T&v:  GariatJisenna),  a  name  which  occurs  once 
only  (Josh.  xv.  49),  as  another,  and  probably  an  ear 
lier,  appellation  for  DEBIR,  an  important  place  in 
the  mountains  of  Judah,  not  far  from  Hebron,  and 
which  also  bore  the  name  of  KIRJATH-SEPHER. 
Whence  the  name  is  derived  we  have  no  clue,  and 
its  meaning  has  given  rise  to  a  variety  of  conjec 
tures  (see  Keil,  Josua,  on  x.  40  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  i. 
324 note).  That  of  Gesenius  (Thes.  962)  is,  that 
sannah  is  a  contraction  of  sansannah  —  a  palm- 
branch,  and  thus  that  Kirjath-sannah  is  the  "city 
of  palms."  But  this,  though  adopted  by  Stanley 
(S.  $  P.  161,  524),  is  open  to  the  objection  that 
palms  were  not  trees  of  the  mountain  district,  where 
Kirjath-sannah  was  situated,  but  of  the  valleys 
(S.  $  P.  145). 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  LXX.  interpret  both 
this  name  and  Kirjath-sepher  alike.  [G.] 

KIR'JATH-SE'PHER  (IBD  'J3 :  in  Judg.  i. 

11,  KapiaOffei'ifp  Tr6\ts  rpafj./jLa.TUV ;  in  ver.  12, 
and  in  Josh,  the  first  word  is  omitted:  Cariath- 
wpher),  the  early  name  of  the  city  DEBIR,  which 
further  had  the  name — doubtless  also  an  early  one — 
of  KIRJATII-SANNAII.  Kiijnth-sepher  occurs  only 
in  the  account  of  the  capture  of  the  place  by  Othniel, 
who  gained  thereby  the  hand  of  his  wife  Achsah, 
Caleb's  daughter  (Josh.  xv.  15,  16  ;  and  in  the  exact 

*  Taking  Debir  to  mean  an  adytum,  or  innermost 
recess,  as  it  does  in  1  K.  vi.  5,  19,  &c.  (A.  V. 
"oracle"). 

b  In  the  Targuin  it  is  rendered  by  '3~IJ$  'p,  "  city 
«r -jrinccs  "  (<ipx<»).  See  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tnlm.  217. 


KIR  OF  MOAB 


43 


re]>otition  of  the  narrative,  Judg.  i.  11.  12).  la 
this  narrative,  a  document  of  unmistakably  early 
character  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  373,  4),  it  is  stated 
that ''  the  name  of  Debir  before  was  Kirjath-sepher." 
Ewald  conjectures  that  the  new  name  was  given  it  by 
the  conquerors  on  account  of  its  retired  position  on 
the  back" — the  south  or  south-western  slopes — of  the 
mountains,  possibly  at  or  about  the  modem  el-Burj, 
a  few  miles  W.  of  ed-Dhoheriyeh  (Gesch.  ii.  373 
note).  But  whatever  the  interpretation  of  the 
Hebrew  name  of  the  place  may  be,  that  of  the  Ca- 
naanite  name  must  certainly  be  more  obscure.  It 
is  generally  assumed  to  mean  "  city  of  book  "  (from 
the  Hebrew  word  Scpher=\>ook),  and  it  has  been 
made  the  foundation  for  theories  of  the  amount  of 
literary  culture  possessed  by  the  Canaanites  (Keil, 
Josua,  x.  39  ;  Ewald,  i.  324).  But  such  theories 
are,  to  say  the  least,  premature  during  the  extreme 
uncertainty  as  to  the  meaning  of  these  veiy  ancient 
names.b 

The  old  name  would  appear  to  have  been  still  iii 
existence  in  Jerome's  time,  if  we  may  understand 
his  allusion  in  the  epitaph  of  Paula  (§11),  where 
he  translates  it  vinculum  litterarum.  [Comp.  KiK- 

JATH-ARBA.] 

KIR  OF  MOAB  (3Kte  TJ3 :  rb  reT^os  TTJJ 

Mo>a/3iTi8os :  imirus  Moab),  one  of  the  two  chiet 
strongholds  of  Moab,  the  other  being  AR  OF  MOAB. 
The  name  occurs  only  in  Is.  xv.  1,  though  the  place 
is  probably  refeired  to  under  the  names  of  KIR- 
HERES,  KIK-HARASETH,  £c.  The  clue  to  its  iden 
tification  is  given  us  by  the  Targum  on  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah,  which  for  the  above  names  has  N3"13 

T  -  :  > 

Cracca,     "sp3,    Crac,   almost  identical   with  the 

name  Kerak,  by  which  the  site  of  an  important 
city  in  a  high  and  very  strong  position  at  the  S.E. 
of  the  Dead  Sea  is  known  at  this  day.  The  chain 
of  evidence  for  the  identification  of  Kerak  with 
Kir-Moab  is  very  satisfactory.  Under  the  name 
of  XapaK/xoJjSot  it  is  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem,  A.D.  536  (Reland,  Pal.  533), 
by  the  geographers  Ptolemy  and  Stephanus  of  By 
zantium  (Reland,  463,  705).  In  A.D.  1131,  under 
King  Fulco,  a  castle  was  built  there  whic^h  became 
an  impoitant  station  for  the  Crusaders.  Here,  in 
A.D,  1183,  they  sustained  a  fruitless  attack  from 
Saladin  and  his  brother  (Bohaeddin,  Vit.  Sal.  ch. 
25),  the  place  being  as  impregnable  as  it  had  been 
in  the  days  of  Elisha  (2  K.  iii.  25).  It  was  then 
the  chief  city  cf  Arabia  Secunda  or  Fetracensts;  it 
is  specified  as  in  the  Bclka,  and  is  distinguished 
from  "  Moab"  or  "  Rabbat,"  the  ancient  AR-MOAB, 
and  from  the  Mons  regalis  (Schultens,  Indet 
Geogr.  "Caracha";  see  also  the  remarks  of  Ge 
senius,  Jesaia,  517,  and  his  notes  to  the  German 
transl.  of  Burckhardt").  The  Crusaders  in  error 
believed  it  to  be  Petra,  and  that  name  is  frequently 
attached  to  it  in  the  writings  of  William  of  Tyre 
and  Jacob  de  Vitry  (see  quotations  in  Rob.  Bib. 
lies.  ii.  167).  This  error  is  perpetuated  in  the 
Greek  Church  to  the  present  day;  and  the  bishop 
of  Petra,  whose  office,  as  representative  of  the  Pa 
triarch,  it  is  to  produce  the  holy  fire  at  Easter  in 
the  "  Church  of  the  Sepulchre"  at  Jerusalem 

•  Gesenius  expresses  it  as  follows  :  "  Ar-Moab, 
Stadt  Moabs  gleichsam  a.<m>  oder  wbs  Mcabitarum 
. . .  und  die  Burg  dcs  Landcs  Kir-Moab"  (Burckbar.lt 
von  Gesenius,  1064y. 


14  KISH 

(Stanley,  S.  $  P.  467),  is  in  reality  bishop  of  Kerak 
(Seetzen,  Reisen,  ii.  358  ;  Burckh.  387). 

The  modem  Kerak  is  known  to  us  through  the 
descriptions  of  Burckhardt  (379-390),  Irby  (ch. 
vii.),  Seetzen  (Reisen,  i.  412,  3),  and  De  Saulcy 
(La  Mer  Morte,  i.  355,  &c.)  ;  and  these  fully  bear 
out  the  interpretation  given  above  to  the  name — 
the  "  fortress,"  as  contradistinguished  from  the 
"  metropolis  "  ( Ar)  of  the  country,  i.  e.  Kabbath- 
Moab,  the  modern  Rabba.  It  lies  about  6  miles 
S.  of  the  last-named  place,  and  some  10  miles 
from  the  Dead  Sea,  upon  the  plateau  of  highlands 
which  forms  this  part  of  the  country,  not  far  from 
the  western  edge  of  th«  plateau.  Its  situation  is 
truly  remarkable.  It  is  built  upon  the  top  of  a 
steep  hill,  surrounded  on  all  sides  by  a  deep  and 
narrow  valley,  which  again  is  completely  inclosed 
by  mountains  rising  higher  than  the  town,  and 
overlooking  it  on  all  sides.  It  must  have  been  from 
these  surrounding  heights  that  the  Israelite  slingers 
hurled  their  vollies  of  stones  after  the  capture  of 
the  place  had  proved  impossible  (2  K.  iii.  25). 
The  town  itself  is  encompassed  by  a  wall,  to  which, 
when  perfect,  there  were  but  two  entrances,  one  to 
the  south  and  the  other  to  the  north,  cut  or  tun 
nelled  through  the  ridge  of  the  natural  rock  below 
the  wall  for  a  length  of  100  to  120  feet.  The 
wall  is  defended  by  several  large  towers,  and  the 
western  extremity  of  the  town  is  occupied  by  an 
enormous  mass  of  buildings — on  the  south  the  castle 
or  keep,  on  the  north  the  seraglio  of  El-Melek  edh- 
Dhahir.  Between  these  two  buildingi  is  apparently 
a  third  exit,  leading  to  the  Dead  Sea.  (A  map  of 
the  site  and  a  view  of  part  of  the  keep  will  be 
found  in  the  Atlas  to  De  Saulcy,  La  Mer  Morte, 
&c.,  feuilles  8,  20).  The  latter  shows  well  the 
way  in  which  the  town  is  inclosed.  The  walls,  the 
keep,  and  seraglio  are  mentioned  by  Lynch  (Report, 
May  2,  p.  19,  20),  whose  account,  though  interest 
ing,  contains  nothing  new.  The  elevation  of  the 
town  can  hardly  be  less  than  3000  feet  above  the 
sea  (Porter,  Hdbk.  60).  From  the  heights  imme 
diately  outside  it,  near  a  ruined  mosque,  a  view  is 
obtained  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  in  clear  weather  of 
Bethlehem  and  Jerusalem  (Seetzen,  Reisen,  i.  413 ; 
Schwarz,  217).  [G.] 

KISH  (K"p :  Kk  :  Cis,  Vulg.  and  A.  V., 
Acts  xiii.  21).  1.  A  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
and  the  family  of  Matri,  according  to  1  Sam.  x. 
21,  though  descended  from  Becher  according  to 
I  Chr.  vii.  8,  compared  with  1  Sam.  ix.  1.  [BE 
CKER.]  He  was  son  of  Ner,  brother  to  Abner,  and 
father  to  King  Saul.  Gibeah  or  Gibeon  seems  to 
have  been  the  seat  of  the  family  from  the  time  of 
Jehiel,  otherwise  called  Abiel  (I  Sam.  xiv.  51), 
Kish's  grandfather  (1  Chr.  ix.  35). 

2.  Son  of  Jehiel,  and  uncle  to  the  preceding 
(1  Chr.  ix.  36). 

3.  A  Benjamite,  great  grandfather  of  Mordecai, 
who  was  taken  captive  at  the  time  that  Jeconiah 
was  carried  to  Babylon  (Esth.  ii.  5). 

4.  A  Merarite,  of  the  house  of  Mahli,  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi.     His  sons  married  the  daughters  of 
his  brother  Eleazar  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  22,  xxiv.  28, 
29),  apparently  about  the  time  of  King  Saul,  or 

»  Kishon  is  from  V?\\),  to  be  bent,  or  tortuous ; 
Kishion  fron  7\&\),  to  be  hard  (Thes.  1211,  1243). 

b  By  some  this  was— with  the  usual  cravinp  to 
make  the  name  of  a  IM»CC  mean  something — developed 
into  x.  ruv  Kto-crui'.  "  the  torrent  of  the  ivy  bushes  " 


KISHON,  THE  RWEK 

early  in  the  reign  of  David,  since  Jeduthun  tin 
singer  was  the  son  of  Kish  (1  Chr.  vi.  44,  A.  V., 
compared  with  2  Chr.  xxix.  12).  In  th<:  last  cited 
place,  "  Kish  the  son  of  Abdi,"  in  the  reign  oS 
Hezekiah,  must  denote  the  Levitical  house  or  divi 
sion,  under  its  chief,  rather  than  an  individual. 
[JE8HUA.]  The  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  vi.  shows 
that,  though  Kish  is  called  "  the  son  of  Mahli " 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  21),  yet  eight  generations  intei  ?ened 
between  him  and  Mahli.  In  the  corrupt  ttxt  of 
1  Chr.  xv.  the  name  is  written  Kushaiah  at  ver.  17, 
and  for  Jeduthun  is  written  Ethan.  [JEDUTHUN.] 
At  1  Chr.  vi.  29  (44,  A.  V.)  it  is  written  Kishi. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  the  name  Kish  may  have 
passed  into  the  tribe  of  Levi  from  that  of  Benjamin, 
owing  to  the  residence  of  the  latter  in  the  immediate 
neighbourhood  ot  Jerusalem,  which  might  lead  to 
intermarriages  (1  Chr.  viii.  28,  32).  [A.  C.  H.] 

EISH'I  (»B»p :  Kurd  ;  Alex.  Kturdv :  Cusi), 
a  Merarite,  and  father  or  ancestor  of  Ethan  the 
minstrel  (1  Chr.  vi.  44).  The  form  in  which  his 
name  appears  in  the  Vulg.  is  supported  by  22  of 
Kennicotfs  MSS.  In  1  Chr.  xv.  17  he  is  called 
KUSHAIAH,  and  KISH  in  1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  29. 

KISH'ION  (j'Vlpp:  Ktffdiv  ;  Alex.  Kffftd*: 
Ccsiori),  one  of  the  towns  on  the  boundary  of  the 
tribe  of  Issachar  (Josh.  xix.  20),  which  with  its 
suburbs  was  allotted  to  the  Gershonite  Levites  (xxi. 
28  ;  though  in  this  place  the  name — identical  in 
the  original — is  incorrectly  given  ir>  the  A.  V. 
KISHON).  If  the  judgment  of  Gesenius  may  be 
accepted,  there  is  no  connexion  between  the  name 
Kishion  and  that  of  the  river  Kishon,  since  as  He 
brew  words  they  are  derivable  from  distinct  roots.". 
But  it  would  seem  very  questionable  how  far  so 
archaic  a  name  as  that  of  the  Kishon,  mentioned,  as  it 
is.  in  one  of  the  earliest  records  wo  possess  ( Judg.  v.) 
can  be  treated  as  Hebrew.  No  trac.'  of  the  situation 
of  Kishion  however  exists,  nor  can  it  be  inferred  so  as 
to  enable  us  to  ascertain  whether  any  connexion  was 
likely  to  have  existed  between  the  town  and  the  river. 

KISH'ON  (j'Wp :  il  Kifftay ;  Alex.  ^  Kiffiiav 
Osibn),  an  inaccurate  mode  of  representing  (Josh. 
xxi.  28)  the  name  which  on  its  other  occurrence  is 
correctly  given  as  KISHION.  In  the  list  of  Levi 
tical  cities  in  1  Chr.  vi.  its  place  is  occupied  by 
KEDESH  (ver.  72). 

KISH'ON,  THE  RIVER  (fiE»p  h  _! I :  & 
Xeinafyovs  K.UTWV,  KiffffStvJ'  and  Kttff&v  ;  Alex, 
usually  Kfiffuv :  torrens  Cisori),  a  torrent  or  wintei 
stream  of  central  Palestine,  the  scene  of  two  of  th« 
grandest  achievements  of  Israelite  history — the  de 
feat  of  Sisera,  and  th*  destruction  of  the  prophet,' 
of  Baal  by  Elijah. 

Unless  it  be  alluded  to  in  Josh.  xix.  11,  as  "  tl.e 
torrent  facing  Jokneam  " — and  if  Kaiman  be  .Jok- 
neam,  the  description  is  very  accurate — the  Ki^hcn 
is  not  mentioned  in  describing  the  possessions  of  the 
tribes.  Indeed  its  name  occurs  onlv  in  connexion 
with  the  two  great  events  just  referred  to  (Judg. 
iv.  7,  13,  v.  21  ;•  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9 — here  inaccurately 
"Kison;"  and  1  K.  xviii.  40). 

The  Nahr  MukHtta,  the  modern  representative 


(Suidas,  ».  e.  'laftiv],  just  as  the  name  of  Kidror 
(Kf'£pu)i<)  was  made  ru>v  KeSptav,  «'  of  the  cedars." 
[CKDRON  ;  KIDRON.] 

c  The  term  coupled  with  the  Kist:«i  in  Judp.  v.  21, 
in  A.  V.  "  that  ancient  river,"  ha*  bccD 


KISHON,  THE  RIVER 

jf  the  Kishon,  is  the  drain  by  which  the  waters 
of  the  plaiu  of  Esdraelon,  and  of  the  mountains 
which  enclose  that  plain,  namely,  Carmel  and  the 
Saniaiia  range  on  the  south,  the  mountains  of 
Galilee  on  the  north,  and  Gilboa,  "  Little  Hermon  " 
(so  called),  and  Tabor  on  the  east,  find  their  way  to 
*he  Mediterranean.  Its  course  is  in  a  direction 
uearly  due  N.W.  along  the  lower  part  of  the  plain 
nearest  the  foot  of  the  Samarian  hills,  and  close 
beneath  the  very  cliffs  of  Carmel  (Thomson,  L.  fy  B. 
2nd  ed.  436),  breaking  through  the  hills  which 
separate  the  plain  of  Esdiaelon  from  the  maritime 
plain  of  Acre,  by  a  very  narrow  pass,  beneath  the 
eminence  of  Harothieh  or  Harti,  which  is  believed 
still  to  retain  a  trace  of  the  name  of  Harosheth  of 
the  Gentiles  (Thomson,  437).  It  has  two  principal 
feeders:  the  first  from  Deburieh  (Daberath),  on 
Mount  Tabor,  the  N.E.  angle  of  the  plain ;  and 
tecondly,  from  Jelb&n  (Gilboa)  and  Jenin  (En- 
gaunim)  on  the  S.E.  The  very  large  perennial 
spring  of  the  last-named  place  may  be  said  to  be  the 
origin  of  the  remote  pail  of  the  Kishon  (Thomson, 
435).  It  is  also  fed  by  the  copious  spring  of 
Lcjjun,  the  stream  from  which  is  probably  the 
"  waters  of  Megiddo  "  (Van  de  Velde,  353 ;  Porter, 
Handbook,  385).  During  the  winter  and  spring,  and 
after  sudden  storins  of  rain  the  upper  part  of  the 
Kishou  flows  with  a  very  strong  torrent;  so  strong, 
that  in  the  battle  of  Mount  Tabor,  April  16,  1799, 
some  of  the  circumstances  of  the  defeat  of  Sisera 
were  reproduced,  many  of  the  fugitive  Turks  being 
drowned  in  the  wady  from  Deburieh,  which  then  in- 
ur.udted  a  part  of  the  plain  (Burckhardt,  339).  At 
the  same  seasons  the  grounds  about  Lejjun  (Me 
giddo)  where  the  principal  encounter  with  Sisera 
would  seem  to  have  taken  place,  becomes  a  morass, 
impassable  for  even  single  travellers,  and  truly  de 
structive d  for  a  huge  horde  like  his  army  (Prokesch, 
in  Kob.  ii.  364  ;  Thomson,  436). 

But  like  most  of  the  so-called  "  rivers  "  of  Pales 
tine,  the  perennial  stream  forms  but  a  small  part  of 
the  Kishon.  During  the  greater  part  of  the  year  its 
upper  portion  is  dry,  and  the  stream  confined  to  a 
few  miles  next  the  sea.  The  sources  of  this  perennial 
portion  proceed  from  the  roots  of  Carmel — the 
"  vast  fountains  called  Sa'adiyeh,  about  three  miles 
east  of  Chaifa"  (Thomson,  435)  and  those,  ap 
parently  still  more  copious,  described  by  Shaw  (Rob. 


KISHON,  THE  RIVER 


45 


>65),e  as  bursting  forth  from  beneath  the  oasteru 
brow  of  Carmel,  and  discharging  of  themselves  "  a 
river  half  as  big  as  the  Isis."  It  enters  the  sea  at 
the  lower  part  of  the  bay  of  Akka,  about  two  miles 
ast  of  Chaifa  "  in  a  deep  tortuous  bed  between 
banks  of  loamy  soil  some  15  feet  high,  and  15  to  20 
yards  apart"  (Porter,  Handbook,  383.  4).  Be 
tween  the  mouth  and  the  town  the  shore  is  lined 
by  an  extensive  grove  of  date-palms,  one  of  the 
finest  in  Palestine  (Van  de  Velde,  289). 

The  part  of  the  Kishon  at  which  the  prophets  of 
Baal  were  slaughtered  by  Elijah  was  doubtless 
close  below  the  spot  on  Carmel  where  the  sacrifice 
had  taken  place.  This  spot  is  now  fixed  with  all 
but  certainty,  as  at  the  extreme  east  end  of  the 
mountain,  to  which  the  name  is  still  attached  of 
El-Maliraka,  "  the  burning."  [CAKMEL.]  No 
where  does  the  Kishou  run  so  close  to  the  mountain 
as  just  beneath  this  spot  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  324). 
It  is  about  1000  feet  above  the  river,  and  a  preci 
pitous  ravine  leads  directly  down,  by  which  the 
victims  were  perhaps  hurried  from  the  sacred  pirc- 
cincts  of  the  altar  of  Jehovah  to  their  doom  in  the  tor 
rent  bed  below,  at  the  foot  of  the  mound,  which  from 
this  circumstance  may  be  called  Tell  Kusis,  the  hill 
of  the  priests.  Whether  the  Kishou  contained  any 
water  at  this  time  we  are  not  told ;  that  required 
for  Elijah's  sacrifice  was  in  all  probability  obtained 
from  the  spring  on  the  mountain  side  below  the 
plateau  of  El-Mahrakak.  [CAKMEL,  vol.  i.  2796.] 

Of  the  identity  of  the  Kishon  with  the  present 
Nahr  Mukuttu  there  can  be  noquestion.  Theexistence 
of  the  sites  of  Taanach  and  Megiddo  along  its  course, 
and  the  complete  agreement  of  the  circumstances 
just  named  with  the  requirements  of  the  story  of 
Elijah,  are  sufficient  to  satisfy  us  that  the  two  are 
one  and  the  same.  But  it  is  very  remarkable  what 
an  absence  there  is  oi  any  continuous  or  traditional 
evidence  on  the  point.  By  Josephus  the  Kishou  is 
never  named,  neither  does  the  name  occur  in  the 
early  Itineraries  of  Antoninus  Augustus,  or  the 
Bourdeaux  Pilgrim.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  dismiss 
it  in  a  few  words,  and  note  only  its  origin  in  Tabir 
(Onom.  "  Cison  "),  or  such  part  of  it  as  can  be  seen 
thence  (Ep.  ad  Eustochium,  §13),  passing  by  en 
tirely  its  connexion  with  Carmel.  Benjamin  of 
Tndela  visited  Akka  and  Carmel.  He  mentions  the 
river  by  name  as  "  Nachal  Kishon  ;"'  but  only  in  the 


very  variously  rendered  by  the  old  interpreters.  1.  It 
is  taken  as  a  proper  name,  and  thus  apparently  that 
of  a  distinct  stream — in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX., 
Ko&j/oiei'iu.  (gee  Barhdt's  Hexapla)  ;  by  Jerome,  in  the 
Vulgate,  torrens  Cadumim ;  in  the  Peshito  and  Arabic 
versions,  Carmin.  This  view  is  also  taken  by  Ben 
jamin  of  Tudela,  who  speaks  of  the  river  close  to 
Acre  (doubtless  meaning  thereby  the  Belus)  as  the 

D^Dnp  7l"13-  2.  As  an  epithet  of  the  Kishon  itself : 
LXX.,  xcinappowi  apxauav;  Aquila,  Kavatavtav ,  perhaps 
intending  to  imply  a  scorching  wind  or  simoom  as 
accompanying  the  rising  of  the  waters  ;  Symmachus, 
•liyiuiv  or  alyiav,  perhaps  alluding  to  the  swift  spring 
ing  of  the  torrent  (afyes  is  used  for  high  waves  by 
Artemidorus).  The  Targum,  adhering  to  the  signifi 
cation  "  ancient,"  expands  the  sentence — "  the  tor 
rent  in  which  were  shewn  signs  and  wonders  to 
Israel  of  old ;"  and  this  miraculous  torrent  a  later 
Jewish  tradition  (preserved  in  the  Commentarius  in 
Canticum  Debborae,  ascribed  to  Jerome)  would  iden 
tify  with  the  Red  Sea,  the  scene  of  the  greatest  mar 
vels  in  Israel's  history.  The  rendering  of  the  A.  V. 
is  supported  by  Mendelssohn,  Gesenius,  Ewald,  and 
other  eminent  modern  scholars.  But  is  it  not  pos 


sible  that  the  term  may  refer  to  an  ancient  tribe  of 
Kedumim  —  wanderers  from  the  Eastern  deserts  — 
who  had  in  remote  antiquity  settled  ou  the  Kishon  or 
one  of  its  tributary  wadys  1 

d  "  The  Kishon,  considered,  on  account  of  its 
quicksands,  the  most  dangerous  river  in  the  land" 
(Van  de  Velde,  i.  289). 

e  The  report  of  Shaw  that  this  spring  is  called  by 
the  people  of  the  place  Jids  el-Kishon,  though  dis 
missed  with  contempt  by  Robinson  in  his  note,  on  the 
ground  that  the  name  K.  is  not  known  to  the  Arabs, 
has  been  confirmed  to  the  writer  by  the  Rev.  W.  Lea, 
who  recently  visited  the  spot. 

f  The  English  reader  should  be  on  his  guard  not 
to  rely  on  the  translation  of  Benjamin  contained  in 
the  edition  of  Ashr.r  (Berlin,  1840).  In  the  part  of 
the  work  above  referred  to  two  serious  errors  occur. 
(1)  D'Wlp  ^HJ  is  rendered  "Nahr  el  Kelb;"  meat 
erroneously,  fo>  '.he  JV.  el  Kelb  (Lycus)  is  more  than  80 
miles  farther  uorth.  (2)  )itJ"p  7H3  is  rendered 
"  the  river  Mukattua."  Other  renderings  re  IBM 
inexact  occur  elsewhere,  which  need  Lot  bt  noteJ 
bere. 


46  KISON 

most  cursoiy  manner.  Brocardus  (cir.  1500)  de- 
scribes  the  western  portion  of  the  stream  with  a  little 
more  fullness,  but  enlarges  most  on  its  upper  or 
eastern  part,  which,  with  the  victory  of  Barak,  he 
places  on  the  east  of  Tabor  and  Hermon,  as  dis 
charging  the  water  of  those  mountains  into  the  Sea 
of  Galilee  (Descr.  Terrae  S.  cap.  6,  7).  This  has 
been  shown  by  Dr.  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  364)  to  allude 
to  the  Wady  el  Bireh,  which  runs  down  to  the 
Jordan  a  few  miles  above  Scythopolis.  For  the 
descriptions  of  modern  travellers,  see  Maundrell 
(Early  Tntv.  430) ;  Robinson  (ii.  362,  &c.,  iii. 
116,  17);  Van  de  Velde  (324,  &c.) ;  Stanley 
(336,  339,  355),  and  Thomson  (Land  and  Book, 
chap.  xxix.).  [G.] 

KJS'ON  (PCJ»J? :  Ktiff&v ;  Alex.  Kin  S,i> ;  Ci- 
>'0»),  an  inaccurate  mode  of  representing  t'.ie  name 
elsewhere  correctly  given  in  the  A.  V.  KISHON 
(Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9  only).  An  additional  inconsistency 
is  the  expression  "  the  brook  of  Kison  " — the  word 
"of"  being  redundant  both  here  and  in  Judg.  iv. 
13,  and  v.  21.  (G.] 

KISS.8  Kissing  the  lips  by  way  of  affectionate 
salutation  was  not  only  permitted,  but  customary, 
amongst  near  relatives  of  both  sexes,  both  in  Patri 
archal  and  in  later  times  (Gen.  xxix.  11;  Cant, 
viii.  1).  Between  individuals  of  the  same  sex,  and 
in  a  limited  degree  between  those  of  different  sexes, 
the  kiss  on  the  cheek  as  a  mark  of  respect  or  an  act 
of  salutatioa  has  at  all  times  been  customary  in  the 
East,  and  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  extinct  even  in 
Europe.  Mention  is  made  of  it  (1)  between  parents 
and  children  (Gen.  xxvii.  26,  27,  xxxi.  28,  55, 
xlviii.  10,  1.  1 ;  Ex.  xviii.  7 ;  Ruth  i.  9,  14;  2  Sam. 
xiv.  33;  1  K.  xix.  20;  Luke  xv.  20;  Tob.  vii.  6, 
x.  12):  (2)  between  brothers  or  near  male  relatives 
or  intimate  friends  (Gen.  xxix.  13,  xxxiii.  4,  xiv. 
15;  Ex.  iv.  27;  1  Sam.  xx.  41):  (3)  the  same 
mode  of  salutation  between  persons  not  related,  but 
of  equal  rank,  whether  friendly  or  deceitful,  is  men 
tioned  (2  Sam.  xx.  9  ;  Ps.  Ixxv.  10 ;  Prov.  xxvii. 
6;  Luke  vii.  45  (1st  clause),  xxii.  48;  Acts  xx. 
37) :  (4)  as  a  mark  of  real  or  aflected  condescension 
(2  Sam.  xv.  5,  xix.  39) :  (5)  respect  from  an  in 
ferior  (Luke  vii.  38,  45,  and  perhaps  viii.  44). 

In  the  Christian  Church  the  kiss  of  charity  was 
practised  not  only  as  a  friendly  salutation,  but  as 
an  act  symbolical  of  love  and  Christian  brotherhood 
(Rom.  xvi.  16;  1  Cor.  xvi.  20;  2  Cor.  xiii.  12; 
1  Thess.  v.  26 ;  1  Pet.  v.  14).  It  was  embodied 
in  the  early  Christian  offices,  and  has  been  con 
tinued  in  some  of  those  now  in  use  <  Apost.  Constit. 
ii.  57,  viii.  11;  Just.  Mart.  Apol.  i.  65;  Palmer, 
On  Lit.  ii.  102,  and  note  from  Du  Cange  ;  Bing- 
ham,  Christ.  Antiq.  b.  xii.  c.  iv.  §5,  vol.  iv.  49, 
b.  ii.  c.  xi.  §10,  vol.  i.  161,  b.  ii.  c.  xix.  §17,  vol. 
».  272,  b.  iv.  c.  vi.  §14,  vol.  i.  5'JG,  b.  xxii.  c.  iii. 
§6,  vol.  vii.  316;  see  also  Cod.  Jitst.  V.  Tit.  iii. 
16,  de  Don.  ante  Nupt.;  Brando,  Pop.  Antiq.  ii. 
87). 

Between  persons  of  unequal  rank,  the  kiss,  as  a 
mark  either  of  condescension  on  the  one  hand,  or 
of  respect  on  the  other,  can  hardly  be  said  to  sur 
vive  in  Europe  except  in  the  case  of  royal  per 
sonages.  In  the  East  it  has  been  continued  with 
little  diminution  to  the  present  day.  The  ancient 


KITE 

Persian  custom  among  relatives  is  mentioned  by 
Xeuophon  (Ci/rop.  i.  4,  §27),  and  among  inferiors 
towards  superiors,  whose  feet  and  hands  they  kissed 
(»'&.  vii.  5,"  §32  ;  Dion  Cass.  lix.  27).  Among  thn 
Arabs  the  women  and  children  kiss  the  beards  of 
their  husbands  cr  fathers.  The  superior  returns 
the  salute  by  a  kiss  on  the  forehead.  In  Kgypt 
an  inferior  kisses  the  hand  of  a  superior,  generally 
on  the  back,  but  sometimes,  as  a  special  favour,  on 
the  palm  also.  To  testify  abject  submission,  and 
in  asking  favours,  the  feet  are  often  kissed  instead 
of  the  hand.  "  The  son  kisses  the  hand  of  his 
father,  the  wife  that  of  her  husband,  the  slave, 
and  often  the  free  servant,  that  of  the  master. 
The  slaves  and  servants  of  a  grandee  kiss  their 
lord's  sleeve  or  the  skirt  of  his  clothing"  (Lane, 
Mod.  Eg.  ii.  9;  Arvieux,  Tram.  p.  151;  Burck- 
hardt,  Trav.  i.  369  ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  329,  ii.  93  ; 
Layard,  Nin.  i.  174 ;  Wellsted,  Arabia,  i.  341  ; 
Malcolm,  Sketctes  of  Persia,  p.  271;  see  abo\e 

(5)). 

The  written  decrees  of  a  sovereign  are  kissed  in 
token  of  respect ;  even  the  ground  is  sometimes 
kissed  by  Orientals  in  the  fulness  of  their  sub 
mission  (Gen.  xli.  40  ;  1  Sam.  xxiv.  8 ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  9 ; 
Is.  xlix.  23;  Mic.  vii.  17;  Matt,  xxviii.  9;  Wil 
kinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii. '203;  Layard,  Nin.  i.  274, 
Harmer,  Obs.  i.  336). 

Friends  saluting  each  other  join  the  right  hand, 
then  each  kisses  his  own  hand,  and  puts  it  to  his 
lips  and  forehead,  or  breast;  after  a  long  absence 
they  embrace  each  other,  kissing  first  on  the  right 
side  of  the  face  or  neck,  and  then  on  the  left,  or  on 
both  sides  of  the  beard  (Lane,  ii.  9, 10  ;  Irby  aril 
Mangles,  p.  116;  Chardin,  Voy.  iii.  421 ;  Arvieux, 
I.e.;  Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  369  ;  Russell,  Aleppo, 
i.  240). 

Kissing  is  spoken  of  in  Scripture  as  a  mark  of 
respect  or  adoration  to  idols  (1  K.  xix.  18;  Hos. 
xiii.  2  ;  comp.  Cic.  Verr.  iv.  43  ;  Tacitus,  speaking 
of  an  Eastern  custom,  Hist.  iii.  24,  and  the  Mo 
hammedan  custom  of  kissing  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca  ; 
Burckhardt,  Travels,  i.  250,  298,  323  ;  Crichton, 
Arabia,  ii.  215).  [H-  W-  P-] 

KITE  (H'K,  ayy&h:  Ixrlvos,  71^:  vttlhtr, 
milvus?}.  The  Hebrew  word  thus  rendered  occurs 
in  three  passages,  Lev.  xi.  14,  Deut.  xiv.  13,  and 
.lob  xxviii.  7 :  in  the  two  former  it  is  translated 
"  kite"  in  the  A.  V.,  in  the  latter  "  vulture."  It 
is  enumerated  among  the  twenty  names  of  birds 
mentioned  in  Deut.  xiv.b  (belonging  for  the  most 
part  to  the  oi-der  Raptor es),  which  were  considered 
unclean  by  the  Mosaic  Law,  and  forbidden  to  be 
used  as  food  by  the  Israelites.  The  allusion  in  .lob 
alone  affoids  a  clue  to  its  identification.  The  deep 
mines  in  the  recesses  of  the  mountains  from  which 
the  labour  of  man  extracts  the  treasures  of  the 
eailh  are  there  described  as  "a  track  which  the 
bird  of  prey  hath  not  known,  nor  hath  the  eye  ol 
the  aytjah  looked  upon  it."  Among  all  birds 
of  prey,  which  are  proverbially  clearsighted, 
the  ayyah  is  thus  distinguished  as  possessed  of 
peculiar  keenness  of  vision,  and  by  this  attribute 
alone  is  it  marked.  Translators  have  been  sin 
gularly  at  variance  with  regard  to  this  bird.  In 
the  LXX.  of  Lev.  and  Deut.  ayyah  is  rendered 


»  1.  Verb.  p£>3  :  LXX.  and  X.  T.  <f>iAe'o),  «<"•<«• 
<t>i\tu>  :  osculnr,  deosculor.  2.  Siihs.  Hp'CJ'jt  the 
notion  being  of  extension,  or  possibly  from  the  sound, 
(it-hen  i.  924  :  I. XX.  and  N.  T.  </>i'A»);ua  :  ntcnhtm. 


b  In  the  parallel  passage  of  Lev.  xi.  the  gleil 
is  omitted  ;  but  the  Hebrew  won1.  h:is  in  al. 
probability  crept  into  the  text  by  nn  error  of  M.:;I* 
transcriber.  (*ee  Oesen.  s,  r.,  niul  (ii  > 


KITE 

•'  kite,"  »  while  in  Job  it  is  "  vulture,"  v-/hich  the 
A.  V.  h;\s  followed.  The  Vulg.  give  "  vulture"  in 
all  three  passages,  unless,  as  Drusius  suggests  (on 
Lev.  xi.  14),  the  order  of  the  words  in  Lev.  and  Deut. 
is  changed ;  but  even  in  this  case  there  remains 
the  rendering  "  vulture "  in  Job,  and  the  reason 
advanced  by  Drusius  for  the  transposition  is  not 
conclusive.  The  Targ.  Onkelos  vaguely  renders  it 
"  bird  of  prey  ;"  Targ.  Pseudo-Jonathan,  "  black 
vulture ;"  Targ.  Jerus.  by  a  word  which  Buxtorf 
translates  "  a  pie,"  in  which  he  is  supported  by  the 
authority  of  Kimchi,  but  which  Bochart  considers 
to  be  identical  in  meaning  with  the  preceding,  and 
v:hich  is  employed  in  Targ.  Onkelos  as  the  equiva 
lent  of  the  word  rendered  "  heron"  in  A.  V.  of  Lev. 
xi.  19.  It  is  impossible  to  say  what  the  rendering 
of  the  Peshito  Syriac  in  Lev.  and  Deut.  may  be,  in 
consequence  of  an  evident  confusion  in  the  text; 
ia  Job  ayyah  is  translated  by  dattho*  "  a  kite"  or 
"  vulture "  as  some  have  it,  which  is  the  repre 
sentative  of  "  vulture"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Is.  xxxiv. 
15.  The  Arabic  versions  of  Saadias  and  Abulwalid 
give  "  the  night-owl ;"  and  Aben  Ezra,  deriving  it 
from  a  root0  signifying  "an  island,"  explains  it 
as  "  the  island  bird,"  without  however  identifying 
it  with  any  individual  of  the  feathered  tribes. 
Robertson  (Clams  Pcntate'.tchf)  derives  ayyah  from 
the  Heb.  PPK,  an  obsolete  root,  which  he  connects 
*rith  an  Arabic  word,d  the  primary  meaning  of 
which,  according  to  Schultens,  is  "  to  turn."  If 
this  derivation  be  the  true  one,  it  is  not  impro 
bable  that  "  kite  "  is  the  correct  rendering.  The 
nabit  which  birds  of  this  genus  have  of  "  sailing  in 
circles,  with  the  rudder-like  tail  by  its  inclination 
governing  the  curve,"  as  Yarrell  says,  accords  with 
the  Arabic  derivation." 

Bochart,  regarding  the  etymology  of  the  word, 
connected  it  with  the  Arabic  al  yuyu,  a  kind  of 
hawk  so  called  from  its  cry  ydyd,  described  by 
Damir  as  a  small  bird  with  a  short  tail,  used  in 
hunting,  and  remarkable  for  its  great  courage,  the 
swiftness  of  its  flight,  and  the  keenness  of  its  vision, 
which  is  made  the  subject  of  praise  in  an  Arabic 
stanza  quoted  by  Damir.  From  these  considerations 
Bochart  identities  it  with  the  merlin,  or  Falco 
aesalon  of  Linnaeus,  which  is  the  same  as  the  Greek 
al<Ta\(i>v  and  Latin  aesalo.  It  must  be  confessed, 
however,  that  the  grounds  for  identifying  the 
ayyah  witli  any  individual  species  are  too  slight  to 
enable  us  to  regard  with  confidence  any  conclusions 
which  may  be  based  upon  them ;  and  from  the  ex 
pression  which  follows  in  Lev.  and  Deut.,  "after 
its  kind,"  it  is  evident  that  the  term  is  generic. 
The  Talmud  goes  so  far  as  to  assert  that  the  four 
Hebrew  words  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  vulture," 
•'glede,"  and  "kite,"  denote  one  and  the  same  bird 
(Lewysohn,  Zoologie  dos  Talmuds,  §196).  Seetzen 
(i.  310)  mentions  a  species  of  falcon  used  in  Syria 
for  hunting  gazelles  and  hares,  and  a  smaller  kind 
for  hunting  hares  in  the  desert.  Russell  (Aleppo, 
ii.  196)  enumerates  seven  different  kinds  employed 
by  the  natives  for  the  same  purpose. 

•  In  ornithological  language  "  kite  "  =  "  glede  " 
(Mllvus  vulgaris]  ;  but  "  glede "  is  applied  by  the 
common  people  in  Ireland  to  the  common  buzzard 
(Buteo  vulffaris),  the  "  kite"  not  being  indigenous  to 
that  country.  So,  too,  the  translators  of  the  A.  V. 
considered  the  terms  "  kite  "  and  "  glede  "  as  distinct, 
for  they  render  HX"I  "glede,"  and  il'K  "kite," 
"  and  <he  glcdc  and\he  kite"  (Deut.  xiv.  13). 


KNIFE 


47 


T-vo  pei-sons  are  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  wno>< 
names  are  derived  from  this  bird.  [A JAM.]  Fiirst 
(Handw.  s.  ».)  compares  the  parallel  instances  o! 
Shebin,  a  kind  of  falcon,  used  as  a  proper  name  uy 
the  Persians  and  Turks,  and  the  Latin  Milmus. 
To  these  we  may  add  Fntfu  and  Falconia  among 
the  Romans,  and  the  naof/.  of  Hawke,  Falcon, 
Falconer,  Kite,  &c.  &c.,  in  our  own  language  (see 
Lower's  Historical  Essays  on  English  Surnames). 

[W.  A.  W  | 


KITH'LISH  (K»?n3,  f.  e.  Cithlish :  MaaXc6s  i 
Alex.  x^^s:  Cethlis),  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah, 
in  the  Shefelah  or  lowland  (Josh.  xv.  40),  named 
n  the  same  group  with  Eglon,  Gederoth,  and  Mak- 
kedah.  It  is  not  named  by  Eusebius  or  Jerome, 
nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  either  sought  or 
found  by  any  later  traveller.  [G.] 


KIT'RON  (fnpp:  Ketipoov:  Alex.,  with  un 
usual  departure  from  the  Heb.  text,  Xe/Spwv :  Cetron}, 
a  town  which,  though  not  mentioned  in  the  specifi 
cation  of  the  possessions  of  Zebulun  in  Josh,  xix.,  is 
catalogued  in  Judg.  i.  30  as  one  of  the  towns  from 
which  Zebulun  did  not  expel  the  Canaanites.  It  is 
here  named  next  to  Nahalol,  a  position  occupied  in 
Josh.  xix.  15,  by  Kattath.  Kitron  may  be  a  cor 
ruption  of  this,  or  it  may  be  an  independent  place 
omitted  for  some  reason  from  the  other  list.  In 
the  Talmud  (Megillah,  as  quoted  by  Schwarz, 
173)  it  is  identified  with  "  Zippori,"  i.e.  Sepphoris, 
now  Seffarieh.  [G .] 

KIT'TIM  (D»n?  :  K-f,rt0l,  Gen.  x.  4  ;  Kfnoi. 
1  Chr.  i.  7  :  Cethim).  Twice  written  in  the  A.  V. 
for  CHITTIM. 

KNEADING-TROUGHS.    [BREAD.] 

KNIFE.'  1.  The  knives  of  the  Egyptians,  and 
of  other  nations  in  early  times,  were  probably  only 
of  hard  stone,  and  the  use  of  the  flint  or  sto'# 


*  Gesenius  traces  the  word  to  the  unused  r«>Dt 
niX  —  Arab.  <^^s.i  "to  howl  like  a.  dog  or  wo/'f." 

'  1.  3~in,  Gesen.  p.  516  :  tt.axa.ipa. :  gladius,  ciilttr. 
2.  nS3NJD,  from  7DK,  "  eat,"  Gesen.  pp.  80,  92  : 
p6fj.ifta.ia.  :  gladiut. 


48  KNIFE 

knife  was  sometimes  retailed  for  sacred  purposes 
after  the  introduction  of  iron  and  steel  (Plin. 
//.  N.  xxxv.  12,  §165).  Herodotus  (ii.  86) 
mentions  knives  both  of  iron  and  of  stone*  in 
different  stages  of  the  same  process  of  embalming. 
The  same  may  perhaps  be  said  to  .some  extent  of 
the  Hebrews.1* 

2.  In  their  meals  the  Jews,  like  other  Orientals, 
made  little  use  of  knives,  but  they  were  required 
both  for  slaughtering  animals  either  for  food  or 
sacrifice,  as  well  as  cutting  up  tlw  carcase  (Lev. 
vii.  33,  34,  viii.  15,  20,  25,  ix.  13;  Num.  xviii. 
18 ;  1  Sam.  ix.  24;  Ez.  xxiv.  4;   Ezr.  i.  9;  Matt, 
xxvi.  23  ;    Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  172;    Wilkinson,  i. 
169;  Mischn.  Tamid.  iv.  3). 

3.  Smaller  knives  were  in  use  for  paring  fruit 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  7 ;  B.  J.  i.  33,  §7)  and  for 
sharpening  pens  c  (Jer.  xxxvi.  23X 


I,  2.  Egyptian  Flint  Knives  m  Mint-urn  at  Berlin. 
3.  Egyptian  Knife  represented  in  Hieroglyphics. 

4.  The  razor d  was  often  used  for  Nazaritic  pur 
poses,  for  which  a  special  chamber  was  reserved  in 
the  Temple  (Num.  vi.  5,  9,  19  ;  Ez.  v.  1 ;  Is.  vii. 
20 ;  Jer.  xxxvi.  23  ;  Acts  xviii.  18,  xxi.  24  ;  Mischn. 
Midd.  ii.  5). 


Eg/py.tin  Kiire.    (British  V  Me-n.) 

5    The  pruning-hooks  of  Is.  xvli;.  5  «  were  pro 
bably  curved  knives. 


11  "|Vf  (Ex.iv.  25)  is  in  LXX.  <W<J>o«,  in  which  Syr. 
ind  otner  versions  agree ;   as  also  D^V  fllTl!^ 

Ges.  p.  1160;  ^axoipa?  irerpiVas  «  ffeVpa?  aicpOTojiOixr, 

josh.  v.  2.    See  Wilkinson,  Ar.c.  Eg.  ii.  164  ;  Prescott, 
Mexico,  i.  63. 

"iyplt  "  the  knife  of  a  scribe." 


KNOP 

6.    The   lancets'   of  the   priests   of  Rn.il  were 
doubt' -^ss  pointed  knives  (1  K.  xviii.  2.S). 


Assyrian  Knives.    (Frum  Originals  in  British  Museum.) 

Asiatics  usually  cany  about  with  them  a  knifj 
or  dagger,  ofteu  with  a  highly  ornamented  handle, 
which  may  be  used  when  required  for  eating  pur 
poses  (Judg.  iii.  21  ;  Layard,  Nin.  ii.  342,  299  : 
Wilkinson,  i.  358,  360;  Chardin,  Voy.  iv.  18; 
Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  340,  pi.  71).  [H.  W.  P.] 

KNOP,  that  is  KNOB  (A.  S.  cncep).  A  word  em 
ployed  in  the  A.  V.  to  translate  two  terms,  of  the  real 
meaning  of  which  all  that  we  can  say  with  certainty 
is  that  they  refer  to  some  architectural  or  ornamental 
object,  and  that  they  have  nothing  in  common. 

1.  Caphtor  ("YinSG).     This  occurs  in  the  de 

scription  of  the  candlestick  of  the  sacred  tent  in 
Ex.  xxv.  31-36,  and  xxxvii.  17-22,  the  two  passages 
being  identical.  The  knops  are  here  distinguished 
from  the  shaft,  branches,  bowls,  and  flowers  of  the 
candlestick  ;  but  the  knop  and  the  flower  go  together, 
and  seem  intended  to  imitate  the  produce  of  an 
almond-tree.  In  another  part  of  the  work  they 
appear  to  form  a  boss,  from  which  the  branches  are 
to  spring  out  from  the  main  stem.  In  Am.  ix.  1 
the  same  word  is  rendered,  with  doubtful  accuracy, 
"  lintel."  The  same  rendering  is  used  in  Zeph.  ii. 
14,  where  the  reference  is  to  some  part  of  the  palaces 
of  Nineveh,  to  be  exposed  when  the  wooden  upper 
story  —  the  "  cedar  work"  —  was  destroyed.  The 
Hebrew  word  seems  to  contain  the  sense  of  "  co 
vering"  and  "crowning"  (Gesenius,  Thes.  709). 
Josephus's  description  (Ant.  iii.  6,  §7)  names  both 
balls  (crtfuiipia)  and  pomegranates  (fioitffKoi),  either 
of  which  may  be  the  cap/itor.  TheTargum*  agrees 
with  the  latter,  the  LXX.  (<r<J>a«po>TTjp«)  with  the 
former.  [LiNTEL.] 

2.  The  second  term,  Peka'im  (D^ypS),  is  found 


only  in  1  K.  vi.  18  and  vii  24.  It  refers  in  the 
tormer  to  carvings  executed  in  the  cedar  wainscot 
of  the  interior  of  the  Temple,  and,  as  in  the  pre 
ceding  word,  is  associated  with  flowers.  Jn  tht 
latter  case  it  denotes  an  ornament  cast  round  th* 


jj),  Gesen.  p.  1D69. 
,  Gesen.  p.  421  :  JpeVava  :  Jalce>. 
:  <r€tpo/xo<rToi  :  lanetoti.. 
5  "Win,  an  apple,  or  other  fruit  of  a  ror.nd 
both  in  Onkclos  and  Pseudojon. 


KOA 

great  reserve  ir  v.r  "  sea"  of  Solomon's  Temple  below 
the  brim :  there  was  a  double  row  of  them,  ten  to 
a  cubit,  or  about  2  inches  from  centre  to  centre. 

The  word  no  doubt  signifies  some  globular  thing 
resembling  a  small  gourd,*  or  an  egg,1*  though  as  to 
the  character  of  the  ornament  we  are  quite  in  the 
dark.  The  fol 'owing  woodcut  of  a  portion  of  a 
richly  ornamented  door-step  or  slab  from  Kouyunjik, 
probably  represents  something  approximating  to  the 
"  knop  and  the  flower  "  of  Solomon's  Temple.  But 
as  the  building  from  which  this  is  taken  was  the 
work  of  a  king  at  least  as  late  as  the  son  of  Esar- 
haddon,  contemporary  with  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Manasseh,  it  is  only  natural  to  suppose  that 
the  character  of  the  ornament  would  have  under 
gone  considerable  modification  from  what  it  was  in 
the  time  of  Solomon.  We  must  await  some  future 
happy  discovery  in  Assyrian  or  Egyptian  art,  to 
throw  clearer  light  on  the  meaning  of  these  and  a 
hundred  other  terms  of  detail  in  the  descriptions  of 


the  buildings  and  life  of  the  Israelites. 


[G.] 


i  Slab  from  Kouyunjik.     (Fergu 


i  Architecture.) 


KOHATH  49 

KOIIATH*  (Jin,-;  and,  Num.  in.  1,  &c., 
Kd0  and  Kadt6 :  Cahath:  "  family "), 
second  of  the  three  sons  of  Levi  (Gershon,  Kohath. 
Merari),  from  whom  the  three  principal  divisions  of 
the  Levites  derived  their  origin  and  their  nan.e  (Gen. 
xivi.  11 ;  Exod.  vi.  16,  18 ;  Num.  iii.  17  ;  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  12,  &c.).  Kohath  was  the  father  of  Am- 
ram,  and  he  of  Moses  and  Aaron.  From  him, 
therefore,  were  descended  all  the  priests ;  and  hence 
those  of  the  Kohathites  who  were  not  pritsts  weie 
of  the  highest  rank  of  the  Levites,  though  not  the 
sons  of  Levi's  first-born.  Korah,  the  son  of  Izhar, 
was  a  Kohathite.  and  hence,  perhaps,  his  impa 
tience  of  the  superiority  of  his  relatives,  Moses  and 
Aaron.  In  the  journeyings  of  the  Tabernacle  the 
sons  of  Kohath  had  charge  of  the  most  holv  tor- 
tiori  of  the  vessels,  to  carry  them  by  staves*  us 
the  vail,  the  ark,  the  tables  of  show-bread,  the 
golden-altar,  &c.  (Num.  iv.)  ;  but  they  were  not 
to  touch  them  or  look  upon  them  "  lest  they  die." 


These  were  all  previously  covered  by  the  priests, 
the  sons  of  Aaron.  In  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  the 
Kohathites  are  mentioned  first  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12), 
as  they  are  also  1  Chr.  xv.  5-7,  11,  when  Urie. 
their  chief  assisted,  with  120  of  his  brethren,  in 
bringing  up  the  ark  to  Jerasalem  in  the  time  of 
David.  It  is  also  remarkable  that  in  this  last  list 
of  those  whom  David  calls  "  chief  of  the  fathers  of 
the  Levites,"  and  couples  with  "  Zadok  and  Abia- 
thar  the  priests,"  of  six  who  are  mentioned  by 
name  four  are  descendants  of  Kohath  ;  viz.,  besides 
Uriel,  Shemaiah  the  sou  of  Elzaphan,  with  200  of 
KO  A  (Vlp:  Txoue")  is  a  word  which  occurs  only  his  brethren;  Eliel,  the  son  of  Hebron,  with  80  of 


in  Ez.  xxiii.  23: — "The  Babylonians  and  all  the 
Chaldaeans,  Pekod,  and  Shoa,  and  Koa,  and  all  the 


Assyrians  with  them." 
is  a  proper  name  or  no. 


It  is  uncertain  if  the  word 
It  may  perhaps  designate 


a  place  otherwise  unknown,  which  we  must  suppose 
to  have  been  a  city  or  district  of  Babylonia.  Or  it 
may  be  a  common  noun,  signifying  "  prince"  or 
'  nobleman,"  as  the  Vulgate  takes  it,  and  some  of 


he  Jewish  interpreters. 


[G.  R.] 


his  brethren ;  and  Amminadab,  the  son  of  Uzziel, 
with  112  of  his  brethren.  For  it  appears  from  Ex. 
vi.  18-22,  compared  with  1  Chr.  xxiii.  12,  xxvi. 
23-32,  that  there  were  four  families  of  sons  of 
Kohath  —  Amramites,  Izharites,  Hebronites,  and 
Uzzielites;  and  of  the  above  names  Elzaphan  and 
Amminadab  were  both  Uzaielites  (Ex.  vi.  22),  and 
Eliel  a  Hebronite.  The  verses  already  cited  from 
1  Chr.  xxvi. ;  Num.  iii.  19,  27  ;  1  Chr.  xxiii.  12, 


•  Compare   the   similar   word   nyjpS,   Pakkuoth, 
•gourds,"  in  2  K.  iv.  39. 
b  This  is  the  rendering  of  the  Targum. 
0  The  conjunction  being  taken  as  part  of  the  name. 


d  It  is  not  apparent  why  the  form  Kohath,  which 
occurs  but  occasionally,  should  have  heen  chosen  in 
the  A.  V.  in  preference  to  the  more  usual  one  of  Ke- 
hath,  sanctioned  both  by  LXX.  and  Vulg. 


LEVI. 

1 

ochebed. 

Mb 

lit**. 

nil.  W.) 

in.'  10; 
24.) 

ADJLI. 
IT.  K» 

Gerehon.                         KOHATH.                         Merari.                     A  daughter,  J 
Gershunito.                                                           Meruriw*. 

Aim-am  —  Jochebed.                                                    lihar.                                             He'irro 
1                                                                      1                                                     1      ' 

U* 

owl 

(1  da.  Ml 
AH.                                Mu 

nxiii.  19  j       (i(hr.  xi 
S8.J                       jtxir 

BL.                             AuMIt 

*».  ••)             (1  Chr. 
K 

I                                          1                                           izrmritM.                                       Hebronitn. 
A.ron  =  Elisheba.           Mo*»  =  Zipporah.         C»  Chr.  xxiv.  is  ;                          (i  Chr.  xxiii.  19 
|                                          |       '                          „      xxvi.  ja.)                          xxvi.  23,  ao.  »•}. 

Gereiom.                 Eliczi-r.                                                              I 
Korah. 

Korahitet. 
(1  Chr.  ix.  19.) 

ElUanah. 

In  time  of  Davkl,      In  time  of  David         ••  Df  the  sons  of         Sons  of  Hemim        (1  Chr. 
••of  the  «>nsot         (1  Chr  xxvi.  tt,         Izhar  "  (j  Chr.           (1    Chr.    vi.              xxw 
Amram"       ;l          1»).      But  "  Re-          xxiii.    18),    in            33). 
Chr.   xxiii.  18;          habiah  "     WM»            time  of  David                                                    El 
xxif.  SO).                   chii-f  of  thCBOin         (and  xxiv.  M).                                         ,  1  Chr 
of  Elicxer  in  t'.ie 
diiy*  of  David,  nt-cording  to  1  Chr. 
xxni.  17;  and  Sh,-Um.i>th  <.H».liirf 
"'  """""•"•'"'""    <»»•>*> 

50 


KOLAIAH 


also  disclose  the  wealth  and  importance  of  the  Ko 
hathites,  and  the  important  offices  filled  by  them  as 
keepers  of  the  dedicated  treasures,  as  judges,  officers, 
and  rulers,  both  secular  and  sacred.  In  2  Chr.  xx. 
19,  they  appear  as  singers,  with  the  Korhites. 

The  number  of  the  sons  of  Kohath  between  the 
ages  of  30  and  .r>0,  at  the  first  census  in  the  wilder 
ness,  was  2750,  and  the  whole  number  of  malet 
from  a  month  old  was  8600  (Num.  iii.  28,  iv.  36). 
Their  number  is  not  given  at  the  second  numbering 
(Num.  xxvi.  57),  but  the  whole  number  of  Levites 
had  increased  by  1300,  viz.  from  22,000  to  23,300 
(Num.  iii.  39,  xxvi.  62).  The  place  of  the  sons  of 
Kohath  in  marching  and  encampment  was  south  of 
the  tabernacle  (Num.  iii.  29),  which  was  also  the 
situation  of  the  Keubenites.  Samuel  was  a  Ko- 
hathite,  and  so  of  course  were  his  descendants,  He- 
man  the  singer  and  the  third  division  of  the  singers 
which  was  uuier  him.  [HEMAN  ;  ASAPH  ;  JE- 
DUTHUN.]  The  inheritance  of  those  sons  of  Ko- 
bath  who  were  not  priests  lay  in  the  half  tribe 
of  Munasseh,  in  Kphraim  (1  Chr.  vi.  61-70\  and 
in  Dan  (Josh.  xxi.  5,  20-26).  Of  the  personal 
history  of  Kohath  we  know  nothing,  except  that  he 
came  down  to  Egypt  with  Levi  and  Jacob  (Gen. 
xlvi.  1 1),  that  his  sister  was  Jochebed  (Ex.  vi.  20), 
and  that  he  lived  to  the  age  of  133  years  (Ex. 
vi.  18).  He  lived  about  80  or  90  years  in  Egypt 
during  Joseph's  lifetime,  and  about  30  more  after 
his  death.  He  may  have  been  some  20  years 
younger  than  Joseph  his  uncle.  The  table  on  the 
preceding  page  shows  the  principal  descents  from 
Kohath  ;  a  fuller  table  may  be  seen  in  Burrington's 
0«wafogrtiw,Tab,X.No.l.  [LEVITES.]  [A.C.H.] 

KOLAT'AH  (n^flp :  KwXefa ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
Ko\fia :  Colitta).  1.  A  Benjamite  whose  de 
scendants  settled  in  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from 
the  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

2.  The  father  of  Ahab  the  false  prophet,  who 
was  burnt  by  the  king  of  Babylon  (Jer.  xxix.  21). 

KO'RAH  (PHp,  "baldness"*:  Kop«:  Core). 
1.  Third  son  of  Esau  by  Aholibamah  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  5,  14,  18;  1  Chr.  i.  35).  He  was  born  in 
Canaan  before  Esau  migrated  to  Mount  Seir  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  5-9),  and  was  one  of  the  "  dukes  "  of  Edom. 

2.  Another  Edom itish  duke  of  this  name,  sprung 
from  Eliphaz,  Esau's  son  by  Adah  (Gen.  xxxvi.  16) ; 
but  this  is  not  confirmed  by  ver.  1 1,  nor  by  the  list 
in  1  Chr.  i.  36.  nor  is  it  probable  in  itself. 

3.  One  of  the  "sons  of  Hebron"  in  1  Chr.  ii. 
43  ;  but  whether,  in  this  obscure  passage,  Hebron 
is  the  name  of  a  man  or  of  a  city,  and  whether,  in 
the  latter  case,  Korah  is  the  same  as  the  son  of 
Izhar  (No.  4),  whose  children  may  have  been  located 
»t   Hebron   among    those    Kohathites    who    were 
priest;,  is  difficult  to  determine. 

4.  Son  of  Izhar,  the  son  of  Kohath,  the  son  of 
Levi.     He  was  leader  of  the  famous  rebellion  against 
his  cousins  Moses  and  Aaron  in  the  wilderness,  for 
which  he  paid  the  penalty  of  perishing  with  his 
followers  by  an  earthquake  and  rlames  of  fire  (Num. 


1  The  moaning  of  Koran's  name  (baldness)  has 
supplied  a  ready  handle  to  some  members  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  banter  Calvin  (Calvinus,  Calvus), 
as  being  homonymous  with  his  predecessor  in  schism ; 
and  it  has  been  retorted  that  Konih's  baldness  has  a 
more  suitable  antitype  in  the  tonsure  of  the  Romish 
priests  (Simonis,  Otiorit.  s.  v.). 

k>  aiTiAoyta,  "  contradiction,"  alluding  to  his  speech 
in  Num.  xvi.  3,  and  accompanying  rebellion.  Compare 
th«*  u»e  of  the  mine  word  in  Hcb.  xii.  3,  Ps.  cvi.  32, 


KORAH 

xvi.  xxvi.  9-11).  The  details  of  this  rebellion  art 
too  well  known  to  need  rejietitiou  here,  but  it  may 
be  well  to  remark,  that  the  particular  grievance 
which  rankled  in  the  mind  of  Korah  and  his  com 
pany  was  their  exclusion  from  the  «*Hce  of  the 
priesthood,  and  their  being  confiued — tnose  among 
them  who  were  Levites — to  the  inferior  service  of 
the  tabernacle,  as  appears  clearly,  both  from  the 
words*  of  Moses  in  ver.  9,  and  from  the  test  resorted 
to  with  regard  to  the  censers  and  the  offering  of 
incense.  The  same  thing  also  appears  from  th« 
subsequent  confirmation  of  the  priesthood  to  Aaron 
(ch.  xvii.).  The  appointment  of  Elizaphan  to  be 
chief  of  the  Kohathites  (Num.  iii.  30)  may  have 
further  inflamed  his  jealousy.  Korah's  position  as 
leader  in  this  rebellion  was  evidently  the  result  of 
his  personal  character,  which  was  that  of  a  bold, 
haughty,  and  ambitious  man.  This  appears  from  his 
address  to  Moses  in  ver.  3,  and  especially  from  his 
conduct  in  ver.  19,  where  both  his  daring  and  his 
influence  over  the  congregation  are  very  apparent. 
Were  it  not  for  this,  one  would  have  expected  the 
Gershonites — as  the  elder  branch  of  the  Levites — to 
have  supplied  a  leader  in  conjunction  with  the  sons 
of  Reuben,  rather  than  the  family  of  Izhar,  who  was 
Amram's  younger  brother.  From  some  cause 
which  does  not  clearly  appear,  the  children  of  Ko 
rah  were  not  involved  in  the  destruction  of  their 
father,  as  we  are  expressly  told  in  Num.  xxvi.  11, 
and  as  appeal's  from  the  continuance  of  the  family 
of  the  Korahites  to  the  reign,  at  least  of  Jeho- 
shaphat  (2  Chr.  xx.  19),  and  probably  till  the  return 
from  the  captivity  (1  Chr.  ix.  19,  31).  fKORA- 
HITES.]  Perhaps  the  fissure  of  the  ground  which 
swallowed  up  the  tents  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  did 
not  extend  beyond  those  of  the  Reubenites.  From 
ver.  27  it  seems  clear  that  Korah  himself  was  not 
with  Dathan  and  Abiram  at  the  moment.  His  tent 
may  have  been  one  pitched  for  himself,  in  contempt 
of  the  orders  of  Moses,  by  the  side  of  his  fellow- 
rebels,  while  his  family  continued  to  reside  in  their 
proper  camp  nearer  the  tabernacle ;  or  it  must  have 
been  separated  by  a  considerable  space  from  those 
of  Dathan  and  Abiram.  Or,  even  if  Korah's  family 
resided  amongst  the  Reubenites,  they  may  have 
fled,  at  Moses's  warning,  to  take  refuge  in  the  Ko- 
hathite  camp,  instead  of  remaining,  as  the  wives 
and  children  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  did  (ver.  27). 
Korah  himself  was  doubtless  with  the  250  men 
who  bare  censers  nearer  the  tabernacle  (ver.  19), 
and  perished  with  them  by  the  "  fire  from  Je 
hovah  "  which  accompanied  the  earthquake.  It  is 
nowhere  said  that  he  was  one  of  those  who  "  went 
down  quick  into  the  pit"  (comp.  Ps.  cvi.  17,  18), 
and  it  is  natural  that  he  should  have  been  with  the 
censer-bearers.  That  he  was  so  is  indeed  clearly 
implied  by  Num.  xvi.  16-19,  35, 40,  compared  with 
xxvi.  9,  10.  In  the  N.  T.  (Jude  ver.  11)  Korah  is 
coupled  with  Cain  and  Balaam,  and  seems  to  bt 
held  out  as  a  warning  to  those  who  "  despise  domi 
nion  and  speak  evil  of  dignities,"  of  whom  it  is  s:\id 
that  they  "  perished  in  the  gainsaying  of  Core."  b 

and  of  the  verb,  John  six.  12,  and  Is.  xxii.  22, 
Ixv.  2  (LXX.),  in  which  latter  passage,  as  quoted 
Kom.  x.  21,  the  A.  V.  has  the  same  expression  of 
"gainsaying"  as  in  Jude.  The  Son  of  Sirach,  follow 
ing  P«.  cvi.  16,  nfc^>  -1N3J5V  &c.  (otherwise  rcn- 
dered  however  by  LXX.,  Ps.  cvi.  16,  ircuxipyiaoi'}, 
describes  Korah  and  his  companions  as  envious  or 
jealous  of  Moses,  where  the  Knglish  "  maligned  •' li 
hardly  an  equivalent  for  e'ojAuxrai'. 


KOHALUTE 

Nothing  more  is  known  of  Koran's  personal  cha 
racter  or  career  previous  to  his  rebellion.   [A.  C.  H.J 
KORAHITE  (1  Chr.  ix.  19, 31),  KORHITE, 
or  KORATHITE  (in  Hebrew  always  *rnj5,  or  in 


KUSHAIAH 


51 


strains  to  Neman  and  his  choir,  and  the  simpler  and 
quieter  psalms  to  tht  other  choirs.  J.  van  Iperen 
(ap.  Kosenm.)  assigns  these  psalms  to  the  times  ol 
Jehoshaphat ;  others  to  thost  of  the  Maccabees  ; 
Ewald  attributes  the  42nd  Psalm  to  Jeremiah. 


plur.  DVT1J3:  never  expressed  at  all  by  the  LXX.,  ,  The  purpose  of  manv  of  the  German  critics  seems 
but  paraphrased  vloi,  STJJUOS,  or  yevifftis  Kopf :  to  be  to  reduce  the  antiquity  of  the  Scriptures  as 
Coritae),  that  portion  of  the  Kohathites  who  were  ',  low  as  possible. 

Others,  again,  of  the  sons  of  Korah  were  "  por- 


descended  from  Korah,  and  are  frequently  styled  by 
the  synonymous  phrase  Sons  of  Korah.  [KOHATH.] 
It  would  appear,  at  first  sight,  from  Ex.  vi.  24, 
that  Korah  had  three  sons — Assir,  Elkanah,  and 
Abiasaph — as  Winer,  Rosenmiiller,  &c.,  also  undcr- 


ters,"  f.  e.  doorkeepers,  in  the  temple,  an  office  of 
considerable  dignity.  In  1  Chr.  ix.  17-19,  we  learn 
that  Shallum,  a  Korahite  cf  the  line  of  Ebias&ph, 
was  chief  of  the  doorkeepers,  and  that  he  and  his 


stand  it,;  but  as  we  learn  from  1  Chr.  vi.  22,  23,  I  brethren  were  over  the  work  of  the  service,  keepers 
37,  that  Assir,  Elkanah,  and  Abiasaph,  were  re-  j  of  the  gates  of  the  tabernacle  (comp.  2  K.  xxv.  18} 
spectively  the  son,  grandson,  and  great-grandson  of  apparently  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonish 


Korah,  it  seems  obvious  that  Ex.  vi.  24,  gives  us 
the  chief  houses  sprung  from  Korah,  and  not  his 
actual  sons,  and  therefore  that  Elkanah  and  Abiasaph 
were  not  the  sons,  but  later  descendants  of  Kornh. 
If,  however,  Abiasaph  was  the  grandson  of  Assir 
his  name  must  have  been  added  to  this  genealogy  in 
Exodus  later,  as  he  could  not  have  been  born  at  that 
time.  Elkanah  might,  being  of  the  same  genera 
tion  as  Phinehas  (Ex.  vi.  25). 

The  offices  filled  by  the  sons  of  Korah,  as  far  as 
we  arc  informed,  are  the  following.     They  were  an 
important  branch  of  the  singers  in  the  Kohathite 
division,  Heman  himself  being  a  Korahite  (1  Chr. 
vi.  33),  and  the  Korahites  being  among  those  who, 
in  Jehoshaphat's  reign,  "  stood    up  to  praise  the 
Loixl  God  of  Israel  with  a  loud  voice  on  high " 
(2  Chr.  xx.  19).   [HEMAN.]    Hence  we  find  eleven 
Psalms  (or  twelve,  if  Ps.  43  is  included  under  the 
same  title  as  Ps.  42)  dedicated  or  assigned  to  the 
sons  of  Korah,  viz.  Ps.  42,  44-49,  84,  85,  87,  88. 
Winer  describes  them  as  some  of  the  most  beautiful 
in  the  collection,  from  their  high  lyric  tone.  Origen 
says  it  was  a  remark  of  the  old  interpreters  that  all 
the  Psalms  inscribed  with  the  name  of  the  sons  of 
Korah  are  full  of  pleasant  and  cheerful  subjects, 
and  free  from  anything  sad  or  harsh  (/TorntV.  on 
1  Kings,  i.e.  1  Sam.),  and  on  Matt,  xviii.  20,  he 
ascribes  the  authorship  of  these  Psalms  to  "  the 
three  sons  of  Korah,"  who,  "  because  they  agreed 
together  had  the  Word  of  God  in  the   midst  of 
them  "  (Homil.  xiv.).*     Of  moderns,  Rosenmuller 
thinks  that  the  sons  of  Korah,  especially  Heman, 
were  the  authors  of  these  Psalms,  which,  he  says, 
rise  to  greater  sublimity  and  breathe  more  vehe 
ment  feelings  than  the  Psalms  of  David,  and  quotes 
Hensler  and  Eichhorn  as  agreeing.     De  Wette  also 
considers  the  sons  of  Korah  as  the  authors  of  them 
(Einl.  335-339),  and  so  does  Just.  Olshausen  on 
the   Psalms  (Exeg.  Handb.   Einl.   p.   22).      As, 
however,  the  language  of  several  of  these  Psalms — 
as  the  42nd,   84th,  &c. — is  manifestly  meant  to 
apply  to  David,  it  seems  much  simpler  to  explain 
the  title  "  for  the  sons  of  Korah,"  to  mean  that 
they  were  given  to  them  to  sing  in  the  temple- 
services.     If  their  style  of  music,  vocal  and  instru 
mental,  was  of  a  mure  sublime  and  lyric  character 
than  that  of  the  sons  of  Merari  or  Gershon,  and 
Heman  had  more  fire  in  his  execution  than  Asaph 
and  Jeduthun,  it  is  perfectly  natural  that  David 
should  have  given  his  more  poetic  and  elevated 

•  St.  Augustine  has  a  still  more  fanciful  conceit, 
which  Ue  thinks  it  necessary  to  repeat  in  almost  every 
homily  on  the  eleven  psalms  inscribed  to  the  sons  ol 
Kore.  Adverting  to  the  interpretation  of  Korah, 
Cnlvitiet,  he  finds  in  it  a  great  mystery.  Under 
this  term  is  set  forth  Christ,  who  is  intitled  Calvus, 


captivity.     [KINGS.]     See  also  1  Chr.  ix.  22-29  ; 
Jer.  xxxv.  4  ;   and  Ezr.  ii.  42.     But  in  1  Chr. 
xxvi.  we  find  that  this  official  station  of  the  Korah 
ites  dated  from  the  time  of  David,  and  that  their 
chief  was  then  Shelemiah  or  Meshelemiah,  the  son 
of  (Abi)asaph,  to  whose  custody  the  east  gate  fell 
by  lot,  being  the  principal  entrance.     Shelemiah  is 
doubtless  the  same  name  as  Shallum  in  1  Chr.  ix. 
17,  and,  perhaps,  Meshullam,  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12, 
Neh.  xii.  25,  where,  as  in  so  many  other  places,  it 
designates,  not  the  individuals,  but  the  house  or 
family.     In  2  Chr.  xxxi.  14,  Kore,  the  son  of  Imnah 
the  Levite,  the  doorkeeper  towards  the  east,  who  was 
over  the  freewill  offerings  of  God  to  distribute  the 
oblations  of  the  Lord  and  the  most  holy  things,  was 
H'obably  a  Korahite,  as  we  find  the  name  Kore  in 
he  family  of  Korah  in  1  Chr.  ix.   19.     In  1  Chr. 
x.  31,  we  find  that  Mattithiah,  the  first-born  of 
Shallum  the  Korahite,  had  the  set  office  over  the 
.hings  that  were  made  in  the  pans  (Burrington's 
•ies ;  Patrick,  Comment,  on  Num.;  Lyell's 


Princ.  of  Geol.,  ch.  23.  24.  25,  on  Earthquakes; 
iosenmiiller  and  Olshausen,  On  Psalms ;  De  Wette, 
EM.).  [A.  C.  H.] 

KOBATHITES,  THE  OfTTjpn),  Num.  xxvi. 
8.  [KORAHITE.] 

KORHITES,  THE  (TV^n),  Ex.  vi.  24,  xxvi. 
1 ;  1  Chr.  xii.  6 ;  2  Chr.  xx.'  19.  [KORAHITE.] 

KO'RE  (fcO'lp :  Kopt ;  Alex.  Xurf  in  1  Chr. 
x.  19;  Alex.  Koprje,  1  Chr.  xxvi.  1:  Core). 
1.  A  Korahite,  ancestor  of  Shallum  and  Meshele 
miah,  chief  porters  in  the  reign  of  David. 

2.  (Kop^:  Alex.  Kwp^.)  Son  of  Imnah,  a  Levite 
n  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  appointed  over  the  free-will 

offerings  and  most  holy  things,  and  a  gatekeeper  on 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Temple  after  the  reform  of 
worship  in  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  14). 

3.  In  the  A.  V.  of  1  Chr.  xxvi.  19,  "  the  son? 
of  KORE"  (following  the  Vulg.  Core),  should  pro 
perly  be  "  the  sons  of  the  Korhite." 

KOZ(pp:  'AKKOVS  in  Ezr.  ii.,61;  'A/ows, 
Neh.  iii.  4,  21 :  Accos  in  Ezr.,  Accus  in  f»en.  iii.  4, 
Haccus  in  Neh  iii.  21)  =  ACCOZ  =  Coz  =  HAKKOZ. 

KUSHAI'AH  (irW-1p :  Kuraias:  Casafas), 
The  same  as  KiSH  or  KISHI,  the  father  of  Ethan 
the  Merarite  (1  Chr.  xv.  17).  

because  He  was  crucified  on  Calvary,  and  was  mocked 
by  the  bystanders,  as  Elisha  had  been  by  the  children 
who  cried  after  him  "  Calve,  calve .'"  and  who,  when 
they  said  "  Go  up,  thou  bald  pate,"  had  prefigured  the 
crucifixion.  The  sons  of  Korah  are  therefore  the 
children  of  Christ  the  bridegroom  (Homil.  on  Psalms) 

E  2 


LAADAH 


LA  'ADAH  (ftty:  AooSi:  Laadd),  the  son 
of  Shelah,  and  grandson  of  Judah.  He  is  described 
as  the  "  father  f'  or  founder,  of  MARESHAH  in  the 
lowlands  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  21). 

LA'ADAN  (>:    AaaSib:    Alex.  Ta\aaSd 


andAaaSa:  Laadari).     1.  An  Ephraimite,  ancestor 
of  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun  (I  Chr.  vii.  26). 

2.  (*E8<fi';  Alex.  AtaSdv  ;  Leedan,  1  Chr.  xxiii. 
7,  8,  9:  AjSdv;  Alex.  teSdv  and  AooSi:  Ledan, 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  21.)  The  son  of  Gershom,  elsewhere 
called  LlRNi.  His  descendants  in  the  reign  of  David 
were  among  the  chief  fathers  of  his  tribe,  and 
formed  part  of  the  Temple-choir. 

LAB'AN  (J31?,  AetjSav;  Joseph.  AajSwos: 
Laban),  son  of  Bethuel,  grandson  of  Nahor  and 
Milcah,  grand-nephew  of  Abraham,  brother  of  Re- 
bekah,  and  father  of  Leah  and  Rachel  ;  by  whom 
and  their  handmaids  Bilhah  and  Zilpah  he  was  the 
natural  progenitor  of  three-fourths  of  the  nation  of 
the  Jews,  and  of  our  Blessed  Lord,  and  the  legal 
ancestor  of  the  whole. 

The  elder  branch  of  the  family  remained  at  Haran 
when  Abraham  removed  to  the  laud  of  Canaan,  and 
it  is  there  that  we  first  meet  with  Laban,  as  taking 
the  leading  part  in  the  betrothal  of  his  sister  Re- 
bekah  to  her  cousin  Isaac  (Gen.  xxiv.  10,  29-60, 
xxvii.  43,  xxix.  4).  Bethuel,  his  father,  plays  so 
insignificant  a  part  in  the  whole  transaction,  being 
in  fact  only  mentioned  once,  and  that  after  his  son 
(xxiv.  50),  that  various  conjectures  have  been  formed 
to  explain  it.  Josephus  asserts  that  Bethuel  was 
dead,  and  that  Laban  was  the  head  of  the  house  and 
his  sister's  natural  guardian  (Ant.  i.  16,  §2);  in 
which  case  "  Bethuel  "  must  have  crept  into  the 
text  inadvertently,  or  be  supposed,  with  some  (Adam 
Clarke,  in  loc.),  to  be  the  name  of  another  brother  of 
Rebekah.  Le  Clerc  (in  Pent.)  mentions  the  conjec 
ture  that  Bethuel  was  absent  at  first,  but  returned  in 
time  to  give  his  consent  to  the  marriage.  The  mode 
adopted  by  Prof.  Blunt  (  Undesigned  Coincidences, 
p.  35)  to  explain  what  he  terms  "  the  consistent 
insignificance  of  Bethuel,"  viz.,  that  he  was  inca 
pacitated  from  taking  the  management  of  his  family 
by  age  or  imbecility,  is  most  ingenious  ;  but  the 
prominence  of  Laban  may  be  sufficiently  explained 
by  the  custom  of  the  country,  which  then,  as  now 
(see  Niebuhr,  quoted  by  Rosenmiiller  in  foe.),  gave 
the  brothers  the  main  share  in  the  arrangement 
of  their  sister's  marriage,  and  the  defence  of  her 
honour  (comp.  Gen.  xxxiv.  13;  Judg.xxi.22  ;  2Sam. 
xiii.  20-29).  [BETHUEL.] 

The  next  time  Laban  appears  in  the  sacred  nar 
rative  it  is  as  the  host  of  his  nephew  Jacob  at  Haran 
(Gea.  xxix.  13,  14).  The  subsequent  transactions 
by  which  he  secured  the  valuable  sen-ices  of  his 
nephew  for  fourteen  years  in  return  for  his  two 
daughters,  and  for  six  years  as  the  price  of  his 
cattle,  together  with  the  disgraceful  artifice  by 
»rhich  he  palmed  off  his  elder  and  less  attractive 
daughter  on  the  unsuspecting  Jacob,  are  familiar 
to  all  (Gen.  xxix.,  xxx.). 

Laban  was  absent  shearing  his  sheep,  when  Jacob, 
having  gathered  together  all  his  possessions,  started 
with  his  wives  and  children  for  his  native  land;  and 
it  was  not  till  the  third  day  that  he  heard  of  their 
btn;ilthy  dcparUiiT,  In  Lot  haste  he  sets  off  in 


LABAN 

pursuit  of  the  fugitives,  his  indignation  at  the 
prospect  of  losing  a  servant,  the  value  of  whose 
services  he  had  proved  by  experience  (xxx.  27),  and 
a  family  who  he  hoped  would  have  increased  the 
power  of  his  tribe,  being  increased  by  the  discovery 
of  the  loss  of  his  teraphim,  or  household  gods,  which 
Rachel  had  earned  off,  probably  with  the  view 
of  securing  a  prosperous  journey.  Jacob  and  his 
family  had  crossed  the  Euphrates,  and  were  already 
some  days'  march  in  advance  of  their  pursuers ; 
but  so  large  a  caravan,  encumbered  with  women 
and  children,  and  cattle,  would  travel  but  sJowly 
(comp.  Gen.  sxxiii.  IS),  and  Laban  and  his  kinsmen 
came  up  with  the  retreating  party  on  the  east  side 
of  the  Jordan,  among  the  mountains  of  Gileod.  The 
collision  with  his  irritated  father-in-law  might  have 
proved  dangerous  for  Jacob  but  for  a  divine  intima 
tion  to  Laban,  who,  with  characteristic  hypocrisy, 
passes  over  in  silence  the  real  ground  of  his  dis 
pleasure  at  Jacob's  departure,  urging  only  its  clan  • 
destine  character,  which  had  prevented  his  sending 
him  away  with  marks  of  affection  and  honour,  and 
the  theft  of  his  gods.  After  some  sharp  mutual  re 
crimination,  and  an  unsuccessful  search  for  th« 
teraphim,  which  Rachel,  with  the  cunning  which 
characterized  the  whole  family,  knew  well  how  to 
hide,  a  covenant  of  peace  was  entered  into  between 
the  two  parties,  and  a  cairn  raised  about  a  pillar- 
stone  set  up  by  Jacob,  both  as  a  memorial  of  the 
covenant,  and  a  boundary  which  the  contracting 
parties  pledged  themselves  not  to  pass  with  hostile 
intentions.  After  this,  in  the  simple  and  beautiful 
words  of  Scripture,  "  Laban  rose  up  and  kissed  his 
sons  and  his  daughters,  and  blessed  them,  and  de 
parted,  and  returned  to  his  place ;"  and  he  thence* 
forward  disappears  from  the  Biblical  narrative. 

Kew  Scriptural  characters  appear  in  more  re 
pulsive  colours  than  Laban,  who  seems  to  have 
concentrated  all  the  duplicity  and  acquisitiveness 
which  marked  the  family  of  Haran.  The  leading 
principle  of  his  conduct  was  evidently  self-interest, 
and  he  was  little  scrupulous  as  to  the  means  whereby 
his  ends  were  secured.  Nothing  can  excuse  the 
abominable  trick  by  Which  he  deceived  Jacob  in  the 
matter  of  his  wife,  and  there  is  much  of  harshness 
and  mean  selfishness  in  his  other  relations  with  him. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  impossible,  on  an  unbiassed 
view  of  the  whole  transactions,  to  acquit  Jacob  of 
blame,  or  to  assign  him  any  very  decided  superiority 
over  his  uncle  in  fair  and  generous  dealing.  In  the 
matter  of  the  flocks  each  was  evidently  seeking  to 
outwit  the  other ;  and  though  the  whole  was  di 
vinely  overruled  to  work  out  important  issues  in 
securing  Jacob's  return  to  Canaan  in  wealth  and 
dignity,  our  moral  sense  revolts  from  what  Chalmers 
(Daily  Scr.  Readings,  i.  60)  does  not  shrink  from 
designating  the  "  sneaking  artifices  for  the  promo 
tion  of  his  own  selfishness,"  adopted  for  his  own 
enrichment  and  the  impoverishment  of  his  uncle ; 
while  we  can  well  excuse  Laban's  mortification  at 
seeing  himself  outdone  by  his  nephew  in  cunning, 
and  the  best  of  his  flocks  changing  hands.  In  their 
mistaken  zeal  to  defend  Jacob,  Christian  writers 
have  unduly  depreciated  Laban  ;  and  even  the 
ready  hospitality  shewn  by  him  to  Abraham's  ser 
vant,  and  the  affectionate  reception  of  his  nephew 
(Gen.  xxiv.  30,  31,  xxix.  13,  14),  have  been  mis 
construed  into  the  acts  of  a  selfish  man,  eager  to 
embrace  an  opportunity  of  a  lucrative  connexion 
No  man,  however,  is  wholly  selfish ;  and  even 
Laban  was  capable  of  generous  impulses,  however 
mean  and  unprincipled  his  general  conduct.  [K.V.] 


LABAN  LACHISH  53 

LA'BAN  (J3/  :    h.ofi&v :  Labari),  one  of  the  |  Lachish  occurs  in  the  same  place  with  regard  to  the 


Jandmarks  named  in  the  obscure  and  disputed 
passage,  Deut.  i.  1  :  "  Paran,  and  Tophel,  and 
Laban,  and  Hazeroth,  and  Di-zahab."  The  mention 
of  Hazeroth  has  perhaps  led  to  the  only  conjecture 
regarding  Laban  of  which  the  writer  is  aware, 
namely,  that  it  is  identical  with  LIBNAH  (Num. 
xx.xiii.  130),  which  was  the  second  station  from 
Hazeroth. 

The  Syriac  Peschito  understands  the  name  as 
Lebanon.  The  Targums,  from  Onkelos  downward, 
play  upon  the  five  names  in  this  passage,  connecting 
them  with  the  main  events  of  the  wanderings. 
Laban  in  this  way  suggests  the  manna,  because  of 
its  white  colour,  that  being  the  force  of  the  word 
in  Hebrew.  [G.J 

LAB'ANA  (A-afavd  :  Laband),  1  Esd.  v.  29. 

[LEBANA.] 

LACEDEMO'NIANS  (^iraprMTai  ;  once  Ao- 
KeSatjuopioi,  2  Mace.  v.  9  :  Spartiatae,  Spartiani, 
Lacedaemon/te'),  the  inhabitants  of  Sparta  or  Lace- 
daemon,  with  whom  the  Jews  claimed  kindred 
(1  Mace.  xii.  2,  5,  6,  20,  21  ;  xiv.  20,  23  ;  xv.  23  ; 
2  Mace.  v.  9).  [SPARTA.] 


LA'CHISH  (Wlh  :  AaXek  ;  but  in  Vat.  of 
Josh.  xv.  MaxTjs  ;*  Joseph.  Adxf  lffa  '•  Lachis),  a 
city  of  the  Amorites,  the  king  of  which  joined  with 
four  others,  at  the  invitation  of  Adonizedek  king  of 
Jerusalem,  to  chastise  the  Gibeonites  for  their  league 
with  Israel  (Josh.  x.  3,  5).  They  were  however 
routed  by  Joshua  at  Beth-horon,  and  the  king  of 
Lachish  fell  a  victim  with  the  others  under  the 
trees  at  Makkedah  (ver.  26).  The  destruction  of 
the  town  seems  to  have  shortly  followed  the  death 
of  the  king  :  it  was  attacked  in  its  turn,  immediately 
after  the  fall  of  Libnah,  and  notwithstanding  an 
effort  to  relieve  it  by  Horara  king  of  Gezer,  was 
taken,  and  every  soul  put  to  the  sword  (ver.  3  1-33). 
In  the  special  statement  that  the  attack  lasted  two 
days,  in  contradistinction  to  the  other  cities  v/hich 
were  taken  in  one  (see  ver.  35),  we  gain  our  first 
glimpse  of  that  strength  of  position  for  which 
Lachish  was  afterwards  remarkable.  In  the  cata 
logue  of  the  kings  slain  by  Joshua  (xii.  10-12), 


others  as  in  the  narrative  just  quoted ;  but  in  Josh, 
xv.,  where  the  towns  are  separated  into  groups,  it 
is  placed  in  the  Shefelah,  or  lowland  district,  and 
in  the  same  group  with  Eglon  and  Makkedah  (ver 
39),  apart  from  its  former  companions.  It  should 
not  be  overlooked  that,  though  included  in  the  low 
land  district,  Lachish  was  a  town  of  the  Amorites, 
who  appear  to  have  been  essentially  mountaineers. 
Its  king  is  expressly  named  as  one  of  the  "  kings  of 
the  Amorites  who  dwell  in  the  mountains"  (Josh. 
x.  6).  A  similar  remark  lias  already  been  made  of 
JARMUTH  ;  KEILAH,  and  others ;  and  see  J0DAH, 
vol.  i.  1156  6.  Its  proximity  to  Libnah  is  im 
plied  many  centuries  later  (2  K.  xix.  8).  Lachish 
was  one  of  the  cities  fortified  and  garrisoned  by 
Rehoboam  after  the  revolt  of  the  northern  king 
dom  (2  Chr.  xi.  9).  What  was  its  fate  duriug  the 
invasion  of  Shishak — who  no  doubt  advanced  by  the 
usual  route  through  the  maritime  lowland,  which 
would  bring  him  under  its  very  walls —  we  are  not 
told.  But  it  is  probable  that  it  did  not  materially 
suffer,  for  it  was  evidently  a  place  of  security  later, 
when  it  was  chosen  as  a  refuge  by  Ainaziah  king 
of  Judah  from  the  conspirators  who  threatened 
him  in  Jerusalem,  and  to  whom  he  at  last  fell  a 
victim  at  Lachish  (2  K.  xiv.  19,  2  Chr.  xxv.  27). 
Later  still,  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  it  was  one  of 
the  cities  taken  by  Sennacherib  when  on  his  way 
from  Phoenicia  to  Egypt  (Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  477) . 
It  is  specially  mentioned  that  he  laid  siege  to  it 
"  with  all  his  power"  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  9)  ;  and  here 
"  the  great  King"  himself  remained,  while  his  officen> 
only  were  dispatched  to  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  9  ; 
2  K.  xviii.  17). 

This  siege  is  considered  by  Layard  and  Hincks 
to  be  depicted  on  the  slabs  found  by  the  former  in 
one  of  the  chambers  of  the  palace  at  Kouyunjik, 
which  bear  the  inscription  "  Sennacherib,  the  mighty 
king,  king  of  the  country  of  Assyria,  sitting  oil  the 
throne  of  judgment  before  (or  at  the  entrance  of) 
the  city  of  Lachish  fLakhisha).  I  give  permission 
for  its  slaughter ''  ^Layard,  N.  $  B,  149-52,  and 
153,  note).  These  slabs  contain  a  view  of  a  city 
which,  if  the  inscription  is  correctly  interpreted, 
must  be  Lachish  itself. 


Fig  1  The  city  of  Laclnsh  repellmu  "in 
attack  of  Sennacherib.  From  l.aynrd'»  Monn 
menu  of  Nineveh,  <nd  Series,  p  if.-  il 


•  The  ordinary  editions  of  the  Vatican  LXX.,  Tlschen- 
dorf 's  Included,  give  Aaxi's,  and  the  Alex.  Aa^tis ;  but 
the  edition  of  the  former  by  Cardinal  Mai  lias  tlie  Aaxeic. 


throughout.  In  Josh.  xv.  39,  all  trace  of  Lachlsh  lias  dis 
appeared  in  the  common  editions ;  but  in  Mai's,  Maxijs  u 
Insfi-twi  between  'lawapeTjA  and  KCU  IWtjiSwfl. 


LACHISH 


LACUNUR 


Another  slab  seems  to  show  the  ground-plan  of  j  the  Bible  as  to  the  position  cf  Lachisli.     The  elerv 


Ihe  same  city  after  its  occupation  by  the  con 
querors — the  Assyrian  tents  pitchjd  within  the 
walls,  and  the  foreign  worship  going  on.  The 
features  of  the  town  appear  to  be  accurately  given. 
At  any  rate  there  is  considerable  agreement  be 
tween  the  two  views  in  the  character  of  the  walls 
and  towers,  and  both  are  unlike  those  represented  on 
other  slabs.  Both  support  in  a  remarkable  manner 
the  conclusions  above  drawn  from  the  statement  of 


tion  of  the  town,  fig.  1,  shows  that  it  was  on  hilly 
ground,  one  part  higher  than  the  other.  This  i: 
also  testified  to  by  the  background  of  the  scene  in 
fig.  2,  which  is  too  remote  to  be  included  in  the 
limits  of  the  woodcut,  but  which  in  the  original 
shows  a  very  hilly  country  covered  with  vineyard* 
and  fig-trees.  On  the  other  hand  the  palms  round 
the  town  in  fig.  2  point  to  the  proximity  of  the 
maritime  plain,  in  which  palms  flourished — and  st'lf 


Pig  i.    l'ian  of  Uichiio  (?)  after  its  capture.    From  the  tame  work,  plate  &t 


flouiish — more  than  in  any  other  region  of  Palestine. 
But  though  the  Assyrian  records  thus  appear b  to 
assert  the  capture  of  Lachish,  no  statement  is  to  be 
found  either  in  the  Bible  or  Josephus  that  it  was 
taken.  Indeed  some  expressions  in  the  former  would 
almost  seem  to  imply  the  reverse  (see  "  thought  to  win 
them,"  2  Chr.  xxxii.  1 ;  "  departed0  from  Lachish," 
2  K.  xix.  8  ;  and  especially  Jer.  xxxiv.  7). 

The  warning  of  Micah  (i.  13)d  was  perhaps  de 
livered  at  this  time.  Obscure  as  the  passage  is,  it 
plainly  implies  that  from  Lachish  some  form  of 
idolatry,  possibly  belonging  to  the  northern  kingdom, 
had  been  imported  into  Jerusalem. 

After  the  return  from  captivity,  Lachish  with 
its  surrounding  "  fields "  was  re-occupied  by  the 
Jews  (Neh.  xi.  30).  It  is  not  however  named  in 
the  books  of  the  Maccabees,  nor  indeed  does  its  name 
reappear  in  the  Bible. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon, 
Lachish  is  mentioned  as  "  7  miles  from  Eleuthero- 
polis,  towards  Daroma,"  ».  ?.  towards  the  south.  No 
trace  of  the  name  has  yet  been  found  in  any  position 
at  all  corresponding  to  this.  Asitecallel  Um-L&kis, 
situated  on  a  "  low  round  swell  or  knoll,"  and  dis 
playing  a  few  columns  and  other  fragments  of  ancient 
buildings,  is  found  between  Gaza  and  Beit-Jibrin, 
probably  the  ancienv  Eleutheropolis,  at  the  distance 


»  Col.  Kawlinson  seems  to  read  the  name  as  Lubaua, 
t  e.  l.ibnali  (l-ayard,  X.  .(•  K.  153,  note). 

c  'I  hk  is  U!MJ  the  opinion  of  lUwlinson  (Hood.  i.  480 

•I-.  Ii   6). 


of  1 1  miles  (14  Roman  miles),  and  in  a  direction  not 
S.,  but  about  W.S.W.  from  the  latter.  Two  miles 
east  of  Um-Lakis  is  a  site  of  similar  character,  called 
'Ajl&n  (Rob.  ii.  46,  7).  Among  modern  travellers, 
these  sites  appear  to  have  been  first  discovered  by 
Dr.  Robinson.  While  admitting  the  identity  of  A  j  Ian 
with  EGLON,  he  disputes  that  of  Um-Lakis,  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  at  variance  with  the  statement  of 
Eusebius,  as  above  quoted;  and  further  that  the 
remains  are  not  those  of  a  fortified  city  able  to  brave 
an  Assyrian  army  (47).  On  the  other  hand,  in  favour 
of  the  identification  are  the  proximity  of  Eglon  (if 
'Ajldn  be  it),  and  the  situation  of  Um-Ldkis  in  the 
middle  of  the  plain,  right  in  the  road  from  Egypt 
By  "  Daroma  "  also  Eusebius  may  have  intended,  not 
the  southern  district,  but  a  place  of  that  name,  which 
is  mentioned  in  the  Talmud,  and  is  placed  by  the 
accurate  old  traveller  hap-Parchi  as  two  hours  south 
of  Gaza  (Zunz  in  Bcnj.  of  Tudela,  by  Asher,  ii.  442). 
With  regard  to  the  weakness  erf  Um-Lakis,  Mr. 
Porter  has  a  good  comparison  between  it  and  Ash- 
dod  (Handbk.  261).  [G.J 

LACU'NUS  (Aaicicovvos :  Caleus*),  one  of  the 
sons  of  Addi,  who  returned  with  Ezra,  and  had 
married  a  foreign  wife  (1  Esd.  is.  31).  The  name 
does  not  occur  in  this  form  in  the  parallel  lists  of 
Ezr.  x.,  but  it  apparently  occupies  the  place  of 


d  Tin-  play  of  the  words  is  between  I«u  ish  mud  Reces\ 

A.V     "s.wift  U-asf"),  u:nl  'lie  rxlu.rtaliim  is  tc 


fllgh'l' 


LAD  AN 

CHELAL  (ver.  30),  as  is  indicated  by  the   Calcus  \ 
of  the  Vulg. 

LA'DAN  (AaA.t£i>,  Tisch.,  but  'Affav  in  Mai's  j 
fd. :  Dalarus],  1  Esd.  v.  37.  [DELAIAH,  2.] 

LADDER  OF  TYBUS,    THE  (i, 

Tvpov:  a  terminis  Tyri,  possibly  reading 
one  of  the  extremities  (the  northern)  of  the  district 
over  which  Simon  Maccabaeus  was  made  captain 
{ffrpo.Ti}y6s)  by  Autiochus  VI.  (or  Theos),  very 
shortly  after  his  coming  to  the  throne ;  the  other 
being  "the  borders  of  Egypt"  (1  Mace.  xi.  59). 
The  Ladder  of  Tyre,"  or  of  the  Tyrians,  was  the  local 
name  for  a  high  mountain,  the  highest  in  that 
neighbourhood,  a  hundred  stadia  north  of  Ptolemais, 
the  modern  Akka  or  Acre  (Joseph.  B.J.  ii.  10,  §2). 
The  position  of  the  Eos-en- Nakhurah  agrees  very 
nearly  with  this,  as  it  lies  10  miles,  or  about  120 
stadia,  from  Akka,  and  is  characterised  by  travellers 
from  Parchi  downwards  as  very  high  and  steep. 
Both  the  Ras-en- Nakhurah,  and  the  Ras-el-Abyad, 
i.e.  the  White  Cape,  sometimes  called  Cape  Blanco,  a 
headland  6  miles  still  farther  north,  are  surmounted 
by  a  path  cut  in  zigzags ;  that  over  the  latter  is 
attributed  to  Alexander  the  Great.  It  is  possibly 
from  this  circumstance  that  the  Ras-el-Abyad,^  is 
by  some  travellers  (Irby,  Van  de  Velde,  &c.)  treated 
as  the  ladder  of  the  Tyrians.  But  by  the  early  and 
accurate  Jewish  traveller,  hap-Parchic  (Zunz,  402), 
and  in  our  own  times  by  Robinson  (iii.  89),  Misliii 
(Les  Saints  Lieux,  ii.  9),  Porter  (Hdbfi.  389), 
Schwarz  (76),  Stanley  (S.  &  P.  264),  the  Ras-ei^- 
Nakhurah  is  identified  with  the  ladder ;  the  last- 
named  traveller  pointing  out  well  that  the  reason 
lor  the  name  is  the  fact  of  its  "  differing  from 
Carmel  in  that  it  leaves  no  beach  between  itself  and 
the  sea,  and  thus,  by  cutting  off  all  communication 
round  its  base,  acts  as  the  natural  barrier  between 
the  Bay  of  Acre  and  the  maritime  plain  to  the 
north — in  other  words,  between  Palestine  and  Phoe 
nicia"  (comp.  p.  266).  [G.] 

LA'EL  (btfV:  Aa^\:  Lael),  the  father  of 
Eliasaph,  prince  of  the  Gershonites  at  the  time  of 
the  Exodus  (Num.  iii.  24). 

LA'HAD  (ir6:  AoctS ;  Alex.  A<£5:  Laad}, 
t>on  of  Jahath,  one  of  the  descendants  of  Judah, 
from  whom  sprang  the  Zorathites,  a  branch  of  the 
tribe  who  settled  at  Zorah,  according  to  the  Targ. 
of  R.  Joseph  (1  Chr.  iv.  2). 

LAHA'I-ROI,  THE  WELL  ('NT  »l$  liO  : 
rb  <pptap  TTJS  6pAffe<as :  puteus,  cujus  nomen  est 
Viventis  et  Vidcntis).  In  this  form  is  given  in  the 
A.  V.  of  Gen.  xxiv.  62,  and  xxv.  11,  the  name  ot 
the  famous  well  of  Hagar's  relief,  in  the  oasis  ot 
verdure  round  which  Isaac  afterwards  resided.  In 
xvi.  14 — the  only  other  occurrence  of  the  name— 
it  is  represented  in  the  full  Hebrew  form  of  BEER- 
LAHAJ-ROI.  In  the  Mussulman  traditions  the  well 
Zcmzem  in  the  Bcit-allah  of  Mecca  is  identical  with 
it.  [LEHI.]  [G.] 


LAISH 


LAH'MAM  (DEr:  Mire's  «ol  Moa^s; 
Alex.  Aa/uas  :  Leheman,  Lcemas),  a  town  in  the 
lowland  district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xy.  40)  named 
between  CABHON  and  KITHLISH,  and  in  the  same 
group  with  LACHISH.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Onomasticon,  nor  does  it  appear  that  any  traveller 
has  sought  for  or  discovered  its  site. 

In  many  MSS.  and  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible, 
amongst  them  the  Rec.  Text  of  Van  der  Hooght,  the 
nnme  is  given  with  a  final  s  —  Lachmas.'  Corrupt 
as  the  LXX.  text  is  here,  it  will  be  observed  that 
both  MSS.  exhibit  the  s.  This  is  the  case  also  in 
the  Targum  and  the  other  Oriental  versions.  The 
ordinary  copies  of  the  Vulgate  have  Leheman,  but 
the  text  published  in  the  Benedictine  Edition  of 
Jerome  Leemas.  G/ 


LAH'MI  OOr  :  Tbv  'E\f^f  ;  Alex.  rbt> 
fjue?:  Eeth-lehem-ites),  the  brother  of  Goliath 
the  Gittite,  slain  by  Elhanan  the  son  of  Jair,  or  Jaor 
(1  Chr.  xx.  5).  In  the  parallel  narrative  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  19),  amongst  other  differences,  Lahmi  disappears 
in  the  word  Beth  hal-lachmi,  i.e.  the  Bethlehemite. 
This  reading  is  imported  into  the  Vulgate  of  the 
Chron.  (see  above).  What  was  the  original  form 
of  the  passage  has  been  the  subject  of  much  debate  ; 
the  writer  has  not  however  seen  cause  to  alter  the 
conclusion  to  which  he  came  under  ELHANAN  —  that 
the  text  of  Chronicles  is  the  more  correct  of  the  two. 
In  addition  to  the  LXX.,  the  Peschito  and  the  Tar- 
gum  both  agree  with  the  Hebrew  in  reading  Lachmi. 
The  latter  contains  a  tradition  that  he  was  slain  on 
the  same  day  with  his  brother.  [G.] 

LA'ISH  (V^  ;  in  Isaiah,  r\&h  :  Aa«ra;  Judg. 
xviii.  29,  Ov\afj.als  ;'  Alex.  Aaeis:  Lais),  the  city 
which  was  taken  by  the  Danites,  and  under  its  new 
name  of  DAN  became  famous  as  the  northern  limit 
of  the  nation,  and  as  the  depository,  first  of  the 
graven  image  of  Micah  (Judg.  xviii.  7,  14,  27,  29), 
and  subsequently  of  one  of  the  calves  of  Jeroboam. 
In  another  account  of  the  conquest  the  name  is 
given,  with  a  variation  in  the  form,  as  LESHEM 
(Josh.  xix.  47).  It  is  natural  to  presume  that 
Laish  was  an  ancient  sanctuary,  before  its  appio- 
priation  for  that  purpose  by  the  Danites,  and  we 
should  look  for  soir.e  explanation  of  the  mention  of 
Dan  instead  of  Laish  in  Gen.  xiv.  ;  but  nothing  is  as 
yet  forthcoming  on  these  points.  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  situation  of  the  place  was  at  or 
very  near  that  of  tin-  modem  Bunias.  [DAN.] 

In  the  A.  V.  Laish  is  again  mentioned  in  the 
graphic  account  by  Isaiah  of  Sennacherib's  march 
on  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  30)  :  —  "  Lift  up  thy  voice, 
0  daughter  of  Gallim  !  cause  it  to  be  heard  unto 
Laish,  oh  poor  Anathoth  !"  —  that  is,  cry  so  loud 
that  your  shrieks  shall  be  heard  to  the  very  confines 
j  of  the  land.  This  translation  —  in  which  our  trans 
lators  followed  the  version  of  Junius  andTremellius, 
and  the  comment  of  Grotius  —  is  adopted  because 
the  ia»t  syllable  of  the  name  which  appears  here  <u> 
Laishah  is  taken  to  be  the  Hebrew  particle  of  mo- 


a  This  name  is  found  in  the  Talmud,  -fl  %n 
See  Zun*  (Ben],  of  Tud.  402). 

b  Maundreli,  ordinarily  so  exact  (March  17),  places  "  the 
mountain  climax  "  at  an  hour  and  a  quarter  south  of  the 
Xahr  Ibrahim  Bafsa  (Adonis  River), meaning  therefore  the 
headland  which  encloses  on  the  north  the  bay  of  Junch 
ubove  Beirut  '  On  the  other  hand,  Irby  and  Mangles 
(Oct.  21)  with  equally  unusual  inaccuracy,  give  the  name 
ul  Cape  Blanco  to  the  Has  .VafcuroA— an  hour's  ride  from 
Kx-Zib.  the  ancient  Kcdippa.  Wilson  also  (ii  4W2)  IIHK 


fallen  into  a  curious  confusion  between  the  two. 

c  He  gives  the  name  as  Al-Nanakir,  probably  a  mere 
corruption  of  En-Xakura. 

d  DtDH?  i°r  DDH?.  by  interchange  of  Q  and  Q. 
e   The    LXX.   have    here    transferred    literally    the 
Hebrew    words    5^17    D7-1XV    " atlli    indeed    I^aish." 


Exactly  the  same  thing  is  done  in  tlin  rase  of  Luz,  (Jcu 
xxvlii.  19. 


5G 


LAISH 


tion,  "  to  Laish,"  as  is  undoubtedly  the  case  in  Judg. 
rviii.  7.  But  such  a  rendering  is  found  neither  in 
any  of  the  ancient  versions,  nor  in  those  of  modern 
scholars,  as  Gesenius,  Ewald,  Zunz,  &c. ;  nor  is 
the  Hebrew  word '  here  rendered  "  cause  it  to  be 
heard,"  found  elsewhere  in  that  voice,  but  always 
absolute — "hearken,"  or  "attend."  There  is  a 
certain  violence  in  the  sudden  introduction  amongst 
these  little  Benjamite  villages  of  the  frontier  town  so 
very  far  remote,  and  not  leas  in  the  use  of  its  ancient 
name,  elsewhere  so  constantly  superseded  by  Dan. 
(See  Jer.  viii.  16.)  On  the  whole  it  seems  more 
consonant  with  the  tenor  of  the  whole  passage  to  take 
Laishah  as  the  name  of  a  small  village  lying  between 
Gallim  and  Anathoth,  and  of  which  hitherto,  as  is 
still  the  case  with  the  former,  and  until  1831  was 
the  case  with  the  latter,  no  traces  have  been  fonnd. 
In  1  Mace.  ix.  5  a  village  named  Alasa  (Mai,  and 
Alex.  'AAcwra;  A.  V.  Eleasa)  is  mentioned  as  the 
scene  of  the  battle  in  which  Judas  was  killed.  In 
the  Vulgate  it  is  given  as  Laisa.  If  ti^  Berea  at 
which  Demetrius  was  encamped  o~  the  same  occasion 
was  Beeroth — and  from  the  Peschito  reading  this 
seems  likely — then  Alasa  or  Laisha  was  somewhere 
on  th>?  northern  road,  10  or  12  miles  from  Jerusalem, 
about  the  spot  at  which  a  village  named  Adasa 
existed  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  D  (A) 
and  L  (A)  are  so  often  interchanged  in  Greek  manu 
scripts,  that  the  two  names  may  indicate  one  and 
the  same  place,  and  that  the  Laishah  of  Isaiah. 
Such  an  identification  would  be  to  a  certain  extent 
consistent  with  the  requirements  of  Is.  x.  30,  while 
it  would  throw  some  light  on  the  uncertain  topo 
graphy  of  the  last  struggle  of  Judas  Maccabaeus. 
But  it  must  be  admitted  that  at  present  it  is  but 
conjectural ;  and  that  the  neighbourhood  of  Beeroth 
is  at  the  best  somewhat  far  removed  from  the  narrow 
circle  of  the  villages  enumerated  by  Isaiah.  [G.] 

LA'ISH  (B>£  ;  in  2  Sam.  the  orig.  text,  Cethib, 

has  Wr?  :  'Apels,  SfXXTJJ ;  Alux.  Aofs,  Aae/s : 
Lais),  father  of  Phaltiel,  to  whom  Saul  had  given 
Michal,  David's  wife  (1  Sam.  xxv.  44 ;  2  Sam.  iii. 
15).  He  was  a  native  of  GALLIM.  It  is  very 
remarkable  that  the  names  of  Laish  (Laishah)  and 
Gallim  should  be  found  in  conjunction  at  a  much 
later  date  (Is.  x.  30).  [G.j 

LAKES.     [PALESTINE.] 

LA'KUM  (Qlfb,  i.e.  Lakkum:  AwSe£/i;  Alex. 

— unusually  wide  of  the  Hebrew  —  ius  'A/cpou  : 
Lemm),  one  of  the  places  which  formed  the  land 
marks  of  the  boundary  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  33), 
named  next  to  Jabneel,  and  apparently  between  it 
and  the  Jordan :  but  the  whole  statement  is  exceed 
ingly  obscure,  and  few,  if  any,  of  the  names  have 
yet  been  recognised.  Lakkum  is  but  casually  named 
in  the  Onoinasticon,  and  no  one  since  has  discovered 
its  situation.  The  rendering  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  is 
worth  remark.  [G.] 

LAMB.  1.  "1J2K,  immar,  is  the  Chaldee  equi 
valent  of  the  Hebrew  cebes.  See  below,  No.  3  (Ezr. 
ri.  9,  17;  vii.  17). 

2.  r6tt,  taleh  (1  Sam.  vii.  9 ;  Is.  Ixv.  25),  a 
young  sucking  lamb ;  originally  the  young  of  any 
animal.  The  noun  from  the  same  root  in  Arabic 
signifies  "a  fawn,"  in  Ethiopic  "  a  kid,"  in  Sama- 
fitan  "  a  boy ;"  while  in  Syriac  it  denotes  "  a 
my,"  and  in  the  fern.  "  a  girl."  Hence  "  TcAitha 

.  hipinl  imp.,  from 


LAMECH 

kumi,"  "Damsel,  arise!"  (Mark  v.  41).  Theplnral 
of  a  cognate  form  occurs  in  Is.  xl.  11. 

3.  KO?>  cebes,  2B-'3,  ceseb,  and  the  feminine 


3,  cibs&h,  or  nK>33,  cabsdh,  and  n2B>3,  cis- 

:  •  T  :  -  T  :    • 

bdh,  respectively  denote  a  male  and  female  lamb  from 
the  first  to  the  third  year.  The  former  perhaps 
more  nearly  coincide  with  the  provincial  term  hoy 
or  hogget,  which  is  applied  to  a  young  ram  before  he 
is  shorn.  The  corresponding  word  in  Arabic,  accord 
ing  to  Gesenius,  denotes  a  ram  at  that  period  when 
he  has  lost  his  first  two  teeth  and  four  others  make 
their  appearance,  which  happens  in  the  second  01 
third  year.  Young  rams  of  this  age  formed  an  im 
portant  part  of  almost  every  sacrifice.  They  we-r 
offered  at  the  daily  morning  and  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  38-41),  on  the  sabbath  day  (Num.  xxviii. 
9),  at  the  feasts  of  the  new  moon  (Num.  xxviii.  11), 
of  trumpets  (Num.  xxix.  2),  of  tabernacles  (Num. 
xxix.  13-40),  of  Pentecost  (Lev.  xxiii.  18-20),  and 
of  the  Passover  (Ex.  xii.  5).  They  were  brought 
by  the  princes  of  the  congregation  as  burnt-offerings 
at  the  dedication  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  vii.),  and 
were  offered  on  solemn  occasions  like  the  consecra 
tion  of  Aaron  (Lev.  ix.  3),  the  coronation  of  Solomon 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  21),  the  purification  of  the  temple 
under  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  21),  and  the  great 
passover  held  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  7). 
They  formed  part  of  the  sacrifice  offered  at  the  puri 
fication  of  women  after  childbirth  (Lev.  xii.  6;,  and 
at  the  cleansing  of  a  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  10-25).  They 
accompanied  the  presentation  of  first-fruits  (Lev. 
xxiii.  12).  When  the  Nazarites  commenced  their 
period  of  separation  they  offered  a  he-lamb  for  a 
trespass-offering  (Num.  vi.  12)  ;  and  at  its  conclu 
sion  a  he-lamb  was  sacrificed  as  a  burnt-offering, 
and  an  ewe-lamb  as  a  sin-offering  (v.  14).  An  ewe- 
lamb  was  also  the  offering  for  the  sin  of  ignorance 
(Lev.  iv.  32). 

4.  13,   car,    a    fat    ram,    or    more    probably 
"  wether,"  as  the  word  is  generally  employed  in 
opposition  to  ayil,  which  strictly  denotes  a  "  ram  " 
(Deut.  xxxii.  14  ;  2  K.  iii.  4  ;  Is.  xxxiv.  6).    Mesha 
king  of  Moab  sent  tribute  to  the  king  of  Israel 
100,000  fat  wethers;  and  this  circumstance  is  made 
use  of  by  R.  Joseph  Kimchi  to  explain  Is.  xvi.  1, 
which  he  regards  as  an  exhortation  to  the  Moabites 
to  renew  their  tribute.     The  Tyrians  obtained  their 
supply  from  Arabia  and  Kedar  (Ez.  xxvii.  21),  and 
the  pastures  of  Bashan  were  famous   as  grazing 
grounds  (Ez.  xxxix.  18). 

5.  |NV,  tson,  rendered  "  lamb"  in  Ex.  xii.  21, 
is  properly  a  collective  term  denoting  a  "  fioi'k  "  of 
small  cattle,  sheep  and  goats,  in  distinction  irom 
herds  of  the  larger  animals  (Eccl.  ii.  7  ;  Ez.  xl  v.  1  i). 
In  opposition  to  this  collective  term  the  word 

6.  fit?,  seh,  is  applied  to  denote  the  individuals 

of  a  flock,  whether  sheep  or  goats  ;  and  hence,  though 
"  lamb"  is  in  many  passages  the  rendering  of  the 
A.  V.,  the  marginal  reading  gives  "kid  '"  (Gen.  xxii. 
7,  8  ;  Ex.  xii.  3,  xxii.  1,  &c.).  [SHEEP.] 

On  the  Paschal  Lamb  see  PASSOVER.  [\V.  A.  W.] 

LAM'ECH  (yck:  Ao/i*'*:  Lnrnecli),  properly 

Lemech,  the  name  of  two  persons  in  antediluvian 
history.  1.  The  fifth  lineal  descendant  from  ('ain 
(Gen.  iv.  18-24).  He  is  the  only  one  except  Enoch, 
of  the  posterity  of  Cain,  whose  history  is  related 
with  some  detail.  He  is  the  first,  poly<;amist  on 
record.  His  two  wives,  Adah  anil  /Cillali,  and  his 
daughter  Naamali,  are,  with  Eve,  the  onlr  antedi- 


LAMECH 

mvian  women  whose  names  are  mentioned  by  Moses. 
His  three  son? — JAHAL,  JOBAL,  and  TDBAL-CAIN, 
are  celebrated  in  Scripture  as  authors  of  useful  in 
ventions.  The  Targuin  of  Jonathan  adds,  that  his 
daughter  was  "  the  mistress  of  sounds  and  songs," 
i.  e.  the  first  poetess.  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  2,  §  2) 
relates  that  the  number  of  his  sons  was  seventy- 
seven,  and  Jerome  records  the  same  tradition,  add 
ing  that  they  were  all  cut  off  by  the  Deluge,  and 
that  this  was  the  seventy-and-sevenfold  vengeance 
which  Lamech  imprecated. 

The  remarkable  poem  which  Lamech  uttered  has 
not  yet  been  explained  quite  satisfactorily*.  It  is  the 
subject  of  a  dissertation  by  Hilliger  in  Thesaurus 
Theologico-Philol.  i.  141,  and  is  discussed  at  length 
by  the  various  commentators  on  Genesis.  The 
history  of  the  descendants  of  Cain  closes  with  a 
song,  which  at  least  threatens  bloodshed.  Delitzsch 
observes,  that  as  the  arts  which  were  afterwards 
consecrated  by  pious  men  to  a  heavenly  use,  had 
their  origin  in  the .  family  of  Cain,  so  this  early 
effort  of  poetry  is  composed  in  honour,  not  of  God, 
but  of  some  deadly  weapon.  It  is  the  only  extant 
specimen  of  antediluvian  poetry ;  it  came  down, 
perhaps  as  a  popular  song,  to  the  generation  for 
whom  Moses  wrote,  and  he  inserts  it  in  its  proper 
place  in  his  history.  Delitzsch  traces  in  it  all  the 
peculiar  features  of  later  Semitic  poetry  ;  rhythm, 
assonance,  parallelism,  strophe,  and  poetic  diction. 
It  may  be  rendered  : — 

Adah  and  Zillah !  hear  my  voice, 

Ye  wives  of  Lamech !   give  ear  unto  my  speech ; 
For  a  man  had  1  slain  for  smiting  me, 

And  a  youth  for  wounding  me  : 
Surely  sevenfold  shall  Cain  be  avenged. 

But  Lamech  seventy  and  seven. 

The  A.  V.  makes  Lamech  declare  himself  a  mur 
derer,  "  I  have  slain  a  man  to  my  wounding,"  &c. 
This  is  the  view  taken  in  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate. 
Chrysostom  (Horn.  xx.  in  Gen.)  regards  Lamech  as 
a  murderer  stung  by  remorse,  driven  to  make  public 
confession  of  his  guilt  solely  to  ease  his  conscience, 
and  afterwards  (Horn,  in  Ps.  vi.)  obtaining  mercy. 
Theodoret  (Quaest.  in  Gen.  xliv.)  sets  him  down  as 
a  murderer.  Basil  (Ep.  260  [317],  §5)  interprets 
Lamech 's  words  to  mean  that  he  had  committed 
two  murders,  and  that  he  deserved  a  much  severer 
punishment  than  Cain,  as  having  sinned  after  plainer 
warning  ;  Basil  adds,  that  some  persons  interpret 
the  last  lines  of  the  poem,  as  meaning,  that  whereas 
Cain's  sin  increased,  and  was  followed  after  seven 
generations  by  the  punishment  of  the  Deluge  wash 
ing  out  the  foulness  of  the  world,  so  Lamech 's  sin 
shall  be  followed  in  the  seventy-seventh  (see  St. 
Luke  iii.  23-38)  generation  by  the  coming  of  Him 
svho  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  Jerome 
[Ep.  xxxvi.  ad  Damasum,  t.  i.  p.  161)  relates  as  a 
tradition  of  his  predecessors  and  of  the  Jews,  that 
Cain  was  accidentally  slain  by  Lamech  in  the  seventh 
generation  from  Adam.  This  legend  is  told  with 
fuller  details  by  Jarchi.  According  to  him,  the 
occasion  of  the  poem  was  the  refusal  of  Lamech's 
wives  to  associate  with  him  in  consequence  of  his 
having  killed  Cain  and  Tubal-cain ;  Lamech,  it  is 
said,  was  blind,  and  was  led  about  by  Tubal-cain  : 
when  the  latter  saw  in  the  thicket  what  he  sup 
posed  to  be  a  wild-beast,  Lamech,  by  his  son's 
direction,  shot  an  arrow  at  it,  and  thus  slew  Cain  ; 
in  alarm  and  indignation  at  the  utt'd,  he  killed  his 
son  ;  hence  his  wives  refused  to  associate  with  him  ; 
u.d  he  excuses  himself  ;it>  having  acted  without 


LAMENTATIONS  57 

a  vengeful  or  murderous  purpose.  Luther  con 
siders  the  occasion  of  the  poem  to  be  tho  deliberate 
murder  of  Cain  by  Lamech.  Lightfoot  (Decaa 
Chorogr.  Marc,  praem.  §  iv.)  considers  Lamech  as 
expressing  remorse  for  having,  as  the  first  poly- 
gamist,  introduced  more  destruction  and  murder 
than  Cain  was  the  author  of  into  the  world.  Pfeiffer 
(Diff.  Scrip.  Loc.  p.  25)  collects  different  opinions 
with  his  ufual  diligence,  and  concludes  that  the 
poem  is  Lamech's  vindication  of  himself  to  his 
wives,  who  were  in  terror  for  the  possible  conse 
quences  of  his  having  slain  two  of  the  posterity  of 
Seth.  Lowth  (De  S.  Poesi  Heb.  iv.)  and  Michaelis 
think  that  Lamech  is  excusing  himself  for  some 
murder  which  he  had  committed  in  self-defence, 
"  for  a  wound  inflicted  on  me." 

A  rather  milder  interpretation  has  been  given  to 
the  poem  by  some,  whose  opinions  are  perhaps  of 
greater  weight  than  the  preceding  in  a  question  01' 
Hebrew  criticism.  Onkelos,  followed  by  Pseudo- 
Jonathan,  paraphrases  it,  "  I  have  not  slain  a  man  that 
I  should  bear  sin  on  his  account."  The  Arab.  Ver. 
(Saadia)  puts  it  in  an  interrogative  form,  "  Have  I 
slain  a  man  ?"  &c.  These  two  versions,  which  we 
substantially  the  same,  are  adopted  by  De  Dieu  and 
Bishop  Patrick.  Aben-Ezra,  Calvin,  Drusius,  and 
Cartwright,  interpret  it  in  the  future  tense  as  a 
threat,  "  1  will  slay  any  man  who  wounds  me." 
This  version  is  adopted  by  Herder;  whose  hypo 
thesis  as  to  the  occasion  of  the  poem  was  partly 
anticipated  by  Hess,  and  has  been  received  by  Ko- 
senmiiller,  Ewald,  and  Delitzsch.  Herder  regards  it 
as  Lamech's  song  of  exultation  on  the  invention  of 
the  sword  by  his  son  Tubal-cain,  in  the  possession 
of  which  he  foresaw  a  great  advantage  to  himself 
and  his  family  over  any  enemies.  This  interpreta 
tion  appears,  on  the  whole,  to  be  the  best  that  has 
been  suggested.  But  whatever  interpretation  be 
preferred,  all  persons  will  agree  in  the  remark  of 
Bp.  Kidder  that  the  occasion  of  the  poem  not  being 
revealed,  no  man  can  be  expected  to  determine  the 
full  sense  of  it ;  thus  much  is  plain,  that  they  are 
vaunting  words  in  which  Lamech  seems,  from 
Cain's  indemnity,  to  encourage  himself  in  violence 
and  wickedness. 

2.  The  father  of  Noah  (Gen.  v.  29).  Chrysostom 
(Senn.  ix.  in  Gen.  and  Horn.  xxi.  in  Gen.},  perhap* 
thinking  of  the  character  of  the  other  Lamech. 
speaks  of  this  as  an  unrighteous  man,  though  moved 
by  a  divine  impulse  to  give  a  prophetic  name  to  his 
son.  Buttman  and  others,  observing  that  the  names 
of  Lamech  and  Enoch  are  found  in  the  list  of 
Seth's,  as  well  as  in  the  list  of  Cain's  family,  infer 
that  the  two  lists  are  merely  different  versions  or 
recensions  of  one  original  list, — traces  of  two  con 
flicting  histories  of  the  first  human  family.  This 
theory  is  deservedly  repudiated  by  Delitzsch  on 
Gen.  v.  [W.  T.  B.J 

LAMENTATIONS.  The  Hebrew  title  of  this 
Book,  Echah  (rO^N),  is  taken,  like  those  of  the  five 
Books  of  Moses,  from  the  Hebrew  word  with  which 
it  opens,  and  which  appears  to  have  been  almost  a 
received  formula  for  the  commencement  of  a  song  of 
wailing  (comp.  2  Sam.  i.  19-27).  The  Septuagint 
translators  found  themselves  obliged,  as  in  the 
other  cases  referred  to,  to  substitute  some  title  mora 
significant,  and  adopted  Bpfjvot  'Ifpf/tiov  as  the  equi 
valent  of  Kinoth  (fli)*j5,  "  lamentations"),  which 
they  found  in  Jer.  vii.  29,  ix.  10,  20,  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  25,  and  which  had  probably  beer,  applied 


fi8 


LAMENTATIONS 


familiarly,  as  it  was  afterwards  by  Jewish  com 
mentators,  to  the  Book  itself.  The  Vulgate  gives 
the  Greek  word  and  explains  it  (Threni,  id  est, 
Lamentationes  Jeretniae  Prophetae).  Luther  and 
the  A.  V.  have  given  the  translation  only,  in  Klag- 
lieder  and  Lamentations  respectively. 

The  poems  included  in  this  collection  appear  in 
the  Hebrew  canon  with  no  name  attached  to  them, 
and  there  is  no  direct  external  evidence  that  they 
were  written  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  earlier  than 
the  date  given  in  the  prefatory  verse  which  ap 
pears  in  the  Septuagint.8  This  represents,  how 
ever,  the  established  belief  of  the  Jews  after  the 
completion  of  the  canon.  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  5,  §1) 
follows,  as  far  as  the  question  of  authorship  is  con 
cerned,  in  the  same  track,  and  the  absence  of  any 
tradition  or  probable  conjecture  to  the  contrary, 
leaves  the  consensus  of  critics  and  commentators 
almost  undisturbed.b  An  agreement  so  striking 
rests,  as  might  be  expected,  on  strong  internal  evi 
dence.  The  poems  belong  unmistakeably  to  the 
last  days  of  the  kingdom,  or  the  commencement  of 
the  exile.  They  are  written  by  one  who  speaks, 
with  the  vividness  and  intensity  of  an  eye-witness, 
of  the  misery  which  he  bewails.  It  might  almost 
be  enough  to  ask  who  else  then  living  could  have 
written  with  that  union  of  strong  passionate  feeling 
and  entire  submission  to  Jehovah  which  charac 
terises  both  the  Lamentations  and  the  Prophecy  of 
Jeremiah.  The  evidences  of  identity  are,  however, 
stronger  and  more  minute.  In  both  we  meet,  once 
and  again,  with  the  picture  of  the  "  Virgin-daughter 
of-  Zion,"  sitting  down  in  her  shame  and  misery 
(Lam.  i.  15,  ii.  13  ;  Jer.  xiv.  17).  In  both  there 
is  the  same  vehement  out-pouring  of  sorrow.  The 
prophet's  eyes  flow  down  with  tears  (Lam.  i.  16, 
ii.  11,  iii.  48,  49;  Jer.  ix.  1,  xiii.  17,  xiv.  17). 
There  is  the  same  haunting  feeling  of  being  sur 
rounded  with  fears  and  terrors  on  every  side  (Lam. 
ii.  22  ;  Jer.  vi.  25,  xlvi.  5).c  In  both  the  worst  of 
all  the  evils  is  the  iniquity  of  the  prophets  and  the 
priests  (Lam.  ii.  14,iv.  13 ;  Jer.  v.  30, 31,  xiv.  13, 14). 
The  sufferer  appeals  for  vengeance  to  the  righteous 
Judge  (Lam.  iii.  64-66 ;  Jer.  xi.  20).  He  bids  the 
rival  nation  that  exulted  in  the  fall  of  Jerusalem 
prepare  for  a  like  desolation  (Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Jer. 
xlix.  12).  We  can  well  understand,  with  all  these 
instances  before  us,  how  the  scribes  who  compiled 
the  Canon  after  the  return  from  Babylon  should 
have  been  led,  even  in  the  absence  of  external  testi 
mony,  to  assign  to  Jeremiah  the  authorship  of  the 
Lamentations. 

Assuming  this  as  sufficiently  established,  there 
come  the  questions — ( 1 .)  When,  and  on  what  occa 
sion  did  he  write  it?  (2.)  In  what  relation  did  it 
stand  to  his  other  writings  ?  (3.)  What  light  does 
it  throw  on  his  personal  history,  or  on  that  of  the 
time  in  which  he  lived  ? 

I.  The  earliest  statement  on  this  point  is  that 
of  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  5,  §1).  He  finds  among  the 
books  which  were  extant  in  his  own  time  the  lamen 
tations  on  the  death  of  Josiah,  whbh  are  mentioned 
in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  25.  As  there  are  no  traces  of  any 
other  poem  of  this  kind  in  the  later  Jewish  litera- 

•  "  And  it  came  to  pass  that  after  Israel  was  led 
captive  and  Jerusalem  was  laid  waste,  Jeremiah  sat 
weeping,  and  lamented  with  this  lamentation  over 
Jerusalem,  and  said." 

b  The  question  whether  all  tho  five  poems  were  by 
the  same  writer  has  however  been  raised  by  Thonius, 
Die  Klageliedur  crkliirt :  Vorbenicrk.  quoted  in  Da 
vidson's  Introd.  to  0.  T.,  p.  888. 


LAMENTATIONS 

ture,  it  has  been  inferred  naturally  enough,  that 
he  speaks  of  this.  This  opinion  was  maintained 
also  by  Jerome,  and  has  been  defended  by  soina 
modern  writers  (Ussher,  Dathe,  Michaelis,d  Notes  to 
Lowth,  Prael.  xxii. ;  Calovius,  Prolegom.  ad  Thren. ; 
De  Wette,  Einl.  in  das  A.  T.,  Klagl.).  It  does  not 
appear,  however,  to  rest  on  any  better  grounds 
than  a  hasty  conjecture,  arising  from  the  reluc 
tance  of  men  to  admit  that  any  work  by  an  inspired 
writer  can  have  perished,  or  the  arbitrary  assump 
tion  (De  Wette,  /.  c.)  that  the  same  man  could  not, 
twice  in  his  life,  have  been  the  spokesman  of  a 
great  national  sorrow.*  And  against  it  we  have  to 
set  (1)  the  tradition  on  the  other  side  embodied  in 
the  preface  of  the  Septuagint,  (2 )  the  content*  ot 
the  book  itself.  Admitting  tliat  some  of  the  cala 
mities  described  in  it  may  have  been  common  to 
the  invasions  of  Necho  and  Nebuchadnezzar,  we 
yet  look  in  vain  for  a  single  word  distinctive  of  a 
funeral  dirge  over  a  devout  and  zealous  reformer 
like  Josiah,  while  we  find,  step  by  step,  the  closest 
possible  likeness  between  the  pictures  of  misery  in 
the  Lamentations  and  the  events  of  the  closing 
years  of  the  reign  of  Zedekiah.  The  long  siege  had 
brought  on  the  famine  in  which  the  young  children 
fainted  for  hunger  (Lam.  ii.  11,  12,  20,  iv.  4,  9; 
2  K.  xiv.  3).  The  city  was  taken  by  storm  (Lam. 
ii.  7,  iv.  12;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  17).  The  Temple 
itself  was  polluted  with  the  massacre  of  the  pneste 
who  defended  it  (Lam.  ii.  20,  21 ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  17), 
and  then  destroyed  (Lam.  ii.  6;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  19). 
The  fortresses  and  strongholds  of  Judah  were  thrown 
down.  The  anointed  of  the  Lord,  under  whose 
shadow  the  remnant  of  the  people  might  have  hoped 
to  live  in  safety,  was  taken  prisoner  (Lam.  iv.  20  ; 
Jer.  xxxix.  5).  The  chief  of  the  people  were  carried 
into  exile  (Lam.  i.  5,  ii.  9 ;  2  K.  xxv.  11).  The 
bitterest  grief  was  found  in  the  malignant  exulta 
tion  of  the  Edomites  (Lam.  iv.  21  ;  Ps.  cxxxvii.7). 
Under  the  rule  of  the  stranger  the  Sabbaths  and 
solemn  feasts  were  forgotten  (Lam.  i.  4,  ii.  6),  as 
they  could  hardly  have  been  during  the  short  period 
in  which  Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Egyp 
tians.  Unless  we  adopt  the  strained  hypothesis 
that  the  whole  poem  is  prophetic  in  the  sense  of 
being  predictive,  the  writer  seeing  the  ."uture  as  i' 
it  were  actually  present,  or  the  still  wilder  con 
jecture  of  Jarchi,  that  this  was  the  roll  which  Je- 
hoiachin  destroyed,  and  which  was  re-written  by 
Barnch  or  Jeremiah  (Carpzov,  Introd.  ad  lib.  V.  T. 
iii.  c.  iv.),  we  are  compelled  to  come  to  the  con 
clusion  that  the  coincidence  is  not  accidental,  and 
to  adopt  the  later,  not  the  earlier  of  the  dates.  At 
what  period  after  the  capture  of  the  city  the  pit>- 
phet  gave  this  utterance  to  his  sorrow  we  can  only 
conjecture,  and  the  materials  for  doing  so  with  any 
probability  are  but  scanty.  The  local  tradition 
which  pointed  out  a  cavern  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Jerusalem  as  the  refuge  to  which  Jeremiah  with 
drew  that  he  might  write  this  book  (Del  Rio,  Pro- 
leg,  in  Thren.,  quoted  by  Carpzov,  Introd.  I.  c.), 
is  as  trustworthy  as  most  of  the  other  legends  ot 
the  time  of  Helena.  The  ingenuity  which  aims  a: 
attaching  each  individual  poem  to  some  definita 


c  More  detailed  coincidences  of  words  and  phrases 
are  given  by  Keil  (quoting  from  Pareau)  in  his  Einl. 
in  das  A.  T.  §129. 

d  Micbaelis  and  Dathe,  however,  afterwards  aban 
doned  this  hypothesis,  and  adopted  that  of  the  latei 
date. 

•  The  argument  that  iii.  27  implies  the  youth  of  tho 
writer  hardly  needs  to  be  confuted. 


LAMENTATIONS 

event  in  the  prophet's,  lite,  is  for  the  most  part 
simply  wasted.'  He  may  have  written  it  imme 
diately  after  the  attack  was  over,  or  when  he  was 
with  Gedaliah  at  Mizpeh,  or  when  he  was  with  his 
countrymen  at  Tahpanhes. 

II.  It  is  well,  however,  to  be  reminded  by 
these  conjectures  that  we  have  before  us,  not  a 
iook  in  five  chapters,  but  five  separate  poems, 
each  complete  in  itself,  each  having  a  distinct  sub 
ject,  yet  brought  at  the  same  time  under  a  plan 
Trhich  includes  them  all.  It  is  clear,  before  enter 
ing  on  any  other  characteristics,  that  we  find,  in 
full  predominance,  that  strong  personal  emotion 
which  mingled  itself,  in  greater  or  less  measure, 
with  tlie  whole  prophetic  work  of  Jeremiah.  There 
is  here  no  "  word  of  Jehovah,"  no  direct  message 
to  a  sinful  people.  The  man  speaks  out  of  the 
fulness  of  his  heart,  and  though  a  higher  Spirit 
than  his  own  helps  him  to  give  utterance  to  his 
sorrows,  it  is  yet  the  language  of  a  sufferer  rather 
than  of  a  teacher.  There  is  this  measure  of  truth 
in  the  technical  classification  which  placed  the  La 
mentations  among  the  Hagiographa  of  the  Hebrew 
Canon,  in  the  feeling  which  led  the  Habbinic  writers 
(Kimchi,  Pref.  in  Psalm.)  to  say  that  they  and  the 
other  books  of  that  group,  were  written  indeed  by 
the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  not  with  the  special 
gift  of  prophecy. 

Other  differences  between  the  two  books  that  bear 
the  prophet's  name  grew  out  of  this.  Here  there 
is  more  attention  to  form,  more  elaboration.  The 
rhythm  is  more  uniform  than  in  the  prophecies.  A 
complicated  alphabetic  structure  pervades  nearly 
the  whole  book.  It  will  be  remembered  that  this 
acrostic  form  of  writing  was  not  peculiar  to  Jeremiah. 
Whatever  its  origin,  whether  it  had  been  adopted  as 
a  help  to  the  memory,  and  so  fitted  especially  for 
didactic  poems,  or  for  such  as  were  to  be  sung  by 
great  bodies  of  people  (Lowth,  Prael.  xxii.),8  it 
had  been  a  received,  and  it  would  seem  popular, 
framework  for  poems  of  very  different  characters, 
and  extending  protably  over  a  considerable  period 
»f  time.  The  119th  Psalm  is  the  great  monu 
ment  which  forces  itself  upon  our  notice  ;  but  it  is 
found  also  in  the  25th,  34th,  37th,  lllth,  112th, 
145th — and  in  the  singularly  beautiful  fragment 
appended  to  the  book  of  Proverbs  (Prov.  xxxi. 
10-31).  Traces  of  it,  as  if  the  work  had  been  left 
half-finished  (De  Wette,  Psalmen,  ad  loc.)  appear 
in  the  9th  and  10th.  In  the  Lamentations  (con 
fining  ourselves  for  the  present  to  the  structure) 
we  meet  with  some  remarkable  peculiarities. 

(1.)  Ch.  i.,  ii.,  and  iv.  contain  22  verses  each, 
arranged  in  alphabetic  order,  each  verse  falling  into 


LAMENTATIONS  59 

three  nearly  balanced  clauses  (Ewuld,  Poet,  ti&ch. 
p.  147) ;  ii.  19  forms  an  exception  as  having  a 
fourth  clause,  the  result  of  an  interpolation,  as  if 
the  writer  had  shaken  off  for  a  moment  the  re 
straint  of  his  self  imposed  law.  Possibly  the  in 
version  of  the  usual  order  of  J7  and  B  in  ch.  ii.,  iii  , 
iv.,  may  have  arisen  from  a  like  forgetfulness. 
Grotius,  ad  loc.,  explains  it  on  the  assumption  that 
here  Jeremiah  followed  the  order  of  the  Chaldaean 
alphabet.11 

(2.)  Ch.  iii.  contains  three  short  verses  under 
each  letter  of  the  alphabet,  the  initial  letter  being 
'three  times  repeated. 

(3.)  Ch.  v.  contains  the  same  number  of  verses 
as  ch.  i.,  ii.,  iv.,  but  without  the  alphabetic  order. 
The  thought  suggests  itself  that  the  earnestness 
of  the  prayer  with  which  the  book  closes  may  have 
carried  the  writer  beyond  the  limits  within  which 
he  had  previously  confined  himself;  but  the  con 
jecture  (of  Ewald)  that  we  have  here,  as  in  Ps. 
ix.  and  x.,  the  rough  draught  of  what  was  intended 
to  have  been  finished  afterwards  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  others,  is  at  least  a  probable  one. 

III.  The  power  of  entering  into  the  spirit  and 
meaning  of  poems  such  as  these  depends  on  two 
distinct  conditions.  We  must  seek  to  see,  as  with 
our  own  eyes,  the  desolation,  misery,  confusion, 
which  came  before  those  of  the  prophet.  We  must 
endeavour  also  to  feel  as  he  felt  when  he  looked  on 
them.  And  the  last  is  the  more  difficult  of  the 
two.  Jeremiah  was  not  merely  a  patriot-poet, 
weeping  over  the  ruin  of  his  country.  He  was  a 
prophet  who  had  seen  all  this  coming,  and  had  fore 
told  it  as  inevitable.  He  had  urged  submission  to 
the  Chaldaeans  as  the  only  mode  of  diminishing  the 
terrors  of  that  "  day  of  the  Lord."  And  now  the 
Chaldaeans  were  come,  irritated  by  the  perfidy  and 
rebellion  of  the  king  and  princes  of  Judah;  and  the 
actual  horrors  that  he  saw,  surpassed,  though  he 
had  predicted  them,  all  that  he  had  been  able  to 
imagine.  All  feeling  of  exultation  in  which,  as 
mere  prophet  of  evil,  he  might  have  indulged  at  the 
fulfilment  of  his  forebodings,  was  swallowed  up  in 
deep  overwhelming  sorrow.  Yet  sorrow,  not  less 
than  other  emotions,  works  on  men  according  to 
their  characters,  and  a  man  with  Jeremiah's  gifts 
of  utterance  could  not  sit  down  in  the  mere  silence 
and  stupor  of  a  hopeless  grief.  He  was  compelled 
to  give  expression  to  that  which  was  devouring 
his  heart  and  the  heart  of  his  people.  The  act 
itself  was  a  relief  to  him.  It  led  him  on  (as  will 
be  seen  hereafter)  to  a  calmer  and  serener  state.  It 
revived  the  faith  and  hope  which  had  been  nearly 
crushed  out. 


1  Pareau  (quoted  by  De  Wette,  /.  c.)  connects  the 
poems  in  the  life  as  follows  : — 

C.  I.  During  the  siege  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5). 

C.  II.  After  the  destruction  of  the  Temple. 

C.  III.  At  the  time  of  Jeremiah's  imprisonment  in 
the  dungeon  (Jer.  xxxv:'ii.  6,  with  Lam.  iii.  55). 

C.  IV.  After  the  capture  of  Zedekiah. 

C.  V.  After  the  destruction,  later  than  c.  ii. 

t  De  Wette  maintains  ( Comment,  iiber  die  Psalm. 
p.  56)  that  this  acrostic  form  of  writing  was  the  out 
growth  of  a  feeble  and  degenerate  age  dwelling  on 
the  outer  structure  of  poetry  when  the  scul  had  de 
parted.  His  judgment  as  to  the  origin  and  cha 
racter  of  the  alphabetic  form  is  shared  by  Ewald 
(Poet.  Buck.  i.  p.  140).  It  is  hard,  however,  to  re- 
concilc  this  estimate  with  the  impression  made  on  us 
by  such  Psalms  as  the  25th  and  J4th ;  and  Ewald 
nimself,  in  his  translation  of  the  AlphaDelic  I'aahns 


and  the  Lamentations,  has  shewn  how  compatible 
such  a  structure  is  with  the  highest  energy  and  beauty. 
With  some  of  these,  too,  it  must  be  added,  the  assign 
ment  of  a  later  date  than  the  time  of  David  rests  on 
the  foregone  conclusion  that  the  acrostic  structure  is 
itself  a  proof  of  it.  (Comp.  Delitzsch,  Commentar  iiber 
den  Psalter,  on  Ps.  ix.,  x.)-  De  Wette  however  allows, 
condescendingly,  that  the  Lamentations,  in  spite  c1 
their  degenerate  taste,  "  have  some  merit  in  tbeii 
way  "  ("  sind  twar  In  ihrer  Art  von  einigen  Werthc  ") 
k  Similar  anomalies  occur  in  Ps.  xxxvii.,  and  have 
received  a  like  explanation  (De  Wette,  Ps.  p.  57). 
It  is  however  a  mere  hypothesis  that  the  Chaldaean 
alphabet  differed  in  this  respect  from  the  Hebrew  ; 
nor  is  it  easy  to  see  why  Jeremiah  should  have  chosen 
the  Hebrew  order  for  one  poem,  and  the  Chaldaean  foi 
the  other  three. 


60 


LAMENTATIONS 


It  has  to  be  remembered  too,  that  in  thus  speak 
ing  he  was  doing  that  which  many  must  have 
looked  for  from  him,  and  so  meeting  at  once  their 
expectations  and  their  wants.  Other  prophets  and 
poets  had  made  themselves  the  spokesmen  of 
the  nation's  feelings  on  the  death  of  kings  and 
heroes.  The  party  that  continued  faithful  to  the 
policy  and  principles  of  Josiah  remembered  how 
the  prophet  had  lamented  over  his  death.  The 
lamentations  of  that  period  (though  they  are  lost 
to  us)  had  been  accepted  as  a  great  national  dirge. 
Was  he  to  be  silent  now  that  a  more  terrible  cala 
mity  had  fallen  upon  the  people  ?  Did  not  the  exiles 
in  Babylon  need  this  form  of  consolation  ?  Does 
not  the  appearance  of  this  book  in  their  Canon  of 
Sacred  writings,  after  their  return  from  exile,  indi 
cate  that  during  their  captivity  they  had  found 
that  consolation  in  it  ? 

The  choice  of  a  structure  so  artificial  as  that 
which  has  been  described  above,  may  at  first  sight 
appear  inconsistent  with  the  deep  intense  sorrow  of 
which  it  claims  to  be  the  utterance.  Some  wilder 
less  measured  rhythm  would  seem  to  us  to  have 
been  a  fitter  form  of  expression.  It  would  belong, 
however,  to  a  very  shallow  and  hasty  criticism  to 
pass  this  judgment.  A  man  true  to  the  gift  he  has 
received  will  welcome  the  discipline  of  self-imposed 
rules  for  deep  sorrow  as  well  as  for  other  strong 
emotions.  In  proportion  as  he  is  afraid  of  being 
carried  away  by  the  strong  current  of  feeling,  will 
he  be  anxious  to  make  the  laws  more  difficult,  the 
discipline  more  effectual.  Something  of  this  kind 
is  traceable  in  the  faot  that  so  many  of  the  master 
minds  of  European  literature  have  chosen,  as  the 
fit  vehicle  for  their  deepest,  tenderest,  most  im 
passioned  thoughts,  the  complicated  structure  of  the 
sonnet ;  in  Dante's  selection  of  the  terza  rima  for 
his  vision  of  the  unseen  world.  What  the  sonnet 
was  to  Petrarch  and  to  Milton,  that  the  alphabetic 
verse-system  was  to  the  writers  of  Jeremiah's  time, 
the  most  difficult  among  the  recognised  forms  of 
poetry,  and  yet  one  in  which  (assuming  the  earlier 
date  of  some  of  the  Psalms  above  referred  to)  some 
of  the  noblest  thoughts  of  that  poetry  had  been 
uttered.  We  need  not  wonder  that  he  should  have 
employed  it  as  fitter  than  any  other  for  the  purpose 
for  which  he  used  it.  If  these  Lamentations  were 
intended  to  assuage  the  bitterness  of  the  Babylonian 
exile,  there  was,  besides  this,  the  subsidiary  ad 
vantage  that  it  supplied  the  memory  with  an  arti 
ficial  help.  Hymns  and  poems  of  this  kind,  once 
learnt,  are  not  easily  forgotten,  and  the  circum 
stances  of  the  captives  made  it  then,  more  than  ever, 
necessary  that  they  should  have  this  help  atibrded 
them.' 

An  examination  of  the  five  poems  will  enable  us 
to  judge  how  far  each  stands  by  itself,  how  far 
they  are  connected  as  parts  forming  a  whole.  We 
must  deal  with  them  as  they  are,  not  forcing  our 
own  meanings  into  them ;  looking  on  them  not  as 
prophetic,  or  didactic,  or  historical,  but  simply  as 
lamentations,  exhibiting,  like  other  elegies,  the  diffe 
rent  phases  of  a  pervading  sorrow. 

I.  The  opening  verse  strikes  the  key-note  of  the 
whole  poem.  That  which  haunts  the  prophet's 
niinil  is  the  solitude  in  which  he  finds  himself. 


LAMENTATIONS 

She  that  waj  "princess  among  the  nat.'.ms"  (1, 
sits  (like  the  JUDAEA  CAPTA  of  the  1  toman  me 
dals),  "solitary,"  "as  a  widow."  Her  "  lovers  " 
(the  nrtions  with  whom  she  had  been  allied)  hold 
aloof  fiom  her  (2).  The  heathen  are  entered  into 
the  sanctuary,  and  mock  at  her  Sabbaths  (7,  10;. 
After  the  manner  so  characteristic  of  Hebrew  poet'-y, 
the  personality  of  the  writer  now  recedes  and  now 
advances,  and  blends  by  hardly  perceptible  transi 
tions  with  that  of  the  city  which  he  personifies, 
and  with  which  he,  as  it  were,  identifies  himself. 
At  one  time,  it  is  the  daughter  of  Zion  that  asks 
"  Is  it  nothing  to  you,  all  ye  that  pass  by?"  (12). 
At  another,  it  is  the  prophet  who  looks  on  her,  and 
portrays  her  as  "spreading  forth  her  hands,  and 
there  is  none  to  comfort  her"  (17).  Mingling 
with  this  outburst  of  sorrow  there  are  two  thought* 
characteristic  both  of  the  man  and  the  time.  The 
calamities  which  the  nation  suffers  are  the  conse 
quences  of  its  sins.  There  must  be  the  confession 
of  those  sins:  "Tha  Lord  is  righteous,  for  I  have 
rebelled  against  His  commandment"  (18).  There 
is  also,  at  any  rate,  this  gleam  of  consolation  that 
Judah  is  not  alone  in  her  sufferings.  Those  who 
have  exulted  in  her  destruction  shall  drink  of  the 
same  cup.  They  shall  be  like  unto  her  in  the  day 
that  the  Lord  shall  call  (21). 

II.  As  the  solitude  of  the  city  was  the  subject  of 
the  first  lamentation,  so  the  destruction  that  had  laid 
it  waste  is  that  which  is  most  conspicuous  in  the 
second.     Jehovah  had  thrown  down  in  his  wrath 
the  strongholds  of  the  daughter  of  Judah  (2).    The 
rampart  and  the  wall  lament  together  (8).     The 
walls  of  the  palace  are  given  up  into  the  hand  of  the 
enemy  (7).     The  breach  is  great  as  if  made  by  the 
inrashing  of  the  sea  (13).     With  this  there  had 
been  united  all  the  horrors  of  the  famine  and  the 
assault : — young  children  fainting  for  hunger  in  the 
top  of  every  street  (19) ;  women  eating  their  own 
children,  and  so  fulfilling  the  curse  of  Deut.  xxviii. 
53  (20);   the  priest  and  the  prophet  slain  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  Lord  (ibid.).     Added  to  all  this, 
there  was  the  remembrance  of  that  which  had  been 
all  along  the  great  trial  of  Jeremiah's  life,  against 
which  he  had  to  wage  continual  war.    The  prophets 
of  Jerusalem  had  seen  vain  and  foolish  things,  t'alse 
burdens,  and  causes  of  banishment  (14).    A  right 
eous  judgment  had  fallen  on  them.     The  prophets 
found  no  vision  of  Jehovah  (9).     The  king  and  the 
princes   who   had   listened    to  them  were  captive 
among  the  Gentiles. 

III.  The  difference  in  the  structure  of  this  poem 
which  has  been  already  noticed,  indicates  a  corre 
sponding  difference  in  its  substance.     In  the  two 
preceding  poems,  Jeremiah  had  spoken  of  the  misery 
and  destruction  of  Jerusalem.    In  the  third  he  speaks 
chiefly,  though  not  exclusively,  of  his  own.     He 
himself  is  the  man  that  has  seen  affliction    (1), 
who  has  been  brought  into  darkness  and  not  into 
light  (2).     He  looks   back   upon    the  long  life  of 
suffering  which  he  has  been  called  on  to  endure,  the 
scorn  and  derision  of  the  people,  the  bitterness  as 
of  one  drunken  with  wormwood  (14,  15).     But 
that  experience  was  not  one  which  had  ended  in 
darkness  and  despair.     Here,  as  in  the  prophecies, 
we  find  a  Gospel  tor  the  weaiy  and  heavy-laden,  a 


1  The  re-appearance  of  this  structure  in  tne  later 
literature  of  the  East  is  not  without  interest.  Alpha 
betic  poems  are  found  among  the  hymns  of  Ephraem 
*yrus  (Asscmani,  Bibl.  Orient,  iii.  p.  68)  and  other 


a  much  more  complicated  plan  than  any  of  the  O.  T. 
i«jems  of  this  type  (ibid.  iii.  p.  328),  and  these  chiefly 
in  hymns  to  be  sung  by  boys  ut  solemn  festivals,  or 
in  confessions  of  faith  which  were  meant  for  theif 


writers ;  sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Ebed-jcsus,  with  ;  instruction. 


LAMENTATIONS 

trust,  not  to  be  shaken,  in  the  mercy  and  righteous 
ness  of  Jehovah.     The  mercies  of  the  Lord  are  new 
every  morning  (22,  23).     He  is  good  to  them  that 
wait  for  Him  (25).     And  the  retrospect  of  that 
sharp  experience  showed  him  that  it  all  formed  part 
of  the  discipline  which  was  intended  to  lead  him  on 
to  a  higher  blessedness.     It  was  good  for  a  man  to 
bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth,  good  that  he  should 
both  hope  and  quietly  wait  (26,  27).     With  this, 
equally  characteristic  of  the  prophet's  individuality, 
there  is  the  protest  against  the  wrong  which  had 
been  or  might  hereafter  be  committed  by   rulers 
and  princes  (34-36),  the  confession  that  all  that  had 
come  on  him  and  his  people  was  but  a  righteous  re 
tribution,  to  be  accepted  humbly,  with  searchings 
of  heart,  and  repentance  (39-42).    The  closing  verses 
may  refer  to  that  special   epoch  in  the  prophet's 
life  when   his   own   sufferings  had  been   sharpest 
(53-56)  and  the  cruelties  of  his  enemies  most  tri 
umphant.     If  so,  we  can  enter  more  fully,  remem 
bering  this,  into  the  thanksgiving  with  which  he 
acknowledges    the    help,    deliverance,    redemption, 
which  he  had  received  from  God  (57,  58).     And 
feeling  sure   that,   at   some  time  or  other,  there 
would  be  for  him  a  yet  higher  lesson,  we  can  enter 
with  some  measure   of  sympathy,   even   into  the 
terrible  earnestness  or"  his  appeal  from  the  unjust 
judgment  of  earth  to  the  righteous  Judge,  into  his 
cry  for  a  retribution  without  which  it  seemed  to  him 
that  the  Eternal  Righteousness  would  fail  (64-66). 
IV.  It  might  seem,  at  first,  as  if  the  fourth  poem 
lid  but  reproduce  the  pictures  and  the  thoughts  of 
the  first  and  second.     There  come  before  us,  once 
again,    the    famine,    the    misery,   the   desolation, 
that  had  fallen  on  the  holy  city,  making  all  faces 
gather  blackness.     One  new  element  in  the  picture 
is  found  in  the  contrast  between  the  past  glory  of 
the  consecrated  families  of  the  kingly  and  priestly 
stocks  (Nazarites  in  A .  V.)  and  their  later  misery 
and  shame.     Some  changes  there  are,  however,  not 
without  interest  in  their  relation  to  the  poet's  own 
life  and  to  the  history  of  his  time.     All  the  facts 
gain  a  new  significance  by  being  seen  in  the  light 
of  the  personal  experience  of  the  third  poem.     The 
declaration  that  all  this  had  come  "  for  the  sins  of  the 
prophets  and  the  iniquities  of  the  priests"  is  clearer 
and  sharper  than  before  (13).    There  is  the  giving  up 
of  the  last  hope  which    Jeremiah  had   cherished, 
when  he  urged  on  Zedekiah  the  wisdom  of  submis 
sion  to  the  Chaldaeans  (20).     The  closing  words 
indicate  the  strength  of  that  feeling  against  the 
Edomites    which    lasted    all    through    the    capti 
vity  k  (21,  22).     She,  the  daughter  of  Edom,  had 
rejoiced  in  the  fall  of  her  rival,  and  had  pressed  on 
the  work  of  destruction.     But  for  her  too  there 
was  the  doom  of  being  drunken  with  the  cup  of 
the  Lord's  wrath.     For  the  daughter  of  Zion  there 
was  hope  of  pardon,  when  discipline  should  have 
done  its  work  and  the  punishment  of  her  iniquity 
should  be  accomplished. 

V.  One  great  difference  in  the  fifth  and  last  section 
of  the  poem  has  been  already  pointed  out.  It  ob 
viously  indicates  either  a  deliberate  abandonment  of 
the  alphabetic  structure,  or  the  unfinished  cha 
racter  of  the  concluding  elegy.  The  title  prefixed 
in  tie  Vulgate, "  OratioJeremiae  Prophetae,"  points 

k  Comp.  with  this  Obad.  ver.  10,  andPs.  cxxxvii.  7. 

m  The  Vulgate  imports  into  this  verse  also  the 
thought  of  a  shameful  infamy.  It  must  be  remem 
bered,  however,  that  the  literal  meaning  conveyed  to 
the  mind  of  an  Israelite  one  of  the  lowest  offices  of 
slave-labour  (comp.  Jurtg.  xvi.  21). 


LAMENTATIONS 


61 


to  one  marked  characteristic  which  may  have  occa 
sioned  tnis  difference.  There  are  signs  also  of  £ 
later  date  than  that  of  the  preceding  poems.  Though 
the  horrors  of  the  famine  are  ineffaceable,  yet  that 
which  he  has  before  him  is  rather  the  continued 
protracted  suffering  of  the  rule  of  the  Chalclaeaus. 
The  mountain  of  Zion  is  desolate,  and  the  foxes 
walk  on  it  (18).  Slaves  have  ruled  over  the 
people  of  Jehovah  (8).  Women  have  been  sub 
jected  to  intolerable  outrages  (11).  The  young 
men  have  been  taken  to  grind,1"  and  the  children 
have  fallen  under  the  wood  (13).  But  in  this  also, 
deep  as  might  be  the  humiliation,  there  was  hope, 
even  as  there  had  been  in  the  dark  hours  of  the 
prophet's  own  life.  He  and  his  people  are  sustained 
by  the  old  thought  which  had  been  so  fruitful  of 
comfort  to  other  prophets  and  psalmists.  The 
periods  of  suffering  and  struggle  which  seemed  so 
long,  were  but  as  moments  in  the  lifetime  of  the 
Eternal  (19)  ;  and  the  thought  of  that  eternity 
brought  with  it  the  hope  that  the  purposes  of  love 
which  had  been  declared  so  clearly  should  one  day 
be  fulfilled.  The  last  words  of  this  lamentation 
are  those  which  have  risen  so  often  from  broken  and 
contrite  hearts,  "  Turn  thou  us,  0  Lord,  and  we 
shall  be  turned.  Renew  our  days  as  of  old  "  (21). 
That  which  had  begun  with  wailing  and  weeping 
ends  (following  Ewald's  and  Michaelis's  translation) 
with  the  question  of  hope,  "  Wilt  thou  utterly  reject 
us  ?  Wilt  thou  be  very  wroth  against  us  ?" 

There   are  perhaps   few  portions  of  the  0.  T. 
which  appear  to  have  done  the  work  they  were 
meant  to  do  more  effectually  than  this.    It  has  pre 
sented  but  scanty  materials  for  the  systems  and 
controversies  of  theology.     It  has  supplied  thou 
sands  with  the  fullest  utterance  for  their  sorrows  in 
the  critical  periods  of  national  or  individual  suffer 
ing.     We  may  well  believe   that   it  soothed  the 
weary  years  of  the  Babylonian  exile  (comp.  Zech.  i. 
6,  with   Lam.  ii.   17).     When  they  returned  to 
their  own  land,  and  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem  was 
remembered  as  belonging  only  to  the  past,  this  was 
the  book  of  remembrance.     On  the  ninth  day  of 
the  month  of  Ab  (July),  the  Lamentations  of  Jere 
miah  were  read,  year  by  year,  with  fasting  and 
weeping,  to  commemorate  the  misery  out  of  which 
the  people  had  been  delivered.     It  has  come  to  be 
connected  with  the  thoughts  of  a  later  devastation, 
and  its  words  enter,  sometimes  at  least,  into  the 
prayers  of  the  pilgrim  Jews  who  meet  at  the  "  place 
of  wailing"  to  mourn  over  the  departed  glory  of 
their  city."     It  enters  largely  into  the  nobly-con 
structed  'order  of  the  Latin  Church  for  the  services 
of  Passion-week  (Breviar.  Bom.  Feria  Quinta.    "  In 
Coena  Domini ").    If  it  has  been  comparatively  in  the 
background  in  times  when  the  study  of  Scripture 
hail  passed  into   casuistry  and  speculation,  it  has 
come  forward,  once  and  again,  in  times  of  danger 
and  suffering,  as  a  messenger  of  peace,  comforting 
men,  not  alter  the  fashion  of  the  friends  of  Job, 
with  formal  moralizings,  but  by  enabling  them  to 
express  themselves,  leading  them  to  feel  that  they 
might  give  utterance  to  the  deepest  and  saddest 
feelings  by  which  they  were  overwhelmed.     It  is 
striking,  as  we  cast  our  eye  over  the  list  of  writers 
who  have  treated  specir.lly  of  the  book,  to  notice 


•  Is  there  any  uniform  practice  in  these  devotions  1. 
The  -writer  hears  from  some  Jews  th&t  the  only  prayers 
said  are  those  that  would  have  been  said,  is  the  prayer 
of  the  day,  elsewhere ;  from  others,  that  the  Lamenta 
tions  of  Jeremiah  ere  frequently  employed. 


62 


LAMP 


how  many  must  have  passed  through  scenes  of  trial 
not  unlike  in  kind  to  that  of  which  the  Lamenta 
tions  speak.  The  book  remains  to  do  its  work  for 
any  future  generation  that  may  be  exposed  to  ana 
logous  calamities. 

A  few  facts  connected  with  the  external  history 
of  the  Book  remain  to  be  stated.  The  position 
which  it  has  occupied  in  the  canon  of  the  0.  T.  has 
varied  from  time  to  time.  In  the  received  Hebrew 
arrangement  it  is  placed  among  the  Kethubim  or 
Hagiographa,  between  Ruth  and  Koheleth  (Eccle- 
siastes).  In  that  adopted  for  synagogue  use,  and 
reproduced  in  some  editions,  as  in  the  Bomberg 
Bible  of  1521,  it  stands  among  the  five  Megillotli 
after  the  books  of  Moses.  The  LXX.  group  the 
writings  connected  with  the  name  of  Jeremiah  to 
gether,  but  the  Book  of  Baruch  comes  between  the 
prophecy  and  the  Lamentation.  On  the  hypothesis 
of  some  writers  that  Jer.  Hi.  was  originally  the 
introduction  to  the  poem,  and  not  the  conclusion  of 
the  prophecy,  and  that  the  preface  of  the  LXX. 
(which  is  not  found  either  in  the  Hebrew,  or  in 
the  Targum  of  Jonathan)  was  inserted  to  diminish 
the  abruptness  occasioned  by  this  separation  of  the 
book  from  that  with  which  it,  had  been  originally 
connected,  it  would  follow  that  the  arrangement  of 
the  Vulg.  and  the  A.  V.  corresponds  more  closely 
than  any  other  to  that  which  we  must  look  on  as 
tke  original  one. 

Literature. — Theodoret,  Opp.  ii.  p.  286  ;  Je 
rome,  Opp.  v.  165 ;  Special  Commentaries  by 
Calvin  (Prol.  in  Thren.);  Bullinger  (Tigur. 
1575);  Peter  Martyr  (Tigur.  1629);  Oecolampa- 
dius  (Argent.  1558);  Zuinglius  (Tigur.  1544); 
Maldonatus ;  Pareau  ( Threni  Jeremiae,  Lugd.  Bat. 
1790);  Tarnovius(1624);  Kalkar  (1836);  Neu 
mann  (Jeretnias  u.  Klagelieder,  1858).  Translated 
by  Ewald,  in  Poet.  Bitch,  part  i.  [E.  H.  P.] 

LAMP."  1.  That  part  of  the  golden  candle 
stick  belonging  to  the  Tabernacle  which  bore  the 
light;  also  of  each  of  the  ten  candlesticks  placed  by 
Solomon  in  the  Temple  before  the  Holy  of  Holies 
(Ex.  xxv.  37 ;  1  K.  vii.  49  ;  2  Chr.  iv.  20,  xiii.  11 ; 
Zech.  iv.  2).  The  lamps  were  lighted  every  evening, 
ar.'i  cleansed  every  morning  (Ex.  xxx.  7,  8 ;  Reland, 
Ant.  Hebr.  i.  v.  9,  and  vii.  8).  The  primary  sense 
of  light  (Gen.  xv.  17)  gives  rise  to  frequent  meta 
phorical  usages,  indicating  life,  welfare,  guidance, 
as  e.  q.  2  Sam.  xxi.  17  ;  Ps.  cxix.  105;  Prov.  vi. 
23,  xiii.  9. 

2.  A  torch  or  flambeau,  such  as  was  carried  by 
"4ie  soldiers  of  Gideon  (Judg.  vii.  16,20;  comp. 
xv.  4).     See  vol.  i.  p.  695,  note. 

3.  In  N.  T.  AdjUTrclSes  is  in  A.  V.,  Acts  xx.  8, 
"lights;"  in  John  xviii.  3,  "torches;"  in  Matt. 
xxv.  1,  Rev.  iv.  5,  "  lamps." 

Herodotus,  speaking  of  Egyptian  lamps  used  at  a 
festival,  describes  them  as  vessels  rilled  with  salt 
and  olive  oil,  with 
floating  wicks,  but 
does  not  mention  the 
material  of  the  ves 
sels  (Herod,  ii.  62; 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eij. 
Abridg.i.298,ii.71). 
The  use  of  lamps 
fed  with  oil  at  mar 
riage  processions  is  al 
luded  toin  the  parable  of  the  ten  virgins(Matt.xxv.  1). 


Egypt 


a  *1    once   T3    (2  Sam.   xxii.   29),    from    "VI J, 
ti  shine,"  Ccs.  p.  867  :  Auxw  :   litcerna. 


LAODICEA 

Modern  Egyptian  lamps  consist  of  sni.ill  glass 
vessels  with  a  tube  at  the  bottom  rtntnining  a 
cotton-wick  twisted  round  a  piece  of  straw.  Some 
water  is  poured  in  first,  and  then  oil.  For  night- 
travelling,  a  lantern  composed  of  waxed  cloth 
strained  over  a  sort  of  cylinder  of  wire-rings,  and  a 
top  and  bottom  of  perforated  copper.  This  would, 
in  form  at  least,  answer  to  the  lamps  within 
pitchers  of  Gideon.  On  occasions  of  marriage  the 
street  or  quarter  where  the  bridegroom  lives  is 
illuminated  with  lamps  suspended  from  cords 
drawn  across.  Sometimes  the  bridegroom  is  ac 
companied  to  a  mosque  by  men  bearing  flambeaux, 
consisting  of  frames  of  iron  fixed  on  staves,  and  filled 
with  burning  wood;  and  on  his  return,  by  others  bear 
ing  frames  with  many  lamps  suspended  from  them 
(Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  202  215,  224,  225,  230 ;  Mrs. 
Poole,  Englisliw.  in  Eg.  iii.  131).  [H.  W.  P.] 

LANCET.  This  word  is  found  in  1  K.  rviii. 
28  only.  The  Hebrew  term  is  Romach,  which  is 
elsewhere  rendered,  and  appears  to  mean  a  javelin, 
or  light  spear.  [See  ARMS,  vol.  i.  p.  110  6.]  In 
the  original  edition  of  the  A.  V.  (1611)  this  mean 
ing  is  preserved,  the  word  being  "lancers." 

LANGUAGE.    [TONGUES,  CONFUSION  OF.' 
LANGUAGES,  SEMITIC.     [SHEM.] 

LANTERN  (<j>a.vos)  occurs  only  in  John 
xviii.  3.  See  Diet,  of  Ant.  art.  LATEKNA. 

LAODICE'A  'AaoS/KSta).  The  two  passages 
in  the  N.  T.  where  this  city  is  mentioned  define  its 
geographical  position  in  harmony  with  other  autho 
rities.  In  Rev.  i.  11,  iii.  14,  it  is  spoken  of  as 
belonging  to  the  general  district  which  contained 
Ephesus,  Smyrna,  Thyatira,  Pergamus,  Sardis,  and 
Philadelphia.  In  Col.  iv.  13, 15,  it  appears  in  still 
closer  association  with  Colossae  and  Hierapolis.  And 
this  was  exactly  its  position.  It  was  a  town  of  some 
consequence  in  the  Roman  province  of  ASIA;  and  it 
was  situated  in  the  valley  of  the  Maeander,  on  » 
small  river  called  the  Lycus,  with  COLOSSAE  and 
HIERAPOLIS  a  few  miles  distant  to  the  west. 

Built,  or  rather  rebuilt,  by  one  of  the  Seleucid 
monarchs,  and  named  in  honour  of  his  wife,  Lao- 
Jicea  became  under  the  Roman  government  a  place 
of  some  importance.  Its  trade  was  considerable: 
it  lay  on  the  line  of  a  great  road ;  and  it  was  the 
seat  of  a  conventus.  From  Rev.  iii.  17,  we  should 
gather  it  was  a  place  of  great  wealth.  The  damage 
which  was  caused  by  an  earthquake  in  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  (Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  27)  was  promptly  repaired 
by  the  energy  of  the  inhabitants.  It  was  soon  after 
this  occurrence  that  Christianity  was  introduced  into 
Laodicea,  not  however,  as  it  would  seem,  through  the 
direct  agency  of  St.  Paul.  We  have  good  reason 
for  believing  that  when,  in  writing  from  Rome 
to  the  Christians  of  Colossae,  he  sent  a  greeting 
to  those  of  Laodicea,  he  had  not  personally  visited 
either  place.  But  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  at 
Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  19-xix.  41)  must  inevitably 
have  resulted  in  the  formation  of  churches  in  the 
neighbouring  cities,  especially  where  Jews  were 
settled  :  and  there  were  Jews  in  Laodicea  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  3,  §4;  xiv.  10,  §20).  In  subsequent  times 
it  became  a  Christian  city  of  eminence,  the  see  of  a 
bishop,  and  a  meeting-place  of  councils.  It  is  often 
mentioned  by  the  Byzantine  writers.  The  Mo 
hammedan  invaders  destroyed  it ;  and  it  is  now  a 
scene  of  utter  desolation :  but  the  extensive  ruins 
near  Denislu  justify  all  that  we  read  of  Laodicea 
in  Greek  and  Roman  writers.  Many  travellers 


LAODICEANS 

(Pococke,  Chandler,  Leake,  Arundell,  Fellows)  have 
visited  and  described  the  place,  but  the  most  elabo 
rate  and  interesting  account  is  that  of  Hamilton. 

One  Biblical  subject  of  interest  is  connected  with 
Laodicea.  From  Col.  iv.  16  it  appears  that  St. 
Paul  wrote  a  letter  to  this  place  (ij  tie  AooSi/eet'cts) 
when  he  wrote  the  letter  to  Colossae.  The  question 
arises  whether  we  can  give  any  account  of  this 
Laodicean  epistle.  Wieseler's  theory  (Apost.  Zeit- 
alter,  p.  4.50)  is  that  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  is 
•neant ;  and  the  tradition  in  the  Apostolical  Consti 
tutions  that  he  was  bishop  of  this  see  is  adduced 
in  confirmation.  Another  view,  maintained  by 
Paley  and  others,  and  suggested  by  a  manuscript 
variation  in  Eph.  i.  1,  is  that  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians  is  intended.  Ussher's  view  is  that  this 
last  epistle  was  a  circular  letter  sent  to  Laodicea 
tmong  other  places  (see  TAfe  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
.ti.  488,  with  Alford's  Prolegomena,  G.  T.  v.  iii. 
Ill- 18).  None  of  these  opinions  can  be  maintained 
with  much  confidence.  It  may  however  be  said, 
without  hesitation,  that  the  apocryphal  Epistola  ad 
Laodicenses  is  a  late  and  clumsy  forgery.  It  exists 
only  in  Latin  MSS.,  and  is  evidently  a  cento  from 
*-he  Galatians  and  Ephesians.  A  full  account  of  it 
is  given  by  Jones  (On  the  Canon  ii.  31-49). 

The  subscription  at  the  end  of  the  First  Epistle 
to  Timothy  (eypdtpij  airb  AaoSiKctas,  ?}TIS  tffrl 
ftijTpJiroA.jy  4>pvyla.s  TTJS  na/caTiacTjs)  is  of  no 
authority ;  but  it  is  worth  mentioning,  as  showing 
the  importance  of  Laodicea.  [J.  S.  H.] 

LAODICE'ANS(Aoo5iKery:  Laodicenses),the 
inhabitants  of  Laodicea  (Col.  iv.  16  ;  Rev.  iii.  14). 

LAP'IDOTH  (DiT^?,  *.  e.  Lappldoth :  Aa- 
(pfi5d>6:  Lapidoth),  the  husband  of  Deborah  the 
prophetess  (Judg.  iv.  4  only).  The  word  rendered 
"  wife"  in  the  expression  "wife  of  Lapidoth"  has 
simply  the  force  of  "  woman  ;"  and  thus  lappidoth 
("torches")  has  been  by  some  understood  as  de 
scriptive  of  Deborah's  disposition,  and  even  of  her 
occupations.  [DEBORAH.]  But  there  is  no  real 
ground  for  supposing  it  to  mean  anything  but  wife, 
or  for  doubting  the  existence  of  her  husband.  True, 
the  termination  of  the  name  is  feminine ;  but  this  is 
the  case  in  other  names  undoubtedly  borne  by  men, 
as  MEREMOTH,  MAHAZIOTH,  &c.  [G.] 

LAPWING (n&3tt,duttphath:  liroi|/:  upupa) 
occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  19,  and  in  the  parallel  passage 
of  Deut.  xiv.  18,  amongst  the  list  of  those  birds  which 
were  forbidden  by  the  law  of  Moses  to  be  eaten  by 
the  Israelites.  Commentators  generally  agree  with 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  that  the  Hoopoe  is  the  bird 
intended,  and  with  this  interpretation  the  Arabic 
versions"  coincide:  all  these  three  versions  ghe 
one  word,  Hoopoe,  as  the  meaning  of  dukiphath ; 
but  one  cannot  definitely  say  whether  the  Syriac 
reading,b  the  Targums  of  Jerusalem,  Onkelos,  and 


LAPWING 


63 


-  -  t)  - 
J,  alhudhud,  from  root  4X^4X^1  "  to 

moan  as  a  dove."  ffudhud  is  the  modern  Arabic 
name  for  the  hoopoe.  At  Cairo  the  name  of 
this  hird  is  hidhid  (vid.  Forskal,  Deter.  Animal,  p. 

vii.). 


(Syriac),  woodland-cock. 

c   fcO-113  "153  (Chaldee),  artifex  mantis;  German, 

tergmtisttr  ^then,  gallus  montanus)  :  from  the  Rab 
binical   Btor;  of  the  Hoopoe  and  the  Shamir.     (Sec 


Jonathan,'  and  the  Jewish  doctors,  indicate  any 
particular  bird  or  not,  for  they  merely  appear  to 
resolve  the  Hebrew  word  into  its  component  parts. 
dukiphath  being  by  them  understood  as  the  "  nioun  • 
tain-cock.''  or  "  woodland-cock."  This  translation 
has,  as  may  be  supposed,  produced  considerable  dis 
cussion  as  to  the  kind  of  bird  represented  by  these 
teims — expressions  which  would,  before  the  date 
of  acknowledged  scientific  nomenclature,  have  a 
very  wide  meaning.  According  to  Bochart,  these 
four  different  interpretations  have  been  assigned  to 
dukiphath: — 1.  The  Sadducees  supposed  the  bird 
intended  to  be  the  common  hen,  which  they  there 
fore  refused  to  eat.  2.  Another  interpretation 
understands  the  cock  of  the  woods  (tetrao  uro- 
gallus).  3.  Other  inteipreters  think  the  attagen 
is  meant.  4.  The  last  interpretation  is  that  which 
gives  the  Hoopoe  as  the  rendering  of  the  Hebiuw 
word.d 


The  Hoopoe  (Vfitfu  Epopil 

As  to  the  value  of  1.  nothing  can  be  urged  in  its 
favour  except  that  the  first  part  of  the  word  duk 
or  dik  does  in  Arabic  mean  a  cock.*  2.  With  almost 
as  little  reason  can  the  cock  of  the  woods,  or 
capercailzie,  be  considered  to  have  any  claim  to  be 
the  bird  indicated ;  for  this  bird  is  an  inhabitant  of 
the  northern  parts  of  Europe  and  Asia,  and  although 
it  has  been  occasionally  found,  according  to  M. 
Temmink,  as  far  south  as  the  Ionian  Islands,  yet 
such  occurrences  are  rare  indeed,  and  we  have  no 
record  of  its  ever  having  been  seen  in  Syria  or 
Egypt.  The  capercailzie  is  therefore  a  bird  not 
at  all  likely  to  come  within  the  sphere  of  the 
observation  of  the  Jews.  3.  As  to  the  third  theory, 
it  is  certainly  at  least  as  much  a  question  what  is 
signified  by  attagen,  as  by  dukiphath.1 

Many,  and  curious  in  some  instances,  are  the 
derivations  proposed  for  the  Hebrew  word,  but  the 
most  probable  one  is  that  which  was  alluded  to 
above,  viz.  the  mountain-cock.  Aeschylus  speaks 
of  the  Hoopoe  by  name,  and  expressly  calls  it  the 


ADAMANT,   ia  Appendix,   and  Buxtorf,   Lex.   ClialA. 
Talm.  s.  v.  133.) 

'd  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hoopoe  is  the 
hird  intendpd  by  dukiphath  ;  for  the  Coptic  Kukupha, 
the  Syriac  Kikupha,  which  stand  for  the  Upupa  Epops, 
are  almost  certainly  allied  to  the  Hebrew  flQ'O-'n 
dukiphath. 

Xj^  :  gallina,  gallus. 


1  By  attagen  is  here  of  course  meant  the  arnryat 
of  the  Greeks,  and  the  attagen  of  the  Romans  ;  not 
that  name  as  sometimes  applied  locally  to  the  /  (or- 
mif/nn,  or  white  grouse. 


64  LAPWING 

bird  of  tfo  rocks  (Fragm.  291,  quoted  by  Arist. 
//.  A.  ix.  49).  Aelian  (N.  A.  iii.  26)  says  that 
these  birds  build  their  nests  in  lofty  rooks.  Aris 
totle's  words  are  U  the  same  effect,  for  he  writes, 
"  Now  some  animals  are  found  in  the  mountains, 
as  the  hoopoe  for  instance"  (ff.  A.  i.  1).  When 
the  two  lawsuit-wearied  citizens  of  Athens,  Euel- 
pides  and  Pisthetaerus,  in  the  comedy  of  the  Birds 
of  Aristophanes  (20,  54),  are  on  their  search  for 
the  home  of  Epops,  king  of  birds,  their  ornitholo 
gical  conductor  lead  them  through  a  wild  desert  tract 
terminated  by  mountains  and  rocks,  in  which  is 
situated  the  royal  aviary  of  Epops. 

It  must,  however,  be  remarked  that  the  observa 
tions  of  the  habits  of  the  hoopoe  recorded  by  modern 
zoologists  do  not  appear  to  warrant  the  assertion 
that  it  is  so  pre-eminently  a  mountain-bird  as  has 
been  implied  above.8  Marshy  ground,  ploughed  land, 
wooded  districts,  such  as  are  near  to  water,  are 
more  especially  its  favourite  haunts ;  but  perhaps 
more  extended  observation  on  its  habits  may  here 
after  confirm  the  accuracy  of  the  statements  of  the 
ancients. 

Ine  noopoe  was  accounted  an  unclean  bird  by 
the  Mosaic  law,  nor  is  it  now  eaten h  except  occa 
sionally  in  those  countries  where  it  is  abundantly 
found — Egypt,  France,  Spain,  &c.  &c.  Many  and 
strange  are  the  stories  which  are  told  of  the  hoopoe 
in  ancient  Oriental  fable,  and  some  of  these  stories 
are  by  no  means  to  its  credit.  It  seems  to  have  been 
always  regarded,  both  by  Arabians  and  Greeks,  with 
a  superstitious  reverence ' — a  circumstance  which  it 
owes  no  doubt  partly  to  its  crest  (Aristoph.  Birds, 
94;  comp.  Ov.  Met.  vi.  672),  which  certainly 
gives  it  a  most  imposing  appearance,  partly  to  the 
length  of  its  beak,  and  partly  also  to  its  habits. 
"  If  any  one  anointed  himself  with  its  blood,  and 
then  fell  asleep,  he  would  see  demons  suffocating 
him " — "  if  its  liver  were  eaten  with  rue,  the 
eater's  wits  would  be  .sharpened,  and  pleasing  me 
mories  be  excited  " — are  superstitions  held  respect 
ing  this  bird.  One  more  fable  narrated  of  the 
hoopoe  is  given,  because  its  origin  can  be  traced  to 
a  peculiar  habit  of  the  bird.  The  Arabs  say  that 
the  hoopoe  is  a  betrayer  of  secrets ;  that  it  is  able 
moreover  to  point  out  hidden  wells  and  fountains 
under  ground.  Now  the  hoopoe,  on  settling  upon 
the  ground,  has  a  strange  and  portentous-looking 
habit  of  bending  the  head  downwards  till  the  point 
of  the  beak  touches  the  ground,  raising  and  de 
pressing  its  crest  at  the  same  time.k  Hence  with 
much  probability  arose  the  Arabic  fable. 

These  stories,  absurd  as  they  are,  are  here  men 
tioned  because  it  was  perhaps  in  a  great  measure 
owing,  not  only  to  the  uncleanly  habits  of  the  bird, 
but  also  to  the  superstitious  feeling  with  which  the 
hoopoe  was  regarded  by  the  Egyptians  and  heathen 
generally,  that  it  was  forbidden  as  food  to  the 
Israelites,  whose  affections  Jehovah  wished  to  wean 
from  the  land  of  their  bondage,  to  which,  as  we 
know,  they  fondly  clung. 


s  See  Macgillivray's  British  Birds,  vol.  iii.  43  ; 
Tarrell,  Brit.  B.  ii.  178,  2nd  edit. ;  Lloyd's  Scandi 
navian  Adventures,  ii.  321  ;  Tristram  in  Ibis,  vol.  i. 
The  chief  grounds  for  all  the  filthy  habits  which  have 
been  ascribed  to  this  much-maligned  bird  are  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  it  resorts  to  dunghills,  &c.,  in 
tcarch  of  the  worms  and  insects  which  it  finds  there. 

h  A  writer  in  Ibi»,  vol.  i.  p.  49,  says,  "  We  found 
the  Jfon/i  ie  a  very  good  bird  to  cat." 

'  Such  i»  tli*  rase  even  to  this  day.     The  Rev.  H. 


LASAEA 

The  word  Hoopoe  is  evidently  ononwtopootic, 
being  derived  from  the  voice  of  the  bird,  which 
resembles  the  words  "  hoop,  hoop,"  softly  but 
rapidly  uttered.  The  Germans  call  the  bird  Eir. 
ffonp,  the  French  La  Huppe,  which  is  particu 
larly  appropriate,  as  it  refers  both  to  the  crest 
and  note  of  the  bird.  In  Sweden  it  is  known  by 
the  name  of  Har-Fogel,  the  army-bird,  because, 
from  its  ominous  cry,  frequently  heard  in  the  wilds 
of  the  forest,  while  the  bird  itself  moves  off  as 
any  one  approaches,  the  common  people  have  sup 
posed  that  seasons  of  scarcity  and  war  are  impenil- 
ing  (Lloyd's  Scand.  Advent,  ii.  321). 

The  Hoopoe  is  an  occasional  visitor  to  this  coun 
try,  arriving  for  the  most  part,  in  the  autumn,  but 
instances  are  on  record  of  its  having  been  seen  in 
the  spring.  Col.  Hamilton  Smith  has  supposed 
that  there  are  two  Egyptian  species  of  the  genus 
Upupa,  from  the  fact  that  some  birds  remain  perma 
nently  resident  about  human  habitations  in  Egypt, 
while  others  migrate :  he  says  that  the  migratory 
species  is  eaten  in  Egypt,  but  that  the  stationary 
species  is  considered  inedible  (Kitto's  Cycl.  ait. 
'Lapwing').  There  is,  however,  but  one  species 
of  Egyptian  hoopoe  known  to  ornithologists,  viz. 
Upupa  Epops.  Some  of  these  birds  migrate  north 
wards  from  Egypt,  but  a  large  number  remain  all 
the  year  round ;  all,  however,  belong  to  the  same 
species.  The  hoopoe  is  about  the  size  of  the 
missel-thrush  (Turdus  viscivorus).  Its  crest  is  very 
elegant,  the  long  feathers  forming  it  are  each  01 
'.hem  tipped  with  black.  It  belongs  to  the  family 
Upupidae,  sub-order  Tenuirostres,  and  order  Pas- 
seres.  [W.  H.] 

LASAE'A  (Aao-ofa).  Four  or  five  years  ago 
it  would  have  been  impossible  to  give  any  informa 
tion  regarding  this  Cretan  city,  except  indeed  that 
it  might  be  presumed  (Conybeare  and  Howson, 
St.  Paul,  ii.  394,  2nd  ed.)  to  be  identical  with 
the  "  Lisia"  mentioned  in  the  Peutinger  Table 
as  16  miles  to  the  east  of  GORTYNA.  This  cor 
responds  sufficiently  with  what  is  said  in  Acts 
xxvii.  8  of  its  proximity  to  FAIR  HAVENS.  The 
whole  matter,  however,  has  been  recently  cleared  up. 
In  the  month  of  January,  1856,  a  yachting  party 
made  inquiries  at  Fair  Havens,  and  were  told  that 
the  name  Lasaea  was  still  given  to  some  ruins  a  few 
miles  to  the  eastward.  A  short  search  sufficed  to 
discover  these  ruins,  and  independent  testimony 
confirmed  the  name.  A  full  account  of  the  dis 
covery,  with  a  plan,  is  given  in  the  2nd  ed.  of 
Smith  s  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul,  A  pp. 
iii.  pp.  262,  263.  Captain  Spratt,  R.N.,  had  pre 
viously  observed  some  remains,  'which  probably 
represent  the  harbour  of  Lasaea  (see  pp.  80,  82 
245).  And  it  ought  to  be  noticed  that  in  the 
Descrizione  dell'  Isola  di  Candia,  a  Venetian  MS. 
of  the  16th  century,  as  published  by  Mr.  E.  Falkener 
in  the  Museum  of  Classical  Antiquities,  Sept.  1852 
(p.  287),  a  place  called  Lapsea,  with  a  "  temple  in 
ruins,"  and  "  other  vestiges  near  the  harbour,"  is 


B.  Tristram,  who  visited  Palestine  in  the  spring  ol 
1858,  says  of  the  Hoopoe  (Ibis,  i.  27)  :  "  The  Arabs 
have  a  superstitious  reverence  for  this  bird,  which 
they  believe  to  possess  marvellous  medicinal  qualities, 
and  call  it  '  the  Doctor.'  Its  head  is  an  indispensable 
ingredient  in  all  charms,  and  in  the  practice  of  witch 
craft." 

k  This  habit  of  inspecting  probably  first  suggested 
the  Greek  word  en-o^. 


LASHA 

D.entionfcd  as  being  close  to  Fair  Havens.  'Phis 
also  is  undoubtedly  St.  Luke's  Lasaea;  and  we  see 
how  needless  it  is  (with  Cramer,  Ancient  Greece, 
iii.  374,  and  the  Edinburgh  Review,  No.  civ.  176) 
to  resort  to  Lachmann's  reading,  "  Aliissa,"  or  to  the 
"Thalassa"  of  the  Vulgate.  [CRETE.]  [J.S.  H.] 


LA'SHA  (W,  i.  e.  Lesha  :  Acurd  :  Lsaa\  a 
place  noticed  in  Gen.  x.  19  only,  as  marking  the 
limit  of  the  country  of  the  Canaanites.  From  the 
order  in  which  the  names  occur,  combined  with  the 
expression  "  even  unto  Lasha,"  we  should  infer  that 
it  lay  somewhere  in  the  south-east  of  Palestine.  Its 
exact  position  cannot,  in  the  absence  of  any  subse 
quent  notice  of  it,  be  satisfactorily  ascertained,  and 
hence  we  can  neither  absolutely  accept  or  reject  the 
opinion  of  Jerome  and  other  writers,  who  identify 
it  with  Callirhoe,  a  spot  famous  for  hot  springs 
near  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  It  may 
indeed  be  observed,  in  corroboration  of  Jerome's  view, 
that  the  name  Lasha,  which  signifies,  according  to 
Geseuius  (  Thes.  p.  764),  "  a  fissure,"  is  strikingly 
appropriate  to  the  deep  chasm  of  the  Zerka  Main, 
through  which  the  watei-s  of  Callirhoe  find  an  out 
let.  to  the  sea  (Lynch's  Exped.  p.  370).  No  town, 
however,  is  known  to  have  existed  in  the  neighbour 
hood  of  the  springs,  unless  we  place  there  Machaerus, 
which  is  described  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  vii.  6,  §3) 
as  having  hot  springs  near  it.  That  there  was 
some  sort  of  a  settlement  at  Callirhoe  may  perhaps 
be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  springs  were 
visited  by  Herod  during  his  last  illness  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5)  ;  and  this  probability  is  supported 
by  the  discovery  of  tiles,  pottery,  and  coins  on  the 
spot.  But  no  traces  of  buildings  have  as  yet  been 
discovered  ;  and  the  valley  is  so  narrow  as  not  to 
offer  a  site  for  any  thing  like  a  town  (Irby  and 
Mangles  (ch.  viii.  June  8).  [W.  L.  B.] 

LASHA'RON  (fnB&,  t.  e.  LasshAron  :  LXX. 
omits  :  Saron  ;  but  in  the  Benedictine  text  Lassarori), 
one  of  the  Canaanite  towns  whose  kings  were  killed 
by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  18).  Some  difference  of  opinion 
has  been  expressed  as  to  whether  the  first  syllable 
is  an  integral  part  of  the  name  or  the  Hebrew  pos 
sessive  particle.  (See  Keil,  Josua,  ad  loc.)  But 
there  seems  to  be  no  warrant  for  supposing  the 
existence  of  a  particle  before  this  one  name,  which 
certainly  does  not  exist  before  either  of  the  other 
thirty  names  in  the  list.  Such  at  least  is  the  con 
clusion  of  Bochart  (Hieroz.  i.  ch.  31),  Reland  (Pal. 
871),  and  others,  a  conclusion  supported  by  the 
reading  of  the  Targum,*  and  the  Arabic  version, 
and  also  by  Jerome,  if  the  Benedictine  text  can  be 
relied  on.  The  opposite  conclusion  of  the  Vulgate, 
given  above,  is  adopted  by  Gesenius  (Thes.  642  6), 
but  not  on  very  clear  grounds,  his  chief  argument 
being  apparently  that,  as  the  name  of  a  town, 
Sharon  would  not  require  the  article  affixed,  which, 
as  that  of  a  district,  it  always  bears.  But  this 
appears  to  be  begging  the  question.  The  name  has 
vanish'id  from  both  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  unless  a  trace 
exists  in  the  'OQeKTij-ffapdic  of  the  Vat.  [G.] 

LAS'THENES  (Ao(r««V7jj  ;  cf.  At£-^axos),  an 
officer  who  stood  high  in  the  favour  of  Demetrius  II. 
Nicator.  He  is  described  as  "  cousin  "  (ffvyytviis, 
1  Mace.  xi.  31),  and  "father"  (1  Mace.  xi.  32; 
Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  3,  §9)  of  the  king.  Both  words  may 
le  taken  as  titles  of  high  nobility  (comp.  Grimm  on 


=  "  king  of  Ussharon. 


VOL.  II. 


LATTICE  fi'j 

1  Mace.  x.  89  ;  Diod.  xvii.  59  ;  Ges.  Thes.  s.  v.  3K, 
§4).  It  appears  from  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  4,  §3) 
that  he  was  a  Cretan,  to  whom  Demetrius  was 
indebted  for  a  large  body  of  mercenaries  (cf.  1  Mace. 
x.  67),  when  he  asserted  his  claim  to  the  Syrian 
throne.  The  service  which  he  thus  rendered  makes 
it  likely  (Vales,  ad  loc.)  that  he  was  the  powerful 
favourite  whose  evil  counsels  afterwards  issued  in 
the  ruin  of  his  master  (Diod.  Exc.  xxxii.  p.  592). 
But  there  is  not  the  slightest  ground  for  identifying 
him  with  the  nameless  Cnidian  to  whose  charge 
Demetrius  I.  committed  his  sons  (Just.  xxxv.  2). 

[B.  F.  W.] 

LATCHET,  the  thong  or  fastening  by  which 
the  sandal  was  attached  to  the  foo;.  The  English 
word  is  apparently  derived  from  the  A.  Saxon 
laeccan,  "  to  catch  "  or  "  fasten  "  (Old  Eng.  "  to 
latch"),  as  "hatchet"  from  haccan,  "  to  hack  ;" 
whence  "  latch,"  the  fastening  of  a  door,  "  lock," 
and  others.  The  Fr.  lacet  approaches  most  nearly 
in  form  to  the  present  word.  The  Hebrew  'ifl'TE', 
seroc,  is  derived  from  a  root  which  signifies  "  to 
twist."  It  occurs  in  the  proverbial  expression  in 
Gen.  xiv.  23,  and  is  there  used  to  denote  some 
thing  trivial  or  worthless.  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v. 

PI)  compares  the  Lat.  hilum  =filum,  and  quotes 
two  Arabic  proverbs  from  the  Hamasa  and  the 
Kamus,  in  which  a  corresponding  word  is  simi 
larly  employed.  In  the  poetical  figure  in  Is.  v. 
27  the  "  latchet "  occupies  the  same  position  with 
regard  to  the  shoes  as  the  girdle  to  the  long  flow 
ing  Oriental  dress,  and  was  as  essential  'to  the 
comfort  and  expedition  of  the  traveller.  Another 
semi-proverbial  expression  in  Luke  iii.  16  points  to 
the  fact  that  the  office  of  bearing  and  unfastening 
the  shoes  of  great  personages  fell  to  the  meanest 
slaves.  [SHOE.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

•LATIN,  the  language  spoken  by  the  Romans, 
is  mentioned  only  in  John  xix.  20,  and  Luke  xxiii. 
38 ;  the  former  passage  being  a  translation  of 
'Punaiffrl,  "  in  the  Roman  tongue,"  i.  e.  Liaiin  ;  and 
the  latter  pf  the  adjective  'Pcojuoi'/cois 


LATTICE.  The  rendering  in  A.  V.  of  three 
Hebrew  words. 

1.  UJB'K,  eshiidb,  which  occurs  but  twice,  Judg. 
v.  28,  and  1'rov.  vii.  6,  and  in  the  latter  passage  is 
translated  '-casement"  in  the  A.  V.  In  both  in 
stances  it  stands  in  parallelism  with  "  window." 
Gesenius,  following  Schultens,  connects  it  with  an 
Arab,  root,  which  signifies  "  to  be  cool,"  esp.  of  the 
day,  and  thus  attaches  to  eshndb  the  signification 
of  a  "  latticed  window,"  through  which  the  cool 
breezes  enter  the  house,  such  as  is  seen  in  the  illus 
trations  to  the  article  HOUSE  (vol.  i.  p.  837).  But 
Fuerst  and  Meier  attach  to  the  root  the  idea  of 
twisting,  twining,  and  in  this  case  the  word  will 
be  synonymous  with  the  two  following,  which  are 
rendered  by  the  same  English  term,  "  lattice,"  in 
the  A.  V.  The  LXX.  in  Judg.  v.  28  render  eshndb 
by  To^utAv,  which  is  explained  by  Jerome  (ad  Ez. 
xl.  16)  to  mean  a  small  arrow-shaped  aperture, 
narrow  on  the  outside,  but  widening  inwards,  by 
which  light  is  admitted.  Others  conjecture  that  it 
denoted  a  narrow  window,  like  those  in  the  castles 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  from  which  the  archers  could 
discharge  their  arrows  in  safety.  It  would  then 
correspond  with  the  "  shot-window "  of  Chaucer 
("  Miller's  Tale  "),  according  to  the  interpretation 
whicli  some  give  to  that  obscure  phrase. 

F 


<)6  LAVKK 

2.  D*3"in,  kh&raccim  (Cant,  ii.fl),  rw  apparently 
synonymous  with  the  preceding,  though  a  won!  o 
later  date.     The  Targum  gives  it,  in  the  Chalde 
form,  as  the  equivalent  of  eshndb  in  Prov.  vii.  6 
Kucrst  (Cone.  s.  v.),  and  Michaelis   before   him 
assign  to  the  root  the  same  notion  of  twisting  o 
weaving,  so  that  khdraccim  denotes  a  network  o 
jalousie  before  a  window. 

3.  HDIK',    sebdcdJi,    is   simply   "  a   network 
placed  before  a  window  or  balcony.     Perhaps  th 
network  through  which  Ahaziah  fell  and  receive* 
his  mortal  injury  was  on  the  parapet  of  his  palac 
(-2  K.i.2).  [HousK,  vol.i.8386,839«.]    The  roo 
involves  the  same  idea  of  weaving  or  twisting  as  ii 
the  case  of  the  two  preceding  words.     Sebdcdh  i 
used  for  "  a  net"  in  Job  xviii.  8,  as  well  as  for  th 
network  ornaments  on  the  capitals  of  the  columns 
:n  the  Temple.     [WINDOW.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

LAVER.*  ].  In  the  Tabernacle,  a  vessel  o 
brass  containing  water  for  the  priests  to  wash  thei 
hands  and  feet  before  offering  sacrifice.  It  stooi 
in  the  court  between  the  altar  and  the  door  of  th 
Tabernacle,  and,  according  to  Jewish  tradition,  i 
little  to  the  south  (Ex.  xxx.  19,  21  ;  Reland,  Ant 
Hebr.  pt.  i.  ch.  iv.  9  ;  Clemens,  de  Labro  Aeneo,  iii 
9  ;  ap.  Ugolini,  Thes.  vol.  six.).  It  rested  on  a 
basis,b  t.  e.  a  foot,  though  by  some  explained  to  be  a 
cover  (Clemens,  ibid.  c.  iii.  5),  of  copper  or  brass 
which,  as  well  as  the  laver  itself,  was  made  from  the 
mirrors  c  of  the  women  who  assembled  a  at  the  doo: 
of  the  Tabernacle-court  (Ex.  xxxviii.  8).  The  notion 
held  by  some  Jewish  writer,  and  reproduced  by  Fran 
ziu<s,  Biihr  (Symb.  i.  484),  and  others,  founded  on  thi 
omission  of  the  word  "  women,"  that  the  brazen 
vessel,  being  polished,  served  as  a  mirror  to  th 
I'vites,  is  untenable.9 

The  form  of  the  laver  is  not  specified,  but  may 
be  assumed  to  have  been  circular.  Like  the  othei 
vessels  belonging  to  the  Tabernacle,  it  was,  together 
with  its  "  foot,"  consecrated  with  oil  (Lev.  viii.  10 
1 1").  No  mention  is  found  in  the  Hebrew  texl 
of  the  mode  of  transporting  it,  but  in  Num.  iv. 
14  a  passage  is  added  in  the  LXX.,  agreeing  with 
the  Samaritan  Pent,  and  the  Samaritan  version, 
which  prescribes  the  method  of  packing  it,  viz.  in 
a  purple  cloth,  protected  by  a  skin  covering.  As 
no  mention  is  made  of  any  vessel  for  washing  the 
flesh  of  the  sacrificial  victims,  it  is  possible  that  the 


LAVER 

I  laver  may  have  been  us«d  for  this  purpos*  also 
(Keland,  Ant.  Hebr.  i.  iv.  9). 

2.  In  Solomon's  Temple,  besides  the  great  molten 
sea,  there  were  ten  lavers f  of  brass,  raised  on 
bases «  (1  K.  vii.  27,  39),  five  on  the  N.  and  S. 
sides  respectively  of  the  court  of  the  priests.  Each 
laver  contained  40  of  the  measures  called  "  bath  " 
(x<f«>  LXX.  and  Josephus).  They  were  used  for 
washing  the  animals  to  be  offered  in  burntH>fferings 
(2  Chr.  iv.  6  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  3,  §6).  The  bases 
were  mutilated  by  Ahaz,  and  carried  away  as  plunder, 
or  at  least  what  remained  of  them,  by  Nebuzar-adan, 
after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xvi.  17  ;  xxv. 
13).  No  mention  is  made  in  Scripture  of  the  exist 
ence  of  the  lavers  in  the  second  Temple,  nor  by 
Josephus  in  his  account  of  Herod's  restoration 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  5).  [MOLTEN  SEA.] 

The  dimensions  of  the  bases  with  the  lavers,  as 
given  in  the  Hebrew  text,  are  4  cubits  in  length 
and  breadth,  and  3  in  height.  The  LXX.  gives 

4  X  4  X  6  in  height.    Josephus,  who  appears  to  have 
followed  a  var.  reading  of  the  LXX.,  makes  them 

5  in  length,  4  in  width,  and  6  in  height  (1  K.  vii. 
28;  Thenius,  ad  loc.;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  8,  §3) 
There  were  to  each  4  wheels  of  1^  cubit  in  diameter, 
with  spokes,  &c..  all  cist  in  one  piece.     The  prin 
cipal  parts  requiring  explanation  may  be  thus  enu 
merated  : — (a)  "  Borders,"11  probably  panels.     Ge- 
senius  (  Thes.  938)  supposes  these  to  have  been  orna 
ments  like  square  shields  with  engraved  work,    (b) 
"  Ledges,"  '  joints  in  comers  of  bases  or  fillets  cover 
ing  joints.*    (c)  "  Additions,"  »  probably  festoons  ; 
Lightfbot  translates,  "marginesobliquedescendentes." 
(d)  Plates,0  probably  axles,  cast  in  the  same  piece  aa 
the  wheels,     (e)  Undersettei-s,0  either  the  naves  of 
the  wheels,  or  a  sort  of  handles  for  moving  the  whole 
machine ;  Lightfoot  renders  "  columnae  fulcientes 
lavacrum."  (/)  Naves.P   (g)  Spokes.q   (A)  Felloes.' 
(i)  Chapiter,*1  perhaps  the  rim  of  the  circular  open 
ing  ("  mouth,"  ver.  31)  in  the  convex  top.     (£)  A 
round  compass,'  perhaps  the  convex  roof  of  the  base. 
To  these  parts  Josephus  adds  chains,  which  may 
probably  be  the   festoons   above  mentioned  (Ant. 
viii.  3,  §6). 

Thenius,  with  whom  Keil  in  the  main  agrees, 
both  of  them  differing  from  Ewald,  in  a  minute 
examination  of  the  whole  passage,  but  not  without 
some  transposition,  chiefly  of  the  greater  part  of 
ver.  31  to  ver.  35,  deduces  a  construction  of  the 


•  "li'3  and  "1»3,  from  1-13,  "  to  boil,"  Ges.  p.  C71 : 
Xovr>7p :  labrum. 

b  |3,  0a<r«,  basis,  and  so  also  A.  V. 
°  rtftOD.  KaToirrpa,  specula. 
d  LXX.  riav  in)<rrev<rcurS>v. 

•  See  the  parallel  passage,  1  Sam.  ii.  22,  where 
D*E>3>  yvvaiituv,  is  inserted ;  Gesenius  on  the  prep. 
3,  p.  172  ;  Keil,  Sibl.Arch.  pt.  i.  c.  1,  §19  ;  Glassius, 
Phil.  Sacr.  i.  p.  580,   ed.  Dathe ;   Lightfoot,  Descr. 
Tempi,  c.  37, 1 ;  Jennings,  Jew.  Antiq.  p.  $02  ;  Knobel, 
Kurtzg.  Exey.  Handb.  Exod.  xxxviii.  Philo,  Tit.  Mos. 
iii.  15,  ii.  156,  ed.  Mangey. 

'  rvn»3. 

*  ntabo,  pi.  of  rubp  or  nitoo,  from  pa, 

"stand  upright,"  Gen.  pp.  665,  670  ;  pexiavuO;  bases. 

vyifAei'ovuuiTa  ;  scu>,pturae. 

xoneva,  junchirae,  from  S?^.  "  out 
in  notches,"  Ges.  p.  1411. 


^  Josephus    says  :    KIOCUJXOI  rtrpayiavoi,  ra  ir\evpa 
TTJS  0a<recof  «f  exarepov  juc'povf  iv  avrots  ixovrtt  efjjp- 


. 
niv,  from  HI?,  "twine,"  GCB.  p.  746; 

'ora  ;  whence  Thenius  suggests  AWJXH  or  Xupa  u  the 
true  reading. 


vpoexovra,   axes,   Ges.  972  ;    Lightfoot, 
massae  aereae  tetragonae. 

,  u^Cai,  humeruli,  Ges.  724. 
,  modioli  ;  and 
'H,    radii;    the   two   words   combined    it 

XX.  i  irpaynaTtia,  Ges.  p.  536;    Schleusner,  Ley. 
'.  T.,  wpayp. 

'  0*33,  vuni,  canthi,  Ges.  p.  256. 

,  K«<f>aAis.  stimmitas,  Ges.  p.  725. 
bjy,   Ges.  935,   985  : 

.tlln/litlis. 


LAW 

bases  and  layers,  v/hich  -seems  fairly  to  reconcile 
tho  very  great  difficulties  of  the  subject.  Following 
chiefly  his  description,  we  may  suppose  the  base  to 
have  been  a  quadrangular  hollow  frame,  connected 
at  its  corners  by  pilastere  (ledges),  and  moved  by 
4  wheels  or  high  castors,  one  at  each  comer,  with 
handles  ('plates)  for  drawing  the  machine.  The 
sides  of  this  frame  were  divided  into  3  vertical 
panels  or  compartments  (borders),  ornamented  with 
bas-reliefs  of  lions,  oxen,  and  cherubim.  The  top 
of  the  base  was  convex,  with  a  circular  opening 
of  1|  cubit  diameter.  The  top  itself  was  covered 
with  engraved  cherubim,  lions,  and  palm-trees  or 
branches.  The  height  of  the  convex  top  from  the 
tipper  plane  of  the  base  was  ^  cubit,  and  the  space 
between  this  top  and  the  lower  surface  of  the  laver 
J  cubit  more.  The  laver  rested  on  supports  (under- 
setters)  rising  from  the  4  corners  of  the  base.  Each 
laver  contained  40  "baths,"  or  about  300  gallons.  Its 
dimensions,  therefore,  to  be  in  proportion  to  7  feet 
(4  cubits,  ver.  38)  in  diameter,  must  have  been 
about  30  inches  in  depth.  The  great  height  of  the 
whole  machine  was  doubtless  in  order  to  bring  it 
near  the  height  of  the  altar  (2  Chr.  iv.  1 ;  Arias 
Montanus.  de  Tcmpli  Fabrica,  Crit.  Sacr.  viii.  626  ; 
Ughtfoot,  Descr.  Templi,  c.  xxxvii.  3,  vol.  i.  646; 
Thenius,  in  Kurzg.  Exey.  Handb.  on  1  K.  vii.,  and 
App.  p.  41;  Ewald,  Geschichte,  iii.  313;  Keil, 
Handb.  der  Bibl.  Arch.  §24,  p.  128,  129  ;  Winer, 
s.  v.  Hcmdfass).  [H.  W.  P.] 


c— 


Conjectural  Diagram  nf  the  1,-ivir.    (After  Tbcniun.) 

a,  bartlera;  i,  ledge*;  r,  additions;  </,  plate*  e,  undcncttcii 
/,  cavM  ;  .7,  ipokc* ;  It,  Iclloo  ;  t,  chapiter  ;  k,  roun 
compare. 


LAW  (m'lfl  :  Ncfyios).  The  word  is  properly 
used,  in  Scripture  as  elsewhere,  to  express  a  definite 
commandment  laid  down  by  any  recognised  autho 
rity.  The  commandment  may  be  general,  or  (as 


LAW  OF  MOSES  fi? 

in  Lev.  vi.  9,  14,  &c.,  "the  law  jf  the  burnt- 
ortering,"  &c.)  particular  in  its  bearing;  the  autho 
rity  either  human  or  divine.  But  when  the  word 
is  used  with  the  article,  and  without  any  words  of 
limitation,  it  refrvs  to  the  expressed  will  of  God, 
and,  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  to  the  Mosaic  Law, 
?r  *x>  the  I'entateuch,  of  which  it  forms  the  chief 
portion. 

The  Hpbiv.v  word  (derived  from  the  root  JIT 
"  to  point  out,"  and  so  "  to  direct  and  lead  ")  lays 
more  stress  on  its  moral  authority,  as  teaching  the 
truth,  and  guiding  in  the  right  way;  the  Greek 
N<fyios  (from  vd/mw,  "to  assign  or  appoint"),  on  ite 
constraining  power,  as  imposed  and  enforced  by  a 
recognised  authority.  But  in  either  case  it  is  a 
commandment  proceeding  from  without,  and  dis 
tinguished  from  the  free  action  of  its  subjects, 
although  not  necessarily  opposed  thereto. 

The  sense  of  the  word,  however,  extends  its  scope, 
and  assumes  a  more  abstract  character  in  the 
writings  of  St.  Paul.  NdVios,  when  used  by  him 
with  the  article,  still  refers  in  general  to  the  Law 
of  Moses  ;  but  when  used  without  the  article,  so  as 
to  embrace  any  manifestation  of  "Law,"  it  includes 
all  powers  which  act  on  the  will  of  man  by  com 
pulsion,  or  by  the  pressure  of  external  motives, 
whether  their  commands  be  or  be  not  expressed  in 
definite  forms.  This  is  seen  in  the  constant  oppo 
sition  of  epya  fSftov  ("  works  done  under  the  con 
straint  of  law ")  to  faith,  or  "  works  of  faith," 
that  is,  works  done  freely  by  the  internal  influence 
of  faith.  A  still  more  remarkable  use  of  the  word 
is  found  in  Rom.  vii.  23,  where  the  power  of  evil 
over  the  will,  arising  from  the  corruption  of  man,  is 
spoken  of  MS  a  "  law  of  sin,"  that  is,  an  unnatural 
tyranny  proceeding  from  an  evil  power  without. 

The  occasional  use  of  the  word  "  law "  (as  in 
Rom.  iii.  27,  "  law  of  faith ;"  in  vii.  23,  "  law  of 
my  mind,"  rov  vo6s;  in  viii.  2,  "  law  of  the  spirit 
of  life ;"  and  in  Jam.  i.  25,  ii.  12,  "  a  perfect  law. 
the  law  of  liberty  ")  to  denote  an  internal  principle 
of  action,  does  not  really  militate  against  the  gene 
ral  rule.  For  in  each  case  it  will  be  seen,  that  suc'ii 
principle  is  spoken  of  in  contrast  with  some  formal 
law,  and  the  word  "law"  is  consequently  applied 
to  it  "  improperly,"  in  order  to  mark  this  oppo 
sition,  the  qualifying  words  which  follow  guarding 
against  any  danger  of  misapprehension  of  its  real 
character 

It  should  also  be  noticed  that  the  title  "  the 
Law  "  is  occasionally  used  loosely  to  refer  to  the 
whole  of  the  Old  Testament  (as  in  John  x.  34, 
referring  to  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6  ;  in  John  xv.  25,  referring 
to  Ps.  xxxv.  19;  and  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  21,  referring  to 
Is.  xxviii.  11,  12).  This  usage  is  probably  due,  not 
only  to  desire  of  brevity  and  to  the  natural  prominence 
of  the  Pentateuch,  but  also  to  the  predominance  ic 
the  older  Covenant  (when  considered  separately  from 
the  New,  for  which  it  was  the  preparation)  of  <;B 
external  and  legal  character.  [A .  B.  | 

LAW  OF  MOSES.  It  will  be  the  object  of 
this  article,  not  to  enter  into  the  history  of  the 
giving  of  the  Law  (for  which  see  MOSES,  THE 
EXODUS,  &c.),  nor  to  examine  the  authorship  of 
the  books  in  which  it  is  contained  (for  which  see 
PENTATEUCH,  EXODUS,  &c.),  nor  to  dwell  on  par 
ticular  ordinances,  which  are  treated  cf  under  their 
respective  heads ;  but  to  give  a  brief  analysis  of  its 
substance,  to  point  out  its  main  principles;  and  to 
explain  the  positron  which  it  occupies  in  the  pro 
gress  of  Divine  Revelation.  In  order  to  do  this 

F  2 


08  LAW  OF  MOSES 

tike  more  cleai  ly,  it  seems  best  to  speak  of  the  Law, 
1st,  in  relation  to  the  past;  2ndly,  in  its  own 
intrinsic  character ;  and,  Srdly,  in  its  relation  to  the 
future. 

(I.)  (a.)  In  reference  to  the  past,  it  is  all-import- 
ant,  for  the  proper  understanding  of  the  Law,  to 
remember  its  entire  dependence  on  the  Abrahamic 
Covenant,  and  its  adaptation  thereto  (see  Gal.  iii. 
17-24).  That  covenant  had  a  twofold  character. 
It  contained  the  "  spiritual  promise  "  of  the  Mes 
siah,  which  was  given  to  the  Jews  as  representa 
tives  of  the  whole  human  i-ace,  and  as  guardians  of 
a  treasure  in  which  "  all  families  of  the  earth 
should  be  blessed."  This  would  prepare  the  Jewish 
nation  to  be  the  centre  of  the  unity  of  all  mankind. 
But  it  contained  also  the  temporal  promises  sub 
sidiary  to  the  former,  and  needed  in  order  to  pre 
serve  intact  the  nation,  through  which  the  race  of 
man  should  be  educated  and  prepared  for  the 
coming  of  the  Redeemer.  These  promises  were 
special,  given  distinctively  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation, 
and,  so  far  as  they  were  considered  in  themselves, 
calculated  to  separate  them  from  other  nations  of 
the  earth.  It  follows  that  there  should  be  in  the 
Law  a  corresponding  duality  of  nature.  There 
would  be  much  in  it  of  the  latter  character,  much 
(that  is)  peculiar  to  the  Jews,  local,  special,  and 
transitory ;  but  the  fundamental  principles  on 
which  it  was  based  must  be  universal,  because 
expressing  the  will  of  an  unchanging  God,  and 
springing  from  relations  to  Him,  inherent  in 
human  nature,  and  therefore  perpetual  and  uni 
versal  in  their  application. 

(6.)  The  nature  of  this  relation  of  the  Law  to 
the  promise  is  clearly  pointed  out.  The  belief  in 
God  as  the  Redeemer  of  man,  and  the  hope  of  His 
manifestation  as  such  in  the  person  of  the  Messiah, 
involved  the  belief  that  the  Spiritual  Power  must 
be  superior  to  all  carnal  obstructions,  and  that 
there  was  in  man  a  spiritual  element  which  could 
rule  his  life  by  communion  with  a  Spirit  from 
above.  But  it  involved  also  the  idea  of  an  antago 
nistic  Power  of  Evil,  from  which  man  was  to  be 
redeemed,  existing  in  each  individual,  and  existing 
also  in  the  world  at  large.  The  promise  was  the 
witness  of  the  one  truth,  the  Law  was  the  de 
claration  of  the  other.  It  was  "  added  because  of 
transgressions."  In  the  individual,  it  stood  between 
his  better  and  his  worser  self;  in  the  world,  between 
the  Jewish  nation,  as  the  witness  of  the  spiritual 
promise,  and  the  heathendom,  which  groaned  under 
the  power  of  the  flesh.  It  was  intended,  by  the 
gift  of  guidance  and  the  pressure  of  motives,  to 
strengthen  the  weakness  of  good,  while  it  curbed 
directly  the  power  of  evil.  It  followed  inevitably, 
that,  in  the  individual,  it  assumed  somewhat  of  a 
coercive,  and,  as  between  Israel  and  the  world, 
somewhat  of  an  antagonistic  and  isolating  cha 
racter;  and  hence  that,  viewed  without  reference 
to  the  promise  (as  it  was  viewed  by  the  later 
Jews),  it  might  actually  become  a  hindrance  to  the 
true  revelation  of  God,  and  to  the  mission  for 
which  the  nation  had  been  made  a  "  chosen  people." 

(c.)  Nor  is  it  less  essential  to  remark  the  period 
of  the  history  at  which  it  was  given.  It  marked 
and  determined  the  transition  of  Israel  from  the 
condition  of  a  tribe  to  that  of  a  nation,  and  its 
definite  assumption  of  a  distinct  position  and  office 
in  the  history  of  the  world.  It  is  on  no  unreal 
metaphor  that  we  base  the  well-known  analogy 
between  the  stages  of  individual  life  and  those  of 
national  or  universal  existence.  la  Israel  the  pa- 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

triarchal  time  was  that  of  childhood,  ruled  chiefly 
through  the  affections  and  the  power  of  natural 
relationship,  with  rules  few,  simple,  and  unsys 
tematic.  The  national  period  was  that  of  youth. 
in  which  this  indirect  teaching  and  influence  give? 
place  to  definite  assertions  of  right  and  responsi 
bility,  and  to  a  system  of  distinct  commandments, 
needed  to  control  its  vigorous  and  impulsive  action. 
The  fifty  days  of  their  wandering  alone  with  <io.| 
in  the  silence  of  the  wilderness  represent  that 
awakening  to  the  difficulty,  the  responsibility,  and 
the  nobleness  of  life,  which  marks  the  "putting 
away  of  childish  things."  The  Law  is  the  sign  and 
the  seal  of  such  an  awakening. 

(d.)  Yet,  though  new  in  its  general  conception, 
it  was  probably  not  wholly  new  in  its  materials. 
Neither  in  His  material  nor  His  spiritual  providence 
does  God  proceed  per  saltum.  There  must  neces 
sarily  have  been,  before  the  Law,  commandments 
and  revelations  of  a  fragmentary  character,  under 
which  Israel  had  hitherto  grown  up.  Indications 
of  such  are  easily  found,  both  of  a  ceremonial  and 
moral  nature;  as,  for  example,  in  the  penalties 
against  murder,  adultery,  and  fornication  (Gen.  ix. 
6,  xxxviii.  24),  in  the  existence  of  the  Levirate  law 
(Gen.  xxxviii.  8),  in  the  distinction  of  clean  and 
unclean  animals  (Gen.  viii.  20),  and  probably  in 
the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  xvi.  23,  27-29). 
But,  even  without  such  indications,  our  knowledge 
of  the  existence  of  Israel  as  a  distinct  community 
in  Egypt  would  necessitate  the  conclusion,  that  it 
must  have  been  guided  by  some  laws  of  its  own, 
growing  out  of  the  old  patriarchal  customs,  which 
would  be  preserved  with  Oriental  tenacity,  and 
gradually  becoming  methodised  by  the  progress  of 
circumstances.  Nor  would  it  be  possible  for  th« 
Israelites  to  be  in  contact  with  an  elaborate  system 
of  ritual  and  law,  such  as  that  which  existed  ii; 
Egypt,  without  being  influenced  by  its  general 
principles,  and,  in  less  degree,  by  its  minuter  de 
tails.  As  they  approached  nearer  to  the  condition 
of  a  nation  they  would  be  more  and  more  likely  to 
modify  their  patriarchal  customs  by  the  adoption 
from  Egypt  of  laws  which  were  fittal  for  national 
existence.  This  being  so,  it  is  hardly  conceivable 
that  the  Mosaic  legislation  should  have  embodied 
none  of  these  earlier  materials.  It  is  clear,  even 
to  human  wisdom,  that  the  only  constitution,  which 
can  be  efficient  and  permanent,  is  one  which  has 
grown  up  slowly,  and  so  been  assimilated  to  the 
character  of  a  people.  It  is  the  peculiar  mark  of 
legislative  genius  to  mould  by  fundamental  prin 
ciples,  and  animate  by  a  higher  inspiration,  ma 
terials  previously  existing  in  a  cruder  state.  Th« 
necessity  for  this  lies  in  the  nature,  not  of  the  legis 
lator,  but  of  the  subjects ;  and  the  argument  there 
fore  is  but  strengthened  by  the  acknowledgment  in 
the  case  of  Moses  of  a  divine  and  special  inspira 
tion.  So  far  therefore  as  they  were  consistent  with 
the  objects  of  the  Jewish  law,  the  customs  of 
Palestine  and  the  laws  of  Egypt  would  doubtless  be 
traceable  in  the  Mosaic  system. 

(e.)  In  close  connexion  with  and  almost  in  con 
sequence  of  this  reference  to  antiquity  we  find  an 
accommodation  of  the  Law  to  the  temper  and  cir 
cumstances  of  the  Israelites,  to  which  our  Lord 
refers  in  the  case  of  divorce  (Matt.  xix.  7,  8)  ae 
necessarily  interfering  with  its  absolute  perfection. 
In  many  cases  it  rather  should  be  said  to  guide  and 
modify  existing  usages  than  actually  to  sanction 
them  ;  and  the  ignorance  of  their  existence  may 
lead  to  a  conception  of  its  i  nlin:inct'S  not  only 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

erroneous,  but  actually  the  reverse  of  the  truth. 
Thus  the  punishment  of  filial  disobedience  appears 
severe  (Deut.  xxi.  18-21);  yet  when  we  refer  to 
the  extent  of  parental  authority  in  a  patriarchal 
system,  or  (as  at  Rome)  in  the  earlier  periods  of 
national  existence,  it  appears  more  like  a  limitation 
of  absolute  parental  authority  by  an  appeal  to  the 
judgment  of  the  community.  The  Levirate  Law 
again  appears  (see  Mich.  Mos.  Recht,  bk.  iii.  ch.  6, 
art.  98)  to  have  existed  in  a  far  more  general  form 
in  the  early  Asiatic  peoples,  and  to  have  been  rather 
limited  than  favoured  by  Moses.  The  law  of  the 
Avenger  of  blood  is  a  similar  instance  of  merciful 
limitation  and  distinction  in  the  exercise  of  an 
immemorial  usage,  probably  not  without  its  value 
and  meaning,  and  certainly  too  deep-seated  to  admit 
of  any  but  gradual  extinction.  Nor  is  it  less 
noticeable  that  the  degree  of  prominence,  given  to 
each  part  of  the  Mosaic  system,  has  a  similar  re 
ference  to  the  period  at  which  the  nation  had 
arrived.  The  ceremonial  portion  is  marked  out 
distinctly  and  with  elaboration ;  the  moral  and 
criminal  law  is  clearly  and  sternly  decisive ;  even 
the  civil  law,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  individuals,  is 
systematic :  because  all  these  were  called  for  by  the 
past  growth  of  the  nation,  and  needed  in  order  to 
settle  and  develope  its  resources.  But  the  political 
and  constitutional  law  is  comparatively  imperfect ; 
a  few  leading  principles  are  laid  down,  to  be  de 
veloped  hereafter;  but  the  law  is  directed  rather 
to  sanction  the  various  powers  of  the  state,  than  to 
define  and  balance  their  operations.  Thus  the  ex 
isting  authorities  of  a  patriarchal  nature  in  each 
tribe  and  family  are  recognised ;  while  side  by  side 
with  them  is  established  the  priestly  and  Levitical 
power,  which  was  to  supersede  them  entirely  in 
sacerdotal,  and  partly  also  in  judicial  functions. 
The  supreme  civil  power  of  a  "  Judge,"  or  (here 
after)  a  King,  is  recognised  distinctly,  although 
only  in  general  terms,  indicating  a  sovereign  and 
summary  jurisdiction  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20) ;  and  the 
prophetic  office,  in  its  political  as  well  as  its  moral 
aspect,  is  spoken  of  still  more  vaguely  as  future 
(Deut.  xviii.  15-22).  These  powers,  being  recog 
nised,  are  left,  within  due  limits,  to  work  out  the 
political  system  of  Israel,  and  to  ascertain  by  ex 
perience  their  proper  spheres  of  exercise.  On  a 
careful  understanding  of  this  adaptation  of  the  Law 
to  the  national  growth  and  character  of  the  Jews 
(and  of  a  somewhat  similar  adaptation  to  their 
climate  and  physical  circumstances)  depends  the 
correct  appreciation  of  its  nature,  and  the  power  of 
distinguishing  in  it  what  is  local  and  temporary 
from  that  which  is  universal. 

(/.)  In  close  connexion  with  this  subject  we 
observe  also  the  gradual  process  by  which  the  Law 
was  revealed  to  the  Israelites.  In  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.,  in 
direct  connexion  with  the  revelation  from  Mount 
Sinai,  that  which  may  be  called  the  rough  outline 
of  the  Mosaic  Law  is  given  by  God,  solemnly  re 
corded  by  Moses,  and  accepted  by  the  people.  In 
Ex.  xxv.-xxxi.  there  is  a  similar  outline  of  the 
Mosaic  ceremonial.  On  the  basis  of  these  it  m;iy 
be  conceived  that  the  fabric  of  the  Mosaic  system 
gradually  grew  up  under  the  requirements  of  the 
time.  In  certain  cases  indeed  (as  e.  g.  in  Lev.  x. 
1,  2,  compared  with  8-1 1  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  1 1-16  ;  Num. 
ix.  6-12;  xv.  32-41;  xxvii.  1-11  compared  with 
xxxvi.  1-12)  we  actually  see  how  general  rules, 
civil,  criminal,  and  ceremonial,  originated  in  special 
circumstances ;  and  the  unconnected  nature  of  the 
records  of  laws  in  the  earlier  books  suggests  the 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


6S 


idea  that  this  method  of  legislation  extended  to 
many  other  cases. 

The  first  revelation  of  the  Law  in  anything  like 
a  perfect  form  is  found  in  the  book  of  Deuteronomy, 
at  a  period  when  the  people,  educated  to  freedom 
and  national  responsibility,  were  prepared  to  re 
ceive  it,  and  carry  it  with  them  to  the  land  which 
was  now  prepared  for  them.  It  is  distinguished 
by  its  systematic  character  and  its  reference  to  first 
principles ;  for  probably  even  by  Moses  himself,  cer 
tainly  by  the  people,  the  Law  had  not  before  this 
been  recognised  in  all  its  essential  characteristics  ( 
and  to  it  we  naturally  refer  in  attempting  to  ana 
lyze  its  various  parts.  [DEUTERONOMY.]  Yet  even 
then  the  revelation  was  not  final ;  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  prophets  to  amend  and  explain  it  in  special 
points  (as  in  the  well-known  example  in  Ez.  xviii.), 
and  to  bring  out  more  clearly  its  great  principles, 
as  distinguished  from  the  external  rules  in  which  they 
were  embodied  ;  for  in  this  way,  as  in  others,  they 
prepared  the  way  of  Him,  who  "came  to  fulfil" 
(7r\Tjpc5<rai)  the  Law  of  old  time. 

The  relation,  then,  of  the  Law  to  the  Covenant, 
its  accommodation  to  the  time  and  circumstances 
of  its  promulgation,  its  adaptation  of  old  materials, 
and  its  gradual  development,  are  the  chief  points  to 
be  noticed  under  the  first  head. 

(II.)  In  examining  the  nature  of  the  Law  >n 
itself,  it  is  customary  to  divide  it  into  the  Moral, 
Political,  and  Ceremonial.  But  this  division,  al 
though  valuable,  if  considered  as  a  distinction  merely 
subjective  (as  enabling  us,  that  is,  to  conceive  the 
objects  of  Law,  dealing  as  it  does  with  man  in  his 
social,  political,  and  religious  capacity),  is  wholly 
imaginary,  if  regarded  as  an  objective  separation  of 
various  classes  of-  Laws.  Any  single  ordinance 
might  have  at  once  a  moral,  a  ceremonial,  and  a 
political  bearing ;  and  in  fact,  although  in  parti 
cular  eases  one  or  other  of  these  aspects  predomi 
nated,  yet  the  whole  principle  of  the  Mosaic  insti 
tutions  is  to  obliterate  any  such  supposed  separation 
of  laws,  and  refer  all  to  first  principles,  depending 
on  the  Will  of  God  and  the  nature  of  man. 

In  giving  an  analysis  of  the  substance  of  the  Law. 
it  will  probably  be  better  to  treat  it,  as  any  othei 
system  of  laws  is  usually  treated,  by  dividing  it 
into — (1)  Laws  Civil;  (2)  Laws  Criminal;  (3) 
Laws  Judicial  and  Constitutional ;  (4)  Laws  Eccle 
siastical  and  Ceremonial. 

(I.)  LAWS  CIVIL. 

(A)  OF  PERSONS. 

(a)  FATHER  AND  SON. 

The  power  of  a  Father  to  be  held  sacred  ;  curs 
ing,  or  smiting  (Ex.  xxi.  15,  17  ;  Lev.  xx.  9),  or 
stubborn  and  wilful  disobedience  to  be  considered 
capital  crimes.  But  uncontrolled  power  of  life  and 
death  was  apparently  refused  to  the  lather,  and  vested 
only  in  the  congregation  (Deut.  xxi.  18-21). 

Right  of  the  first-born  to  a  double  portior.  of  the 
inheritance  not  to  be  set  aside  by  partiality  (Deut. 
xxi.  15-17)." 

Inheritance  by  Daughters  to  be  allowed  in  default 
of  sons,  provided  (Num.  xxvii.  6-8,  comp.  xxxvi.) 
that  heiresses  married  in  their  own  tribe. 

Daughters  unmarried  to  be  entirely  dependent 
on  their  father  (Num.  xxx.  3-5). 


•  For  an  example  of  the  authority  of  the  first-born 
see  1  Sam.  xx.  29  ("my  brother,  he  hath  commanded 
me  to  be  there"). 


70 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


(6)  HUSBAND  AND  WIFE. 

The  power  of  a  Husband  to  be  so  great  that  a 
wife  could  never  be  sui  juris,  or  enter  independently 
into  any  engagement,  even  before  God  (Num.  xxx. 
6-15).  A  widow  or  divorced  wife  became  inde 
pendent,  and  did  not  again  fall  under  her  father's 
power  (ver.  9). 

Divorce  (for  uncleannsss)  allowed,  but  to  be 
formal  and  irrevocable  (Deut.  xxiv.  1-4). 

Marriage  within  certain  degrees  forbidden  (Lev. 
xviii.  &c.). 

A  Slave  Wife,  whether  bought  or  captive,  not  to 
be  actual  property,  nor  to  be  sold  ;  if  ill-treated,  to 
be  ipso  facto  free  (Ex.  xxi.  7-9;  Deut.  xxi.  10-14). 

Slander  against  a  wife's  virginity,  to  be  punished 
by  fine,  and  by  deprival  of  power  of  divorce ;  on 
the  other  hand,  ante-connubial  uncleanuess  in  her 
to  be  punished  by  death  (Deut.  xxii.  13-21). 

The  raising  up  of  seed  (Levirate  law)  a  formal 
right  to  be  claimed  by  the  widow,  under  pain  of 
infamy,  with  a  view  to  preservation  of  families 
(Deut.  xxv.  5-10). 

(c)  MASTER  AND  SLAVE. 

Power  of  Master  so  far  limited,  that  death  under 
actual  chastisement  was  punishable  (Ex.  xxi.  20) ; 
and  maiming  was  to  give  liberty  ipso  facto  (ver. 
26,  27). 

The  Hebrew  Slave  to  be  freed  at  the  sabbatical 
7ear,b  and  provided  with  necessaries  (his  wife  and 
children  to  go  with  him  only  if  they  came  to  his 
master  with  him),  unless  by  his  own  formal  act 
he  consented  to  be  a  perpetual  slave  (Ex.  xxi.  1-6  ; 
Deut.  xv.  12-18).  In  any  case  (it  would  seem)  to 
be  freed  at  the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  10),  with  his  chil 
dren.  If  sold  to  a  resident  alien,  to  be  always  re 
deemable,  at  a  price  proportional  to  the  distance  of 
the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  47-54). 

Foreign  Slaves  to  be  held  and  inherited  as  pro 
perty  for  ever  (Lev.  xxv.  45,  46);  and  fugitive 
slaves  from  foreign  nations  not  to  be  given  up 
(Deut.  xxiii.  15). 

(d)  STKANGERS. 

They  seem  never  to  have  been  sui  juris,  or  able 
to  protect  themselves,  and  accordingly  protection 
and  kindness  towards  them  are  enjoined  as  a  sacred 
duty  (Ex.  xxii.  21  ;  Lev.  xix.  33,  34). 

(B)  LAW  OF  THINGS. 

(a)  LAWS  OF  LAND  (AND  PROPERTY). 

(1)  All  Land  to  be  the  property  of  God  alone, 
and  its  holders  to  be  deemed  His  tenants  (Lev. 
xxv.  23). 

(2)  All  sold  Land  therefore  to  return  to  its  ori 
ginal  owners  at  the  jubilee,  and  the  price  of  sale  to 
be  calculated  accordingly ;  and  redemption  on  equit- 
aUe  terms  to  be  allowed  at  all  times  (xxv.  25-27). 

A  House  sold  to  be  redeemable  within  a  year ; 
and,  if  not  redeemed,  to  pass  away  altogether  (szv. 
29,  30). 

But  the  Houses  of  the  Levites,  or  those  in  1111- 
walled  villages  to  be  redeemable  at  all  times,  in  the 
same  way  as  land  ;  and  the  Levitical  suburbs  to  be 
inalienable  (xxv.  31-34). 

(3)  Land  or  Houses  sanctified,  or  tithes,  or  un 
clean  firstlings  to  be  capable  of  being  redeemed,  <it  % 
value  (calculated  according  to  the  distance  from  the 
jubilee-year  by  the  priest)  ;  if  devoted  by  the  owner 

*  The  difficulty  of  enforcing  this  law  is  seen  in 
ler.  xxxiv.  8-\6. 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

and  unredeemed,  to  be  hallowed  at  the  jubilee  foi 
ever,  and  given  to  the  priests  ;  if  only  by  a  possessor, 
to  return  to  the  owner  at  the  jubilee  (Lev.  xxvii 
14-34). 

(4)  Inheritance. 


(1)  Sons. 

(2)  Daughters." 
(3)   Brot'* 

(4)  Uncie*  on  the  Father's  lii*.  \ 

(5)  Next  Kinsmen,  generally 

(6)  LAWS  OF  DEBT. 

(1)  All  Debts  (to  an  Israelite)  to  be  released  at 
the  7th  (sabbatical)  year  ;  a  blessing  promised  to 
obedience,  and  a  curse  on  refusal  to  lend  (Deut.  XT. 
1-11). 

(2)  Usury  (from  Israelites)  not  to  be  taken  (Ex. 
xxii.  25-27  ;  Deut.  xxiii.  19,  20). 

(3)  Pledges  net  to  be  insolently  or  ruinously  ex 
acted  (Deut.  xxiv.  6,  10-13,  17,  18). 

(c)  TAXATION. 

(1)  Census-money,  a  poll-tax  (of  a  half-sheitel),  to 

be  paid  for  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex. 
xxx.  12-16). 

All  spoil  in  war  to  be  halved;  of  the  com 
batant's  half,  sfoth,  of  the  people's,  ^,th,  to  b« 
paid  for  a  "  heave-oflering"  to  Jehovah. 

(2)  Tithes. 

(a)  Titftes  of  all  produce  to  be  given  for 
maintenance  of  the  Levites  (Num.  xviii. 
20-24). 

(Of  this  ^th  to  be  paid  as  a  heave-ofler- 
mg  (for  maintenance  of  the  priests)  .... 
24-32). 

(/3)  Second  Tithe  to  be  bestowed  in  religious 
feasting  and  charity,  either  at  the  Holy 
Place,  or  every  3rd  year  at  home  (?)  (Deut. 
xiv.  22-28). 

(7)  First-Fruits  of  corn,  wine,  and  oil  (at 
least  ^,th,  generally  ,'Bth,  for  the  priests) 
to  be  offered  at  Jerusalem,  with  a  solemn 
declaration  of  dependence  on  God  the  King 
of  Israel  (Deut.  xxvi.  1-15:  Num.  xviii. 
12,  13). 

Firstlings  of  clean  beasts  ;  the  redemp 
tion-money  (5  shekels)  of  man,  and  (J  she 
kel,  or  1  shekel)  of  unclean  beasts,  to  be 
given  to  the  priests  after  sacrifice  (Num. 
xviii.  15-18). 

(3)  Poor-Laws. 

(a)  Gleanings  (in  field  or  vineyard)  to  be  a 
legal  right  of  the  poor  (Lev.  xix.  9,  105 
Deut.  xxiv.  19-22). 

(0)  Slight  Trespass  (eating  on  the  spot)  to 
be  allowed  as  legal  (Deut.  xxiii.  24,  25). 

(7)  Second  Tithe  (see  2  ft)   to  be  given  in 
charity. 

(8)  Wages  to  be  paid  day  by  day   (Deut. 
xxiv.  15). 

(4)  Maintenance  of  Priests  (Num.  xviii.  8-32). 

(a)   Tenth  of  Levites'  Tithe.    (See  2  a). 
06)   The  heave    and   wave-offerings    (breast 

and  right  shoulder  of  all  i*ace-offerings). 
(7)   The  meat  and  sin-offerings,  to  be  eaten 

solemnly,  and  only  in  the  holy  place. 
(5)  First-Fruits  and  redemption  money.  (Sea 


*  Heiresses  to  marry  in   their   own   tribe   (Num. 
xxvii.  6-8,  xxxvi.). 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

(<}  Price  of  all  devoted  things,  unless  spc-  j 
cially  given  for  a  sacral  service.     A  man's 
service,  or  that  cf  bis  household,  to  be  re 
deemed  at  50  shekels  for  man,  30  for  woman, 
20  for  boy,  and  10  for  girl. 

(II.)  LAWS  CRIMINAL. 

(A)  OFFENCES  AGAINST   GOD   (of  the 

nature  of  treason). 

1  st  Comrn-nd.  Acknowledgment  of  false  gods 
(Ex.  xxii.  20),  as  e.g.  Moloch  (Lev.  xx.  1-5),  and 
generally  all  idolatry  (Deut.  xiii.,  xvii.  2-5). 

2nd  Command.  Witchcraft  and  false  prophecy 
(Kx.  xxii.  18  ;  Deut.  xviii.  9-22;  Lev.  xix.  31). 

3rd  Command.    Blasphemy  (Lev.  xxiv.  15,  16). 

4th  Command.  Sabbath-breaking  (Num.  xv. 
32-36). 

Punishment  in  all  cases,  death  by  stoning.  Ido 
latrous  cities  to  be  utterly  destroyed. 

(B)  OFFENCES  AGAINST  MAN. 

5th  Command.  Disobedience  to  or  cursing  or 
smiting  of  parents  (Ex.  xxi.  15,  17  ;  Lev.  xx.  9, 
Deut.  xxi.  18-21),  to  be  punished  by  death  by 
stoning,  publicly  adjudged  and  inflicted  ;  so  also  of 
disobedience  to  the  priests  (as  judges)  or  Supreme 
Judge.  Comp.  1  K.  xxi.  10-14  (Naboth) ;  2  Chr. 
xxiv.  21  (Zechariah). 

6th  Command.  (1)  Murder,  to  be  punished  by 
ieath  without  sanctuary  or  reprieve,  or  satisfaction 
(Ex.  xxi.  12,  14;  Deut.  xix.  11-13).  Death  of  a 
slave,  actually  under  the  rod,  to  be  uunished  (Ex. 
xxi.  20,  21). 

(2)  Death  by   negligence,   to   be  punished   by 
death  (Ex.  xxi.  28-30). 

(3)  Accidental  Homicide  ;  the  avenger  of  blood 
to  be  escaped  by  flight  to  the  cities  of  refuge  till 
the  death  of  the  high-priest  (Num.  xxxv.  9-28; 
Deut.  iv.  41-43,  xix.  4-10). 

(4)  Uncertain  Murder,  to  be  expiated  by  formal 
disavowal  and  sacrifice  by  the  elders  of  the  nearest 
city  (Deut.  xxi.  1-9). 

(5)  Assault  to  be  punished  by  lex  talionis,  or 
damages   (Ex.    xxi.    18,    19,    22-25;    Lev.    xxiv. 
19,  20). 

7th  Command.  (1)  Adultery  to  be  punished  by 
death  of  both  offenders ;  the  rape  of  a  married  or 
betrothed  woman,  by  death  of  the  offender  (Deut. 
xxii.  13-27). 

'2)  Rape  or  Seduction  of  an  unbetrothed  virgin, 
to  be  compensated  by  marriage,  with  dowry  (50 
shekels),  and  without  power  of  divorce  ;  cr,  r.  sha 
be  refused,  by  payment  of  full  dowry  (Ex.  xxii.  16, 
17  ;  Deut.  xxii.  28,  29). 

(3)  Unlawful  Marriages  (incestuous,  &c.),  to  be 
puuished,  some  by  death,  some  by  childlessness 
(Lev.  xx.). 

8th  Command.  (1)  Theft  to  be  punished  by 
fourfold  or  double  restitution  ;  a  nocturnal  robber 
might  be  slain  as  an  outlaw  (Ex.  xxii.  1-4). 

(2)  Trespass   and  injury  of  things   lent  to  be 
compensated  (Ex.  xxii.  5-15). 

(3)  Perversion  of  Justice  (by  bribes,  threats, 
&c.),  and  especially  oppression  of  strangers,  strictly 
forbidden  (Ex.  xxiii.  9,  &c.). 

(4)  Kidnapping  to  be  punished  by  death  (Deut. 
xxiv.  7). 

9th  Command.  False  Witness  ;  to  be  punished 
by  lex  talionis  (Ex.  xxiii.  1-3;  Deut.  six.  16-21). 

Slander  of  a  wife's  chastity,  by  fine  and  loss  of 
|  owev  of  divorce  (Deut.  xxii.  18,  19). 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


n 


A  fuller  consideration  of  the  tables  o:  tht  Pet 
Commandments  is  given  elsewhere.  [TEN  Coil 

MANDMENTS.] 

(III.)  LAWS  JUDICIAL  AND  CONSTITUTIONAL. 

(A)  JURISDICTION. 

(a)  Local  Judges  (generally  Levites,  as  more 
skilled  in  the  Law)  appointed,  for  ordinary  matters, 
probably  by  the  people  with  approbation  of  the  su 
preme  authority  (as  of  Moses  in  the  wilderness) 
(Ex.  xviii.  25;  Deut,  i.  15-18),  through  all  t.'ie 
land  (Deut.  xvi.  18). 

(ft)  Appeal  to  the  Priests  (at  the  holy  place),  or 
to  the  judge ;  their  sentence  final,  and  to  be  ac 
cepted  under  pain  of  death.  See  Deut.  xvii.  8-13 
(comp.  appeal  to  Moses,  Ex.  xviii.  26.) 

(c)  Tiro  witnesses  (at  least)  required  in  capital 
matters  (Num.  xxxv.  30;  Deut.  xvii.  6,  7). 

(d)  Punishment  (except  by  special  command) 
to  be  personal,  and  not  to  extend  to  the  family 
(Deut.  xxiv.  16). 

Stripes  allowed  and  limited  (Deut.  xxv.  1-3),  so 
as  to  avoid  outrage  on  the  human  frame. 

All  this  would  be  to  a  great  extent  set  aside — 

1st.  By  tile  summary  jurisdiction  of  the  king.  See 
1  Sam.  xxii.  11-19  (Saul);  2  Sam.  xii.  1-5,  xiv. 
4-11  ;  1  K.  iii.  16-28;  which  extended  even  to  the 
deposition  of  the  high-priest  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17,  18; 
1  K.  ii.  26,  27). 

The  practical  difficulty  of  its  being  carried  out  is 
seen  in  2  Sam.  xv.  2-6,  and  would  lead  of  course 
to  a  certain  delegation  of  his  power. 

2nd.  By  the  appointment  of  the  Seventy  (Num. 
xi.  24-30)  with  a  solemn  religious  sanction.  (In 
later  times  there  was  a  local  Sanhedrim  of  23  in  each 
city,  and  two  such  in  Jerusalem,  as  well  as  the 
Great  Sanhedrim,  consisting  of  70  members,  besides 
the  president,  who  was  to  be  the  high-priest  if  duly 
qualified,  and  controling  even  the  king  and  high- 
priest.  The  members  were  priests,  scribes  (Levites), 
and  elders  (of  other  tribes).  A  court  of  exactly 
this  nature  is  noticed,  as  appointed  to  supreme 
power  by  Jehoshaphat.  (See  2  Ch.  xix.  8-11.; 

(B)  ROYAL  POWER. 

The  King's  Power  limited  by  the  Law,  as  written 
and  formally  accepted  by  the  king:  and  directly 
forbidden  to  bedespoticd  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20;  comp. 
1  Sam.  x.  25).  Yet  he  had  power  of  taxation  (to 
,gth);  and  of  compulsory  service  (1  Sam.  viii.  10- 
18;  the  declaration  of  war  (1  Sam.  xi.),  &c.  There 
are  distinct  traces  of  a  "  mutual  contract"  (2  Sam. 
T.  3  (David);  a  "league"  (Joash),  2  K.  xi.  17)  ; 
the  remonstrance  with  Rehoboant  being  clearly  not 
extraordinary  (1  K.  xii.  1-6). 

T/K  Princes  of  the  Congregation.  The  heads  of 
the  tribes  (see  Josh.  ix.  15)  seem  to  have  had  au 
thority  under  Joshua  to  act  for  the  people  ('omp. 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  16-22)  ;  and  in  the  later  tim<-s  "  the 
princes  of  Judah  "  seem  to  have  had  power  to  con 
trol  both  the  king  and  the  priests  (see  Jer.  xxvi. 
10-24,  xxxviii.  4,  5,  &c.). 

(C)  ROYAL  REVENUE.   (See  Mich.  b.  n. 
c.  7,  art.  59. 

(1)  Tenth  of  produce. 

(2)  Domain  land  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  26-29).     Note 
confiscation  of  criminal's  land  (1  K.  xxi.  15). 


d  Military  conquest  discouraged  by  the  prohibition 
of  the  use  of  horses.  (See  Josh.  xi.  6.)  For  an  ex 
ample  of  obedience  to  this  law  see  2  Sain.  viii.  4,  and 
of  disobedience  to  it  in  1  K.  x.  20-29. 


72 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


(3)  Bond  service  (1  K.  v.  17,  18)  chiefly  on 
foreieuers  (1  K.  ix.  20-22 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  16,  17). 
«4)  Flocks  and  herds  (1  Chr.  xxvil.  29-31). 

(5)  Tributes  (gifts)  from  foreign  kings. 

(6)  Commerce;  especially   in    Solomon's   time 
(1  K.  x.  22,  29,  &c.). 

(IV.)  ECCLESIASTICAL  AND  CEREMONIAL  LAW. 

(A)  LAW  OF  SACRIFICE  (considered  as  the  sign  and 
the  appointed  means  of  the  union  with  God, 
on  which  the  holiness  of  the  people  de 
pended). 

(1;  ORDINARY  SACRIFICES. 

(a)  The  whole  Burnt-Offering  (Lev.  i.)  of  the 
herd  or  the  flock  ;  to  be  offered  continually 
(Ex.  xxix.  58-42);  and  the  fire  on  the  altar 
never  to  be  extinguished  (Lev.  vi.  8-13). 

(ft)  The  Meat-Offering  (Lev.  ii.,  vi.  14-23) 
of  flour,  oil,  and  frankincense,  unleavened, 
and  seasoned  with  salt. 

(7)  The  Peace-Offering  (Lev.  iii.,vii.  11-21) 
of  the  herd  or  the  flock ;  either  a  thank- 
offering,  or  a  vow,  or  freewill  offering. 

(8)  The  Sin-Offering,  or    Trespass- Offering 
(Lev.  iv.,  v.,  vi.). 

(a)  For  sins  committed  m  ignorance  (Lev. 
iv.). 

(b)  For   vows   unwittingly    made    and 
broken,    or    uncleanness    unwittingly 
contracted  (Lev.  v.). 

(c)  For  sins  wittingly  committed  (Lev. 
vi.  1-7). 

'2)  EXTRAORDINARY  SACRIFICES. 

(a)  At   the    Consecration   of  Priests   (Lev. 

viii.,  ix.). 
(ft)  At  the  Purification  of  Women  (Lev.  xii.). 

(7)  At  the  Cleansing  of  Lepers  (Lev.  xiii., 
xiv.). 

(8)  On  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement  (Lev. 
xvi.). 

(«)  On  the  great  Festivals  (Lev.  xxiiil). 

^B)  LAW  OF  HOLINESS  (arising   from  the  union 
with  God  through  sacrifice). 

(1)  HOLINESS  OF  PERSONS. 

(a)  Holiness  of  the  whole  people  as  "  children 
of  God  "  (Ex.  xix.  5, 6  ;  Lev.  xi.-xv.,  xvii., 
xviii. ;  Deut.  xiv.  1-21)  shown  in 

(a)  The  Dedication  of  the  first-born  (Ex. 
xiii.  2,  12,  13,  xxii.  29,  30,  &c.);  and 
the  offering  of  all  firstlings  and  first- 
fruits  (Deut.  xxri.,  &c.). 
(6)  Distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  food 
(Lev.  xi. ;  Deut.  xiv.). 

(c)  Provision  for  purification  (Lev.  xii., 
xiii.,  xiv.,  xv. ;  Deut.  xxiii.  1-14). 

(d)  Laws    against    disfigurement    (Lev. 
xix.   27 ;   Deut.  xiv.  1  ;  comp.   Deut. 
xxv.  3,  against  excessive  scourging;. 

(«)  Laws    against   unnatural    marriages 

and  lusts  (Lev.  xviii.,  XT.). 
^8)  Holiness  of  the  Priests  (and  Levites). 

(a)  Their  consecration   (Lev.  viii.   ix. ; 
Ex.  xxix.). 

(6)  Their  special   qualifications   and  re 
strictions  (Lev.  xxi.,  xxii.  1-9). 

(c)  Their  rights  (Deut.  xviii.  1-iJ  ;  Num. 
xviii.)  anil  authority  (Deut.  xvii.  8-13). 

HOLINESS  OF  PLACES  AND  THINGS. 

fa)    The  Tabernacle  with  the  ark,  the  vail, 


LAW  OF  MOSE8 

the  altars,  the  laver,  the  priestly  vobet ,  fcc 
(Ex.  xxv.-xxviii.,  xxx). 
(ft)  The  Holy  Place  chosen  for  the  peinn- 
nent  erection  of  the  tabenuicle  (Deut.  xii, 
xiv.  22-29),  where  only  all  sacrifices  were  to 
be  ottered,  and  all  tithes,  first-fruits,  vows, 
&c.,  to  be  given  or  eaten. 

(3)  HOLINESS  OF  TIMES. 

(a)   The  Sabbath  (Ex.  xx.  9-1 1 ,  xxiii.  1 2,  ic.). 
'JB)   The  Sirbbatical  year  (Ex.  xxiii.  10,  11  t 
Lev.  xxv    1-7,  &c.). 

(7)  The  Year  of  Jubilee  (Lev.  xxv.  8-16,  &c.). 

(8)  The  Passover  (Ex.  xii.  3-27 ;  Lev.  xxiii. 
4-14). 

(e)  The  Feast  of  Weeks  (Pentecost)   (Ley. 

xxiii.  15,  &c.). 
(C)   The  Feast  of   Tabernacles   (Lev.   xxiii. 

33-43. 
(77)   The    Feast    of    Trumpets     (Lev.   xxiii. 

2P.-25). 
(0)  The  Day  of  Atonement  (Lev.  xxiii.  26- 

32,  &c.). 

On  this  part  of  the  subject,  see  FESTIVALS, 
PRIESTS,  TABERNACLE,  SACRIFICE,  &c. 

Such  is  the  substance  of  the  Mosaic  Law ;  it* 
details  must  be  studied  under  their  several  heads ; 
and  their  full  comprehension  requires  a  constant 
reference  to  the  circumstances,  physical  and  moral, 
of  the  nation,  and  a  comparison  with  the  correspond 
ing  ordinances  of  other  ancient  codes. 

The  leading  principle  of  the  whole  is  its  THEO 
CRATIC  CHARACTER,  its  reference  (that  is)  of  all 
action  and  thoughts  of  men  directly  and  immediately 
to  the  will  of  God.  All  law,  indeed,  must  ulti 
mately  make  this  reference.  If  it  bases  itself  on 
the  sacredness  of  human  authority,  it  must  finally 
trace  that  authority  to  God's  appointment ;  if  on 
the  rights  of  the  individual  and  the  need  of  pro 
tecting  them,  it  must  consider  these  rights  as  in 
herent  and  sacred,  because  implanted  by  the  liand 
of  the  Creator.  But  it  is  characteristic  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  as  also  of  all  Biblical  history  and  pro 
phecy,  that  it  passes  over  all  the  intermediate  steps, 
and  refers  at  once  to  God's  commandment  as  the 
foundation  of  all  human  duty.  The  key  to  it  is 
found  in  the  ever-recurring  formula,  "  Ye  shal» 
observe  all  these  statutes  ;  I  am  the  LORD." 

It  follows  from  this,  that  it  is  to  be  regarded 
not  merely  as  a  law,  that  is,  a  rule  of  conduct, 
based  on  known  truth  and  acknowledged  authority, 
but  also  as  a  Revelation  of  God's  nature  and  His 
dispensations.  In  this  view  of  it,  more  particu 
larly,  lies  its  connexion  with  the  rest  of  the  Old 
Testament.  As  a  law,  it  is  definite  and  (generally 
speaking)  final ;  as  a  revelation,  it  is  the  beginning 
of  the  great  system  of  prophecy,  and  indeed  bears 
within  itself  the  marks  of  gradual  development, 
from  the  first  simple  declaration  ("  I  am  the  Lord 
thy  God  ")  in  Exodus  to  the  full  and  solemn  decla 
ration  of  His  nature  and  will  in  Deuteronomy. 
With  this  peculiar  character  of  revelation  stamped 
upon  it,  it  naturally  ascends  from  rule  to  principle, 
and  regards  all  goodness  in  man  as  the  shadow  of 
the  Divine  attributes,  "  Ye  shall  be  holy :  for  I  the 
Lord  your  God  am  holy  "  (Lev.  xix.  2,  &c. ;  comp, 
Matt.  v.  48). 

But  this  theocratic  character  of  the  law  dependf 
necessarily  on  the  belief  in  God,  as  not  only  the 
Creator  and  sustainer .  of  the  world,  but  as,  by 
special  covenant,  the  head  of  the  Jewish  nation.  It 
is  not  indeed  doubted  that  lie  is  the  king  of  all  th> 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

earth,  and  that  all  earthly   authority   is   derived 
from   Him ;   but   here   again,    in   the  case  of  the 
Israelites,  the  intermediate  steps  are  all  but  ignored, 
and  the  people  at  once  brought  face  to  face  with 
Him  as  their  ruler.     It  is  to  be  especially  noticed, 
that  God's  claim  (so  to  speak)  on  their  allegiance 
is  based  not  on  His  power  or  wisdom,  but  on  His 
especial  mercy  in  being  their  Saviour  from  Egyptian 
bondage.     Because  they  were  made  free  by  Him, 
therefore  they  became  His  servants  (comp.  Rom. 
vi.  19-22) ;  and  the  declaration,  which  stands  at 
the  opening  of  the  law  is,  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy 
God,  which  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt." 
(Comp.  also  the  reason  given  for  the  observation  of 
the  sabbath  in  Deut.  v.  15  ;  and  the  historical  pre 
faces  of  the  delivery  of  the  second  law  (Deut.  i.-iii.)  ; 
of  the  renewal  of  the  covenant  by  Joshua  (Josh. 
xxiv.  1-13)  ;  and  of  the  rebuke  of  Samuel  at  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  (1  Sam.  xii.  6-15).  ) 
This  immediate  reference  to  God  as  their  king, 
is  clearly  seen  as  the  groundwork  of  their  whole 
polity.     The  foundation  of  the  whole  law  of  land, 
and  of  its  remarkable  provisions  against  alienation, 
lies  in  the  declaration,    "  The  land  is  mine,   and 
ye  are  strangers  and  sojourners  with  me "  (Lev. 
xxv.  23).     As  in  ancient  Rome,  all  land  belonged 
properly  to  the  state,  and  under  the  feudal  system 
in  mediaeval  Europe  to  the  king ;  so  in  the  Jewish 
law   the   true   ownership   lay   in   Jehovah    alone. 
The  very  system  of  tithes  embodied  only  a  peculiar 
form  of  a  tribute  to  their  king,  such  as  they  were 
familiar  with   in   Egypt  (see  Gen.  xlvii.  23-26); 
and  the  ottering  of  the  first-fruits,  with  the  remark 
able  declaration  by  which  it  was  accompanied  (see 
Deut.  xxvi.  5-10),  is  a  direct  acknowledgment  ol 
God's  immediate  sovereignty.     And,  as  the  land, 
so  also  the  persons  of  the  Israelites  are  declared  to 
be  the  absolute  property  of  the  Lord,  by  the  dedi 
cation  and  ransom  of  the  first-bom  (Ex.  xiii.  2- 
13,  &c.),  by  the  payment  of  the  half-shekel  at  the 
numbering  of  the  people,  "  as  a  ransom  for  theii 
souls  to  the  Lord"  (Ex.  xxx.  11-16);  and  by  the 
limitation  of  power  over  Hebrew  slaves,  as  con 
trasted  with  the  absolute  mastership  permitted  ovei 
the  heathen  and  the  sojourner  (Lev.  xxv..  39-46). 

From  this  theocratic  nature  of  the  law  follow 
important  deductions  with  regard  to  (a)  the  view 
which  it  takes  of  political  society ;  (6)  the  extent 
of  the  scope  of  the  law ;  (c)  the  penalties  by  which 
it  is  enforced ;  and  (d)  the  character  which  it  seeks 
to  impress  on  the  people. 

(a.)  The  basis  of  human  society  is  ordinarily 
sought,  by  law  or  philosophy,  either  in  tike  rights 
of  the  individual,  and  the  partial  delegation  of  them 
to  political  authorities ;  or  in  the  mutual  needs  o 
men,  and  the  relations  which  spring  from  them 
or  in  the  actual  existence  of  power  of  man  ovei 
man,  whether  arising  from  natural  relationship,  01 
from  benefits  conferred,  or  from  physical  or  intel 
lectual  ascendancy.  The  maintenance  of  society  i 
supposed  to  depend  on  a  "  social  compact "  betwee 
governors  and  subjects ;  a  compact,  true  as  an  ab 
stract  idea,  but  untrue  if  supposed  to  have  been  a 
historical  reality.  The  Mosaic  Law  seeks  the  basis 
of  its  polity,  first,  in  the  absolute  sovereignty  o 
God,  next  in  the  relationship  of  each  individual  t< 
God,  and  through  God  to  his  countrymen.  It  i 
clear  that  such  a  doctrine,  while  it  contradicts  non 
of  the  common  theories,  yet  lies  beueath  them  all 
and  shows  why  each  of  them,  being  only  a  stcondar; 
deduction  from  an  ultimate  truth,  cannot  be  ii 
itself  sufficient ;  zui,  if  it  claim  to  be  the  whol 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


75 


ruth,  will  become  an  absurdity.  It  is  the  doc- 
rine  which  is  insisted  upon  and  developed  in  the 
whole  series  of  prophecy  ;  and  which  is  brought  tc 
ts  perfection  only  when  applied  to  that  universal 
nd  spiritual  kingdom  for  which  the  Mosaic  system 
was  a  preparation. 

(6.)  The  law,  as  proceeding  directly  from  3od, 
and  referring  directly  to  Him,  is  necessarily  a&so- 
ute  in  its  supremacy  and  unlimited  in  its  scope. 

It  is  supreme  over  the  governors,  as  being  only 
-he  delegates  of  the  Lord,  and  therefore  it  is  Incom- 
>at  ible  with  any  despotic  authority  in  them.  This 
s  seen  in  its  limitation  of  the  power  of  the  master 
over  the  slave,  in  the  restrictions  laid  on  the  priest- 
icod,  and  the  ordination  of  the  "  manner  of  the 
tingdom  "  (Deut.  xvii.  14-20 ;  comp.  1  Sam.  x.  25). 
By  its  establishment  of  the  hereditary  priesthood 
side  by  side  with  the  authority  of  the  heads  of 
,ribes  ("the  princes"),  and  the  subsequent  sove 
reignty  of  the  king,  it  provides  a  balance  of  powers, 
all  of  which  are  regarded  as  subordinate.  The  ab 
solute  sovereignty  of  Jehovah  is  asserted  in  the 
earlier  times  in  the  dictatorship  of  the  Judge ;  but 
much  more  clearly  under  the  kingdom  by  the 
spiritual  commission  of  the  prophet.  By  his  re 
bukes  of  priests,  princes,  and  kings,  for  abuse  of 
their  power,  he  was  not  only  defending  religion  and 
morality,  but  also  maintaining  the  divinely-ap 
pointed  constitution  of  Israel.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  supreme  over  the  governed,  recognising  no 
inherent  rights  in  the  individual,  as  prevailing 
against,  or  limiting  the  law.  It  is  therefore  unli 
mited  in  its  scope.  There  is  in  it  no  recognition, 
such  as  is  familiar  to  us,  that  there  is  one  class  of 
actions  directly  subject  to  the  coercive  power  of 
law,  while  other  classes  of  actions  and  the  whole 
realm  of  thought  are  to  be  indirectly  guided  by 
moral  and  spiritual  influence.  Nor  is  there  any 
distinction  of  the  temporal  authority  which  wields 
the  former  power,  from  the  spiritual  authority  to 
which  belongs  the  other.  In  fact  these  distinctions 
would  have  been  incompatible  with  the  character 
and  objects  of  the  law.  They  depend  partly  on 
the  want  of  foresight  and  power  in  the  lawgiver  -. 
they  could  have  no  place  in  a  system  traced  di 
rectly  to  God:  they  depend  also  partly  on  the 
freedom  which  belongs  to  the  manhood  of  our  race  ; 
they  could  not  therefore  be  appropriate  to  the  more 
imperfect  period  of  its  youth. 

Thus  the  law  regulated  the  whole  life  of  an 
Israelite.  His  house,  his  dress,  and  his  food,  his 
domestic  arrangements  and  the  distribution  of  his 
property,  all  were  determined.  In  the  laws  ,)f 
the  release  of  debts,  and  the  prohibition  of  upury, 
the  dictates  of  self-interest  and  the  natural  course 
of  commercial  transactions  are  sternly  checked.  His 
actions  were  rewarded  and  punished  with  great  mi 
nuteness  and  strictness ;  and  that  according  to  the 
standard,  not  of  their  consequences,  but  of  their  in 
trinsic  morality ;  so  that,  for  example,  fornication 
and  adultery  were  as  severely  visited  as  theft  or 
murder.  His  religious  worship  was  defined  and 
enforced  in  an  elaborate  and  unceasing  ceremonial. 
In  all  things  it  is  clear,  that,  if  men  submitted  to 
it  merely  as  a  law,  imposed  under  penalties  by  an 
irresistible  authority,  and  did  not  regard  it  as  a 
means  to  the  knowledge  and  love  of  God,  and  a 
preparation  for  His  redemption,  it  would  well  de 
serve  from  Israelites  the  description  given  of  it  by 
St.  I'eter  (Acts  xv.  10),  as  "  a  yoke  which  ueithei 
they  nor  their  fathers  were  able  to  bear." 

(c.)   The  penalties  and  rewards  by  which  the 


74 


LAW  OF  MOSES 


law  is  enforced  are  such  as  depend  on  the  direct 
theocracy.  With  regard  to  individual  actions,  it 
may  be  noticed  that,  us  generally  some  penalties 
are  inflicted  by  the  subordinate,  and  some  only  by 
the  supreme  authority,  so  among  the  Israelites 
some  penalties  came  from  the  hand  of  man,  some 
directly  from  the  Providence  of  God.  So  much 
is  this  Ihe  case,  that  it  often  seems  doubtful 
whether  the  threat  that  a  "  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  Israel "  refers  to  outlawry  and  excommunica 
tion,  or  to  such  miraculous  punishments  as  those  of 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  or  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram. 
In  dealing  with  the  nation  at  large,  Moses,  regu 
larly  and  as  a  matter  of  course,  refers  for  punish 
ments  and  rewards  to  the  providence  of  God.  This 
is  seen,  not  only  in  the  great  blessing  and  curse 
which  enforces  the  law  as  a  whole,  but  also  in 
special  instances,  as,  for  example,  in  the  promise  of 
unusual  fertility  to  compensate  for  the  sabbatical 
year,  and  of  safety  of  the  country  from  attack 
when  left  undefended  at  the  three  great  festivals. 
Whether  these  were  to  come  fiom  natural  causes, 
t.  e.  laws  of  His  providence,  which  we  can  under 
stand  and  foresee,  or  from  causes  supernatural,  »'.  e. 
incomprehensible  and  inscrutable  to  us,  is  not  in 
any  case  laid  down,  nor  indeed  does  it  affect  this 
principle  of  the  law. 

The  bearing  of  this  principle  on  the  inquiry  as  to 
the  revelation  of  a  future  life,  in  the  Pentateuch., 
is  easily  seen.  So  far  as  the  law  deals  with  the 
nation  as  a  whole,  it  is  obvious  that  its  penalties 
and  rewards  could  only  refer  to  this  life,  in  which 
alone  the  nation  exists.  So  far  as  it  relates  to  such 
individual  acts  as  are  generally  cognizable  by 
human  law,  and  capable  of  temporal  punishments, 
no  one  would  expect  that  its  divine  origin  should 
necessitate  any  reference  to  the  world  to  come. 
But  the  sphere  of  moral  and  religious  action  and 
thought  to  which  it  extends  is  beyond  the  cognizance 
of  human  laws,  and  the  scope  of  their  ordinary 
penalties,  ami  is  therefore  left  by  them  to  the  retribu 
tion  of  God's  inscrutable  justice,  which,  being  but 
imperfectly  seen  here,  is  contemplated  especially  as 
exercised  in  a  future  state.  Hence  arises  the 
expectation  of  a  direct  revelation  of  this  future 
state  in  the  Mosaic  Law.  Such  a  revelation  is 
certainly  not  given.  Warburton  (in  his  Divine 
Legation  of  Moses)  even  builds  011  its  non-exist 
ence  an  argument  for  the  supernatural  power  and 
commission  of  the  law-giver,  who  could  promise 
and  threaten  retribution  from  the  providence  of 
God  in  this  life,  and  submit  his  predictions  to  the 
test  of  actual  experience.  The  truth  seems  to  be 
that,  in  a  law  which  appeals  directly  to  God  him 
self  for  its  authority  and  its  sanction,  there  cannot 
be  that  broad  line  of  demarcation  between  this  life 
and  the  next,  which  is  drawn  for  those  whose 
power  is  limited  by  the  grave.  Our  Lord  has 
taught  us  (Matt.  xxii.  31,  32)  that  in  the  very 
revelation  of  God,  as  the  "  God  of  Abraham  and 
Isaac  and  Jacob,"  the  promise  of  immortality  and 
future  retribution  was  implicitly  contained.  We 
may  apply  this  declaration  even  more  strongly  to 
a  law  in  which  God  was  revealed,  as  entering  into 
covenant  with  Israel,  and  in  them  drawing  man 
kind  directly  under  His  immediate  government. 
His  blessings  and  curses,  by  the  very  fact  that  they 
came  from  Him,  would  be  felt  to  be  unlimited  by 
time ;  and  the  plain  and  immediate  fulfilment, 
which  they  found  in  this  life,  would  be  accepted  as 
an  earnest  of  a  deeper,  though  more  mysterious 
-onipletiou  in  the  world  to  come.  But  the  time 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

for  the  clear  revelation  of  this  truth  was  not  yei 
come,  and,  therefore,  while  the  future  life  and  its 
retribution  is  implied,  yet  the  rewards  and  penalties 
of  the  present  life  are  those  which  are  plainl  j  held 
out  and  practically  dwelt  upon. 

(d.)  But  perhaps  the  most  important  consequent* 
of  the  theocratic  nature  of  the  law  was  the 
peculiar  character  of  goodness  which  it  sought  to 
impress  on  the  people.  Goodness  in  its  relation 
to  man  takes  the  forms  of  righteousness  and  love ; 
in  its  independence  of  all  relation,  the  form  of 
purity,  and  in  its  relation  to  God,  that  of  piety. 
Laws,  which  contemplate  men  chiefly  in  their 
mutual  relations,  endeavour  to  enforce  or  protect  in 
them  the  first  two  qualities;  the  Mosaic  Law, 
beginning  with  piety,  as  its  first  object,  enforces 
most  emphatically  the  purity  essential  to  those  who, 
by  their  union  with  God,  have  recovered  the  hope 
of  intrinsic  goodness,  while  it  views  righteousness 
and  love  rather  as  deductions  from  these  than  as 
independent  objects.  Not  that  it  neglects  these 
qualities ;  on  the  contrary  it  is  full  of  precepts 
which  show  a  high  conception  and  tender  care 
of  our  relative  duties  to  man  ;d  but  these  can  hardly 
be  called  its  distinguishing  features.  It  is  most 
instructive  to  refer  to  the  religious  preface  of  the 
law  in  Deut.  vi.-xi.  (especially  to  vi.  4-13),  where 
all  is  based  on  the  first  great  commandment,  and 
to  observe  the  subordinate  and  dependent  character 
of"  the  second  that  is  like  unto  it," — "  Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself;  /  am  the  Lord" 
(Lev.  xix.  18).  On  the  contrary,  the  care  for  the 
purity  of  the  people  stands  out  remarkably,  not 
only  in  the  enforcement  of  ceremonial  "  cleanness," 
and  the  multitude  of  precautions  or  remedies  against 
any  breach  of  it,  but  also  in  the  severity  of  the 
laws  against  sensuality  and  self-pollution,  a  seve 
rity  which  distinguishes  the  Mosaic  code  before  all 
others  ancient  and  modern.  In  punishing  these 
sins,  as  committed  against  a  man's  own  self,  without 
reference  to  their  effect  on  others,  and  in  recognizing 
purity  as  having  a  substantive  value  and  glory,  it 
sets  up  a  standard  of  individual  morality,  such 
as,  even  in  Greece  and  Rome,  philosophy  reserved  for 
its  most  esoteric  teaching. 

Now  in  all  this  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the 
appeal  is  not  to  any  dignity  of  human  nature,  but 
to  the  obligations  of  communion  with  a  Holy  God. 
The  subordination,  therefore,  of  this  idea  alos  to 
the  religious  idea  is  enforced  ;  and  so  long  as  the 
due  supremacy  of  the  latter  was  preberved,  all  other 
duties  would  find  their  places  in  proper  harmony. 
But  the  usurpation  of  that  supremacy  in  practice 
by  the  idea  of  personal  and  national  sanctity  was 
that  which  gave  its  peculiar  colour  to  the  Jewish 
character.  In  that  character  there  was  intense 
religious  devotion  and  self-sacrifice ;  there  was 
a  high  standard  of  personal  holiness,  and  connected 
with  these  an  ardent  feeling  of  nationality,  based  on 
a  great  idea,  and,  therefore,  finding  its  vent  in 
their  proverbial  spirit  of  proselytism.  But  there 
was  also  a  spirit  of  contempt  for  all  unbelievers, 
and  a  forgetfulness  of  the  existence  of  any  duties 
towards  them,  which  gave  ev*n  to  their  religion  an 
antagonistic  spirit,  and  degraded  it  in  after-times  to 
a  ground  of  national  selt-glorirication.  It  is  to  be 
traced  to  a  natural,  though  not  justifiable  perversion 
of  the  law,  by  those  who  made  it  their  ail  ;  and 
both  in  its  strength  and  its  weaknesses  it  has  reap- 


d  Sec,  for  example,  Ex.  xxi.   7-11,  28-36;  xxllL 
1-9,  De-.it.  xxii.  1-4;  xxiv.  10-22,  &c.  &c. 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

peaied   remarkably   among   those   Christians   who 
have  dwelt  on  the  0.  T.  to  the  neglect  of  the  New. 


LAW  OF  MOSES  76 

Law,  both  by  its  dishonour  towards  God,  and  its 
forbidden  tyranny  over  man.     Indeed  if  the  Law 


It   is   evident   that   this    characteristic   of    the  I  was  looked  upon  as  a  collection  of  abstract  rules, 


Israelites  would  tend  to  preserve  the  seclusion 
which,  under  God's  providence,  was  intended  for 
them,  and  would  in  its  turn  be  fostered  by  it.  We 
may  notice,  in  connexion  with  this  part  of  the 
subject,  many  subordinate  provisions  tending  to  the 
same  direction.  Such  are  the  establishment  of  an 
agricultural  basis  of  society  and  property,  and  the 
provision  against  its  accumulation  in  a  few  hands ; 
the  discouragement  of  commerce  by  the  strict 
laws  as  to  usuiy,  and  of  foreign  conquest  by  the 
laws  against  the  maintenance  of  horses  and  chariots  ; 
as  well  as  the  direct  prohibition  of  intermarriage 
with  idolaters,  and  the  indirect  prevention  of  all 
familiar  intercourse  with  them  by  the  laws  as  to 
meats — all  these  things  tended  to  impress  on  the 
Israelitish  polity  a  character  of  permanence,  stability, 
and  comparative  isolation.  Like  the  nature  and- 
position  of  the  country  to  which  it  was  in  great 
measure  adapted,  it  was  intended  to  preserve  in 
purity  the  witness  borne  by  Israel  for  God  in  the 
darkness  of  heathenism,  until  the  time  should  come 
for  the  gathering  in  of  all  nations  to  enjoy  the 
blessing  promised  to  Abraham. 

III.  In  considering  the  relation  of  the  Law  to 
the  future,  it  is  important  to  be  guided  by  the 
general  principle  laid  down  in  Heb.  vii.  19,  "  The 
Law  made  nothing  perfect"  (Oi»5«c  £re\efW«i'  6 
Nif/uo?).  This  principle  will  be  applied  in  different 
degrees  to  its  bearing  (a)  on  the  after-history  of 
the  Jewish  commonwealth  before  the  coming  of 
Christ;  (6)  on  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Himself; 
and  (c)  on  the  dispensation  of  the  Gospel. 

(a.)  To  that  after-history  the  Law  was,  to  a  great 
extent,  the  key ;  for  in  ceremonial  and  criminal  law 
it  was  complete  and  final ;  while,  even  in  civil  and 
constitutional  law,  it  laid  down  clearly  the  general 
principles  to  be  afterwards  more  fully  developed. 
It  was  indeed  often  neglected,  and  even  forgotten. 
Its  fundamental  assertion  of  the  Theccracy  was 
violated  by  the  constant  lapses  into  idolatry,  and  its 
provisions  for  the  good  of  man  overwhelmed  by  the 

natural  course  of  human  sellishness   (Jer.  xxxiv. 

12-17) ;  till  at  List,  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  its  very 

existence  was  unknown,  and  its  discovery  was  to 

the  king  and  the  people  as  a  second  publication: 

yet  still  it  formed  the  standard  from  which  they 

knowingly  departed,  and  to  which  they  constantly 

rjtuvnsJ ;  and  to  it  therefore  all  which  was  pecu 
liar  in  their  national  and  individual  character  was 

due.     Its  direct  influence  was    probably   greates 

in  the  periods  before  the  establishment  of  the  king 
dom,  and  after  the  Babylonish  captivity.     The  las 

act  of  Joshua  was  to  bind  the  Israelites  to  it  as  th 

charter  of  their  occupation  of  the  conquered  lam 

(Josh.  xxiv.  24-27) ;   and,  in  the  semi-anarchica 

period  of  the  Judges,  the  Law  and  the  Tabernacle 

were  the  only  centres   of  anything    like   nationa 

unity.     The  establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  du 

to  an  impatience  of  this  position,  and  a  desire  for  a 

visible  and  personal  centre  of  authority,  much  the 

same   in  nature  as   that  which   plunged  them  so 

often  in  idolatry.    The  people  were  warned  (1  Sam. 

xii.  6-25)   that  it  involved  much  danger  of  their 

forgetting  and  rejecting  the  main  principle  of  the 

Law — that  "  Jehovah  their  God  was  their  King." 

The  truth  of  the  prediction  was  soon  shown.     Even 

under  Solomon,  as  soon  as  the  monarchy  became 

one  of  great  splendour  and  power,   it.  assumed  a       .  Note  here  the  question  as  to  the  lawfulness  of  wai 

heathenish  and  polytheistic  character,  bieaking  the    ou  the  Sabbath  in  ihis  war  (1  Mace.  ii.  23-41). 


,nd  not  as  a  means  of  knowledge  of  a  Personal  God, 
t  was  inevitable  that  it  should  be  overborne  by  the 
>resence  of  a  visible  and  personal  authority. 

Therefore  it  was,  that  from  the  time  of  the  esta- 
ilishment  ot  the  kingdom  began  the  prophetic  office, 
ts  object  was  to  enforce  and  to  perfect  the  Law,  by 
)earing  witness  to  the  great  truths  on  which  it  was 
iuilt,  viz.  the  truth  of  God's  government  over  all, 
dngs,  priests,  and  people  alike,  and  the  consequent 
certainty  of  a  righteous  retribution.  It  is  plain 
:hat  at  the  same  time  this  witness  went  far  beyond 
,he  Law  'as  a  definite  code  of  institutions.  It 
dwelt  rather  on  its  great  principles,  which  were  to 
transcend  the  special  forms  in  which  they  were 
embodied.  It  frequently  contrasted  (as  in  Is.  i.,  &c.) 
;he  external  observance  of  form  with  the  spiritua. 
lomage  of  the  heart.  It  tended  therefore,  at  least 
ndirectly,  to  the  time  when,  according  to  the  well- 
cnown  contrast  drawn  by  Jeremiah,  the  Law  writ 
ten  on  the  tables  of  stone  should  give  place  to  a 
new  Covenant,  depending  on  a  law  written  011  the 
:ieart,  and  therefore  coercive  no  longer  (Jer.  xxxi. 
31-34).  In  this  they  did  but  carry  out  the  pre 
diction  of  the  Law  itself  (Deut.  xviii.  9-22),  and 
prepare  the  way  for  "  the  Prophet "  who  was  to 
>me. 

Still  the  Law  remained  as  the  distinctive  standard 
of  the  people.  In  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  after  the 
separation,  the  deliberate  rejection  of  its  leading 
principles  by  Jeroboam  and  his  successors  was  the 
beginning  of  a  gradual  declension  into  idolatry  and 
heathenism.  But  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah  the 
very  division  of  the  monarchy  and  consequent  di 
minution  of  its  splendour,  and  the  need  of  a  prin 
ciple  to  assert  against  the  superior  material  power 
of  Israel,  brought  out  the  Law  once  more  in  in 
creased  honour  and  influence.  In  the  days  of  Jeho- 
shaphat  we  find,  for  the  first  time,  that  it  was  taken 
by  the  Levites  in  their  circuits  through  the  land, 
and  the  people  taught  by  it  (2  Chr.  xvii.  9).  We 
find  it  especially  spoken  of  in  the  oath  taken  by 
the  king  "  at  his  pillar  "  in  the  temple,  and  made 
the  standard  of  reference  in  the  reformations  of 
Hezekiah  and  Josiah  (2  K.  xi.  14,  xxiii.  3 ;  2  Chr. 
xxx.,  xxxiv.  14-31). 

Far  more  was  this  the  case  after  the  captivity. 
The  revival  of  the  existence  of  Israel  was  hallowed 
by  the  new  and  solemn  publication  of  the  Law  by 
Ezra,  and  the  institution  of  the  synagogues,  through 
which  it  became  deeply  and  familiarly  known. 
[EZRA.]  The  loss  of  the  independent  monarchy, 
and  the  cessation  of  prophecy,  both  combined  to 
throw  the  Jews  back  upon  the  Law  alone,  as  then- 
only  distinctive  pledge  of  nationality,  and  sure 
guide  to  truth.  The  more  they  mingled  with  the 
other  subject-nations  under  the  Persian  and  Grecian 
empires,  the  more  eagerly  they  clung  to  it  as  their 
distinction  and  safeguard  ;  and  opening  the  know 
ledge  of  it  to  the  heathen,  by  the  translation  of  the 
LXX.,  based  on  it  their  proverbial  eagerness  to 
proselytize.  This  love  for  the  Law,  rather  thati 
any  abstract  pitriotism,  was  the  strength  of  the 


and  the 
Levitical 

power,  deepened  the  feeling  from  which  it  sprang. 

It  so  entered  into  the  heart  of  the  people  that  open 


Maccabean  struggle  against  the  Syrians,' 
success   of  that    struggle,    enthroning   a 


76  LAW  OF  MOSES 

Molatrj  became  impossible.  The  certainty  and  au 
thority  of  the  Law's  commandments  amidst  the 
perplexities  of  paganism,  and  the  spirituality  of  its 
•.(octriue  as  contrasted  with  sensual  and  carnal 
idolatries,  were  the  favourite  boast  of  the  Jew,  and 
the  secret  of  his  influence  among  the  heathen.  The 
Law  thus  became  the  moulding  influence  of  the 
Jewish  character ;  and,  instead  of  being  looked  upon 
as  subsidiary  to  the  promise,  and  a  means  to  its 
fulfilment,  was  exalted  to  supreme  importance  as 
at  once  a  means  and  a  pledge  of  national  and  indi 
vidual  sanctity. 

This  feeling  laid  hold  of  and  satisfied  the  mass 
of  the  people,  harmonising  as  it  did  with  their 
ever-increasing  spirit  of  an  almost  fanatic  nation 
ality,  until  the  destruction  of  the  city.  The  Phari 
sees,  truly  representing  the  chief  strength  of  the 
people,  systematized  this  feeling ;  they  gave  it  fresh 
food,  and  assumed  a  predominant  leadership  over  it 
by  the  floating  mass  of  tradition  which  they  gra 
dually  accumulated  around  the  Law  as  a  nucleus. 
The  popular  use  of  the  word  "  lawless  "  (&i>of*.os) 
as  a  term  of  contempt  (Acts  ii.  23  ;  1  Cor.  ix.  21) 
for  the  heathen,  and  even  for  the  uneducated  mass 
of  their  followers  (John  vii.  49),  marked  and  stereo 
typed  their  principle. 

Against  this  idolatry  of  the  Law  (which  when 
Imported  into  the  Christian  Church  is  described  and 
vehemently  denounced  by  St.  Paul),  there  were  two 
reactions.  The  first  was  that  of  the  SADDUCEES  ; 
one  which  had  its  basis,  according  to  common  tra 
dition,  in  the  idea  of  a  higher  love  and  service  of 
God,  independent  of  the  Law  and  its  sanctions ;  but 
which  degenerated  into  a  speculative  infidelity,  and 
an  anti-national  system  of  politics,  and  which  pro 
bably  had  but  little  hold  of  the  people  The  other, 
that  of  the  ESSENES,  was  an  attempt  to  burst 
the  bonds  of  the  formal  law,  and  assert  its  ideas  in 
all  fullness,  freedom,  and  purity.  In  its  practical 
form  it  assumed  the  character  of  high  and  ascetic 
devotion  to  God  ;  its  speculative  guise  is  seen  in  the 
school  of  Philo,  as  a  tendency  not  merely  to  treat 
the  commands  and  history  of  the  Law  on  a  sym 
bolical  principle,  but  actually  to  allegorise  them 
into  mere  abstractions.  In  neither  form  could  it 
be  permanent,  because  it  had  no  sufficient  rela 
tion  to  the  needs  and  realities  of  human  nature, 
or  to  the  personal  Subject  of  all  the  Jewish  pro 
mises  ;  but  it  was  still  a  declaration  of  the  insuffi 
ciency  of  the  Law  in  itself,  and  a  preparation  for  its 
absorption  into  a  higher  principle  of  unity.  Such 
was  the  history  of  the  Law  before  the  coming  of 
Christ.  It  was  full  of  effect  and  blessing,  when 
used  as  a  means ;  it  became  hollow  and  insufficient, 
when  made  an  end. 

(6.)  The  relation  of  the  Law  to  the  advent  of 
Christ  is  also  laid  down  clearly  by  St.  Paul.  "  The 
Law  was  the  JlaiSayoiybs  els  Xpiffrbv,  the  servant 
(that  is),  whose  task  it  was  to  guide  the  child  to 
the  true  teacher  (Gal.  iii.  24) ;  and  Christ  was  "  the 
end"  or  object  "of  the  Law"  (Horn.  x.  4).  As 
being  subsidiary  to  the  promise,  it  had  accom 
plished  its  purpose  when  the  promise  was  fulfilled. 
In  its  national  aspect  it  had  existed  to  guard  the 
.  faith  in  the  theocracy.  The  chief  hindrance  to  that 
faith  had  been  the  difficulty  of  realising  the  invi 
sible  presence  of  God,  and  of  conceiving  a  commu 
nion  with  the  infinite  Godhead  which  should  not 
crush  or  absorb  the  finite  creature  (comp.  Deut.  v. 
24-27  ;  Num.  xvii.  12,  13;  Job  ix.  32-35,  xiii.  '.'1, 
2'2;  Is.  xlv.  15,  Ixiv.  1,  &c.).  From  that  had 
nome  in  w»vlier  times  open  idolatry,  and  a  half-idol- 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

atrous  longing  for  and  trust  in  the  kingdo  n  ;  ir 
after-times  the  substitution  of  the  law  for  the  pro* 
mise.  This  difficulty  was  now  to  pass  away  for 
ever,  in  the  Incarnation  of  the  Godhead  in  One  truly 
and  visibly  man.  The  guardianship  of  the  Law 
was  no  longer  needed,  for  the  visible  and  personal 
presence  of  the  Messiah  required  no  further  witness. 
Moreover,  in  the  Law  itself  there  had  always  been  a 
tendency  of  the  fundamental  idea  to  burst  the  formal 
bonds  which  confined  it.  In  looking  to  God  as 
especially  their  King,  the  Israelites  were  inheriting 
a  privilege,  belonging  originally  to  all  mankind,  and 
destined  to  revert  to  them.  Yet  that  element  of 
the  Law  which  was  local  and  national,  now  most 
prized  of  all  by  the  Jews,  tended  to  limit  this  girl 
to  them,  and  place  them  in  a  position  antagonistic 
to  the  rest  of  the  world.  It  needed  therefore  to 
pass  away,  before  all  men  could  be  brought  into  a 
kingdom  where  there  was  to  be  "  neither  Jew  nor 
Gentile,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  or  free." 

In  its  individual,  or  what  is  usually  called  its 
"moral"  aspect,  the  Law  bore  equally  the  stamp 
of  transitoriness  and  insufficiency.  It  had,  as  we 
have  seen,  declared  the  authority  of  truth  and  good 
ness  over  man's  will,  and  taken  for  granted  in  man 
the  existence  of  a  spirit  which  could  recognise  that 
authority  ;  but  it  had  done  no  more.  Its  presence 
had  therefore  detected  the  existence  and  the  sinful- 
ness  of  sin,  as  alien  alike  to  God's  will  and  man's 
true  nature  ;  but  it  had  also  brought  out  with  more 
vehement  and  desperate  antagonism  the  power  of 
sin  dwelling  in  man  as  fallen  (Rom.  vii.  7-25).  It 
only  showed  therefore  the  need  of  a  Saviour  from 
sin,  and  of  an  indwelling  power  which  should  en 
able  the  spirit  of  man  to  conquer  the  "  law "  of 
evil.  Hence  it  bore  witness  of  its  own  insufficiency, 
and  led  men  to  Christ.  Already  the  prophets, 
speaking  by  a  living  and  indwelling  spirit,  ever 
fresh  and  powerful,  had  been  passing  beyond  the 
dead  letter  of  the  law,  and  indirectly  condemning  it 
of  insufficiency.  But  there  was  need  of  "  the  Pro 
phet"  who  should  not  only  have  the  fullness  of  the 
spirit  dwelling  in  Himself,  but  should  have  the 
power  to  give  it  to  others,  and  so  open  the  new 
dispensation  already  foretold.  When  He  had  come, 
and  by  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  implanted  in  man  a 
free  internal  power  of  action  tending  to  God,  the 
restraints  of  the  Law,  needful  to  train  the  childhood 
of  the  world,  became  unnecessary  and  even  injurious 
to  the  free  development  of  its  manhood. 

The  relation  of  the  Law  to  Christ  in  its  sacrificial 
and  ceremonial  aspect,  will  be  more  fully  consi 
dered  elsewhere.  [SACRIFICE.]  It  is  here  only  ne 
cessary  to  remark  on  the  evidently  typical  character 
of  the  whole  system  of  sacrifices,  on  which  alone 
their  virtue  depended  ;  and  on  the  imperfect  embo 
diment,  in  any  body  of  mere  men,  of  the  great  truth 
which  was  represented  in  the  priesthood.  By  the 
former  declaring  the  need  of  Atonement,  by  the 
latter  the  possibility  of  Mediation,  and  yet  in  itself 
doing  nothing  adequately  to  realise  either,  the  Law 
again  led  men  to  Him,  who  was  at  once  the  only 
Mediator  and  the  true  Sacrifice. 

Thus  the  Law  had  trained  and  guided  man  to  the 
acceptance  of  the  Messiah  in  His  threefold  cha 
racter  of  King,  Prophet,  and  Priest ;  and  then,  its 
work  being  done,  it  became,  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  trusted  in  it,  not  only  an  encumbrance  but  a 
snare.  To  resist  its  claim  to  allegiance  was  there 
fore  a  matter  of  life  and  death  in  the  days  of  St 
Paul,  and,  in  a  less  degree,  in  after-ages  of  the 
Church. 


LAW  OF  MOSES 

(C.)  It  remains  to  consider  how  far  it  has  any 
obligation  or  existence  under  the  dispensation  of  the 
Gospel.  As  a  means  of  justification  or  salvation, 
it  ought  never  to  have  been  regarded,  even  before 
Christ :  it  needs  no  proof  to  show  that  still  less 
can  this  be  so  since  He  has  come.  But  yet  the 
question  remains  whether  it  is  binding  on  Chris 
tians,  even  when  they  do  not  depend  on  it  for  sal 
vation. 

It  seems  clear  enough,  that  its  formal  coercive 
authority  as  a  whole  ended  with  the  close  of  the 
Jewish  dispensation.  It  is  impossible  to  separate, 
though  we  may  distinguish,  its  various  elements : 
it  must  be  regarded  as  a  whole,  for  he  who  offended 
"  in  one  point  against  it  was  guilty  ot  all  "  (James 
ii.  10).  Yet  it  referred  throughout  to  the  Jewish 
covenant,  and  in  many  points  to  the  constitution, 
the  customs,  and  even  the  local  circumstances  of 
the  people.  That  covenant  was  preparatory  to  the 
Christian,  in  which  it  is  now  absorbed  ;  those  cus 
toms  and  observances  have  passed  away.  It  follows, 
by  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  that  the  formal  obli 
gation  to  the  Law  must  have  ceased  with  the  basis 
on  which  it  is  grounded.  This  conclusion  is  stamped 
most  unequivocally  with  the  authority  of  St.  Paul 
through  the  whole  argument  of  the  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  to  the  Galatians.  That  we  are  "  not 
under  law  "  (Horn.  vi.  14,  15  ;  Gal.  v.  18) ;  "  that 
we  are  dead  to  law"  (Rom.  vii.  4-6  ;  Gal.  ii.  19), 
"redeemed  from  under  law  "  (Gal.  iv.  5),  &c.,  &c., 
is  not  only  stated  without  any  limitation  or  excep 
tion,  but  in  many  places  is  made  the  prominent 
feature  of  the  contrast  between  the  earlier  and 
later  covenants.  It  is  impossible,  therefore,  to 
make  distinctions  in  this  respect  between  the  various 
parts  of  the  Law,  or  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that 
the  formal  code,  promulgated  by  Moses,  and  sealed 
with  the  prediction  of  the  blessing  and  the  curse, 
cannot,  as  a  law,  be  binding  on  the  Christian. 

But  what  then  becomes  of  the  declaration  of  our 
Lord,  that  He  came  "  not  to  destroy  the  Law,  but 
to  perfect  it,"  and  that  "  not  one  jot  or  one  tittle 
of  it  shall  pass  away?"  what  of  the  fact,  conse 
quent  upon  it,  that  the  Law  has  been  reverenced  in 
all  Christian  churches,  and  had  an  important  in 
fluence  on  much  Christian  legislation?  The  expla 
nation  of  the  apparent  contradiction  lies  in  the 
difference  between  positive  and  moral  obligation. 
The  positive  obligation  of  the  Law,  as  such,  has 
passed  away  ;  but  every  revelation  of  God's  Will, 
and  of  the  righteousness  and  love  which  are  its 
elements,  imposes  a  moral  obligation,  by  the  very 
fact  of  its  being  known,  even  on  those  to  whom  it  is 
not  primarily  addressed.  So  far  as  the  Law  of 
Moses  is  such  a  revelation  of  the  will  of  God  to 
mankind  at  large,  occupying  a  certain  place  in  the 
education  of  the  world  as  a  whole,  so  far  its  decla 
rations  remain  for  our  guidance,  though  their  coer 
cion  and  their  penalties  may  be  no  longer  needed. 
It  is  in  their  general  principle,  of  course,  that  they 
remain,  not  in  their  outward  form  ;  and  our  Lord  has 
taught  us,  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  that  these 
principles  should  be  accepted  by  us  in  a  more  ex 
tended  and  spiritual  development  than  they  could 
receive  in  the  time  of  Moses. 

To  apply  this  principle  practically  there  is  need 
of  much  study  and  discretion,  in  order  to  distin 
guish  what  is  local  and  temporary  from  what  is 
universal,  and  what  is  mere  external  foim  from  what 

*  As  the  "  Laying  on  of  hands"  vas  considered  in 
the  Ancient  Church  as  the  "  Supplement  of  Baptism," 


LAZARUS 


77 


is  the  essence  of  an  ordinance.  The  moral  IRW 
undoubtedly  must  be  most  permanent  in  its  in 
fluence,  because  it  is  based  on  the  nature  of  man 
generally,  although  at  the  same  time  it  is  modified 
by  the  greater  prominence  of  love  in  the  Christian 
system.  Yet  the  political  law,  in  the  main  prin 
ciples  which  it  lays  down  as  to  the  sacredness  and 
responsibility  of  all  authorities,  and  the  rights 
which  belong  to  each  individual,  and  which  neithei 
slavery  nor  even  guilt  can  quite  eradicate,  has  its 
permanent  value.  Even  the  ceremonial  law,  by  its 
enforcement  of  the  purity  and  perfection  needed  in 
any  service  offered,  and  in  its  disregard  of  mere 
costliness  on  such  service,  and  limitation  of  it 
strictly  to  the  prescribed  will  of  God,  is  still  iii 
many  respects  our  best  guide.  In  special  cases 
(as  for  example  that  of  the  sabbatical  law  and  the 
prohibition  of  marriage  within  the  degrees)  the 
question  of  its  authority  must  depend  on  the  further 
inquiry,  whether  the  basis  of  such  laws  is  one 
common  to  all  human  nature,  or  one  peculiar  to  the 
Jewish  people.  This  inquiry  will  be  difficult, 
especially  in  the  distinction  of  the  essence  from  the 
foi-m  ;  but  by  it  alone  can  the  original  question  be 
thoroughly  and  satisfactorily  answered. 

For  the  chief  authorities,  see  Winer,  Realw. 
"  Gesetz."  Michaelis  (Mos.  Gerechf)  is  valuable 
for  facts  and  antiquities,  not  much  so  for  theory. 
Ewald,  Gesch.desVolkes Israel,  vol.  ii.  pp.  124-205. 
is  most  instructive  and  suggestive  as  to  the  main 
ideas  of  the  Law.  But  after  all  the  most  important 
parts  of  the  subject  need  little  else  than  a  careful 
study  of  the  Law  itself,  and  the  references  to  it  con 
tained  in  the  N.  T.  [A.  B.] 

LAWYEK  (vo/xiK^s).  The  title  "lawyer" 
is  generally  supposed  to  be  equivalent  to  the  title 
"  scribe,"  both  on  account  of  its  etymological 
meaning,  and  also  because  the  man,  who  is  called  a 
"  lawyer  "  in  Matt.  xxii.  35  and  Luke  x.  25,  is 
called  "  one  of  the  scribes"  in  Mark  xii.  28.  If 
the  common  reading  in  Luke  ri.  44,  45,  46,  be  cor 
rect,  it  will  be  decisive  against  this ;  for  there, 
after  our  Lord's  denunciation  of  the  "  scribes  and 
Pharisees,"  we  find  that  a  lawyer  said,  "  Master, 
thus  saying,  thou  reproachest  us  also.  And  Jesus 
said,  Woe  unto  you  also  ye  lawyers."  But  it 
is  likely  that  the  true  reading  refers  the  pas 
sage  to  the  Pharisees  alone.  By  the  use  of  the 
word  vofjLtK&s  (in  Tit.  iii.  9)  as  a  simple  adjective, 
it  seems  more  probable  that  the  title  "  scribe"  was 
a  legal  and  official  designation,  but  that  the  name 
vofiti(6s  was  properly  a  mere  epithet  signifying  one 
"  learned  in  the  law "  (somewhat  like  the  ol  e« 
vAfiov  in  Rom.  iv.  14),  and  only  used  as  a  title  in 
common  parlance  (comp.  the  use  of  it  in  Tit.  iii. 
13,  "  Zerias  the  lawyer  ").  This  would  account  for 
the  comparative  unfrequency  of  the  word,  and  the 
fact  that  it  is  always  used  in  connexion  with 
"  Pharisees,"  never,  as  the  word  "  scribe  "  so  often 
is,  in  connexion  with  "  chief  priests  "  and  "  elders." 
[SCRIBES.]  [A.  B.] 

LAYING  ON  OF  HANDS.  [See  Ar 
pendix  B."] 

LAZ'ARUS  (Adfrpos :  Lazarus').  In  this 
name,  which  meets  us  as  belonging  to  two  cha 
racters  in  the  N.  T.,  we  may  recognize  an  abbre 
viated  form  of  the  old  Hebrew  Eleazar  (Tertull. 


it  is  considered  better  to  treat  it  in  connexion  with 
the  latter  subject,  which  is  reserved  for  the  Appendix. 


78  LAZARUS 

De  Idol  ,Grotius  et  a/.)  The  corresponding  1TV? 
api>ears  in  the  Talmud  (Winer,  Jtealwb.  a.  v.).  In 
Josephus,  and  :.n  the  historical  books  of  the  Apo 
crypha  (1  Mace.  viii.  17  ;  2  Mace.  vi.  18),  the  more 
frequent  form  is  'EXcdfapo?  ;  but  \d£opos  occurs 
also  (B.  J.  v.  13,  §7). 

1.  I-azarus  of  Bethany,  the  brother  of  Martha 
and  Mary  (John  xi.  1).  All  that  we  know  of  him 
>s  derived  from  the  Gospel  of  St  John,  and  that 
records  little  more  than  the  facts  of  his  death  and 
resurrection.  We  are  able,  however,  without  doing 
violence  to  the  principles  of  a  true  historical  cri 
ticism,  to  arrive  at  some  conclusions  helping  us, 
with  at  least  some  measure  of  probability,  to  fill  up 
these  scanty  outlines.  In  proportion  as  we  bring 
the  scattered  notices  together,  we  rind  them  com 
bining  to  form  a  picture  far  more  distinct  and 
interesting  than  at  first  seemed  possible;  and  the 
distinctness  in  this  case,  though  it  is  not  to  be  mis 
taken  for  certainty,  is  yet  less  misleading  than  that 
which,  in  other  cases,  seems  to  arise  from  the  strong 
statements  of  apocryphal  traditions.  (1.)  The  lan 
guage  of  John,  xi.  I,  implies  that  the  sisters  were 
the  better  known.  Lazarus  is  "  of  (cwrb)  Bethany, 
of  the  village  (tx  TTJS  Kw/tTjs)  of  Mary  and  her 
sister  Martha."  No  stress  can  be  laid  on  the 
ditierence  of  the  prepositions  (Meyer  and  Lnmpe, 
m  loc.},  but  it  suggests  as  possible  the  inference 
that,  while  Lazarus  was,  at  the  time  of  St.  John's 
nan-alive,  of  Bethany,  he  was  yet  described  as  from 
the  fttijUTj  TIS  of  Luke  x.  38,  already  known  as  the 
dwelling-place  of  the  two  sisters  (Greswell,  On  the 
Village  of  Martha  and  Mary,  Dissert.  V.  ii.  545). • 
From  this,  and  from  the  order  of  the  three  names 
in  John  xi.  5,  we  may  reasonably  infer  that  Lazarus 
was  the  youngest  of  the  family.  The  absence  of 
the  name  from  the  narrative  of  Luke  x.  38-42,  and 
his  subordinate  position  (fts  TU>V  bvaKet/ufvuv)  in 
the  feast  of  John  xii.  2  lead  to  the  same  conclusion. 
(2.)  The  house  in  which  the  feast  is  held  appears, 
from  John  xii.  2,  to  be  that  of  the  sisters.  Martha 
•'  serves,"  as  in  Luke  x.  38.  Mary  takes  upon  her 
self  that  which  was  the  special  duty  of  a  hostess 
towards  an  honoured  guest  (comp.  Luke  vii.  46). 
The  impression  left  on  our  minds  by  this  account, 
if  it  stood  alone,  would  be  that  they  were  the  givers 
of  the  feast.  In  Matt.  xxvi.  6,  Mark  xiv.  3,  the 
same  fact b  appeal's  as  occurring  in  "  the  house  of 
Simon  the  leper :"  but  a  leper,  as  such,  would 
have  been  compelled  to  lead  a  separate  life,  and 
certainly  could  not  have  given  a  feast  and  received 
a  multitude  of  guests.  Among  the  conjectural  ex 
planations  which  have  been  given  of  this  difference,0 
the  hypothesis  that  this  Simon  was  the  father  of 
the  two  sisters  and  of  Lazarus,  that  he  had  been 
smitten  with  leprosy,  and  that  actual  death,  or  the 
civil  death  that  followed  on  his  disease,  had  left  his 


LAZARUfi 

children  free  to  act  for  themselves,  is  at  least  as 
probable  as  any  other,  and  has  ^ome  support  in 
early  ecclesiastical  traditions  (Niceph.  H.  E.  i.  27  ; 
Theophyl.  in  loc. ;  comp.  Kwald,  Gesckichte,  v. 
357).  Why,  if  this  were  so,  the  house  should  be 
described  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  as  it  is; 
why  the  name  of  the  sister  of  Lazarus  should  bt 
altogether  passed  over,  will  be  questions  that  will 
meet  us  further  on.  (3.)  All  the  circumstances 
of  John  xi.  and  xii., — the  feast  for  so  many  guests, 
the  number  of  friends  who  come  from  Jerusalem 
to  condole  with  the  sisters,  left  with  female  rela 
tions,  but  without  a  brother  or  near  kinsman  (John 
xi.  19),  the  alabaster-box,  the  ointment  of  spike 
nard  very  costly,  the  funeral  vault  of  their  own, — 
point  to  wealth  and  social  position  above  the  average 
(comp.  Trench,  Miracles,  29).  The  peculiar  sent* 
which  attaches  to  St.  John's  use  of  of  'lovSaiot 
(comp.  Meyer  on  John  xi.  19),  as  the  leaders  of  the 
opposition  to  the  teaching  of  Christ,  in  other  words 
as  equivalent  to  Scribes  and  Elders  and  Pharisees, 
suggests  the  further  inference  that  these  visitors  or 
friends  belonged  to  that  class,  and  that  previous  rela 
tions  must  have  connected  them  with  the  family  of 
Bethany.  (4.)  A  comparison  of  Matt.  xxvi.  6,  Mark 
xiv.  3,  with  Luke  vii.  36,  44,  suggests  another  con 
jecture  that  harmonises  with  and  in  part  explains 
the  foregoing.  To  assume  the  identity  of  the  anoint 
ing  of  the  latter  narrative  with  that  of  the  former  .(to 
Grotius),  of  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner  with  Mary 
the  sister  of  Lazarus,  and  of  one  or  both  of  these  with 
Mary  Magdalene  (Lightfoot,  Harm.  §33,  vol.  iii. 
75),  is  indeed  (in  spite  of  the  authorities,  critica. 
and  patristic,  which  may  be  arrayed  on  either  side) 
altogether  arbitrary  and  uncritical.  It  would  be 
hardly  less  so  to  infer,  from  the  mere  recurrence 
of  so  common  a  name  as  Simon,  the  identity  of  the 
leper  of  the  one  narrative  with  the  Pharisee  of  the 
other ;  nor  would  the  case  be  much  strengthened 
by  an  appeal  to  the  intei-preters  who  have  main 
tained  that  opinion  (comp.  Chrysost.  Horn,  in 
Matt.  Ixxx. ;  Grotius,  in  Matt.  xxvi.  6  ;  Lightfoot, 
/.  c. ;  Winer,  Realwb.  s.  v.  Simon).  [Comp.  MARY 
MAGDALENE  and  SIMON.]  There  are  however 
some  other  facts  which  fall  in  with  this  hypothesis, 
and  to  that  extent  confirm  it.  If  Simon  the  leper 
were  also  the  Pharisee,  it  would  explain  the  lact 
just  noticed  of  the  friendship  between  the  sisters 
of  Lazarus  and  the  members  of  that  party  in  Jeru 
salem.  It  would  account  also  for  the  ready  utter 
ance  by  Martha  of  the  chief  article  of  the  creed  ot 
the  Pharisees  (John  xi.  24).  Mary's  lavish  act  of 
love  would  gain  a  fresh  interest  for  us  if  we  thought 
of  it  (as  this  conjecture  would  lead  us  to  think)  as 
growing  out  of  the  recollection  of  that  which  had 
been  offered  by  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner.  The 
disease  which  gave  occasion  to  the  later  name  may 


»  By  most  commentators  (Trench,  Alford,  Tholuck, 
Liicke)  the  distinction  which  Greswell  insists  on  is  re 
jected  as  utterly  untenable.  It  may  be  urged,  however, 
(1)  that  it  is  the  distinction  drawn  by  a  scholar  like 
Hermann  ("  Ponitur  autem  diri>  nonnisi  de  origine  se- 
curida,  cum  in  origine  prinui  usurpetur  «<c,"  quoted  by 
Wahl,  Clavif  N.  T.) ;  (2)  that  though  both  might  come 
to  be  need  apart  with  hardly  any  shade  of  difference,  their 
use  in  close  juxtaposition  might  still  be  antithetical,  and 
mat  this  was  more  likely  to  be  with  one  who,  though 
writing  in  Greek,  was  not  using  it  as  his  native  tongue  ; 
(3)  that  John  5.  45  is  open  to  the  same  doubt  as  this 
passage ;  (4)  that  our  Lord  is  always  said  to  be  anb, 
iever  «  Nofoper. 

In  connexion  with  this  verse  may  be  noticed  also  the 


Vulg.  translation,  "  de  castello  Marthae,"  and  the  conse 
quent  traditions,  of  a  Castle  of  Lazarus,  pointed  out  to 
mediaeval  pilgrims  among  the  ruins  of  the  village 
which  had  become  famous  by  a  church  erected  in  hii 
honour,  and  had  taken  its  Arab  name  (Lazarieh,  or  El- 
azarieh)  from  him.  [BETHANY,  vol.  i.  195  6.] 

°  The  identity  has  been  questioned  by  some  harmocictg  ; 
but  it  will  be  discussed  under  SIMON. 

«  Meyer  assumes  (on  Matt.  xxvi.  6)  that  St.  John,  a* 
an  eye-witness,  gives  the  true  account,  St.  Matthew  and 
St  Mark  an  erroneous  one.  Paulus  andiireswell  suggest 
that  Simon  was  the  husband,  living  or  deceased,  o! 
Martha ;  Grotius  and  Kuinbl,  that  he  was  a  kinsman,  01 
a  friend  who  gave  the  feast  for  them. 


LAZARUS 


LAZARUS 


79 


have  supervened  after  the  incident  which  St.  Luke 
records.  The  difference  between  the  localities  of  the 
two  histories  (that  of  Luke  vii.  being  apparently  in 
Galilee  near  Nairn,  that  of  Matt.  xxvi.  and  Mark 
xiv.  in  Bethany)  is  not  greater  than  that  which 
meets  us  on  comparing  Luke  x.  38  with  John  xi.  1 
(comp.  Greswell,  Diss.  /.  c.).  It  would  follow  on 
this  assumption  that  the  Pharisee,  whom  we  thus 
fiir  identity  with  the  father  of  Lazarus,  was  pro 
bably  one  of  the  members  of  that  set-t,  sent  down 
from  Jerusalem  to  watch  the  new  teacher  (comp. 
Ellicott's  Hulsean  Lectures,  p.  169)  ;  that  he  looked 
on  him  partly  with  reverence,  partly  with  suspicion  ; 
tliat  in  his  dwelling  there  was  a  manifestation  of 
the  sympathy  and  love  of  Christ,  which  could  not 
out  leave  on  those  who  witnessed  or  heard  of  it, 
and  had  not  hardened  themselves  in  formalism,  a 
deep  and  permanent  impression.  (5.J  One  other 
conjecture,  bolder  perhaps  than  the  others,  may  yet 
be  hazarded.  Admitting,  as  must  be  admitted,  the 
absence  at  once  of  all  direct  evidence  and  of  tra 
ditional  authority,  there  are  yet  some  coincidences, 
at  least  remarkable  enough  to  deserve  attention, 
and  which  suggest  the  identification  of  Lazarus 
with  the  young  ruler  that  had  great  possessions, 
of  Matt,  xix.,  Mark  x.,  Luke  xviii.d  The  age 
(veavias,  Matt.  xix.  20,  22)  agrees  with  what  has 
been  before  inferred  (see  above,  1),  as  does  the  fact 
of  wealth  above  the  average  with  what  we  know  of 
the  condition  of  the  family  at  Bethany  (see  2). 
If  the  father  were  an  influential  Pharisee,  if  there 
were  ties  of  some  kind  uniting  the  family  with  that 
body,  it  would  be  natural  enough  that  the  son, 
even  ip  comparative  youth,  should  occupy  the  po 
sition  of  an  &p\uv.  The  character  of  the  young 
ruler,  the  reverer.ce  of  his  salutation  (Si8d.ffKa\e 
&7<>.0«,  Mark  x.  17)  and  of  iiis  attitude  (yovvTreT-l)- 
<ras,  ibid.)  his  eager  yearning  after  eternal  life,  the 
strict  training  of  his  youth  in  the  commandments 
of  God,  the  blatr.eless  probity  of  his  outward  life, 
all  these  would  agree  with  what  we  might  exppct 
in  the  son  of  a  Pharisee,  in  the  brother  of  one  who 
had  chosen  "  the  good  part."  It  may  be  noticed 
further,  that  as  his  spiritual  condition  is  essentially 
that  which  we  find  about  the  same  period  in 
Martha,  so  the  answer  returned  to  him,  "  One  thing 
thou  lackest,"  and  that  given  to  her,  "  One  thing 
is  needful,"  are  substantially  identical.'  But  fur 
ther,  it  is  of  this  rich  young  man  that  St.  Mark 
uses  the  emphatic  word  ("  Jesus,  beholding  him, 
loved  him,"  rtydv^fffv)  which  is  used  of  no  others 
in  the  Gospel-history,  save  of  the  beloved  apostle 
and  of  Lazarus  and  his 'sisters  (John  xi.  5).  We 
can  hardly  dare  to  believe  that  that  love,  with  all 
the  yearning  pity  and  the  fervent  prayer  which  it 
implied,  would  be  altogether  fruitless;.  There  might 
be  for  a  time  the  hesitation  of  a  divided  will,  but 
the  half-prophetic  words  "  with  God  all  things  are 
possible,"  "  there  are  last  that  shall  be  first*,''  for 
bid  our  hasty  condemnation,  as  they  forbade  that 
of  the  disciples,  and  prepare  us  to  hope  that  some 
discipline  would  yet  be  found  to  overcome  the  evil 
which  was  eating  into  and  would  otherwise  destroy 


so  noble  and  beautiful  a  soul.  However  strongly 
the  abrence  of  the  name  of  Lazarus,  or  of  the  locality 
to  which  he  belonged,  may  seem  to  militate  against 
this  hypothesis,  it  must  be  remembered  that  there 
is  just  the  same  singular  and  perplexing  omission 
in  the  narrative  of  the  anointing  in  Matt.  xxvi.  and 
Mark  xiv. 

Combining  these  inferences  then,  we  get,  with 
some  measure  of  likelihood,  an  insight  into  one 
aspect  of  the  life  of  the  Divine  Teacher  and  Friend, 
full  of  the  most  living  interest.  The  village  of 
Bethany  and  its  neighbourhood  were, — probably 
from  the  first,  certainly  at  a  later  period  of  our 
Lord's  ministry,  —a  frequent  retreat  from  the  con- 
•^roversies  and  tumults  of  Jerusalem  (John  xviii.  2  ; 
Luke  xxi.  37,  xxii.  39).  At  some  time  or  othei 
one  household,  wealthy,  honourable,  belonging  to 
the  better  or  Nicodemus  section  of  the  Pharisees  (see 
above,  1,2,3)  learns  to  know  and  reverence  him. 
There  may  have  been  within  their  knowledge  or  in 
their  presence,  one  of  the  most  signal  proofs  of  His 
love  and  compassion  for  the  outcast  (sup.  4).  Disease 
or  death  removes  the  father  from  the  scene,  and  the 
two  sisters  are  left  with  their  younger  brother  to  do 
as  they  think  right.  They  appear  at  Bethany,  or 
in  some  other  village,  where  also  they  had  a  home 
(Luke  x.  38,  and  Greswell,  I.  c.),  as  loving  and 
reverential  disciples,  each  according  to  her  character. 
In  them  and  in  the  brother  over  whom  they  watch, 
He  finds  that  which  is  worthy  of  His  love,  the 
craving  for  truth  and  holiness,  the  hungering  and 
thirsting  after  righteousness  which  shall  assuredly 
be  filled.  But  two  at  least  need  an  education  in 
the  spiritual  life.  Martha  tends  to  rest  in  outward 
activity  and  Pharisaic  dogmatism,  and  does  not 
rise  to  the  thought  of  an  eternal  lif°  as  actually 
present.  Lazarus  (see  5)  oscillates  between  the 
attractions  of  the  higher  life  and  those  of  the 
wealth  and  honour  which  surround  the  pathway  of 
his  life,  and  does  not  see  how  deep  and  wide  were 
the  commandments  which,  as  he  thought,  he  had 
"  kept  from  his  youth  up."  The  searching  words, 
the  loving  look  and  act,'  fail  to  undo  the  evil  which 
has  been  corroding  his  inner  life.  The  discipline 
which  could  provide  a  remedy  for  it  was  among 
the  things  that  were  "impossible  with  men,"  and 
"  possible  with  God  only."  A  few  weeks  pass 
away,  and  then  comes  the  sickness  of  John  xi. 
One  of  the  sharp  malignant  fevers  of  Palestine  6 
cuts  off  the  life  that  was  so  precious.  The  sisters 
know  how  truly  the  Divine  friend  has  loved  him 
on  whom  their  love  and  their  hopes  centered. 
They  send  to  Him  in  the  belief  that  the  tidings  of 
the  sickness  will  at  once  diaw  Him  to  them  (John 
xi.  3).  Slowly,  and  in  words  which  (though  after 
wards  understood  otherwise)  must  at  the  time  have 
seemed  to  the  disciples  those  of  one  upon  whom  the 
truth  came  not  at  once  but  by  degrees,  he  prepares 
them  for  the  worst.  "  This  sickness  is  not  unto 
death  " — "  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth  " — "  Laza 
rus  is  dead."  The  work  which  He  was  doing  as  a 
teacher  or  a  healer  (John  x.  41,  42)  in  Bethabara, 
or  the  other  Bethany  (John  x.  40,  and  i.  28),  was 


d  The  arrangement  of  Greswell,  Tischendorf,  and  other 
harmonists,  which  places  the  inquiry  of  the  rich  ruler 
r,fter  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Lazarus,  is  uf  course 
destructive  of  this  hypothesis.  It  should  be  remembered, 
however,  that  Greswell  assigns  the  same  position  to  the 
incident  of  Luke  x.  38-12.  The  order  here  followed  is  that 
pven  in  the  present  work  by  Dr.  Thomson  under  GOSPELS 
and  JESUS  CHRIST,  by  Lightfoot,  and  by  Altord. 

•  The   resemblance   is  drawn   out    i:i  a  striking   and 


beautiful  passage  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Quit  Dives 
510). 

'  By  some  interpreters  the  word  was  taken  as  =  icaTe0i- 
\T)o-ev.  It  was  the  received  Rabbinic  custom  for  the  teacher 
to  kiss  the  brow  of  the  scholar  whose  answers  gave  special 
promise  of  wisdom  and  holiness.  Comp.  Grotius,  ad  lite. 

B  The  character  of  the  disease  is  inferred  from  it:  rapid 
progress,  and  from  the  fear  expressed  ty  Martha  (John 
xi.  39).  Comp.  I-ampc,  ad  \oc. 


80 


LAZARUS 


not  inteirupted,  and  continues  for  two  days  aftei 
the  message  reaches  him.  Then  comes  the  journey, 
occupying  two  days  more.  When  He  and  His  dis 
ciples  come,  three  days  have  passed  since  the  burial. 
The  friends  from  Jerusalem,  chiefly  of  the  Pharisee 
and  ruler  class,  are  there  with  their  consolations. 
Vhe  sisters  receive  the  Prophet,  each  according  to 
«er  character,  Martha  hastening  on  to  meet  Him, 
Mary  sitting  still  in  the  house,  both  giving  utter 
ance  to  the  sorrowful,  half-reproachful  thought, 
"  Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been  here  my  brother  had 
not  died"  (John  xi.  21-32).  His  sympathy  with 
their  sorrow  leads  Him  also  to  weep  as  if  he  felt  it 
in  all  the  power  of  its  hopelessness,  though  He 
came  with  th?  purpose  and  the  power  to  remove  it. 
Men  wonder  at  what  they  look  on  as  a  sign  of  the 
intensity  of  His  affection  for  him  who  had  been  cut 
off  (John  xi.  35,  36).  They  do  not  perhaps  see 
that  with  this  emotion  there  mingles  indignation 
(4vtf}pifi'flffaTO,  John  xi.  33,  38)  at  their  want  of 
faith.  Then  comes  the  work  of  might  as  the 
answer  of  the;  prayer  which  the  Son  offers  to  the 
Father  (John  xi.  41, 42).  The  stone  is  rolled  away 
from  the  mouth  of  the  rock-chamber  in  which  the 
body  had  been  placed.  The  Evangelist  writes  as  if 
he  were  once  again  living  through  every  sight  and 
sound  of  that  hour.  He  records  what  could  never 
fade  from  his  memory  any  more  than  could  the 
recollection  of  his  glance  into  that  other  sepulchre 
(comp.  John  xi.  44,  with  xx.  7).  "  He  that  was 
dead  came  forth,  bound  hand  and  foot  with  grave- 
clothes  ;  and  his  face  was  bound  about  with  a 
napkin." 

It  is>  well  not  to  break  in  upon  the  silence  which 
hangs  over  the  interval  of  that  "  four  days'  sleep " 
(comp.  Trench,  Miracles,  I.  c.).  In  nothing  does 
the  Gospel  narrative  contrast  more  strongly  with 
the  mythical  histories  which  men  have  imagined 
of  those  who  have  returned  from  the  unseen  world,h 
and  with  the  legends  which  in  a  later  age  have 
gathered  round  the  name  of  Lazarus  (Wright's 
St.  Patrick's  Purgatory,  p.  167),  than  in  this 
absence  of  all  attempt  to  describe  the  experiences  of 
the  human  soul  that  had  passed  from  the  life  of 
sense  to  the  land  of  the  shadow  of  death.  But 
thus  much  at  least  must  be  borne  in  mind  in  order 
that  we  may  understand  what  has  yet  to  come, 
that  the  man  who  was  thus  recalled  as  on  eagle's 
wings  from  the  kingdom  of  the  grave  (comp.  the 
language  of  the  complaint  of  Hades  in  the  Apocry 
phal  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  Tischendorf,  Evang. 
Apoc.  p.  305)  must  have  learnt  "  what  it  is  to 
die  "  (comp.  a  passage  of  great  beauty  in  Tennyson's 
In  Memoriam,  xxxi.  xxxii.).  The  soul  that  had 
looked  with  open  gaze  upon  the  things  behind  the 
vail  had  passed  through  a  discipline  sufficient  to 
ourn  out  all  selfish  love  of  the  accidents  of  his 
outward  life.*  There  may  have  been  an  inward 
resurrection  parallel  with  the  outward  (comp.  Ols- 
hausen,  ad  loc.).  What  men  had  given  over  as 
impossible  had  been  shown  in  a  twofold  sense  to  be 
possible  with  God. 


LAZARUS 

One  scene  more  meets  us,  and  then  t  IK  life  of  the 
family  which  has  come  before  us  with  such  day 
light  clearness  lapses  again  into  obscurity.  Tht 
fame  of  the  wonder  spreads  rapidly,  as  it  was  likely 
to  do,  among  the  ruling  class,  some  of  whom  had 
witnessed  it.  It  becomes  one  of  the  proximate 
occasions  of  the  plots  of  the  Sanhedrim  against  oui 
Lord's  life  (John  xi.  47-53).  It  brings  Lazarus  no 
less  than  Jesus  within  the  range  of  their  enmity 
(John  xii.  10),  and  leads  perhaps  to  his  withdrawing 
for  a  time  from  Betliany  (Greswell).  They  per 
suade  themselves  apparently  that  they  see  in  him 
one  who  has  been  a  sharer  in  a  great  imposture,  01 
who  has  been  restored  to  life  through  some  demoniac 
agency ,k  But  others  gather  round  to  wonder  and 
congratulate.  In  the  house  which,  though  it  still 
bore  the  father's  name  (sup.  1 ),  was  the  dwelling  of 
the  sisters  and  the  brother,  there  is  a  ftupjcr, 
and  Lazarus  is  there,  and  Martha  serves,  no  longei 
jealously,  and  Mary  pours  out  her  love  in  the 
costly  offering  of  the  spikenard  ointment,  and  finds 
herself  once  again  misjudged  and  hastily  condemned. 
The  conjecture  which  has  been  ventured  on  above 
connects  itself  with  this  fact  also.  The  indignant 
question  of  Judas  and  the  other  disciples  implies 
the  expectation  of  a  lavish  distribution  among  the 
poor.  They  leok  on  the  feast  as  like  that  which 
they  had  seen  in  the  house  of  Matthew  the  pub 
lican,  the  farewell  banquet  given  to  large  numbers 
(comp.  John  xii.  9,  12)  by  one  who  was  renouncing 
the  habits  of  his  former  life.  If  they  had  in  their 
minds  the  recollection  of  the  words,  "  Sell  that  thou 
hast,  and  give  to  the  poor,"  we  can  understand  with 
what  a  sharpened  edge  their  reproach  would  com« 
as  they  contrasted  the  command  which  their  Lord 
had  given  with  the  "  waste "  which  He  thus 
approved.  After  this  all  direct  knowledge  cf 
Lazarus  ceases.  We  may  think  of  him,  however, 
as  sharing  in  or  witnessing  the  kingly  march 
from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem  (Mark  xi.  1),  "  en 
during  life  again  that  Passover  to  keep"  (Keble, 
Christian  Year,  Advent  Sunday).  The  sisters  and 
the  brother  must  have  watched  eagerly,  during 
those  days  of  rapid  change  and  wonderful  expecta 
tion,  for  the  evening's  return  to  Bethany  and  the 
hours  during  which  "  He  lodged  there "  (Matt, 
xxi.  17).  It  would  be  as  plausible  an  explanation 
of  the  strange  fact  recorded  by  St.  Mark  alone 
(xiv.  51)  as  any  other,  if  we  were  to  suppose  that 
Lazarus,  whose  home  was  near,  who  must  have 
known  the  place  to  which  the  Lord  "oftentimes 
resorted,"  was  drawn  to  the  garden  of  Gethsemane 
by  the  approach  of  the  officers  "  with  their  torches 
and  lanterns  and  weapons  "  (John  xviii.  3),  and  in 
the  haste  of  the  night-alarm,  rushed  eagerly  "  with 
the  linen  cloth  cast  about  his  naked  body,"  to  see 
whether  he  was  in  time  to  render  any  help.  Who 
ever  it  may  have  been,  it  was  not  one  of  the  com 
pany  of  professed  disciples.  It  was  one  who  was 
drawn  by  some  strong  impulse  to  follow  Jesus 
when  they,  all  of  them,  "  forsook  him  and  fled." 
It  was  one  whom  the  high-priest's  servants  wore 


>  The  return  of  Eros  the  Armenian  (Plato,  Rep.  x.) 
and  Cunningham  of  Melrose  (Bede,  Eccl.  Hist.  v.  12) 
may  be  taken  as  two  typical  instances,  appearing  under 
circumstances  the  most  contrasted  possible,  yet  having 
not  a  few  features  in  common. 

'  A  tradition  of  more  than  average  interest,  bearing  on 
this  point,  is  mentioned  (though  without  an  authority) 
by  Trench  (Miraeles,  I.  c.).  The  first  question  asked  by 
La/Jirus,  on  his  reluni  to  life,  was  whether  he  should  die 
A&iiii.  He  heard  that  be  was  still  subject  to  tin-  common 


doom  of  all  men,  and  was  never  afterwards  seen  to  smile. 
*  The  explanation,  "  He  casteth  out  devils  by  Beel 
zebub"  (Matt.  ix.  34,  x.  25;  Mark  iii.  22,  fcc).  which 
originated  with  the  scribes  of  Jerusalem,  would  naturally 
be  applied  to  such  a  case  as  this.  That  it  was  so  appli*! 
we  may  infer  from  the  statement  in  the  Sr.phtr  T.bbu. 
Jeshu  (the  Rabbinic  anticipation  of  another  Lebm  Jem, 
that  this  and  other  like  miracles  were  wrought  ly  tn? 
mystic  power  of  the  cabbalistic  SheiiihamphoraRt,  w 
other  maKical  formula  (I^ainpo,  Comm.  in  Joan.  xi.  4'j.Y 


LAZAKUS 

eaper  to  seize,  as  it'  destined  for  a  second  victim 
(comp.  John  xii.  10),  when  they  made  no  effort 
to  detain  any  other.  The  linen-cloth  (criv^div). 
Conning,  as  it  did,  one  of  the  "  soft  raiment "  of 
Matt.  xi.  8,  used  in  the  dress  and  in  the  funerals  of 
the  rich  (Mark  xv.  46  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  59),  points  to 
a  form  of  life  like  that  which  we  have  seen  reason 
to  assign  to  Lazarus  (comp.  also  the  use  of  the  word 
in  the  LXX.  of  Judg.  xiv.  12,  and  Prov.  xxxi.  24). 
Uncertain  as  all  inferences  of  this  kind  must  be, 
this  is  perhaps  at  least  as  plausible  as  those  which 
identify  the  form  that  appeared  so  startlingly 
with  St.  John  (Ambrose,  Chrysost.,  Greg.  Mag.); 
or  St.  Mark  (Olshausen,  Lange,  Isaac  Williams 
(On  the  Passion,  p.  30);  or  James  the  brother 
of  the  Lord  (Epiphan.  Haer.  p.  87,  13;  comp. 
Meyer,  ad  foe.) ;  and,  on  this  hypothesis,  the  omis 
sion  of  the  name  is  in  hannony  with  the  notice 
able  reticence  of  the  first  three  Gospels  through 
out  as  to  the  members  of  the  family  at  Bethany. 
We  can  hardly  help  believing  that  to  them,  as  to 
ethers  ("  the  five  hundred  brethren  at  once,"  1  Cor. 
xv.  6),  was  manifested  the  presence  of  their  risen 
Lord ;  that  they  must  have  been  sharers  in  the 
Pentecostal  gifts,  and  have  taken  their  place  among 
the  members  of  the  infant  Church  at  Jerusalem  in 
the  first  days  of  its  overflowing  love ;  that  then, 
if  not  before,  the  command,  "  Sell  that  thou  hast 
and  give  to  the  poor,"  was  obeyed  by  the  heir  of 
Bethany,  as  it  was  by  other  possessors  of  lands  or 
houses  (Acts  ii.  44,  45).  But  they  had  chosen 
now,  it  would  seem,  the  better  part  of  a  humble 
and  a  holy  life,  and  their  names  appear  no  more  in 
the  history  of  the  N.  T.  Apocryphal  traditions 
even  are  singularly  scanty  and  jejune,  as  if  the  silence 
which  "sealed  the  lips  of  the  Evangelists"  had 
restrained  others  also.  We  almost  wonder,  looking 
at  the  wild  luxuriance  with  which  they  gather 
round  other  names,  that  they  have  nothing  more  to 
tell  of  Lazarus  than  the  meagre  tale  that  follows : 
— He  lived  for  thirty  years  after  his  resurrection, 
and  died  at  the  age  of  sixty  (Epiphan.  Haer.  i. 
652).  When  he  came  forth  from  the  tomb,  it  was 
with  the  bloom  and  fragrance  as  of  a  bridegroom 
('Ai/a^opek  HiKdrov,  Thilo,  Cod.  Apoc.  N.  T.  p. 
805).  He  and  his  sisters,  with  Mary  thp  wife  of 
Cleophas,  and  other  disciples,  were  sent  out  to  sea 
by  the  Jews  in  a  leaky  boat,  but  miraculously 
escaped  destruction,  and  were  brought  safely  to 
Marseilles.  There  he  preached  the  Gospel,  and 
founded  a  church,  and  became  its  bishcp.  After 
many  years,  he  suffered  martyrdom,  and  was  buried, 
some  said,  there ;  others,  at  Citium  in  Cyprus. 
Finally  his  bones  and  those  of  Mary  Magdalene 
were  brought  from  Cyprus  to  Constantinople  by 
the  Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher,  and  a  church 
erected  to  his  honour.  Some  apocryphal  books 
were  extant  bearing  his  name  (comp.  Thilo,  Codex 
Apoc.  N.  T.  p.  711;  Baronius,  ad  Martyrol.  Horn. 
Dec.  xvii. ;  and  for  some  wild  Provencal  legends  as 
to  the  later  adventures  of  Martha,  Migne,  Diet,  de 
la  Bible,  s.  v.  "  Marthe").  These  traditions  have  no 
personal  or  historical  interest  for  us.  In  one  instance 
only  do  they  connect  themselves  with  any  fact  oi 
'mportance  in  the  later  history  of  Christendom. 
The  Canons  of  St. Victor  at  Paris  occupied  a  Priory 
dedicated  (as  one  of  the  chief  churches  at  Marseilles 
had  been)  to  St.  Lazarus.  This  was  assigned,  in 
1633,  to  the  fraternity  of  the  Congregation  founded 
by  St.  Vincent  de  Paul,  and  the  mission-priests  senl 
forth  by  it  consequently  became  conspicuous  as  the 
Lozarists  (Butler's  Lices  of  the  Saints,  July  xix.X 

VOL.  II. 


LAZAKUS 


81 


The  question  why  the  first  three  Gospels  omit 
all  mention  of  so  wonderful  a  fact  as  the  resurrection 
of  Lazarus,  has  fiom  a  comparatively  early  period 
forced  itself  upon  interpreters  and  apologists.  Na 
tionalist  critics  have  made  it  one  of  their  chief  points 
of  attack,  directly  on  the  trustworthiness  of  St.  John, 
indirectly  on  the  credibility  of  the  Gospel  history  as 
a  whole.  Spinoza  professed  to  make  this  the  crucial 
instance  by  which,  if  he  had  but  proof  of  it,  he 
would  be  determined  to  embrace  the  common  faith  of 
Christians  (Bayle.Z)»'c£.  s.  v.  "  Spinoza").  Woolston, 
the  maledicentissimns  of  English  Deists,  asserts  that 
the  story  is  "  brimfull  of  absurdities,"  "  a  contexture 
of  folly  and  fraud  "  (Dis.  on  Miracles,  v.  ;  comp. 
N.  Lardner's  Vindications,  Works,  M.  1-54).  Strauss 
(Leben  Jesu,  pt.  ii.  ch.  ix.  §10J)  scatters  with 
triumphant  scorn  the  subterfuges  of  Paulus  and  the 
naturalist-interpreters  (such,  for  example,  as  the 
hypothesis  of  suspended  animation),  and  pronounces 
the  narrative  to  have  all  the  characteristics  of  a 
mythus.  Ewald  (Gesch.  v.  p.  404),  on  the  other 
hand,  in  marked  contrast  to  Strauss,  recognises,  not 
only  the  tenderness  and  beauty  of  St.  John's  narra 
tive,  and  its  value  as  a  representation  of  the  quicken 
ing  power  of  Christ,  but  also  its  distinct  historical 
character.  The  explanations  given  of  the  perplexing 
phenomenon  are  briefly  these:  (1)  That  fear  of 
drawing  down  persecution  on  one  already  singled  out 
for  it,  kept  the  three  Evangelists,  writing  during  the 
lifetime  of  Lazarus,  from  all  mention  of  him  ;  and 
that,  this  reason  for  silence  being  removed  by  his 
death,  St.  John  could  write  freely.  By  some  (Gro- 
tius,  ad  foe.)  this  has  perhaps  been  urged  too  ex  - 
clusively.  By  others  (Alford,  ad  foe. ;  Trench,  On 
Miracles,  1.  c.)  it  has  perhaps  been  too  hastily  re 
jected  as  extravagant.  (2)  That  the  writers  of  the 
first  three  Gospels  confine  themselves,  as  by  a  deli 
berate  plan,  to  the  miracles  wrought  in  Galilee  (that 
of  the  blind  man  at  Jericho  being  the  only  exception), 
and  that  they  therefore  abstained  from  all  mention 
of  any  fact,  however  interesting,  that  lay  outside  that 
limit  (Meyer,  ad  foe.).  This  too  has  its  weight,  as 
showing  that,  in  this  omission,  the  three  Evangelists 
are  at  least  consistent  with  themselves,  but  it  leaves 
the  question,  "  what  led  to  that  consistency  ?"  un 
answered.  (3)  That  the  narrative,  in  its  beauty  and 
simplicity,  its  human  sympathies  and  marvellous 
transparency,  carries  with  it  the  evidence  of  its  own 
truthfulness,  and  is  as  far  removed  as  possible  from 
the  embellishments  and  rhetoric  of  a  writer  of 
myths,  bent  upon  the  invention  of  a  miracle  which 
should  outdo  all  others  (Meyer, I.e.}.  In  this  there 
is  no  doubt  great  truth.  To  invent  and  tell  any 
story  as  this  is  told  would  require  a  power  equal  to 
that  of  the  highest  artistic  skill  of  our  later  age,  and 
that  skill  we  should  hardly  expect  to  find  combined 
at  once  with  the  deepest  yearnings  after  truth  anc' 
a  deliberate  perversion  of  it.  There  would  seem,  to 
any  but  a  rationalist  critic,  an  improbability  quit* 
infinite,  in  the  union,  in  any  single  write-,  of  the 
characteristics  of  a  Goethe,  an  Ireland,  and  an 
;i  Kempis.  (4)  Another  explanation,  suggested  by  the 
attempt  to  represent  to  one's-self  what  must  have 
been  the  sequel  of  such  a  fact  as  that  now  in  ques 
tion  upon  the  life  of  him  who  had  been  affected  by 
it,  may  perhaps  be  added.  The  history  of  monastic 
orders,  of  sudden  conversion?  after  great  critical  de 
liverances  from  disease  or  danger,  offers  an  analogy 
which  may  help  to  guide  us.  In  such  cases  it  has 
happened,  in  a  thousand  instances,  that  the  man 
has  felt  as  if  the  thread  of  his  life  was  broken,  the 
par-t  buried  for  ever  old  things  vanished  away, 

a 


82 


LAZARUS 


He  retires  from  the  world,  changes  his  name,  speaks 
to  no  one,  or  speaks  only  in  hints,  of  all  that  belongs 
to  his  former  life,  shrinks  above  all  from  making  his 
conversion,  his  resurrection  from  the  death  of  sin,  the 
subject  of  common  talk.  The  instance  already  re 
ferred  to  in  Bede  offers  a  very  striking  illustration 
of  this.  Cunningham,  in  that  histoiy,  gives  up  all 
to  his  wife,  his  children,  and  the  poor,  retires  to  the 
monastery  of  Melrose,  takes  the  new  name  of  Drith- 
elm,  and  "  would  not  relate  these  and  other  things 
which  he  had  seen  to  slothful  persons  and  such  as 
ived  negligently."  Assume  only  that  the  laws  of 
the  spiritual  life  worked  in  some  such  way  on 
Lazarus ;  that  the  feeling  would  be  strong  in  pro 
portion  to  the  greatness  of  the  wonder  to  which  it 
owed  its  birth  ;  that  there  was  the  recollection, 
in  him  and  in  others,  that,  in  the  nearest  parallel 
instance,  silence  and  secrecy  had  been  solemnly  en 
joined  (Mark  v.  43),  and  it  will  seem  hardly  won 
derful  that  such  a  man  should  shrink  from  publicity, 
and  should  wish  to  take  his  place  as  the  last  and  lowest 
in  the  company  of  beliovers.  Is  it  strange  that  it 
should  come  to  be  tacitly  recognised  among  the 
members  of  the  Chu.ch  of  Jerusalem  that,  so  long 
as  he  and  those  dear  to  him  survived,  the  great 
wonder  of  their  lives  'vas  a  thing  to  be  remem 
bered  witli  awe  by  those  who  knew  it,  not  to  be 
talked  or  written  about  to  those  who  knew  it  not? 

The  facts  of  the  case  are,  at  any  rate,  singularly 
in  harmony  with  this  last  explanation.  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Mark,  who  (the  one  writing  for  the  He 
brews,  the  other  under  the  guidance  of  St.  Peter) 
represent  what  may  be  described  as  the  feeling  of 
the  Jerusalem  Church,  omit  equally  all  mention 
of  the  three  names.  They  use  words  which  may 
indeed  have  been  dxavavra  ff'wsToiffiv,  but  they 
avoid  the  names.  Mary's  cosily  offering  is  that  of 
"  a  woman  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  7  ;  Mark  xiv.  3).  The 
house  in  which  the  feast  was  made  is  described  so 
as  to  indicate  it  sufficiently  to  those  who  knew  the 
place,  and  yet  to  keep  the  name  of  Lazarus  out  of 
sight.  The  hypotheses  stated  above  would  add  two 
more  instances  of  the  same  reticence.  St.  Luke, 
coining  later  (probably  after  St.  Matthew  and  St. 
Mark  had  left  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  with  the 
materials  afterwards  shaped  into  their  Gospels), 
collecting  from  all  informants  all  the  facts  they 
will  communicate,  comes  across  one  in  which  the 
two  sisters  are  mentioned  by  name,  and  records 
it,  suppressing,  or  not  having  learnt,  that  of  the 
locality.  St.  John,  writing  long  afterwards,  when 
all  three  had  "  fallen  asleep,"  feels  that  the  restraint 
is  no  longer  necessary,  and  puts  on  record,  as  the 
Spirit  brings  all  things  to  his  remembrance,  the 
whole  of  the  wonderful  history.  The  circum 
stances  of  his  life,  too,  his  residence  in  or  near  Jeru 
salem  as  the  protector  of  the  bereaved  mother  of  his 
Lord  (John  xix.  27),  his  retirement  from  prominent 
activity  for  so  long  a  period  [JOHN  THK  APOSTLE], 
the  insight  we  find  he  had  into  the  thoughts  and 
feelings  of  those  who  would  be  the  natural  com 
panions  ami  friends  of  the  sistens  of  Lazarus  (John 
xx.  1,  11-18) ;  all  these  indicate  that  he  more  than 
any  other  Evangelist  was  likely  to  Imve  lived  in  that 
inmost  circle  of  disciples,  where  these  things  would 
be  most  lovingly  and  reverently  remembered.  Thus 
much  of  truth  there  is,  as  usual,  in  the  idealism  of 
some  interpreters,  that  what  to  most  other  disciples 
would  seem  simply  a  miracle  (Wp«),  a  work  of 
power  ibvva.fj.is  /,  like  other  works,  and  therefore 
one  which  they  could  witho.nt  much  reluctance 
omit  would  be  to  him  a  sign  ( ffrjfjiflov),  manifest- 


LAZARUS 

ing  the  glory  of  (Jcxl,  witnessing  that  Jesus  was 
"  the  resurrection  and  the  lite,"  which  he  could  in 
no  wise  pass  over,  but  must  wheu  the  right  time 
came  record  in  its  fulness.  (Comp.  for  this  signifi 
cance  of  the  miracle,  and  for  its  probable  use  in  the 
spiritual  education  of  Lazarus,  Olshausen,  ad  loc.) 
It  is  of  course  obvious,  that  if  this  supposition  ac 
counts  for  the  omission  in  the  three  Gospels  of  the 
name  and  history  of  Lazarus,  it  accounts  also  for  the 
chronological  dislocation  and  harmonistic  difficulties 
which  were  its  inevitable  consequences. 

2.  The  name  Lazarus  occurs  also  in  the  well- 
known  parable  of  Luke  xvi.  19-31.  What  is  there 
chiefly  remarkable  is,  that  while  in  all  other  cases 
persons  are  introduced  as  in  certain  stations,  be 
longing  ta  certain  classes,  here,  and  here  only,  we 
meet  with  a  proper  name.  Is  this  exceptional  fact 
to  be  looked  on  as  simply  one  of  the  accessories  of 
the  parable,  giving  as  it  were  a  dramatic  sem 
blance  of  reality  to  what  was,  like  other  parables, 
only  an  illustration  ?  Were  the  thoughts  of  men 
called  to  the  etymology  of  the  name,  as  signifying 
that  he  who  bore  it  had  in  his  poverty  no  help  but 
God  (comp.  Germ.  "Gotthilf"),  or  as  meaning,  in 
the  shortened  form,  one  who  had  become  altogether 
"  helpless"  ?  (So  Theophyl.  ad  loc.,  who  explains  it 
as  =  d^o'fidriros,  recognising  possibly  the  derivation 
which  has  been  suggested  by  later  critics  from 

"Ity  N?,  "  there  is  no  help."    Comp.  Suicer,  s.  v. ; 

Lampe,  ad  loc.)    Or  was  it  again  not  a  parable 
but,  in  its  starting-point  at  least,  a  history,  so  that 
Lazarus  was  some  actual  beggar,  like  him  who  lay 
at  the  beautiful  gate  of  the  Temple,  familiar  there 
fore  both  to  the  disciples  and  the  Pharisees?     (So 
Theophyl.  ad  loc. ;    Chrysost.,   Maldon. ;    Suicer, 
s.  v.  Aafapos.)     Whatever  the  merit  of  either  of 
these  suggestions,  no  one  of  them  can  be  accepted 
as  quite  satisfactory,  and  it  add.-,  something  to  the 
force  of  the  hypothesis  ventured  on  above,  to  find 
that    it   connects    itself  with    this   question   also. 
The  key  which  has  served  to  open  other  doors  fits 
into  the  wards  here.     If  we  assume  the  identity 
suggested  in  (5),  or  if,  leaving  that  as   unproved, 
we  remember  only  that  the  historic  Lazaras  be 
longed  by  birth  to  the  class  of  the  wealthy  and 
influential  Pharisees,  as  in  (3),  then,  though  we 
may  not  think  of  him  as  among  those  who  were 
"  covetous,"  and  who  therefore  derided  by  scornful 
look  and  gesture  (^f/xtwHjojjJoj',  Luke  xvi.  14) 
Him  who  taught  that  they  could  not  serve  God 
and  Mammon,  we  may  yet  look  on  him  as  one  of 
the  same  class,  known  to  them,  associating  with 
them,  only  too  liable,  in  spite  of  all  the  promise  of 
his  youth,  to  be  drawn  away  by  that  which  had 
comipted   them.     Could  anything  be  more  signi 
ficant,  if  this  were  so,  than  the  introduction  of  this 
name  into  such  a  parable  ?     Not  Kleazar  the  Pha 
risee,  rich,    honoured,  blameless  among  men,  but 
Eleazar  the  beggar,  full  of  leprous  sores,  lying  at 
the  rich  man's  gate,  was  the  true  heir  of  blessedness, 
Cor  whom  was  reserved  the  glory  of  being  in  Abra 
ham's  bosoni.     Very  striking  too,  it  must  be  addcJ, 
s  the  coincidence  between  the  teaching  of  the  pa 
rable  and  of  the  history  in  another  point.     The  La 
zarus   of  the   one    remains   in    Abraham's    bosom 
Because  "  if  men  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophet*, 
neither  will  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from 
the  dead."    The  Lazarus  of  the  other  returned  from 
:t,  and  yet  bears  no  witness  to  the  unbelieving  J-.wa 
of  the  wonders  or  the  terrors  of  Hades. 

In  this  instan  tr  also  the  m.mp  of  Lazarus  ha* 


LE/LD 

IXKSI  perpetuated  in  an  institution  of  the  Christiai 
Church.  The  parable  did  its  work,  even  in  the 
dark  days  of  her  life,  in  leading  men  to  dread  simply 
•elfish  luxury,  and  to  help  even  the  most  loath 
some  forms  of  suttering.  The  leper  of  the  Middle 
Ages  appeare  as  a  Lazzaro.k  Among  the  orders,  halt- 
military  and  half-monastic,  of  tho  12th  century, 
was  one  which  bore  the  title  of  the  Knights  of  St. 
Lazarus  (A.D.  1119),  whose  special  work  it  was  to 
minister  to  the  lepers,  first  of  Syria,  and  afterwards  of 
Europe.  The  use  of 'lazaretto  and  lazar-house  for  the 
leper-hospitals  then  founded  in  all  parts  of  Western 
Christendom,  no  less  than  that  of  lazzarone  for  the 
mendicants  of  Italian  towns,  are  indications  of  the 
e/lect  of  the  parable  upon  the  mind  of  Europe  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  thence  upon  its  later  speech. 
In  some  cases  there  seems  to  have  been  a  singular 
transfer  of  the  attributes  of  the  one  Lazarus  to  the 
other.  Thus  in  Paris  the  prison  of  St.  Lazare  (the 
Clos  S.  Lazare,  so  famous  in  1848)  had  been  ori 
ginally  an  hospital  for  lepers.  In  the  17th  century 
it  was  assigned  to  the  Society  of  Lazarists,  who 
took  their  name,  as  has  been  said,  from  Lazarus  of 
Bethany,  and  St.  Vincent  de  Paul  died  there  in 
1660.  In  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  pri 
son,  however,  are  two  streets,  the  Rue  d'Enfer  and 
Rue  de  Paradis,  the  names  of  which  indicate  the 
earlier  associations  with  the  Lazarus  of  the  parable. 
It  may  be  mentioned  incidentally,  as  there  has 
Deen  no  article  under  the  head  of  DIVES,  that  the 
occurrence  of  this  word,  used  as  a  quasi-proper 
name,  in  our  early  English  literature,  is  another 
proof  of  the  impression  which  was  made  on  the 
minds  of  men,  either  by  the  parable  itself,  or  by 
dramatic  representations  of  it  in  ths  mediaeval 
mysteries.  The  writer  does  not  know  where  it  is 
found  for  the  first  time  in  this  sense,  but  it  appears 
as  early  as  Chaucer  ("  Lazar  and  Dives,"  Somp- 
noure's  Tale)  and  Piers  Ploughman  ("  Dives  in  the 
deyntees  lyvede,"  1.  9158),  and  in  later  theological 
literature  its  use  has  been  all  but  universal.  In  no 
other  instance  lias  a  descriptive  adjective  passed  in 
this  way  into  the  received  name  of  an  individual. 
The  name  Nimeusis,  which  Euthymius  gives  as  that 
of  the  rich  man  (Trench,  Parables,  1.  c.),  seems 
never  to  have  come  into  any  general  use. 

[E.  H.  P.] 

LEAD  (IVIS'iy:  /u<to.(/3os,,u<to.j/38os),oneofthe 
most  common  of  metals,  found  generally  in  veins 
of  rocks,  though  seldom  in  a  metallic  state,  and 
most  commonly  in  combination  with  sulphur.  It 
was  early  known  to  the  ancients,  and  the  allusions 
to  it  in  Scripture  indicate  that  the  Hebrews  were 
well  acquainted  with  its  uses.  The  rocks  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Sinai  yielded  it  in  large  quantities, 
and  it  was  found  in  Egypt.  That  it  was  common 
in  Palestine  is  shown  by  the  expression  in  Ecclus. 
xlvii.  18,  where  it  is  said,  in  apostrophising  Solo 
mon,  "  Thou  didst  multiply  silver  as  lead ; "  the 
writer  having  in  view  the  hyperbolical  description 
of  Solomon's  wealth  in  1  K.  x.  27 :  "  the  king 
made  the  silver  to  be  in  Jerusalem  as  stones."  It 
was  among  the  spoils  of  the  Midianites  which  the 
children  ot  Israel  brought  with  them  to  the  plains 
of  Moab,  after  their  return  from  the  slaughter  of 
the  tribe  (Num.  xxxi.  22).  The  ships  of  Tarshish 
supplied  the  market  of  Tyre  with  lead,  as  with 


LEAD 


83 


other  metals  (Ez.  xxvii.  12).  Its  heaviness,  tc 
which  ailusion  is  nr.ade  in  Ex.  xv.  10,  and  Ecclus. 
xxii.  14,  caused  it  to  be  used  for  weights,  which 
were  either  in  the  form  of  a  round  flat  cake  (Zech. 
v.  7),  or  a  rough  unfashioned  lump  or  "  stone  " 
(ver.  8) ;  stones  having  in  ancient  times  served  the 
purpose  of  weights  (comp.  Prov.  xvi.  11).  This 
fact  may  perhaps  explain  the  substitution  of  "  lead  " 
for  "  stones  "  in  the  passage  of  Ecclesiasticus  above 
quoted  ;  the  commonest  use  of  the  commonest  metal 
being  present  to  the  mind  of  the  writer.  If  Ges*1- 
nius  is  correct  in  rendering  "Jj3N,  andc,  by  "  lead," 
in  Am.  vii.  7,  8,  we  have  another  instance  of  the 
purposes  to  which  this  metal  was  applied  in  form 
ing  the  ball  or  bob  of  the  plumb-line.  [PLUME- 
LINE.]  Its  use  for  weighting  fishing-lines  was 
known  in  the  time  of  Homer  (II.  xxiv.  80).  But 
Bochart  and  others  identify  andc  with  tin,  and  derive 
from  it  the  etymology  of  "  Britain." 

In  modern  metallurgy  lead  is  used  with  tin  in 
the  composition  of  solder  for  fastening  metals  to 
gether.  That  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted 
with  the  use  of  solder  is  evident  from  the  descrip- 
tion  given  by  the  prophet  Isaiah  of  the  processes 
which  accompanied  the  formation  of  an  image  for 
idolatrous  worship.  The  method  by  which  two 
pieces  of  metal  were  joined  together  was  identical 
with  that  employed  in  modern  times;  the  sub 
stances  to  be  united  being  first  clamped  before 
being  soldered.  No  hint  is  given  as  to  the  com 
position  of  the  solder,  but  in  all  probability  lead 
was  one  of  the  materials  employed,  its  usage  for 
such  a  purpose  being  of  great  antiquity.  The  an 
cient  Egyptians  used  it  for  fastening  stones  together 
in  the  rough  parts  of  a  building,  and  it  was  found 
by  Mr.  Layard  among  the  ruins  at  Nimroud  (Nin. 
and  Bab.  p.  357).  Mr.  Napier  (Metallurgy  of  the 
Bible,  p.  130)  conjectures  that  "  the  solder  used  in 
early  times  for  lead,  and  termed  lead,  was  the  same 
as  is  now  used — a  mixture  of  lead  and  tin." 

But,  in  addition  to  these  more  obvious  uses  of 
this  metal,  the  Hebrew.?  were  acquainted  with  an 
other  method  of  employing  it,  which  indicates  some 
advance  in  the  arts  at  an  early  period.  Job  (six. 
24)  utters  a  wish  that  his  words,  "  with  a  pen  of 
iron  and  lead,  were  graven  in  the  rock  for  ever." 
The  allusion  is  supposed  to  be  to  the  practice  o: 
carving  inscriptions  upon  stone,  and  pouring  molten 
lead  into  the  cavities  of  the  letters,  to  render  them 
legible,  and  at  the  same  time  preserve  them  from 
the  action  of  the  air.  Frequent  references  to  the 
use  of  leaden  tablets  for  inscriptions  are  found  in 
ancient  writers.  Pausanias  (ix.  31)  saw  Hesiod's 
Works  and  Days  graven  on  lead,  but  almost  illegible 
with  age.  Public  proclamations,  according  to  Pliny 
(xiii.  21),  were  written  on  lead,  and  the  name  of 
Germanicus  was  carved  on  leaden  tablets  (Tac.  Ann. 
\\.  69).  Eutychius  (Ann.  Alex.  p.  390;  relates 
that  the  history  of  the  Seven  Sleepers  was  eng.Tved 
on  lead  by  the  Cadi. 

Oxide  of  lead  is  employed  largely  in  modere 
pottery  for  the  formation  of  glazes,  and  its  presence 
has  been  discovered  in  analyzing  the  articles  of 
earthenware  found  in  Egypt  and  Nineveh,  proving 
that  the  ancients  were  acquainted  with  its  use  for 
the  same  purpose.  The  A.  V.  of  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  30 
assumes  that  the  usage  was  known  to  the  Hebiews. 


k  It  is  interesting,  as  connected  with  the  traditions 
given  above  under  (1),  to  find  that  the  first  occurrence  of 
'.he  ur.me  with  this  generic  meaning  is  in  the  old  IViv 


vencal  dialect,  under   the   lorni   Ijadre.     (Comp.  Diez. 
A'oflW'i.H'iw'fr'r/wc/i,  s.  v.  "  I.awjiro.") 

a  2 


34  LEBANA 

thou^n  the  original  is  not  explicit  upon  the  point. 
Speaking  of  the  pottei-'s  art  in  finishing  off  his  work, 
"  he  applieth  himself  to  lead  it  over,"  is  the  render 
ing  of  what  in  the  Greek  is  simply  "  he  giveth  his 
heart  to  complete  the  smearing, '  the  material  em 
ployed  for  the  purpose  not  being  indicated. 

In  modem  metallurgy  lead  is  employed  for  the 
purpose  of  purifying  silver  from  other  mineral  pro 
ducts.  The  alloy  is  mixed  with  lead,  exposed  to 
fusion  npon  aij  earthen  vessel,  and  submitted  to  a 
biast  of  air.  By  this  means  the  dross  is  consumed. 
This  process  is  called  the  cupelling  operation,  with 
which  the  description  in  Ez.  xxii.  18-22,  in  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Napier  (Met.  of  Bible,  pp.  20-24), 
accurately  coincides.  "  The  vessel  containing  the 
j.lloy  is  surrounded  by  the  fire,  or  placed  in  the 
midst  of  it,  and  the  blowing  is  not  applied  to  the 
tire,  but  to  the  fused  metals.  .  .  .  And  when  this  is 
done,  nothing  but  the  perfect  metals,  gold  and 
silver,  can  resist  the  scorifying  influence."  And  in 
support  of  his  conclusion  he  quotes  Jer.  vi.  28-30, 
adding,  "  This  description  is  perfect.  If  we  take 
silver  having  the  impurities  in  it  described  in  the 
text,  namely  iron,  copper,  and  tin,  and  mix  it  with 
lead,  and  place  it  in  the  fire  upon  a  cupell,  it  soon 
melts ;  the  lead  will  oxidise  and  form  a  thick  coarse 
crust  upon  the  surface,  and  thus  consume  away, 
but  effecting  no  purifying  influence.  The  alloy 
remains,  if  anything,  worse  than  before.  .  .  .  The 
silver  is  not  refined,  because  '  the  bellows  were 
burned ' — there  existed  nothing  to  blow  upon  it. 
Lead  is  the  purifier,  but  only  so  in  connexion  with 
a  blast  blowing  upon  the  precious  metals."  An 
allusion  to  this  use  of  lead  is  to  be  found  in 
Theognis  (Gnmn.  1127,  8  ;  ed.  Welcker),  and  it  is 
mentioned  by  Pliny  (xxxiii.  31)  as  indispensable  to 
the  purification  of  silver  from  alloy.  [W.  A.  W.] 

LEBA'NA  (N331? :  Actfai/d ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
\af$a.v  :  Lebana),  one  of  the  Nethinim  whose  de 
scendants  retained  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel 
(Neh.  vii.  48).  He  is  called  LABANA  in  the  pa 
rallel  list  of  1  Esdras,  and 

LEBA'NAH  (iTD1? :  A.a0ar6  :  Lcbana)  in 
Ezr.  ii.  45. 

LEAF,  LEAVES.  The  word  occurs  in  the 
A.  V.  either  in  the  singular  or  plural  number  in 
three  different  senses — (1)  Leaf  or  leaves  of  trees. 
(2)  Leaves  of  the  doors  of  the  Temple.  (3)  Leaves 
of  the  roll  of  a  book. 


1 .  LEAF  (rW,"  aleh ;  epB,h  tereph ;  »BJJ,'  apM : 
<(>v\\oi>,  o-T^\'«xos,  avdpao-i j :  folium,  frons,  cor 
tex}.  The  olive-leaf  is  mentioned  in  Gen.  viii.  11. 
Fig-leaves  formed  the  first  covering  of  our  parents 
in  Eden.  The  ban-en  fig-tree  (Matt.  xxi.  19  ; 
Mark  xi.  13)  on  the  road  between  Bethany  and 
Jerusalem  "  had  on  it  nothing  but  leaves."  The 
fig-leaf  is  alluded  to  by  our  Lord  (Matt.  xxiv.  32 ; 
Mark  xiii.  28) :  "  When  his  branch  is  yet  tender,  and 
putteth  forth  leaves,  ye  know  that  summer  is  nigh." 
The  oak-leaf  is  mentioned  in  Is.  i.  30,  and  vi.  13. 
The  righteous  are  often  compared  to  green  leaves 
(Jer.  xvii.  8) :  "  her  leaf  shall  be  green  " — to  leaver 
that  fade  not  (Vs.  i.  3)—"  his  leaf  also  shall  net 


»  Fiom  n^y,  to  ascend  or  grow  up.  Precisely 
identical  is  avo^ao-ts,  from  a.i>a.Baivea>,  to  ascend. 

k  Strictly,  "  a  green  ami  tender  leaf,"  "  one  easily 
plucked  off;"  from  P|TJ,  "to  tear,  or  pluck  off," 
vhcncc  "all  tlic  leaves  of  hrv  spring"  (K.T.  xvii.  0). 


LEAD 

wither."  The  ungodly  on  the  othor  Luid  ure  as 
"  an  oak  whose  leaf  fadeth ''  (Is.  i.  30)  ;  is  a  trte 
which  "shall  wither  in  all  the  leareu  of  her  spring  " 
(Ea.  xvii.  9) ;  the  "  sound  of  a  shaken  leaf  shall 
chase  them"  (Lev.  xxvi.  36).  In  Ezekiel's  vision 
of  the  holy  waters,  the  blessings  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom  are  spoken  of  under  the  image  of  trees 
growing  on  a  river's  bank  ;  there  "  shall  grow  all 
trees  for  food,  whose  leaf  shall  not  fade"  (Ez. 
xlvii.  12).  In  this  passage  it  is  said  that  "  the 
fruit  of  these  trees  shall  be  for  food,  and  the  leaf 
thereof  for  medicine"  (margin,  for  bruises  and 
sores).  With  this  compare  (Rev.  xxii.  1,  2)  St. 
John's  rision  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem.  "  In  the 
midst  of  the  street  of  it,  and  on  either  side  of  the 
river,  was  there  the  tree  of  life ....  and  the  leaves 
of  the  tree  were  for  the  healing  of  the  nations." 
There  is  probably  here  an  allusion  to  some  tree 
whose  leaves  were  used  by  the  Jews  as  a  medicine 
or  ointment ;  indeed,  it  is  veiy  likely  that  many 
plants  and  leaves  were  thus  made  use  of  by  them, 
as  by  the  old  English  herbalists. 

2.  LEAVES   of  doors   (D^?V,  tseldim ;  fO"". 

deleth  :  irrvx'fl,  0t/p«Ma :  ostium,  ostiolurn).  The 
Hebrew  word,  which  occurs  very  many  times  in  th« 
Bible,  and  which  in  1  K.  vi.  32  (margin)  and  34 
is  translated  "  leaves  "  in  the  A.  V.,  signifies  beams, 
ribs,  sides,  &c.  In  Ez.  xli.  24,  "  And  the  doors 
had  two  leaves  apiece,"  the  Hebrew  word  ddcth 
is  the  representative  of  both  doors  and  leaves.  By 
the  expression  two-leaved  doors,  we  are  no  doubt  to 
understand  what  we  term  folding-doors. 

3.  LEAVES   of  a    book   or  roll  (nTH,  deleth : 

'•'  '• 
fft\ls :  pagella)  occurs  in  this  sense  only  in  Jer. 

xxxvi.  23.  The  Hebrew  word  (literally  doors) 
would  perhaps  be  more  correctly  translated  columns. 
The  Latin  columna,  and  the  English  column,  as 
applied  to  a  book,  are  probably  derived  from  re 
semblance  to  a  column  of  a  building.  [W.  H.] 

LE'AH  (ilK^ :  Aefo,  Am :  Lia),  the  elder 
daughter  of  Laban  (Gen.  xxix.  16).  The  dulness  or 
weakness  of  her  eyes  was  so  notable,  that  it  is  men* 
tioned  as  a  contrast  to  the  beautiful  form  and  ap 
pearance  of  her  younger  sister  Rachel.  Her  father 
took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  which  the  local 
marriage-rite  afforded  to  pass  her  off  in  her  sister's 
stead  on  the  unconscious  bridegroom,  and  excused 
himself  to  Jacob  by  alleging  that  the  custom  of  the 
country  forbade  the  younger  sister  to  be  given  first 
in  marriage.  Roseumiiller  cites  instances  of  these 
customs  prevailing  to  this  day  in  some  parts  of  the 
East.  Jacob's  preference  of  Rachel  grew  into  hatred 
of  Leah,  after  hehad  married  both  sisters.  Leah,  how 
ever,  bore  to  him  in  quick  succession  Reuben,  Simeon. 
Levi,  Judah,  then  Issachar,  Zebulun,  and  Dinah, 
before  Rachel  had  a  child.  Leah  was  conscious 
and  resentful  (ch.  xxx.)  of  the  smaller  share  she  pos 
sessed  in  her  husband's  affections ;  yet  in  Jacob's 
differences  with  his  father-in-law,  his  two  wives  ap 
pear  to  be  attached  to  him  with  equal  fidelity.  In  the 
critical  moment  when  he  expected  an  attack  from 
Esau,  his  discriminate  regard  for  the  several  mem 
bers  of  his  family  was  shown  by  his  placing  Rachel 


Comp.  the  Syr.  -6,  folium,  from    «^i~,    to 

strike  off  (Castell.  Lex.  Kept.  s.  v.). 

c  From   the  unused  root    HDP,    to  flower ;    Syi. 


LEASING 

»nd  her  child  hindermost,  in  the  least  exposed  situa 
tion,  Leah  and  her  children  next,  and  the  two  hand 
maids  with  their  children  in  the  front.  Leah  pro- 
oably  lived  tc  witness  the  dishonour  of  her  daughter 
(ch.  xxxiv.),  so  cruelly  avenged  by  two  of  her  sons ; 
and  the  subsequent  deaths  of  Deborah  at  Bethel,  and 
of  Rachel  near  Bethlehem.  She  died  some  time  after 
Jacob  reached  the  south  country  in  which  his  father 
Isaac  lived.  Her  name  is  not  mentioned  in  the  list 
of  Jacob's  family  (ch.  xlvi.  5)  when  they  went  down 
into  Egypt.  She  was  buried  in  the  family  grave  in 
Machpelah  (ch.  xlix.  31).  [W.  T.  B.] 

LEASING,  "  falsehood."  This  word  is  retained 
In  the  A.  V.  of  Ps.  iv.  2,  v.  6,  from  the  older 
English  versions ;  but  the  Hebrew  word  of  which 
it  is  the  rendering  is  elsewhere  almost  uniformly 
translated  "  lies"  (Ps.  xl.  4,  Iviii.  3,  &c.).  It  is 
derived  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  leas,  "  false,"  whence 
leasung,  "leasing,"  "  falsehood,"  and  is  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  old  English  writers.  So  in  Piers 
Ploughman's  Vision,  2113: 
"  Tel  me  no  tales, 

Ne  letynge  to  laughen  of." 
And  in  Wiclif's  New  Testament,  John  viii.  44, 
"  Whanne  he  spekith  a  lesinge,  he  spekith  of  his 
owne  thingis,  for  he  is  a  lyiere,  and  fadir  of  it."  It  is 
used  both  by  Spenser  and  Shakspere.  [W.  A.  W.] 

LEATHER  (ity,  'or).  The  notices  of  leather 
in  the  Bible  are  singularly  few ;  indeed  the  word 
occurs  but  twice  in  the  A.  V.,  and  in  each  instance 
in  reference  to  the  same  object,  a  girdle  (2  K.  i.  8  ; 
Matt.  iii.  4).  There  are,  however,  other  instances 
in  which  the  word  "  leather"  might  with  propriety 
be  substituted  for  "  skin,"  as  in  the  passages  in 
which  vessels  (Lev.  xi.  32 ;  Num.  xxxi.  20)  or  rai 
ment  (Lev.  xiii.  48)  are  spoken  of;  for  in  these 
cases  the  skins  must  have  been  prepared.  Though 
the  material  itself  is  seldom  noticed,  yet  we  cannot 
doubt  that  it  was  extensively  used  by  the  Jews  ; 
shoes,  bottles,  thongs,  garments,  kneading-troughs 
ropes,  arid  other  articles,  were  made  of  it.  For  the 
mode  of  preparing  it  see  TANNER.  [W.  L.  B.] 

LEAVEN  (")fcb>,  seor:  $>w.  fermentum). 
The  Hebrew  word  seor  has  the  radical  sense  oi 
effervescence  or  fei-mentation,  and  therefore  corre 
sponds  in  point  of  etymology  to  the  Greek  f 
(from  £(oi),  the  Latin  fermentum  (from  ferveo), 
and  the  English  leaven  (from  levare).  It  occurs 
only  five  times  in  the  Bible  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19,  xiii. 
7  ;  Lev.  ii.  II  ;  Deut.  xvi.  4),  and  is  translated 
"  leaven  "  in  the  first  four  of  the  passages  quoted, 
and  "leavened  bread"  in  the' last.  In  connexion 
with  it,  we  must  notice  the  terms  khametz  *  and 
matzzoth,b  the  former  signifying  "  fermented  "  or 
"  leavened,"  literally  "sharpened," bread;  the  latter 
"  unleavened,"  the  radical  force  of  tbj  word  being 
variously  understood  to  signify  sweetness  or  purity. 
The  three  words  appear  in  juxtaposition  in  Ex. 
xiii.  7 :  "  Unleavened  bread  (matzzoth)  shall  be 
inten  seren  days ;  and  there  shall  no  leavened  bread 
(khametz)  be  seen  with  thee,  neither  shall  there  be 
leaven  (SCOT]  seen  with  thee  in  all  thy  quarters." 
Various  substances  were  known  to  have  fermenting 
qu.'Jities ;  but  the  ordinary  leaven  consisted  of  a 
lump  of  old  dough  in  a  high  state  of  fermentation, 
•vhich  was  inserted  into  the  mass  of  dough  prepared 

*f"OPI.     Another  form  of  the  same  root,  khometz 
s    applied    to    sharpened    or    lour    wine 


LEBANON  85 

for  baking.  [BRKAD.]  As  the  process  of  producing 
the  leaven  itself,  or  even  of  leavening  bread  when 
the  substance  was  at  hand,  required  some  time,  un 
leavened  cakes  were  more  usually  produced  on 
sudden  emergencies  (Gen.  xviii.  6;  Judg.  vi.  19). 
The  use  of  leaven  was  strictly  forbidden  in  all 
offerings  made  to  the  Lord  by  fire ;  as  in  the  case 
of  the  meat-offering  (Lev.  ii.  11),  the  trespass- 
offering  (Lev.  vii.  12),  the  consecration-offerinc; 
(Ex.  xxix.  2  ;  Lev.  viii.  2),  the  Nazarite-offeriii;; 
(Num.  vi.  15),  and  more  particularly  in  regard  to 
the  feast  of  the  Passover,  when  the  Israelites 
were  not  only  prohibited  on  pain  of  death  from 
eating  leavened  bread,  but  even  from  having  any 
leaven  in  their  houses  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19)  or  in  their 
land  (Ex.  xiii.  7  ;  Deut.  xvi.  4)  during  seven  days 
commencing  with  the  14th  of  N  isan.  It  is  in  re 
ference  to  these  prohibitions  that  Amos  (iv.  5) 
ironically  bids  the  Jews  of  his  day  to  "  offer  a  sa 
crifice  of  thanksgiving  with  leaven;"  and  hence 
even  honey  was  prohibited  (Lev.  ii.  11),  on  account 
of  its  occasionally  producing  fermentation.  In  other 
instances,  where  the  offering  was  to  be  consumed 
by  the  priests,  and  not  on  the  altar,  leaven  might 
be  used,  as  in  the  case  of  the  peace-offering  (Lev. 
vii.  13),  and  the  Pentecostal  loaves  (Lev.  xxiii.  17). 
Various  ideas  were  associated  with  the  prohibition 
of  leaven  in  the  instances  above  quoted ;  in  the  feast 
of  the  Passover  it  served  to  remind  the  Israelites 
both  of  the  haste  with  which  they  fled  out  of  Egyjt 
(Ex.  xii.  39),  and  of  the  sufferings  that  they  had 
undergone  in  that  land,  the  insipidity  of  unleavened 
bread  rendering  it  a  not  inapt  emblem  of  affliction 
(Deut.  xvi.  3).  But  the  most  prominent  idea,  and 
the  one  which  applies  equally  to  all  the  cases  of 
prohibition,  is  connected  with  the  corruption  which 
leaven  itself  had  undergone,  and  which  it  commu 
nicated  to  bread  in  the  process  of  fermentation.  It 
is  to  this  property  of  leaven  that  our  Saviour  points 
when  he  speaks  of  the  "  leaven  (i.  e.  the  corrupt  doc 
trine)  of  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees  "  (Matt, 
xvi.  6) ;  and  St.  Paul,  when  he  speaks  of  the  "  old 
leaven"  (1  Cor.  v.  7).  This  association  of  ideas 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jews ;  it  was  familiar  to 
the  Romans,  who  forbade  the  priest  of  Jupiter  to 
touch  flour  mixed  with  leaven  (Gell.  x.  15,  19), 
and  who  occasionally  used  the  word  fermentum  as 
=  "  corruption  "  (Pers.  Sat.  i.  24).  Plutarch's  ex 
planation  is  very  much  to  the  point :  "  The  leaven 
itself  is  born  from  corruption,  and  corrupts  the 
mass  with  which  it  is  mixed  "  (Quaest.  Rom.  109). 
Another  quality  in  leaven  's  noticed  in  the  Bible, 
vis.  its  secretly  penetrating  and  diffusive  power 
hence  the  proverbial  saying,  "  a  little  leaven  leav- 
eneth  the  whole  lump"  (1  Cor.  v.  6;  Gal.  v.  9). 
In  this  respect  it  was  emblematic  of  moral  influence 
generally,  whether  good  or  bad,  and  hence  our 
Saviour  adopts  it  as  illustrating  the  growth  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  in  the  individual  heart  and  in 
the  world  at  large  (Matt.  xiii.  33).  [W.  L.  B.] 

LEB'ANON  (in  prose  with  the  art.  JU^n, 
1  K.  v.  20  ;  in  poetry  without  the  art.  fl2  J?,  IV. 

zxis.  6  :  A/0apor :  Libaniis),  a  mountain  range  in 
the  north  of  Palestine.  The  name  Lebanon  signifies 
"  white,"  and  was  applied  either  on  account  of  the 
snow,  which,  during  a  great  part  of  the  year,  covers 


[VINKOAR]  :     khametz    is    applied    exclusively    to 
bread. 


86 


LEBANON 


its  whole  summit,"  or  on  account  of  tlie  white 
colour  of  its  linvi'stone  cliff's  and  peaks.  It  is  the 
"  white  mountain  " — the  Mont  Blanc  of  Palestine; 
an  appellation  which  seems  to  be  given,  in  one  form 
or  another,  to  the  highest  mountains  in  all  the  coun 
tries  of  the  old  world.  Lebanon  is  represented  in 
Scripture  as  lying  upon  Ihe  northern  border  of  the 
laud  of  Israel  (Deut.  i.  7,  si.  24  ;  Josh.  i.  4).  Two 
distinct  ranges  bear  this  name.  They  both  begin 
in  lat.  33°  20',  and  run  in  parallel  lines  from  S.W. 
to  N.E.  for  about  90  geog.  miles,  enclosing  between 
them  a  long  fertile  valley  from  5  to  8  miles  wide, 
anciently  called  Coele-Syria.  The  modern  name  is 
el-Bukd'a,b  "  the  valley,"  corresponding  exactly  to 
"  the  valley  of  Lebanon"  in  Joshua  (si.  17).c  It 
is  a  northern  prolongation  of  the  Jordan  valley, 
and  likewise  a  southern  prolongation  of  that  of  the 
Oroutes  (Porter's  Handbook,  p.  xvi.).  The  western 
range  is  the  "  Libanus  "  of  the  old  geographers,  and 
the  Lebanon  of  Scripture,  where  Solomon  got  timber 
tor  the  temple  (1  K.  v.  9,  &c.),  and  where  the 
Hivites  and  Giblites  dwelt  (Judg.  iii.  3 ;  Josh, 
xiii.  5).  The  eastern  range  was  called  "  Anti- 
Libanus "  by  geographers,  and  "  Lebanon  toward 
the  sun-rising"  by  the  sacred  writers  (Josh.  xiii.  5). 
Strabo  describes  (xvi.  p.  754)  the  two  as  commenc 
ing  near  the  Mediterranean — the  former  at  Tripolis, 
and  the  latter  at  Sidon — and  running  in  parallel 
lines  toward  Damascus ;  and,  strange  to  say,  this 
error  has,  in  pail  at  least,  been  followed  by  most 
modern  writers,  who  represent  the  mountain-range 
between  Tyre  and  the  lake  of  Merom  as  a  branch  of 
Anti-Libanus  (Winer,  Realwb.,  s.  v.  "  Libanon  ;" 
Robinson,  1st  ed,  iii.  346 ;  but  see  the  corrections 
in  the  new  edition).  The  topography  of  Anti- 
Libanus  was  first  clearly  described  in  Porter's 
Damascus  (i.  297,  &c.,  ii.  309,  &c.).  A  deep 
valley  called  Wady  et-Teim  separates  the  southern 
section  of  Anti-Libanus  from  both  Lebanon  and  the 
hills  of  Galilee.* 

Lebanon — the  western  range — commences  on  the 
south  at  the  deep  ravine  of  the  Litany,  the  ancient 
river  Leontes,  which  drains  the  valley  of  Coele-Syria, 
and  falls  into  the  Mediterranean  five  miles  north 
of  Tyre.  It  runs  N.E.  in  a  straight  line  parallel 
to  the  coast,  to  the  opening  from  the  Mediterranean 
into  the  plain  of  Emesa,  called  in  Scripture  the 
"  Entrance  of  Hamath"  (Num.  xxxiv.  8).  Here 
Nahr  el-Jfebti — the  ancient  river  Eleutherus — 
sweeps  round  its  northern  end,  as  the  Leoutes  does 
round  its  southern.  The  average  elevation  of  the 
range  is  from  6000  to  8000  ft. ;  but  two  peaks  rise 
considerably  higher.  One  of  these  it>  Sunntn,  nearly 
on  the  parallel  of  Beyrout,  which  is  more  than  9000 
feet ;  the  other  is  Jebel  Mukhmel,  which  was  mea 
sured  in  September,  1860,  by  the  hydrographer  of 
the  Admiralty,  and  found  to  be  very  nearly  10,200 
feet  high  (Nat.  Hist.  Rev.,  No.  V.  p.  11).  It  is 
the  highest  mountain  in  Syria.  On  the  summits 
of  both  these  peaks  the  snow  remains  in  patches 
during  the  whole  summer. 

The  central  ridge  or  backbone  of  Tphnnon  ha? 
smooth,  barren  sides,  and  gray  rounded  summits. 


LEBANON 

It  is  entirely  destitute  of  verdure,  and  ia  covew! 
with  small  fragments  of  limestone,  from  which 
white  crowns  and  jagged  points  of  miked  rock  shoot 
up  at  intervals.  Here  and  there  a  f<nw  stuntnl 
pine-tree?  or  dwarf  oaks  are  met  with.  The  line  of 
cultivation  runs  along  at  the  height  of  about 
6000  ft. ;  and  below  this  the  features  of  the  westei  c 
slopes  arc  entirely  different.  The  descent  is  gradual ; 
but  is  everywhere  broken  by  precipices  and  tower 
ing  rocks  which  time  and  the  elements  have  chiselled 
into  strange,  fantastic  shapes.  Ravines  of  singulai 
wildness  and  grandeur  furrow  the  whole  mountain 
side,  looking  in  many  places  like  huge  rents.  Here 
and  there,  too,  bold  promontories  shoot  out,  and 
dip  perpendicularly  into  the  bosom  of  the  Mediter 
ranean.  The  rugged  limestone  banks  are  scantily 
clothed  with  the  evergreen  oak,  and  the  sandstone 
with  pines ;  while  every  available  spot  is  carefully 
cultivated.  The  cultivation  is  wonderful,  and 
shows  what  all  Syria  might  be  if  under  a  good  go 
vernment.  Miniature  fields  of  grain  are  often  seen 
where  one  would  suppose  the  eagles  alone,  which 
hover  round  them,  could  have  planted  the  seed. 
Fig-trees  cling  to  the  naked  rock ;  vines  are  trained 
along  narrow  ledges  ;  long  ranges  of  mulberries,  on 
terraces  like  steps  of  stairs,  cover  the  more  gentle 
declivities;  and  dense  groves  of  olives  fill  up  the 
bottoms  of  the  glens.  Hundreds  of  villages  are 
seen — here  built  amid  labyrinths  of  rocks;  there 
clinging  like  swallows' nests  to  the  sides  of  cliffs; 
while  convents,  no  less  numerous,  are  perched  on 
the  top  of  every  peak.  When  viewed  from  th« 
sea  on  a  moming  in  early  spring,  Lebanon  presents 
a  picture  which  once  seen  is  never  forgotten  ;  but 
deeper  still  is  the  impression  left  on  the  mind  when 
one  looks  down  over  its  terraced  slopes  clothed  in 
;  their  gorgeous  foliage,  and  through  the  vistas  of  its 
magnificent  glens,  on  the  broad  and  bright  Medi- 
|  terranean.  How  beautifully  do  these  noble  features 
j  illustrate  the  words  of  the  prophet :  "  Israel  shall 
1  grow  as  the  lily,  and  strike  forth  his  roots  as  Leba 
non"  (Hos.  xiv.  ft).  And  the  fresh  mountain 
breezes,  filled  in  early  summer  with  the  fragrance 
of  the  budding  vines,  and  throughout  the  year  with 
the  rich  odours  of  numerous  aromatic  shrubs,  call 
to  mind  the  words  of  Solomon — "  The  smell  of  thy 
garments  is  like  the  smell  of  Lebanon  "  (Cant.  iv. 
11;  see  also  Hos.  xiv.  6).  When  the  plains  of 
Palestine  are  burned  up  with  the  scorching  sun, 
and  when  the  air  in  them  is  like  the  breath  of  a 
furnace,  the  snowy  tops"  and  ice-cold  streams  of 
Lebanon  temper  the  breezes,  and  make  the  mountain- 
range  a  pleasant  and  luxurious  retreat, — "  Shall  a 
man  leave  the  snow  of  Lebanon  ...  or  shall  the 
cold-flowing  waters  be  forsaken?"  (Jer.  xviii.  14). 
The  vine  is  still  largely  cultivated  in  every  part  of 
the  mountain ;  and  the  wine  is  excellent,  notwith 
standing  the  clumsy  apparatus  and  unskilful  work 
men  employed  in  its  manufacture  (Hos.  xiv.  7). 
Lebanon  also  abounds  in  olives,  figs,  and  mulberries ; 
while  some  remnants  exist  of  the  forests  of  pine, 
oak,  and  cedar,  which  formerly  covered  it  ( 1  K.  v. 
6;  Ps.  xxix.  5;  Is.  xiv.  8;  Ezr.  iii.  7  ;  Diod.  Sic. 


•  So  Tacitus  (Hitt.  v.  6)  :  "  Praecipnum  montium 
I.ibanum  erigit,  mirum  dictu,  tantos  inter  ardores 
:<pacum  fldumque  nivibus." 


(v.  20)  :    "  A  tergo  (Sidonis)  mons  Libanus  orsws, 
mille  quingentis  stadiis  Simyram  usque  porrigitur, 


qua  Coele-Syria  cognominatnr.    Huic  par  intcrjacente 
valle  mons  adversus  obtcnditur,   muro  ronjunctus." 
Ptolemy  (v.  15)  follows  Strabo  ;  but  Euscbius  (flnom, 
j  8.  v.   "  Antilibanus")  says,  'ArriAi^afov,  re.  Oirfp  T<* 
Pliny  was  more  accurate  than  Strabo.     He  says  '  Ai/Joror  npbs  araroAa?,  wpbs  ^0410.0 uriviov  x<oi>ov. 


'  jij3>>n  nyj53 


LEBANON 

xix.  .r>8).  I'oLsiilerable  numbers  of  wild  boasts  still 
inhabit  its  retired  glens  and  higher  peaks;  the 
writer  has  seen  jackals,  hyenas,  wolves,  bears,  and 
[•anthers  (2  K.  xiv.  9  ;  Cant.  iv.  $  ;  Hab.  ii.  17). 

Some  noble  streams  of  classic  celebrity  have  their 
sources  high  up  in  Lebanon,  and  rush  down  in 
sheets  of  foam  through  sublime  glens,  to  stain  with 
their  ruddy  waters  the  transparent  bosom  of  the 
Mediterranean.  The  Leontes  is  on  the  south. 
Next  comes  Nahr  Auwuly — tho  "  graceful  Ros- 
trenos "  of  Dionysius  Periegetes  (905).  Then 
follows  the  Ddmui — the  "  Tamuras "  of  Strabo 
(xvi.  p.  726),  and  the  "  Damuras"  of  Polybius  (v. 
68).  Next,  just  on  the  north  side  of  Beyrout, 
.Va/if  Beyroui,  the  "  M.igoras"  of  Pliny  (v.  ?0). 


LEBANON 


87 


A  lew  miles  beyond  it  is  Nahr  el-Kclb,  the  "  Lycus 
flumen  "  of  the  old  geographers  (Plin.  v.  20).  At 
its  mouth  is  the  celebrated  pass  where  Egyptian, 
Assyrian,  and  Roman  conquerors  have  left  on  tablets 
of  stone,  'ecords  of  their  routes  and  their  victories 
(Porter's  Handbook,  p.  407).  Nahr  Ibrahim,  the 
classic  river  "  Adonis,"  follows,  bursting  from  a 
cave  beneath  the  lofty  brow  of  Sitnnin,  beside  the 
ruins  of  Apheca.  From  its  native  rock  it  runs 

"  Purple  to  the  sea,  supposed  with  blood 
Of  Thammuz,  yearly  •wounded." 

(Lucian  de  Syr.  Dea,  6-8 ;  Strab.  xvi.  755 ;  Plin. 
v.  17 ;  Porter's  Damascus,  ii.  295.)  Lastly,  we 
have  the  "  sacred  river,"  Kadisha — descending 


The  grand  range 


from  the  side  of  the  loftiest  peak  m  the  whole 
range,  through  a  gorge  of  surpassing  grandeur. 
Upon  its  banks,  in  a  notch  of  a  towering  cliff,  is 
perched  the  great  convent  of  Kanobin,  the  residence 
of  the  Maronite  patriarch. 

The  situation  of  the  little  group  of  cedars — the 
last  remnant  of  that  noble  forest,  once  the  glory  of 
Lebanon — is  very  remarkable.  Round  the  head  of 
the  sublime  valley  of  the  Kadisha  sweep  the  highest 
summits  of  Lebanon  in  the  form  of  a  semicircle. 
Their  sides  rise  up,  bare,  smooth,  majestic,  to  the 
rounded  snow-capped  heads.  In  the  centre  of  this 
vast  recess,  far  removed  from  all  other  foliage  and 
verdure,  stand,  in  strange  solitude,  the  cedars  of 
Lebanon,  as  if  they  scorned  to  mingle  their  giant 
arms,  and  graceful  fan-like  branches,  with  the  de 
generate  trees  of  a  later  age." 

Along  the  ba°e  of  Lebanon  runs  the  irregular 
plain  of  Phoenicia;  nowhere  more  than  two  miles 
wide,  and  often  interrupted  by  bold  rocky  spurs, 
that  dip  into  the  sea. 


The  eastern  slopes  of  Lebanon  are  much  less  im-' 
posing  and  less  fertile  than  the  western.  In  the 
southern  half  of  the  range  there  is  an  abrupt  descen* 
from  the  summit  into  the  plain  of  Coele-Syria, 
which  has  an  elevation  of  about  2500  ft.  Along 
the  proper  base  of  the  northern  half  runs  a  low  side 
ridge  partially  covered  with  dwarf  oaks. 

The  northern  half  of  the  mountain-range  is  peo 
pled,  almost  exclusively,  by  Maronite  Christians — a 
brave,  industrious,  and  hardy  race ;  but  sadly  op 
pressed  by  an  ignorant  set  of  priests.  In  the  souther* 
half  the  Druzes  predominate,  who,  though  they  num 
ber  only  some  20,000  righting  men,  form  one  01 
the  most  powerful  parties  in  Syria. 

The  main  ridge  of  Lebanon  is  composed  of  Jura 
limestone,  and  abounds  in  fossils.  Long  belts  of 
more  recent  sandstone  run  along  the  western  slopes, 
which  is  in  places  largely  impregnated  with  iron. 
Some  strata  towards  the  southern  end  are  said  to 
yield  as  much  as  90  per  cent,  of  pure  iron  (Deut. 
viii.  9,  xxxiii.  25).  Coal  is  found  in  the  district  of 


•  The  height  ot  the  grove  la  now  ascertained  to  be  6172  ft.  above  the  Mediterranean  (Dr.  Hooker,  in  .\at.  Hitt.  . 
No.  V.  p.  11). 


88 


LEBANON 


Metn,  east  of  Beyrowt,  near  the  village  of  Kur- 
idyil.  A  mine  was  opened  by  Ibrahim  Pasha,  but 
soon  abandoned.  Cretaceous  strata  of  a  very  late 
period  lie  along  the  whole  western  base  of  the  moun 
tain-range. 

Lebanon  was  originally  inhabited  by  the  Hivites 
and  Giblites  (Judg.  iii.  3 ;  Josh.  xiii.  5,  6).  The 
latter  either  gave  their  name  to,  or  took  their  name 
from,  the  city  of  Gebal,  called  by  the  Greeks  Byblus 
(LXX.  of  Ez.  xxvii.  9  ;  Strabo,  xvi.  p.  755).  The 
old  city — now  almost  in  ruins, — and  a  small  district 
round  it,  still  bear  the  ancient  name,  in  the  Arabic 
form  Jebailf  (Porter's  Handbook,  p.  586).  The 
whole  mountain  range  was  assigned  to  the  Israelites, 
but  was  never  conquered  by  them  (Josh.  liii.  2-6  ; 
Judg.  iii.  1-3).  During  the  Jewish  monarchy  it  ap 
pears  to  have  been  subject  to  the  Phoenicians  (IK. 
v.  2-6  ;  Ezr.  iii.  7).  From  the  Greek  conquest  until 
modern  times  Lebanon  had  no  separate  history. 

Anti-Libanus. — The  main  chain  of  Anti-Libanus 
:ommences  in  the  plateau  of  Bashan,  near  the  pa 
rallel  of  Caesarea-Philippi,  runs  north  to  Hermon, 
and  then  north-east  in  a  straight  line  till  it  sinks 
down  into  the  great  plain  of  Emesa,  not  far  from 
the  site  of  Riblah.  HERMON  is  the  loftiest  peak, 
and  has  already  been  described ;  the  next  highest 
is  a  few  miles  north  of  the  site  of  Abila,  beside 
the  village  of  Bludan,  and  has  an  elevation  of 
about  7000  ft.  The  rest  of  the  ridge  averages 
about  5000  ft. ;  it  is  in  general  bleak  and  barren, 
with  shelving  gray  declivities,  gray  cliffs,  and  gray 
rounded  summits.  Here  and  there  we  meet  with 
thin  forests  of  dwarf  oak  and  juniper.  The  western 
slopes  descend  abruptly  into  the  Buka'a ;  but  the 
features  of  the  eastern  are  entirely  different.  Three 
side-ridges  here  radiate  from  Hermon,  like  the  ribs 
of  an  open  fan,  and  form  the  supporting  walls  of 
three  great  terraces.  The  last  and  lowest  of  these 
ridges  takes  a  course  nearly  due  east,  bounding  the 
plain  of  Damascus,  and  running  out  into  the  desert 
as  far  as  Palmyra.  The  greater  part  of  the  terraces 
thus  formed  are  parched  flinty  deserts,  though  here 
and  there  are  sections  with  a  rich  soil.  Anti-Liba 
nus  can  only  boast  of  two  streams — the  Pharpar, 
now  Nahr  el-'Awaj,  which  rises  high  up  on  the  side  of 
Hermon ;  and  the  Abana,  now  called  Bar&da.  The 
fountain  of  the  latter  is  in  the  beautiful  little  plain 
of  Zebdany,  on  the  western  side  of  the  main  chain, 
'  through  which  it  cuts  in  a  sublime  gorge,  and  then 
divides  successively  each  of  the  side-ridges  in  its 
course  to  Damascus.  A  small  streamlet  flows  down 
the  valley  of  Helbon  parallel  to  the  Abana. 

Anti-Libanus  is  more  thinly  peopled  than  its 
nister  range ;  and  it  is  more  abundantly  stocked 
with  wild  beasts.  Eagles,  vultures,  and  other 
birds  of  prey,  may  be  seen  day  after  day  sweeping 
m  circles  round  the  beetling  cliffs.  Wild  swine  are 
numerous  ;  and  vast  herds  of  gazelles  roam  over  the 
bleak  eastern  steppes. 

Anti-Libanus  is  only  once  distinctly  mentioned 
in  Scripture,  where  it  is  accurately  described  as 
"  Lebanon  toward  the  sun-rising  "h  (Josh.  xiii.  5)  ; 
out  the  southern  section  of  the  chain  is  frequently 


mjo 

1  Amana  and  Abana  seem  to  be  identical,  for  in 
2  K.  v.  12  the  Keii  reading  is  flJQK. 

k  The  Heb.   "MD3   is   identical   with   the   Aralic 

-^  i.  «'a  panther." 
'    Strabo  tavg 'xvi.  p.  755),   o  Matrovat    fx10"  T*1"' 


LEBONAH 

referred  to  under  other  names.  [See  llKKMON.  j 
The  words  of  Solomon  in  Cant.  iv.  8  are  very 
striking — "  Look  from  the  top  of  Amana,  from  the 
top  of  Shenir  and  Hermon,  from  the  lions'  den,  from 
the  mountains  of  the  leopards."1  The  reference  if 
in  all  probability,  to  the  two  highest  peaks  of  Anti- 
Libanus, — Hermon,  and  that  near  the  fountain  of 
the  Abana;  and  in  both  places  panthers*  still  exist, 
"  The  tower  of  Lebanon  which  looketh  toward 
Damascus"  (Cant.  vii.  4)  is  doubtless  Hermon, 
which  forms  the  most  striking  feature  in  the  whole 
panorama  round  that  city.  Josephus  mentions 
Lebanon  as  lying  near  Dan  and  the  fountains  of  the 
Jordan  (Ant.  v.  3,  §1),  and  as  bounding  the  pro 
vince  of  Gaulanitis  on  the  north  (£.  J.  iii.  3,  §5) ; 
he  of  course  means  Anti-Libanus.1  The  old  city  of 
Abila  stood  in  one  of  the  wildest  glens  of  Anti- 
Libanus,  on  the  banks  of  the  Abana,  and  its  terri 
tory  embraced  a  large  section  of  the  range.  [ABI 
LENE.]  Damascus  owes  its  existence  to  a  stream 
from  these  mountains ;  so  did  the  once  great  and 
splendid  city  of  Heliopolis ;  and  the  chief  sources  of 
both  the  Leontes  and  Orontes  lie  along  their  western 
base  (Porter's  Handbook,  pp.  xviii.,  xix.).  [J.  L.  P.] 

LEB'AOTH  (niK3^> :  AcjSciy ;  Alex.  Aa0o>0  : 
Lebaotli),  a  town  which  forms  one  of  the  last  group 
of  the  cities  of  "  the  South  "  in  the  enumeration  of 
the  possessions  of  Judah  (Josh.  rv.  32).  It  is  named 
between  Sansannah  and  Shilhim ;  and  is  very  pro 
bably  identical  with  BETH-LEBAOTH,  elsewhere 
called  BETH-BIREI.  No  trace  of  any  names  an 
swering  to  these  appears  to  have  been  yet  disco 
vered.  If  we  may  adopt  the  Hebrew  signification 
of  the  name  ("  lionesses"),  it  furnishes  an  indi 
cation  of  the  existence  of  wild  animals  in  the  south 
of  Palestine.  [G.] 

LEBBAE'US.  This  name  occurs  in  Matt, 
x.  3,  according  to  Codex  D  (Bezae  Cantabrigiensis) 
of  the  sixth  century,  and  in  the  received  Text.  In 
Mark  iii.  18,  it  is  substituted  in  a  few  unimportant 
MSS.  for  Thaddeus.  The  words,  "  Lebbaeus  who 
is  called  "  (Matt.  x.  3),  are  not  found  in  the  Va 
tican  MS.  (B),  and  Lachmann  rejects  them  as,  in 
his  opinion,  not  received  by  the  most  ancient  Eastern 
churches.  The  Vulgate  omits  them ;  but  Jerome 
(Comm.  in  Matt.)  says  that  Thaddeus,  or  Judas 
the  brother  of  James,  is  elsewhere  called  Lebbaeus  ; 
and  he  concludes  that  this  apostle  had  three  names. 
It  is  much  easier  to  suppose  that  a  strange  name  has 
been  omitted  than  that  it  has  been  inserted  by  later 
transcribers.  It  is  admitted  into  the  ancient  versions 
of  the  N.  T.,  and  into  all  the  English  versions  (except 
the  Rhemish)  since  Tyndale's  in  1534.  For  the 
signification  of  the  name,  and  for  the  life  of  the 
apostle,  see  JUDE,  vol.  i.  p.  1163.  [W.  T.  B.] 

LEBO'NAH  (fUto^  :  TTJS  A«fl«w»;  Alex,  rot 

\ifrivov  TIJS  At£o>j/a  :  Lebond),  a  place  named  in 
Judg.  xxi.  19  only ;  and  there  but  as  a  landmark  to 
determine  the  position  of  Shiloh,  which  is  stated  to 
have  lain  south  of  it.  Lebonah  has  survived  to  our 
times  under  the  almost  identical  form  of  el-Lttbban. 


xat  optiva.,  iv  ois  7;  XaAxU,  ucnrcp  axpoTroAtt  TOV 
Meuroiiov.  'Ap^i;  &'  avrov  Aaoiixeia  ^  rrpbt  Ai/3aiti>. 
From  this  it  appears  that  the  province  of  Massyas  in 
his  day  embraced  the  whole  of  Anti-Libanus ;  for 
Laodicca  ad  Libanum  lies  at  the  northern  end  of  the 
range  (Porter's  Damaiciu,  ii.  339),  and  the  site  of 
Chalcis  is  at  its  western  base,  twenty  miles  soutb  t! 
Ba'albek  (id.  i.  11). 


LECAIJ 

It  lies  co  the  west  of,  and  close  to,  theJfablus  road, 
about  eight  miles  north  of  Beitin  (Bethel),  and  two 
from  Seil&n  (Shiloh),  in  relation  to  which  it  stands, 
however,  nearer  W.  than  N.  The  village  is  on  the 
northern  acclivity  of  the  wady  to  which  it  gives 
its  name.  Its  appearance  is  ancient ;  and  in  the  rocks 
above  it  are  excavated  sepulchres  (Rob.  ii.  272).  To 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
Vnown.  The  earliest  mention  of  it  yet  met  with 
is  in  the  Itinerary  of  the  Jewish  traveller  hap- 
Parchi  (A.D,  cir.  1320),  who  describes  it  under  the 
name  oi'Lubin,  and  refers  especially  to  its  correspond 
ence  with  the  passage  in  Judges  (See  Asher's  Benj. 
of  Tudela,  ii.  435).  It  was  visited  by  Maimdrell 
(March  24,  25),  who  mentions  the  identification 
with  Lebonah,  but  in  such  terms  as  may  imply 
that  he  was  only  repeating  a  tradition.  Since  then 
it  has  been  passed  and  noticed  by  most  travellers 
to  th>  Holy  Land  (Rob.  ii.  272  ;  Wilson,  ii.  292,  3  ; 
Bonar,  363  ;  Mislin,  iii.  319,  &c.  &c.).  [G.] 

LE'CAH  (POJ?  :  ArjxS ;  Alex.  Ar;xa5:  Lecha), 

a  name  mentioned  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iv.  21  only)  as  one  of  the  descendants  of 
Shelah,  the  third  son  of  Judah  by  the  Canaanitess 
Bath-shua.  The  immediate  progenitor  of  Lecah 
was  ER.  Many  of  the  names  in  this  genealogy, 
especially  when  the  word  "father"  is  attached, 
are  towns  (comp.  Eshtemoa,  Keilah,  Mareshah,  &c.) ; 
but  this,  though  probably  the  case  with  Lecah,  is 
not  certain,  because  it  is  not  mentioned  again,  either 
in  the  Bible  or  the  Onomasticon,  nor  have  any  traces 
of  it  been  since  discovered.  L^*3 

LEECH.    [HORSE-LEECH,  Appendix  A.] 

LEEKS  (TSI 


LEEKS 


80 


•  herba,  porrus,  foenum, 
pratum).  The  word  chdtsir,  which  in  Num.  xi.  5 
is  translated  leeks,  occurs  twenty  times  in  the  He 
brew  text.  In  1  K.  xviii.  5;  Job  xl.  15;  Ps.  civ. 
14,  cxlvii.  8,  cxxix.  6,  xxxvii.  2,  xc.  5,  ciii.  15  ;  Is. 
xxxvii.  27,  xl.  6,  7,  8,  xliv.  4,  Ii.  12,  it  is  rendered 
grass ;  in  Job  viii.  12,  it  is  rendered  herb ;  in  Prov. 
xxvii.  25,  Is.  xv.  6,  it  is  erroneously  translated 
hay ;  in  Is.  xxxiv.  14,  the  A.  V.  has  court  (see 
note).  The  word  leeks  occurs  in  the  A.  V.  only 
in  Num.  xi.  5  ;  it  is  there  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
good  things  of  Egypt  for  which  the  Israelites  longed 
in  their  journey  through  the  desert,  just  before  the 
terrible  plague  at  Kibroth-hattaavah,  "  the  cucum 
bers,  and  the  melons,  and  the  leeks,  and  the  onions, 
and  the  garlic."  The  Hebrew  term,  which  properly 
denotes  grass,  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
be  green,"*  and  may  therefore  stand  in  this  passage 
for  any  green  food,  lettuce,  endive,  &c.,  as  Ludolf 
and  Maillet  have  conjectured  ;  it  would  thus  be 
applied  somewhat  in  the  same  manner  as  we  use 
the  term  "  greens ;"  yet  as  the  chdtsir  is  mentioned 
together  with  onions  and  garlick  in  the  text,  and 
as  the  most  ancient  versions,  Onkelos,  the  LXX., 
and  the  Vulgate,  together  with  the  Syriac  and  the 
Arabic  of  Saadias,b  unanimously  understand  leeks 
by  the  Hebrew  word,  we  may  be  satisfied  with  our 
own  translation.  Moreover,  chdtsir  would  apply  to 
the  leek  appropriately  enough,  both  from  its  green 
colour  and  the  grass-like  form  of  the  leaves. 


There  is,  however,  another  and  a  very  ingenious 
interpretation  of  chdtsir,  first  proposed  by  Heng- 
stenberg,  and  received  by  Dr.  Kitto  (Pictor.  Bible, 
Num.  xi.  5),  which  adopts  a  more  literal  translation 


Common  leek  (All 


of  the  original  word,  for,  says  Dr.  Kitto,  "among 
the  wonders  in  the  natural  history  of  Egypt,  it  is 
mentioned  by  travellers  that  the  common  people 
there  eat  with  special  relish  a  kind  of  grass  similar 
to  clover."  Mayer  (Reise  nach  Aegyptien,  p.  226) 
says  of  this  plant  (whose  scientific  name  is  Trigo- 
nella  foenum  Graecum,  belonging  to  the  natural 
order  Leguminosae),  that  it  is  similar  to  clover, 
but  its  leaves  more  pointed,  and  that  great  quan 
tities  of  it  are  eaten  by  the  people.  ForskSl  mentions 
the  Trigonella  as  being  grown  in  the  gardens  at 
Cairo ;  its  native  name  is  ffalbeh  (Flor.  Aegypt. 
p.  81). 


Trigonell 


Sonnini  (  Voyage,  i.  379)  says,  "  In  this  fertile 
country,  the  Egyptians  themselves  eat  the  fenu-grcc 


,  viruit,  i.  q.  Arab. 


(hadsir).  Gesenius 


cirmimvallit.     He  compares  the  Greek  x°PTO*>  which 
primarily  means  a  court  (for  cattle) ;  hence,  a  pasture  ; 


hence,  in  an  extended  sense,  grass  or  herbage.    But 
see  the  different  derivation  of  Fiirst. 

b  The  word  employed  here  is  still  the  nsxie   IB 
Egypt  for  leek  (Hasselquist,  562). 


M  LEES 

so  largely,  that  it  may  be  properly  called  the  food 
of  man.  In  the  month  of  November  they  cry 
'  green  halbeh  for  sale ! '  in  the  streets  of  the 
town;  it  is  tied  up  in  large  bunches,  which  the 
inhabitants  purchase  at  a  low  price,  and  which 
they  eat  with  incredible  greediness  without  any 
kind  of  seasoning." 

The  seeds  of  this  plant,  which  is  also  cultivated 
in  Greece,  are  often  used ;  they  are  eaten  boiled  or 
raw,  mixed  with  honey.     ForskSl  includes  it  in  the 
Materia  Medica  of  Egypt  (Mat.  Med.  Kahir.  p. 
155).     However  plausible  may  be  this  theory  of 
Hengstenberg,  there  does  not  appear  sufficient  reason 
for  ignoring  the  old  versions,  which  seem  all  agreed 
tha.  the  leek  is  the  plant  denoted  by  chdtsir,  a 
vegetable  from  the  earliest  times  a  great  favourite 
with   the    Egyptians,   as   both   a   nourishing  and 
savouiy  food.     Some  have  objected  that,  as  the 
Egyptians  held  the  leek,  onion,  &c.,  sacred,  they 
would  abstain  from  eating  these  vegetables  them 
selves,  and  would  not  allow  the  Israelites  to  use 
them.c     We  have,  however,  the  testimony  of  Hero 
dotus  (ii.  125)  to  show  that  onions  were  eaten  by 
the  Egyptian  poor,  for  he  says  that  on  one  of  the 
pyramids  is  shown  an  inscription,  which  was  ex 
plained  to  him  by  an  interpreter,  showing  how  much 
money  was  spent  in  providing  radishes,  onions,  and 
garlic,  for  the   workmen.      The  priests  were  not 
al'.owed  to  eat  these  things,  and  Plutarch  (De  Is.  et 
Osir.  ii.  p.  353)  tells  us  the  reasons.    The  Welshman 
reverences  his  leek,  and  wears  one  on  St.  David's 
Day — he  eats  the  leek  nevertheless ;  and  doubtless 
the   Egyptians   were   not   over-scrupulous  (Scrip. 
Herbal,  p.  230).  The  leek  d  is  too  well-known  to  need 
description.     Its  botanical  name  is  Allium  porrum  • 
it  belongs  to  the  order  Liliaceae.  [W.  H.] 


LEH1 

'o  the  angels  (Matt.  xxvi.  53),  and  in  this  sense  it 
:>nswers  to  the  '«  hosts  "  of  the  Old  Testament  (G«u. 
xxxii.  2;  Ps.  cxlviii.  2).«  It  is  again  the  name 
which  the  demoniac  assumes,  "  My  name  is  Legion 
(Afyitav)  ;  for  we  are  many"  (Mark  v.  9),  imply 
ing  the  presence  of  a  spirit  of  superior  powir  in  ad 

[W.  L.  B.j 


LEES  (Dn»E> :  rpvyiai :  faeces').  The  Hebrew 
shemer  bears  the  radical  sense  of  preservation,  and 
was  applied  to  "  lees"  from  the  custom  of  allowing 
the  wine  to  stand  on  the  lees  in  order  that  its  colour 
and  body  might  be  better  preserved.  Hence  the 
expression  "  wine  on  the  lees,"  as  meaning  a  gener 
ous  full-bodied  liquor  (Is.  xxv.  6).  The  wine  in 
this  state  remained,  of  course,  undisturbed  in  its 
cask,  and  became  thick  and  syrupy ;  hence  the 
proverb,  "  to  settle  upon  one's  lees,"  to  express  the 
sloth,  indifference,  and  gross  stupidity  of  the  un 
godly  (Jer.  xlviii.  11;  Zeph.  i.  12).  Before  the 
wine  was  consumed,  it  was  necessary  to  strain  off 
the  lees ;  such  wine  was  then  termed  "  well  refined  " 
(Is.  xxv.  6).  To  drink  the  lees,  or  "  dregs,"  was  an 
expression  for  the  endurance  of  extreme  punishment 
(Ps.  Ixxv.  8).  [W.  L.  B.] 

LEGION  (Aeyet&v :  Legio),  the  chief  sub 
division  of  the  I  Ionian  army,  containing  about  6000 
infantry,  with  a  contingent  of  cavalry.  The  tenn 
does  not  occur  in  the  Bible  in  its  primary  sense, 
but  appears  to  have  been  adopted  in  order  to  express 
any  large  number,  with  the  accessory  ideas  of  order 
and  subordination.  Thus  it  is  applied  by  our  Lord 


c  Juvenal's  derision  of  the  Egyptians  for  the  re- 
Tcrcnce  they  paid  to  the  leek  may  here  be  quoted  : 
"  Porrum  et  coepe  ncfas  violare  ac  frangere  morsu, 

O  sanctas  (jentes,  quibus  hnec  nascuntur  in  hortis 

Numina !  " — Sat.  xv.  9. 

Cf.  Plin.  H.  N.  xix.  6  ;  Celsii  Hierob.  ii.  263  ;  Killer. 
Uierophyt.  pt.  ii.  p.  36  ;  Diosc.  ii.  4. 

d  "  Leek "  is  from  the  Anglo-Saxon  leac,  German 
lauch. 
"  This  applicavion  of  the  term  is  illustrated  by  the 


dition  to  subordinate  ones. 

LEHA'BIM    (D'an?  :    Aofre^  :     Laabim}, 
occurring  only  in  Gen.  X.  13,  the  name  of  a  Miz- 
raite  people  or  tribe,  supposed  to  be  the  same  as 
the  Lubim,  mentioned  in  several  places  in  the  Scrip 
tures  as  mercenaries  or  allies  of  the  Egyptians. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Lubim  are  the  same 
as  the  1'eBU  or  LeBU  of  the  Egyptian  inscriptions, 
and  that  from  them  Libya  and  the  Libyans  derived 
their  name.   These  primitive  Libyans  appear,  in  the 
period  at  which  they  are  mentioned  in  these  two  his 
torical  sources,  that  is  from  the  time  of  Menptah,  B.C. 
cir.  1250,  to  that  of  Jeremiah's  notice  of  them  Lite 
in  the  6th  century  B.C.,  and  probably  in  the  case  of 
Daniel's,  prophetically  to  the  earlier  part  of  the  second 
century  B.C.,  to  have  inhabited  the  northern  part  of 
Africa  to  the  west  of  Egypt,  though  latterly  driven 
from  the  coast  by  the  Greek  colonists  of  the  Cyre- 
naica,  as  is  more  fully  shown  under  LUBIM.  Philolo- 
gically,  the  interchange  of  H  as  the  middle  letter  of 
a  root  into  1  quiescent,  is  frequent,  although  it  is  im 
portant  to  remark  that  Gesenius  considers  the  form 
with  H  to  be  more  common  in  the  later  dialects, 
as   the  Semitic    languages  are  now  found  (Thes. 
art.  n).     There  seems  however  to  be  strong  reason 
for  considering  many  of  these  later  forms  to  be  re 
currences  to  primitive  forms.     Geographically,  the 
position  of  the  Lehabim  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
Mizraites  immediately  before  the  Naphtuhim,  sug 
gests  that  they  at  first  settled  to  the  westward  of 
Egypt,  and  nearer  to  it,  or  not  more  distant  from 
it  than  the  tribes  or  peoples  mentioned  before  them. 
[MizRAiM.]     Historically  and  ethnologically,  the 
connexion  of  the  ReBU  and  Libyans  with  Egypt 
and  its  people  suggests  their  kindred  origin  with 
the  Egyptians.    [LUBIM.]    On  these  grounds  there 
can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  of  the  identity  of  the 
Lehabim  and  Lubim.  [K.  S.  P.] 

LE'HI  (with  the  def.  article,  Vl|n,  except  in 
ver.  14:  Aeu«',  in  ver.  9;  Alex.  Aei/f ;  3ta-)<ai>: 
Lechi,  id  est  maxilla),  a  place  in  Judah,  probablv 
on  the  confines  of  the  Philistines'  country,  between 
t  and  the  cliff  Etam ;  the  scene  of  Samson's  well- 
cnown  exploit  with  the  jawbone  (Judg.  xv.  9,  14, 
19).  It  contained  an "minence—  Ramath-lehi,  and  a 
spring  of  great  md  lasting  repute— En  hak-kore. 

Whether  the  name  existed  before  the  exploit  or 
the  exploit  originated  the  name  cannot  now  be  de 
termined  from  the  narrative."  On  the  one  hand,  in 
vers.  9  and  19,  Lehi  is  named  as  if  existing  before 
this  occurrence,  while  on  the  other  the  play  of  the 
story  and  the  statement  of  the  bestowal  of  the  name 
Ramath-lehi  look  as  if  the  reverse  were  intended. 
The  analogy  of  similar  names  in  other  countries  b  is 


Rabbinical    usage    of   fl         as  =  "  leader,    chief" 
(Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  p.  1123). 

8  It  Is  unusually  full  of  plays  and  parcnomastic  turns. 
Thus  »n?  signifies  a  jaw,  and  ^rh  Is  the  name  of  the 
place ;  "llOn  Is  both  a  he-ass  and  a  heap,  &c. 

*>  Compare  the  somewhat  parallel  case  of  Iiunchnrrl. 
and  Iiunsmoor,  which,  in  the  local  traditions,  derive  their 
names  from  an  exploit  of  Guy  of  \Vaiwick. 


LEMUEL 

il  favour  of  its  having  existed  previously.  Even 
uikeii  *>  a  Hebrew  word,  "  Lechi '"  has  another 
meaning  besides  a  jawbone  ;  and  after  all  there  is 
throughout  a  difference  between  the  two  words, 
which,  though  slight  to  our  ears,  would  be  much 
more  marked  to  those  of  a  Hebrew,  and  which  so 
tor  betrays  the  accommodation.0 

A  similar  discrepancy  in  the  case  of  Beer  Lahai-roi, 
and  a  great  similarity  between  the  two  names  in  the 
anginal  (Gesen.  Tlies.  175  6),  has  led  to  the  suppo 
sition  that  that  place  was  the  same  as  Lehi.  But  the 
situations  do  not  suit.  The  well  Lahai-roi  was  below 
Kadesh,  very  far  from  the  locality  to  which  Samson's 
adventures  seem  to  have  been  confined.  The  same 
consideration  would  also  appear  fatal  to  the  identi 
fication  proposed  by  M.  Van  de  Velde  (Meiiwir,  343) 
at  Tell  el-Lekhiyeh,  in  the  extreme  south  of  Pales- 
fine,  only  four  miles  above  Beersheba,  a  distance  to 
A-hich  we  have  no  authority  for  believing  that 
either  Samson's  achievements  or  the  possessions  of 
the  Philistines  (at  least  in  those  days)  extended. 
As  far  as  the  name  goes,  a  more  feasible  suggestion 
would  be  Beit-Likiueh,  a  village  on  the  northern 
slopes  of  the  great  Wady  Suleiinan,  about  two  miles 
below  the  upper  Beth-horon  (see  Tobler,  'Me  Wan- 
i/c'/vt.'i//).  Here  is  a  position  at  once  on  the  borders 
of  both  Judah  and  the  Philistines,  and  within  rea 
sonable  proximity  to  Zorah,  Eshtaol,  Timnath,  and 
other  places  familiar  to  the  history  of  the  great 
Danite  hero.  On  this,  however,  we  must  await 
further  investigation  ;  and  in  the  meantime  it  should 
not  be  overlooked  that  there  are  reasons  for  placing 
the  cliff  Etam — which  seems  to  have  been  near  Lehi 
— in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem.  [ETAM, 

THE  ROCK.] 

The  spring  of  En  hak-kore  is  mentioned  by  Jerome 
(Epitaph.  Paulae,  §14)  in  such  terms  as  to  imply 
that  it  was  then  known,  and  that  it  was  near 
Morasthi,  the  native  place  of  the  prophet  Micah, 
which  he  elsewhere  (Onom.  s.  v. ;  Pref.  ad  Mich.] 
mentions  as  east  of  Eleutheropolis  (Beit  Jibriri). 

Lehi  is  possibly  mentioned  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11 
the  relation  of  another  encounter  with  the  Phi 
listines  hardly  less  disastrous  than  that  of  Samson. 
The  wordd  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "into  a  troop," 
by  alteration  of  the  vowel-points  becomes  "  to  Lehi." 
which  gives  a  new  and  certainly  an  appropriate 
sense.  This  reading  first  appears  in  Josephus  (Ant. 
vii.  12,  §4),  who  gives  it  "a  place  called  Siagona'" 
— the  jaw — the  word  which  he  employs  in  the  story 
of  Samson  (Ant.  v.  8,  §9).  It  is  also  given  in  the 
Complutenoian'  LXX.,  and  among  modern  inter 
preters  by  Bochart  (Hieroz.  i.  2,  ch.  13),  Kennicott 
(Dissert.  140),  J.  D.  Michaelis  (Bibel  fur  Un- 
gelekrt.},  Ewald  (Gesc/uchte,  iii.  180,  note).  [G.] 

LEM'UEL  (^Nlft1?  and  WllO^ :  Lamuel),  the 
Dame  of  an  unknown  king  to  whom  his  mothei 
addressed  the  prudential  maxims  contained  in  Prov. 
itxxi.  1-9.  The  version  of  this  chapter  in  the  LXX. 
is  so  obscure  that  it  is  difficult  to  discover  what 


LENTILES 


01 


text  they  could  have  had  before  them.  In  the  ren 
dering  of  Lemuel  by  vvb  6eov,  in  Prov.  xxx  i.  1, 
niie  traces  of  the  original  are  discernible,  but  in 
ver.  4  it  is  entirely  lost.  The  Rabbinical  com 
mentators  identify  Lemuel  with  Solomon,  and  tell 
a  strange  tale  how  that  when  he  married  the 
daughter  of  Pharaoh,  on  the  day  of  the  dedication 
of  the  Temple,  he  assembled  musicians  of  all  kinds, 
and  passed  the  night  awake.  On  the  morrow  he 
ilept  till  the  fourth  hour,  with  the  keys  of  the 
Temple  beneath  his  pillow,  when  his  mother  en 
tered  and  upbraided  him  in  the  words  of  Prov. 
xxxi.  2-9.  Grotius,  adopting  a  fanciful  etymology 
from  the  Arabic,  makes  Lemuel  the  same  as  Heze- 
kiah.  Hitzig  and  others  regard  him  as  king  or 
chief  of  an  Arab  tribe  dwelling  on  the  borders  of 
Palestine,  and  elder  brother  of  Agur,  whose  name 
stands  at  the  head  of  Prov.  xxx.  [See  JAKEH.] 
According  to  this  view  massd  (A.  V.  "  the  pro 
phecy  " )  is  Maasa  in  Arabia  ;  a  region  mentioned 
twice  in  close  connexion  with  Dumah,  and  peopled 
by  the  descendants  of  Ishmael.  In  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  a  roving  baud  of  Simeonites  drove  out  the 
Amalekites  from  Mount  Seir  and  settled  in  their 
stead  (1  Chr.  iv.  38-43),  and  from  these  exiles  01 
Israelitish  origin  Hitzig  conjectures  that  Lemuel 
and  Agur  were  descended,  the  former  having  been 
born  in  the  land  of  Israel ;  and  that  the  name 
Lemuel  is  an  older  form  of  Nemuel,  the  first-born 
of  Simeon  (Die  Spruche  Salomos,  p.  310-314).  But 
it  is  more  probable,  as  Eichhorn  and  Ewald  suggest, 
that  Lemuel  is  a  poetical  appellation,  selected  by 
the  author  of  these  maxims  for  the  guidance  of  a 
king,  for  the  purpose  of  putting  in  a  striking  form 
the  lessons  which  they  conveyed.  Signifying  as  it 
does  "  to  God,"  »'.  c.  dedicated  or  devoted  to  God, 
like  the  similar  word  Lael,  it  is  in  keeping  with  the 
whole  sense  of  the  passage,  which  contains  the 
portraiture  of  a  virtuous  and  righteous  king,  and 
belongs  to  the  latest  period  of  the  proverbial  litera 
ture  of  the  Hebrews.  "  [W.  A.  W.] 

LENTILESCnWg,  &/&«/»:  4>a<cck:  lens). 

There  cannot  be  the  least  doubt  that  the  A.  V.  is 
correct  in  its  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  which 
occurs  in  the  four  following  passages : — Gen.  xxv. 
34,  2  Sam.  xvii.  28,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11,  and  Ez.  iv.  9  • 
from  which  last  we  learn  that  in  times  of  scarcity 
leutiles  were  sometimes  used  in  making  bread.  There 
are  three  or  four  kinds  of  leutiles,  all  of  which  are 
still  much  esteemed  in  those  countries  where  they 
are  grown,  viz.  the  South  of  Europe,  Asia,  and 
North  Africa:  the  red  lentile  is  still  a  favourite 
article  of  food  in  the  East ;  it  is  a  small  kind,  the 
seeds  of  which  after  being  decorticated,  are  com 
monly  sold  in  the  bazaars  of  India.  The  modern 
Arabic  name  of  this  plant  is  identical  with  the  He 
brew  ;  it  is  known  in  Egypt  and  Arabia,  Syria,  &c., 
by  the  name  'Adas,  as  we  learn  from  the  testimony 
of  several  travellers.*  When  Dr.  Robinson  was 
staying  at  the  castle  of  'Akabah,  he  partook  of 


c  ^n7=Leohl,  Is  the  name  of  the  place  in  vers.  9, 14, 19, 
8r.il  in  Kauiath-Lehi,  ver.  17 :  whereas  L'chl,  ^fl?.  is  the 
word  for  jawbone.  In  ver.  19  the  words  "  in  the  jaw  " 
should  be  "  in  Lehi :"  the  original  is  >H  j>3,  exactly  as  in 
d ;  not  >rP2>  «»  In  16.  See  Milton,  Sams.  Ag.,  Hue  082. 

*  H'nb.  as  if  i1»n.  from  the  root  *n  (tiesen.  Then. 
|<  470).  In  this  sense  the  word  ver?  rarely  occurs  (see 
A.  V.  of  I's  Ixviil.  10,  W;  Ixx'v.  19).  It  elsewhere  has 


the  sense  of  "  living,"  and  thence  of  wild  animals,  which 
is  adopted  by  the  LXX.  in  this  place,  as  remarked  above. 
In  ver.  13  it  is  again  rendered  "  troop."  In  the  parallel 
narrative  of  1  Chronicles  (xi.  15),  the  word  njflD.  » 
"  camp,"  is  substituted. 

"  The  Vatican  and  Alex.  MSS.  read  eis  S^pia.  (>|"0-  *• 
if  the  Philistines  had  come  on  a  hunting  expedition. 

*  See  also  Cataiugo's  Arabic  Duitionury,  "  Lentilcs,' 
,  adat. 


92 


LENTILEB 


(entiles,  which  he  says  he  "  found  veiy  palatable 
and  could  well  conceive  that  to  a  weary  hunter, 
faint  with  hunger,  they  would  be  quite  a  dainty  " 


Lentile  (Krvum  lent) 

(Bib.  Res.  i.  246).  Dr.  Kitto  also  says  that  he  has 
often  partaken  of  red  pottage,  prepared  by  seething 
the  lentiles  in  water,  and  then  adding  a  little  suet, 
to  give  them  a  flavour ;  and  that  he  found  it  better 
food  than  a  stranger  would  imagine;  "  the  mess," 
he  adds,  "  had  the  redness  which  gained  for  it  the 
name  of  adorn"  (Pict.  Bib.,  Gen.  xxv.  30,34).  From 
Sonnini  we  learn  that  lentile  bread  is  still  eaten  by 
the  poor  of  Egypt,  even  as  it  was  in  the  time  of 
Ezekiel ;  indeed,  that  towards  the  cataracts  of  the 
Nile  there  is  scarce  any  other  bread  in  use,  because 
com  is  very  rare ;  the  people  generally  add  a  little 
barley  in  making  their  bread  of  lentiles.  which  "  is 
by  no  means  bad,  though  heavy  "  (Sonnini's  Travels, 
Hunter's  transl.  iii.  288).  Shaw  and  Russell  bear 
similar  testimony. 


Egyptian*  cooking  Lcntiloi  ( Wilkintcn). 

The  Arabs  have  a  tradition  that  Hebron  is  the 
spot  where  Esau  sold  his  birthright,  and  in  memory 
of  this  event  the  dervises  distribute  from  the  kitchen 

»  The  word  1103  means  "spotted"  (see  the  deri 
vations  of  FUrst  and  Gesenius).  The  same  word  for 
"  leopard  "  occurs  in  all  the  cognate  languages.  The 

S  S(j 

Arabic  i*  j^j  (rmmiV),  ^J  (nt'mr),  with  which  the 


LEOPARD 

of  a  mosque  there  a  daily  supply  of  lectile  souy  tc 
travellers  and  poor  inhabitants  (D'Anrieur,  Mem. 
\\.  237). 

The  lentile,  Ervum  lens,  is  much  used  with  other 
pulse  in  Roman  Catholic  countries  during  Lent ;  and 
some  say  that  from  hence  the  season  derives  its  nar:.:. 
It  is  occasionally  cultivated  in  England,  but  only  as 
fodder  for  cattle ;  it  is  also  imported  from  Alexandria. 
From  the  quantity  of  gluten  the  ripe  seeds  contain 
they  must  be  highly  nutritious,  though  they  have 
the  character  of  being  heating  if  taken  in  large 
quantities.  In  Egypt  the  haulm  is  used  for  packing. 
The  lentile  belongs  to  the  natural  order  Legumi- 
nosae.  [W.  H.] 

LEOPARD  ("ID3,  ndmer :  irdpSa\tj :  pardius) 

is  invariably  given  by  the  A.  V.  as  the  translation 
of  the  Hebrew  word,'  which  occurs  in  the  seven 
following  passages, — Is.  xi.  6  ;  Jer.  v.  6,  xiii.  23 ; 
Dan.  vii.  6 ;  Hos.  xiii.  7 ;  Cant.  iv.  8  ;  Hab.  i.  8. 
Leopard  occurs  also  in  Ecclus.  xxviii.  23,  and  in 
Rev.  xiii.  2.  The  swiftness  of  this  animal,  to  which 
Habakkuk  compares  the  Chaldaean  horses,  and  to 
which  Daniel  alludes  in  the  winged  leopard,  the 
emblem  in  his  vision  of  Alexander's  rapid  conquests, 
is  well  known :  so  great  is  the  flexibility  of  its  body, 
that  it  is  able  to  take  surprising  leaps,  to  climb  trees, 
or  to  crawl  snake-like  upon  the  ground.  Jeremiah 
and  Hosea  allude  to  the  insidious  habit  of  this  animal, 
which  is  abundantly  confirmed  by  the  observations 


Leopard  (Leapardut 


of  travellers ;  the  leopard  will  take  up  its  position  in 
some  spot  near  a  village,  and  watch  for  some  favour 
able  opportunity  for  plunder.  From  the  passage 
of  Canticles,  quoted  above,  we  learn  that  the  hilly 
ranges  of  Lebanon  were  in  ancient  times  frequented 
by  these  animals,  and  it  is  now  not  uncommonly 
seen  in  and  about  Lebanon,  and  the  southern 
maritime  mountains  of  Syria b  (Kitto,  note  on 
Cant.  iv.  8).  Burckhardt  mentions  that  leopards 
have  sometimes  been  killed  in  "  the  low  and  rocky 
chain  of  the  Richel  mountain,"  but  he  calls  them 
ounces  (Burck.  Syria,  p.  132).  In  another  passage 
(p.  335)  he  says,  "  in  the  wooded  parts  of  Mount 
Tabor  are  wild  boars  and  ounces."  Mariti  says  that 
the  "  grottoes  at  Kedron  cannot  be  entered  at  all 
seasons  without  danger,  for  in  the  middle  of  summer 
it  is  frequented  by  tigers,  who  retire  hither  to  shun 
the  heat "  (Mariti,  Truv.  (translated),  iii.  58).  By 
tigers  he  undoubtedly  means  leopards,  for  the  tiger 
does  not  occur  in  Palestine.  Under  the  name 


modern  Arabic  is  identical,  though  this  name  is  also 
applied  to  the  tiger;  but  perhaps  "tiger"  and 
"  leopard  "  are  synonymous  in  those  countries  where 
the  former  animal  is  not  found. 

k  Beth-nimrah,  Nimrah,  the  waters  of  Nimrim, 
;>os.sibly  derive  their  names  from  ffnmer  (Borhart. 
Jiiern;.  ii.  107,  cd.  Roscnmu'1.). 


LEPER 

n/.m<?r,c  which  means  "  spotted,"  it  is  not  impro 
bable  that  another  animal,  namely  the  cheetah 
(Giieparda  jubata},  maybe  included;  which  is 
tamed  by  the  Mahometans  of  Syria,  who  employ 
it  in  hunting  the  gazelle.  These  animals  are 
represented  on  the  Egyptian  monuments ;  they 
were  chased  as  an  amusement  for  the  sake  of  their 
skins,  which  were  worn  by  the  priests  during  their 
ceremonies,  or  they  were  hunted  as  enemies  of  the 
farmyard  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  ch.  viii.  20). 
Sir  G.  Wilkinson  also  draws  attention  to  the  fact 
that  there  is  no  appearance  of  the  leopard  (cheetah), 
having  heen  employed  for  the  purpose  of  the  chase, 
01.  the  monuments  of  Egypt  ;d  nor  is  it  now  used 
by  any  of  the  African  races  for  hunting.  The 
natives  of  Africa  seem  in  some  way  to  connect 
the  leopard  skin  with  the  idea  of  royalty,  and  to 
look  upon  it  as  part  of  the  insignia  of  majesty 
(Wood's  Nat.  Hist.  i.  160).  The  leopard  (Leo- 
fturdus  varius)  belongs  to  the  family  Felidae,  sub 
order  Digitigradae,  order  Carnicora.  The  panther 
is  now  considered  to  be  only  a  variety  of  the  same 
animal.  [W.  H.] 

LEPER,  LEPROSY.  The  Egyptian  and 
Syrian  climates,  but  especially  the  rainless  atmos 
phere  of  the  former,  are  very  prolific  in  skin-dis 
eases  ;  including,  in  an  exaggerated  form,  some 
which  are  common  in  the  cooler  regions  of  western 
Europe.  The  heat  and  drought  acting  for  long 
periods  upon  the  skin,  and  the  exposure  of  a  large 
surface  of  the  latter  to  their  influence,  combine  to 
predispose  it  to  such  affections.  Even  the  modified 
forms  known  to  our  western  hospitals  show  a  per 
plexing  variety,  and  at  times  a  wide  departure  from 
the  best-known  and  recorded  types ;  much  more 
then  may  we  expect  departure  from  any  routine  of 
symptoms  amidst  the  fatal  fecundity  of  the  Levant 
in  this  class  of  disorders  (Good's  Study  of  Medicine, 
vol.  iv.  p.  445,  &c.,  ed.  4th).  It  seems  likely  that 
diseases  also  tend  to  exhaust  their  old  types,  and  to 
reappear  under  new  modifications.  [MEDICINE.] 
This  special  region,  however,  exhibiting  in  wide  va 
riety  that  class  of  maladies  which  disfigures  the 
pei'son  and  makes  the  presence  horrible  to  the  be 
holder,  it  is  no  wonder  that  notice  was  early  drawn 
to  their  more  popular  symptoms.  The  Greek  ima 
gination  dwelt  on  them  as  the  proper  scourge  of  an 
offended  deity,  and  perhaps  foreign  forms  of  disease 
may  be  implied  by  the  expressions  used  (Aeschyl. 
Cocph.  271,  &c.),  or  such  as  an  intercourse  with 
Persia  and  Egypt  would  introduce  to  the  Greeks. 
But,  whatever  the  variety  of  form,  there  seems 
strong  general  testimony  to  the  cause  of  all  alike, 
as  being  to  be  sought  in  hard  labour  in  a  heated 
atmosphere,  amongst  dry  or  powdery  substances, 
rendering  the  proper  care  of  the  skin  difficult  or 
impossible.  This  would  be  aggravated  by  unwhole 
some  or  innutritions  diet,  want  of  personal  clean 
liness,  of  clean  garments,  &c.  Thus  a  "  baker's " 


LEPER  9S 

and  a  "  bricklayer's  itch,"  are  recorded  by  the 
faculty  (Bateman,  On  Skin  Diseases,  Psoriasis; 
Good's  Study  of  Med.,  ib.  p.  459  and  484).» 

The  predominant  and  characteristic  form  of  leprosy 
in  Scripture  is  a  white  variety,  covering  either  tli* 
entire  body  or  a  large  tract  of  its  surface  ;  which 
has  obtained  the  name  of  lepra  Mosaica.  Such 
were  the  cases  of  Moses,  Miriam,  Naaman,  and 
Gehazi  (Ex.  iv.  6;  Num.  xii.  10;  2  K.  v.  1,  27; 
comp.  Lev.  xiii.  13).  But,  remarkably  enough,  in 
the  Mosaic  ritual-diagnosis  of  the  disease  (Lev.  xiii., 
xiv),  this  kind,  when  overspreading  the  whole  sur 
face,  appeal's  to  be  regarded  as  "clean"  (xiii.  12, 
13,  16,  17).  The  first  question  which  occurs  as 
we  read  the  entire  passage  is,  have  we  any  right  to 
assume  one  disease  as  spoken  of  throughout  ?  or  ra 
ther — for  the  point  of  view  in  the  whole  passage  is 
ceremonial,  not  medical — is  nof  a  register  of  certain 
symptoms,  marking  the  afflicted  person  as  undjr  a 
Divine  judgment,  all  that  is  meant,  without  raising 
the  question  of  a  plurality  of  diseases  ?  But  beyond 
this  preliminary  question,  and  supposing  the  symp 
toms  ascertained,  there  are  circumstances  which, 
duly  weighed,  will  prevent  our  expecting  the  iden 
tity  of  these  with  modern  symptoms  in  the  same 
class  of  maladies.  The  Egyptian  bondage,  with  its 
studied  degradations  and  privations,  and  especially 
the  work  of  the  kiln  under  an  Egyptian  sun,  must 
have  had  a  frightful  tendency  to  generate  this  class  of 
disorders;  hence  Manetho  (Joseph,  cont.  Ap.  i.  26) 
asserts  that  the  Egyptians  drove  out  the  Israelites  as 
infected  with  leprosy — a  strange  reflex,  perhaps,  of 
the  Mosaic  nairative  of  the  "  plagues  "  of  Egypt,  yet 
probably  also  containing  a  germ  of  truth.  The  sudden 
and  total  change  of  food,  air,  dwelling,  and  mode  of 
life,  caused  by  the  Exodus,  to  this  nation  of  newly- 
emancipated  slaves  may  possibly  have  had  a  further 
tendency  to  skin-disoiders,  and  novel  and  severe  re 
pressive  measures  may  have  been  required  in  the 
dcsert^moving  camp  to  secure  the  public  health,  or 
to  allay  the  panic  of  infection,  hence  it  is  possible 
that  many,  perhaps  most,  of  this  repertory  of  symp 
toms  may  have  disappeared  with  the  period  of  the 
Exodus,  and  the  snow-white  form,  which  had  pre 
existed,  may  alone  have  ordinarily  continued  in  a  later 
age.  But  it  is  obsei-vable  that,  amongst  these  Levitical 
symptoms,  the  scaling,  or  peeling  off  of  the  surface, 
is  nowhere  mentioned,  nor  is  there  any  expression 
in  the  Hebrew  text  which  points  to  exfoliation  of  the 
cuticle.b  The  principal  morbid  features  are  a  rising  01 
swelling,0  a  scab  or  baldness,d  and  a  bright  or  white  e 
spot  (xiii.  2).  [BALDNESS.]  But  especially  a 
white  swelling  in  the  skin,  with  a  change  of  the  hair 
of  the  part  from  the  natural  black  to  white  01  yellow 
(3,  10,  4,  20,  25,  30),  or  an  appearance  of  a  taint 
going  "deeper  than  the  skin,"  or  again,  "raw  flesh" 
appearing  in  the  swelling  (10,  14,  15),  were  critical 
signs  of  pollution.  The  mere  swelling,  or  scab,  or 
bright  spot,  was  remanded  for  a  week  as  doubtful  (4, 


e  The  leopard  is  called  by  the  natives  of  India 
lakree-baug,  "  tree-tiger."  In  Africa  also  "  tiger  " 
is  applied  to  the  "  leopard,"  the  former  animal  not 
existing  there. 

*  The  lion  was  always  employed  by  the  Egyptians 
for  the  purpose  of  the  chase.     See  Diodor.  i.  48  ;  and 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Egyp.  ch.  viii.  17. 

•  The  use  of  the  word  yJ3,  in  association  with  tlw 
proper  term,  nj?^¥,  marks  the  outward  appearance 
T.e  the  chief  test  of  the  malady.      For  y33  means 
"a  blow"  or  "touch,"  and  is  etymologically  repre 
sented  by  pf.aga,  our  "  plague." 

b  The  raw  flesh  of  xiii.  10  miyht  be  discovered  in 


this  way,  or  by  the  skin  merely  cracking,  an  abscess 
forming,  or  the  like.  Or  —  what  is  more  probable  — 
"  raw  flesh  "  means  granulations  forming  on  patches 
where  the  surface  had  become  excoriated.  These 
granulations  would  form  into  a  fungous  flesh  which 
might  be  aptly  called  "raw  flesh." 


d  TinSD,  nnSpD.  Gesenius,  s.v.,  says,  "strictly  a 
bald  place  on  the  head  occasioned  by  the  scab  or  itch." 

e  rnn2-  The  root  appears  to  be  "inn,  which  ru 
Chald.  'and  Arab,  means  "to  be  white,  or  shinhn?" 
(Oenen.  .s.  v.\. 


94 


LEPER 


21  26,  31),  and  foi  a  second  such  period,  if  it  hail 
not  yet  pronounced  (5).  If  it  then  spread  (7,  22, 
27,  35),  it  was  decided  as  polluting.  But  if  after 
the  second  period  of  quarantine  the  trace  died  away 
and  showed  no  symptom  of  spreading,  it  was  a  mere 
tcab,  and  he  was  adjudged  clean  (6,  23,  34).  This 
tendency  to  spread  seems  especially  to  have  been 
relied  on.  A  spot  most  innocent  in  all  other  re 
spects,  if  it  "  spread  much  abroad,"  was  unclean  ; 
whereas,  as  before  remarked,  the  man  so  wholly 
overspread  with  the  evil  that  it  could  find  no 
farther  range,  was  on  the  contrary  "clean"  (12, 
13).  These  two  opposite  criteria  seem  to  show, 
that  whilst  the  disease  manifested  activity,  the  Mosaic 
law  imputed  pollution  to  and  imposed  segregation  on 
the  sufferer,  but  that  the  point  at  which  it  might  be 
viewed  as  having  run  its  course  was  the  signal  for  his 
readmission  to  communion.  The  question  then  arises, 
supposing  contagion  were  dreaded,  and  the  sufferer  on 
that  account  suspended  from  human  society,  would 
not  one  who  offered  the  whole  area  of  his  body  as  a 
means  of  propagating  the  pest  be  more  shunned 
than  the  partially  afflicted  ?  This  leads  us  to  regard 
the  disease  in  its  sacred  character.  The  Hebrew  was 
reminded  on  every  fide,  even  on  that  of  disease,  tliat 
he  was  of  God's  peculiar  people.  His  time,  his  food 
and  raiment,  his  liair  and  beard,  his  field  and  fruit- 
tree,  all  were  touched  by  the  finger  of  ceremonial ; 
nor  was  his  bodi'y  condition  exempt.  Disease  itself 
had  its  sacred  relations  arbitrarily  imposed.  Cer 
tainly  contagion  need  not  be  the  basis  of  our  views 
in  tracing  these  relations.  In  the  contact  of  a  dead 
body  there  was  no  notion  of  contagion,  for  the  body 
the  moment  life  was  extinct  was  as  much  ceremo 
nially  unclean  as  in  a  state  of  decay.  Many  of 
the  unclean  of  beasts,  &c.,  are  as  wholesome  as  the 
clean.  Why  then  in  leprosy  must  we  have  recourse 
to  a  theory  of  contagion  ?  To  cherish  an  undefined 
horror  in  the  mind  was  perhaps  the  primary  object ; 
such  horror,  however,  always  tends  to  some  definite 
dread,  in  this  case  most  naturally  to  the  dread  of 
contagion.  Thus  religious  awe  would  ally  itself 
with  and  rest  upon  a  lower  motive,  and  there 
would  thus  be  a  motive  to  weigh  with  carnal  and 
spiritual  natures  alike.  It  would  perhaps  be  nearer 
the  truth  to  say,  that  uncleanncss  was  imputed, 
rather  to  inspire  the  dread  of  contagion,  than  in  order 
to  check  contamination  as  an  actual  process.  Thus 
this  disease  was  a  living  plague  set  in  the  man  by  the 
finger  of  Cod  whilst  it  showed  its  life  by  activity — 
by  "spreading;"  but  when  no  more  showing  signs 
of  life,  it  lost  its  character  as  a  curse  from  Him. 
Such  as  dreaded  contagion — and  the  immense  ma- 
joiity  in  every  country  have  an  exaggerated  alarm 
of  it — would  feel  on  the  safe  side  through  the  Levi- 
tical  ordinance;  if  any  did  not  fear,  the  loathsome 
ness  of  the  aspect  of  the  malady  would  prevent 
th'em  from  wishing  to  infringe  the  ordinance. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  enter  into  the  question  whe 
ther  the  contagion  existed,  nor  is  there  perhaps  any 
more  vexed  question  in  pathology  than  how  to  fix  a 
rule  of  contagiousness  ;  but  whatever  was  currently 
believed,  unless  opposed  to  morals  or  humanity,  would 
have  been  a  sufficient  basis  for  the  lawgiver  on  this 
subject.  The  panic  of  infection  is  often  as  distress 
ing,  or  rather  far  more  so,  in  proportion  as  it  is  far 


The  word  in  'he  Hcb.  is 


,  which  means  to 


or  fade  away  ;  hence  the  A.  V.  hardly  con- 
»eyo  the  sense  adequately  by  "  be  somewhat  dark." 
Perhupt  the  expressions  of  Hippocrates,  who  speak 


LEPER 

more  \vid«iy  diffused,  than  actual  disease.  Not 
need  we  excljde  popular  notions,  so  far  as  they  do 
not  conflict  with  higher  views  of  the  Mosaic  eco 
nomy.  A  degree  of  deference  to  them  is  pe.rhajis 
apparent  in  the  special  reference  to  the  "  head  "  and 
"  beard  "  as  the  seat  of  some  form  of  polluting  dis 
order.  The  sanctity  and  honour  attaching  to  the 
head  and  beard  ( 1  Cor.  xi.  3,  4,  5 ;  see  also  BKAKD) 
made  a  scab  thereon  seem  a  heinous  disfigurement, 
and  even  baldness,  though  not  unclean,  yet  was  un 
usual  and  provoked  reproach  (2  K.  ii.  23),  and 
when  a  diseased  appearance  arose  "  out  of  a  bald 
ness  "  even  without  "  spreading  abroad,"  it  was  at 
once  adjudged  "  unclean."  On  the  whole,  though 
we  decline  to  rest  leprous  defilement  merely  on  po 
pular  notions  of  abhorrence,  dread  of  contagion, 
snd  the  like,  yet  a  deference  to  them  may  be  ad 
mitted  to  have  been  shown,  especially  at  the  time 
when  the  people  were,  from  previous  habit  and 
associations,  up  to  the  moment  of  the  actual  Exodus, 
most  strongly  imbued  with  the  scrupulous  purity 
and  refined  ceremonial  example  of  the  Egyptians  011 
these  subjects. 

To  trace  the  symptoms,  so  far  as  they  are  re 
corded,  is  a  simple  task,  if  we  keep  merely  to  the 
text  of  Leviticus,  and  do  not  insist  on  finding  nice 
definitions  in  the  broad  and  simple  language  of  an 
early  period.  It  appears  that  not  only  the  before- 
mentioned  appearances  but  any  open  sore  which 
exposed  raw  flesh  was  to  be  judged  by  its  effect 
on  the  hair,  by  its  being  in  sight  lower  than  the 
skin,  by  its  tendency  to  spread ;  and  that  any  one  of 
these  symptoms  would  argue  uncleanness.  It  seems 
also  that  from  a  boil  and  from  the  eflects  of  a  burn  a 
similar  disease  might  be  developed.  Nor  does  mo 
dern  pathology  lead  us  to  doubt  that,  given  a  con 
stitutional  tendency,  such  causes  of  inflammation 
may  result  in  various  disorders  of  the  skin  or  tissues. 
Cicatrices  after  burns  are  known  sometimes  to  assume 
a  peculiar  tuberculated  .appearance,  thickened  and 
raised  above  the  level  of  the  surrounding  skin — the 
keloid  tumour — which,  however,  may  also  appear  in 
dependently  of  a  burn. 

The  language  into  which  the  LXX.  has  rendered 
the  simple  phrases  of  the  Hebrew  text  shows  traces 
of  a  later  school  of  medicine,  and  suggests  an  ac 
quaintance  with  the  terminology  of  Hippocrates. 
This  has  given  a  hint,  on  which,  apparently  wishing  • 
to  reconcile  early  Biblical  notices  with  the  results 
of  later  observation,  Dr.  Mason  Good  and  some  other 
professional  expounders  of  leprosy  have  drawn  out 
a  comparative  table  of  parallel  terms.8 

It  is  clear  then  that  the  leprosy  of  Lev.  xiii.,  xiv. 
means  any  severe  disease  spreading  on  the  surface  of 
the  body  in  the  way  described,  and  so  shocking  of 
aspect,  or  so  generally  suspected  of  infection,  that 
public  feeling  called  for  separation.  No  doubt  such 
diseases  as  syphilis,  elephantiasis,  cancer,  and  all 
others  which  not  merely  have  their  seat  in  the  skin, 
but  which  invade  and  disorganise  the  underlying 
uid  deeper-seated  tissues,  would  hive  been  classed 
Levitically  as  "  leprosy,"  had  they  been  so  gene 
rally  prevalent  as  to  require  notice. 

It  is  now  undoubted  that  the  "leprosy"  of 
modem  Syria,  and  which  has  a  wide  range  in  Spaii., 
Greece,  and  Norway,  is  the  Elephantiasis  Grneco- 


tions  one  umbrae  similis,  may  have  led  our  transistors 
to  endeavour  to  find  equivalents  for  them  in  the 
Hebrew. 

Thus  -,ve  have  in  Kitto's  Cyclopaedia  of  Biblical 


.if  a  M*A«M  form  of  leprosy,   ami  of  Oelsus,  who  men-  j  Litrraturr  the  following  table,  baae.1  apparently  on  » 


LEPER 

rum.  The  Arabian  physicians  ]«vh:ips  Mused  the 
confusion  of  terms,  who,  when  they  translated  the 
Greek  of  Hippocrates,  rendered  his  elephantiasis  by 
leprosy,  there  being  another  disease  to  which  they 
gave  a  name  derived  from  the  elephant,  and  which 
is  now  known  as  Elephantiasis  Arabutn,  —  the  "Bar- 
badoes  leg,"  "  Boucnemia  Tropica."  The  Ele 
phantiasis  Graecorum  is  said  to  have  been  brought 
home  by  the  crusaders  into  the  various  countries  of 
Western  and  Northern  Europe.  Thus  an  article 
on  "  Leprosy,1*  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  Royal  Me 
dical  and  Chirurgical  Society  of  London,  Jan.  1860, 
vol.  iii.  3,  p.  164,  &c.,  by  Dr.  Webster,  describes 
what  is  evidently  this  disease.  Thus  Michaelis 
(Smith's  translation,  vol.  iii.  p.  283,  Art.  ccx.) 
speaks  of  what  he  calls  lepra  Arabutn,  the  symp 
toms  of  which  are  plainly  elephantisiac.  For  a  dis 
cussion  of  the  question  whether  this  disease  was 
known  in  the  early  Biblical  period,  see  MEDICINE. 
It  certainly  was  not  that  distinctive  white  leprosy  of 
which  we  are  now  speaking,  nor  do  any  of  the  de 
scribed  symptoms  in  Lev.  xiii.  point  to  elephan 
tiasis.  "  White  as  snow  "  (2  K.  v.  27)  would  be 
as  inapplicable  to  elephantiasis  as  to  small-pox. 
Further,  the  most  striking  and  fearful  results  of 
this  modem  so-called  "  leprosy  "  are  wanting  in  the 
Mosaic  description  —  the  transformation  of  the  fea 
tures  to  a  leonine  expression,  and  the  corrosion  of 
the  joints,  so  that  the  fingers  drop  piecemeal,  from 


which  the  Arabic  name, 


Jud/tdm,  i.  e. 


mutilation,  seems  derived.11  Yet  before  we  dismiss 
the  question  of  the  affinity  of  this  disease  with  Mosaic 
leprosy,  a  description  of  Kayer's  (  Traite  Theorique, 
$-c.,  des  Maladies  dj  la  Peau,  s.  v.  Elephantiasis)  is 
worth  quoting.  He  mentions  two  characteristic  spe 
cies,  the  one  tuberculated,  probably  the  commoner 
kind  at  present  (to  judge  t'rom  the  concurrence  of 
modern  authorities  in  describing  this  type),  the  other 
"  character!  see  par  des  plaques  fauves,  larges,  e'tendues, 
fletries,  ride'es,  insensibles,  accompagnees  d'une  legere 
desquamation  et  d'une  deformation  particuliere  des 
pieds  et  des  mains,"  and  which  he  deems  identical 
with  the  "  l^pre  du  moyen  age."  This  certainly 
appears  to  be  at  least  a  link  between  the  tuber- 


LEPER  95 

ciliated  elephantiasis  and  the  Mosaic  leprosy.1  C>}- 
sus,  after  distinguishing  the  three  Hippoeratic  va 
rieties  of  vitiligo  =  leprosy,  separately  describes  ele 
phantiasis.  Avicenna  (Dr.  Mead,  Medico,  Sacra, 
"  the  Leprosy  ")  speaks  of  leprosy  as  a  sort  of  uni 
versal  cancer  of  the  whole  body.  But  amidst  the 
evidence  of  a  redundant  variety  of  diseases  of  the 
skin  and  adjacent  tissues,  and  of  the  probable  rapid 
production  and  evanescence  of  some  forms  of  them 
it  would  be  rash  to  assert  the  identity  of  any  from 
such  resemblance  as  this. 

Nor  ougnt  we  in  the  question  of  identity  of 
symptoms  to  omit  from  view,  that  not  only  does 
observation  become  more  precise  with  accumulated 
experience ;  but,  that  diseases  also,  in  proportion  as 
they  fix  their  abiding  seat  in  a  climate,  region,  or 
race  of  men,  tend  probably  to  diversity  of  type,  and 
that  in  the  course  of  centuries,  as  with  the  fauna 
and  flora,  varieties  originate  in  the  modifying  in 
fluence  of  circumstances,  so  that  Hippocrates  might 
find  three  kindsof  leprosy,  where  one  variety  only  had 
existed  before.  Whether,  therefore,  we  regard  Lev. 
xiii.  as  speaking  of  a  group  of  diseases  having  mu 
tually  a  mere  superficial  resemblance,  or  a  real  affi 
nity,  it  need  not  perplex  us  that  they  do  not  corre 
spond  with  the  threefold  leprosy  of  Hippocrates  (the 
a.\<pos,  \fvKri,  and  ju«A.as),  which  are  said  by  Bate- 
man  (Skin  Diseases,  Plates  vii.  and  viii.)  to  prevail 
still  respectively  as  lepra  ulphoides,  lepra  vulgaris, 
and  lepra  nigricans.  The  first  has  more  minute  and 
whiter  scales,  and  the  circular  patches  in  which  they 
form  are  smaller  than  those  of  the  vulgaris,  which 
appears  in  scaly  discs  of  different  sizes,  having  nearly 
always  a  circular  form,  first  presenting  small  distinct 
red  shining  elevations  of  the  cuticle,  then  white  scales 
which  accumulate  sometimes  into  a  thick  crust ;  or. 
as  Dr.  Mason  Good  describes  its  appearance  (vol.  iv. 
p.  451),  as  having  a  spreading  scale  upon  an  elevated 
base ;  the  elevations  depressed  in  the  middle,  but 
without  a  change  of  colour;  the  black  hair  on  the 
patches,  which  is  the  prevailing  colour  of  the  hair  in 
Palestine,  participating  in  the  whiteness,  and  the 
patches  themselves  prepetually  widening  in  their 
outline.  A  phosphate  of  lime  is  probably  what 
gives  their  bright  glossy  colour  to  the  scaly  patches, 


more  extensive  one  in  Dr.  Mason  Good  (ub.  sup.  pp. 
448,  452),  which  is  chiefly  characterised  by  an  at 
tempt  to  fix  modern  specific  meanings  on  the  general 

rnn3,  Lev.  AeVpa,  Hipp, 

comprehending  comprehending 

(i)  pn'3,  i        (i)    f  w>   } 

(?)  n:3^>  rnns,  I  =  (2)   J  \6^,  > 
(3)  nrra  rnns.  |        (3)   (  Me'\e«.    J 


terms  of  Lev.  xiii. 
J?33,  ictus,  "  blow 


e.  g-  TIXK')  herpes,  or  tetter ; 
or  "  bruise,"  &c. 

vitiligo,  Ccls. 
comprehending 

(1)  (  albida, 

(2)  I  Candida, 

(3)  j  nigresccns,  or 

[     umbrae  similis. 


But  the  Hebrew  of  ( 1)  is  in  Lev.  xiii.  39  predicated 
of  a  subject  compounded  of  the  phraseology  of  (2)  and 
(3),  whereas  the  (1),  (2),  and  (3)  of  Hipp,  and  of 
Cclgus  are  respectively  distinct  and  mutually  exclusive 
of  one  another.  Further,  the  word  HHS  appears 
mistranslated  by  "  black  "  or  "  dark ;"  meaning  rather 
"  languid,"  "  dim,"  as  an  old  man's  eyes,  an  expiring 
and  feeble  flame,  &e.  Now  it  is  remarkable  that  the 
Hippoeratic  terms  aA$6s  and  Aevmj  are  found  in  the 
LXX.  The  phraseology  of  the  latter  is  also  more 
specific  than  will  adequately  j  eprcsent  the  Hebrew, 
•uggesting  shades  of  meaning  *  \vhera  this  has  a  wide 


*  Thus  the  expression  "IC?3  liyD  pbj?,  "  deeper 
than  the  skin  of  the  flesh,"  is  rendered  in  ver.  3  by 
Tantivy)  airb  TO-3  Sep/iaros,  in  30  by  iyKoi\OTfpo  rov 
HWOLTO-;.  in  Zi  by  Koi'A>)  airb  TOV  6.  j 


general  word,  or  substituting  a  word  denoting  onn 
symptom  as  SpaOcr/ota,-)-  "  crust,"  formed  probably  by 

humour  oozing,  for  pHp,  "  expilation." 

h  This  is  clearly  and  forcibly  pointed  out  in  ar. 
article  by  Dr.  Robert  Sim  in  the  Medical  Times, 
April  14,  1800,  whose  long  hospital  experience  iu 
Jerusalem  entitles  his  remarks  to  great  weight. 

1  On  the  question  how  far  elephantiasis  may  pro 
bably  have  been  mixed  up  wiih  the  leprosy  of  the 
Jews,  see  Paul.  Aegin.  vol.  ii.  p.  6  and  32,  33,  ed. 
Syd.  Soc. 


t  So  Dr.  M.  Good,  who  improves  on  the  flpauo-^o 
by  eKjrv'r/ais,  "  suppuration,"  wishing  to  substituts 
moist  sciill  for  the  "  dry  scall "  of  the  A.  V.,  Mhior 
latter  is  no  dot; :  t  nearer  tie  mark. 


96  LEPER 

and  this  in  the  kindred  disease  of  iethyosis  is  depo- 
bited  in  great  abundance  on  the  surface.  The  third, 
nigricans,  or  rather  subfusca,*  is  rarer,  in  form  and 
distribution,  resembling  the  second,  but  differing  in 
the  dark  livid  colour  of  the  patches.  The  scaly  in 
crustations  of  the  first  species  infest  the  flat  of  the 
fere-arm,  knee,  and  elbow  joints,  but  on  the  face 
reidom  extend  beyond  the  forehead  and  temples; 
oomp.  2  Chr.  xxvi.  19 :  "  the  leprosy  rose  up  in  his 
forehead."  The  cure  of  this  is  not  difficult ;  the  se 
cond  scarcely  ever  heals  (Celsus,  De  Med.v.  28,  §1 9). 
The  third  is  always  accompanied  by  a  cachetic  con 
dition  of  body .  Further,  elephantiasis  itself  has  also 
passed  current  under  the  nameof  the  "black  leprosy." 
It  is  possible  that  the  "  freckled  spot  "  of  the  A.  V. 
Lev.  xiii.  39  m  may  correspond  with  the  harmless 
1.  alphoides,  since  it  is  noted  as  "  clean."  The  ed. 
of  Paulus  Aegin.  by  the  Sydenham  Society  (vol.  ii. 
p.  17,  foil.)  gives  the  following  summary  of  the 
opinions  of  classical  medicine  on  this  subject: — 
"  Galen  is  very  deficient  on  the  subject  of  lepra, 
having  nowhere  given  a  complete  description  of  it, 
though  he  notices  it  incidentally  in  many  parts  of 
his  works.  In  one  place  he  calls  elephas,  leuce,  and 
alphos  cognate  affections.  Alphos,  he  says,  is  much 
more  superficial  than  leuce.  Psora  is  said  to  par 
take  more  of  the  nature  of  ulceration.  According 
to  Oribasius,  lepra  affects  mostly  the  deep-seated 
parts,  and  psora  the  superficial.  Aetius  on  the 
other  hand,  copying  Archigenes,  represents  lepra  as 
affecting  only  the  skin.  Actuarius  states  that  lepra 
is  next  to  elephantia  in  malignity,  and  that  it  is 
distinguished  from  psora  by  spreading  deeper  and 
having  scales  of  a  circular  shape  like  those  of  fishes. 
Leuce  holds  the  same  place  to  alphos  that  lepra 
does  to  psora ;  that,  is  to  say,  leuce  is  more  deep- 
seated  and  affects  the  colour  of  the  hair,  while 
alphos  is  more  superficial,  and  the  hair  in  general 
is  unchanged.  .  .  .  Alexander  Aphrodisiensis  men 
tions  psora  among  the  contagious  diseases,  but  says 
that  lepra  and  leuce  are  not  contagious.  Chrysostom 
alludes  to  the  common  opinion  that  psora  was 
among  the  contagious  diseases.  .  .  .  Celsus  describes 
alphos,  melas,  and  leuce,  very  intelligibly,  connecting 
them  together  by  the  generic  term  of  vitiligo." 

There  is  a  remarkable  concurrence  between  the 
Aeschylean  description  of  the  disease  which  was  to 
produce  "  lichens  coursing  over  the  flesh,  eroding 
with  fierce  voracity  the  former  natural  structure, 
and  white  hairs  shooting  up  over  the  part  diseased,"0 
and  some  of  the  Mosaic  symptoms;  the  spreading 
energy  of  the  evil  is  dwelt  upon  both  by  Moses  and 
by  Aeschylus,  as  vindicating  its  character  as  a  scourge 
of  God.  But  the  syinptoms  of  "  white  hairs  "  is  a 
curious  and  exact  confirmation  of  the  genuineness  of 
the  detail  in  the  Mosaic  account,  especially  as  the 
poet's  language  would  rather  imply  that  the  disease 
spoken  of  was  not  then  domesticated  in  Greece,  but 


LEPER 

the  strange  horror  of  some  other  land.  Still,  uothinf? 
very  remote  from  our  own  experienci!  is  implied  iu 
the  mere  changed  colour  of  the  hair ;  it  is  common  to 
see  horses  with  galled  backs,  &c.,  in  which  the  hair 
has  turned  white  through  the  destruction  of  those 
follicles  which  secrete  the  colouring  matter. 

There  remains  a  curious  question,  before  we  quit 
Leviticus,  as  regards  the  leprosy  of  gamients  and 
houses.  Some  have  thought  garments  worn  by 
leprous  patients  intended.  The  discharges  of  the 
diseased  skin  absorbed  into  the  apparel  would,  if  in 
fection  were  possible,  probably  convey  disease  ;  and 
it  is  known  to  be  highly  dangerous  in  some  cases  to 
allow  clothes  which  have  so  imbibed  the  discharges 
of  an  ulcer  to  be  worn  again.0  And  the  words  of 
Jude  v.  23,  may  seem  to  countenance  this,*  "  hating 
even  the  garment  spotted  by  the  flesh."  But  Istly, 
no  mention  of  infection  occurs ;  2ndly,  no  con 
nexion  of  the  leprous  garment  with  a  leprous  hu 
man  wearer  is  hinted  at;  Srdly,  this  would  not 
help  us  to  account  for  a  leprosy  of  stone-walls  and 
plaster.  Thus  Dr.  Mead  (ut  sup.)  speaks  at  any 
rate  plausibly  of  the  leprosy  of  garments,  but  be 
comes  unreasonable  when  he  extends  his  explanation 
to  that  of  walls.  Michaelis  thought  that  wool  from 
sheep  which  had  died  of  a  particular  disease  might 
fret  into  holes,  and  exhibit  an  appearance  like  that 
described,  Lev.  xiii.  47-59  (Michaelis,  art.  ccxi. 
iii.  290-1).  But  woollen  cloth  is  far  from  being 
the  only  material  mentioned ;  nay,  there  is  even 
some  reason  to  think  that  the  words  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "  warp"  and  "  woof"  are  not  those  distinct 
parts  of  the  texture,  but  distinct  materials.  Linen, 
however,  and  leather  are  distinctly  particularised, 
and  the  latter  not  only  as  regards  garments,  but "  any 
thing  (lit.  vessel)  made  of  skin,"  for  instance,  bottles. 
This  classing  of  garments  and  house-walls  with  tht 
human  epidermis,  as  leprous,  h:is  moved  the  mirth 
of  some,  and  the  wonder  of  others.  Yet  modern 
science  has  established  what  goes  far  to  vindicate 
the  Mosaic  classification  as  more  philosophical  than 
such  cavils.  It  is  now  known  that  there  are  some 
skin-diseases  which  originate  in  an  acarus,  and  othei-s 
which  proceed  from  a  fungus.  In  these  we  may 
probably  find  the  solution  of  the  paradox.  The  ana 
logy  between  the  insect  which  frets  the  human  skin 
and  that  which  frets  the  garment  that  covers  it,  le- 
tween  the  fungous  growth  that  lines. the  crevices  of 
the  epidermis  and  that  which  creeps  in  the  interstices 
of  masonry,1!  is  close  enough  for  the  purposes  of  a 
ceremonial  law,  to  which  it  is  essential  that  there 
should  be  an  arbitrary  element  intermingled  with 
provisions  manifestly  reasonable.  Michaelis  (ib.  art 
ccxi.  iii.  293-9)  has  suggested  a  nitrous  efflorescence 
on  the  surface  of  the  stone,  produced  by  saltpetre, 
or  rather  an  acid  containing  it,  and  issuing  in  red 
spots,  and  cites  the  example  of  a  house  in  Lubeck  : 
he  mentions  also  exfoliation  of  the  stone  from  othc: 


k  Still  it  is  known  that  black  secretions,  sometimes 
carried  to  the  extent  of  negro  blackness,  have  been 
produced  under  the  skin,  as  in  the  rete  mucosttm  of 
the  African.  See  Medlco-Chirurgical  Rev.,  New  Series, 
vol.  v.  p.  215,  Jan.  1847. 

«  Ileb.  pna  ;  Arab.  iji*,. 

n  napKuiv  eTrafAjSaTTJpas  dypiats  yvdOots 

Aixijpas  ffe'o'floi'Tas  ap^ca'aw  if>v<riv 
Aevicas  ie  Kopcras.  TTJ&'  eTrat>T(i\Xeiv  vo<T<p. 

Choeph.  271-274. 

•  So  Surcnhusius  (Mishna,  Ifegnim)  says,  "M:ioulac 
a'.iquando  subviridcs,  nliquundo  subrubidue,  cujua- 
n;udi  videri  sclent  in  aegrotorum  indusiis,  et  prw>- 


cipue  ea  in  parte  ubi  vis  morbi  medicina  sudorifera  e 
corpore  exterius  prodierit." 

f  See,  however,  Lev.  xv.  3,  4,  which  suggests  an 
other  possible  meaning  of  the  words  of  St.  Jude. 

"»  The  word  te<-x*)v  (the  "  lichen  "  of  botany),  tht 
Aeschylean  word  to  express  the  dreaded  scourge  in 
Choephor.  271-274  (comp.  Eumen.  785,  see  note  n\  is 
also  the  technical  term  for  a  disease  akin  to  leprosy. 
The  ed.  of  Paulus  Aegin.,  Sydenh.  Soc.,  vol.  ii.  p.  19, 
says  that  the  poet  here  means  to  describe  leprosy.  In 
the  Isagoge,  generally  ascribed  to  Galen  (ib.  p.  25), 
two  varieties  are  described,  the  lichen  mitis  and  the 
lichen  agrius,  in  both  of  which  scales  are  formco 
upon  the  skin.  Galen  remarks  on  the  tendency  o( 
tiiis  disease  to  pass  into  lopra  and  scabies. 


LB8UEM 

causes  ;  but  probably  these  appearances  would  not  be 
developed  witliont  a  greater  degree  of  damp  than  is 
common  in  Palestine  and  Arabia.  It  is  manifest  also 
that  a  disease  in  the  human  subject  caused  by  an 
acarus  or  by  a  fungus  would  be  certainly  contagious, 
since  the  propagative  cause  could  be  transferred  from 
person  to  person.  Some  physicians  indeed  asseit 
that  only  such  skin-diseases  are  contagious.  Hence 
perhaps  arose  a  further  reason  for  marking,  even  in 
their  analogues  among  lifeless  substances,  the  strict 
ness  with  which  forms  of  disease  so  arising  were  to 
be  shunned.  The  sacrificial  law  attending  the  pur 
gation  of  the  leper  will  be  more  conveniently  treated 
of  under  UuCLEANNESS. 

The  lepers  of  the  New  Testament  do  not  seem  to 
offer  occasion  for  special  remark,  save  that  by  the 
N.  T.  period  the  disease,  as  known  in  Palestine,  pro 
bably  did  not  differ  materially  from  the  Hippocratic 
record  of  it,  and  that  when  St.  Luke  at  any  rate  uses 
the  words  \firpa,  \firpos,  he  does  so  with  a  recog 
nition  of  their  strict  medical  signification. 

From  Surenhusius  (Mishna,  Negaiin),  we  find  that 
soine  Rabbinical  commentators  enumerate  16,  36, 
or  72  diverse  species  of  leprosy,  but  they  do  so  by 
including  all  the  phases  which  each  passes  through, 
reckoning  a  red  and  a  green  variety  in  garments, 
the  same  in  a  house,  &c.,  and  counting  calvitium, 
recalvatio,  adustio,  and  even  ulcus,  as  so  many  dis 
tinct  forms  of  leprosy. 

For  further  illustrations  of  this  subject  see 
Schilling,  de  Lepra;  Reinhard,  Bibelkran/theiten; 
Schmidt,  Biblischer  Medecin  ;  Rayer,  ut  sup.,  who 
refers  to  Roussille-Chamseru,  Recherches  sv.r  le  ve- 
-itable  Caractere  de  la  Lepre  des  Hebreux,  and 
Relation  Chirurgicale  de  I'Armee  de  V  Orient, 
Paris,  1804;  Cazenave  and  Schedel,  Abrege  Pra 
tique  des  Maladies  de  la  Peau  ;  Dr.  Mead,  ut  sup., 
who  refers  to  Aretaeus,'  Morb.  Chron.  ii.  13  ;  Fra- 
castorius,  de  Morbis  Contagiosis  ;  Johannes  Ma- 
Kid-dus,  Epist.  Medic,  vii.  2,  and  to  iv.  3,  3,  §1  ; 
Avicenna,  de  Medicina,  v.  28,  §19;  also  Dr.  Sim 
in  the  North  American  Chirur.  Rev.  Sept.  1859, 
p.  876.  The  ancient  authorities  are  Hippocrates, 
Prorrhetica,  lib.  xii.  ap.  Jin.  ;  Galen,  Explicatio 
Linguarum  Hippocratis,  and  de  Art.  Curat.  lib. 
ii.  ;  Celsus,  de  Medic,  v.  28,  §19.  [H.  H.] 

LE'SHEM  (Q&h:  Lesem),  a  variation  in  the 
form  of  the  name  of  LAISH,  afterwards  DAN, 
occurring  only  in  Josh.  xix.  47  (twice).  The  Vat. 
LXX.  is  very  corrupt,  having  AaxeJ*  and  Ae<rej/j/- 
Sdic  (see  Mai's  ed.)  ;  but  the  Alex.,  as  usual,  is  in 
the  second  case  much  closer  to  the  Hebrew,  Ac<re/x 
and  AeffffSav. 

The  commentators  and  lexicographers  afford  no 
clue  to  the  reason  of  this  variation  in  form.  [G.] 

LETT'US  (AOTTOUS  ;  Alex.  "ATTOUJ:  Acchus), 
the  same  as  HATTUSH  (1  Esd.  viii.  29).  The 
Alex.  MS.  has  evidently  the  correct  reading,  of 
which  the  name  as  it  appears  in  the  Vat.  MS.  is 
an  easy  corruption,  from  the  similarity  of  the  uncial 
A  and  A. 


LEV! 


97 


LETU'SHIM  (DBMD^  :  AarouoW/i  :  Latu- 
sim,  Latussirn),  the  name  of  the  second  of  the 
sons  of  Dedan,  son  of  Jokshan,  Gen.  xxv.  3  (and 
1  Chr.  i.  32,  Vulg.).  Fresnel  (Journ.  Asiat.  IIP 
sene,  vol.  vi.  p.  217,  8)  identifies  it  with  Tasm* 

'  Dr.  Mead's  reference  is  de  Morbis  Contagions,  ii. 
cap.  9.  There  Is  no  such  title  extant  to  any  portion 
Aretaeus'  -work  ;  see,  however,  the  Syrtenham  So 
ciety's  edition  of  that  writer,  p.  370. 

VOL  H. 


one  of  the  ancient  and  extinct  tribes  of  Arabia,  like 
as  he  compares  Leuinmim  with  Ume»yim.  The 
names  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  commencing 
with  the  Hebrew  article.  Nevertheless,  the  identi 
fication  in  eaih  case  seems  to  be  quite  untenable. 
(Respecting  these  tribes,  see  LKUMMIM  and  ARABIA.) 
It  is  noteworthy  that  the  three  sons  of  the  Keturahite 
Dedau  are  named  in  the  plural  form,  evidently  as 
tribes  descended  from  him.  [E.  S.  P.] 


LEUM'MTM 


,  from 


Loomim,  Laomim),  the  name  of  the  third  of  the 
descendants  of  Dedan,  son  of  Jokshan,  Gen.  xxv.  3 
(1  Chr.  i.  32,  Vulg.),  being  in  the  plural  form  like 
his  brethren,  Asshurim  and  Letushim.  It  evidently 
refers  to  a  tribe  or  people  sprung  from  Dedan,  and 
indeed  in  its  present  form  literally  signifies  "  peo 
ples,"  "  nations;"  but  it  has  been  observed  in  art. 
LETUSHIM,  that  these  names  perhaps  commence 
with  the  Hebrew  article.  Leummim  has  been 
identified  with  the  'AAAou/ucMTtSTai  of  Ptolemy  (vi. 
7.  §24  :  see  Diet,  of  Geogr.},  and  by  Fresnel  (in  the 
Journ.  Asiat.  Ill"  serie,  vol.  vi.  p.  217)  with 
an  Arab  tribe  called  Umeiyim.*  Of  the  former, 
the  writer  knows  no  historical  trace:  the  latter 
was  one  of  the  very  ancient  tribes  of  Arabia 
of  which  no  genealogy  is  given  by  the  Arabs,  and 
who  appear  to  have  been  ante-Abiahamic,  and 
possibly  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  the  country. 

[AllABIA.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

LE'VI.  1.  (^  :  Afvfl:  Levi},  the  name  of  the 
third  son  of  Jacob  by  his  wife  Leah.  This,  like 
most  other  names  in  the  patriarchal  history,  was 
connected  with  the  thoughts  and  feelings  that  ga 
thered  round  the  child's  birth.  As  derived  from 

HI?,  "  to  adhere,"  it  gave  utterance  to  the  hooe  of 
Ti 

the  mother  that  the  affections  of  her  husband, 
which  had  hitherto  rested  on  the  favoured  Rachel, 
would  at  last  be  drawn  to  her.  "This  time  will 
my  husband  bo  joined  unto  me,  because  I  have  borne 
him  three  sons"  (Gen.  xxix.  34).  The  new-bora 
child  was  to  be  a  Kotvtavtas  jSejScuwTT;?  (Jos.  Ant. 
i.  19-,  §8),  a  new  link  binding  the  parents  to  each 
other  more  closely  than  before.0  But  one  fact  is 
recorded  in  which  he  appears  prominent.  The  son* 
of  Jacob  have  come  from  Padan-Aram  to  Canaan 
with  their  father,  and  are  with  him  "  at  Shalem,  a 
city  of  Shechem."  Their  sister  Dinah  goes  out 
"  to  see  the  daughters  of  the  land  "  (Gen.  xxxiv. 
1),  i.  e.  as  the  words  probably  indicate,  and  as  Jo- 
sephus  distinctly  states  (Ant.  i.  21),  to  be  present 
at  one  of  their  great  annual  gatherings  for  some 
festival  of  nature-worship,  analogous  to  that  which 
we  meet  with  afterwards  among  the  Midianites 
(Num.  xxv.  2).  The  license  of  the  time  or  the 
absence  of  her  natural  guardians  exposes  her,  though 
yet  in  earliest  youth,  to  lust  and  outrage.  A  stain 
is  left,  not  only  on  her,  but  on  the  honour  of  her 
kindred,  which,  according  to  the  rough  justice  of 
the  time,  nothing  but  blood  could  wash  out.  The 
duty  of  extorting  that  revenge  fell,  as  in  the  case  of 
Amncn  a«d  Tamar  (2  Sam.  xiii.  22),  and  in  most 
other  states  of  society  in  which  polygamy  has  pre 
vailed  (comp.  for  the  customs  of  modern  Arabs, 
J.  D.  Michael  is,  quoted  by  Kurtz,  Hist,  of  Ola 
Covenant,  i.  §82,  p.  340,  on  the  brothers  rather 


I 


The  same  etymology  is  recognized,  dough  with  a 
her  significance,  In  Num.  xviii.  2. 


»8  LEVI 

than  the  father,  just  as,  in  the  case  of  Rebekah,  it 
belonged  to  the  brother  to  conduct  the  negotiations 
for  the  marriage.     We  are  left  to  conjecture  why 
lieu  ben.  as  the  first-born,  was  not  foremost  in  the 
work,    but  the  sin    01    which  he  was   afterwards 
guilty,  makes  it  possible  that  his  zeal  for  his  sister's 
purity  was  not  so  sensitive  as  theirs.     The  same 
explanation  may  perhaps  apply  to  the  non-appear- 
ai  ce  of  Judah  in  the  history.     Simeon  and  Levi, 
at,  the  next  in  succession  to  the  first-born,  take  the 
tisk  upon   themselves.     Though  not  named  in  the 
Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.    till  xxxiv.    25,  there 
can  be  little  doubt  that  they  were  "  the  sons  of 
Jacob  "  who  heard  from  their  father  the  wrong  over 
which  he  had  brooded  in  silence,  and  who  planned 
their  revenge  accordingly.     The  LXX.  version  does 
introduce  their  names  in  ver.  14.   The  history  that 
follows  is  that  of  a  cowardly  and  repulsive  crime. 
The  two  brothers  exhibit,  in  its  broadest  contrasts, 
that  union  of  the  noble  and  the  base,  of  charac 
teristics  above  and  below  the  level    of  the  heathen 
tribes  around  them,  which  marks  the  whole  his 
tory  of  Israel.     They  have  learned  to  loathe  and 
scorn  the  impurity  in  the  midst  of  which  they 
lived,  to  regard  themselves  as  a  peculiar  people,  to 
glory   in  the  sign   of  the  covenant.     They   have 
learnt  only  too  well  from  Jacob  and  from  Laban, 
the  lessons  of  treachery  and  falsehood.     They  lie 
to  the  men  of  Shechem  as  the  Druses  and  the  Ma- 
ronites  lie  to  each  other  in  the  prosecution  of  their 
blood-feuds.     For  the  offence  of  one  man,  they  de 
stroy  and  plunder  a  whole  city.     They  cover  their 
murderous  schemes  with  fair  words  and  professions 
of  friendship.     They  make  the  very  token  of  their 
religion   the   instrument  of  their  perfidy  and  re 
venge.*     Their  father,  timid  and  anxious  as  ever, 
utters  a  feeble  lamentation  (Blunt's  Script.  Coin- 
tidences,  Part  i.  §8),  "  Ye  have  made  me  to  stink 
among  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  ...  I  being 
few  in  number,  they  shall  gather  themselves  against 
me."    With  a  zeal  that,  though  mixed  with  baser 
elements,  foreshadows  the  zeal  of  Phinehas,  they 
glory  in  their  deed,  and  meet  all  remonstrance  with 
the  question,  "  Should  he  deal  with  our  sister  as 
with  a  harlot?"     Of  other  facts  in  the  life  of  Levi, 
there  are  none  in  which  he  takes,  as  in  this,  a  pro 
minent  and  distinct  part.     He  shares  in  the  hatred 
which  his  brothers  bear  to  Joseph,  and  joins  in  the 
plots  against  him  (Gen.  xxxvii.  4).     Reuben  and 
Judah  interfere  severally  to  prevent  the  consumma 
tion  of  the  crime  (Gen.  xxxvii.  21,  26).     Simeon 
appears,  as  being  made  afterwards  the  subject  of 
a  shai-per  discipline  than  the  othere,  to  have  been 
foremost — as  his  position  among  the  sons  of  Leah 
made  it  likely  that  he  would  be — in  this  attack  on 
the  favoured  son  of  Rachel ;  and  it  is  at  least  pro 
bable  that  in  this,  as  in  their  former  guilt,  Simeon 
and  Levi  were  brethren.     The  rivalry  of  the  mo 
thers  was  perpetuated   in  the  jealousies  of  their 
children;  and  the  two  who  had  shown  themselves  so 
keenly  sensitive  when  their  sister  had  been  wronged, 
make  themselves  the  instruments  and  accomplices 
of  the  hatred  which  originated,  we  are  told,  with 
the  baser-bom  sons  of  the  concubines  (Gen.  xxxvii. 
2).  Then  comes  for  him,  as  for  the  others,  the  dis 
cipline  of  suffering  and  danger,  the  special  educa 
tion  by  which  the  brother  whom  they  had  wronged 
leads  them  back  to  faithfulness  and  natural  aftec- 

d  Josephus  (Ant.  \.  c.)  characteristically  glosses  over 
all  that  connects  the  attack  with  the  circumcision  of  the 
Shechemites,  and  represents  ll  as  made  In  a  time  of  feast- 
Ing  and  roloifing. 


LEVI 

tion.  The  detention  of  Simeor  in  Egypt  may 
have  been  designed  at  once  to  be  the  punishment 
for  the  large  share  which  he  had  lakcn  in  the  com 
mon  crime,  and  to  separate  the  two  brothers  who 
had  hitherto  been  such  close  companions  in  evil. 
The  discipline  does  its  work.  Those  who  had  been 
relentless  to  Joseph  become  self-sacrificing  for  Ben 
jamin. 

After  this  we  trace  Levi  as  joining  in  the  ni  g,a- 
tion  of  the  tribe  that  owned  Jacob  as  its  patriarch. 
He,  with  his  three  sons,  Gershon,  Kohath,  Merari, 
went  down  into  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvi.  11).  As  one 
of  the  four  eldest  sons  we  may  think  of  him  as 
among  the  five  (Gen.  xlvii.  2)  that  were  specially 
presented  before  Pharaoh".  Then  comes  the  last 
scene  in  which  his  name  appears.  When  his  father's 
death  draws  near,  and  the  sons  are  gathered  round 
him,  he  hears  the  old  crime  brought  up  again  to 
receive  its  sentence  from  the  lips  that  are  no  longer 
feeble  and  hesitating.  They,  no  less  than  the  in 
cestuous  first-born,  had  forfeited  the  privileges  of 
their  birthright.  "  In  their  anger  they  slew  men, 
and  in  their  wantonness  they  maimed  oxen  "  (marg. 
reading  of  A.  V.;  comp.  LXX.  lvfvpoK&iri\aa» 
ravpov).  And  therefore  the  sentence  on  those  who 
had  been  united  for  evil  was,  that  they  were  to  be 
"  divided  in  Jacob  and  scattered  in  Israel."  How  that' 
condemnation  was  at  once  fulfilled  and  turned  into 
a  benediction,  how  the  zeal  of  the  patriarch  reap 
peared  purified  and  strengthened  in  his  descendants ; 
how  the  very  name  came  to  have  a  new  significance, 
will  be  found  elsewhere.  [LEVITES.] 

The  history  of  Levi  has  been  dealt  with  here 
in  what  seems  the  only  true  and  natural  way  of 
treating  it,  as  a  history  of  an  individual  person. 
Of  the  theory  that  sees  in  the  sons  of  Jacob 
the  mythical  Eponymi  of  the  tribes  that  claimed 
descent  from  them — which  finds  in  the  crimes  and 
chances  of  their  lives  the  outlines  of  a  national  or 
tribal  chronicle — which  refuses  to  recognise  that 
Jac6b  had  twelve  sons,  and  insists  that  the  history 
of  Dinah  records  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Ca- 
naanites  to  enslave  and  degrade  a  Hebrew  tribe 
(Ewald,  Geschichte,  i.  466-496)— of  this  one  may 
be  content  to  say,  as  the  author  says  of  other  hy 
potheses  hardly  more  extravagant,  "  die  Wissen- 
j  schaft  verscheucht  alle  solche  Gespenster  "(Ibid. 
i.  466).  The  book  of  Genesis  tells  us  of  the  lives 
of  men  and  women,  not  of  ethnological  phantoms. 

A  yet  wilder  conjecture  has  been  hazarded  by 
another  German  critic.  P.  Kedslob  (Die  alttesta- 
mentl.  Namen,  Hamb.  1846,  p.  24,  25),  recog 
nizing  the  meaning  of  the  name  of  Levi  as  given 
above,  finds  in  it  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  con 
federacy  or  synod  of  the  priests  that  had  been  con 
nected  with  the  several  local  worships  of  Canaan, 
and  who,  in  the  time  of  Samuel  and  David,  were 
gathered  together,  joined,  "round  the  Central 
Pantheon  in  Jerusalem."  Here  also  we  may  borrow 
the  terms  of  our  judgment  from  the  language  of  the 
writer  himself.  If  there  are  "  abgeschmackten  ety- 
mologischen  Mahrchen  "  ( Redslob,  p.  82)  connected 
with  the  name  of  Levi,  they  are  hardly  those  we 
meet  with  in  the  narrative  of  Genesis.  [K.  H.  P.] 
2.  (Aeuef;  Rec.  Text,  A«ut;  Levi)  Son  of 
Melchi,  one  of  the  near  ancestors  of  our  Lord,  in 
fact  the  great-grandfather  of  Joseph  (Luke  iii.  24). 
This  name  is  omitted  in  the  list  given  by  Africanus. 


•The  Jewish  tradition  (Targ.  Ptetulojon.")  state'  the 
flve  to  have  been  Zebulun.  I>an.  Naphtali,  Gad,  and 
Asher 


LEVIATHAN 

3.  A  moi-fi    remote    ancestor  of  Christ,  son  of 
Simeon  (Luke  iii.  29).     Lord  A.  Hervey  considers 
that  the  uame  of  Levi  reappears   in  his  descendant 
Lebbaeus  (Geneal.  of  Christ,  132,  and  see  36,  46). 

4.  (AeuWs ;   R.  T.  Aeufs.)     Mark  ii.  14 ;  Luke 
T.  27,  29.  [MATTHEW.] 

LEVI'ATHAN  (jri^,  Hv'ydthdn :  rb  fitya 

<iJTos,  SpoLKcuv;  Complut.  Job  iii.  8,  \e&ia6di>, 
leviathan,  draco)  occurs  rive  times  in  the  text  of  the 
A.  V.,  and  once  in  the  margin  of  Job  iii.  8,  where 
the  text  has  "  mourning. "  In  the  Hebrew  Bible 
the  word  liv'yathan,*  which  is,  with  the  foregoing 
exception,  always  left  untranslated  in  the  A.  V.,  is 
found  only  iu  the  following  passages:  Job  iii.  8,  xl. 
25  (xli.  1,  A.  V.);  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14,  civ.  26;  Is. 
xxvii.  1.  In  the  margin  of  Job  iii.  8,  and  text  of 
Job  xli.  l,b  the  crocodile  is  most  clearly  the  animal 
denoted  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14  also 
clearly  points  to  this  same  saurian.  The  context  of 
Ps.  civ.  26,  "There  go  the  ships:  there  is  that 
leviathan,  whom  thou  hast  made  to  play  therein," 
seems  to  show  that  in  this  passage  the  name  repre 
sents  some  animal  of  the  whale  tribe ;  but  it  is 
somewhat  uncertain  what  animal  is  denoted  in  Is. 
xxvii.  1 .  It  would  be  out  place  here  to  attempt  any 
detailed  explanation  of  the  passages  quoted  above, 
but  the  following  remarks  are  offered.  The  pas 
sage  in  Job  iii.  8  is  beset  with  difficulties,  and  it  is 
evident  from  the  two  widely  different  readings  of 
the  text  and  margin  that  our  translators  were  at  a 
loss.  There  can  however  be  little  doubt  that  the 
margin  is  the  coirect  rendering,  and  this  is  supported 
by  the  LXX.,  Aquila,  Theodotion,  Symmachus,  the 
Vulgate  and  the  Syriac.  There  appears  to  be  some 
reference  to  those  who  practised  enchantments. 
Job  is  lamenting  the  day  on  which  he  was  born, 
and  he  says,  "  Let  them  curse  it  that  curse  the 
(Uy,  who  are  ready  to  raise  up  a  leviathan :"  i.  e. 
"  Let  those  be  hired  to  imprecate  evil  on  my  natal 
day  who  say  they  are  able  by  their  incantations  to 
render  days  propitious  or  unpropitious,  yea,  let 
such  as  are  skilful  enough  to  raise  up  even  leviathan 
(the  crocodile)  from  his  watery  bed  be  summoned 
tc  curse  that  day :"  or,  as  Mason  Good  has  trans 
lated  the  passage,  "  Oh !  that  night !  let  it  be  a 
barren  rock!  let  no  sprightliness  enter  into  it!  let 
the  sorcerers  of  the  day  curse  it !  the  expertest  among 
them  that  can  conjure  up  leviathan!" 

The  detailed  description  of  leviathan  given  in 
Job  xli.  indisputably  belongs  to  the  crocodile,  and 
it  is  astonishing  that  it  should  ever  have  been  un 
derstood  to  apply  to  a  whale  or  a  dolphin  ;  but 
Lee  (Comm.  on  Jbixli.),  following  Hasaeus (Disq. 
de  Lev.  Jobi  et  Ceto  Jonae,"  Brem.  1723),  has 
laboured  hard,  though  unsuccessfully,  to  prove  that 
the  leviathan  of  this  passage  is  some  species  of 
whale,  probably,  he  says,  the  Delphinus  orca,  or 
common  grampus.  That  it  can  be  said  to  be  the 


'  in11"!?,  from  iVp,  an.  animal  wreathed. 

b  \Vliirlpool,  i.  e.  some  sea-monster :  vid.  Trench's 
Select  Glossary,  p.  226. 

c  The  modern  Arabic  name  of  crocodile  is  Timsdh. 
The  word  is  derived  from  the  Coptic,  JEtnsah,  Amsah, 
whence  with  the  aspirate  x«-^a.i  (Herod,  ii.  69). 
Wilkins,  however  (de  L.  Copt.  p.  101),  contends 
that  the  word  is  of  Arabic  origin.  See  Jablonsk. 
Opera  i.  387,  287,  ed.  Te  Water,  1804. 

<»  "The  people  inhabiting  the  wilderness" — a 
poetical  expression  to  denote  the  wild  beasts  :  comp. 
"  the  ants  are  a  people  not  strong,"  "  the  conies  are 


LEVIATHAN  <)y 

iride  of  any  cetacean  that  his  "  scales  shut  up  to 
gether  as  with  a  close  seal,"  is  an  assertion  that  no 
one  can  accept,  since  every  member  of  this  group 
uir  a  body  almost  bald  and  smooth. 


Crocodile  of  the  Nile  (C.  vuyaru) 

The  Egyptian  crocodile  also  is  certainly  the 
animal  denoted  by  leviathan  in  Ps.  Ixxiv.  14  :c 
*'  Thou,  0  God,  didst  destroy  the  princes  of  Pha 
raoh,  the  great  crocodile  or  '  dragon  that  lieth  in 
the  midst  of  his  rivers'  (Ez.  xxix.  3)  in  the  Red 
Sea,  and  didst  give  their  bodies  to  be  food  for  the 
wild  beasts  of  the  desert."  d  The  leviathan  of  Ps. 
civ.  26  seems  clearly  enough  to  allude  to  some  great 
cetacean.  The  "  great  and  wide  sea  "  must  surely  be 
the  Mediterranean,  "  the  great  sea,"  as  it  is  usually 
called  in  Scripture ;  it  would  ceilainly  be  stretch 
ing  the  point  too  far  to  understand  the  expression  to 
represent  any  part  of  the  Nile.  The  crocodile,  as 
is  well  known,  is  a  fresh-water,  not  a  marine 
animal : e  it  is  very  probable  therefore  that  some 
whale  is  signified  by  the  term  leviathan  in  this 
passage,  and  it  is  quite  an  error  to  assert,  as  Dr. 
Harris  (Diet.  Nat.  Hist.  Bib.},  Mason  Good  (Book 
of  Job  translated),  Michaelis  (Supp.  1297),  and  Ko- 
senmuller  (quoting  Michaelis  in  not.  ad  Bochart  Hic- 
roz.  iii.  738)  have  done,  that  the  whale  is  not  found 
in  the  Mediterranean.  The  Orca  gladiator  (Gray) — 
the  grampus  mentioned  above  by  Lee — the  Physahis 
antiquorum  (Gray),  or  the  Rorqual  de  la  Mediter- 
ranee  (Cuvier),  are  not  uncommon  in  the  Medi 
terranean  (Fischer,  Synops.  Mam.  525,  and  Lace- 
pfede,  H.  N.  des  Cetac.  115),  and  in  ancient 
times  the  species  may  have  been  more  numerous. 

There  is  some  uncertainty  about  the  leviathan 
of  Is.  xxvii.  1.  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.  in  I.  c.)  thinks 
that  the  word  nachash,  here  rendered  serpent,  is  to 
be  taken  in  a  wide  sense  as  applicable  to  any  great 
monster ;  and  that  the  prophet,  under  the  term 
"  leviathan  that  crooked  serpent,"  is  speaking  of 
Egypt,  typified  by  the  crocodile,  the  usual  emblem 
of  the  prince  of  that  kingdom.  The  Chaldee  para 
phrase  understands  the  "  leviathan  that  piercing 
serpent"  to  refer  to  Pharaoh,  and  "leviathan  that 
crooked  serpent"  to  refer  to  Sennacherib. 

but  a  feeble  folk"  (Prov.  xxx.  25,  26).  For  ofcher 
interpretations  of  this  passage  see  Roseumiill.  Schol., 
and  Bochart,  Phalep,  318. 

•  According  to  Warburton  (Cresc.  <f-  Cr.  85)  the 
crocodile  is  never  now  seen  below  Minyeh,  but  it 
should  be  stated  that  Pliny  (N.  H.  viii.  25),  not  He 
rodotus,  as  Mr.  Warburton  asserts,  speaks  of  croco 
diles  being  attacked  by  dolphins  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Nile.  Seneca  (Nat.  Quaest.  iv.  2)  gives  an  account 
of  a  contest  between  these  animals.  Cuvier  thinks 
that  a  species  of  dog-rish  is  meant  (Acanthias  vul- 
yaris},  on  account  of  the  dorsal  spines  of  which  Plinj 
speaks,  and  which  no  species  of  dolphin  possesses. 

H  2 


too 


LEVIS 


As  *he  term  leviathan  is  evidently  used  in  no 
limited  sense,  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  "  levi 
athan  the  pieicing  serpent,"  or  "  leviathan  the 
crooked  serpent,"  may  denote  some  species  of  the 
great  rock-snakes  (Boidae)  which  are  common  in 
South  and  West  Africa,  perhaps  the  Hortulia  Sebae, 
which  Schneider  (Amph.  ii.  266),  under  the  sy 
nonym  Boa  hieroglyphica,  appears  to  identify  with 
the  huge  serpent  represented  on  the  Egyptian  mo- 
.uments.  This  python,  as  well  as  the  crocodile, 
•\ras  worshipped  by  the  Egyptians,  and  may  well 
therefore  be  understood  in  this  passage  to  typify 
the  Egyptian  power.  Perhaps  the  English  word 
monster  may  be  considered  to  be  as  good  a  transla 
tion  of  liv'i/dthan  as  any  other  that  can  be  found  ; 
.  and  though  the  crocodile  seems  to  be  the  animal 
more  particularly  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  term, 
yet,  as  has  been  shown,  the  whale,  and  perhaps  the 
rock-snike  also,  may  be  signified  under  this  name.' 
[WHALE.]  Bochart  (iii.  769,  ed.  Rosenmuller)  says 
that  the  Talmudists  use  the  word  liv'ydthdn  to 
denote  the  crocodile;  this  however  is  denied  by 
Lewysohn  (Zool.  des  Talm.  155,  355),  who  says 
that  in  the  Talmud  it  always  denotes  a  whale,  and 
never  a  crocodile.  For  the  Talmudical  fables  about 
the  leviathan,  see  Lewysohn  (Zool.  des  Talm.),  in 
passages  refeiTed  to  above,  and  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Chal. 

Talm.    s.  v.  jrv6.     [VV.  H.] 

LEVIS  (Aevfs  :  Levis),  improperly  given  as  a 
proper  name  in  1  Esd.  is.  14.  It  is  simply  a  coV- 
ruption  of"  the  Levite"  in  Ezr.  x.  15. 


LEVITES 


:    Aei/?ra«  :   Levitae  :   also 


*)?  \J3  :  viol  hevi:  filii  Leoi).  The  analogy  of 
the  names  of  the  other  tribes  of  Israel  would 
lead  us  to  include  under  these  titles  the  whole 
tribe  that  traced  its  descent  from  Levi.  The 
existence  of  another  division,  however,  within  the 
tribe  itself,  in  the  higher  office  of  the  priesthood 
as  limited  to  the  "  sous  of  Aaron,"  gave  to  the 
common  form,  in  this  instance,  a  peculiar  meaning. 
Most  frequently  the  Levites  are  distinguished,  as 
such,  from  the  priests  (IK.  viii.  4;  Ezr.  ii.  70; 
John  i.  19,  &c.),  and  this  is  the  meaning  which 
has  perpetuated  itself.  Sometimes  the  word  extends 
to  the  whole  tribe,  the  priests  included  (Num.  xxxv. 
'2  ;  Josh.  xxi.  3,  41  ;  Ex.  vi.  25;  Lev.  xxv.  32,  &c.). 
Sometimes  again  it  is  added  as  an  epithet  of  the 
smaller  portion  of  the  tribe,  and  we  read  of  "the 
priests  the  Levites"  (Josh.  iii.  3;  Ez.  xliv.  15X 
The  history  of  the  tribe,  and  of  the  functions  at 
tached  to  its  several  orders,  is  obviously  essential 
to  any  right  apprehension  of  the  history  of  Israel 
as  a  people.  They  are  the  representatives  of  its 
faith,  the  ministers  of  its  worship.  They  play  at 
least  as  prominent  a  part  in  the  growth  of  its  insti 
tutions,  in  fostering  or  repressing  the  higher  life  of 
the  nation,  as  the  clergy  of  the  Christian  Church 


LEVITES 

have  played  in  the  history  of  any  European  kiu 
dom.  It  will  be  the  object  of  this  article  to  trace 
the  outlines  of  that  history,  marking  out  th«  ftuic- 
tions  which  at  different  periods  were  assigned  to  tb.3 
tribe,  and  the  influence  which  its  members  exercised. 
This  is,  it  is  believed,  a  truer  method  than  that  which 
would  attempt  to  give  a  more  complete  picture  by 
combining  into  one  whole  the  fragmentary  notices 
which  are  separated  from  each  other  by  wide  inter 
vals  of  time,  or  treating  them  as  if  they  represented 
the  permanent  characteristics  of  the  order.  In  the 
history  of  all  priestly  or  quasi-priestly  bodies,  func 
tions  vary  with  the  changes  of  time  and  circum 
stances,  and  to  ignore  those  changes  is  a  sufficient 
proof  of  incompetency  for  dealing  with  the  history. 
As  a  matter  of  convenience,  whatever  belongs  ex 
clusively  to  the  functions  and  influence  of  the  priest 
hood,  will  be  found  under  that  head  [PRIEST]  ;  but 
it  is  proposed  to  treat  here  of  all  that  is  common  to 
the  priests  and  Levites,  as  being  together  the  sacer 
dotal  tribe,  the  clerisy  of  Israel.  The  history  will 
fall  naturally  into  four  great  periods.. 

I.  The  time  of  the  Exodus. 
II.  The  period  of  the  Judges. 

III.  That  of  the  Monarchy. 

IV.  That  from  the  Captivity  to  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem. 

I.  The  absence  of  all  reference  to  the  consecrated 
character  of  the  Levites  in  the  book  of  Genesis  is 
noticeable  enough.  The  prophecy  ascribed  to  Jacob 
(Gen.  xlix.  5-7)  was  indeed  fulfilled  with  singular 
precision  ;  but  the  terms  of  the  prophecy  are  hardly 
such  as  would  have  been  framed  by  a  later  writer,* 
after  the  tribe  had  gained  its  subsequent  pre-emi 
nence;  and  unless  we  frame  some  hypothesis  to 
account  for  this  omission  as  deliberate,  it  takes  its 
place,  so  far  as  it  goes,  among  th>  evidence  of  the 
antiquity  of  that  section  of  Genesis  in  which  these 
prophecies  are  found.  The  only  occasion  on  which 
the  patriarch  of  the  tribe  appears — the  massacre  of 
the  Shechemites — may  indeed  have  contributed  to 
influence  the  history  of  his  descendants,  by  fostering 
in  them  the  same  fierce  wild  zeal  against  all  that 
threatened  to  violate  the  purity  of  their  race;  but 
generally  what  strikes  us  is  the  absence  of  all  recog 
nition  of  the  later  character.  In  the  genealogy  of 
Gen.  xlvi.  11,  in  like  manner,  the  list  does  not  go 
lower  down  than  the  three  sons  of  Levi,  and  they 
are  given  in  the  order  of  their  birth,  not  in  that 
which  would  have  corresponded  to  the  official  su 
periority  of  the  Kohathites.b  There  are  no  signs, 
again,  that  the  tribe  of  Levi  had  any  special  pre 
eminence  over  the  others  during  the  Egyptian  bond 
age.  As  tracing  its  descent  from  Leah,  it  would 
take  its  place  among  the  six  chief  tribes  sprung  from 
the  wives  of  Jacob,  and  share  with  them  a  recog 
nised  superiority  over  those  that  bore  the  names  of 
the  sons  of  Bilhah  and  Zilpah.  Within  "iie  tnbe 
itself  there  are  some  slight  tokens  that  the  Ko- 


1  The  Heb.  word  BT13  occurs  about  thirty  times 
in  the  O.  T.,  and  it  seems  clear  enough  that  in  every 
case  its  use  it  limited  to  the  serpent  tribe.  If  the 
I, XX.  interpretation  of  CHS  be  taken,  the  fleeing 
and  not  piercing  serpent  is  the  rendering  :  the  Heb. 
{in?pJJ>  tortuosits,  is  more  applicable  to  a  serpent 
than  to'any  other  animal.  The  expression,  "  He  shall 
play  the  dragon  that  is  in  the  sea,"  refers  also  to  the 
Egyptian  power,  and  is  merely  expletive — the  dragon 
being  the  crocodile,  which  is  in  this  part  of  the  verse 
*n  emblem  of  Phiruh,  as  the  serpent  is  in  the  former 


part  of  the  verse. 

•  Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  454)  refers  the  language  of 
Gen.  xlix.  7  not  to  the  distribution  of  the  Levites 
in  their  48  cities,  but  to  the  time  when  they  had 
fallen  into  disrepute,  and  become,  as  in  Judg.  xvii., 
a  wandering,  half-mendicant  order.  But  see  Kalisch, 
Genesis,  ad  loc. 

b  The  later  genealogies,  it  shcn'.d  be  noticed.  *epro- 
duce  the  same  order.  This  was  natural  enougli ;  but 
a  genealogy  originating  in  a  later  age,  and  reflecting 
ts  feelings,  would  probably  have  changed  the  order. 
(Comp.  I  x.  vi.  1C,  Num.  iii.  17,  1  Ch.r  vi.  16.) 


LEVITES 

hatliites  are  grilling  thi>  first  place.  The  classifica 
tion  of  Ex.  vi.  16-2.S,  gives  to  that  section  of  the 
;ribe  tour  clans  or  houses,  while  those  of  Gershon 
snd  Merari  have  but  two  each.c  To  it  belonged 
the  house  cf  Amram  ;  and  "  Aaron  the  Levite"  (Ex. 
iv.  14)  is  o-poken  of  as  one  tc  whom  the  people  will 
be  sure  to  listen.  He  marries  the  daughter  of  the 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Ex.  vi.  23).  The  work 
accomplished  by  him,  and  by  his  yet  greater  brother, 
would  tend  naturally  to  give  prominence  to  the 
family  and  the  tribe  to  which  they  belonged  ;  but 
as  yet  there  are  no  traces  of  a  caste-character,  no 
signs  of  any  intention  to  establish  an  hereditary 
priesthood.  Up  to  this  time  the  Israelites  had  wor 
shipped  the  God  of  their  fathers  after  their  fathers' 
manner.  The  first-born  of  the  people  were  the 
priests  of  the  people.  The  eldest  son  of  each  house 
inherited  the  priestly  office.  His  youth  made  him, 
in  his  father's  lifetime,  the  representative  of  the 
purity  which  was  connected  from  the  beginning 
with  the  thought  of  worship  (Ewald,  Alterthilm. 
273,  and  comp.  PRIEST).  It  was  apparently 
with  this  as  their  ancestral  worship  *hat  the  Israel 
ites  came  »p  out  of  Egypt.  The  "  young  men  "  of 
the  sons  of  Israel  otter  sacrifices'1  (Ex.  xxiv.  5). 
They,  we  may  infer,  are  the  priests  who  remain 
with  the  people  while  Moses  ascends  the  heights  of 
Sinai  (xix.  22-24).  They  represented  the  truth 
that  the  whole  people  were  "  a  kingdom  of  priests  " 
(xix.  6).  Neither  they,  nor  the  "  officers  and 
judges  "  appointed  to  assist  Moses  in  administering 
justice  (xviii.  25)  are  connected  in  any  special 
manner  with  the  tribe  of  Levi.  The  first  step  to 
wards  a  change  was  made  in  the  institution  of  an 
hereditary  priesthood  in  the  family  of  Aaron,  during 
the  first  withdrawal  of  Moses  to  the  solitude  of 
Sinai  (xxviii.  1).  This,  however,  was  one  thing: 
it  was  quite  another  to  set  apart  a  whole  tribe  of 
Israel  as  a  priestly  caste.  The  directions  given  for 
the  construction  of  the  tabernacle  imply  no  pre 
eminence  of  the  Levites.  The  chief  workers  in  it  are 
from  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  of  Dan  (Ex.  xxxi.  2-6). 
The  next  extension  of  the  idea  of  the  priesthood  grew 
out  of  the  terrible  crisis  of  Ex.  xxxii.  If  the  Levites 
had  been  sharers  in  the  sin  of  the  golden  calf,  they 
were  at  any  rate  the  foremost  to  rally  round  their 
leader  when  he  called  on  them  to  help  him  in  stem 
ming  the  progress  of  the  evil.  And  then  came  that 
terrible  consecration  of  themselves,  when  every  man 
was  against  his  son  and  against  his  brother,  and  the 

offering  with  which  they  filled  their  hands  (-"IXp?? 
D3"V,  Ex.  xxxii.  29,  comp.  Ex.  xxviii.  41)  was  the 


LEVITES 


101 


0  As  the  names  of  the  lesser  houses  recur,  some  of 
them  frequently,  it  may  he  well  to  give  them  here 


Gtrshon.   {8hlnle, 


<  Moses 

Amram  .  1  A  „„  j  Eleazar 

(Aaron  .  .   |lthamar< 

j  Korah 


Kohath 

Kohath    . 


Merari 


(Zlthri 


Hpbron 

(Mishae! 
Uz>.tel  .   .  /  Elzaphan 

IZithri. 
(  Mahali 


bliXKl  of  their  nearest  of  kin.  The  tribe  stoo«l 
forth,  separate  and  apart,  recognising  even  in 
this  stem  work  the  spiritual  as  higher  than 
the  natural,  and  therefore  counted  worthy  to 
be  the  representative  of  the  ideal  life  of  tha 
people,  "an  Israel  within  an  Israel"  (Ewald, 
Altertlmm.  279),  chosen  in  its  higher  represen 
tatives  to  offer  incense  and  burnt-sacritice  before  the 
Lord  (Deut.  xxxiii.  9,  10),  not  without  a  share  in 
the  glory  of  the  Urini  and  Thummim  that  were 
worn  by  the  prince  and  chieftain  of  the  tribe. 
From  this  time  accordingly  they  occupied  a  dis 
tinct  position.  Experience  had  shown  how  easily 
the  people  might  fall  back  into  idolatry  —  how 
necessary  it  was  that  there  should  be  a  body  ot 
men,  an  order,  numerically  large,  and  when  the 
people  were  in  their  promised  home,  equally  diffused 
throughout  the  country,  as  witnesses  and  guardians 
of  the  truth.  Without  this  the  individualism  ot 
the  older  worship  would  have  been  fruitful  in  an 
ever-multiplying  idolatry.  The  tribe  of  Levi  was 
therefore  to  take  the  place  of  that  earlier  priesthood 
of  the  first-born  as  representatives  of  the  holiness 
of  the  people.  The  minds  of  the  people  were  to  be 
drawn  to  the  fact  of  the  substitution  by  the  close 
numerical  correspondence  of  the  consecrated  tribe 
with  that  of  those  whom  they  replaced.  The  first 
born  males  were  numbered,  and  found  to  be  22,273  ; 
the  census  of  the  Levites  gave  22,000,  reckoning  in 
each  case  from  children  of  one  month  upwards6 
(Num.  iii.).  The  fixed  price  for  the  redemption  of 
a  victim  vowed  in  sacrifice  (comp.  Lev.  xxvii.  6  ; 
Num.  xviii.  16)  was  to  be  paid  for  each  of  the 
odd  number  by  which  the  first-born  were  in  excess 
of  the  Levites  (Num.  iii.  47).  In  this  way  the 
latter  obtained  a  sacrificial  as  well  as  a  priestly  cha 
racter.'  They  for  the  first-bora  of  men,  and  their 
cattle  for  the  firstlings  of  beasts,  fulfilled  the  idea 
that  had  been  asserted  at  the  time  of  the  destruction 
of  the  first-born  of  Egypt  (Ex.  xiii.  12,  13).  The 
commencement  of  the  march  from  &nai  gave  a 
prominence  to  their  new  character.  As  the  Taber 
nacle  was  the  sign  of  the  presence  among  the  people 
of  their  unseen  King,  so  the  Levites  were,  among 
the  other  tribes  of  Israel,  as  the  royal  guard  that 
waited  exclusively  on  Him.  The  wailike  title  of 
"  host"  is  specially  applied  to  them  (comp.  use  of 

KZJV,  in  Num.  iv.  3,  30  ;  and  of  rUHO,  in  1  Ohr. 


ix.  19).  As  such  they  were  not  included  in  the 
number  of  the  armies  of  Israel  (Num.  i.  47,  ii.  •"••'>, 
xxvi.  62),  but  reckoned  separately  by  themselves. 
When  the  people  we:e  at  rest  they  encamped  as 


*  This  is  expressly  stated  in  the  Targ.  Pseudojon. 
on  this  verse  :—  "  And  he  sent  the  first-born  of  the 
Cli.  of  Isr.,  for  even  to  that  time  the  worship  was  by 
the  first-born,  because  the  Tabernacle  was  not  yet 
Dixie,  nor  the  priesthood  given  to  Aaron,"  &c. 


e  The  separate  numbers  in  Num.  iii.  (Gershon,  7500 ; 
Kohath,  8600  ;  Merari,  G200)  give  a  total  of  2»,3()0. 
The  received  solution  of  the  discrepancy  is  that  300 
were  the  first-born  of  the  Levites,  who  as  such  worn 
already  consecrated,  and  therefore  could  not  take  tlio 
place  of  others.  Talnuulic  traditions  (Gemnr.  Bali, 
tit.  Sanhedrim,  quoted  by  Patrick)  add  that  the  ques 
tion,  which  of  the  Israelites  should  be  redeemed  by  a 
Levite,  or  which  should  pay  the  five  shekels,  wa* 
settled  by  lot.  The  number  of  the  first-born  appears 
disproportionately  small,  as  compared  with  the  popu 
lation.  It  must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
conditions  to  be  fulfilled  were  that  they  should  be  at 
once  (1)  the  first  child  of  the  father,  (2)  the  first  child 
of  the  mother,  (3)  males.  (Comp.  on  this  question, 
and  on  that  of  the  difference  of  numbers,  Kurtz, 
History  of  the  Old  Covenant,  iii.  201.) 

*  Comp.  the  recurrence  of  the  same  thought  IE  tbt 
**KA.T)<Tia  irpuiroTOKujv  -A  Heb.  xii.  23. 


102 


LEVITES 


guardians  round  the  sacred  tent;  no  one  else  might 
come  near  it  under  pain  of  death  (Num.  i.  51, 
xviii.  22).  They  were  to  occupy  a  middle  position 
in  that  ascending  scale  of  consecration,  which,  stall 
ing  from  the  idea  of  the  whole  nation  as  a  priestly 
people,  reached  its  culminating  point  in  the  high- 
priest  who,  alone  of  all  the  people,  might  enter 
"  within  the  veil."  The  Levites  might  come  nearer 
than  the  other  tribes ;  but  they  might  not  sacrifice, 
nor  burn  incense,  nor  see  the  "holy  things"  of  the 
sanctuary  till  they  were  covered  (Num.  iv.  15). 
When  on  the  march,  no  hands  but  theirs  might 
strike  the  tent  at  the  commencement  of  the  day's 
journey,  or  carry  the  parts  of  its  structure 
during  it,  or  pitch  the  tent  once  again  when  they 
halted  (Num  i.  51).  It  was  obviously  essential 
for  such  a  work  that  there  should  be  a  fixed  assign 
ment  of  duties :  and  now  accordingly  we  meet  with 
the  first  outlines  of  the  organisation  which  after 
wards  became  permanent.  The  division  of  the  tribe 
into  the  three  sections  that  traced  their  descent 
from  the  sons  of  Levi,  formed  the  groundwork  of 
it.  The  work  which  they  all  had  to  do  required  a 
man's  full  strength,  and  therefore,  though  twenty 
was  the  starting-point  for  military  service  (Num. 
i.);  they  were  not  to  enter  on  their  active  service 
till  they  were  thirty  s  (Num.  iv.  23,  30,  35).  At 
fifty  they  were  to  be  free  from  all  duties  but  those 
of  superintendence  (Num.  viii.  25,  26).  The  result 
of  this  limitation  gave  to  the  Kohathites  2750  on 
active  service  out  of  8600  ;  to  the  sons  of  Gershon 
2630  out  of  7500  ;  to  those  of  Merari  3200  out  of 
6200  (Num.  iv.).  Of  these  the  Kohathites,  as 
nearest  of  kin  to  the  priests,  held  from  the  first  the 
highest  offices.  They  were  to  bear  all  the  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary,  the  ark  itself  included h  (Num. 
iii.  31,  iv.  15;  Deut.  xxxi.  25),  after  the  priests 
had  covered  them  with  the  dark-blue  cloth  which 
was  to  hide  them  from  all  profane  gaze ;  and  thus 
they  became  also  the  guardians  of  all  the  sacred 
treasures  which  the  people  had  so  freely  offered. 
The  Gershonites  in  their  turn,  had  to  cairy  the 
tent-hangings  and  curtains  (Num.  iv.  22-26).  The 
heavier  burden  of  the  boards,  bars,  and  pillars  of 
the  tabernacle  fell  on  the  sons  of  Merari.  The  two 
latter  companies  were  allowed,  however,  to  use  the 
oxen  and  the  waggons  which  were  offered  by  the 
congregation,  Merari,  in  consideration  of  its  heavier 
work,  having  two-thirds  of  the  number  (Num.  vii. 
1-9).  The  more  sacred  vessels  of  the  Kohathites 
were  to  be  borne  by  them  on  their  own  shoulders 
(Num.  vii.  9).  The  Kohathites  in  this  arrange 
ment  were  placed  under  the  command  of  Eleazar, 
Ciershon  and  Merari  under  Ithamar  (Num.  iv.  28, 
.•>:<).  Before  the  march  began  the  whole  tribe  wns 
once  again  solemnly  set  apart.  The  rites  (some  of 
them  at  least)  were  such  as  the  people  might 
have  witnessed  in  Egypt,  and  all  would  understand 
their  meaning.  Their  clothes  were  to  be  washed. 
They  themselves,  as  if  they  were,  prior  to  their 
separation,  polluted  and  unclean,  like  the  leper,  or 


LEVITES 

those  that  had  touched  the  dead,  were  to  be  sprinkled 
with  "  water  of  purifying  "  (Num.  viii.  7,  comp 
with  xix.  13  ;  Lev.  xiv.  8,  9),  and  to  shave  all  theii 
flesh.'  The  people  were  then  to  lay  their  hands 
upon  the  heads  of  the  consecrated  tribe  and  oft'ei 
them  up  as  their  representatives  (Num.  viii.  10). 
Aaron,  as  high-priest,  was  then  to  present  them  as 
a  wave-offering  (turning  them,  t.  e.  this  way  and 
that,  while  they  bowed  themselves  to  the  four  points 
of  the  compass  ;  comp.  Abarbanel  on  Num.  viii. 
11,  and  Kurtz,  iii.  208),  in  token  that  all  their 
powers  of  mind  and  body  were  henceforth  to  be  de 
voted  to  that  service.1*  They,  in  their  turn,  were 
to  lay  their  hands  on  the  two  bullocks  which  were 
to  be  slaiu  as  a  sin-offering  and  burnt-offering  for 
an  atonement  OS3»  Num.  viii.  12).  Then  they 
entered  on  their  work  ;  from  one  point  of  view  given 
by  the  people  to  Jehovah,  from  another  given  by 
Jehovah  to  Aaron  and  his  sons  (Num.  iii.  9,  viii. 
19,  xviii.  6).  Their  very  name  is  turned  into  an 
omen  that  they  will  cleave  to  the  service  of  the 
Lord  (comp.  the  play  on  -M?*  and  *1?  in  Num. 
xviii.  2,  4). 

The  new  institution  was,  however,  to  receive  a 
severe  shock  from  those  who  were  most  interested 
in  it.  The  section  of  the  Levites  whose  position 
brought  them  into  contact  with  the  tribe  of  Reuben  * 
conspired  with  it  to  reassert  the  old  patriarchal 
system  of  a  household  priesthood.  The  leader  of 
that  revolt  may  have  been  impelled  by  a  desire  to 
gain  the  same  height  as  that  which  Aaron  had 
attained  ;  but  the  ostensible  pretext,  that  the  "  whole 
congregation  were  holy"  (Num.  xvi.  3),  was  one 
which  would  have  cut  away  all  the  distinctive  pri 
vileges  of  the  tribe  of  which  he  was  a  member. 
When  their  self-willed  ambition  had  been  punished, 
when  all  danger  of  the  sons  of  Levi  "  taking  too 
much  upon  them"  was  for  the  time  checked,  it 
was  time  also  to  provide  more  definitely  for  them, 
and  so  to  give  them  more  reason  to  be  satisfied  witt 
what  they  actually  had  ;  and  this  involved  a  pernia 
nent  organisation  for  the  future  as  well  as  for  tin 
present.  If  they  were  to  have,  like  other  tribes,  a 
distinct  territory  assigned  to  them,  their  influence 
over  the  people  at  large  would  be  diminished, 
and  they  themselves  would  be  likely  to  forget,  in 
labours  common  to  them  with  others,  their  own 
peculiar  calling.  Jehovah  therefore  was  to  be  theii 
inheritance  (Num.  xviii.  20 ;  Deut.  x.  9,  xviii.  2). 
They  were  to  have  no  territorial  possessions.  In 
place  of  them  they  were  to  receive  from  the  others 
the  tithes  of  the  produce  of  the  land,  from  which 
they,  in  their  turn,  offered  a  tithe  to  the  priests,  as 
a  recognition  of  their  higher  consecration  (Num 
xviii.  21,  24,  26  ;  Neh.  x.  37).  As  if  to  provide  tbi 
the  contingency  of  failing  crops  or  the  like,  and  the 
consequent  inadequacy  of  the  tithes  thus  assigned 
to  them,  the  Levite  not  less  than  the  widow  and  the 
orphan,  was  commended  to  the  special  kindness  of 
the  people  (Deut.  xii.  19,  xiv.  27,  29).  When  the 


*  The  mention  of  twenty-five  in  Num.  viii.  24,  as 
the  age  of  entrance,  must  be  understood  either  of  a 
probationary  period  during  which  they  were  trained 
for  their  duties,  or  of  the  lighter  work  of  keeping  'the 
pates  of  the  tabernacle. 

11  On  more  solemn  occasions  tne  priests  themselves 
appear  as  the  bearers  of  the  ark  (Josh,  .ii  3,  15,  vi.  6  ; 
1  K.  viii.  6). 

*  Comp.  the  analogous  practice  (differing,  however, 
in  being  constantly  repeated)  of  the  Egyptian  priests 
(Hrrud.  ii.  37 ;  con  p.  Spencer,  DC  Lrg.  IM.  b    H.  c.  5). 


k  Solemn  as  this  dedication  is,  it  fell  short  of  the 
consecration  of  the  priests,  and  was  expressed  by 
a  different  word.  [PRIEST.]  The  Levites  were  purified, 
not  consecrated  (comp.  Gesen.  s.  v.  I!1t3  and  fTp? 
and  Oehler,  ».  ».  "Levi,"  in  Herzog's  Real.  E'icycl.). 

1  In  the  encampment  in  the  wilderness,  the  sons 
of  Aaron  occupied  the  foremost  place  of  honour  on  the 
east.  The  Kohathites  were  at  their  right,  on  th« 
south,  the  Gershonites  on  the  west,  the  sons  of  Morari 
on  the  north  of  the  tabernacle.  On  the  south  u  ere 
also  Reuben,  Simeon,  and  Gad  (Num.  ii.  and  iii.)t 


LEVITES 

w.'iinleriiigs  of  the  people  should  be  over  and  the 
tabernacle  have  a  sett  led  place,  great  part  of  the  labour 
that  had  fallen  on  them  would  come  to  an  end.  and 
they  too  would  need  a  fixed  abode.  Concentration 
round  the  tabernacle  would  lead  to  evils  nearly  as 
great,  though  of  a  different  kixid,  as  an  assignment 
of  special  territory.  Their  ministerial  character 
might  thus  be  intensified,  but  their  pervading  in 
fluence  as  witnesses  and  teachers  would  be  sacrificed 
to  it.  Distinctness  and  diffusion  were  both  to  be 
secured  by  the  assignment  to  the  whole  tribe  (the 
priests  included)  of  forty-eight  cities,  with  an 
outlying  "  suburb "  (KHSD,  irpoaffrfia. ;  Num. 
xxxv.  2)  of  meadow-land  for  the  pasturage  of  their 
flocks  and  herds.™  The  reverence  of  the  people  for 
them  was  to  be  heightened  by  the  selection  of  six  of 
these  as  cities  of  refuge,  in  which  the  Levites  were 
to  present  themselves  as  the  protectors  of  the  fugi 
tives  who,  though  they  had  not  incurred  the  guilt, 
were  yet  liable  to  the  punishment  of  murder." 
How  rapidly  the  feeling  of  reverence  gained  strength, 
we  may  judge  from  the  share  assigned  to  them  out 
of  the  flocks  and  herds  and  women,  of  the  conquered 
Midianites  (Num.  xxxi.  27,  &c.).  The  same  victory 
led  to  the  dedication  of  gold  and  silver  vessels  of 
great  value,  and  thus  increased  the  importance 
of  the  tribe  as  guardians  of  the  national  treasures 
(Num.  xxxi.  50-54). 

The  book  of  Deuteronomy  is  interesting  as  in 
dicating  more  clearly  than  had  been  done  before 
the  other  functions,  over  and  above  their  ministra 
tions  in  the  tabernacle,  which  were  to  be  allotted 
to  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Through  the  whole  land  they 
were  to  take  the  place  of  the  old  household  priests 
(subject,  of  course,  to  the  special  rights  of  the 
Aaronic  priesthood),  sharing  in  all  festivals  and  re 
joicings  (Deut.  xii.  19,  xiv.  26,  27,  xxvi.  11).  Every 
third  year  they  were  to  have  an  additional  share  in 
the  produce  of  the  land  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12). 
The  people  were  charged  never  to  forsake  them.  To 
"  the  priests  the  Levites"0  was  to  belong  the  office 
of  preserving,  transcribing,  and  interpreting  the  law 
(Deut.  xvii.  9-12;  xxxi.  26).  They  were  solemnly 
to  read  it  every  seventh  year  at  the  Feast  of  Taber 
nacles  (Deut.  xxxi.  9-13).  They  were  to  pronounce 
the  curses  from  Mount  Ebal  (Deut.  xxvii.  14). 

Such,  if  one  may  so  speak,  was  the  ideal  of  the 
religious  organisation  which  was  present  to  the 
mind  of  the  lawgiver.  Details  were  left  to  be  de 
veloped  as  the  altered  circumstances  of  the  people 
might  require.?  The  great  principle  was,  that  the 
warrior-caste  who  had  guarded  the  tent  of  the  cap 
tain  of  the  hosts  of  Israel,  should  be  throughout 
the  land  as  witnesses  that  the  people  still  owed 
allegiance  to  Him.  Jt  deserves  notice  that,  as  yet, 
with  the  exception  of  the  few  passages  that  refer  to 


LEVITES 


103 


m  Heliopolis  (Strabo,  xvii.  1),  Thebes  and  Memphis 
in  Egypt,  and  Benares  in  Hindostan,  have  been  referred 
to  as  parallels.  The  aggregation  of  priests  round  a 
great  national  sanctuary,  so  as  to  make  it  as  it  were 
the  centre  of  a  collegiate  life,  was  however  different  in 
its  object  and  results  from  that  of  the  polity  of  Israel. 
(Comp.  Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  402.) 

•  The  importance  of  giving  a  sacred  character  to 
such  an  asylum  is  sufficient  to  account  for  the  assign 
ment  of  the  cities  of  refuge  to  the  Levites.  Philo, 
however,  with  his  characteristic  love  of  an  inner 
meaning,  sees  in  it  the  truth  that  the  Levites  them 
selves  were,  according  to  the  idea  of  their  lives, 
fugitives  from  the  world  of  sense,  who  had  found 
Iteir  place  of  refuge  in  God. 

This  phraseology,  characteristic  of  Deuteronomy 


the  priests,  no  traces  appear  of  their  character  as  a 
learned  caste,  and  of  the  work  which  aftci  wards 
belonged  to  them  as  hymn-wi iters  and  musicians. 
The  nymns  of  this  period  were  probably  occasional; 
not  recurring  (comp.  Ex.  xv. ;  Num.  xxi.  17  ;  Deut. 
xxxii.).  Women  bore  a  large  share  in  singing  their, 
(Ex.  xv.  20 ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  25).  It  is  not  unlikely 
that  the  wives  and  daughters  of  the  Levites,  who 
must  have  been  with  them  in  all  their  encampments, 
as  afterwards  in  their  cities,  took  the  foremost  part 
among  the  "damsels  playing  with  their  timbrels,'"1 
or  among  the  "  wise-hearted,"  who  wove  hangings 
for  the  decoration  of  the  tabernacle.  There  are  at 
any  rate  signs  of  their  presence  there,  in  the  mention 
of  the  "women  that  assembled"  at  its  door  (Ex. 
xxxviii.  8,  and  comp.  Ewald,  Alterthum.  p.  297). 

II.  The  successor  of  Moses,  though  belonging  (o 
another  tribe,  did  faithfully  all  that  could  be  done  to 
convert  this  idea  into  a  reality.  The  submission  of 
the  Gibeonites,  after  they  had  obtained  a  promise 
that  their  lives  should  be  spared,  enabled  him  to  re 
lieve  the  tribe-divisions  of  Gershon  and  Merari  of  the 
most  burdensome  of  their  duties.  The  conquered 
Hivites  became  "  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of 
water  "  for  the  house  of  Jehovah  and  for  the  con 
gregation  (Josh.  ix.  27;.r  As  soon  as  the  con 
querors  had  advanced  far  enough  to  proceed  to  a 
partition  of  the  country,  the  forty-eight  cities  were 
assigned  to  them.  Whether  they  were  to  be  the 
sole  occupiers  of  the  cities  thus  allotted,  or  whether 
—  as  the  rule  for  the  redemption  of  their  houses  in 
Lev.  xxv.  32  might  seem  to  indicate — others  were 
allowed  to  reside  when  they  had  been  provided  for, 
must  remain  uncertain.  The  principle  of  a  widely 
diffused  influence  was  maintained  by  allotting,  as  a 
rule,  four  cities  from  the  district  of  each  tribe  ;  but 
it  is  interesting  to  notice  how,  in  the  details  of  the 
distribution,  the  divisions  of  the  Levites  in  the  order 
of  their  precedence  coincided  with  the  relative  im 
portance  of  the  tribes  with  which  they  were  con 
nected.  The  following  table  will  help  the  reader 
to  form  a  judgment  on  this  point,  and  to  trace  the 
influence  of  the  tribe  in  the  subsequent  events  of 
Jewish  history. 

1.    KOHATHITES: 


A.  Priests 


(  Judah  and  Simeon   ....  9 
' '  (  Benjamin      4 


bruini 


II.    til  KSHONITKS 


111.  MERAUITES 


B.  Not  Priests  {  Dan 

(Half  Manasseh  (West)  .     2 
Half  Manasseh  (East)    . .  2 

Issachar   4 

'   Asher 4 

Naphtall 3 

(Zebulun 4 

.  <  Keuben 4 

(Gad    4 


and  Joshua,  appears  to  indicate  that  the  function 
spoken  of  belonged  to  them,  as  the  chief  members  ol 
the  sacred  tribe,  as  a  clerisy  rather  than  as  priests  in 
the  narrower  sense  of  the  word. 

*  To  this  there  is  one  remarkable  exception.  Deut. 
xviii.  6  provides  for  a  permanent  dedication  as  the 
result  of  personal  zeal  going  beyond  the  fixed  period 
of  service  that  came  in  rotation,  and  entitled  accord, 
ingly  to  its  reward. 

i  Comp.,  as  indicating  their  presence  and  function* 
at  a  later  date,  1  Chr.  xxv.  5,  6. 

r  The  Nethinim  (Deo  dati)  of  1  Chr.  ix.  2,  Ear, 
ii.  43,  were  probably  sprung  from  captives  taken  b) 
David  in  later  wars,  who  were  assigned  to  the  servio* 
of  the  tabernacle,  replacing  possibly  the  Gibeomtct 
who  had  been  slain  by  Saul  (2  Sam  xxt.  1) 


104 


LEVITKS 


LEV1TES 


The  scanty  memorials  that  are  left  us  in  the  book  |  The  fact  that  the  Levites  were  thus  brought  under  the 


of  Judges  fail  to  show  how  far,  lor  any  length  of 
time,  the  reality  answered  to  the  idea.  The  ravages 
of  invasion,  and  the  pressure  of  an  alien  rate, 
marred  the  working  of  the  organisatiop  which 
seemed  so  perfect.  Levitical  cities,  such  as  Aijalon 
(Josh.  xxi.  24  ;  Judg.  i.  35)  and  Gezer  (Josh.  xxi. 
21;  1  Chr.  vi.  67),  fall  into  the  hands  of  their 
enemies.  Sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Nob,  others 
apparently  took  their  place.  The  wandering  un 
settled  habits  of  the  Levites  who  are  mentioned  in 
the  later  chapters  of  Judges  are  probably  to  be 
traced  to  this  loss  of  a  fixed  abode,  and  the  con 
sequent  necessity  of  taking  refuge  in  other  cities, 
even  though  their  tribe  as  such  had  no  portion  in 
them.  The  tendency  of  the  people  to  fall  into  the 
idolatry  of  the  neighbouring  nations  showed  either 
that  the  Levites  failed  to  bear  their  witness  to  the 
truth  or  had  no  power  to  enforce  it.  Even  in  the 
lifetime  of  Phinehas,  when  the  high-priest  was  still 
consulted  as  an  oracle,  the  reverence  which  the 
people  felt  for  the  tribe  of  Levi  becomes  the  occa 
sion  of  a  rival  worship  (Judg.  xvii.).  The  old 
household  priesthood  revives,"  and  there  is  the  risk 
of  the  national  worship  breaking  up  into  indivi 
dualism.  Micah  first  consecrates  one  of  his  own 
sons,  and  then  tempts  a  homeless  Levite  to  dwell 
with  5>im  as  "  a  father  and  a  priest"  for  little  more 
than  his  food  and  raiment.  The  Levite,  though  pro 
bably  the  grandson  of  Moses  himself,  repeats  the 

sin  of  Korah.    [JONATHAN.]     First  in  the  house  of 

Micah,  and  then  for  the  emigrants  of  Dan,  he  exer 
cises  the  office  of  a  priest  with  "an  ephod,  and  a 

teraphim  and  a  graven  image."     With  this  excep 
tion  the  whole  tribe  appears  to  have  fallen  into  a 

condition  analogous  to  that  of  the  clergy  in  the 

darkest  period  and  in  the  most  outlying  districts 

of  the  Mediaeval  Church,  going  through  a  ritual 

routine,  but  exercising  no  influence  for  good,  at  once 

corrupted  and  corrupting.     The  shameless  license 

of  the  sons  of  Eli  may  be  looked  upon  as  the  result 

of  a  long  period  of  decay,  affecting  the  whole  order. 

When  the  priests  were  such  as  Hophni  and  Phinehas, 

we  may  fairly  assume  that  the  Levites  were  not 

doing  much  to  sustain  the  moral  life  of  the  people. 
The  work  of  Samuel  was  the  starting-point  of  a 

better  time.     Himself  a  Levite,  and,  though  not  a 

priest,  belonging  to  that  section  of  the  Levites  which 

was   nearest   to  the   priesthood    (1   Chr.  vi.  28), 

adopted  as  it  were,  by  a  special  dedication  into  thi 

priestly  line  and  trained  for  its  offices  (1  Sam.  ii. 

18),  he  appeare  as  infusing  a  fresh  life,  the  authoi 

of  a  new  organisation.    There  is  no  reason  to  think, 

indeed,  that  the  companies  or  schools  of  the  sons  o: 

the  prophets  which  ay/pear  in  his  time  (1  Sam.  x 

5),  and  are  traditionally  said  to  have  been  foundec 

by  him,  consisted  exclusively  of  Levites ;  but  ther 

are  many  signs  that  the  members  of  that   tribe 

formed  a  large  element  in  the  new  order,  and  re 
ceived  new  strength  from  it.     It  exhibited,  indeed 

the  ideal  of  the  Levite  life  as  one  of  praise,  devotion 

teaching,  standing  in  the  same  relation  to  the  priests 

and  Levites  generally  as  the  monastic  institutions  o 

the  firth  century,  or  the  mendicant  orders  of  the  thir 
teenth  did  to  the  secular  clergy  of  Western  Europe.    Abel "  (lamentation),  and  the  name  remains  as  a  me- 

samc  conclusion  as  to  Joel,  Micah,  Habakkuk,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  and  even  Isaiah  himself.  Jaha/.iel  (2  Chr. 
xx.  14)  appears  as  at  once  a  prophet  and  a  Levite. 
There  is  a  balance  of  probability  on  the  same  side  hi 
to  Jehu,  Hanani,  the  second  Oded,  and  Ahijah  01 
Shiloh. 


influence  of  a  system  which  addre>sed  itself  to  the 
mind  and  heart  in  a  greater  degree  than  the  sacri 
ficial  functions  of  the  priesthood,  may  possibly  have 
led  them  on  to  apprehend  the  higher  truths  as  to 
the  nature  of  worship  which  begin  to  be  asserted 
Vom  this  period,  and  which  are  nowhere  pro 
claimed  more  clearly  than  in  tne  great  hymn 
that  bears  the  name  of  Asaph  (Ps.  1.  7-15).  The 
man  who  raises  the  name  of  prophet  to  a  new  signi- 
icance  is  himself  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ix.  9).  It  is 
among  them  that  we  find  the  first  signs  rf  the  mu 
sical  skill  which  is  afterwards  so  conspicuous  in  the 
Levites  (1  Sam.  x.  5).  The  order  in  which  the 
Temple  services  were  arranged  is  ascribed  to  two  of 
the  prophets,  Nathan  and  Gad  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25), 
who  must  have  grown  up  under  Samuel's  super 
intendence,  and  in  part  to  Samuel  himself  (1  Chr. 
ix.  22).  Asaph  and  Heman,  the  Psalmists,  bear  the 
same  title  as  Samuel  the  Seer  (1  Chr.  xxv.  5 ;  2  Chr. 
xxix.  30).  The  very  word  "  prophesying  "  is  applied 
not  only  to  sudden  bursts  of  song,  but  to  the  organ 
ised  psalmody  of  the  Temple  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2, 3).  Even 
of  those  who  bore  the  name  of  a  prophet  in  a  higher 
sense,  a  large  number  are  traceably  of  this  tribe.' 

III.  The  capture  of  the  Ark  by  the  Philistines 
did  not  entirely  interrupt  the  worship  of  the 
Israelites,  and  the  ministrations  of  the  Levites  went 
on,  first  at  Shiloh  (1  Sam.  xiv.  3),  then  for  a  time 
at  Nob  (1  Sam.  xxii.  11),  afterwards  at  Gibeon 
(1  K.  iii.  2 ;  1  Chr.  xvi.  39).  The  history  of  the 
return  of  the  ark  to  Beth-shemesh  after  its  capture 
by  the  Philistines,  and  its  subsequent  removal  to 
Kirjath-jearim,  points  apparently  to  some  strange 
complications,  rising  out  of  the  anomalies  of  this 
period,  and  affecting,  in  some  measure,  the  position 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Beth-shemesh  was,  by  the 
original  assignment  of  the  conquered  country,  one 
of  the  cities  of  the  priests  (Josh.  xxi.  16).  They, 
however,  do  not  appear  in  the  narrative,  unless  we 
assume,  against  all  probability,  that  the  men  of 
Beth-shemesh  who  were  guilty  of  the  act  of  pro 
fanation  were  themselves  of  the  priestly  order. 
Levites  indeed  are  mentioned  as  doing  their  ap 
pointed  work  (1  Sam.  vi.  15),  but  the  sacrifices 
and  burnt-offerings  are  offered  by  the  men  of  the 
city,  as  though  the  special  function  of  the  priest 
hood  had  been  usurped  by  others ;  and  on  this  sup 
position  it  is  easier  to  understand  how  those  who 
had  set  aside  the  Law  of  Moses  by  one  offence 
should  defy  it  also  by  another.  The  singular  read 
ing  of  the  LXX.  in  1  Sam.  vi.  19  (KO)  obit  iifffie- 
viffav  ol  viol  'lexovlov  Iv  rdis  &v$paffi  'BatOcrafji.vs 
'6-ri  eiSov  KiBwrbv  Kvpiov)  indicates,  if  we  assume 
that  it  rests  upon  some  corresponding  Hebrew  text, 
a  struggle  between  two  opposed  parties,  one  guilty 
of  the  profana*ion,  the  other—  possibly  the  Levites 
who  had  been  before  mentioned — zealous  in  their 
remonstrances  against  it.  Then  comes,  either  ts 
the  result  of  this  collision,  or  by  direct  supei -natural 
infliction,  the  great  slaughter  of  the  Beth-shemites. 
and  they  shrink  from  retaining  the  ark  any  longei 
among  them.  The  great  Eben  (stone)  becomes,  by  a 
slight  paronomastic  change  in  its  form,  the  "  great 


'  Compare,  on  the  extent  of  this  relapse  into  an 
earlier  system,  Kalisch,  On  Genesis  xliV.  7. 

*  It  may  he  worth  while  to  indicate  the  extent  of 
this  connexion.  As  prophets,  who  are  also  priests, 
we  have  Jeremiah  (Jcr.  i.  1).  Ezekiel  'Ez.  i.  3), 
Azariah  the  son  of  Oded  (2  Chr.  xv  >V  Zechariah 
(2  Chr.  xxiv  20).  Internal  evidence  tends  to  the 


LEVITES 

monal  of  the  sin  .\nd  of  its  punishment.  [BETH8HK- 
MF.SII.]     We  are  left  entire. 7  in  the  dark  as  to  the 
reasons  which  led  them,  after  this,  to  send  the  ark  of 
Jehovah,  not  to  Hebron  or  s)me  other  priestly  city, 
but  to  Kirjath-jearim,  round  which,  so  far  as  wo  know, 
there  gathered  legitimately  no  sacred  associations. 
It  has  been  commonly  assumed  indeed  that  Abina- 
dali,    under   whose    guardianship   it   remained    for 
twenty  years,  must  necessarily  have  been  of  the 
tribe  of  Levi.     [ABINADAB.]     Of  this,  however, 
there  is  not  the  slightest  direct  evidence,  and  against 
it  there  is  the  language  of  David  in  1  Chr.  xv.  2, 
"  None  ought  to  carry  the  ark    of  God    but  the 
Levites,  for  them    hath  Jehovah    chosen,"  which 
would  lose  half  its  force  if  it  were  not  meant  as  a 
protest  against  a  recent  innovation,  and  the  ground 
of  a  return  to  the  more  ancient  order.     So  far  as 
one  can  see  one's  way  through  these  perplexities  of 
a  dark  period,  the  most  probable  explanation — al 
ready  suggested    under  KiRJATH-JEARiM — seems 
to  be  the    following.     The  old  names  'of  Baaleh 
(Josh.    xv.   9)  and    Kirjath-baal    (Josh.    xv.  60) 
suggest  there  had  been  of  old  some  special  sanctity 
attached  to  the  place  as  the  centre  of  a  Canaanite 
local    worship.  The  fact    that  the  ark  was  taken 
to  the  house    of   Abinadab  in  the    hill  (1   Sam. 
vii.  1),  the  Gibeah  of  2  Sam.  vi.  3,  connects  it 
self  with  that  old  Canaanitish  reverence  for  high 
places,  which,   through   the  whole  history  of  the 
Israelites,  continued  to  have  such  strong  attractions 
for  them.     These  may  have  seemed  to  the  panic- 
stricken  inhabitants  of  that  district,  mingling  old 
things  and  new,  the  worship  of  Jehovah  with  the 
lingering   superstitions   of  the   conquered    people, 
sufficient  grounds  to  determine  their  choice  of  a 
locality.     The  consecration  (the  word  used  is  the 
special  sacerdotal  term)  of  Eleazar  as  the  guardian 
or  the  ark  is,  on  this  hypothesis,  analogous  in  its  way 
to  the  other  irregular  assumptions  which  characterise 
this  period,  though  here  the  offence  was  less  flagrant, 
and  did  not  involve  apparently  the  performance  of 
any  sacrificial  acts.     While,  however,  this  aspect  of 
the  religious  condition  of  the  people  brings  the  Levi- 
tical  and  priestly  orders  before  us,  as  having  lost  the 
position  they  had  previously  occupied,  there  were 
other  influences  at  work  tending  to  reinstate  them. 
The  rule  of  Samuel  and  his  sons,  and  the  prophet 
ical  character  now  connected  with  the  tribe,  tended 
to  give  them  the  position  of  a  ruling  caste.     In  the 
strong  desire  of  the  people  for  a  king,  we  may  per 
haps  trace  a  protest  against  the  assumption  by  the 
Levites  of  a  higher  position  than  that  originally 
assigned.     The  reign  of  Saul,  in  its  later  period, 
was  at  any  rate  the  assertion  of  a  self-willed  power 
against  the  priestly  order.     The  assumption  of  the 
sacrificial  office,  the  massacre  of  the  priests  at  Nob, 
the  slaughter  of  the  Gibeonites  who  were  attached 
to  their  service,  were  parts  of  the  same  policy,  and 
the  narrative  of  the  condemnation  of  Saul  for  the 
two  former  sins,  no  less  than  of  the  expiation  re 
quired  for  the  latter  (2  Sam.  xxi.),  shows  by  what 
strong  measures  the  truth,  of  which  that  policy  was 
a  subversion,  had  to  be  impressed  on  the  minds  ot 
the  Israelites.   The  reign  of  David,  however,  brought 
the  change  from  persecution  to  honour.    The  Levites 
were  ready  to  welcome  a  king  who,  though  not  ol 
their  tribe,  had  been  brought  up  under  their  train 
ing,  was  skilled   in   their  aits,  prepared  to  share 


LEVITES 


105 


ven  in  some  }f  their  ministrations,  and  to  array 
limself  in  their  apparel  (2  Sam.  vi.  14),  and  4600  of 
heir  number  with  3700  priests  waited  upon  David 
it  Hebron — itself,  it  should  be.  remembered,  one  ol 
the  priestly  cities — to  tender  their  allegiance  (1  Chr. 
xii.  26).  When  his  kingdom  was  established,  there 
came  a  fuller  organisation  of  the  whole  tribe.  Its 
wsition  in  relation  to  the  priesthood  was  once  again 
lefinitcly  recognised.  When  the  ark  was  carried  up 
:o  its  new  resting-place  in  Jerusalem,  their  claim 
to  be  the  bearers  of  it  was  publicly  acknowledged 

1  Chr.  xv.  2).   When  the  sin  of  Uzzah  stopped  the 
jrocossion,  it  was  placed  for  a  time  under  the  care 
of  Obed-Edom  of  Gath — probably  Gath-rimmon — 
as  one. of  the  chiefs  of  the  Kohathites  (1  Chr.  xiii. 
13 ;  Josh.  xxi.  24  ;  1  Chr.  xv.  1 8). 

In  the  procession  which  attended  the  ultimate 
conveyance  of  the  ark  to  its  new  resting-place  the 
Levites  were  conspicuous,  wearing  their  linen  ephods, 
and  appearing  in  their  new  character  as  minstrels 
(1  Chr.  xv.  27,  28).  In  the  worship  of  the  taber 
nacle  under  David,  as  afterwards  in  that  of  the 
Temple,  we  may  trace  a  development  of  the  simpler 
arrangements  of  the  wilderness  and  of  Shiloh.  The 
Levites  were  the  gatekeepers,  vergers,  sacristans, 
choristers  of  the  central  sanctuary  of  the  nation. 
They  were,  in  the  language  of  1  Chr.  xxiii.  24-32, 
to  which  we  may  refer  as  almost  the  locus  classicus 
on  this  subject,  "  to  wait  on  the  sons  of  Aaron 
for  the  service  of  the  house  of  Jehovah,  in  the 
courts,  and  the  chambers,  and  the  purifying  of  all 
holy  things."  This  included  the  duty  of  providing 

for  the  shew-bread,  and  the  fine  flour  for  meat 
offering,  and  for  the  unleavened  bread."  They 
were,  besides  this,  "to  stand  every  morning  to  thank 
and  praise  Jehovah,  and  likewise  at  even."  They 
were  lastly  "  to  offer  " —  i.  e.  to  assist  the  priests  in 
offering — "  all  burnt-sacrifices  to  Jehovah  in  the  sab 
baths  and  on  the  set  feasts ."  They  lived  for  the  greater 
part  of  the  year  in  their  own  cities,  and  came  up  at 
fixed  periods  to  take  their  turn  of  work  (1  Chr.  xxv., 
.\ vi.).  How  long  it  lasted  we  have  no  sufficient 
data  for  determining.  The  predominance  of  the 
number  twelve  as  the  basis  of  classification  "  might 
seem  to  indicate  monthly  periods,  and  the  festivals 
of  the  new  moon  would  naturally  suggest  such  an 
arrangement.  The  analogous  order  in  the  civil  and 
military  administration  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  1)  would  tend 
to  the  same  conclusion.  It  appears,  indeed ,  that  there 
was  a  change  of  some  kind  every  week  (1  Chr.  is.  25  ; 

2  Chr.  xxiii.  4,  8) ;  but  this  is  of  course  compatible 
with  a  system  of  rotation,  which  would  give  to  each 
a  longer  period  of  residence,  or  with  the  permanent 
residence  of  the  leader  of  each  division  within  the 
precincts  of  the  sanctuary.     Whatever  may  have 
been  the  system,  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the 
duties  now  imposed  upon  the  Levites  were  such  us 
to  require  almost  continuous  practice.    They  would 
need,  when  their  turn  came,  to  be  able  to  bear  their 
parts  in  the  great  choral  hymns  of  the  Temple,  and 
to  take  each  his   appointed  share  in  the  complex 
structure  of  a  sacrificial    liturgy,  and  for  this  a 
special  study  would  be  required.     The  education 
which  the  Levites  received  for  their  peculiar  duties, 
no  less  than  their  connexion,  moie  or  less  intimate, 
with  the  schools  of  the  prophets  (see  above),  would 
tend  to  make  them,  so  far  as  there  was  any  educa 
tion  at  all,  the  teachers  of  the  others,*  the  tran- 


•  There  are  24  coursef  of  the  priests,   24,000  Le-  *  There  is,  however,  a  curious  Jewish  tradition  luat 

vitcs  in  the  general  business  of  the  Tcnrx'  i';  Chr.  the    Rch-.-olmastors   of   Israel    were   of   the    tribe   o) 

3-xiii.  4).     The  number  of  singers  is  288  —  12  x  24  Simeon  (Solom.  Jarchi  on  Gen.  xlix.  7,  in  Godwyn't 

i  Ohr.  xxv.  7).  Musi:i  and  Aaron). 


106 


LEVITES 


scribers  and  interpreters  of  the  Law,  the  chroniclers 
of  the  tiroes  in  which  they  lived.  We  have  some 
striking  instances  of  their  appearance  in  this  new 
character.  One  of  them,  Ethan  the  Ezrahite/  tikes 
his  place  among  the  old  Hebrew  sages  who  were 
worthy  to  be  compared  with  Solomon,  and  (1's. 
ixxxix.  title)  his  name  appears  as  the  writer  of  the 
39th  Psalm  (1  K.  iv.  31 ;  1  Chr.  xv.  17).  One  of 
the  first  to  bear  the  title  of  "  Scribe "  is  a  Lerite 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  6),  and  this  is  mentioned  as  one  of 
their  special  offices  under  Josiah  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  13). 
They  are  described  as  "  officers  and  judges"  under 
David  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  29),  and  as  such  are  employed 
"  in  all  the  business  of  Jehovah,  and  in  the  service 
of  the  king."  They  are  the  agents  of  Jehoshaphat 
and  Hezekiah  in  their  work  of  reformation,  and  are 
sent  forth  to  proclaim  and  enforce  the  law  (  2  Chr. 
xvii.  8,  xxx.  22).  Under  Josiah  the  function  has 
passed  into  a  title,  and  they  are  "  the  Levites  that 
taught  all  Israel"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  3).  The  two 
books  of  Chronicles  bear  unmistakeable  marks  of 
having  been  written  by  men  whose  interests  were 
all  gathered  round  the  services  of  the  Temple,  and 
who  were  familiar  with  its  records.  The  materials 
from  which  they  compiled  their  narratives,  and  to 
which  they  refer  as  the  works  of  seers  and  prophets, 
were  written  by  men  who  were  probably  Levites 
themselves,  or,  if  not,  were  associated  with  them. 

The  former  subdivisions  of  the  tribe  were  recog 
nised  in  the  assignment  of  the  new  duties,  and  the 
Kohathites  retained  their  old  pre-eminence.  They 
have  four  "  princes"  (1  Chr.  xv.  5-10),  while 
Merari  and  Gershon  have  but  one  each.  They  sup 
plied,  from  the  families  of  the  Izharites  and  Hebron- 
ites,  the  "  officers  and  judges  "  of  1  Chr.  xxvi.  30. 
To  them  belonged  the  sons  of  Korah,  with  Heman 
at  their  head  (1  Chr.  ix.  19),  playing  upon  psalteries 
and  harps.  They  were  "  over  the  work  of  the  ser 
vice,  keepers  of  the  gates  of  the  tabernacle"  (I.  c.). 
It  was  their  work  to  prepare  the  shew-bread  every 
Sabbath  (1  Chr.  ix.  32).  The  Gershonites  were 
represented  in  like  manner  in  the  Temple-choir  by 
the  sons  of  Asaph  (1  Chr.  vi.  39,  xv.  17) ;  Merari 
by  the  sons  of  Ethan  or  Jeduthun  (1  Chr.  vi.  44, 
xvi.  42,  xxv.  1-7).  Now  that  the  heavier  work  of 
conveying  the  tabernacle  and  its  equipments  from 
place  to  place  was  no  longer  required  of  them,  and 
that  psalmody  had  become  the  most  prominent  of 
their  duties,  they  were  to  enter  on  their  work  at  the 
earlier  age  of  twenty  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  24-27).1 

As  in  the  old  days  of  the  Exodus,  so  in  the 
organisation  under  David,  the  Levites  were  not 
included  in  the  general  census  of  the  people  (1  Chr. 
ijci.  8),  and  formed  accordingly  no  portion  of  its 
military  strength.  A  separate  census,  made  appa 
rently  before  the  change  of  age  just  mentioned 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  3),  gives — 

24,000  over  the  work  of  the  Temple. 
6,000  officers  and  judges. 
4,000  porters,  i.  e.  gate-keepers,*  and,  as  such, 


LEVITES 

bearing  arms   (1  Chr.  ix.    19 ;    2   Chr 

xxxi.  2). 

4,000  praising  Jehovah  with  instruments. 
Tne  latter  number,  however,  must  have  included 
the  full  choruses  of  the  Temple.  The  more  skilleu 
musicians  among  the  sons  of  Heman,  Asaph,  and 
Jeduthun  are  numbered  at  288,  in  24  sections  of 
12  each.  Here  again  the  Kohathites  are  pi-ominent, 
having  14  out  of  the  24  sections ;  while  Gershon 
has  4  and  Merari  8  (1  Chr.  xxv.  2-4).  To  these 
288  were  assigned  apparently  a  more  permanent 
residence  in  the  Temple  (1  Chr.  ix.  33),  and  in 
the  Tillages  of  the  Netophathites  near  Bethlehem 
(1  Chr.  ix.  16),  mentioned  long  afterwards  as  in 
habited  by  the  "  sons  of  the  singers"  (Neh.  xii.  28). 
The  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes,  and  the  policy  pur 
sued  by  Jeroboam,  led  to  a  great  change  in  the 
position  of  the  Levites.  They  were  the  witnesses 
of  an  appointed  order  and  of  a  central  worship. 
He  wished  to  make  the  priests  the  creatures  and 
instruments  of  the  king,  and  to  establish  a  pro 
vincial  and  divided  worship.  The  natural  result 
was,  that  they  left  the  cities  assigned  to  them  in 
the  territory  of  Israel,  and  gathered  round  the  me 
tropolis  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xi.  13,  14).  Their  in 
fluence  over  the  people  at  large  was  thus  diminished, 
and  the  design  of  the  Mosaic  polity  so  far  frus 
trated ;  but  their  power  as  a  religious  order  was 
probably  increased  by  this  concentration  within 
narrower  limits.  In  the  kingdom  of  Judah  they 
were,  from  this  time  forward,  a  powerful  body, 
politically  as  well  as  ecclesiastically.  They  brought 
with  them  the  prophetic  element  of  influence,  in 
the  wider  as  well  as  in  the  higher  meaning  of  the 
word.  We  accordingly  find  them  prominent  in 
the  war  of  Abijah  against  Jeroboam  (2  Chr.  xiii. 
10-12).  They  are,  as  before  noticed,  sent  out  by 
Jehoshaphat  to  instruct  and  judge  the  people  (2  Chr. 
xix.  8-10).  Prophets  of  their  order  encourage  the 
king  in  his  war  against  Moab  and  Ammon,  and  go 
before  his  army  with  their  loud  Hallelujahs  (2  Chr. 
xx.  21),  and  join  afterwards  in  the  triumph  of  his 
return.  The  apostasy  that  followed  on  the  mar 
riage  of  Jehoram  and  Athaliah  exposed  them  for  a 
time  to  the  dominance  of  a  hostile  system ;  but  the 
services  of  the  Temple  appear  to  have  gone  on,  and 
the  Levites  were  again  conspicuous  in  the  counter 
revolution  effected  by  Jehoiada  (2  Chr.  xxiii.),  and 
in  restoring  the  Temple  to  its  former  stateliness 
under  Joash  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  5).  They  shared  in  the 
disasters  of  the  reign  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr.  xxv.  24), 
and  in  the  prosperity  of  Uzziah,  and  were  ready 
we  may  believe,  to  support  the  priests,  who,  as 
representing  their  order,  opposed  the  sacrilegious 
usurpation  of  the  latter  king  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  17). 
The  closing  of  the  Temple  under  Ahaa  involved  the 
cessation  at  once  of  their  work  and  of  their  privi 
leges  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  24).  Under  Hezekiah  they 
again  became  prominent,  as  consecrating  themselves 
to  the  special  work  of  cleansing  and  repairing  the 


*  In  1  Chr.  ii.  6  the  four  names  of  1  K.  iv.  31 
appear  as  belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  in  the 
third  generation  after  Jacob.  On  the  other  hand  the 
names  of  Heman  and  Ethan  are  prominent  among 
the  Levites  under  Solomon  (infra)  ;  and  two  psalms, 
one  of  which  belongs  manifestly  to  a  later  date,  are 
ascribed  to  them,  with  this  title  of  Ezrahite  attached 
(Ps.  Ixxxviii.  and  Ixxxix.).  The  difficulty  arises  pro 
bably  out  of  some  confusion  of  the  later  and  the  earlier 
names.  Ewald's  conjecture,  that  conspicuous  minstrels 
of  other  tribes  were  received  into  the  choir  of  the 
Temple,  and  then  reckoned  as  Lcvitrs,  would  give  a 


new  aspect  to  the  influence  of  the  tribe.     (Comp. 
Poet.  Bilch.  i.  213  ;  De  Wette,  Psalmen,  Einleit.  §  iii.) 

•  The  change  is  indicated  in  what  are  described  as 
the  "  last  words  of  David."     The  king  feels,  in  his 
old  age,  that  a  time  of  rest  has  come  for  himself  and 
for  the  people,  and  that  the  Levites  have  a  right  to 
share  in  it.    They  are  now  the  ministers — not,   aa 
before,  the  warrior-host — of  the  Unseen  King. 

•  Ps.  cxxxiv.  acquires  a  fresh   interest  when  we 
think  of  it  as  the  song  of  the  night-sentries  of  tha 
Temple. 


IEVITES 

Temple  (2  Chr  xxix.  12-15);  and  the  hymns  of 
David  and  of  Asaph  were  again  renewed.  In  this 
.nstancc  it  was  thought  worthy  of  special  record 
that  those  who  were  simply  Levites  were  more 
"  upright  in  heart "  and  zealous  than  the  priests 
themselves  (U  Chr.  xxix.  34) ;  and  thus,  in  that 
great  passover,  they  took  the  place  of  the  unwilling 
or  unprepared  members  of  the  priesthood.  Their 
old  privileges  were  restored,  they  were  put  forward 
as  teachers  (2  Chr.  xxx.  22),  and  the  payment  of 
tithes,  which  had  probably  been  discontinued  under 
Ahaz,  was  renewed  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  4).  The  gene 
alogies  of  the  tribe  were  revised  (ver.  17),  and  the 
old  classification  kept  its  ground.  The  reign  of 
Mauasseh  was  for  them,  during  the  greater  part  of 
it,  a  period  of  depression.  That  of  Josiah  witnessed 
a  fresh  revival  and  reorganisation  (2  Chr.  xxxiv. 
8-13).  In  the  great  passover  of  his  eighteenth 
year  they  took  their  place  as  teachers  of  the  people, 
as  well  as  leaders  of  their  worship  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
3,  15).  Then  came  the  Egyptian  and  Chaldacan 
invasions,  and  the  rule  of  cowardly  and  apostate 
kings.  The  sacred  tribe  itself  showed  itself  un 
faithful.  The  repeated  protests  of  the  priest  Ezekiel 
indicate  that  they  had  shared  in  the  idolatry  of  the 
people.  The  prominence  into  which  they  had  been 
brought  in  the  reigns  of  the  two  reforming  kings 
had  apparently  tempted  them  to  think  that  they 
might  encroach  permanently  on  the  special  func 
tions  of  the  priesthood,  and  the  sin  of  Korah  was 
renewed  (Ez.  xliv.  10-14,  xlviii.  11).  They  had, 
as  the  penalty  of  their  sin,  to  witness  the  destruc 
tion  of  the  Temple,  and  to  taste  the  bitterness  of  exile. 
IV.  After  the  Captivity.  The  position  taken 
by  the  Levites  in  the  first  movements  of  the  return 
from  Babylon  indicates  that  they  had  cherished  the 
traditions  and  maintained  the  practices  of  their 
tribe.  They,  we  may  believe,  were  those  who  were 
specially  called  on  to  sing  to  their  conquerors  one 
of  the  songs  of  Zion  (De  Wette  on  Ps.  cxxxvii.). 
Jt  is  noticeable,  however,  that  in  the  first  body  of 
returning  exiles  they  are  present  in  a  dispropor 
tionately  small  number  (Ezr.  ii.  36-42).  Those 
who  do  come  take  their  old  parts  at  the  foundation 
and  dedication  of  the  second  Temple  (Ezr.  iii.  10, 
vi.  18).  In  the  next  movement  under  Ezra  their 
reluctance  (whatever  may  have  been  its  origin  b) 
was  even  more  strongly  marked.  None  of  them 
presented  themselves  at  the  first  great  gathering 
(Ezr.  viii.  15).  The  special  efforts  of  Ezra  did  not 
succeed  in  bringing  together  more  than  38,  and 
cheir  place  had  to  be  filled  by  220  of  the  Nethinim 
(ib.  20).c  Those  who  returned  with  him  resumed 
their  functions  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  as 
teachers  and  interpreters  (Neh.  viii.  7),  and  those 
who  were  most  active  in  that  work  were  foremost 
also  in  chanting  the  hymn-like  prayer  which  appears 
in  Neh.  ix.  as  the  last  great  effort  of  Jewish  psalmody. 
They  are  recognised  in  the  great  national  covenant, 
and  the  offerings  and  tithes  which  were  their  due 
are  once  more  solemnly  secured  to  them  (Neh.  x. 
37-39 ).  They  take  their  old  places  in  the  Temple 
and  in  the  villages  iioar  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  29), 
and  are  present  in  full  array  at  the  great  feast  of 
the  Dedication  of  the  Wall.  The  two  prophets  who 
were  active  at  the  time  of  the  Return,  Haggai  and 


LEVITES 


107 


6  May  we  conjecture  that  the  language  of  Kze- 
kiel  had  led  to  some  jealousy  between  the  two 
orders  ? 

c  There  is  a  Jewish  tradition  (Surenhusius,  Mi?hn&, 
lota,  ix.  10)  to  the  cftVct  that,  a»  a  punishment  for 


Zechanah,  if  they  did  not  belong  to  the  tribe, 
helped  it  forward  in  the  work  of  restoration.  The 
strongest  measures  are  .adopted  by  Nehemiah,  as 
before  by  Ezra,  to  guard  the  purity  of  their  blood 
from  the  contamination  of  mixed  marriages  (Ezr.  \. 
23) ;  and  they  are  made  the  special  guardians  of 
the  holiness  of  the  Sabbath  (Neh.  xiii.  22).  The 
last  prophet  of  the  0.  T.  sees,  as  part  of  his  vision 
of  the  latter  days,  the  time  when  the  Lord  "  shall 
purify  the  sons  of  Levi  "  (Mai.  iii.  3). 

The  guidance  of  the  0.  T.  fails  us  at  this  point, 
and  the  history  of  the  Levites  in  relation  to  the 
national  life  becomes  consequently  a  matter  of  in 
ference  and  conjecture.  The  synagogue  worship, 
then  originated,  or  receiving  a  new  development, 
was  organised  irrespectively  of  them  [SYNAGOGUE], 
and  thus  throughout  the  whole  of  Palestine  there 
were  means  of  instruction  in  the  Law  with  which 
they  were  not  connected.  This  would  tend  na 
turally  to  diminish  their  peculiar  claim  on  the 
reverence  of  the  people ;  but  where  a  priest  or 
Levite  was  present  in  the  synagogue  they  were 
still  entitled  to  some  kind  of  precedence,  and  special 
sections  in  the  leseons  for  the  day  were  assigned 
to  them  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hcb.  on  Matt.  iv.  23). 
During  the  period  that  followed  the  Captivity  they 
contributed  to  the  formation  of  the  so-called  Great 
Synagogue.  They,  with  the  priests,  theoretically 
constituted  and  practically  formed  the  majority  of 
the  permanent  Sanhedrim  (Maimonides  in  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt.  xxvi.  3),  and  as  such  had  a  large 
share  in  the  administration  of  justice  even  in  capital 
cases.  In  the  characteristic  feature  of  this  period, 
as  an  age  of  scribes  succeeding  to  an  age  of  prophets, 
they  too  were  likely  to  be  sharers.  The  training 
and  previous  history  of  the  tribe  would  predispose 
them  to  attach  themselves  to  the  new  system  as 
they  had  done  to  the  old.  They  accordingly  may 
have  been  among  the  scribes  and  elders  who  accu 
mulated  traditions.  They  may  have  attached  them 
selves  to  the  sects  of  Pharisees  and  Sadducees.1' 
But  in  proportion  as  they  thus  acquired  fame  and 
reputation  individually,  their  functions  as  Levites 
became  subordinate,  and  they  were  known  simply 
as  the  inferior  ministers  of  the  Temple.  They  take 
no  prominent  part  in  the  Maccabaean  struggles, 
though  they  must  have  been  present  at  the  great 
purification  of  the  Temple. 

They  appear  but  seldom  in  the  history  of  the  N.  T. 
Where  we  meet  with  their  names  it  is  as  the  type  of 
a  formal  heartless  worship,  without  sympathy  and 
without  love  (Luke  x.  32).  The  same  parable  in 
dicates  Jericho  as  having  become — what  it  had  not 
been  originally  (see  Josh,  xxi.,  1  Chr.  vi.) — one  of  the 
great  stations  at  which  they  and  the  priests  resided 
(Lightfoot,  Cent.  Chorograph.  c.  47)  In  John  i. 
19  they  appear  as  delegates  of  the  Jews,  that  is  of 
the  Sanhedrim,  coming  to  inquire  into  the  cre 
dentials  of  the  Baptist,  and  giving  utterance  to 
their  own  Messianic  expectations.  The  mention  of 
a  Levite  of  Cyprus  in  Acts  iv.  36  shows  that  the 
changes  of  the  previous  century  had  carried  that 
tribe  also  into  "  the  dispe/sed  among  the  Gentiles." 
The  conversion  of  Barnabas  and  Mark  was  probably 
no  solitary  instance  of  the  reception  by  them  of  the 
new  faith,  which  was  the  fulfilment  of  the  old. 


this  backwardness,  Ezra  deprived  them  of  their  tithes, 
and  transferred  the  right  to  the  priests. 

d  The  life  of  Josephus  may  be  taken  as  an  example 
of  the  education  of  the  higher  members  of  the  order 
(Jos.  Vita,  c.  i.). 


I  OS 


LEVITES 


If  "  a  great  company  of  the  priests  were  obedient 
to  the  faith"  (Acts  vi.  7),  it  is  not  too  bold 
to  believe  that  their  influence  may  have  led  Levites 
to  follow  their  example ;  and  thus  the  old  psalms, 
and  possibly  also  the  old  chants  of  the  Temple- 
service,  might  be  transmitted  through  the  agency 
of  those  who  had  been  specially  trained  in  them, 
to  be  the  inheritance  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Later  on  in  the  history  of  the  first  century,  when 
the  Temple  had  received  its  final  completion  under 
the  younger  Agrippa,  we  find  one  section  of  the  tribe 
engaged  in  a  new  movement.  With  that  strange 
unconsciousness  of  a  coming  doom  which  so  often 
marks  the  last  stage  of  a  decaying  system,  the  singers 
of  th<>  Temple  thought  it  a  fitting  time  to  apply 
tor  the  right  of  wearing  the  same  linen  garment  as 
the  priests,  and  persuaded  the  king  that  the  con 
cession  of  this  privilege  would  be  the  glory  of  his 
reign  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  8,  §6).  The  other  Levites 
at  the  same  time  asked  for  and  obtained  the  privi 
lege  of  joining  in  the  Temple  choruses,  from  which 
hitherto  they  had  been  excluded."  The  destruction 
of  the  Temple  so  soon  after  they  had  attained  the 
object  of  their  desires  came  as  with  a  grim  irony 
to  sweep  away  their  occupation,  and  so  to  deprive 
them  of  every  vestige  of  that  which  had  distin 
guished  them  from  other  Israelites.  They  were 
merged  in  the  crowd  of  captives  that  were  scattered 
over  the  Roman  world,  and  disappear  from  the 
stage  of  history.  The  Rabbinic  schools,  that  rose 
out  of  the  ruins  of  the  Jewish  polity,  fostered  a 
studied  and  habitual  depreciation  of  the  Levite 
order  as  compared  with  their  own  teachers  (M'Caul, 
Old  Paths,  p.  435).  Individual  families,  it  may 
be,  cherished  the  tradition  that  their  fathers,  as 
priests  or  Levites,  had  taken  part  in  the  services 
of  the  Temple.'  If  their  claims  were  recognised, 
they  received  the  old  marks  of  reverence  in  the 
worship  of  the  synagogue  (comp.  the  Regulations 
of  the  Great  Synagogue  of  London,  in  Margoliouth's 
History  of  Jews  in  Great  Britain,  iii.  270),  took 
precedence  in  reading  the  lessons  of  the  day  (Light- 
foot,  Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt.  iv.  23),  and  pronounced 
the  blessing  at  the  close  (Basnage,  Hist,  des  Juifs, 
vi.  790).  Their  existence  was  acknowledged  in 
some  of  the  laws  of  the  Christian  emperors  (Basnage, 
/.  c.).  The  tenacity  with  which  the  exiled  race 
clung  to  these  recollections  is  shown  in  the  pre 
valence  of  the  names  (Cohen,  and  Levita  or  Levy) 
which  imply  that  those  who  bear  them  are  of  the  sons 
of  Aaron  or  the  tribe  of  Levi  \  and  in  the  custom 
which  exempts  the  first-bora  cf  priestly  or  Levite 
families  from  the  payments  which  are  still  offered, 
in  the  case  of  others,  as  the  redemption  of  the 
first-bora  (Leo  of  Modena,  in  Picart's  Ceremonies 
Religieuses,  i.  26 ;  Allen's  Modern  Judaism,  p.  297). 
In  the  meantime  the  old  name  had  acquired  a  new 
signification.  The  early  writers  of  the  Christian 
Church  applied  to  the  later  hierarchy  the  language 
of  the  earlier,  and  gave  to  the  bishops  and  pres 
byters  the  title  (icpe?r)  that  had  belonged  to  the 
sons  of  Aaron  ;  while  the  deacons  were  habitually 
spoken  of  as  Levites  (Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v.  Aeuir»js).f 
The  extinction  or  absorption  of  a  tribe  which  had 


•  The  tone  of  Josephus  is  noticeable  as  being  that 
01  .1  man  who  looked  on  the  change  as  a  dangerous 
innovation.  As  a  priest,  he  saw  in  this  movement  of 
the  Levites  an  intrusion  on  the  privileges  of  his 
order  ;  and  this  was,  in  his  judgment,  one  of  the  sins 
which  brought  on  the  destruction  of  the  city  and  ttte 
Temple. 

'  Dr.   Joseph    Wolff,  in   his  recent    Trnrcli   and 


LEVITICUS 

home  so  prominent  a  part  in  the  history  of  Israel, 
was,  like  other  such  changes,  an  instance  of  the 
order  in  which  the  shadow  is  succeeded  by  the 
substance — that  which  is  decayed,  is  waxing  old 
and  ready  to  vanish  away,  by  a  new  and  more 
living  organisation.  It  had  done  its  work,  and  it 
had  lost  its  life.  It  was  bound  up  with  a  localised 
and  exclusive  worship,  and  had  no  place  to  occupy 
in  that  which  was  universal.  In  the  Christian- 
Church — supposing,  by  any  effort  of  imagination, 
that  it  had  had  a  recognised  existence  in  it — it  would 
have  been  simply  an  impediment.  Looking  at  the 
long  history  of  which  the  outline  has  been  here 
traced,  we  find  in  it  the  light  and  darkness,  the 
good  and  evil,  which  mingle  in  the  character  of 
most  corporate  or  caste  societies.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  Levites,  as  a  tribe,  tended  to  fall  into  a  formal 
worship,  a  narrow  and  exclusive  exaltation  of  them 
selves  and  of  their  country.  On  the  other  hand, 
we  must  not  forget  that  they  were  chosen,  together 
with  the  priesthood,  to  bear  witness  of  great  truths 
which  might  otherwise  have  perished  from  remem 
brance,  and  that  they  bore  it  well  through  a  long 
succession  of  centuries.  To  members  of  this  tribe 
we  owe  many  separate  books  of  the  0.  T.,  and  pro 
bably  also  in  great  measure  the  preservation  of  the 
whole.  The  hymns  which  they  sung,  in  part  pro 
bably  the  music  of  which  they  were  the  originators, 
have  been  pei-petuated  in  the  worship  of  the  Christian 
Church.  In  the  company  of  prophets  who  have 
left  behind  them  no  written  records  they  appear 
conspicuous,  united  by  common  work  and  common 
interests  with  the  prophetic  order.  They  did  their 
work  as  a  national  clerisy,  instruments  in  raising 
the  people  to  a  higher  life,  educating  them  in  the 
knowledge  on  which  all  order  and  civilization 
rest.  It  is  not  often,  in  the  history  of  the  world, 
that  a  religious  caste  or  order  has  passed  away 
with  more  claims  to  the  respect  and  gratitude  of 
mankind  than  the  tribe  of  Levi. 

(On  the  subject  generally  may  be  consulted,  in 
addition  to  the  authorities  already  quoted,  Carpzov, 
Appar.  Grit.  b.  i.  c.  5,  and  Annotat. ;  Saalschiitz, 
Archdol.  der  Hebr.  c.  78;  Michaelis,  Comm.  on 
Laws  of  Moses,  i.  art.  52.)  [E.  H.  P.] 

LEVITICUS  (JOj??l),  the  first  word  in  the 
book  giving  it  its  name  :  AtviriK6v :  Leviticus  • 
called  also  by  the  later  Jews  D'OH'S  ITl'lP),  "  Law 
of  the  priests ;"  and  lYUS^  f\~f\P\,  "  Law  of 
offerings." 

CONTENTS. — The  Book  consists  of  the  following 
principal  sections: — 

I.  The  laws  touching  sacrifices  (chap,  i.-rii.). 

II.  An   historical   section  containing,    first,  tnc 
consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  (chap,  yiii.), 
next,  his  first  offering  for  himself  and  the  peopltj 
(chap,  ix.)  ;  and  lastly,  the  destruction  of  Nadao 
and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  for  their  presump 
tuous  offence  (chap.  x.). 

III.  The  laws  concerning  purity  and  impurity, 
and  the  appropriate  sacrifices  and   ordinances   ibr 
putting  away  impurity  (chap,  xi.-xvi.). 

Adventures    (p.   2),   claims    his    descent  from   thii 
tribe. 

*  In  the  literature  of  a  later  period  the  same  name 
meets  us  applied  to  the  same  or  nearly  the  same  order, 
no  langor,  however,  as  the  language  of  reverence,  but 
as  that  of  a  cynical  contempt  for  the  less  worthy  per- 
tion  of  the  ciergy  of  the  English  Church  (Macaulay. 
Hist,  of  England,  iii.  327). 


LEVITICUS 

IV.  Laws  chiefly  intended  to  mark  the  separation 
between    Israel    and    the   heathen   nations    (chap. 
ivii.-xx.). 

V.  Laws  concerning  the  priests  (xxi.,  xxii.)  ;  and 
certain  holy  days  and  festivals   (xxiii.,  xxv.),  to 
gether  with  an  episode  (xxiv.).     The  section  extends 
from  chap.  xxi.  1  to  xxvi.  2. 

VI.  Promises  and  threats  (xxvi.  2-46). 

VII.  An  appendix  containing  the  laws  concerning 
rows  (xxvii.). 

I.  The  book  of  Exodus  concludes  with  the  account 
of  the  completion  of  the  tabernacle.  "  So  Moses 
finished  the  work,"  we  read  (xl.  33)  :  and  imme 
diately  there  rests  upon  it  a  cloud,  and  it  is  filled 
with  the  glory  of  Jehovah.  From  the  tabernacle, 
thus  rendered  glorious  by  the  Divine  Presence, 
issues  the  legislation  contained  in  the  book  of  Levi 
ticus.  At  first  God  spake  to  the  people  out  of  the 
thunder  and  lightning  of  Sinai,  and  gave  them  His 
holy  commandments  by  the  hand  of  a  mediator. 
But  henceforth  His  Presence  is  to  dwell  not  on  the 
secret  top  of  Sinai,  but  in  the  midst  of  His  people, 
both  in  their  wanderings  through  the  wilderness, 
and  afterwards  in  the  Land  of  Promise.  Hence 
tha  first  directions  which  Moses  receives  after  the 
work  is  finished  have  reference  to  the  offerings 
which  were  to  be  brought  to  the  door  of  the  taber 
nacle.  As  Jehovah  draws  near  to  the  people  in 
the  tabernacle,  so  the  people  draw  near  to  Jehovah 
in  the  offering.  Without  offerings  none  may  ap 
proach  Him.  The  regulations  respecting  the  sacri 
fices  fall  into  three  groups,  and  each  of  these  groups 
again  consists  of  a  decalogue  of  instructions.  Ber 
theau  has  observed  that  this  principle  runs  through 
ail  the  laws  of  Moses.  They  are  all  modelled  after 
the  pattern  of  the  ten  commandments,  so  that  each 
distinct  subject  of  legislation  is  always  treated  of 
under  ten  several  enactments  or  provisions. 

Bhumgarten  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Penta 
teuch,  has  adopted  the  arrangement  of  Bertheau, 
as  set  forth  in  his  Sicbcn  Gruppen  des  Mos.  Redds. 
On  the  whole,  his  principle  seems  sound.  We  find 
Bunsen  acknowledging  it  in  part,  in  his  division  of 
the  19th  chanter  (see  below).  And  though  we 
cannot  always  agree  with  Bertheau,  we  have  thought 
it  worth  while  to  give  his  arrangement  as  sug 
gestive  at  least  of  the  main  structure  of  the  Book. 

1.  The  first  group  of  regulations  (chap,  i.-iii.) 
deals  with  three  kinds  of  offerings:  the  burnt-offer 
ing  (i17'iy),  the  meat-offering*  (Hnj»),  and  the 
thank-offering  (D'O^B*  POT). 

i.  The  burnt-offering  (chap,  i.)  in  three  sections.  It 
might  be  either  (  I.)  a  male  without  blemish  from  the 
herd*  ("l£2n  JO),  ver.  3-9  ;  or  (2)  a  male  without 
blemish  from  tiieflocki,  or  lesser  cattle  (  J'S-SH),  ver. 
10-13;  or  (9)  it  might  be  fowls,  an  offering  of 
turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons,  ver.  14-17.  The 
subdivisions  are  here  marked  clearly  enough,  not 
only  by  the  the  three  hinds  of  sacrifice,  but  also  by 
the  form  in  which  the  enactment  is  put.  Each 
begins  with  IJlIp  ----  DN,  "  If  his  offering,"  &<:., 
and  each  ends  with  Hirpb  Him 


LEVITICUS 


109 


"  an  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a  sweet  savour  unto 
Jehovah." 

The  next  group  (chap,  ii.)  presents  many  more 
difficulties.  Its  parts  are  not  so  clearly  marked 
either  by  prominent  features  in  the  subject-matter, 

»  "  Meat  "  is  used  by  our  translators  in  the  sense  of  food 
of  any  kind,  whether  flesh  o  farinaceous. 


or  by  the  more  technical  boundaries  ot  certain  initial 
and  final  phrases.     We  have  here — 

ii.  The  meat-offering,  or  bloodless  offering  in  four 
sections:  (1)  in  its  uncooked  form,  consisting  of 
fine  flour  with  oil  and  frankincense,  ver.  1-3 ; 
(2)  in  its  cooked  form,  of  which  three  different 
kinds  are  specified — baked  in  the  oven,  fried,  or 
boiled,  ver.  4-10  ;  (3)  the  prohibition  of  leaven, 
and  the  direction  to  use  salt  in  all  the  meat-offer 
ings,  11-13  ;  (4)  the  obktion  of  first-fruits,  14-16. 
This  at  least  seems  on  the  whole  to  be  the  best 
arrangement  of  the  group,  though  we  offer  it  with 
some  hesitation. 

(a.)  Bertheau's  arrangement  is  different.  He 
divides  (1)  ver.  1-4  (thus  including  the  meat 
offering  baked  in  the  oven  with  the  uncooked  offer- 
ing  >  C2)  ver-  5  a11'1  c>  the  meat-offering  when  tried 
in  the  pan  ;  (3)  ver.  7-13,  the  meat-offering  when 
boiled ;  (4)  ver.  14-16,  the  offering  of  the  first- 
fruits.  But  this  is  obviously  open  to  many  objec 
tions.  For,  first,  it  is  exceedingly  arbitrary  to  con 
nect  ver.  4  with  ver.  1-3,  rather  than  with  the 
verses  which  follow.  Why  should  the  meat-offering 
baked  in  the  oven  be  classed  with  the  uncooked 
meat-offering  rather  than  with  the  other  two  which 
were  in  different  ways  supposed  to  be  dressed  with 
fire?  Next,  two  of  the  divisions  of  the  chapter  are 
clearly  marked  by  the  recurrence  of  the  formula, 
"  It  is  a  thing  most  holy  of  the  offerings  of  Jehovah 
made  by  fire,"  ver.  3  and  10.  Lastly,  the  direc 
tions  in  ver.  11-13,  apply  to  every  form  of  meat 
offering,  not  only  to  that  immediately  preceding. 
The  Masoretic  arrangement  is  in  five  sections :  vers. 
1-3;  4;  5,  6 ;  7-13;  14-16. 

iii.  The  Shelamim — "  peace-offering  "  (A.  V.),  or 
"  thank-offering  "  (Ewald),  (chap,  iii.)  in  three  sec 
tions.  Strictly  speaking  this  falls  under  two  heads : 
first,  when  it  is  of  the  herd;  and  secondly,  when  it  is 
of  the  flock.  But  this  last  has  again  its  subdivision  ; 
for  the  offering  when  of  the  flock  may  be  either  a  lamb 
or  a  goat.  Accordingly  the  three  sections  are,  vers. 
1-5;  7-11;  12-16.  Ver.  6  is  merely  introduc 
tory  to  the  second  class  of  sacrifices,  and  ver. 
17  a  general  conclusion,  as  in  the  case  of  other 
laws.  This  concludes  the  first  Decalogue  of  the 
book. 

2.  Chap,  jv.,  v.  The  laws  concerning  the  sin- 
offering  and  the  trepass-  (or  guilt-)  offering. 

The  sin-offering  (chap,  iv.)  is  treated  of  under  four 
specified  cases,  after  a  short  introduction  to  the 
whole  in  ver.  1,  2:  (1)  the  sin-offering  for  the 
priest,  3-12 ;  (2)  for  the  whole  congregation,  13- 
21 ;  (3)  for  a  ruler,  22-26  ;  (4)  for  one  of  the 
common  people,  27-35. 

After  these  four  cases  in  which  the  offering  is  to 
be  made  for  four  different  classes,  there  follow  pro 
visions  respecting  three  several  kinds  of  transgres 
sion  for  which  atonement  must  be  made.  It  is  not 
quite  clear  whether  these  should  be  ranked  under 
the  head  of  the  sin-offering  or  of  the  trespass-offer 
ing  (see  Winer,  Ewb.).  We  may  however  follow 
Bertheau,  Baumgarten,  and  Knobel,  in  regarding 
them  as  special  instances  in  which  a  sm-offering 
was  to  be  brought.  The  three  cases  are:  first, 
when  any  one  hears  a  curse  and  conceals  what  h- 
hears  (v.  1) ;  secondly,  when  any  one  touches  with 
out  knowing  or  intending  it,  any  unclean  thing 
(vers.  2,  3) ;  lastly,  when  any  one  takes  an  oath 
inconsiderately  (ver.  4).  For  each  of  these  cases 
the  same  trespass-offering,  "  a  female  from  the  flock, 
a  lamb  or  kid  of  the  goats,"  is  appointed  ;  but  with 
that  mercifulness  which  characterises  the  Mosaic  lav/ 


no 


LEVITICUS 


sxpress  provision  is  made  for  a  less  costly  offering 
where  the  offerer  is  poor. 

The  Decalogue  is  then  completed  by  the  three 
regulations  respecting  the  guilt-offering  (or  trespass- 
oflering) :  first,  when  any  one  sins  "  through  igno 
rance  in  the  holy  things  of  Jehovah"  (ver.  14, 
16) ;  next,  when  a  person  without  knowing  it 
"  commits  any  of  these  things  which  are  forbidden 
to  be  done  by  the  commandments  of  Jehovah  " 
(17-19)  ;  lastly,  when  a  man  lies  and  swears  falsely 
concerning  that  which  was  entrusted  to  him,  &c. 
(ver.  20-26).*  This  Decalogue,  like  the  preceding 
one,  has  its  characteristic  words  and  expressions. 
The  prominent  word  which  introduces  so  many  of 
the  enactments,  is  fc?E>3,  "  soul "  (see  iv.  2,  27,  v. 
1,  2,  4,  15,  17,  vi.  2) ;  and  the  phrase,  "if  a  soul 
shall  sin "  (iv.  2)  is,  with  occasional  variations 
having  an  equivalent  meaning,  the  distinctive  phrase 
of  the  section. 

As  in  the  former  Decalogue,  the  nature  of  the  offer 
ings,  so  in  this  the  person  and  the  nature  of  the 
ofi'ence  are  the  chief  features  in  the  several  statutes. 

3.  Chap,  vi.,  vii.  Naturally  upon  the  law  of 
sacrifices  follows  the  law  of  the  priests'  duties  when 
they  offer  the  sacrifices.  Hence  we  find  Moses  di 
rected  to  address  himself  immediately  to  Aaron  and 
his  sons  (vi.  2,  18,  =  vi.  9,  25,  A.  V.). 

In  this  group  the  different  kinds  of  offerings  are 
named  in  nearly  the  same  order  as  in  the  two  pre 
ceding  Decalogues,  except  that  the  offering  at  the 
consecration  of  a  priest  follows,  instead  of  the  thank- 
offering,  immediately  after  the  meat-offering,  which 
it  resembles ;  and  the  thank-offering  now  appears 
after  the  trespass-offering.  There  are  therefore,  in 
all,  six  kinds  of  offering,  and  in  the  case  of  each  of 
these  the  priest  has  his  distinct  duties.  Bertheau 
has  very  ingeniously  so  distributed  the  enactments 
in  which  these  duties  are  prescribed  as  to  arrange 
them  all  in  five  Decalogues.  We  will  briefly  indi 
cate  his  arrangement. 

3.  (a.)  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  burnt>offering  " 
(vi.  9 ;    A.  V.)  in  five  enactments,  each  verse  (ver. 
9-13)  containing  a  separate  enactment. 

(6.)  "  And  this  is  the  law  of  the  meat-offering" 
(ver.  14),  again  in  five  enactments,  each  of  which  is, 
as  before,  contained  in  a  single  verse  (ver.  14-18). 

4.  The  next  Decalogue  is  contained  in  ver.  19-30. 
(a.)  Verse  19  is  merely  introductory ;  then  follow, 

in  five  verses,  five  distinct  directions  with  regard 
to  the  offering  at  the  time  of  the  consecration  of 
the  priests,  the  first  in  ver.  20,  the  next  two  in 
ver.  21,  the  fourth  in  the  former  part  of  ver.  22, 
and  the  last  in  the  latter  pail  of  ver.  22  and  ver.  23. 
(6.)  "  This  is  the  law  of  the  sin-offering  "  (ver. 
25).  Then  the  five  enactments,  each  in  one  verse,  ex 
cept  that  two  verses  (27, 28)  are  given  to  the  third. 

5.  The  third  Decalogue  is  contained  in  chap.  vii. 
1-10,  the  laws  of  the  trespass-offering.     But  it  is 
impossible  to  avoid  a  misgiving  as  to  the  soundness 
of  Bertheau's  system  when  we  find  him  making  the 
words  "  It  is  most  holy,"  in  ver.  1 ,  the  first  of  the 
ten  enactments.     This  he  is  obliged  to  do,  as  ver. 
3  and  4  evidently  form  but  one. 

6.  The  fourth  Decalogue,  after  an  introductory 
verse  (ver.  11),  is  contained  in  ten  verses  (12-21). 

7.  The  last  Decalogue  consists  of  cei-tain  general 
laws  about  the  fat,  the  blood,  the  wave-breast,  &c., 
diid  is  comprised  again  in  ten  verses  (23-33),  the 
verses  as  before  marking  the  divisions. 


•  In  the  English  Version    this  is  chap.    vi.    1-7. 
This  U  only  one    of  those  ins'lances  in  which   the 


LEVITICUS 

The  chapter  doses  with  a  brief  /nsUrical  notice 
of  the  fact  that  these  several  commands  were  given 
to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai  (ver.  35-38). 

II.  Chap,  viii.,  ix.,  x.     Thif  section  is  entirely 
historical.     In  chapter  viii.  we  have  the  account 
of  the  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  by  Moses 
before  the  whole  congregation.     They  are  washed  ; 
he  is  arrayed  in  the  priestly  vestments  and  anointed 
with  the  holy  oil ;  his  sons  also  are  arrayed  in  their 
garments,  and  the  various  offerings  appointed  are 
offered.    In  chap.  ix.  Aaron  offers,  eight  days  after  his 
consecration,  his   first  offering  for  himself  and  the 
people:  this  comprises  for  himself  a  sin-  and  burnt- 
offering   (1-14),    for  the  people   a  sin-offering,   a 
burnt^offering,  and  a  peace-  (or  thank-)  offering.  He 
blesses  the  people,  and  fire  comes  down  from  heaven 
and  consumes  the   burnt-offering.     Chap.  x.  tells 
how  Nadab  and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  eager  to 
enjoy  the  privileges  of  their  new  office,  and  perhaps 
too  much  elated  by  its  dignity,  forgot  or  despised 
the  restrictions  by  which  it  was  fenced  round  (Ex. 
xxx.  7,  &c.),  and  daring  to  "  offer  strange  fire  before 
Jehovah,"  perished  because  of  their  presumption. 

With  the  house  of  Aaron  began  this  wickedness 
in  the  sanctuary ;  with  them  therefore  began  also 
the  divine  punishment.  Veiy  touching  is  the  story 
which  follows.  Aaron,  though  forbidden  to  mourn 
his  loss  (ver.  6,  7),  will  not  eat  the  sin-offering 
in  the  holy  place;  and  when  rebuked  by  Moses, 
pleads  in  his  defence,  "  Such  things  have  befallen 
me:  and  if  I  had  eaten  the  sin-offering  to-day, 
should  it  have  been  accepted  in  the  sight  of  Je 
hovah  ?"  And  Moses,  the  lawgiver  and  the  judg?, 
admits  the  plea,  and  honours  the  natural  feeling  it 
the  father's  heart,  even  when  it  leads  to  a  violation 
of  the  letter  of  the  divine  commandment. 

III.  Chap,  xi.-xvi.     The  first  seven  Decalogues 
had  reference  to  the  putting  away  of  guilt.    By  the 
appointed  sacrifices  the  separation  between  man  and 
God  was  healed.     The  next  seven  concern  them 
selves  with  the  putting  away  of  impurity.     That 
chapter  xi.-xv.  hang  together  so  as  to  form  one 
series  of  laws  there  can  be  no  doubt.     Besides  that 
they  treat  of  kindred  subjects,  they  have  their  cha 
racteristic    words,      NOB.     i"IKDt3>    "  unclean," 
"  uncleanness,"    "Tli"lt3.     ">i"lt3>     "  clean,"    which 
occur    in   almost   every  verse.      The    only  ques 
tion   is  about  chap,  xvi.,  which  by  its  opening  is 
connected  immediately  with  the  occurrence  related 
in  chap.  x.     Historically  it  would  seem  therefore 
that  chap.  xvi.  ought  to  have  followed  chap.  x. 
And  as  this  order  is  neglected,  it  would  lead  us  to 
suspect  that  some  other  principle  of  arrangement 
than  that  of  historical  sequence  has  been  adopted. 
This  we  find  in  the  solemn  significance  of  the  Great 
Day  of  Atonement.     The  high-priest  on  that  day 
made  atonement,  "  because  of  the  uncleanness  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  and  because  of  then  ur.ns- 
gressions  in  all  their  sins"  (xvi.  16),  and  he  "  re 
conciled  the  holy  place  and  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  and  the  altar  "  (ver.  20).     Delivered 
from  their  guilt  and  cleansed  from  their  pollutions, 
from  that  day  forward  the  children  of  Israel  entered 
upon  a  new  and  holy  life.     This  was  typified  both 
by  the  ordinance  that  the  bullock  and  the  goat  for 
the  sin-oHering  were  burnt  without  the  camp  (ver. 
27),  and  also  by  the  sending  away  of  the  goat,  laden 
with  the  iniquities  of  the  people  into  the  wilderness. 
Hence  chap.  xvi.  seems  to  stand  most  fitly  at  tlit 
end  of  this  second  group  of  seven  Decalogues. 


reader   marvels  at  the    perversity  ilispbyed  iu  thf 
divisicn  ol  chapters. 


LEVITICUS 

It  has  reference,  we  believe,  rot  only  (as  Ber 
theau  supposes)  to  tlie  putting  away,  as  by  one 
Mleimi  r.ct,  of  all  those  unclean  nesses  mentioned  in 
chap,  xi.-xv.,  and  for  which  the  various  expiations 
and  cleansings  there  appointed  were  temporary  and 
insufficient;  but  also  to  tne  making  atonement,  in 
the  sense  of  hiding  sin  or  putting  away  its  guilt. 
For  not  only  do  we  find  the  idea  of  cleansing  as 
from  defilement,  but  far  more  prominently  the  idea 
of  reconciliation.  The  often-repeated  word  ^Q3,  "  to 
cover,  to  atone,"  is  the  great  word  of  the  section. 

1.  The  first   Decalogue  in  this  group  refers  to 
clean  and  unclean  flesh.      Five  classes  of  animals 
arc  pronounced  unclean.     The  first  four  enactments 
declare  what  animals  may  and  may  not  be  eaten, 
whether  ( 1 )  beasts  of  the  earth  (2-8),  or  (2)  fishes 
(9-12),    or     (3)  birds   (13-20),    or  (4)  creeping 
things  with  wings.     The  next  four  are  intended  to 
guard  against  pollution  by  contact  with  the  carcase 
of  any  of  these  animals  :   (5)  ver.  24-26  ;    (6)  ver. 
27,  28  ;  ( 7)  ver.  29-38  ;  (8)  ver.  39,  40.  The  ninth 
and  tenth  specify  the  last  class  of  animals  which  are 
unclean  for  food,  (9)  41,  42,  and  forbid  any  other 
kind  of  pollution  by  means  of  them,  (10)  43-45. 
Ver.  46  and  47  are  merely  a  concluding  summary. 

2.  Chap.  xii.    Women's  purification  in  childbed. 
The  whole  of  this  chapter,  according  to  Bertheau, 
constitutes  the  first  law  of  this  Decalogue.     The 
remaining  nine  are  to  be  found  in  the  next  chapter, 
which  treats  of  the  signs  of  leprosy  in  man  and  in 
garments.    (2)  ver.  1-8  ;    (3)  ver.  9-17  ;    (4)  ver. 
18-23  ;    (5)  ver.  24-28 ;    (6)  ver.  29-37  ;  (7)  ver. 
38,  39  ;    (8)  ver.  40,  41 ;    (9)  ver.  42-46 ;    (10) 
ver.  47-59.     This  arrangement  of  the  several  sec 
tions  is  not  altogether  free  from  objection  ;  but  it  is 
certainly  supported  by  the  characteristic  mode  in 
which  each  section  opens.     Thus  for  instance,  chap.- 

xii.  2,  begins  with  V'HTn  ^3  ilB>N  ;  chap.  xiii.  2, 
with  rV.T  »3  D*JK,  ver.  9,  (TnTl  *3  Hjm  yjU, 
and  so  on,  the  same  order  being  always  observed, 
the  subst.  being  placed  first,  then  *3,  and  then  the 
verb,  except  only  in  ver.  42,  where  the  subst.  is 
placed  after  the  verb. 

3.  Chap.  xiv.  1-32.     "  The  law  of  the  leper  in 
the  day  of  his  cleansing,"  i.  e.  the  law  which  the 
priest   is  to  observe  in  purifying  the  leper.     The 
priest  is  mentioned  in  ten  verses,   each  of  which 
begins  one  of  the  ten  sections  of  this  law :  ver.  3, 
4,  5,  11,  12,  14,  15,  16,  19,  20.    In  each  instance 
the  word  jnbn  is  preceded  by  1  consecut.  with  the 
perfect.     It  is  true  that  in  ver.  3,  and  also  in  ver. 
14,   the  word   JHSn   occurs  twice ;   but  in  both 

verses  there  is  MS.  authority,  as  well  as  that  of 
the  Vulg.  and  Arab,  versions  for  the  absence  of  the 
second.  Verses  21-32  may  be  regarded  as  a  sup 
plemental  provision  in  cases  where  the  leper  is  too 
poor  to  bring  the  required  offering. 

4.  Chap.  xiv.  33-57.     The  leprosy  in  a  house. 
It  is  not  so  easy  here  to  trace  the  arrangement  no 
ticed  in  so  many  other  laws.     There  are  no  charac- 

eristic  words  or  phrases  to  guide  us.  Bertheau's 
division  is  as  follows:  ( I  )  ver.  34,  35  ;  (2)  ver. 
36,  37 ;  (3)  ver.  38  ;  (4)  ver.  39 ;  (5)  ver.  40 ; 
(6)  ver.  41,  42  ;  (7)  ver.  43-45.  Then  as  usual 
follows  a  short  summary  which  closes  the  statute 
roncerning  leprosy,  ver.  54-57. 

5.  Chap.  xv.  1-15.     6.  Chap.  xv.  16-31.     The 
law  of  uneleanness  by  issue,  &c.,  in  two  decalogues. 
The  division  is  clearly  marked,  as   Bertheau   ob- 


LEVITICUS 


111 


serves,  by  the  form  of  cleansing,  which  is  so  exactly 
similar  in  the  two  principal  cases,  and  which  closes 
each  series,  (1)  ver.  13-15;  (2)  ver.  28-30.  Wt 
again  give  his  arrangement,  though  we  do  not  profess 
to  regard  it  as  in  all  respects  satisfactory. 

6.  (1)  ver.  2,  3 ;  (2)  ver.  4  ;  (3)  ver.  5  ;  (4} 
ver.  6;  (5)  ver.  7;  (6)  ver.  8  ;  (7)  ver.  9  ;  (8) 
ver.  10 ;  (9)  ver.  11,12  ; — these  Bertheau  considers 
as  one  enactment,  because  it  is  another  way  of  say 
ing  that  either  the  man  or  thing  which  the  unclean 
pei-son  touches  is  unclean ;  but  on  the  same  prin 
ciple  ver.  4  and  5  might  just  as  well  form  one 
enactment— (10)  v.  13-15. 

6.  (1)  ver.  16;  (2) -er.  17  ;  (3)  ver.  18  ;  (4) 
ver.  19  ;  (5)  ver.  20  ;  (6)  ver.  21  ;  (7)  ver.  22  ; 
(8)  ver.  23;  (9)  ver.  24:  (10)  ver.  28-30.  In 
order  to  complete  this  arrangement,  he  considers 
verses  25-27  as  a  kind  of  supplementary  enactment 
provided  for  an  irregular  uneleanness,  leaving  it  as 
quite  uncertain  however  whether  this  was  a  later 
addition  or  not.  Verses  32  and  33  form  merely 
the  same  general  conclusion  which  we  have  had 
before  in  xiv.  54-57. 

The  last  Decalogue  of  the  second  group  of  seven 
Decalogues  is  to  be  found  in  chap,  xvi.,  which  treats 
of  the  great  Day  of  Atonement.  The  Law  itself  is 
contained  in  ver.  1-28.  The  remaining  verses. 
29-34,  consist  of  an  exhortation  to  its  careful  ob 
servance.  In  the  act  of  atonement  three  persons 
are  concerned.  The  high-priest, — in  this  instance 
Aaron  ;  the  man  who  leads  away  the  goat  for  Azazel 
into  the  wilderness ;  and  he  who  burns  the  skin, 
flesh,  and  dung  of  the  bullock  and  goat  of  the  sin- 
offering  without  the  camp.  The  two  last  have 
special  purifications  assigned  them  ;  the  first  because 
he  has  touched  the  goat  laden  with  the  guilt  of 
Israel ;  the  last  because  he  has  come  in  contact 
with  the  sin-offering.  The  9th  and  10th  enactments 
prescribe  what  these  purifications  are,  each  of  them 
concluding  with  the  same  formula :  N13*  }3  '111^. 
nJHftn  ?R,  and  hence  distinguished  from  each 

other.  The  duties  of  Aaron  consequently  ought,  if 
the  division  into  decads  is  correct,  to  be  com 
prised  in  eight  enactments.  Now  the  name  of 
Aaron  is  repeated  eight  times,  and  in  six  of  these 
it  is  preceded  by  the  Perfect  with  1  consecut.  as 
we  observed  was  the  case  before  when  "  the  priest " 
was  the  prominent  figure.  According  to  this  then 
the  Decalogue  will  stand  thus: — (1)  ver.  2,  Aaron 
not  to  enter  the  Holy  Place  at  all  times  ;  (2)  ver. 
3-5,  With  what  sacrifices  and  in  what  dress  Aaron 
is  to  enter  the  Holy  Place;  (3)  ver.  6,  7,  Aaron 
to  offer  the  bullock  tor  himself,  and  to  set  the  two 
goats  before  Jehovah  ;  (4)  Aaron  to  cast  lots  on 
the  two  goats ;  (5)  ver.  9,10,  Aaron  to  offer  the 
goat  on  which  the  lot  falls  for  Jehovah,  and  to 
send  away  the  goat  for  Azazel  into  the  wilderness  , 
(6)  ver.  11-19,  Aaron  to  sprinkle  the  blood  both 
of  the  bullock  and  of  the  goat  to  make  atonement 
for  himself,  for  his  house,  and  for  the  whole  congre 
gation,  as  also  to  purify  the  altar  of  incense  with 
the  blood ;  (7)  ver.  20-22,  Aaron  to  lay  his  hands 
on  the  living  goat,  and  confess  over  it  all  the  sins  of 
the  children  of  Israel;  (8)  ver.  23-25,  Aaron  aftei 
this  to  take  off  his  linen  garments,  bathe  himself 
and  put  on  his  priestly  garments,  and  then  offer  nis 
burnt-offering  and  that  of  the  congregation  ;  (9)  ver. 
26,  The  man  by  whom  the  goat  is  sent  into  the 
wilderness  to  purify  himself;  (10)  ver.  27,  28, 
What  is  to  be  done  by  him  who  burns  the  sin- 
offering  without  the  camp. 


112 


LEVITICUS 


We  have  now  reached  the  great  central  point  of 
the  book.  All  going  before  was  but  a  preparation 
for  this.  Two  great  truths  have  been  established  ; 
first,  that  God  cm  only  be  approached  by  means  of 
\ppointed  sacrifices ;  next,  that  mail  in  nature  and 
life  is  full  of  pollution,  which  must  be  cleansed. 
And  now  a  third  is  taught,  viz.  that  not  by  several 
cleansings  for  several  sins  and  pollutions  can  guilt 
be  put  away.  The  several  acts  of  sin  are  but  so 
many  manifestations  of  the  sinful  nature.  For  this, 
therefore,  also  must  atonement  be  made;  one  solemn 
act,  which  shall  cover  all  transgressions,  and  turn 
away  God's  righteous  displeasure  from  Israel. 

IV.  Chap,  xvii.-xx.  And  now  Israel  is  reminded 
that  it  is  the  holy  nation.  The  great  atonement 
offered,  it  is  to  enter  upon  a  new  life.  It  is  a 
separate  nation,  sanctified  and  set  apart  for  the  ser 
vice  of  God.  It  may  not  therefore  do  after  the 
abominations  of  the  heathen  by  whom  it  is  sur 
rounded.  Here  consequently  we  find  those  laws 
and  ordinances  which  especially  distinguish  the 
nation  of  Israel  from  all  other  nations  of  the  earth. 

Here  again  we  may  trace,  as  before,  a  group  of 
seven  decalogues.  But  the  several  decalogues  are 
not  so  clearly  marked ;  nor  are  the  characteristic 
phrases  and  the  introductions  and  conclusions  so 
common.  In  chap,  xviii.  there  are  twenty  enact 
ments,  and  in  chap.  xix.  thirty.  In  chap,  xvii.,  on 
the  other  hand,  there  are  only  six,  and  in  chap.  xx. 
there  are  fourteen.  As  it  is  quite  manifest  that  the 
enactments  in  chap,  xviii.  are  entirely  separated  by 
a  fresh  introduction  from  those  in  chap.,  xvii.,  Ber- 
Iheau,  in  order  to  preserve  the  usual  arrangement 
of  the  laws  in  decalogues,  would  transpose  this 
chapter,  and  place  it  after  chapter  xix.  He  observes, 
that  the  Jaws  in  chap,  xvii.,  and  those  in  chap.  xx. 
1-9,  are  akin  to  one  another,  and  may  very  well 
constitute  a  single  decalogue ;  and,  what  is  of  more 
importance,  that  the  words  in  xviii.  1-5  form  the 
natural  introduction  to  this  whole  group  of  laws : 
"  And  Jehovah  spake  unto  Moses,  saying,  Speak 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  I 
am  Jehovah  your  God.  After  the  doings  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,  wherein  ye  dwelt,  shall  ye  not  do : 
and  after  the  doings  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  whither 
I  bring  you,  shall  ye  not  do:  neither  shall  ye  walk 
in  their  ordinances,"  &c. 

There  is,  however,  a  point  of  connexion  between 
chaps,  xvii.  and  xviii.  which  must  not  be  over 
looked,  anil  which  seems  to  indicate  that  their  posi 
tion  in  our  present  text  is  the  right  one.  All  the 
six  enactments  in  chap.  xvii.  (ver.  3-5,  ver.  6,  7, 
ver.  8,  9,  ver.  10-12,  ver.  13,  14,  ver.  15)  bear 
upon  the  nature  and  meaning  of  the  sacrifice  to  Je 
hovah  as  compared  with  the  sacrifices  offered  to  false 
gods.  It  would  seem  too  that  it  was  necessary  to 
guard  against  any  license  to  idolatrous  practices, 


LEVITICUS 

which  might  possibly  be  drawn  from  the  sending  ol 
the  goat  for  Axaxel  into  the  wilderness  [ATONK 
MENT,  DAV  OF],  especially  perhaps  against  the 
Egyptian  custom  of  appeasing  the  Evil  Spirit  of  the 
wilderness  and  averting  his  malice  (Hengstenberg, 
Mose  «.  Acgi/pten,  178;  Movers,  Pkonizier,  i. 
369).  To  this  there  may  be  an  allusion  in  ver.  7. 
Perhaps  however  it  is  better  and  more  simple  to 
regard  the  enactments  in  these  two  chapters  (with 
Bunsen,  Sibelwerk,  2te  abth.,  Ite  th.  p.  245)  as 
directed  against  two  prevalent  heathen  practices, 
the  eating  of  blood  and  fornication.  It  is  remark 
able,  as  showing  how  intimately  moral  and  ritual 
observances  were  blended  together  in  the  Jewish 
mind,  that  abstinence  "  from  blood  and-  things 
strangled,  and  fornication,"  was  laid  down  by  the 
Apostles  as  the  only  condition  of  communion  to  be 
required  of  Gentile  converts  to  Christianity.  Before 
we  quit  this  chapter  one  observation  may  be  made. 
The  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  in  ver.  11,  "for  it  is 
the  blood  that  maketh  an  atonement  for  the  soul  " 
should  be  "  for  it  is  the  blood  that  maketh  an  atone 
ment  by  means  of  the  life."  This  is  important.  It 
is  not  blood  merely  as  such,  but  blood  as  having  in  it 
the  principle  of  life  that  God  accepts  in  sacrifice.  For 
by  thus  giving  vicariously  the  life  of  thedumb  animal, 
the  sinner  confesses  that  his  own  life  is  forfeit. 

In  chap,  xviii.,  after  the  introduction  to  which  we 
have  already  alluded,  ver.  1-5,  —  and  in  which  God 
claims  obedience  on  the  double  ground  that  He  is  Is 
rael's  God,  and  that  to  keep  His  commandments  is  life 
(ver.  5),  —  there  follow  twenty  enactments  concern 
ing  unlawful  marriages  and  unnatural  lusts.  The 
first  ten  are  contained  one  in  each  verse,  vers.  6-15. 
The  next  ten  range  themselves  in  like  manner  with 
the  verses,  except  that  ver.  17  and  23  contain  each 
two.b  Of  the  twenty  the  first  fourteen  are  alike 


in  form,  as  well  as  in  the  repeated  n?3n  ' 

Chap.  xix.  Three  Decalogues,  introduced  by  the 
words,  "  Ye  shall  be  holy,  for  I  Jehovah  your  God 
am  holy,"  and  ending  with,  "  Ye  shall  observe  all 
my  statutes,  and  all  my  judgments,  and  do  them. 
I  am  Jehovah."  The  laws  here  are  of  a  very  mixed 
character,  and  many  of  them  a  repetition  merely  of 
previous  laws.  Of  the  three  Decalogues,  the  first 
is  comprised  in  ver.  3-13,  and  may  be  thus  distri 
buted:  —  (1)  ver.  3,  to  honour  father  and  mother; 
(2)  ver.  3,  to  keep  the  sabbath  ;  (3)  ver.  4,  not  to 
turn  to  idols  ;  (4)  ver.  4,  not  to  make  molten  gods 
(these  two  enactments  being  separated  on  the  same 
principle  as  the  first  and  second  commandments  of 
the  Great  Decalogue  or  Two  Tables)  ;  (5)  ver.  5-8, 
of  thank-offerings  ;  (6)  ver.  9,  10,  of  gleaning;  (7) 
ver.  11,  not  to  steal  or  lie  ;  (8)  ver.  12,  not  to  swear 
falsely  ;  (9)  ver.  13,  not  to  defraud  one's  neighbour  • 
(10)  ver.  13,  the  wages  of  him  that  is  hired,  &c.e 


b  The  interpretation  of  ver.  18  has  of  late  been  the 
subject  of  so  much  discussion,  that  we  may  perhaps 
be  permitted  to  say  a  word  upon  it,  even  in  a  work 
which  excludes  all  dogmatic  controversy.  The  ren 
dering  of  the  English  Version  is  supported  by  a  whole 
catena  of  authorities  of  the  first  rank,  as  may  be 
seen  by  reference  to  Dr.  M  'Caul's  pamphlet,  The  An 
cient  Interpretation  of  Leviticus  X.VIII.  18,  &c.  Wt 
maj  further  remark,  that  the  whole  controversy,  so 
far  as  the  Scriptural  question  is  concerned,  might 
have  been  avoided  if  the  Church  had  but  acted  in  the 
gpirit  of  Luther's  golden  words  : — "  Ad  rem  veniamus 
et  dionmus  Moscm  esre  mortuum,  vixisse  autem  po- 
pulo  Judaico,  nee  obligari  nos  legibus  illius.  Ideo 
ex  Mo«e  ut  legislatore  nisi  idem  ex  legibu* 


nostris,  e.  g.  naturalibus  et  politicis  probetur,  non  ad- 
mittamns  nee  confundamus  totius  orbis  politias." — 
Sriefe,  De  Wette's  edit.  iv.  305. 

*  It  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  six  of  these 
enactments  should  only  be  repetitions,  for  the  most 
part  in  a  shorter  form,  of  Commandments  contained 
in  the  Two  Tables.  This  can  only  be  accounted  for 
by  remembering  the  great  object  of  this  section, 
which  is  to  remind  Israel  that  it  is  a  separate  nation, 
its  '  iws  being  expressly  framed  to  be  a  fence  and  a 
hedge  about  it,  keeping  it  from  profane  contact  with 
the  heathen.  Bunsen  divides  chapter  xix.  into  two 
tables  of  ten  commandments  each,  and  one  of  flvo. 
(See  his  Bibelu'ftk.) 


LEVITICUS 

The  next  Decalogue,  ver.  14-25,  Berth<>au  ar 
ranges  <tiu.*  •  "?v  14,  ver.  15,  ver.  16a,  ver.  166, 
ver.  17,  ver.  18,  vet.  19a,  ver.  196,  ver.  20-22, 
ver  23-25.  We  object,  however,  to  making  the 
words  iu  19a,  "  Ye  shall  keep  my  statutes,"  a  se 
parate  enactment.  There  is  no  reason  for  this.  A  much 
better  plan  would  be  to  consider  ver.  17  as  consist 
ing  of  two  enactments,  which  is  manifestly  the  case. 

The  third  decalogue  may  be  thus  distributed : — 
ver.  26a,  ver.  266,  ver.  27,  ver.  28,  ver.  29,  ver. 
'.50,  ver.  31,  ver.  32,  ver.  33,  34,  ver.  35,  36. 

We  have  thus  found  five  decalogues  in  this  group. 
Bertheau  completes  the  number  seven  by  transpos 
ing,  as  we  have  seen,  chap,  xvii.,  and  placing  it 
immediately  before  chap.  xx.  He  also  transfers 
ver.  27  of  chapter  xx.  to  what  he  considers  its 
proper  place,  viz.  after  ver.  6.  It  must  be  con 
fessed  that  the  enactment  in  ver.  27  stands  very 
awkwardly  at  the  end  of  the  chapter,  completely 
isolated  as  it  is  from  all  other  enactments  ;  for  ver. 
'22-26  are  the  natural  conclusion  to  this  whole 
section.  But  admitting  this,  another  difficulty  re 
mains,  that  according  to  him  the  7th  decalogue  be 
gins  at  ver.  10,  and  another  transposition  is  neces 
sary,  so  that  ver.  7,  8,  may  stand  after  ver.  9,  and 
so  conclude  the  preceding  series  of  ten  enactments. 
It  is  better  perhaps  to  abandon  the  search  for  com 
plete  symmetry  than  to  adopt  a  method  so  violent 
in  order  to  obtain  it. 

It  should  be  observed  that  chap,  xviii.  6-23  and 
chap.  xx.  10-21  stand  in  this  relation  to  one  an 
other  ;  that  the  latter  declares  the  penalties  attached 
to  the  transgression  of  many  of  the  commandments 
given  in  the  former.  But  though  we  may  not  be 
able  to  trace  seven  decalogues,  in  accordance  with 
the  theory  of  which  we  have  been  speaking,  in 
chap,  xvii.-xx.,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they 
form  a  distinct  section  of  themselves,  of  which 
xx.  22-26  is  the  proper  conclusion. 

Like  the  other  sections  it  has  some  characteristic 
expressions : — (a)  "  Ye  shall  keep  my  judgments 

and  my  statutes"  (TIpPI,  l|t3BB'D)  occurs  xviii.  4, 

5,  26,  xix.  37,  xx.  8,  22,  but  is  not  met  with  either 
in  the  preceding  or  the  following  chapters.  (6)  Th< 
constantly  recurring  phrases,  "  I  am  Jehovah  ;' 
"  I  am  Jehovah  your  God ;"  "  Be  ye  holy,  for  ] 
am  holy  ;"  "  I  am  Jehovah  which  hallow  you.' 
In  the  earlier  sections  this  phraseology  is  only 
found  in  Lev.  xi.  44,  45,  and  Ex.  xxxi.  13.  In  the 
section  which  follows  (xxi.-xxv.)  it  is  much  mon 
common,  this  section  being  in  a  great  measure  a 
continuation  of  the  preceding. 

V.  We  come  now  to  the  last  group  of  decalogues 
— that  contained  in  ch.  xxi.-xxvi.  2.  The  subjects 
comprised  in  these  enactments  are — First,  the  per 
sonal  purity  of  the  priests.  They  may  not  defile 
themselves  for  the  dead  ;  their  wives  and  daughter 
must  be  pure,  and  they  themselves  must  be  fre 
from  all  personal  blemish  (ch.  xxi.).  Next,  th 
eating  of  the  holy  things  is  permitted  only  t< 
priests  who  are  free  from  all  uncleanness :  they  an 
the.r  household  only  may  eat  them  (xxii.  1-16) 
Thirdly,  the  offerings  of  Israel  are  to  be  pure  anc 
without  blemish  (xxii.  17-33).  The  fourth  serie 
provides  for  the  due  celebration  of  the  great  festi 
vals  when  priests  and  people  were  to  be  gathere 
together  before  Jehovah  in  holy  convocation. 

Up  to  this  point  we  trace  system  and  purpose  i 
the  order  of  the  legislation.  Thus,  for  instance 
chap,  xi.-xvi.  treats  of  external  purity  ;  ch.  xvii.-xx 
>f  moral  purity;  chap,  xxi.-xxiii.  of  the  holiness  o 

VOL.  II. 


LEVITICUS  11G 

ie  pnests,  and  their  duties  with  regard  to  holy 
lings ;  th?  whole  concluding  witli  provisions  foi 
ic  solemn  feasts  on  which  all  Israel  appeared 
efbre  Jehovah.  We  will  again  briefly  indicate 
ertheau's  groups,  and  then  append  some  general 
aservations  on  the  section. 

1.  Chap.  xxi.  Ten  laws,  as  follows: — (1)  ver. 
-3;  (2)  ver.  4;    (3)  ver.  5,  6;    (4)  vei.  7,  &. 
5)  ver.  9  ;  (6)  ver.  10, 11 ;  (7)  ver.  12  ;  (8)  ver 
3,  14;  (9)  ver.  17-21;  (10)  ver.  22,  23.     The 
ret  five  laws  concern  all  the  priests ;  the  sixth  to 
le  eighth  the  high-priest ;  the  ninth  and  tenth  the 
lects  of  bodily  blemish  in  particular  cases. 

2.  Chap.  xxii.  1-16.    (1)  ver.  2;    (2)  ver.  3; 
3)  ver.  4 ;  (4)  ver.  4-7 ;  (5)  ver.  8,  9 ;  (6)  ver. 
0;  (7)  ver.  11;  (8)  ver.  12;  (9)  ver.  13;  (10) 
er.  14-16. 

3.  Chap.  xxii.  17-33.     (1)  ver.  18-20 ;  (2)  ver. 
1 ;  (3)  ver.  22  ;  (4)  ver.  23 ;  (5)  ver.  24  ;  (6)  ver. 
5;  (7)  ver.  27;  (8)  ver.  28;  (9)  ver.  29;  (10) 
er.  30  ;  and  a  general  conclusion  in  ver.  31-33. 

4.  Chap,  xxiii.    (1)  ver.  3;    (2)  ver.  5-7;   (3) 
•er.  8;  (4)  ver.  9-14;  (5)  ver.  15-21 ;    (6)  ver. 
>2  ;  (7)  ver.  24,  25  ;  (8)  ver.  27-32  ;  (9)  ver.  34. 
15;   (10)  ver.  36:    ver.  37,  38  contain  the  con- 
lusion  or  general  summing  up  of  the  Decalogue. 
)n  the  remainder  of  the  chapter,  as  well  as  chap. 

xxiv.,  see  below. 

5.  Chap.  xxv.  1-22.  (1)  ver.  2 ;  (2)  ver.  3,  4  ; 
3)  ver.  5 ;  (4)  ver.  6 ;   (5)  ver.  8-10 ;   (6)  ver. 

11,  12;   (7)  ver.  13;    (8)  ver.  14;   (9)  ver.  15; 
10)  ver.  16:  with  a  concluding  formula  in  ver. 
18-22. 

6.  Chap.  xxv.  23-38.  (1)  ver.  23,  24;  (2)  ver. 
25  ;   (3)  ver.  26,  27  ;  (4)  ver.  28;   (5)  ver.  29  ; 
(6)  ver.  30;  (7)  ver.  31;  (8)  ver.  32,  33;  (9) 
ver.  34 ;    (10)  ver.  35-37 :   the  conclusion  to  the 
whole  in  ver.  38. 

7.  Chap.  xxv.   39-xxvi.  2.     (1)  ver.  39;    (2~) 
ver.  40-42  ;    (3)  ver.  43  ;    (4)  ver.  44,  45 ;    (5^ 
far.  46  ;    (6)  ver.  47-49  ;   (7)  ver.  50  ;    (8)  ver. 
51,  52  ;  (9)  ver.  53;  (10)  ver.  54. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  above  arrangement 
s  only  completed  by  omitting  the  latter  part  of 
chap,  xxiii.  and  the  whole  of  chap.  xxiv.  But  it  is 
clear  that  chap,  xxiii.  39-44  is  a  later  addition, 
containing  further  instructions  respecting  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles.  Ver.  39,  as  compared  with  ver.  34, 
shows  that  the  same  feast  is  referred  to;  whils: 
ver.  37,  38,  are  no  less  manifestly  the  original  con 
clusion  of  the  laws  respecting  the  feasts  which  are 
enumerated  in  the  previous  part  of  the  chapter. 
Chap,  xxiv.,  again,  has  a  peculiar  character  of  its 
own.  First  we  have  a  command  concerning  the  oi. 
to  be  used  in  the  lamps  belonging  to  the  Tabernacle, 
which  is  only  a  repetition  of  an  enactment  already 
given  in  Ex.  xxvii.  20,  21,  which  seems  to  be  its 
natural  place.  Then  follow  directions  about  the 
shew-bread.  These  do  not  occur  previously.  In 
Ex.  the  shew-bread  is  spoken  of  always  as  a  matter 
of  course,  concerning  which  no  regulations  are  ne 
cessary  (comp.  Ex.  xxv.  30,  xxxv.  13,  xxxix.  36). 
Lastly  come  certain  enactments  arising  out  of  an 
historical  occurrence.  The  son  of  an  Egyptian 
father  by  an  Israelitish  wom;in  blasphemes  the 
name  of  Jehovah,  and  Moses  is  commanded  to  stone 
him  in  consequence:  and  this  circumstance  is  the 
occasion  of  the  following  laws  being  given : — ( 1) 
That  a  blasphemer,  whether  Israelite  or  stranger, 
is  to  be  stoned  (comp.  Ex.  xxii.  28).  (2)  That  he  thai 
kills  any  man  shall  surely  be  put  to  death  (comp. 
Ex.  xxi.  12-27).  (3)  that  he  that  kills  a  beasa 


114 


LEVITICUS 


shall  make  it  good  (not  found  where  we  might 
have  expected  it,  in  the  series  of  laws  Ex.  xxi.  28- 
ixii.  16).  (4)  That  if  a  man  cause  a  blemish  in 
his  neighbour  he  shall  be  requited  in  like  manner 
(comp.  Kx.  xxi.  22-25).  (5)  We  have  then  a  repe 
tition  in  an  inverse  order  of  ver.  17,  18;  and  (6) 
the  injunction  that  there  shall  be  one  law  for  the 
s'.ranger  and  the  Israelite.  Finally,  a  brief  notice 
of  the  infliction  of  the  punishment  in  the  case  of 
th*  son  of  Shelomith,  who  blasphemed.  Not  an 
other  instance  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole  collection 
in  which  any  historical  circumstance  is  made  the 
occasion  of  enacting  a  law.  Then  again  the  laws 
(2),  (3),  (4),  (5),  are  mostly  repetitions  of  existing 
laws,  and  seem  here  to  have  no  connexion  with  the 
event  to  which  they  are  referred.  Either  therefore 
some  other  circumstances  took  place  at  the  same 
time  with  which  we  are  not  acquainted,  or  these 
isolated  laws,  detached  from  their  proper  connexion, 
were  grouped  together  here,  in  obedience  perhaps  to 
«ome  traditional  association. 

VI.  The  seven  decalogues  are  now  fitly  closed 
by  words  of  promise  and  threat  —  promise  of  largest, 
richest,  blessing  to  those  that  hearken  unto  and  do 
these  commandments  ;  threats  of  utter  destruction 
to  those  that  break  th^  covenant  of  their  God. 
Thus  the  second  great  division  of  the  Law  closes 
like  the  first,  except  that  the  first  part,  or  Book  of 
the  Covenant,  ends  (Ex.  xxiii.  20-33)   with  pro 
mises  of  blessing  only.     There  nothing  is  said  of 
the  judgments  which  are  to  follow  transgression, 
because  as  yet  the  Covenant  had  not  been  made. 
Hut  when  once  the  nation  had  freely  entered  into 
that  Covenant,  they  bound  themselves  to  accept  its 
sanctions,  its  penalties,  as  well  as  its  rewards.    And 
we  cannot  wonder  if  in  these  sanctions  the  punish 
ment  of  transgression  holds  a  larger  place  than  the 
rewards  of  obedience.     For  already  was  it  but  too 
plain   thr.t  "  Israel  would  not  obey."     From  the 
first  they  were  a  stiffnecked  and  rebellious  race, 
and  from  the  first  the  doom  of  disobedience  hung 
like  some  fiery  sword  above  their  heads. 

VII.  The  legislation  is  evidently  completed   in 
the  last  words  of  the  preceding  chapter  :  —  "  These 
are  the  statutes  and  judgments  and  laws  which  Je 
hovah  made  between  Him  and  the  children  of  Israel 
in   Mount  Sinai  by  the  hand  of  Moses."     Chap. 
xxvii.  is  a  later  appendix,  again  however  closed  by 
a  similar  formula,  which  at  least  shows  that  the 
transcriber  considered  it  to  be  an  integral   part  of 
the  original  Mosaic  legislation,  though  he  might  be 
at  a  loss  to  assign  it  its  place.     Bertheau  classes 
it  with  the  other  less  regularly  grouped  laws  at  the 
beginning  of  the  book  of  Numbers.     He  treats  the 
section  Lev.  xxvii.-Num.  x.  10  as  a  series  of  sup 
plements  to  the  Siuaitic  legislation. 

Integrity.  —  This  is  very  generally  admitted. 
Those  critics  even  who  are  in  favour  of  different 
documents  in  the  Pentateuch  assign  nearly  the 
whole  of  this  book  to  one  writer,  the  Elohist,  or 
author  of  the  original  document.  According  to 
Knobel  the  only  portions  which  are  not  to  be 
referred  to  the  Elohist  are  —  Moses'  rebuke  of  Aaron 
because  the  goat  of  the  sin-offering  had  been  burnt 
(x.  16-20);  the  group  of  laws  in  chap,  xvii.-xx.  ; 
certain  additional  enactments  respecting  the  Sabbath 
and  the  Feasts  of  Weeks  and  of  Tabernacles  (xxiii., 
«  ver.  3,  ver.  18, 


LKVITIUUS 

and  the  promises  and  warnings  contained  iu  chap. 

v\. 

With  regard  to  the  section  chap,  rvii.-ix.,  h« 
does  not  consider  the  whole  of  it  to  have  been  bor 
rowed  from  the  same  sources.  Chap,  xvii,  he 
believes  was  introduced  here  by  the  Jehovist  from 
some  ancient  document,  whilst  he  Admits  neverthe 
less  that  it  contains  certain  Elohistic  forms  of  ex 
pression,  as  -|B>3  ^>3,  "all  flesh,"  ver.  14;  B>B3, 

T     T 

"soul,"  (in  the  sense  of  "  person"),  ver.  10-12 
15;  irn,  "beast,"  ver.  13;  \3.~$>,  "offering," 
ver.  4  ;  nifVJ  n^,  "  a  sweet  savour,"  ver.  6  ;  "  a 
statute  for  ever,"  and  "  after  your  generations," 
ver.  7.  But  it  cannot  be  from  the  Elohist,  he 
argues,  because  (a)  he  would  have  placed  it  after 
chap,  vii.,  or  at  least  after  chap.  xv.  ;  (6)  he  would 
not  have  repeated  the  prohibition  of  blood,  &c., 
which  he  had  already  given;  (c)  he  would  have 
taken  a  more  favourable  view  of  his  nation  than 
that  implied  in  ver.  7  ;  and  lastly  (d)  the  phrase 
ology  has  something  of  the  colouring  of  chap,  xviii.- 
xx.  and  xxvi.,  which  are  certainly  not  Elohistic. 
Such  reasons  are  too  transparently  unsatisfactory 
to  need  serious  discussion.  He  observes  further 
that  the  chapter  is  not  altogether  Mosaic.  The 
first  enactment  (ver.  1-7)  does  indeed  apply  only 
to  Israelites,  and  holds  good  therefore  for  the  time 
of  Moses.  But  the  remaining  three  contemplate 
the  case  of  strangers  living  amongst  the  people,  and 
have  a  reference  to  all  time. 

Chap,  xviii.-xx.,  though  it  has  a  Jehovistic  colour 
ing,  cannot  have  been  originally  from  the  Jehovist. 
The  following  peculiarities  of  language,  which 
are  worthy  of  notice,  according  to  Knobel  (Exod. 
und  Leviticus  erklart,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg.  Hdbuch, 
1857)  forbid  such  a  supposition,  the  more  so  as 
they  occur  nowhere  else  in  the  0.  T.  :  —  JD^,  "  I»* 
down  to  "  and  "  gender,"  xviii.  23,  xix.  19,  xx.  16  : 
VlF),  "  confusion,"  xviii.  23,  xx.  12;  BjT?,  "  ga 
ther,"  xix.  9,  xxiii.  22;  1313,  "grape"  »*•  l<>; 
"near  kinswomen,"  xviii.  17;  rnJ53, 


part  of  ver.  2,  from 
19,  22,  39-44);  the  punishments  ordained  for 
blasphemy,  murder,  &c.  (xxiv.  10-23");  the  direc 
tions  respecting  the  Sal  batical  year  (xxv.  18-'J'J), 


"  scourged,"  xix.  20  ;  n^SH,  "  free,"  ibid.  ; 
nibs,  "  print  marks,"Txix"  28  ;  N'pn,  "  vomit," 
in  the  metaphorical  sense,  xviii.  25,  28,  xx.  22  ; 
rbl]},  "  uncircumcised,"  as  applied  to  fruit-trees, 
xix.  23  ;  and  ITI^D,  "  born,"  xviii.  9,  11  ;  as  well 
as  the  Egyptian  word  (for  such  it  probably  is) 
TJOySJ',  "  garment  of  divers  sorts,"  which,  how 
ever,  does  occur  once  beside  in  Deut.  xxii.  11. 

According  to  Bunsen,  chap.  xix.  is  a  genuine  part 
of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  given  however  in  its 
ori<"inal  form  not  on  Sinai,  but  on  the  east  side 
of  the  Jordan  ;  whilst  the  general  arrangement  of 
the  Mosaic  laws  may  perhaps  be  as  late  as  the  time 
of  the  Judges.  He  regards  it  as  a  very  ancient 
document,  based  on  the  Two  Tables,  of  which,  and 
especially  of  the  first,  it  is  in  fact  an  extension, 
and  consisting  of  two  decalogues  and  one  pentad 
of  laws.  Certain  expressions  in  it  he  considers 
imply  that  the  people  were  already  settled  in  the 
land  (ver.  9,  10,  13,  15),  while  on  the  other  hand 
ver.  23  supposes  a  future  occupation  of  the  lana. 
Hence  he  concludes  that  the  revision  of  this  docu 
ment  by  the  transcribers  was  incomplete:  whereas 
all  the  passives  may  fairly  be  interpreted  as 
looking  forward  to  a  future  settlement  in  Canaan. 


LIBANUS 

Tee  great  simplicity  and  lofty  moral  character  of 
ihis  section  compel  us,  says  Bunsen,  to  refer  it  at 
least  to  the  earlier  time  of  the  Judges,  if  not  to  that 
of  Joshua  himself. 

We  must  not  quit  this  book  without  a  word  on 
what  may  be  called  its  spiritual  meaning.  That 
so  elaborate  a  ritual  looked  beyond  itself  we  cannot 
doubt.  It  was  a  prophecy  of  things  to  come ;  a 
shadow  whin-oof  the  substance  was  Christ  and  His 
kingdom.  We  may  not  always  be  able  to  say  what 
tiie  exact  relation  is  between  the  type  and  the 
antitype.  Of  many  things  we  may  be  sure  that 
they  belonged  only  to  the  nation  to  whom  they 
were  given,  containing  no  prophetic  significance, 
but  serving  as  witnesses  and  signs  to  them  of  God's 
covenant  of  grace.  We  may  hesitate  to  pronounce 
with  Jerome  that  •'  every  sacrifice,  nay  almost 
every  syllable — the  garments  of  Aaron  and  the 
whole  Levitical  system — breathe  of  heavenly  mys 
teries."  d  But  we  cannot  read  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  not  acknowledge  that  the  Levitical 
p'riests  "  served  the  pattern  and  type  of  heavenly 
things  " — that  the  sacrifices  of  the  Law  pointed  to 
and  found  their  interpretation  in  the  Lamb  of  God 
— that  the  ordinances  of  outward  purification  signi 
fied  the  true  inner  cleansing  of  the  heart  and  con 
science  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God. 
One  idea  moreover  penetrates  the  whole  of  this 
vast  and  burdensome  ceremonial,  and  gives  it  a 
real  glory  even  apart  from  any  prophetic  signifi 
cance.  Holiness  is  its  end.  Holiness  is  its  character. 
The  tabernacle  is  holy — the  vessels  are  holy — the 
offerings*  are  most  holy  unto  Jehovah — the  gar 
ments  of  the  priests  are  holy.'  All  who  approach 
Him  whose  name  is  "  Holy,"  whether  priestss  who 
minister  unto  Him,  or  people  who  worship  Him, 
must  themselves  be  holy.h  It  would  seem  as  if, 
amid  the  camp  and  dwellings  of  Israel,  was  ever 
to  be  heard  an  echo  of  that  solemn  strain  which 
fills  the  courts  above,  where  the  seraphim  cry  one 
unto  another,  Holy,  Holy,  Holy.' 

Other  questions  connected  with  this  book,  such 
as  its  authorship,  its  probable  age  in  its  present 
foitn,  and  the  relation  of  the  laws  contained  in  it 
to  those,  either  supplementary  or  apparently  con 
tradictory,  found  in  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch, 
will  best  be  discussed  in  another  article,  where  op 
portunity  will  be  given  for  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  Mosaic  legislation  as  a  whole.  [PENTA 
TEUCH.]  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

LIB'ANUS  (6  A/flaws),  the  Greek  form  of  the 
name  LEBANON  ( 1  Esd.  iv.  48;  v.  55 ;  2  Esd.  xv.  20 ; 
Jud.  i.  7;  Ecclus.  xxiv.  13;  1.  12).  ANTI-LIBANUS 
('fivri\t(la.vos)  occurs  only  in  Jud.  i.  7.  [G.] 

LIBERTINES  (Aifcp-nvoi :  Libertini).  This 
word  occurs  once  only  in  the  N.  T.  In  Acts  vi.  9, 
we  find  the  opponents  of  Stephen's  preaching  d< 
scribed  as  lives  rcicv  £K  rrjs  ffvvayoiyris  rrjs  \eyo- 
Hfvrjs  Aifieprivcav,  Kal  KvpTji/aitav  Kal  'AA.efaj'- 
8f>tW  Kal  riav  airb  KiXi/cms  Kal  'Affias.  The 
question  is,  who  were  these  "  Libertines,"  and  in 
what  relation  did  they  stand  to  the  others  who  are 

"  In  promptu  est  Leviticus  liber  in  quo  singula 
^acriflcia,  immo  singulae  pene  syllabae  et  vestes 
Aaron  ct  totus  ordo  Leviticus  spirant  caelestia  sacra- 
menta"  (llieron.  JEp.  ad  Paulin.). 

•  ii.  3,  10;  vi.   17,  25,  29;  vii.  1,  6;  x.  12,  17; 


LIBEHTINES 


115 


mentioned  with  them  ?  The  structure  of  th«  passage 
leaves  it  doubtful  how  many  synagogues  are  implied 
in  it.  Some  (Calvin,  Beza,  Bengel)  have  taken  it 
as  if  there  were  but  one  synagogue,  including  men 
from  all  the  different  cities  that  are  named.  Winei 
(N.  T.  Gramm.  p.  179),  on  grammatical  grounds, 
takes  the  repetition  of  the  article  as  indicating  a 
fresh  group,  and  finds  accordingly  two  synagogues, 
one  including  Libertines,  Cyrenians,  Alexandrians; 
the  other  those  of  Cilicia  and  Asia.  Meyer  (ad 
loc.)  thinks  it  unlikely  that  out  of  the  480  syna 
gogues  at  Jerusalem  (the  number  given  by  Rabbinic 
writers,  Megill.  §73,  4;  Kctub.  t.  105,  1),  there 
should  have  been  one,  or  even  two  only,  for  natives 
of  cities  and  districts  in  which  the  Jewish  popu 
lation  was  so  numerous,*  and  on  that  ground  assigns 
a  separate  synagogue  to  each  of  the  proper  names. 

Of  the  name  itself  there  have  been  several  expla 
nations.  (1.)  The  other  name  being  local,  this  also  has 
been  referred  to  a  town  of  Libertum  in  the  pro 
consular  province  of  Africa.  This,  it  is  said,  would 
explain  the  close  juxta-position  with  Gyrene.  Suidas 
recognises  Ajj8epT?j/oi  as  opo/xa  tOvovs,  and  in  the 
Council  of  Carthage  in  411  (Mansi.  vol.  iv.  p.  2t>5- 
274,  quoted  in  Wiltsch,  Handbuch  dcr  Kirchlich. 
Geogr.  §96),  we  find  an  Episcopus  Libertinensis 
(Simon.  Onomast.  N.  T.  p.  99 ;  and  Gerdes.  de 
Synag.  Libert.  Groning.  1736,  in  Winer,  Rwb.*). 
Against  this  hypothesis  it  has  been  urged,  (1)  that 
the  existence  of  a  town  Libertum,  in  the  first  cen 
tury,  is  not  established ;  and  (2)  that  if  it  existed, 
it  can  hardly  have  been  important  enough  either  to 
have  a  synagogue  at  Jerusalem  for  the  Jews  be 
longing  to  it,  or  to  take  precedence  of  Cyrene  and 
Alexandria  in  a  synagogue  common  to  the  three.b 

(2.)  Conjectural  readings  have  been  proposed. 
Aij8o<TT Ivaav  (Oecumen.,  Beza,Clericus,  Valckenaer) 
\LJAvtav  TU>V  Kara  Kvp'ftvijy  (Schultness,  de  Char. 
Sp.  S.  p.  162,  in  Meyer,  ad  loc.}.  The  difficulty 
is  thus  removed  ;  but  every  rule  of  textual  criticism 
is  against  the  reception  of  a  reading  unsupported  by 
a  single  MS.  or  version. 

(3.)  Taking  the  word  in  its  received  meaning  as 
=  freedmen,  Lightfoot  finds  in  it  a  description  of 
natives  of  Palestine,  who  having  fallen  into  slavery, 
had  been  manumitted  by  Jewish  masters  (Exc.  on 
Acts  vi.  9).  In  this  case,  however,  it,  is  hardly 
likely  that  a  body  of  men  so  circumstanced  would 
have  received  a  Roman  nan,«. 

(4.)  Grotius  and  Vitringa  explain  the  word  as 
describing  Italian  freedmen  who  had  become  con 
verts  to  Judaism.  In  this  case,  however,  the  word 
"  proselytes"  would  most  probably  have  been  used  ; 
and  it  is  at  least  unlikely  that  a  body  of  converts 
would  have  had  a  synagogue  to  themselves,  or  that 
proselytes  from  Italy  would  have  been  united  with 
Jews  from  Cyrene  and  Alexandria. 

(5.)  The  earliest  explanation  of  the  word  (Chry- 
sost.)  is  also  that  which  has  been  adopted  by  the 
most  recent  authorities  (Winer,  Rwb.  s.  v. ;  Meyer, 
Comm.  ad  foe.).  The  Libertini  are  Jews  who, 
having  been  taken  prisoners  by  Pompey  and  other 
Roman  generals  in  the  Syrian  wars,  had  been  re- 


riv.  13. 


'  xvi.  4. 


*  xxi.  6-8,  15. 


11  vi.  18,  27  ;  vii.  21  ;  x.  3,  10  ;  xi.  43,  45  ;  xv.  31 
'xviii.  21)  ;  xix.  2  ;  xx.  7,  20. 


1  In  chaps,  xviii.-xxv.  observe  the  phrase,  "  J  am  I  mentioned 


Jehovah,"  "  I  am  Jehovah  your  God."  Latter  part 
of  xxv.  and  xxvi.  somewhat  changed,  but  recurring 
in  xxvi.  The  reason  given  for  this  holiness,  "  I  am 
holy,"  xi.  44,  &c.,  xix.  2,  xx.  7,  26. 

*  In  Cyrene  one-fourth,  in  Alexandria  two-fifths  of 
the  whole  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2,  xiv.  10,  §1,  xix.  5,  §2  ; 
B.J.  ii.  13,  §7  ;  c.  Ap.  2,  §4). 

b  Wiltsch  gives  no  information  beyoua  the  fact  Just 


I  2 


I1G 


LIUNAU 


lured  to  slavery,  and  h;id  afterwards  been  enianci- 
i«t  3(1.  and  relumed,  j>ei  manently  or  for  a  time,  to 
Jhe  country  of  their  fathers.  Of  the  existence  of  a 
large  body  of  Jews  in  this  position  at  Rome  we 
have  abundant  evidence.  Under  Tiberius,  the  Se- 
Katus-Consultum  for  the  suppression  of  Egyptian 
and  Jewish  mysteries  led  to  the  banishment  of 
4000  "  libertini  generis "  to  Sardinia,  under  the 
pretence  of  military  or  police  duty,  but  really  in 
the  hope  that  the  malaria  of  the  island  might  be 
fatal  to  them.  Others  were  to  leave  Italy  unless 
they  abandoned  their  religion  (Tacit.  Annal.  ii.  85 ; 
comp.  Suet.  Tiber,  c.  36).  Josephus  (Ant.  xviii. 
3,  §5),  narrating  the  same  feet,  speaks  of  the  4000 
who  were  sent  to  Sardinia  as  Jews,  and  thus  iden 
tifies  them  with  the  "  libertinum  genus  "  of  Tacitus. 
Philo  (Legat.  ad  Caium,  p.  1014,  C.)  in  like 
manner  says,  that  the  greater  part  of  the  Jews  of 
Home  were  in  the  position  of  freedmen  (o7re\ei»- 
OfpeaOevrei),  and  had  been  allowed  by  Augustus 
to  settle  in  the  Trans-Tiberine  part  of  the  city,  and 
ta  follow  their  own  religious  customs  unmolested 
(comp.  Horace,  Sat.  i.  4,  143,  i.  9,  70).  The  ex 
pulsion  from  Rome  took  place  A.u.  19  ;  and  it  is 
<m  ingenious  conjecture  of  Mr.  Humphrey's  (Comm. 
on  Acts,  ad  loc.)  that  those  who  were  thus  banished 
from  Italy  may  have  found  their  way  to  Jerusalem, 
and  that,  as  having  suffered  for  the  sake  of  their 
religion,  they  were  likely  to  be  foremost  in  the  oppo 
sition  to  a  teacher  like  Stephen,  whom  they  looked 
on  as  impugning  the  sacredness  of  all  that  they 
most  revered.  [E.  H.  P.] 

LIB'NAH  (nia*?  :  Af/SrS,  also  Ae/tw,  Arf.u^a, 

\rifj.va,  'Stvva;  Alex.  Ae^/uva,  Ao/Be^a:  Libna, 
Labana,  Lebna,  Lobna),  a  city  which  lay  in  the 
south-west  part  of  the  Holy  Land.  It  was  taken 
by  Joshua  immediately  after  the  rout  of  Beth-horon. 
That  eventful  day  was  ended  by  the  capture  and  de 
struction  of  MAKKEDAH  (Josh.  x.  28)  ;  and  then  the 
host — "  Joshua,  and  all  Israel  with  him  " — moved 
on  to  Libnah,  which  was  also  totally  destroyed,  its 
king  and  all  its  inhabitants  (Josh.  x.  29,  30,  32, 
39,  xii.  15).  The  next  place  taken  was  Lachish. 

Libnah  belonged  to  the  district  of  the  Shefelah, 
the  maritime  lowland  of  Judah,  among  the  cities  of 
which  district  it  is  enumerated  (Josh.  xv.  42),  not 
in  close  connexion  with  either  Makkedah  or  Lachish, 
but  in  an  independent  group  of  nine  towns,  among 
which  are  Keilah,  Mareshah,  and  Nezib."  Libnah 
was  appropriated  with  its  "  suburbs"  to  the  priests 
(Josh.  xxi.  13;  1  Chr.  vi.  57).  In  the  reign  of 
Jehoram  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat  it  "  revolted  "  from 
Judah  at  the  same  time  with  Edom  (2  K.  viii.  22  ; 
2  Chr.  xxi.  10) ;  but,  beyond  the  fact  of  their  simul 
taneous  occurrence,  there  is  no  apparent  connexion 
between  the  two  events.  On  completing  or  relin 
quishing  the  siege  of  Lachish — which  of  the  two 
is  not  quite  certain  —  Sennacherib  laid  siege  to 
Libnah  (2  K.  xix.  8;  Is.  xxxvii.  8).  While  there 
he  was  joined  by  Rabshakeh  and  the  part  of  the 
army  which  had  visited  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xix.  8 ;  Is. 
xxxvii.  8),  and  received  the  intelligence  of  Tirhakah's 
Spproach  ;  and  it  would  appear  that  at  Libnah  the 
.lestruction  of  the  Assyrian  army  took  place,  though 

•  The  sites  of  these  have  all  been  discovered,  not  in  the 
lowland,  as  they  are  specified,  but  In  the  mountains  Imme 
diately  to  the  sou  tli  and  cost  of  Beit-jibrin. 

>>  The  account  of  Berosus,  quoted  by  Joseplms  (Ant.  x. 
,  {5),  la  that  the  destruction  took  place  when  Sonnacberib 
on-1,  reached  Jerusalem,  after  his  Egyptian  expedition,  on 
UiC  Urst  flight  of  the  siege.  His  words  are,  'Yn- 


U13NAR 

the  statements  of  Herodotus  (ii  141)  and  of  Jo 
sephus  (Ant.  x.  1,  §4)  place  it  at  Pelusium.k  (See 
Rawlinson,  Herod,  i.  480.) 

It  was  the  native  place  of  Hamntal,  or  Hamital, 
the  queen  of  Josiah,  and  mother  of  Jehoahaz  (2  K. 
xxiii.  31)  and  Zedekiah  (xxiv.  18;  Jer.  lii.  1).  It 
is  in  this  connexion  that  its  name  appears  for  the 
last  time  in  the  Bible. 

Libnah  is  described  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome  in 
the  Onomasticon  (s.  v.  \4tva  and  "  Lebna")  merely 
as  a  village  of  the  district  of  Eleutheropolis.  Its 
site  has  hitherto  escaped  not  only  discovery,  but, 
until  lately,  even  conjecture.  Professor  Stanley 
(S.  $  P.  207  note,  258  note),  on  the  ground  of  the 
accordance  of  the  name  Libnah  (white)  with  the 
"  Blanchegarde  "  of  the  Crusaders,  and  of  both  with 
the  appearance  of  the  place,  would  locate  it  at 
Tell  es-Safieh,  "  a  white-faced  hill  .  .  .  which  forms 
a  conspicuous  object  in  the  eastern  part  of  the 
plain,"  and  is  situated  5  miles  N.W.  of  Beit- 
jibrin.  But  Tell  es-Safieh  has  claims  to  be  iden 
tified  with  GATH,  which  are  considered  under 
that  head  in  this  work.  Van  de  Velde  places  it 
with  confidence  at  Ardk  el-Menshlyeh,  a  hill  about 
4  miles  W.  of  Boit-jibrin,  on  the  ground  of  its  being 
"  the  only  site  between  Sumeil  (Makkedah)  and 
Urn  Lakhis  (Lachish)  shewing  an  ancient  fortified 
position  "  (Memoir,  330  ;  in  his  Syria  and  Palestine 
it  is  not  named).  But  as  neither  Um  Lakhis  nor 
Sumeil,  especially  the  latter,  are  identified  with 
certainty,  the  conjecture  must  be  left  for  further 
exploration.  One  thing  must  not  be  overlooked, 
that  although  Libnah  is  in  the  lists  of  Josh.  xv. 
specified  as  being  in  the  lowland,  yet  3  of  the 
8  towns  which  form  its  group  have  been  actually 
identified  as  situated  among  the  mountains  to  the 
immediate  S.  and  E.  of  Beit-jibrin. — The  name  is 
also  found  in  SmiiOR-LiBNATH.  [G.] 

LIB'NAH  (rm^> ;  Sam.  ,1313^  ;  and  so  the 

LXX.  Aeyuoira;  Alex.  Ac/Suva:  Lebna),  one  of  the 
stations  at  which  the  Israelites  encamped,  on  their 
journey  between  the  wilderness  of  Sinai  and  Kadesh. 
It  was  the  fifth  in  the  series,  and  lay  between 
Rimmon-parez  and  Rissah  (Num.  xxxiii.  20,  21). 
If  el-ffudherah  be  Hazeroth,  then  Libnah  would  be 
situated  somewhere  on  the  western  border  of  the 
Aelanitic  arm  of  the  Red  Sea.  But  no  trace  of  the 
name  has  yet  been  discovered ;  and  the  only  con 
jecture  which  appears  to  have  been  made  concerning 
it  is  that  it  was  identical  with  Laban,  mentioned  in 
Deut.  i.  1.  The  word  in  Hebrew  signifies  "  white," 
and  in  that  case  may  point  either  to  the  colour  of 
the  spot  or  to  the  presence  of  white  poplar  (Stanley, 
S.  $  P.  App.  §77).  Count,  Bertou  in  his  recent 
Etude,  le  Mont  Hor,  &c.  1860,  endeavours  to  iden 
tify  Libnah  with  the  city  of  Judah  noticed  in  the 
foregoing  article.  But  there  is  little  in  his  argu 
ments  to  support  this  theory,  while  the  position 
assigned  to  Libnah  of  Judah — in  the  Shefelah  or 
maritime  district,  not  amongst  the  towns  of  "  the 
South,"  which  latter  form  a  distinct  division  of  the 
territory  of  the  tribe,  in  proximity  to  Edom — seems 
of  itself  to  be  fatal  to  it. 

The  reading  of  the  Samaritan  Codex  and  Version 

eis   TO  'lepoo-oAv/ua Kara    rijv    irpta-rriv   Trjf 

TT-oAtop/ci'a?  VVKTO.  &ia<f>9tipovrcn,  &c.  Professor  Stanley 
on  the  other  band,  Inclines  to  agree  with  the  Jewish  tnv 
dltlon  which  places  the  event  tn  the  pass  of  Bethhoron, 
and  therefore  on  the  road  between  Liboah  <uul  Jerusalem 
(S.  Jr  1'.  207  note}. 


LIBNI 

,  is  supported  by  the  LXX.,  but  not  apparently 
by  any  other  authority.  The  Targum  Pseudojonathan 
.in  the  passage,  plays  with  the  name,  according  to  the 
custom  of  the  later  Jewish  writings  :  "  Libnah,  a  place; 
the  boundary  of  which  is  a  building  of  brickwork," 
as  if  the  name  were  i"l32?,  Lebenah,  a  brick.  [G.] 

LIB'NI  033?  :  Ao&tvi  :  Lobni,  and  once,  Num. 
iii.  18,  Lebni).  1.  The  eldest  son  of  Gershom,  the 
son  of  Levi  (Ex.  vi.  17  ;  Num.  iii.  18  ;  1  Chr.  vi. 
17,  20),  and  ancestor  of  the  family  of  the  LIBNITES. 

2.  The  son  of  Mahli,  or  Mahali,  son  of  Merari 
(1  Chr.  vi.  29),  as  the  Text  at  present  stands.  It 
is  probable,  however,  that  he  is  the  same  with  the 
preceding,  and  that  something  has  been  omitted 
(comp.  ver.  29  with  20,  42).  [MAHLI,  1.] 

LIBNITES,  THE  ('n^n:  dAofcvt:  Lobni, 
Lcbnitica,  sc.  familia),  the  descendants  of  Libni, 
eldest  son  of  Gershom,  who  formed  one  of  me  ,ji«a~ 
branches  of  the  great  Levitical  family  of  Gershouites 
(Num.  iii.  21,  xxvi.  58). 

LIB'YA  (AijSihj,  AijSuct)  occurs  only  in  Acts 
li.  10,  in  the  periphrasis  "  the  parts  of  Libya  about 
Cyrene"  (TCI  /ue'pij  TT}?  AtjSurjs  TTJS  Kara  Kvp^j/r/j/), 
which  obviously  means  the  Cyrenaica.  Similar 
expressions  are  used  by  Dion  Cassius  (Ai^vrj  fi  irepl 
Kup7)»"?</,  Hii.  12)  and  Josephus  (fi  trpbs  Kvp-fiVTiv 
AiJ3vi),  Ant.  xvi.  6,  §1),  as  noticed  in  the  article 
CYRENE.  The  name  Libya  is  applied  by  the  Greek 
and  Roman  writers  to  the  African  continent,  gene 
rally  however  excluding  Egypt.  The  consideration 
of  this  and  its  more  restricted  uses  has  no  place  in 
this  work.  The  Hebrews,  whose  geography  deals 
with  nations  rather  than  countries,  and,  in  accord 
ance  with  the  genius  of  Shemites,  never  generalizes, 
had  no  names  for  continents  or  other  large  tracts 
comprising  several  countries  ethnologically  or  other 
wise  distinct:  the  single  mention  is  therefore  of 
Greek  origin.  Some  account  of  the  Lubim,  or 
primitive  Libyans,  as  well  as  of  the  Jews  in  the 
Cyrenaica,  is  given  in  other  articles.  [LUBIM; 

"JYRENE.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

LU.CE  (D33,  D»33.  D33  ;  chinnim,  chinndm  : 
ffKvityes,  ffKviires  :  sciniphes,  cinifes).  This  word 
occurs  in  the  A.  V.  only  in  Ex.  viii.  16,  17,  18, 
and  in  Ps.  cv.  31  ;  both  of  which  passages  have 
reference  to  the  third  great  plague  of  Egypt.  In 
Exodus  the  miracle  is  recorded,  while  in  the  Psalm 
grateful  remembrance  of  it  is  made.  The  Hebrew 
word,"  —  which,  with  some  slight  variation,  occurs 
only  in  Ex.  viii.  16,  17,  18,  andinPs.  cv.  31—  has 
given  occasion  to  whole  pages  of  discussion  ;  some 
commentators,  amongst  whom  may  be  cited  Mi- 
chaelis  (Suppl.  s.  v.),  Oedmann  (in  Vermisch. 
Samm.  i.  vi.  p.  80),  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.  in  Ex.  viii. 
12),  Harenberg  (Obs.  Grit,  de  D'33,  in  Miscell. 

•  Considerable  doubt  has  been  entertained  by  some 
scholars  as  to  the  origin  of  the  word.      See  the  re- 
vrarks  of  Gesenius  and  Fiirst. 

"  J-13.     But  see  Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.  }3. 
«  De  Sabb.  cap.  14,  fol.  107,  6. 

*  aKvfy.  ftaov  xkiapov  re  xa.1  TerpaTrrfpov    and 
Ki/if  (Kvi'i//).  ^umv  TTTrjvov,  OJUOIOP  Kiaviairi. 

(Hesych.  Lex.  s.  v  ) 
Kvl\l/,  £<ati(f>i.ovt  ri  yeviicri  TOV  Kviirbf 

ei/o,  «ai  Stavfyia  ru>v 


LICE 


117 


Lips.  Nov.  vol.  ii.  p.  lv.  p.  617;,  Dr.  Geddcs  (Crit. 
Rem.  Ex.  viii.  17),  i)r.  Harris  (Diet.  Nat.  H.  oj 
Bible),  to  which  is  to  be  added  the  authority 
of  Philo  (De  Vit.  Mos.  ii.  97,  ed.  Mangcy)  and 
Origen  (Horn.  Tert.  in  Exod.),  and  indeed  mo 
dern  writers  generally — suppose  that  gnats  are  the 
animals  intended  by  the  original  word ;  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  Jewish  Rabbis,  Josephus 
(Ant.  ii.  14,  §3),  Bochart  (Hieroz.  iii.  457,  ed, 
Roseum.),  Montanns,  Munster  (Crit.  Sac.  in  Ex. 
viii.  12),  Bryant  (Plagues  of  Egypt,  p.  56),  and 
Dr.  Adam  Clarke  are  in  favour  of  the  translation 
of  the  A.  V.  The  old  versions,  the  Chaldee  para 
phrase,  the  Targums  of  Jonathan  and  Onkelos,  the 
Syriac,  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  the  Arabic,  arc 
claimed  by  Bochart  as  supporting  the  opinion  that 
lice  are  here  intended.  Another  writer  believes 
he  can  identify  the  chinnim  with  some  worm-like 
creatures  (perhaps  some  kind  of  Scolopendridae) 
called  tarrentes,  mentioned  in  Vinisauf's  account 
of  the  expedition  of  Richard  I.  into  the  Holy  Land, 
and  which  by  their  bites  during  the  night-time  occa 
sioned  extreme  pain  (Harmer's  Observat.  Clarke's 
ed.  iii.  549).  With  regard  to  this  last  theory 
it  may  fairly  be  said  that,  as  it  has  not  a  word  of 
proof  or  authority  to  support  it,  it  may  at  once 
be  rejected  as  fanciful.  Those  who  believe  that 
the  plague  was  one  of  gnats  or  mosquitoes  appear 
to  ground  their  opinion  solely  on  the  authority 
of  the  LXX.,  or  rather  on  the  interpretation  of 
the  Greek  word  ffnvityes,  as  given  by  Philo  (De 
Vit.  Mos.  ii.  97),  and  Origen  (Horn.  III.  in 
Exodum).  The  advocates  of  the  other  theory,  that 
lice  are  the  animals  meant  by  chinnim,  and  not 
gnats,  base  their  arguments  upon  these  facts: — (1) 
because  the  chinnim  sprang  from  the  dust,  whereas 
gnats  come  from  the  waters ;  (2)  because  gnats, 
though  they  may  greatly  irritate  men  and  beasts, 
cannot  properly  be  said  to  be  "  in  "  them ;  (3)  be 
cause  their  name  is  derived  from  a  root  b  which 
signifies  "  to  establish,"  or  "  to  fix,"  which  cannot 
be  said  of  gnats ;  (4)  because  if  gnats  are  in 
tended,  then  the  fourth  plngue  of  flies  would  be 
unduly  anticipated  ;  (5)  because  the  Talmudists  use 
the  word  chinnah  in  the  singular  number  to  mean  a 
louse;  as  it  is  said  in  the  Treatise  on  the  Sabbath 
"  As  is  the  man  who  slays  a  camel  on  the  Sabbath, 
so  is  he  who  slays  a  louse  on  the  Sabbath."  c 

Let  us  examine  these  arguments  as  briefly  as  pos 
sible.  First,  the  LXX.  has  been  quoted  as  a  direct 
proof  that  chinnim  means  gnats ;  and  certainly  in 
such  a  matter  as  the  one  before  us  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  exaggerate  the  authority  of  the  trans 
lators,  who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  and  therefore  must  be 
considered  good  authorities  on  this  subject.  But  is 
it  quite  clear  that  the  Greek  word  they  made  use 
of  has  so  limited  a  signification  ?  Does  the  Greek 

vty  or  Kvty  mean  a  gnat1A     Let   the  reader, 


(TTCvii//,  £toov  x^iapov  Tf  KOU  Terpawrepov.  $mov  Ktavia 

wiuJcs. 
Geov  U.IK.PQV  fuAo^ayov.  (Phavorili   i.  c  1 


Phryn.  (Lob.)  400.  Prut.  ii.  636,  D. 
Theophrastus  (Hist.  Plant,  ii.  cap.  ult.)  speaks  oi 
o-KviVes,  and  calls  them  worms.  Dioscorides  (iii. 
de  Ulmo)  speaks  of  the  well-known  viscid  secretion 
on  the  leaves  of  plants  and  trees,  and  says  that  when 
this  moisture  is  dried  up,  animalcules  like  gnats  appear 
(flijpiSia  KiaviainaeiSri).  In  another  place  (v.  181)  he 
calls  them  oxaiAj)<c«.  No  doubt  plant-lice  are  meant. 
Ae'tius  (ii.  9)  speaks  of  Jtyf^ss,  by  which  word  he 
clearly  means  plant-lice,  or  aphides.  Aristophanes 
associates  the  (cviVes  (aphides)  with  il/ijw  (gall-flies), 
and  speaks  of  them  as  injuring  the  young  shoots  oi 
the  vines  (Aves,  427).  Aristotle  (Hist.  An.  viii.  3. 
§9)  speaks  of  a  bird,  woodpecker,  which  he  t*  uu 


118 


LICE 


however,  read  carefully  the  passages  quoted  in  the 
foot-notes,  and  he  will  see  at  once  that  at  any  rate 
there  is  very  considerable  doubt  whether  any  one 
particular  animal  is  denoted  by  the  Greek  word. 
la  the  few  passages  where  it  occurs  in  Greek 
authors  the  word  seems  to  point  in  some  instances 
clearly  enough  to  the  well-known  pests  of  field  and 
garden,  the  plant-lice  or  aphides.  By  the  fficvty  Iv 
Xupa,  the  proverb  referred  to  in  the  note,  is  very 
likely  meant  one  of  those  small  active  jumping 
insects,  common  under  leaves  and  under  the  bark 
of  trees,  known  to  entomologists  by  the  name  of 
spring-tails  (Podaridae).  The  Greek  lexicographers, 
having  the  derivation  of  the  word  in  view,  gene 
rally  define  it  to  be  some  small  worm-like  creature 
that  eats  away  wood  ;  if  they  used  the  term  winged, 
the  winged  aphis  is  most  likely  intended,  and 
perhaps  vermicuhis  may  sometimes  refer  to  the 
wingless  individual.  Because,  however,  the  lexicons 
occasionally  say  that  the  ffxvty  is  like  a  gnat  (the 
"  green  and  four-winged  insect"  of  Hesychius), 
many  commentators  have  come  to  the  hasty 
conclusion  that  some  species  of  gnat  is  denoted  by 
the  Greek  term ;  but  resemblance  by  no  means 
constitutes  identity,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  this 
insect,  the  aphis,  even  though  it  be  winged,  is  far 
more  closely  allied  to  the  wingless  louse  (pediculus) 
than  it  is  to  the  gnat,  or  to  any  species  of  the  fa 
mily  Culicidae ;  for  the  term  lice,  as  applied  to  the 
various  kinds  of  aphides  (Phytophthiria,  as  is  their 
appropriate  scientific  name),  is  by  no  means  merely 
one  of  analogy.  The  wingless  aphis  is  in  appear 
ance  somewhat  similar  to  the  pediculus  ;  and  indeed 
n  great  authority,  Burmeister,  arranges  the  Ano- 
plura,  the  order  to  which  the  pediculus  belongs, 
with  the  Rhyncota,  which  contains  the  sub-order 
Homoptcra,  to  which  the  aphides  belong.  Hence, 
by  an  appropriate  transfer,  the  same  word  which  in 
Arabic  means  pediculus  is  applied  in  one  of  its 
significations  to  the  "  thistle  black  with  plant-lice." 
Every  one  who  has  observed  the  thistles  of  this 
country  black  with  the  peculiar  species  that  infests 
them  can  see  the  force  of  the  meaning  assigned  to 
it  in  the  Arabic  language.' 

Again,  almost  all  the  passages  where  the  Greek 
word  occurs  speak  of  the  animal,  be  it  what  it 
may,  as  being  injurious  to  plants  or  trees ;  it  can 
not  therefore  be  applied  in  a  restricted  sense  to  any 
gnat  (culex  or  simuliuni),  for  the  Culicidae  are 
eminently  blood-suckers,  not  vegetable-feeders.* 

Oedman  (Vermisch.  Sammlung.  i.  ch.  vi.)  is 
of  opinion  that  the  species  of  mosquito  denoted  by 
the  chinnim  is  probably  some  minute  kind  allied 
to  the  Culex  reptans,  s.  pulicaris  of  Linnaeus. 
That  such  an  insect  might  have  been  the  instru 
ment  God  made  use  of  in  the  third  plague  with 


Gnats  are  for  the  most  part  taken  on  the 
wing ;  but  the  man-is  here  alluded  to  are  doubtless 
the  various  kinds  of  ants,  larvae,  aphides,  lepismidae, 
eoccinae,  oniscidae,  &c.  Sec.,  which  are  found  on  the 
leaves  and  under  the  bark  of  trees. 

•   V^y.      "  Nigricans  et  quasi  pediculis  obsitus 

apparuit  carduus"  (Gol.  Arab.  Lex.  s.  v.). 

'  The  mosquito  and  gnat  belong  to  the  family  of 
Culicidae.  The  Simttlium,  to  which  genus  the  Oulcr 
reptans  (Lin.)  belongs,  is  comprised  under  the  family 
Tipulidae.  This  is  a  northern  species,  and  probably 
not  found  in  Kgypt.  The  Simttlia,  or  sand-flies,  are 
most  inveterate  blood-suckers,  whose  bites  often  give 
rise  to  very  painful  swellings. 


LICE 

which  He  visited  the  Egyptians  is  readily  granted, 
so  far  as  the  irritating  powers  of  the  creature  are 
concerned,  for  the  members  of  the  gcnur>  Simuliwn 
(sand-fly)  are  a  terrible  pest  in  those  localities  where 
they  abound.  But  no  proof  at  all  can  be  brought 
forward  in  support  of  this  theory. 

Bryant,  in  illustrating  the  propriety  of  the 
plague  being  one  of  lice,  has  the  following  very  just 
remarks : — "  The  Egyptians  affected  git-nt  external 
purity,  and  were  very  nice  both  in  their  persons 
and  clothing.  .  .  .  Uncommon  care  was  taken  not 
to  harbour  any  vermin.  They  were  particularly 
solicitous  on  this  head;  thinking  it  would  be  a 
great  profanation  of  the  temple  which  they  entered 
if  any  animalcule  of  this  sort  were  concealed  in 
their  garments."  And  we  learn  from  Herodotus 
that  so  scrupulous  were  the  priests  on  this  point 
that  they  used  to  shave  the  hair  off  their  heads  and 
bodies  every  third  day  for  fear  of  harbouring  any 
louse  while  occupied  in  their  sacred  duties  (Herod, 
ii.  37).  "We  may  hence  see  what  an  abhorrence 
the  Egyptians  showed  towards  this  sort  of  vermin, 
and  that  the  judgments  inflicted  by  the  hand  of 
Moses  were  adapted  to  their  prejudices "  (Bryant's 
Observations,  &c.,  p.  5G). 

The  evidence  of  the  old  versions,  adduced  by 
Bochart  in  support  of  his  opinion,  has  been  called  in 
question  by  Rosenmiiller  and  Geddes,  who  will  not 
allow  that  the  words  used  by  the  Syriac,  theChaldee, 
and  the  Arabic  versions,  as  the  representatives  of  the 
Hebrew  word  chinnim,  can  properly  be  translated 
lice ;  but  the  interpretations  which  they  themselves 
allow  to  these  words  apply  better  to  lice  than  tognats; 
and  it  is  almost  certain  that  the  normal  meaning  of 
the  words  in  all  these  three  versions,  and  indis 
putably  in  the  Arabic,  applies  to  lice.  It  is  readily 
granted  that  some  of  the  arguments  brought  forward 
by  Bochart  (ffieroz.  iii.  457,  ed.  Rosenm.)  and  his 
consentients  are  unsatisfactory.  As  the  plague  was 
certainly  miraculous,  nothing  can  be  deduced  from 
the  assertion  made  that  the  chinnim  sprang  from 
the  dust ;  neither  is  Bochart's  derivation  of  the 
Hebrew  word  accepted  by  scholars  generally.  Much 
force  however  is  contained  in  the  Talmudical  use 
of  the  word  chinnah,  to  express  a  louse,  though 
Gesenius  asserts  that  nothing  can  be  adduced 
thence. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  this  much  appears  cer 
tain,  that  those  commentators  who  assert  that 
chinnim  means  gnats  have  arrived  at  this  conclu 
sion  without  sufficient  authority  ;  they  have  based 
their  arguments  solely  on  the  evidence  of  the  LXX., 
though  it  is  by  no  means  proved  that  the  Greek 
word  used  by  these  translators  has  any  reference  to 
gnats ;f  the  Greek  word,  which  probably  originally 
denoted  any  small  irritating  creature,  being  derived 

Although  Origen  and  Philo  both  understand  by 
the  Greek  tTKvfy  some  minute  winged  insect  that 
stings,  yet  their  testimony  by  no  means  proves  that 
a  similar  use  of  the  term  -was  restricted  to  it  by  the 
LXX.  translators.  It  has  been  shown,  from  the  quo 
tations  given  above,  that  the  Greek  word  has  a  wide 
signification  :  it  is  an  aphis,  a  worm,  a  flea,  or  a 
spring-tail—in  fact  any  small  insect-like  animal  that 
bites;  and  all  therefore  that  should  legitimately  be 
deduced  from  the  words  of  these  two  writers  is  that 
they  applied  in  this  instance  to  some  irritating-  w  mired 
insect  a  term  which,  from  its  derivation,  so  appro 
priately  describes  its  irritating  properties.  Their 
insect  seems  to  refer  to  some  species  of  midge  (Cerato- 
pogoiti. 

•  If  the   LXX.   understood  gnats  by  the  Hebrew 


LIEUTENANTS 


LIGUKE 


119 


from  a  root  which  means  to  bite,  to  gnaw,  was  |  neralogists.b      With   this  supposifion    Hill    (Note* 


used  in  this  general  sense,  and  selected  by  the 
LXX.  translitors  to  express  the  original  word, 
which  has  an  origin  kindred  to  that  of  the  Greek 
word,  but  the  precise  meaning  of  which  they  did 
Hot  know.  They  had  in  view  the  derivation  of  the 
Hebrew  term  chinndh,  from  chdndh,  "to  gnaw," 
and  most  appropriately  rendered  it  by  the  Greek 
word  Kvfy,  from  Kvdia,  "  to  gnaw."  It  appears 
therefore  that  there  is  not  sufficient  authority  for 
leparting  from  the  translation  of  the  A.  V.,  which 
renders  the  Hebrew  word  by  lice;  and  as  it  is  sup 
ported  by  the  evidence  of  many  of  the  old  versions, 
it  is  best  to  rest  contented  with  it.  At  any  rate  the 
point  is  still  open,  and  no  hasty  conclusion  can  be 


adopted  concerning  it. 
LIEUTENANTS 


[W.  H.] 
The  He- 


brew  achashdrapan  was  the  official  title  of  the 
satraps"  or  viceroys  who  governed  the  provinces  of 
the  Persian  empire  ;  it  is  rendered  "  lieutenant  "  in 
Esth.  iii.  12,  viii.  9,  ix.  3  ;  Ezr.  viii.  36,  and 


"prince"  in  Dan.  iii.  2,  vi.  1,  &c. 
LIGN  ALOES.    [ALOES.] 


[W.  L.  B.] 


LIGURE  (DB,  leshem  :  Kiyvpiov  ;  Aid.  dpyt- 

piov  ;  Alex,  vdicivdos  '.  Ugurius).  A  precious  stone 
mentioned  in  Ex.  xxviii.  19,  xxxix.  12,  as  the  first 
in  the  third  row  of  the  high-priest's  breastplate. 
"And  the  third  row,  a  ligure,  an  agate,  and  an 
amethyst."  It  is  impossible  to  say,  with  any  cer 
tainty,  what  stone  is  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  term. 
The  LXX.  version  generally,  the  Vulgate  and  Jo- 
sephus  (B.  J.  v.  5,  §7),  understand  the  lyncurium  or 
ligurium  ;  but  it  is  a  matter  of  considerable  difficulty 
to  identify  the  ligurium  of  the  ancients  with  any 
known  precious  stone.  Dr.  Woodward  and  some  old 
commentators  have  supposed  that  it  was  some  kind 
of  belemnite,  because,  as  these  fossils  contain  bitu 
minous  particles,  they  have  thought  that  they  have 
been  able  to  detect,  upon  heating  or  rubbing  pieces 
of  them,  the  absurd  origin  which  Theophrastus 
{Frag.  ii.  28,  31,  xv.  2,  ed.  Schneider)  and  Pliny 
(H.  N.  xxxvii.  iii.)  ascribe  to  the  lyncurium.  Others 
have  imagined  that  amber  is  denoted  by  this  word  ; 
but  Theophrastus,  in  the  passage  cited  above,  has 
given  a  detailed  description  of  the  stone,  and  clearly 
distinguishes  it  from  electron,  or  amber.  Amber, 
moreover,  is  too  soft  for  engraving  upon  ;  while  the 
lyncurium  was  a  hard  stone,  out  of  which  seals  were 
made.  Another  interpretation  seeks  the  origin  of  the 
word  in  the  country  of  Liguria  (Genoa),  where  the 
stone  was  found,  but  makes  no  attempt  at  identifi 
cation.  Others  again,  without  reason,  suppose  the 
opal  to  be  meant  (Kosenmiill.  Sch.  in  Ex.  xxviii.  1  9). 
Dr.  Watson  (Phil.  Trans,  vol.  li.  p.  394)  identifies 
it  with  the  tourmaline.  Beckmann  (Hist.  Invent,  i. 
87,  Bohn)  believes,  with  Braun,  Epiphanius,  and 
J.  de  Laet,  that  the  description  of  the  lyncurium 
agrees  well  with  the  hyacinth  stone  of  modern  mi- 


on  Theophrastus  on  Stones,  §50,  p.  166)  and  Ro- 
senmiiller  (Mineral,  of  Bible,  p.  36,  Bib.  Cab.) 
agres.  It  must  be  confessed,  however,  that  this 
)pinion  is  far  from  satisfactory.,  for  there  is  the 
iblbwing  difficulty  in  the  identification  of  the  lyn 
curium  with  the  hyacinth.  Theophrastus,  speaking 
of  the  properties  of  the  lyncurium,  says  that  it 
attracts  not  only  light  particles  of  wood,  but  frag 
ments  of  iron  and  brass.  Now  there  is  no  peculiar 
attractive  power  in  the  hyacinth;  nor  is  Beck- 
mann's  explanation  of  this  point  sufficient.  He 
says :  "  If  we  consider  its  (the  lyncurium' 's)  attract- 
ing  of  small  bodies  in  the  same  light  which  our 
hyacinth  has  in  common  with  all  stones  of  the 
glassy  species,  I  cannot  see  anything  to  controvert 
this  opinion,  and  to  induce  us  to  believe  the  lyn 
curium  and  the  tourmaline  to  be  the  same."  But 
surely  the  lyncurium,  whatever  it  be,  had  in  a 
marked  manner  magnetic  properties ;  indeed  the  term 
was  applied  to  the  stone  on  this  very  account,  for  the 
Greek  name  ligurion  appeal's  to  be  derived  froia 
"  to  lick,"  "  to  attract ;"  and  doubtless- 
was  selected  by  the  LXX.  translators  for  this  reason 
to  express  the  Hebrew  word,  which  has  a  similar 
derivation."  More  probable,  though  still  incon 
clusive,  appears  the  opinion  of  those  who  identify 
the  lyncurium  with  the  tourmaline,  or  more  defi 
nitely  with  the  red  variety  known  as  rubellite,  which 
is  a  hard  stone  and  used  as  a  gem,  and  some 
times  sold  for  red  sapphire.  Tourmaline  become?, 
as  is  well  known,  electrically  polar  when  heated. 
Beckmann's  objection,  that  "  had  Theophrastus  been 
acquainted  with  the  tourmaline,  he  would  have 
remarked  that  it  did  not  acquire  its  attractive  t 
power  till  it  was  heated,"  is  answered  by  his  own 
admission  on  the  passage,  quoted  from  the  Ilistoire 
de  ?  Academic  for  1717,  p.  7  (see  Beckmann,  i.  91). 

Tourmaline  is  a  mineral  found  in  many  parts  of 
the  world.  The  Duke  de  Noya  purchased  two  of 
these  stones  in  Holland,  which  are  there  called 
aschentrikker.  Linnaeus,  in  his  preface  to  the  Flora 
Zeylandica,  mentions  the  stone  under  the  name  of 
lapis  electricus  from  Ceylon.  The  natives  call  it 
tournamal  (vid.  Phil.  Trans,  in  loc.  cit.).  Many 
of  the  precious  stones  which  were  in  the  possession 
of  the  Israelites  during  their  wanderings  were  no 
doubt  obtained  from  the  Egyptians,  who  might 
have  procured  from  the  Tyrian  merchants  specimens 
from  even  India  and  Ceylon,  &c.  The  fine  specimen 
of  rubellite  now  in  the  British  Museum  belonged 
formerly  to  the  King  of  Ava. 

The  word  ligure  is  unknown  in  modern  mine 
ralogy.  Phillips  (Mineral.  87)  mentions  ligurite, 
the  fragments  of  which  are  uneven  and  transparent, 
with  a  vitreous  lustre.  It  occurs  in  a  sort  of  talcose 
rock  in  the  banks  of  a  river  in  the  Apennines. 

The  claim  of  rubellite  to  be  the  leshem  of  Scrip 
ture  is  very  uncertain,  but  it  is  perhaps  better  than 
that  of  the  other  minerals  which  writers  have  from 
time  to  time  endeavoured  to  identify  with  it.  [W.  H.J 


term,  why  did  not  these  translators  use  some  well- 
known  Greek  name  for  gnat,  as  Kiavia^i  or  HAITI'S? 

•  The  LXX.  gives  o-arpdm)?,  trrpanjyos,  and  virai 
the  Vulgate  satrapes  and  princeps.  Both  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Greek  words  are  modifications  of  the  same 
Sanscrit  root :  but  philologists  are  not  agreed  as  to 
the  form  or  meaning  of  the  word.  Gesenius  (Thes. 
t>.  74)  adopts  the  opinion  of  Von  Bohlen  that  it  comes 
from  kshatriya-pati,  inclining  "  warrior  of  the  host." 
Pitt  (£tym.  Forsch.  Pref.  p.  68)  suggests  other  de 


rivations  more  in  consonance  with  the  position  of  the 
satraps  as  civil  rather  than  military  rulers. 

b  Busching.  p.  342,  from  Dutens  DCS  Pierres  pr* 
clauses,  p.  61,  says  "the  hyacinth  is  not  found  ir 
the  East."  This  is  incorrect,  for  it  occurs  in  Egypt, 
Ceylon,  and  the  East  Indies  (v.  Mineral,  and  Crystall. 
Orr's  Circle  of  Sciences,  515). 

«    Thes.  8.  v.  DKv.     Fiirst  gays  of  DJJJ"),  cujus  no; 
fuglt  orifio.    Tarjj.  vcrtit,  »"V33p,  h.  e.  Gr.  K 
i  quo  Smiris  (Shamir)  gcnero  r.  Plln.  xxxiv.  4. 


120 


LIKHI 


LIK'HI  (.'npS  :  Aa/ci'/x;  Alex.  AaKti'o:  Led), 
a  ilanassite,  sou  of  Shemida,  the  son  of  Manasseh 
.1  Chr.  vii.  19). 

LILY  (|K«IK>,  sh&shdn,  7\WhV,  shoshannah: 
Kpivov,  Matt!  vi.  28,  29).  The  Hebrew  word  is 
rendered  "rose"  in  the  Chaldee  Targum,  and  by 
Maimonides  and  other  rabbinical  writers,  with  the 
exception  of  Kimchi  and  Ben  Melech,  who  in  1  K.  vii. 
19,  translated  it  by  "  violet."  In  the  Judaeo- 
Spanish  version  of  the  Canticles,  sh&sh&n  and  sho 
shanndh  are  always  translated  by  rosa  ;  but  in 
Hos.  xiv.  5  the  latter  is  rendered  lirio.  But  Kpivov, 
or  "  lily,"  is  the  uniform  rendering  of  the  LXX., 
and  is  in  all  probability  the  true  one,  as  it  is  sup 
ported  by  the  analogy  of  the  Arabic  and  Persian 
siisan,  which  has  the  same  meaning  to  this  day,  and 
by  the  existence  of  the  same  word  in  Syriac  and 
Coptic.  The  Spanish  azufena,  "  a  white  lily,"  is 
merely  a  modification  of  the  Arabic. 

But  although  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  word 
denotes  some  plant  of  the  lily  species,  it  is  by  no 
means  certain  what  individual  of  this  class  it  espe 
cially  designates.  Father  Souciet  (Recueil  de  diss. 
Grit.  1715)  laboured  to  prove  that  the  lily  of 
Scripture  is  the  "  crown-imperial,"  the  Persian 
tiiKid,  the  Kpivov  fiacriXinAv  of  the  Greeks,  and  the 
Fritillaria  imperialis  of  Linnaeus.  So  common  was 
this  plant  in  Persia,  that  it  is  supposed  to  have 
given  its  name  to  Susa,  the  capital  (Athen.  xii.  1  ; 
Bochart,  Phaleg.  ii.  14).  But  there  is  no  proof 
that  it  was  at  any  time  common  in  Palestine,  and 
"  the  lily  "  par  excellence  of  Persia  would  not  of 
necessity  be  "  the  lily"  of  the  Holy  Land.  Dios- 
coridcs  (i.  62)  bears  witness  to  the  beauty  of  the 
'  lilies  of  Syria  and  Pisidia,  from  whicli  the  best  per 
fume  was  made.  He  says  (iii.  106  [116]  )  of  the 
Kpivov  &cuTt\ut6v  that  the  Syrians  call  it  ffcura 
(  =  shushari),  and  the  Africans  d/3i/3Aa/3oj>,  which 
Bochart  renders  in  Hebrew  characters  J3?  S'ON. 
"  white  shoot."  Kiihn,  in  his  note  on  the  passage, 
identifies  the  plant  in  question  with  the  Lilium 
candidum  of  Linnaeus.  It  is  probably  the  same  as 
that  called  in  the  Mishna  "  king's  lily  "  (Kilaim, 
v.  8).  Pliny  (xxi.  5)  defines  Kpivov  as  "  rubens 
lilium  ;"  and  Dioscorides,  in  another  passage,  men 
tions  the  fact  that  there  are  lilies  with  purple 
flowers  ;  but  whether  by  this  he  intended  the 
Lilium  Martagon  or  Chalcedmicum,  Kiihn  leaves 
undecided.  Now  in  the  passage  of  Athenaens  above 
quoted  it  is  said,  SoGow  yctp  tlvcu  rp  'E\\-fivwv 
(puvfj  ri>  Kpivov.  'BiitintheEtymologicumMojjnum 
(s.  v.  2ov<ro)  we  find  ra  70^  \tipia.  inrb  ruv  <t>oi- 
v'iK<or  ffovffa  \tyerat.  As  the  shushan  is  thus 
identified  both  with  Kpivov,  the  red  or  purple  lily, 
and  with  \dptov,  the  white  lily,  it  is  evidently 
impossible  from  the  word  itself  to  ascertain  exactly 
the  kind  of  lily  which  is  referred  to.  If  the  shushan 
or  shoshannah  of  the  0.  T.  and  the  Kpivov  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  be  identical,  which  there 
seems  no  reason  to  doubt,  the  plant  designated  by 
these  terms  must  have  been  a  conspicuous  object  on 
the  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  (Matt.  vi.  28  ; 
Luke  xii.  27)  ;  it  must  have  flourished  in  the  deep 

»  According  to  another  opinion,  the  allusion  in  this 
verse  ie  to  the  fragrance  and  not  the  colour  of  the  Illy, 
anil,  if  BO,  the  passage  is  favourable  to  the  claims  of  the 
I,,  candidum,  which  is  highly  fragrant,  while  the  /,. 
Cbalcedanicum  is  almost  destitute  of  odour.  The  lily  of 
the  N.  T.  may  still  be  the  latter. 

•>  IlKiStraml  (f'lor.  I'aiaest.)  mentions  it  aa  s?rowlnp 
aear  Joppa.  ami  Kltto  (Pky<;.  Hist,  of  ral.  219)  make; 


IJLY 

broad  valleys  of  Palestine  (Cant.  ii.  1^,  amo:ig  thi 
thorny  shrubs  (ib.  ii.  2)  and  pastures  of  the  desert 
(16.  ii.  16,  iv.  5,  vi.  3),  and  must  have  been  re 
markable  for  its  rapid  and  luxuriant  growth  (Hos. 
xiv.  5;  Ecclus.  xxxix.  14).  That  its  flowers  were 
brilliant  in  colour  would  seem  to  be  indicated  in 
Matt.  vi.  28,  where  it  is  compared  with  the  goi-gecus 
robes  of  Solomon  ;  and  that  this  colour  was  scarlet 
or  purple  is  implied  in  Cant.  v.  13.*  There  appears 
to  be  no  species  of  lily  which  so  completely  answeis 
all  these  requirements  as  the  Lilium  Chalcedonicttm, 
or  Scarlet  Martagon,  which  grows  in  profusion  In 
the  Levant.  But  direct  evidence  on  the  point  is 
still  to  be  desired  from  the  observation  of  travellers. 
We  have,  however,  a  letter  from  Dr.  Bowring,  re 
ferred  to  (Gard.  Chron.  ii.  854),  in  which,  under 
the  name  of  LUia  Syriaca,  Lindley  identifies  with 
the  L.  Chalcedonicum  a  flower  which  is  '•  abundant 
in  the  district  of  Galilee  "  in  the  months  of  April 
and  May.  Sprengel  (Ant.  Bot.  Spen.  i.  p.  9) 
identifies  the  Greek  Kpivov  with  the  /..  ULtrtagon. 


Ulimn  Chnlcfd 


With  regard  to  the  other  plants  which  nave  been 
identified  witn  the  shushan,  the  difficulties  are  many 
and  great.  Gesenms  derives  the  word  fix>m  a  root 
signifying  "  to  be  white,"  and  it  has  hence  been 
inferred  that  the  shushan  is  the  white  lily.  But 
it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  the  Lilium  cai*- 
didum  grows  wild  in  Palestine,  though  a  specimen 
was  found  by  Forsk&l  at  Zambak  in  Arabia  Felix. k 
Dr.  Koyle  (Kitto's  Cyclop,  art.  "Shushan")  iden 
tified  the  "lily"  of  the  Canticles  with  the  lotus  of 
Egypt,  in  spite  of  the  many  allusions  to  "  feeding 
among  the  lilies."  The  purple  flowers  of  the  khob, 
or  wild  artichoke,  which  abounds  in  the  plain  north 
of  Tabor  and  in  the  valley  of  Esdraelon,  have  been 
thought  by  some  to  be  the  "  lilies  of  the  field  " 
alluded  to  in  Matt.  vi.  28  (Wilson,  Lands  of  the 
Bible,  ii.  1 10).  A  recent  traveller  mentions  a  plant, 
with  lilac  flowers  like  the  hyacinth,  and  called  by 
the  Arabs  usweih,  which  he  considei-ed  to  be  of  the 

especial  mention  of  the  L.  candidum  growing  in  I'ales' 
tine;  and  in  connexion  with  the  hahltat  given  by  Strand 
it  is  worth  observing  that  the  lily  is  mentioned  (Cant.  Ii. 
1)  with  the  rose  of  Sharon.  Now  let  this  DP  compaiol 
with  Jerome's  Comment,  ad  Is.  xxxiii.  9 :  "  Saron  omnU 
Juxta  Joppen  Lyddamquo  appcllatur  rcgio  io  qua  Inti* 
simi  cumpl  fertilesque  tenduntur."  [W.  HI 


LILY 

species  denominated  lily  in  Scripture  (Bonar,  Desert 
cf  Sinai,  p.  329).  Lynch  enumerates  the  "  lily  " 
as  among  the  plants  seen  by  him  on  the  shores  of 
the  Itead  Sea,  but  gives  no  details  which  could  lead 
to  its  identification  (Exped.  to  Jordan,  p.  286). 
lie  had  previously  observed  the  water-lily  on  the 
,'ordan  (p.  173),  but  omits  to  mention  whether  it 
was  the  yellow  (Nuphar  lutea)  or  the  white 


LINEN 


121 


fi/iaca  alba].     "  The  only  '  lilies '  which  I  saw  in 


the  titles  of  Ps.  xlv.,  lx.,  Lxix.,  and  hxx.  were  musical 
instruments  in  the  form  of  lilies,  or  whether  the 
word  denote  a  musical  air,  will  be  discussed  undei 

[W.  A.  W.] 

This  substance  ia 


the  article  SHOSHANNIM. 


LIME 


Kovla  :  calx). 


noticed  only  three-  times  in  the  Bible,  viz.,  in  Deut. 
xxvii.  2,  4,  where  it  is  ordered  to  be  laid  on  the 
great  stones  whereon  the  law  was  to  be  written 


LlUum  candldum. 


Palestine,"  says  Prof.  Stanley.  "  111  the  months  of 
March  and  April,  were  large  yellow  water-lilies,  in 
the  clear  spring  of  'Ain  Mellahah,  near  the  Lake  of 
Merom  "  (S.  $  P.  p.  429).  He  suggests  that  the 
name  "lily"  "may  include  the  numerous  flowers 
of  the  tulip  or  amaryllis  kind,  which  appear  in  the 
early  summer,  or  the  autumn  of  Palestine."  The 
following  description  of  the  Huleh-lily  by  Dr.  Thom 
son  (The  Land  and  the  Book,  i.  394),  were  it  more 
precise,  would  perhaps  have  enabled  botanists  to 
identify  it :  "  This  Huleh-lily  is  very  large,  and  the 
three  inner  petals  meet  above  and  form  a  gorgeous 


(A.  V.  "thou  shalt  plaister  them  with  plaister")  ; 
in  Is.  xxxiii.  12,  where  the  "burnings  of  lime" 
are  figuratively  used  to  express  complete  destruc 
tion;  and  in  Am.  ii.  1,  where  the  prophet  describes 
the  outrage  committed  on  the  memory  of  the  king 
of  Edom  by  the  Moabites,  when  they  took  his  bones 
and  burned  them  into  lime,  i.  e.  calcined  them — 
an  indignity  of  which  we  have  another  instance  in 
2  K.  xxiii.  16.  That  the  Jews  were  acquainted 
with  the  use  of  the  lime-kiln,  has  been  already  no 
ticed.  [FURNACE.]  [W.  L.  B.] 

LINEN.    Five  different  Hebrew  words  are  thus 

j  rendered,  and  it  is  difficult  to  assign  to  each  its 

j  precise   significance.      With   regard   to  the  Greek 

i  words   so   translated   in  the   N.  T.    there   is   less 

ambiguity. 

1.  As  "Egypt  was  the  great  centre  of  the  linen 
manufacture  of  antiquity,  it  is  in  connexion  with 
that  country  that  we  find  the  first  allusion  to  it  in 
the  Bible.  Joseph,  when  promoted  to  the  dignity 
of  ruler  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  was  arrayed  "  in 
vestures  of  fine  linen"  (shesh,*  marg.  "silk,"  Gen. 
xli.  42),  and  among  the  offerings  for  the  tabernacle 
of  the  things  which  the  Israelites  had  brought  out 
I  of  Egypt  were  "  blue,  and  purple,  and  scarlet,  and 
fine  linen"  (Ex.  xxv.  4,  xxxv.  6).  Of  twisted 


threads  of  this  material  were  composed  the  ten 
embroidered  hangings  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxvi. 
1),  the  vail  which  separated  the  holy  place  from 
the  holy  of  holies  (Ex.  xxvi.  31),  and  the  cur 
tain  for  the  entrance  (ver.  36),  wrought  with  needle 
work.  The  ephod  of  the  high-priest,  with  its 
"curious,"  or  embroidered  girdle,  and  the  breast 
plate  of  judgment,  were  of  "fine  twined  linen" 
(Ex.  xxviii.  6,  8,  15).  Of  fine  linen  woven  in 
checker-work  were  made  the  high-priest's  tunic  anc 
mitre  (Ex.  xxviii.  39).  The  tunics,  turbans,  and 


canopy,  such  as  art  never  approached,  and  king  I  drawers  of  the  inferior  priests  (Ex.  xxxix.  27,  28) 

are  simply  described  as  of  woven  work  of  fine  linen. 
2.  But  in  Ex.  xxviii.  42,  and  Lev.  vi.  10,  the 
drawers  of  the  priests  and  their  flowing  robes  are 
said  to  be  of  linen  (bad*},  and  the  tunic  of  the 
high-priest,  his  girdle,  and  mitre,  which  he  wore  on 
the  day  of  atonement,  were  made  of  the  same  ma 
terial  (Lev.  xvi.  4).  Cunaeus  (De  Rep.  ffebr.  ii. 
c.  i.)  maintained  that  the  robes  worn  by  the  high- 
priest  throughout  the  year,  which  are  called  by  the 
Talmudists  "the  golden  vestments,"  were  thus 
named  because  they  were  made  of  a  more  valuable 
kind  of  linen  (shesh)  than  that  of  which  "  the 
white  vestments,"  worn  only  on  the  day  of  atone 
ment,  were  composed  (bad).  But  in  the  Mishna 
(Cod.  Joma,  iii.  7)  it  is  said  that  the  dress  worn 
by  the  high-priest  on  the  morning  of  the  day  of 
atonement  was  of  linen  of  Pelusium,  that  is,  of  the 
finest  description.  In  the  evening  of  the  same  day 
he  wore  garments  of  Indian  linen,  which  was  less 
costly  than  the  Egyptian.  From  a  comparison  oi 
Ex.  xxviii.  42  with  xxxix.  28  it  seems  clear  that 
bad  and  shesh  were  synonymous,  or,  if  there  be  any 
difference  between  them,  the  latter  probably  de- 


never  sat  under,  even  in  his  utmost  glory 

We  call  it  Huleh-lily,  because  it  was  here  that  it 

was  first  discove.-ed.     Its  botanical  name,  if  it  have 

one,  I  am  unacquainted  with Our  flower 

delights  most  in  the  valleys,  but  is  also  found  on 
the  mountains.  It  grows  among  thorns,  and  I  have 
sadly  lacerated  my  hands  in  extricating  it  from 
them.  Nothing  can  be  in  higher  contrast  than  the 
luxuriant  velvety  softness  of  this  lily,  and  the 
crabbed  tangled  hedge  of  thorns  about  it.  Gazelles 
still  delight  to  feed  among  them ;  and  you  can 
scarcely  ride  through  the  woods  north  of  Tabor, 
where  these  lilies  abound,  without  frightening  them 
from  their  flowery  pasture."  If  some  future  traveller 
would  give  a  description  of  the  Hfileh-lily  somewhat 
less  vague  than  the  above,  the  question  might  be  at 
once  resolved.  [FLOWERS,  Appendix  A.] 

The  Phoenician  architects  of  Solomon's  temple 
decorated  the  capitals  of  the  columns  with  "  lily- 
work,"  that  is,  with  leaves  and  flowers  of  the  lily 
(I  K.  vii.),  corresponding  to  the  lotus-headed  ca 
pitals  cf  Egyptian  architecture.  The  rim  of  the 
''  brazen  sea  "  was  possibly  wrought  in  the  form  of 
the  recurved  margin  of  a  lily  flower  (1  K.  vii.  26). 
Whether  the  yhfahannbn  and  shvuhan  mciitione  1  iu 


as  in  Kz.  xvi.  13. 


122 


LINEN 


njtes  the  q  ;un  threads,  while  the  foitner  is  the 
linen  woven  from  them.  Maimonides  (Cele  ham- 
miMash,  c.  8)  considered  them  as  identical  with 
regard  to  the  material  of  which  they  were  com 
posed,  for  he  says,  "  wherever  in  the  Law  bad  or 
shesh  are  mentioned,  they  signify  flax,  that  is, 
byssm."  And  Abarbanel  (on  Kx.  xxv.)  defines  shesh 
to  be  Egyptian  flax,  and  distinguishes  it  as  com 
posed  of  six  (Heb.  shfsh,  "  six  ")  threads  twisted 
together,  from  bad,  which  was  single.  But  in  op 
position  to  this  may  be  quoted  Ex.  xxxix.  28,  where 
the  drawers  of  the  priests  are  said  to  be  linen  (hid) 
of  fine  twined  linen  (shesh).  The  wise-hearted 
among  the  women  of  the  congregation  spun  the  flax 
which  was  used  by  Bezaleel  and  Aholiab  for  the 
hangings  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxxv.  25),  and  the 
making  of  linen  was  one  of  the  occupations  of 
women,  of  whose  dress  it  formed  a  conspicuous  part 
(Prov.  xxxi.  22,  A.  V.  "  silk;"  Ez.  xvi.  10,  13; 
comp.  Rev.  xviii.  16).  In  Ez.  xxvii.  7  shesh  is 
enumerated  among  the  products  of  Egypt,  which 
the  Tyrians  imported  and  used  for  the  sails  of  their 
ships ;  and  the  vessel  constructed  for  Ptolemy  Philo- 
pator  is  said  by  Athenaeus  to  have  had  a  sail  of 
byssiis  (ftvffffivov  %xo)V  l<rrlov,  Deipn.  i.  27  F). 
Hermippus  (quoted  by  Athenaeus)  describes  Egypt 
as  the  great  emporium  for  sails : — 

«<C    &'   AiyVTTTOU    TO    Kpe/JUCTTO 

torta  Kai  )3u/3\ous . 

Cleopatra's  galley  at  the  battle  of  Actium  had  a 
sail  of  purple  canvas  (Plin.  xix.  5).  The  ephods 
worn  by  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  by  Samuel, 
though  he  was  a  Levite  (1  Sam.  ii.  18),  and  by 
David  when  he  danced  before  the  ark  (2  Sam.  vi. 
14;  1  Chr.  xv.  27),  were  all  of  linen  (bad).  The 
man  whom  Daniel  saw  in  vision  by  the  river  Hid- 
dekel  was  clothed  in  linen  (bad,  Dan.  x.  5,  xii. 
6,  7;  comp.  Matt,  xxviii.  3).  In  no  case  is  bad 
used  for  other  than  a  dress  worn  in  religious  cere 
monies,  though  the  other  terms  rendered  "  linen  " 
are  applied  to  the  ordinary  dress  of  women  and  per 
sons  in  high  rank. 

3.  £uts,c  always  translated  "  fine  linen,"  except 
2  Chr.  v.  12,  is  apparently  a  late  word,  and  pro 
bably  the  same  with  the  Greek  j8i5o-<ros,  by  which 
it  is  represented  by  the  LXX.  It  was  used  for  the 
dresses  of  the  Levite  choir  in  the  temple  (2  Chr.  v. 
12),  for  the  loose  upper  garment  worn  by  kings 
over  the  close-fitting  tunic  (1  Chr.  xv.  27),  and  for 
the  vail  of  the  temple,  embroidered  by  the  skill  of 
the  Tyrian  artificers  (2  Chr.  iii.  14).  Mordecai 
was  arrayed  in  robes  of  fine  linen  (btits)  and  purple 
(Esth.  viii.  15)  when  honoured  by  the  Persian  king, 
and  the  dress  of  the  rich  man  in  the  parable  was 
purple  and  fine  linen  (j8u<r<ros,  Luke  xvi.  19).  The 
Tyrians  were  celebrated  for  their  skill  in  linen- 
embroidery  (2  Chr.  ii.  14),  and  the  house  of  Ash bea, 
a  family  of  the  descendants  of  Shelah  the  son  of 
Judah,  were  workers  in  fine  linen,  probably  in  the 
lowland  country  (1  Chr.  iv.  21).  Tradition  adds 
that  they  wove  the  robes  of  the  kings  and  priests 
(Targ.  Joseph),  and,  according  to  Jarchi,  the  hang 
ings  of  the  sanctuary.  The  cords  of  the  canopy 
over  the  garden-court  of  the  palace  at  Shushan 
were  of  fine  linen  (buts,  Esth.  i.  6).  "  Purple  and 
broidered  work  and  fine  linen"  were  brought  by 


LINEN 

.  the  Syrians  to  the  market  of  Tyre  (Ez.  xxrli.  16  ,, 
the  Wits  of  Syria  being  distinguished  from  the  shes.* 
of  Egypt,  mentioned  in  ver.  7,  as  being  in  all  pro 
bability  an  Aramaic  word,  while  shesh  is  referred 
to  an  Egyptian  original."1  "  Fine  linen  "  (j8<Wos). 
with  purple  and  silk  are  enumerated  in  Rev.  xviii.  12 
as  among  the  merchandise  of  the  mystical  Baly- 
lon ;  and  to  the  Lamb's  wife  (xix.  8)  it  "  was 
granted  that  she  should  be  arrayed  in  fine  linen 
(frvaaivov)  clean  and  white:"  the  symbolical  sig 
nificance  of  this  vesture  being  immediately  ex 
plained,  "  for  the  fine  linen  is  the  righteousness  of 
saints."  And  probably  with  the  same  intent  the 
armies  in  heaven,  who  rode  upon  white  horses  and 
followed  the  "  Faithful  and  True,''  were  clad  in 
"  fine  linen,  white  and  clean,"  as  they  went  forth 
to  battle  with  the  beast  and  his  army  (Rev. 
xix.  14). 

4.  Etune  occurs  but  once  (Prov.  vii.  16),  and  there 
in  connexion  with  Egypt.  Schultens  connects  it 
with  the  Greek  o96vr\,  oOSviov,  which  he  supposes- 
were  derived  from  it.  The  Talmudists  translate  it 
by  73H,  chebel,  a  cord  or  rope,  in  consequence  of 

its  identity  in  form  with  atunf  which  occurs  in  the 
Targ.  on  Josh.  ii.  15,  and  Esth.  i.  6.  R.  Parchon 
interprets  it  "  a  girdle  of  Egyptian  work."  But  in 
what  way  these  cords  were  applied  to  the  decora 
tion  of  beds  is  not  clear.  Probably  etun  was  a 
kind  of  thread  made  of  fine  Egyptian  flax,  aud 
used  for  ornamenting  the  coverings  of  beds  with 
tapestry-work.  In  support  of  this  may  be  quoted 
the  afjuptrdtroi  of  the  LXX.,  and  the  pictae  tapetes 
of  the  Vulgate,  which  represent  the  j-IDN  RHpf"! 
of  the  Hebrew.  But  Celsius  renders  the  word 
"  linen,"  and  appeals  to  the  Greek  oBovri,  o66vtov, 
as  decisive  upon  the  point.  See  Jablonski,  Opusc. 
i.  72,  73. 

Schultens  (Prov.  vii.  16)  suggests  that  the  Greek 
ffivScev  is  derived  from  the  Hebrew  sadtnf  which  is 
used  of  the  thirty  linen  garments  which  Samson 
promised  to  his  companions  (Judg.  xiv.  12,  13)  at 
his  wedding,  and  which  he  stripped  from  the  bodies 
of  the  Philistines  whom  he  slew  at  Ashkelon  (ver. 
19).  It  was  made  by  women  (Prov.  xxxi.  24),  and 
used  for  girdles  and  under-garments  (Is.  iii.  23 ; 
comp.  Mark  xiv.  51).  The  LXX.  in  Judg.  and 
Prov.  render  it  ffivSwv,  but  in  Judg.  xiv.  13 
oQ&via.  is  used  synonymously;  just  as  crivStav  in 
Matt,  xxvii.  59,  Mark  xv.  46,  and  Luke  xxiii.  53. 
is  the  same  as  o66via  in  Luke  xxiv.  12  :  John  xx.  5, 
6,  xix.  40.  In  these  passages  it  is  seen  that  linen 
was  used  for  the  winding-sheets  of  the  dead  by  the 
Hebrews  as  well  as  by  the  Greeks  (Horn.  77.  xviii. 
353,  xxiii.  254;  comp.  Eur.  Bacch.  819).  Towels 
were  made  of  it  (\4vnov,  John  xiii.  4,  5),  and 
napkins  (ffovSdpta,  John  xi.  44),  like  the  coai-se 
linen  of  the  Egyptians.  The  dress  of  the  poor 
(Eccius.  xl.  4)  was  probably  unbleached  flax  (w/j.6- 
\ivov),  such  as  was  used  for  barbers'  towels  (Pint 
De  Garrul.). 

The  general  term  which  included  all  those  already 
mentioned  was  pishteh,*  corresponding  to  the  Greek 
\ivov,  which  was  employed — like  our  "  cotton  " — tj 
denote  not  only  the  flax  (Judg.  xv.  14)  or  raw  ma 
terial  from  which  the  linen  was  made,  but  also  the 


-  Jablonskl  (Opusc.  i.  297,  &c.)  claimg  for  tli« 


0  T*-13.  /3v<r<ro«,  byssus. 

*  In  Gen.  xli.  42,  the  Targum  of  Onkelos  gives  j»!|3  as  i  wor(j  an  Egyptian  origin.    The  Coptic  thento  is  the  repre- 
the  equivalent  of  {J>{J*.    See  also  Ex.  xxv.  4,  xxxv.  35.      j  sentative  of  atvSiav  in  the  N.  T 
'  t-IDN'  Veneto-Gr.  <rxoivof. 


LINKN 

plant  itself  (JosK.  ii.  6), ami  tlic  inanufact  ire  from  it. 
It  is  generally  opposed  to  wool,  as  a  vegetable  pro 
duct  to  an  animal  (Lev.  xiii.  47,  48,  52,  59;  Deut. 
xxii.  11;  Prov.  xxxi.  13;  Hos.  ii.  5,  9),  and  was 
used  for  nets  (Is.  xix.  9),  girdles  (Jer.  xiii.  1),  and 
mensuring-lines  (Ez.  xl.  3),  as  well  as  for  the  dress 
of  the  priests  (Ez.  xliv.  17,  18).  From  a  com 
parison  of  the  last-quoted  passages  with  Ex.  xxviii. 
4'2,  and  Lev.  vi.  10  (3),  xvi.  4,  23,  it  is  evident 
that  bad  and  pislitch  denote  the  same  material,  the 
latter  being  the  more  general  term.  It  is  equally 
apparent,  from  a  comparison  of  Rev.  xv.  6  with 
xix.  8,  14,  that  \lvov  and  frvaaivov  are  essentially 
the  same.  Mr.  Yates  (Textrinum  Antiquorum, 
p.  276)  contends  that  \ivov  denotes  the  common 
Hax,  and  fivffcros  the  finer  variety,  and  that  in  this 
sense  the  terms  are  used  by  Pausanias  (vi.  26,  §4). 
Till  the  time  of  Dr.  Forster  it  was  never  doubted 
that  byssus  was  a  kind  of  flax,  but  it  was  main 
tained  by  him  to  be  cotton.  That  the  mummy- 
cloths  used  by  the  Egyptians  were  cotton  and  not 
linen  was  first  asserted  by  Rouelle  (Mem.  da 
I'Acad.  Eoy.  des  Scien.  1750),  and  he  was  sup 
ported  in  his  opinion  by  Dr.  Forster  and  Dr. 
Icelander,  after  an  examination  of  the  mummies  in 
the  British  Museum.  But  a  more  careful  scrutiny 
by  Mr.  Bauer  of  about  400  specimens  of  mummy- 
cloth  has  shown  that  they  were  universally  linen. 
Dr.  Ore  arrived  independently  at  the  same  conclu 
sion  (Yates,  Textr.  Ant.  b.  ii.). 

One  word  remains  to  be  noticed,  which  our  A.  V. 
has  translated  "  linen  yam"  (1  K.  x.  28;  2  Chr.  i. 
16),  brought  out  of  Egypt  by  Solomon's  merchants. 
The  Hebrew  mikveh,1  or  mikve^  is  variously  ex 
plained.  In  the  LXX.  of  1  Kings  it  appears  as  a 
proper  name,  Qtitovt,  and  in  the  Vulgate  Coa,  a 
place  in  Arabia  Felix.  By  the  Syriac  (2  Chr.)  and 
Arabic  translators  it  was  also  regarded  as  the  name  of 
a  place.  Bochart  once  referred  it  to  Troglodyte  Egypt, 
anciently  called  Michoe,  according  to  Pliny  (vi.  34), 
but  afterwards  decided  that  it  signified  "a  tax" 
(Hieroz.  pt.  1,  b.  2,  c.  9).  To  these  Michaelis  adds 
a  conjecture  of  his  own,  that  Ku  in  the  interior  of 
Africa,  S.W.  of  Egypt,  might  be  the  place  referred 
to,  as  the  country  whence  Egypt  procured  its  horses 
(Laws  of  Moses,  trans.  Smith,  ii.  493).  In  trans 
lating  the  word  "  linen  yarn  "  the  A.  V.  followed 
.Tunius  and  Tremellius,  who  are  supported  by 
Sebastian  Schmid,  De  Dieu,  and  Clericus.  Gesenius 
has  recourse  to  a  very  unnatural  construction,  and, 
rendering  the  word  "  troop,"  refers  it  in  the  first 
clause  to  the  king's  merchants,  and  in  the  second 
to  the  horses  which  they  brought. 

From  time  immemorial  Egypt  was  celebrated  for 
its  linen  (Ez.  xxvii.  7).  It  was  the  dress  of  the 
Egyptian  priests  (Her.  ii.  37,  81),  and  was  worn 
by  them,  according  to  Plutarch  (Is.  et  Osir.  4), 
because  the  colour  of  the  flax-blossom  resembled 
that  of  the  circumambient  ether  (comp.  Juv.  vi. 
533,  of  the  priests  of  Isis).  Panopolis  or  Chemmis 
(the  modem  Akhmiiri)  was  anciently  inhabited  by 
linen- weavers  (Strabo,  xvii.  41,  p.  813).  According 
to  Herodotus  (ii.  86)  the  mummy-cloths  were  of 
byssus;  and  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  6,  §1)  mentions 
among  the  contributions  of  the  Israelites  for  the 
tabernacle,  "  byssus  of  flax ;"  the  hangings  of  the 
tabernacle  were  "  sindon  of  byssus  "  (§2),  of  which 
material  the  tunics  of  the  priests  were  also  made 
'Ant.  iii.  7,  §2),  the  drawers  being  of  byssus  (§1). 


LINTEL 


123 


£,  1  Kings. 


,  2  Chron. 


Philo  also  says  that  the  high-prii-st  wore  a  gannen 
of  the  finest  byssus.  Combining  the  testimony  oi 
Herodotus  as  to  the  mummy-cloths  with  the  results 
of  microscopic  examination,  it  seems  clear  that 
byssus  was  linen,  and  not  cotton  ;  and  moreover,  that 
the  dresses  of  the  Jewish  priests  were  made  of  the 
same,  the  purest  of  all  materials.  For  further  in 
formation  see  Dr.  Kalisdi's  Comm.  on  Exodus,  pp. 
487-489  ;  also  article  WOOLLEN.  [W.  A.  W.| 

LINTEL.  The  beam  which  forms  the  upper 
part  of  the  framework  of  a  door.  In  tho  A.  V. 
"  lintel  "  is  the  rendering  of  three  Hebrew  words. 

1.  S*N,  ayil  (1  K.  vi.  31);  translated  "post" 
throughout  Ez.  xl.,  xli.     The  true  meaning  of  this 
word  is  extremely  doubtful.     In  the  LXX.  it  is 
left  untranslated  (aX\,  al\ev,  al\dp)  ;  and  in  the 
Chaldee  version  it  is   represented  by  a  modifica 
tion  of  itself.     Throughout  the  passages  of  Ezekiel 
in  which  it  occurs  the  Vulg.  uniformly  renders  it 
by  frons ;  which  Gesenius  quotes  as  favourable  to 
his  own  view,  provided  that  by  frons  be  understood 
the  projections  in  front  of  the  building.     The  A.  V. 
of  1  K.  vi.  31,  "lintel,"  is  supported  by  the  ver 
sions  of-Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion  of 
Ez.  xl.  21  ;  while  Kimchi  explains  it  generally  by 
"  post."     The  Peshito-Syriac  uniformly  renders  the 
word. by  a  modification  of  the  Greek  irapaffTdSts, 
"  pillars."  Jarchi  understands  by  ayil  a  round  co 
lumn  like  a  large  tree ;  Aquila  (Ez.  xl.  14),  having 
in  view  the  meaning  "  ram,"  which  the  word  else 
where  bears,  renders  it  /cpicojuo,  apparently  intend 
ing   thereby   to   denote    the   volutes   of  columns, 
curved  like  rams'  horns.     J.  D.  Michaelis  (Supp. 
ad  Lex.  s.  v.)  considers  it  to  be  the  tympanum  or 
triangular   area   of   the   pediment   above   a   gate, 
supported  by  columns.     Gesenius  himself,  after  re 
viewing  the  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs, 
arrives  at  the  conclusion  that  in  the  singular  it 
denotes  the  whole  projecting  framewoi'k  of  a  door 
or  gateway,  including  the  jambs  on  either  side,  the 
threshold,  and  the  lintel  or  architrave,  with  frieze 
and  cornice.     In  the  plural  it  is  applied  to  denote 
the  projections  along  the  front  of  an  edifice  orna 
mented  with  columns  or  palm-teees,  and  with  re 
cesses  or  intercolumniations  between   them  some 
times  filled   up  by  windows.     Under  the  former 
head  he  places  1  K.  vi.  31 ;  Ez.  xl.  9,  21,  24,  26, 
29,  31,  33,  34,  36-38,  48,  49,  xli.  3;  while  ;o 
the  latter  he  refers  xl.  10,  14,  16,  xli.  1.     Anotht-r 
explanation  still  is  that  of  Boettcher  (quoted  by 
Winer,  Realw.  ii.  575),  who  says  that  ayil  is  the 
projecting  entrance-  and  passage-wall — which  miglu 
appropriately  be  divided  into  compartments  by  pa 
nelling  ;  and  this  view  is  adopted  by  Fiirst  (Handw. 
s.  v.). 

2.  "WB3,  caphtar  (Amos  ix.  1 ;  Zeph.  ii.  14). 
The  marginal  rendering,  "  chapiter  or  kuop,"  of  bot'i 
these  passages  is  undoubtedly  the  more  correct, 
and  in  all  other  cases  where  the  word  occurs  it  is 
translated  "  knop."     [KNOP.] 

3.  S^pEfo,  mashkdph  (Ex.  xii.  22,  23)  ;  also  ren 
dered  "  upper  door-post "  in  Ex.  xii.  7.     That  this 
is  the  true  rendering  is  admitted  by  all  modern 
philologists,  who  connect  it  with  a  root  which  in 
Arabic  and  the  cognate  dialects  signifies  "  to  over 
lay  with  beams."     The  LXX.  and  Vulgate  coincide 
in  assigning  to  it  the  same  meaning.     Rabbi  Sol. 
Jarchi   derives  it  from  a   Chaldee  root  signifying 
"  to  beat,"  because  the  door  in  being  shut  beats 


1 24 


LINUS 


against  it.  The  signification  "  to  look  "  or  "  peep," 
"vhich  W.TS  acquired  by  the  Hebrew  root,  induced 
A beii  Ezra  to  translate  mashkoph  by  "  window," 
such  as  the  Arabs  have  over  the  doors  of  their 
houses  ;  and  in  assenting  to  this  rendering,  Bochart 
observes  "  that  it  was  so  called  on  account  of  the 
grates  and  railings  over  the  tops  of  the  doors, 
through  which  those  who  desire  entrance  into 
the  house  could  be  seen  before  they  were  ad 
mitted"  (Kalisch,  Exodus).  An  illustration  of 
one  of  these  windows  is  given  in  the  art.  HOUSE, 
vol.  i.  p.  837  a.  [W.  A.W.] 

LI'NUS  (ATvos),  a  Christian  at  Rome,  known 
to  St.  Paul  and  to  Timothy  (2  Tim.  iv.  21 ).  That 
the  first  bishop  of  Rome  after  the  apostles  was 
named  Linus  is  a  statement  in  which  all  ancient 
writers  agree  (e.  g.  Jerome,  De  Viris  IHustr.  1 f> ; 
August.  Ep.  liii.  2).  The  early  and  unequivocal 
assertion  of  Irenaeus  (iii.  3,  §3),  corroborated  by 
Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii.  2)  and  Theodoret,  (fn  2  Tim. 
iv.  21),  is  sufficient  to  prove  the  identity  of  the 
bishop  with  St.  Paul's  friend. 

The  date  of  his  appointment,  the  duration  of  his 
episcopate,  and  the  limits  to  which  his  episcopal 
authority  extended,  are  points  which  cannot  be 
regarded  as  absolutely  settled,  although  they  have 
been  discussed  at  great  length.  Eusebius  and 
Theodoret,  followed  by  Baronius  and  Tillemont 
(Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  165  and  591),  state  that  he  became 
bishop  of  Rome  after  the  death  of  St.  Peter.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  words  of  Irenaeus — "  [Peter 
and  Paul]  when  they  founded  and  built  up  the 
church  [of  Rome]  committed  the  office  of  its 
episcopate  to  Linus  " — certainly  admit,  or  rather 
imply  the  meaning,  that  he  held  that  office  before 
the  death  of  St.  Peter :  as  if  the  two  great  apostles, 
having,  in  the  discharge  of  their  own  peculiar  office, 
completed  the  organisation  of  the  church  at  Rome, 
left  it  under  the  government  of  Linus,  and  passed 
on  to  preach  and  teach  in  some  new  region.  This 
proceeding  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  prac 
tice  of  the  apostles  in  other  places.  And  the  earlier 
appointment  of  Linus  is  asserted  as  a  fact  by 
Ruffinus  (Praef.  in  Clem.  Recogn.*),  and  by  the 
author  of  ch.  xlvi.  bk.  vii.  of  the  Apostolic  Con 
stitutions.  It  is  accepted  as  the  true  statement  of 
the  case  by  Bishop  Pearson  {De  Serie  et  Successione 
Priorum  Komae  Episcoporum,  ii.  5,  §1)  and  by 
Fleury  (Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  26).  Some  persons  have 
objected  that  the  undistinguished  mention  of  the 
name  of  Linus  between  the  names  of  two  other 
Roman  Christians  in  2  Tim.  iv.  21,  is  a  proof  that 
he  was  not  at  that  time  bishop  of  Rome.  But  even 
Tillemont  admits  that  such  a  way  of  introducing 
the  bishop's  name  is  in  accordance  with  the  sim 
plicity  of  that  early  age.  No  lofty  pre-eminence 
was  attributed  to  the  episcopal  office  in  the  apostolic 
times. 

The  arguments  by  which  the  exact  years  of  his 
episcopate  are  laid  down  are  too  long  and  minute 
to  be  recited  here.  Its  duration  is  given  by  Euse 
bius  (whose  //.  E.  iii.  16  and  Chronicon  give  in- 


•  Ruffinus'  statement  ought,  doubtless,  to  be  inter 
preted  in  accordance  with  that  of  his  contemporary  Epi- 
phanius  (Adv.  Haer.  xxvii.  6,  p.  107),  to  the  effect  that 
LitMis  and  Cletus  were  bishops  of  Rome  in  succession,  not 
contemporaneously.  The  facts  were,  however,  differently 
viewed:  (1)  by  an  interpolator  of  the  Gctta Ponlificum 
liamasi,  quoted  I>y  J.  Vo»s  in  his  second  epistle  to  A. 
Aivet(App.'to  Pearson's  Yindiciat  Ignatianae) ;  (2)  by 
BeJe  (  Vita  S.  Benedicti  $7,  p.  1 16,  ffl  Steven-smi)  wheti 


LION 

consistent  evidence)  as  A.D.  68-80  ;  by  Tillemont 
who  however  reproaches  Pearson  with  depart  iir_ 
from  the  chronology  of  Eusebius,  as  66-78;  by 
Baronius  as  67-78;  and  by  Pearson  as  55-67. 
Pearson,  in  the  treatise  already  quoted  (i.  10), 
gives  weighty  reasons  for  distrusting  the  chronology 
of  Eusebius  as  regards  the  years  of  the  early  bishops 
of  Rome ;  and  he  derives  his  own  opinion  from 
certain  very  ancient  (but  interpolated)  lists  of  those 
bishops  (see  i.  13  and  ii.  5).  This  po:r>*  ha«  been 
[subsequently  considered  by  Baraterius  (De  Suc 
cessione  Antiquissima  Episc.  Rom.  1740),  who  gives 
A.D.  56-67  as  the  date  of  the  episcopate  of  Linus. 

The  statement  of  Ruffinus,  that  Linus  and  Cletue 
were  bishops  in  Rome  whilst  St.  Peter  was  alive,* 
has  been  quoted  in  support  of  a  theory  which 
sprang  up  in  the  17th  centuiy,  received  the  sanc 
tion  even  of  Hammond  in  his  controversy  with 
Blondel  (  Works,  ed.  1684,  iv.  825;  Episcopates 
Jura,  v.  1,  §1 1),  was  held  with  some  slight  modi 
fication  by  Baraterius,  and  has  been  recently  revived. 
It  is  supposed  that  Linus  was  bishop  in  Rome  only 
of  the  Christians  of  Gentile  origin,  while  at  the  same 
time  another  bishop  exercised  the  same  authority 
over  the  Jewish  Christians  there.  Tertullian's 
assertion  (De  Praescr.  Haeret.  §32)  that  Clement 
[the  third  bishop]  of  Rome  was  consecrated  by 
St.  Peter,  has  been  quoted  also  as  corroborating 
this  theory.  But  it  does  not  follow  from  the  words 
of  Tertullian  that  Clement's  consecration  took  place 
immediately  before  he  became  bishop  of  Rome :  and 
the  statement  of  Ruffinuu,  so  far  as  it  lends  any 
support  to  the  above-named  theory,  is  shown  to  be 
without  foundation  by  Pearson  (ii.  3,  4).  Til- 
lemont's  observations  (p.  590)  in  reply  to  Pear 
son  only  show  that  the  establishment  of  two  con 
temporary  bishops  in  one  city  was  contemplated  in 
ancient  times  as  a  possible  provisional  arrangement 
to  meet  certain  temporary  difficulties.  The  actual 
limitation  of  the  authority  of  Linus  to  a  section  of 
the  church  in  Rome  remains  to  be  proved. 

Linus  is  reckoned  by  Pseudo-Hippolytus,  and  in 
the  Greek  Menaea,  among  the  seventy  disciples. 
Various  days  are  stated  by  different  authorities  in 
the  Western  Church,  and  by  the  Eastern  Church, 
as  the  day  of  his  death.  A  narrative  of  the  mar 
tyrdom  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  printed  in  the 
Bibliotheca  Patrum,  and  certain  pontifical  decrees, 
are  incorrectly  ascribed  to  Linus.  He  is  said  to 
have  written  an  account  of  the  dispute  between 
St.  Peter  and  Simon  Magus.  [W.  T.  B.] 

LION.  Rabbinical  writers  discover  in  the  0.  T 
seven  names  of  the  lion,  which  they  assign  to  the 
animal  at  seven  periods  of  its  life.  1.  1-13,  yur,  or 
113,  gor,  a  cub  (Gen.  xlix.  9;  Deut.  xxxiii.  22- 
Jer.  Ii.  38  ;  Nab.  ii.  12).  2.  "VB3,  cephir,  a  young 
lion  ( Judg.  xiv.  5 ;  Job  iv.  10  ;  Ez.  xix.  2,  &c.). 
3.  ^*1N,  Art,  or  HHX,  aryeh,  a  full-grown  lion 

(Gen.  xlix.  9  ;  Judg.  xiv.  5,  8,  &c.).  4.  ^HP, 
shakhal,  a  lion  more  advanced  in  age  and  strength 

he  was  seeking  a  precedent  for  two  contemporaneous 
abbots  presiding  in  one  monastery;  and  (3)  by  Kahanus 
Maurus  (De  Chorepitcopis :  Opp.  ed.  Migne,  torn.  iv.  p. 
1197),  who  ingeniously  claims  primitive  authority  for  the 
institution  of  chorepiscooi  on  the  supi>osition  that  Limit! 
and  Cletus  were  never  wishops  with  full  powers,  but  were 
contemporaneous  chorcpi»i:o|ii  employed  by  St.  IVler  in 
his  absence  from  Rome,  and  at  his  request,  to  oriiaL: 
clertymrti  for  the  church  ;it  K"iiie. 


LION 

(Job  iv.  10 ;  \\.  zci.  i:'>,  &<V).  5.  pnK>,  stiakhats, 
a  lion  in  full  vigor..- '  fob  xxviii.  8j.  6.  JOT?,  Idbi, 
or  N'l^,  lebiyya,  an  old  lion  (Gen.  xlix.  9 ;  Job 
;-v.  11,  £c.).  7.  K>)^,  laish,  a  lion  decrepit  with 

age  (Job  iv.  11;  Is.  xxx.  6,  &c.)  Well  might 
Bochart  (Hieroz.  pt.  i.  b.  iii.  1)  say,  "Hie  gram- 
matic:  videntur  mire  sibi  indulgere."  He  differs 
from  this  arrangement  in  every  point  but  the 
second.  In  the  first  place,  gur  is  applied  to  the 
young  of  other  animals  besides  the  lion ;  for  in 
stance,  the  sea  monsters  in  Lam.  iv.  3.  Secondly, 
cephir  differs  from  gur,  as  juvencus  from  vitulus. 
Ari  or  aryth  is  a  generic  term,  applied  to  all  lions 
without  regard  to  age.  In  Judg.  xiv.  the  "  young 
lion  "  (cephir  ardyoth*)  of  ver.  5  is  in  ver.  8  called 
the  "lion"  (art/eh).  Bochart  is  palpably  wrong 
in  rendering  shakhal  "a  black  lion"  of  the  kind 
which,  according  to  Pliny  (viii.  17),  was  found  in 
Syria.  The  word  is  only  used  in  the  poetical  books, 
and  most  probably  expresses  some  attribute  of  the 
lion.  It  is  connected  with  an  Arabic  root,  which 
signifies  "  to  bray  "  like  an  ass,  and  is  therefore 
simply  "  the  brayer."  Shakhats  does  not  denote  a 
lion  at  all.  Labi  is  properly  a  "  lioness,"  and  is 
connected  with  the  Coptic  labai,  which  has  the 
same  signification.  Laish  (comp.  \1s,  Horn.  //. 
xv.  275)  is  another  poetic  name.  So  far  from  being 
applied  to  a  lion  weak  with  age,  it  denotes  one  in 
full  vigour  (Job  iv.  11;  Prov.  xxx.  30).  It  has 
been  derived  from  an  Arabic  root,  which  signifies 
"  to  be  strong,"  and,  if  this  etymology  be  true, 
the  word  would  be  an  epithet  of  the  lion,  "the 
strong  one." 

At  present  lions  do  not  exist  in  Palestine,  though 
they  are  said  to  be  found  in  the  desert  on  the 
road  to  Egypt  (Schwarz,  Desc.  of  Pal.:  see  Is. 
xxx.  6).  They  abound  on  the  banks  of  the  Eu 
phrates  between  Bussorah  and  Bagdad  (Russell, 
Aleppo,  p.  61),  and  in  the  marshes  and  jungles 
near  the  rivers  of  Babylonia  (Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab. 
p.  566).  This  specie's,  according  to  Layard,  is 
without  the  dark  and  shaggy  mane  of  the  African 
lion  (id.  487),  though  he  adds  in  a  note  that  he 
had  seen  lions  on  the  river  Karoon  with  a  long 
black  mane. 

But,  though  lions  liave  now  disappeared  from 
Palestine,  they  must  in  ancient  times  have  been 
numerous.  The  names  Lebaoth  (Josh.  xv.  32';, 


LION 


125 


Beth-Lebaoth  (Josh.  xix.  6),  Arieh  (2  K.  xv.  25), 
incl  Laish  (Judg.  xviii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xxv.  44)  were 
•obabi  y  derived  from  the  presence  of  or  connexion 
with  lions,  and  point  to  the  fact  that  they  were  at  one 
ime  common.  They  had  their  laivs  ic  the  forests 
which  have  vanished  with  them  (Jer.  v.  6,  xii. 
iS ;  Am.  iii.  4),  in  the  tangled  brushwood  (Jer. 
v.  7,  xxv.  38  ;  Job  xxxviii.  40),  and  in  the  caves 
of  the  mountains  (Cant.  iv.  8  ;  Ez.  xix.  9  ;  Nah. 
i.  12).  The  cane-brake  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan, 
the  "  pride "  of  the  river,,  was  their  favourite 
launt  (Jer.  xlix.  19,  1.  44;  Zech.  xi.  3),  and 
in  this  reedy  covert  (Lam.  iii.  10)  they  were  to  be 
found  at  a  comparatively  recent  period ;  as  we 
learn  from  a  passage  of  Johannes  Phocas,  who 
travelled  in  Palestine  towards  the  end  of  the  12th 
century  (Reland,  Pal.  i.  274).  They  abounded  in 
the  jungles  which  skirt  the  rivers  of  Mesopotamia 
(Ammian.  Marc,  xviii.  7,  §5),  and  in  the  time  ot 
Xenophon  (de  Venat.  xi.)  were  found  in  Nysa. 


turbary  l.ion.     (F 


Persian  Lion.     (From  specimen  in  the  Zoological  G 

The  lion  of  Palestine  was  in  all  probability  the 
Asiatic  variety,  described  by  Aristotle  (H.  A. 
ix.  44)  and  Pliny  (viii.  18),  as  distinguished  by  its 
short  curly  mane,  and  by  being  shorter  and  rounder 
in  shape,  like  the  sculptured  lion  found  at  Arban 
(Layard,  Nin.  $•  Bab.  p.  278).  It  was  less  daring 
than  the  longer  maned  species,  but  when  driven  by 
hunger  it  not  only  ventured  to  attack  the  flocks  in 
the  desert  in  presence  of  the  shepherd  (Is.  xxxi.  4 ; 
1  Sam.  xvii.  34),  but  laid  waste  towns  and  villages 
(2  K.  xvii.  25,  26  ;  Prov.  xxii.  13,  xxvi.  13),  and 
devoured  men  (1  K.  xiii.  24,  xx.  36;  2  K.  xvii. 
25 ;  Ex.  xix.  3,  6).  The  shepherds  sometimes 
ventured  to  encounter  the  lion  single  handed 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  34),  and  the  vivid  figure  employed 
by  Amos  (iii.  12],  the  herdsman  of  Tekoa,  was  but 
the  transcript  of  a  scene  which  he  must  have  often 
witnessed.  At  other  times  they  pursued  the 
animal  in  large  bands,  raising  loud  shouts  to  in 
timidate  him  (Is.  xxxi.  4),  and  drive  him  into  the 
net  or  pit  they  had  prepared  to  catch  him  (Ez. 
xix.  4,  8).  This  method  of  capturing  wild  beasts 
is  described  by  Xenophon  (de  Yen.  xi.  4)  and  by 
Shaw,  who  says,  "The  Arabs  dig  a  pit  where  they 
are  observed  to  enter  ;  and,  covering  it  over  lightly 
with  reeds  or  small  branches  of  trees,  they  fre 
quently  decoy  and  catch  them  "  ( Travels,  2nd  ed. 
p.  172).  Benaiah,  one  of  David's  heroic  body 
guard,  had  distinguished  himself  by  slaying  a  lion 
in  his  deu  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20).  The  kings  of  Persia 
had  a  menagerie  of  lions  (33,  (job,  I)an.  vi.  7,  &c.). 
When  captured  alive  they  were  put  in  a  cage 
;  K.z.  xix.  9),  but  it  does  not  appear  that  they  were 
tamed.  Iiv  the  bunting  scenes  ;it  Beui-Hassan  tain* 
lio;is  are  represented  as  used  in  hunting  Wilkinson, 


126  LION 

Aiic.  Egypt,  iii.  17).  On  the  bas-reliefs  at  Kou- 
yunjik  a  lion  led  by  a  chain  is  among  the  presents 
brought  by  the  conquered  to  their  victors  (I.avard, 
Nm.  &  Bab.  p.  138\ 


Hunting  w.Ui  a  lion,  which  na»  seized  an  ibex.    (From  Wilkina 
Egyptians,  vol.  1.  p  £gl.) 

The  strength  (Judg.  xiv.  18  ;  Prov.  xxx.  30 ;  2 
.<am.  i.  23),  courage  (2  Sam.  xvii.  10  ;  Prov.  xxviii. 
I ;  Is.  xxxi.  4 ;  Nah.  ii.  11),  and  ferocity  (Gen.  xlix. 
9 ;  Num.  xxiv.  9),  of  the  lion  were  proverbial.  The 
"  liou-faced  "  warriors  of  Gad  were  among  David's 
most  valiant  troops  (1  Chr.  xii.  8);  and  the  hero 
Judas  Maccabeus  is  described  as  "  like  a  lion,  and 
like  a  lion's  whelp  roaring  for  his  prey"  (1  Mace, 
iii.  4).  The  terrible  roar  of  the  lion  is  expressed  in 
Hebrew  by  four  different  words,  between  which  the 
following  distinction  appears  to  be  maintained : — 
3NC?,  shdag  (Judg.  xiv.  5  ;  Ps.  xxii.  13,  civ.  21 ; 
Am.  iii.  4),  also  used  of  the  thunder  (Job  xxxvii.  4), 
denotes  the  roar  of  the  lion  while  seeking  his  prey  ; 
Drj3,  naham  (Is.  v.  29),  expresses  the  cry  which 
he  utters  when  he  seizes  his  victim ;  nJH,  hdgah 

(Is.  xxxi.  4),  the  growl  with  which  he  defies  any 
attempt  to  snatch  the  prey  from  his  teeth ;  while 
"$3,  nd'ar  (Jer.  li.  38),  which  in  Syriac  is  applied 

to  the  braying  of  the  ass  and  camel,  is  descriptive  of 
the  cry  of  the  young  lions.  If  this  distinction  be 
correct  the  meaning  attached  to  naham  will  give 
force  to  Prov.  xix.  12.  The  terms  which  describe 
the  movements  of  the  animal  are  equally  distinct : — 
¥3~l,  rabats  (Gen.  xlix.  9 ;  Ez.  xix.  2),  is  applied 
to  the  crouching  of  the  lion,  as  well  as  of  any  wild 
beast,  in  his  lair ;  nntJ>,  shdchdh,  3K",  ydshab 
(Job  xxxviii.  40),  and  3^$,  drab  (Ps.  x.  9),  to  his 
lying  in  wait  in  his  den,  the  two  former  denoting  the 
position  of  the  animal,  and  the  latter  the  secrecy  of  the 
act;  BW,  ramas  (Ps.  civ.  20),  is  used  of  the 
stealthy  creeping  of  the  lion  after  his  prey;  and 
p3T,  zinnek  (Deut.  xxxiii.  22)  of  the  leap  with 
which  he  hurls  himself  upon  it. 

The  lion  was  the  symbol  of  strength  and  sove 
reignty,  as  in  the  human-headed  figures  of  the 
Nimroud  gateway,  the  symbols  of  Nergal,  the 
Assyrian  Mars,  and  tutelary  god  of  Babylon.  In 
Egypt  it  was  worshipped  at  the  city  of  Leontopolis, 
as  typical  of  Dom,  the  Egyptian  Hercules  (Wil 
kinson,  Anc.  Egypt,  v.  169).  Plutarch  (de  hid. 
§38)  says  that  the  Egyptians  ornamented  their 
temples  with  gaping  lions'  mouths,  because  the  Nile 
began  to  rise  when  the  sun  was  in  the  constellation 


LIZARD 

I  Leo.  Among  the  Hebrews,  and  throughout  the 
O.  T.,  the  lion  was  the  achievement  of  the  princely 
tribe  of  Judah,  while  in  the  closing  book  of  th« 
canon  it  received  a  deeper  significance  as  the  emblem 
of  him  who  "  prevailed  to  open  the  book  and  loose 
the  seven  seals  thereof"  (Rev.  v.  5).  On  the 

i  other  hand  its  fierceness  and  cruelty  rendered  it  aa 
appropriate  metaphor  for  a  fierce  and  malignant 
enemy  (Ps.  vii.  2,  xxii.  21,  Ivii.  4;  2  Tim.  iv.  17), 
and  hence  for  the  arch-fiend  himself  (1  Pet.  v.  8). 
The  figure  of  the  lion  was  employed  as  an  orna 
ment  both  in  architecture  and  sculpture.  On  each 
of  the  six  steps  leading  up  to  the  great  ivory 
throne  of  Solomon  stood  tv  o  lions  on  either  side, 
carved  by  the  workmen  of  Hiram,  and  two  others 
were  beside  the  arms  of  the  throne  (1  K.  x.  19,20). 
The  great  brazen  laver  was  in  like  manner  adorned 
with  cherubim,  lions,  and  palm-trees  in  graven 
work  (1  K.  vii.  29,  36).  [W.  A.  W.] 


J-IZ'ARD 


,   letaah  :    Vat.    and    Alex. 


a>T7js  ;  Compl.  itrxoAaflciTT/s  ;  Aid.  <taAo- 
:  stellio).  The  Hebrew  word,  which  with 
its  English  rendering  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  30, 
appears  to  be  correctly  translated  by  the  A.  V.  Some 
species  of  lizard  is  mentioned  amongst  those  "  creep 
ing  things  that  creep  upon  the  earth  "  which  were  to 
be  considered  unclean  by  the  Israelites. 

Lizards  of  various  kinds  abound  in  Egypt,  Pales 
tine,  and  Arabia  ;  some  of  these  are  mentioned  in 
the  Bible  under  various  Hebrew  names,  notices  ol 
which  will  be  found  under  other  articles.  [FER 
RET  ;  SNAIL.]  All  the  old  versions  agree  in  iden 
tifying  the  letaah  with  some  saurian,  and  some 
concur  as  to  the  particular  genus  indicated.  The 
LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  the  Targ.  of  Jonathan,*  with  the 
Arabic  versions,  understand  a  lizard  by  the  Hebrew 
word.  The  Syriac  has  a  word  which  is  generally 
translated  salamander,  but  probably  this  name  was 
applied  also  to  the  lizard.  The  Greek  word,  with 
its  slight  variations,  which  the  LXX.  use  to  express 
the  letaah,  appears  from  what  may  be  gathered  from 
Aristotle,b  and  perhaps  also  from  its  derivation,8 
to  point  to  some  lizard  belonging  to  the  Geckotidae. 


Many  members  of  this  family  of  Saura  are  cha- 
•acterised  by  a  peculiar  lamcllated  structure  on  the 
under  surface  of  the  toes,  by  means  of  which  they 
are  enabled  to  run  over  the  smoothest  surfaces,  and 


*  NTVIDDK* ;  "  stellio,  reptile  immundum." 

k  The  following  are  the  references  to  the  Greek  word 
u(T(caAa(SuJn)?  In  Aristot.  de  Anim.  Hist,  (ed  Schneider), 
iv. .11,  $2;  vtll.  17,  $1;  vlll.  19,  $2;  vlll.  28,  $2;  Ix.  2,  }5 ; 
ix.  10,  $2.  That  Aristotle  understands  some  species  of 
lircko  by  the  Greek  word  Is  clear;  for  he  says  of  the 
woodpecker,  irofxverai  eirt  TO<S  StvSpttn  ra^fois  KO.L 
3»rrtot,  xatla-afo  ol  ao-K<zAa/3u>Tai  (ix.  10.  $2).  He  alludes 


also  to  a  sprcles  In  Italy,  perhaps  the  Hemidactylut  ixr- 
•ucatus,  whose  bite,  he  says,  is  fatal  (?). 
e  'AoxaAa/Sum)!,  ^av<f>iov  eoticbs  <7a.vpif  iv  rots  TOI'\OI< 
vfpirov  Taif  ouajfiarui'.     This  seems  to  Identify  It  witi< 
me  of  the  Geckotidae:  perhaps  the  Tarentola  was  b«sl 
mown  to  the  Greeks.    The  noiseless  rt<nix<»?)  an;'-.  *1 
times,  fixed  habits  of  this  llsui  are  referred  to  oelow 
;See  Galsf.  £tym.  Mag.) 


LIZARD 

even  in  an  inverted  jiosition,  like  house-flies  on  a 
ieling.  Mr.  liroderip  observes  that  they  can  remain 
suspended  beneath  the  large  leaves  of  the  tropical 
vegetation,  and  remain  for  hours  in  positions  as 
"r.traordinary  as  the  insects  for  which  they  watch ; 
the  wonderful  apparatus  with  which  their  feet  are 
furnished  enabling  them  to  overcome  gravity.  Now 
the  Hebrew  letddh  appears  to  be  derived  from  a 
root  w'.uch,  though  not  extant  in  that  language, 
is  found  in  its  sister-tongue  the  Arabic :  this  root 
means  to  adhere  to  the  tjround,*  an  expression 
which  well  agrees  with  the  peculiar  sucker-like 
properties  of  the  feet  of  the  Geckos.  Bochart  has 
uiccessfully  argued  that  the  lizard  denoted  by  the 
Hebrew  word  is  that  kind  which  the  Arabs  call 
oachara,  the  translation  of  which  term  is  thus  given 
ov  Golius :  "  An  animal  like  a  lizard,  of  a  red  colour, 
and  adhering  to  the  ground,  cibo  potuive  venenum 
inspirat  quemeunque  contigerit."  This  description 
will  be  found  to  agree  with  the  character  of  the 
Kan-Foot  Lizard  (Ptyodactylitsi  Gecko],  which  is 


LOAN 


127 


The  Fan-Foot.     (I'lyixlactylui  Gecko.) 

common  in  Egypt  and  in  parts  of  Arabia,  and 
perhaps  is  also  found  in  Palestine.  It  is  reddish 
brown,  spotted  with  white.6  Hasselquist  thus 
•speaks  of  it :  "  The  poison  of  this  animal  is  very 
singular,  as  it  exhales  from  the  lobidi  of  the  toes. 
At  Cairo  I  had  an  opportunity  of  observing  how 
acrid  the  exhalations  of  the  toes  of  this  animal  ai  e. 
As  it  ran  over  the  hand  of  a  man  who  was  endea 
vouring  to  catch  it,  there  immediately  rose  little 
red  pustules  over  all  those  parts  which  the  animal 
had  touched"  (  Voyages,  p.  220).  Forskal  (Descr. 
Anitn.  13)  says  that  the  Egyptians  call  this  lizard 
Abu  burs,  "  father  of  leprosy,"  in  allusion  to  the 
leprous  sores  which  contact  with  it  produces ;  and 
to  this  day  the  same  term  is  used  by  the  Arabs 
to  denote  a  lizard,  probably  of  this  same  species.' 
The  Geckos  live  on  insects  and  worms,  which  they 
swallow  whole.  They  derive  their  name  from  the 
peculiar  sound  which  some  of  the  species  utter. 
This  sound  has  been  described  as  being  similar  to 
the  double  click  often  used  in  riding;  they  make  it 
by  some  movement  of  the  tongue  against  the  palate. 
The  Geckotidae  are  nocturnal  in  their  habits,  and 
frequent  houses,  cracks  in  rocks,  &c.  They  move 
very  rapidly,  and  without  making  the  slightest 
sound  ;  heuce  probably  the  derivation  of  the  Greek 


d  Sec  Gesen.  (Tltes.  s.  v.).  A  similar  root  has  the  force 
of  "hiding;"  in  which  case  the  word  will  refer  to  the 
Gecko's  habit  of  frequenting  holes  in  walls,  &c. 

8  The  Gr.  ao-/caAa/3uJTr)s,  and  perhaps  Lat.  stellio, 
indicate  the  K<>.nus,.thc  red  colour  the  species. 

(j^jjj     ~j\,  <*ni  Ifurays,  Lizard.  (Catafago,  Arab. 
fret.) 


word  for  this  lizard.  They  are  found  in  all  part; 
of  the  world ;  in  the  greatest  abundance  in  warm 
climates.  It  is  no  doubt  owing  to  their  repulsive 
appearance  that  they  have  the  character  of  being 
highly  venomous,  just  as  the  unscientific  in  England 
attach  similar  properties  to  toads,  newts,  olind 
worms,  &c.  &c.,  although  these  creatures  are  per 
fectly  harmless.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  ad 
mitted  that  there  may  be  species  of  lizards  which 
do  secrete  a  venomous  fluid,  the  effects  of  which  nre 
no  doubt  aggravated  by  the  heat  of  the  climate,  the 
unhealthy  condition  of  the  subject,  or  other  causes. 
The  Geckos  belong  to  the  sub-order  Pachyglcssae, 
order  Saura.  They  are  oviparous,  producing  a  round 

egg,  with  a  hard  calcareous  shell.  fw.  H."| 

j 
LO-AM'MI  ('''Gy  K?  :   ov  Ka6s  ftov  :  non  po- 

pnlus  meus),  i.  e.  "  not  my  people,"  the  figurative 
name  given  by  the  prophet  Hosea  to  his  second  son 
by  Corner,  the  daughter  of  Diblaim  (Hos.  i.  9),  to 
denote  the  rejection  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  by 
Jehovah.  Its  significance  is  explained  in  ver.  9,  10. 

LOAN.  The  law  of  Moses  did  not  contemplate 
any  raising  of  loans  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining 
capital,  a  condition  perhaps  alluded  to  in  the  pa 
rables  of  the  "  pearl  "  and  "  hidden  treasure " 
(Matt.  xiii.  44,  45 ;  Michaehs,  Cornm.  on  Laws 
of  Moses,  art.  147,  ii.  297,  ed.  Smith).  [CoM- 
MERCK.]  Such  persons  as  bankers  and  sureties,  ic 
the  commercial  sense  (Prov.  xxii.  26;  Neh.  v.  3) 
were  unknown  to  the  earlier  ages  of  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth.  The  Law  strictly  forbade  any  in 
terest  to  be  taken  for  a  loan  to  any  poor  person, 
either  in  the  shape  of  money  or  of  produce,  and  at 
first,  as  it  seems,  even  In  the  case  of  a  foreigner ; 
but  this  prohibition  was  afterwards  limited  to 
Hebrews  only,  from  whom,  of  whatever  rank,  not 
only  was  no  usury  on  any  pretence  to  be  exacted, 
but  relief  to  the  poor  by  way  of  loan  was  enjoined, 
and  excuses  for  evading  this  duty  were  forbidden 
(Ex.  xxii.  25;  Lev.  xxv.  35,  37  ;  Deut.  xv.  3,  7-10, 
xxiii.  19,  20).  The  instances  of  extortionate  con 
duct  mentioned  with  disapprobation  in  the  book  of 
Job  probably  represent  a  state  of  things  previous  to 
the  Law,  and  such  as  the  Law  was  intended  to  remedy 
(Job  xxii.  6,  xxiv.  3,  7).  As  commerce  increased,  the 
practice  of  usury,  and  so  also  of  suretiship,  grew  up ; 
but  the  exaction  of  it  from  a  Hebrew  appears  to  have 
been  regarded  to  a  late  period  as  discreditable  (Prov. 
vi.  1,  4,  si.  15,  xvii.  18,  xx.  16,  xxii.  26  ;  Ps.  xv.  5, 
xxvii.  13  ;  Jer.  xv.  10  ;  Ez.  xviii.  13,  xxii.  12).  Sys 
tematic  breach  of  the  law  in  this  respect  was  corrected 
by  Nehemiah  after  the  return  from  captivity  (see  No. 
6)  (Neh.  v.  1,  13;  Michaelis,  »&.,  arts.  148,  151). 
In  later  times  the  practice  of  borrowing  money  appears 
to  have  prevailed  without  limitation  of  race,  and  to 
have  been  carried  on  on  systematic  principles,  though 
the  original  spirit  of  the  Law  was  approved  by  our 
Lord  (Matt.  v.  42,  xxv.  27  ;  Luke  vi.  35,  six.  23). 
The  money-changers  {KeppMTiarai,  and  KO\\V- 
j8«rTo(),  who  had  seats  and  tables  in  the  Temple, 
were  traders  whose  profits  arose  chiefly  from  the 
exchange  of  money  with  those  who  came  to  pay 
their  annual  half-shekel  (Pollux,  iii.  84,  vii.  170; 
Schleusner,  Lex.  N.  T.  s.  v. ;  Lightfoot,  ffor.  ITebr. ; 
Matt.  xxi.  12).  The  documents  relating  to  loans  of 
money  appear  to  have  been  deposited  in  public  offices 
in  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B.  J,  ii.  17,  §6). 

In  making  loans  no  prohibition  is  pronounced  in 
the  Law  against  taking  a  pledge  of  the  borrower, 
but  certain  limitations  are  prescribed  in  favour  o/ 
the  poor. 


124  LOAVKH 

1.  The  outer  garment,  which  formed   the  poor 
man's  principal  covering  by  night  as  well  as  by  .lay, 
if  taken  in  pledge,  was  to  be  returned  before  sunset. 
A  bedstead,  however,  might  be  taken  (Ex.  xxii.  26, 
27  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  12,  13:  comp.  Job  xxii.  6  ;  Prov. 
txii.  27  ;  Shaw,  Trav.  224  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on 
Bed.  i.47, 231 ;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  del'Ar.  56;  Lane, 
ifotl.  E<f.  i.  57,  58 ;  Ges.  Thes.  403  ;  Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  arts.  143  and  150). 

2.  The  prohibition  was  absolute  in  the  case  of 
(a)  the  widow's  garment   (Deut.  xxiv.    17),  and 
(6)  a  millstone   of  either  kind   (Deut.   xxiv.  6). 
Michaelis  (art.  150,  ii.  321)  supposes  also  all  indis 
pensable  animals  and  utensils  of  agriculture ;  see  also 
Mishua,  Mauser  Sheni,  i. 

3.  A  creditor  was  forbidden  to  enter  a  house  to 
reclaim  a  pledge,  but  was  to  stand  outside  till  the 
borrower  should   come  forth  to   return  it  (Deut. 
xxiv.  10,  11). 

4.  The  original  Roman  law  of  debt  permitted  the 
debtor  to  be  enslaved  by  his  creditor  until  the  debt 
was  discharged  ;  and  he  might  even  be  put  to  death 
ry  him,  though  this  extremity  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  ever  practised  (Cell.  xx.  1,  45,  52  ;  Diet, 
of  Antiq.  "  Bonorum  Cessio,"  "Nexum").     The 
Jewish  law,  as  it  did  not  forbid  temporary  bondage 
in  the  case  of  debtors,  so  it  forbade  a  Hebrew  debtor 
to  be  detained  as  a  bondsman  longer  than  the  7th 
year,  or  at  farthest  the  year  of  Jubilee  (Ex.  xxi.  2  ; 
Lev.  xxv.  39,  42  ;  Deut.  xv.  9).     If  a  Hebrew  was 
sold  in  this  way  to  a  foreign  sojourner,  he  might 
l«  redeemed  at  a  valuation  at  any  time  previous  to 
the  Jubilee  year,  and  in  that  year  was,  under  any 
circumstances,  to  be  released.     Foreign  sojourners, 
however,  were  not  entitled  to  release  at  that  time 
[Lev.  xxv.  44,  46,  47,  54;  2  K.  iv.  2  ;  Is.  1.  1, 
Iii.  3).     Land  gold  on  account  of  debt  was  redeem 
able  either  by  the  seller  himself,  or  by  a  kinsman  in 
case  of  his  inability  to  repurchase.    Houses  in  walled 
towns,  except  such  as  belonged  to  Levites,  if  not 
redeemed  within  one  year  after  sale,  were  alienated 
for  ever.     Michaelis  doubts  whether  all  debt  was 
'extinguished  by  the  Jubilee ;  but  Josephus'  account 
is  very  precise  (Ant.  iii.  12,  §3  ;  Lev.  xxv.  23, 34  ; 
Ruth   iv.  4,   10  ;    Michaelis,  §158,  ii.  360).     In 
later   times  the   sabbatical  or  jubilee  release  was 
superseded  by  a  law,  probably  introduced  by  the 
Romans,  by  which  the  debtor  was  liable  to  be  de 
tained  in  prison  until  the  full  discharge  of  his  debt 
(Matt.  v.  26).      Michaelis  thinks   this  doubtful. 
The  case  imagined  in  the  parable  of  the  Unmerciful 
Servant  belongs  rather  to  despotic  Oriental  than 
Jewish  manners  (Matt,  xviii.  34;  Michaelis,  ibid, 
art.  149  ;  Trench,  Parables,  p.  141).     Subsequent 
Jewish  opinions  on  loans  and  usuiy  may  be  seen  in 
the  Mishna,  Baba  Metziah,  c.  iii.  x.     [JUBILEE.] 

[H.  W.  P.] 

LOAVES.     [BREAD.] 

LOCK."     Where  European  leeks  have  not  been 
introduced,  the  locks  of  Eastern  houses  are  usually 


LOCUST 

ot  wood,  and  consist  of  a  partly  hollow  bolt  fron. 
14  inches  to  2  feet  long  for  external  doors  or  gates, 
or  from  7  to  9  inches  for  interior  doors.  The  bolt 
passes  through  a  groove  in  a  piece  attached  to  the 
door  into  a  socket  in  the  door-post.  In  the  groove- 
piece  are  from  4  to  9  small  iron  or  wooden  sliding- 
pins  or  wires,  which  drop  into  corresponding  holes 
in  the  bolt,  and  fix  it  in  its  place.  The  key  is  a 
piece  of  wood  furnished  with  a  like  number  of  pins, 
which,  when  the  key  is  introduced  sideways,  raise 
the  sliding-pins  in  the  lock,  and  allow  the  bolt  to 
be  drawn  back.  Ancient  Egyptian  doors  were  fas 
tened  with  central  bolts,  and  sometimes  with  bars 
passing  from  one  door-post  to  the  other.  They  were 
also  sometimes  sealed  with  clay.  [CLAY.]  Keys 
were  made  of  bronze  or  iron,  of  a  simple  construc 
tion.  The  gates  of  Jerusalem  set  up  under  Nehe- 
miah's  direction  had  both  bolts  and  locks.  (Judg. 
iii.  23,  25;  Cant.  v.  5;  Neh.  iii.  3,  &c. ;  Rau- 
wollff,  Trav.  in  Ray,  ii.  17  ;  Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  22  ; 
Volney,  Travels,  ii.  438 ;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  42 ; 
Chardin,  Voy.  iv.  123 ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg., 
abridgm.  i.  15,  16).  [H.  W.  P.] 

LOCUST,b  a  well-known  insect,  which  cotimits 
terrible  devastation  to  vegetation  in  the  countries 
which  it  visits.  In  the  Bible  there  are  frequent 
allusions  to  locusts ;  and  there  are  nine  or  ten 
Hebrew  words  which  are  supposed  to  denote  dif 
ferent  varieties  or  species  of  this  destructive  family. 
They  belong  to  that  order  of  insects  known  by  the 
term  Ortfioptera.e  This  order  is  divided  into  two 
large  groups  or  divisions,  viz.  Cursoria  and  Sal- 
tatoria.  The  first,  as  the  name  imports,  includes 
only  those  families  of  Orthoptera  which  have  leg* 
formed  for  creeping,  and  which  were  considered 
unclean  by  the  Jewish  law.  Under  the  second  are 
comprised  those  whose  two  posterior  legs,  by  their 
peculiar  structure,  enable  them  to  move  on  the 
ground  by  leaps.  This  group  contains,  according  to 
Serville's  arrangement,  three  families,  the  Gryllides, 
Locustariae,  and  the  Acridites,  distinguished  one 
from  the  other  by  some  peculiar  modifications  of 
structure.  The  common  house-cricket  (Gryllus  do- 
mesticus,  Oliv.)  may  be  taken  as  an  illustration  of 
the  Gryllides ;  the  green  grasshopper  (.Locusta  viri- 
dissima,  Fabr.),  which  the  French  call  Sauterelle 
verte,  will  represent  the  family  Locustariae; 
and  the  Acridites  may  be  typified  by  the  common 
migratory  locust  (  Ocdipoda  migratoria,  Aud.  Serv.), 


Oedlpoda  migratuna. 


which  is  an  occasional  visitor  to  this  country  *     Of 
the  Gryllides,  G.  cerisyi  has  been  found  in  Egypt, 


*  7-1V3D.  xXelOpov,  sera ;  Ges.  Thes.  892. 

b  From  the  Latin  locusta,  derived  by  the  old  etymolo 
gists  from  locus  and  tistits,  "  quod  tactu  multa  urit,  niorsu 
VCTO  omnia  erodat.'' 

c  From  opOov  and  wrtpov '.  an  order  of  insects  charac 
terized  )>y  their  anterior  wings  being  semi-coriaceous 
»nd  overtopping  at  the.  tips.  The  posterior  wings  are 
hrRe  and  memi-ranous,  and  longitudinally  folded  whei 
at  rest. 

'i  In  the  year  1748  locusts  (the  dedipoda  migratmta, 
j.jubtlcas)  Invaded  Kurope  in  immense  nuiliitii 


Charles  XII.  and  his  army,  then  in  Bessarabia,  were 
stopped  in  their  course.  It  is  said  that  the  swarms  wers 
four  hours  passing  over  Breslau.  Nor  did  England  escape 
for  a  swarm  fell  near  Pristol,  and  ravaged  the  country  in 
the  month  of  July  of  the  same  year.  They  did  great 
damage  in  Shropshire  and  Staffordshire,  by  ef.!.'e.g  the 
blossoms  of  the  apple-trees,  and  especially  the  icaveg  of 
Daks,  which  looked  as  bare  as  at  Christmas.  The  rooks 
did  a  good  service  in  this  case  at  least.  See  Gentleman's 
Magazine,  July  1748,  pp.  331  and  414  ;  also  T'te  Times 
Oct.  4,  1845. 


LOCUST 

and  G.  domestims,  on  the  authority  of  Dr.  Kitto, 
nt  Palestine ;  but  doubtless  other  species  also 
occur  in  these  countries.  Of  the  Locustariae, 
Phaneroptera  falcata,  Serv.  (G.  falc.  Scopoli),  has 
•Uso.  according  to  Kitto,  been  found  in  Palestine, 
Bradyporus  dasypus  in  Asia  Minor,  Turkey,  &c., 
Saga  Natoliae  near  Smyrna.  Of  the  locusts  proper, 
or  Acridites,  four  species  of  the  genus  Truxalis  are 
recorded  as  having  been  seen  in  Egypt,  Syria,  or 
Arabia :  viz.  T.  nasitta,  T.  variabilis,  T.  procera, 
and  T.  miniata.  The  following  kinds  also  occur : 
Opsomala  pisciformis,  in  Egypt  and  the  oasis  of 
Harrat ;  Foekiloceros  hieroglyphicus,  P.  bufonius, 
P.  punctiventris,  P.  vulcanus,  in  the  deserts  of 
Cairo ;  Dericorys  albidula  in  Egypt  and  Mount  Le 
banon.  Of  the  genus  Acridium,  A.  maestum,  the 
most  formidable  perhaps  of  all  the  Acridites, 
A.  lineola  (=G.  Acgypt.  Linn.),  which  is  a  species 
commonly  sold  for  food  in  the  markets  of  Bagdad 


LOCUST 


129 


Acridium  Llneola. 

(Strv.  Ortkop.  657),  A.  semifasciatum,  A.  pere- 
yrmttm,  one  of  the  most  destructive  of  the  species, 
and  A.  morbosum,  occur  either  in  Egypt  or  Arabia. 
Calliptamus  serapis  and  Chrotogomts  lugubris  are 
found  in  Egypt,  and  in  the  cultivated  lands  about 
Cairo ;  Eremobia  carinata,  in  the  rocky  places 
about  Sinai.  E.  cisti,  E.  pulchripennis,  Ocdipoda 
octofasciata,  and  Oe.  migratoria  (  =  (?.  migrat. 
Linn.),  complete  the  list  of  the  Saltatorial  Orthop- 
tera  of  the  Bible-lands.  From  the  above  catalogue 
it  will  be  seen  how  perfectly  unavailing,  for  the 
most  part,  must  be  any  attempt  to  identify  the 
Hebrew  names  with  ascertained  species,  especially 
when  it  is  remembered  that  some  of  these  names 
occur  but  seldom,  others  (Lev.  xi.  21)  only  once  in 
the  Bible — that  the  only  clue  is  in  many  instances 
the  mere  etymology  of  the  Hebrew  word — that 
such  etymology  has  of  necessity,  from  the  fact  of 
there  being  but  a  single  word,  a  very  wide  meaning 
— and  that  the  etymology  is  frequently  very  un 


certain.  The  LXX.  ami  Vulg.  do  not  conHbutc 
much  help,  for  the  words  used  there  are  themselves 
of  a  very  uncertain  signification,  and  moreover  em 
ployed  in  a  most  promiscuous  manner.  Still, 
though  the  possibility  of  identifying  with  certainty 
any  one  of  the  Hebrew  names  is  a  hopeless  task, 
yet  in  one  or  two  instances  a  fair  approximation  to 
identification  may  be  arrived  at. 

From  Lev.  xi.  21,  22,  we  learn  the  Hebrew 
names  of  four  different  kinds  of  Saltatorial  Ortho- 
ptcra.  "  These  may  ye  eat  of  every  flying  creeping 
thing  that  goeth  upon  all  four,d  which  have  legs 
above  their  feet «  to  leap  withal  upon  the  earth ; 
even  those  of  them  ye  may  eat,  the  arbeh  after  his 
kind,  and  the  salam  after  his  kind,  and  the  chargol 
(wrongly  translated  beetle  by  the  A.  V.,  an  insect 
which  would  be  included  amongst  the  flying  creep 
ing  things  forbidden  as  food  in  vers.  23  and  42) 
after  his  kind,  and  the  chdgab  after  his  kind." 
Besides  the  names  mentioned  in  this  passage,  there 
occur  five  others  in  the  Bible,  all  of  which  Bochart 
(iii.  251,  &c.)  considers  to  represent  so  many 
distinct  species  of  locusts,  viz.  gob,  gazam,  chdsil, 
yelck,  and  tseldtsdl. 

(1.)    Arbeh   (!"I2"]N  :    aicpls,    fipovxos,    OTre- 

AejSos,  a.TTt\a&os ;  in  Joel  ii.  25,  ipvfflfti\  : 
lucusta,  bruchus :  "  locust,'1  "  grasshopper")  is 
the  most  common  name  for  locust,  the  word 
occurring  about  twenty  times  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  viz.,  in  Ex.  x.  4,  12,  13,  14,  19;  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12 ;  Lev.  xi.  22  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  38 ;  IK. 
viii.  37;  2  Chr.vi.  28;  Job  xxxix.  20;  Ps.  cv.  34, 
cix.  23,  Ixxviii.  46  ;  Prov.  xxx.  27  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  23  ; 
Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25;  Nah.  iii.  15,  17.  The  LXX.  ge 
nerally  render  arbeh  by  aicpis,  the  general  Greek 
name  for  locust :  in  two  passages,  however,  viz., 
Lev.  xi.  22,  and  1  K.  viii.  37,  they  use  Ppovxo* 
as  the  representative  of  the  original  word.  In  Nah. 
iii.  17,  arbeh  is  rendered  by  ai-reAe/Sos  ;  while  the 
Aldine  version,  in  Joel  ii.  25,  has  ipixrifiT],  mildew. 
The  Vulg.  has  locusta  in  every  instance  except  in 
Lev.  xi.  22,  where  it  has  bruchus.  The  A.  V.  in 
the  four  following  passages  has  grasshopper,  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12;  Job  xxxix.  20;  and  Jer.  xivi.  23: 
in  all  the  other  places  it  has  locust.  The  word 
arbeh,1  which  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
be  numerous,"  is  probably  sometimes  used  in  a 
wide  sense  to  express  any  of  the  larger  devastating 
species.  It  is  the  locust  of  the  Egyptian  plague. 
In  almost  every  passage  where  arbeh  occurs  re 
ference  is  made  to  its  terribly  destructive  powers 
It  is  one  of  the  flying  creeping  creatures  that  were 
allowed  as  food  by  the  law  of  Moses  (Lev.  xi.  21). 
In  this  passage  it  is  clearly  the  representative  of 
some  species  of  winged  saltatorial  orthoptera,  which 
must  have  possessed  indications  of  form  sufficient  to 
distinguish  the  insect  from  the  three  other  names 
which  belong  to  the  same  division  of  orthoptera,  and 
are  mentioned  in  the  same  context.  The  opinion 


d  It  is  well  known  that  all  insects,  properly  so  called, 
have  six  feet.  But  the  Jews  considered  the  two  anterior 
pair  only  as  true  legs  in  the  locust  family,  regarding  them 
as  additional  instruments  for  leaping. 

•  V^V  by»O  D^STO  I1?  "iBJtf.  The  rendering 
cf  the  A.  V.,  "  which  have  legs  above  their  feet,"  is  cer 
tainly  awkward.  D^V"O>  which  occurs  only  in  the  dual 

number,  properly  denotes  "  that  part  of  the  leg  between 
the  knee  and  ankle"  which  is  bent  in  bowing  down,  i.  e. 
Ihe  titriat.  The  passage  may  be  thus  translated,  "  whlcti 
hsve  Oieir  tibiae  so  placed  above  their  feet  [Ursi]  as  to 

vo:,.  ii. 


enable  them  to  leap  upon  the  earth."  Dr.  Harris,  adept- 
ing  the  explanation  of  the  author  'of  Scripture  Ittwtrattd, 
understands  D>JH3  to  mean  "joints,"  and  Q^JT  "hind 

legs;"  which  rendering  Niebuhr  (Quaett.  xxx)  gives. 
But  there  is  no  reason  for  a  departure  from  the  literal 
and  general  significations  of  the  Hebrew  terms. 

-  locust,  so  called  from  its  multitude,  H2"^ 


See  Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.,  who  adopts  the  explanation  01 
Michaelis  that  the  four  names  in  Lev.  xi.  22  are  not 
tne  representatives  of  four  distinct  genera  or  species,  but 
denote  the  different  stages  of  growth.  „ 

K 


180 


LOOUST 


of  Michaelis  (Suppl.  667,  910),  that  the  fou 
words  mentioned  in  Lev.  xi.  22  denote  the  sam 
insect  in  four  different  ages  or  stages  of  its  growth 
if.  quite  untenable,  for,  whatever  particular  s]>ecie 
are  intended  bf  these  words,  it  is  quite  clear  from 
ver.  21  that  ,ney  must  all  be  winged  orthoptera 
From  the  fact  that  almost  in  every  instance  wher 
the  woi  d  arbeh  occurs,  reference  is  made  either 
the  dev  ouring  and  devastating  nature  of  this  insecl 
or  else  to  its  multiplying  powers  ( Judg.  vi.  5,  vii.  1 
wrongly  translated  "grasshopper"  by  the  A.  V. 
Nah.  iii.  15,  Jer.  xlvi.  23),  it  is  probable  that  eithe 
the  Acridium  peregrinum,s  or  the  Oedipoda  migra 
toria  is  the  insect  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  woi 
arbeh,  for  these  two  species  are  the  most  destructiv 
)f  the  family.  Of  the  foiTner  species  M.  Olivie 


( Voyage  dans  F  Empire  Othoman,  ii.  424)  thu 
writes :  "  With  the  burning  south  winds  (o 
Syria)  there  come  from  the  interior  of  Arabia  an 
from  the  most  southern  parts  of  Persia  clouds  o 
locusts  (Acridium  peregrinum),  whose  ravages  to 
these  countries  are  as  grievous  and  nearly  as  sudde; 
xs  those  of  the  heaviest  hail  in  Europe.  We  wit 
nessed  them  twice.  It  is  difficult  to  express  th 
effect  produced  on  us  by  the  sight  of  the  whol 
atmosphere  filled  on  all  sides  and  to  a  great  heigh 
by  an  innumerable  quantity  of  these  insects,  whose 
flight  was  slow  and  uniform,  and  whose  noise  re 
sembled  that  of  rain :  the  sky  was  darkened,  anc 
the  light  of  the  sun  considerably  weakened.  In  a 
moment  the  ten-aces  of  the  houses,  the  streets,  anc 
all  the  fields  were  covered  by  these  insects,  and  in 
two  days  they  had  nearly  devoured  all  the  leaves 
of  the  plants.  Happily  they  lived  but  a  short  time, 
and  seemed  to  have  migrated  only  to  reproduce 
themselves  and  die ;  in  fact,  nearly  all  those  we 
saw  the  next  day  had  paired,  and  the  day  follow 
ing  the  fields  were  covered  with  their  dead  bodies." 
This  species  is  found  in  Arabia,  Egypt,  Meso 
potamia,  and  Persia.  Or  perhaps  arbeh  may  de 
note  the  Oedipoda  migratoria,  the  Sauterelle  do 
passage,  concerning  which  Michaelis  inquired  of 
Carsten  Niebuhr,  and  received  the  following  reply : 
"  Sauterelle  de  passage  est  la  rr/Sme  que  les  Arabes 
mangent  et  la  m&ne  qu'on  a  vd  en  Allemagne  " 
(Jiecueil,  quest.  32  in  Niebuhr's  Desc.  de  FArabie}. 
This  species  appeai-s  to  be  as  destructive  as  the 
Acridium  peregrinum. 

(2.)  Chdgdb  (3371  :  iitpls  :  locusta  :  "  grass 
hopper,"  "locust"),  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  22,  Num. 
xiii.  33,  2  Chr.  vii.  13,  Eccl.  xii.  5,  Is.xl.  22  ;  in  all 
of  which  passages  it  is  rendered  dxpis  by  the  LXX., 
and  locusta  by  the  Vulg.  In  2  Chr.  vii.  13  the 


»  The  Gryttut  gregarius  of  Forskal  (Detc.  Anim.  81)  is 
perhaps  identical  with  the  Acrid  pereg.     Forskal  says, 

"  Arabes  ubique  vocaat  Djerad  (v\l  t^**^  et  Jndae'  in 
Yemen  habltantes  ilium  ease  PQTX  asseverabant," 


,  (hadjab),  qui  velum  obtendit,  from 

,  intern- suit,  fecliitit.. ' 


LOCUST 

A.  V.  reads  "  locust,"  in  the  other  pn£S,-.gt« 
"  grasshopper."  From  the  use  of  the  word  hi 
Chron.,  "  If  I  command  the  locusts  to  devour  th* 
land,"  compared  with  Lev.  xi.  22,  it  would  appeal 
that  some  species  of  devastating  locust  is  intended. 
In  the  passage  of  Numbers,  "  There  we  saw  the 
giants  the  sons  of  Anak  ....  and  we  were  in  our 
own  sight  as  grasshoppers  "  (chdgdb),  as  well  as  in 
Eoclesiastes  and  Isaiah,  reference  seems  to  be  made 
to  some  small  species  of  locust ;  and  with  this  view 
Oedman  (  Verm.  Samm.  ii.  90)  agrees.  Tychsen 
( Comment,  de  Locust,  p.  76)  supposes  that  chdgdb 
denotes  the  Gryllus  coronatus,  Linn. ;  but  this  is 
the  Acanthodis  coron.  of  Aud.  Serv.,  a  S.  American 
species,  and  probably  confined  to  that  continent. 
Michaelis  (Supp.  668),  who  derives  the  word  from 
an  Arabic  root  signifying  "to  veil,"h  conceives  that' 
chdgdb  represents  either  a  locust  at  the  fourth 
stage  of  its  growth,  "  ante  quartas  exuvias  quod 
adhuc  velata  est,"  or  else  at  the  last  stage  of  its 
growth,  "  post  quartas  exuvias,  quod  jam  volans 
solem  ccelumque  obvelat."  To  the  first  theory  the 
passage  in  Lev.  xi.  is  opposed.  The  second  theory 
is  more  reasonable,  but  chdgdb  is  probably  derived 
not  from  the  Arabic  but  the  Hebrew.  From  what 
has  been  stated  above  it  will  appear  better  to  own 
our  complete  inability  to  say  what  species  of  locust 
chdgdb  denotes,  than  to  hazard  conjectures  which 
must  be  grounded  on  no  solid  foundation.  In  the 
Talmud !  chdgdb  is  a  collective  name  for  many  of 
the  locust  tribe,  no  less  than  eight  hundred  kinds 
of  chagdbim  being  supposed  by  the  Talmud  to  exist ! 
(Lewysohn,  Zoolog.  des  Talm.  §384).  Some  kinds, 
of  locusts  arc  beautifully  marked,  and  were  sought 
after  by  young  Jewish  children  as  playthings,  just 
as  butterflies  and  cockchafers  are  now-a-days.  M. 
Lowysohn  says  (§384)  that  a  regular  traffic  used  to 
be  carried  on  with  the  chagdbim,  which  were  caught 
in  great  numbers,  and  sold  after  wine  had  been  |j 
sprinkled  over  them  ;  he  adds  that  the  Israelites 
were  only  allowed  to  buy  them  before  the  dealer 
had  thus  prepared  them.k 

(3.)  Chargol  (?i~in :  oQtofidxils  '•  ophiomachus . 
"beetle").  The  A.  V.  is  clearly  in  error  ir. 
translating  this  word  "  beetle ;"  it  occurs  only  in 
Lev.  xi.  22,  but  it  is  clear  from  the  context  that  it 
denotes  some  species  of  winged  Saltatorial  orthopte~ 
rous  insect  which  the  Israelites  were  allowed  to  use 
as  food.  The  Greek  word  used  by  the  LXX.  is  one 
of  most  uncertain  meaning,  and  the  story  about  any 
kind  of  locust  attacking  a  serpent  is  an  absurdity 
which  requires  no  Cuvier  to  refute  it.m  As  to  this 
word  see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  iii.  264  ;  Rosenm.  notes  ; 
the  Lexicons  of  Suidas,  Hesychius,  &c.,  Pliny  xi.  29  • 
Adnotat.  ad  Arist.  H.  A.  torn.  iv.  47,  ed.  Schneider. 
Some  attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  the 
'hdrgol,  "  meree  conjecture: ! "  as  Rosenmiiller 
ruly  remarks.  The  Rev.  J.  F.  Denham,  in  Cyclop. 
Sib.  Lit.  (arts.  Chargol  and  Locust),  endeavours  to 
hew  that  the  Greek  word  ophiomachus  denotes 
ome  species  of  Tnucalis,  perhaps  T.  Nasutus.  '  •  The 


Fiirst  derives  3Jn  from  v-  imls-     331 

T   T  ™    T 

xire  a  radice,  poi>.  3  J,  to  which  root  he  refers 


. 

-  31J 


The  Talmudists  have  the  following  law  :  "  fle  that 
oweth  to  abstain  from  flesh  OK>3  H  JO)  is  forbidden 
he  flesh  of  fish  and  of  locusts  "  (D^ltl  D*3T  "K?3) 
fieros.  Nedar.  fol.  40,  2. 
m  SeePliny.    Paris,  1828,  pd.Grandsagne,  p.  451,  noU>. 


LOCUST 

^ord  instantly  suggests  a  reference  to  the  ichneu 
mon,  the  celebrated  destroyer  of  serpents  .  .  .  i: 
then  any  species  of  locust  can  be  adduced  whose 
habits  resemble  those  of  the  ichneumon,  may  not 
this  resemblance  account  for  the  name,  quasi  the 
ichneumon  (locust),  just  as  the  whole  genus  (T 
(family)  of  insects  called  fchneumonidae  were  so 
denominated  because  of  the  supposed  analogy  be 
tween  their  services  and  those  of  the  Egyptian 
ichneumon  ?  and  might  not  this  name  given  to 
that  secies  (?)  of  locust  at  a  very  early  period  have 
afterwards  originated  the  erroneous  notion  referred 
to  by  Aristotle  and  Pliny?"  But  is  it  a  fact  that 
the  genus  Truxnlis  is  an  exception  to  the  rest  of  the 
Acridites,  and  is  pre-eminently  insectivorous.  Ser- 
ville  (Orthopt.  579)  believes  that  in  their  manner 
of  living  the  Truxalides  resemble  the  rest  of  the 
Acridites,  but  seems  to  allow  that  further  investiga 
tion  is  necessary.  Fischer  (Orthop.  Europ.  p.  292) 
says  that  the  nutriment  of  this  family  is  plants  of 
various  kinds.  Mr.  F.  Smith,  in  a  letter  to  the 
writer  of  this  article,  says  he  has  no  doubt  that  the 
Truxalides  feed  on  plants.  What  is  Mr.  Denham's 
authority  for  asserting  that  they  are  insectivorous  ? 
It  is  granted  that  there  is  a  quasi  resemblance  in 
external  form  between  the  Truxalides  and  some  of 
the  larger  Ichneumonidae,  but  the  likeness  is  far 
from  striking.  Four  species  of  the  genus  Truxalis 
are  inhabitants  of  the  Bible  lands  (see  above). 


LOCUST 


131 


Truxaha  Nasuta. 

The  Jews,  however,  interpret  chdrgSl  to  mean  a 
species  of  grasshopper,  German,  heuschrecke,  which 
M.  Lewysohn  identifies  with  Locusta  viridissima, 
adopting  the  etymology  of  Bochart  and  Gesenius, 
who  refer  the  name  to  an  Arabic  origin."  The 
Jewish  women  used  to  carry  the  eggs  of  the  chargol 
in  their  ears  to  preserve  them  from  the  ear-ache, 
^Buxtorf,  Lex.  Cliald.  et  Rabbin,  s.  v.  chargol). 

(4.)  Salam  (DJPD  :  OTTOKJJS,  Compl.  arrants : 

attacus:  "bald  locust")  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi.  22, 
as  one  of  the  four  edible  kinds  of  leaping  insects. 
All  that  can  possibly  be  known  of  it  is  that  it  is 
some  kind  of  Saltatorial  orthopterous  insect,  winged, 
and  good  for  food.  Tychseu,  however,  arguing  from 
what  is  said  of  the  salam  in  the  Talmud  (Tract, 
Choliri),  viz.  that  "  this  insect  has  a  smooth  head,0 
and  that  the  female  is  without  the  sword-shaped 
tail,"  conjectures  that  the  species  here  intended  is 
Gry Hits  eversor  (Asso),  a  synonym  that  it  is  difficult 
to  identify  with  any  recorded  species. 
(5.)  Gazam  (DT3).  See  PALMER-WORM. 


I,  locustae  species  alata,  a  saltando.    Gesenius 

o  - 

refers  the  word  to  the  Arabic  Y^.-^..  (hardjal),  saliit, 
comparing  the  Germ.  HeuscArecfce  from  shrecken.  satire. 

0  Hence  perhaps  the  epithet  bald,  applied  to  salam  in 
Ibe  text  of  the  A.  V. 
p  S13.  aoconttug  to  Qesenius  (Thes   a.  v.),  is  from  an 


(6.)  Gob  (313:1"  dicpis,  (irtyov^  ci/f^owr :  Aq, 
in  Am.  vii.  1 ,  BapdStav :  locusta ;  locustae  locus- 
tarum  =  »313  313  in  Nah.  iii.  17:"  great  grass 
hoppers;"  " grasshoppers  ;"  marg  n  "green  worms," 
in  Amos).  This  word  is  found  only  in  Is. 
xxxiii .  4,  and  in  the  two  places  cited  above. 
There  is  nothing  in  any  of  these  passages  that 
will  help  to  point  out  the  species  denoted. 
That  some  kind  of  locust  is  intended  seems  pro 
bable  from  the  passage  in  Nahum,  "  thy  captains 
are  as  the  great  gobai  which  camp  in  the  hedges 
in  the  cool  of  the  day,  but  when  the  sun  ariseth 
they  flee  away,  and  their  place  is  not  known  where 
they  are."  Some  writers  led  by  this  passage, 
have  believed  that  the  gobai  represent  the  larva 
state  of  some  of  the  large  locusts ;  the  habit  of  halting 
at  night,  however,  and  encamping  under  the  hedges, 
as  described  by  the  prophet,  in  all  probability  belongs 
to  the  winged  locust  as  well  as  to  the  larvae,  see 
Ex.  x.  13,  "  the  Lord  brought  an  east  wind  upon  the 
land  all  that  day,  and  all  that  night ;  and  when  it 
was  morning,  the  east  wind  brought  the  locusts." 
Mr.  Barrow  (i.  257-8),  speaking  of  some  species 
of  S.  African  locusts,  says,  that  when  the  larvae, 
which  are  still  mere  voracious  than  the  parent 
insect,  are  on  the  march,  it  is  impossible  to  make 
them  turn  out  of  the  way,  which  is  usually  that  of 
the  wind.  At  sunset  the  troop  halts  and  divides 
into  separate  groups,  each  occupying  in  bee-like 
clusters  the  neighbouring  eminences  for  the  night. 
It  is  quite  possible  that  the  yob  may  represent  tht 
larva  or  nympha  state  of  the  insect ;  nor  is  the 
passage  from  Nahum,  "  when  the  sun  ariseth  they 
Hee  away,"  any  objection  to  this  supposition,  for  the 
last  stages  of  the  larva  differ  but  slightly  from  the 
nympha,  both  which  states  may  therefore  be  compre 
hended  under  one  name;  the<7$>a»of  Nah.  iii.  17, may 


Locufct  flying. 

easily  have  been  the  nymphae  (which  in  all  the  Amt- 
'abola  continue  to  feed  as  in  their  larva  condition)  en 
camping  at  night  under  the  hedges,  and,  obtaining 
.heir  wings  as  the  sun  arose,  are  then  represented  as 
lying  away.q  It  certainly  is  improbable  that  thi 
fews  should  have  had  no  name  fur  the  locust  in  its 


mused  root,  !"1I13>  the  Arab. 


to  emerge  from  tb* 


;round.    Fiirst  refers  the  word  to  a  Hebrew  origin.    Set 
iote,  ARBEH. 

Siuee  the  above  was  wntten  it  has  been  discovered 
hat  Dr.  Kitto  (Pict.  Bible,  n-.te  on  Nah.  iii  17)  is  ol  » 
imilar  opinion,  that  the  y6b  pr  i\  ;.bly  denotes  the  nymfha, 

K  2 


132 


LOCUST 


larva  or  nympha  state,  for  they  must  have  been 
^uite  familiar  with  the  sight  of  such  devourers  of 
every  green  thing,  the  larvae  being  even  more 
destructive  than  the  imago;  perhaps  some  of 
the  other  nine  names,  all  of  which  Bochart  con 
siders  to  be  the  names  of  so  many  species,  denote 
',he  insect  in  one  or  other  of  these  conditions. 
The  A.  V.  were  evidently  at  a  loss,  for  the  trans 
lators  read  "  green  worms,"  in  Am.  vii.  1.  Tychsen 
(p.  93)  identifies  the  gob  with  the  Gryllus  migra- 
lorius,  Linn.,  "qua  vero  ratione  motus,"  observes 
Kfwenmiiller, "  non  exponit." 

(7.)  Chanamal  (^^H  :  iv  rp  TOX^TJ  ;    Aq.   iv 

xpvti:  in  pruind  ;  "frost").  Some  writers  have 
supposed  that  this  word,  which  occurs  only  in  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  47,  denotes  some  kind  of  locust  (see  Bochart, 
Hieroz.  iii.  255,  oi,  Rosenm.).  Mr.  J.  F.  Denham 
(in  Kitto,  s.  v.  Locust)  is  of  a  similar  opinion  ;  but 
surely  the  concurrn ;  testimony  of  the  old  veisions, 
which  interpret  the  word  chan&rndl  to  signify  hail 
or  frost ,  ought  to  forbid  the  conjecture.  We  have 
already  more  locusts  than  it  is  possible  to  identify ; 
tet  c/iandmal,  therefore,  be  understood  to  denote  hail 
or  frost,  as  it  is  rendered  by  the  A.  V.,  and  all  the 
important  old  versions. 

(8.)    Yelek  (pj?'_  »:    dicpis,  fyovxos :    bnichus : 

bruchus  aculeatus,  in  Jer.  li.  27 :  "  cankerworm," 
"  caterpillar")  occurs  in  Ps.  cv.  34;  Nah.  iii.  15, 16 ; 
Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25;  Jer.  li.  14,  27  ;  it  is  rendered  by 
the  A.  V.  cankerworm  in  four  of  these  places,  and 
caterpillar  in  the  two  remaining.  From  the  epithet 
of  "  rough,"  which  is  applied  to  the  word  in  Jere 
miah,  some  have  supposed  the  yelek  to  be  the  larva 
of  some  of  the  destructive  Lepidoptera :  the  epithet 
samar,  however  (Jer.  li.  27),  more  properly  means 
having  spines,  which  agrees  with  the  Vulgate,  acu 
leatus.  Michaelis  (Suppl.  p.  1080)  believes  the 
yelek  to  be  the  cockchafer  (Maykafer,.  Oed- 
man  (ii.  vi.  126)  having  in  view  this  spiny  cha 
racter,  identifies  the  word  with  the  Gryllus  cristatus, 
Linn.,  a  species,  however,  which  is  found  only  in 
S.  America,  though  Linnaeus  has  erroneously  given 
Arabia  as  a  locality.  Tychsen  arguing  from  the 
epithet  rough,  believes  that  the  yelek  is  represented 
by  the  G.  haematopus,  Linn.  (Calliptamus  hae- 
mat.  Aud.  Serv.)  a  species  found  in  S.  Africa. 

How  purely  conjectural  are  all  these  attempts  at 
identification  !  for  the  term  spined  may  refer  not  to 
any  particular  species,  but  to  the  veiy  spinous 
nature  of  the  tibiae  in  all  the  locust  tribe,  and 
yelek,  the  cropping,  licking  off  insect  (Num.  xxii.  4), 
may  be  a  synonym  of  some  of  the  names  already 
mentioned,  or  the  word  may  denote  the  larvae  or 
pupae  of  the  locust,  which  from  Joel  i.  4,  seems  not 
improbable,  "  that  which  the  locust  (arbeh)  hath 
left,  hath  the  cankerworm  (yelek)  eaten,"  after  the 
winged  arbeh  had  departed,  the  young  larvae  of  the 
same  appeared  and  consumed  the  residue.  The 
passage  in  Nah.  iii.  16,  "  the  yelek  spreadeth  himself 
(margin)  and  fleeth  away,"  is  no  objection  to  the 
opinion  that  the  yilek  may  represent  the  larva  or 
nympha  for  the  &>.ine  reason  as  was  given  in  a 
former  part  of  this  article  ((?<J6). 

(».)  Ch&stl  (^pH).    See  CATERPILLAR. 
(10.)  Tsel&tsdlfryh?:  ipurvfa:  rubigo:  "lo 
cust  ").    The  derivation  of  this  word  seems  to  imply 


'  p*.  «•  v.  inus.  p\  i  q. 
dff>avit  (Q«sen.  Thes.  s.  \.). 


>,  linxit,  Inde  lambendo 


LOCUST 

that  some  kind  of  locust  is  indicated  by  it.  It 
occurs  only  in  this  sense  in  Deut.  xxviii.  42,  "  All 
thy  trees  and  fruit  of  thy  land  shall  the  locust  con 
sume."  In  the  other  passages  where  the  Hebrew 
word  occurs,  it  represents  some  kind  of  tinkling 
musical  instrument,  and  is  generally  translated 
cymbals  by  the  A.  Vi  The  word  is  evidently  ono- 
matopoietic,  and  is  here  perhaps  a  synonym  for 
some  one  of  the  other  names  for  locust.  Michaelis 
(Suppl.  p.  2094)  believes  the  word  is  identical 
with  chasil,  which  he  says  denotes  perhaps  the 
mole-cricket,  Gryllus  talpiformis,  from  the  stri- 
dulous  sound  it  produces.  Tychsen  (p.  79,  80) 
identifies  it  with  the  Gryllut  stridulus.  Linn. 
( =  Oedipoda  stridula,  Aud.  Serv.).  The  notion 
conveyed  by  the  Hebrew  word  will  however  apply 
to  almost  any  kind  of  locust,  and  indeed  to  many 
kinds  of  insects ;  a  similar  word  tsalsalza,  was  ap 
plied  by  the  Ethiopians  to  a  fly  which  the  Arabs 
called  zimb.  which  appears  to  be  identical  with  the 
tsetse  fly  of  Dr.  Livingstone  and  other  African  tra 
vellers.  All  that  can  be  positively  known  respect 
ing  the  tselatsdl  is,  that  it  is  some  kind  of  insect 
injurious  to  trees  and  crops.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
understand  blight  or  mildew  by  the  word. 

The  most  destructive  of  the  locust  tribe  that 
occur  in  the  Bible  lands  are  the  Oedipoda  migra- 
toria  and  the  Acridium  peregrinum,  and  as  both 
these  species  occur  in  Syria  and  Arabia,  &c.,  it  is 
most  probable  that  one  or  other  is  denoted  in  those 
passages  which  speak  of  the  dreadful  devastations 
committed  by  these  insects ;  nor  is  there  any  occasion 
to  believe  with  Bochart,  Tychsen,  and  others,  that 
nine  or  ten  distinct  species  are  mentioned  in  th« 
Bible.  Some  of  the  names  may  be  synonyms; 
others  may  indicate  the  larva  or  nympha  con- 
ditions  of  the  two  pre-eminent  devourers  alreadj 
named. 

Locusts  occur  in  great  numbers,  and  sometimes 
obscure  the  sun — Ex.  x.  15  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  23  ;  Judg. 
vi.  5,  vii.  12  ;  Joel  ii.  10  ;  Nah.  iii.  15  ;  Livy,  ilii. 
2;  Aelian,  N.  A.  iii.  12;  Pliny,  N.  H.  xi.  29  ; 
Shaw's  Travels,  p.  187  (fol.  2nd  ed.)  ;  Lu.W,  Hist. 
Aethiop.  i.  13 ;  and  de  Locustis,  i.  4 ;  Volney's 
Trav.  in  Syria,  i.  236. 

Their  voracity  is  alluded  to  in  Ex.  x.  12,  15, 
Joel  i.  4,  7,  12,  and  ii.  3 ;  Deut.  xxviii.  38  ;  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  46,  cv.  34;  Is.  xxxiii.  4;  Shaw's  Trav. 
187  ;  and  travellers  in  the  East,  passim. 

They  are  compared  to  horses — Joel  ii.  4  ;  Kev. 
ix.  7.  The  Italians  call  the  locust  "  Cavaletta ;" 
and  Ray  says,  "  Caput  oblongum,  equi  instiu-  prona 
spectans."  Comp.  also  the  Arab's  description  to 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  f Arabic. 

They  make  a  fearful  noise  in  their  flight — Joel 
ii.  5 ;  Rev.  ix.  9. 

Forsk&l,  Descr.  81,  "  transeuntes  grylli  super 
verticem  nostrum  sono  magnae  cataractae  ferve- 
bant."  Volney,  Trav.  i.  235. 

They  have  no  king — Prov.  xxx.  27  ;  Kirby  and 
Sp.  Int.  ii.  17. 

Their  irresistible  progress  is  referred  to  in  Joel 
ii.  8,  9 ;  Shaw,  Trav.  187. 

They  enter  dwellings,  and  devour  even  the  wood 
work  of  houses — Ex.  x.  6  ;  Joel  ii.  9,  10  ;  Pliny, 
N.  H.  xi.  29.' 

They  do  not  fly  in  the  night — Nah.  iii.  17; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  f  Arabic,  173. 

Birds  devour  them — Russel,  N.  Hist,  of  Aleppo t 


•  "  Omiiln    vero    morsn    erodentes    et    fora 


LOCUST 

127  ;    Volney,  Trav.    i.  237  :    Kitto's  Phys.  Hist.  \ 
Pal.  (p.  410).' 


LOD 


133 


The  sea  destroys  the  greater  number — Ex.  x.  19  ; 
Joel  ii.  20 ;  Pliny,  xi.  35  ;  Hasselq.  Trav.  445 
[Engl.  transl.  1766)  ;  cf.  also  Iliad,  xxi.  12. 

Their  dead  bodies  taint  the  air — Joel  ii.  20  ; 
Hasselq.  Trav.  445. 

They  are  used  as  food— Lev.  xi.  21,  22  ;  Matt. 
iii.  4 ;  Mark  i.  6 ;  Plin.  N.  H.  vi.  35,  xi.  35 ; 
Died.  Sic.  iii.  29  (the  Acridophagf) ;  Aristoph. 
Achar.  1116;  Ludolf,  H.  Aethiop.  67  (Gent's 
transl.)  ;  Jackson's  Morocco,  52  ;  Niebuhr,  Descr. 
de  f Arabic,  150  ;  Sparman's  Trav.  i.  367,  who  says 
the  Hottentots  are  glad  when  the  locusts  come,  for 
they  fatten  upon  them;  Hasselq.  Trav.  232,  419  ; 
Kirby  and  Spence,  Entom.  i.  305. 

There  are  different  -ways  of  preparing  locusts  for 
food :  sometimes  they  are  ground  and  pounded,  and 
then  mixed  with  flour  and  water  and  made  into 
cakes,  or  they  are  salted  and  then  eaten ;  sometimes 
smoked ;  boiled  or  roasted ;  stewed,  or  fried  in 
butter.  Dr.  Kitto  (Pict.  Bib.  not.  on  Lev.  xi. 
21),  who  tasted  locusts,  says  they  are  more  like 
shrimps  than  anything  else ;  and  an  English  clergy 
man,  some  years  ago,  cooked  some  of  the  green  grass- 
hopuers,  Locusta  viridissima,  boiling  them  in  water 
half  an  hour,  throwing  away  the  head,  wings,  and 
legs,  and  then  sprinkling  them  with  pepper  and  salt, 
and  adding  butter  ;  he  found  them  excellent.  How 
strange  then,  nay,  "  how  idle,"  to  quote  the  words  of 
Kirby  and  Spence  (Entom.  i.  305),  "  was  the  contro 
versy  concerning  the  locusts  which  formed  part  of  the 
sustenance  of  John  the  Baptist,  ....  and  how  apt 
even  learned  men  are  to  perplex  a  plain  question  from 
ignorance  of  the  customs  of  othar  countries  • !" 

The  following  are  some  of  tl  •?  works  which  treat 
of  locusts : — Ludolf,  Dissertatio  de  Locustis,  Francof. 


ad  lloen.  1694.  This  author  believes  that  the  quails 
which  fed  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  were 
locusts  (vid.  his  Diatriba  qua  sententia  nova  de 
Salavis,  sive  Locustis  defcnditor).  A  more  absurd 
opinion  was  that  held  by  Norrelius,  who  main 
tained  that  the  four  names  of  L-'.v.  xi.  22  were 
birds  (see  his  Schediasma  de  Avibus  sac-is,  Arbch, 
Chagab,  Solam,  et  Chargol,  in  Bib.  Brem  Cl.  iii. 
>.  36).  Faber,  De  Locustis  Biblicii,  et  siijillatim 
de  Avibus  Quadrupedibus,  ex  Lev.  xi.  20,  Wittenb. 
1710-11.  Asso's  Abh<  mdlung  von  den  Heuschrecken, 
Uostock,  1787 ;  and  Tychsen's  Comment,  de  Locustis. 
Oedman's  Vermischte  Sammlung,  ii.  c.  vii.  Kirby 
Spence's  Introd.  to  Entomology,  i.  305,  &c. 
Bochart's  Hierozoicon,  iii.  251,  &c.,  ed.  Eosenmull. 
Kitto's  Phys.  History  of  Palestine,  419,  420. 
Kitto's  Pictorial  Bible,  see  Index,  "  Locust." 
Dr.  Harris's  Natural  History  of  the  Bible,  art. 
'  Locust,"  1833.  Kitto's  Cyclopaedia,  arts.  "  Lo 
cust,"  "  Chesil,"  &c.  Banner's  Observations,  Lon 
don,  1797.  The  travels  of  Shaw,  Kussel,  Hassel- 
quist,  Volney,  &c.  &c.  For  a  systematic  description 
of  the  Orthoptera,  see  Serville's  Monograph  in  the 
Suites  a  Buffon,  and  Fischer's  Orihoptera  Europaea ; 
and  for  an  excellent  summary,  see  Winer's  RealwSr- 
terbuch,  vol.  i.  p.  574.  art.  "  Heuschrecken."  For 
the  locusts  of  St.  John,  Mr.  Dcnham  refers  to  Suicer's 
Thesaurus,  i.  169,  179,  and  Gutherr,  De  Victu 
Johannis,  Franc.  1785 ;  and  for  the  symbolical 
locusts  of  Rev.  ix.,  to  Newton  On  Prophecies,  and 
Woodhouse  On  the  Apocalypse.*  [W.  H.] 

LOD  ("ff :  $  A.6S ;  'AoSapd>6,  AoSaSia,  both  by 
inclusion  of  the  following  name ;  Alex,  in  Ezra, 
AvSSiav  AoSaStS  :  Lod),  a  town  of  Benjamin,  stated 
to  have  been  founded  by  Shamed  or  Shamer  (1  Chr. 
viii.  12).  It  is  always  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
ONO,  and,  with  the  exception  of  the  passage  just 
quoted,  in  the  post-captivity  records  only.  It  would 
appear  that  after  the  boundaries  of  Benjamin,  as  given 
in  the  book  of  Joshua,  were  settled,  that  enterprising 
tribe  extended  itself  further  westward,  into  the  rich 
plain  of  Sharon,  between  the  central  hills  and  the 
sea,  and  occupied  or  founded  the  towns  of  Lod,  Ono, 
Hadid,  and  others  named  only  in  the  later  lists. 
The  people  belonging  to  the  three  places  just  men 
tioned  returned  from  Babylon  to  the  number  of  725 
(Ezr.  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii.  37),  and  again  took  possession 
of  their  former  habitations  (Neh.  xi.  35). 

Lod  has  retained  its  name  almost  unaltered  to 
the  present  day ;  it  is  now  called  Ludd ;  but  is  most 
familiar  to  us  from  its  occurrence  in  its  Greek 
garb,  as  LYDDA,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  [G.] 


•  *  The  iocust-bird  (see  woodcut)  referred  to  by  tra 
vellers,  and  which  the  Arabs  call  smurmur,  is  no  doubt, 
from  Dr.  Kitto's  description,  the  "  rose-coloured  starling," 
I'astor  roseus.  The  Rev.  H.  B.  Tristram  saw  one  spe 
cimen  in  the  orange  groves  at  Jaffa  in  the  spring  of  1858 
but  makes  no  allusion  to  its  devouring  locusts.  Dr.  Kitto 
In  one  place  (p.  410)  says  the  locust-bird  is  about  the  size 
of  a  starling ;  in  another  place  (p.  420)  he  compares  it  in 
fine  to  a  swallow.  The  bird  is  about  eight  inches  and  a  hal; 
In  length.  Yarretl  (Brit.  Birds,  ii.  61, 2nd  ed.)  says  "  it  is 
held  sacred  at  Aleppo  because  it  feeds  on  the  locust;"  anc 
Col.  Sykes  bears  testimony  to  the  immense  flocks  in  which 
they  fly.  He  says  ( Catalogue  of  Birds  of  Daklian)  "  they 

iarken  the  air  by  their  numbers forty  or  fifty  have 

been  killed  at  a  shot."  But  he  says  "  they  prove  a  cala 
mity  to  the  husbandman,  as  they  are  as  destructive  as 
locusts,  and  not  much  less  numerous." 

u  There  are  people  at  this  day  who  gravely  assert  tha 
the  locusts  which  formed  part  of  the  food  of  the  Baptis 
were  not  the  insect  of  that  name,  but  the  long  sweet  pods 
af  the  locustrtree  (Oeratonia  siliqua),  J^hannit  brodt 


"  St.  John's  bread,"  as  the  monks  of  Palestine  call  it. 
For  other  equally  erroneous  explanations,  or  unauthorised 
alterations,  of  iiepiSes,  see  Celsii  Hierob.  i.  74. 

1  For  the  judgment  of  locusts  referred  to  in  the  prophet 
Joel,  see  Dr.  Pusey's  "  Introduction  "  to  that  book.  Thia 
writer  maintains  that  the  prophet,  under  the  figure  of  the 
locust,  foretold  "  a  judgment  far  greater,  an  enemy  far 
mightier  than  the  locust"  (p.  99),  namely,  the  Assyrian 
invasion  of  Palestine,  because  Joel  calls  the  scourge  the 
"  northern  army,"  which  Dr.  Pusey  says  cannot  be  said  of 
the  locusts,  because  almost  always  by  a  sort  of  law  cf 
their  being  they  make  their  Inroads  from  their  birth 
place  in  the  south.  This  one  point,  however,  may  be 
fairly  questioned.  The  usual  direction  of  the  flight  of 
this  insect  is  from  East  to  West,  or  from  South  to 
North;  but  the  Oedipoda  migratoria  is  believed  to 
have  its  birthplace  in  Tartary  (Serv.  Orthop.  738),  from 
whence  it  visits  Africa,  the  Mauritius,  and  part  of  the 
South  of  Europe.  If  this  species  be  considered  to  be 
the  locust  of  Joel,  the  expression  northern  army  it  :sost 
applicable  to  it. 


134  LO-DEBAR 

LO-DE'BAROin  ft;  l>ut  in  xvii.  27  "1  16  : 
'i\  AaSaficip,  Aw5a$ap  :  Lodabar),  a,  place  named 
with  Mahanaim,  Hogelim,  and  other  trans-Jordanic 
towns  (2  Sam.  xvii.  27),  and  therefore  no  doubt  on 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan.  It  was  the  native 
place  of  Machir  ben-Ammiel,  in  whose  house  Mephi- 
bosheth  found  a  home  after  the  death  of  his  father 
and  the  ruin  of  his  grandfather's  house  (is.  4,  5). 
Lo-debar  receives  a  bare  mention  in  the  Onomasticon, 
nor  has  any  trace  of  the  name  been  encountered  by 
any  later  traveller.  Indeed  it  has  probably  never 
teen  sought  for.  Reland  (Pal.  734)  conjectures 
that  it  is  intended  in  Josh.  xiii.  26,  where  the  word 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  of  Debir  " 


same  in  its  consonants  a?  Lodebar,  though  with 
different  vowel-points.  In  favour  of  this  con 
jecture,  which  is  adopted  by  J.  D.  Michaelis  (Bib. 
fiir  UnffcL),  is  the  fact  that  such  a  use  of  the 

preposition  7  is  exceedingly  rare  (see  Keil,  Josuct, 
ad  loc.). 

If  taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  the  root  of  the  name  is 
possibly  "  pasture,"  *he  driving  out  of  flocks  (Gesen. 
Thes.  7356  ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  App.  §9)  ;  but  this 
must  be  very  uncertain.  [G.] 

LODGE,  TO.  This  word  in  the  A.  V.—  with 
one  exception  only,  to  be  noticed  below  —  is  used  to 
translate  the  Hebrew  verb  }-1?  or  }v,  which  has, 
at  least  in  the  narrative  portions  of  the  Bible, 
almost  invariably  the  force  of  "  passing  the  night." 
This  is  worthy  of  remark,  because  the  word  lodge 
•  —  probably  only  another  form  of  the  Saxon  liggan, 
"  to  lie"  —  does  not  appear  to  have  had  exclusively 
that  force  in  other  English  literature  at  the  time  the 
Authorised  Version  was  made.  A  few  examples  of 
its  occurrence,  where  the  meaning  of  passing  the 
night  would  not  at  first  sight  suggest  itself  to  an 
English  reader,  may  be  of  service  :  —  1  K.  xix.  9  ; 
1  Chr.  is.  27  ;  Is.  x.  29  (where  it  marks  the  halt 
of  the  Assyrian  army  for  bivouac);  Neh.  iv.  22, 
xiii.  20,  21  ;  Cant.  vii.  11  ;  Job  xxiv.  7,  xxxi.  32, 
&c.  &c.  The  same  Hebrew  word  is  otherwise  trans 
lated  in  the  A.  V.  by  "  lie  all  night"  (2  Sam.  xii. 
1(3  ;  Cant.  i.  13  ;  Job  xxix.  19)  ;  "  tarry  the  night  " 
(Gen.  xix.  2;  Judg.  xix.  10;  Jer.xiv.  8);  "remain," 
i.  e.  until  the  morning  (Ex.  xxiii.  18). 

The  force  of  passing  the  night  is  also  present  in 
the  words  J-17D,  "  a  sleeping-place,"  hence  an  INN 
[vol.  i.  8676],  and  it3-ft»,  "a  hut,"  erected  in 
vineyards  or  fruit-gardens  for  the  shelter  of  a  man 
who  watched  all  night  to  protect  the  fruit.  This 
is  rendered  "lodge"  in  Is.  i.  8,  and  "cottage"  in 
xxiv.  20,  the  only  two  passages*  in  which  it  is  found. 

2.  The  one  exception  above-named  occurs  in  Josh. 
ii.  1  ,  where  the  word  in  the  original  is  23t?,  a  word 


elsewhere  rendered  "  to  lie,"  generally  in  allusion  to 
sexual  intercourse.  [G.] 

LOFT.     [HOUSE,  vol.  i.  8386.] 
LOG.     [WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.] 
LO'IS  (Aa>fs),   the   grandmother   (/ud/u^Tj)   of 
TIMOTHY,  and  doubtless  the  mother  of  his  mother 
EUNICE  (2  Tim.  i.  5).     From  the  Greek  form  of 
these  three  names  we  should  naturally  infer  that 
the  family  had  been  Hellenistic  for  three  generations 
at  least.     It  seems  likely  also  that  Lois  had  resided 
long  at  Lystra;  and  almost  certain  that  from  her, 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

as  well  as  from  Eunice,  Timothy  obtained  his  inti 
mate  knowledge  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures  (2  Tim. 
iii.  15).  Whether  she  was  surviving  at  either  oi 
St.  Paul's  visits  to  Lystra,  we  cannot  say :  she  is  not 
alluded  to  in  the  Acts :  nor  is  it  absolutely  certain, 
though  St.  Paul  speaks  of  her  "  faith,"  that  she 
became  a  Christian.  The  phrase  might  be  used  of  a 
pious  Jcwess,who  was  ready  to  believe  in  the  Messiah. 
Calvin  has  a  good  note  on  this  subject.  [J.  S.  H.j 
LOOKING-GLASSES.  [MIRRORS.] 

LORD,  as  applied  to  the  Deity,  is  the  almost 
uniform  rendering  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  0.  T.  of 
the  Heb.  HIH*,  Jehovah,  which  would  be  more 
properly  represented  as  a  proper  name.  Tha  re 
verence  which  the  Jews  entertained  for  the  sacred 
name  of  God  forbade  them  to  pronounce  it,  and  in 
reading  they  substituted  for  it  either  Adonai, 
"  Lord,"  or  Elohim,  "  God,"  according  to  the  vowel- 
points  by  which  it  was  accompanied.  [JEHOVAH, 
vol.  i.  p.  9526],  This  custom  is  observed  in  the  ver 
sion  of  the  LXX.,  where  Jehovah  is  most  commonly 
translated  by  Kvpios,  as  in  the  N.  T.  (Heb.  i.  10, 
&c.),  and  in  the  Vulgate,  where  Do/minus  is  the 
usual  equivalent.  The  title  Adon&i  is  also  rendered 
"  Lord"  in  the  A.  V.,  though  this,  as  applied  to  God, 
is  of  infrequent  occurrence  in  the  historical  books. 
For  instance,  it  is  found  in  Genesis  only  in  xv.  2,  8, 
xviii.  3  (where  "  my  Lord  "  should  be  "  0  Lord  "), 
27,  30,  31,  32,  xx.  4;  once  in  Num.  xiv.  17; 
twice  in  Deut.  iii.  24,  ix.  26 ;  twice  in  Josh.  vii. 
7,  8  ;  four  times  in  Judges ;  and  so  on.  In  other 
passages  of  these  books  "  Lord  "  is  the  translation 
of  "Jehovah;"  except  Ex.  xxiii.  17,  xxxiv.  23; 
Deut.  x.  17;  Josh.  iii.  11,  13,  where  adon  is  so 
rendered.  But  in  the  poetical  and  historical  books 
it  is  more  frequent,  excepting  Job,  where  ft  occurs 
only  in  xxviii.  28,  and  the  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
and  Song  of  Songs,  where  it  is  not  once  found. 

The  difference  between  Jehovah  and  Adonai  (or 
Adon)  is  generally  marked  in  the  A.  V.  by  printing 
the  word  in  small  capitals  (LORD)  when  it  repre 
sents  the  former  (Gen.  xv.  4,  &c.),  and  with  an 
initial  capital  only  when  it  is  the  translation  of  the 
latter  (Ps.  xcvii.  5 ;  Is.  i.  24,  x.  16) ;  except  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  17,  xxxiv.  23,  where  "  the  LORD  God"  should 
be  more  consistently  "  the  Lord  Jehovah."  A  similar 

distinction  prevails  between  PI5!!!*   (the  letters  of 
.   .*.  \ 

Jehovah  with  the  vowel-points  of  Elohim)  and 
D'i"PK>  elohim  •  the  former  being  represented  in 
the  A.  V.  by  "  GOD"  in  small  capitals  (Gen.  xv. 
2,  &c.),  while  Elohim  is  "God  "  with  an  initial 
capital  only.  And,  generally,  when  the  name  of  the 
Deity  is  printed  in  capitals,  it  indicates  that  th« 
corresponding  Hebrew  is  !Yli"P,  which  is  translated 
LOKD  or  GOD  according  to  the  vowel-points  by 
which  it  is  accompanied. 

In  some  instances  it  is  difficult,  on  account  of 
the  pause  accent,  to  say  whether  Adonai  is  the 
title  of  the  Deity,  or  merely  one  of  respect  addressed 
to  men.  These  have  been  noticed  by  the  Masoi  ites, 
who  distinguish  the  former  in  their  notes  as  "  holy," 
and  the  latter  as  "profane."  (See  Gen.  xviii.  :>, 
xix.  2,  18 ;  and  compare  the  Masoretic  notes  ou 
Gen.  xx.  13,  Is.  xix.  4.)  [W.  A.  W.] 

LORD'S  DAY,  THE  ('H  /tup.a/cJ?  'Hjit'pa; 
7j  (ila  ffafifl<iTcoi>}.  It  has  been  questioned,  though 
not  seriously  until  of  late  years,  what  is  the  mean- 


/What  can  have  led  the  LXX.  to  translate  the  word    they  employ  for  ^3^7)3  in  the  above  two 
JMM  ••  heaps,"  in  PH.  Ixxix.  1,  bv  oniaoo6v\a.Kiov,  which     writer  io  unable  to  ccnjectun;. 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 


ing  of  the  phrase  i)  Kupia/o;  'Hjus'pa,  which  occurs 
in  one  passage  only  of'  the  Holy  Scripture,  Rev.  i. 
10,  and  is,  in  our  English  version,  translated  "  the 
Lord's  Day."  The  general  consent  both  of  Christian 
antiquity  and  of  modern  divines  has  referred  it  to 
the  weekly  festival  of  our  Lord's  resurrection,  and 
identified  it  with  "  the  first  day  of  the  week,"  on 
which  He  rose,  with  the  patristical  "  eighth  day," 
or  "  day  which  is  both  the  first  and  the  eighth,"  in 
fact  with  the  i)  TOV  'H\iov  'H/if'pa,"  "  Soils  Dies," 
or  "  Sunday,"  of  every  age  of  the  Church. 

But  the  views  antagonistic  to  this  general  consent 
deserve  at  least  a  passing  notice.  1.  Some  have 
supposed  St.  John  to  be  speaking,  in  the  passage 
above  referred  to,  of  the  Sabbath,  because  that 
institution  is  called  in  Isaiah  Iviii.  13,  by  the 
Almighty  Himself,  "  My  holy  day."'  To  this  it 
is  replied — If  St.  John  had  intended  to  specify  the 
sabbath,  he  would  surely  have  used  that  word 
which  was  by  no  means  obsolete,  or  even  obso 
lescent,  at  the  time  of  his  composing  the  book  of  the 
Revelation.  And  it  is  added,  that  if  an  apostle 
had  set  the  example  of  confounding  the  seventh  and 
the  first  days  of  the  week,  it  would  have  been 
strange  indeed  that  every  ecclesiastical  writer  for 
the  first  five  centuries  should  have  avoided  any 
approach  to  such  confusion.  They  do  avoid  it — 
for  as  ~S,a,$$a.TOv  is  never  used  by  them  for  the 
first  day,  so  Kvpiaicfi  is  never  used  by  them  for 
the  seventh  day.  2.  Another  theory  is,  that  by 
"  the  Lord's  Day,"  St.  John  intended  "  the  day  of 
judmgent,"  to  which  a  large  portion  of  the  book 
of  Revelations  may  be  conceived  to  refer.  Thus 
"  I  was  in  the  spirit  on  the  Lord's  day  "  (3yev6- 
V*iv  *"  irvevfj.a.Ti  ev  rfj  KupiaK*?  'H/uepa)  would 
imply  that  he  was  rapt,  in  spiritual  vision,  to  the 
date  of  that  "  great  and  terrible  day,"  just  as  St. 
Paul  represents  himself  as  caught  up  locally  into 
Paradise.  Now,  not  to  dispute  the  interpretation 
of  the  passage  from  which  the  illustration  is  drawn 
(2  Cor.  xii.  4),  the  abettors  of  this  view  seem  to 
have  put  out  of  sight  the  following  considerations. 
In  the  preceding  sentence,  St.  John  had  mentioned 
the  place  in  which  he  was  writing,  Patmos,  and  the 
causes  which  had  brought  him  thither.  It  is  but 
natural  that  he  should  further  particularise  the 
circumstances  under  which  his  mysterious  work 
was  composed,  by  stating  the  exact  day  on  which 
the  Revelations  were  communicated  to  him,  and 
the  employment,  spiritual  musing,  in  which  he  was 
then  engaged.  To  suppose  a  mixture  of  the  metapho 
rical  and  the  literal  would  be  strangely  out  of  keep 
ing.  And  though  it  be  conceded  that  the  day  of 
judgment  is  in  the  New  Testament  spoken  of  as 
'H  rov  Kvpiou  'HjUf'pa,  the  employment  of  the  ad 
jectival  form  constitutes  a  remarkable  difference, 
which  was  observed  and  maintained  ever  after 
wards.1"  There  is  also  a  critical  objection  to  this 
interpretation.0  This  second  theory  then,  which  is 
sanctioned  by  the  name  of  Augusti,  must  be  aban 
doned.  3.  A  third  opinion  is,  that  St.  John  in 
tended  by  the  "  LorcKs  Day,"  that  on  which  the 
Lord's  resurrjction  was  annually  celebrated,  or,  as 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE  13o 

we  now  term  it,  Easter-day.  On  this  it  need  only 
be  observed,  that  though  it  was  never  questionec! 
that  the  weekly  celebration  of  that  event  should 
take  place  on  the  first  day  of  the  hebdomadal  cycle, 
t  was  for  a  long  time  doubted  on  what  day  in  the 
annual  cycle  it  should  be  celebrated.  Two  schools 
at  least  existed  on  this  point  until  considerably  after 
the  death  of  St.  John.  It  therefore  seems  unlikely 
that,  in  a  book  intended  for  the  whole  Church,  he 
would  have  employed  a  method  of  dating  which  was 
far  from  generally  agreed  upon.  And  it  is  to  be 
added  that  no  patristical  authority  can  be  quoted, 
either  for  the  interpretation  contended  for  in  this 
opinion,  or  for  the  employment  of  TJ  KvpiaK^i  Hptpa 
to  denote  Easter-day. 

All  other  conjectures  upon  this  point  may  be 
permitted  to  confute  themselves;  but  the  following 
cavil  is  too  curious  to  be  omitted.  In  Scripture 
the  first  day  of  the  week  is  called  fj  jufa  ffapfid- 
TCDV,  in  post-Scriptural  writers  it  is  called  T\  Kv- 

Kri  'Hjiie'pa  as  well ;  therefore,  the  book  of  Reve 
lations  is  not  to  be  ascribed  to  an  apostle  ;  or  in 
oth^r  ^vords,  is  not  part  of  Scripture.  The  logic 
of  this  argument  is  only  to  be  surpassed  by  its 
boldness.  It  says,  in  effect,  because  post-Scriptural 
writers  have  these  two  designations  for  the  first 
day  of  the  week  ;  therefore,  Scriptural  writers  must 
be  confined  to  one  of  them.  It  were  surely  more 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  adoption  by  post- 
Scriptural  writers  of  a  phrase  so  pre-eminently 
Christian  as  rj  KvpiaK^i  'H/xe'pa  to  denote  the  first 
day  of  the  week,  and  a  day  so  especially  marked, 
can  be  traceable  to  nothing  else  than  an  apostle's 
use  of  that  phrase  in  the  same  meaning. 

Supposing  then  that  fi  KvpiaK^i  'H/ue'po  of  St. 
John  is  the  Lord's  Day, — What  do  we  gather  from 
Holy  Scripture  concerning  that  institution  ?  How 
is  it  spoken  of  by  early  writers  up  to  the  time  of 
Constantine?  What  change,  if  any,  was  brought 
upon  it  by  the  celebrated  edict  of  that  emperor, 
whom  some  have  declared  to  have  been  its  ori 
ginator  ? 

1.  Scripture  says  very  little  concerning  it.  But 
that  little  seems  to  indicate  that  the  divinely  in 
spired  apostles,  by  their  practice  and  by  their  pre 
cepts,  marked  the  first  day  of  the  week  as  a  day 
for  meeting  together  to  break  bread,  for  communi 
cating  and  receiving  instruction,  for  laying  up  offer 
ings  in  store  for  charitable  purposes,  for  occupation 
in  holy  thought  and  prayer.  The  first  day  of  the 
week  so  devoted  seems  also  to  have  been  the  day 
of  the  Lord's  Resurrection,  and  therefore,  to  have 
been  especially  likely  to  be  chosen  for  such  purposes 
by  those  who  "  preached  Jesus  and  the  Resur 
rection." 

The  Lord  rose  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  (T$ 
/j.i§  ffaj3/3d.T<at>),  and  appeared,  on  the  very  day  of 
His  rising,  to  His  followers  on  five  distinct  occa 
sions — to  Mary  Magdalene,  to  the  other  women,  to 
the  two  disciples  on  the  road  to  Emmaus,  to  St. 
Peter  separately,  to  ten  Apostles  collected  together. 
After  eight  days  (/uefl'  r;/xepay  OKTO/),  that  is.  ac 
cording  to  the  ordinary  reckoning,  on  the  first  ciay 


ni11). 

b  17  'Hjtte'pa  TOV  Kvpiou  occurs  In  1  Cor.  i.  8,  and 
2  Thcss.  il.  2,  with  the  words  ^/ixwi/  'Irjcrov  Xpiorov 
attached ;  in  l  Cor.  v.  5,  and  2  Cor.  i.  14.  with  the  word 
\r\aov  only  attached ;  and  in  I  Thess.  v.  2,  and  2  Pet.  iii.  10, 
with  the  article  TOV  omitted.  In  one  place,  where  both 
the  day  of  judgment,  and,  as  a  foreshadowing  of  It,  the 
lay  of  vengeance  upon  Jerusalem,  seem  to  be  alluded  to 


the  Lord  himself  says,  OVTWS  eorai  <cac  6  iitbs  TOV  av 
&p<airov  ev  Ty  T]i>.epi  avrov,  Luke  xvii.  24. 

c  'Eyevoftrjv  would  necessarily  have  to  be  constructed 
with  iv  rifiepa.,  "  I  was  in  the  day  of  judgment,  i.  e.  1  was 
passing  the  day  of  judgment  spiritually."  Now  yiVeo-0<u 
iv  rinepq  is  never  used  for  diem  agere.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  construction  of  eyevonyv  with  ev  irvevfian  \» 
justified  by  a  parallel  passage  in  Kev.  iv.  a,  <ai  tCC«u»i 
iytvonnv  ev  nvevuMTi. 


136 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 


of  the  next  week,  He  appeared  to  the  eleven.  He 
does  not  seem  to  have  appeared  in  the  interval — it 
may  be  to  render  that  day  especially  noticeable  by  the 
apostles,  or,  it  may  be  for  other  reasons.  But,  how 
ever  this  question  be  settled,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
which  in  that  year  fell  on  the  first  day  of  the  week 
(see  Bramhall,  Disc,  of  the  Sabbath  and  Lord's 
Day,  in  Works,  vol.  v.  p.  51,  Oxford  edition), 
"  they  were  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place," 
had  spiritual  gifts  conferred  on  them,  and  in 
their  turn  began  to  communicate  those  gifts, 
as  accompaniments  of  instruction,  to  others.  At 
Troas  (Acts  xx.  7),  many  years  after  the  occurrence 
at  Pentecost,  when  Christianity  had  begun  to  as 
sume  something  like  a  settled  form,  St.  Luke  records 
the  following  circumstances.  St.  Paul  and  his 
companions  arrived  there,  and  "  abode  seven  days, 
and  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week  when  the  dis 
ciples  came  together  to  break  bread,  Paul  preached 
unto  them."  In  1  Cor.  xvi.  1,  2,  that  same  St. 
Paul  writes  thus :  "  Now  concerning  the  collection 
for  the  saints,  as  I  have  given  order  to  the  churches 
m  Galatia,  even  so  do  ye.  Upon  the  first  day  oi 
the  week,  let  every  one  of  you  lay  by  him  in  store, 
as  God  hath  prospered  him,  that  there  be  no  ga 
therings  when  I  come."  In  Heb.  x.  25,  the  cor 
respondents  of  the  writer  are  desired  "  not  to  forsake 
the  assembling  of  themselves  together,  as  the  mannei 
of  some  is,  but  to  exhort  one  another,"  an  injunc 
tion  which  seems  to  imply  that  a  regular  day  fo 
such  assembling  existed,  and  was  well  known  ;  for 
otherwise  no  rebuke  would  lie.  And  lastly,  in  the 
passage  given  above,  St.  John  describes  himself  as 
being  in  the  Spirit  "  on  the  Lord's  Day." 

Taken  separately,  perhaps,  and  even  all  to 
gether,  these  passages  seem  scarcely  adequate  to 
prove  that  the  dedication  of  the  first  day  of  the 
week  to  the  purposes  above  mentioned  was  a  matter 
of  apostolic  institution,  or  even  of  apostolic  prac 
tice.  But,  it  may  be  observed,  that  it  is  at  any 
rate  an  extraordinary  coincidence,  that  almost  im 
mediately  we  emerge  from  Scripture,  we  find  the 
same  day  mentioned  in  a  similar  manner,  and  di 
rectly  associated  with  the  Lord's  Resurrection  ;  that 
it  is  an  extraordinary  fact  that  we  never  find  its 
dedication  questioned  or  argued  about,  but  accepted 
as  something  equally  apostolic  with  Confirmation, 
with  Infant  Baptism,  with  Ordination,  or  at  least 
spoken  of  in  the  same  way.  And  as  to  direct  sup 
port  from  Holy  Scripture,  it  is  noticeable  that  those 
other  ordinances  which  are  usually  considered  Scrip 
tural,  and  in  support  of  which  Scripture  is  usually 
cited,  are  dependent,  so 'far  as  mere  quotation  is 
concerned,  upon  fewer  texts  than  the  Lord's  Day  is. 
Stating  the  case  at  the  very  lowest,  the  Lord's  Day 
has  at  least  "  probable  insinuations  in  Scripture,"*1 
and  so  is  superior  to  any  othor  holy  day,  whether 
of  hebdomadal  celebration,  as  Friday  in  memory  of 
the  Crucifixion,  or  of  annual  celebration,  as  Easter- 
day  in  memory  of  the  Resurrection  itself.  These 
other  days  may  be,  and  are,  defensible  on  other 
grounds ;  but  they  do  not  possess  anything  like  a 
Scriptural  authority  for  their  observance.  And  if 
we  are  inclined  still  to  press  for  more  pertinent 
Scriptural  proof,  and  more  frequent  mention  of  the 
institution,  for  such  we  suppose  it  to  be,  in  the 
writings  of  the  apostles,  we  must  .recollect  how 
little  is  said  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  and 
how  vast  a  difference  is  naturally  to  be  expected  to 
Uxist  between  a  sketch  of  the  manners  and  habits 


This  plirasr  is  employed  by  Bishop  Sanderson. 


LOKDS  DAY,  THE 

of  their  age,  which  the  authors  of  the  Holy  Scriptiu  M 
did  not  write,  and  hints  as  to  life  and  conduct,  and 
regulation  of  known  practices,  which  they  did  write. 

2.  On  quitting  the  canonical  writings,  we  turn 
naturally  to  Clement  of  Rome.  He  does  not,  how 
ever,  directly  mention  "  the  Lord's  Day,"  but  in  1 
Cor.  i.  40,  he  says,  tedvra  rd£fi  iroitiv  6<pd\o/j.(v, 
and  he  speaks  ot  dipirr/ifVoi  Kaipol  KCU  Sipat,  at  which 
the  Christian  irpofftyopal  Kal  \tirovpylat  should  be 
made. 

Ignatius,  the  disciple  of  St.  John  (ad  Magn.  c. 
9),  contrasts  Judaism  and  Christianity,  and  as  an 
exemplification  of  the  contrast,  opposes  ffaft^art- 
((iv  to  living  according  to  the  Lord's  life  (nark 
rr)v  KvpiaKTiv  Zwr/v  (uvrts). 

The  Epistle  ascribed  to  St.  Barnabas,  which, 
though  certainly  not  written  by  that  apostle,  was 
in  existence  in  the  earlier  pail  of  the  2nd  century, 
has  (c.  15)  the  following  words,  "  We  celebrate  the 
eighth  day  with  joy,  on  which  too  Jesus  rose  from 
the  dead."* 

A  pagan  document  now  comes  into  view.  It  is 
the  well-known  letter  of  Pliny  to  Trajan,  written 
while  he  presided  over  Pontus  and  Bithynia.  "  The 
Christians  (says  he),  affirm  the  whole  of  their  guilt 
or  error  to  be,  that  they  were  accustomed  to  meet  to 
gether  on  a  stated  day  (stato  die),  before  it  was  light, 
and  to  sing  hymns  to  Christ  as  a  God,  and  to  bind 
themselves  by  a  Sacramentum,  not  for  any  wicked 
purpose,  but  never  to  commit  fraud,  theft,  or  adul 
tery  ;  never  to  break  their  word,  or  to  refuse,  when 
called  upon  to  deliver  up  any  trust ;  after  which  it 
was  their  custom  to  separate,  and  to  assemble  again 
to  take  a  meal,  but  a  general  one,  and  without 
guilty  purpose." 

A  thoroughly  Christian  authority,  Justin  Mailyr, 
who  flourished  A.D.  140,  stands  next  on  the  list. 
He  writes  thus :  "  On  the  day  called  Sunday  (ry 
rov  r]\iov  \fyofitmy  rmtpq.),  is  an  assembly  of  ail 
who  live  either  in  the  cities  or  in  the  ruial  districts, 
and  the  memoirs  of  the  apostles  and  the  writings  of 
the  prophets  are  read."  Then  he  goes  on  to  de 
scribe  the  particulars  of  the  religious  acts  which  are 
entered  upon  at  this  assembly.  They  consist  of 
prayer,  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist,  and 
of  collection  of  alms.  He  afterwards  assigns  the  rea 
sons  which  Christians  had  for  meeting  on  Sunday. 
These  are,  •'  because  it  is  the  First  Day,  on  which 
God  dispelled  the  darkness  (rb  tricoros)  and  the 
original  state  of  things  (rfyy  SATjf),  and  formed  the 
world,  and  because  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  ros« 
from  the  dead  upon  it"  (Apol.  Prim.).  In  an 
other  work  (Dial.  c.  Tryph.\  he  makes  circum 
cision  furnish  a  type  of  Sunday.  "  The  command 
to  circumcise  infants  on  the  eighth  day  was  a  type 
of  the  true  circumcision  by  which  we  are  circum 
cised  from  error  and  wickedness  through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  rose  from  the  dead  on  the  first 
day  of  the  week  (rjj  ^19  ffafr&tirwv} ;  therefore  it 
remains  the  chief  and  first  of  days."  As  for  <ro3- 

rl&tv,  he  uses  that  with  exclusive  reference  to 
the  Jewish  law.     He  carefully  distinguishes  Satur 
ay   (ft  KpovtK^i),  the  day  after   which  our  Lord 
was  crucified,  from  Sunday  (ij  pera  rfy  Kpovix^r 

s  iffriv  rj  rov  'HA/ou  Jiptpa],  upon  which  He 
rose  from  the  dead.  (If  any  surprise  is  felt  at 
Justin's  employment  of  the  heathen  designations 
for  the  seventh  and  first  days  of  the  week,  it  may 
be  accounted  for  thus.  Before  the  death  of  Ha- 


TT)i> 
/j  icai  6  'I»)<rous 


LORD'S  DAY,  THE 

drian,  A.D.  138,  the  hebdomadal  division  (which 
Dion  Cassius,  writing  in  the  3rd  century,  derives, 
together  with  its  nomenclature,  from  Egypt),  had 
in  matters  of  common  life,  almost  universally  su 
perseded  in  Greece,  and  even  in  Italy,  the  national 
divisions  of  the  lunar  month.  Justin  Martyr, 
•writing  to  and  for  heathen,  as  well  as  to  and  for 
Jews,  employs  it,  therefore,  with  a  certainty  of 
being  understood.) 

The  strange  heretic,  Bardesanes,  who  however 
delighted  to  consider  himself  a  sort  of  Christian,  has 
the  following  words  in  his  book  on  "  Fate,"  or  on 
"  the  Laws  of  the  Countries,"  which  he  addressed  to 
the  Emperor  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus:  "  What  then 
shall  we  say  respecting  the  new  race  of  ourselves 
who  are  Christians,  whom  in  every  country  and  in 
every  region  the  Messiah  established  at  His  coining ; 
for,  lo !  wherever  we  be,  all  of  us  are  called  by  the 
one  name  of  the  Messiah,  Christians;  and  upon  one 
day,  which  is  the  first  of  the  week,  we  assemble 
ourselves  together,  and  on  the  appointed  days  we 
abstain  from  food"  (Cureton's  Translation). 

Two  very  short  notices  stand  next  on  our  list, 
but  they  are  important  from  their  casual  and  un 
studied  character.  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Corinth, 
A.D.  170,  in  a  letter  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  a  frag 
ment  of  which  is  preserved  by  Eusebius,  says,  rfyv 
trflpepov  o^v  KvpicMj]v  ayiav  T]fj.tpav  Siriydyoft.ei', 
tv  17  aveyv&fjiev  v^iav  TT)V  firiffro\T]V.  And  Me- 
lito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  his  contemporary,  is  stated 
to  have  composed,  among  other  works,  a  treatise  on 
th«  Lord's  Day  (6  irtpl  rrjs  KvptaKris  \6yos). 

The  next  writer  who  may  be  quoted  is  Irenaeus, 
bishop  of  Lyons,  A.D.  178.  He  asserts  that  the 
Sabbath  is  abolished ;  but  his  evidence  to  the  ex 
istence  of  the  Lord's  Day  is  clear  and  distinct.  It 
is  spoken  of  in  one  of  the  best  known  of  his  Frag 
ments  (see  Heaven's  frenaeus,  p.  202).  But  a 
record  in  Kuseb.  (v.  23,  2)  of  the  part  which  he 
took  in  the  Quarta-Deciman  controversy,  shows  that 
in  his  time  it  was  an  institution  beyond  dispute. 
The  point  in  question  was  this:  Should  Easter  be 
celebrated  in  connexion  with  the  Jewish  Passover, 
on  whatever  day  of  the  week  that  might  happen  to 
tail,  with  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  and 
Mesopotamia;  or  on  the  Lord's  Day,  with  the  rest 
of  the  Christian  world?  The  Churches  of  Gaul, 
then  under  the  superintendence  of  Irenaeus,  agreed 
upon  a  synodical  epistle  to  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome, 
in  which  occurred  words  somewhat  to  this  eflect, 
"  The  mystery  of  the  Lord's  Resurrection  may  not 
be  celebrated  on  any  other  day  than  the  Lord's  Day, 
and  on  this  alone  should  we  observe  the  breaking  off 
of  the  Paschal  Fast."f  This  confirms  what  was 
said  above,  that  while,  even  towards  the  end  of  the 
2nd  century,  tradition  varied  as  to  the  yearly  cele 
bration  of  Christ's  Resurrection,  the  weekly  celebra 
tion  of  it  was  one  upon  which  no  diversity  existed, 
or  was  even  hinted  at. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  A.D.  194,  comes  next. 
One  does  not  expect  anything  very  definite  from  a 
writer  of  so  mystical  a  tendency,  but  he  has  some 
things  quite  to  our  purpose.  In  his  Strom,  (iv.  §3), 
.ie  speaks  of  T^V  apxiyovov  rjfj.tpav,  rr)v  TO?  bv-ri 
nvdiraufftv  TJ/J.WV,  rr]V  $T)  Kal  vpiaTrjv  ry  Svrt 
'  yeveffiv,  K.T.\.,  words  which  Bishop  Kaye 


LORD'S  DAY,  1HE 


137 


interprets  as  contrasting  the  seventh  day  of  the 
Law,  witti  the  eighth  day  of  the  Gospel.  And,  as 
the  same  learned  prelate  observes,  "  When  Clement 
says  that  the  gnostic,  or  transcendental  Christian, 
does  not  pray  in  any  fixed  place,  or  on  any  stated 
days,  but  throughout  his  whole  life,  he  gives  us  to 
understand  that  Christians  in  general  did  meet  to 
gether  in  fixed  places  and  at  appointed  times  for  the 
purposes  of  prayer."  But  we  are  noc  left  to  mere 
inference  on  this  important  point,  for  Clement 
speaks  of  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  well-known  and  cus 
tomary  festival,  and  in  one  place  gives  a  mysticai 
interpretation  of  the  name.* 

Tertullian,  whose  date  is  assignable  to  the  close 
of  the  2nd  century,  may,  in  spite  of  his  conver 
sion  to  Montanism,  be  quoted  as  a  witness  to  facts. 
He  terms  the  first  day  of  the  week  sometimes 
Sunday  (Dies  Solis),  sometimes  Dies  Dominicus. 
He  speaks  of  it  as  a  day  of  joy  (Diem  Solis  laetitiae 
indulgemus,  Apol.  c.  16),  and  asserts  that  it  is 
wrong  to  fast  upon  it,  or  to  pray  kneeling  during 
its  continuance  (Die  Dominico  jejunium  nefas  du- 
cimus,  vel  de  geniculis  adorare,  De  Cor.  c.  3). 
"  Even  business  is  to  be  put  off,  lest  we  give  place 
to  the  devil"  (Diff'erentes  etiam  negotia,  ne  quem 
Diabolo  locum  demus,  De  Orat.  c.  13). 

Origen  contends  that  the  Lord's  Day  had  its  su 
periority  to  the  Sabbath  indicated  by  manna  having 
been  given  on  it  to  the  Israelites,  while  it  was  with 
held  on  the  Sabbath.  It  is  one  of  the  marks  of  the 
perfect  Christian  to  keep  the  Lord's  Day. 

Minucius  Felix,  A.D.  210,  makes  the  heathen 
interlocutor,  in  his  dialogue  called  Octavius,  assert 
that  the  Christians  come  together  to  a  repast  "  on 
a  solemn  day  "  (solenni  die). 

Cyprian  and  his  colleagues,  in  a  synodical  letter, 
A.D.  253,  make  the  Jewish  circumcision  on  the 
eighth  lay  pretigure  the  newness  of  life  of  the 
Christian,  to  which  Christ's  resurrection  introduces 
him,  and  point  to  the  Lord's  Day,  which  is  at  once 
the  eighth  and  the  first. 

Commodian,  circ.  A.D.  270,  mentions  the  Lord's 
Day. 

Victorinus,  A.D.  290,  contrasts  it,  in  a  very 
remarkable  passage,  with  the  Parasceve  and  the 
Sabbath  ; 

And  Peter,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  A.D.  300,  says 
of  it,  "  We  keep  the  Lord's  Day  as  a  day  of  joy, 
because  of  Him  who  rose  thereon."* 

The  results  of  our  examination  of  the  principal 
writers  of  the  two  centuries  after  the  death  of  St. 
John  are  as  follows.  The  Lord's  Day  (a  name 
which  has  now  come  out  more  prominently,  and  is 
connected  more  explicitly  with  our  Lord's  resur 
rection  than  before)  existed  during  these  two  cen 
turies  as  a  part  and  parcel  of  apostolical,  and  so  of 
Scriptural  Christianity.  It  was  never  defended,  for 
it  was  never  impugned,  or  at  least  only  impugned 
as  other  things  received  from  the  apostles  were. 
It  was  never  confounded  with  the  Sabbath,  but 
carefully  distinguished  from  it,  (though  we  have 
not  quoted  nearly  all  the  passages  by  which  this 
point  might  be  proved).  It  was  not  an  institution 
of  severe  Sabbatical  character,  but  a  day  of  joy 
(xa-ppoavvi})  and  cheerfulness  (fv<ppoffwr)) ,  rather 
encouraging  than  forbidding  relaxation.  Religiously 


'  "O«  iv  /u.r)5'  iv  oAAjj  irore  TT)<r  Kvpuucijt  li/^tp?  TO  T»)S 
tK  vfxpiav  ava.<TT<i<reios  envreAoiTO  TOU  Kupi'ov  lUWT^ptW, 
«ai  oTraj?  iv  ravrr)  f-ovrf  riav  Kara  TO  7id(T\a  vrjtrrtitav 


Otros    ivro\r)t'    ri\v   Ka.ro. 
K,    Kipiaxrji     T7)i>    >;;iepai' 


i,    or'   iv    airo/SoAAj; 


<f>av\ov  vorii^a  Kal  yvtacrrtKov  n-poo-Aa/Sr;,  TT\V  iv  avna  roi 
Kupi'ov  avao-rao-iv  SofdftO',  (.S'irom.  V.). 

h  Tt)!/  -yap  Kvpteueriv   \apiJLOtruinit  rifJ-epav    ayo/itv,    iio 
rov  avaardi-ra  iv  avrjj,  iv  y  oi/Se  ydvira  xAueii-  irap«i- 


138 


LORD'S  DAY.  TUB 


regarded,  it  was  a  day  of  solemn  meeting  for  the 
Holy  Eucharist,  for  united  prayer,  for  instruction, 
for  almsgiving;  and  though,  being  an  institution 
under  the  law  of  liberty,  work  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  formally  interdicted,  or  rest  formally 
enjoined,  Tertullian  seems  to  indicate  that  the  cha 
racter  of  the  day  was  opposed  to  worldly  business. 
Finally,  whatever  analogy  may  be  supposed  to  exist 
between  the  Lord's  Day  and  the  Sabbath,  in  no 
passage  that  has  come  down  to  us  is  the  Fourth 
Commandment  appealed  to  as  the  ground  of  the 
obligation  to  observe  the  Lord's  Day.  Ecclesiastical 
writers  reiterate  again  and  again,  in  the  strictest  sense 
of  the  words,  "  Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you  in 
respect  of  an  holiday,  or  of  the  new  moon,  or  of 
the  sabbath  days"  (MWj  TIS  upas  Kpii>(T<o  $v  /ue'pei 
ioprris,  t)  vovfirjvias,  1)  <ra/3/3dTiav,  Col.  ii.  16). 
Nor,  again,  is  it  referred  to  any  Sabbatical  foundation 
Anterior  to  the  promulgation  of  the  Mosaic  economy. 
On  the  contrary,  those  before  the  Mosaic  era  are 
constantly  assumed  to  have  had  neither  knowledge 
nor  observance  of  the  Sabbath.  And  as  little  is  it 
anywhere  asseited  that  the  Lord's  Day  is  merely  an 
ecclesiastical  institution,  dependent  on  the  post- 
apostolic  Church  for  its  origin,  and  by  consequence 
capable  of  being  done  away,  should  a  time  ever 
airive  when  it  appeal's  to  be  no  longer  needed. 

Our  design  does  not  necessarily  lead  us  to  do 
more  than  state  facts ;  but  if  the  facts  be  allowed 
to  apeak  for  themselves,  they  indicate  that  the 
Lord's  Day  is  a  purely  Christian  institution,  sanc 
tioned  by  apostolic  practice,  mentioned  in  apostolic 
writings,  and  so  possessed  of  whatever  divine  au 
thority  all  apostolic  ordinances  and  doctrines  (which 
were  not  obviously  temporary,  or  were  not  abro 
gated  by  the  apostles  themselves)  can  be  supposed 


3.  Bat  on  whatever  grounds  "the  Lord's  Day" 
may  be  supposed  to  rest,  it  is  a  great  and  indis 
putable  fact  that  four  years  before  the  Oecumenical 
Council  of  Nicaea,  it  was  recognised  by  Constan 
tine  in  his  celebrated  edict,  as  "  the  venerable  Day 
of  the  Sun."  The  terms  of  the  document  are 
these : — 

"  Imperator  Constantinus  Aug.  Ifelpidio. 
"  Omnes  judlces  urbanaeque  plebes  et  cunctarum  artium 
officla  vcnerabili  Die  Solis  quiescant.  Ruri  tamen  positi 
agrorum  culturae  llbere  Ilcenterque  inserviant,  quoniam 
frequenter  evenit  ut  non  aptius  allo  die  frumenta  sulcis 
But  vineae  scroblbus  mandentur,  ne  occasione  moment! 
pereat  commoditas  coelesti  provisione  concessa." — Dot. 
Non,  Mart.  Crispo  If.  et  Constantino  II.  Cost. 

Some  have  endeavoured  to  explain  away  this 
document  by  alleging — 1  st,  that  "  Solis  Dies  "  is 
not  the  Christian  name  of  the  Lord's  Day,  and  that 
Constantine  did  not  therefore  intend  to  acknowledge 
it  as  a  Christian  institution. 

2nd.  That,  before  his  conversion,  Constantine  had 
professed  himself  to  be  especially  under  the  guardian 
ship  of  the  sun,  and  that,  at  the  very  best,  he  in 
tended  to  make  a  religious  compromise  between 
sun-worshippers,  properly  so  called,  and  the  wor- 


r)/Jiepav,  rji>  'E/3paioi  T-pw- 
',  "EAArji'e?    St    Tip    HAiu 


'  Trjc  it 

Trfv  Tr/s  ef$&on<iSos  ovo^a.^o 
avaTiStaTiv,  Ka.1  -^r\v  jrpb  T>j$  e/366/X 
ffrrjpuav  *cat  TWI'  aAAwi'  Trpayfiarajr  (r^oATjr  ayeif  Tra^Ta?, 
•  ai  iv  eu\ait  icai.  Atrouj  TO  ®flov  Bepaireveiv  erifia.  Se 
rr)i>  Kvpicmriv,  ax;  iv  ravrr)  ToO  Xpiarou  ai'aardiTOS  e<c 
vtKputv-  TTJV  Se  tre'par,  tos  tv  avrrj  <na.vpia9evT<K  (So/.. 
Kxl.  llitt.  1.  c.  8).  But  on  this  p.iss.iK'1  .-MIH  <T  observes 
rerv  truly,  "Non  dlcit  a  Constantino  appellatam  Kvp<.aKi\v, 


LORDS  DAY,  THE 

shippers  of  the  "  Sun  of  lii^hteousuess,"  i.  e. 
'Jliristians. 

3rdly.  That  Constantine's  edict  \v:is  puiely  a 
kalemlarial  one.  and  intended  to  reduce  the  number 
of  public  holic  »ys,  "  Dies  Nefasti,"  or  "  Feriati," 
which  had,  so  h/ng  ago  as  the  date  of  the  "  Actiones 
Verrinae,"  become  a  serious  impediment  to  the 
transaction  of  business.  And  that  this  was  to  be 
effected  by  choosing  a  day  which,  while  it  woul.: 
be  accepted  by  the  Paganism  then  in  fashion,  would 
of  course  be  agreeable  to  the  Christians. 

4thly.  That  Constantine  then  instituted  Sunday 
for  the  first  time  as  a  religious  day  for  Christians. 

The  fourth  of  these  statements  is  absolutely  re 
futed,  both  by  the  quotations  made  above  from 
writers  of  the  second  and  third  centuries,  and  by 
the  terms  of  the  edict  itself.  It  is  evident  that 
Constantine,  accepting  as  facts  the  existence  of  the 
"  Soils  Dies,"  and  the  reverence  paid  to  it  by  some 
one  or  other,  does  nothing  more  than  make  that 
reverence  practically  universal.  It  is  "  venerabilis  " 
already.  And  it  is  probable  that  this  most  natural 
interpretation  would  never  have  been  disturbed,  had 
not  Sozomen  asserted,  without  wan-ant  from  either 
the  Justinian  or  the  Theodosian  Code,  that  Con 
stantine  did  for  the  sixth  day  of  the  week  what  the 
codes  assert  he  did  for  the  first.1 

The  three  other  statements  concern  themselves 
rather  with  what  Constantine  meant  than  with 
what  he  did.  But  with  such  considerations  we 
have  little  or  nothing  to  do.  He  may  have  pur 
posely  selected  an  ambiguous  appellation.  He  may 
have  been  only  half  a  Christian,  wavering  between 
allegiance  to  Christ  and  allegiance  to  Mithras.  He 
may  have  affected  a  religious  syncretism.  He  may 
have  wished  his  people  to  adopt  such  syncretism. 
He  may  have  feared  to  offend  the  Pagans.  He  may 
have  hesitated  to  avow  too  openly  his  inward  lean 
ings  to  Christianity.  He  may  have  considered  that 
community  of  religious  days  might  lead  bye  and  bye 
to  community  of  religious  thought  and  feeling. 
And  he  may  have  had  in  view  the  rectification  of 
the  kalendar.  But  all  this  is  nothing  to  the  pur 
pose.  It  is  a  fact,  that  in  the  year  A.D.  321,  in  a 
public  edict,  which  was  to  apply  to  Christians  MS 
well  as  to  Pagans,  he  put  especial  honour  upon  a 
day  already  honoured  by  the  former — judiciously 
calling  it  by  a  name  which  Christians  had  long 
employed  without  scruple,  and  to  which,  as  it  was 
in  ordinary  use,  the  Pagans  could  scarcely  object. 
What  he  did  for  it  was  to  insist  that  worldly 
business,  whether  by  the  functionaries  of  the  law 
or  by  private  citizens,  should  be  intermitted  during 
its  continuance.  An  exception  indeed  was  made 
in  favour  of  the  rural  districts,  avowedly  from  the 
necessity  of  the  case,  covertly  perhaps  to  prevent 
those  districts,  where  Paganism  (as  the  word  Pagus 
would  intimate)  still  prevailed  extensively,  from 
feeling  aggrieved  by  a  sudden  and  stringent  change. 
It  need  only  be  added  here,  that  the  readiness  with 
which  Christians  acquiesced  in  the  interdiction  of 
business  on  the  Lord's  Day  affords  no  small  pre 
sumption  that  they  had  long  considered  it  to  be  a 

sed  'jam  ante  sic  vocatnm  feriatam  osse  decrevit.' ''  There 
is  a  passage  also  in  Kusebius  ( \'it.  Const,  iv.  ]X>  which 
appears  to  assert  the  same  thing  of  Saturday.  It  is,  how 
ever,  manifestly  corrupt,  and  can  scarcely  be  translated  at 
all  except  by  the  employment  of  an  emendation  ;  while 
if  we  do  thus  emend  it,  it  will  speak  of  Kriday,  as  Suzompn 
does,  and  not  of  Saturday ;  and,  what.  Is  more  t<,  our  pur 
pose,  to  whichever  of  those  d.ivs  it  does  refer,  what  ib  said 
in  it  concerning 'H  nvfuani)  win  fall  under  Suicrr's  rci'iark 


LORD'S  SUPPER 

day  of  rest,  and  that,  so  far  as  circumstances  ad 
mitted,  they  had  made  it  so  long  before. 

Were  any  other  testimony  wanting  to  the  exist 
ence  of  Sunday  as  a  day  of  Christian  worship  at 
this  period,  it  might  be  supplied  by  the  Council  of 
tficaea,  A.D.  325.  The  Fathers  there  and  then  as 
sembled  make  no  doubt  of  the  obligation  of  that 
day — do  not  ordain  it — do  not  defend  it.  They 
assume  it  as  an  existing  fact,  and  only  notice  it 
incidentally  in  order  to  regulate  an  indifferent  mat 
ter,  the  posture  of  Christian  worshippers  upon  it.k 

Richard  Baxter  has  well  summed  up  the  history 
of  the  Lord's  Day  at  this  point,  and  his  words  may 
not  unaptly  be  inserted  here  : — "  That  the  first 
Cnristian  emperor,  finding  all  Christians  unanimous 
in  the  possession  of  the  day,  should  make  a  law 
(as  our  kings  do)  for  the  due  observing  of  it,  and 
that  the  first  Christian  council  should  establish 
uniformity  in  the  very  gesture  of  worship  on  that 
day,  are  strong  confirmations  of  the  matter  of  fact, 
that  the  churches  unanimously  agreed  in  the  holy 
use  of  it  as  a  separated  day  even  from  and  in  the 
Apostles'  days"  (Richard  Baxter,  On  the  Divine 
Appointment  of  the  Lord's  Day,  p.  41.  1671). 

Here  we  conclude  our  inquiry.  If  patristical  or 
ecclesiastical  ground  has  been  touched  upon,  it  has 
been  only  so  far  as  appeared  necessary  for  the 
elucidation  of  the  Scripture  phrase,  T)  Kvpiax^i 
'H/ue'pa.  '  What  became  of  the  Sabbath  after  Chris 
tianity  was  fairly  planted;  what  Christ  said  of  it 
in  the  Gospels,  and  how  His  words  are  to  be  inter 
preted  ;  what  the  apostles  said  of  that  day,  and 
how  they  treated  it ;  what  the  early  ecclesiastical 
writers  held  respecting  it;  and  in  what  sense 
"There  remaineth  a  sabbatismus  (iraj8j8aTt07i£>r, 
A.  V.  "  rest")  to  the  people  of  God"  (Heb. 
iv.  9) :  these  are  questions,  which  fall  rather 
under  the  head  of  SABBATH  than  under  that 
of  "  Lord's  Day."  And  as  no  debate  arose  in  apos 
tolic  or  in  primitive  times  respecting  the  relation, 
by  descent,  of  the  Lord's  Day  to  the  Mosaic  Sabbath, 
>r  to  any  Sabbatical  institution  of  assumed  higher 
antiquity,  none  need  be  raised  here.  [See  SAB- 
BATH.] 

The  whole  subject  of  the  Lord's  Day,  including 
its  "  origin,  history,  and  present  obligation,"  is 
treated  of  by  the  writer  of  this  article  in  the  Bamp- 
ton  Lecture  for  1860.  •  [J.  A.  H.] 

LORD'S  SUPPER  (Kvpiaicbv  Stwoit:  Coena 
Dominica).  The  words  which  thus  describe  the 
great  central  act  of  the  worship  of  the  Christian 
Church  occur  but  in  one  single  passage  of 
the  N.  T.  (1  Cor.  xi.  20).a  Of  the  fact  which 
lies  under  the  name  we  have  several  notices, 
and  from  these,  incidental  and  fragmentary  as  they 
are,  it  is  possible  to  form  a  tolerably  distinct  picture. 
To  examine  these  notices  in  their  relation  to  the  life 


LORD'S  SUPPER 


139 


k  'ETretfiTJ  Tii/e's  flinv  tv  TJJ  (tvpiaicjj  yow  KAcVoi/rej  Kal 
iv  rai?  T>)9  IlenTjKoerrijs  ^e'pats,  vjrep  TOV  Trdi/ra  tv 
7ra<T7j  Trapoixtqi  6/j.ouus  <£vAaTT€<7$ai,  e0ra>Ta9  eSofe  TT) 
ayio  <rvv6&<a  ras  eux«S  airoSi&ovai.  rip  ©ecu  (Cone.  JVic. 
Can.  20). 

"  Maldonatus  (Comm.  on  Matt.  xxvi.  26)  is  bold  enough 
to  deny  that  the  "  Lord's  Supper  "  of  1  Cor.  xi.  20  is  the 
same  as  the  "  Eucharistia"  of  the  later  Church,  and  iden 
tities  H  with  the  meal  that  followed.  The  phraseology  to 
which  we  arc  accustomed  is  to  him  only  an  example  of 
the  "  ridicula  Calviritstarum  et  Lutheranorum  Inscitin," 
Innovating  on  the  received  language  of  the  Church.  The 
keen  detector  of  heresy,  however,  is  in  this  Instance  at 
variance  not  only  with  the  consensus  of  the  chief  fathers 
tf  the  ancient  Church  (comp.  Suicrr.  Thes,  a.  v.  Stiirvov), 


of  the  Christian  society  in  the  first  stages  of  it* 
growth,  and  so  to  learn  what  "  the  Supper  of 
the  Lord  "  actually  was,  will  be  the  object  of  this 
article.  It  would  be  foreign  to  its  purpose  to  trace 
the  history  of  the  stately  liturgies  which  grew  up 
out  of  it  in  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries,  except  so  far 
as  they  supply  or  suggest  evidence  as  to  the  customs 
of  the  earlier  period,  or  to  touch  upon  the  many 
controversies  which  then,  or  at  a  later  age,  have 
clustered  round  the  original  institution. 

I.  The  starting  point  of  this  inquiry  is  found  iu 
the  history  of  that  night  when  Jesus  and  His  dis 
ciples  met  together  to  eat  the  Passover  (Matt.  xxvi. 
19;  Mark  xiv.  16;  Luke  xxii.  13).  The  manner 
in  which  ,the  Paschal  feast  was  kept  by  the  Jews 
of  that  period  differed  in  many  details  from  that 
originally  prescribed  by  the  rules  of  Ex.  xii.  The 
multitudes  that  came  up  to  Jerusalem,  met,  as  they 
could  find  accommodation,  family  by  family,  or  in 
groups  of  friends,  with  one  of  their  number  as  the 
celebrant,  or  "  proclaimer  "  of  the  feast.  The  cere 
monies  of  the  feast  took  place  in  the  following  order 
(Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  xiii. ;  Meyer,  Co/mm,  in 
Matt.  xxvi.  26).  (1)  The  members  of  the  company 
that  were  joined  for  this  purpose  met  in  the  evening 
and  reclined  on  couches,  this  position  being  now  as 
much  a  matter  of  rule  as  standing  had  been  originally 
(comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  20,  avtKftro  ;  Luke  xxii.  14  ; 
j  and  John  xiii.  23,  25).  The  head  of  the  house 
hold,  or  celebrant,  began  by  a  form  of  blessing 
"  for  the  day  and  for  the  wine,"  pronounced  over  a 
cup,  of  which  he  and  the  others  then  drank.  The 
wine  was,  according  to  Rabbinic  traditions,  to  be 
mixed  with  water ;  not  for  any  mysterious  reason, 
but  because  that  was  regarded  as  the  best  way  of 
using  the  best  wine  (comp.  2  Mace.  xv.  39). 
(2)  All  who  were  present  then  washed  their  hands ; 
this  also  having  a  special  benediction.  (3)  The 
table  was  then  set  out  with  tlie  paschal  lamb,  un 
leavened  bread,  bitter  herbs,  and  the  dish  known 
asChai'oseth  (DDTin),  a  sauce  made  of  dates,  figs, 
raisins,  and  vinegar,  and  designed  to  commemorate 
the  mortar  of  their  bondage  in  Egypt  (Buxtorff, 
Lex.  Rabb.  831).  (4)  The  celebrant  first,  and 
then  the  others,  dipped  a  portion  of  the  bitter  herbs 
into  the  Charoseth  and  ate  them.  (5)  The  dishes 
were  then  removed,  and  a  cup  of  wine  again 
brought.  Then  followed  an  interval  which  was 
allowed  theoretically  for  the  questions  that  might 
be  asked  by  children  or  proselytes,  who  were  asto 
nished  at  such  a  strange  beginning  of  a  feast,  and 
the  cup  was  passed  round  and  drunk  at  the  close 
of  it.  (6)  The  dishes  being  brought  on  again,  the 
celebrant  repeated  the  commemorative  words  which 
opened  what  was  strictly  the  paschal  supper,  and 
pronounced  a  solemn  thanksgiving,  followed  by  Ps. 
cxiii.  and  cxiv.b  (7)  Then  came  a  second  washing 

but  with  the  authoritative  teaching  of  his  own  (Catechism. 
Trident,  c.-lv.  qu.  5). 

b  It  may  be  Interesting  to  give  the  words,  as  shewing 
what  kind  of  forms  may  have  served  as  types  for  the  first 
worship  of  the  Christian  Church. 

1.  This  is  the  passover,  which  we  eat  because  the  ].*>rd 
passed  over  the  houses  of  our  fathers  in  Egypt 

2.  These  are  the  bitter  herbs,  which  we  eat  in  romem- 
brance  that  the  Egyptians  made  the  lives  of  our  lather* 
bitter  In  Egypt. 

3.  This  is  the  unleavened  bread,  which  we  eat,  because 
the  dough  of  our  fathers  had  not  time  to  be  leavened 
before  the  Lord  revealed  himself  and  redeemed  them  out 
of  hand. 

4.  Therefore  arc  we  bound  to  give  thanks,  to  praise,  tc 


140 


LORD'S  SUPPER 


»f  the  hands,  with  a  short  form  of  blessing  as 
betbre,  and  the  celebrant  broke  one  of  the  two 
loaves  or  cakes  of  unleavened  bread,  and  gave  thanks 
over  it.  All  then  took  portions  of  the  bread  and 
dipped  them,  together  with  the  bitter  herbs,  into 
tbe  Charoseth,  and  so  ate  them.  (8)  After  this 
they  ate  the  flesh  of  the  paschal  lamb,  with  bread, 
&c.,  as  they  liked;  and  after  another  blessing,  a 
third  cup,  known  especially  as  the  "  cup  of  bless 
ing,"  was  handed  round.  (9)  This  -was  succeeded 
by  a  fourth  cup,  and  the  recital  of  Ps.  cxv.-cxviii. 
followed  by  a  prayer,  and  this  was  accordingly 
known  as  the  cup  of  the  Hallel,  or  of  the  Song. 
(10)  There  might  be,  in  conclusion,  a  fifth  cup, 
provided  that  the  "  great  Hallel "  (possibly  Psalms 
cxx.-cxxxvii.)  wassuug  over  it. 

Comparing  the  ritual  thus  gathered  from  Rab 
binic  writers  with  the  N.  T.,  and  assuming  (1) 
that  it  represents  substantially  the  common  practice 
of  our  Lord's  time  ;  and  (2)  that  the  meal  of  which 
He  and  His  disciples  partook,  was  either  the  pass- 
over  itself,  or  an  anticipation  of  it,c  conducted 
according  to  the  same  rules,  we  are  able  to  point, 
though  not  with  absolute  certainty,  to  the  points 
of  departure  which  the  old  practice  presented  for 
the  institution  of  the  new.  To  (1)  or  (3),  or  even 
to  (8),  we  may  refer  the  first  words  and  the  first 
distribution  of  the  cup  (Luke  xxii.  17,  18) ;  to  (2) 
or  (7),  the  dipping  of  the  sop  (tj/w/*(ov)  of  John 
xiii.  26 ;  to  (7),  or  to  an  interval  during  or  after 
(8),  the  distribution  of  the  bread  (Matt.  xxvi.  26  ; 
Mark  xiv.  22  ;  Luke  xxii.  19;  1  Cor.  xi.  23,  24); 
to  (9)  or  (10)  ("after  supper,"  Luke  xxii.  20)  the 
thanksgiving,  and  distribution  of  the  cup,  and 
the  hymn  with  which  the  whole  was  ended.  It 
will  be  noticed  that,  according  to  this  order  of  suc 
cession,  the  question  whether  Judas  partook  of 
what,  in  the  language  of  a  later  age,  would  be 
called  the  consecrated  elements,  is  most  probably  to 
be  answered  in  the  negative. 

The  narratives  of  the  Gospels  show  how  strongly 
the  disciples  were  impressed  with  the  words  which 
had  given  a  new  meaning  to  the  old  familiar  acts. 
They  leave  unnoticed  all  the  ceremonies  of  the  Pass 
over,  except  those  which  had  thus  been  transferred  to 
the  Christian  Church  and  perpetuated  in  it.  Old 
things  were  passing  away,  and  all  things  becoming 
new.  They  had  looked  on  the  bread  and  the  wine 
as  memorials  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt.  They 
were  now  told  to  partake  of  them  "  in  remem 
brance"  of  their  Master  and  Lord.  The  festival 
had  been  annual.  No  rule  was  given  as  to  the  time 
and  frequency  of  the  new  feast  that  thus  supervened 
on  the  old,  but  the  command  "  Do  this  as  oft  as 
ye  drink  it"  (1  Cor.  xi.  25),  suggested  the  more 
continual  recurrence  of  that  which  was  to  be  their 
memorial  of  one  whom  they  would  wish  never  to 
forget.  The  words,  "  This  is  my  body,"  gave  to 
the  unleavened  bread  a  new  character.  They  had 
been  prepared  for  language  that  would  otherwise 


land,  to  glorify,  to  extol,  to  honour,  to  praise,  to  magnify 
him  that  hath  done  for  our  fathers,  and  for  us,  all  these 
wonders;  who  hath  brought  us  from  bondage  to  free 
dom,  from  sorrow  to  rejoicing,  from  mourning  to  a  good 
day,  from  darkness  to  a  great  light,  from  affliction  to 
redemption ;  therefore  must  we  say  before  him.  Hallelu 
iah,  praise  ye  the  Lord ....  followed  by  Ps.  cxlll.  (Light- 
foot,  I.  c.). 

c  This  reservation  is  made  as  being  a  possible  alterna 
tive  for  explaining  the  differences  between  the  three 
Qrei  jospels  and  St.  John. 


LORD'S  SUFFER 

have  been  so  startling,  by  the  teaching  of  John  (»i. 
32-58),  and  they  were  thus  taught  to  see  in  the 
bread  that  was  broken  the  witness  of  the  closest 
possible  union  and  incorporation  with  their  Lord. 
The  cup  which  was  "the  new  testament"  (5ia- 
6-fiKri)  "in  His  blood,"  would  remind  them,  in  like 
manner,  of  the  wonderful  prophecy  in  which  that 
new  covenant  had  been  foretold  (Jer.  xxxi.  31-34) 
of  which  the  crowning  glory  was  in  the  promise, 
"  I  will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and  I  will  remember 
their  sin  no  more."  His  blood  shed,  as  He  told  them, 
"  for  them  and  for  many,"  for  that  remission  of 
sins  which  He  had  been  proclaiming  throughout  his 
whole  ministry,  was  to  be  to  the  new  covenant 
what  the  blood  of  sprinkling  had  been  to  that  of 
Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  8).  It  is  possible  that  there  may 
have  been  yet  another  thought  connected  with  these 
symbolic  acts.  The  funeral  customs  of  the  Jews 
involved,  at  or  after  the  burial,  the  administration 
to  the  mourners  of  bread  (comp.  Jer.  xvi.  7, 
"  neither  shall  they  break  bread  for  them  in  mourn 
ing,"  in  marginal  reading  of  A.  V. ;  Ewald  and 
Hitzig,  ad  loc. ;  Ez.  xxiv.  17 ;  Hos.  ix.  4  ;  Tob.  iv. 
17),  and  of  wine,  known,  when  thus  given,  as 
"  the  cup  of  consolation."  May  not  the  bread  and 
the  wine  of  the  Last  Supper  have  had  something  ot 
that  character,  preparing  the  minds  of  Christ's  dis 
ciples  for  His  departure  by  treating  it  as  already 
accomplished?  They  were  to  think  of  his  body  as 
already  anointed  for  the  burial  (Matt.  xxvi.  12  , 
Mark  xiv.  8 ;  John  xii.  7),  of  his  body  as  already 
given  up  to  death,  of  his  blood  as  already  shed. 
The  passover-meal  was  also,  little  as  they  might 
dream  of  it,  a  funeral-feast.  The  bread  and  the 
wine  were  to  be  pledges  of  consolation  for  their 
sorrow,  analogous  to  the  verbal  promises  of  John 
xiv.  1,  27,  xvi.  20.  •  The  word  5«x0VJKT;  might  even 
have  the  twofold  meaning  which  is  connected  with 
it  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

May  we  not  conjecture,  without  leaving  the 
region  of  history  for  that  of  controversy,  that  the 
thoughts,  desires,  emotions,  of  that  hour  of  divine 
sorrow  and  communion  would  be  such  as  to  lead 
the  disciples  to  crave  earnestly  to  renew  them? 
Would  it  not  be  natural  that  they  should  seek  that 
renewal  in  the  way  which  their  Master  had  pointed 
out  to  them  ?  From  this  time,  accordingly,  the 
words  "to  break  bread."  appeal'  to  have  had  for 
the  disciples  a  new  significance.  It  may  not  have 
assumed  indeed,  as  yet,  the  character  of  a  distinct 
liturgical  act ;  but  when  they  met  to  break  bread, 
it  was  with  new  thoughts  and  hopes,  and  with 
the  memories  of  that  evening  fresh  on  them.  It 
would  be  natural  that  the  Twelve  should  transmit 
the  command  to  others  who  had  not  been  present, 
and  seek  to  lead  them  to  the  same  obedience  and 
the  same  blessings.  The  narrative  of  the  two  dis 
ciples  to  whom  their  Lord  made  himself  known  "  in 
breaking  of  bread  "  at  Emmaus  (Luke  xxiv.  30-35) 
would  strengthen  the  belief  that  this  was  the  way 
to  an  abiding  fellowship  with  Him.d 


d  The  general  consensus  of  patristic  and  Roman  Catholic 
Interpreters  finds  in  this  also  a  solemn  celebration  of  tbe 
Eucharist.  Here,  they  say,  are  the  solemn  benediction 
and  the  technical  words  for  the  distribution  of  the  elements 
as  in  the  original  institution,  and  as  In  the  later  notices 
of  the  Acts.  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
phrase  "  to  break  bread  "  bid  been  a  synonym  for  the  act 
of  any  one  presiding  at  »  meal  (comp.  Jer.  xvi.  7,  Unm 
iv.  4),  and  that  tbe  Rabbinic  -ule  required  a  blessing 
whenever  throe  persons  sat  down  together  at  it.  (Comp 
Maldonatus  and  Meyer,  <ui  loc.). 


LORD'S  SUPPEIi 

II.  In  the  account  given  by  the  writer  of  the 
Acts  of  the  life  of  the  first  disciples  at  Jerusalem,  a 
prominent  place  is  given  to  this  act,  and  to  the 
phrase  which  indicated  it.  Writing,  we  must  re 
member,  with  the  definite  associations  that  had 
gathered  round  the  words  during  the  thirty  years  that 
followed  the  events  he  records,  he  describes  the 
baptized  members  of  the  Church  as  continuing 
steadfast  in  or  to  the  teaching  of  the  apostles,  in 
fellowship  with  them  and  with  each  other,6  and  in 
breaking  of  bread  and  in  prayers  (Acts  ii.  42).  'A 
few  verses  further  on,  their  daily  life  is  described 
as  ranging  itself  under  two  heads:  (1)  that  of 
public  devotion,  which  still  belonged  to  them  as  Jews 
("continuing  daily  with  one  accord  in  the  Temple") ; 
(2)  that  of  their  distinctive  acts  of  fellowship 
"breaking  bread  from  house  to  house  (or  "pri 
vately,"  Meyer),  they  did  eat  their  meat  in  gladness 
and  singleness  of  heart,  praising  God,  and  having 
favour  with  all  the  people."  Taken  in  connexion 
with  the  account  given  in  the  preceding  verses  of 
the  love  which  made  them  live  as  having  all  things 
common,  we  can  scarcely  doubt  that  this  implies 
that  the  chief  actual  meal  of  each  day  was  one  in 
which  they  met  as  brothers,  and  which  was  either 
preceded  or  followed  by  the  more  solemn  comme 
morative  acts  of  the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  the 
drinking  of  the  cup.  It  will  be  convenient  to  anti 
cipate  the  language  and  the  thoughts  of  a  some 
what  later  date,  and  to  say  that,  apparently,  they 
thus  united  every  day  the  Agapfc l  or  feast  of  Love 
with  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist.  So  far  as  the 
former  was  concerned,  they  were  reproducing  in 
the  streets  of  Jerusalem  the  simple  and  brotherly 
life  which  the  Essenes  were  leading  in  their  seclu 
sion  on  the  shores  of  the  Dead  Sea.K  It  would  be 
natural  that  in  a  society  consisting  of  many  thou 
sand  members  there  should  be  many  places  of 
meeting.  These  might  be  rooms  hired  for  the  pur 
pose,  or  freely  given  by  those  members  of  the 
Church  who  had  them  to  dispose  of.  The  congre 
gation  assembling  in  each  place  would  come  to  be 
known  as  "the  Church"  in  this  or  that  man's  house 
(Rom.  xvi.  5,  23;  1  Cor.  xvi.  19;  Col.  iv.  15; 
Philem.  ver.  2).  When  they  met,  the  place  of  honour 
would  naturally  be  taken  by  one  of  the  apostles,  or 
some  elder  representing  him.  It  would  belong  to 
him  to  pronounce  the  blessing  (ev\oyla)  and  thanks 
giving  (evxapiffrta),  with  which  the  meals  of  de 
vout  Jews  always  began  and  ended.  The  materials 
for  the  meal  would  be  provided  out  of  the  common 
funds  of  the  Church,  or  the  liberality  of  individual 
members.  The  bread  (unless  the  converted  Jews 
were  to  think  of  themselves  as  keeping  a  perpetual 
passover)  would  be  such  as  they  habitually  used. 

•  The  meaning  of  noivtovia.  in  this  passage  is  probably 
explained  by  the  flxov  airavra.  KOIVO.  that  follows  (comp. 
Meyer,  ad  toe.).     The  Vulg.  rendering,  "  et  communica- 
tione  fractionis  panis,"  originated  probably  in  a  wish  to 
give  to  the  word  its  later  liturgical  sense. 

*  The/act  is  traceable  to  the  earliest  days  of  the  Church. 
The  origin  of  the  name  is  obscure.   It  occurs  in  this  sense 
only  in  two  passages  of  the  N.  T.,  2  Pet.  ii.  13,  Jude  v. 
12 ;  and  there  the  reading  (though  supported  by  B  and 
other  great  MSS.)  Is  not  undisputed.    The  absence  of  any 
reference  to  it  in  St.  Paul's  memorable  chapter  on  'Ayairi) 
(1  Cor.  xiii.)  makes  it  improbable  that  it  was  then  and 
there  in  use.    In  the  age  after  the  apostles,  however,  it 
is  a  currently  accepted  word  for  the  meal  here  described 
Ugnat.  Ep.  ad  Smyrn.  c.  8 ;  Tertull.  Apol.  c.  39,  ad  Marc. 
:.  2 ;  Cyprian,  Testin.  ad  Quirin.  iii.  3). 

t  The  account  given  by  Josephus  (Bell.  Jud.  ii.  8)  de 
serves  to  be  studied,  both  as  coming  from  an  eye-witness 


LORDS  SIPPER 


141 


The  wine  (probably  the  common  red  w.'ne  of  Pales- 
tine,  Prov.  xxiii.  31)  would,  according  to  their 
usual  practice,  be  mixed  with  water.  Special  stress 
would  probably  be  laid  at  first  on  the  office  of 
breaking  and  distributing  the  bread,  as  that  which 
represented  the  fatherly  relation  of  the  pastor  to  his 
flock,  and  his  work  as  ministering  to  men  the  word 
of  life.  But  if  this  was  to  be  more  than  a  common 
meal  after  the  pattern  of  the  Essenes,  it  would  be 
necessary  to  introduce  words  that  would  show  that 
what  was  done  was  in  remembrance  of  their  Master. 
At  some  time,  before  or  after h  the  meal  of  which 
they  partook  as  such,  the  bread  and  the  wine  would 
be  given  with  some  special  form  of  words  or  acts, 
to  indicate  its  character.  New  converts  would 
need  some  explanation  of  the  meaning  and  origin  of 
the  observance.  What  would  be  so  fitting  and  so 
much  in  harmony  with  the  precedents  of  the  Paschal 
feast  as  the  narrative  of  what  had  passed  on  the  night 
of  its  institution  (1  Cor.  xi.  23-27)  ?  With  this 
there  would  naturally  be  associated  (as  in  Acts  ii.  42) 
prayers  for  themselves  and  others.  Their  gladness 
would  show  itself  in  the  psalms  and  hymns  with 
which  they  praised  God  (Heb.  ii.  46,  47  ;  James 
v.  13).  The  analogy  of  the  Passover,  the  general 
feeling  of  the  Jews,  and  the  practice  of  the  Essenes 
may  possibly  have  suggested  ablutions,  partial  or 
entire,  as  a  preparation  for  the  feast  (Heb.  x.  22  ; 
John  xiii.  1-15  ;  comp.  Tertull.  de  Oral.  c.  xi. ;  and 
for  the  later  practice  of  the  Church,  August.  Serm. 
ccxliv.).  At  some  point  in  the  feast  those  who  were 
present,  men  and  women  sitting  apart,  would  rise 
to  salute  each  other  with  the  "  holy  kiss  "  (1  Cor. 
xvi.  20  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  12  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Pacdagog.  iii. 
c.  11  ;  Tertull.  de  Orat.  c.  14 ;  Just.  M.  Apol.  ii.). 
Of  the  stages  in  the  growth  of  the  new  worship  we 
have,  it  is  true,  no  direct  evidence,  but  these  con 
jectures  from  antecedent  likelihood  are  confirmei 
by  the  fact  that  this  order  appeal's  as  the  common 
element  of  all  later  liturgies. 

The  next  traces  that  meet  us  are  in  1  Cor.,  and 
the  fact  that  we  find  them  is  in  itself  significant. 
The  commemorative  feast  has  not  been  confined  to 
the  personal  disciples  of  Christ,  or  the  Jewish  con 
verts  whom  they  gathered  round  them  at  Jeru 
salem.  It  has  been  the  law  of  the  Church's  expan 
sion  that  this  should  form  part  of  its  life  every 
where.  Wherever  the  apostles  or  their  delegates 
have  gone,  they  have  taken  this  with  them.  The 
language  of  St.  Paul,  we  must  remember,  is  not 
that  of  a  man  who  is  setting  forth  a  new  truth, 
but  of  one  who  appeals  to  thoughts,  words,  phrases 
that  are  familiar  to  his  readers,  and  we  find  accord 
ingly  evidence  of  a  received  liturgical  terminology 
The  title  of  the  "cup  of  blessing"  (1  Cor.  x.  16), 


(Vita,  c.  2),  and  as  shewing  a  type  of  holiness  which 
could  hardly  have  been  unknown  to  the  first  Christian 
disciples.  The  description  of  the  meals  of  the  Essenes 
might  almost  pass  for  that  of  an  Agape.  "  They  wash 
themselves  with  pure  water,  and  go  to  their  refectory  as 
to  a  holy  place  (re>e«>s),  and  sit  down  calmly  ....  The 
priest  begins  with  a  prayer  over  the  food,  and  It  is  unlaw 
ful  for  any  one  to  taste  of  it  before  the  prayer."  This  is 
the  early  meal.  The  Stiirvov  is  In  the  same  order  (comp 
Pliny,  Ep.  ad  Traj.). 

h  Examples  of  both  are  found  in  the  history  of  the 
early  Church :  1  Cor.  xi.  is  an  example  of  the  Agape 
coming  before  the  Eucharist.  The  order  of  the  two  words 
In  Ignat.  Epist.  ad  Smyrn.  c.  4  implies  priority.  The 
practice  continued  in  some  parts  of  Egypt  even  to  the 
time  of  Sozomcn  (Hist.  Eccl.  vli.  c.  19),  and  the  rule  ot 

_  the  Council  of  Cartnage  (can.  xli.)  forbidding  it,  inr  piles 

i  that  it  had  been  customary. 


142 


LORD  S  SUPPER 


Hebrew  in  its  origin  and  form  (see  above),  has  bee 
imported  into  the  Greek  Church.  The  synonyn 
of  "  the  cup  of  the  Lord"  (1  Cor.  x.  21)  distin 
guishes  it  from  the  other  cups  that  belonged  to  th 
Agai>&.  The  word  "fellowship"  (Koivcavia.)  is  pass 
ing  by  degrees  into  the  special  signification  of  "  Com 
m union."  The  apostle  refers  to  his  own  office  a. 
breaking  the  bread  and  blessing  the  cup  (1  Co: 
x.  16).'  The  table  on  which  the  bread  was  place 
was  the  Lord's  Table,  and  that  title  was  to  th 
Jew  not,  as  later  controversies  have  made  it,  th 
antithesis  of  altar  (®vffiaffT'f)piov),  but  as  nearl 
as  possible  a  synonym  (Mai.  i.  7,  12  ;  Ez.  xli.  22' 
But  the  practice  of  the  Agapfc,  as  well  as  the  ob 
servance  of  the  commemorative  feast,  had  bee 
transferred  to  Corinth,  and  this  called  for  a  specia 
notice.  Evils  had  sprung  up  which  had  to  b 
checked  at  once.  The  meeting  of  friends  for 
social  meal,  to  which  all  contributed,  was  a  suffi 
ciently  familiar  practice  in  the  common  life  o 
Greeks  of  this  period;  and  these  club-feasts  wer 
associated  with  plans  of  mutual  relief  or  charity 
the  poor  (comp.  Smith's  Dictionary  of  Antiquities 
s.  v.  "Eoavoi).  The  Agapfc  of  the  new  societ 
would  seem  to  them  to  be  such  a  feast,  and  henc 
came  a  disorder  that  altogether  frustrated  the  objec 
of  the  Church  in  instituting  it.  Richer  members 
came,  bringing  their  supper  with  them,  or  appro 
priating  what  belonged  to  the  common  stock,  and  sa 
down  to  consume  it  without  waiting  till  others  wer 
assembled  and  the  presiding  elder  had  taken  hi 
place.  The  poor  were  put  to  shame,  and  defraudec 
of  their  share  in  the  feast.  Each  was  thinking  o 
his  own  supper,  not  of  that  to  which  we  now  fin< 
attached  the  distinguishing  title  of  "the  Lord' 
Supper .k  And  when  the  time  for  that  came,  one  wa 
hungry  enough  to  be  looking  to  it  with  physical  no 
spiritual  craving,  another  so  overpowered  with  win< 
as  to  be  incapable  of  receiving  it  with  any  reverence 
It  is  quite  conceivable  that  a  life  of  excess  and  ex 
citement,  of  overwrought  emotion  and  unrestrainec 
indulgence,  such  as  this  epistle  brings  before  us,  may 
have  proved  destructive  to  the  physical  as  well  as 
the  moral  health  of  those  who  were  affected  by  it, 
and  so  the  sicknesses  and  the  deaths  of  which  St. 
Paul  speaks  (1  Cor.  xi.  30),  as  the  consequences  ol 
this  disorder  may  have  been  so,  not  by  supernatural 
infliction,  but  by  the  working  of  those  general  laws  oi 
the  divine  government,  which  make  the  punishment 
the  traceable  consequence  of  the  sin.  In  any  case, 
what  the  Corinthians  needed  was,  to  be  taught  to 
come  to  the  Lord's  table  with  greater  reverence,  to 
distinguish  (JSictKplvftv*)  the  Lord's  body  from  their 


LORD'S  SUPPEK 

common  food.  Unless  they  did  so,  they  would 
bring  upon  themselves  condemnation.  What  was 
to  be  the  remedy  for  this  terrible  and  growing  evil 
he  does  not  state  explicitly.  He  reserves  formal 
regulations  for  a  later  personal  visit.  In  the  mean- 
time  he  gives  a  rule  which  would  make  the  union 
of  the  Agapfe  and  the  Lord's  Supper  possible  with 
out  the  risk  cf  profanation.  They  were  not  to  come 
even  to  the  former  with  the  keen  edge  of  appetite 
They  were  to  wait  till  all  were  met,  instead  of 
scrambling  tumultuously  to  help  themselves  ( 1  Cor. 
xi.  33,  34).  In  one  point,  however,  the  custom  of 
the  Church  of  Corintli  differed  apparently  from  that 
of  Jerusalem.  The  meeting  for  the  Lord's  Supper 
was  no  longer  daily  (1  Cor.  xi.  20,  33).  The  direc 
tions  given  in  1  Cor.  xvi.  2,  suggest  the  constitution 
cf  a  celebration  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  (comp. 
Just.  Mart.  Apol.  i.  67  ;  Pliny,  Ep.  ad  Traj.}.  The 
meeting  at  Troas  is  on  the  same  day  (Acts  xx.  7). 

The  tendency  of  this  language,  and  therefore  pro 
bably  of  the  order  subsequently  established,  was  to 
separate  what  had  hitherto  been  united.™  We  stand 
as  it  were  at  the  dividing  point  of  the  history  of 
the  two  institutions,  and  henceforth  each  takes  its 
own  course.  One,  as  belonging  to  a  transient  phase 
of  the  Christian  life,  and  varying  in  its  effects  with 
changes  in  national  character  or  forms  of  civilisation, 
passes  through  many  stages0 — becomes  more  and 
more  a  merely  local  custom — is  found  to  be  pro 
ductive  of  evil  rather  than  of  good — is  discouraged 
by  bishops  and  forbidden  by  councils — and  finally  dies 
out.0  Traces  of  it  linger  in  some  of  the  traditional 
practices  of  the  Western  Church.P  There  have  been 
attempts  to  revive  it  among  the  Moravians  and 
other  religious  communities.  The  other  also  has 
its  changes.  The  morning  celebration  takes  the 
place  of  the  evening.  New  names — Eucharist, 
Sacrifice,  Altar,  Mass,  Holy  Mysteries — gather 
round  it.  New  epithets  and  new  ceremonies 
express  the  growing  reverence  of  the  people.  The 
mode  of  celebration  at  the  high  altar  of  a  basilica 
in  the  4th  century  differs  so  widely  from  the  cir 
cumstances  of  the  original  institution,  that  a  care 
less  eye  would  have  found  it  hard  to  recognise  their 
identity.  Speculations,  controversies,  superstitions 
crystallise  round  this  as  their  nucleus.  Great  dis 
ruptions  and  changes  threaten  to  destroy  the  life 
and  unity  of  the  Church.  Still,  through  all  tho 
changes,  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  vindicates  its  claim 
to  universality,  and  bears  a  permanent  witness  of 
the  truths  with  which  it  was  associated. 

In  Acts  xx.  11  we  have  an  example  of  the  way 
in  which  the  transition  may  have  been  effected. 


'  The  plural  Kb.ioiJ.fv  has  been  understood  as  implying 
that  the  congregation  took  part  in  the  act  of  breaking 
(Stanley,  Corinthians ;  and  Estius,  ad  toe.).  It  may  be 
questioned,  however,  whether  this  is  sufficient  ground  for 
an  interpretation  for  which  there  is  no  support  either  in 
the  analogous  custom  of  the  Jews  or  in  the  traditions  of 
the  Church.  The  «vAoyov/uev,  which  stands  parallel  to 
icAui/iei/,  can  bardly  be  referred  to  the  whole  tody  of 
partakers.  When  the  act  is  described  historically,  the  sin 
gular  is  always  used  (Acts  xx.  11,  xxvii.  35).  Tertullian,  in 
Vhe  passage  to  which  Prof.  Stanley  refers,  speaks  of  the 
otlwr  practice  ("necde  aliorum  quam  praesidentium  ma- 
nibus,"  deCor.Mil.c.^as&n  old  tradition, notasachangc. 
k  The  word  xvpiaxb?  appears  to  have  been  coined  for 
the  purpose  of  expressing  the  new  thought. 

m  It  has  been  ingeniously  contended  that  the  change 

Ironi  evening  to  morning  was  the  direct  result  of  St.  Paul's 

interposition  (Christian  Remembrancer,  art.  on  "  Evening 

I'xinui  i  unions "  July,  1860). 

•  That  presented  by  the  Council  of  Gangrn  (can.  xl.)  is 


noticeable  as  an  attempt  to  preserve  the  primitive  custom 
of  an  Agape  In  church  against  the  assaults  of  a  false 
asceticism. 

The  history  of  the  Agapae,  in  their  connexion  with 
the  life  of  the  Church,  is  full  of  interest,  but  would  be  om 
of  place  here.    An  outline  of  it  may  be  found  in  Augusti, 
'hristl.  Arcliaeol.  iii.  704-711. 

P  The  practice  of  distributing  bread,  which  has  been 

>lessed  but  not  consecrated,  to  the  congregation  generally 

children  included),  at  the  greater  festivals  of  the  Church, 

resents  a  vestige,  or  at  least  an  analogue,  of  the  old 

Agape.    Liturgical  writers  refer  it  to  the  period  (A.I>. 

58-385)  when  the  earlier  practice  wa:,  Killing  into  disuse, 

and  this  taking  its  place  as  the  expression  of  the  same 

eeling.     The  bread  thus  distributed  is  known   in   the 

Eastern  Church  as  euAoyi'a,  in  the  Western  as  the  panit 

">enedicttLS,  the  "  pain  b6nl "  of  the  modern  French  Church 

'he  practice  is  still  common  in  France  and  other  parts  at 

urope.  (Comp.  Moroni,  Ditumar.  Kccles.,  Pascal,  f.itvrg 

Cathol.,  in  Migne's  Kncyc.  Thed..  s  v.  "  Isulogle." 


LORD'S  SUPPER 

The  disciples  at  TYoas  meet  together  to  I  reak  bread. 
The  hour  is  not  definitely  stated,  but  the  fact  that 
St.  Paul's  discourse  was  protracted  till  past  mid 
night,  and  the  mention  of  the  many  lamps,  indicate 
a  later  time  than  that  commonly  fixed  for  the  Greek  | 
?f7-nvov.  If  we  are  not  to  suppose  a  scene  at 
variance  with  St.  Paul's  rule  in  1  Cor.  xi.  34,  they 
must  have  had  each  his  own  supper  before  they 
assembled.  Then  came  the  teaching  and  the  prayers, 
and  then,  towards  early  dawn,  the  breaking  of  bread, 
which  constituted  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  for  which 
they  were  gathered  together.  If  this  midnight 
meeting  may  be  taken  as  indicating  a  common  prac 
tice,  originating  in  reverence  for  an  ordinance  which 
Christ  had  enjoined,  we  can  easily  understand  how 
the  next  step  would  be  (as  circumstances  rendered 
the  midnight  gatherings  unnecessary  or  inexpedient) 
to  transfer  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  perma 
nently  to  the  morning  hour,  to  which  it  had  gra 
dually  been  approximating.11  Here  also  in  later 
times  there  were  traces  of  the  original  custom. 
Even  when  a  later  celebration  was  looked  on  as  at 
variance  with  the  general  custom  of  the  Church 
(Sozomen,  supra)  it  was  recognised  as  legitimate 
to  hold  an  evening  communion,  as  a  special  com 
memoration  of  the  original  institution,  on  the 
Thursday  before  Easter  (August.  Ep.  118  ;  ad  Jan. 
e.  5-7) ;  and  again  on  Easter-eve,  the  celebration 
in  the  latter  case  probably  taking  place  "  very  early 
iu  the  morning  while  it  was  yet  dark "  (Tertull. 
ad  Vxor.  ii.  c.  4). 

The  recurrence  of  the  same  liturgical  words  in 
Acts  xxvii.  35  makes  it  probable,  though  not  cer 
tain,  that  the  food  of  which  St.  Paul  thus  partook 
was  intended  to  have,  for  himself  and  his  Christian 
companions,  the  character  at  once  of  the  Agape  and 
the  Eucharist.  The  heathen  soldiers  and  sailors,  it 
may  be  noticed,  are  said  to  have  followed  his  ex 
ample,  not  to  have  partaken  of  the  bread  which  he 
had  broken.  If  we  adopt  this  explanation,  we  have 
in  this  narrative  another  example  of  a  celebration 
in  the  early  houi-s  between  midnight  and  dawn 
(comp.  v.  27,  39),  at  the  same  time,  »'.  e.,  as  we, 
have  met  with  in  the  meeting  at  Troas. 

TKRAH 


LOT 


143 


Ail  ti.c  distinct  references  to  *Ke  Lord's  Supper 
which  occnr  within  the  limits  of  t'ie  N.  T.  have, 
it  is  believed,  been  noticed.  •  Tc  find,  as  a  recent 
writer  has  done  (Christian  RemerrJir  oncer  for  April, 
1860),  quotations  from  the  Liturgy  of  the  Eastern 
Church  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  involves  (ingeni 
ously  as  the  hypothesis  is  supported)  assumptions 
too  many  and  too  bold  to  justify  our  acceptance  cf 
it.r  Extending  the  inquiry,  however,  to  the  times 
as  well  as  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.,  we  find  reason 
to  believe  that  we  can  trace  in  tl  e  later  worship 
of  the  Church  some  fragments  of  that  which  be 
longed  to  it  from  the  beginning.  The  agreement 
of  the  four  great  families  of  liturgies  implies  the 
substratum  of  a  common  order.  To  that  order  may 
well  have  belonged  the  Hebrew  words  Hallelujah, 
Amen,  Hosanna,  Lord  of  Sabaoth ;  the  salutations 
"  Peace  to  all,"  "  Peace  to  thee;"  the  Sursum 
Corda  (avu  ffx<a/J-(v  ras  KapStas),  the  Trisagion, 
the  Kyrie  Eleison.  We  are  justified  in  looking  at 
these  as  having  been  portions  of  a  liturgy  that  was 
really  primitive;  guarded  from  change  with  the 
tenacity  with  which  the  Christians  of  the  second 
century  clung  to  the  traditions  (the  TropoSdVeis  of 
2  Thess.  ii.  15,  iii.  6)  of  the  first,  forming  part  of 
the  great  deposit  (irapaKOTofl^Krj)  of  faith  and 
worship  which  they  had  received  from  the  apostles 
and  have  transmitted  to  later  ages  (comp.  Bingham, 
Eccles.  Antiq.  b.  xv.  c.  7 ;  Augusti,  Christl.  Archdol. 
b.  viii. ;  Stanley  on  1  Cor.  x.  and  xi.).  [E.  H.  P.] 

LO-RUH'AMAH  (HOrn  &6  :  OVK  Ti\erinevr, ; 

absque  misericordia),  i.  e.  "  the  uncompassionated,'/ 
the  name  of  the  daughter  of  Hosea  the  prophet, 
given  to  denote  the  utterly  ruined  and  hopeless 
condition  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  on  whom 
Jehovah  would  no  more  have  mercy  (Hos.  i.  6). 

LOT  (121? :  Ac6r ;  Joseph.  AWTOS,  and  so 
Veneto-Greek  Vers. :  Lot),  the  son  of  Haran,  and 
therefore  the  nephew  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xi.  27, 
31).  His  sisters  were  MiLCAH  the  wife  of  Nahor, 
and  ISCAH,  by  some  identified  with  Sarah.  The 
following  genealogy  exhibits  the  family  relations : — 


Hagar  =  Abram  =  Sarai 


Isaac 


Nahor  =  Milcah 


Bcthuel 


Haran  • 
I 


Lot  =•:  wife    Milcah  =  Nahor 


Isc&h 


I  I 

Esau         Jacob 


llebekah       Laban 


I  I 

Leah       llachel. 


Daughter 


Moah 


Daughter 


Ben-Atnmi. 


Haran  died  before  the  emigration  of  Terah  and  his  i  with  Abram  and  Sarai  to  Canaan  (xii.  4,  5;.    With 


iam..y  rrorn  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (ver.  28),  and  Lot 
was  tuerefore  born  there.  He  removed  with  the 
rest  of  his  kindred  to  Charan,  and  again  subsequently 


them  he  took  refuge  iu  Egypt  from  a  famine,  and 
with  them  returned,  first  to  the  "South"  (xiii.  1), 
and  then  to  their  original  settlement  between  Bethel 


*  Comp.  the  "  antelucanls  coetibus  "  of  Tertull  (de  Cor. 
Mil.  c.  3).  The  amalgamation  in  the  ritual  of  the  mo 
nastic  orders,  of  the  Nocturns,  and  Matin-Lauds,  into  the 
single  office  of  Matins,  presents  an  instance  of  an  ana 
logous  transition  (Palmer,  Orig.  Liturg.  i.  202), 

'  1  Cor.  ii.  9,  compared  with  the  recurrence  of  the  same 
words  in  the  Liturgy  with  an  antecedent  to  the  relative 
which  appears  in  the  Kpistle  without  one,  is  the  passage 
on  which  most  stress  is  laid.  1  Pet.  ii.  16,  and  Kph.  v.  14, 
are  adduced  as  further  instants. 


*  Tenth's  sons  are  given  above  in  the  order  in  which 
they  occur  in  the  record  (Gen.  xi.  27-32).  But  the  facts 
that  Nahor  and  Isaac  (and  if  Iscah  be  Sarai,  Abram  also) 
married  wives  not  of  their  own  generation,  but  of  the  next 
below  them,  and  that  Abrarn  and  Lot  travel  together  and 
behave  as  if  exactly  on  equal  terms,  seem  to  show  that 
Haran  wag  the  eldest  of  Terah's  three  deacon  .lants,  anil 
Abram  the  youngest.  It  would  be  a  parallel  to  the  cost 
of  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet,  where  Japhet  was  really  tk«- 
eldest,  though  enumerated  last. 


144 


LOT 


and  Ai  (ver.  3,  4),  where  Abram  had  built  his  first 
altar  (xiii.  4;  comp.  xii.  7),  and  invoked  on  it  the 
namo  of  Jehovah.  But  the  pastures  of  the  hills 
of  Bethel,  which  had  with  ease  contained  the  two 
strangers  en  their  first  arrival,  were  not  able  any 
longer  to  bear  them,  so  much  had  their  possessions 
of  sheep,  goats,  and  cattle  increased  since  that  time. 
It  was  not  any  disagreement  between  Abram  and 
Lot — their  relations  continued  good  to  the  last ; 
but  between  the  slaves  who  tended  their  countless 
herds  disputes  arose,  and  a  parting  was  necessary. 
The  exact  equality  with  which  Abram  treats  Lot  is 
very  remarkable.  It  is  as  if  they  were  really, 
according  to  the  very  ancient  idiom  of  these  records 
(Ewald  on  Gen.  xxxi.),  "  brethren,"  instead  of  uncle 
and  nephew.  From  some  one  of  the  round  swelling 
nills  which  surround  Bethel — from  none  more  likely 
than  that  which  stands  immediately  on  its  east 
[BETHEL,  vol.  i.  199]— the  two  Hebrews  looked 
over  the  comparatively  empty  land,  in  the  direction 
of  Sodom,  Gomorrah,  and  Zoar  (xiii.  10).  "  The  oc 
casion  was  to  the  two  lords  of  Palestine — then  almost 
'  free  before  them  where  to  choose' — what  in  Grecian 
legends  is  represented  under  the  figure  of  the  Choice 
of  Hercules ;  in  the  fables  of  Islam  under  the  story 
of  the  Prophet  turning  back  from  Damascus." 
And  Lot  lifted  up  his  eyes  towards  the  left,  and 
beheld  all  the  precinct  of  the  Jordan  that  it  was 
well  watered  eveiy  where ;  like  a  garden  of  Jehovah  ; 
like  that  unutterably  green  and  fertile  land  of 
Egypt  he  had  only  lately  quitted.  Even  from  that 
distance,  through  the  clear  air  of  Palestine,  can  be 
distinctly  discovered  the  long  and  thick  masses  of 
vegetation  which  fringe  the  numerous  streams  that 
descend  from  the  hills  on  either  side,  to  meet 
the  central  stream  in  its  tropical  depths.  And  what 
it  now  is  immediately  opposite  Bethel,  such  it  seems 
then  to  have  been  "  even  to  Zoar,"  to  the  farthest 
extremity  of  the  sea  which  now  covers  the  "  valley 
of  the  fields'1 " — the  fields  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah. 
"  No  crust  of  salt,  no  volcanic  convulsions,  had  as 
yet  blasted  its  verdure,  or  alarmed  the  secure  civi 
lisation  of  the  early  Phoenician  settlements  which 
had  struck  root  in  its  fertile  depths."  It  was 
exactly  the  prospect  to  tempt  a  man  who  had  no 
fixed  purpose  of  his  own,  who  had  not  like  Abram 
obeyed  a  stern  inward  call  of  duty.  So  Lot  left  his 
uncle  on  the  barren  hills  of  Bethel,  and  he  "  chose 
all  the  precinct  of  the  Jordan,  and  journeyed  east," 
down  the  ravines  which  give  access  to  the  Jordan 
valley ;  and  then  when  he  reached  it  turned  again 
southward  and  advanced  as  far  as  Sodom  (11,  12). 
Here  he  "  pitched  his  tent,"  for  he  was  still  a 
nomad.  But  his  nomad  life  was  virtually  al 
an  end.  He  was  now  to  relinquish  the  freedom 


LOT 

t,  there  is  no  doubt  that,  as  far  as  the  hi  story  t( 
Lot  is  concerned,  it  is  in  its  right  position  in  the 
narrative.  The  events  which  it  narrates  must  have 
occurred  after  those  of  ch.  xiii.,  and  before  those  of 
xviii.  and  xix.  Abram  has  moved  further  south, 
and  is  living  under  the  oaks  of  Mamre  the  Amorite, 
where  he  remained  tillthedestruction  of  Sodom.  Th*re 
is  little  in  it  which  calls  for  remark  here.  The  te.  m 
"  brother"  is  once  used  (ver.  16)  for  Lot's  relation 
to  Abram  (but  comp.  ver.  12,  "  brother's  son")  ; 
and  a  word  is  employed  for  the  possessions  of  Lot 
(ver.  1 1 ,  A.  V. " goods  "),  which  from  its  being  else 
where  in  these  early  records  (xlvi.  6 ;  Num.  xxxv. 
3)  distinguished  from  "cattle,"  and  employed  spe- 
:ially  for  the  spoil  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  may 
perhaps  denote  that  Lot  had  exchanged  the  wealth 
of  his  pastoral  condition  for  other  possessions 
more  peculiar  to  his  new  abode.  Women  are  also 
named  (ver.  16),  though  these  may  belong  to  the 
people  of  Sodom. 

3.  The  last  scene  preserved  to  us  in  the  Ibtory 
of  Lot  is  too  well  known  to  need  repetition.  He  is 
still  living  in  Sodom  (Gen.  xix.).  Some  years  have 
passed,  for  he  is  a  well-known  resident  in  the  town, 
with  wife,  sons,  and  daughters,  married  and  mar 
riageable.  But  in  the  midst  of  the  licentious  cor 
ruption  of  Sodom — the  eating  and  drinking,  the 
buying  and  selling,  the  planting  and  building  (Luke 
xvii.  28),  and  of  the  darker  evils  exposed  in  the 
ancient  narrative — he  still  preserves  some  of  the 
delightful  characteristics  of  his  wandering  life,  his 
fervent  and  chivalrous  hospitality  (xix.  2,  8),  the 
unleavened  bread  of  the  tent  of  the  wilderness  (ver. 
3),  the  water  for  the  feet  of  the  wayfarers  (ver.  2), 
affording  his  guests  a  reception  identical  with  that 
which  they  had  experienced  that  very  morning  in 
Abraham's  tent  on  the  heights  of  Hebron  (comp.  rviii. 
3, 6).  It  is  this  hospitality  which  receives  the  com 
mendation  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
in  words  which  have  passed  into  a  familiar  proverb, 
"  be  not  forgetful  to  entertain  strangers,  for  thereby 
some  have  entertained  angels0  unawares"  (Heb.  xiii. 
2).  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  his  deliverance  from  the 
guilty  and  condemned  city — the  one  justd  man  in  that 
mob  of  sensual  lawless  wretches — which  points  the 
allusion  of  St.  Peter,  to  "  the  godly  delivered  out 
of  temptations,  the  unjust  reserved  unto  the  day 
of  judgment  to  be  punished,  an  ensample  to  those 
that  after  should  live  ungodly"  (2  Pet.  ii.  6-9). 
Where  Zoar  was  situated,  in  which  he  found  a  tem 
porary  refuge  during  the  destruction  of  the  other 
cities  of  the  plain,  we  do  not  know  with  absolute 
certainty.  If,  as  is  most  probable,  it  was  at  the 
mouth  of  Wady  Kerak  (Rob.  ii.  188,  517),  then 
by  "  the  mountain "  is  meant  the  very  elevated 
ground  east  of  the  Dead  Sea.  If  with  De  Saulcy 


of  Judah. 


the  mountain ' 
Either  would  afford  caves  for  his  sub- 


and  independence  of  the  simple  life  of  the  tent — a 

mode  of  life  destined  to  be  one  of  the  great  methods  of  i  we  place  it  in  es-Zouara,  on  the  precipitous  descent 

educating  the  descendants  of  Abram — and  encounter  :  from  Hebron,  "  the  mountain  "  was  the  high  ground 

the  corruptions  which  seem  always  to  have  attended 

the  life  of  cities  in  the  East — "the  men  of  Sodom  were 

wicked,  and  sinners  before  Jehovah  exceedingly." 

2.  The  next  occurrence  in  the  life  of  Lot  is  his 
capture  by  the  four  kings  of  the  East,  and  his  rescue 
by  Abram  (Gen.  xiv.).  Whatever  may  be  the  age 
of  this  chapter  in  relation  to  those  before  and  after 


sequent  dwelling.  The  former  situation — on  the 
eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea,  has  in  its  favour  the 
fact  that  it  is  in  accordance  with  the  position  sub 
sequently  occupied  by  the  Ammonites  and  Moabites. 
But  this  will  be  best  examined  under  ZOAR. 

The  end  of  Lot's  wife  •  is  commonly  ti-oated  as 


k  -  Valley  of  Siddim  "— Siddim  =  fields. 

c  The  story  of  Baucis  and  Philemon,  who  unwittingly 
entertained  Jupiter  and  Mercury  (see  Diet,  of  Biography, 
lie.),  has  been  often  compared  with  this. 

<»  Aucoio?,  possibly  referring  to  Gen.  xviii.  23-33,  where 
ti«  LXX.  employ  this  word  throughout.  The  rabbinical 


tradition  is  that  he  was  actually  "judge"  of  Sodom,  and 
sate  in  the  gate  in  that  capacity.  (See  quotations  in 
Otho,  Lea.  Raub. "  Loth,"  and  "  Sodomah.") 

•  In  the  Jewish  traditions  her  name  is  Edith— JWJ? 
One  of  the  daughters  was  called  Plutith— JVB17B.  Se« 
Fabricios.  Cod.  Psevdep.  V.  T.  431. 


LOT 

OTC  of  the  "  diflksuitias "  of  the  Bible.  But  it  surely 
need  unt  be  so.  It  csainot  be  necessary,  as  some  have 
lone  to  create  the  details  of  the  story  where  none 
tire  given — to  describe  "the  unhappy  woman  struck 
rf,.a,l  " — "  a  blackened  corpse — smothered  and  stif 
fened  as  she  stood,  and  fixed  for  the  time  to  the  soil 
by  saline  or  bituminous  incrustations — like  a  pillar 
of  salt."  On  these  points  the  record  is  silent.  Its 
words  are  simply  these:  "  His  wife  looked  back  from 
behind  him/  and  became  a  pillar  of  salt ;" — words 
which  neither  in  themselves  nor  in  their  position 
in  the  narrative  afford  any  warrant  for  such 
speculations.  In  fact,  when  taken  with  what  has 
gone  before,  they  contradict  them,  for  it  seems 
plain,  from  vers.  22,  23,  that  the  work  of  destruc 
tion  by  fire  did  not  commence  till  after  Lot  had 
entered  Zoar.  But  this,  like  the  rest  of  her  fate, 
is  left  in  mystery. 

The  value  and  the  significance  of  the  story  to 
us  are  contained  in  the  allusion  of  Christ  (Luke 
xvii.  32)  :— "  In  that  day  he  that  is  in  the  field 
let  him  not  return  back :  remember  Lot's  wife," 
who  did.  "  Whosoever  shall  seek  to  save  his  life 
shall  lose  it."  It  will  be  observed  that  there  is 
no  attempt  in  the  narrrative  to  invest  the  circum 
stance  with  permanence;  no  statement — as  in  the 
case  of  the  pillar  erected  over  Rachel's  grave 
(xxxv.  20) — that  it  was  to  be  seen  at  the  time  of 
the  compilation  of  the  history.  And  in  this  we 
surely  have  a  remarkable  instance  of  that  sobriety 
which  characterises  the  statements  of  Scripture, 
even  where  the  events  narrated  are  most  out  of 
the  ordinary  course. 

Later  ages  have  not  been  satisfied  so  to  leave 
the  matter,  but  have  insisted  on  identifying  the 
"pillar"  with  some  one  of  the  fleeting  forms 
which  the  perishable  rock  of  the  south  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea  is  constantly  assuming  in  its  process  of 
decomposition  and  liquefaction  (Anderson's  Off. 
Narr.  180,  1).  The  first  allusion  of  this  kind  is 
perhaps  that  in  Wisd.  x.  7,  where  "  a  standing 
pillar  of  salt,  the  monument  ((tvi}fjit1ov)  of  an  un 
believing  soul,"  is  mentioned  with  the  "  waste 
land  that  smoketh,"  and  the  "plants  bearine  fruit 
that  never  come  to  ripeness,"  as  remaining  to  that 
lay,  a  testimony  to  the  wickedness  of  Sodom. 
Josephus  also  (Ant.  i.  11,  §4)  says  that  he  had 
seen  it,  and  that  it  was  then  remaining.  So  too 
do  Clemens  Komanus  and  Irenaeus  (quoted  by 
Kitto,  Cycl.  "Lot"). s  So  does  Benjamin  of 
Tudela,  whose  account  is  more  than  usually  cir 
cumstantial  (ed.  Asher,  i.  72)>  And  so  doubtless 
have  travellers  in  every  age — they  certainly  have  in 
our  own  times.  See  Maundrell,  March  30  ;  Lynch, 
Report,  p.  15;  and  Anderson's  Off.  Narrative,  181, 
TV  here  an  account  is  given  of  a  pillar  or  spur  stand 
ing  out  detached  from  the  general  mass  of  the  Jebel 
Usd&tn,  about  40  feet  in  height,  and  which  was 
recognized  by  the  sailors  of  the  expedition  as  "  Lot's 
wife." 

The  story  of  the  origin  of  the  nations  of  Moab 
and  Ammon  from  the  incestuous  intercourse  be 
tween  Lot  and  his  two  daughters,  with  which  his 
history  abruptly  concludes,  has  been  often  treated 

'  LXX.,  els  TO.  on-iVo) ;  comp.  Luke  ix.  62,  Phil.  iii.  13. 

«  See  the  quotations  from  ihe  Fathers  and  others  in 
Hofmann's  Lexiam  (s  v.  "Ix>t"),  and  in  Mislin,  Lieux 
Saints  (iii.  221). 

h  Rabbi  Petachiu,  on  the  other  hand,  looked  for  it 
»ut  "  dirt  not  see  it ;  it  no  longer  exists  "  (KJ.  Benisch, 
Alt. 

VOL.  II. 


LOT  14-b 

as  it  it  were  a  Hebrew  legend  which  owed  its  origin 
to  the  bitter  hatred  existing  from  the  earliest  to  the 
latest  times  between  the  "  Children  of  Lc  t "  and  the 
Children  of  Israel.1  The  horrible  nature  of  the 
transaction — not  the  result  of  impulse  or  passion, 
but  a  plan  calculated  and  carried  out,  and  tliat  not 
once  but  twice,  would  prompt  the  wish  that  the 
legendary  theory  were  true.k  But  even  the  most 
destructive  critics  (as,  for  instance,  Tuch)  allow  that 
the  narrative  is  a  continuation  without  a  break  of  that 
which  precedes  it,  while  they  fail  to  point  out  any 
marks  of  later  date  in  the  language  of  this  portion  ; 
and  it  cannot  be  questioned  that  the  writer  records 
it  as  an  historical  fact. 

Even  if  the  legendary  theory  were  admissible, 
there  is  no  doubt  of  the  fact  that  Ammon  and  Moab 
sprang  from  Lot.  It  is  affirmed  in  the  statement? 
of  Deut.  ii.  9  and  19,  as  well  as  in  the  later  docu 
ment  of  Ps.  xxxiii.  8,  which  Ewald  ascribes  to  the 
time  when  Nehemiah  and  his  newly-returned 
colony  were  suffering  from  the  attacks  and  obstruc 
tions  of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  and  Sanballat  the 
Horonite  (Ewald,  Dichter,  Ps.  83). 

The  Mohammedan  traditions  of  Lot  are  contained 
in  the  Koran,  chiefly  in  chaps,  vii.  and  xi. :  others 
are  given  by  D'Herbelot  (s.  v.  "  Loth").  According 
to  these  statements  he  was  sent  to  the  inhabitants 
of  the  five  cities  as  a  preacher,  to  warn  them  against 
the  unnatural  and  horrible  sins  which  they  prac 
tised — sins  which  Mohammed  is  continually  de 
nouncing,  but  with  less  success  than  that  of 
drunkenness,  since  the  former  is  perhaps  the  most 
common,  the  latter  the  rarest  vice,  of  Eastern 
cities.  From  Lot's  connexion  with  the  inhabitants 
of  Sodom,  his  name  is  now  given  not  only  to  the 
vice  in  question  (Freytag,  Lexicon,  iv.  136  a),  but 
also  to  the  people  of  the  five  cities  themselves — the 
Lothi,  or  Kattm  Loth.  The  local  name  of  the  Dead 
Sea  is  Bahr  Lut — Sea  of  Lot.  [G.] 

LOT.  The  custom  of  deciding  doubtful  ques 
tions  by  lot  is  one  of  great  extent  and  high  antiquity, 
recommending  itself  as  a  sort  of  appeal  to  the  Al 
mighty,  secure  from  all  influence  of  passion  or  bias, 
and  is  a  sort  of  divination  employed  even  by  the  gods 
themselves  (Horn.  //.  xxii.  209  ;  Cic.  de  Div.  i.  34, 
ii.  41).  The  word  sors  is  thus  used  for  an  oracular 
response  (Cic.  de  Div.  ii.  56).  [DIVINATION.] 
Among  heathen  instances  the  following  may  be 
cited: — 1.  Choice  of  a  champion  or  of  priority  in 
combat  (//.  iii.  316,  vii.  171;  Her.  iii.  108). 
2.  Decision  of  fate  in  battle  (//.  xx.  209).  3.  Ap 
pointment  of  magistrates,  jurymen,  or  other  func 
tionaries  (Arist.  Pol.  iv.  16;  Schol.  On  Aristoph. 
Plut.  277;  Her.  vi,  109;  Xen.  Cyr.  iv.  5,  55; 
Demosth.  c.  Aristog.  i.  p.  778,  1 ;  Diet,  of  Antiq. 
"  Dicastes").  4.  Priests  (Aesch.  in  Tim.  p.  188, 
Bekk.).  5.  A  German  practice  of  deciding  by 
marks  on  twigs,  mentioned  by  Tacitus  (Germ.  10), 
6.  Division  of  conquered  cr  colonized  land  (Thuc 
iii.  50  ;  Plut.  Pericl.  84  ;  Boeckh,  Public  Econ.  of 
Ath.  ii.  170). 

Among  the  Jews  also  the  use  of  lots,  with  a 
religious  intention,  direct  or  indirect,  pievailed  ex 
tensively.  The  religious  estimate  of  them  may 

i  See  Tuch,  aenesis,  369.  Von  Bohlen  ascribes  the 
legend  to  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Josian. 

k  For  the  pretty  legend  of  the  repentance  of  Ix>t,  and 
of  the  tree  which  he  planted,  which,  being  cut  down  for 
use  In  the  building  of  the  Temple,  was  afterward, 
employed  for  the  Cross,  see  Fabricius,  Cod. 
V.  T.,  42H-31 

I. 


146 


LOT  AN 


be  gathered  from  Prov.  xvi.  33.  The  following 
historical  or  ritual  instances  correspond  in  most 
respects  to  those  of  a  heathen  kind  mentioned 
above : — 

1.  Choice  of  men  for  an  invading  foroe  (Judg 
i,  l,xx.  10). 

2.  Partition,  (a)  of  the  soil  of  Palestine  among 
the  tribes  (Num.  xxvi.  55 ;  Josh,  xviii.  10 ;  Acts 
xiii.  19).     (6)  of  Jerusalem ;  f.  e.  probably  its  spoil 
or  captives   among   captors   (Obad.   11);    of  the 
land  itself  in  a   similar   way  (1  Mace.  iii.  36). 

(c)  After  the  return  from  cap'tivity,  Jerusalem  was 
populated  by  inhabitants  drawn  by  lot  in  the  pro 
portion  of  -fa  of  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Benjamin 
(Neb.  xi.  1,  2  ;  see  Ps.  xvi.  !5,  6,   Ez.  xxiv.  6). 

(d)  Apportionment  of  possessions,  or  spoil,  or  of  pri 
soners,  to  foreigners  or  captors  (Joel  iii.  3 ;  Nah.  iii. 
10  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  35). 

3.  (a)  Settlement  of  doubtful   questions  (Prov. 
xvi.  33,  where  "  lap"  is  perhaps  =  urn ;  xviii.  18). 
f  6)  A  mode  of  divination  among  heathens  by  means 
of  arrows,  two  inscribed,  and  one  without  mark, 
jStAojuarrtfa  (Hos.  iv.  12  ;  Ez.  xxi.  21 ;  Mauritius, 
de  Sortitione,  c.  14,  §4:  see  also  Esth.  iii.  7,  ix. 
24-32  ;  Mishna,   Taanith,  ii.  10.     [DIVINATION  ; 
PURIM.]    (c)  Detection  of  a  criminal,  as  in  the  case 
of  Achan  (Josh.  vii.  14,  18).     A  notion  prevailed 
among  the  Jews  that  this  detection  was  performed 
by  observing  the  shining  of  the  stones  in  the  high- 
priest's  breastplate   (Mauritius,  c.   21,  §4).     Jo 
nathan  was  discovered  by  lot  (1  Sam.  xiv.  41,  42). 
(d)  Appointment  of  persons  to  offices  or  duties 
Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  20,  21),  said  to  have  been  chosen 
as  above  in  Achan's  case.     St.  Matthias,  to  replace 
Judas  among  the  Twelve  (Acts  i.  24-26).     Distri 
bution    of  priestly  offices   in    the   Temple-service 
among  the  sixteen  of  the  family  of  Eleazar,  and  th 
eight  of  that  of  Ithamar  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  3,  5,  19 
Luke  i.  9).    Also  of  the  Levites  for  similar  purposes 
(1  Chr.  xxiii.  28,  xxiv.  20-31,  xxv.  8,  xxvi.  13; 
Mishna,  Tamid,  i.  2,  iii.  1,  v.  2  ;  Joma,  ii.  2,  3,  4 
Shabb.  xxiii.  2 ;  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Luke  i 
8,  9,  vol.  ii.  p.  489). 

Election  by  lot  appears  to  have  prevailed  in  the 
Christian  Church  as  late  as  the  7th  century  (Bing 
ham,  Ecclcs.  Antiq.  iv.  1,  1,  vol.  i.  p.  426  ;  Bruns 
Cone.  ii.  66). 

(e)  Selection  of  the  scape-goat  on  the  Day  o 
Atonement  (Lev.  xvi.  8,  10).  The  two  inscribec 
tablets  of  boxwood,  afterwards  of  gold,  were  pu 
into  an  urn,  which  was  shaken,  and  the  lot 
drawn  out  (Joma,  iii.  9,  iv.  1).  [ATONEMENT 
DAY  OF.] 

4.  The  use  of  words  heard  or  passages  chosen  at 
random  from  Scripture.  Sortes  Biblicae,  like  the 
Sortes  Virgilianae,  prevailed  among  Jews,  as  they 
have  also  among  Christians,  though  denounced  by 
several  Councils  (Diet.  ofAntiq.  "  Sortes ;"  Johnson 
"  Life  of  Cowley,"  Works,  ix.  8  ;  Bingham,  Eccl 
Ant.  xvi.  5,  3,  id.  vi.  53,  &c. ;  Bruns,  Cone,  ii 
145-154,  166;  Mauritius,  c.  15;  Hofmann,  Lex 
"Sortes").  [H.W.P.] 

LO'TAN(|O'^:  AWTC^:  Lotari),  the  eldes 
•on  of  Seir  the  Horite,  and  a  "  duke"  or  chief  o 
his  tribe  in  the  land  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  20,  22 
29 ;  1  Chr.  i.  38,  39). 

LOTHASU'BUS  (Ao>0c(<rou0oy :  Abusthas 
Sabiis),  a  corruption  of  HASIIUM  in  Neh.  viii.  4 
for  which  it  is  not  easy  to  account  (1  Esd.  ix.  44) 
lh«  Vijltr.  is  a  further  corruption  of  the  LXX. 


LOZON 

LOTS,  FEAST  OF.    [PirBiK.] 

LOVE-FEASTS  (iydvai:   epulnc,  c«>nnr:Vi , 
n  this  sense  used  only  twice,  Jude  12,  and  2  I'et. 
i.  13,  in  which  latter  place,  however,  Jhrdrai  is 
also  read),  an  entertainment  in  which  the  poorer 
members  of  the  Church  partook,  furnished  from  the 
contributions  of  Christians  reselling  to  the  Eucha- 
ristic  celebration,  but  whether  before  or  after  it 
may  be  doubted.     The  true  account  of  the  matter 
is  probably  that  given  by  Chrysostom,  who  says 
that  after  the  early  community  of  goods  had  ceased, 
the  richer  members  brought  to  the  Church  con 
tributions  of  food  and  drink,  of  which,  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  services  and  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist,  all  partook  together,  by  this  means  help 
ing  to  promote  the  principle  of  love  among  Christians 
(Horn,  in  1  Cor.  xi.  19,  vol.  Hi.  p.  293,  and  Horn. 
xxvii.  in  1  Cor.  xi.  vol.  x.  p.  281,  ed.  Gaume) 
The  intimate  connexion,  especially  in  early  times, 
between  the  Eucharist  itself  and  the  love-feast,  hrw 
led  several  writers  to   speak  of  them    almost   as 
identical.     Of  those  who  either  tike  this  view,  or 
regard  the  feast  as  subsequent  to  the  Euchnrist, 
may  be  mentioned  Pliny,  who  says  the  Christian? 
met  and  exchanged  sacramental  pledges  against  nil 
sorts  of  immorality ;  after  which  they  separated, 
and  met  again  to  partake  in  an   entertainment.' 
The  same  view  is  taken  by  Ignatius,  ad  Smym. 
c.  8  ;  Tertull.  Apol.  39  ;  Clein.  Alex.  Strom,  vii. 
322  (vol.  ii.  p.  892).  lii.  185  (vol.  i.  514),  but  in 
Paed.  ii.  61  (vol.  i.  p.  165)  he  seems  to  regard 
them  as  distinct ;    Apost.  Const,   ii.   28,  1  :  and 
besides  these,  Jerome  on  1  Cor.  xi. ;  Theodoret  and 
Oecumenius,  quoted  by  Bingham,  who  considers 
that  the  Agape  was  subsequent  ( Orig.  Eccl.  xv. 
6,  7 ;  vol.  v.  p.  284)  ;  Hofmann,  Lex.  "  Agapae." 
On  the  other  side  may  be  mentioned  Grotius  (on 
2  Pet.  ii.  13,  in  Grit.  Sacr.),  Suicer  (  Thes.  Eccl. 
vol.  i.  s.  v.),  Hammond,  Whitby,  Corn,  i  Lapidc, 
and  authorities  quoted  by  Bingham,  /.  c. b     The 
almost  universal  custom  to  receive  the  Eucharist 
fasting  proves  that  in  later  times  the  love-feasts 
must  have  followed,  not  preceded,  the  Eucharist 
(Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  19;  Aug.  c.  Faiist.  xx.  L'U  ; 
Ep.  liv.  (alias  cxviii.) ;  ad  Januar.  c.  6,  vol.  ii. 
p.  203,  ed.   Migne ;    Cone.  Carth.   iii.  A.D.  397. 
c.  29  ;  Bruns,  Cone.  i.  p.  127):  but  the  exception 
of  one  day  from  the  general  rule  (the  day  called 
Coena  Domini,  or  Maunday  Thursday)  seems  to  argue 
a  previously  different  practice.    The  love-feasts  were 
forbidden  to  be  held  in  churches  by  the  Council  of 
Laodicea,  A.D.  320,  Cone.  Quinisext.,   A.D.  692, 
c.  74,  Aix-la-Chapelle,  A.D.  816;  but  in  some  foim 
or  other  they  continued  to  a  much  later  period. 
Entertainments   at   births,  deaths,  and   marriages 
were  also  in  use  under  the  names  of  agapae  nata- 
litiae,  nuptialcs,  and  funeralcs.     (Bede,  Hist.  Eccl. 
Gent.  Angl.  i.  30 ;  Ap.  Const,  viii.  44,  1 ;  Theo 
doret,  Evany.  Vcrit.  viii.  p.  923,  924,  ed.  Schulz; 
Gree    Naz    Ep.  i.  14,  and  Carm.  x. ;  Hofmann. 
Lex r.'l.  c.)  [H.  W.  P.] 

LOZ'ON  (A.o£d>v :  Dedori),  one  of  the  sons  of 
"  Solomon's  servants  "  who  returned  with  Zoi  obabel 
(1  Esd.  v.  33).  The  name  corresponds  with  DAK- 
KON  in  the  parallel  lists  of  Ezr.  ii.  56  and  N»h. 
vii.  58,  and  the  variation  may  be  an  error  of  the 


»  "  Promiscnum  et  innoxiutn,  quod  ipsuni  '*  (i.  f.  the 
entertainment,  surely  not  the  sacrammtum)  "  faciro  d*- 
stsse  post  edictum  nieum"  (Kp.  x.  97). 

t  This  su):|oct  is  also  dlttcussed  tiudi-r  I»i-!'V  Si 


LUBiM 

transcriber,  which  is  easily  traceable  when  the  word 
is  written  in  the  uncial  character. 

LU'BIM  (D»3-lb,  2  Chr.  xii.  3,  xvi.  8;  Nah.  iii. 
0,   0*2?,    Dan.  xi.  43 :  Aiflvts :  Libyes ;   except 
Daniel,  Libyi),  a  nation  mentioned  as  contributing, 
together  wilh  Cushites  and  Sukkiim,  to  Shishak's 
army  (2  Chr.  xii.  3) ;  and  apparently  as  forming 
with  Cushites  the  bulk  of  Zerah's  army  (xvi.  8), 
spoken  of  by  Nahum  (iii.  9)  with  Put  or  Phut, 
as  helping  Mo-Amon  (Thebes),  of  which  Cush  and 
Egypt  were  the  strength  ;  and  by  Daniel  (xi.  43) 
as  paying  court  with  the  Cushites  to  a  conqueror 
of  Egypt   or   the    Egyptians.      These   particulars 
indicate  an  African  nation  under  tribute  to  Egypt, 
if  not  under  Egyptian  rule,  contributing,  in  the 
10th   century  B.C.,    valuable   aid    in   mercenaries 
or  auxiliaries  to  the  Egyptian  armies,  and  down  to 
Nahum's   time,   and    a    period   prophesied   of  by 
Daniel,  probably  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
JAHTIOCHUS  IV".],  assisting,  either  politically  or 
tommercially,  to  sustain  the  Egyptian  power,  or, 
in  the    last  case,  dependent   on  it.      These    indi 
cations  do  not  fix  the  geographical  position  of  the 
Lubim,  but  they  favour  the  supposition  that  their 
territory  was  near  Egypt,  either  to  the  west  or  south. 
For  more   precise   information  we   look  to  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  upon  which  we  find  repre 
sentations  of  a  people  called  ReBU,  or  LebU  (R 
and  L  having  no  distinction  in  hieroglyphics),  who 
cannot  be   doubted  to  correspond  to  the   Lubim. 
These   Rebu   were  a  warlike  people,   with  whom 
Monptah  (the  son   and  successor  of  Rameses  II.) 
and    Rameses    III.,   who  both  ruled  in   the    13th 
century  B.C.,  waged  successful  ware.     The  latter 
king  routed  them  with  much  slaughter.    The  sculp 
tures  of  the  great   temple   he   raised  at   Thebes, 
now  called  that  of  Medeenet  Haboo,  give  us  repre 
sentations  of  the  Rebu,  showing  that  they  were  fair, 
and  of  what   is   called   a   Semitic  type,   like   the 
Berbers  and  Kabyles.     They  are  distinguished  as 
northern,  that  is,  as  parallel  to,  or  north  of,  Lower 
Egypt.     Of  their  being  African  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt,  and  we  may  assign  them  to  the 
coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  commencing  not  fiir  to 
the  westward  of  Egypt.  We  do  not  find  them  to  have 
been  mercenaries  of  Egypt  from  the  monuments, 
but  we  know  that  the  kindred  Mashawasha-u  were 
so  employed  by  the  Bubastitc   family,   to  which 
Shislmk  and  probably  Zerah  also  belonged ;  and  it 
is  not  unlikely  that  the  latter  are  intended  by  the 
Lubim,  used  in  a  more  generic  sense  than  Rebu,  in 
the  Biblical  mention  of  the  armies  of  these  kings 
(Brugsch,  Geogr.  Inschr.  ii.  79,  seq.~).     We  have 
already  shown  that  the   Lubim  are  probably  the 
Mizraite  LEHABIM:  if  so,  their  so-called  Semitic 
physical    characteristics,    as    represented    on    the 
Egyptian  monuments,  afford  evidence  of  great  im 
portance   for  the   inquirer  into   primeval    history. 
The  mention  in  Manetho's  Dynasties  that,  unde 
Nccherophes,  or  Necheroehis,  the   first  Memphite 
king,  and  head  of  the  third  dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  2000), 
the  Libyans  revolted  from  the  Egyptians,  but  re 
turned  to  their  allegiance  through  fear  on  a  wonder 
ful  increase  of  the  moon,"  may  refer  to  the  Lubim, 
but  may  as  probably  relate  to  some  other  African 
people,  perhaps  the  Xaphtuhim,  or  Phut  (Put). 


LUCIFER 


147 


The  historical  indications  of  the  Egyptian  monu 
ments  thus  lead  us  to  place  the  seat  of  the  Lubim, 
or  primitive  Libyans,  on  the  African  coast  to  the 
westward  of  Egypt,  perhaps  extending  far  beyond 
the  Cyrenaica.  From  the  earliest  ages  of  which 
we  have  any  record,  a  stream  of  colonization  has 
flowed  from  the  East  along  the  coast  of  Africa, 
north  of  the  Great  Desert,  as  far  as  the  Pillars 
of  Hercules.  The  oldest  of  these  colonists  of  this 
•egion  were  doubtless  the  Lubim  and  kindred  tribes, 
particularly  the  Mashawasha-u  and  Tahen-nu  of 
;hc  Egyptian  monuments,  all  of  which  appeal 
,o  have  ultimately  taken  their  common  name  of 

ibyans  from  the  Lubim.  They  seem  to  have  been 
irst  reduced  by  the  Egyptians  about  1250  B.C., 
ind  to  have  been  afterwards  driven  inland  by  the 
Phoenician  and  Greek  colonists.  Now,  they  still 
•emain  on  the  northern  confines  of  the  Great  Desert, 
ind  even  within  it,  and  in  the  mountains,  while 
their  later  Shemite  rivals  pasture  their  flocks  in  the 

ich  plains.  Many  as  are  the  Arab  tribes  of  Africa, 
one  great  tribe,  that  of  the  Benee  'Alee,  extends 
rom  Egypt  to  Morocco,  illustrating  the  probable 
extent  of  the  territory  of  the  Lubim  and  their 
cognates.  It  is  possible  that  in  Ezek.  xxx.  5,  Lub, 

,  should  be  read  for  Chub,  2-13  ;  but  there  is 
no  other  instance  of  the  use  of  this  form  :  as,  how 
ever,  "VI?  and  Q^"!-1!^  are  used  for  one  people, 
pparently  the  Mizraite  Ludim,  most  probably  kin 
dred  to  the  Lubim,  this  objection  is  not  conclusive 
[CHCB;  LUDIM.]  In  Jer.  xlvi.  9,  the  A.  V 
renders  Phut  "  the  Libyans  ;"  and  in  Ezek.  xxxviii 
5,  "  Libya."  [R.  S.  P.] 

LTJ'CAS  (A.OVKO.S  :  Lucas),  a  friend  and  com 
panion  of  St.  Paul  during  his  imprisonment  at 
Home  (Philom.  24).  He  is  the  same  as  Luke,  the 
beloved  physician,  who  is  associated  with  Demas  in 
Col.  iv.  14,  and  who  remained  faithful  to  the 
apostle  when  others  forsook  him  (2  Tim.  iv.  11), 
on  his  first  examination  before  the  emperor.  For 
the  grounds  of  his  identification  with  the  evangelist 
St.  Luke,  see  article  LUKE. 

LU'CIFEE  ("?^n  :  'Ea><r<J>c5pos  :  Lucifer).  The 
name  is  found  in  Is.  xiv.  12,  coupled  with  the 
epithet  "  son  of  the  morning,"  and  (being  derived 

from  ??n,  "  to  shine")  clearly  signifies  a  "  bright 

star,"  and  probably  what  we  call  the  morning  star.' 
In  this  passage  it  is  a  symbolical  representation  of 
the  king  of  Babylon,  in  his  splendour  and  in  his  fall  ; 
perhaps  also  it  refers  to  his  glory  as  paling  before  the 
unveiled  presence  of  God.  Its  application  (from 
St.  Jerome  downwards)  to  Satan  in  his  fall  from 
heaven,  arises  probably  from  the  fact  that  the  Baby 
lonian  Empire  is  in  Scripture  represented  as  the 
type  of  tyrannical  and  self-idolising  power,  and 
especially  connected  with  the  empire  of  the  E\il 
One  in  the  Apocalypse.  The  fall  of  its  material 
power  before  the  unseen  woi  king  of  the  providence 
of  God  is  therefore  a  type  of  tiie  defeat  of  all  mani 
festations  of  the  tyranny  of  Satan.  This  applica 
tion  of  the  name  "  Lucifer  "  as  a  proper  name  of 
the  devil  is  plainly  ungrounded  ;  but  the  magnifi 
cence  of  the  imagery  of  the  prophet,  far  transcend 
ing  in  grandeur  the  fall  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to 


f  apa  \6yov  avf  TjSei'oijs  Sia  Se'os  eaurous 
x<ip*':3(ra.v  fAfr.  ip.  Cory,  Xnc.  >Va<7.  2nd  od,  p.  luo, 
^onip.  1 01.) 


a  The  other  interpretation,  which  makes 
Imperative  of  the  verb  ;5?\  in  the  sense  of  *  wail  "  or 
"  lament,"  Injures  the  parallelism,  and  is  generally  regai  deil 
as  niitciuilile. 

U  a 


148 


LUCIUS 


which  it  immediately  refers,  has  naturally  given  :i 
colour  to  the  symbolical  interpretation  of  the  pas 
sage,  and  fixed  that  application  in  our  modem 
language.  [A.  B.] 

LU'CIUS  (AeuKtoj,  AOUKIOS),  a  Roman  consul 
(Siren-OS  'Pwnalwv),  who  is  said  to  have  written 
the  letter  to  Ptolemy  (Euergetes),  which  assured 
Simon  I.  of  the  protection  of  Rome  (cir.  B.C.  139-8  ; 
1  Mace.  xv.  10,  15-24).  The  whole  form  of  the 
letter — the  mention  of  one  consul  only,  the  descrip 
tion  of  the  consul  by  the  praenomen,  the  omission 
of  the  senate  and  of  the  date  (comp.  Wernsdorf,  De 
fide  Mace.  §  cxix.) — shows  that  it  cannot  be  an 
accurate  copy  of  the  original  decuman t ;  but  there 
is  nothing  in  the  substance  of  the  letter  which  is 
open  to  just  suspicion. 

The  imperfect  transcription  of  the  name  has  led 
to  the  identification  of  Lucius  with  three  distinct 
persons — (1.)  [Lucius]  Furius  Philus  (the  lists, 
Clinton,  Fasti  Hell.  ii.  112,  give  P.  Furius  Philus), 
who  was  not  consul  till  B.C.  136,  and  is  therefore 
at  once  excluded.  (2.)  Lucius  Caecilius  Metellus 
Calvus,  who  was  consul  in  B.C.  142,  immediately 
after  Simon  assumed  the  government.  On  this 
supposition  it  might  seem  not  unlikely  that  the 
answer  which  Simon  received  to  an  application  for 
protection,  which  he  made  to  Rome  directly  on  his 
assumption  of  power  (comp.  1  Mace.  xiv.  17, 18)  in 
the  consulship  of  Metellus,  has  been  combined  with 
the  answer  to  the  later  embassy  of  Numenius 
(1  Mace.  xiv.  24,  xv.  18).  (3.)  But  the  third 
identification  with  Lucius  Calpurnius  Piso,  who 
was  consul  B.C.  139,  is  most  probably  correct. 
The  date  exactly  corresponds,  and,  though  the 
praenomen  of  Calpumius  is  not  established  beyond 
all  question,  the  balance  of  evidence  is  decidedly 
against  the  common  •  lists.  The  Fasti  Capitolini 
are  defective  for  this  year,  and  only  give  a  fragment 
of  the  name  of  Popillius,  the  fellow-consul  of 
Calpurnius.  Cassiodorus  (Chron.~),  as  edited,  gives 
Cn.  Calpurnius,  but  the  eye  of  the  scribe  (if  the 
reading  is  correct)  was  probably  misled  by  the 
names  in  the  years  immediately  before.  On  the 
other  hand  Valerius  Maximus  (i.  3)  is  wrongly 
quoted  from  the  printed  text  as  giving  the  same 
praenomen.  The  passage  in  which  the  name 
occurs  is  in  reality  no  part  of  Valerius  Maximus, 
but  a  piece  of  the  abstract  of  Julius  Paris  inserted 
in  the  text.  Of  eleven  MSS.  of  Valerius  which  the 
writer  has  examined,  it  occurs  only  in  one  (Mus. 
Brit.  Burn.  209),  and  there  the  name  is  given  Lucius 
Calpurnius,  as  it  is  given  by  Mai  in  his  edition  of 
Julius  Paris  (Script.  Vet.  Nova  Coll.  iii.  7).  Sigo- 
nius  says  rightly  (Fasti  Cons. p.  207)  :  "Cassiodorus 
prodit  consules  Cn.  Pisonem  ....  epitoma  L. 
Calpurnium"  ....  The  chance  of  an  error  of  tran 
scription  in  Julius  Paris  is  obviously  less  than  in  the 
Fasti  of  Cassiodorus  ;  and  even  if  the  evidence  were 
equal,  the  authority  of  1  Mace,  might  rightly  be 
urged  as  decisive  in  such  a  case. 

Joseph  i  is  omits  all  mention  of  the  letter  of 
"Lucius"  in  his  account  of  Simon,  but  gives  one 
very  similar  in  contents  (Ant.  xiv.  8,  §5),  as  written 
MI  the  motion  of  LucLis  Valerius  in  the  ninth 
(nineteenth)  year  of  Hyrcanus  II.  ;  and  unless  the 
two  letters  and  the  two  missions  which  led  to  them 
were  purposely  assimilated,  which  is  not  wholly 
improbable,  it  must  be  supposed  that  he  has  been 
guilty  of  a  strange  oversight  in  removing  the  incident 
from  its  proper  place.  [B.  F.  W.J 

LU'CIUS  (Aoi5*ios :    Lucius],   a    kinsman    01 


LUD 

fellow-tribesman  of  St.  Paul  (Rom.  xvi.  21),  cy 
whom  he  is  said  by  tradition  to  have  been  ordaineo 
bishop  of  the  church  of  Cenchreae,  from  whence 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written  (Apost, 
Const,  vii.  46).  He  is  thought  by  some  to  be  the 
same  with  Lucius  of  Cyrene.  (See  the  following 
article.) 

LU'CIUS  OF  CYRE'NE  (Aofatos  6  Kvoi;- 
vaios).  Lucius,  thus  distinguished  by  the  name  of 
his  city — the  capital  of  a  Greek  colony  in  Northern 
Africa,  and  remarkable  for  the  number  of  its  Jewish 
inhabitants — is  first  mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  in 
company  with  Barnabas,  Simeon  called  Niger, 
Manaen,  and  Saul,  who  are  described  as  prophets 
and  teachers  of  the  church  at  ntioch  (Acts  xiii.  1). 
These  honoured  disciples  having,  while  engaged  in 
the  office  of  common  worship,  received  command 
ment  from  the  Holy  Ghost  to  set  apart  Bamabas 
and  Saul  for  the  special  service  of  God,  proceeded 
after  fasting  and  prayer,  to  lay  their  hands  upon 
them.  This  is  the  first  recorded  instance  of  a 
foi-mal  ordination  to  the  office  of  Evangelist,  but  it 
cannot  be  supposed  that  so  solemn  a  commission 
would  have  been  given  to  any  but  such  as  had 
themselves  been  ordained  to  the  ministry  of  the 
Word,  and  we  may  therefore  assume  that  Lucius 
and  his  companions  were  already  of  that  number. 
Whether  Lucius  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples, 
as  stated  by  Pseudo-Hippolytus,  is  quite  a  matter 
of  conjecture,  but  it  is  highly  probable  that  he 
formed  one  of  the  congregation  to  whom  St.  Peter 
preached  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  10) ; 
and  there  can  hardly  be  a  doubt  that  he  was  one 
of  "  the  men  of  Cyrene "  who,  being  "  scattered 
a> road  upou  the  persecution  that  arose  about  Ste 
phen,"  went  to  A  ntioch  preaching  the  Lord  Jesus 
(Acts  xi.  19,  20). 

It  is  commonly  supposed  that  Lucius  is  the  kins 
man  of  St.  Paul  mentioned  by  that  apostle  as  joining 
with  him  in  his  salutation  to  the  Roman  brethren 
(Rom.  xvi.  21).  There  is  certainly  no  sufficient 
reason  for  regarding  him  as  identical  with  St.  Luke 
the  Evangelist,  though  this  opinion  was  apparently 
held  by  Origen  (in  loco),  and  is  supported  by 
Calmet,  as  well  as  by  Wetstein,  who  adduces  in 
confirmation  of  it  the  fact  reported  by  Herodotus 
(iii.  121),  that  the  Cyrenians  had  throughout 
Greece  a  high  reputation  as  physicians.  But  it 
must  be  observed  that  the  names  are  clearly  dis 
tinct.  The  missionary  companion  of  St.  Paul  was 
not  Lucius,  but  Lucas  or  Lucanus,  "  the  beloved 
physician,"  who,  though  named  in  three  different 
Epistles  (Col.  iv.  14  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  11 ;  Philem.  24), 
is  never  referred  to  as  a  relation.  Again,  it  is 
hardly  probable  that  St.  Luke,  who  suppresses  his 
own  name  as  the  companion  of  St.  Paul,  would 
have  mentioned  himself  as  one  among  the  more 
distinguished  prophets  and  teachers  at  Antioch. 
Olshausen,  indeed,  asserts  confidently  that  the  no 
tion  of  St.  Luke  and  Lucius  being  the  same  person 
has  nothing  whatever  to  support  it  (Clark's  Thcol. 
Lib.  iv.  513).  In  the  Apostolical  Constitutions, 
vii.  46,  it  is  stated  that  St.  Paul  consecrated 
Lucius  bishop  of  Cenchreae.  Different  traditions 
make  Lucius  the  first  bishop  of  Cyrene  and  of 
Laodicea  in  Syria.  [E.  H — s.] 

LUD  HI?:  AouS:  L'td),  the  fourth  name  in 
the  list  of  the  children  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  22  ;  corr.p, 
1  Chr.  i.  17),  that  of  a  person  or  tribe,  or  both, 
descended  from  nim.  It  has  been  supposed  that  Lud 
was  the  ancestor  of  the  Lydians  (Jos.  Ant.  i .  6,  §  4  *, 


LUDIM 

and  iiMt  ripresent«d  by  the  Lydus  of  their  mythical 
f-;r!od  (Herod,  i.  7).  The  Shemite  character  of 
their  manners,  and  the  strong  orientalism  of  the  art 
of  the  Lydian  kingdom  during  its  latest  period  and 
after  the  Persian  conquest,  but  before  the  predomi 
nance  of  Greek  art  in  Asia  Minor,  favour  this  idea  ; 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Egyptian  monuments 
show  us  in  the  13th,  14th,  and  15th  centuries  B.C. 
a  powerful  people  called  RUTEN  or  LUDEN,  pro 
bably  seated  near  Mesopotamia,  and  apparently 
north  of  Palestine,  whom  some,  however,  make  the 
Assyrians.  We  may  perhaps  conjecture  that  the 
Lydians  first  established  themselves  near  Palestine, 
and  afterwards  spread  into  Asia  Minor  ;  the  occupiers 
of  the  old  seat  of  the  race  being  destroyed  or  removed 
by  the  Assyrians.  For  the  question  whether  the 
l.ud  or  Ludim  mentioned  by  the  prophets  be  of 
this  stock  or  the  Mizraite  Ludim  of  Gen.  x.,  see  the 
next  article.  [R.  S.  P.] 

LU'DIM  (DH^,  Gen.  x.  13,  D'H-'b,  1  Chr. 

i.  1  1  :  AouStei'/i  :  Ludim),  a.  Mizraite  people  or  tribe. 
From  their  position  at  the  head  of  the  list  of  the 
Mizraites,  it  is  probable  that  the  Ludim  were  settled 
to  the  west  of  Egypt,  perhaps  further  than  any  other 
Mizraite  tribe.  Lud  and  the  Ludim  are  mentioned 
in  four  passages  of  the  prophets.  It  is  important  to 
rscertain,  if  possible,  whether  the  Mizi  aite  Ludim  or 
the  Shemite  Lud  be  referred  to  in  each  of  these 
passages.  Isaiah  mentions  "  Tarshish,  Pul,  and  Lud, 
that  draw  the  bow  (nt^'p  *3&?B),  Tubal,  and  Javan, 


LUDIM 


149 


the  isles  afar  off"  (Ixvi.  19).  Here  the  expression 
in  the  plural,  "  that  draw  the  bow  "  (tendentes 
sogittam,  Vulg.),  may  refer  only  to  Lud,  and  there 
fore  not  connect  it  with  one  or  both  of  the  names 
preceding.  A  comparison  with  the  other  three  pas 
sages,  in  all  which  Phut  is  mentioned  immediately 
before  or  after  Lud  or  the  Ludim,  makes  it  almost 


*  The  manner  in  which  these  foreign  troops  in  the 
Egyptian  army  are  characterized  is  perfectly  in  accordance 
with  the  evidence  of  the  monuments,  which,  although 
about  six  centuries  earlier  than  the  prophet's  time,  no 
doubt  represent  the  same  condition  of  military  matters. 
The  only  people  of  Africa  beyond  Egypt,  portrayed  on 
the  monuments,  whom  we  can  consider  as  most  probably 
of  the  same  stock  as  the  Egyptians,  are  the  R--BU,  who 
are  the  Lubim  of  the  Bible,  almost  certainly  the  same  as 
the  Mizraite  Lehabim.  [LEHABIM  ;  LUBIM.]  Therefore 
we  may  take  the  Rp.BU  as  probably  illustrating  the 
Ludim,  supposing  the  latter  to  be  Mizraites,  in  which  case 
they  may  indeed  be  included  under  the  same  name  as  the 
Lubim,  if  the  appellation  ReBU  be  wider  than  the  Lubim 
of  the  Bible,  and  also  as  illustrating  Oush  and  Phut.  The 
last  two  are  spoken  of  as  handling  the  buckler.  The 
Egyptians  are  generally  represented  with  small  shields, 
frequently  round ;  the  ReBU  with  small  round  shields,  for 
which  the  term  here  used,  JJJO,  the  small  shield,  and 

the  expression  "  that  handle,"  are  perfectly  appropriate. 
That  the  Ludim  should  have  been  archers,  and  apparently 
armed  with  a  long  bow  that  was  strung  with  the  aid  of 
the  foot  by  treading  (DK'p  <ID"V:J)>  is  note-worthy, 
sinoo  the  Africans  were  always  famous  for  their  archery. 
The  ReBU,  and  one  other  of  the  foreign  nations  that  served 
In  the  Egyptian  army— the  monuments  show  the  former 
mly  as  enemies — were  bowmen,  being  armed  with  a  bow 
:f  moderate  length ;  the  other  mercenaries — of  whom  we 
can  only  identify  the  Philistine  Cherethim,  though  they 
probably  include  certain  of  the  mercenaries  or  auxiliaries 
irentJoned  in  the  Bible— carrying  swords  and  Javelins, 
tut  nat  bows.  These  points  of  agreement,  founded  on  our 
exf.i/jinntion  of  the  monuments,  arc  of  no  little  vse'.ght,  us 
ticwuig  the  accuracy  of  the  Bible. 


certain  that  the  LXX.  reading,  Phut,  *ou5,  ftr 
Pul,  a  word  not  occurring  in  any  other  passage,  is 
the  true  one,  extraordinary  as  is  the  change  from 
*3^O  to  Moff6x-  [PUL.]  Jeremiah,  in  speaking 
of  Pharaoh  Necho's  army,  makes  mention  of  "  Cash 
and  Phut  that  handle  the  buckler  ;  and  the  Ludim 
that  handle  [and]  bend  the  bow"*  (xlvi  9).  Here 
the  Ludim  are  associated  with  African  nations,  a? 
mercenaries  or  auxiliaries  of  the  king  jf  Egypt,  and 
therefore  it  would  seem  probable,  prima  facie,  that 
the  Mizraite  Ludim  are  intended.  Ezekiel,  in  the 
description  of  Tyre,b  speaks  thus  of  Lud  :  "  Persia 
and  Lud  and  Phut  were  in  thine  army,  thy  men 
of  war  :  buckler  (  )3O)  and  helmet  hung  they  up  in 
thee  ;  they  set  thine  adorning"  (xxvii.  10).  In 
this  place  Lud  might  seem  to  mean  the  Shemite 
Lud,  especially  if  the  latter  be  connected  with  Lydia  ; 
but  the  association  with  Phut  renders  it  as  likely 
that  the  nation  or  country  is  that  of  the  African 
Ludim.  In  the  prophecy  against  Gog  a  similar 
passage  occurs.  "  Persia,  Gush,  and  Phut  (A.V. 
"  Libya  ")  with  them  [the  army  of  Gog];  all  of  them 
[with]  buckler  (J30)  and  helmet"  (xxxviii.  5).  It 

seems  from  this  that  there  were  Persian  mercenaries 
at  this  time,  the  prophet  perhaps,  if  speaking  of  a 
remote  future  period,  using  their  name  and  that  of 
other  well-known  mercenaries  in  a  general  sense. 
The  association  of  Persia  and  Lud  in  the  formei 
passage  loses  therefore  somewhat  of  its  weight.  In 
one  of  the  prophecies  against  Egypt  Lud  is  thus 
mentioned  among  the  supports  of  that  country  : 
"  And  the  sword  shall  come  upon  Mizraim,  and 
great  pain  shall  be  in  Gush,  at  the  falling  of  the 
slain  in  Mizraim,  and  they  shall  take  away  her 
multitude  (n31Dn.),c  and  her  foundations  shall  be 
broken  down.  Gush,  and  Phut,  and  Lud,  and  aL 
the  mingled  people  (21$),  and  Chub,  and  the 


b  The  description  of  Tyre  in  this  prophecy  of  Ezekiel 
receives  striking  illustration  from  what  we  believe  to  be 
its  earliest  coins.  These  coins  were  held  to  be  most 
probably  of  Tyre,  or  some  other  Phoenician  city,  or  pos 
sibly  of  Babylon,  on  numismatic  evidence  alone,  by  the 
writer's  lamented  colleague  at  the  British  Museum,  Mr 
Burgon.  They  probably  date  during  the  5th  century  B.C.  , 
they  may  possibly  be  a  little  older  ;  but  it  is  most  reason 
able  to  consider  them  as  of  the  time  of,  and  issued  by 
Darius  Hystaspis.  The  chief  coins  are  octodrachms  of  the 
earlier  Phoenician  weight  [MOKEY],  bearing,  on  the  ob 
verse,  a  war-galley  beneath  the  towered  walls  of  a  city, 
and,  on  the  reverse,  a  king  in  a  chariot,  with  an  incuse 


goat  beneath.  This  combination  of  galley  and  city  is 
exactly  what  we  find  in  the  description  of  Tyre  in 
Ezekiel,  which  mainly  portrays  a  state-galley,  but  also 
refers  to  a  port,  and  speaks  of  towers  and  walls. 

<=  There  may  perhaps  be  here  a  reference  by  parono 
masia  to  Amon,  the  chief  divinity  of  Thebes,  the  Hebrew 
name  of  which  'lJON  X3  contains  Uis  name. 


150 


LUDIM 


children  of  the  land  of  the  covenant,  shall  f;ill  by 
the  sword  with  them"  (xxx.  4,  5).  Here  Lud  is 
associated  with  Cush  and  Phut,  as  though  an  African 
nation.  The  Ereb,  whom  we  have  called  "  mingled 
people  "  rather  than  "  strangers,"  appear  to  have  been 
an  Arab  population  of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  perhaps 
including  Arab  or  half-Arab  tribes  of  the  Egyptian 
desert  to  the  east  of  the  Nile.  Chub  is  a  name 
nowhere  else  occurring,  which  perhaps  should  be 
read  Lub,  for  the  country  or  nation  of  the  Lubim. 
[OilUB ;  LUBIM.]  The  "  children  of  the  land  of  the 
covenant  "  may  be  some  league  of  tribes,  as  probably 
were  the  Nine  Bows  of  the  Egyptian  inscriptions ; 
or  the  expression  may  menu  nations  or  tribes  allied 
with  Egypt,  as  though  a  general  designation  for  the 
rest  of  its  supporters  besides  those  specified.  It  is 
noticeable  that  in  this  passage,  although  Lud  is  placed 
among  the  close  allies  or  supporters  of  Egypt,  yet  it 
follows  African  nations,  and  is  followed  by  a  nation 
or  tribe  at  least  partly  inhabiting  Asia,  although 
possibly  also  partly  inhabiting  Africa. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  but  one  nation  is 
intended  in  these  passages,  and  it  seems  that  thus 
far  the  preponderance  of  evidence  is  in  favour  of  the 
Mizraite  Ludim.  There  are  no  indications  in  the 
Bible  known  to  be  positive  of  mercenary  or  allied 
troops  in  the  Egyptian  armies,  except  of  Africans, 
and  perhaps  of  tribes  bordering  Egypt  on  the  east. 
We  have  still  to  inquire  how  the  evidence  of  the 
Egyptian  monuments  and  of  profane  history  may 
ftrtect  our  supposition.  From  the  former  we  learn 
that  several  foreign  nations  contributed  allies  or 
mercenaries  to  the  Egyptian  armies.  Among  them 
we  identify  the  REBU  with  the  Lubim,  and  the 
SHAKY ATANA  with  the  Cherethim,  who  also  served 
in  David's  army.  The  latter  were  probably  from 
the  coast  of  Palestine,  although  they  may  have 
been  drawn  in  the  case  of  the  Egyptian  army  from 
an  insular  portion  of  the  same  people.  The  rest  of 
these  foreign  troops  seem  to  have  been  of  African 
nations,  but  this  is  not  certain.  The  evidence  of  the 
monuments  reaches  no  lower  than  the  time  of  the 
Bubastite  line.  There  is  a  single  foreign  contem 
porary  inscribed  record  on  one  of  the  colossi  of 
the  temple  of  Aboo-Simbel  in  Nubia,  recording  the 
passage  of  Greek  mercenaries  of  a  Psammetichus, 
probably  the  first  (Wilkinson,  Modern  Egypt  ana 
Thebes,  ii.  329).*  From  the  Greek  writers,  who  give 
us  information  from  the  time  of  Psammetichus  I. 
downwards,  we  learn  that  Ionian,  Carian,  and  other 
Greek  mercenaries,  formed  an  important  element  in 
the  Egyptian  army  in  all  times  when  the  country  was 
independent,  from  the  reign  of  that  king  until  the 
final  conquest  by  Ochus.  These  mercenaries  were 
even  settled  in  Egypt  by  Psammetichus.  There  does 
not  seem  to  be  any  mention  of  them  in  the  Bible, 
excepting  they  be  intended  by  Lud  and  the  Ludim 
.11  the  passages  that  have  been  considered.  It  must 
be  recollected  that  it  is  reasonable  to  connect  the 
Sheniite  Lud  with  the  Lydians,  and  that  at  the 
time  of  the  prophets  by  whom  Lud  and  the  Ludim 
are  mentioned,  the  Lydian  kingdom  generally  or  al 
ways  included  the  more  western  part  of  Asia  Mi 
nor,  so  that  the  terms  Lud  and  Ludim  might  well 
apply  to  the  Ionian  and  Carian  mercenaries  drawn 


A  The  leader  of  these  mercenaries  is  called  in  the  In 
scription  "Psanimatichus.sonofTheocles;"  which  shows 
in  the  adoption  of  an  Egyptian  name,  the  domestioUioi 
ol  tliosc  Greeks  in  Kgypt. 

«  Any  indications  of  an  alliance  with  Lydia  under 
Aniusis  are  InsuUidcut  to  render  it  probable  that  evei 


LUKE 

rom  tins  territory.*  We  must  therefore  hesitate  be- 
ore  absolutely  concluding  that  this  important  poi- 
;ion  of  the  Egyptian  mercenaries  is  not  mentioned  in 
;he  Bible,  upon  the  prima  facie  evidence  that  the 
only  name  which  could  stand  for  it  would  seem  tr 
ue  that  of  an  African  nation.  [R.  S.  P.] 

LU'HITH,  THE  ASCENT  OF  (n!?J|Q 
rvn-l?n,  in  Isaiah  ;  and  so  also  in  the  Kri  or  cor 
rected  text  of  Jeremiah,  although  there  the  original 
text  has  ]"rtrvi"I,  i.  e.  hal-Luhoth :  rj  wdficHns 
AovdO ;  in  Jeremiah,  'A\<60,*  Alex.  'A.\cuad : 
ascensus  Luitlt),  a  place  in  Moab ;  apparently  the 
ascent  to  a  sanctuary  or  holy  spot  on  an  eminence. 
It  occurs  only  in  Is.  xv.  5,  and  the  parallel  passage 
of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  5).  It  is  mentioned  with  ZOAII 
and  HORONAIM,  but  whether  because  they  were 
locally  connected,  or  because  they  were  all  sanc 
tuaries,  is  doubtful.  In  the  days  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  (  Onomasticon,  "  Luith  ")  it  was  still  known, 
and  stood  between  Areopolis  (Rabbath-Moab)  and 
Zoar.  the  latter  being  probably  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Wady  Kerak.  M.  de  Saulcy  (Voyage,  ii.  19,  and 
Map,  sheet  9)  places  it  at  "  Kharbct-NouShin  ;" 
but  this  is  north  of  Areopolis,  and  cannot  be  said 
to  lie  between  it  and  Zoar,  whether  we  take  Zoar 
on  the  east  or  the  west  side  of  the  sea.  The  writer 
is  not  aware  that  any  one  else  has  attempted  to 
identify  the  place. 

The  signification  of  the  name  hal-Luhith  must 
remain  doubtful.  As  a  Hebrew  word  it  signifies 
"made  of  boards  or  posts"  (Gesen.  Thes.  748); 
but  why  assume  that  a  Moabite  spot  should  have 
a  Hebrew  name  ?  By  the  Syriac  interpreters  it  is 
rendered  "  paved  with  flagstones"  (Eichhorn,  Ally. 
Bibliothek,  i.  845,  872).  In  the  Targums  (Pscudo- 
jon.  and  Jerus.  on  Num.  xxi.  16,  and  Jonathan  on 
Is.  xv.  1)  Lechaiath  is  given  as  the  equivalent  of 
Ar-Moab.  This  may  contain  an  allusion  to  Luchith  ; 
or  it  may  point  to  the  use  of  a  term  meaning  "  jaw  " 
for  certain  eminences,  not  only  in  the  case  of  the 
Lehi  of  Samson,  but  also  elsewhere.  (See  Michaelis, 
Suppl.  No.  1307  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  Buxtorf, 
Lex.  Rabb.  1 134.)  It  is  probably,  like  AKRABBIM, 
the  name  of  the  ascent,  and  not  of  any  town  at  th« 
summit,  as  in  that  case  the  word  would  appear  a» 
Luhithah;  with  the  particle  of  motion  added.  [G.] 

LUKE.  The  name  Luke  (Aov.tas),  is  an  ab 
breviated  form  of  Lu"anus  or  of  Lucilius  (Meyer). 
It  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  Lucius  (Acts  xiii. 
1  ;  Rom.  xvi.  21),  which  belongs  to  a  different 
person.  The  name  Luke  occurs  three  times  in  the 
New  Testament  (Col.  iv.  14  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  11 ;  Philem. 
24),  and  probably  in  all  three,  the  third  evangelist 
is  the  pei-son  spoken  of.  To  the  Colossians  "he  is 
described  as  "the  beloved  physician."  probably 
because  he  had  been  known  to  them  in  that  faculty. 
Timothy  needs  no  additional  mark  for  identifica 
tion  ;  to  him  the  words  are,  "  only  Luke  is  with 
me."  To  Philemon  Luke  sends  his  salutation  in 
common  with  other  "  fellow-labourers  "  of  St.  Paul. 
As  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  Luke 
of  these  passages  is  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  as  well  as  of  the  Gospel  which  boars  liis 
name,  it  is  natural  to  seek  in  the  former  book  for 

then  Lydians  fought  in  the  Egyptian  anny,  and  throw 
no  light  on  the  earlier  relations  of  the  EgyptiaLs  and 
Lydians. 

•  The  LXX.  follow  the  Cctiiib  rather  than  the  AYi.  aa 
they  frequently  do  elsewhere,  and  al»:  im-Jr.dc  the  deluitu 
article  of  the  Hebrew. 


LUKE 

jomc  traces  of  that  connexion  with  St.  Paul  which 
these  passages  assume  to  exist :  and  although  the 
name  of  St.  Luke  does  not  occur  in  the  Acts,  there 
is  reason  to  believe  that  under  the  pronoun  "  we," 
several  references  to  the  evangelist  are  to  be  added 
to  the  three  places  just  quoted. 

Combining  the  traditional  element  with  the 
scriptural,  the  uncertain  with  the  certain,  we  are 
able  to  trace  the  following  dim  outline  of  the  Evan 
gelist's  life.  He  was  born  at  Antioch  in  Syria 
(Euscbius,  Hist.  iii.  4)  ;  in  what  condition  of  life 
is  uncertain.  That  he  was  taught  the  science  of 
medicine  does  not  prove  that  he  was  of  higher  birth 
than  the  rest  of  the  disciples ;  medicine  in  its  earlier 
inJ  ruder  state  was  sometimes  practised  even  by  a 
.slave.  The  well-known  tradition  that  Luke  was 
also  a  painter,  and  of  no  mean  skill,  rests  on  the 
authority  of  Nicephorus  (ii.  43),  of  the  Menology 
of  the  Emperor  Basil,  drawn  up  in  980,  and  of  other 
late  writers ;  but  none  of  them  are  of  historical  au 
thority,  and  the  Acts  and  Epistles  are  wholly  silent 
upon  a  point  so  likely  to  be  mentioned.  He  was 
not  born  a  Jew,  for  he  is  not  reckoned  among  them 
"  of  the  circumcision  "  by  St.  Paul  (comp.  Col.  iv. 
1 1  with  ver.  14).  If  this  be  not  thought  con 
clusive,  nothing  can  be  argued  from  the  Greek 
idioms  in  his  style,  for  he  might  be  a  Hellenist 
Jew,  nor  from  the  Gentile  tendency  of  his  Gospel, 
for  this  it  would  share  with  the  inspired  writings 
of  St.  Paul,  a  Pharisee  brought  up  at  the  feet  of 
Gamaliel.  The  date  of  his  conversion  is  uncertain. 
He  was  not  indeed  "  an  eye-witness  and  minister  of 
the  word  from  the  beginning"  (Luke  i.  2),  or  he 
would  have  rested  his  claim  as  an  evangelist  upon 
that  ground.  Still  he  may  have  been  converted 
by  the  Lord  Himself,  some  time  before  His  de 
parture;  and  the  statement  of  Epiphanius  (Cont. 
Haer.  li.  11)  and  others,  that  he  was  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples,  has  nothing  very  improbable  in 
it ;  whilst  that  which  Theophylact  adopts  (on  Luke 
xxiv.)  that  he  was  one  of  the  two  who  journeyed 
to  Emmaus  with  the  risen  Redeemer,  has  found 
modern  defenders.  Tertullian  assumes  that  the 
conversion  of  Luke  is  to  be  ascribed  to  Paul — 
"  Lucas  non  apostolus,  sed  apostolicus ;  non  ma- 
gister,  sed  discipulus,  utique  magistro  minor,  certe 
tanto  posterior  quanto  posterioris  Apostoli  sectator, 
Paul!  sine  dubio  "  (Adv.  Marcion,  iv.  2)  ;  and  the 
balance  of  probability  is  on  this  side. 

The  rirst  ray  of  historical  light  tails  on  the  Evan 
gelist  when  he  joins  St.  Paul  at  Troas,  and  shares 
liis  journey  into  Macedonia.  The  sudden  transition 
to  the  first  person  plural  in  Acts  xvi.  9,  is  most 
naturally  explained,  after  all  the  objections  that 
have  been  urged,  by  supposing  that  Luke,  the 
writer  of  the  Acts,  formed  one  of  St.  Paul's  com- 
|)iiny  from  this  point.  His  conversion  had  taken 
place  before,  since  he  silently  assumes  his  place 
among  the  great  Apostle's  followers  without  any 
hint  that  this  was  his  first  admission  to  the  know 
ledge  and  ministry  of  Christ.  He  may  have  found 
his  way  to  Troas  to  preach  the  G^pel,  sent  pos 
sibly  by  St.  Pau.  himself.  As  far  as  Philippi  the 
Evangelist  journeyed  with  the  Apostle.  The  re 
sumption  of  the  third  person  on  Paul's  departure 
from  that  place  (xvii.  1)  would  show  that  Luke 
was  now  left  behind.  During  the  rest  of  St. 
Paul's  second  missionary  journey  we  hear  of 
Luke  no  more.  But  on  the  third  journey  the 
same  indication  reminds  us  that  Luke  is  again  of 
the  company  (Acts  xx.  5),  having  joined  it  appa 
rently  at  Philippi,  where  he  had  been  left.  With 


LUKE 


151 


the  Apostle  he  passed  through  MiKtus,  Tyre,  and 
Caesarea  to  Jerusalem  (xx.  5,  xxi.  18).  Between 
the  two  visits  of  Paul  to  Philippi  seven  ^years  had 
elapsed  (A.D.  51  to  A.D.  58),  which  the  Evangelist 
may  have  spent  in  Philippi  and  its  neighbourhood, 
preaching  the  Gospel. 

There  remains  one  passage,  which,  if  it  refers  to 
St.  Luke,  must  belong  to  this  period.  "  We  have 
sent  with  him"  (»'.  e.  Titus)  "the  brother  whose 
praise  is  in  the  gospel  throughout  all  the  churches  " 
(2  Cor.  viii._18).  The  subscription  of  the  epistle 
sets  out  that  it  was  "  written  from  Philippi,  a  city 
of  Macedonia,  by  Titus  and  Lucas,"  and  it  is  an 
old  opinion  that  Luke  was  the  companion  of  Titus, 
although  he  is  not  named  in  the  body  of  the  Epistle. 
If  this  be  so,  we  are  to  suppose  that  during  tho 
"  three  months "  of  Paul's  sojourn  at  Philippi 
(Acts  xx.  3)  Luke  was  sent  from  that  place  to  Co 
rinth  on  this  errand  ;  and  the  words  "  whose  praise 
is  in  the  Gospel  throughout  all  the  churches,"  en 
able  us  to  form  an  estimate  of  his  activity  during 
the  interval  in  which  he  has  not  been  otherwise 
mentioned.  It  is  needless  to  add  that  the  praise 
lay  in  the  activity  with  which  he  preached  the 
Gospel,  and  not,  as  Jerome  understands  the  passage, 
in  his  being  the  author  of  a  written  gospel.  "  Lu 
cas  .  .  .  scripsit  Evangelium  de  quo  idem  Paulus 
'  Misimus,  inquit,  cum  illo  fratrem,  cujus  laus  est 
in  Evangelio  per  omnes  ecclesias  ' "  (I>e  Viris  III. 
ch.  7). 

He  again  appears  in  the  company  of  Paul  in  the 
memorable  journey  to  Rome  (Acts  xxvii.  1).  He 
remained  at  his  side  during  his  first  imprisonment 
(Col.  iv.  14;  Philem.  24)  ;  and  if  it  is  to  be  supposed 
that  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy  was  written 
during  the  second  imprisonment,  then  the  testimony 
of  that  Epistle  (iv.  11)  shows  that  he  continued 
faithful  to  the  Apostle  to  the  end  of  his  afflictions. 

After  the  death  of  St.  Paul,  the  acts  of  his  faithful 
companion  are  hopelessly  obscure  to  us.  In  the 
well-known  passage  of  Epiphanius  (cont.  Haer. 
li.  11,  vol.  ii.  464,  in  Dindorfs  recent  edition),  we 
find  that  "  receiving  the  commission  to  preach  the 
Gospel,  [Luke]  preaches  first  in  Dalmatia  and 
Gallia,  in  Italy  and  Macedonia,  but  first  in  Gallia, 
as  Paul  himself  says  of  some  of  his  companions,  in 
his  epistles, '  Crescens  in  Gallia,'  for  we  are  not  to 
read  'in  Galatia'  as  some  mistakenly  think,  but 
'  in  Gallia.'  "  But  there  seems  to  be  as  little  au 
thority  for  this  account  of  St.  Luke's  ministry  as 
there  is  for  the  reading  Gallia  in  2  Tim.  iv.  10. 
How  scanty  are  the  data,  and  how  vague  the  results, 
the  reader  may  find  by  referring  to  the  Acta  Sanc 
torum,  October,  vol.  viii.,  in  the  recent  Brussels 
edition.  It  is,  as  perhaps  the  Evangelist  wishes  it 
to  be:  we  only  know  b;m  whilst  h»  stands  by  the 
side  of  his  beloved  Paul ;  when  the  master  departs 
the  history  of  the  follower  becomes  confusion  and 
fable.  As  to  the  age  and  death  of  the  Evangelist 
there  is  the  utmost  uncertainty.  It  seems  probable 
that  he  died  in  advanced  life ;  but  whether  he 
suffered  martyrdom  or  died  a  natural  death  ;  whe 
ther  Bithynia  or  Achaia,  or  some  other  country, 
witnessed  his  end,  it  is  impossible  to  determine 
amidst  contradictory  voices.  That  he  died  a  martyr, 
between  A.D.  75  and  A.D.  100,  would  seem  to 
have  the  balance  of  suffrages  in  its  favour.  It  is 
enough  for  us,  so  far  as  regards  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Luke,  to  know  that  the  writer  was  the  tried  and 
constant  friend  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  who  sirred 
his  labours,  and  was  nor  driven  from  his  side  by 
dauSer.  [W.  T.] 


152 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OK 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  third  Gospel  is 
ascribed,  by  the  general  consent  of  ancient  Christen 
dom,  to  "  the  beloved  physician,"  Luke,  the  friend 
and  companion  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  lu  the  well- 
known  Muratorian  fragment  (see  vol.  i.  p.  712)  we 
find  "  Tertio  evangclii  librum  secundura  Lucam. 
Lucas  iste  medicus  post  ascensum  Christ!  cum  eum 
Paulus,  quasi  ut  juris  studiosum  secundum  ad- 
sumsisset,  nomine  suo  ex  opinione  conscripsit.  Do- 
miuum  tamen  nee  ipse  vidit  in  carne.  Et  idem 
prout,  assequi  potuit.  Ita  et  ab  nativitate  Johannis 
incipit  dicere."  (Here  Credner's  restoration  of  the 
text  is  followed;  see  his  Geschichte  des  N.  T. 
Kaion,  p.  \b'A,  §76;  comp.  Routh's  Reliquiae, 
vol.  iv.).  The  citations  of  Justin  Martyr  from  the 
Gospel  narrative  show  an  acquaintance  with  and 
use  of  St.  Luke's  account  (see  Kirchhofer,  Quellen- 
atmmlung,  p.  132,  for  the  passages).  Irenaeus 
(cont.  Jfacr.  iii.  1)  says  that  "  Luke,  the  follower 
of  Paul,  preserved  in  a  book  the  Gospel  which 
that  apostle  preached."  The  same  writer  affords 
(iii.  14)  an  account  of  the  contents  of  the  Gospel, 
which  proves  that  in  the  book  preserved  to  us  we 
possess  the  same  which  he  knew.  Eusebius  (iii.  iv.) 
speaks  without  doubting,  of  the  two  books,  the 
Gospel  and  the  Acts,  as  the  work  of  St.  Luke. 
Both  he  and  Jerome  (Catal.  Script.  Eccl.  p.  7) 
mention  the  opinion  that  when  St.  Paul  uses  the 
words  "  according  to  my  Gospel "  it  is  to  the  work 
of  St.  Luke  that  he  refers:  both  mention  that 
St.  Luke  derived  his  knowledge  of  divine  things, 
not  from  Paul  only,  but  from  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles,  with  whom  (says  Eusebius)  he  had  active 
intercourse.  Although  St.  Paul's  words  refer  in  all 
probability  to  no  written  Gospel  at  all,  but  to  the 
substance  of  his  own  inspired  preaching,  the  error 
is  important,  as  showing  how  strong  was  the  opinion 
in  ancient  times  that  Paul  was  in  some  way  co.i- 
nected  with  the  writing  of  the  third  Gospel. 

It  has  been  shown  already  [GOSPELS,  vol.  i.  p. 
712]  that  the  Gospels  were  in  use  as  one  collection, 
and  were  spoken  of  undoubtingly  as  the  work  of  those 
whose  names  they  bear,  towards  the  end  of  the 
second  century.  But  as  regards  the  genuineness  of 
St.  Luke  any  discussion  is  entangled  with  a  some 
what  difficult  question,  namely,  what  is  the  rela 
tion  of  the  Gospel  we  possess  to  that  which  was 
used  by  the  heretic  Marcion?  The  case  may  be 
briefly  stated. 

The  religion  of  Jesus  Christ  announced  salvation 
to  Jew  and  Gentile,  through  Him  who  was  bom 
A  Jew,  of  the  seed  of  David.  The  two  sides  of  this 
fact  produced  very  early  two  opposite  tendencies 
in  the  Church.  One  party  thought  of  Christ  as  the 
Messiah  of  the  Jews  ;  the  other  as  the  Redeemer  of 
the  human  race.  The  former  viewed  the  Lord  as 
the  Messiah  of  Jewish  prophecy  and  tradition ;  the 
other  as  the  revealer  of  a  doctrine  wholly  new,  in 
which  atonement  and  salvation  and  enlightenment 
were  offered  to  men  for  the  first  time.  Marcion  of 
Sinope,  who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  second 
century,  expressed  strongly  the  tendency  opposed  to 
Judaism.  The  scheme  of  redemption,  so  full  of  divine 
compassion  and  love,  was  adopted  by  him,  though  in 
a  perverted  form,  with  his  whole  heart.  The  asper 
sions  on  his  sincerity  are  thrown  out  in  the  loose  rhe- 


»  •'  Cerdon  autem  ....  docuit  eum  qul  a  lege  «t  pro- 
phetis  annuntiatus  sit  I>eus,  non  esse  patrem  Domini 
nostri  Christ!  Jesn.  Hone  enim  cognosci,  ilium  autem 
ignorari ; ct  alternm  quidem  justum, alk-rum  auteui  bonum 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

toric  of  controversy,  and  are  to  be  received  will 
something  more  than  caution.  The  heathen  world, 
into  the  discord  of  which  the  music  of  that  message 
had  never  come,  appeared  to  him  as  the  kingdom 
of  darkness  and  of  Satan.  So  far  Marcion  and  his 
opponents  would  go  together.  But  how  does  Ma<-- 
cion  deal  with  the  0.  T.?  He  views  it,  not  as  a 
preparation  for  the  coining  of  the  Lord,  but  nf 
something  hostile  in  spirit  to  the  Gospel.  In 
God,  as  revealed  in  the  0.  T.,  he  saw  only  a  being 
jealous  and  cruel.  The  heretic  Cerdo  taught  that 
the  ^ust  and  severe  God  of  the  Law  and  the  Pro 
phets  was  not  the  same  as  the  merciful  Father 
of  the  Lord  Jesus.  This  dualism  Marcion  earned 
further,  and  blasphemously  argued  that  the  God 
of  the  0.  T.  was  represented  as  doing  evil  and 
delighting  in  strife,  as  repenting  of  His  decrees  and 
inconsistent  with  Himself."  this  divorcement  of 
the  N.  T.  from  the  Old  was  at  the  root  of  Marcion's 
doctrine.  In  his  strange  system  the  God  of  the 
O.  T.  was  a  lower  being,  to  whom  he  gave  the 
name  of  ArimovpySs,  engaged  in  a  constant  con 
flict  with  matter  (*TX»j),  over  which  he  did  not 
gain  a  complete  victory .  But  the  holy  and  eternal 
God,  perfect  in  goodness  and  love,  comes  net  in 
contact  with  matter,  and  creates  only  what  is  like 
to  and  cognate  with  himself.  In  the  0.  T.  we  see 
the  "  Demiurgus ;"  the  history  of  redemption  is  the 
history  of  the  operation  of  the  true  God.  Thus 
much  it  is  necessary  to  state  as  bearing  upon  what 
follows:  the  life  and  doctrine  of  Marcion  have 
received  a  much  fuller  elucidation  from  Neander, 
Kirchenyeschichte,  vol.  ii. ;  Antignostikus,  and 
Dwmengeschichte ;  and  from  Volckmar,  DCS 
Evangelium  Mar  dons,  p.  25.  The  data  in  older 
writers  are  found  in  the  apology  of  Justin  Martyr, 
in  Tertullian  against  Marcion  i.-v. ;  Irenaeus,  i. 
ch.  xxvii. ;  and  Epiphanius,  Haer.  xlii. 

For  the  present  purpose  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  a 
teacher,  determined  as  Marcion  was  to  sever  the 
connexion  between  the  Old  and  New  Testament, 
would  approach  the  Gospel  history  with  strong 
prejudices,  and  would  be  unable  to  accept  as  it 
stands  the  written  narrative  of  any  of  the  three 
Evangelists,  so  far  as  it  admitted  allusions  to  the 
Old  Testament  as  the  soil  and  root  of  the  New.  It 
is  clear,  in  fact,  that  he  regarded  Paul  as  the  only 
apostle  who  had  remained  faithful  to  his  calling. 
He  admitted  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  a  Gospel 
which  he  regarded  as  Pauline,  and  rejected  the  res» 
of  the  N.  T.,  not  from  any  idea  that  the  books 
were  not  genuine,  but  because  they  were,  as  he 
alleged,  the  genuine  works  of  men  who  were  net 
faithful  teachers  of  the  Gospel  they  had  received. 

But  what  was  the  Gospel  which  Marcion  used? 
The  ancient  testimony  is  very  strong  on  this  pcint ; 
it  was  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  altered  to  suit  his 
peculiar  tenets.  "  Et  super  haec,"  says  Irenaeus, 
"  id  quod  est  secundum  Lucam  Evangelium  cir- 
cumcidens,  et  omnia  quae  sunt  de  generatione 
Domini  conscripta  auferens,  et  de  doctrini  ses- 
monum  Domini  multa  auferens,  in  quibus  manit'es- 
tissime  conditorem  hujus  universitatis  suum  Patrem 
confitens  Dominus  conscriptus  est ;  semetipsum  esse 
veraciorem  quam  sunt  hi,  qui  Evangelium  tradi- 
derunt  apostoli,  suasit  discipulis  suis  ;  non  Evange- 


doctrinam,  impudorate  blasphemans  eum,  qui  a  lope  et 
prophetis  annuntiatus  est  Deus;  maiorum  faetorcm  el 
bellorum  concupi  seen  tern  et  Inconstantem  quoque  wn- 
tentia,  et  coutrarlum  sibi  ipsum  dicens"  (lrcuaej»,  i 


Succtdcns  autem  ei  Marcion  I'onticus  adampliavit    xxvii.  1  :md  2,  p.  256.  Sticrcn's  ed.)- 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


153 


Cmui  scd  particul 
autem  ct  ap ostol 
quaecumque  ma 
Deo,  qui  mumlu 
nostri  Jesu  Clu 


im  Evangelii  tradenseis.  Similitcr 
Pauli  Epistolas  al«cidit,  auferens 
liteste  dicta  stint  ab  apostolo  de  eo 
n  fecit,  quoniam  hie  Pater  Domini 
sti,  et  quaecumque  ex  propheticis 


memorans  a]K>stolus  docuit,  praenuntiantibus  ad- 
ventum  Domini"  (cont.  Haer.  \.  xxvii.  2).  "  Lucam 
ridetur  Marcion  elegisse,"  says  Tertullian,  "quern 
caederet "  (cont.  Marc.  iv.  2  ;  comp.  Origen,  cont. 
Cclsum,  ii.  27;  Eplphanius,  Haer.  xlii.  11  ;  Theo- 
doret,  Haeret.  Fab.  i.  24).  Marcion,  however,  did 
not  ascribe  to  Luke  by  name  the  Gospel  thus  cor 
rupted  (Tert.  cont.  Marc.  iv.  6),  calling  it  simply 
the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

From  these  passages  the  opinion  that  Marcion 
formed  for  himself  a  Gospel,  on  the  principle  of 
rejecting  all  that  savoured  of  Judaism  in  an  existing 
narrative,  and  that  he  selected  the  Gospel  of 
St.  Luke  as  needing  the  least  alteration,  seems  to 
have  been  held  universally  in  the  Church,  until 
Semler  started  a  doubt,  the  prolific  seed  of  a  large 
controversy ;  from  the  whole  result  of  which, 
however,  the  cause  of  truth  has  little  to  regret. 
His  opinion  was  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  and 
that  used  by  Marcion  were  drawn  from  one  and  the 
snme  original  source,  neither  being  altered  from  the 
other.  He  thinks  that  Tertullian  erred  from  want 
of  historical  knowledge.  The  charge  of  Epipha- 
nius,  of  omissions  in  Marcion's  Gospel,  he  meets  by 
the  fact  of  Tertullian's  silence.  Griesbach,  about 
the  same  time,  cast  doubt  upon  the  received  opinion. 
Eichhorn  applied  his  theory  of  an  "  original 
Gospel"  [see  article  GOSPELS,  vol.  i.  p.  715]  to 
this  question,  and  maintained  that  the  Fathers  had 
mistaken  the  short  and  unadulterated  Gospel  used 
by  Marcion  for  an  abridgment  of  St.  Luke,  whereas 
it  was  probably  more  near  the  "  original  Gospel  " 
than  St.  Luke.  Hahn  has  more  recently  shown, 
in  an  elaborate  work,  that  there  were  sufficient 
motives,  of  a  doctrinal  kind,  to  induce  Marcion  to 
wish  to  get  rid  of  parts  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel ;  and 
he  refutes  Eichhorn's  reasoning  on  several  passages 
which  he  had  misunderetood  from  neglecting  Ter 
tullian's  testimony.  He  has  the  merit,  admitted  on 
all  hands,  of  being  the  first  to  collect  the  data  for 
a  restoration  of  Marcion's  text  in  a  satisfactory 
manner,  and  of  tracing  out  in  detail  the  bearing  of 
his  doctrines  on  particular  portions  of  it.  Many 
were  disposed  to  regard  Hahn's  work  as  conclusive ; 
and  certainly  most  of  its  results  are  still  undis 
turbed.  Ritschl,  however,  took  the  other  side,  and 
held  that  Marcion  only  used  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke 
in  an  older  and  more  primitive  form,  and  that  what 
are  charged  against  the  former  as  omissions  are 
often  interpolations  in  the  latter.  A  controversy, 
in  which  Baur,  Hilgenfdd,  and  Volckmar  took  part, 
lias  resulted  in  the  confirmation,  by  an  overpowering 
weight  of  argument,  of  the  old  opinion  that  Marcion 
corrupted  the  Gospel  of  Luke  for  his  own  purposes. 
Volckmar,  whose  work  contains  the  best  account  of 
the  whole  controversy,  sweeps  away,  it  is  to  be 
hoped  for  ever,  the  opinion  of  Ritschl  and  Baur 
that  Marcion  quoted  the  "  original  Gospel  of  Luke," 
as  well  as  the  later  view  of  Baur,  for  which  there 
is  really  not  a  particle  of  evidence,  that  the  Gospel 
had  passed  through  the  hands  of  two  authors  or 
editors,  the  former  with  strong  inclinations  against 
Judaism,  a  zealous  follower  of  St.  Paul,  and  the 
latter  with  leanings  to  Judaism  and  against  the 
Gnostics !  He  considers  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  as 
wo  now  possess  it,  to  be  in  all  its  general  features 


that  which  Marcion  found  ready  to  his  hand, 
and  which  for  doctrinal  reasons  he  abridged  and 
altered.  In  certain  passages,  indeed,  he  consider1! 
that  the  Gospel  used  by  Marcion,  as  cited  by  Ttr- 
tullian  and  Epiphanius,  may  be  employed  to  cor 
rect  our  present  text.  But  this  is  only  putting  the 
copy  used  by  Marcion  on  the  footing  of  an  olde/ 
MS.  The  passages  which  he  considers  to  have  cer. 
tainly  suffered  alteration  since  Maicion's  time  ar« 
only  these  : — Luke  x.  21  (fv^apiffrSi  Kal  e|o/uo,\f>- 
yovpai),  22  (>coi  ovStls  tyvta  rls  fffnv  6 
•jrarfyp  el  [1)1  &  vios,  Kal  ris  fffnv  6  vibs  fl  /u^  t 
TTOTTJP  Kal  ij>  tav  @ov\r)Tcu  K.  r.  \.),  xi.  2  (85s 
rjfj.1v  rb  ayiov  irvtvfjLa.  ffov),  xii.  38  (TT;  fffirtptvirj 
<f>v\aKrj),  xvii.  2  (supply  e<  /*•)>  iyevv^Qjj  %  K.T.\.'), 
xviii.  19  (fjL-fi  fif  \eye  aya66v  efs  ka-riv  ayaBbs  d 
TTOT^P  6  fi>  TO?J  ovpavots).  In  all  these  places  the 
deviations  are  such  as  may  be  found  to  exist  be 
tween  different  MSS.  A  new  witness  as  to  the 
last,  which  is  of  the  greatest  importance,  appear:, 
in  Hippolytus,  Refutatio  Haeresium,  p.  254,  Ox 
ford  edition,  where  the  ri  /xe  \fyfTf  ayaOSv  appears. 
See,  on  all  these  passages,  Tischeudorf's  Greek 
Testament,  ed.  vii.,  and  critical  notes.  Of  four 
other  places  Volckmar  speaks  more  doubtfully,  as 
having  been  disturbed,  but  possibly  before  Marcion 
(vi.  17,  xii.  32,  xvii.  12,  xxiii.  2). 

From  this  controversy  we  gain  the  following  re 
sult: — Marcion  was  in  the  height  of  his  activity 
about  A.D.  138,  soon  after  which  Justin  Martyr 
wrote  his  Apology ;  and  he  had  probably  given  forth 
his  Gospel  some  years  before, i.  e.  about  A.  D.  130. 
At  the  time  when  he  composed  it  he  found  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Luke  so  far  diffused  and  accepted  that  he 
based  his  own  Gospel  upon  it,  altering  and  omitting. 
Therefore  we  may  assume  that,  about  A.D.  120,  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Luke  which  we  possess  was  in  use, 
and  was  familiarly  known.  The  theory  that  it  was 
composed  about  the  middle  or  end  of  the  2nd 
century  is  thus  overthrown;  and  there  is  no  posi 
tive  evidence  of  any  kind  to  set  against  the  har 
monious  assertion  of  all  the  ancient  Church  that  this 
Gospel  is  the  genuine  production  of  St.  Luke. 

(On  St.  Luke's  Gospel  in  its  relation  to  Marcion, 
see,  besides  the  fathers  quoted  above,  Hahn,  Das 
Evangelium  Marcions,  Konigsberg,  1823;  Ols- 
hausen,  Echtheit  der  vier  Jianon.  Evcmtjelicn, 
Konigsberg,  1823;  Ritschl,  Das  Evangelium  Mar 
cions,  Sue.,  Tubingen,  1846,  with  his  retracta 
tion  in  Tlieol.  Jahrb.  1851  ;  Baur,  Krit.  Vnter-. 
suchung  iiber  d.  Kan.  Evangelien,  Tubingen,  1847  ; 
Hilgenfeld,  Krit.  Untersuchungen  &c.,  Halle, 
1850 ;  Volckmar,  Das  Evangelium  Marcions, 
Leipzig,  1852  ;  Bishop  Thirlwall's  Introduction  to 
Schlciermacher  on  St.  Luke;  De  Wette,  Lehr- 
buch,  d.  N.  T.,  Berlin,  1848.  These  are  but  a 
part  of  the  writers  who  have  touched  the  subject. 
The  work  of  Volckmar  is  the  most  comprehensive 
and  thorough ;  and,  though  some  of  his  views 
cannot  be  adopted,  he  has  satisfactorily  proved 
that  our  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  existed  before  the  time 
of  Marciou.) 

II.  Dale  of  the  Gospel  of  Luke. — We  have  seen 
that  this  Gospel  was  in  use  before  the  year  120. 
From  internal  evidence  the  date  can  be  more  nearly 
fixed.  From  Acts  i.  1,  it  is  clear  that  it  was 
written  before  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  The  latest 
time  actually  mentioned  in  the  Acts  is  the  term  of 
two  years  during  which  Paul  dwelt  at  Rome  "  in 
his  own  hired  house,  and  received  all  that  carao 
in  unto  him"  (xxvni.  30,  31).  The  writer  who 


154 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 


has  tracked  the  footsteps  of  Paul  hitherto  with  such 
exactness,  leaves  him  here  abruptly,  without  making 
Known  the  result  of  his  appeal  to  Caesar,  or  the 
works  in  which  he  engaged  afterwards.  No  other 
motive  for  this  silence  can  be  suggested  than  that 
the  writer,  at  the  time  when  he  published  the  Acts, 
had  no  more  to  tell ;  and  in  that  case  the  book  of 
the  Acts  was  completed  about  the  end  of  the  second 
year  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment,  that  is,  about 
A.D.  63  (Wieseler,  Olshausen,  Alford).  How  much 
earlier  the  Gospel,  described,  as  "  the  former  trea 
tise  "  (Acts  i.  1),  may  have  been  written  is  uncer 
tain.  But  Dean  Alford  (Prolegomena)  remarks 
that  the  words  imply  some  considerable  interval 
between  the  two  productions.  The  opinion  of  the 
younger  Thiersch  (Christian  Church,  p.  148,  Car- 
lyle's  translation)  thus  becomes  very  probable,  that 
it  was  written  at  Caesarea  during  St.  Paul's  im 
prisonment  there,  A.D.  58-60.  The  Gospel  of  St. 
Matthew  was  probably  written  about  the  same 
time;  and  neither  Evangelist  appears  to  have  used 
the  other,  although  both  made  use  of  that  form  of 
oral  teaching  which  the  apostles  had  gradually  come 
to  employ.  [GOSPELS.]  It  is  painful  to  remark 
how  the  opinions  of  many  commentators,  who  refuse 
to  fix  the  date  of  this  Gospel  earlier  than  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem,  have  been  influenced  by  the 
determination  that  nothing  like  prophecy  shall  be 
found  in  it.  Believing  that  our  Lord  did  really 
prophesy  that  event,  we  have  no  difficulty  in  be 
lieving  that  an  Evangelist  reported  the  prophecy 
before  it  was  fulfilled  (see  Meyer's  Commentary, 
Introduction). 

III.  Place  where  the  Gospel  was  written. — If  the 
time  has  been  rightly  indicated,  the  place  would  be 
Caesarea.   Other  suppositions  are — that  it  was  com 
posed  in  Achaia  and  the  region  of  Boeotia  (Jerome), 
in  Alexandria  (Syriac  version),  in  Rome  (Ewald, 
&c.),  in  Achaia  and  Macedonia  (Hilgenfeld),  and 
Asia  Minor  (Kostlin).     It  is  impossible  to  verify 
these  traditions  and  conjectures. 

IV.  Origin  of  the  Gospel. — The  preface,  contained 
in  the  four  first  verses  of  the  Gospel,  describes  the 
object  of  its  writer.     "  Forasmuch  as  many  have 
taken  in  hand  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration 
of  those   things   which   are   most  surely  believed 
among  us,  even  as  they  delivered  them  unto  us, 
which  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and 
ministers  of  the  word ;  it  seemed  good  to  me  also, 
having  had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from 
the  very  first,  to  write  unto  thee  in  order,  most 
excellent  Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest  know  the 
certainty  of  those  things  wherein  thou  hast  been 
instructed."     Here  are  several  facts  to  be  observed. 
There  were  many  narratives  of  the  life  of  our  Lord 
current  at  the  early  time  when  Luke  wrote  his 
Gospel.     The  word  "  many"  cannot  apply  to  Mat 
thew  and  Mark,  because  it  must  at  any  rate  include 
more   than    two,  and   because   it  is   implied  that 
former  labourers  leave  something  still  to  do,  and 
that  the  writer  will  supersede  or  supplement  them 
cither  in  whole  or  in  part.     The  ground  of  fitness 
tor  the  task  St.  Luke  places  in  his  having  carefully 
followed  out  the  whole  course  of  events  from  the 
beginning.     He  does  not  claim  the  character  of  an 
eye-witness  fiom  the  first;    but  possibly  he  may 
have  been  a  witness  of  some  part  of  our  Lord's 
doings  (see  above  LUKE,  LIFE). 

The  ancient  opinion,  that  Luke  wrote  his  Gospel 
under  the  influence  of  Paul,  rests  on  the  authority 
of  henaeus,  Tertullijui,  Origen,  and  Euscbius.  The 
two  first  assert  that  we  have  ill  Luke  the  Gospel 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

preached  by  Paul  (Iren.  cont.  //tier.  iii.  1  ;  Tcrt 
cont.  Marc.  iv.  5)  ;  Origen  calls  it  "  the  Gospel 
quoted  by  Paul,"  alluding  to  Rom.  ii.  16  (Eu.seb. 
E.  Hist.  vi.  25)  ;  and  Eusebius  refers  Paul's  woids 
"  according  to  my  Gospel"  (2  Tim.  ii.  8),  to  that 
of  Luke  (E.  Hist.  iii.  4),  in  which  Jerome  concurs 
(De  Vir.  III.  7).  The  language  of  the  preface  is 
against  the  notion  of  any  exclusive  influence  of  St. 
Paul.  The  Evangelist,  a  man  on  whom  the  Spirit 
of  God  was,  made  the  history  of  the  Saviour's  life 
the  subject  of  research,  and  with  materials  so  ob 
tained  wrote,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit  that 
was  upon  him,  the  history  now  before  us.  The 
four  verses  could  not  have  been  put  at  the  head 
of  a  history  composed  under  the  exclusive  guidance 
of  Paul  or  of  any  one  apostle,  and  as  little  could 
they  have  introduced  a  gospel  simply  commuukated 
by  another.  Yet  if  we  compare  St.  Paul's  account 
of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper  (1  Cor.  xi. 
23-25)  with  that  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  (xxii.  19, 
20),  none  will  think  the  verbal  similarity  could  be 
accidental.  A  less  obvious  parallel  between  1  Cor. 
xv.  3  and  Luke  xxiv.  26,  27,  more  of  thought  than 
of  expression,  tends  the  same  way.  The  truth  seems 
to  be  that  St.  Luke,  seeking  information  from  every 
quarter,  sought  it  from  the  preaching  of  his  beloved 
master,  St.  Paul ;  and  the  apostle  in  his  turn  em 
ployed  the  knowledge  acquired  from  other  sources 
l>y  his  disciple.  Thus  the  preaching  of  the  apostle, 
founded  on  the  same  body  of  facts,  and  the  same 
arrangement  of  them  as  the  rest  of  the  apostles 
used,  became  assimilated  especially  to  that  which 
St.  Luke  set  forth  in  his  narrative.  This  does  not 
detract  from  the  worth  of  either.  The  preaching 
and  the  Gospel  proceeded  each  from  an  inspired 
man ;  for  it  is  certain  that  Luke,  employed  as  he 
was  by  Paul,  could  have  been  no  exception  in  that 
plentiful  effusion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  which  Paul 
himself  bears  witness.  That  the  teaching  of  two 
men  so  linked  together  (see  LIFE)  should  have  be 
come  more  and  more  assimilated  is  just  what  would 
be  expected.  But  the  influence  was  mutual,  and  not 
one-sided  ;  and  Luke  still  claims  with  right  the  posi 
tion  of  an  independent  inquirer  into  historic  facts. 

Upon  the  question  whether  Luke  made  use  of  the 
Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  no  opinion  given 
here  could  be  conclusive.  [GOSPELS,  vol.  i.  p.  714.] 
Each  reader  should  examine  it  for  himself,  with  the 
aid  of  a  Greek  Harmony.  It  is  probable  that  Mat 
thew  and  Luke  wrote  independently,  and  about  the 
same  time.  Some  of  their  coincidences  arise  from 
their  both  incorporating  the  oral  teaching  of  the 
apostles,  and  others,  it  may  be,  from  their  common 
use  of  written  documents,  such  as  are  hinted  at  in 
Luke  i.  1.  As  regards  St.  Mark,  some  regard  his 
Gospel  as  the  oldest  New  Testament  writing,  whilst 
others  infer,  from  apparent  abbreviations  (Mark  i. 
12,  xvi.  12),  from  insertions  of  matter  from  othei 
places  (Mark  iv.  10-34,  is.  38-48),  and  from  the 
mode  in  which  additional  information  is  intro 
duced — now  with  a  seeming  connexion  with  Mat 
thew  and  now  with  Luke — that  Mark's  Gospel  is 
the  last,  and  has  been  framed  upon  the  other  twc 
(De  Wette,  Einleitung,  §94).  The  remit  of  thi* 
controversy  should  be  to  inspire  distrust  of  all  sucb 
seeming  proofs,  which  conduct  dirt'erent  critics  to 
exactly  opposite  results. 

V.  Purpose  for  which  the  Gospel  teas  tcritten. — 
The  Evangelist  professes  to  write  that  Theophilu* 
"  might  know  the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein 
he  had  been  instructed"  (i.  4).  Who  \vas  thit 
Theophilus?  Some  hare  supposed  that  it  is  a  si^ 


LUKE.  GOSPEL  OF 

name,  applicable  not  to  one  man,  but  to 
any  amans  Dei;  but  the  addition  of  Kpdriffros,  a 
term  of  honour  which  would  be  used  towards  a  man 
jf  station,  or  sometimes  (see  passages  in  Kuinol 
and  VVetstein)  towards  a  personal  friend,  seems 
against  this.  He  was,  then,  an  existing  person.  Con 
jecture  has  been  wildly  busy  in  endeavouring  to 
identify  him  with  some  person  known  to  history. 
Some  indications  are  given  in  the  Gospel  about 
him,  and  beyond  them  we  do  not  propose  to  go. 
He  was  not  an  inhabitant  of  Palestine,  for  the 
Evangelist  minutely  describes  the  position  of  places 
which  to  such  a  one  would  be  well  known.  It  is 
so  with  Capernaum  (iv.  31),  Nazareth  (i.  26), 
Anmathea  (xxiii.  51),  the  country  of  the  Gada- 
rones  (viii.  26),  the  distance  of  Mount  Olivet  and 
Emmaus  from  Jerusalem  (Acts  i.  12 ;  Luke  xxiv. 
13).  If  places  in  England — say  Bristol,  and  Oxford, 
and  Hampstead — were  mentioned  in  this  careful 
minute  way,  it  would  be  a  fair  inference  that  the 
writer  meant  his  work  for  other  than  English 
readers. 

By  the  same  test  he  probably  was  not  a  Macedo 
nian  (Acts  xvi.  12),  nor  an  Athenian  (Acts  xvii. 
21),  nor  a  Cretan  (Acts  xxvii.  8,  12).  But  that 
he  was  a  native  of  Italy,  and  perhaps  an  inhabitant 
of  Rome,  is  probable  from  similar  data.  In  tracing 
St.  Paul's  journey  to  Rome,  places  which  an  Italian 
might  be  supposed  not  to  know  are  described  mi 
nutely  (Acts  xxvii.  8,  12,  16)  ;  but  when  he  comes 
to  Sicily  and  Italy  this  is  neglected.  Syracuse  and 
Rhegium,  even  the  more  obscure  Puteoli,  and  Appii 
Forum  and  the  Three  Taverns,  are  mentioned  as  to 
one  likely  to  know  them.  (For  other  theories  see 
Marsh's  Michaelis,  vol.  iii.  Part  i.  p.  236 ;  Kui- 
nol's  Prolegomena,  and  Winer's  Realwbuch,  art. 
'  Tbeophilus.")  All  that  emerges  from  this  argu 
ment  is,  that  the  person  for  whom  Luke  wrote  in 
the  first  instance  was  a  Gentile  reader.  We  must 
admit,  but  with  great  caution,  on  account  of  the 
abuses  to  which  the  notion  has  led,  that  there  are 
traces  in  the  Gospel  of  a  leaning  towards  Gentile 
rather  than  Jewish  converts.  The  genealogy  of 
Jesus  is  traced  to  Adam,  not  from  Abraham  ;  so  as 
to  connect  Him  with  the  whole  human  race,  and 
not  merely  with  the  Jews.  Luke  describes  the 
mission  of  the  Seventy,  which  number  has  been 
usually  supposed  to  be  typical  of  all  nations ;  as 
twelve,  the  number  of  the  apostles,  represents  the 
Jews  and  their  twelve  tribes.  As  each  Gospel 
has  within  certain  limits  its  own  character  and 
mod<i  of  treatment,  we  shall  recognise  with  Ols- 
hauseii  that  "  St.  Luke  has  the  peculiar  power  of 
exhibiting  with  great  clearness  of  conception  and 
truth  (especially  in  the  long  account  of  Christ's 
tourney,  from  ix.  51  to  xviii.  34),  not  so  much  the 
discourses  of  Jesus  as  HL>  conversations,  svith  all 
t!.e  incidents  that  gave  rise  to  them,  with  the  re 
marks  of  those  who  were  present,  and  with  the 
final  results." 

On  the  supposed  "  doctrinal  tendency "  of  the 
Gospel,  however,  much  has  been  written  which  it 
is  paintul  to  dwell  on,  but  easy  to  refute.  Some 
have  endeavoured  to  see  in  this  divine  book  an 
attempt  to  engraft  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  the 
Jewish  representations  of  the  Messiah,  and  to  elevate 
the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation,  of  which  Paul 
was  the  most  prominent  preacher,  over  the  Ju- 
daizing  tendencies,  and  to  put  St.  Paul  higher  than 
the  twelve  Apostles  !  (See  Zeller,  Apost. ;  Baur, 
Kanon.  Ecanij. ;  and  Hilgenfeld.)  How  two  im- 
p/irti?!  historical  narratives,  the  Gospel  and  tht 


LUKE,  GOSPEL  OP 


155 


Acts,  could  have  been  taken  for  two  tract*  written 
for  polemical  and  personal  ends,  is  to  an  English 
mind  hardly  conceivable.  Even  its  supporters  found 
that  the  inspired  author  had  carried  out  his  purpose 
so  badly,  that  they  were  forced  to  assume  that  a 
second  author  or  editor  had  altered  the  work  with 
a  view  to  work  up  together  Jewish  and  Paulino 
elements  into  harmony  (Baur,  Kanon.  Evany,  p. 
502).  Of  this  editing  and  re-editing  there  is  no 
trace  whatever;  and  the  invention  of  the  second 
editor  is  a  gross  device  to  cover  the  failure  of  the 
first  hypothesis.  By  such  a  machinery,  it  will  be 
possible  to  prove  in  after  ages  that  Gibbon's  History 
was  originally  a  plea  for  Christianity,  or  any  similar 
paradox. 

The  passages  which  are  supposed  to  bear  out 
this  "  Pauline  tendency,"  are  brought  together  by 
Hilgenfeld  with  great  care  (Evangelicn,  p.  220)  ; 
but  Heuss  has  shown,  by  passages  from  St.  Matthew 
which  have  the  same  "  tendency"  against  the  Jews, 
how  brittle  such  an  argument  is,  and  has  left  no 
room  for  doubt  that  the  two  Evangelists  wrote 
facts  and  not  theories,  and  dealt  with  those  facts 
with  pure  historical  candour  (Reuss,  ffistoirede  la 
The'ologie,  vol.  ii.  b.  vi.  ch.  vi.).  Writing  to  a 
Gentile  convert,  and  through  him  addressing  other 
Gentiles,  St.  Luke  has  adapted  the  form  of  his  nar 
rative  to  their  needs ;  but  not  a  trace  of  a  subjective 
bias,  not  a  vestige  of  a  personal  motive,  has  been 
suffered  to  sully  the  inspired  page.  Had  the  in 
fluence  of  Paul  been  the  exclusive  or  principal 
source  of  this  Gospel,  we  should  have  found  in  it 
more  resemblance  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, 
which  contains  (so  to  speak)  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Paul. 

VI.  Language  and  style  of  the  Gospel. — It  has 
never  been  doubted  that  the  Evangelist  wrote  his 
Gospel  in  Greek.  Whilst  Hebraisms  are  frequent., 
classical  idioms  and  Greek  compound  words  abound. 
The  number  of  words  used  by  Luke  only  is  un 
usually  great,  and  many  of  them  are  compound 
words  for  which  there  is  classical  authority  (see 
Dean  Alford's  valuable  Greek  Test.}. 

Some  of  the  leading  peculiarities  of  style  are 
here  noted:  a  more  minute  examination  will  be 
found  in  Prof.  Davidson's  Introduction  to  N.  T. 
(Bagster,  1848). 

1.  The  very  frequent  use  of  tyevero  in  intro 
ducing  a  new  narrative  or  a  transition,  and  of  £yt- 
vero  ev  Ttf  with  an   infinitive,  are  traceable  to  tiie 
Hebrew. 

2.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  frequent  use 
of  KapSla,  answering  to  the  Hebrew  37. 

3.  No/iiKoi,  used  six  times  instead  of  the  usual 
ypa.fj.fj.a.Tf'is,    and    tiri(nd.Tt\s  US(*I    s'x   times  for 
pafi&i,  SiSdffKaKos,  are  cases  of  a  preference  for 
words  more  intelligible  to  Greeks  or  Gentiles. 

4.  The  neuter  participle  is  used  frequently  for  a 
substantive,  both  in  the  Gospel  and  the  Acts. 

5.  The  infinitive  with  the  genitive  of  the  article, 
to  indicate  design  or  result,  as  in  i.  9,  is  frequent 
in  both  books. 

6.  The.  frequent  use  of  oe  Kal,  for  the  sake  of 
emphasis,  as  in  iii.  9. 

7.  The  frequent  use  of  /col  avr6s,  as  in  i.  17. 

8.  The  preposition  avv  is  used  about  seventy-five 
times  in  Gospel  and  Acts :  in  the  other Gosp els  rarely • 

9.  'Arfvi^etv  is  useo.  eleven  times  in  Gospel  and 
Acts;  elsewhere  only  twice,  by  St.  Paul  (2  Cor.). 

10.  EJ  Se  fj.ri  ye  is  used  five  times  for  the  tl  5« 
f.irt  of  Mark  and  John. 


15fl  LUKE,  GOSPEL  OF 

11.  EliTilv  -irp6s,  which  is  frequent  in  St.  Luke, 
a  used  elsewhere  only  by  St.  John :  AaAf?»  irp6s, 
id(«o  frequent,  is  only  thrice  used  by  other  writers. 

12.  St.  Luke  very  frequently  uses  the  auxiliary 
verb  with  a  participle  for  the  verb,  as  in  v.  17, 
..  20. 

13.  He  makes  remarkable   use   of  verbs   com 
pounded  with  Sia  and  eVi. 

14.  Xapis,  veiy  frequent  in  Luke,  is  only  used 
thrice  by  John,  and  not  at  all  by  Matthew  and 
Mark.     SCOTTJ^,  ffwTrjpia,  ffur'ftpiov,  are  frequent 
with  Luke;  the  two  first  are  used  once  each  by 
John,  and  not  by  the  other  Evangelists. 

15.  The  same  may  be  said  of  €vayyf\i£e<rOcu, 
once  in  Matthew,   and   not  at   all    in   Mark  and 
John ;  vTroffrpfQfiv,  once  in  Mark,   not  in  other 
Gospels ;   efyiffTdvai,  not   used  in  the  other  three 
Gospels;    SiepxeffBai,  thirty-two  times  in  Luke's 
Gospel   and   the   Acts,    and    only    twice   each    in 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  John ;  irapaxprina  frequent 
in  Luke,  and  only  twice  elsewhere,  in  Matthew. 

16.  The  words  0>to0i;yua5dV,  «uAaj8^s,  avfip,  as  a 
form  of  address  and  before  substantives,  are  also 
chai~acteristic  of  Luke. 

17.  Some  Latin  words  are  used  by  Luke  :  \eyeiav 
(viii.  30),  Sijrdpwv  (x.  35),  rnUftm  (xix.  20), 
Ko\uvla  (Acts  xvi.  12). 

On  comparing  the  Gospel  with  the  Acts  it  is 
found  that  the  style  of  the  latter  is  more  pure  and 
free  from  Hebrew  idioms;  and  the  style  of  the 
later  portion  of  the  Acts  is  more  pure  than  that 
of  the  former.  Where  Luke  used  the  materials  he 
derived  from  others,  oral  or  written,  or  both,  his 
style  reflects  the  Hebrew  idioms  of  them;  but 
when  he  comes  to  scenes  of  which  he  was  an  eye 
witness  and  describes  entirely  in  his  own  words, 
these  disappear. 

VII.  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament. — In 
the  citations  from  the  0.  T.,  of  the  principal  of 
which  the  following  is  a  list,  there  are  plain  marks 
of  the  use  of  the  Septuagint  version : — 


Lnkei.  17. 
li.  23. 
ii.24. 
iii.  4,  5,  6. 
iv.  4. 
iv.  8. 
iv.  10, 11. 
iv.  12. 
iv.  18. 
vil.  27. 
viii.  10. 
x.  27. 
xviit.  20. 
xix.  46. 
xx.  17. 
xx.  28. 
xx.  42,  43. 
xxii.  37. 
xxiii.  46. 


Mai.  iv.  4,  5. 

Ex.  xiii.  2. 

Lev.  xii.  8. 

Is.  xl.  3,  4,  5. 

Deut.  viii.  3. 

Deut.  vi.  13. 

Ps.  xci.  11,  12. 

Deut.  vi.  14. 

Is.  Ixi.  1,  2. 

Mai.  Hi.  1. 

Is.  vi.  9. 

Deut.  vi.  5;  Lev  xix.  18. 

Ex.  xx.  12. 

Is.  Ivi.  7  ;  Jer.  viii.  11. 

Ps.  cxviii.  22,  23. 

Deut.  xxv.  5. 

Ps.  ex.  1. 

Is.  liii.  12. 

Ps.  xxxi.  5. 


VIII.  Integrity  of  the  Gospel  —  the  first  two 
Chapters.  —  The  Gospel  of  Luke  is  quoted  by  Justin 
Martyrand  by  the  author  of  the  Clementine  Homilies. 
The  silence  of  the  apostolic  fathers  only  indicates 
that  it  was  admitted  into  the  Canon  somewhat  late, 
which  was  probably  the  case.  The  result  of  the 
Marcion  controversy  is,  as  we  have  seen,  that  our 
Gospel  was  in  use  before  A..D.  120.  A  special  ques 
tion,  however,  has  been  raised  about  the  two  first 
chapters.  The  critical  history  of  these  is  best 


LUZ 

drawn  out  perhaps  in  Meyer's  note.  The  chief  ob 
jection  against  them  is  founded  on  the  garbled  open  • 
ing  of  Marcion 's  Gospel,  who  omits  the  two  first 
chapters,  and  connects  iii.  1  immwli.itely  with  iv.  Ml. 
(So  Tertullian,  "  Anno  quintodecimo  principatns 
Tiberiani  proponit  Deum  descendisse  in  civitatem 
Galilaeae  Capharnaum,"  cont.  Marc.  iv.  7).  But 
any  objection  founded  on  this  would  apply  to  the 
third  chapter  as  well ;  and  the  history  of  our  Loi-d's 
childhood  seems  to  have  been  known  to  and  quoted 
by  Justin  Martyr  (see  Apology,  i.  §33,  and  an 
allusion,  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  100)  about  the  time 
of  Marcion.  There  is  therefore  no  real  ground  1'or 
distinguishing  between  the  two  first  chapters  and 
the  rest;  and  the  arguments  for  the  genuineness  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel  apply  to  the  whole  inspired  nar 
rative  as  we  now  possess  it  (see  Meyer's  note ;  also 
Volckmar,  p.  130). 

IX.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — This  Gospel  con 
tains — 1 .  A  preface,  i.  1-4.  2.  An  account  of  the 
time  preceding  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  i.  5  to  ii.  52. 

3.  Several  accounts  of  discourses  and  acts  of  our 
Lord,  common  to  Luke,  Matthew,  and  Mark,  related 
for  the  most  part  in  their  order,  and  belonging  to 
Capernaum  and  the  neighbourhood,  iii.  1  to  ix.  50. 

4.  A  collection  of  similar  accounts,  referring  to  a 
certain  journey  to  Jerusalem,  most  of  them  peculiar 
to  Luke,  ix.  51  to  xviii.  14.     5.  An  account  of  the 
sufferings,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus,  common 
to  Luke  with  the  other  Evangelists,  except  as  to 
some  of  the  accounts  of  what  took  place  after  the 
resurrection,  xviii.  15  to  the  end. 

SOURCES.  Works  of  Irenaeus  (ed.  Stieren); 
Justin  Martyr  (ed.  Otto) ;  Tertullian,  Origen,  and 
Epiphanius  (ed.  Dindorf) ;  Hippolytus  (ed.  Miller)  ; 
and  Kusebius  (ed.  Valesius)  ;  Marsh's  Michaelis ; 
De  Wette,  Einlcitung ;  Meyer,  Kommentar ;  the 
work  of  Hahn,  Kitsch!,  Baur,  and  Volckmar,  quoted 
above ;  Credner,  Kanon ;  Dean  Alford's  Commen 
tary  ;  Dictionaries  of  Winer  and  Herzog ;  Commen 
taries  of  Kuinol,  Wetstein,  and  others;  Thiersch, 
Church  History  (Eng.  Trans.);  Olshausen,  Echth- 
eit ;  Hug,  Einleitung ;  Weisse,  Evangelienfrage ; 
Greek  Testament,  Tischendorf,  ed.  vii.,  and  notes 
there.  [W.  T.] 

LUNATICS  (ffe\r>via(6ntvot).  This  word  is 
used  twice  in  the  N.  T.  In  the  enumeration  ol 
Matt.  iv.  24,  the  "  lunatics "  are  distinguished 
from  the  demoniacs;  in  Matt.  xvii.  15,  the  name  is 
applied  to  a  boy  who  is  expressly  declared  to  have 
been  possessed.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the 
word  itself  refers  to  some  disease,  affecting  both  the 
body  and  the  mind,  which  might,  or  might  not,  be 
a  sign  of  possession  (see  on  this  subject  DEMONIACS). 
By  t'ne  description  of  Mark  ix.  17-26,  it  is  con 
cluded  that  this  disease  was  epilepsy  (see  Winer, 
Eealw.  "  Besessene ;"  Trench,  On  the  Miracles, 
p.  363).  The  origin  of  the  name  (as  of  <re\T]via.K<is 
and  o'eA.iji'd'jSA.ijTOS  in  earlier  Greek,  "  lunaticus  " 
'n  Latin,  and  equivalent  words  in  modern  lan 
guages),  is  to  be  found  in  the  belief  that  diseases  ol 
a  paroxysmal  character  were  affected  by  the  light, 
or  by  the  changes  of  the  moon.  [A.  B.] 

LUZ  (N^,  and  perhaps  PIT-I^,*  i.  c.  Luzah, 
which  is  also  the  reading  of  the  Samar.  Codex  and 


•  The  ground  for  this  suggestion,  besides  the  remark- 
alle  agreement  of  the  ancient  versions  as  given  above,  is 
jotih.  xviii.  13,  where  the  words  nN^  P|r)3~^N  should, 
wx>rdlng  to  ordinary  usage,  be  rendered  "  to  the  shoulder 
.'{  Luzah ;"  the  ah,  which  is  the  particle  of  motion  in 


Hebrew,  not  being  required  here,  as  it  is  in  the  former 
part  of  the  some  verse.  Other  names  are  found  both  witb 
and  without  a  similar  termination,  as  Jolbah,  Jotbathoi : 
Timnath,  Tininathah ;  Kiblah,  Riblathah.  l.alsb  »nj 
l.air-liali  arc  probably  distinct  places 


LUZ 

.>f  its  two  versions:  of  the  LXX.  and  Eusebins, 
i\ov£d  and  AouyJ  :b  and  the  Vulgate  Luza).  The 
Qiicertiiinty  which  attends  the  name  attaches  in  a 
greater  degree  to  the  place  itself.  It  seems  impos 
sible  to  discover  with  precision  whether  Luz  and 
Bethel  represent  one  and  the  same  town — the  former 
the  Canaanite,  the  latter  the  Hebrew  name — or  whe 
ther  they  were  distinct  places,  though  in  close  proxi 
mity.  The  latter  is  the  natural  inference  from  two 
of  the  passages  in  which  Luz  is  spoken  of.  Jacob 
*  called  the  name  of  the  place  Bethel,  but  the  name 
of  the  city  was  called  Luz  in  the  beginning"  (Gen. 
xxviii.  19) ;  as  if  the  spot — the  "certain  place" — 
on  which  he  had  "  lighted,"  where  he  saw  his 
vision  and  erected  his  pillar,  were  outside  the  walls 
of  the  Canaanite  town.  And  with  this  agree  the 
terms  of  the  specification  of  the  common  boundary 
of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin.  It  ran  "  from  Bethel 
to  Luz  "  (Josh.  xvi.  2),  or  "  from  the  wilderness 
of  Bethaven  ...  to  Luz,  to  the  shoulder  of  Luzah 
southward,  that  is  Bethel"  (xviii.  13) ;  as  if  Bethel 
were  on  the  south  side  of  the  hill  on  which  the 
other  city  stood. 

Other  passages,  however,  seem  to  speak  of  the 
two  as  identical — "  Luz  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  that 
is  Bethel"  (Gen.  xxxv.  6);  and  in  the  account  of 
the  capture  of  Bethel,  after  the  conquest  of  the 
country,  it  is  said  that  "  the  name  of  the  city 
before  was  Luz  "  ( Judg.  i.  23).  Nor  should  it  be 
overlooked  that  in  the  very  first  notice  of  Abram's 
arrival  in  Canaan,  Bethel  is  mentioned  without  Luz 
(Gen.  xii.  8,  xiii.  3),  just  as  Luz  is  mentioned  by 
Jacob  without  Bethel  (xlviii.  3). 

Perhaps  there  never  was  a  point  on  which  the 
evidence  was  so  curiously  contradictory.  In  the 
passages  just  quoted  we  rind  Bethel  mentioned  in 
the  most  express  manner  two  generations  before  the 
occurrence  of  the  event  which  gave  it  its  name; 
while  the  patriarch  to  whom  that  event  occurred, 
and  who  made  there  the  most  solemn  vow  of  his 
lite,  in  recurring  to  that  very  circumstance,  calls 
the  place  by  its  heathen  name.  We  further  find 
the  Israelite  name  attached,  before  the  conquest  ol 
the  country  by  the  Israelites,  to  a  city  of  the 
building  of  which  we  have  no  record,  and  which 
city  is  then  in  the  possession  of  the  Canaanites. 

The  conclusion  of  the  writer  is  that  the  two 
places  were,  during  the  times  preceding  the  con 
quest,  distinct,  Luz  being  the  city  and  Bethel  the 
pillar  and  altar  of  Jacob :  that  after  the  destruction 
of  Luz  by  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  the  town  of  Bethe 
arose:  that  the  close  proximity  of  the  two  was 
sufficient  to  account  for  their  being  taken  as  iden 
tical  in  cases  where  there  was  no  special  reason  foi 
discriminating  them,  and  that  the  great  subsequen 
reputation  of  Bethel  will  account  for  the  occurrence 
of  its  name  in  Abram's  history  in  reference  to  a 
date  prior  to  its  existence,  as  well  as  in  the  record 
of  the  conquest. 

2.  When  the  original  Luz  was  destroyed,  throug] 
the  treachery  of  one  of  its  inhabitants,  the  man 
who  had  introduced  the  Israelites  into  the  towr 
went  into  the  "land  of  the  Hittites"  and  built 
city,  which  he  named  after  the  former  one 
This  city  was  standing  at  the  date  of  the  recon 
(Judg.  i.  26).  But  its  situation,  as  well  as  tha 
of  the  "  land  of  the  Hittites,"  has  never  been  dii 


LYCAONIA 


157 


overed  since,  and  is  one  of  the  favourite  puzzles 
f  Scripture  geographers.  Eusebius  (  Oiwm.  A.ov£d) 
nentions  a  place  of  the  name  as  standing  neai 
jhechem,  nine  (Jerome,  three)  miles  from  Keapolis 
Nablus).  The  objection  to  ';his  is  the  difficulty  of 
lacing  in  central  Palestine,  and  at  that  period,  a 
istrict  exclusively  Hittite.  Some  have  imagined 
t  to  be  in  Cyprus,  as  if  Chittim  were  the  country 
jf  the  Hittites ;  others  in  Arabia,  as  at  Lysa,  a 
Joman  town  in  the  desert  south  of  Palestine,  on 
he  road  to  Akabah  (Rob.  i.  187). 

The  signification  of  the  name  is  quite  uncertain, 
t  is  usually  taken  as  meaning  "  hazel,''  and  de 
noting  the  presence  of  such  trees;  but  the  late*; 
exicographer  (Fuerst,  Hdwbh.  666)  has  returned  *e 
he  opinion  of  an  earlier  scholar  (Hiller,  Onom.  70), 
,hat  the  notion  at  the  root  of  the  word  is  rathtn 
'  bending  "  or  "  sinking,"  as  of  a  valley.  [G.j 

LYCAO'NIA  (Avicaovta).  This  is  one  of  those 
listricts  of  Asia  Minor,  which,  as  mentioned  in  the 
tf.  T.,  are  to  be  understood  rather  in  an  ethno- 
ogical  than  a  strictly  political  sense.  From  what 
s  said  in  Acts  xiv.  1 1  of  "  the  speech  of  Lycaonia," 
,t  is  evident  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  district,  in 
St.  Paul's  day,  spoke  something  very  different  from 
ordinary  Greek.  Whether  this  language  was  some 
Syrian  dialect  [CAPPADOCIA],  or  a  corrupt  foion  of 
Greek,  has  been  much  debated  (Jablonsky,  Opusc. 
iii.  3;  Gukling,  De  Ling.  Lycaon.  1726).  The 
fact  that  the  Lycaonians  were  familiar  with  the 
Greek  mythology  is  consistent  with  either  suppo 
sition.  It  is  deeply  interesting  to  see  these  rude 
country  people,  when  Paul  and  Barnabas  worked 
miracles  among  them,  rushing  to  the  conclusioc 
that  the  strangei-s  were  Mercury  and  Jupiter,  whose 
visit  to  this  very  neighbourhood  forms  the  subject 
of  one  of  Ovid's  most  charming  stories  (Ovid, 
Metam.  viii.  626).  Nor  can  we  fail  to  notice  how 
admirably  St.  Paul's  address  on  the  occasion  was 
adapted  to  a  simple  and  imperfectly  civilised  race 
(xiv.  15-17).  This  was  at  LYSTRA,  in  the  heart  of 
the  country.  Further  to  the  east  was  DERBU  (ver. 
6),  not  far  from  the  chief  pass  which  leads  up  through 
Taurus,  from  CiLlClA  and  the  coast,  to  the  central 
table-land.  At  the  western  limit  of  Lycaonia  was 
ICONIUM  (ver.  1),  in  the  direction  of  ANTIOCH  IN 
PISIDIA.  A  good  Roman  road  intersected  the  dis 
trict  along  the  line  thus  indicated.  On  St.  Paul's 
first  missionary  journey  he  traversed  Lycaonia  from 
west  to  east,  and  then  returned  on  his  steps  (ver.  21  ; 
see  2  Tim.  iii.  1 1).  On  the  second  and  third  journeys 
he  entered  it  from  the  east ;  and  after  leaving  it, 
travelled  in  the  one  case  to  Troas  (Acts  xvi.  1-8), 
in  the  other  to  Ephesus  (Acts  xviii.  23,  xix.  1). 
Lycaonia  is  for  the  most  part  a  dreary  plain,  bare 
of  trees,  destitute  of  fresh  water,  and  with  several 
salt  lakes.  It  is,  however,  very  favourable  to  sheep- 
farming.  In  the  first  notices  of  this  district,  which 
occur  in  connexion  with  Roman  history,  we  find  it 
under  the  rule  of  robber-chieftains.  After  the  provin 
cial  system  had  embraced  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor, 
the  boundaries  of  the  provinces  were  variable  ;  and 
Lycaonia  was,  politically,  sometimes  in  Cappadocw, 
sometimes  in  Galatia.  A  question  has  been  raised, 
in  connexion  with  this  point,  concerning  the  chro 
nology  of  parts  of  St.  Paul's  life.  This  subject  k 
noticed  in  the  article  on  GALATIA.  [J.  S.  II. 1 


b  In  one  case  only  do  the  LXX.  omit  the  termination 
namely,  in  Gen.  xxviii.  19,  and  here  they  give  the  nam 
us  Oulammaous,  OvAaju.ju.aous,  incorporating  with  it  th 
preceding  Hebrew  word  Ulam,  Q>1K>  as  they  have  als 


done  in  the  case  of  Laish  (see  p.  55t>  note).  The  eagerness 
with  which  Jerome  attacks  this  motstrotis  name  at 
every  possible  opportunity  is  very  cur^us  ami  charac 
teristic. 


158 


LYCIA. 


LYC'IA  (Avitia)  is  the  name  of  that  south 
western  region  of  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor  which 
is  immediately  opposite  the  island  of  Rhodes  It  is  a 
remarkable  district  both  physically  and  historically. 
The  last  eminences  of  the  range  of  Taurus  come 
down  here  in  majestic  masses  to  the  sea,  forming  the 
heights  of  Cragus  and  Anticragus,  with  the  river 
Xanthus  winding  between  them,  and  ending  in  the 
long  series  of  promontories  called  by  modern  sailors 
the  "  seven  capes,"  among  which  are  deep  inlets 
favourable  to  seafaring  and  piracy.  In  this  district 
are  those  curious  and  very  ancient  architectural 
remains,  which  have  been  so  fully  illustrated  by 
our  English  travellers,  Sir  C.  Fellows,  and  Messrs. 
Spratt  and  Forbes,  and  many  specimens  of  which 
are  in  the  British  Museum.  Whatever  may  have 
been  the  political  history  of  the  earliest  Lycians, 
their  country  was  incorporated  in  the  Persian  empire, 
nnd  their  ships  were  conspicuous  in  the  great  war 
against  the  Greeks  (Herod,  vii.  91,  9'2).  After  the 
death  of  Alexander  the  Great,  Lycia  was  included  in 
the  Greek  Seleucid  kingdom,  and  was  a  part  of  the 
territory  which  the  Romans  forced  Antiochus  to  cede 
(Liv.  xxxvii.  55).  It  was  made  in  the  first  place  one 
of  the  continental  possessions  of  Rhodes  [CARIA]  : 
but  before  long  it  was  politically  separated  from  that 
island,  and  al lowed  to  be  an  independent  state.  This 
has  been  called  the  golden  period  of  the  history  of 
Lycia.  It  is  in  this  period  that  we  find  it  mentioned 
(1  Mace.  xv.  23)  as  one  of  the  countries  to  which 
'.he  Romans  sent  despatches  in  favour  of  the  Jews 
under  Simon  Maccabaeus.  It  was  not  till  the  reign 
of  Claudius  that  Lycia  became  part  of  the  Roman 
provincial  system.  At  first  it  was  combined  with 
1'amphylia  :  and  the  governor  bore  the  title  of 
"  Proconsul  Lyciae  et  Pamphyliae  "  (Gruter,  Tlies. 
p.  458).  Such  seems  to  have  l>een  the  condition  of 
the  district  when  St.  Paul  visited  the  Lycian  towns 
of  PATAKA  (Acts  xxi.  1)  and  MYRA  (Acts  xxvii.  5). 
At  a  later  period  of  the  Roman  empire  it  was  a  sepa 
rate  province,  with  Myra  for  its  capital.  [J.  S.  H.J 

LYD'DA  (AtSSa:  L>/dda),  the  Greek  form  of 
the  name  which  originally  appears  in  the  Hebrew 
records  as  LOD.  It  is  familiar  to  us  as  the  scene  of 
one  of  St.  Peter's  acts  of  healing,  on  the  paralytic 
Aeneas,  one  of  "  the  saints  who  dwelt  at  Lydda  " 
(Acts  ix.  32),  the  consequence  of  which  was  the 
conversion  of  a  very  large  number  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  town  and  of  the  neighbouring  plain  of  Sharon 
(ver.  35).  Here  Peter  w;is  residing  when  the  dis 
ciples  of  Joppa  fetched  him  to  that  city  in  their 
distress  at  the  death  of  Tabitha  (ver.  38). 

Quite  in  accordance  with  these  and  the  other 
scattered  indications  of  Scripture  is  the  situation  of 
the  modern  town,  which  exactly  retains  its  name, 
and  probably  its  position.  Lidil  (Tobler,  3tte.  Wand. 
69,  450),  or  Ludd  (Robinson,  D.  R.  ii.  244),  stands 
in  the  Mcrj,  or  meadow,  of  ibn  Omcir,  pirt  of  the 
great  maritime  plain  which  anciently  bore  the  name 
of  SHARON,  and  which,  when  covered  with  its  crops 
of  corn,  reminds  the  traveller  of  the  rich  wheat- 
iiplds  of  our  own  Lincolnshire  (Rob.  iii.  145;  and 
see  Thomson,  L.  <$•  D.  ch.  xxxiv.).  It  is  9  miles 
from  Jop|xi,  and  is  the  first  town  on  the  northern 
most  of  the  two  roads  between  that  place  and  Jeru- 


LYDDA 

salem.  Within  n  circle  of  4  miles  still  stand  One 
(Kcfr  Annit),  Hadid  (el- Hitditheh.),  and  Ni-t.-tllal 
(Beit-Neballah},  three  plices  constantly  associated 
with  Lod  in  the  ancient  records.  The  wate-- 
course  outside  the  town  is  said  still  to  bear  the  nam  t 
of  Abi-Butrus  (Peter),  in  memory  of  the  Aj>ostlt 
(Rob.  ii.  248  ;  Tobler,  471 ).  Lying  so  conspicuously 
in  this  fertile  plain,  and  upon  the  main  road  from  the 
sea  to  the  interior,  Lydda  could  hardly  escape  an 
eventful  history.  It  wns  in  the  time  of  Josephus 
a  place  of  considerable  size,  which  gave  its  name  to 
one  of  the  three  (or  four,  xi.  57)  "governments" 
or  toparchies  (see  Joseph.  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5)  which 
Demetrius  Soter  (B.C.  cir.  152),  at  the  request  o" 
Jonathan  Maccabaeus,  released  from  tribute,  and 
transferred  from  Samaria  to  the  estate  of  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem  (1  Mace.  xi.  34;  comp.  x.  30,  38 ; 
xi.  28,  57) ;  though  by  whom  these  districts  were 
originally  denned  does  not  appear  (see  Michaelis, 
Bib.  fiir  Ungel.).  A  century  later  (B.C.  cir.  45) 
Lydda,  with  Gophna,  Emmaus,  and  Thamna,  became 
the  prey  of  the  insatiable  Cassius,  by  whom  the 
whole  of  the  inhabitants  were  sold  into  slavery  to 
raise  the  exorbitant  taxes  imposed  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv. 
11,  §2).  From  this  they  were,  it  is  true,  soon  re 
leased  by  Antony  ;  but  a  few  years  only  elapsed 
before  their  city  (A.D.  66)  was  burnt  by  Cestius 
Callus  on  his  way  from  Caesarea  to  Jerusalem.  He 
entered  it  when  all  the  people  of  the  place  but  fifty 
were  absent  at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  Jerusalem 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  19,  §1).  He  must  have  passed 
the  hardly  cold  ruins  not  more  than  a  fortnight 
after,  when  flying  for  his  life  before  the  infuriated 
Jews  of  Jerusalem.  Some  repair  appeai-s  to  have 
been  immediately  made,  for  in  less  than  two  years, 
early  in  A.D.  68,  it  was  in  a  condition  to  be  again 
taken  by  Vespasian,  *hen  on  his  way  to  his  cam 
paign  in  the  south  of  Judaea.  Vespasian  introduced 
fresh  inhabitants  from  the  prisoners  lately  taken  in 
Galilee  (Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §1).  But  the  sub 
stantial  rebuilding  of  the  town — lying  as  it  did  in 
the  road  of  every  invader  and  every  countermarch — 
can  hardly  have  been  effected  till  the  disorders  of 
this  unhappy  country  were  somewhat  composed. 
Hadrian's  reign,  after  the  suppression  of  the  revolt 
of  Bar-Cocheba  (A.D.  cir.  136),  when  Paganism  was 
triumphant,  and  Jerusalem  rebuilding  as  Aelia  Ca- 
pitolina,  would  not  be  an  improbable  time  for  this, 
and  for  the  bestowal  on  Lydda  of  the  new  name  e: 
Diospolis  " — City  of  Zeus — which  is  staled  by  Je 
rome  to  have  accompanied  the  rebuilding.  (Se» 
Quaresmius,  Peregr.  i.,  lib.  4,  cap.  3.)  We  liavt 
already  seen  that  this  new  name,  as  is  so  often  the 
case  in  Palestine,  has  disappeared  in  favour  of  the 
ancient  one.  [Accno;  KKNATH,  &c.] 

When  Eusebius  wrote  (A.D.  320-330)  Diospolis 
was  a  well-known  and  much-frequented  town,  to 
which  he  often  refers,  though  the  names  of  neither 
it  nor  Lydda  occur  in  the  actual  catalogue  of  hi? 
Onomasticon.  In  Jerome's  time  (Epitaph.  P>\nl,ie  • 
§8),b  A.D.  404,  it  was  an  episcopal  see.  Tradition 
reports  that  the  first  bishop  was  "  Zenas  the  lawyer" 
(Tit.  iii.  13),  originally  one  of  the  seventy  disc  ijilcs 
(Dorotheus,  in  Relaud,  879) ;  but  the  first  historical 
mention  of  the  see  is  the  signature  of  "Aetius  Lyd- 


•  Was  this  the  Diospolis  mentioned  by  Josephus  (Ant. 
xv.  5.  $1,  and  Ii.  J.  \.  4,  06 1  But  It  is  dllllcult  to  discover 
If  two  places  are  not  intended,  possibly  rcither  of  them 
Identical  with  Lydda. 

Can  there  be  any  connexion,  ptymo'of.lcal  or  other, 
between  tho  two  nanics?  In  tlir  Itict.  «f  C't<yr.  !.  778,  6  I 


modern  Egyptian  village   is  mentioned  named 
of  which  the  ancient  name  was  also  liiospolis. 

b  Jerome  is  wrong  here  in  placing  the  raising  of  Dorr*.1 
at  Lydda.  So  aLso  Hitter  (I'ltliittina,  £51)  ascribed  thr 
miruclr  to  St.  I'aul. 


LYDDA 

Oensis  "  to  the  acts  of  the  Council  ot  Nicaea  (A.D. 
325  ;  Reland,  878).  After  this  the  name  is  found, 
now  Diospolis,  now  Lydda,  amongst  the  lists  of  the 
Councils  down  to  A.D.  518  (Koo.  n.  '245;  Mislin, 
ii.  149).  The  bishop  of  Lydda,  originally  subject 
to  Caesarea,  became  at  a  later  date  suffragan  to 
Jerusalem  (see  the  two  lists  in  Von  Raumer,  401); 
and  this  is  still  the  case.  In  the  latter  end  or  415 
a  Council  of  14  bishops  was  held  here,  before  which 
Pelagius  appeared,  and  by  whom,  after  much  tumul 
tuous  debate,  and  in  the  absence  of  his  two  accusers, 
he  was  acquitted  of  heresy,  and  received  as  a 
Christian  brother c  (Milner,  Hist,  of  Ch.  of  Christ, 
Cent.  V.  ch.  iii.).  St.  George,  the  patron  saint  of 
England,  was  a  native  of  Lydda.  After  his  martyr 
dom  his  remains  were  buried  there  (see  quotations 
by  Robinson,  ii.  245),  and  over  them  a  church  was 
afterwards  built  and  dedicated  to  his  honour.  The 
erection  of  this  church  is  commonly  ascribed  to 
Justinian,  but  there  seems  to  be  no  real  ground  for 
the  assertion,*1  and  at  present  it  is  quite  uncertain 
by  whom  it  was  built.  When  the  countiy  was 
taken  possession  of  by  the  Saracens  in  the  early  part 
of  the  8th  cent,  the  church  was  destroyed  ;  and  in 
this  ruined  condition  it  was  found  by  the  Crusaders 
in  A.D.  1099,  who  reinstituted  the  see,  and  added 
to  its  endowment  the  neighbouring  city  and  lands 
ofRamleh.  Apparently  at  the  same  time  the  church 
was  rebuilt  and  strongly  fortified  (Rob.  ii.  247). 
It  appears  at  that  time  to  Jwve  been  outside  the 
city.  Again  destroyed  by  Saladin  after  the  battle 
of  Hattin  in  1191,  it  was  again  rebuilt,  if  we  are 
to  believe  the  tradition,  which,  however,  is  not  so 
consistent  or  trustworthy  as  one  would  desire,  by 
Richard  Coeur-de-lion  (Will.  Tyr. ;  but  see  Rob.  ii. 
245, 24ti).  The  remains  of  the  church  still  form  the 
most  remarkable  object  in  the  modern  village.  A 
minute  and  picturesque  account  of  them  will  be 
found  in  Robinson  (ii.  244),  and  a  view  in  Van  do 
Yelde's  Pays  d' Israel  (plate  55).  The  town  is,  for 
a  Mohammedan  place,  busy  and  prosperous  (see 
Thomson,  Land  and  Book  ;  Van  de  Velde,  S.  fy  P. 
i.  244).  Buried  in  palms,  and  with  a  large  well 
close  to  the  entrance,  it  looks  from  a  distance  in 
viting  enough,  but  its  interior  is  very  repulsive  on 
account  of  the  extraordinary  number  of  persons, 
old  and  young,  whom  one  encounters  at  every  step, 
either  totally  blind  or  afflicted  with  loathsome  dis 
eases  of  the  eyes.  Indeed  it  is  proverbial  for  this ; 
and  the  writer  was  told  on  the  spot  in  1858,  as  a 
common  saying,  that  in  Lydd  every  man  has  either 
but  one  eye  or  none  at  all. 

Lydda  was,  for  some  time  previous  to  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem,  the  seat  of  a  very  famous 
Jewish  school,  scarcely  second  to  that  of  Jabneh. 
About  the  time  of  the  siege  it  was  presided  over  by 
Rabbi  Gamaliel,  second  of  the  uame  (Lightfoot, 
Chor.  Cent.  xvi.).  Some  curious  anecdotes  and  short 
notices  from  the  Talmuds  concerning  it  are  preserved 
by  Lightfoot.  One  of  these  states  that  "  Queen  He 
lena  celebrated  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  there  "  ! 

As  the  city  of  St.  George,  who  is  one  with  the 
famous  personage  El-Kliudr,  Lydda  is  held  in  much 
honour  by  the  Muslims.  In  their  traditions  the  gate 
of  the  city  will  be  the  scene  of  the  final  combat 
between  Christ  and  Antichrist  (Sale's  Koran,  note 


c  "  Ilia  mlserabilis  Synodus  Diospolltanus "  (Jerome, 
Ep.  ad  Ali/p.  el  Aug.  02). 

d  The  church  which  Justinian  built  to  St..  George  was 
In  Hizaiia  (iv  Bifai/ois),  somewhere  in  Armenia  (I'ro- 
copim,  <le  M.  Just.  3,  4  ;  in  Hob.  2  Hi).  See  the  remarks 


LYSANIAS  159 

to  ch.  43  ;  and  Prel.  Disc.  iv.  §4 ;  also  Jalal  al-Diu 
Temple  of  Jerusalem,  434).  [(;.] 

LYD'IA  (AuSla),  a  maritime  province  in  the 
west  of  Asia  Minor,  bounded  by  Mysia  on  the  N. 
Phrygia  on  the  E.,  and  Caria  on  the  S.  The  name 
occurs  only  in  1  Mace.  viii.  8  (the  rendering  of  the 
A.  V.  in  Ez.  xxx.  5  being  incorrect  for  Ludim); 
it  is  there  enumerated  among  the  districts  which 
the  Romans  took  away  from  Antiochus  the  Great 
after  the  battle  of  Magnesia  in  B.C.  190,  and  trans 
ferred  to  Eumenes  II.,  king  of  Pergamus.  Some 
difficulty  arises  in  the  passage  referred  to  from  the 
names  "  India  and  Media  "  found  in  connexion  with 
it:  but  if  we  regard  these  as  incorrectly  given 
either  by  the  writer  or  by  a  copyist  for  "  Ionia  and 
Mysia,"  the  agreement  with  Livy's  account  of  the 
same  transaction  (xxxvii.  56)  will  be  sufficiently 
established,  the  notice  of  the  maritime  province's 
alone  in  the  Iwok  of  Maccabees  being  explicable  on 
the  ground  of  their  being  best  known  to  the  in 
habitants  of  Palestine.  For  the  connexion  between 
Lydia  and  the  Lud  and  Ludim  of  the  0.  T.,  see 
LUDIM.  Lydia  is  included  in  the  "  Asia  "  of  the 
N-  T-  [W.  L.  B.j 

LYD'IA  (AuS/a),  the  first  European  convert 
of  St.  Paul,  and  afterwards  his  hostess  during  his 
first  stay  at  Philippi  (Acts  xvi.  14,  15,  also°40). 
She  was  a  Jewish  proselyte  ((Te/Jo/ueV?;  r'bv  Qf6v) 
at  the  time  of  the  Apostle's  coming ;  and  it  was  at 
the  Jewish  Sabbath-worship  by  the  side  of  a  stream 
(ver.  13)  that  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  reached 
her  heart.  She  was  probably  only  a  temporary  re 
sident  at  Philippi.  Her  native  place  was  THYATIRA, 
in  the  province  of  Asia  (ver.  14  ;  Rev.  ii.  18) ;  and 
it  is  interesting  to  notice  that  through  her,  in 
directly,  the  Gospel  may  have  come  into  that  very 
d!..trict,  where  St.  Paul  himself  had  recently  been 
ibrbidden  directly  to  preach  it  (Acts  xvi.  <>). 
Thyatira  was  famous  for  its  dyeing-works  ;  and 
Lydia  was  connected  with  this  trade  (irup<pvp6- 
7ro>A.»s),  either  as  a  seller  of  dye,  or  of  dyed  goods. 
We  infer  that  she  was  a  person  of  considerable 
wealth,  partly  from  the  fact  that  she  gave  a  home 
to  St.  Paul  and  his  companions,  partly  from  the 
mention  of  the  conversion  of  her  "  household," 
under  which  term,  whether  children  are  included 
or  not,  slaves  are  no  doubt  comprehended.  Ot 
Lydia's  character  we  are  led  to  form  a  high  estimate, 
from  her  candid  reception  of  the  Gospel,  her  urgent 
hospitality,  and  her  continued  friendship  to  Paul 
and  Silas  when  th-sy  were  persecuted.  Whether  she 
was  one  of  "  those  women  who  laboured  with  Paul 
in  the  Gospel"  at  Philippi,  as  mentioned  afterwards 
in  the  Epistle  to  that  place  (Phil.  iv.  3),  it  is 
impossible  to  say.  As  regards  her  name,  though 
it  is  certainly  curious  that  Thyatira  was  in  the 
district  anciently  called  "  Lydia,"  there  seems  no 
reason  for  doubting  that  it  was  simply  a  propel 
name,  or  for  supposing  with  Giotius  that  she  was 
"  ita  dicta  a  solo  uatali."  [J.  S.  II.] 

LYSA'NIAS  (At'O'aj'/oyX  mentioned  by  St. 
Luke  in  one  of  his  chronological  passages  (iii.  1) 
as  being  tetrarch  of  ABILKNE  (i.  e.  the  district 
round  Abila)  in  the  15th  year  of  Tiberius,  at  tlu 
time  when  Herod  Antipas  was  tetrarch  of  Galilee, 


of  Robinson  against  the  possibility  of  Constantine  having 
built  the  church  at  Lydda.     But  were  there  not  probably 
two  churches  at  Lydda,  one  dedicated  to  St.  George,  iviri 
ic  to  the  Virgin  ?    See  Heland,  878. 


160 


LYSLAS 


\nd  Herod  Philip  tetrarch  of  Ituraea  and  Tracho 
i:itis.  It  happens  that  Josephus  speaks  of  a  princ 
named  Lysanias  who  ruled  over  a  territory  in  th 
neighbourhood  of  Lebanon  in  the  time  of  Anton; 
and  Cleopatra,  and  that  he  also  mentions  Abilen 
as  associated  with  the  name  of  a  tetiarch  Lysanias 
while  recounting  events  of  the  reigns  of  Caligula 
and  Claudius.  These  circumstances  have  given  tc 
Strauss  and  others  an  opportunity  for  accusing  the 
Evangelist  of  confusion  and  error:  but  we  shal 
see  that  this  accusation  rests  on  a  groundless  as 
sumption. 

What  Josephus  says  of  the  Lysanias  who  was 
contemporary  with  Antony  and  Cleopatra  (i.  e.  who 
Jived  60  years  before  the  time  referred  to  by  St 
Luke)  is,  that  he  succeeded  his  father  Ptolemy,  th< 
•on  of  Mennaeus,  in  the  government  of  Chalcis 
under  Mount  Lebanon  (B.  J.  i.  13,  §1 ;  Ant.  xiv 
f ,  §4) ;  and  that  he  was  put  to  death  at  the  instance 
of  Cleopatra  (Ant.  xv.  4,  §1),  who  seems  to  have 
received  a  good  part  of  his  territory.  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  Abila  is  not  specified  here  at  all,  and 
that  Lysanias  is  not  called  tetrarch. 

What  Josephus  says  of  Abila  and  the  tetrarchy 
in  the  reigns  of  Caligula  and  Claudius  (i.  e.  about 
20  years  after  the  time  mentioned  in  St.  Luke's 
Gospel)  is,  that  the  former  emperor  promised  the 
"  tetrarchy  of  Lysanias  "  to  Agrippa  (Ant.  xviii.  6, 
§10),  and  that  the  latter  actually  gave  to  him 
"  Abila  of  Lysanias  "  and  the  territory  near  Lebanon 
(Ant.  xix.  5,  §1,  with  B.  J.  ii.  12,  §8). 

Now,  assuming  Abilene  to  be  included  in  both 
cases,  and  the  former  Lysanias  and  the  latter  to  be 
identical,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  a  prince  of  the 
same  name  and  family  from  having  reigned  as 
tetrarch  over  the  territory  in  the  intermediate  period. 
But  it  is  probable  that  the  Lysanias  mentioned  by 
Josephus  in  the  second  instance  is  actually  the 
prince  referred  to  by  St.  Luke.  Thus,  instead  of  a 
contradiction,  we  obtain  from  the  Jewish  historian 
a  confirmation  of  the  Evangelist ;  and  the  argument 
becomes  very  decisive  if,  as  some  think,  Abilene  is 
to  be  excluded  from  the  territory  mentioned  in  the 
story  which  has  reference  to  Cleopatra. 

Fuller  details  are  given  in  Davidson's  Introduction 
to  the  N.  T.\.  214-220;  and  there  is  a  good  brief 
notice  of  the  subject  in  Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lec 
tures  for  1859,  p.  203,  and  note  113.  [J.  S.  H.] 
LYS'IAS  (Ai»(T/os),  a  nobleman  of  the  blood- 
royal  (1  Mace.  iii.  32;  2  Mace.  xi.  1),  who  was 
entrusted  by  Autiochus  Epiphanes  (cir.  li.C.  166) 
with  the  government  of  southern  Syria,  and  the 
guardianship  of  his  son  Antiochus  Eupator  (1  Mace, 
iii.  32  ;  2  Mace.  x.  11).  In  the  execution  of  his 
office  Lysias  armed  a  very  considerable  force  against 
Judas  Maccabaeus.  Two  detachments  of  this  army 
under  Nicanor  (2  Mace,  viii.)  and  Gorgias  were 
defeated  by  the  Jews  near  Emmaus  (1  Mace,  iv.), 
and  in  the  following  year  Lysias  himself  met  with 
a  much  more  serious  reverse  atBethsura  (B.C.  165), 
which  was  followed  by  the  purification  of  the 
Temple.  Shortly  after  this  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
died  (u.c.  164),  and  Lysias  assumed  the  government 
as  guardian  of  his  son,  who  was  yet  a  child  (App. 
Syr.  46,  tvatris  iraiSiov;  1  Mace.  vi.  17).  The 
war  against  the  Jews  was  renewed,  and,  after  a 
severe  struggle,  Lysias,  who  took  the  young  king 
with  him,  captured  Bethsura,  and  was  besieging 
Jerusalem,  when  he  received  tidings  of  the  approach 
nf  Philip,  to  whom  Antiochus  had  transferred  the 
guardianship  of  the  prince  (1  Mace.  vi.  18;  'J 
Marc.  xiii.).  He  defeated  Philip  (K.c.  163;,  and 


LYSTRA 

was  supported  at  Rome ;  but  in  the  next  year,  to 
gethcr  with  his  ward,  fell  into  the  hands  of  Deme 
trius  Sotcr  [DEMETRIUS  I.],  who  put  them  both  to 
death  (1  Mace.  vii.  2-4;  2  Mace.  xiv.  2;  Jos. 
Ant.  xii.  12,  §15,  1C;  App.  Syr.  45-47  ;  Polyb. 
xxxi.  15,  19). 

There  are  considerable  differences  between  th« 
first  and  second  books  of  Maccabees  with  regard 
to  the  campaigns  of  Gorgias  and  the  subsequent 
one  of  Lysias :  the  former  places  the  defeat  of 
Lysias  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  before 
the  purification  of  the  Temple  (1  Mace.  iv.  26-35). 
the  latter  in  the  reign  of  Autiochus  Eupator  after 
the  purification  (2  Mace.  x.  10,  xi.  1,  &c.).  There 
is  no  sufficient  ground  for  believing  that  the  events 
recorded  are  different  (Patricius,  De  Consensu 
Mace.  §xxvii.  xxxrii.),  for  the  mistake  of  date  in 
2  Maccabees  is  one  which  might  easily  arise  (comp. 
Wernsdorf,  De  fide  Mace.  §lxvi. ;  Grimm,  ad  2 
Mace.  xi.  1).  The  idea  of  Grotius  that  2  Mace,  xi , 
and  2  Mace.  xiii.  are  duplicate  records  of  the  sami 
event,  in  spite  of  Ewald's  support  (Geschichte,  iv. 
365  note),  is  scarcely  tenable,  and  leaves  half  the 
difficulty  unexplained.  [B.  F.  W.] 

LYSIM'ACHUS  (Au<rf/iax°*)-  1-  "  A  son  of 
Ptolemaeus  of  Jerusalem  "  (A.  nroAf^nlot;  &  e» 
'lepov(ra\'f)p)>  the  Greek  translator  of  the  book  of 
Esther  (tiriffTO\-f).  Comp.  Esth.  ix.  20),  according 
to  the  subscription  of  the  LXX.  There  is,  however, 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  translator  was  also 
the  author  of  the  additions  made  to  the  Hebrew 
text.  [ESTHER.] 

2.  A  brother  of  the  high-priest  Menelaus,  who 
was  left  by  him  as  his  deputy  (Sidtioxos)  during 
lis  absence  at  the  court  of  Antiochus.  Hi» 
yranny  and  sacrilege  excited  an  insurrection,  during 
which  he  fell  a  victim  to  the  fury  of  the  people 
cir.  B.C.  170(2  Mace.  iv.  29-42).  The  Vulgate,  by 
a  mistranslation  (Menelaus  amotus  est  a  sacerdotio, 
succedente  Lysimacho  fratre  suo,  2  Mace.  iv.  29) 
makes  Lysimachus  the  successor  instead  of  the  de 
puty  of  Menelaus.  [B.  F.  W.J 

LYSTRA  (Avtrrpa)  has  two  points  of  extreme 
nterest  in  connexion  respectively  with  St.  Paul's 
irst  and  second  missionary  journeys — (1)  as  the 
)lace  where  divine  honours  were  offered  to  him, 
uid  where  he  was  presently  stoned ;  (2)  as  the 
lome  of  his  chosen  companion  and  fellow-mis- 
ionary  TIMOTHEUS. 

We  are  told  in  the  14th  chapter  of  the  Act*, 

hat  Paul  and  Barnabas,  driven  by  pei-secution  from 

CONIUM   (ver.  2),   proceeded   to   Lystra  and    its 

neighbourhood,  and  there  preached  the  Gospel.     In 

he  course  of  this  service  a  remarkable  miracle  was 

vorked  in  the  healing  of  a  lame  man  (ver.  8).    This 

occurrence  produced  such  an  effect  on  the  minds 

if  the   ignorant  and  superstitious   people   of  the 

dace,  that  they  supposed  that  the  two  gods,  51  KK- 

:URY  and  JUPITER,  who  were  said  by  the  poets  to 

iave  formerly  visited  this  district  in  human  form 

LYCAONIA]   had  again  bestowed  on  it  the  same 

avour,  and  consequently  were  proceeding  to  offer 

sacrifice  to  the  strangers  (ver.  13).     The  apostles 

ejected  this  worship  with  horror  (ver.  14),  and 

5t.  Paul  addressed  a  speech  to  them,  turning  their 

minds  to  the  true  Source  of  all  the  blessings  of 

lature.      The  distinct    proclamation   of  Christian 

octrine  is  not  mentioned,  but  it  is  implied,  inas- 

iuch  as  a  church  was  founded  at  Lystra.     The 

deration  of  the  Lystrians  was  rapidly  followed  by 

rliaiitro  of  feeling.     The  persmiting  Jews  arrived 


LYSTRA 

from  Antioch  in  Pisidia  and  leoui  ,rn,  and  had  such 
influence  that  Paul  was  stoned  and  left  lor  dead 
(<;er.  19).  On  his  recovery  he  withdrew,  with 
Barnabas,  to  DERBE  (ver.  '20),  but  before  long 
retraced  his  steps  through  Lystra  (ver.  21),  en 
couraging  the  new  disciples  to  be  stedfast. 

It  is  evident  from  2  Tim.  iii.  10,  1 1,  that  Timo- 
theus  was  one  of  those  who  witnessed  St.  Paul's 
sufferings  and  courage  on  this  occasion  :  and  it  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  his  conversion  to  Chris 
tianity  resulted  partly  from  these  circumstances, 
combined  with  the  teaching  of  his  Jewish  mother 
and  grandmother,  EUNICE  and  Lois  (2  Tim.  i.  5). 
Thus,  when  the  apostle,  accompanied  by  Silas,  came, 
on  his  second  missionary  journey,  to  this  place  again 
(and  here  we  should  notice  how  accurately  Derbe  and 
Lystra  are  here  mentioned  in  the  inverse  order), 
Timotheus  was  already  a  Christian  (Acts  xvi.  1). 
Here  he  received  circumcision,  "  because  of  the 
Jews  in  those  parts  "  (ver.  3) ;  and  from  this  point 
began  his  connexion  with  St.  Paul's  travels.  We 
are  doubly  reminded  here  of  Jewish  residents  in  and 
near  Lystra.  Their  first  settlement,  and  the  an 
cestors  of  Timotheus  among  them,  may  very  pro 
bably  be  traced  to  the  establishment  of  Babylonian 
Jews  in  Phrygia  by  Antiochus  three  centuries  before 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §4).  Still  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  no  influential  Jewish  population  at 
Lystra :  no  mention  is  made  of  any  synagogue ;  and 
the  whole  aspect  of  the  scene  described  by  St.  Luke 
(Acts  xiv.)  is  thoroughly  heathen.  With  regard  to 
St.  Paul,  it  is  not  absolutely  stated  that  he  was  ever 
in  Lystra  again,  but  from  the  general  description  of 
the  route  of  the  third  missionary  journey  (Acts 
xviii.  23)  it  is  almost  certain  that  he  was. 

Lystra  was  undoubtedly  in  the  eastern  part  of 
the  great  plain  of  Lycaonia;  and  there  are  very 
strong  reasons  for  identifying  its  site  with  the  ruins 
called  Bin-bir-Kilisseh,  at  the  base  of  a  conical 
mountain  of  volcanic  structure,  named  the  Kara- 
dagh  (Hamilton,  Res.  in  A.  M.  ii.  313).  Here  are 
the  remains  of  a  great  number  of  churches :  and  it 
should  be  noticed  that  Lystra  has  its  post-apostolic 
Christian  history,  the  names  of  its  bishops  appearing 
in  the  records  of  early  councils. 

Pliny  (v.  42)  places  this  town  in  Galatia,  and 
Ptolemy  (v.  4, 12)  in  Isauria:  but  these  statements 
are  quite  consistent  with  its  being  placed  in  Ly- 
caonia  by  St.  Luke,  as  it  is  by  Hierocles  (Synecd. 
p.  675).  As  to  its  condition  in  heathen  times,  it  is 
worth  while  to  notice  that  the  words  in  Acts  xiv. 
13  (roD  Atbs  TOV  tWos  irpb  TTJS  ir6\ttas~)  would 


MAACAH 


161 


»  Gesenius  (ZVies.  811  o)  suggests  that  the  name  may 
have  been  originally  H37lDi  ^ie  7  having  changed  into 
y,  in  accordance  with  Phoenician  custom.  (See  also 
Fiirst,  Hdwb.  7666;  though  he  derives  the  name  itself 
from  a  root  signifying  depression—  lowland.)  It  is  per 
haps  some  support  to  this  idea,  that  Kusebius  in  the 
Onamastican  gives  the  name  MoXaxa,  and  that  the  LXX. 
read  in  one  passage  "  Amalek,"  as  above.  Is  it  not  also 
possible  that  in  2  Sam.  viii.  12  "  Amalek  "  may  more  accu 
rately  be  Maacah  ?  At  least,  no  campaign  against  Amalek 
is  recoided  in  these  wars  —  none  since  that  before  the  death 
i>f  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxx.),  which  can  hardly  be  referred  to  in 
this  catalogue. 

k  This  is  probably  the  origin  of  the  name  Crau  attached 
to  the  great  stony  plain  north  of  Marseilles. 

0  The  ancient  versions  do  not  assist  us  much  in  fixing 
the  position  of  Maacah.  The  Syriac  PeshiUj  in  1  Chr. 


six.  has  Cturrcn, 
VOL.  II. 


/.     If  this  could  be  identified 


load  us  to  conclude  that  it  was  under  the  tutelage  of 
Jupiter.  Walch.  iu  his  Spicilegium  Antiquitaturn 
Lystrensium  (Diss.  in  Acta  Apostolorum,  Jena, 
1766,  vol.  iii.),  thinks  that  in  this  passage  a  statue, 
not  a  temple,  of  the  god  is  intended.  f  J  S.  H."1 


M 

MA'ACAH  (n3J?O :  MooX(£ ;  Alex. 

Maacha).  1.  The  mother  of  Absalom  =  MAACHAH 
5  (2  Sam.  iii.  3). 

2.  MAACAH,  and  (in  Chron.)  MAACHAH:  in 
Samuel  'A/uoX^jK,'  and  so  Josephus ;  in  Chron. 
M«xS  and  Moo^S ;  Alex,  in  both,  Maax« : 
Machati,  Maacha.  A  small  kingdom  in  close 
proximity  to  Palestine,  which  appears  to  have  lain 
outside  Argob  (Deut.  iii.  14)  and  Bashan  (Josh, 
xii.  5).  These  districts,  probably  answering  to  the 
Lejah  and  Jauldn  of  modem  Syiia,  occupied  the 
space  from  the  Jordan  on  the  west  to  Salcah 
(JSulkhad)  on  the  east  and  Mount  Hermon  on  the 
north.  There  is  therefore  no  alternative  but  tc 
place  Maacah  somewhere  to  the  east  of  the  Lejah, 
in  the  country  that  lies  between  that  remarkable 
district  and  the  Sufd,  namely  the  stony  desert  of 
el-Kra^  (see  Kiepert's  map  to  Wetzstein's  ffaurdn, 
&c.,  1860),  and  which  is  to  this  day  thickly  studded 
with  villages.  In  these  remote  eastern  regions  was 
also  probably  situated  Tihchath,  Tebach,  or  Betach, 
which  occurs  more  than  once  in  connexion  with 
Maacah e  (1  Chr.  xviii.  8  ;  Gen.  xxii.  24;  2  Sam. 
viii.  8).  Maacah  is  sometimes  assumed  to  have 
been  situated  about  ABEL-BETH-MA  ACAH  ;  but,  if 
Abil  be  the  modern  representative  of  that  town, 
this  is  hardly  probable,  as  it  would  bring  the  king 
dom  of  Maacah  west  of  the  Jordan,  and  within  the 
actual  limits  of  Israel.  It  is  possible  that  the  town 
was  a  colony  of  the  nation,  though  even  this  is 
rendered  questionable  by  the  conduct  of  Joab  to 
wards  it  (2  Sam.  xx.  22).  That  implacable  soldier 
would  hardly  have  left  it  standing  and  unharmed 
had  it  been  the  city  of  those  who  took  so  promi 
nent  a  part  against  him  in  the  Ammonite  war. 

That  war  was  the  only  occasion  on  which  the 
Maacathites  came  into  contact  with  Israel,  when 
their  king  assisted  the  Bene-Ammon  against  Joab 
with  a  force  which  he  led  himself  (2  Sam.  x.  6,  8  ; 
1  Chr.  six.  7.  In  the  first  of  these  passages  "  of" 
is  inaccurately  omitted  in  the  A.V.).  The  small 


El-Charra,  the  district  east  of  Sulkhad,  and  south  of  the 
Sufa  (see  Wetzsteln,  aud  Cyril  Graham),  it  would  support 
the  view  taken  in  the  text,  and  would  also  fall  In  v.ith 
the  suggestion  of  Ewald  (6'e?c/i.  Iii.  197),  that  the  Suf&  is 
connected  with  Zobah.  In  Josh.  xiii.  the  Peshito  has  Kuros, 

iCQQiQ_Q,  of  which  the  writer  can  make  nothing. 
The  Targums  of  Onkelos,  Jonathan,  and  Jerusalem  have 
Aphikeros,  Dilp^SK  (with  some  slight  variations  in 

spelling).  This  is  probably  intended  for  the  'ETTI'ICIUPOS  of 
Ptolemy,  which  he  mentions  in  company  with  Uviim, 
Callirhoe,  and  Jazer  (?).  (See  Reland,  Pal.  462  ;  and  com 
pare  the  expression  of  Josephus  with  regard  to  Machamis, 
B.  J.  vii.  6,  }2).  But  this  would  surely  be  Wo  far  south 
for  Maacah.  The  Targum  Psendojon.  has  -rfntikeros, 
3R>  wn'cn  retna'118  obscure.  It  will  be  ob 


served,  however,  that  every  one  of  these  names  contain* 
Kr  or  CAr. 


162 


MAACHAH 


extent  of  the  country  m'.y  be  inferred  from  a  com 
parison  of  the  number  of  this  force  with  that  of  the 
people  of  Zobah.  Ishtob,  and  Rehob  (2  Sam.  x.  6), 
combined  with  the  expression  "  his  people  "  in  1  Chr. 
xix.  7,  which  perhaps  imply  that  a  thousand  men 
were  the  whole  strength  of  his  army.  [MAAO 

I1ATHI.] 

To  the  connexion  which  is  always  implied  between 
Maacah  and  Geshur  we  have  no  clue.  It  is  perhaps 
illustrated  by  the  fact  of  the  daughter  of  the  king 
of  Geshur — wife  of  David  and  mother  of  Absalom — 
being  named  Maacah.  [G.] 

MA'ACHAH  (nSiJD :  MoX<£ ;  Alex.  Mo>Xa: 
J/aac/ta).  1.  The  daughter  of  Nahor  by  hrs  con 
cubine  Reumah  (Gen.  xxii.  24).  Kwald  connects 
her  name  with  the  district  of  Maachah  in  the  Hennou 
range  (Gesch.  i.  414,  note  1). 

2.  (Maax<£.)    The  father  of  Achish,  who  was 
king  of  Gath  at  the  beginning  of  Solomon's  reign 
(1  K.  ii.  39).    [MAOCH.] 

3.  The   daughter,    or    more    probably   grand 
daughter,  of  Absalom,  named  after  his  mother ;  the 
third  and  favourite  wife  of  Rehoboam,  and  mother 
of  Abijah  (1  K.  xv.  2 ;  2  Chr.  xi.  20-22).     Ac 
cording  to  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  10.  §1)  her  mother 
was  Tamar,  Absalom's  daughter.     But  the  mother 
of   Abijah    is    elsewhere    called    "  Michaiah,    the 
daughter  of  Uriel   of  Gibeah"   (2  Chr.   xiii.  2). 
The  LXX.  and  Syriac,  in  the  latter  passage,  have 
Maachah,  as  in  xi.  20.     If  Michaiah  were  a  mere 
variation  of  Maachnh,   as  has  been  asserted   (the 
resemblance  in  English  characters  being  much  more 
close  than  in  Hebrew),  it  would  be  easy  to  under 
stand    that   Uriel    of  Gibeah   married    Tamar   the 
daughter  of  Absalom,  whose  granddaughter  there 
fore  Maachah  was.     But  it  is  more  probable  that 
"  Michaiah "    is   the  error  of  a  transcriber,  and 
that  "  Maachah  "  is  the  true  reading  in  all  cases 
(Capelli,  Grit.  Sacr.  vi.  7,  §3).     Houbigant  pro 
posed  to  alter  the  text,  and  to  read  "  Maachah,  the 
daughter  of  Abishalom  (or  Absalom),  the  son  of 
Uriel."     During  the  reign  of  her  grandson  Asa  she 
occupied  at  the  court  of  Judah  the  high  position  of 
"  King's  Mother"  (comp.  1  K.  ii.  1 9),  which  has 
been  compared  with  that  of  the  Sultana  Valide  in 
Turkey.     It  may  be  that  at  Abijah "s  death,  after  a 
short  reign  of  three  years,  Asa  was  left  a  minor, 
and  Maachah  acted  as  regent,  like  Athaliah  under 
similar  circumstances.    If  this  conjecture  be  correct, 
it  would  serve  to  explain  the  influence  by  which 
she  promoted  the  practice  of  idolatrous  worship. 
The  idol  or  "  horror "  which  she  had   made  for 
Asherah  (1  K.  xv.  13 ;   2  Chr.  xv.  16)  is  supposed 
to  have  been  the  emblem  of  Priapus,  and  was  so 
understood  by  the  Vulgate.    [IDOL,  vol.  i.  p.  849  a.J 
It  was  swept  away  in  Asa's  refoi-mation,  and  Maa 
chah  was  removed  from  her  dignity.    Josephus  calls 
Maachah  Max<t>"?,  perhaps  a  corruption  of  Max<$, 
and  makes  Asa  the  son  of  Maxnia.    See  Burrington's 
Genealogies,  i.  222-228,  where  the  two  Maachahs 
are  considered  distinct. 

4.  (Mwx1*-;  Thfi  concubine  of  Caleb  the  son  of 
Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  48). 

5.  (Mo>x<$-)  The  daughter  of  Talmai,   king  of 
Geshur,  and  mother  of  Absalom   (1  Chr.  iii.  2): 
aiso  called  MAACAH  in  A.  V.  of  2   Sam.  iii.  3. 
Josephus  gives  her  name  Max<fy"?  (-Ant.  vii.  1,  §4). 
She  is  said,   according  to  n  Hebrew  tradition  re 
corded  by  Jerome  (Qn.   //<•/»-.  in  />V//.\  to  have 
been  taken  by  David   in  battle  and  added  to  the 
number  of  hit  wives. 


MAARATH 

6.  (Moa>x<i ;  Alex.  Mooxd.)   The  wife  of  M* 
chir  the  Manassite,  the  father  or  founder  of  Gile.ul, 
and  sister  of  Huppim  and  Shuppim   (1  Chr.  vii 
15, 16),  who  were  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr. 
vii.  12).     In  the  Peshito  Syriac  Maachah  is  mail* 
the  mother  of  Machir. 

7.  (Moaxct ;  Alex.  Maaxa.)  The  wife  of  Jehiel, 
father  or  founder  of  Gibeon,  from  whom  was  de 
scended  the  family  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  29,  ix.  35). 

8.  (Moctfx^i  Alex.  Mox«4.)  The  father  of  Hanan, 
one  of  the  heroes  of  David's  body-guard  (1  Chr.  xi. 
43),  who  is  classed    among  the   warriors   selected 
from  the  eastern   side  of  the  Jordan.      It  is  not 
impossible  that  Maachah  in  this  instance  may  be 
the  same  as  Svria-Maachah  in  1  Chr.  xix.  6,  7. 

9.  (Maax<£.)  A  Simeonite,  father  of  Shephatiah, 
prince  of  his  tribe  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvii.  16).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAA'CHATHI,  and  MAA'CHATHITES, 

THE  OrDJttSn:  'Ojuaxaflei',  r,  Max«i,  &  Ma- 
Xarel ;  Alex.  Moxaflt :  Machathi,  Machati\  two 
words — the  former  taking  the  form  of  the  Hebrew — 
which  denote  the  inhabitants  of  the  small  kingdom 
of  MAACHAH  (Dent.  iii.  14;  Josh.  xii.  5,  xiii.  11, 
13).  Individual  Maachathites  were  not  unknown 
among  the  warriors  of  Israel.  One,  recorded  simply 
as  "  son  of  the  Maachathite,"  or  possibly  "  Kli- 
phelet,  son  of  Ahasbai  the  Maachathite"  (see  Ken- 
nicott,  Dissertation,  205,  206),  was  a  member  of 
David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  34).  Another,  Je- 
zaniah,  was  one  of  the  chiefs  who  rallied  round 
Gedaliah  the  superintendent,  after  the  first  destruc 
tion  of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  xl.  8  ;  2  K.  xxv.  23).  Esh- 
temoa  the  Maachathite  (1  Chr.  iv.  19)  more  pro 
bably  derives  that  title  from  the  concubine  of 
Caleb  (ii.  48)  than  from  the  Syrian  kingdom. 
[MAACAH,  2.]  [G.] 

MAADA'I  (njflO :  MooSfa  ;  Alex.  MooStm . 
Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  AeSt'o :  Maaddi),  one  of  the  sons  of 
Bani  who  returned  with  Ezra  and  had  intermarried 
with  the  people  of  the  land  (Ezr.  x.  34J.  He  is 
called  MOMDIS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  34. 

MAADI'AH  (nHyD :  om.  in  Vat.  MS. :  Alex. 
MoaSia?  :  Madia),  one  of  the  priests,  or  families  of 
priests,  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  5) ;  elsewhere  (v.  17)  called  MOADIAH. 

MAA'I  OJfl? :  'Afa :  Madi),  one  of  the  Bene- 
Asaph  who  took  part  in  the  solemn  musical  service 
by  which  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  was  dedicated  after 
it  had  been  rebuilt  by  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  36). 

MA'ALEH-ACRABBIM  (D»2Pj?y  n?J?O  • 
»;  irpo>ravdf}affis  'A/cpo/SeiV  ;  ascensus  Scorpionis). 
The  full  tbrm  of  the  name  which  in  its  other  occur 
rences  (in  the  original  identical  with  the  above)  is 
given  in  the  A.  V.  as  "  the  ascent  of,  or  the  going 
up  to,  Akrabbim."  It  is  found  only  in  Josh.  xv.  3. 
For  the  probable  situation  of  the  pass,  see  AKUAH- 

DIM.  ["•] 

MA'ANI  CBaavl:  Bannf),  1  Esd.  ix.  34  identi 
cal  with  BANI,  4. 

MA'ARATH  (rnyO:  Ma^opcifl:'  Marctfi), 
one  of  the  towns  of  Judah,  in  the  district  of  the 
mountains,  and  in  the  same  group  which  contains 
HALHUL,  BETH-ZUR,  and  GKDOR  (Josh.  xv.  58). 
The  places  which  occur  in  company  with  it  have 


The  1AX.  here  represent  the  Hebrew  Ain  by  y  •  com 


MAASEIAH 

been  identified  at  a  few  miles  to  the  north  of 
Hebron,  but  Maarath  has  hitherto  eluded  observa 
tion.  It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  known  to  Eu- 
sebius  or  Jerome,  although  its  name  is  mentioned 
by  them  (O'wmasticon,  "  Maroth"). 

By  Gesen:iw  (Thcs.  1069a)  the  name  is  derived 
from  a  root  signifying  openness  or  bareness ;  but 
may  it  not  with  equal  accuracy  and  greater  plausi 
bility  be  derived  from  that  which  has  produced 
the  similar  word,  Mearah,  a  cave  ?  It  would  thus 
point  to  a  characteristic  feature  of  the  mountainous 
districts  of  Palestine,  one  of  which,  the  Mearath- 
Adullam,  or  cave  of  Adullam,  was  probably  at  no 
great  distance  from  this  very  locality.  [G.] 

MAASEI'AH  (rmj?n  :  Maacn'a ;  Alex.  Maa- 
rrjio ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  MaaeHja :  Maasia).  1.  A 
descendant  of  Jeshua  the  priest,  who  in  the  time  of 
Ezra  had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  was  divorced 
from  her  (Ezr.  x.  18).  He  is  called  MATTHELAS 
in  1  Esd.  ix.  19,  but  in  the  margin,  MAASIAS. 

2.  (Maffa^A.;  Alex.  Macreias.)  A  priest,  of  the 
sons  of  Harim,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at 
Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x.  21).    MAASIAH  in  margin 
of  1  Esd.  ix.  19. 

3.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Vlcuuraia.)  A  priest,  of  the 
sons  of  Pashur,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  in 
the  time  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  22).     He  is  called  MAS- 
BIAS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  22. 

4.  (Alex.  Macwnja ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  MatHj :  Maa 
sias.}  One  of  the  laymen,  a  descendant  of  Pahath- 
Moab,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  in  the  time 
of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  30).      Apparently  the  same  as 
MOOSIAS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  31. 

5.  (Maaa-tas ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  MaSoo-irjX :   Maa 
sias.)  The  father  of  Azariah,  one  of  the  priests  from 
the  oasis  of  the  Jordan,  who  assisted  kehemiah  in 
rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  23). 

6.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Macurota.)  One  of  those  who 
stood  on  the  right  hand  of  Ezra  when  he  read  the 
law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4).     He  was  probably 
a  priest,  but  whether  one  of  those  mentioned  in 
ch.  xii.  41,  42,  is  uncertain.      The  corresponding 
name  in  1  Esd.  ix.  43  is  BALASAMUS. 

7.  (Om.  in  LXX.)  A  Levite  who  assisted  on  the 
same  occasion  in  expounding  the  law  to  the  people 
(Neh.  viii.  7).     He  is  called  MAIANEAS  in  1  Esd. 
ix.  48. 

8.  (Alex.  MaoAcna;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Maairaia.) 
One  of  the  heads  of  the  people  whose  descendants 
signed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  25). 

9.  (Alex.  MaAffjo.)  Son  of  Baruch  and  descend 
ant  of  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah.     His  family  dwelt 
in  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh. 
ri.  5).     In  the  corresponding  narrative  of  1  Chr. 
is.  5  he  is  called  ASAIAH. 

10.  (Moaerfas ;  Masia.}  A  Benjamite,  ancestor 
of  Sallu,  who  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  after  the  captivity 
(Neh.  xi.  7). 

11.  (Om.  in  Vat.  MS. ;  Alex.  Macunos.)'  Two 
priests  of  this  name  are  mentioned  (Neh.  xii.  41, 
42)  as  taking  part  in  the  musical  service  which 
accompanied  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
under  Ezra.     One  of  them  is  probably  the  same  as  6. 

12.  (Bwrafas;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Mcwe'as  in  Jer. 
Hi.  1  ;  Mooo-ai'as  ;  Alex.  Mcuraias,  Jer.  xxxvii.  3.) 
Father  of  Zephaniah,  who  was  a  priest  in  the  reign 
of  Zedekiah  (Jer.  xxix.  25). 

13  (Om.  in  LXX.)  The  father  of  Zedekiah  the 
taibt>  prophet,  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiab  king  of  Judah 
l,Jcr.  xxix.  21 ). 

14.    (SrvbE :     Maao-afa  ;     Alex.    Maao-.a : 


MA13DA 


163 


Maasias),  one  of  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank, 
appointed  by  David  to  sound  "  with  psalteries  on 
Alamoth,"  when  the  ark  was  brought  from  the  house 
of  Obed-edom.  He  was  also  one  of  the  "  porters" 
or  gate-keepers  for  the  ark  (1  Chr.  XT.  18,  20,). 

15.  (Alex.  Mao-ja.)  The  son  of  Adaiah,  and  one 
of  the  captains  of  hundreds  in  the  reign  of  Joash 
king  of  Judah.     He  assisted  Jehoiada  in  the  revo 
lution  by  which  Joash  was  placed  on  the  throne 
(2  Chr.  xxiii.  1). 

16.  (yiaafflas  ;  Alex.  Mao-troios.)  An  officer  of 
high  rank  (shoter)  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah  (2  Chr. 
xxvi.  11).    He  was  probably  a  Levite  (comp.  1  Chr. 
xxiii.  4),  and  engaged  in  a  semi-military  capacity, 
corresponding  to  the  civic  functions  of  the  judges, 
with  whom  the  shoterim  are  frequently  coupled. 

17.  (Moa<rfas;     Alex.   Matria.)    The  "king's 
son,"  killed  by  Zichri  the  Ephraimitish  hero  in  the 
invasion  of  Judah  by  Pekah  king  of  Israel,  during 
the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  7).   The  personage 
thus  designated  is  twice  mentioned   in  connexion 
with  the  "  governor  of  the  city  "  (1  K.  xxii.  26  ; 
2  Chr.  xviii.  23),  and  appears  to  have  held  an  office 
of  importance  at  the  Jewish  court  (perhaps  acting 
as  viceroy  during  the  absence  of  the  king),  just  as 
the  queen  dowager  was  honoured  with  the  title  of 
"king's  mother"  (comp.  2  K.  xxiv.  12  with  Jer. 
xxix.  2),  or  gebirah,  i.  e.  "  mistress,"  or  "  powerful 
lady."     [MALCHIAH,  8.]      For  the  conjecture  of 
Geiger  see  JOASH,  4. 

18.  (Maaffd.)  The  governor  of  Jerusalem  In  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  appointed  by  the  king,  in  conjunc 
tion  with  Shaphan  and  Joah,  to  superintend  the 
restoration  of  the  temple  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8). 

19.  (Maaffaias  ;   Alex.  Maaaias.)    The  son  of 
Slmllum,  a  Levite  of  high  rank,  and  one  of  the  gate 
keepers  of  the  Temple  in  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim 
(Jer.  xxxv.  4  ;  comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  19). 

20.  (iT'DnD:    Maatrftiaj:     Alex.    Mownnas: 
Maasias,  Jer.  xxxii.  12  ;  Alex.  Maewreraias  ;  Masias, 
Jer.  li.  59).     A  priest  ;   ancestor  of  Baruch  and 
Seraiah,  the  sons  of  Neriah.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAASIA'I  C'E^O  :  Macurala  ;  Alex.  Matrai  : 
Maasa'f),  a  priest  who  after  the  return  from  Ba 
bylon  dwelt  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  ix.  12).  He  is 
apparently  the  same  as  AMASHAI  in  Neh.  xi.  13. 

MASSIAS  (Maaffdias:  J/assias).  The  same 
as  MASSEIAH,  20,  the  ancestor  of  Baruch  (Bar.  i.  1). 

MA'AZ  (}*JfD  :  Maets  :  Moos'),  son  of  Ram,  the 
firstborn  of  Jcrahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  27). 


MAAZI'AH  (nny»  :  MaaC«o  ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug. 
'  A^ia  :  Maazia).  1.'  One  of  the  priests  who  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  8).  From 
the  coincidence  between  many  of  the  names  of  the 
priests  in  the  lists  of  the  twenty-four  courses  esta 
blished  by  David,  of  those  who  signed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.),  and  those  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.),  it  would  seem  either 
that  these  names  were  hereditary  in  families,  or 
that  they  were  applied  to  the  families  themselves. 
This  is  evidently  the  case  with  the  names  of  the 
"  heads  of  the  people"  enumerated  in  Neh.  x.  14-27. 

2.  (•liT'TyE:  Maatrof  ;  Alex.Moo£a\:  Maaziaii), 
A  priest  hi  the  reign  of  David,  head  of  the  twenty- 
fourth  course  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  18;.  See  the  preceding. 

MABDA'I  (Ma/35cu  ;  Alex.  MavSai:  Bemeaii). 
The  same  as  BKNAIAH  (1  Esd.  ix.  34;  see  Ezr 
x.  35), 

M  2 


1C4 


MACALON 


MACALON  (Mait<i\u>v,  in  both  MSS. :  Bas- 
faro),  1  Esd.  v.  21.  Tills  name  is  the  equivalent  of 
MICHMASII  in  the  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  ("G.] 

MACCABEES,  THE  (of  McucKa&cuoi).  This 
title,  which  was  originally  the  surname  of  Judas, 
»ne  of  the  sons  of  Mattathias  (infr.  §2),  was  after 
wards  extended  to  the  heroic  family  of  which  he 
was  one  of  the  noblest  representatives,  and  in  a  still 
Wider  sense  to  the  Palestinian  martyrs  in  the  per 
secution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  [4  MACCABEKS], 
and  even  to  the  Alexandrine  Jews  who  suffered  for 
their  faith  at  an  earlier  time  [3  MACCABEES]. 
The  original  term  Maccabi  (6  MaKKa/3a?os)  has 
been  variously  derived.  Some  have  maintained  that 
it  was  formed  from  the  combination  of  the  initial 
letters  of  the  Hebrew  sentence,  "  Who  among  the 
gods  is  like  unto  thee,  Jehovah?"  (Ex.  xv.  11, 
Hebr.  V  3,  D.  D),  which  is  supposed  to  have  been 
inscribed  upon  the  banner  of  the  patriots  ;  or,  again, 
of  the  initials  of  the  simply  descriptive  title,  "  Mat 
tathias,  a  priest,  the  son  of  Johanan."  Kut  even 
if  the  custom  of  forming  such  words  was  in  use 
among  the  Jews  at  this  early  time,  it  is  obvious 
that  such  a  title  would  not  be  an  individual  title 
in  the  first  instance,  as  Maccabee  undoubtedly  was 
(1  Mace.  ii.  4),  and  still  remains  among  the  Jews 
(Kaphall,  Hist,  of  Jews,  i.  249).  Moreover  the 


MACCABEES,  THE 

orthography  of  the  word  in  CJitek  and  Syiiac 
(Ewald,  Geschichte,  iv.  3^2  note)  points  to  tiie 
form  *3pD,  and  not  *23JD.  Another  derivatioi 
has  been  proposed,  which,  although  direct  evidenc* 
is  wanting,  seems  satisfactory.  According  to  this, 
the  word  is  formed  from  112(50,  "a  hammer" 

(like  Mulachi,  Ewaltl,  353  note),  giving  a  sense  not 
altogether  unlike  that  in  which  Charles  Martel 
derived  a  surname  from  his  favourite  weapon,  and 
still  more  like  the  Malleus  Scotorum  and  Malleus 
Hacreticorum  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Although  the  name  Maccabees  has  gained  the 
widest  currency,  that  of  Asmonaeans,  or  Hasma* 
naeans,  is  the  proper  name  of  the  family.  The 
origin  of  this  name  also  has  been  disputed,  but  the 
obvious  derivation  from  Chashmon  (JDKT1,  'Affafiw 

vaios ;  comp.  Ges.  Thes.  5346),  great-grandfather  of 
Mattathias,  seems  certainly  correct.  How  it  earn* 
to  pass  that  a  man,  otherwise  obscure,  gave  his  mime 
to  the  family,  cannot  now  be  discovered ;  but  no 
stress  can  be  laid  upon  this  difficulty,  nor  upon  the 
fact  that  in  Jewish  prayers  (Herzfeld,  Gesch.  d.  Jiul. 
':.  264)  Mattathias  himself  is  called  ffashmonai* 

The  connexion  of  the  various  members  of  the 
Maccabaean  family  will  be  seen  from  the  accom 
panying  table: — 


THK  ASMONAEAN  FAMILY. 

Chasmon  ('of  the  sons  of  Joarlb,'  comp.  1  Chrou.  xxiv.  7). 
Johanan  ('luiaw)?)- 
Simeon  (^v/xewr,  Simon.    Comp.  2  Pet.  i  1). 

Mattathias  (Matthias,  Joseph.  B.  J.  L  1,  $3.) 
f  167  B.C. 


Jchanari  (Johannes) 
(Gaddis), 
f  '  Jotcph"  in  2  Mace,  viii 

f  161  B.C. 

Simon 
(Thassi) 
22),               f  135  B-c- 

Judas 
(Maccabseus), 
t  161  B.C. 

Eleazar                   JonathRO 
(Avaran),                (Appl.us) 

f!63BC.                     f  143  B.C. 

1 

Judaa, 
f  135  B.C. 

Johannes  Hyrcanus  I. 

f  106  B.C. 

Mattathias                 Daughter  =  Ptolei..ien8 
t  135  B.C.                     (1  Mace,  xvt  11,  18). 

Sf.lotnc  (Alexandra)  =  Aristobulns  I.          Antigonus. 

f  105  B.O.                   t  105  B.O. 

Janntens  Alexander  = 
t  78  B.C. 

=  Alexandra.           Sou.          Son 

Hyrcanus  11. 
t  30  B.C. 

Aristobulus  11. 

t  49BX5. 

Alexandra  =.  Alexander. 
f  28  B.C.     1     f  49  B.C. 

Antigonus. 
f37  B.O. 

Mariamne  =  Herod  the  Great, 
f  29  SjC. 

Aristobulus. 
fMBA 

The  original  authorities  for  the  history  of  the 
Maccabees  are  extremely  scanty  ;  but  for  the  course 
of  the  war  itself  the  first  book  of  Maccabees 
:s  a  most  trustworthy,  if  an  incomplete  witness. 
[MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF.]  The  second  book  adds 
some  important  details  to  the  history  of  the  earlier 
part  of  the  struggle,  and  of  the  events  which  im 
mediately  preceded  it ;  but  all  the  statements  which 
k  contains  require  close  examination,  and  must  be 
received  with  caution.  Joseph  us  follows  I  Mace., 
for  the  period  which  it  embraces,  very  closely,  but 
slight  additions  of  names  and  minuto  particulars 


indicate  that  he  was  in  possession  of  other  materials, 
probably  oral  traditions,  which  have  not  been  else 
where  preserved.  On  the  other  hand  there  are 
cases,  in  which,  from  haste  or  carelessness,  he  has 
misinterpreted  his  authority.  From  other  sources 
little  can  be  gleaned.  Hebrew  and  classical  litera 
ture  furnishes  nothing  more  than  a  few  trifling 
fragments  which  illustrate  Maccabaean  history.  Sc 
long  an  interval  elapsed  before  the  Hebrew  tra 
ditions  were  committed  to  writing,  that  facts,  when 
not  embodied  in  rites  or  precepts,  became  wholly 
distorted.  Classical  writei-s,  again,  were  little  likoly 


*  HcrzfcW  derives  the  name  from  QDri'  "  to 


uteel  ;"  «o  that  tt  t>ecomes  in  sense  a  synonym  of  "  Macraboe." 


MACCABEES,  THE 

to  cnronicle  a  conflict  which  probably  they  could 
uot  have  understood.  Of  the  great  work  of  Poly- 
bius — who  alone  might  have  been  expected  to  ap 
preciate  the  importance  of  the  Jewish  war — only 
fragments  remain  which  refer  to  this  period  ;  but 
the  omission  of  all  mention  of  the  Maccabaean  cam 
paign  in  the  corresponding  sections  of  Livy,  who 
follows  very  closely  in  the  track  of  the  Greek  his 
torian,  seems  to  prove  that  Polybius  also  omitted 
them.  The  account  of  the  Syrian  kings  in  Appian 
is  too  meagre  to  make  his  silence  remarkable ;  but 
indifference  or  contempt  must  be  the  explanation 
of  a  general  silence  which  is  too  widespread  to  be 
accidental.  Even  when  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  had 
directed  unusual  attention  to  the  past  fortunes  of  its 
defenders,  Tacitus  was  able  to  dismiss  the  Macca 
baean  conflict  in  a  sentence  remarkable  for  scornful 
carelessness.  "  During  the  dominion  of  the  Assy 
rians,  the  Medes,  and  the  Persians,  the  Jews,"  he 
says,  "  were  the  most  abject  of  their  dependent  sub 
jects.  After  the  Macedonians  obtained  the  su 
premacy  of  the  East,  King  Antiochus  endeavoured 
to  do  away  with  their  superstition,  and  introduce 
Greek  habits,  but  was  hindered  by  a  Parthian  war 
from  reforming  a  most  repulsive  people"  (teter- 
rimam  gentem,  Tac.  Hist.  v.  8)> 

1.  The  essential  causes  of  the  Maccabaean  Wai- 
have  been  already  pointed  out  [ANTIOCHUS  IV. 
vol.  i.  p.  75a].  The  annals  of  the  Maccabaean 
family,  "  by  whose  hand  deliverance  was  given  unto 
Israel "  (1  Mace.  v.  62),  present  the  record  of  its 
progress.  The  standard  of  independence  was  first 
raised  by  MATTATHIAS,  a  priest0  of  the  course  of 
Joarib,  which  was  the  first  of  the  twenty-four 
courses  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  7),  and  consequently  of  the 
noblest  blood  (comp.  Jos.  Vit.  i. ;  Grimm,  on  \Macc. 
ii.  1).  The  persecutions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
had  already  roused  his  indignation,  when  emis 
saries  of  the  king,  headed  by  Apelles  (Jos.  Ant. 
xii.  6,  §2),  came  to  MODIN,  where  he  dwelt,  and  re 
quired  the  people  to  offer  idolatrous  sacrifice  (1  Mac. 
ii.  1 5,  &c.).  Mattathias  rejected  the  overtures  which 
were  made  to  him  first,  and  when  a  Jew  came  to 
the  altar  to  renounce  his  faith,  slew  him,  and  after 
wards  Apelles,  "  as  Phinees — from  whom  he  was 
descended— did  unto  Zambri."  After  this  he  fled 
with  his  sons  to  the  mountains  (B.C.  168),  whither 
he  was  followed  by  numerous  bands  of  fugitives. 
Some  of  them,  not  in  close  connexion  with  Matta 
thias,  being  attacked  on  the  Sabbath,  offered  no 
resistance,  and  fell  to  the  number  of  a  thousand. 
When  Mattathias  heard  of  the  disaster  he  asserted 
the  duty  of  self-defence,  and  continued  the  war 
with  signal  success,  destroying  the  idolatrous  altars, 
and  restoring  the  observance  of  the  Law.  He 
seems,  however,  to  have  been  already  advanced  in 
years  when  the  rising  was  made,  and  he  did  not 
long  survive  the  fatigues  of  active  service.  He  died 
B.C.  166,  and  "was  buried  in  the  sepulchre  of  his 
fathers  at  Modin."  The  speech  which  he  is  said  to 
nave  addressed  to  his  sons  before  his  death  is  re 
markable  as  containing  the  first  distinct  allusion  to 
he  contents  of  Daniel,  a  book  which  seems  to  have 
exercisod  the  most  powerful  influence  on  the  Mucca- 


MACCABEES,  THE 


165 


*  The  short  notice  of  the  Jews  fci  Diodorus  Siculug  (Lib. 

.,  Ed.  l)  is  singularly  free  from  popular  misrepresenta 
tions,  many  of  which,  however,  lie  quotes  as  used  by  the 
counsellors  of  Antiochus  to  urge  the  king  to  extirpate  the 
nation  (Lib.  xxxiv.,  h'cl.  1). 

The  laisr  tradition,  by  a  natural  exaggeration,  made 
Win  high-priest.    Comp.  Herzfcltl,  Vetch,  i.  261,  379. 


baean  conflict  (1  Mace.  ii.  60;  comp.  Jos.  Ani 
xii.  6,  §3). 

2.  Mattathias  himself  named  JUDAS — appaieutlj 
hi.-,  third  son — as  his  successor  in  directing  the  war 
of  independence  (1  Mace.  ii.  66).     The  energy  and 
skill  of  "THK  MACCABEE"  (o  Ma/cKaj8a?os),  as 
Judas  is  often  called  in  2  Mace.,  fully  justified,  his 
father's  preference.     It  appears  that  he  had  already 
taken  a  prominent  part  in  the  first  secession  to  the 
mountains  (2  Mace.  v.  27,  where  Mattathias  is  not 
mentioned) ;  and  on  receiving  the  chief  command 
he   devoted  himself  to  the  task  of  combining  for 
common  action  those  who  were  still  faithful  to  the 
religion  of  their  fathers  (2  Mace.  viii.  1).     His 
first   enterprises   were   night   attacks   and   sudden 
surprises,  which  were  best  suited  to  the  troops  at 
his  disposal   (2   Mace.  viii.  6,   7);  and  when  his 
men  were  encouraged  by  these  means,  he  ventured 
on  more  important  operations,  and  defeated  Apollo- 
nius  (1  Mace.  iii.  10-12)  and  Seron  (1   Mace.  iii. 
13-24),  who  hearing  of  his  success  came  against 
him  with  very  superior  forces,  at  Bethhoron,  the 
scene  of  the  most  glorious  victories  of  the  Jews  iii 
earlier  and  later  times.    [BETH-HORON.]     Shortly 
afterwards  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  whose  resources  had 
been  impoverished  by  the  war  (I  Mace.  iii.  27-31), 
left  the  government  of  the  Palestinian  provinces  to 
Lysias,  while  he  himself  undertook  an  expedition 
against  Persia  in  the  hope  of  recruiting  his  treasury. 
Lysias  organised  an  expedition  against  Judas  ;  but 
his  army,  a  part  of  which  had  been  separated  from 
the  main  body  to  effect  a  surprise,  was  defeated  by 
Judas  at  Emmaus  with  great  loss  (B.C.  166),  after 
the  Jews  had  kept  a  solemn  fast  at  Mizpeh  (1  Mace, 
iii.  46-53);    and  in  the  next  year  Lysias  himself 
was  routed  at  Bethsura.     After  this  success  Judas 
was  able  to  occupy  Jerusalem,  except  the  "  tower  " 
(1   Mace.  vi.  18,  19),  and  he  purified  the  Temple 
( 1  Mace.  iv.  36,  41-53)  on  the  25th  of  Cisleu,  exactly 
three  years  after   its  profanation  (1  Mace.  i.  59 
[DEDICATION]  ;    Grimm,  on   1    Mace.   iv.   59). 
The  next  year  was  spent  in   wars   with   frontier 
nations  (1  Mace,  v.)  ;  bui  in  spite  of  continued 
triumphs  the  position  of  Judas  was  still  precarious. 
In  B.C.  163  Lysias,  with  the  young  king  Antiochu? 
Eupator,  took  Bethsura,  which  had  been  fortified 
by   Judas   as   the    key   of   the    Idumaean   border 
(1  Mace.  iv.  61),  after  having  defeated  the  patriots 
who  came  to  its  relief;  and  next  laid  siege  to  Jeru 
salem.     The  city  was  on  the  point  of  surrendering, 
when   the  approach   of  Philip,  who   claimed   the 
guardianship  of  the  king,  induced  Lysias  to  gua 
rantee  to  the  Jews  complete  liberty  of  religion. 
The    compact   thus   made   was   soon    broken,  but 
shortly  afterwards  Lysias  fell  into   the   hands   of 
Demetrius,  a  new  claimant  of  the  throne,  and  was 
put  to  death.     The  accession  of  Demetrius  brought 
with  it  fresh  troubles   to   the   patriot   Jews.     A 
large  party  of  their  countrymen,  with  ALCIMUS 
at  their  head,  gained  the  ear  of  the  king,  and  he 
sent  Nicanor  against  Judas.     Nicanor  was  defeated, 
first   at   Capharsalama,   and    again   in   a   decisive 
battle  at  Adasa,  near  to  the  glorious  field  of  Beth 
horon  (B.C.  161,  on  the  13th  Adar ;   1  Mace.  vii. 
49;  2  Mace.  xv.  36),  where  he  was  slain.'    This 
victory  was  the  gri  atest  of  Judas's  successes,  and 
practically  decided   the  question   of  Jewish  inde 
pendence,  but  it  was  followed  by  an  unexpected 
reverse.     Judas    employed   the  short   interval    01 
peace  which  followed  in  negotiating  a  favourable 
league  with  the  Komans.     But  in  the  same  year 
before  the  answer  of  the  senate  was  returned,  a  new 


166 


MACCABEES,  THE 


invasion  under  Bacchides  took  place.  The  Roman 
alliance  seems  to  have  alienated  many  of  the  extreme 
Jewish  party  from  Judas  (Midr.  Hhanuka,  quoted 
by  Raphall,  Hist,  of  Jews,  i.  325),  and  he  was  able 
only  to  gather  a  small  force  to  meet  the  sudden 
danger.  Of  this  a  large  part  deserted  him  on  the 
eve  of  the  battle ;  but  the  courage  of  Judas  was 
unshaken,  and  he  fell  at  Eleasa,  the  Jewish  Thermo 
pylae,  fighting  at  desperate  odds  against  the  in 
vaders.  His  body  was  recovered  by  his  brothers, 
and  buried  at  Modin  "  in  the  sepulchre  of  his 
fathers  "(B.C.  161).d 

3.  After  the  death  of  Judas  the  patriotic  party 
seems  to  have  been  for  a  short  time  wholly  dis 
organised,  and  it  was  only  by  the  pressure  of 
unparalleled  sufferings  that  they  were  driven  to 
renew  tha-  conflict.  For  this  purpose  they  offered 
the  command  to  JONATHAN,  sumamed  Apphus 

(.fcMBn,  the  wary),  the  youngest  son  of  Mattathias. 

The  policy  of  Jonathan  shows  the  greatness  of  the 
loss  involved  in  his  brother's  death.  He  made  no 
attempt  to  maintain  himself  in  the  open  country, 
but  retired  to  the  lowlands  of  the  Jordan  (1  Mace, 
ix.  42),  where  he  gained  some  advantage  over 
Bacchides  (B.C.  161 ),  who  made  an  attempt  to 
hem  in  and  destroy  his  whole  force.  Not  long 
afterwards  Alcimus  died  (B.C.  160),  and  Bacchides 
losing,  as  it  appears,  the  active  support  of  the 
Grecizing  party,  retired  from  Palestine.  Mean 
while  Jonathan  made  such  use  of  the  interval  of 
rest  as  to  excite  the  fears  of  his  Jewish  enemies  ; 
and  after  two  years  Bacchides,  at  their  request, 
again  took  the  field  against  Jonathan  (B.C.  158). 
This  time  he  seems  to  have  been  but  feebly  sup 
ported,  and  after  an  unsuccessful  campaign  he 
accepted  terms  which  Jonathan  proposed  ;  and  after 
his  departure  Jonathan  "judged  the  people  at 
Michmash"  (1  Mace.  ix.  73),  and  gradually  extended 
tiis  power.  The  claim  of  Alexander  Balas  to  the 
Syrian  crown  gave  a  new  importance  to  Jonathan 
\nd  his  adherents.  Demetrius  I.  empowered  him  to 
raise  an  army,  a  permi:,sion  which  was  followed  by 
the  evacuation  of  all  the  outposts  occupied  by  the 
Syrians  except  Bethsura,  but  Jonathan  espoused 
the  cause  of  Alexander,  and  refused  the  liberal 
offers  which  Demetrius  made,  when  he  heard  that 
the  Jews  had  resolved  to  join  his  rival  (B.C.  153). 
The  success  of  Alexander  led  to  the  elevation  of 
Jonathan,  who  assumed  the  high-priestly  office 
after  the  royal  nomination  •  at  the  feast  of  taber 
nacles  (1  Mace.  x.  21),  "the  greatest  and  holiest 
feast"  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  4,  §1);  and  not  long 
after  he  placed  the  king  under  fresh  obligations  by 
the  defeat  of  Apollonius,  a  general  of  the  younger 
Demetrius  (1  Mace.  x.).  [APOLLONius.]  On  the 
<eath  of  Alexander,  Demetrius  II.,  in  spite  of  the 
reverse  which  he  had  experienced,  sought  to  gain 
the  support  of  the  Jews  (B.C.  145) ;  but  after 
receiving  important  assistance  from  them  he  failed 
to  fulfil  his  promises,  and  on  the  appearance  of 
Antiochus  VI.,  Jonathan  attached  himself  to  his 


MACCABEES,  THE 

party,  and  though  he  fell  into  a  position  of  gieat 
peril  gained  an  important  victory  over  the  generalt 
of  Dvmetrius.  He  then  strengthened  his  position  by 
alliances  with  Rome  and  "  the  Lacedaemonians " 
[SPARTANS],  and  gained  several  additional  su> 
cesses  in  the  field  (B.C.  144)  ;  but  at  last  fell  a 
victim  to  the  treachery  of  Tryphon  (B.C.  144), 
who  feared  that  he  would  prove  an  obstacle  to  the 
design  which  he  had  formed  of  usurping  the  crown 
after  the  murder  of  the  young  Antiochus  (1  Mace, 
xi.  8-xii.  4). 

4.  As    soon    as    SIMON,'    the    last    remaining 
brother  of  the   Maccabaean   family,  heard  of  the 
detention  of  Jonathan  in    Ptolemais  by   Tryphon. 
he  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  the  patriot  party, 
who    were    already    beginning    to    despond,    and 
effectually  opposed   the   progress   of  the   Syrians. 
His  skill  in  war  had  been  proved  in  the  lifetime  of 
Judas  (1  Mace.  v.  17-23),  and  he  had  taken  an 
active  share  in  the  campaigns  of  Jonathan,  when 
he  was  intrusted  with  a  distinct  command  (1  Mace, 
xi.  59).     He  was  soon  enabled  to  consummate  the 
object  for  which  his  family  had  fought  gloriously, 
but   in  vain.     Tryphon,  after   carrying   Jonathan 
about  as  a  prisoner  for  some  little  time,  put  him  to 
c'eath,  and  then,  having  murdered  Antiochus,  seized 
the   throne.     On   this   Simon   made   overtures  to 
Demetrius  II.  (B.C.  143),  which  were  favourably 
received,  and  the  independence  of  the  Jews  was  at 
length   formally   recognised.      The  long  struggle 
was  now  triumphantly  ended,  and  it  remained  only 
to  reap  the  fruits  of  victory.     This  Simon  hastened 
to  do.    In  the  next  year  he  reduced  "  the  tower  "  at 
Jerusalem,  which  up  to  this  time  had  always  been 
occupied  by  the  Syrian  faction ;    and  during  the 
remainder  of  his  command  extended  and  confirmed 
the  power  of  his  countrymen  on  all  sides,  in  spite 
of  the  hostility  of  Antiochus  Sidetes,  who  after 
a  time  abandoned  the  policy  of  Demetrius.     [CEN- 
DEBAEUS.]     The  prudence  and  wisdom  for  which 
he  was  already  distinguished  at  the  time  of  his 
father's  death    (1    Mace.  ii.  65),  gained   for  the 
Jews   the  active  support  of  Rome  (1    Mace.  rv. 
16-21),  in  addition  to  the  confirmation  of  earlier 
treaties.     After   settling   the  external  relations  of 
the  new  state  upon  a  sure  basis,  Simon  regulated 
its  internal  administration.     He  encouraged  trade 
and  agriculture,  and  secured  all  the  blessings  of 
peace  (1  Mace.  xiv.  4-15).     But  in  the  midst  of 
successes  abroad  and  prosperity  at  home,  he  fell  o 
victim   to   domestic  treachery.      Ptolemaeus,   the 
governor  of  Jericho,   his    son-in-law,   aspired    to 
usui-p   the    supreme    power,   and    having    invited 
Simon   and  two  of  his  sons  to  a  banquet  in  his 
castle  at  D6k,  he  murdered  them  there  B.C.  135 
(1  Mace.  xvi.  11-16). 

5.  The  treason  of  Ptolemaeus  failed  in  its  object. 
JOHANNES  HYRCANUS,  one  of  the  sons  of  Simon, 
escaped   from    the    plot   by   which   his    life   was 
threatened,  and  at  once  assumed  the  government 
(B.C.    135).     At    first   he  was   hard   pressed   by 
Antiochus  Sidetes,  and  only  able  to  preserve  Jem- 


d  Judos  (like  Mattathias)  is  represented  in  later  times 
as  high.priest  Even  Josephus  (Ant.  xil.  11,  }2)  speaks  of 
the  high-priesthood  of  Judas,  and  also  says  that  he  was 
elected  by  "  the  people  "  on  the  death  of  Alcimus  (xii.  10, 
}6).  But  It  is  evident  from  1  Mace.  ix.  18,  56,  that  Judas 
died  some  time  before  Alcimus ;  and  elsewhere  (Ant.  xx. 
10,  $3)  Josephiis  himself  says  that  the  high-priesthood  was 
vacant  for  seven  years  all'  T  iho  death  of  Alriniiis,  and  that 
Jonathan  was  the  first  ol  the  Asmunitean  family  who  held 
Hie  •  I'.ke. 


•  It  does  not  appear  that  any  direct  claimant  to  the 
high-priesthood  remained.  Onias  the  younger,  who  inhe 
rited  the  claim  of  his  lather  Onias,  the  last  legitimate  high- 
priest,  had  retired  to  Egypt. 

'  He  was  surnamed  "  Thassl "  (eacreri,  eaerai's) ;  but 
the  meaning  of  the  title  is  uncertain.  Michaelis  (Grimm, 
on  1  Mace.  ii.x  thiuUc  that  it  represents  tht  I'j.ildM 


MACCABEES,  THE 


MACCABEES,  THE 


107 


salem    on   condition   of  dismantling    the  fortifica-  !  forced  to  find  a  refuge  in  the  lowlands  near  Jericho, 
tio'is  and  submitting  to  a  tribute,  B.C.  133.     The   and   after    some    slight    successes   Jonathan    wai 


foreign  and  civil  wars  of  the  Seleucidae  gave  him 
afterwards  abundant  opportunities  to  retrieve  his 
losses.  He  reduced  Idumaea  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii. 
9,  §1),  confirmed  the  alliance  with  Rome,  and  at 
length  succeeded  in  destroying  Samaria,  the  hated 
rival  of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  109.  The  external  splen 
dour  of  his  government  was  marred  by  the  growth 
of  internal  divisions  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  10,  §5,  6);  but 
John  escaped  the  fate  of  all  the  older  members  of 
his  family,  and  died  in  peace  B.C.  106-5.  His 
eldest  son  Aristotmlus  1.,  who  succeeded,  was  the 
first  who  assumed  the  kingly  title,  though  Simon 
had  enjoyed  the  fulness  of  the  kingly  power. 

6.  Two  of  the  first  generation  of  the  Maccabaean 
family  still  remain  to  be  mentioned.  These,  though 
they   did   not   attain   to   the   leadership   of   their 
countrymen  like  their  brothers,  shared  their  fate — 
Eleazer   [ELEAZER,  8]    by  a  noble  act  of  self- 
devotion,  John  [JOHN,  2],  apparently  the   eldest 
brother,  by  treachery.     The  sacrifice  of  the  family 
was  complete,  and  probably  history  offers  no  pa 
rallel  to  the  undaunted  courage  with  which  such  a 
band  dared  to  face  death,  one  by  one,  in  the  main 
tenance  of  a  holy  cause.     The  result  was  worthy 
of  the  sacrifice.     The  Maccabees  inspired  a  subject- 
people  with  independence ;  they  found  a  few  per 
sonal  followers,  and  they  left  a  nation. 

7.  The  great  outlines  of  the  Maccabaean  contest, 
which   are  somewhat  hidden   in   the   annals  thus 
briefly  epitomised,  admit  of  being  traced  with  fair 
distinctness,   though   many   points    must    always 
remain  obscure  from  our  ignorance  of  the  numbers 
and  distribution  of  the  Jewish  population,  and  of 
the  general  condition  of  the  people  at  the  time. 
The    disputed    succession    to   the   Syrian    throne 
(B  c.  153)  was  the  political  turning  point  of  the 
struggle,   which   may   thus   be  divided   into  two 
great  periods.     During  the  first  period  (B.C.  168- 
153)    the   patriots    maintained   their    cause  with 
varying   success    against    the   whole   strength    of 
Syria:    during  the   second    (B.C.    153-139),  they 
were  courted  by  rival  factions,  and  their  independ 
ence  was  acknowledged  from  time  to  time,  though 
pledges  given  in  times  of  danger  were  often  broken 
when  the  danger  was  over.     The  paramount  im 
portance  of  Jerusalem  is  conspicuous  throughout 
the  whole  war.     The  loss  of  the  Holy  City  re 
duced  the  patriotic  party  at  once  to  the  condition  of 
mere  guerilla  bands,  issuing  from  "  the  mountains" 
or  "  the  wilderness,"  to  make  sudden  forays  on  the 
neighbouring  towns.     This  was  the  first  aspect  of 
the  war  (2  Mace.  viii.  1-7  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  ii.  45) ; 
and  the  scene  of  the  early  exploits  of  Judas  was 
the  hill-country  to  the  N.E.  of  Jerusalem,  from 
which  he  drove  the  invading  armies  at  the  famous 
battle-fields  of  BETH-HORON  and  KMMAUS  (Nice- 
polis).      The  occupation  of  Jerusalem   closed   the 
first  act  of  tne   war   (B.C.    165)  ;   and  after  this 
Judas  made  rapid  attacks  on  every  side — in  Idu 
maea,  Ammon,  Gilead,  Galilee — but  he  made  no 
permanent  settlement   in  the   countries  which  he 
ravaged.     Bethsura  was  fortified  as  a   defence  of 
Jerusalem  on  the  S. ;  but  the  authority  of  Judas 
seems  to  have  been  limited  to  the  immediate  neigh 
bourhood  of  Jerusalem,  though  the  influence  of  his 
name  extended  more  widely   (1   Mace.  vii.   50,  % 
fT)  *Iov$a) .     On  the  death  of  Judas  the  patriots 
were  reduced  to  as  en-eat  distress  as  at  their  first 


allowed  to  settle  at  Michmash  undisturbed,  though 
the  whole  country  remained  absolutely  under  th« 
sovereignty  of  Syria.  So  far  it  seemed  that  little 
had  been  gained  when  the  contest  between  Alex 
ander  Balas  and  Demetrius  I.  opened  a  now  period 
(B.C.  153).  Jonathan  was  empowered  to  raise 
troops :  the  Jewish  hostages  were  restored ;  many 
of  the  fortresses  were  abandoned ;  and  apparently 
a  definite  district  was  assigned  to  the  government 
of  the  hig4i-priest.  The  former  unfruitful  con 
flicts  at  length  produced  their  full  harvest.  The 
defeat  at  Eleasa,  like  the  Swiss  St.  Jacob,  had 
shown  the  worth  of  men  who  could  face  all  odds, 
and  no  price  seemed  too  great  to  secure  their  aid. 
When  the  Jewish  leaders  had  once  obtained  legiti 
mate  power  they  proved  able  to  maintain  it,  though 
their  general  success  was  chequered  by  some  re 
verses.  The  solid  power  of  the  national  party  was 
seen  by  the  slight  effect  which  was  produced  by  the 
treacherous  murder  of  Jonathan.  Simon  was  able 
it  once  to  occupy  his  place,  and  carry  out  his  plans. 
The  Syrian  garrison  was  withdrawn  from  Jeru 
salem  ;  Joppa  was  occupied  as  a  sea-port ;  and 
"four  governments"  (reVcrapes  vo/j.oi,  xi.  57, 
xiii.  37) — probably  the  central  parts  of  the  old 
kingdom  of  Judah,  with  three  districts  taken  from 
Samaria  (x.  38,  39) — were  subjected  to  the  sove 
reign  authority  of  the  high-priest. 

8.  The  war,  thus  brought  to  a  noble  issue,  if  less 
famous    is   not   less   glorious  than   any  of  those 
in  which  a  few  brave  men  have  successfully  main 
tained  the  cause  of  freedom  or  religion  against  over 
powering  might.     The  answer  of  Judas  to  those 
who  counselled  retreat  (1   Mace.  ix.  10)  was  as 
true-hearted  as  that  of  Leonidas  ;  and  the  exploits 
of  his  followers  will  bear  favourable   comparison 
with   those   of  the   Swiss,  or   the  Dutch,   or   the 
Americans.     It  would  be  easy  to  point   out   pa 
rallels  in  Maccabaean  history  to  the  noblest  traits 
of  patriots  and  martyrs  in  other  countries ;  but  it 
may  be  enough  here  to  claim  for  the  contest  the 
attention    which    it    rarely   receives.      It   seems, 
indeed,  as  if  the  indifference  of  classical  writers 
were  perpetuated  in  our  own  days,  though  there  is 
no   straggle — not   even   the   wars   of  Joshua    or 
David — which   is  more  profoundly  interesting   to 
the  Christian  student.     For  it  is  not  only  in  their 
victory  over  external  difficulties  that  the  heroism  of 
the  Maccabees  is  conspicuous:    their  real  success 
was  us  much  imperilled  by  internal  divisions  as  bj 
foreign  force.     They  liad  to  contend  on   the   one 
hand  against  open  and  subtle  attempts  to  introduce 
Greek  customs,  and  on  the  other  against  an  extreme 
Pharisaic  party,  which  is  seen  from  time  to  time  op 
posing  their  counsels  (1  Mace.  vii.  12-lb;  comp.  §2, 
end).     And  it  was  from  Judas  and  those  whom  he 
inspired  that  the  old  faith  received  its  last  develop 
ment  and  final  impress  before  the  coming  of  our  Lord. 

9.  Fcr  that  view  of  the  Maccabaean  war  which 
regards    t  only  as  a  civil  and  not  as  a  religious 
conflict,  is  essentially  one-sided.     If  there  were  no 
other  evidence  than  the  book  of  Daniel — whatever 
opinion  be  held  as  to  the  date  of  it — that  alone 
would  show  how  deeply  the  noblest  hopes  of  tho 
theocracy  were  centred  in  the  success  of  the  struggle 
When  the  feelings  of  the  nation  were  thus  again 
turned  with  fresh  power  to  their  ancient  faith,  we 
might  expect  that  there  would  be  a  new  creative 


rising  ;   and  as   Bacchides     had  the   keys   of  the  i  epodi  in  Uie  national  literature :  or,  if  the  form  of 
'•  mountains   of  Kihraim"   (in.    50)    they    wer? !  Hebrew  composition  was  already  Sxad  by  sacred 


108 


MACCABEES,  THE 


types,  a  prophet  or  psalmist  would  express  the 
thoughts  ot'  the  new  age  after  the  models  of  old 
tims.  Yet  in  part  at  least  the  leaders  of  Macca- 
baean  times  felt  that  they  were  separated  by  a  real 
chasm  from  t?e  times  of  the  kingdom  or  of  the 
exile.  If  they  looked  for  a  prophet  in  the  future, 
they  acknowledged  that  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
was  not  among  them.  The  volume  of  the  pro 
phetic  writings  was  completed,  and,  as  far  as 
appears,  no  one  ventured  to  imitate  its  contents. 
But  the  Hagiographa,  though  they  were  already 
long  fixed  as  a  definite  collection  [CANON],  were 
not  equally  far  removed  from  imitation.  The 
apocalyptic  visions  of  Daniel  [DANIEL,  §1]  served 
as  a  pattern  for  the  visions  incorporated  in  the 
book  of  Enoch  [ENOCH,  BOOK  OF]  ;  and  it  has 
been  commonly  supposed  that  the  Psalter  contains 
compositions  of  the  Maccabaean  date.  This  sup 
position,  which  is  at  variance  with  the  best  evi 
dence  which  can  be  obtained  on  the  history  of  the 
Canon  can  only  be  received  upon  the  clearest  in 
ternal  e  proof;  and  it  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  the  hypothesis  is  not  as  much  at  variance 
with  sound  interpretation  as  with  the  history  of 
the  Canon.  The  extreme  forms  of  the  hypothesis, 
as  that  of  Hitzig,  who  represents  Ps.  1,2,  44,  60, 
and  all  the  last  three  books  of  the  Psalms  (Ps. 
73-150)  as  Maccabaean  (Grimm,  1  Mace.  EM. 
§9,  3),  or  of  Just.  Olshausen  (quoted  by  Lwald, 
Ja/irb.  1853,  pp.  250  ff.),  who  is  inclined  to  bring 
the  whole  Psalter  with  very  few  exceptions  to  that 
date,  need  only  be  mentioned  as  indicating  the  kind 
of  conjecture  which  finds  currency  on  such  a  sub 
ject.  The  real  controversy  is  confined  to  a  much 
narrower  field ;  and  the  psalms  which  have  been 
referred  with  the  greatest  show  of  reason  to  the 
Maccabaean  age  are  Ps.  44,  60,  74,  79,  80,  83. 
It  has  been  argued  that  all  these  speak  of  the 
dangers  to  which  the  house  and  people  of  God  were 
exposed  from  heathen  enemies,  at  a  period  later  than 
the  captivity  ;  and  the  one  ground  for  referring 
them  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  is  the  general 
coincidence  which  they  present  with  some  features 
of  the  Greek  oppression.  But  if  it  be  admitted 
that  the  psalms  in  question  are  of  a  later  date  than 
the  captivity,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  they  are 
Maccabaean.  On  the  contrary  they  do  not  contain 
the  slightest  trace  of  those  internal  divisions  of  the 
people  which  were  the  most  markeJ  features  of  the 
Maccabaean  struggle.  The  dangers  then  were  as 
much  from  within  as  from  without;  and  party 
jealousies  brought  the  divine  cause  to  the  greatest 
peril  (Ewald,  Psalmen,  355).  It  is  incredible 
that  a  series  of  Maccabaean  psalms  should  contain 
no  allusion  to  a  system  of  enforced  idolatry,  or  to  a 
temporising  priesthood,  or  to  a  faithless  multitude. 
And  while  the  obscurity  which  hangs  over  the 
history  of  the  Persian  supremacy  from  the  time  of 
Nehemiah  to  the  invasion  of  Alexander,  makes  it 
impossible  to  fix  with  any  precision  a  date  to  which 
the  psalms  can  be  referred,  the  one  glimpse  which 
is  given  of  the  state  of  Jerusalem  in  the  interval 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  7)  is  such  as  to  show  that  they 

g  The  historical  argument  for  the  completion  of  the 
present  collection  of  the  Psalms  before  the  compilation  of 
Chronicles  is  very  well  given  by  Ewald  (Jahrb.  1 853,  4, 
pp.  20-32)  In  1  Chr.  xvl.  7-36  passages  occur  which  are 
derived  from  Ps.  cv.,  cvi.,  xcvl.,  of  which  the  first  two  are 
among  the  latest  hymns  in  the  Psalter. 

*  It  must,  however,  be  noticed  that  the  formula  ol  quo 
tation  prefixed  to  the  words  from  Ps.  Ixxix.  in  1  Mace. 
Tii.  17  Is  not  that  in  which  Scripture  is  quoted  in  tattr 
b"»ki,  as  is  commonly  said.  It  is  not  us  yffpanrtu..  or 


MACCABEES,  THE 

may  well  have  found  some  sufficient  occuaion  in 
the  ware  and  disorders  which  attended  the  decliue 
of  the  Persian  power  (comp.  Ewald).  It  may, 
however,  be  doubted  whether  the  arguments  for  a 
post-Babylonian  date  are  conclusive.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  psalms  themselves  which  may  not 
apply  to  the  circumstances  which  attended  the 
overthrow  of  the  kingdom  ;  and  it  seems  incredible 
that  the  desolation  of  the  Temple  should  have  given 
occasion  to  no  hymns  of  pious  •  sorrow. 

10.  The  collection  of  the  so-called  Psalms  of  So 
lomon  furnishes  a  strong  continuation  of  the  belief 
that  all  the  canonical  Psalms  are  earlier  than  the 
Maccabaean  era.  This  collection,  which  bears  the 
clearest  trace*  cf  unity  of  authorship,  is,  almost 
beyond  question,  a  true  Maccabaean  work.  There 
is  every  reason  to  believe  (Ewald,  Geschichte,  iv, 
343)  that  the  book  was  originally  composed  in 
Hebrew  ;  and  it  presents  exactly  those  characteristics 
which  are  wanting  in  the  other  (conjectural)  Macca 
baean  Psalms.  "  The  holy  ones"  (ol  itffioi,  DTDO 
[AssiDAEANs]  ;  01  <po0ovfj.ffoi  rbv  xvpiov ,  appear 
throughout  as  a  distinct  class,  struggling  against 
hypocrites  and  men-pleasers,  who  make  the  observ 
ance  of  the  law  subservient  to  their  own  interests 
(Ps.  Sol.  iv.,  xiii.-xv.).  The  sanctuary  is  polluted 
by  the  abominations  of  professing  sen-ants  of  God 
before  it  is  polluted  by  the  heathen  (Ps.  Sol.  i.  8,  ii. 
1  ff.,  viii.  8  ff.,  xvii.  15  ff.).  National  unfaithful 
ness  is  the  cause  of  national  punishment ;  and  the 
end  of  trial  is  the  "justification"  of  God  (Ps.  Sol.  ii. 
16,  iii.  3,  iv.  9,  viii.  7  ff.,  ix.).  On  the  other  hand 
there  is  a  holiness  of  works  set  up  in  some  passages 
which  violates  the  divine  mean  of  Scripture  (Ps. 
Sol.  i.  2,  3,  iii.  9) ;  and,  while  the  language  is  full  of 
echoes  of  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  impossible  not  to 
feel  that  it  wants  something  which  we  find  in  all 
the  canonical  writings.  The  historical  allusions  in 
the  Psalms  of  Solomon  are  as  unequivocal  as  the 
description  which  they  give  of  the  state  of  tht 
Jewish  nation.  An  enemy  "  threw  down  the  strong 
walls  "  of  Jerusalem,  and  "  Gentiles  went  up  to  the 
altar"  (Ps.  Sol.  ii.  1-3 ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  31 ).  In  his 
pride  "  he  wrought  all  things  in  Jerusalem,  as  the 
Gentiles  in  their  cities  do  for  their  gods"  (Ps.  Sol. 
xvii.  16).  "Those  who  loved  the  assemblies  of 
the  saints  (ffvvayuyht  &ffian>),  wandered  (lege 
fv\avuvro)  in  deserts"  (Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  19  ;  comp. 
1  Mace.  i.  54,  ii.  28) ;  and  there  "  was  no  one  in 
the  midst  of  Jerusalem  who  did  mercy  and  truth  " 
(  Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  1 7  ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  38).  One  Psalm 
(viii.)  appears  to  refer  to  a  somewhat  later  period. 
The  people  wrought  wickedly,  and  God  sent  upon 
them  a  spirit  of  error.  He  brought  one  "  from  the 
extremity  of  the  earth"  (viii.  10  ;  comp.  1  Marc, 
vii.  1, — "  Demetrius  from  Home").  "The  princes 
of  the  land  met  him  with  joy  "  (1  Mace.  vii.  5-8) ; 
and  he  entered  the  land  in  safety  (1  Mace.  vii. 
9-12, — Bacchides  his  general),  "  as  a  father  in 
peace"  (1  Maw.  vii.  15).  Then  "he  slew  the 
princes  and  every  one  wise  in  counsel"  (1  Mace, 
vii.  16),  and  "poured  out  the  blood  of  those  who 
dwelt  in  Jerusalem"  (1  Marc.  vii.  17).1  The  pur- 

XO.TO.  TO  ytypa(ifj.evov,  but  Kara  rov  Aoyov  ov  cypaifit, 
which  is  variously  altored  by  different  authorities. 

'  The  prominence  given  to  the  slaughter  of  the  Asii- 
daeans  both  in  1  Mace,  and  in  the  psalm,  and  the  share 
which  the  Jews  had  directly  in  thr  second  pollution  of 
Jerusalem,  seem  to  fix  the  events  of  the  psalm  to  the  time 
of  Demetrius ;  but  the  close  similarity  (with  this  excep. 
tlon)  between  the  invasions  of  Apollonius  and  Bacchides 
may  leave  some  doubt  as  to  the  identification.  (Comp»rf 
1  Mace  1.  29-38.  with  PB.  Sol.  viii.  16-24.) 


MACCABEES,  THE 

port  of  these  evils,  as  a  retributive  and  punfyi-i? 
judgment,  leads  to  the  most  remarkable  feature  of 
the  Psalms,  the  distinct  expression  of  Messw^e 
hopes.  In  this  respect  they  offer  a  direct  control 
to  the  books  of  Maccabees  (1  Mace.  xiv.  41).  The 
sorrow  and  the  triumph  are  seen  together  in  their 
spiritual  aspect,  and  the  expectation  of  "  an  anointed 
Lord  "  (xpurrbs  Kvpios,  Ps.  Sol.  xvii.  36  (xviii.  8) ; 
eomp.  Luke  ii.  11)  follows  directly  after  the  de 
scription  of  the  impious  assaults  of  Gentile  enemies 
(Ps.  Sol.  xvii. ;  comp.  Dan.  xi.  45,  xii.).  "  Blessed," 
it  is  said,  "  are  they  who  are  bora  in  those  days,  to 
sec  the  good  things  which  the  Lord  shall  do  for  the 
generation  to  come.  [When  men  are  brought]  be 
neath  the  rod  of  correction  of  an  anointed  Lord  (or 
the  Lord's  anointed,  inrb  pdfiSov  -rraiSfias  xpiffrov 
Kvpiov)  in  the  fear  of  his  God,  in  wisdom  of  spirit 
and  of  righteousness  and  of  might"  .  .  .  then 
there  shall  be  a  "  good  generation  in  the  fear  of 
God,  in  the  days  of  mercy  "  (Ps.  Sol.  xviii.  6-10). 

11.  Elsewhere  there  is  little  which  marks  the 
distinguishing  religious  character  of  the  era.  The 
notice  of  the  Maccabaean  heroes  in  the  book  of 
Daniel  is  much  more  general  and  brief  than  the  cor 
responding  notice  of  their  great  adversary ;  but  it 
is  not  on  that  account  less  important  as  illustrating 
the  relation  of  the  famous  chapter  to  the  simple 
history  of  the  period  which  it  embraces.  Nowhere  is 
it  more  evident  that  facts  are  shadowed  forth  by 
the  prophet  only  iu  their  typical  bearing  oil  the 
development  of  God's  kingdom.  In  this  aspect  the 
passage  itself  (Dan.  xi.  29-35)  will  supersede  in  a 
great  measure  the  necessity  of  a  detailed  comment. 
"  At  the  time  appointed  [in  the  spring  of  168  B.C.] 
he  [Antiochus  Epiph.]  shall  return  and  come  to 
ward  the  south  [Egypt]  ;  but  it  shall  not  be  as  the 
first  time,  so  also  the  last  time  [though  his  first 
attempts  shall  be  successful,  in  the  end  he  shall  fail]. 
For  the  ships  of  Chittim  [the  Romans]  shall  come 
against  him,  and  he  shall  be  cast  down,  and  return, 
and  be  very  wroth  against  the  holy  covenant ;  and 
he  shall  do  [his  will]  ;  yea  he  shall  return,  and 
have  intelligence  with  them  that  forsake  the  holy 
covenant  (comp.  Dan.  viii.  24,  25).  And  forces  from 
him  [at  his  bidding]  shall  stand  [remain  in  Judaea  as 
garrisons ;  comp.  1  Mace.  i.  33,  34]  ;  and  they  shall 
pollute  the  sanctuary,  the  stronghold,  and  shall  take 
away  the  daily  [sacrifice] ;  and  they  shall  set  up 
the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate  [1  Mace.  i. 
45-47].  And  such  as  do  wickedly  against  (or 
i-ather  such  as  condemn)  the  covenant  shall  he  cor 
rupt  [to  apostasy]  by  smooth  words ;  but  the  people 
that  know  their  God  shall  be  strong  and  do  [ex 
ploits].  And  they  that  understand  [know  God  and 
His  law]  among  the  people,  shall  instruct  many : 
yet  they  shall  fall  by  the  stcord  and  by  flame,  by 
captivity  and  by  spoil  [some]  days  (1  Mace.  i. 
60-64).  Now  when  they  shall  fall,  the;/  shall  be 
ho'.pen  with  a  little  help  (1  Mace.  i.  28 ;  2  Mace. 
v.  27,  Judas  Mace,  with  nine  others  ....);  and 
many  shall  cleave  to  them  [th«  faithful  followers  of 
the  law]  with  hypocrisy  [ilretding  the  prowess  of 
Judas :  1  Mace.  ii.  46,  and  yet  ready  to  fall  away 
at  the  first  opportunity,  1  Mace.  vii.  6].  And  some 
of  them  of  understanding  shall  fall,  to  make  trial 
among  them,  and  t^  purge  aiia  to  make  them  white, 
unto  the  time  of  the  end  ;  because  [the  end  is]  yet 
for  a  time  appointed."  From  this  point  the  prophet 
describes  in  detail  the  godlossness  of  the  great  op 
pressor  (ver.  36-39 j,  and  then  his  last  fortunes 
and  death  (ver.  40-45),  but  says  nothing  if  the 
triumph  of  the  Maccabees  or  ot  the  restoration  of 


MACCABEES,  THE  Ififi 

the  Temple,  which  preceded  the  last  event  by  some 
months.  This  omission  is  scarcely  intelligible 
unless  we  regard  the  facts  as  symbolising  a  higher 
struggle — a  truth  wrongly  held  by  those  who  fiom 
early  i.-mes  referred  verses  36-45  only  to  Antichrist, 
the  antitype  of  Antiochus — in  which  that  recovery 
of  the  earthly  temple  had  no  place.  And  at  any 
rate  it  shows  the  imperfection  of  that  view  of  the 
whole  chapter  by  which  it  is  regarded  as  a  mere 
transcription  of  history. 

12.  The  history  of  the  Maccabees  dots  not  con 
tain  much  which  illustrates  in  ietail  the  religious 
or  social  progress  of  the  Jews.  It  is  obvious  that 
the  period  must  rot  only  have  intensified  old  beliefs, 
but  also  have  rolled  out  elemer  ts  which  were  latent 
in  them.  One  docttine  at  least,  that  of  a  resurrec 
tion,  and  even  of  a  material  resurrection  (2  Mace, 
xiv.  46),  was  brought  out  into  the  most  distinct 
apprehension  by  suffering.  "  It  is  good  to  look  for 
the  hope  from  God,  to  be  raised  up  again  by  Him" 
(vd\.iv  avaffT-f<(re<rQai  inr'  O.VTOV),  was  the  sub 
stance  of  the  martyr's  answer  to  his  judge  ;  *'  as  for 
thee,  thou  shalt  have  no  resurrection  to  life" 
(avdirraffis  els  &ai\v,  2  Mace.  vii.  14;  comp.  vi. 
26,  xiv.  46).  "  Our  brethren,"  says  another,  "  have 
fallen,  having  endured  a  short  pain  leading  to  ever 
lasting  life,  being  under  the  covenant  of  God " 
(2  Mace.  yii.  36,  ir6vov  hevvdov  fo>T)s).  And  as  it 
was  believed  that  an  interval  elapsed  between  death 
and  judgment,  the  dead  were  supposed  to  be  in 
some  measure  still  capable  of  profiting  by  the  inter 
cession  of  the  living.  Thus  much  is  certainly  ex 
pressed  in  the  famous  passage,  2  Mace.  xii.  43-45, 
though  the  secondary  notion  of  a  purgatorial  state 
is  in  no  way  implied  in  it.  On  the  other  hand  it 
is  not  very  clear  how  far  the  future  judgment  was 
supposed  to  extend.  If  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked  heathen  in  another  life  had  formed  a  definite 
article  of  belief,  it  might  have  been  expected  to  be 
put  forward  more  prominently  (2  Maec.  vii.  17, 
19,  35,  &c.),  though  the  passages  in  question  may 
be  understood  of  sufferings  after  death,  and  not 
only  of  earthly  sufferings ;  but  for  the  apostate 
Jews  there  was  a  certain  judgment  in  reserve  (vi. 
26).  The  firm  faith  in  the  righteous  providence  of 
God  shown  in  the  chastening  of  His  people,  as  con 
trasted  with  His  neglect  of  other  nations,  is  another 
proof  of  the  widening  view  of  the  spiritual  world, 
which  is  characteristic  of  the  epoch  (2  Mace.  iy. 
16,  17,  v.  17-20,  vi.  12-16,  &c.).  The  lessons  of 
the  captivity  were  reduced  to  moral  teaching;  and 
in  the  same  way  the  doctrine  of  the  ministry  of 
angels  assumed  an  importance  which  is  without 
parallel  except  in  patriarchal  times  [2  MACCABEES]  , 
It  was  perhaps  from  this  cause  also  that  the  Mes 
sianic  hope  was  limited  in  its  range.  The  vivid 
perception  of  spiritual  truths  hindered  the  spread  of 
a  hope  which  had  been  cherished  in  a  material 
form ;  and  a  pause,  as  it  were,  was  made,  in  which 
men  gained  new  points  of  sight  from  which  to  con 
template  the  old  promises. 

13.  The  various  glimpses  of  national  life  which 
can  be  gained  during  the  period,  show  on  the  whole 
a  steady  adherence  to  the  Mosaic  law.  Probably 
the  law  was  never  more  rigorously  fulfilled.  The 
importance  of  the  Antiochian  persecution  in  fixing 
the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  has  been  already 
noticed.  [CANON,  vol.  i.  251.]  The  books  of  the 
law  were  specially  sought  out  for  destruction  (J 
Mace.  i.  56,  57,  iii.  48);  and  their  distinctive 
value  was  in  consequence  proportionately  increased 
To  use  the  words  of  1  Mace.,  "  the  holv  books ' 


170 


MACCABEES,  THd 


.'a  TCI  &yia  TO.  tv  x(Pff^v  W*")  were  ^e^ 
to  make  all  other  comfort  superfluous  ( 1  Mace.  xii. 
9).  The  strict  observance  of  the  sabbath  (1  Mace. 
ii.  32 ;  2  Mace.  vi.  1 1,  viii.  26,  &c.)  and  of  the  Sab 
batical  year  (1  Mace.  vi.  53),  the  law  of  the  Nazarites 
(1  Mace,  iii.  49),  and  the  exemptions  from  military 
service  (1  Mace.  iii.  36),  the  solemn  prayer  and  fast 
ing  (1  Mace.  iii.  47  ;  2  Mace.  x.  25,  &c.),  carry  us 
back  to  early  timfs.  The  provision  for  the  maimed, 
the  aged,  and  the  bereaved  (2  Mace.  viii.  28,  30),  was 
in  the  spirit  of  the  law ;  and  the  new  feast  of  the 
dedication  was  a  homage  to  the  old  rites  (2  Mace. 
i.  9)  while  it  was  a  proof  of  independent  life.  The 
interruption  of  the  succession  to  the  high-priesthood 
was  the  most  important  innovation  which  was 
made,  and  one  which  prepared  the  way  for  the  dis 
solution  of  the  state.  After  various  arbitrary 
changes  the  office  was  left  vacant  for  seven  years 
upon  the  death  of  A  lei  m  us.  The  last  descendant 
of  Jozadak  (OciasY  in  whose  family  it  had  been 
for  nearly  four  centuries,  fled  to  Egypt,  and  esta 
blished  a  schismatic  worship ;  and  at  last,  when  the 
support  of  the  Jews  became  important,  the  Macca- 
baean  leader,  Jonathan,  of  the  family  of  Joarib, 
was  elected  to  the  dignity  by  the  nomination  of  the 
Syrian  king  (1  Mace.  x.  20),  whose  will  was  con 
firmed,  as  it  appears,  by  the  voice  of  the  people 
(comp.  1  Mace.  xiv.  35). 

14.  Little  can  be  said  of  the  condition  of  litera 
ture  aiid  the  arts  which  has  not  been  already  anti 
cipated.  In  common  intercourse  the  Jews  used  the 
Aramaic  dialect  which  was  established  after  the 
return  :  this  was  "  their  own  language  "  (2  Mace, 
vii.  8,  21,  27,  xii.  37);  but  it  is  evident  from  the 
narrative  quoted  that  they  understood  Greek,  which 
must  have  spread  widely  through  the  influence  of 
Syrian  officers.  There  is  not,  however,  the  slightest 
evidence  that  Greek  was  employed  in  Palestinian 
literature  till  a  much  later  date.  The  description 
of  the  monument  which  was  erected  by  Simon  at 
Modin  in  memory  of  his  family  (1  Mace.  xiii. 
27-30),  is  the  only  record  of  the  architecture  of 
the  time.  The  description  is  obscure,  but  in 
some  features  the  structure  appears  to  have  pre 
sented  a  resemblance  to  the  tombs  of  Porsena  and 
the  Curiatii  (Plin.  H.  N.  xxxvi.  13),  and  perhaps 
to  one  still  found  in  Idumaea.  An  oblong  base 
ment,  of  which  the  two  chief  faces  were  built  of 
polished  white  marble  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  6,  §5), 
supported  "seven  pyramids  in  a  line  ranged  one 
against  another,"  equal  in  number  to  the  members 
of  the  Maccabaean  family,  including  Simon  himself. 
To  these  he  added  "  other  works  of  art  (jtij^ewTJ- 
/uara),  placing  round  (on  the  two  chief  faces?) 
great  columns,  (Josephus  adds,  each  of  a  single 
block),  bearing  trophies  of  arms,  and  sculptured 
ships,  which  might  be  visible  from  the  sea  below." 
The  language  of  1  Mace,  and  Josephus  implies  that 
these  columns  were  placed  upon  the  basemeut, 
otherwise  it  might  be  supposed  that  the  columns 
rose  only  to  the  height  of  the  basement  supporting 
the  trophies  on  the  same  level  as  the  pyramids.  So 
much  at  least  is  evident,  that  the  characteristics  of 
this  work — and  probably  of  later  Jewish  archi 
tecture  generally — bore  closer  affinity  to  the  styles 
of  Asia  Minor  and  Greece  than  of  Egypt  or  the 
East,  a  result  which  would  follow  equally  from  the 
Syriar  dominion  and  the  commerce  which  Simon 
opened  by  the  Mediterranean  (1  Mace.  xiv.  5). 

1 ''.  The  only  recognised  relics  of  the  time  are  th 
roi.is  which  bear  the  name  of  "  Simon/'  or  "  Simon 
Pi  iiut1  (Nasi    of  Israel  "  in  Samaritan  letters.    The 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

privilege  of  a  national  coinage  was  granted  to  Simon 
by  Antiochus  VII.  Sidetes  (1  Mace.  xv.  6,  «td/u/ia 
IStov  vAfAitr^a.  Ttj  x<apa)  ;  and  numerous  examples 
occur  which  have  the  dates  of  the  first,  second, 
third,  and  fourth  years  of  the  liberation  of  Jeru 
salem  (Israel,  Zion)  ;  and  it  is  a  remarkable  con 
firmation  of  their  genuineness,  that  in  the  first  year 
the  name  Zion  does  not  occur,  as  the  citadel  wa» 
not  recovered  till  the  second  year  of  Simon's  supre 
macy,  while  after  the  second  year  Zion  alone  is  found 
(Bayer,  de  Nummis,  171).  The  privilege  was  first 
definitely  accorded  to  Simon  in  B.C.  140,  while  the 
first  year  of  Simon  was  B.C.  143  (1  Mace.  xiii.  42) ; 
but  this  discrepancy  causes  little  difficulty,  as  it  ir 
not  uniikclj  that  the  concession  of  Antiochus  was 
made  in  favour  of  a  practice  already  existing.  No 
date  is  given  later  than  the  fourth  year,  but  coins 
of  Simon  occur  without  a  date,  which  may  belong 
to  the  four  last  years  of  his  life.  The  emblems 
which  the  coins  bear  have  generally  a  connexion 
with  Jewish  history — a  vine-leaf,  a  cluster  of 
grapes,  a  vase  (of  manna?),  a  trifid  flowering  rod, 
a  palm  branch  surrounded  by  a  wreath  of  laurel,  a 
lyre  (1  Mace.  xiii.  51),  a  bundle  of  branches  sym 
bolic  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  The  coins  issued 
in  the  last  war  of  independence  by  Bar-cochba,  repeat 
many  of  these  emblems,  and  there  is  considerable 
difficulty  in  distinguishing  the  two  series.  The  au 
thenticity  of  all  the  Maccabaean  coins  was  impugned 
by  Tychsen  (Die  Unacht/tett  d.  Jud.  Miinzen  .  .  . 
bewiesen  .  .  .  0.  G.  Tychsen,  1779),  but  on  in 
sufficient  grounds.  He  was  answered  by  Bayer, 
whose  admirable  essays  (De  Nummis  Hebr.  Sama 
ritanis,  Val.  Ed.  1781  ;  Vindiciae  .  .  .  1790), 
give  the  most  complete  account  of  the  coins,  though 
he  reckons  some  apparently  later  types  as  Macca 
baean.  Eckhel  (Doctr.  Numm.  iii.  p.  455  ff.)  has 
given  a  good  account  of  the  controversy,  and  an 
accurate  description  of  the  chief  types  of  the  coins. 
Comp.  De  Saulcy,  Numism.  Judaique;  Ewaid, 
Gesch.  vii.  366,  476.  [MONEY.] 

The  authorities  for  the  Maccabaean  history  have 
been  given  already.  Of  modern  works,  that  of 
Ewald  is  by  far  the  best.  Herzfeld  has  collected  a 
mass  of  details,  chiefly  from  late  sources,  which  are 
interesting  and  sometimes  valuable ;  but  the  student 
of  the  period  cannot  but  feel  how  difficult  it  is  to 
realise  it  as  a  whole.  Indeed,  it  seems  that  the 
instinct  was  true  which  named  it  from  one  chief 
hero.  In  this  last  stage  of  the  history  of  Israel,  as 
in  the  first,  all  life  came  from  the  leader ;  and  it  is 
the  greatest  glory  of  the  Maccabees  that  while  they 
found  at  first  all  turn  upon  their  personal  fortunes, 
they  left  a  nation  strong  enough  to  preserve  an  in 
dependent  faith  till  the  typical  kingdom  gave  piace 
to  a  universal  Church.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF  (MoKicaflcuW 
a',  /3',  &c.  Four  books  which  bear  the  common 
title  of  "  Maccabees,"  are  found  in  some  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.  Two  of  these  were  included  in  the 
early  current  Latin  versions  of  the  Bible,  and 
thence  passed  into  the  Vulgate.  As  forming  jiart 
of  the  Vulgate  they  were  received  as  canonical  by 
the  council  of  Trent,  and  retained  among  the 
apocrypha  by  the  reformed  churches.  The  two 
other  books  obtained  no  such  wide  circulation,  and 
have  only  a  secondary  connexion  with  the  Mac 
cabaean  history.  But  all  thn  books,  though  they 
dirter  most  widely  in  character  and  date  anil  worth, 
jioi.scss  ]H*ints  of  interest  \vhich  make  them  a  fruit- 
ful  ik'ld  for  studv.  If  the  historic  cider  *-ere 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

observed,  the  so-called  third  book  would  come  first, 
the  fourth  would  be  an  appendix  to  the  second, 
which  would  retain  its  place,  and  the  first  would 
come  last ;  but  it  will  be  more  convenient  to  ex 
amine  the  books  in  the  order  in  which  they  are 
found  iu  the  MSS.,  which  was  probably  decided  by 
some  vague  tradition  of  their  relative  antiquity. 

The  controversy  as  to  the  mutual  relations  and 
historic  worth  of  the  first  two  books  of  Maccabees 
has  given  rise  to  much  very  ingenious  and  partial 
criticism.  The  subject  was  very  nearly  exhausted 
by  a  series  of  essays  published  in  the  last  century,, 
which  contain  in  the  midst  of  much  unfair  reason 
ing  the  substance  of  what  has  been  writtta  since. 
The  discussion  was  occasioned  by  E.  Frolich's 
Annals  of  Syria  (Annales  ....  Syriae  .... 
numis  veteribus  illustrati.  Vindob.  1744).  In 
this  great  work  the  author — a  Jesuit — had  claimed 
paramount  authority  for  the  books  of  Maccabees. 
This  claim  was  denied  by  E.  F.  Wernsdorf  in  his 
Prolusio  de  Jontibus  historiae  Syriae  in  Libris 
Mace.  (Lips.  1746).  Frolich  replied  to  this  essay 
in  another.  De  fontibus  hist.  Syriae  in  Libris 
Mace,  prolusio  ....  in  examen  vocata  (Vindob. 
1746)  ;  and  then  the  argument  fell  into  other 
hands.  Wernsdorf  s  brother  (Gli.  Wernsdorf)  under 
took  to  support  his  cause,  which  he  did  in  a 
Commentatio  historico-critica  de  fide  librorum 
Mace.  (Wratisl.  1747);  and  nothing  has  been 
written  on  the  same  side  which  can  be  compared 
with  his  work.  By  the  vigour  and  freedom  of  his 
style,  by  his  surprising  erudition  and  unwavering 
confidence — almost  worthy  of  Bentley — he  carries 
his  reader  often  beyond  the  bounds  of  true  criticism, 
and  it  is  only  after  reflection  that  the  littleness 
and  sophistry  of  many  of  his  arguments  are  appa 
rent.  But  in  spite  of  the  injustice  and  arrogance 
of  the  book,  it  contains  very  much  which  is  of  the 
greatest  value,  and  no  abstract  can  give  an  ade 
quate  notion  of  its  power.  The  reply  to  Wernsdorf 
was  published  anonymously  by  another  Jesuit : — 
Auctoritas  utriusque  Libri  Mace,  canonico-historica 
adserta  ....  a  quodam  Soc.  Jesu  sacerdote 
(Vindob.  1749).  The  authorship  of  this  was 
fixed  upon  J.  Khell  (Welte,  Einl.  p.  23  note) ;  and 
while  in  many  points  Khell  is  unequal  to  his  adver 
sary,  his  book  contains  some  very  useful  collections 
for  the  history  of  the  canon.  In  more  recent  times, 
F.  X.  Patritius  (another  Jesuit)  has  made  a  fresh 
attempt  to  establish  the  complete  harmony  of  the 
books,  and,  on  the  whole,  his  essay  (De  Consensu 
utriusque  Libri  Mace.  Romae,  1856),  though  far 
from  satisfactory,  is  the  most  able  defence  of  the 
books  which  has  been  published. 

I.  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  MACCABEES. — 1.  The 
first  book  of  Maccabees  contains  a  history  of  the 
patriotic  struggle,  from  the  first  resistance  of  Matta^ 
ihias  to  the  settled  sovereignty  and  death  of  Simon, 
a  period  of  thirty-threi  years  (B.C.  168-135). 
The  opening  chapter  gives  a  short  summary  of  the 
conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great  as  laying  the 
foundations  of  the  Greek  empire  in  the  East,  and 
describes  at  greater  length  the  oppression  of  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes,  culminating  in  his  desperate 
attempt  to  extirpate  Judaism.  The  great  subject  of 
the  book  begins  with  the  enumeration  of  the  Macva- 
baeau  family  (ii.  1-5),  which  is  followed  by  an 
account  of  the  part  which  the  aged  Mattathias  took 
in  rousing  and  guiding  the  spirit  of  his  countrymen 
•'11.  6-70).  The  remainder  of  the  narrative  is 
occupied  with  the  exploits  of  his  rive  sons,  th  ee 
51  whom  in  succession  carried  on  with  varying  for- 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        171 

tune  the  work  which  he  began,  till  it  reached  its 
triumphant  issue.  Each  of  the  three  divis.ons, 
into  which  the  main  portion  of  the  book  timi 
naturally  falls,  is  stamped  with  an  individual 
character  derived  from  its  special  hero.  First 
Judas,  by  a  series  of  brilliant  successes,  and  scarcely 
less  noble  reverses,  fully  roused  his  countrymen  to 
their  work,  and  then  fell  at  a  Jewish  Thermopylae 
(iii.  1-ix.  22,  B.C.  167-161).  Next  Jonathan  con 
firmed  by  policy  the  advantages  which  his  brother 
had  gained  by  chivalrous  daring,  and  fell  not 
in  open  field,  but  by  the  treachery  of  a  usurper 
(k.  23-xii.  53 ;  B.C.  161-143).  Last  of  all  Simon, 
by  wisdom  and  vigour,  gave  shape  and  order  to  the 
new  state,  anJ  was  formally  installed  in  the 
princely  office.  He  also  fell,  but  by  domestic  and 
not  by  foreign  treason ;  and  his  son  succeeded  to 
his  power  (xiii.-xvi.  B.C.  143-135).  The  history, 
in  this  aspect,  presents  a  kind  of  epic  unity.  The 
passing  allusion  to  the  achievements  of  after  times 
(xvi.  23,  24)  relieves  the  impression  caused  by  the 
murder  of  Simon.  But  at  his  death  the  victory  was 
already  won :  the  life  of  Judaism  had  mastered  the 
tyranny  of  Greece. 

2.  While  the  grandeur  and  unity  of  the  subject 
invests  the  book  with  almost  an  epic  beauty,   it 
never  loses  the  character  of  history.     The  earlier 
part   of  the   narrative,   including  the   exploits  of 
Judas,  is  cast  in  a  more  poetic  mould  than  any 
other   part,    except    the    brief    eulogy   of   Simon 
(xiv.  4-15);   but  when  the  style  is  most  poetica, 
(i.  37-40,  ii.  7-13,  49-68,  iii.  3-9,  18-22,  iv.  8-t  1 , 
30-33,  38,  vi.  10-13,  vii.  37,  38,  41,  42)— and 
this   poetical   form  is   chiefly   observable    in    the 
speeches — it  seems  to  be  true  iu  spirit.     The  great 
marks  of  trustworthiness   are  everywhere   conspi 
cuous.     Victory  and  failure  and  despondency  are, 
on  the  whole,  chronicled  with  the  same  candour. 
There  is  no  attempt  to  bring  into  open  display  the 
working  of  providence.     In  speaking  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  (i.  10  ff.)  the  writer  betrays  no  unjust 
violence,  while  he  marks  in  one  expressive  phrase 
(i.  I0,fii£a  a.fjLa.pra>\6s)  the  character  of  the  Syrian 
type  of  antichrist  (cf.  Is.  xi.  10 ;    Dan.  xi.  36) ; 
and  if  no  mention  is  made  of  the  reckless  profligacy 
of  Alexander  Balas,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
his  relations   to   the  Jews  were   honourable   and 
liberal,  and  these  alone  fall  within  the  scope  of  the 
history.      So  far  as  the  circumstances  admit,  the 
general  accuracy  of  the  book  is  established  by  the 
evidence  of  other  authorities ;  but  for  a  considerable 
period  it  is  the  single  source  of  our  information. 
And,  indeed,  it  has  little  need  of  external  testimony  to 
its  worth.     Its  whole  character  bears  adequate  wit 
ness  to  its  essential  truthfulness ;  and  Luther — no 
servile  judge — expressed  himself  as  not  disinclined, 
on  internal  grounds,  to  see  it  "  reckoned  among  the 
books  of  Holy  Scripture  "  ("  Diess  Buch  ....  fast 
eine  gleiche  Weise  halt  mit  Reden  und  Worten  wie 
andere  heilige  Biicher  und  nicht  unwiii-dig  gewest 
ware,  hiiieinzurechncn,  well  es  ein  sehr  nothig  und 
niitzlich    Buch    ist   zu   verstehen    den    Propheten 
Daniel  im  1 1   Kapitel."      Werke,  vou  Walch,  xiv. 
94,  ap.  Grimm,  p.  xxii.). 

3.  There  are,  however,  some  points  in  which  the 
writer  appears  to  have  been  imperfectly  informed, 
especially  in  the  history  of  foreign  nations ;    and 
some,  again,  in  which  he  has  been  supposed  to  have 
magnified   the    difficulties   and    successes    of    hi» 
ccvintrvmen.    Of  the  former  class  of  objections  two, 
which    turn    upon    the    description    given    of    the 
foundation   of    the  Greek   kingdoms   of  the   Kfcst 


172       MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OP 

(1  Mace  i.  5-9),  and  of  the  power  of  Rome  (viii. 
1-16),  deserve  notice  from  their  intrinsic  interest. 
After  giving  a  rapid  summary  of  the  exploits  of 
Alexander — the  reading  and  interpretation  of  ver. 
1  are  too  uncertain  to  allow  of  objections  based 
wpon  the  common  text — the  writer  states  that  the 
King,  conscious  of  approaching  death  "  divided  his 
kingdom  among  his  servants  who  had  been  brought 
up  with  him  from  his  youth"  (1  Mace.  i.  6, 
8ie?A.€j/  O')TO?S  r^v  $curi\tiav  avrov,  foi  {wvros 
oi/ToD)  .  .  .  .  "  and  after  his  death  they  all  put  on 
crowns."  Various  rumours,  it  is  known  (Curt, 
i.  10),  prevailed  about  a  will  of  Alexander,  which 
decided  the  distribution  of  the  provinces  of  his 
kingdom,  but  this  narrative  is  evidently  a  different 
and  independent  tradition.  It  may  rest  upon  some 
former  indication  of  the  king's  wishes,  but  in  the 
absence  of  all  corroborative  evidence  it  can  scarcely 
be  accepted  as  a  historic  tact  (Patritius,  De  Cons. 
Mace.  pref.  viii.),  though  it  is  a  remarkable  proof  of 
the  desire  which  men  felt  to  attribute  the  constitution 
of  the  Greek  power  to  the  immediate  counsels  of  its 
great  founder.  In  this  instance  the  author  has  pro 
bably  accepted  without  inquiry  the  opinion  of  his 
countrymen ;  in  the  other  it  is  distinctly  said  that 
the  account  of  the  greatness  of  Rome  was  brought 
to  Judas  by  common  report  (1  Mace.  viii.  1,  2, 
Ijicovffcv  ....  Siriyfiffamo).  The  statements 
made  give  a  lively  impression  of  the  popular  esti 
mate  of  the  conquerors  of  the  west,  whose  character 
and  victories  are  described  chiefly  with  open  or 
covert  allusion  to  the  Greek  powers.  The  subjuga 
tion  of.  the  Galatians,  who  were  the  terror  of  the 
neighbouring  people  (Liv.  xxxviii.  37),  and  the 
conquest  of  Spain,  the  Tarshish  (comp.  ver.  3)  of 
Phoenician  merchants,  are  noticed,  as  would  be 
natural  from  the  immediate  interest  of  the  events  ; 
but  the  ware  with  Carthage  are  wholly  omitted 
(Josephus  adds  these  in  his  narrative,  Ant.  xii. 
10,  §6).  The  errors  in  detail — as  the  capture  of 
Antiochus  the  Great  by  the  Romans  (ver.  7),  the 
numbers  of  his  armament  (ver.  6),  the  constitution 
of  the  Roman  senate  (ver.  15),  the  one  supreme 
yearly  officer  at  Rome  (ver.  16  ;  comp.  xv.  16) — are 
only  such  as  might  be  expected  in  oral  accounts ; 
and  the  endurance  (ver.  4,  fj.a.KpoOv/j.la),  the  good 
faith  (ver.  112),  and  the  simplicity  of  the  republic 
(ver.  14,  OVK  tirtQtro  ouSels  avrur  StdSrjfj.a  Kal 
ov  irfpif/SdhovTO  irop<t>vpav  Sxrre  aSpwOrjvat  £t> 
wirij,  contrast  i.  9),  were  features  likely  to  arrest 
the  attention  of  orientals.  The  very  imperfection 
of  the  writer's  knowledge — for  it  seems  likely 
(ver.  11)  that  he  remodels  the  rumours  to  suit  his 
own  time — is  instructive,  as  affording  a  glimpse  of 
the  extent  and  manner  in  which  fame  spread  the 
reputation  of  the  Romans  in  the  scene  of  their 
future  conquests.  Nor  are  the  mistakes  as  to  the 
condition  of  foreign  states  calculated  to  weaken  the 
testimony  of  the  book  to  national  history.  They 
are  peifectly  consistent  with  good  faith  in  the 
narrator ;  and  even  if  there  are  inaccuracies  in 
recording  the  relative  numbers  of  the  Jewish  and 
Syrian  forces  (xi.  45-47 ;  vii.  46),  these  need  cause 
little  surprise,  and  may  in  some  degree  be  due  to 
erroi's  of  transcription.' 

4.  Much  has  been  written  as  to  the  sources  from 
which  the  narrative  was  derived,  but  there  does  not 
seem  to  be  evidence  sufficient  to  indicate  them  with 


"  The  relation  of  the  history  of  Jusephus  tc  that  of 
1  Mace,  is  carefully  discussed  by  Grimm,  Kxeg.  Uandb. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

any  certainty.  In  one  passage  (ix.  22)  the  author 
im  j  .les  that  written  accounts  of  some  of  the  action* 
of  Judas  were  in  existence  (T&  irtpitrn-a  .  .  .  .  ov 
Kartypdipri) ;  and  the  poetical  character  of  the 
first  section  of  the  book,  due  in  a  great  measure  to 
the  introduction  of  speeches,  was  probably  bor 
rowed  from  the  writings  on  which  that  part  was 
based.  It  appears,  again,  to  be  a  reasonable  con 
clusion  from  the  mention  of  the  official  records  of 
the  life  of  Hyrcanus  (xvi.  24,  ravra  yiypairrat 
iirl  /3(/3Ai<j)  i]p.fpiav  dpx'fpwtrvvris  adrof)),  that 
similar  records  existed  at  least  for  the  high-priest 
hood  of  Simon.  There  is  nothing  ceitainly  to 
indicate  that  the  writer  designed  to  fill  up  any  gap 
in  the  history ;  and  the  notice  of  the  change  of 
reckoning  which  attended  the  elevation  of  Simon 
(xiii.  42)  seems  to  suggest  the  existence  of  some 
kind  of  public  register.  The  constant  appeal  to 
official  documents  is  a  further  proof  both  of  the 
preservation  of  public  records  and  of  the  sense 
entertained  of  their  importance.  Many  documents 
are  inserted  in  the  text  of  the  history,  but  even 
when  they  are  described  as  "  copies  "  (dmiypcupa.) 
it  is  questionable  whether  the  winter  designed  to 
give  more  than  the  substance  of  the  originals. 
Some  bear  clear  marks  of  authenticity  (viii.  22-28, 
xii.  6-18),  while  others  are  open  to  grave  difficulties 
and  suspicion ;  but  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the 
letters  of  the  Syrian  kings  generally  appear  to  be 
genuine  (x.  18-20,  25-45,  xi.  30-37,  xiii.  36-40, 
xv.  2-9).  Wliat  has  been  said  will  show  the 
extent  to  which  the  writer  mny  have  used  written 
authorities,  but  while  the  memoiy  of  the  events 
was  still  recent  it  is  not  possible  that  he  should 
have  confined  himself  to  them.  If  he  was  not 
himself  engaged  in  the  war  of  independence,  h«; 
must  have  been  familiar  with  those  who  were,  and 
their  information  would  supplement  and  connect  the 
narratives  which  were  already  current,  and  which 
were  probably  confined  to  isolated  passages  in  the 
history.  But  whatever  were  the  sources  of  diffe 
rent  parts  of  the  book,  and  in  whatever  way  written, 
oral,  and  personal  information  was  combined  in  its 
structure,  the  writer  made  the  materials  which  he 
used  truly  his  own ;  and  the  minute  exactness  of 
the  geographical  details  carries  the  conviction  that 
the  whole  finally  rests  upon  the  evidence  of  eye 
witnesses. 

5.  The  language  of  the  book  does  not  present 
any  striking  peculiarities.  Both  in  diction  and 
structure  it  is  generally  simple  and  unaffected,  with 
a  marked  and  yet  not  harsh  hebraistic  character. 
The  number  of  peculiar  words  is  not  very  con 
siderable,  especially  when  compared  with  those 
in  2  Mace.  Some  of  these  are  late  forms,  as: 
fta  (tyoylfa),  xi.  5,  1 1  ;  ^ouStV&xm,  i.  39  ; 
oir\o&OTtu,  xiv.  32  ;  ioTnSitr/CTj,  iv.  57  ;  &fi\6ofnat 
iv.  8,  21,  v.  4,  xvi.  6 ;  o>7jpo,  viii.  7,  ix.  53,  &c. ; 
a<paipf/jta,  xv.  5  ;  re\cov('ia'8ai,  xiii.  39  ;  f^ovcrid- 
fcffOcu,  x.  70  ;  or  compounds,  such  as  airoo  Kupirifr 
xi.  55 ;  firiffvffrpf<pta,  xiv.  44 ;  8««A<tyu;fos,  viii. 
15,  xvi.  5  ;  (povoKTovla,  i.  24.  Other  words  are 
used  in  new  or  strange  senses,  as  atipwta,  viii.  14  ; 
irapdffTwris,  xv.  32 ;  5»a<rro\^,  viii.  7.  Some 
phrases  clearly  express  a  Semitic  idiom  (ii.  48 
Sovvai  Kfpas  Tip  a/napr.  vi.  23,  x.  62,  xii.  23), 
and  the  influence  of  the  LXX.  is  continually  per 
ceptible  (e.  g.  i.  54,  ii.  63,  vii.  17,  ix.  23,  xiv.  9) ; 
but  in  the  main  (comp.  §6)  the  hebraisms  which 
exist  are  such  as  might  have  boon  naturalise!  in  tiw 
Hebrew-Greek  of  Palestine.  Josephus  undoubtedly 
madu  use  of  the  Greek  text  (Ant.  xii.  5  ff.'j ;  atd 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

apart  from  external  evidence,  this  might  have  been 
supposed  to  be  the  original.     But, 

6.  The  testimony  of  antiquity  leaves  no  doubt  but 
that  the  book  was  first  written  in  Hebrew.  Origeu, 
in  his  famous  catalogue  of  the  books  of  Scripture 
(ap.  Euseb.  H,  E.  vi.  25),  after  enumerating  the 
contents  of  the  0.  T.  according  to  the  Helnuw 
canon,  adds  :  "  But  without  (»'.  e.  excluded  from 
the  number  of)  these  is  the  Maccabaean  history 
(ret  MaKKafJaiKci),  which  is  entitled  Sarbeth 
Sabanaiel."*  In  giving  the  names  of  the  books 
of  the  0.  T.  he  had  subjoined  the  Hebrew  to  the 
Greek  title  in  exactly  the  same  manner,  and  there 
can  be  therefore  no  question  but  that  he  was 
acquainted  with  a  Hebrew  original  for  the  Macca- 
batca,  as  for  the  other  books.  The  term  Macca- 
biuca  is,  however,  somewhat  vague,  though  the 
analogy  of  the  other  parts  of  the  list  requires  that  it 
should  be  limited  to  one  book ;  but  the  statement 
of  Jerome  is  quite  explicit : — "  The  first  book  of 
Maccabees,"  he  says,  "  I  found  in  Hebrew ;  the 
second  is  Greek,  as  can  be  shewn  in  fact  from  its 
style  alone"  (Prol.  Gal.  ad  Libr.  Reg.).  Ad 
mitting  the  evidence  of  these  two  fathers,  who 
were  alone  able  to  speak  with  authority  on  a  sub 
ject  of  Hebrew  literature  during  the  first  four  cen 
turies,  the  fact  of  the  Hebrew  original  of  the  book 
may  be  supported  by  several  internal  arguments 
which  would  be  in  themstlves  insufficient  to  esta 
blish  it.  Some  of  the  hebraisms  are  such  as  sug 
gest  luther  the  immediate  influence  of  a  Hebrew 
text  than  the  free  adoption  of  a  Hebrew  idiom 
(i.  4,  tyfvoi/TO  els  <f>6pov ;  16,  Tjroifj.dffdr]  i]  /Soo". ; 
29,  Svo  «TT)  rifjitpSiv ;  36,  ets  Sidf3o\ov  irovr\pbv ; 
58,  iv  iravrl  p,t\vl  Kai  (ii]vl,  &c.  ;  ii.  57,  i,i.  9, 
BTroXA.ufiej'ous  •  iv.  2,  v.  37,  /xeTci  -ret  pJifiara, 
ravra,  &c.),  and  difficulties  in  the  Greek  text  are 
removed  by  a  recurrence  to  the  words  which  may 
be  supposed  to  have  been  used  in  the  original 
(i.  28,  'irl  rovs  KaroiKovvras  for  rPri^'P  >  *• 
36,  ii.  8,  iv.  19,  xvi.  3).  A  question,  however, 
might  be  raised  whether  the  book  was  written 
in  biblical  Hebrew,  or  in  the  later  Aramaic 
(Chaldee) ;  but  it  seems  almost  certain  that  the 
writer  took  the  canonical  histories  as  his  model ; 
and  the  use  of  the  original  text  of  Scripture  by  the 
learned  class  would  preserve  the  Hebrew  as  a 
literary  language  when  it  had  ceased  to  be  the  lan 
guage  of  common  life.  But  it  is  by  no  means 
unlikely  (Grimm,  Exeg.  Handb.  §4)  that  the 
Hebrew  was  corrupted  by  later  idioms,  as  in  the 
most  recent  books  of  the  0.  T.  It  seems  almost 
incredible  that  any  one  should  have  imagined 
that  the  worthless  Megillath  Antiochus,  of  which 
Bartolocci's  Latin  translation  is  printed  by  Fabri 
cius  (Cod.  Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  1165-74),  was  the 
Hebrew  original  of  which  Origen  and  Jerome 
spoke.8  This  tract,  which  occurs  in  some  of  the 
Jewish  services  for  the  Feast  of  Dedication  (Fabri 
cius,  1.  c.),  is  a  perfectly  unhistorical  narrative  of 
some  of  the  incidents  of  the  Maccabaean  war,  in 
which  John  the  high-priest,  and  not  Judas,  plays  by 
far  the  most  conspicuous  part.  The  order  of  events 

t>  2apj3rj0  Sa/Sai/aieA..  This  is  undoubtedly  the  true 
Teaming  wittout  the  p.  All  the  explanations  of  the  word 
with  which  I  am  acquainted  start  from  the  false  reading 
— 2ap/3ave— "  The  rod  of  the  renegades"  (^{<'IJ2~1D. 
Herzfeld),  "  The  sceptre  of  the  prince  of  the  sons  of  God" 
033  "iB't  Ewald),  "  The  history  of  the  princes  of  the  sons 
of  God"  (»J2  *")£>);  and  J  cannot  propose  any  sulis- 
fftotory  transcription  of  the  true  reading. 


MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF        173 

is  so  entirely  disregarded  in  it  that,  after  the  death 
of  Judas,  Miittathias  is  represented  as  leading  his 
other  sons  to  the  decisive  victory  which  preceded 
the  purification  of  the  Temple. 

7.  The  whole  structure  of  1  Mace,  points  to  Pa 
lestine  as  the  place  of  its  composition.  This  fact 
itself  is  a  strong  proof  for  a  Hebrew  original,  for 
there  is  no  trace  of  a  Greek  Palestinian  literature. 
during  the  Hasmonaean  dynasty,  though  the  wide 
use  of  the  LXX.  towards  the  close  of  the  period, 
prepared  the  way  for  the  apostolic  writings.  But 
though  the  country  of  the  writer  can  be  thus  fixed 
with  certainty,  there  is  considerable  doubt  as  to  his 
date.  At  the  cioss  of  the  book  he  mentions,  in  ge 
neral  terms,  the  acts  of  Johannes  Hyrcanus  as 
written  "  in  the  chronicles  of  his  priesthood  from 
the  time  that  he  was  made  high-priest  after  his 
father"  (xvi.  23,  24).  From  this  it  has  been  con 
cluded  that  he  must  have  written  after  the  death 
of  Hyrcanus,  B.C.  106  ;  and  the  note  in  xiii.  30 
(«os  TTJS  fijifpas  TOUT^S),  implies  the  lapse  of  a 
considerable  time  since  the  accession  of  Simon  (B.C. 
143).  On  the  other  hand,  the  omission  of  all 
mention  of  the  close  of  the  government  of  Hyrcanus, 
when  the  note  of  its  commencement  is  given,  may 
be  urged  as  an  argument  for  placing  the  book  late 
in  his  long  reign,  but  before  his  death.  It  cannot 
certainly  have  been  composed  long  after  his  death  ; 
for  it  would  have  been  almost  impossible  to  write  a 
history  so  full  of  simple  faith  and  joyous  triumph 
in  the  midst  of  the  troubles  which,  early  in  the  suc 
ceeding  reign,  threatened  too  distinctly  the  coming 
dissolution  of  the  state.  Combining  these  two 
limits,  we  may  place  the  date  of  the  original  book 
between  B.C.  120-100.  Th'e  date  and  person  of  the 
Greek  translator  are  wholly  undetermined  ;  but  it 
is  unlikely  that  such  a  book  would  remain  long 
unknown  or  untranslated  at  Alexandria. 
.  8.  In  a  religious  aspect  the  book  is  more  remark 
able  negatively  than  positively.  The  historical  in 
stinct  of  the  writer  confines  him  to  the  bare  recital 
of  facts,  and  were  it  not  for  the  words  of  others 
which  he  records,  it  might  seem  that  the  true  theo 
cratic  aspect  of  national  life  had  been  lost.  Not 
only  does  he  relate  no  miracle,  such  as  occur  in 
2  Mace.,  but  he  does  not  even  refer  the  triumphant 
successes  of  the  Jews  to  divine  interposition.*  It 
is  a  characteristic  of  the  same  kind  that  he  passes 
over  without  any  clear  notice  the  Messianic  hopes, 
which,  as  appears  from  the  Psalms  of  Solomon  and 
the  Book  of  Enoch,  were  raised  to  the  highest  pitch 
by  the  successful  struggle  for  independence.  Yet 
he  preserves  faint  traces  of  the  national  belief.  He 
mentions  the  time  from  which  "  a  prophet  was  not 
seen  among  them"  (1  Mace.  ix.  27,  OVK  &<f>0i} 
irpo^Trjs)  as  a  marked  epoch  ;  and  twice  he  anti 
cipates  the  future  coming  of  a  prophet  as  of  one  who 
should  make  a  direct  revelation  of  the  will  of  God 
to  His  people  (iv.  40,  /ue'xp*  rov  ira.pu.yevi]9r\va.i 
irepl  avrtav),  and  su 


persede  the  temporary  arrangements  of  a  merely 
civil  dynasty  (xiv.  41,  rov  flvai  'Slfj.tava  yyov- 
Kttl  aiftci  fh  rbv  aliavu  rots  rov  avaff- 


•  The  book  is  found  not  only  in  Hebrew,  but  also  in 
Chaldee  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  441  note). 

d  The  passage  xi.  71,  2,  may  seem  to  contradict  this 
assertion ;  but  though  some  writers,  even  from  early  times, 
have  regarded  the  event  as  miraculous,  the  tone  of  the 
writer  seems  ouly  to  be  that  of  one  describing  a  noole  act 
of  successful  Viilour. 


174   MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 


TTJVO*  irpo^Tijj'  iriffr6v).  But  the  hope  or  belief  I 
occupies  no  prominent  place  in  the  book  ;  and,  like 
the  book  of  Esther,  its  greatest  merit  is,  that  it  is 
throughout  inspired  by  the  faith  to  which  it  gives 
no  definite  expression,  and  shows,  in  deed  rather 
than  in  word,  both  the  action  of  Providence  and  a 
sustaining  trust  in  His  power. 

9.  The  book  does  not  seem  to  have  been  much 
used  in  early  times.     It  offered  far  less  for  rhe 
torical  purposes  thau  the  second  book  ;  and  the  his 
tory  itself  lay  beyond  the  ordinary  limits  of  Chris 
tian  study.     Tertullian   alludes   generally   to   the 
conduct  of  the  Maccabaean   war   (adv.  Jud.   4). 
Clement  of  Alexandria  speaks  of  "  the  book  of  the 
Maocabaean  history  "  (rb  [fii$\iov~]  TWV  MUKKO- 
Pa'iKcav,  Strom,  i.  §  123),  as  elsewhere  (Strom,  v. 
§  98)  of  "  the  epitome  "    (fj  -rtav  Ma/cKa/3ai'/ca>p 
iirirofufi).     Eusebius  assumes  an  acquaintance  with 
the  two  books  (Praep.  Ev.  viii.  9,  ij  Sevrtpa  T£>V 
MaKKa.pa.iwv)  ;  and  scanty  notices  of  the  first  book, 
but  more  of  the  second,  occur  in  later  writers. 

10.  The  books  of  Maccabees  were  not  included 
by  Jerome  in  his  translation  of  the  Bible.     "  The 
first    book,"    he    says,    "  I   found   m   Hebrew  " 
(Prol.  Gal.  in  Reg.),  but  he  takes  no  notice  of  the 
Latin  version,  and  certainly  did  not  revise  it.    The 
version  of  the  two  books  which  has  been  incorpo 
rated  in  the  Romish  Vulgate  was  consequently  de 
rived  from  the  old  Latin,  current  before  Jerome's 
time.     This  version  was  obviously  made  from  the 
Greek,  and  in  the  main  follows  it  closely.     Besides 
the  common  text,  Sabaticr  has  published  a  version 
of  a  considerable  part  of  the  first  book  (cap.  i.-xiv. 
1)  from  a  very  ancient  Paris  MS.  (8.  Germ.  15) 
(annorum  saltern  nongentorum,  in  1751),  which 
exhibits  an   earlier  form   of  the    text.      Grimm, 
strangely  misquoting  Sabatier  (Exeg.  Handb.  §10), 
inverts  the  relation  of  the  two  versions  ;  but  a  com 
parison  of  the  two,  even  for  a  few  verses,  can  leave 
no  doubt  but  that  the  St.  Germain  MS.  represents 
the  most  ancient  text,  following  the  Greek  words 
and  idioms  with  a  slavish  fidelity  (Sabatier,  p.  1014, 
"  Quemadmodum  autem  etiamnum  inveniri  possunt 
MSS.  codices  qui  Psalmos  ante  omnem  Hieronymi 
correctionem  exhibeant,  ita  pariter  inventus  est  a 
nobis  codex,  qui  libri  primi  MachaWorum  partem 
continet  majorem,  minime  quidem  correctam,  sed 
qualis  olim  in  nonullis  MSS.  antiquis  reperiebatur"). 
Mai  (Spicil.  Rom.  ix.  App.  60)  has  published  a  frag 
ment  of  another  Latin  translation  (c.  ii.  49-64), 
which  differs  widely  from  both  texts.     The  Syriac 
version  given  in  the  Polyglotts  is,  like  the  Latin,  a 
close  rendering  of  the  Greek.     From  the  rendering 
of  the  proper  names,  it  has  been  supposed  that  the 
translator  lived  while  the  Semitic  forms  were  still 
current  (Grimm,  EM.  §  10)  ;  but  the  arguments 
which  have  been  urged  to  show  that  the  Syriac 
was  derived  directly  from  the  Hebrew  original,  are 
of  no  weight  against  the  ovei-whelming  proof  of  the 
influence  of  the  Greek  text. 

11.  Of  the  early  commentators  on  the  first  two 
books  of  Maccabees,  the  most  important  are  Drusius 
and  Grotius,    whose   notes   are   reprinted   in    the 
Critici  Sacri.     The  annotations  of  Calmet  (Com- 
mentaire  literal,  &c.,  Paris,  1724)  and  Michaelis 
(  Uebersetzung  der  1  Mace.  B.'s  mit  Anmerk.  Leipz. 
1778),  are  of  permanent  interest  ;  but  for  practical 
use  the  manual  of  Grimm  (Kurzgefasstes  Exeg. 
ffandl.  zu  den  Apokryphen,  &c.,  Leipz.  1853-7) 
supplies  everything  which  the  student  can  require. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  MACCABEES. — 1.  The 
history  of  the  Second  Book  of  the  Maccabees  begins 
some  years  •earlier  than  that  of  the  First  Book,  and 
closes  with  the  victory  of  Judas  Maecabaeus  over 
Nicanor.  It  thus  embraces  a  period  of'  twenty 
years,  from  B.C.  180  (?)  to  B.C.  161.  For  the 
few  events  noticed  during  the  earlier  years  it  is 
the  chief  authority ;  during  the  remainder  of  the 
time  the  narrative  goes  over  the  same  ground  as 
1  Mace.,  but  with  very  considerable  differences. 
The  first  two  chapters  are  taken  up  by  two  letters 
supposed  to  be  addressed  by  the  Palestinian  to  the 
Alexandrine  Jews,  and  by  a  sketch  of  the  author's 
plan,  which  proceeds  without  any  perceptible  break 
from  the  close  of  the  second  letter.  The  main  nar 
rative  occupies  the  remainder  of  the  book.  This 
presents  several  natural  divisions,  which  appear  to 
coincide  with  the  "  five  books  "  of  Jason  on  which 
it  was  based.  The  first  (c.  iii.)  contains  the  history 
of  Heliodorus,  as  illustrating  the  fortunes  of  the 
Temple  before  the  schism  and  apostasy  of  part  of 
the  nation  (cir.  B.C.  180).  The  second  (iv.-vii.) 
gives  varied  details  of  the  beginning  and  course  of  the 
great  persecution — the  murder  of  Onias,  the  crimes 
of  Menelaus,  the  martyrdom  of  Eleazar,  and  of  the 
mother  with  her  seven  sons  (B.C.  175-167).  The 
third  (viii.-x.  9)  follows  the  fortunes  of  Judas  to 
the  triumphant  restoration  of  the  Temple  service 
(B.C.  166,  165).  The  fourth  (x.  10-xiii.)  includes 
the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator  (B.C.  164-162). 
The  fifth  (xiv.,  xv.)  records  the  treachery  of  Alci- 
mus,  the  mission  of  Nicanor,  and  the  crowning 
success  of  Judas  (B.C.  162,  161).  Each  of  these 
divisions  is  closed  by  a  phrase  which  seems  to  mark 
the  end  of  a  definite  subject  (iii.  40,  vii.  42,  x.  9, 
xiii.  26,  xv.  37) ;  and  they  correspond  in  fact  with 
distinct  stages  in  the  national  struggle. 

2.  The  relation  of  the  letters  with  which  the  book 
opens  to  the  substance  of  the  book  is  extremely 
obscure.  The  first  (i.  1-9)  is  a  solemn  invitation 
to  the  Egyptian  Jews  to  celebrate  "  the  feast  of 
tabernacles  in  the  month  Casleu"  (i.e.  the  feast  of 
the  Dedication,  i.  9),  as  before  they  had  sympathised 
with  their  brethren  in  Judaea  in  "  the  extremity  of 
their  trouble"  (i.  7).  The  second  (i.  10-ii.  13, 
according  to  the  received  division),  which  bears  a 
formal  salutation  from  "  the  council  and  Judas  "  to 
"  Aristobulus  .  .  .  and  the  Jews  in  Egypt,"  is  a 
strange,  rambling  collection  of  legendary  stories  of 
the  death  of  "  Antiochus,"  of  the  preservation  of 
the  sacred  fire  and  its  recovery  by  Nehemiah,  of 
the  hiding  of  the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary  by  Jere 
miah,  ending — if  indeed  the  letter  can  be  said  to 
have  any  end — with  the  same  exhortation  to  observe 
the  feast  of  dedication  (ii.  10-18).  For  it  is  im 
possible  to  point  out  any  break  in  the  construction 
or  style  after  ver.  19,  so  that  the  writer  passes 
insensibly  from  the  epistolary  fonn  in  ver.  16  to 
that  of  the  epitomator  in  ver.  29  (So»cw).  For 
this  reason  some  critics,  both  in  ancient  and  modern 
times  (Wernsdorf,  §  35,  123),  have  considered  that 
the  whole  book  is  intended  to  be  included  in  the 
letter.6  It  seems  more  natural  to  suppose  that  the 
author  found  the  letters  already  in  existence  when 
he  undertook  to  abridge  the  work  of  Jason,  and 
attached  his  own  introduction  to  the  second  letter 
for  the  convenience  of  transition,  without  consider 
ing  that  this  would  necessarily  make  the  whole 
appear  to  be  a  letter.  The  letters  themselves  can 
lay  no  claims  to  authenticity.  It  is  possible  that 


'  The  subscription  in  C<xl.  Alex.  Is'IouJa  rov  M<ucica£aiov  irpa£tfW  e7r«rroA»). 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

they  may  rest  upon  some  real  correspondence  between 
Jerusalem  and  Alexandria ;  but  the  extravagance  of 
the  fables  which  they  contain  makes  it  impossible 
to  accept  them  in  th*>ir  present  form  as  the  work  of 
the  Jewish  Council.  Though  it  may  readily  be 
admitted  that  the  fabulousness  of  the  contents  of 
a  letter  is  no  absolute  proof  of  its  spuriousness,  yet 
on  the  other  hand  the  stories  may  be  (as  in  this 
case)  so  entirely  unworthy  of  what  we  know  of  the 
position  of  the  alleged  writers,  as  to  betray  the 
work  of  an  impostor  or  an  interpolator.  Some  have 
supposed  that  the  original  language  of  one,f  or  of 
both  the  letters  was  Hebrew,  but  this  cannot  be 
made  out  by  any  conclusive  arguments.  On  the 
other  hand  there  is  no  ground  at  all  for  believing 
that  they  were  made  up  by  the  author  of  the  book. 
3.  The  writer  himself  distinctly  indicates  the  source 
of  his  narrative — "  the  five  books  of  Jason  of  Cyrene" 
(ii.  23),  of  which  he  designed  to  furnish  a  short 
aud  agreeable  epitome  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
would  be  deterred  from  studying  the  larger  work. 
[JASON.]  His  own  labour,  which  he  describes  in 
strong  terms  (ii.  26,  7  ;  comp.  xv.  38,  39),  was 
entirely  confined  to  condensation  and  selection  ;  all 
investigation  of  detail  he  declares  to  be  the  peculiar 
duty  of  the  original  historian.  It  is  of  course  im 
possible  to  determine  how  far  the  colouring  of  the 
events  is  due  to  Jason,  but  "  the  Divine  manifesta 
tions  "  in  behalf  of  the  Jews  are  enumerated  among 
the  subjects  of  which  he  treated ;  and  no  sufficient 
reasons  have  been  alleged  to  show  that  the  writer 
either  followed  any  other  authority  in  his  later 
chapters,  or  altered  the  general  character  of  the 
history  which  he  epitomized.  Of  Jason  himself 
nothing  more  is  known  than  may  be  gleaned  from 
this  mention  of  him.  It  has  been  conjectured 
(Herzfeld,  Gcsch.  d.  Volkes  Isr.  i.  455)  that  he 
was  the  same  as  the  son  of  Eleazer  (1  Mace.  viii. 
17),  who  was  sent  by  Judas  as  envoy  to  Rome 
after  the  defeat  of  Nicanor ;  and  the  circumstance 
of  this  mission  has  been  used  to  explain  the  limit 
to  which  he  extended  his  history,  as  being  that 
which  coincided  with  the  extent  of  his  personal  ob 
servation.  There  are  certainly  many  details  in  the 
book  which  sho.w  a  close  and  accurate  knowledge 
(iv.  21,  29  if.,  viii.  1  ff.,  ix.  29,  x.  12,  13,  xiv.  1), 
and  the  errors  in  the  order  of  events  may  be  due 
wholly,  or  in  part,  to  the  epitomator.  The  ques 
tionable  interpretation  of  facts  in  2  Mace,  is  no 
objection  to  the  truth  of  the  facts  themselves  ;  and 
when  due  allowance  is  made  for  the  overwrought 
rendering  of  many  scenes,  and  for  the  obvious  effort 
of  the  writer  to  discover  everywhere  signs  of  provi 
dential  interference,  the  historic  worth  of  the  book 
appears  to  be  considerably  greater  than  it  is  com 
monly  esteemed  to  be.  Though  Herzfeld's  con 
jecture  may  be  untenable,  the  original  work  of 
Jason  probably  extended  no  farther  than  the  epi 
tome,  for  the  description  of  its  contents  (2  Mace, 
ii.  19-22)  does  not  carry  us  beyond  the  close  of 
2  Mace.  The  "  brethren  "  of  Judas,  whose  exploits 
he  related,  were  already  distinguished  during  the 
lifetime  of  "  the  Maccabee"  (1  Mace.  v.  17  ff.,  24  ft'., 
vi.  43-6;  2  Mace.  viii.  22-29). 

4.  The  district  of  Cyrene  was  most  closely  united 
with  that  of  Alexandria.  In  both  the  predominance 
ot'Greek  literature  and  the  Greek  language  was  abso 
lute.  The  work  of  Jason — like  the  poems  of  Callima- 
chus — must  therefore  have  been  composed  in  Greek ; 


f  F.  SchlUnk?s,  Epistolae  quae,  2  Mac.  i.  1-9,  legttur 
vcplicatio.  Colon.  1844. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        175 

and  the  style  of  the  epitome,  as  Jerome  remarked, 
proves  beyond  doubt  that  the  Greek  text  is  thecrigiuaj 
(Prol.  Gal.  **  Secundus  [Machabaeorum]  Graecus  est 
quod  ex  ipsa  quoque  (ppdfffi  probari  potest").  It  it 
scarcely  less  certain  that  2  Mace,  was  compiled  at 
Alexandria.  The  characteristics  of  the  style  and 
language  are  essentially  Alexandrine ;  and  though 
the  Alexandrine  style  may  have  prevailed  in  Cyre- 
naica,  the  form  of  the  allusion  to  Jason  shows 
clearly  that  the  compiler  was  not  his  fellow-coun 
tryman.  But  all  attempts  to  determine  more  ex 
actly  who  the  compiler  was  are  mere  groundless 
guesses,  without  even  the  semblance  of  plausibility. 

5.  The  style  of  the  book  is  extremely  uneven. 
At  times  it  is  elaborately  ornate  (iii.  15-39,  v.  20, 
vi.  12-16,  23-28,  vii.  &c.);  and  again,  it  is  so  rude 
and  broken,  as  to  seem  more  like  notes  for  an  epi 
tome  than  a  finished  composition  (xiii.  19-26)  ;  but 
it  nowhere  attains  to  the  simple  energy  and  pathos 
of  the  first  book.     The  vocabulary  corresponds  to 
the  style.     It  abounds  in  new  or  unusual  words. 
Many  of  these  are  forms  which  belong  the  decay  of 
a  language,  as :   &\\o^)v\ifffj.6s,  iv.   13,   vi.   24 ; 
'EAATji/or/uifo,  vi.  13  (tn<paviff/j.6s,  iii.  9)  ;  fraer- 
(i.6s,  vii.  37  ;   daipa.Kicr/j.ds,  v.  3  ;  O"r\ayx.vi.ffn6s, 
vi.  7,  21 ;  vii.  42;  or  compounds  which  betray  a 
false  pursuit  of  emphasis  or  precision:    StefJirl/j.- 
tr\ri/ii,  iv.  40  ;    e7reu\a/8eT<r0at,  xiv.   18 ;  KWfw 
QiKTfiv,    xiv.   43 ;    irpo(rava\tyfff6cu,    viii.    19 ; 
trpoffvTrofj.ifj.vi]ffK<a,  xv.   9  ;  ffvvfKKevrflv,  .v.  26. 
Others  words  are  employed  in   novel  senses,  as : 
Sevrepo\oye'iv,  xiii.  22  ;    fiffKVK\e'iff6ai,-  ii.   24  ; 
fvairavrriTOS,  xiv.  9  ;  ire<ppft>o)fj.tvos,  xi.  4  ;  ^i/x'* 
KUS,  iv.  37,  xiv.  24.     Others  bear  a  sense  which  is 
common  in  late  Greek,  as :  a.K\ijpfiv,  xiv.  8 ;  avu- 
£vyfl,  ix.  2,  xiii.  26  ;  $id\rityi$,  iii.   32  ;   ilvaire- 
peiSta,  ix.  4  ;  <ppvdcrffofj.ai,  vii.  34  ;  irtpifficvdifa, 
vii.  4.     Others  appear  to  be  peculiar  to  this  book, 
as :    SidffTa\(Tis,   xiii.   25 ;    8v<r7r€T77/aa,    v.    20 ; 
irpoa-jrvpovv,  xiv.  11  ;  iro\efj.oTpo<peii>,  x.  14,  15  ; 
6ir\o\oye?v ,  viii.  27,  31  ;  airfv6avari^ftv,  vi.  28  , 
5o£t/cds,  viii.  35  ;  ai>Spo\oyia.  xii.  43.     Hebraisms 
are  very  rare  (viii.  15,  ix.  5,  xiv.  24).     Idiomati: 
Greek  phrases  are  much  more  common  (iv.  40,  xii. 
22,  xv.  12,  &c.) ;   and  the  writer  evidently  had  a 
considerable  command   over  the   Greek   language, 
though  his  taste  was  deformed  by  a  love  of  rhe 
torical  effect. 

6.  In  the  absence  of  all  evidence  as  to  the  person 
of  Jason — for  the  conjecture  of  Herzfeld  (§3)  is 
wholly  unsupported  by  proof — there  are  no  data 
which  fix  the  time  of  the  composition  of  his  ori 
ginal  work,  or  of  the  epitome  given  in  2  Mace, 
within  very  narrow  limits.     The  superior  limit  ol 
the  age  of  the  epitome,  though  not  of  Jason's  work, 
is  determined  by  the  year  124  B.C.,  which  is  men 
tioned  in  one  of  the  introductory  letters  (i.  10) ; 
but  there  is  no  ground  for  assigning  so  great  an 
antiquity  to  the  present  book.     It  has,  indeed,  been 
concluded  from  xv.  37,  dir"   iiteiviav  rwv   Kaipcav 
KpaTiiOtiaris   rf/s   ir6\f<as   virb   TUV    'E/3pataii>— 
which  is  written  in  the  person  of  the  epitomator, 
that  it  must  have  been  composed  before  the  defeat 
and  death  of  Judas;  but  the  import  of  the  words 
appears  to  be  satisfied  by  the  religious  supremacy 
and  the  uninterrupted  celebration  of  the  lempk 
service,  which  the  Jews  maintained  till  the  final 
ruin  of  their  city  ;  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
is  the  only  inferior  limit,  below  which  the  book 
rannot  be  placed.     The  supposed  reference  to  the 
book  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrewr   (Hgb.  xi.  35, 
"  and  others  wore  tortured;"  comp.  vi.  Is-vii.  42) 


176        MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

may  perhaps  be  rather  a  reference  to  the  currei.t 
tradition  than  to  the  written  text ;  and  Josephus  in 
his  history  shows  no  acquaintance  with  its  conten-.s. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  probable  that  the  author  of 
4.  Mace,  used  either  2  Mace.,  or  the  work  of  Jason 
but  this  at  most  could  only  determine  that  th 
book  was  written  before  the  destruction  of  Jeru 
salem,  which  is  already  clear  from  xv.  37.     Thci 
is  no  explicit  mention  of  the  book  before  the  tim 
of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  v.    14,  §  98 
Internal  evidence  is  quite  insufficient  to  settle  th 
date,  which  is  thus  left  undetermined  within  th 
limits   124  B.C — 70  A.C.     If  a  conjecture  be  ac 
missible,  I  should  be  inclined  to  place  the  origin* 
work  of  Jason  not  later  than  100  B.C.,  and  the  epi 
tome  half  a  century  later.     It  is  quite  credible  tha 
a  work  might  have  been  long  current  at  Alexandri 
before  it  was  known  to  the  Jews  of  Palestine. 

7.  In  order  to  estimate  the  historical  worth  o 
the  book  it  is  necessary  to  consider  separately  th 
two  divisions  into  which  it  falls.  The  narrative  in 
iii.-vii.  is  in  part  anterior  (iii.-iv.  6)  and  in  par 
(iv.  7-vii.)  supplementary  to  the  brief  summary  ii 
1  'Mace.  i.  10-64 :  that  in  viii.-xv.  is,  as  a  whole 
parallel  with  1  Mace,  iii.-vii.  In  the  first  section 
the  book  itself  is,  in  the  main,  the  sole  source  of  in 
formation :  in  the  second,  its  contents  can  be  testec 
by  the  trustworthy  records  of  the  first  book.  I: 
will  be  best  to  take  the  second  section  first,  for  thi 
character  of  the  book  does  not  vary  much  ;  and  i: 
this  can  once  be  determined  from  sufficient  evidence 
the  result  may  be  extended  to  those  parts  which 
are  independent  of  other  testimony.  The  chic' 
differences  between  the  first  and  second  books  lie  in 
the  account  of  the  campaigns  of  Lysias  and  Timo- 
theus.  Differences  of  detail  will  always  arise  where 
the  means  of  information  are  partial  and  separate ; 
but  the  differences  alleged  to  exist  as  to  these  events 
are  more  serious.  In  1  Mace.  iv.  26-35  we  read 
of  an  invasion  of  Judaea  by  Lysias  from  the  side  ol 
Idumaea,  in  which  Judas  met  him  at  Bethsura  and 
inflicted  upon  him  a  severe  defeat.  In  consequence 
of  this  Lysias  retired  to  Antioch  to  make  greater 
preparations  for  a  new  attack,  while  Judas  under 
took  the  restoration  of  the  sanctuary.  In  2  Mace, 
the  first  mention  of  Lysias  is  on  the  accession  of 
Antiochus  Eupator  (x.  11).  Not  long  after  this 
he  is  said  to  have  invaded  Judaea  and  suffered  a 
defeat  at  Bethsura,  in  consequence  of  which  he 
made  peace  with  Judas,  giving  him  favourable 
terms  (xi.).  A  later  invasion  is  mentioned  in  both 
books,  which  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus 
Eupator  (1  Mace.  vi.  17-50;  2  Mace.  xiii.  2  ff.), 
in  which  Bethsura  fell  into  the  hands  of  Lysias. 
It  is  then  necessary  either  to  suppose  that  there 
were  three  distinct  invasions,  of  which  the  first  is 
mentioned  only  in  1  Mace.,  the  second  only  in 
2  Mace.,  and  the  third  in  both  ;  or  to  consider  the 
narrative  in  2  Mace.  x.  1  ff.  as  a  misplaced  version 
of  one  of  the  other  invasions  (for  the  history  in 
1  Mace.  iv.  26-61  bears  every  mark  of  truth) :  a 


supposition  which  is  confirmed  by  the  character  of 
the  details,  and  the  difficulty  of  reconciling  the  sup 
posed  results  with  the  events  which  immediately 
followed.  It  is  by  no  means  equally  clear  that 
there  is  any  mistake  in  2  Mace,  as  to  the  history 
of  Timotheus.  The  details  in  1  Mace.  v.  1 1  ff.  are 
•quite  reconcileable  with  those  in  2  Mace.  xii.  2  ff., 


*  The  following  Is  the  parallelism  which  Patritlus  (D< 
BOTH,  ulri.  lib.  Mace.  115-246)  endeavours  to  establish  be 
tween  foe  common  narratives  of  i.and  ii.  Mace.  When 
two  or  t.ore  passages  are  placed  opposite  to  one,  It  IB  tu  b* 


MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF 

and  it  seems  certain  that  both   books  reorrd  tJie 
same  events ;   but  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  for 
supposing  that  1  Mace.  v.  6  ff.  is  parallel  with 
2  Mace.  x.  24-37.     The  similarity  of  the  names 
Jazer  and  Gazara  probably  gave  rise  to  the  confu 
sion  of  the   two   events,  which  differ   in  fact  in 
almost  all  their  circumstances ;  though  the  idenk- 
h'cation  of  the  Timotheus  mentioned  in  2  Mace.  x. 
'24,  with  the  one  mentioned  in  viii.  30,  seems  to 
have  been  designed  to  distinguish  him  from  some 
other  of  the  same  name.     With  these  exceptions, 
the  general  outlines  of  the  history  in  the  two  books 
are  the  same;  but  the  details  are  almost  always 
independent  and  different.     The  numbers  given  in 
2  Mace,  often  represent  incredible  results :  e.  a.  viii. 
20,  30 ;  x.  23,  31 ;  xi.  11 ;  xii.  16,  19,  23,  26,  28  ; 
xv.  27.     Some  of  the  statements  are  obviously  in 
correct,  and  seem  to  have  arisen  from  an  erroneous 
interpretation  and   embellishment  of  the  original 
source:  vii.  3   (the  presence  of  Antiochus  at  the 
death  of  the  Jewish  martyrs) ;  ix.  (the  death  of 
Antiochus);  x.  11,  &c.   (the  relation  of  the  boy- 
king  Antiochus  Eupator  to  Lysias) ;  xv.  31,  35  (the 
recovery  of  Acra) ;  xiv.  7  (the  forces  of  Demetrius) 
But  on  the  other  hand  many  of  the  peculiar  details 
seem  to  be  such  as  must  have  been  derived  from 
immediate  testimony:  iv.  29-50  (the  intrigues  of 
Menelaus)  ;  vi.  2  (the  temple  at  Gerizim)  ;  x.  12, 
13  ;  xiv.  1  (the  Landing  of  Demetrius  at  Tripolis)  ; 
viii.  1-7  (the  cliaracter  of  the  first  exploits  of  Judas). 
The  relation  between  the  two  books  may  be  not 
inaptly  represented  by  that  existing  between  the 
books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles.     In  each  case  the 
later  book   was  composed   with   a   special  design, 
which   regulated    the   character   of  the   materials 
mployed  for  its  construction.     But  an  the  design 
in  2  Mace,  is  openly  avowed  by  the  compiler,  so  it 
seems  to  have  been  carried  out  with  considerable 
icense.     Yet  his  errors  appear  to  be  those  of  one 
who  interprets  history  to  support  his  cause,  rather 
;han  of  one  who  falsifies  its  substance.   The  ground 
work  of  facts  is  true,  but  the  dress  in  which  the 
acts  are  presented  is  due  in  part  at  least  to  th* 
narrator.    It  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  the  error 
with  regard  to  the  first  campaign  of  Lysias  arose 
Vom  the  mode  in  which  it  was  introduced  by  Jason 
is  an  introduction  to  the  more  important  measures 
>f  Lysias  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Eupator.     In 
•ther  places  (as  very  obviously  in  xiii.  1 9  ff.)  the 
ompiler  may  have  disregarded  the  historical  de- 
>endence   of  events  while   selecting   those  which 
were  best  suited  for  the  support  of  his  theme.     If 
hese  remarks  are  true,  it  follows  that  2  Mace, 
iii.-xv.  is  to  be  regarded  not  as  a  connected  and 
Complete  history,  but  as  a  series  of  special  incidents 
rom  the  life  of  Judas,  illustrating  the  providential 
terference  of  God  in  behalf  of  His  people,  true  in 
ubstance,  but  embellished  in  foim ;  and  this  view 
f  the  book  is  supported  by  the  character  of  the 
•Her   chapters,   in   which   the   narrative   is  un- 
hecked  by  independent  evidence.     There  is  not  any 


ground  for  questioning  the  main  facts  in  the  history 
f  Heliodorus  (ch.  iii.)  or  Menelaus  (iv.)  ;  and  while 
;  is  very  probable  that  the  narratives  of  the  surier- 
ngs  of  the  martyrs  (vi.  vii.)  are  highly  coloured ; 
et  the  grounds  of  the  accusation,  the  replies  of  the 
ccused,  and  the  forms  of  torture,  in  their  essential 
laracteristics,  seem  perfectly  authentic.* 


nderstood  that  the  frtt  only  has  a  parallel  in  the  otheo 
arrative  :— 

1  MACC.  2  M*co. 

t,  11-16.  IT.  7-Jl;  13-20. 


MACCABEES.  BOOKS  OF 

8.  Besides  the  differences  which  exist  between 
Ihe  two  books  of  Maccabees  as  to  the  sequence  and 
ietails  of  common  eveirts,  there  is  considerable  diffi 
culty  as  to  the  chronological  data  which  th^j  give. 
Both  follow  the  Seleucian  era  ("  the  era  of  con 
tracts;"  "of  the  Greek  kingdom;"  1  Mace.  i.  10, 
Iv  trfi  .  .  .  Bcuri\f[a.s'f.\Kiivo)v),  but  in  some  cases 
in  which  the  two  books  give  the  date  of  the  same 
event,  the  first  book  gives  a  date  one  year  later 
than  the  second  (I  Mac*,  vi.  16  ||  2  Mace.  xi.  21, 
33;  1  Mace.  vi.  20  ||  2  Mace.  xiii.  1)  ;  yet  on  the 
ether  hand  they  agree  in  1  Mace.  vii.  1  ||  2  Mace, 
xiv.  4.  This  discrepancy  seems  to  be  due  not  to  a 
mere  error,  but  to  a  difference  of  reckoning  ;  for  all 
attempts  to  explain  away  the  discrepancy  art'  un 
tenable.  The  true  era  of  the  Seleucidae  Ix^an  in 
October  (Zh'ws)  B.C.  312;  but  there  is  <n  '-'ence 
Jiat  considerable  variations  existed  in  Syria  in  the 
reckoning  by  it.  It  is  then  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  discrepancies  in  the  books  of  Maccabees, 
which  proceeded  from  independent  and  widely- 
separated  sources,  are  to  be  referred  to  this  con 
fusion  ;  and  a  very  probable  mode  of  explaining  (at 
least  in  part)  the  origin  of  the  difference  has  been 
supported  by  most  of  the  best  chronologers.  Though 
the  Jews  way  have  reckoned  two  beginnings  to  the 
year  from  the  time  of  the  Exodus  [CHRONOLOGY, 
vol.  i.  p.  315],  yet  it  appears  that  the  biblical  dates 
are  always  reckoned  by  the  so-called  ecclesiastical 
year,  which  began  with  Nisan  (April),  and  not  by 
the  civil  year,  which  was  afterwards  in  common  use 
(Jos.  Ant.  i.  3,  §3),  which  began  with  Tisri  (Oc 
tober:  comp.  Patritius,  De  Cons.  Mace.  p.  33  ff.). 
Now  since  the  writer  of  1  Mace,  was  a  Palestinian 
Jew,  and  followed  the  ecclesiastical  year  in  his 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF        177 

Beckoning  of  months  (1  Mace.  iv.  52),  it  is  pro- 
Dable  that  he  may  have  commenced  the  Seleucian 
vear  not  in  autumn  (Tisri),  but  in  spring  (Nisari).* 
The  narrative  of  1  Mace.  x.  in  fact  demands  a 
longer  period  than  could  be  obtained  (1  Mace.  x.  1, 
21,  fourteen  days)  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  yeai 
began  with  Tisri.  If,  however,  the  year  began  in 
Nisan  (reckoning  from  spring  312  B.C.),'  the 
events  which  fell  in  the  last  half  of  the  true 
Seleucian  year  would  be  dated  a  year  forward, 
while  the  true  and  the  Jewish  dates  would  agree 
in  the  first  half  of  the  year.  Nor  is  there  any 
difficulty  in  supposing  that  the  two  events  assigned 
to  different  years  (Wemsdorf,  De  Fide  Mace.  §9) 
happened  in  one  half  of  the  year.  On  other  grounds, 
indeed,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  difference  in  the 
reckoning  of  the  two  books  is  still  greater  than  it 
thus  accounted  for.  The  Chaldaeans,  as  is  proved 
by  good  authority  (Ptol.  Vley.  ffvvr.  ap.  Clinton 
F.  H.  Ill,  350,  370),  dated  their  Seleucian  era 
one  year  later  than  the  true  time  from  311  B.C., 
and  probably  from  October  (Dius ;  comp.  2  Mace, 
xi.  21,  33).  If,  as  is  quite  possible,  the  writer  ol 
2  Mace. — or  rather  Jason  of  Gyrene,  whom  he 
epitomized — used  the  Chaldaean  dates,  there  may  be 
a  maximum  difference  between  the  two  books  of  a 
year  and  half,  which  is  sufficient  to  explain  the 
difficulties  of  the  chronology  of  the  events  connected 
with  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (Ideler,  i. 
531-534,  quoted  and  supported  by  Browne,  Ordo 
Saeclorum,  489,  490.  Comp.  Clinton,  Fasti  Hell. 
iii.  367  ff.,  who  takes  a  different  view  ;  Patritius, 
I.  c. ;  and  Wernsdorf,  §ix.  ff.,  who  states  the  diffi 
culties  with  great  acuteness). 

9.  The  most  interesting  feature  in  2  Mace,  is  its 


1  MAOC. 

2  MACC. 

1  MACC.                                  2  MACC 

111. 

..  iv.  21a;  21I/-50;  v.  1-4. 

vi.  14,  15.                                ...            — 

1.  18-20. 

— 

vi.  16;  I7a.                      ...  ix.  28. 

_ 

..  v.  5-10. 

...  xi.  5-12;  13-150. 

L  21-24a. 

..  v.  11-16;  17-20. 

v.  9;  10-13;  14-20.           ...  xii.  1-5. 

i.  246. 

..  v.  21;  22-23. 

vi.  176.                              ...          — 

1.  30-32  ;  33-39. 

..  v.  24-26. 

...  xii.  6-17;  ix.  29. 

i.  400  ;  406-42. 

...  v.  27. 

v.  21a;  23a;24;  25-28  ...          — 

i.  43;  44-48. 

..  vi.  1. 

...  xi.  156-26;  27-38. 

i.  49;  50-51. 

...  vi.  2. 

v.  29.                                 ...  xii.  176;  18,  19. 

_ 

..   vi.  3-7. 

v.30-34;  216-23a;  35,  36  ...           — 

i.  52-54;  55,  56;  57-(i-'. 

...   vi.  8,9. 

v.  55-62.                                ...           — 

i.  63,  64. 

..  vi.  10;  12-17. 

v.  37-39  ;  40-43(1.               ...  xii.  20,  21. 

i.  65-67. 

— 

v.  436-44.                              ...   xii.  22-26. 

— 

...  vi.  18-31. 

v.  45-65a.                             ...  xii.  27-33;  34-46. 

ii.  1-30. 



v.  656-68;  vi.  18-27           ...          — 

ii.  31  ;  32-37 

...  vi.  Ha. 

vi.  28-30.                             ...  xiii.  1,2;  3-17. 

ii.  38. 

...  vi.  116. 

vi.  31  ;  32-48.                       ...   xiii.  18-21. 

_ 

...  vii.  1-42. 

vi.  49-54;  55-59.                 ...  xiii.  22,  23O. 

ii.  39-70. 



vi.  60-62a.                         ...  xiii.  336-24. 

iii.  1-9;  10-3T 

..'.  viil.  1-7. 

vi.  626-63;  vii.  1-24.         ...  xiii.  25,  26. 

_ 

...  viii.  8;  9-11 

_                                     ...  xiv.  1-2. 

Hi.  38,  39;  40,41. 



vii.  25.                               ...  xiv.  3-5;  6-11. 

iii.  42. 

...  viii.  I2a;  126-21 

Vii.  26.                                 ...  xiv.  12,13;  14.29. 

iii.  43-54. 

vii.  27-38.                            ...  xiv.  30-36;  37-46;  xv.  1-21. 

Iti.  55  ;  56-60. 

...  viii.  22. 

vii.  39,  40a.                          ...           — 

iv.  1-12. 



vii.  40!>-50.                           ...  xv.  22-40. 

iv.  13-16;  17-22 
iv.  23-25. 

...  viii.  23-26. 

...  v.iii.  27  ;  28-36. 

This  arrangement,  however,  is  that  of  an  apologist  for 
the  books  ;  and  the  tesselation  of  passages,  no  less  than 

vi.  la  ;  iv.  26,  27. 
vi.  16^. 

...  ir.l-3;  <-10. 

the  large  amount  of  passages  peculiar  to  each  book,  indi 
cates  how  little  real  parallelism  there  is  between  them. 

iv.  28-35 

— 

t  In  2  Mace.  xv.  36  the  same  reckoning  of  months  occurs, 

iv.  35-43a  ;  435-46. 

...  X.  l-3«. 

but  with  a  distinct  reference  to  the  Palestinian  decree. 

Iv.  47-61. 

...  x.  36-J;  9-13. 

i  It  is,  however,  possible  that  the  years  may  have  been 

vi.  5-8. 

— 

dated  from  the  following  spring  (311  B.C.);  in  which  case 

V.  1-So. 

...  x.  14  18;  19-22. 

the  Jewish  and  truJ  years  would  coincide  for  the  last  lisilf 

V.  56  ;  8-8. 

...  x.  23. 

of  the  year,  and  during  the  first  half  the  Jewish  date 

vi.  9-13. 

...  ix.  11-17;  18  27. 

would  fall  short  by  one  year  (Herzfeld,  Gesch.  d.  V.-rfiw 

VOL    II 

...   x.  24-38;  xi.  I-t. 

/«-.  L  449). 

178        MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

marked  religious  character,  by  which  it  is  clearly 
distinguished  from  the  fii-st  book.  "  The  mani- 
fr  stations  (iiTHpavficu)  made  from  heaven  on  behali 
of  those  who  were  zealous  to  behave  manfully  in 
defence  of  Judaism"  (2  Mace.  ii.  21)  form  the 
staple  of  the  book.  The  events  which  are  related 
historically  in  the  former  book  are  in  this  regarded 
theocratically,  if  the  word  may  be  used.  The  cala 
mities  of  persecution  and  the  desolation  of  God's 
people  are  definitely  referred  to  a  temporary  visita 
tion  of  His  anger  (v.  17-20,  vi.  12-17,  vii.  32,  33), 
which  shows  itself  even  in  details  of  the  war  (xii.  40 ; 
comp.  Josh.  vii.).  Before  his  great  victory  Judas 
is  represented  as  addressing  "  the  Lord  that  worketh 
wonders"  (rfparovoi6s)  with  the  prayer  that,  as 
once  His  augel  slew  the  host  of  the  Assyrians,  so 
then  He  would  "  send  a  good  angel  before  His 
aimies  for  a  fear  and  dread  to  their  enemies "  (xv. 
22-24;  comp.  1  Mace.  vii.  41,  42).  A  great  "mani 
festation  "  wrought  the  punishment  of  Heliodorus 
(iii.  24-29) :  a  similar  vision  announced  his  cure 
(iii.  33,  4).  Heavenly  portents  for  "forty  days" 
(ivKpivfia,  v.  4)  foreshewed  the  coming  judgment 
(v.  2,  3).  "  When  the  battle  waxed  strong  five 
comely  men  upon  horses  "  appear,  of  whom  two 
cover  Maccabaeus  from  all  danger  (x.  29,  30). 
Again,  in  answer  to  the  supplication  of  the  Jews 
for  "a  good  angel  to  deliver  them,"  "there  ap 
peared  before  them  on  horseback  one  in  white 
clothing,"  and  "  they  marched  forward  "  to  triumph, 
"  having  an  helper  from  heaven  "  (xi.  6-11).  And 
«vhere  no  special  vision  is  recorded,  the  rout  of  the 
aiiemy  is  still  referred  to  "  a  manifestation  of  Him 
that  seeth  all  things  "  (xii.  22).  Closely  connected 
with  this  belief  in  the  active  energy  of  the  beings 
of  the  unseen  world,  is  the  importance  assigned  to 
dreams  (xv.  11,  ovapov  d^i6irirrrov  Sirap)  ;  and 
the  distinct  assertion,  not  only  of  a  personal  "  resur 
rection  to  life"  (vii.  14,  dvdffraffis  tls  Cw^"» 
v.  9,  aiii>i>ios  avafiiuHTis  CWTJS),  but  of  the  in- 
Huence  which  the  living  may  yet  exercise  on  the 
condition  of  the  dead  (xii.  43-45).  The  doctrine 
of  Providence  is  carried  out  in  a  most  minute 
jwrallelism  of  great,  crimes  and  their  punishment. 
Thus,  Andronicus  was  put  to  death  on  the  very  spot 
where  he  had  murdered  Onias  (iv.  38,  rov  Kvpiov 
TV  o£iaf  airrtp  KoKaaiv  airoSoVror)  :  Jason,  who 
had  "  driven  many  out  of  their  country,"  died  an 
exile,  without  "  solemn  funeral,"  as  he  had  "  cast 
out  many  unburiai"  (v.  9,  10):  the  torments 
suffered  by  Antiochus  are  likened  to  those  which  he 
had  inflicted  (ix.  5,  6):  Menelaus,  who  "had  com 
mitted  many  sins  about  the  altar,"  "  received  his 
death  in  ashes"  (xiii.  4-8):  the  hand  and  tongue 
of  Nicanor,  with  which  he  had  blasphemed,  were 
hung  up  "  as  an  evident  and  manifest  sign  unto  all 
of  the  help  of  the  Lord  "  (xv.  32-35).  On  a  larger 
scale  the  same  idea  is  presented  in  the  conti-asted 
relations  ef  Israel  and  the  heathen  to  the  Divine 
Power.  The  former  is  "  God's  people,"  "  God's 
portion"  (TJ  /uepi's,  i.  26  ;  xiv.  15),  who  are  chas 
tised  in  love:  the  latter  are  left  unpunished  till  the 
full  measure  of  their  sins  ends  in  destruction  (vi. 
12-17).  For  in  this  book,  as  in  1  Mace.,  there  are 
no  traces  of  the  glorious  visions  of  the  prophets, 
who  foresaw  the  time  when  all  nations  should  be 
united  in  one  bond  under  one  Lord. 

10.  The  history  of  the  book,  as  has  been  already 
noticed  (§o),  is  extremely  obsr-ure.  It  is  first  men 
tioned  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (1.  c.)  ;  and  Origen, 
in  a  Greek  fragment  of  his  commentaries  on  Exodus 
(Philoc.  26),  quotes  vi.  12-16,  with  very  consider 
able  variations  of  le.vt,  fioin  "the  Maccnbaeau  his  , 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

tory"  (rek  MaKKa/Safca :  comp.  1  MACO.  §b').  A1 
a  later  time  the  history  of  the  martyred  brothers  wat 
a  favourite  subject  with  Christian  writers  (Cypr. 
Ep.  Ivi.  6,  &c.) ;  and  in  the  time  of  Jerome  (Pro/ 
Galeat.)  and  Augustine  (De  Doctr.  Chri»t.  ii.  8, 
De  Civ.  Dei,  xviii.  36)  the  book  was  in  common 
and  public  use  in  the  Western  Church,  where  it 
maintained  its  position  till  it  was  at  last  definitely 
declared  to  be  canonical  at  the  council  of  Trent. 
[CANON,  vol.  i.  p.  259.] 

11.  The  Latin  version  adopted  in  the  Vulgate, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  first  book,  is  that  current 
before  Jerome's  time,  which  Jerome  left  wholly 
untouched  in  the  apocryphal  bocks,  with  the  ex 
ception  of  Judith  and  Tobit.   The  St.  Germain  MS., 
from  which  Sabatier  edited  an  earlier  text  of  1  Mace., 
does  not,  unfortunately,  contain  the  second  book, 
being  imperfect  at  the  end ;  but  the  quotations  of 
Lucifer  of  Cagliari   (Sabatier,  ad  Capp.  vi.  vii.) 
and  a  fragment  published  by  Mai  (Spicil.  Rom.  1.  c. 
I  MACC.  §10),  indicate  the  existence  and  character 
of  such  a  text.     The  version  is  much  less  close  to 
the  Greek  than  in  the  former  book,  and  often  gives 
no  more  than  the  sense  of  a  clause  (i.  13,  vi.  21, 
vii.  5,  &c.).     The  Syriac  version  is  of  still  less 
value.     The  Arabic  so-called  vei-sion  of  2   Mace, 
is  really  an  independent  work.     [FIFTH  BOOK  OF 
MACCABEES.] 

12.  The   chief  commentaries  on  2  Mace,  have 
been  already  noticed.  [FIRST  BOOK  OF  MACCABEES, 
§11.]     The  special  edition  of  Hasse  (Jena,  1786), 
seems,  from  the  account  of  Grimm,  to  be  of  no 
value.      There  are,  however,  many   valuable  his 
torical  observations  in  th<:  essay  of  Patritius  (De 
Consensu,  &c.  already  cited.) 

III.  THE  THIRD  BOOK  OF  THE  MACCABEES 
contains  the  history  of  events  which  preceded  the 
great  Maccabaean  struggle.  After  the  decisive 
battle  of  Raphia  (B.C.  2 17),  envoys  from  Jerusalem, 
following  the  example  of  other  cities,  hastened  to 
Ptolemy  Philopator  to  congratulate  him  on  his  suc 
cess.  After  receiving  them  the  king  resolved  to 
visit  the  holy  city.  He  offered  sacrifice  in  the 
Temple,  and  was  so  much  struck  by  its  majesty 
that  he  urgently  sought  permission  to  enter  the 
sanctuary.  When  this  was  refused  he  resolved 
to  gratify  his  curiosity  by  force,  regardless  of  the 
consternation  with  which  his  design  was  received 
(ch.  i.).  On  this  Simon  the  high-priest,  after  the 
people  had  been  with  difficulty  restrained  from  vio 
lence,  kneeling  in  front  of  the  Temple  implored 
divine  help.  At  the  conclusion  of  the  prayer  the 
king  fell  paralysed  into  the  arms  of  his  attendants, 
and  on  his  recovery  returned  at  once  to  Egypt 
without  prosecuting  his  intention.  But  angry  at 
his  failure  he  turned  his  vengeance  on  the  Alexan 
drine  Jews.  Hitherto  these  had  enjoyed  the  highest 
rights  of  citizenship,  but  the  king  commanded  that 
those  only  who  were  voluntarily  initiated  into  the 
heathen  mysteries  should  be  on  an  equal  footing 
with  the  Alexandrians,  and  that  the  remainder 
should  be  enrolled  in  the  lowest  class  (e»s  Aoo- 
ypwpiav  Kdl  oiKeriK^v  SidOtffiv  dx^vai,  ii.  28), 
and  branded  with  an  ivy-leaf  (ch.  ii.).  [DiON  rsus.] 
Not  content  with  this  order,  which  was  evaded  or 
despised,  he  commanded  all  the  Jews  in  the  country 
to  be  arrested  and.  sent  to  Alexandria  (ch.  iii.). 
This  was  done  as  well  as  mignt  be,  though  the 
greater  part  escaped  (iv.  18),  and  the  gathered 
multitudes  were  confined  in  the  Hippodrome  out- 
ide  the  city  (comp.  Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5). 
The  resident  Jews,  who  shewed  sympathy  for  their 
souiitrymen.  were  LnnirisoneJ  with  them  ;  and  tlw 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

Icing  ordered  the  names  of  all  to  be  taken  down  • 
preparatory  to  their  execution.  Here  the  first  , 
marvel  happened :  the  scribes  to  whom  the  tusk  j 
was  assigned  toiled  for  forty  days  from  morning  j 
till  evening,  till  at  last  reeds  and  paper  failed 
them,  and  the  king's  plan  was  defeated  (ch.  iv.). 
However,  regardless  of  this,  the  king  ordered  the 
keeper  of  his  elephants  to  drug  the  animals,  five 
hundred  in  number,  with  wine  and  incense,  that 
they  might  trample  the  prisoners  to  death  on  the 
morrow.  The  Jews  had  no  help  but  in  prayer; 
and  here  a  second  marvel  happened.  The  king 
was  overpowered  by  a  deep  sleep,  and  when  he 
awoke  the  next  day  it  was  already  time  for  the 
banquet  which  he  had  ordered  to  be  prepared,  so 
that  the  execution  was  deferred.  The  Jews  still 
prayed  for  help;  but  when  the  dawn  came,  the 
multitudes  were  assembled  to  witness  their  destruc 
tion,  and  the  elephants  stood  ready  for  their  bloody 
work.  Then  was  there  another  marvel.  The 
king  was  visited  by  deep  forgetfulness,  and  chided 
the  keeper  of  the  elephants  for  the  preparations 
which  he  had  made,  and  the  Jews  were  again 
saved.  But  at  the  evening  banquet  the  king 
recalled  his  purpose,  and  with  terrible  threats 
prepared  for  its  immediate  accomplishment  at 
daybreak  (ch.  v.).  Then  Eleazer,  an  aged  priest, 
prayed  for  his  people,  and  as  he  ended  the  royal 
train  came  to  the  Hippodrome.  On  this  there  was 
seen  a  heavenly  vision  by  all  but  the  Jews  (vi.  18). 
The  elephants  trampled  down  their  attendant*,  and 
the  wrath  of  the  king  was  turned  to  pity.  So  the 
Jews  were  immediately  set  free,  and  a  great  feast 
was  prepared  for  them  ;  and  they  resolved  to  observe 
a  festival,  in  memory  of  their  deliverance,  during 
the  time  of  their  sojourn  in  strange  lands  (ch.  vi.). 
A  royal  letter  to  the  governors  of  the  provinces  set 
forth  the  circumstances  of  their  escape,  and  assured 
them  of  the  king's  protection.  Pel-mission  was  given 
to  them  to  take  vengeance  on  their  renegade  country 
men,  and  the  people  returned  to  the*,-  homes  in  great 
triumph,  "  crowned  with  flowers,  and  singing  praises 
to  the  God  of  their  fathers." 

2.  The  form  of  the  narrative,  even  in  this  bald 
outline,  sufficiently  shows  that  the  object  of  the 
book  has  modified  the  facts  which  it  records.     The 
writer,  in  his  zeal  to  bring  out  the  action  of  Provi 
dence,  has  coloured  his  history,  so  that  it  has  lost 
all  semblance  of  truth.     In  this  respect  the  book 
offers  an  instructive  contrast  to  the  book  of  Esther, 
with  which  it  is  closely  connected  both  in  its  pur 
pose  and  in  the  general  character  of  its  incidents. 
In  both  a  terrible  calamity  is  averted  by  faithful 
prayer ;  royal  anger   is  changed  to  royal  favour ; 
and  the  punishment  designed  for  the  innocent  is 
directed  to  the  guilty.     But  here  the  likeness  ends. 
The  divine  reserve,  which  is  the  peculiar  charac 
teristic  of  Esther,  is  exchanged  in  3  Mace,  for  rhe 
torical  exaggeration ;  and  once  again  the  words  of 
inspiration  stand  ennobled  by  the  presence  of  their 
later  counterpart. 

3.  But  while   it   is    impossible   to    accept   the 
details  of  the  book  as  historical,  some  basis  of  truth 
must  be  supposed  to  lie  beneath  them.     The  yearly 
festival  (vi.  36;  vii.  19)  can  hardly  have  been  a 
mere   fancy   of  the   writer ;    and    the   pillar   and 
synagogue  (irpoffevx'ti)  at  Ptolemais  (vii.  20)  must 
have  been   connected  in  some  way  with  a  signal 
deliverance.     Besides  this,  Josephus  (c.  Ap.  ii.  5) 
Mates  a  very  similar  occurrence  which  took  place 
in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  VII.  (Physcon).     "  The 
king,"  as  he  says,  "  exasperated  by  the  opposition 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 


179 


which  Onias,  the  Jewish  general  of  the  royai  army, 
made  to  his  usurpation,  seized  all  the  Jews  in 
Alexandria  with  their  wives  and  children,  and 
exposed  them  to  intoxicated  elephants.  But  the 
animals  turned  upon  the  king's  friends ;  and  forth 
with  the  king  saw  a  terrible  visage  which  foibad 
him  to  injure  the  Jews.  On  this  he  yielded  to 
the  prayers  of  his  mistress,  and  repented  of  his 
attempt ;  and  the  Alexandrine  Jews  observed  the 
day  of  their  deliverance  as  a  festival."  The  essen 
tial  points  of  the  story  are  the  sjme  as  those  in 
the  second  part  of  3  Mace.,  and  there  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  Josephus  has  preserved  the  events 
which  the  writer  adapted  to  his  narrative.  If  it  be 
true  that  Ptolemy  Philopator  attempted  to  enter 
the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  was  frustrated  in  his 
design — a  supposition  which  is  open  to  no  reason 
able  objection — it  is  easily  conceivable  that  tradi 
tion  may  have  assigned  to  him  the  impious  design 
of  his  successor;  or  the  author  ot  3  Mace,  may 
have  combined  the  two  events  for  the  sake  of  effect. 

4.  Assuming  rightly  that  the  book  is  an  adapta 
tion  of  history,    Ewald   and   (at   greater   length) 
Grimm   have  endeavoured  to  fix   exactly  the  cir 
cumstances   by  which  it  was   called    forth.     The 
writings  of  Philo,  occasioned   by  the   oppressions 
which  the  Alexandrine  Jews  suffered  in  the  reign  .ol 
Caligula,  offer  several  points  of  connexion  withk  it ; 
and  the  panic  which  was  occasioned  at  Jerusalem 
by  the  attempt  of  the  emperor  to  erect  his  statue  in 
the  Temple  is  well  known  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  8, 
§2).     It  is  then  argued  that  the  writer  designed 
to  portray  Caligula  under  the  name  of  the  sensual 
tyrant  who  had   in  earlier  times  held  Egypt  and 
Syria,    while  he  sought  to  nerve  his  countrymen 
for  their  struggle  with  heathen  power,  by  remind 
ing  them  of  earlier  deliverances.     It  is  unnecessary 
to  urge  the  various  details  in  which  the  parallel 
between  the  acts  of  Caligula  and  the  narrative  fail. 
Such  differences  may  have  been  part  of  the  writer's 
disguise;  but  it  may  be  well  questioned  whether 
the  position  of  the  Jews  in  the  early  time  of  the 
empire,   or   under   the  later    Ptolemies,    was   not 
generally  such  that  a  narrative  like  3  Mace,  would 
find  a  ready  auditory. 

5.  The  language  of  the  book  betrays  most  clearly 
its  Alexandrine  origin.     Both  in    vocabulary  and 
construction   it  is  rich,  affected,  and  exaggerated. 
Some  words  occur  nowhere  else  (\aoypa<pia,  ii.  28  ; 
irpoffvffT(\\(ffOat,    ii.    29 ;     vir6<ppiKos,    vi.    20 ; 
X«pTijpta,  iv.  20  ;  j8u0oTpe^)y,  vi.  8  ;  fyvxov\- 
KfiffOcuj  v.  25 ;    /j.Lffvj3pis,  vi.  9  ;  irovT6ftpoxos, 
vi.  4  ;  fj.tya\oKpdrwp,  vi.  2  ;   /ut>po|8pe;KT)s,  iv.  (3 : 
irpoKaTaffKtppovffOai,    iv.   1  ;    kvtirKnpfirTus,   i. 
2u)  ;  others  are  used  in  strange  senses  (  IKWUGIV, 
Met.  iii.  22;  TrapajScunXevw,  vi.  24;   eyuTropiraw, 
Met.  vii.  5)  ;  others  are  very  rare  or  characteristic 
of  late  Greek  writers  (tiriftddpa,  ii.  31  ;   KaTairru- 
ffis,  ii.   14;    %v6ffffi.os,  ii.  21;    airpAirTiaros,  iii. 
14;  a\oyiffrta,   v.  42;  birapairdSiffTOs,  vi.   28; 
<t>piKaff/ji6s,  iii.  17  ;  /j.fya\o/j.fpu>,  vi.  oo  ;  aitv\n6i, 
iii.  25  ;  Kiffff6<pv\\ov,  ii.  29  ;  ^airocrro\-fi,  iv.  4). 
The  form  of  the  sentences  is  strained  (e.g.  i.  15, 1 7, 
ii.  31,  iii.  23,  iv.  11,  vii.  7,   19,  &c.),  and  every 
description  is  loaded  with  rhetorical  ornament  (e.  g. 
iv.  2,  5;   vi.  45).     As  a  natural  consequence  the 
meaning  is  often  obscure  (e,  g.  i.  9, 14, 19,  iv.  5, 14), 


*  These  are  pointed  out  at  length  by  (irinun  (Kinl.  ^3; ; 
but  the  re'.atiun  of  the  Alexandrine  Jews  to  a  persecutinp 
civil  power  would,  perhaps,  always  present  the  sue* 
general  fet  lures. 

v  •.; 


180        MACCABEES,  BOOK8  OF 

ind  the  writer  is  led  into  exaggerations  which  are  his 
torically  incorrect  (vii.  2,  20,  v.  2  ;  comp.  Grimm). 

6.  From  the  abruptness  of  the  commencement 
(6  8«  *I\OT(£T«P)  it  has  been  thought  (Ewald, 
Gtesch.  iv.  535)  that  the  book  is  a  mere  fragment  of  a 
larger  work.     Against  this  view  it  may  be  urged 
that  the  tenor  of  the  book  is  one  and  distinct,  and 
brought  to  a  perfect  issue.     It  must,  however,  be 
noticed  that  in  some  MSS.  (44,  125,  Parsons)  the 
beginning  is  differently  worded :    "  Now  in  these 
days  king  Ptolemy " ;  and  the  reference  in  ii.  25 
(rS»v  irpoawoSfSfiyfievtav}  is  to  some  passage  not 
contained  in  the  present  narrative.     It  is  possible 
that   the  narrative   may    have  formed  the   sequel 
to  an  earlier  history,  as  the  Hellenica  continue, 
without  break  or  repetition,  the  history  ofThucy- 
dides  (peril  Si  ravra,  Xen.  Hell.  i.  1)  ;  or  we  may 
suppose  (Grimm,  Einl.  §4)  that  the  introductory 
chapter  has  been  lost. 

7.  The   evidence   of  language,   which   is   quite 
sufficient  to  fix  the  place  of  the  composition  of  the 
book  at  Alexandria,  is  not  equally  decisive  as  to  the 
date.     It   might,   indeed,   seem    to   belong  to  the 
early  period  of  the  empire  (B.C.  40-70),  when  for  a 
Jew  all  hope  lay  in  the  record  of  past  triumphs, 
which  assumed  a  fabulous  grandeur  from  the  con 
trast  with  present  oppression.     But  such  a  date  is 
purely   conjectural ;    and   in   the   absence   of  any 
direct  proof  it  is  unsafe  to  trust  to  an  impression 
which  cannot  claim  any  decisive  authority,  from  the 
very  imperfect  knowledge  which  we  possess  of  the 
religious   history   of  the   Jews  of  the  dispersion. 
If,  however,  Ewald's  theory  be  correct,  the  date 
falls  within  the  limits  which  have  been  suggested. 

8.  .The   uncertainty   of  the  date   of  the   com 
position  of  the  book  corresponds  with  the  uncer 
tainty  of  its  history.     In  the  Apostolical  Canons 
(Can.   85)  "three  books  of  the  Maccabees"  are 
mentioned  (MaKKaftaicav  rpta,  one  MS.  reads  8'). 
of  which  this  is  probably  the  third,  as  it  occupies 
the  third  place  in  the  oldest  Greek  MSS.,  which 
contain  also  the  so-called  fourth  book.     It  is  found 
in  a  Syriac  translation,  and  is  quoted  with  marked 
respect  by  Theodoret  (ad  Dan.  xi.  7)  of  Antioch 
(died  cir.  A.D.  457).     "  Three  books  of  the  Mac 
cabees  "  (MaKKafiaiKa.  y'  )  are  placed  at  the  head 
of  the  antilegomena  of  the  0.  T.  in  the  catalogue  ol 
Nicephorus ;  and  in  the  Synopsis,  falsely  ascribed 
to    Athanasius,  the   third  book  is  apparently  d 
scribed  as  "  Ptolemaica,"  from  the  name   of  the 
royal  hero,1  and    reckoned    doubtfully  among  the 
disputed  books.     On  the  other  hand  the  book  seems 
to  have  found  no  acceptance  in    the  Alexandrine 
or  Western  churches,  a  fact  which  confirms  the  late 
date  assigned  to  it,  if  we  assume  its  Alexandrine 
origin.     It  is  not  quoted,  as  far  as  we  know,  in  any 
Latin  writer,  and  does  not  occur  in  the  lists  of 
canonical   and   apocryphal  books   in    the   Gelasian 
Decretals.     No  ancient  Latin  version  of  it  occurs 
and  as  it  is  not  contained  in  the  Vulgate  it  has  been 
excluded  from  the  canon  of  the  Romish  church. 

9.  In  modern  times  it  has  been  translated  into 
Latin  (first  in  the  Complutensian  Polyglott) ;  Ger 
man  (De  Wette  and  Augusti,  Bibelubersetzung 
1st  ed. ;  and  in  an  earlier  version  "  by  Jo.  Circem- 
berger,  Wittenberg,  1554 ;"  Cotton,  Five  Books,  &c. 
p.  xx.);  and  French  (Calmet).  The  first  English 
version  was  appended  to  "  A  briefe  and  compen- 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

lious  table  .  .  .  opening  the  way  to  the  principal/ 
listories  of  the  whole  Bible  .  .  .  London,  1550.'' 
This  version  with  a  few  alterations  (Cotton,  p.  xx.^ 
was  included  in  a  folio  Bible  published  next  year 
by  J.  Day ;  and  the  book  was  again  published  in 
15*53.  A  better  translation  was  published  '>v  Whis 
ton  in  his  Authentic  Documents  (1727) ;  and  a 
new  version,  with  short  notes  by  Dr.  Cotton  (  The 
five  books  of  Maccabees  in  English  .  .  .  Oxford, . 
1832).  The  Commentary  of  Grimm  (Kurzgcf. 
HandbucK)  gives  ample  notices  of  the  opinions  of 
earlier  commentators,  and  supersedes  the  necessity 
of  using  any  other. 

IV.  THE  FOURTH  BOOK  OF  MACCABEES  (Mo/c- 
<a$a.{<av  8'.  fis  MaKKuflaiovs  \6yos)  contains  a 
rhetorical  narrative  of  the  martyrdom  of  Eleazer  and 
of  the  "  Maccabaean  family,"  following  in  the  main 
the  same  outline  as  2  Mace.  The  second  title  of 
the  book,  On  the  Supreme  Sovereignty  of  Reason 
(irepl  avroKpdropos  \oytfffj.ov),  explains  the  moral 
use  which  is  made  of  the  history.  The  author  in 
the  introduction  discusses  the  nature  of  reason  and 
the  character  of  its  supremacy,  which  he  then  illus 
trates  by  examples  taken  from  Jewish  history 
(§1-3,  Hudson).  Then  turning  to  his  principal 
proof  of  the  triumphant  power  of  reason,  he  gives 
a  short  summary  of  the  causes  which  led  to  the 
persecution  of  Antioch  us  (§  4),  and  in  the  remainder 
of  the  book  describes  at  length  the  death  of  Eleazer 
(§  5-7),  of  the  seven  brethren  (8-14),  and  of  their 
mother  (15-19),  enforcing  the  lessons  which  he 
would  teach  by  the  words  of  the  martyrs  and  the 
reflections  which  spring  from  them.  The  last  sec 
tion  (20)  is  evidently  by  another  hand. 

2.  The  book  was  ascribed  in  early  times  to  Jo 
sephus.    Eusebius  (ff.  E.  iii.  10,  jmrrfvijTeu  Se  Kal 

ffriircp — irepl  avTOKparopos  \oytfffj.ov,  o  riftj 
Mu.KKa/Sa'iKui'  (irtypa^/av),  and  Jerome,  following 
him  (De  Vir.  ill.  13,  "  Alius  quoque  liber  ejus,  qui 
inscribitur  irtpl  avroKpdropos  \oyi(T(j.ov  valde  ele- 
gans  habetur,  in  quo  et  Maccabaeorum  sunt  digesta 
martyria  "  comp.  Jerome,  adv.  Pal.  ii.),  also  Photius 
(ap.  Philostorg.  If.  E.  1,  rb  fifvrotye  rtraprov 
fnrb  "IcocHjirou  ylypa<t>6ai  KO!  avrbs  ffvvofj.o\oysavt 
so  that  at  that  time  the  judgment  was  disputed), 
and  Suidas  (s.  v.  'Icienjiros) — give  this  opinion 
without  reserve  ;  and  it  is  found  under  his  name  in 
many  MSS.  of  the  great  Jewish  historian.  On  the 
other  hand,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  quotes  the  book 
(Orat.  xv.  22)  as  though  he  was  unacquainted  with 
the  author,  and  in  the  Alexandrine  and  Sinaitic  MSS. 
it  is  called  simply  "  the  fourth  of  Maccabees."  The 
internal  evidence  against  the  authorship  by  Josephus 
is  so  great  as  to  outweigh  the  testimony  of  Eusebius, 
from  whom  it  is  probable  that  the  later  statements 
were  derived ;  and  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  the  book  was  assigned  to  Josephus  by  a  mer< 
conjecture,  which  the  style  and  contents  alike  show 
to  be  unfounded.  It  is  possible  that  a  tradition 
was  preserved  that  the  author's  name  was  Josephus 
('IttHTTjiroj),  in  which  case  the  confusion  would  bt- 
more  easy. 

3.  If  we  may  assume  that  the  authorship  wns 
attributed  to  Josephus  only  by  error,  no  evidence 
remains  to  fix  the  date  of  the  book.     It  is  only 
certain  that  it  was  written  before  the  destruction  ol 
Jerusalem,  and  probably  after  2  Mace.     The  cha- 


1  This  title  occurs  only  in  the  Synopsis  of  the  I'mudo 
Atlianasius  (p.  432,  ed.  Migne).  Athanasius  omits  the 
Maccabees  in  liis  detailed  list.  The  textat  present  stands 
Waicifa/Stuica  3i/3Ai'a  $' .  nroAeMatVa.  But  Credner  (/((? 


Gesch.  d.  Kan.  ] 44  note)  conjectures  \vith  great  pro 
liability  that  the  true  reading  is  Ma/ex.  j3i/3A.  icai  II  roA. 
Kni  and  8'  can  frequently  be  scarcely  distin^uiilied  ir 
cursive  MSS. 


MACCABEES,  BOOKS  OF 

meter  of  the  composition  leads  the  reader  to  suppose 
that  it  was  not  a  mere  rhetorical  exercise,  but  an 
earnest  effort  to  animate  the  Jewish  nation  to  face 
,-eal  perils.  In  which  case  it  might  be  leferred  not 
Mimaturally,  to  the  troubled  times  which  immedi 
ately  preceded  the  war  with  Vespasian  (cir.  A.r>.  67). 

4.  As  a  historical  document  the  narrative  is  of 
no  value      Its  interest  centres  in  the  fact  that  it  is 
a  unique  example  of  the  didactic   use   which   the 
Jews  made  of  their  history.     Ewald  (Gesck.   iv. 
556)  rightly  compares  it  with  the  sermon  of  later 
times,  in  which  a  scriptural   theme  becomes   the 
subject   of  an    elaborate   and    practical    comment. 
The  style  is  very  ornate  and  laboured ;  hu*   it  is 
correct  and  vigorous,  and  truly  Greek.     The  rich 
ness  and  boldness  of  the  vocabulary  is  surprising. 
Many  words,  coined  in  an  antique  mould,  seem  to 
be  peculiar  to  the   book,  as  ouroSeViroTos,  t0v6- 
TATjKToy,  eirrajU^Ttop,  KO<rfJ.oir\riO-f]S,  Kotr/ji.ocpope'ii', 
na\a.Ko\l/vx€'iv,  olffrpfi^affia,  iradoKparf'tffOai,  &c. ; 
others  belong  to  later  types,  as  avre£ovffi6rris,  apxtf- 
paffOai ;    others  are    used  in   meanings   which  are 
found  in  late  writers,  as  ir-ti$a.\iovxf'iv,  ayurrfia, 
a^>?J7^juo  ;  and  the   number  of  prepositional  com 
pounds  is    very  large — e'va.iro<r<f>pa.'yi£fi.i>,  e'|ef/ue- 
i>i£ftv,     firiKapiro\oyfTffOai,     f'irippfayo\oyfi(T6ai, 
irpofftiriKarareivfiv. 

5.  The  philosophical  tone  of  the  book  is  essen 
tially  stoical ;  but  the  stoicism  is  that  of  a  stern 
legalist.     The  dictates  of  reason  are  supported  by 
the  remembrance  of  noble  traditions,  and  by  the 
hope  of  a  glorious  future.     The  prospect  of  the  life 
to  come  is  clear  and  wide.     The  faithful  are  seen 
to  rise  to  endless  bliss  ;  the  wicked  to  descend  to  end 
less  torment,  varying  in  intensity.     But  while  the 
writer  shows,  in  this  respect,  the  effects  of  the  full 
culture  of  the  Alexandrine  school, and  in  part  advances 
beyond  his  predecessors,  he  offers  no  trace  of  that 
deep  spiritual  insight  which  was  quickened  by  Chris 
tianity.     The  Jew  stands  alone,  isolated  by  charac 
ter  and  by  blessing  (comp.  Gfrorer,  Philo,  &c.,  ii.  173 
ff. ;  Daehne,  Jud.  Alex.  Rdig.  Philos.  ii.  190  ff.). 

6.  The  original  Greek  is  the  only  ancient  text  in 
which  the  book  has  been  published,  but  a  Syriac 
version  is  said  to  be  preserved    in   MS.  at  Milan 
(Grimm,  EM.  §7).     In  recent  times  the  work  has 
hardly  received  so  much  attention  as  it  deserves.    The 
first  and  only  complete  commentary  is  that  of  Grimm 
(Exeg.  Handbuch),  which  errs   only  by   extreme 
elaborateness.    An  English  translation  has  been  pub 
lished  by  Dr.  Cotton  (  The  five  books  of  Maccabees, 
Oxf.  1832).     The  text  is  given  in  the  best  form  by 
Bekker  in  his  edition  of  Josephus  (Lips.  1855-6). 

7.  Though  it  is  certain  that  our  present  book  is 
that  which  old  writers  described,  Sixtus  Senensis 
(Bibl.  Sancta,  p.  37,  ed.  1575)  gives  a  very  interest 
ing  account  of  another  fourth  book  of  Maccabees, 
which  he  saw  in  a  library  at  Lyons,  which  was  after 
wards  burnt.     It  was  in  Greek,  and  contained  the 
history  of  John  Hyrcanus,  continuing  the  narrative 
directly  after  the  close  of  the  first  book.  Sixtus  quotes 
the  first  words:   ical  fj.fr a  rb  airoicravBrivai  rbv 
2'i/j.cava,   fjfv-tiOij   '\<aa.vt]s   vibs    avrov   apxitptv! 
dpr'  avrov,  but  this  is  the  only  fragment  which 
remains  of  it.    The  history,  he  says,  was  nearly  the 
same  as  that  in  Jos.   Ant.  xiii.,  though  the  style 
was  very  different  from  his,  abounding  in  Hebrew 
idioms.     The  testimony  is  so  exact  and   explicit, 
that  we  can  see  no  reason  for  questioning  its  accu 
racy,  and   still   less  for   supposing    (with   Calmet) 
that    Sixtus   saw    only  the    so-called    fifth    book, 
which  is  at  present  preserved  iu  Arabic. 


MACEDONIA 


181 


V.  THE  FIFTH  BOOK  OF  MACCABEES  just  men 
tioned  may  call  for  a  very  brief  notice.  It  ii 
printed  in  Arabic  in  the  Paris  and  London  1'oly. 
glotts  ;  and  contains  a  history  of  the  Jews  from  the 
attempt  of  Heliodorus  to  the  birth  of  our  Lord. 
The  writer  made  use  of  the  first  two  books  of  Mac 
cabees  and  of  Josephus,  and  has  no  claim  to  be  con 
sidered  an  independent  authority.  His  own  know 
ledge  was  very  imperfect,  and  he  perverts  the  state 
ments  which  he  derives  from  others.  He  must  have 
lived  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  probably  out 
of  Palestine,  though  the  translation  bears  very  clear 
traces  of  Hebrew  idioms,  so  that  it  has  been  supposed 
that  the  book  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew,  or 
at  least  that  the  Greek  was  strongly  modified  by 
Hebrew  influence.  The  book  has  been  published  in 
English  by  Dr.  Cotton  (Five  bwks,$c.}.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MACEDO'NIA  (MaiceSovla.},  the  first  part  of 
Europe  which  received  the  Gospel  directly  from 
St.  Paul,  and  an  important  scene  of  his  subsequent 
missionary  labours  and  the  labours  of  his  com 
panions.  So  closely  is  this  region  associated  with 
apostolic  journeys,  sufferings,  and  epistles,  that  it 
has  truly  been  called  by  one  of  our  English  tra 
vellers  a  kind  of  Holy  Land  (Clarke's  Travels,  ch. 
xi.).  For  details  see  NEAPOLIS,  PHILIPPI,  AMPIII-* 
POLIS,  APOLLONIA,  THESSALONICA,  and  BEREA. 
We  confine  ourselves  here  to  explaining  the  geo 
graphical  and  political  import  of  the  term  "  Mace 
donia"  as  employed  in  the  N.  T.,  with  some  allu 
sion  to  its  earlier  use  in  the  Apocrypha,  and  one  or 
two  general  remarks  on  St.  Paul's  journeys  through 
the  district,  and  the  churches  which  he  founded  there. 

In  a  rough  and  popular  description  it  is  enough 
to  say  that  Macedonia  is  the  region  bounded  inland 
by  the  range  of  Haemus  or  the  Balkan  northwards, 
and  the  chain  of  Pindus  westwards,  beyond  which 
the  streams  flow  respectiviiy  to  the  Danube  and 
the  Adriatic  ;  that  it  is  separated  from  Thessaly  on 
the  south  by  the  Cambunian  hills,  running  easterly 
from  Pindus  to  Olympus  and  the  Aegean;  and  that 
it  is  divided  on  the  east  from  Thrace  by  a  less 
definite  mountain-boundary  running  southwards 
from  Haemus.  Of  the  space  thus  enclosed,  two 
of  the  most  remarkable  physical  features  are  two 
great  plains,  one  watered  by  the  Axius,  which 
comes  to  the  sea  at  the  Thermaic  gulf,  not  far 
from  Thessalonica ;  the  other  by  the  Strymon, 
which,  after  passing  near  Philippi,  flows  out  below 
Amphipolis.  Between  the  mouths  of  these  two 
rivers  a  remarkable  peninsula  projects,  dividing 
itself  into  three  points,  on  the  farthest  of  which 
Mount  Athos  rises  nearly  into  the  region  of  per 
petual  snow.  Across  the  neck  of  this  peninsula  St. 
Paul  travelled  more  than  once  with  his  companions. 

This  general  sketch  would  sufficiently  describe 
the  Macedonia  which  was  ruled  over  by  Philip  and 
Alexander,  and  which  the  Romans  conquered  from 
Perseus.  At  first  the  conquered  country  was  di 
vided  by  Aemilius  Paulus  into  four  districts.  Mace 
donia  Prima  was  on  the  east  of  the  Strymon,  and 
had  Amphipolis  for  the  capital.  Macedonia  Secunda 
stretched  between  the  Strymon  and  the  Axius,  with 
Thessalonica  for  its  metropolis.  The  third  and 
fourth  districts  lay  to  the  south  and  the  west. 
This  division  was  only  temporary.  The  whole  of 
Macedonia,  along  with  Thessaly  and  a  large  tract 
along  the  Adriatic,  was  made  one  province  and 
centralised  under  the  jurisdiction  of  a  proconsui, 
who  resided  at  Thessalonica.  We  have  now  reached 
the  definition  which  corresponds  with  the  usage  of 
the  tenn  in  *he  N.  T.  ''Acts  xvi.  9,  10,  12, 


182 


MACEDONIA 


rviii.  5,  xix.  21,  22,  29,  xx.  1,  3,  xxvii.  2;  Itom. 
iv.  26;  1  Cor.  xvi.  5;  2  Cor.  i.  16,  ii.  13,  vii.  5, 
viii.  1,  is.  2,  4,  xi.  9;  Phil.  iv.  15;  1  Thess  i. 
7,  8,  iv.  10 ;  1  Tim.  i.  3).  Three  Roman  provinces, 
all  very  familiar  to  us  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul, 
divided  the  whole  space  between  the  basin  of  the 
Danube  and  Cape  Matapan.  The  border-town  of 
ILLYRICUM  was  Lissus  on  the  Adriatic.  The 
boundary-line  of  ACHAIA  nearly  coincided,  except 
in  the  western  portion,  with  that  of  the  kingdom 
of  modern  Greece,  and  ran  in  an  irregular  line 
from  the  Acroceraunian  promontory  to  the  bay  oi 
Thermopylae  and  the  north  of  Euboea.  By  sub- 
a-acting  these  two  provinces,  we  define  Macedonia. 
The  history  of  Macedonia  in  the  period  between 
the  Persian  wars  and  the  consolidation  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  the  Levant  is  touched  in  a  veiy  in 
teresting  manner  by  passages  in  the  Apocrypha. 
In  Esth.  xvi.  10,  Hainan  is  described  as  a  Mace 
donian,  and  in  xvi.  14  he  is  said  to  have  contrived 
his  plot  for  the  purpose  of  transferring  the  kingdom 
of  the  Persians  to  the  Macedonians.  This  suffi 
ciently  betrays  the  late  date  and  spurious  character 
of  these  apocryphal  chapters :  but  it  is  curious  thus 
to  have  our  attention  turned  to  the  early  struggle 
of  Persia  and  Greece.  Macedonia  played  a  great 
part  in  this  struggle,  and  there  is  little  doubt  that 
Ahasuerus  is  Xerxes.  The  history  of  the  Maccabees 
opens  with  vivid  allusions  to  Alexander  the  son  of 
Philip,  the  Macedonian  king  ('AAe'lcwSpos  6  TOV 
Qi\iiriTOv  o  &acn\tvs  &  MaKfSaivj,  who  came  out 
of  the  land  of  Chettiim  and  smote  Darius  king  of 
the  Persians  and  Medes  (1  Mace.  i.  1),  and  who 
reigned  first  among  the  Grecians  (ib.  vi.  2).  A 
little  later  we  have  the  Roman  conquest  of  Perseus 
"  king  of  the  Citims  "  recorded  (ib.  viii.  5).  Subse 
quently  in  these  Jewish  annals  we  find  the  term 
"  Macedonians  "  used  for  the  soldiers  of  the  Seleucid 
successors  of  Alexander  (2  Mace.  viii.  20).  In 
what  is  called  the  Fifth  Book  of  Maccabees  this 
usage  of  the  word  is  very  frequent,  and  is  applied 
not  only  to  the  Seleucid  princes  at  Antioch,  but  to 
the  Ptolemies  at  Alexandria  (see  Cotton's  Five 
Books  of  Maccabees,  Oxford,  1832).  It  is  evident 
that  the  words  "Macedonia"  and  "Macedonian" 
were  fearfully  familiar  to  the  Jewish  mind  ;  and  this 
gives  a  new  significance  to  the  vision  by  which  St. 
Paul  was  invited  at  Troas  to  the  country  of  Philip 
and  Alexander. 

Nothing  can  exceed  the  interest  and  impressive- 
ness  of  the  occasion  (Acts  xvi.  9)  when  a  new  and 
religious  meaning  was  given  to  the  well-known 
avfyp  Mo/ce5ai^  of  Demosthenes  (Phil.  i.  p.  43),  and 
when  this  part  of  Europe  was  designated  as  the 
first  to  be  trodden  by  an  Apostle.  The  account  of 
St.  Paul's  first  journey  through  Macedonia  (Acts 
xvi.  10-xvii.  15)  is  marked  by  copious  detail  and 
well-defined  incidents.  At  the  close  of  this  journey 
he  returned  from  Corinth  to  Syria  by  sea.  On  the 
next  occasion  of  visiting  Europe,  though  he  both 
went  and  returned  through  Macedonia  (Acts  xx. 
1-6),  the  narrative  is  a  very  slight  sketch,  and  the 
route  is  left  uncertain,  except  as  regards  Philippi. 
Maay  yea~»  elapsed  before  St.  Paul  visited  this  pro 
vince  agau;  but  from  1  Tim.  i.  3  it  is  evident 
that  he  did  accomplish  the  wish  expressed  during 
his  first  imprisonment  (Phil.  ii.  24). 

The  character  of  the  Macedonian  Christians  is  set 
before  us  in  Scripture  in  a  very  favourable  light. 
The  candour  of  the  Bereaus  is  highly  commended 
(Acts  xvii.  11);  the  Thessalonians  were  evidently 
objects  of  St.  Paul's  peculiar  ati'ection  (\  Thess.  ii. 


MACHIR 

8,  17-'2<J,  iii.  10);  and  the  Philippiann,  besid* 
their  general  freedom  from  blame,  are  noted  as 
remarkable  for  their  liberality  and  self-denial  (Phi*, 
iv.  10, 14-19 ;  see  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  xi.  9).  It  is  worth 
noticing,  as  a  fact  almost  typical  of  the  change 
which  Christianity  has  produced  in  the  social  lite 
of  Europe,  that  the  female  element  is  conspicuous 
in  the  records  of  its  introduction  into  Macedonia. 
The  Gospel  was  first  preached  there  to  a  small  con 
gregation  of  women  (Acts  xvi.  13);  the  first  con 
vert  was  a  woman  (ib.  ver.  14) ;  and,  at  least  at 
Philippi,  women  were  prominent  as  active  workers 
in  the  cause  of  religion  (Phil.  iv.  2,  3). 

It  should  be  observed  that,  in  St.  Paul's  time, 
Macedonia  was  well  intersected  by  Roman  roads, 
especially  by  the  great  Via  Egnatia,  which  con 
nected  Philippi  and  Thessalonica,  and  also  led 
towards  Illyricum  (Rom.  xv.  19).  The  antiquities 
of  the  country  have  been  well  explored  and  de 
scribed  by  many  travellers.  The  two  besfc  works 
are  those  of  Cousinery  (  Voyage  dans  la  Macedoine, 
Paris,  1831)  and  Leake  (Travels  in  Northern 
Greece,  London,  1835).  [J.  S.  H.] 


Coin  of  Macedonia. 


MACEDONIAN  (MuiceS^)  occurs  in  A.V. 
only  in  Acts  xxvii.  2.  In.  the  other  cases  (Acts 
xvi.  9,  xix.  29,  2  Cor.  ix.  2,  4)  our  translators  ren 
der  it "  of  Macedonia." 

MACHBANA'I  03230 :  Mt\Xa0ayat;  Alex. 

laxa&avdt :  Machbanai),  one  of  the  lion-faced 
warriors  of  Gad  who  joined  the  fortunes  of  David 
when  living  in  retreat  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  13). 

MACHBE'NAH  (N333D :  Maxa^o;  Alex. 

axa^Tfivd:  Machbena).  Sheva,  the  father  oi 
Machbena,  is  named  in  the  genealogical  list  of  Judah 
as  the  offspring  of  Maachah,  the  concubine  of  Caleb 
ben-Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  49).  Other  names  similar)  v 
mentioned  in  the  passage  are  known  to  be  those 
not  of  persons  but  of  towns.  The  most  feasible 
inference  from  this  is,  that  Machbena  was  founded 
or  colonized  by  the  family  of  Maachah.  To  the 
position  of  the  town,  however,  whether  near  Gaza, 
like  MADMANNAH,  or  between  Jerusalem  and  He 
bron,  like  GIBEA,  we  possess  no  clue.  It  is  not 
named  by  Euscbius  or  Jerome,  and  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  met  with  by  any  later  traveller.  [G.J 

MA'CHI  (»313  :  Mwcx' ?  Alex.  Max* :  Machi), 
the    father  of  Geuel  the  Gadite,  who  weut  with 
Jaleb  and  Joshua  to  spy  out  the  land  of  Canaan 
Num.  xiii.  15). 

MACH'IR  (T3O:  MaX«> :  Machir),  the 
eldest  son  (Josh.  xvii.  1)  of  the  patriarch  Manasseh 
jy  an  Aramite  or  Syrian  concubine  (1  Chr.  vii.  14, 
aiid  the  LXX.  of  Gen.  xlvi.  20).  His  children  are 
commemorated  as  having  been  caressed  •  by  Joseph 
before  his  death  (Gen.  1.  23).  His  wife's  name  it 
'.ot  preserved,  but  she  was  a  Benjamite,  the  "  sisiei 


•  Tbc  Tarjntiu  cliarhcierlstically  wye  "  circumcise-.!  " 


MACHIRITEfc. 

jf  Huppim  aiul  Shnppim"  (1  Chr.  vn.  15).  The 
inly  children  whose  names  are  given  are  his  son 
l:ik';i(l,k  who  is  repeatedly  mentioned  (Num.  xxvi. 
29,  xxvii.  1,  xxxvi.  1;  1  Chr.  vii.  14,  &c.),  and  a 
daughter,  Abiah,  who  married  a  chief  of  Judah 
named  Hezron  (1  Chr.  ii.  21,  24).  The  connexion 
with  Benjamin  may  perhaps  have  led  to  the  selec- 
.ion  by  Abner  of  Mahanaim,  which  lay  on  the 
boundary  between  Gad  and  Manasseh,  as  the  resi 
dence  of  Ishbosheth  (2  Sam.  ii.  8)  ;  and  that  with 
Judah  may  have  also  influenced  David  to  go  so 
far  north  when  driven  out  of  his  kingdom.  At 
the  time  of  the  conquest  the  family  of  Machir  had 
become  very  powerful,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
country  on  the  east  of  Jordan  was  subdued  by 
them  (Num.  xxxii.  39  ;  Deut.  iii.  15).  In  fact  to 
their  warlike  tendencies  it  is  probably  entirely  due 
that  the  tribe  was  divided,  and  that  only  the 
inferior  families  crossed  the  Jordan.  So  great  was 
their  power  that  the  name  of  Machir  occasionally 
supersedes  that  of  Manasseh,  not  only  for  the 
eastern  territory,  but  even  for  the  western  half  of 
the  tribe  also :  see  Judg.  v.  14,  where  Machir 
occurs  in  the  enumeration  of  the  western  tribes — 
"  Gilead  "  apparently  standing  for  the  eastern  Ma 
nasseh  in  ver.  17  ;  and  still  more  unmistakeably  in 
Josh.  xiii.  31,  compared  v:ith  29. 

2.  The  son  of  Ammiel,  a  powerful  sheykh  of  one 
of  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes,  but  whether  of  Ma 
nasseh— the  tribe  of  his  namesake — or  of  Gad,  must 
remain  uncertain  till  we  know  where  Lo-debar,  to 
which  place  he  belonged,  was  situated.  His  name 
occurs  but  twice,  but  the  part  which  he  played  was 
by  no  means  an  insignificant  one.  It  was  his  for 
tune  to  render  essential  service  to  the  cause  of  Saul 
and  of  David  successively — in  each  case  when  thev 
were  in  difficulty.  Under  his  roof,  when  a  cripple 
and  friendless,  after  the  death  of  his  uncle  and  the 
ruin  of  his  house,  the  unfortunate  Mephibosheth 
found  a  home,  from  which  he  was  summoned  by 
David  to  the  honours  and  the  anxieties  of  a  resi 
dence  at  the  court  of  Jerusalem  (2  .Sam.  ix.  4,  5). 
When  David  himself,  some  years  later,  was  driven 
from  his  throne  to  Mahanaim,  Machir  was  one  of 
the  three  great  chiefs  who  lavished  on  the  exiled 
king  and  his  soldiers  the  wealth  of  the  rich  pastoral 
district  of  which  they  were  the  lords — "  wheat,  and 
barley,  and  flour,  and  parched  com,  and  beaus,  and 
lentiles,  and  parched  pulse,  and  honey,  and  butter, 
and  sheep,  and  cows' -milk  cheese"  (2  Sam.  xvii. 
27-29).  Josephus  calls  him  the  chief  of  the  country 
of  Gilead  (Ant.  vii.  9,  §8).  [G.] 

MACHIR'ITES,  THE  OTOttn  :  &  MaXip* ; 
Alex.  &  Maxetpl :  Machiritae).  The  descendants 
of  Machir  the  father  of  Gilead  (Num.  xxvi.  29). 

MACHMAS  (Max/"<**:    Machmas),  1  Mace. 

.:;.  7:i.      [MlCHMASH.] 

MACHNADEBA'I 


A1A011PELA11 


IS'6 


b  There  are  several  considerations  which  may  lead  us  to 
doubt  whether  we  are  warranted  by  the  Biblical  narrative 
in  affixing  a  personal  sense  to  the  name  of  Gilead,  such  as 
the  very  remote  period  from  which  that  name  as  attached 
to  the  district  dates  (Gen.  xxxi.),  and  also  such  passages 
as  Num.  xxxii.  39,  and  Deut.  iii.  15.  (See  Ewald,  Gesch. 
ii  477.  478,  493.) 

8  The  story  of  the  purchase  current  amongst  the  mo 
dern  Arabs  of  Hebron,  as  told  by  Wilson  (Landt,  &c.,  i. 
361),  is  a  counterpart  of  the  legend  of  the  stratagem  by 
which  the  Phoenician  Dido  obtained  land  enough  for  her 
city  of  Byrsa.  "  Ibrahim  asked  only  as  much  ground  as 
souM  be  covered  with  a  cow's  hide  ;  but  after  the  ogree- 


AleA.  Maxvabaaffoi'i :  MechncdebaT),oni  of  the  sons 
of  Bani  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's 
command  (Ezr.  x.  40).  The  marginal  reading  of 
A.  V.  is  Mabnadebai,  which  is  found  in  some  copies. 
In  the  corresponding  list  of  1  Esd.  ix.  34  the  place 
of  this  name  is  occupied  by  "  of  the  sons  of  Ozora," 
which  may  be  partly  traced  in  the  original. 

MACHTELAH  (always  with  the  article— 
i"l73!3J3n  :  rb  5ur\ovv,  also  rb  Snr\ovi>  ffiri]\aiov ; 
duplex,  also  spelunca  duplex},  the  spot  containing 
the  timbered  field,  in  the  end  of  which  was  the 
cave  which  Abraham  purchased"  from  the  Bene- 
Heth,  and  which  became  the  burial  place  of  Sarah, 
Abraham  himself,  Isaac,  Rebekah,  Leah,  and  Jacob. 
Abraham  resided  at  Bethel,  Hebron  and  Gerar, 
but  the  field  which  contained  his  tomb  was  the 
only  spot  which  positively  belonged  to  him  in  the 
Land  of  Promise.  That  the  name  applied  to  the 
general  locality,  and  not  to  either  the  field  or  the 
cavi»m,b  is  evident  from  Gen.  xxiii.  17,  "the  field 
of  Ephron  which  was  in  Macpelah  ...  the  field 
and  the  cave  which  was  therein,"  although  for 
convenience  of  expression  both  field  and  cave  are 
occasionally  called  by  the  name.  Its  position  is — 
with  one  exception  uniformly — specified  as  "  facing 
(^ST^V)  Mamre"  (Gen.  xxiii.  17,  19,  xxv.  9, 
xlix.  30,  I.  13).  What  the  meaning  of  this  ancient 
name — not  met  with  beyond  the  book  of  Genesis 
— may  be,  appears  quite  uncertain.  The  older 
interpreters,  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  Targums  of  On- 
kelos  and  Pseudo-Jonathan,  Peschito,  Veneto-Greek, 
&c.,  explain  it  as  meaning  "  double " — the  double 
cave  or  the  double  field — but  the  modern  lexico 
graphers  interpret  it,  either  by  comparison  with  the 
Ethiopic,  as  Gesenius  ( Thes.  7046),  an  allotted  or 
separated  place ;  or  again — as  Fiirst  (ffandwb. 
733  a)  —the  undulating  spot.  The  one  is  probably 
as  near  the  real  meaning  as  the  other. 

Beyond  the  passages  already  cited,  the  Bible  con 
tains  no  mention  either  of  the  name  Macpelah  or 
of  the  sepulchre  of  the  Patriarchs.  Unless  this 
was  the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah  to  which  Absalom 
had  vowed  or  pretended  to  have  vowed  a  pilgri 
mage,  when  absent  in  the  remote  Geshur  (2  Sam. 
xv.  7),  no  allusion  to  it  has  been  discovered  .'a 
the  records  of  David's  residence  at  Hebron,  nor 
yet  in  the  struggles  of  the  Maccabees,  so  many 
of  whose  battles  were  fought  in  and  around 
it.  It  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  absence 
among  the  ancient  Hebrews  of  that  veneiation 
for  holy  places  which  is  so  eminently  charac 
teristic  of  modern  Orientals.  But  there  are  few,  if 
any,  of  the  ancient  sites  of  Palestine  of  whose  ge 
nuineness  we  can  feel  more  assured  than  Macpelah. 
The  traditional  spot  has  everything  in  its  favour  as 
far  as  position  goes ;  while  the  wall  which  encloses 
the  Haram,  or  sacred  precinct  in  which  the  sepul- 


ment  was  concluded  he  cut  the  hide  into  thongs,  and  sur 
rounded  the  whole  of  the  space  now  forming  the  Haram." 
The  story  is  remarkable,  not  only  for  its  repetition  of  the 
older  Semitic  tale,  but  for  its  complete  departure  from 
the  simple  and  open  character  of  Abraham,  »8  set  forth  In 
the  Biblical  narrative.  A  similar  story  is  told  of  othei 
places,  but,  like  Byrsa,  their  names  contain  something 
suggestive  of  the  hide.  The  writer  has  not  been  »Ue  tc 
trace  any  connexion  of  this  kind  in  any  of  the  names  oJ 
Macpelah  or  Hebron. 

b  The  LXX.  invariably  attach  the  name  to  the  cave  • 
see  xxiii.  19,  lv  TO>  <m->)Aa«ji  TOV  aypou  TCO  6in\<o.  Thij 
is  followed  by  Jerome 


184 


MACtlPELAH 


Mosque  l 

chres  themselves  are  reported,  and  probably  with 
truth,  still  to  lie — and  which  is  the  only  part  at 
present  accessible  to  Christians — is  a  monument 
certainly  equal,  and  probably  superior  in  age  to 
anything  remaining  in  Palestine.  It  is  a  quadran 
gular  building  of  about  200  feet  in  length  by  1 1 5  in 
width,  its  dark  grey  walls  rising  50  or  60  in  height, 
without  window  or  opening  of  any  description, 
except  two  small  entrances  at  the  S.E.  and  S.W. 
corners.  It  stands  nearly  on  the  crest  of  the  hill 
which  forms  the  eastern  side  of  the  valley  on  the 
slopes  and  bottom  of  which  the  town  is  strewn,  and 
it  is  remarkable  how  this  venerable  structure,  quite 
affecting  in  its  hoary  grey  colour  and  the  archaic 
forms  of  its  masonry,  thus  rising  above  the  meaner 
buildings  which  it  has  so  often  beheld  in  ruins, 
dignifies,  and  so  to  speak  accentuates,  the  general  mo 
notony  of  the  town  of  Hebron.  The  ancient  Jewish 
tradition  c  ascribes  its  erection  to  David  (Jickus  ha- 
Aboth  in  Hottinger,  Cippi  Hebr.  ;50),  thus  making 
it  coeval  with  the  pool  in  the  valley  below ;  but, 
whatever  the  worth  of  this  tradition,  it  may  well 
be  of  the  age  of  Solomon,1*  for  the  masonry  is  even 
more  antique  in  its  character  than  that  of  the 
lower  portion  of  the  south  and  south-western  walls 
of  the  Haram  at  Jerusalem,  and  which  many 
critics  ascribe  to  Solomon,  while  even  the  severest 


«  According  to  hap-Parchi  (Asher's  Uenj.  437),  "  tbe 
stones  had  formerly  belonged  to  the  Temple."  Ritter 
(Erdkunde,  Palatt.  240)  goes  so  far  as  to  suggest  Joseph  ! 

d  The  peculiarities  of  the  masoury  are  these :— (1)  Some 
of  the  stones  are  very  large :  Dr.  Wilson  mentions  one 
38  ft.  long,  and  3  ft.  4  in.  deep.  The  largest  in  the  Haram 
wall  at  Jerusalem  is  24i  ft.  But  yet  (2)  the  surface— in 
-|)li-n<lid  preservation — is  very  finely  worked,  more  «>  than 
Uie  ftneetof  the  stones  ut  the  south  and  soutb-west  portion 


allows  it  to  be  of  the  .Nte  of  Herod.  The  dare 
must  always  remain  a  mystery,  but  there  are  two 
considerations  which  may  weigh  in  favour  of  fixing 
t  very  early.  1 .  That  often  as  the  town  of  Hebron 
may  have  been  destroyed,  this,  being  a  tomb,  would 
always  be  sparged.  2.  It  cannot  on  architectural 
grounds  be  later  than  Herod's  time,  while  on  the 
other  hand  it  is  omitted  from  the  catalogue  given 
by  Josephus  of  the  places,  which  he  rebuilt  or 
ridorned.  Had  Herod  erected  the  enclosure  round  the 
tombs  of  the  fathers  of  the  nation,  it  is  hardly  con 
ceivable  that  Josephus  would  have  omitted  to  extol 
it,  especially  when  he  mentions  apparently  the  veiy 
structure  now  existing.  His  words  on  this  occasion 
are  "  the  monuments  (fj.vrifj.f'ia.}  of  Abraham  and 
his  sons  are  still  to  be  seen  in  the  town,  all  of  fine 
stone  and  admirably  wrought"  (vd.vv  tca\?is  pap- 
fj.dpov  Kal  <pi\ort/j.<as  elpya.fffi.fva.,  B.  J.  iv.  9,  §7). 
Of  the  contents  of  this  enclosure  we  have  onlj 
the  most  meagre  and  confused  accounts.  The  spot 
is  one  of  the  most  sacred  of  the  Moslem  sanctuaries, 
and  since  the  occupation  of  Palestine  by  them  it 
has  been  entirely  closed  to  Christians,  and  partially 
so  to  Jews,  who  are  allowed,  on  rare  occasions  only, 
to  look  in  through  a  hole.  A  great  part  of  the  area 
is  occupied  by  a  building  which  is  now  a  mosque, 
and  was  probably  originally  a  church,  but  of  its 

of  the  enclosure  at  Jerusalem ;  the  sunken  part  round  the 
edges  (absurdly  called  the  "  bevel ")  very  shallow,  with  no 
resemblance  at  all  to  more  modern  "  rustic  work."  (3)  The 
cro&s  joiuts  are  not  always  vertical,  but  some  are  at  an 
angle.  (4)  The  wall  is  divided  by  pilasters  about  2  ft.  6  in. 
wide,  and  5  ft.  apart,  running  the  entire  height  of  the 
ancient  wall.  It  is  very  much  to  be  wished  that  careful 
large  photographs  were  taken  of  these  walls  from  a  near 
point.  The  writer  is  not  aware  that  any  such  yet  exist 


MADAI 

i\te  or  ityle  nothing  is  known.  The  sepu/chres  of 
Abraham  and  Sarah,  Isaac  and  Rebekah,  Jacob  and 
Leah,  are  shown  on  the  floor  of  the  mosque,  covered 
in  the  usual  Mohammedan  style  with  rich  carpets  ; 
but  the  real  sepulchres  are,  as  they  were  in  the 
12th  and  16th  centuries,  in  a  cave  below  the  floor 
vBenj.  of  Tudela:  Jichus  ha-Aboth:  Monro).  In 
this  they  resemble  the  tomb  of  Aaron  on  Mount 
Hor.  [See  vol.  i.  p.  824,  825.]  The  cave,  according 
to  the  earliest  and  the  latest  testimony,  opens  to  the 
south.  This  was  the  report  of  Monro's  servant  in 
1 833 ;  and  Arculf  particularly  mentions  the  fact 
that  the  bodies  lay  with  their  heads  to  the  north,  as 
they  would  do  if  deposited  from  the  south.  A  belief 
seems  to  prevail  in  the  town  that  the  cave  commu 
nicates  with  some  one  of  the  modern  sepulchres  at 
a  considerable  distance,  outside  of  Hebron  (Loewe, 
in  Zeitung  des  Judenth.  June  1,  1839). 

The  accounts  of  the  sacred  enclosure  at  Hebron 
will  be  found  collected  by  Ritter  (Erdkunde,  Pa- 
lastina,  209,  &c.,  but  especially  236-250) ;  Wilson 
(Lands,  &c.,  i.  363-367)  ;  Robinson  (Bib.  Res.  ii. 
75-79).  The  chief  authorities  are  Arculf  (A.D. 
700);  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (A.D.  cir.  1170);  the 
Jewish  tract  Jichus  ha-Aboth  (in  Hottinger,  Cippi 
Hebraici ;  and  also  in  Wilson,  i.  365);  Ali  Bey  (  Tra 
vels,  A.D.  1807,  ii.  232, 233) ;  Giovanni  Finati  (Life 
by  Bankes,  ii.  236) ;  Monro  (Summer  Ramble 
in  1833,  i.  243)  ;  Loewe,  in  Zeitung  des  Judenth. 
1839,  p.  272,  288.  In  a  note  by  Asher  to  his  edi 
tion  of  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (ii.  92),  mention  is 
made  of  an  Arabic  MS.  in  the  Bibliotheque  Royale 
at  Paris,  containing  an  account  of  the  condition  of 
the  mosque  under  Saladin.  This  MS.  has  not  yet 
been  published.  The  travels  of  Ibrahim  el-Khijan 
in  1669,  70 — a  small  portion  of  which  from  the 
MS.  in  the  Ducal  Library  at  Gotha,  has  been  pub 
lished  by  Tuch,  with  Translation,  &c.  (Leipzig, 
Vogel,  1850),  are  said  to  contain  a  minute  descrip 
tion  of  the  Mosque  (Tuch,  p.  2). 

A  few  words  about  the  exterior,  a  sketch  of  the 
masonry,  and  a  view  of  the  town,  showing  the  en 
closure  standing  prominently  in  the  foreground, 
will  be  found  in  Bartlett's  Walks,  &c.,  216-219.  A 
photograph  of  the  exterior,  from  the  East  (?)  is  given 
as  No.  63  of  Palestine  as  it  is,  by  Rev.  G.  W. 
Bridges.  A  ground-plan  exhibiting  considerable 
detail,  made  by  two  Moslem  architects  who  lately 
superintended  some  repairs  in  the  Haram,  and  given 
by  them  to  Dr.  Barclay  of  Jerusalem,  is  engraved 
in  Osborn's  Pal.  Past  and  Present,  p.  364.  [G.] 

MAC'RON  (MaKpcov  :  Macer),  the  surname 
of  Ptolemeus,  or  Ptolemee,  the  son  of  Dorymenes 
(1  Mace.  iii.  38)  and  governor  of  Cyprus  undei 
Ptolemy  Philometor  (2  Mace.  x.  12). 

MAD'AI^nO;  MoSof:  Madaf),  which  occurs 
in  (Jen.  x.  2.  among  the  list  of  the  sons  of  Japhet 
has  been  commonly  regarded  as  a  personal  appel 
lation  ;  and  most  commentators  call  Madai  the  thirc 
son  of  Japhet,  and  the  progenitor  of  the  Medes 
But  it  is  extremely  doubtful  whether,  in  the  mine 
of  the  writer  of  Gen.  x.,  the  term  Madai  was  re 
garded  as  representing  a  person.  That  the  gene- 
tlogies  in  the  chapter  are  to  some  extent  ethnic  i 
universally  allowed,  and  may  be  seen  even  in  on 
Authorized  Version  (ver.  16-18).  And  as  Corner 


MADMENAH 


185 


•  Note  the  change  of  m  into  &,  unusual  in  the  Alex 
MS.,  which  usually  follows  the  Hebrew  more  closely  than 
the  ordinary  LXX.  text :  compare  also  MADMENAH. 

*>  The  LXX.  have  translated  the  name  as  if  from  th 
»mc  root  with  the  verb  which  accompanies  it— JD1C 


'lagog,  Javan,  Tubal,  and  Meshech,  which  are  con- 
oined  in  Gen.  x.  2  with  Madai,  are  elsewhere  in 
scripture  always  ethnic  and  not  personal  appellatives 
Ez.  xxvii.  13,  xxxviii.  6,  xxxix.  6;  Dan.  viii.  21  ; 
'oel  iii.  6  ;  Ps.  cxx.  5  ;  Is.  Ixvi.  19,  &c.),  so  it  it 
robable  that  they  stand  for  nations  rather  than 
'ersons  here.  In  that  case  no  one  would  regard 
iladai  as  a  person  ;  and  we  must  remember  that  it 
s  the  exact  word  used  elsewhere  throughout  Scrip- 
ure  for  the  well-known  nation  of  the  Medes.  Pro- 
ably  therefore  all  that  the  writer  intends  to  assert 
n  Gen.  x.  2  is,  that  the  Medes,  as  well  as  the 
jomerites,  Greeks,  Tibareni,  Moschi,  &c.,  descended 
rom  Japhet.  Modem  science  has  found  that,  both 
si  physical  type  and  in  language,  the  Medes  belong 
o  that  family  of  the  human  race  which  embraces  the 
Jymry  and  the  Gr°co-  Romans.  (See  Prichard's  Phys 
Hist,  of  Mankind,  iv.  6-50  ;  Ch.  x.  §2-4  ;  and 
omp.  the  article  on  the  MEDES.)  [G.  R.] 

MADI'ABUN  (>H/uaSa|8oi5»'  ;  Alex.  'Inffov 
H/uaSoj8ouj').  The  sons  of  Madiabun,  according  to 

Esd.  v.  58,  were  among  the  Levites  who  super- 
ntended  the  restoration  of  the  Temple  under  Zoro- 
>abel.  The  name  does  not  occur  in  the  parallel 
larrative  of  Ezr.  iii.  9,  and  is  also  omitted  in  the 
fulgate  ;  HOI-  is  it  easy  to  conjecture  the  origin  of 
-he  interpolation.  Our  translators  followed  the 
•eading  of  the  Aldine  edition. 

.MA  'D  IAN  (MaSidfj.  :  Madian,  but  Cod.  Amiat. 
of  N.  T.  Madiam),  Jud.  ii.  26;  Acts  vii.  29. 

"MlDlAN.] 

MADMAN'NAH(njl»l»:  Moxape//*;  Alex 

Sffiijva  :  a  Medemena),  one  of  the  towns  in  tht 
south  district  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  31).  It  is  named 
with  Hormah,  Ziklag,  and  other  remote  places,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  identical  with  the  MADMENAH 
of  Isaiah.  To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (  Onomasticon, 
'  Medemana")  it  appears  to  have  been  well-known. 
[t  was  called  in  their  time  Menois,  and  was  not  far 
from  Gaza.  The  first  stage  southward  from  Gaza 
is  now  el-Minyay  (Rob.  i.  602),  which,  in  default 
of  a  better,  is  suggested  by  Kiepert  (in  his  Map, 
1856)  as  the  modern  representative  of  Meuois,  and 
therefore  of  Madmannah. 

In  the  genealogical  lists  of  1  Chron.,  Madmannab 
s  derived  from  Caleb-ben-Hezron  through  his  con 
cubine  Maachah,  whose  son  Shaaph  is  recorded  as 
the  founder  of  the  town  (ii.  49). 

For  the  termination  compare  the  neighbouring 
place  Sansannah.  [G.] 

MAD'MEN  (JO-JO  :b  vavvis:  silens),  a  place 
in  Moab,  threatened  with  destruction  in  the  de 
nunciations  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  2),  but  not  elsewher* 
named,  and  of  which  nothing  is  yet  known.  [G.] 


MADMEN'AH 


va:  Mede 


mena'),  one  of  the  Benjamite  villages  north  of 
Jerusalem,  the  inhabitants  of  which  were  fright 
ened  away  by  the  approach  of  Sennacherib  along 
the  northern  road  (Is.  x.  31).  Like  others  of  the 
places  mentioned  in  this  list,  Madmenah  is  not 
elsewhere  named  ;  for  to  MADMANNAH  and  MAD 
MEN  it  can  have  no  relation.  Gesenius  (Jesaia, 
414)  points  out  that  the  verb  m  the  sentence  is 


>  iravviv  travcrerca. :  in  which  they  are  followed  bj 

the  Vulgate — but  the  roots,  though  similar,  are  really  dis 
tinct.    (See  Gesenius,  T/ies.  344a,  34Sa.) 
«  For  the  change  of  m  into  b  comp.  MAL»IAN:;AH. 


180 


MADNESS 


active — "  Madmenah  flies,"  not,  as  in  A.  V.,  "  is 
removed  "  (sc  also  Michaelis,  Bibclfiir  Ungelehrtcri). 
Madmenah  is  not  impossibly  alluded  to  by 
Isaiah  (xxv.  10)  in  his  denunciation  of  Moab,  where 
the  word  rendered  in  A.  V.  "  dunghill "  is  identical 
with  that  name.  The  original  text  (or  Cethib),  by 
a  variation  in  the  preposition  (*D2  for  1D3),  reads 
tht  "  waters  of  Madmenah."  If  this  is  so,  the 
reference  may  be  either  tj  the  Madmeuah  of  Ben 
jamin — one  of  the  towns  in  a  district  abounding 
with  corn  and  threshing-floors — or  more  appro 
priately  still  to  MADMEN,  the  Moabite  town. 
Gesenius  (Jesaia,  786)  appears  to  have  overlooked 
this,  which  might  have  induced  him  to  regard  with 
more  favour  a  suggestion  which  seems  to  have  been 


first  made  by  Joseph  Kimchi. 


[G.] 


MADNESS.  The  words  rendered  by  "  mad," 
"  madman,"  "  madness,"  &c.,  in  the  A.  V.,  vary 
considerably  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  0.  T.  In  Deut. 
xxviii.  28,  34,  1  Sam.  xxi.  13,  14,  15,  &c.  (p.avia, 
&c.,  in  the  LXX.),  they  are  derivatives  of  the  root 
1}Xy,  "to  be  stirred  or  excited;"  in  Jer.  xxv.  16, 
1.  38,  li.  7,  Eccl.  i.  17,  &c.  (vepupopd,  LXX.),  from 
the  root  7?n,  "  to  flash  out,"  applied  (like  the  Greek 
<l>\fyeiv)  either  to  light  or  sound ;  in  Is.  xliv.  25, 
from  />3D,  "to  make  void  or  foolish"  (jj.tapa.ivew, 
LXX.);  in  Zech.  xK.  4,  from  rJOFI,  "  to  wander" 

s,  LXX.).  In  the  N.  T.  they  are  generally 
used  to  render  fj.aivfir8ai  or  /j.avia  (as  in  John  x. 
20  ;  Acts  xxvi.  24  ;  1  Cor.  xiv.  23) ;  but  in  2  Pet. 
ii.  16  the  word  is  irapafyfovia.,  and  in  Luke  vi.  11 
&voia.  These  passages  show  that  in'  Scripture 
"  madness "  is  recognised  as  a  derangement,  pro 
ceeding  either  from  weakness  and  misdirection  of 
intellect,  or  from  ungovernable  violence  of  passion  ; 
and  in  both  cases  it  is  spoken  of,  sometimes  as  arising 
from  the  will  and  action  of  man  himself,  some 
times  as  inflicted  judicially  by  the  hand  of  God. 
In  one  passage  alone  (John  x.  20)  is  madness  ex 
pressly  connected  with  demoniacal  possession,  by 
the  Jews  in  their  cavil  against  our  Lord  [see  DE 
MONIACS]  ;  in  none  is  it  referred  to  any  physical 
causes.  It  will  easily  be  seen  how  entirely  this 
usage  of  the  word  is  accordant  to  the  general  spirit 
and  object  of  Scripture,  in  passing  by  physical 
causes,  and  dwelling  on  the  moral  and  spiritual  in 
fluences,  by  which  men's  hearts  may  be  affected, 
either  from  within  or  from  without. 

It  is  well  known  that  among  Oriental,  as  among 
most  semi-civilised  nations,  madmen  were  looked 
upon  with  a  kind  of  reverence,  as  possessed  of  a 
quasi-sacred  character.  This  arises  partly  no  doubt 
from  the  feeling,  that  one,  on  whom  God's  hand  is 
laid  heavily,  should  be  safe  from  all  other  harm  ; 
but  partly  also  from  the  belief  that  the  loss  of  rea 
son  and  self-control  opened  the  mind  to  supematural 
influence,  and  gave  it  therefore  a  supernatural  sa- 
credness.  This  belief  was  strengthened  by  the 
enthusiastic  expression  of  idolatrous  worship  (see 
1  K.  xviii.  26,  28),  and  (occasionally)  of  real  in 
spiration  (see  1  Sam.  xix.  21-24;  comp.  the  appli 
cation  of  «'  mad  fellow"  in  2  K.  ix.  11,  and  see 
Jer.  xxix.  26 ;  Acts  ii.  13).  An  illustration  of  it 
may  be  seen  in  the  record  of  David's  pretended 
madness  at  the  court  of  Acbish  (1  Sam.  xxi.  13- 


MAGDALA 

15),  which  shows  it  to  be  not  inconsistent  with  a 
kind  of  contemptuous  forbearance,  such  as  s  ollen 
manifested  now,  especially  by  the  Turks,  towanls 
real  or  supposed  madmen.  [A.  B.j 

MA'DON  (fnD :  Ma.ppS>v  ;  Alex.  MaSwy 
Viapuv:  Madon),  one  of  the  principal  cities  of 
Canaan  before  the  conquest.  Its  king  joined  Jabin 
and  his  confederates  in  their  attempt  against  Joshua 
at  the  waters  of  Merom,  and  like  the  rest  was  killed 
(Josh.  xi.  1,  xii.  19).  No  later  mention  of  it  is 
found,  and  beyond  the  natural  inference  drawn 
from  its  occurrence  with  Hazor,  Shimron,  &c.,  that 
it  was  in  the  north  of  the  country,  we  have  no  clue 
to  its  position.  Schwarz  (90)  proposes  to  discover 
Madon  at  Kefr  Menda,  a  village  with  extensive 
ancient  remains,  at  the  western  end  of  the  Plain  of 
Battauf,  4  or  5  miles  N.  of  Sepphoris.  His  grounds 
for  the  identification  are  of  the  slightest :  (a)  the 
frequent  transposition  of  letters  in  Arabic,  and  (6) 
a  statement  of  the  early  Jewish  traveller  hap- 
Parchi  (Asher's  Benj.  of  Tudela,  430),  that  the 
Arabs  identify  Kefar  Mendi  with  "Midian,"  or, 
as  Schwarz  would  read  it,  Madon.  The  reader  may 
judge  for  himself  what  worth  there  is  in  these 
suggestions. 

In  the  LXX.  version  of  2  Sam.  xxi.  20  the 
Hebrew  words  JH10  SJ*K,  "a  man  of  stature," 
are  rendered  avijp  MuScov,  "a  man  of  Madon." 
This  may  refer  to  the  town  Madon,  or  may  be 
merely  an  instance  of  the  habit  which  these  trans 
lators  had  of  rendering  literally  in  Greek  letters 
Hebrew  words  which  they  did  not  understand. 
Other  instances  will  be  found  in  2  K.  vi.  8,  ix.  13, 


xii.  9,  xv.  10,  &c.  &c. 


[G.] 


MAE'LUS  (MafjAoj :  Michelus},  for  MIAHIN 
(1  Esd.  ix.  26 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  25). 

MAG'BISH  (E»^D :  Maytfa  :  Megbis).  A 
proper  name  in  Ezr.  ii.  30,  but  whether  of  a  man  or 
of  a  place  is  doubted  by  some ;  it  is  probably  the 
latter,  as  all  the  names  from  Ezr.  ii.  20  to  34, 
except  Elam  and  Harim,  are  names  of  places.  The 
meaning  of  the  name  too,  which  appears  to  be 
"  freezing  "  or  "  congealing,"  seems  better  suited  to 
a  place  than  a  man.  One  hundred  and  fifty-six  of 
its  inhabitants,  called  the  children  of  Magbish,  are 
included  in  the  genealogical  roll  of  Ezr.  ii.,  but 
have  fallen  out  from  the  parallel  passage  in  Neh.  vii. 
MAGPIASH,  however,  is  named  (Neh.  x.  20)  as  on* 
of  those  who  sealed  to  the  covenant,  where  Ana- 
thoth  and  Nebo  (Nebai)  also  appear  in  the  midst 
of  proper  names  of  men.  Why  in  these  three 
cases  the  names  of  the  places  are  given  instead  of 
those  of  the  family,  or  house,  or  individual,  as 
in  the  case  of  all  the  other  signatures,  it  is  im 
possible  to  say  for  certain,  though  many  reasons 
might  be  guessed.  From  the  position  of  Magbish 
in  the  list  in  Ezr.  ii.,  next  to  Bethel,  Ai,  and  Nebo, 
and  before  Lod,  Hadid,  Ono,  and  Jericho,  it  woulJ 
seem  to  be  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  [A.  C.  H.] 

MAG'DALA  (Ma.yaSZv*  in  MSS.  B,  D,  and  Si- 
nait. — A  being  defective  in  this  place ;  but  Kec.  Text, 
MaySa\d:  Syr.  Magedun :  Vulg.  Magedan). 

The  name  Magdala  does  not  really  exist  in  the 
Bible.  It  is  found  in  the  received  Greek  text 
and  the  A.  V.  of  Matt.  xv.  39  only  ;  but  the  duel 
MSS.  and  versions  exhibit  the  name  as  Magadan. 


*  It  la  not  necessary  to  do  more  than  mention  the  hy-  (or,  as  he  calls  it,  Syala),  east  of  Banias,  which  he  sayi 
ptthesis  of  Brocaftlus,  who  identifies  Martian  and  Dal-  the  Saracens  call  Me-lMn,  or  watc-  of  Dan.  (S«  Bri> 
rraiiutiia  with  the  well  ktiuwu  circular  pool  c.Uled  I'liiala  carilus,  Dtscr.  cap.  ill.) 


MAGDALA 

Into  the  limits"  of  Magadan  Christ  came  by 
l*Mt,  over  the  lake  of  Gennesareth,  after  His  miracle 
of  feeding  the  four  thousand  on  the  mountain  of  tlve 
••astern  side  (Matt.  xv.  39)  ;  and  from  thence,  after 
a  short  encounter  with  the  Pharisees  and  Sad- 
ducees,  He  returned  in  the  same  boat  to  the  oppo 
site  shore.  In  the  present  text  of  the  parallel  nar 
rative  of  St.  Mark  (viii.  10)  we  rind  the  "  parts 
of  Dalmauutha,"  though  in  the  time  of  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  the  two  were  in  agreement,  both  reading 
Magedan,  as  Mark  still  does  in  Codex  D.  They 
place  it  "round  Gerosa"  (Onotnastioan,  sub  voce), 
as  if  the  MAGED  or  MAKED  of  Maccabees;  but 
this  is  at  variance  with  the  requirements  of  the  nar 
rative,  which  indicates  a  place  close  to  the  water,  and 
on  its  western  side.  The  same,  as  far  as  distance  is 
concerned,  may  be  said  of  Megiddo — in  its  Greek 
form,  Mageddo,  or,  as  Josephus  spells  it,  Magedo — 
which,  as  a  well-known  locality  of  Lower  Galilee, 
might  not  unnaturally  suggest  itself. 

Dalmanutha  was  probably  at  or  near  Ain  el-Ba- 
rideh,  about  a  mile  below  el-Mejdel,  on  the  western 
edge  of  the  lake  of  Gennesareth.  El-Mejdel  is 
doubtless  the  representative  of  an  ancient  Migdol  or 
Magdala,  possibly  that  from  which  St.  Mary  came. 
Her  native  place  was  possibly  not  far  distant  from 
the  Magadan  of  our  Lord's  history,  and  we  can  only 
suppose  that,  owing  to  the  familiar  recurrence  of 
the  word  Magdalene,  the  less  known  name  was 
absorbed  in  the  better,  and  Magdala  usurped  the 
name,  and  possibly  also  the  position  of  Magadan. 
At  any  rate  it  has  prevented  any  search  being 
made  for  the  name,  which  may  very  possibly  still 
be  discovered  in  the  country,  though  so  strangely 
superseded  in  the  records.' 

The  Magdala  which  conferred  her  name  on 
•'  Mary  the  Magdal-ene"  (M.  f)  Me^SoM/Hj),  one 
of  the  numerous  Migdols,  i.  e.  towers,  which  stood 
_n  Palestine — such  as  the  MIGDAL-EL,  or  tower 
of  God,  in  Naphtali,  the  MIGDAMIAD  and  Migdal- 
EDAR  of  Judah — was  probably  the  place  of  that 
name  which  is  mentioned  in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud 
as  near  Tiberias  (Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  353  ;  Schwarz, 
189),  and  this  again  is  as  probably  the  modern 
el-Mejdel,  "a  miserable  little  Muslim  village," 
rather  more  than  an  hour,  or  about  three  miles,1* 
above  Tu-bariyeh,  lying  on  the  water's  edge  at  the 
south-east  corner  of  the  plain  of  Gennesareth 
(Rob.  ii.  396,  397).  Professor  Stanley's  description 
seems  to  embrace  every  point  worth  notice.  "  Of 
all  the  numerous  towns  and  villages  in  what  must 
have  been  the  most  thickly  peopled  district  of  Pa 
lestine  one  only  remains.  A  collection  of  a  few 
hovels  stands  at  the  south-east  corner  of  the  plain 
of  Gennesareth,  its  name  hardly  altered  from  the 
ancient  Magdala  or  Migdol,  so  called  probably  from 
a  watch-tower,  of  which  ruins  appear  to  remain, 
that  guarded  the  entnnrr  to  the  plain.  Through 
its  connexion  with  her  whom  the  long  opinion  of 
the  Church  identified  with  the  penitent  sinner,  the 
nwie  of  that  ancient  tower  has  now  been  incorpo 
rated  into  all  the  languages  of  Europe.  A  large 
solitary  thorn-tree  stands  beside  it.  The  situation, 
otherwise  unmarked,  is  dignified  by  the  high  lime- 
ttoue  rock  which  overhangs  it  on  the  south-west, 


MAGI 


187 


perforated  witn  caves;  recalling,  by  a  curious  though 
doubtless  unintentional  coincidence,  the  scene  ol 
Coreggio's  celebrated  picture."  These  caves  are  said 
by  Schwarz  (189) — though  on  no  clear  authority — 
to  bear  the  name  of  Teliman,  i.  e.  Talmanutha.  "  A 
clear  stream  rushes  past  the  rock  into  the  sea, 
issuing  in  a  tangled  thicket  of  thorn  and  willow 
from  a  deep  ravine  at  the  back  of  the  plain  "  (S.  ^ 
P.  382,  383).  Jerome,  although  he  plays  upon  the 
name  Magdalene — "  recte  vocatam  Magdalenen,  id 
est  Turritam,  ob  ejus  siugularem  fidei  ac  ardoris 
constautiam" — does  not  appear  to  connect  it  with 
the  place  in  question.  By  the  Jews  the  wore 

&OT3O  is  used  to  denote  a  person  who  platted  or 
twisted  hair,  a  practice  then  much  in  use  amongst 
women  of  loose  character.  A  certain  "  Miriam 
MagJala "  is  mentioned  by  the  Talmudists,  who 
is  probably  intended  for  St.  Mary.  (See  Otho, 
Lex.  Rabb.  "  Maria ;"  and  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm. 
389,  1459.)  Magdalum  is  mentioned  as  between 
Tiberias  and  Capernaum,  as  early  as  by  Willibald, 
A.D.  722  ;  since  that  time  it  is  occasionally  named 
by  travellers,  amongst  others  Quaresmius,  Eluci- 
ddtio,  8006;  Sir  R.  Guylforde,  Pylgrymage; 
Breydenbach,  p.  29 ;  Bonar,  Land  of  Promise, 
433,  434,  and  549.  Buchanan  (Clerical  Furlough, 
375)  describes  well  the  striking  view  of  the 
northern  part  of  the  lake  which  is  obtained  from  el- 
Mejdel. — A  ruined  site  called  Om  Moghdala  i» 
pointed  out  at  about  2  hours  S.  of  Jerusalem,  appa 
rently  N.W.  of  Bethlehem  (Tobler,  3tte  Wand.  81). 

TH.  B.  H.] 

MAG'DIEL  (7K«13»:  MayeSifa,  in  Chron. 
MeSnjA, ;  Alex.  MeroSt^A. :  Maifdicfj.  One  of  the 
"  dukes "  of  Edom,  descended  from  Esau  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  43  ;  1  Chr.  i.  54).  The  name  does  not  yet 
appear  to  have  been  met  with,  as  borne  by  either 
tribe  or  place. 

MA'GED  (MoKe'8,  in  both  MSS. :  MagetK), 
the  form  in  which  the  name  MAKED  appears  in 
the  A.  V.  on  its  second  occurrence  (1  Mace.  v.  36). 

MAGI  (A.V.  "wise  men:"  Mdyot:  magi}. 
It  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  article 
to  enter  fully  into  the  history  of  the  Magi  as 
an  order,  and  of  the  relation  in  which  they 
stood  to  the  religion  of  Zoroaster.  Only  so  far 
as  they  come  within  the  horizon  of  a  student 
of  the  Bible,  and  present  points  of  contact  with  its 
history  and  language,  have  they  any  claim  for  notice 
in  this  place.  As  might  be  expected,  where  twc 
forms  of  faith  and  national  life  run  on,  for  a  long 
period,  side  by  side,  each  maintaining  its  distinct 
ness,  those  points  are  separated  from  each  other  by 
wide  intervals,  and  it  is  hard  to  treat  of  them  with 
any  apparent  continuity.  What  has  to  be  said  will 
be  best  arranged  under  the  four  following  heads  :— 

I.  The  position  occupied  by  the  Magi  in  the  his- 
tory  of  the  0.  T. 

II.  The  transition-stages  in  the  history  of  the  word 
and  of  the  order  between  the  close  of  the  O.  T.  and 
the  time  of  the  N.  T.,  so  far  as  they  affect  the  latter. 

III.  The  Magi  as  they  appear  in  the  N.  T. 

IV.  The  later  traditions  which   have  gathered 
round  the  Magi  of  Matt.  ii. 


*>  TOL  opca.  Thus  the  present  el-Mejdel— whether  iden 
tical  with  Magadan  or  Magdala  or  not— is  surrounded  by 
the  Ard  et-AIejdtl  (Wilson,  Lands,  ii.  136). 

"  The  original  form  of  the  name  may  have  beer.  Mi- 
gron ;  at  least  so  we  muy  infer  from  tbe  hXX.  version  of 
Mtgrou,  which  1=  .YUi?edo  or 


d  The  statement  of  the  Talmud  Is,  that  a  person  pass 
ing  by  Magdala  could  hear  the  voice  of  the  crier  In  Ti 
berias.  At  three  miles'  distance  this  would  not  be  impos 
sible  in  Palestine,  where  sound  travels  to  a  distance  fw 
greater  than  in  Ibis  country.  (See  Rob.  iii.  17 ;  titaiUey 
6'.  $  /'. ;  Thomson,  iMnd  and  Hook.) 


188 


MAGI 


I.  In  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  the  word  occurs 
but  twice,  and  then  only  incidentally.  In  Jer.  xxxix. 
3  and  13  we  meet,  among  the  Chaklaean  officers 
sent  by  Nebuchadnezzar  to  Jerusalem,  one  with  the 
name  or  title  of  Rab-Mag  (3D"2"1).  This  word  is 
interpreted,  after  the  analogy  of  Rau-shakeh  and 
Kab-saris,  as  equivalent  to  chief  of  the  Magi  (Ewald, 
Prop/teten,  and  Hitzig,  in  !oc.,  taking  it  as  the 
title  of  Nergal-Sharezer),  and  we  thus  find  both  the 
nair.3  and  the  order  occupying  a  conspicuous  place 
under  the  government  of  the  Chaldaeans.  Many 
questions  of  some  difficulty  are  suggested  by  this  fact. 
Historically  the  Magi  are  conspicuous  chiefly  as 
a  Persian  religious  caste.  Herodotus  connects  them 
with  another  people  by  reckoning  them  among  the 
six  tribes  of  the  Medes  (i.  101).  They  appear  in 
his  history  of  Astyages  as  interpreters  of  dreams 
(i.  120),  the  name  having  apparently  lost  its  ethno 
logical  and  acquired  a  caste  significance.  But  in 
Jeremiah  they  appear  at  a  still  earlier  period  among 
the  retinue  of  the  Chaldaean  king.  The  very  word 
liab-Mag  (if  the  received  etymology  of  Magi  be  cor 
rect)  presents  a  hybrid  formation.  The  first  syllable 
is  unquestionably  Semitic,  the  last  is  all  but  un 
questionably  Aryan.*  The  problem  thus  presented 
admits  of  two  solutions: — (1)  If  we  believe  the 
Chaldaeans  to  have  been  a  Hamitic  people,  closely 
connected  with  the  Babylonians  [CHALDAEANS], 
we  must  then  suppose  that  the  coloscal  schemes  of 
greatness  which  showed  themselves  in  Nebuchad 
nezzar's  conquests  led  him  to  gather  round  him 
the  wise  men  and  religious  teachers  of  the  nations 
which  he  subdued,  and  that  thus  the  sacred  tribe 
of  the  Medes  rose  under  his  rule  to  favour  and 
power.  His  treatment  of  those  who  bore  a  like 
character  among  the  Jews  (Dan.  i.  4)  makes  this 
hypothesis  a  natural  one ;  and  the  alliance  which 
existed  between  the  Medes  and  the  Chaldaeans  at 
the  time  of  the  overthrow  of  the  old  Assyrian 
empire  would  account  for  the  intermixture  of  reli 
gious  systems  belonging  to  two  different  races. 
(2)  If,  on  the  other  hand,  with  Renan  (ffistoire 
des  Langues  Scmitiques,  pp.  66,  07),  following 
Lassen  and  Hitter,  we  look  on  the  Ch;tldaeans  as 
themselves  belonging  to  the  Aryan  family,  and  pos 
sessing  strong  affinities  with  the  Medes,  there  is 
even  less  difficulty  in  explaining  the  presence  among 
the  one  people  of  the  religious  teachers  of  the 
other.  It  is  likely  enough,  in  either  case,  that  the 
simpler  Median  religion  which  the  Magi  brought 
with  them,  corresponding  more  or  less  closely  to 
the  faith  of  the  Zendavesta,  lost  some  measure  of 
its  original  purity  through  this  contact  with  the 
darker  superstitions  of  the  old  Babylonian  popula 
tion.  From  this  time  onward  it  is  noticeable  that 


a  In  the  Pehlvi  dialect  of  the  Zend,  Mogh  =  priest 
(Hyde.  Relig.  Viet.  Pert.  c.  31);  and  this  ts  connected  by 
philologists  with  the  Sanskrit,  mahat  (great),  fj-eyai,  and 
magnus (Gesenius, s. v.  JO;  Anquetll du Perron's Zenda- 

ixsta,  11.  555).  The  coincidence  of  a  Sanskrit  mdya,  In 
the  sense  of  "  illusion,  magic,"  Is  remarkable  ;  but  it  is 
probable  that  this,  as  well  as  the  analogous  Greek  word, 
is  the  derived,  rather  than  the  original  meaning  (comp. 
Kichhoff,  Vercleichung  der  Sprache,  ed.  Kaltschmidt,  p. 
231).  Hyde  (I.  c.)  notices  another  etymology,  given  by 
Arabian  authors,  which  makes  the  word  =  cropt-eared 
(pareis  uurilrus),  but  rejects  it.  Prideaux,  on  the  other 
hand  (Connexion,  under  B  c.  522),  accopts  it,  and  seriously 
connects  it  with  the  story  of  the  Pseudo-Smerdis  who  had 
lost  his  ears  in  Herod,  iii.  69.  Spanheim  (IHtb.  Keang. 
xviii.)  spoaks  favourably,  though  not  decisively,  of  a  He 
brew  etynn>i»Ky 


MAGI 

the  names  both  of  the  Magi  and  Chaldaeans  arc 
identified  with  the  astrology,  divination,  interorefcv 
tion  of  dreams,  which  had  impressed  themselves  iu 
the  prophets  of  Israel  as  the  most  characteristic 
features  of  the  old  Babel-religion  (Is.  xliv.  25,  xlvii. 
13).  The  Magi  took  their  places  among  '*  the  astro 
logers  and  star-gazers  and  monthly  prognosticators." 

It  is  with  such  men  that  we  have  to  think  of 
Daniel  and  his  fellow-exiles  as  associated.  They 
are  described  as  "ten  times  wiser  than  all  the 
magicians  (LXX.  pdyovs;}  and  astrologers"  (Dan. 
i.  20).  Daniel  himself  so  far  sympathises  witli  the 
order  into  which  he  is  thus,  as  it  were,  enrolled, 
as  to  intercede  for  them  when  Nebuchadnezzar 
gives  the  order  for  their  death  (Dan.  ii.  24),  and 
accepts  an  office  which,  as  making  him  "  master 
of  the  magicians,1"  astrologers,  Chaldaeans,  sooth 
sayers"  (Dan.  v.  11),  was  probably  Identical  with 
that  of  the  Rab-Mag  who  first  came  before  us. 
May  we  conjecture  that  he  found  in  the  belief 
which  the  Magi  had  brought  with  them  some 
elements  of  the  truth  that  had  been  revealed  to  his 
fathers,  and  that  the  way  was  thus  prepared  for 
the  strong  sympathy  which  showed  itself  in  a 
hundred  ways  when  the  purest  Aryan  and  the 
purest  Semitic  faiths  were  brought  face  to  face 
with  each  other  (Dan.  vi.  3,  16,  26;  Ezr.  i.  1-4; 
Is.  xliv.  28),  agreeing  as  they  did  in  their  hatred 
of  idolatry  and  in  their  acknowledgment  of  the 

God  of  Heaven  "? 

The  name  of  the  Magi  does  not  meet  us  in  the 
Biblical  account  of  the  M«do-Persian  kings.  If, 
however,  we  identify  the  Artaxerxes  who  stops  tho 
building  of  the  Temple  (Ezr.  iv.  17-22)  with  the 
Pseudo-Smerdis  of  Herodotus  [ARTAXERXKS]  and 
the  Gomates  of  the  Behistun  inscription,  we  may 
see  here  also  another  point  of  contact.  The  Magian 
attempt  to  reassert  Median  supremacy,  and  with  it 
probably  a  corrupted  Chaldaized  form  of  Magianism, 
in  place  of  the  purer  faith  in  Ormuzd  of  which 
Cyrus  had  been  the  propagator,0  would  naturally 
be  accompanied  by  antagonism  to  the  people  whom 
the  Persians  had  protected  and  supported.  The 
immediate  renewal  of  the  suspended  work  on  the 
triumph  of  Darius  (Ezr.  iv.  24,  v.  1,  2,  vi.  7,  8) 
falls  in,  it  need  hardly  be  added,  with  this  hypo 
thesis.*  The  story  of  the  actual  massacre  of  the 
Magi  throughout  the  dominions  of  Darius,  and  of 
the  commemorative  Magophouia  (Herod,  iii.  79), 
with  whatever  exaggerations  it  may  be  mixed  up, 
ndicates  in  like  manner  the  triumph  of  the  Zoro- 
istrian  system.  If  we  accept  the  traditional  date 
of  Zoroaster  as  a  contemporary  of  Darius,  we  may 
see  in  the  changes  which  he  effected  a  revival  of  the 
older  system."1  It  is  at  any  rate  striking  that  the 


"1  ;  ap\oi'Ta  enaOiSiav  iJ-dytav,  LXX. 
c  Comp!  'Sir  Henry  Rawlinson's  translation  of  the  Be- 

ik;tun  inscription :  "  The  rites  which  Gomates  the  Magian 

lad  introduced  1  prohibited.  I  restored  to  the  state  the 
chants,  and  the  worship,  and  to  those  families  which  Go- 

nates  the  Magian  had  deprived  of  them"  (Journal  of 
Asiatic  Soc.t  voL  x.,  and  Blakesley's  Herodotus,  Excurs.  on 

ii.  74). 

d  The  opinion  that  Zoroaster  (otherwise  Zerduscht,  or 
Zarathrust)  and  his  work  belonged  to  the  6th  century  B.C. 
rests  chiefly  on  the  mention  in  his  life  and  in  the  Zenda- 

'esta  of  a  king  Gustasp,  who  has  been  identified  with 
Hystaspes,  the  father  of  Darius  (Hyde,  c.  24  ;  Du  Perron, 
Zi-ndaueata,  i.  29).  On  the  other  hand,  the  name  of  Zo 
roaster  doee  not  appear  in  any  of  the  monumental  or 
liiMuriral  imtices  of  Darius;  and  Bactria,  rather  than 
Persia,  appears  as  the  so-no  of  his  labours.  The  JlnKi.  w 
»nv  rate.  ajiiK-ar  as  a  distinct  »"ler.  and  with  t.  l*iiuit' 


MAGI 


189 


»-o!\l  Magi  does  not  appear  in  the  Zendavesta,  the 
priests  being  there  described  as  Atharva  (Guardians 
ol'  the  Fire),  and  that  there  are  multiplied  pro 
hibitions  in  it  of  all  forms  of  the  magic  which,  in 
the  West,  and  possibly  in  the  East  also,  took  its 
name  from  them,  and  with  which,  it  would  appear, 
»hey  had  already  become  tainted.  All  such  arts, 
auguries,  necromancy,  and  the  like,  are  looked  on 
as  evil,  and  emanating  from  Ahriman,  and  are  pur 
sued  by  the  hero-king  Fcridoun  with  the  most  per 
sistent  hostility  (Du  Perron,  Zendavesta,  vol.  i.  part 
2,  p.  268,  424). 

The  name,  however,  kept  its  ground,  and  with  it 
probably  the  order  to  which  it  was  attached.  Under 
Xerxes,  the  Magi  occupy  a  position  which  indicates 
that  they  had  recovered  from  their  temporary  de 
pression.  They  are  consulted  by  him  as  soothsayers 
(Herod,  vii.  19),  and  are  as  influential  as  they  had 
been  in  the  court  of  Astyages.  They  prescribe  the 
strange  and  terrible  sacrifices  at  the  Strymon  and 
the  Nine  Ways  (Herod,  vii.  114).  They  were  said 
to  have  urged  the  destruction  of  the  temples  of 
Greece  (Cic.  De  Legg.  ii.  10).  Traces  of  their  in- 
•  fluence  may  perhaps  be  seen  in  the  regard  paid  by 
Mardonius  to  the  oracles  of  the  Greek  god  that 
offered  the  nearest  analogue  to  their  own  Mithras 
(Herod,  viii.  134),  and  in  the  like  reverence  which 
had  previously  been  shown  by  the  Median  Datis 
towards  the  island  of  Delos  (Herod,  vi.  97).  They 
come  before  the  Greeks  as  the  representatives  of  the 
religion  of  the  Persians.  No  sacrifices  may  be 
offered  unless  one  of  their  order  is  present  chanting 
the  prescribed  prayers,  as  in  the  ritual  of  the 
Zendavesta  (Herod,  i.  132).  No  great  change  i 
traceable  in  their  position  during  the  decline  of  the 
Persian  monarchy.  The  position  of  Judaea  as  a 
Persian  province  must  have  kept  up  some  measure 
of  contact  between  the  two  religious  systems.  The 
histories  of  Esther  and  Nehemiah  point  to  the  in 
fluence  which  might  be  exercised  by  members  of 
the  subject-race.  "It  naight  well  be  that  the  religious 
minds  of  the  two  nations  would  learn  to  respecl 
each  other,  and  that  some  measure  of  the  propheti 
hopes  of  Israel  might  mingle  with  the  belief  of  the 
Magi.  As  an  order  they  perpetuated  themselves 
under  the  Parthian  kings.  The  name  rose  to  fresh 
honour  under  the  Sassanidae.  The  classification 
which  was  ascribed  to  Zoroaster  was  recognised  as 
the  basis  of  a  hierarchical  system,  after  other  and 
lower  elements  had  mingled  with  the  earliei 
Dualism,  and  might  be  traced  even  in  the  religion 
and  worship  of  the  Parsees.  According  to  this 
arrangement  the  Magi  were  divided — >by  a  classi 
fication  which  has  been  compared  to  that  of  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons— into  disciples  (Harbeds) 
teachers  (Mobedse),  and  the  more  perfect  teachers 
of  a  higher  wisdom  (Destur  Mobeds).  This  too 
v.'ill  connect  itself  with  a  tradition  further  on 
^lyde,  c.  28  ;  Du  Perron,  Zendavesta,  ii.  555). 

II.  In  the  meantime  the  word  was  acquiring  a 
new  and  wider  signification.  It  presented  itself  t( 
the  Greeks  as  connected  with  a  foreign  system  o 


faith,  before  this  time;  and  bis  work  in  relation  to  them 
If  contemporary  with  Darius,  must  have  I>een  ihat  of  the 
restorer  rather  than  the  founder  of  a  system.  The  hyp( 
thesis  of  two  Zoroasters  is  hardly  more  than  an  attemp 
to  disentangle  the  conflicting  traditions  that  cluster  round 
the  name,  so  as  to  give  some  degree  of  historical  credibility 
to  each  group.  Most  of  these  traditions  lie  outside  the 
range  of  our  present  inquiry,  but  one  or  two  come  withi 
the  horizon  of  Biblical  legend,  if  not  of  Biblical  history 
Unable  to  account  for  the  truth  they  recognized  in  hi 
-.y.-i.'U),  except  on  the  hypothesis  that  it  had  been  ik-rlvet 


ivination,  and  the  religion  of  a  foe  whom  they  had 
onquered,  and  it  soon  became  a  bye-word  for  the 
worst  form  of  imposture.  The  rapid  growth  of  this 
"eeling  is  traceable  perhaps  in  the  meanings  attached 

0  the  word  by  the  two  great  tragedians.     In  Acs- 
ihylus  (Persae,  291)  it  retains  its  old  significance 
is  denoting  simply  a  tribe.    In  Sophocles  (Oed.  Tyr. 
387)  it  appears  among  the   epithets  of  reproach 
which  the  king  heaps  upon  Teiresias.     The  fact, 

lowever,  that  the  religion  with  which  the  word 
was  associated  still  maintained  its  ground  as  the 
faith  of  a  great  nation,  kept  it  from  falling  into 
utter  disrepute,  and  it  is  interesting  to  notice  how 
at  one  time  the  good,  and  at  another  the  bad,  side 
of  the  word  is  uppermost.  Thus  the  p.ayeia  of 
Zoroaster  is  spoken  of  with  respect  by  Plato  as  a 
0ecD</  QfpaTtfia,  forming  the  groundwork  of  an  edu 
cation  which  he  praises  as  far  better  than  that  of 
the  Athenians  (Alcib.  i.  p.  122  a).  Xenophon,  in 
.ike  manner,  idealises  the  character  and  functions 
of  the  order  (Cyrop.  iv.  5,  §16  ;  6,  §6).  Both  mean 
ings  appear  in  the  later  lexicographers.  The  word 
Magos  is  equivalent  to  airarfwv  Kal  (pappaKevrfys. 
but  it  is  also  used  for  the  Oeocreffis  Kal  6eo\oyos 
lepevs  (Hesych.).  The  Magi  as  an  order  are 

01  irapa  Tlepffals  (pi\6ffo<poi  Kal  <pi\69eoi  (Suid.). 
The  word  thus  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  LXX., 
and  from  them  into  those  of  the  writers  of  the  N.  T., 
oscillating  between  the  two  meanings,  capable  of 
being   used   in  either.     The   relations   which   had 
existed  between  the  Jews  and  Pers-8  s  would  per 
haps  tend  to  give  a  prominence  to  Lie  more  favour 
able  associations  in  their  use  of  it.    In  Daniel  (i.  20, 
ii.  2,  10,  27,  v.  11)  it  is  used,  as  has  been  noticed, 
for  the  priestly  diviners  with  whom  the  prophet 
was  associated.    Philo.  in  like  manner  (Quodomnis 
probus  liber,   p.  792),   mentions    the   Magi   with 
warm  praise,  as  men  who  gave  themselves  to  the 
study  of  nature  and  the  contemplation  of  the  Divine 
perfections,  worthy  of  being  the  counsellors  of  kings. 
It  was  perhaps  natural  that  this  aspect  of  the  word 
should  commend   itself  to  the  theosophic  Jew  of 
Alexandria.     There  were,  however,  other  influences 
at  work  tending  to  drag  it  down.     The  swarms  of 
impostors  that  were  to  be  met  with  in  every  part 
of  the  Roman  empire,  known  as  "  Chaldaei,"  "  Ma- 
thematici,"  and  the  like,  bore  this  name  also.   Theii 
arts  were  "  artes  magicae."     Though  philosophers 
and  men  of  letters  might  recognise  the  better  mean 
ing  of  which  the  word  was  capable  (Cic.  De  Dioin. 
i.  23,  41),  yet  in  the  language  of  public  documents 
and  of  historians,  they  were  treated  -as  a  class  at  once 
hateful  and  contemptible  (Tacit.  Ann.  i.  32,  ii.  27, 
xii.  22,  xii.  59),  and  as  such  were  the  victims  o/ 
repeated  edicts  of  banishment. 

III.  We  need  not  wonder  accordingly  to  find  that 
this  is  the  predominant  meaning  of  the  word  as  it 
appears  in  the  N.  T.  The  noun  and  the  verb  de 
rived  from  it  (fusyda  and  nayftw)  are  used  by  St. 
Luke  in  describing  the  impostor,  who  is  therefore 
known  distinctively  as  Simon  Magus  (Acts  viii.  9). 
Another  of  the  same  class  (Bar-jesus)  is  describe 

from  the  faith  of  Israel,  Christian  and  Mahometan  writeis 
have  seen  In  him  the  disciple  of  one  of  the  prophets  of  the 
0.  T.  The  leper  Gehazi,  Baruch  the  friend  and  disctp'ia 
of  Jeremiah,  some  unnamed  disciple  of  Ezra,— these  (wild 
as  it  may  sound)  have,  each  in  his  turn,  been  identified 
with  the  Bactrlan  sage.  His  name  will  meet  us  again 
In  connexion  with  the  Magi  of  the  N.  T.  (Hyde,  I.  c. ; 
I'rideaux,  (.'or,n.,  B.r.  521-486). 

«  The  word  "  Mobed,"  a  contraction  of  the  fuller  form 
Magovad,  is  apparently  identical  with  that  which  appear* 
!n  Greek  as  Mayo? 


190 


MAGI 


(Acts  xiii.  8)  as  having,  in  his  cognomen  Elymas, 
A  title  which  was  equivalent  to  Magus.  [ELYMAS.] 

In  one  memorable  instance,  however,  the  word 
retains  (probably,  at  least)  its  better  meaning.  In  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  written  (according  to  the  ge 
neral  belief  of  early  Christian  writers)  for  the  Hebrew 
Christians  of  Palestine,  we  find  it,  not  as  embody 
ing  the  contempt  which  the  frauds  of  impostors  had 
brought  upon  it  through  the  whole  Roman  empire, 
but  in  the  sense  which  it  had  had,  of  old,  as  asso 
ciated  with  a  religion  which  they  respected,  and  an 
order  of  which  one  of  their  own  prophets  had  been 
the  head.  In  spite  of  Patristic  authorities  on  the 
other  side,  asserting  the  Mdyoi  Inrb  avaroXuv  of 
Matt.  ii.  1  to  have  been  sorcerers  whose  mys 
terious  knowledge  came  from  below,  not  from 
ibove,  and  who  were  thus  translated  out  of  dark 
ness  into  light  (Just.  Martyr,  Chrysostom,  Theo- 
phylact,  in  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  xix. ;  Lighttbot, 
//or.  Ileb.  in  Matt,  ii.)  we  are  justified,  not  less 
oy  the  consensus  of  later  interpreters  (including 
even  Maldonatus)  than  by  the  general  tenor  of  St. 
Matthew's  narrative,  in  seeing  in  them  men  such  as 
those  that  were  in  the  minds  of  the  LXX.  trans 
lators  of  Daniel,  and  those  described  by  Philo — at 
once  astronomers  and  astrologers,  but  not  mingling 
any  conscious  fraud  with  their  efforts  after  a  higher 
knowledge.  The  vagueness  of  the  description-leaves 
their  country  undefined,  and  implies  that  probably 
the  Evangelist  himself  had  no  certain  information. 
The  same  phrase  is  used  as  in  passages  where 
the  express  object  is  to  include  a  wide  range  of 
country  (comp.  ivb  avaro\uv,  Matt.  viii.  11,  xxiv. 
27  ;  Luke  xiii.  29).  Probably  the  region  chiefly 
present  to  the  mind  of  the  Palestine  Jew  would  be 
the  tract  of  country  stretching  eastward  from  the 
Jordan  to  the  Euphrates,  the  land  of  "  the  children 
of  the  East "  in  the  early  period  of  the  history  of 
the  0.  T.  (Gen.  xxix.  1 ;  Judg.  vi.  3,  vii.  12,  viii. 
10).  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  the 
language  of  the  0.  T.,  and  therefore  probably  that 
of  St.  Matthew,  included  under  this  name  coun 
tries  that  lay  considerably  to  the  north  as  well  as 
to  the  east  of  Palestine.  Balaam  came  from  "  the 
mountains  of  the  east,"  »'.  e.  from  Pethor  on  the 
Euphrates  (Num.  xxiii.  7,  xxii.  5).  Abraham  (or 
Cyrus  ?)  is  the  righteous  man  raised  up  "  from  the 
east "  (Is.  xli.  2).  The  Persian  conqueror  is  called 
"  from  the  east,  from  a  far  country"  (Is.  xlvi.  11). 

We  cannot  wonder  that  there  should  have  ^een 
very  varying  inteipretations  given  of  words  that 
allowed  so  wide  a  field  for  conjecture.  Seme  of 
these  are,  for  various  reasons,  worth  noticing. 
(1)  The  feeling  of  some  early  writers  that  the 
coming  of  the  wise  men  was  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecy  which  spoke  of  the  gifts  of  the  men  of 
Sheba  and  Seba  (Ps.  Ixxii.  10,  15  ;  comp.  Is.  Ix.  6) 
led  them  to  fix  on  Arabia  as  the  country  of  the  Magi 
(Just.  Martyr,  Tertullian,  Epiphanius,  Cyprian,  in 
Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  1.  c.),'  and  they  have  been 
followed  by  Baronius,  Maldonatus,  Grotius,  and 


MAGI 

Lightfoot.  (2)  Others  have  conjee:  .red  Mescpo 
tamia  as  the  great  seat  of  Chaldaean  astmlrsiy 
(Origen,  Horn,  in  Matt.  vi.  and  vii.),  or  Egypt  as  th« 
country  in  which  Magic  was  most  prevalent  (Jleyer. 
ad  foe.).  (3)  The  historical  associations  of  the.  wore 
led  others  again,  with  greater  probability,  to  fix  on 
Persia,  and  to  see  in  these  Magi  members  of  the 
priestly  order,  to  which  the  name  of  right  belonged 
(Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  Calvin,  Olshausen), 
while  Hyde  (Eel.  Pers.  1.  c.)  suggests  Parthia,  as 
being  at  that  time  the  conspicuous  eastern  monarchy 
in  which  the  Magi  were  recognised  and  honoured. 

It  is  perhaps  a  legitimate  inference  from  the  nar 
rative  of  Matt.  ii.  that  in  these  Magi  we  may  recog 
nise,  as  the  Church  has  done  from  a  very  early  period, 
the  first  Gentile  worshippers  of  the  Christ.  The 
name,  by  itself,  indeed,  applied  as  it  is  in  Acts  xiii. 
8,  to  a  Jewish  false  prophet,  would  hardly  prove 
this  ;  but  the  distinctive  epithet  "  from  the  east  " 
was  probably  intended  to  mark  them  out  as  different 
in  character  and  race  from  the  Western  Magi, 
Jews,  and  others,  who  swarmed  over  the  Roman 
empire.  So,  when  they  come  to  Jerusalem  it  is  to 
ask  not  after  "  our  king  "  or  "  the  king  of  Israel," 
but,  as  the  men  of  another  race  might  do,  after  "  the 
king  of  the  Jews."  The  language  of  the  0.  T. 
prophets  :ind  the  traditional  interpretation  of  it  are 
apparently  new  things  to  them. 

The  narrative  of  Matt.  ii.  supplies  us  with  an 
outline  which  we  may  legitimately  endeavour  to  fill 
up,  as  far  as  our  knowledge  enables  us,  with  in 
ference  and  illustration. 

Some  time  after  the  birth  of  Jesus  e  there  ap 
peared  among  the  strangers  who  visited  Jerusalem 
these  men  from  the  far  East.  They  were  not  idol 
aters.  Their  form  of  worship  was  looked  upon  by 
the  Jews  with  greater  tolerance  and  sympathy  than 
that  of  any  other  Gentiles  (comp.  \Visd.  xiii.  6,  7). 
Whatever  may  have  been  their  country,  their  name 
indicates  that  they  would  be  watchers  of  the  stars, 
seeking  to  read  in  them  the  destinies  of  nations. 
They  say  that  they  have  seen  a  star  in  which  they 
recognise  such  a  prognostic.  They  are  sure  that 
one  is  born  King  of  the  Jews,  and  they  come  to 
pay  their  homage.  It  may  have  been  simply  that 
the  quarter  of  the  heavens  in  which  the  star  ap 
peared  indicated  the  direction  of  Judaea.  It  may 
have  been  that  some  form  of  the  prophecy  of  Ba 
laam  that  a  "  star  should  rise  out  of  Jacob " 
(Num.  xxiv.  17)  had  reached  them,  eithei  through 
the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  or  through  traditions 
running  parallel  with  the  0.  T.,  and  that  this  led 
them  to  recognise  its  fulfilment  (Origen,  c.  Cels.  i. ; 
Horn,  in  Num.  xiii. ;  but  the  hypothesis  is  neither 
necessary  nor  satisfactory ;  comp.  Ellicott,  Hulsean 
Lectures,  p.  77).  It  may  have  been,  lastly,  that 
the  traditional  predictions  ascribed  to  their  own 
prophet  Zoroaster,  leading  them  to  expect  a  suc 
cession  of  three  deliverers,  two  working  as  prophets 
to  reform  the  world  and  raise  up  a  kingdom 
(Tavemier,  Travels,  iv.  8),  the  third  (Zosiosh). 


l  Tills  is  adopted  by  most  Romish  Interpreters,  and  is 
all  but  authoritatively  recognized  in  the  services  of  the 
Latin  Church.  Through  the  whole  Octave  of  the  Epiphany 
tbe  ever-recurring  antiphon  Is,  "  Reges  Tharsis  et  insulae 
munera  afferent.  Alleluia,  Alleluia.  Kepes  Arabum  et 
Saba  dona  adducent  Alleluia,  Alleluia."— Jirec.  Rom.  in 
Spiph. 

r  The  discordant  views  of  commentators  and  har 
monists  indicate  the  absence  of  any  trustworthy  data. 
The  time  of  their  arrival  at  Bethlehem  has  been  fixed  in 
«ich  o>se  en  grounds  so  utterly  Insufficient,  thut  it  would 


be  idle  to  examine  them.  (1)  As  In  the  Church  Calendar, 
on  the  twelfth  day  after  the  nativity  (Baronius.  Ann.  i.  9). 
(2)  At  some  time  towards  the  close  of  the  forty  days 
before  the  Purification  (Spanheim  and  Stolberg).  (3)  Four 
months  later  (Greswell),  on  the  hypothesis  that  they  saw 
the  star  at  the  nativity,  and  then  started  on  a  journey 
which  would  take  that  time.  Or  (4)  as  an  inference  from 
Matt.  ii.  16,  at  some  time  in  the  second  year  after  the  birth 
of  Christ  (comp.  Spanheim,  Dub.  Ernrtg.  \.  c.).  On  the  at 
tempt  to  find  a  chronological  datum  in  the  star  itself,  eomp 
SIAK  IN  THK  KAST;  also  Juscs  CIIUMT,  vol.  i.  p.  1072  6. 


flic  gi 


MAGI 


MAGI 


191 


tlw  greatest  of  the  three,  coming  to  !>*>  the  head  of  the 
kingdom,  to  conquer  Ahriman  arul  to  raise  the  dead 
(Du  PeiTon,  Zendav.  i.  u.  p.  46  ;  Hyde,  c.  31 ;  Elli- 
cott,  ffalsean  Lect.  1.  c.  \  and  in  strange  fantastic 
ways  connecting  these  redeemers  with  the  seed  of 
Abraham  (Tavernier,  I.e. ;  and  D'Herbelot,  Bibliot. 
Orient,  s.  v.  Zerdascht,),  had  roused  their  minds 
to  an  attitude  of  expectancy,  and  that  their  contact 
with  a  people  cherishing  like  hopes  on  stronger 
grounds,  may  have  prepared  them  to  see  in  a  king 
of  the  Jews,  the  Oshanderbegha  {Homo  Mundi, 
Hyde,  I.  c.),  or  the  Zosiosh  whom  they  expected.  In 
any  case  they  shared  the  "  vetus  et  constans  opinio  " 
which  had  spread  itself  over  the  whole  East,  that 
the  Jews,  as  a  people,  crushed  and  broken  as  they 
were,  were  yet  destined  once  again  to  give  a  ruler 
to  the  nations.  It  is  not  unlikely  that  they  ap 
peared,  occupying  the  position  of  Destur-Mobeds  in 
the  later  Zoroastrian  hierarchy,  as  the  represen 
tatives  of  many  others  who  shared  the  same  feeling. 
They  came,  at  any  rate,  to  pay  their  homage  to  the 
king  whose  birth  was  thus  indicated,  and  with  the 
gold  and  frankincense  and  myrrh,  which  were  the 
customary  gifts  of  subject  nations  (comp.  Gen. 
xliii.  11;  Ps.  Ixxii.  15;  IK.  x.  2,  10 ;  2  Chr.  is. 
'24;  Cant.  iii.  6,  iv.  14).  The  arrival  of  such  a 
company,  bound  on  so  strange  an  errand,  in  the  last 
years  of  the  tyrannous  and  distrustful  Herod,  could 
hardly  fail  to  attract  notice  and  excite  a  people, 
among  whom  Messianic  expectations  had  already 
begun  to  show  themselves  (Luke  ii.  25,  38). 
"  Herod  was  troubled,  and  all  Jerusalem  with 
him."  The  Sanhedrim  was  convened,  and  the 
question  where  the  Messiah  was  to  be  bom  was 
formally  placed  before  them.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  the  subtle,  fox-like  character  of  the  king  that 
he  should  pretend  to  share  the  expectations  of  the 
people  in  order  that  he  might  find  in  what  direction 
they  pointed,  and  then  take  whatever  steps  were 
necessary  to  crush  them  [comp.  HEROD],  The 
answer  given,  based  upon  the  traditional  interpreta 
tion  of  Mic.  v.  2,  that  Bethlehem  was  to  be  the 
birthplace  of  the  Christ,  determined  the  king's 
plans.  He  had  found  out  the  locality.  It  remained 
to  determine  the  time :  with  what  was  probably  a 
real  belief  in  astrology,  he  inquired  of  them  dili 
gently,  when  they  had  first  seen  the  star.  If  he 
assumed  that  that  was  contemporaneous  with  the 
birth,  he  could  not  be  far  wrong.  The  Magi  ac 
cordingly  are  sent  on  to  Bethlehem,  as  if  they  were 
but  the  forerunners  of  the  king's  own  homage.  As 
they  journeyed  they  again  saw  the  star,  which  for 
a  time,  it  would  seem,  they  had  lost  sight  of,  and  it 
guided  them  on  their  way.  [Comp.  STAR  IN  THE 
EAST  for  this  and  all  other  questions  connected  with 
its  appearance.]  The  pressure  of  the  crowds,  which 
a  fortnight,  or  four  months,  or  well-nigh  two  years 
before,  had  driven  Mary  and  Joseph  to  the  rude 
stable  of  the  caravanserai  of  Bethlehem,  had  appa 
rently  abated,  and  the  Magi  entering  "  the  house" 
(Matt.  ii.  11)  fell  down  and  paid  their  homage  and 
otfered  their  gifts.  Once  more  they  receive  guid 
ance  through  the  channel  which  their  work  and 
their  studies  had  made  familiar  to  them.  From 


h  It  is  perhaps  not  right  to  pass  over  the  supposed  tes 
timony  of  heathen  authors.    These  are  found  (I)  in  the 
lying  of  Augustus,  recorded  by  Macroblus  ("  It  is  better 


first  to  last,  in  Media,  in  Babylon,  in  Persia,  th« 
Magi  had  been  famous  as  the  interpreters  of  dreams. 
That  which  they  received  now  need  not  have  in 
volved  a  disclosure  of  the  plans  of  Herod  to  them 
It  was  enough  that  it  directed  them  to  "  return  tt 
their  own  country  another  way."  With  this  their 
history,  so  far  as  the  N.  T.  carries  us,  comes  to  an 
end. 

Jt  need  hardly  be  said  that  this  part  of  i;h« 
Gospel  narrative  has  had  to  bear  the  brunt  of  the 
attacks  of  a  hostile  criticism.  The  omission  of  all 
mention  of  the  Magi  in  a  gospel  which  enters  so 
fully  into  all  the  circumstances  of  the  infancy  of 
Christ  as  that  of  St.  Luke,  and  the  difficulty  of  har 
monising  this  incident  with  those  which  he  narrates, 
have  been  urged  asat  least  throwing  suspicion  on  what 
St.  Matthew  alone  has  recorded.  The  advocate  of  a 
"  mythical  theory  "  sees  in  this  almost  the  strongest 
confirmation  of  it  (Strauss,  Leben  Jesu,  i.  p.  272). 
"  There  must  be  prodigies  gathering  round  the  cradle 
of  the  infant  Christ.  Other  heroes  and  kings  had  had 
their  stars,  and  so  must  he.  He  must  receive  in  his 
childhood  the  homage  of  the  representatives  of  other 
races  and  creeds.  The  facts  recorded  lie  outside 
the  range  of  history,  and  are  not  mentioned  by  any 
contemporary  historian."  The  answers  to  these  ob 
jections  may  be  briefly  stated.  (1)  Assuming  the 
central  fact  of  the  early  chapters  of  St.  Matthew, 
no  objection  lies  against  any  of  its  accessories  on 
the  ground  of  their  being  wonderful  and  impro 
bable.  It  would  be  in  harmony  with  our  expecta 
tions  that  there  should  be  signs  and  wonders  indi 
cating  its  presence.  The  objection  therefore  pos 
tulates  the  absolute  incredibility  of  that  fact,  and 
begs  the  point  at  issue  (comp.  Trench,  Star  of  the 
Wise  Men,  p.  124).  (2)  The  question  whether 
this,  or  any  other  given  narrative  connected  with 
the  nativity  of  Christ,  bears  upon  it  the  stamp  of  a 
mythus,  is  therefore  one  to  be  determined  by  its 
own  merits,  on  its  own  evidence ;  and  then  the  case 
stands-  thus : — A  mythical  story  is  characterised  for 
the  most  part  by  a  large  admixture  of  what  is 
wild,  poetical,  fantastic.  A  comparison  of  Matt,  ii . 
with  the  Jewish  or  Mahometan  legends  of  a  later 
time,  or  even  with  the  Christian  mythology  which 
afterwards  gathered  round  this  very  chapter,  will 
show  how  wide  is  the  distance  that  separates  its 
simple  narrative,  without  ornament,  without  exag 
geration,  from  the  overflowing  luxuriance  of  those 
figments  (comp.  IV.  below).  (3)  The  absence  of 
any  direct  confirmatory  evidence  in  other  writers 
of  the  time  may  be  accounted  for,  partly  at  least, 
by  the  want  of  any  full  chronicle  of  the  events  of 
the  later  years  of  Herod.  The  momentary  excite 
ment  of  the  arrival  of  such  travellers  as  the  Magi, 
or  of  the  slaughter  of  some  score  of  children  in  a 
small  Jewish  town,  would  easily  oe  effaced  by  the 
more  agitating  events  that  followed  [comp.  HEROD], 
The  silence  of  Josephus  is  not  more  conclusive 
against  this  fact  than  it  is  (assuming  the  spurious- 
ness  of  Ant.  xviii.  4,  §3)  against  the  fact  of  the 
Crucifixion  and  the  growth  of  the  sect  of  the  Naza- 
renes  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem.1"  (4)  The 
more  peiplexing  absence  of  all  mention  of  the  Magi 


not  of  a  conqueror  or  destroyer  but  of  adivine  and  righteousi 
king.  The  facts  of  the  Gospel  history  may  have  been 
mixed  up  with  (1),  but  the  expression  of  Augustus  does 


192 


MAGI 


in  St.  Lukes  Gospel  may  yet  icceive  some  pro 
bable  explanation.  So  far  as  we  cannot  explain  it, 
our  ignorance  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  the  circumstances 
of  th.3  composition  -of  the  Gospels  is  a  sufficient 
answer.  It  is,  however,  at  least  possible  that  St. 
Luke,  knowing  that  the  facts  related  by  St.  Matthew 
were  already  current  among  the  churches,1  sought 
rather  to  add  what  was  not  yet  recorded.  Something 
too  may  have  been  due  to  the  leading  thoughts  of 
the  two  Gospels.  St.  Matthew,  dwelling  chiefly  on 
the  kingly  office  of  Christ  as  the  Son  of  David,  seizes 
naturally  on  the  first  recognition  of  that  character 
by  the  Magi  of  the  East  (comp.  on  the  iitness  of 
this  Mill,  Pantheistic  Principles,  p.  375).  St. 
Luke,  portraying  the  Son  of  Man  in  His  sympathy 
with  common  men,  in  His  compassion  on  the  poor 
and  humble,  dwells  as  naturally  on  the  manifesta 
tion  to  the  shepherds  on  the  hills  of  Bethlehem. 
It  may  be  added  further,  that  everything  tends  to 
show  that  the  latter  Evangelist  derived  the  ma 
terials  for  this  part  of  his  history  much  more  di 
rectly  from  the  mother  of  the  Loi-d,  or  her  kindred, 
than  did  the  former ;  and,  if  so,  it  is  not  difficult  to 
understand  how  she  might  come  to  dwell  on  that 
which  connected  itself  at  once  with  the  eternal 
blessedness  of  peace,  good-will,  salvation,  rather 
than  on  the  homage  and  offerings  of  strangers,  which 
seemed  to  be  the  presage  of  an  earthly  kingdom,  and 
had  proved  to  be  the  prelude  to  a  life  of  poverty, 
and  to  the  death  upon  the  cross. 

IV.  In  this  instance,  as  in  others,  what  is  told 
by  the  Gospel-writers  in  plain  simple  words,  has 
become  the  nucleus  for  a  whole  cycle  of  legends.  A 
Christian  mythology  has  overshadowed  that  which 
itsalf  had  nothing  in  common  with  it.  The  love 
of  the  strange  and  marvellous,  the  eager  desire  to 
fill  up  in  detail  a  narrative  which  had  been  left  in 
outline,  and  to  make  every  detail  the  representative 
of  an  idea — these,  which  tend  everywhere  to  the 
growth  of  the  mythical  element  within  the  region 
of  history,  fixed  themselves,  naturally  enough,  pre 
cisely  on  those  portions  of  the  life  of  Christ  where 
the  written  records  were  the  least  complete.  The 
stages  of  this  development  present  themselves  in 
regular  succession. 

(1)  The  Magi  are  no  longer  thought  of  as  simply 
"  wise  men,"  members  of  a  sacred  order.  The  pro 
phecies  of  Ps.  Ixxii. ;  Is.  xlix.  7, 23,  Ix.  16,  must  be 
fulfilled  in  them,  and  they  become  princes  ("  re- 
guli,"  Tertull.  c.  Jud.  9 ;  c.  Marc.  5).  This  tends 
more  and  more  to  be  the  dominant  thought.  When 
the  arrival  of  the  Magi,  rather  than  the  birth  or 
the  baptism  of  Christ,  as  the  first  of  His  mighty 
works,  comes  to  be  looked  on  as  the  great  Epiphany 
of  His  divine  power,  the  older  title  of  the  feast 
receives  as  a  synonym,  almost  as  a  substitute,  that 
of  the  Feast  of  the  Three  Kings.  (2)  The  numbtr 

i  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  is  altogether  a  distinct 
hypothesis  from  that  which  assumes  that  he  had  the  Gos 
pel  of  St,  Matthew  in  its  present  form  before  him. 

k  This  was  the  prevalent  interpretation ;  but  others 
read  the  symbols  differently,  and  with  coarser  feeling. 
The  gold  helped  the  poverty  of  the  Holy  Family.  The 
incense  remedied  the  noisome  air  of  the  stable.  The  myrrh 
was  used,  it  was  said,  to  give  strength  and  firmness  to  the 
bodies  of  new-born  infants.  (Suicer,  I.  c.). 

I  The  treatise  De  Colkctaneis  is  in  fact  a  miscel 
laneous  collection  of  memoranda  in  the  form  of  question 
and  answer.  The  desire  to  lind  names  for  those  who  have 
none  given  them  is  very  noticeable  in  other  instances  as 
well  as  in  that  of  the  Magi :  e.  g.,  he  gives  tliose  of  the 
penitent  and  impenitent  thief.  The  pass:igo  aii"'»d  in 


MAGI 

of  the  Wise  Men,  which  St.  Matthew  leaves  alto 
gether  undefined,  was  arbitrarily  fixed.  They  were 
three  (Leo  Magn.  Serm.  ad  Epiph.),  because  thus 
they  became  a  symbol  of  the  mysterious  Trinity 
(Hilary  of  Aries),  or  because  then  the  number  cor 
responded  to  the  threefold  gifts,  or  to  the  three 
parts  of  the  earth,  or  the  three  great  divisions  of  the 
human  race  descended  from  the  sons  of  Noah  (Bede, 
De  Collect.).  (3)  Symbolic  meanings  were  found 
for  each  of  the  three  gifts.  The  gold  they  offered 
as  to  a  king.  With  the  myrrh  they  prefigured  the 
bitterness  of  the  Passion,  the  embalmment  for  the 
Burial.  With  the  frankincense  they  adored  the 
divinity  of  the  Son  of  God  (Suicer,  Thes.  s.  v. 
Mdyoi  ;k  Brev.  Rom.  in  Epiph.  passim).  (4)  Later 
on,  in  a  tradition  which,  though  appearing  iu  a 
Western  writer,  is  traceable  probably  to  reports 
brought  back  by  pilgrims  from  Italy  or  the  East, 
the  names  are  added,  and  Caspar,  Melchior,  and 
Balthazar,  take  their  place  among  the  objects  of 
Christian  reverence,  and  are  honoured  as  the  patron 
saints  of  travellei-s.  The  passage  from  Bede  (de 
Collect.)  is,  in  many  ways,  interesting,  and  as  it  is 
not  commonly  quoted  by  commentators,  though 
often  referred  to,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  give  it.1 
"  Primus  dicitur  fuisse  Melchior,  qui  senex  et  canus.. 
barba  prolixft  et  capillis,  aurum  obtulit  regi  Do 
mino.  Secundusf  nomine  Caspar,  juvenis  imberbis, 
rubicundus,  thure,  quasi  Deo  oblatione  digna,  Deum 
honoravit.  Tertius  fuscus,  integre  barbatus,  Bal- 
tassar  nomine,  per  myrrham  filium  hominis  mori- 
turum  professus."  We  recognise  at  once  in  this 
description  the  received  types  of  the  early  pictorial 
art  of  Western  Europe.  It  is  open  to  believe  that 
both  the  description  and  the  art-types  may  be 
traced  to  early  quasi-dramatic  representations  of  the 
facts  of  the  Nativity.  In  any  such  representations 
names  of  some  kind  would  become  a  matter  of  ne 
cessity,  and  were  probably  invented  at  randon. 
Familiar  as  the  names  given  by  Bede  now  are  t> 
us,  there  was  a  time  when  they  had  no  more  autho 
rity  than  Bithisarca,  Melchior,  and  Gathaspar  (Mo 
roni,  Dizion.  s.  v.  "  Magi ")  ;  Magalath,  Pangalath, 
Saracen ;  Appellius,  Amerius,  and  Damascus,  and  a 
score  of  othei-s  (Spanheim,  Dub.  Evany,  ii.  p.  288)." 
In  the  Eastern  Church,  where,  it  would  seem, 
there  was  less  desire  to  find  symbolic  meanings 
than  to  magnify  the  circumstances  of  the  history, 
the  traditions  assume  a  different  character.  The 
Magi  arrive  at  Jerusalem  with  a  retinue  of  1000 
men,  having  left  behind  them,  on  the  further  bank 
of  the  Euphrates,  an  ai-my  of  7000  (Jacob.  Edess. 
and  Bar-hebraeus,  in  Hyde,  I.  c.).  They  have 
been  led  to  undertake  the  journey,  not  by  the  star 
only,  or  by  expectations  which  they  shared  with 
Israelites,  but  by  a  prophecy  of  the  founder  of  their 
own  faith.  Zoroaster  had  predicted"  that  in  the 


the  text  is  followed  by  a  description  of  their  dress,  taken 
obviously  either  from  some  early  painting,  or  from  tlie 
decorations  of  a  miracle-play  (comp.  the  account  of  such  u 
ixrformance  in  Trench,  Star  of  the  U'ise  Men,  p.  70).  The 
Recount  of  the  offerings,  it  will  be  noticed,  does  not  agree 
Mr'tb  the  traditional  hexameter  of  the  Latin  Church : — 
"  ''--opar  fert  mvrrham,  thus  Melchior,  Balthasar  aurum.'' 

"•  Hyde  quotes  from  Bar  Bahlul  the  names  of  the 
thV<«cn  who  appear  in  the  Eastern  traditions.  The  three 
vhlch  the  legends  of  the  West  have  mode  famous  are  not 
among  them. 

•  "  Vos  autem,  0  fllli  mei,  ante  omnes  gentes  ortua 
ejus  porcepturi  estis"  (Abulpharagius,  Dynast.  Lib.,  in 
Hyde,  c.  31). 


MAGI 

latter  days  there  should  be  a  Mighty  One  and  o 
Kedeemer,  and  that  his  descendants  should  see  the 
star  which  should  be  the  herald  of  his  coming. 
According  to  another  legend  (Opus  imperf.  in 
Matt.  ii.  apud  Chrysost.  t.  vi.  ed.  Montfaucon) 
they  came  from  the  remotest  East,  near  the  borders 
of  the  ocean.  They  had  been  taught  to  expect  the 
star  by  a  writing  that  bore  the  name  of  Seth. 
That  expectation  was  handed  down  from  father  to 
son.  Twelve  of  the  holiest  of  them  were  appointed 
to  be  ever  on  the  watch.  Their  post  of  observation 
was  a  lock  known  as  the  Mount  of  Victory.  Night 
by  night  they  washed  in  pure  water,  and  prayed, 
and  looked  out  on  the  heavens.  At  last  the  star 
appeared,  and  in  it  the  form  of  a  young  child  bear 
ing  a  cross.  A  voice  came  from  it  and  bade  them 
proceed  to  Judaea.  They  started  on  their  two  years' 
journey,  and  during  all  that  time  the  meat  and  the 
drink  with  which  they  started  never  failed  them. 
The  gifts  they  bring  are  those  which  Abraham  gave  to 
their  progenitors  the  sons  of  Keturah  (this,  of  course, 
ou  the  hypothesis  that  they  were  Arabians),  which 
the  queen  of  Sheba  had  in  her  turn  presented  to 
Solomon,  and  which  had  found  their  way  back  again 
to  the  children  of  the  East  (Epiphan.  in  Comp. 
Doctr.  in  Moroni,  Dizion.  1.  c.).  They  return  from 
Bethlehem  to  their  own  country,  and  give  them 
selves  up  to  a  life  of  contemplation  and  prayer. 
When  the  twelve  apostles  leave  Jerusalem  to  carry 
on  their  work  as  preachers,  St.  Thomas  finds  them 
in  Parthia.  They  offer  themselves  for  baptism,  and 
become  evangelists  of  the  new  faith  ( Opus  imperf. 
in  Matt.  ii.  I.  c.).  The  pilgrim-feeling  of  the 
4th  century  includes  them  also  within  its  range. 
Among  other  relics  supplied  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  market  which  the  devotion  of  Helena  had 
created,  the  bodies  of  the  Magi  are  discovered 
somewhere  in  the  East,  are  brought  to  Constan 
tinople,  and  placed  in  the  great  church  which,  as 
the  Mosque  of  St.  Sophia,  still  bears  in  its  name 
the  witness  of  its  original  dedication  to  the  Divine 
Wisdom.  The  favour  with  which  the  people  of 
Milan  had  received  the  emperor's  prefect  Eustorgius 
called  for  some  special  mark  of  favour,  and  on  his 
consecration  as  bishop  of  that  city,  he  obtained  for 
it  the  privilege  of  being  the  resting-place  of  the 
precious  relics.  There  the  fame  of  the  three  kings 
increased  The  prominence  given  to  all  the  feasts 
connected  with  the  season  of  the  Nativity — the 
transfer  to  that  season  of  the  mirth  and  joy  of  the 
old  Saturnalia — the  setting  apart  of  a  distinct  day 
for  the  commemoration  of  the  Epiphany  in  the 
4th  century  P — all  this  added  to  the  veneration  with 
which  they  were  regarded.  When  Milan  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Frederick  Barbarossa  (A.D.  1162)  the 
influence  of  the  archbishop  of  Cologne  prevailed  on 
the  emperor  to  transfer  them  to  that  city.  The 
Milanese,  at  a  later  period,  consoled  themselves  by 
fomiing  a  special  confraternity  for  perpetuating 
their  veneration  for  the  Magi  by  the  annual  per 
formance  of  a  "  Mystery  "  (Moroni,.  /.  c.) ;  but  the 
glory  of  possessing  the  relics  of  the  first  Gentile 
worshippers  of  Christ  remained  with  Cologne.*  In 
that  proud  cathedral  which  is  the  glory  of  Teutonic 
art  the  shrine  of  the  Three  Kings  has,  for  six  cen 
turies,  been  shown  as  the  greatest  of  its  many 
treasures.  The  tabernacle  in  which  the  bones  of 

P  The  Institution  of  the  Feast  of  the  Three  Kings  is 
ascribed  to  Pope  Julius,  A.D.  336  (Moroni,  Dizion.  1.  c.). 

*  For  the  later  mediaeval  developments  of  the  tradi 
tion;,  comp.  Joan.  ror.  Hildesheim  in   Quarterly    ten, 
Lxxvili.  p.  433. 
VOL.  II 


MAGIC 


193 


some  whose  real  name  and  history  are  lost  for  ever 
lie  enshrined  in  honour,  bears  witness,  in  its  gold 
and  gems,  to  the  faith  with  which  the  story  of  the 
wanderings  of  the  Three  Kings  has  been  received. 
The  reverence  has  sometimes  taken  stranger  and 
more  grotesque  forms.  As  the  patron-saints  of  tra 
vellers  they  have  given  a  name  to  the  inns  of  earlier 
or  later  date.  The  names  of  Melchior,  Caspar,  and 
Balthasar  were  used  as  a  charm  against  attacks  of 
epilepsy  (Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  xxi.). 

(Comp.,  in  addition  to  authorities  already,  cited, 
Trench,  Star  of  the  Wise  Men ;  J.  F.  Miiller,  in  Her- 
zog's  Real-Encycl.  s.  v. "  Magi ;"  Triebel,  De  May  is 
advenient.,  and  Miegius,  De  Stella,  $c.,  in  Crit. 
Sacri;  Thes.  Nov.  ii.  Ill,  118  ;  Stolberg,  Dissert, 
de  Magis ;  and  Rhoden,  De  primis  Salv.  venerat., 
in  Crit.  Sacri ;  Thes.  Theol.  Phil.  ii.  69.  [E.  H.  P .] 

MAGIC,  MAGICIANS.  The  magical  arts 
spoken  of  in  the  Bible  are  those  practised  by  the 
Egyptians,  the  Canaanites.  and  their  neighbours, 
the  Hebrews,  the  Chaldaeans,  and  probably  the 
Greeks.  We  therefore  begin  this  article  with  an 
endeavour  to  state  the  position  of  magic  in  relation 
to  religion  and  philosophy  with  the  several  races  of 
mankind. 

The  degree  of  the  civilisation  of  a  nation  is  not 
the  measure  of  the  importance  of  magic  in  its  con 
victions.  The  natural  features  of  a  country  are 
not  the  primary  causes  of  what  is  termed  super 
stition  in  its  inhabitants.  With  nations  as  with 
men— and  the  analogy  of  Plato  in  the  '  Republic '  is 
not  always  false — the  feelings  on  which  magic 
fixes  its  hold  are  essential  to  the  mental  consti 
tution.  Contrary  as  are  these  assertions  to  the 
common  opinions  of  our  time,  inductive  reasoning 
forbids  our  doubting  them. 

With  the  lowest  race  magic  is  the  chief  part  of 
religion.  The  Nigritians,  or  blacks  of  this  race, 
show  this  in  their  extreme  use  of  amulets  and 
their  worship  of  objects  which  have  no  other  value 
in  their  eyes  but  as  having  a  supposed  magical 
character  through  the  influence  of  supernatural 
agents.  With  the  Turanians,  or  corresponding 
whites  of  the  same  great  family, — we  use  the  word 
white  for  a  group  of  nations  mainly  yellow,  in  con 
tradistinction  to  black, — Incantations  and  witchcraft 
occupy  the  same  place,  shamanism  characterizing 
their  tribes  in  both  hemispheres.  In  the  days  of 
Herodotus  the  distinction  in  this  matter  between  the 
Nigritians  and  the  Caucasian  population  of  north 
Africa  was  what  it  now  is.  In  his  remarkable  ac 
count  of  the  journey  of  the  Nasamonian  young  men 
— the  Nasamones,  be  it  remembered,  were  "  a  Libyan 
race  "  and  dwellers  on  the  northern  coast,  as  the  his 
torian  here  says, — we  are  told  that  the  adventurers 
passed  through  the  inhabited  maritime  region,  and 
the  tract  occupied  by  wild  beasts,  and  the  desert,  and 
at  last  came  upon  a  plain  with  trees,  where  trey 
were  seized  by  men  of  small  stature  who  carried 
them  across  marshes  to  a  town,  of  such  men 
black  in  complexion.  A  great  river,  running  from 
west  to  east  and  containing  crocodiles,  flowed  by 
that  town,  and  all  that  nation  were  sorcerers  (c j 
Tour  ovroi  airiKovTo  avdpcbvovs,  yArjras  flva^ 
Travras,  ii.  32,  33).  It  little  matters  whether  the 
conjecture  that  the  great  river  was  the  Niger  be 
true,  which  the  idea  adopted  by  Herodotus  that  it 
was  the  upper  Nile  seems  to  favour:4  it  is  quite 

*  It  is  perhaps  worthy  of  note  that  ^Eschylus  calls  lit 
upper  Nile  norativs  Aiflt'oi/;,  as  though  the  great  AIthlop|..ij 
nv«>r  (Prom.  Vinct.  S09  :  comp.  Soliu.  32,  30) 

C 


194 


MAGIO 


evident  that  the  Nasamones  came  upon  a  nation  of 
Nigritians  beyond  the  Great  Desert  and  were  struck 
with  their  fetishism.  So,  in  our  own  days,  the 
traveller  i>  astonished  at  the  height  to  which  this 
superstition  is  carried  among  the  Nigritians,  who 
have  no  religious  practices  that  are  not  of  the 
nature  of  sorcery,  nor  any  priests  who  are  not 
magicians,  and  magicians  alone.  The  strength  ot 
this  belief  in  magic  in  these  two  great  divisions  of 
the  lowest  race  is  shown  in  the  case  of  each  by  its 
having  maintained  its  hold  in  an  instance  in  which 
its  tenacity  must  have  been  severely  tried.  The 
ancient  Egyptians  show  their  partly-Nigritian  origin 
not  alone  in  their  physical  characteristics  and  Ian- 
l£uage  but  in  their  religion.  They  retained  the 
*trange  low  nature-worship  of  the  Nigritians,  forcibly 
combining  it  with  more  intellectual  kinds  of  belief, 
as  they  represented  their  gods  with  the  heads  of 
animals  and  the  bodies  of  men,  and  even  connecting 
it  with  truths  which  point  to  a  primeval  revelation. 
The  Ritual,  which  was  the  great  treasury  of  Egyptian 
belief  jnd  explained  the  means  of  gaining  future 
happiness,  is  full  of  charms  to  be  said,  and  contains 
directions  for  making  and  for  using  amulets.  As 
the  Nigritian  goes  on  a  journey  hung  about  with 
amulets,  so  amulets  were  placed  on  the  Egyptian's 
embalmed  body,  and  his  soul  went  on  its  myste 
rious  way  fortified  with  incantations  learnt  while 
on  earth.  In  China,  although  Buddhism  has  esta 
blished  itself,  and  the  system  of  Confucius  has 
gained  the  power  its  positivism  would  ensure  it 
with  a  highly-educated  people  of  low  type,  another 
belief  still  maintains  itself  which  there  is  strong 
reason  to  hold  to  be  older  than  the  other  two, 
although  it  is  usually  supposed  to  have  been  of  the 
same  age  as  Confucianism  ;  in  this  religion  magic  is 
of  the  highest  importance,  the  distinguishing  cha 
racteristic  by  which  it  is  known. 

With  the  Shemites  magic  takes  a  lower  place. 
Nowhere  is  it  even  part  of  religion  ;  yet  it  is 
looked  upon  as  a  powerful  engine,  and  generally 
unlawful  or  lawful  according  to  the  aid  invoked. 
Among  many  of  the  Shemite  peoples  there  linger 
the  remnants  of  a  primitive  fetishism.  Sacred 
trees  and  stones  are  reverenced  from  an  old  super 
stition,  of  which  they  do  not  always  know  the 
meaning,  derived  from  the  nations  whose  place  they 
have  taken.  Thus  fetishism  remains,  although  in  a 
kind  of  fossil  state.  The  importance  of  astrology 
with  the  Shemites  has  tended  to  raise  the  character 
of  their  magic,  which  deals  rather  witli  the  dis 
covery  of  supposed  existing  influences  than  with 
the  production  of  new  influences.  The  only  direct 
association  of  magic  with  religion  is  where  the 
priests,  as  the  educated  class,  have  taken  the  func 
tions  of  magicians ;  but  this  is  far  different  from 
the  case  of  the  Nigritians,  where  the  magicians  are 
the  only  priests.  The  Shemites,  however,  when  de 
pending  on  human  reason  alone,  seem  never  to  have 
doubted  the  efficacy  of  magical  arts,  yet  recourse  to 
their  aid  was  not  usually  with  them  the  first  idea  j 
of  a  man  in  doubt.  Though  the  case  of  Saul 
i:annot  be  taken  as  applying  to  the  whole  race, 
yet,  even  with  the  heathen  Shemites,  prciyers  must 
have  been  held  to  be  of  more  value  than  incan 
tations. 

The  Iranians  assign  to  magic  a  still  less  important 
position.  It  can  scarcely  be  traced  in  the  relics  of 
old  nature-worship,  which  they  with  greater  skill 
than  the  Egyptians  interwove  with  their  more  intel 
lect ua,'  beliefs,  as  tlio  Greeks  gave  the  objects  of 
fOverence  in  Arcadia  and  Crete  a  place  in  poetical 


MAGIC 

myths,  and  the  .Scandinavians  animated  the  hard 
remains  of  primitive  superstition.  The  character  ci 
the  ancient  belief  is  utterly  gone  with  the  assigning 
of  new  reasons  for  the  reverence  of  its  sacred  objects. 
Magic  always  maintained  some  hold  on  men's 
minds ;  but  the  stronger  intellects  despised  it, 
like  the  Roman  commander  who  threw  the  sacred 
chickens  overboard,  and  the  Greek  who  defied  an 
adverse  omen  at  the  beginning  of  a  great  battle. 
When  any,  oppressed  by  the  sight  of  the  cala 
mities  of  mankind,  sought  to  resolve  the  myste 
rious  problem,  they  fixed,  like  ..Eschylus,  not  upon 
the  childish  notion  of  a  chance-government  by 
many  conflicting  agencies,  but  upon  the  nobler 
idea  of  a  dominating  fate.  Men  of  highly  sensitive 
temperaments  have  always  inclined  to  a  belief  in 
magic,  and  there  has  therefore  been  a  section  of 
Iranian  philosophers  in  all  ages  who  have  paid 
attention  to  its  practice ;  but,  expelled  from  reli 
gion,  it  has  held  but  a  low  and  precarious  place  in 
philosophy. 

The  Hebrews  had  no  magic  of  their  own.  It 
was  so  strictly  forbidden  by  the  Law  that  it  could 
never  afterwards  have  had  any  recognised  existence, 
save  in  times  of  general  heresy  or  apostasy,  and  the 
same  was  doubtless  the  case  in  the  patriarchal  ages. 
The  magical  practices  which  obtained  among  the 
Hebrews  were  therefore  borrowed  from  the  nations 
aropnd.  The  hold  they  gained  was  such  as  we 
should  have  expected  with  a  Shemite  race,  making 
allowance  for  the  discredit  thrown  upon  them  by 
the  prohibitions  of  the  Law.  From  the  first  en 
trance  into  the  Land  of  Promise  until  the  destruc 
tion  of  Jerusalem  we  have  constant  glimpses  of 
magic  practised  in  secret,  or  resorted  to,  not  alone 
by  the  common  but  also  by  the  great.  The  Talmud 
abounds  in  notices  of  contemporary  magic  among 
the  Jews,  showing  that  it  survived  idolatry  notwith 
standing  their  original  connexion,  and  was  supposed 
to  produce  real  effects.  The  Kur-dn  in  like  manner 
treats  charms  and  incantations  as  capable  of  pro 
ducing  evil  consequences  when  used  against  a 
man.b  It  is  a  distinctive  characteristic  of  the 
Bible  that  from  first  to  last  it  wan-ants  no  such 
trust  or  dread.  In  the  Psalms,  the  most  persona! 
of  all  the  books  of  Scripture,  there  is  no  prayer 
to  be  protected  against  magical  influences.  The 
believer  prays  to  be  delivered  from  every  kind  of 
evil  that  could  hurt  the  body  or  the  soul,  but  he 
says  nothing  of  the  machinations  of  sorcerers. 
Here  and  everywhere  magic  is  passed  by,  or  if 
mentioned,  mentioned  only  to  be  condemned  (comp. 
Ps.  cvi.  28).  Let  those  who  affirm  that  they  see 
in  the  Psalms  merely  human  piety,  and  in  Job 
and  Ecclesiastes  merely  human  philosophy,  explain 
the  absence  in  them,  and  throughout  the  Scrip- 
tures,  of  the  expression  of  superstitious  feelings 
that  are  inherent  in  the  Shemite  mind.  Let  them 
explain  the  luxuriant  growth  in  the  after-literature  of 
the  Hebrews  and  Arabs,  and  notably  in  the  Talmud 
and  the  Kur-4n,  of  these  feelings  with  no  root  in 
those  older  writings  from  which  that  after-litera 
ture  was  derived.  If  the  Bible,  the  Talmud,  and 
the  Kur-&n,  be  but  several  expressions  of  the 
Shemite  mind,  differing  only  through  the  effect  of 
time,  how  am  this  contrast  be  accounted  for  ? — the 
very  opposite  of  what  obtains  elsewhere ;  for  super- 
stitions  are  generally  strongest  in  the  earlier  lite- 


•>  The  113th  chapter  of  the  Ivur-rfn  was  written  wher 
Mohammad  believed  that  the  magical  practices  of  certain 
[id sons  hud  affected  him  with  a  kiiui  if  rheumatism. 


MAGIC 


MAGIC 


195 


rature  of  a  race,  and  gradually  fade,  excepting  a  con-  |  32-35).     It  may  be  supposed  from  the  manner  in 
iition   of  barbarism  restore  their  vigour.     Those,    which  they  were  hidden  that  these  teraphim  were 


who  see  in  the  Bible  a  Divine  work  can  understand 
how  a  God-taught  preacher  could  throw  aside  the 
miserable  fears  of  his  race,  and  boldly  tell  man  to 
trust  in  his  Maker  alone.  Here,  as  in  all  matters, 
jie  history  of  the  Bible  confirms  its  doctrine.  In 
the  doctrinal  Scriptures  magic  is  passed  by  with 
contempt,  in  the  historical  Scriptures  the  reason 
ableness  of  this  contempt  is  shown.  Whenever  the 
practise*-*  of  magic  attempt  to  combat  the  servants 
of  God,  they  conspicuously  fail.  Pharaoh's  magic 
ians  bow  to  the  Divine  power  shown  :n  the  won- 


not  very  small.  The  most  important  point  is 
that  Laban  calls  them  his  "gods"  (ibid.  30,  32), 
although  he  was  not  without  belief  in  the  true  God 
(24,  49-53)  ;  for  this  makes  it  almost  certain  that 
we  have  here  not  an  indication  of  the  worship  of 
strange  gods,  but  the  first  notice  of  a  superstition 
that  afterwards  obtained  among  those  Israelites  who 
added  corrupt  practices  to  the  true  religion.0  The 
derivation  of  the  name  teraphim  js  extremely  ob 
scure.  Gesenius  takes  it  from  an  "  unused  "  root, 
PJ,  which  he  supposes,  from  the  Arabic,  probably 


ders  wrought  by  Moses  and  Aaron.     Balaam   the  j  signified  « to  live  pleasantly"  (Tkes.  s.v.).    It  may, 
great  enchanter,  comes  from  afar  to  curse  Israel  and  |  however>  be  reasonably  conjectured  that  such  a  root 


is  forced  to  bless  them. 

In  examining  the  mentions  of  magic  in  the  Bible, 
we  must  keep  ia  view  the  curious  inquiry  whether 
there  be  any  reality  in  the  art.  We  would  at  the 
outset  protest  against  the  idea,  once  very  prevalent, 


would  have  had,  if  not  in  Hebrew,  in  the  language 
whence  the  Hebrews  took  it  or  its  derivative,  the 
proper  meaning  "  to  dance,"  corresponding  to  this, 
which  would  then  be  its  tropical  meaning."1  We 
should  prefer,  if  no  other  derivation  be  found,  to 


that  the  conviction  that  the  seen  and  unseen  worlds  ,  ^  tnat  the  name  teraphim  might  mean 
were  often  more  manifestly  in  contact  in  the  Bib-  «dancers»  or  «  auiKn  of  dancing,"  with  reference 
lical  ages  than  now  necessitates  a  belief  in  the  either  to  imitive  nature-worship «  or  its  magical 
reality  of  the  magic  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures  nteg  of  the  character  of  shamanism,  rather  than 
We  do  indeed  see  a  connexion  of  a  supernatural  .  that  it  signifieS)  ^  Qesenius  suggests,  "  givers  ot 
agency  with  magic  in  such  a  case  as  that  ot  the  |  pleasant  lit-e;>  Therc  seems>  however,  to  be  a  cog- 
damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit  ot  divination  men-  ,  nate  word>  unconnected  with  the  «unused"  root 
tioned  in  the  Acts  ;  yet  there  the  agency  appears  to  just  mentioned>  in  ancient  Egyptian,  whence  we  may 
have  been  involuntary  in  the  damsel,  and  shrewdly  obtain  a  conjocturai  derivation.  We  do  not  of  course 
made  profitable  by  her  employers.  This  does  not  trace  the  worship  of  teraphim  to  the  sojourn  in 
establish  the  possibility  ot  man  being  able  at  his  j  E  .  They  we).e  pl.obably  those  objects  of  the 
will  to  use  supernatural  powers  to  gam  his  own  I  pl.e-Abrahamite  idolatry,  put  away  by  order  ot 
ends,  which  is  what  magic  has  always  pretended  to  ,  Jacob  ,Gen_  xxxv  ^  .  vetained  even  in  joshua's 
accomplish.  Thus  much  we  premise,  lest  we  should  ;  time  ,  josh  xxiy  14)  and)  .f  so>  notwithstanding 
be  thought  to  hold  iatitudinarian  opinions  because  |  his  exhortation>  abandoned  only  tor  a  space  (Judg 
we  treat  the  reality  of  magic  as  an  open  question,  j  xvii  ?  xviii>).  and  they  were  also  known  to  the 
Without  losing  sight  of  the  distinctions  we  have  ,  BabyionianS)  being  used  by  them  for  divination 
drawn  between  the  magic  of  different  races,  we  shall  (Ez>  Jxi  21  But  there  js  t  reason  fo, 


consider  the  notices  of  the  subject  in  the  Bible  in 
the  order  in  which  they  occur.     It  is  impossible  in 


supposing   a  close  connexion   between    the   oldest 
language  and  religion  of  Chaldaea,  and  the  ancient 


every  case  to  assign  the  magicaljwactice  *V<&en  of  j  Egyptian    ianguage   and   religion!     The   Egyptian 

word  TER  signifies  "a  shape,  type,  transforma 
tion,"'  and  has  for  its  determinative  a  mummy: 
it  is  used  in  the  Ritual,  where  the  various  transfor 
mations  of  the  deceased  in  Hades  are  described 
(Todtenbuch.  ed.  Lepsius,  ch.  76  seq).  The  small 
mummy-shaped  figure,  SHEBTEE,  usually  made 
of  baked  clay  covered  with  a  blue  vitreous  varnish, 
representing  the  Egyptian  as  deceased,  is  of  a  na 
ture  connecting  it  with  magic,  since  it  was  made 
with  the  idea  that  it  secured  benefits  in  Hades; 


to  a  particular  nation,  or  when  this  can  be  done  to 
determine  whether  it  be  native  or  borrowed,  and  the 
general  absence  of  details  renders  any  other  system 
of  classification  liable  to  error. 

The  theft  and  carrying  away  of  Laban's  tera 


phim 


by  Rachel,  seems  to  indicate  the 


practice  of  magic  in  Padan-aram  at  this  early  time. 
It  appears  that  Laban  attached  great  value  to  these 
objects,  from  what  he  said  as  to  the  theft  and  his 
determined  search  for  them  (Gen.  xxxi.  19,  30, 


c  Laban'g  expression  in  Gen.  xxx.  27,  "  I  have  augured" 
OF]BTIJ)i  may  refer  to  divination ;  but  the  context 
makes  it  more  reasonable  not  to  take  it  in  a  literal  sense. 

*  The  Arabic  root  O  «j  certainly  means  "  he  abounded 

In  the  comforts  of  life,"  and  the  like,  but  the  correspond-  t 
Ing  ancient  Egyptian  word  TERF  or  TREF,  "  to  dance,"  | 
suggests  that  this  is  a  tropical  signification,  especially  as  j 
in  the  Indo-European  languages,  if  our  "  to  trip  "  preserve  j 
Uje  proper  sense  and  the  Sanskrit  trip  and  the  Greek 
TC'PJTW  the  tropical  sense  of  the  root,  we  have  the  same  | 
won!  with  the  two  meanings.  We  believe  also  that,  in 
point  of  age,  precedence  should  be  given  to  the  ancient  \ 
Egyptian  word  before  the  Semitic,  and  that  in  the  former 
language  an  objective  sense  is  always  the  proper  sense, 
and  a  subjective  the  tropical,  when  a  word  is  used  in  both 
significations.  We  think  that  this  principle  is  equally  tnw 
of  the  Semitic  group,  although  it  may  be  contested  wV.'i 
rtiemice  to  the  Indo-Kuroppan  lanK'uiges. 


e  In  the  fragments  ascribed  to  Sanchoniatho,  which, 
whatevmr  their  age  and  author,  cannot  be  doubted  to  bo 
genuine,  the  Baetulia  are  characterised  in  a  manner  tha*. 
illustrates  this  supposition.  The  Baetulia,  it  must  be 
remembered,  were  sacred  stones,  the  reverence  of  which 
in  Syria  in  the  historical  times  was  a  relic  of  the  early 
low  nature-worship  with  which  fetishism  or  shamanism 
is  now  everywhere  associated.  The  words  used,  irrev6i)<r( 
Oebs  Oiipai/b?  BairvAia,  Aiflov?  ejii^uxous  frrixaiTja-afiewK 
(<  'ory,  Anc.  Frag.  p.  12),  cannot  be  held  to  mean  more  than 
that  Uranus  contrived  living  stones,  but  the  idea  of  contriv 
ing  and  the  terra  "  living"  imply  motion  in  these  stones. 
'  Egyptologists  have  generally  read  this  word  TER. 
Mr.  Birch,  however,  reads  it  CHEPER  (SHEPER  accord 
ing  to  the  writer's  system  of  transcription).  The  balance 
:«  decided  by  the  discovery  of  the  Coptic  equivalent 
TO  IT  "  transmutare,"  in  which  the  absence  of  the 
final  H  is  explained  by  a  peculiar  but  regular  modificatioc 
which  the  writer  was  the  first  to  point  out  (UiKito- 
PT.YPHIOO,  £n<;>iclopw(tia  Kritannica,  Mth  ed.  p.  421). 

O  2 


i«J6  MAGIC 

«n«l  it  is  conuected  with  the  word  TI'.R,  for  it  repre 
sents  a  mummy,  the  determinative  of  that  word, 
and   was  considered   to   be   of  use    in    the   state 
in  which  the  deceased  passed  through  transforma 
tions,  TERU.      The  ditficulty  which  forbids   our 
doing   more    than    conjecture   a    relation    between 
TER  and  teraphim  is  the  want  in  thj  former  of 
the  third  radical  of  the  latter ;  and  in  our  present 
state  of  ignorance  respecting  the  ancient  Egyptian 
»nd   the  primitive  language  of  Chaldaea  in  their 
verbal  relations  to  the  Semitic  family  it  is  impos 
sible  to  say  whether  it  is  likely  to  be  explained. 
The  possible  connexion  with  the  Egyptian  religious 
magic  is,  however,  not  to  be  slighted,  especially  as  it 
is  not  improbable  that  the  household  idolatry  of  the 
Hebrews  was  ancestral  worship,  and  the  SHEBTEE 
was  the  image  of  a  deceased  man  or  woman,  as  a 
mummy,  and  therefore  as  an  Osiris,  bearing  the 
insignia  of  that  divinity,  and  so  in  a  manner  as 
a  deified  dead  person,  although  we  do  not  know 
that  it  was  used  in  the  ancestral  worship  of  the 
Egyptians.     It  is  important  to  notice  that  no  sin 
gular  is  found  of  the  word  teraphim,  and  that  the 
plural  form  is  once  used  where  only  one  statue 
seems  to  be  meant  (1  Sam.  xix.  13,  16)^  in  this 
case  it  may  be  a  "  plural  of  excellence."     If  the 
latter  inference  be  .true,  this  word  must  have  become 
thoroughly  Semiticized.     There  is  no  description  of 
these  images;  but  from  the  account  of  Michal's 
stratagem  to  deceive  Saul's  messengers,  it  is  evi 
dent,  if  only  one  image  be  there  meant,  as  is  very 
probable,  that  they  were  at  least  sometimes  of  the 
size  of  a  man,  and  perhaps  in  the  head  and  shoulders, 
if  not  lower,  of  human  shape,  or  of  a  similar  form 
(Id.  13-16). 

The  worship  or  use  of  teraphim  after  the  occu 
pation  of  the  Promised  Land  cannot  be  doubted 
to  have  been  one  of  the  corrupt  practices  of  those 
Hebrews  who  leant  to  idolatry,  but  did  not  abandon 
their  belief  in  the  God  of  Israel.  Although  the 
Scriptures  draw  no  marked  distinction  between 
those  who  forsook  their  religion  and  those  who 
added  to  it  such  corruptions,  it  is  evident  that 
the  latter  always  professed  to  be  orthodox.  Tera 
phim  therefore  cannot  be  regarded  as  among  the 
Hebrews  necessarily  connected  with  strange  gods, 
whatever  may  have  been  the  case  with  other 
nations.  The  account  of  Micah's  images  in  the 
Book  of  Judges,  compared  with  a  passage  in  Hosea, 
shows  our  conclusion  to  be  correct.  In  the  earliest 
days  of  the  occupation  of  the  Promised  Land,  in 
the  time  of  anarchy  that  followed  Joshua's  rule, 
Micah,  "a  man  of  mount  Ephraim;"  made  certain 
images  and  other  objects  of  heretical  worship,  which 
were  stolen  from  him  by  those  Danites  who  took 
Laish  and  called  it  Dan,  there  setting  up  idolatry, 
where  it  continued  the  whole  time  that  the  ark  was 
at  Shiloh,  the  priests  retaining  their  post  "  until 
the  day  of  the  captivity  of  the  land"  (Judg.  xvii., 
xviii.,  esp.  30,  31).  Probably  this  worship  was 
somewhat  changed,  although  not  in  its  essential 
character,  when  Jeroboam  set  up  the  golden  calf  at 
Dan.  Micah's  idolatrous  objects  were  a  graven 
image,  a  molten  image,  an  ephod,  and  teraphim 
(zvii.  3,  4,  5,  xviii.  17,  18,  20).  In  Hosea  there 
is  a  retrospect  of  this  period  where  the  prophet 
takes  a  harlot,  and  commands  her  to  be  faithful  to 


MAGIC 


him  "  many  days."     It  is  added  :  "  For  the  chil 
dren  of  Israel   shall  abide  many  dajs  without  a 
king,  and  without  a  prince,  and  without  a  sacrifice, 
and  without  an  image  [or  "  pillar,"  H3tfD],  and 
without  an  ephod,  and  teraphim  :  afterw  ard  shall 
the   children   of  Israel  return,  and   seek  Jehovah 
;heir  God,  and  David  their  king;  and    hall  fear 
Jehovah  and  His  goodness  in  the  latter  days"  (iii. 
esp.  4,  5).    The  apostate  people  are  long  to  be  with 
out  their  spurious  king  and  false  worship,  and  in  the 
end  are  to  return  to  their  loyalty  to  the  house  of 
David  and  their  faith  in  the  true  God.     That  Dan 
should  be  connected  with  Jeroboam  "  who  made  Israel 
to  sin,"  and  with  the  kingdom  which  he  founded, 
ie  most  natural  ;  and  it  is  therefore  worthy  of  note 
that   the  images,    ephod,  and  teraphim  made    by 
Micah  and  stolen  and  set  up  by  the  Danites  at  Dan 
should  so  nearly  correspond  with  the  objects  spoken 
of  by  the  prophet.     It  has  been  imagined  that  the 
use  of  teraphim  and  the  similar  abominations  of  the 
heretical  Israelites  are  not  so  strongly  condemned  in 
the  Scriptures  as  the  worship  of  strange  gods.    This 
mistake  arises  from  the   mention  of  pious   kings 
who  did  not  suppress  the  high  places,  which  proves 
only  their  timidity,  and  not  any  lesser  sinfulness 
in  the  spurious  religion  than  in  false  systems  bor 
rowed  from  the  peoples  of  Canaan  and  neighbouring 
countries.    The  cruel  rites  of  the  heathen  are  indeed 
especially  reprobated,  but  the  heresy  of  the  Israelites 
is  too  emphatically  denounced,  by  Samuel  in  a  passage 
to  be  soon  examined,  and  in  the  repeated  condemna 
tion  of  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat  "  who  made  Israel 
to  sin,"  for  it  to  be  possible  that  we  should  take  a 
view  of  it  consistent  only  with  modem  sophistry  £ 

We  pass  to  the  magical  use  of  teraphim.  By  the 
Israelites  they  were  consulted  for  oracular  answers. 
This  was  apparently  done  by  the  Danites  who  asked 
Micah's  Levite  to  inquire  as  to  the  success  of  their 
spying  expedition  (Judg.  xviii.  5,  6).  In  later 
times  this  is  distinctly  stated  of  the  Israelites  where 
Zechariah  says,  "  For  the  teraphim  have  spoken 
vanity,  and  the  diviners  have  seen  a  lie,  and  have 
told  false  dreams"  (x.  2).  It  cannot  be  supposed 
that,  as  this  first  positive  mention  of  the  use  of  te 
raphim  for  divination  by  the  Israelites  is  after  the 
return  from  Babylon,  and  as  that  use  obtained  with 
the  Babylonians  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
therefore  the  Israelites  borrowed  it  from  their  con 
querors;  for  these  objects  are  mentioned  in  earlier 
places  in  such  a  manner  that  their  connexion  with 
divination  must  be  intended,  if  we  bear  in  mind 
that  this  connexion  is  undoubted  in  a  subsequent  pe 
riod.  Samuel's  reproof  of  Saul  for  his  disobedience 
in  the  matter  of  Amalek,  associates  "  divination  " 
with  "vanity,"  or  "idols"  (J1X),and"  teraphim,' 
however  we  render  the  difficult  passage  where  these 
words  occur  (1  Sam.  xv.  22,  23).  (The  word  ren 
dered  "  vanity,"  J1K,  is  especially  used  with  referenc 
to  idols,  and  even  in  some  places  stands  alone  fo 
an  idol  or  idols.)  When  Saul,  having  put  to  deatl 
the  workers  in  black  aits,  finding  himself  rejected 
of  God  in  his  extremity,  sought  the  witch  of  Endoi 
and  asked  to  see  Samuel,  the  prophet's  apparitio 
denounced  his  doom  as  the  punishment  of  this  ver 
disobedience  as  to  Amalek.  The  reproof  would  seen: 
therefore,  to  have  been  a  prophecy  that  the  sell 


«  Ka'-lsch,  In  hJs  Commentary  on  Genesis  (pp.  533,  534) 
eonstdo-s  the  use  of  teraphim  as  a  comparatively  harm 
less  form  of  Idolatry,  and  explains  the  passage  in  Hosef 
quoted  above  aa  meaning  that  the  Israelites  should  b< 


deprived  not  alone  of  true  religion,  but  even  of  the  re 
source  of  their  mild  household  superstitions.  Ho  thus 
entirely  misses  the  sense  of  the  passage.  Mid  makts  ti 
Bible  contradictory. 


MAGIC 

confident  king  would  at  the  last  alienate  himself  j 
from  God,  and  take  refuge  in  the  very  abominations 
he  despised.  This  apparent  retercnce  tends  to  con 
firm  ths  inference  we  have  indicated.  As  to  a  later 
time,  whan  Josiah's  reform  is  related,  he  is  said  to 
have  put  away  "  the  wizards,  and  the  teraphim, 
and  the  idols"  (2  K.  xxiii.  24)  ;  where  the  mention 
of  the  teraphim  immediately  after  the  wizards, 
and  as  distinct  from  the  idols,  secrns  to  favour  the 
inference  that  they  are  spoken  of  as  objects  used  in 
divination. 

The  only  account,  of  the  act  of  divining  by  tera 
phim  is  in  a  remarkable  passage  of  Ezekiel  relat 
ing  to  Nebuchadnezzar's  advance  against  Jerusalem. 
"  Also»  thou  son  of  man,  appoint  thee  two  ways, 
that  the  sword  of  the  king  of  Babylon  may  come : 
both  twain  [two  swords]  shall  come  forth  out  of 
me.  land :  and  choose  thou  a  place,  choose  [it]  at 
Wie  head  of  the  way  to  the  city.  Appoint  a  way, 
that  the  sword  may  come  to  Rabbath  of  the  Am 
monites,  and  to  Judah  in  Jerusalem  the  defenced. 
Vor  the  king  of  Babylon  stood  at  the  parting  of  the 
way,  at  the  head  of  the  two  ways,  to  use  divina 
tion:  he  shuffled  arrows,  he  consulted  with  tera 
phim,  he  looked  in  the  liver.  At  his  right  hand 
was  the  divination  for  Jerusalem"  (xxi.  19-22). 
The  mention  together  of  consulting  teraphim  and 
looking  into  the  liver,  may  not  indicate  that  the  vic 
tim  was  offered  to  teraphim  and  its  liver  then  looked 
into,  but  may  mean  two  separate  acts  of  divining. 
That  the  former  is  the  right  explanation  seems,  how 
ever,  probable  from  a  comparison  with  the  LXX. 
rendering  of  the  account  of  Michal's  stratagem.11 
Perhaps  Michal  had  been  divining,  and  on  the 
coming  of  the  messengers  seized  the  image  and 
liver  and  hastily  put  them  in  the  bed. — The 
accounts  which  the  Rabbins  give  of  divining  by 
teraphim  are  worthless. 

Before  speaking  of  the  notices  of  the  Egyptian 
magicians  in  Genesis  and  Exodus,  there  is  one 
pnssage  that  may  be  examined  out  of  the  regular 
order.  Joseph,  when  his  brethren  left  after  their 
second  visit  to  buy  corn,  ordered  his  steward  to 
hide  his  silver  cup  in  Benjamin's  sack,  and  after 
wards  sent  him  after  them,  ordering  him  to  claim 
it,  thus:  "  [Is]  not  this  [it]  in  which  my  lord 
drinketh,  and  whereby  indeed  he  divineth?"1  (Gen. 
xliv.  5).  The  meaning  of  the  latter  clause  has  been 
contested,  Gesenius  translating  "  he  could  surely 
foresee  it"  (ap.  Barrett,  Synopsis,  in  foe.),  but  the 
other  rendering  seems  far  more  probable,  especially  as 
we  read  that  Joseph  afterwards  said  to  his  brethren, 
"  Wot  ye  not  that  such  a  man  as  I  can  certainly  di 
vine?"  (xliv.  1  J»), — the  same  word  being  used.  If  so 
the  reference  would  probably  be  to  the  use  of  the  cup 
in  divining,  and  we  should  have  to  infer  that  here 
Joseph  was  acting  on  his  own  judgment  [JOSEPH], 


MAGIC 


197 


divination  being  not  alone  doubtless  a  forbidden  act, 
but  one  of  which  he  when  called  before  Pharaoh 
had  distinctly  disclaimed  the  practice.  Two  uses  oi 
cups  or  the  like  for  magical  purposes  have  obtained 
in  the  East  from  ancient  times.  In  one  use  eithei 
the  cup  itself  bears  engraved  inscriptions,  suj  posed 
to  have  a  magical  influence,11  or  it  is  plain  and  such 
inscriptions  are  written  on  its  inner  surface  in  ink. 
In  both  cases  water  poured  into  the  cup  is  drunk 
by  those  wishing  to  derive  benefit,  as,  for  instance 
the  cure  of  diseases,  from  the  inscriptions,  which, 
if  written,  are  dissolved."*  This  use,  in  both  its 
forms,  obtains  among  the  Arabs  in  the  present  day, 
and  cups  bearing  Chaldaean  inscriptions  in  ink  have 
been  discovered  by  Mr.  Layard,  and  probably  show 
that  this  practice  existed  among  the  Jews  in  Baby 
lonia  in  about  the  7th  century  of  the  Christian  era." 
In  the  other  use  the  cup  or  bowl  was  of  very  secon 
dary  importance.  It  was  merely  the  receptacle  for 
water,  in  which,  after  the  performance  of  magical 
rites,  a  boy  looked  to  see  what  the  magician  desired. 
This  is  precisely  the  same  as  the  practice  of  the  mo 
dern  Egyptian  magicians,  where  the  difference  that 
ink  is  employed  and  is  poured  into  the  palm  of  the 
boy's  hand  is  merely  accidental.  A  gnostic  papyrus 
in  Greek,  written  in  Egypt  in  the  earlier  centu 
ries  of  the  Christian  era,  now  preserved  in  the 
Bi'itish  Museum,  describes  the  practice  of  the  bov 
with  a  bowl,  and  alleges  results  strikingly  similar 
to  the  alleged  results  of  the  well-known  modern 
Egyptian  magician,  whose  divination  would  seem, 
therefore,  to  be  a  relic  of  the  famous  magic  of 
ancient  Egypt.0  As  this  latter  use  only  is  of 
the  nature  of  divination,  it  is  probable  that  to  it 
Joseph  referred.  The  practice  may  have  been 
•prevalent  in  his  time,  and  hieroglyphic  inscriptions 
upon  the  bowl  may  have  given  colour  to  the  idea 
that  it  had  magical  properties,  and  perhaps  even  that 
it  had  thus  led  to  the  discovery  of  its  place  of  con 
cealment,  a  discovery  which  must  have  struck 
Joseph's  brethren  with  the  utmost  astonishment. 

The  magicians  of  Egypt  are  spoken  of  as  a  class 
in  the  histories  of  Joseph  and  Moses.  When  Pha 
raoh's  officers  were  troubled  by  their  dreams,  being 
in  prison  they  were  at  a  loss  for  an  interpreter. 
Before  Joseph  explained  the  dreams  he  disclaimed 
the  power  of  interpreting  save  by  the  Divine  aid, 
saying,  "  [Do]  not  interpretations  [belong]  to  God  ? 
tell  me  [them],  I  pray  you "  (Gen.  xl.  8).  In 
like  manner  when  Pharaoh  had  his  two  dreams 
we  find  that  he  had  recourse  to  those  who  professed 
to  interpret  dreams.  We  read:  "  He  sent  uid  called 
for  all  the  scribes  of  Egypt,  and  all  "the  wise  men 
thereof :  and  Pharaoh  told  them  his  dream ;  but 
[there  was]  none  that  could  interpret  them  unto 
Pharaoh"  (xli.  8;  comp.  ver.  24).  Joseph,  being 
sent  for  on  the  report  of  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers 


h  The  Masoretic  text  reads,  "And  Michal  took  the 
teraphim,  and  laid  [it]  upon  the  bed,  and  the  mattress 
$  "V33)  of  she-goats  [or  goats'  hair]  she  put  at  its  head, 
ind  she  covered  [it]  with  a  cloth"  [or  garment]  (1  Sam. 
fix.  13).  The  LXX.  has  "  the  liver  «f  goats,"  having  ap 
parently  found  13?  instead  of  "V33  (Kai  eAa/3ev  ^ 
MeA^bA.  TO.  KevoratfiLa,  (cat  tdero  ewi  TTJV  K\ivr)V,  Kai 
?lirap  ^u>v  alyiav  eOero  n-pb;  Ke</>aAf)s  aiiroO,  Kai  fKa.\vif/cv 
aura  ijnaTi'u.) 

'  "13  B>m<  tj>"m- 

k  The  modern  Persians  apply  the  wo»d  Jain,  signifying 
a  enp,  mirror,  or  even  siui>e,  to  magical  vessels  of  this 
Kind,  and  relate  marvels  of  two  which  they  say  belonged  to 
their  ancient  klcg  JcmshceJ  and  to  Alexander  the  Great. 


The  former  of  these,  called  Jitm-i-Jem  or  Jita-i- Jemsheed. 
is  famous  in  Persian  poetry.  D'Herbelot  quotes  a  Turklsfr 
poet  who  thus  alludes  to  this  belief  In  magical  cups : — 
"When  I  shall  have  been  illuminated  by  the  light  of 
heaven  my  soul  will  become  the  mirror  of  the  world,  iu 
which  1  shall  discover  the  most  hidden  secrets"  (Bibliti- 
ttieque  Orientate,  s.  v.  GIAM). 

m  Modern  Egyptians,  5th  edit.  chap.  xi. 

n  Ifineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  509,  &c.  There  is  au 
excellent  paper  on  these  bowls  by  Dr.  Levy  of  Breslau,  in 
the  Zeitsclirift  der  Deutsch.  JJorgenliind.  Gesellscha/t, 
ix.  p.  465,  &c. 

0  See  the  Modern  Egyptians,  5th  edit.  chap.  xii.  for  an 
account  of  the  performances  of  this  magician,  and  Mr. 
Lane's  opinion  as  to  the  causes  of  their  ocrasioiial  app» 
rent  «ucc*fi6. 


198 


MAGIC 


was  told  by  Pharaoh  that  he  had  heard  that  he 
could  interpret  a  dream.  J'oseph  said,  "  [It  is]  not 
in  me :  God  shall  give  Pharaoh  an  answer  of  peace  " 
yVer.  16).  Thus,  from  the  expectations  of  the 
Egyptians  and  Joseph's  disavowals,  we  see  that  the 
interpretation  of  dreams  was  a  branch  of  the  know 
ledge  to  which  the  ancient  Egyptian  magicians  pre 
tended.  The  failure  of  the  Egyptians  in  the  case 
of  Pharaoh's  dreams  must  probably  be  regarded  as 
the  result  of  their  inability  to  give  a  satisfactory 
explanation,  for  it  is  unlikely  that  they  refused  to 
attempt  to  interpret.  The  two  words  used  to  de 
signate  the  inteipreters  sent  for  by  Pharaoh  are 
D'J3p"in.  "  scribes"  (?)  and  D'O3n>  "  wise  men."> 
We  again  hear  of  the  magicians  of  Egypt  in  the 
narra*ive  of  the  events  before  the  Exodus.  They 
were  summoned  by  Pharaoh  to  oppose  Moses.  The 
account  of  what  they  effected  requires  to  be  care 
fully  examined,  from  its  bearing  on  the  question 
whether  magic  be  an  imposture.  We  read:  "And 
Hie  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 
When  Pharaoh  shall  speak  unto  you,  saying,  Show 
a  miracle  for  you :  then  thou  shult  say  unto  Aaron, 
Take  thy  rod,  and  cast  [it]  before  Pharaoh,  [and] 
it  shall  become  a  serpent."  <  It  is  then  related  that 
Aaron  did  thus,  and  afterwards :  "  Then  Pharaoh 
also  called  the  wise  ntenf  and  the  enchant  ere  :• 
now  they,  the  scribes'  of  Egypt,  did  so  by  their 
secret  arts  :•  for  they  cast  down  every  man  his  rod, 
and  they  became  serpents,  but  Aaron's  rod  swal 
lowed  up  their  rods"  (Ex.  vii .  8-12) .  The  rods  were 
probably  long  staves  like  those  represented  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  not  much  less  than  the  height 
of  a  man.  If  the  word  used  mean  here  a  serpent, 
the  Egyptian  magicians  may  have  feigned  a  change : 
if  it  signify  a  crocodile  they  could  scarcely  have 
done  so.  The  names  by  which  the  magicians  are 
designated  are  to  be  noted.  That  which  we  render 
"  scribes"  seems  here  to  have  a  general  signification, 
including  wise  men  and  enchanters.  The  last  tei-m  is 
more  definite  in  its  meaning,  denoting  users  of  in 
cantations.*  On  the  occasion  of  the  first  plague,  the 
turning  the  rivers  and  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood, 
the  opposition  of  the  magicians  again  occurs.  "  Aiid 
the  scribes  of  Egypt  did  so  oy  their  secret  arts " 
(vii.  22).  When  the  second  plague,  that  of  frogs, 


MAGIC 

was  sent,  the  magicians  again  made  the  same  oppo 
sition  (viii.  7).  Once  more  they  appear  in  the 
history.  The  plague  of  iice  came,  and  we  read 
that  when  Aaron  had  worked  the  wonder  th« 
magicians  opposed  him  :  "  And  the  scribes  did 
so  by  their  secret  arts  to  bring  forth  the  lice, 
but  they  could  not:  so  there  were  lice  upon  man 
and  upon  beast.  And  the  scribes  said  unto  Pharaoh, 
This  [is]  the  finger  of  God :  but  Pharaoh's  hcai  t 
was  hai-dened,  and  he  hearkened  not  unto  them,  as 
the  Lord  had  said"  (viii.  18,  11),  Heb.  14,  15). 
After  this  we  hear  no  more  of  the  magicians.  All 
we  can  gather  from  the  narrative  is  that  the  ap 
pearances  produced  by  them  were  sufficient  to 
deceive  Pharaoh  on  three  occasions.  It  is  no 
where  declared  that  they  actually  produced  won 
ders,  since  the  expression  "  the  scribes  did  so 
by  their  secret  arts"  is  used  on  the  occasion  ol 
their  complete  failure.  Nor  is  their  statement 
that  in  the  wonders  wrought  by  Aaron  they  saw 
the  finger  of  God  any  proof  that  they  recognised  a 
power  superior  to  the  native  objects  of  worship 
they  invoked,  for  we  find  that  the  Egyptians  fre 
quently  spoke  of  a  supreme  being  as  God.  It 
seems  rather  as  though  they  had  said,  "  Our  juggles 
are  of  no  avail  against  the  work  of  a  divinity." 
There  is  one  later  mention  of  these  transactions, 
which  adds  to  our  information,  but  does  not  decide 
the  main  question.  St.  Paul  mentions  Jannes  and 
Jambres  as  having  "  withstood  Moses,"  and  says 
that  their  folly  in  doing  so  became  manifest  (2  Tim. 
iii.  8,  9).  The  Egyptian  character  of  these  names, 
the  first  of  which  is,  in  our  opinion,  found  in  hiero 
glyphics,  does  not  favour  the  opinion,  which  seems 
inconsistent  with  the  character  of  an  inspired  record, 
that  the  Apostle  cited  a  prevalent  tradition  of  the 
Jews.  [JANNES  AND  JAMBRES.] 

We  turn  to  the  Egyptian  illustrations  of  this 
part  of  the  subject.  Magic,  as  we  have  before 
remarked,  was  inherent  in  the  ancient  Egyptian 
religion.  The  Ritual  is  a  system  of  incantations 
and  directions  for  making  amulets,  with  the  object 
of  securing  the  future  happiness  of  the  disembodied 
soul.  However  obscure  the  belief  of  the  Egyptians 
as  to  the  actual  character  of  the  state  of  the  soul 
after  death  may  be  to  us,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 


P  The  former  word  Is  difficult  of  explanation.  It  is  to 
be  noticed  that  it  is  also  used  for  a  class  of  the  Baby. 
Ionian  magi  (Dan.  1.  20,  \i.  2) ;  so  that  it  can  scarcely  be 
supposed  to  be  an  Egyptian  word  Hebraicized.  Egyptian 
nqulvalents  have  however  been  sought  for ;  and  Jablonsky 
suggests  GpXCUJUL'  thaumaturgus,  and  Ignatius 
Rossi  Ci.p6CTUJ.JUL.  "guardian  of  secret  things" 
(ap.  Ges.  Thee.  s.  v.),  both  of  which  are  far  too  unlike  the 
Hebrew  to  have  any  probability.  To  derive  it  from 

the  Persian  t\L>c -i  r-*-  "  endued  with  wisdom/'  when 
occurring  In  Daniel,  is  puerile,  as  Gesenius  admits.  He 
suggests  a  Hebrew  origin,  and  tikes  it  either  from  t2^H. 
"  a  pen  or  stylus,"  and  Q —  formative,  or  supposes  it  to 
he  a  quadrlllteral,  formed  from  the  trllitcral  tSIH.  the 
"  unused  "  root  of  t3"in.  and  D^fh  "  he  or  it  was 
Bacred."  The  former  seems  far  more,  prolxible  at  first 
sight ;  and  tue  latter  would  not  have  had  any  weight 
were  it  not  for  its  likeness  to  the  Greek  itpcypannarevs, 
used  of  Egyptian  religious  scribes ;  a  resemblance  which, 
moreover,  loses  much  of  its  value  wlion  we  find  that 
In  hieroglyphics  there  is  no  exactly  corresponding  ex 
pression.  \otwitnstanding  these  Hebrew  derivations, 
inclines  *,o  the  idc«  that  a  similar  Kjvptlan 


word  was  imitated:  instancing  Abrech,  Moses,  and 
behemoth  C«p3R.  HS^O.  n'lOn2)  ;  but  no  one  ol 
these  can  be  proved  to  be  Egyptian  in  origin,  and  thore 
is  no  strong  ground  for  seeking  any  but  a  Hebrew  etymo 
logy  for  the  second  and  third  (The*.  1.  c.).  The  most 
similar  word  is  Hashmannim,  D'iDtTI  (Ps.  Ixviil.  31, 
Heb.  32),  which  we  suppose  to  be  Egyptian,  meaning 
Hermopolites,  with  perhaps,  in  the  one  place  where  it 
occurs,  a  reference  to  the  wisdom  of  the  citizens  of  Her- 
mopolis  Magna,  the  city  of  Thoth,  the  Egyptian  Hermes 
[HASHMANNIM.]  We  prefer  to  keep  to  the  Hebrew  deri 
vation  simply  from  D^r],  and  to  read  "  scribes."  the  idea 
of  magicians  being  probably  understood.  The  other  word, 
D'ODH.  does  not  seem  to  mean  any  special  class,  but 
merely  the  wise  mcn\>f  Kgypt  generally. 

i  pan.          r 


»  The  word  D*pi"l?,  elsewhere  D't3T>  (ver.  22,  viii 
3,  14),  signifies  "secret"  or  ••  hidden  art?,"  from  £!)^j 
H?).  "  he  or  it  covered  over.  hW.  or  \vr.n.p,  •<' 


MAGIC 

Jhe  knowledge  and  use  of  the  magical  amulets  and 
uicantatious  treated  of  in  the  Ritual  was  held  to  be 
necessary  for  future  happiness,  although  it  was  not 
believed  that  they  alone  could  ensure  it,  since  to 
have  done  good  works,  or,  more  strictly,  not  to  have 
committed  certain  sins,  was  an  essential  condition 
of  the  acquittal  of  the  soul  in  the  great  trial  in  Hades. 
The    thoroughly  magical    character  of  the  Ritual 
is  most  strikingly  evident  in  the  minute  directions 
given  for  making  amulets   (Todtenbuch,  ch.    100, 
rj9,  134),  and  the  secresy  enjoined  in  one  case  to 
those   thus  occupied  (183).     The  later  chapters  of 
the   Ritual  (163-165),  held  to    have   been   added 
after  the  compilation   or  composition  of  the  rest, 
which  theory,  as  M.  Chabas  has  well  remarked,  does 
not  prove  their  much  more  modern  date  (Le  Papyrus 
Maijique  Harris,  p.  162),  contain  mystical  names 
iiot  bearing  an  Egyptian  etymology.     These  names 
have  been   thought  to  be  Ethiopian ;    they  either 
have  no  signification,  and  are  mere  magical  gibberish, 
or  else  they  are,  mainly  at  least,  of  foreign  origin. 
Besides  the  Ritual  the  ancient  Egyptians  had  books 
of  a  purely  magical  character,  such  as  that  which 
M.  Chabas  has  just  edited  in  his  work  referred  to 
above.     The   main   source   of  their   belief  in  the 
slficacy  of  magic  appears  to  have  been  the  idea  that 
the  souls  of  the  dead,  whether  justified  or  con 
demned,  had  the  power  of  revisiting  the  earth  and 
taking  various   forms.     This  belief  is  abundantly 
used  in  the  moral  tale  of  '  The  Two  Brothers/  of 
which  the  text  has  been  recently  published  by  the 
Trustees  of  the  British   Museum   (Select  Papyri, 
Part  11.),  and  we  learn  from   this  ancient  papyrus 
the  age  and  source  of  much  of  the  machinery  of 
mediaeval   fictions,  botli  eastern  and  western.     A 
likeness  that  strikes  us  at  once  in  the  case  of  a 
fiction  is  not  less  true  of  the  Ritual ;  and  the  perils 
encountered  by  the  soul  in  Hades  are  the  first  rude 
indications  of  the  adventures  of  the  heroes  of  Arab 
and  German  romance.     The  regions  of  terror  tra 
versed,  the  mystic  portals  that  open  alone  to  magical 
words,  and   the  monsters  whom  magic   alone  can 
deprive  of  their  power  to  injure,  are  here  already 
in  the  book  that  in  part  was  found  in  the  reign  of 
king  Mencheres  four  thousand  yeare  ago.     Bearing 
in  mind  the  Nigritian  nature  of  Egyptian  magic, 
we  may  look  for  the  source  of  these  ideas  in  primi 
tive  Africa.     There  we  find  the  realities  of  which 
the  ideal    form    is    not   greatly  distorted,    though 
greatly  intensified.       The   forests  that  clothe  the 
southern  slopes  of  snowy  Atlas,  full  of  fierce  beasts  ; 
the  vast  desert,  untenanted  save  by  harmful   rep 
tiles,  swept  by  sand-storms,  and  ever  burning  under 
an  unchanging  sun;  the  marshes  of  the  south,  teem 
ing  with  brutes  of  vast  size  and  strength,  are  the 
several  zones  of  the  Egyptian  Hades.    The  creatures 
of  the  desert  and  the  plains  and  slopes,  the  crocodile, 
the  pachydermata,  the  lion,  perchance  the  got  ilia, 
are  the  genii  that  hold  this  land  of  fear.     In  what 
dread  must  the  first  scanty  population  have  held 
dangers  and  enemies  still  feared  by  their  swarming 
posterity.     No  wonder  then  that  the  imaginative 
Nigritians  were   struck   with  a  superstitious  fear 
that  certain   conditions  of  external  nature  always 
produce  with  races  of  a  low  type,  where  a  higher 
feeling   ivould  only  be  touched  by  the  analogies  of 
life  and  death,  of  time  and  eternity.     No  wonder 
that,  so  struck,  the   primitive  race  imagined  the 
evils  of  the  unseen  world  to  be  the  recurrence  of 
those  against  which  they  struggled  while  on  earth. 
That  there  is  some  ground  tor  our  theory,  besides 
vhc  generalisation  which  led  us  to  it,  is  shov/n  by 


MAGIC 


199 


n  usual  Egyptian  name  of  Hades,  "  the  West ;"  and 
that  the  wild  regions  west  of  Egypt  might  directly 
give  birth  to  such  fancies  as  fonn  the  common 
ground  of  the  machinery,  nut  the  general  belief,  ot 
the  Ritual,  as  well  as  of  the  machinery  of  mediaeval 
fiction,  is  shown  by  the  fables  that  the  rude  Arabs 
of  our  own  day  tell  of  the  wonders  thty  have  seen. 

Like  all  nations  who  have  practised  magic  gene 
rally,  the  Egyptians  separated  it  into  a  lawful  kind 
and  an  unlawful.  M.  Chabas  has  proved  this  fiom 
a  papyrus  which  he  finds  to  contain  an  account  of 
the  prosecution,  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  111.,  (B.C. 
cir.  1220)  of  an  official  for  unlawfully  acquiring  and 
using  magical  books,  the  king's  property.  The 
culprit  was  convicted  and  punished  with  death 
(p.  169  seq.) 

A  belief  in  unlucky  and  lucky  days,  in  actions  to 
be  avoided  or  done  on  certain  days,  and  in  the 
fortune  attending  birth  on  certain  days,  was  ex 
tremely  strong,  as  we  learn  from  a  remarkable 
ancient  calendar  (Select  Papyri,  Part  1.)  and  the 
evidence  of  writers  of  antiquity.  A  religious  pre 
judice,  or  the  occurrence  of  some  great  calamity, 
probably  lay  at  the  root  of  this  observance  of  days. 
Of  the  former  the  birthday  of  Typhon,  the  fifth  of 
the  Epagomenae,  is  an  instance.  Astrology  WMS 
also  held  in  high  honour,  as  the  calendars  of  certain 
of  the  tombs  of  the  kings,  stating  the  positions  of 
the  stars  and  their  influence  on  different  parts  of  the 
body,  show  us ;  but  it  seems  doubtful  whether  this 
branch  of  magical  arts  is  older  than  the  xviiith 
dynasty,  although  certain  stars  were  held  in  re 
verence  in  the  time  of  the  ivth  dynasty.  The  belief 
in  omens  probably  did  not  take  an  important  place 
in  Egyptian  magic,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  ab 
sence  of  direct  mention  of  thorn.  The  superstition 
as  to  "  the  evil  eye  "  appears  to  have  been  known, 
but  there  is  nothing  else  that  we  can  class  with 
phenomena  of  the  nature  of  animal  magnetism. 
Two  classes  of  learned  men  had  the  charge  of  the 
magical  books:  one  of  these,  the  name  of  which 
has  not  been  read  phonetically,  would  seem  to  cor 
respond  to  the  "  scribes,"  as  we  render  the  word,\ 
spoken  of  in  the  history  of  Joseph ;  whereas  the 
other  has  the  general  sense  of  "  wise  men,"  like 
the  other  class  there  mentioned.? 

There  are  no  representations  on  the  monuments 
that  can  be  held  to  relate  directly  to  the  practice 
of  this  art,  but  the  secret  passages  in  the  thickness 
of  the  wall,  lately  opened  in  the  great  temple  (if 
Dendarah,  seem  to  have  been  intended  for  some 
purpose  of  imposture. 

The  Law  contains  very  distinct  prohibitions  of 
all  magical  arts.  Besides  several  passages  con 
demning  them,  in  one  place  there  is  a  specifi 
cation  which  is  so  full  that  it  seems  evident  that 
its  object  is  to  include  every  kind  of  magical 
art.  The  reference  is  to  the  practices  of  Canaan, 
not  to  those  of  Egypt,  which  indeed  do  not  seem  to 
have  been  brought  away  by  the  Israelites,  who.  it 
may  be  remarked,  apparently  did  not  adopt  Egyptian 
idolatry,  but  only  that  of  foreigners  settled  in 
Egypt.  [REMPHAN.] 

The  Israelites  are  Commanded  in  the  place  referred 
to  not  to  learn  the  abominations  of  the  peoples  of 
the  Promised  Land.  Then  follows  this  prohibition : 
"  There  shall  not  be  found  with  thee  one  who 


J  For  the  facts  respecting  Egyptian  magic  here  stated 
we  are  greatly  indebted  to  M.  Chabas'  remarkable  wort 
We  do  not,  however,  agree  with  some  of  his  deduction*: 
and  the  theory  we  have  put  forth  of  the  origin  of  Egyptian 
magic  is  ourolv  our  own 


^00  MAGIC 

offereth  his  son  or  his  daughter  by  fire,  a  practiser 
of  divinations  (D*EDp  DDp),  a  worker  of  hidden 
arts  (|3iy?3),  an  augurer  (K>n3D),  an  enchanter 
(f|B*2Q),  or  a  fabricator  of  charms  ("OH  ^3H),  or 

an  inquirer  by  a  familiar  spirit  (31N  /KB'),  or  a 
wizai-d  ('3JTP),  or  a  consulter  of  the  dead  (-^N  tjhl 
DTDSH)."  It  is  added  that  these  are  abominations, 

and  that  on  account  of  their  practice  the  nations 
of  Canaan  were  to  be  driven  out  (Deut.  xviii.  9-14, 
esp.  10,  11).  It  is  remarkable  that  the  offering  of 
children  should  be  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
magical  arts.  The  passage  in  Micah,  which  has 
been  supposed  to  preserve  a  question  of  Balak  and 
an  answer  of  Balaam,  when  the  soothsayer  was 
sent  for  to  curse  Israel,  should  be  here  noticed, 
for  the  questioner  asks,  after  speaking  of  sacrifices 
of  usual  kinds,  "  Shall  I  give  my  first-born  [for] 
my  transgression,  the  fruit  of  my  body  [for]  the 
sin  of  my  soul?"  (vi.  5-8).  Perhaps,  however, 
child-sacrifice  is  specified  on  account  of  its  atrocity, 
which  would  connect  it  with  secret  arts,  which  we 
Know  were  frequently  in  later  times  the  causes  ef 
cruelty.  The  terms  which  follow  appear  to  refer 
properly  to  eight  different  kinds  of  magic,  but  some 
of  them  are  elsewhere  used  in  a  general  sense. 
1.  D^JDDp  DDp  is  literally  "adiviner  of  divinations." 

The  verb  DDp  is  used  of  false  prophets,  but  also 
in  a  general  sense  for  divining,  as  in  the  narrative 
of  Saul's  consultation  of  the  witch  of  Endor,  where 

the  king  says  "  divine  unto  me  (v  WEIDp 
21K3),  I  pray  thee, by  the  familiar  spirit"  (1  Sam. 
xxviii.  8).  2.  JJIJJO  conveys  the  idea  of  "  one  who 
acts  covertly,"  and  so  "  a  worker  of  hidden  arts." 
The  meaning  of  the  root  J3JJ  is  covering,  and  the 
supposed  connexion  with  fascination  by  the  eyes, 
like  the  notion  of  "  the  evil  eye,"  as  though  the 
original  root  were  "  the  eye  "  (pj?)>  seems  unten 
able.1  3.  fnjp,  which  we  render  "an  augurer," 
is  from  BTI3,  which  is  literally  "  he  or  it  hissed  or 
whispered,"  and  in  Piel  is  applied  to  the  practice  of 
enchantments,  but  also  to  divining  generally,  as  in  the 
case  of  Joseph's  cup,  and  where,  evidently  referring 
to  it,  he  tells  his  brethren  that  he  could  divine,  al 
though  in  both  places  it  has  been  read  more  vaguely 
with  the  sense  to  foresee  or  make  trial  (Gen.  xliv. 
5,  15).  We  therefore  render  it  by  a  term  which 
seems  appropriate  but  not  too  definite.  The  sup 
posed  connexion  of  BTI3  with  BT13,  "  a  serpent,"  as 
though  meaning  serpent-divination,  must  be  rejected, 
the  latter  word  rather  coming  from  the  former,  with 
the  signification  "a  hisser."*  4.  ^BOO  signifies 

"  an  enchanter :"  the  original  meaning  of  the  verb 
was  probably  "he  prayed,"  and  the  strict  sense  of  this 
word  "  one  who  uses  incantations."  5.  "QH  "Oh 
seems  to  mean  "  a  fabricator  of  material  charms  or 
amulets,"  if  "12P1,  when  used  of  practising  sorcery, 

•  The  ancient  Egyptians  seem  to  have  held  the  super 
etltion  of  the  evil  eye,  for  an  eye  Is  the  determinative  of 
B  word  which  appears  to  signify  some  kind  of  magic  (Cha 
SBS,  Papyrus  JUagique  ffai-ris,  p.  170  and  note  4). 

A  The  nsjne  Nahshon  (T1ETI3).  of  aprinceof  Judah  in 


B1AGIC 

means  to  bind  magical  knots,  and  not  tc  bind  ? 
person  by  spells.      6.  31N  7X1?  is  "an  inquiier 

by  a  familiar  spirit."  The  second  term  signifiet  » 
bottle,6  a  familiar  spirit  consulted  by  a  soothsajer 
and  a  soothsayer  having  a  familiar  spirit.  Tht  LXX. 
usually  render  the  plural  JTQX  by  iyycurrpinvOoi, 
which  has  been  rashly  translated  ventriloquists,  for 
it  may  not  signify  what  we  understand  by  the  latter, 
but  refer  to  the  mode  in  which  soothsayers  of  this 
kind  gave  out  their  responses :  to  this  subject  we 
shall  recur  later.  The  consulting  of  familiar  spirit* 
may  mean  no  more  than  invoking  them  ;  but  in  the 
Acts  we  read  of  a  damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit  of 
divination  (xvi.  16-18)  in  very  distinct  terms.  This 
kind  of  sorcery — divination  by  a  familiar  spirit — was 
practised  by  the  witch  of  Endor.  7.  *3jn*»  which 
we  render  "  a  wizard,"  is  properly  "  a  wise  man," 
but  is  always  applied  to  wizards  and  false  pro 
phets.  Gesenius  ( Thes.  s.  v.)  supposes  that  in  Lev. 
xx.  27  it  is  used  of  a  familiar  spirit,  but  surely  the 
reading  "  a  wizard"  is  there  more  probable.  8.  The 
last  term,  D*rU3!T7K  EH a,  is  very  explicit,  mean 
ing  "  a  cousulter  of  the  dead :"  necromancer  is  an 
exact  translation  if  the  original  signification  of  the 
latter  is  retained,  instead  of  the  more  general  one  it 
now  usually  bears.  In  the  Law  it  was  commanded 
that  a  man  or  woman  who  had  a  familiar  spirit,  or 
a  wizard,  should  be  stoned  (Lev.  xx.  27).  An 
"enchantress"  (HQtJOp)  was  not  to  live  (Ex. 

xxii.   18;   Heb.   17).     Using  augury   and   hidden 
arts  was  also  forbidden  (Lev.  xix.  26). 

The  history  of  Balaam  shows  the  belief  of  some 
ancient  nations  in  the  powers  of  soothsayers.  When 
the  Israelites  had  begun  to  conquer  the  Land  of  Pro 
mise,  Balak  the  king  of  Moab  and  the  elders  of 
Midian,  resorting  to  Pharaoh's  expedient,  sent  by 
messengers  with  "  the  rewards  of  divination 
(?  D^lODp)  in  their  hands  "  (Num.  xxii.  7)  for  Balaam 
the  diviner  (  DDIpH,  Josh.  xiii.  22),  whose  fame  was 
known  to  them  though  he  dwelt  in  Aram.  Balak's 
message  shows  what  he  believed  Balaam's  powers  to 
be :  "  Behold,  there  is  a  people  come  out  from 
Egypt:  behold,  they  cover  the  face  of  the  earth,  and 
they  abide  over  against  me :  come  now  therefore, 
I  pray  thee,  curse  me  this  people ;  for  they  [are] 
too  mighty  for  me:  peradventure  I  shall  prevail, 
[that]  we  may  smite  them,  and  [that]  I  may  drive 
them  out  of  the  land :  for  I  wot  that  he  whom  thou 
blessest  [is]  blessed:  and  he  whom  thou  cursest  is 
cursed"  (Num.  xxii.  5,  6).  We  are  told,  however, 
that  Balaam,  warned  of  God,  fii'st  said  that  he  could 
not  speak  of  himself,  and  then  by  inspiration  blessed 
those  whom  he  had  been  sent  for  to  curse.  He  appears 
to  have  received  inspiration  in  a  vision  or  a  trance 
In  one  place  it  is  said,  "  And  Balaam  saw  that  it 
was  good  in  the  eyes  of  the  LORD  to  bless  Israel, 
and  he  went  not,  now  as  before,  to  the  meeting 
enchantments  (DHJT13),  but  he  set.  his  face  to  the 
wilderness"  (xxiv.  1).  From  this  it  would  seem 
that  it  was  his  wont  to  use  enchantments,  and  that 
when  on  other  occasions  he  went  away  after  the 


Ruth  iv.  20,  &c.),  means  "  enchanter :"  it  wag  probably 
used  as  a  proper  name  in  a  vague  sense. 

b  This  meaning    suggests    the   probability    that  th« 
Arab  idea  of  the  evil  Jinn   having  been   enclose!   U 


Uie§B«>nd  year  after  the  Kxodus  (Num.  i.  1 ;  Ex.  vi.aa-  . <llttf> 


bottle*  by  Solomon  was  derived  from  some  Jewish  lr» 


MAGIC 

racrifices  had  been  offered,  ne  hoped  that  he  could 
prevail  to  obtaiu  the  wish  of  those  who  had  sent 
for  him,  but  was  constantly  defeated.  The  building 
new  altars  of  the  mystic  number  of  seven,  and  the 
offering  of  seven  oxen  and  seven  rams,  s»em  to  show 
that  Balaam  had  some  such  idea ;  and  the  marked 
manner  in  which  he  declared  "  there  is  no  en 
chantment  (B>n3  )  against  Jacob,  and  no  divination 
IDpp)  against  Israel"  (xxiii.  23),  that  he  had  come  in 
the  hope  that  they  would  have  availed,  the  diviner 
here  being  made  to  declare  his  own  powerlessness 
while  he 'blessed  those  whom  he  was  sent  for  to 
curse.  The  case  is  a  very  difficult  one.  since  it  shows 
a  man  who  was  used  as  an  instrument  of  declaring 
God's  will  trusting  in  practices  that  could  only 
have  incurred  His  displeasure.  The  simplest  expla 
nation  seems  to  be  that  Balaam  was  never  a  true 
prophet  but  on  this  occasion,  when  the  enemies  of 
Israel  were  to  be  signally  confounded.  This  history 
affords  a  notable  instance  of  the  failure  of  magicians 
in  attempting  to  resist  the  Divine  will. 

The  account  of  Saul's  consulting  the  witch  of 
Endor  is  the  foremost  place  in  Scripture  of  those 
which  refer  to  magic.  The  supernatural  terror 
with  which  it  is  full  cannot  however  be  proved  to 
be  due  to  this  art,  for  it  has  always  been  held  by 
sober  critics  that  the  appearing  of  Samuel  was  per 
mitted  for  the  purpose  of  declaring  the  doom  of  Saul, 
and  not  that  it  was  caused  by  the  incantations  of  a 
sorceress.  As,  however,  the  narrative  is  allowed  to 
be  very  difficult,  we  may  look  for  a  moment  at  the 
evidence  of  its  authenticity.  The  details  are  strictly 
in  accordance  with  the  age :  there  is  a  simplicity  in 
the  manners  described  that  is  foreign  to  a  latei 
time.  The  circumstances  are  agreeable  with  the 
rest  of  the  history,  and  especially  with  all  we  know 
of  Saul's  character.  Here,  as  ever,  he  is  seen  re 
solved  to  gain  his  ends  without  caring  what  wrong 
he  does :  he  wishes  to  consult  a  prophet,  and  ask 
a  witch  to  call  up  his  shade.  Most  of  all  the  vigou 
of  the  narrative,  showing  us  the  scene  in  a  few 
words,  proves  its  antiquity  and  genuineness.  W 
am  see  no  reason  whatever  for  supposing  that  it  i 
an  interpolation. 

"  Now  Samuel  was  dead,  and  all  Israel  had  la 
mented  him,  and  buried  him  in  Hamah,  even  in  hi 
own  city.  And  Saul  had  put  away  those  that  hac 
familiar  spirits,  and  the  wields,  out  of  the  land 
And  the  Philistines  gathered  themselves  togethei 
and  came  and  pitched  in  Shunem  ;  and  Saul  ga 
thered  all  Israel  together,  svnd  they  pitched  in  Gil 
boa."  That  the  Philistines  should  have  advancec 
so  far,  spreading  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the 
garden  of  the  Holy  Land,  shows  the  straits  to  whic 
Saul  had  come.  Here  in  times  of  faith  Sisera  was 
defeated  by  Barak,  and  the  Midianites  were  smitte 
by  Gideon,  some  of  the  army  of  the  former  perishin 
at  En-dor  itself  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  9, 10).  "  And  when  Sau 
saw  the  host  of  the  Philistines,  he  was  afraid,  and  hi 
heart  greatly  trembled.  And  when  Saul  enquired  o 
the  LORD,  the  LORD  answered  him  not,  neither  b 
dreams,  nor  by  Urim,  nor  by  prophets.  Then  sai 
Saul  unto  his  servants,  Seek  me  a  woman  that  hat 
a  familiar  spirit,  that  I  may  go  to  her,  and  enquii 
nf  her.  And  his  servants  said  to  him,  Behold 


MAGIC 


201 


c  Dor  is  said  to  have  taken  its  name  from  Dorus,  3,  so 
of  Neptune,  whose  name  reminds  one  of  Taras,  th 
founder  of  Tarentum. 


there  is]   a  woman  that  hath  a  familiar  spirit  at 
n-dor.     And  Saul  disguised  himself,  and  put  on 
ther  raiment,  and  he  went,  and  t-.vo  men  witr 
im,  and  they  came  to  the  woman  by  night."    En  • 
or  lay  in  the  territory  of  Issachar,  about  7  or  8 
lies   to   the   northward   of  Mount   Gilboa.      Its 
ame,  the  "  fountain  of  Dor,"  may  connect  it  with 
le  Phoenician  city  Dor,  which  was  on  the  coast 
o  the  westward.0     If  so,  it  may  have  retained  its 
tranger-population,  and  been  therefore  chosen  by 
be  witch  as  a  place  where  she  might  with  less  danger 
tian  elsewhere  practise  her  arts.    It  has  been  noticed 
liat  the  mountain  on  whose  slope  the  modem  village 
tands  is  hollowed  into  rock-hewn  caverns,  in  one  of 
which  the  witch  may  probably  have  dwelt.    [EN- 
DOR.]    Saul's  disguise,  and  his  journeying  by  night, 
eem  to  have   been  taken  that  he  might  not  alarm 
he  woman,  rather  than  because  he  may  have  passed 
hrough  a  part  of  the  Philistine  force.     The  Philis- 
,ines  held  the  plain,  having  their  camp  at  Shunem, 
whither   they   had   pushed   on   from    Aphek:   the 
sraelites  were  at  first  encamped  by  a  fountain  at 
Jezreel,  but  when  their  enemies  had  advanced  to 
Jezreel  they  appear  to  have  retired  to  the  slopes  ot 
3ilboa,  whence  there  was  a  way  of  retreat  either 
nto  the  mountains  to  the  south,  or  across  Jordan. 
The  latter  seems  to  have  been  the  line  of  flight,  as, 
:hough  Saul  was  slain  on  Mount  Gilboa,  his  body 
was  fastened    to    the  wall  of   Beth-shan.      Thus 
Saul    could   have  scarcely    reached    En-dor  with 
out  passing  at  least  very  near  the  army  of  the  Phi 
listines.     "  And  he  said,  divine  unto  me,  1  pray 
thee,  by  the  familiar  spirit,  and  bring  me  [him]  up, 
whom  I  shall  name  unto  thee."     It  is  noticeable 
that  here  witchcraft,   the  inquiring  by  a  familiar 
spirit,  and  necromancy,  are  all  connected  as  though 
but  a  single  art,  which  favours  the  idea  that  the 
prohibition  in  Deuteronomy  specifies  every  name  by 
which  magical  arts  were  known,   rather  than  so 
many  different  kinds  of  arts,  in  order  that  no  one 
should  attempt  to  evade  the  condemnation  of  such 
practices  by  any  subterfuge.    It  is  evident  that  Saul 
thought  he  might  be  able  to  call  up  Samuel  by  the 
aid  of  the  witch  ;  but  this  does  not  prove  what  was 
his  own  general  conviction,  or  the  prevalent  con 
viction  of  the  Israelites  on  the  subject.     He  was  in 
a  great  extremity :  his  kingdom  in  danger :  himself 
forsaken  of  God:  he  was  weary  with  a  night-journey, 
perhaps  of  risk,  perhaps  of  great  length  to  avoid 
the  enemy,  and  faint  with  a  day's  fasting :  he  was 
conscious  of  wrong  as,  probably  for  the  first  time, 
he  commanded  unholy  rites  and  heard  in  the  gloom 
unholy  incantations.     In  such  a  strait  no  man's 
judgment  is  steady,  and  Saul  may  have  asked  to 
see  Samuel  in  a  moment  of  sudden  desperation  when 
he  had  only  meant  to  demand  an  oracular  answer.    It 
may  even  be  thought  that,  yearning  for  the  counsel  of 
Samuel,  and  longing  to  learn  if  the  net  that  he  felt 
closing  about  him  were  one  from  which  he  should 
never  escape,    Saul    had   that   keener  sense    that 
some  say  comes  in  the  last  hours  of  life,  and  so, 
conscious  that  the  prophet's  shade  was  near,  or  was 
about  to  come,  at  once  sought  to  see  and  speak  with 
it,    though    this    had    not    been    before  purposed. 
Strange  things  we  know  occur  at  the  moment  when 
man  feels  he  is  about  to  die,d  and  if  there  be  any  time 


tbat  in  the  last  moments  of  consciousness  all  the  events 
of  their  lives  have  passed  before  their  minds.  A  frienc 
of  the  writer  assured  him  that  he  experienced  this  sens* 


We  may  instance  the  well-known  circumstance  that  i  i.io;i,  whenever  he  bod  a  very  bad  fall  in  hunting,  while  hi 
men  who  have  been  near  death  by  drowning  have  asserted  i  was  actually  falling.    This  U  alluded  to  in  the  epilaph  - 


202 


MAGIC 


when  the  unseen  world  is  fell  wfnie  yet  unentered, 
it  is  when  the  soul  coines  first  within  the  chill  of 
its  long-projected  shadow.  "  And  the  woman  said 
unto  him,  Behold,  thou  knowest  what  Saul  hath 
(tone,  how  he  hath  cut  oft' those  that  have  familiar 
spirits,  and  the  wizards,  out  of  the  land  :  wherefore 
then  layest  thou  a  snare  for  my  life,  to  cause  me  to 
die?  And  Saul  sware  to  her  by  the  LORD,  saying, 
[As]  the  LORD  liveth,  there  shall  no  punishment 
happen  to  thee  for  this  thing."  Nothing  more  shows 
Saul's  desperate  resolution  than  his  thus  swear 
ing  when  engaged  in  a  most  unholy  act,  a  terrible 
profanity  that  makes  the  horror  of  the  scene  com 
plete.  Everything  being  prepared,  the  final  act 
takes  place.  "  Then  said  the  woman,  Whom  shall 
I  bring  up  unto  thee  ?  And  he  said,  Bring  me  up 
Samuel.  And  when  the  woman  saw  Samuel,  she 
cried  with  a  loud  voice :  and  the  woman  spake  to 
Saul,  saying,  Why  hast  thou  deceived  me  ?  foi 
thou  [art]  Saul.  And  the  king  said  unto  her, 
Be  not  afraid :  for  what  sawest  thou  ?  And  the 
woman  said  unto  Saul,  I  saw  gods  ascending  out  of 
the  earth.  And  he  said  unto  her,  What  [is]  his 
form  ?  And  she  said,  An  old  man  cometh  up;  and 
he  [is]  covered  wit^  a  mantle.  And  Saul  per 
ceived  that  it  [was]  Samuel,  and  he  stooped  with 
[his]  face  to  the  ground,  and  bowed  himself.  And 
Samuel  said  to  Saul,  Why  hast  thou  disquieted  [or 
"disturbed"]  me,  to  bring  me  up?  And  Saul 
answered,  I  am  sore  distressed  ;  for  the  Philistines 
make  war  against  me,  and  God  is  departed  from  me, 
and  answereth  me  no  more,  neither  by  prophets,  nor 
by  dreams :  therefore  I  have  called  thee,  that  thou 
mayest  make  known  unto  me  what  I  shall  do.  Then 
said  Samuel,  Wherefore  then  dost  thou  ask  of  me, 
seeing  the  LOKD  is  departed  from  thee,  and  is  become 
thine  enemy  ?  And  the  LOKD  hath  done  to  him, 
as  he  spake  by  me :  for  the  LORD  hath  rent  the 
kingdom  out  of  thine  hand,  and  given  it  to  thy 
neighbour,  [even]  to  David:  because  thou  obeyedst 
not  the  voice  of  the  LORD,  nor  executedst  his  fierce 
wrath  upon  Amalek,  therefore  hath  the  LORD  done 
this  thing  unto  thee  this  day.  Moreover,  the  LORD 
will  also  deliver  Israel  with  thee  into  the  hand 
of  the  Philistines :  and  to-morrow  [shalt]  thou 
and  thy  sons  [be]  with  me :  the  LORD  also  shall 
deliver  the  host  of  Israel  into  the  hand  of  the  Phi 
listines.  Then  Saul  fell  sti-aightway  all  along  on 
the  earth,  and  was  sore  afraid,  because  of  the  words 
of  Samuel :  and  there  was  no  strength  in  him  ;  for 
he  had  eaten  no  bread  all  the  day,  nor  all  the 
night"  (1  Sam.  xrviii.  3-20).  The  woman  clearly 
was  terrified  by  an  unexpected  apparition  when  she 
saw  Samuel.  She  must  therefore  either  have  been 
a  mere  juggler,  or  one  who  had  no  power  of  working 
magical  wonders  at  will.  The  sight  of  Samuel  at 
once  showed  her  who  had  come  to  consult  her.  The 
prophet's  shade  seems  to  have  been  preceded  by  some 
majestic  shapes  which  the  witch  called  gods.  Saul, 
as  it  seems  interrupting  her,  asked  his  form,  and  she 
described  the  prophet  as  he  was  in  his  last  days  on 
earth,  an  old  man,  covered  either  with  a  mantle, 
such  as  the  prophets  used  to  wear,  or  wrapped  in 
his  winding-sheet.  Then  Saul  knew  it  was  Samuel, 
;ind  bowed  to  the  ground,  from  respect  or  fear.  It 
seems  that  the  woman  saw  the  appearances,  and  that 
Saul  only  knew  of  them  through  har,  perhaps  not 

"  Between  the  saddle  and  the  ground, 
1  mercy  sought,  and  mercy  found." 
If  this  phenomenon  be  not  involuntary,  but  the  result  of 
ui  effort  of  will,  then  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be 
•jonfincd  to  the  last  moments  of  conscionsiicbs.     A  iris:1. 


MAGIC 

daring  tj  look,  else  why  should  he  have  asked 
what  form  Samuel  had  ?  The  pi  ophet's  coin  • 
plaint  we  cannot  understand,  in  our  ignorance  as  to 
the  separate  state :  thus  much  we  know,  that  st;ite 
is  always  described  as  one  of  perfect  rest  or  sleep. 
That  the  woman  should  have  been  able  to  call  him 
up  cannot  be  hence  inferred ;  her  astonishment 
shows  the  contrary ;  and  it  would  be  explanation 
enough  to  suppose  that  he  was  sent  to  give  Saul 
the  last  warning,  or  that  the  earnestness  of  tlit 
king's  wish  had  been  permitted  to  disquiet  him  in 
his  resting-place.  Although  the  word  "  disquieted  " 
need  not  be  pushed  to  an  extreme  sense,  and  seems 
to  mean  the  interruption  of  a  state  of  rest,  our 
translators  wisely,  we  think,  preferring  this  render 
ing  to  "  disturbed,"  it  cannot  be  denied  that,  if  we 
hold  that  Samuel  appeared,  this  is  a  great  difficulty. 
If,  however,  we  suppose  that  the  prophet's  coming 
was  ordered,  it  is  not  unsurmountable.  The  de 
claration  of  Saul's  doom  agrees  with  what  Samuel 
had  said  before,  and  was  fulfilled  the  next  day, 
when  the  king  and  his  sons  fell  on  Mount  Gilboa. 
It  may,  however,  be  asked — Was  the  apparition  Sa 
muel  himself,  or  a  supernatural  messenger  in  his 
stead  ?  Some  may  even  object  to  our  holding  it  to 
have  been  aught  but  a  phantom  of  a  sick  brain  ;  but 
if  so,  what  can  we  make  of  the  woman's  conviction 
that  it  was  Samuei,  and  the  king's  horror  at  the 
words  he  heard,  or,  as  these  would  say,  that  he 
thought  he  heard?  It  was  not  only  the  hearing 
his  doom,  but  the  hearing  it  in  a  voice  from  the 
other  world  that  stretched  the  faithless  strong  man 
on  the  ground.  He  must  have  felt  the  presence  of 
the  dead,  and  heard  the  sound  of  a  sepulchral  voice. 
How  else  could  the  doom  have  come  true,  and  not 
the  king  alone,  but  his  sons,  have  gone  to  the  place 
of  disembodied  souls  on  the  morrow?  for  to  ta 
with  the  dead  concerned  the  soul  not  the  body :  it 
is  no  difficulty  that  the  king's  corpse  was  unburied 
till  the  generous  men  of  Jabesh-gilead,  mindful  of 
his  old  kindness,  rescued  it  from  the  wall  of  Beth- 
shan.  If  then  the  apparition  was  real,  should  we 
suppose  it  Samuel's?  A  reasonable  criticism  would 
say  it  seems  to  have  been  so ;  for  the  supposition 
that  a  messenger  came  in  his  stead  must  be  re 
jected,  as  it  would  make  the  speech  a  mixture  of 
truth  and  untruth ;  and  if  asked  what  sufficient 
cause  there  was  for  such  a  sending  forth  of  the 
prophet  from  his  rest,  would  reply  that  we  know 
not  the  reason  for  such  warnings  as  abound  in  the 
Bible,  and  that  perhaps  eveu  at  the  eleventh  hour, 
the  door  of  repentance  was  not  closed  against  the 
king,  and  his  impiety  might  have  been  pardoned  had 
he  repented.  Instead,  he  went  forth  in  despair,  and, 
when  his  sons  had  fallen  and  his  army  was  put  to 
the  rout,  sore  wounded  fell  on  his  own  sword. 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  this  Grange 
history  we  have  no  warrant  tor  attributing  super 
natural  power  to  magicians.  Viewed  reasonably,  it 
refers  to  the  question  of  apparitions  of  the  dead  as 
to  which  other  places  in  the  Bible  leave  no  doubt. 
The  connexion  with  magic  seems  purely  accidental. 
The  witch  is  no  more  than  a  bystander  after  the 
first:  she  sees  Samuel,  and  that  is  all.  The  apjm- 
rition  may  have  been  a  terrible  fulfilment  of  Saul's 
desire,  but  this  does  not  prove  that  the  measures 
he  used  were  of  any  power.  We  have  examined 

sure  of  his  doom  might  be  in  tills  peculiar  and  unexplained 
mental  state  long  before.  Perhaps,  however,  the  mind 
before  death  experiences  a  change  of  condition,  just  ;is 
conversely,  every  physical  function  dms  noi  IT.IM'  at  or,' t 
with  what  we  leiiii  dissolution. 


MAGIC 

tha  narrative  very  carefully,  from  its  detail  and  its  ] 
vemarkable  character:  the  result  leaves  the  main  - 
question  unanswered. 

In  the  later  days  of  the  two  kingdoms  magical 
practices  of  many  kinds  prevailed  among  the  Hebrews, 
as  we  especially  learn  from  the  condemnation  of  them 
by  the  prophets.  Every  form  of  idolatry  which  the 
people  had  adopted  in  succession  doubtless  brought 
with  it  its  magic,  which  seems  always  to  have  re 
mained  with  a  strange  tenacity  that  probably  made 
it  outlive  the  false  worship  with  which  it  was  con 
nected.  Thus  the  use  of  teraphirr.,  dating  from  the 
patriarchal  age,  was  not  abandoned  when  the  worship 
of  the  Canaanite,  Phoenician,  and  Syrian  idols  had 
been  successively  adopted.  In  the  historical  books 
of  Scripture  there  is  little  notice  of  magic,  except 
ing  that  wherever  the  false  prophets  are  mentioned 
we  have  no  doubt  an  indication  of  the  prevalence  of 
magical  practices.  We  are  especially  told  of  Josiah 
that  he  put  away  the  workers  with  familiar  spirits, 
the  wizards,  and  the  teraphim,  as  well  as  the  idols 
and  the  other  abominations  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem, 
in  performance  of  the  commands  of  the  book  of  the 
Law  which  had  been  found  (2  K.  xxiii.  24).  But 
in  the  prophets  we  find  several  notices  of  the  magic 
of  the  Hebrews  in  their  times,  and  some  of  the 
magic  of  foreign  nations.  Isaiah  says  that  the 
people  had  become  "  workers  of  hidden  arts  (D^3y) 
like  the  Philistines,"  and  apparently  alludes  in  the 
same  place  to  the  practice  of  magic  by  the  Bene- 
Kedem  (ii.  6).  The  nation  had  not  only  abandoned 
true  religion,  but  had  become  generally  addicted  to 
magic  in  the  manner  of  the  Philistines,  whose 
Egyptian  origin  [CAPHTOR]  is  consistent  with  such 
a  condition.  The  origin  of  the  Bene-Kedem  is 
doubtful,  but  it  seems  certain  that  as  late  as  the  time 
of  the  Egyptian  wars  in  Syria,  under  the  xixth 
dynasty,  B.C.  cir.  1300,  a  race,  partly  at  least  Mon 
golian,  inhabited  the  valley  of  the  Orontes,*  among 
whom  therefore  we  should  again  expect  a  national 
practice  of  magic,  and  its  prevalence  with  their 
neighbours.  Balaam,  too,  dwelt  with  the  Benee- 
Kedem,  though  he  may  not  have  been  of  their  race. 
In  another  place  the  prophet  reproves  the  people  for 
seeking  "  unto  them  that  have  familiar  spirits,  and 
unto  the  wizards  that  chirp,  and  that  mutter  "  (viii. 
19).  The  practices  of  one  class  of  magicians  are  still 
more  distinctly  described,  where  it  is  thus  said  of 
Jerusalem  :  "  And  I  will  camp  against  thee  round 
about,  and  will  lay  siege  again»t  thee  with  a  mount, 
and  I  will  raise  forts  against  thee.  And  thou  shalt 
be  brought  down,  [and]  shalt  speak  out  of  the 
ground,  and  thy  speech  shall  be  low  out  of  the  dust, 
and  thy  voice  shall  be,  as  of  one  that  hath  a  familiar 
spirit,  out  of  the  ground,  and  thy  speech  shall 
whisper  out  of  the  dust "  (xxix.  3,  4).  Isaiah  al 
ludes  to  the  magic  of  the  Egyptians  when  he  says 
that  in  their  calamity  "  they  shall  seek  to  the  idols, 
and  to  the  charmers  [D*t2N  ?],'  and  to  them  that 
have  familiar  spirits,  and  to  the  wizards"  (xix.  3). 
And  in  the  same  manner  he  thus  taunts  Babylon  : 
"  Stand  now  with  thy  charms,  and  with  the  multi 
tude  of  thine  enchantments,  wherein  thou  hast 
laboured  from  thy  youth;  if  so  be  thou  shalt  be 
able  to  profit,  if  so  be  thou  mayest  prevail.  Thou 

•  Let  those  who  doubt  this  examine  the  representation 
in  Rosellini's  Jfonumenti  Storici,  \.  pi.  Ixxxviii.  seq.  of  the 
great  battle  between  llamescs  II.  and  the  Hittitet  and 
their  confederates,  near  KIsTKSH,  on  the  Onml.es. 

'  This  word  may  mean  whisperers,  if  it  be  the  plural  of 
oK>  "  a  murmur." 


MAGIC 


203 


art  wearied  in  the  multitude  of  thy  counsels.  Let 
now  the  viewers  of  the  heavens  [or  astrologers] 
the  stargazers,  the  monthly  prognosticators,  staua 
up,  and  save  thee  from  [these  things]  that  shall 
come  upon  thee"  (xlvii.  12, 13).  The  magic  of  Ba 
bylon  is  here  characterized  by  the  prominence  given 
to  astrology,  no  magicians  being  mentioned  except 
ing  practisers  of  this  art;  unlike  the  case  of  the 
Egyptians,  with  whom  astrology  seems  always  to 
have  held  a  lower  place  than  with  the  Chaldaean 
nation.  In  both  instances  the  folly  of  those  who 
seek  the  aid  of  magic  is  shown. 

Micah,  declaring  the  judgments  coming  for  the 
crimes  of  his  time,  speaks  of  the  prevalence  of 
divination  among  prophets  who  most  probably 
were  such  pretended  prophets  as  the  opponents  of 
Jeremiah,  not  avowed  prophets  of  idols,  as  Ahab's 
seem  to  have  been.  Concerning  these  prophets  it 
is  said,  "  Night  [shall  be]  unto  you,  that  ye  shall 
not  have  a  vision ;  and  it  shall  be  dark  unto  you, 
that  ye  shall  not  divine ;  and  the  sun  shall  go  down 
over  the  prophets,  and  the  day  shall  be  dark  over 
them.  Then  shall  the  seers  be  ashamed,  and  the 
diviners  confounded :  yea,  they  shall  all  cover  theii 
lip;  for  [there  is]  no  answer  of  God"  (iii.  6,  7). 
Later  it  is  said  as  to  Jerusalem,  "  The  heads  thereof 
judge  for  reward,  and  the  priests  thereof  teach  for 
hire,  and  the  prophets  thereof  divine  for  money: 
yet  will  they  lean  upon  the  LORD,  and  say,  [Is]  not. 
the  LOKD  among  us  ?  none  evil  can  come  upon  us ' 
(ver.  1 1).  These  prophets  seem  to  have  practised 
unlawful  arts,  and  yet  to  have  expected  revelations. 

Jeremiah  was  constantly  opposed  by  false  pro 
phets,  who  pretended  to  speak  in  the  name  of  thf 
Lord,  saying  that  they  had  dreamt,  when  they  told 
false  visions,  and  who  practised  various  magical  arts 
(xiv.  14,  xxiii.  25,  adfn.,  xxvii.  9,  10 — where  the 
several  designations  applied  to  those  who  counselled 
the  people  not  to  serve  the  king  of  Babylon  may  be 
used  in  contempt  of  the  false  prophets — xxix.  8,  9). 

Ezekiel,  as  we  should  have  expected,  affords 
some  remarkable  details  of  the  m;igic  of  his  time, 
in  the  clear  and  forcible  descriptions  of  his  visions. 
From  him  we  learn  that  fetishism  was  among 
the  idolatries  which  the  Hebrews,  in  the  latest 
days  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  had  adopted  from 
their  neighbours,  like  the  Romans  in  the  age 
of  general  corruption  that  caused  the  decline  of 
their  empire.  In  a  vision,  in  which  the  prophe* 
saw  the  abominations  of  Jerusalem,  he  entered  the 
chambers  of  imagery  in  the  Temple  itself:  "  I  went 
in  and  saw ;  and  behold  every  form  of  creeping 
things,  and  abominable  beasts,  and  all  the  idols  of 
the  house  of  Israel,  pourtrayed  upon  the  wall 
round  about."  Here  seventy  elders  were  offering 
incense  in  the  dark  (viii.  7-12).  This  idolatry  was 
probably  borrowed  from  Egypt,  for  the  description 
perfectly  answers  to  that  of  the  dark  sanctuaries  of 
Egyptian  temples,  with  the  sacred  animals  pour- 
trayed  upon  their  walls,  and  does  not  accord  with 
the  character  of  the  Assyrian  sculptures,  where 
creeping  things  are  not  represented  as  objects  of 
worship.  With  this  low  form  of  idolatry  an  equally 
low  kind  of  magic  obtained,  practised  by  pro 
phetesses  who  for  small  rewards  made  amulets  by 
which  the  people  were  deceived  (xiii.  17  ad  fin,*), 
The  passage  must  be  allowed  to  be  very  difficult, 
but  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  amulets  are  re 
ferred  to  which  were  made  and  sold  by  these 
women,  and  perhaps  also  worn  by  them.  We  may 
probably  read :  "  Woe  to  the  [women]  th;it  sen 
uillows  upon  all  joints  of  the  hands  [elbows  ni 


204 


MAGIC 


nrmbxks  f],  and  make  kerchiefs  upon  the  head  oi 
every  stature  to  hunt  souls!"  (xiii.  18).  If  so, 
«  e  have  a  practice  analogous  to  that  of  the  modern 
Egyptians,  who  hang  amulets  of  the  kind  called 
hegab  upon  the  right  side,  and  of  the  Nubians, 
who  hang  them  on  the  upper  part  of  the  arm. 
We  cannot,  in  any  case,  see  how  the  passage  can  be 
explained  as  simply  referring  to  the  luxurious  dress 
of  the  women  of  that  time,  since  the  prophet  dis 
tinctly  alludes  to  pretended  visions  and  to  divinations 
(ver.  23),  using  almost  the  same  expressions  that 
he  applies  in  another  place  to  the  practices  of  the 
false  prophets  (xxii.  28).  The  notice  of  Nebuchad 
nezzar's  divination  by  arrows,  where  it  is  said  "  he 
shuffled  arrows"  (xxi.  21),  must  refer  to  a  prac 
tice  the  same  or  similar  to  the  kind  of  divination 
by  arrows  called  El-Meysar,  in  use  among  the 
pagan  Arabs,  and  forbidden  in  the  Kur-an.  [See 
HOSPITALITY.] 

The  references  to  magic  in  the  book  of  Daniel 
relate  wholly  to  that  of  Babylon,  and  not  so  much 
to  the  art  as  to  those  who  used  it.  Daniel,  when 
taken  captive,  was  instructed  in  the  learning  of  the 
Chaldaeans  and  placed  among  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon  (ii.  18),  by  whom  we  are  to  understand  the 

Magi  (?33.  '0*3!"!),  for  the  term  is  used  as  in 
cluding  magicians 


enchanters    (D^QKOQ),    astrologers   (j^TS),   and 

Chaldaeans,  the  last  being  apparently  the  most  im 
portant  class  'ii.  2,  4,  5,  10,  12,  14,  18,  24,  27  ; 
comp.  i.  20).  As  in  other  cases  the  true  prophet 
was  put  to  the  test  with  the  magicians,  and  he 
succeeded  where  they  utterly  failed.  The  case  re 
sembles  Pharaoh's,  excepting  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
asked  a  harder  thing  of  the  wise  men.  Having  for 
gotten  his  dream,  he  not  only  required  of  them  an 
interpretation,  but  that  they  should  make  known 
the  dream  itself.  They  were  perfectly  ready  to  tell 
the  interpretation  if  only  they  heard  the  dream. 
The  king  at  once  saw  that  they  were  impostors, 
and  that  if  they  truly  had  supernatural  powers 
they  could  as  well  tell  him  his  dream  as  its 
meaning.  Therefore  he  decreed  the  death  of  all 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon ;  but  Daniel,  praying 
that  he  and  his  fellows  might  escape  this  de 
struction,  had  a  vision  in  which  the  matter  was 
revealed  to  him.  He  was  accordingly  brought 
before  the  king.  Like  Joseph,  he  disavowed  any 
knowledge  of  his  own.  "  The  secret  which  the 
king  hath  demanded,  the  wise  men,  the  sorcerers, 
the  magicians,  the  astrologers,  cannot  show  unto 
the  king ;  but  there  is  a  God  in  heaven  that  re- 
vealeth  secrets"  (vers.  27,  28).  "  But  as  for  me, 
this  secret  is  not  revealed  to  me  for  [any]  wisdom 
that  I  have  more  than  any  living"  (30).  He  then 
related  the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  and  was  set 
over  the  province  as  well  as  over  all  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon.  Again  the  king  dreamt ;  and  though  he 
told  them  the  dream  the  wise  men  could  not  interpret 
it,  and  Daniel  again  showed  the  meaning  (iv.  4, 
seqq.).  In  the  relation  of  this  event  we  read  that 
the  king  called  him  "  chief  of  the  scribes,"  the 
second  part  of  the  title  being  the  same  as  that 
applied  to  the  Egyptian  magicians  (iv.  9;  Chald. 
6).  A  third  time,  when  Belshazzar  saw  the  writ 
ing  on  the  wall,  were  the  wise  men  sent  for,  and 
ou  their  failing  Daniel  was  brought  before  the  king 
and  the  interpretation  given  (v.).  These  events 
we  perfectly  consistent  with  what  always  occurred 
in  .jl  other  cases  recorded  in  Scripture  when  the 


MAGIC 

practisers  of  magic  were  placed  in  opposition  tc 
true  prophets.  It  may  be  asked  by  some  hov." 
Daniel  could  take  the  post  of  chief  of  the  wise  men 
when  he  had  himself  proved  their  imposture.  If, 
however,  as  we  cannot  doubt,  the  class  were  one  of 
the  learned  generally,  among  whom  some  practised 
magical  arts,  the  case  is  very  different  from  what  il 
would  have  been  had  these  wise  men  been  magici-in? 
only.  Besides,  it  seems  almost  certain  that  Daniel 
was  providentially  thus  placed  that,  like  another 
Joseph,  he  might  further  the  welfare  and  ultimate 
return  of  his  people.  [MAGI.] 

After  the  Captivity  it  is  probable  that  the  Jewt 
gradually  abandoned  the  practice  of  magic.  Zecha- 
riah  speaks  indeed  of  the  deceit  of  teraphim  and 
diviners  (x.  2),  and  foretells  a  time  when  the  very 
names  of  idols  should  be  forgotten  and  false  prophets 
have  virtually  ceased  (xiii.  1-4),  yet  in  neither  case 
does  it  seem  certain  that  he  is  alluding  to  the  usage* 
of  his  own  day. 

In  the  Apocrypha  we  find  indications  that  in  the 
later  centuries  preceding  the  Christian  era  magic 
was  no  longer  practised  by  the  educated  Jews.  In 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  the  writer,  speaking  of  the 
Egyptian  magicians,  treats  their  art  as  an  impos 
ture  (xvii.  7).  The  book  of  Tobit  is  an  exceptional 
case.  If  we  hold  that  it  was  written  in  Persia  or 
a  neighbouring  country,  and,  with  Ewald,  date  its 
composition  not  long  after  the  fall  of  the  Persian 
empire,  it  is  obvious  that  it  relates  to  a  differ 
ent  state  of  society  to  that  of  the  Jews  of  Egypt 
and  Palestine.  If,  however,  it  was  written  in 
Palestine  about  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  as  others 
suppose,  we  must  still  recollect  that  it  refere  rather 
to  the  superstitions  of  the  common  people  than  tc 
those  of  the  learned.  In  either  case  its  pre 
tensions  make  it  unsafe  to  follow  as  indicating 
the  opinions  of  the  time  at  which  it  was  written.  It 
professes  to  relate  to  a  period  of  which  its  writer 
could  have  known  little,  and  borrows  its  idea  of  su 
pernatural  agency  from  Scripture,  adding  as  much 
as  was  judged  safe  of  current  superstition. 

In  the  N.  T.  we  read  very  little  of  magic.  The 
coming  of  Magi  to  worship  Christ  is  indeed  related 
(Matt.  ii.  1-12),  but  we  have  no  warrant  for  sup 
posing  that  they  were  magicians  from  their  name, 
which  the  A.  V.  not  unreasonably  renders  "  wis.. 
men"  [MAGiJ.  Our  Lord  is  not  said  to  have  been 
opposed  by  magicians,  and  the  Apostles  and  other 
early  teachers  of  the  Gospel  seem  to  have  rarely 
encountered  them.  Philip  the  deacon,  when  he 
preached  at  Samaria,  found  there  Simon  a  famou; 
magician,  commonly  known  as  Simon  Magus,  who 
had  had  great  power  over  the  people ;  but  he  is  not 
said  to  have  been  able  to  work  wonders,  nor,  had 
it  been  so,  is  it  likely  that  he  would  have  soon 
been  admitted  into  the  Church  (viii.  9-24).  When 
St.  Barnabas  and  St.  Paul  were  at  Paphos,  as  thej 
preached  to  the  proconsul  Sergius  Paulus,  Elymai, 
a  Jewish  sorcerer  and  false  prophet  (rtva  &vSpa 

ov  if/fvSoTrpoQJiTijv)  withstood  them,  and  was 
struck  blind  for  a  time  at  the  word  of  St.  Paul  (xiii. 
6-12).  At  Ephesus,  certain  Jewish  exorcists  signally 
failing,  both  Jews  and  Greeks  were  afraid,  and  aban 
doned  their  practice  of  magical  arts.  "  And  many 
that  believed  came,  and  confessed,  and  showed  their 
deeds.  Many  of  them  also  which  used  curious  art* 
brought  their  books  together,  and  burned  them 
before  all :  and  they  counted  the  price  of  them,  and 
Pound  [it]  fifty  thousand  [pieces]  of  silver"  (six. 
18,  19).  Here  both  Jews  and  Greeks  seem  to  have 
tiecn  greatly  addicted  to  magii',  even  after  they  had 


MAGOG 


205 


nominally  joined  the  Church.      In  all  these  cases  it  i  in   Ez.    xxxviii.  2,   xxxix.   1,  6,  it   appears  as    * 


appears  that  though  the  practisers  were  generally 
or  always  Jews,  the  field  of  their  success  was  with 
Gentiles,  showing  that  among  the  Jews  in  general, 
or  the  educated  class,  the  art  had  fallen  into  dis- 
repnt }.  Here,  as  before,  there  is  no  evidence  of  any 
real  effect  produced  by  the  magicians.  We  have 
already  noticed  the  remarkable  case  of  the  "  damsel 
having  a  spirit  of  divination" 
iri/6*>va)  "  which  brought  her  masters  much  gain 
by  foretelling"  (fjiavrfvofifvij),  from  whom  St.  Paul 
cast  out  the  spirit  of  divination  (xvi.  16-18).  This 
is  a  matter  belonging  to  another  subject  than  that 
of  magic. 

Our  examination  of  the  various  notices  of  magic 
in  the  Bible  gives  us  this  general  result : — They  do 
not,  as  far  as  we  can  understand,  once  state  posi 
tively  that  any  but  illusive  results  were  produced 
ny  magical  rites.  They  therefore  afford  no  evi 
dence  that  man  can  gain  supernatural  powers  to 
use  at  his  will.  This  consequence  goes  some  way 
towards  showing  that  we  may  conclude  that  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  real  magic ;  for  although  it  is 
dangerous  to  reason  on  negative  evidence,  yet  in  a 
case  of  this  kind  it  is  especially  strong.  Had  any 
but  illusions  been  worked  by  magicians,  surely  the 
Scriptures  would  not  have  passed  over  a  fact  of  so 
much  importance,  and  one  which  would  have  ren 
dered  the  prohibition  of  these  arts  far  more  neces 
sary.  The  general  belief  of  mankind  in  magic,  or 
things  akin  to  it,  is  of  no  worth,  since  the  holding 
such  current  superstition  in  some  of  its  branches, 
if  we  push  it  to  its  legitimate  consequences,  would 
lead  to  the  rejection  of  faith  in  God's  government 
of  the  world,  and  the  adoption  of  a  creed  far  below 
that  of  Plato. 

From  the  conclusion  at  which  we  have  arrived, 
that  there  is  no  evidence  iu  the  Bible  of  real  results 
having  been  worked  by  supernatural  agency  used  by 
magicians,  we  may  draw  this  important  inference, 
that  the  absence  of  any  proof  of  the  same  in  profane 
literature,  ancient  or  modern,  in  no  way  militates 
against  the  credibility  of  the  miracles  recorded  in 
Scripture.  [R.  S.  P.] 

MA'GIDDO  (M<rye56<$;  but  Mai,  juerek 'A8- 
ScPs  ;  and  Alex."  VleraeSSaovs :  Mageddo),  the 
Greek  form  of  the  name  MEGIDDO.  It  occurs  only 
in  1  Esd.  i.  29.  [MEGIDDOX.]  [G.] 

MA'GOG  (a'UO  :  Mayt&y}.  The  name  Magog 
is  applied  in  Scripture  both  to  a  person  and  to 
a  land  or  people.  In  Gen.  x.  2  Magog  appears  as 
the  second  son  of  Japheth  in  connexion  with 
Gomer  (the  Cimmerians)  and  Madai  (the  Medes) : 


»  This  is  one  of  a  great  number  of  cases  in  which  the 
readings  of  Mai's  edition  of  the  Vatican  Codex  depart  from 
the  ordinary  "  Vatican  Text,"  as  usually  edited,  and  agree 
more  or  less  closely  with  the  Alexandrine  (Codex  A). 

b  Von  Bohlen  (Irttrod.  to  Gen.  ii.  211)  represents  Gog 
«»  the  people,  and  not  the  prince.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
thut  in  Rev.  xx.  8  the  name  does  apply  to  a  people,  but 
this  is  not  the  case  in  Ezekiel. 

c  In  the  A.  V.  Gog  is  represented  as  "  the  chief  prince  " 
it  Mcshech  and  Tubal  :  but  it  is  pretty  well  agreed  that 
the  Hebrew  words  JJ'JO  N^}  cannot  bear  the  meaning 


thus  affixed  to  them.  The  true  rendering  Is  "  prince  of 
Rosh,"  as  given  in  the  LXX.  (apxov-ra  'Pws).  The  other 
le-jjse  was  adopted  by  the  Vulgate  in  consequence  of  the 
naaie  Rosh  not  occurring  elsewhere  iu  Scripture.  [Roan.] 
*  Various  etymologies  of  the  name  have  been  suggested, 
none  of  which  can  he  absolutely  accepted.  Knobel 


{ "j'ollu.'r'..  p.  63)   proposes    the   Sanscrit    malt   or  malm,  \  doubtful.     LScvrHO1>OU8-") 


count)  ~  or  people  of  which  Gog  was  the  prince/ 
in  conjunction  with  Meshech*  (the  Moschici),  Tuba' 
(the  Tibareni),  and  Rosh  (the  Roxolani).  In  tr-.e 
latter  of  these  senses  there  is  evidently  implied  an 
etymological  connexion  between  Gog  and  Ma  =  gog. 
the  Ma  being  regarded  by  Ezekiel  as  a  prefix  signi 
ficant  of  a  country.  In  this  case  Gog  contains 
the  original  element  of  the  name,  which  may 
possibly  have  its  origin  in  some  Persian  root.""1 
The  notices  of  Magog  would  lead  us  to  fix  a 
northern  locality:  not  only  did  all  the  tribes  men 
tioned  in  connexion  with  it  belong  to  that  quarter, 
but  it  is  expressly  stated  by  Ezekiel  that  he  was  to 
come  up  from  "  the  sides  of  the  north  "  (xxxix.  2), 
from  a  country  adjacent  to  that  of  Togarmah  or 
Armenia  (xxxviii.  6),  and  not  far  from  "  the  isles" 
or  maritime  regions  of  Europe  (xxxix.  6).  The 
people  of  Magog  further  appear  as  having  a  force  of 
cavalry  (xxxviii.  15),  and  as  armed  with  the  bow 
(xxxix.  3).  From  the  above  data,  combined  with 
the  consideration  of  the  time  at  which  Ezekiel 
lived,  the  conclusion  has  been  drawn  that  Magog 
represents  the  important  race  of  the  Scythians. 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  6,  §1)  and  Jerome  (Quacst.  in 
Gen.  x.  2)  among  early  writers  adopted  this  view 
and  they  have  been  followed  in  the  main  by 
modern  writers.  In  identifying  Magog  with  the 
Scythians,  howover,  we  must  not  be  understood  as 
using  the  Jatter  tcnrt  in  a  strictly  ethnographical 
sense,  bat  as  a  general  expression  for  the  tribes 
living  north  of  the  Caucasus.8  We  regard  Magog  as 
essentially  a  geographical  term,  just  as  it  was 
applied  by  the  Syrians  of  the  middle  ages  to 
Asiatic  Tartary,  and  by  the  Arabians  to  the  district 
between  the  Caspian  and  Euxine  seas  (Winer,  Rwb. 
s.  v.).  The  inhabitants  of  this  district  in  the  time 
of  Ezekiel  were  undoubtedly  the  people  generally 
known  by  the  classical  name  of  Scythians.  In 
the  latter  part  of  the  7th  century  B.C.  they 
had  become  well  known  as  a  formidable  power 
through  the  whole  of  western  Asia.  Forced  from 
their  original  quarters  north  of  the  Caucasian 
range  by  the  inroad  of  the  Massagetae,  they  de 
scended  into  Asia  Minor,  where  they  took  Sardis 
(B.C.  629),  and  maintained  a  long  war  with  the 
Lydian  monarchs:  thence  they  spread  into  Media 
(B.C.  624),  where  they  defeated  Cyaxares.  They 
then  directed  their  course  to  Egypt,  and  were 
bribed  off  by  Psammetichus  ;  on  their  return '  they 
attacked  the  temple  of  Venus  Urania  at  Ascalon. 
They  were  finally  ejected  B.C.  596,  after  having 
made  their  name  a  terror  to  the  whole  eastern, 
world  (Herod,  i.  103  ff.).  The  Scythians  are 

"  great,"  and  a  Persian  word  signifying  "  mountain,"  In 
which  case  the  reference  would  be  to  the  Caucasian  range. 
The  terms  ghogh  and  moghef  are  still  applied  to  some  of 
the  heights  of  that  range.  This  etymology  is  supported 
by  Von  Bohlen  (Introd.  to  Gen.'\i.  211).  On  the  other 
hand,  Hitzig  (Comm.  in  Ez.)  connects  the  first  syllable 
with  the  Coptic  ma,  "  place,"  or  the  Sanscrit  maha, 
"  land,"  and  the  second  with  a  Persian  root,  koka,  "  the 
moon,"  as  though  the  term  had  reference  to  moon- 
worshippers. 

e  In  the  Koran  Gog  and  Magog  are  localized  north  of 
the  Caucasus.  There  appears  to  have  been  from  the 
earliest  times  a  legend  that  the  enemies  of  religion  ana 
civilization  lived  in  that  quarter  (Haxthauien's  Tribes  of 
the  Caucasus,  p.  55). 

*  The  name  of  Scythopolis,  by  which  Beth-shean  was 
known  in  our  Saviour's  time,  was  regarded  as  a  trace  ol 
the  Scythian  occupation  (Plin.  v.  16):  this,  however,  is 


206 


MAGOll-MISSABIB 


described  by  classical  writers  as  skilful  in  the  USP  of 
the  bow  (Herod,  i.  73,  iv.  132  ;  Xen.  Anab.  iii. 
4,  §15),  and  even  as  the  inventors  of  the  bow  and 
airow  (Plin.  vii.  57);  they  were  specially  famous 
as  mounted  bowmen  (lwiroro^6rai ;  Herod,  iv. 
46  ;  Thucyd.  ii.  96) ;  they  also  enjoyed  an  ill- 


Scytbian  horseman  (from  Kertch). 

fame  for  their  cruel  and  rapacious  habits  (Herod,  i. 
106).  With  the  memory  of  these  events  yet  fresh 
on  the  minds  of  his  countrymen,  Ezekiel  selects  the 
Scythians  as  the  symbol  of  earthly  violence,  ar 
rayed  against  the  people  of  God,  hut  meeting  with 
a  signal  and  utter  overthrow.  He  depicts  their 
avarice  and  violence  (xxxviii.  7-13),  and  the 
fearful  vengeance  executed  upon  them  (xxxviii. 
14-23)  —  a  massacre  so  tremendous  that  seven 
months  would  hardly  suffice  for  the  burial  of  the 
corpses  in  the  valley  which  should  thenceforth  be 
named  Hamon-gog  (xxxix.  11-16).  The  imagery 
of  Ezekiel  has  been  transferred  in  the  Apocalypse  to 
describe  the  final  struggle  between  Christ  and  Anti 
christ  (Rev.  xx.  8).  As  a  question  of  ethnology, 
the  origin  of  the  Scythians  presents  great  difficul 
ties  :  many  eminent  writers,  with  Niebuhr  and 
Neumann  at  their  head,  regard  them  as  a  Mongolian, 
and  therefore  a  non-Japhetic  race.  It  is  unnecessary 
for  us  to  enter  into  the  general  question,  which  is 
complicated  by  the  undefined  and  varying  applica 
tions  of  the  name  Scythia  and  Scythians  among 
ancient  writers.  As  far  as  the  Biblical  notices 
are  concerned,  it  is  sufficient  to  state  that  the 
Scythians  of  Kzekiel's  age  —  the  Scythians  of  Hero 
dotus  —  were  in  all  probability  a  Japhetic  race. 
They  are  distinguished  on  the  one  hand  from  the 
Argippaei,  a  clearly  Mongolian  race  (Herod,  iv.  23), 
and  they  are  connected  on  the  other  hand  with  the 
Agathyrsi,  a  clearly  Indo-European  race  (iv.  10). 
The  mere  silence  of  so  observant  a  writer  as  Hero- 
lotus,  as  to  any  striking  features  in  the  physical 
conformation  of  the  Scythians,  must  further  be 
regarded  as  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  their 
Japhetic  origin.  •  [W.  I,.  B.] 


MA'GOR-MIS'SABIB  (T3DO  T^O  :  Mtr- 
OIKOS  :  Pavor  undique),  literally,  "  terror  on  every 
sid«:"  the  name  given  by  Jeremiah  to  Pashm-  the 
priest,  when  he  smote  him  and  put  him  in  the 
stocks  for  prophesying  against  the  idolatry  of  Jeru 
salem  (Jer.  xx.  3).  The  significance  of  the  appel 
lation  is  explained  in  the  denunciation  with  which 
it  was  accompanied  (ver.  4)  :  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah, 
Behold  I  will  make  thee  a  terror  to  thyself  and  to 
all  thy  friends."  The  LXX.  must  have  connected 
the  word  with  the  original  meaning  of  the  root 
"'»  wan.lor,"  for  they  koc)>  up  the  play  upon  tha 


MAHALATH 

name  in  \er.  4.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  sami 
phrase  occurs  in  several  other  passages  ol  Jeremiah 
(vi.  25,  xx.  10,  xlvi.  5,  xlix.  29  ;  Lam  ii.  22), 
and  is  only  found  besides  in  Ps.  xxxi.  13. 

MA'GPIASH  (ItWQM:  Mtyatfs  ;  Alex. 
yiaycufrfis  ;  Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  Ba-yaip^s  :  Afegphias), 
one  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  signed  thf 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  20).  The  name 
is  probably  not  that  of  an  individual,  but  of  a 
family.  It  is  supposed  by  Calmet  and  Junius  to 
be  the  same  as  MAOBISII  in  Ezr.  ii.  30. 

MAH'ALAH  (r6n»  :  MoeA<£  ;  Alex.  MooA<£  : 
Mohold),  one  of  the  three  children  of  Hammoleketh, 
the  sister  of  Gilead  (1  Chr.  vii.  18).  The  name  is 
probably  that  of  a  woman,  as  it  is  the  same  with 
that  of  Mahlah,  the  daughter  of  Zelophehad,  also  a 
descendant  of  Gilead  the  Manassite. 

MAHA'LALEEL  bvhhnn  :  MoAtA^A  : 
Malaleel).  1.  The  fourth  in  descent  from  Adam, 
according  to  the  Sethite  genealogy,  and  son  of 
Cainan  (Gen.  v.  12,  13/15-17;  1  Chr.  i.  2). 
In  the  LXX.  the  names  of  Mahalaleel  and  Mehujael, 
the  fourth  from  Adam  in  the  genealogy  of  the 
descendants  of  Cain,  are  identical.  Ewald  recog 
nises  in  Mahalaleel  the  sun-god,  or  Apollo  of  -the 
antediluvian  mythology,  and  in  his  sou  Jared  the 
god  of  water,  the  Indian  Varuna  (Gesch.  i.  357), 
but  his  assertions  are  perfectly  arbitrary. 

2.  (Cod.  Fr.  Aug.  MoAeA^i).  A  descendant  of 
Perez,  or  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah,  and  ancestor  of 
Athaiah,  whose  family  resided  in  Jerusalem  after 
the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh.  xi.  4). 

MAH'ALATH  (H^PIO  ;  M«A«0:  MaheletK), 
the  daughter  of  Ishmael,  and  one  of  the  wives  of 
Esau  (Gen.  xxviii.  9).  In  the  Edomite  genealogy 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  3,  4,  10,  13,  17)  she  is  called 
BASHEMATH,  sister  of  Nebajoth,  and  mother  of 
Reuel;  but  the  Hebraeo-Samaritan  text  has  Ma- 
halath  throughout.  On  the  other  hand  Bashemath, 
the  wife  of  Esau,  is  described  as  the  daughter  of 
Elon  the  Hittite  (Gen.  xxvi.  34).  [BASHEMATH.] 

MAH'ALATH  (JlbriD:  f,  MoAoofl  ;  Alex. 
MoAaO  :  Maalath),  one  of  the  eighteen  wives  of  king 
Rehoboam,  apparently  his  first  (2  Chr.  xi.  18  only). 
She  was  her  husband's  cousin,  being  the  daughter  of 
king  David's  son  Jerimoth.who  was  probably  the  child 
of  a  concubine,  and  not  one  of  his  regular  family. 
Josephus,  without  naming  Mahalath,  speaks  of  her  as 
"  a  kinswoman  "  (o-vyyevTJ  riva,  Ant.  viii.  10,  §1). 
No  children  are  attributed  to  the  marriage,  nor  is 
she  again  named.  The  ancient  Hebrew  text  (  Cethib) 
in  this  passage  has  "  son  "  instead  of  "  daughter." 
The  latter,  however,  is  the  correction  of  the  Kri, 
and  is  adopted  by  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  and  Targum, 
as  well  as  by  the  A.  V.  [G.] 


MAHALATH 


:  MoeA*'«: 


The  title  of  Ps.  liii.,  in  which  this  rare  word  occurs, 
was  rendered  in  the  Geneva  version,  "  To  him  that 
excelleth  on  Mahalath  ;"  which  was  explained  in 
the  margin  to  be  "an  instrument  or  kind  of  note." 
This  expresses  in  short  the  opinions  of  most  com 

mentators.  Connecting  the  word  with  711113, 
macliol  (Ex.  xv.  20  ;  Ps.  cl.  4),  rendered  "  dance  " 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  supposed  by  many  from  its  con 
nexion  with  instruments  of  music  to  be  one  ikeli 
(I)ANCK,  vol.  i.  p.  389),  Jerome  renders  the  phrase 
"on  Mahalath,"  by  "  pn  •  <-/K>rum."  and  in  this  h< 


MAHALATH 

is  supported  by  the  translations  of  Theodntioii 
(Inrtp  TTJV  x"pfi'<*s)>  Symmachus  (Sia  xopov},  aud 
Aquila  (&rl  xopei'a)>  quoted  by  Theodoret  (Comm. 
m  Ps.  In.).  Augustine  (Enarr.  in  Ps.  lii.)  gives 
the  title  of  the  Psalm,  "  In  finem  pro  Amalcck  in- 
tellectus  ipsi  David;"  explaining  "pro  Araalech," 
as  he  says  from  the  Hebrew,  "  for  one  in  labour  or 
sorrow  "  (pro  parturiente  sive  doleute),  by  whom 
he  understands  Christ,  as  the  subject  of  the  Psalm. 
But  in  another  passage  (Enarr.  in  Ps.  Izxxvii.)  he 
gives  the  word  in  the  form  melech,  and  interprets 
^•.  by  the  Latin  chorus :  having  in  the  first  instance 
made  some  confusion  with  7OJ7,  'dmdl,  "  sorrow," 
which  forms  part  of  the  proper  name  "  Amaiek." 
The  title  of  Ps.  liii.  in  the  Chaldee  and  Syriac  ver 
sions  contains  no  trace  of  the  word,  which  is  also 
omitted  in  the  almost  identical  Ps.  xiv.  From  this 
fact  alone  it  might  be  inferred  that  it  was  not  in 
tended  to  point  enigmatically  to  the  contents  of  the 
psalm,  as  Hengstenberg  and  others  are  inclined  to 
believe.  Aben  Ezra  understands  by  it  the  name  of 
»  melody  to  which  the  Psalm  was  sung,  and  R.  So 
lomon  Jarchi  explains  it  as  "  the  name  of  a  musical 
instrument,"  adding  however  immediately,  with  a 
play  upon  the  word,  "  another  discourse  on  the 
tickness  (machaldJi)  of  Israel  when  the  Temple  was 
laid  waste."  Calvin  and  J.  H.  Michaelis,  among 
others,  regarded  it  as  an  instrument  of  music  or  the 
commencement  of  a  melody.  Junius  derived  it 
from  the  root  ?;?!"!,  chalal,  "  to  bore,  perforate," 
and  understood  by  it  a  wind  instrument  of  some 
kind,  like  Nehiloth  in  Ps.  vi. ;  but  his  etymology  is 
certainly  wrong.  Its  connexion  with  mdchol  is 
equally  uncertain.  Joel  Bril,  in  the  second  preface 
to  his  notes  on  the  Psalms  in  Mendelssohn's  Bible, 
mentions  three  opinions  as  current  with  regard  to 
the  meaning  of  Mahalath ;  some  regarding  it  as  a 
feminine  form  of  mdchol,  others  as  one  of  the  wind 
instruments  (the  flute,  according  to  De  Wette's 
translation  of  Ps.  liii.),  and  others  again  as  a  stringed 
instrument.  Between  these  conflicting  conjectures, 
he  says,  it  is  impossible  to  decide.  That  it  was  a 
stringed  instrument,  played  either  with  the  ringers 
or  a  quill,  is  maintained  by  Simonis  (Lex.  ffebr.), 

who  derives  it  from  an  unused  Arabic  root  ^XLs*. 
to  sweep.  But  the  most  probable  of  all  conjectures, 
and  one  which  Gesenius  approves,  is  that  of  Ludolf, 
who  quotes  the  Ethiopia  machlet,  by  which  the 
Ki6dpa  of  the  LXX.  is  rendered  in  Gen.  iv.  21 
(Simonis,  Arcanum  Formarum,  p.  475).  Fiirst 
(ffandto.  s.  v.)  explains  Mahalath  as  the  name  of 
a  musical  corps  dwelling  at  Abe\-Meholah,  just 
as  by  Gittith  he  understands  the  band  of  Levite 
minstrels  at  Gath  Rimmon. 

On  the  ether  hand,  the  opinion  that  Mahalath 
contains  an  enigmatical  indication  of  the  subject  of 
the  Psalrn,  which  we  have  seen  hinted  at  in  the 
quotations  from  Jarchi  given  above,  is  adopted  by 
Hengstanberg  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other.  He 
translates  "on  Mahalath"  by  "on  sickness,"  re 
ferring  to  the  spiritual  malady  of  the  sons  of  men 
(Ccmm.  iiber  die  Psalm.).  Lengerke  (die  Psalmen) 
adopts  the  same  view,  which  had  been  previously 
advanced  by  Arias  Montanus. 

A  third  theory  is  that  of  Delitzsch  (Comm.  iib. 
d.  Psalter),  who  considers  Mahalath  as  indicating 
.'•o  the  choir  the  manner  in  which  the  Psalm  was  to 
De  sung,  and  compares  the  modern  terms  mesto, 
andante  mcsto.  Ewald  loaves  it  untranslated  and 
Unexplained,  regarding  it  as  probably  an  abb  rev  ia- 


MAHALATH  LEANNOTH          2f  7 

tion  01  a  longer  sentence  (Dichter  d.  Alt.  Bundes, 
i.  174).  The  latest  speculation  upon  the  subject 
is  that  of  Mr.  Thrupp,  who,  after  dismissing  as 
mere  conjecture  the  interpretation  of  Mahalath  as 
a  musical  instrument,  or  as  sickness,  propounds,  as 
more  probable  than  either,  that  it  is  "  a  proper  name 
borrowed  from  Gen.  xxviii.  9,  and  used  by  David 
as  an  enigmatical  designation  of  Abigail,  in  the  same 
manner  as  in  Psalms  vii.,  xxxiv.,  the  names  Gush 
and  Abimelech  are  employed  to  denote  Shimei  and 
Achish.  The  real  Mahalath,  Esau's  wife,  was  the 
sister  of  Nebajoth,  from  whom  were  descended 
an  Arabian  tribe  famous  for  their  wealth  in  sheep ; 
the  name  might  be  therefore  not  unfitly  applied  to 
one  who,  though  now  wedded  to  David,  had  till 
recently  been  the  wife  of  the  rich  sheep-owner  of 
the  village  of  Carmel "  (Introd.  to  the  Psalms,  i. 
314).  It  can  scarcely  be  said  that  Mr.  Thrupp  has 
replaced  conjecture  by  certainty.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAH'ALATH LEAN'NOTH(ni3j6  rbntt'- 
Mof  \(6  TOV  airoKpiBriva.!. :  Maheleth  ad  respon- 
dendum).  The  Geneva  version  of  Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  in 
the  title  of  which  these  words  occur,  has  "  upon 
Malath  Leanuoth,"  and  in  the  margin,  "  that  is,  tc 
humble.  It  was  the  beginning  of  a  song,  by  the 
tune  whereof  this  Psalm  was  sung."  It  is  a  re 
markable  proof  of  the  obscurity  which  envelops 
the  former  of  the  two  words  that  the  same  com 
mentator  explains  it  differently  in  each  of  the  pas 
sages  in  which  it  occurs.  In  De  Wette's  transla 
tion  it  is  a  "flute"  in  Ps.  liii.,  a  "guitar"  in  Ps. 
Ixxxviii. ;  and  while  Jarchi  in  the  former  passage 
explains  it  as  a  musical  instrument,  he  describes  the 
latter  as  referring  to  "  one  sick  of  love  and  affliction 
who  was  afflicted  with  the  punishments  of  the  cap 
tivity."  Symmachus,  again,  as  quoted  by  Theo 
doret  (Comm.  in  Ps.  87),  has  Sixopov,  unless  this 
be  a  mistake  of  the  copyist  for  Sjefc  x°P°v>  as  m 
Ps.  liii.  Augustine  and  Theodoret  both  understand 
Leannoth  of  responsive  singing.  Theophylact  says 
"  they  danced  while  responding  to  the  music  of  the 
organ."  Jerome  in  his  version  of  the  Hebrew,  has 
"  per  chorum  ad  praecinendum."  The  Hebrew 

J"l13y,   in    the  Piel  Coiij.,  certainly  signifies   "to 

sing,"  as  in  Ex.  xxxii.  18  ;  Is.  xxvii.  2 ;  and  in  this 
sense  it  is  taken  by  Ewald  in  the  title  of  Ps. 
Ixxxviii.  In  like  manner  Junias  and  Tremellius 
render  "  upon  Mahalath  Leannoth  "  "  to  be  sung 
to  the  wind  instruments."  There  is  nothing,  how 
ever,  in  the  construction  of  the  Psalm  to  show  that 
it  was  adapted  for  responsive  singing;  and  if  lean 
noth  be  simply  "  to  sing,"  it  would  seem,  as  Ols- 
hausen  observes,  almost  unnecessary.  It  has  refer 
ence,  more  probably,  to  the  character  of  the  psalm, 
and  might  be  rendered  "  to  humble,  or  afflict,"  in 
which  sense  the  root  occurs  in  verse  7.  In  support 
of  this  may  be  compared,  "  to  bring  to  remem 
brance,"  in  the  titles  of  Pss.  xxxviii.  and  Ixx. ;  and 
"to  thank,"  1  Chr.  xvi.  7.  Mr.  Thrupp  remarks 
that  this  Psalm  (Ixxxviii.)  "  should  be  regarded  as 
a  solemn  exercise  of  humiliation  ;  it  is  more  deeply 
melancholy  than  any  other  in  the  Psalter"  (Intr, 
to  the  Psalms,  ii.  99).  Hengstenberg,  in  accord 
ance  with  the  view  he  tikes  of  Mahalath,  regards 
Ps.  Ixxxviii.  as  the  prayer  of  one  recovered  from 
severe  bodily  sickness,  rendering  leannoth  "  con 
cerning  affliction,"  and  the  whole  "  on  the  sickness 
of  distress."  Lengerke  has  a  similar  explanation 
whic.h  is  the  same  with  that  of  Piscator,  but  is  toe 
forced.  [\V.  A.  \V  ] 


208  MAHAL1 

MAUALI  C^nO:  Moo\t ;  Alex.  MooXef : 
Moholi);  MAHLI,  the  son  of  Merari.  His  name 
occurs  in  the  A.  V.  but  once  in  this  form  (Ex. 
7i.  19). 

MAHANA'IM  (D»3n»  =  two  camps  or  hosts: 
napewSoAai ;  Ka/uefj>;  Mai/o*>;  Mavaflu;  Joseph. 
8«oO  <rrpaTdVe8oi' :  Manaim),  a  town  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan,  intimately  connected  with  the  early 
*nd  middle  history  of  the  nation  of  Israel.  It 
purports  to  have  received  its  name  at  the  most, 
important  crisis  of  the  life  of  Jacob.  He  had 
parted  from  Laban  in  peace  after  their  hazardous 
encounter  on  Mount  Gilead  (Gen.  xxxi.),  and  the 
next  step  in  the  journey  to  Canaan  brings  him  to 
Mahanaim :  "  Jacob  went  on  his  way ;  and  he  lifted 
up  his  eyes  and  saw  the  camp  of  God«  encamped; 
and  the  angels  (or  messengers)  of  God  met  him. 
And  wheu  he  saw  them  he  said,  This  is  God's  host 
(mahaneh},  and  he  called  the  name  of  that  place 
Mahanaim."  It  is  but  rarely,  and  in  none  but  the 
earliest  of  these  ancient  records,  that  we  meet  with 
the  occasion  of  a  name  being  conferred ;  and  gene  • 
rally,  as  has  been  already  remarked,  such  narra 
tives  are  full  of  difficulties,  arising  from  the  pe 
culiar  turns  and  involutions  of  words,  which  form 
a  very  prominent  feature  in  this  primeval  litera 
ture,  at  once  so  simple  and  so  artificial.  [BEER 
LAHAI  ROI,  EN-HAKKORE,  &c.]  The  form  in  which 
the  history  of  Mahanaim  is  cast  is  no  exception  to  this 
rule.  It  is  in  some  respects  perhaps  more  character 
istic  and  more  pregnant  with  hidden  meaning  than 
any  other.  Thus  the  "  host "  of  angels—  "  God's 
host" — which  is  said  to  have  been  the  occasion  of 
the  name,  is  only  mentioned  in  a  cursory  manner, 
and  in  the  singular  number — "  the  [one]  host ;" 
while  the  "  two  hosts  "  into  which  Jacob  divided  his 
caravan  when  anticipating  an  attack  from  Esau,  the 
host  of  Leah  and  the  host  of  Kachel,  agreeing  in 
their  number  with  the  name  Mahanaim  ("  two 
hosts"),  are  dwelt  upon  with  constant  repetition 
and  emphasis.  So  also  the  same  word  is  employed 
for  the  "  messengers  "  of  God  and  the  "  messengers  " 
to  Esau ;  and  so,  further  on  in  the  history,  the 
"  face  "  of  God  and  the  "  face  "  of  Esau  are  named 
by  the  same  word  (xxxiii.  30,  xxxiii.  10).  It  is  as 
if  there  were  a  correspondence  throughout  between 
the  human  and  the  divine,  the  inner  and  outer  parts 
of  the  event, — the  host  of  God  and  the  hosts  of 
Jacob  ;  the  messengers  of  God  and  the  messengers 
of  Jacob ;  the  face  of  God  and  the  face  of  Esau.b 
The  very  name  of  the  torrent  on  whose  banks  the 
event  took  place  seems  to  be  derived  from  the 
"  wrestling "  e  of  the  patriarch  with  the  angel. 
The  whole  narrative  hovers  between  the  real  and 
the  ideal,  earth  and  heaven. 

How  or  when  the  town  of  Mahanaim  arose  on 
the  spot  thus  signalized  we  are  not  told.  We  next 
meet  with  it  in  the  records  of  the  conquest.  The 
line  separating  Gad  from  Manasseh  would  appear 
to  have  run  through  or  close  to  it,  since  it  is  named 
in  the  specification  of  the  frontier  of  each  tribe  (Josh. 
xiii.  26  and  29).  It  was  also  on  the  southern 
boundary  of  the  district  of  Bashan  (ver.  30).  But 
it  was  certainly  within  the  territory  of  Gad  (Josh. 
xii.  38,  39),  and  therefore  on  the  south  side  of  the 
torrent  Jabbok,  as  indeed  we  should  infer  from  the 


•  This  paragraph  is  added  In  the  LXX. 
»  For  this  observation  the  writer  is  indebted  to  a  sermon 
ty  Prof.  Stacley  (Marlborough,  1853). 
«  Jabbok,  J33V;  "  wrestled  "  p^X' 


MAHANAIM 

history  of  Genesis,  in  which  it  lies  between  Gile.id — 
probably  the  modern  Jebel  Jilad — and  the  torrent 
The  town  with  its  "  suburbs  "  was  allotted  to  tht 
•  el-vice  of  the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  39; 
1  Chron.  vi.  80).  From  some  cause — the  sanc 
tity  of  its  original  foundation,  or  the  strength  of 
its  position  •* — Mahanaim  had  become  in  the  time 
of  the  monarchy  a  place  of  mark.  When,  after  the 
death  of  Saul,  Abner  undertook  the  establishment 
of  the  kingdom  of  Ishbosheth,  unable  to  occupy  any 
of  the  towns  of  Benjamin  or  Ephraim,  which  were 
then  in  the  hands  of  the  Philistines,  he  fixed  on 
Mahanaim  as  his  head-quarters.  There  the  new 
king  was  crowned  over  all  Israel,  east  as  well  as 
west  of  the  Jordan  (2  Sam.  ii.  9).  From  them* 
Abner  made  his  disastrous  expedition  to  Gibeon 
(ver.  12),  and  there  apparently  the  unfortunate 
Ishbosheth  was  murdered  (iv.  5),  the  murderers 
making  off  to  Hebron  by  the  way  of  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan. 

The  same  causes  which  led  Abner  to  fix  Ish- 
bosheth's  residence  at  Mahanaim  probably  induced 
David  to  take  refuge  there  when  driven  out  of  the 
western  part  of  his  kingdom  by  Absalom.  He  pro 
ceeds  thither  without  hesitation  or  inquiry,  but  as 
if  when  Jerusalem  was  lost  it  was  the  one  alternative 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  24 ;  1  K.  ii.  8).  It  was  then  a  walled 
town,  capacious  enough  to  contain  the  "  hundreds  " 
and  the  "  thousands  "  of  David's  followers  (xviii . 
1,4;  and  compare  "  ten  thousand,"  ver.  3) ;  witk 
gates,  and  the  usual  provision  for  the  watchman 
of  a  fortified  town  (see  the  remark  of  Josephus 
quoted  in  the  note).  But  its  associations  with  royal 
persons  were  not  fortunate.  One  king  had  already 
been  murdered  within  its  walls,  and  it  was  here 
that  David  received  the  news  of  the  death  of  Ab 
salom,  and  made  the  walls  of  the  "  chamber  over 
the  gate  "  resound  with  his  cries. 

Mahanaim  was  the  seat  of  one  of  Solomon's  com 
missariat  officers  (1  K.  iv.  14) ;  and  it  is  alluded  to 
in  the  Song  which  bears  his  name  (vi.  13),  in  terms 
which,  though  very  obscure,  seem  at  any  rate  to 
show  that  at  the  date  of  the  composition  of  that 
poem  it  was  still  in  repute  for  sanctity,  possibly 
famous  for  some  ceremonial  commemorating  the 
original  vision  of  the  patriarch  :  "  What  will  ye  see 
in  the  Shulamite?  We  see  as  it  were  the  dance 
(mecholah,  a  word  usually  applied  to  dances  of  a 
religious  nature;  see  vol.  i.  p.  389)  of  the  two 
hosts  of  Mahanaim." 

On  the  monument  of  Sheshonk  (Shishak)  at 
Karnak,  in  the  22nd  cartouch — one  of  those  which 
are  believed  to  contain  the  names  of  Israelite  cities 
conquered  by  that  king — a  name  appears  which  is 
read  as  Ma-ha-n-ma,  that  is,  Mahanaim.  The 
adjoining  cartouches  contain  names  which  are  read 
as  Beth-shean,  Shunem,  Megiddo,  Beth-horon, 
Gibeon,  and  other  Israelite  names  (Brugsch,  Geogr. 
der  nachbarl&nder  Aegyptens,  &c.,  p.  61).  If  this 
interpretation  may  be  relied  on  it  shows  that  the 
invasion  of  Shishak  was  more  extensive  than  we 
should  gather  from  the  records  of  the  Bible  (2  Chr. 
xii.),  which  are  occupied  mainly  with  occurrences 
At  the  metropolis.  Possibly  the  army  entered  by 
the  plains  of  Philistia  and  Sharon,  ravaged  Ksdraelon 
and  some  towns  like  Mahanaim  just  beyrnd  Jordan, 
and  then  returned,  either  by  the  same  route  or  by 


d  To  the  latter' Josephus  testifies  :  IIap«/x/3oAai— so  ht 
renders  the  Hebrew  Mahanaim--KaAAt'<rn)  *ai  o^vpi* 
TOTTJ  iroXis  (Ant.  vii.  9,  $8). 


MAHANKEI-DAN 

flie  Jordan  valley,  to  Jerusalem,  attacking  it  last. 
This  wonl.l  account  tor  Kehoboam's  non-resistance, 
UK!  also  for  the  fact,  of  which  special  mention  is 
made,  that  many  of  the  chief  men  of  the  country 
had  taken  refuge  in  the  city.  It  should,  however, 
be  remarked  tha*  the  names  occur  in  most  pro 
miscuous  order,  and  that  none  has  been  found  re 
sembling  Jerusalem. 

As  to  the  identification  of  Mahanaim  with  any 
modern  site  or  remains  little  can  be  said.  To  Eu- 
cl'ius  mid  Jerome  it  appears  to  have  been  unknown. 
^  place  called  Mahnch  does  certainly  exist  among 
I  he  villages  of  the  east  of  Jordan,  though  its  exact 
position  is  not  so  certain.  The  earliest  mention  of 
it  appears  to  be  that  of  the  Jewish  traveller  hap- 
IVchi,  according  to  whom  "  Machnajim  is  Mach- 
nc/i,  and  stands  about  half  a  day's  journey  in  a  due 
east  direction  from  Beth-san  "  (Zunz,  in  Asher's 
Benj.  of  Tiidela,  408).  Mahneh  is  named  in  the 
lists  of  Dr.  Eli  Smith  among  the  places  of  Jebcl 
Ajlim  (Rob.  B.  R.  1st  ed.,  iii.  App.  160).  It  is 
marked  on  Kiepert's  map  (1S56)  as  exactly  east  of 
Dethshan,  but  about  30  miles  distant  therefrom 
—  »'.  e.  not  half  but  a  long  whole  day's  journey.  It 
is  also  mentioned,  and  its  identity  with  Mahanaim 
upheld,  by  Porter  (Handbook,  322).  But  the  dis 
tance  of  Mahneh  from  the  Jordan  and  from  both 
the  Wady  Zurka  and  the  Yarmuk—  each  of  which 
has  claims  to  represent  the  torrent  Jabbok  —  seems 
to  forbid  this  conclusion.  At  any  rate  the  point 
may  be  recommended  to  the  investigation  of  future 
travellers  east  of  the  Jordan.  [G.J 

MAH'ANEH-DAN 


±di>:  Castra  Dan:  the  "  Camp-of-Dan  :"  Luth. 
arts  Lager  Dans},  a  name  which  commemorated  the 
last  encampment  of  the  band  of  six  hundred  Danite 
warriors  before  setting  out  on  their  expedition  to 
Laish.  The  position  of  the  spot  is  specified  with 
great  precision,  as  "  behind  Kirjath-jearim  "  (Judg. 
xviii.  12),  and  as  "  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaof" 
(xiii.  25j  here  the  name  is  translated  in  the  A.  V.). 
Kirjath-jearim  is  identified  with  tolerable  certainty 
in  Kuriet-el-Enab,  and  Zorah  in  Sura,  about  7 
miles  S.W.  of  it.  But  no  site  has  yet  been  sug 
gested  for  Eshtaol  which  would  be  compatible  with 
the  above  conditions,  requiring  as  they  do  that 
Kirjath-jearim  should  lie  between  it  and  Zorah. 
In  Kastul,  a  "  remarkable  conical  hill  about  an  hour 
from  Kuriet-cl-Enab,  towards  Jerusalem,"  south 
of  the  road,  we  have  a  site  which  is  not  dissimilar 
in  name  to  Eshtaol,  while  its  position  sufficiently 
answers  the  requirements.  Mr.  Williams  (Holy 
City,  i.  12  note)  was  shewn  a  site  on  the  north 
side  of  the  Wadij  Ismail,  N.N.E.  from  Deir  el- 
Howa—  which  bore  the  name  of  Beit  Mahanem, 
and  which  he  suggests  may  be  identical  with  Ma- 
haneh  Dan.  The  position  is  certainly  very  suitable  ; 
but  the  name  does  not  occur  in  the  lists  or  maps 
of  other  travellers  —  not  even  of  Tobler  (Dritte 
Wanderung,  1859)  ;  a:id  the  question  must  be  left 
with  that  started  above,  of  the  identity  of  Kustul 
and  Eshtaol,  for  the  investigation  of  future  ex 
plorers  and  Arabic  scholars. 

The  statement  in  xviii.  12  :f  the  origin  of  the 
mime  is  so  precise,  and  has  so  historical  an  air, 
that  it  supplies  a  strong  reason  for  believing  that 
I  he  events  there  recorded  took  place  earlier  than 
those  in  xiii.  25,  though  in  the  present  arrangement 
(if  the  book  of  Judges  they  come  after  them.  [G.] 


vor,.  u. 


nO:    Norpt; 


MAHLAIJ  205 

in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  28;  Mopoj;  Alex.  Mt(ty,u,  1  Chr 
xi.  30;  Meypd  ;  Alex.  Moopai,  I  Chr.  xxvii.  13: 
Maharal,  Marai,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  13),  an  inhabitant 
of  Netophah  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  one  oi 
David's  captains.  He  was  of  the  family  of  Zerah. 
and  commanded  the  tenth  monthly  division  of  the 
army. 

MA'HATH  (fine :  Made :  MahatK).  1.  The 
son  of  Amasai,  a  Kohathite  of  the  house  of  Korah, 
and  ancestor  ofHeman  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  35)! 
In  ver.  25  he  is  called  AHIMOTH  (Hervey,  Geneal 
p.  215). 

2.  (Alex.  Moe'0,  2  Chr.  xxix.  12;  Vat.  MS, 
Noe'0,  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13).  Also  a  Kohathite,  who, 
in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  was  appointed,  as  one  of  the 
representatives  of  his  house,  to  assist  in  the  purifica 
tion  of  the  Levites,  by  which  they  prepared  them 
selves  to  cleanse  the  Temple  from  the  traces  of  idola 
trous  worship.  He  was  apparently  the  same  who, 
with  other  Levites,  had  the  charge  of  the  tithes 
and  dedicated  offerings,  unuer  the  superintendence  of 
Cononiah  and  Shimei. 

MAH'AVITE,  THE  (DTOn,  t.  e.  "  the 
Machavites  " :  6  Mt'ei ;  Alex.  6  Matativ:  Maumitcs}, 
the  designation  of  Eliel,  one  of  the  warriors  of  king 
David's  guard,  whose  name  is  preserved  in  the  cata 
logue  of  1  Chron.  only  (xi.  46).  It  will  be  observed 
that  the  word  is  plural  in  the  Hebrew  text,  but  the 
whole  of  the  list  is  evidently  in  so  confused  a  state, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  draw  any  inference  from 
that  circumstance.  The  Targum  has  KliniD  JOT, 
"  from  Machavua."  Kennicott  (Dissert.  231)  con 
jectures  that  originally  the  Hebrew  may  have  stood 
DMnnft,  "  from  the  Hivites."  Others  have  pro 
posed  to  insert  an  N  and  read  "  the  Mahanaimite  " 
(Kiirst,  Ifdwb.  721a;  Bertheau,  Chronik,  136).  [G.] 

MAHAZ'IOTH  (niNHnO :  Mfa&8 ;  Alex. 
Maa£ia>0:  MahaziolK),  one  of  the  14  sons  of 
Heman  the  Kohathite,  who  formed  pait  of  the 
Temple  choir,  under  the  leadership  of  their  father 
with  Asaph  and  Jeduthtm.  He  was  chief  of  the 
23rd  course  of  twelve  musicians  (1  Chr.  xxv.  4,  30), 
whose  office  it  was  to  blow  the  horns. 

MAHEK-SHALAL-HASH-13AZ  (^>tj>  -|} 


T2  K'n  :  Taxfois  ffKv\evcrov  o£ «oy  irpov 
Accelera  spolia  detrahere  fcstina],  son  of  Isaiah, 
and  younger  brother  of  Shear-jashub,  of  whom 
nothing  more  is  known  than  that  his  name  was 
given  by  Divine  direction,  to  indicate  that  Damascus 
and  Samaria  were  soon  to  be  plundered  by  the  king 
of  Assyria  (Is.  viii.  1-4 ;  comp.  vol.  i.  p.  880). 
In  reference  to  the  grammatical  construction  of  the 
several  parts  of  the  name,  whether  the  verbal  parts 
are  imperatives,  indicatives,  infinitives,  or  verbal 
adjectives,  leading  versions,  as  well  as  the  opinions 
of  critics  differ,  though  all  agree  as  to  its  general 
import  (comp.  Drechsler  in  foe.).  [E.  H— e.] 

MAH'LAH  (r6n» :  MoAti,  Num.  xxvi.  33 ; 
MaaAo,  Num.  xxvii.  1 ;  Josh.  xvii.  3 ;  MaA.ua,  Num. 
xxxvi.  11  ;  MaeAet;  Alex.  MooXci,  1  Chr.  vii.  13: 
Maala  in  all  cases,  except  Mohola,  \  Chr.  vii.  18), 
the  eldest  of  the  five  daughters  of  Zelophehad,  th<? 
grandson  of  Manasseh,  in  whose  favour  the  law  ol 
succession  to  an  inheritance  was  altered  (Num 
xxvii.  l  U).  She  married  her  cousin,  and  re 
ceived  35  her  share  a  portion  of  the  territory  ol 
Maruustich.  K.  of  the  Joidi-n. 

P 


210 

MAH'LI  obniD:  Moo\i:  Moholl).  1.  The 
sou  of  Meruri,  the  son  of  Levi,  and  ancestor  of  the 
family  of  the  MAHLITES  (Num.  iii.  20  ;  1  Chr.  vi. 
19,  29,  xxiv.  26).  In  the  last  quoted  verse  there 
is  apparently  a  gap  in  the  text,  Libni  and  Shimei 
belonging  to  the  family  of  Gershom  (comp.  ver.  20, 
42),  and  Eleazar  and  Kish  being  afterwards  de 
scribed  as  the  sons  of  Mahli  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  21, 
xxiv.  28).  One  -of  his  descendants,  Sherebiah, 
was  appointed  one  of  the  ministers  of  the  Temple  in 
the  days  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  viii.  18).  He  is  called 
MAHAU  in  the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  ri.  19,  MOLI  in  1  Esd. 
viii.  47,  and  MACHLI  in  the  margin. 

2.  The  son  of  Mushi,  and  grandson  of  Merari 
(1  Chr.  vi.  47,  xxiii.  23,  xxiv.  30). 

MAH'LITES,  THE  (^>n?2>n  :  6  MooXf  :  Mo- 
holitae,  Moholi],  the  descendants  of  Mahli  the  son 
of  Merari  (Num.  iii.  33,  xxvi.  58). 


MAH'LON  (j'nO  :  MaeU^  :  Maalon),  the 
first  husband  of  Ruth!  He  and  his  brother  Chilion 
were  sons  of  Elimelech  and  Naomi,  and  are  de 
scribed,  exactly  in  the  same  terms  with  a  subse 
quent  member  of  their  house  —  Jesse  —  as  "  Kphrath- 
ites  of  Bothlehem-judah  "  (Ruth  i.  2,  5  ;  iv.  9,  10  ; 
comp.  1  Sam.  xvii.  12). 

It  is  uncertain  which  was  the  elder  of  the  two. 
In  the  narrative  (i.  2,  5)  Mahlon  is  mentioned 
first  ;  but  in  his  formal  address  to  the  elders  in  the 
gate  (iv.  9),  Boaz  says  "  Chilion  and  Mahlon." 
Like  his  brother,  Mahlon  died  in  the  land  of  Moab 
without  offspring,  which  in  the  Targum  on  Ruth 
'i.  5)  is  explained  to  have  been  a  judgment  for 
their  transgression  of  the  law  in  marrying  a  Moab- 
jtess.  In  the  Targum  on  1  Chr.  iv.  22,  Mahlou  is 
dentified  with  Joash,  possibly  on  account  of  the 
double  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  which  follows, 
and  which  signifies  both  "  had  dominion  "  and 
"married."  (See  that  passage.)  [G 


MA'HOIi  (>inO  :  Md\  ;  Alex.  MaouA  :  Mahol). 
The  father  of  Ethan  the  Ezrahite,  and  Heman, 
Chalcol,  and  Darda,  the  four  men  most  famous  foi 
wisdom  next  to  Solomon  himself  (1  K.  iv.  31),  who  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  6  are  the  sons  and  immediate  descendants  oi 
Zerah.  Mahol  is  evidently  a  proper  name,  but  som 
consider  it  an  appellative,  and  translate  "  the  sons 
of  Mahol  "  by  "  the  sons  of  song,"  or  "  sons  of  the 
choir,"  in  reference  to  their  skill  in  music.  In  this 
case  it  would  be  more  correct  to  render  it  "  sons  of  the 
dance  ;"  m&chol  corresponding  to  the  Greek  x6po 
in  its  original  sense  of  "  a  dance  in  a  ring,"  thoug 
it  has  not  followed  the  meanings  which  have  been 
attached  to  its  derivatives  "  chorus  "  and  "  choir.' 
Jarchi  says  that  "they  were  skilled  in  composing 
hymns  which  were  recited  in  the  dances  of  song.' 
Another  explanation  still  is  that  Ethan  and  his 
brethren  the  minstrels  were  called  "  the  sons  o 
Mahol,"'  because  machol  is  the  name  o(  an  instru 
inent  of  music  in  Fs.  cl.  4.  Josephus  (Ant.  viii 
2,  §5)  calls  him  'Hpdw.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MAIA'NEAS  i  yicudvvas  :  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
MAASEIAH,  7  (1  Ksd.  ix.  48);  probably  a  corrup 
tion  of  MAASIAS. 

MAK'AZ(fi5D:  JAaXf^s;  Alex.  MoXMos 
Macces),  a  place,  apparently  a  town,  named  one 
only  (1  K.  iv.  9),  in  the  s]>ecilication  of  the  jurisdic 

»  £.  g.  Gideon's,  Saul's,  and  David's  attacks.    [See  EN 


MAKKEDAH 

ion  of  Solomon's  commissariat  officer,  Bcn-Iiekai 
he  places  which  accompany  it — Shaalbim,  lieth- 
hemesh,  and  Elon-both-hanan — seem  to  have  been 
>n  the  western  slopes  of  the  mountains  of  Judah 
Mid  Benjamin,  «'.  e.  the  district  occupied  by  the  tribe 
>f  Dan.  But  Makaz  has  not  been  discovered.  Mich- 
mnsh — the  reading  of  the  LXX.  (but  of  no  other 
ion) — is  hardly  possible,  both  for  distance  and 
[irectiou,  though  the  position  and  subsequent  im- 
x>rtance  of  Michmash,  and  the  great  fertility  of  its 
leighbourhood,  render  it  not  an  unlikely  seat  for  i 
commissariat  officer.  [G.J 

MA'KED  (Maice'8;  Alex.  Mewc«/8  :  Syr.  Mokw. 
Vulg.  Mageth},one  of  the  "strong  and  great"  cities 
of  Gilead — Josephus  says  Galilee,  but  this  must  be 
an  error — into  which  the  Jews  were  driven  by  the 
Ammonites  under  Timotheus,  and  from  which  they 
were  delivered  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  v. 
26,  36 ;  in  the  latter  passage  the  name  is  given  in 
the  A.  V.  MAGED.)  By  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  8,  §3,) 
t  is  not  mentioned.  Some  of  the  other  cities 
named  in  this  narrative  have  been  identified  ;  but 
no  name  corresponding  to  Maked  has  yet  been  dis 
covered;  and  the  conjecture  of  Schwarz  (p.  230) 
;hat  it  is  a  corruption  of  MINNITH  (J1JQ  for 
H3D),  though  ingenious,  can  hardly  be  accepted 
without  further  proof.  [G-] 

MAK'HELOTH  (rfrnpD:  Mo^Xcitf:  Mace- 
loth'),  a  place  only  mentioned  in  Num.  xxxiii.  25 
,is  that  of  a  desert  encampment  of  the  Israelites. 
The  name  is  plural  in  form,  and  may  signify 
"  places  of  meeting."  [H.  H.J 

MAK'KEDAH  (HlpO  :  MoKrjSa,  onceMa/o?- 

Sav ;  Alex  Ma/cTjSa:  Syr.  Mokor,  and  Nakoda  : 
Maceda),  a  place  memorable  in  the  annals  of  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  as  the  scene  of  the  execution  by 
Joshua  of  the  five  confederate  kings:  an  act  by 
which  the  victory  of  Beth-horon  was  sealed  and 
consummated,  and  the  subjection  of  the  entire 
southern  portion  of  the  country  ensured.  Makkedah 
is  first  mentioned  (Josh.  x.  10)  with  Azekah,  in  the 
narrative  of  the  battle  of  Beth-horon,  as  the  point  to 
which  the  rout  extended ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  decide 
whether  this  refers  to  one  of  the  operations  in  the 
earlier  portion  of  the  fight,  or  is  not  rather  an  anti 
cipation  of  its  close — of  the  circumstances  related 
in  detail  in  verses  1 1  and  1 6,  &c.  But  with  re.£ird 
to  the  event  which  has  conferred  immortality  on 
Makkedah — the  "  crowning  mercy  " — (if  we  may  be 
allowed  to  borrow  an  expression  from  a  not  dissimilar 
transaction  in  our  own  history) — there  is  fortu 
nately  no  obscurity  or  uncertainty.  It  unquestion 
ably  occurred  in  the  afternoon  of  that  tremendous 
day,  which  "  was  like  no  day  before  or  after  it."  The 
order  of  the  events  of  the  twenty-four  hours  which 
elapsed  after  the  departure  from  the  ark  and  k.oei-- 
nacle  at  the  camp  seems  to  have  been  as  follows. 
The  march  from  the  depths  of  the  Jordan  valley  at 
Gilgal,  through  the  rocky  clefts  of  the  ravines  which 
lead  up  to  the  central  hills,  was  made  during  the 
night.  By  or  before  dawn  they  had  reached  Gibeoa  , 
then — at  the  favourite  hour  for  such  surprises  • — 
came  the  sudden  onset  and  the  fij-st  carnage  *> ;  then 
the  chase  ami  the  appeal  of  Joshua  to  the  rising  tia, 
just  darting  his  level  rays  over  the  ridge  of  the  LiJ  ol 
Gibeon  in  the  rear  ;  then  the  furious  storm  assisting 
and  completing  the  rout.  In  the  meantime  the 


The  Mo«tenj  tradition  is  that  the  at'acfc  took  plnce 


on  a  Friday,  und  that  the  day  was  prolonged  by  om 
half,  tu  tirovrtil  the  Sabkilli  Ix-ing  encniachcd  upoa 
(S»-i-  Jalaladilin.  7>'ii/>/f  <•(  Jt  i-utal,m.Wl.) 


MAKTESH 

detection  of'  the  five  chiefs  in  their  hiding-place  has 
been  communicated  to  Joshua,  and,  as  soon  as  the 
matter  in  hand  will  allow,  he  rushes  on  with  the 
whole  of  his  force  to  Makkedah  (ver.  2 1).  The  first 
thing  to  be  done  is  to  form  a  regular  camp  ( n3l"ID). 
The  next  to  dispose  of  the  rive  chiefs,  and  that  by  no 
hurried  massacre,  but  in  so  deliberate  and  judicial  a 
manner  as  at  once  to  infuse  terror  into  the  Canaan- 
ites  and  confidence  into  his  own  followers,  to  show 
to  both  that  "  thus  shall  Jehovah  do  to  all  the 
enemies"  of  Israel.  The  cave  in  the  recesses  ot 
which  the  wretched  kings  were  hidden  was  a  well- 
known  one.c  It  was  close  to  the  town,d  we  may 
safely  conclude  that  the  whole  proceeding  was  in 
full  view  of  the  walls.  At  last  the  ceremonial  is 
over,  the  strange  and  significant  parable  has  been 
acted,  and  the  bodies  of  Adoni-zedek  and  his  com 
panions  are  swinging*  from  the  trees — possibly  the 
trees  of  some  grove  sacred  to  the  abominable  rites 
of  the  Canaanite  Ashtaroth — in  the  afternoon  sun. 
Then  Joshua  turns  to  the  town  itself.  To  force 
the  walls,  to  put  the  king  and  all  the  inhabitants  to 
the  sword  (ver.  28)  is  to  that  indomitable  energy, 
still  fresh  after  the  gigantic  labours  and  excitements 
of  the  last  twenty-four  hours — the  work  of  an  hour  or 
two.  And  now  the  evening  has  arrived,  the  sun  is  at 
last  sinking — the  first  sun  that  has  set  since  the  de 
parture  from  Gilgal, — and  the  tragedy  is  terminated 
by  cutting  down  the  five  bodies  from  the  trees,  and 
restoring  them  to  the  cave,  which  is  then  so  blocked 
up  with  stones  as  henceforth  never  again  to  become 
refuge  for  friend  or  foe  of  Israel. 

The  taking  of  Makkedah  was  the  first  in  that 
series  of  sieges  and  destructions  by  which  the  Great 
Captain  possessed  himself  of  the  main  points 
of  defence  throughout  this  portion  of  the  country. 
Its  situation  has  hitherto  eluded  discovery.  The 
catalogue  of  the  cities  of  Judah  in  Joshua  (xv.  41) 
places  it  in  the  Shefelah  or  maritime  plain,  but 
unfortunately  it  forms  one  of  a  group  of  towns  of 
which  few  or  none  are  identified.  The  report  of 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomasticon,  "Maceda")  is 
that -it  lay  8  miles  to  the  east  of  Eleutheropolis, 
Beit-Jibrin,  a  position  irreconcileable  with  every 
requirement  of  the  narrative.  Porter  (Handbook, 
224,  251)  suggests  a  ruin  on  the  northern  slope  of 
the  Wady  es  Sumt,  bearing  the  somewhat  similar 
name  of  el-Klediah ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  under 
stand  how  this  can  have  been-  the  position  of  Mak 
kedah,  which  we  should  imagine  would  be  found,  if  it 
ever  is  found,  considerably  nearer  Kamleh  or  Jimzu. 

Van  de  Velde  (Memoir,  332)  would  place  it  at 
Sumeil,  a  village  standing  on  a  low  hill  6  or  7 
miles  N.W.  of  Beit-Jibrin;  but  the  only  claim  of 
this  site  appears  to  be  the  reported  existence  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  a  large  cavern,  while  its  position — 
at  least  8  miles  further  from  Beth-horou  than  even 
el-Klediah — would  make  the  view  of  the  narrative 
taken  above  impossible.  [G.j 

MAK'TESH  (t5>n3»n,«  with  the  def.  article: 
i]  KaraKfKO/j./j.fvrt :  Piloj,  a  place,  evidently  in  Jeru- 


MALACHI 


211 


c  It  is  throughout  distinguished  l>y  the  definite  article, 
the  cave." 


d  The  preposition  used  \s  the  same  as  that  employed 
to  describe  the  position  of  the  live  kings  in  the  cave— 
mpO3,  "  i"  Makkedah"— n"iyO3i  "  >n  the  cave." 

'  The  word  ("PPl.  rendered  "  hang "  in  ver.  26,  has 
the  fo/ce  of  suspending.  See  P».  cxxxvii.  2,  2  Sam.  xviii. 
10,  vA  othor  passages  where  it  must  have  this  meaning 
H  Is  an  entirely  disvnct  term  lYuin  yp*.  which,  tliougli 


salem,  the  inhabitants  of  which  are  denounced  by 
Zephaniah  (i.  11).  Kwald  conjectures  (Propheten, 
364)  that  it  was  the  "  Phoenician  quarter"  of  the 
city,  in  which  the  traders  of  that  natior  -the  Ca- 
naanites  (A.  V.  "  merchants"),  who  in  th.s  passage 
are  associated  with  Mactesh — resided,  after  the  cus 
tom  in  Oriental  towns.  As  to  which  part  of  the  titv 
this  quarter  occupied  we  have  little  or  no  indication. 
The  meaning  of  "  Mactesh  "  is  probably  a  deep  hollow, 
literally  a  "  moiiar."b  This  the  Targum  identifies 
with  the  torrent  Kedron,  the  deep  basin  or  ravine  o( 
which  sinks  down  below  the  eastern  wall  and  south 
eastern  corner  of  the  city.  The  Targum,  probably 
with  an  eye  to  the  traditional  uncleanness  of  this 
valley,  and  to  the  idol-worship  perpetrated  at  its 
lower  end,  says,  "  Howl  ye  inhabitants  of  the  torrent 
Kedron,  for  all  the  people  are  broken  whose  works 
were  like  the  works  of  the  people  of  Canaan."  But 
may  it  not,  with  equal  probability,  have  been  the 
deep  valley  which  separated  the  Temple  from  the 
upper  city,  and  which  at  the  time  of  Titus'  siege 
was,  as  it  still  is,  crowded  with  the  "  bazaars  "  of 
the  merchants  ?  (See  vol.  i.  10126.)  [G.j 

MAL'ACHI  03i6o :  MoAox»as  in  the  titk- 
only :  Malackias],  the  last,  and  therefore  called 
"  the  seal "  of  the  piophets,  as  his  prophecies  con 
stitute  the  closing  book  of  the  canon.  His  name  is 
probably  contracted  from  Malachijah,  "  messenger 
of  Jehovah,"  as  Abi  (2  K.  xviii.  2)  from  Abijah 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  1).  Of  his  personal  history  nothing 
is  known.  A  tradition  preserved  in  Pseudo-Epi- 
phanius  (De  Vitis  Proph.)  relates  that  Malachi  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  and  born  after  the  captivity 
at  Sopha  (5o</>£)  in  the  territory  of  that  tribe. 
According  to  the  same  apocryphal  story  he  died 
young,  and  was  buried  with  his  fathers  in  his  own 
country.  Jerome,  in  the  preface  to  his  Commentary 
on  Malachi,  mentions  a  belief  which  was  cuirent 
among  the  Jews,  that  Malachi  was  identical  with 
Ezra  the  priest,  because  the  circumstances  re 
corded  in  the  narrative  of  the  latter  are  also  men 
tioned  by  the  prophet.  The  Targum  of  Jonathan 
ben  Uzziel,  on  the  words  "  by  the  hand  of  Malachi  " 
(i.  1 ),  gives  the  gloss  "  whose  name  is  called  Ezra 
the  scribe."  With  equal  probability  Malachi  has 
been  identified  with  Mordecai,  Nehemiah,  and  Ze- 
rubbabel.  The  LXX.  render  "  by  Malachi"  (Mai. 
i.  1),  "  by  the  hand  of  his  angel ;"  and  this  transla 
tion  appears  to  have  given  rise  to  the  idea  that 
Malachi,  as  well  as  Haggai  and  John  the  Baptist, 
was  an  angel  in  human  shape  (comp.  Mai.  iii.  1 : 
'2  Esd.  i.  40;  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Hag.  i.  13).  Cyril 
illudes  to  this  belief  only  to  express  his  disappro 
bation,  and  characterizes  those  who  held  it  as 
omancers  fot  /XOTTJJ/  epf>a.^wSi]Ka<Tii>  K.  r.  A.). 
Another  Hebrew  tradition  associated  Malachi  with 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  as  the  companions  of  Dani-el 
when  he  saw  the  vision  recorded  in  Dan.  x.  7 
(Smith's  Select  Discourses,  p.  214  ;  ed.  1660),  and 
as  among  the  first  members  of  the  Graat  Synagogue. 
which  consisted  of  1 20  elders. 


ilso  translated  by  "hang"  in  the  A.  V.,  really  means  to 

crucify.    See  MEPHIBOSUETH. 

One  of  the  few  cases  lu  which  our  translators  havo 

represented  the  Hebrew  letter  Caph  by  K,  which  they 

commonly  reserve  for  Koph.    [See  also  MEKONAH.] 

The  literal  Aqnila  renders  the  words  by  eis  T'OV  oA- 
;  Theodotion,  iv  r<a  pd6ei.    The  Hebrew  term  to  thi 

same  as  that  employed  in  Judg.  xv.  19  for  the  hollo* 

basin  or  combe  in  Lfhi  from  which  the  soring  burst  forts 

for  the  relief  of  Samson. 

P  2 


212 


MALACHI 


The  time  at  which  his  prophecies  were  delivered  i 
is  not  difficult  to  ascertain.  Cyril  makes  him  con-  I 
temporary  with  Haggai  and  Zcchariah,  or  a  little 
later.  Syncellus  (p.  240  B)  places  these  three  pro 
phets  tinder  Joshua  the  son  of  Josedec.  That  Ma 
lachi  was  contemporary  with  Nehemiah  is  rendered 
probable  by  a  comparison  of  ii.  8  with  Neh.  xiii. 
15;  ii.  10-16  with  Neh.  xiii.  23,  &c. ;  and  iii.  7-12 
with  Neh.  xiii.  10,  &c.  That  he  prophesied  after 
the  times  of  Haggai  and  Zechamh  is  inferred  from 
his  omitting  to  mention  the  restoration  of  the 
Temple,  and  from  no  allusion  being  made  to  him 
by  Kzra.  The  captivity  was  already  a  thing  of  the 
long  past,  and  is  not  referred  to.  The  existence  of 
the  Temple-service  is  presupposed  in  i.  10,  iii.  1,  10. 
The  Jewish  nation  had  still  a  political  chief  (i.  8), 
distinguished  by  the  same  title  as  that  borne  by 
Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  26),  to  which  Gesenius  assigns 
a  Persian  origin.  Hence  Vitringa  concludes  that 
Malachi  delivered  his  prophecies  after  the  second 
return  of  Nehemiah  from  Persia  (Neh.  xiii.  6),  and 
subsequently  to  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longi- 
raanus  (cir.  B.C.  420),  which  is  the  date  adopted 
by  Kennicott  and  Hales,  and  approved  by  Davidson 
(Introd.  p.  985).  It  may  be  mentioned  that  in  the 
Seder  Olam  Rabba  (p.  55,  ed.  Meyer)  the  date  of 
Malachi's  prophecy  is  assigned,  with  that  of  Haggai 
and  Zechariah,  to  the  second  year  of  Darius ;  and 
his  death  in  the  Seder  Olam  Zuta  (p.  105)  is 
placed,  with  that  of  the  same  two  prophets,  in  the 
52nd  year  of  the  Me;1es  and  Persians.  The  prin 
cipal  reasons  adduced  by  Vitringa,  and  which  appear 
conclusively  to  fix  the  time  of  Malachi's  prophecy 
as  contemporary  with  Nehemiah,  are  the  follow 
ing: — The  offences  denounced  by  Malachi  as  pre 
vailing  among  the  people,  and  especially  the  cor 
ruption  of  the  priests  by  marrying  foreign  wives, 
correspond  with  the  actual  abuses  with  which 
Nehemiah  had  to  contend  in  his  efforts  to  bring 
about  a  reformation  (comp.  Mai.  ii.  8  with  Neh. 
xiii.  29).  The  alliance  of  the  high-priest's  family 
with  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  (Neh.  xiii.  4,  28)  and 
Sanballat  the  Horonite  had  introduced  neglect  of 
the  customary  Temple-service,  and  the  offerings  and 
tithes  due  to  the  Levites  and  priests,  in  consequence 
of  which  the  Temple  was  forsaken  (Neh.  xiii.  4-13), 
and  the  Sabbath  openly  profaned  (id.  15-21).  The 
short  interval  of  Nehemiah's  absence  from  Jeru 
salem  had  been  sufficient  for  the  growth  of  these 
corruptions,  and  on  his  return  he  found  it  necessary 
to  put  them  down  with  a  strong  hand,  and  to  do 
over  again  the  work  that  Ezra,  had  done  a  few 
years  before.  From  the  striking  parallelism  be 
tween  the  state  of  things  indicated  in  Malachi's 
prophecies  and  that  actually  existing  on  Nehemiah's 
return  from  the  court  of  Artaxerxes,  it  is  on  all 
accounts  highly  probable  that  the  efforts  of  the 
secular  governor  were  on  this  occasion  seconded  by 
the  preaching  of  "  Jehovah's  messenger,"  and  that 
Malachi  occupied  the  same  position  with  regard  to 
the  reformation  under  Nehemiah,  which  Isaiah  held 
in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  and  Jeramiah  in  that  of 
Josiah.  The  last  chapter  of  canonical  Jewish 
history  is  the  key  to  the  last  chapter  of  its  pro 
phecy. 

The  book  of  Malachi  is  contained  in  four  chap 
ters  in  our  version,  as  in  the  LXX.,  Vulgate,  and 
Peshito-Syriac.  In  the  Hebrew  the  3rd  and  4th 
frrm  but  one  chapter.  The  whole  prophecy  na 
turally  divides  itself  into  three  sections,  in  the  first 
of  which  Jehovah  is  represented  as  the  loving  father 
and  ruler  of  His  people  (i.  2-ii.  9)  ;  in  the  second, 


MALACHI 

as  the  supreme  God  and  Cither  of  all  (ii.  10-16); 
and  in  the  third,  as  their  righteous  and  final  judge 
(ii.  17-end).  These  may  be  again  subdivided  into 
smaller  sections,  each  of  which  follows  a  certain 
order:  first,  a  short  sentence;  then  the  sceptical 
questions  which  might  be  raised  by  thi:  people; 
and,  finally,  their  full  and  triumphant  refutation. 
The  formal  and  almost  scholastic  manner  of  the 
prophecy  seemed  to  Ewald  to  indicate  that  it  was 
rather  delivered  in  writing  than  spoken  publicly. 
But  though  this  may  be  true  of  the  prophecy  in  its 
present  shape,  which  probably  presents  the  sub 
stance  of  oral  discourses,  there  is  no  reason  for  sup 
posing  that  it  was  not  also  pronounced  orally  ic 
public,  like  the  warnings  and  denunciations  of  the 
older  prophets,  however  it  may  differ  from  them  in 
vigour  of  conception  and  high  poetic  diction.  The 
style  of  the  prophet's  language  is  suitable  to  the 
manner  of  his  prophecy.  Smooth  and  easy  to  a 
remarkable  degree,  it  is  the  style  of  the  reasoner 
rather  than  of  the  poet.  We  miss  the  fiery  pro 
phetic  eloquence  of  Isaiah,  and  have  in  its  stead  the 
calm  and  almost  artificial  discourse  of  the  practised 
orator,  carefully  modelled  upon  those  of  the  ancient 
prophets:  thus  blending  in  one  the  characteristics 
of  the  old  prophetical  and  the  more  modern  dia- 
logistic  structures. 

I.  The  first  section  of  the  prophet's  message  con 
sists  of  two  parts ;  the  first  (i.  1-8)  addressed  to 
the  people  generally,  in  which  Jehovah,  by  His 
messenger,  asserts  His  love  for  them,  and  proves  it, 
in  answer  to  their  reply,  "  Wherein  hast  thou  loved 
us?"  by  referring  to  the  punishment  of  Eclom  as 
an  example.     The  second  part  (i.  6-ii.  9)  is  ad 
dressed  especially  to  the  priests,  who  had  despised 
the  name  of  Jehovah,  and  had  been  the  chief  movers 
of  the  defection  from  His  worship  and  covenant. 
They  are  rebuked  for  the  worthlessness  of  their 
sacrifices  and  offerings,  and  their  profanation  of  the 
Temple  thereby  (i.  7-14).   The  denunciation  of  their 
offence  is  followed  by  the  threat  of  punishment  for 
future  neglect  (ii.  1-3),  and  the  character  of  the 
true  priest  is  drawn  as  the  companion  picture  to 
their  own  (ii.  5-9). 

II.  In  the  second  section  (ii.  10-16)  the  prophet 
reproves  the  people  for  their  intermarriages  with 
the  idolatrous  heathen,  and  the  divorces  by  which 
they   separated   themselves   from   their   legitimate 
wives,  who  wept  at  the  altar  of  Jehovah ;  in  viola 
tion  of  the  great  law  of  marriage  which  God,  the 
father  of  all,  established  at  the  beginning. 

III.  The  judgment,  which  the  people  lightly  re 
gard,  is  announced  with  all  solemnity,  ushered  in 
by  the  advent  of  the  Messiah.     The  Lord,  preceded 
by  His  messenger,  shall  come  to  His  Temple  suddenly, 
to  purify  the  land  from  its  iniquity,  and  to  execute 
swift  judgment  upon  those  who  violate  their  duty 
to  God  and  their  neighbour.     The  first  part  (ii. 
17-iii.  5)  of  the  section  terminates  with  the  threat 
ened  punishment;    in  the   second   (iii.  6-12)   the 
faithfulness  of  God  to  his  promises  is  vindicated, 
and  the  people  exhorted   to  repentance,  with  its 
attendant  blessings;    in    the   third   (in.  13-ir.  6) 
they  are  reproved  for  their  want  of  confidence  in 
God,  and  for  confusing  good  and  evil.     The  final 
severance  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked  is 
then  set  forth,  and  the  great  day  of  judgment  is 
depicted,  to  be  announced  by  the  coming  of  Elijah, 
or  John  the  Baptist,  the  forerunner  of  Christ  (Matt, 
xi.  14,  zvis.  10-13). 

The  prophecy  of  Malachi  is  alluded  to  in  the 
N.  T.,  and    its    canonical   authority   thereby  esta- 


MALACHY 

Dlished  (comp.  Mirk  i.  2,  ix.  11.  12;  Luke  i.  17; 
liom.  ix.  13).  "VV.  A.  \V.] 

MAL'ACHY  (Malaccas),  the  prophet  Malachi 
(2  Esd.  i.  40). 

MAL'CHAM  (D3^» :  Me\x«s  5  Alex-  M«*- 
xd/j. :  Molchotn) .  1.  One  of  the  heads  of  the  fathers 
of  Benjamin,  and  son  of  Shaharaim  by  his  wife 
Hodesh  (1  Chr.  viii.  9),  whom  the  Targum  of 
R.  Joseph  identifies  with  Baara. 

2.  (6  fia<rt\cvs  avruv:  Mclchom.~)  The  idol 
Molech,  as  some  suppose  (Zeph.  i.  5).  The  word 
literally  signifies  "  their  king,"  as  the  margin  of 
our  version  gives  it,  and  is  referred  by  Gesenius  to 
an  idol  generally,  as  invested  with  regal  honours  by 
its  worshippers.  He  quotes  Is.  viii.  21,  and  Am.  v. 
26,  in  support  of  this  view,  though  he  refers  Jer. 
xlix.  1,  3,  to  Molech,  (as  the  LXX.,  the  present 
reading  being  evidently  con-upt),  and  regards  Mal- 
cham  as  equivalent  to  Milcom  (1  K.  xi.  5,  &c.). 
Hitzig  (Kurzg.  Hdb.  Jeremia),  while  he  considers 
the  idol  Milcom  as  unquestionably  intended  in  Jer. 
xlix.  1,  renders  Malcham  literally  "their  king"  in 
ver.  3.  The  same  ambiguity  occurs  in  2  Sam. 
xii.  30,  where  David,  after  his  conquest  of  the 
Ammonites,  is  said  bo  have  taken  the  crown  of 
"their  king,"  or  "Malcham"  (see  LXX.  and 
Vulg.  on  1  Chr.  xx.  2).  A  legend  is  told  in 
Jerome's  Quaestiones  Hcbr.  (1  Chr.  xx.  2)  how 
that,  as  it  was  unlawful  for  a  Hebrew  to  touch 
anything  of  gold  or  silver  belonging  to  an  idol, 
Ittai  the  Gittite,  who  was  a  Philistine,  snatched 
the  crown  from  the  head  of  Milcom,  and  gave  it  to 
David,  who  thus  avoided  the  pollution.  [li'TAi ; 
MOLECH.] 

Asrain,    in   2    Sam.    xii.    31,    the    Cethib    has 
L  L 

|3  p^3,  where  the  Keri  is  |3/?f33  (A.  V.  "  through 

the  brick-kiln  ").  Kimchi's  note  on  the  passage  is 
as  follows:  "  i.  e.  in  the  place  of  Molech,  in  the  fire 
which  the  children  of  Ammon  made  their  children 
pass  through  to  Molech;  for  Milcom  was  the  abo 
mination  of  the  children  of  Ammon,  that  is  Molech, 
and  Milcom  and  Malcen  are  one."  [VV.  A.  W.] 

MALCHI'AH  (il»3ta :  Me\x^=  Mclchias). 
1.  A  descendant  of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Levi,  and 
ancestor  of  Asaph  the  minstrel  (\  Chr.  vi.  40). 

2.  (Melclna.')    One  of  the  sons  of  Parosh,  who 
had  married  a  foreign  wife,  and  put  her  away  at 
the  command  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  25).     MELCIIIAS  in 
1  Esd.  ix.  2U. 

3.  (jMffc/iws.)    Enumerated  among  the  sons  of 
Harim,   who  lived   in  the  time  of  Ezra,  and  had 
intermarried   witli    the   people   of  the  land  (Ezr. 
x.  31).     In  1  Esd.  x.  32  he  appears  as  MELCIIIAS, 
and  in  Neh.  iii.  11  as  MALCHIJAH  4. 

4.  Son  of  Rechab,  and  ruler  of  the  circuit  or 
environs  of  Bethhaccerem.     He   took  part  in  the 
rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Nehemiah, 
and  repaired  the  dung-gate  (Neh.  iii.  14"i. 

5.  "  The  goldsmith's  son,"  who  assisted  Nehe 
miah  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem    (Neh. 
iii.  31).     The  word  rendered '"  the  goldsmith      is 
taken  as  a  proper  name  by  the  LXX.  (5ape<£i),  and 
in  the  Peshito-Syriac  Malchiah  is  called  "  the  son 
of  Zepliar.iah."     The  A.  V.  has  followed  the  Vul 
gate  and  Jarchi. 

6.  (MtA.\ias;  Alex.  MeA.x«'as:  Mclc/tici.)'  One 
of  the  priests  who  stood  at  the  left  hand  of  Ezra 

cii  he  read  the  law  to  the  people  in  the  street 


MALCHIJAH 


213 


tjetore  the  water-gate  (Neh.  viii.  4).     In    1  Esd 
jt.  44  he  is  called  MELCIIIAS. 

7.  A  priest,  the  father  of  Pashur  =  MALCHIJAH  1 
(Neh.  xi.  12  ;   Jer.  xxxviii.  1),  and   MELCHIAH 
(Jer.  xxi.  1). 

8.  (-in'Sta-)    The  son  of  Ham-melech  (or  "  the 
king's  son,"  as  it  is  translated  in  1  K.  xxii.  26  ; 
2  Chr.  xxviii.  7),  into  whose  dungeon  or  cistern 
Jeremiah    was   cast   (Jer.  xxxviii.   6).     The   title 
"  king's  son  "  is  applied  to  Jerahmeel  (Jer.  xxxvi. 
26),  who  was  among  those  commissioned  by  the 
king  to  take  prisoners  Jeremiah  and  Baruch;    to 
Joash,  who  appears  to  have  held  an  office  inferior 
to  that  of  the  governor  of  the  city,  and  to  whose 
custody  Micaiah  was  committed    by  Ahab  (1  K. 
xxii.    26)  ;    and  to   Maaseiah  who  was   slain   by 
Zichri  the  Ephraimite  in  the  invasion  of  Judah  by 
Pekah,  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  7). 
It  would  seem  from  these  passages  that  the  title 
"king's  son"  was   official,   like   that   of  "king's 
mother,"  and  applied  to  one  of  the  royal  family, 
who  exercised  functions  somewhat  similar  to  those  of 
Potiphar  in  the  court  of  Pharaoh.        [W.  A.  W.] 


MAL'CHIEL  (N'1         :  MeAx'^>  Gen.  xlvi. 

17  ;  MeAX'^A.  in  Num.  and  Chr.  ;  as  Alex,  in  all 
cases  :  Melchief),  the  son  of  Beriah,  the  son  of  Asher, 
and  ancestor  of  the  family  of  the  MALCHIELITES 
(Num.  xxvi.  45).  In  1  Chr.  vii.  31  he  is  called 
the  father,  that  is  founder,  of  Birzavith  or  Berazith, 
as  is  the  reading  of  the  Targum  of  R.  Joseph. 
Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  7,  §4)  reckons  him  with  Heber 
among  the  six  sons  of  Asher,  thus  making  up  the 
number  of  Jacob's  children  and  grandchildren  to 
seventy,  without  reckoning  great-grandchildren. 


MAL'CHIELITES,  THE  (K'sn  :  MeA- 
:  Mclchielitae),  the  descendants  of  Malchiel, 
the  grandson  of  Asher  (Num.  xxvi.  45). 

MALCHI'JAH    (iV3ta  :     M*AX«'a  ;     Alex. 

MeAxias:  Melchius).  1.  A  priest,  the  father  of 
Pashur  (1  Chr.  ix.  12)  ;  the  same  as  MALCHIAH 
7,  and  MELCHIAH. 

2.  (Melchia.)  A  priest,  chief  of  the  fifth  of  the 
twenty-four  courses  appointed  by  David  (1   Chr. 
xxiv.  9). 

3.  ("A<ra/3ta  :    Jammebias.)    An    Israelite   lay 
man  of  the  sons  of  Parosh,  who  at  Ezra's  command 
put  away  his  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  25).     In  1  Esd. 
ix.  26  he  is  called  ASIBIAS,  which  agrees  with  the 
reading  of  the  LXX. 

4.  (MeAxi'os  ;    Alex.    M«Ax«'as:     Melchias.} 
Son,    that    is,   descendant   of  Harim,    who    with 
Hashub  repaired  the  tower  of  the  furnaces  when 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem  was   rebuilt  by  Nehemiah 
(Neh.    iii.    11).      He    is    probably   the    same   as 
MALCHIAH  3. 

5.  (MeAxi'a  ;    Alex.    M«A.x«'a-)     One   of  the 
priests   who    sealed   the  covenant   with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  x.  3j.     It  seems  probable  that  the  narccs  in 
the  list  referred  to  arc  rather  those  of  families  thui 
of  individuals  (timp.  1  Chr.  xxiv.  7-18,  and  Neil. 
xii.  1-7),  and  in  this  case  Malchijah  in  Neh.  x.  3 
would  be  the  saue  with  the  head  of  the  fifth  course 
of  priests  =  MALCHIJAH  2. 

6.  (om.  in  Vat.  MS.;  Alex.  Mc\x6('as:  ^el- 
c/tia.)  C:;e  of  the  priests  who  assisted  in  the  solemn 
dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under  Ezra  au«' 
Nehcmiah  '  NVh   xii   42). 


214  MALCHIKAM 

MALCU1RAM  (DTs'pD:  M 

chiram),  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeconiah,  o/  Jehoiachin, 
the  last  but  one  of  the  kings  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  18). 

MAL/CHI-8HUA 


Itfelchisuc),  one  of  the  sons  of  king  Saul.  His  posi 
tion  in  the  family  cannot  be  exactly  determined. 
In  the  two  genealogies  of  Saul's  house  preserved  in 
Chronicles  he  is  given  as  the  second  son  next  below 
Jonathan  (1  Chr.  viii.  33,  ix.  39).  But  in  the 
jvccouut  of  Saul's  offspring  in  1  Samuel  he  is  named 
third  —  Ishui  being  between  him  and  Jonathan  (1 
Sam.  xiv.  49),  and  on  the  remaining  occasion  the 
same  order  is  preserved,  but  Abinadab  is  substi 
tuted  for  Ishui  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  2).  In  both  these 
latter  passages  the  name  is  erroneously  given  in  the 
A.  V.  as  Melchi-shua.  Nothing  is  known  of  Mal- 
chi-shua  beyond  the  fact  that  he  fell,  with  his  two 
brothers,  and  before  his  father  in  the  early  part  of 
the  battle  of  Gilboa.  [G.] 

MAL'CHUS  (Ma\x°*  =  "W®,  Malluch,  in 
1  Chr.  vi.  44,  Neh.  x.  4,  &e.  ;  LXX.  Ma\eix  or 
MaAoify;  and  Joseph.  Md\x<>s,  Ant.  xiii.  5,  §1, 
xiv.  14,  §1)  is  the  name  of  the  servant  of  the  high- 
priest,  whose  light  ear  Peter  cut  off  at  the  time  of 
the  Saviour's  apprehension  in  the  garden.  See  the 
narrative  in  Matt.  xxvi.  51  ;  Mark  xiv.  47  ;  Luke 
xxii.  49-51  ;  John  xviii.  10.  He  was  the  personal 
servant  (SoDXos)  of  the  high-priest,  and  not  one  of 
the  bailiffs  or  apparitors  (forrjperTjs)  of  the  San 
hedrim.  The  high-priest  intended  is  Caiaphas  no 
doubt  (though  Annas  is  called  bpxieptvs  in  the 
same  connexion)  ;  for  John,  who  was  j*rsonally 
known  to  the  former  (John  xviii.  15),  is  the  only 
one  of  the  evangelists  who  gives  the  name  of  Mal- 
chus.  This  servant  was  probably  stepping  forward 
Ht  the  moment  with  others  to  handcuff  or  pinion 
Jesus,  when  the  zealous  Peter  struck  at  him  with 
his  sword.  The  Wow  was  meant  undoubtedly  to 
be  more  effective,  but  reached  only  the  ear.  It 
may  be  as  Stier  remarks  (Reden  Jesu,  vi.  268), 
That  the  man  seeing  the  danger,  threw  his  head  or 
body  to  the  left,  so  as  to  expose  the  right  ear  more 
than  the  other.  The  allegation  that  the  writers 
are  inconsistent  with  each  other,  because  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  John  say  either  urrlov,  or  wrdpwv  (as  if 
that  meant  the  lappet  or  tip  of  the  ear),  while  Luke 
says  ols,  is  groundless.  The  Greek  of  the  New  Tes 
tament  age,  like  the  modern  Romaic,  made  no  distinc 
tion  often  between  the  primitive  and  diminutive.  In 
fact,  Luke  himself  exchanges  the  one  term  for  the 
other  in  this  very  narrative.  The  Saviour,  as  His 
pursuers  were  about  to  seize  Him,  asked  to  be  left  free 
for  a  moment  longer  (iarf  ?ws  roirrot;),  and  that 
moment  He  used  in  restoring  the  wounded  man  to 
soundness.  The  afydntvos  rov  w-rlou  may  indicate 
(  which  is  not  forbidden  by  i<t>e"i\(v,  airtKotytv)  that 
the  ear  still  adhered  slightly  to  its  place.  It  is  no 
ticeable  that  Luke  the  physician  is  the  only  one  of 
the  writers  who  mentions  the  act  of  healing.  It  is 
•i  touching  remembrance  that  this  was  our  Lord's 
last  miracle  for  the  relief  of  human  suffering.  The 
hands  which  had  been  stretched  forth  so  often  to 
heal  and  bless  mankind,  were  then  bound,  and  His 
beneficial  ministry  in  that  form  of  its  exercise  was 
finished  for  ever.  [H.  B.  H.] 


MALLOWS 

MAL'ELEEL  U«laA*X«^\:  MaMett).  The 
same  as  MAHALALEEL,  the  son  of  Cainan  (Luke 
iii.  37  ;  Gen.  v.  12,  marg.). 

MAL'LOS,  THEY  OF  (MaAA<6Ta«:  Mai- 
totae),  who,  with  the  people  of  Tarsus,  revoltc-I 
from  Antiochus  Epiphanes  because  he  had  b* 
stowed  them  on  one  of  his  concubines  ('2  Mace,  iv 
HO).  The  absence  of  the  king  from  Antioch  to  put 
down  the  insurrection,  gave  the  infamous  Menelatis 
the  high-priest,  an  opportunity  of  purloining  some 
of  the  sacred  vessels  from  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem 
(ver.  32,  39),  an  act  which  finally  led  to  the  mur 
der  of  the  good  Onias  (ver.  34,  35).  Mallos  was  ar 
important  city  of  Cilicia,  lying  at  the  mouth,  of  th« 
Pyramus  (Seihun),  on  the  shore  of  the  Mediterra 
nean,  N.E.  of  Cyprus,  and  about  20  miles  from 
Tarsus  (  Ters&s).  (See  Diet .  of  Geography.)  [G.] 

MALLO'THI  OrtfeD :  MoAA.tf ;  Alex.  Mca- 
A.w0i,  and  MfXATjfli' :  Melloth\],  a  Kohathite,  one 
of  the  fourteen  sons  of  Heman  the  singer,  and  chief 
of  the  nineteenth  course  of  twelve  Levites  into  which 
the  Temple  choir  was  divided  (1  Chr.  xxv.  4,  26). 

MALLOWS Otl j>O,mma/foacA:  *&\I(ICL:  herbae 
et  arborum  cortices').  By  the  Hebrew  word  we  are 
no  doubt  to  understand  some  species  of  Orache,  and 
in  all  probability  the  Atriplex  halimus  of  botanists. 
It  occurs  only  in  Job  xxx.  4,  where  the  patriarch 
laments  that  he  is  exposed  to  the  derision  of  the 
lowest  of  the  people,  "  whose  fathers  he  would  have 
disdained  to  have  set  with  the  dogs  of  his  Hock," 
and  who  from  poverty  were  obliged  to  seek  their 
sustenance  in  desert  places  amongst  wild  herbs — 
"  who  pluck  off  the  sea  orache  near  the  hedges,* 
and  eat  the  bitter  roots  of  the  Spanish  Broom." 


Krcm  n^D(Arab-  ^Juo).  "salt-" 

Ud  edition*  of  the  text  read  aAi/uia,  instead  o 


Jcw'i  Mallow  (Oordunu  olttoriiu). 

Some  writers,  as  R.  Levi  (Job  xxx.)  and  Luther, 
with  the  Swedish  and  the  old  Danish  versions,  hence 
understood  "  nettles "  to  be  denoted  by  MaUuach, 
this  troubles<me  weed  having  been  from  time  im 
memorial  an  article  of  occasional  diet  amongst  th ! 

as  from  i  priv.  and  Atftw,  "  hunger."  So  ChrysosUwr 
iAi/xa.  /So-ran,  -i?  effTif,  Tax"  wA»)poO<Ta  rov  Mfarftti 

K  fVb>~'V?y  s°n"'  translate  "  :n  the  branch."   Ste  LeV 
Comment,  on  job.  I.  c 


MALLOWS 

poor,  even  as  it  is  amongst  ourselves  at  this  day 
(Plin.  N.  H.  xxi.  15 ;  Athen.  iv.  c.  1 5).  Others  have 
conjectured  that  some  species  of  "  mallow  "  (malva) 
is  intended,  as  Deodatius,  and  the  A.  V.  Sprengcl 
(Hist.  Rei  herb.  14)  identifies  the  "  Jew's  mallow" 
(Corchorus  olitorius)  with  the  Malluac/i,  and  Lady 
Calloott  (Script.  Herb.  p.  255)  is  of  a  similar  opi 
nion.  "  In  Purchase's  Pilgrims,"  observes  this 
writer,  "  there  is  a  letter  from  Master  William  BiJ- 
dulph,  who  was  travelling  from  Aleppo  to  Jeru- 
kalem  in  1*500,  in  which  he  says,  '  we  saw  many 
poor  people  gathering  mallows  and  three-leaved 
grasse,  and  asked  them  what  they  did  with  it,  and 
they  answered  that  it  was  all  their  food  and  they 
did  eate  it'"  (see  also  Harmer's  Observations,  iii. 
166).  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  same  mallow  is 
still  eaten  in  Arabia  and  Palestine,  the  leaves  and 
pods  being  used  as  a  pot-herb.  Dr.  Shaw  (  Travels, 
i.  258,  8vo.  1808)  mentions  Mellow-Keaks,  which 
he  says  is  the  same  with  the  Corchorus,  as  being 
cultivated  in  the  gardens  of  Barbary,  and  draws  at 
tention  to  the  resemblance  of  this  word  with  the 
Mattuach  of  Job,  but  he  thinks  "  some  other  plant 
of  a  more  saltish  taste  "  is  rather  intended.  The 
Atriplex  halimus  has  undoubtedly  the  best  claim 
to  represent  the  MaUuach,  as  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii. 
223),  and  before  him  Drusius  (Quacst.  Hebr.  i.  qu. 
17)  have  proved.  Celsius  (ffierob.  ii.  97),  Killer 
Hierophijt.  i.  457),  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.  in  Job 
xxx.  4,  and  Botany  of  the  Bible,  p.  115),  and  Dr. 
Kitto  (Pictor.  Bible  on  Jolt)  adopt  this  opinion.  The 
Gn*k  word  used  by  the  LXX.  is  applied  by  Diosco- 
rides  (i.  c.  1 20)  to  the  Atriplex  halimus,  as  Sprengel 


MAMRE 


216 


Atrtflex  tottrniu. 

(Comment,  in  1.  c.)  has  shown.  Dioscorides  says  of 
this  plant,  that  "  it  is  a  shrub  which  is  used  for 
hedges,  and  resembles  the  Rhamnus,  being  white  and 
without  thorns  ;  its  leaves  are  like  those  of  the  olive, 
but  broader  and  smoother,  they  are  cooked  as  vege 
tables  •  the  plant  grows  near  the  sea,  and  in  hedges." 
See  ils->  the  quotation  from  the  Arabian  botanist, 


Aben-Beitar  (in  Bochart,  /.  c.  above),  who  says  that 
the  plant  which  Dioscorides  calls  "  halimus  "  is  the 
same  with  that  which  the  Syrians  call  Maluch, 
Galen  (vi.  22),  Serapion  in  Bochart,  and  Prosper 
Alpinus  (De  Plant.  Aegypt.  cxxviii.  45). 

The  Hebrew  name,  like  the  Greek,  has  reference 
either  to  the  locality  where  the  plant  grows  —  "  no- 
men  graecum  a  loco  natali  a\i/j.(f,  ira.pa8a\affffltft" 
says  Sprengel  —  or  to  its  saline  taste.  The  Atriplex 
halimus  is  a  shrub  from  four  to  five  feet  high  with 
many  thick  branches  ;  the  leaves  are  rather  scur  to 
the  taste  ;  the  flowers  are  purple  and  ver/  smail  ; 
it  grows  on  the  sea-coast  in  Greece,  Arabia,  Syria, 
&c.,  and  belongs  to  the  natural  Order  Chenopo* 
diaceae.  Atriplex  hortensis,  or  garden  Orach,  if 
often  cooked  and  eaten  as  spinach,  to  which  it  is  by 
some  persons  preferred.  [W.  H.] 

MALL'UCH  (^O  :  Mo\«x:  Maloch).  1.  A 
^evite  of  the  family  of  Merari,  and  ancestor  of 
Ethan  the  singer  (1  Chr.  vi.  44). 

2.  (Ma\oi>x  '•  Mclluch.}     One   of  the   sous  of 
Hani,  who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  com 
mand  (Ezr.  x.  29).     He  was  probably  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  and  line  of  Pharez  (see  1  Chr.  ix.  4).    In 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  ix.  30,  he  is  called  MA- 

MUCHUS. 

3.  (BoAoi5x  ;  Alex.  Ma\ovx:  Maloch.}    One  ol 
the  descendants  of  Harim  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  who 
had  married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  32). 

4.  (MoAoi^x  :  Mettuch.')     A  priest  or  family  of 
priests  who  signed  the  covenant  with   Nehemiah 
(Neh.  x.  4). 

5.  One  of  the  "  heads"  of  the  people  who  signed 
the  covenant  on  the  same  occasion  (Neh.  x.  27). 

6.  One  of  the  families  of  priests  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  2)  ;  probably  the  same 
as  No.  4.    It  was  represented  in  the  time  of  Juiakiin 
by  Jonathan  (ver.  14).    The  same  as  MELIOU. 

MAMAI'AS  (S,a.fjLo.ia:  Samoa"),  apparently  the 
same  with  SHEMAIAH  in  Ezr.  viii.  16.  In  the 
Geneva  version  of  1  Esdi.  viii.  44,  it  is  written 
Samaian. 


MAM'MON  (ji»E>  :  Majueoiw  :  Matt.  vi.  24, 
and  Luke  xvi.  9),  a  word  which  often  occurs  in  the 
Chaldee  Targums  of  Onkelos,  and  later  writers, 
and  in  the  Syriac  Version,  and  which  signifies 
"  riches."  This  meaning  of  the  word  is  given  by 
Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc.  iv.  33,  and  by  Augustine 
and  Jerome  commenting  on  St.  Matthew  :  Au 
gustine  adds  that  it  was  in  use  as  a  Punic,  and 
Jerome  adds  that  it  was  a  Syriac  word.  There  is 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  idol  received  divine 
honours  in  the  east  under  this  name.  It  is  used  in 
St.  Matthew  as  a  personification  of  riches.  The 
derivation  of  the  word  is  discussed  by  A.  PfeiH'er 
Opera,  p.  474.  [W.  T.  B.] 

MAMNITANAI'MUS(MoMi'*Tc£>'o^os:  Ma- 
thaneus),  a  name  which  appears  in  the  lists  of 
1  Esdr.  ix.  34,  and  occupies  the  place  of  "  Matta- 
niah,  Mattenai,"  in  Ezr.  x.  37,  of  which  it  is  «, 
corruption,  as  is  still  more  evident,  from  the  form 
"  Mamnimatanaius,"  in  which  it  appears  in  the 
Geneva  version. 

MAMKE  (KTOO  :  Ma^p-f,  ,  Joseph.  Ma^- 
f}pr)s  :  Mamre),  an  ancient  Amorite,"  who  with 


»  The  LXX.,  except  in  xiv.  24,  give  me  ruune  with  (hi 
feminine  article.  They  do  the  some  in  other  ctaes ;  e.  g 
Ba.il. 


21(5 


MAMUCHUS 


who  with  his  brothers  Eshcol  and  Aner  was  in 
allhnce  with  Abrarn  (Gen.  xiy.  13,  24),  and  under 
the  shade  of  whose  oak-grove  the  patriarch  dwelt 
in  the  interval  between  his  residence  at  Bethel  and 
•t  Beeisheba  (xiii.  18,  xviii.  1).  The  personality 
of  this  ancient  chieftain,  unmistakeably  though 
alightiy  brought  outfc  in  the  narrative  just  cited — 
•«  narrative  regarded  by  Ewald  and  others  as  one 
of  the  most  ancient,  if  not  the  most  ancient,  docu 
ments  in  the  Bible — is  lost  in  the  subsequent  chap 
ters.  Mamre  is  there  a  mere  local  appellation  — 
"  Mamre  which  faces  Machpelah"  (xxiii.  17,  19, 
xxv.  9,  xlix.  30, 1.  13).  It  does  not  appear  beyond 
the  book  of  Genesis.  ESHCOL  survived  to  the  date 
of  the  conquest — survives  possibly  still — but  Mamre 
and  Aner  have  vanished,  at  least  their  names  have 
not  yet  been  met  with.  If  the  field  and  cave  of 
MACHPELAH  were  on  the  hill  which  forms  the 
north-eastern  side  of  the  valley  of  Hebron — and  we 
need  not  doubt  that  they  were— then  Mamre,  as 
"facing"  them,  must  have  been  on  the  opposite  slope, 
where  the  residence  of  the  governor  now  stands. 

In  the  Vulgate  of  Jud.  ii.  14  (A.  V.  ii.  24), 
"  ton-ens  Mambre  "  is  found  for  the  Abronas  of  the 
original  text.  [G.] 

MAMU'CHUS  (MajuoOxos  '•  Maluchus),  the 
same  as  MALLUCH  2(1  Esdr.  ix.  30).  The  LXX. 
was  probably  MaXXoDxos  at  first,  which  would 
easily  be  corrupted  into  the  present  reading. 

MAN.  Four  Hebrew  terms  are  rendered  "  man  " 
in  the  A.  V.  1.  Adam,  DIN.  (A)  The  name  of  the 

man  created  in  the  image  of  God.  It  appears  to  be 
derived  from  adorn*  "  he  or  it  was  red  or  ruddy," 
like  Edom.b  The  epithet  rendered  by  us  "  red  "  has 
a  very  wide  signification  in  the  Semitic  languages, 
and  must  not  be  limited  to  the  English  sense.  Thus 
the  Arabs  speak,  in  both  the  literary  and  the  vulgar 
language,  of  a  "  red  "  camel,  using  the  term  ahmarf 
their  common  word  for  "  red,"  just  as  they  speak 
of  a  "  green  "  ass,  meaning  in  the  one  case  a  shade 
of  brown,  and  in  the  other  a  kind  of  dingy  gray. 
When  they  apply  the  term  "  red "  to  man,  they 
always  mean  by  it  "  fair."  The  name  Adam  has  been 
supposed  by  some  to  be  derived  from  addmd/i,A 
"  earth,"  or  "  ground,"  because  Adam  was  formed 
of  "  dust  of  the  ground""  (Gen.  ii.  7)  ;  but  the  earth 
or  ground  derived  this  appellation  from  its  brown- 
ness,  which  the  Hebrews  would  call  "  redness."  In 
Egypt,  where  the  alluvial  earth  of  the  Nile-valley 
is  of  a  blackish-brown  colour,  the  name  of  the 
country,  KEM,  signifies  "  black "  in  the  ancient 


MAN 

Egyptian  and  in  Coptic.  [Ecvi-T.]  Others  have 
connected  the  name  of  Adam  with  demuth,*  *'  like 
ness,"  from  ddmdhjf  "  he  or  it  was  or  became  like/ 
on  account  of  the  use  of  this  word  in  both  nar 
ratives  of  his  creation :  "  And  God  said,  Let  us 
make  Adam  in  our  image,  after  our  likeness,"* 
(Gen.  i.  26).  "  In  the  day  of  God's  creating  Adam, 
in  the  likeness1  of  God  made  He  him"  (v.  1). 
It  should  be  observed  that  the  usual  opinion  that 
by  "image"  and  "likeness"  moral  qualities  are 
denoted,  is  perfectly  in  accordance  with  Semitic 
phraseology  :  the  contraiy  idea,  arising  from  a 
misapprehension  of  anthropomorphism,  is  utterly 
repugnant  to  it.  This  derivation  seems  improbable, 
although  perhaps  more  agreeable  than  that  from 
ddam  with  the  derivations  of  antediluvian  names 
known  to  us.  (B)  The  name  of  Adam  and  his 
wife  (v.  1,2:  comp.  i.  27,  in  which  case  there 
is  nothing  to  shew  that  more  than  one  pair  is 
intended).  (C)  A  collective  noun,  indeclinable, 
having  neither  construct  state,  plural,  nor  feminine 
form,  used  to  designate  any  or  all  of  the  descendants 
of  Adam. 

2.  Ish,  K*X,  apparently  softened  from  a  form  un 
used  in  the  singular  by  the  Hebrews,  enesh*  "  man," 
"  woman,"  "  men."     It  corresponds  to  the  Arabic 
ins,™  "  man,"  t'nsdn,'  softened  form  ccsdn°  "  a 
man,"  "  a  woman,"  and  "  man  "  collectively  like 
ins ;  and  perhaps  to  the  ancient  Egyptian  as,  "  a 
noble."  P  The  variant  Enosh  (mentioned  in  the  note), 
occurs  as  the  proper  name  of  a  son  of  Seth  and 
grandson  of  Adam  (Gen.  iv.  26  ;  1  Chr  i.  1).     In 
the  A.  V.  it  is  written  Enos.    It  might  be  supposed 
that  this  was  a  case  like  that  of  Adam's  name  ; 
but  this  cannot  be  admitted,  since  the  valiant  Ish 
and  the  fern,  form  Tshshdh  arc  used  before  the  birth 
of  Enosh,  as  in   the  cases  of  the  naming  of  Eve 
(Gen.  ii.  23)  and  Cain  (iv.  1).     If  it  be  objected 
that  we  must  not  lay  too  much  stress  upon  verbal 
criticism,  we  reply  that  if  so  no  stress  can  be  laid 
upon  the  name  of  Enosh,  which  might  even  be  a 
translation,  and  that  such  forms  as  Methusael  and 
Methuselah,  which   have   the  characteristics  of  a 
primitive  state  of  Hebrew,  oblige  us  to  lay  the 
greatest  stress  upon  verbal  criticism.! 

3.  Geber,  "133,  "  a  man,"  from  gdbar*  "  to  be 

strong,"  generally  with  reference  to  his  strength, 
corresponding  to  vir  and  oHjp. 

4.  Methim,  D^HO,1  "men,"  always  masculine. 
The  singular  is  to  be  traced  in  the  antediluvian 


b  In  the  Jewish  traditions  he  appears  as  encouraging 
Abraham  to  undergo  the  pain  of  circumcision,  from 
which  his  brothers  would  have  dissuaded  him—  by  a  re- 
ferenco  to  the  deliverance  he  had  already  experienced 
from  far  greater  trials—  the  furnace  of  Nimrod  and  the 
sword  of  Chedorlaomer.  (Beer,  Leben  Abraliams,  36.) 


DIN 


b  tflK. 


nsy. 


» tinwjs. 

k  K'JN  ;    fein.    H^N>  pi.    D^BON.'    variant  enOsh, 
;,  which  some  take  to  be  the  primitive  form. 
o  o  ^o 


P  It  has  been  derived  from  t?3N>  "  he  was  sick,"  so  as 
to  mean  weak,  mortal ;  to  which  Gesenius  objects  that 
this  verb  comes  from  the  theme  $}  (Lex.  s.  v.  tiON) 
The  opposite  signification,  strength  and  robustness,  has 
been  suggested  with  a  reference  to  the  theme  t^N  (Fiirst, 
Concord,  e.  v.  B^N)-  it  seems  more  reasonable  to  sup 
pose,  with  Gesenius,  Unit  this  is  a  primitive  word  (Lex. 
s.  v.  E^N)-  Perhaps  the  idea  of  being  may  lie  at  it* 
foundation. 

i  The  naming  of  Cain  (]*$)  may  suggest  how  Enosh 
cnme  to  bear  a  name  signifying  "  man."  "  I  have  ob 
tained  a  man  (B^N  *IV3p)  from  the  LORD"  (Gen.  iv.  1). 

'  133. 

-  T 

*  Defective  DJ"]P>  from  an  unused  singular,  HO 
or  J"ID- 


MANAEN 

proper  names  Methusael  and  Methuselah.*  Per 
haps  it  may  be  derived  from  the  root  muth,  "  he 
Jied,"11  iu  which  case  its  use  would  be  very  ap 
propriate  in  Is  xli.  14,  "  Fear  not,  thou  worm 
Jacob,  ye  men  of  Israel." x  It'  this  conjecture  be 
admitted,  this  word  would  correspond  to  Ppor6s, 
•uid  might  be  read  "  mortal." 

MAN'AEN  (Mavafa :  Manahcn)  is  mentioned 
in  Acts  xiii.  1  as  one  of  the  teachers  and  prophets 
in  the  church  at  Antioch  at  the  time  of  the  appoint 
ment  of  Saul  and  Barnabas  as  missionaries  to  the 
heathen..  He  is  not  known  out  of  this  passage.  The 
name  signifies  consoler  (Dn3O,  2  K.  xv.  17,  &c.)  ; 

and  both  that  and  his  relation  to  Herod  render  it 
quite  certain  that  he  was  a  Jew.  The  Herod  with 
whom  he  is  said  to  have  been  brought  up  (ffvvrpo- 
<pos)  could  not  have  been  Herod  Agrippa  II.  (Acts 
xxv.  13),  for  as  he  was  only  seventeen  years  old  at 
the  time  of  the  death  of  his  father,  Herod  Agrippa  I. 
in  A.D.  44  (Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  9,  §1),  a  comrade  of 
that  age  would  have  been  too  young  to  be  so  pro 
minent  as  a  teacher  at  Antioch  as  Manaen  was  at 
the  date  of  Paul's  first  missionary  journey  (Acts 
xiii.  3).  The  Herod  in  question  must  have  been 
Herod  Antipas,  under  whose  jurisdiction  the  Saviour 
as  a  Galilean  lived,  and  who  beheaded  John  the 
Baptist.  Since  this  Antipas  was  older  than  Arche- 
laus,  who  succeeded  Herod  the  Great  soon  after  the 
birth  of  Christ,  Manaen  (his  <riWpo</>os)  must  have 
been  somewhat  advanced  in  years  in  A.D.  44,  when 
he  appears  before  us  in  Luke's  history — older  cer 
tainly  than  forty-five  or  fifty,  as  stated  in  Lange's 
Bibelwerk  (v.  182).  The  point  of  chief  interest 
relating  to  him  concerns  the  sense  of  trvvrpo<f>of, 
which  the  historian  regarded  as  sufficiently  remark 
able  to  connect  with  his  name.  We  have  a  learned 
discussion  of  this  question  in  Walch's  Dissertationes 
in  Acta  Apostolorum  (de  Menachemo,  ii.  199-252). 
For  the  value  of  this  treatise  see  Tholuck's  Glaub- 
wiirdigkeit,  p.  167. 

The  two  following  are  the  principal  views  that 
have  been  advanced,  and  have  still  their  advocates. 
One  is  that  ffvvrpoipos  means  comrade,  associate, 
or,  more  strictly,  one  brought  up,  educated  with 
another.  This  is  the  more  frequent  sense  of  the 
word,  and  Calvin,  Grotius,  Schott,  Baumgarten, 
and  others,  adopt  it  here.  It  was  very  common  in 
ancient  times  for  persons  of  rank  to  associate  other 
children  with  their  own,  for  the  purpose  of  sharing 
their  amusements  (hence  trvjuirai/cTopes  in  Xenoph 
Cyropaed.  i.  3,  §14)  and  their  studies,  and  thus 
exciting  them  to  greater  activity  and  emulation 
Josephus,  Plutarch,  Polybius,  and  others  speak  o 
this  custom.  Walch  shows  it  to  have  existei 
among  the  Medes,  Persians,  Egyptians,  Greeks,  am 
Romans.  Herod  might  have  adopted  it  from  th 
Romans,  whom  he  was  so  inclined  to  imitate  (see 
Raphel's  Annotationes,  ii.  80,  and  Wetstein,  at 
Acta  xiii.  1). 

The  other  view  is  that  avvrpofyos  denotes  foster 
brother,  brought  up  at  the  same  breast  (6/n.o 
ya.\anTos,  collactaneus),  and  as  so  taken  Manaen' 
mother,  or  the  woman  who  reared  him,  would  have 
been  also  Herod's  nurse.  So  Kuinoel,  Olshausen 
De  Wette,  Alford,  and  others.  Walch's  conclusion 


MANAEN 


217 


not  correctly  represented  by  some  recent  •writers), 
ombines  in  a  measure  these  two  explanations.  He 
hinks  that  Manaen  was  educated  in  Herod's  family 
long  with  Antipas  and  some  of  his  other  children, 
,nd  at  the  same  time  that  he  stood  in  the  stricter 
elation  to  Antipas  which  ffvvrpo<pos  denotes  a? 
ollactaneus.  He  lays  particular  stress  on  the  state 
ment  of  Josephus  (Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3)  that  the  bro- 
,hers  Antipas  and  Archelaus  were  educated  in  a 
trivate  way  at  Rome  ('Apx*'^"05  8e  KCL\  'Airforcu 
iirl  Pd>fj.r]s  irapd  nvi  ISturri  rpo(pas  e?x°'')>  though 
IB  does  not  deem  it  necessary  to  deny  that  before 
.heirdepartuie  thither  Manaen  may  have  enjoyed 
he  same  course  of  discipline  and  instruction  (avv- 
rpotyos  in  that  sense)  as  the  two  brothers,  who  are 
lot  likely  to  have  been  separated  in  their  earlier, 
any  more  than  in  their  later  education.  Yet  as 
tfanaen  is  called  the  ffvvrpotyos  of  Herod  only, 
Walch  suggests  that  there  may  have  been  the  ad 
ditional  tie  in  their  case  which  resulted  from  their 
laving  had  a  common  nurse. 

It  is  a  singular  circumstance,  to  say  the  least, 
that  Josephus  (Ant.  xv.  10,  §5)  mentions  a  certain 
Manaem  (Moj/aTj/ios),  who  was  in  high  repute  among 
the  Essenes  for  wisdom  and  sanctity,  and  who  fore 
told  to  Herod  the  Great,  in  early  life,  that  he  was 
destined  to  attain  royal  honours.  After  the  fulfil 
ment  of  the  prediction  the  king  treated  the  prophet 
with  special  favour,  and  honoured  the  entire  sect  on 
lis  account  (irdvras  owr'  tKfivov  robs  'Effffrfvovs 

/jtuv  8j€T€X«).  There  was  a  class  of  the  Essenes 
who  had  families  (others  had  not) ;  and  it  has  been 
conjectured  with  some  plausibility  that,  as  one  of  the 
results  of  Herod's  friendship  for  the  lucky  soothsayer, 
he  may  have  adopted  one  of  his  sons  (who  took  the 
father's  name),  so  far  as  to  receive  him  into  his 
family,  and  make  him  the  companion  of  his  children 
(see  Walch,  p.  234,  &c.).  Lightfoot  surmises 
(florae  Hebr.  ii.  726)  that  the  Manaen  of  Josephus 
may  be  the  one  mentioned  in  the  Acts ;  but  the 
disparity  between  his  age  and  that  of  Herod  the 
Great,  to  say  nothing  of  other  difficulties,  puts  that 
supposition  out  of  the  question. 

The  precise  interest  which  led  Luke  to  recal  the 
Herodian  connexion  is  not  certain.  Meyer's  sug 
gestion,  that  it  may  have  been  the  contrast  between 
the  early  relationship  and  Manaen's  later  Christian 
position  (though  he  makes  it  of  the  first  only), 
applies  to  one  sense  of  ff&vrpotyos  as  well  as  the 
other.  A  far-fetched  motive  need  not  be  sought. 
Even  such  a  casual  relation  to  the  great  Jewish 
family  of  the  age  (whether  it  was  that  of  a  foster- 
brother  or  a  companion  of  princes)  was  peculiar  and 
interesting,  and  would  be  mentioned  without  any 
special  object  merely  as  a  part  of  the  individual's 
history.  Walch's  citations  show  that  ffvvrpo<pos, 
as  used  of  such  intimacies  (ffwrpotyiai),  was  a  title 
greatly  esteemed  among  the  ancients ;  that  it  was 
often  borne  through  life  as  a  sort  of  proper  name; 
and  was  recounted  among  the  honours  of  the  epitaph 
after  death.  It  is  found  repeatedly  on  ancient  monu 
ments. 

It  may  be  added  that  Manaen,  as  a  resident 
in  Palestine  (he  may  have  been  one  of  Herod's 
courtiers  till  his  banishment  to  Gaul),  could  hardly 
fail  to  have  had  some  personal  knowledge  of  the 


where  the  word  is  not 

m  frcsrnlus  would  make  it,  changed  by  the  construct  state 
but  has  a  case-ending  ."I,  to  be  compared  to  the  Arabic  cast, 
^ding  of  the  nominative,  un,  u,  £>,  3. 

'•  The  conjecture  of  Gcsenius  (tex.  s.  v.),  that  the  miikll 


radical  of  fl-lD  is  softened  from  r  is  not  borne  out  by  the 
Egyptian  form,  which  is  MET,  "  a  dead  one." 

1  7{Ob>^n£ ;  oAtyoorbs  'lopaijA.      For  the  Tord 
"  worm  "  ttmipare  Job  xxv.  6 ;  Pi.  xxil.  6. 


218 


MANAHATH 


Savijur's  ministry.  He  must  have  spent  his  youth 
at  Jerusalem  or  in  that  neighbourhood  ;  and  among 
his  recollections  of  that  period,  connected  as  he  was 
with  Herod's  family,  may  have  been  the  tragic  scene 
nf  the  massacre  a:  Bethlehem.  [  H.  B.  H.] 

MANA'HATH  (JimD  :    Max<x"a0«  :    Ma- 

naatX),  a  place  named  in  1  Chr.  viii.  6  only,  in 
connexion  with  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Ben 
jamin.  The  passage  is  very  obscure,  and  is  not 
made  less  so  by  the  translation  of  the  A.  V.  ;  but 
the  meaning  probably  is  that  the  family  of  Ehud, 
the  heads  of  the  town  of  Geba,  migrated  thence, 
under  the  guidance  of  Naaman,  Ahiah,  and  Gera, 
and  settled  at  Manachath.  Of  the  situation  of 
Manachath  we  know  little  or  nothing.  It  is  tempt 
ing  to  believe  it  identical  with  the  Menuchah  men 
tioned,  according  to  many  interpreters,  in  Judg. 
xx.  43  •  (in  the  A.V.  translated  "with  ease"). 
This  has  in  its  favour  the  close  proximity  in  which 
the  place,  if  a  place,  evidently  stood  to  Gibeah, 
which  was  one  of  the  chief  towns  of  Benjamin, 
even  if  not  identical  with  Geba.  Manachath  is 
usually  identified  with  a  place  of  similar  name  in 
Judah,  but,  considering  how  hostile  the  relations 
of  Judah  and  Benjamin  were  at  the  earlier  period 
of  the  history,  this  identification  is  difficult  to 
receive.  The  Chaldee  Targum  adds,  u  in  the  land 
of  the  house  of  Esau,"  f.  e.  in  Edom.  The  Synac 
and  Arabic  Tersions  connect  the  name  with  that 
immediately  following,  and  read  "  to  the  plain  or 
pasture  of  Naaman."  But  these  explanations  are 
no  less  obscure  than  that  which  they  seek  to  ex 
plain.  [MANAHETHITES.]  [G.] 

MANA'HATH(nmK):  WlavaxdO  ;  Alex.  Mw- 
vaxdO  :  Manahat  :  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  23,  Maxa^fl  ; 
Alex.  MavaxdO  '•  Manahath,  I  Chr.  i.  40),  one 
of  the  sons  of  Shobal,  and  descendant  of  Seir  the 
Horite. 

MANA'HETHITES,  THE  (nim»n,  ».  e. 
the  Menuchoth,  and  'flrWSn,  the  Manachti  :  in  54, 


TTJS  MaAofct  ;  Alex,  rijs  Via.va.9  :  Vulg.  translating, 
dimidium  requietionum)  .  "  Half  the  Manahethites  " 
are  named  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah  as  descended 
from  Shobal,  the  father  of  Kirjath-jeanm  ^  I  Chr. 
ii.  52),  and  half  from  Salma,  the  founder  of  Beth 
lehem  (ver.  54).  It  seems  to  be  generally  accepted 
that  the  same  place  is  referred  to  in  each  passage, 
though  why  the  vowels  should  be  so  different  —  as 
it  will  be  seen  above  they  are  —  is  not  apparent. 
Nor  has  the  writer  succeeded  in  discovering  why 
the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  rendered  the  two  differ 
ing  Hebrew  words  by  the  same  English  one.b 

Of  the  situation  or  nature  of  the  place  or  places 

»  The  Vat.  LXX.  has  airo  NoCa. 

b  They  sometimes  follow  Junlus  and  Tremellius  ;  but 
In  this  passage  those  translators  have  exactly  reversed 
the  A.  V.,  and  in  both  cases  use  the  form  Menuchot. 

=  This  seems  to  follow  from  the  expressions  of  xlviii.  5 
and  9  :  "  Th/  two  sons  who  were  born  unto  thee  in  the  land 
of  Egypt"—"  My  sons  whom  God  hath  given  me  in  this 
place,"  and  from  the  solemn  Invocation  over  them  of  Ja 
cob's  "  name,"  and  the  "  names  "  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 
(ver.  ]«),  combined  with  the  fact  of  Joseph  having  married 
MI  Egyptian,  a  person  of  different  race  from  his  own.  The 
Jewish  commentators  overcome  the  difficulty  of  Joseph's 
marrying  an  entire  foreigner,  by  a  tradition  that  Asenath 
was  the  daughter  of  Dinah  and  Shcchem.  See  Targum 
fceudojon.  on  Gen.  xli.  45. 

*  "And  like  fish  become  a  multitude"    Smli  is  the 


MANASSEH 

we  have  as  yet  no  knowledge.  The  town  My-Ni 
HATH  naturally  suggests  itself,  but  it  seems  ini 
possible  to  identify  a  Benjamite  town  with  a  p'.acx 
occurring  in  the  genealogies  of  Judah,  and  appa 
rently  in  close  connexion  with  Bethlehem  and  with 
the  house  of  Joab,  the  great  opponent  and  murderer 
of  Abner  the  Benjamite.  It  is  more  probably  iden 
tical  with  Manocho  (Macox£>>  =  WHJD),  one  of 
the  eleven  cities  which  in  the  LXX.  text  are  in 
serted  between  verses  59  and  60  of  Josh,  xv., 
Bethlehem  being  another  of  the  eleven.  The 
writer  of  the  Targum.  playing  on  the  word  as  if  it 
were  Minchah,  "an  offering,"  renders  the' passage 
in  1  Chr.  ii.  52,  "  the  disciples  and  priests  who 
looked  to  the  division  of  the  offerings."  His  in 
terpretation  of  ver.  54  is  too  long  to  quote  here. 
See  the  editions  of  Wilkins  and  Beck,  with  the 
leamed  notes  of  the  latter.  [G .] 

MANAS'SEAS  (Mavcurfflca  ;  Alex.  Mavaa- 
fffas:  Manasses)  =  MANASSEH  3,  of  the  SODS  of 
Pahath  Moab  (1  Esd.  ix.  31 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30). 

MANAS'SEH  (T\WX),  i.e.  M'nassheh:  Ma- 

yafffffi :  Manasses),  the  eldest  son  of  Joseph  by  his 
wife  Asenath  the  Kgyptian  (Gen.  xli.  51,  xlvi.  20). 
The  birth  of  the  child  was  the  first  thing  which 
had  occurred  since  Joseph's  banishment  from  Canaan 
to  alleviate  his  sorrows  and  fill  the  void  left  by  the 
father  and  the  brother  he  so  longed  to  behold,  and 
it  was  natural  that  he  should  commemorate  his 
acquisition  in  the  name  MANASSEH,  "  Forgetting" — 
"  For  God  hath-made-me-forget  (iiasshani)  all  my 
toil  and  all  my  father's  house."  Both  he  and  Ephraim 
were  born  before  the  commencement  of  the  famine. 
Whether  the  elder  of  the  two  sons  was  inferior  in 
form  or  promise  to  the  younger,  or  whether  there  was 
any  external  reason  to  justify  the  preference  of  Jacob, 
we  are  not  told.  It  is  only  certain  that  when  the 
youths  were  brought  before  their  aged  grandfather  to 
receive  h;s  blessing  and  his  name,  and  be  adopted  as 
foreigners  c  into  his  family,  Manasseh  was  degraded, 
in  spite  of  the  efforts  of  Joseph,  into  the  second 
place.  [EPHRAIM,  vol.  i.  5666.]  It  is  the  first  in 
dication  of  the  inferior  rank  in  the  nation  which  the 
tribe  descended  from  him  afterwards  held,  in  relation 
to  that  of  his  more  fortunate  brother.  But  though , 
like  his  grand-uncle  Esau,  Manasseh  had  lost  his 
birthright  in  favour  of  his  younger  brother,  he 
received,  as  Esau  had,  a  blessing  only  interior  to  the 
birthright  itself.  Like  his  brother  he  was  to  increase 
with  the  fertility  of  the  fish  d  which  swarmed  in  the 
great  Egyptian  stream,  to  "  become  a  people  and  also 
to  be  great " — the  "  thousands  of  Manasseh,"  n« 
less  than  those  of  Ephraim,  indeed  more,  were  to  be 
come  a  proverb*  in  the  nation,  his  name,  no  less  than 


literal  rendering  of  the  words  3"1?  13*!?)  (Gen.xlviu 

16),  which  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  are  "  grow  into  a 
multitude."  The  sense  is  preserved  in  the  margin.  The 
expression  is  no  doubt  derived  from  that  which  is  to  this 
day  one  of  the  most  characteristic  things  in  Egypt.  Cer 
tainly,  next  to  the  vast  stream  itself,  nothing  could  strike 
a  native  of  Southern  Palestine  more,  on  his  first  visit  to 
the  banks  of  the  Nile,  than  the  abundance  of  its  fish. 

e  The  word  "  thousand,"  (^N)-  In  the  sense  of  "  fa 
mily,"  seen;  to  be  more  frequently  applied  to  Manasseb 
than  to  any  of  the  other  tribes.  See  Oeut.  xxxiii.  17,  and 
compare  Judg.  vi.  15,  where  "  family"  should  be  'thou 
sand  "— "  my  thousand  is  the  ]x>or  oue  hi  Manus&eb  :"  and 
1  Chr.  xii.  2C. 


IfAffASSEH 

lhat  of  Ephraim,  was  to  be  the  symbol  and  the  ex 
pression  of  the  richest  blessings  for  his  kindred.* 

At  the  time  of  this  interview  Manasseh  seems  to 
have  been  about  22  years  of  age.  Whether  he  mar 
ried  in  Egypt  we  are  not  told.  At  any  rate  the 
names  of  no  wives  or  lawful  children  are  extant  in  the 
lists.  As  if  to  carry  out  most  literally  the  terms  of 
the  blessing  of  Jacob,  the  mother  of  MACHIK,  his 
eldest,  indeed  apparent!  j  his  omy  son — who  was  really 
the  foundation  of  the  "  thousands  of  Manasseh  " — 
was  no  regular  wife,  but  a  Syrian  or  Aramite  concu 
bine  (1  Chr.  vii.  14),  possibly  a  prisoner  in  some  pre 
datory  expedition  into  Palestine,  like  that  in  which 
the  sons  of  Ephraim  lost  their  lives  (1  Chr.  vii.  21). 
It  is  recorded  that  the  children  of  Machir  were 
embraced*  by  Joseph  before  his  death,  but  of  the 
personal  history  of  the  patriarch  Manasseh  himself 
no  trait  whatever  is  given  in  the  Bible,  either  in 
the  Pentateuch  or  in  the  curious  records  preserved 
in  1  Chronicles.  The  ancient  Jewish  traditions  are, 
however,  less  reticent.  According  to  them  Manasseh 
was  the  steward  of  Joseph's  house,  and  the  inter 
preter  who  intervened  between  Joseph  and  his  bre 
thren  at  their  interview ;  and  the  extraordinary 
strength  which  he  displayed  in  the  struggle  with  and 
binding  of  Simeon,  first  caused  Judah  to  suspect  that 
the  apparent  Egyptians  were  really  his  own  flesh  and 
blood  (see  Targums  Jerusalem  and  Pseudojon.  on 
Gen.  xlii.  23,  xliii.  15  ;  also  the  quotations  in  Weil's 
Bibl.  legends,  88  note). 

The  position  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  during  the 
march  to  Canaan  was  with  Ephraim  and  Benjamin 
on  the  west  side  of  the  sacred  Tent.  The  standard 
of  the  three  sons  of  Rachel  was  the  figure  of  a  boy 
with  the  inscription,  "  The  cloud  of  Jehovah  rested 
on  them  until  they  went  forth  out  of  the  camp" 
(Targ.  Pseudojon.  on  Num.  ii.  18).  The  Chief  of 
the  tribe  at  the  time  of  the  census  at  Sinai  was 
Gamaliel  ben-Pedahzur,  and  its  numbers  were  then 
32,200  (Num.  i.  10,  35,  ii.  20,  21,  vii.  54-59). 
The  numbers  of  Ephraim  were  at  the  same  date 
40,500.  Forty  years  later,  on  the  banks  of  Jordan, 
these  proportions  were  reversed.  Manasseh  had  then 
increased  to  52,700,  while  Ephraim  had  diminished 
to  32,500  (Num.  xxvi.  34,  37).  On  this  occasion 
it  is  remarkable  that  Manasseh  resumes  his  position 
in  the  catalogue  as  the  eldest  son  of  Joseph. 
Possibly  this  is  due  to  the  prowess  which  the  tribe 
had  shown  in  the  conquest  of  Gilead,  for  Manasseh 
was  certainly  at  this  time  the  most  distinguished  of 
all  the  tribes.  Of  the  three  who  had  elected  to  re 
main  on  that  side  of  the  Jordan,  Reuben  and  Gad 
had  chosen  their  lot  because  the  country  was  suitable 
to  their  pastoral  possessions  and  tendencies.  But 
Machir,  Jair,  and  Nobah,  the  sons  of  Manasseh,  were 
no  shepherds.  They  were  pure  warriors,  who  had 
taken  the  most  prominent  part  in  the  conquest  of 
those  provinces  which  up  to  that  time  had  been  con 
quered,  and  whose  deeds  are  constantly  referred  to 
(Num.  xxxii.  39  ;  Deut.  iii.  13,  14,  15)  with  credit 
and  renown.  "  Jair  the  son  of  Manasseh  took  all 
the  tract  of  Argob  .  .  .  sixty  great  cities  "  (Deut.  iii. 
14  ;  4).  "Nobah  took  Kenath  and  the  daughter- 
towns  thereof,  and  called  it  after  his  own  name " 
(Num.  xxxii.  42).  "  Because  Machir  was  a  man  of 
«r&r,  therefore  he  had  Gilead  and  Bashan  "  (Josh.xvii. 
I).  The  district  which  these  ancient  warriors  con- 


'  The  Targvim  Pseudojon.  on  xlviii.  20  seems  to  inti 
mate  that  the  words  of  that  verse  were  used  as  part  of  the 
formula  at  the  rite  of  circumcision.  They  do  not,  however, 
ippeur  in  my  of  the  accounts  of  that  ceremony,  as  given 


MANASSEH  21  y 

quered  was  among  the  most  difficult,  if  not  the  most 
difficult,  in  the  whole  country.  It  embraced  the  hills 
of  Gilead  with  their  inaccessible  heights  and  impass 
able  ravines,  and  the  almost  impregnable  tract  of 
Argob,  which  derives  its  modern  name  of  Lejah  from 
the  secure  "  asylum  "  it  affords  to  those  who  take 
refuge  within  its  natural  fortifications.  Had  they 
not  remained  in  these  wild  and  inaccessible  districts, 
but  had  gone  forward  and  taken  their  lot  with  the 
rest,  who  shall  say  what  changes  might  not  have 
occurred  in  the  history  of  the  nation,  through 
the  presence  of  such  energetic  and  warlike  spirits  ? 
The  few  personages  of  eminence  whom  we  can  with 
certainty  identify  as  Manassites,  such  as  Gideon  and 
Jephthah — for  Elijah  and  others  may  with  equal 
probability  have  belonged  to  the  neighbouring  tribe 
of  Gad — were  among  the  most  remarkable  characters 
that  Israel  produced.  Gideon  was  in  fact  "  the 
greatest  of  the  judges,  and  his  children  all  but 
established  hereditary  monarchy  in  their  own  line  " 
(Stanley,  S.  $  P.  230).  But  with  the  one  excep 
tion  of  Gideon  the  warlike  tendencies  of  Manasseh 
seem  to  have  been  confined  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan. 
There  they  throve  exceedingly,  pushing  their  way 
northward  over  the  rich  plains  of  Jauldn  and  Jedur 
— the  Gaulanitis  and  Ituraea  of  the  Roman  period — 
to  the  foot  of  Mount  Hermon  (1  Chr.  v.  23).  At 
the  time  of  the  coronation  of  David  at  Hebron,  while 
the  western  Manasseh  sent  18,000,  and  Ephraim 
itself  20,800,  the  eastern  Manasseh,  with  Gad  an.l 
Reuben,  mustered  to  the  number  of  120,000, 
thoroughly  armed — a  remarkable  demonstration  of 
strength,  still  more  remarkable  when  we  remember 
the  fact  that  Saul's  house,  with  the  great  Abner  at  its 
head,  was  then  residing  at  Mahanaim  on  the  border 
of  Manasseh  and  Gad.  But,  though  thus  outwardly 
prosperous,  a  similar  fate  awaited  them  in  the  end  to 
that  which  befel  Gad  and  Reuben ;  they  gradually 
assimilated  themselves  to  the  old  inhabitants  of  the 
country — they  "  transgressed  against  the  God  of 
their  fathers,  and  went  a-whoi  ing  after  the  gods  of 
the  people  of  the  land  whom  God  destroyed  before 
them  "  (ib.  25).  They  relinquished  too  the  settled 
mode  of  life  and  the  defined  limits  which  befitted 
the  members  of  a  federal  nation,  and  gradually 
became  Bedouins  of  the  wilderness,  spreading  them 
selves  over  the  vast  deserts  which  lay  between  the 
allotted  possessions  of  their  tribe  and  the  Euphrates, 
and  which  had  from  time  immemorial  been  the 
hunting-grounds  and  pastures  of  the  wild  Hagarites, 
of  Jetur,  Nephish,  and  Nodab  (I  Chr.  v.  19,  22). 
On  them  first  descended  the  punishment  which  was 
ordained  to  be  the  inevitable  consequence  of  such 
misdoing.  They,  first  of  all  Israel,  were  carried 
away  by  Pul  and  Tiglath-Pileser,  and  settled  in  the 
Assyrian  territories  (ib.  26).  The  connexion,  how 
ever,  between  east  and  west  had  been  kept  up  to  a 
certain  degree.  In  Bethshean,  the  most  easterly 
city  of  the  cis-Jordanic  Manasseh,  the  two  portions 
all  but  joined.  David  had  judges  or  officers  there 
for  all  matters  sacred  and  secular  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  32) ; 
and  Solomon's  commissariat  officer,  Ben-Geber,  ruled 
over  the  towns  of  Jair  and  the  whole  district  of 
Argob  (1  K.  iv.  13),  and  transmitted  their  pro 
ductions,  doubtless  not  without  their  people,  to  the 
court  of  Jerusalem. 

The  genealogies  of  the   tribe   are   preserved  in 

by  Buxtorf  and  others,  that  the  writer  has  been  tble  to 
discover. 
6  Tht  Targum  characteristically  s>ay»  ctrcumciMd. 


220 


MANASSEH 


Num.  xrvi.  1S-34 ;  Josh.  zvii.  1,  &c. ;  and  1  Chr. 
tii.  14-19.  But  it  seems  impossible  to  unravel 
these  so  as  to  ascertain  for  instance  which  of  the 
families  remained  east  of  Jordan,  and  which  ad 
vanced  to  the  west.  From  the  fact  that  Abi-ezer 
(the  family  of  Gideon),  Hepher  (possibly  Ophrah, 
the  native  place  of  the  same  hero),  and  Shechem 
'the  well-known  city  of  the  Bene-Joseph)  all  occur 
among  the  names  of  the  sons  of  Gilead  the  son  of 
Machir,  it  seems  probable  that  Gilead,  whose  name 
is  so  intimately  connected  with  the  eastern,  was 
also  the  immediate  progenitor  of  the  western  half 
of  the  tribe.k 

Nor  is  it  less  difficult  to  fix  the  exact  position 
of  the  territory  allotted  to  the  western  half.  In  Josh, 
rvii.  14-18,  a  passage  usually  regarded  by  critics 
as  an  exceedingly  ancient  document,  we  find  the 
two  tribes  of  Joseph  complaining  that  only  one 
jwrtion  had  W<?  allotted  to  them,  viz.  Mount 
Ephraim  (ver.  15),  and  that  they  could  not  extend 
into  the  plains  of  Jordan  or  Esdraelon,  because 
those  districts  were  still  in  the  possession  of  the 
Canaanites,  and  scoured  by  their  chariots.  In  reply 
Joshua  advises  them  to  go  up  into  the  forest  (ver. 
15,  A.  V.  "  wood  ") — into  the  mountain  which  is  a 
forest  (ver.  1 8).  This  mountain  clothed  with  forest 
can  surely  be  nothing  but  CARMEL,  the  "  moun 
tain"  closely  adjoining  the  portion  of  Ephraim, 
whose  richness  of  wood  was  so  proverbial.  And  it 
is  in  accordance  with  this  view  that  the  majority 
of  the  towns  of  Manasseh — which  as  the  weaker  por 
tion  of  the  tribe  would  naturally  be  pushed  to  seek 
its  fortunes  outside  the  limits  originally  bestowed — 
were  actually  on  the  slopes  either  of  Carmel  itself 
or  of  the  contiguous  ranges.  Thus  TAANACH  and 
MEGIDDO  were  on  the  northern  spurs  of  Carmel ; 
IBLEAM  appears  to  have  been  on  the  eastern  con 
tinuation  of  the  range,  somewhere  near  the  present 
Jenin.  EN-DOR  was  on  the  slopes  of  the  so-called 
"  Little  Hermon."  The  two  remaining  towns  men 
tioned  as  belonging  to  Manasseh  formed  the  extreme 
eastern  and  western  limits  of  the  tribe ;  the  one, 
BETHSHEAN1  (Josh.  xvii.  11),  was  in  the  hollow 
of  the  Ghor,  or  Jordan- Valley ;  the  other,  DOR 
(ibid.),  war  on  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  shel 
tered  behiiu  the  range  of  Carmel,  and  immediately 
opposite  t)  e  bluff  or  shoulder  which  forms  its  highest 
poiiit.  T'ue  whole  of  these  cities  are  specially  men 
tioned  a,'  standing  in  the  allotments  of  other  tribes, 
though  jiliabited  by  Manasseh  ;  and  this,  with  the 


h  If  tais  Is  correct,  It  may  probably  furnish  the  clue  to 
tlie  real  meaning  of  the  difficult  allusion  to  Gilead  in 
Jud«  viu  3.  [See  vol.  i.  695a.] 

i  "  Betlisan  in  Manasseh "  (Hap-Parchi,  In  Ashcr's 
B.  of  T.  401). 

*  flie  name  of  ASHEU,  as  attached  to  a  town,  inde 
pendent  of  the  tribe,  was  overlooked  by  the  writer  at  the 
proper  time.  ("^N  :  ±ri\avd.O :  Alex.  A<njp :  Aser). 
It  is  mentioned  in  Josh.  xvi4.  7  only  as  the  starting-point 
— evidently  at  its  eastern  end — of  the  boundary  line  se 
parating  Kphraim  and  Manasseh.  It  cannot  have  been  at 
any  great  distance  from  Shechem,  because  the  next  point 
in  the  boundary  Is  "  the  Michmethath  facing  Shechem." 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon  (sub  race 
*Aser"),  it  is  mentioned,  evidently  from  actual  know 
ledge,  as  still  retaining  its  name,  and  lying  on  the  high  road 
from  Neapolis  (Xablvs),  that  is  Sbechem,  to  Scythopolis 
( Heisan),  the  ancient  Bethshean,  fifteen  1  Ionian  miles  from 
the  former.  Jn  the  Itinerarium  Jlicrof.  (587)  it  occurs, 
between  "civiLis  Sciopoli "  (i.e.  Scythopolis)  and  "civ. 
Neapolis"  as  "Aser,  ubi  full  villa  Job."  Where  it  lay 
thin,  tt  lies  still.  Kxactly  in  this  position  M.  Van  do 


MANASSEH 

absence  of  any  attempt  to  define  a  limit  to  the  posses 
sions  of  the  tribe  on  the  north,  looks  as  if  no  boundary- 
line  had  existed  on  that  side,  but  as  if  the  territory 
faded  off  gradually  into  thoce  of  the  two  contiguous 
tribes  from  whom  it  had  borrowed  its  fairest  cities. 
On  the  south  side  the  boundary  between  Manasseh  and 
Ephraim  is  more  definitely-described,  and  may  be  ge 
nerally  traced  with  tolerable  certainty.  It  began  OB 
the  east  in  the  territory  of  Issachar  (xvii.  10)at  a  place 
called  ASHER,*  (ver.  7)  now  Yasir,  1 2  miles  N.E. 
of  Nablits.  Thence  it  ran  to  Michmethah,  described 
as  facing  Shechem  (Nablte),  though  new  unknown ; 
then  went  to  the  right,  t.  e.  apparently  *  north 
ward,  to  the  spring  of  Tappuah,  also  UULHCWI  ; 
there  it  fell  in  with  the  watercourses  of  the  torrent 
Kanah — probably  the  Nahr  Falaik — along  which  it 
ran  to  the  Mediterranean. 

From  the  .indications  of  the  history  it  would 
appear  that  Manasseh  took  very  little  part  in  public 
affairs.  They  either  left  all  that  to  Ephraim,  or 
were  so  far  removed  from  the  centre  of  the  nation 
as  to  have  little  interest  in  what  was  taking  place. 
That  they  attended  David's  coronation  at  Hebron 
has  already  been  mentioned.  When  his  rule  was 
established  over  all  Israel,  each  half  had  its  distinct 
ruler — the  western,  Joel  beu-Pedaiah,  the  eastern, 
Iddo  ben-Zechariah  (1  Chr.xxvii.  20, 21).  From  this 
time  the  eastern  Manasseh  fades  entirely  from  oui 
view,  and  the  western  is  hardly  kept  before  us  by 
an  occasional  mention.  Such  scattered  notices  as 
we  do  find  have  almost  all  reference  to  the  part 
taken  by  members  of  the  tribe  in  the  reforms  of  the 
good  kings  of  Judah — the  Jehovah-revival  under 
Asa  (2  Chr.  xv.  9) — the  Passover  of  Hezekiah  (xxi. 
1,  10,  11,  18),  and  the  subsequent  enthusiasm 
against  idolatry  (xxxi.  1) — the  iconoclasms  of  Josiah 
(xxxiv.  6),  and  his  restoration  of  the  buildings  of 
the  Temple  (ver.  9).  It  is  gratifying  to  reflect  that 
these  notices,  faint  and  scattered  as  they  are,  are  all 
coloured  with  good,  and  exhibit  none  of  the  repulsive 
traits  of  that  most  repulsive  heathenism  into  which 
other  tribes  of  Israel  fell.  It  may  have  been  at  some 
such  time  of  revival,  whether  brought  about  by  the 
invitation  of  Judah,  or,  as  the  title  in  the  LXX. 
would  imply,  by  the  dread  of  invasion,  that  Ps. 
Ixxx.  was  composed.  But  on  the  other  hand,  the 
mention  of  Benjamin  as  in  alliance  with  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh,  points  to  an  earlier  date  than  the 
disruption  of  the  two  kingdoms.  Whatever  its  date 
may  prove  to  be,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 


Velde  (Syr.  and  1'al.  ii.  336)  has  discovered  a  village 
called  Yasir,  lying  in  the  centre  of  a  plain  or  basin,  sur 
rounded  on  the  north  and  west  by  mountains,  but  on  the 
east  sloping  away  into  a  \\~ady  called  the  Salt,  Valley 
which  forms  a  near  and  direct  descent  to  the  Jordan 
Valley.  The  road  from  A'ablut  to  Beisan  passes  by  the 
village.  Porter  (Ildbk.  348)  gives  the  name  as  Teydtir. 

It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  important  enough  to 
allow  us  to  suppose  that  its  inhabitants  are  the  AMU  u- 
ITES,  or  Asherites  of  2  Sam.  ii.  9. 

Van  de  Velde  suggests  that  this  may  have  been  the 
spot  on  which  the  Midianites  encamped,  when  surprisrd. 
by  Gideon;  but  that  was  surely  further  to  the  north, 
nearer  the  spring  of  Charod  and  the  plain  of  Ksdraelon. 

m  The  right  (pQ'H)  is  generally  taken  to  signify  the 
South;  and  so  Keil  understands  it  in  this  place:  but  it 
seems  more  consonant  with  common  sense,  and  also 
with  the  probable  course  of  the  boundary— which  could 
hardly  have  gone  south  of  Shechem— to  take  it  as  itu 
right  of  the  person  tracing  the  line  from  East  to  \Vost 
t.  e.  North. 


MANASSEH 

luthor  of  the  Psnlm  was  a  member  of  the  house  of 
Joseph. 

A  jK>sitive  connexion  between  Manassch  and  Ben- 
iainiu  is  implied  in  the  genealogies  of  1  Chr.  vii., 
where  Machir  is  said  to  have  married  into  the  family 
of  Huppim  and  Shuppim,  chief  houses  in  the  latter 
tribe  (ver.  lf>).  No  recoi-d  of  any  such  relation 
appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered  in  the  historical 
books,  nor  is  it  directly  alluded  to  except  in  the 
genealogy  just  quoted.  But  we  know  that  a  con 
nexion  existed  between  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  and 
the  town  of  Jabesh-Gilead,  inasmuch  as  from  that 
town  were  procured  wives  for  four  hundred  out  of 
the  six  hundred  Benjamites  who  sui-vived  the  slaugh 
ter  of  Gibeah  (Judg.  xxi.  12);  and  if  Jabesh-Gilead 
was  a  town  of  Manasseh — as  is  very  probable, 
though  the  feet  is  certainly  nowhere  stated — it  does 
appear  very  possible  that  this  was  the  relationship 
referred  to  in  the  genealogies.  According  to  the 
statement  of  the  narrative  two-thirds  of  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin  must  have  been  directly  descended  from 
Manasseh.  Possibly  we  have  here  an  explanation 
of  the  apparent  connexion  between  King  Saul  and 
the  people  of  Jabesh.  No  appeal  could  have  been 
more  forcible  to  an  Oriental  chieftain  than  that  of 
his  blood-relations  when  threatened  with  extermi 
nation  (1  Sam.  xi.  4,  5),  while  no  duty  was  more 
natural  than  that  which  they  in  their  turn  per 
formed  to  his  remains  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  11).  [G.] 

MANAS'SEH  (H^O:    Mow«r<rijs:   Manas- 

ses),  the  thirteenth  king  of  Judah.  The  reign  of 
this  monarch  is  longer  than  that  of  any  other  of  the 
house  of  David.  There  is  none  of  which  we  know 
so  little.  In  part,  it  may  be,  this  was  the  direct 
result  of  the  character  and  policy  of  the  man.  In 
part,  doubtless,  it  is  to  be  traced  to  the  abhorrence 
with  which  the  following  generation  looked  back 
upon  it  as  the  period  of  lowest  degradation  to  which 
their  country  had  ever  fallen.  Chroniclers  and 
prophets  pass  it  over,  gathering  from  its  horrors 
and  disasters  the  great  broad  lessons  in  which 
they  saw  the  foot-prints  of  a  righteous  retribution, 
the  tokens  of  a  Divine  compassion,  and  then  they 
avert  their  eyes  and  will  see  and  say  no  more.  This 
is  in  itself  significant.  It  gives  a  meaning  and  a 
value  to  every  fact  which  has  escaped  the  sentence 
of  oblivion.  The  very  reticence  of  the  historians 
of  the  0.  T.  shows  how  free  they  were  from  the 
rhetorical  exaggerations  and  inaccuracies  of  a  later 
age.  The  struggle  of  opposing  worships  must  have 
been  as  tierce  under  Manasseh,  as  it  was  under  An- 
tiochus,  or  Decius,  or  Diocletian,  or  Mary.  Men 
must  have  suffered  and  died  in  that  struggle,  of 
whom  the  world  was  not  worthy,  and  yet  no  contrast 
can  be  greater  than  that  between  the  short  notices 
in  Kings  and  Chronicles,  and  the  martyrologies 
which  belong  to  those  other  periods  of  persecution. 
The  birth  of  Manasseh  is  fixed  twelve  years  be 
fore  the  death  of  Hezekiah,  B.  c.  710  (2  K.  xxi.  1). 
We  must,  therefore,  infer  either  that  there  had  been 
no  heir  to  the  throne  up  to  that  comparatively 
late  period  in  his  reign,  or  that  any  that  had  been 
born  had  died,  or  that,  as  sometimes  happened  in 
the  succession  of  Jewish  and  other  Eastern  kings,  th 
elder  son  was  passed  over  for  the  younger.  There 
are  reasons  which  make  the  former  the  more 
probable  alternative.  The  exceeding  bitterness  01 
Hezekiah's  sorrow  at  the  threatened  approach  o 
death  (2  K.  xx.  2,  3  ;  2  Chr.  xxxii.  24;  Is.  xxxviii 
1-.'!),  is  more  natural  if  we  think  of  him  as  sink 
ing  under  the  thought  that  ho  was  dying  childless 


MANASSEH 


221 


leaving  no  heir  to  his  work  and  to  his  kingdom. 
When,  a  little  later,  Isaiah  warns  him  of  the  cap 
tivity  and  shame  which  will  fall  on  his  children,  li€ 
speaks  of  those  children  as  yet  future  (2  K.  xx.  18). 
This  circumstance  will  explain  one  or  two  facts  in 
the  contemporaiy  histoiy.  Hezekiah,  it  would 
seem,  recovering  from  his  sickness,  aniious  to  avoid 
lie  danger  that  had  threatened  him  of  leaving  his 
kingdom  without  an  heir,  marries,  at  or  about  this 
.ime,  Hephzibiih  (2  K.  xxi.  1),  the  daughter  of  one 
of  the  citizens  or  princes  of  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant. 
x.  3,  §1).  The  prophets,  we  may  well  imagine, 
would  welcome  the  prospect  of  a  successor  named  by 
a  king  who  had  been  so  true  and  faithful.  Isaiah 
in  a  passage  clearly  belonging  to  a  later  date  than 
the  early  portions  of  the  book,  and  apparently  sug 
gested  by  some  conspicuous  marriage)  with  his  cha 
racteristic  fondness  for  tracing  auguries  in  names, 
inds  in  that  of  the  new  queen  a  prophecy  of  the 
ultimate  restoration  of  Israel  and  the  glories  of  Je 
rusalem  (Is.  Ixii.  4,  5;  comp.  Blunt,  Scriptural 
Coincid.  Part  iii.  5).  The  city  also  should  be  a 
llephzibah,  a  delightsome  one.  As  the  bridegroom 
rejoiceth  over  the  bride,  so  would  Jehovah  rejoice 
over  His  people.*  The  child  that  is  born  from 
this  union  is  called  Manasseh.  This  name  too  is 
strangely  significant.  It  appears  nowhere  else  in 
the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  The  only 
associations  connected  with  it  were,  that  it  belonged 
to  the  tribe  which  was  all  but  the  most  powerful 
of  the  hostile  kingdom  of  Israel.  How  are  we  to 
account  for  so  singular  and  unlikely  a  choice  ?  The 
answer  is,  that  the  name  embodied  what  had  been 
for  years  the  cherished  object  of  Hezekiah's  policy 
and  hope.  To  take  advantage  of  the  overthrow  of 
the  rival  kingdom  by  Shalmaueser,  and  the  anarchy 
in  which  its  provinces  had  been  left,  to  gather 
round  him  the  remnant  of  the  population,  to  bring 
them  back  to  the  worship  and  faith  of  their  fathers, 
this  had  been  the  second  step  in  his  great  national 
reformation  (2  Chr.  xxx.  6).  It  was  at  least  par 
tially  successful.  "  Divers  of  Asher,  Manasseh,  and 
Zebulun,  humbled  themselves  and  came  to  Jeru 
salem."  They  were  there  at  the  great  passover. 
The  work  of  destroying  idols  went  on  in  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  as  well  as  in  Judah  (2  Chr.  xxxi.  1). 
What  could  be  a  more  acceptable  pledge  of  his 
desire  to  receive  the  fugitives  as  on  the  same  footing 
with  his  own  subjects  than  that  he  should  give  to 
the  heir  to  his  throne  the  name  in  which  one  of  their 
tribes  exulted  ?  What  could  better  show  the  desire 
to  let  all  past  discords  and  offences  be  forgotten 
than  the  name  which  was  itself  an  amnesty  ?  (Ge- 
senius.) 

The  last  twelve  years  of  Hezekiah's  reign  were 
not,  however,  it  will  be  remembered,  those  which 
were  likely  to  influence  for  good  the  character  of  his 
successor.  His  policy  had  succeeded.  He  had  thrown 
off  the  yoke  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  which  Ahaz  had 
accepted,  had  defied  his  armies,  had  been  delivered 
from  extremest  danger,  and  had  made  himself  the 
head  of  an  independent  kingdom,  receiving  tribute 
from  neighbouring  princes  instead  of  paying  it  to 
the  great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria.  But  he  goes  a 
step  further.  Not  content  with  independence,  he 
enters  on  a  policy  of  aggression.  He  contracts  an 
alliance  with  the  rebellious  viceroy  of  Babylon 
against  their  common  enemy  (2  K.  xx.  12 ;  la. 


B  The  bearing  of  this  passage  on  the  controversy  as  tc 
the  authorship  and  date  of  the  later  chapters  of  Isaiah  io 
at  least,  worth  considering. 


222 


MANASSEII 


isxix.).  He  displays  the  treasures  of  his  kingdom 
to  the  ambassadors,  in  the  belief  that  that  will  show 
them  how  powerful  an  ally  he  can  prove  himself. 
Isaiah  protested  against  this  step,  but  the  ambition 
of  being  a  great  potentate  continual,  and  it  was  to 
the  results  of  this  ambition  that  the  boy  Manasseh 
succeeded  at  the  age  of  twelve.  His  accession  ap 
pears  to  have  been  the  signal  for  an  entire  change,  if 
not  in  the  foveign  policy,  at  any  rate  in  the  religious 
administration  of  the  kingdom.  At  so  early  an  age 
he  can  scarcely  have  been  the  spontaneous  author  of 
so  great  an  alteration,  and  we  may  infer  accordingly 
that  it  was  the  work  of  the  idolatrous,  or  Ahaz 
jwrty,  which  had  been  repressed  during  the  reign 
of  Hezekiah,  but  had  all  along,  like  the  Romish 
clergy  under  Edward  VI.  in  England,  looked  on 
the  reform  with  a  sullen  acquiescence,  and  thwarted 
it  when  they  dared.  The  change  which  the  king's 
measures  brought  about  was  after  all,  superficial. 
The  idolatry  which  was  publicly  discountenanced, 
was  practised  privately  (Is.  i.  29,  ii.  20,  Ixv.  3). 
The  priests  and  the  prophets,  in  spite  of  their  out- 
ward  orthodoxy,  were  too  often  little  better  than 
licentious  drunkards  (Is.  xxviii.  7).  The  nobles  of 
Judah  kept  the  new  moons  and  sabbaths  much  in 
the  same  way  as  those  of  France  kept  their  Lents, 
when  Louis  XIV.  had  made  devotion  a  court  cere 
monial  (Is.  i.  13,  14).  There  are  signs  that  even 
among  the  king's  highest  officers  of  state  there  was 
one,  Shebna  the  scribe  (Is.  xxxvii.  2),  the  treasurer 
(Is.  xxii.  15)  "over  the  house,"  whose  policy  was 
simply  that  of  a  selfish  ambition,  himself  possibly 
a  foreigner  (comp.  Blunt's  Script.  Coinc.  iii.  4), 
and  whom  Isaiah  saw  through  and  distrusted.  It 
was,  moreover,  the  traditional  policy  of  "  the  princes 
of  Judah  "  (comp.  one  remarkable  instance  in  the 
reign  of  Joash,  2  Chr.  xxiv.  17),  to  favour  foreign 
alliances  and  the  toleration  of  foreign  worship,  as  it 
was  that  of  the  true  priests  and  prophets  to  protest 
against  it.  It  would  seem,  accordingly,  as  if  they 
urged  upon  the  young  king  that  scheme  of  a  close 
alliance  with  Babylon  which  Isaiah  had  condemned, 
and  as  the  natural  consequence  of  this,  the  adop 
tion,  as  far  as  possible,  of  its  worship,  and  that  of 
other  nations  whom  it  was  desirable  to  conciliate. 
The  morbid  desire  for  widening  the  range  of  their 
knowledge  and  penetrating  into  the  mysteries  of 
other  systems  of  belief,  may  possibly  have  contri 
buted  now,  as  it  had  done  in  the  days  of  Solomon, 
to  increase  the  evil  (Jer.  ii.  10-25  ;  Ewald,  Gesch. 
fsr.  iii.  666).  The  result  was  a  debasement  which 
had  not  been  equalled  even  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz, 
uniting  in  one  centre  the  abominations  which  else 
where  existed  separately.  Not  content  with  sane- ' 
turning  their  piesence  in  the  Holy  City,  as  Solo 
mon  and  Rehoboam  had  done,  lie  deh'led  with  it  the 
Sanctuary  itself  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  4).  The  worship 
thus  introduced  was,  as  has  been  said,  predomi 
nantly  Babylonian  in  its  character.  "  He  observed 
times,  and  used  enchantments,  and  used  witchcraft, 
and  .dealt  with  a  familiar  spirit,  and  with  wizards  " 
(ibid.  ver.  6).  The  worship  of  "  the  host  of  hea 
ven,"  which  each  man  celebrated  for  himself  on  the 
roof  of  his  own  house,  took  the  place  of  that  of  the 
Lord  God  of  Sabaoth  (2  K.'xxiii.  12;  Is.  Ixv.  3, 
11  ;  Zeph.  i.  5;  Jer.  viii.  2,  xix.  13,  xxxii.  29). 
With  this,  however,  there  was  associated  the  old 
Molech  worship  of  the  Ammonites.  The  fires  were 
rekindled  in  the  valley  of  Ben-Hinnom.  Tophet 
was  (for  the  first  time,  apparently),  built  into  a 
stately  fabric  (2  K.  xvi.  3  ;  Is.  xxx.  33,  as  cmn- 
pured  with  Jw.  vii.  31.  xix.  .">  ;  Kw;ild.  'iV.Wi.  fsr. 


MANASSEH 

iii.  t>(57).  Even  the  king's  sons,  insteal  of  being 
presented  to  Jehovah,  received  a  horrible  fire-bap 
tism  dedicating  them  to  Molech  (2  Chr.  ixxiii.  GJ, 
while  others  were  actually  slaughtered  (Ez.  xxiii. 
37,  39).  The  Baal  and  Ashtaroth  ritual,  whi.-h 
had  been  imported  under  Solomon,  from  the  Phoe 
nicians,  was  revived  with  fresh  splendour,  and  in  the 
worship  of  the  "  Queen  of  heaven,"  fixed  its  root* 
deep  into  the  habits  of  the  people  (Jer.  vii.  18) 
Worse  and  more  horrible  than  all,  the  Asherah,  the 
image  of  Astarte,  or  the  obscene  symbol  of  a  phallic 
worship  (comp.  ASHERAH,  and  in  addition  to  the 
authorities  there  cited,  Mayer,  DC  Reform.  Josiae, 
&c.,  in  the  T/ies.  Theo.  philol.  Amstel.  1701) 
was  seen  in  the  house  of  which  Jehovah  had  said 
that  He  would  there  put  His  Name  for  ever  (2  K. 
xxi.  7).  All  this  was  accompanied  by  the  extremest 
moral  degradation.  The  worship  of  those  old  Eastern 
religions,  has  been  well  described  as  a  kind  of  "sen 
suous  intoxication,"  simply  sensuous,  and  therefore 
associated  inevitably  with  a  fiendish  cruelty,  leading 
to  the  utter  annihilation  of  the  spiritual  life  of  men 
(Hegel,  Philos.  of  History,  i.  3).  So  it  was  in  Je 
rusalem  in  the  days  of  Manasseh.  Rival  priests 
(the  Chemarim  of  Zeph.  i.  4)  were  consecrated  for 
this  hideous  worship.  Women  dedicating  them 
selves  to  a  cultus  like  that  of  the  Babylonian  My- 
litta,  wove  hangings  for  the  Asherah,  as  they  sat 
there  (Mayer,  cap.  ii.  §4).  The  Kadeshim,  in  closest 
neighbourhood  with  them,  gave  themselves  up  to 
yet  darker  abominations  (2  K.  xxiii.  7).  The  awful 
words  of  Isaiah  (i.  10)  had  a  terrible  truth  in  them. 
Those  to  whom  he  spoke  were  literally  "  rulers  of 
Sodom  and  princes  of  Gomorrah."  Every  faith 
was  tolerated  but  the  old  faith  of  Israel.  This  was 
abandoned  and  proscribed.  The  altar  of  Jehovah 
was  displaced  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  16).  The  very  ark  of 
the  covenant  was  removed  from  the  sanctuary 
(2  Chr.  xxxv.  3).  The  sacred  books  of  the  people 
were  so  systematically  destroyed,  that  fifty  yeai-s 
later,  men  listened  to  the  Book  of  the  Law  of  Je 
hovah  as  a  newly  discovered  treasure  (2  K.  xxii.  8). 
It  may  well  be,  according  to  a  Jewish  tradition,  that 
this  fanaticism  of  idolatry  led  Manasseh  to  order  the 
name  Jehovah  to  be  erased  from  all  documents  and 
inscriptions  (Patrick,  ad  loc.}.  All  this  involved 
also  a  systematic  violation  of  the  weekly  Sabbatic 
vest  and  the  consequent  loss  of  one  witness  against 
a  merely  animal  life  (Is.  Ivi.  2,  Iviii.  13).  Th« 
tide  of  corruption  carried  away  some  even  of  those 
who  as  priests  and  prophets,  should  have  been  stand 
fast  in  resisting  it  (Zeph.  iii.  4;  Jer.  ii.  26,  v.  13. 
vi.  13). 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  the  bitter  grief  and  burning 
indignation  of  those  who  continued  faithful.  The 
fiercest  zeal  of  Huguenots  in  Fiance,  of  Covenanters 
in  Scotland,  against  the  badges  and  symbols  of  the 
Latin  Church,  is  perhaps  but  a  faint  shadow  of 
that  which  grew  to  a  white  heat  in  the  hearts  of 
the  worshippers  of  Jehovah.  They  spoke  out  in 
words  of  corresponding  strength.  Evil  was  coming 
on  Jerusalem  which  should  make  the  ears  at'  men 
to  tingle  (2  K.  xxi.  12).  The  line  of  Samaria  and 
the  plummet  of  the  house  of  Ahab  should  be  th. 
doom  of  the  Holy  City.  Like  a  vessel  that  had 
once  been  full  of  precious  ointment  (comp.  the 
LXX.  dka&affrpov'),  but  had  afterwards  In-come 
foul.  Jerusalem  should  be  emptied  and  wiped  out, 
and  exposed  to  the  winds  of  Heaven  till  it  was 
cleansed.  Foremost,  we  may  well  believe,  among 
those  who  thus  bore  their  witness  was  the  old 
piojmrt,  now  bent  with  tin-  weignt  of  fourscore 


MANA8SKH 

years,  who  had  in  his  earlier  days  protested  with  | 
oqiud  courage  against  tlie  crimes  of  the  king's  | 
grandfather.  On  him  too,  according  to  the  old 
Jewish  tradition,  came  the  first  shock  of  the  per 
secution.  [ISAIAH.J  Habakkuk  may  have  shared 
his  martyrdom  (Keil  on  2  K.  xxi. ;  but  comp. 
HAHAKKUK).  But  the  persecution  did  not  stop 
there.  It  attacKed  the  whole  order  of  the  true 
prophets,  and  those  wno  followed  them  Every 
day  witnessed  an  execution  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  3,  §1). 
The  slaughter  was  like  that  under  Alva  or  Charles 
IX.  (2  K.  xxi.  16).  The  martyrs  who  were  faithful 
unto  death  had  to  endure  not  torture  only,  but  the 
mocks  and  taunts  of  a  godless  generation  (Is.  Ivii. 
1-4).  Lorfg  afterwards  the  remembrance  of  that 
reign  of  terror  lingered  in  the  minds  of  men  as  a 
guilt  for  which  nothing  could  atone  (2  K.  xxiv. 
4).  The  persecution,  like  most  other  persecutions 
carried  on  with  entire  singleness  of  purpose,  was 
fora,  time  successful  (Jer.  ii.  30).  The  prophets 
appear  no  more  in  the  long  history  of  Manasseh's 
reign.  The  heart  and  the  intellect  of  the  nation 
were  crushed  out,  and  there  would  seem  to  have 
oeen  no  chroniclers  left  to  record  this  portion  of  its 
history. 

Retribution  came  soon  in  the  natural  sequence 
of  events.  There  are  indications  that  the  neigh- 
Iwuring  nations — Philistines,  Moabites,  Ammonites 
— who  had  been  tributary  under  Hezekiah,  revolted 
at  some  period  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  and 
asserted  their  independence  (Zeph.  ii.  4-19  ;  Jer. 
xlvii.  xlviii.  xlix.).  The  Babylonian  alliance  bore 
the  fruits  which  had  been  predicted.  Hezekiah  had 
been  too  hasty  in  attaching  himself  to  the  cause  of 
the  rebel-prince  against  Assyria.  The  rebellion  of 
Merodach-Baladan  was  crushed,  and  then  the  wrath 
of  the  Assyrian  king  fell  on  those  who  had  supported 
him.  [ESARHAUDON.]  Judaea  was  again  over 
run  by  the  Assyrian  armies,  and  this  time  the  in 
vasion  was  more  successful  than  that  of  Sennacherib. 
The  city  apparently  was  taken.  The  king  himself 
was  made  prisoner  and  carried  off  to  Babylon. 
There  his  eyes  were  opened,  and  he  repented,  and 
his  prayer  was  heard,  and  the  Lord  delivered  him 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  12,  13;  comp.  Maurice,  Prophets 
and  Kings,  p.  362). 

Two  questions  meet  us  at  this  point.  (I)  Have 
we  satisfactory  grounds  for  believing  that  this 
^itement  is  historically  true?  (2)  If  we  accept 
it,  to  what  period  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  is  it  to 
be  assigned?  It  has  been  urged  in  regard  to  (1) 
that  the  silence  of  the  writer  of  the  books  of  Kings 
is  conclusive  against  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
narrative  of  2  Chronicles.  In  the  firmer  there  is 
no  mention  made  of  captivity  or  repentance  or 
return.  The  latter,  it  has  been  said,  yields  to  the 
temptation  of  pointing  a  moial,  of  making  history 
appear  more  in  harmony  with  his  own  notions  of 
the  Divine  government  than  it  actually  is.  His 
anxiety  to  deal  leniently  with  the  successors  of  David 
leads  him  to  invent  at  once  a  reformation  and  the 
captivity  which  is  represented  as  its  cause  (Winer, 
Rwb.  s.  v.  Manasseh  ;  Rosenmiiller,  Bibl.  Alterth.  i. 
2,  p.  131  ;  Hitzig,  Begr.  d.  Kritik,  p.  130,  quoted 
by  Keil).  It  will  be  necessary  in  dealing  with 
this  objection  to  meet  the  sceptical  critic  on  his  own 
ground.  To  say  that  his  reasoning  contradicts  our 
belief  in  the  inspiration  of  the  historical  books  of 
°'Cri])f,ure,  and  is  destructive  of  all  reverence  for 
them,  would  involve  a  petit io  principii,  and  how- 
iver  siroujrly  it  may  influence  our  feelings,  we  are 
^o'lDd  to  find  another  answer.  It  is  believed  that 


MANARSEH 


223 


that  answer  is  uot  far  to  seek,  ( 1 1  The  silence  qf 
a  writer  wno  sums  up  the  history  of  a  reign  of  55 
'•ears  in  19  verses  as  to  one  alleged  event  in  it  is 
mrely  a  weak  ground  foi  refusing  to  accept  that 
event  on  the  authority  of  another  historian.  (2) 
The  omission  is  in  part  explained  by  the  character 
of  the  narrative  of  2  K.  xxi.  The  writer  deliberately 
turns  away  from  the  history  of  the  days  of  shame, 
and  not  hss  from  the  personal  biography  of  the 
king.  He  looks  on  the  reign  only  as  it  contributed 
to  the  corruption  and  final  overthrow  of  the  king 
dom,  and  no  after-repentance  was  able  to  undo  the 
mischief  that  had  been  done  at  first.  (3)  Still 
keeping  on  the  level  of  humau  probabilitiee,  the 
character  of  the  writer  of  2  Chronicles,  obviously  a 
Levite,  and  looking  at  the  facts  of  the  history  from 
the  Levite  point  of  view,  would  lead  him  to  attach 
greater  importance  to  a  partial  reinstatement  of  the 
old  ritual  and  to  the  cessation  of  persecution,  and 
so  to  give  them  in  proportion  a  greater  prominence. 

(4)  There  is  one  peculiarity  in  the  history  which 
is,  in  some  measure,  of  the  nature  of  an  undesigned 
coincidence,  and  so  confirms  it.     The  captains  of 
the  host   of  Assyria   take   Manasseh  to  Babylon. 
Would  not  a  later  writer,  inventing  the  story,  have 
made  the  Assyrian,  and  not  the  Babylonian  capital, 
the  scene  of  the  captivity;  or  if  the  latter  were 
chosen  for  the  sake  of  harmony  with  the  prophecy 
of  Is.  xxxix.,  have  made  the  king  of  Babylon  rather 
than  of  Assyria  the  captor  ?  b     As  it  is,  the  narra 
tive  fits  in,  with  the  utmost  accuracy,  to  the  facts 
of  Oriental  history.     The  first  attempt  of  Babylon 
to  assert  its  independence  of  Nineveh  failed.    It  was 
crushed  by  Esarhaddon  (the  first  or  second  of  that 
name;  comp.  ESAIIHADDON,  and  Ewald,  Gesch.  Isr. 
iii.  675),  and  tor  a  time  the  Assyrian  king  held  his 
court  at  Babylon,  so  as  to  effect  more  completely 
the  reduction  of  the  rebellious  province.     There  is 

(5)  the  fact  of  agreement  with  the  intervention  of 
the  Assyrian  king  in  2  K.  xvii.  24,  just  at  the  same 
time.     The  king  is  not  named  there,  but  Ezra  iv. 
2,  10,  gives  Asnapper,  and  this  is  probably  only 
another  form  of  Asardanapar,  and  this  =  Esarhaddon 
(comp.   Ewald,   Gesch.  iii.  676:  Tob.  i.  21  gives 
Sarchedonus).      The    importation   of   tribes   from 
Eastern  Asia  thus  becomes  part  of  the  same  policy 
as  the  attack  on  Judah.     On  the  whole,  then,  the 
objection  may  well  be  dismissed   as  frivolous  and 
vexatious.     Like  many  other  difficulties  urged  by 
the  same  school,  it  has  in  it  something  at  once 
captious  and  puerile.     Those  who  lay  undue  stress 
on  them  act  in  the  spirit  of  a  clever  boy  asking 
puzzling  questions,  or  a  sharp  advocate  getting  up 
a  case  against  the  evidence  on  the  other  side,  rather 
than   in  that  of  critics  who  have  learnt  how  to 
construct  a   history   and    to    value    its    materials 
rightly  (comp.  Keil,  Comm.  on  2  K.  xxi.).    Ewald, 
a  critic  of  a  nobler  stamp,  whose  fault  is  rather  that 
of  fantastic  reconstruction  than  needless  scepticism 
(Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  678),  admits  the  groundwork  of 
truth.     Would  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  it  may  be 
asked,  h.ive  been  recorded  and  preserved  if  it  had  not 
been  fulfilled  ?     Might  not  Manasseh's  release  have 
been,  as  Ewald  suggests,  the  direct  consequence  of 
tl>e  death  of  Esarhaddon  ? 

The  circumstance  just  noticed  enables  us  to  return 
an  approximate  answer  to  the  other  question.  Tho 
duration  of  Esarhaddon's  Babylonian  reign  is  calcu 
lated  as  from  u.c.  680-667  ;  and  Manasseh'o  cap- 

b  It  may  be  noticed  that  this  was  actually  done  in  later 
apocryphal  traditions  (see  below). 


224 


ftlANASSEH 


tivity  must  thu-elbie  have  fallen  within  those  limits. 
A  Jewish  tradition  (Seder  Olam  Rabba,  c.  24)  fixes 
the  22nd  year  of  his  reign  as  the  exact  date ;  and 
this,  according  as  we  adopt  the  earlier  or  the  later 
date  of  his  accession,  would  give  B.C.  676  or  673. 

The  period  that  followed  is  dwelt  upon  by  the 
writer  of  2  Chr.  as  one  of  a  great  change  for  the 
better.  The  discipline  of  exile  made  the  king  feel 
that  the  gods  whom  he  had  Chosen  were  powerless 
to  deliver,  and  he  turned  in  his  heart  to  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  his  fathers.  The  compassion  or  death  of 
Ksarhaddon  led  to  his  release,  and  he  returned  after 
some  uncertain  interval  of  time  to  Jerusalem.  It 
is  not  improbable  that  his  absence  from  that  city  had 
given  a  breathing  time  to  the  oppressed  adherents  of 
the  ancient  creed,  and  possibly  had  brought  into  pro 
minence,  as  the  provisional  ruler  and  defender  of  the 
city,  one  of  the  chief  members  of  the  party.  If  the 
prophecy  of  Is.  xxii.  15  received,  :is  it  probably  did, 
its  fulfilment  inShcbna's  sharing  the  captivity  of  his 
master,  there  is  nothing  extravagant  in  the  belief 
that  we  may  refer  to  the  same  period  the  noble 
words  which  speak  of  Eliakim  the  son  of  Hilkiah  as 
taking  the  place  which  Shebna  should  leave  vacant, 
and  rising  up  to  be  "  a  father  unto  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  house  of  Judah,"  having 
"  the  key  of  the  house  of  David  on  his  shoulder." 

The  return  of  Manasseh  was  at  any  rate  followed 
by  a  new  policy.  The  old  faith  of  Israel  was  no 
longer  persecuted.  Foreign  idolatries  were  no  longer 
thrust,  in  all  their  foulness,  into  the  Sanctuary  itself. 
The  altar  of  the  Lord  was  again  restored,  and  peace- 
oHerings  and  thank-offerings  sacrificed  to  Jehovah 
(2  Chr.  xxxiii.  15,  16).  But  beyond  this  the  re 
formation  did  not  go.  The  ark  was  not  restored 
to  its  place.  The  book  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah 
remained  in  its  concealment.  Satisfied  with  the 
feeling  that  they  were  no  longer  worshipping  the 
gods  of  other  nations  by  name,  they  went  on  with 
a  mode  of  worship  essentially  idolatrous.  "  The 
people  did  sacrifice  still  in  the  high  places,  but  to 
Jehovah  their  God  only"  (ibid.  ver.  17). 

The  other  facts  known  of  Manasseh's  reign  con 
nect  themselves  with  the  state  of  the  world  round 
him.  The  Assyrian  monarchy  was  tottering  to  its 
fall,  and  the  king  of  Judah  seems  to  have  thought 
that  it  was  still  possible  for  him  to  rule  as  the  head 
of  a  strong  and  independent  kingdom.  If  he  had  to 
content  himself  with  a  smaller  territory,  he  might 
yet  guard  its  capital  against  attack,  by  a  new  wall 
defending  what  had  been  before  its  weak  side,  •'  to 
the  entering  in  of  the  fish-gate,"  and  completing  the 
tower  of  Ophel,e  which  had  been  begun,  with  a  like 
purpose,  by  Jotham  (2  Chr.  xxvii.  3).  Nor  were  the 
preparations  for  defence  limited  to  Jerusalem.  "  He 
put  captains  of  war  in  all  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah." 
There  was.  it  must  be  remembered,  a  special  reason 


•  A  comparison  of  the  description  of  these  fortifications 
with  Zeph.  1. 10  gives  a  special  Interest  and  force  to  the 
prophet's  words.  Manasseh  had  strengthened  the  city 
where  it  was  most  open  to  attack.  Zephanlah  points  u> 
the  defences,  and  says  that  they  shall  avail  nothing.  It  ia 
useless  to  trust  in  them :  "  There  shall  be  the  noise  of  a 
cry  from,  the  fish-gate." 

d  The  passage  referred  to  occurs  in  the  opening  para 
graphs  of  the  letter  of  the  Pseudo-Aristeas.  He  is  speak 
ing  of  the  large  number  of  Jews  (100,000)  who  had  been 
brought  into  Egypt  by  Ptolemy,  the  son  of  Lagus.  "  They, 
however,"  he  says,  "  were  not  the  only  Jews  there. 
Others,  though  not  so  many,  had  come  in  with  the  Per 
son.  Before  that  troops  had  been  sent,  by  virtue  oi  a 
treaty  of  alliance,  to  help  Psanunitkhua  against  the 


MANASSEH 

for  this  rxttiti.de,  over  and  above  f  hat  allorde  I  )\  iht 
condition  of  Assyria.  Egypt  had  emerged  from  the 
chaos  of  the  Dodecarchy  and  the  Ethiopian  intruders, 
and  was  become  strong  and  aggressive  under  I  Vain- 
mitichus.  Pushing  his  arms  northwards,  he  attacked 
the  Philistines ;  and  the  twenty-nine  years'  siege  oi 
Azotus  must  have  fallen  wholly  or  in  part  within  the 
reign  of  Manasseh.  So  far  his  progress  would  not 
be  unacceptable.  It  would  be  pleasant  to  see  the  olc 
hereditary  enemies  of  Israel,  who  had  lately  growi 
insolent  and  defiant,  meet  with  their  masters 
About  this  time,  accordingly,  we  find  the  though) 
of  an  Egyptian  alliance  again  beginning  to  gait 
favour.  The  prophets,  and  those  who  were  gui'led 
by  them,  dreaded  this  mere  than  anything,  and 
entered  their  protest  against  it.  Not  the  less, 
however,  from  this  time  forth,  did  it  continue  to 
be  the  favourite  idea  which  took  possession  of  the 
minds  of  the  lay-party  of  the  piiuces  of  Judah. 
The  very  name  of  Manasseh's  son,  Amon,  barely  ad 
mitting  a  possible  Hebrew  explanation,  but  identical 
in  form  and  sound  with  that  of  the  great  sun-god  of 
Egypt  (so  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  665),  is  probably  an 
indication  of  the  gladness  with  which  the  alliance 
of  Psammitichus  was  welcomed.  As  one  of  its  con 
sequences,  it  involved  probably  the  supply  of  troops 
from  Judah  to  serve  in  the  amiies  of  the  Egyptian 
king.  Without  adopting  Ewald's  hypothesis  flint 
this  is  referred  to  in  Deut.  xxviii.  68,  it  is  yet 
likely  enough  in  itself,  and  Jer.  ii.  14-16  seems  to 
allude  to  some  such  state  of  things.  In  return  for 
this  Manasseh,  we  may  believe,  received  the  help  ol 
the  chariots  and  horses  for  which  Egypt  was  always 
famous  (Is.  xxxi.  1).  (Comp.  Aristeas,  Epist.  ad 
Philocr.  in  Havercamp's  Josephus,  ii.  p.  104).d  If 
this  was  the  close  of  Manasseh's  reign,  we  can  well 
understand  how  to  the  writer  of  the  books  of  Kings  it 
would  seem  hardly  better  than  the  beginning,  leaving 
the  root-evil  uncured,  pi  eparing  the  way  for  worse 
evils  than^  itself.  We  can  understand  how  it  was  that 
on  his  death  he  was  buried  as  Ahaz  had  been,  not 
with  the  burial  of  a  king,  in  the  sepulchres  of  the 
house  of  David,  but  in  the  garden  of  Uzza  (2  K. 
xxi.  26),  and  that,  long  afterwards,  in  spite  of  his 
repentance,  the  Jews  held  his  name  in  abhorrence,  as 
one  of  the  three  kings  (the  other  two  are  Jeroboam 
and  Ahab)  who  had  no  part  in  eternal  life  (Sanhedr. 
ch.  xi.  1,  quoted  by  Patrick  on  2  Chr.  xxxiii.  13). 

And  the  evil  was  irreparable.  The  habits  of  * 
sensuous  and  debased  worship  had  eaten  into  tho 
life  of  the  people ;  and  though  they  might  be  re 
pressed  for  a  time  by  force,  as  in  the  reformation  of 
Josiah,  they  burst  out  again,  when  the  pressure  was 
removed,  with  fresh  violence,  and  rendered  even  the 
zeal  of  the  best  of  the  Jewish  kings  fruitful  chiefly 
in  hypocrisy  and  unreality. 

The  intellectual  life  of  the  people  suffered  in  the 


Ethiopians."  The  direct  authority  of  this  writer  is,  of 
course,  not  very  great ;  but  the  absence  of  any  motive  foi 
the  invention  of  such  a  fact  makes  it  probable  that  lir 
was  following  some  historical  records.  Ewald,  it  shoulc 
be  mentioned,  claims  the  credit  of  having  been  tho  first, 
to  discover  the  bearing  of  this  fact  on  the  history  of  Ma 
nasseh's  reign.  Another  indication  that  Ethiopia  was 
looked  on,  about  this  time,  as  among  the  enemies  of  Judah, 
may  be  found  in  Zeph.  ii.  12,  while  in  Zeph.  iii.  10  wo 
have  a  clear  statement  of  the  fact  that  a  great  multitude 
of  the  people  had  found  their  way  to  that  remote  country. 
The  story  tuld  by  Herodotus  of  the  revolt  of  the  Auto- 
moll  (ii.  30)  indicates  the  necessity  which  led  Psaniml- 
tichus  to  gather  mercenary  troops  from  all  quarters  da 
defence  of  that  frontier  of  bib  kingdom. 


MANA88EH 

same  degree.  The  persecution  cut  off  all  who, 
trained  in  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  -were  the 
thinkers  and  teachers  of  the  people.  The  reign  of 
Manasseh  witnessed  the  close  of  the  work  of  Isaiah 
and  Habakkuk  at  its  beginning,  and  the  youth 
nf  Jeremiah  and  Zephaniah  at  its  conclusion,  but 
no  prophetic  writings  illumine  that  dreary  half 
century  of  debasement.'  The  most  fearful  symptom 
of  all  when  a  prophet's  voice  was  again  heard  during 
the  minority  of  Josiah,  was  the  atheism  which,  then 
as  in  other  ages,  followed  on  the  confused  adoption  of 
a  conflueift  polytheism  (Zeph.  i.  12).  It  is  surely 
a  strained,  almost  a  fantastic  hypothesis,  to  assign 
(as  Ewald  does)  to  such  a  period  two  such  noble 
works  as  Deuteronomy  and  thz  Book  of  Job.  Nor 
was  this  dying-out  of  a  true  taith  the  only  evil. 
The  systematic  persecution  of  the  worshippers  of 
Jehovah  accustomed  the  people  to  the  horrors  of 
t.  religious  war ;  and  when  they  in  their  turn 
gained  the  ascendancy,  they  used  the  opportunity 
with  a  fiercer  sternness  than  had  been  known  before. 
Jehoshaphat  and  Hezekiah  in  their  reforms  had 
been  content  with  restoring  the  true  worship  and 
destroying  the  instruments  of  the  false.  In  that  of 
Josiah,  the  destruction  extends  to  the  priests  of  the 
high  places  whom  he  sacrifices  on  their  own  altars 
(2  K.  xxiii.  20). 

But  little  is  added  by  later  tradition  to  the 
0.  T.  narrative  of  Manasseh's  reign.  The  prayer 
Jiat  bears  his  name  among  the  apocryphal  books 
cajj  hardly,  in  the  absence  of  any  Hebrew  original, 
be  considered  as  identical  with  that  referred  to  in 
2  Chr.  xxxiii.,  and  is  probably  rather  the  result  of 
an  attempt  to  work  out  the  hint  there  supplied 
than  the  reproduction  of  an  older  document.  There 
are  reasons,  however,  tor  believing  that  there  existed 
at  some  time  or  other,  a  fuller  history,  more  or  less 
legendary,  of  Manasseh  and  his  conversion,  from 
which  the  prayer  may  possibly  have  been  an  excerpt 
preserved  for  devotional  purposes  (it  appears  for 
the  first  time  in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions)  when 
the  rest  was  rejected  as  worthless.  Scattered  here 
and  there,  we  find  the  disjecta  membra  of  such  a 
work.  Among  the  offences  of  Manasseh,  the  most 
prominent  is,  that  he  places  in  the  sanctuary  an 
fryoA/ua  TfTf>airp6<ro:irov  of  Zeus  (Suidas,  s.  v.  Ma- 
vaffffris ;  Georg.  Syncellus,  Chronograph.  \.  404). 
The  charge  on  which  he  condemns  Isaiah  to  death 
is  that  of  blasphemy,  the  words,  "  I  saw  the  Lord  " 
(is.  vi.  1)  being  treated  as  a  presumptuous  boast 
at  variance  with  Ex.  xxxiii.  20  (Nic.  de  Lyra,  from 
a  Jewish  treatise :  Jebamoth,  quoted  by  Amama, 
in  Grit.  Sacri  on  2  K.  xxi.).  Isaiah  is  miracu 
lously  rescued.  A  cedar  opens  to  receive  him.  Then 
conies  the  order  that  the  cedar  should  be  sawn 
through  (ibid.).  That  which  made  this  sin  the 
greater  was,  that  the  king's  mother,  Hephzibah, 
was  the  daughter  of  Isaiah.  When  Manasseh  was 
taken  captive  by  Merodach  and  taken  to  Babylon 
(Suidas),  he  was  thrown  into  prison  and  fed  daily 
with  a  scanty  allowance  of  bran-bread  and  water 
mixed  with  vinegar.  Then  came  his  condemnation. 
He  was  encased  in  a  brazen  image  (the  description 
suggests  a  punishment  like  that  of  the  bull  of  Pe- 
rillus),  but  he  repented  and  prayed,  and  the  image 
clave  asunder,  and  he  escaped  (Suidas  and  Georg. 
Syncellus).  Then  he  returned  to  Jerusalem  and 
lived  righteously  and  justly.  [E.  H.  P.] 

2.  (Muvaffffri :  Manasse.}  One  of  the  descendants 


MANASSEH 


225 


of  Pahath-Moab,  who  in  the  oays  of  Kzra  had  m*r- 
ried  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  30).  In  1  Eal.  is,  31 
he  is  called  MANASSEAS. 

3.  One  of  the  laymen,  of  the  tauu'ly  01'  ilashum, 
who  put  away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  coomand 
(Ezr.  x.  33).     He  is  called  MANASSES  in  1  Esd. 
ix.  33. 

4.  (Moyses.')  In  the  Hebrew  text  of  Judg.  tvni. 
30,  the  name  of  the  priest  of  the  graven  image  of 
the  Danites  is  given  as  "  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Ger- 
shom,  the  son  of  Manasseh" ;  the  last  word  being 
written  fifjOjo,  and  a  Masoretic  note  calling  atten 
tion  to  the  "  nun  suspended."     "  The  fate  of  this 
superposititious  letter,"  says  Kennicott  (Z)iss.  ii. 
53),   "  has   been  very  various,   sometimes   placed 
over  the  word,  sometimes  suspended  half-way,  and 
sometimes  uniformly  inserted."    Jarchi's  note  upon 
the  passage  is  as  follows : — "  On  account  of  the 
honour  of  Moses  he  wrote  Nun  to  change  the  name  ; 
and  it  is  written  suspended  to  signify  that  it  was 
not  Manasseh  but  Moses."     The  LXX.,   Peshito- 
Syriac,  and  Chaldee  all  read  "  Manasseh,"  but  the 
Vulgate  retains  the  original  and  undoubtedly  the 
true  reading,  Moyses.     Three  of  De  Rossi's  MSS. 
had  originally  nt^JO,  "  Moses ;"  and  this  was  also 
the  residing  "of  three  Greek  MSS.  in  the  Library 
of  St.  Germain  at  Paris,  of  one  in  the  Library  of 
the  Carmelites  of  the  same  place,  of  a  Greek  MS., 
No,  331,  in  the  Vatican,   and   of  a   MS.  of  the 
Octateuch  in  University  College  Library,  Oxford " 
(Burrington,   Genealogies,  i.  86).      A  passage  in 
Theodoret  is  either  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the  two 
readings,  or  indicates  that  in  some  copies  at  least 
of  the  Greek  they  must  have  coexisted.     He  ouotes 
the  clause  in  question  in  this  foim,  'iwvadav  .  .  . 
vlbs  Mavafffffj  vlov   Trifiaa/j.  vlov  Mooffij ;  and  this 
apparently   gave   rise  to   the   assertion   of   Killer 
(Arcanum   Keri  et   Kethib,   p.  187,    quoted    by 
Rosenmiiller  on  Judg.  xviii.  30),  that  the  "  Nun 
suspended  "  denotes  that  the  previous  word  is  trans 
posed.    He  accordingly  proposes  to  read  |3  }n31!"P 
DCJnH  p  n£?3E:  but  although  his  judgment  on 
the  point  is  accepted  as  final  by  Rosenmiiller  it  has 
not  the  smallest  authority.     Kennicott  attributes 
the  presence  of  the  Nun  to  the  corruption  of  MSS. 
by  Jewish  transcribers.    With  regard  to  the  chrono 
logical  difficulty  of  accounting  for  the  presence  of  a 
grandson  of  Moses  at  an  apparently  late  period,  there 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  last  live  chapters 
of  Judges  refer  to  earlier  events  than  those  after  which 
they  are  placed.     In  xx.  28  Phinehas  the  son  of 
Eleazar,  and  therefore  the  grandson  of  Aaron,  is  said 
to  have  stood  before  the  ark,  and  there  is  therefore 
no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  a  granason  of  Moses 
might  be  alive  at  the  same  time,  which  was  not  long 
after  the  death  of  Joshua.  Josephus  places  the  episode 
of  the  Benjamites  before  that  of  the  Gadites,  and  in 
troduces  them  both  before  the  invasion  of  Chushau- 
rishathaim  and  the  deliverance  of  Israel  hy  Othniel, 
narrated  in  Judg.  iii.  (Ant.  v.  2,  §8-v.  3,  §1 :  see 
also  Kennicott's  Dissertations,  ii.  51-57;  Dissert. 
Gener.  p.  10).     It  may  be  as  well  to  mention  a 
tradition  recorded  by  R.  David  Kimchi,  that  in  the 
genealogy   of  Jonathan,  Manasseh   is  written    for 
Moses  because  he  did  the  deed  of  Manasseh,  the 
idolatrous  king  of  Judah.    A  note  from  the  margin 
of  a    Hebrew    MS.    quoted   by  Kennicott   (Diss. 
Gen.  p.  10)  is  as  follows: — "  He  is  called  by  the 


'  Them  is  a  possible  exception  to  this  In  the  existence    has  n>v  afxaimuv,  am'   'In-  A.  V.  '•  tue  seers "  (2  Cbt 
wf  a  prvpiiot  Hozai  (the  Vul*.  rendering,  where  the  1JIX.    zxxiit.  19);  but  nothing  else  is  known  of  fclw. 
voi,   II. 


226 


MANASSES 


name  of  Manasseh  th<>  <son  of  Hezekiah,  for  he  also 
made  the  graven  image  in  the  Temple."  It  must 
be  confessed  that  the  point  of  this  is  not  very 
apparent.  [W.  A.  W.~| 

MANAfc'SES  (Mavaffffris  :  Manasses).  1. 
MANASSUH  4,  of  the  sons  of  Hashum  (1  Esd.  ix.  33  ; 
comp.  Ezr.  x.  33). 

2.  MANASSEH,  king  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  10),  to 
whom  the  apocryphal  prayer  is  attributed. 

3.  MANASSEH,  the  son  of  Joseph  (Rev.  vii.  6). 

4.  A  wealthy  inhabitant  of  Bethulia,  and  husband 
of  Judith,  according  to  the  legend.    He  was  smitten 
with  a  sunstroke  while  superintending  the  labourers 
in  his  fields,  leaving  Judith  a  widow  with  great 
possessions    (Jud.    viii.  2,  7,   x.  3,    xvi.  22,  23, 
24),  and  was  buried  between  Dothan  and   Baal- 
hamon. 


MANAS  'SES,  THE  PRAYER  OF 
tuxb  Mavcurffri).  1.  The  repentance  and  restora 
tion  of  Manasseh  (2  Chr.  xxxiii.  12  ff.)  furnished 
the  subject  of  many  legendary  stories  (Fabric.  Cod. 
Apocr.  V.  T.  1101  f.).  "His  prayer  unto  his 
God  "  was  still  preserved  "  in  the  book  of  the  kings 
rf  Israel  "  when  the  Chronicles  were  compiled 
V2  Chr.  xxxiii.  18),  and,  after  this  record  was  lost, 
the  subject  was  likely  to  attract  the  notice  of  later 
writers."  "  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh,"  which  is 
found  in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  is  the  work  of 
one  who  has  endeavoured  to  express,  not  without 
true  feeling,  the  thoughts  of  the  repentant  king. 
It  opens  with  a  description  of  the  majesty  of  God 
(1-5),  which  passes  into  a  description  of  His  mercy 
in  granting  repentance  to  sinners  '(6-8,  ifutl  T<£ 
i.uapToJXo)).  Then  follows  a  personal  confession 
and  supplication  to  God  as  "  the  God  of  them  that 
repent,"  "  hymned  by  all  the  powers  of  heaven," 
to  whom  belongs  "  glory  for  ever  "  (9-15,  ffov 
4ffnv  i]  5<f£o  fls  rovs  aluvas).  "  And  the  Lord 
heard  the  voice  of  Manasses  and  pitied  him,"  the 
legend  continues,  "  and  there  came  around  him  a 
flame  of  fire,  and  all  the  irons  about  him  (TO  iff  pi 
avrbv  ffiSripa)  were  melted,  and  the  Lord  delivered 
him  out  of  his  affliction  "  (Const.  Apost.  ii.  22  ; 
comp.  Jul.  Afric.  ap.  Routh,  Rel.  Sac.  ii.  288). 

2.  The  Greek  text  is  undoubtedly  original,  and 
not  a  mere  translation  from  the  Hebrew  ;  and  even 
within  the  small  space  of  fifteen  verses  some  pecu 
liarities  are  found  (Atrrtitros,  K\ivtu>  y6vv  Kap- 
8/ay,  irapopyi&iv  rbv  8v/j.6v,  rlOeffBai  fierdvotdv 
rivt).     The  writer  was  well  acquainted  with  the 
LXX.   (ret  KaTtirara  rrjs  yijs,   fb  v\rjOos   TJJS 
•XJ»]ffTOTi\T&s   ffov,    iroero   ij    Svva.fj.ts   rS>v  ovpa- 
tSev)  ;  but  beyond  this  there  is  nothing  to  determine 
the  date  at  which  he  lived.     The  allusion  to  the 
patriarchs  (ver.  8,  SIKCUOI  ;  ver.  1,  rb  fftr(p/.ia  av- 
r&v  rb  Slicatov)  appears  to  fix  the  authorship  on  a 
Jew;  but  the  clear  teaching  on  repentance  points 
to  a  time  certainly  not  long  before  the  Christian 
ern.     Thjrs  is  no  indication  of  the  place  at  which  the 
Prayer  was  written. 

3.  The  earliest  reference  to  the  Prayer  is  con 
tained  in  a  fragment  of  Julius  Africanus  (cir.  221 
A.D.),  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  words  in 
their  original  form  clearly  referred  to  the  present 
composition  (Jul.  Afric.  fr.  40).     It  is,  however, 
piven   at   length   in   the  Apostolical  Constitutions 
(ii.  22),  in  which  it  is  followed  by  a  narrative  of 


MANDRAKES 

the  same  apocryphal  facts  (§1)  as  arc  quoted  froai 
Africanus.  The  Prayer  is  found  in  the  Alexandrine 
MS.  in  the  collection  of  hymns  and  metrical  prayers 
which  is  appended  to  the  Psalter  —  a  position  which 
it  generally  occupies  ;  but  in  the  three  Latin  MSS. 
used  by  Sabatier  it  is  placed  at  the  end  of  2  Chr. 
(Sabat.  Bibl.  Lat.  iii.  1038). 

4.  The  Prayer  was  never  distinctly  recognised  as 
a  canonical  writing,  though  it  was  included  in  in.iny 
MSS.  of  the  LXX.  and  of  the  Latin  version,  and 
has  been  deservedly  retained  among  the  apocrypha 
in  A.  V.  and  by  Luther.     The  Latin  translation 
which  occurs  in  Vulgate  MSS.  is  not  by  the  hand 
of  Jerome,  and  has  some  remarkable  phrases  (insus- 
tentabilis,  importabilis  (4wjr<J<TTaTos),  omnis  virtus 
coelorum)  ;  but  there  is  no  sufficient  internal  evi 
dence  to  show  whether  it  is  earlier  or  later  than  his 
time.    It  does  not,  however,  seem  to  have  been  used 
by  any  Latin  writer  of  the  first  four  centuries,  and 
was  not  known  to  Victor  Tunonensis  in  the  6th 
(Ambrosius,  iv.  989,  ed.  Migne). 

5.  The  Commentary  of  Fritzsche  (Exeg.  Handb. 
1851)  contains  all  that  is  necessary  for  the  inter 
pretation  of  the  Prayer,  which  is,  indeed,  in  little 
need  of  explanation.    The  Alexandrine  text  seems  to 
have  been  interpolated  in  some  places,  while  it  also 
omits  a  whole  clause  ;  but  at  present  the  materials 
for  settling  a  satisfactory  text  have  not  been  col 
lected.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MANASS'ITES,  THE  OBta,  t.  e.  «  the 


Manassite"  :  6  Mavaffffrj  :  Manasse),  that  is,  the 
members  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  The  word  occurs 
but  thrice  in  the  A.  V.  viz.  Deut.  iv.  43;  Judg. 
xii.  4;  and  2  K.  x.  33.  In  the  first  and  last  of 
these  the  original  is  as  given  above,  but  in  the  other 
it  is  "Manasseh"  —  "  Fugitives  of  Ephraim  are  you, 
Gilead  ;  in  the  midst  of  Ephraim,  in  the  midst  of 
Manasseh."  It  may  be  well  to  take  this  oppor 
tunity  of  remarking,  that  the  point  of  the  verse 
following  that  just  quoted  is  lost  in  the  A.  V., 
from  the  word  which  in  ver.  4  is  rightly  rendered 
"  fugitive  "  being  there  given  as  "  those  which  were 
escaped."  Ver.  5  would  more  accurately  be,  "  And 
Gilead  seized  the  fords  of  the  Jordan-of-Ephraim  ; 
and  it  was  so  that  when  fugitives  of  Ephraim  said, 
'  I  will  go  over,'  the  men  of  Gilead  said  to  him, 
'  Art  thou  an  Ephraimite?'  "  —  the  point  being  that 
the  taunt  of  the  Ephraimites  was  turned  against 
themselves.  G.] 


MAN'DRAKES  (D'XTIV  duddim: 

HavSpayopuv,  ol  /j.av$pay6pcu  :  mandragorae). 
"  It  were  a  wearisome  and  superfluous  task,"  says 
Oedmann  (  Vermisch.  Samml.  i.  v.  95),  "  to  quote 
and  pass  judgment  on  the  multitude  of  authors 
who  have  written  about  dudaim  :"  but  the  reader 
who  cares  to  know  the  literature  of  the  subject  will 
find  a  long  list  of  authorities  in  Celsius  (Ilierob. 
i.  1,  sq.)  and  in  Rudbeck  (De  DudMm  Rubenis, 
Upsal,  1733).  See  also  Winer,  (Bibl.  RealwSrt. 
"  Alraun  ").  The  dudaim  (the  word  occurs  only 
in  the  plural  number)  are  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxx. 
14,  15,  16,  and  in  Cant.  vii.  13.  From  the  former 
passage  we  learn  that  they  were  found  in  the 
fields  of  Mesopotamia,  where  Jacob  and  his  wives 
were  at  one  time  living,  and  that  the  fruit 
(jtfjAa  fjiavSpayopcey,  LXX.)  was  gathered  "  in  the 


•  Kw&ld  (Gesch.  iii.  679)  is  Inclined  to  think  that  the 
Oreek  m»y  have  been  based  on  the  Hebrew.  There  Is  at 
leut  uo  trarr  of  such  an  origin  of  the  Greek  text. 


•  Various  etymologies  have  been  proposed  for  this  word ; 
the  most  probable  Is  that  it  comes  from  the  root  "M"5!, 
•'  to  love."  whence  "J^,  "  love." 


MAN7  DRAKES 

cays  of  'vhcat-harvest,"  t.  e.  in  May.  There  is  evi 
dently  also  an  allusion  to  the  supposed  properties  | 
of  this  plant  to  promote  conception,  hence  Rachel's 
desire  of  obtaining  the  fruit,  for  as  yet  she  had  not 
borne  children.  In  Cant.  vii.  13  it  is  said,  "  the 
duddim  give  a  smell,  and  at  our  gates  are  all  man 
ner  of  pleasant  fruits  " — from  this  passage  we  learn 
that  the  plant  in  question  was  strong-scented,  and 
that  it  grew  in  Palestine.  Various  attempts  have 
been  made  to  identify  the  duddim.  Rudbeck  the 
younger — the  same  who  maintained  that  the  quails 
which  fed  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  were 
"  flying  fish,"  and  who,  as  Oedmann  has  truly  re 
marked,  seems  to  have  a  special  gift  for  demon 
strating  anything  he  pleases — supposed  the  duddim 
were  "  bramble-berries"  (Rubies  caesius,  Linn.),  a 
theory  which  deserves  no  serious  consideration. 
OeHus,  who  supposes  that  a  kind  of  Rhamnus  is 
/•  eant,  is  far  from  satisfactory  in  his  conclusions ; 
he  identifies  the  duddim  with  what  he  calls  Lotus 
Gyrenaica,  the  Sidra  of  Arabic  authors.  This  ap 
peal's  to  be  the  lotus  of  the  ancients,  Zizyphus  lotus. 
See  Shaw's  Travels,  i.  263,  and  Sprengel,  Hist. 

5U 

Rei  herb.  i.  251 ;   Freytag,  Ar.  Lex.  s.  v.  .Jy**. 

Celsius's  argument  is  based  entirely  upon  the  autho 
rity  of  a  certain  Rabbi  (see  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm. 
p.  1202),  who  asserts  the  duddim  to  be  the  fruit  of 
the  mayisch  (the  lotus?)  ;k  but  the  authority  of  a 
single  Rabbi  is  of  little  weight  against  the  almost 
unanimous  testimony  of  the  ancient  versions.  With 
still  less  reason  have  Castell  (Lex.  Hept.  p.  2052) 
and  Ludolf  (Hist.  Aeth.  i.  c.  9),  and  a  few  others, 
advanced  a  claim  for  the  Musa  paradisiaca,  the 
banana,  to  denote  the  duddim.  Faber,  following 
Ant.  Deusing  (Dissert,  de  Dudaim),  thought  the 
duddim  were  small  sweet-scented  melons  (Cucumis 
dudaim),  which  grow  in  Syria,  Egypt,  and  Persia, 
known  by  the  Persians  as  distemhujeh,  a  word 
which  means  "  fragrance  in  the  hand  ;"  and  Sprengel 
(Hist.  i.  17)  appears  to  have  entertained  a  similar 
belief.  This  theory  is  certainly  more  plausible 
than  many  others  that  have  been  adduced,  but  it 
is  unsupported  except  by  the  Persian  version  in 
Genesis.  Various  other  conjectures  have  from  time 
to  time  been  made,  as  that  the  ditddim  are 
"lilies,"  or  "citrons,"  or  "baskets  of  figs" — all 
mere  theories. 

The  most  satisfactory  attempt  at  identification  is 
certainly  that  which  supposes  the  mandrake  (Atropa 
mandragord)  to  be  the  plant  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
word.  The  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  the  Syriac,  and  the 
Arabic  versions,  the  Targums,  the  most  learned  of 
the  Rabbis,  and  many  later  commentators,  are  in 
favour  of  the  translation  of  the  A.  V.  The  argu 
ments  which  Celsius  has  adduced  against  the 
mandrake  being  the  d>jddim  have,  been  most  ably 
answered  by  Michaelis  (see  Supp.  ad  Lex.  ffeb. 
No.  451).  It  is  well  known  that  the  man 
drake  is  far  from  odoriferous,  the  whole  plant 
being,  in  European  estimation  at  all  events,  very 
fetid ;  on  this  account  Celsius  objected  to  its  being 
the  duddim,  which  he  supposed  were  said  in  the 
Canticles  to  be  fragrant.  Michaelis  has  shown  that 
nothing  of  the  kind  is  asserted  in  Scripture:  the 


MANDRAKES 


227 


duddim  "  give  forth  ah  odour,"  which,  hc-wever, 
may  be  one  of  no  fragrant  nature ;  the  invitation 
to  the  "  beloved  to  go  forth  into  the  fit  Id  "  is  full 
of  force  if  we  suppose  the  duddim  ("  love  plants  ") 
to  denote  the  mandrake.0  Again,  the  odour  or 
flavour  of  plants  is  after  all  a  matter  of  opinion, 
for  Schulz  (Leitung.  des  Hochsten,  v.  197),  who 
found  mandrakes  on  Mount  Tabor,  says  of  them, 
"  they  have  a  delightful  smell,  and  the  taste  is 
equally  agreeable,  though  not  to  everybody."  Maiiti 
(Trav.  iii.  146)  found  on  the  7th  of  May,  near  the 
hamlet  of  St.  John  in  "  Mount  Juda,"  mandrake 
plants,  the  fruit  of  which  he  says  "  is  of  the  size  and 
colour  of  a  small  apple,  ruddy  and  of  a  most  agree 
able  odour."  Oedmann,  after  quoting  a  number  of 
authorities  to  show  that  the  mandrakes  were  prized 
by  the  Arabs  for  their  odour,  makes  the  following 
just  remark  : — "  It  is  known  that  Orientals  set  an 
especial  value  on  strongly  smelling  things  that  to 
more  delicate  European  senses  are  unpleasing  .  .  . 
The  intoxicating  qualities  of  the  mandrake,  far  from 
lessening  its  value,  would  rather  add  to  it,  for 
every  one  knows  with  what  relish  the  Orientals 
use  all  kinds  of  preparations  to  produce  intoxi 
cation." 


The  Arabic  version  of  Saadias  has  luffach  d  =  raan- 
dragora ;  in  Onkelos  yabruchin,  and  in  Syriac  yabruck  • 
express  the  Hebrew  dudaim:  now  we  learn  from 
Mariti  (Trav.  iii.  146,  ed.  Lond.  1792)  that  a  word 


This  plant,  according  to  Abulfadli,  corre 


sponds  with  the  Arabic 


,  which,  however,  Spren- 


•  "  Qui  quidem  quod  hircinus  est  quodammodo,  vlresque 
mandragorae  In  Aphrodisiacis  laudantur,  amoribus  aura! 
pertlare  videtnr  et  ad  eos  stimulare." 


gel  Identifies  with  Zizypkus  I'aliurus. 


Z  3 

.uu. 


'  prmrr 
•  .    ,  . 


0  2 


228 


MAN  EH 


similar  to  this  last-  was  npplied  by  the  Arabs  to  the 
mandrake — be  says  "  the  Arabs  call  it  jabrohaft."1 
Celsius  asserts  that  the  mandrake  has  not  the  pro 
perty  which  K.TS  been  attributed  to  it :  it  is,  how 
ever,  a  matter  of  common  belief  in  the  East  that 
this  plant  has  the  power  to  aid  in  the  procreation 
of  offspring.  Schultz,  Maundr»ll,  Mariti,  all  allude 
to  it;  compare  «!so  Dioscorides,  iv.  76,  Sprengel's 
Annotations  ;  and  Theophrastns,  Hist.  Plant,  ix.  9, 
§1.  Venus  was  called  Mandragoritis  by  the  an 
cient  Greeks  (Hesych.  s.  t>.),  and  the  fruit  of  the 
plant  was  termed  "  apples  of  love." 

That  the  fruit  was  fit  to  be  gathered  at  the  time 
of  wheat-harvest  is  clear  from  the  testimony  of 
several  travellers.  Schultze  found  mandrake-apples 
on  the  15th  of  May.  Hasselqaist  saw  them  at 
Nazareth  early  in  May.  He  says :  "  I  had  not  the 
pleasure  to  see  the  plant  in  blossom,  the  fruit  now 
[May  5,  0.  S.]  hanging  ripe  on  the  stem  which 
lay  withered  on  the  ground  " — he  conjectures  that 
they  are  Rachel's  dudaim.  Dr.  Thomson  ( The 
Land  and  the  Book,  p.  577)  found  mandrakes  ripe 
on  the  lower  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon  towards 
the  end  of  April. 

From  a  certain  rude  resemblance  of  old  roots  of 
the  mandrake  to  the  human  form,  whence  Pytha 
goras  is  said  to  have  called  the  mandrake  &v6pwtr6- 
pnptpni,  and  Columella  (10,  19)  semihomo,  some 
strange  superstitious  notions  have  arisen  concerning 
it.  Josephus  (#.  /.  vii.  6,  §3)  evidently  alludes  to 
one  i)f  these  superstitions,  though  he  calls  the  plant 
binrns.  In  a  Vienna  MS.  of  Dioscorides  is  a  curious 
drawing  which  represents  Euresis,  the  goddess  of 
discovery,  handing  to  Dioscorides  a  root  of  the 
mandrake ;  the  dog  employed  for  the  purpose  is 
depicted  in  the  agonies  of  death  (Daubeny's  Roman 
Husbandry,  p.  275). 6 

The  mandrake  is  found  abundantly  in  the  Grecian 
islands,  and  in  some  parts  of  the  south  of  Europe. 
The  root,  is  spindle-shaped  and  often  divided  into 
two  or  three  forks.  The  leaves,  which  are  long, 
sharp-pointed,  and  hahy,  rise  immediately  from 
the  ground  ;  they  are  of  a  dark-green  colour.  The 
flowers  are  dingy  white,  stained  with  veins  of 
purple.  The  fruit  is  of  a  pale  orange  colour,  and 
about  the  size  of  a  nutmeg ;  but  it  would  appear 
that  the  plant  varies  considerably  in  appearance 
according  to  the  localities  where  it  grows.  The 
mandrake  (Atropa  m'mdragora)  is  closely  allied  to 
the  well-known  deadly  nightshade  (A.  belladonna), 
and  belongs  to  the  order  Solanaceae.  [W.  H.] 

MANEH.     [WKIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.] 

MANGER.  This  word  occurs  only  in  con 
nexion  with  the  birth  of  Christ,  in  Luke  ii.  7,  12, 
1C.  The  original  term  is  <f>drv-rt,  which  is  found 
but  once  besides  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.  Luke  xiii.  15, 
where  it  is  rendered  by  "stall."  The  word  in 
classical  Greek  undoubtedly  means  a  manger,  crib, 
or  feeding  trough  (see  Liddell  and  .Scott,  Lex. 
t.  iO;  but  according  to  Schleusner  its  real 
signification  in  the  N.  T.  is  the  open  court 
yard,  attached  to  the  inn  or  khan,  and  enclosed  by 
a  ro-'gh  fence  of  stones,  wattle,  or  other  slight 
material,  into  which  the  cattle  would  be  shut 

'  The  Arabs  call  the  fruit  tuphach  el  thfltan,  "  the 
Atvll's  apple,"  from  its  power  to  excite  voluptuousness. 

t  Comp.  also  Shaksp  Henry  IV.,  I't.  11.  Act  i.  Sc.  2; 
Kan.  and  Jut.,  Act  iv.  Sc.  3;  P'Hcrbolot,  HMiath. 
f/nent.  n  v.  "  Abrousaimm.'' 

who  desire  10  see  all  that  can  be  uld  on  the 


MANLOJS,  T. 

at  night,  and  where  the  poorer  travellers  might 
unpack  their  animals  and  take  up  their  lodging, 
when  they  were  either  by  want  of  room  or  want  oi 
means  excluded  from  the  house.  This  conclusion  is 
supported  by  the  rendering  of  the  Vulg. — praesep* 

— and   of  the  Peshito-Syriac,  |L*9OJ,  both  which 

terms  mean  "  enclosures," — and  also  by  the  customs 
of  Palestine.*  Stables  and  mangers  in  the  sense  in 
which  we  understand  them,  are  of  comparatively 
late  introduction  into  the  East  (?ee  the  quotations 
from  Chardiu  and  others  in  Hanner's  Observations, 
ii.  205, 6),  and  although  they  have  furnished  material 
to  painters  and  poets,  did  not  enter  into  the  circum 
stances  attending  the  birth  of  Christ — and  are  hardly 
less  inaccurate  than  the  "  cradle"  and  the  "stable,"1" 
which  are  named  in  some  descriptions  of  that  event. 

This  applies,  however,  only  to  the  painters  of  the 
later  schools.  The  early  Christian  artists  seem 
almost  invariably  to  represent  the  Nativity  as  in 
an  open  and  detached  court-yard.  A  crib  or  trough 
is  occasionally  shown,  but  not  prominently,  and 
more  as  if  symbolic  of  the  locality  than  as  actually 
existing. 

The  above  interpretation  of  $><£T«TJ  is  of  course 
at  variance  with  the  traditional  belief  that  the  Na 
tivity  took  place  in  a  cave.  Professor  Stanley  \\ax 
however  shown  (S.  $  P.  440,  441 ;  see  also  153) 
how  destitute  of  foundation  this  tradition  is.  And 
it  should  not  be  overlooked  that  the  two  apociy- 
phal  Gospels  which  appeal-  to  be  its  main  founda 
tion,  the  Protevangelion  and  the  Gospel  of  the  In 
fancy,  do  not  represent  the  cave  as  belonging  to  the 
inn — in  tact,  do  not  mention  the  inn  in  connexion 
with  the  Nativity  at  all,  while  the  former  does 
not  introduce  the  manger  and  the  inn  till  a  later 
period,  that  of  the  massacre  of  the  innocents  (Protev. 
chap.  xvi.).  [G.] 

MA'NI  (Mavl :  Banni}.  The  same  as  BANI,  4 
(1  Esd.  ix.  30  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  29). 

MAN'LIUS,  T.  In  the  account  of  the  con 
clusion  of  the  campaign  of  Lysias  (B.C.  163)  against 
the  Jews  given  in  2  Mace,  xi.,  four  letters  are  intro 
duced,  of  which  the  last  purports  to  be  from  "  L. 
Memmius  and  Q.  Manlius,  ambassadors  (itpta&u- 
rai)  of  the  Romans"  (ver.  34-38)  confirming 
the  concessions  made  by  Lysias.  There  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  the  letter  is  a  fabrication.  No 
such  names  occur  among  the  many  legates  to  Syria 
noticed  by  Polybius ;  and  there  is  no  room  foi 
the  mission  of  another  embassy  between  two  re 
corded  shortly  before  and  after  the  death  of  Anti 
ochus  Epiphanos  (Polyb.  xxxi.  9,  6  ;  12, 9  ;  Grimm 
nd  toe.).  If,  as  seems  likely,  the  true  reading  it 
T.  Manius  (not  Manlius1),  the  writer  was  probably 
thinking  of  the  former  embassy  when  C.  Sulpicius 
and  Manius  Sergius  were  sent  to  Syria.  The  form 
of  the  letter  is  no  less  fatal  to  the  idea  of  it*  au 
thenticity  than  the  names  in  which  it  is  written. 
The  use  of  the  aera  of  the  Seleucidae  to  fix  the  year, 
the  omission  of  the  name  of  the  place  at  which  it  was 
dated,  and  the  exact  coincidence  of  the  date  of  this 
letter  with  that  of  the  young  Antiochus,  are  all  suspi 
cious  circumstances.  Moreover,  the  first  intercourse 


meaning  of  $&.-rvr\  In  the  N.  T.  and  in  the  LXX.,  as  bear 
ing  on  the  N.  T.,  will  find  it  In  the  1 6th  chapter  of  th« 
2nd  book  of  P.  Hor-pi,  MiscelL  criticorum  liltri  duo: 
Leocnrdiae,  173? 

t>  See  for  %»amj  V    Miltt  n'e   Hymn  on   the  Nativity. 
line  243. 


MANNA 

between  the  Jews  *nd  Romans  is  marked  distinctly 
as  taking  place  two  years  later  (1  Mace  viii  '  <F.), 
when  Judas  heard  of  their  power  and  ridelit) 

The  remaining  letters  are  of  no  more  worth, 
though  it  is  possible  that  some  facts  may  have  sug 
gested  special  details  (e.  g.  2  Mace.  xi.  29  ff.). 

(Wernsdorf,  De  Fide  Mace.  §  66 ;  Grimm,  ad 
loc. ;  and  on  the  other  side  Patritius,  De  Cons.  Mace. 
pp.  142,  280.)  [B.  F.  W.] 

MAN'NA  (f »,  mdn :  Mdvva :  Manhu,  Man, 
Manna}.  The  most  important  passages  of  the  0.  T. 
on  this  topic  are  the  following: — Ex.  xvi.  14-36  ; 
Num.  xi.  7-9;  Deut.  riii.  3,  16;  Josh.  v.  12;  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  24,  25;  Wisd.  xvi.  20,  21.  From  these 
passages  we  learn  that  the  manna  came  every  morn 
ing  except  the  Sabbath,  in  the  form  of  a  small 
round  seea  resembling  the  hoar  frost ;  that  it  must 
be  gathered  early,  before  the  sun  became  so  hot  as 
to  melt  it ;  that  it  must  be  gathered  every  day 
except  the  Sabbath ;  that  the  attempt  to  lay  aside 
for  a  succeeding  day,  except  on  the  day  immediately 
preceding  the  Sabbath,  failed  by  the  substance  be 
coming  wormy  and  offensive  ;  that  it  was  prepared 
for  food  by  grinding  and  baking ;  that  its  taste  was 
like  fresh  oil,  aud  like  wafers  made  with  honey, 
equally  pgreeable  to  all  palates ;  that  the  whole 
nation  subsisted  upon  it  for  forty  years  ;  that  it 
suddenly  ceased  when  they  first  got  the  new  com 
of  the  land  of  Canaan ;  and  that  it  was  always 
regarded  as  a  miraculous  gift  directly  from  God, 
and  not  as  a  product  of  nature. 

The  natural  products  of  the  Arabian  deserts  and 
other  Oriental  regions,  which  bear  the  name  of 
manna,  have  not  the  qualities  or  uses  ascribed  to 
the  manna  of  Scripture.  They  are  all  condiments 
or  medicines  rather  than  food,  stimulating  or  pur 
gative  rather  than  nutritious  ;  they  are  produced 
only  three  or  four  months  in  the  year,  from  May  to 
August,  and  not  all  the  year  round  ;  they  come  only 
in  small  quantities,  never  affording  anything  like 
15,000,000  of  pounds  a-week,  which  must  have 
been  requisite  for  the  subsistence  of  the  whole 
Israelitish  camp,  since  each  man  had  an  omer  (or 
three  English  quarts)  a-day,  and  that  for  forty  years ; 
they  can  be  kept  for  a  long  time,  and  do  not  become 
useless  in  a  day  or  two ;  they  are  just  as  liable  to 
deteriorate  on  the  Sabbath  as  on  any  other  day; 
nor  does  a  double  quantity  fall  on  the  day  preceding 
the  Sabbath ;  nor  would  natural  products  cease  at 
once  and  for  ever,  as  the  manna  is  represented  as 
ceasing  in  the  book  of  Joshua.  The  manna  of  Scrip 
ture  we  therefore  regard  as  wholly  miraculous,  and 
not  in  any  respect  a  product  of  nature. 

The  etymology  and  meaning  of  the  word  manna 
are  best  given  by  the  old  authorities,  the  Septuagint, 
the  Vulgate,  aud  Josephus.  The  Septuagint  trans 
lation  of  Ex.  xvi.  15  is  this:  'iSovrts  5«  airrb  o, 
viol  'lffpa})\  elirav  (rtpos  rf  frtptf,rl  Iffrt  rovro 
ov  yhp  jotio-av  ri  %v.  "  But  the  children  of  Israel 
seeiruj  it,  said  one  to  another,  What  is  this  ?  for 
they  knew  not  what  it  was."  The  Vulgate,  with  a 
very  careful  reference  to  the  Hebrew,  thus :  "  Quo< 
eum  vidissent  filii  Israel,  dixerunt  ad  invicem  manhu 
quod  significat :  Quid  est  hoc  ?  ignorabant  enim 
quid  esset :"  i.  e.  '  Which  when  the  children 
Israel  saw,  they  said  one  to  another,  MAN  HU 
which  signifies,  What  is  this  1  for  they  knew  no 
to/tar  it  was."  In  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  1,  §6)  we  hav 
the  following:  Ka\ov<ri  5e  'Efipdioi  rb  /3pi/x 
rovro  p.dvva,  ro  yap  /uai/  eirtpii>ri]o~LS  Kara  rri 
TJntTfpw  oid\tKrov,  rt  rovr'  tonv,  avaxpivovoi 


MANNA 


UZ9 


Now  the  Hebrews  call  this  food  MANNA,  for  Vu 
article  MAN,  in  our  language,  is  the  as/tiny  of  a 
ucstion,  WHAT  is  THIS  ?" 

According  to  all  these  authorities,  with  which  th# 
yriac  also  agrees,  the  Hebrew  word  man,  by  which 
lis  substance  is  always  designated  in  the  Hebrew 
scriptures,  is  the  neuter  interrogative  pronoun 
what?) ;  and  the  name  is  derived  from  the  inquiry 
i-in  JO  (man  hu,  what  is  this?),  which  the  He- 
rews  made  when  they  first  saw  it  upon  the  gouiu!. 
he  other  etymologies,  which  would  derive  the  woru 
•om  either  of  the  Hebrew  verbs  n3D  or  |3D,  are 

more  recent  and  less  worthy  of  confidence,  and  do 
ot  agree  with  the  sacred  text ;  a  literal  translation 
f  which  (Ex.  xvi.  15)  is  this:  "  And  the  children 
F  Israel  saw  and  said,  a  mi  in  to  //is  neighbour,  what 
s  this  (man  hu) ;  fur  they  knew  not  what  it  was." 
The  Arabian  physician  Avicenna  gives  the  fol- 
owing  description  of  the  mamm  which  in  his  time 
•as  used  as  a  nvdicine : — "  Jlaima  is  a  dew  which 
alls  on  stones  or  bushes,  becomes  thick  like  honey, 
nd  can  be  hardened  so  as  to  be  like  grains  of  corn." 


Tamarix  Gallica. 


The  substance  now  called  manna  in  the  Arabria 
desert  through  which  the  Israelites  passed,  is  col 
lected  in  the  month  of  June  from  the  tarfa  or 
tamarisk  shrub  ( Tamarix  (jallica).  According  to 
Burckhardt  it  drops  from  the  thorns  on  the  sticks 
and  leaves  with  which  UK;  ground  is  covered,  aud 
must  be  gathered  early  in  the  day,  or  it  will  be 


230 


MANNA 


melted  by  the  sun.  The  Arabs  cleanse  ami  boil  it, 
ttraiu  it  through  a  cloth,  and  put  it  in  leathern 
bottles ;  and  in  this  way  it  can  be  kept  uninjured 
for  several  years.  They  use  it  like  honey  or  butter 
with  their  unleavened  bread,  but  never  make  it  into 
cakes  or  eat  it  by  itself.  It  abounds  only  in  very 
wet  vears,  and  in  dry  seasons  it  sometimes  disappears 
entirely.  Various  shrubs,  all  through  the  oriental 
world,  from  India  to  Syria,  yield  a  substance  of  this 
kind.  The  tamarisk  gum  is  by  some  supposed  to 
be  produced  by  the  puncture  of  a  small  insect, 
which  Ehrenberg  has  examined  and  described  under 
the  name  of  Coccus  manniparus.  See  Symbolae 
Physicae,  p.  i. ;  Transact,  of  Literary  Society  of 
Bombay,  i.  251.  This  surely  could  not  have  been 
the  food  of  the  Israelites  during  their  forty  years' 
sojourn  in  the  wilderness,  though  the  name  might 
have  been  derived  from  some  veal  or  fancied  resem 
blance  to  it. 

Rauwolf  (Trav.  i.  94)  and  some  more  recent  tra 
vellers  have  observed  that  the  dried  grains  of  the 
oriental  mrana  were  like  the  coriander-seed.  Gmelin 
(Trav.  through  Russia  to  Persia,  pt.  iii.  p.  28)  re 
marks  this  of  the  manna  of  Persia,  which  he  says  is 
white  as  snow.  The  peasants  of  Ispahan  gather  the 
leave;,  of  a  certain  thorny  shrub  (the  sweet  thorn) 
and  strike  them  with  a  stick,  and  the  grains  of 
manna  are  received  in  a  sieve.  Niebuhr  observed 
that  at  Mardin  in  Mesopotamia,  the  manna  lies  like 
meal  on  the  leaves  of  a  tree  called  in  the  East  ballot 
and  afs  or  as,  which  he  regards  as  a  species  of  oak.* 
The  harvest  is  in  July  and  August,  and  much  more 
plentiful  in  wet  than  dry  seasons.  It  is  sometimes 
collected  before  sunrise  by  shaking  if  from  the  leaves 
on  to  a  cloth,  and  thus  collected  it  remains  very 
white  and  pure.  That  which  is  not  shaken  off  in 
the  morning  melts  upon  the  leaves,  and  accumu 
lates  till  it  becomes  very  thick.  The  leaves  ai« 
then  gathered  and  put  in  boiling  water,  an<i  the 
manna  floats  like  oil  upon  the  surface.  This  the 
natives  call  manna  essemma,  i.  e.  heavenly  maiina. 
In  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  Burckhardt  found  manna 
like  gum  on  the  leaves  and  branches  of  the  tree 
gharrob*  which  is  as  large  as  the  olive-tree,  having 
a  leaf  like  the  poplar,  though  somewhat  broader. 
It  appears  like  dew  upon  the  leaves,  is  of  a  brown 
or  grey  colour,  and  drops  on  the  ground.  When 
first  gathered  it  is  sweet,  but  in  a  day  or  two  be 
comes  acid.  The  Arabs  use  it  like  honey  or  butter, 
and  eat  it  in  their  oatmeal  gruel.  They  also  use  it 
in  cleaning  their  leather  bottles  and  making  them 
air-tight.  The  season  for  gathering  this  is  May  or 
June.  Two  other  shrubs  which  have  been  supposed 
to  yield  the  manna  of  Scripture,  are  the  Alhagi 
maitrorum,  or  Persian  manna,  and  the  Alhagi  de- 
sertorum, — thorny  plants  common  in  Syria. 

The  manna  of  European  commerce  comes  mostly 
from  Calabria  and  Sicily.  It  is  gathered  during 
the  months  of  June  and  July  from  some  species  of 
ash  (Ornus  Europaea  and  Ornus  rotundifolia), 
from  which  it  drops  in  consequence  of  a  puncture 
by  an  insect  resembling  the  locust,  but  distin 
guished  from  it  by  having  a  sting  under  its  body. 
The  substance  is  fluid  at  night,  and  resembles  the 
dew,  but  in  the  morning  it  begins  to  harden. 


MANOAH 

Compare  RosenmiiUw's  Alterthumslainde,  Iv.  r> 
316-29;  Winer,  RealwOrttrbiick,  ii.  p.  53,  34;  ar<l 
the  Oriental  travellers  above  referred  to.  [C.  E.  S.~\ 


which  Freytag,  however,  Identifies  with 
some  species  of  C'apparit, 

t>  Sprrngel  (fTist.  Rei  herb.  i.  270)  identifies  the  ghai-b 
or  gharab  with  the  Salix  l>ab//l(>itna 


MANO'AH  (PpJO :  MwW  ;  Joseph.  Mo- 
xvs  •  Manue),  the  father  of  Samson  ;  a  Danite, 
native  of  the  town  of  Zorah  (Judg.  xiii.  2).  The 
narrative  of  the  Bible  (xiii.  1-23),  of  the  circum 
stances  which  preceded  the  birth  of  Samson,  supplies 
us  with  very  few  and  faint  traits  of  Manoah's  cha 
racter  or  habits.  He  seems  to  have  had  some  occu 
pation  which  separated  him  during  part  of  the  day 
from  his  wife,  though  that  was  not  field  work,  be 
cause  it  was  in  the  field  that  his  wife  was  found  by 
the  angel  during  his  absence.  He  was  hospitable, 
as  his  forefather  Abram  had  been  before  him.-  hf 
was  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah,  and  reverent  10  ? 
great  degree  of  fear.  These  faint  lineaments  aie 
brought  into  somewhat  greater  distinctness  by  Jo- 
sephus  {Ant.  v.  8,  §2,  3),  on  what  authority  we  hav 
no  means  of  judging,  though  his  account  is  doubtless 
founded  on  some  ancient  Jewish  tradition  or  record. 
"  There  was  a  certain  Manoches  who  was  without 
controversy  the  best  and  chiefest  person  of  his 
country.  This  man  had  a  wife  of  exceeding  beauty, 
surpassing  the  other  women  of  the  place.  Now, 
when  they  had  no  children,  and  were  much  di.-r- 
tressed  thereat,  he  besought  God  that  He  would  grant 
unto  them  a  lawful  heir,  and  for  that  purpose  re 
sorted  often  with  his  wife  to  the  suburb  *  (rb  irpod- 
of  the  city.  And  in  that  place  was  the 


Possibly  to  consult  the  Levites,  whose  special  pro 
perty  the  suburbs  of  the  city  were.  But  Zorah  is  no 
where  stated  to  have  been  a  Invites'  city. 


MANSLAYER 

great  plain.  Now  the  man  loved  his  wife  to  dis 
traction,  and  on  that  account  was  exceedingly  jealous 
of  her.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  his  wife  being 
alone,  an  angel  appeared  to  her  .  .  .  and  when  he 
had  said  these  things  he  departed,  for  he  had  come 
by  the  command  of  God.  When  her  husband  came 
she  informed  him  of  all  things  concerning  the  angel, 
wondering  greatiy  at  the  beauty  and  size  of  the 
youth,  insomuch  that  he  was  filled  with  jealousy 
and  with  suspicion  thereat.  Then  the  woman  de- 
liring  to  relieve  her  husband  of  his  excessive  grief, 
besc-ight  God  that  He  would  send  again  the  angel, 
•o  that  the  man  might  behold  him  as  well  as  she. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  when  they  were  in  the 
suburbs  again,  by  the  favour  of  God  the  angel  ap 
peared  the  second  time  to  the  woman,  while  her 
husband  was  absent.  And  she  having  prayed  him 
to  tarry  awhile  till  she  should  fetch  her  husband, 
went  and  brought  Manoches."  The  rest  of  the  story 
agrees  with  the  Bible. 

We  hear  of  Manoah  once  again  in  connexion  with 
the  marriage  of  Samson  to  the  Philistine  of  Tim- 
Bath.  His  father  and  his  mother  remonstrated  with 
him  thereon,  but  to  no  purpose  (xiv.  2,  3).  They 
then  accompanied  him  to  Timnath,  both  on  the  pre 
liminary  visit  (vers.  5,  6),  and  to  the  marriage  itself 
(9, 10).  Manoah  appears  not  to  have  survived  his 
ton :  not  he,  but  Samson's  brothers,  went  down  to 
Gaza  for  the  body  of  the  hero,  and  bringing  it  up 
to  the  family  tomb  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  re 
united  the  father  to  the  son  (xvi.  31),  whose  birth 
had  been  the  subject  of  so  many  prayers  and  so  much 
anxiety.  Milton,  however,  does  not  take  this  view. 
In  Samson  Agonistes  Manoah  bears  a  prominent 
part  throughout,  and  lives  to  bury  his  son.  [G.] 

MANSLAYER.'  The  principle  on  which  the 
"  manslayer"  was  to  be  allowed  to  escape,  viz. 
that  the  person  slain  was  regarded  as  "  delivered 
into  his  hand"  by  the  Almighty,  was  obviously 
open  to  much  wilful  perversion  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  4,  18  ; 
xxvi.  8 ;  Philo,  De  Spec.  Leg.  iii.  21,  vol.  ii.  320), 
though  the  cases  mentioned  appear  to  be  a  sufficient 
sample  of  the  intention  of  the  lawgiver,  a.  Death 
by  a  blow  in  a  sudden  quarrel  (Num.  xxxv.  22). 
b.  Death  by  a  stone  or  missile  thrown  at  random 
(ib.  22,  23).  c.  By  the  blade  of  an  axe  flying  from 
its  handle  (Deut.  xix.  5).  d.  Whether  the  case  of  a 
person  killed  by  falling  from  a  roof  unprovided  with 
a  parapet  involved  the  guilt  of  manslaughter  on  the 
owner,  is  not  clear ;  but  the  law  seems  intended  to 
prevent  the  imputation  of  malice  in  any  such  case, 
by  preventing  as  far  as  possible  the  occurrence  of 
the  fact  itself  (Deut.  xxii.  8).  (Michaelis,  On 
the  Laws  of  Moses,  arts.  223,  280,  ed.  Smith.) 
In  all  these  and  the  like  cases  the  manslayer  was 
allowed  to  retire  to  a  city  of  refuge.  [CITIES  OF 
UKFUGE.] 

Besides  these  the  following  may  be  mentioned  as 
TOSPS  of  homicide,  a.  An  animal,  not  known  to  be 
vicious,  causing  death  to  a  human  being,  was  to  be 
put  to  death,  and  regarded  as  unclean.  But  if  it 
was  known  to  be  vicious,  the  owner  also  was  liable 
to  fine,  and  even  death  (Ex.  xxi.  28,  31).  6.  A  thief 
overtaken  at  night  in  the  act  might  lawfully  be  put 
t"  death,  but  if  the  sun  had  risen  the  act  of  killing 


MANTLE 


231 


*  nV"l,  Part-  of  n¥1.  "pierce"  or  "crush,"  Ges. 
p.  1307 ;  <{>oi>€i>Ti)«  ;  Jwmicida:  used  also  in  the  sense  of 
murderer.  The  phrase  HJiK'il'  a«ouo-iois,  per  iyno- 
rantiam,  Ges.  p.  1362,  inurt  therefore  be  included,  to  denote 
Uie  distinction  which  the  Law  drew  so  plainly  between 


him  was  to  be  regarded  as  murder  (Ex.  xxii.  2,  3) 
Other  cases  are  added  by  the  Mishua,  whkh,  however 
are  included  in  the  definitions  given  above.  (Sanh.  is. 
1,  2,  3:  Maccoth,  ii.  2  ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  "  Homi- 
cida."  [MURDER.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

MANTLE.  The  word  employed  in  the  A.  V. 
to  translate  no  less  than  four  Hebrew  terms,  entirely 
distinct  and  independent  both  in  derivation  am' 
meaning. 

1  .  rO^Dt^,  s'micah.  This  word  occurs  but  once, 

• 


viz.  Judg.  iv.  18,  where  it  denotes  the  thing  with 
which  Jael  covered  Sisera.  It  has  the  definite  article 
prefixed,  and  it  may  therefore  be  inferred  that  it 
was  some  part  of  the  regular  furniture  of  the  tent. 
The  clue  to  a  more  exact  signification  is  given  by 
the  Arabic  version  of  the  Polyglott,  which  renders 

it  by  alcatifah,  ^..U't'^.  a  word  which  is  ex 


plained  by  Dozy,"  on  the  authority  of  Ibn  Batutu 
and  other  Oriental  authors,  to  mean  certain  articles 
of  a  thick  fabric,  in  shape  like  a  plaid  or  shawl, 
which  are  commonly  used  for  beds  by  the  Arabs  : 
"  When  they  sleep  they  spread  them  on  the  ground." 
"  For  the  under  part  of  the  bed  they  are  doubled 
several  times,  and  one  longer  than  the  rest  is  used 
for  a  coverlid."  On  such  a  bed  on  the  floor  of 
Heber's  tent  no  doubt  the  weary  Sisera  threw  him 
self,  and  such  a  coverlid  must  -the  semicah  have 
been  which  Jael  laid  over  him.  The  A.  V.  perhaps 
derived  their  word  "mantle"  from  the  pallium  of 
the  Vulgate,  and  the  mantel  of  Luther. 

2.  /^JJIO,  meil.  (Rendered  "  mantle"  in  1  Sam. 
xv.  27,  xxviii.  14;  Ezr.  ix.  3,  5;  Job  i.  20,  ii.  12; 
and  Ps.  cix.  29.)  This  word  is  in  other  passages  of 
the  A.  V.  rendered  "coat,"  "cloak,"  and  "robe.' 
This  inconsistency  is  undesirable;  but  in  one  case 
only  —  that  of  Samuel  —  is  it  of  importance.  It 
is  interesting  to  know  that  the  garment  which  his 
mother  made  and  brought  to  the  infant  prophet  at 
her  annual  visit  to  the  Holy  Tent  at  Shiloh  was 
a  miniature  of  the  official  priestly  tunic  or  robe  ; 
the  same  that  the  great  Prophet  wore  in  mature 
years  (1  Sam.  xv.  27),  and  by  which  he  was  or. 
one  occasion  actually  identified.  When  the  witch 
of  Endor,  in  answer  to  Saul's  inquiry,  told  him  that 
"  an  old  man  was  come  up,  covered  with  a  meil," 
this  of  itself  was  enough  to  inform  the  king  in  whose 
presence  he  stood  —  "  Saul  perceived  that  it  was 
Samuel  "  (xxviii.  14). 

3    HBOyD    maataphah  (the  Hebrew  word  is 

found  in  Is.  iii.  22  only).    Apparently  some  article 
of  a   b  lady's  dress;    probably  an   exterior  tunic, 
longer  and  ampler  than  the  internal  one,  and  pro 
vided  with  sleeves.     See  Gesenius,  Jesiia,  i.  214; 
Schroeder,  de  Vestitu  Hebraearum,  ch.  xv.  §  1-5. 
But  the  most  remarkable  of  the  four  is  : 
4.  m"W,  addereth  (rendered  "  mantle"  in  1  K. 

xix.  13,  19  ;  2  K.  ii.  8,  13,  14  ;  elsewhere  "  gar 
ment"  and  "robe");  since  by  it,  and  it  only,  is 
denoted  the  cape  or  wrapper  which,  with  the  ex 
ception  of  a  strip  of  skin  or  leather  round  his  loins, 


malicious  and  involuntary  homicide.  (Ex.  xxl.  13,  14 ; 
Lev.  iv.  ?2  ;  Num.  xxxv.  22,  23 ;  Deut.  xix.  4,  5. 

B  Dictionnaire  des  Vetementt  Arabes,  p.  232.  We  gladly 
seize  this  opportunity  to  express  our  obligations  to  this 
admirable  work. 

b  But  see  the  curious  speculations  of  Dr.  Muitland 
Assay  on  False  Wors/iip,  p.  176,  &c. 


232 


MAOCH 


formed,  as  we  have  every  reason  to  beliere,  the  sole 
garment  of  the  prophet  Elijah. 

Such  clothing,  or  absence  of  clothing,  is  commonly 
ftMumed  by  those  who  aspire  to  extraordinary  sanc 
tity  iu  the  East  at  the  present  day — "  Savage  figures, 
with  '  a  cloak  woven  of  camels'  hair  thrown  over 
the  shoulders,  and  tied  in  front  on  the  breast,  naked 
except  at  the  waist,  round  which  is  a  girdle  of  skin, 
the  hair  flowing  loose  about c  the  head.'"  But 
a  description  still  more  exactly  in  accordance  with 
the  habit  of  the  great  Israelite  d  dervish,  and  sup 
porting  in  a  remai'kable  manner  the  view  of  the 
LXX.,  who  render  addereth  by  jwjAwrtji,  i.  e. 
"  sheep-skin,"  is  found  in  the  account  of  a  French 
traveller*  in  the  16th  century: — "  L'enseigne  que 
\esdervisportent  pour  montrer  qu'ils  sont  religieux, 
est  une  peau  de  brebis  sur  leurs  e'paules :  et  ne  por 
tent  autie  vetement  sur  eux  sinon  une  seule  peau 
de  mouton  ou  de  bre"bis,  et  quelque  chose  devant 
leur  parties  honteuses." 

Inaccurately  as  the  word  "  mantle "  represents 
jtuch  a  gaiment  as  the  above,  it  has  yet  become  so 
identified  with  Elijah  that  it  is  impossible  now  to 
alter  it.  It  is  desirable  therefore  to  substitute 
"mantle"  for  "garment"  in  Zech.  xiii.  4;  a 
passage  from  which  it  would  appeal-  that  since  the 
time  of  Elijah  his  garb  had  become  the  recognized 
sign  of  a  prophet  of  Jehovah.  [G.] 

MA'OCH  OpJJD  :  'Aju/^X ;  Alex.  MweJ/3  : 
Maoc/i),  the  father  of  Achish,  king  of  Gath,  with 
whom  David  took  refuge  (1  Sam.  xxvii.  2).  In  the 
Syriac  version  he  is  called  Maachah;  and  in  1  K. 
ii.  39  we  find  Maachah  described  a»  the  father  of 
•Vchish,  who  was  king  of  Gath  at  the  beginning  of 
Solomon's  reign.  It  is  not  impossible  that  the  same 
Achish  may  be  intended  in  both  cases  (Keil,  Comm. 
on  1  K.  ii.  39),  and  Maoch  and  Maachah  would  then 
be  identical ;  or  Achish  may  have  been  a  title,  like 
Abimelech  and  Pharaoh,  which  would  still  leave 
Maoch  and  Maachah  the  same ;  "  son  "  in  either 
case  denoting  descendant. 

MA'ON  (jiVD:   Mawp,   MaSv;   Alex.  Mcuai>: 

Maori),  one  of  the  cities  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  in 
the  district  of  the  mountains ;  a  member  of  the 
same  group  which  contains  also  the  names  of  Car- 
mel  and  Ziph  (Josh.  xv.  55).  Its  interest  for  us 
lies  in  its  connexion  with  David.  It  was  in  the 
midbar  or  waste  pasture-ground  of  Maon  (A.  V. 
"wilderness")  that  he  and  his  men  were  lurking 
when  the  treachery  of  the  Ziphites  brought  Saul 
upon  them,  and  they  had  the  narrow  escape  of  the 
cliff  of  ham-Machlekoth  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  24,  25).  It 
seems  from  these  passages  to  have  formed  part  of  a 
larger  district  called  "  the  Arabah"  (A.  V.  ver.  24, 
''  plain  "),  which  can  hardly  have'been  the  depressed 
locality  round  the  Dead  Sea  usually  known  by  that 
name.  To  the  north  of  it  was  another  tract  or  spot 
called  "  the  Jeshimon,"  possibly  the  dreary  burnt- 
up  hills  lying  on  the  immediate  west  of  the  Dead 
Sea.  Close  by  was  the  hill  or  the  cliff  of  Hacilah, 
and  the  midbar  itself  probably  extended  over  and 
about  the  mountain  (ver.  26),  round  which  Saul 
was  pursuing  his  fugitives  when  the  sudden  alarm 
of  the  Philistine  incursion  drew  him  off.  Over  the 
pastures  of  Maon  and  Carmel  ranged  the  three  thou 
sand  sheep  and  the  thousand  goats  of  Nabal  (xxv. 


«  Light,  TravtU  in  Egypt,  &c.,  quoted  by  Stanley, 
X.ft  P.  311. 

«  See  the  instructive  and  suggestive  remarks  of  Dr. 
IVolfl.  on  the  DuinU  of  correspondence.  Utv.ee:.  the 


MAONITE8,  THE 

2).  Close  adjoining  was  the  midbar  of  Paran 
which  the  LXX.  make  identical  with  Maon.  Jo> 
sephus's  version  of  the  passage  is  curious — "a  <er« 
tain  man  of  the  Ziphites  from  the  city  Emma " 
(Ant.  vi.  13,  §6). 

The  name  of  Maon  still  exists  all  but  unchanged 
in  the  mouths  of  the  Arab  herdsmen  and  peasants 
in  the  south  of  Palestine.  Main  is  a  lofty  conical 
hill,  south  of,  and  about  7  miles  distant  from, 
Hebron.  To  the  north  there  is  an  extensive  pros 
pect — on  the  one  hand  over  the  region  bordering 
the  Dead  Sea,  on  the  other  as  far  as  Hebron. 
Close  in  front  is  the  lower  eminence  of  Kui-mul, 
the  ancient  Camiel,  no  less  intimately  associated 
with  David's  fortunes  than  Maon  itself  (Rob.  i. 
493,  494-). 

It  is  very  much  to  be  desired  that  some  traveller 
would  take  the  trouble  to  see  how  the  actual  lo 
cality  of  Main  agrees  with  the  minute  indications 
of  the  narrative  cited  above.  See  also  HACHILAH. 

In  the  genealogical  records  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
in  1  Chronicles,  Maon  pppears  as  a  descendant  of 
Hebron,  through  Rekem  and  Shammai,  and  in  its 
turn  the  "  father  "  or  colonizer  of  Beth-zur  (ii.  45). 
Hebron  is  of  course  the  well-known  metropolis  of 
the  southern  country,  and  Beth-zur  has  been  iden 
tified  in  Beit-s&r,  4  miles  north  of  Hebron,  and 
therefore  about  1 1  from  Main. 

It  should  not  however  be  overlooked  that  in  the 
original  the  name  of  Maon  is  identical  with  that  of 
the  Mehunim,  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  before 
the  conquest  it  may  have  been  one  of  their  towns, 
just  as  in  the  more  central  districts  of  Palestine 
there  were  places  which  preserved  the  memory  of 
the  Avites,  the  Zemarites,  the  Ammonites,  and 
other  tribes  who  originally  founded  them.  [BEN 
JAMIN,  vol.  i.  1886.]  [G.] 

MA'ONITES,  THE  (jtyO,  i.  e.  Maon,  with 
out  the  article  :  MaSia/u  in  both  MSS. :  Chanaari), 
a  people  mentioned  in  one  of  the  addresses  of  Jeho 
vah  to  the  repentant  Israelites,  as  having  at  some 
former  time  molested  them  :  "  the  Zidonians  also, 
and  Amalek,  and  Maon  did  oppress  you,  and  y* 
cried  to  me,  and  I  delivered  you  out  of  their  hand  " 
(Judg.  x.  12).  The  name  agrees  with  that  of  a 
people  residing  in  the  desert  far  south  of  Palestine, 
elsewhere  in  the  A.  V.  called  MEHDNIM  ;  but,  as 
no  invasion  of  Israel  by  this  people  is  related  before 
the  date  of  the  passage  in  question,  various  ex 
planations  and  conjectures  have  been  offered.  The 
reading  of  the  LXX.— "Midian  " — is  remarkable  as 
being  found  in  both  the  great  MSS.,  and  having  on 
that  account  a  strong  claim  to  \#  considered  as  the 
reading  of  the  ancient  Hebrew  text.  Ewald  (Gesch. 
i.  322  note)  appears  to  incline  to  this,  which  ha« 
also  in  its  favour,  that,  if  it  b»  not  genuine,  Midian 
— whose  ravages  were  then  surely  too  recent  to  be  for 
gotten —  is  omitted  altogether  from  the  enumeiation. 
Still  it  is  remarkable  that  no  variation  has  hitherto 
been  found  in  the  Hebrew  MSS.  of  this  \t.se. 
M^ichaelis  (Bibelfiir  Umjelehrte ;  and  Siipplem.  No. 
1437),  on  the  other  hand, accepts  the  current  reading, 
and  explains  the  difficulty  by  assuming  that  Maon  is 
included  among  the  Bene-Kedem,  or  "  children  of 
the  East,"  named  in  vi.  3 :  leaving,  however,  the 
equal  difficulty  of  the  omission  of  Israel's  great  foe, 
Midian,  unnoticed.  The  reason  which  would  leaJ 

ancient  Prophets  and  the  modern  Dervishes  (  Travels.  Ac.. 
I.  483;  also  329,  531);  and  Stanley's  East.  Church,  397. 
c  Bf'.on,  Observations  (Paris,  16S81.  quoted  by  Uorj 
/HcHoH-naire,  &c..  p.  54. 


MARA 

as  to  accept  Midian  would  lead  us  to  reject  the  ruad- 
iug  of  the  Syriac  Peshito — "  Ammon," — the  Bene- 
Aminon  having  been  already  named.     "  Canaan 
was  probably  a  conjecture  of  Jerome's.     [MiiHU- 
HIMS.] 

A  trace  of  the  residence  of  the  Maonites  in  the 
south  of  Palestine  is  perhaps  extant  in  MAON,  now 
Main,  the  city  of  Judah  so  well  known  in  con 
nexion  with  David.  [G.] 

MA'RA  (SOO,  or,  according  to  the  correction 
.of  the  Kri,  PHO),  the  name  which  NAOMI  adopted 

in  the  exclamation  forced  from  her  by  the  recogni 
tion  of  her  fellow-citizens  at  Bethlehem  (Ruth  i.  20), 
"  Call  me  not  Naomi  (pleasant),  but  call  me  Mara 
(bitter),  for  Shaddai  hath  dealt-very-bitterly  (ha- 
m6r)  with  me."  The  LXX.  have  preserved  the 
play  ....  iriKpav,  Srt  tirucpdvOi) .  .  .  .  6  LKca>6s  ; 
though  hardly  as  well  as  Jerome,  "  Vacate  me  Mara, 
(lux  est  amarani)  quid  amaritudine  me  replevit 
Omnipotens."  Marah  is  often  assumed  to  have 
been  the  origin  of  the  name  MARY,  but  inaccurately, 
for  Mary — in  the  N.  T.  Mariam — is  merely  a  cor 
ruption  of  MIRIAM  (see  that  article).  [G.] 

MA'RAH  (mD :   Mefipa,   UtKpia,   Tlmplai : 

Mara),  a  place  which  lay  in  the  wilderness  of 
Shur  or  Etham,  three  days'  journey  distant  (Ex. 
xv.  22-24,  Num.  xxxiii.  8)  from  the  place  at  which 
the  Israelites  crossed  the  Red  Sea,  and  where  was  a 
spring  of  bitter  water,  sweetened  subsequently  by 
the  casting  in  of  a  tree  which  "  the  Lord  showed  " 
to  Moses.  It  has  been  suggested  (Burckhardt, 
Syria,  474)  that  Moses  made  use  of  the  berries  of 
the  plant  Ghurkud,*  and  which  still  it  is  implied 
would  be  found  similarly  to  operate.  Robinson, 
however  (i.  67),  could  not  find  that  this  or  any  tree 
was  now  known  by  the  Arabs  to  possess  such  pro 
perties  ;  nor  would  those  berries,  he  says,  have  been 
found  so  early  in  the  season  as  the  time  when  the 
Israelites  reached  the  region.  It  may  be  added 
that,  had  any  such  resource  ever  existed,  its  eminent 
usefulness  to  the  supply  of  human  wants  would 
hardly  have  let  it  perish  from  the  traditions  of  the 
desert.  Further,  the  expression  "  the  Lord" shewed" 
seems  surely  to  imply  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  transaction.  As  regards  the  identity  of 
Marah  with  any  modern  site,  all  travellers  appear 
to  look  out  for  water  which  is  bitter  at  this  day 
whereas  if  miraculous,  the  effect  would  surely  have 
been  permanent,  as  it  clear!?  is  intended  to  be  in 
2  K.  ii.  21.  On  this  supposition,  however,  How- 
arah,  distant  16J  hours  (Rob.  B.  R.,  i.  67)  from 
Ayoun  Mousa,  has  been  by  Robinson,  as  also  by 
Burckhardt  (April  27,  1816),  Schubert  (274),  and 
Wellsted,  identified  with  it,  apparently  because  it 
is  the  bitterest  water  in  the  neighbourhood.  Winer 
says  (s.  v.)  that  a  still  bitterer  well  lies  east  oi 
Marah,  the  claims  of  which  Tischendorf,  it  appears, 
has  supported.  Lepsius  prefers  Wady  Ghurundel. 
Prof.  Stanley  thinks  that  the  claim  may  be  left  be 
tween  this  and  How  'rah,  but  adds  in  a  note  a  men 
tion  of  a  spring  south  of  ffowarah,  "  so  bitter  that 
neither  men  nor  camel*  could  drink  it,"  of  which 
"  Dr.  Graul  (vol.  ii.  p.  2o4)  was  told."  The  Ayoun 
Mousa,  "wolls  of  Mosej,"  which  local  tradition 
assigns  to  Marah,  are  manifestly  too  close  to  the 
head  of  the  gulf,  and  probable  spot  of  crossing  it, 

*  Robinson  says  (i.  26),  "  peganum  retu&um,"  Forsk. 
Flsra  Aeg.  Arab.  p.  Ixvi.     More,  correctly,  "  .\itrarta  tri- 
'    i  !  Dcjloiitaiiie...  Flora  Atiant.  i.  372. 


MARBLE 


233 


to  suit  the  distance  of  "  three  days'  journey."  The 
soil  of  this  region  is  described  as  being  alternately 
gravelly,  stony,  and  sandy  ;  undei  the  range  of  the 
Gebel  Wardan  chalk  and  flints  are  plentiful,  and 
on  the  direct  line  of  route  between  Ayoun  Mousa 
and  ffowarah  no  water  is  found  (Robinson,  i.  67). 

[H.  H.] 
MAR'ALAH(r6jn»:  Mayf\$d;  Alex.  Mo 

pi\d  :  Marala),  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  11), 
which,  with  most  of  the  places  accompanying  it,  is 
unfortunately  hitherto  unknown.  Keil  (Josua.  ad 
loc.)  infers,  though  on  the  slightest  grounds,  that  it 
was  somewhere  on  the  ridge  of  Carmel.  [G.] 

MARAN'ATHA  (KapavaBd),  an  expression 
used  by  St.  Paul  at  the  conclusion  of  his  first  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians  (xvi.  22).  It  is  a  Grecised 
form  of  the  Aramaic  words  KJItf  pD,  "  our  Lord 

T  -•     '  -   T 

cometh."  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  combined  with  the 
preceding  "  anathema  ;  "  but  this  is  unnecessary  ; 
at  all  events  it  can  only  be  regarded  as  adding 
emphasis  to  the  previous  adjuration.  It  rather 
appeai-s  to  be  added  "  as  a  weighty  watchword  "  to 
impress  upon  the  disciples  the  important  truth  that 
the  Lord  was  at  hand,  and  that  they  should  be  ready 
to  meet  Him  (Alfoid,  Gr.  Test,  in  loc.).  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  phrase  be  taken  to  mean,  as  it  may, 
"  Our  Lord  has  come,"  then  the  connection  is, 
"  the  curse  will  remain,  for  the  Lord  has  come 
who  will  take  vengeance  on  those  who  reject  Him." 
Thus  the  name  "  Maronite"  is  explained  by  a  tra 
dition  that  the  Jews,  in  expectation  of  a  Messiah, 
were  constantly  saying  Maran,  i.e.  Lord  ;  to  which 
the  Christians  answered  Maran  atha,  the  Lord  is 
come,  why  do  you  still  expect  Him?  (Stanley, 
Corinthians,  ad  loc.).  [W.  L.  B.] 

MARBLE  .•  Like  the  Greek  pdpfiapos,  No.  1 
fsee  foot-note),  the  generic  term  for  marble  may  pro 
bably  be  taken  to  mean  almost  any  shining  stone. 
The  so-called  marble  of  Solomon's  architectural 
works,  which  Josephus  calls  \lOos  \evtc6s,  may 
thus  have  been  limestone  —  (a)  from  near  Jerusalem 
(6)  from  Lebanon  (Jura  limestone),  identical  with 
the  material  of  the  Sun  Temple  at  Baalbec  ;  or  (c) 
white  marble  from  Arabia  or  elsewhere  (Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  3,  §2  ;  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  52  :  Plin.  H.  N.  xxxvi. 
12;  Jamieson,  Mineralogy,  41  ;  Haumer,  Pal.  28; 
Volney,  Trav.  ii.  241  ;  K'itto,  Phys.  Geogr.  of,  Pal. 
73,  88  ;  Robinson,  ii.  493,  iii.  508  ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P. 
307,  424  ;  Wellsted,  Trav.  i.  426,  ii.  143).  That 
this  stone  was  not  marble  seems  probable  frcwi 
the  remark  of  Josephus,  that  whereas  Solomon  con 
structed  his  buildings  of  "  white  stone,"  he  caused 
the  roads  which  led  to  Jerusalem  to  be  m^de  of 
"  black  stone,"  probably  the  black  basalt  of 
the  Haurdn;  and  also  from  his  account  of  thn 
porticoes  of  Herod's  temple,  which  he  says  weie 
fiovo\i6ot.\evKOT'firi]s  papfjidpov  (Joseph.  Ant.  I.e., 
and  B.  J.  v.  5,  §1,  6;  Kitto,  pp.  74,  75,  80, 

1  1.  £»>£»>,  or  £>>{*?  ;  Ilapios,  Zlapii/os  Ai'flos  ;  marnior 
I'arium;  from  &!\&,  to  shine  (Ges.  1384).  2.  rnnD, 
from  "1HD.  to  travel  round,  either  a  stone  used  in 

tessellated  pavements,  or  one  with  circular  spots  (Ges. 
947).  3.  T^  ;  iriwivo*  Ai'0os  ;  probably  a  stone  with 


pearly  appearance,  like  alabaster  (Ges.  355).    ,4. 

«-<j.apayiiT7js  Ai'0o?  ;  lapis  smaragdinus  (Ges.  182).  Tbt 
three  last  words  used  only  in  Ksth.  i.  6.  5.  /tuip^apos; 
nuii'tnar  (Rev.  xviii.  12). 


234 


MAUCHESHVAN 


8?).  But  whether  the  "costly  stone"  employed 
in  Solomon's  buildings  was  marble  or  not,  it  seems 
dear  from  the  expressions  both  of  Scripture  and 
Josephus,  that  some  at  least  of  the  "  great  stones," 
whose  weight  can  scarcely  have  been  less  than  40 
tons,  must  have  come  from  Lebanon  (1  K.  v.  14-18, 
vii.  10 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  2,  §9). 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Herod,  both  in  the 
Tempie  and  elsewhere,  employed  Parian  or  other 
marble.  Remains  of  marble  columns  still  exist  in 
abundance  at  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  9,  §4,  6, 
and  11,  §3,  5;  Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  330; 
Sandys,  190  ;  Robinson,  i.  301,  305). 

The  marble  pillars  and  tesserae  of  various  colours 
of  the  palace  at  Susa  came  doubtless  from  Persia 
itself,  where  marble  of  various  colours  is  found, 
especially  in  the  province  of  Hamadan,  Susiana. 
(Esth.  i.  6 ;  Marco  Polo,  Travels,  78,  ed.  Bohn ; 
Chardin,  Voy.  iii.  280,  308,  358,  and  viii.  253 ; 
P.  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  ii.  250;  Winer,  s.  v. 
"  Marmor.")  [H.  W.  P.] 

MAKCHESHVAN.    .[MONTHS.] 

MAR'CUS  (ttiipKos :  Marcus).  The  Evangelist 
Mark,  who  was  cousin  to  Barnabas  (Col.  iv.  10), 
and  the  companion  and  fellow-labourer  of  the 
apostles  Paul  (Philem.  24)  and  Peter  (1  Pet.  v.  13). 
[MABK.] 

MARDOCHE'US  (MopSoxatbs :  Mardo- 
chaeus).  1.  MORDECAI,  the  uncle  of  Esther,  in 
the  apocryphal  additions  (Esth.  x.  1,  xi.  2,  12,  xii. 
1-6,  xvi.  13;  2  Mace.  xv.  36).  The  14th  of  the 
month  Adar,  on  which  the  feast  of  Purim  was 
celebrated,  is  called  in  the  last  passage  "Mar- 
docheus'  day"  (jj  Mop5ox«t^  We'pa>  Mar- 
dochaei  dies). 

2.  (Mardocheus)  =  MORDECAI,  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  (1  Esdr.  v.  8  ;  comp. 
Ezr.  ii.  2). 

MARE'SHAH  (ilB'SOD,  in  Josh,  only ;  else 
where  in  the  shorter  form  of  ntPlO :  Bo0r;<r<£ p. 

T   "  T 

r^v  Maptiffdv ;  Alex.  Vlaprjffa :  Maresd),  one  of 
the  cities  of  Judah  in  the  district  of  the  Shefelah 
or  low  country;  named  in  the  same  group  with 
KEILAH  and  NEZIB  (Josh.  xv.  44).  If  we  may 
so  interpret  the  notices  of  the  1  Chronicles  (see 
below),  Hebron  itself  was  colonized  from  Mare- 
shah.  It  was  one  of  the  cities  fortified  and  gar 
risoned  by  Rehoboam  after  the  rupture  with  the 
northern  kingdom  (2  Chr.  xi.  8).  The  natural 
inference  is,  that  it  commanded  some  pass  or 
position  of  approach,  an  inference  which  is  sup 
ported  by  the  fact  that  it  is  named  as  the  point 
to  which  the  enormous  horde  of  Zerah  the  Cushite 
reached  in  his  invasion  of  Judaea,  before  he  was 
met  and  repulsed  by  Asa  (2  Cnr.  xiv.  9).  A  ra 
vine  (ver.  10 ;  Ge:  A.  V.  "valley")  bearing  the 
name  of  Zephathah  was  near.  In  the  rout  which 
followed  the  encounter,  the  flying  Cushites  were 
pursued  to  the  Bedouin  station  of  Gerar  (ver.  14, 
15). 

Mareshah  is  mentioned  once  or  twice  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  Maccabaean  struggles.  Judas  probably 
passed  through  it  on  his  way  from  Hebron  to  avenge 
the  defeat  of  Joseph  and  Azarios  (1  Mace.  v.  66. 
The  reading  of  the  LXX.  and  A.  V.  is  Samaria ; 

•  Hetyamln  of  Tudela  (Ashcl.  1.  77)  identifies  Mareshah 
with -••  Beit  <iabrin."  Parclii,  with  unusual  inaccuracy, 
vuuld  place  it  in  tue  mountains  ICast  of  Jaffa. 


MAKESHAH 

but  Josephus,  Ant.  xii.  8,  §6,  has  Marissa,  and  the 
position  is  exactly  suitable,  which  that  of  SanuJna 
is  not.  The  same  exchange,  but  reversed,  will  ba 
found  in  2  Mace.  xii.  35.) 

A  few  days  later  it  afforded  a  refuge  to  Gorging 
when  severely  wounded  in  the  attack  of  Dor.i- 
theus  (2  Mace.  xii.  35  ;  here,  as  just  remarked 
the  Syriac  version  would  substitute  Samaria, — a 
change  quite  unallowable).  Its  subsequent  fortunes 
were  oad  enough,  but  hardly  worse  than  might  be 
expected  for  a  place  which  lay  as  it  were  at  the 
junction  of  two  cross-roads,  north  and  south,  east 
and  west,  each  the  constant  thoroughfare  of  armies. 
It  was  bumt  by  Judas  in  his  Idumaean  war,  in 
passing  from  Hebron  to  Azotus  (Ant.  xii.  8,  §6). 
About  the  year  110  B.C.  it  was  taken  from  the 
Idumaeans  by  John  Hyrcanus.  Some  forty  years 
after,  about  B.C.  63,  its  restoration  was  decreed  by 
the  clement  Pompey  (Ant.  xiv.  4,  §4),  though  it 
appears  not  to  have  been  really  reinstated  till  later 
(xiv.  5,  §3).  But  it  was  only  rebuilt  to  become 
again  a  victim  (B.C.  39),  this  time  to  the  Parthians, 
who  plundered  and  destroyed  it  in  their  rage  at  not 
finding  in  Jerusalem  the  treasure  they  anticipated 
(Ant.  xiv.  13,  §9;  B.  J.  i.  13,  §9).  It  was  in 
ruins  in  the  4th  century,  when  Eusebius  and  Je 
rome  describe  it  as  in  the  second  mile  from  Eleuthe- 
ropolis.  S.S.W.  of  Beit-jibrin — in  all  probability 
Eleutheropolis — and  a  little  over  a  Roman  mile 
therefrom,  is  a  site  called  Marash,  which  is  very 
possibly  the  representative  of  the  ancient  llare- 
shah.  It  is  described  by  the  indefatigable  Tobler 
(Dritte  Wand.  129,  142)  as  lying  on  a  gently 
swelling  hill  leading  down  from  the  mountains  to 
the  great  western  plain,  from  which  it  is  but  half 
an  hour  distant.  The  ruins  are  not  extensive,  and 
Dr.  Robinson,  to  whom  their  discovery  is  due,'  has 
ingeniously  conjectured  (on  grounds  for  which  the 
reader  is  referred  to  B.  R.  ii.  67,  68)  that  the  ma 
terials  were  employed  in  building  the  neighbouring 
Eleutheropolis. 

On  two  other  occasions  Mareshah  comes  forward 
in  the  0.  T.  It  was  the  native  place  of  Eliezer 
ben-Dodavah,  a  prophet  who  predicted  the  destruc 
tion  of  the  ships  which  king  Jehoshaphat  had  built 
in  conjunction  with  Ahaziah  of  Israel  (2  Chr. 
xx.  37).  It  is  included  by  the  prophet  Micah 
among  the  towns  tf  the  low  country  which  he 
attempts  to  rouse  to  a  sense  of  the  dangers  their 
misconduct  is  bringing  upon  them  (Mic.  i.  15). 
Like  the  rest,  the  apostrophe  to  Mareshah  is  a 
play  on  the  name :  "  I  wil'  bring  your  heir 
(yoresh)  to  you,  oh  city  of  inheritance  "  (Mare- 
shah}.  The  following  verse  (16)  shows  that  th« 
inhabitants  had  adopted  the  heathen  and  forbidden 
custom  of  cutting  off  the  back  hair  as  a  sign  ot 
mourning. 

2.  (Mopet<ro)  Father  of  Hebron,  and  appa 
rently  a  son  or  descendant  of  Caleb  the  brothei 
of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  42),  who  derived  his  de 
scent  from  Judah  through  Pharez.  "  The  sons  of 
Caleb  were  .  .  .  Mesha,  the  father  of  Ziph,  and  the 
sons  of  Maresha  father  of  Hebron."  It  is  difficult 
not  to  suppose  that  Mesha  may  ha~e  l>een  a 
transcriber's  variation  for  Maresha,  especially  as  the 
text  of  the  LXX. — both  MSS. — actually  stands  so. 
It  is  however  only  a  probable  conjecture.  The 
names  in  these  lists  are  many  of  them  no  doubt 
thosf  not  of  persons  but  of  towns,  and  whether 
Mesna  and  .Maiohah  be  identical  or  not,  a  close 
relationship  is  equally  denoted  between  the  towni 
of  Hebron  and  Mareshah.  But 


MARIMOTH 

3.  (Moix«;  Alex.  MapTjcro)  in  1  Clir.  iv.  21 
we  find  Mareshah  again  named  as  deriving  its 
origin  from  SHELAH,  the  third  son  of  Judah, 
through  Laadnh.  Whether  this  Mareshah  be  a  man 
Or  a  place,  identical  with  or  distinct  from  the  last- 
mentioned,  it  is  impossible  to  determine.  [G.] 

MAR'IMOTH  (MaritnotK).  The  same  as  ME- 
RAIOTH  the  priest,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Ezra 
(2  Esdr.  i.  2 ;  comp.  Ezr.  vii.  3).  He  is  also  called 
MERKMOTH  (1  Esdr.  viii.  2). 

MA'RISA  (Mapiffd :  Maresd),  the  Greek  form 
of  the  name  MARESHAH,  occurring  2  Mace.  xii.  35 
only.  [G.] 

MARK  (MdpKos :  Marcus).  Mark  the  Evan 
gelist  is  probably  the  same  as  "  John  whose  surname 
Was  Mark"  (Acts  xii.  12, 25).  Groti us  indeed  main 
tains  the  contrary,  on  the  ground  that  the  earliest 
historical  writers  nowhere  call  the  Evangelist  by 
the  name  of  John,  and  that  they  always  describe 
nim  as  the  companion  of  Peter  and  not  of  Paul. 
But  John  was  the  Jewish  name,  and  Mark,  a  name 
of  frequent  use  amongst  the  Romans,  was  adopted 
afterwards,  and  gradually  superseded  the  other. 
The  places  in  the  N.  T.  enable  us  to  trace  the 
process.  The  John  Mark  of  Acts  xii.  12,  25,  and 
;he  John  of  Acts  xiii.  5,  13,  becomes  Mark  only  in 
Acts  xv.  39,  Col.  iv.  10,  2  Tim.  iv.  11,  Philem. 
24.  The  change  of  John  to  Mark  is  analogous 
to  that  of  Saul  to  Paul ;  and  we  cannot  doubt 
that  the  disuse  of  the  Jewish  name  in  favour  of 
the  other  is  intentional,  and  has  reference  to 
the  putting  away  of  his  former  life,  and  entrance 
upon  a  new  ministry.  No  inconsistency  arises 
from  the  accounts  of  his  ministering  to  two 
Apostles.  The  desertion  of  Paul  (Acts  xiii.  13) 
may  have  been  prompted  partly  by  a  wish  to 
rejoin  Peter  and  the  Apostles  engaged  in  preaching 
in  Palestine  (Benson ;  see  Kuinoel's  note),  though 
partly  from  a  disinclination  to  a  perilous  and 
doubtful  journey.  There  is  nothing  strange  in 
the  character  of  a  warm  impulsive  young  man, 
drawn  almost  equally  towards  the  two  great 
teachers  of  the  faith,  Paul  and  Peter.  Had  mere 
cowardice  been  the  cause  of  his  withdrawal, 
Barnabas  would  not  so  soon  after  have  chosen 
him  for  another  journey,  nor  would  he  have 
accepted  the  choice. 

John  Mark  was  the  son  of  a  certain  Mary,  who 
dwelt  at  Jerusalem,  and  was  therefore  probably  born 
in  that  city  (Acts  xii.  12).  He  was  the  cousin  (Ave- 
<f/io's)  of  Barnabas  (Col.  iv.  10).  It  was  to  Mary's 
house,  as  to  a  familiar  haunt,  that  Peter  came  after 
his  deliverance  from  prison  (Acts  xii.  12),  and  there 
found  "  many  gathered  together  praying ;"  and 
probably  John  Mark  was  converted  by  Peter  from 
meeting  him  in  his  mother's  house,  for  he  speaks 
of  "Marcus  my  son"  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  This  natural 
link  of  connexion  between  the  two  passages  is  broken 
by  the  supposition  of  two  Marks,  which  is  on  all 
accounts  improbable.  The  theory  that  he  was  one 
of  the  seventy  disciples  is  without  any  warrant. 
Another  theory,  that  an  event  of  the  night  of  our 
Lord's  betrayal,  related  by  Mark  alone,  is  one  that 
befell  himself  (Olshausen,  Lange),  must  not  be  so 
promptly  dismissed.  "  There  followad  Him  a  cer 
tain  young  man,  having  a  linen  clotb  cast  about  his 
naked  body ;  and  the  young  men  laiu  hold  on  him  : 
and  he  left  the  linen  cloth,  and  fled  from  them 
naked"  (Mark  xiir.  51,  52).  The  detail  of  facts  is 
remarkably  minute,  the  name  only  is  wanting.  The 
oiotrt  probable  view  is  that  St.  Mark  suppressed  Uis 


MAKK 


935 


own  name,  whilst  telling  a  story  which  he  had  the 
best  means  of  knowing.  Awakened  out  of  sleep, 
or  just  preparing  for  it,  in  s:  me  house  in  the  valley 
of  Kedron,  he  comes  out  to  see  the  seizure  of  the 
betrayed  Teacher,  known  to  him  and  in  some  de 
gree  beloved  already.  He  is  so  deeply  interred 
iu  His  fate  that  he  follows  Him  even  in  his  »nin 
linen  robe.  His  demeanour  is  such  that  sou»e  of 
the  crowd  are  about  to  arrest  him ;  then,  "  fear 
overcoming  shame  "  (Bengel),  he  leaves  his  gaiuient 
in  their  hands  and  flees.  We  can  only  say  that  if 
the  name  of  Mark  is  supplied  the  narrative  receht* 
its  most  probable  explanation.  John  (i.  40.,  six, 
28;  introduces  himself  in  tms  unootrusive  way, 
and  perhaps  Luke  the  same  (xxiv.  18).  Mary  the 
mother  of  Mark  seems  to  have  been  a  person  of 
some  means  and  influence,  and  her  house  a  rallying 
point  for  Christians  in  those  dangerous  days.  Her 
son,  already  an  inquirer,  would  soon  become  more. 
Anxious  to  work  for  Christ,  he  went  with  Paul  and 
Barnabas  as  their  "  minister  "  (umjpe'Tijs)  on  their 
tirst  journey ;  but  at  Perga,  as  we  have  seen  above, 
turned  back  (Acts  xii.  25,  xiii.  13).  On  the  second 
journey  Paul  would  not  accept  him  again  as  a  com 
panion,  but  Barnabas  his  kinsman  was  more  in 
dulgent;  and  thus  he  became  the  cause  of  the 
memorable  "  sharp  contention  "  between  them  (Acts 
xv.  36-40).  Whatever  was  the  cause  of  Mark's 
vacillation,  it  did  not  separate  him  for  ever  from 
Paul,  for  we  find  him  by  the  side  of  that  Apostle 
in  his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome  (Col.  iv.  10; 
Philem.  24).  In  the  former  place  a  possible  journey 
of  Mark  to  Asia  is  spoken  of.  Somewhat  later  ht 
is  with  Peter  at  Babylon  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  Some 
consider  Babylon  to  be  a  name  here  given  to  Rome 
in  a  mystical  sense;  surely  without  reason,  since 
the  date  of  a  letter  is  not  the  place  to  look  for  a 
figure  of  speech.  Of  the  causes  of  this  visit  to 
Babylon  there  is  no  evidence.  It  may  be  conjec 
tured  that  he  made  the  journey  to  Asia  Minor 
(Col.  iv.  10),  and  thence  went  on  to  join  Peter  at 
Babylon.  On  his  return  to  Asia  he  seems  to  have 
been  with  Timothy  at  Ephesus  when  Paul  wrote 
to  him  during  his  second  imprisonment,  and  Paul 
was  anxious  for  his  return  to  Rome  (2  Tim.  iv. 
11). 

When  we  desert  Scripture  we  find  the  facts 
doubtful  and  even  inconsistent.  If  Papias  be  trusted 
(quoted  in  Eusebius,  H.  E.  iii.  39),  Mark  never 
was  a  disciple  of  our  Lord;  which  he  probably 
infers  from  1  Pet.  v.  1 3.  Epiphanius,  on  the  other 
hand,  willing  to  do  honour  to  the  Evangelist,  adopts 
the  tradition  that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy-two 
disciples,  who  turned  back  from  our  Lord  at  the 
hard  saying  in  John  vi.  (Cont.  Haer.  li.  6,  p.  457; 
Dindorf's  recent  edition).  The  same  had  beer,  said 
'of  St.  Luke.  Nothing  can  l>e  decided  on  this  point. 
The  relation  of  Mark  to  Peter  is  of  great  import 
ance  for  our  view  of  his  Gospel.  Ancient  writers 
with  one  consent  make  the  Evangelist  the  inter 
preter  (ep/wji/evT^s)  of  the  Apostle  Peter  (Papias 
in  Euseb.  //.  E.  iii.  39  ;  Irenaeus,  Haer.  iii.  1, 
iii.  10,  6  ;  Tertullian,  c.  Marc.  iv.  5 ;  Hieronymus. 
ad  Hcdib.  ix.,  &c.).  Some  explain  this  word  to 
mean  that  the  office  of  Mark  was  to  translate  into 
the  Greek  tongue  the  Aramaic  discourses  of  th° 
Apostle  (Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  &c.) ;  whilst  others 
adopt  the  more  probable  view  that  Mark  wrote  a 
Gospel  which  conformed  more  exactly  than  the 
others  to  Peter's  preaching,  and  thus  "  interpreted  " 
it  to  the  church  at  large  (Valesius,  Alford,  Langr, 
bnxtovhe,  Meyer,  &c.).  The  passage  from  Eusebhu 


236 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 


favours  the  latter  view ;  it  is  a  quotation  from 
Papias.  "  This  also  [John]  the  elder  said : — Mark, 
being  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down  exactly 
whatever  things  he  remembered,  but  yet  not  in  the 
order  in  which  Christ  either  spoke  or  did  them  ; 
for  he  was  neither  a  hearer  nor  a  follower  of  the 
Lord's,  but  he  was  afterwards,  as  /  [Papias]  said, 
a  follower  of  Peter."  The  words  in  italics  refer  to 
the  word  interpreter  above,  and  the  passage  de 
scribes  a  disciple  writing  down  what  his  master 
preached,  and  not  an  interpreter  orally  translating 
his  words.  This  tradition  will  be  further  examined 
below.  [MARK,  GOSPEL  OF.]  The  report  that 
Mark  was  the  companion  of  Peter  at  Rome  is  no 
doubt  of  great  antiquity.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
is  quoted  by  Eusebius  as  giving  it  for  "  a  tradition 
which  he  had  received  of  the  elders  from  the  first " 
(TrapaSocriv  fiav  dcc/cadec  irpeff&VTfpay,  Eusebius, 
H.  E.  vi.  14  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Hyp.  6).  But  the  force 
of  this  is  invalidated  by  the  suspicion  that  it  rests 
on  a  misunderstanding  of  1  Pet.  v.  13,  Babylon 
being  wrongly  taken  for  a  typical  name  of  Home 
(Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  1 5 ;  Hieron.  De  Vir.  ill.  8).  Sent 
on  a  mission  to  Egypt  by  Peter  (Epiphanius,  Haer. 
li.  6,  p.  457,  Diudorf ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  16),  Mark 
there  founded  the  church  of  Alexandria  (Hieron. 
De  Vir.  ill.  8),  and  preached  in  various  places 
(Niceph.  H.  E.  ii.  43),  then  returned  to  Alexandria, 
of  which  church  he  was  bishop,  and  suffered  a 
martyr's  death  (Niceph.  ibid.,  and  Hieron.  De  Vir. 
ill.  8).  But  none  of  these  later  details  rest  on 
sound  authority.  (SOURCES  : — The  works  on  the 
Gospels  referred  to  under  LUKE  and  Gosi'ELS ;  also 
Fi-itzsche,  In  Marcum,  Leipzig,  1830 ;  Lange,  Bibel- 
werk,  part  ii.,  &c.)  [W.  T.] 

MARK,  GOSPEL  OF.  The  characteristics 
of  this  Gospel,  the  shortest  of  the  four  inspired 
records,  will  appear  from  the  discussion  of  the 
various  questions  that  have  been  raisec>  about  it. 

I.  Sources  of  this  Gospel. — The  tradition  that  it 
gives  the  teaching  of  Peter,  rather  than  of  the  rest 
of  the  Apostles,  has  been  a'.iuded  to  above.  The 
witness  of  John  the  Presbyter,  quoted  by  Eusebius 
<  H.  E.  iii.  39)  through  Papias,  has  been  cited.  [See 
p.  235,  &.]  Irenaeus  calls  Mark  "  interpres  et  sec- 
tator  Petri,"  and  cites  the  opening  and  the  concluding 
words  of  the  Gospel  as  we  now  possess  them  (iii. 
x.  6).  He  also  alludes  to  a  sect  (the  Cerinthians  ?) 
who  hold  "  impassibilem  perseverasse  Christum, 
passum  vero  Jesum,"  and  who  prefer  the  Gospel  of 
St  Mark  to  the  rest  (iii.  xi.  7).  Eusebius  says,  on 
the  authority  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  that  the 
hearers  of  Peter  at  l\ome  desired  Mark,  the  follower 
of  Peter,  to  leave  with  them  a  record  of  his  teaching ; 
upon  which  Mark  wrote  his  Gospel,  whicli  the 
Apostle  afterwards  sanctioned  with  his  authority, 
»nd  directed  that  it  should  be  read  in  the  Churcnes 
(Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  15).  Elsewhere,  quoting  Clement 
again,  we  have  the  same  account,  except  that  Peter 
is  there  described  as  "  neither  hindering  nor  urging" 
the  undertaking  (H.  E.  vi.  14).  The  apparent  con 
tradiction  has  been  conciliated  by  supposing  that 
Peter  neither  helped  nor  hindered  the  work  before 
it  was  completed,  but  gave  his  approval  afterwards 
("  licet  fieri  ipsum  non  jusserit,  tameu  factum  noc 
prohibuit,"  Rurlmus  :  see  note  of  Valesius  in  loc. 
Eus.).  Tertullian  (Cont.  Marcionem,  iv.  5)  speaks 
of  the  Gospel  of  Mark  as  being  connected  with  Peter, 
"  cujus  interpres  Marcus,"  and  so  having  apostolic 
authority.  Epiphanius  says  that,  immediately  after 
St.  Matthew,  the  l&sk  wa*  laid  on  St.  Mark,  "the 


MARK   GOSPEL  Otf 

follower  of  St.  Peter  at  Home,"  of  writing  a  Gosj*l 
(Haer.  !i.).  Hieronymus  (De  Vir.  ill.  8)  repeats  the 
story  of  Eusebius  ;  and  again  says  that  the  Gospt'. 
was  written,  "  Petro  narrante,  et  illo  scribente'' 
(Ad  Hedib.  2).  If  the  evidence  of  the  Apostle's 
connexion  with  this  Gospel  rested  wholly  on  these 
passages,  it  would  not  be  sufficient,  since  the  wit 
nesses,  though  many  in  number,  are  not  all  inde 
pendent  of  each  other,  and  there  are  marks,  in  the 
former  of  the  passages  from  Eusebius,  of  a  wish  tc 
enhance  the  authority  of  the  Gospel  by  Peter's  ap 
proval,  whilst  the  latter  passage  does  not  allege  the 
same  sanction.  But  there  are  peculiarities  in  the 
Gospel  which  are  best  explained  by  the  supposition 
that  Peter  in  some  way  superintended  its  compo 
sition.  Whilst  there  is  hardly  any  part  of  its  nar 
rative  that  is  not  common  to  it  and  nome  other 
Gospel,  in  the  manner  of  the  narrative  there  is 
often  a  marked  character,  which  puts  aside  at  once 
the  supposition  that  we  have  here  a  mere  epitome 
of  Matthew  and  Luke.  The  picture  of  the  same 
events  is  far  more  vivid  ;  touches  are  introduced 
such  as  could  only  be  noted  by  a  vigilant  eye 
witness,  and  such  as  make  us  almost  eye-witnesses 
of  the  Redeemer's  doings.  The  most  remarkable 
case  of  this  is  the  account  of  the  demoniac  in  the 
country  of  the  Gadarenes.  where  the  following  words 
are  peculiar  to  Mark:  •'  And  no  man  could  bind  him, 
no  not  with  chains :  because  that  he  had  often  be»>n 
bound  with  fetters  and  chains,  and  the  chains  had 
been  plucked  asunder  by  him,  and  the  fetters  broken 
iii  pieces :  neither  could  any  man  tame  him.  And 
always  night  and  day  he  was  in  the  mountains  i 
crying  and  cutting  himself  with  stones.  But  when  j 
he  saw  Jesus  afar  off,  he  ran,"  &c.  Here  we  are 
indebted  for  the  picture  of  the  fierce  and  hopeless  -r 
wanderer  to  the  Evangelist  whose  work  is  the 
briefest,  and  whose  style  is  the  least  perfect.  He 
sometimes  adds  to  the  account  of  the  others  a 
notice  of  our  Lord's  look  (iii.  34,  viii.  33,  x.  21,1 
x.  23) ;  he  dwells  on  human  feelings  and  the  tokens 
of  them  ;  on  our  Lord's  pity  for  the  leper,  and  Hi» 
strict  charge  not  to  publish  the  miracle  (i.  41,  44)  j3 
He  "  loved "  the  rich  young  man  for  his  answers 
(x.  21);  He  "looked  round"  with  anger  when 
another  occasion  called  it  out  (iii.  5);  He  groaned 
in  spirit  (vii.  34,  viii.  12).  All  these  are  pcculiarj 
to  Mark;  and  they  would  be  explained  most  readily^ 
by  the  theory  that  one  of  the  disciples  most  near  to] 
Jesus  had  supplied  them.  To  this  must  be  added 
that  whilst  Mark  goes  over  the  same  ground  for  thfl 
most  part  as  the  other  Evangelists,  and  especially' 
Matthew,  there  are  many  facts  thrown  in  which 
prove  that  we  are  listening  to  an  independent  witnesJ 
Thus  the  humble  origin  of  Peter  is  made  kuowfl 
through  him  (i.  16-20),  and  his  connexion  witl 
Capernaum  (i.  29) ;  he  tells  us  that  Levi  was  "  thl 
sun  of  Alphaeus"  (ii.  14),  that  Peter  was  the  naml 
given  by  our  Lord  to  Simon  (iii.  16),  and  Boanergw 
a  surname  added  by  Him  to  the  names  of  two  othem 
(iii.  17);  he  assumes  the  existence  of  another  bocnj 
of  disciples  wider  than  the  Twelve  (iii.  32,  iml 
10,  36,  viii.  34,  xiv.  51,  52):  we  owe  to  hwl 
the  mune  of  Jairus  (v.  22),  the  word  "  carpenter  J] 
applied  to'  our  Lord  (vi.  3),  the  nation  of  tblj 
"  Syrophoenician "  woman  (vii.  26) ;  he  substitute  j 
Dalmanutha  for  the  "Magdala"  of  Matthew  (VM| 
10)  ;  he  names  Bartimaeus  (x.  46) ;  he  alone  men»  I 
tions  that  our  Lord  would  not  suiter  any  man  to  | 
carry  any  vessel  through  the  Temple  (xi.  1<>  ;  and 
that  Simon  of  Cyrene  was  the  father  of  Alexander 
and  Hutu*  ^xv.  21).  All  these  are  tokens  of  an  ii>-  j 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 

dependent  writer,  different  from  Matthew  and  Luke, 
iiid  in  the  absence  of  other  traditions  it  is  natural 
to  look  to  Peter.  One  might  hope  that  much  light 
would  be  thrown  on  this  question  from  the  way  in 
which  Peter  is  mentioned  in  the  Gospel  ;  but  the 
evidence  is  not  so  clear  as  might  have  been  expected. 
Peter  is  often  mentioned  without  any  special  occa 
sion  for  it  (i.  36,  v.  37,  xi.  20-26,  xiii.  3,  xvi.  7) ; 
but  on  the  other  hand  there  are  passages  from  which 
it  might  seem  that  the  writer  knew  less  of  the  great 
Apostle.  Thus  in  Matt.  xv.  15  we  have  "  Peter ;" 
in  the  parallel  place  in  Mark  only  "  the  disciples." 
The  Apostle's  walking  on  the  sea  is  omitted  :  so  the 
blessing  pronounced  on  him  (Matt.  xvi.  17-19),  and 
the  promise  made  to  all  the  Apostles  in  answer  to 
him  (Matt.  xix.  28).  Peter  was  oiie  of  those  who 


MARK    GOBPEL  OP 


237 


which  they  have  in  common,  each  treats  the  events 
in  an  independent  way,  and  not  as  a  copyist.  Still 
this  opinion  has  been  held  by  Herder,  Storr,  Wilke, 
Weisse,  Reuss,  Kwald,  and  others.  (6)  The  theory 
that  Mark's  Gospel  is  a  compilation  and  abridgment 
of  that  of  Matthew  is  maintained  by  Augustin, 
and  after  him  by  Euthymius  and  Michaelis.  The 
facts  on  which  it  rests  are  clear  enough.  There 
are  in  St.  Mark  only  about  three  events  which 
St.  Matthew  does  not  nan-ate  (Mark  i.  23,  viii.  22, 
xii.  41) ;  and  thus  the  matter  of  the  two  may  be 
regarded  as  almost  the  same.  But  the  foitn  in 
St.  Mark  is,  as  we  have  seen,  much  briefer,  and 
the  omissions  are  many  and  important.  The  ex 
planation  is  that  Mark  had  the  work  of  Matthew 
before  him,  and  only  condensed  it.  Bir>  many 


were  sent  to  prepare  the  Passover  ;  yet  Mark  on  its  I  would  make  Mark  a  compiler  from  both  the  others 
his  name.  The  word  "  bitterly "  of  Matthew  and  j  (Griesbach,  De  Wette,  &c.),  arguing  from  passages 
Luke  is  omitted  by  Mark  from  the  record  of  Peter's  i  where  there  is  a  curious  resemblance  to  both  (.see 
rejientance;  whilst  the  account  of  his  denials  is  full  j  De  Wette,  ffandbuch,  §94a).  (c)  Lastly,  the 


and  circumstantial.  It  has  been  sought  to  account 
for  these  omissions  on  the  ground  of  humility  ;  but 
some  may  think  that  this  cannot  be  the  clue  to  all 
the  places.  But  what  we  generalize  from  these 
passages  is,  that  the  name  Peter  is  peculiarly  dealt 
with,  added  here,  and  there  withdrawn,  which 
would  be  explained  if  the  writer  had  access  to 
special  information  about  Peter.  On  the  whole,  in 
spite  of  the  doubtfulness  of  Eusebius'  sources,  and 
the  almost  self-contradiction  into  which  he  falls,  the 
internal  evidence  inclines  us  to  accept  the  account 
that  this  inspired  Gospel  has  some  connexion  with 
St.  Peter,  and  records  more  exactly  the  preaching 
which  he,  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  uttered  for 


theory  that  the  Gospel  before  us  forms  a  sort  of 
transition-link  between  the  other  two,  standing 
midway  between  the  Judaic  tendency  of  Matthew 
and  the  Universalist  or  Gentile  Gospel  of  St.  Luke, 
need  not  trouble  us  much  here  [see  above,  p.  155]. 
An  account  of  these  views  may  be  found  in  II H- 
genfeld's  Evangelien.  It  is  obvious  that  they 
refute  one  another :  the  same  internal  evidence 
suffices  to  prove  that  Mark  is  the  first,  and  th« 
last,  and  the  intermediate.  Let  us  return  to  the 
facts,  and,  taught  by  these  contradictions  what  u 
the  wortii  of  "  internal  evidence,"  let  us  carry  our 
speculations  no  further  than  the  facts.  The  Gospel 
of  Mark  contains  scarcely  any  events  that  are  not 


recited  by  the  others.  There  are  verbal  coincidences 
with  each  of  the  others,  and  sometimes  peculiar 
words  from  both  meet  together  in  the  parallel  place 


the  instruction  of  the  world. 

II.  Relation  of  Mark  to  Matthew  and  Luke.— 
The  results  of  criticism  as  to  the  relation  of  the 

three  Gospels  are  somewhat  humiliating.  Up  to  j  jn  Mark.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  unmistake- 
this  day  three  views  are  maintained  with  equal  able  marks  of  independence.  He  has  passages  pe- 
ardour:  (a)  that  Mark's  Gospel  is  the  original  I  culiar  to  himself  (as  iii.  20,  21,  iv.  26-29,  vii. 
Gospel  out  of  which  the  other  two  have  been  31-37,  viii.  22-26,  xi.  11-14,  xiv.  51,  52,  xvi. 
developed ;  (6)  that  it  was  a  compilation  from  the  9-11),  and  a  peculiar  fulness  of  detail  where  he 
other  two,  and  therefore  was  written  last;  and  goes  over  the  same  ground  as  the  others.  Th? 
(c)  that  it  was  copied  from  that  of  Matthew,  and  beginning  of  his  Gospel  is  peculiar;  so  is  the  end. 
forms  a  link  of  transition  between  the  other  two.  Remarkable  is  the  absence  of  passages  quoted  from 
(a)  Of  the  first  view  Thiersch  may  serve  as  the  j  the  Old  Testament  by  the  writer  himself,  who, 
expositor.  "  No  one,"  he  says,  "  will  now  venture  however,  recites  such  passages  when  used  by  our 
to  call  Mark  a  mere  epitomizer  of  Matthew  and  ;  Lord.  There  are  only  two  exceptions  to  this, 
Luke.  Were  his  Gospel  an  epitome  of  theirs,  it  j  uamely,  the  opening  verses  of  the  Gospel,  where 
would  bear  the  marks  of  the  attempt  to  combine  ]  Mai.  iii.  1  and  Is.  xl.  3  are  cited;  and  a  verse  in 
in  one  the  excellences  of  both;  else  the  labour  of.  the  account  of  the  crucifixion  (xv.  28),  whert  he 
epitome  would  have  been  without  an  object.  But  quotes  the  words,  "  and  He  was  numbered  with  the 
the  very  opposite  is  the  case.  We  miss  the  pecu-  transgressors "  (Is.  liii.  12) ;  but  this  is  rejected 
liarities  of  Matthew  and  Luke.  We  find  that  ;  by  Alford  and  Tischendorf  as  spurious,  inserted 
which  is  common  to  both.  And  therefore,  were  here  from  Luke  xxii.  37.  After  deducting  these 
Mark's  Gospel  a  mere  epitome  of  the  others,  we  exceptions,  23  quotations  from  or  references  to  the 
should  have  a  third  repetition  of  that  which  had  j  O.  T.  remain,  in  all  of  which  it  is  either  our  Lord 


been  already  twice  related,  with  so  little  additional 
or  more  exact  matter,  that  the  intention  and  con 
duct  of  the  writer  would  remain  a  riddle.  This 
difficulty  disappears,  and  a  great  step  is  made  in 
threading  the  labyrinth  of  the  Gospel  harmony. 


Himself  who  is  speaking,  or  some  one  addressing 
Him. 

The  hypothesis  which  best  meets  these  facts  is, 
that  whilst  the  matter  common  to  all  three  Evan 
gelists,  or  to  two  of  them,'  is  derived  from  the  oral 


when  we  see  that  Mark  formed  the  basis  of  Mat-  !  teaching  of  the  Apostles,  which  they  had  purposely 
thew  and  Luke.  Where  they  follow  him  they  '  reduced  to  a  common  form,  our  Evangelist  writes 
agree.  Where  they  do  not,  as  in  the  history  of ;  as  an  independent  witness  to  the  truth,  and  not  as 
our  Lord's  childhood,  in  His  discourses,  and  in  a  compiler ;  and  that  the  tradition  that  the  Gospei 
His  appearances  after  His  resurrection,  they  differ  was  written  under  the  sanction  of  Peter,  and  its 
widely,  and  each  takes  his  own  way "  (Thiersch,  '  matter  in  some  degree  derived  from  him,  is  made 
Church  History,  p.  94,  Carlyle's  translation).  But !  probable  by  the  evident  traces  of  an  eye-witness  in 
the  amount  of  independent  narrative  is  too  great, 


in  each  of  the   others,  to  admit  of  their  having  j      a  Mark  has  39  Secti0n8  common  to  all  three ;  23  common 
ienvpd  their  Gospels  from  Mark  ;  and  in  the  places    to  him  anil  Matthew ;  and  18  common  to  b)iii  and  Luke. 


238 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 


manv  of  thj  narratives.  The  omission  and  abridg 
ment  of  our  Lord's  discourses,  and  the  sparing  use 
of  O.  T.  quotations,  might  be  accounted  for  by  the 
special  destination  of  the  Gospel,  if  we  had  surer 
data  for  ascertaining  it;  but  it  was  for  Gentiles, 
with  whom  illustrations  from  the  0.  T.  would 
have  less  weight,  and  the  purpose  of  the  writer 
was  to  present  a  clear  and  vivid  picture  of  the  acts 
of  our  Lord's  human  life,  rather  than  a  full  record 
of  His  divine  doctrine.  We  may  thankfully  own 
that,  with  little  that  is  in  substance  peculiar  to 
himself,  the  Evangelist  does  occupy  for  us  a  distinct 
jii.siticm,  and  supply  a  definite  want,  in  virtue  of 
these  characteristics. 

III.  Tliis  Gospel  written  primarily  for  Gen 
tiles. — We  have  seen  thai  the  Evangelist  scarcely 
refers  to  the  0.  T.  in  his  own  person.  The  word 
Law  (yonos)  does  not  once  occur.  The  genealogy 
of  our  Lord  is  likewise  omitted.  Other  matters 
interesting  chiefly  to  the  Jews  are  likewise  omitted ; 
such  as  the  references  to  the  0.  T.  and  Law  in 
M-ttt.  xii.  5-7,  the  reflexions  on  the  request  of  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  for  a  sign,  Matt.  xii.  38-45 ; 
the  parable  of  the  king's  son,  Matt.  xxii.  1-14  ;  and 
the  awful  denunciation  of  the  Scribes  and  Pha 
risees,  in  Matt,  xxiii.  Explanations  are  given  in 
some  places,  which  Jews  could  not  require:  thus, 
Jordan  is  a  "river"  (Mark  i.  5  ;  Matt.  iii.  6);  the 
Pharisees,  &c.  "  used  to  fast"  (Mark  ii.  18  ;  Matt, 
ix.  14),  and  other  customs  of  theirs  are  described 
(Mark  vii.  1-4  ;  Matt.  xv.  1,  2)  ;  "  the  time  of  figs 
was  not  yet,"  t.  e.  at  the  season  of  the  Passover 
(Mark  xi.  13  ;  Matt.  xxi.  19) ;  the  Sadducees'  worst 
tenet  is  mentioned  (Mark  xii.  18);  the  Mount  of 
Olives  is  "over  against  the  temple"  (Mark  xiii.  3 ; 
Matt.  xxiv.  3) ;  at  the  Passover  men  eat  "  unlea 
vened  bread"  (Mark  xiv.  1,  12;  Matt.  xxvi.  2, 
17),  and  explanations  are  given  which  Jews  would 
not  need  (Mark  xv.  6,  16,  42  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  15, 
27,  57).  Matter  that  might  offend  is  omitted,  as 
Matt.  x.  5,  6,  vi.  7,  8.  Passages,  not  always 
peculiar  to  Mark,  abound  in  his  Gospel,  in  which 
the  antagonism  between  the  pharisaic  legal  spirit 
and  the  Gospel  come  out  strongly  (i.  2'2,  ii.  19, 
22,  x.  5,  viii.  15),  which  hold  out  hopes  to  the 
heathen  of  admission  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  even 
without  the  Jews  (xii.  9),  and  which  put  ritual 
forms  below  the  worship  of  the  heart  (ii.  18,  iii.  1-5, 
vii.  5-23).  Mark  alone  preserves  those  words  of 
Jesus,  "  The  sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not 
man  for  the  sabbath  "  (ii.  27).  Whilst  he  omits  the 
invective  against  the  Pharisees,  he  indicates  by  a 
touch  of  his  own  how  Jesus  condemned  them  "  with 
anger  "  (iii.  5).  When  the  Lord  purges  the  Temple 
of  those  that  polluted  it.  He  quotes  a  passage  of 
Isaiah  (Ivi.  7) ;  but  Mark  alone  reports  as  part  of 
it  the  words  "of  all  nations  "  (xi.  17).  Mark  alone 
makes  the  Scribe  admit  that  love  is  better  than 
sacrifices  (xii.  33).  From  the  general  testimony 
of  thesj  places,  whatever  may  be  objected  to  an 
inference  from  one  or  other  amongst  them,  there 
.«  little  doubt  but  that  the  Gospel  was  meant  for 
use  in  the  first  instance  amongst  Gentiles.  But 
the  facts  give  no'  warrant  for  the  dream  that  the 
first  Evangelist  represents  the  Judaic  type  of  Chris 
tianity,  and  the  third  the  Pauline  ;  and  that  Mark 
occupies  an  intermediate  position,  marking  the 
transition  from  one  to  the  other !  In  St.  Mark  we 
have  the  Gospel  as  it  was  preached  to  all  the  world, 
and  it  is  so  presented  as  to  suit  the  wants  of  Gen- 
tilos.  But  there  is  not  a  trace  of  the  wish,  conscious 
er  unconscious,  to  assist  in  any  change  of  Christ  an 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 

belief  or  modes  of  thinking.     In  all  things  it  is  i 
calm  history,  not  a  polemical  pleading. 

IV.  Time  when  the  Gospel  was  written. — It  will 
be  understood  from  what  has  been  said,  that  no 
thing  positive  can  be  asserted  as  to  the  time  when 
this  Gospel  was  written.     The  traditions  are  con 
tradictory.     Irenaeus  says  that  it  was  written  after 
the   death    (t£o8oi>,   but  Grabe   would    translate, 
wrongly,  departure   from   Rome)   of  the  apostl* 
Peter  (Eusebius,  H.  E.  v.  8) ;  but  we  have  seet 
above,  that  in  other  passages  it  is  supposed  to  be 
written  during  Peter's  lifetime  (Bus.  II.  E.  vi.  14, 
and  ii.  15).     In  the  Bible  there  is  nothing  to  decide 
the  question.     It  is  not  likely  that  it  dates  before 
the  reference  to  Mark  in  the  epistle  to  the  Colos- 
sians  (iv.  10),  where  he  is  only  introduced  as  a 
relative  of  Barnabas,  as  if  this  were  his  greatest 
distinction ;    and   this   epistle  was  written   about 
A.D.  62.     If  after  coming  to  Asia  Minor  on  Paul's 
sending  he  went  on  and  joined  Peter  at  Babylon, 
he  may  have  then  acquired,  or  rather  completed, 
that  knowledge  of  Peter's  preaching,  which  tradi 
tion  teaches  us  to  look  for  in  the  Gospel,  and  of 
which  there  is  so  much  internal  evidence ;  and  soon 
after   this,  the  Gospel  may  have  been  composed. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  was  written  before  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem  (xiii.  13,  24-30,  33,  &c.) 
Probably,  therefore,  it  was  written  between  A.D 
63  and  70.     But  nothing  can  be  certainly  deter 
mined  on  this  point. 

V.  Place  where  the  Gospel  was  written. — The 
place  is  as  uncertain  as  the  time.     Clement,  EUSP- 
bius,  Jerome,  and  Epiphanius,  pronounce  for  Rome, 
and  many  moderns  take  the  same  view.    The  Latin 
expressions  in  the  Gospel  prove  nothing ;  for  there 
is   little   doubt    that,    wherever   the   Gospel   was 
written,  the  writer  had  been  at  Rome,  and  so  knew 
its  language.     Chrysostom  thinks  Alexandria ;  but 
this  is  not  confirmed  by  other  testimony. 

VI.  Language. — The    Gospel    was   written   in 
Greek ;  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt  if  ancient 
testimony  is  to  weigh.     Baronius  indeed,  on  the 
ai.thority  of  an  old  Syriac  translation,  asseits  that 
Latin  was  the  original  language ;  and  some  MSS. 
refered  to  in  Scholz  {Greek  Test.  p.  xxx.)  repeat 
the  same ;  but  this  arises  no  doubt  from  the  belief 
that  it  was  written  at  Rome  and  for  Gentiles.     This 
opinion    and  its  grounds  Wahl  has  travestied  by 
supposing   that  the  Gospel  was  written  at  Alex 
andria  in  Coptic.     A  Latin  Gospel  written  for  the 
use  of  Roman  Christians   would   not   have   been 
lost   without   any   mention   of  it   in   an   ancient 
writer. 

VII.  Genuineness  of  the  Gospel. — Schleiermacher 
was  the  first  perhaps  to  question  that  we  have  in 
our  present  Gospel  that  of  which  Papias  speaks, 
on  the  ground  that  his  words  would  apply  to  a 
simpler  and  less  orderly  composition  (Studien  u. 
Kritiken,  1832).     Accordingly  the  usual  assump 
tion  of  a  later  editor  is  brought  in,  as  in  the  case  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel  [see  p.  155].     But  the  words  of 
Papias  require  no  such  aid  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39), 
nor  would  such  authority  be  decisive  if  they  did. 
All  ancient  testimony  makes  Mark  the  author  of  a 
certain  Gospel,  and  that  this  is  the  Gospel  which 
has  come  down  to  us,  there  is  not  the  least  histo 
rical  ground  for  doubting.     Owing  to  the  very  few 
sections  peculiar  to  Mark,  evidence  from  patristic 
quotation  is  somewhat  difficult  to  produce.    Justin 
Martyr,  however,  quotes  ch.  ix.  44,  46,  48,  xii.  30. 
and  iii.  17,  and  Irenaeus  cites  both  the  opening  and 
closing  words  (iii.  10. 6).  An  important  testimony  in 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OP 

any  case,  but  doubly  so  from  the  doubt  that  has  been 
east  ou  the  closing  verses  (xvi.  9-19).  Concerning 
these  verses  see  Meyer's,  Alford's,  and  Tischendorf  s 
notes.  The  passage  is  rejected  by  the  majority  of 
modem  critics,  on  the  testimony  of  MSS.  and  of  old 
writers  and  on  the  internal  evidence  of  the  diction. 
Though  it  is  probable  that  this  section  is  from  a 
different  hand,  and  was  annexed  to  the  Gospel  soon 
after  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  it  must  be  remem 
bered  that  it  is  found  in  three  of  the  four  great  uncial 
MSS.  (A.C.D),  and  is  quoted  without  any  question 
by  Irenaeus.  Among  late  critics  Olshausen  still 
pronounces  for  its  genuineness.  With  the  exception 
of  these  few  verses  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel 
is  placed  above  the  reach  of  reasonable  doubt. 

VIII.  Style  and  Diction. — The  purpose  of  the 
Evangelist  seems  to  be  to  place  before  us  a  vivid 
picture  of  the  earthly  acts  of  Jesus.  The  style  is 
peculiarly  suitable  to  this.  He  uses  the  present 
tense  instead  of  the  narrative  aorist,  almost  in  every 
chapter.  The  word  tvOfias,  "  straightway,"  is  used 
by  St.  Mark  forty-one  times.  The  first  person  is 
preferred  to  the  third  (iv.  39,  v.  8,  9,  12,  vi.  2, 
'6,  31,  33,  ix.  25,  33,  xii.  6).  Precise  and  minute 
details  as  to  persons,  places,  and  numbers,  abound 
in  the  narrative.  All  these  tend  to  give  force  and 
vividness  to  the  picture  of  the  human  life  of  our 
Lord.  On  the  other  side,  the  facts  are  not  very 
exactly  arranged ;  they  are  often  connected  by 
nothing  more  definite  than  /col  and  ird\iv.  Its 
conciseness  sometimes  makes  this  Gospel  more 
obscure  than  the  others  (i.  13,  ix.  5,  6,  iv. 
10-34). 

Many  peculiarities  of  diction  may  be  noticed  ; 
amongst  them   the  following: — 1.  Hebrew  (Ara 
maic)  words  are  used,  but  explained  for  Gentile 
readers  (iii.  17,  22,  v.  41,  vii.  11,  34,  ix.  43,  x. 
46,  xiv.  36,  xv.  22,  34).     2.  Latin  words  are  very 
frequent,  as  Sijvdpiov,  \ty«av,  ffirfKov\drcap,  K 
Tvpicov,   Kjjvffos,  KoSpdvrris,   <f>payyf\\6(»,  irpai- 
r&piov,   £fffTi)s.     3.   Unusual   words   or   phrases 
are  found  here  ;  as  Qdiriva,  ix.  8  ;  iiriffvvrpt-^ 
ix.  25 ;  vovvfX^si  x"-  34 ;  vdpSos  vurrticfi,  xiv. 
3;  fvti\€ca,  xv.  46;  fjtpte,  i.  34,  xi.  16;  irpoffKap- 
repftv  (of  a  thing),  iii.  9  ;  tvl  rb  trpoffKf<t>d\cuov 
KadfvScav,  iv.  38  ;  irpoe'AajSe  fnvplffai,  xiv.  8.     4. 
Diminutives  are  frequent.     5.  The  substantive  is 
often  repeated  instead  of  the  pronoun ;  as  (to  cite 
from  ch.  ii.  only)   ii.   16,   18,  20,   22,  27,   28. 
6.  Negatives  are  accumulated  for  the  sake  of  em 
phasis  (vii.  12,  ix.  8,  xii.  34,  xv.  5,  i.  44  (oir/c 
ou  fj.^i,  xiv.  25,  &c.,  &c.).     7.  Words   are   often 
added  to  adverbs  for  the  sake  of  emphasis  ;  as  r6re 
tv   eKeivri  TTJ  rifj.fpa,    ii.  20  ;    StairavTbs  vvicrbs 
teal  Tjfifpas,  v.  5  ;  eirfle'cws  fj.erii  (TirouSfjy,  vi.  25 
also  vii.  21,  viii.  4,  x.  20,  xiii.  29,  xiv.  30,  43 
8.    The   same   idea   is   often    repeated   under  an 
other  expression,   as  i.   42,  ii.   25,  viii.  15,  xiv. 
68,    &c.      9.    And    sometimes    the    repetition   is 
effected  by  means  of  the  opposite,  as  in  i.  22,  44, 
and  many  other  places.     10.  Sometimes  emphasis 
is  given  by  simple  reiteration,  as  in  ii.  15,  19. 
11.  The  elliptic  use  of  Iva,  like  that  of  Sirwy  in 
classical  writers,  is  found,  v.  23.     12    The  word 
iirfpwrqv  is  used  twenty-five  times  in  this  Gospel. 
13.  Instead   of  ffvuftovXiov   Xa^dvuv   of  Matt. 
Mark  has  <rvfj.&ov\iov  iroielv,  iii.  6,  xv.   1.      13. 
Thire  are   many  words   peculiar  to  Mark  ;   thus 
t\o\os,  vii.    37,  ix.   17,  25;    tit0a./j.pt'iff8cu,  i.x. 
15,  xiv.  33,  xvi.  5,  6  ;   tvayica\i£fffecu,  ix.  36,  x. 
16;  Ktvrvpiwv,  xv.  39,  44,  45;  irpofj.fpifj.vav,  xni. 
11;    irtHMnroofvsffOai.    x.    35;    cni\l3ftv,    ix.   3; 


MARK,  GOSPEL  OF 


23S 


<rTc»i/3<£y,  xi.  8 ;  <ri/i/0Ai/3«tc,  v.  21,  31;  ffKta\r]l 
x.  44,  46,  48  ;  iraibi60fi>,  ix.  21  ;  cr/a/oi/i'fw, 
xv.  23. 

The  diction  of  St.  Mark  presents  the  difficulty 

that  whilst   it   abounds   in   Latin  words,   and   in 

xpressions  that  recall  Latin  equivalents,  it  is  still 

much  more  akin  to  the  Hebraistic  diction  of  St. 

Matthew  than  to  the  purer  style  of  St.  Luke. 

IX.  Quotations  from  the  Old  Testament.— The 
Allowing  list  of  references  to  the  Old  Testament  is 
nearly  or  quite  complete : — 

Mark  i.    2.  Mai.  iii.  1. 

„    3.  Is.  xl.  3. 

„  44.  Lev.  xiv.  2. 

ii.  25.  1  Sam.  xxi.  6. 

iv.  12.  Is.  v..  10. 

vii.    6.  Is.  r.xix.  13. 

„  10.  Ex.  xx.  12,  xxl.  17. 

ix.  44.  Is.  Ixvi.  24. 

x.    4.  Daut.  xxiv.  1. 

„    1.  Gen.  ii.  24. 

„  19.  Ex.  xx.  12-17. 

xi.  17.  Is.  Id.  7;  Jer.  vii.  11. 

xii.  10.  Pa  cxviil.  22. 

„    19.  Deut.  xxv.  6. 

„   26.  Ex.  iii.  «. 

„   29.  Deut.  vi.  4. 

„  31.  Lev.  xlx.  18. 

„  36.  Ps.  ex.  1. 

xiii.  14.  Dan.  !x.  27. 

„    24.  Is.  xiii.  10. 

xiv.  27.  Zech.  xiii.  7. 

„    62.  Dan.  vii.  13. 
xv.  28(?)Is.  liil.  12. 

„  34.  Ps.  xxii.  1. 

X.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — Though  this  Gospel 
has  little  historical  matter  which  is  not  shared 
with  some  other,  it  would  be  a  great  error  to 
suppose  that  the  voice  of  Mark  could  have  been 
silenced  without  injury  to  the  divine  harmony. 
The  minute  painting  of  the  scenes  in  which  the 
Lord  took  part,  the  frvsh  and  lively  mode  of  the 
narration,  the  very  absence  of  the  precious  dis 
courses  of  Jesus,  which,  interposed  between  His 
deeds,  would  have  delayed  the  acticn,  all  give  to 
this  Gospel  a  character  of  its  own.  It  is  the  his 
tory  of  the  war  of  Jesus  against  sin  and  evil  in  the 
world  during  the  time  that  He  dwelt  as  a  Man 
among  men.  Its  motto  might  well  be,  as  Lange 
observes,  those  words  of  Peter  :  "  How  God  anointed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with 
power ;  who  went  about  doing  good,  and  healing 
all  that  were  oppressed  of  the  devil ;  for  God  was 
with  Him  "  (Acts  x.  38).  It  developes  a  series  of 
acts  of  this  conflict,  broken  by  times  of  rest  and 
refreshing,  in  the  wilderness  or  on  the  mountain. 
It  records  the  exploits  of  the  Son  of  God  in  the 
war  agaiivst  Satan,  ana  tne  retirement  in  wmch 
after  each  He  returned  to  commune  witn  His 
Father,  and  bring  back  fresh  strength  for  new 
encounters.  Thus  the  passage  from  ii.  1  to  iii.  6 
describes  His  first  conflict  with  the  Pharisees,  and 
it  ends  in  a  conspiracy  of  Pharisees  and  Herodians 
for  His  destruction,  before  which  He  retires  to  the 
sea  (iii.  7).  The  passage  from  iii.  13  to  vi.  6 
contains  the  account  of  his  conflict  with  the  un 
belief  of  His  own  countrymen,  ending  with  those 
remarkable  words,  "  And  He  could  there  do  no 
mighty  work,  save  that  He  laid  His  hands  upon  a 
few  sick  folk  and  healed  them  :"  then,  constrained 
(so  to  speak)  in  His  working  by  their  resistance. 
He  retired  for  that  time  from  the  struggle,  and 
"  went  round  about  the  villages  teaching  "  (vi.  6)1 


240 


MARMOTH 


The  principal  divisions  in  the  Gospel  are  these:  — 
1.  John  the  Baptist  and  Jesus  (i.  1-13).  2.  Acts 
of  Jwus  in  Galilee  (i.  14-ix.  50).  3.  Teaching  in 
Peraea,  where  the  spirit  of  the  new  kingdom  of 
the  Gospel  is  brought  out  (x.  1-34).  4.  Teaching, 
trials,  and  sufferings  in  Jerusalem.  Jesus  revealing 
Himself  as  Founder  of  the  new  kingdom  (x.  35- 
xv.  47).  5.  Resurrection  (xvi.). 

SOURCES.  —  The  works  quoted  under  LUKE,  and 
besides  them,  Davidson,  Introduction  to  N.  T. 
,  Bagster,  1848);  Lange,  Bibelwerk,  part  ii.,  and 
LebenJesu  ;  Fritzsche  on  St.  Mark  (Leipzig,  1830)  ; 
Kuhn,  Leben  Jesii,  vol.  i.  (Mainz,  1838);  and 
Sepp,  Leben  Jesu  (1843-6).  [W.  T.] 


MAR'MOTH    (Mapfiwei  ;    Alex, 
Marimotk}  =  MEREMOTH  the  priest,  the  son  of 
Uriah  (1  Esdr.  viii.  62  ;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  33). 


MAR'OTH 


in  both  MSS.  :  and 


so  also  Jerome,  in  Amaritudinibus),  one  of  the 
towns  of  the  western  lowland  of  Judah  whose 
names  are  alluded  to  or  played  upon  by  the  prophet 
Micah  in  the  warning  with  which  his  prophecy 
opens  (i.  12).  The  allusion  turns  on  the  significa 
tion  of  Maroth  —  "  bitternesses."  It  is  not  else 
where  mentioned,  nor  has  the  name  been  encoun 
tered  by  travellers.  Schwarz's  conjecture  (1  07)  that 
it  is  a  contraction  of  Maarath  is  not  very  happy,  as 
the  latter  contains  the  letter  am,  which  but  very 
rarely  disappears  under  any  process  to  which  words 
are  subjected.  .'•/>  •'  [G.] 

MARRIAGE.  The  topics  which  this  subject 
presents  to  our  consideration  in  connexion  with 
Biblical  literature  may  be  most  conveniently  ar 
ranged  under  the  following  five  heads:  — 

I.  Its  origin  and  history. 

II.  The   conditions   under   which   it   could   be 
legally  effected. 

III.  The  modes  by  which  it  was  effected. 

IV.  The  social  and  domestic  relations  of  manned 

life. 

V.  The   typical    and    allegorical   references   to 
marriage. 

I.  The  institution  of  marriage  is  founded  on 
the  requirements  of  man's  nature,  and  dates  from 
the  time  of  his  original  creation.  It  may  be  said 
to  have  been  ordained  by  God,  in  as  far  as  man's 
nature  was  ordained  by  Him  ;  but  its  formal  ap 
pointment  was  the  work  of  man,  and  it  has  ever 
leen  in  its  essence  a  natural  and  civil  institution, 
though  admitting  of  the  infusion  of  a  religious 
element  into  it.  This  view  of  marriage  is  exhibited 
in  the  historical  account  of  its  origin  in  the  book 
of  Genesis:  the  peculiar  formation  of  man's  nature 
is  assigned  to  the  Creator,  who,  seeing  it  "  not  good 


MARRIAGE 

for  man  to  be  aione,"  determined  to  t'orm  an  "  help 
meet  tor  him  "  (ii.  18),  and  accordingly  completed 
the  work  by  the  addition  of  the  female  to  the  malt 
(i.  27).  The  necessity  for  this  step  appears  from 
the  words  used  in  the  declaration  of  the  Divine 
counsel.  Man,  as  an  intellectual  and  spiritual  being, 
would  not  have  been  a  worthy  representative  of  the 
Deity  on  earth,  so  long  as  he  lived  in  solitude,  cr 
in  communion  only  with  beings  either  high  above 
him  in  the  scale  of  creation,  as  angels,  or  far  beneath 
him,  as  the  beasts  of  the  field.  It  was  absolutely 
necessary,  not  only  for  his  comfort  and  happiness, 
but  still  more  for  the  perfection  of  the  Divine 
work,  that  he  should  have  a  "  help  meet  for 
him,"  •  or,  as  the  words  more  properly  mean,  "  the 
exact  counterpart  of  himself" — a  being  capable 
of  receiving  and  reflecting  his  thoughts  and  affec 
tions.  No  sooner  was  the  formation  of  woman 
effected,  than  Adam  recognised  in  that  act  the  will 
of  the  Creator  as  to  man's  social  condition,  and  im 
mediately  enunciated  the  important  statement,  t« 
which  his  posterity  might  refer  as  the  charter  of 
marriage  in  all  succeeding  ages,  "  Therefore  shall 
a  man  leave  his  lather  and  his  mother,  and  shall 
cleave  unto  his  wife:  and  they  shall  be  one  flesh" 
(ii.  24).  From  these  words,  coupled  with  the  cir 
cumstances  attendant  on  the  formation  of  the  first 
woman,  we  may  evolve  the  following  principles : — > 
(1)  The  unity  of  man  and  wife,  as  implied  in  her 
being  formed  out  of  man,  and  as  expressed  in  the 
words  "  one  flesh  ;"  (2)  the  indissolubleness  of  the 
marriage  bond,  except  on  the  strongest  ground* 
(comp.  Matt.  xix.  9) ;  (3)  monogamy,  as  the  ori 
ginal  law  of  marriage,  resulting  from  there  having 
been  but  one  original  couple,b  as  is  forcibly  ex 
pressed  in  the  subsequent  references  to  this  passage 
by  our  Lord  ("  they  twain,"  Matt.  xix.  5),  and  S'_ 
Paul  ("  two  shall  be  one  flesh,"  1  Cor.  vi.  16) , 
(4)  the  social  equality  of  man  and  wife,  as  imrJiec 
in  the  terms  ish  and  ishshah,c  the  one  bein^  the 
exact  coirelative  of  the  other,  as  well  as  in  the 
words  "  help  meet  for  him  ;"  (5)  the  subordination 
of  the  wife  to  the  husband,  consequent  upon  her 
subsequent  formation  (1  Cor.  xi.  8,  9 ;  1  Tim.  ii. 
13) ;  and  (6)  the  respective  duties  of  man  and  wife, 
as  implied  in  the  words  "  help  meet  for  him." 

The  introduction  of  sin  into  the  world  modified 
to  a  certain  extent  the  mutual  relations  of  man  and 
wife.  As  the  blame  of  seduction  to  sin  lay  on  the 
latter,  the  condition  of  subordination  was  turned 
into  subjection,  and  it  was  said  to  her  of  her  hus 
band,  "  he  shall  rule  over  thee  "  (Gen.  iii.  1 6) — a 
sentence  which,  regarded  as  a  prediction,  has  Ven 
strikingly  fulfilled  in  the  position  assigned  to  women 
in  Oriental  countries,*  but  which,  regarded  as  a 
rule  of  life,  is  fully  sustained  by  the  voice  of  nature 
and  by  the  teaching  of  Christianity  (1  Cor.  xiv.  34; 


"  1^333.  literally,  "  as  over  against,"  and  so  "  corre 
sponding  to."  The  renderings,  in  the  A.  V.  "  meet  for 
him,"  in  the  LXX.  KO.T  avrov,  o/ioto?  a.vr<p,  and  in  the 
Vulg.  simile  sibi,  are  inadequate. 

b  The  LXX.  introduces  Wo  into  the  text  in  Gen.  ii.  24, 
and  Is  followed  by  the  Vulgate. 

'  C^tf  and  i"IB>S'  We  are  unable  to  express  the 
rwbal  correspondence  of  these  words  in  our  language. 
The  Vulgate  retains  the  etymological  identity  at  the 
expense  of  the  sense :  "  Virago  quora&m  de  viro."  The 
old  Latin  term  in'ra  would  have  been  better.  Luther  is 
more  successful  with  mann  and  mdnnin ;  but  even  this 
falls  to  convey  tne  double  sense  of  ishshah  as  =• "  woman  " 
Mi)  "  wife,"  boU)  of  wliUi  should  be  preserved,  as  in  the 


German  wn'b,  in  order  to  convey  the  full  force  of  tin 
original.  We  may  here  observe  that  ishshah  was  the  only 
term  in  ordinary  use  among  the  Hebrews  for  "  wife." 

They  occasionally  used  /%•?>  as  we  use  "consort,"  for  the 
wives  of  kings  (Ps.  xiv.  » ;  Neh.  ii.  6 ;  Dan.  v.  2). 

d  The  relation  of  the  husband  to  the  wife  is  expressel  in 
the  Hebrew  term  baal  OS?!!)-  literally  'ord,  for  husband 
(Ex.  xxl.  3,  22;  Deut  xxi.  13;  2  Sam.  xi.  26,  &c.  *c.). 
The  respectful  term  used  by  Sarah  to  A  waham  OD^Sj 

"my  lord,"  Gen.xviii.  12;  comp.  1  K.  i.  IT,  18,  Ps.xlv.ll) 
furnishes  St.  Peter  with  an  illustration  of  the  wife's  proper 
position  (1  Pet.  iii.  6). 


-  MARRIAGE 

Kph.  T.  '2'2,  23;  1  Tim.  ii.  12).  The  evil  effects 
of  the  fall  were  soon  apparent  in  the  corrupt  usages 
of  marriage:  the  unity  of  the  bond  was  impaired 
by  polygamy,  which  appeara  to  have  originated 
imong  the  Cainites  (Gen.  iv.  19);  and  its  purity 
was  deteriorated  by  the  promiscuous  intermarriage 
of  the  "  sons  of  God  "  with  the  "  daughter  of  men," 
«. «.  of  the  Sethites  with  the  Cainites,  in  the  days 
preceding  the  flood  (Gen.  vi.  2). 

In  the  post-diluvial  age  the  usages  of  marriage 
were  marked  with  the  simplicity  that  characterises 
a  patriarchal  state  of  society.  The  rule  of  mono 
gamy  was  re-established  by  the  example  of  Noah 
and  his  sons  (Gen.  vii.  13).  The  early  patriarchs 
selected  their  wives  from  their  own  family  (Gen. 
ri.  29,  xxiv.  4,  xxviii.  2),  and  the  necessity  for 
doing  this  on  religious  grounds  superseded  the  pro 
hibitions  tha*  ifterwards  held  good  against  such 
marriages  on  ,he  score  of  kindred  (Gen.  xx.  12  ; 
Ex.  vi.  20;  comp.  Lev.  xviii.  9,  12).  Polygamy 
'prevailed  (Gen.  xvi.  4,  xxv.  1,6,  xxviii.  9,  xxix. 
23,  28;  1  Chr.  vii.  14),  but  to  a  great  extent 
divested  of  the  degradation  which  in  modern  tiirfes 
attaches  to  that  practice.  In  judging  of  it  we  must 
take  into  regard  the  following  considerations: — 
(1)  that  the  principle  of  monogamy  was  retained, 
even  in  the  practice  of  polygamy,  by  the  distinction 
made  between  the  chief  or  original  wife  and  the 
secondary  wives,  or,  as  the  A.  V.  terms  them, 
"  concubines  " — a  term  which  is  objectionable,  in 
asmuch  as  it  conveys  to  us  the  notion  of  an  illicit 
and  unrecognised  position,  whereas  the  secondary 
wife  was  regarded  by  the  Hebrews  as  a  wife,  and 
her  rights  were  secured  by  law ;  e  (2)  that  the 
motive  which  led  to  polygamy  was  that  absorbing 
desire  of  progeny  which  is  prevalent  throughout 
Eastern  countries,  and  was  especially  powerful 
among  the  Hebrews  ;  and  (3)  that  the  power  of  a 
parent  over  his  child,  and  of  a  master  over  his  slave 
(the  postestas  patria  and  dominica  of  the  Romans), 
was  paramount  even  in  matters  of  marriage,  and 
led  in  many  cases  to  phases  of  polygamy  that  are 
otherwise  quite  unintelligible,  as,  for  instance,  to 
the  cases  where  it  was  adopted  by  the  husband  at 
the  request  of  his  wife,  under  the  idea  that  children 
born  to  a  slave  were  in  the  eye  of  the  law  the 
children  of  the  mistress'  (Gen.  xvi.  3,  xxx.  4,  9) ; 
or,  again,  to  cases  where  it  was  adopted  at  the 
instance  of  the  father  (Gen.  xxix.  23,  28  ;  Ex.  xxi. 


MARRIAGE 


341 


9,'10).  It  must  be  allowed  that  polygamy,  tli IB 
legalised  and  systematised,  justified  to  a  certain 
extent  by  the  motive,  and  entered  into,  not  only 
without  offence  to,  but  actually  at  the  suggestion  of 
those  who,  according  to  our  notions,  would  feel  most 
deeply  injured  by  it,  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
what  polygamy  would  be  in  our  own  state  of  society. 

Divorce  also  prevailed  in  the  patriarchal  age, 
though  but  one  instance  of  it  is  recorded  (Gen.  xxi. 
14).  Of  this,  again,  we  must  not  judge  by  our 
own  standard.  Wherever  marriages  are  effected  by 
the  violent  exercise  of  the  patria  potestas,  or  with 
out  any  bond  of  affection  between  the  parties  con 
cerned,  ill-assorted  matches  must  be  of  frequent 
occurrence,  and  without  the  remedy  of  divorce,  in 
such  a  state  of  society,  we  can  understand  the 
truth  of  the  Apostles'  remark  that  "  it  is  not  good 
to  marry"  (Matt.  xix.  10).  Hence  divorce  prevails 
to  a  great  extent  in  all  countries  where  marriage  is 
the  result  of  arbitrary  appointment  or  of  purchase : 
we  may  instance  the  Arabians  (Burckhardt's  Notes, 
i.  Ill;  Layard's  Nineveh,  i.  357)  and  the  Egyp 
tians  (Lane,  i.  235  ff.).  From  the  enactments  of 
the  Mosaic  law  we  may  infer  that  divorce  was 
effected  by  a  mere  verbal  declaration,  as  it  still  is 
in  the  countries  referred  to,  and  great  injustice  was 
thus  committed  towards  the  wives. 

The  Mosaic  law  aimed  at  mitigating  rather  than* 
removing  evils  which  were  inseparable  from  the 
state  of  society  in  that  day.  Its  enactments  were 
directed  (1)  to  the  discouragement  of  polygamy: 
(2)  to  obviate  the  injustice  frequently  consequent 
upon  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  a  father  or  a 
master ;  (3)  to  bring  divorce  under  some  restric 
tion  ;  and  (4)  to  enforce  purity  of  life  during  the 
maintenance  of  the  matrimonial  bond.  The  first  ofy 
these  objects  was  forwarded  by  the  following  enact 
ments: — the  prohibition  imposed  upon  kings  against 
multiplying  8  wives  (Deut.  xvii.  17);  the  prohibition 
against  marrying  two  sisters  together  (Lev.  xviii. 
18) ;  the  assertion  of  the  matrimonial  rights  of  each 
wife  (Ex.  xxi.  10,  11);  the  slur  cast  upon  the 
eunuch  state,  which  has  been  ever  regarded  as  in 
dispensable  to  a  system  of  polygamy  (Deut.  xxii: 
1)  ;  and  the  ritual  observances  entailed  on  a  mat  . 
by  the  duty  of  marriage  (Lev.  xv.  18).  The  second 
object  was  attained  by  the  humane  regulations  rela 
tive  to  a  captive  whom  a  man  might  wish  to  marry 
(Deut.  xxi.  10-14),  to  a  purchased  wifeh  (Ex.  xxi. 


•  The  position  of  the  Hebrew  concubine  may  be  com 
pared  with  that  of  the  concubine  of  the  early  Christian 
Church,  the  sole  distinction  between  her  and  the  wife 
consisting  in  this,  that  the  marriage  was  not  in  accordance 
with  the  civil  law  :  In  the  eye  of  the  Church  the  marriage 
was  perfectly  valid  (Bingham,  Ant.  xi.  5,  $11).  It  is 


worthy  of  notice  that  the  term  pillegtsh    E^3?S  ;  A.  V. 

•concubine")  nowhere  occurs  in  the  Mosaic  law.  The 
terms  used  are  either  "wife"  (Deut  xxi.  15)  or  "  maid 
servant"  (Ex.  xxi.  7)  ;  the  latter  applying  to  a  purchased 
wife. 

*  The  language  in  1  Chr.  ii.  18,  "  these  are  her  sons," 
following  on  the  mention  of  his  two  wives,  admits  of  an 
Interpretation  on  this  ground. 

e  The  Talmudists  practically  set  aside  this  prohibition, 
(1)  by  explaining  the  word  "  multiply"  of  an  inordinate 
number  ;  and  (2)  by  treating  the  motive  for  it,  "  that  his 
heart  turn  not  away,"  as  a  matter  of  discretion.  They 
considered  eighteen  the  maximum  to  be  allowed  a  king 
(Selden,  Tz.  Ebr.  i.  8).  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  high- 
priest  dimself  authorizes  bigamy  in  the  case  of  king  Joash 
i2Chr.  xxiv.  3). 
h  The  regulations  in  Ex.  xxi.  7-11  deserve  a  detailed 

VOL.  II. 


notice,  as  exhibiting  the  extent  to  which  the  power  of  the 
head  of  a  family  might  be  carried.  It  must  be  premised 
that  the  maiden  was  born  of  Hebrew  parents,  was  under 
uge  at  the  time  of  her  sale  (otherwise  her  father  would 
have  no  power  to  sell),  and  that  the  object  of  the  purchase 
was  that  when  arrived  at  puberty  she  should  become  the 
wife  of  her  master,  as  is  implied  in  the  difference  in  the 
law  relating  to  her  (Ex.  xxi.  7),  and  to  a  slave  purchased 
for  ordinary  work  (Deut.  xv.  12-17),  as  well  as  in  the  term 
amah,  "  maid -servant,"  which  Is  elsewhere  used  con- 
vertlbly  with  "  concubine"  (Judg.  ix.  18 ;  comp.  viii.  31). 
With  regard  to  such  it  is  enacted  (1)  that  she  is  not  to 
"  go  out  as  the  men-servants,"  (t.  e.  be  freed  after  six  years' 
service,  or  in  the  year  of  jubilee),  on  the  understanding  that 
her  master  either  already  has  made,  or  intends  to  make 
her  his  wife  (ver.  7):  (2)  but,  if  he  has  no  such  intention, 
he  is  not  entitled  to  retain  her  in  the  event  of  any  other 
person  of  the  Israelites  being  willing  to  purchase  her  of 
him  for  the  same  purpose  (ver.  8) ;  (3)  he  might,  however, 
assign  her  to  his  son,  and  in  this  case  she  was  to  be  treated 
as  a  daughter  and  not  as  a  slave  (ver.  9) ;  (4)  if  either  he 
or  his  son,  having  married  her,  took  another  wife,  she  was 
still  to  be  treated  as  a  wife  in  all  respects  (ver.  10  ;  and, 
lastly,  if  neither  of  the  three  contingencies  took  place 

R 


242 


MARRIAGE 


7-11),  and  to  a  slave  who  either  was  married  at 
the  time  of  their  purchase,  or  who,  having  since 
received  a  wife1  at  the  hands  of  his  master,  was 
onwilling  to  be  parted  from  her  (Ex.  xxi.  2-6), 
and,  lastly,  by  the  law  relating  to  the  legal  distri 
bution  of  property  among  the  children  of  the 
different  wives  (Deut.  xxi.  15-17).  The  third  object 
was  effected  by  rendering  divorce  a  formal  proceed 
ing,  not  to  be  done  by  word  of  mouth  as  heretofore, 
but  by  a  "  bill  of  divorcement"  (Deut.  xxiv.  1), 
which  would  generally  demand  time  .and  the  inter 
vention  of  a  third  party,  thus  rendering  divorce  a 
less  easy  process,  and  furnishing  the  wife,  in  the 
event  of  its  being  carried  out,  with  a  legal  evidence 
of  her  marriageabilfty :  we  may  also  notice  that 
Moses  wholly  prohibited  divorce  in  case  the  wife 
lad  been  seduced  prior  to  marriage  (Deut.  xxii.  29), 
or  her  chastity  had  been  groundlessly  impugned 
(Deut.  xxii.  19).  The  fourth  object  forms  the  sub 
ject  of  one  of  the  ten  commandments  (Ex.  xx.  14), 
»ny  violation  of  which  was  punishable  with  death 
(Lev.  xx.  10  Deut.  xxii.  22),  even  in  the  case  of  a 
betrothed  person  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  4).:  . 

The  practical  results  of  these  regulations  may 
have  been  very  salutary,  but  on  this  point  we  have 
but  small  opportunities  of  judging.  The  usages 
themselves,  to  which  we  have  referred,  remained  in 
full  force  to  a  late  period.  We  have  instances  of 
:he  arbitrary  exercise  of  the  paternal  authority  in 
ihe  cases  of  Achsah  (Judg.  i.  12),  Ibzan  (Judg.  xii. 
9),  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  20,  xv.  2),  and  Michal 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  25).  The  case  of  Abishag,  and  the 
.anguage  of  Adonijah  in  reference  to  her,  (1  K.  i.  2, 
ii.  17),  prove  that  a  sen-ant  was  still  completely  at 
the  disposal  of  his  or  her  master.  Polygajny  also 
prevailed,  as  we  are  expressly  informed  in  reference 
to  Gideon  (Judg.  viii.  30),  Elkanah  (1  Sam.  i.  2), 
Saul  (2  Sam.  xii.  8),  David  (2  Sam.  v.  13),  Solo 
mon  (1  K.  xi.  3),  the  sons  of  Issachar  (1  Chr.  vii. 
4),  Shaharaim  (1  Chr.  viii.  8,  9),  Rehoboam  (2 
Chr.  xi.  21),  Abijah  (2  Chr.  xiii.  21),  and  Joash 
(2  Chr.  xxiv.  3) ;  and  as  we  may  also  infer  from 
the  number  of  children  in  the  cases  of  Jair,  Ibzan, 
i  and  Abdon  (Judg.  x.  4,  xii.  9,  14).  It  does  not, 
\  however,  follow  that  it  was  the  general  practice  of 
the  country :  the  inconveniences  attendant  on  poly 
gamy  in  small  houses  or  with  scanty  incomes  are 
so  great  as  to  put  a  serious  bar  to  its  general  adop 
tion,1'  and  hence  in  modern  countries  where  it  is 
fully  established  the  practice  is  restricted  to  com 
paratively  few  (Niebuhr,  Voyage,  p.  65 ;  Lane,  i. 
239).  The  same  rule  holds  good  with  regard  to 
ancient  times :  the  discomforts  of  polygamy  are  ex 
hibited  in  the  jealousies  between  the  wives  of  Abra 
ham  (Gen.  xvi.  6),  and  of  Elkanah  (1  Sam.  i.  6); 
and  the  cases  cited  above  rather  lead  to  the  in 


ference  that  it  was  confined  to  the  wealthy.  Mean 
while  it  may  be  noted  that  the  theory  of  im>n.)ganiy 
was  retained  and  comes  prominently  forward  in  the 
pictures  of  domestic  bliss  portrayed  in  the  poetical 
writings  of  this  period  (Ps.  cxxviii.  3  ;  Prov.  v.  18, 
xviii.  22,  xix.  14,  xxxi.  10-29 ;  Eccl.  ix.  9).  The 
sanctity  of  the  marriage-bond  was  but  too  fre 
quently  violated,  as  appears  from  the  frequent  allu 
sions  to  the  "  strange  woman"  in  the  book  of  Pro 
verbs  (ii.  16,  v.  20,  &c.),  and  in  the  denunciations 
of  the  prophets  against  the  prevalence  of  adultery 
(Jer.  v.  8 ;  Ez.  xviii.  11,  xxii.  11). 

In  the  post-Babylonian  period  monogamy  appears  i 
to  have  become  more  prevalent  than  at  any  previous/ 
time :  indeed  we  have  no  instance  of  polygamy  during 
this  period  on  record  in  the  Bible,  all  the  marriages 
noticed  being  with  single  wives  (Tob.  i.  9,  ii.  11; 
Susan,  vers.  29,  63;  Matt,  xviii.  25;  Luke  i.  5; 
Acts  v.  1).  During  the  same  period  the  theory  of 
monogamy  is  set  forth  in  Ecclus.  xxvi.  1-27.  The 
practice  of  polygamy  nevertheless  still  existed ; » 
Herod  the  Great  had  no  less  than  nine  wives  at  one 
time  (Joseph.  Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3);  the  Talmudists 
frequently  assume  it  as  a  well-known  fact  (e.  g. 
Ketub.  10,  §1 ;  Yebam.  1,  §1) ;  and  the  early  Chris 
tian  writers,  in  their  comments  on  1  Tim.  iii.  2, 
explain  it  of  polygamy  in  terms  which  leave  no 
doubt  as  to  the  fact  of  its  prevalence  in  the  Apostolic 
age.  The  abuse  of  divorce  continued  unabated 
(Joseph.  Vit.  §76)  ;  and  under  the  Asmonaean 
dynasty  the  right  was  assumed  by  the  wife  as 
against  her  husband,  an  innovation  which  is  attri 
buted  to  Salome  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xv.  7,  §10), 
but  which  appeai-s  to  have  been  prevalent  in  the 
Apostolic  age,  if  we  may  judge  from  passages  where 
the  language  implies  that  the  act  emanated  from 
the  wife  (Mark  x.  12 ;  1  Cor.  vii.  11),  as  well  as 
from  some  of  the  comments  of  the  early  writei-s  on 
1  Tim.  v.  9.  Our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  re 
established  the  integrity  and  sanctity  of  the  mar 
riage-bond  by  the  following  measures: — (1)  by  the 
confirmation  of  the  original  charter  of  marriage  as 
the  basis  on  which  all  regulations  were  to  be  framed 
(Matt.  xix.  4,  5)  ;  (2)  by  the  restriction  of  divorce 
to  the  case  of  fornication,  and  the  prohibition  of 
re-marriage  in  all  persons  divorced  on  improper 
grounds  (Matt.  v.  32,  xix.  9  ;  Rom.  vii.  3  ;  1  Cor 
vii.  10,  11);  and  (3)  by  the  enforcement  of  moral 
purity  generally  (Heb.  xiii.  4,  &c.),  and  especially 
by  the  formal  condemnation  of  fornication,  which 
appears  to  have  been  classed  among  acts  morally 
indifferent  (a5id<f>opa)  by  a  certain  party  in  the 
Church  (Acts  xv.  20). 

Shortly  before  the  Christian  era  an  important 
change  took  place  in  the  views  entertained  on  the 
question  of  marriage  as  affecting  the  spiritual  and 


i.  «.  If  he  neither  married  her  himself,  nor  gave  her  to 
bis  son,  nor  bad  her  redeemed,'  then  the  maiden  was  to 
become  absolutely  free  without  waiting  for  the  expiration 
of  the  six  years  or  for  the  year  of  jubilee  (ver.  11). 

1  In  this  case  we  must  assume  that  the  wife  assigned 
was  a  non-Israelitish  slave ;  otherwise,  the  wife  would, 
as  a  matter  of  course,  be  freed  along  with  her  husband  in 
the  year  of  jubilee.  In  this  case  the  wife  and  children 
*».iM  be  the  absolute  property  of  the  master,  and  the 
(>ositlon  of  the  wife  would  be  analogous  to  that  of  the 
Roman  contubernalis,  who  was  not  supposed  capable  of 
any  connubium.  The  issne  of  such  a  marriage  would 
remain  slaves  in  accordance  with  the  maxim  of  the  Tal- 
iiiudists,  that  the  child  is  liable  to  its  mother's  disquali 
fication  (Kiddush.  3,  $12).  Josephus  (Ant.  iv. 8,  $28)  states 
viat  In  the  yew  of  jubilee  the  glave,  having  married  during 


service,  carried  off  his  wife  and  children  with  btm :  this, 
however,  may  refer  to  an  Israelite  maid-senrant 

k  The  Talmudists  limited  polygamists  to  four  wives. 
The  same  number  was  adopted  by  Mahomet  in  the  Koran, 
and  still  forms  the  rule  among  his  followers  (Niebubr, 
Voyage,  p.  62). 

m  Michaelis  (  taw*  of  Moses,  iii.  5,  $95)  asserts  that  poly 
gamy  ceased  entirely  after  the  return  from  the  captivity; 
Selden,  on  the  other  hand,  that  polygamy  prevailed  among 
the  Jews  until  the  time  of  Honorius  and  Arcadius  (circ. 
A.D.  400),  when  it  was  prohibited  by  an  Imperial  edicl 
(Ux.  Ebr.  i.  9). 

The  term  nopvua  is  occasionally  iia>d  in  a  broad  sense 
to  Include  both  adultery  (Matt.  v.  32)  and  incest  (1  O>r. 
v.  1).  In  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  it  mu»< 
bo  regarded  In  its  usual  and  restricted  seme. 


MARRIAGE 

I'utellectual  pails  of  man's  nature.  Throughout 
tlie  Old  Testament  period  marriage  was  regarded  as 
tlie  indispensable  duty  of  every  man,  nor  was  it 
surmised  that  the);-  existed  in  it  any  drawback  to 
the  attainment  of  ;he  highest  degree  of  holiness. 
Li  the  interval  that  elapsed  between  the  Old  and 
Now  Testament  periods,  a  spirit  of  asceticism  had 
been  evolved,  probably  in  antagonism  to  the  foreign 
notions  with  which  the  Jews  were  brought  into 
close  and  painful  contact.  The  Essenes  were  the 
first  to  propound  any  doubts  as  to  the  propriety  of 
marriage:  some  of  them  avoided  it  altogether,  others 
availed  themselves  of  it  under  restrictions  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  8,  §2,  13).  Similar  views  were  adopted 
by  the  Therapeutae,  and  at  a  later  period  by  the 
Gnostics  (Burton's  Lectures,  i.  214);  thence  they 
passed  into  the  Christian  Church,  forming  one  of 
die  distinctive  tenets  of  the  Encratites  (Bui-ton,  ii. 
161),  and  finally  developing  into  the  system  of 
numachism.  The  philosophical  tenets  on  which  the 
prohibition  of  marriage  was  based  are  generally 
oondemned  in  Col.  ii.  16-23,  and  specifically  in 

il  Tim.  iv.  3.  The  general  propriety  of  marriage 
is  enforced  on  numerous  occasions,  and  abstinence 
from  it  is  commended  only  in  cases  where  it  was 
rendered  expedient  by  the  calls  of  duty  (Matt.  xix. 
1'2  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  8,  26).  With  regard  to  re-marriage 
after  the  death  of  one  of  the  parties,  the  Jews,  in 
common  with  other  nations,  regarded  abstinence 
from  it,  particularly  in  the  case  of  a  widow,  laud 
able,  and  a  sign  of  holiness  (Luke  ii.  36,  7  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xvii.  13,  §4,  xviii.  6,  §6);  but  it  is  clear 
from  the  example  of  Josephus  ( Vit.  §76)  that 
there  was  no  prohibition  even  in  the  case  of  a 
priest.  In  the  Apostolic  Church  re-marriage  was 
regarded  as  occasionally  undesirable  (1  Cor.  vii.  40), 
and  as  an  absolute  disqualification  for  holy  func 
tions,  whether  in  a  man  or  woman  (1  Tim.  iii.  2, 
12,  v.  9):  at  the  same  time  it  is  recommended  in 
in  the  case  of  young  widows  (1  Tim.  v.  14). 

II.  The  conditions  of  legal  marriage  are  decided 
by  the  prohibitions  which  the  law  of  any  country 
imposes  upon  its  citizens.  In  the  Hebrew  com 
monwealth  these  prohibitions  were  of  two  kinds, 
according  as  they  regulated  marriage  (i.)  between  an 
Israelite  and  a  non-Israelite,  and  (ii.)  between  an 
Israelite  and  one  of  his  own  community. 

i.  The  prohibitions  relating  to  foreigners  were 
based  on  that  instinctive  feeling  of  exclusiveness, 
which  forms  one  of  the  bonds  of  every  social  body, 
and  which  prevails  with  peculiar  strength  in  a  rude 
etate  of  society.  In  all  political  bodies  the  right  of 
marriage  (jus  connubif)  becomes  in  some  form  or 
other  a  constituent  element  of  citizenship,  and,  even 
where  its  nature  and  limits  are  not  defined  by  legal 
enactment,  it  is  supported  with  rigour  by  the  force 
of  public  opinion.  The  feeling  of  aversion  against 
intermarriage  with  foreigners  becomes  more  in 
tense,  when  distinctions  of  religious  creed  supervene 
on  those  of  blood  and  language ;  and  hence  we  should 
naturally  expect  to  find  it  more  than  usually  strong 
in  the  Hebrews,  who  were  endowed  with  a  peculiar 
position,  and  were  separated  from  surrounding  na 
tions  by  a  sharp  line  of  demarcation.  The  warnings 
nf  past  history  and  the  examples  of  the  patriarchs 
:anv)  in  support  of  natural  feeling:  on  the  one 

"  The  act  of  marriage  with  a  foreigner  is  described  in 
the  Hebrew  by  a  special  term,  chdtan  (jni"l)>  expressive 
of  the  affinity  thus  produced,  as  appears  from  the  cognate 
terns,  ;hdtdii,  cluiten,  and  chotcneh,  for  "  son-in-law," 
w,'  and  "  tnothsr-in-l*w."  1*.  is  used  in 


MARRIAGE 


248 


hand,  the  evil  effects  of  intermarriage  with  aliens 
were  exhibited  in  the  overwhelming  sinfiilness  o' 
the  generation  destroyed  by  the  flood  (Gen.  vi.  '2-13): 
on  the  other  hand,  there  were  the  examples  of  the 
patriarchs  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  man-ying 
from  among  their  own  kindred  (Gen.  xx.  12,  xxiv. 
3  &c.,  xxviij.  2),  and  in  each  of  the  two  latter  cases 
there  is  a  contrast  between  these  carefully-sough* 
unions  and  those  of  the  rejected  sons  Ishmael,  who 
married  an  Egyptian  (Gen.  xxi.  21),  and  Esau, 
whose  marriages  with  Hittite  women  were  "  a 
grief  of  mind  "  to  his  parents  (Gen.  xxvi.  34,  35). 
The  marriages  of  Joseph  with  an  Egyptian  (Gen. 
xli.  45),  of  Manasseh  with  a  Syrian  secondary 
wife  (1  Chr.  vii.  14;  comp.  Gen.  xlvi.  20,  LXX.jt 
and  of  Moses  with  a  Midianitish  woman  in  the  fn-st 
instance  (Ex.  ii.  21),  and  afterwards  with  a  Cushite 
or  Ethiopian  woman  (Num.  xii.  1),  were  of  an  ex 
ceptional  nature,  and  yet  the  last  was  the  cause  of 
great  dissatisfaction.  A  far  greater  objection  was 
entertained  against  the  marriage  of  an  Israelitish 
ivoman  with  a  man  of  another  tribe,  as  illustrated 
by  the  narrative  of  Shechem's  proposals  for  Dinah, 
the  ostensible  ground  of  their  rejection  being  the 
difference  in  religious  observances,  that  Shechem 
and  his  countrymen  were  uncircumcised  (Gen. 
xxxiv.  14). 

The  only  distinct  prohibition  in  the  Mosaic  law 
•efers  to  the  Canaanites,  with  whom  the  Israelites 
were  not  to  many0  on  the  ground  that  it  would 
lead  them  into  idolatry  (Ex.  xxxiv.  16  ;  Deut.  vii. 
3,  4) — a  result  which  actually  occurred  shortly 
after  their  settlement  in  the  Promised  Land  (Judg. 
iii.  6,  7).  But  beyond  this,  the  legal  disabilities 
to  which  the  Ammonites  and  Moabites  were  sub 
jected  (Deut.  xxiii.  3),  acted  as  a  virtual  bar  to 
intermarriage  with  them,  totally  preventing  (ac 
cording  to  the  interpretation  which  the  Jews  them 
selves  put  upon  that  passage)  the  marriage  of 
Israelitish  women  with  Moabites,  but  permitting 
that  of  Israelites  with  Moabite  women,  such  as  that 
of  Mahlon  with  Ruth.  The  prohibition  against 
marriages  with  the  Edomites  or  Egyptians  was  less 
stringent,  as  a  male  of  those  nations  received  the 
right  of  marriage  on  his  admission  to  the  full  citizen 
ship  in  the  third  generation  of  proselytism  (Deut. 
xxiii.  7,  8).  There  were  thus  three  grades  of  pro 
hibition — total  in  regard  to  the  Canaanites  on  either 
side  ;  total  on  the  side  of  the  males  in  regard  to  the 
Ammonites  and  Moabites;  and  temporary  on  the 
side  of  the  males  in  regard  of  the  Edomites  and 
Egyptians,  marriages  with  females  in  the  two  latter 
instances  being  regarded  as  legal  (Selden,  de  Jur. 
Nat.  cap.  14).  Marriages  between  Israelite  women 
and  proselyted  foreigners  were  at  all  times  of  rare 
occurrence,  and  are  noticed  in  the  Bible,  as  though 
they  were  of  an  exceptional  nature,  such  as  that  of 
an  Egyptian  and  an  Israelitish  woman  (Lev.  xxiv. 
10),  of  Abigail  and  Jether  the  Ishmeelite,  contracted 
probably  when  Jesse's  family  was  sojourning  in 
Moab  (1  Chr.  ii.  17),  of  Sheshan's  daughter  and  an 
Egyptian,  who  was  staying  in  his  house  (1  Chr. 
ii.  35),  and  of  a  Naphthalite  woman  and  a  Tyrian, 
living  in  adjacent  districts  (1  K.  vii.  14).  In  the 
reverse  case,  viz.,  the  marriage  of  Israelites  with 
foreign  women  it  is,  of  course,  highly  probable  that 

Gen.  xxxiv.  9 ;  Deut.  vii.  3 ;  Josh,  xxiii.  12 ;  1  K.  Hi.  1  ; 
Ezr.  ix.  14 ;  and  metaphorically  in  2  Chr.  xviii.  1.  The 
same  idea  comes  prominently  forward  in  the  term  ch&t6t> 
in  Kx.  iv.  26,  where  it  is  used  of  the  affinity  produced  b) 
the  rite  of  circumcision  between  Jehovah  and  the  child. 

R  2 


244 


MARRIAGE 


the  wives  became  proselytes  after  their  marriage, 
as  instanced  in  the  case  of  Ruth  (i.  16);  but  this 
was  by  no  means  invariably  the  case.  On  the  con- 
ti-ary  we  find  that  the  Egyptian  wife  of  Solomon 
(1  K.  xi.  4),  and  the  Phoenician  wife  of  Ahab  (1  K. 
tvi.  31),  retained  their  idolatrous  practices  and  in 
troduced  them  into  their  adopted  countries.  Pro- 
»elytism  does  not  therefore  appear  to  have  been  a 
sine  qnd  nan  in  the  case  of  a  wife,  though  it  was  so 
in  the  case  of  a  husband :  the  total  silence  of  the 
law  as  to  any  such  condition  in  regard  to  a  captive, 
whom  an  Israelite  might  wish  to  marry,  must  be 
regarded  as  evidence  of  the  reverse  (Deut.  xxi.  10- 
14),  nor  have  the  refinements  of  1,'abbinical  writers 
on  that  passage  succeeded  in  establishing  the  neces 
sity  of  proselytism.  The  opposition  of  Samson's 
parents  to  his  marriage  with  a  Philistine  woman 
(Judg.  xiv.  3)  leads  to  the  same  conclusion.  So 
long  as  such  unions  were  of  merely  occasional  occur 
rence  no  veto  was  placed  upon  them  by  public  au 
thority  ;  but,  when  after  the  return  from  the  Baby 
lonish  captivity  the  Jews  contracted  marriages  with 
the  heathen  inhabitants  of  Palestine  in  so  wholesale 
n  manner  as  to  endanger  their  national  existence, 
the  practice  was  severely  condemned  (Ezr.  ix.  2, 
x.  2),  and  the  law  of  positive  prohibition  origin 
ally  pronounced  only  against  the  Canaanites  was 
extended  to  the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Philis 
tines  (Neh.  xiii.  23-25).  Public  feeling  was  thence 
forth  strongly  opposed  to  foreign  marriages,  and 
the  union  of  Manasseh  with  a  Cuthaean  led  to  such 
animosity  as  to  produce  the  great  national  schism, 
which  had  its  focus  in  the  temple  on  Mount  Ge- 
rizim  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §2).  A  no  less  signal 
instance  of  the  same  feeling  is  exhibited  in  the  cases 
of  Joseph  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §6)  and  Anileus  (Ant.  xviii. 
9,  §5),  and  is  noticed  by  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  5)  as 
one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  Jewish  nation  in 
his  day.  In  the  N.  T.  no  special  directions  are 


MARRIAGE 

given  on  this  head,  but  the  general  precepts  of  se 
paration  between  believers  and  unbelievers  (2  Cor 
vi.  14,  17)  »  would  apply  with  special  force  to  the 
case  of  marriage  ;  and  the  permission  to  dissolve 
mixed  marriages,  contracted  previously  to  the  con 
version  of  one  party,  at  the  instance  of  the  uncon 
verted  one,  cannot  but  be  regarded  as  implying 
the  impropriety  of  such  unions  subsequently  to  con 
version  (1  Cor.  vii.  12). 

The  progeny  of  illegal  marriages  between  Israel 
ites  and  non-Israelites  was  described  under  a  pe 
culiar  term,  mamzer*  (A.  V.  "bastard";  Deut. 
xxiii.  2),  the  etymological  meaning  of  which  is  un 
certain,'  but  which  clearly  involves  the  notion  oi 
"  foreigner,"  as  in  Zech.  ix.  6,  where  the  LXX.  has 
a.\\oyfv(is,  "  strangers."  Persons  born  in  this 
way  were  excluded  from  full  rights  of  citizenship 
until  the  tenth  generation  (Deut.  xxiii.  2).  It  follows 
hence  that  intermarriage  with  such  persons  was  pro 
hibited  in  the  same  manner  as  with  an  Ammonite 
or  Moabite  (comp.  Mishna,  Kiddush.  4,  §1 ). 

ii.  The  regulations  relative  to  marriage  between  Is 
raelites  and  Israelites  may  be  divided  into  two  classes : 
(1)  general,  and  (2)  special — the  former  applying  to 
the  whole  population,  the  latter  to  particular  cases. 

1.  The  general  regulations  are  based  on  consi 
derations  of  relationship.  The  most  important  pas 
sage  relating  to  these  is  contained  in  Lev.  xviii. 
6-18,  wherein  we  have  in  the  first  place  a  general 
prohibition  against  marriages  between  a  man  and 
the  "  flesh  of  his  flesh,"  •  and  in  the  second  place 
special  prohibitions*  against  marriage  with  a  mo 
ther,  stepmother,  sister,  or  half-sister,  whether 
"  born  at  home  or  abroad,"  •  grand-daughter,  aunt, 
whether  by  consanguinity  on  either  side,  or  by 
marriage  on  the  father's  side,  daughter-in-law,  bro 
ther's  wife,  step-daughter,  wife's  mother,  step- 
grand-daughter,  or  wife's  sister  during  the  lifetime 
of  the  wife.1  An  exception  is  subsequently  made 


P  The  term  eTepoftryovires  (A.  V.  "  unequally  yoked 
with  ")  has  no  special  reference  to  marriage  :  its  meaning 
Is  shown  in  the  cognate  term  erepofvyos  (Lev.  xix.  19  ; 
A.  V.  "  of  a  diverse  kind  ").  It  is,  however,  correctly 
connected  in  the  A.  V.  with  the  notion  of  a  "yoke,"  as 
explained  by  Hesycbius,  oi  M  (rvfvyovvrfs,  and  not  with 
that  of  a  "  balance,"  as  Theophylact. 


'  Cognate  words  appear  in  Rabbinical  writers,  signifying 
(1)  to  spin  or  weave  ;  (2)  to  be  corrupt,  as  an  addled  egg  ; 
(3)  to  ripen.  The  important  point  to  be  observed  is  that. 
the  word  does  not  betoken  bastardy  in  our  sense  of  the 
term,  but  simply  the  progeny  of  a  mixed  marriage  of  a 
Jew  and  a  foreigner.  It  may  be  with  a  special  reference 
to  this  word  that  the  Jews  boasted  that  they  were  not 
born  "of  fornication  "  (««  iropi/et'ai,  John  viii.  41),  imply 
ing  that  there  was  no  admixture  of  foreign  blood,  or  conse 
quently  of  foreign  Idolatries,  in  themselves. 

•  The  Hebrew  expression  i"lK>3  ~INK>  (A.V.  "  near  of 
bin  "),  is  generally  regarded  as  applying  to  blood-relation 
ship  alone.  The  etymological  sense  of  the  term  sheer  Is 
not  decided.  By  some  it  Is  connected  with  shaar,  "  to 
remain,"  as  by  Michaells  (Laws  of  Moses,  iii.  7,  }2),  and  in 
the  marginal  translation  of  the  A.  V.  "  remainder  ;"  but 
its  ordinary  sense  of  "  flesh  "  is  more  applicable.  Which 
ever  of  these  two  we  adopt,  the  idea  of  blood-relationship 
evidently  attaches  to  the  term  from  the  cases  in  which  it 
is  used  (vers.  12,  13,  17  ;  A.  V.  "near-kinswoman").  as 
well  as  from  its  use  In  Lev.  xx.  19,  Num.  xxvii.  11.  The 
term  basar,  literally  "  flesh  "  or  "  body,"  is  also  peculiarly 
used  of  blood-relationship  (Gen.  xxix.  14,  xxxvii.  27; 
Jndg.  ix.  2  ;  2  Sam.  v.  1  ;  l  Chr.  xi.  1).  The  two  terras, 
si-egr  basar,  are  used  conjointly  in  Lev.  xxv.  49  as  equi 
valent  to  mishpachah,  "  family."  The  term  Is  applicable 


to  relationship  by  affinity,  in  as  far  as  it  regards  the  blood- 
relations  of  a  wife.  The  relationships  specified  may  be 
classed  under  three  heads :  (1)  blood-relationships  proper 
in  vers.  7-13 ;  (2)  the  wives  of  blood-relations  in  vers. 
14-16 ;  (3)  the  blood-relations  of  the  wife  in  vers.  17,  18. 

4  The  daughter  is  omitted ;  whether  as  being  pre 
eminently  the  "  flesh  of  a  man's  flesh,"  or  because  It  was 
thought  unnecessary  to  mention  such  a  connexion. 

u  The  expression  "  born  at  home  or  abroad  "  has  been 
generally  understood  as  equivalent  to  "  in  or  out  if  wed 
lock,"  i.  c.  the  daughter  of  a  father's  concubine ;  but  it 
may  also  be  regarded  as  a  re-statement  of  the  preceding 
words,  and  as  meaning  "  one  born  to  the  father,  or  mother, 
in  a  former  marriage  "  (comp.  Keil,  Archiiul.  II.  55).  The 
distinction  between  the  cases  specified  In  vers.  9  and  1 1 
Is  not  very  evident:  it  probably  consists  in  this,  that 
ver.  9  prohibits  the  union  of  a  son  of  the  first  marriage 
with  a  daughter  of  the  second,  and  ver.  11  that  of  a  son 
of  the  second  with  a  daughter  of  the  first  (Kell). 
On  the  other  band,  Knobel  (Comm.  in  loc.)  finds  the  dis 
tinction  in  the  words  "wife  of  thy  father"  (ver.  11), 
which  according  to  him  includes  the  mother  as  welt  M 
the  stepmother,  and  thus  specifically  states  the/uU  sister, 
while  ver.  9  is  reserved  for  the  half-sister. 

1  The  sense  of  this  verse  has  been  much  canvassed,  in 
connexion  with  the  question  of  marriage  with  a  deceased 
wife's  sister.  It  has  been  urged  that  the  marginal  transla 
tion,  "  one  wife  to  another,"  is  the  correct  one,  and  that 
the  prohibition  is  really  directed  against  polygamy.  The 
following  considerations,  however,  support  the  rendering 
of  the  text  (1)  The  writer  would  hardly  use  the  tormi 
rendered  "  wife "  and  "  sister "  in  a  different  sense  in 
ver.  18  from  that  which  he  assigned  to  thoni  in  the  pre 
vious  verses.  (2)  The  usage  of  the  Hebrew  language 
and  indeed  of  every  language,  requires  that  the  expression 


MARRIAGE 

Deut.  xxv.  5)  in  favour  of  marriage  with  a  bro 
ther's  wife  in  the  event  of  his  having  died  child- 
Jess:  to  this  we  shall  ha\e  occasion  to  refer  at 
length.  Different  degrees  of  guiltiness  attached  to 
the  infringement  of  these  prohibitions,  as  implied 
both  in  the  different  terms  1  applied  to  the  various 
offences,  and  in  the  punishments  affixed  to  them, 
the  general  penalty  being  death  (Lev.  xx.  11-17), 
but  in  the  case  of  the  aunt  and  the  brother's  wife 
childlessness  (19-21),  involving  probably  the  stain  of 
illegitimacy  in  cases  where  there  was  an  issue,  while 
in  the  case  of  the  two  sisters  no  penalty  is  stated. 

The  moral  effect  of  the  prohibitions  extended  be 
yond  cases  of  formal  marriage  to  those  of  illicit  in 
tercourse,  and  gave  a  deeper  dye  of  guilt  to  such 
conduct  as  that  of  Lot's  daughters  (Gen.  xix.  33), 
of  Keuben  in  his  intercourse  with  his  father's  con 
cubine  (Gen.  xxxv.  22),  and  of  Absalom  iu  th«  same 
act  (2  Sam.  xvi.  22) ;  and  it  rendered  such  crimes 
tokens  of  the  greatest  national  disgrace  (Ez.  xxii. 
11).  The  Rabbinical  writers  considered -that  the 
prohibitions  were  abrogated  in  the  case  of  proselytes, 
inasmuch  as  their  change  of  religion  was  deemed 
equivalent  to  a  new  natural  birth,  and  consequently 
involved  the  severing  of  all  ties  of  previous  rela 
tionship:  it  was  necessary,  however,  in  such  a  case 
that  the  wife  as  well  as  the  husband,  should  have 
adopted  the  Jewish  faith. 

The  grounds  on  which  these  prohibitions  were 
snacted  are  reducible  to  the  following  three 
heads : — ( 1 )  moral  propriety ;  (2)  the  practices  of 
aeathen  nations  ;  and  (3)  social  convenience.  The 
first  of  these  grounds  comes  prominently  forward 
in  the  expressions  by  which  the  various  offences 
are  characterised,  as  well  as  in  the  general  prohibi 
tion  against  approaching  "  the  flesh  of  his  flesh." 
The  use  of  such  expressions  undoubtedly  contains 
an  appeal  to  the  horror  naturalis,  or  that  repug 
nance  with  which  man  instinctively  shrinks  from 
matrimonial  union  with  one  with  whom  he  is  con 
nected  by  the  closest  ties  both  of  blood  and  of 
family  affection.  On  this  subject  we  need  say  no 
more  than  that  there  is  a  difference  in  kind  between 
the  affection  that  binds  the  members  of  a  family 

"  one  to  another  "  should  be  preceded  by  a  plural  noun. 
The  cases  in  which  the  expression  Hn'riN'T'X  Mt^N 
is  equivalent  to  "  one  to  another,"  as  in  Ex.  xxvl.  3,  5,  6, 
17,  Ez.  1.  9,  23,  iii.  13,  instead  of  favouring,  as  has  gene 
rally  been  supposed,  the  marginal  translation,  exhibit  the 
peculiarity  above  noted.  (3)  The  consent  of  the  ancient 
versions  is  unanimous,  including  the  LXX.  (yvpaiica  or' 
aJeA<f>}J  avT>)«),  the  Vulgate  (sorarem  uxoris  tuae),  the 
Chaldee,  Syriac,  &c.  (4)  The  Jews  themselves,  as  shown 
In  the  Mlshna,  and  in  the  works  of  Philo,  permitted  the 
marriage.  (5)  Polygamy  was  recognised  by  the  Mosaic 
law,  and  cannot  consequently  be  forbidden  in  this  passage. 
Another  interpretation,  by  which  the  sense  of  the  verse  is 
again  altered,  is  effected  by  attaching  the  words  "  in  her 
life-time  "-exclusively  to  the  verb  "  vex."  The  objections 
to  this  are  patent:  (1)  it  is  but  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  this  clause,  like  the  others,  would  depend  on  the 
principal  verb ;  and  (2),  if  this  were  denied,  it  would  be 
but  reasonable  to  attach  it  to  the  nearest  ("  uncover "), 
rather  than  the  more  remote  secondary  verb ;  which  would 
b*  fatal  to  the  sense  of  the  passage. 

y  These  terms  are— (1)  Zimmah  (HJ3T  ;  A.V.  "wick 
edness"),  applied  to  marriage  with  mother  or  daughter 
(Lev.  xx.  14),  with  mother-in-law,  step-daughter,  or  grand- 
Btep-daughter  (xviii.  17).  The  term  is  elsewhere  applied 
to  gross  violations  of  decency  or  principle  (Lev.  xix.  29 ; 

Jtbxxxi.  11  ;  K/..  xvl.  43,  xxii.  11).  (2)  Tebel  O3P| ! 
A.V.  "  confusion  "),  applied  to  marriage  with  a  danghte'r- 


MARRIAGE 


246 


together,  and  that  which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  the 
matrimonial  bond,  and  that  the  amalgamation  of 
these  affections  cannot  take  place  without  a  serious 
shock  to  one  or  the  other  of  the  two ;  hence  the  de 
sirability  of  drawing  a  distinct  line  between  t.'it 
provinces  of  each,  by  stating  definitely  where  th« 
matrimonial  affection  may  legitimately  take  root. 
The  second  motive  to  laying  down  these  prohibi 
tions  was  that  the  Hebrews  might  be  preserved  as 
a  peculiar  people,  with  institutions  distinct  from 
those  of  the  Egyptians  and  Canaanites  (Lev.  xviii 
3),  as  well  as  of  other  heathen  nations  with  whom 
they  might  come  in  contact.  Marriages  within  the 
proscribed  degrees  prevailed  in  many  civilized  coun 
tries  in  historical  times,  and  were  not  unusual 
among  the  Hebrews  themselves  in  the  pre-Mosaic 
age.  For  instance,  marriages  with  half-sisters  by 
the  same  father  were  allowed  at  Athens  (Plutarcl 
dm.  4s  Themistocl.  32),  with  half-sisters  Ly  the 
same  mother  at  Sp<irt2  (Philc,  d*  !jpec.  Leg.  p. 
779),  and  with  full  sisters  in  Egypt  (Diod.  i.  27) 
and  Persia,  as  illustrated  in  the  well-known  in 
stances  of  Ptolemy  1'hiladelphus  in  the  former 
(Paus.  i.  7,  §1),  and  Cam byses  in  the  latter  country 
(Herod,  iii.  31).  It  was  even  believed  that  in  some 
nations  marriages  between  a  son  and  his  mother 
were  not  unusual  (Ov.  Met.  x.  331 ;  Eurip.  An- 
drom.  174).  Among  the  Hebrews  we  have  in 
stances  of  marriage  with  a  half-sister  in  the  case  oi 
Abraham  (Gen.  xx.  12),  with  an  aunt  in  the  case 
of  Amram  (Ex.  vi.  20),  and  with  two  sisters  at  the 
same  time  in  the  case  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxix.  26). 
Such  cases  were  justifiable  previous  to  the  enact 
ments  of  Moses:  subsequently  to  them  we  have  nc 
case  in  the  0.  T.  of  actual  marriage  within  the 
degrees,  though  the  language  of  Tamar  towards  her 
half-brother  Amnon  (2  Sam.  xiii.  13)  implies. the  pos 
sibility  of  their  union  with  the  consent  of  their  father.1 
The  Herods  committed  some  violent  breaches  of  the 
marriage  law.  Herod  the  Great  married  his  half- 
sister  (Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3)  ;  Archelaus  his  brother's 
widow,  who  had  children  (xvii.  13,  §1);  Herod 
Antipas  his  brother's  wife  (xviii.  5,  §1  ;  Matt 
xiv.  3).  In  the  Christian  Church  we  have  an  in- 


in-law  (Lev.  xx.  12) :  it  signifies  pollution,  and  is  applied 
to  the  worst  kind  of  defilement  (Lev.  xviii.  23).  (3)  Chesed 
ODH  ;  A.  V.  "  wicked  thing"),  applied  to  marriage  with 
a  sister  (Lev.  xx.  17) :  Its  proper  meaning  appears  to  be 
disgrace.  (4)  Ifiddah  (iT^  ;  A.V.  "an  unclean  thing"), 
applied  to  marriage  with  a  brother's  wife  (Lev.  xx.  21) 
it  conveys  the  notion  of  impurity.  Michaelis  (Lavs  of 
Moses,  iii.  7,  }2)  asserts  that  these  terms  have  a  forrnsic 
force ;  but  there  appears  to  be  no  ground  for  this.  The 
view  which  the  same  authority  propounds  (}4)  as  tc 
the  reason  for  the  prohibitions,  viz.,  to  prevent  seduction 
under  the  promise  of  marriage  among  near  relations,  K 
singularly  inadequate  both  to  the  occasion  and  to  the  terms 
employed. 

•  Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  reconcile  this 
language  with  the  Levitical  law.  The  Rabbinical  exp'a. 
nation  was  that  Tamar's  mother  was  a  heathen  at  ilw 
time  of  her  birth,  and  that  the  law  did  not  apply  to  such 
a  case.  Joscphus  (Ant.  vii.  8,  $1)  regarded  it  as  a  mere 
ruse  on  the  part  of  Tamar  to  evade  Amnon's  Importunity : 
but,  if  the  marriage  were  out  of  the  question,  she  would 
hardly  have  tried  such  a  poor  device.  Thenius  (C'omm. 
in  loc.)  considers  that  the  Levitical  prohibitions  applied 
only  to  cases  where  a  disruption  of  family  bonds  was  likely 
to  result,  or  where  the  motives  were  of  a  gross  character 
an  argument  which  would  utterly  abrogate  the  authority 
of  this  acd  every  other  absolute  law. 


246 


MARRIAGE 


stance  of  marriage  with  a  father's  wife  (1  Cor.  v 
1),  which  St.  Paul  character".- ."»  as  "fornication' 
(•zapi/tla.),  and  visits  with  the  severest  condemna 
tion.  The  third  ground  of  the  prohibitions,  socia 
convenience,  comes  forward  solely  in  the  case  o 
marriage  with  two  sisters  simultaneously,  the  effec 
of  which  would  be  to  "  vex  "  or  irritate  the  firs 
rvife,  and  produce  domestic  jars.* 

A  remarkable  exception  to  these  prohibition 
existed  in  favour  of  marriage  with  a  deceased  bro 
ther's  wife,  in  the  event  of  his  having  died  child 
less.  The  law  which  regulates  this  has  been  namet 
the  "  Levirate,"  b  from  the  Latin  levir,  "  brother 
in-law."  The  custom  is  supposed  to  have  originate* 
in  that  desire  of  perpetuating  a  name,e  which  pro 
vails  all  over  the  world,  but  with  more  than  ordi 
nary  force  in  Eastern  countries,  and  pre-eminentl; 
among  Israelites,  who  each  wished  to  bear  part  in 
the  promise  made  to  Abraham  that  "  in  his  secc 
should  all  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed  "  (Gen 
xxvi.  4).  The  first  instance  of  it  occurs  in  the  pa 
triarchal  period,  where  Onan  is  called  upon  to 
marry  his  brother  Er's  widow  (Gen.  xxxviii.  8) 
The  custom  was  confirmed  by  the  Mosaic  law 
which  decreed  that  "  if  brethren  (i.  e.  sons  of  the 
same  father)  dwell  together  (either  in  one  family 
in  one  house,  or,  ai  the  Rabbins  explained  it,  in 
contiguous  properties ;  the  first  of  the  three  senses 
is  probably  correct),  and  one  of  them  die  and  leave 
no  child  (ben,  here  used  in  its  broad  sense,  and  uol 
specifically  son  ;  compare  Matt.  xxii.  25,  fify  *; 
ffirfpua  ;  Mark  xii.  1 9  ;  Luke  xx.  28,  &rt KVOS), 
the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not  marry  without  (i.  e 
out  of  the  family)  unto  a  stranger  (one  unconnected 
by  ties  of  relationship)  ;  her  husband's  brother  shall 
go  in  unto  her  and  take  her  to  him  to  wife  ;"  not, 
however,  without  having  gone  through  the  usual 

"  The  expression  T1¥?  admits  of  another  explanation, 
"  to  pack  together,"  or  combine  the  two  in  one  marriage, 
and  thus  confound  the  nature  of  their  relationship  to  one 
another.  This  Is  in  one  respect  a  preferable  meaning, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  not  clear  why  two  sisters  should  be  more 
partionlarly  irritated  than  any  two  not  so  related.  The 
usage,  however,  of  the  cognate  word  m¥>  in  1  Sam.  i.  6, 
favours  the  sense  usually  given ;  and  in  the  Mishna  TWX 
is  the  usual  term  for  the  wives  of  a  polygamist  (Mishna, 
Yebam.  i.  $l). 

b  The  Talmud ical  term  for  the  obligation  was  yebum 
(D-1T).  fromyabam  CDS'1),  "husband's  brother:"  hence 
the  title  yebamoth  of  the  treatise  in  the  Mishna  for  the 
regulation  of  such  marriages.  From  the  same  root  comes 
the  term  yibbem  (D3')>  to  contract  such  a  marriage  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  8). 

c  The  reason  here  assigned  is  hardly  a  satisfactory  one. 
May  it  not  rather  have  been  connected  with  the  purchase 
system,  which  would  reduce  a  wife  into  the  position  of  a 
chattel  or  mancipium,  and  give  the  survivors  a  rever 
sionary  interest  in  her  F  This  view  derives  some  support 
from  the  statement  in  Haxthausen's  Transcaucasia,  p. 
404,  that  among  the  Ossetes,  who  have  a  l^evirate  law  of 
Ilielrown,  in  the  event  of  none  of  the  family  marrying 
the  widow,  they  are  entitled  to  a  certain  sum  from  any 
other  husband  whom  she  may  marry. 

d  The  position  of  the  issue  of  a  Levirate  marriage,  as 
compared  with  other  branches  of  the  family,  is  exhibited 
in  the  case  of  Tamar,  whose  son  by  her  father-in-law, 
Judah,  became  the  head  of  the  family,  and  the  channel" 
through  whom  the  Messiah  was  born  (Gen.  xxxviii.  29  ; 
Matt.  i.  3). 

"  The    technical    term    for    this   act    was    khalitzait 
from  kiialatt  'V/H).  "to  draw  off"     It  i« 


MAHKIAUE 

preliminaries  of  a  regular  marriage.  'ITie  lii>,t-bom 
of  this  second  marriage  then  succeeded  in  the  name 
of  the  deceased  brother,*  i.  e.  became  his  legal  heir, 
receiving  his  name  (according  to  Josephus, .Ant.  iv 
8,  §23;  but  compare  Ruth  i.  2,  iv.  17),  and  his 
property  (Deut.  xxv.  5,  6).  Should  the  brother 
object  to  marrying  his  sister-in-law,  he  was  pub 
licly  to  signify  his  dissent  in  the  presence  of  the 
authorities  of  the  town,  to  which  the  widow  re 
sponded  by  the  significant  act  of  loosing  his  shoe 
and  spitting  in  his  face,  or  (as  the  Talmudists  ex 
plained  it)  on  the  ground  before  him  (Yebam.  12, 
§6) — the  foimer  signifying  the  transfer  of  property 
from  one  person  to  another  •  (as  usual  among  the 
Indians  and  old  Germans,  Keil,  Arc/tool,  ii.  66), 
the  latter  the  contempt  due  to  a  man  who  refused  to 
perform  his  just  obligations  (Deut.  xxv.  7-9  ;  Ruth 
iv.  6-11).  In  this  case  it  was  permitted  to  the 
next  of  kin  to  come  forward  and  to  claim  both  the 
wife  and  the  inheritance. 

The  Levirate  marriage  was  not  peculiar  to  the 
Jews ;  it  has  been  found  to  exist  in  many  eastern 
countries,'  particularly  in  Arabia  (Burckhardt's 
Notes,  i.  112;  Niebuhr's  Voyage,  p.  61),  and 
among  the  tribes  of  the  Caucasus  (Haxthausen's 
Transcaucasia,  p.  403).  The  Mosaic  law  brings 
the  custom  into  harmony  with  the  general  prohibi 
tion  against  mairying  a  brother's  wife  by  restrict 
ing  it  to  cases  of  childlessness ;  and  it  further  secure? 
the  marriage  bond  as  founded  on  affection  by  re 
lieving  the  brother  of  the  obligation  whenever  he 
was  averse  to  the  union,  instead  of  making  it  com 
pulsory,  as  in  the  case  of  Onan  (Gen.  xxxviii.  9). 
One  of  the  results  of  the  Levirate  marriage  would 
be  in  certain  cases  the  consolidation  of  two  pro 
perties  in  the  same  family ;  but  this  does  not  appeal 
to  have  been  the  object  contemplated.* 


of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  treatise  Tebamoth,  where 
minute  directions  are  given  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  act  was  to  be  performed ;  e.  g  that  the  shoe  was  to 
be  of  leather,  or  a  sandal  furnished  with  a  heel-strap; 
a  felt  shoe  or  a  sandal  without  a  strap  would  not  do 
(rdiam.  12,  }1,  2).  The  khalitzah  was  not  valid  when 
the  person  performing  it  was  deaf  and  dumb  (}4),  as  Iw 
could  not  learn  the  precise  formula  which  accompanied 
the  act  The  custom  is  retained  by  the  modern  Jews, 
and  is  minutely  described  by  Picart  (CMmonift  Kelt- 
gieuset,  i.  243).  It  receives  illustration  from  the  ex 
pression  used  by  the  modern  Arabs,  in  speaking  of  • 
repudiated  wife,  "  She  was  my  slipper :  I  have  cast  her 
off  "  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  113). 

The  variations  in  the  usages  of  the  Levirate  marriage 
are  worthy  of  notice.  Among  the  Ossetes  in  Georgia  the 
marriage  of  the  widow  takes  place  if  there  are  children, 
and  may  be  contracted  by  the  father  as  well  as  the  brother 
of  the  deceased  husband.  If  the  widow  has  no  children 
the  widow  is  purchaseuble  by  another  husband,  as  already 
noticed  (Haxthausen,  pp.  403, 404).  In  Arabia,  the  right 
of  marriage  is  extended  from  the  brother's  widow  lo  the 
cousin.  Neither  in  this  nor  in  the  case  of  the  brother's 
widow  is  the  marriage  compulsory  on  the  part  of  the 
woman,  though  in  the  former  the  man  can  put  a  veto 
upon  any  other  marriage  (Burckhardt,  yottt,  i.  112,  113). 
Another  development  of  the  Levirate  principle  may 
>erhaps  be  noticed  in  the  privilege  which  the  king  en- 
oyed  of  succeeding  to  the  wives  as  well  as  the  throne  of 
iis  predoceiwor  (2  Sam.  xii.  8).  Hence  Absalom's  public 
seizure  of  his  father's  wives  was  not  only  a  breach  c.f 
morality,  but  betokened  his  usurpation  of  the  throne 
2  Sain.  xvi.  22).  And  so,  again,  Adonijali's  request  for 
lie  hand  of  AbUhag  was  regarded  by  Solomon  us  almost 
quivalcnt  to  demanding  tin1  tlirtnio  (1  K.  ii.  22). 

The  history  of  Ruth's  marriage  has  led  to  some  mis- 
onception  on  this  p"int.  Boa*  stood  to  Kuth  in  thr 


MARRIAGE 

The  Levirate  law  offered  numerous  opportunities 
for  the  exercise  of  that  spirit  of  casuistry,  for  which 
the  Jewish  teachers  are  so  conspicuous.  One  such 
<ase  is  brought  forward  by  the  Sadducees  for  the 
Mike  of  entangling  our  Lord,  and  turns  upon  the 
complications  which  would  arise  in  the  world  to 
come  (the  existence  of  which  the  Sadducees  sought 
to  invalidate)  from  the  circumstance  of  the  same 
woman  having  been  married  to  several  brothers 
(Matt.  xxii.  23-30).  The  Rabbinical  solution  of 
this  difficulty  was  that  the  wife  would  revert  to 
the  first  husband :  our  Lord  on  the  other  hand  sub 
verts  the  hypothesis  on  which  the  difficulty  was 
based,  viz.,  that  the  material  conditions  of  the 
present  life  were  to  te  earned  on  in  the  world  to 
come;  and  thus  He  asserts  the  true  character  of 
marriage  as  a  temporary  and  merely  human  insti 
tution.  Numerous  difficulties  are  suggested,  and 
minute  regulations  laid  down  by  the  Talmudical 
writers,  the  chief  authority  on  the  subject  being 
the  book  of  the  Mishna,  entitled  Yebamoth.  From 
this  we  gather  the  following  particulars,  as  illus- 
tiating  the  working  of  the  law.  If  a  man  stood 
within  the  proscribed  degrees  of  relationship  in  re 
ference  to  his  brother's  widow,  he  was  exempt  from 
the  operation  of  the  law  (2,  §3),  and  if  he  were  on 
this  or  any  other  account  exempt  from  the  obligation 
to  marry  one  of  the  widows,  he  was  also  from  the 
obligation  to  marry  any  of  them  (1,  §1)  ;  it  is  also 
implied  that  it  was  only  necessary  for  one  brother 
to  marry  one  of  the  widows,  in  cases  where  there 
were  several  widows  left.  The  marriage  was  not 
to  take  place  within  three  months  of  the  husband's 
death  (4,  §10).  The  eldest  brother  ought  to  per 
form  the  duty  of  marriage ;  but,  on  his  declining  it, 
a  younger  brother  might  also  do  it  (2,  §8,  4,  §5). 
The  khalitzah  was  regarded  as  involving  future  rela 
tionship  ;  so  that  a  man  who  had  received  it  could 
not  marry  the  widow's  relations  within  the  prohi 
bited  degrees  (4,  §7).  Special  rules  are  laid  down 
for  cases  where  a  woman  married  under  a  false  im 
pression  as  to  her  husband's  death  (10,  §1),  or 
where  a  mistake  took  place  as  to  whether  her  son 
or  her  husband  died  first  (10,  §3),  for  in  the  latter 
case  the  Levirate  law  would  not  apply ;  and  again 
as  to  the  evidence  of  the  husband's  death  to  be  pro 
duced  in  certain  cases  (caps.  15,  16). 

From  the  prohibitions  expressed  in  the  Bible, 
others  have  been  deduced  by  a  process  of  inferential 
reasoning.  Thus  the  Talmudists  added  to  the  Le 
vitical  relationships  several  remoter  ones,  which 
they  termed  secondary,  such  as  grandmother  and 
great-grandmother,  greatgrandchild,  &c. :  the  only 
points  in  which  they  at  all  touched  the  Levitical 
degrees  were,  that  they  added  (1)  the  wife  of  the 
father's  uterine  brother  under  the  idea  that  in  the 
text  the  brother  described  was  only  by  the  same 
father,  and  (2)  the  mother's  brother's  wife,  for 
which  they  had  no  authority  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr. 
i.  2).  Considerable  differences  of  opinion  have 
arisen  as  to  the  extent  to  which  this  process  of  rea 
soning  should  be  carried,  and  conflicting  laws  have 
been  tiade  in  different  countries,  professedly  based 
on  the  same  original  authority.  It  does  not  fall 
within  our  province  to  do  more  than  endeavjur  to 


MAKR1AGE 


241! 


position,  not  of  a  Levir  (for  he  was  only  her  husband's 
cousin),  but  of  a  Goel,  or  redeemer  in  the  second  degree 
(A.  V.  "  near  kinsman,"  iii.  9):  as  such,  he  redeemed  the 
inheritance  of  Naomi,  after  the  refusal  of  the  redeemer 
in  the  nearest  deipre,  in  conformity  with  Lev.  xxv.  25 
It  appears  to  have  been  customary  for  the  redeemer  at 
the  game  time  to  marry  the  heiress,  but  this  custom  t; 


pint  out  in  what  respects  and  to  what  extent  trt 
Biblical  statements  bear  upon  the  subject.  In  tin 
first  place  we  must  observe  that  the  design  of  the 
legislator  apparently  was  to  give  an  exhaustive  list 
of  prohibitions ;  for  he  not  only  gives  examples  oi 
degrees  of  relationship,  but  he  specifies  the  pro 
hibitions  in  cases  which  are  strictly  parallel  to 
each  other,  e.  <j.,  son's  daughter  and  daughter .; 
daughter  (ver.  10),  wife's  son's  daughter  and  wife's 
daughter's  daughter  (ver.  17):  whereas,  had  he 
wished  only  to  exhibit  the  prohibited  degree,  one  o' 
these  instances  would  have  been  sufficient.  In  the 
second  place  it  appears  certain  that  he  did  not 
regard  the  degree  as  the  test  of  the  prohibition ;  for 
tie  establishes  a  different  rule  in  regard  to  a  brother's 
widow  and  a  deceased  wife's  sister,  though  the 
degree  of  relationship  is  in  each  case  strictly  parallel. 
It  cannot,  therefore,  in  the  face  of  this  express  en 
actment  be  argued  that  Moses  designed  his  country 
men  to  infer  that  marriage  with  a  niece  was  illegal 
because  that  with  the  aunt  was,  nor  yet  that  mar 
riage  with  a  mother's  brother's  wife  was  included  in 
the  prohibition  of  that  with  the  father's  brother's 
wife.  For,  though  no  explicit  statement  is  made 
s  to  the  legality  of  these  two  latter,  the  rule  of  in 
terpretation  casually  given  to  us  in  the  first  must 
be  held  to  apply  to  them  also.  In  the  third  place, 
it  must  be  assumed  that  there  were  some  tangible 
and  even  strong  grounds  for  the  distinctions  noted 
in  the  degrees  of  equal  distance ;  and  it  then  be 
comes  a  matter  of  importance  to  ascertain  whether 
these  grounds  are  of  perpetual  force,  or  arise  out  ot 
a  peculiar  stv.te  of  society  or  legislation  ;  if  the  latter, 
then  it  seems  justifiable  to  suppose  that  on  the 
alteration  of  that  state  we  may  recur  to  the  spirit 
rather  than  the  letter  of  the  enactment,  and  may 
infer  prohibitions  which,  though  not  existing  in  the 
Levitical  law,  may  yet  be  regarded  as  based  upon  it. 
The  cases  to  which  these  remarks  would  most 
pointedly  apply  are  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's 
sister,  a  niece,  whether  by  blood  nr  by  marriage, 
and  a  maternal  uncle's  widow.  With  regard  to  the 
first  and  third  of  these,  we  may  observe  that  the 
Hebrews  regarded  the  relationship  existing  between 
the  wife  and  her  husband's  family,  as  of  a  closer 
nature  than  that  between  the  husband  and  his  wife's 
family.  To  what  extent  this  difference  was  sup 
posed  to  hold  good  we  have  no  means  of  judging ; 
but  as  illustrations  of  the  difference  we  may  note 

(1)  that  the  husband's  brother  stood  in  the  special 
relation  of  lemr  to  his  brother's  wife,  and  was  sub 
ject  to  the  law  of  Levirate  marriage  in  consequence  ; 

(2)  that  the  nearest  relation  on  the  husband's  side, 
whether  brother,  nephew,  or  cousin,  ftood  in  the 
special  relation  of  goel,  or  avenger  of  hood  t<«  his 
widow  ;  and  (3)  that  an  heiress  was  restricted  to  a 
marriage  with  a  relation  on  her  father's  side.     AS 
no  corresponding  obligations  existed  in  reference  to 
the  wife's  or  (he  mother's  family,  it  follows  almost 
as  a  matter  of  course  that  the  degree  of  relationship 
must  have  been  regarded  as  different  in  the  two 
cases,  and  that  prohibitions  might  on  this  account, 
be  applied  to  the  one,  from  which  the  other  was 
exempt.     When,  however,  we  transplant  the  Levi- 
tical   regulations    from   the  Hebrew  to  any  other 


not  founded  on  any  written  law.  The  writer  of  the  boot 
of  Kuth,  according  to  Selden  (De  Success,  cap.  15),  confuset 
the  laws  relating  to  the  Goel  and  the  Levir,  as  Josephup 
(Ant.  v.  9,  $4)  has  undoubtedly  done;  but  this  is  an 
unnecessary  assuniption  :  the  custom  is  one  that  may 
well  have  existed  in  conformity  with  the  spirit  of  tbf 
I  law  of  the  Levirate  marriace. 


Z48 


MARRIAGE 


commonwealth,  we  are  fully  warranted  in  taking 
into  account  the  temporary  and  local  conditions  of 
relationship  in  each,  and  in  extending  the  prohibi 
tions  to  cases  where  alterations  in  the  social  or 
legal  condition  have  taken  place.  The  question  to 
be  fairly  argued,  then,  is  not  simply  whether  mar 
riage  within  a  certain  degree  is  or  is  not  permitted 
by  the  Levitical  law,  but  whether,  allowing  for 
'he  altered  state  of  society,  mutatis  mutandis,  it  ap 
pears  in  conformity  with  the  general  spirit  of  that 
raw.  The  ideas  of  different  nations  as  to  relation 
ship  differ  widely ;  and,  should  it  happen  that  in 
the  social  system  of  a  certain  country  a  relationship 
is,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  regarded  as  an  intimate  one, 
then  it  is  clearly  permissible  for  the  rulers  of  that 
country  to  prohibit  marriage  in  reference  to  it,  not 
rm  the  ground  of  any  expressed  or  implied  prohibi 
tion  in  reference  to  it  in  particular  in  the  book  of  Le 
viticus,  but  on  the  general  ground  that  Moses  in 
tended  to  prohibit  marriage  among  near  relations. 
The  application  of  such  a  rule  in  some  cases  is  clear 
enough ;  no  one  could  hesitate  for  a  moment  to  pro 
nounce  marriage  with  a  brother's  widow,  even  in 
cases  where  the  Mosaic  law  would  permit  it,  as  ab 
solutely  illegal  in  the  present,  day :  inasmuch  as  the 
peculiar  obligation  of  the  Levir  has  been  abolished. 
As  little  could  we  hesitate  to  extend  the  prohibition 
from  the  paternal  to  the  maternal  uncle's  widow, 
now  that  the  peculiar  differences  between  relation 
ships  on  the  father's  and  the  mother's  side  are  abo 
lished.  With  regard  to  the  vexed  question  of  the 
deceased  wife's  sister  we  refrain  from  expressing  an 
opinion,  inasmuch  as  the  case  is  still  in  lite ;  under 
the  rule  of  interpretation  we  have  already  laid 
down,  the  case  stands  thus :  such  a  marriage  is  not 
>n)y  not  prohibited,  but  actually  permitted  by  the 
letter  of  the  Mosaic  law  ;  but  it  remains  to  be  argued 
( 1 )  whether  the  pel-mission  was  granted  under  pe 
culiar  circumstances ;  (2)  whether  those  or  strictly 
parallel  circumstances  exist  in  the  present  day ;  and 
(3)  whether,  if  they  do  not  exist,  the  general  tenour 
of  the  Mosaic  prohibitions  would,  or  would  not, 
justify  a  community  in  extending  the  prohibition  to 
such  a  relationship  on  the  authority  of  the  Levitical 
law.  In  what  has  been  said  on  this  point,  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that  we  are' viewing  the  question 
simply  in  its  relation  to  the  Levitical  law:  with  the 
other  arguments  pro  and  con  bearing  on  it,  we  have 
at  present  nothing  to  do.  With  regard  to  the  mar 
riage  with  the  niece,  we  have  some  difficulty  in 
suggesting  any  sufficient  ground  on  which  it  was 
permitted  by  the  Mosaic  law.  The  Rabbinical  ex 
planation,  that  the  distinction  between  the  aunt  and 
the  niece  was  based  upon  the  respectus  parentelae, 
which  would  not  permit  the  aunt  to  be  reduced 
from  her  natural  seniority,  but  at  the  same  time 
would  not  object  to  the  elevation  of  the  niece,  can 
not  be  regarded  as  satisfactory;  for,  though  it  ex 
plains  to  a  certain  extent  the  difference  between  the 
two,  it  places  the  prohibition  of  marriage  with  the 
aunt,  and  consequently  the  permission  of  that  with 
the  niece,  on  a  wrong  basis ;  for  in  Lev.  xx.  19  con- 
.sanguinity,  and  not  respectus  parentelae,  is  stated  as 
the  ground  of  the  prohibition.  The  Jews  appear 
to  have  availed  themselves  of  the  privilege  without 
scruple :  in  the  Bible  itself,  indeed,  we  have  but 
one  instance,  and  that  not  an  undoubted  one,  in  the 


*  From  Ei.  xliv.  22  It  appears  that  the  law  relative  to 
the  marria^  of  priests  was  afterwards  made  more  rigid  : 
they  could  marry  only  maidens  of  Israelitish  origin  or 
'he  widows  of  priests. 


MARRIAGE 

case  of  Othniel,  who  was  probably  the  IrctLei  of 
Caleb  (Josh.  xv.  17),  and,  if  so,  then  the  uncle  irf 
Achsah  his  wife.  Several  such  marriages  are  no 
ticed  by  Josephus,  as  in  the  case  of  Joseph,  the 
nephew  of  Onias  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §6),  Herod  the  Great 
(Ant.  xvii.  1,  §3),  and  Herod  Philip  (Ant.  xviii. 
5,  §1).  But  on  whatever  ground  they  were  for 
merly  permitted,  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the 
propriety  of  prohibiting  them  in  the  present  day. 

2.  Among  the  special  prohibitions  we  have  to  I 
notice  the  following.  (1)  The  high-priest  was  for-  ' 
bidden  to  marry  any  except  a  virgin  selected  from 
his  own  people,  t.  e.  an  Israelite  ^Lev.  Hi.  13, 1*;. 
He  was  thus  exempt  from  the  action  of  the  Levirate 
law.  C2)  The  priests  were  less  restricted  in  their 
choice*;  they  were  only  prohibited  from  mariying 
prostitutes  and  divorced  women  (Lev.  xxi.  7). 
(3)  Heiresses  were  prohibited  from  marrying  out  of 
their  own  tribe,'  with  the  view  of  keeping  the  pos 
sessions  of  the  sevenil  tribes  intact  (Num.  xxxvi. 
5-9 ;  comp.  Tob.  vii.  10).  (4)  Persons  defective 
in  physical  powers  were  not  to  intermarry  with 
Israelites  by  virtue  of  the  regulations  in  Deut. 
xxiii.  1.  (5)  In  the  Christian  Church,  bishops  and 
deacons  were  prohibited  from  having  more  than 
one  wife  (1  Tim.  iii.  2,  12),  a  prohibition  of  nn 
ambiguous  nature,  inasmuch  as  it  may  refer  (1)  to 
polygamy  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  term,  as  ex 
plained  by  Theodoret  (in  loc.),  and  most  of  the 
Fathers ;  (2)  to  marriage  after  the  decease  of  the 
first  wife ;  or  (3)  to  marriage  after  divorce  during 
the  lifetime  of  the  first  wife.  The  probable  sense 
is  second  marriage  of  any  kind  whatever,  including 
all  the  three  cases  alluded  to,  but  with  a  special 
reference  to  the  two  last,  which  were  allow 
able  in  the  case  of  the  laity,  while  the  first  was 
equally  forbidden  to  all.  The  early  Church  gene 
rally  regarded  second  marriage  as  a  disqualification 
for  the  ministry,  though  on  this  point  there  was  not 
absolute  unanimity  (see  Bingham,  Ant.  iv.  5, 
§1-3).  (6)  A  similar  prohibition  applied  to  those 
who  were  candidates  for  admission  into  the  eccle 
siastical  order  of  widows,  whatever  that  order  may 
have  been  (1  Tim.  v.  9) ;  in  this  case  the  words 
"wife  of  one  man"  can  be  applied  but  to  two 
cases,  (1)  to  re-marriage  after  the  decease  of  the 
husband,  or  (2)  after  divorce.  That  divorce  was 
obtained  sometimes  at  the  instance  of  the  wife,  is 
implied  in  Mark  x.  12,  and  1  Cor.  vii.  11,  and  is 
alluded  to  by  several  classical  writers  (see  Whitby 
in  loc.).  But  St.  Paul  probably  refers  to  the  ge 
neral  question  of  re-marriage.  (7)  With  regard  to 
the  general  question  of  the  re-marriage  of  divorced 
persons,  there  is  some  difficulty  in  ascertaining  the 
sense  of  Scripture.  According  to  the  Mosaic  law, 
a  wife  divorced  at  the  instance  of  the  husband 
might  marry  whom  she  liked ;  but  if  her  second 
husband  died  or  divorced  her  she  could  not  revert 
to  her  first  husband,  on  the  ground  that,  as  far  as 
he  was  concerned,  she  was  "  defiled  "  (Deut.  xxiv. 
2-4)  ;  we  may  infer  from  the  statement  of  the 
ground  that  there  was  no  objection  to  the  re-mar 
riage  of  the  original  parties,  if  the  divorced  wifo 
had  remained  unmarried  in  the  interval.  If  the 
wife  was  divorced  on  the  ground  of  adultery,  her 
re-marriage  was  impossible,  inasmuch  as  the  pu 
nishment  for  such  a  crime  was  death.  In  the// 

1  The  close  analogy  of  this  regulation  to  the  Atheniar 
law  respecting  the  cirucAqpot  has  been  already  noticed  u 
the  article  on  Hi  IK. 


MARRIAGE 

/  M.  T.  there  are  no  direct  precepts  on  the  subject  of 
[  !he  re-marriage  of  divorced  persons.  All  the  re- 
oiarks  bearing  upon  the  point  had  a  primary  refer 
ence  to  an  entirely  different  subject,  viz.  the  abuse 
3f  divorce.  For  instance,  our  Lord's  declarations  in 
Matt.  v.  32,  xix.  9,  applying  as  they  expressly  do 
to  tie  case  of  a  wife  divorced  on  other  grounds 
than  that  of  unfaithfulness,  and  again  St.  Paul's, 
in  1  Cor.  vii.  11,  pre-supposing  a  contingency 
which  he  himself  had  prohibited  as  being  improper, 
cannot  be  regarded  as  directed  to  the  general  ques 
tion  of  re-marriage.  In  applying  these  passages  to 
our  own  circumstances,  due  regard  must  be  had  to 
the  peculiar  nature  of  the  Jewish  divorce,  which 
was  not,  as  with  us,  a  judicial  proceeding  based  on 
evidence  and  pronounced  by  authority,  but  the 
arbitrary,  and  sometimes  capricious  act  of  an  indi 
vidual.  The  assertion  that  a  woman  divorced  on 
improper  and  trivial  grounds  is  made  to  commit 
adultery,  does  not  therefore  bear  upon  the  question 
of  a  person  divorced  by  judicial  authority;  no  such 
case  as  our  Lord  supposes  can  now  take  place ;  at 
ill  events  it  would  take  place  only  in  connexion 
with  the  question  of  what  form  adequate  grounds 
for  divorce.  The  early  Church  was  divided  in  its 
opinion  on  this  subject  (Bingham,  Ant.  xxii.  2,  §12). 
With  regard  to  age,  no  restriction  is  pronounced  in 
the  Bible.  Early  marriage  is  spoken  of  with  ap 
proval  in  several  passages  (Prov.  ii.  17,  v.  18  ;  Is. 
Ixii.  5),  and  in  reducing  this  general  statement  to 
the  more  definite  one  of  years,  we  must  take  into 
account  the  very  early  age  at  which  persons  arrive 
at  puberty  in  Oriental  countries.  In  modern  Egypt 
marriage  takes  place  in  general  before  the  bride 
has  attained  the  age  of  16,  frequently  when  she 
is  12  or  13,  and  occasionally  when  she  is  only  10 
(Lane,  i.  208).  The  Talmudists  forbade  marriage 
in  the  case  of  a  man  under  13  years  and  a  day, 
and  in  the  case  of  a  woman  under  12  years  and 
a  day  (Buxtorf,  Synagog.  cap.  7,  p.  143).  The 
usual  age  appears  to  have  been  higher,  about  18 
years. 

Certain  days  were  fixed  for  the  ceremonies  of 
betrothal  and  marriage — the  fourth  day  for  virgins, 
and  the  fifth  for  widows  (Mishna,  Ketub.  1,  §1).  The 
more  modern  Jews  similarly  appoint  different  days 
for  virgins  and  widows,  Wednesday  and  Friday  for 
the  former,  Thursday  for  the  latter  (Picart,  i.  240). 
III.  The  customs  of  the  Hebrews  and  of  Oriental 
nations  generally,  in  regard  to  the  preliminaries  of 
marriage,  as  well  as  the  ceremonies  attending  the 
rite  itself,  differ  in  many  respects  from  those  with 
which  we  are  familiar.  In  the  first  place,  the 
choice  of  the  bride  devolved  not  on  the  bridegroom 
himself,  but  on  his  relations  or  on  a  friend  deputed 
by  the  bridegroom  for  this  purpose.  Thus  Abra 
ham  sends  Eliezer  to  find  a  suitable  bride  for  his 
son  Isaac,  and  the  narrative  of  his  mission  affords 
one  of  the  most  charming  pictures  of  patriarchal  life 


MARRIAGE 


249 


(Gen.  xxiv.) ;  Hagar  chooses  a  wife  for  Ishmael 
(Gen.  xxi.  21) ;  Isaac  directs  Jacob  in  his  choice  (Gen. 
xxviii.  1);  and  Judah  selects  a  wife  for  Er  (Gen. 
xxxviii.  6).  It  does  not  follow  that  the  bridegroom's 
wishes  were  not  consulted  in  this  arrangement  •  on 
the  contrary,  the  parents  made  proposals  at  the  in 
stigation  of  their  sons  in  the  instances  of  Shechem 
(Gen.  xxxiv.  4,  8)  and  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  1-10).  A 
marriage  contracted  without  the  parents'  inter 
ference  was  likely  to  turn  out,  as  in  Esau's  case, 
"  a  grief  of  mind"  to  them  (Gen.  xxvi.  35,  xxvii. 
46).  As  a  general  rule  the  proposal  originated 
with  the  family  of  the  bridegroom  :  occasionally, 
when  there  was  a  difference  of  rank,  this  rule  was 
reversed,  and  the  bride  was  offered  by  her  father, 
as  by  Jethro  to  Moses  (Ex.  ii.  21),  by  Caleb  to 
Othniel  (Josh.  xv.  17),  and  by  Saul  to  David 
(1  Sam.  xviii.  27).  The  imaginary  case  of  women 
soliciting  husbands  (Is.  iv.  1)  was  designed  to  con 
vey  to  the  mind  a  picture  of  the  ravages  of  war, 
by  which  the  greater  part  of  the  males  had  fallen. 
The  consent  of  the  maiden  was  sometimes  asked 
(Gen.  xxiv.  58) ;  but  this  appears  to  have  been 
subordinate  to  the  previous  consent  of  the  father 
and  the  adult  brothers  (Gen.  xxiv.  51,  xxxiv.  11). 
Occasionally  the  whole  business  of  selecting  the 
wife  was  left  in  the  hands  of  a  friend,  and  hence 
the  case  might  arise  which  is  supposed  by  the  Tal 
mudists  (  Yebam.  2,  §6,  7),  that  a  man  might  not 
be  aware  to  which  of  two  sisters  he  was  bbt/othed. 
So  in  Egypt  at  the  present  day  the  choice  of  a  wife 
is  sometimes  entrusted  to  a  professional  woman 
styled  a  khdfbeh  :  and  it  is  seldom  that  the  bride 
groom  sees  the  features  of  his  bride  before  the 
marriage  has  taken  place  (Lane,  i.  209-211). 

The  selection  of  the  bride  was  followed  by  the 
espousal,  which  was  not  altogether  like  our  "  en 
gagement,"  but  was  a  formal  proceeding,  under 
taken  by  a  friend  or  legal  representative  on  the 
part  of  the  bridegroom,  and  by  the  parents  on  the 
part  of  the  bride ;  it  was  confirmed  by  oaths,  and 
accompanied  with  presents  to  the  bride.  Thus 
Eliezer,  on  behalf  of  Isaac,  propitiates  the  favour 
of  Kebekah  by  presenting  her  in  anticipation  with  a 
massive  golden  nose-ring  and  two  bracelets ;  he 
then  proceeds  to  treat  with  the  parents,  and,  having 
obtained  their  consent,  he  brings  forth  the  more 
costly  and  formal  presents,  "  jewels  of  silver,  and 
jewels  of  gold,  and  raiment,"  for  the  bride,  and 
presents  of  less  value  for  the  mother  and  brothers 
(Gen.  xxiv.  22,  53).  These  presents  were  described 
by  different  terms,  that  to  the  bride  by  mohar* 
(A.  V.  «'  dowry "),  and  that  to  the  relations  by 
mattan."  Thus  Shechem  offers  "  never  so  nmch 
dowry  and  gift"  (Gen.  xxxiv.  12),  the  former  foi 
the  bride,  the  latter  for  the  relations.  It  has  been 
supposed  indeed  that  the  mohar  was  a  price  paid 
down  to  the  father  for  the  sale  of  his  daughter. 
Such  »  custom  undoubtedly  preva.I.s  in  certair 


k  The  term  mohar  CiriD)  occurs  omy  thrice  in  the 
Bible  (Gen.  xxxiv.  12;  Ex.  xxii.  17;  1  Sara,  xviii.  25). 
From  the  second  of  the  three  passages,  compared  with 
Deut.  xxii.  29,  it  has  been  inferred  that  the  sum  was  in  all 
cases  paid  to  the  father ;  but  this  inference  is  unfounded, 
because  the  sum  to  be  paid  according  to  that  passage  was 
not  the  proper  mohar,  but  a  sum  "  according  to,"  i.  e. 
equivalent  to  the  mohar,  and  this,  not  as  a  price  for  the 
bride,  but  as  a  penalty  for  the  offence  committed.  The 
origin  of  the  term,  and  consequently  its  specific  sense,  is 
uncertain.  Gesenius  (Thes.  p.  773)  has  evolved  the  sense 
of  "  purchase-money  "  liy  counectinK  it  with  ~GD>  "  to 


sell."  It  has  also  been  connected  with  "1HD>  "to  hasten," 
as  though  it  signified  a  present  hastily  produced  for  the 
bride  when  her  consent  was  obtained  ;  and  again  with 
"1HD,  "  morrow,"  as  though  it  were  the  gift  presented 
to  the  bride  on  the  morning  after  the  wedding,  like  the 
German  morgen-gabc  (Saalschiitz,  Archdol.  ii.  193). 

m  JFIO-  The  importance  of  presents  at  the  time  oi 
betrothal  appears  from  the  application  of  the  term  drat 
(KHN)>  literally,  "  to  make  a  present,"  in  the  speda! 
sense  of  "  to  betroth." 


250 


MARRIAGE 


parts  of  the  East  at  the  present  day,  but  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  the  case  with  free  women  in 
patriarchal  times  ;  for  the  daughters  of  Laban  make 
it  a  matter  of  complaint   that   their   father   had 
bargained  for  the  services  of  Jacob  in  exchange  for 
their  hands,  just  as  if  they  were  "  strangers  "  (Gen. 
xxxi.  15);  and  the  permission  to  sell  a  daughter 
was   restricted   to   the  case   of  a   "  servant      or 
secondary  wife  (Ex.  xxi.  7) :  nor  does  David,  when 
complaining  of  the  non-completion  of  Saul's  bargain 
with  him,  use  the  expression  "  I  bought  for,"  but 
"  I  espoused  to  me  for  an  hundred  foreskins  of  the 
Philistines  (2  Sam.  iii.  14).      The  expressions  in 
Hos.  iii.  2,  "  So  I  bought  her  to  me,"  and  hi  Ruth 
iv.  10,  "  Ruth  have  I  purchased  to  be  my  wife," 
•ertainly  appear  to  favour  the  opposite  view ;  it 
should  be  observed,  however,  that  in  the  former 
passage  great  doubt  exists  as  to  the  correctness  of 
the  translation  •;    and  that  in  the  latter  the  case 
would  not  be  conclusive,  as  Ruth  might  well  be 
considei-ed  as  included  in  the  purchase  of  her  pro 
perty.     It  would  undoubtedly  be  expected  that  the 
inohar  should  be  proportioned  to  the  position  of  the 
bride,  and  that  a  poor  man  could  not  on  that  ac 
count  afford  to  marry  a  rich  wife  (1  Sam.  xviii. 
23).      Occasionally  the  bride  received  a  dowry  ° 
irom  her  father,  as  instanced  in  the  cases  of  Caleb's 
(Judg.  i.  15)  and  Pharaoh's  (1  K.  ix.  16)  daugh 
ters.     A  "  settlement,"  in  the  modem  sense  of  the 
term,  i.  e.  a  written  document  securing  property 
to  the  wife,  did  not  come  into  use  until  the  post- 
Babylonian  period :  the  only  instance  we  have  of 
one  is  in  Tob.  vii.  14,  where  it  is  described  as  an 
"  instrument "  (ffvyypa.<j>-(\).  The  Talmudists  styled 
it  a  ketubah  f  and  have  laid  down  minute  directions 
as  to  the  disposal  of  the  sum  secured,  in  a  treatise 
of  the   Mishna  expressly   on   that   subject,  •  from 
which  we  extract  the  following  particulars.     The 
peculiarity  of  the  Jewish  ketubah  consisted  in  this, 
that  it  was  a  definite  sum,  varying  not  according 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  parties,  but  according 
to  the  state  of  the  bride,i  whether  she  be  a  spinster, 
a   widow,    or  a  divorced    woman*  (1,    §2);    and 
further,  that  the  dowiy  could  not  be  claimed  until 
the  termination  of  the  marriage  by  the  death  of  the 
husband  or  by  divorce  (5,  §1),  though  advances 
might  be  made  to  the  wife  previously  (9,  §8). 
Subsequently  to  betrothal  a  woman  lost  all  power 
over  her  property,  and  it  became  vested  in  the  hus 
band,  unless   he   had   previously   to  marriage  re 
nounced  his  right  to  it  (8,  §1  ;  9,  §1).    Stipulations 
were  entered  into  for  the  increase  of  the  ketubah, 
when  the  bride  had  a  handsome  allowance  (6,  §3). 

•  The  term  used  (HIS)  has  a  general  sense  "  to  make 
an  agreement."  The  meaning  of  the  verse  appears  to  be 
this : — the  Prophet  had  previously  married  a  wife,  named 
Gomer,  who  had  turned  out  unfaithful  to  him.  He  had 
separated  from  her;  but  he  was  ordered  to  renew  his 
intimacy  with  her,  and  previous  to  doing  this  he  places 
her  on  her  probation,  setting  her  apart  for  a  time,  and  for 
her  maintenance  agreeing  to  give  her  fifteen  pieces  of 
silver,  in  addition  to  a  certain  amount  of  food. 

0  The  technical  term  of  the  Talmudists  for  the  dowry 
which  the  wife  brought  to  her  husband,  answering  to  the 
dot  of  the  Latins,  was  N^JHS- 

v  rQ-inSli  literally  "a  writing."  The  term  was  also 
specifically  applied  *o  *he  sum  settled  on  the  wife  by 
the  nusbano,  answering  to  the  i-atin  dunatio  propter 
nuptiat. 

1  The  practice  of  the  modern  Kpyptians  illustrates  this; 
for  with  them   the  dowry,  though  its  amount  differs 
according  to  the  wealth  of  the  suitor,  is  still  graduated 


MARRIAGE 

The  ac'  <f  betrothal'  was  celebrated  by  a  fea*t 
(1,  §5)  aud  among  the  more  modern  Jews  it  is  the 
custom  in  seme  parts  for  the  bridegroom  to  place  a 
ring  on  the  bride's  finger  (Picart,  i.  239) — a  cus 
tom  which  also  prevailed  among  the  Romans  (Diet, 
of  Ant.  p.  604).  Some  writers  have  endeavoured 
to  prove  that  the  rings  noticed  in  the  0.  T. 
(Ex.  xxxv.  22;  Is.  iii.  21)  were  nuptial  rings 
but  there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  of  this. 
The  ring  was  nevertheless  regarded  among  the  He 
brews  as  a  token  of  fidelity  (Gen.  xli.  42),  and  of 
adoption  into  a  family  (Luke  XT.  22).  According 
to  Selden  it  was  originally  given  as  an  equi 
valent  for  dowry-money  (Uxor  Ebraic.  ii.  14). 
Between  the  betrothal  and  the  marriage  an  interval 
elapsed,  varying  from  a  few  days  in  the  patriarchal 
age  (Gen.  xxiv.  55),  to  a  full  year  for  virgins  and  a 
month  for  widows  in  later  times.  During  this 
period  the  bride -el  set  lived  with  her  friends,  and  all 
communication  between  herself  and  her  future  hus 
band  was  carried  on  through  the  medium  of  a  friend 
deputed  for  the  purpose,  termed  the  "  friend  of  the 
bridegroom "  (John  iii.  29).  She  was  now  vir 
tually  regarded  as  the  wife  of  her  future  husband ; 
for  it  was  a  maxim  of  the  Jewish  law  that  betrothal 
was  of  equal  force  with  marriage  (Phil.  De  Spec. 
Leg.  p.  788).  Hence  faithlessness  on  her  part  was 
punishable  with  death  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  24),  the  hus 
band  having,  however,  the  option  of  "  putting  her 
away  "  (Matt.  i.  19)  by  giving  her  a  bill  of  di 
vorcement,  in  case  he  did  not  wish  to  proceed  to 
such  an  extreme  punishment  (Deut.  xxiv.  1).  False 
accusations  on  this  ground  were  punished  by  a 
severe  fine  and  the  forfeiture  of  the  right  of  divorce 
(Deut.  xxii.  13-19).  The  betrothed  woman  could 
not  part  with  her  property  after  betrothal,  except 
in  certain  cases  (Ketub.  8,  §1):  and,  in  short,  the 
bond  of  matrimony  was  as  fully  entered  into  by 
betrothal,  as  with  us  by  marriage.  In  this  respect 
we  may  compare  the  practice  of  the  Athenians,  who 
regarded  the  formal  betrothal  as  indispensable  to 
the  validity  of  a  marriage  contract  (Diet,  of  Ant. 
p.  598).  The  customs  of  the  Nestorians  affoid 
several  points  of  similarity  in  respect  both  to  the 
mode  of  effecting  the  betrothal  and  the  importance 
attached  to  it  (Grant's  Nestorians,  pp.  197,  198). 

We  now  come  to  the  wedding  itself;  and  in  this 
the  most  observable  point  is,  that  there  were  no 
definite  religious  ceremonies  connected  with  it. 
It  is  probable,  indeed,  that  some  formal  ratification 
of  the  espousal  with  an  oath  took  place,  as  implied 
in  some  allusions  to  marriage  (Ez.  xvi.  8  ;  -Mai.  ii. 
14),  particularly  in  the  expression,  "  the  covenant 


according  to  the  state  of  the  bride.  A  certain  portion 
only  of  the  dowry  is  paid  down,  the  rest  being  held  in 
reserve  (Lane,  i.  211).  Among  the  modern  Jews  al.so 
the  amount  of  the  dowry  varies  with  the  state  of  the 
bride,  according  to  a  fixed  scale  (Picart,  i.  240). 

The  amount  of  the  dowry,  according  to  the  Mosaic 
law,  appears  to  have  been  fifty  shekels  (Ex.  xxii.  17. 
compared  with  Deut  xxii.  29). 

The  technical  term  used  by  the  Talmudists  for  be 
trothing  was  Mddfahin  (pB^-Hp).  derived  from  L'Hj5. 
"  to  set  apart."  There  is  a  treatise  in  the  Mishna  sc 
entitled;  in  which  various  quexions  of  casuistry  of  slight 
interest  to  us  are  discussed. 

*  It  is  worthy  of  observation  that  there  Is  no  term  in 
thfc  Hetrew  language  to  express  the  ceremony  of  marriage. 
The  substantive  cltatunnah  (n3J"in)  occurs  but  once 
and  then  in  connexion  with  the  day  (Cant.  ill.  11).  Th( 
word  "  wedding"  does  not  occur  at  all  in  the  A.  V.  of  UM 
Old  Tegument. 


MARRIAGE 

of  her  God"  (Prov.  ii.  17),  as  applied  to  the  mar 
riage  bond,  and  that  a  blessing  was  pronounced 
(Gen.  xxiv.  60  ;  Ruth  iv.  11,  12)  sometimes  by  the 
parents  (Tob.  vii.  13).  But  the  essence  of  the 
marriage  ceremony  consisted  in  the  removal  of  the 
bride  from  her  father's  house  to  that  of  the  bride 
groom  or  his  father.™ 

The  bridegroom  prepared  himself  for  the  occasion 
by  putting  on  a  festive  dress,  and  especially  by 
placing  on  his  head  the  handsome  turban  described 
by  the  term  peer  (Is.  Ixi.  10  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments"), 
and  a  nuptial  crown  or  garland*  (Cant.  iii.  11): 
he  was  redolent  of  myrrh  and  frankincense  and 
"  all  powders  of  the  merchant "  (Cant.  iii.  6). 
The  bride  prepared  herself  for  the  ceremony  by 
taking  a  bath,  generally  on  the  day  preceding  the 
wedding.  This  was  probably  in  ancient  as  in  mo 
dern  times  a  formal  proceeding,  accompanied  with 
considerable  pomp  (Picart,  i.  '240;  Lane,  i.  217). 
The  notices  of  it  in  the  Bible  are  so  few  as  to  have 
escaped  general  observation  (Ruth  iii.  3  ;  Ez.  xxiii. 
40  ;  Eph.  v.  26,  27) ;  but  the  passages  cited  esta 
blish  the  antiquity  of  the  custom,  and  the  expres 
sions  in  the  last  ("  having  purified  her  by  the 
laver  of  water,"  "  not  having  spot  "),  have  evident 
reference  to  it.  A  similar  custom  prevailed  among 
the  Greeks  (Diet,  of  Ant.  s.  v.  Balneae,  p.  185). 
The  distinctive  feature  of  the  bride's  attire  was  the 
ts&'iphj  or  "  veil  " — a  light  robe  of  ample  dimen 
sions,  which  covered  not  only  the  face  but  the 
whole  person  (Gen.  xxiv.  65 ;  comp.  xxxviii.  14, 
15).  This  was  regarded  as  the  symbol  of  her  sub 
mission  to  her  husband,  and  hence  in  1  Cor.  xi.  10, 
the  veil  is  apparently  described  under  the  term 
^ovffia,  "  authority."  She  also  wore  a  peculiar 
girdle,  named  kishshurim,*  the  "  attire  "  (A.  V.), 
which  no  bride  could  forget  (Jer.  ii.  32) ;  and  her 
head  was  crowned  with  a  chaplet,  which  was  again 
so  distinctive  of  the  bride,  that  the  Hebrew  term 


MAIiRIAGF, 


251 


u  There  seems  indeed  to  be  a  literal  truth  in  the 
Hebrew  expression  "  to  take  "  a  wife  (Num.  xii.  1 ;  1  Chr. 
il.  21)  ;  for  the  ceremony  appears  to  have  mainly 
consisted  in  the  taking.  Among  the  modern  Arabs  the 
same  custom  prevails,  the  capture  and  removal  of  the 
bride  being  effected  with  a  considerable  show  of  violence 
(Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  108). 

»  The  bridegroom's  crown  was  made  of  various  materials 
(gold  or  silver,  roses,  myrtle  or  olive),  according  to  his 
circumstances  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr.  il.  15).  The  use  of  the 
crown  at  marriages  was  familiar  both  to  the  Greeks  and 
Komans  (Diet,  of  Ant.,  CORONA). 

y  ^y¥-  See  article  on  DRESS.  The  use  of  the  veil 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews.  It  was  customary 
among1  the  Greeks  and  Romans  ;  and  among  the  latter  it 
gave  rise  to  the  expression  nubo,  literally  "  to  veil,"  and 
hence  to  our  word  "  nuptial."  It  is  still  used  by  the  Jews 
(Picart,  1.  241).  The  modern  Kgyptians  envelope  the 
bride  in  an  ample  shawl,  whieb  perhaps  more  than  any 
thing  else  resembles  the  Hebrew  tzaipk  (I.ane,  i.  220). 

1  D^-IK'jp.  Some  difference  of  opinion  exists  as  to 
this  term.  [GIRDLE.]  The  girdle  was  an  ini|K>rtant  article 
of  the  bride's  dress  among  the  Romans,  ami  gave  rise  to 
the  expression  solvere  zonam. 

H  ?3.  The  bride's  crown  was  either  of  gold  or  gilded. 
The  use  of  it  was  interdicted  after  the  destruction  of  the 
second  Temple,  as  a  token  of  humiliation  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr. 
ii.  15). 

b  D^B-  Winer  (Rwb.  s.  v.  ••  Hochzeit ")  identifies 
the  "children  ol  the  bridechamber "  wltn  the  shostibtnim 
(D*33E>iE>)  of  me  Talmudists.  But  the  former  were 
'.he  attendant  ».i  the  bridegroom  alone,  while  the  thosli- 


callah*  "bride,"  originated  from  it  If  the  bride 
were  a  virgin,  she  wore  her  hair  flowing  (Ketub. 
2,  §1).  Her  robes  were  white  (Rev.  xix.  8),  and 
sometimes  embroidered  with  gold  thread  (Ps.  xlv. 
13,  14),  and  covered  with  perfumes  (Ps.  xlv.  8): 
she  was  further  decked  out  with  jewels  (Is.  xliz 
18,  Ixi.  10;  Rev.  xxi.  2).  When  the  fixed  houi 
arrived,  which  was  generally  late  in  the  evening, 
the  bridegroom  set  forth  from  his  house,  attended 
by  his  groomsmen,  termed  in  Hebrew  mereim* 
(A.  V.  "  companions  ;  Judg.  xiv.  11),  and  in  Greek 
viol  rov  i>vjj.<pu>i>os  (A.  V.  "  children  of  the  bride- 
chamber  ;"  Matt.  ix.  15),  preceded  by  a  band  of 
musicians  or  singers  (Gen.  xxxi.  27 ;  Jer.  vii.  34, 
xvi.  9  ;  1  Mace.  ix.  39),  and  accompanied  by  per 
sons  bearing  flambeaux'  (2  Esdr.  x.  2  ;  Matt.  xxv. 
7  ;  compare  Jer.  xxv.  10  ;  Rev.  xviii.  23,  "  the  light 
of  a  candle").  Having  reached  the  house  of  the 
bride,  who  with  her  maidens  anxiously  expected 
his  arrival  (Matt.  xxv.  6),  he  conducted  the  whole 
party  buck  to  his  own  or  his  father's11  house, 
with  every  demonstration  of  gladness*  (Ps.  xlv.  15). 
On  their  way  back  they  were  joined  by  a  party  of 
maidens,  friends  of  the  bride  and  bridegroom,  who 
were  in  waiting  to  catch  the  procession  as  it  passed 
(Matt.  xxv.  6 ;  comp.  Trench  on  Parables,  p.  244 
note).  The  inhabitants  of  the  place  pressed  out 
into  the  streets  to  watch  the  procession  (Cant.  iii. 
11).  At  the  house  a  feast '  was  prepared,  to  which 
all  the  friends  and  neighbours  were  invited  (Gen. 
xxix.  22 ;  Matt.  xxii.  1-10  ;  Luke  xiv.  8  ;  John 
ii.  2),  and  the  festivities  were  protracted  for 
seven,  or  even  fourteen  days  (Judg.  xiv.  12;  Tob. 
viii.  19).  The  guests  were  provided  by  the  host 
with  fitting  robes  (Matt.  xxii.  1 1  ;  comp.  Trench, 
Parables,  p.  230),  and  the  feast  was  enlivened  with 
riddles  (Judg.  xiv.  12)  and  other  amusements.  The 
bridegroom  now  entered  into  direct  communication 
with  the  bride,  and  the  joy  of  the  friend  was  "  ful- 


benim  were  two  persons  selected  on  the  day  of  the  mar 
riage  to  represent  the  interests  of  bride  and  bridegroom, 
apparently  with  a  special  view  to  any  possible  litigation 
that  might  subsequently  arise  on  the  subject  noticed  in 
Deut.  xxii.  15-21  (Selden,  Ux.  Ebr.  ii.  16). 

c  Compare  the  S<}Ses  w^ixai  of  the  Greeks  (Aristoph. 
Pax,  1317).  The  lamps  described  in  Matt.  xxv.  7  would 
be  small  hand-lamps.  Without  them  none  could  join  tho 
procession  (Trench's  Parables,  p.  257  noteV 

d  The  bride  was  said  to  "go  to"  (?N  N13)  the  house 
of  her  husband  (Josh.  xv.  18  ;  Judg.  i.  14);  an  expression 
which  is  worthy  of  notice,  inasmuch  as  it  has  not  been 
rightly  understood  in  Dan.  xi.  6,  where  "  they  that  brought 
her"  is  an  expression  for  husband.  The  bringing  home  of 
the  bride  was  regarded  in  the  later  days  of  the  Roman 
empire  as  one  of  the  most  important  parts  of  the  marriage 
ceremony  (Bingham,  Ant.  xxii.  4,  $7). 

e  From  the  joyous  sounds  used  on  these  occasions  the 
term  halal  77i"l)  is  applied  in  the  sense  of  marrying  vs. 
Ps.  Ixxviil.  63 ;  A.  V.  "  their  maidens  were  not  givtn  to 
marriage,"  liierally,  "  were  not  praised,"  as  in  the  margin. 
This  sense  appears  preferable  to  that  of  ibr  '  ,VX.  OVK 
tirevO-t)<Tav ,  which  is  adopted  by  Gescnlus  (l*,et.  p.  596). 
The  noise  In  the  streets,  attendant  on  an  Oriental  wedding, 
is  excessive,  and  enables  us  to  understand  the  allusions  in 
Jeremiah  to  the  "  voice  of  the  bridegroom  and  the  voice 
of  the  bride." 

'  The  feast  was  regarded  as  so  essential  a  part  of  the 
marriage  ceremony,  that  TTOKHC  yd.fj.av  acquired  the  spe 
cific  meaning  "to  celebrate  the  marriage-feast"  (Gen. 
xxix.  22;  Kslli.  ii.  18 ;  Tob.  viii.  19  ;  1  Mace.  ix.  37,  x.  58 
LXX.,  Matt.  xxii.  4,  xxv.  10 ;  Luke  xiv.  H),  aud  bomctioiei 
to  celebrate  any  feast  (Esth  ix.  221. 


252 


MARRIAGE 


filled"  at  hearing  the  voice  of  the  bridegroom 
(John  iii.  29)  conversing  with  her,  which  he  re 
garded  as  a  satisfactory  testimony  of  the  success  of 
his  share  in  the  work.  In  the  case  of  a  virgin, 
parched  corn  was  distributed  among  the  guests 
(Ketvb.  2,  §1),  the  significance  of  which  is  not 
apparent ;  the  custom  bears  some  resemblance  to 
the  distribution  of  the  mustaceum  (Juv.  vi.  202) 
among  the  guests  at  a  Roman  wedding.  The  modern 
Jews  have  a  custom  of  shattering  glasses  or  vessels, 
by  dashing  them  to  the  ground  (Picart,  i.  240). 


Lamp  suspended  at  a  modem  Egyptian  wedding.    (Lone.) 


The  last  act  in  the  ceremonial  was  the  conducting 
of  the  bride  to  the  bridal  chamber,  chedert  (Judg. 
xv.  1 ;  Joel  ii.  16),  where  a  canopy,  named  chup- 
pah^  was  prepared  (Ps.  xix.  5;  Joel  ii.  16).  The 
bride  was  still  completely  veiled,  so  that  the  decep 
tion  practised  on  Jacob  (Gen.  xxix.  23)  was  very 
possible.  If  proof  could  be  subsequently  adduced 
that  the  bride  had  not  preserved  her  maiden  purity, 
the  case  was  investigated ;  and,  if  she  was  convicted, 
she  was  stoned  to  death  before  her  father's  house 
(Deut.  xxii.  13-21).  A  newly  married  man  was 
exempt  from  military  service,  or  from  any  public 
business  which  might  draw  him  away  from  his 
home,  for  the  space  of  a  year  (Deut.  xxiv.  5) :  a 
similar  privilege  was  granted  to  him  who  was  be 
trothed  (Deut.  xx.  7). 

Hitherto  we  have  described  the  usages  of  mar 
riage  as  well  as  they  can  be  ascertained  from  the 
Bible  itself.  The  Talmudists  specify  three  modes 
by  which  marriagt  might  be  effected,  viz.,  money, 
marriage -con  tract,  and  consummation  (Kiddush.  i. 
§1).  The  first  was  by  the  presentation  of  a  sum 
of  money,  or  its  equivalent,  in  the  presence  of  wit 
nesses,  accompanied  by  a  mutual  declaration  of  be 
trothal.  The  second  was  by  a  written,  instead  of  a 
verbal  agreement,  either  with  or  without  a  sum  of 
money.  The  third,  though  valid  in  point  of  law, 
was  discouraged  to  the  greatest  extent,  as  being 


«vtn. 

h  HSn.     The  term  occurs  in  the  Mislma  (Ketub.  4, 
£\  uul  is  explained  by  some  of  the  Jewish  commentators 


MARRIAGE 

contrary  to  the  laws  of  morality  (Seld€n,  Ux.  Ebr. 
ii.  1,2). 

IV.  In  considering  the  social  and  domestic  con 
ditions  of  married  life  unong  the  Hebrews,  we  musl 
in  the  first  place  take  into  account  the  position  as 
signed  to  women  generally  in  their  social  scale 
The  seclusion  of  the  harem  and  the  habits  conse 
quent  upon  it  were  utterly  unknown  in  early  times, 
and  the  condition  of  the  Oriental  woman,  as  pic 
tured  to  us  in  the  Bible,  contrasts  most  favourably 
with  that  of  her  modern  representative.  There  is 
abundant  evidence  that  women,  whether  manned 
or  unmanned,  went  about  with  their  faces  unveiled 
(Gen.  xii.  14,  xxiv.  16,  65,  xxix.  11 ;  1  Sam.  i.  13). 
An  unmanned  woman  might  meet  and  converse  with 
men,  even  strangers,  in  a  public  place  (Gen.  xxiv. 
24,  45-7,  xxix.  9-12  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  11):  she  might 
be  found  alone  in  the  country  without  any  reflec 
tion  on  her  character  (Deut.  xxii.  25-27 ) :  or  she 
might  appear  in  a  court  of  justice  (Num.  xxvii.  2). 
Women  not  unfrequently  held  important  offices; 
some  were  prophetesses,  as  Miriam,  Deborah,  Hul- 
dah,  Noadiah,  and  Anna:  c{  others  advice  was 
sought  in  emergencies  (2  Sam.  xiv.  2,  xx.  16-22). 
They  took  their  part  in  matters  of  public  interest 
(Ex.  xv.  20 ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6,  7) :  in  short,  they 
enjoyed  as  much  freedom  in  ordinary  life  as  the 
women  of  our  own  country. 

If  such  was  her  general  position,  it  is  certain 
that  the  wife  must  have  exercised  an  important 
influence  in  her  own  home.  She  appears  to  have 
taken  her  part  in  family  affairs,  and  even  to  have 
enjoyed  a  considerable  amount  of  independence.  For 
instance,  she  entertains  guests  at  her  own  desire 
(2  K.  iv.  8)  in  the  absence  of  her  husband  (Judg. 
iv.  1 8),  and  sometimes  even  in  defiance  of  his  wishes 
(1  Sam.  xxv.  14,  &c.) :  she  disposes  of  her  child  by 
a  vow  without  any  reference  to  her  husband  (1  Sam. 
i.  24) :  she  consults  with  him  as  to  the  mairiage 
of  her  children  (Gen.  xxvii.  46):  her  suggestions 
as  to  any  domestic  arrangements  meet  with  due 
attention  (2  K.  iv.  9) :  and  occasionally  she  criticises 
the  conduct  of  her  husband  in  terms  of  great  severity 
(1  Sam.  xxv.  25 ;  2  Sam.  vi.  20). 

The  relations  of  husband  and  wife  appear  to  have 
been  characterised  by  affection  and  tenderness.  He 
is  occasionally  described  as  the  "friend"  of  his 
wife  (Jer.  iii.  20 ;  Hos.  iii.  1),  and  his  love  for  her 
is  frequently  noticed  (Gen.  xxiv.  67,  xxix.  18).  On 
the  other  hand,  the  wife  was  the  consolation  of  the 
husband  in  time  of  trouble  (Gen.  xxiv.  67),  and  her 
grief  at  his  loss  presented  a  picture  of  the  most  ab 
ject  woe  (Joel  i.  8).  No  stronger  testimony,  how 
ever,  can  be  afforded  as  to  the  ardent  affection  of 
husband  and  wife,  than  that  which  we  derive  from 
the  general  tenor  of  the  book  of  Canticles.  At  tht 
same  time  we  cannot  but  think  that  the  exceptions: 
to  this  state  of  afiairs  were  more  numerous  than  is 
consistent  with  our  ideas  of  matrimonial  happiness. 
One  of  the  evils  inseparable  from  polygamy  is  the 
discomfort  arising  from  the  jealousies  and  quan-els 
of  the  several  wives,  as  instanced  in  the  households 
of  Abraham  and  Elkanah  (Gen.  xxi.  11 ;  1  Sam.  i. 
6).  The  purchase  of  wives,  and  the  smaii  amount 
of  liberty  allowed  to  daughters  m  the  choioe  01 
husbands,  must  inevitably  have  led  to  unhappy 
unions.  The  allusions  to  the  misery  of  a  coii- 

to  have  been  a  bower  of  roses  and  myrtles.  The  term  WM 
also  applied  to  the  canopy  undor  which  the  nuptial  bene 
diction  was  pronounced,  or  to  the  robe  spread  ovtr  tht 
heads  of  the  bride  and  bridegroom  ^Seldcn,  ii.  16X 


MARRIAGE 

tentious  and  brawling  wife  in  the  Proverbs  (xix.  13 
xxi.  9,  19,  xxvii.  15)  convey  the  impression  that 
the  infliction  was  of  frequent  occurrence  in  Hebrew 
households,  and  in  the  Mishna  (Ketub.  7,  §6)  the 
fact  of  a  woman  being  noisy  is  laid  down  as  an 
adequate  ground  for  divorce.  In  the  N.  T.  the 
mutual  relations  of  husband  and  wife  are  a  subject 
of  frequent  exhortation  (Eph.  v.  22-33  ;  Col.  iii. 
18,  19;  Tit.  ii.  4,  5;  1  Pet.  iii.  1-7):  it  is  cer 
tainly  a  noticeable  coincidence  that  thsse  exhorta 
tions  should  be  found  exclusively  in  the  epistles 
addressed  to  Asiatics,  nor  is  it  improbable  that  they 
were  more  particularly  needed  for  them  than  for 
Europeans. 

The  duties  of  the  wife  in  the  Hebrew  household 
were  multifarious :  in  addition  to  the  geneial  super 
intendence  of  the  domestic  arrangements,  sucn  as 
cooking,  from  which  even  women  of  rank  were  not 
exempted  (Gen.  xviii.  6  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  8),  and  the 
distribution  of  food  at  meal-times  ^Prov.  xxxi.  15), 
the  manufactui-e  of  the  clothing  and  the  various 
textures  required  in  an  Eastern  establishment  de 
volved  upon  her  (Prov  xxxi.  13,  21,  22),  and  if 
she  were  a  model  of  acti\  ity  and  skill,  she  produced 
a  surplus  of  line  linen  shi.is  and  girdles,  which 
she  sold,  and  so,  like  a  well-freighted  merchant- 
ship,  brought  in  wealth  to  her  husband  from  afar 
(Prov.  xxxi.  14,  24).  The  poetical  description  of  a 
good  house-wife  drawn  in  the  last  chapter  of  the 
Proverbs  is  both  filled  up  and  in  some  measure 
illustrated  by  the  following  minute  description  of  a 
wife's  duties  towards  her  husband,  as  laid  down  iii 
the  Mishna :  "  She  must  grind  com,  and  bake,  and 
wash,  and  cook,  and  suckle  his  child,  make  his  bed, 
and  work  in  wool.  If  she  brought  her  husband  one 
bondwoman,  she  need  not  grind,  bake,  or  wash :  if 
two,  she  need  not  cook  nor  suckle  his  child:  if 
three,  she  need  not  make  his  bed  nor  work  in  wool : 
if  four,  she  may  sit  in  her  chair  of  state  "  (Ketvb. 
5,  §5).  Whatever  money  she  earned  by  her  labour 
belonged  to  her  husband  (ib.  6,  §1).  The  qua 
lification  not  only  of  working,  but  of  working  at 
home  (Tit.  ii.  5,  where  oiicovpyovs  is  preferable 
to  oiicovpovs},  was  insisted  on  in  the  wife,  and  to 
spin  in  the  street  was  regarded  as  a  violation  of 
Jewish  customs  (Ketub.  7,  §6). 

The  legal  rights  of  the  wife  are  noticed  in  Ex. 
xxi.  10,  under  the  three  heads  of  food,  raiment, 
and  duty  of  marriage  or  conjugal  right.  These 
were  defined  with  great  precision  by  the  Jewish 
doctors ;  for  thus  only  could  one  of  the  most  cruel 
effects  of  polygamy  be  averted,  viz.,  the  sacrifice 
of  the  rights  of  the  many  in  favour  of  the  one 
whom  the  lord  of  the  modem  harem  selects  for  his 
special  attention.  The  regulations  of  the  Talmudists 
founded  on  Ex.  xxi.  10  may  be  found  in  the  Mishna 
(Ketub.  5,  §6-9). 

V.  The  allegorical  and  typical  allusions  to  mar 
riage  have  exclusive  reference  to  one  subject,  viz., 
to  exhibit  the  spiritual  relationship  between  God 
and  his  j>eople.  The  earliest  form,  in  which  the 
image  is  implied,  is  in  the  expressions  "  to  gc  a 
whoring,"  and  "  whoredom,"  as  descriptive  of  the 
rupture  of  that  relationship  by  acts  of  idolatry. 
These  expressions  have  by  some  writers  been  taken 
in  their  primary  and  literal  sense,  as  pointing  to 
the  licentious  practices  of  idolaters.  But  this  de- 


MAR8ENA 


253 


strcys  the  whole  point  of  the  comparison,  and  is 
jppjsed  to  the  plain  language  of  Scripture:  foi 
(1  )  Israel  is  described  as  the  false  wife1  "  playing 
the  harlot"  (Is.  i.  21  ;  Jer.  iii.  1,  6,  8)  ;  (2)  Je 
hovah  is  the  injured  husband,  who  therefore  di 
vorces  her  (Ps.  bcxiii.  27  :  Jer.  ii.  20  :  Hos.  iv.  12, 
ix.  1)  ;  ana  (3)  the  other  party  in  the  adultery  14. 
specified,  sometimes  generally,  as  idols  or  false  gods 
(Deut.  xxxi.  16  ;  Judg.  ii.  17  ;  1  Chr.  v.  25  ;  Ez. 
xx.  30,  xxiii.  30),  and  sometimes  particularly,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  worship  of  goats  (A.  V.  "  devils,' 
Lev.  xvii.  7),  Molech  (Lev.  xx.  5),  wizards  (Lev. 
xx.  6),  an  ephod  (Judg.  viii.  27),  Baalim  (Judg. 
7iii.  33),  and  even  the  heart  and  eyes  (Num.  xv. 
39)  —  the  last  of  these  objects  being  such  as  wholly 
to  exclude  the  idea  of  actual  adultery.  The  image 
is  drawn  out  more  at  length  by  Ezekiel  (xxiii.), 
who  compares  the  kingdoms  of  Samaria  and  Judah 
to  the  harlots  Aholah  and  Aholibah  ;  and  again 
by  Hosea  (i.  iii.),  whose  marriage  with  an  adul 
terous  wife,  his  separation  from  her,  and  subse 
quent  reunion  with  her,  were  designed  to  be  a 
visible  lesson  to  the  Israelites  of  their  dealings  with 
Jehovah. 

The  direct  comparison  with  marriage  is  confined 
in  the  0.  T.  to  the  prophetic  writings,  unless  we 
regard  the  Canticles  as  an  allegorical  work.  [CAN 
TICLES.]  The  actual  relation  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people  is  generally  the  point  of  comparison 
(Is.  liv.  5,  Ixii.  4  ;  Jer.  iii.  14;  Hos.  ii.  19  ;  Mai. 
ii.  11)  ;  but  sometimes  the  graces  consequent  thereon 
are  described  under  the  image  of  bridal  attire  (Is. 
xlix.  18,  Ixi.  10),  and  the  joy  of  Jehovah  in  His 
Church  under  that  of  the  joy  of  a  bridegroom 
(Is.  Ixii.  5). 

In  the  N.  T.  the  image  of  the  bridegroom  is 
transferred  from  Jehovah  to  Christ  (Matt.  ix.  15  ; 
John  iii.  29),  and  that  of  the  bride  to  the  Church 
(2  Cor.  xi.  2  ;  Rev.  xix.  7,  xxi.  2,  9,  xxii.  17),  and 
the  comparison  thus  established  is  converted  by  St. 
Paul  into  an  illustration  of  the  position  and  mutual 
duties  of  man  and  wife  (Eph.  v.  23-32).  The  sud 
denness  of  the  Messiah's  appearing,  particularly  at 
the  last  day,  and  the  necessity  of  watchfulness  are 
inculcated  in  the  parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins,  the 
imagery  of  which  is  borrowed  from  the  customs  of 
the  marriage  ceremony  (Matt.  xxv.  1-13).  The 
Father  prepares  the  marriage  feast  for  his  Son,  the 
joys  that  result  from  the  union  being  thus  repre 
sented  (Matt.  xxii.  1-14,  xxv.  10;  Rev.  xix.  9  ; 
comp.  Matt.  viii.  11),  while  the  qualifications  re 
quisite  for  admission  into  that  union  are  prefigured 
by  the  marriage  garment  (Matt.  xxii.  11).  The 
breach  of  the  union  is,  as  before,  described  as  forni 
cation  or  whoredom  in  reference  to  the  mystical 
Babylon  (Rev.  xvii.  1,  2,  5). 

The  chief  authorities  on  this  subject  are  Selden's 
Uxor  Ebraica;  Michaelis'  Commentaries  ;  the 
Mishna,  particularly  the  books  Yebamoth,  Ketu- 
both,  Gittin,  and  Kiddushin  ;  Buxtorfs  Spousal,  et 
Divort.  Among  the  writers  on  special  points  we 
may  notice  Benary,  de  Hebr.  Leviratu,  Berlin, 
1835  ;  Redslob's  Leviratsehc,  Leipzig,  1836  ;  and 
Kurtz-'s  Eke  des  Hosea,  Dorpat,  1859.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MARS'  HILL.     [AREOPAGUS.] 
MAR'SENA  (tOpnO:  MoAj<r«£p  ;  Alex.  Ma- 


i  The  term  zdnuh  (H3T)-  in  its  ordinary  application, 
is  almost  without  exception  applied  to  the  act  of  the 
woman.  We  may  here  notice  the  only  exceptions  to 
tbf  ordinary  seust-  of  this  term,  viz..  Is.  xxiii.  17,  where 


H  meano  "  commerce,"  and  N'ah.  iii.  4,  where  it  is  eqnl 
valent  to  "crafty  policy,"  Just  as  in  2  K.  ix  22  the  parallel 
word  is  "  witchcrafts  " 


254 


MARTHA 


\ria-fdp :  Marsana),  one  of  the  seven  prince?,  of 
Persia,  "  wise  men  which  knew  the  times,"  which 
saw  the  king's  face  and  sat  first  in  the  kingdom 
(Esth.  i.  14).  According  to  Josephiis  they  had 
the  office  of  interpreters  of  the  laws  (Ant,  xi. 
«,  §D. 

MARTHA  (Mdp0a:   Martha).     This  name 
which  does  not  appear  in  the  0.  T.,  belongs  to  th 
later  Aramaic,  and  is  the  feminine  form  of  V 
Lord.     We  first  meet  with  it  towards  the  close  c 
the  2nd  century  B.C.     Marius,  the  Roman  dictate] 
was  attended  by  a  Syrian   or  Jewish  prophetes, 
Martha  during  the  Numidian  war  and  in  his  cam 
paign  against  the  Cimbri  (Plutarch,  Marius,  xvii/ 
Of  the  Martha  of  the  N.  T.  there  is  comparative! 
little  to  be  said.     What  is  known  or  conjectured  as 
to  the  history  of  the  family  of  which  she  was 
member  may  be  seen  under  LAZARUS.     The  facts 
tecorded  in  Luke  x.  and  John  xi.  indicate  a  cha 
racter  devout  after  the  customary  Jewish  type  o 
devotion,  sharing  in  Messianic  hopes  and  acceptiu, 
Jesus  as  the  Christ ;  sharing  also  in  the  popula 
belief  in  a   resurrection    (John  xi.  24),  but  no 
rising,  as  her  sister  did,  to  the  belief  that  Chris 
was  making  the  eternal  life  to  belong,  not  to  th< 
future  only,  but  to  the  present.     When  she  fii-s 
comes  before  us  in  Luke  x.  38,  as  receiving  he 
Lord  into  her  house  (it  is   uncertain  whether  a 
Bethany  or  elsewhere),  she  loses  the  calmness  o 
her  spirit,  is  "  cumbered  with  much  serving,"  is 
"  careful  and  troubled  about  many  things."     Sh< 
is  indignant  that  her  sister  and  her  Lord  care  so 
little  for  that  for  which  she  cares  so  much.     Shi 
needs  the  reproof  "  one  thing  is  needful ;"  but  hei 
love,  though  imperfect  in  its  form,  is  yet  recognisec 
as  true,  and  she  too,  no  less  than  Lazarus  and  Mary, 
has  the  distinction  of  being  one  whom  Jesus  loved 
(John  xi.  3).    Her  position  here,  it  may  be  noticed, 
is  obviously  that  of  the  elder  sister,  the  head  and 
manager  of  the  household.     It  has  been  conjectured 
that  she  was  the  wife  or  widow  of  "  Simon  the 
leper  "  of  Matt.  xxvi.  6  and  Mark  xiv.  3  (Schulthess, 
in  Winer,  Rwb.;  Paulus,  in  Meyer,  in  loo. ;  Greswell, 
Diss.  on  Village  of  Martha  and  Mary).     The  same 
character  shows  itself  in  the  history  of  John  xi. 
She  goes  to  meet  Jesus  as  soon  as  she  hears  that 
He  is  coming,  turning  away  from  all  the  Pharisees 
ind  rulers  who  had  come  with  their  topics  of  con 
solation  (ver.  19,  20).      The  same  spirit  of  com 
plaint  that  she  had  shown  before  finds  utteiance 
again  (ver.  21),  but  there  is  now,  what  there  was 
not  before,  a  fuller  faith  at  once  in  His  wisdom 
and  His  power  (ver.  22).     And  there  is  in  that 
sorrow  an  education  for  her  as  well  as  for  others. 
She  rises  from  the  formula  of  the  Pharisee's  creed 
to  the  confession  which  no  "  flesh  and  blood,"  no 
human  traditions,  could  have  revealed  to  her  (ver. 
24-27).     It  was  an  immense  step  upward  fiom  the 
dull  stupor  of  a  grief  which  refused  to  be  comforted, 
that,  without  any  definite  assurance  of  an  imme 
diate  resurrection,  she  should  now  think  of  her 
brother   as   living  still,  never  dying,  because  he 
had  believed  in  Christ.     The  transition  from  vain 
fruitless  regrets  to  this  assured  faith,  accounts  it 
may  be  for  the  words  spoken  by  her  at  the  sepulchre 
'ver.  39).     We  judge  wrongly  of  her  if  we  see  in 


a  The  form  of  the  expression  "  Mary  of  Clopas," 
'  Mary  of  James,"  iu  Its  more  colloquial  form  "  Clopas' 
Mary,"  "James"  Mary"  is  familiar  to  every  one  ac 
quainted  with  English  village  life.  It  is  still  a  common 
fhlng  for  the  unmarried,  and  sometimeg  for  the  married 


MARY  OP  CLEOPHA8 

them  the  utterance  of  an  impatient  or  desponding 
unbelief.  The  thought  of  that  true  victory  over 
death  has  comforted  her,  and  she  is  no  longer  ex 
pecting  that  the  power  of  the  eternal  life  will  show 
itself  in  the  renewal  of  the  earthly.  The  wonder 
that  followed,  no  less  than  the  tears  which  pre 
ceded,  taught  her  how  deeply  her  Lord  sympathised 
with  the  passionate  human  sorrows  of  which  Ho 
imu  seemed  to  her  so  unmindful.  It  taught  her, 
as  it  teaches  us,  that  the  eternal  life  in  which  she 
had  learnt  to  believe  was  no  absorption  of  the  indi 
vidual  being  in  that  of  the  spirit  of  the  universe — 
that  it  recognised  and  embraced  all  true  and  pure 
affections. 

Her  name  appears  once  again  in  the  N.  T.  She 
is  present  at  the  supper  at  Bethany  as  "  serving  " 
(John  xii.  2).  The  old  character  shows  itself  still, 
but  it  has  been  freed  from  evil.  She  is  no  longer 
"  cumbered,"  no  longer  impatient.  Activity  has 
been  calmed  by  trust.  When  other  voices  are  raised 
against  her  sister's  overflowing  love,  hers  is  not 
heard  among  them. 

The  traditions  connected  with  Martha  have  been 
already  mentioned.  [LAZARUS.]  She  goes  with 
her  brother  and  other  disciples  to  Marseilles,  gathers 
round  her  a  society  of  devout  women,  and,  true  to 
her  former  character,  leads  them  to  a  life  of  active 
ministration.  The  wilder  Provencal  legends  make 
her  victorious  over  a  dragon  that  laid  waste  the 
country.  The  town  of  Tarascon  boasted  of  possess 
ing  her  remains,  and  claimed  her  as  its  patron-saint 
(Acta  Sanctorum,  and  Brev.  Rom.  in  Jul.  29  ; 
Fabricii,  Lux  Evangel,  p.  388).  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY  OF  CLEOPHAS.  So  in  A.  V.,  but 
accurately  "  of  CLOPAS  "  (Map/a  q  rov  KAanra). 
[n  St.  John's  Gospel  we  read  that  "  there  stood 
the  cross  of  Jesus  His  mother,  and  His  mother's 
sister,  Mary  of  Clopas,  and  Mary  Magdalene  " 
(John  xix.  25).  The  same  group  of  women  \> 
described  by  St.  Matthew  as  consisting  of  Mai') 
Magdalene,  and  Mary  of  James  and  Joses,  and 
.he  mother  of  Zebedee's  children"  (Matt,  xrvii. 
56) ;  and  by  St.  Mark,  as  "  Mary  Magdalene,  and 
Hary  of  James  the  Little  and  of  Joses,  and  Sa- 
ome"*  (Mark  xv.  40).  From  a  comparison  of 
.hese  passages,  it  appears  that  Mary  of  Clopas,  and 
tfary  of  James  the  Little  and  of  Joses,  are  the  same 
>erson,  and  that  she  was  the  sister  of  St.  Maiy  the 

irgin.  The  arguments,  preponderating  on  the 
ffirmative  side,  for  this  Mary  being  (according  to 
he  A.  V.  translation),  the  wife  of  Clopas  or  Al- 
ihaeus,  and  the  mother  of  James  the  Little,  Joses, 

ude,  Simon,  and  their  sisters,  have  been  given 
under  the  heading  JAMES.  There  is  an  apparent 
ifficulty  in  the  fact  of  two  sisters  seeming  to 
>ear  the  name  of  Mary.  To  escape  this  difficulty, 
t  has  been  suggested  (1)  that  the  two  clauses  "  his 
mother's  sister"  and  "  Mary  of  Clopas,"  are  not  in 
pposition,  and  that  St.  John  meant  to  designate  four 
arsons  as  present — namely,  the  mother  of  Jesus; 
er  sister,  to  whom  he  does  not  assign  any  name ; 
lary  of  Clopas;  and  Mary  Magdalene  (Lange). 
nd  it  has  been  further  suggested  that  this  sister's 
ame  was  Salome,  wife  of  Zebedee  (Wieseler).  This 

avoiding,  not  solving  a  dirticulty.  tt.  John  could 
ot  have  expressed  himself  as  he  does  had  he  meant 

omen  of  the  labouring  clauses  in  a  country  town  or 
lloge,  to  be  distinguished  from  their  namesakes,  not 
y  their  surnames,  but  by  the  name  of  their  fattier  m 
isband,  or  son,  e.g-  "William's  Mary,"  "John's 
ary,"  &J. 


MARY  OF  CLEOPHAS 

more  than  three  persons.  It  has  been  suggested 
(2)  that  the  word  o5eA<f>^  is  not  here  to  be  taken  iu 
,ts  strict  sense,  but  rather  in  the  hxer  acceptation, 
which  it  clearly  does  bear  in  other  places.  Mary, 
wife  of  Clopas,  it  has  been  said,  was  not  the  sister, 
but  the  cousin  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin  (see  Words 
worth,  Gk.  Test.,  Preface  to  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James).  There  is  nothing  in  this  suggestion  which 
is  objectionable,  or  which  can  be  disproved.  But  it 
appears  unnecessary  and  unlikely:  unnecessary,  be 
cause  the  fact  of  two  sisters  having  the  same  name, 
though  unusual,  is  not  singular ;  and  unlikely,  be 
cause  we  find  the  two  families  so  closely  united — 
living  together  in  the  same  house,  and  moving  about 
together  from  place  to  place — that  we  are  disposed 
rather  to  consider  them  connected  by  the  nearer  than 
the  more  distant  tie.  That  it  is  far  from  impossible 
for  two  sisters  *.<•  have  the  same  name,  may  be  seen 
by  any  one  who  will  cast  his  eye  over  Betham's  Ge 
nealogical  Tables.  To  name  no  others,  his  eye  will 
at  once  light  on  a  pair  of  Antonias  and  a  piir  of 
Octavias,  the  daughters  of  the  same  father,  and  in 
one  case  of  different  mothers,  in  the  other  of  the 
same  mother.  If  it  be  objected  that  these  are  merely 
gentilic  names,  another  table  will  give  two  Cleo- 
patras.  It  is  quite  possible  too  that  the  same  cause 
which  operates  at  present  in  Spain,  may  have  been 
at  work  formerly  in  Judea.  MIRIAM,  the  sister  of 
Moses,  may  have  been  the  holy  woman  after  whom 
Jewish  mothers  called  their  daughters,  just  as  Spanish 
mothers  not  unfrequently  give  the  name  of  Mary  to 
their  children,  male  and  female  alike,  in  honour  of 
St.  Mary  the  Virgin.b  This  is  on  the  hypothesis 
that  the  two  names  are  identical,  but  on  a  close 
examination  of  the  Greek  text,  we  find  that  it  is 
possible  that  this  was  not  the  case.  St  Mary  the 
Virgin  is  Mapid/j. ;  her  sister  is  Mapio.  It  is  more 
than  possible  that  these  names  are  the  Greek  repre 
sentatives  of  two  forms  which  the  antique  D" 
had  then  taken  ;  and  as  in  pronunciation,  the  em 
phasis  would  have  been  thrown  on  the  last  syllable 
in  Mopioju,  while  the  final  letter  in  Mapla  would 
have  been  almost  unheard,  there  would,  upon  this 
hypothesis,  have  been  a  greater  difference  in  the 
sisters'  names  than  there  is  between  Mary  and 
Maria  among  ourselves.0 

Mary  of  Clopas  was  probably  the  elder  sister 
of  the  Lord's  mother.  It  would  seem  that  she 
had  married  Clopas  or  Alphaeus  while  her  sister 
was  still  a  girl.  She  had  four  sons,  and  at  least 
three  daughters.  The  names  of  the  daughters  are 
unknown  to  us:  those  of  the  sons  are  James, 
Joses,  Jude,  Simon,  two  of  whom  became  enrolled 
among  the  twelve  apostles  [JAMES],  and  a  third 
(Simon),  may  have  succeeded  his  brother  in  the 
charge  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem.  Of  Joses  and 
the  daughters  we  know  nothing.  Mary  herself  is 
brought  before  us  for  the  first  time  on  the  day  of 
the  Crucifixion— in  the  parallel  passages  already 
quoted  from  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark,  and  St.  John 
In  the  evening  of  the  same  day  we  find  hei  sitting 
desolately  at  the  tomb  with  Mary  Magdalene  (Matt, 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


255 


b  Maria,  Maria-Pla,  and  Maria-Immacolata,  are  the 
Erst  names  of  three  of  the  sisters  of  the  late  king  of  the 
Two  Sicilies. 

c  The  ordinary  explanation  that  Mapiofi  is  the  Hebraic 
form,  and  Mapta  the  Greek  form,  and  that  the  difference 
is  in  the  use  of  the  Evangelists,  not  in  the  name  itself 
soems  scarcely  adequate :  for  why  should  the  Evangelists 
Invariably  employ  the  Hebraic  form  when  writing  of  St 
Mary  the  Virgin,  and  tbs  Greek  form  when  writing  abov ' 


xvii.  61  ;  Mark  xv.  47),  and  at  the  dawn  of  Eastei 
norning  she  was  again  there  with  swec-t  spices, 
which  she  had  prepared  on  the  Friday  night  (Matt. 
xxviii.  1 ;  Mark  xvi.  1  ;  Luke  xxiii.  5C),  and  was  on* 
of  those  who  had  "  a  vision  of  angels,  which  said 
,hat  He  was  alive  "  (Luke  xxiv.  23).  These  are  all 
;he  glimpses  that  we  have  of  her.  Clopas  or  Al- 
>haeus  is  not  mentioned  at  all,  except  as  designating 
Mary  and  James.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  dead 
>efore  the  ministry  of  our  Lord  commenced.  Joseph 
the  husband  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin,  was  likewise 
dead  ;  and  the  two  widowed  sisters,  as  was  natuni. 
)oth  for  comfort  and  for  protection,  were  in  the 
custom  of  living  together  in  one  house.  Thus  the 
;wo  families  came  to  be  regarded  as  OLB,  and  the 
children  of  Mary  and  Clopas  were  called  the  brothers 
and  sisters  of  Jesus.  How  soon  the  two  sisters  com 
menced  living  together  cannot  be  known.  It  ia 
possible  that  her  sister's  house  at  Nazareth  was  St. 
Mary's  home  at  the  time  of  her  marriage,  for  we 
never  hear  of  the  Virgin's  parents.  Or  it  may  have 
been  on  their  return  from  Egypt  to  Nazareth  that 
Joseph  and  Mary  took  up  their  residence  with 
Mary  and  Clopas.  But  it  is  more  likely  that 
the  union  of  the  two  households  took  place  after 
the  death  of  Joseph  and  of  Clopas.  In  the  second 
year  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  we  find  that  they  had 
been  so  long  united  as  to  be  considered  one  by  their 
fellow  townsmen  (Matt.  xiii.  55)  and  other  Gali 
leans  (Matt.  xii.  47).  At  whatever  period  it  was 
that  this  joint  housekeeping  commenced,  it  would 
seem  to  have  continued  at  Nazareth  (Matt.  xiii.  55) 
and  at  Capernaum  (John  ii.  12),  and  elsewhere,  till 
St.  John  took  St.  Mary  the  Virgin  to  his  own  home 
in  Jerusalem,  A.D.  30.  After  this  time  Mary  of 
Clopas  would  probably  have  continued  living  with 
St.  James  the  Little  and  her  other  children  at  Jeru 
salem  until  her  death.  The  fact  of  her  name  being 
omitted  on  all  occasions  on  which  her  children  and 
her  sister  are  mentioned,  save  only  on  the  days  of 
the  Crucifixion  and  the  Resurrection,  would  indi 
cate  a  retiring  disposition,  or  perhaps  an  advanced  age. 
That  his  cousins  were  older  than  Jesus,  and  conse 
quently  that  their  mother  was  the  elder  sister  of  the 
Virgin,  may  be  gathered  as  likely  from  Mark  iii. 
21,  as  it  is  not  probable  that  if  they  hnd  been 
younger  than  Jesus,  they  would  have  ventured  to 
have  attempted  to  interfere  by  force  with  Him  for 
over-exerting  Himself,  as  they  thought,  in  the  pro 
secution  of  His  ministry.  We  may  note  that  the 
Gnostic  legends  of  the  early  ages,  and  the  me 
diaeval  fables  and  revelations  alike  refuse  to  acknow 
ledge  the  existence  of  a  sister  of  St.  Mary,  as 
interfering  with  the  miraculous  conception  and 
birth  of  the  latter.  [F.  M.] 

MARY  MAG'DALENE  (Mopfa  rj  Ma7So- 
\tiv)i  :  Maria  Magdalene).  Four  different  expla 
nations  have  been  given  of  this  name.  (1)  That 
which  at  first  suggests  itself  as  the  most  natural, 
that  she  came  from  the  town  of  Magdala.  The 
statement  that  the  women  with  whom  she  jour 
neyed,  followed  Jesus  in  Galilee  (Mark  xv.  41), 


all  the  other  Maries  in  the  Gospel  history?  It  is  true 
that  this  distinction  is  not  constantly  observed  in  the 
readings  of  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  the  Codex  Ephraemi, 
and  a  few  other  MSS. ;  but  there  is  sufficient  agreement 
in  the  majority  of  the  Codices  to  determine  the  usage. 
That  it  is  possible  for  a  name  to  develop  into  several 
kindred  forms,  and  for  these  forms  to  be  cons  dered  suffi 
ciently  distinct  appellations  for  two  or  more  brothers  01 
sisters,  is  evidenced  by  our  daily  experience. 


256 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


agrees  w.th  thjs  notion.  (2)  Another  explana 
tion  has  been  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Talmudic 
writers  in  their  calumnies  against  the  Nazarenes  make 
mention  of  a  Miriam  Megaddela  (HT1313),  and 
deriving  that  word  from  the  Piel  of  7*13,  to  twine, 
explain  it  as  meaning  "  the  twiner  or  plaiter  of 
hair."  They  connect  with  this  name  a  story  which 
will  be  mentioned  later ;  but  the  derivation  has 
been  accepted  by  Lightfoot  (ffor.  Heb.  on  Matt. 
xxvi.  56 ;  Harm.  Evang.  on  Luke  viii.  3)  as  satis 
factory,  and  pointing  to  the  previous  worldliness  of 
"  Miriam  with  the  braided  locks,"  as  identical  with 
"  the  woman  that  was  a  sinner"  of  Luke  vii.  37. 
It  has  been  urged  in  favour  of  this,  that  tke  rj 
Ka\»ufjif'.-7)  of  Luke  viii.  3,  implies  something  pe 
culiar,  and  is  not  used  where  the  word  that  follows 
points  only  to  origin  or  residence.  (3)  Either  se 
riously,  or  with  the  patristic  fondness  for  parono 
masia,  Jerome  sees  in  her  name,  and  in  that  of  her 
town,  the  old  Migdol  (=  a  watch-tower),  and 
dwells  on  the  coincidence  accordingly.  The  name 
denotes  the  stedfastness  of  her  faith.  She  is  "  vere 
irvpyir-ns,  vere  tun-is  candoris  et  Libani,  quae  pros- 
picit  in  faciem  Damasci  "  (Epist.  ad  Principiarn).* 
He  is  followed  in  this  by  later  Latin  writers,  and 
the  pnn  forms  the  theme  of  a  panegyric  sermon  by 
Odo  of  Clugni  (Acta  Sanciontm,  Antwerp,  1727, 
July  12).  (4)  Origen,  lastly,  looking  to  the  more 

common  meaning  of  7T3  (gddal,  to  be  great),  sees 
in  her  name  a  prophecy  of  her  spiritual  greatness 
as  having  ministered  to  the  Lord,  and  been  the  first 
witness  of  His  resurrection  (Tract,  in  Matt.  xxxv.). 
It  will  be  well  to  get  a  firm  standing-ground  in  the 
tacts  that  are  definitely  connected  in  the  N.  T. 
with  Mary  Magdalene  before  entering  on  the  per 
plexed  and  bewildering  conjectures  that  gather  round 
her  name. 

I.  She  comes  before  us  for  the  first  time  in  Luke 
viii.  2.  It  was  the  custom  of  Jewish  women 
(Jerome  on  1  Cor.  ix.  5)  to  contribute  to  the  sup 
port  of  Kabbis  whom  they  reverenced,  and  in  con 
formity  with  that  custom,  there  were  among  the 
disciples  of  Jesus,  women  who  "ministered  unto 
Him  of  their  substance."  All  appear  to  have  occu 
pied  a  position  of  comparative  wealth.  With  all 
the  chief  motive  was  that  of  gratitude  for  their  de 
liverance  from  "  evil  spirits  and  infirmities."  Of 
Mary  it  is  said  specially  that  "  seven  devils  ($0.1/16- 
via}  went  out  of  her,"  and  the  number  indicates,  as 
in  Matt.  xii.  45,  and  the  "  Legion  "  of  the  Gadarene 
demoniac  (Mark  v.  9),  a  possession  of  more  than 
ordinary  malignity.  We  must  think  of  her,  accord 
ingly  as  having  had,  in  their  most  aggravated  fonns, 
some  of  the  phenomena  of  mental  and  spiritual 
disease  which  we  meet  with  in  other  demoniacs,  the 
wretchedness  of  despair,  the  divided  consciousness, 
the  preternatural  frenzy,  the  long-continued  fits  of 
silence.  The  appearance  of  the  same  description  in 
Mark  xvi.  9  (whatever  opinion  we  may  form  as  to 
the  authorship  of  the  closing  section  of  that  Gospel), 
indicates  that  this  was  the  fact  most  intimately  con 
nected  with  her  name  in  the  minds  of  the  early 
disciples.  From  that  state  of  misery  she  had  been 
set  free  by  the  presence  of  the  Healer,  and,  in  the 
absence,  as  we  may  infer,  of  other  ties  and  duties, 
she  found  her  safety  and  her  blessedness  in  follow 
ing  Him.  The  eilence  of  the  Gospels  as  to  the  pre- 

"  The  writer  Is  indebted  for  this  quotation,  and  for  one 
or  two  references  in  the  course  of  the  article,  to  the  kind- 
r,.,,,  of  Mr.  W.  A.  Wright. 


MARY  MAGDALENE 

sence  of  these  women  at  other  periods  ot  the  Lord's 
ministry,  makes  it  probable  that  they  attended  on 
Him  chiefly  in  His  more  solemn  progresses  through 
the  towns  and  villages  of  Galilee,  while  at  other 
times  he  journeyed  to  and  fro  without  any  other 
attendants  than  the  Twelve,  and  sometimes  without 
even  them.  Jn  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  to 
which  so  many  had  been  looking  with  eager  expec 
tation,  they  again  accompanied  Him  (Matt,  xxvii. 
55 ;  Mark  xv.  41 ;  Luke  xxiii.  55,  xxiv.  10).  It 
will  explain  much  that  follows  if  we  remember 
that  this  life  of  ministration  must  have  brought 
Mary  Magdalene  into  companionship  of  the  closest 
nature  w'th  Salome  the  mother  of  James  and  John 
(Mark  xv.  40),  and  even  also  with  Mary  the  mothej 
of  the  Lord  (John  xix.  25).  The  women  who  thus 
devoted  themselves  are  not  prominent  in  the  his 
tory  :  we  have  no  record  of  their  mode  of  life,  or 
abode,  or  hopes  or  fears  during  the  few  momentous 
days  that  preceded  the  crucifixion.  From  that  hour, 
they  come  forth  for  a  brief  two  days'  space  into 
marvellous  distinctness.  They  "  stood  afar  off,  be 
holding  these  things"  (Luke  xxiii.  49)  during  the 
closing  hours  of  the  Agony  on  the  Cross.  Mary 
Magdalene,  Mary  the  mother  of  the  Lord,  and  the 
beloved  disciple  were  at  one  time  not  atar  off,  but 
close  to  the  cross,  within  hearing.  The  same  close 
association  which  drew  them  together  there  is  seen 
afterwards.  She  remains  by  the  cross  till  all  is 
over,  waits  till  the  body  is  taken  down,  and  wrapped 
in  the  linen-cloth  and  placed  in  the  garden-sepulchre 
of  Joseph  of  Arimathea.  She  remains  there  in 
the  dusk  of  the  evening  watching  what  she  must 
have  looked  on  as  the  final  resting-place  of  tin- 
Prophet  and  Teacher  whom  she  had  honoured  (Matt, 
xxvii.  61 ;  Mark  xv.  47  ;  Luke  xxiii.  55).  Not  to 
her  had  there  been  given  the  hope  of  the  Resurrec 
tion.  The  disciples  to  whom  the  words  that  sooke 
of  it  had  been  addressed  had  failed  to  understand 
them,  and  were  not  likely  to  have  reported  them  to 
her.  The  sabbath  that  followed  brought  an  enforced 
rest,  but  no  sooner  is  the  sunset  over  than  she,  with 
Salome  and  Mary  the  mother  of  James,  "  brought 
sweet  spices  that  they  might  come  and  anr.int"  the 
body,  the  interment  of  which  on  the  night  of  the 
crucifixion  they  looked  on  as  hasty  and  provisional 
(Mark  xvi.  1). 

The  next  morning  accordingly,  in  the  earliest 
dawn  (Matt,  xxviii.  1 ;  Mark  xvi.  2)  they  come 
with  Mary  the  mother  of  James,  to  the  sepulchre. 
It  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  here  into  the 
harmonistic  discussions  which  gather  round  the 
history  of  the  Resurrection.  As  far  as  they  connect 
themselves  with  the  name  of  Mary  Magdalene,  the 
one  fact  which  St.  John  records  is  that  of  the 
chiefest  interest.  She  had  been  to  the  tomb  and  had 
found  it  empty,  had  seen  the  "vision  of  angels" 
(Matt,  xxviii.  5  ;  Mark  xvi.  5).  To  her,  however, 
after  the  first  moment  of  joy,  it  had  seemed  to  be 
but  a  vision.  She  went  with  her  cry  of  sorrow  to 
Peter  and  John  (let  us  remember  that  Salome  had 
been  with  her),  "  they  have  taken  away  the  Lord 
out  of  the  sepulchre,  and  we  know  not  where  they 
have  laid  Him  '"  (John  xx.  1,  2).  But  she  returns 
there.  She  follows  Peter  nnH  John,  rind  vfmnins 
when  they  go  back.  The  one  thought  that  fills  hei 
mind  is  still  that  the  body  is  not  there.  She  has 
been  robbed  of  that  task  of  reverential  love  on  which 
ehe  had  set  her  heart.  The  words  of  the  angels 
can  call  out  no  other  answer  than  that — "  They 
have  taken  away  my  Lord,  and  I  know  not  where 
they  have  laid  Him"  (John  «.  13").  Thi»  intense 


MARY  MAGDALENE 

brooding  over  one  fixed  thought  was,  wo  may  ven 
ture  to  say,  to  one  who  had  suffered  as  sli«  had 
suffered,  full  of  special  danger,  and  called  tor  a 
special  discipline.  The  spirit  must  be  raised  out 
of  its  blank  despair,  or  else  the  "  seven  devils " 
might  oome  in  once  again,  and  the  List  state  be 
wo1  se  than  the  first.  The  uttei  stupor  of  grief  is 
shown  in  her  want  of  power  to  recognise  at  first 
eilhar  the  voice  or  the  form  of  the  Lord  to  whom 
she  had  ministeied  (John  xx.  14,  1-5).  At  last  her 
own  name  uttered  by  that  voice  as  she  had  heard  it 
uttered,  it  may  be,  in  the  hour  of  her  deepest  misery, 
recalls  her  to  consciousness ;  and  then  follows  the 
cry  of  recognition,  with  the  strongest  word  of  re 
verence  which  a  woman  of  Israel  could  use,  "  IJab- 
boni,"  and  the  rush  forward  to  cling  to  His  feet. 
That,  however,  is  not  the  discipline  she  needs. 
Her  love  had  been  too  dependent  on  the  visible 
presence  of  her  Master.  She  had  the  same  lesson 
to  learn  as  the  other  disciples.  Though  they  had 
"  known  Christ  after  the  flesh,"  they  were  "  hence- 
...  forth  to  know  Him  so  no  more."  She  was  to  hear 
that  truth  in  its  highest  and  sharpest  form.  "  Touch 
me  not,  for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my  Father." 
For  a  time,  till  the  earthly  affection  had  been 
raised  to  a  heavenly  one,  she  was  to  hold  back. 
When  He  had  finished  His  work  and  had  ascended 
to  the  Father,  there  should  be  no  barrier  then  to 
the  fullest  communion  that  the  most  devoted  love 
could  crave  for.  Those  who  sought,  might  draw 
near  and  touch  Him  then.  lie  would  be  one  with 
them,  and  they  one  with  Him. — It  was  fit  that 
this  should  be  the  last  mention  of  Mary.  The  Evan 
gelist,  whose  position,  as  the  son  of  Salome,  must 
have  given  him  the  fullest  knowledge  at  once  of 
the  facts  of  her  after-history,  and  of  her  inmost 
thoughts,  bore  witness  by  his  silence,  in  this  case 
as  in  that  of  Lazarus,  to  the  truth  that  lives,  such 
as  thcii-s,  were  thenceforth  "hid  with  Christ  in 
God." 

II.  What  follows  will  show  how  great  a  contrast 
there  is  between  the  spirit  in  which  he  wrote  and 
that  which  shows  itself  in  the  later  traditions. 
Out  of  these  few  facts  there  rise  a  multitude  of 
wild  conjectures;  and  with  these  there  has  been 
constructed  a  whole  romance  of  hagiology. 

The  questions  which  meet  us  connect  themselves 
with  the  narratives  in  the  four  Gospels  of  women 
who  came  with  precious  ointment  to  anoint  the 
feet  or  the  head  of  Jesus.  Each  Gospel  contains 
an  account  of  one  such  anointing ;  and  men  have 
asked,  in  endeavouring  to  construct  a  harmony, 
"  Do  they  tell  us  of  four  distinct  acts,  or  of  three, 
or  of  two,  or  of  one  only?  On  any  supposition 
but  the  last,  are  the  distinct  acts  performed  by 
the  same  or  by  different  persons ;  and  if  by  dif 
ferent,  then  by  how  many?  Further,  have  we 
any  grounds  for  identifying  Mary  Magdalene  with 
the  woman  or  with  anj  one  of  the  women  whose 
arts  are  thus  brought  before  us  ?"  This  opens  a 
wide  range  of  possible  combinations,  but  the  limits 
of  the  inquiry  may,  without  much  difficulty,  be  nar 
rowed.  Although  the  opinion  seems  to  have  been 
at  one  time  maintained  (Origen,  Tract,  in  Matt. 
XJJTV.),  few  would  now  hold  that,  Matt.  xxvi.  and 
Mark  xiv.  are  reports  of  two  distinct  events.  Few, 
except  critics  bent  like  Schlciermacher  and  Strauss 


MAKY  MAGDALENE 


257 


on  getting  up  a  case  against  the  historical  veracity 
of  the  Evangelists,  could  persuade  themsel  res  that 
the  narrative  of  Luke  vii.,  differing  as  it  does  in 
well-nigh  every  circumstance,  is  but  a  misplaced 
and  embellished  version  of  the  incident  which  the 
first  two  Gospels  connect  with  the  last  week  o! 
our  Lord's  ministry.  The  supposition  tliat  there 
were  three  anointings  has  found  favour  with  Origen 
(1.  c.)  and  Lightfoot  (Harm.  JEvang.  in  loc.,  and 
ffor.  Heb.  in  Matt,  xxvi.) ;  but  while,  on  the  one 
hand,  it  removed  some  harmonistic  difficulties, 
there  is,  on  the  other,  something  improbable  to 
the  verge  of  being  inconceivable,  in  the  repetition 
within  three  days  of  the  same  scene,  at  the  same 
place,  with  precisely  the  same  murmur  and  the 
same  reproof.  We  are  left  to  the  conclusion 
adopted  by  the  great  majority  of  interpreters,  that 
the  Gospels  record  two  anointings,  one  in  some 
city  unnamed  (Capernaum  or  Nain  have  been 
suggested)  during  our  Lord's  Galilean  ministry 
(Luke  vii.),  the  other  at  Bethany,  before  the  last 
entry  into  Jerusalem  (Matt.  xxvi. ;  Mark  xiv. ; 
John  xii.).  We  come,  then,  to  the  question  whe 
ther  in  these  two  narratives  we  meet  with  one 
woman  or  with  two.  The  one  passage  adduced  for 
the  former  conclusion  is  John  xi.  2.  It  has  been 
urged  (Maldonatus  in  Matt.  xxvi.  and  Joan.  xi.  2, 
Acta  Sanctorum,  July  22nd)  that  the  words  which 
we  find  there  ("It  was  that  Mary  which  anointed 

the    Lord  with  ointment whose  brother 

Lazarus  was  sick ")  could  not  possibly  refer  by 
anticipation  to  the  history  which  was  about  to 
follow  in  ch.  xii.,  and  must  therefore  presuppose 
some  fact  known  through  the  other  Gospels  to  the 
Church  at  large,  and  that  fact,  it  is  inferred,  is 
found  in  the  history  of  Luke  vii.  Against  this  it 
has  been  said  on  the  other  side,  that  the  assump 
tion  thus  made  is  entirely  an  arbitrary  one,  and 
that  there  is  not  the  slightest  trace  of  the  life  of 
Mary  of  Bethany  ever  having  been  one  of  open  and 
flagrant  impurity.b 

There  is,  therefore,  but  slender  evidence  for  the 
assumption  that  the  two  anointings  were  the  acts 
of  one  and  the  same  woman,  and  that  woman  the 
sister  of  Lazarus.  There  is,  if  possible,  still  less 
for  the  identification  of  Mary  Magdalene  with  the 
chief  actor  in  either  history.  (!.")  When  her  name 
appears  in  Luke  viii.  3  there  is  not  one  word  to 
connect  it  with  the  history  that  immediately  pre 
cedes.  Though  possible,  it  is  at  least  unlikely 
that  such  an  one  as  the  "  sinner  "  would  at  once 
have  been  received  as  the  chosen  companion  of 
Joanna  and  Salome  and  have  gone  from  town  to 
town  with  them  and  the  disciples.  Lastly,  the 
description  that  is  given — "  Out  of  whom  wen* 
seven  devils " — points,  as  has  been  stated,  to  a 
form  of  suffering  all  but  absolutely  incompatible 
with  the  life  implied  in  o/xoprwAoj,  and  to  a  very 
different  work  of  healing  from  that  of  the  divine 
words  of  pardon — "Thy  sins  be  forgiven  thee." 
To  say,  as  has  been  said,  that  the  "  seven  devils " 
are  the  "  many  sins "  (Greg.  Mag.  Horn,  in  Evany. 
25  and  53),  is  to  identify  two  things  which  are 
separated  in  the  whole  tenor  of  the  N.  T.  by  the 
clearest  line  of  demarcation.  The  argument  that 
because  Mary  Magdalene  is  mentioned  so  soon 
afterwards  she  must  be  the  same  as  the  woman  i.f 


b  The  difficulty  is  hardly  met  by  the  portentous  con 
jecture  of  one  commentator,  that  the  word  n-naprwAb; 
does  not  meaji  what  it  is  commonly  supposed  to  mean, 
»nd  that  the  "  many  sins"  consisted  chiefly  (as  the  name 
VOL     II. 


Magdalene,  according  to  the  etymology  noticed  above, 
implies)  in  her  giving  too  large  a  portion  of  thp  Sabbat!) 
to  the  braiding  or  plaiting  of  her  hair  (!).  Lamy  Jr> 
[.amp*-  oil  John  xii.  2. 


258 


MARY  MAGDALENE 


Luke  vii.  (Butler's  Lives  of  the  Saints,  July  22), 
is  simply  puerile.  It  would  be  just  as  reasonable 
to  identify  "  the  sinner"  with  Susanna.  Never,  per 
haps,  has  a  figment  so  utterly  baseless  obtained  so 
wide  an  acceptance  as  that  which  we  connect  with 
the  name  of  the  "  penitent  MagJalene."  It  is  to 
je.  regretted  that  the  chapter-heading  of  the  A.  V. 
r,l  Luke  vii.  should  seem  to  give  a  quasi-authori 
tative  sanction  to  a  tradition  so  utterly  uncertain, 
and  that  it  should  have  been  perpetuated  in  con 
nexion  with  a  great  work  of  mercy.  (2.)  The 
belief  that  Mary  of  Bethany  and  Mary  Magdalene 
are  identical  is  yet  more  startling.  Not  one  single 
circumstance,  except  that  of  love  and  reverence  for 
Jheir  Master,  is  common.  The  epithet  Magdalene, 
whatever  may  be  its  meaning,  seems  chosen  for 
*Jie  express  purpose  of  distinguishing  her  from  all 
other  Maries.  No  one  Evangelist  gives  the  slight 
est  hint  of  identity.  St.  Luke  mentions  Martha 
and  her  sister  Mary  in  x.  38,  39,  as  though  neither 
had  been  named  before.  St.  John,  who  gives  the 
fullest  account  of  both,  keeps  their  distinct  indi 
viduality  most  prominent.  The  only  simulacrum 
of  an  argument  on  behalf  of  the  identity  is  that,  if 
we  do  not  admit  it,  we  have  no  record  of  the 
sister  of  Lazarus  having  been  a  witness  of  the 
resurrection. 

Nor  is  this  lack  of  evidence  in  the  N.  T.  itself 
compensated  by  any  such  weight  of  authority  as 
would  indicate  a  really  trustworthy  tradition.  Two 
of  the  earliest  writers  who  allude  to  the  histories  of 
the  anointing — Clement  of  Alexandria  (Paedag.  ii. 
8)  and  Tertullian  (de  Pudic.  ch.  8) — say  nothing 
that  would  imply  that  they  accepted  it.  The  lan 
guage  of  Irenaeus  (iii.  4)  is  against  it.  Origen 
(/.  c.)  discusses  the  question  fully,  and  rejects  it. 
He  is  followed  by  the  whole  succession  of  the  ex 
positors  of  the  Eastern  Church:  Theophilus  of  An- 
tioch,  Macarius,  Chrysostom,  Theophylact.  The 
traditions  of  that  Church,  when  they  wandered 
into  the  regions  of  conjecture,  took  another  direc 
tion,  and  suggested  the  identity  of  Mary  Magdalene 
with  the  daughter  of  the  Syro-Phoenician  woman 
of  Mark  vii.  26  (Nicephorus,'#.  E.  i.  33).  In  the 
Western  Church,-  however,  the  other  belief  began  to 
spread.  At  first  it  is  mentioned  hesitatingly,  as  by 
Ambrose  (de  Virg.  Vel.  and  in  Luc.  lib.  vi.), 
Jerome  (in  Matt.  xxvi.  2 ;  contr.  Jovin.  c.  16). 
Augustine  at  one  time  inclines  to  it  (de  Consens. 
Evang.  c.  69),  at  another  speaks  very  doubtingly 
Tract,  in  Joann.  49).  At  the  close  of  the  first 
great  period  of  Church  history,  Gregory  the  Great 
takes  up  both  notions,  embodies  them  in  his  Homilies 
(inEv.  25, 53),  and  stamps  them  with  his  authority. 
The  reverence  felt  for  him,  and  the  constant  use  of 
his  works  as  a  text-book  of  theology  during  the 
whole  mediaeval  period,  secured  for  the  hypothesis 
a  currency  which  it  never  would  have  gained  on  its 
own  merits.  The  services  of  the  feast  of  St.  Mary 
Magdalene  were  constructed  on  the  assumption  of 
its  truth  (Brev.  Rom.  in  Jul.  22).  Hymns  and 
paintings  and  sculptures  fixed  it  deep  in  the  minds 
of  the  Western  nations,  France  and  England  being 
foremost  in  their  reverence  for  the  saint  whose  his 
tory  appealed  to  their  sympathies.  (See  below.) 
Well-nigh  all  ecclesiastical  writers,  after  the  time  of 
Gregory  the  Great  (Albert  the  Great  and  Thomas 
Aquinas  are  exceptions),  take  it  for  granted.  When 
it  was  first  questioned  by  Fevre  d'Etaples  (Faber 
btapulensis)  in  the  early  Biblical  criticism  of  the 
16th  century,  the  new  opinion  was  formally  con 
demned  by  the  Soi-bonn*  (Acta  Sanctorum,  I.e.), 


MABY  MAGDALENE 

and  denounced  by  Bishop  Fisher  of  Rochester.  The 
Prayer-Book  of  1549  follows  in  the  wake  of  the 
Breviary  ;  but  in  that  of  1552,  either  on  account  of 
the  uncertainty  or  for  other  reasons,  the  feast  dis* 
appears.  The  Book  of  Homilies  gives  a  doubtful 
testimony.  In  one  passage  the  "  sinful  woman  "  is 
mentioned  without  any  notice  of  her  being  the  same 
as  the  Magdalene  (Serm.  on  Repentance,  Part  ii.)  ; 
in  another  it  depends  upon  a  comma  whether  the 
two  are  distinguished  or  identified  (Ibid.  Part  ii.). 
The  translators  under  James  1 .,  as  has  been  stated, 
adopted  the  received  tradition.  Since  that  period 
there  has  been  a  gradually  accumulating  consensus 
against  it.  Calvin,  Grotius,  Hammond,  Casaubou, 
among  older  critics,  Bengel,  Lampe,  Greswell, 
Alford,  Wordsworth,  Stier,  Meyer,  Ellicott,  Ols- 
hausen,  among  later,  agree  in  rejecting  it.  Ro 
manist  writers  even  (Tillemont,  Dupin,  Estius) 
have  borne  their  protest  against  it  in  whole  or  in 
part ;  and  books  that  represent  the  present  teaching 
of  the  Gallican  Church  reject  entirely  the  identifi 
cation  of  the  two  Maries  as  an  unhappy  mistake 
(Migne,  Diet,  de  le  Bible).  The  mediaeval  tradi 
tion  has,  however,  found  defenders  in  Baronius,  the 
writers  of  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  Maldonatus, 
Bishop  Andrewes,  Lightfoot,  Isaac  Williams,  and 
Dr.  Pusey. 

It  remains  to  give  the  substance  of  the  legend 
formal  out  of  these  combinations.  At  some  time 
before  the  commencement  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  a 
great  sorrow  fell  upon  the  household  of  Bethany. 
The  younger  of  the  two  sisters  fell  from  her  purity 
and  sank  into  the  depths  of  shame.  Her  life  was 
that  of  one  possessed  by  the  "  seven  devils  "  of  un- 
cleanness.  From  the  city  to  which  she  then  went, 
or  from  her  harlot-like  adornments,  she  was  known 
by  the  new  name  of  Magdalene.  Then  she  hears  ot 
the  Deliverer,  and  repents  and  loves  and  is  forgiven. 
Then  she  is  received  at  once  into  the  fellowship  o! 
the  holy  women  and  ministers  to  the  Lord,  and  is 
received  back  again  by  her  sister  and  dwells  with 
her,  and  shows  that  she  has  chosen  the  good  part. 
The  death  of  Lazarus  and  his  return  to  life  are  new 
motives  to  her  gratitude  and  love ;  and  she  shows 
them,  as  she  had  shown  them  before,  anointing  no 
longer  the  feet  only,  but  the  head  also  of  her  Lord. 
She  watches  by  the  cross,  and  is  present  at  the 
sepulchre  and  witnesses  the  resurrection.  Then 
(the  legend  goes  on,  when  the  work  of  fantastic 
combination  is  completed),  after  some  years  of 
waiting,  she  goes  with  Lazarus  and  Martha  and 
Maximin  (one  of  the  Seventy)  to  Marseilles  [comp. 
LAZARUS].  They  land  there;  and  she,  leaving 
Martha  to  more  active  work,  retires  to  a  cave  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Aries,  and  there  leads  a  life  of 
penitence  for  thirty  years.  When  she  dies  a  church 
is  built  in  her  honour,  and  miracles  are  wrought 
at  her  tomb.  Clovis  the  Frank  is  healed  by  her 
intercession,  and  his  new  faith  is  strengthened  ;  nnd 
the  chivalry  of  Fi-ance  does  homage  to  her  name  as> 
to  that  of  the  greater  Mary. 

Such  was  the  full-grown  form  of  the  Western 
story.  In  the  East  there  was  a  different  tradition. 
Nicephorus  (H.  E.  ii.  10)  states  that  she  went  tc 
Rome  to  accuse  Pilate  for  his  unrighteous  judg 
ment;  Modestus,  patriarch  of  Constantinople  (Horn. 
in  Marias'),  that  she  came  to  Ephesus  with  the 
Virgin  and  St.  John,  and  died  and  was  buried 
there.  The  Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher  (circ. 
890)  brought  her  body  from  that  city  to  Constan 
tinople  (Acta  Sanctorum,  1.  c.). 

The   name   appears   to    have  been   couspicuow 


MARY,  MOTHER  OF  MARK 

UK.iu.'h,  either  among  the  living  members  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  or  in  their  written  records, 
V>  attract  the  notice  of  their  Jewish  opponents. 
The  Talmndists  record  a  tradition,  confused  enough, 
that  Stada  or  Satda,  whom  they  represent  as  the 
mother  of  the  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  was  known  by 
this  name  as  a  "  plaiter  or  twiner  of  hair  ;"  that 
she  was  the  wife  of  Paphus  Ben-Jehudah,  a  con 
temporary  of  Gamaliel,  Joshua,  and  Akiba ;  and 
that  she  grieved  and  angered  him  by  her  wanton 
ness  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt,  xxvi.,  Harm. 
Evang.  on  Luke  viii.  3).  It  seems,  however,  from 
the  fuller  report  given  by  Eisenmenger,  that  there 
were  two  women  to  whom  the  Talmudists  gave 
this  name,  and  the  wife  of  Paphus  is  not  the  one 
whom  they  identified  with  the  Mary  Magdalene  of 
the  Gospels  (Entdecht.  Judenth.  i.  277). 

There  is  lastly  the  strange  supposition  (rising 
out  of  an  attempt  to  evade  some  of  the  harmonistic 
difficulties  of  the  resurrection  history)  that  there 
were  two  women  both  known  by  this  name,  and 
both  among  those  who  went  early  to  the  sepulchre 
(Lampe,  Comm.  in  Joann. ;  Ambrose,  Comm.  in 
Luc.  x.  24).  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY,  MOTHER  OF  MARK.  The  wo 
man  known  by  this  description  must  have  been 
among  the  earliest  disciples.  We  learn  from  Col. 
iv.  10  that  she  was  sister  to  Barnabas,  and  it 
would  appear  from  Acts  iv.  37,  xii.  12,  that, 
while  the  brother  gave  up  his  land  and  brought 
the  proceeds  of  the  sale  into  the  common  treasury 
of  the  Church,  the  sister  gave  up  her  house  to  be 
used  as  one  of  its  chief  places  of  meeting.  The 
fact  that  Peter  goes  to  that  house  on  his  release 
from  prison,  indicates  that  there  was  some  special 
intimacy  (Acts  xii.  12)  between  them,  and  this  is 
confirmed  by  the  language  which  he  uses  towards 
Mark  as  being  his  "  son"  (1  Pet.  v.  13).  She,  it 
may  be  added,  must  have  been  like  Barnabas  of 
the  tribe  of  Levi,  and  may  have  been  connected, 
as  he  was,  with  Cyprus  (Acts  iv.  36).  It  has 
been  surmised  that  filial  anxiety  about  her  welfare 
during  the  persecutions  and  the  famine  which 
harassed  the  whurch  at  Jerusalem,  was  the  chief 
cause  of  Mark's  withdrawal  from  the  missionary 
labours  of  Paul  and  Barnabas.  The  tradition  of 
a  later  age  represented  the  place  of  meeting  for 
the  disciples,  and  therefore  probably  the  house  of 
Mary,  as  having  stood  on  the  upper  slope  of  Zion, 
and  affirmed  that  it  had  been  the  scene  of  the 
wonder  of  the  day  of  Pentecost,  had  escaped  the 
general  destruction  of  the  city  by  Titus,  and  was 
still  used  as  a  church  in  the  4th  century  (Epiphan. 
de  Pond,  et  Metis,  xiv. ;  Cyril  Hierosol.  Catech. 
xvi.).  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY,    SISTER   OF   LAZARUS.      For 

much  of  the  information  connected  with  this  name, 
comp  LAZARUS  and  MARY  MAGDALENE.  The 
tiuits  strictly  personal  to  her  are  but  few.  She  and 
her  sister  Martha,  appear  in  Luke  x.  40,  as  receiving 
Christ  in  their  house.  The  contrasted  tempera 
ments  of  the  two  sisters  have  been  already  in  part 
discussed  [MARTHA].  Mary  sat  listening  eagerly 
for  every  word  that  fell  from  the  Divine  Teacher. 
She  had  chosen  the  good  part,  the  life  that  has 
found  its  unity,  the  "  one  thing  needful,"  in  rising 
from  the  earthly  to  the  heavenly,  no  longer  dis 
tracted  by  the  "  many  things  "  of  earth.  The  same 
character  shows  itself  in  the  history  of  John  xi. 
Her  grief  is  deeper  but  less  active.  She  site  still  in 
the  house.  She  will  not  go  to  nie«-t  the  friends 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


259 


who  come  on  the  formal  visit  of  consolation.  But 
when  her  sister  tells  her  secretly  "  The  Master  is 
coma  and  ealleth  for  thee,"  she  rises  quickly  ana 
goes  forth  at  once  (John  xi.  20,  28).  Those  who 
have  watched  the  depth  of  her  grief  have  but  one 
explanation  for  the  sudden  change :  "  She  goeth  to 
the  grave  to  weep  there  !"  Her  first  thought  when 
she  sees  the  Teacher  in  whose  power  and  love  she 
had  trusted,  is  one  of  complaint.  "She  fell  down 
at  his  feet,  saying,  Lord  if  thou  hadst  been  here, 
my  brother  had  not  died."  Up  to  this  point,  her 
relation  to  the  Divine  Friend  had  been  one  of  reve 
rence,  receiving  rather  than  giving,  blessed  in  the 
consciousness  of  His  favour.  But  the  great  joy  ami 
love  which  her  brother's  return  to  life  calls  ap  in 
her,  pour  themselves  out  in  larger  measure  than 
had  been  seen  before.  The  treasured  alabaster-box 
of  ointment  is  brought  forth  at  the  final  feast  of 
Bethany,  John  xii.  3.  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark 
keep  back  her  name.  St.  John  records  it  as  though 
the  reason  for  the  silence  held  good  no  longer.  Of 
her  he  had  nothing  more  to  tell.  The  education  of 
her  spirit  was  completed.  The  love  which  hail 
been  recipient  and  contemplative  shows  itself  in 
action. 

Of  her  after-history  we  know  nothing.  The 
ecclesiastical  traditions  about  her  are  based  on  the 
unfounded  hypothesis  of  her  identity  with  Mary 
Magdalene.  [E.  H.  P.] 

MARY  THE  VIRGIN  (Mopiifc:  on  the 
form  of  the  name  see  p.  255).  There  is  no  person 
perhaps  in  sacred  or  in  profane  literature,  around 
whom  so  many  legends  have  been  grouped  as  the 
Virgin  Mary ;  and  there  are  few  whose  authentic 
history  is  more  concise.  The  very  simplicity  of 
the  evangelical  record  has  no  doubt  been  one  cause 
of  the  abundance  of  the  legendary  matter  of  which 
she  forms  the  central  figure.  Imagination  had  to 
be  called  in  to  supply  a  craving  which  authentic 
narrative  did  not  satisfy.  We  shall  divide  her  life 
into  three  periods.  I.  The  period  of  her  childhood, 
up  to  the  time  of  the  birth  of  our  Lord.  II.  The 
period  of  her  middle  age  contemporary  with  the 
Bible  record.  Ill,  The  period  subsequent  to  the 
Ascension.  The  first  and  last  of  these  are  wholly 
legendary,  except  in  regard  to  one  fact  mentioned 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  the  second  will  contain 
her  real  history.  For  the  first  period  we  shall 
have  to  rely  on  the  early  apocryphal  gospels  ; 
for  the  second  on  the  Bible ;  for  the  third  on  the 
traditions  and  tales  which  had  an  origin  external  to 
the  Church,  but  after  a  time  were  transplanted 
within  her  boundaries,  and  there  flourished  and 
increased  both  by  the  force  of  natural  growth,  and 
by  the  accretions  which  from  time  to  time  resulted 
from  supposed  visions  and  reflations. 

I.  The  childhood  of  Mary,  wholly  legendary. — 
Joachim  and  Anna  were  both  of  the  race  of  David. 
The  abode  of  the  former  was  Nazareth  ;  the  ktier 
passed  her  early  years  at  Bethlehem.  They  lived 
piously  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  faultlessly  before 
man,  dividing  their  substance  into  three  portions, 
one  of  which  they  devoted  to  the  service  of  the 
temple,  another  to  the  poor,  and  the  third  to  theii 
own  wants.  And  so  twenty  years  of  their  live* 
passed  silently  away.  But  at  the  end  of  this  period 
Joachim  went  to  Jerusalem  with  some  otners  of  his 
tribe,  to  make  his  usual  offering  at  the  Feast  of  the 
Dedication.  And  it  chanced  that  Issachar  was  high- 
pru»t  (Gospel  of  Birth  of  Marj) ,  that  Reuben  was 
high-priest,  (ProtevangelionX  An 3  tho  hi^h- print* 


160 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


scorned  Joachim,  and  drove  him  roughly  away, 
asking  how  he  dared  to  present  himself  in  company 
with  those  who  had  children,  while  he  had  none ; 
and  he  refused  to  accept  his  offerings  until  he 
should  have  begotten  a  child,  for  the  Scripture  said, 
•'  Cursed  is  everv  one  who  does  not  beget  a  man- 
child  in  Israel."  And  Joachim  was  shamed  before 
his  friends  and  neighbours,  and  he  retired  into  the 
wilderness  and  fixed  his  tent  there,  and  fasted  forty 
days  and  forty  nights.  And  at  the  end  of  thi« 
period  an  angel  appeared  to  him,  and  told  him  that 
his  wife  should  conceive,  and  should  bring  forth  a 
daughter,  and  he  should  call  her  name  Mary.  Anna 
meantini"  was  much  distressed  at  her  husband's 
absence,  and  being  reproached  by  her  maid  Judith 
with  her  barrenness,  she  was  overcome  with  grief 
uf  spirit.  And  in  her  sadness  she  went  into  her 
garden  to  walk,  dressed  in  her  wedding-dress.  And 
she  sat  down  under  a  laurel-tree,  and  looked  up  and 
spied  among  the  branches  a  sparrow's  nest,  and  she 
bemoaned  herself  as  more  miserable  than  the  very 
oirds,  for  they  were  fruitful  and  she  was  barren  ; 
and  she  prayed  that  she  might  have  a  child  even  as 
Sarai  was  blessed  with  Isaac.  And  two  angels  ap 
peared  to  her,  and  promised  her  that  she  should 
have  a  child  who  should  be  spoken  of  in  all  the 
world.  And  Joachim  returned  joyfully  to  his  home, 
and  when  the  time  was  accomplished,  Anna  brought 
forth  a  daughter,  and  they  called  her  name  Mary. 
Now  the  child  Mary  increased  in  strength  day  by 
day,  and  at  nine  months  of  age  she  walked  nine 
steps.  And  when  she  was  three  years  old  her  pa 
rents  brought  her  to  the  Temple,  to  dedicate  her  to 
the  Lord.  And  there  were  fifteen  stairs  up  to  the 
Temple,  and  while  Joseph  and  Mary  were  changing 
their  dress,  she  walked  up  them  without  help ;  and 
the  high-priest  placed  her  upon  the  third  step  of 
the  altar,  and  she  danced  with  her  feet,  and  all  the 
house  of  Israel  loved  her.  Then  Mary  remained  at 
the  Temple  until  she  was  twelve  (Prot.)  fourteen  (G. 
B.  M.)  years  old,  ministered  to  by  the  angels,  and 
advancing  in  perfection  as  in  years.  At  this  time 
the  high-priest  commanded  all  the  virgins  that 
were  in  the  Temple  to  return  to  their  homes  and  to 
be  married.  But  Mary  refused,  for  she  said  that  she 
hail  vowed  virginity  to  the  Lord.  Thus  the  high- 
priest  was  brought  into  a  perplexity,  and  he  had 
recourse  to  God  to  enquire  what  he  should  do. 
Then  a  voice  from  the  ark  answered  him  (G.  B. 
M.),  an  angel  spake  unto  him  (Prot.);  and  they 
gathered  together  all  the  widowers  in  Israel  (Prot.), 
all  the  marriageable  men  of  the  house  of  David 
(G.  B.  M.),  and  desired  them  to  bring  each  man 
his  rod.  And  amongst  them  came  Joseph  and 
brought  his  rod,  but  he  shuuned  to  present  it,  be 
cause  he  was  an  old  man  and  had  children.  There 
fore  the  other  rods  were  presented  and  no  sign 
occurred.  Then  it  was  found  that  Joseph  had  not 
presented  his  rod ;  and  behold,  as  soon  as  he  had  pre 
sented  it,  a  dove  came  forth  from  the  rod  and  flew 
upon  the  head  of  Joseph  (Prot.) ;  a  dove  came  from 
Heaven  and  pitched  on  the  rod  (G.  B.  M.).  And 
Joseph,  in  spite  of  his  reluctance,  was  compelled  to 
betroth  himself  to  Mary,  and  he  returned  to  Beth 
lehem  to  make  prsparations  tor  his  marriage  (G.  B. 


*  Three  spots  l»y  claim  to  be  the  scene  of  the  Annun 
ciation.  Two  of  these  are,  as  was  to  be  expected,  in  Na 
zareth,  and  one,  as  every  one  knows.  Is  in  Italy.  The 
Greeks  and  1-atins  each  claim  to  be  the  guardians  of  tiie 
I  me  spot  In  Palestine;  the  third  claimant  Is  the  holy 
house  of  Loretto.  The  Greeks  point  out  tbe  spring  of 
water  mentioned  ii;  the  1'rotcvangelion  as  confirmatory  of 


MAilV  THE  VIRGIN 

M.) ;  he  betook  himself  to  his  occupation  of  building 
houses  (Prot.);  while  Mary  went  back  to  h;r 
parents'  house  in  Galilee.  Then  it  chanced  that  the 
priests  needed  a  new  veil  for  the  Temple,  and  seven 
virgins  cast  lots  to  make  different  parts  of  it ;  and 
the  lot  to  spin  the  true  purple  i'ell  to  Mary.  And 
she  went  out  with  a  pitcher  to  draw  water.  And 
she  heard  a  voice,  saying  unto  her,  "  Hail,  thou 
that  art  highly  favoured,  the  Lord  is  with  thee. 
Blessed  art  thou  among  women !"  and  she  looked 
round  with  trembling  to  see  whence  the  voice  came, 
and  she  laid  down  the  pitcher  and  went  into  the 
house  and  took  the  purple  and  sat  down  to  work 
at  it.  And  behold  the  angel  Gabriel  atood  by  her 
and  filled  the  chamber  with  prodigious  light,  and 
said,  "  Fear  not,"  &c.  And  when  Mary  had  finished 
the  purple,  she  took  it  to  the  high-priest;  and 
having  received  his  blessing,  went  to  visit  her 
cousin  Elizabeth,  and  returned  back  again.*  Then 
Joseph  returned  to  his  home  from  building  houses 
(Prot.) ;  came  into  Galilee,  to  marry  the  Virgin  to 
whom  he  was  betrothed  (G.  B.  M.),  and  finding 
her  with  child,  he  resolved  to  put  her  away  privily  ; 
but  being  warned  in  a  dream,  he  relinquished  his 
purpose,  and  took  her  to  his  house.  Then  came 
Annas  the  scribe  to  visit  Joseph,  and  he  went 
back  and  told  the  priest  that  Joseph  had  committed 
a  great  crime,  for  he  had  privately  married  the 
Virgin  whom  he  had  received  out  of  the  Temple, 
and  had  not  made  it  known  to  the  children  of  Israel. 
And  the  priest  sent  his  servants,  and  they  found 
that  she  was  with  child ;  and  he  called  them  tc 
him,  and  Joseph  denied  that  the  child  was  his,  and 
the  priest  made  Joseph  drink  the  bitter  water  ot 
trial  (Num.  v.  18),  and  sent  him  to  a  mountainous 
place  to  see  what  would  follow.  But  Joseph  re 
turned  in  perfect  health,  so  the  priest  sent  them 
away  to  their  home.  Then  after  three  months  Joseph 
put  Mary  on  an  ass  to  go  to  Bethlehem  to  be  taxed  ; 
and  as  they  were  going,  Mary  besought  him  to  tak« 
her  down,  and  Joseph  took  her  down  and  carried 
her  into  a  cave,  and  leaving  her  there  with  his  sons, 
he  went  to  seek  a  midwife.  And  as  he  went  he 
looked  up,  and  he  saw  the  clouds  astonished  and  all 
creatures  amazed.  The  fowls  stopped  in  their 
flight ;  the  working  people  sat  at  their  food,  but  did 
not  eat ;  the  sheep  stood  still ;  the  shepherds'  lifted 
hands  became  fixed;  the  kids  were  touching  the 
water  with  their  mouths,  but  did  not  drink.  And 
a  midwife  came  down  from  the  mountains,  and 
Joseph  took  her  with  him  to  the  cave,  and  a  bright 
cloud  overshadowed  the  cave,  and  the  cloud  became 
a  great  light,  and  when  the  bright  light  faded, 
there  appeared  an  infant  at  the  breast  of  Mary. 
Then  the  midwife  went  out  and  told  Salome  that  a 
Virgin  had  brought  forth,  and  Salome  would  not 
believe ;  and  they  came  back  again  into  the  cave, 
and  Salome  received  satisfaction,  but  her  hand 
withered  away,  nor  was  it  restored,  until,  by  the 
command  of  an  angel,  she  touched  the  child,  where 
upon  she  was  straightway  cured.  (Giles,  Codes 
Apocryphus  Novi  Testamenti,  pp.  33-47  and  66-81, 
Lond.  1852  ;  Jones,  On  the  New  Testament,  ii.  c. 
xiii.  and  xv.,  Oxf.  1827  ;  Thilo,  Codex  Apocryphus. 
See  also  Vita  gloriuissimae  Matris  Annae  per  F 

their  claim.  The  Latins  have  engraved  on  a  marble  slat 
in  the  grotto  of  their  convent  in  Nazareth  the  words 
\'erbum  hlc  carofactum  ett,  and  point  out  the  pillar  which 
marks  the  spot  where  the  angel  stood ;  whilst  the  Head  ol 
their  Church  is  irretrievably  commuted  to  tlie  wild  legend 
of  Loretto.  (See  Sianley,  S.  <(•  /'.  ch.  liv). 


MARY  THE  \1KG1N 

Petnan  Dorlando,  appended  to  Ludolph  ot  Saxony's 
Vita  Christi,  Lyons,  1642  ;  mid  a  most  audacious 
ffistoria  Christi,  written  ill  Persian  by  the  Jesuit 
P.  Jerome  Xavier,  and  exposed  by  Louis  de  Dieu, 
Liigd.  Bat.  1639). 

II.  The  real  history  of  Mary. — We  now  pass 
from  legend  to  that  period  of  St.  Mary's  life  which 
's  maue  known  to  us  by  Holy  Scripture.  In  order 
to  give  a  single  view  of  all  that  we  know  of  her 
who  was  chosen  to  be  the  mother  of  the  Saviour, 
we  shall  in  the  present  section  put  together  the 
whole  of  her  authentic  history,  supplementing  it 
afterwards  by  the  more  prominent  legendary  cir 
cumstances  which  are  handed  down. 

We  are  wholly  ignorant  of  the  name  and  occupa 
tion  of  St.  Mary's  parents.  If  the  genealogy  given 
by  St.  Luke  is  that  of  St.  Mary  (Greswell,  &c.), 
her  father's  name  was  Heli,  which  is  another  form 
of  the  name  given  to  her  legendary  father,  Je- 
hoiakim  or  Joachim.  If  Jacob  and  Heli  were  the 
two  sons  of  Matthan  or  Matthat,  and  if  Joseph, 
being  the  son  of  the  younger  brother,  married  his 
cousin,  the  daughter  of  the  elder  brother  (Hervey, 
Genealogies  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ),  her  father 
was  Jacob.  The  evangelist  does  not  tell  us,  and 
we  cannot  know.  She  was,  like  Joseph,  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  and  of  the  lineage  of  David  (Ps.  cxxxii. 
11 ;  Luke  i.  32 ;  Rom.  i.  3).  She  had  a  sister,  named 
probably  like  herself,  Mary  (John  six.  25)  [MARY 
OF  CLEOPHAS],  and  she  was  connected  by  marriage 
(trvyyevfo,  Luke  i.  36)  with  Elisabeth,  who  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Levi  and  of  the  lineage  of  Aaron. 
This  is  all  that  we  know  of  her  antecedents. 

In  the  summer  of  the  year  which  is  known 
as  B.C.  5,  Mary  was  living  at  Nazareth,  probably 
at  her  parents' — possibly  at  her  elder  sister's — 
house,  not  having  yet  been  taken  by  Joseph  to  his 
home.  She  was  at  this  time  betrothed  to  Joseph,  and 
was  therefore  regarded  by  the  Jewish  law  and  custom 
as  his  wife,  though  he  had  not  yet  a  husband's 
rights  over  her.  [MARRIAGE,  p.  250, &.]  At  this 
time  the  angel  Gabriel  came  to  her  with  a  message 
from  God,  and  announced  to  her  that  she  was  to 
be  the  mother  of  the  long-expected  Messiah.  He 
probably  bore  the  form  of  an  ordinary  man,  like 
the  angels  who  manifested  themselves  to  Gideon 
and  to  Manoah  (Judg.  vi.,  xiii.).  This  would 
appear  both  from  the  expression  elffeXQ&v,  "  he 
came  in  ;"  and  also  from  the  fact  of  her  being  trou 
bled,  not  at  his  presence,  but  at  the  meaning  of 
his  words.  The  scene  as  well  as  the  salutation  is 
very  similar  to  that  recounted  in  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  "  Then  there  came  again  and  touched  me 
one  like  the  appearance  of  a  man,  and  he  strength 
ened  me,  and  said,  0  man  greatly  beloved,  fear  not: 
peace  be  unto  thee,  be  strong,  yea,  be  strong !" 
(Dan.  x.  18, 19).  The  exact  meaning  of  Kf)(api.r<a- 
jue'n/  is  "thou  that  hast  bestowed  upon  thee  a  free 
gift  ot  grace."  The  A.  V.  rendering  of  "highly 
favoured  "  is  therefore  very  exact  and  much  nearer 
O)  the  original  than  the  "gratia  plena"  of  the 
Vulgate,  on  which  a  huge  and  wholly  unsubstantial 
edifice  has  been  built  by  Romanist  devotional 
writers.  The  next  part  of  the  salutation,  "  The 
Lord  is  with  thee,"  would  probably  have  been 
better  translated,  "  The  Lord  be  with  thee."  It  is 
thf  same  salutation  as  that  with  which  the  angel 
accosts  Gideon  (Judg.  vi.  12).  "  Blessed  art  thou 
among  women,"  is  nearly  the  same  expression  tu> 
that  used  by  Ozias  to  Judith  (Jud.  xiii.  18).  Ga-  \ 
briel  proceeds  to  instruct  Mary  that  by  the  opera- 
•joii  of  the  Holy  Ghost  the  everlasting  Son  of  the 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


261 


Father  should  be  born  of  her ;  that  m  Him  tht 
prophecies  relative  to  David's  throne  and  kingdom 
should  be  accomplished  ;  and  that  His  name  was  to 
be  called  Jesus.  He  further  informs  her,  perhapti 
as  a  sign  by  which  she  might  convince  herself  that 
his  prediction  with  regard  to  herself  would  come1 
true,  that  her  relative  Eliseieth  was  within  th.vtt 
months  of  being  delivered  of  a  child. 

The  angel  left  Mary,  and  she  set  off  to  visit  Eli 
sabeth  either  at  Hebron  or  Juttah  (whichever  way 
we  understand  the  els  TT}V  opeif^v  tls  ir6\tv 
'lovSa,  Luke  i.  39),  where  the  latter  lived  with  her 
husband  Zacharias,  about  20  miles  to  the  south  of 
Jerusalem,  and  therefore  at  a  very  considerable 
distance  from  Nazareth.  Immediately  on  her  en 
trance  into  the  house  shj  was  saluted  by  Elisabeth 
as  the  mother  of  her  I  ord,  and  had  evidence  of 
the  truth  of  the  angel's  saying  with  regard  to  he- 
cousin.  She  embodied  her  feelings  of  exultation 
and  thankfulness  in  the  hymn  known  under  the  name 
of  the  Magnificat.  Whether  this  was  uttered  by  im 
mediate  inspiration,  in  reply  to  Elisabeth's  saluta 
tion,  or  composed  during  her  journey  from  Nazareth, 
or  was  written  at  a  later  period  of  her  three 
months'  visit  at  Hebron,  does  not  appear  for  certain. 
The  hymn  is  founded  on  Hannah's  song  of  thank 
fulness  (1  Sam.  ii.  1-10),  and  exhibits  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  Psalms,  prophetical  writings,  and 
books  of  Moses,  from  which  sources  almost  every 
expression  in  it  is  drawn.  The  most  remarkable 
clause,  '•  From  henceforth  all  generations  shall  call 
me  blessed,"  is  borrowed  from  Leah's  exclamation 
on  the  birth  of  Asher  (Gen.  xxx.  13).  The  same 
sentiment  and  expression  are  also  found  in  Prov. 
xxxi.  28  ;  Mai.  iii.  12  ;  Jas.  v.  11.  In  the  latter 
place  the  word  paKapifa  is  rendered  with  great  ex 
actness  "  count  happy."  The  notion  that  there  is 
conveyed  in  the  word  any  anticipation  of  her  bearing 
the  title  of  "  Blessed  "  arises  solely  from  ignorance. 

Mary  returned  to  Nazareth  shortly  before  the 
birth  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  continued  living  at 
her  own  home.  In  the  course  of  a  few  months 
Joseph  became  aware  that  she  was  with  child,  and 
determined  on  giving  her  a  bill  of  divorcement, 
instead  of  yielding  her  up  to  the  law  to  sufl'er  the 
penalty  which  he  supposed  that  she  had  incurred. 
Being,  however,  warned  and  satisfied  by  an  angel 
who  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream,  he  took  her  to  his 
own  house.  It  was  soon  after  this,  as  it  would 
seem,  that  Augustus'  decree  was  promulgated,  and 
Joseph  and  Mary  travelled  to  Bethlehem  to  have 
their  names  enrolled  in  the  registers  (B.C.  4)  by 
way  of  preparation  for  the  taxing;  which  however 
was  not  completed  till  ten  years  afterwards  (A.D.  (j), 
in  the  governorship  of  Quirinus.  They  reached 
Bethlehem,  and  there  Mary  brought  forth  the 
Saviour  of  the  world,  and  humbly  kid  him  in  a 
manger. 

The  visit  of  the  shepherds,  the  circumcision,  the 
adoration  of  the  wise  men,  and  the  presentation  in 
the  Temple,  are  rather  scenes  in  the  life  of  Christ 
than  in  that  of  his  mother.  The  presentation  in 
the  Temple  might  not  tike  place  till  forty  days 
after  the  birth  of  the  child.  During  this  period 
the  mother,  according  to  the  law  of  Moses,  was 
unclean  (Lev.  xii.).  In  the  present  case  there  could 
be  no  necessity  for  offering  the  sacrifice  and  making 
Atonement  beyond  that  of  obedience  to  the  Mosaic 
pivcept ;  but  already  He,  and  His  mother  for  Him, 
were  acting  upon  the  principle  of  fulfilling  all 
righteousness.  The  poverty  of  St.  Mary  and  Jo- 
soph,  it  ma,  !H>  noted,  is  shown  by  theii  making 


262 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


f)ie  uttering  of  the  poor.  The  song  of  Sitneon  and 
the  thanksgiving  of  Anna,  like  the  wonder  of  the 
shepherds  and  the  adoration  of  the  magi,  onlj  in 
cidentally  refer  to  Mary.  One  passage  alone  in 
.Simeon's  address  is  specially  directed  to  her,  "  Yea 
a  sword  shall  pierce  through  thy  own  soul  also." 
The  exact  purport  of  these  words  is  doubtful.  A 
common  patristic  explanation  refers  them  to  the 
pang  of  unbelief  which  shot  through  her  bosom  on 
seeing  her  Son  expire  on  the  cross  (Tertullian, 
Origen,  Basil,  Cyril,  &c.).  By  modern  interpreters 
it  is  more  commonly  referred  to  the  pangs  of  grief 
which  she  experienced  on  witnessing  the  sufferings 
of  her  Son. 

In  the  flight  into  Egypt,  Mary  and  the  babe  had 
the  support  and  protection  of  Joseph,  as  well  as  in 
their  return  from  thence,  in  the  following  year,  on 
the  death  of  Herod  the  Great  (B.C.  3).b  It  appears 
to  have  been  the  intention  of  Joseph  to  have  settled 
at  Bethlehem  at  this  time,  as  his  home  at  Nazareth 
had  been  broken  up  for  more  than  a  year ;  but  on 
linding  how  Herod's  dominions  had  been  disposed  of, 
lie  changed  his  mind  and  returned  to  his  old  place 
of  abode,  thinking  that  the  child's  life  would  be 
safer  in  the  tetrarchy  of  Antipas  than  in  that  of 
Archelaus.  It  is  possible  that  Joseph  might  have 
been  himself  a  native  of  Bethlehem,  and  that  before 
this  time  he  had  been  only  a  visitor  at  Nazareth, 
drawn  thither  by  his  betrothal  and  marriage.  In 
that  case,  his  fear  of  Archelaus  would  make  him 
exchange  his  own  native  town  for  that  of  Mary.  It 
may  be  that  the  holy  family  at  this  time  took  up 
their  residence  in  the  house  of  Mary's  sister,  the 
wife  of  Clopas. 

Henceforward,  until  the  beginning  of  our  Lord's 
ministry — i.  e.  from  B.C.  3  to  A.D.  26 — we  may 
picture  St.  Mary  to  ourselves  as  living  in  Nazareth, 
in  a  humble  sphere  of  life,  the  wife  of  Joseph  the 
carpenter,  pondering  over  the  sayings  of  the  angels, 
of  the  shepherds,  of  Simeon,  and  those  of  her  Son, 
as  the  latter  "  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature  and 
in  favour  with  God  and  man"  (Luke  ii.  52).  Two 
circumstances  alone,  so  far  as  we  know,  broke  in 
on  the  otherwise  even  flow  of  the  still  waters  of 
her  life.  One  of  these  was  the  temporary  loss  of 
her  Son  when  he  remained  behind  in  Jerusalem, 
A.D.  8.  The  other  was  the  death  of  Joseph.  The 
exact  date  of  this  last  event  we  cannot  determine. 
But  it  was  probably  not  long  after  the  other. 

From  the  time  at  which  our  Lord's  ministry 
commenced,  St.  Mary  is  withdrawn  almost  wholly 
from  sight.  Four  times  only  is  the  veil  removed, 
which,  not  surely  without  a  reason,  is  thrown  over 
her.  These  four  occasions  are, — 1.  The  marriage 
at  Cana  of  Galilee  (John  ii.).  2.  The  attempt 
Vvhich  she  and  his  brethren  made  "  to  spoak  with 
hi\m  "  (Matt.  xii.  46;  Mark  iii.  21  and  31  ;  Luke 
viiiV  1 9)-  3.  The  Crucifixion.  4.  The  days  suc 
ceeding?  *he  Ascension  (Acts  i.  14).  If  to  these  we 
add  twd>  references  to  her,  the  first  by  her  Nazarene 
fellc  »-crt*izens  (Matt.  xiii.  54,  5;  Mark  vi.  1-3),  the 
seccivd  ty  Vi  woman  in  the  multitude  (Luke  xi.  27), 


k  Jn  the  Gospel  of  the  Infancy,  which  seems  to  date 
from  the  2nd  century,  innumerable  miracles  are  made  to 
attend  on  St.  Mar/  and  her  Son  during  their  sojourn  In 
Egypt, :  e.  g.t  Mary  it  x>ked  with  pity  on  a  woman  who  was 
possessed,  and  immediately  Satan  came  out  of  her  in  the 
form  of  a  young  man,  saying,  "  Woe  is  me  because  of  thee, 
Mary,  and  thy  Son  !"  On  another  occasion  they  fell  in 
with  two  thieves,  named  TO'is  and  Dumachus ;  and  Titus 
was  gentle,  and  Dumachus  was  harsh :  the  Lady  Mary 
therefore  promised  Titus  that  God  should  receive  him  on 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

we  have  specified  every  event  known  to  us  it  her 
life.  It  is  noticeable  that,  on  every  occasion  of  our 
Lord's  addressing  her,  or  speaking  of  her.  there  'ut 
a  sound  of  reproof  in  His  words,  with  the  exception 
of  the  last  words  spoken  to  her  from  the  cross. 

1.  The  marriage  at  Cana  in  Galilee  took  place  in 
the  three  months  which    intervened  between  the 
baptism  of  Christ  and  the  passover  of  the  year  27. 
When  Jesus  was  found  by  his  mother  and  Joseph  in 
the  Temple  in  the  year  8,  we  find  him  repudiating 
the  name  of  "  father"  as  applied  to  Joseph.    "  Thy 
father  and  I  have  sought  thee  sorrowing  " — "  How 
is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ?     Wist  ye  not  that  I  must 
be  about"    (not  Joseph's   and    ycurs,   but)  "WM/ 
father's  business?"  (Luke  ii.  48,  9).     New,  in  like 
manner,  at  His  first  miracle  which  inaugurates  His 
ministry,  He  solemnly  withdraws  himself  from  the 
authority  of  His  earthly  mother.     This  is  St.  Au 
gustine's  explanation  of  the  "  What  have  I  to  do 
with  thee?  my  hour  is  not  yet  come."     It  was 
His  humanity  not  His  divinity  which  came  from 
Mary.    While  therefore  He  was  acting  in  His  divine 
character  He  could  not  acknowledge  her,  nor  does 
He  acknowledge  her  again  until  He  was  hanging  on 
the  cross,  when,  in  that  nature  which  He  took  from 
her,  He  was  about  to  submit  to  death  (St.  Aug. 
Comm.  in  Joan.  Evang.  tract  viii.,  vol.  iii.  p.  1455, 
ed.  Migne,  Paris,  1845).     That  the  words  Tf  tpo: 

Kal  <roi;  =  *p1  v  HO,  imply  reproof,  is  certain 
(cf.  Matt.  viii.  29  ;  Mark  i.  24  ;  and  LXX.,  Judg. 
xi.  12 ;  IK.  xvii.  18  ;  2  K.  iii.  13),  and  such  is 
the  patristic  explanation  of  them  (see  Iren.  Adv. 
Haer.  iii.  18 ;  Apud  Bibl.  Pair.  Max.  torn,  ii., 
pt.  ii.  293 ;  S.  Chrys.  Horn,  in  Joan.  xxi.).  But 
the  reproof  is  of  a  gentle  kind  (Trench,  on  the  Mi 
racles,  p.  102,  Lend.  1&5G ;  Alford,  Comm.  in  foe. : 
Wordsworth,  Comm.  in  foe.).  Mary  seems  to  have 
understood  it,  and  accordingly  to  have  drawn  back, 
desiring  the  servants  to  pay  attention  to  her  divine 
Son  (Olshausen,  Comm.  in  foe.).  The  modern  Ro 
manist  translation,  "What  is  that  to  me  and  tc 
thee  ?"  is  not  a  mistake,  because  it  is  a  wilful 
misrepresentation  (Douay  vei-sion ;  Orsini,  Life  of 
Mary,  &c. ;  see  The  Catholic  Layman,  p.  117 
Dublin,  1852). 

2.  Capernaum  (John  ii.  12),  and  Nazareth  (Matt, 
iv.  13,  xiii.  54 ;  Mark  vi.  1),  appear  to  have  been 
the  residence  of  St.  Mary  for  a  considerable  period. 
The  next  time  that  she  is  brought  before  us  we  find 
her  at  Capernaum.     It  is  the  autumn  of  the  year 
28,  more  than  a  year  and  a  half  after  the  miracle 
wrought  at  the  marriage  feast  in  Cana.     The  Lard 
had  in  the  meantime  attended  two  feasts  of  the 
passover,  and  had  twice  made  a  circuit  throughout. 
Galilee,  teaching  and  working  miracles.     His  fame 
had  spread,  and  crowds  came  pressing  round  him, 
so  that  he  had  not  even  time  "  to  eat  bread."    Mr.iy 
was  still  living  with  her  sister,  and  her  nephews 
and  nieces,  James,  Joses,  Simon,  Jude,  and  their 
three  sisters  (Matt.  xiii.  55);   and  she  and  tl.ty 
heard  of  the  toils  which  He  was  undergoing,  and 


his  right  hand.  And  accordingly,  thirty-three  years  after 
wards,  Titus  was  the  penitent  thief  who  was  crucified  <m 
the  right  hand,  and  Dumachus  was  crucified  on  the  left 
These  are  sufficient  as  samples.  Throignont  tne  book 
we  find  St  Mary  associated  with  her  Son,  in  the  strange 
freaks  of  power  attributed  to  them,  in  a  way  which  shawt 
us  whence  the  aittus  of  St.  Mary  took  its  origin.  (Se« 
Jones,  On  Vie  Xew  Teat.,  vol.  ii.  Oxf.  182? ;  Giles,  Godt* 
Apocryphus ;  Thilo.  Codex  Apocryphus). 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

they  umlerstood  that  He  was  denying  himself  every 
relaxation  from  His  labours.  Their  human  affection 
conquered  their  faith.  They  thought  that  He  was 
soiling  Himself,  and  with  an  indignation  arising 
from  love,  they  exclaimed  that  He  was  beside  him 
self,  and  set  oil  to  bring  Him  home  either  by  entreaty 
or  compulsion. e  He  was  surrounded  by  eager 
crowds,  and  they  could  not  reach  Him.  They 
therefore  sent  a  message,  begging  Him  to  allow 
them  to  speak  to  Him.  This  message  was  handed 
on  from  one  person  in  the  crowd  to  another,  till  at 
length  it  was  reported  aloud  to  Him.  Again  He 
reproves.  Again  He  refuses  to  admit  any  authority 
on  the  part  of  his  relatives,  or  any  privilege  on 
account  of  their  relationship.  "  Who  is  my  mo 
ther,  and  who  are  my  brethren  ?  And  He  stretched 
forth  His  hand  towards  His  disciples,  and  said,  Be 
hold  my  mother  and  my  brethren  !  For  whosoever 
shall  do  the  will  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven, 
the  same  is  my  brother,  and  sister,,  and  mother  " 
(Matt.  xii. 48,49).  Comp.  Theoph.  inMarc.  iii.  32; 
S.  Chrys.  Horn.  xliv.  in  Matt. ;  S.  Aug.  in  Joan. 
tract  x.,  who  all  of  them  point  out  that  the  blessed 
ness  of  St.  Mary  consists,  not  so  much  in  having 
borne  Christ,  as  in  believing  on  Him  and  in  obey 
ing  His  words  (see  also  Quaest.  et  JResp.  ad  Orthod. 
cxxxvi.,  ap.  S.  Just.  Mart,  in  Bibl.  Max.  Pair. 
torn.  ii.  pt.  ii.  p.  138).  This  indeed  is  the  lesson 
taught  directly  by  our  Lord  Himself  on  the  next 
occasion  on  which  reference  is  made  to  St.  Mary. 
It  is  now  the  spring  of  the  year  30,  and  only  about 
a  month  before  the  time  of  His  crucifixion.  Christ 
had  set  out  on  His  last  journey  from  Galilee,  which 
was  to  end  at  Jerusalem.  As  He  passed  along,  He, 
as  usual,  healed  the  sick,  and  preached  the  glad 
tidings  of  salvation.  In  the  midst,  or  at  the  com 
pletion,  of  one  of  His  addresses,  a  woman  of  the 
multitude,  whose  soul  had  been  stirred  by  His 
words,  cried  out,  "Blessed  is  the  womb  that  bare 
thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou  hast  sucked!"  Im 
mediately  the  Lord  replied,  "  Yea  rather,  blessed 
are  they  that  hear  the  word  of  God,  and  keep  it" 
(Luke  xi.  27).  He  does  not  either  affirm  or  deny 
anything  with  regard  to  the  direct  bearing  of  the 
woman's  exclamation,  but  passes  that  by  as  a  thing 
indifferent,  in  order  to  point  out  in  what  alone  the 
true  blessedness  of  His  mother  and  of  all  consists. 
This  is  the  full  force  of  the  pfvovtryf,  with  which 
He  commences  his  reply. 

3.  The  next  scene  in  St.  Mary's  life  brings  us  to 
the  foot  of  the  cross.  She  was  standing  there  with 
her  sister  Maiy  and  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Salome, 
and  other  women,  having  no  doubt  followed  her 
Son  as  she  was  able  throughout  the  terrible  morn 
ing  of  Good  Friday.  It  was  about  3  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon,  and  He  was  about  to  give  up  His  spirit. 
His  divine  mission  was  now,  as  it  were,  accom 
plished.  While  His  ministry  was  in  progress  He 
had  withdrawn  Himself  from  her  that  He  might 
do  His  Father's  work.  But  now  the  hour  was  come 
when  His  human  relationship  might  be  again  recog 
nised,  "  Tune  enim  agnovit,"  says  St.  Augustine, 
"  quando  illud  quod  peperit  moriebatur "  (S.  Aug. 
In  Joan.  ix.).  Standing  near  the  company  of  the 
women  was  St.  John ;  and,  with  almost  His  last 
words,  Christ  commended  His  mother  to  the  care  of 
him  who  had  borne  the  name  of  the  Disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved.  "  Woman,  behold  thy  son."  "  Com- 

c  It  is  a  mere  subterfuge  to  refer  the  words  eAeyo,/ 
yap.  *c.,  to  tke  people,  instead  of  to  Mary  and  his  brethren 
Ctilmet  sad  Migue,  Diet,  of  the  JJible). 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN  2o3 

mendat  homo  honiini  hominem,"  says  St.  Au 
gustine.  And  from  that  hour  St.  John  assures  us 
that  he  took  her  to  his  own  abode.  If  by  "  thaJ 
hour  "  the  Evangelist  means  immediately  after  th* 
words  were  spoken,  Mary  was  not  present  at  th« 
last  scene  of  all.  The  sword  had  sufficiently  pierced 
her  soul,  and  she  was  spared  the  hearing  of  the  last 
loud  cry,  and  the  sight  of  the  bowed  head.  St.  Am 
brose  considers  the  chief  purpose  of  our  Lord's 
words  to  have  been  a  desire  to  make  manifest  the 
truth  that  the  Redemption  was  His  work  alone, 
while  He  gave  human  affection  to  His  mother.  "  Noa 
egebat  adjutore  ad  omnium  redemptionem.  Suscepr, 
quidem  matris  affectum,  sed  non  quaesivit  hominis 
auxilium"  (S.  Amb.  Exp.  Evang.  Luc.  x.  132). 

4.  A  veil  is  drawn  over  her  sorrow  and  over 
her  joy  which  succeeded  that  sorrow.  Mediaeval 
imagination  has  supposed,  but  Scripture  does  not 
state,  that  her  Son  appeared  to  Mary  after  His 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  (See  for  example  Lu- 
dolph  of  Saxony,  Vita  Christi,  p.  666,  Lyons, 
1642;  and  Ruperti,  De  Divinis  Officiis,  vii.  25, 
torn.  iv.  p.  92,  Venice,  1751).  St.  Ambrose  is  consi 
dered  to  be  the  first  writer  who  suggested  the  idea, 
and  reference  is  made  to  his  treatise,  De  Virgini- 
tate,  i.  3 ;  but  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  text  has 
been  corrupted,  and  that  it  is  of  Mary  Magdalene 
that  he  is  there  speaking.  (Comp.  his  Exposition  of 
St.  Luke,  x.  156.  See  note  of  the  Benedictine 
edition,  torn.  ii.  p.  217,  Paris,  1790.)  Another 
reference  is  usually  given  to  St.  Anselm.  The 
treatise  quoted  is  not  St.  Anselm's,  but  Eadmer's. 
(See  Eadmer.,  De  Excellentia  Mariae,  ch.  v.,  ap 
pended  to  Anselm's  Works,  p.  138,  Paris,  1721.) 
Ten  appearances  are  related  by  the  Evangelists  a* 
having  occurred  in  the  40  days  intervening  between 
Easter  and  Ascension  Day,  but  none  to  Maiy.  She 
was  doubtless  living  at  Jerusalem  with  John,  che 
rished  with  the  tenderness  which  her  tender  soul 
would  have  specially  needed,  and  which  undoubt 
edly  she  found  pre-eminently  in  St.  John.  AVe 
have  no  record  of  her  presence  at  the  Ascension. 
Arator,  a  writer  of  the  6th  century,  describes  her 
as  being  at  the  time  not  on  the  spot,  but  in  Jeru 
salem  (Arat.  De  Act.  Apost.  1.  50,  apud  Migne, 
torn.  Ixviii.  p.  95,  Paris,  1848,  quoted  by  Words 
worth,  Gk.  Test.  Com.  on  the  Acts,  i.  14).  We 
have  no  account  of  her  being  present  at  the  descent 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  What 
we  do  read  of  her  is,  that  she  remained  stedfot  in 
prayer  in  the  upper  room  at  Jerusalem  with  Mary 
Magdalene  and  Salome,  and  those  known  as  the 
Lord's  brothers  and  the  apostles.  This  is  the  last 
view  that  we  have  of  her.  Holy  Scripture  '.  eaves 
her  engaged  in  prayer  (see  Wordsworth  as  cited 
above).  From  this  point  forwards  we  know  nothing 
of  her.  It  is  probable  that  the  rest  of  her  life  was 
spent  in  Jerusalem  with  St.  John  (see  Epiph.  ffaer. 
78).  According  to  one  tradition  the  beloved  disciple 
would  not  leave  Palestine  until  she  had  expired  in 
his  arms  (see  Tholuck  Light  from  the  Cross,  ii. 
Serm.  x.  p.  234,  Edinb.,  1 857)  ;  and  it  is  added  that 
she  lived  and  died  in  the  Coenaculum  in  what  is 
now  the  Mosque  of  the  Tomb  of  David,  the  tra 
ditional  chamber  of  the  Last  Supper  (Stanley, 
S.  fy  P.  ch.  xiv.  p.  456).  Other  traditions  make 
her  journey  with  St.  John  to  Ephesus,  and  there 
die  in  extreme  old  age.  It  was  beLeved  by  some 
in  the  5th  century  that  she  was  buried  at  Ephesus 
(see  Cone.  Ephes.,  Cone.  Labb.  torn.  iii.  p.  574  a) ; 
by  others,  in  the  same  century,  that  she  was  buned 
at  Gethsemane,  and  this,  appears  to  have  been  the 


264 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


information  given  to  Marcian  and  Fuleheria  by 
Juvenal  of  Jerusalem.  As  soon  as  we  lose  the 
guidance  of  Scripture,  we  have  nothing  from  which 
we  can  derive  any  sure  knowledge  about  her.  The 
darkness  in  which  we  are  left  is  in  itself  most  in 
structive. 

5.  The  character  of  St.  Mary  is  not  drawn  by  any 
of  the  Evangelists,  but  some  of  its  lineaments  are 
incidentally  manifested  in  the  fragmentary  record 
which  is  given  of  her.  They  are  to  be  found  for 
the  most  part  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  whence  an 
attempt  has  been  made,  by  a  curious  mixture  of  the 
imaginative  and  rationalistic  methods  of  interpreta 
tion,  to  explain  the  old  legend  which  tells  us  that 
St.  Luke  painted  the  Virgin's  portrait  (Calmet, 
Kitto,  Migne,  Mrs.  Jameson).  We  might  have  ex- 
]>ected  greater  details  from  St.  John  than  from  the 
other  Evangelists  ;  but  in  his  Gospel  we  learn  no 
thing  of  her  except  what  may  be  gathered  from  the 
scene  at  Cana  and  at  the  cross.  It  is  clear  from 
St.  Luke's  account,  though  without  any  such  inti 
mation  we  might  rest  assured  of  the  fact,  that  her 
vouth  had  been  spent  in  the  study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  that  she  had  set  before  her  the 
example  of  the  holy  women  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  her  model.  This  would  appear  from  the  Mag 
nificat  (Luke  i.  46).  The  same  hymn,  so  far  as 
it  emanated  from  herself,  would  show  no  little 
power  of  mind  as  well  as  warmth  of  spirit.  Her 
laith  and  humility  exhibit  themselves  in  her  imme 
diate  surrender  of  herself  to  the  Divine  will,  though 
ignorant  how  that  will  should  be  accomplished 
(Luke  i.  38);  her  energy  and  earnestness,  in  her 
journey  from  Nazareth  to  Hebron  (Luke  i.  39) ; 
her  happy  thankfulness,  in  her  song  of  joy  (Luke 
i.  48)  ;  her  silent  musing  thoughtfulness,  in  her 
pondering  over  the  shepherds'  visit  (Luke  ii.  19), 
and  in  her  keeping  her  Son's  words  in  her  heart 
(Luke  ii.  51)  though  she  could  not  fully  under 
stand  their  import.  Again,  her  humility  is  seen 
in  her  drawing  back,  yet  without  anger,  after  re 
ceiving  reproof  at  Cana  in  Galilee  (John  ii.  5),  and 
in  the  remarkable  manner  in  which  she  shuns 
putting  herself  forward  throughout  the  whole  of  her 
Son's  ministry,  or  after  his  removal  from  earth. 
Once  only  does  she  attempt  to  interfere  with  her 
Divine  Son's  freedom  of  action  (Matt.  xii.  46 ; 
Mark  iii.  31 ;  Luke  viii.  19)  ;  and  even  here  we  can 
hardly  blame,  for  she  seems  to  have  been  roused, 
not  by  arrogance  and  by  a  desire  to  show  her  au 
thority  and  relationship,  as  St.  Chrysostom  sup 
poses  (Horn.  xliv.  in  Matt.) ;  but  by  a  woman's 
and  a  mother's  feelings  of  affection  and  fear  for  him 
whom  she  loved.  It  was  part  of  that  .exquisite 
tenderness  which  appears  throughout  to  have  be 
longed  to  her.  In  a  word,  so  far  as  St.  Mary  is 
|K>urtrayed  to  us  in  Scripture,  she  is,  as  we  should 
have  expected,  the  most  tender,  the  most  faithful, 
humble,  patient,  and  loving  of  women,  but  a  woman 
still. 

III.  Her  after  life,  wholly  legendary. — We  pass 
again  into  the  region  of  free  and  joyous  legend 
which  we  quitted  for  that  of  true  history  at  the 
period  of  the  Annunciation.  The  Gospel  record  con 
fined  the  play  of  imagination,  and  as  soon  as  this 
check  is  withdrawn  the  legend  bursts  out  afresh. 
The  legends  of  St.  Mary's  childhood  may  be  traced 
buck  as  far  as  the  third  or  even  the  second  century. 
Those  of  her  death  arc  probably  of  a  later  date. 
The  chief  legend  was  for  a  length  of  time  con 
sidered  to  be  a  veritulile  history,  written  by 
Melito  Bishop  of  Sardis  in  the  2nd  century.  It  i* 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

to  be  found  in  the  Bibliothfca  Maxima  (torn.  ft. 
pt.  ii.  p.  212),  entitled  Sancti  Melitonis  Episcoy\ 
Sardensis  de  Transitu  Virginis  Mariae  Liber , 
and  there  certainly  existed  a  book  with  this  title  at 
the  end  of  the  5th  century,  which  was  condemned 
by  Pope  Gelasius  as  apocryphal  (Op.  Gelas.  apud 
Migne,  torn.  59,  p.  152).  Another  form  of  the 
same  legend  has  been  published  at  Elberfeld  in 
1854  by  Maximilian  Enger  in  Arabic.  He  supposes 
that  it  is  an  Arabic  translation  from  a  Syriac 
original.  It  was  found  in  the  library  at  Bonr. 
and  is  entitled  Joannis  Apostoli  de  Transitu  Beatae 
Mariae  Virginis  Liber.  It  is  perhaps  the  same  as 
that  referred  to  in  Assemani  (Biblioth.  Orient. 
torn.  iii.  p.  287,  Rome,  1725),  under  the  name  of 
Historia  Dormitionis  et  Assumptionis  B.  Marian. 
Virginis  Joanni  Evangelistae  falso  inscripta.  We 
give  the  substance  of  the  legend  with  its  main 
variations. 

When  the  apostles  separated  in  order  to  evangelist 
the  world,  Mary  continued  to  live  with  St.  Jolin's 
parents  in  their  house  near  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  every  day  she  went  out  to  pray  at  the  tomb  ot 
Christ,  and  at  Golgotha.  But  the  Jews  had  placed 
a  watch  to  prevent  prayers  being  offered  at  these 
spots,  and  the  watch  went  into  the  city  and  told 
the  chief  priests  that  Mary  came  daily  to  pray 
Then  the  priests  commanded  the  watch  to  stone 
her.  But  at  this  time  king  Abgarus  wrote  to 
Tiberius  to  desire  him  to  take  vengeance  on  the 
Jews  for  slaying  Christ.  They  feared  therefore  to 
add  to  his  wrath  by  slaying  Mary  also,  and  yet  they 
could  not  allow  her  to  continue  her  prayers  at 
Golgotha,  because  an  excitement  and  tumult  was 
thereby  made.  They  therefore  went  and  spoke 
softly  to  her,  and  she  consented  to  go  and  dwell  in 
Bethlehem ;  and  thither  she  took  with  her  three 
holy  virgins  who  should  attend  upon  her.  And  in 
the  twenty-second  year  after  the  ascension  of  the 
Lord,  Mary  felt  her  heart  burn  with  an  inexpressible 
longing  to  be  with  her  Son ;  and  behold  an  angel 
appeared  to  her,  and  announced  to  her  that  her 
soul  should  be  taken  up  from  her  body  on  the  third 
day,  and  he  placed  a  palm-branch  from  paradise  in 
her  hands,  and  desired  that  it  should  be  carried 
before  her  bier.  And  Mary  besought  that  the  apostles 
might  be  gathered  round  her  before  she  died, 
and  the  angel  replied  that  they  should  come. 
Then  the  Holy  Spirit  caught  up  John  as  he 
was  preaching  at  Ephesus,  and  Peter  as  he  was 
offering  sacrifice  at  Home,  and  Paul  as  he  was  dis 
puting  with  the  Jews  near  Rome,  and  Thomas 
in  the  extremity  of  India,  and  Matthew  and  James. 
these  were  all  of  the  apostles  who  were  still  living , 
then  the  Holy  Spirit  awakened  the  dead,  Fhilip  and 
Andrew,  and  Luke  and  Simon,  and  Mark  and  Bar 
tholomew  ;  and  all  of  them  were  snatched  away  in 
a  bright  cloud  and  found  themselves  at  Bethlehem. 
And  angels  and  powers  without  number  descended 
from  heaven  and  stood  round  about  the  house  ; 
Gabriel  stood'at  blessed  Mary's  head,  and  Michael  at 
her  feet,  and  they  fanned  her  with  their  wings; 
and  Peter  and  John  wiped  away  her  tears ;  and  there 
was  a  great  cry,  and  they  all  said  "  Hail  l>lr:->e.l 
one !  blessed  is  the  fruit  of  thy  womb  I"  And  the 
people  of  Bethlehem  brought  their  sick  to  the 
house,  and  they  were  all  healed.  Then  news  of 
these  things  was  carried  to  Jerusalem,  and  tlie  king 
sent  and  commanded  that  they  should  bring  Marj 
and  the  disciples  to  Jerusalem.  And  horsemen 
came  to  Bethlehem  to  seize  Mary.  l>nt  they  did  uot 
find  her,  for  the  Holy  Spirit  ha. I  taken  her  and  tba 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

disciples  in  a  cloud  over  the  heads  of  the  horsemen 
U>  Jerusalem.  Then  the  men  of  Jerusalem  sa«^ 
iiii'/ols  ascending  and  descending  at  the  spot  when- 
Mury's  house  was.  And  the  high-priests  went  to 
the  governor,  and  craved  permission  to  burn  her  and 
the  house  with  tire,  and  the  governor  gave  them 
permission,  and  they  brought  wood  and  fire ;  but 
as  soon  as  they  came  near  to  the  house,  behold  there 
burst  forth  a  tire  upon  them  which  consumed  them 
utterly.  And  the  governor  saw  these  things  afar  otf, 
and  in  the  evening  he  brought  his  son,  who  was  sick, 
to  Mary,  and  she  healed  him. 

Then,  on  the  sixth  day  of  the  week,  the  Holy 
Spirit  commanded  the  apostles  to  take  up  Mary, 
and  to  carry  her  from  Jerusalem  to  Gethsemane, 
and  as  they  went  the  Jews  saw  them.  Then  drew 
near  Juphia,  one  of  the  high-priests,  and  attempted 
to  overthrow  the  litter  on  which  she  was  being 
earned,  for  the  other  priests  had  conspired  with 
him,  and  they  hoped  to  cast  her  down  into  the 
valley,  and  to  throw  wood  upon  her,  and  to  burn 
her  body  with  fire.  But  as  soon  as  Juphia  had 
touched  the  litter  the  angel  smote  off  his  arms  with 
a  fiery  sword,  and  the  arms  remained  fastened  to 
the  litter.  Then  he  cried  to  the  disciples  and  Peter 
for  help,  and  they  said,  "  Ask  it  of  the  Lady  Mary  ;" 
and  he  cried,  "  0  Lady,  O  Mother  of  Salvation, 
have  mercy  on  me ! "  Then  she  said  to  Peter, 
"  Give  him  back  his  arms ;"  and  they  were  re 
stored  whole.  But  the  disciples  proceeded  onwards, 
and  they  laid  down  the  litter  in  a  cave,  as  tney 
were  commanded,  and  gave  themselves  to  prayer. 

And  the  angel  Gabriel  announced  that  on  the 
first  day  of  the  week  Mary's  soul  should  be  removed 
from  this- world.  And  on  the  morning  of  that  day 
there  came  Eve  and  Anne  and  Elisabeth,  and  they 
kissed  Mary  and  told  her  who  they  were:  came 
Adam,  Seth,  Shem,  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob, 
David,  and  the  rest  of  the  old  fathers :  came  Enoch 
and  Elias  and  Moses:  came  twelve  chariots  of 
angels  innumerable:  and  then  appeared  the  Lord 
Chiist  in  his  humanity,  and  Mary  bowed  before 
him  and  said,  "  0  my  Lord  and  my  God,  place  thy 
hand  upon  me ;"  and  he  stretched  out  his  hand  and 
blessed  her ;  and  she  took  his  hand  and  kissed  it, 
and  placed  it  to  her  forehead  and  said,  "  I  bow 
before  this  right  hand,  which  has  made  heaven  and 
earth  and  all  that  in  them  is,  and  I  thank  theo  and 
pi-aise  thee  that  thou  hast  thought  me  worthy  of 
this  hour."  Then  she  said,  "  0  Lord,  take  me  to 
thyself  I"  And  he  said  to  her,  "Now  shall  thy 
body  be  in  paradise  to  the  day  of  the  resurrection, 
and  angels  shall  serve  thee ;  but  thy  pure  spirit 
shall  shine  in  the  kingdom,  in  the  dwelling-place 
of  my  Father's  fulness."  Then  the  disciples  drew 
near  and  besought  her  to  pray  for  the  world  which 
she  was  about  u>  leave.  And  Mary  prayed.  And 
after  her  prayer  was  finished  her  face  shone  with 
marvellous  brightness,  and  she  stretched  out  her 
hands  and  blessed  them  all ;  and  her  Son  put  forth 
his  hands  and  received  her  pure  soul,  and  bore  it 
into  his  Father's  treasure-house.  And  there  was  a 
light  and  a  sweet  smell,  sweeter  than  anything  on 
sarth  ;  and  a  voice  from  heaven  saying,  "  Hail, 
blessed  one!  blessed  and  celebrated  art  thou  among 
women !"  d 

And  the  apostles  carried  her  body  to  the  valley 
of  Jehoshaphat,  to  a  place  which  the  Lord  had  told 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


205 


them  of,  and  John  went  before  and  carried  the 
palm-branch.  And  they  placed  her  in  a  new  tomb, 
and  sat  at  the  mouth  of  the  sepulchre,  as  the  Lord 
commanded  them ;  and  suddenly  there  appeared 
the  Lord  Christ,  surrounded  by  a  multitude  of 
angels,  and  said  to  the  apostles,  "  What  will  ye 
that  I  should  do  with  her  whom  my  Father's  com 
mand  selected  out  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel  that 
I  should  dwell  in  her?"  And  Peter  and  the 
apostles  besought  him  that  he  would  raise  the 
body  of  Mary  and  take  it  with  him  in  glory  to 
heaven.  And  the  Saviour  said,  "Be  it  according 
to  your  word."  And  he  commanded  Michael  the 
archangel  to  bring  down  the  soul  of  Mary.  And 
Gabriel  rolled  away  the  stone,  and  the  Lord  said, 
"  Rise  up,  my  beloved,  thy  body  shall  not  suffer 
corruption  in  the  tomb."  And  immediately  Mary 
arose  and  bowed  herself  at  his  feet  and  worshipped  ; 
and  the  Lord  kissed  her  and  gave  her  to  the  angels 
to  carry  her  to  paradise. 

But  Thomas  was  not  present  with  the  rest,  for 
at  the  moment  that  he  was  summoned  to  come  he 
was  baptising  Polodius,  who  was  the  son  of  the 
sister  of  the  king.  And  he  arrived  just  after  all 
these  things  were  accomplished,  and  he  demanded 
to  see  the  sepulchre  in  which  they  had  laid  his 
Lady  :  "  For  ye  know,"  said  he, "  that  I  am  Thomas, 
and  unless  I  see  I  will  not  believe."  Then  Peter 
arose  in  haste  and  wrath,  and  the  other  disciplen 
with  him,  and  they  opened  the  sepulchre  and  went 
in  ;  but  they  found  nothing  therein  save  that  in 
which  her  body  had  been  wrapped.  Then  Thomas 
confessed  that  he  too,  as  he  was  being  borne  in  the 
cloud  from  India,  had  seen  her  holy  body  being 
can-led  by  the  angels  with  great  triumph  into 
heaven ;  and  that  on  his  crying  to  her  for  her 
blessing,  she  had  bestowed  upon  him  her  precious 
Girdle,  which  when  the  apostles  saw  they  were 
glad.e  Then  the  apostles  were  carried  back  each 
to  his  own  place. 

Joannis  Apostoli  de  Transitu  Beatae  Mariat 
Virginis  Liber,  Elberfeldae,  1854 ;  S.  Melitonis 
Episc.  Sard,  de  Transitu  V.  M.  Liber,  apud  Bibl. 
Max.  Patr.  torn.  ii.  pt.  ii.  p.  212,  Lugd.  1677; 
Jacobi  a  Voragine,  Legenda  Aurea,  ed.  Graesse,  ch. 
cxix.  p.  504,  Dresd.  1846 ;  John  Damasc.  Serm.  de 
Dormit.  Deiparae,  Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  857  seq.,  Venice, 
1743  ;  Andrew  of  Crete,  In  Dormit.  Deiparae  Scrm 
iii.  p.  115,  Paris,  1644;  Mrs.  Jameson,  Legends 
of  the  Madonna,  Lond.  1852  ;  Butler,  Lives  of  the 
Saints  in  Aug.  1  5  ;  Dressel,  Edita  et  inedita  Epi- 
phanii  Monachi  et  Presbyteri,  p.  105,  Paris,  1843. 

IV.  Jewish  traditions  respecting  her. — These  are 
of  a  very  different  nature  from  the  light-hearted 
fairy-tale-like  stories  which  we  have  recounted 
above.  We  should  expect  that  the  miraculous  birth 
of  our  Lord  would  be  an  occasion  of  scoffing  to  the 
unbelieving  Jews,  and  we  find  this  to  be  the  case. 
To  the  Christian  believer  the  Jewish  slander  be 
comes  in  the  present  case  only  a  confirmation  of  his 
faith.  The  most  definite  and  outspoken  of  those 
slanders  is  that  .which  is  contained  in  the  book 
called  yw<  nrPin,  or  Toldoth  Jesu.  It  was 
grasped  at  with  avidity  by  Voltaire,  and  declared 
by  him  to  be  the  most  ancient  Jewish  writing 
directed  against  Christianity,  and  apparently  of  the 
lirst  century.  It  was  written,  he  says,  before  the 
Gospels,  and  is  altogether  contrary  to  them  (Lcttrt 


•1  Th*  legend  ascribed  to  Melito  makes  her  soul  to  be 
•irricd  to  paradise  by  Gabriel  while  her  Son  returns  tc 


«  For  the  story  of  this  Sacratissiw  Cititolo,  stl"  pre 
served  at  I'rato,  see  Mrs.  Jameson's  /  egends  qf  tht  Ma 
eloMia,  i>.  344  Lond.  1852. 


206 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


s»«r  Ics  Jwfs).  It  is  proved  by  Ammon  (Biblisch. 
Theologie,  p.  263,  Erlang.  1801)  to  be  a  compo 
sition  of  the  13th  century,  and  by  Wagenseil  (Tela 
ignea  Satanae ;  Confut.  Libr.  Toldos  Jeschu,  p.  12, 
Altorf,  1681)  to  be  irreconcileable  with  the  earlier 
Jewish  tales.  In  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  other 
wise  called  the  Acts  of  Pilate,  we  find  the  Jews 
represented  as  charging  our  Lord  with  illegitimate 
birth  (c.  2).  The  date  of  this  Gospel  is  about  the 
end  of  the  third  century.  The  origin  of  the  charge 
is  referred  with  great  probability  by  Thilo  ( Codex 
Apocr.  p.  527,  Lips.  1832)  to  the  circular  letters 
of  the  Jews  mentioned  by  Grotius  (ad  Matt,  xxvii. 
63,  et  ad  Act.  Apost.  xxviii.  22  ;  Op.  ii.  278  and 
666,  Basil.  1732),  which  were  sent  from  Palestine 
to  all  the  Jewish  synagogues  after  the  death  of 
Christ,  with  the  view  of  attacking  "  the  lawless 
and  atheistic  sect  which  had  taken  its  origin  from 
the  deceiver  Jesus  of  Galilee"  (Justin,  adv.  Tryph.). 
The  first  time  that  we  find  it  openly  proclaimed  is 
in  an  extract  made  by  Origen  from  the  work  of 
Celsus,  which  he  is  refuting.  Celsus  introduces  a 
Jew  declaring  that  the  mother  of  Jesus  virb  rov 

yflflWOS,  TfKTOVOS  T^V  Tf-}(V1\V  OVTOS,   QtUffOai, 

t\€y\0t'iffav  &s  /j.f/jioixfv/ji&'nv  (Contra  Celsum, 
3.  2S,  Origenis  Opera,  xviii.  59,  Berlin,  1845). 
Air  again,  j\  rov  Iqffov  ^TT/p  Kvovffa,  H-a>ff6tt<ra 
jrttrov  [im)ffTfvffafi,fvou  avrfyv  rtKrovos,  t\ey%- 
(  iiffa.  iirl  fj.oixfi<f  Kal  rlicTovcra.  iir6  TWOS  arpart- 
UTOV  T\av&-i)f>a  rovvopa.  (ibid.  32).  Stories  to  the 
same  effect  may  be  found  in  the  Talmud — not  in 
the  Mishna,  which  dates  from  the  second  century, 
Dut  in  the  Gemara,  which  is  of  the  fifth  or  sixth 
see  Tract.  Sanhedrin,  cap.  vii.  fol.  67,  col.  1 ;  Shab- 
both,  cap.  xii.  fol.  104,  col.  2  ;  and  the  Midrash 
Koheleth,  cap.  x.  5).  Rabanus  Maurus,  in  the  ninth 
century,  refers  to  the  same  story: — "  Jesum  filium 
Ethnici  cujusdam  Pandera  adulteri,  more  latronum 
punitum  esse."  We  then  come  to  the  Toldoth  Jesu, 
in  which  these  calumnies  were  intended  to  be 
summed  up  and  harmonised.  In  the  year  4671, 
the  story  runs,  in  the  reign  of  King  Jannoeus, 
there  was  one  Joseph  Pandera  who  lived  at  Beth 
lehem.  In  the  same  village  there  was  a  widow 
who  had  a  daughter  named  Miriam,  who  was 
betrothed  to  a  God-fearing  man  named  Johanan. 
And  it  came  to  pass  that  Joseph  Pandera  meeting 
with  Miriam  when  it  was  dark,  deceived  her  into 
the  belief  that  he  was  Johanan  her  husband.  And 
after  three  months  Johanan  consulted  Rabbi  Simeon 
Shetachides  what  he  should  do  with  Miriam,  and 
the  rabbi  advised  him  to  bring  her  before  the  great 
council.  But  Johanan  was  ashamed  to  do  so,  and 
instead  he  left  his  home  and  went  and  lived  at 
Babylon ;  and  there  Miriam  brought  forth  a  son 
and  gave  him  the  name  of  Jehoshua.  The  rest  of 
the  work,  which  has  no  merit  in  a  literary  aspect 
or  otherwise,  contains  an  account  of  how  this 
Jehoshua  gained  the  art  of  working  miracles  by 
stealing  the  knowledge  of  the  unmentionable  name 
from  the  Temple;  how  he  was  defeated  by  the 
superior  magical  arts  of  one  Juda;  and  how  at  last 
he  was  crucified,  and  his  body  hidden  under  a 
watercourse.  It  is  offensive  to  make  use  of  sacred 
ncmes  in  connexion  with  such  tales;  but  in  Wa- 
genseil's  quaint  words  we  may  recollect,  "  haec 
nomina  ion  attiuere  ad  Servatorem  Nostrum  aut 
bea'-Jsgim-un  illius  mat  run  coeterosque  quos  sig- 
uificare  videntur,  sed  designari  iis  a  Diabolo  sup- 
posita  Spectra,  Larvas,  Lemures,  Lamias,  Stryges, 
»ut  si  quid  turpius  istis"  (Tcla  Ignea  Satanae, 
Lite*-  -folios  Jeschu,  p.  2,  Altorf,  1681).  It  is  a 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

curious  thing  tnat  a  Pandera  or  Panther  ha<;  b» 
introduced  into  the  genealogy  cf  our  Lord  by  Fpi. 
phanius  (Haeres.  Ixxviii.),  who  makes  him  grand 
father  of  Joseph,  and  by  John  of  Damascus  ( De  Fide 
orthodoxa,  iv.  15),  who  makes  him  the  father  o* 
Barpanther  and  grandfather  of  St.  Mary. 

V.  Mahometan  Traditions. — These  are  again  cast 
in  a  totally  different  mould  from  those  of  the  Jews. 
The  Mahometans  had  no  purpose  to  serve  in  spreid« 
ing  calumnious  stories  as  to  the  birth  of  Jesus,  ?.nd 
accordingly  we  find  none  of  the  Jewish  malignity 
about  their  traditions.  Mahomet  and  his  followers 
appear  to  have  gathered  up  the  floating  Oriental  tra 
ditions  which  originated  in  the  legends  of  St.  Mary's 
early  years,  given  above,  and  to  have  drawn  fi-om 
them  and  from  the  Bible  indifferently.  It  has  been 
suggested  that  the  Koran  had  an  object  in  magnify 
ing  St.  Mary,  and  that  this  was  to  insinuate  that 
the  Son  was  of  no  other  nature  than  the  mother. 
But  this  does  not  appear  to  be  the  case.  Mahomet 
seems  merely  to  have  written  down  what  had  come 
to  his  ears  about  her,  without  definite  theological 
purpose  or  inquiry. 

Mary  was,  according  to  the  Koran,  the  daughter 
of  Amram  (sur.  iii.)  and  the  sister  of  Aaron  (sur. 
xix.).  Mahomet  can  hardly  be  absolved  from  having 
here  confounded  Miriam  the  sister  of  Moses  with 
Mary  the  mother  of  our  Lord.  It  is  possible  indeed 
that  he  may  have  meant  different  persons,  and  such 
is  the  opinion  of  Sale  (Koran,  pp.  38  and  251),  and 
of  D'Herbelot  (Bibl.  Orient,  in  voc.  "  Miriam  ") ; 
but  the  opposite  view  is  more  likely  (see  Guadagnoli, 
Apol.  pro  rel.  Christ,  c.  viii.  p.  277,  Rom.  1631). 
Indeed,  some  of  the  Mahometan  commentators  have 
been  driven  to  account  for  the  chronological  diffi 
culty,  by  saying  that  Miriam  was  miraculously  kept 
alive  from  the  days  of  Moses  in  order  that  she  might 
be  the  mother  of  Jesus.  Her  mother  Hannah  dedi 
cated  her  to  the  Lord  while  still,  in  the  womb,  and 
at  her  birth  "  commended  her  and  her  future  issue 
to  the  protection  of  God  against  Satan."  And 
Hannah  brought  the  child  to  the  Temple  to  bo 
educated  by  the  priests,  and  the  priests  disputed 
among  themselves  who  should  take  charge  of  her. 
Zacharias  maintained  that  it  was  his  office,  because 
he  had  married  her  aunt.  But  when  the  otheii 
would  not  give  up  their  claims,  it  was  determined 
that  the  matter  should  be  decided  by  lot.  So  they 
went  to  the  river  Jordan,  twenty-seven  of  them,  each 
man  with  his  rod  ;  and  they  threw  their  rods  into 
the  river,  and  none  of  them  floated  save  that  of 
Zacharias,  whereupon  the  care  of  the  child  was 
committed  to  him  (Al  Beidawi ;  Jallalo'ddiu).  Then 
Zacharias  placed  her  in  an  inner  chamber  by  herself; 
and  though  he  kept  seven  doore  ever  locked  upon 
her,'  he  always  found  her  abundantly  supplied  with 
provisions  which  God  sent  her  from  paradise,  winter 
fruits  in  summer,  and  summer  fruits  in  winter. 
And  the  angels  said  unto  her,  "  0  Mary,  verily  God 
hath  chosen  thee,  and  hath  purified  thee.  and  hath 
chosen  thee  above  all  the  women  of  the  world " 
(Koran,  sur.  iii.).  And  she  retired  to  a  place  to 
wards  the  East,  and  Gabriel  appeared  unto  her  and 
said,  "  Verily  I  am  the  messenger  of  thy  Lord,  and 
am  sent  to  give  thee  a  holy  Son  "  (sur.  xix.).  And 
the  angels  said,  "  0  Mary,  verily  God  sendeth  thee 
good  tidings  that  thou  shall  bear  the  Word  proceed 
ing  from  Himself:  His  name  shall  be  Christ  Jesus, 
the  son  of  Mary,  honourable  in  this  world  and  in 


f  Other  stories  make  the  only  entrance  to  1  c  by  a  ladftf 
.11  id  a  door  ul  ways  kept  locked. 


MABY  THE  VIRGIN 

the  world  to  come,  and  one  of  them  who  approach 
item  to  the  presence  of  God :  and  he  shall  speak 
unto  men  in  his  cradle  and  when  he  is  grown  up ; 
and  he  shall  be  one  of  the  righteous."  And  she  said, 
"How  shall  I  have  a  son,  seeing  I  know  not  a  man  ?" 
The  angel  said,  "  So  God  createth  that  which  He 
pleaseth  :  wheu  He  decreeth  a  thing.  He  only  saith 
Onto  it,  '  Be,'  and  it  is.  God  shah  teach  him  the 
scripture  and  wisdom,  and  the  law  and  the  gospel, 
and  shall  appoint  him  His  apostle  to  the  children  of 
Israel  "  (sur.  iii.).  So  God  breathed  of  His  Spirit 
into  the  womb  of  Mary  t ;  and  she  preserved  her 
chastity  (sur.  Ixvi.)  ;  for  the  Jews  have  spoken 
against  her  a  grievous  calumny  (sur.  iv.).  And  she 
conceived  a  son,  and  retired  with  him  apart  to  a 
distant  place  ;  and  the  pains  of  childbirth  came  upon 
her  near  the  trunk  of  a  palm-tre.  :  and  God  pro 
vided  a  rivulet  for  her,  and  she  shook  the  palm-tree, 
and  it  let  fall  ripe  dates,  and  she  ate  and  drank,  and 
was  calm.  Then  she  carried  the  child  in  her  arms 
to  her  people ;  but  they  said  that  it  was  a  strange 
thing  she  had  done.  Then  she  made  signs  to  the 
child  to  answer  them ;  and  he  said,  "Verily  I  am 
the  servant  of  God :  He  hath  given  me  the  book  of 
the  gospel,  and  hath  appointed  me  a  prophet ;  and  He 
hath  made  me  blessed,  wheresoever  I  shall  be  ;  and 
hath  commanded  me  to  observe  prayer  and  to  give 
alms  so  long  as  I  shall  live  ;  and  He  hath  made  me 
dutiful  towards  my  mother,  and  hath  not  made  me 
proud  or  unhappy :  and  peace  be  on  me  the  day 
whereon  I  was  bora,  and  the  day  whereon  I  shall 
die,  and  the  day  whereon  1  shall  be  raised  to  life." 
This  was  Jesus  the  Son  of  Mary,  the  Word  of  Truth 
concerning  whom  they  doubt  (sur.  xix.). 

Mahomet  is  reported  to  have  said  that  many  men 
have  arrived  at  perfection,  but  only  four  women  ; 
and  that  these  are,  Asia  the  wife  of  Pharaoh,  Mary 
the  daughter  of  Amram,  his  first  wife  Khadijah, 
and  his  daughter  Fatima. 

The  commentators  on  the  Koran  tell  us  that 
every  person  who  comes  into  the  world  is  touched 
at  his  birth  by  the  devil,  and  therefore  cries  out; 
but  that  God  placed  a  veil  between  Mary  and  her 
Son  and  the  Evil  Spirit,  so  that  he  could  not  reach 
them.  For  which  reason  they  were  neither  of  them 
guilty  of  sin,  like  the  rest  of  the  children  of  Adam. 
This  privilege  they  had  in  answer  to  Hannah's  prayer 
for  their  protection  from  Satan.  (Jallalo'ddin  ;  Al 
Beidawi ;  Kitada.)  The  Immaculate  Conception 
therefore,  we  may  note,  was  a  Mahometan  doc 
trine  six  centuries  before  any  Christian  theologians 
or  schoolmen  maintained  it. 

Sale,  Koran,  pp.  39,  79,  250,  458,  Lond.  1734; 
Warner,  Compendium  Historicum  eorum  quae  Mu- 
hammedani  de  Christo  tradiderunt,  Lugd.  Bat. 
L643  ;  Guadagnoli,  Apologia  pro  Christiana  Eeli- 
gione,  Rom.  1631  ;  D'Herbelot,  Bibliotheque  Orien- 
talc,  p.  583,  Paris,  1697  ;  Weil,  Biblische  Lcgcnden 
der  Musclmanner,  p.  230,  Frankf.  1845. 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


267 


t  The  commentators  have  explained  this  expression 
as  signifying  the  breath  of  Gabriel  (Yahya ;  Jallalo'ddin). 
But  this  does  not  seem  to  have  been  Mahomet's  meaning. 

i>  "Origen's Lament,"  the  "Three Discourses"  published 
by  Vossius  as  the  work  of  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  the 
Homily  attributed  to  St.  Athanasius  containing  an  invo- 
cation  of  St.  Mary,  the  Panegyric  attributed  to  St.  Epi- 
Dhanius,  the  "  Christ  Suffering,"  and  the  Oration  contain 
ing  the  story  of  Justina  and  St.  Cyprian,  attributed  to 
Uregory  Naziamen ;  the  Eulogy  of  the  Holy  Virgin, 
and  the  Prayer  attributed  to  Ephrem  Syrus ;  the  Book  oi 
Meditations  attributed  to  St.  Augustine ;  the  Two  Ser 
mons  supposed  to  have  been  delivered  by  Pope  Leo  on 
the  >'eMt  of  the  Annunciation, — are  all  spuni/us. 


VI.  Eniblems. — There  was  a  time  in  the  history 
of  the  Church  wheu  all  the  expressions  used  in  the 
book  of  Canticles  were  applied  at  once  to  St.  Mnrr. 
Consequently  all   the  Eastern   metaphors  of  k»is 
Solomon  have  been  hardened  into  symbols,  mid  re 
presented  in  pictures  or  sculpture,  and  attached  to 
tier  in  popular  litanies.    The  same  method  of  inter 
pretation  was  applied  to  certain  parts  of  the  book 
of  the  Revelation.     Her  chief  emblems  are  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars  (Rev.  xii.  1  ;  Cant.  vi.  10).     The 
name  of  Star  of  the  Sea  is  also  given  her,  from  a 
fanciful  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of  her  name. 
She  is  the  Rose  of  Sharon  (Cant.  ii.  1),  and  the  Lily 
(ii.  2),  the  Tower  of  David  (iv.  4),  tin  Mountain 
of  Myrrh  and  the  Hill  of  Frankincense  \'.v.  6),  the 
Garden  enclosed,  the  Spring  shut  up,  the  Fountain 
sealed  (iv.  12),  the  Tower  of  Ivory  (vii.  4),  the 
Palm-tree  (vii.  7),  the  Closed  Gate  (Ez.  xliv.  2). 
There  is  no  end  to  these  metaphorical  titles.     See 
Mrs.  Jameson's  Legends  of  the  Madonna,  and  the 
ordinary  Litanies  of  the  B.  Virgin. 

VII.  Cultus  of  the  Blessed  Virgin. — We  do  not 
enter  into  the  theological  bearings  of  the  worship  of 
St.  Mary ;  but  we  shall  have  left  our  task  incom 
plete  if  we  do  not  add  a  short  historical  sketch  of 
the  origin,  progress,  and  present  state  of  the  devo 
tion  to  her.     What  was  its  origin  ?     Certainly  not 
the  Bible.     There  is  not  a  word  there  from  which 
it  could  be  inferred  ;  nor  in  the  Creeds  ;  nor  in  the 
Fathers  of  the  first  five  centuries.     We  may  scan 
each  page  that  they  have  left  us,  and  we  shall  find 
nothing  of  the  kind.     There  is  nothing  of  the  sort 
in  the  supposed  works  of  Hermas  and  Barnabas, 
nor  in  the  real  works  of  Clement,  Ignatius,  and 
Polycarp :  that  is,  the  doctrine  is  not  to  be  found 
in  the  1st  century.     There  is  nothing  of  the  sort 
in  Justin  Martyr,  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Theophilus, 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian  :  that  is,  in  the 
2nd  century.     There  is  nothing  of  the  sort  in  Ori 
gen,  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Cyprian,  Methodius, 
Lactantius :  that  is,  in  the  3rd  century.     There  is 
nothing  of  the  sort  in  Eusebius,  Athanasius,  Cyril 
of  Jerusalem.  Hilary,  Macarius,  Epiphanius,  Basil, 
Gregory   Nazianzen,    Ephrem    Syrus,    Gregory   of 
Nyssa,   Ambrose:    that   is,   in    the  4th   century. 
There  is  nothing  of  the  sort  in  Chrysostom,  Augus 
tine,  Jerome,  Basil  of  Seleucia,  Orosius,  Sedulius. 
Isidore,  Theodoret,  Prosper,  Vincentius  Lirinensis, 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Popes  Leo,  Hilarus,  Simplicius, 
Felix,  Gelasius,  Anastasius,  Symmachus :  that  is, 
in  the  5th  century.1     Whence,  then,  did  it  arise  ? 
There  is  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  that  the  origin  of 
the  worship  of  St.  Mary  is  to  be  found  in  the  apo 
cryphal  legends  of  her  birth  and  of  her  death  which 
we  have  given  above.     There  we  find  the  germ  of 
what  afterwards  expanded  into  its  present  portentous 
proportions.     Some  of  the  legends  of  her  birth  are 
as  early  as  the  2nd  or  3rd  century.    They  were  the 
production  of  the  Gnostics,  and  were  unanimously 

Moral  and  Devotional  Theology  of  the  Church  of  Romt 
(Mozley,  Lond.  1857).  The  oration  of  Gregory,  contain 
ing  the  story  of  Justina  and  Cyprian,  is  retained  by  the 
Benedictine  editors  as  genuine ;  and  they  pronounce  that 
nowhere  else  is  the  protection  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary 
so  clearly  and  explicitly  commended  in  the  4th  century. 
The  words  are  :  "  Justina . . .  meditating  on  these  instances 
(and  beseeching  the  Virgin  Mary  to  assist  a  virgin  in  peril), 
throws  before  her  the  charm  of  fasting."  It  is  shown  to  be 
spurious  by  Tyler  (  Worship  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  p.  378, 
Lond.  1844).  Even  suppose  it  were  genuine,  the  contrast 
between  the  strongest  passage  of  the  4th  century  and 
the  ordinary  language;  of  the  19th  would  us  sufficiently 
striking. 


268 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


and  firmly  rejected  by  the  Church  of  the  first  fVe 
centuries  as  fabulous  and  heretical.  The  Gnostic 
tradition  seems  to  have  been  handed  on  to  the 
Collyridians,  whom  we  find  denounced  by  Epi- 
phamus  for  worshipping  the  Virgin  Maiy.  They 
were  regarded  as  distinctly  heretical.  The  words 
which  this  Father  uses  respecting  them  were  pro 
bably  expressive  of  the  sentiments  of  the  entire 
Church  in  the  4th  century.  "  The  whole  thing," 
he  says,  "  is  foolish  and  strange,  and  is  a  device  and 
deceit  of  the  devil.  Let  Mary  be  in  honour.  Let 
the  Lord  be  worshipped.  Let  no  one  worship  Mary " 
(Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixxxix.,  Op.  p.  1066,  Paris,  1662). 
Down  to  the  time  of  the  Nestorian  controversy  the 
cultus  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  would  appear  to  have 
been  wholly  external  to  the  Church,  and  to  have 
been  regarded  as  heretical.  But  the  Nestorian  con 
troversies  produced  a  great  change  of  sentiment  in 
men's  minds.  Nestorius  had  maintained,  or  at  least 
it  was  the  tendency  of  Nestorianism  to  maintain, 
not  only  that  our  Lord  had  two  natures,  the  divine 
and  the  human  (which  was  right),  but  also  that 
He  was  two  persons,  in  such  sort  that  the  child  born 
of  Mary  was  not  divine,  but  merely  an  ordinary 
human  being,  until  the  divinity  subsequently  united 
itself  to  Him.  This  was  condemned  by  the  Council 
of  Ephesus  in  the  year  431 ;  and  the  title  Otoroicos, 
loosely  translated  "  Mother  of  God,"  was  sanc 
tioned.  The  object  of  the  Council  and  of  the  Anti- 
Nestorians  was  in  no  sense  to  add  honour  to  the 
mother,  but  to  maintain  the  true  doctrine  with 
respect  to  the  Son.  Nevertheless  the  result  was 
to  magnify  the  mother,  and,  after  a  time,  at  the 
expense  of  the  Son.  For  now  the  title  QforSicos 
became  a  shibboleth  ;  and  in  art  the  representation  of 
the  Madonna  and  Child  became  the  expression  of  or 
thodox  belief.  Very  soon  the  purpose  for  which  the 
title  and  the  picture  were  first  sanctioned  became 
forgotten,  and  the  veneration  of  St.  Mary  began  to 
spread  within  the  Church,  as  it  had  previously  ex 
isted  external  to  it.  The  legends  too  were  no  longer 
treated  so  roughly  as  before.  The  Gnostics  were 
not  now  objects  of  dread.  Nestorians,  and  afterwards 
Iconoclasts,  were  objects  of  hatred.  The  old  fables 
were  winked  at,  and  thus  they  "  became  the  mytho 
logy  of  Christianity,  universally  credited  among  the 
Southern  nations  of  Europe,  while  many  of  the 
dogmas,  which  they  are  grounded  upon,  have,  as 
a  natural  consequence,  crept  into  the  faith  "  (Lord 
Lindsay,  Christian  Art,  i.  p.  xl.  Lend.  1847).  From 
this  time  the  worship  of  St.  Mary  grew  apace.  It 
agreed  well  with  many  natural  aspirations  of  the 
heart.  To  paint  the  mother  of  the  Saviour  an  ideal 
woman,  with  all  the  grace  and  tenderness  of  woman 
hood,  and  yet  with  none  of  its  weaknesses,  and  then 
to  fall  down  and  worship  the  image  which  the  ima 
gination  had  set  up,  was  what  might  easily  happen, 
and  what  did  happen.  Evidence  was  not  asked  for. 
Perfection  "  was  Becoming"  to  the  mother  of  the 
Lord;  therefore  she  was  perfect.  Adoration  "was 
befitting  "  on  the  part  of  Christians ;  therefore  they 
gave  it.  Any  tales  attributed  to  antiquity  were  re 
ceived  as  genuine ;  any  revelations  supposed  to  be 
made  to  favoured  saints  were  accepted  as  true: 
and  the  Madonna  reigned  as  queen  in  heaven,  in 
earth,  in  purgatory,  and  over  hell.  We  learn  the 
present  state  of  the  religious  regard  in  which  she  is 
held  throughout  the  south  of  Europe  from  St.  Al 
fonso  de'  Liguori,  whose  every  woixi  is  vouched  for 
by  the  whole  weight  of  his  Church's  authority. 
From  the  Glories  of  Mary,  t.y;iiislatnl  from  (lie 
iriginoJ,  and  published  in  Lcndon  in  1852,  we  find 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

that  St.  Mary  is  Queen  of  Mei-cy  (p.  13)  anj 
Mother  of  all  mankind  (p.  23),  our  Life  (p.  52,. 
our  Protectress  in  death  (p.  71),  the  Hop  of  al' 
(p.  79),  our  only  Refuge,  Help,  and  Asylum  (p. 
81)  ;  the  Propitiatory  of  the  whole  world  (p.  81; ; 
the  one  City  of  Refuge  (p.  89)  ;  the  Comfortress  of 
the  world,  the  Refuge  of  the  unfortunate  (p.  100) 
our  Patroness  (p.  106);  Queen  of  Heaven  and  Heft 
(p.  110);  our  Protectress  from  the  Divine  Justice 
and  from  the  Devil  (p.  115);  the  Ladder  of  Para 
dise,  the  Gate  of  Heaven  (p.  121);  the  Mediatrix 
of  grace  (p.  124) ;  the  Dispenser  of  all  graces  (p. 
128)  ;  the  Helper  of  the  Redemption  (p.  133)  ;  the 
Co-operator  in  our  Justification  (p.  133)  ;  a  tender 
Advocate  (p.  145)  ;  Omnipotent  (p.  146)  ;  the  sin 
gular  Refuge  of  the  lost  (p.  156) ;  the  great  Peace 
maker  (p.  165);  the  Throne  prepared  in  mercy 
(p.  165);  the  Way  of  Salvation  (p.  200);  the 
Mediatrix  of  Angels  (p.  278).  In  short,  she  is 
the  Way  (p.  200),  the  Door  (p.  583),  the  Mediator 
(p.  295),  the  Intercessor  (p.  129),  the  Advocate  (p. 
144),  the  Redeemer  (p.  275),  the  Saviour  (p.  343). 

Thus,  then,  in  the  worship  of  the  Blessed  Virgin 
there  are  two  distinctly  marked  periods.  The  first 
is  that  which  commences  with  the  apostolic  times, 
and  brings  us  down  to  the  close  of  the  century  in 
which  the  Council  of  Ephesus  was  held,  during  which 
time  the  worship  of  St.  Mary  was  wholly  external  to 
the  Church,  and  was  regarded  by  the  Church  as  he 
retical,  and  confined  to  Gnostic  and  Collyridian  here 
tics.  The  second  period  commences  with  the  6th 
century,  when  it  began  to  spread  within  the  Church  ; 
and,  in  spite  of  the  shock  given  it  by  the  Reformation, 
has  continued  to  spread,  as  shown  by  Liguori's 
teaching ;  and  is  spreading  still,  as  shown  by  the 
manner  in  which  the  papal  decree  of  Dec.  8,  1854, 
has  been,  not  universally  indeed,  but  yet  generally, 
received.  Even  before  that  decree  was  issued,  the 
sound  of  the  word  "deification"  had  been  heard 
with  reference  to  St.  Mary  (Newman,  Essay  on 
Development,  p.  409,  Lond.  1846) ;  and  she  had 
been  placed  in  "  a  throne  far  above  all  created 
powers,  mediatorial,  intercessory ;"  she  had  been 
invested  with  "  a  title  archetypal ;  with  a  crown 
bright  as  the  morning  star ;  a  glory  issuing  from 
the  Eternal  Throne ;  robes  pure  as  the  heavens ; 
and  a  sceptre  over  all"  (ibid.  p.  406). 

VIII.  Her  Assumption. — Not  only  religious  senti 
ments,  but  facts  grew  up  in  exactly  the  same  way. 
The  Assumption  of  St.  Mary  is  a  fact,  or  an  alleged 
fact.  How  has  it  come  to  be  accepted  ?  At  the  end 
of  the  5th  century  we  find  that  there  existed  a  book, 
De  Transitu  Virginis  Mariae,  which  was  condemned 
by  Pope  Gelasius  as  apocryphal.  This  book  is  with 
out  doubt  the  oldest  foim  of  the  legend,  of  which  the 
books  ascribed  to  St.  Melito  and  St.  John  are  varia 
tions.  Down  to  the  end  of  the  5th  century,  ther, 
the  story  of  the  Assumption  was  external  to  the 
Church,  and  distinctly  looked  upon  by  the  Church 
as  belonging  to  the  heretics  and  not  to  her.  But 
then  came  the  change  of  sentiment  already  referred 
to,  consequent  on  the  Nestorian  controversy.  The 
desire  to  protest  against  the  early  fables  which  had 
been  spread  abroad  by  the  heretics  was  now  passed 
away,  and  had  been  succeeded  by  the  desire  tc 
magnify  her  who  had  brought  forth  Him  who  was 
(Jod.  Accordingly  a  writer,  whose  date  Baronius 
fixes  at  about  this  time  (Ann.  Eccl.  i.  347,  Lucist, 
1738),  suggested  the  possibility  of  the  Assumption, 
but  declared  his  inability  to  decide  tin'  question. 
The  letter  in  which  this  possibility  «r  probability 
is  thrown  out  came  to  be  attributed  to  St. 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 

and  may  be  still  found  among  his  works,  entitled 
Ad  Paulam  et  Eustochium  dc  Asswnptione  B.  Vir 
ginia  (v.  82,  Paris,  1706).     About  the  same  time, 
probablv  or  rather  late,-,  an  insertion  (now  recog 
nized  on  all  hands  to  'oe  a  forgery)  was  made  in 
Kusebii1*'  Chronicle,  to  the  effect  that  "  in  the  year 
A.D.  48  Mary  the  Virgin  was  taken  up  into  heaven, 
as  some  wrote  that  they  had  had  it  revealed  to 
them."     Another  tract  was  written  to  prove  that 
»he  Assumption  was  not  a  thing  in  itself  unlikely ; 
and  this  came  to  be  attributed  to  St.  Augustine, 
mid  may  be  found  in  the  appendix  to  his  works : 
and  a  sermon,  with  a  similar  purport,  was  ascribed 
to  St.  Athanasius.     Thus  the  names  of  Eusebius, 
Jerome,  Augustine,  Athanasius,  and  others,  came 
to   be   quoted   as   maintaining   the   truth   of  the 
Assumption.     The  first  writers  within  the  Church 
in  whose  extant  writings  we  find  the  Assumption 
asserted,  are  Gregory  of  Tours  in  the  6th  century, 
who  has  merely  copied  Melito's  book,  De  Transitu 
(De  Glor.  Mart.  lib.  i.  c.  4;   Migne,  71,  p.  708); 
Andrew  of  Crete,  who  probably  lived   in  the  7th 
century  ;  and  John  of  Damascus,  who  lived  at  the 
beginning  of  the  8th  century.     The  last  of  these 
authors  refers  to  the  Euthymiac  history  as  stating 
that  Marcian  and  Pulcheria  being  in  search  of  the 
hody  of  St.  Mary,  sent  to  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem  to 
inquire  for  it.     Juvenal  replied,  "  In  the  holy  and 
divinely  inspired  Scriptures,  indeed,  nothing  is  re 
corded  of  the  departure  of  the  holy  Mary,  Mother 
of  God.     But  from  an  ancient  and  most  true  tra 
dition  we  have  received,  that  at  the  time  of  her 
glorious  falling  asleep  a.11  the  holy  apostles,  who 
were  going  through  the  world  for  the  salvation  of 
the  nations,  borne  aloft  in  a  moment  of  time,  came 
together  to  Jer  isalem :  and  when  they  were  near 
her  they  had  a  vision  of  angels,  and  divine  melody 
was  heard ;  anc.   then  with  divine  and  more  than 
heavenly  melodf  she  delivered  her  holy  soul  into 
the  hands  of  God  in  an  unspeakable  manner.     But 
that  which  had  borne  God,  being  carried  with  angelic 
and  apostolic  psalmody,  with  funeral  rites,  was  de 
posited  in  a  coffin  at  Gethsemane.     In  this  place  the 
chorus  and  singing  of  the  angels  continued  three 
whole  days.     But  after  three  days,  on  the  ang< 
music  ceasing,  those  of  the  apostles  who  were  present 
opened  the  tomb,  as  one  of  them,  Thomas,  had  been 
absent,  and  on  his  arrival  wished  to  adore  the  body 
which  had  borne  God.     But  her  all  glorious  body 
they  could  not  find ;  but  they  found  the  linen  clothes 
lying,  and  they  were  filled  with  an  ineffable  odour 
of  sweetness  which  proceeded  from  them.  Then  they 
closed  the  coffin.     And  they  were  astonished  at  the 
mysterious  wonder ;    and   they  came  to  no  other 
conclusion  than  that  He  who  had  chosen  to  take 
flesh  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  to  become  a  man, 
*nd  to  be  born  of  l.sr — God  the  Word,  the  Lord  oi 
Glory — and  had  praserved  her  virginity  after  birth, 
was  also  pleased,  after  her  departure,  to  honour  hei 
immaculate  and  unpolluted  body  with  incorruption, 
4*vJ  to  translate  her  before  the  common  resurrection 
of  ail  men"  (St.  Joan.  Damasc.  Op.  ii.  880,  Venice, 
1748).    It  is  quite  clear  that  this  is  the  same  legeni 
MI  that  which  we  have  before  given.     Here,  then 
we  see  it  b-ought  over  the  borders  and  planta 
jrithin  the  Church,  if  this  "  Euthymiac  history ' 
if  to  be  accepted  as  veritable,  by  Juvenal  of  Jeru 
salem  in  the  5th  century,  or  else  by  Gregory  o 
Tours  in  the  6th  csntury,  or  by  Andrew  of  Crete 


MARY  THE  VIRGIN 


2t>8 


!  This  "  Euthymiac  History  "  is  involved  in  the  utmos 
aonftuion     Cave  considers  the  Homily  proved  spurloni 


n  the  7th  century,  or  finally,  by  John  of  Da 
mascus  in  the  8th  century  (see  his  three  JIamiliej 
yn  the  Sleep  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary,  Op.  ii. 
857-886).'  The  same  legend  is  given  in  a  slightly 
different  form  as  veritable  history  by  Nicephorus 
2allistus  iu  the  13th  century  ^Niceph.  i.  171,  Paris 
1630)  ;  and  the  fact  of  the  Assumptijn  is  stereo- 
yped  in  the  Breviary  Services  for  Aug.  15th  (Brev. 
Rom.  Pars  aest.  p.  551,  Milan,  1851).  Here  again, 
hen,  we  see  a  legend  originated  by  heretics,  and 
•emaining  external  to  the  Church  till  the  close  oi 
;he  5th  century,  creeping  into  the  Church  during 
the  6th  and  7th  centuries,  and  finally  ratified  by 
;he  authority  both  of  Rome  and  Constantinople. 
SeeBaronius,  Ann.  Eccl.  (i.  344,  Lucca,  1738),  and 
Martyroloffium  (p.  314,  Paris,  1607). 

IX.  Her  Immaculate  Conception.  —  Similarly 
with  regard  to  the  sinlessness  of  St.  Maiy,  which 
has  issued  in  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Con 
ception.  Down  to  the  close  of  the  5th  century 
bhe  sentiment  with  respect  to  her  was  identical 
with  that  which  is  expressed  by  theologians  of  the 
Church  of  England  (see  Pearson,  On  the  Creed").  She 
was  regarded  as  "  highly  favoured ;"  as  a  woman 
arriving  as  near  the  perfection  of  womanhood  as  it 
was  possible  for  human  nature  to  arrive,  but  yet 
liable  to  the  infirmities  of  human  nature,  and  some 
times  led  away  by  them.  Thus,  in  the  2nd  cen 
tury,  Tertullian  represents  her  as  guilty  of  unbelief 
(De  came  Christi,  vii.  315,  and  Adv.  Marcian. 
iv.  19,  p.  433,  Paris,  1695).  In  the  3rd  century, 
Origen  interprets  the  sword  which  was  to  pierce  her 
bosom  as  being  her  unbelief,  which  caused  her  to 
be  offended  (Horn,  in  Luc.  xvii.  iii.  952,  Paris, 
1733).  In  the  4th  century  St.  Basil  gives  the 
same  interpretation  of  Simeon's  words  (Ep.  260,  iii. 
400,  Paris,  1721) ;  and  St.  Hilary  speaks  of  Lei 
as  having  to  come  into  the  severity  of  the  final 
judgment  (In  Ps.  cxix.  p.  262,  Paris,  1693).  In 
the  5th  century  St.  Chrysostom  speaks  of  the 
"  excessive  ambition,"  "  foolish  arrogancy,"  and 
"  vain-glory,"  which  made  her  stand  and  desire 
to  speak  with  Him  (vii.  467,  Paris,  1718) ;  and 
St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  (so  entirely  is  he  misrepre 
sented  by  popular  writers)  speaks  of  her  as  failing  in 
faith  when  present  at  the  Passion — as  being  weaker 
in  the  spiritual  life  than  St.  Peter — as  being  en 
trusted  to  St.  John,  because  he  was  capable  of 
explaining  to  her  the  mystery  of  the  Cross — as 
inferior  to  the  apostles  in  knowledge  and  belief  of 
the  resurrection  (iv.  1064,  vi.  391,  Paris,  1638). 
It  is  plain  from  these  and  other  passages,  which 
might  be  quoted,  that  the  idea  of  St.  Mary's  exemp 
tion  from  even  actual  sins  of  infirmity  and  imperfec 
tion,  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  external  to  the  Church. 
Nevertheless  there  grew  up,  as  was  most  natural,  a 
practice  of  looking  upon  St.  Mary  as  an  example  to 
other  women,  and  investing  her  with  an  ideal  cha 
racter  of  beauty  and  sweetness.  A  very  beautiful 
picture  of  what  a  girl  ought  to  be  is  drawn  by 
St.  Ambrose  (De  Virgin,  ii.  2,  p.  164,  Paris,  1690), 
and  attached  to  St.  Mary.  It  is  drawn  wholly  from 
the  imagination  (as  may  be  seen  by  his  making  one 
of  her  characteristics  to  be  that  she  never  went  out 
of  doors  except  when  she  accompanied  her  parents 
to  church),  but  there  is  nothing  in  it  which  is  in 
any  way  superhuman.  Similarly  we  find  St.  Je 
rome  speaking  of  the  clear  light  of  Mary  hiding  th« 
little  fires  of  other  women,  such  as  Anna  and  Elisa- 

by  its  reference  to  it    Sec  ffistoria,  Literar.  i.  682,  626 
Oxf,  mn. 


270 


MAR* 


beth  (vi.  671,  Verona,  1734).  St.  Augustine 
takes  us  a  step  further.  He  again  and  again  speaks 
of  her  as  under  original  sin  (iv.  241,  x.  654,  &c., 
Pains,  1700) ;  but  with  respect  to  her  actual  sin  he 
says  that  he  would  rather  not  enter  on  the  ques 
tion,  for  it  was  possible  (how  could  we  tell  ?)  that 
God  had  given  her  sufficient  gra;e  to  keep  her  free 
from  actual  sin  (x.  144).  At  this  time  the  change 
of  mind  before  referred  to,  as  originated  by  the 
Nestorian  controversies,  was  spreading  within  the 
Church ;  and  it  became  more  and  more  the  general 
belief  that  St.  Mary  was  preserved  from  actual  sin 
by  the  grace  of  God.  This  opinion  had  become 
almost  universal  in  the  12th  century.  And  now  a 
further  step  was  taken.  It  was  maintained  by  St. 
Bernard  that  St.  Mary  was  conceived  in  original  sin, 
but  that  before  her  birth  she  was  cleansed  from  it, 
like  John  the  Baptist  and  Jeremiah.  This  was  the 
sentiment  of  the  13th  century,  as  shown  by  the 
works  of  Peter  Lombard  (Sentent.  lib.  iii.  dist.  3), 
Alexander  of  Hales  (Sum.  Theol.  num.  ii.  art.  2), 
Aibertus  Magnus  (Sentent.  lib.  iii.  dist.  3),  and 
Thomas  Aquinas  (Sum.  T/ieol.  quaest.  xxvii.  art. 
1,  and  Comm.  in  Lib.  Senlent.  dist.  3,  quaest.  1 ). 
Early  in  the  14th  century  died  J.  Duns  Scotus,  and 
he  is  the  first  theologian  or  schoolman  who  threw 
out  as  a  possibility  the  idea  of  an  Immaculate  Con 
ception,  which  would  exempt  St.  Maiy  from  original 
as  well  as  actual  sin.  This  opinion  had  been  growing 
up  for  the  two  previous  centuries,  having  originated 
apparently  in  France,  and  having  been  adopted,  to 
St.  Bernard's  indignation,  by  the  canons  of  Lyons. 
From  this  time  forward  there  was  a  struggle  between 
the  maculate  and  immaculate  conceptionists,  which 
has  led  at  length  to  the  decree  of  Dec.  8,  1854,  but 
which  has  not  ceased  with  that  decree.  Here,  then, 
we  may  mark  four  distinct  theories  with  respect  to 
the  sinlessness  of  St.  Maiy.  The  first  is  that  of  the 
early  Church  to  the  close  of  the  5th  century.  It 
taught  that  St.  Mary  was  born  in  original  sin,  was 
liable  to  actual  sin,  and  that  she  fell  into  sins  of 
infirmity.  The  second  extends  from  the  close  of  the 
5th  to  the  12th  century.  It  taught  that  St.  Mary 
was  born  in  original  sin,  but  by  God's  grace  was 
saved  from  falling  into  actual  sins.  The  third  is 
par  excellence  that  of  the  13th  century.  It  taught 
that  St.  Mary  was  conceived  in  original  sin,  but  was 
sanctified  in  the  womb  before  birth.  The  fourth 
may  be  found  obscurely  existing,  but  only  existing 
to  be  condemned,  in  the  12th  and  13th  centuries  ; 
brought  into  the  light  by  the  speculations  of  Scotus 
and  his  followers  in  the  14th  century ;  thencefor 
ward  running  parallel  with  and  struggling  with  the 
sanctijtcata  in  utero  theory,  till  it  obtained  its  appa 
rently  final  victory,  so  far  as  the  Roman  Church  is 
concerned,  in  the  1 9th  century,  and  in  the  lifetime  of 
ourselves.  It  teaches  that  St.  Mary  was  not  conceived 
or  born  in  original  sin,  but  has  been  wholly  exempt 
from  all  sin,  original  and  actual,  in  her  conception 
and  birth,  throughout  her  life,  and  in  her  death. 

See  Laborde,  La  Croyance  a  I'Immaculee  Con 
ception  ne  pent  devenir  Dogme  dc  Foi,  Paris,  1855 ; 
Perrone,  De  Immnculato  B.  V.  M.  Conceptu, 
Avenione,  1848  ;  Christian  Remembrancer,  vols. 
xxiii.  and  xxxvii. ;  Bp.  Wilberforce,  Some — lier 
new  Dogma,  and  our  Duties,  Oxf.  1855;  Obser- 
vateur  Catholique,  Paris,  1855-60;  Fray  Morgaez, 
Examen  Bullae  Ine/abilis,  Paris,  1858.  [F.  M.] 

MARY  (Rec.  Text,  with  D,  Maptet/*;  Lach- 
mann,  with  ABC,  Mapfo :  Maria},  a  Roman 
Christnn  who  is  greeted  by  St.  Paul  in  his  Epistk 
to  the  Romans  (xvi.  G)  as  having  toiled  hard  f»-  j 


MASCHIL 

him  —  or  according  to  some  MSS.  for  them.  No 
thing  more  is  known  of  her.  But  Professor  Jowett 
(Tlus  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  &c.  ad  foe.)  has  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  hers  is  the  only  Jewish 
name  in  the  list.  G.] 

MAS'ALOTH  (M«<roA«S0  ;  Alex.  MecrvroAeSfl  : 
Masaloth),  a  place  in  Arbela,  which  Bacchides  and 
Alcimus,  the  two  generals  of  Demetrius,  besieged 
and  took  with  great  slaughter  on  their  way  from 
the  north  to  Gilgal  (1  Mace.  ix.  2).  Arbela  is  pro 
bably  the  modern  Irbid,  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Wady  el-Humdm,  about  3  miles  N.W.  of  Tiberias, 
and  half  that  distance  from  the  Lake.  The  name 
Mesaloth  is  omitted  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  11,  §1), 
nor  has  any  trace  of  it  been  since  diiTOvered  ;  but  the 
word  may,  as  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  398)  suggests,  have 
originally  signified  the  "  steps  "  or  "  terraces  "  (as  if 

J"li?pO).     In  that  case  it  was  probably  a  name 

given  to  the  remarkable  caverns  still  existing  on 
the  northern  side  of  the  same  Wady,  and  now  called 
Kula'at  Ibn  Ma'am,  the  "  fortress  of  the  son  of 
Maan"  —  caverns  which  actually  stood  a  remarkable 
siege  of  some  length,  by  the  forces  of  Herod  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  i.  16,  §4). 

A  town  with  the  similar  name  of  MISHAL,  or 
MASHAL,  occurs  in  the  list,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher,  bat 
whether  its  position  was  near  that  assumed  above 
for  Masaloth,  we  have  no  means  of  judging.  [G.] 


MAS'CHIL 


:    intellects, 


but  in  Ps.  liii.  intelligentia).  The  title  of  thirteen 
Psalms;  xxxii.,  xlii.,  xliv.,  xlv.,  lii.-lv.,  Ixxiv., 
Ixxviii.,  Ixxxviii.,  Ixxxix.,  cxlii.  Jerome  in  his 
version  from  the  Hebrew  renders  it  uniformly  eru- 
ditio,  "  instruction,"  except  in  Pss.  xlii.,  Ixxxix., 
where  he  has  intellectus,  "  understanding."  The 
margin  of  our  A.  V.  has  in  Pss.  Ixxiv.,  Ixxviii., 
Ixxxix.,  "  to  give  instruction  ;"  and  in  Pss.  Ixxxviii., 
cxlii.,  "  giving  instruction."  In  other  passages  in 
which  the  word  occurs  it  is  rendered  "  wise  "  (Job 
xxii.  2;  Prov.  x.  5,  19,  &c.),  "  prudent"  (Prov. 
xix.  14;  Am.  v.  13),  "expert"  (Jer.  iv.  9),  and 
"  skilful  "  (Dan.  i.  4).  In  the  Psalm  in  which  it 
first  occurs  as  a  title,  the  root  of  the  word  is  found  in 
another  form  (Ps.  xxxii.  8),  "  I  will  instruct 
thee,"  from  which  circumstance,  it  has  been  in 
ferred,  the  title  was  applied  to  the  whole  Psalm 
as  "  didactic."  But  since  "  Maschil  "  is  affixed  to 
many  Psalms  which  would  scarcely  be  classed  as 
didactic,  Gesenius  (or  rather  Roediger)  explains  it 
as  denoting  "  any  sacred  song,  relating  to  divine 
things,  whose  end  it  was  to  promote  wisdom  and 
piety"  (Thes.  p.  1330).  Ewald  (Dichterd.  alt.  B. 
i.  25)  regards  Ps.  xlvii.  7  (A.  V.  "  sing  ye  praises 
with  understanding  ;"  Heb.  maschil},  as  the  key  to 
the  meaning  of  Maschil,  which  in  his  opinion  is  a 
musical  term,  denoting  a  melody  requiring  gi-eat 
skill  in  its  execution.  The  objection  to  the  expla 
nation  of  Roediger  is,  that  it  is  wanting  in  precision. 
and  would  allow  the  term  "  Maschil  "  to  be  applied 
to  every  Psalm  in  the  Psalter.  That  it  is  employed 
to  indicate  to  the  conductor  of  the  Temple  choir  the 
manner  in  which  the  Psalm  was  to  be  sung,  or  the 
melody  to  which  it  was  adopted,  mther  th.in  a?  de 
scriptive  of  its  contents,  seems  to  be  implied  in  the 
title  of  Ps.  xlv.,  where,  after  "  Maschil,"  is  added 
"  a  song  of  loves  "  to  denote  the  special  character  ol 
the  Psalm.  Again,  with  few  exceptions,  it  is  asso 
ciated  with  directions  for  the  choir.  "  to  the  chief 
musician,"  £c.,  and  occupies  the  s;,me  position  in 
the  titles  as  Michtnm  (IV.  xvi.,  M.-  U.),  Afizmat 


MASH 

VA.  V.  "  Psalm ;"  Ps.  iv.-vi.,  &c.),  and  Shiggaion 
(Ps.  vii.).  If,  therefore,  we  regard  it  as  originally 
used,  in  the  sense  of  "  didactic,"  to  indicate  the  cha 
racter  of  one  particular  Psalm,  it  might  have  been 
applied  to  others  as  being  set  to  the  melody  of  the  ori 
ginal  Maschil-Psalm.  But  the  suggestion  of  Ewald, 
given  above,  has  most  to  commend  it.  Comparing 
"  Maschil "  with  the  musical  terms  already  alluded 
to,  and  observing  the  different  manner  in  which  the 
character  of  a  psalm  is  indicated  in  other  instances 
(I  Chr.  xvi.  7  ;  Pss.  xxxviii.,  Ixx.,  titles),  it  seems 
probable  that  it  was  used  to  convey  a  direction  to 
the  singers  as  to  the  mode  in  which  they  were  to 
sing.  There  appear  to  have  been  Maschils  of  dif 
ferent  kinds,  for  in  addition  to  those  of  David  which 
form  the  greater  number,  there  are  others  of  Asaph 
(Pss.  Ixxiv., Ixxviii.),  Heman  the  Ezrahite  (Ixxxviii.), 


and  Ethan  (Ixxxix.). 


[W.  A.  W.] 


MASH  (t?» :  Moff6x :  Mes),  one  of  the  sons 
of  Aram,  and  the  brother  of  Uz,  Hul,  and  Gether 
(Gen.  x.  23).  Jn  1  Chr.  i.  17  the  name  appears  as 
Meshech,  and  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.,  as  above 
given,  leads  to  the  inference  that  a  similar  form  also 
existed  in  some  of  the  copies  of  Genesis.  It  may 
further  be  noticed  that  in  the  Chronicles,  Mash  and 
his  brothers  are  described  as  sons  of  Shem  to  the  omis 
sion  of  Aram  ;  this  discrepancy  is  easily  explained : 
the  links  to  connect  the  names  are  omitted  in  other 
instances  (comp.  ver.  4),  the  ethnologist  evidently 
assuming  that  they  were  familiar  to  his  readers. 
As  to  the  geographical  position  of  Mash,  Josephus 


MASTICH-TREK  271 

MAS'PHA.    1.  (MaffffTi<pd.6  •  Alex.  Mairo  rj<pa ; 
a.)  A  place  opposite  to  (/careVovrj)  Jeru- 


salem,  at  which  Judas  Maccabaeus  and  his  followers 
assembled  themselves  to  bewail  the  desolation  of 
the  city  and  the  sanctuary,  and  to  inflame  their  re 
sentment  before  the  battle  of  Emmaus,  by  the  sight, 
not  only  of  the  distant  city,  which  was  probably 
visible  from  the  eminence,  but  also  of  the  Book  of 
the  Law  mutilated  and  profaned,  and  of  other 
objects  of  peculiar  preciousuess  and  sanctity  (1  Mace, 
iii.  46).  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  is  identical 
with  MIZPEH  of  Benjamin,  the  ancient  sanctuary 
at  which  Samuel  had  convened  the  people  on  au 
occasion  of  equal  emergency.  In  fact,  Maspha,  or 
more  accurately  MassSpha,  is  merely  the  form  in 
which  the  LXX.  uniformly  render  the  Hebrew 
name  Mizpeh. 

2.  (Maa/j<f><£  in  both  MSS. ;  but  Josephus  MaA- 
\ijv  i  Maspha.')  One  of  the  cities  which  were  taken 
from  the  Ammonites  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  in  his 
campaign  on  the  east  of  Jordan  (1  Mace.  v.  35) 
It  is  probably  the  ancient  city  of  Mizpeh  of  Gilead. 
The  Syriac  has  the  curious  variation  of  Olim, 

salt."  Perhaps  Josephus  also  reads  l"!?Df 
"  salt."  [G-] 

MASR'EKAH  (P!jriK>»:  Ma<r(r6KKas,  in 
Chron.  MatreK/cas,  and  so  Alex,  in  both:  Mase- 
reca,  Maresca),  an  ancient  place,  the  native  spot 
of  Samlah,  one  of  the  old  kings  of  the  Edomites 
(Gen.  xxxvi.  36 ;  1  Chr.  i.  47).  Interpreted  as 


(Ant.  i.  6,  §4)  connects  the  name  with  Mesene  in  ;  HebreW)  tne  name  refers  to  vineyai-ds— as  if  from 
lower   Babylonia,   on   the   shores   of  the   Persian    gara^  a  root  w;th  which  we  are  familiar  in  the 
Gulf — a  locality  too  remote,  however,    from   the 
other  branches  of  the  Aramaic  race.     The  more 


'  vine  of  Sorek,"  that  is,  the  choice  vine  ;  and  led 
by  this,  Knobel  (Genesis,  257)  proposes  to  place 


probable  opinion  is  that  which  has  been  adopted  by  Masrekah  in  the  district  of  the  Idumaean  mountains 
Bochart  (Phal.  ii.  11),  Winer  (Ewb.  s.  v.),  and  I  north  of  petraj  ^  ^^  the  Hadj  route)  where 
Knobel  (VSlkert.  p.  237)— viz.  that  the  name_  Burcym-rtt  found "  extensive  vineyards,"  and  "great 


Mash  is  represented  by  the  Mons  Masius  of 
classical  writers,  a  range  which  forms  the  northern 
boundary  of  Mesopotamia,  between  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates  (Strab.  xi.  pp.  506,  527).  Knobel 
reconciles  this  view  with  that  of  Josephus  by  the 
supposition  of  a  migration  from  the  north  of  Meso 
potamia  to  the  south  of  Babylonia,  where  the  race 
may  have  been  known  in  later  times  under  the 
name  of  Meshech :  the  progress  of  the  population 
in  these  parts  was,  however,  in  an  opposite  direc 
tion,  from  south  to  north.  Kalisch  (Co/mm.,  on-  Gen. 
p.  286)  connects  the  names  of  Mash  and  Mysia : 
this  is,  to  say  the  least,  extremely  doubtful ;  both 
the  Mysians  themselves  and  their  name  (  =  Moesia) 
were  probably  of  European  origin.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MASH'AL  ('pKfo :  Maao-5 :  Masai),  the  con 
tracted  or  provincial  (Galilean)  form  in  which,  in 
the  later  list  of  Levitical  cities  (1  Chr.  vi.  74),  the 
r.ame  of  the  town  appears,  which  in  the  earlier  re 
cords  is  given  as  MISHEAL  and  MISHAL.  It  suggests 
the  MASALOTII  of  the  Maccabean  history.  [G.] 

MASI'AS  (Mio-aiow;  Alex.  Mowfay :  Malsith), 
one  of  the  servant?  of  Solomon,  whose  descendants 
•  -etr.rned  with  Zorobabel  (1  Esdr.  v.  34). 


quantities  of  dried  grapes,"  made  by  the  tribe  of  the 
Eefaya  for  the  supply  of  Gaza  and  for  the  Mecca 
pilgrims  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  Aug.  21).  But  this 
is  mere  conjecture,  as  no  name  at  all  corresponding 
with  Masrekah  has  been  yet  discovered  in  that  loca 
lity.  Schwarz  (215)  mentions  a  site  called  En- 
Masrak,  a  few  miles  south  of  Petra.  He  probably 
refers  to  the  place  marked  Ain  Mafrak  in  Palmer's 
Map,  and  Ain  el-  Usdaka  in  Kiepert's  (Robinson,  Bib. 
Ees.  1856).  The  versions  are  unanimous  in  adhering 


more  or  less  closely  to  the  Hebrew. 


[GO 


MAS'SA 


Macnrij:  Massa),  a  son  of 


MASMAN 


;  Alex.  Maafffuiv  :  Mas- 


man).  This  name  occurs  for  SHEMAIAH  in  1  Esd. 
«ii.  43  (comp.  Ezr.  viii.  16).  The  Greek  text  is 
evidently  con-upt,  2oj«afas  (A.  V.  Mamaias),  which 
is  the  true  reading,  being  misplaced  in  ver.  44  after 
Alnathan. 
MASORA.  [OLD  TESTAMENT.] 


Ishmael  (Gen.  xxv  14  ;  1  Chr.  i.  30).  His  de 
scendants  were  not  improbably  the  Masani,  who 
are  placed  by  Ptolemy  (v.  19,  §2)  in  the  east  of 
Arabia,  near  the  borders  of  Babylonia.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MASSAH  (HOE  :  irejpoo>i&s),  ».  e.  "  tempta 

tion,"  a  name  given  to  the  spot,  also  called  MERI- 
BAH,  where  the  Israelites  "  tempted  Jehovah, 
saying,  Is  Jehovah  among  us  or  not?"  (Ex.  xvi. 
7).  The  name  also  occurs,  with  mention  of  the 
circumstances  which  occasioned  it,  in  Ps.  zcv.  8,  9, 
and  its  Greek  equivalent  in  Heb.  iii.  8.  [H.  H.~| 

MASSI'AS  (yiaffffias  :  Hismaenis)  =  MAA- 
SEIAH  3  (1  Esd.  ix.  22;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  22). 

MASTICH-TREE  (<TX«"OS,  lentiscus)  occurs 
only  in  the  Apocrypha  (Susan,  ver.  54»),  where  the 


n  This  verse  contains  a  happy  play  upon  the  word 
"  Under  what  tree  sawest  thou  them  ? . . .  under  a  niast.ich- 
tree  (VTTO  vxlvov).  And  Daniel  said . .  .  tbo  angel  of  God 


272 


MASTICH-TBEE 


margin  of  the  A.  V.  has  lenlisk.  There  is  r.o 
doubt  that  the  Greek  word  is  correctly  rendered,  as 
is  evident  from  the  description  of  it  by  Theophrastus 
(Hist.  Plant,  ix.  i.  §2,  4,  §7,  &c.) ;  Pliny  (N.  II. 
iii.  36,  xxiv.  28) ;  Dioscorides  (i.  90),  and  other 
writers.  Herodotus  (iv.  177)  compares  the  fruit 
of  the  lotus  (the  Rhamnus  lotus,  Linn.,  not  the 
Egyptian  Nelumbium  speciosum)  in  size  with  the 
mastich  berry,  and  Babrius  (3,  5)  says  its  leaves 
are  browsed  by  goats.  The  fragrant  resin  known 
in  the  arts  as  "  mastick,"  and  which  is  obtained  by 
incisions  made  in  the  trunk  in  the  month  of  August, 
is  the  produce  of  this  tree,  whose  scientific  name  is 
1'istacia  lentiscus.  It  is  used  with  us  to  strengthen 
the  teeth  and  gums,  and  was  so  applied  by  the 
ancients,  by  whom  it  was  much  prized  on  this  ac 
count,  and  for  its  many  supposed  medicinal  virtues. 
Lucian  (Lexiph.  12)  uses  the  term  0'x»«'OTpc6/cT»js 
of  one  who  chews  mastich  wood  in  order  to  whiten 
his  teeth.  Martial  (Ep.  xiv.  22)  recommends  a 
mastich  toothpick  (dentiscalpiurn).  Pliny  (xxiv. 
7)  speaks  of  the  leaves  of  this  tree  being  rubbed 
on  the  teeth  for  toothache.  Dioscorides  (i.  90) 
says  the  resin  is  often  mixed  with  other  materials 
and  used  as  tooth-powdei ,  and  that  if  chewed,*  it 
imparts  a  sweet  odour  to  the  breath.  Both  Pliny 
and  Dioscorides  state  that  the  best  mastich  comes 
from  Chios,  and  to  this  day  the  Arabs  prefer  that 
which  is  imported  from  that  island  (comp.  Nie- 
buhr,  Beschr.  von  Arab.  p.  144;  Galen,  de  fac. 
Simpl.  7,  p.  69).  Tournefort  (Voyages,  ii.  58-61, 
transl.  1741)  has  given  a  full  and  very  interesting 
account  of  the  Lentisks  or  Mastich  plants  of  Scio 
(Chios) :  he  says  that  "  the  towns  of  the  island  are 
distinguished  into  three  classes,  those  del  Campo, 
those  of  Apanomeria,  and  those  where  they  plant 
Lentisk-trees,  from  whence  the  mastick  in  tears  is 


Mutich  (Pillar 


produced."  Tournefort  enumerates  several  Lentisk- 
tive  villages.  Of  the  trees  he  says,  "  these  trees  are 
very  wide  spread  and  circular,  ten  or  twelve  foot 
tall,  consisting  of  several  branchy  stalks  which  in 


MATTAN 

time  grow  crooked.  The  biggest  trunks  are  a  fxr! 
diameter,  covered  with  a  bark,  greyish,  rugged 

chapt the  leaves  are  disposed  in  three  or  foui 

couples  on  each  side,  about  an  inch  long,  narrow  at 
the  beginning,  pointed  at  their  extremity,  half  an 
inch  broad  about  the  middle.  From  the  junctures 
of  the  leaves  grow  flowers  in  bunches  like  grapes 
(see  woodcut) ;  the  fruit  too  grows  like  bunches  of 
{•rapes,  in  each  berry  whereof  is  contained  a  white 
kernel.  These  trees  blow  in  May,  the  fruit  does  not 
ripen  but  in  autumn  and  winter."  This  writer 
gives  the  following  description  of  the  mode  in  which 
the  mastich  gum  is  procured.  "  They  begin  to  make 
iucisions  in  these  trees  in  Scio  the  first  of  August, 
cutting  the  bark  crossways  with  huge  knives,  without 
touching  the  younger  branches ;  next  day  the  nutri 
tious  juice  distils  in  small  tears,  which  by  little  and 
little  form  the  mastick  grains ;  they  harden  on  the 
ground,  and  are  carefully  swept  up  from  under  the 
trees.  The  height  of  the  crop  is  about  the  middle  of 
August  if  it  be  dry  serene  weather,  but  if  it  be  rainy, 
the  tears  are  all  lost.  Likewise  towards  the  end  of 
September  the  same  incisions  furnish  mastick,  but 
in  lesser  quantities."  Besides  the  uses  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  above,  the  people  of  Scio  put 
grains  of  this  resin  in  perfumes,  and  in  their  bread 
before  it  goes  to  the  oven. 

Mastick  is  one  of  the  most  important  products  of 
the  East,  being  extensively  used  in  the  preparation 
of  spirits,  as  juniper  berries  are  with  us,  as  a  sweet 
meat,  as  a  masticatory  for  preserving  the  gums  and 
teeth,  as  an  antispasmodic  in  medicine,  and  as  an 
ingredient  in  varnishes.  The  Greek  writers  occa 
sionally  use  the  word  ff-^ivos  for  an  entirely  dif 
ferent  plant,  viz.,  the  Squill  (Scilla  maritima') 
(see  Aristoph.  Plat.  715;  Sprengel,  Flor.  Hippoc. 
41 ;  The,ophr.  Hist.  Plant,  v.  6,  §10).  The  Pis- 
tacia  lentiscus  is  common  on  the  shores  of  the  M<>- 
diterranean.  According  to  Strand  (Flor.  Palaest. 
No.  559)  it  has  been  observed  at  Joppa,  both  by 
!  Kauwolf  and  Pococke.  The  Mastich-tree  Mongs  to 
the  natural  order  Anacardiaceae.  [W.  H.] 

MATHANI'AS  (MaTfloWos:  Mathathias)  = 
MATTANIAH,  a  descendant  of  Pahath-Moab  (1  Esd. 
ix.  31 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30). 

MATHU'SALA  (Ma0<w<r<£Aa :  Mathusale)  = 
METHUSELAH,  the  son  of  Enoch  (Luke  iii.  37). 

MAT'RED  (T1B»:  Marpaffl;  Alex.  MarpatiB: 
Hatred),  a  daughter  of  Mezahab,  and  mother  of 
Mehetabel,  who  was  wife  of  Hadar  (or  Hadad)  of 
Pau,  king  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  39  ;  1  Chr.  i.  50). 
Respecting  the  kings  of  Edcm  whose  records  are 
contained  in  the  chapters  referred  to,  see  HADAD, 

1  RAM,  &c.       .  [E.  S.  P.] 

MAT'RI  0-]BBn,  with  the  art.  properly  "  the 

Matri:"  Marrapi;  Alex. Mar-rapti and  yiarraptlr: 
Metrf),  a  family  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  to  which 
Saul  the  king  of  Israel  belonged  (1  Sam  x.  21). 

MAT'TAN  (jn»  :  MaOck  ;  Alex.  MaXw  in 
Kings ;  MarBdv  in  Chron. :  Mathari).  1.  The 
priest  of  Baal  slain  before  his  altars  in  the  idol 
temple  at  Jerusalem,  at  the  time  when  Jehoiada 
swept  away  idolatry  from  Juduh  (2  K.  xi.  18 

2  Chr.  xxiii.  17).     He  probably  accompanied  Atha- 


hath  received  the  sentence  of  God  to  cut  thee  In  two 
><rxi«r«  <re  fieVov).  This  is  unfortunately  lost  in  our 
version ;  but  it  is  preserved  by  the  Vulgate,  "  sub  schino 
.  .  scindet  te;"  and  by  Luther,  "  Linde  . . .  flnden."  A 
fW.Uar  play  occurs  ir  vers.  58,  59,  between  irpivov,  and 


irpurtu  o-e.     For  the  bearing  of  these  and  similar  charac 
teristics  on  the  date  and  origin  of  the  book,  see  SUSANNA. 
a  Whence  the  derivation  of  mattich,  fram  fuurrt'xi),  tne 
gum  of  the  a-\ivof,  from  fiaoraf ,  /ioo  -ix«w,  uao-orua 
"  to  chew,'    "  to  masticate." 


MATTANAH 

iiah  from  Samaria,  and  would  thus  be  the  first 
priest  of  the  Baal-worship  which  Jehoram  king  of 
Judah,  following  in  the  steps  of  his  father-in-law 
Ahab,  established  at  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxi.  6,  13). 
Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  7,  §3)  calls  him  WlaaBdv. 

U.  CNdOw.)  The  father  of  Shephatiah  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  1).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MATTANAH  (rUflO  :    Mw9anulv  ;   Alex. 


MATTATHIAB 


273 


tila.v6a.veiv  :  Matthana),  a  station  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  (Num.  xxi. 
18,  19).  It  lay  next  beyond  the  well,  or  Beer,  and 
between  it  and  Nahaliel  ;  Nahaliel  again  being  but 
one  day's  journey  from  the  Barnoth  or  heights  of 
Moab.  Mattanah  was  therefore  probably  situated 
to  the  S.E.  of  the  Dead  S«i,  hut  no  name  like  it 
appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered.  The  meaning 
at  the  root  of  the  word  (if  taken  as  Hebrew)  is  a 
"  gift/'  and  accordingly  the  Targumists  —  Onkelos 
as  well  as  Pseudojonathau  and  the  Jerusalem  —  treat 
Mattanah  as  if  a  synonym  for  BEER,  the  well 
which  was  "given"  to  the  people  (ver.  16).  In 
the  same  vein  they  further  translate  the  names  in 
verse  20  ;  and  treat  them  as  denoting  the  valleys 
^Nahaliel)  and  the  heights  (Bamoth),  to  which  the 
miraculous  well  followed  the  camp  in  its  journey- 
ings.  The  legend  is  noticed  under  BEER.»  By 
Le  Clerc  it  is  suggested  that  Mattanah  may  be  the 
same  with  the  mysterious  word  Vahcb  (ver.  14  ; 
A.  V.  "  what  He  did  ")  —  since  the  meaning  of  that 
word  in  Arabic  is  the  same  as  that  of  Mattanah  iu 
Hebrew.  [G.] 

MATTANTAH  (fVJnB:  BarrBarlcu;  Alex. 
MeOffttvlat  :  Matthanias).  1.  The  original  name 
of  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah,  which  was  changed 
when  Nebuchadnezzar  placed  him  on  the  throne 
instead  of  his  nephew  Jehoiachin  (2  K.  xxiv.  17) 
In  like  manner  Pharaoh  had  changed  the  name  of 
his  brother  Eliakim  to  Jehoiakim  on  a  similar  occa 
sion  (2  K.  xxiii.  34),  when  he  restored  the  succes 
sion  to  the  elder  branch  of  the  royal  family  (comp. 
2  K.  xxiii.  31,  36). 

2.  (MarBavlas  in  Chr.,  and  Neh.  xi.  17  ;  MOT- 
Oavia  Neh.  xii.  8,  35;  Alex.  Ma00(wfay,  Neh.  xi. 
17,  Madavla,  Neh.  xii.  8,  10.ad6a.via,  Neh.  xii.  35: 
Mathania,  exc.  Neh.  xii.  8,  35,  Mathanias).  A 
Levite  singer  of  the  sons  of  Asaph  (1  Chr.  ix.  15). 
He  is  described  as  the  son  of  Micah,  Micha  (Neh. 
xi.  17),  or  Michaiah  (Neh.  xii.  35),  and  after  the 
return  from  Babylon  lived  in  the  villages  of  the 
Netophathites  (1  Chr.  ix.  16)  or  Netophathi  (Neh. 
xii.  28),  which  the  singers  had  built  in  the  neigh 
bourhood  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  29).  As  leader 
of  the  Temple  choir  after  its  restoration  (Neh.  xi. 
17,  xii.  8)  iu  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  he  took  part 
in  the  musical  service  which  accompanied  the  dedi 
cation  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  25,  35). 
We  find  him  among  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank, 
"  keepers  of  the  thresholds,"  an  office  which  fell  to 
the  singers  (comp.  1  Chr.  xv.  18,  21).  In  Neh. 
xii.  35,  there  is  a  difficulty,  for  "  Mattaniah,  the 
«on  of  Michaiah,  the  son  of  Zaccur,  the  sou  o; 
Asaph,"  is  apparently  the  same  with  "  Mattaniah 
the  son  of  Micha,  the  son  of  Zabdi  the  son  o 
Asaph"  (Neh.  xi.  17),  and  with  the  Mattaniah  o: 
Neh.  xii.  8,  25,  who,  as  in  xi.  17,  is  associatet 


with  Bakbukiah,  and  is  expressly  mentioned  as 
iving  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah  and  Ezra  (Neh. 
:ii.  26).  But,  if  the  reading  in  Neh.  xii.  35  be 
orrect,  Zechariah,  the  great-grandson  of  Mattaniah 
further  described  as  one  of  "  the  priests'  sons,"'- 
whereas  Mattaniah  was  a  Levite).  blew  the  trumpet 
it  the  head  of  the  procession  led  by  Ezra,  which 
marched  round  the  city  wall.  From  a  comparison 
f  Neh.  xii.  35  with  xii.  41,  42,  it  seems  probable 
,hat  the  former  is  comipt,  that  Zechariah  in  verses 
35  and  41  is  the  same  priest,  and  that  the  clause 
n  which  the  name  of  Mattaniah  is  found  is  to  be 
connected  with  rer.  36,  in  which  are  enumerated 
i  "brethren"  alluded  to  in  ver.  8. 

3.  (yia.Tda.vias:  Mathanias.')     A  descendant  of 
Asaph,  and  ancestor  of  Jahaziel  the  Levite  in  the 
i-eign  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chron.  xx.  14). 

4.  CMarBavia, ;    Alex.    MaSQavia,:   Mathania.) 
One   of  the  sons   of  Elam    who   had   married  a 
'oreign  wife  in  the  time   of  Ezra    (Ezr.  x.   26). 
In  1  Esdr.  ix.  27  he  is  called  MATTHANIAS. 

5.  (yiarBavat ;  Alex.  MoOflaraf.)     One  of  the 
,ons  of  Zattu  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  who  put  away 
Ms  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x.  27).     He  is  called  OTIIO- 
KIAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  28. 

6.  (Ma.r6a.vid ;   Alex.   MaBdavid:  Mathanias.) 
A    descendant    of  Pahath-Moab  who  lived    at  the 
same  time,  and  is  mentioned  under  the  same  cir 
cumstances  as  the  two  preceding  (Ezr.  x.  30).     In 
1  Esdr.  ix.  31,  he  is  called  MATHANIAS. 

7.  One  of  the  sons  of  Bani,  who  like  the  three 
above  mentioned,    put  away  his   foreign   wife  at 
Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x.  37).     In  the  parallel  list 
of  Esdr.  ix.  34,  the  names  "  Mattaniah,  Mattenai," 
are  corrupted  into  MAMNITANAIMUS. 

8.  (MaT0ava.tas ;  Alex.  Ma.6Ba.vias.)     A  Levite, 
father  of  Zaccur,  and  ancestor  of  Hanan  the  under- 
treasurer  who  had  charge  of  the  offerings  for  the 
Levites  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xiii.  13). 

9.  (•IJTOnO:   MarBavias:  Mathaniau,  1  Chr. 
xxv.  4;  Mathanias,  1  Chr.  xxv.  16),  one  of  the 
fourteen  sons  of  Heman  the  singer,  whose  office  it 
was  to  blow  the  horns  in  the  Temple  service  as  ap 
pointed  by  David.     He  was  the  chief  of  the  9th  di 
vision  of  twelve  Levites  who  were  "  instructed  in 
the  songs  of  Jehovah." 

10.  A  descendant  of  Asaph,  the  Levite  minstrel, 
who  assisted  in  the  purification  of  the  Temple  in 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13).  [W.  A.  W.J 

MAT'TATHA  (Marradd :  Mathatha),  the  son 
of  Nathan,  and  grandson  of  David  in  the  genealogy 
of  our  Lord  (Luke  iii.  31). 

MAT'TATHAH  (nflHO  :  Ma-rBaBd  :  Alex. 
Ma.66a.0d:  Mathatha),  a  descendant  of  Hashum, 
who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  in  the  time  of  Ezra, 
and  was  separated  from  her  (Ezr.  x.  33).  He  is 
called  MATTHIAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  33. 

MATTATHI'AS  (MarraBias:  Mathathias). 
1.  =  MATTITHIAH,  who  stood  at  Ezra's  right  hand 
when  he  read  the  lavr  to  the  people  (1  Esdr.  ix. 
43  ;  comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

2.  (Mathathias.)  The  father  of  the  Maccabees 
(1  Mace.  ii.  1,  14,  16,  17,  19,  24,  27,  39,  45,  49. 
xiv.  29).  [MACCABEES,  165  a.] 


B  Vol.  i.  179a.  In  addition  to  the  authorities  there 
cited,  the  curious  reader  who  may  desire  to  investigati 
this  remarKable  tradition  will  find  it  exhausted  in  Bux 
Lorfs  KxerritatimifS  (Mo.  v.  Hist.  Petrae  in  l)e.serl.o). 

'•  Th«  word  "priest"  iff  apparently  applied  iu  a  Ifs 


restricted  sense  in  later  times,  for  we  find  in  Ezr.  viii.  24 
Sherebiah  and  Hashabiali  described  as  among  the  "  elite! 
of  the  priests,"  whereas,  in  vers.  18, 19,  they  are  Merarite 
Levitos ;  if,  as  is  probablo,  the  same  persons  are  alluded  to 
in  both  instar.cft,  Comp.  also  Josli.  lit  3  with  Num.  vii.9. 

T 


274 


MATTENAl 


3.  (Mathathias.}  The  son  of  Absalom,  and  bro 
ther  of  JONATHAN  14  (1  Mace.  xi.  70;  xiii.  11). 
In  the  battle  fought  by  Jonathan  the  high-priest 
with  the  forces  of  Demetrius  on  the  plain  of  Nasor 
(the  old  Hazor),  his  two  generals  Mattathias  and 
Judas  alone  stood  by  him,  when  his  army  was 
seized   with   a   panic    and   fled,    and   with    their 
assistance  the  fortunes  of  the  day  were  restored. 

4.  (Mathathias.)  The  son  of  Simon  Maccabeus, 
who  was  treacherously  murdered,  together  with  his 
father  and  brother,   in  the  fortress  of  Docus,  by 
Ptoleh._:is  the  son  of  Abubus  (1  Mace.  xvi.  14).     • 

5.  (Matthias.')  One  of  the  three  envoys  sent  by 
Nicanor  to  treat  with  Judas  Maccabeus  (2  Mace. 
liv.  19). 

6.  (Mathathias.}  Son  of  Amos,  in  the  genealogy 
of  <><;sus  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25). 

7.  (Mathathias.)  Son  of  Semei,  in  the  same  cata 
logue  (Luke  iii.  26).  (W.  A.  W.) 

MATTENA'I  (»3BO  :  Merfcnrfa  ;  Alex.  Mofl- 
6avat :  Mathanat).  1.  One  of  the  family  of  Hashum, 
who  in  the  time  of  Ezra  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  x.  33).  In  1  Esdr.  ix.  33  he  if  called  AL- 

TANEUS. 

2.  (MarBavat;    Alex.    Ma00avat:   Mathanai). 
A  descendant  of  Bani,  who  put  away  his  foreign 
wife  at  Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x.  37).     The  place 
of  this  name  and  of  Mattaniah  which  precedes  it  is 
occupied  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  34  by  MAMNITANAIMUS. 

3.  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joiakim  the  son  of 
Jeshua  (Neh.  xii.  19).     He  represented  the  house 
of  Joiarib. 

MAT'THAN  (Rec.  Text,  MctrOA? ;  Lachm. 
with  B,  yia66dt> :  Mathan,  Matthan.)  The  son  of 
Eleazar,  and  grandfather  of  Joseph  "  the  husband 
of  Mary"  (Matt.  i.  15).  He  occupies  the  same 
place  in  the  genealogy  as  MATTHAT  in  Luke  iii.  24, 
with  whom  indeed  he  is  probably  identical  (Hervey, 
Genealogies  of  Christ,  129,  134,  &c.).  "  He  sewns 
to  have  been  himself  descended  from  Joseph  the 
son  of  Judah,  of  Luke  iii.  26,  but  to  have  become 
the  heir  of  the  elder  branch  of  the  house  of  Abmd 
on  the  failure  of  Eleazar's  issue  "  (ib.  134). 

MATTHANI'AS  (Mai-ftwfaj)  =  MATTANIAH, 
one  of  the  descendants  of  Elam  (1  Esdr.  ix.  27; 
comp.  Ezr.  x.  26).  In  the  Vulgate,  "  Ela,  Matha- 
nias,"  are  corrupted  into  "  Jolaman,  Chamas," 
which  is  evidently  a  transcriber's  error. 

MATTHAT  (MarOdr ;  but  Tisch.  MaOOdr: 
Mathat,  Mattat,  Matthad,  &c.)  1.  Son  of  Levi 
and  grandfather  of  Joseph,  according  to  the  genealogy 
of  Luke  (iii.  24).  He  is  maintained  by  Lord  A. 
Hervey  to  have  been  the  same  person  as  the  MAT- 
THAN  of  Matt.  i.  15  (see  Genealogies  of  Christ, 
137,  138,  &c.). 

2.  Also  the  son  of  a  Levi,  and  a  progenitor  of 
Joseph,  but  much  higher  up  in  the  line,  namely 
eleven  generations  from  David  (Luke  iii.  29).  No 
thing  is  known  of  him. 

It  should  be  remarked  that  no  fewer  than  five 
names  in  this  list  are  derived  from  the  same  Hebrew 
root  as  that  of  their  ancestor  NATHAN  the  son  of 
David  (see  Hervey,  Genealogies,  &c.,  p.  150). 

MATTHE'LAS  (Ma^Aos :  Mascot}  =  MAA- 
3EIAH  1  (1  Esd.  ix.  19;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  18).  The 
reading  of  the  LXX.  which  is  followed  in  the  A.  V. 
might  easily  arise  from  a  mistake  between  the  uncial 
6  wid  2  (C). 

MATTHEW  (Lruhm.  with  Bl>.  MaOBaws  ;  AC 


MATTHEW 

and  Rec.  Text,  MarOatos :  Matthaeus.,  Matthew 
the  Apostle  and  Evangelist  is  the  same  as  Leri  (Lukt 
v.  27-29)  the  son  of  a  certain  Alphaeus  (Mark  ii. 
14).  His  call  to  be  an  Apostle  is  related  by  all  three 
Evangelists  in  the  same  words,  except  that  Matthew 
(ix.  9)  gives  the  former,  and  Mark  (ii.  14)  and 
Luke  (v.  27)  the  latter  name.  If  there  were  two 
publicans,  both  called  solemnly  in  the  same  form 
at  the  same  place,  Capernaum,  then  one  of  them 
became  an  Apostle,  and  the  other  was  heard  of  no 
more ;  for  Levi  is  not  mentioned  again  after  the 
feast  which  he  made  in  our  Lord's  honour  (Luke 
v.  29).  This  is  most  unlikely.  Euthymius  and 
many  other  commentators  of  note  identify  Alphaeus 
the  father  of  Matthew  with  Alphaeus  the  father 
of  James  the  Less.  Against  this  is  to  be  set  the 
fact  that  in  the  lists  of  Apostles  (Matt.  x.  3  ;  Mark 
iii.  18;  Luke  vi.  15;  Acts  i.  13),  Matthew  and 
James  the  Less  are  never  named  together,  like 
other  pairs  of  brothers  in  the  apostolic  body.  It 
may  be,  as  in  other  cases,  that  the  name  Levi  was 
replaced  by  the  name  Matthew  at  the  time  of  the 
call.  According  to  Gesenius,  the  names  Matthaeus 
and  Matthias  are  both  contractions  of  Mattathins 
(  =  n*nflE),  "  gift  of  Jehovah  ;"  QtSScapos,  9e6- 

SOTOS),  a  common  Jewish  name  after  the  exile; 
but  the  true  derivation  is  not  certain  (see  Winer, 
Lange).  The  publicans,  properly  so  called  (pub- 
licani),  were  persons  who  fanned  the  Roman 
taxes,  and  they  were  usually,  in  later  times, 
Roman  knights,  and  persons  of  wealth  and  credit. 
They  employed  under  them  inferior  officers,  natives 
of  the  province  where  the  taxes  wtre  collected, 
called  properly  portitores,  to  which  class  Matthew 
no  doubt  belonged.  These  latter  were  notorious  for 
impudent  exactions  everywhere  (Plautus,  Menaech. 
i.  2,  5 ;  Cic.  ad  Quint.  Fr.  i.  1 ;  Plut.  De  Curios. 
p.  518  e);  but  to  the  Jews  they  were  especially 
odious,  for  they  were  the  very  spot  where  the 
Roman  chain  gdled  them,  the  visible  proof  of  the 
degraded  state  of  their  nation.  As  a  rule,  none  but 
the  lowest  would  accept  such  an  unpopular  office, 
and  thus  the  class  became  more  worthy  of  the 
hatred  with  which  in  any  case  the  Jews  would 
have  regarded  it.  The  readiness,  however,  with 
which  Matthew  obeyed  the  call  of  Jesus  seems  to 
show  that  his  heart  was  still  open  to  religious  im 
pressions.  His  conversion  was  attended  by  a  great 
awakening  of  the  outcast  classes  of  the  Jews  (Matt, 
ix.  9,  10).  Matthew  in  his  Gospel  does  not  omit 
the  title  of  infamy  which  had  belonged  to  him 
(x.  3)  ;  but  neither  of  the  other  Evangelists  speaks 
of  "  Matthew  the  publican."  Of  the  exact  share 
which  fell  to  him  in  preaching  the  Gospel  we  have 
nothing  whatever  in  the  N.  T.,  and  other  sources 
of  information  we  cannot  trust. 

Eusebius  (/?.  E.  iii.  24)  mentions  that  after  our 
Lord's  ascension  Matthew  preached  in  Judaea  (some 
add  for  fifteen  years,  Clem.  Strom,  vi.),  and  then 
went  to  foreign  nations.  To  the  lot  of  Matthew  it 
fell  to  visit  Aethiopia,  says  Socrates  Scholasticus 
(H.  E.  i.  19 ;  Kuff.  H.  E.  x.  9).  But  Ambrose 
says  that  God  opened  to  him  the  country  of  thp 
Persians  {In  Ps.  45);  Isidore  the  Macedonians 
(Isidore  Hisp.  de  Sanct.  77)  ;  and  others  the  Par- 
thians,  the  Medes,  the  Persians  of  the  Euphrates. 
Nothing  whatever  is  really  known.  Heracleon,  the 
disciple  of  Valentinus  (cited  by  Clemens  Alex. 
Strom,  iv.  9),  describes  him  as  dying  a  n.itural 
death,  which  Clement,  Origen,  and  'lYrtiilliau  ;*  re. 
to  jiiTt'jit :  the  tradition  that  he  died  a  martyr,  L» 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

rt  true  or  false,  came  in  afterwards  (Niceph.  If.  E. 
u.  41). 

If  the  first  feeling  on  reading  these  meagre  par 
ticulars  be  disappointment,  the  second  will  be  ad 
miration  for  those  who  doing  their  part  under  God 
k.  the  great  work  of  founding  the  Church  on  earth, 
have  passed  away  to  their  Master  in  heaven  with 
out  so  much  as  an  efl'ort  to  redeem  their  names 
from  silence  and  oblivion.  (For  authorities  see  the 
works  on  the  Gospels  referred  to  under  LUKE  and 
GOSPELS  ;  also  Fritzsche,  In  Matthaeum,  Leipzic, 
1826:  Lange,  Bibelwerk,  part  i.)  [W.  T.] 

MATTHEW.  GOSPEL  OF.  The  Gospel 
which  bears  the  name  of  St.  Matthew  was  written 
by  the  Apostle,  according  to  the  testimony  of  all 
antiquity. 

I.  Language  in  which  it  was  first  written. — We 
are  told  on  the  authority  of  Papias,  Irenaeus,  Pan- 
taenus,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Epiphanius,  Jerome,  and 
many  other  Fathers,  that  the  Gospel  was  first 
written  in  Hebrew,  t.  e.  in  the  vernacular  language 
of  Palestine,  the  Aramaic,  a.  Papias  of  Hierapolis 
(who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  2nd  cen 
tury)  says,  "  Matthew  wrote  the  divine  oracles  (TO 
\6yia)  in  the  Hebrew  dialect ;  and  each  interpreted 
them  as  he  was  able"  (Eusebius,  H.  E.  iii.  39). 
It  has  been  held  that  ra  \6yia  is  to  be  understood 
as  a  collection  of  discourses,  and  that  therefore;  the 
book  here  alluded  to,  contained  not  the  acts  of  our 
Lord  but  His  speeches ;  but  this  falls  through,  for 
Papias  applies  the  same  word  to  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Mark,  and  he  uses  the  expression  \6yta  Kvpiaicd  in 
the  title  of  his  own  work,  which  we  know  from 
fragments  to  have  contained  tacts  as  well  as  dis 
courses  (Studien  und  Kritiken,  1832,  p.  735 ; 
Meyer,  Einleitung  ;  De  Wette,  Einleitung,  §97  a ; 
Alford's  Prolegomena  to  Gr.  Test.  p.  25).  Euse 
bius,  indeed,  in  the  same  place  pronounces  Papias  to 
be  "  a  man  of  very  feeble  understanding,"  in  refer 
ence  to  some  false  opinions  which  he  held ;  but  it 
requires  little  critical  power  to  bear  witness  to  the 
fact  that  a  certain  Hebrew  book  was  in  use.  6. 
Irenaeus  says  (iii.  1),  that  "  whilst  Peter  and  Paul 
were  preaching  at  Rome  and  founding  the  Church, 
Matthew  put  forth  his  written  Gospel  amongst  the 
Hebrews  in  their  own  dialect."  It  is  objected  to 
this  testimony  that  Irenaeus  probably  drew  from 
the  same  source  as  Papias,  for  whom  he  had  great 
respect ;  this  assertion  can  neither  be  proved  nor 
refuted,  but  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus  is  in  itself  no 
mere  copy  of  that  of  Papias.  c.  According  to  Eu 
sebius  (ff.  E.  v.  10),  Pantaenus  (who  flourished 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  2nd  century)  "  is  reported 
to  have  gone  to  the  Indians  "  (»'.  e.  to  the  south  of 
Arabia  ?),"  where  it  is  said  that  he  found  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew  already  among  some  who  had  the  know 
ledge  of  Christ  there,  to  whom  Bartholomew,  one 
of  the  apostles,  had  preached,  and  left  them  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew  written  in  Hebrew,  which  was 
preserved  till  the  time  referred  to."  We  have  no 
writings  of  Pantaenus,  and  Eusebius  recites  the 
*t(.iy  with  a  kind  of  doubt.  It  reappears  in  two 
different  fomns : — Jerome  and  Ruflinus  say  that  Pan 
taenus  brought  back  with  him  this  Hebrew  Gospel, 
and  Nicephorus  asserts  that  Bartholomew  dictated 
the  Gospel  of  Matthew  to  the  inhabitants  of  that 
201111  try.  Upon  the  whole,  Pantaenus  contributes 
but  little  to  the  weight  of  the  argument,  d.  Origen 
«ays  (Comment,  on  Mutt.  i.  in  Eusebius,  H.  E.  vi. 
25),  "  As  I  have  learnt,  by  tradition  conceiving  the 
Four  Gospels,  which  alone  are  received  without  dis 
pute  by  the  Church  of  God  under  heaven  :  the  first 


MATTHEW.  GOSPEL  OF       27o 

was  written  by  St.  Matthew,  once  a  tax-gritlierer, 
afterwards  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  pub 
lished  it  for  the  benefit  of  the  Jewish  converts,  com 
posed  in  the  Hebrew  language."  The  objections  to 
this  passage  brought  by  Masch,  are  disposed  of  by 
Michaelis  iii.  part  i.  p.  127  ;  the  "  tradition  "  does 
not  imply  a  doubt,  and  there  is  no  reason  for  tracing 
this  witness  also  to  Papias.  e.  Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii. 
24)  gives  as  his  own  opinion  the  following : 
"  Matthew  having  first  preached  to  the  Hebrews 
delivered  to  them,  when  he  was  preparing  to  depart 
to  other  countries,  his  Gospel,  composed  in  their 
native  language."  Other  passages  to  the  same  effect 
occur  in  Cyril  (Catech.  14),  .Epiphanius  (Haer.  li. 
2, 1),  Hieronymus  (de  Vir.  ill.  ch.  3),  who  mentions 
the  Hebrew  original  in  seven  places  at  least  of  his 
works,  and  from  Gregory  of  Nazianzus.  Chrysostora, 
Augustine,  and  other  later  writers.  From  all  these 
there  is  no  doubt  that  the  old  opinion  was  that 
Matthew  wrote  in  the  Hebrew  language.  To  whom 
we  are  to  attribute  the  Greek  translation,  is  not 
shown ;  but  the  quotation  of  Papias  proves  that  in 
the  time  of  John  the  Presbyter,  and  probably  in 
that  of  Papias,  there  was  no  translation  of  great 
authority,  and  Jerome  (de  Vir.  ill.  ch.  3)  ex 
pressly  says  that  the  translator's  name  was  un 
certain. 

So  far  all  the  testimony  is  for  a  Hebrew  original. 
But  there  are  arguments  of  no  mean  weight  in 
favour  of  the  Greek,  a  very  brief  account  of  which 
may  be  given  here.  1.  The  quotations  from  the 
0.  T.  in  this  Gospel,  which  are  very  numerous 
(see  below),  are  of  two  kinds:  those  introduced  intc 
the  narrative  to  point  out  the  fulfilment  of  pro 
phecies,  &c.,  and  those  where  in  the  course  of  the 
narrative  the  persons  introduced,  and  especially  oiu 
Lord  Himself,  make  use  of  0.  T.  quotations.  Be 
tween  these  two  classes  a  difference  of  treatment  if 
observable.  In  the  latter  class,  where  the  citations 
occur  in  discourses,  the  Septuagint  version  is  fol 
lowed,  even  where  it  deviates  somewhat  from  the 
original  (as  iii.  3,  xiii.  14),  or  where  it  ceases  tc 
follow  the  very  words,  the  deviations  do  not  come 
from  a  closer  adherence  to  the  Hebrew  0.  T. ;  ex 
cept  in  two  cases,  xi.  10  and  xxvi.  31.  The  quo 
tations  in  the  narrative,  however,  do  not  follow  the 
Septuagint,  but  appear  to  be  a  translation  from  the 
Hebrew  text.  Thus  we  have  the  remarkable  phe 
nomenon  that,  whereas  the  Gospels  agree  most  ex 
actly  in  the  speeches  of  persons,  and  most  of  all  in 
those  of  our  Lord,  the  quotations  in  these  speeches 
are  reproduced  not  by  the  closest  rendering  of  the 
Hebrew,  but  from  thp  Septuagint  version,  although 
many  or  most  of  them  must  have  been  spoken  in 
the  vernacular  Hebrew,  and  could  have  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Septuagint.  A  mere  translatoi 
could  not  have  done  this.  But  an  independent 
writer,  using  the  Greek  tongue,  and  wishing  to 
conform  his  narrative  to  the  oral  teaching  of  the 
Apostles  (see  vol.  i.  p.  718  a),  might  have  used  for 
the  quotations  the  well-known  Greek  0.  T.  used  by 
his  colleagues.  There  is  an  independence  in  the 
mode  of  dealing  witli  citations  throughout,  which  is 
incon;  istent  with  the  function  of  a  mere  translator. 
2.  But  this  difficulty  is  to  be  got  over  by  assuming 
a  high  authority  for  this  translation,  as  though 
made  by  an  inspired  writer ;  and  it  has  been  sug 
gested  that  this  writer  was  Matthew  himself  (Ben- 
gel,  Oishausen,  Lee,  and  others),  or  at  least  that  he 
directel  it  (Guericke),  or  that  it  was  some  other 
apostle  (Gerhard),  or  James  the  brother  of  the 
Lord,  or  John,  or  the  general  body  of  the  Apostles, 

T  a 


276       MATTHEW.  GOSPEL  OF 

or  that  two  discip'.es  of  St.  Matthew  wrote,  from 
him,  the  one  in  Aramaic  and  the  other  in  Greek  1 
We  are  further  invited  to  admit,  with  Dr.  Lee, 
that  the  Hebrew  book  "  belonged  to  that  class  of 
writings  which,  although  composed  by  inspired 
men,  were  never  designed  to  form  part  of  the 
Canon"  (On  Inspiration,  p.  571).  But  supposing 
that  there  were  any  good  ground  for  considerin^ 
these  suggestions  as  facts,  it  is  clear  that  in  the 
attempt  to  preserve  the  letter  of  the  tradition,  they 
have  quite  altered  the  spirit  of  it.  Papias  and  Je 
rome  make  a  Hebrew  original,  and  dependent  trans 
lations  ;  the  moderns  make  a  Greek  original,  which 
is  a  translation  only  in  name,  and  a  Hebrew  ori 
ginal  never  intended  to  be  preserved.  The  modern 
view  is  not  what  Papias  thought  or  uttered  ;  and 
the  question  would  be  one  of  mere  names,  for  the 
only  point  worthy  of  a  struggle  is  this,  whether 
the  Gospel  in  our  hands  is  or  is  not  of  apostolic 
authority,  and  authentic.  4.  Olshausen  remarks, 
"  While  all  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  relate  that 
Matthew  has  written  in  Hebrew,  yet  they  univers 
ally  make  use  of  the  Greek  text,  as  a  genuine  apos 
tolic  composition,  without  remarking  what  relation 
the  Hebrew  Matthew  bears  to  our  Greek  Gospel. 
For  that  the  earlier  ecclesiastical  teachers  did  not 
possess  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  in  any  other 
form  than  we  now  have  it,  is  established "  (Echt- 
lieit,  p.  35).  The  original  Hebrew  of  which  so 
many  speak,  no  one  of  the  witnesses  ever  saw  (Je 
rome,  de  Vir.  ill.  3,  is  no  exception).  And  so 
little  store  has  the  Church  set  upon  it,  that  it  has 
utterly  perished.  5.  Were  there  no  explanation  of 
this  inconsistency  between  assertion  and  fact,  it 
would  be  hard  to  doubt  the  concurrent  testimony 
of  so  many  old  writers,  whose  belief  in  it  is  shown 
by  the  tenacity  with  which  they  held  it  in  spite  of 
their  own  experience.  But  it  is  certain  that  a 
gospel,  not  the  same  as  our  canonical  Matthew, 
sometimes  usurped  the  Apostle's  name ;  and  some 
of  the  witnesses  we  have  quoted  appear  to  have  re- 
ferred  to  this  in  one  or  other  of  its  various  forms  or 
names.  The  Christians  in  Palestine  still  held  that 
the  Mosaic  ritual  was  binding  on  them,  even  after 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  At  the  close  of  the 
first  century  one  party  existed  who  held  that  the 
Mosaic  law  was  only  binding  on  Jewish  converts — 
this  was  the  Nazarenes.  Another,  the  Ebionites, 
held  that  it  was  of  universal  obligation  on  Chris 
tians,  and  rejected  St.  Paul's  Epistles  as  teaching 
the  opposite  doctrine.  These  two  sects,  who  differed 
also  in  the  most  important  tenets  as  to  our  Lord's 
person,  possessed  each  a  modification  of  the  same 
gospel,  which  no  doubt  each  altered  more  and  more, 
as  their  tenets  diverged,  and  which  bore  various 
names — the  Gospel  of  the  twelve  Apostles,  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Gospel  of 
Peter,  or  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew.  Enough 
is  known  to  decide  that  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews  was  not  identical  with  our  Gospel  of  Mat 
thew.  But  it  had  many  points  of  resemblance  to 
the  synoptical  gospels,  and  especially  to  Matthew. 
What  was  its  origin  it  is  impossible  to  say :  it  may 
ha^e  been  a  description  of  the  oral  teaching  of  the 
Aj.ostles,  corrupted  by  degrees ;  it  may  have  come 
in  its  early  and  pure  form  from  the  hand  of  Mat 
thew,  or  it  may  have  been  a  version  of  the  Greek 
Gospel  of  St.- Matthew,  as  the  Evangelist  who  wrote 
especially  for  Hebrews.  Now  this  Gospel,  "  the 
Proteus  o»  criticism  "  (Thssysch),  did  exist ;  is  it  im- 
jKissible  that  when  the  Hebrew  Mattnew  is  spoken 
of,  this  questionable  document,  the  Gospel  of  the 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OP 

Hebrews,  was  really  referred  to  ?  Observe  that  all 
accounts  of  it  are  at  second  hand  (with  a  notable 
exception) ;  no  one  quotes  it ;  in  cases  of  doubt  about 
the  text,  Origen  even  does  not  appeal  from  the 
Greek  to  the  Hebrew.  All  that  is  certain  Is,  that 
Nazarenes  or  Ebionites,  or  both,  boasted  that  they 
possessed  the  original  Gospel  of  Matthew.  Jerome 
is  the  exception ;  and  him  we  can  convict  of  the 
very  mistake  of  confounding  the  two,  and  almost 
on  his  own  confession.  "  At  first  he  thought," 
says  an  anonymous  writer  (Edinburgh  Review, 
1851,  July,  p.  39),  "  that  it  was  the  authentic  Mat 
thew,  and  translated  it  into  both  Greek  and  Latin 
from  a  copy  which  he  obtained  at  Beroea,  in  Syria. 
This  appears  from  his  De  Vir.  ill.,  written  in  the 
year  392.  Six  years  later,  in  his  Commentary  on 
Matthew,  he  spoke  more  doubtfully  about  it, — 
"  quod  vocatur  a  plerisque  Matthaei  authenticum." 
Later  still  in  his  book  on  the  Pelagian  heresy, 
written  in  the  year  415,  he  modifies  his  account 
still  further,  describing  the  work  as  the  '  Evange- 
lium  juxta  Hebraeos,  quod  Chaldaico  quidem  Sy- 
roque  sermone,  sed  Hebraicis  literis  conscriptum  est, 
quo  utuntur  usque  hodie  Nazareni  secundum  Apos- 
tolos,  sive  ut  plerique  autumant  juxta  Matthaeum, 
quod  et  in  Caesariensi  habetur  Bibliotheca.' " 
5.  Dr.  Lee  in  his  work  on  Inspiration  asserts,  by 
an  oversight  unusual  with  such  a  writer,  that 
the  theory  of  a  Hebrew  original  is  "  generally  re 
ceived  by  critics  as  the  only  legitimate  conclusion." 
Yet  there  have  pronounced  for  a  Greek  original — 
Erasmus,  Calvin,  Le  Clerc,  Fabricius,  Lightfoot, 
Wetstein,  Paulus,  Lardner,  Hey,  Hales,  Hug, 
Schott.  De  Wette,  Moses  Stuart,  Fritzsche,  Credncr, 
Thiersch,  and  many  others.  Great  names  are  ranged 
also  on  the  other  side;  as  Simon,  Mill,  Michaalis, 
Marsh,  Eichhorn,  Storr,  Olshausen,  and  others. 

With  these  arguments  we  leave  a  great  question 
unsettled  still,  feeling  convinced  of  the  early  accept 
ance  and  the  Apostolic  authority  of  our  "  Gospel 
according  to  St.  Matthew ;"  and  far  from  convinced 
that  it  is  a  reproduction  of  another  Gospel  from  St. 
Matthew's  hand.  May  not  the  truth  be  that  Papias, 
knowing  of  more  than  one  Aramaic  Gospel  iu  use 
among  the  Judaic  sects,  may  have  assumed  the 
existence  of  a  Hebrew  original  from  which  these 
were  supposed  to  be  taken,  and  knowing  also  the 
genuine  Greek  Gospel  may  have  looked  on  all  these, 
in  the  loose  uncritical  way  which  earned  for  him 
Eusebius'  description,  as  the  various  "  interpreta 
tions  "  to  which  he  alludes  ? 

The  independence  of  the  style  and  diction  of  the 
Greek  Evangelist,  will  appear  from  the  remarks  in 
the  next  section. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. — Hug's  Einleitung,  with  the 
Notes  of  Professor  M.  Stuart,  Andover,  1836. 
Meyer,  Komm.  Einleitung,  and  the  Commentaries 
of  Kuinol,  Fritzsche,  Alford,  and  others.  The  pas 
sages  from  the  Fathers  are  discussed  in  Michaelis 
(ed.  Marsh,  vol.  iii.  part  i.)  ;  and  they  will  be  found 
for  the  most  part  in  Kirchhofer,  Quellensammltmg ; 
where  will  also  be  found  the  passages  referring  to 
the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews,  p.  448.  Credner's 
Einleitung,  and  his  Beitrage ;  and  the  often  citt-d 
works  on  the  Gospels,  of  Gieseler,  Baur,  Norton, 
Olshausen,  Weisse,  and  Hilgenfeld.  Also  Cureton's 
Syriac  Gospels',  but  the  views  iu  the  preface  must 
not  be  regarded  as  established.  Dr.  Lee  on  In- 
spiration,  Appendix  P.,  London,  18o7. 

II.  Style  and  Diction. — The  following 
on  the  style  of  .St.  Matthew  are  founded  on 
of  <I  redder. 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OF 

1.  Matthew  uses  the  expression  "  that  it  might 
:>e  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the 
prophet"   (i.  22,  ii.  15).     In  ii.  5,  and  in  later 
passages  of  Matt,  it  is  abbreviated  (ii.  17,  iii.  3, 
ir.  14,  viii.  17,  xii.  17,  xiii.  14,  35,  xxi.  4,  xxvi. 
U<5,  xxvii.  C).     The  variation    {nrb  TOV  ®eov  in 
*xii.  31,  is  notable;  and  ako  the  TOVTO  8e  8\ov 
7«->  jffv  of  i.  22,  not  found  in  other  Evangelists ; 
bv.t  compare  Mark  xiv.  49  ;  Luke  xxiv.  44. 

2.  The  reference  to  the  Messiah  under  the  name 
Son  of  David,"  occurs  in  Matthew  eight  times  ; 

and  three  times  each  in  Mark  and  Luke. 

3.  Jerusalem  is  called  "  the  holy  city,"  "  the 
holy  place"  (iv.  5,  xxiv.  15,  xxvii.  53). 

4.  The  expression  ffWTtXeia  TOV  aiiavos  is  used 
five  times ;  in  the  rest  of  the  N.  T.  only  once,  in 
Ep.  to  Hebrews. 

5.  The   phrase   "  kingdom   of  heaven,"   about 
thirty-three  times ;  other  writers  use  "  kingdom  of 
3od,"  which  is  found  also  in  Matthew. 

6.  "  Heavenly  Father,"  used  about  six  times ; 
and  "  Father  in  heaven  "  about  sixteen,  and  with 
out  explanation,  point  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  speak 
ing  iu  this  Gospel. 

7.  Matthew  alone  of  the   Evangelists  uses  rb 
faOfv,  efytOri  as  the  form  of  quotation  from  0.  T. 
The  apparent  exception  in  Mark  xiii.    14,  is  re 
jected  by  Tischendorf,  &c.  as  a  wrong  reading.     In 
Matt,  about  twenty  times. 

8.  'Ava,x<apetv  is  a  frequent  word  for  to  retire. 
Once  in  Mark. 

9.  Kar'  ovap  used  six  times ;  and  here  only. 

10.  The  use  of  irpo<re'pxeo'^0'  preceding  an  inter 
view,  as  in  iv.  3,   is  much  more  frequent  with 
Matt,  than  Mark  and  Luke;  once  only  in  John. 
Compare  the  same  use  of  iropevfff6ai,  as  in  ii.  8, 
also  more  frequent  in  Matt. 

11.  2c/>c!5pa  after  a  verb,  or  participle,  six  times ; 
the  same  word  used  once  each  by  Mark  and  Luke, 
but  after  adjectives. 

12.  With  St.  Matthew  the  particle  of  transition  is 
usually  the  indefinite  r6re  ;  he  uses  it  ninety  times, 
against  six  times  in  Mark  and  fourteen  in  Luke. 

13.  Kai  tytveTo  8r«,  vii.  28,  xi.  1,  xiii.  53, 
xix.  1,  xxvi.  1 ;  to  be  compared  with  the  Sre  tyt- 
vfTo  of  Luke. 

14.  Ho  tew  &s,  SiffTrep,  &c.,  is  characteristic  o) 
Matthew:— i.  24,  vi.  2,  xx.  5,  xxi.  6,  xxvi.  19, 
xxviii.  15. 

1 5.  Tdtpos  six  times  in  this  Gospel,  not  in  the 
others.     They  use  fivrifitlov  frequently,  which  is 
also  found  seven  times  in  Matt. 

16.  ~2,vfj.$ov\iov  Xa/j./3dveLv,  peculiar  to  Matt. 
Si»/u.  IT 01  el v  twice  in  Mark;  nowhere  else. 

17.  MaAa/ci'a,  fj.a0ijTfveiv,  <re\rtvid£tffdai,  pecu 
liar  to  Matt.     The  following  words  are  either  used 
by  this  Evangelist  alone,  or  by  him  more  frequently 
thau  by  the  others : — tppovi^os  OIKIOKO'S,  vtrrepov, 
iKflQfv,  5i<TTd£e.ii>,   KaTaTrovTifeffOai,  /jieralp 
(Hnri£ety,  <ppd£eti>,  ffvvaipfiv  \6yov. 

18.  The  frequent  use  of  ISov  after  a  genitive 
absolute  (as  i.  20),  and  of  Kal  ISov  when  introduc 
ing  anything  new,  is  also  peculiar  to  St.  Matt. 

1 9.  Adverbs  usually  stand  after  the  imperative 
not  before  it;    except  ovrws,  which  stands  first. 
Ch.  x.  1 1,  is  an  exception. 

20.  TlpoffKWfiv  takes  the  dative  in  St.  Matt., 
and  elsewhere  more  rarely.     With  Luke  and  John 
it  takes  the  accusative.     There  is  one  apparent  ex- 
wption  in  Matt.   (ix.  13),  but  it  is  a  quotation 
from  0.  T. 

21.  The   participle   \ty<av   is   used    frequently 


IJATTHEW,  GOSi'EL  OF       277 

witleut  the  dative  of  the  person,  as  in  i.  20,  ii.  2 
~~L.  vii.  21  is  an  exception. 

22.  The  expression  6/jLvvia  tv  or  els  is  a   Hts« 
jraism,  frequent  in  Matt.,  and  unknown  to  the  othei 
Evangelists. 

23.  'Iepoff6\v/j.a  is  the  name  of  the  holy  city 
with  Matt,  always,  except  xxiii.   37.     It   is   the 
same   in    Mark,   with    one    (doubtful)    exception 
'xi.  1).     Luke  uses  this  foim  rarely  ;  'lepoixroA^/u 
"requently. 

III.  Citations  from  0.  T. — The  following  list  jj 
nearly  complete. 

Matt.  Matt, 

i.  23.  Is.  vii.  14.  xvii.    2.  Ex.  xxxiv.  29. 

ii.    6.  Mic.  v.  2.  11.  Mai.  iii.  1,  iv.  5 

15.  Hos.xi.  1.  xviii.  15.  Lev.  xix.  17  (?). 

18.  Jer.  xxxi.  15.  xix.    4.  Gen.  i.  27. 

iii.   3.  Is.  xl.  3.  5.  Gen.  ii.  24. 

iv.    4.  Deut.  viii.  3.  7.  Deut.  xxi  v.  1. 

6.  Ps.  xei.  11.  18.  Ex.  xx.  12,  Lo.v. 

7.  Deut.  vi.  16.                                   xix.  18. 
10.  Deut.  vi.  13.  xxi.    5.  Zech.  ix.  9. 

9.     Pa.  cxviii.  25. 
13.    Is.  Ivi.  7,  Jer 
vii.  11. 


27. 
31. 
33. 

38. 
43. 

viii.   4. 
17. 

ix.  13. 
X.  35. 
xi.  5. 

10. 

14. 

xii.    3. 


40. 

42. 
xiii.  14. 

35. 

XV.  4. 
XV.  8. 


Is.  vii.  14. 
Mic.  v.  2. 
Hos.  xi.  1. 
Jer.  xxxi.  15. 
Is.  xl.  3. 
Deut.  viii.  3. 
Ps.  xci.  11. 
Deut.  vi.  16. 
Deut.  vi.  13. 
15.    Is.  viii.  23,  ix.  1. 
5.    rs.xxxvii.il. 
21.    Ex.  xx.  13. 
Ex.  xx.  14. 
Deut.  xxiv.  1. 
Lev.  xix.  12,  Deut. 

xxiii.  23. 
Ex.  xxi.  24. 
I^ev.  xix.  18. 
Lev.  xiv.  2. 
Is.  liii.  4. 
Hos.  vi.  6. 
Mic.  vii.  6. 
Is.  xxxv.  5,  xxix. 

18. 

Mai,  iii.  1. 
Mai.  iv.  5. 
1  Sam.  xxi.  6. 
5.    Num.  xxviii.  9  (?) 
7.    Hos.  vi.  6. 
18.    Is.  xiii.  1. 
Jon.  i.  17. 
1  K.  x.  1. 
Is.  vi.  9. 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  2. 
Ex.  xx.  12,  xxi.  17. 
Is.  xxix.  13. 


16. 
42. 
44. 

xxii.  24. 
32. 
37. 
39. 
44. 


Ps.  viii.  2. 
Ps.  cxviii.  22. 
Is.  viii.  14. 
Deut.  xxv.  5. 
Ex.  iii.  6. 
Deut.  vi.  5. 
-Lev.  xix.  1?. 
Ps.  ex.  1. 


xxiii.  35.    Gen.  iv.  8,  2  Chr 

xxiv.  21. 

38.    Ps.  Ixix.  25  (?) 
Jer.  xii.  7,  xxii 


39. 

xxiv.  15. 
29. 

37. 


Ps.  cxviit.  26 

Dan.  ix.  27. 

Is.  xiii.  10. 

Gen.  vi.  11. 
xxvi.  31.    Zech.  xiii.  7. 
52.    Gen.  ix.  6  (?). 
64.    Dan.  vii.  13. 
xxvii.    9.    Zech.  xi.  13. 
35.    Ps.  xxii.  18. 
43.    Ps.  xxii.  8. 
46.     Ps.  xxii.  1. 


The  number  of  passages  in  this  Gospel  which 
refer  to  the  0.  T.  are  about  65.  In  St.  Luke  they 
are  43.  But  in  St.  Matthew  there  are  43  verbal 
citations  of  0.  T.;  the  number  of  these  direct  ap 
peals  to  its  authority  in  St.  Luke  is  only  about  19 
This  fact  is  very  significant  of  the  ch'ai-acter  and 
original  purpose  of  the  two  narratives. 

IV.  Genuineness  of  the  Gospel. — Some  critics, 
admitting  the  apostolic  antiquity  of  a  part  of  the 
Gospel,  apply  to  St.  Matthew  as  they  do  to  St.  Luka 
(see  above  p.  155)  the  gratuitous  supposition  of  a 
later  editor  or  compiler,  who  by  augmenting  and 
altering  the  earlier  document  produced  our  present 
Gospel.  Hilgenfeld  (p.  106)  endeavours  to  sepa 
rate  the  older  from  the  newer  work,  and  includes 
much  historical  matter  in  the  former:  since  Schleier- 
macher,  several  critics,  misinterpreting  the  \6yiet 
of  Papias,  consider  the  older  document  to  have  been 
a  collection  of  "  discourses  "  only.  We  are  asked  to 
believe  that  in  the  second  century  for  two  or  more 
of  the  Gospels,  new  works,  differing  from  them 
both  in  matter  and  compass,  were  substituted  for 
the  old,  and  lhat  about  the  end  of  the  second  cen 
tury  our  present  Gospels  were  adopted  by  authority 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  others,  and  that  henceforth 
the  copies  of  the  older  works  entirely  disappeared, 
and  have  escaped  the  keenest  research  ever  since. 
Eichhorn's  notion  is  that  "  the  Church  "  sanctioned 
the  four  canonical  books,  and  by  its  authority  gavj 
them  exclusive  currency ;  but  there  existed  at  tliat 


278       MATTHEW.  GOSPEL  OF 

ume  no  means  for  convening  a  Courcil  ;  and  if  such 
a  body  could  have  met  and  decided,  it  would  not 
have  been  able  to  force  on  the  Churches  books  dis 
crepant  from  the  older  copies  to  which  they  had 
long  been  accustomed,  without  discussion,  protest, 
a:id  resistance  (see  Norton,  Genuineness,  Chap.  I.). 
That  there  was  no  such  resistance  or  protest  we 
have  ample  evidence.  Irenaeus  knows  the  four 
Gospels  only  (Hacr.  iii.  ch.  i.).  Tntiau,  who  died 
A.D.  170,  composed  a  harmony  of  the  Gospels,  lost 
to  us,  under  the  name  of  Diatessaron  (Ens.  //.  E. 
iv.  29).  Theophilus,  bishop  of  Autioch,  about 
168,  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Gospels  (Hieron. 
ad  Alyasiam  and  da  Vir.  ill.).  Clement  of  Alex 
andria  (Flourished  about  189)  knew  the  four  Gospels, 
and  distinguished  between  them  and  the  uncauo- 
nical  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians.  Tertul- 
lian  (born  about  IGO)  knew  the  four  Gospels,  and 
was  called  on  to  vindicate  the  text  of  one  of  them 
against  thecorruptionsof  Marcion  (see  above,  LUKE). 
Origeii  (born  185)  calls  the  four  Gospels  the  four 
elements  of  the  Christian  faith  ;  and  it  appears  that 
his  copy  of  Matthew  contained  the  genealogy 
(Comm.  in  Joan.}.  Passages  from  St.  Matthew 
are  quoted  by  Justin  Martyr,  by  the  author  of  the 
letter  to  Diognetus  (see  in  Otto's  Justin  Martyr, 
vol.  ii.),  by  Hegesippus,  Irenaeus,  Tatian,  Athena- 
goras,  Theophilus,  Clement,  Tertullian,  and  Origen. 
It  is  not  merely  from  the  matter  but  the  manner 
of  the  quotations,  from  the  calm  appeal  as  to  a 
settled  authority,  from  the  absence  of  all  hints  of 
doubt,  that  we  regard  it  as  proved  that  the  book 
we  possess  had  not  been  the  subject  of  any  sudden 
change.  Was  there  no  heretic  to  throw  back  with 
double  force  against  Tertullian  the  charge  of  altera 
tion  which  he  brings  against  Marcion  ?  Was  there 
no  orthodox  Church  or  member  of  a  Church  to 
complain,  that  instead  of  the  Matthew  and  the 
Luke  that  had  been  taught  to  them  and  their 
fathers,  other  and  different  writings  were  now  im 
posed  on  them?  Neither  the  one  nor  the  other 
appears. 

The  citations  of  Justin  Martyr,  very  important 
for  this  subject,  have  been  thought  to  indicate  a 
source  different  from  the  Gospels  which  we  now 
possess:  and  by  the  word  a.irofj.vrip.ovf'lifnara. 
(memoirs),  he  has  been  supposed  to  indicate  that 
lost  work.  Space  is  not  given  here  to  show  that 
the  remains  referred  to  are  the  Gospels  which  we 
possess,  and  not  any  one  book ;  and  that  though 
Justin  quotes  the  Gospels  very  loosely,  so  that  his 
words  often  bear  but  a  slight  resemblance  to  the 
original,  the  same  is  true  of  his  quotations  from 
the  Septuagint.  He  transposes  words,  brings  se 
parate  passages  together,  attributes  the  words  of 
one  prophet  to  another,  and  even  quotes  the  Penta 
teuch  for  facts  not  recorded  in  it.  Many  of  the 
quotations  from  the  Septuagint  are  indeed  precise, 
but  these  are  chiefly  in  the  Dialogue  with  Trypho, 
where,  reasoning  with  a  Jew  on  the  O.  T.,  he  does 
not  trust  his  memory,  but  consults  the  text.  This 
question  is  disposed  of  in  Norton's  Genuineness, 
vol.  i.,  and  in  Hug's  Einleituny. 

The  genuineness  of  the  two  first  chapters  of  the 
Gospel  has  been  questioned ;  but  is  established  on 
satisfactory  grounds  (see  Fritzsche,  on  Matt.,  Ex 
cursus  iii. ;  Meyer,  on  Matt.  p.  65).  i.  All  the  old 
MSS.  and  versions  contain  them  ;  and  they  are 
quoted  by  the  Fathers  of  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries 
(livnauus,  Clement  Alex.,  and  others).  Celsus 
*!so  knew  ch.  ii.  (see  Origen  cont.  CcLs.  i.  38). 
ii.  Their  contents  would  naturally  form  part  of  a 


MATTHEW,  GOSPEL  OP 

Gospel  intended  primarily  for  the  Jews.  iii.  Tht 
commencement  of  ch.  iii.  is  dependent  on  ii.  23 ;  and 
in  iv.  13  there  is  a  reference  to  ii.  23.  iv.  In  con 
structions  and  expressions  they  are  similar  to  the  rest 
of  the  Gospel  (see  examples  above,  in  II.  Style  and 
diction).  Professor  Norton  disputes  the  genuine 
ness  of  these  chapters  upon  the  ground  of  the  diffi 
culty  of  harmonising  them  with  St.  Luke's  nar 
rative,  and  upon  the  ground  that  a  large  number  oi 
the  Jewish  Christians  did  not  possess  them  in  their 
version  of  the  Gospel.  The  former  objection  is  dis 
cussed  in  all  the  commentaries ;  the  answer  would 
require  much  space.  But,  1 .  Such  questions  are  by 
no  means  confined  to  these  chapters,  but  are  found 
in  places  of  which  the  Apostolic  origin  is  admitted. 
2.  The  treatment  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  by  Marcion 
(above,  pp.  152,  153)  suggests  how  the  Jewish 
Christians  dropped  out  of  their  version  an  account 
which  they  would  not  accept.  3.  Prof.  N.  .stand.; 
alone,  among  those  who  object  to  the  two  chapters, 
in  assigning  the  genealogy  to  the  same  author  as 
the  rest  of  the  chapters  (Hilgenfeld,  p.  46,  47). 
4.  The  difficulties  in  the  harmony  are  all  recon- 
cileable,  and  the  day  has  passed,  it  may  be  hoped, 
when  a  passage  can  be  struck  out,  against  all  the 
MSS.  and  the  testimony  of  early  writers,  for  sub 
jective  impressions  about  its  contents. 

On  the  whole,  it  may  be  said  that  we  have  for 
the  genuineness  and  Apostolic  origin  of  our  Greek 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  the  best  testimony  that  can  be 
given  for  any  book  whatever. 

V.  Time  when  the   Gospel  was  written. — No 
thing  can  be  said  on  this  point  with  certainty. 
Some  of  the  ancients  think  that  it  was  written  in 
the  eighth  year  after  the  Ascension  (Theophylact 
and  Euthymius);  others  in  the  fifteenth   (Nicc- 
phorus,  H.  E.  ii.  45);  whilst  Irenaeus  says  (iii.  1) 
that  it  was  written  "  when  Peter  and  Paul  were 
preaching  in  Rome,"  and  Eusebius  {H.  E.  iii.  24), 
at  the  time  when  Matthew  was  about  to  leave  Pa 
lestine.     From  two  passages  xxvii.  7,  8,  xxviii.  15, 
some  time  must  have  elapsed  between  the  events 
and  the  description  of  them,  and  so  the  eighth  year 
seems  out  of  the  question ;  but  a  term  of  fifteen  or 
twenty  yeai-s  would  satisfy  these  passages.     The 
testimony  of  old  writers  that  Matthew's  Gospel  is 
the  earliest  must  be  taken  into  account  (Origeii  in 
Eus.  H.  E.  vi.  25;  Irenaeus  iii.  1 ;  comp.  Murato- 
rian  fragment,  as  far  as  it  remains,  in  Credner's 
Kanori) ;   this  would  bring  it  before  A.D.  58-6u 
(above,  p.  154),  the  supposed  date  of  St.  Luke. 
The  most  probable  supposition  is  that  it  was  written 
between  50  and  60 ;  the  exact  year  cannot  even  b» 
guessed  at. 

VI.  Place  where  it  was  written. — There  is  not 
much  doubt  that  the  Gospel  was  written  in  Pales 
tine.     Hug  has  shown  elaborately,  from  the  diffu 
sion  of  the  Greek  element  over  and  about  Palestine, 
that  there  is  no  inconsistency  between  the  asser 
tions  that  it  was  written  for  Jews  in  Palestine,  ;uid 
that  it  was  written  in  Greek  (Einleitung,  ii.,  ch.  i. 
§  10)  ;  the  facts  he  has  collected  are  worth  study. 

VII.  Purpose  of  the  Gospel. — The  Gospel  itself 
tells   us  by   plain   internal  evidence  that   it  was 
written  for  Jewish  converts,  to  show  them  in  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  the  Messiah  of  the  O.  T.  whom  they 
expected.     Jewish  converts  over  all  the  world  seem 
to  have  been  intended,  and  not  merely  Jews  in 
Palestine  (Irenaeus,  Origen,  and  Jerome  say  simply 
that  it  was  written  "for  the  Hebrews").     Jestu. 
is  the  Messiah  of  the  0.  T.,  recognizable  by  Jews 
from  his  acts  as  such  (i.  22,  ii.  5.  16>  17-  iv.  14 


MATTHIAS 

viii.  17,  xii.  17-21,  xiii.  55,  xxi.  4,  xxvii,  9). 
Knowledge  of  Jewish  customs  and  of  the  country 
is  presupposed  in  the  readers  (Matt.  XT.  1,  2  with 
Mark  vii.  1-4  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  62  with  Mark  xv.  4'J  ; 
?,nke  xxiii.  54 ;  John  xix.  14,  31,  42,  and  other 
places).  Jerusalem  is  the  holy  city  (see  above, 
'Style  and  diction).  Jesus  is  the  son  of  David,  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham  (i.  1,  ix.  27,  xii.  23,  xv.  2'.!, 
xz.  30,  xxi.  9,  15);  is  to  be  born  of  a  virgin  in 
David's  place,  Bethlehem  (i.  22,  ii.  6^ ;  must  flee 
into  Egypt  and  be  recalled  thence  (ii.  15,  19) ; 
must  have  a  forerunner,  John  the  Baptist  (iii.  3, 
xi.  10)  ;  was  to  labour  in  the  outcast  Galilee  that 
sat  in  darkness  (iv.  14-16);  His  healing  was  a 
promised  mark  of  His  office  (viii.  17,  xii.  17):  and 
so  was  His  mode  of  teaching  in  parables  (xiii.  14) ; 
He  entered  the  holy  city  as  Messiah  (xxi.  5-lfi) ; 
was  rejected  by  the  people,  in  fulfilment  of  a  pro 
phecy  (xxi.  42) ;  and  deserted  by  His  disciples  in 
the  same  way  (xxvi.  31,  56).  The  Gospel  is  per 
vaded  by  one  principle,  the  fulfilment  of  the  Law 
and  of  the  Messianic  prophecies  in  the  person  of 
Jesus.  This  at  once  sets  it  in  opposition  to  the  Ju 
daism  of  the  time ;  for  it  rebuked  the  Pharisaic  in 
terpretations  of  the  Law  (v.,  xxiii.),  and  proclaimed 
Jesus  as  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Saviour  of  the 
world  through  His  blood,  ideas  which  were  strange 
to  the  cramped  and  limited  Judaism  of  the  Chris 
tian  era. 

VIII.  Contents  of  the  Gospel. — There  are  traces 
in  this  Gospel  of  an  occasional  superseding  of  the 
chronological  order.  Its  principal  divisions  are — 
I.  The  Introduction  to  the  Ministry,  i.-iv.  II. 
The  laying  down  of  the  new  Law  for  the  Church 
in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  v.-vii.  III.  Events 
in  historical  order,  showing  Him  as  the  worker  of 
Miracles,  viii.  and  ix.  IV.  The  appointment  of 
Apostles  to  preach  the  Kingdom,  x.  V.  The  doubts 
and  opposition  excited  by  His  activity  in  divers 
minds — in  John's  disciples,  in  sundry  cities,  in  the 
Pharisees,  xi.  and  xii.  VI.  A  series  of  parables  on 
the  nature  of  the  Kingdom,  xiii.  VII.  Similar 
to  V.  The  effects  of  His  ministry  on  His  country 
men,  on  Herod,  the  people  of  Gennesaret,  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  and  on  multitudes,  whom  He  feeds, 
xiii.  53 — xvi.  12.  VIII.  Revelation  to  His  disciples 
of  His  sufferings.  His  instructions  to  them  there 
upon,  xvi.  13 — xviii.  35.  IX.  Events  of  a  journey 
to  Jerusalem,  xix.,  xx.  X.  Entrance  into  Jeru 
salem  and  resistance  to  Him  there,  and  denuncia 
tion  of  the  Pharisees,  xxi.-xxiii.  XI.  Last  dis 
courses  ;  Jesus  as  Lord  and  Judge  of  Jerusalem, 
and  also  of  the  world,  xxiv.,  xxv.  XII.  Passion 
and  Resurrection,  xxvi.-xxvih. 

Sources. — The  works  quoted  under  LUKE,  p. 
156 ;  and  Norton,  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels ; 
Fritzsche,  on  Matthew ;  Lange,  Bibelwerk  ;  Credner, 
Einleitung  and  Beitrage.  [W.  T.] 

MATTHI'AS  (M<XT0/as:  Matthias},  the  Apostle 
elected  to  fill  the  place  of  the  traitor  Judas  (Acts 
i.  26).  All  beyond  this  that  we  know  of  him  for 
certainty  is  that  he  had  been  a  constant  attendanl 
upon  the  Lord  Jesus  during  the  whole  course  of  His 
ministry ;  for  such  was  declared  by  St.  Peter  to  be 
the  necessary  qualification  of  one  who  was  to  be  a 
witness  of  the  resurrection.  The  name  of  Matthias 
occurs  in  no  other  place  in  the  N.  T.  We  may 
accept  as  probable  the  opinion  which  is  shared  by 
Eusebius  (H.  E.  lib.  i.  12)  and  Epiphanius  (i.  20] 
that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples.  It  is  saic 
that  he  preached  the  Gospel  and  suffered  martyrdom 


MATTOCK 


279 


n  Ethiopia  (Nicephor.  ii.  60).  Cave  believes  that 
t  was  rather  in  Cappadccia.  An  apocryphal  gospe 
vas  published  under  his  name  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  23), 
Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  from  the  Tra 
ditions  of  Matthias  (Strom,  ii.  163,  &c.). 

Different  opinions  have  prevailed  as  to  the  manner 
if  the  election  of  Matthias.  The  most  natural  con- 
.truction  of  the  words  of  Scripture  seems  to  be 
;his: — After  the  address  of  St.  Peter,  the  whole 
assembled  body  of  the  brethren,  amounting  in  num 
ber  to  about  120  (Acts  i.  15),  proceeded  to  nominate 
two,  namely,  Joseph  surnamed  Barsabas,  and  Mat 
thias,  who  answered  the  requirements  of  the  Apostle : 
;he  subsequent  selection  between  the  two  was  referred 
in  prayer  to  Him  who,  knowing  the  hearts  of  men, 
knew  which  of  them  was  the  fitter  to  be  His  witness 
and  apostle.  The  brethren  then,  under  the  heavenly 
guidance  which  they  had  invoked,  proceeded  to  give 
forth  their  lots,  probably  by  each  writing  the  name  of 
one  of  the  candidates  on  a  tablet,  and  casting  it  into 
the  urn.  The  uni  was  then  shaken,  and  the  name 
that  first  came  out  decided  the  election.  Lightfoot 
(ffor.  Heb.  Luc.  i.  9)  describes  another  way  of  casting 
lots  which  was  used  in  assigning  to  the  priests  their 
several  parts  in  the  service  of  the  Temple.  The 
apostles,  it  will  be  remembered,  had  not  yet  received 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  this  solemn  mode  of 
casting  the  lots,  in  accordance  with  a  practice  enjoined 
in  the  Levitical  law  (Lev.  xvi.  8),  is  to  be  regarded 
as  a  way  of  referring  the  decision  to  God  (comp. 
Prov.  xvi.  33).  St.  Chrysostom  remarks  that  it  was 
never  repeated  after  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  election  'of  Matthias  is  discussed  by  Bishop 
Beveridge,  Works,  vol.  i.  serm.  2.  [E.  H — s/J 

MATTHI'AS  (MoTToOjas :  Mathathias)  = 
MATTATHAH,  of  the  descendants  of  Hashum 
(1  Esdr.  ix.  33 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  33). 

MATTITHI'AH  (n»nfl& :  Ma*6aOlas ;  Alex. 

MaTT<x0/as:  Mathathias).  1.  A  Levite,  the  first 
born  of  Shallum  the  Korhite,  who  presided  over 
the  offerings  made  in  the  pans  (1  Chr.  ix.  31  ; 
comp.  Lev.  vi.  20  [12],  &c.). 

2.  (yiarradias.)   One  of  the  Levites  of  the  second 
rank  under  Asaph,  appointed  by  David  to  minister 
before  the  ark  in  the  musical  service  (1  Chr.  xvi.  5), 
"  with  harps  upon  Shemiuith  "  (comp.  1  Chr.  xv 
21),  to  lead  the  choir.     See  below,  5. 

3.  (MarOavias ;  Alex.  Ma00a0(os.)    One  of  the 
family  of  Nebo,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  in 
the  days  of  Ezra  (Neh.  x.  43).     He  is  called  MAZI- 
TIAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  35. 

4.  (MarOaOias ;  Alex.  MarraOias.}     Probably 
a  priest,  who  stood  at  the  right  hand  of  Ezra  when 
he  read  the  law  to  the  people  (Ezr.  viii.  4).     In 
1  Esdr.  ix.  43,  he  appears  as  MATTATHIAS. 

5.  (•lil'TWO:    MuT0a0fo;    Alex.    MarraOja ; 
1  Chr.  xv.Vs,  Ma.TTa.elas;  1  Chr.  xv.  21,  Mar- 
6a0ias  ;  Alex.  MoTTaOfas,  1  Chr.  xxv.  3  ;  MaTBias, 
1  Chr.  xxv.  21).    The  same  as  2,  the  Hebrew  being 
iu  the  lengthened  form.     He  was  a  Levite  of  the 
second  rank,  and  a  doorkeeper  of  the  ark  (1  Chr. 
xv.  18,  21).     As  one  of  the  six  sons  of  Jeduthun, 
he  was  appointed  to  preside  over  the  14th  division 
of  twelve  Levites  into  which  the  Temple  choir  was 
distributed  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3,  21). 

MATTOCK.*     The  tool   used  in  Arabia  for 


a  1.  ~nyO  ;  samilum,  Is.  vii.  25.    2. 
TTO.VOV.  sarculum  and  nt^1)nO>  Qepurrripiov,  vomer,  botb 


280 


MAUL 


loosening  the  ground,  described  by  Niebuhr,  answers 
generally  to  our  mattock  or  grubbing-axe,  »'.  e, 
a  single-headed  pickaxe,  the  sarculus  simplex,  as 
opposed  to  bicornis,  of  Palladius.  The  ancient 
Egyptian  hoe  was  of  wood,  and  answered  for  hoe, 
spade,  and  pick.  The  blade  was  inserted  in  the 
handle,  and  the  two  were  attached  about  the  centre 
by  a  twisted  rope.  (Palladius,  de  Be  rust.  i.  43  ; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Ar.  p.  137  ;  London,  Encyol. 
if  Gardening,  p.  517;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii. 
16,  18,  abridgm. ;  comp.  Her.  ii.  14;  Hasselqaist, 
Trav.  p.  100.)  [HANDICRAFT.]  [H.  V/.  P.I 


Egyptian  hoes.    iFrom  Wilkinson.) 


MAUL  (i.  e.  a  hammer ;  a  variation  of  mall, 
from  malleus),  a  word  employed  by  our  translators 
to  render  the  Hebrew  term  pQID.  The  Hebrew 
and  English  alike  occur  in  Prov.  xxv.  18  only.  But 
a  derivative  from  the  same  root,  and  differing  but 
slightly  in  form,  viz.  ^Stt,  is  found  in  Jer.  Ii.  20, 
and  is  there  translated  by  "battle-ax" — how  in 
correctly  is  shown  by  the  constant  repetition  of 
the  verb  derived  from  the  same  root  in  the  next 
three  verses,  and  there  uniformly  rendered  "  break 
in  pieces."  The  root  ]^Q3  or  pS,  has  the  force  of 
dispersing  or  smashing,  and  there  is  no  doubt  that 
some  heavy  warlike  instrument,  a  mace  or  club,  is 
alluded  to.  Probably  such  as  that  which  is  said  to 
have  suggested  the  name  of  Charles  Martel. 

The  mace  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  accounts 
of  the  ware  of  the  Europeans  with  Saracens,  Turks, 
and  other  Orientals,  and  several  kinds  are  still  in 
use  among  the  Bedouin  Arabs  of  remoter  parts 
(Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bedouins,  i.  55.)  In  their 
European  wars  the  Turks  were  notorious  for  the  use 
they  made  of  the  mace  (Knollys'  Hist,  of  the 
Turks). 

A  similar  word  is  found  once  again  in  the  original 
of  Ez.  ix.  2,  f*BD  v3  =  weapon  of  smashing 
(A.  V.  "  slaughter-weapon  ").  The  sequel  shows 
how  terrible  was  the  destruction  such  weapons 
could  effect.  [G.] 

MAUZ'ZIM  (Dny» :  Maw&f/i !  Alex.  Vlan^i : 
Maozim).  The  marginal  note  to  the  A.  V.  of  Dan. 


carve,"  "  engrave."  1  Sain.  xlii.  20.  Which 
of  these  is  the  ploughshare  and  which  the  mattock  cannot 
be  (uoertained.  See  Ges.  |>  530. 


MAUZZtM 

,  xl.  .-!8,  '•  the  God  of  forces"  gives,  as  the  equi- 
'  valent  of  the  last  word,  "  Mauzzim,  w  gods  pro 
tectors,  or  munitions."  The  Geneva  vemon  renders 
the  Hebrew  as  a  proper  name  Doth  in  Dan.  xi.  38 
and  39,  where  the  word  occurs  again  (murg.  ol 
A.  V.  "munitions").  In  the  Greek  version  ol 
Theodotion,  given  above,  it  is  treated  as  a  proper 
name,  as  well  as  in  the  Vulgate.  The  LXX.  at.  at 
present  printed  is  evidently  corrupt  in  this  passage, 
but  Iffxvpd  (yer.  37)  appeal's  to  represent  the  word 
in  question.  In  Jerome's  time  the  reading  was 
different,  and  he  gives  "  Deum  fortissimum  "  for  the 
I  Latin  translation  of  it,  and  "  Deum  fortitudinum  " 
for  that  of  Aquila.  He  ridicules  the  interpretation 
of  Porphyry,  who,  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  understood 
by  "  the  god  of  Mauzzim"  the  statue  of  Jupiter 
set  up  in  Modin,  the  city  of  Mat  tat  h  his  and  his 
sons,  by  the  generals  of  Antiochus,  who  compelled 
the  Jews  to  sacrifice  to  it,  "  the  god  of  Modin." 
Theodoret  retains  the  reading  of  Theodotion  (Mo- 
foiffyt  being  evidently  for  Mao>£efyt),  and  explains 
it  of  Antichrist,  "  a  god  strong  and  powerful."  The 


Peshitc-Syriac has  \  I  *  •  "V  JCT1^,J,  "the  strong 

god,"  and  Junius  and  Tremellius  render  it  "  Deum 
sumini  roboris,"  considering  the  Hebrew  plural  as 
intensive,  and  interpreting  it  of  the  God  of  Israel. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  "  Mauzzim  "  is  to 
be  taken  in  its  literal  sense  of  "  fortresses,"  just  as 
in  Dan.  xi.  19,  39,  "  the  god  of  fortresses"  being 
then  the  deity  who  presided  over  strongholds.  But 
beyond  this  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  connect  an  ap 
pellation  so  general  with  any  special  object  of  idola 
trous  worship.  Grotius  conjectured  that  Mauzzim 
was  a  modification  of  the  name  yA£t£bs,  the  war- 
god  of  the  Phoenicians,  mentioned  in  Julian's  hymn 
to  the  sun.  Calvin  suggested  that  it  denoted 
"  money,"  the  strongest  of  all  powers.  By  others 
it  has  been  supposed  to  be  Mars,  the  tutelary  deity 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  is  the  subject  of  allu 
sion.  The  only  authority  for  this  supposition  exists 
in  two  coins  struck  at  Laodicea,  which  are  believed 
to  have  on  the  obverse  the  head  of  Antiochus  with 
a  radiated  crown,  and  on  the  reverse  the  figure  of 
Mai's  with  a  spear.  But  it  is  assorted  on  the  con 
trary  that  all  known  coins  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
bear  his  name,  and  that  it  is  mere  conjecture  whirh 
attributes  these  to  him ;  and  further,  that  there  is 
no  ancient  authority  to  show  that  a  temple  to  Mare 
was  built  by  Antiochus  at  Laodicea.  The  opinion 
of  Gesenius  is  more  probable,  that  "  the  god  of 
"ortresses"  was  Jupiter  Capitolinus,  for  whom  An- 
iochus  built  a  temple  at  Antioch  (Liv.  xli.  20). 
3y  others  it  is  referred  to  Jupiter  Olympius,  to 
whom  Antiochus  dedicated  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem 
2  Mace.  vi.  2).  But  all  these  are  simply  con- 
ectures.  Fiirst  (ffandw.  s.  v.),  comparing  Is. 
xxxiii.  4,  where  the  reference  is  to  Tyre,  "  the 
ortress  of  the  sea,"  makes  D^D  equivalent  to 

l'n  TiyO,  or  even  proposes  to  read  for  the  former 

T  -.       T 

I*  TJJD,  the  god  of  the  "  stronghold  of  the  sea  " 

would  thus  be  Melkart,  the  Tyrian  Hercules.  A 
suggestion  made  by  Mr.  Layard  (Nin.  ii.  456,  note] 
is  worthy  of  being  recorded,  as  being  at  least  ar 
well  founded  as  any  already  mentioned.  After  de 
scribing  Hera,  the  Assyrian  Venus,  as  "  standing 
erect  on  a  lion,  and  crowned  with  a  tower  or  mural 
coronet,  which,  we  learn  from  Lucian,  was  peculiai 
to  the  Semitic  »igure  of  the  goddess,"  he  adds  in  a 
note,  "  May  she  be  connected  with  the  '  El  Mao- 
Ktn,'  the  deity  presiding  over  bulwarks  and  for- 


MAZITIAS 

tresses,  the  '  god  of  forces  '  of  Dan.  xi.  38  ?  " 
Pfeifler  (Dub.  Vex.  cent.  4,  loc.  72)  will  only  s«e 
u  it  "  the  idol  of  the  Mass  !  "  fW.  A.  W.] 

MAZITI'AS  (Mafrrfai:  Mathathias)  =  MAT 
TITHIAH  3  (1  Esd.  ix.  35  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  43). 

MAZ'ZABOTH  (n'TTJO  :  Mafovprffl  :  Lucifer). 
The  margin  of  the  A.  V.  of  Job  xxxviii.  32  gives 
"  the  twelve  signs  "  as  the  equivalent  of  "  Mazza- 
roth,"  and  this  is  in  all  probability  its  true  mean 

ing.    The  Peshito-Syriac  renders  it  by 


'ogalto,  "the  wain"  or  "Great  Bear;"  and  J.  D. 
Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  No.  1391)  is  fol 
lowed  by  Ewald  in  applying  it  to  the  stars  of  "  the 
northern  crown"  (Ewald  adds  "the  southern"), 
deriving  the  word  from  "1T3,  nezer,  "  a  crown." 
Fiirst  (Handw.  s.  v.)  understands  by  Mazzaroth 
the  planet  Jupiter,  the  same  as  the  "  star"  of  Amos 
v.  26.»  But  the  interpretation  given  in  the  margin 
of  our  version  is  supported  by  the  authority  of  Ge- 
senius  (T/ies.  p.  869).  On  referring  to  2  K.  xxiii. 
5,  we  find  the  word  flWD,  mazzaloth  (A.  V. 

"  the  planets  "),  differing  only  from  Mazzaroth  in 
having  the  liquid  I  for  r,  and  rendered  in  the  margin 
"  the  twelve  signs,"  as  in  the  Vulgate.  The  LXX. 
there  also  have  fj.a£ovpcl>Q,  which  points  to  the 
same  reading  in  both  passages,  and  is  by  Suidas  ex 
plained  as  "  the  Zodiac,"  but  by  Procopius  of  Gaza 
as  probably  "  Lucifer,  the  morning  star,"  following 
the  Vulgate  of  Job  xxxviii.  32.  In  later  Jewish 
writings  mazzaloth  are  the  signs  of  the  Zodiac,  and 
the  singular,  mazzal,  is  u«ed  to  denote  the  single 
signs,  as  well  as  the  planets,  and  also  the  influence 
which  they  were  believed  to  exercise  upon  human 
destiny  (Selden,  De  Dk  Syr.  Synt.  i.  c.  1).  In 
consequence  of  this,  Jarchi,  and  the  Hebrew  com 
mentators  generally,  identify  mazzarotli  and  mazza 
loth,  though  their  interpretations  vary.  Aben  Ezra 
understands  "  stars  "  generally  ;  but  R.  Levi  ben 
Gershon,  "  a  northern  constellation."  Gesenius 
himself  is  in  favour  of  regarding  mazzaroth  as  the 
older  form,  signifying  strictly  "premonitions,"  and 
in  the  concrete  sense,  "  stars  that  give  warnings  or 
presages,"  from  the  usage  of  the  root  "1T3,  ndzar,  in 
Arabic.  He  deciphered,  as  he  believed,  the  same 
•word  on  some  Cilician  coins  in  the  inscription 
?y  "|T  T)TE,  which  he  renders  as  a  prayer,  "  may 
thy  pure  star  (shine)  over  (us)  "  (Hon.  Phoen. 
p.  279,  tab.  36).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEADOW.  This  word,  so  peculiarly  English, 
is  used  in  the  A.  V.  to  translate  two  words  which 
are  entirely  distinct  and  independent  of  each  other. 

1.  Gen.  xli.  2  and  18.  Here  the  word  in  the  ori 
ginal  is  -iriNn  (with  the  definite  article),  ha-Achu. 
It  appears  to  be  an  Egyptian  term,  literally  trans 
ferred  into  the  Hebrew  text,  as  it  is  also  into  that 
cf  the  Alexandrian  translators,  who  give  it  as  T$ 
"Axei.b  The  same  form  is  retained  by  the  Coptic 
version.  Its  use  in  Job  viii.  11  (A.  V.  "flag") 
—  where  it  occurs  as  a  parallel  to  gome  (A.  V. 
"  rush  "),  a  word  used  in  Ex.  ii.  3  for  the  "  bul 
rushes"  of  which  Moses'  ark  was  composed  —  seems 


•  A  note  to  the  Hexaplar  Syriac  version  of  Job  (ed. 
Middeldorpf,  1835)  has  the  following :  "  Some  say  it  is 
the  dog  of  the  giant  (Orion,  i.  e.  Canis  major),  others  that 
it  is  the  Zodiac." 

b  This  is  the  reading  of  Codex  A.  Codex  B,  if  we  may 
accept  the  edition  of  Mai,  has  eAot ;  so  also  the  rendering  of 


MEAH,  THE  TOWER  OF        281 

to  shew  that  it  is  not  a  "  meadow,"  but  some  kind 
of  reed  or  water-plant.  This  the  LXX.  support, 
both  by  rendering  in  the  latter  passage  POVTO/JLOV, 
and  also  by  introducing  vAx'  as  the  equivalent  01 
the  word  rendered  "  paper-reeds "  in  Is.  six.  7. 
St.  Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  the  passage,  also 
confirms  this  meaning.  He  states  that  he  was  in 
formed  by  learned  Egyptians  that  the  word  achi 
denoted  in  their  tongue  any  green  thing  that  grew 
in  a  marsh — omne  quod  in  palude  virciis  nascitur 
But  as  during  high  inundations  of  the  Nile — such 
inundations  as  are  the  cause  of  fruitful  years — the 
whole  of  the  land  on  either  side  is  a  marsh,  and  as 
the  cultivation  extends  up  to  the  very  lip  of  the 
river,  is  it  not  possible  that  Achu  may  denote  the 
herbage  of  the  growing  crops?  The  fact  that 
the  cows  of  Pharaoh's  vision  were  feeding  there 
would  seem  to  be  as  strong  a  figure  as  could  be 
presented  to  an  Egyptian  of  the  extreme  fruitful - 
ness  of  the  season:  so  luxuriant  was  the  growth 
on  either  side  of  the  stream,  that  the  very  cows 
fed  amongst  it  unmolested.  The  lean  kine,  on  the 
other  hand,  merely  stand  on  the  dry  brink.  [NILE.] 
No  one  appears  yet  to  have  attempted  to  discover 
on  the  spot  what  the  signification  of  the  term  is. 

2.  Judg.  xx.  33  only :  "  the  meadows  of  Gibeah." 
Here  the  word  is  fnjJD,  Maareh,  which  occurs  no 
where  else  with  the  same  vowels  attached  to  it. 
The  sense  is  thus  doubly  uncertain.  "  Meadows  " 
around  Gibeah  can  certainly  never  have  existed : 
the  nearest  approach  to  that  sense  would  be  to  take 
maareh  as  meaning  an  open  plain.  This  is  tne 
dictum  of  Gesenius  (Thes.  1069),  on  the  authority 
of  the  Targutn.  It  is  also  adopted  by  De  Wette 
(die  Plane  von  <?.).  But  if  an  open  plain,  where 
could  the  ambush  have  concealed  itself? 

The  LXX.,  according  to  the  Alex.  MS.,C  read  a 
different  Hebrew  word — 3"1J?D — "  from  the  west 
of  Gibeah."  Tremellius,  taking  the  root  of  the  word 
in  a  figurative  sense,  reads  "  after  Gibeah  had  been 
left  open,"  i.  e.  by  the  quitting  of  its  inhabitants" 
— post  denudationem  Gibhae.  This  is  adopted  by 
Bertheau  (Kurzgef.  Handb.  ad  loc.)  But  the  most 
plausible  interpretation  is  that  of  the  Peshito-Syriac, 
which  by  a  slight  difference  in  the  vowel-points 
makes  the  word  m}?O,  "  the  cave  ;"  a  suggestion 
quite  in  keeping  with  the  locality,  which  is  very 
suitable  for  caves,  and  also  with  the  requirements 
of  the  ambush.  The  only  thing  that  can  be  saic 
against  this  is  that  the  liers-in-wait  were  "  set 
round  about"  Gibeah,  as  if  not  in  one  spot,  but 
several.  [G.] 

ME'AH,  THE  TOWER  OF  (PlKBn  ^t3D  = 
irvpyos  TUV  l/coToV:  turris  centum  cubitorum, 
turrim  Emetfi),  one  of  the  towers  of  the  wall  ot 
Jerusalem  when  rebuilt  by  Nehemiah  (iii.  1,  xii. 
39).  It  stood  between  the  tower  of  Hananeel  and 
the  sheep-gate,  and  appears  to  have  been  situated 
somewhere  at  the  north-east  part  of  the  city,  out 
side  of  the  walls  of  Zion  (see  the  diagram,  vol.  i. 
p.  1027).  The  name  in  Hebrew  means  •'  the  towei 
of  the  hundred,"  but  whether  a  hundred  cubits  of 
distance  from  some  other  point,  or  a  hundred  in 
height  (Syriac  of  xii.  39),  or  a  hundred  heroes  com- 

Aquila  and  Symmachus,  and  of  Josephus  (Ant .  li.  6,  $5;. 
Another  version,  quoted  in  the  fragments  of  the  Hcxapla, 
attempts  to  reconcile  sound  and  sense  by  oxOrj,  The 
Veneto-Greek  has  Aeif/.ui'. 

«  The  Vatican  Codex  transfers  the  word  litcrailj 
— Mapaay  o£c'. 


282 


MEA.U5 


memorated  by  it,  we  are  not  told  or  enabled  to 
infer.  In  the  Arabic  version  it  is  rendered  Bab-el- 
bostdn,  the  gate  of  the  gai-den,  which  suggests  its 
identity  with  the  "gate  Gennath"d  of  Josephus. 
But  the  gate  Gennath  appeal's  to  have  lain  further 
round  towards  the  west,  nearer  the  spot  where  the 
ruin  known  as  the  Kasr  Jalud  now  stands.  [G.] 

MEALS.  Our  information  on  this  subject  is 
but  scanty :  the  early  Hebrews  do  not  seem  to  have 
given  special  names  to  their  several  meals,  for  the 
terms  rendered  "  dine"  and  "dinner"  in  the  A.  V. 
(Gen.  xliii.  16  ;  Prov.  xv.  17)  are  in  reality  general 
expressions,  which  might  more  correctly  be  rendered 
"eat"  and  "portion  of  food."  In  the  N.  T.  we 
have  the  Greek  terms  &piffrov  and  Utiirvov,  which 
the  A.  V.  renders  respectively  "  dinner"  and  "sup 
per"'  (Lukexiv.  12  ;  John  xxi.  12),  but  which  are 
more  properly  "  breakfast "  and  "  dinner."  There 
is  some  uncertainty  as  to  the  hours  at  which  the 
meals  were  taken :  the  Egyptians  undoubtedly  took 


MEALS 

their  principal  meal  at  noon  (Gen.  xlm.  16;:  Lv 
bourers  took  a  light  meal  at  that  time  (Ruth  ii.  14 ; 
comp.  verse  17);  and  occasionally  that  early  hour 
was  devoted  to  excess  and  revelling  (1  K.  xx.  16).  It 
has  l>een  inferred  from  those  passages  (somewhi*  loo 
hastily,  we  think)  that  the  principal  meal  gene' ally 
took  place  at  noon:  the  Egyptians  do  indeed  still 
make  a  substantial  meal  at  that  time  (Lane's  Mod. 
Egypt,  i.  189),  but  there  are  indications  that  the 
Jews  rather  followed  the  custom  that  prevails  among 
the  Bedouins,  and  made  their  principal  meal  after 
sunset,  and  a  lighter  meal  at  about  9  or  10  A.M. 
(Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  64).  For  instance,  Lot  pre 
pared  a  feast  for  the  two  angels  "  at  even  "  (Gen. 
xix.  1-3) :  Boaz  evidently  took  his  meal  late  in  the 
evening  (Kuth  iii.  7):  the  Israelites  ate  flesh  in  the 
evening,  and  bread  only,  or  manna,  in  the  morning 
(Ex.  xvi.  12):  the  context  seems  to  imply  that 
Jethro's  feast  was  in  the  evening  (Ex.  xviii.  12, 14). 
But,  above  all,  the  institution  of  the  Paschal  feast 


t  Egyptian  dinner  party.     (Wilkinson.) 


a, ),  n,  r.  Tables  with  various  dishes.         t,  p.  Figs.        rf,  f,  q,  and  i 
fig.  4  holds  a  joint  of  meat        Figs.  &  and  7  are  eating  fish. 


Baskets  of  grapes.        Fig.  3  is  taking  a  wing  from  a  goose. 
Fig.  6  is  about  to  drink  water  from  an  earthen  vessel. 


in  the  evening  seems  to  imply  that  the  principal 
meal  was  usually  taken  then :  it  appears  highly  im 
probable  that  the  Jews  would  have  been  ordered  to 
eat  meat  at  an  unusual  time.  In  the  later  Biblical 
period  we  have  clearer  notices  to  the  same  effect: 
breakfast  took  place  in  *he  morning  (John  xxi.  4, 12), 
on  ordinary  days  not  before  9  o'clock,  which  was  the 
first  hour  of  prayer  (Acts  ii.  15),  and  on  the  Sab 
bath  not  before  12,  when  the  service  of  the  synagogue 
was  completed  (Joseph.  Vit.  §54) :  the  more  pro 
longed  and  substantial  meal  took  place  in  the  evening 
(Joseph.  Vit.  §44 ;  B.  J.  i.  17,  §4).  The  general 
tenour  of  the  parable  of  the  great  supper  certainly 
implies  that  the  feast  took  place  in  the  working  hours 
of  the  day  (Luke  xiv.  15-24):  but  we  may  regard 
this  perhaps  as  part  of  the  imagery  of  the  parable, 
rather  than  as  a  picture  of  real  life. 


The  posture  at  meals  varied  at  various  periods . 
there  is  sufficient  evidence  that  the  old  Hebrews  were 
in  the  habit  of  sitting  (Gen.  xxvii.  19 ;  Judg.  xix.  6 ; 
1  Sam.  xx.  5,  24 ;  1  K.  xiii.  20),  but  it  does  not 
hence  follow  that  they  sat  on  chairs ;  they  may 
have  squatted  on  the  ground,  as  was  the  occasional, 
though  not  perhaps  the  general,  custom  of  the  ancient 
Egyptians  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  58,  181).  The 
table  was  in  this  case  but  slightly  elevated  above  the 
ground,  as  is  still  the  case  in  Egypt.  At  the  same 
time  the  chair  b  was  not  unknown  to  the  Hebrews, 
but  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  a  token  of  dignity. 
As  luxury  increased,  the  practice  of  sitting  was  ex 
changed  for  that  of  reclining :  the  first  intimation 
of  this  occurs  in  the  prophecies  of  Amos,  who  repro 
bates  those  "  that  lie  upon  beds  of  ivory,  and  stretch 
themselves  upon  their  couches  "  (vi.  4),  and  it  ap- 


<>  Possibly  from  fl^33.  gannOOi,  "gardens,"  perhaps 
alluding  to  the  gardens  which  lay  north  of  the  city. 

»  The  Greek  word  Seiirvov  was  used  indifferently  in  the 
Homeric  age  for  the  early  or  the  late  meal,  its  special 
meaning  being  the  principal  meal.  In  later  times,  how 
ever,  the  term  was  applied  exclusively  to  tbc  late  meal, 
—  the  Sopnov  of  the  Homeric  age. 


b  The  Hebrew  term  is  kitst  (KD3)-  There  is  oniy 
one  instance  of  its  being  mentioned  as  an  article  of  ordi 
nary  furniture,  viz.,  in  2  K.  iv.  10,  where  tne  A.  V.  incor 
rectly  renders  it  "  stool."  Kven  there  it  seems  probable 
that  it  was  placed  more  as  a  mark  of  special  honour  to  Uie 
prophet  than  for  cemmon  use. 


MSALS 


283 


f<oars  that  the  couches  themselves  were  of  a  costly 
character — the  "  corners  "  c  or  edges  (iii.  12)  being 
finished  with  ivory,  and  the  seat  covered  with  silk 
or  damask  coverlets."1  Ezekiel,  again,  inveighs  against 
one  who  sat  "  on  a  stately  bed  with  a  table  prepared 
before  it"  (xxiii.  41).  The  custom  may  have  been 
borrowed  in  the  first  instance  from  the  Babylonians 
and  Syrians,  among  whom  it  prevailed  at  aa  early 
(jeriod  (Esth.  i.  6,  vii.  8).  A  similar  change  took 
place  in  the  habits  of  the  Greeks,  who  are  represented 
in  the  Heroic  age  as  sitting  e  (//.  x.  578  ;  Od.  i. 
145),  but  who  afterwards  adopted  the  habit  of 
reclining,  women  and  children  excepted.  In  the  time 
of  our  Saviour  reclining  was  the  universal  custom, 
as  is  implied  in  the  terms'  used  for  "  sitting  at  meat," 
as  the  A.  V.  incorrectly  has  it.  The  couch  itself 
(K\ivtj)  is  only  once  mentioned  (Mark  vii.  4 ;  A.  V. 
"  tables  "),  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 
Roman  triclinium  had  been  introduced,  and  that  the 
arrangements  of  the  table  resembled  those  described 
by  classical  writers.  Generally  speaking,  only  three 
persons  reclined  on  each  couch,  but  occasionally  four 
or  even  five.  The  couches  were  provided  with 
cushions  on  which  the  left  elbow  rested  in  support 
of  the  upper  part  of  the  body,  while  the  right  arm 
remained  free :  a  room  provided  with  these  was 
described  as  ^arpecjtteVoj/,  lit.  "  spread  "  (Mark  xiv. 
15;  A.  V.  "  furnished  ").  As  several  guests  reclined 
on  the  same  couch,  each  overlapped  his  neighbour, 
as  it  were,  and  rested  his  head  on  or  near  the  breast 
of  the  one  who  lay  behind  him :  he  was  then  said  to 
"  lean  on  the  bosom  "  of  his  neighbour  (ava.Kf'io'Oai 
fv  T<f  K«J\iry,  John  xiii.  23,  xxi.  20  ;  comp.  Plin. 
Epiit.  iv.  22).  The  close  proximity  into  which 
pei-sons  were  thus  brought  rendered  it  more  than 
usually  agreeable  that  friend  should  be  next  to  friend, 
and  it  gave  the  opportunity  of  making  confidential 
communications  (John  xiii.  25).  The  ordinary  ar 
rangement  of  the  couches  was  in  three  sides  of  a 
square,  the  fourth  being  left  open  for  the  servants  to 
bring  up  the  dishes.  The  couches  were  denominated 
respectively  the  highest,  the  middle,  and  the  lowest 
couch  ;  the  three  guests  on  each  couch  were  also  de 
nominated  highest,  middle,  and  lowest — the  terms 
being  suggested  by  the  circumstance  of  the  guest  who 
reclined  on  another's  bosom  always  appearing  to  be 
below  him.  The  protoklisia  (irp<aTOK\iffia,  Matt. 
xxiii.  6),  which  the  Pharisees  so  much  coveted,  was 
not,  as  the  A.  V.  represents  it,  "  the  uppermost 
room,"  but  the  highest  seat  in  the  highest  couch — 
the  seat  numbered  1  in  the  annexed  diagram, 
lectus  medius 


Some  doubt  attends  the  question  whether  the 
females  took  their  meals  along  with  the  males.  Th? 
present  state  of  society  in  the  East  throws  no  light 
upon  this  subject,  as  the  customs  of  the  Harem 
date  from  tne  time  of  Mahomet.  The  cases  of 
Kuth  amid  the  reapers  (Ruth  ii.  14),  of  Elkanah 
with  his  wives  (1  Sam.  i.  4),  of  Job's  sons  and 
daughters  (Job  i.  4),  and  the  general  intermixture 
of  the  sexes  in  daily  life,  make  it  more  than  pro 
bable  that  they  did  so  join  ;  at  the  same  time,  as  the 
duty  of  attending  upon  the  guests  devolved  upon 
them  (Luke  x.  40),  they  probably  took  a  somewhat 
irregular  and  briefer  repast. 


I  1  a 

""   S   2 

1 

Minimus 

€54 
7                    3 

imus 

3 

mediua 

8                  2 

medius 

% 

imus 

9                  1 

summits 

a 

c  Th3  word  is  peah  (i"lKB)>  which  will  apply  to  the 
Kige  as  wall  as  to  the  angle  of  a  couch.  That  the  seat 
aml  couches  of  the  Assyrians  were  handsomely  orna 
mented,  appears  from  the  specimens  given  by  Layard 
(j\inevelt,  ii.  300-2.). 

•»  The  A.  V.  has  "  in  Damascus  in  a  couch ;"  but  there 
san  be  no  doubt  'iat  Use  name  of  the  town  was  trans- 


Washing  before  or  after  a  meal.    (From  Lane's  Modern  Egyptian  '•* 

Before  commencing  the  meal,  the  guests  washed 
their  hands.  This  custom  was  founded  on  natural 
decorum  ;  not  only  was  the  hand  the  substitute  for 
our  knife  and  fork,  but  the  hands  of  all  the  guests 
were  dipped  into  one  and  the  same  dish  ;  unclean- 
liness  in  such  a  case  would  be  intolerable.  Hence 
not  only  the  Jews,  but  the  Greeks  (Od.  i.  136),  the 
modern  Egyptians  (Lane,  i.  190),  and  many  other 
nations,  have  been  distinguished  by  this  practice ; 
the  Bedouins  in  particular  are  careful  to  wash  their 
hands  before,  but  are  indifferent  about  doing  so  after 
their  meals  (Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  63).  The  Pha 
risees  transformed  this  conventional  usage  into  a 
ritual  observance,  and  overlaid  it  with  burdensome 
regulations — a  wilful  perversion  which  our  Lord 
reprobates  in  the  strongest  terms  (Mark  vii.  1-13). 
Another  preliminary  step  was  the  grace  or  blessing, 
of  which  we  have  but  one  instance  in  the  0.  T. 
(1  Sam.  ix.  13),  and  more  than  one  pronounced  by 
our  Lord  Himself  in  the  N.  T.  (Matt.  xv.  36  ;  Luke 
ix.  16:  John  vi.  11);  it  consisted,  as  far  as  we 
may  judge  from  the  words  applied  to  it,  partly  of  a 
blessing  upon  the  food,  partly  of  thanks  to  the  Giver 
of  it.  The  Rabbinical  writers  have,  as  usual,  laid 
down  most  minute  regulations  respecting  it,  which 
may  be  found  in  the  treatise  of  the  Mishna,  en 
titled  Berachoth,  chaps.  6-8. 

The  rcode  of  taking  the  food  differed  in  no  ma 
terial  point  from  the  modern  usages  of  the  East 
generally  there  was  a  single  dish  into  which  ear;h 


ferred  to  the  silk  stuffs  manufactured  there,  which  arc 
still  known  by  the  name  of  "  Damask." 

•  Sitting  appears  to  have  been  the  posture  usual  among 
the  Assyrians  on  the  occasion  of  great  festivals.  A  bas- 
relief  on  the  walls  of  Khorsabad  represents  the  guest* 
seated  on  high  chairs  (Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  411). 


28  i 


MEALN 


guest  dipped  his  hand  (Matt.  xxvi.  23) ;  occasion 
ally  separate  portions  were  served  out  to  each  (Gen. 
xliii.  34;  Ruth  ii.  14;  1  Sam.  i.  4).  A  piece  of 
bread  was  held  between  the  thumb  and  two  fingers  of 
the  right  hand,  and  was  dipped  either  into  a  bowl  of 
melted  grease  (in  which  case  it  was  termed  ^ftaftiov, 
"  a  sop,"  John  xiii.  26),  or  into  the  dish  of  meat, 
whence  a  piece  was  conveyed  to  the  mouth  between 
the  layers  of  bread  (Lane,  i.  193,  194;  Burck- 
hardt's  Notes,  i.  63).  It  is  esteemed  an  act  of 
politeness  to  hand  over  to  a  friend  a  delicate  morsel 
(John  xiii.  26  ;  Lane,  i.  194).  In  allusion  to  the 
above  method  of  eating,  Solomon  makes  it  a  charac 
teristic  of  the  sluggard,  that  "  he  hideth  his  hand  in 
his  bosom  and  will  not  so  much  as  bring  it  to  his  mouth 
again  "  (Prov.  six.  24,  xxvi.  15).  At  the  conclusion 
-of  the  meal,  grace  was  again  said  in  conformity  with 
Dent.  viii.  10,  and  the  hands  were  again  washed. 


A  party  at  dinner  or  supper.    (From  Lanu's  At 


Thus  far  we  have  described  the  ordinary  meal  : 
on  state  occasions  more  ceremony  was  used,  and 
the  meal  was  enlivened  in  various  ways.  Such  oc 
casions  were  numerous,  in  connexion  partly  with 
public,  partly  with  private  events:  in  the  first  class 
we  may  place — the  great  festivals  of  the  Jews  (Dent. 
xvi. ;  Tob.  ii.  1) ;  public  sacrifices  (Deut.  xii.  7 ; 
xxvii.  7  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  13,  22  ;  IK.  i.  9,  iii.  15  ; 
Zeph.  i.  7);  the  ratification  of  treaties  (Gen.  xxvi. 
30,  xxxi.  54) ;  the  offering  of  the  tithes  (Deut. 
xiv.  26),  particularly  at  the  end  of  each  third  year 
(Deut.  xiv.  28) :  in  the  second  class — marriages 
(Gen.  xxix.  22  ;  Judg.  xiv.  10  ;  Esth.  ii.  18  ;  Tob. 
viii.  19;  Matt.  xxii.  2;  John  ii.  1),  birth-days 
(Gen.  xl.  20 ;  Job  i.  4 ;  Matt.  xiv.  6,  9),  burials 
(2  Sam.  iii.  35  ;  Jer.  xvi.  7  ;  Hos.  ix.  4 ;  Tob.  iv. 
17),  sheep-shearing  (1  Sam.  xxv.  2,  36  ;  2  Sam. 
xiii.  23),  the  vintage  (Judg.  ix.  27),  laying  the 


MEANI 

foundation  stone  of  a  house  (Prov  ix.  1-5),  tirt 
reception  of  visitors  (Gen.  xviii.  6-8,  xix.  3  • 
2  Sam.  iii.  20,  xii.  4 ;  2  K .  vi.  23  ;  Tob.  vii.  9 ; 

1  Mace.  xvi.   15;   2  Mace.  ii.  27;  Luke  v.  29, 
xv.    23 ;    John    xii.   2),   or   any   event  cDnm  cted 
with  the  sovereign  (Hos.  vj.  5).*     On  each  of  these 
occasions  a   sumptuous   repast  was  prepared;  the 
guests  were  previously  invited  (Esth.  v.  8;  Matt, 
xxii.  3),  and  on  the  day  of  the  feast  a  second  invi 
tation  was  issued  to  those  that  were  bidden  (Esth. 
vi.  14;   Prov.  ix.  3  ;  Matt.  xxii.  3).     The  visitors 
were  received  with  a  kiss  (Tob.  vii.  6 ,  Luke  vii. 
45) ;  water  was  produced  for  them  to  wash  their 
feet  with  (Luke  vii.  44)  ;  the  head,  the  beard,  the 
feet,  and  sometimes  the  clothes,  were  perfumed  with 
ointment  (Ps.  xxiii.  5;  Am.  vi.  6;   Luke  vii.  38; 
John  xii.  3)  ;  on  special  occasions  robes  were  pro 
vided  (Matt.  xxii.  11;  comp.  Trench  on  Parables, 
p.  230)  ;  and  the  head  was  decorated  with  wreaths'1 
(Is.  xxviii.  1 ;  Wisd.  ii.  7,  8;  Joseph.  Ant.  xix.  9, 
§1).    The  regulation  of  the  feast  was  under  the  su 
perintendence  of  a  special  officer,  named  ipxirpi- 
K\IVOS  '  (John  ii.  8  ;  A.  V.  "governor  of  the  feast"), 
whose  business  it  was  to  taste  the  food  and  the 
liquors  before  they  were  placed  on  the  table,  and  to 
settle  about  the  toasts  and  amusements ;  he  was  ge 
nerally  one  of  the  guests  (Ecclus.  xxxii.  1 ,  2),  and 
might  therefore  take  part  in  the  conversation.    The 
places  of  the  guests  were  settled  according  to  their 
respective  rank    (Gen.  xliii.  33 ;    1  Sam.  ix.  22  ; 
Luke  xiv.  8 ;   Mark  xii.  39  ;   John  xiii.  23)  ;  por 
tions  of  food  were  placed  before  each  (1  Sam.  i.  4 ; 

2  Sam.  vi.  19  ;   1  Chr.  xvi.  3),  the  most  honoured 
guests  receiving  either  larger  (Gen.  xliii.  34  ;  comp. 
Herod,  vi.  57)  or  more  choice  (1  Sam.  ix.  24; 
comp.  //.  vii.  321)  portions  than  the  rest.     The 
importance  of  the  feast  was  marked  by  the  numbei 
of  the  guests  (Gen.  xxix.  22  ;  1  Sam.  ix.  22  ;  IK. 
i.  9,  25 ;   Luke  v.  29,  xiv.  16),   by  the  splendour 
of  the  vessels  (Esth.  i.   7),  and  by  the  profusion 
or   the   excellence   of  the  viands   (Gen.  xviii.   6, 
xxvii.  9;  Judg.  vi.  19;  1  Sam.  ix.  24;  Is.  xiv.  6 
Am.  vi.  4).     The  mail  was  enlivened  with  music 
singing,  and  dancing  (2  Sam.   xix.  35;   Ps.  Ixix. 
12;   Is.  v.   12;   Am.  vi.  5 ;   Ecclus.  xxxii.  3-6; 
Matt.   xiv.    6 ;    Luke   xv.    25),   or   with    riddles 
(Judg.  xiv.  12);  and   amid  these  entertainments 
the  festival  was  prolonged  for  several  days  (Esth. 
i.  3,  4).     Entertainments  designed   almost   exclu 
sively  for  drinking  were  known  by  the  special  name 
of  mishteh*;  instances  of  such  drinking-bouts  are 
noticed  in  1  Sam.  xxv.  36 ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  28  ;  Esth. 
i.  7 ;  Dan.  v.  1 ;  they  are  reprobated  by  the  pro 
phets  (Is.  v.  11 ;  Am.  vi.  6).  Somewhat  akin  to  the 
mishteh  of  the  Hebrews  was  the  komosm  (KW/JOX)  o4' 
the  apostolic  age,  in  which  gross  licentiousness  was> 
added  to  drinking,  and  which  is  frequently  made  the 
subject  of  warning  in  the  Epistles  (Rom.  xiii.  13 ;  Gal. 
v.  21  ;  Eph.  v.  18 ;  1  Pet.  iv.  3).         [W.  L.  B.] 

ME'ANI  (Mar/ ;  Alex.  Matwf :  Mnnei).     The 
same  as  MEHUNIM  (1  Esdr.  v.  31 ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii. 


r  ••  The  day  of  the  king"  in  this  passage  has  been  va 
riously  understood  as  his  birthday  or  his  coronation :  It 
may,  however,  be  equally  applied  to  any  other  event  of 
similar  importance. 

h  This  custom  prevailed  extensively  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans :  not  only  were  chaplets  worn  on  the  head, 
but  fcgtootm  of  flowers  were  hung  over  the  neck  and  breast 
(Plat,  .tywjp.  iii.  1,  }3;  Mart.  x.  19:  Ov.  Fatt  ii.  739). 
They  were  generally  introduced  after  the  first  part  of  the 
euteTbiinnicnt  was  completed.  They  arc  noticed  in  several 


familiar  passages  of  the.Latin  poets  (Hor.  Carm.  II.  7,  24 ; 
Sat.  11.  3, 256;  Juv.  v.  36). 

*  The  classical  designation  of  this  officer  among  the 
Greeks  was  (rvniroo-iapxos,  among  the  Romans  magitter 
or  rex  convivii.  He  was  chosen  by  lot  out  of  the  guest* 
(/Wet.  of  Ant.  p.  925). 


m  fne  KW/HOS  resembled  the  eomissatio  of  the  Romans. 
It  took  place  after  the  supper,  and  was  a  mere  drinking 
revel,  with  only  so  much  food  as  served  to  whet  (lie  palaU 
for  wine  (Viet,  of  Ant.  p.  271 X 


MEARAH 

50).     In  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  it  Is  given  in  the 
form  "  Meunim,"  as  in  Neh.  vii.  52. 

MEA'RAH  (r-IJJC  :  LXX.  omit,  both  MSS. : 
Maara),  a  place  named  in  Josh.  xiii.  4  only,  in 
specifying  the  boundaries  of  the  land  which  remained 
to  be  oonquet  ed  after  the  subjugation  of  the  south 
ern  portion  of  Palestine.  Its  description  is  "  Mea-  j  ^ ' 
iah  which  is  to  the  Zidonians  "  (i.  e.  which  belongs 
to — ?  :  the  "  beside  "  of  the  A.  V.  is  an  erroneous 


MEAT-OFFERING 


28? 


peace- off ering  (Lev.  ii.  1,  &c.) — and  which  consisted 
solely  of  flour,  or  corn,  and  oil,  sacrifices  of  flesh 
being  confined  to  the  other  two.  The  word  thus 


translated  is  HHiD,  elsewhere  rendered  "  present r 

and  "  oblation,"  and  derived  from  a  root  which  has 
the  force  of  "  sending"  or  "  offering"  to  a  person. 
English  term  should 
avoid  this  ambiguity. 

"  Food-offering "  is  hardly  admissible,   though  it 
is  perhaps  preferable   to   "  unbloody   or  bloodless 


translation).     The  word  mear&h  means  in  Hebrew  1  sacrifice." 

a  cave,  and  it  is  commonly  assumed  that  the  refer-  3.  There  are  several  other  words,  which  though 
ence  is  to  some  remarkable  cavern  in  the  neighbour-  |  entirely  distinct  in  the  original,  are  all  translated  in 
hood  of  Zidon  ;  such  as  tn*b  wmcn  picked  a  memor-  ,  the  A.  V.  by  "  meat  ;"  but  none  of  them  present 
able  part  many  centuries  afterwards  in  the  history  j  any  special  interest  except  tTlB.  This  word,  from 
of  the  Crusades.  (See  William  of  Tyre,  xix.  11,  j  &  ^  tt  to  tear,»  would  be  perhaps  more 

1  booty."     Its  use 
taken  in  connexion 

'  £ood  understanding  "  in 
^.^  should  ^  .R  ^  ^ 


bore  in  later  Hebrew,  and  when  pointed  with  the 
vowels  of  the  still  later  Masorets.  Besides,  if  a 
cave  were  intended,  and  not  a  place  called  Mearah, 
the  name  would  surely  have  been  preceded  by  the 
definite  article,  and  would  have  stood  as 
"  the  cave." 


„       d  g  „ 


Q( 


une        ted  j    ht 


It  seems  to  shew  how  ivextinguishable  was  the 
warlike  predatory  spirit  in  the  mind  of  the  writer, 
good  Israelite  and  devout  worshipper  of  Jehovah  as 


Reland  (Pal.  896)  suggests  that  Mearah  may  be    he  was;  Late  as  he  liyed  m  the  history  of  hjs  natior)) 


the  same  with  Meroth,  a  village  named  by  Josephus 
(Ant.  iii.  3,  §1)  as  forming  the  limit  of  Galilee  on 
the  west  (see  also  Ant.  ii.  20,  §6),  and  which 
again  may  possibly  have  been  connected  with  the 
WATERS  OF  MEROM.  The  identification  is  not  im 
probable,  though  there  is  no  means  of  ascertaining 
the  fact. 

A  village  called  el-Mughar  is  found  in  the  moun 
tains  of  Naphtali,  some  ten  miles  W.  of  the  northern 
extremity  of  the  sea  of  Galilee,  which  may  possibly 
represent  an  ancient  Mearah  (Rob.  iii.  79,  80  ;  Van 
de  Velde's  map).  [G.] 

MEASURES.  [WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.] 
MEAT.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  word 
"  meat"  is  used  in  any  one  instance  in  the  Autho 
rized  Version  of  either  the  0.  or  N.  Testament,  in 
the  sense  which  it  now  almost  exclusively  bears  of 
animal  food.  The  latter  is  denoted  uniformly  by 
"  flesh." 

1  .  The  only  possible  exceptions  to  this  assertion 
in  the  0.  T.  are  :  — 

(a.)  Gen.  xxvii.  4,  &c.,  "  savoury  meat." 
(6.)  Ib.  xlv.  23,  "  corn  and  bread  and  meat." 
But  (a)  in  the  former  of  these  two  cases  the 


Hebrew  word,  D^JSypD,  which  in  this  form  appears 
in  this  chapter  only,  is  derived  from  a  root  which 
has  exactly  the  force  of  our  word  "  taste,"  and  is 
employed  in  reference  to  the  manna.  In  the  passage 
in  question  tne  word  "  dainties"  would  be  perhaps 
more  appropriate.  (6)  In  the  second  case  the  ori 
ginal  wor  J  is  one  of  almost  equal  rarity,  j'lTD  ;  and 
if  the  Lexicons  did  not  shew  that  this  had  only  the 
general  force  of  food  in  all  the  other  Oriental  tongues, 
hhat  would  be  established  in  regard  to  Hebrew  by 
(ts  other  occurrences,  .viz.,  2  Chr.  xi.  23,  where  it 
rs  rendered  "  victual  ;"  and  Dan.  iv.  12,  21,  where 
the  "  meat"  spoken  of  is  that  to  be  furnished  by  a 
tree. 


2.  The  only  real  and  inconvenient  ambiguity 
caused  by  the  change  which  has  taken  place  in  the 
meaning  of  the  word  is  in  the  case  of  the  "  meat 
offering,"  the  second  of  tin;  three  great  divisions 
into  which  the  sacrifices  of  the  Law  were  divided  j 
— the  burnt-offering,  the  meat-onermf ,  and  the  .  Or  "  to  pi\ 


he  cannot  forget  the  "  power"  of  Jehovah's  "  works" 
by  which  his  forefathers  acquired  the  "  heritage  of 
the  heathen  ;"  and  to  him,  as  to  his  ancestors  when 
conquering  the  countiy,  it  is  still  a  firm  article  of 
belief  that  those  who  fear  Jehovah  shall  obtain  most 
of  the  spoil  of  His  enemies — those  who  obey  His 
commandments  shall  have  the  best  success  in  the 
field. 

4.  In  the  N.  T.  the  variety  of  the  Greek  words 
thus  rendered  is  equally  great ;  but  dismissing  such 
terms  as  waKftaQai  or  avairiTrrtiv,  which  are  ren 
dered  by  "  sit  at  meat" — <paye?v,  for  which  we  oc 
casionally  find  "meat" — rpcforefa  (Acts  xvi.  34), 
the  same — flSa\o6vTa,  "  meat  offered  to  idols  " — 
K\dff/j.a.Ta,  generally  "  fragments,"  but  twice 
"  broken  meat " — dismissing  these,  we  have  left 
rpotp'fi  and  jSpoi/ua  (with  its  kindred  words,  fipuxris, 
&c-),  both  words  bearing  the  widest  possible  signi 
fication,  and  meaning  every  thing  that  can  be  eaten, 
or  can  nourish  the  frame.  The  former  is  most  used 
in  the  Gospels  and  Acts.  The  latter  is  found  in 
St.  John  and  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  It  is  the 
word  employed  in  the  famous  sentences,  "  for  meat 
destroy  not  the  work  of  God,"  "  if  meat  make  my 
brother  to  offend,"  &o.  [G.] 

MEAT-OFFERING  (nm»  :  Supov  0t/<n'«, 
or  Ovffia :  oblatio  sacrifieii,  or  sacrificiuni).  The 
word  Minchah*  signifies  originally  a  gift  of  any 
kind ;  and  appears  to  be  used  generally  of  a  gift 
from  an  inferior  to  a  superior,  whether  God  or  man. 
Thus  in  Gen,  xxxii.  13  it  is  used  of  the  present 
from  Jacob  to  Esau,  in  Gen.  xliii.  11  of  the  present 
sent  to  Joseph  in  Egypt,  in  2  Sam.  viii.  2,  6  of  the 
tribute  from  Moab  and  Syria  to  David,  &c.,  &c. ; 
and  in  Gen.  iv.  3,  4,  5  it  is  applied  to  the  sacrifices 
to  God,  offered  by  Cain  and  Abel,  although  Abel's 
was  a  whole  burnt-offering.  Afterwards  this  ge 
neral  sense  became  attached  to  the  word  "  Corban 
and  the  word  Minchah  restricted  to  an 
"  unbloody  offering  "  as  opposed  to  H3T,  a  "  bloody  " 
sacrifice.  It  is  constantly  spoken  of  in  connexion 
from  the  obsolete  root  HUD.  "  tc  distribute  * 


286 


MEAT-OFFEHINC, 


with  the  DRINK-OFFERING  (^D3  •  atrov^ ;  liba- 

mcn),  which  generally  accompanied  it,  and  which 
had  the  same  meaning.  The  law  or  ceremonial  of 
the  iDeat-otfering  is  described  in  Lev.  ii.  and  vi. 
14-23.  It  was  to  be  composed  of  fine  flour,  sea- 
wned  with  salt,  and  mixed  with  oil  and  frankin 
cense,  but  without  leaven ;  and  it  was  generally 
accompanied  by  a  drink-offering  of  wine.  A  por 
tion  of  it,  including  all  the  frankincense,  was  to 
be  burnt  on  the  altar  as  "a  memorial;"  the  rest 
belonged  to  the  priest ;  but  the  meat-offerings 
offered  by  the  priests  themselves  were  to  be  wholly 
burnt. 

Its  meaning  (which  is  analogous  to  that  of  the 
offering  of  the  tithes,  the  first-fruits,  and  the  shew- 
bread)  appears  to  be  exactly  expressed  in  the  words 
of  David  (1  Chr.  xxix.  10-14),  "  All  that  is  in  the 

heaven   and   in   the   earth  is  Thine All 

things  come  of  Thee,  and  of  Thine  own  have  we 
given  Thee."  It  recognised  the  sovereignty  of 
the  Lord,  and  His  bounty  in  giving  them  all 
earthly  blessings,  by  dedicating  to  Him  the  best  of 
His  gifts:  the  flour,  as  the  main  support  of  life; 
oil,  as  the  symbol  of  richness;  and  wine  as  the 
symbol  of  vigour  and  refreshment  (see  Ps.  civ.  15). 
All  these  were  unleavened,  and  seasoned  with  salt, 
in  order  to  show  their  purity,  and  hallowed  by  the 
frankincense  for  God's  special  service.  This  recog 
nition,  implied  in  all  cases,  is  expressed  clearly  in 
the  form  of  offering  the  first-fruits  prescribed  in 
LVut.  xxvi.  5-11. 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  meaning  involves  nei 
ther  of  the  main  ideas  of  sacrifice — the  atonement 
for  sin  and  the  self-dedication  to  God.  It  takes 
them  for  granted,  and  is  baaed  on  them.  Accord 
ingly,  the  meat-offering,  properly  so  called,  seems 
always  to  have  been  a  subsidiary  offering,  needing 
to  be  introduced  by  the  sin-offering,  which  repre 
sented  the  one  idea,  and  forming  an  appendage  to  the 
burnt-offering  which  represented  the  other. 

Thus,  in  the  case  of  public  sacrifices,  a  "  meat- 
offering"  was  enjoined  as  a  part  of — 

(1)  The  daily  morning   and  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  40,  41). 

(2)  The  Sabbath-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  9,  10). 

(3)  The  offering  at  the  new  moon  (Num.  xxviii. 
11-14). 

(4)  The  offerings  at  the  great  festivals  (Num. 
xxviii.  20,  28,  xxix.  3,  4,  14,  15,  &c.). 

(5)  The  offerings  on  the  great  day  of  atonement 
(Num.  xxix.  9,  10). 

The  same  was  the  case  with  private  sacrifices, 
as  at — 

(1)  The  consecration  of  priests  (Ex.  xxix.  1,2; 
Lev.  vi.  20,  viii.  2),  and  of  Levites  (Num.  viii.  8). 

(2)  The  cleansing  of  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  20). 

(3)  The  termination  of  the  Nazaritic  vow  (Num. 
vi.  15). 

The  unbloody  offerings  offered  alone  did  not  pro 
perly  belong  to  the  regular  meat-offering.  They 
wars  usually  substitutes  for  other  offerings.  Thus, 
for  example,  in  Lev.  v.  11,  a  tenth  of  an  ephah  of 
flour  is  allc  wed  to  be  substituted  by  a  poor  man 
for  the  lamb  or  kid  of  a  trespass-offering:  in  Num. 
v.  15  the  same  offering  is  ordained  as  the  "  offering 
of  jealousy "  for  a  suspected  wife.  The  unusual 
character  of  the  offering  is  marked  in  both  cases  by 
the  absence  of  the  oil,  frankincense,  and  wine.  We 
find  ali-o  at  certain  times  libations  of  water  poured 
Out  before  God  ;  as  by  Samuel's  command  at  Mizpeb  | 
iuriii£  the  fr..st  (1  Sam.  vii.  6),  and  l>y  I>avid  at  i 


MED  AN 

Bethlehem  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  lt>),  and  a  libation  of  oil 
poured  by  Jacob  on  the  pillar  at  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxv 
14).  But  these  have  clearly  especial  meanings, 
and  are  uot  to  be  included  in  the  ordinaiy  drink- 
offerings.  The  same  remark  will  apply  to  the  re 
markable  libation  of  water  customary  at  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  [TABERNACLES],  but  not  mentioned 
in  Scripture.  [>  B.~] 

MEBUN'NAI  0330 :  IK  ruv  viuy  .  Mo- 
lonnai).  In  this  form  appears,  in  one  passage  onlj 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  27\  the  name  of  one  of  David's 
guard,  who  is  elsewhere  called  SIBBECHAI  (2  Sam. 
xxi.  18  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  4)  or  SIBBECAI  (1  Chr.  xi. 
29,  xxvii.  11)  in  the  A.  V.  The  reading  "Sib- 
bechai  "  (O3D),  is  evidently  the  true  one,  of  which 
"  Mebunnai"  was  an  easy  and  early  corruption,  for 
even  the  LXX.  translators  must  have  had  the 
same  consonants  before  them  though  they  pointed 
thus,  \33D.  It  is  curious,  however,  that  the 

Aldine  edition  has  2o£ot>xaf  (Kennicott,  Diss.  i. 
p.  186).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MECHER'ATHITE,  THEO/TOSH:  Mo- 
X&p ;  Alex.  (pepu/j.fxovpa0i :  Mecherathites),  that 
is,  the  native  or  inhabitant  of  a  place  called  Me- 
cherah.  Only  one  such  is  mentioned,  namely 
HEPIIER,  one  of  David's  thirty-seven  warriors 
(1  Chr.  xi.  36).  In  the  pu-allel  list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii. 
the  name  appears,  with  other  variations,  as  "  the 
Maachathite  "  (ver.  34).  It  is  the  opinion  of  Ken 
nicott,  after  a  long  examination  of  the  passage,  that 
the  latter  is  the  correcter  of  the  two ;  and  as  no 
place  named  Mecherah  is  known  to  have  existed, 
while  the  Maachathites  had  a  certain  connexion  with 
Israel,  and  especially  with  David,  we  may  concur 
in  his  conclusion,  more  especially  as  his  guard 
contained  men  of  almost  every  nation  round 
Palestine.  [G.] 

ME'DABA  (Mij8a0<£:  Madabd),  the  Greek 
form  of  the  name  MEDEBA.  It  occurs  only  in 
1  Mace.  ix.  36.  [G.] 

ME'DAD.    [ELDAD  and  MEDAD.] 
ME'DAN  (!"7O,   "  strife,  contention,"  Ges. : 

aScto.,  MaStfyt :  Madan),  a.  son  of  Abraham  and 
Keturah  (Gen.  xxv.  2  ;  1  Chr.  i.  32),  whose  name 
and  descendants  have  not  been  traced  beyond  this 
record.  It  has  been  supposed,  from  the  similarity 
of  the  name,  that  the  tribe  descended  from  Medan 
was  more  closely  allied  toMidian  than  by  mere  blood- 
relation,  and  that  it  was  the  same  as,  or  a  portion 
of,  the  latter.  There  is,  however,  no  ground  for  this 
theory  beyond  its  plausibility. — The  traditional  city 
Medyen  of  the  Arab  geographers  (the  classical  Mo- 
diana),  situate  in  Arabia  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the 
gulf  of  Eyleh  must  be  held  to  have  been  Midi- 
anite,  not  Medauite  (but  Bunsen,  Bibclwerk,  sug 
gests  the  latter  identification).  It  has  been  else 
where  remarked  [KETURAHJ  that  many  of  the 
Keturahite  tribes  seem  to  have  merged  in  early 
times  into  the  Ishmaelite  tribes.  The  mention  of 

Ishmaelite "  as  a  convertible  term  with  "  Mi- 
dianite,"  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  36,  is  remarkable ;  but 
the  Midianite  of  the  A.  V.  in  ver  28  is  Medanite 
in  the  Hebrew  (by  the  LXX.  rendered  MaSrwcucu 
and  in  the  Vulgate  Ismaelitae  and  Madianitae) ;  and 
we  may  have  here  a  trace  of  the  subject  of  this 
article,  though  Midianite  appears  on  the  whole  to 
be  more  likely  the  correct  muling  in  the  pasxigo: 
refenod  to.  [MiDiAN.]  [ K.  S.  F.j 


MHDEBA 

ME'DEBA  (K3TO  :  Mo«5a)3a  and  M?j5a/3a«; 
Sfedaba},  a  town  on  the  eastern  side  of  Jordan. 
Taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  Me-deba  means  "  waters  b 
of  quiet,"  but  except  the  tank  (see  below),  what 
waters  can  there  ever  have  been  on  that  high  plain  ? 
The  Arabic  name,  though  similar  in  sound,  has  a 
different  signification. 

Medeba  is  first  alluded  to  in  the  fragment  of  a 
popular  song  of  the  time  of  the  conquest,  preserved 
in  Num.  xxi.  (see  ver.  30).  Here  it  seems  to  denote 
the  limit  of  the  territory  of  Heshbon.  It  next  occurs 
in  the  enumeration  of  the  country  divided  amongst 
the  Transjordanic  tribes  (Josh.  xiii.  9),  as  giving  its 
name  to  a  district  of  level  downs  called  ;'  the  Mishor 
of  Medeba,"  or  "  the  Mishor  on  Medeba."  This  dis 
trict  fell  within  the  allotment  of  Reuben  (ver.  10). 
At  the  time  of  the  conquest  Medeba  belonged  to  the 
Amorites,  apparently  one  of  the  towns  taken  from 
Moab  by  them.  When  we  next  encounter  it,  four 
centuries  later,  it  is  again  in  the  hands  of  the 
Moabites,  or  which  is  nearly  the  same  thing,  of  the 
Ammonites.  It  was  before  the  gate  of  Medeba  that 
Joab  gained  his  victory  over  the  Ammonites,  and 
the  horde  of  Aramites  of  Maachah,  Mesopotamia,  and 
Zobah,  which  they  had  gathered  to  their  assistance 
after  the  insult  perpetrated  by  Hanuu  on  the  mes 
sengers  of  David  (1  Chr.  xix.  7,  compared  with 
2  Sam.  x.  8,  14,  &c.).  In  the  time  of  Ahaz  Medeba 
was  a  sanctuary  of  Moab  (Is.  xv.  2),  but  in  the 
denunciation  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.)  often  parallel 
with  that  of  Isaiah,  it  is  not  mentioned.  In  the 
Maccabaean  times  it  had  returned  into  the  hands  of 
the  Amorites,  who  seem  most  probably  intended  by 
the  obscure  word  JAMBRI  in  1  Mace,  ix  36.  (Here 
the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  as  Medaba,  according 
to  the  Greek  spelling.)  It  was  the  scene  of  the 
capture,  and  possibly  the  death,  of  John  Macca- 
baeus,  and  also  of  the  revenge  subsequently  taken  by 
Jonathan  and  Simon  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  1,  §4;  the 
name  is  omitted  in  Mace,  on  the  second  occasion, 
see  ver.  38).  About  110  years  B.C.  it  was  taken 
after  a  long  siege  by  John  Hyreanus  (Ant.  xiii.  9, 
§1 ;  B.  J.  i.  2,  §4)  and  then  appears  to  have  re 
mained  ill  the  possession  of  the  Jews  for  at  least 
thirty  years,  till  the  time  of  Alexander  Jannaeus 
(xiii.  15,  §4);  and  it  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
twelve  cities,  by  the  promise  of  which  Aretas,  the 
king  of  Arabia,  was  induced  to  assist  Hyrcanus  II. 
to  recover  Jerusalem  from  his  brother  Aristobulus 
(Ant.  xiv.  1,  §4). 

Medeba  has  retained  its  name  down  to  our  own 
times.  To  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomast.  "  Me 
daba  ")  it  was  evidently  known.  In  Christian  times 
it  was  a  noted  bishopric  of  the  patriarchate  of  "  Be- 
oerra,  or  Bitira  Arabiae,"  and  is  named  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (A.I).  451)  and  other 
Ecclesiastical  Lists  (Reland,  217,  223,  226,  893. 
See  also  Le  Quien,  Oriens  Christ.}.  Among  modem 
ti-avellers  Mddeba  has  been  visited,  recognised,  and 
described  by  Burckhardt  (Syria,  July  13,  1812), 
Seetzen  (i.  407,  408,  iv.  223),  and  Irby  (145) ;  see 
also  Porter  (Handbook,  303).  It  is  in  the  pastoral 
district  of  the  Belka,  which  probably  answers  to 
the  Mishor  of  the  Hebrews,  4  miles  S.E.  of  Heshbdn 
and  like  it,  lying  on  a  rounded  but  rocky  hil 

a  It  may  be  well  to  give  a  collation  of  the  passages  in 
the  LXX.  in  which  Medeba  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  text, 
which  will  shew  how  frequently  it  is  omitted : — Num 
xxi.  30,  iir\  Mwa)3  ;  Josh.  xiii.  9,  AaiSa^av,  Alex.  Mai 
5c^3a;  ib.  16,  omit,  both  MSS. ;  1  Chr.  xix.  7,  MaiSa/3o 
\loE.  MTJ*«£«;  la.  xv.  2,  rf/s  MwaBmicK. 


MEUES 


287 


Burckh.,  Seetzen,.  A  large  tank,  cc  mnns,  and  ei- 
ensive  foundations  are  still  to  be  seen ;  the  remains 
)f  a  Roman  road  exist  near  the  town,  which  seem* 
brmerly  to  have  connected  it  with  HeshLon.  [G.j 
MEDES  (HO.:  M^Bot:  Medi),  one  of  the 
most  powerful  nations  of  Western  Asia  in  the  times 
anterior  to  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
Cyrus,  and  one  of  the  most  important  fc-ibes  com- 
wsing  that  kingdom.  Their  geographical  position 
s  considered  under  the  article  MEDIA.  The  title 
iy  which  they  appear  to  have  known  themselves 
was  Mada ;  which  by  the  Semitic  races  was  made 
nto  Madai,  and  by  the  Greeks  and  Komans  into 
Mcdi,  whence  our  "  Medes." 

1.  Primitive  History. — It  may  be  gathered  from 
;he  mention  of  the  Medes,  by  Moses,  among  the 
•aces  descended  from  Japhet  [see  MADAI],  that 
;hey  were  a  nation  of  very  high  antiquity ;  and  it 

in  accordance  with  this  view  that  we  find  a 
otice  of  them  in  the  primitive  Babylonian  history 
of  Berosus,  who  says  that  the  Medes  conquered 
Babylon  at  a  very  remote  period  (circ.  B.C.  2458), 
and  that  eight  Median  monarchs  reigned  there  con 
secutively,  over  a  space  of  224  years  (Beros.  ap. 
Euseb.  Chron.  Can.  i.  4).  Whatever  difficulties 
may  lie  in  the  way  of  our  accepting  this  statement 
as  historical — from  the  silence  of  other  authors,  from 
the  affectation  of  precision  in  respect  of  so  remote  a 
time,  and  from  the  subsequent  disappearance  of  the 
Medes  from  these  parts,  and  their  reappearance, 
after  1300  years,  in  a  different  locality — it  is  too 
definite  and  precise  a  statement,  and  comes  from 
too  good  an  authority,  to  be  safely  set  aside  as 
unmeaning.  There  are  independent  grounds  for 
thinking  that  an  Arian  element  existed  in  the  popu 
lation  of  the  Mesopotamian  valley,  side  by  side 
with  the  Cushite  and  Semitic  elements,  at  a  very 
early  date.6  It  is  therefore  not  at  all  impossible 
that  the  Medes  may  have  been  the  predominant 
race  there  for  a  time,  as  Berosus  states,  and  may 
afterwards  have  been  overpowered  and  driven  to 
the  mountains,  whence  they  may  have  spread  them 
selves  eastward,  northward,  and  westward,  so  as  to 
occupy  a  vast  number  of  localities  from  the  banks 
of  the  Indus  to  those  of  the  middle  Danube.  The 
term  Arians,  which  was  by  the  universal  consent 
of  their  neighbours  applied  to  the  Medes  in  the 
time  of  Herodotus  (Herod,  vii.  62),  connects  them 
with  the  early  Vcdic  settlers  in  western  Hindustan  ; 
the  Mati-eni  of  Mount  Zagros,  the  Ssmro-Matae  of 
the  steppe-country  between  the  Caspian  and  the 
Euxine,  and  the  Maetae  or  Maeotae  of  the  Sea  of 
Azov,  mark  their  progress  towards  the  north  ;  while 
the  Moedi  or  Medi  of  Thrace  seem  to  indicate  their 
spread  westward  into  Europe,  which  was  directly 
attested  by  the  native  traditions  of  the  Sicrynnae 
(Herod,  v.  9). 

2.  Connexion  with  Assyria. — The  deepest  ob 
scurity  han^s,  however,  over  these  movements,  and 
indeed  ovei"  the  whole  history  of  the  Medes  from 
the  time  of  their  bearing  sway  in  Babylonia  (B.C. 
2458-2234)  to  their  first  appearance  in  the  cunei 
form  inscriptions  among  the  enemies  of  Assyria, 
about  B.C.  880.  They  then  inhabit  a  portion  of  the 
region  which  bore  their  name  down  to  th«  Ma- 

b  To  this  Bnrckhardt  seems  to  allude  when  he  obwrves 
(Syr,  306),  "  this  is  the  ancient  Medela;  but  there  '.t  no 
river  neanit." 

<:  See  the  remarks  of  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  in  Rawlinso'a 
Jfercdotiif,  i.  021  note. 


288 


MKDES 


hometan  conquest  of  Persia;  but  whether  tlty 
were  recent  immigrants  into  it,  or  had  held  it  from 
a  remote  antiquity,  is  uncertain.  On  the  one  hand 
it  is  noted  that  their  absence  from  earlier  cuneiform 
monuments  seems  to  suggest  that  their  arrival  was 
recent  at  the  date  above  mentioned ;  on  the  other, 
that  Ctesias  asserts  (ap.  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  1,  §9),  and 
Herodotus  distinctly  implies  (i.  95),  that  they  had 
been  settled  in  this  part  of  Asia  at  least  from  the 
time  of  the  first  formation  of  the  Assyrian  Empire 
(B.C.  1273).  However  this  was,  it  is  co-tain  that 
at  first,  and  for  a  long  series  of  years,  they  were 
very  inferior  in  power  to  the  great  empire  established 
upon  their  flank.  They  were  under  no  general  or 
centralised  government,  but  consisted  of  various 
petty  tribes,  each  ruled  by  its  chief,  whose  do 
minion  was  over  a  single  small  town  and  perhaps 
a  few  villages.  The  Assyrian  monarchs  ravaged 
their  lands  at  pleasure,  and  took  tribute  from  their 
chiefs ;  while  the  Medes  could  in  no  way  retaliate 
upon  their  antagonists.  Between  them  and  Assyria 
lay  the  lofty  chain  of  Zagros,  inhabited  by  hardy 
mountaineers,  at  least  as  powerful  as  the  Medes 
themselves,  who  would  not  tamely  have  suffered 
their  passage  through  their  territories.  Media,  how- 
3ver,  was  strong  enough,  and  stubborn  enough,  to 
maintain  her  nationality  throughout  the  whole 
period  of  the  Assyrian  sway,  and  was  never  ab 
sorbed  into  the  empire.  An  attempt  made  by 
Sargon  to  hold  the  country  in  permanent  subjection 
by  means  of  a  number  of  military  colonies  planted 
in  cities  of  his  building  failed  [SARGONj  ;  and 
both  his  son  Sennacherib,  and  his  grandson  Esar- 
haddon,  were  forced  to  lead  into  the  territory  hostile 
expeditions,  which  however  seem  to  have  left  no 
more  impression  than  previous  invasions.  Media 
was  reckoned  by  the  great  Assyrian  monarchs  of 
this  period  as  a  part  of  their  dominions ;  but  its 
subjection  seems  to  have  been  at  no  time  much 
more  than  nominal,  and  it  frequently  threw  off  the 
yoke  altogether. 

3.  Median  History  of  Herodotus. — Herodotus 
represents  the  decadence  of  Assyria  as  greatly  ac 
celerated  by  a  formal  revolt  of  the  Medes,  following 
upon  a  period  of  contented  subjection,  and  places 
this  revolt  more  than  218  years  before  the  battle 
of  Marathon,  or  a  L  tie  before  B.C.  708.  Ctesias 
placed  the  commencement  of  Median  independence 
still  earlier,  declaring  that  the  Medes  had  destroyed 
Nineveh  and  established  themselves  on  the  ruins  of 
the  Assyrian  Empire,  as  far  back  as  B.C.  875.  No 
one  now  defends  this  latter  statement,  which  alike 
contradicts  the  Hebrew  records  and  the  native  docu 
ments.  It  is  doubtful  whether  even  the  calculation 
of  Herodotus  does  not  throw  back  the  independence 
to  too  early  a  date:  his  chronology  of  the  period  is 
clearly  artificial ;  and  the  history,  as  he  relates  it,  is 
fabulous.  According  to  him  the  Medes,  when  they 
first  shook  off  Ihe  yoke,  established  no  government. 
For  a  time  there  was  neither  king  nor  prince  in  the 
land,  and  each  man  did  what  was  right  in  his  own 
eyes.  Quarrels  were  settled  by  arbitration,  and  a 
certain  Deioces,  having  obtained  a  reputation  in  this 
•way,  contrived  after  a  while  to  get  himself  elected 
sovereign.  He  then  built  the  seven-walled  Ecbatana 
[ECBATANA],  established  a  court  after  the  ordinary 
Oriental  model,  and  had  a  prosperous  and  peaceful 
reign  of  53  years.  Deioces  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Phraortes,  an  ambitious  prince,  who  dirt-ctly  after 
his  accession  began  a  career  of  conquest,  first  at 
tacking  and  subduing  the  Persians,  then  reducing 
sation  after  nation,  and  finally  perishing  in  an 


MEDEW 

expedition  against  Assyria,  after  he  had  reig;jed 
2!£  years.  Cyaxares,  the  son  of  Phvaortes,  then 
mounted  the  throne.  Having  first  introduced  a 
new  military  system,  he  proceeded  to  carry  out  hi» 
father's  designs  against  Assyria,  defeated  the  As 
syrian  army  in  the  field,  besieged  thtir  capital ,  ano 
was  only  prevented  from  capturing  it  on  this  first 
attack  by  an  invasion  of  Scythians,  whict  -ecalleil 
him  to  the  defence  of  his  own  country.  After  a 
desperate  struggle  during  eight-and-twenty  years 
with  these  new  enemies,  Cyaxares  succeeded  in  ex 
pelling  them  and  recovering  his  former  ercpire; 
whereupon  he  resumed  the  projects  which  their 
invasion  had  made  him  temporarily  abandon,  be 
sieged  and  took  Nineveh,  conquered  the  Assyrians; 
and  extended  his  dominion  to  the  Halys.  Nor  did 
these  successes  content  him.  Bent  on  establishing 
his  sway  over  the  whole  of  Asia,  he  passed  the 
Halys,  and  engaged  in  a  war  with  Alyattes,  king 
of  Lydia,  the  father  of  Croesus,  with  whom  he 
long  maintained  a  stubborn  contest.  This  war  wa» 
terminated  at  length  by  an  eclipse  of  the  run, 
which,  occurring  just  as  the  two  armies  were  en 
gaged,  furnished  an  occasion  for  negotiations,  and 
eventually  led  to  the  conclusion  of  a  peace  and  the 
formation  of  an  alliance  between  the  two  powei-s. 
The  independence  of  Lydia  and  the  other  kingdoms 
west  of  the  Halys  was  recognised  by  the  Modes, 
who  withdrew  within  their  own  borders,  having 
arranged  a  marriage  between  the  eldest  son  01 
Cyaxares  and  a  daughter  of  the  Lydian  king,  which 
assured  them  of  a  friendly  neighbour  upon  this 
frontier.  Cyaxares,  soon  after  this,  died,  having 
reigned  in  all  40  years.  He  was  succeeded  by  his 
son  Astyages,  a  pacific  monarch,  of  whom  nothing 
is  related  beyond  the  fact  of  his  deposition  by  his 
own  grandson  Cyrus,  35  years  after  his  accession — 
an  event  by  which  the  Median  Empire  was  brought 
to  an  end,  and  the  Persian  established  upon  its 
ruins. 

4.  Its  imperfections. —  Such  is,  in  outline,' the 
Median  History  of  Herodotus.  It  has  been  accepted 
as  authentic  by  most  modern  writers,  not  so  much 
from  a  feeling  that  it  is  really  trustworthy,  as  from 
the  want  of  anything  more  satisfactory  to  put  in 
its  place.  That  the  story  of  Deioces  is  a  romance 
has  been  seen  and  acknowledged  (Grote's  Greece, 
iii.  307,  308).  That  the  chronological  dates  arc 
improbable,  and  even  contradictory,  has  been  a 
frequent  subject  of  complaint.  Recently  it  has  been 
shown  that  the  whole  scheme  of  dates  is  artificial 
(Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  421,  422) ;  and  that  the 
very  names  of  the  kings,  except  in  a  single  instance, 
are  unhistorical.  Though  the  cuneiform  records 
do  not  at  present  supply  the  actual  history  of  the 
time,  they  enable  us  in  a  great  measure  to  test 
the  narrative  which  has  come  down  to  us  from 
the  Greeks.  We  can  separate  in  that  narrative  the 
authentic  portions  from  those  which  are  fabulous ; 
we  can  account  for  the  names  used,  and  in  most 
instances  for  the  numbers  given  ;  and  we  can  thus 
rid  ourselves  of  a  great  deal  that  is  fictitious, 
leaving  a  residuum  which  has  a  fair  right  to  be 
regarded  as  truth. 

The  records  of  Sargon,  Sennacherib,  and  Esau 
haddon  clearly  show  that  the  Median  kingdom  d'A 
not  commence  so  early  as  Herodotus  imagined 
These  three  princes,  whose  reigns  cover  the  space 
extending  from  B.C.  720  to  B.C.  660,  all  carried 
their  arms  deep  into  Media,  and  found  it,  not  under 
the  dominion  of  a  single  powerful  monarch,  but 
under  the  rule  of  a  vast  number  of  potty  chieftain*. 


MEDES 

It  cannot  ha%  s  been  till  near  the  middle  of  the 
7th  century  H.C.  that  the  Median  kingdom  was 
consolidated,  and  became  formidable  to  its  neigh 
bours.  How  this  change  was  accomplished  is  un 
certain  :  the  most  probable  supposition  would  seem 
to  be,  that  about  this  time  a  fresh  Arian  immi 
gration  took  place  from  the  countries  east  of  the 
Caspian,  and  that  the  leader  of  the  immigrants 
established  his  authority  over  the  scattered  tribes 
of  his  race,  who  had  been  settled  previously  in  the 
district  between  the  Caspian  and  Mount  Zagros. 
There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  this  leader  was 
the  great  Cyaxares,  whom  Diodorus  speaks  of  in 
one  place  as  the  first  king  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  32),  and 
whom  Aeschylus  represents  as  the  founder  of  the 
Mcdo- Persic  empire  (Pers.  761).  The  Deioces  and 
1'hraortes  of  Herodotus  are  thus  removed  from  the 
list  of  historical  personages  altogether,  and  must 
take  rank  with  the  early  kings  in  the  list  of  Ctesias,b 
who  are  now  generally  admitted  to  be  inventions. 
In  the  case  of  Deioces  the  very  name  is  fictitious, 
being  the  Arian  da/idk,  "  biter"  or  "  snake,"  which 
was  a  title  of  honour  assumed  by  all  Median 
monarchs,  but  not  a  proper  name  of  any  individual. 
Phraortes,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  true  name,  but  one 
"vhich  has  been  transferred  to  this  period  from  a  later 
passage  of  Median  history,  to  which  reference  will 
be  made  in  the  sequel.  (Kawlinson's  Herod,  i.  408.) 
5.  Development  of  Median  power,  and  formation 
of  the  Empire. — It  is  evident  that  the  development 
of  Median  power  proceeded  pari  passu  with  the 
decline  of  Assyria,  of  which  it  was  in  part  an  effect, 
in  part  a  cause.  Cyaxares  must  have  been  con 
temporary  with  the  later  years  of  that  Assyrian 
monarch  who  passed  the  greater  portion  of  his  time 
in  hunting  expeditions  in  Susiana.  [ASSYRIA, 
§11.]  His  first  conquests  were  probably  under 
taken  at  this  time,  and  were  suffered  tamely  by  a 
prince  who  was  destitute  of  all  military  spirit.  In 
order  to  consolidate  a  powerful  kingdom  in  the  dis 
trict  east  of  Assyria,  it  was  necessary  to  bring  into 
subjection  a  number  of  Scythic  tribes,  who  disputed 
with  the  Arians  the  possession  of  the  mountain- 
country,  and  required  to  be  incorporated  before 
Media  could  be  ready  for  great  expeditions  and 
distant  conquests.  The  struggle  with  these  tribes 
may  be  the  real  event  represented  in  Herodotus  by 
the  Scythic  war  of  Cyaxares,  or  possibly  his  nar 
rative  may  contain  a  still  larger  amount  of  truth. 
The  Scyths  of  Zagros  may  have  called  in  the  aid 
of  their  kindred  tribes  towards  the  north,  who  may 
have  impeded  for  a  while  the  progress  of  the 
Median  arms,  while  at  the  same  time  they  really 
prepared  the  way  for  their  success  by  weakening 
the  other  nations  of  this  region,  especially  the  As 
syrians.  According  to  Herodotus,  Cyaxares  at  last 
got  the  better  of  the  Scyths  by  inviting  their 
leaders  to  a  banquet,  and  there  treacherously  mur 
dering  them.  At  any  rate  it  is  clear  that  at  a 
tolerably  early  period  of  his  reign  they  ceased  to  be 
formidable,  and  he  was  able  to  direct  his  efforts 
against  other  enemies.  His  capture  of  Nineveh 
and  conquest  of  Assyria  are  facts  which  no  scep 
ticism  can  doubt ;  and  the  date  of  the  capture  may 
be  fixed  with  tolerable  certainty  to  the  year  B.C.  625. 
Abydenus  (probably  following  Berosus)  informs  us 
that  in  his  Assyrian  war  Cyaxares  was  assisted 

*>  Ctesias  made  the  Median  monarchy  commence  about 
B.O.  875,  with  a  certain  Arbaces,  who  headed  the  rebellion 
against  Sardanapalus,  the  voluptuary.  Arbaces  reigned 
28  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Mandaucas,  who  reigned 
50  yeixrs.  Then  followed Sosarmus  (30  years),  Artias  (50 
VOL.  II. 


MEDES 


2B9 


by  the  Babylonians  uuaer  Nabop  .lassar,  between 
whom  and  Cyaxares  an  intimate  alliance  was  tormed. 
cemented  by  a  union  of  their  children ;  and  that 
a  result  of  their  success  was  the  establishment  of 
Nabopolassar  as  independent  king  on  the  throne  of 
Babylon,  an  event  which  we  know  to  belong  to  the 
above-mentioned  year.  It  was  undoubtedly  after 
this  that  Cyaxares  endeavoured  to  conquer  Lydia. 
His  conquest  of  Assyria  had  made  him  master  of 
the  whole  country  lying  between  Mount  Zagros 
and  the  river  Halys,  to  which  he  now  hoped  to  add 
the  tract  between  the  Halys  and  the  Aegean  Sea. 
It  is  surprising  that  he  failed,  more  especially  as  he 
seems  to  have  been  accompanied  by  the  forces  of 
the  Babylonians,  who  were  perhaps  commanded  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  on  the  occasion.  [NEBUCHAD 
NEZZAR.]  After  a  war  which  lasted  six  years  he 
desisted  from  his  attempt,  and  concluded  the  treaty 
with  the  Lydian  monarch,  of  which  we  have  already 
spoken.  The  three  great  Oriental  monarchies, 
Media,  Lydia,  and  Babylon,  were  now  united  by 
mutual  engagements  and  intermarriages,  and  con 
tinued  at  peace  with  one  another  during  the  re 
mainder  of  the  reign  of  Cyaxares,  and  during  that 
of  Astyages,  his  son  and  successor. 

6.  Extent  of  the  Empire. — The  limits  of  the 
Median  Empire  cannot  be  definitely  fixed ;  but  it  is 
not  difficult  to  give  a  general  idea  of  its  size  and 
position.     From  north  to  south  its  extent  was  in  no 
place  great,  since  it  was  certainly  confined  between 
the  Persian  Gulf  and  the  Euphrates  on  the  one  side, 
the  Black  and  Caspian  Seas  on  the  other.     From 
east  to  west  it  had,  however,  a  wide  expansion, 
since  it  reached  from  the  Halys  at  least  as  far  as 
the  Caspian  Gates,  and  possibly  further.     It  com 
prised    Persia,    Media    Magna,    Northern    Media, 
Matiene   or    Media    Mattiana,    Assyria,    Armenia, 
Cappadocia,  the  tract  between   Armenia   and  the 
Caucasus,  the  low  tract  along  the  south-west  and 
south  of  the  Caspian,  and  possibly  some  portion  of 
Hyrcania,  Parthia,  and  Sagartia.     It  was  separated 
from  Babylonia  either  by  the  Tigris,  or  more  pro 
bably  by  a  line  running  about  half-way  between 
that  river  and  the  Euphrates,  and  thus  did  not 
include  Syria,  Phoenicia,  or  Judaea,  which  fell  to 
Babylon  on  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  Empire. 
Its  greatest  length  may  be  reckoned  at  1500  miles 
from  N.W.  to   S.E.,  and   its  average   breadth  at 
400  or  450  miles.     Its  area  would  thus  be  about 
600,000  square  miles,  or  somewhat  greater  than 
that  of  modern  Persia. 

7.  Its  character. — With  regard  to  the  nature  of 
the  government  established  by  the  Medes  over  the 
conquered  nations,  we  possess  but  little  trustworthy 
evidence.     Herodotus  in  one  place  compaies,  some 
what  vaguely,  the  Median  with  the  Persian  system 
(i.  134),  and  Ctesias  appears  to  have  asserted  the 
positive  introduction  of  the  satrapial  organization 
into   the   empire    at   its    first   foundation   by   his 
Arbaces  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  28)  ;  but  on  the  whole  it  is 
perhaps  most  probable  that  the  Assyrian  organiza 
tion  was  continued  by  the  Medes,  the  subject-nations 
retaining  their  native  monarchs,  and  merely  acknow 
ledging  subjection  by  the  payment  of  an  annual 
tribute.    This  seems  certainly  to  have  been  the  case 
in  Persia,  where  Cyrus  and  his  father  Cambyses 
were  monarchs,  holding  their  crown  of  the  Median 


years),  Arbiatea  (22  years),  Artaeus  (40  years'),  Artynes 
(22  years),  Astlbaras  (40  years),  and  finally  Aspadas,  01 
Astyages,  the  last  king  (x  years).  This  scheme  appears 
to  lie  a  clumsy  extension  of  the  monarchy,  by  Kieans  ol 
repetition,  from  the  data  furnished  by  Uerodotna. 

U 


290 


MKDES 


king,  before  the  revolt  of  the  former  ;  and  thorp  is 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  remainder  of  the 
empire  was  organized  in  a  different  manner.  The 
gatrapial  organization  was  apparently  a  Persian  in 
vention,  begun  by  Cyrus,  continued  by  Cambyses, 
his  son,  but  first  adopted  as  the  regular  govern 
mental  system  by  Darius  Hystaspis. 

8.  Its  duration. — Of  all   the  ancient   Oriental 
monarchies  the  Median  was  the  shortest  in  duration. 
It  commenced,  as  we  have  seen,  after  the  middle 
of  the  7th  century  B.C.,  and  it  terminated  B.C.  558. 
The  period  of  three-quarters  of  a  century,  which 
Herodotus  assigns  to  the  reigns  of  Cyaxares  and 
Astyages,  may  be  taken   as   fairly   indicating   its 
probable  length,  though  we  cannot  feel  sure  that 
the  years   are   correctly  apportioned  between  the 
monarchs.     Two  kings  only  occupied  the  throne 
during  the  period  ;  for  the  Cyaxares  II.  of  Xenophon 
is  an  invention  of  that  amusing  writer. 

9.  Its  final  overthrow. — The   conquest   of  the 
Medes  by  a  sister-Iranic  race,  the  Persians,  under 
their  native  monarch  Cyrus,  is  another  of  those  in 
disputable  facts  of  remote  history,  which  make  the 
inquirer  feel  that   he  sometimes  attains   to  solid 
ground  in  these  difficult  investigations.    The  details 
of  the  struggle,  which  are  given  partially  by  He 
rodotus  (i.  127,  128),  at  greater  length  by  Nicolas 
of  Damascus  (Fr.  Hist.  Gr.  iii.  404-406),  probably 
following  Ctesias,  have  not  the  same  claim  to  ac 
ceptance.     We  may  gather  from  them,  however, 
that  the  contest  was  short,  though  severe.     The 
Medes  did   not  readily  relinquish  the   position  of 
superiority  which  they  had  enjoyed  for  75  years ; 
but  their' vigour  had  been  sapped  by  the  adoption 
of  Assyrian  manners,  and  they  were  now  no  match 
for  the  hardy  mountaineers  of  Persia.     After  many 
partial  engagements  a  great  battle  was  fought  be 
tween  the  two  armies,  and  the  result  was  the  com 
plete  defeat  of  the  Medes,  and  the  capture  of  their 
king,  Astyages,  by  Cyrus. 

10.  Position  of  Media  under  Persia. — The  treat 
ment  of  the  Medes  by  the  victorious  Persians  was 
not  that  of  an  ordinary  conquered  nation.    Accord 
ing  to  some  writers  (as  Herodotus  and  Xenophon) 
there  v.-as  a  close  relationship  between  Cyrus  and 
the  last  Median  monarch,  who  was  therefore  na 
turally  treated  with  more  than  common  tenderness. 
The  fact  of  the  relationship  is,  however,  denied  by 
Ctesias ;  and  whether  it  existed  or  no,  at  any  rate 
the  peculiar  position  of  the  Medes  under  Persia  was 
not  really  owing  to  this  accident.    The  two  nations 
were  closely  akin ;   they  had  the  same  Arian  or 
Iranic  origin,  the  same  eaily  traditions,  the  same 
language  (Strab.  xv.  2,  §8),  nearly  the  same  reli 
gion,  and  ultimately  the  same  manners  and  cus 
toms,  dress,  and  general  mode  of  life.     It  is  not 
surprising  therefore  that  they  were  drawn  together, 
and  that,  though  never  actually  coalescing,  they  still 
formed  to  some  extent  a  single  privileged  people. 
Medes  were  advanced  to  stations  of  high  honour  and 
importance  under  Cyrus  and  his  successors,  an  ad 
vantage  shared  by  no  other  conquered  people.     The 
Median  capital  was  at  first  the  chief  royal  residence, 
and  always  remained  one  of  the  places  at  which  the 
court  spent  a  portion  of  the  year ;  while  among  the 
provinces  Meua  claimed  and  enjoyed  a  precedency, 
which  appears  equally  in  the  Greek  writers  and  in 
the  native  records.     Still,  it  would  seem  that  the 
nation,  so  lately  sovereign,  was  not  altogether  con 
tent  with   its   secondary   position.      On  the   first 
convenient  opportunity  Media  rebelled,  derating  to 
the  throne  a  certain   Phruorti's  (PnacartiaK),  who 


MKDKS 

called  himself  Xathrites,  and  claimed  to  be  a  J^- 
acendant  from  Cyaxares.  Dnrius  Hystaspis,  in  whos« 
reign  this  rebellion  took  place,  had  great  difficulty 
in  suppressing  it.  After  vainly  endeavouring  to 
put  it  down  by  his  genera  If ,  he  was  compelled  to 
take  the  field  himself.  lie  defeated  Phraortes  in  a 
pitched  battle,  pursued,  and  captured  him  near 
Rhages,  mutilated  him,  kept  him  for  a  time  "  chained 
at  his  door,"  and  finally  crucified  him  at  Ecbatana, 
executing  at  the  same  time  his  chief  followers  (see 
the  Behistun  Inscription,  in  Hawlinson's  Herodotus, 
ii.  601,  602).  The  Medes  hereupon  submitted, 
and  quietly  bore  the  yoke  for  another  century, 
when  they  made  a  second  attempt  to  free  them 
selves,  which  was  suppressed  by  Darius  Nothus 
(Xen.  Hell.  i.  2,  §19).  Henceforth  they  patiently 
acquiesced  in  their  subordinate  position,  and  fol 
lowed  through  its  various  shifts  and  changes  the 
fortune  of  Persia. 

11.  Internal  divisions. — According  to  Herodotus 
the  Median  nation  was  divided  into  six  tribes  (Iflnj), 
called  the  Busae,  the  Paretaceni,  the  Stnichatej;, 
the  Arizanti,  the  Budii,  and  the  Magi.    It  is  doubt 
ful,  however,  in  what  sense  these  are  to  be  con 
sidered  as  ethnic  divisions.     The  Paretaceni  appear 
to  represent  a  geographical  district,  while  the  Magi 
were  certainly  a  priest-caste ;  of  the  rest  we  know 
little  or  nothing.   The  Arizanti,  whose  name  would 
signify  "  of  noble  descent,"  or  "  of  Arian  descent," 
must   (one   would   think)   have  been  the  leading 
tribe,  corresponding  to  the  Pasargadae  in  Persia; 
but  it  is  remarkable  that  they  have  only  the  fourth 
place  in  the  list  of  Herodotus.    The  Budii  are  fairly 
identified  with  the  eastern  Phut — the  Putiya  of 
the  Persian  inscriptions — whom  Scripture  joins  with 
Persia  in  two  places  (Ez.  xxvii.  10,  xxxviii.  5).    Of 
the  Busae  and  the  Struchates  nothing  is  known 
beyond   the   statement   of  Herodotus.      We   may 
perhaps  assume,  from  the  order  of  Herodotus'  list, 
that  the  Busae,  Paretaceni,  Struchates,  and  Arizanti 
were  true  Medes,  of  genuine  Arian  descent,  while 
the  Budii  and  Magi  were  foreigners  admitted  into 
the  nation. 

12.  Religion. — The  original  religion  of  the  Mede? 
must  undoubtedly   have  been   that   simple   creed 
which  is  placed  before  us  in  the  earlier  portions  ot 
the  Zendavesta.      Its   peculiar   characteristic   was 
Dualism,  the  belief  in  the  existence  of  two  opposite 
principles  of  good  and  evil,  nearly  if  not  quite  on 
a  par  with  one  another.      Ormazd  and  Ahriman 
were  both   self-caused  and   self-existent,  both  in 
destructible,  both  potent  to  work  their  will — their 
warfare  had  been  from  all  eternity,  and  would  con 
tinue  to  all  eternity,   though   on   the  whole  the 
struggle  was  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Prince  of 
Darkness.     Ormazd  was  the  God  of  the  Arians,  the 
object  of  their  worship  and  trust ;  Ahriman  was 
their  enemy,  an  object  of  fear  and  abhorrence,  but 
not  of  any  religious   rite.      Besides  Ormazd,  the 
Arians  worshipped  the  Sun  and  Moon,  under  the 
names  of  Mithra  and  Homa;  and  they  behaved  in 
the  existence  of  numerous   spirits  or  genii,  some 
good,  some  bad,  the  subjects  and  ministers  respec 
tively  of  the  two  powers  of  Good  and  Evil.     Their 
cult  was  simple,  consisting  in  processions,  religious 
chants  and  hymns,  and  a  few  simple  offerings,  ex 
pressions  of  devotion  and  thankfulness.     Such  was 
the  worship  and  such  the  belief  which  the  whole 
Arian  rat.«  brought  with  them  from  the  remote 
east  when  they  migrated  westward.     Their  migra 
tion  brought  them  into  contact  with  the  tire-wor 
shippers   of  Armenia   and    Mount  Zc^ios,  aiming 


MEDES 

Magism  had  been  established  from  a  remote 
Antiquity.  The  result  was  either  a  combination  of 
tlie  two  religions,  or  in  some  cases  an  actual  con- 
re  rsion  of  the  conquerors  to  the  faith  and  worship 
of  the  conquered.  So  far  as  can  be  fathered  from 
the  scanty  materials  in  our  possession,  the  latter 
was  the  case  with  the  Medes.  While  in  Persia  the 
true  Arian  creed  maintained  itself,  at  least  to  the 
time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  in  tolerable  purity,  in 
the  neighbouring  kingdom  of  Media  it  was  early 
swallowed  up  in  Magism,  which  was  probably 
established  by  Cyaxares  or  his  successor  as  the 
religion  of  the  state.  The  essence  of  Magism  was 
the  worship  of  the  elements,  fire,  water,  air,  and 
earth,  with  a  special  preference  of  fire  to  the  re 
mainder.  Temples  were  not  allowed,  but  fire-altars 
were  maintained  on  various  sacred  sites,  generally 
mountain-tops,  where  sacrifices  were  continually 
oHered,  and  the  flame  w*as  never  suffered  to  go  out. 
A  hierarchy  naturally  followed,  to  perform  these 
constant  rites,  and  the  Magi  became  recognised  as  a 
i-acred  caste  entitled  to  the  veneration  of  the  faith 
ful.  They  claimed  in  many  cases  a  power  of  di 
vining  the  future,  and  practised  largely  those  occult 
arts  which  are  still  called  by  their  name  in  most 
of  the  languages  of  modern  Europe.  The  fear  of 
uolluting  the  elements  gave  rise  to  a  number  of 
nirious  superstitions  among  the  professors  of  the 
Magian  religion  (Herod,  i.  138);  among  the  rest 
to  the  strange  practice 
of  neither  burying  nor 
burning  their  dead,  but 
exposing  them  to  be  de 
voured  by  beasts  or  birds 
of  prey  (Herod,  i.  140  ; 
Strab.  xv.  3,  §20).  This 
custom  is  still  observed 
by  their  representatives, 
the  modern  Parsees. 

13.  Manners,  customs, 
and  national  character. 
— The  customs  of  the 
Medes  are  said  to  have 
nearly  resembled  those 
of  their  neighbours,  the 
Armenians  and  the  Per 
sians  ;  but  they  were  re 
garded  as  the  inventors, 
their  neighbours  as  the 
copyists  (Strab.  xi.  13, 
§9).  They  were  brave 
and  warlike,  excellent 
riders,  and  remarkably 
skilful  with  the  bow. 
The  flowing  robe,  so  well 
known  from  the  Perse- 
politan  sculptures,  was 
their  native  dress,  and 

Jit-diau  Dress.  (From  Monuments.)  was  certainly  among  the 
points  for  which  the  Per 
sians  were  beholden  to  them.  Their  whole  costume 
was  rich  and  splendid ;  they  were  fond  of  scarlet, 
and  decorated  themselves  with  a  quantity  of  gold,  in 
the  shape  of  chains,  collars,  armlets,  &c.  As  troops 
they  were  considered  little  inferior  to  the  native 
Persians,  next  to  whom  they  were  usually  ranged 
in  the  battle-field.  They  fought  both  on  foot  and 
on  horseback,  and  carried,  not  bows  and  arrows 

«  See  Esth.  i.  3,  14, 18,  and  19.  The  only  passage  In 
Esther  where  Media  takes  precedence  of  Persia  is  x.  2, 
where  we  have  a  mention  of  "  the  book  of  the  chronicles 
of  the  klnfs  of  Media  and  Persia"  Here  the  order  is 


MEDIA 


291 


only,  but  shields,  short  spears,  and  pon'ards.  It  is 
thought  that  they  must  have  excelled  in  the  manu 
facture  of  some  kinds  of  stuffs. 

14.  References  to  the  Medes  in  Scripture. — The 
references  to  the  Medes  in  the  canonical  Scriptures 
are  not  very  numerous,  but  they  are  striking.  We 
first  hear  of  certain  "  cities  of  the  Medes,"  in  which 
the  captive  Israelites  were  placed  by  "  the  king  of 
Assyria"  on  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  B.C.  721 
(2  K.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  11).  This  implies  the  sub 
jection  of  Media  to  Assyria  at  the  time  of  Shal- 
maneser,  or  of  Sargon,  his  successor,  and  accords 
(as  we  have  shown)  very  closely  with  the  account 
given  by  the  latter  of  certain  military  colonies 
which  he  planted  in  the  Median  country.  Soon 
afterwards  Isaiah  prophesies  the  part  which  the 
Medes  shall  tike  in  the  destruction  of  Babylon 
(Is.  xiii.  17,  xxi.  2) ;  which  is  again  still  more  dis 
tinctly  declared  by  Jeremiah  (li.  11  and  28),  who 
sufficiently  indicates  the  independence  of  Media  in 
his  day  (xxv.  25).  Daniel  relates,  as  a  historian,  the 
fact  of  the  Medo-Persic  conquest  (v.  28,  31),  giving 
an  account  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  Mede,  who 
appears  to  have  been  made  viceroy  by  Cyrus  (vi. 
1-28).  In  Ezra  we  have  a  mention  of  Achmetha 
(Ecbatana),  "  the  palace  in  the  province  of  the 
Medes,"  where  the  decree  of  Cyrus  was  found  (vi. 
2-5) — a  notice  which  accords  with  the  known  facts 
that  the  Median  capital  was  the  seat  of  government 
under  Cyrus,  but  a  royal  residence  only  and  not 
the  seat  of  government  under  Darius  Hystaspis. 
Finally,  in  Esther,  the  high  rank  of  Media  under  the 
Persian  kings,  yet  at  the  same  time  its  subordinate 
position,  are  marked  by  the  frequent  combination  of 
the  two  names  in  phrases  of  honour,  the  precedency 
being  in  every  case  assigned  to  the  Persians." 

In  the  Apocryphal  Scriptures  the  Medes  occupy 
a  more  prominent  place.  The  chief  scene  of  one 
whole  book  (Tobit)  is  Media;  and  in  another 
(Judith)  a  very  striking  portion  of  the  narrative 
belongs  to  the  same  country.  But  the  historical 
character  of  both  these  books  is  with  reason  doubted  ; 
and  from  neither  can  we  derive  any  authentic  or 
satisfactory  information  concerning  the  people. 
From  the  story  of  Tobias  little  could  be  gathered, 
even  if  we  accepted  it  as  true ;  while  the  history 
of  Arphaxad  (which  seems  to  be  merely  a  distorted 
account  of  the  struggle  between  the  rebel  Phraortes 
and  Darius  Hystaspis)  adds  nothing  to  our  know 
ledge  of  that  contest.  The  mention  of  Rhages  in 
both  narratives  as  a  Median  town  and  region  of 
importance  is  geographically  correct ;  and  it  is  his 
torically  true  that  Phraortes  suffered  his  overthrow 
in  the  Rhagian  district.  But  beyond  these  facts 
the  narratives  in  question  contain  little  that  even 
illustrates  the  true  history  of  the  Median  nation. 
(See  the  articles  on  JODITH  and  TOBIAS  in  Winer's 
Eealworterbuch ;  and  on  the  general  subject  com  • 
pare  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  401-422  ;  Bosan- 
quet's  Chronology  of  the  Medes,  read  before  the 
Royal  Asiatic  Society,  June  5,  1858 ;  Brandis, 
Rerum  Assyriarwn  tempora  emendata,  pp.  1-14; 
Grote's  History  of  Greece,  iii.  pp.  301-312  ;  and 
Hupfeld's  Exercitationum  HerodoUarum  Specimina 
duo,  p.  56,  seq.)  [G.  R.j 

ME'DIA  (HP,  i.e.  Madai :  TAT$ia :  Media),  a 
country  the  general  situation  of  which  is  abundantly 


chronological.  As  the  Median  empire  preceded  the  Perclau. 
its  chronicles  came  first  in  "  the  book."  The  precedency 
in  Daniel  (v.  28,  and  vi.  8,  12.  &c.)  Is  owing  to  the  fact  of 
a  Median  viceroy  being  established  on  the  throne. 

u  a 


292 


MEDIA 


clear,  though  its  limits  may  not  be  capable  of  being 
precisely  determined.  Media  lay  north-west  of  Persia 
Proper,  soutn  and  south-west  of  the  Caspian,  east 
of  Armenia  and  Assyria,  west  and  north-west  of  the 
great  salt  desert  of  I  ram.  Its  greatest  length  was 
from  north  to  south,  and  in  this  direction  it  ex 
tended  from  the  32nd  to  the  40th  parallel,  a  dis 
tance  of  550  miles.  In  width  it  reached  from  about 
long.  45°  to  53° ;  but  its  average  breadth  was  not 
more  than  from  250  to  300  miles.  Its  area  may 
be  reckoned  at  about  150.000  square  miles,  or 
three-fourths  of  that  of  modern  France.  The  na 
tural  boundary  of  Media  on  the  north  was  the  river 
Aras ;  on  the  west  Zagros  and  the  mountain-chain 
which  connects  Zagros  with  Ararat ;  in  the  south 
Media  was  probably  separated  from  Persia  by  the 
desert  which  now  forms  the  boundary  between 
Farsistan  and  Irak  Ajemi ;  on  the  east  its  natural 
limit  was  the  desert  and  the  Caspian  Gates.  West 
of  the  gates,  it  was  bounded,  not  (as  is  commonly 
said)  by  the  Caspian  Sea,  but  by  the  mountain 
range  south  of  that  sea,  which  separates  between 
the  high  and  the  low  countiy.  It  thus  comprised 
the  modern  provinces  of  Irak  Ajemi,  Persian  Kur 
distan,  part  of  Luristan,  Azerbijan,  perhaps  Talish 
and  Ghilan,  but  not  Mazanderan  or  Asterabad. 

The  division  of  Media  commonly  recognised  by 
the  Greeks  and  Romans  was  that  into  Media  Magna, 
and  Media  Atropatene.  (Strab.  xi.  13,  §1  ;  comp. 
Polyb.  v.  44  ;  Pliu.  ff.  N.  vi.  13  ;  Ptol.  vi.  2,  &c.) 
.1 .  Media  Atropatene,  so  named  from  the  satrap 
Atropates,  who  became  independent  monarch  of  the 
province  on  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  empire 
by  Alexander  (Strab.  ut.  sup. ;  Died.  Sic.  xviii.  3), 
corresponded  nearly  to  the  modem  Azerbijan,  being 
the  tract  situated  between  the  Caspian  and  the 
mountains  which  run  north  from  Zagros,  and  con 
sisting  mainly  of  the  rich  and  fertile  basin  of  Lake 
JTrumiyeh,  with  the  valleys  of  the  Aras  and  the 
Sefid  Rud.  This  is  chiefly  a  high  tract,  varied 
between  mountains  and  plains,  and  lying  mostly 
three  or  four  thousand  feet  above  the  sea  level. 
The  basin  of  Lake  Urumiyeh  has  a  still  greater  ele 
vation,  the  surface  of  the  lake  itself,  into  which  all 
the  rivers  run,  being  as  much  as  4200  feet  above  the 
ocean.  The  country  is  fairly  fertile,  well-watered 
in  most  places,  and  favourable  to  agriculture ;  its 
climate  is  temperate,  though  occasionally  severe  in 
winter  ;  it  produces  rice,  com  of  all  kinds,  wine, 
silk,  white  wax,  and  all  manner  of  delicious  fruits. 
Tabriz,  its  modem  capital,  forms  the  summer  re 
sidence  of  the  Persian  kings,  and  is  a  beautiful 
place,  situated  in  a  forest  of  orchards.  The  ancient 
Atropatene  may  have  included  also  the  countries  of 
Ghilan  and  Talish,  together  with  the  plain  of 
Moghan  at  the  mouth  of  the  combined  Kur  and 
Aras  rivers.  These  tracts  are  low  and  flat ;  that  of 
Moghan  is  sandy  and  sterile ;  Talish  is  more  pro 
ductive  ;  while  Ghilan  (like  Mazanderan)  is  rich 
and  fertile  in  the  highest  degiee.  The  climate  of 
Ghilan,  however,  is  unhealthy,  and  at  times  pesti 
lential  ;  the  streams  perpetually  overflow  their 
banks;  and  the  waters  which  escape,  stagnate  in 
marshes,  whose  exhalations  spread  disease  and  death 
among  the  inhabitants.  2.  Media  Magna  lay  south 
and  east  of  Atropatenp.  Its  northern  boundary  was 
the  range  of  Elburz  from  the  Caspian  Gates  to  the 
Bttdbar  pass,  through  which  the  Sefid  Rud  reaches 
the  low  country  of  Ghilan.  It  then  adjoined  upon 
Atropatene,  from  which  it  may  be  regarded  as  se 
parated  by  a  line  running  about  S.W,  by  VV.  from 
the  bridge  of  Menjil  to  Zagros.  Here  it  touched 


MEDIA 

Assyria,  from  which  it  was  probably  divide.!  by  tlw 
last  line  of  hills  towards  the  west,  before  the  moun 
tains  sink  down  upon  the  plain.  On  the  south  i» 
was  bounded  by  Susiana  and  Persia  Proper,  thy 
former  of  which  it  met  in  the  modern  Luristan, 
probably  about  lat.  33°  30',  while  it  struck  the 
latter  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Zagros  range,  in 
lat.  32°  or  32°  30'.  Towards  the  east  it  was 
closed  in  by  the  great  salt  desert,  which  Herodotus 
reckons  to  Sagartia,  and  later  writers  to  Parthia 
and  Car-mania.  Media  Magua  thus  contained  great 
part  of  Kurdistan  and  Luristan,  with  all  Ardelan 
and  Irak  Ajemi.  The  character  of  this  tract  is 
very  varied.  Towards  the  west,  in  Ardelan,  Kur 
distan  and  Luristan,  it  is  highly  mountainous,  but 
at  the  same  time  well-watered  and  richly  wooded, 
fertile  and  lovely ;  on  the  north,  along  the  flank  of 
Elburz,  it  is  less  charming,  but  still  pleasant  and 
tolerably  productive;  while  towards  the  east  and 
south-east  it  is  bare,  arid,  rocky,  and  sandy,  sup 
porting  with  difficulty  a  spare  and  wretched  popu 
lation.  The  present  productions  of  Zagros  are 
cotton,  tobacco,  hemp,  Indian  corn,  riee,  whe-.it, 
wine,  and  fruits  of  every  variety ;  every  valley  is  a 
garden;  and  besides  valleys,  extensive  plains  are 
often  found,  furnishing  the  most  excellent  pasturage. 
Here  were  nurtured  the  valuable  breed  of  horses 
called  Nisaean,  which  the  Persians  cultivated  with 
such  especial  care,  and  from  which  the  horses  of  the 
monarch  were  always  chosen.  The  pasture-grounds 
of  Khawah  and  Alishtar  between  Behistun  and 
Khorram-abad,  probably  represent  the  "  Nisaean 
plain  "  of  the  ancients,  which  seems  to  have  taken 
its  name  from  a  town  Nisaea  (Nisaya),  mentioned 
in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions. 

Although  the  division  of  Media  into  these  two 
provinces  can  only  be  distinctly  proved  to  have  ex 
isted  from  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  yet 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  it  was  more  ancient, 
dating  from  the  settlement  of  the  Medes  in  the 
country,  which  did  not  take  place  all  at  once,  but 
was  first  in  the  more  northern  and  afterwards  in 
the  southern  country.     It  is  indicative  of  the  divi 
sion,   that  there  were   two  Ecbatanas  —  one,   the 
'  northern,   at    Takht-i-Suleiman :   the    other,    the 
:  southern,   at   Hamadan,  on  the  flanks  of  Mount 
,  Orontes  (Elwand) — respectively  the  capitals  of  the 

two  districts.       [ECBATANA.] 

Next  to  the  two  Ecbatanas,  the  chief  town  in 
Media  was  undoubtedly  Rhages — the  Raga  of  the 
inscriptions.  Hither  the  rebel  Phraortes  fled  on  his 
defeat  by  Darius  Hystaspis,  and  hither  too  came 
Darius  Codomannus  after  the  battle  of  Arbela,  on 
his  way  to  the  eastern  provinces  (Arr.  Exp.  Alex. 
iii.  20).  The  only  other  place  of  much  note  was 

:  Bagistana,  the  modem  Behistun,  which  guarded  the 
chief  pass  connecting  Media  with  the  Mesopota- 
mian  plain. 

i  No  doubt  both  parts  of  Media  were  further  sub 
divided  into  provinces  ;  but  no  trustworthy  account 

'  of  these  minor  divisions  has  come  down  to  us.  The 
tract  about  Rhages  was  certainly  called  Rhagiana ; 
and  the  mountain  tract  adjoining  Persia  seems  to 
have  been  known  as  Paraetacene,  or  the  country  ot 
the  Paraetacae.  Ptolemy  gives  as  Median  districts 
Elymais,  Choromithrene,  Sigrina,  Daritis,  and  Sy- 
romedia ;  but  these  names  are  little  known  to  othei 
writers,  and  suspicions  attach  to  some  of  them.  On 
the  whole  it  would  seem  tnat  we  do  not  posses* 
materials  for  a  minute  account  of  the  ancient  geo 
graphy  of  the  country,  which  is  very  imperfectly 
described  by  Strabo,  and  almost  omitted  by  ?liu). 


MEDIAN 


MEDICINE 


293 


f See  Sir  II.  Rawlmson's  Articles  in  the  Journal  \  4thly.   The  Anatomical   Period,  which   continued 


t>/  the  Geographical  Society,  vol.  ix.  Art.  2,  and 
fol.  x.  Articles  1  and  2  ,  and  compare  Layard's 
Nineveh  and  Babylon,  chap.  xvii.  and  xviii.  ; 
Chesney's  Euphrates  Expedition,  i.  122,  &c.  ; 
Kinneir's  Persian  Empire;  Ker  Porter's  Travels; 
End  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol  i.  Appendix,  Essay 

[G.  R.] 


ME'DIAN  (NHO  ;  Keri, 

V  ' 


6  MfjSoj  : 


Medus).  Dan-aS-.  "  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  the  seed 
of  the  Medes"  (Dan.  ix.  1)  or  "the  Mede"  (xi.  1), 
is  thus  described  in  Dan.  v.  31. 

MEDICINE.  I.  Next  to  care  for  food,  clothing, 
and  shelter,  the  curing  of  hurts  takes  precedence 
even  amongst  savage  nations.  At  a  later  period 
comes  the  treatment  of  sickness,  and  recognition  of 
states  of  disease  ;  and  these  mark  a  nascent  civiliza 
tion.  Internal  diseases,  and  all  for  which  an  ob 
vious  cause  cannot  be  assigned,  are  in  the  most  early 
period  viewed  as  the  visitation  of  God,  or  as  the  act 
of  some  malignant  power,  human  —  as  the  evil  eye  — 
or  else  superhuman,  and  to  be  dealt  with  by  sorcery, 
or  some  other  occult  supposed  agency.  The  Indian 
notion  is  that  all  diseases  are  the  work  of  an  evil 
spirit  (Sprengel,  Gesch.  der  Arzeneikunde,  pt.  ii. 
48).  But  among  a  civilised  race  the  pre-eminence 
of  the  medical  art  is  confessed  in  proportion  to  the 
increased  value  set  on  human  life,  and  the  vastly 
greater  amount  of  comfort  and  enjoyment  of  which 
civilised  man  is  capable.  It  would  be  strange  if  their 
close  connexion  historically  with  Egypt  had  not  im 
bued  the  Israelites  with  a  strong  appreciation  of  the 
value  of  this  art,  and  with  some  considerable  degree 
of  medical  culture.  From  the  most  ancient  testi 
monies,  sacred  and  secular,  Egypt,  from  whatever 
cause,  though  perhaps  from  necessity,  was  foremost 
among  the  nations  in  this  most  human  of  studies 
purely  physical.  Again,  as  the  active  intelligence 
of  Greece  flowed  in  upon  her,  and  mingled  with  the 
immense  store  of  pathological  records  which  must 
have  accumulated  under  the  system  described  by 
Herodotus,  —  Egypt,  especially  Alexandria,  became 
the  medical  repertory  and  museum  of  the  world. 
Thither  all  that  was  best  worth  preserving  amid 
earlier  civilisations,  whether  her  own  or  foreign, 
had  been  attracted,  and  medicine  and  surgery. 
flourished  amidst  political  decadence  and  artistic 
decline.  The  attempt  has  been  made  by  a  French 
writer  (Renouard,  Histoire  de 
Medicine  depuis  son  Origine 
&c.)  to  arrange  in  periods  the 
growth  of  the  medical  art  as 
follows:—  1st.  The  Primi 
tive  or  Instinctive  Period, 
lasting  from  the  earliest  re 
corded  treatment  to  the  fall 
of  Troy.  2ndly.  The  Sacred 
or  Mystic  Period,  lasting  till 
the  dispersion  of  the  Pythagorean  Society,  500  B.C. 
Srdly.  The  Philosophical  Period,  closing  with  the 
foundation  of  the  Alexandrian  Library,  B.C.  320. 


till  the  death  of  Galen,  A.D.  200.  But  these  arti 
ficial  lines  do  not  strictly  exhibit  the  truth  of  the 
matter.  Egypt  was  the  earliest  home  of  medical 
and  other  skill  for  the  region  of  the  Mediterranean 
basin,  and  every  Egyptian  mummy  of  the  more  ex 
pensive  and  elaborate  sort,  involved  a  process  of 
anatomy.  This  gave  opportunities  of  inspecting  a 
vast  number  of  bodies,  varying  in  every  possible  con 
dition.  Such  opportunities  were  sure  to  be  turned 
to  account  (Pliny,  N.  H.  six.  5)  by  the  more  dili 
gent  among  the  faculty — for  "  the  physicians " 
embalmed  (Gen.  1.  2).  The  intestines  had  a  sepa 
rate  receptacle  assigned  them,  or  were  restored  to 
the  body  through  the  ventral  incision  (Wilkinson, 
v.  4G8)  ;  and  every  such  process  which  we  can 
trace  in  the  mummies  discovered  shows  the  most 
minute  accuracy  of  manipulation.  Notwithstand 
ing  these  laborious  efforts,  we  have  no  trace  cf  any 
philosophical  or  rational  system  of  Egyptian  origin ; 
and  medicine  in  Egypt  was  a  mere  art  or  pro 
fession.  Of  science  the  Asclepiadae  of  Greece  were 
the  true  originators.  Hippocrates,  who  wrote  a 
book  on  "  Ancient  Medicine,"  and  who  seems  to 
have  had  many  opportunities  of  access  to  foreign 
sources,  gives  no  prominence  to  Egypt.  It  was  no 
doubt  owing  to  the  repressive  influences  of  her  fixed 
institutions  that  this  country  did  not  attain  to  a 
vast  and  speedy  proficiency  in  medical  science,  when 
post  mortem  examination  was  so  general  a  rule  in 
stead  of  being  a  rare  exception.  Still  it  is  impos 
sible  to  believe  that  considerable  advances  in  physi 
ology  could  have  failed  to  be  made  there  from  time 
to  time,  and  similarly,  though  we  cannot  so  well 
determine  how  far,  in  Assyria.11  The  best  guarantee 
for  the  advance  of  medical  science  is,  after  all,  the 
interest  which  every  human  being  has  in  it;  and 
this  is  most  strongly  felt  in  large  gregarious  masses 
of  population.  Compared  with  the  wild  countries 
around  them,  at  any  rate,  Egypt  must  have 
seemed  incalculably  advanced.  Hence  the  awe, 
with  which  Homer's  Greeks  speak  of  her  wealth,b 
resources,  and  medical  skill ;  and  even  the  visit  of 
Abraham,  though  prior  to  this  period,  found  her 
no  doubt  in  advance  of  other  countries.  Repre 
sentations  of  early  Egyptian  surgery  apparently 
occur  on  some  of  the  monuments  of  Beni-Hassan. 
Flint  knives  used  for  embalming  have  been  re 
covered — the  "  Ethiopic  stone"  of  Herodotus  (ii.  80 ; 


Flint  Knives.     (Wilkinoon.) 

comp.  Ex.  iv.  25)  was  probably  either  olack  flint  or 
agate  ;  and  those  who  have  assisted  at  the  opening  of 
a  mummy  have  noticed  that  the  teeth  exhibited  a 


a  Recent  researches  at  Kouyunjik  have  given  proof.it 
Is  said,  of  the  use  of  the  microscope  in  minute  devices, 
and  yielded  up  even  specimens  of  magnifying  lenses. 
A  cone  engraved  with  a  table  of  cubes,  so  small  as  to  be 
unintelligible  without  a  lens,  was  brought  home  by  Sir  H. 
Ilawlinson,  and  Is  now  in  the  British  Museum.  As  to 
whether  the  invention  was  brought  to  bear  on  medical 
science,  proof  Is  wanting.  Frobatly  such  science  had  not 
yet  been  pushed  to  the  point  at  which  the  microscope 
Seoomcs  useful.  Only  those  who  have  quick  keen 


eyes  for  the  nature-world  feel  the  want  of  such  spec 
tacles. 

b  n.  ix.  381 ;  Od.  iv.  229.  See  also  Herod.  11.  84,  and 
L  77.  The  simple  heroes  had  reverence  for  the  healing 
skill  which  extended  only  to  wounds.  There  is  hardly  any 
recognition  of  disease  in  Homer.  There  is  sudden  death, 
pestilence,  and  weary  old  age,  but  hardly  any  fixed  morbU 
condition,  save  in  a  simile  (OeJ.  v.  395).  See,  however  a 
letter  l)e  rebus  ex  //onwo  medicis,  D.  G.  Wolf,  WU4»abecg 
1701. 


294 


MEDICINE 


dentistry  not  inferior  in  execution  to  the  work  of  the 
best  modem  experts.  This  confirms  the  statement  of 
Herodotus  that  every  part  of  the  body  was  studied 
by  a  distinct  practitioner.  Pliny  (vii.  57)  asserts 
that  the  Egyptians  claimed  the  invention  of  the 
healing  art,  and  (xxvi.  1)  thinks  them  subject  to 
many  diseases.  Their  "  many  medicines"  are  men 
tioned  (Jer.  xlvi.  11).  Many  valuable  drugs  may 


Doctors  (or  Barbers?)  and  I'atumla.     (Wilkinson.) 


be  derived  from  the  plants  mentioned  by  Wilkinson 
(iv.  621),  and  the  senna  of  the  adjacent  interior  of 
Africa  still  excels  all  other.  Athothmes  II.,  king  of 
the  country,  is  said  to  have  written  on  the  subject 
of  anatomy.  Hermes  (who  may  perhaps  be  the 
same  as  Athothmes,  intellect  personified,  only  dis 
guised  as  a  deity  instead  of  a  legendary  king),  was 


MEDICINE 

the  first  lialf  of  which  related  to  anatomy.    Tlw 

various  recipes  known  to  have  been  beneficial  were 

recorded,  with  their  peculiar  cases,  in  Ihe  memoirs 

of  physic,  inscribed  among  the  laws,  and  df  posited 

in  the  principal  temples  of  the  place  (Wilkinson,  iii. 

396,  397).     The  reputation  of  its  practitioners  in 

historical  times  was  such   that   both   Cyrus  and 

Darius  sent  to  Egypt  for  physicians  or  surgeons' 

(Herod,  iii.  1,  129-132);  and  by  one  of 

the  same  country,  no  doubt,  Cambyses' 

wound  was  d  tended,  though  not  per 

haps  with  much  zeal  for  his  recovery. 

Of  midwifery  we   have  a   distinct 
notice  (Ex.  i.  15),  and  of  women  as 
its  practitioners,'  which  fact  may  also 
be  verified  from  the  sculptures  (Raw- 
linson's  note  on  Herod,  ii.  84).     The 
physicians  had  salaries  from  the  public 
treasury,  and  treated  always  according 
to  established  precedents,  or  deviated 
from  these  at  their  peril,  in  case  of  a 
fatal    termination  ;    if,    however,   the 
patient  died  under  accredited  treatment 
no  blame  was  attached.     They  treated 
_^_^_^^^  gratis  patients  when  traveling  or  on 
~"  military  service.     Most  diseases  were 
by  them  ascribed   to   indigestion   and 
excessive  eating  (Diod.  Sicul.'  i.  82), 
and  when   their  science   failed   them  magics  was 
called  in.    On  recovery  it  was  also  customary  to 
suspend  in  a  temple  an  exvoto,  which  was  com 
monly  a  model  of  the  part  affected  ;  and  such  offer 
ings  doubtless,  as  in  the  Coan  temple  of  Aescu 
lapius,  became  valuable  aids   to  the   pathological 
student.  The  Egyptians  who  lived  in  the  corn-grow 


Eivotos.     (Wilkinson.) 

1.  Ivory  hand,  in  Mr.  Bait's  collection. 

2.  Stone  tablet,  dedicated  to  Amunre,  for  the  recov 

3.  An  ear,  of  terra  cotta,  from  Thebes,  in  Sir  J.  Get 


said  to  have  written  six  books  on  medicine ;  in 
which  an  entire  chapter  was  devoted  to  diseases  of 
the  eye  (Kawlinson's  Herod.,  note  to  ii.  84),  and 


ing  region  are  said  by  Hero 
dotus,  (ii.  77)  to  have  been 
specially  attentive  to  health. 
The  practice  of  circumcision 
is  traceable  on  monuments 
certainly  anterior  to  the  age 
of  Joseph.  Its  antiquity  is 
involved  in  obscurity ;  es 
pecially  as  all  we  know  of 
the  Egyptians  makes  it  un 
likely  that  they  would  have 
borrowed  such  a  practice, 
so  late  as  the  period  of 
Abraham,  from  any  mere 
sojourner  among  them.  Its 
l>eneficial  effects  in  the 
temperature  of  Egypt  and 
Syria  have  often  been  no 
ticed,  especially  as  a  pre 
servative  of  cleanliness,  &c. 

«complalntinth,««rifo,ffid.tThebe*    T1^     «raP"l™«     attention 

Wilkinson's  pos«ea»ion.  paid  to  the  dead  was  favour 

able  to  the  health  of  tht 


c  Comp.  the  letter  of  Benbadad  to  Joram,  2  K.  v.  6,  to 
procure  the  cure  of  Naainan. 

<»  The  words  of  Herod,  (iii.  66),  ci«  e<rxf>iuc«Aio-<(  re  TO 
ixrreov  icai  6  ^rjpb?  ra.\i(Tra.  co-am),  appear  to  indicate 
medical  treatment  by  tbe  terras  employed.  It  is  not 
unlikely  the  physician  may  have  taken  the  opportunity 
to  avenge  the  wrongs  of  his  nation. 

e  The  sex  is  clear  from  the  Heb.  grammatical  forms. 
The  names  of  two,  Shiphrah  and  Puah,  are  recorded. 
The  treatment  of  newborn  Hebrew  infants  is  mentioned 
(Ex.  xvi.  4)  as  consisting  in  washing,  salting,  and 


living.  Such  powerful  drugs  as  asphaltum,  natron. 
resin,  pure  bitumen,  and  various  aromatic  gums. 
suppressed  or  counteracted  all  noxious  effluvia  from  >• 


swaddling:  this  last  was  not  used  in  Egypt  (Wilkin 
son). 

'  The  same  author  adds  that  the  most  common  method 
of  treatment  wag  by  KAvo-fioi;  KOI  »T)oTeiais  «ai  e^erois. 

K  Magicians  and  physicians  both  belonged  to  the 
priestly  caste,  and  perhaps  united  their  professions  in 
one  person. 

h  "  L'Egypte  moderne  u'eu  est  plus  la,  et,  comme  M. 
Parisct  1'a  si  bicn  signale,  les  tomboaux  drs  peres,  infiltres 
par  les  eaux  dn  Nil.  se  convertissont  en  autant  de  foyert 
pebtiltntiels  pour  Icurs  enfanta"  (Michel  Levy,  p.  12) 


MEDICINE 

the  corpse ;  even  the  saw-dust  of  ;he  floor,  on  which 
t'.e  body  liad  been  cleansed,  was  collected  in  small 
linen  bags,  which,  to  the  number  of  twenty  or  thirty, 
•vzre  deposited  in  vases  near  the  tomb  (Wilkinson,1 
v.  463, 469).  For  the  extent  to  which  these  practices 
were  imitated  among  the  Jews,  see  EMBALMING  ; 
at  any  rate  the  uncleanness  imputed  to  contact 
with  a  corpse  was  a  powerful  preservative  k  against 
the  inoculation  of  the  living  frame  with  morbid 
humours.  But,  to  pursue  to  later  times  this  merely 
general  question,  it  appears  (Pliny,  N.  H.  xix.  5m) 
that  the  Ptolemies  themselves  practised  dissection, 
and  that,  at  a  period  when  Jewish  intercourse  with 
Egypt  was  complete  and  reciprocal  ,n  there  existed 
in  Alexandria  a  great  zeal  for  anatomical  study. 
The  only  influence  of  importance  which  would  tend 
to  check  the  Jews  from  sharing  this  was  the  cere 
monial  law,  the  special  reverence  of  Jewish  feeling 
towards  human  remains,  and  the  abhorrence  of 
"  uncleanness."  Yet  those  Jews — and  there  were 
at  all  times  since  the  captivity  not  a  few,  perhaps 
• — who  tended  to  foreign  laxity,  and  affected  Greek 
philosophy  and  culture,  would  assuredly,  as  we 
shall  have  further  occasion  to  notice  that  they 
in  fact  did,  enlarge  their  anatomical  knowledge 
from  sources  which  repelled  their  stricter  bre 
thren,  and  the  result  would  be  apparent  in  the 
general  elevated  standard  of  that  profession,  even 
as  practised  in-  Jerusalem.  The  diS'usion  of  Chris 
tianity  in  the  3rd  and  4th  centuries  exercised  a 
similar  but  more  universal  restraint  on  the  dis 
secting-room,  until  anatomy  as  a  pursuit  became 
extinct,  and  the  notion  of  profaneness  quelling 
everywhere  such  researches,  surgical  science  be 
came  stagnant  to  a  degree  to  which  it  had  never 
previously  sunk  within  the  memory  of  human 
records. 

In  comparing  the  growth  of  medicine  in  the 
rest  of  the  ancient  world,  the  high  rank  of  its  prac 
titioners — princes  and  heroes — settles  at  once  the 


MEDICINE 


205 


question  as  to  the  esteem  ui  which  a  was  held  in 
the  Homeric  °  and  pre-Homeric  P  period.  To  de 
scend  to  the  historical,  the  story  of  Democedes  q  at 
the  court  of  Darius  illustrates  the  practice  of  Greek 
surgery  before  the  period  of  Hippocrates  ;  anti 
cipating  in  its  gentler  waiting  upon'  nature,  as 
compared  (Herod,  iii.  130)  with  that  of  the  Per 
sians  and  Egyptians,  the  method  and  maxims  of  that 
Father  of  physic,  who  wrote  against  the  theories 
and  speculations  of  the  so-culled  philosophical  school, 
and  was  a  true  Empiricist  before  that  sect  was 
formularized.  The  Dogmatic  school  was  founded 
after  his  time  by  his  disciples,  who  departed  from  his 
eminently  practical  and  inductive  method.  It  re 
cognised  hidden  causes  of  health  and  sickness  arising 
from  certain  supposed  principles  or  elements,  out  of 
which  bodies  were  composed,  and  by  virtue  of 
which  all  their  parts  and  members  were  attempered 
together  and  became  sympathetic.  He  has  some 
curious  remarks  on  the  sympathy  of  men  with 
climate,  seasons,  &c.  Hippocrates  himself  rejected 
supernatural  accounts  of  disease,  and  especially  de 
moniacal  possession.  He  refers,  but  with  no  mystical 
sense,  to  numbers1  as  furnishing  a  rule  for  cases.  It 
is  remarkable  that  he  extols  the  discernment  of 
Orientals  above  Westerns,  and  of  Asiatics  above  Eu 
ropeans,  in  medical  diagnosis.*  The  empirical  school, 
which  arose  in  the  third  century  B.C.,  under  the 
guidance  of  A cron  of  Agrigentum,  Serapionof  Alex 
andria,  and  Philinus  of  Cos,"  waited  for  the  symp 
toms  of  every  case,  disregarding  the  rules  of  practice 
based  on  dogmatic  principles.  Among  its  votaries 
was  a  Zachalias  (perhaps  Zacharias,  and  possibly  a 
Jew)  of  Babylon,  who  (Pliny,  N.  H.  xxxvii.  10, 
comp.  xxxvi.  10)  dedicated  a  book  on  medicine  to 
Mithridates  the  Great;  its  views  were  also  sup 
ported*  by  Herodotus  of  Tarsus,  a  place  which,  next 
to  Alexandria,  became  distinguished  for  its  schools 
of  philosophy  and  medicine ;  as  also  by  a  Jew  named 
Theodas,  or  Theudas.r  of  Laodicea,  but  a  student 


This  may  perhaps  be  the  true  account  of  the  production 
of  the  modern  plague,  which,  however,  disappears  when 
the  temperature  rises  above  a  given  limit,  excessive  heat 
tending  to  dissipate  the  miasma. 

1  This  author  further  refers  to  Pettlgrew's  History  of 
Egyptian  Mummies. 

k  Dr.  Ferguson,  in  an  article  on  pestilential  Infection, 
Quarterly  Review,  vol.  xlvi.,  1852,  insists  on  actual  contact 
with  the  diseased  or  dead  as  the  condition  of  transmission 
of  the  disease.  But  compare  a  tract  by  Dr.  Macmichael, 
On  the  Progress  of  Opinion  on  the  Subject  of  Contagion. 
See  also  Essays  on  State  Medicine,  H.  W.  Rumsey,  London, 
1 856,  ess.  iii.  p.  130,  £c.  For  ancient  opinions  on  the  matter, 
see PaulusAegin.ed.Sydenhsan Society,  1.284  &c.  Thucy- 
dides,  in  his  description  of  the  Athenian  plague,  is  the  first 
who  alludes  to  it,  and  that  but  inferentially.  It  seems 
on  the  whole  most  likely  that  contagiousness  is  a  quality 
of  morbid  condition  which  may  be  present  or  absent. 
What  the  conditions  are  no  one  seems  able  to  say.  As  an 
instance,  elephantiasis  was  said  by  early  writers  (e.g. 
Aretaeus  and  Khazes)  to  be  contagious,  which  some 
modern  authorities  deny.  The  assertion  and  denial  are 
so  clear  and  circumstantial  In  either  case,  that  no  other 
solution  seems  open  to  the  question. 

m  "  Reglbtta  corpora  mortuorum  ad  scrutandos  morbos 
insecantibns." 

0  Gyrene,  the  well-known  Greek  African  colony,  had  a 
high  repute  for  physicians  of  excellence ;  and  some  of  its 
coins  bear  the  impress  of  the  OTTO?,  or  ossctfoetidn,  a.  me 
dical  drug  to  which  miraculous  virtues  were  ascribed. 
.Now  the  Cyrenaica  was  a  nome  for  the  Jews  of  the  disper 
sion  (Acts  11. 10 ;  Paul.  Aeyin.  sydenbam  Society,  iii.  283).  I 

0  Ualen  himself  wrote  a  bock,  *fpi  ^  Kaff  'O^pov  I 
iarpi»r»t,  quoted  by  Alexander  of  Trallee,  lib.  ix.  cap.  4.  ' 


P  The  indistinctness  with  which  the  medical,  the  ma 
gical,  and  the  poisonous  were  confounded  under  the  word 
0dp/u.a/ca  by  the  early  Greeks  will  escape  no  one.  (So 
Ex.  xxii.  18,  the  Heb.  word  for  "  witch  "  is  in  the  LXX. 
rendered  by  ^ap^cucds.)  The  legend  of  the  Argonauts  and 
Medea  Illustrates  this ;  the  Homeric  Moly,  and  Nepenthes 
and  the  whole  story  of  Circe,  confirm  it 

T  The  fame  which  he  had  acquired  in  Samos  had  reached 
Sardis  before  Darius  discovered  his  presence  among  the 
captives  taken  from  Oroetes  (Herod,  iii.  129). 

r  The  best  known  name  amongst  the  pioneers  of  Greek 
medical  science  is  Herodicus  of  Selymbria,  "  qui  totam 
gymnasticam  mediclnae  adjunxit;"  for  which  he  wag 
censured  by  Hippocrates  (Siblioth.  Script.  Med.  B.  v.).  The 
alliance,  however,  of  the  iarpuoj  with  the  yv/ut/aori/oj  is 
familiar  to  us  from  the  Dialogues  of  Plato. 

•  Thus  the  product  of  seven  and  forty  gives  the  tern: 
of  the  days  of  gestation ;  in  his  Trepl  vovaiav  S,  why  men 
died,  fv  TJJo-i  ffepi£r<77)<Ti  Tu>t>  yiiepewv,  is  discussed ;  so  the 
4th,  8th,  llth,  and  17th,  are  noted  as  the  cr.tlcal  days  ua 
acute  diseases. 

«  Sprengel,  ub.  sup.  iv.  52-5,  speaks  of  an  Alexandrian 
school  of  medicine  as  having  carried  anatomy,  especially 
under  the  guidance  of  Hlerophilus,  to  its  highest  pitch  of 
ancient  perfection.  It  seems  not,  however,  to  have  claimed 
any  distinctive  principles,  but  stands  chronologically  be 
tween  the  Dogmatic  and  Empiric  schools. 

u  The  former  of  these  wrote  against  Hippocrates,  the 
latter  was  a  commentator  on  him  (Sprengel,  ub.  sup.  iv.  81). 

*  It  treats  of  a  stone  called  hematite,  to  which  the  author 
ascribes  great  virtues,  especially  as  regards  the  eyes. 

7  The  authorities  for  these  statements  about  Thcudaa 
are  given  by  Wundcrbar,  Riblisch-Talmudifche  Medicin, 
Itcs  Heft,  p.  25.  He  refers  among  others  to  Talmud. 


296 


MEDICINE 


of  Alexaidria,  and  the  last,  or  nearly  so,  of  the 
Empiricists  whoir  its  schools  produced.  The  re 
marks  of  Theudas  or  che  right  method  of  observing, 
and  the  value  of  experience,  and  1m  book  on  medicine, 
now  lost,  in  which  he  arranged  his  mbject  under  the 
heads  of  indicatoria,  curatoria,  &w\  salubris,  earned 
him  high  reputation  as  a  champion  of  empiricism 
against  the  reproaches  of  the  dogmatic.'1.,  though  they 
were  subsequently  impugned  by  Gaien  and  Theo- 
dosius  of  Tripoli.  His  period  was  that  from  Titus  to 
Hadrian.  "  The  empiricists  held  that  observation 
and  the  application  of  known  remedies  in  one  case  to 
others  presumed  to  be  similar  constitute  the  whole 
art  of  cultivating  medicine.  Though  their  views 
were  narrow,  and  their  infoitnation  scanty  when 
compared  with  some  of  the  chiefs  of  the  other  sects, 
and  although  they  rejected  as  useless  and  unattain 
able  all  knowledge  of  the  causes  and  recondite  nature 
of  diseases,  it  is  undeniable  that,  besides  personal 
experience,  they  freely  availed  themselves  of  his 
torical  detail,  and  of  a  strict  analogy  founded  upon 
observation  and  the  resemblance  of  phenomena" 
(Dr.  Adams,  Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Sydenham  Soc.). 

This  school,  however,  was  opposed  by  another, 
known  as  the  Methodic,  which  had  arisen  under  the 
leading  of  Themison,  also  of  Laodicea,  about  the 
period  of  Pompey  the  Great.1  Asclepiades  paved 
the  way  for  the  "  method  "  in  question,  finding  a 
theoretic  »  basis  in  the  corpuscular  or  atomic  theory 
of  phpics  which  he  borrowed  from  Heraclides  of 
Pontus.  He  had  passed  some  early  years  in  Alex 
andria,  and  thence  came  to  Rome  shortly  before 
Cicero's  time  (comp.  quo  nos  medico  amicoque  usi 
sumus,  Crassus.  ap.  Cic.  de  Orat.  i.  14).  He  was 
a  transitional  link  between  the  Dogmatic  and  Em 
piric  schools  and  this  later  or  Methodic  (Sprengel, 
M&.  sup.  pt.  v.  16),  which  sought  to  rescue  medicine 
from  the  bewildering  mass  of  particulars  in  which 
empiricism  had  plunged  it.  He  reduced  diseases  to 
two  classes,  chronic  and  acute,  and  endeavoured  like 
wise  to  simplify  remedies.  In  the  meanwhile  the 
most  judicious  of  medical  theorists  since  Hippocrates, 
Celsus  of  the  Augustan  period,  had  reviewed 
medicine  in  the  light  which  all  these  schools 
afforded,  and  not  professing  any  distinct  teaching, 
but  borrowing  from  all,  may  be  viewed  as  eclectic. 
He  translated  Hippocrates  largely  verbatim,  quoting 
in  a  less  degree  Asclepiades  and  others.  Autonius 
Musa,  whose  "  cold-water  cure,"  after  its  successful 
trial  on  Augustus  himself,  became  generally  popular, 
teems  to  have  had  little  of  scientific  basis  ;  but  by 
the  usual  method,  or  the  usual  accidents,  became 
merely  the  fashionable  practitioner  of  his  day  in 
Rome.*  Attalia,  near  Tarsus,  furnished  also, 
shortly  after  the  period  of  Celsus,  Athenaeus,  the 
leader  of  the  last  of  the  schools  of  medicine  which 
divided  the  ancient  world,  under  the  name  of  the 
"  Pneumatic,"  holding  the  tenet  "  of  an  etherial 


MEDICINE 

principle  (ureC/ua)  residing  in  the  microcosm,  b/ 
means  of  which  the  mind  performed  the  function5 
of  the  body."  This  is  also  traceable  in  Hippo 
crates,  and  was  an  established  opinion  of  the 
Stoics.  It  was  exemplified  in  the  innate  heat,  6fp^ 
tnQvrot,  (Aret.  de  Cans,  et  Sign.  Morb.  Chron. 
ii.  13),  and  thecalidum  innatum  of  modem  physio 
logists,  especially  in  the  17th  century  (Dr.  Adams, 
Pref.  Aretaeus,  ed.  Syd.  Soc.).  It  is  clear  that 
all  these  schools  may  easily  have  contributed  to 
form  the  medical  opinions  current  at  the  period  of 
the  N.  T.,  that  the  two  earlier  among  them  may 
have  influenced  Rabbinical  teaching  on  that  sub 
ject  at  a  much  earlier  period,  and  that,  especially 
at  the  time  of  Alexander's  visit  to  Jerusalem,  the 
Jewish  people,  whom  he  favoured  and  protected,  had 
an  opportunity  of  largely  gathering  from  the  medical 
lore  of  the  west.  It  was  necessary  therefore  to 
pass  in  brief  review  the  growth  of  the  latter,  and 
especially  to  note  the  points  at  which  it  intersects 
the  medical  progress  of  the  Jews.  Greek  Asiatic 
medicine  culminated  in  Galen,  who  was,  however, 
still  but  a  commentator  on  his  western  predecessors, 
and  who  stands  literally  without  rival,  successor,  or 
disciple  of  note,  till  the  period  when  Greek  leai  ning 
was  reawakened  by  the  Arabian  intellect.  Galen 
himself c  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Anto- 
nines,  but  he  appears  to  have  been  acquainted  with 
the  writings  of  Moses,  and  to  have  travelled  in 
quest  of  medical  experience  over  Egypt,  Syria,  and 
Palestine,  as  well  as  Greece,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
west,  and,  in  particular,  to  have  visited  the  banks 
of  the  Jordan  in  quest  of  opobalsamum,  and  the 
coasts  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  obtain  samples  of  bitumen. 
He  also  mentions  Palestine  as  producing  a  watery 
wine,  suited  for  the  drink  of  febrile  patients. 

II.  Having  thus  described  the  external  influences 
which,  if  any,  were  probably  most  influential  in 
forming  the  medical  practice  of  the  Hebrews, 
we  may  trace  next  its  internal  growth.  The 
cabalistic  legends  mix  up  the  names  of  Shem 
and  Heber  in  their  fables  about  healing,  and 
ascribe  to  those  patriarchs  a  knowledge  of  simples 
and  rare  roots,  with,  of  course,  magic  spells  and 
occult  powers,  such  as  have  clouded  the  history  of 
I  medicine  from  the  earliest  times  down  to  the 
17th  century .d  So  to  Abraham  is  ascribed  a  talis 
man,  the  touch  of  which  healed  all  disease.  We 
know  that  such  simple  surgical  skill  as  the  opera 
tion  for  circumcision  implies  was  Abraham's ;  but 
severer  operations  than  this  are  constantly  required 
in  the  flock  and  herd,  and  those  who  watch  care 
fully  the  habits  of  animals  can  hardly  fail  to  amass 
some  guiding  principles  applicable  to  man  and 
beast  alike.  Beyond  this,  there  was  probably 
nothing  but  such  ordinary  obstetrical  craft  as  h<u> 
always  been  traditional  among  the  women  of  rude 
tribes,  which  could  be  classed  as  medical  lore  in  the 


Vasir,  526 ;  to  Tosiphta  OMotk,  }  iv. ;  and  to  Tr.  San- 
tedrin,  asa,  93d ;  hechoroth,  286. 

•  "  Alia  est  Hippocratis  sccta  [the  Dogmatic],  alia  Ascle- 
pladls,  alia  Themlsonis"  (Seneca,  Epist.  95;  comp.  Juv. 
Sat.  x.  221). 

"  For  his  remains  see  Asclepiadis  Bithynici  Fragmenta, 
ed.  Christ  Gottl.  Gumpert,  8«.  Vinar.  1794. 

11  Female  medical  aid  appears  to  have  been  current  at 
Rome,  whether  in  midwifery  only  (the  obttetric),  or  in 
general  practice,  as  the  titles  medica,  larpiiei\,  would  seem 
to  Imply  (see  Martial,  Epig.  xi.  72).  The  Greeks  were  not 
Etrtngf  re  to  female  stndy  of  medicine ;  e.  g.  some  frag 
ments  of  the  famous  Aspasia  on  women's  disorders  occur 
lu  At  tliu. 


«  The  Arabs,  however,  continued  to  bufld  wholly  npoa 
Hippocrates  and  Galen,  save  in  so  far  as  their  advance  In 
chemical  science  Improved  their  pharmacopoeia:  thi-  may 
be  seen  on  reference  to  the  works  of  Khases,  A.D.  930,  and 
Haly  Abbas,  A.D.  980.  The  first  mention  of  smallpox  is 
ascribed  to  Rhazes,  who,  however,  quotes  several  earlier 
writers  on  the  subject.  Mahomet  himself  is  gaid  to  have 
been  versed  In  medicine,  and  to  have  compiled  some 
aphorisms  upon  It;  and  a  herbalist  literature  was  alwayc 
extensively  followed  In  tne  East  from  the  days  of  Solomon 
downwards  (Freind's  History  of  Medicine,  ii.  5,  27). 

d  See,  In  evidence  of  this,  Royal  and  Prach'tni  Cijf 
•nittry,  in  Uirte  treatises.  London,  l6Je 


MEDICINE 

family  of  the  patriarch,  until  his  sojourn  brought 
him  among  the  more  cultivated  Philistines  and 
Egyptians.  The  only  notices  which  Scripture 
Affords  in  connexion  with  the  subject  are  the  cases 
of  difficult  midwifery  in  the  successive  households 
of  Isaac,8  Jacob,  and  Judah  (Gen.  XXT.  26,  xxxv. 
17,  xxxviii.  27),  and  so,  later,  in  that  of  Phinehas 
(1  Sam.  iv.  19).  The  traditional  value  ascribed  to 
the  mandrake,  in  regard  to  generative  functions, 
relates  to  the  same  branch  of  natural  medicine ; 
but  throughout  this  period  occurs  no  trace  of  any 
attempt  to  study,  digest,  and  systematise  the  sub 
ject.  But,  as  Israel  grew  and  multiplied  in  Egypt, 
they  derived  doubtless  a  large  mental  cultivation 
from  their  position  until  cruel  policy  turned  it  iuto 
bondage  ;  even  then  Moses  was  rescued  from  the 
lot  of  his  brethren,  and  became  learned  in  all 
the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  including,  of  course, 
medicine  and  cognate  sciences  (Clem.  Alex.  i.  p. 
413),  and  those  attainments  perhaps  became  sug 
gestive  of  future  laws.  Some  practical  skill  in 
metallurgy  is  evident  from  Ex.  xxxii.  20.  But,  if 
we  admit  Egyptian  learning  as  an  ingredient,  we 
should  also  notice  how  far  exalted  above  it  is  the 
standard  of  the  whole  Jewish  legislative  fabric,  in 
its  exemption  from  the  blemishes  of  sorcery  and 
juggling  pretences.  The  priest,  who  had  to  pro 
nounce  on  the  cure,  used  no  means  to  advance  it,  and 
the  whole  regulations  prescribed  exclude  the  notion 
of  trafficking  in  popular  superstition.  We  have  no 
occult  practices  reserved  in  the  hands  of  the  sacred 
caste.  It  is  God  alone  who  doeth  great  things, 
working  by  the  wand  of  Moses,  or  the  brazen 
serpent ;  but  the  very  mention  of  such  instruments 
is  such  as  to  expel  all  pretence  of  mysterious  virtues 
in  the  things  themselves.  Hence  various  allusions 
to  God's  "  healing  mercy,"  and  the  title  "  Jehovah 
that  healeth  "  (Ex.  xv.  26  ;  Jer.  xvii.  14,  xxx.  17 ; 
Ps.  ciii.  3,  cxlvii.  3 ;  Is.  xxx.  26).  Nor  was  the 
practice  of  physic  a  privilege  of  the  Jewish  priest 
hood.  Any  one  might  practise  it,  and  this  pub 
licity  must  have  kept  it  pure.  Nay,  there  was 
no  scriptural  bar  to  its  practice  by  resident  aliens. 
We  read  of  "  physicians,"  "  healing,"  &c.,  in 
Ex.  xxi.  19;  2  K.  viii.  29;  2  Chr.  xvi.  12; 
Jerem.  viii.  22.  At  the  same  time  the  greater 
leisure  of  the  Levites  and  their  other  advantages 
would  make  them  the  students  of  the  nation,  as  a 
rule,  in  ail  science,  and  their  constant  residence  in 
cities  would  give  them  the  opportunity,  if  carried 
out  in  fact,  of  a  far  wider  field  of  observation. 
The  reign  of  peace  of  Solomon's  days  must  have 
opened,  especially  with  renewed  Egyptian  inter 
course,  new  facilities  for  the  study.  He  himself 
seems  to  have  included  in  his  favourite  natural 
history  some  knowledge  of  the  medicinal  uses  of  the 
creatures.  His  works  show  him  conversant  with 
the  notion  of  remedial  treatment  (Prov.  iii.  8, 


297 


•  Doubts  have  been  raised  as  to  the  possibility  of  twins 
being  born,  one  holding  the  other's  heel ;  but  there  does 
not  seem  any  such  limit  to  the  operations  of  nature 
as  any  objection  on  that  score  would  imply.  After  all, 
it  was  perhaps  only  just  such  a  relative  position  of  the 
1'mbs  of  the  infants  at  the  mere  moment  of  birth  as  would 
suggest  the  "  holding  by  the  heel."  The  midwives,  it 
seems,  in  case  of  twins,  were  called  upon  to  distinguish 
the  first-born,  to  whom  important  privileges  appertained. 
The  tying  on  a  thread  or  ribbon  was  an  easy  way  of  pre 
venting  mistake,  and  the  assistant  in  the  case  of  Tamar 
eeized  the  earliest  possible  moment  for  doing  it.  "  When 
the  hand  or  foot  of  a  living  child  protrudes,  it  is  to  be 
pushed  up  . .  and  the  head  made  to  present"  (Paul.  Acgin. 


MEDICINE 


vi.  15,  xii.  18,  xvii.  22,  xx.  30,  xxix.  1 ; 
iii.  3) ;  and  one  passage  (see  p.  306)  indicates  con 
siderable  knowledge  of  anatomy.  His  repute  in 
magic  is  the  universal'  theme  of  eastern  story.  Jt 
has  even  been  thought  he  had  recourse  to  the 
shrine  of  Aesculapius  at  Sidon,  and  enriched  his  re 
sources  by  its  records  or  relics  ;  but  there  seems 
some  doubt  whether  this  temple  was  of  such  high 
antiquity.  Solomon,  however,  we  cannot  doubt, 
would  have  turned  to  the  account,  not  only  of 
wealth  but  of  knowledge,  his  peaceful  reign,  wide 
dominion,  and  wider  renown,  and  would  have  sought 
to  traffic  in  learning,  as  well  as  in  wheat  and  gold. 
To  him  the  Talmudists  ascribe  a  "  volume  of  cures  " 

iNISn  ")BD),  of  which  they  make  frequent  men 
tion  (Fabricius,  Cod.  Pseudep.  V.  T.  1043,4).  Jo- 
sephus  (Ant.  viii.  2)  mentions  his  knowledge  of 
medicine,  and  the  use  of  spells  by  him  to  expel 
demons  who  cause  sicknesses,  "  which  is  continued 
among  us,"  he  adds,  "  to  this  time."  The  dealings 
of  various  prophets  with  quasi-medical  agency  can 
not  be  regarded  as  other  than  the  mere  accidental 
form  which  their  miraculous  gifts  took  (1  K.  xiii. 
6,  xiv.  12,  xvii.  17  ;  2  K.  i.  4,  xx.  7  ;  Is.  xxxviii. 
21).  Jewish  tradition  has  invested  Elisha,  it 
would  seem,  with  a  function  more  largely  medi 
cinal  than  that  of  the  other  servants  of  God ;  but 
the  Scriptural  evidence  on  the  point  is  scanty, 
save  that  he  appears  to  have  known  at  once  the 
proper  means  to  apply  to  heal  the  waters,  and 
temper  the  noxious  pottage  (2  K.  ii.  21,  iv.  39-41). 
His  healing  the  Shunammite's  son  has  been  dis 
cussed  as  a  case  of  suspended  animation,  and  of 
animal  magnetism  applied  to  resuscitate  it ;  but 
the  narrative  clearly  implies  that  the  death  was 
real.  As  regards  the  leprosy,  had  the  Jordan  com 
monly  possessed  the  healing  power  which  Naaman's 
faith  and  obedience  found  in  it,  would  there 
have  been  "  many  lepers  in  Israel  in  the  days 
of  Eliseus  the  prophet,"  or  in  any  other  days  ? 
Further,  if  our  Lord's  words  (Luke  iv.  27)  are  to  be 
taken  literally,  Elisha's  reputation  could  not  have 
been  founded  on  any  succession  of  lepers  healed.  The 
washing  was  a  part  of  the  enjoined  lustration  of  the 
leper  after  his  cure  was  complete ;  Naaman  was  to 
act  as  though  clean,  like  the  "  ten  men  that  were 
lepers,"  bidden  to  "  go  and  show  themselves  to 
the  priest " — in  either  case  it  was  "  as  thou  has* 
believed,  so  be  it  done  unto  thee." 

The  sickness  of  Benhadad  is  certainly  so  de 
scribed  as  to  imply  treachery  on  the  part  of  Hazael 
(2  K.  viii.  15).  Yet  the  observation  of  Bruce,  upon 
a  "cold-water  cure"  practised  among  the  people 
near  the  Red  Sea,  has  suggested  a  view  somewhat 
different.  The  bed-clothes  are  soaked  with  cold 
water,  and  kept  thoroughly  wet,  and  the  patient 
drinks  cold  water  freely.  But  the  crisis,  it  seems, 
occurs  on  the  third  day,  and  not  till  the  fifth  is  it 


ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.,  i.  648,  Hippocr.  quoted  by  Dr.  Adams). 
This  probably  the  midwife  did ;  at  the  same  time  marking 
him  as  first-born  in  virtue  of  being  thus  "presented  "first 
The  precise  meaning  of  the  dot  btful  expression  in  Gee 
xxxviii.  27  and  marg.  is  discussed  by  Wunderbar,  «6.  sup 
p.  50,  in  reference  both  to  the  children  and  to  the  mother. 
Of  Rachel  a  Jewish  commentator  says,  "  Multis  etlam 
ex  itincre  dimcultatibus  pracgressis,  viribusque  post  din 
protractos  dolores  exhaustis,  atonia  uteri,  forsan  quidem 
haemi-rrhagia  in  pariendo  mortua  cst "  (ibid.). 

t  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  2)  mentions  a  cure  of  one  pos' 
sessed  with  a  devil  by  the  use  of  some  root,  the  knowledge 
of  which  was  referred  by  tradition  to  Solomon. 


298 


MEDICINE 


there  usual  to  apply  this  treatment.  If  the  cham 
berlain,  through  carelessness,  ignorance,  or  treachery, 
precipitated  the  application,  a  fatal'  issue  may 
have  suddenly  resulted.  The  "  brazen  serpent, ' 
oace  the  means  of  healing,  and  worshipped  idola- 
trously  in  Hezekiah's  reign,  is  supposed  to  have  ac 
quired  those  honours  under  its  Aesculapiin  aspect. 
This  notion  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  Scripture 
narrative,  though  not  therein  traceable.  It  is  sup 
posed  that  something  in  the  "  volume  of  cures," 
current  under  the  authority  of  Solomon,  may  have 
conduced  to  the  establishment  of  these  rites,  and 
drawn  away  the  popular  homage,  especially  in 
prayers  during  sickness,  or  thanksgivings  after 
recovery,  from  Jehovah.  The  statement  that  King 
Asa  (2  Chr.  xvi.  12)  "sought  not  to  Jehovah  but 
to  the  physicians,"  may  seem  to  countenance  the 
notion  that  a  rivalry  of  actual  worship,  based  on 
some  medical  fancies,  had  been  set  up,  and  would  so 
far  support  the  Talmudical  tradition. 

The  captivity  at  Babylon  brought  the  Jews 
in  contact  with  a  new  sphere  of  thought.  Their 
chief  men  rose  to  the  highest  honours,  and  an 
improved  mental  culture  among  a  large  section  of 
the  captives  was  no  doubt  the  result  which  they 
imported  on  their  return.1"  We  know  too  little  of 
the  precise  state  of  medicine  in  Babylon,  Susa,  and 
the  "  cities  of  the  Medes,"  to  determine  the  direction 
iu  which  the  impulse  so  derived  would  have  led  the 
exiles ;  but  the  confluence  of  streams  of  thought 
from  opposite  sources,  which  impregnate  each  other, 
would  surely  produce  a  tendency  to  sift  established 
practice  and  accepted  axioms,  to  set  up  a  new 
standard  by  which  to  try  the  current  rules  of  ail, 
and  to  determine  new  lines  of  inquiry  for  any  eager 
spirits  disposed  to  search  for  truth.  Thus  the  visit 
of  Democedes  to  the  court  of  Darius,  though  it 
seems  to  be  an  isolated  fact,  points  to  a  general 
opening  of  oriental  manners  to  Greek  influence, 
which  was  not  too  late  to  leave  its  traces  in  some 
perhaps  of  the  contemporaries  of  Ezra.  That  great 
reformer,  with  the  leaders  of  national  thought 
gathered  about  him,  could  not  fail  to  recognise 
medicine  among  the  salutary  measures  which  dis- 


MEDICINE 

tinguished  his  epoch.  And  whatever  adrantagei 
the  Levites  had  possessed  in  earlier  days  were  now 
speedily  lost  even  as  regards  the  study  of  the  divine 
law,  and  much  more  therefore  as  regards  thai 
of  medicine;  into  which  competitors  vould  crowd 
in  proportion  to  its  broader  and  more  obsious 
human  interest,  and  effectually  demolish  any 
narrowing  barriers  of  established  privilege,  if  such 
previously  existed. 

Jt  maybe  observed  that  the  priests  in  their  minis 
trations,  who  performed  at  all  seasons  of  the  year 
barefoot  on  stone  pavement,  and  without  perhaps 
any  variation  of  dress  to  meet  that  of  temperature, 
were  peculiarly  liable  to  sickness.'  Hence  the 
permanent  appointment  of  a  Temple  physician  has 
been  supposed  by  some,  and  a  certain  Ben-Ahijah  is 
mentioned  by  Wunderbar  as  occurring  in  the  Talmud 
in  that  capacity.  But  it  rather  appears  as  though 
such  an  officer's  appointment  were  precarious,  and 
varied  with  the  demands  of  the  ministrants. 

The  book  of  Ecdesiasticus  shows  the  increased 
regard  given  to  the  distinct  study  of  medicine,  by 
the  repeated  mention  of  physicians,  &c.,  which  it 
contains,  and  which,  as  probably  belonging  to  the 
period  of  the  Ptolemies,  it  might  be  expected  to 
show.  The  wisdom  of  prevention  is  recognised  in 
Ecclus.  xviii.  19,  perhaps  also  in  x.  10.  Ifcuik 
and  honour  are  said  to  be  the  portion  of  the  physi 
cian,  and  his  office  to  be  from  the  Lord  (xxxviii.  1, 
3,  12).  The  repeated  allusions  to  sickness  in  vii. 
35,  xxx.  17,  xxxi.  22,  xxxvii.  30,  xxxviii.  9,  coupled 
with  the  former  recognition  of  merit,  have  caused 
some  to  suppose  that  this  author  was  himself  a 
physician.  If  he  was  so,  the  power  of  mind  and 
wide  range  of  observation  shown  in  his  work  would 
give  a  favourable  impression  of  the  standard  of 
practitioners ;  if  he  was  not,  the  great  general  po 
pularity  of  the  study  and  practice  may  be  inferred 
from  its  thus  becoming  a  common  topic  of  general 
advice  offered  by  a  non-professional  writer.  In 
Wisd.  xvi.  12,  plaister  is  spoken  of;  anointing,  as  a 
means  of  healing,  in  Tob.  vi.  8. 

To  bring  down  the  subject  to  the  period  of  the 
N.  T.  St.  Luke,k  "  the  beloved  physician,"  who 


8  Professor  Newman  remarks  on  the  manner  of  Ben- 
luuUul's  recorded  death,  that  "  when  a  man  is  so  near 
tc  death  that  this  will  kill  him,  we  need  good  evi 
dence  to  show  that  the  story  is  not  a  vulgar  scandal" 
(JJe&reio  Monarchy,  p.  180  note).  The  remark  seems 
to  betray  ignorance  of  what  is  meant  by  the  crisis  of  a 
fever. 

h  Wunderbar,  whom  the  writer  has  followed  in  a  large 
portion  of  this  general  review  of  Jewish  medicine,  and 
his  obligations  to  whom  are  great,  has  here  set  up  a  view 
which  appears  untenable.  He  regards  the  Babylonian 
captivity  as  parallel  in  ite  effects  to  the  Egyptian  bondage, 
and  seems  to  think  that  tbe  people  would  return  debased 
from  its  influence.  On  the  contrary,  those  whom  sub 
jection  had  made  ignoble  and  unpatriotic  would  remain. 
If  any  returned,  it  was  a  pledge  that  they  were  not  so 
impaired ;  and,  if  not  impaired,  they  would  be  certainly 
improved  by  the  discipline  they  had  undergone.  He  also 
thinks  that  sorcery  bad  the  largest  share  in  any  Baby 
lonian  or  Persian  system  of  medicine.  This  is  assuming 
too  much :  there  were  magicians  in  Egypt,  but  physicians 
&lso  (see  above)  of  high  cultivation.  Human  nature  has 
so  great  an  interest  in  human  life,  that  only  in  the  savage 
rudimentary  societies  is  its  economy  left  thus  involved  in 
phantasms.  The  earliest  steps  of  civilization  include 
something  of  medicine.  Of  course  superstitions  are  found 
copiously  involved  in  such  medical  tenets,  but  this  is  not 
equivalent  to  abandoning  the  study  to  a  class  of  professed 
magicians.  Thus  in  the  UcUerrtttc  der 


Literatur,  p.  123,  by  D.  Chwolson,  St.  Petcrsb.  1859  (the 
value  of  which  is  not  however  yet  ascertained),  a 
writer  on  poisons  claims  to  have  a  magic  antidote,  but 
declines  stating  what  it  is,  as  it  is  not  his  business  to 
mention  such  things,  and  he  only  does  so  in  cases  where 
the  charm  is  in  connexion  with  medical  treatment  and 
resembles  it;  the  magicians,  adds  the  same  writer  on 
another  occasion,  use  a  particular  means  of  cure,  but  ho 
declines  to  impart  it,  having  a  repugnance  to  witchcraft 
So  (pp.  125-6)  we  find  traces  of  charms  introduced  into 
Babylonish  treatises  on  medical  science,  but  apologetically, 
and  as  if  against  sounder  knowledge.  Similarly,  the  opinion 
of  fatalism  Is  not  without  its  influence  on  medicine ;  but  it 
is  chiefly  resorted  to  where,  as  in  pestilence  often  happens, 
all  known  aid  seems  useless. 

»  Thus  we  find  Kail,  De.  Morbis  Sacerdotum,  Hafn.  1745. 
referred  to  by  Wunderbar,  Istes  Heft,  p.  60. 

k  This  Is  not  the  place  to  introduce  any  discussion  on  the 
language  of  St.  Luke ;  It  may  be  observed,  however  that 
it  appears  often  tinctured  by  his  early  studies :  «.  g.,  v.  18, 
iropoAeAunie'i'Os,  the  correct  term,  instead  of  the  popular 
iropoAvTiicbs  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark;  so  \iii.44, 
e<m)  ^  pu'cns,  instead  of  the  apparently  Hebraistic  phrase 
efTjpacOrj  >j  T>jy)  of  the  latter ;  SO  vi.  19,  ia.ro  irdvra.s, 
where  5icc7w<h)crai>  and  i<rtu£ovTo  are  used  by  the  others ; 
and  vili.  55,  tire'orpe^e  TO  JTWU/U.O  (the  breath  ?),  as  though 
a  token  of  animation  returning;  and  the  list  might  easily  be 
enlarged.  St.  Luke  abounds  in  the  narratives  of  demoniacs, 
while  H\p;x,<Talrs  repudiates  such  influence,  as  producing 


MEDICINE 

practised  at  Antioch  whilst  the  body  was  his  care, 
could  hardly  have  failed  to  be  conversant  with  all 
the  leading  opinions  current  down  to  his  own  time. 
Situated  between  the  great  ?"hnols  of  Alexandria 
and  Cilicia,  within  easy  sea-transit  of  both,  as  well 
as  of  the  western  homes  of  science,  Antioch  enjoyed 
a  more  central  position  than  any  great  city  of 
the  ancient  world,  and  in  it  accordingly  all  the 
streams  of  contemporary  medical  learning  may 
have  probably  found  a  point  of  confluence.  The 
medicine  of  the  N.  T.  is  not  solely,  nor  even  chiefly, 
Jewish  medicine ;  and  even  if  it  were,  it  is  clear 
that  the  more  mankind  became  mixed  by  intercourse, 
the  more  medical  opinion  and  practice  must  have 
ceased  to  be  exclusive.  The  great  number  of  Jews 
resident  in  Rome  and  Greece  about  the  Christian  era, 
and  the  successive  decrees  by  which  their  banish 
ment  from  the  former  was  proclaimed,  must  have 
imported,  even  into  Palestine,  whatever  troni  the 
west  was  best  worth  knowing ;  and  we  may  be  as 
sure  that  its  medicine  and  surgery  expanded  under 
these  influences,  as  that,  in  the  writings  of  the  Tal- 
mudists,  such  obligations  would  be  unacknowledged. 
But,  beyond  this,  the  growth  of  large  mercantile 
commflnities  such  as  existed  in  Rome,  Alexandria, 
Antioch,  and  Ephesus,  of  itself  involves  a  peculiar 
sanitary  condition  from  the  mass  of  human  elements 
gathered  to  a  focus  under  new  or  abnormal  circum 
stances.  Nor  are  the  words  in  which  an  eloquent 
modern  writer  describes  the  course  of  this  action  less 
applicable  to  the  case  of  an  ancient  than  to  that  of  a 
modern  metropolis.  "  Diseases  once  indigenous  to 
a  section  of  humanity,  are  slowly  but  surely  creep 
ing  up  to  commercial  centres  from  whence  they 
will  be  rapidly  propagated.  One  form  of  Asiatic 
leprosy  is  approaching  the  Levant  from  Arabia. 
The  history  of  every  disease  which  is  communicated 
from  man  to  man  establishes  this  melancholy  truth, 
that  ultimately  such  maladies  overleap  all  obstacles 
of  climate,  and  demonstrate  a  solidarity  in  evil  as 
well  as  in  good  among  the  brotherhood  of  nations."  m 
In  proportion  as  this  "  melancholy  truth  "  is  per 
ceived,  would  an  intercommunication  of  medical 
science  prevail  also. 

The  medicine  and  surgery  of  St.  Luke,  then,  was 
probably  not  inferior  to  that  commonly  in  demand 
among  educated  Asiatic  Greeks,  and  must  have 
been,  as  regards  its  basis,  Greek  medicine,  and  not 
Jewish.  Hence  a  standard  Gentile  medical  writer, 
if  any  is  to  be  found  of  that  period,  would  best  re 
present  the  profession  to  which  the  evangelist  be 
longed.  Without  absolute  certainty  as  to  date,"  we 
seem  to  have  such  a  writer  in  Aretaeus,  commonly 
called  "  the  Cappadocian,"  who  wrote  certainly  after 
Nero's  reign  began,  and  probably  flourished  shortly 
before  and  after  the  decade  in  which  St.  Paul 
reached  Rome  and  Jerusalem  fell.  If  he  were  of 
St.  Luke's  age,  it  is  striking  that  he  should  also  be 


MEDICINE 


299 


perhaps  the  only  ancient  medica!  authority  in  favour 
of  demoniacal  possession  as  a  possible  account  of 
epilepsy  (see  p.  298,  note  k).  If  his  country  bt 
rightly  indicated  by  his  surname,  we  know  that  it 
gave  him  the  means  of  intercourse  with  both  tha 
Jews  and  the  Christians  of  the  Apostolic  period  (Acts 
ii.  9;  1  Pet.  i.  1).  It  is  very  likely  Chat  Tarsus, 
the  nearest  place  of  academic  repute  to  that  region, 
was  the  scene  of  at  any  rate  the  earlier  studies  of 
Aretaeus,  nor  would  any  chronological  difficulty 
prevent  his  having  been  a  pupil  in  medicine  there 
when  Paul  and  also,  perhaps,  Barnabas  were,  as  is 
probable,  pursuing  their  early  studies  in  other  sub 
jects  at  the  same  spot.  Aretaeus,  then,  assuming  the 
date  above  indicated,  may  be  taken  as  expounding 
the  medical  practice  of  the  Asiatic  Greeks  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  first  century.  There  is,  however,  much 
of  strongly  marked  individuality  in  his  work,  more 
especially  in  the  minute  verbal  portraiture  of  d-isease. 
That  of  pulmonary  consumption  in  particular  is 
traced  with  the  careful  description  of  an  eye 
witness,  and  represents  with  a  curious  exactness 
the  curved  nails,  shrunken  ringers,  slender  sharpened 
nostrils,  hollow  glazy  eye,  cadaverous  look  and  hue, 
the  waste  of  muscle  and  startling  prominence  of 
bones,  the  scapula  standing  off  like  the  wing  of  a 
bird ;  as  also  the  habit  of  body  marking  youthful 
predisposition  to  the  malady,  the  thin  veneer-like 
frames,  the  limbs  like  pinions,0  the  prominent 
throat  and  shallow  chest,  with  a  remark  that  moist 
and  cold  climates  are  the  haunts  of  it  (Aret.  irepj 
fyOifffos}.  His  work  exhibits  strong  traits  here  and 
there  of  the  Pneumatic  school,  as  in  his  statement 
regarding  lethargy,  that  it  is  frigidity  implanted 
by  nature  ;  Concerning  elephantiasis  even  more  em 
phatically,  that  it  is  a  refrigeration  of  the  innate 
heat,  "  or  rather  a  congelation — as  it  were  one 
great  winter  of  the  system."  v  The  same  views 
betray  themselves  in  his  statement  regarding  the 
blood,  that  it  is  the  warming  principle  of  all  the 
parts  ;  that  diabetes  is  a  sort  of  dropsy,  both  exhi 
biting  the  watery  principle ;  and  that  the  effect  of 
white  hellebore  is  as  that  of  fire :  "  so  that  what 
ever  fire  does  by  burning,  hellebore  effects  still  more 
by  penetrating  inwardly."  The  last  remark  shows 
that  he  gave  some  scope  to  his  imagination,  which 
indeed  we  might  illustrate  from  some  of  his  patho 
logical  descriptions,  e.g.  that  of  elephantiasis,  where 
the  resemblance  of  the  beast  to  the  afflicted  human 
being  is  wrought  to  a  fanciful  parallel.  Allowing 
for  such  overstrained  touches  here  and  there,  we 
may  say  that  he  generally  avoids  extravagant 
crotchets,  and  rests  chiefly  on  wide  observation,  and 
on  the  common  sense  which  sobers  theory  and  ra 
tionalises  facts.  He  hardly  ever  quotes  an  authority ; 
and  though  much  of  what  he  states  was  taught 
before,  it  is  dealt  with  as  the  common  property  of 
science,  or  as  become  sui  juris  through  being  proved 


maniacal  and  epileptic  disorders.  See  this  subject  dis 
cussed  in  the  Notes  on  the  "  Sacred  Diseases "  in  the 
Sydenh.  Soc.  ed.  of  Hippocr.  Aretaeus,  on  the  contrary, 
reeognizes  the  opinion  of  demoniac  agency  in  disease.  His 
words  are :  teprjv  iaicA7J<7<cou<ri  TI\V  trdO^v  drop  ical  fit' 
aAAa?  7rpo$<x<Tias,  TJ  /u.e'i/effos  TOV  KOKOV,  Ifpov  yap  TO 
ut'ya-  jy  tija'tos  OVK  avBpwjriTjy  aAAa  SeiTjs  ij  Jat- 
uoi>os  56£rjs  €5  TOV  avdptitnov  ct<7o5ov,  77  £vp.TTcivT<t)V  o/xov, 
rtjvSe  eKueXijOTcoi'  iepTji'.  Hep!  erriATji/fiTjs.  (De  Caus.  et 
Sign.  Morb.  Chron.  i.  4.) 

«  Dr.  Ferguson,  Pref.  Essay  to  Gooch  on  Diseases  of 
Wwnen,  New  Sydenham  Society,  London,  1859,  p.  xlvi. 
Ho  adds,  "  Such  has  been  the  case  with  smallpox,  measles, 
scarlatina,  and  the  plague  .  .  .  The  yellow  fever  has  lately 


ravaged  Lisbon  under  a  temperature  perfectly  similar  to 
that  of  London  or  Paris." 

11  The  date  here  given  is  favoured  by  the  introductory 
review  of  Aretaeus'  life  and  writings  prefixed  to  Boer- 
haave's  edition  of  his  works,  and  by  Dr.  Greenhill  in 
Smith's  Dictionary  of  Biog.  and  Myth,  sub  voc.  Are 
taeus.  A  view  that  he  was  about  a  century  later — a  con 
temporary,  in  short,  of  Galen— is  advanced  in  the  Syd. 
Soc.  edition,  and  ably  supported.  Still  the  evideno?  being 
purely  negative,  is  slender,  and  the  opposite  arguments 
are  not  taken  into  account.  °  irrepvy*>iees. 

f  i'ufis  earl  TOV  f/ujrvTOV  fcpfiov  ou  (tucpa.  re,  >j  KOJ 
irayo?,  is  iv  TI  pieyo  \elfia.  (Ve  CcLtK.  et  Sign.  Mvrb 
Cftres.  IS.  13). 


300 


MEDICINE 


by  his  own  experience.  The  freedom  with  which 
he  follows  or  rejects  earlier  opinions,  has  occasioned 
him  to  be  classed  by  some  amongst  the  eclectic 
school.  His  work  Is  divided  Into — 1.  the  causes  and 
signs  of  (1)  acute,  and  (2)  chronic  diseases ;  and, 
II.  the  curative  treatment  of  (I)  acute,  and  (2) 
chronic  diseases.  H's  boldness  of  treatment  is  ex 
emplified  in  his  selection  of  the  vein  to  be  opened 
in  a  wide  range  of  parts,  the  arm,  ancle,  tongue, 
nose,  &c.  He  first  has  a  distinct  mention  of 
leeches,  which  Themison  is  said  to  have  intro 
duced  ;  and  in  this  respect  his  surgical  resources 
appear  to  be  in  advance  of  Celsus.  He  was  familiar 
with  the  operation  for  the  stone  in  the  bladder 
and  prescribes,  as  Celsus  also  does,  the  use  of  the 
catheter,  where  its  insertion  is  not  prevented  by 
inflammation,  then  the  incuionfl  into  the  neck  of 
the  bladder,  nearly  as  in  modern  lithotomy.  His 
views  of  the  internal  economy  were  a  strange  mix 
ture  of  truth  and  error,  and  the  disuse  of  anatomy 
was  no  doubt  the  reason  why  this  was  the  weak 
point  of  his  teaching.  He  held  that  the  work  of 
producing  the  blood  pertained  to  the  liver,  "  which 
is  the  root  of  the  veins;"  that  the  bile  was  distri 
buted  from  the  gall  bladder  to  the  intestines ;  and, 
if  this  vesica  became  gorged,  the  bile  was  thrown 
back  into  the  veins,  and  by  them  diffused  over  the 
system.  He  regarded  the  nerves  as  the  source  of 
sensation  and  motion ;  and  had  some  notion  of  them 
as  branching  in  pairs  from  the  spine.*  Thus  he  has 
a  curious  statement  as  regards  paralysis,  that  in 
the  case  of  any  sensational  point  below  the  head, 
e.  g.  from  the  membrane  of  the  spinal  marrow  being 
affected  injuriously,  the  parts  on  the  right  side  will 
be  paralysed  if  the  nerve  towards  the  right  side  be 
hurt,  and  similarly,  conversely,  of  the  left  side;  but 
that  if  the  head  itself  be  so  affected,  the  inverse  law 
of  consequence  holds  concerning  the  parts  related, 
since  each  nerve  passes  over  to  the  other  side  from 
that  of  its  origin,  decussating  each  other  in  the 
form  of  the  letter  X.  The  doctrine  of  the  Pneuma, 
or  etherial  principle  existing  in  the  microcosm  by 
yhich  the  mind  performs  all  the  functions  of  the 
oody,  holds  a  more  prominent  position  in  the 
works  of  Aretaeus  than  in  those  of  any  of  the 
other  authorities  (Dr.  Adams'  pref.  to  Aret.  pp. 
x.  xi.).  He  was  aware  that  the  nervous  function 
of  sensation  was  distinct  from  the  motive  power; 
that  either  might  cease  and  the  other  continue. 
His  pharmacopoeia  is  copious  and  reasonable,  and 
the  limits  of  the  usefulness  of  this  or  that 
drug  are  laid  down  judiciously.  He  makes  large 
use  of  wine,»  and  prescribing  the  kind  and  the 
number  of  cyathi  to  be  taken ;  and  some  words  of  his 
on  «tomach  disorders  (irepl  KapSia\ylrjs)  forcibly 
recall  those  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy  (1  Tim.  v. 
23),  and  one  might  almost  suppose  them  to  have 
been  suggested  by  the  intenser  spirituality  of  his 
Je-yish  or  Christian  patients.  "  Such  disorders, 
he  says,  "  are  common  to  those  who  toil  in  teach 
ing,  whose  yearning  is  after  divine  instruction,  who 
despise  delicate  and  varied  diet,  whose  nourishment 
is  fasting,  and  whose  drink  is  water."  And  as  a 
purge  of  melancholy  he  prescribes  "  a  little  wine, 
and  some  other  more  liberal  sustenance."  In  his 


MEDICINE 

essay  ov.  Kausus,  or  "brain"'  fever,  he  describe 
the  powers  acquired  by  the  soul  before  dissolution 
in  the  following  remarkable  words :  "  Every  sense 
is  pure,  the  intellect  acute,  the  gnostic  powei-s  pro 
phetic  ;  for  they  prognosticate  to  themselves  in  the 
first  place  their  own  departure  from  life ;  then  they 
foretell  what  will  afterwards  take  place  to  those 
present,  who  fancy  sometimes  that  they  are  delirious : 
but  these  persons  wonder  at  the  result  of  what  has 
been  said.  Others,  also,  talk  to  certain  of  the  dead, 
perchance  they  alone  perceiving  them  to  be  present, 
in  virtue  of  their  acute  and  pure  sense,  or  perchance 
from  their  soul  seeing  beforehand,  and  announcing 
the  men  with  whom  they  are  about  to  associate. 
For  formerly  they  were  immersed  in  humours,  as  if 
in  mud  and  darkness  ;  but  when  the  disease  has 
drained  these  off,  and  taken  away  the  mist  from 
their  eyes,  they  perceive  those  things  which  are  in 
the  air,  and  through  the  soul  being  unencumbered 
become  true  prophets."  u  To  those  who  wish  fur 
ther  to  pursue  the  study  of  medicine  at  this  era 
the  edition  of  Aretaeus  by  the  Sydenham  Society, 
and  in  a  less  degree  that  by  Boerhaave,  (Lugd.  Bat. 
1735),  to  which  the  references  have  here  been 
made,  may  be  recommended. 

As  the  general  science  of  medicine  and  surgery  of 
this  period  may  be  represented  by  Aretaeus,  &o  we 
have  nearly  a  representation  of  its  Materia  Medica 
by  Dioscorides.  He  too  was  of  the  same  general 
region — a  Cilician  Greek — and  his  first  lessons  were 
probably  learnt  at  Tarsus.  His  period  is  tinged  by 
the  same  uncertainty  as  that  of  Aretaeus ;  but  lie 
has  usually  been  assigned  to  the  end  of  the  1st 
or  beginning  of  the  2nd  century  (see  Diet,  of  Biog. 
and  Mythol.  s.  v.).  He  was  the  first  author  of 
high  mark  who  devoted  his  attention  to  Materia 
Medica.  Indeed  this  branch  of  ancient  science  re 
mained  as  he  left  it  till  the  times  of  the  Arabnus; 
and  these,  though  they  enlarged  the  supply  of  drugs 
aud  pharmacy,  yet  copy  and  repeat  Dioscorides,  as 
indeed  Galen  himself  often  does,  on  all  common 
subject  matter.  Above  90  minerals,  700  pini.ts, 
and  168  animal  substances,  are  said  to  be  described 
in  the  researches  of  Dioscorides,  displaying  an 
industry  and  skill  which  has  remained  the  marvel 
of  all  subsequent  commentators.  Pliny,  copious 
rare,  and  curious  as  he  is,  yet  for  want  of  scientific 
medical  knowledge,  is  little  esteemed  in  this  parti 
cular  branch,  save  when  he  follows  Dioscondes. 
The  third  volume  of  Paulus  Aegin.  (ed.  Sydenham 
Soc.),  contains  a  catalogue  of  medicines  simple  and 
compound,  and  the  large  proportion  in  which  the 
authority  of  Dioscorides  has  contributed  to  form  it, 
will  be  manifest  at  the  most  cursory  inspectkn. 
To  abridge  such  a  subject  is  impossible,  and  to 
transcribe  it  in  the  most  meagre  form  would  be  far 
beyond  the  limits  of  this  article. 

Before  proceeding  to  the  examination  of  diseases 
in  detail,  it  may  be  well  to  observe  that  the  ques 
tion  of  identity  between  any  ancient  malady  known 
by  description,  and  any  modem  one  known  by  ex 
perience,  is  often  doubtful.  Some  diseases,  just  as 
some  plants  and  some  animals,  will  exist  almost  any 
where  ;  others  can  only  be  produced  within  narrow 
limits  depending  on  the  conditions  of  climate, 


1  Ta.fi.vtiv  TT/IV  rpi'xoSa  ical  TOV  TJ)S  KVITTI&OS  Tpa\ii\.ov. 

*  Sprengel  (lib.  sup.  ir.  62-5)  thinks  that  an  approxi 
mately  right  conception  of  the  nervous  system  was  attained 
by  Hierophilus  of  the  Alexandrian  school  of  medicine. 

•  Galen  (ffyg.  v.)  strenuously  recommends  the  use  of 
tvinc  to  the  aged,  stating  the  wiucs  best  adapted  to  them. 


Even  Plato  (Leg.  ii.)  allows  old  men  thus  to  restore  theii 
youth,  and  correct  the  austerity  of  age. 

»  So  Sir  H.  Halford  renders  it,  Essay  VI.,  in  which 
occur  some  valuable  comments  on  the  subject  treated  b) 
Aretucus. 

"  Arct.  tie  Sign  et  Caut.  Morb.  Acut.  II.  4. 


MEDICINE 

nabit,  &t. ;  and  were  only  equal  observation  applied 
to  the  two,  the  habitat  of  a  disease  might  be  mapped 
as  accurately  as  that  of  a  plant.  It  is  also  possible 
that  some  diseases  once  extensively  prevalent,  may 
run  their  course  and  die  out,  or  occur  only  cr- 
sually ;  just  as  it  seems  certain  that,  since  the 
middle  ages,  some  maladies  have  been  introduced 
into  Europe  which  were  previously  unknown  (£i- 
blioth.  Script.  Med.  Genev.  1731,  s.  v. ;  Hippocrates, 
Celsus,  Galen ;  Leolerc's  History  of  Med.  Par.  1 723, 
transl.  Lond.  1699;  Freind's  History  of  Med.). 

Eruptive  diseases  of  the  acute  kind  are  more  pre 
valent  in  the  East  than  in  colder  climes.  They 
also  run  their  course  more  rapidly ;  e.  g.  common 
itch,  which  in  Scotland  remains  for  a  longer  time 
vesicular,  becomes,  in  Syria,  pustular  as  early 
sometimes  as  the  third  day.  The  origin  of  it  is 
now  supposed  to  be  an  acarus,  but  the  parasite  pe 
rishes  when  removed  from  the  skin.  Disease  of 
various  kinds  is  commonly  regarded  as  a  divine  in 
fliction,  or  denounced  as  a  penalty  for  transgression ; 
"  the  evil  diseases  of  Egypt "  (perhaps  in  reference 
to  some  of  the  ten  plagues)  are  especially  so  charac 
terised  (Gen.  xx.  18;  Ex.  xv.  26;  Lev.  xxvi.  16; 
Deut.  vii.  15,  xxviii.  60 ;  1  Cor.  xi.  30) ;  so  the 
emerods  (see  EMERODS)  *  of  the  Philistines  (1  Sam. 
v.  6);  the  severe  dysentery  f  (2  Chr.  xxi.  15, 19)  of 
Jehoram,  which  was  also  epidemic  [BLOOD,  ISSUE 
OF;  and  FEVER],  the  peculiar  symptom  of  which 
may  perhaps  have  been  prolapsus  ani  (Dr.  Mason 
Good,  i.  311-13,  mentions  a  case  of  the  entire  colon 
exposed)  ;  or,  perhaps,  what  is  known  as  diarrhoea 
tvbularis,  formed  by  the  coagulation  of  fibrine  into 
a  membrane  discharged  from  the  inner  coat  of 
the  intestines,  which  takes  the  mould  of  the  bowel, 
and  is  thus  expelled  (Kitto,  s.  v.  "  Diseases  ")  ;  so  the 
sudden  deaths  of  Er,  Onan  (Gen.  xxxviii.  7,  10),  the 
Egyptian  first-born  (Ex.  xi.  4,  5),  Nabal,  Bathshe- 
ba's  son,  and  Jeroboam's  (1  Sam.xxv.  38  ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  15;  1  K.  xiv.  1,  5),  are  ascribed  to  action  of  Je 
hovah  immediately,  or  through  a  prophet.  Pestilence 
(Hab.  iii.  5)  attends  His  path  (comp.  2  Sam.  xxiv. 
15),  and  is  innoxious  to  those  whom  He  shelters  (Ps. 
xci.  3-iO).  It  is  by  Jeremiah,  Ezckiel,  and  Amos 
associated  (as  historically  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  13)  with 
"  the  sword"  and  "  famine"  Jer.  xiv.  12,  xv.  2, 
xxi.  7,  9,  xxiv.  10,  xxvii.  8,  13,  xxviii.  8,  xxix. 
17,  18,  xxxii.  24,  36,  xxxiv.  17,  xxxviii.  2,  xlii. 
17,  22,  xliv.  13;  Ez.  v.  12,  17,  vi.  11,  12, 
vii.  15,  xii.  16,  xiv.  21,  xxxiii.  27  ;  Am.  iv.  6, 10). 

*  To  the  authorities  there  adduced  may  be  added  some 
remarks  by  Michel  Levy  (TraM  d'Hygiene,  206-1).  who 
ft«.ribes  them  to  a  plethoric  state  producing  a  congestion 
ot  the  veins  of  the  rectum,  and  followed  by  piles.  Blood 
is  discharged  from  them  periodically  or  continuously; 
thus  the  plethora  is  relieved,  and  hence  the  ancient 
opinion  that  hemorrhoids  were  beneficial.  Sanguineous 
flux  of  the  part  may,  however,  arise  from  other  causes 
than  these  varices— e.  g.  ulceration,  cancer,  &c.,  of  rectum. 
Wunderbar  (Bib.  Talm.  Med.  iii.  17  d)  mentions  a  blood 
less  kind,  distinguished  by  the  Talmudists  as  even  more 
dangerous,  and  these  he  supposes  meant  in  1  Sam. 
v.  To  these  is  added  (vi.  5,  11,  18)  a  mention  of 
D>%)33y.  (A.  V.  "  mice ;")  but  according  to  Lichtenstein 
<in  Eichhorn's  Mblioth.  vi.  407-66)  a  venomous  solpuga 
is  with  some  plausibility  intended,  so  large,  and  so 
similar  in  form  to  a  mouse,  as  to  admit  of  its  being 
denominated  by  the  same  word.  It  is  said  to  destroy  and 
Ive  upon  scorpions,  and  to  attack  in  the  parts  alluded  to. 
I'he  reference  given  is  FUny,  H.  y.  xxix.  4 ;  but  Pliny 
gives  merely  the  name,  ••  solpuga :"  the  rest  of  the  state- 
dent  tods  no  foundation  in  him.  See  below,  p.  305ft. 


MEDICINE 


301 


The  sicknesses  of  the  widow's  son  of  Za.'uphath,  of 
Ahaziah,  Benhadad,  the  leprosy  of  Uzziah,  the  boil 
of  Hezekiah,  are  also  noticed  as  diseases  sent  by  Je 
hovah,  or  in  which  He  interposed,  1  K.  xvii.  17,  20  ; 
2  K.  i.  3,  xx.  1.  In  2  Sam.  iii.  29,  disease  is  ia 
voked  as  a  curse,  and  in  Solomon's  prayer,  1  K. 
viii.  37  (comp.  2  Chr.  xx.  9),  anticipated  as  a  chas 
tisement.  Job  and  his  friends  agree  in  ascribing 
his  disease  to  divine  infliction;  but  the  latter  urge 
his  sins  as  the  cause.  So,  conversely,  the  healing 
character  of  God  is  invoked  or  promised,  Ps.  vi.  2, 
xii.  3,  ciii.  3;  Jer  xxx.  17.  Satanic  agency  appears 
also  as  procuring  disease,  Job  ii.  7  ;  Luke  xiii.  11, 
16.  Diseases  are  also  mentioned  as  ordinary  calami 
ties,  e.  g.  the  sickness  of  old  age,  headache  (perhaps 
by  sunstroke),  as  that  of  the  Shunammite's  son, 
that  of  Elisha,  and  that  of  Benhadad,  and  that  ot 
Joram,Gen.  xlviii.  1  ;  1  Sam.  xxx.  13;  2  K.iv.  20, 
viii.  7,  29,  xiii.  14;  2  Chr.  xxii.  6. 

Among  special  diseases  named  in  the  0.  T.  are, 
ophthalmia  (Gen.  xxix.  17,  D^J/  Irfot?),  which 

is  perhaps  more  common  in  Syria  and  Egypt  than 
anywhere  else  in  the  world ;  especially  in  the  fig 
season,1  the  juice  of  the  newly-ripe  fruit  having  the 
power  of  giving  it.  It  may  occasion  partial  or  total 
blindness  (2  K.  vi.  18).  The  eye-salve  (KO\\I>PIOV, 
Rev.  iii.  18 ;  Hor.  Sat.  i.),  was  a  remedy  common 
to  Orientals,  Greeks,  and  Romans  (see  Hippocr. 
KO\Ko{>piov ;  Celsus,  vi.  8,  de  oculorum  morbis, 
(2)  de  diversis  collyriis).  Other  diseases  are— r-barren- 
ness  of  women,  which  mandrakes  were  supposed  to 
have  the  power  of  correcting  (Gen.  xx.  18;  comp. 
xii.  17,  xxx.  1,  2,  14-16)  — "  consumption,"5 
and  several,  the  names  of  which  are  derived  from 
various  words,  signifying  to  burn  or  to  be  hot 
(Lev.  xxvi.  16;  Deut.  xxviii.  22;  see  FEVER); 
compare  the  kinds  of  fever  distinguished  by  Hippo 
crates  as  Kavffos  and  irvp.  The  "  burning  boil," 
or  "of  a  boil"  (Lev.  xiii.  23,  priori  HITS, 
LXX.  ov\^i  TOV  f  A/COM)  is  again  meiely  marked 
by  the  notion  of  an  effect  resembling  that  of  fire, 
like  the  Greek  fyXeypjOvi],  or  our  '•  carbuncle  ;"  it 
may  possibly  rind  an  equivalent  in  the  Damascus 
boil  of  the  present  time.  The  "  botch  (pnK>)  of 

Egypt"  (Deut.  xxviii.  27),  is  so  vague  a  term  as 
to  yield  a  most  uncertain  sense  ;  the  plague,  as 
known  by  its  attendant  bubo,  has  been  suggested 
by  Scheuchzer.b  It  is  possible  that  the  Elephantiasis 


Wunderbar  (Sttes  Heft,  p.  19)  has  another  interpretation 
of  the  "  mice." 

y  See  a  singular  quotation  from  the  Talmud  Shabbath, 
82,  concerning  the  effect  of  tenesmus  on  the  sphincter, 
Wunderbar,  Bib.-Tal.  Med.  Sites  Heft,  p.  17.  The  Tal 
mudists  say  that  those  who  die  of  such  sickness  as  Je- 
horain's  die  painfully,  but  with  full  consciousness. 

1  Comp.  Hippocr.  jrepi.  oi^ios.  a.  b<|>0aAn.i7)S  T>JS  en-e- 
reiov  KOI  ei>8rnj.iov  fuf*<Kpei  Kadapar^  <ce<f>aA»js  KO.I  TJ)S 

KO.TIO    KOlAl'jJS. 

»  Possibly  the  pulmonary  tuberculation  of  the  West, 
which  is  not  unknown  in  Syria,  and  common  enough  in 
Smyrna  and  in  Egypt.  The  word  J")SnB>  is  from  a  root 
meaning  "to  waste  away."  In  Zech.  xiv.  12  a  plague  is 
described  answering  to  um>  Jieaning, — an  intense  emacia 
tion  or  atrophy ;  although  no  link  of  causation  is  hinted  at, 
such  sometimes  results  from  severe  internal  abscesses. 

b  It  should  be  noted  that  Hippocrates,  in  his  £pidemict, 
makes  mention  of  fevers  attended  with  buboes,  which 
affords  presumption  in  favour  of  plague  being  not  un 
known.  It  is  at  any  rate  as  old  as  the  1st  century,  A.D 
See  Littre's  Hippocrates,  torn.  ii.  p.  585,  and  iii.  p.  5.  The 


302 


MEDICINE 


Qratsorwn  may  be  intended  by  )T1K>,  understood 
in  the  widest  sense  of  a  continued  ulceration 
nntil  the  whole  body,  or  the  portion  affected, 
may  be  regarded  as  one  fTTCP.  Of  this  disease 
»me  further  notice  will  be  taken  below  ;  at  pre 
sent  it  is  observable  that  the  same  word  is  used 
to  express  the  "  boil "  of  Hezekiah.  This  was  cer 
tainly  a  single  locally  confined  eruption,  and  was 
probably  a  carbuncle,  one  of  which  may  well  be 
fatal,  though  a  single  "  boil "  in  our  sense  of  the 
word  seldom  is  so.  Dr.  Mead  supposes  it  to  have 
been  a  fever  terminating  in  an  abscess.  The  diseases 
rendered  "scab"c  and  "scurvy"  in  Lev.  xxi.  20, 
xxii.  22,  Deut.  xxviii.  27,  may  be  almost  any  skin 
disease,  such  as  those  known  under  the  names  of 
lepra,  psoriaris, pityriasis,  icthyosis, favus,  or  common 
itch.  Some  of  these  may  be  said  to  approach  the  type 
of  leprosy  [LEPROSY]  as  laid  down  in  Scripture, 
although  they  do  not  appear  to  have  involved  cere 
monial  defilement,  but  only  a  blemish  disqualifying 
for  the  priestly  office.  The  quality  of  being  incurable 
is  added  as  a  special  curse,  for  these  diseases  are  not 
generally  so,  or  at  any  rate  are  common  in  milder 
forms.  The  "  running  of  the  reins"  (Lev.  xv.  2, 
3,  xxii.  4,  marg.)  may  perhaps  mean  gonorrhoea.* 
If  we  compare  Num.  xxv.  1,  xxxi.  7  with  Josh, 
xxii.  17,  there  is  ground  for  thinking  that  some 
disease  of  this  class,  derived  from  polluting  sexual 
intercourse,  remained  among  the  people.  The 
"issue"  of  xv.  19,  may  be  [BLOOD,  ISSUE  OF] 
the  menorrkagia,  the  duration  of  which  in  the  East 
is  sometimes,  when  not  checked  by  remedies,  for 
an  indefinite  period  (Matt.  ix.  20),  or  uterine  he 
morrhage  from  other  causes.  In  Deut.  xxviii.  35,  is 
mentioned  a  disease  attacking  the  "  knees  and  legs," 
consisting  in  a  "  sore  botch  which  cannot  be  healed," 
but  extended,  in  the  sequel  of  the  verse,  from  the 
"sole  of  the  foot  to  the  top  of  the  head."  The 
latter  part  of  the  quotation  would  certainly  accord 
with  Elephantiasis  Graecorum;  but  this,  if  the 


MEDICINE 

whole  verse  be  a  mere  continuation  of  one  Jpsrnkvl 
malady,  \vould  be  in  contradiction  to  the  fact  that 
this  disease  commences  in  the  face,  not  in  the  lower 
members.  On  the  other  hand,  a  disease  which 
affects  the  knees  and  legs,  or  more  commonly  one  of 
them  only — its  principal  feature  being  intumescence, 
distorting  and  altering  all  the  proportions — is  by  a 
mere  accident  of  language  known  as  Elephantiasis  • 
Arabum,  Bucnemia  Tropica  (Rayer,  vol.  iii.  820- 
841),  or  "  Barbadoes  leg,"  from  being  well  known 
in  that  island.  Supposing,  however,  that  the  affec 
tion  of  the  knees  and  legs  is  something  distinct, 
and  that  the  latter  part  of  the  description  applies 
to  the  Elephantiasis  Graecorum,1  the  incurable 
and  the  all-pervading  character  of  the  malady 
are  well  expressed  by  it.  This  disease  is  what 
now  passes  under  the  name  of  "  leprosy  " 
(Michaelis,  iii.  259)— the  lepers,  e.g.  of  the  huts 
near  the  Zion  gate  of  modern  Jerusalem  are 
elephantisiacs.8  It  has  been  asserted  that  there 
are  two  kinds,  one  painful,  the  other  painless ;  but 
as  regards  Syria  and  the  East  this  is  contradicted. 
There  the  parts  affected  are  quite  benumbed  and 
lose  sensation.  It  is  classed  as  a  tubercular  disease, 
not  confined  to  the  skin,  but  pervading  the  tissues 
and  destroying  the  bones.  It  is  not  confined  to 
any  age  or  either  sex.  It  first  appears  in  general, 
but  not  always,  about  the  face,  as  an  indurated 
nodule  (hence  it  is  improperly  called  tubercular), 
which  gradually  enlarges,  inflames,  and  ulcerates. 
Sometimes  it  commences  in  the  neck  or  arms.  The 
ulcers  will  heal  spontaneously,  but  only  after  a  long 
period,  and  after  destroying  a  great  deal  of  the 
neighbouring  parts.  If  a  joint  be  attacked,  the 
ulceration  will  go  on  till  its  destruction  is  com 
plete,  the  joints  of  finger,  toe,  &c.,  dropping  off  one 
by  one.  Frightful  dreams  and  fetid  breath  are 
symptoms  mentioned  by  some  pathologists.  More 
nodules  will  develope  themselves ;  and,  if  the  face 
be  the  chief  seat  of  the  disease,  it  assumes  a  leonine  h 
aspect,  loathsome  and  hideous ;  the  skin  becomes 


plague  is  referred  to  by  writers  of  the  1st  century,  viz. 
i'oscidonius  and  Rufus. 

o  Their  terms  in  the  respective  versions  are : — 
3^3  >          \jjwpa  aypia,        scabies  juyis. 

f\u?^t       Aeixi}",  impetigo. 

«>  Or  more'  probably  blennorrhoen  (mucous  discharge). 
The  existence  of  gonorrhoea  in  early  times — save  in  the 
mild  form — has  been  much  disputed.  Michel  Levy  ( Traiti 
d' Hygiene,  p.  7)  considers  the  affismative  as  established 
by  the  above  passage,  and  says  of  syphilis,  "  Qne  pour 
notre  part,  nous  n'avons  jamais  pu  considerer  comme 
one  nouveaute  du  xv.e  siecle."  He  certainly  gives  some 
strong  historical  evidence  against  the  view  that  it  was 
introduced  into  France  by  Spanish  troops  under  Gonzalvo 
de  Cordova  on  their  return  from  the  Xew  World,  and  so 
into  the  rest  of  Europe,  where  it  was  known  as  the 
morbus  Gallicus.  He  adds,  "  La  syphilis  est  perdue  con- 
fusement  dans  la  pathologic  ancienne  par  la  dlversite  de 
ties  symptdmes  et  de  ses  alterations ;  leur  interpretation 
collective,  et  leur  redaction  en  une  seule  unite  morblde, 
a  fait  croire  a  1'introduction  d'une  malodle  nouvelle."  See 
also  Frelud's  History  of  Med.,  Dr.  Mead,  Michaelis,  Reia- 
hart  (Sibelkrankheiten),  Schmidt  (Biblischer  Med.),  and 
others.  Wunderbar  (Bib.-Talm.  lied.  Hi.  20,  comment- 
Ing  on  Lev.  xv.,  and  comparing  Mishnu,  Zabim,  11.  2,  and 
Maimon.  ad  Zoc.)  thinks  that  gonorrhoea  benigna  was  ii) 
the  mind  of  the  latter  writers.  Dr.  Adams,  the  editor  of 
Paul.  Aegin.  (Sydenh.  Soc.,  ii.  14),  considers  syphilis  a 
modified  form  of  elephantiasis.  For  all  ancient  notices 
af  the  cognate  diseases  see  that  work,  i.  593  foil. 

•  The  Arabs  call  Elephantiasis  Graecoi~um  ^'t,3o»» 


(judli&m)  =  mutilation,  from  the  gradual  dropping  off 
of  the  joints  of  the  extremities.  They  give  to  E.  Arabum 

the  name  of  \usiJl  j:ta>  Dd'l-fi  I  =  morbus  elephas, 
from  the  leg  when  swelled  resembling  that  of  the  animal ; 
but  the  latter  disease  Is  quite  distinct  from  the  former. 

f  For  its  ancient  description  see  Celsus,  iii.  25,  de  Kit- 
phantiasi.  Galen  (de  Arte  CuratoriA  ad  Glaucon,  lib.  ii. 
de  Cancro  et  Eleph.)  recommends  viper's  lesh,  gives  anec 
dotes  of  cases,  and  adds  that  the  disordei  was  common  in 
Alexandria.  In  Hippocr.  (Prorrhetic.  ii.  ap.  fin.)  ii 
mentioned  ^  vouaos  ri  <J>BIVIKTI  icaAeo/ien),  but  in  the 
glossary  of  Galen  is  found,  17  4>oivi<ctT)  vovtros-  ^  xard 
*oivi(C7)i'  KOI  Kara  ra  avaroAuca  /xe'pr)  JrAeora'fovcra. 
ATjAovcrOai  Se  KavravSa  Soxei  T;  cAc<£>aiTi'a<ris. 

g  Schilling  de  Lepra,  Animadv.  in  Ousselium  ad 
Jxix,  says,  "persuasum  habeo  lepram  ab  elephantin.-l 
non  dlfferre  nisi  gradn;  ad  $xxlii.  he  illustrates  Num. 
xii.  12,  by  his  own  experience,  In  dissecting  a  woman  dead 
in  childbed,  as  follows : — "  Corrupt!  fetus  dimidin  pars  in 
utero  sdhuc  haerebat.  Aperto  utero  tarn  immanis  sparge- 
batur  fetor,  ut  non  solum  omnes  adstantes  aufugerent," 
&c.  He  thinks  that  the  point  of  Moses'  simile  Is  the 
Ul  odonr,  which  he  ascribes  to  lepers,  t.  e.  elephantisiacs. 

k  Hence  called  also  I^eontiasis.  Many  have  attributed 
to  these  wretched  creatures  a  libido  inexpltbilis  (see 
Proceedings  of  Med.  and  Chirurg.  Soc.  of  London,  Jon. 
I860,  ill.  164,  from  which  some  of  the  above  remarks  are 
taken).  This  is  denied  by  Dr.  Robert  Sun  (from  a  close 
study  of  the  disease  In  Jerusalem),  save  in  so  far  of 
idleness  and  inactivity,  with  animal  wants  snpptod 
may  conduce  to  it. 


MEDiCINB 

thick,  rugose,  and  livid ;  the  eyes  are  fierce  mid 
staring,  and  the  hair  generally  falls  oft'  irom  all  the 
parts  affected.  When,  the  throat  is  attacked  the  voice 
shares  the  affection,  and  sinks  to  a  hoarse,  husky 
whisper.  These  two  symptoms  are  eminently  cha 
racteristic.  The  patient  will  become  bed-ridden, 
and,  though  a  mass  of  bodily  corruption,  seem 
happy  and  contented  with  his  sad  condition,  until 
sinking  exhausted  under  the  ravages  of  the  disease, 
he  is  generally  carried  off,  at  least  in  Syria,  by 
diarrhoea.  It  is  hereditary,  and  may  be  inocu 
lated,  but  does  not  propagate  itself  by  the  closest 
contact  ;l  e.  g.  two  women  in  the  aforesaid  icper- 
huts  remained  uncontaminated  though  their  hus 
bands  were  both  affected,  and  yet  the  children 
born  to  them  were,  like  the  fathers,  elephantisiac, 
and  became  so  in  early  life.  On  the  children  of 
diseased  parents  a  watch  for  the  appearance  of  the 
malady  is  kept ;  but  no  one  is  afraid  of  infection, 
and  the  neighbours  mix  freely  with  them,  though, 
like  the  lepers  of  the  0.  T.,  they  live  "  in  a 
several  house."  It  became  first  prevalent  in  Eu 
rope  during  the  crusades,  and  by  their  means  was 
diffused,  and  the  ambiguity  of  designating  it  leprosy 
then  originated,  and  has  been  generally  since  re 
tained.  Pliny  (Nat.  Hist.  xxvi.  5)  asserts  that  it 
was  unknown  in  Italy  till  the  time  of  Pompey  the 
Great,  when  it  was  imported  from  Egypt,  but  soon 
became  extinct  (Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.  ii.  6). 
It  is,  however,  broadly  distinguished  from  the 
\eirpa,  Aeu/CTj,  &c.  of  the  Greeks  by  name  and 
symptoms,  no  less  than  by  Roman  medical  and  even 
popular  writers  ;  comp.  Lucretius,  whose  mention 
of  it  is  the  earliest — 

"  Eat  elephas  morbus,  qui  propter  flumina  Nili, 
Gignltur  Aegypto  in  media,  neque  praeterea  usquam." 
It  is  nearly  extinct  in  Europe,  save  in  Spain  and 
Norway.    A  case  was  seen  lately  in  the  Crimea,  but 
may  have  been  produced  elsewhere.     It  prevails  in 
Turkey  and  the  Greek  Archipelago.    One  case,  how 
ever,  indigenous  in  England,  is  recorded  amongst 
the    medical   fac-similes    at   Guy's   Hospital.      In 
Granada  it  was  generally  fatal  after  eight  or  ten 
years,  whatever  the  treatment. ' 

This  favours  the  correspondence  of  this  disease 
with  one  of  those  evil  diseases  of  Egypt,k  possibly 
its  "  botch,"  threatened  Deut.  xxviii.  27,  35.  This 
"  botch,"  however,  seerns  more  probably  to  mean 
the  foul  ulcer  mentioned  by  Aretaeus  (de  Sign,  et 
Cans.  Morb.  Acut.  i.  9),  and  called  by  him  &<f>0a 
or  tffxdpfi.  He  ascribes  its  frequency  in  Egypt  to 
the  mixed  vegetable  diet  there  followed,  and  to  the 
use  of  the  turbid  water  of  the  Nile,  but  adds  that  it 
is  common  in  Coelo-Syria.  The  Talmud  speaks  o 
the  Elephantiasis  (Baba  Kama,  80  b.)  as  being 
"moist  without  and  dry  within"  (Wunderbar, 
Biblisch-Talmudische  Med.  3ttes  Heft,  10,  11) 
Advanced  cases  are  said  to  have  a  cancerous  aspect 
and  some™  even  class  it  as  a  form  of  cancer,  a  dis- 
easj  dependent  on  faults  of  nutrition.  It  has  beei 


MEDICINE 


303 


asserted  that  this,  which  is  perhaps  the  mostcre&dfuJ 
disease  of  the   East,   was  Job's  malady.     Origeu, 
Hexapla  on  Job  ii.  7,  mentions,  that  one  of  the 
Greek  versions  gives  it,  loc.  cit.,  as  the  affliction 
which  befel  him.     Wunderbar  (ut  sup.  p.  10)  sup 
poses  it  to  have  been  the  Tynan  leprosy,  resting 
chiefly  on  the  itching"  implied,  as  he  supposes,  by 
'ob  ii.  7,   8.     Schmidt  (Biblischer  Med.  iv.   4) 
hinks  the  "  sore  boil "  may  indicate  some  graver  ° 
lisease,  or  concurrence  of  diseases.     But  there  is  no 
iced  to   go   beyond   the   statement   of  Scripture, 
which  speaks  not  only  of  this  "  boil,"  but  of  "skin 
oathsome  and  broken,"  "  covered  with  worms  and 
Jods  of  dust ;"  the  second  symptom  is  the  result 
f  the  first,  and  the  "  worms "  are  probably  the 
arvae  of  some  fly,  known  so  to  infest  and  makt- 
ts  nidus  in  any  wound  or  sore  exposed  to  the  air, 
and  to  increase  rapidly  in  size.      The  "  clods  of 
dust "  would  of  course  follow  from  his  "  sitting 
n  asnes."     The  "  breath  strange  to  his  wife,"  if  it 
>e  not  a  figurative  expression  for  her  estrangement 
rom  him,  may  imply  a  fetor,  which  in  such  a  state 
of  body  hardly  requires  explanation.     The  expres 
sion  my  "  bowels  boiled  "  (xxx.  27),  may  refer  to 
;he  burning  sensation  in  the  stomach  and  bowels, 
caused  by  acrid  bile,    <vhieh  is  common  in  ague. 
Aretaeus  (de  Cur.  Morb.  Acut.  ii.  3)  has  a  similar 
expression,  depficurlT)  Ttav   (nr\<iy)(y<av   olov   airb 
upbs,  as  attending  syncope. 

The  "  scaring  dreams  "  and  "terrifying  visions," 
are  perhaps  a  mere  symptom  P  of  the  state  of  mind 
bewildered  by  unaccountable  afflictions.  The  in 
tense  emaciation  was  (xxxiii.  21)  perhaps  the  mere 
result  of  protracted  sickness. 

The  disease  of  king  Antiochus  (2  Mace.  ix.  5-10, 
&c.)  is  that  of  a  boil  breeding  worms  (ulcus  vermino- 
sum).  So  Sulla,  Pherecydes,  and  Alcman  the  poet  are 
mentioned  (Plut.  vita  Sullae)  as  similar  cases.  The 
examples  of  both  the  Herods  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  6, 
§5,  B.J.  i.  33,  §5)  may  also  be  adduced,  as  that  of 
Pheretime  (Herod,  iv.  205).  There  is  some  doubt 
whether  this  disease  be  not  allied  to  phthiriasis, 
in  which  lice  are  bred,  and  cause  ulcers.  This  con 
dition  may  originate  either  in  a  sore,  or  in  a  morbid 
habit  of  body  brought  on  by  uncleanliness,  sup 
pressed  perspiration,  or  neglect ;  but  the  vermina 
tion,  if  it  did  not  commence  in  a  sore,  would  pro 
duce  one.  Dr.  Mason  Good,  (iv.  504-6),  speaking  of 
p.d\is,  fj.a\iacrfj.6s  =  cutaneous  vermination,  men 
tions  a  case  in  the  Westminster  Infirmary,  and  an 
opinion  that  universal  phthiriasis  was  no  unfrequent 
disease  among  the  ancients  ;  he  also  states  (p.  500) 
that  in  gangrenous  ulcers,  especially  in  warm  cli 
mates,  innumerable  grubs  or  maggots  will  appeal- 
almost  every  morning.  The  camel,  and  other 
creatures,  are  known  to  be  the  habitat  of  similar 
parasites.  There  are  also  cases  cf  vermination 
without  any  wound  or  faulty  outward  state,  such  as 
the  Vena  Medinensis,  known  in  Africa  as  the  Guinea- 
worm, "I  of  which  Galen  had  heard  only,  breeding 


I  Jahn  (lleb.  Ant.,  Upham's  translation,  p.  206)  denie 
this. 

k  The  editor  of  Paul.  Aegin.  (Sydenham  Society,  il.  14 
is  convinced  that  the  syphilis  of  modern  times  is  a  mo 
dilied  form  of  the  elephantiasis. 

"»  Such  is  the  opinion  of  Dr.  R.  Sim,  expressed  in 
private  letter  to  the  writer.  But  see  a  letter  of  his  i 
tied.  Times  and  Gazette,  April  14,  1860. 

II  The  suppuration,  &c.,  of  ulcers,  appears  at  leas 
nqnally  likely  to  be  intended. 

•  Hi-  refers  to  Hippccr.  f,ib.  de  Med.  toni.  viii.  /leif. 


P  Hippocrates  mentions,  ii.  514,  ed.  Kiihn,  Lips.  1826, 
as  a  symptom  of  fever,  that  the  patient  <£o/3e'eT<u  an-b 
evvirvitov.  See  also  1.  592,  irepi  iepijs  voffov  .  .  .  Sfinara 

WKTOS    KO.I    l/)0j3oi. 

1  Rayer,  vol.  iii.  808-819  gives  a  list  of  parasites,  most 
of  them  in  the  skin.  This  "  Guinea-worm,"  it  appears, 
is  also  found  in  Arabia  Petraea,  on  the  coasts  of  the 
Caspian  and  Persian  Gulf,  on  the  Ganges,  in  Upper 
Egypt  and  Abyssinia  (ib.  814).  Pr.  Mead  refers  Herod's 
disease  to  evrofiaa,  or  intestinal  worms.  Shapter,  withcul 
due  foundation,  objects  that  the  word  in  that  case  should 
have  been  not  o-KuAjjf ,  but  ev\rj  (Medica  Sacra,  p.  188). 


304 


MEDICINE 


".nder  the  skin  and  needing  to  be  drawn  out  care 
fully  by  a  needlo,  lest  it  break,  when  great  soreness 
arid  suppuration  succeed  (Freind,  Hist,  of  Med.  i. 
49  ;  Do  Mandelslo's  Travels,  p.  4  ;  and  Paul.  Aegin. 
t.  iv.  Sydenh.  Soc.  ed.). 

In  Deut.  xxviii.  65,  it  is  possible  that  a  palpi 
tation  of  the  heart  is  intended  to  be  spoken  of 
(oomp.  Gen.  xiv.  26).  In  Mark  ix.  17  (compare 
Luke  ix.  38)  we  have  an  apparent  case  of  epilepsy, 
shown  especially  in  the  foaming,  falling,  wallowing, 
and  similar  violent  symptoms  mentioned  ;  this  might 
easily  be  a  form  of  demoniacal  manifestation.  The 
case  of  extreme  hunger  recorded,  1  Sam.  xiv.,  was 
merely  the  result  of  exhaustive  fatigue  ;  but  it  is 
remarkable  that  the  Bulimia  of  which  Xenophon 
speaks  (Anah.  iv.  5,  7),  was  remedied  by  an  appli 
cation  in  which  "honey"  (comp.  1  Sam.  xiv.  27) 
was  the  chief  ingredient. 

Besides  the  common  injuries  of  wounding,  bruis 
ing,  striking  out  eye,  tooth,  &c.,  we  have  in  Ex. 
xxi.  22,  the  case  of  miscarriage  produced  by  a 
blow,  push,  &c.,  damaging  the  fetus. 

The  plague  of  "boils  and  blains"  is  not  said  to 
have  been  fatal  to  man,  as  the  murrain  preceding 
was  to  cattle  ;  this  alone  would  seem  to  contradict 
the  notion  of  Shapter  (Medic.  Sacr.  p.  113),  that 
the  disorder  in  question  was  smallpox/  which, 
wherever  it  has  appeared,  until  mitigated  by  vacci 
nation,  has  been  fatal  to  a  great  part,  perhaps  a 
majority  of  those  seized.  The  smallpox  also  gene 
rally  takes  some  days  to  pronounce  and  mature. 
which  seems  opposed  to  the  Mosaic  account.  The 
expression  of  Ex.  ix.  10,  a  "boil"'  flourishing,  or 
ebullient  with  blains,  may  perhaps  be  a  disease 
analogous  to  phlegmonous  erysipelas,  or  even 
common  erysipelas,  which  is  often  accompanied  by 
vesications  such  as  the  word  "  blains  "  might  fitly 
describe.* 

The  "withered  hand"  of  Jeroboam  (1  K.  xiii. 
4-6),  and  of  the  man,  Mat.  xii.  10-13  (comp.  Luke 
vi.  10),  is  such  an  effect  as  is  known  to  follow  from 
the  obliteration  of  the  main  artery  of  any  member, 
or  from  paralysis  of  the  principal  nerve,  either 
through  disease  or  through  injury.  A  case  with  a 
symptom  exactly  parallel  to  that  of  Jeroboam  is 
mentioned  in  the  life  of  Gabriel,  an  Arab  physician. 
It  was  that  of  a  woman  whose  hand  had  become 
rigid  in  the  act  of  swinging,™  and  remained  in  the 
extended  posture.  The  most  remarkable  feature  in 
the  case,  as  related,  is  the  remedy,  which  consisted 
in  alarm  acting  on  the  nerves,  inducing  a  sudden 
and  spontaneous  effort  to  use  the  limb—  an  effort 
which,  like  that  of  the  dumb  son  of  Croesus  (Herod. 
i.  8f>),  was  paradoxically  successful.  The  case  of 
the  widow's  son  restored  by  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  19), 
v.  as  probably  one  of  sunstroke. 

The   disease  of  Asa   "in   his   feet"    (Schmidt, 

*  It  has  been  much  debated  whether  the  smallpox  be 
&n  ancient  disease.  On  the  whole,  perhaps,  the  arguments 
in  favour  of  Its  not  being  such  predominate,  chiefly  on 
account  of  the  strongly  marked  character  of  the  symp 
toms,  which  makes  the  negative  argument  of  unusual 
weight. 

•  rns 


*  This  is  Dr.  Robert  Sim's  opinion.  On  comparing, 
however,  the  means  used  to  produce  the  disorder  (Ex.  ix. 
8),  an  analogy  is  perceptible  to  what  is  called  "  brick 
layer's  itch,"  and  therefore  to  leprosy.  [LEPROSY.]  A 
disease  involving  a  white  spot  breaking  forth  from  a  boil 
related  to  leprosy,  and  clean  or  unclean  according  to 
symptoms  specified,  occurs  under  Die  general  locus  of 
leprosy  (Lev.  xiii.  18-23). 


MEDICINE 

Biblischer  Med,  iii.  5,  §2),  wnich  attacked  him  in 
his  old  age  (1  K.  xv.  23  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  12)andbtcaine 
exceed  ing  great,  may  have  been  either  oedema,  twell- 
ing,  or  podagra,  gout.  The  former  is  comnwn  in 
aged  pei-sons,  in  whom,  owing  to  the  difficulty  ot 
the  return  upwards  of  the  sluggish  blood,  it* 
watery  part  stays  in  the  feet.  The  latter,  though 
rare  in  the  East  at  present,  is  mentioned  by  the 
Talmudists  (Sotah,  10  a,  and  Sanhedrin,  4S6), 
and  there  is  no  reason  why  it  may  not  have  been 
known  in  Asa's  time.  It  occurs  in  Hippocr.  Aphor. 
vi.,  Prognost.  15;  Celsus,  iv.  24;  Aretaeus,  J/br&. 
Chron.  ii.  12,  and  other  ancient  writers." 

In  1  Mace.  vi.  8,  occurs  a  mention  of  "  sicknf? s  of 
grief;"  in  Ecclus.  xxxvii.  30,  of  sickness  caused  by 
excess,  which  require  only  a  passing  mention.  The 
disease  of  Nebuchadnezzar  has  been  viewed  by  Jabn 
as  a  mental  and  purely  subjective  malady.  It  is 
not  easy  to  see  how  this  satisfies  the  plain  emphatic 
statement  of  Dan.  iv.  33,  which  seems  to  include, 
it  is  true,  mental  derangement,  but  to  assert  a  de 
graded  bodily  state  7  to  some  extent,  and  a  corre 
sponding  change  of  habits.  We  may  regard  it  a« 
Mead  (Med.  Sacr.  vii.),  following  Burton's  Ana 
tomy  of  Melancholy,  does,  as  a  species  of  the  melan  • 
choly  known  as  Lycanthropia *  (Paulus  Aegin.  iii. 
16;  Avicenna,  iii.  1,  5,  22).  Persons  so  affected 
wander  like  wolves  in  sepulchres  by  night,  and 
imitate  the  howling  of  a  wolf  or  a  dog.  Further, 
there  are  well  attested  accounts  of  wild  or  half-wild 
human  creatures,  of  either  sex,  who  have  lived  as 
beasts,  losing  human  consciousness,  and  acquiring  a 
superhuman  ferocity,  activity,  and  swiftness.  Either 
the  lyeanthropic  patients  or  these  latter  may  furnish 
a  partial  analogy  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  regard  to 
the  various  points  of  modified  outward  appearance 
and  habits  ascribed  to  him.  Nor  would  it  seem 
impossible  that  a  sustained  lycanthropia  might  pro 
duce  this  latter  condition. 

Here  should  be  noticed  the  mental  malady  of 
Saul.*  His  melancholy  seems  to  have  had  its  origin 
in  his  sin ;  it  was  therefore  grounded  in  his  moral 
nature,  but  extended  its  effects,  as  commonly,  to 
the  intellectual.  The  "  evil  spirit  from  God,"  what 
ever  it  mean,  was  no  part  of  the  medical  features 
of  his  case,  and  may  therefore  be  excluded  from  the 
present  notice.  Music,  which  soothed  him  for 
a  while,  has  entered  largely  into  the  milder  modern 
treatment  of  lunacy. 

The  palsy  meets  us  in  the  N.  T.  only,  and  in 
features  too  familiar  to  need  special  remark.  The 
words  "  grievously  tormented "  (Matt.  viii.  6), 
have  been  commented  on  by  Baier  (de  Paral.  32), 
to  the  effect  that  examples  of  acutely  painful  para 
lysis  are  not  wanting  in  modern  pathology,  e.g.  when 
paralysis  is  complicated  with  neuralgia.  But  if  this 
statement  be  viewed  with  doubt,  we  might  under- 


•  "  Inter  jactaudum  se  funibus . . .  remans!  t  ilia  (manug) 
extensa,  ita  ut  retrahere  ipsam  nequlret  (Freind's  HuL 
Med.  ii.  Append,  p.  2). 

•  Seneca  mentions  it  (Epist.  95)  as  an  extreme  note  cl 
the  female  depravity  current  in  his  own  time,  that  even 
the  female  sex  was  become  liable  to  gout 

r  The  "  eagles'  feathers"  and  "  birds'  claws"  are  pro 
bably  used  only  in  illustration,  not  necessarily  as  de 
scribing  a  uew  type  to  which  the  hair,  &c.,  approximated. 
Comp.  the  simile  of  Ps.  clii.  6,  and  that  of  2  K.  v.  14. 

•  Comp.  Virg.  Bucol.  viii.  97  : — 

"  Saepe  lupnm  fieri  et  se  oondere  sllvls." 

•  The  Targ.  of  Jonathan  renders  the  Heb.  N2'T"I' 
1  Sam.  x.  10,  by  "he  was  mad  or  insane"  (Jahn,  Upbam't 

;  triunl.  212-3). 
t 


MEDICINE 

the  Greek  expression  (fiaffavifyufvos)  as  used 
i)f  pai-alysis  agitans.  or  even  of  chorea  b  (St.  Vitas' 
dance),  in  both  of  which  the  patient,  being  never 
still  lor  a  moment  save  when  asleep,  might  well  be 
BO  described.  The  woman's  case  who  was  "  bowed 
together  "  by  "  a  spirit  of  infirmity,"  may  probably 
have  been  paralytic  (Luke  xiii.  11).  If  the  dorsal 
muscles  were  affected,  those  of  the  chest  and  ab 
domen,  from  want  of  resistance  would  undergo 
contraction,  and  thus  cause  the  patient  to  suffer  as 
described. 

Gangrene  (ydyypatva,  Celsus,  vii.  33,  de  gan- 
graena),  or  mortification  in  its  various  forms,  is  a 
totally  different  disorder  from  the  "  canker  "  of  the 
A.  V.  in  2  Tim.  ii.  17.  Both  gangrene  and  cancer 
were  common  in  all  the  countries  familiar  to  the 
Scriptural  writers,  and  neither  differs  from  the  mo 
dern  disease  of  the  same  came  (Dr.  M.  Good,  ii. 
669,  &c.,  and  579,  &c.). 

In  Is.  xxvi.  18  ;  Ps.  vii.  14,  there  seems  an  allu 
sion  to  false  conception,  in  which,  though  attended 
by  pains  of  quasi-labour  and  other  ordinary  symp 
toms,  the  womb  has  been  found  unimpregnated,  and 
no  delivery  has  followed.  The  medical  term  (Dr.  M. 
Good,  iv.  188)  fpirvtv/j.&Ta>ffts,  mola  ventosa,  sug 
gests  the  Scriptural  language,  "  we  have  as  it  were 
brought  forth  wind ;"  the  whole  passage  is  figurative 
for  disappointment  after  great  effort." 

Poison,  as  a  means  of  destroying  life,  hardly  occurs 
in  the  Bible,  save  as  applied  to  arrows  (Job  vi.  4). 
In  Zech.  xii.  2,  the  marg.  gives  "  poison "  as  an 
alternative  rendering,  which  does  not  seem  prefer 
able  ;  intoxication  being  probably  meant.  In  the 
annals  of  the  Herods  poisons  occur  as  the  resource 
of  stealthy  murder.* 

The  bite  or  sting  of  venomous  beasts  can  hardly 
be  treated  as  a  disease ;  but  in  connexion  with  the 
"  fiery  (i.  e.  venomous)  serpents  "  of  Nuna.  xxi.  6, 
and  the  deliverance  from  death  of  those  bitten,  it  de 
serves  a  notice.  Even  the  Talmud  acknowledges  that 
the  healing  power  lay  not  in  the  brazen  serpent  itself, 
but  "  as  soon  as  they  feared  the  Most  High,  and 
uplifted  their  hearts  to  their  Heavenly  Father  they 
were  healed,  and  in  default  of  this  were  brought  to 
nought."  Thus  the  brazen  figure  was  symbolical 
only  ;  or,  according  to  the  lovers  of  purely  natural 
explanation,  was  the  stage-trick  to  cover  a  false 


MEDICINE 


305 


miracle.  It  was  customary  to  consecrate  the  imagt 
of  the  affliction,  either  in  its  cause  or  in  its  effect, 
as  in  the  golden  emerods,  golden  mice,  of  1  Sam.  vi. 
4,  8,  and  in  the  ex-votos  common  in  Egypt  even 
before  the  exodus ;  and  these  may  be  compared  with 
this  setting  up  of  the  brazen  serpent.  Thus  we 
have  in  it  only  an  instance  of  the  current  custom, 
fanciful  or  superstitious,  being  sublimed  to  a  higher 
purpose. 

The  bite  of  a  white  she-mule,  perhaps  in  the 
rutting  season,  is  according  to  the  Talmudists 
fatal ;  and  they  also  mention  that  of  a  mad  dog, 
with  certain  symptoms  by  which  to  discern  his 
state  (Wunderbar,  ut  sup.  21).  The  scorpion  and 
centipede  are  natives  of  the  Levant  (Rev.  ix.  5,  10), 
and,  with  a  large  variety  of  serpents,  swarm  there. 
To  these,  according  to  Lichtenstein,  should  be  added 
a  venomous  solpuga,9  or  large  spider,  similar  to 
the Calabrian  Tarantula ;  but  the  passage  in  Pliny' 
adduced  (H.N.  xxix.  29),  gives  no  satisfactory  ground 
for  the  theory  based  upon  it,  that  its  bite  was  the 
cause  of  the  emerods.S  It  is  however  remarkable 
that  Pliny  mentions  with  some  fulness,  a  mus  ara- 
neus — not  a  spider  resembling  a  mouse,  but  a  mouse 
resembling  a  spider — the  shrew-mouse,  and  called 
araneus,  Isidorush  says  from  this  resemblance,  or 
from  its  eating  spiders.  Its  bite  was  venomous, 
caused  mortification  of  the  part,  and  a  spreading 
ulcer  attended  with  inward  griping  pains,  and  when 
crashed  on  the  wound  was  its  own  best  antidote.1 

The  disease  of  old  age  has  acquired  a  place  in 
Biblical  nosology  chiefly  owing  to  the  elegant  alle 
gory  into  which  "  The  Preacher "  throws  the  suc 
cessive  tokens  of  the  ravage  of  time  on  man  (Eccl. 
xii.).  The  symptoms  enumerated  have  each  their 
significance  for  the  physician,  for,  though  his  art 
can  do  little  to  arrest  them,  they  yet  mark  an 
altered  condition  calling  for  a  treatment  of  its  own. 
"  The  Preacher "  divides  the  sum  of  human  exist 
ence  into  that  period  which  involves  every  mode  of 
growth,  and  that  which  involves  every  mode  of  de 
cline.  The  first  reaches  from  the  point  of  birth  or 
even  of  generation,  onwards  to  the  attainment  of  the 
"  grand  climacteric,"  and  the  second  from  that  epoch 
backwards  through  a  corresponding  period  of  decline 
till  the  point  of  dissolution  is  reached.k  This  latter 
course  is  marked  in  metaphor  by  the  darkening  of  the 


b  Jahn  (Upham's  transl.  232)  suggests  that  cramp, 
twisting  the  limb  round  as  if  in  torture,  may  have  been 
Intended.  This  suits  &<ura.vi£oit.evo<;,  no  doubt,  but  not 
iropaAvTueos. 

c  For  an  account  of  the  complaint,  see  Paul.  Aegin., 
e4.  Syd.  Soc.  i.  p.  632. 

d  In  Chwolson's  Ueben-este  d.  Altbab.  Literatur,  p.  129, 
Ibn  WaTischijjah's  treatise  on  poisons  contains  references 
to  several  older  writings  by  authors  of  other  nations  on 
that  subject.  His  commentator,  Jarbftqa,  treats  of  the 
existence  and  effects  of  poisons  and  antidotes,  and  in  an 
independent  work  of  his  own  thus  classifies  the  subject : 
(1)  of  poisons  which  kill  at  sight  (\venn  sie  man  nur 
ansleht) ;  (2)  of  those  which  kill  through  sound  (Schall 
oder  Laut);  (3)  of  those  which  kill  by  smelling;  (4)  of 
those  which  kill  by  reaching  the  interior  of  the  body; 
(5)  of  those  which  kill  by  contact,  with  special  mention 
of  the  poisoning  of  garments. 

«  Comp.  Lucan,  1'ha.rsalia,  ix.  837-8 :  "  Quis  calcare  tuas 
timeat  solpuga  latebras,"  £c. 

'  His  words  are  :  "  Est  et  formicarum  genus  vcnenatum, 
non  feie  ;n  Italia:  solpugas  Cicero  appellat." 

t  He  says  that  the  solpuga  causes  such  swellings  on 
Ibe  parts  of  the  female  camel,  and  that  they  are  called 

by  tDe  game  V,«JM  in  Arabic  as  the  Heb.  D  vQJ?'  which 
VOI.  II 


simply  means  "  swellings."  He  supposes  the  men  might 
have  been  "  versetzt  bei  der  Befriedigung  natttrlicher 
Bediirfnisse."  He  seems  not  to  have  given  due  weight 
to  the  expression  of  1  Sam.  vi.  5,  "  mice  which  mar  the 
land,"  which  seems  to  distinguish  the  "  land ''  from  the 
people  in  a  way  fatal  to  the  ingenious  notion  he  supports. 
For  the  multiplication  of  these  and  similar  creatures  to  an 
extraordinary  and  fatal  degree,  comp.  Varro,  h'ragm.  ap.ftn. 
"  M.  Varro  autor  est,  a  cuniculis  suffossum  in  HispuniS 
oppidum,  a  talpis  in  Thessalia,  ab  ranis  civitatem  in 
Gallia  pulsam,  ab  locustis  in  Africa,  ex  Gyaro  Cycladum 
insula  incolas  a  muribus  fugatos." 

h  His  words  are :  "  Mus  araneus  cujus  morsu  aranea 
morltur  est  in  Sardinia  animal  perexiguum  araneae  forma 
quae  sollfuga  dicitur,  eo  quod  diem  fugtat"  (Orig.  xii.  3). 

'  As  regards  the  scorpion,  this  belief  and  practice  still 
prevails  in  Palestine.  Pliny  says  (II.  N.  xxix.  27),  after 
prescribing  the  ashes  of  a  rain's  hoof,  young  of  a  weasel, 
&c.,  "  si  Jumenta  momorderit  mus  (i.  e.  araneus)  receris 
cum  sale  imponitur,  nut  fel  vespertilionis  ex  aceto.  Et 
ipse  mus  araneus  contra  se  remedio  est  divulstis  et  im- 
positus,"  &c.  In  cold  climates,  it  seems,  the  venom  of  tho 
shrew-mouse  is  not  perceptible. 

k  These  are  respectively  called  the  Hvjjn  ^O11  all(1 
the  iTT'Eyn  '•D'1  of  the  Nubbins  (Wunderbar,  2le« 
Heft).  The  same  idea  appears  in  Sopb.  Trachin. 


306 


MEDICINE 


gi«at  lights  of  nature,  and  the  ensuing  season  of  life  is 
compared  to  the  broken  weather  of  the  wet  season, 
setting  in  when  summer  is  gone,  when  after  every 
nhower  fresh  clouds  are  in  the  sky,  as  contrasted 
with  the  showers  of  other  seasons,  which  pass  away 
into  clearness.  Such,  he  means  are  the  ailments 
and  troubles  of  declining  age,  as  compared  with 
those  of  advancing  life.  The  "  keepers  of  the 
house"  are  perhaps  the  ribs  which  support  the 
frame,  or  the  aims  and  shoulders  which  enwrap  and 
protect  it.  Their  "  trembling,"  especially  that  of 
the  arms,  &c.,  is  a  sure  sign  of  vigour  past.  The 
"strongmen"  are  its  supporters,  the  lower  limbs 
"  bowing  themselves  "  under  the  weight  they  once 
so  lightly  bore.  The  "  grinding  "  hardly  needs  to 
oe  explained  of  the  teeth  now  become  "  few."  The 
"lookers  from  the  windows"  are  the  pupils  of  the 
eyes,  now  "darkened,"  as  Isaac's  were,  and  Eli's ; 
and  Moses,  though  spared  the  dimness,  was  yet  in 
that  very  exemption  a  marvel  (Gen.  xxvii.,  comp, 
xlviii.  10;  1  Sam.  iv.  15;  Deut.  xxxiv.  7).  The 
"  doors  shut "  represent  the  dulness  of  those  other 
senses  which  are  the  portal*  of  knowledge ;  thus 
the  taste  and  smell,  as  in  the  case  of  Barzillai,  be 
come  impaired,  and  the  ears  stopped  against  sound. 
The  "  rising  up  at  the  voice  of  a  bird  "  pourtrays 
the  light,  soon-rleeting,  easily-broken  slumber  of  the 
aged  man :  or  possibly,  and  more  literally,  actual 
waking  in  the  early  morning,  when  first  the  cock 
crows,  may  be  intended.  The  "  daughters  of  music 
brought  low,"  suggest  the 

— —  "  big  manly  voice 
Now  tnrn'd  again  to  childish  treble ;" 

and  also,  as  illustrated  again  by  Barzillai,  the  failure 
in  the  discernment  and  the  utterance  of  musical 
notes.  The  fears  of  old  age  are  next  noticed : 
"  They  shall  be  afraid  of  that  which  is  high  ;"m  an 
obscure  expression,  perhaps,  for  what  are  popularly 
called  "nervous"  terrors,  exaggerating  and  magni 
fying  every  object  of  alarm,  and  "  making,"  as  the 
saying  is,  "  mountains  of  molehills."  "  Fear  in 
the  way "  •  is  at  first  less  obvious ;  but  we 
observe  that  nothing  unnerves  and  agitates  an 
old  pei-son  more  than  the  prospect  of  a  long 
journey.  Thus  regarded,  it  becomes  a  fine  and 
vi  I  it  i  li-  touch  in  the  description  of  decrepitude.  All 
readiness  to  haste  is  arrested  and  a  numb  despond 
ency  succeeds.  The  "  flourishing  "  of  "  the  almond- 
tree  "  is  still  more  obscure ;  but  we  observe  this 
tree  in  Palestine  blossoming  when  others  show  no 
sign  of  vegetation,  and  when  it  is  dead  winter  all 
around — no  ill  type,  perhaps,  of  the  old  man  who 
has  survived  his  own  contemporaries  and  many  of 
his  juniors.0  Youthful  lusts  die  out,  and  their 
organs,  of  which  "  the  grasshopper  "  P  is  perhaps  a 
figure,  are  relaxed.  The  "silver  cord"  may  be 
that  of  nervous  sensation,*  or  motion,  or  even  the 


m  Or,  even  more  simply,  these  words  may  be  under 
stood  as  meaning  that  old  men  have  neither  vigour  nor 
breath  for  going  up  hills,  mountains,  or  anything  else  that 
Is  "high;"  nay,  for  them  the  plain  even  road  has  1U 
terrors— they  walk  timidly  and  cautiously  even  along 
that. 

1  Compare  also  perhaps  the  dictum  of  the  slothful  man, 
Prov.  xxii.  13,  "  There  is  a  lion  in  the  way." 
'  In  the  same  strain  Juvenal  (Sat.  x.  243-5)  says  :— 
Haec  data  pocna  din  viventihus,  ut  renovatA 
Senjper  clade  domUs,  multis  in  luctibus  inque 
Perpetuo  moerore  et  nigra  veste  senescant." 
P  Fr.  Mittd  (Med.  Sacr.  vii.)  thinks  that  the  scrotum, 


MEDICINE 

spinal  marrow  itself.  Perhaps  some  incapacity  of 
retention  may  be  signified  by  the  "  golden  bowl 
broken  ;"  the  "  pitcher  broken  at  the  well "  suggests 
some  vital  supply  stopping  at  the  usual  source—do 
rangement  perhaps  of  the  digestion  or  of  the  respira 
tion  ;  the  "  wheel  shivered  at  the  cistern,"  conveys, 
through  the  image  of  the  water-lifting  process  fami 
liar  in  irrigation,  the  notion  of  the  blood,  pumped, 
as  it  were,  through  the  vessels,  and  fertilising  the 
whole  system  ;  for  "  the  blood  is  the  life." 

This  careful  register  of  the  tokens  of  decline 
might  lead  us  to  expect  great  care  for  the  preserva 
tion  of  health  and  strength  ;  and  this  indeed  is 
found  to  mark  the  Mosaic  system,  in  the  regulations 
concerning  diet/  the  "  divers  washings,"  and  the 
pollution  imputed  to  a  corpse — nay,  even  in  cir 
cumcision  itself.  These  served  not  only  the  cere 
monial  purpose  of  imparting  self-consciousness  to 
the  Hebrew,  and  keeping  him  distinct  from  alien 
admixture,  but  had  a  sanitary  aspect  of  rare  wisdom, 
when  we  regard  the  country,  the  climate,  and  the 
age.  The  laws  of  diet  had  the  effect  of  tempering 
by  a  just  admixture  of  the  organic  substances  of  the 
animal  and  vegetable  kingdoms  the  regimen  of  He 
brew  families,  and  thus  providing  for  the  vigour 
of  future  ages,  as  well  as  checking  the  stimulus 
which  the  predominant  use  of  animal  food  gives  to 
the  passions.  To  these  effects  may  be  ascribed  the 
immunity  often  enjoyed  by  the  Hebrew  race1 
amidst  epidemics  devastating  the  countries  of  their 
sojourn.  The  best  and  often  the  sole  possible  exer 
cise  of  medicine  is  to  prevent  disease.  Moses  could 
not  legislate  for  cure,  but  his  rules  did  for  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  what  no  therapeutics  however 
consummate  could  do, — they  gave  the  best  security 
for  the  public  health  by  provisions  incorporated  in 
the  public  economy.  Whether  we  regard  the  laws 
which  secluded  the  leper,  as  designed  to  prevent 
infection  or  repress  the  dread  of  it,  their  wisdom 
is  nearly  equal,  for  of  all  terrors  the  imaginary  are 
the  most  terrible.  The  laws  restricting  marriage 
have  in  general  a  similar  tendency,  degeneracy 
being  the  penalty  of  a  departure  from  those  which 
forbid  commixture  of  near  kin.  Michel  Le'vy  re 
marks  en  the  salubrious  tendency  of  the  law  of 
marital  separation  (Lev.  xv.)  imposed  (Le'vy,  Traiti 
d' Hygiene,  p.  8).  The  precept  also  concerning 
purity  on  the  necessary  occasions  in  a  desert  en 
campment  (Deut.  xxiii.  12-14),  enjoining  the  re 
turn  of  the  elements  of  productiveness  to  the  soil, 
would  probably  become  the  basis  of  the  muni 
cipal  regulations  having  for  their  object  a  similar 
purity  in  towns.  The  consequences  of  its  neglect 
in  such  encampments  is  shewn  by  an  example 
quoted  by  Michel  Le'vy,  as  mentioned  by  M.  de  La- 
martine  (ib.  8,  9).  Length  of  life  was  regarded  as 
.1  mark  of  divine  favour,  and  the  divine  legislator 
had  pointed  out  the  means  of  ordinarily  ensuring  a 


swoln  by  a  rupture,  is  perhaps  meant  to  be  typified  by 
the  shape  of  the  grasshopper.    He  renders  the  Hebrew 

nn  /"anp11)  after  the  LXX.  tiraXvv»r,  19  iitpis,  Vulg. 
impinffudbitur  loctitta.  Comp.  Hor.  Odes,  11.  xi.  7,  8 

q  We  find  hints  of  the  nerves  proceeding  in  pairs  from 
the  brain,  both  in  the  Talmudiuil  writers  and  in  Aretacns 
See  below  In  the  text. 

Michel  Levy  (unites  Halle  as  acknowledging  the  sa 
lutary  character  of  the  prohibition  to  eat  pork,  which  he 
says  is  "  sujet  a  line  alteration  du  tissu  graisseux  trial 
:;:ialci'/ue  a  la  ilegenerescence  lepreuse." 

This  was  said  of  the  Jews  in  Ixindon  during  Utf 
cholera  attack  of  1849. 


MEDICINE 

fuller  measure  of  it  to  the  people  at  large  than 
could,  according  to  physical  laws,  otherwise  be 
hoped  for.  Perhaps  the  extraordinary  means  taken 
to  prolong  vitality  may  be  referred  to  this  source 
( 1  K.  i.  2),  and  there  is  no  reason  why  the  case  of 
David  should  be  deemed  a  singular  one.  We  may 
also  compare  the  apparent  influence  of  vital  warmth 
enhanced  to  a  miraculous  degree,  but  having,  per 
haps,  a  physical  law  as  its  basis,  in  the  cases  of 
Elijah,  Elisha,  and  the  sons  of  the  widow  of  Za- 
rephath,  and  the  Shunammite.  Wunderbar'  has 
collected  several  examples  of  such  influence  simi 
larly  exerted,  which  however  he  seems  to  exag 
gerate  to  an  absurd  pitch.  Yet  it  would  seem  not 
against  analogy  to  suppose,  that,  as  pernicious  exha 
lations,  miasmata,  &c.,  may  pass  from  the  sick  and 
affect  the  healthy,  so  there  should  be  a  reciprocal 
action  in  favour  of  health.  The  climate  of  Pales 
tine  afforded  a  great  range  of  temperature  within  a 
narrow  compass, — e.  g.  a  long  sea-coast,  a  long  deep 
valley  (that  of  the  Jordan),  a  broad  flat  plain  (Es- 
draelon),  a  large  portion  of  table-land  (Judah  and 
Ephraim),  and  the  higher  elevations  of  Carmel, 
Tabor,  the  lesser  and  greater  Hermon,  &c.  Thus 
it  partakes  of  nearly  all  supportable  climates."  In 
October  its  rainy  season  begins  with  moist  westerly 
winds.  In  November  the  trees  are  bare.  In  De 
cember  snow  and  ice  are  often  found,  but  never  lie 
long,  and  only  during  the  north  wind's  prevalence. 
The  cold  disappears  at  the  end  of  February,  and  the 
"  latter  rain  "  sets  in,  lasting  through  March  to  the 
middle  of  April,  when  thunderstorms  are  common, 
torrents  swell,  and  the  heat  rises  in  the  low  grounds. 
At  the  end  of  April  the  hot  season  begins,  but  pre 
serves  moderation  till  June,  thence  till  September 
becomes  extreme;  and  during  all  this  period  rain 
seldom  occurs,  but  often  heavy  dews  prevail.  In 
September  it  commences  to  be  cool,  first  at  night, 
and  sometimes  the  rain  begins  to  fall  at  the  end  of 
it.  The  migration  with  the  season  from  an  inland 
to  a  sea-coast  position,  from  low  to  high  ground, 
&c.,  was  a  point  of  social  development  never 
systematically  reached  during  the  Scriptural  his 
tory  of  Palestine.  But  men  inhabiting  the  same 
regions  for  centuries  could  hardly  fail  to  notice  the 
connexion  between  the  air  and  moisture  of  a  place 
and  human  health,  and  those  favoured  by  circum 
stances  would  certainly  turn  their  knowledge  to 
account.  The  Talmudists  speak  of  the  north  wind 
as  preservative  of  life,  and  the  south  and  east  winds 
as  exhaustive,  but  the  south  as  the  most  insupport 
able  of  all,  coming  hot  and  dry  from  the  deserts, 
producing  abortion,  tainting  the  babe  yet  unborn, 
and  corroding  the  pearls  in  the  sea.  Further,  they 
dissuade  from  performing  circumcision  or  venesec 
tion  during  its  prevalence  (Jebamoth,  72  a,  ap. 
Wunderbar,  2tes  Heft,  ii.  A.~).  It  is  stated  that 
*•  the  marriage-bed  placed  between  north  and  south 
will  be  blessed  with  male  issue"  (Berachoth,  15, 
«'&.),  which  may,  Wunderbar  thinks,  be  interpreted 

*  Biblisch-Talmud.  Meet.  2tes  Heft,  I.  D.  pp.  15-17.  He 
speaks  of  the  result  ensuing  from  shaking  hands  witli 
one's  friends,  &c. 

"  The  possession  of  an  abundance  of  salt  tended  to 
banish  much  disease  (Vs.  Ix.  2;  2  Sam.  viii.  13;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  i?.).  Salt-pi  ts  (Zeph.  ii.  9)  are  still  dug  by  the  Arabs 
on  tho  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea.  For  the  use  of  salt  tp  a 
m-w-born  infant,  Ez.  xvi.  4,  comp.  Galen  de  Sanit.  lib.  i. 
lap.  1. 

1  Sec  some  remarks  in  Michel  Levy,  Tiuite  d'llygiine, 
I'aris  1850:  "Kieu  de  plus  rebutant  que  cette  sorte  de 
Diai.-roprete  rien  de  plus  farorable  an  dovoloppement  des 


MEDICINE 


307 


of  the  temperature  \ehen  moderate,  and  in  nelthei 
extreme  (which  these  winds  respectively  represent), 
as  most  favouring  fecundity.  If  the  fact  be  so,  it 
is  more  probably  related  to  the  phenomena  of  mag 
netism,  in  connexion  with  which  the  same  theory 
has  been  lately  revived.  A  number  of  precepts  are 
given  by  the  same  authorities  in  reference  to  health, 
e.  g.  eating  slowly,  not  contracting  a  sedentary 
habit,  regularity  in  natural  operations,  cheerfulness 
of  temperament,  due  sleep  (especially  early  morn 
ing  sleep  is  recommended),  but  not  somnolence  by 
day  (Wunderbar,  ut  sup.). 

The  rite  of  circumcision,  besides  its  special  sur 
gical  operation,  deserves  some  notice  in  connexion 
with  the  general  question  of  the  health,  longevity, 
and  fecundity  of  the  race  with  whose  history  it  is 
identified.  Besides  being  a  mark  of  the  covenant 
and  a  symbol  of  purity,  it  was  perhaps  also  a 
protest  against  the  phallus-worship,  which  has 
a  remote  antiquity  in  the  corruption  of  mankind, 
and  of  which  we  have  some  trace  in  the  Egyptian 
myth  of  Osiris.  It  has  been  asserted  also  (Wun 
derbar,  3tes  Heft,  p.  25)  that  it  distinctly  con 
tributed  to  increase  the  fruitfulness  of  the  race, 
and  to  check  inordinate  desires  in  the  individual. 
Its  beneficial  effects  in  such  a  climate  as  that  of 
Egypt  and  Syria,  as  tending  to  promote  cleanliness, 
to  prevent  or  reduce  irritation,  and  thereby  to  stop 
the  way  against  various  disorders,  have  been  the 
subject  of  comment  to  various  writers  on  hygiene." 
In  particular  a  troublesome  and  sometimes  fatal 
kind  of  boil  (phymosis  and  paraphymosis)  is  men 
tioned  as  occurring  commonly  in  those  regions, 
but  only  to  the  uncircumcised.  It  is  stated  by 
Josephus  (Cont.  Ap.  ii.  13)  that  Apion,  against 
whom  he  wrote,  having  at  first  derided  circum 
cision,  was  circumcised  of  necessity  by  reason  of 
such  a  boil,  of  which,  after  suffering  great  pain, 
he  died.  Philo  also  appears  to  speak  of  the  same 
benefit  when  he  speaks  of  the  "  anthrax  "  infesting 
those  who  retain  the  foreskin.  Medical  authorities 
have  also  stated  that  the  capacity  of  imbibing 
syphilitic  virus  is  less,  and  that  this  has  been 
proved  experimentally  by  comparing  Jewish  with 
other,  e.  g.  Christian  populations  (Wunderbar, 
3tes  Heft,  p.  27).  The  operation  itself  7  consisted  of 
originally  a  mere  *  incision  ;  to  which  a  further 
stripping*  off  the  skin  from  the  part,  and  a  custom 
of  sucking b  the  blood  from  the  wound  was  in  a  later 
period  added,  owing  to  the  attempts  of  Jews  of  the 
Maccabean  period,  and  later  (1  Mace.  i.  15  ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  5,  §1  :  comp.  1  Cor.  vii.  8)  to  cultivate 
heathen  practices.  [CIRCUMCISION.]  The  reduc 
tion  of  the  remaining  portion  of  the  praeputium 
after  the  more  simple  operation,  so  as  to  cover  what 
it  had  exposed,  known  as  epispasmus,  accomplished 
by  the  elasticity  of  the  skin  itself,  was  what  this 
anti-Judaic  practice  sought  to  effect,  and  what 
the  later,  more  complicated  and  severe,  operation 
frustrated.  To  these  were  subjoined  the  use  of 


accidents  syphilitiques."    Circumcision  is  said  to  be  also 

practised  among  the  natives  of  Madagascar,  "  qui  ne  pa- 

raissent  avoir  aucune  notion  du  Judaisme  nl  du  Maho- 

metisme  "  (p.  11,  note), 
y  There  is  a  good  modern  account,  of  circumcision  in  th« 

Dublin  Medical  Press,  May  19, 1858,  by  Dr.  Joseph  Hirscb- 

feld  (from  Oestereich.  Zeitschri/t}. 
1  Known  as  the  *1J"in>  a  WOI"d  meaning  "  cut" 
*  Called  the  y>~\Q,  from  JTUJ,  "to  expose." 
b  Called  Meziza,  from  V^D.  "  to  suck."  This  counter 

acted  a  fp-dency  to  inflammation. 

X  2 


308 


MEDICINE 


the  warm-bath,  before  and  after  the  operation.  I 
pounded  cummin  as  a  styptic,  and  a  mixture  of' 
wine  and  oil  to  heal  the  wound.  It  is  remarkable 
that  the  tightly-swathed  rollers  which  formed  the 
first  covering  of  the  new-bora  child  (Luke  ii.  7)  are 
still  retained  among  modern  Jews  at  the  circum 
cision  of  a  child,  effectually  preventing  any  move 
ment  of  the  body  or  limbs  (Wunderbar,*  p.  29). 
No  surgical  operation  beyond  this  finds  a  place  in 
Holy  Scripture,  unless  indeed  that  adverted  to 
under  the  article  Eunuch.  [ECNUCH.]  The  Tal 
mudists  speak  uf  two  operations  to  assist  birth,  one 
known  as  jQVin  njP^p  (gastrotomia),  and  intended 
to  assist  parturition,  not  necessarily  fatal  to  the 
mother :  the  oth«r  known  as  }t3Hn  flJPTp,  (hystero- 
tomia,  sectio  caesarea),  which  was  seldom  prac 
tised  save  in  the  case  of  death  in  the  crisis  of  labour, 
or  if  attempted  on  the  living  was  either  fatal,  or  at 
least  destructive  of  the  powers  of  maternity.  An 
operation  is  also  mentioned  by  the  same  authorities 
having  for  its  object  the  extraction  piecemeal  of  an 
otherwise  inextricable  foetus  (ibid.  pp.  53,  &c.). 
Wunderbar  enumerates  from  the  Mishna  and 
Talmud  fifty-six  surgical  instruments  or  pieces 
of  apparatus ;  of  these,  however,  the  following 
only  are  at  all  alluded  to  in  Scripture.11  A  cutting 
instrument,  called  "11¥>  supposed  a  "sharp  stone" 
(Ex.  iv.  25).  Such  was  probably  the  "  Aethiopian 
stone  "  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (ii.  86),  and  Pliny 
speaks  of  what  he  calls  Testa  samia,  as  a  similar 
implement.  Zipporah  seems  to  have  caught  up  the 
first  instrument  which  came  to  hand  in  her  appre 
hension  for  the  life  of  her  husband.  The  "  knife  " 
(fl?DNO)  of  Josh.  v.  2  was  probably  a  more 
refined  instrument  for  the  same  purpose.  An  "  awl " 
(I'VlO),  is  mentioned  (Ex.  xxi.  6)  as  used  to  bore 
through  the  ear  of  the  bondman  who  refused  re 
lease,  and  is  supposed  to  have  been  a  surgical  in 
strument. 

A  seat  of  delivery  called  in  Scripture  D'33X, 
Ex.  i.  16,  by  the  Talmudists  "QK'D  (comp.  2  K. 
xix.  3),  "  the  stools ;"  but  some  have  doubted 
whether  the  word  used  by  Moses  does  not  mean 
rather  the  uterus  itself,  as  that  which  moulds '  and 
shapes  the  infant.  Delivery  upon  a  seat  or  stool 
is,  however,  a  common  practice  in  France  at  this 
day,  and  also  in  Palestine. 

The  "roller  to  bind"  of  Ez.  xxx.  21  was  for 
a  broken  limb,  as  still  used.  Similar  bands  wound 
with  the  most  precise  accuracy  involve  the 
mummies. 


•  This  writer  gives  a  full  account  of  the  entire  process 
as  now  in  practice,  with  illustrations  from  the  Turkish 
modd  of  operating,  gathered,  it  seems,  from  a  fragment 
ot  a  rare  work  on  the  healing  art  by  an  anonymous 
Turkish  author  of  the  16th  century,  in  the  public  library 
at  J  «lps:.  •.    The  Persians,  Tartars,  &c.,  have  furnished 
him  with  further  illustrations. 

d  Yet  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  rest  w.t  not 
known  in  Scriptural  times,  "  it  being  a  well-known  fact 
In  the  history  of  inventions  that  many  useful  discoveries 
have  long  been  kept  as  family  secrets."  Thus  an  obste 
trical  forceps  was  found  in  a  bouse  excavated  at  Pompeii, 
though  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  so  far  as  their  medical 
works  show,  were  unacquainted  with  the  instrument 
(Paul.  Aeg.  i.  652,  ed.  Sydcnham  Soc.). 

•  In  Jer.  xviii.  3  the  same  word  appears,  rendered 
"  wheels  "  in   the  A.  V. ;   margin,  "  frames  or  seats ;" 
that  which  gives  shape  to  the  work  of  the  potter. 

f  See  Tacit.  Hist.  v.  7,  and  Orelli  s  note  ad.  Inc. 

•  Taeitns.  Ibid.  \.  6. 


MEDICINE 

A  scraper  (DIM),  for  which  the  "  potsherd"  <A 
Job  was  a  substitute  (Job  ii.  8). 

Ex.  xxx.  23-5  is  a  prescription  in  form.  It  may 
be  worth  while  also  to  enumerate  the  leading  sub 
stances  which,  according  to  Wunderbar,  composed 
the  pharmacopoeia  of  the  Talmudists — a  much  more 
limited  one — which  will  afford  some  insight  into  the 
distance  which  separates  them  from  the  leaders  of 
Greek  medicine.  Besides  such  ordinary  appliances 
as  water,  wine  (Luke  x.  34),  beer,  vinegar,  honey, 
and  milk,  various  oils  are  found  ;  as  opobalsamum' 
("  balm  of  Gilead  "),  the  oil  of  olive,*  myrrh,  rose, 
palma  christi,  walnut,  sesamum,  colocynth,  and 
fish ;  figs  (2  K.  xx.  7),  dates,  apples  (Cant.  ii.  5), 
pomegranates,  pistachio-nuts,k  and  almonds  (a  pro 
duce  of  Syria,  but  not  of  Egypt,  Gen.  xliii.  11,; 
wheat,  barley,  and  various  other  grains;  garlic, 
leeks,  onions,  and  some  other  common  herbs; 
mustard,  pepper,  coriander  seed,  ginger,  preparations 
of  beet,  fish,  &c.,  steeped  in  wine  or  vinegar,  whey, 
eggs,  salt,  wax,  and  suet  (in  plaisters),  gall  of  fish  ' 
(Tob.  vi.  8,  xi.  11),  ashes,  cowdung,  &c. ;  fasting-sa 
liva^  urine,  bat's  blood,  and  the  following  rarer  herbs, 
&c. :  amrneisision,  menta  gentilis,  saffron,  man- 
dragora,  Lawsonia  spinosa  (Arab,  alhenna),  juniper, 
broom,  poppy,  acacia,  pine,  lavender  or  rosemary, 
clover-root,  jujub,  hyssop,  fern,  sampsuchum, 
milk-thistle,  laurel,  Eruca  muralis,  absynth,  jas 
mine,  narcissus,  madder,  curled  mint,  fennel,  endive, 
oil  of  cotton,  myrtle,  myrrh,  aloes,  sweet  cane 
(acorus  calamus),  cinnamon,  canella  alba,  cassia, 
ladanum,  galbanum,  frankincense,  storax,  nard, 
gum  of  various  trees,  musk,  blatta  byzantina; 
and  these  minerals — bitumen,  natrum,  borax,  alum, 
clay,  aetites,"  quicksilver,  litharge,  yellow  arsenic. 
The  following  preparations  were  also  well  known : — 
Theriacas,  an  antidote  prepared  from  serpents ; 
various  medicinal  drinks,  e.g.  from  the  fruit-bear 
ing  rosemary  ;  decoction  of  wine  with  vegetables  ; 
mixture  of  wine,  honey,  and  pepper ;  of  oil,  wine, 
and  water ;  of  asparagus  and  other  roots  steeped  in 
wine  ;  emetics,  purging  draughts,  soporifics,  potions 
to  produce  abortion  or  fruitfulness ;  and  various 
salves,  some  used  costnetically,"  e.  g.  to  remove 
hair ;  some  for  wounds,  and  other  injuries.0  The 
forms  of  medicaments  were  cataplasm,  electuary, 
liniment,  plaister  (Is.  i.  6;  Jer.  viii.  22,  xlvi.  11, 
Ii.  8 ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  33,  §5),  powder,  infusion, 
decoction,  essence,  syrup,  mixture. 

An  occasional  trace  occurs  of  some  chemical 
knowledge,  e.  g.  the  calcination  of  the  gold  by 
Moses ;  the  effect  of  "  vinegar  upon  nitre "  f  (Ex. 


h  Commended  by  Pliny  as  a  specific  for  the  bite  of  a 
serpent  (Plin.  H.  If.  xxiil.  78). 

Rhases  speaks  of  a  Bsh  named  saint,  the  gall  of  which 
healed  inflamed  eyes  (ix.  27);  and  Pliny  says,  "Callio- 
nymi  fel  cicatrices  sanat  et  carnes  oculorum  supervacnas 
consumit"  (N.  H.  xxxii.  24). 

Comp.  Mark  viii.  23,  John  ix.  6;  also  the  mention  by 
Tacitus  (Hist.  iv.  81)  of  a  request  made  of  Vespasian  at 
Alexandria.  Galen  (De  Simpl.  Facult.  i.  10)  and  Pliny 
(H.  jV.  xxviii.  7)  ascribe  similar  virtues  to  it 

1  Said  by  Pliny  to  be  a  specific  against  abortion  (.y.  H 
XXX.  44). 

Antimony  was  and  is  used  as  a  dye  for  the  eye-lids,  the 
ol.  See  Rosenmttller  in  the  Biblical  Cabinet,  xxvii.  61 
The  Arabs  suppose  that  a  cornelian  stone  (the  Sardiut 
lapis,  Ez.  xxviii.  13,  but  in  Joseph.  Ant,  iii.  7,  $5, 
Sardonyx)  laid  on  a  fresh  wound  will  stay  hemorrhage. 

v  "1113  meaning  natron :  the  Egyptian  kind  was  foniid 
i  i  two  lakes  between  Naukratis  ard  Memphfs  (BifeL  Cat 
xxvii.  n.  71. 


MEDICINE 

nxii.  20  ;  Prov.  xxv.  20;  comp.  Jer.  ii.  22)  ;  the 
mention  of  "  the  apothecary  "  (Ex.  xxx.  35  ;  Eccl. 
s.  1),  and  of  the  merchant  in  "powders"  (Cant, 
iii.  6),  shows  that  a  distinct  and  important  branch 
of  trade  was  set  up  in  these  wares,  in  which,  as  at 
a  modern  druggist's,  articles  of  luxury  &c.,  are 
combined  with  the  remedies  of  sickness  ;  see  further, 
Wunderbar,  Istes  Heft,  pp.  73,  ad  fin.  Among  the 
most,  favourite  of  external  remedies  has  always  been 
the  bath.  As  a  preventive  of  numerous  disorders 
its  virtues  were  known  to  the  Egyptians,  and  the 
scrupulous  levitical  bathings  prescribed  by  Moses 
would  merely  enjoin  the  continuance  of  a  practice 
familial'  to  the  Jews,  from  the  example  especially  of 
the  priests  in  that  country.  Besides  the  significance 
of  moral  purity  which  it  carried,  the  use  of  the  bath 
checked  the  tendency  to  become  unclean  by  violent 
perspirations  from  within  and  effluvia  from  without ; 
it  kept  the  porous  system  in  play,  and  stopped  the 
outset  of  much  disease.  In  order  to  make  the  sanc 
tion  of  health  more  solemn,  most  oriental  nations 
have  enforced  purificatory  rites  by  religious  mandates 
— and  so  the  Jews.  A  treatise  collecting  all  the 
dicta  of  ancient  medicine  on  the  use  of  the  bath  has 
been  current  ever  since  the  revival  of  learning,  under 
the  title  De  Balneis.  According  to  it  Hippocrates 
and  Galen  prescribe  the  bath  medicinally  in  peri- 
pneumonia  rather  than  in  burning  fever,  as  tending  to 
allay  the  pain  of  the  sides,  chest,  and  back,  promoting 
various  secretions,  removing  lassitude,  and  suppling 
joints.  A  hot  bath  is  recommended  for  those  suffer 
ing  from  lichen  (De  Bain.  464).  Those,  on  the 
contrary,  who  have  looseness  of  the  bowels,  who  are 
languid,  loathe  their  food,  are  troubled  with  nausea 
or  bile,  should  not  use  it,  as  neither  should  the 
epileptic.  After  exhausting  journeys  in  the  sun 
the  bath  is  commended  as  the  restorative  of  moist 
ure  to  the  frame  (456-458).  The  four  objects 
which  ancient  authorities  chiefly  proposed  to  attain 
by  bathing  are — 1,  to  warm  and  distil  the  ele 
ments  of  the  body  throughout  the  whole  frame,  to 
equalise  whatever  is  abnormal,  to  rarefy  the  skin, 
and  promote  evacuations  through  it;  2,  to  reduce 
a  dry  to  a  moister  habit;  3  (the  cold-bath),  to 
sool  the  frame  and  brace  it ;  4  (the  warm-bath), 
a  sudorific  to  expel  cold.  Exercise  before  bathing 
is  recommended,  and  in  the  season  from  April  till 
November  inclusive  it  is  the  most  conducive  to 
health ;  if  it  be  kept  up  in  the  other  months  it 
should  then  be  but  once  a  week,  and  that  fasting. 
Of  natural  waters  some  are  nitrous,  some  saline, 
some  aluminous,*  some  sulphureous,  some  bitu 
minous,  some  copperish,  some  ferruginous,  and 
some  compounded  of  these.  Of  all  the  natural 
waters  the  power  is,  on  the  whole,  desiccant 
and  calefacient ;  and  they  are  peculiarly  fitted 
for  those  of  a  humid  and  cold  habit.  Pliny 
(If.  N.  xxxi.)  gives  the  fullest  extant  account 
of  the  thermal  springs  of  the  ancients  (Paul.  Aegin. 
ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.  i.  71).  Avicenna  gives  precepts 
for  salt  and  other  mineral  baths;  the  former  he 
recommends  in  case  of  scurvy  and  itching,  as  rare 
fying  the  skin,  and  afterwards  condensing  it.  Water 
medicated  with  alum,  natron,  sulphur,  naphtha, 


MEDICINE 


309 


iron,  litharge,  vitriol,  and  vinegar,  aiealso  specified 
by  him.  Friction  and  unction  are  prescribed,  and 
a  caution  given  against  staying  too  long  in  the 
water  (ibid.  338-340 ;  comj..  Aetius,  de  Bain. 
iv.  484).  A  sick  bather  shouH  lie  quiet,  and 
allow  others  to  rub  and  anoint  him,  and  use  no 
strigil  (the  common  instrument  for  scraping  the 
skin),  but  a  sponge  (456).  Maimonides  chiefly 
following  Galeu,  recommends  the  bath,  especif^lly 
for  phthisis  in  the  aged,  as  being  a  case  of  dryness 
with  cold  habit,  and  to  a  hectic  fever  patient  as 
being  a  case  of  dryness  with  hot  habit;  also  in 
cases  of  ephemeral  and  tertian  fevers,  under  certain 
restrictions,  and  in  putrid  fevers,  with  the  caution 
not  to  incur  shivering.  Bathing  is  dangerous  to 
those  who  feel  pain  in  the  liver  after  eating.  He 
adds  cautions  regarding  the  kind  of  water,  but  these 
relate  chiefly  to  water  for  drinking  (De  Bain. 
438-9).  The  bath  of  oil  was  formed,  according  to 
Galen  and  Aetius,  by  adding  the  fifth  part  of  heated 
oil  to  a  water-bath.  Josephus  speaks  (B.  J.  i. 
33,  §5)  as  though  oil  had,  in  Herod  s  case,  been  used 
pure. 

There  were  special  occasions  on  which  the  bath 
was  ceremonially  enjoined,  after  a  leprous  eruption 
healed,  after  the  conjugal  act,  or  an  involuntary 
emission,  or  any  gonorrhoeal  discharge,  after  men 
struation,  child-bed,  or  touching  a  corpse ;  so  for  the 
priests  before  and  during  their  times  of  office  such  a 
duty  was  prescribed.  [BATHS.]  The  Pharisees 
and  Essenes  aimed  at  scrupulous  strictness  of  all 
such  rules  (Matt.  xv.  2  ;  Mark  vii.  5 ;  Luke  xi. 
38).  River-bathing*  was  common,  but  houses  soon 
began  to  include  a  bath-room  (Lev.  xv.  13 ;  2  K. 
v.  10 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  2  ;  Susanna  15).  Vapour-baths, 
as  among  the  Romans,  were  latterly  included  in 
these,  as  well  as  hot  and  cold-bath  apparatus,  and 
the  use  of  perfumes  and  oils  after  quitting  it  was 
everywhere  diffused  (Wunderbar,  2tes  Heft,  ii.  B.). 
The  vapour  was  sometimes  sought  to  be  inhaled, 
though  this  was  reputed  mischievous  to  the  teeth. 
It  was  deemed  healthiest  alter  a  warm  to  take 
also  a  cold  bath  (Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Sydenh.  Soc.  i. 
68).  The  Talmud  has  it — "  Whoso  takes  a  warm- 
bath,  and  does  not  also  drink  thereupon  some  warm 
water,  is  like  a  stove  hot  only  from  without,  but 
not  heated  also  from  within.,  Whoso  bathes  and 
does  not  withal  anoint,  is  like  the  liquor  outside 
a  vat.  Whoso  having  had  a  warm-bath  does  not 
also  immediately  pour  cold  water  over  him,  is  like 
an  iron  made  to  glow  in  the  fire,  but  not  thereafter 
hardened  in  the  water."  This  succession  of  cold 
water  to  hot  vapour  is  commonly  practised  in  Rus 
sian  and  Polish  baths,  and  is  said  to  contribute 
much  to  robust  health  (Wunderbar,  ibid.). 

Besides  the  usual  authorities  on  Hebrew  anti 
quities,  Talmudical  and  modern,  Wunderbar  (Istes 
Heft,  pp.  57-69)  has  compiled  a  collection  of 
writers  on  the  special  subject  of  Scriptural  &c. 
medicine,  including  its  psychological  and  botanical 
aspects,  as  also  its  political  relations  ;  a  distinct 
section  of  thirteen  monographs  treats  of  the  leprosy  ; 
and  every  various  disease  mentioned  in  Scripture 
appears  elaborated  in  one  or  more  such  short  trea- 


i  Dr.  Adams  (Paul.  Aegin.  ed.  Syd.  Soc.  i.  72)  says 
that  the  alum  of  the  ancients  found  in  mineral  springs 
cannot  have  been  the  alum  of  modern  commerce,  since  it 
>B  very  rarely  to  be  detected  there  ;  but  the  alumen  plu- 
motum,  or  hair  alum,  said  to  consist  chiefly  of  the  sul 
phite  of  magnesia  and  iron.  The  former  exists,  how 
ever.  In  Rrtiut  abundance  in  the  aluminous  spring  of  the 


Isle  of  Wight.    The  ancient  nitre  or  natron  was  a,  nativg 
carbonate  of  soda  (ibid.). 

*  The  case  of  Naaman  may  be  paralleled  by  Herod. 
Iv.  90,  where  we  read  of  the  Teams,  a  tributary  of  the 
Hebrus— Ae'-yerat  cirai  Trora/oiwi'  dpioro?,  TO.  T»  aMa 
(<;  n.Kt<riv  i/x'porTo,  sat  &r)  KO.I  av&pdm  Kal  iIHTOKri 


310 


MEDICINE 


tiBes.  Those  out  of  the  whole  number  which 
appear  most  generally  in  esteem,  to  judge  from 
references  made  to  them,  are  the  following : — 

Kosenmiiller's  Natural  History  of  the  Bibk,  in 
the  Biblical  Cabinet,  vol.  xxvii. 

De  Wette,  Hebraisch  -  jiidische  Archaologie, 
§271  6. 

Calmet,  Augustin,  La  Medecine  et  les  Medecins 
des  anc.  Ilebreux,  in  his  Comm.  literate,  Paris, 
1724,  vol.  v. 

Idem,  Dissertation  sur  la  Sueur  du  San<j, 
Luke  xxii.  43-4. 

Pruner,  Krankheiten  des  Orients. 

Sprengel,  Kurt,  De  medic.  Ebraeamm  Halle, 
1789.  8vo.  Also, 

Idem,  Beitrage  zur  Qeschichte  der  Medicin. 
Halle,  1794,  8vo. 

Idem,  Versuch  einer  pragm.  Geschichte  der 
Arzeneikunde.  Halle,  1792,  1803,  1821.  Also 
the  last  edition  by  Dr.  Rosenbaum,  Leipzig,  1846, 
8vo.  i.  §37-45. 

Idem,  ffistor.  Rei  Herbar.  lib.  i.  cap.  i.  Flora 
Biblica. 

Bartholini,  Thorn.,  De  morbis  biblicis,  miscella 
nea  medico,  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxx.  p.  1521. 

Idem,  Paralytici  novi  Testamenti,  in  Ugolini, 
vol.  xxx.  p.  1459. 

Schmidt,  Joh.  Jac.,  Biblischer  Medicos.  Ziil- 
lichau,  1743,  8vo.  p.  761. 

Kail,  De  morbis  sacerdot.  V.  T.  Hafn.  1745.  4to. 

Reinhard,  Chr.  Tob.  Ephr.,  Bibelkrankheiten, 
welche  im  alien  Testamente  vorkommen.  Books 
i.  and  ii.  1767,  8vo.  p.  384.  Book  v.  1768,  8vo. 
p.  244. 

Shapter,  Thomas,  Medica  sacra,  or  short  exposi 
tions  of  the  more  important  diseases  mentioned 
in  the  sacred  writings.  London,  1834. 

Wunderbar,  R.  J.,  Biblisch-talmudische  Medi 
cin,  in  4  parts,  Riga,  1850-3,  8vo.  Also  new 
series,  1857. 

Celsius,  Ol.,  Hierobotanicon  s.  de  plantis  sacrce 
scriptures  dissertationes  breves.  2  Pails.  Upsal, 
1745,  1747.  8vo.  Amstelod.  1748. 

Bochart,  Sam.,  Hierozoicon  s.  bipartitum  opus 
de  animalibus  sacrce  scripturce.  London,  1665, 
fol.  Francf.  1675.  fol.  Abo  edited  by,  and  with 
the  notes  of,  Era.  F.  G.  Rosenmiiller,  Lips.  1793, 
3  vols.  4to. 

Spencer,  De  legibus  Hebraeorum  ritualibus.  Tu 
bingen,  1732,  fol. 

Reinhard,  Mich.  H.,  De  cibis  Hebrcenrum  prohi- 
bitis;  Diss.  I.  respon.  Seb.  Mailer.  Viteb.  1697, 
4to. — Diss.  II.  respon.  Chr.  Liske,  ibid.  1697, 
4to. 

Eschenbach,  Chr.  Ehrenfr.,  Progr.  de  lepra 
Judceorum.  Rostock,  1774.  4to.  in  his  Scripta 
medic,  bibl.  p.  17-41. 

Schilling,  G.  G.  De  lepra  commentationcs,  rec. 
J.  D.  Hahn,  Lugd.  Bat.  1788,  8vo. 

Chamseru,  R.,  Recherches  sur  le  veritable 
caraciere  de  la  lepre  des  Hebreux,  iu  Man.  da  la 
8oc.  medic,  d 'emulation  de  Paris,  1810,  iii.  335. 

•  This  writer  has  several  monographs  if  much  interest 
on  detached  points,  all  to  be  found  in  his  Dissertationet 
Acatl.  Medic.    Jena,  17th  and  18th  centuries. 

«  This  writer  is  remarkable  for  carefully  abstaining 
from  any  reference  to  the  0.  T.,  even  where  such  would 
be  most  apposite. 

•  The  writer  wishes  to  acknowledge  his  obligations  to 
Dr.  Kolleston,  Linacre  Professor  of  Physiology ;  Dr.  Green- 
Mil  of  Hastings;    Dr.  Adams,  editor  of  several  of  the 

Society's  publications     M.i.   H.    Kumsey  of 


MEGIDDO 

Relation  Chirurgicale  De  f Annie  de  I' Or  tent 
Pjiris,  1804. 

Wedel,*  Geo.  W.,  De  lepra  in  sacris,  Jena, 
1715.  4to.  in  his  Exercitat  med.  philolog.  Cent. 
II.  dec.  4.  S.  93-107. 

Idem,  De  morb.  Jfiskice,  Jena,  1692,  4to  in 
his  Exercit.  med.philol.  Cent.  1.  Dec.  7. 

Idem,  De  morbo  Jorami  exercit.  I.  II.  Jen. 
1717.  4to.  in  his  Exercit.  med.  philol.  Cent.  II. 
Dec.  5. 

Idem,  De  Saulo  energumeno,  Jena,  1685,  in 
his  Exercitat.  med.  philol.  Cent.  I.  dec.  II. 

Idem,  De  morbis  senum  Solomonceis,  Jen. 
1686,  4to.  in  his  Exercit.  med.  phil.  Cent.  1. 
dec.  3. 

Lichtenstein,  Versuch,  $c.  in  Eichharn's  Allgem. 
Bibliothek,  VI.  407-67. 

Mead,  Dr.  R.,  Medica  Sacra.    4to.     London. 

Gudius,  G.  F.,  Exercitatio  philologica  de  He- 
braica  obstetricum  origins,  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxx. 
p.  1061. 

Kail,  De  obstetricibus  matrum  Hebrceorum  in 
JEgypto.  Hamburg,  1746,  4to. 

Israels,  Dr.  A.  H.,'  Tentamen  historico-me- 
dicum,  exhibens  collectanea  G  yncecologica,  quce  ex 
Talmude  Babylonico  depromsit.  Groningeii, 
1845,  8vo.  [H.  H.]« 

ME'EDA  (MetSSa  :  Meedda)  =  MEHIDA 
(1  Esdr.  v.  32). 

MEGID'DO  (VMO;  in  Zech.  iii.  11,  }nj»  : 

in  the  LXX.  MaytSoui  or  MayfoSuv,  except  in 
1  K.  ix.  15,  where  it  is  Ma-y5c<>)  was  in  a  very 
marked  position  on  the  southern  rim  of  the  plain 
of  KSDRAELON,  on  the  frontier-line  (speaking  gene 
rally)  of  the  territories  of  the  tribes  of  ISSACH  AU 
and  MANASSEH,  and  commanding  one  of  those 
passes  from  the  north  into  the  hill-country  which 
were  of  such  critical  importance  on  various  occa 
sions  in  the  history  of  Judaea  (ris  ava&dafis  TTJJ 
optivfjs,  oVi  8V  avruv  1\v  rj  ffooSos  fls  rrjv 
'lovSaiav,  Judith  iv.  7). 

Megiddo  is  usually  spoken  of  in  connexion  with 
TAANACH,  and  frequently  in  connexion  with  BETH- 
SHAN  and  JEZREEL.  This  combination  suggests 
a  wide  view  alike  over  Jewish  scenery  and  Jewish 
history.  The  first  mention  occurs  in  Josh.  xii.  21, 
where  Megiddo  appears  as  the  city  of  one  of  the 
"  thirty  and  one  kings,"  or  petty  chieftains,  whom 
Joshua  defeated  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan.  This  was 
one  of  the  places  within  the  limits  of  Issachar  assigned 
to  Manasseh  (Josh.  xvii.  11 ;  1  Chr.  vii.  29).  But 
the  arrangement  gave  only  an  imperfect  advantage 
to  the  latter  tribe,  for  they  did  not  drive  out  the 
Canaanites,  and  were  only  able  to  make  them  tri 
butary  (Josh.  xvii.  12, 18 ;  Judg.  i.  27,  28).  The 
song  of  Deborah  brings  the  place  vividly  before  us, 
as  the  scene  of  the  great  conflict  between  Sisera 
.and  Barak.  The  chariots  of  Sisera  were  gathered 
"  unto  the  river  of  KiSHON  "  (Judg.  iv.  13) ;  Barak 
went  down  with  his  men  "  from  Mount  TABOU  " 

Cheltenham,  and  Mr.  J.  Cooper  Forster  of  Guy's  Hospital, 
I  .Minion,  for  their  kindness  in  revising  and  correcting  this 
article,  and  that  on  LEFKUSY,  In  their  passage  through  the 
press ;  at  the  same  time  that  he  does  not  wish  to  imply 
any  responsibility  on  their  part  for  Hie  opinions  or  state 
ments  contained  in  them,  wive  so  far  as  they  are  referred 
to  by  name.  Dr.  Koly-rt  Sim  has  also  greatly  assisted 
liui  with  the  results  of  large  actual  experience  in  Oriaote) 


MEGIDDO 

mln  the  plain  (iv.  14);  "then  fought  the  kings  of 
'.'anian  in  Taanach  by  the  waters  of  Megiddo" 
^v.  19).  The  course  of  the  Kishon  is  immediately 
in  front  of  this  position ;  and  the  river  seems  to 
have  been  flooded  by  a  storm:  hence  what  fol 
lows  : — "  The  river  of  Kishon  swept  them  away, 
that  ancient  river,  the  river  Kishon"  (v.  21). 
Still  we  do  not  read  of  Megiddo  being  firmly  in  the 
occupation  of  the  Israelites,  and  perhaps  it  was  not 
really  so  till  the  time  of  Solomon.  That  monarch 
placed  one  of  his  twelve  commissariat  officers, 
named  Baana,  over  "  Taanach  and  Megiddo,"  with 
the  neighbourhood  of  Beth-shean  and  Jezreel  (1  K. 
iv.  12).  In  this  reign  it  appears  that  some  costly 
works  were  constructed  at  Megiddo  (ix.  15).  These 
were  probably  fortifications,  suggested  by  its  im 
portant  military  position.  All  the  subsequent  no 
tices  of  the  place  are  connected  with  military 
transactions.  To  this  place  Ahaziah  fled  when  his 
unfortunate  visit  to  Joram  had  brought  him  into 
collision  with  Jehu ;  and  here  he  died  (2  K.  ix.  27) 
within  the  confines  of  what  is  elsewhere  called 
Samaria  (2  Chr.  xxii.  9). 

But  the  chief  historical  interest  of  Megiddo  is 
concentrated  in  Josiah's  death.  When  Pharaoh- 
Necho  came  from  Egypt  agianst  the  king  of  As 
syria,  Josiah  joined  the  latter,  and  was  slain  at 
Megiddo  (2  K.  xxiii.  29),  and  his  body  was  can-led 
from  thence  to  Jerusalem  (ib.  30).  The  story  is 
told  in  the  Chronicles  in  more  detail  (2  Chr. 
xxxv.  22-24).  There  the  fatal  action  is  said  to  have 
taken  place  "  in  the  valley  of  Megiddo."  The 
words  in  the  LXX.  are,  ec  T<£  ireSfy  yiayeSSuv. 
This  calamity  made  a  deep  and  permanent  impres 
sion  on  the  Jews.  It  is  recounted  again  in  1  Esd. 
i.  25-31,  where  in  the  A.  V.  "the  plain  of  Ma- 
giddo"  represents  the  same  Greek  words.  The 
lamentations  for  this  good  king  became  "  an  ordi 
nance  in  Israel"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25).  "  In  all 
Jewry"  they  mourned  for  him,  and  the  lamentation 
was  made  perpetual  "  in  all  the  nation  of  Israel  " 
(1  Esd.  i.  32).  "  Their  grief  was  no  land-flood  of 
present  passion,  but  a  constant  channell  of  continued 
sorrow,  streaming  from  an  annuall  fountain  "  (Ful 
ler's  Pisgah  Sight  of  Palestine,  p.  165).  Thus,  in 
the  language  of  the  prophets  (Zech.  xii.  11),  "the 
mourning  of  Hadadrimmon  in  the  valley  (ireSi'y, 
LXX.)  of  Megiddon  "  becomes  a  poetical  expression 
for  the  deepest  and  most  despairing  grief;  as  in  the 
Apocalypse  (Rev.  xvi.  16)  ARMAGEDDON,  in  con 
tinuance  of  the  same  imagery,  is  presented  as  the 
scene  of  terrible  and  final  conflict.  For  the  Septua- 
gintal  version  of  this  passage  of  Zechariah  we  may 
refer  to  Jerome's  note  on  the  passage.  "  Adad- 
remmon,  pro  quo  LXX.  transtulerunt  'PotScos,  urbs 
est  juxta  Jesraelem,  quae  hoc  olim  vocabulo  nun- 
capata  est,  et  hodie  vocatur  Maximianopolis  in 
Campo  Mageddon."  That  the  prophet's  imagery 
is  drawn  from  the  occasion  of  Josiah's  death  there 
can  be  no  doubt.  In  Stanley's  S.  $  P.  (p.  347) 
this  calamitous  event  is  made  very  vivid  to  us  by 
an  allusion  to  the  "  Egyptian  archers,  in  their  long 
array,  so  well  known  from  their  sculptured  monu- 
imnts."  For  the  mistake  in  the  account  of  Pharaoh- 
Necho's  campaign  in  Herodotus,  who  has  evidently 
put  Migdol  by  mistake  for  Megiddo  (ii.  159),  it  is 
enough  to  refer  to  Bahr's  excursus  on  the  passage. 
The  Egyptian  king  may  have  landed  his  troops  at 
Acre ;  but  it  is  far  more  likely  that  he  marched 
northwards  along  the  coast- plain,  and  then  turned 
round  Cannel  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  t.iking 
the  left  bank  of  the  Kishon,  and  that  there  the 


MEGIDDON,  THE  VALLEY  OF     3H 

Jewish  king  came  upon  him  by  the  gorge  01 
Megiddo. 

The  site  thus  associated  with  critical  passages  of 
Jewish  history  from  Joshua  to  Josiah  has  been 
identified  beyond  any  reasonalle  doubt.  Robinson 
did  not  visit  this  comer  of  the  plain  on  his  first 
journey,  but  he  was  brought  confidently  tc  the 
conclusion  that  Megiddo  was  the  modern  el-Lejjvn, 
which  is  undoubtedly  the  Legio  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome,  an  important  and  well-known  place  in 
their  day,  since  they  assume  it  as  a  central  point 
from  which  to  mark  the  position  of  several  other 
places  in  this  quarter  (Bib.  Res.  ii.  328-330). 
Two  of  the  distances  are  given  thus  :  1  5  miles  from 
Nazareth  and  4  from  Taanach.  There  can  be  110 
doubt  that  the  identification  is  substantially  correct. 
The  fieya  ireSiW  Aeyftavos  (  Onomast.  s.  v.  To)3a- 
Ouv)  evidently  corresponds  with  the  "  plain  (or 
valley)  of  Megiddo"  of  the  0.  T.  Moreover  el- 
Lejjun  is  on  the  caravan-route  from  Egypt  to  Da 
mascus,  and  traces  of  a  Roman  road  are  found  near 
the  village.  Van  de  Velde  visited  the  spot  in  1852, 
approaching  it  through  the  hills  from  the  S.W. 
He  describes  the  view  of  the  plain  as  seen  from  the 
highest  point  between  it  and  the  sea,and  the  huge  tells 
which  mark  the  positions  of  the  "  key-fortresses  " 
of  the  hills  and  the  plain,  Taanuk  and  cl-Lejj&n, 
the  latter  being  the  most  considerable,  and  having 
another  called  Tell-Metzellim,  half  an  hour  to  the 
N.W.  (Syr.  $  Pal.  i.  350-356).  About  a  mouth 
later  in  the  same  year  Dr.  Robinson  was  there,  and 
convinced  himself  of  the  correctness  of  his  former 
opinion.  He  too  describes  the  view  over  the  plain, 
northwards  to  the  wooded  hills  of  Galilee,  eastwards 
to  Jezreel,  and  southwards  to  Taanach,  Tell-Met 
zellim  being  also  mentioned  as  on  a  projecting  por 
tion  of  the  hills  which  are  continuous  with  Cannel, 
the  Kishon  being  just  below  (Bib.  Res.  ii.  116- 
119).  Both  writers  mention  a  copious  stream 
flowing  down  this  gorge  (March  and  April),  and 
turning  some  mills  before  joining  the  Kishon.  Here 
are  probably  the  "  waters  of  Megiddo  "  of  Judg.  v. 
19,  though  it  should  be  added  that  by  Professor 
Stanley  (S.  fy  P.  p.  339)  they  are  supposed  rather 
to  be  "  the  pools  in  the  bed  of  the  Kishon  "  itself. 
The  same  author  regards  the  "  plain  (or  valley)  of 
Megiddo"  as  denoting  not  the  whole  of  the  Es 
draelon  level,  but  that  broadest  part  of  it  which  is 
immediately  opposite  the  place  we  are  describing 
(pp.  335,  336). 

The  passage  quoted  above  from  Jerome  suggests 
a  further  question,  viz.  whether  Von  Raumer  is 
right  in  "  identifying  el-Lejjun  also  with  Maxi 
mianopolis,  which  the  Jerusalem  Itinerary  places 
at  20  miles  from  Caesarea  and  10  from  Jezreel." 
Van  de  Velde  (Memoir,  p.  333)  holds  this  view  to 
be  correct.  He  thinks  he  has  tbund  the  true 
Hadadrimmon  in  a  place  called  Rurnmaneh,  "  at 
the  foot  of  the  Megiddo-hills,  in  a  notch  or  valley 
about  an  hour  and  a  half  S.  of  Tell-Metzellim" 
and  would  place  the  old  fortified  Megiddo  on  this 
tell  itself,  suggesting  further  that  its  name,  "  the 
tell  of  the  Governor,"  may  possibly  retain  a  remi 
niscence  of  Solomon's  officer,  Baana  the  son  of 
Ahilud.  [J.  S.  H.] 


MEGID'DON,  THE  VALLEY  OF 

:  irftiiov  e'KJcoirTo/xfVoii:  campus  Mageddon). 
The  extended  form  of  the  preceding  name.  It  occurs 
only  in  Zech.  xii.  11.  In  two  other  cases  the  LXX, 
retain  the  n  at  the  end  of  the  name,  viz.  2  K.  ix, 
27,  and  2  Chr.  xxxv.  22,  though  it  is  not  theii 


312  MEIIETABEEL 

general  custom.     In  this  passage  it  will  be  observed 
that  they  have  translated  the  word.  [.G.j 

MEHE'TABEEL  (biOtynO:  MfTafcfa  i 
Alex.  M«TjTO/3«^A.  :  Metabeel).  Another  and  less 
correct  form  of  'MEHETABEL.  The  ancestor  of 
Shemaiah  the  prophet  who  was  hired  against  Ne- 
hemiah  by  Tobiah  and  Sanballat  (Neh.  vi.  10). 
He  was  probably  of  priestly  descent  ;  and  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  Dclaiah,  who  is  called  his  son,  is  the 
same  as  the  head  of  the  23rd  course  of  priests  in 
the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  18). 

MEHE'TABEL  (^K^ntD:  Samaritan  Cod. 
^fcODTlD  :  MerejSe^A.  :  ifreetabel).  The  daughter 
of  Hatred,  and  wife  of  Hadad,  or  Hadar,  the  eighth 
and  last-mentioned  king  of  Edom,  who  had  Pai  or 
Pau  for  his  birthplace  or  chief  city,  before  royalty 
was  established  among  the  Israelites  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
39).  Jerome  (de  Nomin.  Hebr.~)  writes  the  name 
in  the  form  Mettabel,  which  he  renders  "  quam 
bonus  est  Deus." 

ME'HIDA  (NTnt?  :  Moou5«£  ;  Alex.  Me«S(£  ; 
in  Ezr.  MtSef;  Alex.  MeetSa  in  Neh.:  Mahida}, 
a  family  of  Nethinim,  the  descendants  of  Mehida, 
returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
52  ;  Neh.  vii.  54).  In  1  Esdr.  the  name  occurs  in 
the  form  MEKDA. 


MEHI'B  ("WID:  MaXlp  5  Alex. 
Mahir),  the  son  of  Chelub,  the  brother  of  Shuah, 
or  as  he  is  described  in  the  LXX.,  "  Caleb  the  father 
of  Ascha"  (1  Chr.  iv.  11).  In  the  Targum  of  R. 
Joseph,  Mehir  appears  as  "  Perug,"  its  Chaldee 
equivalent,  both  words  signifying  "  price." 

MEHOL'ATHTTE,  THE  pr^TOn:  Alex. 
6  |Uo0uXa0etT7jr  ;  Vat.  omits  :  Molathita),  a  word 
occurring  once  only  (1  Sam.  xviii.  19),  as  the  de 
scription  of  Adriel,  son  of  Barzillai,  to  whom  Saul's 
daughter  Merab  was  married.  It  no  doubt  denotes 
that  he  belonged  to  a  place  called  Meholah,  but 
whether  that  was  Abel-Meholah  afterwards  the 
native  place  of  Elisha,  or  another,  is  as  uncertain  as 
it  is  whether  Adriel's  father  was  the  well-known 
Barzillai  the  Gileadite  or  not.  [G.] 


MEHU'JAEL  (wnO  and  'HO  :  Ma\e- 
At^A;  Alex.  McuVjA.:  Maviael),  the  son  of  Irad, 
and  fourth  in  descent  from  Cain  (Gen.  iv.  18). 
Ewald,  regarding  the  genealogies  in  Gen.  /v.  and  v. 
as  substantially  the  same,  follows  the  Vat.  LXX., 
considering  Mahalaleel  as  the  true  reading,  and  the 
variation  from  it  the  result  of  careless  transcrip 
tion.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  this  is  a 
gratuitous  assumption.  The  Targum  of  Onkelos 
follows  the  Hebrew  even  in  the  various  forms  which 
the  name  assumes  in  the  same  verse.  The  Peshito- 
Syriac,  Vulgate,  and  a  few  MSS.  retain  the  former 
of  the  two  readings;  while  the  Sam.  text  reads 
,  which  appears  to  have  been  followed  by 


•  The  instances  of  H  being  employed  to  render  the 
strange  Hebrew  guttural  Ain  are  not  frequent  in  the  A.  V. 
"  Hebrew "  0"13jy)  —  which  in  earlier  versions  was 
"  Ebrew"  (comp.  Shakspere,  Henry  IV.  Part  I.  Act  2, 
Sc.  4) — is  oftenest  encountered. 

b     .bc«,  Ma'an,  all  but  identical  with  the  Hebrew 

JfcMh 

«  Here  the  Cetkib.  or  original  Hebrew  text,  has  JUeinim, 
which  is  nearer  the  Greek  pqnivalen;  than  Meunim  or 
tleoniiH. 


MEHUNIMS 

the  Aidine  and  Compluteusiau  editions,    and   tta 
Alex.  MS.  [W.  A.  W.I 

MEH'UMAN  (JIM  DO :  'A/uk  :  Jfaumowij, 
one  of  the  seven  eunuchs  (A.  V.  "chamberlains,") 
who  served  before  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  i.  10).  The 

LXX.  appeal-  to  have  read  JOH?  for  jD-lnD?. 

MEH'UNIM  (D*:-iyO,  without  the  article: 
May toe/ifiv  ;  Alex.  Moowciju :  Munim),  Ezr.  ii.  50, 
Elsewhere  called  MEHUNIMS  and  MEUNIM  ;  and  in 
the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  MEANI. 

MEH'UNIMS,  THE  (B»»jn?n,  i.  e.  the 
Me'uiiim :  of  Mfivawi;  Alex,  oi  Mtvaioi:  Am- 
monitae),  a  people  against  whom  king  Uzziah  waged 
a  successful  war  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  7).  Although  so 
different  in  its  English*  dress,  yet  the  name  is  in 
the  original  merely  the  plural  of  MAON  (J1VD),  a 
nation  named  amongst  those  who  in  the  earlier  days 
of  their  settlement  in  Palestine  harassed  and  op 
pressed  Israel.  Maon,  or  the  Maonites,  probably 
inhabited  the  country  at  the  back  of  the  great 
range  of  Seir,  the  modem  esh-Shcrah,  which  forms 
the  eastern  side  of  the  Wady  el-Arabah,  where  at 
the  present  day  there  is  still  a  town  of  the  same 
nameb  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  Aug.  24).  And  this  is 
quite  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  2  Chr.  xxvi.  7, 
where  the  Mehunim  are  mentioned  with  "  the  Ara 
bians  of  Gur-baal,"  or,  as  the  LXX.  render  it,  Petra. 

Another  notice  of  the  Mehunims  in  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  (cir.  B.C.  726-697)  is  found  in  1  Chr.  iv. 
41  .c  Here  they  are  spoken  of  as  a  pastoral  people, 
either  themselves  Hamites,  or  in  alliance  with  Ha- 
mites,  quiet  and  peaceable,  dwelling  in  tents.  They 
had  been  settled  from  "  of  old,"  i.  e.  aboriginally, 
at  the  east  end  of  the  Valley  of  Gedor  or  Gerar,  in 
the  wilderness  south  of  Palestine.  A  connexion  with 
Mount  Seir  is  hinted  at,  though  obscurely  (ver.  42). 
[See  vol.  i.  p.  669  a.]  Here,  however,  the  A.  V. 
— probably  following  the  translations  of  Luther  and 
Junius,  which  in  their  turn  follow  the  Targum — 
treats  the  word  as  an  ordinary  noun,  and  renders 
it  "habitations;"  a  reading  now  relinquished  by 
scholars,  who  understand  the  word  to  refer  to  the 
people  in  question  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1002a,  and 
Notes  on  Burckhardt,  1069 ;  Bertheau,  Chroruk). 

A  third  notice  of  the  Mehunim,  corroborative  of 
those  already  mentioned,  is  found  in  the  narrative 
of  2  Chr.  xx.  There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that 
in  ver.  1  "  the  Ammonites  "  should  be  read  as  "  the 
d  Maonites,"  who  in  that  case  are  the  "  men  of  Mount 
Seir"  mentioned  later  in  the  narrative  (ver.  10, 22). 

In  all  these  passages,  including  the  last,  the  LXX. 
render  the  name  by  of  Mfivaiot — the  Minaeans — a 
nation  of  Arabia  renowned  for  their  traffic  in  spices, 
who  are  named  by  Strabo,  Ptolemy,  and  other 
ancient  geographers,  and  whose  seat  is  now  ascer 
tained  to  have  been  the  S.W.  portion  of  the  great 
Arabian  peninsula,  the  western  half  of  the  modern 
Hadramaut  (Diet,  of  Geography,  "  Minaei "). 

d  The  text  of  this  passage  is  accurately  as  follows  :— 
"  The  children  of  Moab  and  the  children  of  Aminon,  and 
wi  th  them  of  the  Ammonites ;"  the  words  "  other  beside  " 
being  interpolated  by  our  translators. 

The  change  from  "  Ammonites  "  to  "  Mehunim  "  is  not 
so  violent  as  it  looks  to  on  English  reader.  It  is  a  simple 
transposition  of  two  letters,  D*3iyD  for  D*31Di?  5  and 
it  is  supported  by  the  LXX.,  and  by  Joseplius  (Ant.  ix.  1, 
$2,"Apa/3cf);  and  by  modem  scholars,  as  DeWette(/?iW), 
Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  474,  note).  A  reverse  transpirltios 
will  be  found  in  the  Syriac  version  of  Judg.  x.  12.  whers 


MEI1UNIMS 

Bochart  has  pointed  out  (Piialcg,  ii.  cap.  xxii.), 
with  reason,  that  disteuice  aloue  renders  it  im 
possible  that  these  Minaeans  can  be  the  Meunim 
•>(  the  Bible,  and  also  that  the  people  of  the 
Arabian  peninsula  are  Shemites,  while  the  Meunim 
appear  to  have  been  descended  from  Ham  (1  Chr. 
iv.  41).  But  with  his  usual  turn  for  etymological 
speculation  he  endeavours  nevertheless  to  establish 
an  identity  between  the  two,  on  the  ground  that 
Cam  al-Manasil,  a  place,  two  days'  journey  south 
of  Mecca,  one  of  the  towns  of  the  Minaeans,  signifies 
the  "  horn  of  habitations,"  and  might  therefore  be 
equivalent  to  the  Hebrew  Meonim. 

Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  10,  §3)  calls  them  "  the  Arabs 
who  adjoined  Egypt,"  and  speaks  of  a  city  built 
by  Uzziah  on  the  Red  Sea  to  overawe  them. 

Ewald  (Geschichte,  i.  323 note)  suggests  that 
the  southern  Minaeans  were  a  colony  from  the 
Maonites  of  Mount  Seir,  who  in  their  turn  he 
appeal's  to  consider  a  remnant  of  the  Amorites  (see 
the  text  of  the  same  page). 

That  the  Minaeans  were  familiar  to  the  translators 
of  the  LXX.  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  they  not 
only  introduce  the  name  on  the  occasions  already 
mentioned,  but  that  they  further  use  it  as  equivalent 
to  NAAMATHITE.  Zophar  the  Naamathite,  one  of 
the  three  friends  of  Job,  is  by  them  presented  as 
"  Sophar  the  Minaean,"  and  "  Sophar  king  of  the 
Minaeans."  In  this  connexion  it  is  not  unworthy 
of  notice  that  as  there  was  a  town  called  Maon  in 
the  mountain-district  of  Judah,  so  there  was  one 
called  Naamah  in  the  lowland  of  the  same  tribe. 
El-Miny&y,  which  is,  or  was,  the  first  station  south 
of  Gaza,  is  probably  identical  with  Minois,  a  place 
mentioned  with  distinction  in  the  Christian  records 
of  Palestine  in  the  5th  and  6th  centuries  (Reland, 
Palaestina,  899  ;  LeQuien,  Oriens  Christ,  iii.  669), 
and  both  may  retain  a  trace  of  the  Minaeans. 
BAAL-MEON,  a  town  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  near 
Heshbon,  still  called  Ma' in,  probably  also  retains  a 
trace  of  the  pretence  of  the  Maonites  or  Mehunim 
north  of  their  proper  locality. 

The  latest  appearance  of  the  name  MEHUNIMS 
in  the  Bible  is  in  the  lists  of  those  who  returned 
from  the  Captivity  with  Zerubbabel.  Amongst  the 
non-Israelites  from  whom  the  Nethinim — following 
the  precedent  of  what  seems  to  have  been  the 
foundation  of  the  "order — were  made  up,  we  find 
their  name  (Ezr.  ii.  50,  A.  V.  "  Mehunim  ;"  Neh. 
vii.  52,  A.  V.  "  Meunim  ").  Here  they  are  men 
tioned  with  the  Nephishim,  or  descendants  of 
Nnphish,  an  Ishmaelite  people  whose  seat  appears 
to  have  been  on  the  east  of  Palestine  (1  Chr.  v.  19), 
and  therefore  certainly  not  far  distant  from  Ma'an 
the  chief  city  of  the  Maonites.  [G.] 


MELCHIAJS 


313 


ME-JAR'KON 


:    fldAa<nra  ' 


•:<av  :  Aquae  Jercori],  a  town  in  the  tcrr.'tory  oi 
Dan  (Josh.  six.  46  only)  ;  named  nest  in  order  to 
Gath-rimmon,  and  in  tr«  neighbourhood  of  Joppa 
or  Japho.  The  lexicographers  interpret  the  name 
as  meaning  *  the  yellow  waters."  No  attempt  lias 
been  made  to  identify  it  with  any  existing  site.  It 
is  difficult  not  to  suspect  that  the  name  following 
that  of  Me-hajjarkon,  har-Rakon  (A.  V.  Rakkon),  is 
a  mere  corrupt  repetition  thereof,  as  the  two  bear  a 
very  close  similarity  to  each  other,  and  occur  no 
where  else.  [G.] 

MEKO'NAH  (n3b»  »:  LXX.  omits:  Mocfiona), 

one  of  the  towns  which  were  re-inhabited  after  the 
captivity  by  the  men  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi.  28).  Frcm 
its  being  coupled  with  Ziklag,  we  should  infer  that  it 
was  situated  far  to  the  south,  while  the  mention  of 
the  "  daughter  towns  "  (0133,  A.  V.  "  villages  ") 
dependent  on  it,  seem  to  show  that  it  was  a  place  of 
some  magnitude.  Mekonah  is  not  mentioned  else 
where,  and  it  does  not  appear  that  iny  name  corre 
sponding  with  it  has  been  yet  discovered.  The 
conjecture  of  Schwarz  —  that  it  is  identical  with  the 
Mechanum,  which  Jerome  b  (Onomasticon,  "  Beth- 
macha  ")  locates  between  Eleutheropolis  and  Jeru 
salem,  at  eight  miles  from  the  former  —  is  entirely 
at  variance  with  the  above  inference.  [G.] 


MELATI'AH  (iVEp  :  MOAT/OS  :  Meltias',, 
a  Gibeonite,  who,  with  the  men  of  Gibeon  and 
Mizpah,  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jeru 
salem  under  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii.  7). 

MEL'CHI  (Me\x^  in  Vat.  and  Alex.  MSS.  , 
Me\x/,  Tisch.  :  Melchi').  1.  The  son  of  Janna, 
and  ancestor  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Luke  iii.  24).  In  the  list  given  by  Afri- 
canus  Melchi  appears  as  the  father  of  Heli,  the  in 
tervening  Levi  and  Matthat  being  omitted  (Hervey, 
Geneal.  p.  137). 

2.  The  son  of  Addi  in  the  same  genealogy  (Luke 
iii.  28). 

MELCHI'AH  (n»3^»:  MeAx'«s  =  Melchias], 
a  priest,  the  father  of  Pashur  (Jer.  xxi.  1).  He 
is  elsewhere  called  Malchiah  and  Malchijah.  (See 
MALCHIAH  7,  and  MALCHIJAH  1.) 

MELCHI'  AS  (M6AXias  :  Melchias).  1.  The 
same  as  MALCHIAH  2  (1  Esdr.  ix.  26). 

2.  =  MALCHIAH  3  and  MALCHIJAH  4  (1  Esdr. 
ix.  32). 

3.  (Malachias).    The   same  as  MALCHIAH  6 
(1  Esdr.  k.  44). 


"  Ammon"  is  read  for  the  "  Maon"  of  the  Hebrew.  The 
LXX.  make  the  change  again  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  8 ;  but  here 
there  is  no  apparent  occasion  for  it. 

The  Jewish  gloss  on  2  Chr.  xx.  1  is  curious.  "  By 
Ammonites  Edomites  are  meant,  who,  out  of  respect  for 
the  fraternal  relation  between  the  two  nations,  would  not 
come  against  Israel  in  their  own  dress,  but  disguised  them 
selves  as  Ammonites."  (Jerome,  Quaest.  Iletrr.  ad  loc.) 

«  The  Institution  of  the  Nethiniin,  i.  e.  "  the  given 
ones,"  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  Midianite  war 
(Num.  xxxi.),  when  a  certain  portion  of  the  captives  was 
1  given "  (the  word  In  the  original  (a  the  same)  to  the 
Levites  who  kept  the  charge  of  the  Sacred  Tent  (ver.  30, 
47V  The  Gibeonites  were  probably  the  next  accession, 
and  the  invaluable  lists  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  alluded  to 
above  seem  to  show  that  the  captives  from  many  a  foieign 
cation  went  to  swell  the  numbers  of  the  Order.  See 


Mehunim,  Nephusim,  Harsha,  Sisera,  and  other  foreign 
names  contained  In  these  lists. 

a  Our  translators  have  here  represented  the  Hefciew 
Caph  by  K,  which  they  usually  reserve  for  the  Kcph. 
Other  instances  are  KITHLISH  and  KITTIM. 

b  This  passage  of  Jerome  is  one  of  those  which  com 
pletely  startle  the  reader,  and  incline  him  to  mistrust 
altogether  Jerome's  knowledge  of  sacred  topography.  He 
actually  places  the  Beth-maacha,  in  which  Joab  besieged 
Sheba  the  son  of  Bichri,  and  which  was  one  of  the  first 
places  taken  by  Tiglath-Pileser  on  his  entrance  into  the 
north  of  Palestine,  among  the  mountains  of  Judah,  south 
of  Jerusalem  !  A  mistake  of  the  same  kind  is  found  in 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  and  Hap-Parchi,  who  place  the  Maon 
of  David's  adventures  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Mount 
Carmel. 


314 


MELCII1EL 


MEL'CHIEL  (Mf\xe«^A)-  Charmis,  the 
ion  of  Melchiel,  was  one  of  the  three  governors  of 
Bethulia  (Jud.  vi.  15).  The  Vulgate  has  a  dif 
ferent  reading,  and  the  Peshito  gives  the  name 
Manshajel. 

MELCHI'SEDEC  (M€Ax«r«8eY),  the  form 
of  the  name  MELCHIZEDEK  adopted  in  the  A.V.  of 
the  New  Testament  (Heb.  v.  vi.  vii). 

MELCHI-SHUA  (JWB^D,  i.e.  Malchishua: 

yif\Xeiff~*  >  Alex.  Wle\xi<rovf  >  Joseph.  MtA-X"1"01  • 
Melchisua),  a  son  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xiv.  49,  xxxi.  2), 
An  erroneous  manner  of  representing  the  name, 
which  is  elsewhere  correctly  given  MALCHISHUA. 

MELCHIZ'EDEK  (pnr^O,  «.  e.  Malci- 
tzedek:  MeAxureSeK :  Melchisedech),  king  of 
Salem  and  priest  of  the  Most  High  God,  who 
met  Abram  in  the  valley  of  Shaveh  [or,  the  level 
valley],  which  is  the  king's  valley,  brought  out 
bread  and  wine,  blessed  Abram,  and  received 
tithes  from  him  (Gen.  xiv.  18-20.).  The  other 
places  in  which  Melchizedek  is  mentioned  are  Ps. 
ex.  4,  where  Messiah  is  described  as  a  priest  for  ever, 
"after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,"  and  Heb.  v.,  vi., 
vii.,  where  these  two  passages  of  the  O.  T.  are 
quoted,  and  the  typical  relation  of  Melchizedek  to 
our  Lord  is  stated  at  great  length. 

There  is  something  surprising  and  mysterious  in 
the  first  appearance  of  Melchizedek,  and  iu  the  sub 
sequent  references  to  him.  Bearing  a  title  which 
Jews  in  after  ages  would  recognize  as  designating 
their  own  sovereign,  bearing  gifts  which  recall  to 
Christians  the  Lord's  Supper,  this  Canaanite  crosses 
for  a  moment  the  path  of  Abram,  and  is  unhe 
sitatingly  recognized  as  a  person  of  higher  spiritual 
rank  than  the  friend  of  God.  Disappearing  as  sud 
denly  as  he  came  in,  he  is  lost  to  the  sacred  writings 
for  a  thousand  years ;  and  then  a  few  emphatic  words 
for  another  moment  bring  him  into  sight  as  a  type 
of  the  coming  Lord  of  David.  Once  more,  after 
another  thousand  yeai'S,  the  Hebrew  Christians  are 
taught  to  see  in  him  a  proof  that  it  was  the  con 
sistent  purpose  of  God  to  abolish  the  Levitical 
priesthood.  His  person,  his  office,  his  relation  to 
Christ,  and  the  seat  of  his  sovereignty,  have  given 
rise  to  innumerable  discussions,  which  even  now  can 
scarcely  be  considered  as  settled. 

The  faith  of  early  ages  ventured  to  invest  his 
person  with  superstitious  awe.  Perhaps  it  would 
be  too  much  to  ascribe  to  mere  national  jealousy 
the  fact  that  Jewish  tradition,  as  recorded  in  the 
Targums  of  Pseudo-Jonathan  and  Jerusalem,  and 
in  Rashi  on  Gen.  xiv.,  in  some  cabalistic  (apud 
Bochart,  Phaleg,  pt.  1,  b.  ii.  1,  §69)  and  Rab 
binical  (ap.  Schottgen,  HOT.  Heb.  ii.  645)  writers, 
pronounces  Melchizedek  to  be  a  survivor  of  the 
Deluge,  the  patriarch  Shem,  authorised  by  the 
superior  dignity  of  old  age  to  bless  even  the  father 
of  the  faithful,  and  entitled,  as  the  paramount  lord 
of  Canaan  (Gen.  ix.  26)  to  convey  (xiv.  19)  his  right 
to  Abram.  Jerome  in  his  Ep.  Ixxiii.  ad  Evangelum 
(Opp.  i.  438),  which  is  entirely  devoted  to  a  con 
sideration  of  the  person  and  dwelling-place  of  Mel 
chizedek,  states  that  this  was  the  prevailing  opinion 
of  the  Jews  in  his  time ;  and  it  is  ascribed  to  the 
Samaritans  by  Epiphanius,  Ilacr.  Iv.  6,  p.  472.  It 
was  afterwards  embraced  by  Luther  and  Melanch- 
tlum,  by  our  own  countrymen,  H.  Broughton, 
Selden,  Lightfoot  (C/tor.  Marco  pracm.  ch.  x.  1,  §2), 
Jackson  (On  the  Crcod,  b.  ix.  §2),  and  by  many 
others.  It  should  be  noted  that  iliu  supposition 


MELCHIZKDKK 

does  not  appear  in  the  Targum  of  Onkeloj, — a  pre 
sumption  that  it  wai  not  received  by  the  Jews 
till  after  the  Christian  era — nor  has  it  tbuiul 
favour  with  the  Fathers.  Equally  old,  perhaps, 
but  less  widely  diffused,  is  the  supposition  not 
unknown  to  Augustine  (Quaest.  in  6'cn/lxxii. — 
Opp.  iii.  396),  and  ascribed  by  Jerome  (/.  c.)  to 
Origen  and  Didymus,  that  Melchizedek  w;is  an 
angel.  The  Fathers  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centu 
ries  record  with  reprobation  the  tenet  of  the  Mel- 
chizedekians  that  he  was  a  Power,  Virtue,  or 
Influence  of  God  (August,  de  Hacrcsibus  §34,, 
Opp.  viii.  11;  Theodoret,  Haeret.  fab.  ii.  6,  p. 
332  ;  Epiphan.  Haer.  Iv.  1,  p.  468  ;  compare  Cyril 
Alex.  Glaph.  in  Gen.  ii.  p.  57)  superior  to  Christ 
(Chrysost.  Horn,  in  Metchiz.  Opp.  vi.  p.  269), 
and  the  not  less  daring  conjecture  of  Hieracas  and 
his  followers  that  Melchizedek  was  the  Holy  Ghost 
(Epiphan.  Haer.  Ixvii.  3,  p.  711  and  Iv.  5.  p. 
472).  Epiphanius  also  mentions  (Iv.  7,  p.  474) 
some  members  of  the  church  as  holding  the  erro 
neous  opinion  that  Melchizedek  was  the  Son  of 
God  appearing  in  human  form,  an  opinion  which 
St.  Ambrose  (De  Abrah.  i.  §3,  Opp.  t.  i.  p.  288) 
seems  willing  to  receive,  and  which  has  been  adopted 
by  many  modem  critics.  Similar  to  this  was  a 
Jewish  opinion  that  he  was  the  Messiah  (apud  Dey- 
ling,  Obs.  Sacr.  ii.  73,  Schottgen,  /.  c. ;  compare  the 
Book  Sohar  ap.  Wolf,  Curae  Phil,  in  Heb.  vii.  1). 
Modern  writers  have  added  to  these  conjectures 
that  he  may  have  been  Ham  (Jurieu),  or  a  de 
scendant  of  Japhet  (Owen),  or  of  Shem  (apud 
Deyling,  I.  c.),  or  even  Enoch  (Hulse),  or  Job 
(Kohlreis).  Other  guesses  may  be  found  in  Deyling 
(I.  c.)  and  in  Pfeiffer  (De  persona  Melch. — Opp. 
p.  51).  All  these  opinions  are  unauthorised  addi 
tions  to  Holy  Scripture — many  of  them  seem  to  be 
irreconcileable  with  it.  It  is  an  essential  part  of 
the  Apostle's  argument  (Heb.  vii.  6)  that  Mel 
chizedek  is  "  without  father,"  and  that  his  "  pedi 
gree  is  not  counted  from  the  sons  of  Levi ;"  so 
that  neither  their  ancestor  Shem,  nor  any  other 
son  of  Noah  can  be  identified  with  Melchizedek ; 
and  again,  the  statements  that  he  fulfilled  on  earth 
the  orlices  of  Priest  and  King  and  that  he  was 
"made  like  unto  the  Son  of  God"  would  hardly 
have  been  predicated  of  a  Divine  Person.  The  way 
in  which  he  is  mentioned  in  Genesis  would  rather 
lead  to  the  immediate  inference  that  Melchizedek 
was  of  one  blood  with  the  children  of  Ham,  among 
whom  he  lived,  chief  (like  the  King  of  Sodom)  of  a 
settled  Canaanitish  tribe.  Perhaps  it  is  not  too 
much  to  infer  from  the  silence  of  Philo  (Abrafuim, 
xl.)  and  Onkelos  (in  Gen.*)  as  to  any  other  opinion, 
that  they  held  this.  It  certainly  was  the  opinion 
of  Josephus  (B.  J.  vii.  18),  of  most  of  the  early 
Fathers  (apud  Jerome,  /.  c.),  of  Theodoret  (in 
Gen.  Ixiv.  p.  77),  and  Epiphanius  (Haer.  Ixvii. 
p.  716),  and  is  now  generally  received  (see  Grotius 
in  ffebr. ;  Patrick's  Commentary  in  Gen. ;  Bleek, 
Hcbrder,  ii.  303 ;  Ebrard,  Hebraer ;  Fairbairn, 
Typology,  ii.  313,  ed.  1854).  And  as  Balaam  was 
a  prophet,  so  Melchizedek  was  a  priest  among  the 
corrupted  heathen  (Philo,  Abrah.  xxxix. ;  Euseb. 
Praep.  Evang.  i.  9),  not  self-appointed  (as  Chry- 
sostom  suggests,  Horn,  in  Gen.  xxxv.  §5,  cf.  Heb.  v 
4),  but  constituted  by  a  special  gift  from  God,  an! 
recognised  as  such  by  Him. 

Melchizedek  combined  the  offices  of  priest  ajid 
king,  as  was  not  uncommon  in  patriarchal  times 
Nothing  is  said  to  distinguish  his  kingship  from 
that  of  the  conteiiijxuary  kings  of  Canaan  ;  but  the 


MELOmZKDEK 

emphatic  words  in  which  he  is  described,  by  a  title 
never  given  even  to  Abraham,  as  a  "  priest  of  tne 
most  High  God,"  as  blessing  Abram  and  receiving 
tithes  from  him,  seem  to  imply  that  his  priesthood 
was  something  more  (see  Hengstenberg,  Christol., 
Ps.  ex.)  than  an  ordinary  }wuriar< hai  priesthood, 
such  as  Abram  himself  and  other  heads  of  families 
(Job  i.  5)  exercised.  And  although  it  has  been 
observed  (Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  p.  122,  ed.  1843) 
that  we  read  of  no  other  sacerdotal  act  per 
formed  by  Melchizedek,  but  only  that  of  blessing 
[and  receiving  tithes,  Pfeiffer],  yet  it  may  be  as 
sumed  that  he  was  accustomed  to  discharge  all  the 
ordinary  duties  of  those  who  are  "  ordained  to  offer 
gifts  and  sacrifices,"  Heb.  viii.  3 ;  and  we  might 
toncede  (with  Philo,  Grotius,  /.  c.  and  others)  that 
his  regal  hospitality  to  Abram  was  possibly  preceded 
by  an  unrecorded  sacerdotal  act  of  oblation  to  God, 
without  implying  that  his  hospitality  was  in  itself, 
as  recorded  in  Genesis,  a  sacrifice. 

The  "  order  of  Melchizedek,"  in  Ps.  ex.  4,  is  ex 
plained  by  Gesenius  and  Rosenmiiller  to  mean 
"  manner "  =  likeness  in  official  dignity  =  a  king 
and  priest.  The  relation  between  Melchizedek  and 
Christ  as  type  and  antitype  is  made  in  the  Ep.  to 
the  Hebrews  to  consist  in  the  following  particulars. 
Each  was  a  priest,  (1)  not  of  the  Levitical  tribe ; 
(2)  superior  to  Abraham ;  (3)  whose  beginning 
and  end  are  unknown  ;  (4)  who  is  not  only  a 
priest,  but  also  a  king  of  righteousness  and  peace. 
To  these  points  of  agreement,  noted  by  the  Apostle, 
human  ingenuity  has  added  others  which,  however, 
stand  in  need  of  the  evidence  of  either  an  inspired 
writer  or  an  eye-witness,  before  they  can  be  re 
ceived,  as  facts  and  applied  to  establish  any  doctrine. 
Thus  J.  Johnson  (Unbloody  Sacrifice,  i.  123,  ed. 
1847)  asserts  on  very  slender  evidence,  that  the 
Fathers  who  refer  to  Gen.  xiv.  18,  understood  that 
Melchizedek  offered  the  bread  and  wine  to  God; 
and  hence  he  infers  that  one  great  part  of  our  Sa 
viour's  Melchizedekian  priesthood  consisted  in  offer 
ing  bread  and  wine.  And  Bellarmine  asks  in  what 
other  respects  is  Christ  a  priest  after  the  order  of 
Melchizedek.  Waterland,  who  does  not  lose  sight 
of  the  deep  significancy  of  Melchizedek's  action,  has 
replied  to  Johnson  in  his  Appendix  to  "  the  Chris 
tian  Sacrifice  explained,"  ch.  iii.  §2,  Works,  v. 
165,  ed.  1843.  Bellannine's  question  is  suffi 
ciently  answered  by  Whitaker,  Disputation  on 
Scripture,  Quest,  ii.  ch.  x.  168,  ed.  1849.  And 
the  sense  of  the  Fathers,  who  spmetimes  expressed 
themselves  in  rhetorical  language,  is  cleared  from 
misinterpretation  by  Bp.  Jewel,  Reply  to  Harding, 
art.  xvii.  (  Works,  ii.  731,  ed.  1847).  In  Jackson 
on  the  Creed,  Bk.  ix.  §2,  ch.  vi.-xi.  955,  et  sq., 
there  is  a  lengthy  but  valuable  account  of  the 
priesthood  of  Melchizedek ;  and  the  views  of  two 
different  theological  schools  are  ably  stated  by 
Aquinas,  Summa  iii.  22,  §6,  and  Turretinus,  Theo- 
logia  vol.  ii.  p.  443-453. 

Another  fruitful  source  of  discussion  has  been 
found  in  the  site  of  Salem  and  Shaveh,  which  cer 
tainly  lay  in  Abram's  road  from  Hobah  to  the 
plain  of  Mamre,  and  which  are  assumed  to  be  near 
to  each  other.  The  various  theories  may  be  briefly 
enumerated  as  follows : — (1)  Salem  is  supposed  to 
have  occupied  in  Abraham  s  time  the  ground  on 
which  afterwards  Jebus  and  then  Jerusalem  stood  ; 
and  Shaveh  to  be  the  valley  cast  of  Jerusalem  through 
which  the  Kidron  flows.  This  opinion,  aban 
doned  by  Roland,  I'll.  833,  but  adopted  by  Winer, 
is  supported  by  the  facts  that  Jerusalem  is  called 


MELITA 


315 


Sjili'in  iii  Ps.  Ixxvi.  2,  and  that  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  10, 
§'J)  and  the  Tsirgums  distinctly  as?ert  their  identity  • 
that  the  king's  aale  (2  Sam.  xviii.  18),  identified  it 
Gen.  xiv.  17  with  Shaveh,  is  pkced  by  Josephus 
(Ant.  vii.  10,  §3),  and  by  mediaeval  and  modern 
tradition  (see  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  239)  in  the  imme 
diate  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  :  that  the  name 
of  a  later  king  of  Jerusalem,  Adonizedek  (Josh.  x.  1, 
sounds  like  that  of  a  legitimate  successor  of  Mel 
chizedek  :  and  that  Jewish  writers  (ap.  Schottgen, 
Hor.  Heb.  in  Heb.  vii.  2)  claim  Zedek  =  righteous 
ness,  as  a  name  of  Jerusalem.  (2)  Jerome  (Opp. 
i.  446)  denies  that  Salem  is  Jerusalem,  and  as 
serts  that  it  is  identical  with  8  town  near  Scytho- 
polis  or  Bethshan,  which  in  his  time  retained  the 
name  of  Salem,  and  in  which  some  extensive  ruins 
were  shown  as  the  remains  of  Melchizedek's  palace. 
He  supports  this  view  by  quoting  Gen.  xxx.  18, 
where,  however,  the  translation  is  questionable  ; 
compare  the  mention  of  Salem  in  Judith  iv.  4,  and 
in  John  iii.  23.  (3)  Professor  '  Stanley  (8.  $  P 
237,  8)  is  of  opinion  that  there  is  every  probability 
that  Mount  Gerizim  is  the  place  where  Melchizedek, 
the  priest  of  the  Most  High,  met  Abram.  Eupo- 
lemus  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  17),  in  a 
confused  version  of  this  story,  names  Argerizim, 
the  mount  of  the  Most  High,  as  the  place  in  which 
Abram  was  hospitably  entertained.  (4)  Ewald 
(Gesch.  iii.  239)  denies  positively  that  it  is  Jeru 
salem,  and  says  that  it  must  be  north  of  Jerusalem 
on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  (i.  410):  an  opinion 
which  Rodiger  (Gesen.  Thesaurus,  14226)  con 
demns.  There  too  Professor  Stanley  thinks  that 
the  king's  dale  was  situate,  near  the  spot  where 
Absalom  fell. 

Some  Jewish  writers  have  held  the  opinion  that 
Melchizedek  was  the  writer  and  Abram  the  subjec: 
of  Ps.  ex.  See  Deyling,  06s.  Sacr.  iii.  137. 

It  may  suffice  to  mention  that  there  is  a  fabulous 
life  of  Melchizedek  printed  among  the  spurious 
works  of  Athanasius,  vol.  iv.  p.  189. 

Reference  may  be  made  to  the  following  works 
in  addition  to  those  already  mentioned  :  two  tracts 
on  Melchizedek  by  M.  J.  H.  von  Elswick,  in  the 
Tliesaurus  Novus  Theolog.-philologicus;  L.  Bor- 
gisius,  ffistoria  Critica  Melchisedeci,  1706: 
Gaillard,  Melchisedecus  Christus,  &c.,  1686:  M. 
C.  Hoffman,  De  Melchisedeco,  1669:  H.  Brough- 
ton,  Treatise  of  Melchizedek,  1591.  See  also 
J.  A.  Fabricius,  Cod.  Pscudepig.  V.  T.  :  P.  Moli- 
naeus,  Votes,  &c.,  1640,  iv.  11  :  J.  H.  Heidegger, 
Hist.  Sacr.  Patriarcharum,  1671,  ii.  288:  Hot- 
linger,  Ennead.  Disput.:  and  P.  Cunaeus,  De  Rcpubl. 
Heb.  iii.  3,  apud  Crit.  Sacr.  vol.  v.  [W.  T.  B.] 

MEL'EA  (MeA.eS  :  Melea).  The  son  of  Menan, 
and  ancestor  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  Jesus 
Christ  (Luke  iii.  31). 


MEL'ECH(^0,="king":  MeA<£x  5  Alex. 
MoAtofl  ;  in  1  Chr.  viii.  35,  MoAox  5  Alex.  MaA&>x> 
1  Chr.  ix.  41  :  Melecli).  The  second  son  of  Micah, 
the  son  of  Merib-baal  or  Mephibosheth,  and  there 
fore  great-grandson  of  Jonathan  the  son  of  Saul. 


MEL'ICU  COlta  j  Ken,  W?®  '•  'A/*o\o</x  5 
Alex.  MoAoux  :  Milicho).  The  same  as  MALLUCII  6 
(Neh.  xii.  14  ;  comp.  ver.  2). 

MEL'ITA  (MeAJTTj),  the  modern  Malta.  This 
island  has  an  illustrious  place  in  Scripture,  as  the 
scene  of  that  shipwreck  of  St.  Paul  which  is  de 
scribed  in  such  minute  detail  in  the  Acts  of  the 


316 


MELI1A 


Apoetles.  An  attempt  has  been  made,  more  than 
once,  to  connect  this  occurrence  with  another  island, 
bearing  the  same  name,  in  the  Gulf  of  Venice ;  and 
our  best  course  here  seems  to  be  to  give  briefly  the 
points  01  evidence  by  which  the  true  state  of  the 
jase  has  been  established. 

(1.)  We  take  St.  Paul's  ship  in  the  condition  in 
which  we  find  her  about  a  day  after  leaving  FAIR 
HAVENS,  i.  e.  when  she  was  under  the  lee  of  CLAUDA 
(Acts  xxvii.  16),  laid-to  on  the  starboard  tack, 
and  strengthened  with  "  undergirders "  [SHIP],  the 
boat  being  just  taken  on  board,  and  the  gale 
blowing  hard  from  the  E.N.E.  [EUROCLYDONj 
(2.)  Assuming  (what  every  practised  sailor  would 
allow)  that  the  ship's  direction  of  drift  would  be 
about  W.  by  N.,  and  her  rate  of  drift  about  a  mile 
and  a  half  an  hour,  we  come  at  once  to  the  con 
clusion,  by  measuring  the  distance  on  the  chart, 
that  she  would  be  brought  to  the  coast  of  Malta  on 
the  thirteenth  day  (see  ver.  27).  (3.)  A  ship  drift 
ing  in  this  direction  to  the  place  traditionally  known 
as  St.  Paul's  Bay  would  come  to  that  spot  on  the 
oaast  without  touching  any  other  part  of  the  island 
previously.  The  coast,  in  fact,  trends  from  this  bay 
to  the  S.E.  This  may  be  seen  on  consulting  any 
map  or  chart  of  Malta.  (4.)  On  Koura  Point, 
which  is  the  south-easterly  extremity  of  the  bay, 
there  must  infallibly  have  been  breakers,  with  the 
wind  blowing  from  the  N.E.  Now  the  alarm  was 
certainly  caused  by  breakers,  for  it  took  place  in  the 
night  (ver.  27),  and  it  does  not  appear  that  the 
passengers  were  at  first  aware  of  the  danger  which 
became  sensible  to  the  quick  ear  of  the  "  sailors." 
(5.)  Yet  the  vessel  did  not  strike:  and  this  cor 
responds  with  the  position  of  the  point,  which 
would  be  some  little  distance  on  the  port  side,  or 
to  the  left,  of  the  vessel.  (6.)  Off  this  point  of  the 
coast  the  soundings  are  20  fathoms  (ver.  28),  and  a 
little  further,  in  the  direction  of  the  supposed  drift, 
they  are  15  fathoms  (ib.).  (7.)  Though  the  danger 
was  imminent,  we  shall  find  from  examining  the 
chart  that  there  would  still  be  time  to  anchor 
(ver.  29)  before  striking  on  the  rocks  ahead.  (8.) 
With  bad  holding  ground  there  would  have  been 
great  risk  of  the  ship  dragging  her  anchors.  But 
the  bottom  of  St.  Paul's  Bay  is  remarkably  tena 
cious.  In  Purdy's  Sailing  Directions  (p.  180)  it 
is  said  of  it  that  "  while  the  cables  hold  there  is 
no  danger,  as  the  anchors  will  never  start."  (9.) 
The  other  geological  characteristics  of  the  place  are 
in  harmony  with  the  narrative,  which  describes  the 
creek  as  having  in  one  place  a  sandy  or  muddy 
beach  (K&\irov  fxovra  o.lyuA6v,  ver.  39),  and 
which  states  that  the  bow  of  the  ship  was  held  fast 
in  the  shore,  while  the  stern  was  exposed  to  the 
action  of  the  waves  (ver.  41).  For  particulars  we 
must  refer  to  the  work  (mentioned  below)  of  Mr. 
Smith,  an  accomplished  geologist.  (10.)  Another 
point  of  local  detail  is  of  considerable  interest — viz., 
that  as  the  ship  took  the  ground,  the  place  was 
observed  to  be  8idd\affffos,  i.  c.  a  connexion  was 
noticed  between  two  apparently  separate  pieces  of 
water.  We  shall  see,  on  looking  at  the  chart,  that 
this  would  be  the  case.  The  small  island  of  S.-il- 
monetta  would  at  first  appear  to  be  a  part  of  Malta 
itself;  but  the  passage  would  open  on  the  right  as 
the  vessel  passed  to  the  place  of  shipwreck.  (11.) 
Malta  is  in  the  track  of  ships  between  Alexandria 
»nd  Puteoli  •  and  this  corresponds  with  the  fact 
that  ths  "  Castor  and  Pollux,"  an  Alexandrian  vessel 
which  ultimately  convoyed  St.  Paul  to  Italy,  had 
wintered  in  the  islai,  I  (Act*  uviii.  11).  (12.  j! 


Finally,  the  course  pursued  in  this  conclusion  of  the 
voyage,  first  to  Syracuse  and  then  to  Rhegium,  con 
tributes  a  last  link  to  the  chain  of  arguments  by 
which  we  prove  that  Melita  is  Malta. 

The  case  is  established  to  demonstration.  Still  it 
may  be  worth  while  to  notice  one  or  two  objections. 
It  is  said,  in  reference  to  xxvii.  27,  that  the  wreck 
took  place  in  the  Adriatic,  or  Gulf  of  Venice.  It  is 
urged  that  a  well-known  island  like  Malta  could 
not  have  been  unrecognised  (xxvii.  39),  nor  its  in 
habitants  called  "  barbarous  "  (xxviii.  2).  And  as 
regards  the  occurrence  recorded  in  xxviii.  3,  stress 
is  laid  on  the  facts  that  Malta  has  no  poisonour 
serpents,  and  hardly  any  wood.  To  these  objections 
we  reply  at  once  that  ADRIA,  in  the  language  ol 
the  period,  denotes  not  the  Gulf  of  Venice,  but  the 
open  sea  between  Crete  and  Sicily;  that  it  is  no 
wonder  if  the  sailors  did  not  recognise  a  strange 
part  of  the  coast  on  which  they  were  thrown  in 
stormy  weather,  and  that  they  did  recognise  tha 
place  when  they  did  leave  the  ship  (xxviii.  1)  ;  that 
the  kindness  recorded  of  the  native*  'xxriii.  2 


MEUTA 

10),  shows  they  were  not  "barbarians"  in  the 
sense  of  being  savages,  and  that  the  word  denotes 
simply  that  they  did  not  speak  Greek ;  and  lastly, 
that  the  population  of  Malta  has  increased  in  an 
extraordinary  manner  in  recent  times,  that  pro 
bably  there  was  abundant  wood  there  formerly, 
and  that  with  the  destruction  of  the  wood  many 
indigenous  animals  would  disappear. 

In  adducing  positive  arguments  and  answering 
objections,  we  have  indirectly  proved  that  Melita  in 
the  Gulf  of  Venice  was  not  the  scene  of  the  ship 
wreck.  But  we  may  add  that  this  island  could  not 
have  been  reached  without  a  miracle  under  the  cir 
cumstances  of  weather  described  in  the  narrative ; 
that  it  is  not  in  the  track  between  Alexandria  and 
Puteoli ;  that  it  would  not  be  natural  to  proceed 
from  it  to  Koine  by  means  of  a  voyage  embracing 
Syracuse  j  and  that  the  soundings  on  its  shore  do 
not  agree  with  what  is  recorded,  in  the  Acts. 

An  amusing  passage  in  Coleridge's  Table  Talk 
(p.  185)  is  worth  noticing  as  the  last  echo  of  what 
is  now  an  extinct  controversy.  The  question  has 
been  set  at  rest  for  ever  by  Mr.  Smith  of  Jordan 
Hill,  in  his  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul,  the 
first  published  work  in  which  it  was  thoroughly 
investigated  from  a  sailor's  point  of  view.  It  had, 
however,  been  previously  treated  in  the  same  man 
ner,  and  with  the  same  results,  by  Admiral  Penrose, 
and  copious  notes  from  his  MSS.  are  given  in  The 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  In  that  work  (2nd 
ed.  p.  426  note)  are  given  the  names  of  some  of 
those  who  carried  on  the  controversy  in  the  last 
century.  The  ringleader  on  the  Adriatic  side  of  the 
question,  not  unnaturally,  was  Padre  Georgi,  a 
Benedictine  monk  connected  with  the  Venetian  or 
Austrian  Meleda,  and  his  Paulus  Naufra'gus  is 
sxtremely  curious.  He  was,  however,  not  the  first 
a  suggest  this  untenable  view.  We  find  it,  at  a 
much  earlier  period,  in  a  Byzantine  writer,  Const. 
Porphyrog.  De  Adm.  Imp.  (c.  36,  v.  iii.  p.  164 
of  the  Bonn  ed.) 

As  regards  the  condition  of  the  island  of  Melita, 
when  St.  Paul  was  there,  it  was  a  dependency  of 
the  Roman  province  of  Sicily.  Its  chief  officer 
(under  the  governor  of  Sicily)  appears  from  inscrip 
tions  to  have  had  the  title  of  irp&ros  MeXircuW, 
or  Primus  Melitensium,  and  this  is  the  very  phrase 
which  St.  Luke  uses  (xxviii.  7).  Mr.  Smith  could 
not  find  these  inscriptions.  There  seems,  however, 
no  reason  whatever  to  doubt  their  authenticity  (see 
Bochart,  Opera,  i.  502  ;  Abela,  Descr.  Melitae,  p. 
146,  appended  to  the  last  volume  of  the  Antiqui 
ties  of  Graevius ;  and  Boeckh,  Corp.  fnsc.  vol.  iii. 
5754).  Melita,  from  its  position  in  the  Mediter 
ranean,  and  the  excellence  of  its  harbours,  has 
always  been  important  both  in  commerce  and 
war.  It  was  a  settlement  of  the  Phoenicians 
at  an  early  period,  and  their  language,  in  a  cor 
rupted  form,  continued  to  be  spoken  there  in  St. 
Paul's  day.  (Gesenius,  Versuch  ub.  malt.  Sprache, 
Leipz.  1810.)  From  the  Carthaginians  it  passed  to 
the  Romans  in  the  Second  Punic  War.  It  was 
famous  for  its  honey  and  fruits,  for  its  cotton- 
fabrics,  for  excellent  building-stone,  and  for  a  well- 
known  breed  of  dogs.  A  few  years  before  St.  Paul's 
visit,  corsairs  from  his  native  province  of  Cilicia 
made  Melita  a  frequent  resort;  and  through  sub 
sequent  periods  of  its  history,  Vandal  and  Arabian, 
it  was  often  associated  with  piracy.  The  Chris 
tianity,  however,  introduced  by  St.  Paul  was  never 
ertmct.  This  island  had  a  brilliant  period  under 
tiie  kn-ghts  of  St.  John ;  and  it  is  associated  with 


MELONS 


317 


the  most  exciting  passages  of  the  struggle  between 
the  French  and  Knglish  at  the  close  of  the  last 
century  and  the  beginning  of  the  present.  No  is.and 
so  small  has  so  great  U  history,  whether  Biblical  01 
political.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MELONS  (DT]£2;iN:,»  abattichim:   ireWer: 

pepones)  are  mentioned  only  in  the  following  verse : 
"  We  remember  the  fish,  which  we  did  eat  in  Egypt 
freely ;  the  cucumbers,  and  the  melons,"  &o.  (Num.  xi. 
5)  ;  by  the  Hebrew  word  we  are  probably  to  under 
stand  both  the  Melon  (Cucumis  melo)  and  the  water 
Melon  (Cucurbita  citrullus),  for  the  Arabic  noun 
singular,  batekh,  which  is  identical  with  the  Hebrew 
word,  is  used  generically,  as  we  learn  from  Prosper 
Alpinus,  who  says  (Rcrum  Aegypt.  Hist.  i.  17)  of 
the  Aegyptians  "  they  often  dine  and  sup  on  fruits 
alone,  such  as  cucumbers,  pumpkins,  melons,  which" 
are  known  by  the  generic  name  batech."  The 
Greek  ireiruv,  and  the  Latin  pepo,  appear  to  be 
also  occasionally  used  in  a  generic  sense.  Accord 
ing  to  ForskSl  (Descr.  Plant,  p.  167)  and  Hassel- 
quist  (Trav.  255),  the  Arabs  designated  the  water 
melon  Batech,  while  the  same  word  was  used  with 
some  specific  epithet  to  denote  other  plants  belong 
ing  to  the  order  Cucurbitaceae.  Though  the  water 
melon  is  now  quite  common  in  Asia,  Dr.  Royle 
thinks  it  doubtful  whether  it  was  known  to  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  as  no  distinct  mention  of  it  is 
made  in  Greek  writers ;  it  is  uncertain  at  what  time 
the  Greeks  applied  the  term  ayyovpiov  (anguria] 
to  the  water  melon,  but  it  was  probably  at  a  com 
paratively  recent  date.  The  modern  Greek  word 
for  this  fruit  is  ayyovpi.  Galen  (de  Fac.  Alim. 
ii.  566)  speaks  of  the  common  melon  (Cucumis 
melo)  under  the  name  fii\\.oiriiro>v.  Ser.ipion,  ac 
cording  to  Sprengel  (Comment,  in  Dioscor.  ii.  162) 
restricts  the  Arabic  Batikh  to  the  water  melon. 


l.'iu-urbita  citruUui. 

The  water  melon  is  by  some  considered  to  be  indi 
genous  to  India,  from  which  countiy  it  may  have 
been  introduced  into  Egypt  in  very  early  times; 
according  to  Prosper  Alpinus,  medical  Arabic  writers 
sometimes  use  the  term  batikh-Indi,  or  anguria 


a  From  root  ni32,  transp.  for  H3D 

cook."  Precisely  similar  is  the  derivation  of  ireirur,  from 
ir-eVrw.  Gesenius  compares  the  Spatish  buditcas-  tiif 
French  pastAjues. 


318 


MELZAR 


MEMPHIS 


Ittdica,  to  denote  this  fruit,  whos?  common  Arabic    eunuchs  ;"  his  office  was  to  superintend  the  nurtur* 


name  is  according  to  the  same  authority,  batikh  el 
Maovi  (water) ;  but  Hasselquist  says  ( Trav.  256) 
that  this  name  belongs  to  a  softer  variety,  the  juice 
of  which  when  very  ripe,  and  almost  putrid,  is 
mixed  with  rose-water  and  sugar  and  given  in 
tevers ;  he  observes  that  the  water-melon  is  culti 
vated  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile,  on  the  rich  clayey 
earth  after  the  inundations,  from  the  beginning  of 
May  to  the  end  of  July,  and  that  it  serves  the 
Egyptians  for  meat,  drink,  and  physic ;  the  fruit, 
however,  he  says,  should  be  eaten  "  with  great  cir 
cumspection,  for  if  it  be  taken  in  the  heat  of  the 
day  when  the  body  is  warm  bad  consequences  often 
ensue."  This  observation  no  doubt  applies  only  to 
persons  before  they  have  become  acclimatised,  for 


and  education  of  the  young ;  he  thus  combined  tht 
duties  of  the  Greek  iraiSaycay6s  and  rpo<f>tvs,  and 
more  nearly  resembles  our  "  tutor"  than  any  other 
officer.  Asr  to  the  origin  of  the  term,  there  is  som« 
doubt ;  it  is  generally  r?garded  as  of  Persian  origin, 
the  words  mal,  qara  giving  the  sense  of  "  head  cup 
bearer  ;"  Fiirst  (Lex.  s.  c.)  suggests  its  connexion 
with  the  Hebrew  nazar,  "  to  guard."  [W.  L.  B.] 

MEM'MIUS,  QTJINTUS  (K6irrt,s  M«w"o»), 
2  Mace.  xi.  34.  [MANLius,  T.] 

MEMPHIS,  a  city  of  ancient  Egypt,  situated  on 
the  western  bank  of  the  Nile,  in  latitude  30°  6'  N 
It  is  mentioned  by  Isaiah  (xix.  13),  Jeremiah  (!•. 
16,  xlvi.  14,  19),  and  Ezekiel  (xxx.  13,  16),  under 


the  native  Egyptians  eat  the  fruit  with  impunity.  '  the  name  of  NOPH  ;  and  by  Hosea  (ix.  6)  under  the 

name  of  MOPH  in  Hebrew,  and  MEMPHIS  in 
our  English  version.  The  name  is  compounded 
of  two  hieroglyphics  "  Men  "  =  foundation,  sta 
tion  ;  and  "  Nofre  "  =  good.  It  is  variously 
1  interpreted;  e.g.  "  haven  of  the  good; "  "tomb 
of  the  good  man  " — Osiris ;  "  the  abode  of  the 
good ; "  "  the  gate  of  the  blessed."  Gesenius 
remarks  upon  the  two  interpretations  proposed 
by  Plutarch  (De  Isid.  et  Os.  20)— viz.  8p/uo5 
ayaOwv,  "  haven  of  the  good,"  and  T&Qos 
'OffipiSos,  "  the  tomb  of  Osiris  " — that  '•  both 
are  applicable  to  Memphis,  as  the  sepulchre 
of  Osiris,  the  Necropolis  of  the  Egyptians, 
and  hence  also  the  haven  of  the  blessed,  since 
the  right  of  burial  was  conceded  only  to  the 
good."  Bunsen,  however,  prefers  to  trace  in 
the  name  of  the  city  a  connexion  with  Menes, 
its  founder.  The  Greek  coins  have  Memphis ; 
the  Coptic  is  Memfi  or  Menfi  and  Memf-  He 
brew,  sometimes  Moph  (Mph),  and  sometimes 
Noph ;  Arabic  Memf  or  Menf  (Bunsen,  Egypt's 
Place,  vol.  ii.  53).  There  can  be  no  question 
as  to  the  identity  of  the  Noph  of  the  Hebrew  pro- 


(Clu-umu  niri.i.) 


The  common  melon  (  Cucumis  melo)  is  cultivated  in 
the  same  places  and  ripens  at  the  same  time  with 
the  water-melon  :  but  the  fruit  in  Egypt  is  not  so 
delicious  as  in  th:s  country  (see  Sonnini's  Travels, 
ii.  .'528)  ;  the  poor  in  Egypt  do  not  eat  this  melon. 
"  A  traveller  in  the  East,"  says  Kitto  (note  on 
Num.  xi.  5),  "  who  recollects  the  intense  gratitude 
which  a  gift  of  a  slice  of  melon  inspired  while  jour 
neying  over  the  hot  and  dry  plains,  will  readily 
comprehend  the  regret  with  which  the  Hebrews  in 
the  Arabian  desert  looked  back  upon  the  melons  of 
Egypt."  The  water-melon,  which  is  now  exten 
sively  cultivated  all  over  India  and  the  tropical  parts 
of  Africa  and  America,  and  indeed  in  hot  countries 
generally,  is  a  fruit  not  unlike  the  common  melon, 
but  the  leaves  are  deeply  lobed  and  gashed,  the  flesh 
is  pink  or  white,  and  contains  a  large  quantity  of 
cold  watery  juice  without  much  flavour  ;  the  seeds 
are  black.  The  melon  is  too  well  known  to  need 
description.  Both  these  plants  belong  to  the  order 
Cncurbitaceae,  the  Cucumber  family,  which  contains 
about  sixty  known  genera  and  300  species  —  Cu- 
cnrbita,  Bryonia,  Mo>nordica,  Cucumis,  are  examples 
of  the  genera.  [CUCUMBER;  GOORD.]  [W.  H.j 


MEL'ZAR 


The  A.  V.  is  wrong  in 


regarding  Melzar  as  a  proper  name  ;  it  is  rather  an 
official  title,  as  is  implied  in  the  addition  of  the 
article  in  each  case  where  the  name  occurs  (Dan.  i. 
•  1  ,  16):  the  marginal  reading,  "  the  steward  "  is 
thoivtbre  more  correct.  The  LXX.  regards  the  ar 
ticle  as  a  part  of  the  name,  and  renders  it  'Ajuep- 
«ao;  the  Vulgate,  however,  has  Malasnr.  The 
•Ma.;.-  was  subordinate  to  the  "  master  of  the 


phets  with  Memphis,  the  capital  of  lower  Egypt. 

Though  some  regard  Thebes  as  the  more  ancient 
city,  the  monuments  of  Memphis  are  of  higher  an 
tiquity  than  those  of  Thebes.  Herodotus  dates  its 
foundation  from  Menes,  the  first  really  historical 
king  of  Egypt.  The  era  of  Menes  is  not  satisfac 
torily  determined.  Birch,  Kenrick,  Poole,  Wilkin 
son,  and  the  English  school  of  Egyptologists  gene 
rally,  reduce  the  chronology  of  Manetho's  lists,  by 
making  several  of  his  dynasties  contemporaneous 
instead  of  successive.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  dates  the 
era  of  Manes  from  B.C.  2690 ;  Mr.  Stuart  Poole, 
B.C.  2717  (Rawlinson,  Herod,  ii.  342 ;  Poole, 
Horae  Aegypt.  p.  97).  The  German  Egyptolo 
gists  assign  to  Egypt  a  much  longer  chronology. 
Bunsen  fixes  the  era  of  Menes  at  B.C.  3643  (Egypt's 
Place,  vol.  ii.  579) ;  Brugsch  at  B.C.  4455  (//•*• 
toire  d'Egypte,  i.  287)  ;  and  Lepsius  at  B.C.  3892 
(Kdnigsbuch  der  alien  Aegypter).  Lepsius  also 
registers  about  18,000  years  of  the  dynasties  of 
gods,  demigods,  and  pre-historic  kings,  before  the 
accession  of  Menes.  But  indeterminate,  and  conjec 
tural,  as  the  early  chronology  of  Egypt  yet  is,  all 
agree  that  the  known  history  of  the  empire  begins 
with  Menes,  who  founded  Memphis.  The  city  be 
longs  to  the  earliest  periods  of  authentic  history. 

The  building  of  Memphis  is  associated  by  tradi 
tion  with  a  stupendous  work  of  art  which  has  per 
manently  changed  the  course  of  the  Nile  and  the 
face  of  the  Delta.  Before  the  time  of  Mimes  the 
river  emerging  from  the  upper  valley  into  the  neck 
of  the  Delta,  bent  its  course  westward  uwaid  tli» 


MEMPHIS 

nills  of  the  Libyan  desert,  or  at  least  discharged  a 
litrge  portion  of  its  waters  through  an  arm  in  that 
direction.  Here  the  generous  flood  whose  yearly 
inundation  gives  life  and  fertility  to  Egypt,  was 
largely  absorbed  in  the  sands  of  the  desert,  or 
wasted  in  stagnant  morasses.  It  is  even  conjectured 
that  up  to  the  time  of  Menes  the  whole  Delta  was 
nn  uii inhabitable  marsh.  The  rivers  of  Damascus, 
the  Barada  and  'Awaj,  now  lose  themselves  in  the 
sr.me  way  in  the  marshy  lakes  of  the  great  desert 
plain  south-east  of  the  city.  Herodotus  informs  us, 
upon  the  authority  of  the  Egyptian  priests  of  his 
tune,  that  Menes  "  by  banking  up  the  river  at  the 
bend  which  it  forms  about  a  hundred  furlongs  south 
of  Memphis,  laid  the  ancient  channel  dry,  while  he 
•lug  a  new  course  for  the  stream  halfway  between 
the  two  lines  of  hills.  To  this  day,"  he  continues, 
"  the  elbow  which  the  Nile  forms  at  the  point 
where  it  is  forced  aside  into  the  new  channel  is 
guarded  with  the  greatest  care  by  the  Persians,  pud 
strengthened  svery  vear ;  for  if  the  river  w^re  to 


MEMPHIS 


3iy 


burst  out,  at  this  place,  and  pour  over  the  mound, 
there  would  be  danger  of  Memphis  being  completely 
overwhelmed  by  the  flood.  Men,  the  first  king, 
having  thus,  by  turning  the  river,  made  the  tract 
where  it  used  to  run,  dry  land,  proceeded  in  the 
first  place  to  build  the  city  now  called  Memphis, 
which  lies  in  the  narrow  part  of  Egypt ;  after  which 
he  further  excavated  a  lake  outside  the  town,  to  the 
north  and  west,  communicating  with  the  river, 
which  was  itself  the  eastern  boundary"  (Herod, 
ii.  99).  From  this  description  it  appears,  that — like 
Amsterdam  dyked  in  from  the  Zuyder  Zee,  or  St. 
Petersburg  defended  by  the  mole  at  Cronstadt  from 
the  gulf  of  Finland,  or  mere  nearly  like  New  Orleans 
protected  by  its  levee  from  the  freshets  of  the  Mis 
sissippi,  and  drained  by  lake  Pontchartrain, — Mem 
phis  was  created  upon  a  marsh  reclaimed  by  the 
dyke  of  Menes  and  drained  by  his  artificial  lake. 
New  Orleans  is  situated  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
Mississippi,  about  90  miles  from  it*  mouth,  and  is 
protected  against  inundation  by  an  embankment 


nd  Pyramids  at  M«ii;>i:i» 


15  feet  wide  and  4  feet  high,  which  extends  from  |  the  west  by  the  Libyan  mountains  and  desert,  and 
120  miles  above  the  city  to  40  miles  below  it.  j  on  the  east  by  the  river  and  its  artificial  embank- 


Lake  Pontchartrain  affords  a  natural  drain  for  the 
marshes  that  form  the  margin  of  the  city  upon  the 
east.  The  dyke  of  Menes  began  12  miles  south 
of  Memphis,  and  deflected  the  main  channel  of  the 
river  about  two  miles  to  the  eastward.  Upon  the 
rise  of  the  Nile,  a  canal  still  conducted  a  portion  of 
its  waters  westward  through  the  old  channel,  thus 
irrigating  the  plain  beyond  the  city  in  that  direc 
tion,  while  an  inundation  was  guarded  against  on 


Abousir.  The  skill  in  engineering  which  these 
works  required,  and  which  their  remains  still  indi 
cate,  argues  a  high  degree  of  material  civilisation,  at 
least,  in  the  mechanic  arts,  in  the  earliest  known 
period  of  Egyptian  history. 

The  political  sagacity  of  Menes  appears  in  the 
location  of  his  capital  where  it  would  at  once  com 
mand  the  Delta  and  hold  the  key  of  upper  Egypt, 
controlling  the  commerce  of  the  Nile,  defended  upon 


ments.  The  climate  of  Memphis  may  be  inferred 
from  that  of  the  modern  Cairo — about  10  miles  t<* 
the  north — which  is  the  most  equable  that  Egypt 
affords.  The  city  is  said  to  have  had  a  circum 
ference  of  about  19  miles  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  50),  and 
the  houses  or  inhabited  quarters,  as  was  usual  in 
the  great  cities  of  antiquity,  were  interspersed  with 
numerous  gardens  and  public  areas. 

Herodotus  states,  on  the  authority  of  the  priests, 


that  side  by  a  large  artificial  lake  or  reservoir  at   that  Menes  "  built  the  temple  of  Hephaestus,  whiil 


stands  within  the  city,  a  vast  edifice,  well  worftiy 
of  mention"  (ii.  99).  The  divinity  whom  Heiv- 
dotus  thus  identifies  with  Hephaestus  was  Ptah, 
"  the  creative  power,  the  maker  of  all  material 
tilings"  (Wilkinson  in  Kawlinson's  Herod,  ii.  289; 
Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place,  i.  367,  384).  Pta/i  was 
worshipped  in  all  Egypt,  but  under  different  re 
presentations  indifferent  Nomes;  ordinarily  "  as  a 
god  holding  before  him  with  both  hands  the  Nilo. 


320 


MEMPHIS 


meter,  or  emblem  of  stability,  combined  with  the 
sign  of  life  "  (Bunsen,  i.  382).  But  at  Memphis 
his  worship  was  so  prominent  that  the  primitive 
sanctuary  of  his  temple  was  built  by  Menes :  suc 
cessive  monarchs  greatly  enlarged  and  beautified 
the  structure,  by  the  addition  of  courts,  porches, 
and  colossal  ornaments.  Herodotus  and  Diodorus 
describe  several  of  these  additions  and  restorations, 
but  nowhere  give  a  complete  description  of  the 
temple  with  measurements  of  its  various  dimensions 
(Herod,  ii.  99,  101, 108-110,  121, 136, 153, 176  ; 
Diod.  Sic.  i.  45,  51,  62,  67).  According  to  these 
authorities,  Moeris  built  the  northern  gateway ;  Se- 
sostris  erected  in  front  of  the  temple  colossal  statues 
(varying  from  30  to  50  feet  in  height)  of  himself, 
his  wife,  and  his  four  sous ;  Rhampsinitus  built  the 
western  gateway,  and  erected  before  it  the  colossal 
statues  of  Summer  and  Winter  ;  Asychis  built  the 
eastern  gateway,  which  "  in  size  and  beauty  for 
surpassed  the  other  three;"  Psammetichus  built 
the  southern  gateway ;  and  Amosis  presented  to 
this  temple  "  a  recumbent  colossus  75  feet  long, 
and  two  upright  statues,  each  20  feet  high."  The 
period  between  Menes  and  Amosis,  according  to 
Brugsch,  was  3731  years ;  but  according  to  Wilkin 
son  only  about  2100  years ;  but  upon  either  calcu 
lation,  the  temple  as  it  appeared  to  Strabo  was  the 
growth  of  many  centuries.  Strabo  (xvii.  807)  de 
scribes  this  temple  as  "  built  in  a  very  sumptuous 
manner,  both  as  regards  the  size  of  the  Naos  and  in 
other  respects."  The  Dromos,  or  grand  avenue 
leading  to  the  temple  of  Ptah,  was  used  for  the  cele 
bration  of  bull-fights,  a  sport  pictured  in  the  tombs. 
But  these  fights  were  probably  between  animals 
alone — no  captive  or  gladiator  being  compelled  to 
enter  the  arena.  The  bulls  having  been  trained  for 
the  occasion,  were  brought  face  to  face  and  goaded 
on  by  their  masters ; — the  prize  being  awarded  to 
the  owner  of  the  victor.  But  though  the  bull  was 
thus  used  for  the  sport  of  the  people,  he  was  the 
sacred  animal  of  Memphis. 

Apis  was  believed  to  be  an  incarnation  of  Osiris. 
The  sacred  bull  was  selected  by  certain  outward 
symbols  of  the  in-dwelling  divinity ;  his  colour 
being  black,  with  the  exception  of  white  spots  of  a 
peculiar  shape  upon  his  forehead  and  right  side. 
The  temple  of  Apis  was  one  of  the  most  noted 
structures  of  Memphis.  It  stood  opposite  the 
southern  portico  of  the  temple  of  Ptah  ;  and  Psam 
metichus,  who  built  that  gateway,  also  erected  in 
front  of  the  sanctuary  of  Apis  a  magnificent  colon 
nade,  supported  by  colossal  statues  or  Osiride  pillars, 
such  as  may  still  be  seen  at  the  temple  of  Medeenet 
Habou  at  Thebes  (Herod,  ii.  153).  Through  this 
colonnade  the  Apis  was  led  with  great  pomp  upon 
state  occasions.  Two  stables  adjoined  the  sacred 
vestibule  (Strab.  xvii.  807).  Diodorus  (i.  85)  de 
scribes  the  magnificence  with  which  a  deceased  Apis 
was  interred  and  his  successor  installed  at  Memphis. 
The  place  appropriated  to  the  burial  of  the  sacred 
bulls  was  a  gallery  some  2000  feet  in  length  by 
20  in  height  and  width,  hewn  in  the  rock  without 
the  city.  This  gallery  was  divided  into  numerous 
recesses  upon  each  side  ;  and  the  embalmed  bodies  of 
the  sacred  bulls,  each  in  its  own  sarcophagus  of 
granite,  were  deposited  in  these  "  sepulchral  stalls." 
A  few  years  since  this  burial  place  of  the  sacred 
bulls  was  discovered  by  M.  Mariette,  and  a  large 
number  of  the  sarcophagi  have  already  been  opened. 
These  catacombs  of  mummied  bulls  were  approached 
from  Memphis  by  a  paved  road,  having  colossal 
lions  upon  either  side. 


MEMPH1B 

At  Memphis  was  the  reputed  burial  place  of  Isa 
(DM.  Sic.  i.  22),  it  had  also  a  temple  to  that 
"  myriad-named "  divinity,  which  Herodotus  (ii. 
176)  describes  as  "  a  vast  structure,  well  worthy  of 
notice,"  but  inferior  to  that  consecrated  to  her  in 
Busiris,  a  chief  city  of  her  worship  (ii.  59).  Mem 
phis  had  also  its  Serapeium,  which  probably  stood 
in  the  western  quarter  of  the  city,  toward  the 
desert ;  since  Strabo  describes  it  as  very  much  ex 
posed  to  sand-drifts,  and  in  his  time  partly  buried 
by  masses  of  sand  heaped  up  by  the  wind  (xvii.  807,. 
The  sacred  cubit  and  other  symbols  used  in  mea 
suring  the  rise  of  the  Nile,  were  deposited  in  the 
temple  of  Serapis. 

Herodotus  describes  "  a  beautiful  and  richly  orna 
mented  inclosure,"  situated  upon  the  south  side  of 
the  temple  of  Ptah,  which  was  sacred  to  Proteus,  a 
native  Memphite  king.  Within  this  enclosure  there 
was  a  temple  to  "  the  foreign  Venus  "  (Astarte  ?  ), 
concerning  which  the  historian  narrates  a  myth 
connected  with  the  Grecian  Helen.  In  this  enclosure 
was  "the  Tynan  camp"  (ii.  112).  A  temple  of 
Ra  or  Phre,  the  Sun,  and  a  temple  of  the  Cabein, 
complete  the  enumeration  of  the  sacred  buildings  of 
Memphis. 

The  mythological  system  of  the  time  of  Menes  is 
ascribed  by  Bunsen  to  "  the  amalgamation  of  the  reli 
gion  of  Upper  and  Lower  Egypt ;" — religion  having 

already  united  the  two  provinces  before  the  power 
of  the  race  of  This  in  the  Thebaid  extended  itself  to 
Memphis,  and  before  the  giant  work  of  Menes  con 
verted  the  Delta  from  a  desert,  chequered  over  with 
lakes  and  morasses,  into  a  blooming  garden."  The 
political  union  of  the  two  divisions  of  the  country 
was  effected  by  the  builder  of  Memphis.  "  Menes 
founded  the  Empire  of  Egypt,  by  raising  the  people 
who  inhabited  the  valley  of  the  Nile  from  a  little 
provincial  station  to  that  of  an  historical  nation  " 
(Egypt's  Place,  i.  441,  ii.  409). 

The  Necropolis,  adjacent  to  Memphis,  was  on  a 
scale  of  grandeur  corresponding  with  the  city  itself. 
The  "  city  of  the  pyramids  "  is  a  title  of  Memphis 
in  the  hieroglyphics  upon  the  monuments.  The 
great  field  or  plain  of  the  Pyramids  lies  wholly  upon 
the  western  bank  of  the  Nile,  and  extends  from 
Aboo-Roash,  a  little  to  the  north-west  of  Cairo,  to 
Meydoom,  about  40  miles  to  the  south,  and  thence 
in  a  south-westerly  direction  about  25  miles  farther, 
to  the  pyramids  of  Howara  and  of  Biahmu  in  the 
Fayoura.  Lepsius  computes  the  number  of  pyra 
mids  in  this  district  at  sixty-seven  ;  but  in  this  he 
counts  some  that  are  quite  small,  and  others  of  a 
doubtful  character.  Not  more  than  half  this  num 
ber  can  be  fairly  identified  upon  the  whole  field. 
But  the  principal  seat  of  the  pyramids,  the  Mem 
phite  Necropolis,  was  in  a  range  of  about  1 5  miles 
from  Sakkara  to  Gizeh,  and  in  the  groups  here  re 
maining  nearly  thirty  are  probably  tombs  of  the  im 
perial  sovereigns  of  Memphis  (Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place, 
ii.  88).  Lepsius  regards  the  "  Pyramid  fields  of 
Memphis "  as  a  most  important  testimony  to  the 
civilisation  of  Egypt  (Letters,  Bohn,  p.  25  ;  also 
Chronologic  der  Aegypter,  vol.  i.).  These  royal 
pyramids,  with  the  subterranecJi  halls  of  Apis,  and 
numerous  tombs  of  public  officers  erected  on  the 
plain  or  excavated  in  the  adjacent  hills,  gave  to 
Memphis  the  pre-eminence  which  it  enjoyed  as  "  the 
haven  of  the  blessed." 

Memphis  long  held  its  place  as  a  capital ;  and 
for  centuries  a  Memphite  dynasty  ruled  over  all 
K^ypt.  Lepsius,  Bunsen,  and  Brugsch,  agree  ic 
regarding  the  3rd,  4th,  6th,  7th,  and  8th  dynasti* 


MEMUCAN 

it  the  Old  Empire  as  Memphite,  reaching  through  a 
period  of  about  a  thousand  years.  During  a  portion 
of  this  period,  however,  the  chain  was  broken,  or 
there  were  txmtemporaneous  dynasties  in  other  parts 
of  Egypt. 

The  overthrow  of  Memphis  was  distinctly  pre 
dicted  by  the  Hebrew  prophets.  In  his  "  burden  of 
Egypt,"  Isaiah  says,  "  The  princes  of  Zoan  are  be 
come  fools,  the  princes  of  Noph  are  deceived  "  (Is.  xix. 
13).  Jeremiah  (xlvi.  19)  declares  that  "  Noph  shall 
be  waste  and  desolate  without  an  inhabitant."  Ezekiel 
pi-edicts:  "Thussaith  the  Lord  God:  I  will  alsodestroy 
the  idols,  and  I  will  cause  [their]  images  to  cease  out 
of  Noph ;  and  there  shall  be  no  more  a  nrince  of  the 
land  of  Egypt."  i'he  latest  of  these  predictions  was  ut 
tered  nearly  GOO  years  before  Christ,  and  half  a  cen 
tury  before  the  invasion  of  Egypt  by  Cambyses  (cir. 
B.C.  525).  Herodotus  informs  us  that  Cambyses,  en 
raged  at  the  opposition  he  encountered  at  Memphis, 
committed  many  outrages  upon  the  city.  He  killed 
the  sacred  Apis,  and  caused  his  priests  to  be  scourged. 
"  He  opened  the  ancient  sepulchres,  and  examined 
the  bodios  that  were  buried  iu  them.  He  likewise 
went  into  the  temple  of  Hephaestus  (Ptah)  and 
made  great  sport  of  the  image.  ...  He  went  also 
into  the  temple  of  the  Cabeiri,  which  it  is  unlawful 
for  any  one  to  enter  except  the  priests,  and  not  only 
made  sport  of  the  images  but  even  burnt  them  " 
(Her.  iii.  37).  Memphis  never  recovered  from  the 
blow  inflicted  by  Cambyses.  The  rise  of  Alexan 
dria  hastened  its  decline.  The  Caliph  conquerors 
founded  Fostat  (Old  Cairo)  upon  the  opposite  bank 
af  the  Nile,  a  few  miles  north  of  Memphis,  and 
brought  materials  from  the  old  city  to  build  their 
new  capital  (A.U.  638).  The  Arabian  physician, 
Abd-el-Latif,  who  visited  Memphis  in  the  13th 
century,  describes  its  ruins  as  then  marvellous  be 
yond  description  (see  De  Sacy's  translation,  cited  by 
Brugsch,  Histoire  d'Egypte,  p.  18).  Abulfeda,  in 
the  14th  century,  speaks  of  the  remains  of  Memphis 
as  immense  ;  for  the  most  part  in  a  state  of  decay, 
though  some  sculptures  of  variegated  stone  still  re 
tained  a  reinarkable  freshness  of  colour  (Descriptio 
Aegypti,  ed.  Michaelis,  1776).  At  length  so 
complete  was  the  ruin  of  Memphis,  that  for  a  long 
time  its  very  site  was  lost.  Pococke  could  find  no 
trace  of  it.  Recent  explorations,  especially  those  of 
Messrs.  Mariette  and  Linant,  have  brought  to  light 
many  of  its  antiquities,  which  have  been  dispersed 
to  the  museums  of  Europe  and  America.  Some 
specimens  of  sculpture  from  Memphis  adorn  the 
Egyptian  hall  of  the  British  Museum  ;  other  monu 
ments  of  this  great  city  are  in  the  Abbott  Museum 
in  New  York.  The  dykes  and  canals  of  Menes  still 
form  the  basis  of  the  system  of  irrigation  for  Lower 
Egypt ;  the  insignificant  village  of  Meet  Raheeneh 
occupies  nearly  the  centre  of  the  ancient  capital. 
Thus  the  site  and  the  general  outlines  of  Memphis 
are  nearly  restored  ;  but  "  the  images  have  ceased 
out  of  Noph,  and  it  is  desolate,  without  inha 
bitant."  [j.  p.  T.] 

MEM'UCAN  ( JD-1D» :  MouXa?os :  Mamuchan). 
One  of  the  seven  princes  of  Persia  in  the  reign  of 
Ahasufrus,  who  "saw  the  king's  face,"  and  sat 

a  Kwald  (Gesch.  Isr.  iii.  598),  following  the  LXX., 
would  translate  the  latter  part  of  2  K.  xv.  10,  "  And  Kobe- 
!am(or  Keblaam)  smote  him,  and  slew  him.  and  reigm.d  in 
his  stend."  Kwald  considers  the  fact  of  such  a  king's  cxtst- 
ince  a  help  to  the  interpretation  of  Zech.  xi.  8 ;  and  he  ac- 
x-uats  for  the  silence  of  Scripture  as  to  his  end  by  saying 
';bat  he  ni.\v  hswe  throwt  himself  acrosii  the  Jor.lac.  aiul 

vot.,  n. 


MEN A HEM 


321 


first  in  the  kingdom  (Esth.  i.  1  !•).  They  were 
"wise  men  who  knew  the  times  '  (skilled  in  the 
planets,  according  to  A  ben  Ezra),  and  appear  tc 
have  formed  a  council  of  state  ;  Josephns  says  that 
one  of  their  offices  was  that  of  interpreting  the 
laws  (Ant,  xi.  6,  §1).  This  may  also  be  inferred 
from  the  manner  in  which  the  royal  question  is  put 
to  them  when  assembled  in  council  ;  "  Accordin*) 
to  law  what  is  to  be  done  with  the  queen  Vashti  ?  " 
Memucan  was  either  the  president  of  the  councL1  on 
this  occasion,  or  gave  his  opinion  first  in  conse 
quence  of  his  acknowledged  wisdom,  or  from  the 
respect  allowed  to  his  advanced  age.  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  cause  of  this  priority,  his  sen 
tence  for  Vashti's  disgrace  was  approved  by  the 
king  and  princes,  and  at  once  put  into  execution  ; 
"  and  the  king  did  according  to  the  word  of  Me 
mucan"  (Esth.  i.  16,  21).  The  Targum  of 
Esther  identifies  him  with  "  Hainan  the  grandson 
of  Agag."  The  reading  of  the  Cetldb,  or  written 
text,  in  ver.  16  is  pDlb.  [W.  A.  W.] 


MEN'  AHEM 


:    Mavafo  :    Manaem), 


son  of  Gadi,  who'  slew  the  usurper  Shallum  and 
seized  the  vacant  throne  of  Israel,  B.C.  772.  His 
reign,  which  lasted  ten  years,  is  briefly  recorded  in 
2  K.  xv.  14-22.  It  has  been  inferred  from  the  ex 
pression  in  verse  14,  "  from  Tirzah,"  that  Menahem 
was  a  general  under  Zechariah  stationed  at  Tirzah  . 
and  that  he  brought  up  his  troops  to  Samaria  ar.d 
avenged  the  murder  of  his  master  by  Shallum 
(Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  11,  §1  ;  Keil,  Thenius). 

In  religion  Menahem  wns  a  stedfast  adherent  of 
the  form  of  idolatry  established  in  Israel  by  Jero 
boam.  His  general  character  is  described  by  Jo 
sephus  as  rude  and  exceedingly  cruel.  The  con 
temporary  prophets,  Hosea  and  Amos,  have  left  a 
melancholy  picture  of  the  ungodliness,  demoralisa 
tion,  and  feebleness  of  Israel  ;  and  Ewald  adds  to 
their  testimony  some  doubtful  references  to  Isaiah 
and  Zechariah. 

In  the  brief  history  of  Menahem,  his  ferocious 
treatment  of  Tiphsah  occupies  a  conspicuous  place. 
The  time  of  the  occurrence,  and  the  site  of  the  town 
have  been  doubted.  Keil  says  that  it  can  be  no 
other  place  than  the  remote  Thapsacus  on  the  Eu 
phrates,  the  north-east  boundary  (1  K.  iv.  24)  of 
Solomon's  dominions  ;  and  certainly  no  other  place 
bearing  the  name  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Others 
suppose  that  it  may  have  been  some  town  which 
Menahem  took  in  his  way  as  he  went  from  Tirzah 
to  win  a  crown  in  Samaria  (Ewald)  ;  or  that  it  is  a 
transcriber's  error  for  Tappuah  (Josh.  xvii.  8),  and 
that  Menahem  laid  it  waste  when  he  returned  from 
Samaria  to  Tirzah  (Thenius).  No  sufficient  reason 
appears  for  having  recourse  to  such  conjecture*. 
where  the  plain  text  presents  no  insuperable  diffi 
culty.  The  act,  whether  perpetrated  at  the  begin 
ning  of  Menahem's  reign  or  somewhat  later,  was 
doubtless  intended  to  strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of 
reluctant  subjects  thioughout  the  whole  extent  of 
dominion  which  he  claimed.  A  precedent  for  such 
cruelty  might  be  found  in  the  border  wars  between 
Syria  and  Israel,  2  K.  viii.  12.  It  is  a  striking 
sign  of  the  increasing  degradation  of  the  land,  that  a 


disappeared  among  the  subjects  of  king  Uzziah.  It  does 
not  appear,  however,  how  such  a  translation  can  be  made  U> 
agree  with  the  subsequent  mention  (ver.  13)  of  Sh«llnm, 
and  with  the  express  ascription  of  Shallum's  death  (ver.  14) 
to  Menahem.  Thenius  excuses  the  translation  of  the  LXX 
by  supposing  that  their  MSS.  may  have  been  In  a  defectK'v 
state,  but  ridicules  the  theory  of  Ewald. 


322  MENAN 

king  of  Israel  practises  upon  his  subjects  a  brutality 
from  the  mere  suggestion  of  which  the  unscrupulous 
Syrian  usurper  recoiled  with  indignation. 

But  the  most  remarkable  event  in  Menahem's 
reign  is  the  first  appearance  of  a  hostile  force  of 
Assyrians  on  the  north-east  frontier  of  Israel.  King 
Pul,  however,  withdrew,  having  been  converted  from 
an  enemy  into  an  ally  by  a  timejy  gift  of  1 000 
talents  of  silver,  which  Menahem  exacted  by  an 
assessment  of  50  shekels  a  head  on  60,000  Israelites. 
It  seems  perhaps  too  much  to  infer  from  1  Chr.  v. 
'26,  that  Pul  also  took  away  Israelite  captives.  The 
name  of  Pul  (LXX.  Phaloch  or  Phalos)  appears 
according  to  Rawlinson  (Bampton  Lecture  for  1859, 
Lect.  iv.  p»  133)  in  an  Assyrian  inscription  of  a 
Ninevite  king,  as  Phallukha,  who  took  tribute  from 
Beth  Khumri  (  =  the  house  of  Omri  =  Samaria)  as 
well  as  from  Tyre,  Sidon,  Damascus,  Idumaea,  and 
Philistia ;  the  king  of  Damascus  is  set  down  as 
giving  2300  talents  of  silver  besides  gold  and  copper, 
but  neither  the  name  of  Menahem,  nor  the"  amount 
of  his  tribute  is  stated  in  the  inscription.  Rawliii- 
son  also  says  that  in  another  inscription  the  name  of 
Menahem  is  given,  probably  by  mistake  of  the  stone 
cutter,  as  a  tributary  of  Tiglath-pileser. 

Menahem  died  in  peace,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  son  Pekahiah.  [W.  T.  B.] 

MEN' AN  (MewS :  Mennd).  The  son  of  Mat- 
t M  t  h.-i ,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy 
of  Jesus  Christ  (Luke  iii.  31).  This  name  and  the 
following  Melea  are  omitted  in  some  Latin  MSS., 
and  are  believed  by  Ld.  A.  Hervey  to  be  corrupt 
^Genealogies,  p.  88). 

MENB'(N3O:  Mavfi,  Theodot.:  Mane).    The 

first  word  of  the  mysterious  inscription  written 
upon  the  wall  of  Belshazzar's  palace,  in  which 
Daniel  read  the  doom  of  the  king  and  his  dynasty 
(Dan.  v.  25,  26).  It  is  the  Peal  past  participle  of  the 
Jhaldee  H3K),  mendh,  "  to  number,"  and  therefore 
signifies  "  numbered,"  as  in  Daniel's  interpretation, 
"  God  hath  numbered  (H3D,  men&ti\  thy  kingdom 
and  finished  it."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MENELA'US  (Mei/eAoos),  a  usurping  high- 
priest  who  obtained  the  office  from  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  (c.  B.C.  172)  by  a  large  bribe  (2  Mace.  iv. 
23-5.),  and  drove  out  Jason,  who  had  obtained  it 
not  long  before  by  similar  means.  When  he  neg 
lected  to  pay  the  sum  which  he  had  promised,  he 
was  summoned  to  the  king's  presence,  and  by  -plun 
dering  the  temple  gained  the  means  of  silencing  the 
accusations  which  were  brought  against  him.  By 
;i  similar  sacrilege  he  secured  himself  against  the 
consequences  of  an  insurrection  which  his  tyranny 
had  excited,  and  also  procured  the  death  of  Onias 
(ver.  27-34).  He  was  afterwards  hard  pressed 
by  Jason,  who  taking  occasion  from  his  unpo 
pularity,  attempted  unsuccessfully  to  recover  the 
high-priesthood  (2  Mace.  v.  5-10).  For  a  time  he 
tlien  disappears  from  the  history  (yet  comp.  ver.  23), 
but  at  last  he  met  with  a  violent  death  at  the  hands 
of  Antiochus  Eupator  (cir.  B.C.  163),  which  seemed 
in  a  peculiar  manner  a  providential  punishment  of 
liis  sacrilege  (xiii.  3,  4). 

According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  5,  §1)  he  was 
»  younger  brother  of  Jason  and  Onias,  and,  like 
Jason,  changed  his  proper  name  Onias,  for  a  Greek 


)9  TI/XT/S  *<"  ToC  Sa.lit.ovot  <n}tia.ivovaiv 
"HAiii?  T«  KO\  2eA>)pT)i>.  The  order  of  the  words  hero 
«-«nE  to  favour  the  received  reading  of  the  LXX. ;  whll* 


MENI 

name.  In  2  Maccabees,  on  the  ot.hei  hand,  he  it 
called  a  brother  of  Simon  the  Benjamite  (2  Mace. 
iv.  23),  whose  treason  led  to  the  rirst  atteir  pt  to 
plunder  the  temple.  If  this  account  be  correct,  the 
profanation  of  the  sacred  office  was  the  more  market) 
by  the  fact  that  it  was  transfeired  from  the  famiiv 
of  Aaron.  [B.  F.  W.] 

MENE8THEU8  (Meveotfefo  ;  Alex.  Vlevia- 
Oftris  :  Mncstheus).  The  father  of  APOLLONIUS  3 
(2  Mace.  iv.  21). 

MENI'.  The  last  clause  of  Is.  Ixv.  11  is  ren 
dered  in  the  A.  V.  "and  that  furnish  the  drink-offer 


ing  unto  that  number"  (*3O?),  the  marginal  reading 

for  the  last  word  being  "  Meni."  That  the  word  so 
rendered  is  a  proper  name,  and  also  the  proper  name 
of  an  object  of  idolatrous  worship  cultivated  by  the 
Jews  in  Babylon,  is  a  supposition  which  there  seems 
no  reason  to  question,  as  it  is  in  accordance  with 
the  context,  and  has  every  probability  to  recom 
mend  it.  But  the  identification  of  Meni  with  a»y 
known  heathen  god  is  still  uncertain.  The  versions 
are  at  variance.  In  the  LXX.  the  word  is  rendered 
*/  Ti5;CT>  "  fortune  "  or  "  luck."  The  old  Latin  ver 
sion  of  the  clause  is  "  impletis  daemoni  potionem  ;" 
while  Symmachus  (as  quoted  by  Jerome)  must  have 
had  a  different  reading,  *31D,  mt'nnt,  "  without  me," 
which  Jerome  interprets  as  signifying  that  the  act 
of  worship  implied  in  the  drink-offering  was  not 
performed  for  God,  but  for  the  daemon  ("  ut  doceat 
non  sibi  fieri  sed  daemoni  ").  The  Targum  of  Jo 
nathan  is  very  vague  —  "  and  mingle  cups  for  theii 
idols;"  and  the  Syriac  translators  either  omit  the 
word  altogether,  or  had  a  different  reading,  perhaps 
ID?,  lamo,  "  for  them."  Some  variation  of  the 
same  kind  apparently  gave  rise  to  the  super  earn 
of  the  Vulgate,  referring  to  the  "  table  "  mentioned 
in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse.  From  the  old  ver 
sions  we  come  to  the  commentators,  and  their  judg 
ments  are  equally  conflicting.  Jerome  (Comm.  m  Is. 
Ixv.  11)  illustrates  the  passage  by  reference  to  an 
ancient  idolatrous  custom  which  prevailed  in  Egypt, 
and  especially  at  Alexandria,  on  the  last  day  of  the 
last  month  of  the  year,  of  placing  a  table  covered 
with  dishes  of  various  kinds,  and  a  cup  mixed  with 
mead,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  fertility  of  the  past 
year,  or  as  an  omen  of  that  which  was  to  come 
(comp.  Virg.  Aen.  ii.  763).  But  he  gives  no  clue 
to  the  identification  of  Meni,  and  his  explanation  is 
evidently  suggested  by  the  renderings  of  the  LXX. 
and  the  old  Latin  version  ;  the  former,  as  he  quotes 
them,  translating  Gad  by  "  fortune,"  and  Meni 
by  "  daemon,"  in  which  they  are  followed  by  the 
latter.  In  the  later  mythology  of  Egypt,  as  we 
learn  from  Macrobius  (Saturn,  i.  19),  Aafytw*'  and 
Tvxy  were  two  of  the  four  deities  who  presided 
over  birth,  and  represented  respectively  the  Sun 
and  Moon.  A  passage  quoted  by  Selden  (de  Dis 
Syris,  Synt.  i.  c.  1)  from  a  MS.  of  Vettius  Valena 
of  Antioch,  an  ancient  astrologer,  goes  also  to  prove 
that  in  the  astrological  language  of  his  day  the  sun 
and  moon  were  indicated  by  Saifiuv  and  r^x^t,  as; 
being  the  arbiters  of  human  destiny.*  This  cir 
cumstance,  coupled  with  the  similarity  between 
Meni  and  Wl4\v  or  M^JJTJ,  the  ancient  name  for 
the  moon,  has  induced  the  majority  of  commen 
tators  to  conclude  that  Meni  is  the  Moon  god  or 


the  reading  given  by  Jerome  Is  supported  by  the  fac 

in  Con.  xxx.  11,  ~IH.  ga/l.  i*  rendered  TU^T). 


MENI 

goddess,  the  Deus  Limits,  or  Dea  Luna  of  the  Ro 
mans  ;  masculine  as  regards  the  earth  which  she 
illumines  (terrae  maritus),  feminine  with  respect 
to  the  sun  (Solis  uxor),  from  whom  she  receives  her 
light.  This  twofold  character  of  the  moon  is 
thought  by  David  Millius  to  be  indicated  in  the 
two  names  Gad  and  Meni,  the  former  feminine, 
the  latter  masculine  (Diss.  v.  §  23) ;  but  as  both 
are  masculine  in  Hebrew,  his  speculation  falls  to 
the  ground.  Le  Moyne,  on  the  other  hand,  re 
garded  both  words  as  denoting  the  sun,  and  his 
-loublc  worship  among  the  Egyptians:  Gad  is  then 
the  goat  of  Mendes,  and  Jfer»'=Mnevis  worshipped 
at  Heliopolis.  The  opinion  of  Huetius  that  the 
Meni  of  Isaiah  and  the  Mifjv  of  Strabo  (xii.  c.  31)  both 
denoted  the  sun  was  refuted  by  Vitringa  and  others. 
Among  those  who  have  interpreted  the  word  lite 
rally  "  number,"  may  be  reckoned  Jarchi  and  Abar- 
banel,  who  understand  by  it  the  "  number  "  of  the 
priests  who  formed  the  company  of  revellers  at  the 
feast,  and  later  Hoheisel  (Obs.  ad.  diffic.  Jes.  loca, 
p.  349)  followed  in  the  same  track.  Kimchi,  in 
his  note  on  Is.  Ixv.  11,  says  of  Meni,  "  it  is  a  star, 
and  some  interpret  it  of  the  stars  which  are  num 
bered,  and  they  are  the  seven  stars  of  motion," 
i.  e.  the  planets.  Buxtorf  {Lex.  ffebr.}  applies  it  to 
the  "  number  "  of  the  stars  which  were  worshipped 
as  gods;  Schindler  (Lex.  Pentagl.~)  to  "  the  number 
and  multitude"  of  the  idols,  while  according  to 
others  it  refers  to  "  Mercury  the  god  of  numbers ;" 
all  which  are  mere  conjectures,  quot  homines,  tot 
sententiae,  and  take  their  origin  from  the  play 
upon  the  word  Meni,  which  is  found  in  the  verse 
next  following  that  in  which  it  occurs  ("  therefore 
will  I  number  (*JV3O'1,  umdnitld)  you  to  the 
sword  "),  and  which  is  supposed  to  point  to  its  de 
rivation  from  the  verb  !"I3O,  manah,  to  number. 
But  the  origin  of  the  name  of  Noah,  as  given  in 
Gen.  v.  29,b  shows  that  such  plays  upon  words  are 
not  to  be  depended  upon  as  the  bases  of  etymology. 
On  the  supposition,  however,  that  in  this  case  the 
etymology  of  Meni  is  really  indicated,  its  mean 
ing  is  still  uncertain.  Those  who  understand  by 
it  the  moon,  derive  an  argument  for  their  theory 
from  the  fact,  that  anciently,  years  were  num 
bered  by  the  courses  of  the  moon.  But  Gese- 
nius  (Comm.  ti6.  d.  Jesaia),  with  more  probability, 
while  admitting  the  same  origin  of  the  word,  gives 
to  the  root  manah  the  sense  of  assigning,  or  dis 
tributing^  and  connects  it  with  manah*  one  of  the 
three  idols  worshipped  by  the  Arabs  before  the  time 
of  Mohammad,  to  which  reference  is  made  in  the 
Koran  (Sura  53),  "  What  think  ye  of  A  Hat,  and 
Al  Uzzah,  and  Manah,  that  other  third  goddess?" 
Manah  was  the  object  of  worship  of  "  the  tribes  of 
Hudliei/l  and  Khuzd'ah,  who  dwelt  between  Mekkeh 
and  El-Medeeneh,  and  as  some  say,  of  the  tribes  of 
Ows,  El-Khazraj,  and  Thakeek  also.  This  idol  was 
a  large  stone,  demolished  by  one  Saad,  in  the  8th 


MEONENIM.  THE  PLAIN  OP      323 

year  of  the  Flight,  a  year  so  fatal  to  the  idols  o< 
Arabia"  (Lane's  Sel.  from  the  Kur-an,  pret.  pp. 
30,  31,  from  Pococke's  Spec.  Hist.  Ar.  p.  93.  ed. 
White).  But  Al  Zamakhshari,  the  commentator  on 

the  Koran,  derives  Manah  from  the  root      I  ^.  "  to 

t? 

flow,"  because  of  the  blood  which  flowed  at  the  sacri 
fices  to  this  idol,  or,  as  Millius  explains  it,  because 
the  ancient  idea  of  the  moon  was  that  it  was  a 
star  full  of  moisture,  with  which  it  filled  the  sub 
lunary  regions.*  The  etymology  given  by  Gesenius 
is  more  probable ;  and  Meni  would  then  be  the  per 
sonification  of  fate  or  destiny,  under  whatever  form 
it  was  worshipped.'  Whether  this  foi-m,  as  Geseuius 
maintains,  was  the  planet  Venus,,  which  was  known 
to  Arabic  astrologers  as  •"  the  lesser  good  fortune" 
(the  planet  Jupiter  being  the  ."greater"),  it  is 
impossible  to  say  with  certainty ;  nor  is  it  safe  to 
reason  from  the  worship  of  Manah  by  the  Arabs  in 
the  times  before  Mohammad  to  that  of  Meni  by  the 
Jews  more  than  a  thousand  years  earlier.  But  the 
coincidence  is  remarkable,  though  the  identifica 
tion  may  be  incomplete.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEON;ENIM,  THE  PLAIN  OF  (« 


b  "  And  he  called  his  name  Noah  (H3),  saying,  This  one 
doll  comfort  us,"  &c.  (•<IJJDn3S  yfnac'tamfnii).  Yet  no 
one  would  derive  nj,  n6ach,  from  DH3,  ndcham.  The 
play  on  the  word  may  be  retained  without  detriment  to 
the  sense  If  we  render  Meni  "destiny,"  and  the  following 
clause,  "  therefore  will  I  dettine  you  for  the  sword." 


ks  the  Arab. 


,  mana,  whence  Ij^,  "death," 


JuJLo-  "fete."  "destiny." 


3  :  •  'K\ovfjLa<avffj.fli> :    Alex,    and   Aquila. 

Spvos  a.iro$\firovT<av :  quae  respicit  quercum),  an 
oak,  or  terebinth,  or  other  great  tree — for  the  trans 
lation  of  the  Hebrew  Elon  by  "  plain  "  is  most  pro 
bably  incorrect,  as  will  be  shown  under  the  head  oi 
PLAIN — which  formed  a  well-known  object  in 
central  Palestine  in  the  days  of  the  Judges.  It  is 
mentioned — at  least  under  this  name — only  in  Judg. 
ix.  37,  where  Gaal  ben-Ebed  standing  in  the  gateway 
of  Shechem  sees  the  ambushes  of  Abimelech  coming 
towards  the  city,  one  by  the  middle  of  the  land,  and 
another  "  by  the  way  (^"l;!!?)  of  Elon-Meonenim," 
that  is,  the  road  leading  to  it.  In  what  direction  it 
stood  with  regard  to  the  town  we  are  not  told. 

The  meaning  of  Meonenim,  if  interpreted  as  a 
Hebrew  word,  is  enchanters.*  or  "  observers  of 
times,"  as  it  is  elsewhere  rendered  (Deut.  xviii.  10. 
14;  in  Mic.  v.  12  it  is  "soothsayers").  This 
connexion  of  the  name  with  magical  arts  has  led  to 
the  suggestion  b  that  the  tree  in  question  is  identical 
with  that  beneath  which  Jacob  hid  the  foreign 
idols  and  amulets  of  his  household,  before  going 
into  the  presence  of  God  at  the  consecrated  ground 
of  Bethel  (Gen.  xxxv.  4).  But  the  inference  seems 
hardly  a  sound  one,  for  meonenim  does  not  mean 
"  enchantments "  but  "enchanters,"  nor  is  there 
any  ground  for  connecting  it  in  any  way  with 
amulets  or  images  ;  and  there  is  the  positive  reason 
against  the  identification  that  while  this  tree  seems 
to  have  been  at  a  distance  from  the  town  of  She 
chem,  that  of  Jacob  was  in  it,  or  in  very  close 
proximity  to  it  (the  Hebrew  particle  used  is  DV, 
which  implies  this). 


'  The  moist  star 


Upon  whose  influence  Neptune's  empire  stands.'' 

SHAKSP.  Haml.  i.  1. 

'  The  presence  of  the  article  seems  to  indicate  thai 
"  Meni"  was  originally  an  appellative. 

•  Gesenius  (Thet.  51  b),  incantatores  and  Zauberer , 
Michaelis  and  Fttrst,  Wahrsager.  The  root  of  the  word  ig 
\SJ,  probably  connected  with  PJJ,  the  eye,  which  bears 
so  prominent  a  part  in  Eas*»Ti  magic.  Of  this  there  ie 
a  trace  in  the  respicit  of  the  V  ulgnte.  (See  'jesen.  Tftet, 
1062,  3;  also  DIVINATION,  vol.  i.  443,  444.) 

•>  See  Stanley,  S  *  P.  142. 

y  2 


324 


MEONOTHAI 


Kivs  trees  are  mentioned  in  connexion  with 
Shechpm : — 

1.  The  oak  (not  "plain"  as  in  A.  V.)  of  Moreh, 
where  Abram  made  his  first  halt  and  built  his  first 
altar  in  tlw  Promised  Land  (Gen.  xii.  6). 

2.  That  of  Jacob,  already  spoken  of. 

3.  "  The  oak  which  was  in  the  holy  place  of  Je 
hovah  "  (Josh.  xxiv.  26),  beneath  which  Joshua  set 
up  the  stone  which  he  assured  the  people  had  heard 
all  his  words,  and  would  one  day  witness  against 
them. 

4.  The  Elon-Muttsab,  or  "  oak  (not  "  plain,"  as 
in  A.  V.)  of  the  pillar  in  Shechem,"  beneath  which 
Abimelech  wae  made  king  (Judg.  ix.  6). 

5.  The  Elon-Meonenim. 

The  first  two  of  these  may,  with  great  proba 
bility,  be  identical.  The  second,  third,  and  fourth, 
agree  in  being  all  specified  as  in  or  close  to  the 
town.  Joshua's  is  mentioned  with  the  definite 
article — "  the  oak  " — as  if  well  known  previously. 
It  is  therefore  possible  that  it  was  Jacob's  tree,  or 
its  successor.  And  it  seems  further  possible  that 
during  the  confusions  which  prevailed  in  the 
country  after  Joshua's  death,  the  stone  which  he 
had  erected  beneath  it,  and  which  he  invested,  even 
though  only  in  metaphor,  with  qualities  so  like 
those  which  the  Canaanites  attributed  to  the  stones 
they  worshipped — that  during  these  confused  times 
this  famous  block  may  have  become  sacred  among 
the  Canaanites,  one  of  their  "  mattsebahs  "  [see 
IDOL,  vol.  i.  850,  §15],  and  thus  the  tree  have 
acquired  the  name  of  "  the  oak  of  Muttsab  "  from 
the  fetish  below  it. 

That  Jacob's  oak  and  Joshua's  oak  were  the  same 
tree  seems  still  more  likely,  when  we  observe  the 
remarkable  correspondence  between  the  circumstances 
of  each  occurrence.  The  point  of  Joshua's  address — 
his  summary  of  the  early  history  of  the  nation — is 
that  they  should  "  put  away  the  foreign  gods  which 
were  among  them,  and  incline  their  hearts  to  Je 
hovah  the  God  of  Israel."  Except  in  the  mention 
of  Jehovah,  who  had  not  revealed  Himself  till  the 
Exodus,  the  words  are  all  but  identical  with  those 
in  which  Jacob  had  addressed  his  followers ;  and  it 
seems  almost  impossible  not  to  believe  that  the  coin 
cidence  was  intentional  on  Joshua's  part,  and  that 
such  an  allusion  to  a  well-known  passage  in  the  life 
of  their  forefather,  and  which  had  occurred  on  the 
very  spot  where  they  were  standing,  must  have 
eome  home  with  peculiar  force  to  his  hearers. 

But  while  four  of  these  were  thus  probably  one 
and  the  same  tree,  the  oak  of  Meonenim  for  the  rea 
sons  stated  above  seems  to  have  been  a  distinct  one. 

It  is  perhaps  passible  that  Meonenim  may  have 
originally  been  Maonim,  that  is  Maonites  or  Me- 
hunim ;  a  tribe  or  nation  of  non-Israelites  elsewhere 
mentioned.  If  so  it  furnishes  an  interesting  trace 
of  the  presence  at  some  early  period  of  that  tribe 
in  Central  Palestine,  of  which  others  have  been  no 
ticed  in  the  case  of  the  Ammonites,  Avites,  Zema- 
rites,  &c.  [See  vol.  i.  1 88 note  «.]  [G.] 

MEONOTHA'I  Onbtytt :  Meu/afl :  Maonathf). 

One  of  the  sons  of  Othniel,  the  younger  brother  of 
Caleb  (1  Chr.  iv.  14).  In  the  text  as  it  now  stands 
there  is  probably  an  omission,  and  the  true  reading 


•  The  name  is  given  in  the  LXX.  as  follows: — Josh. 
-111.  18,  Mai<J>oa'8,  Alex.  Mrj<f>aafl;    xxi.  37,  TTJV  JAa<f>a, 
Alex.  T.  Macr^u ;  1  Chr.  vi.  79,  rijv  Mac</>Aa,  Alex.  T.  *<mfl ; 
J«.  xlvili.  (xxxi.)  21,  Mftxpav,  Alex.  Nupafl 

*  Translated  in  A.  V    "  shame." 


MEPHIBOSHETll 

of  ver.  13  and  14  should  be,  as  the  Vulgate  and  the 
Oomplutensian  edition  of  the  LXX.  give  it.  "and 
the  sons  of  Othniel,  Hathath,  and  Meoiiothai;  and 
Meonothai  begat  Ophrah."  It  is  not  clear  whether 
this  last  phrase  implies  that  he  founded  the  town 
of  Ophrah  or  not  :  the  usage  of  the  word  "  father  ' 
in  the  sense  of  "  founder,"  is  not  uncommon. 


MEPHA'ATH  (nVQO  ;  in  Chron.  arid  Jerein. 

B^  ;  in  the  latter  the  Cethib,  or  original  text, 
has  nVQ1D:  Mai<f>o<£5  ;  Alex.  •Mr^aafl:  Me- 
phaath,  Mephath),  a  city  of  the  Reubenites,  one  of 
the  towns  dependent  on  Heshbon  (Josh.  xiii.  1  8),  ly 
ing  ill  the  district  of  the  Mishor  (comp.  17,  and  Jer. 
xlviii.  21,  A.  V.  "  plain  "),  which  probably  answered 
to  the  modern  Belka.  It  was  one  of  the  cities 
allotted  with  their  suburbs  to  the  Merarite  Levites 
(Josh.  xxi.  37  ;  1  Chr.  vi.  79  ;  the  former  does  nol 
exist  in  the  Rec.  Hebr.  Text).  At  the  time  of  the 
conquest  it  was  no  doubt,  like  Heshbon,  in  the 
hands  of  the  Amorites  (Num.  xxi.  26),  but  when 
Jeremiah  delivered  his  denunciations  it  had  been 
recovered  by  its  original  possessors,  the  Moabites 
(xlviii.  21). 

Mephaath  is  named  in  the  above  passages  with 
Dibon,  Jahazah,  Kirjathaim,  and  other  towns,  which 
have  been  identified  with  tolerable  certainty  on  the 
north  of  the  Arnon  (  Wady  Mojeb}  ;  but  no  one 
appears  yet  to  have  discovered  any  name  at  all 
resembling  it,  and  it  must  remain  for  the  further 
investigation  of  those  interesting  and  comparatively 
untrodden  districts.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius 
(Onomast.  Mrj<f><£0)  it  was  used  as  a  military  post 
for  keeping  in  check  the  wandering  tribes  of  the 
desert,  which  surrounded,  as  it  still  surrounds,  the 
cultivated  land  of  this  district. 

The  extended,  and  possibly  later,  form  of  the 
name  which  occurs  in  Chronicles  and  Jeremiah,  as 
if  Mei  Phaath,  "  waters  of  Phaath,"  may  be,  as  in 
other  cases,  an  attempt  to  fix  an  intelligible  meaning 
on  an  archaic  or  foreign  word.  [G.] 

MEPHIBO'SHETH 


;  Joseph.  Mtfj.<pifioff6os  :  Miphiboseth},  the 
name  borne  by  two  members  of  the  family  of 
Saul  —  his  son  and  his  grandson. 

The  name  itself  is  perhaps  worth  a  brief  con 
sideration.  Bosheth  appears  to  have  been  a  favourite 
appellation  in  Saul's  family,  for  it  forms  a  part  of 
the  names  of  no  fewer  than  three  members  of  it  — 
Ish-bosheth  and  the  two  Mephi-bosheths.  But  in 
the  genealogies  preserved  in  1  Chronicles  these 
names  are  given  in  the  different  forms  of  Esh-baal 
and  Merib-baal.  The  variation  is  identical  with  that 
of  Jerub-baal  and  Jerub-besheth,  and  is  in  accord 
ance  with  passages  in  Jeremiah  (xi.  13)  and  Hosea 
(ix.  10),  where  Baal  and  Bosheth  b  appear  to  be  con 
vertible,  or  at  least  related,  terms,  the  latter  being 
used  as  a  contemptuous  or  derisive  synonym  of  the 
former.  One  inference  from  this  wo  old  be  that 
the  persons  in  question  were  originally  e  named 
Baal  ;  that  this  appears  in  the  two  fragments  of 
the  family  records  preserved  in  Chronicles;  but 
that  in  Samuel  the  hateful  heathen  name  has  been 
uniformly  erased,  and  the  nickname  Bosheth  sub 
stituted  for  it.  It  is  some  support  to  this  to  find 


c  Some  of  the  ancient  Greek  versions  of  the  Hexnpln 
givo  the  name  in  Samuel  as  Mempbi-biuil  (see  Bahrdt'a 
Hexapla,  pp.  594,  599,  614).  Also  IVocopius  Gazacus, 
Scholia  on  2  Sam.  xvi.  No  tract'  of  this,  however,  uppeirs 
in  any  MS.  of  the  Hebrew  text. 


MEPHIBOSHETH 

that  Saul  had  an  ancestor  named  BAAL,  who  ap- 
pews  in  the  lists  of  Chronicles  only  (1  Chr.  viii.  30, 
ix.  36).  But  such  a  change  in  the  record  supposes 
an  amount  of  editing  and  interpolation  which  would 
hardly  have  been  accomplished  without  leaving  more 
obvious  traces,  in  reasons  given  for  the  change,  &c. 
How  different  it  is,  for  example,  from  the  case  of 
Jerub-besheth,  where  the  alteration  is  mentioned 
and  commented  on.  Still  the  facts  are  as  above 
stated,  whatever  explanation  may  be  given  of  them. 

1.  Saul's  son  by  Kizpah  the  daughter  of  Aiah, 
his  concubine  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8).     He  and  his  brother 
Armoni  were  among  the  seven  victims  who  were 
surrendered  by  David   to  the  Gibeonites,  and  by 
them  crucified"  d  in  sacrifice  to  Jehovah,  to  avert  a 
famine  from  which  the  country  was  suffering.    The 
seven  corpses,  protected  by  the  tender  care  of  the 
mother  of  Mephibosheth  from  the  attacks  of  bird 
aiid  b«ast,  were   exposed  on  their  crosses  to  the 
fierce  sun*   of  at    least  five  of  the    midsummer 
months,  on  the  sacred  eminence  of  Gibeah.     At  the 
.end  of  that  time  the  attention  of  David  was  called  to 
the  circumstance,  and  also  possibly  to  the  fact  that 
the  sacrifice  had  failed  in  its  purpose.     A  different 
method  was  tried :  the  bones  of  Saul  and  Jonathan 
were  disinterred  from  their  resting-place  at  the  foot 
of  the  great  tree  at  Jabesh-Gi lead,  the  blanched 
and  withered  remains  of  Mephibosheth,  his  brother, 
and  his  five  relatives,  were  taken  down  from  the 
crosses,  and  father,  son,  and  grandsons  found  at  last 
a  resting-place  together  in  the   ancestral  cave  of 
Kish  at  Zelah.     When  this  had  been  done,  "  God 
was  entreated  for  the  land,"  and  the  famine  ceased. 
[KlZI'AH.] 

2.  The  son  of  Jonathan,  grandson  of  Saul,  and 
nephew  of  the  preceding. 

1.  His  life  seems  to  have  been,  from  beginning 
to  end,  one  of  trial  and  discomfort.  The  name  of 
his  mother  is  unknown.  There  is  reason  to  think 
that  she  died  shortly  after  his  birth,'  and  that  he 
was  an  only  child.  At  any  rate  we  know  for  cer 
tain  that  when  his  father  and  grandfather  were  slain 
on  Gilboa  he  was  an  infant  of  but  five  years  old. 
He  was  then  living  under  the  charge  of  his  nurse, 
probably  at  Gibeah,  the  regular  residence  of  Saul. 
The  tidings  that  the  army  was  destroyed,  the  king 
and  his  sons  slain,  and  that  the  Philistines,  spreading 
from  hill  to  hill  of  the  country,  were  sweeping  all 
before  them,  reached  the  royal  household.  The 
nurse  fled,  carrying  the  child  on  her  'shoulder. 
But  in  her  panic  and  hurry  she  stumbled,  and 
Mephibosheth  was  precipitated  to  the  ground  with 
such  force  as  to  deprive  him  for  life  of  the  use  of 
both  g  feet  (2  Sam.  iv.  4).  These  early  misfortunes 


MEPHIB08HET11  326 

threw  a  sfiade  over  his  whole  life,  and  his  personal 
deformity — as  is  often  the  case  where  it  has  been 
the  result  of  accident — seems  to  have  exercised  a 
depressing  and  depreciatory  influence  on  his  cha 
racter.  He  can  never  forget  that  he  is  a  poor 
lame  slave  (2  Sam.  xix.  26),  and  unable  to  walk ; 
a  dead  dog  (ix.  8) ;  that  all  the  house  of  his  father 
were  dead  (xix.  28) ;  that  the  king  is  an  angel  of 
God  (ib.  27),  and  he  his  abject  dependent  (ix. 
6,  8).  He  receives  the  slanders  of  Ziba  and  the 
harshness  of  David  alike  with  a  submissive  equa 
nimity  which  is  quite  touching,  and  which  effectually 
Wins  our  sympathy. 

2.  After  the  accident  which  thus  embittered  his 
whole  existence,  Mephibosheth  was  carried  with 
the  rest  of  his  family  beyond  the  Jordan  to  the 
mountains  of  Gilead,  where  he  found  a  refuge  hi 
the  house  of  Machir  ben-Ammiel,  a  powerful  Gadite 
or  Manassite  sheykh  at  Lo-debar,  not  far  from 
Mahanaim,  which  during  the  reign  of  his  uncle 
Ishbosheth  was  the  head-quarters  of  his  family. 
By  Machir  he  was  brought  up  (Jos.  Ant.  vii.  5, 
§5),  there  he  married,  and  there  he  was  living  at 
a  later  period,  when  David,  having  completed  the 
subjugation  of  the  adversaries  of  Israel  on  every 
side,  had  leisure  to  turn  his  attention  to  claims  of 
other  and  hardly  less  pressing  descriptions.  The 
solemn  oath  which  he  had  sworn  to  the  father  of 
Mephibosheth  at  their  critical  interview  by  the 
stone  Ezel,  that  he  "  would  not  cut  off  his  kindness 
from  the  house  of  Jonathan  for  ever :  no !  not 
when  Jehovah  had  cut  off  the  enemies  of  David 
each  one  from  the  face  of  the  earth"  (1  Sam.  xx. 
15)  ;  and  again,  that  "  Jehovah  should  be  between 
Jonathan's  seed  and  his  seed  for  ever  "  (ver.  42), 
was  naturally  the  first  thing  that  occurred  to  him, 
and  he  eagerly  inquired  who  was  left  of  the  house 
of  Saul,  that  he  might  show  kindness  to  him  for 
Jonathan's  sake  (2  £am.  ix.  1).  So  completely  had 
the  family  of  the  late  king  vanished  from  the 
western  side  of  Jordan,  that  the  only  person  to  be 
met  with  in  any  way  related  to  them  was  one 
ZIBA,  formerly  a  slave  of  the  royal  house,  but  now 
a  freed  man,  with  a  family  of  fifteen  sons,  who  by 
arts  which,  from  the  glimpse  we  subsequently  have 
of  his  character,  are  not  difficult  to  understand, 
must  have  acquired  considerable  substance,  since  he 
was  possessed  of  an  establishment  of  twenty  slaves 
of  his  own.  [Znu.]  From  this  man  David  learnt 
of  the  existence  of  Mephibosheth.  Royal  messengers 
were  sent  to  the  house  of  Machir  at  Lo-debar  in  the 
mountains  of  Gilead,  and  by  them  the  prince  and 
his  infant  son  MiCHA  were  brought  to  Jerusalem. 
The  interview  with  David  was  marked  by  extreme 


<•  There  is  no  doubt  about  this  being  the  real  meaning 
of  the  word  JJpS  translated  here  and  in  Num.  xxv.  4 

"  hanged  up."  (See  Michaelis'  Supplement,  No.  1046 ;  also 
tiesenius,  Thes.  620;  and  Fiirst,  Handwb.  539b .)  Aquila 
bus  a.va.-n-riywij.i,  understanding  them  to  have  been  not 
tt-ucified  but  impaled.  The  Vulgate  reads  crucifixentnt 
(ver.  9),  and  qui  affixi  fuerant  (13).  The  Hebrew  term 
y\y  is  entirely  distinct  from  n?P\,  also  rendered  "to 
hang"  in  the  A.  V.,  which  is  itsT  real  signification.  It 
is  this  latter  word  which  is  employed  in  the  story  of  the 
five  kings  at  Makkedah  ;  in  the  account  of  the  indignities 
practised  on  Saul's  body,  2  Sam.  xxi.  12,  on  Baanah  and 
Rechab  by  David,  2  Sam.  iv.  12  ;  and  elsewhere. 

•  This  follows  from  the  statement  that  they  hung  from 
Dtrley  harvest  (April)  till  the  commencement  of  the  rains 
;Octoher) ;  but  it  is  also  worthy  of  notice  »hat  the  LXX. 
have  employed  the  word  t^rjAiafeti',  "  to  expose  to  thr  I 


sun."  It  is  also  remarkable  that  on  the  only  other  occa 
sion  on  which  this  Hebrew  term  is  used — Num.  xxv.  4 — 
an  express  command  was  given  that  the  victims  should 
be  crucified  "  in  front  of  the  sun." 

'  This  is  the  statement  of  Josephus — an-b  7<av  tomav 
(Ant.  vii.  5,  }5) ;  but  it  Is  hardly  necessary,  for  in  the 
Kast  children  are  always  carried  on  the  shoulder.  See 
the  woodcut  in  Lane's  Mod.  Egyptians,  ch.  i.  p.  5.4 . 

s  It  is  a  remarkable  thing,  and  very  characteristic  ot  HIM 
simplicity  and  unconsciousness  of  these  ancient  records, 
of  which  the  late  Professor  Blunt  has  happily  illustrated 
so  many  other  instances,  that  this  information  concerning 
Mepbibosheth's  childhood,  which  contains  the  key  to  bis 
whole  history,  is  inserted,  almost  as  if  by  accident,  in  the 
midst  of  the  narrative  of  his  uncle's  death,  with  no  appa 
rent  reason  for  the  insertion,  or  connexion  l>etween  the 
two,  further  tnan  tnat  of  their  being  relative!,  arid  havliig 
pomewliat  similar  names. 


326 


MEPHIBOSHETH 


kindness  on  the  pait  of  the  king,  and  on  that  of 
Mephibosheth  by  the  fear  and  humility  which  has 
been  pointed  out  as  characteristic  of  him.  He 
leaves  the  royal  presence  with  all  the  property  of 
his  grandfather  restored  to  him,  and  with  the  whole 
family  and  establishment  of  Ziba  as  his  slaves,  to 
cultivate  the  land  and  harvest  the  produce.  Hfe 
himself  is  to  be  a  daily  guest  at  David's  table. 
From  this  time  forward  he  resided  at  Jerusalem. 

3.  An  interval  of  about  seventeen  years  now  passes, 
and  the  crisis  of  David's  life  arrives.  Of  Mephi- 
bosheth's  behaviour  on  this  occasion  we  possess  two 
accounts — his  own  (2  Sam.  xix.  24-30),  and  that  of 
Ziba  (xvi.  1-4).  They  are  naturally  at  variance 
with  each  other.  (1.)  Ziba  meets  the  king  on  his 
flight  at  the  most  opportune  moment,  just  as  David 
has  undergone  the  most  trying  part  of  that  trying 
day's  journey,  has  taken  the  last  look  at  the  city 
so  peculiarly  his  rwn,  and  completed  the  hot  and 
toilsome  ascent  01  the  Mount  of  Olives.  He  is  on 
foot,  and  is  in  want  of  relief  and  refreshment.  The 
relief  and  refreshment  are  there.  There  stand  a 
couple  of  strong  he-asses  ready  saddled  for  the  king 
or  his  household  to  make  the  descent  upon;  and 
there  are  bread,  grapes,  melons,  and  a  skin  of  wine  , 
and  there — the  donor  of  these  welcome  gifts — is 
Ziba,  with  respect  in  his  look  and  sympathy  on 
his  tongue.  Of  course  the  whole,  though  offered 
as  Ziba's,  is  the  property  of  Mephibosheth :  the 
asses  are  his,  one  of  them  his  own  h  riding  ani 
mal  :  the  fruits  are  from  his  gardens  and  orchards. 
But  why  is  not  their  owner  here  in  person  ? 
Where  is  the  "  son  of  Saul "  ?  He,  says  Ziba, 
is  in  Jerusalem,  waiting  to  receive  from  the  nation 
the  throne  of  his  grandfather,  that  throne  from 
which  he  has  been  so  long  unjustly  excluded.  It 
must  be  confessed  that  the  tale  at  first  sight  is 
a  most  plausible  one,  and  that  the  answer  of 
David  is  no  more  than  was  to  be  expected.  So 
the  base  ingratitude  of  Mephibosheth  is  requited 
with  the  ruin  he  deserves,  while  the  loyalty  and 
thoughtful  courtesy  of  Ziba  are  rewarded  by  the 
possessions  of  his  master,  thus  once  more  rein 
stating  him  in  the  position  from  which  he  had 
been  so  rudely  thrust  on  Mephibosheth 's  arrival  in 
Judah.  (2.)  Mephibosheth's  story — which,  how 
ever,  he  had  not  the  opportunity  of  telling  until 
several  days  later,  when  he  met  David  returning  to 
his  kingdom  at  the  western  bank  of  Jordan — was 
very  different  to  Ziba's.  He  had  been  desirous  to 
fly  with  his  patron  and  benefactor,  and  had  ordered 
Ziba  to  make  ready  his  ass  that  he  might  join  the 
cortege.  But  Ziba  had  deceived  him,  had  left  him, 
and  not  returned  with  the  asses.  In  his  helpless 
condition  he  had  no  alternative,  when  once  the  op 
portunity  of  accompanying  David  was  lost,  but  to 
remain  where  he  was.  The  swift  pursuit  which 
had  been  made  after  Ahimaaz  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam. 
xvii.)  had  shown  what  risks  even  a  strong  and 
able  man  must  run  who  would  try  to  follow  the 
king.  But  all  that  he  could  do  under  the  cir 
cumstances  he  had  done.  He  had  gone  into  the 
ileepest  mourning  possible  '  for  his  lost  friend.  From 
the  very  day  that  David  left  he  had  allowed  his 


h  Th3  word  used  both  in  zvi.  1,  2,  and  xix.  26,  is 
"flDn,  t.  e.  the  strong  he-ass,  a  farm  animal,  as  opposed 
to  the  gbe-ass,  more  commonly  used  for  riding.  For  the 
first  we  ISSACHAR,  vol.  t.  p.  902a;  for  the  second,  ELISHA, 
ibhlUth 

'  ITie  same  mourning  as  David  for  his  child  (xii.  20). 
Jewish  tradition  Is  preserved  by  Jerome 


MEPHIBOSHETH 

beard  to  grow  ragged,  his  crippled  feet  were  un- 
wa.shedk  and  untended,  his  linen  remained  unchanc^l. 
That  David  did  not  disbelieve  this  story  is  shown 
by  his  revoking  the  judgment  he  had  previous!/ 
given.  That  he  did  not  entirely  reverse  his  decision, 
but  allowed  Ziba  to  retain  possession  of  half  the 
lands  of  Mephibosheth,  is  probably  due  partly  to 
weariness  at  the  whole  transaction,  but  mainly  to 
the  conciliatory  frame  of  mind  in  which  he  was  at 
that  moment.  "  Shall  then  any  man  be  put  to 
death  this  day  ? "  is  the  key-note  of  the  whole  pro 
ceeding.  Ziba  probably  was  a  rascal,  who  had  done 
his  best  to  injure  an  innocent  and  helpless  man : 
but  the  king  had  passed  his  woixi  that  no  one  was 
to  be  made  unhappy  on  this  joyful  day ;  and  so 
Mephibosheth,  who  believed  himself  ruined,  has 
half  his  property  restored  to  him,  while  Ziba  is 
better  off  than  he  was  before  the  king's  flight,  and 
far  better  off  than  he  deserved  to  be. 

4.  The  writer  is  aware  that  this  is  not  the  view 
generally  taken  of  Mephibosheth's  conduct,  and  in 
particular  the  opposite  side  has  been  maintained 
with  much  cogency  and  ingenuity  by  the  late  Pro 
fessor  Blunt  in  his  Undesigned  Coincidences  (part 
ii.  §17).  But  when  the  circumstances  on  both 
sides  are  weighed,  there  seems  to  be  no  escape  from 
the  conclusion  come  to  above.  Mephibosheth  could 
have  had  nothing  to  hope  for  from  the  revolution. 
It  was  not  a  mere  anarchical  scramble  in  which 
all  had  equal  chances  of  coming  to  the  top,  but 
a  civil  war  between  two  parties,  led  by  two  indi 
viduals,  Absalom  on  one  side,  David  on  the  other. 
From  Absalom,  who  had  made  no  vow  to  Jona 
than,  it  is  obvious  that  he  had  nothing  to  hope. 
Moreover,  the  struggle  was  entirely  confined  to  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  and,  at  the  period  with  which  alone 
we  are  concerned,  to  the  chief  city  of  Judah.  What 
chance  could  a  Benjamite  have  had  there  ? — more 
especially  one  whose  very  claim  was  his  descent 
from  a  roan  known  only  to  the  people  of  Judah 
as  having  for  years  hunted  their  darling  David 
through  the  hills  and  woods  of  his  native  tribe  • 
least  of  all  when  that  Benjamite  was  a  poor  nervous 
timid  cripple,  as  opposed  to  Absalom,  the  handsomest, 
readiest,  and  most  popular  man  in  the  country. 
Again,  Mephibosheth's  story  is  throughout  valid 
and  consistent.  Every  tie,  both  of  interest  and  of 
gratitude,  combined  to  keep  him  faithful  to  David's 
cause.  As  not  merely  lame,  but  deprived  of  the  use 
of  both  feet,  he  must  have  been  entirely  dependent 
on  his  ass  and  his  servant:  a  position  which  Ziba 
showed  that  he  completely  appreciated  by  not  only 
making  off'  himself,  but  taking  the  asses  and  their 
equipments  with  him.  Of  the  impossibility  of 
flight,  after  the  king  and  the  troops  had  gone,  we 
have  already  spoken.  Lastly,  we  have,  not  his 
own  statement,  but  that  of  the  historian,  to  the 
fact  that  he  commenced  his  mourning,  not  when 
his  supposed  designs  on  the  throne  proved  futile, 
but  on  the  very  day  of  David's  departure  (xix.  24). 

So  much  for  Mephibosheth.  Ziba,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  everything  to  gain  and  nothing  to  lose 
by  nay  turn  affairs  might  take.  As  a  BenjamiU' 
and  an  old  adherent  of  Saul  all  his  tendencies 

in  his  Quatst.  Heb.  on  this  passage,  to  the  effect  that  the 
correct  reading  of  the  Hebrew  is  not  "  undressed,"  but 
rather  "  ill-made  " '  -non  illotis  pedilius,  strf  pedibus  in- 
fcctis— alluding  to  false  wooden  feet  which  he  was  accus 
tomed  to  wear.  The  Hebrew  word— the  saint1  to  both 
feet  and  beard,  though  rendered  in  A.V.  "  dressed  "  aiid 
"  trimmed  " — is  Jlfy,  answering  to  our  wori  "  Jocc," 


MEBAB 

must  have  been  hostile  to  David.  It  was  David, 
moreover,  who  had  thrust  him  down  from  his 
independent  position,  and  brought  himself  and  Lis 
litteen  sons  back  into  the  bondage  from  which 
they  had  before  escaped,  and  from  which  they 
:ould  now  be  delivered  only  by  the  iiill  of  Mephi- 
bosheth.  He  had  thus  ever}  reason  to  wish  his 
master  out  of  the  way,  and  human  nature  must 
be  different  to  what  it  is  if  we  can  believe  that 
eiiher  his  good  offices  to  David  or  his  accusation 
of  Mephibosheth  was  the  result  of  anything  but 
calculation  and  interest. 

With  regard  to  the  absence  of  the  name  of  Mephi 
bosheth  from  the  dying  words  of  DavW,  which  is 
the  main  occasion  of  Mr.  Bltint's  strictures,  it  is 
most  natural — at  any  rate  it  is  quite  allowable — 
to  suppose  that,  in  the  interval  of  eight  years  which 
elapsed  between  David's  return  to  Jerusalem  and 
his  death,  Mephibosheth's  painful  life  had  come  to 
an  end.  We  may  without  difficulty  believe  that 
lie  did  not  long  survive  the  anxieties  and  annoy 
ances  which  Ziba's  treachery  had  brought  upon 
him.  [G.] 

ME'RAB  (3"1» :  Mepc*0,«  Alex,  also  Mepa/3  ; 
Joseph.  Mep^Tj :  Merob),  the  eldest  daughter, 
possibly  the  eldest  child,  of  king  Saul  (1  Sam.  xiv. 
49).  She  first  appears  after  the  victory  over  Goliath 
and  the  Philistines,  when  David  had  become  an  in 
mate  in  Saul's  house  (1  Sam.  xviii.  2),  and  imme 
diately  after  the  commencement  of  his  friendship 
with  Jonathan.  In  accordance  with  the  promise 
which  he  made  before  the  engagement  with  Goliath 
(xvii.  25),  Saul  betrothed  Merabto  David  (xviii.  17), 
but  it  is  evidently  implied  that  one  object  of  thus 
rewarding  his  valour  was  to  incite  him  to  further 
feats,  which  might  at  last  lead  to  his  death  by  the 
Philistines.  David's  hesitation  looks  as  if  he  did 
not  much  value  the  honour — at  any  rate  before  the 
marriage  Merab's  younger  sister  Michal  had  dis 
played  her  attachment  tor  David,  and  Merab  was 
then  married  to  Adriel  the  Meholathite,  who  seems 
to  have  been  one  of  the  wealthy  sheikhs  of  the  eastern 
part  of  Palestine,  with  whom  the  house  of  Saul 
always  maintained  an  alliance.  To  Adriel  she  bore 
five  sons,  who  formed  rive  of  the  seven  members 
of  the  house  of  Saul  who  were  given  up  to  the 
Gibeonites  by  David,  and  by  them  crucified  to 
Jehovah  on  the  sacred  hill  of  Gibeah  (2  Sam. 
zxi.  8).  [KizPAH.J 

The  Authorized  Version  of  this  last  passage  is  an 
accommodation.  The  Hebrew  text  has  "  the  five 
sons  of  Michal,  daughter  of  Saul,  which  she  bare  to 
Adriel,"  and  this  is  followed  in  the  LXX.  and  Vul 
gate.  The  Targum  explains  the  discrepancy  thus : 
"  The  five  sons  of  Merab  (which  Michal,  Saul's 
daughter,  brought  up)  which  she  bare,"  &c..  The 
Peshito  substitutes  Merab  (in  the  present  state  of 
the  text  "  Nadab")  for  Michal.  J.  H.  Michaelis, 
in  hi,i  Hebrew  Bible  (2  Sam.  xxi.  10),  suggests  that 
there  were  two  daughters  of  Saul  named  Michal,  as 
there  were  two  Elishamas  and  two  Eliphalets  among 
David's  sons.  Probably  the  most  feasible  solution 
of  the  difficulty  is  that  "  Michal  "  is  the  mistake  ot 
a  transcriber  for  "  Merab."  But  if  so  it  is  manifest 
from  the  agreement  of  the  versions  and  of  Josephus 
(Ant.  vii.  4,  §30)  with  the  present  text,  that  the 
error  is  one  of  very  ancient  date 

Is  it  not  possible  that  there  is  a  connexion  between 


MEUARI 


32V 


Merab's  name  and  that  of  her  nephew  MKUJB-BAAi 
or  Mephibosheth  as  he  is  ordinarily  called  ?  |"G.] 

MEKAI'AH  (nnD  :  'A/topfa;  F.  A.  Maputo 

Maraia).  A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joiakim,  the  sou 
of  Jeshua.  He  was  one  of  the  "  heads,  of  the 
fathers,"  and  representative  of  the  priestly  family 
of  Seraiah,  to  which  Ezra  belonged  (Neh.  xii.  12). 
The  reading  of  the  LXX.  —  'A/uopi'a,  is  supported  by 
the  Peshito-Syriac. 


MEEAI'OTH  (DinO:  Mapd)\,  in  1  Chr.  vi 
6,  7,  52  ;  Mapai'cifl,  1  Chr.  ix.  11  ;  MopeaSfl,  Ezr. 
vii.  3  ;  yiaptiad,  Neh.  xi.  1  1  ;  Alex.  Mapatwfl,  1  Chr. 
vi.  6,  7,  Ezr.  vii.  3;  Mepaa>0,  1  Chr.  vi.  52; 
MapiwB,  1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Neh.  xi.  11:  Maraioth, 
except  1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Ezr.  vii.  3,  Maraioth).  1.  A 
Aescendant  of  Eleazar  the  son  of  Aaron,  and  head 
of  a  priestly  house.  It  was  thought  by  Lightfoot 
that  he  was  the  immediate  predecessor  of  Eli  in  the 
office  of  high-priest,  and  that  at  his  death  the 
high-priesthood  changed  from  the  line  of  Eleazar  to 
the  line  of  Ithamar  (Temple  Service,  iv.  §1). 
Among  his  illustrious  descendants  were  Zadok  and 
Ezra.  He  is  called  elsewhere  MEREMOTH  (1  Esdr. 
vii.  ;  2),  and  MARIMOTH  (2  Esdr.  i.  2).  It  is 
apparently  another  Meraioth  who  comes  in  between 
Zadok  and  Ahitub  in  the  genealogy  of  Azariah 
(1  Chr.  ix.  11,  Neh.  xi.  11),  unless  the  names 
Ahitub  and  Meraioth  are  transposed,  which  is  not 
improbable. 

2.  (yiapuaO:  Maraioth}.  The  head  of  one  of  the 
houses  of  priests,  which  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the 
son  of  Jeshua  was  represented  by  Helkai  (Neh. 
xii.  15).  He  is  elsewhere  called  MEREMOTH  (Neh. 
xii.  3),  a  confusion  being  made  between  the  letters 
1*  and  !D.  The  Peshito-Syriac  has  Marmuth  in  both 
passages.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'AN  (Mffipav:  Merrha).  The  merchants 
of  Meran  and  Theman  are  mentioned  with  the  Ha- 
garenes  (Bar.  iii.  23)  as  "  searcners  out  of  under 
standing."  The  name  does  not  occur  elsewhere,  and 
is  probably  a  corruption  of  "  Medan  "  or  "  Midian." 
Juuius  and  Tremellius  give  Medanaei,  and  their 
conjecture  is  supported  by  the  appearance  of  the 
Midianites  as  nomade  merchants  in  Gen.  xxxvii. 
Both  Medan  and  Midian  are  enumerated  among  the 
sons  of  Keturah  in  Gen.  xxv.  2,  and  are  closely 
connected  with  the  Dedanim,  whose  "  travelling 
companies,"  or  caravans,  are  frequently  alluded  to 
(Is.  xxi.  13  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  15).  Fritzsche  suggests  that 
it  is  the  Marane  of  Pliny  (vi.  28,  32).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MEK'ARJ. 


:  Mepapi  :  unhappy,  sorrow 
ful,  or,  my  sorrow,  i.  e.  his  mother's),  third  sot 
of  Levi,  and  head  of  the  third  great  division 
(J"inSK>b)  of  the  Levites,  THE  MERARITES,  whose 
designation  in  Hebrew  is  the  same  as  that  of  their 
progenitor,  only  with  the  article  prefixed,  viz., 
^TlSn.  Of  Merari's  personal  history,  beyond  the 
fact  of  his  birth  before  the  descent  of  Jacob  into 
Egypt,  and  of  his  being  one  of  the  seventy  who 
accompanied  Jacob  thither,  we  know  nothing  what 
ever  (Gen.  xlvi.  8,  11).  At  the  time  of  the  Exodus, 
and  the  numbering  in  the  wilderness,  the  Merarites 
consisted  of  two  families,  the  Mahlites  and  the 
Mush>tp.s.  Mahli  and  Mushi  being  either  the  twu 
sons,  or  the  son  and  grandson,  of  Merari  (1  Chr. 


*  The  omission  of  the  name  in  the  LXX.  is  remarkable. 
la  the  Vatican  Codex  it  wcws  iu  1  Sam  xiv.  49  only. 


Tne  Alexandrine  MS.  omits  it  there,  and  inserts  !t  ir 
xviii.  17  and  19. 


326  MERARI 

vi.  19,  47,.  Their  chief  at  that  time  was 
Xuriel,  and  the  whole  number  of  the  family,  from 
n  month  old  and  upwards,  was  6200 ;  those  from 
30  years  old  to  50  were  3200.  Their  charge  was 
the  boards,  bars,  pillars,  sockets,  pins,  and  cords  of 
the  tabernacle  and  the  court,  and  all  the  tools  con 
nected  with  sotting  them  up.  In  the  encampment  their 
place  was  to  the  north  of  the  tabernacle  ;  and  both 
they  and  the  Gershonites  were  "  under  the  hand  " 
of  Ithamar  the  son  of  Aaron.  Owing  to  the  heavy 
nature  of  the  materials  which  they  had  to  carry, 
four  waggons  and  eight  oxen  were  assigned  to  them ; 
.ind  in  the  march  both  they  and  the  Gershonites 


MEKAKI 

followed  immediately  ailer  the  .standard  of  JiuLih. 
and  before  that  of  Reuben,  that  they  might  set  up 
the  tabernacle  against  the  arrival  of  the  Kohathitcs 
(Num.  iii.  20,  33-37,  iv.  29-33,  42-45,  vii.  8,  x. 
17,  21).  In  the  division  of  the  land  by  Joshua, 
the  Merarites  had  twelve  cities  assigned  to  them, 
out  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  Zebulun,  of  which  one  was 
Ramoth-Gilead,  a  city  of  refuge,  and  in  later 
times  a  frequent  subject  of  war  between  Israel 
and  Syria  (Josh.  xxi.  7,  34-40 ;  •  1  Chr.  vi.  63, 
77-81).  In  the  time  of  David  Asaiah  was  their 
chief,  and  assisted  with  220  of  his  family  in  bring 
ing  up  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xv.  6).  Afterwards  we  find 


*  Their  cities  were  Jokueam,  Kartah,  Dimuah,  Nahalal, 
in  Zebulun ;  Bezer,  Jahazah,  Kedemoth,  Mepbaatb,  in 
Reuben ;  Ramoth,  Mabanaim,  Heshbon,  and  Jazer,  in  Gad. 


But  in  1  Chr.  vi.,  Instead  of  the  four  in  Zebulon,  only 
Rimmon  and  Tabor  are  named,  though  the  total  is  given 
as  twelve  in  ver.  63. 


TABLE  OF  THB  MEEAEITES. 
Levi  (Exud.  vi.  16-19;  Num.  ill.  17-20). 


deration. 


Kohatli. 


I 
MerarL 


Mil-    i 
I 


Mahli.  Eder  Jerimoth 

(1  Chr.  xxiv.  38).      (ib.). 


Lit 

Shi 
Ui 
Shi 
Hag, 

Asaiah, 
220  Mer 
the  time 
(1  Chr.  i 
xv.  6). 
genealogy 
imperfect, 
only  10  g 
from  Lev 
ind 

Ho< 
(xvi.  . 
xx  vi.] 

ni. 
net. 

LE. 
nei. 

| 
Abihail.                                 Shai 
1 
Zuriel.                                    Bar 
chief  of  the  house  of  the 
father  of  the  families  of  Merari  in               A  i 
the  time  of  Moses 
(Num.  iii.  35).                             Hil 

MR 
i  =  Bunui  (Neh.  xi.  16)? 
IZL 
uah. 

-iah.                       I 
Jedutl 
chief  of 
arites  in 
of  David 
i.  44,  45. 
But  this 
s  doubtless 
as  it  gives 
enerations 
to  Asaiah 
islve                       / 

\ 

ran? 

Ama 

#Hasl 

ziah. 
abiah. 

raaziah  or  Jaazicl  1  Chr.  xv.  18;  xxiv.  26,  27.  1 

I 

lalluch. 

at 

|                     | 
Shoham         Zaccur  or      Ibri  or  Abdi        At 
(xxiv.  t'C).      Zecbariah         (vi.  44  ; 
(ib.fcxv.18).    xxiv.  27). 
See  LXX.  (rA/3<u). 

Eleazttr  (xxiil.  »1,  22;  xxiv.  28). 

Kishi,  K 

sh  (xxiii.  21),  or  Kusnaiah  (xv.  17) 
1 

ah          Obed-        G 
(8,  42  ;     Edom        G 
0,16).  (xvl.38).   (xx 

1                    1             1 
alal  or      Zeri  or    Jeshaiah  £Iiash 
edaUah         izri    (ib.  3,  15).    (ib.  3 
v.  S,  9).  (ib.3,  11).         i            vi.  4 

1 

emaiali  anil  Uzzicl,"     5 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  14).        \ 
\                              \            Azri 

abiah    Maiti- 
19  ;      i  liiah 
5).    (lb.3,21). 

Kish  the  sor 
of  ,Icli. 

1:1111. 

Jerahmeel     Ethan,  railed 
(xxiv.  29).     also  Jeduthun, 
head  of  the 
singers  in  the  time  of 
David  (vi.  44-47; 
xv.  17,  19;  xvi.  41,  42 
xxv.  1,  3,  «). 

of  Abdi,  and  Aznriah  the  son 
ilelel,  in  reign  of  Hczvkiuh 
(2  Chr.  xxix.  12). 

1                III 
Simri       Hilklah  Teba-  Zecba- 
(xxvi.  10).  (ib.ll).  Hah     riah 
(ib.).    (ib.). 

"  Sons  of  Jeduthun,  Sh 
In  time  of  Hczekiah 

'  Obadiah  (or  Abda)  the  son  of  Shemaiah, 

the  son  of  Gala),  the  son  of  Jeduthun," 

after  the  return  from  captivity 

(1  Chr.  Ix.  16;  Neh.  xi.  17).' 


tibcrebiah.  in  time  of  Ezra,  "  of  the 
VMM  of  Mahli"  (Ezr.  viii.  18);  corrupted  t<i 

A»,  h,  hi.i  (1  Esdr.  vilt.  47). 


.le.stiaiahi  of  the  sons 
of  Merari.  <o  the  time 
of  Kura  (fcir.  rlli.  19). 


Hasshub 

I 

Shemaiah,  after  the  return  from  captivity 
(1  Chr.  ix.  14  ;  Neh.  xi.  15). 

Ilashfihiah.  of  the  sons  of  Merari,  in  the 

time  of  Ezra  (K/.r.  viil.  19),  called  Ax,b! 

and  Assanias  (1  E*<1r.  vili.  4«,  &4\ 


MERARI 

the  Merantes  still  sharing  with  the  two  other 
Levitical  families  the  various  functions  of  their 
caste  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  «,  21-23).  Thus  a  third  part 
of  the  singers  and  musicians  were  Merarites,  and 
Ethan  or  Jeduthun  was  their  chief  in  the  time  of 
David.  |  JEDUTHUN.]  A  third  pail  of  the  door 
keepers  were  Merarites  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  5,  6,  xxvi.  10, 
19),  unless  indeed  we  are  to  understand  from  ver.  19 
that  the  doorkeepers  were  all  either  Kohathites  or 
Merarites,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Gershonites,  which 
does  not  seem  probable.  In  the  days  of  Hezekiah 
tna  Merarites  were  still  flourishing,  and  Kish  the 
son  of  Abdi,  and  Azariah  the  son  of  Jehalelel,  took 
their  part  with  their  brethren  of  the  two  other 
Levitical  families  in  promoting  the  reformation,  and 
purifying  the  house  of  the  Lord  (2  Chr.  xxix.  12, 
15).  After  the  return  from  captivity  Shemaiah 
represents  the  sons  of  Merari,  in  1  Chr.  ix.  14,  Neh. 
xi.  15,  and  is  said,  with  other  chiefs  of  the  Levites, 
to  have  "  had  the  oversight  of  the  outward  business 
of  the  house  of  God."  There  were  also  at  that  time 
sons  of  Jeduthun  under  Obadiah  or  Abda,  the  son 
of  Shemaiah  (1  Chr.  ix.  16;  Neh.  xi.  17).  A  little 
later  again,  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  when  he  was  in 
great  want  of  Levites  to  accompany  him  on  his 
journey  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem,  "  a  man  of 
good  understanding  of  the  sons  of  Mahli"  was 
t'ouud,  whose  name,  if  the  text  here  and  at  ver.  24 
is  correct,  is  not  given.  "  Jeshaiah  also  of  the  sons 
of  Merari,"  with  twenty  of  his  sons  and  brethren, 
came  with  him  at  the  same  time  (Ezr.  viii.  18, 19). 
But  it  seems,  pretty  certain  that  Sherebiah,  in  ver. 
18,  is  the  name  of  the  Mahlite,  arid  that  both  he 
and  Hashabiah,  as  well  as  Jeshaiah,  in  ver.  19,  were 
Levites  of  the  family  of  Merari,  and  not,  as  the 
actual  text  of  ver.  24  indicates,  priests.  The  copu 
lative  )  has  fallen  out  before  their  names  in  ver.  24, 
as  appears  from  ver.  30  (see  also  1  Chr.  ix.  14 ; 
Neh.  xii.  24). 

The  subjoined  table  gives  the  principal  de 
scents,  as  far  as  it  is  possible  to  ascertain  them. 
But  the  true  position  of  Jaaziah,  Mahli,  and 
Jeduthuu  is  doubtful.  Here  too,  as  elsewhere, 
it  is  difficult  to  decide  when  a  given  name  indicates 
an  individual,  and  when  the  family  called  after  him, 
or  the  head  of  that  family.  It  is  sometimes  no  less 
difficult  to  decide  whether  any  name  which  occurs 
repeatedly  designates  the  same  person,  or  others  of 
the  family  who  bore  the  same  name,  as  e.  </.  in  the 
case  of  Mahli,  Hilkiah,  Shimri,  Kislii  or  Kish,  and 
others.  As  regards  the  confusion  between  Ethan 
and  Jeduthun,  it  may  perhaps  be  that  Jeduthun 
was  the  patronymic  title  of  the  house  of  which 
Ethan  was  the  head  in  the  time  of  David.  Jeduthun 
might  have  been  the  brother  of  one  of  Ethan's 
dinxt  ancestors  before  Hashabiah,  in  which  case 
Hashabiah  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  3, 19,  might  be  the  same 
as  Hashabiah  in  vi.  45.  Hosah  and  Obed-edom 
seem  to  have  been  other  descendants  or  clansmen 
ff  Jeduthun,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  David ;  and, 
if  we  may  argue  from  the  names  of  Hosah's  sons, 
Simri  and  Hilkiah,  that  they  were  descendants  of 
Shamer  and  Hilkiah,  in  the  line  of  Ethan,  the 
inference  would  be  that  Jeduthun  was  a  son  either 
of  Hilkiah  or  Amaziah,  since  he  lived  after  Hilkiah, 
but  before  Hashabiah.  The  great  advantage  of  this 
supposition  is,  that  while  it  leaves  to  Kthan  the 
patronymic  designation  Jeduthun,  it  draws  a  wide 
distinction  between  the  term  "  sons  of  Jeduthun  " 
snd  "sons  of  Ethan,"  and  explains  how  in  David's 
time  there  could  be  sons  of  those  who  arc  called 
sons  of  Jeduthun  above  thirty  years  of  age  (since 


MERCY  SEAT 


329 


they  filled  offices,  1  Chr.  xxvi.  10),  at  the  same 
time  that  Jeduthun  was  said  to  be  the  ch.et  cf  tne 
singers.  lu  like  manner  it  is  possible  that  Jaaziah 
may  have  been  a  brother  of  Malluch  or  of  Abdi, 
and  that  if  Abdi  or  Ibri  had  other  descendants 
besides  the  lines  of  Kish  and  Eleazar,  they  may 
have  been  reckoned  under  the  headship  of  Jaaziah. 
The  families  of  Merari  which  were  so  reckoned  were, 
according  to  1  Chr.  xxiv.  27,  Shoham,  Zaccur  (ap 
parently  the  same  as  Zechariah  in  1  Chr.  xv.  18, 
where  we  probably  ought  to  read  "  Z.  son  of 
Jaaziah,"  and  xxvi.  11),  and  Ibri,  where  the  LXX. 
have  'n/35(,  'AjSaf,  and  'A/3St'.  [A.  C.  H.] 

2.  (Mepapf  ;     Alex,    in   Jud.  viii.  1   Wepapti  : 
Merari).  The  father  of  Judith  (Jud.  viii.  1,  xvi.  7). 

MERATHA'IM,  THE  LAND  OF 


Q*mO  :  terra  dominantiurn),  that  is  "  of  double 
rebellion  "  (a  dual  form  from  the  root  m£  ;  Ge- 

senius,  Thes.  819a  ;  Fiirst,  Hdwb.  7916),  alluding 
to  the  country  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  to  the  double 
captivity  which  it  had  inflicted  on  the  nation  of 
Israel  (Jer.  1.  21).  This  is  the  opinion  of  Gesenius, 
Fiirst,  Michaelis  (Bibel  fur  Ungelehrteri],  &c.,  and 
in  this  sense  the  word  is  taken  by  all  the  versions 
which  the  writer  has  consulted,  excepting  that  of 
Junius  and  Tremellius,  which  the  A.  V.  —  as  in 
other  instances  —  has  followed  here.  The  LXX.  e'n-J 
TTJS  yrjs,  \eyet  Kvpios.  IT  i  K  p  a>  s  eirifiriBi,  &c., 
take  the  root  in  its  second  sense  of  "  bitter."  [G.] 

MERCTJ'RIUS  ('EpjtTjs  :  Mercurius),  properly 
Hermes,  the  Greek  deity,  whom  the  Romans  iden 
tified  with  their  Mercury  the  god  of  commerce  and 
bargains.  In  the  Greek  mythology  Hermes  was  the 
son  of  Zeus  and  Maia  the  daughter  of  Atlas,  and  is 
constantly  represented  as  the  companion*  of  his 
father  in  his  wanderings  upon  earth.  On  one  of 
these  occasions  they  were  travelling  in  Phrygia,  and 
were  refused  hospitality  by  all  save  Baucis  and 
Philemon,  the  two  aged  peasants  of  whom  Ovid 
tells  the  charming  episode  in  his  Metam.  viii. 
620-724,  which  appeare  to  have  formed  part  of 
the  folk-lore  of  Asia  Minor,  and  strikingly  illus 
trates  the  readiness  with  which  the  simple  people 
of  Lystra  recognized  in  Barnabas  and  Paul  the 
gods  who,  according  to  their  wont,  had  come 
down  in  the  likeness  of  men  (Acts  xiv.  11). 
They  called  Paul  "  Hemnes,  because  he  was  tho 
chief  speaker,"  identifying  in  him  as  they  supposed 
by  this  characteristic,  the  herald  of  the  gods  (Horn. 
Od.  v.  28  ;  ffym.  in  Herm.  3),  and  of  Zeus  (Od. 
i.  38,  84;  //.  xxiv.  333,  461),  the  eloquent  orator 
(Od.  i.  86  ;  Hor.  Od.  i.  10,  1),  inventor  of  letters, 
music,  and  the  arts.  He  was  usually  represented 
as  a  slender  beardless  youth,  but  in  an  older 
Pelasgic  figure  he  was  bearded.  Whether  St.  Paul 
wore  a  beard  or  not  is  not  to  be  inferred  from  this, 
for  the  men  of  Lystra  identified  him  with  their  god 
Hermes,  not  from  any  accidental  resemblance  in 
figure  or  appearance  to  the  statues  of  that  deity, 
but  because  of  the  act  of  healing  which  had  been 
done  upon  the  man  who  was  lame  from  his 
birth.  [W.A.  W.] 

MERCY-SEAT  (ITIBS  :  l\o.ffri,piov  :  propi- 
tiatorium).  This  appears  to  have  been  merely  the 
lid  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  not  another  surface 
affixed  thereto.  It  was  that  whereon  the  blood  of  the 
yearly  atonement  was  sprinkled  by  the  high-priest  ; 
and  in  this  relation  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  sense 
of  the  word  in  the  Heb.  is  based  on  the  material 


330 


MERED 


fact  of  its  "  covering  "  the  Ark,  or  from  this  notion 
of  its  reference  to  the  "  covering,"  (i.  e.  atonement) 
of  sin.  But  in  any  case  the  notion  of  a  "  seat,"  as 
coiveyed  by  thj  name  in  English,  seems  super 
fluous  and  likely  to  mislead.  Jehovah  is  indeed 
s|K>ken  of  as  "  dwelling "  and  even  as  "  sitting " 
(1's.  Ixxx.  1,  xcix.  1)  between  the  cherubim,  but 
undoubtedly  his  seat  in  this  conception  would  not 
l>e  on  the  same  level  as  that  on  which  they  stood 
(Ex.  xxv.  18),  and  an  enthronement  in  the  glory 
abo/e  it  must  be  supposed.  The  idea  with  which 
it  is  connect<xl  is  not  merely  that  of  "  mercy,"  but 
ot  formal  atonement  made  for  the  breach  of  the  co 
venant  (Lev.  xvi.  14),  which  the  Ark  contained  in 
its  material  vehicle — the  two  tables  of  stone.  The 
communications  made  to  Moses  are  represented  as 
made  "  from  off  the  Mercy-Seat  that  was  upon  the 
Ark  of  the  Testimony  "  (Num.  vii.  89  ;  comp.  Ex. 
xrr.  22,  xxx.  6)  ;  a  sublime  illustration  of  the 
moral  relation  and  responsibility  into  which  the 
people  were  by  covenant  regarded  as  brought  before 
God.  [H.  H.] 

MER'ED  (T]» :  M<ap<i$,  I  Chr.  iv.  17  ;  Mw- 

o^5,  1  Chr.  iv.  18:  Mered).  This  name  occurs  in 
a  fragmentary  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  iv.  17,  18,  as 
that  of  one  of  the  sons  of  Ezra.  He  is  there  said 
to  have  taken  to  wife  BITHIAH  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh,  who  is  enumerated  by  the  Rabbins 
among  the  nine  who  entered  Paradise  (Hottinger, 
Smegma  Orientate,  p.  315),  and  in  the  Targum  of 
R.  Joseph  on  Chronicles  is  said  to  have  been  a  pro 
selyte.  In  the  same  Targum  we  find  it  stated  that 
Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  was  called  Mered 
because  he  withstood  or  rebelled  against  (1110),  the 
counsel  of  the  spies,  a  tradition  also  recorded  by 
Jarchi.  But  another  and  very  curious  tradition 
is  preserved  in  the  Quaestiones  in  libr.  Paral.,  attri 
buted  to  Jerome.  According  to  this,  Ezra  was 
Amram  ;  his  sons  Jetlier  and  Mered  were  Aaron 
and  Moses ;  Epher  was  Eldad,  and  Jalon  Medad. 
The  tradition  goes  on  to  say  that  Moses,  after  re 
ceiving  the  law  in  the  desert,  enjoined  his  father  to 
put  away  his  mother  because  she  was  his  aunt, 
being  the  daughter  of  Levi  -.  that  Amram  did  so, 
married  again,  and  begat  Eldad  and  Medad. 
Bithiah,  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  is  said,  on  the 
same  authority,  to  have  been  "  taken  "  by  Moses, 
because  she  forsook  idols,  and  was  converted  to  the 
worship  of  the  true  God.  The  origin  of  all  this 
seems  to  have  been  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
"  Miriam  "  in  1  Chr.  iv.  17,  which  was  referred  to 
Miriam  the  sister  of  Moses.  Rabbi  D.  Kimchi 
would  put  the  first  clause  of  ver.  18  in  a  paren 
thesis.  He  makes  Bithiah  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh 
the  first  wife  of  Mered,  and  mother  of  Miriam, 
Shammai,and  Ishbah  ;  Jehudijah,  or  "  the  Jewess," 
being  his  second  wife.  But  the  whole  genealogy 
is  so  intricate  that  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  un 
ravel  it.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'EMOTH  (TliOnD :  McptfiM  ;  Alex. 
Mo^uwfl,  Ezr.  viii.  33 ;  Pafia>0,  Neh.  iii.  4 ;  Me- 
pa.fu&6,  Neh.  iii.  21 :  Meremoth').  1.  Son  of  Uriah, 
or  Urijah,  the  priest,  of  the  family  of  Koz  or  Hak- 
koz,  the  head  of  the  seventh  course  ol  priests  as 
established  by  David.  On  the  return  from  Babylon 
the  children  of  Koz  w  >re  among  those  priests  who 
were  unable  to  establish  their  pedigree,  and  in  con 
sequence  were  put  from  the  priesthood  as  polluted 
(Ezr.  ii.  61,  62).  This  probably  applied  to  only 
aoe  family  of  the  descendants  of  Kcz,  ibr  in  Kzr 


MEK1BAH 

viii.  30,  Meremoth  is  clearly  recognised  as  a  priest, 
and  is  appointed  to  weigh  and  register  the  gold  and 
silver  vessels  belonging  to  the  Temple,  which  Ezra 
had  brought  from  Baby'on,  a  function  which  priests 
and  Levites  alone  were  selected  to  discharge  ( Ezr. 
viii.  24-30).  In  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Je 
rusalem  under  Nehemiah  we  find  Meremoth  taking 
an  active  part,  working  between  Meshullam  and 
the  sons  of  Haseeuaah  who  restored  the  h'sh-gate 
(Neh.  iii.  4),  and  himself  restoring  the  portion  01 
the  Temple  wall  on  which  abutted  the  house  of  the 
high-priest  Eliashib  (Neh.  iii.  21).  Burrington 
(Genealogies,  ii.  154)  is  inclined  to  consider  the  two 
mentioned  in  Neh.  iii.  by  the  same  name  as  distinct 
persons,  but  his  reasons  do  not  appear  sufficient. 

In  1  Esdr.  viii.  62,  he  is  called  "  MARMOTM 
the  sou  of  In." 

2.  (Mapt/uid:  MarimutK).     A   layman  of  the 
sons  of  Bani,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  after 
the  return  from   Babylon  and   put   her  away  at 
Ezra's  bidding  (Ezr.  x.  36). 

3.  (Mfpa.fj.ui6:  MerimutK).     A  priest,  or  more 
probably  a  family  of  priests,  who  sealed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  5).     The  latter  supjroi- 
tion   is  more  probable,  because  in  Neh.  xii.  3  the 
name  occurs,  with  many  others  of  the  same  list, 
among  those  who  went  up  with  Zerubbabel  a  cen 
tury  before.     In  the  next  generation,  that  is  in  the 
days  of  Joiakim  the  sou  of  Jeshua,  the  representative 
of  the  family  of  Meremoth  was  Helkai  (Neh.  xii. 
15)  ;  the  reading  Meraioth  in  that  passage  being  an 
error.  [MERAIOTH  2.]    The  A.  V.  of  1611  had 
"  Merimoth  "  in  Neh,  xii.  3.  like  the  Geneva  ver 
sion.  [V.  A.  W.J 

MER'ES  (DTO :  Mares).  One  of  the  seven 
counsellors  of  Ahasuerus  king  of  Persia,  "  wise  met 
which  knew  the  times"  (Esth.  i.  14).  His  name 
is  not  traceable  in  the  LXX.,  which  in  this  passage 
is  corrupt.  Benfey  (quoted  by  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v  ) 
suggests  that  it  is  derived  from  the  Sanscrit  mdrsha, 
"  worthy,"  which  is  the  same  as  the  Zend  merest, 
and  is  probably  also  the  origin  of  Marsena,  the 
name  of  another  Persian  counsellor.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MER'IBAH  (rnnp  :  Ao»5<{pij<m  Ex.  xvii.  ^  , 
'avn\oyia  Num.  xx  13,  xxvii.  14 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51 ; 
\oiSopia  Num.  xx.  24 :  contradictio).  In  Ex.  xvii. 
7  we  read,  "  he  called  the  name  of  the  place  Massab 
and  Meribah,"  •  where  the  people  murmured,  and  the 
rock  was  smitten.  [For  the  situation  see  REPHIDIM.] 
The  name  is  also  given  to  Kadesh  (Num.  xx.  13,  24, 
xxvii.  14  ;  Deut.  xxii.  51  "Meribah-kadesh"),  be 
cause  there  also  the  people,  when  in  want  of  water, 
strove  with  God.  Tb^re,  however,  Moses  and  Aaron 
incurred  the  Divine  displeasure  because  they  "  be 
lieved  not,"  because  they  "  rebelled,"  and  "  sanctified 
not  God  in  the  midst"  of  the  people.  Impatience 
and  self-willed  assumption  of  plenary  power  are  the 
prominent  features  of  their  behaviour  in  Num.  xx. 
10  ;  the  "  speaking  to  the  rock  "  (which  perhaps 
was  to  have  been  in  Jehovah's  name)  was  neglected, 
and  another  symbol,  suggestive  rather  of  them 
selves  as  the  source  of  power,  was  substituted.  In 
spite  of  these  plain  and  distinctive  features  of  differ 
ence  between  the  event  at  Kadesh  and  that  at 
Rephidim  some  commentators  have  regarded  the 
one  as  a  mere  duplicate  of  the  other,  owing  U 
a  mixture  of  earlier  and  later  legend.  [H.  H.] 


•  Chidiug,  or  strife,  !"QH")pi  HDO  ;   »mpao>.c*  KOI 

Aoi6dpi/ais-,   also  apTiAeyi'a  ;  liutrg.  "  temptation,"  1'out 


MER1B-BAAL 

MEBIB-BA'AL  <^J?3  yiD,  except  on  its  4th 
accurrence,  and  there  less  accurately  /JO'^P- 
•'.  g.  Meri-baal,  though  in  many  MSS.  the  fuller 
form  is  preserved  •  Mept/SioA.,  Mapet/3oaA ;  Alex. 
Me4>f»/3aa\,  MexP'#aa*-  '•  Meri-baal},  son  of  Jo 
nathan  the  son  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.  34,  ix.  40), 
doubtless  the  same  person  who  in  the  narrative  of 
2  Samuel  is  called  MEPHI-BOSHETH.  The  reasons 
for  the  identification  are,  that  in  the  histoiy  no 
other  son  but  Mepb:bosheth  is  ascribed  to  Jonathan  ; 
that  Mephibosheth,  like  Merib-baal,  had  a  son  named 
Micah  ;  and  that  the  terms  "  bosheth  "  and  "  baal " 
appear  from  other  examples  (e.  g.  Esh-Baal  =  Ish- 
bosheth)  to  be  convertible.  What  is  the  significance 
of  the  change  in  the  former  part  of  the  name,  and 
whether  it  is  more  than  a  clerical  error  between 
die  two  Hebrew  letters  Q  and  "I,  does  not  appeal'  to 
nave  been  ascertained.  It  is  perhaps  in  favour  of 
the  latter  explanation  that  in  some  of  the  Greek 
versions  of  1  Chr.  viii.  and  ix.  the  name  is  given  as 
Memphi-baal.  A  trace  of  the  same  thing  is  visible 
in  the  reading  of  the  Alex.  LXX.  given  above.  If 
it  is  not  a  mere  error,  then  there  is  perhaps  some 
connexion  between  the  name  of  Merib-baal  and  that 
of  his  aunt  Merab. 

Neither  is  it  clear  why  this  name  and  that  of 
Ishbosheth  should  be  given  in  a  different  form  in 
these  genealogies  to  what  they  are  in  the  historical 
narrative.  But  for  this  see  ISH-BOSHETH  and 
MEPHI-BOSHETH.  [G.] 

MER'ODACHOJTID:  Maiputidx-  Merodach} 
is  mentioned  once  only  in  Scripture,  namely  in  Jer. 
1.  2,  where  Bel  and  Merodach  are  coupled  together, 
and  threatened  with  destruction  in  the  fall  of  Ba 
bylon.  It  has  been  commonly  concluded  from  this 
passage  that  Bel  and  Meroda-1'  were  separate  gods ; 
but  from  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  inscriptions 
it  appears  that  this  was  not  exactly  the  case.  Mero 
dach  was  really  identical  with  the  famous  Babylo 
nian  Bel  or  Belus,  the  word  being  probably  at  first 
a  mere  epithet  of  the  god,  which  by  degrees  super 
seded  his  proper  appellation.  Still  a  certain  dis 
tinction  appears  to  have  been  maintained  between 
the  names.  The  golden  image  in  the  great  temple 
at  Babylon  seems  to  have  been  worshipped  distinctly 
as  Bel  rather  than  Merodach,  while  other  idols  01 
the  god  may  have  represented  him  as  Merodach 
rather  than  Bel.  It  is  not  known  what  the  wore 
Merodach  means,  or  what  the  special  aspect  of  th 
god  was,  when  worshipped  under  that  title.  In  a 
general  way  Bel-Merodach  may  be  said  to  corre 
spond  to  the  Greek  Jupiter.  He  is  "  the  old  man 
of  the  gods,"  "the  judge,"  and  has  the  gates  o: 
heaven  under  his  especial  charge.  Nebuchadnezzar 
calls  him  "  the  great  lord,  the  senior  of  the  gods 
the  most  ancient,"  and  Neriglissar  "  the  first-born 
of  the  gods,  the  layer-up  of  treasures."  In  the 
earlier  period  of  Babylonian  history  he  seems  ti 
share  with  several  other  deities  (as  Nebo,  Nergal 
Bel-Nimrod,  Anu,  &c.)  the  worship  of  the  people 
but  in  the  later  times  he  is  regarded  as  the  source 
of  all  power  and  blessings,  and  thus  concentrates  ii 
his  own  person  the  greater  part  of  that  homage  an< 
respect,  which  had  previously  been  divided  amoni 
the  various  gods  of  the  Pantheon.  Astronomical!; 
he  is  identified  with  the  planet  Jupiter.  His  nam 

8  In  the  uncial  writing  A  is  very  liable  to  be  mistake 
for  A,  and  in  the  ordinary  manuscript  character  A  is  no 


MEKODACH-BA  L  ADAN 


331 


orms  a  frequent  element  in  the  appellations  of  Ba- 
yloniau  kings,  e.  g.  Merodach-Baladau,  Evil-Mero- 
.ach,  Merodach-adin-akhi,  &c. ;  and  is  found  in  this 
>osition  as  early  as  B.C.  1650.  (See  the  Essay  by 
H.  Rawlinson  "  On  the  Religion  of  the  Babylo* 
lians  and  Assyrians,"  in  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i. 
,27-631.)  [G.  R-] 

MER'ODACH-BAL'ADAN(;*1N^3  ^N1O  = 
opcoS^x-B^^dv :  Merodach-Baladan)  is  men- 
ioned  as  king  of  Babylon  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah, 
x)th  in  the  second  book  of  Kings  (xx.  12)  and  in 
saiah  (xxxix.  1).  In  the  former  place  he  is  called 
Jerodach-Baladau,  by  the  ready  interchange  of  the 
tters  3  and  D,  which  was  familiar  to  the  Jews, 
is  it  has  been  to  many  other  nations.  The  ortho 
graphy  "  Merodach  "  is,  however,  to  be  preferred  ; 
iince  this  element  in  the  king's  name  is  undoubtedly 
dentical  with  the  appellation  of  the  famous  Baby- 
onian  deity,  who  is  always  called  "  Merodach," 
both  by  the  Hebrews  and  by  the  native  writers 
l;he  name  of  Merodach-Baladan  has  been  clearly  re 
cognised  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions.  It  appears 
nder  the  form  of  Marudachus-Baldanes,  or  Maru- 
dach-Baldan,  in  a  fragment  of  Polyhistor,  preserved 
)y  Eusebius  (Chron.  Can.  pars  i.  v.  1) ;  and  under 
that  of  Mardoc-empad  (or  rather  Mardoc-empal a) 
n  the  famous  "  Canon  of  Ptolemy."  Josephus 
abbreviates  it  still  more,  and  calls  the  monarch 
simply  "Baladas"  (Ant.Jud.  x.  2,  §2). 

The  Canon  gives  Merodach-Baladan  (Mardoc- 
•mpal)  a  reign  of  12  years — from  B.C.  721  to  B.C. 
709 — and  makes  him  then  succeeded  by  a  certain 
Arceanus.  Polyhistor  assigns  him  a  six  months' 
reign,  immediately  before  Elibus,  or  Belibus,  who 
(according  to  the  Canon)  ascended  the  throne  B.C. 
702.  It  has  commonly  been  seen  that  these  must 
be  two  different  reigns,  and  that  Merodach-Baladan 
must  therefore  have  been  deposed  in  B.C.  709,  and 
have  recovered  his  throne  in  B.C.  702,  when  he  had 
a  second  period  of  dominion  lasting  half  a  year. 
The  inscriptions  contain  express  mention  of  both 
reigns.  Sargon  states  that  in  the  twelfth  year  of  his 
own  reign  he  drove  Merodach-Baladan  out  of  Ba 
bylon,  after  he  had  ruled  over  it  for  twelve  years  ; 
and  Sennacherib  tells  us  that  in  his  first  year  he  de 
feated  and  expelled  the  same  monarch,  setting  up  in 
his  place  "a  man  named  Belib."  Putting  all  our 
notices  together,  it  becomes  apparent  that  Merodach- 
Baladan  was  the  head  of  the  popular  party,  which 
resisted  the  Assyrian  monarchs,  and  strove  to  main 
tain  the  independence  of  the  country.  It  is  uncer 
tain  whether  he  was  self-raised  or  was  the  son  of  a 
former  king.  In  the  second  Book  of  Kings  he  is 
styled  "  the  son  of  Baladan  ;"  but  the  inscriptions 
call  him  "  the  son  of  Yagin ;"  whence  it  is  to  be 
presumed  that  Baladan  was  a  more  remote  iincestor. 
Yayin,  the  real  father  of  Merodach-Baladan,  is  pos 
sibly  represented  in  Ptolemy's  Canon  by  the  nams 
Jugaeus — which  in  some  copies  replaces  the  name 
Elulaeus,  as  the  appellation  of  the  immediate  prede 
cessor  of  Merodach-Baladan.  At  any  rate,  from  the 
time  of  Sargon,  Merodach-Baladan  and  his  family 
were  the  champions  of  Babylonian  independence 
and  fought  with  spirit  the  losing  battle  of  their 
country.  The  king  of  whom  we  are  here  treating 
sustained  two  contests  with  the  power  of  Assyria, 
was  twice  defeated,  and  twice  compelled  to  fly  his 


this  instance.    See  his  work,  Egypt's  Place  in  UnivcT&d 
History,  vol.  i.  p.  726,  E.  T.   The  abbreviation  of  the  uanit 


unlike  S.    M.  fiunscn  was  (we  believe)  the  first  to  suggest  1  has  many  parallels.     (See  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i 
'.hat  there  had  been  a  substitution  of  the  8  for  the  A  in    p  436,  note  1). 


332         MERODACH-BALAUAN 

country.  His  sons,  supported  by  the  king  of  Elani, 
or  Susiana,  continued  the  struggle,  and  are  found 
among  the  adversaries  of  Eaar-Haddon,  Sennacherib's 
.•mn  and  successor.  His  grandsons  contend  against 
A&shur-bani-pal,  the  son  of  tisar-Haddon.  It  is  not 
till  the  fourth  generation  that  the  family  seems  to 
become  extinct,  and  the  Babylonians,  having  no 
champion  to  maintain  their  cause,  contentedly 
acquiesce  in  the  yoke  of  tlie  stranger. 

There  is  *>me  doubt  as  to  the  time  at  which  Me- 
rodach-Baladan  sent  his  ambassadors  to  Hezekiah, 
for  the  purpose  of  enquiring  as  to  the  astronomical 
marvel  of  which  Judaea  had  been  the  scene  (2  Chr. 
xxxii.  31).  According  to  those  commentators  who 
connect  the  illness  of  Hezekiah  with  one  or  other  of 
Sennacherib's  expeditions  against  him,  the  embassy 
has  to  be  ascribed  to  Merodach-Baladan's  second  or 
shorter  reign,  when  alone  he  was  contemporary 
with  Sennacherib.  If  however  we  may  be  allowed 
to  adopt  the  view  that  Hezekiah's  illness  preceded 
the  first  invasion  of  Sennacherib  by  several  years 
(see  above,  ad  voc.  HEZEKIAH,  and  compare  llaw- 
linsou's  Herodotus,  i.  479,  note  2),  synchronising 
really  with  an  attack  of  Sargon,  we  must  assign  the 
embassy  to  Merodach-Baladan's  earlier  reign,  and 
bring  it  within  the  period,  B.C.  721-709,  which 
the  Canon  assigns  to  him.  Mow  the  14th  year 
of  Hezekiah,  in  which  the  embassy  should  fall 
(2  K.  xx.  6 ;  Is.  xxxviii.  5),  appears  to  have  been 
B.C.  713.  This  was  the  year  of  Merodach-Baladan's 
first  reign. 

The  increasing  power  of  Assyria  was  at  this 
period  causing  alarm  to  her  neighbours,  and  the 
circumstances  of  the  time  were  such  as  would  tend 
to  draw  Judaea  and  Babylonia  together,  and  to  give 
rise  to  negotiations  between  them.  The  astrono 
mical  maiTel,  whatever  it  was,  which  accompanied 
the  recovery  of  Hezekiah,  would  doubtless  have 
attracted  the  attention  of  the  Babylonians ;  but  it 
was  probably  rather  the  pretext  than  the  motive 
for  the  formal  embassy  which  the  Chaldaean  king 
despatched  to  Jerusalem  on  the  occasion.  The  real 
object  of  the  mission  was  most  likely  to  effect  a 
league  between  Babylon,  Judaea,  arid  Egypt  (Is. 
xx.  5,  6),  in  order  to  check  the  growing  power  of 
the  Assyrians.1"  Hezekiah's  exhibition  of  "  all  his 
precious  things"  (2  K.  xx.  13)  would  thus  have 
been,  not  a  mere  display,  but  a  mode  of  satisfying 
the  Babylonian  ambassadors  of  his  ability  to  support 
the  expenses  of  a  war.  The  league,  however,  though 
designed,  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  effect.  Sargon, 
acquainted  probably  with  the  intentions  of  his  ad 
versaries,  anticipated  them.  He  sent  expeditions 
both  into  Syria  and  Babylonia — seized  the  strong 
hold  of  Ashdod  in  the  one,  and  completely  defeated 
Merodach-Baladan  in  the  other.  That  monarch 
sought  safety  in  flight,  and  lived  for  eight  years  in 
exile.  At  last  he  found  an  opportunity  to  return. 
In  B.C.  703  or  702,  Babylonia  was  plunged  in 
anarchy — the  Assyrian  yoke  was  thrown  off,  and 
various  native  leaders  struggled  for  the  mastery. 
Under  these  circumstances  the  exiled  monarch  seems 
to  have  returned,  and  recovered  his  throne.  His 


MEROM.  THE  WATERS  OF 

adversary,  Sargon,  was  dead  or  dying,  and  a  new 
and  untried  prince  was  about  to  rule  over  the  Assy 
rians.  He  might  hope  that  the  reins  of  government 
would  be  held  by  a  weaker  hand,  and  that  he  might 
stand  his  ground  against  the  son,  though  he  had 
been  forced  to  yield  to  the  father.  In  this  hope, 
however,  he  was  disappointed.  Sennacherib  had 
scarcely  established  himself  on  the  throne,  when  he 
proceeded  to  engage  his  people  in  wars;  and  it 
seems  that  his  very  first  step  was  to  invade  the 
kingdom  of  Babylon.  Merodach-Baladan  had  ob 
tained  a  body  of  troops  from  his  ally,  the  king  of 
Susiiuia;  but  Sennacherib  defeated  the  combined 
army  in  a  pitched  battle ;  after  which  he  ravaged 
the  entire  country,  destroying  79  walled  cities  and 
820  towns  and  villages,  and  carrying  vast  numbers 
of  the  people  into  captivity.  Merodach-Baladan 
tied  to  "  the  islands  at  the  mouth  of  the  Euphrates  " 
(Fox  Talbot's  Assyrian  Texts,  p.  1) — tracts  pro 
bably  now  joined  to  the  continent — and  succeeded 
in  eluding  the  search  which  the  Assyrians  made 
for  him.  If  we  may  believe  Polyhistor  however, 
this  escape  availed  him  little.  That  writer  relates 
(ap.  Euseb.  Chron.  Can.  i.  5),  that  he  was  soon 
after  put  to  death  by  Elibus,  or  Belibus,  the  vice 
roy  whom  Sennacherib  appointed  to  represent  him 
at  Babylon.  At  any  rate  he  lost  his  recovered 
crown  after  wearing  it  for  about  six  months,  ai:d 
spent  the  remainder  of  his  days  in  exile  and  ob 
scurity.  [G.  It  1 

MEEOM,  THE  WATERS  OF  (DVlD  »D : 
rb  vSwp  yiafificav ;  Alex,  in  ver.  5,  Mtppav :  aqucu 
Merom),  a  place  memorable  in  the  history  of  the 
conquest  of  Palestine.  Here,  after  Joshua  had  gained 
possession  of  the  southern  portions  of  the  country,  a 
confederacy  of  the  northern  chiefs  assembled  under 
the  leadership  of  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor  (Josh.  xi.  J>), 
and  here  they  were  encountered  by  Joshua,  and  com 
pletely  routed  (ver.  7).  The  battle  of  Merom  was 
to  th°.  north  of  Palestine  what  that  of  Beth-horon 
had  been  to  the  south, — indeed  more,  for  there  do 
not  appear  to  have  been  the  same  number  of  im 
portant  towns  to  be  taken  in  detail  after  this  vic 
tory  that  there  had  been  in  the  former  case. 

The  name  of  Merom  occurs  nowhere  in  the  Bible 
but  in  the  passage  above  »  mentioned ;  nor  is  it  found 
in  Josephus.  In  his  account  of  the  battle  (Ant.  v. 
1,  §18),  the  confederate  kings  encamp  "  near  Beroth. 
a  city  of  upper  Galilee,  not  far  from  Kedes ;"  nor  is 
there  any  mention  of  water.  In  the  Onamasticon 
of  Eusebius  the  name  is  given  as  "  Merran,"  and  it 
is  stated  to  be  "  a  village  twelve  miles  distant  from 
Sebaste  (Samaria),  and  near  Dothaim."  It  is  a  re 
markable  fact  that  though  by  common  consent  the 
"  waters  of  Merom "  are  identified  with  the  lake 
through  which  the  Jordan  runs  between  Banias  and 
the  Sea  of  Galilee — the  Semechonitis  b  of  Josephus, 
and  Bohr  el  Huleh  of  the  modern  Arabs— yet  that 
identity  cannot  be  proved  by  any  ancient  record. 
The  nearest  approach  to  proof  is  an  inference  from 
the  statement  of  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  5,  §1),  that  the 
second  Jabin  (Judg.  iv.  v.)  "  belonged  to  the  city 


k  Josephus  expressly  states  that  Merodach-Baladan 
Miit  the  ambassadors  in  order  to  form  an  alliance  with 
Hezekiah  (Ant.  Jud.  x.  2,  §2). 

a  The  mention  of  the  name  in  the  Vulgate  of  Judg. 
v.  18— in  regime  Merome—is  only  apparent.  It  Is  a 

literal  transference  of  the  words  HIK'  *pi"1D  7J? 
rightly  rendered  in  the  A.  V  "  In  the  high  placet  ol  the 
Held,"  and  has  no  conncxicr.  with  Merom. 


3.  J.  ill.  10,  $7,  iv.  1,  }1).  This  name  does  not  occur  in 
any  part  of  the  Bible ;  nor  has  it  been  discovered  in  any 
author  except  Josepbua.  For  the  possible  derivations  ol 
It,  see  I  [eland  (I'al.  262-4),  aud  the  summary  of  Stanley 
(S.  A  P.  391  note).  To  these  it  should  be  added  that  the 
name  XemaA'/t  is  not  confined  to  this  lake.  A  wady  <  I 
iL'at  name  is  the  principal  torrent  on  the  cast  of  the  Set" 
i>l  Tiberias. 


MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF 

Asor  (H.izor),  which  lay  above  the  i-oke  of  Semech- 
ouitis."  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  Hazor 
of  the  first  and  the  Hazor  of  the  second  Jabin  were 
one  and  the  same  place ;  and  as  the  waters  of  Merom 
are  named  in  connexion  with  the  former,  it  is  allow 
able  to  infer  that  they  are  identical  with  the  lake  of 
Sesnechonitis.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that 
this  inference  is  really  all  the  proof  we  have,  while 
Against  it  we  have  to  set  the  positive  statements  of 
Josephus  and  Eusebius  just  quoted ;  and  also  the 
fact  that  the  Hebrew  word  Me  is  not  that  commonly 
used  for  a  large  piece  of  standing  water,  but  rather 
Yam,  "  a  sea,"  which  was  even  employed  for  so 
small  a  body  of  water  as  the  artificial  pond  or  tank 
in  Solomon's  Temple.  This  remark  would  have 
still  more  force  if,  as  was  most  probably  the  case, 
the  lake  was  larger  in  the  time  of  Joshua  than  it  is 
*t  present.  Another  and  greater  objection,  which 
should  not  be  overlooked,  is  the  difficulty  attend 
ant  on  a  flight  and  pursuit  across  a  country  so 
mountainous  and  impassable  to  any  large  numbers, 
as  the  district  which  intervenes  between  the  ffuleh 
and  Sidon,  The  tremendous  ravine  of  the  Litany 
and  the  height  of  Kalat  es-Shukif  are  only  two  of 
the  obstacles  which  stand  in  the  way  of  a  passage 
in  this  direction.  As  however  the  lake  in  question 
is  invariably  taken  to  be  the  "  waters  of  Merom," 
and  as  it  is  an  interesting  feature  in  the  geography 
of  the  upper  part  of  the  Jordan,  it  may  be  well  here 
to  give  some  account  of  it. 

The  region  to  which  the  name  of  Hulehe  is 
attached — the  Ard  el-Huleh — is  a  depressed  plain 
or  basin,  commencing  on  the  north  of  the  foot 
of  the  slopes  which  lead  up  to  the  Merj  Ayun 
,\nd  Tell  el-Kudu,  and  extending  southwards  to 
the  bottom  of  the  lake  which  bears  the  same 
name — Bahr  el-Hulch.  On  the  east  and  west  it  is 
enclosed  between  two  parallel  ranges  of  hills ;  on 
[lie  west  the  highlands  of  Upper  Galilee — the  Jebel 
Safat ;  and  on  the  east  a  broad  ridge  or  table-land  of 
basalt,  thrown  off  by  the  southern  base  of  Hermon, 
and  extending  downwards  beyond  the  ffuleh  till 
lost  in  the  high  ground  east  of  the  lake  of  Tiberias. 
The  latter  rises  abruptly  from  the  low  ground,  but 
the  hills  on  the  western  side  break  down  more  gra 
dually,  and  leave  a  tract  of  undulating  table-land 
of  varying  breadth  between  them  and  the  plain. 
This  basin  is  in  all  about  15  miles  long  and  4  to  5 
wide,  and  thus  occupies  an  area  about  equal  to  that 
of  the  lake  of  Tiberias.  It  is  the  receptacle  for 
the  drainage  of  the  highlands  on  each  side,  but 
more  especially  for  the  waters  of  the  Merj  Ay&n, 
an  elevated  plateau  which  lies  above  it  amongst  the 

c  Kl  Hukh,  ^J»^,V  is  probably  a  very  ancient  name, 
derived  from  or  connected  with  Hul,  or  more  accu 
rately  Chul,  who  appears  in  the  lists  of  Gen.  x.  as  one  of 
the  sons  of  Aram  (Syria,  ver.  23).  In  the  Arabic  version 
of  Saadiah  of  this  passage,  the  name  of  Hul  is  given 
exactly  in  the  form  of  the  modern  name— el-Huleh. 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  6,  $4),  in  his  account  of  the  descendants 
of  Noah,  gives  Hul  as  OSAos,  while  he  also  culls  the  dis 
trict  in  question  OiiAa'0<x  (Ant.  xv.  10,  $3)  The  word 
Ixith  in  Hebrew  and  Arabic  seems  to  have  the  force  of 
depression— the  low  land  (see  Michaells,  Suppl.  Nos.  687, 
7'2ii) ;  and  Michaelis  most  ingeniously  suggests  that  it  is 
the  root  of  the  name  K  o  i  A  ijcnipia,  although  in  its  present 
form  it  may  have  been  sufficiently  modified  to  transform 
It  into  an  intelligible  Greek  word  (Idem,  Spicileffium,  11. 
137,  138). 

•I  This  name  seems  sometimes  to  have  been  applied  to 
tho  la>e  itself.  See  the  quotation  from  "William  of  Tyre, 
— "  Ibtruu  Meleha  '— in  Rob.  ii.  436,  note.  Bun-khardt 


MEROM,  THE  WATERS  OF      33£ 

roots  of  the  great  northern  mountains  cf  Palestine, 
In  fact  the  whole  district  is  an  enormous  swamp, 
which,  though  partially  solidified  at  its  upper  por 
tion  by  the  gradual  deposit  of  detritus  from  the 
hills,  becomes  more  swampy  as  its  length  is  de 
scended,  and  at  last  terminates  in  the  lake  or  pool 
which  occupies  its  southern  extremity.  It  was  prc- 
bably  at  one  time  all  covered  with  water,  and  even 
now  in  the  rainy  seasons  it  is  mostly  submerged. 
During  the  dry  season,  however,  the  upper  portions, 
and  those  immediately  at  the  foot  of  the  western 
hills,  are  sufficiently  firm  to  allow  the  Arabs  to 
encamp  and  pasture  their  cattle,  but  the  lower  part, 
more  immediately  bordering  on  the  lake,  is  ab*>- 
lutely  impassable,  not  only  on  account  of  its  in 
creasing  marshiness,  but  also  from  the  very  d»nsp 
thicket  of  reeds  which  covers  it.  At  this  part  it  is 
difficult  to  say  where  the  swamp  terminates  and  the 
lake  begins,  but  farther  down  on  both  sides  the 
shores  are  perfectly  well  defined. 

In  form  the  lake  is  not  far  from  a  triangle,  the 
base  being  at  the  north  and  the  apex  at  the  south. 
It  measures  about  3  miles  in  each  direction.  Its 
level  is  placed  by  Van  de  Velde  at  120  feet  above 
the  Mediterranean.  That  of  Tell  el  Kadij,  20  miles 
above,  is  647  feet,  and  of  the  Lake  Tiberias, 
20  miles  below,  653  feet,  respectively  above  and 
below  the  same  datum  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir, 
181).  Thus  the  whole  basin  has  a  considerable 
slope  southwards.  The  Hasbany  river,  which  falls 
almost  due  south  from  its  source  in  the  great  Wadi, 
et-Teim,  is  joined  at  the  north-east  corner  of  the 
Ard  el-Huleh  by  the  streams  from  Banias  and 
Tell  el-Kady,  and  the  united  stream  then  flowi 
on  through  the  morass,  rather  nearer  its  eastern 
than  its  western  side,  until  it  enters  the  lake  close 
to  the  eastern  end  of  its  upper  side.  Firm  the 
apex  of  the  triangle  at  the  lower  end  the  .Jordan 
flows  out.  In  addition  to  the  Hasbany  and  Jo  the 
innumerable  smaller  watercourses  which  filter  into 
it  the  waters  of  the  swamp  above,  the  lake  is  fed  bv 
independent  springs  on  the  slopes  of  its  enclosing 
mountains.  Of  these  the  most  considerable  is  the 
Ain  el-Mcllahah,A  near  the  upper  end  of  its  western 
side,  which  sends  down  a  stream  of  40  or  50  feet  in 
width.  The  water  of  the  lake  is  clear  and  sweet; 
it  is  covered  in  parts  by  a  broad-leaved  plant,  and 
abounds  in  water-fowl.  Owing  to  its  triangular 
form  a  considerable  space  is  left  between  the  lake 
and  the  mountains,  at  its  lower  end.  This  appears 
to  be  more  the  case  on  the  west  than  on  the  east, 
and  the  rolling  plain  thus  formed  is  very  fertile,  and 
cultivated  to  the  water's  edge."  This  cultivated 


did  not  visit  it,  but  possibly  guided  by  the  meaning  of 
the  Arabic  word  (salt),  says  that  "  the  S.W.  shore  bears 
the  name  of  Melaha  from  the  ground  being  covered  with 
a  saline  crust"  (June  20,  1812).  The  same  thing  seems 
to  be  affirmed  in  the  Talmud  (Ahaloth,  end  of  chap, 
iii.  quoted  by  Schwarz  p.  42 note);  but  nothing  of  the 
kind  appears  to  have  been  observed  by  other  travellers. 
See  especially  Wilson,  Lands,  &c.,  ii.  163.  By  Schwarz 
(p.  29)  the  name  is  given  as  "  Kin  al-Malcha,  the  King's 
spring."  If  this  could  be  substantiated,  it  would  be  allow 
able  to  see  In  it  a  traditional  reference  to  the  encampment 
of  the  Kings.  Schwarz  also  mentions  (pp.  41,  42  note) 
the  following  names  for  the  lake :  "  Sibchi,"  perhaps  a 
mistake  for  "Somcho,"  t.  e.  Semechonitis  ;  "  Kaldnyeh, 
'  the  high,'  identical  with  the  Hebrew  Merom;"  "Yam 

Ohavilah,  il^lH  D1* ;"  though  this  may  merely  be  hia 
translator's  blunder  for  Chulleh,  i.  e.  lluleh. 

e  This  undulating  plain  appears  to  be  of  volcanic  origin, 
Van  de  Velde  (Syr.  <t  1'al.  416,  416),  speaking  of  the  part 


334 


MERONOTHITE 


district  is  called  the  Ard  el-Khait,  perhaps  "  the 
undulating  land,"  el-Khait'  being  also  the  name 
7/hich   the   Arabs   call   the  lake  (Thomson,  BOM 
Sacra,  199  ;  Rob.  Bib.  Res.  1st  ed.  iii.  App.  135, 
136).     In  fact  the  name  Huleh  appears  to  belong 
rather  to  the  district,  and  only  to  the  lake  as  oc 
cupying  a  portion  thereof.     It  is  not  restricted  t 
this  spot,   but  is  applied  to  another  very  fertil 
district  in  northern  Syria  lying  below  Hamah.     j 
town  of  the  same  name  is  also  found  south  of  an 
close  to  the  Keaimiyeh  river  a  few  mHes  from  th 
castle  of  Himin. 

Supposing  the  lake  to  be  identical  with  th 
"  waters  of  Merom,"  the  plain  just  spoken  of  on  its 
south-western  margin  is  the  only  spot  which  coul< 
have  been  the  site  of  Joshua's  victory,  though,  as  th 
Canaanites  chose  their  own  ground,  it  is  difficult  ix 
imagine  that  they  would  have  encamped  in  a  positioi 
from  which  there  was  literally  no  escape.  But  thi 
only  strengthens  the  difficulty  already  expressed  a. 
to  the  identification.  Still  the  district  of  the  Huleh 
will  always  possess  an  interest  for  the  Biblical  stu 
dent,  from  its  connexion  with  the  Jordan,  and  from 
the  cities  of  ancient  fame  which  stand  on  its  border 
—  Kedesh,  Hazor,  Dan,  Laish,  Caesarea,  Philippi,  &c 
The  above  account  is  compiled  from  the  fol 
lowing  sources:  —  The  Sources  of  the  Jordan,  &c. 
by  Rev.  W.  M.  Thomson,  in  Bibl.  Sacra,  Feb.  1846 
pp.  198-201  ;  Robinson's  Bib.  Res.  (1st  ed.  iii 
341-343,  and  App.  135)  ii.  435,  436,  iii.  395,  396 
Wilson,  Lands,  &c.  ii.  316  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Syria 
and  Pal.  ii.  416  ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  chap.  xi. 

The  situation  of  the  Beroth,  at  which  Josephus 
(as  above)  places  Joshua's  victory,  is  debated  at 
some  length  by  Michaelis  (Allg.  Bibtiothek  &c., 
No.  84)  with  a  strong  desire  to  prove  that  it  is 
Berytus,  the  modern  Beirut,  and  that  Kedesh  is  on 
the  Lake  of  Hums  (Emessa).  His  argument  is 
grounded  mainly  on  an  addition  of  Josephus  (  Ant. 
v.  1,  §18)  to  the  narrative  as  given  both  by  the 
Hebrew  and  LXX.,  viz.  that  it  occupied  Joshua  five 
iluys  to  march  from  Gilgal  to  the  encampment  of 
the  kings.  For  this  the  reader  must  be  referred  to 
Michaelis  himself.  But  Josephus  elsewhere  men 
tions  a  town  called  Meroth,  which  may  possibly  be 
the  same  as  Beroth.  This  seems  to  have  been  a  place 
naturally  strong,  and  important  as  a  military  post 
(  Vita,  §37  ;  B.  J.  ii.  20,  §6),  and  moreover  was 
the  western  limit  of  Upper  Galilee  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §1). 
This  would  place  it  somewhere  about  the  plain  of 
Attka,  much  more  suitable  ground  for  the  chariots 
of  the  Canaanites  than  any  to  be  found  near  the 
Jfuleh,  while  it  also  makes  the  account  of  the  pur 
suit  to  Sidon  more  intelligible.  [G.I 

MERON'OTHITE.  THE  (^Bn:   6  tK 


lAepafl<av,    Alex.    WlapaOuv  ;    in    Neh.    6  - 

»a>0«4T7js  :  Meronathites),  that  is,  the  native  of  a 
place  called  probably  Meronoth,  of  which,  however, 
no  further  traces  have  yet  been  discovered.  Two 
Meronothites  are  named  in  the  Bible:  —  1.  JEH- 
DEIAH,  who  had  the  charge  of  the  royal  asses  of 
King  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  30)  ;  and  2.  JADON,  one 
of  those  who  assisted  m  the  repair  of  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  the  captivity  (Neh. 
iii.  7).  In  the  latter  case  we  are  possibly  afforded 


below  the  Wady  Feraim,  a  few  miles  only  S.  of  the  lake 
r.alU  It  "a  plain  entirely  composed  of  lava;"  and  at  the 
Jitr-Benat-Yakub  ne  speaks  of  the  "  black  lava  sides  "  of 
the  Jordan.  Wilson,  however  (ii.  316).  calls  the  soil  of  the 
WJi*  port  the  "  del  Ms  of  basaltic  rocks  and  dykes." 
'  The  writer  has  not  succeeded  in  ascertaining  tho 


MESECH 

a  clue  to  the  situation  of  Meronoth  by  tke  fact  th.it 
Jadon  is  mentioned  between  a  Gibeon.te  and  the 
men  of  Gibeon,  who  again  are  followed  by  the  men 
of  Mizpah:  but  no  name  like  it  is  to  be  found 
among  the  towns  of  that  district,  either  in  the  listj 
of  Joshua  (xviii.  11-28),  of  Nehemiah  (xi.  31-35), 
or  in  the  Dialogue  of  modern  town?  given  by  Ro 
binson  (B.  R.  1st  ed.  iii.  Append.  121-125).  Foi 
this  circumstance  compare  MKCHERATHITE.  [G.] 

ME'ROZ(ThO:  M77p<*C;  Alex.  Mafrp:  terra 
Meroz),  a  place  mentioned  only  in  the  Song  of 
Deborah  and  Barak  in  Judg.  v.  23,  and  there  de 
nounced  because  its  inhabitants  had  refused  to  take 
any  part  in  the  struggle  with  Sisera  :  _ 

Curse  ye  Meroz,  said  the  messenger  of  Jehovah, 

Curse  ye,  curse  ye,  its  inhabitants; 
Because  they  came  not  to  the  help  of  Jehovah, 
To  the  help  of  Jehovah  aeainst  the  mighty. 
The  denunciation  of  this  faintheartedness  is  made  to 
form  a  pendant  to  the  blessing  proclaimed  on  the 
prompt  action  of  Jael. 

Meroz  must  have  been  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  the  Kishon,  but  its  real  position  is  not  known  : 
possibly  it  was  destroyed  in  obedience  to  the 
curse.  A  place  named  Merrus  (but  Eusebius  Mt/J- 
pdv),  is  named  by  Jerome  (Onom.  "  Merrom  ")  as 
12  miles  north  of  Sebaste,  near  Dothain,  but  this  is 
too  far  south  to  have  been  near  jthe  scene  of  the 
conflict.  Far  more  feasible  is  the  conjecture  ot 
Schwarz  (168,  and  see  36)  that  Meroz  is  to  be 
found  at  Merasas  —  more  correctly  el-Mur&ssus— 
a  ruined  site  about  4  miles,  N.W.  of  Beisan,  on  the 
southern  slopes  of  the  hills,  which  are  the  continua 
tion  of  the  so-called  "  Little  Hermon,"  and  form 
the  northern  side  of  the  valley  (  Wady  Jaltid), 
which  leads  directly  from  the  plain  of  Jezreel  to 
the  Jordan.  The  town  must  have  commanded  the 
Pass,  and  if  any  of  Sisera's  people  attempted,  as  the 
Midianites  did  when  routed  by  Gideon,  to  escape  in 
that  direction,  its  inhabitants  might  no  doubt  have 
prevented  their  doing  so,  and  have  slaughtered 
;hem.  El-Murussus  is  mentioned  by  Burckhardt 
(July  2  :  he  calls  it  Meraszrasz],  Robinson  (ii.  356), 
and  others. 

Fiirst  (ffandwb.  786a)  suggests  the  identity  of 
\l  eroz  with  Merom,  the  place  which  may  have  given 
ts  name  to  the  waters  of  Merom,  in  the  neighbour 
hood  of  which  Kedesh,  the  residence  of  Jael,  where 
Sisera  took  refuge,  was  situated.  But  putting  aside 
;he  fact  of  the  non-existence  of  any  town  named 
tferom,  there  is  against  this  suggestion  the  con- 
idcr.it  ion  that  Sisera  left  his  army  and  fled  alone  in 
another  direction. 

In  the  Jewish  traditions  preserved  in  the  Com  - 
mentary  on  the  Song  of  Deborah  attributed  to  St 
Jerome,  Meroz,  which  may  be  interpreted  as  secret, 
s  made  to  signify  the  evil  angels  who  led  on  the 
Canaanites,  who  are  cursed  by  Michael  the  angel  of 
ehovah  the  leader  of  the  Israelites.  [G.] 

ME'RUTH  ("EnnnpovO  :  Emerus).    A  ccrrup 
ion  of  IMMUR  1,  in  Ezr.  ii.  37  (1  Esd.  v.  24). 


MES'ECH,    MESH'ECH 


Mo«rdx 


Mosoch},  a  son  of  Japheth  (Gen.  x.  2  ;  1  Chr.  i.  5), 
nd  the  progenitor  of  a  race  frequently  noticed  in 


signification  of  this  Arabic  word.  By  Schwarz  (p.  47) 
it  is  given  as  "  Bachr  Chit,"  '  wbr-at  sea,'  because  rnucli 
wheat  is  sown  in  its  neighliourhood."  This  is  probably 
what  Prof.  Stanley  alludes  to  when  he  reports  the  ni-jm 
as  Ifcihr  Hit  or  '  sea  of  wheat ''  (S.  <t  /'.  391  nott\ 


MESHA 

Sc.ipture  in  connexion  with  Tubal,  Magog,  and 
other  northern  nations.  They  appear  as  allies  of 
Gog  (Kz.  xxxviii.  2,  3,  xxxix.  1),  and  as  supply- 
•ng  the  Tyrians  with  copper  and  slaves  (Kz.  xxvii. 
13) ;  in  Ps.  cxx.  5,"  they  are  noticed  as  one  of 
the  remotest,  and  at  the  same  time  rudest  nations 
of  the  world.  Both  the  name  and  the  associations 
are  in  favour  of  the  identification  of  Meshech  with 
the  Moschi :  the  form  of  the  name  adopted  by  the 
LXX.  and  the  Vulg.  approaches  most  nearly  to  the 
classical  designation,  while  in  Procopius  (B.  G.  iv. 
2)  ve  meet  with  another  form  (MeVxot)  which 
assimilates  to  the  Hebrew.  The  position  of  the  Moschi 
in  the  age  of  Ezekiel  was  probably  the  same  as  is 
described  by  Herodotus  (iii.  94),  viz.  on  the  bor 
ders  of  Colchis  and  Armenia,  where  a  mountain 
chain  connecting  Anti-Taurus  with  Caucasus,  was 
named  after  them  the  Moschici  Monies,  and  where 
was  also  a  district  named  by  Strabo  (xi.  497-499) 
Moschice.  In  the  same  neighbourhood  were  the 
Tibareni,  who  have  been  generally  identified  with 
the  Biblical  Tubal.  The  Colchian  tribes,  the  Cha- 
lybes  more  especially,  were  skilled  in  working  metals, 
and  hence  arose  the  trade  in  the  "  vessels  of  brass  " 
with  Tyre ;  nor  is  it  at  all  improbable  that  slaves 
were  largely  exported  thence  as  now  from  the  neigh 
bouring  district  of  Georgia.  Although  the  M<«>ehi 
were  a  comparatively  unimportant  race  in  classical 
times,  they  had  previously  been  one  of  the  most 
powerful  nations  of  Western  Asia.  The  Assyrian 
monarchs  were  engaged  in  frequent  wars  with  them, 
and  it  is  not  improbable  that  they  had  occupied  the 
whole  of  the  district  afterwai-ds  named  Cappadocia. 
In  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  the  name  appears  under 
the  form  of  Muskai :  a  somewhat  similar  name  Ma 
s/wash  appears  in  an  Egyptian  inscription,  which  com 
memorates  the  achievements  of  the  third  Rameses 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  398,  Abridg.).  The  sub 
sequent  history  of  Meshech  is  unknown  ;  Knobel's 
attempt  to  connect  them  with  the  Ligurians 
(  Vdlkertaf.  p.  1 19  &c.)  is  devoid  of  all  solid  ground. 
As  far  as  the  name  and  locality  are  concerned,  Mus 
covite  is  a  more  probable  hypothesis  (Rawlinsou, 
Herod,  i.  652-3).  [W.  L.  B.] 

ME'SHA  (KB>»,  perhaps  =  KE»0,  "  re 
treat,"  Ges. :  Ma<r<T7j ;  Messa),  the  name  of  one  of 
the  geographical  limits  of  the  Joktariites  when  they 
first  settled  in  Arabia :  "  And  their  dwelling  was 
from  Mesha  (Dlpn  1H  PnBD  H3N3  KPfcO),  [as 
thou  goest]  unto  Sephar,  a  mount  of  the  East "  (Gen. 
x.  30).  The  position  of  the  early  Joktanite  colonists 
is  clearly  made  out  from  the  traces  they  have  left  in 
the  ethnology,  language,  and  monuments  of  Southern 
Arabia  ;  and  without  putting  too  precise  a  limita 
tion  on  the  possible  situation  of  Mesha  and  Sephar, 
we  may  suppose  that  these  places  must  have  fallen 
within  the  south-western  quarter  of  the  peninsula ; 
including  the  modern  Yemen  on  the  west,  and  the 
districts  of  'Oman,  Mahreh,  Shihr,  &c.,  as  far  as 
ladramEwt,  on  the  east.  These  general  boundaries 
are  strengthened  by  the  identification  of  Sephar 
with  the  port  of  Zafari,  or  Dhafdri ;  though  the 

B  Various  explanations  have  been  offered  to  account  for 
the  juxtaposition  of  two  such  remote  nations  as  Mesech 
and  Kcdir  in  this  passage.  The  LXX.  does  not  recognize 
It  as  a  proper  name,  but  renders  it  enaxpvvOji.  U'tzig 
suggests  the  identity  of  Mesech  with  Dammcsech,  or  Da 
mascus.  It  is,  however,  quite  possible  that  the  Psalmist 
selects  the  two  nations  for  the  very  reason  which  Is  re 
garded  aa  an  objection,  viz.,  their  remoteness  from  each 
ether  tr.ousb  at  the  same  time  their  wild  un-i  uncivilized 


MESHA  38fl 

site  of  Sephar  may  possibly  be  her<  after  connected 
with  the  old  Himycrite  metropolis  in  the  Yemen 
[see  ARABIA,  p.  94,  and  SEPHAR],  but  this  would 
not  materially  alter  the  question.  In  Sephar  we 
believe  we  have  the  eastern  limit  of  the  early  set 
tlers,  whether  its  site  be  the  sea-port  or  the  inland 
city  ;  and  the  correctness  of  this  supposition  appeal's 
from  the  Biblical  record,  in  which  the  migration  is 
apparently  from  west  to  east,  from  the  probarle 
course  taken  by  the  immigrants,  and  from  the 
greater  importance  of  the  known  western  settle 
ments  of  the  Joktauites,  or  those  of  the  Yemen. 

If  then  Mesha  was  the  western  limit  of  the  Jok- 
tanites,  it  must  be  sought  for  in  north-western 
Yemen.  But  the  identifications  that  have  been 
proposed  are  not  satisfactory.  The  sea-port  called 
Movffa  or  Mov£a,  mentioned  by  Ptolemy,  Pliny, 
Arrian,  and  others  (see  the  Dictionary  of  Geography, 
s.  v.  Muza)  presents  the  most  probable  site.  It 
was  a  town  of  note  in  classical  times,  but  has  since 
fallen  into  decay,  if  the  modern  Moosi  be  the  same 
place.  The  latter  is  situate  in  about  13°  40'  N. 
lat.,  43°  20'  E.  long.,  and  is  near  a  mountain  called 
the  Three  Sisters,  or  Jebel  Moosa,  in  the  Admi- 
alty  Chart  of  the  Hed  Sea,  drawn  from  the  sur 
veys  of  Captain  Pullen,  R.N.  Gesenius  thinks  this 
identification  probable,  but  he  appears  to  have  been 
unaware  of  the  existence  of  a  modern  site  called 
Moosa,  saying  that  Muza  was  nearly  where  now  is 
Maushid.  Bochart,  also,  holds  the  identification 
with  Muza  (Phaleg,  xxx.).  Mesha  may  possibly 
have  lain  inland,  and  more  to  the  north-west  of 
Sephar  than  the  position  of  Moosa  would  indicate  ; 
but  this  is  scarcely  to  be  assumed.  There  is,  how 
ever,  a  Mount  Moosh,"  situate  in  Nejd,  in  the  terri 
tory  of  the  tribe  of  Teiyi  (Mardsid  and  Mushtarak, 
s.  v.).  There  have  not  been  wanting  writers  among 
the  late  Jews  to  convert  Mesha  and  Sephar  into 
Mekkah  and  El-Medeeneh  (Phaleg,  I.e.}.  [E.S.P.] 


ME'SHA  (ytJ»!9  :  Mw<rc£;  Jos.  NioZv:  Mesa). 
1.  The  king  of  Moab  in  the  reigns  of  Ahab  and  his 
sons  Ahaziah  and  Jehoram,  kings  of  Israel  (2  K.  iii.  4), 
and  tributary  to  the  first.  Probably  the  allegiance 
of  Moab,  with  that  of  the  tribes  east  of  Jordan,  was 
transferred  to  the  northern  kingdom  of  Israel  upon 
the  division  of  the  monarchy,  for  there  is  no  account 
of  any  subjugation  of  the  country  subsequent  to  the 
war  of  extermination  with  which  it  was  visited  by 
David,  when  Benaiah  displayed  his  prowess  (2  Sam. 
xxiii.  20),  and  "the  Moabites  became  David's  serv 
ants,  bearers  of  gifts"  (2  Sam.  viii.  2).  When 
Ahab  had  fallen  in  battle  at  Ramoth  Gilead,  Mesha 
seized  the  opportunity  afforded  by  the  confusion 
consequent  upon  this  disaster,  and  the  feeble  reign 
of  Ahaziah,  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of  Israel  and  free 
himself  from  the  burdensome  tribute  of  "  a  hundred 
thousand  wethers  and  a  hundred  thousand  rai»e 
with  their  wool."  The  country  east  of  the  Jordan 
was  rich  in  pasture  for  cattle  (Num.  xxxii.  1),  the 
chief  wealth  of  the  Moabites  consisted  in  their  large 
flocks  of  sheep.,  and  the  king  of  this  pastoral  people 
is  described  as  naked  (~Jj5fa),  "  a  sheep-master," 


character  may  have  been  the  ground  of  the  selection,  as 
Hengstenberg  (Comm.  in  loc.)  suggests.  We  have  already 
had  to  notice  Knobel's  idea,  that  the  Mesech  m  this  passage 
is  the  Meshech  of  1  Chr.  i.  5,  and  the  Babylonian  Mesev.e 
[MASH.] 


3»fi  MESHA 

or  owner  of  herds.*  About  the  significatu  ti  o*"  this 
wont  nolted  there  is  not  mack  doubt,  but  its  origin 
is  obscure.  It  occurs  but  once  besides  in  Am.  i.  1, 
where  the  prophet  Amos  is  described  as  "  among 
the  herdmen  (D*"lp'l3,  nokedlm)  ofTekoah."  On 
this  Kimchi  remarks  that  a  herdman  was  called 
noketl,  because  most  cattle  have  black  or  white 
spots  (comp.  "llpj,  ndkod,  Gen.  xxx.  32,  A.  V. 
"speckled"),  or  as  Buxtorf  explains  it,  because 
sheep  are  generally  marked  with  certain  signs  so  as 
•.a  be  known.  But  it  is  highly  improbable  that 
sny  such  etymology  should  be  correct,  and  Fiirst's 
conjecture  that  it  is  derived  from  an  obsolete  root, 
signifying  to  keep  or  feed  cattle,  is  more  likely  to 
be  true  (Concord,  s.  v.). 

When,  upon  the  death  of  Ahaziah,  his  brother 
Jehoram  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Israel,  one  of 
his  first  acts  was  to  secure  the  assistance  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  his  father's  ally,  in  reducing  the  Moabites 
to  their  former  condition  of  tributaries.  The  united 
irmies  of  the  two  kings  marched  by  a  circuitous 
route  round  the  Dead  Sea,  and  were  joined  by  the 
forces  of  the  king  of  Edom.  [JEFIORAM.]  The  dis 
ordered  soldiers  of  Moab,  eager  only  for  spoil,  were 
surprised  by  the  warriors  of  Israel  and  their  allies, 
and  became  an  easy  prey.  In  the  panic  which 
ensued  they  were  slaughtered  without  mercy,  their 
country  was  made  a  desert,  and  the  king  took  refuge 
in  his  last  stronghold  and  defended  himself  with  the 
energy  of  despair.  With  700  fighting  men  he  made 
a  vigorous  attempt  to  cut  his  way  through  the  be 
leaguering  army,  and  when  beaten  back,  he  with 
drew  to  the  wall  of  his  city,  and  there,  in  sight  of 
the  allied  host,  offered  his  first-born  son,  his  suc 
cessor  in  the  kingdom,  as  a  burnt-offering  to  Che- 
mosh,  the  ruthless  fire-god  of  Moab.  His  bloody 
sacrifice  had  so  far  the  desired  effect  that  the  be 
siegers  retired  from  him  to  their  own  land.  There 
appears  to  be  no  reason  for  supposing  that  the  son 
of  the  king  of  Edom  was  the  victim  on  this  occa 
sion,  whether,  as  R.  Joseph  Kimchi  supposed,  he 
was  already  in  the  power  of  the  king  of  Moab,  and 
was  the  cause  of  the  Edomites  joining  the  armies  of 
Israel  and  Judaii ;  or  whether,  as  R.  Moses  Kimchi 
suggested,  he  was  taken  prisoner  in  the  sally  of  the 
Moabites,  and  sacrificed  out  of  revenge  for  its 
failure.  These  conjectures  appear  to  have  arisen 
from  an  attempt  to  find  in  this  incident  the  event 
to  which  allusion  is  made  in  Am.  ii.  1,  where  the 
Moabite  is  charged  with  burning  the  bones  of  the 
king  of  Edom  into  lime.  It  is  more  natural,  and 
renders  the  narrative  more  vivid  and  consistent,  to 
suppose  that  the  king  of  Moab,  finding  his  last  re 
source  fail  him,  endeavoured  to  avert  the  wrath 
and  obtain  the  aid  of  his  god  by  the  most  costly 
sacrifice  in  his  power.  [MOAB.] 

2.  (J?B>V3:  Mapiffd;  Alex.  Mapiffds:  Mesa}. 
The  eldest  son  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron  by  his 
wife  Azubah,  as  Kimchi  conjectures  (1  Chr.  ii.  42). 
He  is  called  the  father,  that  is  the  prince  or  founder, 


MESHACH 

of  Ziph.  Both  the  Synac  and  Arabic  versicw  ha?« 
"  Klishamai,"  apparently  from  the  pvwious  verse, 
while  the  LXX.,  unless  they  had  a  different  reading, 
yBHD,  seem  to  have  repeated  "  Mareshah,"  wlm-h 
occurs  immediately  afterwards. 

3.  (W5»D:  M«r<{;  Alex.Ma><r<£:  Mosa}.  A  Ben 

jamite,  son  of  Shaharaim,  by  his  wife  Hodesh,  who 
bare  him  in  the  land  of  Moab  (1  Chr.  viii.  9).  The 
Vulgate  and  Alex.  MS.  must  have  had  the  reading 

[W.  A.  W.] 


ME'SHACH  (1fy<O:  M«n£X  ;  Alex.  Miorfir 
Misacfi).  The  name  given  to  Mishael,  one  of  the 
companions  of  Daniel,  and  like  him  of  the  blood-royal 
of  Judah,  who  with  three  others  was  chosen  from 
among  the  captives  to  be  taught  "  the  learning  ind 
the  tongue*  of  the  Chaldaeans"  (Dan.  i.  4),  so  that 
they  might  be  qualified  to  "  stand  before  "  kin* 
Nebuchadnezzar  (  Dan.  i.  5)  as  his  personal  attendants 
and  advisers  (i.  20).  During  their  three  years  of 
preparation  they  were  maintained  at  the  king's  cost, 
under  the  charge  of  the  chief  of  the  eunuchs,  W!ID 
placed  them  with  "  the  Melzar,"  or  chief  butler. 
The  stoiy  of  their  simple  diet  is  well  known.  When 
the  time  of  their  probation  was  ended,  such  was 
"  the  knowledge  and  skill  in  all  learning  and  wisdom" 
which  God  had  given  them,  that  the  king  found  them 
"  ten  times  better  than  all  the  magicians  and  astro 
logers  that  were  in  all  his  realm  "  (i.  20).  Upon 
Daniel's  promotion  to  be  "  chief  of  the  magicians," 
his  three  companions,  by  his  influence,  were  set 
"  over  the  affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon"  (ii. 
49).  But,  notwithstanding  their  Chaldaean  education, 
these  three  young  Hebrews  were  strongly  attached 
to  the  religion  of  their  fathers  ;  and  their  refusal  to 
join  in  the  worship  of  the  image  on  the  plain  ot 
Dura  gave  a  handle  of  accusation  to  the  Chaldaeans. 
who  were  jealous  of  their  advancement,  and  eagerly 
reported  to  the  king  the  heretical  conduct  of  these 
"  Jewish  men"  (iii.  12)  who  stood  so  high  in  his 
favour.  The  rage  of  the  king,  the  swift  sentence 
of  condemnation  passed  upon  the  three  offenders, 
their  miraculous  preservation  from  the  fiery  furnace 
heated  seven  times  hotter  than  usual,  the  king's 
acknowledgment  of  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abednego,  with  their  restoration  to  office,  are 
written  in  the  3rd  chapter  of  Daniel,  and  there  the 
history  leaves  them.  The  name  "  Meshach  "  is 
rendered  by  Fiirst  (ffandw.~)  "  a  ram,"  and  derived 
from  the  Sanscrit  meshah.  He  goes  on  to  say  that 
it  was  the  name  of  the  Sun-god  of  the  Chaldaeans, 
without  giving  any  authority,  or  stopping  to  explain 
the  phenomenon  presented  by  the  name  of  a  Chaldaean 
divinity  with  an  Aiyan  etymology.  That  Meshach 
was  the  name  of  some  god  of  the  Chaldaeans  is  ex 
tremely  probable,  from  the  fact  that  Daniel,  who 
had  the  name  of  Belteshazzar,  was  so  called  after 
the  god  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Dan.  iv.  8),  and  that 
Abednego  was  named  after  Nego,  or  Nebo,  the  Chal 
daean  name  for  the  planet  Mercury.  [W.  A.  W.] 


a  The  LXX.  leave  It  untranslated  (VcoKrjS,  Alex. 
as  does  the  Peshlto  Syriac ;  but  Aquila  renders  It  TTOI/OI- 
riorpo^xK,  and  Sytnmachus  rpt^tav  ^otnc^/uara,  following 
the  Targiun  and  Arabic,  and  themselves  followed  in  the 
margin  of  the  Hezaplar  Syriac.  In  Am.  i.  1,  Symmachus 
has  simply  VM^V.  The  Kamoos,  as  quoted  by  fcochart 

S  ~  ~ 
(Uieroz.  1.  c,  44),  gives  ail  Arabic  word,  jjfj,  nakad,  not 

traced  to  any  origin,  which  denotes  an  inferior  kind  of 
p,  airtjr  and  little  value-.!  except  for  its  wool.    The 


ff  Sf 

keeper  of  such  sheep  is  called  ^LXj.  naJde&d,  which 

Bochart  identifies  with  ndJcfd.  But  if  this  be  the  case, 
it  is  a  little  remarkable  that  the  Arabic  translator  should 
have  passed  over  a  word  apparently  so  appropriate,  and 
followed  the  version  of  the  Targum,  "  an  owner  of  flocks." 
Gescnius  and  lx«,  however,  accept  this  as  the  solution. 

*  The  expression    "3    JICv-1    "1SD    ,-3   includes  tl« 
whole  of  the  Chaldaean  literature,  written  urxl  spoken. 


MESHELEM1AH 


MESOBAITE 


337 


MESHELEMI'AH 

Alex.  MotroAXdju.  :  MosollamiaJt  ,  1  Chr.  ix.  21  ; 
li"Pp?fc?p:  Mofft  \\tfj.ia  ;  Alex.  Mo<roXXa/i,  Mo- 
(TsAAatJa.  Meff-oAXe/Ja  :  Mesellemiah,  1  Chr.  xxvi. 
1,  2,  9).  A  Korhite,  son  of  Kore,  of  the  sons  of 
Asaph,  who  with  his  seven  sons  and  his  brethren, 
"  sons  of  might,"  were  porters  or  gate-keepers  of  the 
house  of  Jehovah  in  the  reign  of  David.  He  is  evi 
dently  the  same  as  SHELEMIAH  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  14),  to 
whose  custody  the  East-gate,  or  principal  entrance, 
was  committed,  and  whose  son  Zechariah  was  a 
wise  counsellor,  and  had  charge  of  the  north  gate. 
"  SHALLUM  the  son  of  Kore,  the  son  of  Ebiasaph, 
the  son  of  Korah"  (1  Chr.  ix.  19),  who  was  chief 
of  the  porters  (17),  and  who  gave  his  name  to  a 
family  which  performed  the  same  office,  and  returned 
from  the  captivity  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  42  ; 
Neh.  vii.  45),  is  apparently  identical  with  Shelemiah, 
Meshelcmiah,  and  Meshullam  (comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  17, 
with  Neh.  xii.  25).  f  W.  A.  W.] 

MESHEZABE'EL 


Alex.  Ma<rc£ei^A.  ;  F.  A.  MaffefoSijA:  Mesezebd). 

1.  Ancestor  of  Meshullam,  who  assisted  Nehe- 
miuh   in  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh. 
iii.  4).    He  was  apparently  a  priest. 

2.  (Me<r«£e|87jA  :  Mesizabel).  One  of  the  "heads 
of  the  people,"  probably  a  family,  who  sealed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  21). 

3.  (BeWT/Co  :    F.  A.    3rd  hand,  Bo<n;£a;8e^A  : 
Mesezebel}.  The  father  of  Pethahiah,  and  descendant 
of  Zerah  the  son  of  Judah  (Neh.  xi.  24). 

MESHIL'LEMITH 


Alex.  Mo(roAAa/iw0  :  Mosollamith,).  The  son  of 
Immer,  a  priest,  and  ancestor  of  Amashai  or  Maasiai, 
according  to  Neh.  xi.  13,  and  of  Pashur  and  Adaiah, 
according  to  1  Chr.  ix.  12.  In  Neh.  xi.  13  he  is 
called  MESHILLEMOTH. 

MESHIL'LEMOTH  (ltid$to  :  MoxroAa- 
(i(o6  ;  Alex.  Mo<roAAa/it«>0  :  Mosollamoth).  An 
Ephraimite,  ancestor  of  Berechiah,  one  of  the  chiefs 
of  the  tribe  in  the  reign  of  Pekah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  12). 

2.  (KearapifiiB).  Neh.  xi.  13.  The  same  as 
MESHILLEMITH. 


MESHUL'LAM  (DB>»  :  Mfffo\\d/j.  ;  Alex. 


»'  :  Messularn).      1.  Ancestor  of  Shaphan 
the  scribe  (2  K.  xxii.  3). 

2.  (Mo<roAAa/i;  Alex.  MoffoAAajuo's:  Mosollam). 
The  son  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  iii.  19). 

3.  (Vat.  and  Alex.  MotroAAcfyi).    A  Gadite,  one 
of  the  chief  men  of  the  tribe,  who  dwelt  in  Bashan 
at  the  time  the  genealogies  were  recorded  in  the 
reign  of  Jotham  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  v.  13). 

4.  A  Benjamite,  of  the  sons  of  Elpaal  (1  Chr. 
viii.  17). 

5.  (yieffov\dfi.  ;  F.  A.  'Aju.€<rouA<x;u  in  Neh.).   A 
Benjamite,  the  son  of  Hodaviah  or  Joed,  and  father 
ot'  Sallu,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe  who  settled 
at  Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (1  Chr. 
ix.  7  i  Neh.  xi.  7). 

6.  (Alex.   Mao-oAAtfyi).     A    Benjamite,  son   of 
Shephathiah,  who  lived  at  Jerusalem  after  the  cap 
tivity  (1  Chr.  ix.  8). 

7.  (yieffov\dfi  in  Neh.;  Alex.  MoiroAAi/t).  The 
nnme  as  SHALLUM,  who  was  high-priest  probably 
in  the  reign  of  Amon,  and  father  of  Hilkiah  (  1  Chr. 
ix.  11  ;  Neh.  xi.  11).    His  descent  is  traced  through 
Zrxdok  and  Meraioth  to  Ahitub  ;  or,  as  is  more  pro 
bable,  the  names  Meraioth  and   Ahitub  are  tmnr. 

VOL.  II. 


posed,  and  his  descent  is  from  Meraioth  as  the  more 
remote  ancestor  (comp.  1  Chr.  vi.  7). 

8.  A  priest,  sou   of  Meshillemith,   or   Meshil- 
lemoth,  the  son  of  Iiamer,  and  ancestor  of  Maasiai 
or  Amashai  (1  Chr.  ix.  12 ;  comp.  Neh.  xi.  13). 
His  name  does  not  occur  in  the  parallel  list  of 
Nehemiah,  and  we  may  suppose  it  to  have  been 
omitted  by  a  transcriber  in  consequence  of  the  simi 
larity  of  the  name  which  follows  ;  or  in  the  passage 
in  which  it  occurs  it  may  have  been  added  from  tint 
same  cause. 

9.  A  Kohathite,  or  family  of  Kohathite  Levites, 
in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  who  were  among  the  over 
seers  of  the  work   of  restoration   in  the  Temple 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12). 

10.  (MecroAAdju).    One  of  the  "  heads  "  (A.  V. 
"  chief  men  ")  sent  by  Ezra  to  Iddo  "  the  head," 
to  gather  together  the  Levites  to  join  the  caravan 
about   to   return   to    Jerusalem    (Ezr.   viii.    16). 
Called  MOSOLLAMON  in  1  Esd.  viii.  44. 

11.  (Alex.  Meraffo\\dfj. :  Mesollam).    A  chief 
man  in  the  time  of  Ezra,  probably  a  Levite,  who 
assisted  Jonathan  and  Jahaziah  in  abolishing  the 
marriages  which  some  of  the  people  had  contracted 
with   foreign   wives   (Ezr.   x.    15).      Also    called 
MOSOLLAM  in  1  Esd.  ix.  14. 

12.  (Moffo\\dfi :   Mosollam).     One  of  the  de 
scendants  of  Bani,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
and  put  her  away  (Ezr.  x.  29).    OLAMUS  in  1  Esd. 
ix.  30,    is  a  fragment  of  this  name. 

13.  (Mfffov\dn,  Neh.  iii.  30,  vi.  18).    The  son 
of  Berechiah,  who  assisted  in  rebuilding  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  4),  as  well  as  the  Temple  wall, 
adjoining  which  he  had  his  "  chamber "  (Neh.  iii. 
30).     He  was  probably  a  priest,  and  his  daughter 
was  married  to  Johanan  the  son  of  Tobiah  the  Am 
monite  (Neh.  vi.  18). 

14.  (Meo-ouAa/it).     The  son  of  Besodeiah  :    he 
assisted  Jehoiada  the  son  of  Paseah  in  restoring  the 
old  gate  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  6). 

15.  (Meffo\\dfi ;    Alex.    Moo-oAAoju).     One  of 
those  who  stood  at  the  left  hand  of  Ezra  when  he 
read  the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4). 

16.  (  Metro  uAajt).    A  priest,  or  family  of  priests, 
\vho  sealed  the   covenant   with    Nehemiah   (Neh. 
x.7> 

17.  (Vleffov\\dft. ;    Alex.  Meerot/Xefyt).     One  of 
the  heads  of  the  people  who  sealed  the  covenant 
with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  20). 

18.  (MecrovAcfju.).    A  priest  in  the  days  of  Joia- 
kim  the  son  of  Jeshua,  and  representative  of  the 
house  of  Ezra  (Neh.  xii.  13). 

19.  (MetroXdju).     Likewise  a  priest  at  the  same 
time  as  the  preceding,  and  head  of  the  priestly 
family  of  Ginnethon  (Neh.  xii.  16). 

20.  (Omitted  in  LXX.).    A  family  of  porters, 
descendants  of  Meshullam  (Neh.  xii.  25),  who  is 
also  called  Meshelemiah  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  1),  Shelemiah 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  14),  and  Shallum  (Neh.  vii.  45). 

21.  (M«roXAefyi ;  Alex.  Mo<roXXc£/t).  One  of  the 
princes  of  Judah  who  were  in  the  right  hand  com 
pany  of  those  who  marched  on  the  wall  of  Jeru 
salem  upon  the  occasion  of  its  solemn  dedication 
(Neh.  xii.  33).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MESHULLEM'ETH  (flDj'K'D :  MeffoXXo/* ; 

Alex.  Maffffa\a/j.ti6 :  Messalemeth).  The  daughter 
of  Haruz  of  Jotbah,  wife  of  Manasseh  king  of  Judah, 
and  mother  of  his  successor  Amon  (2  K.  xxi.  19). 

MESO'BAITE,  THE  (PP3XI?n,  ».  e.  "  tht 
Metsobayali "  :    &   Mtwafifia  ;    Alex. 

Z 


338 


MESOPOTAMIA 


MESOPOTAMIA 


dc  MasdAi),  a  title  which  occurs  only  once,  and  |  careful   water-system,  by   deriving  channels    from 
then  attached  to  the  name  of  JASIEL,  the  last  of  |  the  great  streams  or  their  affluents,  by  storing  the 


David's  guard  in  the  extended  list  of  1  Chronicles 
(xi.  47).  The  word  retains  strong  traces  of  ZOBAII, 
one  of  the  petty  Aramite  kingdoms,  in  which  there 
would  be  nothing  surprising,  as  David  had  a  cer 
tain  connexion  with  these  Aramite  states,  while 
this  very  catalogue  contains  the  names  of  Moabites, 
Ammonites,  and  other  foreigners.  But  on  this  it 
is  impossible  to  pronounce  with  any  certainty,  as 
the  original  text  of  the  passage  is  probably  in  cou- 
fu«ion.  Kennicott's  conclusion  (Dissertation,  233, 
234)  is  that  originally  the  word  was  "  the  Metzo- 


baites  "  (D^UVOH),  and  applied  to  the  three  names 
preceding  it. 

It  is  an  unusual  thing  in  the  A.  V.  to  find  X  (ts) 
rendered  by  s,  as  in  the  present  case.  Another 
instance  is  SIDON.  I G.] 


MESOrOTA'MIA 


Meiroiro- 


rctjufa:  Mesopotamia)  is  the  ordinary  Gieek  ren 
dering  of  the  Hebrew  Aram-Naharaim,  or  "  Syria 
of  the  two  rivers,"  whereof  we  have  frequent  men 
tion  in  the  earlier  books  of  Scripture  (Gen.  xxiv.  10  ; 
Deut.  xxiii.  4  ;  Judg.  iii.  8,  10).  It  is  also  adopted 
by  the  LXX.  to  represent  the  D"IN'J1|a  (Paddan- 
Aram)  of  the  Hebrew  text,  whei  e  our  translators 
keep  the  term  used  in  the  original  (Gen.  xxv.  20, 
xxviii.  2,  5,  &c.). 

If  we  look  to  the  signification  of  the  name,  we 
must  regard  Mesopotamia  as  the  entire  countiy 
between  the  two  rivers  —  the  Tigris  and  the  Eu 
phrates.  This  is  a  tract  nearly  TOO  miles  long, 
and  from  20  to  250  miles  broad,  extending  in  a 
south-easterly  direction  from  Telek  (lat.  38°  23', 
long.  39°  U'.')  to  Kurnah  (lat.  31°,  long.  47°  30'). 
The  Arabian  geographers  term  it  "  the  Island,"  a 
name  which  is  almost  literally  correct,  since  a  few 
miles  only  intervene  between  the  source  of  the 
Tigris  and  the  Euphrates  at  Telek.  It  is  for  the 
most  pail  a  vast  plain,  but  is  crossed  about  its 
centre  by  the  range  of  the  Sinjar  hills,  running 
nearly  east  and  west  from  about  Mosul  to  a  little 
below  Eakkeh  ;  and  in  its  northern  portion  it  is  even 
mountainous,  the  upper  Tigris  valley  being  sepa 
rated  from  the  Mesopotamian  plain  by  an  important 
range,  the  Mons  Masius  of  Strabo  (xi.  12,  §4;  14, 
§'2,  &c.),  which  runs  from  Birehjik  to  Jezir<  ' 
This  district  is  always  charming  ;  but  the  remainder 
of  the  region  varies  greatly  according  to  circum 
stances.  In  early  spring  a  tender  and  luxuriant 
herbage  covers  the  whole  plain,  while  flowers  of  the 
most  brilliant  hues  spring  up  in  rapid  succession, 
imparting  their  colour  to  the  landscape,  which 
changes  from  day  to  day.  As  the  summer  draws 
on,  the  verdure  recedes  towards  the  streams  and 
mountains.  Vast  tracts  of  arid  plain,  yellow, 
parched,  and  sapless,  fill  the  intermediate  space, 
which  ultimately  becomes  a  bare  and  uninhabitable 
desert.  In  the  Sinjar,  and  in  the  mountain-trad 
to  the  north,  springs  of  water  are  tolerably  abun 
dant,  and  com,  vines,  and  figs,  are  cultivated  by  a 
stationary  population  ;  but  the  greater  part  of  the 
region  is  only  suited  to  the  nomadic  hordes,  which 
in  spring  spread  themselves  far  and  wide  over  the 
vast  flats,  so  utilising  the  early  verdure,  and  in 
summer  and  autumn  gather  along  the  banks  of  the 
two  main  streams  and  their  affluents,  where  a  deli 
cious  shade  and  a  rich  pasture  may  be  found  during 
the  greatest  heats.  Such  is  the  present  charactei 
of  the  region.  It  is  thought,  however,  that  by  a 


iuperfluous  spring-rains  in  tanks,  by  digging  wells, 
and  establishing  kandts,  or  subterraneo'is  aqueducts, 
the  whole  territory  might  be  brought  tinder  culti 
vation,  and  rendered  capable  of  sustaining  a  perma 
nent  population.  That  some  such  system  was  esta- 
jlished  in  early  times  by  the  Assyrian  monarchs 
seems  to  be  certain,  from  the  fact  that  the  whole 
evel  country  on  both  sides  of  the  Sinjar  is  covered 
with  mounds  marking  the  sites  of  cities,  which 
wherever  opened  have  presented  appearances  similar 
to  those  found  on  the  site  of  Nineveh.  [ASSYRIA.] 
If  even  the  more  northern  portion  of  the  Mesopota 
mian  region  is  thus  capable  of  being  redeemed  from 
its  present  character  of  a  desert,  still  more  easily 
might  the  southern  division  be  reclaimed  and  con 
verted  into  a  garden.  Between  the  35th  and  34th 
parallels,  the  character  of  the  Mesopotamian  plain 
suddenly  alters.  Above,  it  is  a  plain  of  a  certain 
elevation  above  the  courses  of  the  Tigris  and  Eu 
phrates,  which  are  separated  from  it  by  low  lime 
stone  ranges  ;  below,  it  is  a  mere  alluvium,  almost 
level  with  the  rivers,  which  frequently  overflow 
large  portions  of  it.  Consequently,  from  the  point 
indicated,  canalisation  becomes  easy.  A  skilful  ma 
nagement  of  the  two  rivers  would  readily  convey 
abundance  of  the  life-giving  fluid  to  every  portion 
of  the  Mesopotamian  tract  below  the  34th  parallel. 
And  the  innumerable  lines  of  embankment,  marking 
the  course  of  ancient  canals,  sufficiently  indicate 
that  in  the  flourishing  period  of  Babylonia  a  net 
work  of  artificial  channels  covered  the  country. 
[BABYLONIA.] 

To  this  description  of  Mesopotamia  in  the  most 
extended  sense  of  the  term,  it  seems  proper  to  append 
a  more  particular  account  of  that  region,  which 
bears  the  name  par  excellence,  both  in  Scripture, 
and  in  the  classical  writers.  This  is  the  north 
western  portion  of  the  tract  already  described,  or 
the  country  between  the  great  bend  of  the  Euphrates 
(lat.  35°  to  37°  30')  and  the  upper  Tigris.  (See 
particularly  Ptolem.  Geograph.  v.  18  ;  and  compare 
Eratosth.  ap.  Strab.  ii.  1,  §  29 ;  Arr.  Exp.  Al. 
iii.  7 ;  Dexipp.  Fr.  1 ,  &c.)  It  consists  of  the 
mountain  country  extending  from  Birehjik  to  Je- 
zireh  upon  the  north  ;  and,  upon  tho  south,  of  the 
great  undulating  Mesopofcimian  plain,  as  far  as  the 
Sinjar  hills,  and  the  river  Khabour.  The  northern 
range,  called  by  the  Arabs  Karajah  Dagh  towaitls 
the  west  and  Jebel  Tur  towards  the  east,  does  not 
attain  to  any  great  elevation.  It  is  in  places  rocky 
and  precipitous,  but  has  abundant  springs  and 
streams  which  support  a  rich  vegetation.  Forests 
of  chestnuts  and  pistachio-trees  occasionally  clothe 
the  mountain  sides ;  and  about  the  towns  and  vil 
lages  are  luxuriant  orchards  and  gardens,  producing 
abundance  of  excellent  fruit.  The  vine  is  cultivated 
with  success ;  wheat  and  barley  yield  heavily  ;  and 
rice  is  grown  in  some  places.  The  streams  from 
the  north  side  of  this  range  are  short,  and  fall  mostly 
into  the  Tigris.  Those  from  the  south  are  more 
important.  They  flow  down  at  very  moderate  in 
tervals  along  the  whole  course  of  the  range,  and 
gradually  collect  into  two  considerable  rivers — the 
Belik  (ancient  Bilichus),  and  the  Khabour  (Haboi 
or  Chaboras) — which  empty  themselves  into  the 
Euphrates.  [HABOR.]  South  of  the  mountains  is 
the  great  plain  already  described,  which  between 
the  Khabour  and  the  Tigris  is  inteirupted  only  by 
the  Sinjar  range,  but  west  of  the  Khabour  is  ln-okon 
by  several  spurs  from  the  Karajolt  Dagh,  1m  injr  n 


MESOPOTAMIA 

jjeneral  direction  from  north  to  south.  In  this 
district  are  the  two  towns  of  Orfa  and  Harran,  the 
former  of  which  is  thought  by  many  to  be  the 
native  city  of  Abraham,  while  the  latter  is  on  good 
grounds  identified  with  Haran,  his  resting-place 
between  Chaldaea  and  Palestine.  [HARAN.]  Here 
we  must  fix  the  Padan-Aram  of  Scripture — the 
"  plain  Syria,"  or  "  district  str  itching  away  from 
the  foot  of  the  hills"  (Stanley's  Sin.  |  Pal.  p.  129 
note),  without,  however,  determining  the  extent 
of  country  thus  designated.  Besides  Orfa  and 
Harran,  the  chief  cities  of  modem  Mesopotamia 
are  Mardin  and  Nisibin,  south  of  the  Jebel  Tur, 
and  Diarbekr,  north  of  that  range,  upon  the  Tigris. 
Of  these  places  two,  Nisibin  and  Diarbekr,  were 
important  from  a  remote  antiquity,  Nisibin  being 
then  Nisibis,  and  Diarbekr  Amida. 

We  first  hear  of  Mesopotamia  in  Scripture  as  the 
country  where  Nahor  and  his  family  settled  after 
quitting  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (Gen.  xxiv.  10).  Here 
lived  Bethuel  and  Laban ;  and  hither  Abraham 
sent  his  servant,  to  fetch  Isaac  a  wife  "  of  his  own 
kindred"  (ib.  ver.  38).  Hither  too,  a  century 
later,  came  Jacob  on  the  same  errand  ;  and  hence 
he  returned  with  his  two  wives  after  an  absence 
of  21  years.  After  this  we  have  no  mention  of 
Mesopotamia,  till,  at  the  close  of  the  wanderings  in 
the  wilderness,  Balak  the  king  of  Moab  sends  for 
Balaam  "to  Pethor  of  Mesopotamia"  (Deut.  xxiii. 
4),  which  was  situated  among  "  the  mountains  of 
the  east"  (Num.  xxiii.  7),  by  a  river  (ib.  xxii.  5), 
probably  the  Euphrates.  About  half  a  century 
later,  we  find,  for  the  first  and  last  time,  Mesopo 
tamia  the  seat  of  a  powerful  monarchy.  Chushan- 
Kishathaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia,  establishes  his 
dominion  over  Israel  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Joshua  (Judg.  iii.  8),  and  maintains  his  authority 
for  the  space  of  eight  years,  when  his  yoke  is  broken 
by  Othniel,  Caleb's  nephew  (ib.  vers.  9,  10). 
Finally,  the  children  of  Ammon,  having  provoked  a 
war  with  David,  "  sent  a  thousand  talents  of  silver 
to  hire  them  chariots  and  hoi-semen  out  of  Mesopo 
tamia,  and  out  of  Syria  Maachah,  and  out  of  Zobah  " 
(1  Chr.  six.  6).  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  Meso- 
potamians  were  persuaded  to  lend  their  aid  at  once. 
At  any  rate,  after  the  first  great  victory  of  Joab 
over  Ammon  and  the  Syrians  who  took  their  part, 
these  last  "  drew  forth  the  Syrians  that  were  be 
yond  the  river"  (ib.  ver.  16),  who  participated  in 
the  final  defeat  of  their  fellow-countrymen  at  the 
hands  of  David.  The  name  of  Mesopotamia  then 
passes  out  of  Scripture,  the  country  to  which  it 
had  applied  becoming  a  part,  first  of  Assyria,  and 
afterwards  of  the  Babylonian  empire. 

According  to  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  Mesopo 
tamia  was  inhabited  in  the  early  times  of  the  empire 
(B.C.  1200-1100)  by  avast  number  of  petty  tribes, 
each  under  its  own  prince,  and  all  quite  independent 
of  one  another.  The  Assyrian  monarchs  contended 
with  these  chiefs  at  great  advantage,  and  by  the 
time  of  Jehu  (B.C.  880)  had  fully  established  their 
dominion  over  them.  The  tribes  were  all  called 
"  tribes  of  the  Nairi,"  a  term  which  some  compare 
with  the  Naharaim  of  the  Jews,  and  translate 
"  tribes  of  the  stream-lands"  But  this  identifica 
tion  is  very  uncertain.  It  appears,  however,  in 
close  accordance  with  Scripture,  first,  that  Mesopo 
tamia  was  independent  of  Assyria  till  after  the  time 
of  David ;  secondly,  that  the  Mesopotamians  were 
warlike  and  used  chariots  in  battle  ;  and  thirdly, 
that  not  long  after  the  time  of  David  they  lost  their 
independence,  their  coimtn  being  absorlx*!  by  As- 


MESSIAH 


33& 


syria,  of  which  it  was  thenceforth  c;  inmoniy  reck 
oned  a  part. 

On  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  Meso 
potamia  seems  to  have  been  divided  between  the 
Medes  and  the  Babylonians.  The  conquests  of 
Cyrus  brought  it  wholly  under  the  Persian  yoke ; 
and  thus  it  continued  to  the  time  of  Alexander, 
being  comprised  (probably)  in  the  ninth,  or  Assyrian 
satrapy.  At  Alexander's  death,  it  fell  to  Seleucus, 
and  formed  a  part  of  the  great  Syrian  kingdom  till 
wrested  from  Antiochus  V.  by  the  Parthians,  about 
B.C.  160.  Trajan  conquered  it  from  Parthia  in 
A..r>.  115,  and  formed  it  into  a  Roman  province' 
but  in  A.D.  117  Adrian  relinquished  it  of  his  own 
accord.  It  was  afterwards  more  than  once  recon 
quered  by  Rome,  but  never  continued  long  under  her 
sceptre,  and  finally  reverted  to  the  Persians  in  the 
reign  of  Jovian,  A.D.  363. 

(See  Quint.  Curt.  v.  1 ;  Dio  Cass.  Ixviii.  22-26 ; 
Amm.  Marc.  xv.  8 ,  &c. ;  and  for  the  description  of  the 
district,  compare  C.  Niebuhr's  Voyage  en  Arable, 
&c.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  300-334;  Pocoeke's  Description 
of  the  East,  vol.  ii.  part  i.  ch.  17  ;  and  Layard's 
Nineveh  and  Babylon,  chs.  xi.-xv.).  [G.  R.] 

MESSI'AH.     This  word  (PP^D,  Masiach), 

which  answers  to  the  word  Xpurrds  in  the  N.  T., 
means  anointed ;  and  is  applicable  in  its  first  sense 
to  any  one  anointed  with  the  holy  oil.  It  is  applied 
to  the  high  priest  in  Lev.  iv.  3,  5,  16 ;  and  possibly 
to  the  shield  of  Saul  in  a  figurative  sense  in  2  Sam. 
i.  21.  The  kings  of  Israel  were  called  anointed, 
from  the  mode  of  their  consecration  (1  Sam.  ii. 
10,  35,  xii.  3,  5,  xvi.  6,  xxiv.  6,  10,  xxvi.  9,  11, 
23 ;  2  Sam.  i.  14,  16,  xix.  21,  xxiii.  1). 

This  word  also  refers  to  the  expected  Prince  of 
the  chosen  people  who  was  to  complete  God's  pur 
poses  for  them,  and  to  redeem  them,  and  of  whose 
coming  the  prophets  of  the  old  covenant«in  all  time 
spoke.  It  is  twice  used  in  the  N.  T.  of  Jesus  (Johu 
i.  41,  iv.  25,  A.  V.  "Messias")  ;  but  the  Greek 
equivalent,  the  Christ,  is  constantly  applied,  at  first 
with  the  article  as  a  title,  exactly  the  Anointed 
One,  but  later  without  the  article,  as  a  proper 
name,  Jesus  Christ. 

Three  points  belong  to  this  subject:  1.  The  ex 
pectation  of  a  Messiah  among  the  Jews;  2.  The 
expectation  of  a  suffering  Messiah ;  3.  The  nature 
and  power  of  the  expected  Messiah.  Of  these  the 
second  will  be  discussed  under  SAVIOUR,  and  the 
third  under  SON  OF  GOD.  The  present  article  will 
contain  a  rapid  survey  of  the  first  point  only.  The 
interpretation  of  particular  passages  must  be  left  in 
a  great  measure  to  professed  commentators. 

The  earliest  gleam  of  the  Gospel  is  found  in  the 
account  of  the  fall,  where  it  is  said  to  the  serpent 
"  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman, 
and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed ;  it  shall  bruise 
thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel"  (Gen. 
iii.  15).  The  tempter  came  to  the  woman  in  tho 
guise  of  a  serpent,  and  the  curse  thus  pronounced 
has  a  reference  both  to  the  serpent  which  was  tho 
instrument,  and  to  the  tempter  that  employed  it ; 
to  the  natural  terror  and  enmity  of  man  against  the 
serpent,  and  to  the  conflict  between  mankind  re 
deemed  by  Christ  its  Head,  and  Satan  that  deceived 
mankind.  Many  interpreters  would  understand  by 
the  seed  of  the  woman,  the  Messiah  only ;  but  it  is 
easier  to  think  with  Calvin  that  mankind,  after 
they  are  gathered  into  one  army  by  Jesus  thf 
Christ,  the  Head  of  the  Church,  are  to  achieve  a 
victory  over  evil.  The  Messianic  character  of  this 

Z  2 


340 


MESSIAH 


prophecy  has  been  much  questioned  by  those  who 
see  in  the  history  of  the  fall  nothing  but  a  fable : 
to  those  who  accept  it  as  true,  this  passage  is  the 
primitive  germ  of  the  Gospel,  the  protevangelium. 

The  blessings  in  store  for  the  children  of  Shem 
are  remarkably  indicated  in  the  words  of  Noah, 
'« Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem,"  or  (lit.) 
"  Blessed  be  Jehovah  the  God  of  Shem  "  (Gen.  ix. 
26),  where  instead  of  blessing  Shem,  as  he  had 
cursed  Canaan,  he  carries  up  the  blessing  to  the 
great  fountain  of  the  blessings  that  sh;ill  follow 
Shem.  Next  follows  the  promise  to  Abraham, 
wherein  the  blessings  to  Shem  are  turned  into  the 
narrower  channel  of  one  family — "  I  will  make  of 
the.,'  a  great  nation,  and  I  will  bless  thee,  and  make 
thy  name  great ;  and  tliou  shalt  be  a  blessing ;  and 
I  will  bless  them  that  bless  thee  and  curse  him  that 
curseth  thee ;  and  in  thee  shall  all  fairies  of  the 
earth  be  blessed  "  (Gen.  xii.  2,  3).  The  promise  is 
still  indefinite  ;  but  it  tends  to  the  undoing  of 
the  curse  of  Adam,  by  a  blessing  to  all  the  earth 
through  the  seed  of  Abraham,  as  death  had  come 
on  the  whole  earth  through  Adam.  When  our 
Lord  says  "  Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see 
my  day,  and  he  saw  it  and  was  glad  "  (John  viii. 
56),  we  are  to  understand  that  this  promise  of  a 
real  blessing  and  restoration  to  come  hereafter  was 
understood  in  a  spiritual  sense,  as  a  leading  back  to 
God,  as  a  coming  nearer  to  Him,  from  whom  the 
promise  came ;  and  he  desired  with  hope  and  re 
joicing  (gestivit  cum  desiderio,  Bengel)  to  behold 
the  day  of  it. 

A  great  step  is  made  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  "  The 
sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  law 
giver  from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come ;  and 
unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of  the  people  be." 
The  derivation  of  the  word  Shiloh  (nVCJ')  is  pro 
bably  from  the  root  I'PB' ;  and  if  so,  it  means  rest, 
or,  as  Hengstenberg  argues,  it  is  for  Shifon,  and  is  a 
proper  name,  the  man  of  peace  or  rest,  the  peace 
maker.  For  other  derivations  and  interpretations 
see  Gesenius  (Thesaurus,  sub  voc.)  and  Hengsten 
berg  (Christologie,  vol.  i.\  Whilst  man  of  peace 
is  far  the  most  probable  meaning  of  the  name, 
those  old  versions  which  render  it  "  He  to  whom 
the  sceptre  belongs,"  see  the  Messianic  application 
equally  with  ourselves.  This  then  is  the  first 
case  in  which  the  promises  distinctly  centre  in  one 
person  ;  and  He  is  to  be  a  man  of  peace ;  He  is  to 
wield  and  retain  the  government,  and  the  notions 
shnll  look  up  to  Him  and  obey  Him. 

The  next  passage  usually  quoted  is  the  prophecy 
of  Balaam  (Num.  xxiv.  17-19).  The  star  points 
indeed  to  the  glory,  as  the  sceptre  denotes  the  power, 
of  a  king.  And  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  (Pseudo)  see 
here  the  Messiah.  But  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
prophecy  is  not  fulfilled  in  David  (2  Sam.  viii.  2, 14); 
and  though  David  is  himself  a  type  of  Christ,  the 
direct  Messianic  application  of  this  place  is  by  no 
means  certain. 

The  prophecy  of  Moses  (Deut.  xviii.  18)  "  I  will 
raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  brethren, 
like  unto  thee,  and  will  put  my  words  in  his 
mouth ;  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I 
shall,  command  him,"  claims  attention.  Does  this 
refer  <o  th?  Messiah  ?  The  reference  to  Moses  in 
John  v.  45-47 — "  He  wrote  of  me,"  seems  to 
point  to  this  passage ;  for  it  is  a  cold  and  forced 
interpretation  to  refer  it  to  the  whole  types  and 
symbols  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  On  the  other  hand, 
many  critics  would  fain  find  liorc  the  divine  insti- 


MESSIAH 

tution  of  the  whole  prophetic  ordei.  which  if  not 
here,  does  not  occur  at  all.  Hengst«nberg  thinks 
that  it  does  promise  that  an  order  of  prophets 
should  be  sent,  but  that  the  singular  is  used  in 
div°et  reference  to  the  greatest  of  the  prophets. 
Christ  himself,  without  whom  the  words  would  not 
have  been  fulfilled.  "  The  Spirit  of  Christ  spoke  in 
the  prophets,  and  Christ  is  in  a  sense  the  only 
prophet."  (1  Pet.  i.  11.)  Jews  in  earlier  times 
might  have  been  excused  for  referring  the  words  to 
this  or  that  present  prophet ;  but  the  Jews  whom 
the  Lord  rebukes  (John  v.)  were  inexcusable ;  for, 
having  the  words  before  them,  and  the  works  of 
Christ  as  well,  they  should  have  known  that  no 
prophet  had  so  fulfilled  the  words  as  He  had. 

The  passages  in  the  Pentateuch  which  relate  to 
"  the  Angel  of  the  Lord  "  have  been  thought  bj 
many  to  bear  reference  to  the  Messiah. 

The  second  period  of  Messianic  prophecy  would  in 
clude  the  time  of  David.  In  the  promises  of  a  king 
dom  to  David  and  his  house  "  for  ever  "  (2  Sam.  vii. 
1 3),  there  is  more  than  could  be  fulfilled  save  by  the 
eternal  kingdom  in  which  that  of  David  merged ; 
and  David's  last  words  dwell  on  this  promise  of  an 
everlasting  throne  (2  Sam.  xxiii.).  Passages  in 
the  Psalms  are  numerous  which  are  applied  to  the 
Messiah  in  the  N.  T. :  such  are  Ps.  ii.,  xvi.,  xxii., 
xl.,  ex.  Other  Psalms  quoted  in  the  N.  T.  appear  to 
refer  to  the  actual  history  of  another  king ;  but 
only  those  who  deny  the  existence  of  types  and  pro 
phecy  will  consider  this  as  an  evidence  against  an 
ulterior  allusion  to  Messiah :  such  Psalms  are  xlv., 
Ixviii.,  Ixix.,  Ixxii.  The  advance  in  clearness  in 
this  period  is  great.  The  name  of  Anointed,  i.  e. 
King,  comes  in,  and  the  Messiah  is  to  come  of  the 
lineage  of  David.  He  is  described  in  His  exaltation, 
with  His  great  kingdom  that  shall  be  spiritual 
rather  than  temporal,  Ps.  ii.,  xxi.,  xl.,  ex.  In  other 
places  He  is  seen  in  suffering  and  humiliation, 
Ps.  xxii.,  xvi.,  xl. 

After  the  time  of  David  the  predictions  of  the 
Messiah  ceased  for  a  time ;  until  those  prophets 
arose  whose  works  we  possess  in  the  canon  of 
Scripture.  They  nowhere  give  us  an  exact  and 
complete  account  of  the  nature  of  Messiah;  but 
different  aspects  of  the  truth  are  produced  by  the 
various  needs  of  the  people,  and  so  they  are  led  to 
speak  of  Him  now  as  a  Conqueror  or  a  Judge,  or  a 
Redeemer  from  sin ;  it  is  from  the  study  of  the 
whole  of  them  that  we  gain  a  clear  and  complete 
image  of  His  Person  and  kingdom.  This  third 
period  lasts  from  the  reign  of  Uzziali  to  the  Baby 
lonish  captivity.  The  Messiah  is  a  king  and  Ruler  of 
David's  house,  who  should  come  to  reform  and 
restore  the  Jewish  nation  and  purify  the  church,  as 
in  Is.  xi.,  xl.-lxvi.  The  blessings  of  the  restora 
tion,  however,  will  not  be  confined  to  Jews ;  the 
heathen  are  made  to  share  them  fully  (Is.  ii.  Ixvi.). 
Whatever  theories  have  been  attempted  about  Isaiah 
liii.,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  most  natural 
is  the  received  interpretation  that  it  refers  to  the 
suffering  Redeemer ;  and  so  in  the  N.  T.  it  is 
always  considered  to  do.  The  passage  of  Micah  v. 
2  (corap.  Matt.  ii.  6)  left  no  doubt  in  the  mind  ot 
the  Sanhedrim  as  to  the  birthplace  of  the  Messiah. 
The  lineage  of  David  is  again  alluded  to  in  Zecha- 
riah  xii.  10-14.  The  time  of  the  second  Temple  is 
fixed  by  Haggai  ii.  9  for  Messiah's  coming;  and  the 
coming  of  the  Forerunner  and  of  the  Anointed  are 
clearly  revealed  in  Mai.  iii.  1,  iv.  5,  6. 

The  fourth  period  after  the  close  of  the  canon  of 
-he  0.  T.  is  known  to  us  in  a  great  measure  from 


MESSIAH 

illusions  in  the  N.  T.  to  the  expectation  of  the  Jews. 
From  "n^h  passages  as  Ps.  ii.  2,  6,  8 ;  Jer.  xxiii.  5, 
8  ;  Zech.  ix.  9,  thi  Pharisees  and  those  of  the  Jews 
who  expected  Messiah  at  all,  looked  for  a  temporal 
prince  only.  The  Apostles  themselves  were  in 
fected  with  this  opinion,  till  after  the  Resurrection, 
Matt.  xx.  20,  21 ;  Luke  xxiv.  21 ;  Acts  i.  6. 
Gleams  of  a  purer  faith  appear,  Luke  ii.  30,  xxiii. 
42  ;  John  iv.  25.  On  the  other  hand  there  was  a 
sceptical  school  which  had  discarded  the  expectation 
altogether.  'No  mention  of  Messiah  appears  in  the 
Book  of  Wisdom,  nor  in  the  writings  of  Philo  ;  and 
Josephus  avoids  the  doctrine.  Intercourse  with 
heathens  had  made  some  Jews  ashamed  of  their 
fathers'  faith. 

The  expectation  of  a  golden  age  that  should  re 
turn  upon  the  earth,  was  common  in  heathen 
nations  (Hesiod,  Works  and  Days,  109 ;  Ovid, 
Met.  i.  89  ;  Virg.  Eel.  iv. ;  and  passages  in  Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  i.  7,  xii.  13).  This  hope  the  Jews  also 
shared ;  but  with  them  it  was  associated  with  the 
coming  of  a  particular  Person,  the  Messiah.  It  has 
been  asserted  that  in  Him  the  Jews  looked  for  an 
earthly  king,  and  that  the  existence  of  the  hope  of 
a  Messiah  may  thus  be  accounted  for  on  natural 
grounds  and  without  a  divine  revelation.  But  the 
prophecies  refute  this :  they  hold  out  not  a  Prophet 
only,  but  a  King  and  a  Priest,  whose  business  it 
should  be  to  set  the  people  free  from  sin,  and  to 
teach  them  the  ways  of  God,  as  in  Ps.  xxii.,  xl., 
ex.;  Is.  ii.,  xi.,  liii.  In  these  and  other  places  too 
the  power  of  the  coming  One  reaches  beyond  the 
Jews  and  embraces  all  the  Gentiles,  which  is  con 
trary  to  the  exclusive  notions  of  Judaism.  A  fair 
consideration  of  all  the  passages  will  convince  that 
the  growth  of  the  Messianic  idea  in  the  prophecies  is 
owing  to  revelation  from  God.  The  witness  of  the 
N.  T.  to  the  0.  T.  prophecies  can  bear  no  other  mean 
ing  ;  it  is  summed  up  in  the  words  of  Peter — "  We 
have  also  a  more  sure  word  of  prophecy ;  whereunto 
ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a  light  that 
shineth  in  a  dark  place,  until  the  day  dawn,  and  the 
day  star  arise  in  your  hearts :  knowing  this  first, 
that  no  prophecy  of  the  Scripture  is  of  any  private 
interpretation.  For  the  prophecy  came  not  in  old 
time  by  the  will  of  man :  but  holy  men  of  God 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost" 
(2  Pet.  i.  19-21  ;  compare  the  elaborate  essay  on 
this  text  in  Knapp's  Opuscula,  vol.  i.).  Our  Lord 
affiims  that  there  are  prophecies  of  the  Messiah 
in  0.  T.,  and  that  they  are  fulfilled  in  Him, 
Matt.  xxvi.  54;  Mark  ix.  12;  Luke  xviii.  31-33, 
xxii.  37,  xxiv.  27  ;  John  v.  39,  46.  The  Apostles 
preach  the  same  truth,  Acts  ii.  16,  25,  viii.  28-35, 
x.  43,  xiii.  23,  32,  xxvj.  22,  23;  1  Pet.  i.  11  ; 
and  in  many  passages  of  St.  Paul.  Even  if  in 
ternal  evidence  did  not  prove  that  the  prophecies 
were  much  more  than  vague  longings  after  better 
times,  the  N.  T.  proclaims  everywhere  that  although 
the  Gospel  was  the  sun,  and  0.  T.  prophecy  the 
dim  light  of  a  candle,  yet  both  were  light,  and  both 
assisted  those  who  heeded  them,  to  see  aright ;  and 
that  the  prophets  interpreted,  not  the  private  long 
ings  of  their  own  hearts  but  the  will  of  God,  in 
speaking  as  they  did  (see  Knapp's  Essay  for  this  ex 
planation)  of  the  coming  kingdom. 

Our  own  theology  is  rich  in  prophetic  literature ; 
l>ut  the  most  complete  view  of  this  whole  subject 
ii  found  in  Hengstenberg's  Christologie,  the  second 
edition  of  which,  greatly  altered,  is  translated  in 
Clark's  Foreign  Theological  Library.  [See  as  alieady 
rae.-it  jiicd,  SAVIOUR  ;  SON  OF  GOD.] 


METALS 


341 


MKSSI'AS  (Mto-ffias :  Messias],  the  Greek 
form  of  Messiah  (John  i.  41 ;  iv.  25). 

METALS.  The  Hebrews,  in  commoi  with 
other  ancient  nations,  were  acquainted  with  nearly 
all  the  metals  known  to  modern  metallurgy,  whe 
ther  as  the  products  of  their  own  soil  or  the  results 
of  intercourse  with  foreigners.  One  of  the  earliest 
geographical  definitions  is  that  which  describes  the 
country  of  Havilah  as  the  land  which  abounded  in 
gold,  and  the  gold  of  which  was  good  (Gen.  ii.  11, 
12).  The  first  artist  in  metals  was  a  Caiuite. 
Tubal  Cain,  the  son  of  Lamech,  the  forger  or 
sharpener  of  every  instrument  of  copper  (A.  V. 
"brass")  and  iron  (Gen.  iv.  22).  "  Abram  was 
very  rich  in  cattle,  in  silver,  and  in  gold"  (Gen. 
xiii.  2)  ;  silver,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  being 
the  medium  of  commerce,  while  gold  existed  in  the 
shape  of  ornaments,  during  the  patriarchal  ages. 
Tin  is  first  mentioned  among  the  spoils  of  the 
Midianites  which  were  taken  when  Balaam  was 
slain  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  and  lead  is  used  to  heighten 
the  imngery  of  Moses'  triumphal  song  (Ex.  xv.  10). 
Whether  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted  with 
steel,  properly  so  called,  is  uncertain  ;  the  words  so 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  (2  Sam.  xxii.  35  ;  Job  xx.  24  ; 
Ps.  xviii.  34;  Jer.  xv.  12)  are  in  all  other  passages 
translated  brass,  and  would  be  move  correctly 
copper.  The  "northern  iron"  of  Jer.  xv.  12  is 
believed  by  commentators  to  be  iron  hardened  and 
tempered  by  some  peculiar  process,  so  as  more 
nearly  to  correspond  to  what  we  call  steel  [STEEL]  ; 
and  the  "  flaming  torches"  of  Nah.  ii.  3  are  pro 
bably  the  flashing  steel  scythes  of  the  war-chariots 
which  should  come  against  Nineveh.  Besides  the 
simple  metals,  it  is  supposed  that  the  Hebrews  used 
the  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  known  as  bronze,  and 
probably  in  all  cases  in  which  copper  is  mentioned 
as  in  any  way  manufactured,  bronze  is  to  be  under 
stood  as  the  metal  indicated.  But  with  regard  to 
the  chashmal  (A.  V.  "amber")  of  Ez.  i.  4,  27, 
viii.  2,  rendered  by  the  LXX.  ij\fKTpot>,  and  the 
Vulg.  electrum,  by  which  our  translators  were 
misled,  there  is  considerable  difficulty.  Whatevu- 
be  the  meaning  of  chaskmal,  for  which  no  satis 
factory  etymology  has  been  proposed,  there  am  be 
but  little  doubt  that  by  fj\fKTpov  the  LXX.  trans 
lators  intended,  not  the  fossil  resin  known  by 
that  name  to  the  Greeks  and  to  us  as  "  amber," 
but  the  metal  so  called,  which  consisted  of  a  mix 
ture  of  four  parts  of  gold  with  one  of  silver,  de 
scribed  by  Pliny  (xxxiii.  23)  as  more  brilliant  than 
silver  by  lamp-light.  There  is  the  same  difficulty 
attending  the  -xa\KO^fiavov  (Rev-  i-  15,  »•  18. 
A.  V.  "  fine  brass "),  which  has  hitherto  success 
fully  resisted  all  the  efforts  of  commentators,  but 
which  is  explained  by  Suidas  as  a  kind  of  electron. 
more  precious  than  gold.  That  it  was  a  mixed 
metal  of  great  brilliancy  is  extremely  probable,  but 
it  has  hitherto  been  impossible  to  identify  it.  In 
addition  to  the  metals  actually  mentioned  in  the 
Bible,  it  has  been  supposed  that  mercury  is  alluded 
to  in  Num.  xxxi.  23,  as  "  the  water  of  separation,'' 
being  "  looked  upon  as  the  mother  by  which  all 
the  metals  were  fructified,  purified,  and  brought 
forth,"  and  on  this  account  kept  secret,  and  only 
mysteriously  hinted  at  (Napier,  Metal,  of  the  Bible, 
Intr.  p.  6).  Mr.  Napier  adds,  "  there  is  not  tht 
slightest  foundation  for  this  supposition." 

With  the  exception  of  iron,  gold  is  the  mosl 
widely  diffused  of  all  metals.  Almost  every  country 
in  the  world  has  in  its  turn  yielded  a  «rtain  supply, 
and  as  it  is  found  most  frequently  in  alluvial  soil 


342 


METALS 


nmong  the  debris  of  rocks  washed  down  by  thj  tor 
rents,  it  vas  ki.own  at  a  very  early  period,  aud  was 
procured  with  little  difficulty.  The  existence  of 
gold  and  the  prevalence  of  gold  ornaments  in  early 
times  are  no  proof  of  a  high  state  of  civilization, 
but  rather  the  reverse.  Gold  was  undoubtedly 
usad  before  the  art  of  working  copper  or  iron  was 
discovered.  We  have  no  indications  of  gold  streams 
or  mines  in  Palestine.  The  Hebrews  obtained  their 
principal  supply  from  the  south  of  Arabia,  ai.  \  the 
commerce  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  The  ships  of  Hiram 
king  of  Tyre  brought  it  for  Solomon  (1  K.  ix. 
11,  x.  11),  and  at  a  later  period,  when  the  Hebrew 
monarch  had  equipped  a  fleet  and  manned  it  with 
Tyrian  sailors,  the  chief  of  their  freight  was  the 
gold  of  Ophir  (1  K.  ix.  27,  28).  It  was  brought 
thence  in  the  ships  of  Tarshish  (1  K.  xxii.  48),  the 
Indiamen  of  the  ancient  world ;  and  Parvaim  (2 
Chr.  iii.  6),  Raamah  (Ez.  xxvii.  22),  Sheba  (1  K.  x. 
2,  10 ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  15 ;  Is.  Ix.  6 ;  Ez.  xxvii.  22X  and 
Uphaz  (Jer.  x.  9),  were  other  sources  of  gold  for 
the  markets  of  Palestine  and  Tyre.  It  was  pro 
bably  brought  in  the  form  of  ingots  (Josh.  vii.  21 ; 
A.  V.  "  wedge,"  lit.  "  tongue"),  and  was  rapidly 
converted  into  articles  of  ornament  and  use.  Ear 
rings,  or  rather  nose-rings,  were  made  of  it,  those 
given  to  Rebecca  were  half  a  shekel  (J  oz.)  in 
weight  (Gen.  xxiv.  22),  bracelets  (Gen.  xxiv.  22), 
chains  (Gen.  xli.  42),  signets  (Ex.  xxxv.  22\  bullae 
or  spherical  ornaments  suspended  from  the  neck 
(Ex.  xxxv.  22),  and  chains  for  the  legs  (Num.  xxxi. 
50 ;  comp.  Is.  iii.  18  ;  Plin.  xxxiii.  12).  It  was 
used  in  embroidery  (Ex.  xxxix.  3;  2  Sam  i.  24; 
Plin,  viii.  74)  ;  the  decorations  and  furniture  of  the 
tabernacle  were  enriched  with  the  gold  of  the  orna 
ments  which  the  Hebrews  willingly  offered  (Ex. 
xxxv.-xl.);  the  same  precious  metal  was  lavished 
upon  the  Temple  (1  K.  vi.,  vii) ;  Solomon's  throne 
was  overlaid  with  gold  (1  K.  x.  18),  his  drinking- 
cups  and  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  the  forest  of 
Lebanon  were  of  pure  gold  (1  K.  x.  21\  and  the 
neighbouring  princes  brought  him  as  presents  ves 
sels  of  gold  and  of  silver  (1  K.  x.  25).  So  plentiful 
indeed  was  the  supply  of  the  precious  metals  during 
his  reign  that  silver  was  esteemed  of  little  worth 
(1  K.  x.  21,  27).  Gold  and  silver  were  devoted  to 
the  fashioning  of  idolatrous  images  (Ex.  xx.  23, 
xxxii.  4;  Deut.  xxix.  17;  1  K.  xii.  28).  The  crown 
on  the  head  of  Malcham  (A.  V.  "  their  king  "),  the 
idol  of  the  Ammonites  at  Rabbah,  weighed  a  talent 
of  gold,  that  is  125  Ibs.  troy,  a  weight  so  great  that 
it  could  not  have  been  worn  by  David  among  the 
ordinary  insignia  of  royalty  (2  Sam.  xii.  30).  The 
great  abundance  of  gold  in  early  times  is  indicated  by 
its  entering  into  the  composition  of  every  article  of 
ornament  and  almost  all  of  domestic  use.  Among 
the  spoils  of  the  Midianites  taken  by  the  Israelites,  in 
their  bloodless  victory  when  Balaam  was  slain,  were 
car-rings  and  jewels  to  the  amount  of  16,750  shekels 
of  gold  (Num.  xxxi.  48-54),  equal  in  value  to  more 
than  3C,000/.  of  our  present  money.  1700  shekels 
cf  gold  (worth  more  than  3000/.)  in  nose  jewels 
(A.  V.  "ear-rings")  alone  were  taken  by  Gideon's 
army  from  the  slaughtered  Widianitcs  (Judg.  viii. 
26).  These  numbers,  though  large,  are  not  incre 
dibly  great,  when  we  consider  that  the  country  of 
the  Midianites  was  At  that  time  rich  in  gold  streams 
which  have  been  since  exhausted,  and  that  like  the 


•  As  an  illustration  of  the  enormous  wealth  which  it 
was  possible  for  one  man  to  collect,  we  may  quote  from 
Herodotus  (vii.  28)  the  instance  of  Pythius  thr  l.ydian. 
who  placed  at  the  disposal  of  X cries,  on  his  way  tuiin  •  >  • , 


METALS 

Malays  of  the  present  day,  and  the  Peruvians  of  the 
time  of  Pizarro,  they  carried  most  of  their  wealth 
about  them.  But  the  amount  of  treasure  accumu 
lated  by  David  from  spoils  taken  in  war,  is  so  enor 
mous,  that  we  are  tempted  to  conclude  the  numbers 
exaggerated.  From  the  gold  shields  of  Hadadezer's 
army  of  Syrians  and  other  sources  he  had  collected, 
according  to  the  chronicler  (1  Chr.  xxii.  14),  100,000 
talents  of  gold,  and  1,000,000  talents  of  siher;  to 
these  must  be  added  his  own  contribution  of  3000 
talents  of  gold  and  7000  of  silver  (1  Chr.  xxix. 
2-4),  and  the  additional  offerings  of  the  people, 
the  total  value  of  which,  estimating  the  weight  af 
a  talent  to  be  125  Ibs.  Troy,  gold  at  73s.  per  oz., 
and  silver  at  4s.  4^d.  per  oz.,  is  reckoned  by  Mr. 
Napier  to  be  939,929,687/.  Some  idea  of  the  large 
ness  of  this  sum  may  be  formed  by  considering  that 
in  1855  the  total  amount  of  gold  in  use  in  the 
world  was  calculated  to  be  about  820,000,000/. 
Undoubtedly  the  quantity  of  the  precious  metals 
possessed  by  the  Israelites  might  be  greater  in  con 
sequence  of  their  commercial  intercourse  with  the 
Phoenicians  who  were  masters  of  the  sea ;  but  in 
the  time  of  David  they  were  a  nation  struggling 
for  political  existence,  surrounded  by  powerful  ene 
mies,  and  without  the  leisure  necessaiy  for  deve 
loping  their  commercial  capabilities.  The  numbers 
given  by  Joscphus  (Ant.  vii.  14,  §2)  are  only  one- 
tenth  of  those  in  the  text,  but  the  sum,  even  when 
thus  reduced,  is  still  enormous.*  But  though  gold 
was  thus  common,  silver  appears  to  have  been  the 
ordinary  medium  of  commerce.  The  first  com 
mercial  transaction  of  which  we  possess  the  details 
was  the  purchase  of  Ephron's  field  by  Abraham  for 
400  shekels  of  silver  (Gen.  xxiii.  16) ;  slaves  were 
bought  with  silver  (Gen.  xvii.  12) ;  silver  was  the 
money  paid  by  Abimelech  as  a  compensation  to 
Abraham  (Gen.  xx.  16) ;  Joseph  was  sold  to  the 
Ishmaelite  merchants  for  twenty  pieces  of  siher  (Gen. 
xxxvii.  28)  ;  and  generally  in  the  Old  Testament, 
"  money  "  in  the  A.  V.  is  literally  siloer.  The  first 
payment  in  gold  is  mentioned  in  1  Chr.  xxi.  25, 
where  David  buys  the*  threshing-floor  of  Oman,  or 
Araunah,  the  Jebusite,  for  six  hundred  shekels  of 
gold  by  weight."*  But  in  the  parallel  narrative 
of  the  transaction  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24,  the  price  paid 
for  the  threshing-floor  and  the  oxen  is  fifty  shekels  of 
silver.  An  attempt  has  been  made  by  Keil  to  re 
concile  these  two  passages,  by  supposing  that  in 
the  former  the  purchase  referred  to  was  that  of  the 
entire  hill  on  which  the  "threshing-floor  stood,  and 
in  the  latter  that  of  the  threshing-floor  itself.  But 
the  close  resemblance  between  the  two  narratives 
renders  it  difficult  to  accept  this  explanation,  and  tc 
imagine  that  two  different  circumstances  are  de 
scribed.  That  there  is  a  discrepancy  between  the 
numbers  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  9  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  5  is  ad 
mitted,  and  it  seems  impossible  to  avoid  the  con 
clusion  that  the  present  case  is  but  another  instance 
of  the  same  kind.  With  this  one  exception  there 
is  no  case  in  the  0.  T.  in  which  gold  is  alluded  to 
as  a  medium  of  commerce ;  the  Hebrew  coinage  may 
have  been  partly  gold,  but  we  have  no  proof  of  it. 

Silver  was  brought  into  Palestine  in  the  form  ot 
plates  from  Tarshish,  with  gold  and  ivory  (1  K. 
x.  22;  2  Chr.  ix.  21 ;  Jer.  x.  9).  The  accumula 
tion  of  wealth  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  was  so  great 
that  silver  was  but  little  esteemed ;  "  the  king  made 


2000  talents  of  silver,  and  3,993,000  gold  darks;  a  SUMI 
which  in  these  days  would  amount  to  about  51  nitllioiu 
of  pounds  sterling 
•>  Literally.  "  shekels  of  gold,  a  weight  i>f  CJJ." 


METALS 

silver  to  bu  in  Jerusalem  as  stones"  (?  K.  x.  21, 
27).  With  the  treasures  which  were  brought  out 
of  Egypt,  not  only  the  ornaments  but  the  ordinary 
metal- work  of  the  tabernacle  were  made.  Silver 
was  employed  for  the  sockets  of  the  boards  (Ex. 
xxvi.  19,  xxxvi.  24),  and  for  the  hooks  of  the  pillars 
and  their  fillets  (Ex.  xxxviii.  10),  The  capitals  of 
the  pillars  were  overlaid  with  it  (Ex.  xxxviii.  17), 
the  charters  and  bowls  offered  by  the  princes  at  the 
dedication  of  the  tabernacle  (Num.  vii.  13,  &c.), 
the  trumpets  for  marshalling  the  host  (Num.  x.  2), 
and  some  of  the  candlesticks  and  tables  for  the 
Temple  were  of  silver  (1  Chr.  xxviii.  15,  16).  It 
was  used  for  the  setting  of  gold  ornaments  (Prov. 
xxv.  11}  and  other  decorations  (Cant.  i.  11),  and 
for  the  pillars  of  Solomon's  gorgeous  chariot  or  pa 
lanquin  (Cant.  iii.  10). 

From  a  comparison  of  the  different  amounts  of 
gold  and  silver  collected  by  David,  it  appears  that 
the  proportion  of  the  former  to  the  latter  was  1  to  9 
nearly.  Three  hundred  talents  of  silver  and  thirty 
talents  of  gold  were  demanded  of  Hezekiah  by  Sen 
nacherib  (2  K.  xviii.  14) ;  but  later,  when  Pharaoh- 
nechoh  took  Jehoahaz  prisoner,  he  imposed  upon  the 
land  a  tribute  of  100  talents  of  silver,  and  only  one 
talent  of  gold  (2  K.  xxiii.  33).  The  difference  in 
the  proportion  of  gold  to  silver  in  these  two  cases  is 
very  remarkable,  and  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
explained. 

Brass,  01  more  properly  copper,  was  a  native  pro 
duct  of  Palestine,  "  a  land  whose  stones  are  iron, 
and  out  of  whose  hills  thou  mayest  dig  copper  " 
(Deut.  viii.  9  ;  Job  xxviii.  2).  It  was  so  plentiful 
in  the  days  of  Solomon  that  the  quantity  employed 
in  the  Temple  could  not  be  estimated,  it  was  so 
great  (1  K.  vii.  47).  Much  of  the  copper  which 
David  had  prepared  for  this  work  was  taken  from 
the  Syrians  after  the  defeat  of  Hadadezer  (2  Sam. 
viii.  8),  and  more  was  presented  by  Toi,  king  of 
Hamath.  The  market  of  Tyre  was  supplied  with 
vessels  of  the  same  metal  by  the  merchants  of 
Javan,  Tubal,  and  Meshech  (Ez.  xxvii.  13).  There 
is  strong  reason  to  believe  that  brass,  a  mixture,  pf 
copper  and  zinc,  was  unknown  to  the  ancients.  To 
the  latter  metal  no  allusion  is  found.  But  tin  was 
well  known,  and  from  the  difficulty  which  attends 
the  toughening  pure  copper  so  as  to  render  it  fit 
for  hammering,  it  is  probable  that  the  mode  of 
deoxidising  copper  by  the  admixture  of  small  quan 
tities  of  tin  had  been  early  discovered.  "  We  are 
inclined  to  think,"  says  Mr.  Napier,  "  that  Moses 
used  no  copper  vessels  for  domestic  purposes,  but 
bronze,  the  use  of  which  is  less  objectionable. 
Bronze,  not  being  so  subject  to  tarnish,  takes  on  a 
finer  polish,  and  besides  being  much  more  easily 
melted  and  cast,  would  make  it  to  be  more  exten 
sively  used  than  copper  alone.  These  practical  con 
siderations,  and  the  fact  of  almost  all  the  antique 
castings  and  other  articles  in  metal  that  are  pre 
served  from  these  ancient  times  being  composed  of 
bronze,  prove  in  our  opinion  that  where  the  word 
'  brass '  occurs  in  Scripture,  except  where  it  refers 
to  an  ore,  such  as  Job  xxviii.  2  and  Deut.  viii.  9,  it 
should  be  translated  bronze"  (Metal,  of 'the  Bible, 
p.  66).  Arms  (2  Sam.  xxi.  16 ;  Job  xx.  24;  Ps. 
xviii.  34)  and  armour  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5,  6,  38)  were 
made  of  this  metal,  which  was  capable  of  being  so 
wrought  as  to  admit  of  a  keen  and  hard  edge. 
The  Egyptians  employed  it  in  cutting  the  hardest 
granite.  The  Mexicans,  before  the  discovery  of  iron, 
"  found  a  substitute  in  an  alloy  of  tin  and  copper ; 
inrt  wit.1!  tools  made  of  this  bronze  could  cut  not 


METHEG-AMMAH  343 

only  metals,  but,  with  the  aid  of  a  siliceous  dust, 
the  hardest  substances,  as  basalt,  porphyry,  ame 
thysts,  and  emeralds"  (Prescott,  Conq.  of  Mexico, 
ch.  5).  The  great  skill  attained  by  the  Egyptians 
in  working  metals  at  a  very  early  period  throws 
light  upon  the  remarkable  facility  with  which  the 
Israelites,  during  their  wanderings  in  the  desert, 
elaborated  the  works  of  art  connected  with  the 
structure  of  the  tabernacle,  for  which  great  ac 
quaintance  with  metals  was  requisite.  In  the 
troublous  times  which  followed  their  entrance  into 
Palestine  this  knowledge  seems  to  have  been  lost, 
for  when  the  Temple  was  built  the  metal-workers 
employed  were  Phoenicians. 

Iron,  like  copper,  was  found  in  the  hills  of  Pales 
tine.  The  "  iron  mountain  "  in  the  trans-Jordanic 
region  is  described  by  Josephus  (B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2),  and 
was  remarkable  for  producing  a  particular  kind  of 
palm  (Mishna,  Succa,  ed.  Dachs,  p.  182).  Iron 
mines  are  still  worked  by  the  inhabitants  of  Kefr 
Huneh  in  the  S.  of  the  valley  Zahardni;  smelting 
works  are  found  at  Shemuster,  3  hours  W.  of  Baal- 
l>ek,  and  others  in  the  oak-woods  at  Masbek  (Ritter, 
Erdkunde,  xvii.  73,  201) ;  but  the  method  em 
ployed  is  the  simplest  possible,  like  that  of  the  old 
Samothracians,  and  the  iron  so  obtained  is  chiefly 
used  for  horse-shoes. 

Tin  and  lead  were  both  known  at  a  very  early 
period,  though  there  is  no  distinct  trace  of  them  in 
Palestine.  The  former  was  among  the  spoils  of  the 
Midiaiiites  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  who  might  have  ob 
tained  it  in  their  intercourse  with  the  Phoenician 
merchants  (comp.  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  36),  who  them 
selves  procured  it  from  Tarshish  (Ez.  xxvii.  12)  and 
the  tin  countries  of  the  west.  The  allusions  to  it 
in  the  Old  Testament  principally  point  to  its  ad 
mixture  with  the  ores  of  the  precious  metals  (Is.  i. 
25 ;  Ez.  xxii.  18,  20).  It  must  have  occurred  in 
the  composition  of  bronze :  the  Assyrian  bowls  and 
dishes  in  the  British  Museum  are  found  to  contain 
one  part  of  tin  to  ten  of  copper.  "  The  tin  was 
probably  obtained  from  Phoenicia,  and  consequently 
that  used  in  the  bronzes  in  the  British  Museum 
may  actually  have  been  exported,  nearly  three  thou 
sand  years  ago,  from  the  British  Isles  "  (Layard, 
Nin.  and  Bab.  191). 

Antimony  (2  K.  ix.  30 ;  Jer.  iv.  30,  A.  V. 
"  painting  "),  in  the  form  of  powder,  was  used  by 
the  Hebrew  women,  like  the  kohl  of  the  Arabs,  for 
colouring  their  eyelids  and  eyebrows.  [PAINT.] 

Further  information  will  be  found  in  the  articles 
upon  the  several  metals,  and  whatever  is  known  of 
the  metallurgy  of  the  Hebrews  will  be  discussed 
under  MINING.  [W.  A.  W.] 

METE'KUS  (BajTijpo^j).  According  to  the  list 
in  1  Esd.  v.  17,  "the  sons  of  Meterus"  returned 
with  Zorobabel.  There  is  no  corresponding  name 
in  the  lists  of  Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.,  nor  is  it  trace 
able  in  the  Vulgate. 

METH'EG-AMltAH  (riBKil  3n»:  TTJ» 
a.(j>(apLff/u.ffr]v :  Froenum  tributi),  a  place  which 
David  took  from  the  Philistines,  apparently  in  his 
last  war  with  them  (2  Sam.  viii.  1).  In  the 
parallel  passage  of  the  Chronicles  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1), 
''  Gath  and  her  daughter-towns  "  is  substituted  for 
Metheg  ha-Ammah. 

The  renderings  are  legioii,  airnost  each  translator 
having  his  own ; a  but  the  interpretations  may  be 

a  A  large  collection  of  these  wil!  lie  found  in  Glassr. 
Philologia  Sacra  (lib.  iv.  tr.  3,  obs.  17),  together  with  » 
singular  Jewish  tradition  bearing  upon  the  point.  Tut 


344 


MJCTHUBAKL 


reduced  to  two:  —  1.  That  adopted  by  Gesenius 
(Thesaur.  113)  and  Fiii-st  (Handwb.  1026),  in 
which  A  in  tnah  is  taken  as  meaning  "  mother-city  " 
or  "metropolis"  (comp.  2  Sam.  xx.  19),  and 
Metheg-ha-Ammah  "  the  bridle  of  the  mother-city" 
—viz.  of  Gath,  the  chief  town  of  the  Philistines. 
If  this  is  correct,  the  expression  "  daughter-towns  '' 
in  the  corresponding  passage  of  Chronicles  is  a 
closer  parallel,  and  more  characteristic,  than  it  ap 
pears  at  first  sight  to  be.  2.  That  of  Ewald 
(Gesch.  iii.  190),  who,  taking  Amman  as  meaning 
the  "  forearm,"  treats  the  words  as  a  metaphor  to 
express  the  perfect  manner  in  which  David  had 
smitten  and  humbled  his  foes,  had  torn  the  bridle 
from  their  arm,  and  thus  broken  for  ever  the  do 
minion  with  which  they  curbed  Israel,  as  a  rider 
manages  his  horse  by  the  rein  held  fast  on  his  arm. 
The  former  of  these  two  has  the  support  of  the 
parallel  passage  in  Chronicles  ;  and  it  is  no  valid 
objection  to  it  to  say,  as  Ewald  in  his  note  to  the 
above  passage  does,  that  Gath  cannot  be  referred  to, 
because  it  had  its  own  king  still  in  the  days  of 
Solomon,  for  the  king  in  Solomon's  time  may  have 
been,  and  probably  was,  tributary  to  Israel,  as  the 
kings  "on  this  side  the  Euphrates"  (1  K.  iv.  24) 
were.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  an  obvious  ob 
jection  to  Ewald's  interpretation  that  to  control  his 
horse  a  rider  must  hold  the  bridle  not  on  his  arm 
but  fast  in  his  hand.  [(!.] 

METHU'SAEL  (tal5fcm»,  "man  of  God:" 

Ma6ovffd\a  :  Mathusael),  the  son  of  Mehujael, 
fourth  in  descent  from  Cain,  and  father  of  Lamech 
(Gen.  iv.  18).  [A.  B.] 

METHU'SELAH    H-inD,  "  man  of  off 


spring,"  or  possibly  "man  of  a  dart:"*  Maflou- 
ffd\a  :  Mathusala),  the  son  of  Enoch,  sixth  in 
descent  from  Seth,  and  father  of  Lamech.  The  re 
semblance  of  the  name  to  the  preceding,  on  which 
(with  the  coincidence  of  the  name  Lamech  in  the 
next  generation  in  both  lines)  some  theories  have 
been  formed,  seems  to  be  apparent  rather  than  real. 
The  life  of  Methuselah  is  fixed  by  Gen.  v.  27  at 
969  years,  a  period  exceeding  that  of  any  other 
patriarch,  and,  according  to  the  Hebrew  chronology, 
bringing  his  death  down  to  the  very  year  of  the 
Flood.  The  LXX.  reckoning  makes  him  die  six 
years  before  it  ;  and  the  Samaritan,  although  shorten 
ing  his  life  to  720  years,  gives  the  same  result  as 
the  Hebrew.  [CHRONOLOGY.]  On  the  subject  of 
Longevity,  see  PATRIARCHS.  [A.  B.] 

MEU'NIM  (D'3-IJHD,  Mto-eii^/i;  Alex.  Me«- 
vtefjL:  Munirri),  Neh.  vii.  52.  Elsewhere  given  in 
A.  V.  as  MEHUNIM  and  MEHUNIMS. 


ME'ZAHAB  (am  '»  :  MeuCo<$0  ;  Alex.  M«- 
(W/8  in  Gen.,  omitted  in  1  Chr.  :  Mezaab}.    The 


MIBHAR 

father  of  Matrcd  and  grandfather  of  Muhetabel,  rno 
was  wife  of  Hadar  or  Hadad,  the  last  named  ling 
of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  39 ;  1  Chr.  i.  50).  His  nMtie, 
which,  if  it  be  Hebrew,  signifies  "  waters  of  gold," 
has  given  rise  to  much  speculation.  Jarchi  render* 
it,  "  what  is  gold  ?"  and  explains  it,  "  he  was  a 
rich  man,  and  gold  was  not  valued  in  his  eyes  at 
all."  Abarbanel  says  he  was  "  rich  and  great,  sc 
that  on  this  account  he  was  called  Mezahab,  for  the 
gold  was  in  his  uouse  as  water."  "  Haggaon  " 
(writes  Aben  Ezra)  "  said  he  was  a  refiner  of  gold, 
but  others  said  that  it  pointed  to  those  who  make 
gold  from  brass."  The  Jerusalem  Targum  of  course 
could  not  resist  the  temptation  of  punning  upon  the 
name,  and  combined  the  explanations  given  by  Jarchi 
and  Haggaon.  The  latter  part  of  Gen.  xxxvi.  39 
is  thus  rendered :  "  the  name  of  his  wife  was 
Mehetabel,  daughter  of  Hatred,  the  daughter  of  a 
refiner  of  fold,  who  was  wearied  with  labour 
(N11BO,  matredd)  all  the  days  of  his  life ;  after 

he  had  eaten  and  was  filled,  he  turned  and  said, 
what  is  gold  ?  and  what  is  silver  ?"  A  somewhat 
similar  paraphrase  is  given  in  the  Targum  of  the 
Pseudo-Jonathan,  except  that  it  is  there  referred  t«> 
Hatred,  and  not  to  Mezahab.  The  Arabic  Versiou 
translates  the  name  "  water  of  gold,"  which  must 
have  been  from  the  Hebrew,  while  in  the  Targum 
of  Onkelos  it  is  rendered  "a  refiner  of  gold,"  as  in 
the  Questiones  Hebraicae  in  Paralip.,  attributed 
to  Jerome,  and  the  traditions  given  above ;  which 
seems  to  indicate  that  originally  there  was  some 
thing  in  the  Hebrew  text,  now  wanting,  which  gave 
rise  to  this  rendering,  and  of  which  the  present 
reading,  *D,  me,  is  an  abbreviation.  [W.  A.  W.J 

MTAMIN  (|P»D:  Mta^lv;  Alex.  Mta^V 
Miamiri).  1.  A  layman  of  Israel  of  the  sons  of 
Parosh,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  and  put 
her  away  at  the  bidding  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  x.  25).  He 
is  called  HAELUS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  26. 

2.  (Omitted  in  Vat.  MS.;  Alex.  Mct/Jr:  Mia- 
mm).  A  priest  or  family  of  priests  who  went  up 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  xii.  5) ;  pro 
bably  the  same  as  MIJAMIN  in  Neh.  x.  7.  In  Neh. 
xii.  17  the  name  appears  in  the  form  MINIAMIN. 

MIB'HAR  ("ina» :    M«0o<{A. ;  Alex.  Maflrfp : 

Mibahar).  "  Mibhar  the  son  of  Haggeri  "  is  the 
name  of  one  of  David's  heroes  in  the  list  given  in 

1  Chr.  xi.    The  verse  (38)  in  which  it  occurs  appears 
to  be  corrupt,  for  in  the  corresponding  catalogue  of 

2  Sam.  xxiii.  36  we  find,  instead  of  "  Mibhar  the 
son  of  Haggeri,"  "  of  Zobah,  Bani  the  Gadite."     It 
is  easy  to  see,  if  the  latter  be  the  true  reading,  how 
*"13n  *J3,  Bani  haggadi,  could  be  corrupted  into 

^3n~}3,  ben-haggeri ;  and    '"13H  is  actually  the 

reading  of  three  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  in  1  Chr.,  as 
well  as  of  the  Syriac  and  Arab,  versions,  and  the 


n-.ogt  singular  rendering,  perhaps,  is  that  of  Aquila. 
\aAiybs  TOU  vSpaytoyiav,  "  the  bridle  of  the  aqueduct,1' 
perhaps  with  some  reference  to  the  irrigation  of  the  rich 
district  in  which  Gath  was  situated.  Aqueduct  is  derived 
from  the  Chaldce  version,  NHON,  which  has  that  signi 
fication  amongst  others.  Aquila  adopts  a  similar  rendering 
in  the  case  of  the  hill  Asm  AH. 

•  There  is  some  difficulty  about  the  derivation  of  this 
name.  The  latter  portion  of  the  root  Is  certainly  H?^ 
,from  npjj>,  *  to  send  "),  used  for  a  "  m'ssile  "  In  2  Chr. 
xxxll.  5,  Toe!  II.  8,  and  for  a  "branch"  in  Cant.  iv.  13, 
I«  x  vi.  8.  The  former  portion  is  derived  by  many  of  t*e 


older  Hebraists  from  JT1O,  "  to  die,"  and  various  inter 
pretations  given  accordingly.  See  in  Leusden's  Onoma*- 
ticon,  "  mortem  siiam  mislt,"  "  mortis  suae  arma,"  &c. 
Others  make  it,  "  he  dies,  and  It  [i.  e.  the  Flood]  is  sent,'' 
supposing  It  either  a  name  given  afterwards  from  the 
event,  or  one  given  in  prophetic  foresight  by  Enoch.  Tba 
later  Hebraists  (see  Ges.  I^m.)  derive  It  from  ^flC,  the 
constructive  form  of  J"IO,  "man,"  the  cbsolete  singular, 
of  which  the  plural  0*J")D  is  found.  This  gives  one  ot 
other  of  the  interpretations  In  the  U-xt.  We  can  only 
decide  between  them  (If  at  all)  by  ii'tercal  probability, 
which  seems  to  incline  to  the  former. 


MIBSAM 

Targum  of  R.  Joseph.  But  that  "Mibhar"  is  a 
corruption  of  !"QXD  (or  K3¥O,  ace.  to  some  MSS.), 

mitstsobdk,  "  of  Zobah,"  as  Kennicott  (Dissert. 
p.  215)  and  Cappellus  (Crit.  Sacr.  i.  c.  5)  conclude, 
is  not  so  clear,  though  not  absolutely  impossible. 
It  would  seem  from  the  LXX.  of  2  Sam.,  where 
instead  of  "  of  Zobah  "  we  find  vo\vSwd.ft.Kas,  that 
both  readings  originally  co-existed,  and  were  read  by 

tne  LXX.  K3-¥i"l  "1030,  mibchar  hatstsaba,  "choice 
-      -      • 


MICAH 


346 


of  the  host."  If  this  were  the  case,  the  verse  in  1 
Chr.  would  stand  thus  :  "  Igal  the  brother  of  Nathan, 
Hower  of  the  host  ;  Bani  the  Gadite."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MIB'SAM  (Dbrip,    "  sweet    odour,"  Ges.  : 

yicurtrdfi.  :  Mabsam).  1.  A  son  of  Ishmael  (Gen. 
xxv.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.  29),  not  elsewhere  mentioned. 
The  signification  of  his  name  has  led  some  to  pro 
pose  an  identification  of  the  tribe  sprung  from  him 
with  some  one  of  the  Abrahamic  tribes  settled  in  Ara 
bia  aromatifera,  and  a  connexion  with  the  balsam 
of  Arabia  is  suggested  (Bunsen,  Bibelwerk  ;  Kalisch, 
Gen.  483).  The  situation  of  Mekkeh  is  well  adapted 
for  his  settlements,  surrounded  as  it  is  by  traces  of 
other  Ishmaelite  tribes  ;  nevertheless  the  identifica 
tion  seems  fanciful  and  far-fetched. 

2.  A  son  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  25),  perhaps 
v.amed  after  the  Ishmaelite  Mibsam,  for  one  of  his 
brothers  was  named  MiSHMA,  as  was  one  of  those 
of  the  older  Mibsam.  [E.  S.  P.] 

MIB'ZAR  (~l¥3»  :  Vlafdp  in  Gen.  ;  Bafiffap  ; 

Alex.  Ma/Srrop  in  1  Chr.  :  Mabsar).  One  of  the 
phylarchs  or  "dukes"  of  Edom  (1  Chr.  i.  53)  or 
Esau  (Gen.  xxxvi.  42)  after  the  death  of  Hadad  or 
Hadar.  They  are  said  to  be  enumerated  "accord 
ing  to  their  settlements  in  the  land  of  their  pos 
session;"  and  Knobel  (Genesis),  understanding 
Mibzar  (lit.  "  fortress  ")  as  the  name  of  a  place, 
has  attempted  to  identify  it  with  the  rocky  fast 
ness  of  Petra,  "  the  strong  city  "  ("1S21D  "VJJ,  'ir 

mibtsar  Ps.  cviii.  11  ;  comp.  Ps.  Ix.  11),  "  the  cliff," 
the  chasms  of  which  were  the  chief  stronghold  of  the 
Edomites  (Jer.  xlix.  16  ;  Obad.  3).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MIC'AH  (i"O'D,  but  in  vers.  1  and  4,  -liV^O, 
i.  e.  Micayehu  :  Mixotfas,  but  once  Me<xaias  ; 
Alex.  Mecxa,  but  once  M«x«  :  Michas,  Micha),  an 
Israelite  whose  familiar  story  is  preserved  in  the 
xviith  and  xviiith  chapters  of  Judges.  That  it  is 
so  preserved  would  seem  to  be  owing  to  Micah's 
accidental  connexion  with  the  colony  of  Danites 
who  left  the  original  seat  of  their  tribe  to  conquer 
and  found  a  new  Dan  at  Laish  —  a  most  happy 
accident,  for  it  has  been  the  means  of  furnishing 
us  with  a  picture  of  the  "  interior  "  of  a  private 
Israelite  family  of  the  rural  districts,  which  in 
many  respects  stands  quite  alone  in  the  sacred 
records,  and  has  probably  no  parallel  in  any  litera 
ture  of  equal  age. 

But  apart  from  this  the  narrative  has  several 
points  of  special  interest  to  students  of  biblical  his 
tory  in  the  information  which  it-  affords  as  to  the 


•  One  of  a  thousand  cases  in  which  the  point  of  the 
sentence  is  lost  by  the  translation  of  "  Jehovah  "  by  "  the 
LORD." 

k  It  does  not  seem  at  all  clear  that  the  words  "  molten 
Image  "  and  "  graven  image  "  accurately  expresg  the  ori 
ginal  words  Pesel  and  Massecah.  [IDOL,  vol.  i.  851  b.]  As 
the  Hebrew  text  now  stands,  the  "graven  image"  only 
was  carried  off  to  I^ai-sh,  and  the  "  .tioltcn  "  one  remained 
behind  with  Micah  (xviii.  20,30;  jonip.  18).  True  trie 


condition  of  the  nation,  of  the  members  of  which 
Micah  was  probably  an  average  specimen. 

We  see  (1.)  how  completely  some  of  the  most 
solemn  and  characteristic  enactments  of  the  Law 
had  become  a  dead  letter.  Micah  was  evidently  e 
devout  believer  in  Jehovah.  While  the  Danites  ic 
their  communications  use  the  general  term  Elohim 
"  God "  ("  ask  counsel  of  God,"  xviii.  5  ;  "  God 
hath  given  it  into  your  hands,"  ver.  10),  with 
Micah  and  his  household  the  case  is  quite  different. 
His  one  anxiety  is  to  enjoy  the  favour  of  Jehovah  • 
(xvii.  13) ;  the  formula  of  blessing  used  by  his 
mother  and  his  priest  invokes  the  same  awful  namf 
(xvii.  2,  xviii.  6) ;  and  yet  so  completely  ignorant 
is  he  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah,  that  the  mode  which 
he  adopts  of  honouring  Him  is  to  make  a  molten 
and  a  graven  image,  teraphim  or  images  of  domestic 
gods,  and  to  set  up  an  unauthorised  priesthood,  first 
in  his  own  family  (xvii.  5),  and  then  in  the  person 
of  a  Levite  not  of  the  priestly  line  (ver.  12) — thus 
disobeying,  in  the  most  flagrant  manner,  the  second 
of  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  the  provisions  for 
the  priesthood — both  laws  which  lay  in  a  peculiar 
manner  at  the  root  of  the  religious  existence  of  the 
nation.  Gideon  (viii.  27)  had  established  an  ephod  ; 
but  here  was  a  whole  chapel  of  idols,  a  "  house  of 
gods"  (xvii.  5),  and  all  dedicated  to  Jehovah. 

(2.)  The  story  also  throws  a  light  on  the  con 
dition  of  the  Levites.  They  were  indeed  "  divided 
in  Jacob  and  scattered  in  Israel"  in  a  more  literal 
sense  than  that  prediction  is  usually  taken  to  con 
tain.  Here  we  have  a  Levite  belonging  to  Beth- 
lehem-judah,  a  town  not  allotted  to  the  Levites, 
and  with  which  they  had,  as  far  as  we  know, 
no  connexion;  next  wandering  forth,  with  the 
world  before  him,  to  take  up  his  abode  wherever 
he  could  find  a  residence ;  then  undertaking,  with 
out  hesitation,  and  for  a  mere  pittance,  the  charge 
of  Micah's  idol-chapel ;  and  lastly,  carrying  off  the 
property  of  his  master  and  benefactor,  and  becoming 
the  first  priest  to  another  system  of  false  worship, 
one  too  in  which  Jehovah  had  no  part,  and  which 
ultimately  bore  an  important  share  in  the  disrup 
tion  of  the  two  kingdoms.b 

But  the  transaction  becomes  still  more  remark 
able  when  we  consider  (3.)  that  this  was  no  obscun? 
or  ordinary  Levite.  He  belonged  to  the  chief 
family  in  the  tribe,  nay,  we  may  say  to  the  chief 
family  of  the  nation,  for  though  not  himself  a 
priest,  he  was  closely  allied  to  the  priestly  house, 
and  was  the  grandson  of  no  less  a  person  than  the 
great  Moses  himself.  For  the  "  Manasseh  "  in  xviii. 
30  is  nothing  else  than  an  alteration  of  "  Moses,"  tc 
shield  that  venerable  name  from  the  discredit  which 
such  a  descendant  would  cast  upou  it.  [MANASSEH 
No.  4 ;  p.  234  6.]  In  this  fact  we  possibly  have 
the  explanation  of  the  much-debated  passage,  xviii. 
3 :  "  they  knew  the  viiee  *  of  the  young  man  the 
Levite."  The  grandson  of  the  Lawgivei  was  not 
unlikely  to  be  personally  known  to  the  Danites  ; 
when  they  heard  his  voice  (whether  in  casual 
sj)eech  or  in  loud  devotion  we  are  not  told)  they 
recognized  it,  and  their  inquiries  as  to  who  brought 

LXX.  add  the  molten  image  in  ver.  20,  but  in  ver.  30  they 
agree  with  the  Hebrew  text. 

«  pip  =  voice.  The  explanation  of  J.  D.  Michaclis 
(Sibd  filr  L'ngflehrten)  is  that  they  remarked  that  ht 
did  not  speak  with  the  accent  of  the  Ephraimites.  Bui 
Gesenius  rejects  this  notion  as  repugnant  alike  to  "  tht 
expression  and  the  connexion,"  and  adopts  the  explana 
tion  given  above  (Gesch.  der  htbr.  Sprache,  $15  2,  p.  56) 


346 


MICAH 


him  hither,  what  he  did  there,  and  what  he  had 
there,  were  in  this  case  the  eager  questions  of  old 
acquaintances  long  sepaiated. 

(4.)  The  narrative  gives  us  a  most  vivid  idea  of 
the  terrible  anarchy  in  which  the  country  was 
placed,  when  "  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  and 
every  man  did  what  was  right  in  his  own  eyes," 
and  shows  how  urgently  necessary  a  central  autho 
rity  had  become.  A  body  of  six  hundred  men  com 
pletely  armed,  besides  the  train  of  their  families  and 
cattle,  traverses  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land, 
iiot  on  any  mission  for  the  ruler  or  the  nation,  as  on 
ktter  occasions  (2  Sam.  ii.  12,  &c.,  xx.  7,  14),  but 
simply  for  their  private  ends.  Entirely  disregard 
ing  the  rights  of  private  property,  they  burst  in 
wherever  they  please  along  their  route,  and  plun 
dering  the  valuables  and  carrying  off  persons,  reply 
to  all  remonstances  by  taunts  and  threats.  The 
Turkish  rule,  to  which  the  same  district  has  now 
the  misfortune  to  be  subjected,  can  hardly  be  worse. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  startling  to  our  Western 
minds — accustomed  to  associate  the  blessings  of 
order  with  religion — to  observe  how  religious  were 
these  lawless  freebooters : — "  Do  ye  know  that  in 
these  houses  there  is  an  ephod,  and  teraphim,  and  a 
graven  image,  and  a  molten  image?  Now  there 
fore  consider  what  ye  have  to  do"  (xviii.  14). 
"  Hold  thy  peace,  and  go  with  us,  and  be  to  us  a 
father  and  a  priest"  (Ib.  19). 

As  to  the  date  of  these  interesting  events,  the  nar 
rative  gives  us  no  direct  information  beyond  the  fact 
that  it  was  before  the  beginning  of  the  monarchy  ; 
but  we  may  at  least  infer  that  it  was  also  before 
the  time  of  Samson,  because  in  this  narrative 
(rviii.  12)  we  meet  with  the  origin  of  the  name  of 
Mahaneh-dan,  a  place  which  already  bore  that  name 
in  Samson's  childhood  (xiii.  25,  where  it  is  trans 
lated  in  the  A.  V.  "the  camp  of  Dan").  That 
the  Danites  had  opponents  to  their  establishment  in 
their  proper  territory  before  the  Philistines  enter 
the  field  is  evident  from  Judg.  i.  34.  Josephus 
entirely  omits  the  story  of  Micah,  but  he  places  the 
narrative  of  the  Levite  and  his  concubine,  and  the 
destruction  of  Gibeah  (chaps,  iix.  xx.  xxi.) — a 
document  generally  recognized  as  part  of  the 
same  d  with  the  story  of  Micah,  and  that  document 
by  a  different  hand  to  the  previous  portions  of  the 
book — at  the  very  beginning  of  his  account  of  the 
period  of  the  Judges,  before  Deborah  or  even  Ehud. 
(See  Ant.  v.  2,  §8-12.)  The  writer  is  not  aware 
that  this  arrangement  has  been  found  in  any  MS.  of 
the  Hebrew  or  LXX.  text  of  the  book  of  Judges ; 
but  the  fact  of  its  existence  in  Josephus  has  a  cer 
tain  weight,  especially  considering  the  accuracy  of 
that  writer  when  his  interests  or  prejudices  aie  not 
concerned ;  and  it  is  supported  by  the  mention  of 
Phinehas  the  grandson  of  Aaron  in  xx.  28.  An 
argument  against  the  date  being  before  the  time 
of  Deborah  is  drawn  by  Bertheau  (p.  197)  from 
the  fact  that  at  that  time  the  north  of  Palestine 
was  in  the  possession  of  the  Canaanites  — "  Jabin 
king  of  Canaan,  who  reigned  in  Hazor,"  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Laish.  The  records  | 
at*  the  southern  Dan  are  too  scanty  to  permit  of 
our  fixing  the  date  from  the  statement  that  the 
Danites  had  not  yet  entered  on  their  allotment 
— that  is  to  say  the  allotment  specified  in  Josh. 

•>  The  proofs  of  this  are  given  by  Bertheau  In  his  Com 
mentary  on  the  Book  in  the  Kurzgef.  Exeg.  Handb.  (iii. 
&a;p.  192). 

«  xviii.  1.  It  will  be  observed  tli.it  Uie  words  "all 
'.heir  "  are  interpolated  by  our  translator*. 


MICAH 

xix.  40-48.  But  that  statement  strengthens  thc 
conclusion  arrived  at  from  other  passages,  that 
these  lists  in  Joshua  contain  the  towns  allotted, 
but  not  therefore  necessarily  possessed  by  the 
various  tribes.  "  Divide  the  land  first,  in  con 
fidence,  and  then  possess  it  afterwaixls,"  seems  to 
be  the  principle  implied  in  such  passages  as  Josh, 
xiii.  7  (comp.  1);  xix.  49,  51  (LXX.  "so  they 
went  to  take  possession  of  the  land  "). 

The  date  of  the  record  itself  may  perhaps  be 
more  nearly  arrived  at.  That,  on  the  one  hand,  it. 
was  after  the  beginning  of  the  monarchy  is  evident 
from  the  references  to  the  ante-monarchical  time» 
(xviii.  1,  xix.  1,  xxi.  25);  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
we  may  perhaps  infer  from  the  name  of  Bethlehem 
being  given  as  "  Bethlehem-Judah," — that  it  was 
before  the  fame  of  David  had  conferred  on  it  a 
notoriety  which  would  render  any  such  affix  un- 
necessaiy.  The  reference  to  the  establishment  of 
the  house  of  God  in  Shiloh  (xviii.  31)  seems  also  to 
point  to  the  early  part  of  Saul's  reign,  before  the 
incursions  of  the  Philistines  had  made  it  necessary 
to  remove  the  Tabernacle  and  Ephod  to  Nob,  in 
the  vicinity  of  Gibeah,  Saul's  head-quarters.  [G.J 

MI'CAH  (n^O,  rP3»»,«Cethib,  Jer.xxvi.  18: 
Mtxalas:  Michacas).  The  sixth  in  order  of  the 
minor  prophets,  according  to  the  arrangement  in 
our  present  canon  ;  in  the  LXX.  he  is  placed  third, 
after  Hosea  and  Amos.  To  distinguish  him  from 
Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah,  the  contemporary  of 
Elijah,  he  is  called  the  MORASTHITE,  that  is  a 
native  of  Moresheth,  or  some  place  of  similar 
name,  which  Jerome  and  Eusebius  call  Morasthi 
and  identify  with  a  small  village  near  Eleuthero- 
polis  to  the  east,  when*  formerly  the  prophet's  tomb 
was  shown,  but  which  in  the  days  of  Jerome  had 
been  succeeded  by  a  church  (Epit.  Pauiae,  c.  6). 
As  little  is  known  of  the  circumstances  of  Micah 's 
life  as  of  many  of  the  other  prophets.  Pseudo- 
Epiphanius  (Op.  ii.  p.  245)  makes  him,  contrary  to 
all  probability,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim ;  and  besides 
confounding  him  with  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
who  lived  more  than  a  century  before,  he  betrays 
additional  ignorance  in  describing  Ahab  as  king  of 
Judah.  For  rebuking  this  monarch's  son  and  suc 
cessor  Jehoram  for  his  impieties,  Micah,  according  to 
the  same  authority,  was  thrown  from  a  precipice, 
and  buried  at  Morathi  in  his  own  country,  hard  by 
the  cemetery  of  Enakim  ('EvoKef/u,  a  place  which 
apparently  exists  only  in  the  LXX.  of  Mic.  i. 
10),  where  his  sepulchre  was  still  to  be  seen. 
The  Chronicon  Paschale  (p.  148  c)  tells  the  saint 
tale.  Another  ecclesiastical  tradition  relates  that 
the  remains  of  Habakkuk  and  Micah  were  revealed 
in  a  vision  to  Zebennus  bishop  of  Eleutbewpolis,  in 
the  reign  of  Theodosius  the  Great,  n«r  a  place 
called  Berathsatia,  which  is  apparently  a  conniption 
of  Morasthi  (Sozomen,  H.  E.  vii.  29  ;  Nicephorus, 
H.  E.  xii.  48).  The  prophet's  tomb  was  called  by 
tlie  inhabitants  Nephsameemana,  which  Sozomen 
renders  /ii/rj/ua  iriffrSv. 

The  period  during  which  Micah  exercised  the 
prophetical  office  is  stated,  in  the  superscription  to 


»  The  full  form  of  the  name  Is  ^fl'3'P, 
"  who  \t.  like  Jehovah,"  which  is  found  in  2  Chr.  xiii.  2, 
xvii.  7.  This  is  abbreviated  to  -irPD'D,  tKa'iyihu,  in 
Judg.  xvii  1,  4;  still  further  to  in^S,  Micayikil 
(.»cr.  xxxvi.  11),  !"PD*p,  Mtcaydli  (I  K.  xxii.  13);  «n>t 
finally  to  HD^D,  .Vi>:M,  or  N3/P,  Jf  foi  (2  .Sam.  ix.  m 


M1UAH 

hi»  prophecies,  to  have  extended  over  the  reigns  of 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah,  giving 
thus  a  maximum  limit  of  59  years  (B.C.  756-697), 
from  the  accession  of  Jotham  to  the  death  of  Heze 
kiah,  and  a  minimum  limit  of  16  years  (B.C.  742- 
726),  from  the  death  of  Jotham  to  the  accession  of 
Hezekiah.  In  either  case  he  would  be  contempo 
rary  with  Hosea  and  Amos  during  part  of  their 
ministry  in  Israel,  and  with  Isaiah  in  Judah. 
According  to  Rabbinical  tradition  he  transmitted  to 
the  prophets  Joel,  Nahum,  and  Habakkuk,  and  to 
Seraiah  the  priest,  the  mysteries  of  the  Kabbala, 
which  he  had  received  from  Isaiah  (R.  David  Gaiiz, 
Tsemach  David),  and  by  Syncellus  (Chronogr.  p. 
199  c)  he  is  enumerated  in  the  reign  of  Jotham  as 
contemporaiy  with  Hosea,  Joel,  Isaiah,  and  Oded. 
With  respect  to  one  of  his  prophecies  (iii.  12)  it  is  dis 
tinctly  assigned  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (Jer.  xxvi. 
18),  and  was  probably  delivered  before  the  great 
passover  which  inaugurated  the  reformation  in 
Judah.  The  date  of  the  others  must  be  determined, 
if  at  all,  by  internal  evidence,  and  the  periods  to 
which  they  are  assigned  are  therefore  necessarily 
conjectural.  Reasons  will  be  given  hereafter  for 
considering  that  none  are  later  than  the  sixth  year 
of  Hezekiah.  Bertholdt,  indeed,  positively  denies 
that  any  of  the  prophecies  can  be  referred  to  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  assigns  the  two  earlier  of  the 
four  portions  into  which  he  divides  the  book  to 
the  time  of  Ahaz,  and  the  two  later  to  that  of  Ma- 
nasseh  (Einleitung,  §411),  because  the  idolatry 
which  prevailed  in  their  reigns  is  therein  denounced. 
But  in  the  face  of  the  superscription,  the  genuine 
ness  of  which  there  is  no  reason  to  question,  and  of 
the  allusion  in  Jer.  xxvi.  18,  Bertholdt's  conjecture 
cannot  be  allowed  to  have  much  weight.  The  time 
assigned  to  the  prophecies  by  the  only  direct  evidence 
which  we  possess,  agrees  so  well  with  their  contents 
that  it  may  fairly  be  accepted  as  correct.  Why 
any  discrepancy  should  be  perceived  between  the 
statement  in  Jeremiah,  that  "  Micah  the  Morasthite 
prophesied  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  king  of  Judah," 
and  the  title  of  his  book  which  tells  us  that  the 
word  of  the  Lord  came  to  him  "  in  the  days  of 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,"  it  is  difficult  to 
Imagine.  The  former  does  not  limit  the  period  of 
Micah's  prophecy,  and  at  most  applies  only  to  the 
passage  to  which  direct  allusion  is  made.  A  con 
fusion  appeal's  to  have  existed  in  the  minds  of  those 
who  see  in  the  prophecy  in  its  presentfonn  a  connected 
whole,  between  the  actual  delivery  of  the  several 
portions  of  it,  and  their  collection  and  transcription 
into  one  book.  In  the  case  of  Jeremiah  we  know 
that  he  dictated  to  Baruch  the  prophecies  which  he 
had  delivered  in  the  interval  between  the  13th  year 
of  Josiah  and  the  4th  of  Jehoiakim,  and  that  when 
thus  committed  to  writing  they  were  read  before 
the  people  on  the  fast  day  (Jer.  xxxvi.  2,  4,  6). 
There  is  reason  to  believe  that  a  similar  process 
took  place  with  the  prophecies  of  Amos.  It  is, 
therefore,  conceivable,  to  say  the  least,  that  certain 
portions  of  Micah's  prophecy  may  have  been  uttered 
in  the  reigns  of  Jotham  and  Ahaz,  and  for  the  pro 
bability  of  this  there  is  strong  internal  evidence, 
while  they  were  collected  as  a  whole  in  the  reign 
of  Hezekiah  and  committed  to  writing.  Caspari 
(Micha,  p.  78)  suggests  that  the  book  thus  written 


MICAH 


347 


*•  Knobel  (Prophetismus,  ii.  $20)  imagines  that  the 
prophecies  which  remain  belong  to  the  time  of  Hezekiah, 
Mid  that  thi  se  delivered  under  Jotham  and  Ahaz  have 
perisbe.i 


may  have  been  read  in  the  presence  of  the  king  and  the 
whole  people,  on  some  great  fast  or  festival  day,  and 
that  this  circumstance  may  have  been  in  the  minds 
of  the  elders  of  the  land  in  the  time  of  Jehoiakim 
when  they  appealed  to  the  impunity  which  Micah 
enjoyed  under  Hezekiah.b  It  is  evident  from  Mic. 
i.  6,  that  the  section  of  the  prophecy  in  which  that 
verse  occurs  must  have  been  delivered  before  the 
destruction  of  Samaria  by  Shalmaneser,  which  took 
place  in  the  6th  year  of  Hezekiah  (cir.  B.C.  722), 
and  connecting  the  "high-places"  mentioned  in 
i.  5  with  those  which  existed  in  Judah  in  the  reigns 
of  Ahaz  (2  K.  xvi.  4 ;  2  Chr.  xxviii.  4,  25),  and 
Jotham  (2  K.  xv.  35),  we  may  be  justified  in 
assigning  ch.  i.  to  the  time  of  one  of  these  monarchs, 
probably  the  latter;  although,  if  ch.  ii.  be  consi 
dered  as  part  of  the  section  to  which  ch.  i.  belongs, 
the  utter  corruption  and  demoralisation  of  the 
people  there  depicted  agree  better  with  what  his 
tory  tells  us  of  the  times  of  Ahaz.  Caspari  main 
tains  that  of  the  two  parallel  passages,  Mic.  iv. 
1-5,  Is.  ii.  2-5,  the  former  is  the  original  and  the 
latter  belongs  to  the  times  of  Uzziah  and  Jotham.c 
The  denunciation  of  the  horses  and  chariots  of 
Judah  (v.  10)  is  appropriate  to  the  state  of  the 
country  under  Jotham.  after  the  long  and  prosper 
ous  reign  of  Uzziah,  by  whom  the  military  strength 
of  the  people  had  been  greatly  developed  (2  Chr. 
xxvi.  11-15,  xxvii.  4-6).  Compare  Is.  ii.  7,  which 
belongs  to  the  same  period.  Again,  the  forms  in 
which  idolatry  manifested  itself  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz 
correspond  with  those  which  are  threatened  with 
destruction  in  Mic.  v.  12-14,  and  the  allusions  in 
vi.  16  to  the  "  statutes  of  Omri,"  and  the  "  works 
of  the  house  of  Ahab  "  seem  directly  pointed  at  the 
king,  of  whom  it  is  expressly  said  that  "  he  walked 
in  the  way  of  the  kings  of  Israel "  (2  K.  xvi.  3).  It 
is  impossible  in  dealing  with  internal  evidenceto  assert 
positively  that  the  inferences  deduced  from  it  are 
correct ;  but  in  the  present  instance  they  at  least 
establish  a  probability,  that  in  placing  the  period  of 
Micah's  prophetical  activity  between  the  times  ot 
Jotham  and  Hezekiah  the  superscription  is  correct. 
In  the  first  years  of  Hezekiah's  reign  the  idolatry 
which  prevailed  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  was  not  eradi 
cated,  ami  in  assigning  the  date  of  Micah's  pro 
phecy  to  this  period  there  is  no  anachronism  in 
the  allusions  to  idolatrous  practices.  Maurer  con 
tends  that  ch.  i.  was  written  not  long  before  the 
taking  of  Samaria,  but  the  3rd  and  following  chap 
ters  he  places  in  the  interval  between  the  destruction 
of  Samaria  and  the  time  that  Jerusalem  was  me 
naced  by  the  army  of  Sennacherib  in  the  14th  year 
of  Hezekiah.  But  the  passages  which  he  quotes  iu 
support  of  his  conclusion  (iii.  12,  iv.  9,  &c.,  v 
5,  &c.,  vi.  9,  &c.,  vii.  4,  12,  &c.)  do  not  appear  to 
be  more  suitable  to  that  period  than  to  the  first  years 
of  Hezekiah,  while  the  context  in  many  cases  requires 
a  still  earlier  date.  In  the  arrangement  adopted  by 
Wells  (pref.  to  Micah,  §  iv. — vi.)  ch.  i.  was  deli 
vered  in  the  contemporary  reigns  c-f  Jotharo  king  of 
Judah  and  of  Pekah  king  of  Israel ;  ii.  1— Iv.  8  in 
those  of  Ahaz,  Pekah,  and  Hosea;  iii.  12  being 
assigned  to  the  last  year  of  Ahaz,  and  the  remainder 
of  the  book  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 

But,  at  whatever   time   the   several   jropheoies 
were   first  delivered,  they  appear  in  theii   present 


c  Mic.  iv.  1-4  may  possibly,  as  Kwald  and  otlien,  have 
suggested,  be  a  portion  of  an  older  prophecy  airivnt  at 
the  time,  which  was  adopted  botli  by  Micah  and 
,'lB.  il  2-4). 


348 


MICAH 


form  as  an  organic  whole,  marked  by  a  certain 
regularity  of  development.  Three  sections,  omit 
ting  the  superscription,  are  introduced  by  the  same 

phrase,  •lytDB'  "hear  ye,"  and    represent    three 


natural  divisions  of  the  prophecy  —  i.,  ii.,  iii.-v., 
vi.-vii.  —  each  commencing  with  rebukes  and  threat- 
enings  and  closing  with  a  promise.  The  first  r,ec- 
ticn  opens  with  a  magnificent  description  of  the 
coming  of  Jehovah  to  judgment  for  the  sins  and 
idolatries  of  Israel  and  Judah  (i.  2-4),  and  the 
sentence  pronounced  upon  Samaria  (5-9)  by  the 
Judge  Himself.  The  prophet,  whose  sympathies 
are  strong  with  Judah,  and  especially  with  the 
lowlands  which  gave  him  birth,  sees  the  danger 
which  threatens  his  country,  and  traces  in  imagina 
tion  the  devastating  inarch  of  the  Assyrian  con 
querors  from  Samaria  onward  to  Jerusalem  and  the 
south  (i.  8-16).  The  impending  punishment  sug 
gests  its  cause,  and  the  prophet  denounces  a  woe 
upon  the  people  generally  for  the  corruption  and 
violence  which  were  rife  among  them,  and  upon 
the  false  prophets  who  led  them  astray  by  pan 
dering  to  their  appetites  and  luxury  (ii.  1-11). 
The  sentence  of  captivity  is  passed  upon  them  (10) 
but  is  followed  instantly  by  a  promise  of  restora 
tion  and  triumphant  return  (ii.  12,  13).  The 
second  section  is  addressed  especially  to  the  princes 
and  heads  of  the  people,  their  avarice  and  rapacity 
are  rebuked  in  strong  terms,  and  as  they  have  been 
deaf  to  the  cry  of  the  suppliants  for  justice,  they 
too  "  shall  cry  unto  Jehovah,  but  He  will  not  hear 
them"  (iii.  1-4).  The  false  prophets  who  had 
deceived  others  should  themselves  be  deceived  : 
"  the  sun  shall  go  down  over  the  prophets,  and 
the  day  shall  be  dark  over  them"  (iii.  6).  For 
this  perversion  of  justice  and  right,  and  the  cove- 
tousness  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  judged  for 
reward,  of  the  priests  who  taught  for  hire,  and  of 
the  prophets  who  divined  for  money,  Zion  should 
"  be  ploughed  as  a  field,"  and  the  mountain  of 
the  temple  become  like  the  uncultivated  wood 
land  heights  (iii.  9-12).  But  the  threatening  is 
again  succeeded  by  a  promise  of  restoration,  and 
in  the  glories  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  the  prcphet 
loses  sight  of  the  desolation  which  should  betal  hi 
country.  Instead  of  the  temple  mountain  covered 
with  the  wild  growth  of  the  forest,  he  sees  the 
mountain  of  the  house  of  Jehovah  established  on 
the  top  of  the  mountains,  and  nations  flowing  like 
rivers  unto  it.  The  reign  of  peace  is  inaugurated 
by  the  recal  from  captivity,  and  Jehovah  sits  as 
king  in  Zion,  having  destroyed  the  nations  who 
had  rejoiced  in  her  overthrow.  The  predictions  in 
this  section  form  the  climax  of  the  book,  and 
Ewald  arranges  them  in  four  strophes,  consisting 
of  from  seven  to  eight  verses  each  (iv.  1-8,  iv.  9- 
v.  2,  v.  3-9,  v.  10-15),  with  the  exception  of  the 
last,  which  is  shower,  and  in  which  the  prophet 
reverts  to  the  point  whence  he  started  :  all  objects 
of  politic  and  idolatrous  confidence  must  be  re 
moved  before  the  grand  consummation.  In  the 
last  section  (vi.  vii.)  Jehovah,  by  a  bold  poetical 
figure,  is  represented  as  holding  a  controversy  with 
His  people,  pleading  with  them  in  justification  of 
His  conduct  towards  them  sud  the  reasonableness 
of  His  requirements.  The  dialogue  form  in  which 
chap.  vi.  is  cast  renders  the  picture  very  dramatic 
and  striking.  In  vi.  3-5  Jehovah  speaks  ;  the 


d  E-<vald  now  maintains  that  Mic.  vi.  vil.  is  by  another 
fcuul ;  prcbably  written  ic  the  course  of  tie  7th  cent.  B.C., 


MICAH 

inquiry  of  the  people  follows  in  ver.  6,  indicating 
their  entire  ignorance  of  what  was  required  »>' 
them;  their  inquiry  is  met  by  the  almost  im 
patient  rejoinder,  "  Will  Jehovah  be  pleased  with 
thousands  of  rams,  with  myriads  of  torrents  ot 
oil  ?"  The  still  greater  sacrifice  suggested  by  the 
people,  "  Shall  I  give  my  firstborn  tor  my  trans 
gression  ?"  calls  forth  the  definition  of  their  true 
duty,  "  to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to 
walk  humbly  with  their  God."  How  far  they 
had  fallen  short  of  this  requirement  is  shown  in 
what  follows  (9-12),  and  judgment  is  pronounced 
upon  them  (13-16).  The  prophet  acknowledges 
and  bewails  the  justice  of  the  sentence  (vii.  1-6), 
the  people  in  repentance  patiently  look  to  God, 
confident  that  their  prayer  will  be  heard  (7-10), 
and  are  reassured  by  the  promise  of  deliverance 
announced  as  following  their  punishment  (11-13) 
by  the  prophet,  who  in  his  turn  presents  his 
petition  to  Jehovah  for  the  restoration  of  His 
people  (14,  15).  The  whole  concludes  with  a 
triumphal  song  of  joy  at  the  great  deliverance, 
like  that  from  Egypt,  which  Jehovah  will  achieve, 
and  a  full  acknowledgment  of  His  mercy  and  faith 
fulness  to  His  promises  (16-20).  The  last  verse  is 
reproduced  in  the  song  of  Zacharias  (Luke  i.  72, 73).* 

The  predictions  uttered  by  Micah  relate  to  the 
invasions  of  Shalmaueser  (i.  6-8 ;  2  K.  rvii.  4,  6) 
and  Sennacherib  (i.  9-16;  2  K.  xviii.  13),  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem  (iii.  12,  vii.  13),  the  cap 
tivity  in  Babylon  (iv.  10),  the  return  (iv.  1-8,  vii. 
11),  the  establishment  of  a  theocratic  kingdom  in 
Jerusalem  (iv.  8),  and  the  Ruler  who  should  spring 
from  Bethlehem  (v.  2).  The  destruction  of  Assyria 
and  Babylon  is  supposed  to  be  referred  to  in  v.  5, 6, 
vii.  8,  10.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  prophecies 
commence  with  the  last  words  recorded  of  the 
prophet's  namesake,  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah, 
"  Hearken,  0  people,  every  one  of  you"  (1  K.  xzii. 
28).  From  this,  Bleek  (Emleitung,  p.  539)  con 
cludes  that  the  author  of  the  history,  like  the  eccle 
siastical  historians,  confounded  Micah  the  Morasthite 
with  Micaiah;  while  Hengstenberg  (Christology,  i. 
4C9,  Eng.  tr.)  infers  that  the  coincidence  was  in 
tentional  on  the  part  of  the  later  prophet,  and  that 
"  by  this  very  circumstance  he  gives  intimation  of 
what  may  be  expected  from  him,  shows  that  his 
activity  is  to  be  considered  as  a  continuation  of  that 
of  his  predecessor,  who  was  so  jealous  for  God,  and 
that  he  had  more  in  common  with  him  than  the 
mere  name."  Either  conclusion  rests  on  the  ex 
tremely  slight  foundation  of  the  occurrence  of  a 
formula  which  was  at  once  the  most  simple  and  mos/ 
natural  commencement  of  a  prophetic  discourse. 

The  style  of  Micah  has  been  compared  with  that 
of  Hosea  and  Isaiah.  The  similarity  of  their  sub 
ject  may  account  for  many  resemblances  in  language 
with  the  latter  prophet,  which  were  almost  un 
avoidable  (comp.  Mic.  i.  2  with  Is.  i.  2  ;  Mic.  ii.  2 
with  Is.  v.  8;  Mic.  ii.  6,  11  with  Is.  xxx.  10; 
Mic.  ii.  12  with  Is.  x.  20-22 ;  Mic.  vi.  6-8  with 
Is.  i.  11-17).  The  diction  of  Micah  is  vigorous  and 
forcible,  sometimes  obscure  from  the  abruptness  of 
its  transitions,  but  varied  and  rich  in  figures  derived 
from  the  pastoral  (i.  8,  ii.  12,  v.  4,  5,  7,  8,  vii.  14) 
and  rural  life  of  the  lowland  country  (i.  6,  iii.  12, 
iv.  3,  12,  13,  vi.  15),  whose  vines  and  ohves  and 
fig-trees  were  celebrated  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  27,  28),  and 
supply  the  prophet  with  so  many  striking  allusions 


and  that  v.  9-14  is  the  original  conclusion  of  Jlicah's  pr» 
phccy  (JcOirb.  xi.  p  29). 


MICAIAH 


349 


vi.  6,  iv.  3,  4,  vi.  15,  vii.  1,4)  as  to  suggest  that, 
like  Amos,  he  may  have  been  either  a  herdsman  or 
a  vine-dresser,  who  had  heard  the  howling  of  the 
jackals  (i.  8,  A.  V.  "dragons")  as  he  watched  his 
flocks  or  his  vines  by  night,  and  had  seen  the  lions 
slaughtering  the  sheep  (y.  8).  One  peculiarity 
which  he  has  in  common  with  Isaiah  is  the  frequent 
use  of  paronomasia ;  in  i.  10-15  there  is  a  succes 
sion  of  instances  of  this  figure  in  the  plays  upon 
words  suggested  by  the  various  places  enumerated 
^comp.  also  ii.  4),  which  it  is  impossible  to  transfer 
to  English,  though  Ewald  has  attempted  to  render 
them  into  German  (Proplieten  des  A.  B.  i.  329, 
iioO).  The  poetic  vigour  of  the  opening  scene  and  of 
the  dramatic  dialogue  sustained  throughout  the  last 
two  chapters  has  already  been  noticed. 

The  language  of  Micah  is  quoted  in  Matt.  ii.  5, 6, 
tnd  his  prophecies  alluded  to  in  Matt.  x.  35,  36  ; 
Mark  xiii.  12  ;  Luke  xii.  53  ;  John  vii.  42. 

2.  (M»x^  '•  Micha).  A  descendant  of  Joel  the 
Reulenite  [JOEL,  5],  and  ancestor  of  Beerah,  who 
was  prince  of  his  tribe  at  the  time  of  the  captivity 
of  the  northern  kingdom  (1  Chr.  v.  5). 

3.  The  son  of  Merib-baal,  or  Mephibosheth,  the 
son  of  Jonathan  (1  Chr.  viii.  34,  35,  ix.  40,  41). 
In  2  Sam.  ix.  12  he  is  called  MiCHA. 

4.  A  Kohathite  Levite,  eldest  sou  of  Uzziel  the 
brother  of  Amram,  and  therefore  cousin  to  Moses 
and  Aaron  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  20).    In  Ex.  vi.  22  neither 
Micah  nor  his  brother  Jesiah,  or  Isshiah,  appears 
among  the  sons  of  Uzziel,  who  are  there  said  to  be 
Mishael,  Elzaphan,  and  Zithri.     In  the  A.  V.  of 
1  Chr.  xxiv.  24,  25,  the  names  of  the  two  brothers 
are   written   MICHAH    and   ISSUIAH,   though   the 
Hebrew  forms  are  the  same  as  in  the  preceding 
chapter.     This  would  seem  to  indicate  that  chaps, 
xxiii.,  xxiv.,  were  translated  by  different  hands. 

5.  (Mixai'a)-   The  father  of  Abdon,  a  man  of  high 
station  in  the  reign  of  Josiah.    In  2  K.  xxii.  12  he  is 
called  "MiCHAiAH  the  father  of  Achbor."  [W.A.W.] 

MICAI'AH  (-lrV3»D :    M»x^«:    Michaeas). 

There  are  seven  persons  of  this  name  in  the  O.T. 
besides  Micah  the  Levite,  to  whom  the  name  is 
twice  given  in  the  Hebrew  (Judg.  xvii.  1,  4); 
Micah  and  Micaiah  meaning  the  same  thing,  "  Who 
like  Jehovah  ?"  In  the  A.  V.  however,  with  the  one 
exception  following,  the  name  is  given  as  MICHAIAH. 
The  son  of  Imlah,  a  prophet  of  Samaria,  who, 
in  the  last  year  of  the  reign  of  Ahab,  king  of  Israel, 
predicted  his  defeat  and  death,  B.C.  897.  The  cir 
cumstances  were  as  follows : — Three  years  after  the 
great  battle  with  Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  in  which 
the  extraordi nary  number  of  100,000  Syrian  soldiers 
is  said  to  have  been  slain,  without  reckoning  the 
27,000,  who,  it  is  asserted,  were  killed  by  the  fall 
ing  of  the  wall  at  Aphek,  Ahab  proposed  to  Jeho- 
shaphat  king  of  Judah  that  they  should  jointly  go 
up  to  battle  against  Ramoth  Gilead ;  which  Ben 
hadad  was,  apparently,  bound  by  treaty  to  restore 
to  Ahab.  Jehoshaphat,  whose  son  Jehoram  had 
married  Athaliah,  Ahab's  daughter,  assented  in 
cordial  words  to  the  proposal ;  but  suggested  that 
they  should  first  "  enquire  at  the  word  of  Jeho 
vah."  Accordingly,  Ahab  assembled  400  pro 
phets,  \rhile,  in  an  open  space  at  the  gate  of  the 
city  ot'  Samaria,  he  and  Jehoshaphat  sat  in  royal 
robes  to  meet  and  consult  them.  The  prophets 

«  As  the  definite  article  is  prefixed  in  Hebrew,  Thenius, 
Hertheau,  and  Bunsen  translate  the  Spirit,  and  understand 
1  personification  of  the  Spirit  of  Propneoy.  But  the  ori 
ginal  wotls  scrm  to  be  meivly  an  extreme  instance  of  the 


unanimously  gave  a  favourable  response  ;  and  among 
them,  Zedekiah  the  son  of  Chenaanah,  made  horns 
of  iron  as  a  symbol,  and  announced,  from  Jeho 
vah,  that  with  those  horns  Ahab  would  push  tht 
Syrians  till  he  consumed  them.  For  some  reason 
which  is  unexplained,  and  can  now  only  be  conjec 
tured,  Jehoshaphat  was  dissatisfied  with  the  answer, 
and  asked  if  there  was  no  other  prophet  of  Jehovah, 
at  Samaria?  Ahab  replied  that  there  was  yet 
one — Micaiah.  the  son  of  Imlah ;  but,  in  words 
which  obviously  call  to  mind  a  passage  ia  the  Iliad 
(i.  106),  he  added,  "  I  hate  him,  for  he  does  not 
prophecy  good  concerning  me,  but  evil."  Micaiah 
was,  nevertheless,  sent  for ;  and  after  an  attempt 
had  in  vain  been  made  to  tamper  with  him,  he  first 
expressed  an  ironical  concurrence  with  the  400  pro 
phets,  and  then  openly  foretold  the  defeat  of  Ahab's 
army  and  the  death  of  Ahab  himself.  And  in  op 
position  to  the  other  prophets,  he  said,  that  he  had 
seen  Jehovah  sitting  on  His  throne,  and  all  the  host 
of  Heaven  standing  by  Him,  on  His  right  hand  and 
on  His  left :  that  Jehovah  said,  Who  shall  persuade 
Ahab  to  go  up  and  fall  at  Ramoth  Gilead ;  that  a 
Spirit a  came  forth  and  said  that  he  would  do  so ; 
and  on  being  asked,  Wherewith  ?  he  answered,  that 
he  would  go  forth  and  be  a  lying  spirit  in  the 
mouth  of  all  the  prophets.  Irritated  by  the  account 
of  this  vision,  Zedekiah  struck  Micaiah  on  the 
cheek,  and  Ahab  ordered  Micaiah  to  be  taken  to 
prison,  and  fed  on  bread  and  water,  till  his  return 
to  Samaria.  Ahab  then  went  up  with  his  army  to 
Ramoth  Gilead ;  and  in  the  battle  which  ensued,  Ben 
hadad,  who  could  nothave  failed  to  becomeacquainted 
with  Micaiah's  prophecy,  uttered  so  publicly, 
which  had  even  led  to  an  act  of  public,  personal, 
violence  on  the  part  of  Zedekiah,  gave  special  orders 
to  direct  the  attack  against  Ahab,  individually. 
Ahab,  on  the  other  hand,  requested  Jehoshaphat  to 
wear  his  royal  robes,  which  we  know  that  the  king 
of  Judah  had  brought  with  him  to  Samaria  (1  K. 
xxii.  10) ;  and  then  ho  put  himself  into  disguise  for 
the  battle  ;  hoping  thus,  probably,  to  baffle  the  de 
signs  of  Benhadad,  and  the  prediction  of  Micaiah — 
but  he  was,  nevertheless,  struck  and  mortally  wounded 
in  the  combat  by  a  random  arrow.  See  1  K.  xxii. 
1-35 ;  and  2  Chr.  xviii. — the  two  accounts  in  which 
are  nearly  word  for  word  the  same. 

Josephus  dwells  emphatically  on  the  death  of 
Ahab,  as  showing  the  utility  of  prophecy,  and  the 
impossibility  of  escaping  destiny,  even  when  it  is 
revealed  beforehand  (Ant.  viii.  15,  §6).  He  says 
that  it  steals  on  human  souls,  flattering  them  with 
cheerful  hopes,  till  it  leads  them  round  to  the 
point  whence  it  will  gain  the  mastery  over  them. 
This  was  a  theme  familiar  to  the  Greeks  in  many 
tragic  tales,  and  Josephus  uses  words  in  unison 
with  their  ideas.  (See  Euripides,  Hippolyt.  1256, 
and  compare  Herodot.  vii.  17,  viii.  77,  i.  91.) 
From  his  interest  in  the  story,  Josephus  relates 
several  details  jiot  contained  in  the  Bible,  some  of 
which  are  probable,  while  others  are  very  unlikely  ; 
but  for  none  of  which  does  he  give  any  authority. 
Thus,  he  says,  Micaiah  was  already  in  prison,  when 
sent  for  to  prophesy  before  Ahab  and  Jehoshaphat, 
and  that  it  was  Micaiah  who  had  predicted  death  by  a 
lion  to  the  son  of  a  prophet,  under  the  circumstances 
mentioned  in  1  K.  xx.  35,  36 ;  and  had  rebuked 
Ahab  after  his  brilliant  victory  over  the  Syrians  for 

Hebrews  conceiving  as  definite  what  would  be  indefinite 
in  English.  (See  Gesen.  Gram.  }107,  and  1  K.  iii.  24.)  The 
Spirit  is  conceived  as  definite  from  its  corresponding  to  th» 
requirements  in  the  preceding  question  of  Jehovah. 


350 


MIUAIAH 


not  putting  Benhadad  to  death.  And  there  is  no 
doubt  tliat  these  facts  would  be  not  only  consistent 
with  the  narrative  in  the  Bible,  but  would  throw 
additional  light  upon  it ;  for  the  rebuke  of  Ahab  in 
his  hour  of  triumpfl.  on  account  of  his  forbearance, 
was  calculated  to  excite  in  him  the  intcnsest  feel 
ings  of  displeasure  and  mortification ;  and  it  would 
at  once  explain  Ahab's  hatred  of  Micaiah,  if  Micaiah 
was  the  prophet  by  whom  the  rebuke  was  given. 
And  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Ahab  in  his  resentment 
might  have  caused  Micaiah  to  be  thrown  into  prison, 
just  as  the  princes  of  Judah,  about  300  years  later, 
maltreated  Jeremiah  in  the  same  way  (Jer.  xxxvii. 
15).  But  ^  some  other  statements  of  Josephus  can 
not  so  readily  be  regarded  as  probable.  Thus  he 
relates  that  when  Ahab  disguised  himself,  he  gave 
bis  own  royal  rcbes  to  be  worn  by  Jehoshaphat,  in 
the  battie  of  Ramoth  Gilead — an  act,  which  would 
have  hc-jn  so  unreasonable  and  cowardly  in  Ahab, 
and  would  have  shown  such  singular  complaisance 
in  Jenoshaphat,  that  although  supported  by  the 
transition  in  the  Septuagint,  it  cannot  be  received 
as  true.  The  fact  that  some  of  the  Syrian  captains 
mistook  Jehoshaphat  for  Ahab  is  fully  explained 
oy  Jfthoshaphat's  being  the  only  person,  in  the  army 
of  Isr.iel,  who  wore  royal  robes.  Again,  Josephus 
informs  us,  that  Zedckiah  alleged,  as  a  reason  for 
disregarding  Micaiah's  prediction,  that  it  was  di 
rectly  at  variance  with  the  prophecy  of  Elijah,  that 
dogs  should  lick  the  blood  of  Ahab,  where  dogs  had 
licked  the  blood  of  Naboth,  in  the  city  of  Samaria  : 
inasmuch  as  Ramoth  Gilead,  where,  according  to 
Micaiah,  Ahab  was  to  meet  his  doom,  was  distant 
from  Samaria  a  journey  of  three  days.  It  is  un 
likely,  however,  that  Zedekiah  would  have  founded 
an  argument  on  Elijah's  insulting  prophecy,  even 
to  the  meekest  of  kings  who  might  have  been  the 
subject  of  it ;  but  that,  in  order  to  prove  himself  in 
the  right  as  against  Micaiah,  he  should  have  ven 
tured  on  such  an  allusion  to  a  person  of  Ahab's 
character,  is  absolutely  incredible. 

It  only  remains  to  add,  that  besides  what  is  dwelt 
on  by  Josephus,  the  history  of  Micaiah  offers  several 
points  of  interest,  among  which  the  two  following 
may  be  specified ;  1st.  Micaiah's  vision  presents 
what  may  be  regarded  as  transitional  ideas  of  one 
origin  of  evil  actions.  In  Exodus,  Jehovah  Himself 
is  represented  as  directly  hardening  Pharaoh's  heart 
(vii.  3,  13,  xiv.  4,  17,  x.  20,  27.)  In  the  Book  of 
Job,  the  name  of  Satan  is  mentioned ;  but  he  is 
admitted  without  rebuke,  among  the  Sons  of  God, 
into  the  piesence  of  Jehovah  (Job  i.  6—12).  After 
the  Captivity,  the  idea  of  Satan,  as  an  independent 
principle  of  evil,  in  direct  opposition  to  goodness, 
becomes  fully  established  (1  Chr.  xxi.  1  ;  and 
compare  Wisd.  ii.  24).  [SATAN.]  Now  the  ideas 
presented  in  the  vision  of  Micaiah  are  different 
from  each  of  these  three,  and  occupy  a  place  of 
their  own.  They  do  not  go  so  far  as  the  Book  of 
Job — much  less  so  far  as  the  ideas  current  after  the 
Captivity  ;  but  they  go  farther  than  Exodus.  See 
Ewald,  Poet.  Bucher,  3tter  Theil,  65.  2ndly.  The 
history  of  Micaiah  is  an  exemplication  in  practice, 
af  contradictory  predictions  being  made  by  different 
prophets.  Other  striking  instances  occur  in  the 
time  of  Jeremiah  (xiv.  13, 14;  xxviii.  15, 16 ;  xxiii. 
16,  25,  2B).  The  only  rule  bearing  on  the  judg 
ment  to  be  formed  under  such  circumstances,  seems 
to  have  been  a  negative  one,  which  would  be 
mainly  useful  after  the  event.  It  is  laid  down  in 
Deut.  xviii.  21,  22,  where  the  question  is  asked, 
how  the  children  of  Israel  were  to  know  the  word 


which  Jehovah  had  not  spoken?  And  the  sclutix. 
is,  that  "  if  the  thing  follow  not  nor  come  to 
pass,  that  is  the  thing  which  Jehtvah  has  not 
spoken."  [E.  T.] 

MI'CHA  (NTD  :  MiX<f  :  Micha}.  1.  The  son 
of  Mephibosheth  (2  Sam.  ix.  12);  tiewhere  (1 
Ch.  ix.  40)  called  MlCAH. 

2.  A  Levite,  or  family  of  Levites,  who  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  11). 

3.  (Alex.  'A/t«xe£,  Neh.  xi.  22).    The  father  of 
Mattaniah,  a  Gershonite  Levite  and  descendant  of 
Asaph  (Neh.  ii.  17,  22).     He  is  elsewhere  called 
MICAH  (1  Ch.  ix.  15)  and  MICHAIAH  (Neh.  xii.  35). 

4.  (M«x<£  !  Alex.  Xft/j.d  :  Micha).   A  Simeonite. 
father  of  Ozias,  one  of  the  three  governors  of  the 
city  of  Bethulia  in  the  time  of  Judith  (Jud.  vi.  15). 
His  name  is  remarkable  as  being  connected  with 
one  of  the  few  specific  allusions  to  the  ten  tribei 
after  the  captivity. 

MI'CHAEL  (taa'O 


1.  An  Asherite,  father  of  Sethur,  one  of  the  twelve 
spies  (Num.  xiii.  13). 

2.  The  son  of  Abihail,  one  of  the  Gadites  who 
settled  in  the  land  of  Bashan  (1  Chr.  v.  13). 

3.  Another  Gadite,  ancestor  of  Abihail  (1  Chr. 
v.  14). 

4.  A  Gershonite  Levite,  ancestor  of  Asaph  (1 
Chr.  vi.  40). 

5.  One  of  the  five  sons  of  Izrahiah  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar,  "  all  of  them  chiefs,"  who  with  their 
"  troops  of  the  battle-host"  mustered  to  the  num 
ber  of  36,000  in  the  days  of  David  (1  Chr.  vii.  3). 

6.  A  Benjamite  of  the  sons  of  Beriah  (1  Chr. 
viii.  16). 

7.  One  of  the  captains  of  the  "thousands"  of 
Manasseh  who  joined  the  fortunes  of  David  at  Ziklag 
(1  Chr.  xii.  20). 

8.  The  father,  or  ancestor  of  Omri,  chief  of  the 
tribe  of  Issachar  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  rxvii. 
18)  ;  possibly  the  same  as  No.  5. 

9.  One  of  the  sons  of  Jehoshaphat  who  were 
murdered  by  their  elder  brother  Jehoram  (2  Chr. 
xxi.  2,  4). 

10.  The  father  or  ancestor  of  Zebadiah  of  the 
sons  of  Shephatiah  who  returned  with  Ezra  (Ear. 
viii.  8  ;  1  Esdr.  viii.  34).  [W.  A.  W.] 

11.  "  One,"  or  "  the  first  of  the  chief  princes  " 
or  archangels  (Dan.  x.  1  3  ;  comp.  o  apx<iyyf\os 
in  Jude  9),  described  in  Dan.  x.  21  as  the  "  prince  " 
of  Israel,  and  in  xii.  1  as  '•  the  great  prince  which 
standeth  "  in  time  of  conflict  "  for  the  children  of 
thy  people."    All  these  passages  in  the  0.  T.  belong 
to  that  late  period  of  its  Revelation  when,  to  the 
general  declaration  of  the  angelic  office,  was  added 
the  division  of  that  office  into  parts,  and  the  assign 
ment  of  them  to  individual  angels.     [See  ANGELS, 
vol.  i.  p.  70  a.]     This  assignment  served,  not  only 
to  give  that  vividness  to  man's  faith  in  God's  super 
natural  agents,  which  was  so  much  needed  at  a  time 
of  captivity,  during  the  abeyance  of  His  local  mani 
festations  and  regular  agencies,  but  also  to  mark 
the  finite  and  ministerial  nature  of  the  angels,  lest 
they  should  be  worshipped  in  themselves.     Accord 
ingly,  as  Gabriel  represents  the  ministration  of  the 
angels  towards  man,  so  Michael  is  the  type  and 
leader  of  their  strife,  in  God's  name  and  His  strength. 
against  the  power  of  Satan.     In  the  0.  T.  therefore 
he  is  the  guardian  of  the  Jewish  people  in  their 
antagonism  to  godless  power  and  heathenism.     Jn 
the  N.  T.  (see  Rev.  xii.  7)  he  fights  in  heaven  against 


M10HAH 

the  dragon —  "  1'aat  old  serpent  called  the  Devil  and 
Satan,  which  deceiveth  the  whole  world :"  and  so 
takes  part  in  that  struggle,' which  is  the  work  of  the 
Church  on  earth.  The  nature  and  method  of  his 
war  against  Satan  are  not  explained,  because  the 
knowledge  would  be  unnecessary  and  perhaps 
impossible  to  us :  the  fact  itself  is  revealed  rarely, 
and  with  that  mysterious  vagueness  which  hangs 
over  all  angelic  ministration,  but  yet  with  plainness 
r.nd  certainty. 

There  remains  still  one  passage  (Jude  9  ;  comp. 
2  Pet.  ii.  11)  in  which  we  are  told  that  "  Michael 
the  archangel,  when  contending  with  the  devil  he 
disputed  about  the  body  of  Moses,  durst  not  bring 
against  him  it  railing  accusation,  but  said,  The  Lord 
rebuke  thee."  The  allusion  seems  to  be  to  a  Jewish 
legend  attached  to  Dent,  xxxiv.  6.  The  Targum 
of  Jonathan  attributes  the  burial  of  Moses  to  the 
hands  of  the  angels  of  God,  and  particularly  of  the 
archangel  Michael,  as  the  guardian  of  Israel.  Later 
traditions  (see  Oecumen.  in  Jud.  cap.  i.)  set  forth 
how  Satan  disputed  the  burial,  claiming  for  himself 
the  dead  body  because  of  the  blood  of  the  Egyptian 
(Ex.  ii.  12)  which  was  on  Moses's  hands.  The  reply 
of  Michael  is  evidently  taken  from  Zech.  iii.  1, 
where,  on  Satan's  "  resisting"  Joshua  the  high- 
priest,  because  of  the  filthy  garments  of  his  iniquity, 
Jehovah,  or  "the  angel  of  Jehovah"  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  686),  said  unto  Satan,  "Jehovah  rebuke  thee, 
0  Satan!  Is  not  this  a  brand  plucked  from  the 
Hre  ?  "  The  spirit  of  the  answer  is  the  reference 
to  God's  mercy  alone  for  our  justification,  and  the 
leaving  of  all  vengeance  and  rebuke  to  Him ;  and 
in  this  spirit  it  is  quoted  by  the  Apostle." 

The  Rabbinical  traditions  about  Michael  are  very 
numerous.  They  oppose  him  constantly  to  Sam- 
inael,  the  accuser  and  enemy  of  Israel,  as  disputing 
for  the  soul  of  Moses ;  as  bringing  the  ram  the  sub 
stitute  for  Isaac,  which  Sammael  sought  to  keep 
back,  &c.  &c. :  they  give  him  the  title  of  the  "  greal 
high-priest  in  heaven,"  as  well  as  that  of  the  "  greal 
prince  and  conqueror;"  and  finally  lay  it  down 
that  "  wherever  Michael  is  said  to  have  appeared 
there  the  glory  of  the  Shechinah  is  intended."  I 
is  clear  that  the  sounder  among  them,  in  making 
such  use  of  the  name,  intended  to  personify  th 
Divine  Power,  and  typify  the  Messiah  (see  Schoett 
gen,  Hor.  Hebr.  i.  1079,  1119,  ii.  8, 15,  ed.  Dresd 
'  1742).  But  these  traditions,  as  usual,  are  erectec 
on  very  slender  Scriptural  foundation.  [A.  B.] 
MI'CHAH  (H3»p :  M»x«  =  Micha),  eldest  soi 
of  Uzziel,  the  son  of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  24,  25) 
elsewhere  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  20)  called  MICAH. 

MICHAI'AH  (iVD'O  :  Hixalas  :  Micha} 
The  name  is  identical  with  that  elsewhere  rendera 
Michaiah.  1.  The  father  of  Achbor,  a  man  of  hig 
rank  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  (2  K.  xxii.  32). 
is  the  siime  as  MICAH  the  father  of  Abdon  (2  Chr 
xxxiv.  20). 

2.  (Mixala;  Alex.  Mixeua:  Michaia).  Th 
son  of  Zaccur,  a  descendant  of  Asaph  (Neh.  xi 
Ii5).  He  is  the  same  as  MICAH  the  son  of  Zich: 


MKJHAL 


351 


a  From  unwillingness  to  acknowledge  a  reference  to 
mere  Jewish  tradition  (in  spite  of  vere.  14, 15),  some  hav 
supposed  St.  Jude'8  reference  to  be  to  Zecb.  iii.  1,  an 
explained  the  "  body  of  Moses "  to  be  the  Jewish,  as  th 
"  body  of  Christ "  Is  the  Christian,  Church.  The  who 
explanation  is  forced  ;  but  the  analogy  on  which  the  lae 
part  is  based  is  absolutely  unwarrantable  ;  and  the  ver 
attempt  to  draw  it  shews  a  forgetfulness  of  the  trn 
meaning  of  that  communion  with  Christ,  which  is  implie 
by  the  letter  expression. 


Chr.  is.  15)  and  MICHA  the  son  of  Zabdi  (Neh. 
.17). 

3.  (Omitted    in  Vat.   MS.;    Alex.  Mixufos: 
Niched).     One  of  the  priests  who  blew  the  trum« 
ets  at  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  by 

ehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  41). 

4.  (•1?V3<IO:  Maax<£:  Michaia).  The  daughter 
'  Uriel  of  Gibeah,  wife  of  Rehoboam,  and  mother 
f  Abijah  king  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xiii.  2).       She 

elsewhere  called  "  Maachah  the  daughter  of 
bishalom  "  (1  K.  xv.  2),  or  "  Absalom  "  (2  Chr. 
i.  20),  being,  in  all  probability,  his  granddaughter, 
nd  daughter  of  Tamar  according  to  Josephus. 
MAACHAH,  3.]  The  reading  "  Maachah  "  is  pro- 
ably  the  true  one,  and  is  supported  by  the  LXX. 
nd  Peshito-Syriac. 

5.  (Mjxafa :  Michaea).     One  of  the  princes  of 
ehoshaphat  whom  he  sent  with  certain  priests  and 
,evites  to  teach  the  law  of  Jehovah  in  the  cities  of 
udah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7).  [W.  A.  W.I 

6.  (-inpO:  Mtxafoy.  F.A.  Mix«'<«:  Michaeas). 
'he  son  of  Gemariah.      He  is  only  mentioned  on 
ne  occasion.     After  Baruch  had  read,  in  public, 
>rophecies  of  Jeremiah  announcing  imminent  cala 
mities,  Michaiah  went  and  declared  them  to  all  the 

>rinces  assembled  in  king  Zedekiah's  house ;  and 
,he  princes  forthwith  sent  for  Baruch  to  read  the 
>rophecies  to  them  (Jer.  xxxvi.  11-14).  Michaiah 
as  the  third  in  descent  of  a  princely  family,  whose 
names  are  recorded  in  connexion  with  important 
•eligious  transactions.  His  grandfather  Shaphan 
was  the  scribe,  or  secretary  of  king  Josiah,  to  whom 
ililkiah  the  high-priest  first  delivered  the  book  of 
the  law  which  he  said  he  had  found  in  the  House 
of  Jehovah — Shaphan  first  perusing  the  book  him 
self,  and  then  reading  it  aloud  to  the  youthful  king 
[2  K.  xxii.  10).  And  it  was  from  his  father  Gema- 
riah's  chamber  in  the  Temple,  that  Baruc  hread  the 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  in  the  ears  of  all  the  people. 
Moreover,  Gemariah  was  one  of  the  three  who 
made  intercession  to  king  Zedekiah,  although  in 
vain,  that  he  would  not  burn  the  roll  containing 
Jeremiah's  prophecies.  [E.  T.] 

MICH'AL  (^3»p  :  MeA-x^  5  Joseph.  Mtx^a: 
Michol),  the  younger  of  Saul's  two  daughters 
(1  Sam.  xiv.  49).  The  king  had  proposed  to 
bestow  on  David  his  eldest  daughter  MERAB  ;  but 
before  the  marriage  could  be  arranged  an  unex 
pected  turn  was  given  to  the  matter  by  the  beha 
viour  of  Michal,  who  fell  violently  in  love  with  the 
young  hero.  The  marriage  with  her  elder  sister 
was  at  once  put  aside.  Saul  eagerly  caught  at 
the  opportunity  which  the  change  afforded  him 
of  exposing  his  'rival  to  the  risk  of  death.  The 
price  fixed  on  Michal's  hand  was  no  less  than  the 
slaughter  of  a  hundred  Philistines.1  For  these  the 
usual  "  dowry  "  by  which,  according  to  the  cus 
tom  of  the  East,  from  the  time  of  Jacob  down  to 
the  present  day,  the  father  is  paid  for  his  daughter, 
was  relinquished.  David  by  a  brilliant  feat  doubled 
the  tale  of  victims,  and  Michal  became  his  wife. 
What  her  age  was  we  do  not  know — her  husband 
cannot  have  been  more  than  sixteen. 

a  Perhaps  ncthlng  In  the  whole  Bible  gives  so  complete 
an  example  of  the  gap  which  exists  between  Kaslern 
and  Western  ideas,  as  the  manner  in  which  the  tale  of 
these  uncircumciscd  enemies  of  Israel  was  to  be  counted. 
Josephus  softens  it  by  substituting  heads  for  foreskins, 
but  it  is  obvious  that  heads  would  not  have  answered  the 
same  nurpose.  The  LXX.,  who  often  alter  obnoxious  ex 
pressions,  adhere  to  the  Hebrew  text. 


352 


MICHAL 


It  was  not  long  before  the  strength  of  her  aflec 

tirm  was  put  to  the  proof.     They  seem  to  hav 

been  living  at  Gibeah,  then  the  head-quarters  o 

the  king  and  the  army.    After  one  of  Saul's  attack 

of  freozy,    in   which    David   had    barely   escape 

being  transfixed  by  the  king's  great  spear,  Mich?. 

learned  that  the  house  was  being  watched  by  th 

myrmidons  of  Saul,  and  that  it  was  intended  on 

the  next  morning  to  attack  her  husband  as  he  lef 

his  door  (six.   11).     That  the  intention  was  je 

was   evident    from    the   behaviour   of  the   king' 

soldiers,  who  paraded  round  and  round  the  town,  ant 

"  returning  "  to  the  house  "  in  the  evening,"  witl 

loud  criea,  more  like  the  yells  of  the  savage  dogs  o 

the  East  than    the  utterances  of  human  beings 

"  belched  out "  curses  and  lies  against  the  young 

warrior  who  had  so  lately  shamed  them  all  (Ps.  lix.b 

3,  6,  7,  12).     Michal  seems  to  have  known  too 

well  the  vacillating  and  ferocious  disposition  of  her 

father  when   in   these    demoniacal    moods.      Thi 

attack  was  ordered  for  the  morning;    but  before 

the  morning  arrives  the  king  will  probably  hav 

changed   his  mind   and  hastened  his   stroke.     So 

like  a  true  soldier's  wife,  she  meets  stratagem  by 

stratagem.     She  first  provided  for  David's  safety  by 

lowering  him  out  of  the  window:    to  gain  time 

for  him  to  reach  the  residence  of  Samuel  she  next 

dressed  up  the  bed  as  if  still  occupied  by  him :  the 

teraphira,  or  household  god,  was  laid  in  the  bed,  its 

head  enveloped,  like  that  of  a  sleeper,  in  the  usual 

net c  of  goat's  hair  for  protection  from  gnats,  the 

rest  of  the  figure  covered  with  the  wide  beged  or 

plaid.     It  happened  as  she  had  feared ;  Saul  could 

not  delay  his  vengeance  till  David  appeared  out  of 

doors,  but  sent  his  people  into  the  house.     The 

reply  of  Michal   is   that  her  husband   is   ill   and 

cannot  be  disturbed.     At  last  Saul  will  be  baulked 

no  longer:  his  messengers  force  their  way  into  the 

inmost  apartment  and  there  discover  the  deception 

which  has  been  played  off  upon  them  with  such 

success.     Saul's  rage  may  be  imagined  :  his  fury 

was  such  that  Michal  was  obliged  to  fabricate  a 

story  of  David's  having  attempted  to  kill  her. 

This  was  the  last  time  she  saw  her  husband 
for  many  years;  and  when  the  rupture  between 
Saul  and  David  had  become  open  and  incurable, 
Michal  was  married  to  another  man,  Phalti  or 
Phaltiel  of  Gallim  (1  Sam.  xxv.  44;  2  Sam.  iii. 
15),  a  village  probably  not  far  from  Gibeah. 
After  the  death  of  her  father  and  brothers  at 
Gilboa,  Michal  and  her  new  husband  appear  to 
have  betaken  themselves  with  the  rest  of  the 
family  of  Saul  to  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan. 
If  the  old  Jewish  tradition  inserted  by  the  Targum 
in  2  Sam.  xxi.  may  be  followed,  she  was  occupied 
in  bringing  up  the  sons  of  her  sister  Merab  and 
Adriel  of  Meholah.  At  any  rate  it  is  on  the  road 
leading  up  from  the  Jordan  valley  to  the  Mount 
of  Olives  that  we  first  encounter  her  with  her 
husband — Michal  under  the  joint  escort  of  David's 
messengers  and  Abner's  twenty  men,  en  route  to 
David  at  Hebron,  the  submissive  Phaltiel  behind, 
bewailing  the  wife  thus  torn  from  him.  It  was  at 


b  This  Psalm  by  its  title  in  the  Hebrew,  LXX.,  Vul 
gate,  and  Targum.  is  referred  to  the  event  in  question,  a 
view  strenuously  supported  by  Hengstenberg. 

c  D'W  T23.  This  Is  Ewald's  explanation  of 
A  term  which  has  puzzled  all  other  commentators 
(Geeck.  iii.  101).  For  "V33,  the  LXX.  seem  to  have 
read  "133,  a  liver;  since  they  state  that  Michal  "put 
the  liver  of  a  goat  at  David's  head."  For  an  ingenious 
suggestion  founded  on  this,  see  MAGIC,  p.  179o. 


MICHAL 

least  fourteen  years  since  David  and  she  had  partaj 
at  Gibeah,  since  she  had  watched  him  disappear 
down  the  cord  into  the  darkness  and  had  perilled 
her  own  life  for  his  against  the  rage  of  her  insane 
father.     That  David's  love  for  his  absent  wife  had 
undergone  no  change  in  the  interval  seems  certain 
from   the  eagerness  with  which   he  reclaims  her 
as  soon  as  the  opportunity  is  afforded  him.     Im 
portant  as  it  was   to   him    to   make  an  alliance 
with  Ishbosheth  and  the  great  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
and   much  as   he   respected   Abner,   he  will   not 
listen  for  a  moment  to  any  overtures  till  his  wife 
is  restored.      Every  circumstance   is  fresh  in  his 
memory.     "  I  will  not  see  thy  face  except  thou 
first  bring  Saul's  daughter  ....  my  wife  Michal 
whom  I  espoused  to  me  for  a  hundred  foreskin* 
of  the   Philistines"  (2   Sam.  iii.   13,   14).     The 
meeting  took  place  at  Hebron.     How  Michal  com 
ported  herself  in  the  altered  circumstances  of  David's 
household,  how  she  received   or  was  received  by 
Abigail  and  Ahinoam  we  are  not  told ;  but  it  is 
plain  from  the  subsequent  occurrences  that  some 
thing  had  happened  to  alter  the  relations  of  herself 
and  David     They  were  no  longer  what  they  had 
been  to  each  other.     The  alienation  was  probably 
mutual.     On  her  side  must  have  been  the  recol 
lection  of  the  long  contests  which  had  taken  place 
in  the  interval  between  her  father  and  David  ;  the 
strong  anti-Saulite  and  anti-Benjamite  feeling  pre 
valent  in  the  camp  at  Hebron,  where  every  word 
she  heard  must  have  contained  some  distasteful 
allusion,  and  where  at  every  turn  she  must  have 
encountered    men    like    Abiathar    the    priest    or 
Ismaiah  the  Gibeonite  (1  Chr.  xii.  4;   comp.  2 
Sam.   xxi.   2),   who  had  lost  the  whole  or  the 
greater  part  of  their  relatives  in  some  sudden  burst 
jf  her  father's  fury.     Add  to  this  the  connexion 
between  her  husband  and  the  Philistines  who  had 
killed  her  father  and  brothers  ;  and,  more  than  all 
perhaps,  the  inevitable  difference  between  the  boy- 
lusband  of  her  recollections  and  the  matured  and 
occupied  warrior  who  now  received  her.    The  whole 
must  have  come  upon  her  as  a  strong  contrast  to 
;he  affectionate  husband  whose  tears  had  followed 
ler  along  the  road  over  Olivet,  and  to  the  home 

over  which  we  cannot  doubt  she  ruled  supreme. 
On  the  side  of  David  it  is  natural  to  put  her 

advanced  years,  in  a  climate  where  women  are 
)ld  at  thirty,  and  probably  a  petulant  and  jealous 
emper  inherited  from  her  father,  one  outburst  of 

which  certainly  produced  the  rupture  between 
hem  which  closes  our  knowledge  of  Michal. 

It  was  the  day  of  David's  greatest  triumph,  when 
ie  brought  the  Ark  of  Jehovah  from  its  temporary 

resting-place  to  its  home  in  the  newly-acquired 
ity.  It  was  a  triumph  in  every  respect  peculiarly 
lis  own.  The  procession  consisted  of  priests,  Le- 

vites,  the  captains  of  the  host,  the  elders  of  the 

nation  ;  and  conspicuous  in  front,  "  in  the  midst  of 
he  damsels  playing  on  the  timbrels,"  d  was  the  king 
ancing  and  leaping.  Michal  watched  this  procession 
pproach  from  the  window  of  her  apartments  in  the 
oyal  harem  ;  the  motions  of  her  husband  •  shocked 

No  doubt  a  similar  procession  to  that  alluded  to  in 
Js.  IxvHi.  25,  where  it  will  be  observed  that  the  words 
nterpolated  by  our  translators—"  among  them  were  the 
amsels  " — alter  the  sense.  The  presence  of  the  women 

stated  ahpve  is  implied  in  the  words  of  Michal  in  2  Sam. 
i.  20,  when  compared  with  the  statement  of  PB.  Ixviii  • 

•  It  seems  from  the  words  of  Michal  (vi.  20),  which 
,ust  be  taken  in  their  literal  sense,  coupled  with  the 
tatement  of  1  Chr.  xv.  27,  that  David  was  clad  in  nothing 
ut  the  ephod  of  thin  linoi-.  So  it  is  understood  by 


MICHAL 

JMT  as  undignified  and  indecent  —  "she  despised 
him  in  her  heart."  It  would  have  been  well  it* 
her  contempt  had  rested  there;  but  it  was  not  in 
her  nature  to  conceal  it,  and  when,  after  the 
exertions  of  the  long  day  were  over,  the  last  burnt- 
offering  and  the  last  peace-offering  ottered,  the  last 
portion  distributed  to  the  crowd  of  worshippers, 
the  king  entered  his  house  to  bless  his  family,  he 
was  received  by  his  wife  not  with  the  congratula 
tions  which  he  had  a  right  to  expect  and  which 
would  have  been  so  grateful  to  him,  but  with  a 
bitter  taunt  which  showed  how  incapable  she  was 
of  appreciating  either  her  husband's  temper  or  the 
service  in  which  he  had  been  engaged.  David's 
retort  was  a  tremendous  one,  conveyed  in  words 
which  once  spoken  could  never  be  recalled.  It 
gathered  up  all  the  differences  between  them  which 
made  sympathy  no  longer  possible,  and  we  do 
not  need  the  assurance  of  the  sacred  writer  that 
"  Michal  had  no  child  unto  the  day  of  her  death," 
to  feel  quite  certain  that  all  intercourse  between 
her  and  David  must  have  ceased  from  that  date. 
Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  4,  §3)  intimates  that  she 
returned  to  Phaltiel,  but  of  this  there  is  no  men 
tion  in  the  records  of  the  Bible;  and,  however 
much  we  may  hesitate  at  doubting  a  writer  so 
accurate  as  Josephus  when  his  own  interests  are 
not  concerned,  yet  it  would  be  difficult  to  reconcile 
such  a  thing  with  the  known  ideas  of  the  Jews  as  to 
women  who  had  once  shared  the  king's  bed.f  [See 
KIZPAH,  ABISHAG,  ADONUAH.] 

Her  name  appears  but  once  again  (2  Sam.  xxi.  8) 
as  the  bringer-up,  or  more  accurately  the  mother, 
of  five  of  the  grandchildren  of  Saul  who  were 
sacrificed  to  Jehovah  by  the  Gibeonites  on  the 
hill  of  Gibeah.  But  it  is  probably  more  correct 
to  substitute  Merab  for  Michal  in  this  place,  for 
which  see  p.  327.  [G.] 

MICHE'AS  (Michaeas),  the  prophet  Micah 
the  Morasthite  (2  Esd.  i.  39). 

MICH-MAS  (DD3O :  MaxitJa  ;  Alex.  Xa/u- 
aas :  Machmas),  a  variation,  probably  a  later'  form, 
of  the  name  MICHMASH  (Ezr.  ii.  27  ;  Neh.  vii.  31). 
In  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Esdras  it  is  given  as 
MACALON.  See  the  following  article.  [G.] 


MICHMASH 


353 


MICH'MASH  (PO319 :  MOXM^S  :  Machmas), 

a  town  which  is  known  to  us  almost  solely  by  its 
connexion  with  the  Philistine  war  of  Saul  and  Jo 
nathan  (1  Sam.  xiii.  xiv.).  It  has  been  identifiec 
with  great  probability  in  a  village  which  still  bears 
the  name  of  Mukhmas,  and  stands  at  about  7  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  northern  edge  of  the 
great  Wady  Suweinit — in  some  Maps  W.  Fuwar — 


rhich  forms  the  main  pass  of  communication  be- 
ween  the  central  highlands  on  which  the  village 
amis,  and  the  Jordan  valley  at  Jericho.  Imme« 
lately  facing  Mukhmas,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
•avine,  is  the  modern  representative  of  Geba ;  and 
Behind  this  again  are  Ramah  and  Gibeah — all  me 
morable  names  in  the  long  struggle  which  has  im- 
nortalised  Michmash.  Bethel  is  about  4  miles  to 
he  north  of  Michmash,  and  the  interval  is  filled  uf 
y  the  heights  of  Burka,  Deir  Ditcnn,  Tell  el- 
Hajar,  &c.,  which  appear  to  have  constituted  the 
'  Mount  Bethel "  of  the  narrative  (xiii.  2).  So 
nuch  is  necessary  to  make  the  notices  of  Michmash 
ontained  in  the  Bible  intelligible. 

The  place  was  thus  situated  in  the  very  middle 
f  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  If  the  name  be,  as  some 
cholars  assert  (Fiirst,  Handwb.  6006,  7326),  com 
pounded  from  that  of  Chemosh,  the  Moabite  deity, 
t  is  not  improbably  a  relic  of  some  incursion  or  in- 
rasion  of  the  Moabites,justas  Chephar-haammonai, 
n  this  very  neighbourhood,  is  of  the  Ammonites. 
Jut  though  in  the  heart  of  Benjamin,  it  is  not  named 
n  the  list  of  the  towns  of  that  tribe  (comp.  Josh, 
xviii.),  but  first  appeal's  as  one  of  the  chief  points  of 
Saul's  position  at  the  outbreak  of  the  war.  He  was 
>ccupying  the  range  of  heights  just  mentioned,  one 
md  of  his  line  resting  on  Bethel,  the  other  at 
tfichmash  (1  Sam.  xiii.  2).  In  Geba,  close  to  him 
rat  separated  by  the  wide  and  intricate  valley,  the 
~'hilistines  had  a  garrison,  with  a  chief  •  officer. 
The  taking  of  the  garrison  or  the  killing  of  the 
officer  by  Saul's  son  Jonathan  was  the  first  move. 
The  next  was  for  the  Philistines  to  swarm  up 
Vom  their  sea-side  plain  in  such  numbers,  that  no 
alternative  was  left  for  Saul  but  to  retire  down 
the  Wady  to  Gilgal,  near  Jericho,  that  from  that 
ancient  sanctuary  he  might  collect  and  reassure 
the  Israelites.  Michmash  was  then  occupied  by 
the  Philistines,  and  was  their  furthest  post  to  the 
Kast.b  But  it  was  destined  to  witness  their  sudden 
overthrow.  While  he  was  in  Geba,  and  his  father 
in  Michmash,  Jonathan  must  have  crossed  the 
ntervening  valley  too  often  not  to  know  it  tho 
roughly  ;  and  the  intricate  paths  which  render  it 
impossible  for  a  stranger  to  find  his  way  through 
the  mounds  and  hummocks  which  crowd  the  bottom 
of  the  ravine — with  these  he  was  so  familiar — the 
"  passages"  here,  the  "  sharp  rocks"  there— as  to 
be  able  to  traverse  them  even  in  the  dark.  It  was 
just  as  the  day  dawned  (Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  6,  §2) 
that  the  watchers  in  the  garrison  at  Michmash 
descried  the  two  Hebrews  clambering  up  the  steeps 
beneath.  We  learn  from  the  details  furnished  by 
Josephus,  who  must  have  had  an  opportunity  of 
examining  the  spot  when  he  passed  it  with  Titus 


Procopius  of  Gaza  (in  1  Chr.  xv.).  The  ephod  seems  to 
bave  been  a  kind  of  tippet  which  went  over  thi 
shoulders,  (tTrw/uw),  and  cannot  have  afforded  much  pro 
t*ctlon  to  the  person,  especially  of  a  man  In  violen 
action. 

'  The  Jewish  tradition,  preservjd  in  the  Targum  on 
Ruth  ili.  8,  states  that  Phaltiel  had  from  the  first  acted  in 
accordance  with  the  Idea  alluded  to  In  the  text.  He  1 
placed  in  the  same  rank  with  Joseph,  and  is  comme 

morated  as  "  Phaltiel,  son  of  Laisb,  the  pious  (K*V 

T 

the  word  used  for  the  Puritans  of  the  New  Testamen 
times),  who  placed  a  sword  between  himself  and  Micha 
Saul's  daughter,  lest  he  should  go  in  unto  her."  [Asm 
DAKANS.] 

»  The  change  of  &  into  Q  is  frequent  in  the  late 
Hi-brew  (see  Gesen.  Thes.  9316). 
vni,.  ii. 


The  Hebrew  word  S^V?,  or  l^VD,  means  both  an 
officer  and  a  garrison  (Gesen.  Thes.  903).  It  Is  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  by  the  former  in  1  K.  Iv.  19,  and  by  the  latter 
in  the  passage  in  question.  Ewald  (Gesch.  Hi.  41)  affirms 
unhesitatingly  that  the  former  is  correct;  but  lot  to 
Michaelis,  Zunz,  and  De  Wette,  in  their  translations,  or 
Gesenius  as  above.  The  English  word  "  post "  embraces 
some  of  the  significations  of  ffettib. 

b  See  xlv.  31,  where  Michmash  is  named  as  the  point 
on  the  east  at  which  the  slaughter  began,  and  Ajalon,  on 
the  west,  that  at  which  it  terminated.  Unlike  the  Ca- 
naanites  (Josh,  x.),  who  probably  made  off  in  the  direction 
of  Phoenicia,  and  therefore  chose  the  upper  road  by  the 
two  Beth-borons,  the  Philistines  when  they  reatned  G  (boon 
took  the  left  hand  and  lower  road,  by  the  Wady  Kuleifuii 
—where  Yalo  still  exists— the  most  direct  access  to  tueii 
own  maritime  plain. 

2   A 


354 


MICHMASH 


ou  their  way  to  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  (see  B.  J. 
v.  2,  §1),  that  the  part  of  Michmash  in  which 
the  Philistines  had  established  themselves,  consisted 
of  three  summits,  surrounded  by  a  line  of  rock; 
like  a  natural  entrenchment,  and  ending  in  a  long 
and  sharp  precipice  believed  to  be  impregnable. 
Finding  himself  observed  from  above,  and  taking 
Ihe  invitation  as  an  omen  in  his  favour,  Jonathan 
turned  from  the  course  which  he  was  at  first  pur 
suing,  and  crept  up  in  the  direction  of  the  point 
reputed  impregnable.  And  it  was  there,  according 
to  Josephus,  that  he  and  his  armour-bearer  made 
their  entrance  to  the  camp  (Joseph.  Ant.  vi.  6,  §2). 
[GIBEAH,  vol.  i.  6906  ;  JONATHAN.] 

Unless  MAKAZ  be  Michmash — an  identification 
for  which  we  have  only  the  authority  of  the  LXX. 
— we  hear  nothing  of  the  place  from  this  time 
till  the  invasion  of  Judah  by  Sennacherib  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah,  when  it  is  mentioned  by  Isaiah 
(x.  28).  He  is  advancing  by  the  northern  road, 
and  has  passed  Ai  and  Migron.  At  Michmash,  on 
the  further  side  of  the  almost  impassable  ravine, 
the  heavy  baggage  (A.  V.  "  carriages,"  see  vol.  i. 
28 la)  is  deposited,  but  the  great  king  himseli 
crosses  the  pass,  and  takes  up  his  quarters  for  the 
night  at  Geba.  All  this  is  in  exact  accordance  with 
the  indications  of  the  narrative  of  1  Samuel,  and 
with  the  present  localities. 

After  the  captivity  the  men  of  the  place  returned, 
122  in  number  (Ezr.  ii.  27;  Neh.  vii.  31;  in 
both  these  the  name  is  slightly  altered  to  MICHMAS), 
and  re-occupied  their  former  home  (Neh.  xi.  31). 

At  a  later  date  it  became  the  residence  of  Jo 
nathan  Maccabaeus,  and  the  seat  of  his  government 
(1  Mace.  ix.  73,  "Machmas;"  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii. 
1,  §6).  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Ono- 
masticon,  "  Machmas ")  it  was  "  a  very  large 
village  retaining  its  ancient  n?.me,  and  lying  near 
Ramah  in  the  district  of  Aelia  (Jerusalem)  at  9 
miles  distance  therefrom." 

Later  still  it  was  famed  for  the  excellence  of  its 
com.  See  the  quotation  from  the  Mishna  (Mena- 
choth)  in  Reland  (Pal.  897),  and  Schwarz  (131). 
Whether  this  excellence  is  still  maintained  we  do  not 
know.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  cultivation  in  and 
amongst  groves  of  old  olives  in  the  broad  shallow 
wady  which  slopes  down  to  the  north  and  east  of 
the  village ;  but  Mukhmas  itself  is  a  very  poor 
place,  and  the  country  close  to  it  has  truly  "a 
most  forbidding  aspect."  "  Huge  gray  rocks  raise 
up  their  bald  crowns,  completely  hiding  every  patch 
of  soil,  and  the  gray  huts  of  the  village,  and  the 
gray  ruins  that  encompass  them  can  hardly  be  dis 
tinguished  from  the  rocks  themselves."  There  are 
considerable  remains  of  massive  foundations,  co 
lumns,  cisterns,  &c.,  testifying  to  former  prosperity, 
greater  than  that  of  either  Anathoth  or  Geba  (Potter, 
llandbk.  215,  216). 

Immediately  below  the  village  the  great  wady 
spreads  out  to  a  considerable  width — perhaps  half  a 
mile ;  and  its  bed  is  broken  up  into  an  intricate 
mass  of  hummocks  and  mounds,  some  two  of  which, 
before  the  torrents  of  3000  winters  had  reduced 
and  rounded  their  forms,  were  probably  the  two 
•'  teeth  of  cliff" — the  Bozez  and  Seneh  of  Jo 
nathan's  adventure.  Right  opposite  is  Jeba,  on  a 
curiously  terraced  hill.  To  the  left  the  wady  con 
tracts  again,  and  shows  a  narrow  black  gorge  of 
almost  vertical  limestone  rocks  pierced  with  myste- 


•  For  the  situation  of  the  town  of  A.WKK  see  note  to- 
MANASSXH.  p.  220. 


MICHTAM 

nous  caverns  and  fissures,  the  resort,  so  the  wri'ei 
was  assured,  of  hyenas,  porcupines,  and  eaglas.  lu 
the  wet  season  the  stream  is  said  to  be  often  deepei 
than  a  man's  neck,  very  strong,  and  of  a  bright 
yellow  colour. 

In  the  middle  ages  el-Bireh  was  believed  tc  be 
Michmash  (see  Maundrell,  March  25  ;  and  the  co 
pious  details  in  Quaresmius,  Elucidatio,  ii.  786, 
787).  But  el-Bireh  is  now  ascertained  on  good 
grounds  to  be  identical  with  BEEROTH.  [G.] 

MICH'METHAH  (nniMBH,  i.  e.  the  Mio 


methath  :  'iKcurfjuiv,  ArjAai'aO  ;  Alex.  Ma^OuS,  in 
both  cases  :  Mechmethath,  Machmathath),  a  place 
which  formed  one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  boundary 
of  the  territories  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  en  the 
western  side  of  Jordan.  '(1.)  It  lay  "  facing 
(*3Q  ?V)  Shechem  ;"  it  also  was  the  next  place  on 
the  boundary  west  of  ASHER*  (Josh.  xvii.  7),  if 
indeed  the  two  are  not  one  and  the  same  place  — 
ham-Micmethath  a  distinguishing  affix  to  the  com 
moner  name  of  Asher.  The  latter  view  is  taken 
by  Reland  (Pal.  590)  —  no  mean  authority  —  and 
also  by  Schwarz  (147),  but  it  is  not  supported  by 
the  Masoretic  accents  of  the  passage.  The  former 
is  that  of  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  as  well  as  our 
own  A.  V.  Whichever  may  ultimately  be  found 
correct,  the  position  of  the  place  must  be  somewhere 
on  the  east  of  and  not  far  distant  from  Shechem. 
But  then  (2.)  this  appears  quite  inconsistent  with 
the  mention  of  the  same  name  in  the  specification 
of  a  former  boundary  (Josh,  rvi  6).  Here  the 
whole  description  seems  to  relate  to  the  boundary 
between  Benjamin  and  Ephraim  (t.  e.  Ephraim's 
southern  boundary),  and  Michmethath  follows  Beth- 
horon  the  upper,  and  is  stated  to  be  on  its  west 
or  seaward  side.  Now  Bethhoron  is  at  least  20 
miles,  as  the  crow  flies,  from  Shechem,  and  more 
than  30  from  Asher.  The  only  escape  from  such 
hopeless  contradictions  is  the  belief  that  the  state 
ments  of  chap.  xvi.  have  suffered  very  great  muti 
lation,  and  that  a  gap  exists  between  verses  5  and  6, 
which  if  supplied  would  give  the  landmarks  which 
connected  the  two  remote  points  of  Bethhoron  and 
Michmethath.  The  place  has  not  been  met  with 
nor  the  name  discovered  by  travellers,  ancient  or 
modern.  [G.] 

MICH'KI(n3»:  Max/p  ;  Alex.  Moxopt  : 
Mochori).  Ancestor  of  Elah,  one  of  the  heads  of  the 
fathers  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  ix.  8)  after  the  cap 
tivity. 

MICH'TAM  (DH3»  :  <rrri\oyptt<t>ia  :  titult 
inscriptio).  This  word  occurs  in  the  titles  of  six 
Psalms  (xvi.,  lvi.-lx.),  all  of  which  are  ascribed  to 
David.  The  marginal  reading  of  our  A.  V.  is  "  a 
golden  Psalm,"  while  in  the  Geneva  version  it  is 
described  as  "a  certain  tune."  Froir  the  position 
which  it  occupies  in  the  title,  compared  with  that 
of  Mizmor  (A.  V.  "  Psalm,"  Ps.  iv.-vi.,  &c.), 
Maschil  (Ps.  xxxii.,  &c.),  and  Shiygaion  (Ps.  vii.), 
the  first  of  which  certainly  denotes  a  song  with  an 
instrumental  accompaniment  (as  distinguished  from 
shir,  a  song  for  the  voice  alone),  we  may  infer  that 
michtam  is  a  term  applied  to  these  Psalms  to  denote 
their  musical  character,  but  beyond  this  everything 
is  obscure.  The  very  etymology  of  the  word  is 
uncertain.  1.  Kimchi  and  A  ben  Ezra,  among 
Rabbinical  writers,  trace  it  to  the  root  DflS,  cd- 

-  T 

tham,  as  it  appears  in  DHS,  cethem,  which  is  ren 
dered  in  the  A.  V    'gold"  '.'Job  xxviii.  16),  "pure 


MIGHT  AM 

gold"  (Job  xxviii.  19),  "fine  gold'  (Job  xxxi. 
24)  ;  because  thf:  Psalm  was  to  David  precious  as 
fine  gold.  They  have  been  followed  by  the  trans 
lators  in  the  margin  of  our  version,  and  the  Michtam 
Psalms  have  been  compared  with  the  "  Golden  Say 
ings"  of  Pythagoras  and  the  Proverbs  of  Ali. 
Others  have  thought  the  epithet  "  golden  "  was 
applied  to  these  Pgalms,  because  they  were  written 
in  letters  of  gold  and  suspended  in  the  Sanctuary  or 
elsewhere,  like  the  Moallakat,  or  suspended  poems 
of  Mecca,  which  were  called  Modhahabdt,  or 
"  golden,"  because  they  were  written  in  gold  cha 
racters  upon  Egyptian  linen.  There  is,  however, 
no  trace  among  the  Hebrews  of  a  practice  analogous 
to  this.  Another  interpretation,  based  upon  the  same 
etymology  of  the  word,  is  given  to  Michtam  by  an 
unknown  writer  quoted  by  Jarchi  (Ps.  xvi.  1). 
According  to  this  it  signifies  "  a  crown,"  because 
David  asked  God  for  His  protection,  and  He  was  as 
a  crown  to  him  (Ps.  v.  12).  ^  T 


MIDIAN 


355 


2.  InSyriactherootinconj.PaeZ 

signifies  "  to  stain,"  hence  "  to  defile,"  the  primary 
meaning  in  Peal  being  probably  "to  spot,  mark 
with  spots,"  whence  the  substantive  is  in  common 
use  in  Rabbinical  Hebrew  in  the  sense  of  "  spot  " 
or  "  mark"  (comp.  Kimchi,  on  Am.  i.  1).  In  this 
sense  the  Niphal  participle  occurs  in  Jer.  ii.  22, 
"  thine  iniquity  is  spotted  before  me,"  which  makes 
the  parallelism  more  striking  than  the  "  marked  " 
of  our  A.  V.  From  this  etymology  the  meanings 
have  been  given  to  Michtam  of  "a  noted  song" 
(Junius  and  Tremellius,  insignis],  or  a  song  which 
was  graven  or  carved  upon  stone,  a  monumental 
inscription  ;  the  latter  of  which  has  the  merit  oi 
antiquity  in  its  favour,  being  supported  by  the 
renderings  of  the  LXX.,  Theodotion,  the  Chaldee 
Targum,  and  the  Vulgate.  (See  Michaelis,  Suppl. 
ltd  Lex.  Heb.  No.  1242.)  There  is  nothing  in 
the  character  of  the  Psalms  so  designated  to  render 
the  title  appropriate;  had  the  Hebrews  been  ac 
quainted  with  musical  notes,  it  would  be  as  reason 
able  to  compare  the  word  Michtam  with  the  old 
English  "  prick-song,"  »  a  song  pricked  or  noted 
In  the  utter  darkness  which  envelopes  it,  any  con 
jecture  is  worthy  of  consideration;  many  are  va 
lueless  as  involving  the  transference  to  one  languagi 
of  the  metaphors  of  another.  „  ^  „ 

3.  The  corresponding  Arab.  ,££  ,  katama,  "  to 


conceal,  repress,"  is  also  resorted  to  for  the  explana 
tion  of  Michtam,  which  was  a  title  given  to  certain 
Psalms  according  to  Bezel,  because  they  were 
written  while  David  was  in  concealment.  This 
however,  could  not  be  appropriate  to  Ps.  Iviii.,  Ix 
From  the  same  root  Hengstenberg  attributes  tc 
them  a  hidden,  mystical  import,  and  renders  Mich 
tarn  by  Geheimniss,  which  he  explains  as  "  ein  Liec 
tiefen  Sinnes."  Apparently  referring  the  word  te 
the  same  origin,  Ewald  (  Jahrb.  viii.  p.  68)  suggest 
that  it  may  designate  a  song  accompanied  by  bas. 
instruments,  like  "  the  cymbals  of  trumpet^sound  ' 
of  Ps.  cl.  5,  which  would  be  adapted  to  the  plaintiv 
character  of  Ps.  xvi.  and  others  of  the  series  tc 
which  it  is  applied.  The  same  mournful  tone  i 


»  Shakspearc,  Rom.  and  Jul.  ii.  4  :  "He  fights  as  yo 
aing  pricksong,  keeps  time,  distance,  and  proportion." 
*>  TOU  rairetvofypovos  Kai  aTrAoO  TOV  Aaiu'S. 


d  "  Humilis  et  simplicis  David." 
•  The  notion  that  there  were  two  peoples  called  Mi 
iian,  founded  on  the  supposed  shortness  of  the  interval  ' 


leo  believed  to  be  indicated  in  Michtam  aa  derived 
rom  a  root  analogous  to  the  Arab.  *5Si  cathama. 


hich  in  conj.  vii.  signifies  "  to  be  sad,"  in  whick 
,ase  it  would  denote  "  an  elegy." 

4.  But  the  explanation  which  is  most  approved 
Rosenmuller  and  Gesenius,  is  that  which  finds 

n  Michtam  the  equivalent  of  3FOD,  mictdb  ;    a 

word  which  occurs  in  Is.  xxxviii.  9  (A.  V.  "  writ- 
ng"),  and  which  is  believed  by  Capellus  (Crit. 

Sacr.  iv.  2,  §1  1)  to  have  been  the  reading  followed 
>y  the  LXX.  and  Targum.  Gesenius  supports  hi» 

decision  by  instances  of  similar  interchanges  of  Hi 

and  13  in  roots  of  cognate  meaning.     In  accordance 

with  this  De  Wette  renders  "  Schrift." 

5.  For  the  sake  of  completeness  another  theory 
may  be  noticed,  which  is  quite  untenable  in  itself, 

jut  is  curious  as  being  maintained  in  the  versions 
of  Aquila6  and  Symmachus,c  and  of  Jerome  d  ac 
cording  to  the  Hebrew,  and  was  derived  from  the 

Rabbinical  interpreters.  According  to  these,  DPDJ? 
is  an  enigmatic  word,  equivalent  to  DT11  "i|O, 

humble  and  perfect,"  epithets  applied  to  David 
himself. 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  said,  that  nothing 
has  been  really  done  to  throw  light  upon  the  mean 
ing  of  this  obscure  word,  and  there  seems  little 
likelihood  that  the  difficulty  will  be  cleared  away. 
Beyond  the  general  probability  that  it  is  a  musical 
term,  the  origin  of  which  is  uncertain  and  the  appli 
cation  lost,  nothing  is  known.  The  subject  will 
be  found  discussed  in  Rosenmiiller's  Scholia  {Psalm. 
vol.  i.  explic.  titul.  xlii.-xlvi.),  and  by  Hupfeld 
(Die  Psalmen  i.  308-311),  who  has  collected  all 
the  evidence  bearing  upon  it,  and  adheres  to  the 
rendering  kleinod  (jewel,  treasure),  which  Luther 
also  gives,  and  which  is  adopted  by  Hitzig  and  Men 
delssohn.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MID'DIN  (j'HO  :   Pdvtav  ;  Ma5<ai>  :   Middin), 

a  city  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  61),  one  of  the  six  speci 
fied  as  situated  in  the  district  of  "  the  midbar  " 
(A.  V.  "  wilderness  ").  This  midbar,  as  it  con 
tained  Beth  ha-Arabah,  the  city  of  Salt,  and  En- 
gedi,  must  have  embraced  not  only  the  waste  lands 
on  the  upper  level,  but  also  the  cliffs  themselves 
and  the  strip  of  shore  at  their  feet,  on  the  edge  of 
the  lake  itself.  Middin  is  not  mentioned  by  Euse- 
bius  or  Jerome,  nor  has  it  been  identified  or  per 
haps  sought  for  by  later  travellers.  By  Van  do 
Velde  (Memoir,  256,  and  map)  mention  is  made 
of  a  valley  on  the  south-western  side  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  below  Masada,  called  Urn  el-Bedim,  which  may 
contain  a  trace  of  the  ancient  name.  [G.] 

MID'IAN  (P*1B,  "  strife,  contention,"  Ges.  : 
MaSidfj.  :  Madian),  a  son  of  Abraham  and  Keturah 
(Gen.  xxv.  2  ;  1  Chr.  i.  32)  ;  progenitor  of  the  Mi- 
dianites,  or  Arabians  dwelling  principally  in  the 
desert  north  of  the  peninsula  of  Arabia.*  Southwards 
they  extended  along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Gulf 
of  Eyleh  (Sinus  Aelaniticus')  ;  and  northwards  they 
stretched  along  the  eastern  frontier  of  Palestine  ; 

for  any  considerable  multiplication  from  Abraham  to 
Moses,  and  on  the  mention  of  Moses'  Cushite  wife,  the 
writer  thinks  to  be  untenable.  Even  conceding  the  former 
objection,  which  is  unnecessary,  ono  tribe  has  often  b«» 
come  merged  into  another,  and  older  one,  and  only  thf 
name  of  the  later  retained.  See  below  and  MOSES. 


2  A  2 


356 


MIDIAN 


while  the  oases  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  seem  to 
have  afforded  them  pasture  grounds  and  caused  it 
to  be  included  in  the  "  land  of  Midian  "  (but  see 
below  on  this  point).  The  people  is  always  spoken 
of,  in  the  Hebrew,  as  "  Midian,"  J^IO,  except  in 
Gen.  xxxvii.  36 ;  Num.  xxv.  17,  xxxi.  2,  where  we 
rind  the  pi.  D'3HD.  In  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  the 
form  D^3°7O  occurs,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  as  well 
as  in  the  Vulg.'  Midianites ;  and  this  is  probably 
the  correct  rendering,  since  it  occurs  in  ver.  36  of 
the  same  chap. ;  though  the  people  here  mentioned 
may  be  descendants  of  MEDAN  (which  see).  The 
gentilic  form  *3*1D,  "  Midianite,"  occurs  once, 
Num.  x.  29. 

After  the  chronological  record  of  Midian's  birth, 
with  the  nam«s  of  his  sons,  in  the  xxvth  chaptei  of 
Genesis,  the  name  disappears  from  the  Biblical 
history  until  the  time  of  Moses  ;  Midian  is  first 
mentioned,  as  a  people,  when  Moses  fled,  having 
killed  the  Egyptian,  to  the  "  land  of  Midian"  (Ex.  u. 
15),  and  married  a  daughter  of  a  priest  of  Midian 
(21).  The  "  land  of  Midian,"  or  the  portion  of  it 
specially  referred  to,  was  probably  the  peninsula  of 
Sinai,  for  we  read  in  the  next  chapter  (ver.  1)  that 
Moses  led  the  flock  of  Jethro  his  father-in-law,  the 
priest  of  Midian  "  to  the  backside  of  the  desert,  and 
came  to  the  mountain  of  God,  even  Horeb,"  anl 
this  agrees  with  a  natural  supposition  that  he  di  i 
not  flee  far  beyond  the  frontier  of  Egypt  (compare 
Ex.  xviii.  1-27,  where  it  is  recorded  that  Jethro 
'ame  to  Moses  to  the  mount  of  God  after  the  Exodus 
from  Egypt ;  but  in  v.  27  "  he  went  his  way  into 
his  own  land:"  see  also  Num.  x.  29,  30).  Jt 
should,  however,  be  remembered  that  the  name 
of  Midian  (and  hence  the  "  land  of  Midian ") 
was  perhaps  often  applied,  as  that  of  the  moft 
powerful  of  the  northern  Arab  tribes,  to  the  norther  u 
Arabs  generally,  »'.  e.  those  of  Abrahamic  descent 
(comp.  Gen.  xxxvii.  28,  but  see  respecting  this 
passage  above ;  and  Judg.  viii.  24)  ;  just  as  BENE- 
KEDEM  embraced  all  those  peoples,  and,  with  a 
wider  signification,  other  Eastern  tribes.  If  this 
i-eading  of  the  name  be  correct,  "  Midian "  would 
correspond  very  nearly  with  our  modern  word 
"  Arab ;"  limiting,  however,  the  modern  word 
to  the  Arabs  of  the  northern  and  Egyptian  deserts : 
all  the  Ishmaelite  tribes  of  those  deserts  would  thus 
be  Midianites,  as  we  call  them  Arabs,  the  desert 
being  their  "  land."  At  least,  it  cannot  be  doubted 
that  the  descendants  of  Hagar  and  Keturah  inter 
married  ;  and  thus  the  Midianites  are  apparently 
called  Ishmaelites,  in  Judg.  viil.  24,  being  connected, 
both  by  blood  and  national  customs,  with  the  father 
of  the  Arabs.  The  wandering  habits  of  nomadic  tribes 
must  also  preclude  our  arguing  from  the  fact  of 
Moses'  leading  his  father's  flock  to  Horeb,  that  Sinai 
was  necessarily  more  than  a  station  of  Midian :  those 
tribes  annually  traverse  a  great  extent  of  country 
in  search  of  pasturage,  and  have  their  established 
summer  and  winter  pastures.  The  Midianites  were 
mostly  (not  always)  dwellers  in  tents,  not  towns ; 
and  Sinai  has  not  sufficient  pasture  to  support  more 
than  a  small,  or  a  moving  people.  But  it  must 
be  remembered  that  perhaps  (or  we  may  say 
probably)  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  has  considerably 
changed  in  its  physical  character  since  the  time  of 
Moses;  for  the  adjacent  isthmus  has,  since  that 
period,  risen  many  feet,  so  that  "  the  tongue  of  th3 


f  Tbe  LXX.  have  here  Moairjixuoi,  which  seenis  to  he 
on  nnnsual  mode  of  writing  the  name  of  the  people 
afitn^      The  Samaritan  has 


MIDIAN 

Egyptian  Sea  "  has  "  dried  up  :"  uid  this  supposi. 
tion  would  much  diminish  the  difficulty  of  account 
ing  for  the  means  of  subsistence  found  by  the 
Israelites  in  their  wanderings  in  the  wilderness, 
when  not  miraculously  supplied.  Apart  from 
this  consideration,  we  know  that  the  Egyptians 
afterwards  worked  mines  at  Sai-^bet  el-Khtfdim, 
and  a  small  mining  population  may  have  found 
sufficient  sustenance,  at  least  in  some  seasons  of 
the  year,  in  the  few  watered  valleys,  and  wher 
ever  ground  could  be  reclaimed:  rock-inscriptions 
(though  of  later  date)  testify  to  the  number  of  at 
least  passers-by  ;  and  the  remains  of  villages  of  a 
mining  population  have  been  recently  discovered.-— 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  position  of  Midian  in 
the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  if  we  may  believe  the  Ara 
bian  historians  and  geographers,  backed  as  their 
testimony  is  by  the  Greek  geographers,  the  city  of 
Midian  was  situate  on  the  opposite,  or  Arabian, 
shore  of  the  Arabian  gulf,  and  thence  north  wards  and 
spreading  east  and  west  we  have  the  time  country 
of  the  wandering  Midianites.  See  further  in  SINAI. 
The  next  occurrence  of  the  name  of  this  people 
in  the  sacred  history  marks  their  northern  settle 
ments  on  the  border  of  the  Promised  Land,  "on 
this  side  Jordan  [by]  Jericho"  in  the  plains  of 
Moab  (Num.  xxii.  1-4),  when  Balak  said,  of  Israel, 
to  the  elders  (D'OpT,  or  "  old  men,"  the  same  ss 
the  Arab  "  sheykhs  ")  of  Midian,  "  Now  shall  this 
company  lick  up  all  [that  are]  round  about  us,  as 
the  ox  licketh  up  the  grass  of  the  field."  In  the 
subsequent  transaction  with  Balaam,  the  elders  of 
Midian  went  with  those  of  Moab,  "  with  the 
rewards  of  divination  in  their  hand  "  (7)  ;  but 
in  the  remarkable  words  of  Balaam,  the  Midian 
ites  are  not  mentioned.  This  might  be  explained 
by  the  supposition  that  Midian  was  a  wander 
ing  tribe,  whose  pasture-lands  reached  wherever, 
in  the  Arabian  desert  and  frontier  of  Palestine. 
pasture  was  to  be  found,  and  who  would  not 
feel,  in  the  same  degree  as  Moab,  Amalek,  or  the 
other  more  settled  and  agricultural  inhabitants  of  the 
land  allotted  to  the  tribes  of  Israel,  the  arrival  of 
the  latter.  But  the  spoil  taken  in  the  war  that 
soon  followed,  and  more  especially  the  mention  of 
the  dwellings  of  Midian,  render  this  suggestion  very 
doubtful,  and  point  rather  to  a  considerable  pas 
toral  settlement  of  Midian  in  the  trans-Jordanic 
country.  Such  settlements  of  Arabs  have,  how 
ever,  been  very  common.  In  this  case  the  Midi 
anites  were  evidently  tributary  to  the  Amorites, 
being  "  dukes  of  Sihon,  dwelling  in  the  country  " 
(f^lNn  *2t?')  :  this  inferior  position  explains  their 
omission  from  Balaam's  prophecy.  It  was  here, 
"  on  this  side  Jordan,"  that  the  chief  doings  of  the 
Midianites  with  the  Israelites  took  place.  The  latter, 
while  they  abode  in  Shittim,  "joined  themselves 
unto  Baal-Peor"  (Num.  xxv.  1,  &c.  —  apparently  a 
Midianite  as  well  as  a  Moabitish  deity  —  the  result 
of  the  sin  of  whoredom  with  the  Moabitish  women  ; 
and  when  "  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  against 
Israel  .  .  .  and  the  congregation  of  the  children  of 
Israel  [were]  weeping  [before]  the  door  of  the  ta 
bernacle  of  the  congregation,"  an  Israelite  brought 
a  Midianitish  woman  openly  into  the  camp.  The 
rank  of  this  woman  COZBI,  that  of  a  daughter 
of  Zur,  who  was  "  head  over  a  people,  of  A 
chief  house  in  Midian,"  f  throws  a  strange  light 


K>&O.  •  head  of  families  of  a  pa 
triarchal  house;"  afterward*  la  ver.  18,  called  princ« 
X'l"3.  (See  next  note.) 


MIDI  AN 

ewer  the  obscure  page  of  tnat  people's  history.  The 
noes  of  the  Canaanites,  idolatry  and  whoredom, 
had  infected  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  doubtless 
connected  by  successive  intermarriages  with  those 
tribes  ;  and  the  prostitution  of  this  chief's  daughter, 
caught  as  it  was  from  the  customs  of  the  Ca 
naanites,  is  evidence  of  the  ethnological  type  of 
the  latter  tribes.  Some  African  nations  have  a 
similar  custom  :  they  offer  their  unmarried  daugh 
ters  to  show  hospitality  to  their  guests.  Zur  was 
one  of  the  five  "  kins"  iD,11  slain  in  the  war 


MIDIAN 


357 


with  Midian,  recorded  in  ch.  xxxi. 

The  influence  of  the  Midianites  on  the  Israelites 
was  clearly  most  evil,  and  directly  tended  to  lead 
them  from  the  injunctions  of  Moses.  Much  of  the 
dangerous  character  of  their  influence  may  probably 
be  ascribed  to  the  common  descent  from  Abraham. 
While  the  Canaanitish  tribes  were  abhorred,  Midian 
might  claim  consanguinity,  and  more  readily  seduce 
Israel  from  their  allegiance.  The  events  at  Shittim 
occasioned  the  injunction  to  vex  Midian  and  smite 
them  —  "  for  they  vex  you  with  their  wiles,  where 
with  they  have  beguiled  you  in  the  matter  of  Peor 
and  in  the  matter  of  Cozbi,  the  daughter  of  a  prince 
of  Midian,  their  sister,  which  was  slain  in  the  day  of 
the  plague  for  Peer's  sake  "  (Num.  xxv.  18)  ;  and 
further  on,  Moses  is  enjoined,  "  Avenge  the  children 
of  Israel  of  the  Midianites  :  afterward  shalt  thou  be 
gathered  unto  thy  people  "  (xxxi.  2).  Twelve  thou 
sand  men,  a  thousand  from  each  tribe,  went  up  to 
this  war,  a  war  in  which  all  the  males  of  the  enemy 
were  slain,  and  the  five  kings  of  Midian  —  Evi, 
Kekem,  Zur,  Hur,  and  Keba,  together  with  Balaam  ; 
and  afterwards,  by  the  express  command  of  Moses, 
only  the  virgins  and  female  infants,  of  the  captives 
brought  into  the  camp,  were  spared  alive.  The 
cities  and  castles  of  the  vanquished,  and  the  spoil 
taken,  afford  facts  to  which  we  shall  recur.  After  a 
lapse  of  some  years  (the  number  is  very  doubtful,  see 
CHRONOLOGY),  the  Midianites  appear  again  as  the 
enemies  of  the  Israelites.  They  had  recovered  from 
the  devastation  of  the  former  war,  probably  by  the 
arrival  of  fresh  colonists  from  the  desert  tracts  over 
which  their  tribes  wandered  ;  and  they  now  were 
sufficiently  powerful  to  become  the  oppressors  of 
the  children  of  Israel.  The  advocates  of  a  short 
chronology  must,  however  unwillingly,  concede  a 
considerable  time  for  Midian  thus  to  recover  from 
the  severe  blow  inflicted  by  Moses.  Allied  with 
the  Amalekites,  and  the  Bene-Kedem,  they  drove 
them  to  make  dens  in  the  mountains  and  caves 
and  strongholds,  and  wasted  their  crops  even  to 
Gaza,  on  the  Mediterranean  coast,  in  the  land  of 
Simeon.  The  judgeship  of  Gideon  was  the  imme 
diate  consequence  of  these  calamities  ;  and  with  the 
battle  he  fought  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  and  his 
pursuit  of  the  flying  enemy  over  Jordan  to  Karkor, 
the  power  of  Midian  seems  to  have  been  broken. 
It  is  written,  "  Thus  was  Midian  subdued  before 
the  children  of  Israel,  so  that  they  lifted  up  their 
heads  no  more"  (viii.  28).  The  part  taken  by 
Gideon  in  this  memorable  event  has  been  treated  of 
elsewhere,  but  the  Midianite  side  of  the  story  is 
pregnant  with  interest.  [GIDEON.] 

Midian  had  oppressed  Israel  for  seven  years.    As 

k  These  are  afterwards  (Josh,  xlii  21)  called  "  princes" 
0X^3),  which  may  also  be  rendered  the  leader  or  cap 
tain  of  a  tribe,  or  even  of  a  family  (Ges.V  and  "  dukes  " 
'  *D*D3,  not  the  word  rendered  duke  iu  the  enumeration 
of  the  "  dukes  of  Edom"),  "  one  unointei's  a  pris«e  conse- 


a  numberless  eastern  norde  thej  entered  the  land 
with  their  cattle  and  their  camels.  The  imagina 
tion  shows  us  the  green  plains  of  Palestine  sprinkled 
with  the  black  goats'  hair  tents  of  this  great  Arab 
tribe,  their  flocks  and  herds  and  camels  let  loose  in 
the  standing  corn,  and  foraging  parties  of  horsemen 
driving  before  them  the  possessions  of  the  Israelites  ; 
for  "  they  came  like  locusts  (A.  V.  "  grasshoppers," 
ninS)  for  multitude  "  (Judg.  vi.  5),  and  when  the 

"  angel  of  the  Lord  "  came  to  Gideon,  so  severe  was 
the  oppression  that  he  was  threshing  wheat  by  the 
wiue-press  to  hide  it  from  the  Midianites  (11). 
When  Gideon  had  received  the  Divine  command  to 
deliver  Israel,  and  had  thrown  down  the  altar  of 
Baal,  we  read,  "Then  all  the  Midianites  and  the 
Amalekites  and  the  Bene-Kedem  were  gathered  to 
gether,  and  went  over,"  descended  from  the  desert . 
hills  and  crossed  Jordan,  "and  pitched  in  the  valley 
of  Jezreel"  (33) — part  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon, 
the  battle-field  of  Palestine — and  there,  from  "the 
grey,  bleak  crowns  of  Gilboa,"  where  Saul  and  Jo 
nathan  perished,  did  Gideon,  with  the  host  that  he 
had  gathered  together  of  Israel,  look  down  on  the 
Midianites,  who  "  were  on  the  north  side  of  them, 
by  the  hill  of  Moreh,  in  the  valley"  (vii.  1).  The 
scene  over  that  fertile  plain,  dotted  with  the  enemies 
of  Israel,  "  the  Midiauites  and  the  Amalekites  and 
all  the  Bene-Kedem,  [who]  lay  along1  iu  the  valley 
like  locusts  for  multitude,  and  their  camels  were 
without  number,  as  the  sand  by  the  sea-side  for 
multitude  "  (vii.  12),  has  been  picturesquely  painted 
by  Professor  Stanley  (8.  $  P.). 

The  descent  of  Gideon  and  his  servant  into  the 
camp,  and  the  conversation  of  the  Midiauite  watch 
forms  a  vivid  picture  of  Arab  life.  It  does  more ; 
it  proves  that  as  Gideon,  or  Phurah,  his  servant, 
or  both,  understood  the  language  of  Midian,  the 
Semitic  languages  differed  much  less  in  the  14th 
or  13th  century  B.C.  than  they  did  in  after  times 
[see  ARABIA,  vol.  i.  p.  96]  ;  and  we  besides  obtain 
a  remarkable  proof  of  the  consanguinity  of  the 
Midianites,  and  learn  that,  though  the  name  was 
probably  applied  to  all  or  most  of  the  northern 
Abrahamic  Arabs,  it  was  not  applied  to  the  Canaan 
ites,  who  certainly  did  not  then  speak  a  Semitic 
language  that  Gideon  could  understand. 

The  stratagem  of  Gideon  receives  an  illustration 
from  modern  Oriental  life.  Until  lately  the  police 
in  Cairo  were  accustomed  to  go  their  rounds  with  a 
lighted  torch  thrust  into  a  pitcher,  and  the  pitcher 
was  suddenly  withdrawn  when  light  was  required 
(Lane's  Mod.  Eg.  5th  ed.  p.  120) — a  custom  afford 
ing  an  exact  parallel  to  the  ancient  expedient  adopted 
by  Gideon.  The  consequent  panic  of  the  great  mul 
titude  in  the  valley,  if  it  has  no  parallels  in  modern 
European  history,  is  consistent  with  Oriental  cha 
racter.  Of  all  peoples,  the  nations  of  the  East  are 
most  liable  to  sudden  and  violent  emotions;  and  a 
panic  in  one  of  their  heterogeneous,  undisciplined, 
and  excitable  hosts  has  always  proved  disastrous. 
In  the  case  of  Gideon,  however,  the  result  of  his 
attack  was  directed  by  God,  the  Divine  hand  being 
especially  shown  in  the  small  number  of  Israel, 
300  men,  against  135,000  of  the  enemy.  At  the 
sight  of  the  300  torches,  suddenly  blazing  round 


crated  by  anointing  "  (Ges.)  of  Sihon  king  of  the  Amoritcs ; 
apparently  lieutenants  of  the  Amorite,  or  princes  of  his 
appointing.  [HUR;  IBAM.] 

'  Prof.  Stanley  roads  here  "  wrapt  in  sleep."  Though 
the  Hcb.  will  bear  this  interpretation,  tiesemue  hat 
"  encamped." 


358 


MIDIAN 


about  the  camp  in  the  beginning  of  the  middle-watch 
(which  the  Midianites  had  newly  set),  with  the  con 
fused  din  of  the  trumpets,  "  for  the  three  companies 
blew  the  trumpets,  and  brake  the  pitchers,  and  held 
the  lamps  in  their  left  hands,  and  the  trumpets  in 
their  right  hands  to  blow  [withal],  and  they  cried, 
[The  sword]  of  the  Lord  and  of  Gideon  "  (vii.  20), 
"  all  the  host  ran,  and  cried,  and  fled  "  (21).  The 
panic-stricken  multitude  knew  not  enemy  from 
friend,  for  "  the  Lord  set  every  man's  sword  against 
his  fellow  even  throughout  all  the  host"  (22).  The 
rout  was  complete,  the  first  places  made  for  being 
Beth-shittah  ("  the  house  of  the  acacia  ")  in  Zererath, 
and  the  "  border"  [JIDK']  of  Abel-meholah,  "  the 


meadow  of  the  dance,"  both  being  probably  down 
the  Jordan  valley,  unto  Tabbath,  shaping  their  flight 
to  the  ford  of  Bethbarah,  where  probably  they  had 
crossed  the  river  as  invaders.  The  flight  of  so  great  a 
host,  encumbered  with  slow-moving  camels,  baggage, 
and  cattle,  was  calamitous.  All  the  men  of  Israel, 
out  of  Naphtali,  and  Asher,  and  Manasseh,  joined  in 
the  pursuit  ;  and  Gideon  roused  the  men  of  Mount 
Ephraim  to  "  take  before  "  the  Midianites  "  the 
waters  unto  Beth-barah  and  Jordan"  (23,  24).  Thus 
cut  off,  two  princes,  Oreb  and  Zeeb  (the  "  raven,"  or, 
more  correctly  "  crow,"  and  the  "  wolf"),  fell  into 
the  hands  of  Ephraim,  and  Oreb  they  slew  at  the  rock 
Oreb,  and  Zeeb  they  slew  at  the  wine-press  of  Zeeb  (vii  . 
25  ;  comp.  Is.  x.  26,  where  the  "  slaughter  of  Midian 
at  the  rock  Oreb"  is  referred  to).k  But  though  we 
have  seen  that  many  joined  in  a  desultory  pursuit 
of  the  rabble  of  the  Midianites,  only  the  300  men 
who  had  blown  the  trumpets  in  the  valley  of  Jez- 
reel  crossed  Jordan  with  Gideon,  "  faint  yet  pur 
suing"  (viii.  4).  With  this  force  it  remained  for 
the  liberator  to  attack  the  enemy  on  his  own  ground, 
for  Midian  had  dwelt  on  the  other  side  Jordan 
since  the  days  of  Moses.  Fifteen  thousand  men, 
under  the  "  kings  "  [WOJ  of  Midian,  Zebah 

and  Zalmunna,  were  at  Karkor,  the  sole  remains  of 
135,000,  "  for  there  fell  an  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand  men  that  drew  sword"  (viii.  10).  The 
assurance  of  God's  help  encouraged  the  weary 
three  hundred,  and  they  ascended  from  the  plain 
(or  ghdr)  to  the  higher  country  by  a  ravine  or 
torrent-bed  in  the  hills,  "  by  the  way  of  them  that 
dwelt  in  tents  [that  is,  the  pastoral  or  wandering 
people  as  distinguished  from  towns-people],  on  the 
east  of  Nobah  and  Jogbehah,  and  smote  the  host, 
for  the  host  was  secure"  (viii.  11)  —  secure  in  that 
wild  country,  on  their  own  ground,  and  away  from 
the  frequent  haunts  of  man.  A  sharp  pursuit  seems 
to  have  followed  this  fresh  victory,  ending  in  the 
capture  of  the  kings  and  the  final  discomfiture  of 
the  Midiauites.  The  overthrow  of  Midian  in  its 
encampment,  when  it  was  "  secure,"  by  the  ex 
hausted  companies  of  Gideon  (they  were  "  faint," 
And  had  been  refused  bread  both  at  Succoth  and  at 
Peuuel,  viii.  5'9),  sets  the  seal  to  God's  manifest 
naud  in  the  deliverance  of  His  people  from  the 
oppression  of  Midian.  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  were 
slain,  and  with  them  the  name  itself  of  Midian 
almost  disappears  from  sacred  history.  That  people 
never  afterwards  took  up  arms  against  Israel, 
though  they  may  have  been  allied  with  the  name- 


*  It  is  added,  in  the  same  verse,  that  they  pursued 
Midian,  and  brought  the  heads  of  the  princes  to  Gideon 
"  on  the  other  side  Jordan."  This  anticipates  the  account 
of  his  crossing  Jordan  (viii.  4),  but  such  transpositions 
arc  frequent,  and  the  Hebrew  may  be  read  "on  this  side 
Jonun." 


MIDIAN 

less  hordes  who  under  the  common  designation  01 
"  the  people  of  the  Kast,"  Jiene-Kedem,  harassed 
the  eastern  border  of  Palestine. 

Having  traced  the  history  of  Midian,  it  remains 
to  show  what  is  known  of  their  condition  and  customs 
&c.,  besides  what  has  already  been  incidentally  men 
tioned.  The  whole  account  of  their  uoings  with 
Israel — and  it  is  only  thus  that  they  find  a  place  in 
the  sacred  writings,  plainly  marks  them  as  charac 
teristically  Arab.  We  have  already  stated  our 
opinion  that  they  had  intei-married  with  Ishmael's 
descendants,  and  become  nationally  one  people,  so 
that  they  are  apparently  called  Ishmaelites;  and 
that,  conversely,  it  is  most  probable  their  power 
and  numbers,  with  such  intermarriages,  had  caused 
the  name  of  Midian  to  be  applied  to  the  northern 
Abrahamic  Arabs  generally.  They  are  described 
as  true  Arabs — now  Bedawees,  or  "  peoplo  of  the 
desert ; "  anon  pastoral,  or  settled  Arabs— the ' '  flock ' 
of  Jethro;  the  cattle  and  flocks  of  Midian,  in  the 
later  days  of  Moses ;  their  camels  without  number, 
as  the  sand  of  the  sea-side  for  multitude  when  they 
oppressed  Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Judges — all 
agree  with  such  a  description.  Like  Arabs,  who 
are  predominantly  a  nomadic  people,  they  seem  to 
have  partially  settled  in  the  land  of  Moab,  under 
the  rule  of  Sihon  the  Amorite,  and  to  have  adapted 
themselves  readily  to  the  "cities"  (DH^y),  and 
forts?  (A.V.  "goodly  castles,"  DJYVB),  which  they 

did  not  build,  but  occupied,  retaining  even  then  their 
flocks  and  herds  (Num.  xxxi.  9,  10),  but  not  their 
camels,  which  are  not  common  among  settled  Arabs, 
because  they  are  not  required,  and  are  never,  in  that 
state,  healthy.™  Israel  seems  to  have  devastated  that 
settlement,  and  when  next  Midian  appears  in  history 
it  is  as  a  desert-horde,  pouring  into  Palestine  with 
innumerable  camels ;  and,  when  routed  and  broken 
by  Gideon,  fleeing  "  by  the  way  of  them  that  dwelt 
in  tents  "  to  the  east  of  Jordan.  The  character  of 
Midian  we  think  is  thus  unmistakeably  marked. 
The  only  glimpse  of  their  habits  is  found  in  the 
vigorous  picture  of  the  camp  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel, 
when  the  men  talked  together  in  the  camp,  and  one 
told  how  he  had  dreamt  that  "  a  cake  of  barley- 
bread  tumbled  into  the  host  of  Midian,  and  came 
into  a  tent,  and  smote  it  that  it  fell,  and  overturned 
it,  that  the  tent  lay  along"  Judg.  vii.  13). 

We  can  scarcely  doubt,  notwithstanding  the  dis 
putes  of  antiquaries,  that  the  more  ancient  of  the 
remarkable  stone  buildings  in  the  Lejdh,  and  stretch 
ing  far  away  over  the  land  of  Moab,  arc  at  lenst  as 
old  as  the  days  of  Sihon  ;  and  reading  Mr.  Porter's 
descriptions  of  the  wild  old-world  character  of  the 
scenery,  the  "  cities,"  and  the  "  goodly  castles," 
one  may  almost  fancy  himself  in  presence  of  the  hosts 
of  Midian.  (See  Handbook,  501,  508,  523,  &c.) 

The  spoil  taken  in  both  the  war  of  Moses  and 
tha^  of  Gideon  is  remarkable.  On  the  former  occa 
sion,  the  spoil  of  575,000  sheep,  72,000  beeves, 
and  61,000  asses,  seems  to  confirm  the  other  indi 
cations  of  the  then  pastoral  character  of  the  Mi 
dianites  ;  the  omission  of  any  mention  of  camels  has 
been  already  explained.  But  the  gold,  silver,  brass, 
iron,  tin,  and  lead  (Num.  xxxi.  22),  the  "jewels 
of  gold,  chains,  and  bracelets,  rin^s,  earrings,  ami 


m  Thus  an  Arab,  believing  in  contagious  diseases,  asked 
Mahommud  why  camels  in  the  desert  are  like  gazrli.'s, 
and  become  mangy  as  soon  as  they  mix  with  camels  in 
towns.  The  prophet  answered,  "  Who  tuuJe  tlio  lir.-,i 
camel  mangy  ?  " 


MIDIAN 

tablets"  (50) — the  offering  to  the  Lord  being  16,750 
shekels  (52), — taken  by  Moses,  is  especially  note 
worthy  ;  and  it  is  confirmed  by  the  booty  taken  by 
Gideon ;  for  when  he  slew  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  he 
"  took  away  the  ornaments  that  [were]  on  their 
camels'  necks"  (Judg.  viii.  21),  and  (24-26)  he 
asked  of  every  man  the  earrings  of  his  prey,  "  for 
they  had  golden  earrings,  because  they  [were]  Ish- 
maelites."  "  And  the  weight  of  the  golden  ear 
rings  that  lie  requested  was  a  thousand  and  seven 
hundred  [shekels]  of  gold ;  besides  ornaments  and 
collars,  and  purple  raiment  that  [was]  on  the  kings 
of  Midian,  and  beside  the  chains  that  [were]  about 
their  camels'  necks."  (The  rendering  of  A.  V.  is 
sufficiently  accurate  for  our  purpose  here,  and  any 
examination  into  the  form  or  character  of  these 
ornaments,  tempting  though  it  is,  belongs  more 
properly  to  other  articles.)  We  have  here  a  wealthy 
Arab  nation,  living  by  plunder,  delighting  in  finery 
^especially  their  women,  for  we  may  here  read  "  nose 
ring")  ;  and,  where  forays  were  impossible,  carrying 
on  the  traffic  southwards  into  Arabia,  the  land  of 
gold— if  not  naturally,  by  trade — and  across  to 
Chaldaea ;  or  into  the  rich  plains  of  Egypt. 

Midian  is  named  authentically  only  in  the  Bible. 
It  has  no  history  elsewhere.  The  names  of  places 
and  tribes  occasionally  throw  a  feeble  light  on  its 
past  dwellings;  but  the  stories  of  Arabian  writers, 
borrowed,  in  the  case  of  the  northern  Arabs,  too 
frequently  from  late  and  untrustworthy  Jewish 
writers,  cannot  be  seriously  treated.  For  reliable 
facts  we  must  rest  on  the  Biblical  narrative.  The 
city  of  "  Medyen  [say  the  Arabs]  is  the  city  of  the 
people  of  Shu'eyb,  and  is  opposite  Tabook,  on  the 
shore  of  Bahr  el-Kulzum  [the  Red  Sea] :  between 
these  is  six  days'  journey.  It  [Medyen]  is  larger 
than  Tabook;  and  in  it  is  the  well  from  which 
Moses  watered  the  flock  of  Shu'eyb"  (Mardsid, 
s.  v.).  El-Makreezee  (in  his  Khitaf]  enters  into 
considerable  detail  respecting  this  city  and  people. 
The  substance  of  his  account,  which  is  full  of  in 
credible  fables,  is  as  follows : — Medyen  are  the 
people  of  Shu'eyb,  and  are  the  offspring  of  Medyan  • 
[Midian],  son  of  Abraham,  and  their  mother  was 
Kantoorfe,  the  daughter  of  Yuktan  [Joktan]  the 
Canaanite :  she  bare  him  eight  children,  from  whom 
descended  peoples.  He  here  quotes  the  passage  above 
cited  from  the  Marasid  almost  verbatim,  and  adds, 
that  the  Arabs  dispute  whether  the  name  be  foreign 
or  Arabic,  and  whether  Medyen  spoke  Arabic,  so- 
called.  Some  say  that  they  had  a  number  of  kings, 
who  were  respectively  named  Abjad,  Hawwez, 
Huttee,  Kelemen,  Saafas,  and  Karashet.  This  absurd 


o 


MIDWIFE 


359 


-Of  ,O-  3  C-.T 


enumeration  terms  a  sentence  common  in  Arabic 
grammars,  which  gives  the  order  of  the  Hebrew  and 
ancient  Arabic  alphabets,  and  the  numerical  order  of 
the  letters.  It  is  only  curious  as  possibly  containing 
some  vague  reference  to  the  language  of  Midian,  and 
it  is  therefore  inserted  here.  These  kings  are  said  to 
have  ruled  at  Mekkeh,  Western  Nejd,  the  Y-imen, 
Medyen,  and  Egypt,  &c.,  contemporaneously.  That 
Midian  penetrated  into  the  Yemen  is,  it  must  be  ob 
served,  extremely  improbable,  as  the  writer  of  this 
article  has  remarked  in  ARABIA,  notwithstanding 
the  hints  of  Arab  authors  to  the  contrary,  Ya"koot, 
in  the  Moajam  (cited  in  the  Journal  of  the  Deutsch. 
Morgenl,  Gesellschaffy,  saying  that  a  southern 
Arabian  dialect  is  of  Midian  ;  and  El-Mes'oodee  \ap. 
Schultens,  p.  158,  9)  inserting  a  Midianite  king 
among  the  rulers  of  the  Yemen :  the  latter  being, 
however,  more  possible  than  the  former,  as  an  ac 
cidental  and  individual,  not  a  national  occurrence. 
The  story  of  Shu'eyb  is  found  in  the  Kur-a"n.  He 
was  sent  as  a  prophet  to  warn  the  people  of  Midian, 
and  being  rejected  by  them,  they  were  destroyed 
by  a  storm  from  heaven  (Sale's  Kur-an,  vii.  and 
xi.\  He  is  generally  supposed  to  be  the  same  as 
Jethro,  the  father-in-law  of  Moses ;  but  some,  as 
Sale  informs  us,  deny  this ;  and  one  of  these  says 
"that  he  was  first  called  Buyoon,  and  afterwards 
Shu'eyb,  that  he  was  a  comely  person,  but  spare 
and  lean,  very  thoughtful,  and  of  few  words."— 
The  whole  Arab  story  of  Medyen  and  Shu'eyb, 
even  if  it  contain  any  truth,  is  encumbered  by  A 
mass  of  late  Rabbinical  myths. 

El-Makreezee  tells  us  that  in  the  land  of  Midian 
were  many  cities,  of  which  the  peoplehad  disappeared, 
and  the  cities  themselves  had  fallen  to  ruin;  that 
when  he  wrote  (in  the  year  825  of  the  Flight)  forty 
cities  remained,  the  names  of  some  being  known,  and 
of  others,  lost.  Of  the  former,  he  says,  there  were, 
between  the  Hijdz  and  Palestine  and  Egypt,  sixteen 
cities  ;  and  ten  of  these  in  the  direction  of  Palestine. 
They  were  El-Khalasah,  Es-Saneetah,  El-Medereh, 
El-Minyeh,  El-Aawaj,  El-Khuweyrak,  El-Beereyn, 
El-Md-eyn,  El-Seba,  and  El-Mu'allak.°  The  most 
important  of  these  cities  were  El-Khalasah  P  and  El- 
Saneetah ;  the  stones  of  many  of  them  had  beer, 
removed  to  El-Ghazzah  (Gaza)  to  build  with  them 
This  list,  however,  must  be  taken  with  caution. 

In  the  A.  V.  of  Apocr.  and  N.  T.  the  name  ia 
given  as  MADIAN.  [E.  S.  P.] 

MIDWIFE."  Parturition  in  the  East  is  usually 
easy.1*  The  office  of  a  midwife  is  thus,  in  many 
eastern  countries,  in  little  use,  but  is  performed, 
when  necessary,  by  relatives  (Chardin,  Voy,  vii. 


P  El-Khalasah  (sometimes  written  El-Khulusah,  and 
El-Khulsah),  or  Dhu-1-Khalasah,  possessed  an  idol-temple, 
destroyed  by  order  of  Mohammad ;  the  idol  being  named 
El-Khalasah,  or  the  place,  or  "  growing-place  "  of  El-Kna- 
lusuli.  The  place  is  said  to  be  four  days'  Journey  from 
Ma'ikch,  in  the  'Abla,  and  called  "  the  southern  Kaabeh." 


El-Kaaben  el-Yem&neeyeh  (Stardsid,  s.  v.,  and  EI-Bekrec, 
and  the  Jfdnwos  there  cited).  El-Medereh  seeins  also  U 
be  the  same  as  Dhu-1-Medereh  (Mardxid,  B,  v.),  and  there 
fore  (from  the  name)  probably  the  site  of  an  idol-templo 

a  J"n?*O,  part,  in  P.  of  "T?\  "  tc  tring  forth :"  juala  : 
obstetrix.  It  must  be  remarked  that  nVH,  A.  V.,  Ex.  i. 
19,  "lively,"  is  also  In  Rabbinical  Hebrew  "mldwlvcs," 
an  explanation  which  appears  to  have  been  had  in  view 
by  the  Vulg,,  which  interprets  chayoth  by  "  ipsae  obsti>- 
tricandi  habent  scientiam."  It  is  also  rendered  "living 
creatures,"  implying  that  the  Hebrew  women  were,  like 
animals,  quick  in  parturiton  Gesenius  renders  "  vividae, 
robustae,"  p.  468.  In  any  case  the  general  sense  of  the 
passage  Ex.  i.  19  is  the  same,  viz.,  that  the  Hebrew  women 
stood  in  little  or  ;io  need  of  the  midwlves'  assistance. 

t>  See  an  illustration  of  Cant.  viii.  5,  suggee'/ed  IT! 
Mishna,  1'etar.h  x.  3 


360 


MIGDAL-EL 


23;  Harmer,  Jbs.  iv.  425).  [CHILDREN.]  It 
may  be  for  this  reason  that  the  number  of  persons 
employed  for  this  purpose  among  the  Hebrews 
was  so  small,  as  the  passage  Ex.  i.  19  seems  to 
show ;  unless,  as  Knobel  and  others  suggest,  the 
two  named  were  the  principal  persons  of  their 
class. 

In  the  description  of  the  transaction  mentioned 
in  Ex.  i.  one  expression  "upon  the  c stools"  re 
ceives  remarkable  illustration  from  modern  usage. 
Gesenius  doubts  the  existence  of  any  custom  such 
as  the  direct  meaning  of  the  passage  implies,  and 
suggests  a  wooden  or  stone  trough  for  washing  the 
new-born  child.  But  the  modem  Egyptian  prac 
tice,  as  described  by  Mr.  Lane,  exactly  answers  to 
that  indicated  in  the  book  of  Exodus.  "  Two  or 
three  days  before  the  expected  time  of  delivery,  the 
Layeh  (midwife)  conveys  to  the  house  the  kursee 
elwilddeh,  a  chair  of  a  peculiar  form,  upon  which 
the  patient  is  to  be  seated  during  the  birth  "  (Lane, 
Mod.  Egypt,  iii.  142). 

The  moral  question  arising  from  the  conduct  of 
the  midwives  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  the 
present  article.  The  reader,  however,  may  refer  to 
St.  Augustine,  Contr.  mendacium,  c.  xv.  32,  and 
Quaest.  in  Hept.  ii.  1  ;  also  Corn,  a  Lap.  Com.  on 
Ex.  i. 

When  it  is  said,  "  God  dealt  well  with  the  mid- 
wives,  and  built  them  houses,"  we  are  probably  to 
understand  that  their  families  were  blessed  either 
in  point  of  numbers  or  of  substance.  Other  expla 
nations  of  inferior  value  have  been  offered  by 
Kimchi,  Calvin,  and  others  (Calmet,  Com.  on  Ex. 
i. ;  Patrick  ;  Corn,  a  Lap. ;  .Knobel ;  Schleusner, 
Lex.  V.  T.  olicla;  Ges.  p.  193,  Grit.  Sacr.}. 

It  is  worth  while  to  notice  only  to  refute  on  its 
own  ground  the  Jewish  tradition  which  identified 
Siphrah  and  Puah  with  Jochebed  and  Miriam, 
and  interpreted  the  "houses"  built  for  them  as 
the  so-called  royal  and  sacerdotal  families  of  Caleb 
and  Moses  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  2,  §4 ;  Corn,  a  Lap. 
and  Grit.  Sacr.  I.  c. ;  Schottgen.  Hor.  Hebr. 
ii.  450  ;  De  Mess.  c.  iv.).  [H.  W.  P.] 

MIG'DAL-EL   (bx'Vnj.O  :     Me-yoXoapeO*  ; 

Alex.  Ma-ySaAiT/copofi — both  including  the  succeed 
ing  name :  Magdal-El),  one  of  the  fortified  towns 
of  the  possession  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  38  only), 
named  between  IRON  and  HOREM,  possibly  de 
riving  its  name  from  some  ancient  tower — the 
"  tower  of  El,  or  God."  In  the  present  unexplored 
condition  of  the  part  of  Palestine  allotted  to  Naph 
tali,  it  is  dangerous  to  hazard  conjectures  as  to  the 
situations  of  the  towns :  but  if  it  be  possible  that 
ffurah  is  Horem  and  Yariin  Iron,  the  possibility 
is  strengthened  by  finding  a  Mujeidel,  at  no  great 
distance  from  them,  namely,  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
Wady  Kerkerah,  8  miles  due  east  of  the  Eas  en- 
Nakurah,  6  miles  west  of  Hurah  and  8  of  Yartm 
(see  Van  de  Velde's  Map,  1858).  At  any  rate  the 
point  is  worth  investigation. 

By  Eusebius  ( Onomasticon,  MctySiV/A.)  it  is 
spoken  of  as  a  large  village  lying  between  Dora 
( Tantura)  and  Ptolemais  (Akka)  at  9  miles  from 
the  former,  that  is  just  about  AtMit,  the  ancient 
"  Castellum  peregrinorum."  No  doubt  the  Cas- 
tcllum  was  anciently  a  migdol  *  or  tower :  but  it  is 


MIGDOL 

hard  to  locate  a  town  of  Naphteli  below  Cannel, 
and  at  least  25  miles  from  the  boundaries  of  the 
tribe.  For  "a  similar  reason  Mejdel  by  Tiberias,  oc 
the  shore  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaretn,  is  not  likely 
to  be  Migdal-el  (Rob.  B.  R.  ii.  397),  since  it  must 
be  outside  the  ancient  limits  of  Naphtali  and  within 
those  of  Zcbulun.  In  this  case,  however,  the  di» 
tance  is  not  so  great. 

Schwarz  (184),  reading  Migdal-el  and  Horem  as 
one  word,  proposes  to  identify  it  with  Mejdel  el- 
Ker&m,  a  place  about  1  2  miles  east  of  Akka. 

A  Mejdel  is  mentioned  by  Van  de  Velde  (Syr. 
and  Pal.  ii.  307)  in  the  central  mountains  of 
Palestine,  near  the  edge  of  the  Ghor,  at  the  upper 
end  of  the  Wady  Fasail,  and  not  far  from  Datimeh, 
the  ancient  Edumia.  This  very  possibly  represents 
an  ancient  Migdal,  of  which  no  trace  has  yet  been 
found  in  the  Bible.  It  was  also  visited  by  Dr. 
Robinson  (B.  R.  iii.  295),  wno  gives  good  reasons 
for  accepting  it  as  the  Magdal-senna  mentioned  'by 
Jerome  (Onomast.  "  Senna")  as  seven  miles  north 
of  Jericho,  on  the  border  of  Judaea.  Another 
Migdal  probably  lay  about  two  miles  south  of 
Jerusalem,  near  the  Bethlehem  road,  where  the 
cluster  of  ruins  called  Kirbct  Um-Moghdala  is  now 
situated  (Tobler,  Dritte  Wandenmg,  81). 

The  Migdal-Eder,  at  which  Jacob  halted  on  his 
way  from  Bethlehem  to  Hebron,  was  a  short  distance 
south  of  the  former.  [EDAR,  TOWER  OF.]  [G.] 

MIG'DAL-GAD  (IJ-^Wp  :    MayaSaydS  ; 

Alex.  Mo-ySaA/yaS  :  Magdal-Gad),  a  city  of  Juclah 
(Josh.  xv.  37)  ;  in  the  district  of  the  Shefelah,  or 
maritime  lowland  ;  a  member  of  the  second  group 
of  cities,  which  contained  amongst  others  LACHISH, 
EGLON,  and  MAKKEDAII.  By  Eusebius  and  Je- 
tome  in  the  Onomasticon,  it  appears  to  be  men 
tioned  as  "  Magdala,"  but  without  any  sign  of  its 
being  actually  known  to  them.  A  village  called  el 
Medjdel  lies  in  the  maritime  plain,  a  couole  of 
miles  inland  from  Ascalon,  9  from  Um  Likhis, 
and  11  from  Ajlan.  So  far  this  is  in  support-  of 
Van  de  Velde's  identification  (Syr.  #  P.  ii.  237,  i'38  • 
Memoir,  334;  Rob.  1st  ed.  vol.  iii.  Appeniix 
118  6)  of  the  place  with  Migdal-gad,  and  it  would 
be  quite  satisfactory  if  we  were  not  uncertain  whe 
ther  the  other  two  places  are  Lachish  and  Eglon. 
Makkedah  at  any  rate  must  have  been  much  farther 
north.  But  to  appreciate  these  conditions,  we  ought 
to  know  the  principles  on  which  the  groups  of  towns 
in  these  catalogues  are  arranged,  which  as  yet  we 
do  not.  Migdal-gad  was  probably  dedicated  to  or 
associated  with  the  worship  of  the  ancient  deity  Gad. 
another  of  whose  sanctuaries  lay  at  the  opposite 
extremity  of  the  country  at  BAAI<-GAD  under  Mount 
Hermon.  [G/] 


MIG'DOL  ("nap,  aD:  M<ty$*\or,  or 
oV  :  Magdalum),  proper  name  of  one  or 
two  places  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Egypt,  cognate 
to  /Hip,  which  appears  properly  to  signify  a  mili 
tary  watch-tower,  as  of  a  town  (2  K.  is.  17),  or 
isolated  (xvli.  9),  and  the  look-out  of  a  vineyard 
(Is.  v.  2  :  comp.  Matt.  xxi.  33,  Mark  xii.  1),  or  a 
shepherd's  look-out,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  pro- 
per  name,  TJJJ  THJp,  "  the  tower  of  the  flock,' 


<  rendered  in  the  LXX.  brav  oxri  wpos 
ri  TiKTfiv ;  Vulg.  quum  partus  tempus  advenent. 

»  May  this  not  be  the  Magdolns  named  by  Herodotus, 
U.  153.  as  the  site  of  Faaraob  Necho's  victory  ever  Josiah  ? 


(See  Kawlinson's  Herod,  il.  246,  note.)  But  this  was  not 
tne  only  Migdol  along  this  coast.  The  ^.Tpdriuvos  nvpyt*, 
or  "  Strata's  tower,"  must  have  been  another,  and  a  third 
pojitbly  stood  near  Ashkelon.  fMEGiDDO ; 


MIGDOL 

in  which,  however,  it  is  possible  that  the  second 
word  ia  a  proper  name  (Gen.  xxxv.  21  ;  and  comp. 
Mic.  iv.  8,  where  the  military  signification  seems  to 
foe  implied,  though  perhaps  rhetorically  only).  This 
form  occurs  only  in  Egyptian  geography,  and  it  has 
therefore  been  supposed  by  Champollion  to  be  sub 
stituted  for  an  Egyptian  name  of  similar  sound,  the 
Coptic  equivalent  in  the  Bible,  JULGCIJTCUX, 
JULGXTCOX  (Sab..),  being,  according  to  him, 
of  Egyptian  origin  (L'Ugypte  sous  les  Pharaons, 
ii.  79,  80  ;  comp.  69).  A  native  etymology  has 
been  suggested,  giving  the  signification  "multi 
tude  of  hills""  (Thes.  s.  v.).  The  ancient  Egyp 
tian  form  of  Migdol  having,  however,  been  found, 
written  in  a  manner  rendering  it  not  impro 
bable  that  it  was  a  foreign  word,b  MAKTUR 
or  MAKTeRU,  as  well  as  so  used  that  it  must 


MIGDOL 


361 


be  of  similar  meaning  to  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Coptic  equivalent  occurring  in  a  form, 
JULG()T~oX  (Sah.),  slightly  differing  from  that 
of  the  geographical  name,  with  the  significations 
"  a  circuit,  citadels,  towers,  bulwarks,"  a  point 
hitherto  strangely  overlooked,  the  idea  of  the 
Egyptian  origin  and  etymology  of  the  latter  must 
he  given  up. 

Another  name  on  the  frontier,  Baal-zephon,  appears 
also  to  be  Hebrew  or  Semitic,  and  to  have  a  similar 
signification.  [BAAL-ZEPHON.]  The  ancient  Egyp 
tian  name  occurs  in  a  sculpture  on  the  outer  side 
of  the  north  wall  of  the  great  hypostyle  hall  of  the 
temple  of  El-Karnak  at  Thebes,  where  a  fort,  or 
possibly  fortified  town,  is  represented,  with  the  name 
PA-MAKTUR  EN  RA-MA-MEN,  "  the  tower  of 
Pharaoh,  establisher  of  justice  ;"  the  last  four  words 
being  the  prenomen  of  Sethee  I.  (B.C.  cir.  1322). 
The  sculpture  represents  the  king's  triumphal  return 
to  Egypt  from  an  eastern  expedition,  and  the  place 
is  represented  as  if  on  a  main  road,  to  the  east  of 
Leontopolis. 

1.  A  Migdol  is  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the 
Exodus.  Before  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  the 
Israelites  were  commanded  "  to  turn  and  encamp 
before  Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the  sea, 
over  against  Baal-zephon"  (Ex.  xiv.  2).  In  Num 
bers  we  read,  "  And  they  removed  from  Etham, 
and  turned  again  unto  Pi-hahiroth,  which  [is]  be 
fore  Baal-zephon  :  and  they  pitched  before  Migdol. 
And  they  departed  from  before  Pi-hahiroth,  and 
passed  through  the  midst  of  the  sea  into  the  wilder 
ness"  (xxxiii.  7,  8).  We  suppose  that  the  position 


of  the  encampment  was  before  or  at  Pi-hahiroth, 
behind  which  was  Migdol,  and  on  the  other  hand 
Baal-zephon  and  the  sea,  these  places  being  neai 
together.  The  place  of  the  encampment  and  o. 
the  passage  of  the  sea  we  believe  to  have  been  not 
far  from  the  Persepolitan  monument,  which  is 
made  in  Linant's  map  the  site  of  the  Serapeura. 

[EXODUS,  THE.] 

2.  A  Migdol  is  spoken  of  by  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel. 
The  latter  prophet  mentions  it  as  a  boundary-town, 
evidently  on  the  eastern  border,  corresponding  to 
Seveneh,  or  Syene,  on  the  southern.  He  prophesies 
the  desolation  of  Egypt  "  from  Migdol  to  Seveneh 
even  unto  the  border  of  Gush,"  PI3)D  /MJGllO 
K>-13  ^Oa-ljn  (xxix.  10),  and  predicts'  slaughter 

"  from  M'igdol  to  Seveneh "  (xxx.  6).  That  the 
eastern  border  is  that  on  which  Migdol  was  situate 
is  shewn  not  only  by  this  being  the  border  towards 
Palestine,  and  that  which  a  conqueror  from  the 
east  would  pass,  but  also  by  the  notices  in  the  book 
of  Jeremiah,  where  this  town  is  spoken  of  with  places 
in  Lower  Egypt.  In  the  prophecy  to  the  Jews  in 
Egypt  they  are  spoken  of  as  dwelling  at  Migdol, 
Tahpanhes,  and  Noph,  and  in  the  country  of  Pathros 
(xliv.  1),  and  in  that  foretelling,  apparently,  an 
invasion  of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  Migdol, 
Noph,  and  Tahpanhes  are  again  mentioned  together 
(xlvi.  14).  It  seems  plain,  from  its  being  spoken 
of  with  Memphis,  and  from  Jews  dwelling  there, 
that  this  Migdol  was  an  important  town,  and 
not  a  mere  fort,  or  even  military  settlement.0  After 
this  time  there  is  no  notice  of  any  place  of  this 
name  in  Egypt,  excepting  of  Magdolus,  by  Hecataeus 
of  Miletus,"  and  in  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus,  in 
which  Magdolo  is  placed  twelve  Roman  miles  to 
the  southward  of  Pelusium,  in  the  route  from  the 
Serapeum  to  that  town.'  This  latter  place  most  pro 
bably  represents  the  Migdol  mentioned  by  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel.  Its  position  on  the  route  to  Palestine 
would  make  it  both  strategically  important  and 
populous,  neither  of  which  would  be  the  case  with 
a  town  in  the  position  of  the  Migdol  of  the  Penta 
teuch.  Gesenius,  however,  holds  that  there  is  but 
one  Migdol  mentioned  in  the  Bible  (Lex.  s.  v.). 
Lepsius  distinguishes  two  Migdols,  and  considers 
Magdolo  to  be  the  same  as  the  Migdol  of  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel.  He  supposes  the  name  to  be  only  the 
Semitic  rendering  of  "  the  Camp,"  ~Srpar6ireSa., 
the  settlement  made  by  Psammetichus  I.  of  Ionian 
and  Carian  mercenaries  on  the  Pelusiac  branch  of 
the  Nile.'  He  ingeniously  argues  that  Migdol  is 


•  The  derivation  Is  from  JULHCJJ,  "  multitude,"  and 
O£.X?  T~A.X  (SahO.  "  a  hill."  which  is  daring, 
notwithstanding  the  instability  of  the  vowels  in  Coptic. 
The  form  JULGCIJOA.X  would  better  suit  this  ety 
mology,  were  there  not  other  reasons  than  its  rashness 
against  it.  Foreter  (J.  R.)  gives  it,  on  what  authority  we 
know  nol  :  perhaps  it  is  a  misprint  (Epist.  ad  Michaelis, 
p.  29). 

i>  Foreign  words  are  usually  written  with  all  or  most 
of  the  vowels  in  ancient  Egyptian :  native  words,  rarely. 

«  We  have  no  account  of  Jews  in  the  Egyptian  military 
eerv!^  as  early  as  this  time ;  but  it  is  not  impossible  that 
some  of  the  fugitives  who  took  Jeremiah  with  them  may 
cave  become  mercenaries  in  Pharaoh  Hophra's  army. 

<i  Steph.  Byz.  *.  v.,  comp.  Fragmenta  Historicarum 
Graecorum,  i.  20.  If  the  latter  part  of  the  passage  be 
from  Hecataeus,  the  town  was  important  in  his  time. 
Ivlay&oAn;,  jroAis  Alyvnrov-  'ExaToios  TTtpinvTJO'ci.  TO 
x.r.A.. 


0  The  route  is  as  follows : — "  a  Serapiu  Pelusio  mpm 
Ix  Thanbabio  viii  Sile  xxviii  Magdolo  xii  Pelusio 
xii"  (Ed.  Parthey  et  Finder,  p.  76).  These  distances 
would  place  the  Serapeum  somewhat  further  southward 
than  the  site  assigned  to  it  in  Linant's  map  [see  EXODUS, 
THE],  unless  the  route  were  very  indirect,  which  in  the 
desert  might  well  be  the  case. 

'  Herodotus  describes  "  the  Camps  "  as  two  places,  one 
on  either  side  of  the  Nile,  and  puts  them  "  near  the  sea,  a 
little  below  the  city  Bubastis,  on  the  mouth  of  the  Nile 
called  the  Pelusiac."  elert  Be  oCroi  oi  x^pot  wpbs  "«- 
Aa<roT)s  b\iyov  evtpOe  Bov/Sdarios  irdAios,  eiri  TO!  !!>)• 
AovCTici)  Ka\evfifv<a  ordfiaTi  Toy  Net'Aov  (ii.  154).  This 
statement  is  contradictory,  as  Bubastis  is  far  from  the 
Pelusiac  mouth  or  the  sea.  Lepsius  (I.  c.)  merely  speaks 
of  this  settlement  as  near  Pelusium,  on  the  Pelusiac 
moutl'  below  Bubastis,  citing  the  last  clause  of  the  ft* 
lowing  passage  of  Diodorus  Siculus,  who  gives  but  a  loc*« 
repetition  of  Herodotus,  and  is  not  to  be  taken,  here  al 
least,  as  an  independent  authority,  besides  that  he  may  fii 
lie  position  of  a  territory  only,  and  not  of  "  the  Caniv».' 


•382 


MIGRON 


mentioned  in  the  Bible  at  the  time  of  the  existence 
— -he  rather  loosely  says  foundation — of  this  settle 
ment,  but  omitted  by  the  Greek  geographers — he 
should  have  said  after  Hecataeus  of  Miletus — the 
mercenaries  having  been  removed  by  Amasis  to  Mem 
phis  (ii.  154),  and  not  afterwards  noticed  excepting  in 
the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus  (Chronologie  der  Aegyp- 
ter,  i.  340,  and  note  5).  The  Greek  and  Hebrew  or 
Semitic  words  do  not  however  offer  a  sufficient 
nearness  of  meaning,  nor  does  the  Egyptian  usage 
nppear  to  sanction  any  deviation  in  this  case ;  so 
that  we  cannot  accept  this  supposition,  which,  more 
over,  seems  repugnant  to  the  fact  that  Migdol  was 
a  town  where  Jews  dwelt.  Champollion  (L'Egypte 
sous  les  Pharaons,  ii.  69-71)  and  others  (Ewald, 
Geschichte,  2nd  ed.,  ii.  7  note;  Schleiden,  Die 
Landenge  von  Sues,  pp.  140,  141)  have  noticed 
the  occurrence  of  Arabic  names  which  appear  to 
represent  the  ancient  name  Migdol,  and  to  be  de 
rived  from  its  Coptic  equivalent.  These  names,  of 
which  the  most  common  form  appears  to  be  Mash- 
tool  ,8  are  found  in  the  Census  of  El-Melek  en-Nasir 
(Mohammad  Ibn  Kalacon),  given  by  De  Sacy  in  his 
translation  of  'Abd  el-Lateefs  History  of  Egypt. 
Their  frequency  favours  the  opinion  that  Migdol  was 
a  name  commonly  given  in  Egypt  to  forts,  especially 
on  or  near  the  eastern  frontier.  Dr.  Schleiden  (I.  c.) 
objects  that  Mashtool  has  an  Arabic  derivation ; 
but  we  reply  that  the  modem  geography  of  Egypt 
offers  examples  that  render  this  by  no  means  a 
serious  difficulty. 

It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  t/ldyfio\ot>  men 
tioned  by  Herodotus,  in  his  reference  to  an  expedition 
of  Necho's  (ii.  159),  supposed  to  be  that  in  which 
he  slew  Josiah,  is  the  Migdol  of  the  prophets 
(Mannert,  Afrika,  i.  489),  and  it  has  even  been  pro 
posed  to  read  in  the  Heb.  text  Migdol  for  Megiddo 
(Harenberg,  Bibl.  Brem.  vi.  281,  seqq. ;  Rosen- 
miiller,  Alterth.  ii.  99)  ;  but  the  latter  idea  is  un 
worthy  of  modern  scholarship.  [R.  S.  P.] 

MIG'RON  (fnat? :  MayAv ;  in  Isai.  MaytSc&v, 
and  Alex.  MayeSSto  :  Magron*),  a  town,  or  a  spot 
— for  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  which — in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Saul's  city,  Gibeah,  on  the  very 
edge  of  the  district  belonging  to  it  (1  Sam.  xiv.  2) ; 
distinguished  by  a  pomegranate- tree,  under  which 
on  she  eve  of  a  memorable  event  we  discover  Saul 
and  Ahiah  surrounded  by  the  poor  remnants  of  their 
force.  Josephus  (Ant.  vi.  6,  §2)  presents  it  as  a 
high  hill  (f}ovvbs  foJ/ijXJs),  from  which  there  was  a 
wide  prospect  over  the  district  devastated  by  the 
Philistines.  But  this  gives  no  clue,  for  Palestine 
is  full  of  elevated  spots  commanding  wide  prospects. 

Migron  is  presented  to  our  view  only  once  again, 
viz.  in  the  invaluable  list  of  the  places  disturbed 
by  Sennacherib's  approach  to  Jerusalem  (Is.  x.  28). 
But  here  its  position  seems  a  little  further  north 
than  that  indicated  in  the  former  passage — sup 
posing,  that  is,  that  Gibeah  was  at  Tuleil  el  Fill. 
It  here  occurs  between  Aiath — that  is  Ai — and 
Michmash,  in  other  words  was  on  the  north  of  the 
great  ravine  of  the  Wady-Suweinit,  while  Gibeah 
was  more  than  2  miles  to  the  south  thereof. 
[GIBEAH,  vol.  i.  690  b,  691. J  In  Hebrew,  Migron 
may  mean  a  "  precipice,"  a  frequent  feature  of  the 


rot?  8«  ftwflo^wpois  ....   ra.  KoAou/xera  arpaToireSa  TO- 
vov  (var.   TOIS   icaAovneVoic  OTparoire'Sot?   roirov)   oiittiv 
<Su>K«,     icai     xupo-v    iro\\r)v    Ka.TeK\i)povxil<re 
itifpov  eirapw  TOU  llr|> ouo"caKov  aro^iaTos  (i.  67). 
t 


MILCOM 

part  of  the  COUD  try  in  question,  and  it  is  not  im 
possible  therefoie  that  two  places  of  the  same  name 
are  intended  —  a  common  occurrence  in  primitive 
countries  and  tongues  where  each  rock  or  ravine  has 
its  appellation,  and  where  no  reluctance  or  inconve 
nience  is  found  in  having  places  of  the  same  name 
in  close  proximity.  As  easily  two  Migron*,  as  two 
Gibeahs,  or  two  Shochos. 

The  LXX.  seem  to  -have  had  MEGIDDO  in  their 
intentions,  but  this  is  quite  inadmissible.  (See  Jo 
sephus,  Ant.  vi.  6,  §2.)  [G.] 

MI'JAMIN  (|O>»  :  Meia^lv  ;  Alex.  Mftapfiv  : 
Maiman}.  1.  The  chief  of  the  sixth  of  the  24 
courses  of  priests  established  by  David  (1  Chr. 
xxiv.  9). 

2.  (Miafjiiv  ;  Alex.  Mto/ttefv  ;  F.  A.  Mf  ia/jui>t>  : 
Miamiri).  A  family  of  priests  who  signed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  ;  probably  the  descend 
ants  of  the  preceding,  and  the  same  as  MIAMIN  2 
(Neh.  x.  7),  and  MINIAMIN  2. 

MIK'LOTH  (nftj?»  :    McwceAe$t>  ;  Alex.  Ma- 

Ke$ci>0  in  1  Chr.  ix.  :  Macellotk).  1.  One  of  the 
sons  of  Jehiel,  the  father  or  prince  of  Gibeon,  by 
his  wife  Maachah  (1  Chr.  viii.  32,  ix.  37,  38). 
His  son  is  variously  called  Shimeah  or  Shimeam. 

2.  (M<wceAAei0).  The  leader  (TJJ.  n&gid)  of 
the  second  division  of  David's  army  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
4),  of  which  Dodai  the  Ahohite  was  captain  (It?, 

sar).  The  nagid,  in  a  military  sense,  appears  to 
have  been  an  officer  superior  in  rank  to  the  cap 
tains  of  thousands  and  the  captains  of  hundreds 
(1  Chr.  xiii.  1)> 

MJKNEI'AH  (-irPJpO  :  MoiteXAfa  ;  Alex.  Ma- 

Kfvla  ;  F.  A.  Mcutf\\d,  1  Chr.  xv.  18  ;  Maitfvla.  ; 
Alex.  MaKcffas,  1  Chr.  xv.  21  :  Macenias).  One 
of  the  Levites  of  the  second  rank,  gatekeepers  of 
the  ark,  appointed  by  David  to  play  in  the  Temple 
band  "  with  harps  upon  Sheminith." 

MILALA'I  $3Oi  om.  in  LXX.:  MalaM). 

Probably  a  Gershonite  Levite  of  the  sons  of  Asaph, 
who,  with  Ezra  at  their  head,  played  "  the  musical 
instruments  of  David  the  man  of  God  "  in  the  solemn 
procession  round  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  which 
accompanied  their  dedication  (Neh.  xii.  36V 
[MATTANIAH  2.] 


MIL'CAH  (ri3>:  MeAX<*  =  Melcha).  1. 
Daughter  of  Haran  and  wife  of  her  uncle  Nahor, 
Abraham's  brother,  to  whom  she  bare  eight  chil 
dren  :  the  youngest,  Bethuel,  was  the  father  of 
Rebekah  (Gen.  xi.  29,  xxii.  20,  23,  xxiv.  15,  24 
47).  She  was  the  sister  of  Lot,  and  her  sor 
Bethuel  is  distinguished  as  "  Nahor's  son,  whom 
Milcah  bare  unto  him,"  apparently  to  indicate 
that  he  was  of  the  purest  blood  of  Abraham's 
ancestry,  being  descended  both  from  Haran  and 
Nahor. 

2.  The  fourth  daughter  of  Zelophehad  (Num. 
xxvi.  33,  xxvii.  1,  xxxvi.  11  ;  Josh.  xvii.  3). 

MIL/COM  (DbS»:   &  Pcuntebs  airr&v:   Mc- 

loch,  1  K.  xi.  5,  33  ;  6  yio\6\  ;  Alex.  'A/tfXx^M  • 
Melchom,  2  K.  xxiii.  13).  The  "  abomination  "  of 
the  children  of  Ammon,  elsewhere  called  MOLKCH 

*  ()r  in  wirae  MSS.  in  ayrum  Gabaa. 

b  This  verse  should  be  rendered,  "  And  David  consulted 
with  tin,  captains  of  thousands  and  hundreds,  belonging 
l"  i-arh  Ica-.liT  "  (nagid). 


MILE 

(1  K.  xi.  7,  &c.)  and  MALCIIAM  (Zeph.  i.  5,  marg. 
'their  king"),  of  the  latter  of  which  it  is  probably 
a  dialectical  variation.  Movers  (Phonizier,  i.  358) 
calls  it  an  Aramaic  pronunciation. 

MILE  (M0uoi>,  the  Greek  form  of  the  Latin 
milliariutn),  a  Roman  measure  of  length  equal  to 
1618  English  yards.  It  is  only  once  noticed  in 
the  Bible  (Matt.  v.  41),  the  usual  method  of 
reckoning  both  in  it  and  in  Josephus  being  by  the 
stadium.  The  Roman  system  of  measurement  was 
fully  introduced  into  Palestne,  though  probably 
a';  a  later  date  ;  the  Talmudists  admitted  the  term 
"mile"  (T^O)  into  their  vocabulary:  both  Jerome 
(in  his  Onomasticon)  and  the  Itit.eraries  compute 
the  distances  in  Palestine  by  miles;  and  to  this 
day  the  old  milestones  may  be  seen,  here  and  there, 
in  tnat  country  (Robinson's  Bib.  Res.  ii.  161  note, 
iii.  306).  The  mile  of  the  Jews  is  said  to  have 
been  of  two  kinds,  long  or  short,  dependent  on 
tl«  length  of  the  pace,  which  varied  in  different 
i  arts,  the  long  pace  being  double  the  length  of  the 
short  one  (Cirpzov's  Apparat.  p.  679).  [W.  L.  B.] 

MILETUS  (Mt\i)Tos:  Miletus')  Acts  xx.  15, 
17,  less  correctly  called  MILETUM  in  '2  Tim.  iv. 
20.  The  first  of  these  passages  brings  before  us  the 
scene  of  the  most  pathetic  occasion  of  St.  Paul's 
life ;  the  second  is  interesting  and  important  in 
reference  to  the  question  of  the  Apostle's  second 
imprisonment. 

St.  Paul,  on  the  return  voyage  from  his  third 
missionary  journey,  having  left  Philippi  after  the 
passover  (Acts  xx.  6),  and  desirous,  if  possible,  to 
be  in  Jerusalem  at  Pentecost  (ib.  16),  determined 
to  pass  by  Ephesus.  Wishing,  however,  to  com 
municate  with  the  church  in  which  he  had  laboured 
so  long,  he  sent  for  the  presbyters  of  Ephesus  to 
meet  him  at  Miletus.  In  the  context  we  have  the 
geographical  relations  of  the  latter  city  brought  out 
as  distinctly,  as  if  it  were  St.  Luke's  purpose  to 
state  them.  In  the  first  place  it  lay  on  the  coast 
to  the  S.  of  Ephesus.  Next,  it  was  a  day's  sail  from 
Trogyllmm  (ver.  15).  Moreover,  to  those  who 


MILETUS 


363 


are  sailing  from  the  north,  it  is  in  the  u.rect  line  for 
Cos.  We  should  also  notice  that  it  was  near 
enough  to  Ephesus  by  land  communication,  for 
the  message  to  be  sent  and  the  presbyters  to  come 
within  a  very  narrow  space  of  time.  All  these 
details  correspond  with  the  geographical  facts  of  the 
case.  As  to  the  last  point,  Ephesus  was  by  land 
only  about  20  or  30  miles  distant  from  Miletus. 
There  is  a  further  and  more  minute  topographical 
coincidence,  which  may  be  seen  in  the  phrase. 
"  They  accompanied  him  to  the  ship,"  implying  as 
it  does  that  the  vessel  lay  at  some  distance  from  the 
town.  The  site  of  Miletus  has  now  receded  ten 
miles  from  the  coast,  and  even  in  the  Apostle's 
time  it  must  have  lost  its  strictly  maritime  posi 
tion.  This  point  is  noticed  by  Prof.  Hackett  in 
his  Gamm.  on  the  Acts  (2nd  ed.  p.  344) ;  com 
pare  Acts  xxi.  5.  In  each  case  we  have  a  low 
flat  shore,  as  a  marked  and  definite  feature  of  the 
scene. 

The  passage  in  the  second  Epistle  to  Timothy 
where  Miletus  is  mentioned,  presents  a  very  serious 
difficulty  to  the  theory  that  there  was  only  one 
Roman  imprisonment.  When  St.  Paul  visited  the 
place  on  the  occasion  just  described,  Trophimus 
was  indeed  with  him  (Acts  xx.  4)  ;  but  he  cer 
tainly  did  not  "  leave  him  sick  at  Miletus ;"  for  at 
the  conclusion  of  the  voyage  we  find  him  with  the 
Apostle  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxi.  29).  ,  Nor  is  it 
possible  that  he  could  have  been  so  left  on  the 
voyage  from  Caesarea  to  Rome:  for  in  the  first 
place  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  Trophimus 
was  with  the  Apostle  then  at  all ;  and  in  the  second 
place  the  ship  was  never  to  the  north  of  Cnidus 
(Acts  xxvii.  7).  But  on  the  hypothesis  that  St. 
Paul  was  liberated  from  Rome  and  revisited  the 
neighbourhood  of  Ephesus,  all  becomes  easy,  and 
consistent  with  the  other  notices  of  his  movements 
in  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Various  combinations  are 
possible.  See  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch. 
xxvii.,  and  Birks,  Horae  Apostolicae. 

As  to  the  history  of  Miletus  itself,  it  was  far  more 
famous  five  hundred  years  before  St  Paul's  day 


f  Ap  illo  «t  Sfilotns. 


364 


MILK 


thaa  it  ever  became  afterwards.  In  early  times  it 
was  the  most  flourishing  city  of  the  Ionian  Greeks. 
The  ships  which  sailed  from  it  were  celebrated 
for  their  distant  voyages.  Miletus  suffered  in 
the  progress  of  the  Lydian  kingdom  and  became 
tributary  to  Croesus.  In  the  natural  order  of 
events,  it  was  absorbed  in  the  Persian  empire :  and, 
revolting,  it  was  stormed  and  sacked.  After  a 
brief  period  of  spirited  independence,  it  received  a 
blow  from  which  it  never  recovered,  in  the  siege 
conducted  by  Alexander,  when  on  his  Eastern  cam 
paign.  But  still  it  held,  even  through  the  Roman 
pwiod,  the  rank  of  a  second-rate  trading  town,  and 
Strabo  mentions  its  four  harbours.  At  this  time  it 
was  politically  in  the  province  of  ASIA,  though 
CARIA  was  the  old  ethnological  name  of  the  district 
in  which  it  was  situated.  Its  pre-eminence  on  this 
coast  had  now  long  been  yielded  up  to  EPHESUS. 
These  changes  can  be  vividly  traced  by  comparing 
the  whole  series  of  coins  of  the  two  places.  In  the 
case  of  Miletus,  those  of  the  autonomous  period  are 
numerous  and  beautiful,  those  of  the  imperial  period 
very  scanty.  Still  Miletus  was  for  some  time  an 
episcopal  city  of  Western  Asia.  Its  final  decay  was 
doubtless  promoted  by  that  silting  up  of  the  Mae- 
ander,  to  which  we  have  alluded.  No  remains 
worth  describing  are  now  found  in  the  swamps 
which  conceal  the  site  of  the  city  of  Thales  and 
Hecataeus.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MILK.  As  an  article  of  diet,  milk  holds  a  more 
important  position  in  Eastern  countries  than  with  us. 
It  is  not  a  mere  adjunct  in  cookery,  or  restricted  to 
the  use  of  the  young,  although  it  is  naturally  the 
characteristic  food  of  childhood,  both  from  its  simple 
and  nutritive  qualities  (1  Pet.  ii.  2),  and  particu 
larly  as  contrasted  with  meat  (1  Cor.  iii.  2  ;  Heb. 
v.  12) :  but  beyond  this  it  is  regarded  as  substantial 
food  adapted  alike  to  all  ages  and  classes.  Hence 
it  is  enumerated  among  "  the  principal  things  for 
the  whole  use  of  a  man's  life"  (Ecclus.  xxxix.  26), 
uid  it  appears  as  the  very  emblem  of  abundance  * 
and  wealth,  either  in  conjunction  with  honey  (Ex. 
iii.  8;  Deut.  vi.  3,  xi.  9)  or  wine  (Is.  Iv.  1),  or 
even  by  itself  (Job  xxi.  24  b) :  hence  also  to  "  suck 
the  milk"  of  an  enemy's  land  was  an  expression 
betokening  its  complete  subjection  (Is.  Ix.  16;  Ez. 
xxv.  4).  Not  only  the  milk  of  cows,  but  of  sheep 
(Deut.  xxxii.  14),  of  camels  (Gen.  xxxii.  15),  and 
of  goats  (Prov.  xxvii.  27)  was  used ;  the  latter 
appears  to  have  been  most  highly  prized.  The  use 
of  camel's  milk  still  prevails  among  the  Arabs 
Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  44). 

Milk  was  used  sometimes  in  its  natural  state,  and 
sometimes  in  a  sour,  coagulated  state :  the  former 
was  named  khdldb,e  and  the  latter  khemah.A  In  the 
A.  V.  the  latter  is  rendered  "  butter,"  but  there  can 
be  no  question  that  in  every  case  (except  perhaps 
Prov.  xxx.  33)  the  term  refers  to  a  preparation  of 
milk  well  known  in  Eastern  countries  under  the 
name  of  leben.  The  method  now  pursued  in  its 

*  This  is  expressed  in  the  Hebrew  term  for  milk, 
chnlab,  the  etymological  force  of  which  is  "  fatness."  We 
may  compare  with  the  Scriptural  expression,  "  a  land 
Bowing  with  milk  and  honey,"  the  following  passages 
from  the  classical  writers- — 

'Pel  Sf  •yaAoucTi  neSov, 
*P«i  S'  olixf,  pet  Se  /j.c\Kr<rav 
NeVrapi.— EU«IP.  Bacch.  142. 
"  Flumina  jam  lactis,  jam  flumina  ncctaris  ibant  : 
V'ltvaquc  de  viridi  stlllabant  like  mella.' 

Ov.  Met.  i.  111. 


BULL 

preparation  is  to  boil  the  milk  over  a  slow  fire,  adding 
to  it  a  small  piece  of  old  leben  or  rome  other  acid  ic 
order  to  make  it  coagulate  Russell,  Aleppo,  i.  118, 
370  ;  Burckhardt,  Arabia,  i.  60).  The  refreshing 
draught  which  Jnel  offered  "  in  a  lordly  dish  "  to 
Sisera  (Judg.  v.  '25)  was  leben,  as  Josephus  parti 
cularly  notes  (yaAa  8iof  Oopbs  fjSri,  Ant.  v.  5,  §4)  : 
it  was  produced  from  one  of  the  goatskin  bottles 
which  are  still  used  for  the  purpose  by  the  Bedouin* 
(Judg.  iv.  19  ;  comp.  Burckhardt's  Notes,  i.  45). 
As  it  would  keep  for  a  considerable  time  it  was 
particularly  adapted  to  the  use  of  travellers  (2  Sam, 
xvii.  29).  The  amount  of  milk  required  for  its 
production  was  of  course  considerable  ;  and  hence 
in  Is.  vii.  22  the  use  of  leben  is  predicted  as  a  con 
sequence  of  the  depopulation  of  the  land,  when  all 
agriculture  had  ceased,  and  the  fields  were  covered 
with  grass.  In  Job  xx.  17,  xxix.  6,  the  term  is 
used  as  an  emblem  of  abundance  in  the  same  sense 
as  milk.  Leben  is  still  extensively  used  in  the 
East  :  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year  the  poor  almost 
live  upon  it,  while  the  upper  classes  eat  it  with 
salad  or  meat  (Russell,  i.  118).  It  is  still  offered 
in  hospitality  to  the  passing  stranger,  exactly  as 
of  old  in  Abraham's  tent  (Gen.  rviii.  8  ;  comp. 
Robinson,  Bib.  Res.  i.  571,  ii.  70,  21  1),  so  freely 
indeed  that  in  some  parts  of  Arabia  it  would  be 
regarded  a  scandal  if  money  were  received  in  return 
(Burckhardt's  Arabia,  i.  120,  ii.  106).  Whether 
milk  was  used  instead  of  water  for  the  purpose  of 
boiling  meat,  as  is  at  present  not  unusual  among 
the  Bedouins,  is  uncertain.  [COOKING.]  The  pro 
hibition  against  seething  a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk 
(occurring  as  it  docs  amid  the  regulations  of  the 
harvest  festival,  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26  ;  Deut.  xiv. 
21)  was  probably  directed  against  some  heathen 
usage  practised  at  the  time  of  harvest.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MILL.     The   mills  (D^rn,  rechaim)  •  of  the 


ancient  Hebrews  probably  differed  but  little  from 
those  at  present  in  use  in  the  East.  These  consist 
of  two  circular  stones,  about  18  in.  or  two  feet  in 
diameter,  the  lower  of  which  (Lat.  meta)  is  fixed, 
and  has  its  upper  surface  slightly  convex,  fitting 
into  a  corresponding  concavity  in  the  upper  stone 
(Lat.  catillus).  The  latter,  called  by  the  Hebrews 
rcceb  (331!),  "  chariot,"  and  by  the  Arabs  rekkab, 

"  rider,"  has  a  hole  in  it  through  which  the  grain 
passes,  immediately  above  a  pivot  or  shaft  which 
rises  from  the  centre  of  the  lower  stone,  and  about 
which  the  upper  stone  is  turned  by  means  of  an 
upright  handle  fixed  near  the  edge.  It  is  worked 
by  women,  sometimes  singly  and  sometimes  two 
together,  who  are  usually  seated  on  the  bare  ground 
(Is.  xlvii.  1,2)  "  facing  each  other  ;  both  have  hold 
of  the  handle  by  which  the  upper  is  turned  round 
on  the  '  nether  '  millstone.  The  one  whose  right 
hand  is  disengaged  throws  in  the  grain  as  occasion 
requires  through  the  hole  in  the  upper  stone.  It  is 
not  correct  to  say  that  one  pushes  it  half  round, 


b  In  this  passage  the  marginal  reading,  '  Bilk  pails," 
is  preferable  to  the  text,  "  breasts."  The  Hebrew  word  doei 
not  occur  elsewhere,  and  hence  its  meaning  is  doubtful. 
Perhaps  its  true  sense  is  "farm-yard"  or  "fold." 


•  Compare  .  Arabic       Lov..  rahaydn,    the  dual  ol 

0   — 

-^  ,  nha,  a  mill.    The  dual  form  of  ccurso  refers  tc 
the  pair  of  stones  composing  the  mill. 


MILL 


MILLET 


SfiA 


znl  then  the  other  seizes  the  handle.     This  would  1  married  man  with  slender  means  it  is  said  in  th« 


be  slow  work,  and  would  give  a  spasmodic  motioi 
to  the  stone.  Both  retain  their  hold,  and  pull  to 
or  push  from,  as  men  do  with  the  whip  or  cross 
cut  saw.  The  proverb  of  our  Saviaur  (Matt.  xxiv. 
41)  is  true  to  life,  for  women  only  grind.  I  cannot 
recall  an  instance  in  which  men  were  at  the  mill " 
(Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  c.  34).  The 
labour  is  very  hard,  and  the  task  of  grinding  in 
consequence  performed  only  by  the  lowest  servants 
(Ex.  xi.  5  ;  comp.  Plaut.  Merc.  ii.  3),  and  captives 
CJudg.  xvi.  21;  Job.  xxxi.  10;  Is.  xlvii.  1,  2  ; 
Lam.  v.  13;  comp.  Horn.  Od.  vii.  103  ;  Suet.  Tib. 
c.  51).b  So  essential  were  mill-stones  for  daily- 
domestic  use,  that  they  were  forbidden  to  be  taken 
in  pledge  (Deut.  xxiv.  6 ;  Jos.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §26), 
in  order  that  a  man's  family  might  not  be  deprived 
of  the  means  of  preparing  their  food.  Among  the 
Fellahs  of  the  Hauran  one  of  the  chief  articles  of 
furniture  described  by  Burckhardt  (Syria,  p.  292) 
is  the  "  hand-mill  which  is  used  in  summer  when 
there  is  no  water  in  the  wadys  to  drive  the  mills." 
The  sound  of  the  mill  is  the  indication  of  peaceful 
household  life,  and  the  absence  of  it  is  a  sign  of 
desolation  and  abandonment,  "  When  the  sound  of 
the  mill  is  low"  (Eccl.  xii.  4).  No  more  aifecting 
picture  of  utter  destruction  could  be  imagined  than 
that  conveyed  in  the  threat  denounced  against 
Judah  by  the  mouth  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
(xxv.  10),  "I  will  take  from  them  the  voice  of 
mirth,  and  the  voice  of  gladness,  the  voice  of  the 
bridegroom  and  the  voice  of  the  bride,  the  sound  of 
the  mill-stones,  and  the  light  of  the  candle  "  (comp. 
Rev.  xviii.  22).  The  song  of  the  women  grinding 
is  supposed  by  some  to  be  alluded  to  in  Eccl.  xii.  4, 
and  it  was  evidently  so  understood  by  theLXX,e 
but  Dr.  Robinson  says  (i.  485)  "  we  heard  no  song 
as  an  accompaniment  to  the  work,"  and  Dr.  Hackett 
(Bibl.  Illust.  p.  49)  describes  it  rather  as  shrieking 
than  singing.  It  is  alluded  to  in  Homer  (Od.  xx. 
105-119)  :  and  Athenaeus  (xiv.  p.  619a)  refers  to 
a  peculiar  chant  which  was  sung  by  women  win 
nowing  corn  and  mentioned  by  Aristophanes  in  the 
Ifiesmophoriazusae. 

The  hand-mills  of  the  ancient  Egyptians  appear 
to  have  been  of  the  same  character  as  those  of  their 
descendants,  and  like  them  were  worked  by  women 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  p.  118,  &c.).  "They 
had  also  a  large  mill  on  a  very  similar  principle ; 
but  the  stones  were  of  far  greater  power  and  dimen 
sions  ;  and  this  could  only  have  been  turned  by 
cattle  or  asses,  like  those  of  the  ancient  Romans, 
and  of  the  modem  Cairenes."  It  was  the  mill 
stone  of  a  mill  of  this  kind,  driven  by  an  ass,1*  which 
is  alluded  to  in  Matt,  xviii.  6  (jut5\os  oviic6s),  to 
distinguish  it,  says  Lightfoot  (Hor.  ffebr.  in  loc.) 
from  those  small  mills  which  were  used  to  grind 
spictd  for  the  wound  of  circumcision,  or  for  the 
delights  of  the  sabbath,  and  to  which  both  Kinchi 
au4  Jarchi  find  a  reference  in  Jer.  xxv.  10.  Of  a 


*>  Grinding  is  reckoned  In  the  Mishna  (Shabbath,  vii.  2) 
among  the  chief  household  duties,  to  be  performed  by  the 
wife  unless  she  brought  with  her  one  servant  (Cethuboth, 
v.  5) ;  in  which  case  she  was  relieved  from  grinding, 
baking,  and  washing,  but  was  still  obliged  to  suckle  her 
child,  make  her  husband's  bed,  and  work  in  wool. 


•  iv  curStvfLii  <£<ovi)?  1-175  aXijflowoTjs,  reading 
tfchentih,  ••  a,  woman  grinding,"  for   HiHD,  tachdndh, 
•  u  mill." 

<•  Comp.  Ovid,  Fast.  vi.  318    'et  qnae  pnmlccas  vcrsat 
Luiella  ic-ilas.'" 


Talmud  (Kiddushin,  p.  296),  "  with  a  millstone 
on  his  neck  he  studies  the  law,"  and  the  expression 
is  still  proverbial  (Tendlau,  Sprichw&rter,  p.  181). 

It  was  the  moveable  upper  millstone  of  the  hand* 
mill  with  which  the  woman  of  Thebez  brokf 
Abimelech's  skull  (Judg.  ix.  53).  It  is  now  gene 
rally  made,  according  to  Dr.  Thomson,  of  a  porous 
lava  brought  from  the  Hauran,  both  stones  being 
of  the  same  material,  but,  says  the  same  tra 
veller,  "  I  have  seen  the  nether  made  of  a  com 
pact  sandstone,  and  quite  thick,  while  the  upper 
was  of  this  lava,  probably  because  from  its  light 
ness  it  is  the  more  easily  driven  round  with  the 
hand"  (The  Land  and  the  Book,  ch.  34).  The 
porous  lava  to  which  he  refers  is  probably  the  same 
as  the  black  tufa  mentioned  by  Burckhardt  (Syria, 
p.  57),  the  blocks  of  which  are  brought  from  the 
Lejah,  and  are  fashioned  into  millstones  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Ezra,  a  village  in  the  Hauran.  "  They 
vary  in  price  according  to  their  size,  from  15  to  60 
piastres,  and  are  preferred  to  all  others  on  account 
of  the  hardness  of  the  stone." 

The  Israelites,  in  their  passage  through  the 
desert,  had  with  them  hand-mills,  as  well  as  mor 
tars  [MORTAR]  in  which  they  ground  the  manna 
(Num.  xi.  8).  One  passage  (Lam.  v.  13)  is 
deserving  of  notice,  which  Hoheisel  (de  Molts 
Manual.  Vet.  in  Ugolini,  vol.  xxix)  explains  in  a 
manner  which  gives  it  a  point  which  is  lost  in  our 
A.  V.  It  may  be  rendered,  "  the  choice  (men)  bore 
the  mill  (JIPlp,  techori),*  and  the  youths  stumbled 


beneath  the  wood  ;"  the  wood  being  the  woodwork 
or  shaft  of  the  mill,  which  the  captives  were  com 
pelled  to  carry.  There  are  besides  allusions  to  other 
apparatus  connected  with  the  operation  of  grinding, 
the  sieve,  or  bolter  (HQ3,  naphah,  Is.  xxx.  28  ;  or 
i33,  cebarah,  Am.  ix.  9)  and  the  hopper,  though 
the  latter  is  only  found  in  the  Mishna  (Zabim, 
iv.  3),  and  was  a  late  invention.  We  also  find 
in  the  Mishna  (Demai,  iii.  4)  that  mention  is  made 
of  a  miller  ()niD.  tochen),  indicating  that  grind 
ing  corn  was  recognized  as  a  distinct  occupation. 
Wind-mills  and  water-mills  are  of  more  recent 
date.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MILLET  (JIT8!,*  dochan  :  KeyxP0*  '•  wwViwm), 
n  all  probability  the  grains  of  Panicum  miliacewn 
and  italicwm,  and  of  the  Holcus  sorghum,  Linn. 
^the  Sorghum  vulgare  of  modern  writers),  may  all 
be  comprehended  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Mention 
of  millet  occurs  only  in  Ez.  iv.  9,  where  it  is  enu 
merated  together  with  wheat,  barley,  beans,  lentils, 
and  fitches,  which  the  prophet  was  ordered  to  make 
into  bread.  Celsius  (Hierob.  i.  454)  has  given  the 
names  of  numerous  old  writers  who  are  in  favour  of 
the  interpretation  adopted  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  ; 
the  Chaldee,  Syriac,  and  Arabic  versions  have  a 
word  identical  with  the  Hebrew.  That  "millet" 

the  correct  rendering  of  the  original  word  there 
can  be  no  doubt  ;  the  only  question  that  remains 
for  consideration  is,  what  is  the  particular  species  of 
millet  intended  :  is  it  the  Panicum  miliaceum,  or  the 
Sorghum  vulgare,  or  may  both  kinds  be  denoted  ? 
The  Arabs  to  this  day  apply  the  term  dukhan 


3       -• 

Compare  the  Arabic       k^»U9,  tahoon.  a  mill. 
From  root  JH"1!)  "  to  be  dusky,"  in  allusion  to  O>c 
colour  of  the  seeds 


366 


MILLET 


to  th°  Panicum  miliaceum,  but  Forsk&l  (Dcscr. 
Plant,  p.  174)  uses  the  name  of  the  Holcus 
dochna,  "  a  plant,"  says  Dr.  Koyle  (Kitto's  Cyc. 
art.  "  Dokhan  "),  "  ;is  yet  unknown  to  botanists." 
The  Holcus  durrha  of  Forsk&l,  which  he  says  the 
Arabs  call  taum,  and  which  he  distinguishes  from 
tht  H.  dochna,  appears  to  be  identical  with  the 
dourrtta,  Sorghum  vulgare,  of  modern  botanists. 
It  is  impossible  in  the  case  of  these  and  many 
other  cereal  grains  to  say  to  what  countries  they 
are  indigenous.  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  enumerates  wheat, 
beans,  lentiles,  and  dourrha,  as  being  presei-ved  by 
seeds,  or  by  representation  on  the  ancient  tombs  of 
Egypt,  and  has  no  doubt  that  the  Holcus  sorghum 
was  known  to  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  that  country. 
Dr.  Royle  maintains  that  the  true  dukhun  of  Arab 
authors  is  the  Panicum  miliaceum,  which  is  univer 
sally  cultivated  in  the  East.  Celsius  (Hierob.  1.  c.) 
and  Hiller  (Hierophyt.  ii.  124)  give  Panicum  as  the 
rendering  of  Dochan  •  the  LXX.  word  K(yxPos>  '" 
all  probability  is  the  Panicum  italicum,  a  grass  cul 
tivated  in  Europe  as  an  article  of  diet.  There  is, 
however,  some  difficulty  in  identifying  the  precise 
plants  spoken  of  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans  under  the 
names  of  Ktyxpos,  t\vpos ,  panicum,  milium,  &c. 


Milgan. 


The  Panicum  miliaceum  is  cultivated  in  Europe 
and  in  tropical  countries,  and  like  the  dourrha,  is 
often  used  as  an  ingredient  in  making  bread  ;  in 
India  it  is  cultivated  in  the  cold  weather  with 
nrhea*,  and  barley.  Tournefort  (  Voyage,  ii.  95)  says 
that  the  poor  people  of  Samos  make  bread  by  mixing 
half  wheat  and  half  barley  and  white  millet.  The 
seeds  of  millet  in  this  country  are,  as  is  well  known, 
extensively  used  as  food  for  birds.  It  is  probable 
that  both  the  Sorghum  vulgare,  and  the  Panicum 


M1LLO 

miliaceum,  were  used  by  the  ancient  Hebrews  and 
Egyptians,  and  that  the  Heb.  Dochan  may  denoU 
cither  of  these  plants.  Two  cultivated  sjiecies  of 
Panicum  are  named  as  occurring  in  Palestine,  viz. 
P.  miliaceum  and  P.  italicum,  (Strand's  Flor. 
Palaest.  Nos.  35,  37).  The  genera  Sorghum  and 
Panicum  belong  to  the  natural  order  Oramineae, 
perhaps  the  most  important  order  in  the  vegetable 
kingdom.  [AV.  11. J 


Panicum  Viliu  vum. 


MIL'LO  (Nin,  always  with  the  definite 
article  :  i)  &icpa,  once  rb  avaXrifn^a.  ;  Alex,  in  1  K. 
ix.  only,  y  fie\u:  Mello),  a  place  in  ancient 
Jerusalem.  Both  name  and  thing  seem  to  have 
been  already  in  existence  when  the  city  was 
taken  from  the  Jebusites  by  David.  His  first  oc 
cupation  after  getting  possession  was  to  build  "  round 
about,  from  the  Millo  and  to  the  house"  (A.  V. 
"  inward  ;"  2  Sam.  v.  9)  :  or  as  the  parallel  passage 
has  it,  "  he  built  the  city  round  about,  and  from 
the  Millo  round  about"  (I  Chr.  xi.  8).  Its  repair 
or  restoration  was  one  of  the  great  works  for  which 
Solomon  raised  his  "levy"  (IK.  ix.  15,  24,  xi. 
27)  ;  and  it  formed  a  prominent  part  of  the  fortifi 
cations  by  which  Hezekiah  prepared  for  the  approach 
of  the  Assyrians  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  5).  The  last  pas 
sage  seems  to  show  that  "  the  Millo  "  was  part  of 
the  "  city  of  David,"  that  is  of  Zion,  a  conclusion 
which  is  certainly  supported  by  the  singular  passage. 
2  K.  xii.  20,  where,  whichever  view  we  take  of 
Silla,  the  "  house  of  Millo"  must  be  in  the  neigh- 
oonrhood  of  the  Tyropoeon  valley  which  lay  at  the 
foot  of  Zion.  More  than  this  it  seems  impossible 
to  gather  from  the  notices  quoted  above—all  the 
passages  in  which  the  name  is  found  in  the  0.  T. 

If  "Millo"  be  taken  as  a  Hebrew  word,  it 
would  be  derived  from  a  root  which  has  the  force 
of  "filling"  (see  Gesenius,  Thes.  787,  789).  This 
notion  has  been  applied  by  the  inteqircters  aftei 
their  custom  in  the  most  various  and  opposite 
ways  :  —  a  rampart  (agger)  ;  a  mound  ;  an  open  spac<" 
used  for  assemblies,  and  therefore  often  filled  with 
people  ;  a  ditch  or  valley  ;  even  a  trench  rilled  with 
water.  It  has  led  the  writers  of  the  Targums  to 
render  Millo  by  KJV7D,  »'.  e.  Milletha,  the  term 


MILLO.  THE  HOUSE  OF 

by  which  in  other  passages  they  express  the  Hebrew 
n?pb,  sol'lah,  the  mound  which  in  ancient  warfare 
was  used  to  besiege  a  town.  But  unfortunately 
none  of  these  guesses  enable  us  to  ascertain  what 
Millo  really  was,  and  it  would  probably  be  nearc 
the  truth — it  is  certainly  safer — to  look  on  the 
name  as  an  ancient  or  archaic  term,  Jebusite,  or 
possibly  even  still  older,  adopted  by  the  Israelites 
when  they  took  the  town,  and  incorporated  into 
their  own  nomenclature."  That  it  was  an  ante- 
hebraic  term  is  supported  by  its  occurrence  in  con 
nection  with  Shechem,  so  eminently  a  Canaanite 
place.  (See  the  next  article.)  The  only  ray  of 
light  which  we  can  obtain  is  from  the  LXX.  Their 
rendering  in  every  case  (excepting b  only  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  5)  is  r/  &Kpa,  a  word  which  they  employ  no 
where  else  in  the  0.  T.  Now  i]  ticpa  means  "  the 
citadel,"  and  it  is  remarkable  that  ;t  is  the  word 
used  with  unvarying  persistence  throughout  the 
Books  of  Maccabees  for  the  fortress  on  Mount  Zion, 
which  was  occupied  throughout  the  struggle  by  the 
adherents  of  Antiochus,  and  was  at  last  razed  and  the 
>rery  hill  levelled  by  Simon.  [JERUSALEM,  vol.  i. 
p.  1000  b,  1002  a,  &c.]  It  is  therefore  perhaps  not 
too  much  to  assume  that  the  word  millo  was  em 
ployed  in  the  Hebrew  original  of  1  Maccabees.  The 
jtoint  is  exceedingly  obscure,  and  the  above  is  at 
the  best  little  more  than  mere  conjecture,  though 
it  agrees  so  for  with  the  slight  indications  of  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  5,  as  noticed  already.  [G.] 

MIL'LO,  THE  HOUSE  OF.  1.  (JV3 
:  &  O!KOS  BijfytoaA.coj' ;  Alex.  OIKOS  fj.aa\\eav : 
urbs  Mello ;  oppidum  Mello),  Apparently  a  family 
or  clan,  mentioned  in  Judg.  ix.  6,  20  only,  in  con 
nexion  with  the  men  or  lords  of  Shechem,  and  con 
cerned  with  them  in  the  affair  of  Abimelech.  No 
clue  is  given  by  the  original  or  any  of  the  versions 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  name. 

2.  (fi&D  '2:  olKosMad\v:domusMyllo).  The 
"  house  of  Millo  that  goeth  down  to  Silla "  was 
the  spot  at  which  king  Joash  was  murdered  by  his 
slaves  (2  K.  xii.  20).  There  is  nothing  to  lead  us 
to  suppose  that  the  murder  was  not  committed  in 
Jerusalem,  and  in  that  case  the  spot  must  be  con 
nected  with  the  ancient  Millo  (see  preceding  article). 
Two  explanations  have  been  suggested  of  the  name 
SILLA.  These  will  be  discussed  more  fully  under 
that  head,  but  whichever  is  adopted  would  equally 
place  Beth  Millo  in  or  near  the  Tyropoeon,  taking 
that  to  be  where  it  is  shown  in  the  plan  of  Jeru 
salem,  at  vol.  i.  p.  1018.  More  than  this  can 
hardly  be  said  on  the  subject  in  the  present  state 
of  our  knowledge.  [G.] 

MINES,  MINING.  "  Surely  there  is  a 
source  for  the  silver,  and  a  place  for  the  gold  which 
they  refine.  Iron  is  taken  out  of  the  soil,  and 
stone  man  melts  (for)  copper.  He  hath  put  an  end 
to  darkness,  and  to  all  perfection  (i.  e.,  most 
thoroughly)  he  searcheth  the  stone  of  thick  dark- 
uess  and  of  the  shadow  of  death.  He  hath  sunk  a 
shaft  far  from  the  wanderer  ;  they  that  are  forgotten 
of  the  foot  are  suspended,  away  from  man  they 
waver  to  and  fro.  (As  for)  the  earth,  from  her 

"•  Just  as  the  Knichtena-guild  Lane  of  Saxon  London 
became  Nightingale  Lane,  as  the  Saxon  name  grew 
unintelligible. 

b  Here,  and  here  only,  the  LXX.  have  TO  ava.\i\^\La., 
perhaps  the  "  foundation  "  or  "  substruction  " ;  though 
Schleusner  gwss  also  the  meaning  alUtudo. 


MINES 


367 


cometh  forth  bread,  yet  her  nethermost  parts  ar» 
upturned  as  (by)  fire.  The  place  of  sapphire  (are) 
her  stones,  and  dust  of  gold  is  his.  A  track  which 
the  bird  of  prey  hath  not  known,  nortnecye  mi 
the  falcon  glared  upon  ;  which  the  sons  of  pride 
(«'.  e.  wild  beasts)  have  not  trodden,  nor  the  roaring 
lion  gone  over ;  in  the  flint  man  hath  thrust  his 
hand,  he  hath  overturned  mountains  from  the  root ; 
in  the  rocks  he  hath  cleft  channels,*  and  every  rare 
thing  hath  his  eye  seen  :  the  streams  hath  he  boutd 
that  they  weep  not,  and  that  which  is  hid  he 
bringeth  forth  to  light"  (Job  xxviii.  1-11).  Such 
is  the  highly  poetical  description  given  by  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Job  of  the  operations  of 
mining  as  known  in  his  day,  the  only  record  cf  the 
kind  which  we  inherit  from  the  ancient  Hebrews. 
The  question  of  the  date  of  the  book  cannot  be 
much  influenced  by  it ;  for  indications  of  a  very 
advanced  state  of  metallurgical  knowledge  are  found 
in  the  monuments  of  the  Egyptians  at  a  period  at 
least  as  early  as  any  which  would  be  claimed  for 
the  author.  Leaving  this  point  to  be  settled  inde 
pendently,  therefore,  it  remains  to  be  seen  what  is 
implied  in  the  words  of  the  poem. 

It  may  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  description 
that  a  distinction  is  made  between  gold  obtained  in 
the  manner  indicated,  and  that  which  is  found  in 
the  natural  state  in  the  alluvial  soil,  among  the 
debris  washed  down  by  the  torrents.  This  appears 
to  be  implied  in  the  expression  "  the  gold  they 
refine,"  which  presupposes  a  process  by  which  the 
pure  gold  is  extracted  from  the  ore,  and  separated 
from  the  silver  or  copper  with  which  it  may  have 
been  mixed.  What  is  said  of  gold  may  be  equally 
applied  to  silver,  for  in  almost  every  allusion  to  the 
process  of  refining  the  two  metals  are  associated. 
In  the  passage  of  Job  which  has  been  quoted,  so  far 
as  can  be  made  out  from  the  obscurities  with  which 
it  is  beset,  the  natural  order  of  mining  operations  is 
observed  in  the  description.  The  whole  point  is 
obviously  contained  in  the  contrast,  "  Surely  there 
is  a  source  for  the  silver,  and  a  place  for  the  gold 
which  men  refine, — but  where  shall  wisdom  be 
found,  and  where  is  the  place  of  understanding  ?  " 
No  labour  is  too  great  for  extorting  from  the  eartn 
its  treasures.  The  shaft  is  sunk,  and  the  adven 
turous  miner,  far  from  the  haunts  of  men,  hangs 
n  mid-air  (v.  4) :  the  bowels  of  the  earth — which 
in  the  course  of  nature  grows  but  corn — are  over 
thrown  as  though  wasted  by  fire.  The  path 
which  the  miner  pursues  in  his  underground  course 
is  unseen  by  the  keen  eye  of  the  falcon,  nor  have 
the  boldest  beasts  of  prey  traversed  it,  but  man 
wins  his  way  through  every  obstacle,  hews  out 
;unnels  in  the  rock,  stops  the  water  from  flooding 
lis  mine,  and  brings  to  light  the  precious  metals 
as  the  reward  of  his  adventure.  No  description 
could  be  more  complete.  The  poet  might  have 
lad  before  him  the  copper  mines  of  the  Sinaitic 
>eninsula.  In  the  Wady  MaghartJi,  "  the  valley 
of  the  Cave,"  are  still  traces  of  the  Egyptian  colony 
of  miners  who  settled  there  for  the  purpose  of 
extracting  copper  from  the  freestone  rocks,  and 
eft  their  hieroglyphic  inscriptions  upon  the  face  of 
he  cliff.  That  these  inscriptions  are  of  great 
antiquity  there  can  be  little  doubt,  though  Lepsius 
may  not  be  justified  in  placing  them  at  a  date 


It  is  curious  that  the  word  ~)X*>  yetr,  here  used,  u 
ipparently  Egyptian  in  origin,  gnd  if  so  may  have  been 
,  technical  term  among  the  Egyptian  miners  of  the 
linaitic  peninsula. 


368 


MINES 


B.C.  4000.  "  Already,  under  the  fourth  dynasty 
ofManetho,"  he  says,  "the  same  which  erected 
th»  great  pyramids  of  Gizeh,  4000  B.C.,  copper 
mines  had  been  discovered  in  this  desert,  which 
were  worked  by  a  colony.  The  peninsi.la  was 
then  inhabited  by  Asiatic,  probably  Semiti :  races ; 
therefore  do  we  often  see  in  those  rock  sculptures, 
the  triumphs  of  Pharaoh  over  the  enemies  of 
Egypt.  Almost  all  the  inscriptions  belong  to  the 
Old  Empire,  only  one  was  found  of  the  co-regency 
of  Tuthmosis  III.  and  his  sister"  (Letters  from 
Egypt,  p.  346,  Eng.  tr.).  In  th«  Magh&rah 
tablets  Mr.  Drew  (Scripture  Lands,  p.  50  note) 
"  saw  the  cartouche  of  Suphis,  the  builder  of  the 
Great  Pyramid,  and  on  the  stones  at  Surabit  el 
Khadim  there  are  those  of  kings  of  the  eighteenth 
and  nineteenth  dynasties."  But  the  most  inter 
esting  description  of  this  mining  colony  is  to  be 
found  in  a  letter  to  the  Athenaeum  (June  4,  1859, 
No.  1649,  p.  747),  signed  M.  A.  and  dated  from 
"  Sarabut  el  Khadem,  in  the  Desert  of  Sinai,  May, 
1859."  The  writer  discovered  on  the  mountain 
exactly  opposite  the  caves  of  Magh&rah,  traces  of 
an  ancient  fortress  intended,  as  he  conjectures,  for 
the  protection  of  the  miners.  The  hill  on  which  it 
stands  is  about  1000  feet  high,  nearly  insulated,  and 
formed  of  a  series  of  precipitous  terraces,  one  above 
the  other,  like  the  steps  of  the  pyramids.  The 
uppermost  of  these  was  entirely  surrounded  by  a 
strong  wall  within  which  were  found  remains  of 
140  houses,  each  about  ten  feet  square.  There 
were,  besides,  the  remains  of  ancient  hammers  of 
green  porphyry,  and  reservoirs  "  so  disposed  that 
when  one  was  full  the  surplus  ran  into  the  others, 
and  so  in  succession,  so  that  they  must  have  had 
water  enough  to  last  for  years.  The  ancient  fur 
naces  are  still  to  be  seen,  and  on  the  wast  of  the 
Red  Sea  are  found  the  piei-s  and  wharves  whence 
the  miuei-s  shipped  their  metal  in  the  harbour  of 
Abu  Zelimeh.  Five  miles  from  Sarabut  el  Khadem 
the  same  traveller  found  tho  ruins  of  a  much 
greater  number  of  houses,  indicating  the  existence 
of  a  large  mining  population,  and,  besides,  five 
immense  reservoirs  formed  by  damming  up  various 
wadys.  Other  mines  appear  to  have  been  dis 
covered  by  Dr.  Wilson  in  the  granite  mountains 
east  of  the  Wady  Mokatteb.  In  the  Wady  Nasb 
the  German  traveller  Kiippell,  who  was  commis 
sioned  by  Mohammed  Ali,  the  Viceroy  of  Egypt, 
to  examine  the  state  of  the  mines  there,  met  with 
remains  of  several  large  smelting  furnaces,  sur 
rounded  by  heaps  of  slag.  The  ancient  inhabitants 
had  sunk  shafts  in  several  directions,  leaving  here 
and  there  columns  to  prevent  the  whole  from  tailing 
in.  In  one  of  the  mines  he  saw  huge  masses  of' 
stone  rich  in  copper  (Hitter,  Erdkunde,  xiii.  786). 
The  copper  mines  of  Phaeuo  in  Idumaea,  according 
to  Jerome,  were  between  Zoar  and  Petra:  in  the 
persecution  of  Diocletian  the  Christians  were  con 
temned  to  work  them. 

The  gold  mines  of  Egypt  in  the  BishaVee  desert, 
the  principal  station  of  which  was  Eshuranib,  about 
three  days'  journey  beyond  Wady  Allaga,  have  been 
discovered  within  the  last  few  years  by  M.  Linant 
and  Mr.  Bonomi,  the  latter  of  whom  supplied  Sir 
G.  Wilkinson  with  a  description  of  them,  which  he 
quotes  (Anc.  Eg.  iii.  229,  230).  Ruins  of  the 
miners'  huts  still  remain  as  at  Surabit  el-Kha'dim. 
M  In  those  nearest  the  mines  lived  the  workmen 
who  were  employed  a  break  the  quartz  into  small 
fragments,  the  size  o •':  a  bean,  from  whose  hands  the 
pounded  stone  p:u>seu  to  the  persons  who  ground  it 


MINES 

in  hand-mills,  similar  to  those  now  used  for  corn  in 
the  valley  of  the  Nile  made  of  granitic  stone ;  one 
of  which  is  to  be  found  in  almost  every  house  at 
these  mines,  either  entire  or  broken.  The  quai  tz 
thus  reduced  to  powder  was  washed  on  inclined 
tables,  furnished  with  two  cisterns,  all  built  of 
fragments  of  stone  collected  there ;  and  near  these 
inclined  planes  are  generally  found  little  white 
mounds,  the  residue  of  the  operation."  According 
to  the  account  given  by  Diodorus  Siculus  (iii.  12- 
14),  the  mines  were  worked  by  gangs  of  convicts 
and  captives  in  fetters,  who  were  kept  day  and 
night  to  their  task  by  the  soldiers  set  to  guard 
them.  The  work  was  superintended  by  an  en 
gineer,  who  selected  the  stone  and  pointed  it  out  to 
the  miners.  The  harder  rock  was  split  by  the 
application  of  fire,  but  the  softer  was  broken  up 
with  picks  and  chisels.  The  miners  were  quite 
naked,  their  bodies  being  painted  according  to  the 
colour  of  the  rock  they  were  working,  and  in  order 
to  see  in  the  dark  passages  of  the  mine  they  carried 
lamps  upon  their  heads.  The  stone  as  it  fell  was 
carried  off  by  boys,  it  was  then  pounded  in  stone 
mortars  with  iron  pestles  by  those  who  were  over 
30  years  of  age  till  it  was  reduced  to  the  size  of  a 
lentil.  The  women  and  old  men  afterwards  ground 
it  in  mills  to  a  fine  powder.  The  final  process  of 
separating  the  gold  from  the  pounded  stone  was 
entrusted  to  the  engineers  who  superintended  the 
work.  They  spread  this  powder  upon  a  broad 
slightly  inclined  table,  and  rubbed  it  gently  with 
the  hand,  pouring  water  upon  it  from  time  to  time 
so  as  to  carry  away  all  the  earthy  matter,  leaving 
the  heavier  particles  upon  the  board.  This  was  re 
peated  several  times;  at  first  with  the  hand  and 
afterwards  with  fine  sponges  gently  pressed  upon 
the  earthy  substance,  till  nothing  but  the  gold  was 
left.  It  was  then  collected  by  other  workmen,  and 
placed  in  earthen  crucibles  with  a  mixture  of  lead 
and  salt  in  certain  proportions,  together  with  a  little 
tin  and  some  barley  bran.  The  crucibles  were 
covered  and  carefully  closed  with  clay,  and  in 
this  condition  baked  in  a  furnace  for  five  days 
and  nights  without  intermission.  Of  the  three 
methods  which  have  been  employed  for  refining 
gold  and  silver,  1.  by  exposing  the  fused  metal  to 
a  current  of  air ;  2.  by  keeping  the  alloy  in  a  state 
of  fusion  and  throwing  nitre  upon  it ;  and  3.  by 
mixing  the  alloy  with  lead,  exposing  the  whole  to 
fusion  upon  a  vessel  of  bone-ashes  or  earth,  and 
blowing  upon  it  with  bellows  or  other  blast ;  the 
latter  appears  most  nearly  to  coincide  with  the 
description  of  Diodorus.  To  this  process,  known 
as  the  cupelling  process  [LEAD],  there  seems  to 
be  a  reference  in  Ps.  xii.  6 ;  Jer.  vi.  28-30 ; 
Ez.  xxii.  18-22,  and  from  it  Mr.  Napier  (Met, 
of  the  Bible,  p.  24)  deduces  a  striking  illustra 
tion  of  Mai.  iii.  2,  3,  "  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner 
and  purifier  of  silver,"  &c.  "  When  the  alloy  is 
melted  .  .  .  upon  a  cupell,  and  the  air  blown  upon 
it,  the  surface  of  the  melted  metals  has  a  deep 
orange-red  colour,  with  a  kind  of  flickering  wave 
constantly  passing  over  the  surface  ...  As  the 
process  proceeds  the  heat  is  increased  .  .  .  and  in  a 
little  the  colour  of  the  fused  metal  becomes  lighter. 
...  At  this  stage  the  refiner  watches  the  operation, 
either  standing  or  sitting,  with  the  greatest  earnest 
ness,  until  all  the  orange  colour  and  shading  dis 
appears,  and  the  metal  has  the  appearance  of  a 
highly-polished  mirror,  reflecting  every  object 
around  it ;  even  the  refiner,  as  he  looks  upon  the 
mass  of  metal,  may  see  himself  as  in  a  locking 


MINES 

glass,  and  thus  he  can  form  a  very  con-ect  judg 
ment  respecting  the  purity  of  the  metal.  If  he  is 
satisfied,  the  lire  is  withdrawn,  and  the  metal  re 
moved  from  the  furnace  ;  but  if  not  considered  pure 
more  lead  is  added  and  the  process  repeated." 

Silver  mines  are  mentioned  by  Diodorus  (i.  33) 
with  those  of  gold,  iron,  and  copper,  in  the  island 
of  Meroe,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Nile.  But  the  chief 
supply  of  silver  in  the  ancient  world  appears  to 
have  been  brought  from  Spain.  The  mines  of  that 
country  were  celebrated  (1  Mace.  viii.  3).  Mt. 
Orospeda,  from  which  the  Guadalquivir,  the  ancient 
Baltes,  takes  its  rise,  was  formerly  called  "  the 
silver  mountain,"  from  the  silver-mines  which  were 
in  it  (Strabo,  iii.  p.  148).  Tartessus,  according  to 
Strabo,  was  an  ancient  name  of  the  river,  which 
gave  its  name  to  the  town  which  was  built  between 
its  two  mouths.  But  the  largest  silver-mines  in  Spain 
were  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Carthago  Nova,  from 
which,  in  the  time  of  Polybius,  the  Roman  govern 
ment  received  25,000  drachmae  daily.  These,  when 
Strabo  wrote,  had  fallen  into  private  hands,  though 
most  of  the  gold-mines  were  public  property  (iii. 
p.  148).  Near  Castulo  there  were  lead-mines  con 
taining  silver,  but  in  quantities  so  small  as  not  to 
repay  the  cost  of  working.  The  process  of  separat 
ing  the  silver  from  the  lead  is  abridged  by  Strabo 
from  Polybius.  The  lumps  of  01  e  were  first  pounded, 
and  then  sifted  through  sieves  into  water.  The  se 
diment  was  again  pounded,  and  again  filtered,  and 
after  this  process  had  been  repeated  five  times  the 
water  was  drawn  off,  the  remainder  of  the  ore 
melted,  the  lead  poured  away  and  the  silver  left 
pure.  If  Tartessus  be  the  Tarshish  6f  Scripture, 
the  metal  workers  of  Spain  in  those  days  must  have 
possessed  the  art  of  hammering  silver  into  sheets, 
for  we  find  in  Jer.  x.  9,  "  silver  spread  into  plates 
is  brought  from  Tarshish,  and  gold  from  Uphaz." 

We  have  no  means  of  knowing  whether  the  gold 
of  Ophir  was  obtained  from  mines  or  from  the 
washing  of  gold-streams.1"  Pliny  (vi.  32),  from 
Juba,  describes  the  littus  Hammaeum  on  the  Per 
sian  Gulf  as  a  place  where  gold-mines  existed,  and 
in  the  same  chapter  alludes  to  the  gold-mines  of  the 
Sabaeans.  But  in  all  probability  the  greater  part 
of  the  gold  which  came  into  the  hands  of  the  Phoe 
nicians  and  Hebrews  was  obtained  from  streams ; 
its  great  abundance  seems  to  indicate  this.  At  a 
very  early  period  Jericho  was  a  centre  of  commerce 
with  the  East,  and  in  the  narrative  of  its  capture 
we  meet  with  gold  in  the  form  of  ingots  (Josh.  vii. 
'H,  A.  V.  "wedge,"  lit.  " tongue "),c  in  which  it 
«vns  probably  cast  for  the  convenience  of  traffic. 
That  which  Achau  took  weighed  25  oz. 

As  gold  is  seldom  if  ever  found,  entirely  free 
from  silver,  the  quantity  of  the  latter  varying  from 
2  per  cent,  to  30  per  cent.,  it  has  been  supposed 
that  the  ancient  metallurgists  were  acquainted  with 
some  means  of  parting  them,  an  operation  per 
formed  in  modern  times  by  boiling  the  metal  in 
•  nitric  or  sulphuric  acid.  To  some  process  of  this 
Kind  it  has  been  imagined  that  reference  is  made  in 
Prov.  xvii.  3,  "  The  fining-pot  is  for  silver,  and  the 
furnace  for  gold;"  and  again  in  xxvii.  21.  "If, 
for  example,"  says  Mr.  Napier,  "  the  term  fining- 

>>  The  Hebrew  "IV3»  betser  (Job  xxii.  24,  25),  or  "1 
bitsdr  (Job  xxxvi.  19),  which  is  rendered  "  gold  "  in  the 
A.  V.,  and  is  mentioned  in  the  first-quoted  passage  in  con 
nexion  with  Ophir,  is  believed  to  signify  gold  and  silver  ore. 

e  Compare  the  Kr.  lirtgot,  which  is  from  Lat.  lingua, 
and  is  said  to  be  the  origin  of  ingot. 
VOL,   II. 


MINES 


389 


pot  could  refer  to  the  vessel  or  pnt  in  which  the 
silver  is  dissolved  from  the  gold  in  parting,  as  it 
may  be  called  with  propriety,  then  these  passages 
have  a  meaning  in  our  modem  practice"  (Met.  of 
the  Bible,  p.  28)  ;  but  he  admits  this  is  at  best  but 
plausible,  and  considers  that  "  the  constant  reference 
to  certain  qualities  and  kinds  of  gold  in  Scripting 
is  a  kind  of  presumptive  proof  that  they  were  not 
in  the  habit  of  perfectly  purifving  or  separating  the 
gold  from  the  silver." 

A  strong  proof  of  the  acquaintance  possessed  by 
the  ancient  Hebrews  with  the  manipulation  of 
metals  is  found  by  some  in  the  destruction  of  the 
golden  calf  in  the  desert  by  Moses.  "  And  he  took 
the  calf  which  they  had  made,  and  burnt  it  in  fire, 
and  ground  it  to  powder,  and  strawed  it  upon  the 
water,  and  made  the  children  of  Israel  drink"  (Ex. 
xxxii.  20).  As  the  highly  malleable  character  of 
gold  would  render  an  operation  like  that  which  is 
described  in  the  text  almost  impassible,  an  explana 
tion  has  been  sought  in  the  supposition  that  we 
have  here  an  indication  that  Moses  was  a  proficient 
in  the  process  known  in  modern  times  as  calcination. 
The  object  of  calcination  being  to  oxidise  the  metal 
subjected  to  the  process,  and  gold  not  being  affected 
by  this  treatment,  the  explanation  cannot  be  ad 
mitted.  M.  Goguet  (quoted  in  Wilkinson's  Anc. 
Eg.  iii.  221)  confidently  asserts  that  the  problem 
has  been  solved  by  the  discovery  of  an  experienced 
chemist  that  "  in  the  place  of  tartaric  acid,  which 
we  employ,  the  Hebrew  legislator  used  nation, 
which  is  common  in  the  East."  The  gold  so  re 
duced  and  made  into  a  draught  is  further  said  to 
have  a  most  detestable  ta»*e.  Goguet's  solution 
appears  to  have  been  adopted  without  examination 
by  more  modern  writers,  but  Mr.  Napier  ventured 
to  question  its  correctness,  and  endeavoured  to  trace 
it  to  its  source.  The  only  clue  which  he  (bund  was 
in  a  discovery  by  Stahll,  a  chemist  of  the  17th  cen 
tury,  "  that  if  1  part  gold,  3  parts  potash,  and  3 
parts  sulphur  are  heated  together,  a  compound  is 
formed  which  is  partly  soluble  in  water.  If,"  he 
adds,  "this  be  the  discovery  referred  to,  which  1 
think  very  probable,"1  it  certainly  has  been  made  the 
most  of  by  Biblical  critics"  (Met.  of  the  Bible, 
p.  49).  The  whole  difficulty  appears  to  have  arisen 
from  a  desire  to  find  too  much  in  the  text.  The 
main  object  of  the  destruction  of  the  calf  was  to 
prove  its  worthiessness  and  to  throw  contempt  upon 
idolatry,  and  all  this  might  have  been  done  without 
any  refined  chemical  process  like  that  referred  to. 
The  calf  was  first  heated  in  the  fire  to  destroy  its 
shape,  then  beaten  and  bioken  up  by  hammering 
or  filing  into  small  pieces,  which  were  thrown  into 
the  water,  of  which  the  people  were  made  to  drink 
as  a  symbolical  act.  "  Moses  threw  the  atoms  into 
the  water  as  an  emblem  of  the  perfect  annihilation 
of  the  calf,  and  he  gave  the  Israelites  that  water  to 
drink,  not  only  to  impress  upon  them  the  abomina 
tion  and  despicable  character  of  the  im?.ge  which 
they  had  mode,  but  as  a  symbol  of  jiirification,  to 
remove  the  object  of  the  transgression  by  those  very 
persons  who  had  committed  it"  (Dr.  Kalisch, 
Comm.on  Ex.  xsxii.  20). 

How  tar  the  ancient  Hebrews  were  acquainted 
with  the  processes  at  present  in  use  tor  extracting 
copper  from  the  ore  it  is  impossible  to  aibert,  a* 


<i  This  uncertainty  might  ha\e  been  at  onco  reirosed 
by  a  reference  to  Goguet's  Origins  des  Lois,  &c  (H.  I.  2, 
c.  4),  where  Stabll  (Vitulus  aureus-  opnsc.  cliym.  pnyt 
mod.  p.  r>S5)i*  quoted  as  the  authority  fur  the  statement 

2  B 


J7C  MINES 

Uiere  are  no  references  in  Scripture  to  anything  ol 
the  kind,  except  in  the  passage  of  Job  already  quoted. 
Copper  smelting,  however,  is  in  some  cases  attended 
with  comparatively  small  difficulties,  which  the 
ancients  had  evidently  the  skill  to  overcome.  Ore 
composed  of  copper  and  oxygen  mixed  with  coal 
and  burnt  to  a  bright  red  heat,  leaves  the  copper 
In  the  metallic  state,  and  the  same  result  will 
follow  if  the  process  be  applied  to  the  carbonates 
and  sulphurets  of  copper.  Some  means  of  tough 
ening  the  metal  so  as  to  render  it  fit  for  manu 
facture  must  have  been  known  to  the  Hebrews  as 
to  other  ancient  nations.  The  Egyptians  evidently 
possessed  the  art  of  working  bronze  in  great  perfeo 
tion  at  a  very  early  time,  and  much  of  the  know 
ledge  of  metals  which  the  Israelites  had  must  have 
been  acquired  during  their  residence  among  them. 

Of  tin  there  appears  to  have  been  no  trace  in 
Palestine.  That  the  Phoenicians  obtained  their 
supplies  from  the  mines  of  Spain  and  Cornwall 
theie  can  be  no  doubt,  and  it  is  suggested  that 
even  the  Egyptians  may  have  procured  it  from  the 
same  source,  either  directly  or  through  the  medium 
of  the  former.  It  was  found  among  the  possessions 
of  the  Midianites,  to  whom  it  might  have  come  in 
the  course  of  traffic ;  but  in  other  instances  in 
which  allusion  is  made  to  it,  tin  occurs  in  conjunc 
tion  with  other  metals  in  the  form  of  an  alloy. 
The  lead  mines  of  Gebel  e*  Rossass,  near  the  coast 
of  the  Red  Sea,  about  half  way  between  Berenice 
and  Kossayr  (Wilkinson,  Handb.  for  Egypt,  p. 
403),  may  have  supplied  the  Hebrews  with  that 
metal,  of  which  there  were  no  mines  in  their  own 
country,  or  it  may  have  been  obtained  from  the 
rocks  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sinai.  The  hills  of 
Palestine  are  rich  in  iron,  and  the  mines  are  still 
worked  there  [METALS]  though  in  a  very  simple 
rude  manner,  like  that  of  the  ancient  Samothra- 
cians:  of  the  method  employed  by  the  Egyptians 
and  Hebrews  we  have  no  certain  information.  It 
may  have  been  similar  to  that  in  use  throughout 
the  whole  of  India  from  very  early  times,  which  is 
thus  described  by  Dr.  Ure  (Diet,  of  Arts,  $c.,  art. 
Steel).  "  The  furnace  or  bloomery  in  which  the 
ore  is  smelted  is  from  four  to  five  feet  high ;  it  is 
somewhat  pear-shaped,  being  about  five  feet  wide 
at  bottom  and  one  toot  at  top.  It  is  built  entirely 
of  clay  ....  There  is  an  opening  in  front  about 
a  foot  or  more  in  height,  which  is  built  up  with 
clay  at  the  commencement  and  broken  down  at  the 
end  of  each  smelting  operation.  The  bellows  are 
usually  made  of  a  goat's  skin  ....  The  bamboo 
nozzles  of  the  bellows  are  inserted  into  tubes  of 
clay,  which  pass  into  the  furnace  ....  The  fur 
nace  is  filled  with  charcoal,  and  a  lighted  coal  being 
introduced  before  the  nozzles,  the  mass  in  the  inte 
rior  is  soon  kindled.  As  soon  as  this  is  accom 
plished,  a  small  portion  of  the  ore,  previously 
moistened  with  water  to  prevent  it  from  running 
through  the  charcoal,  but  without  any  flux  what 
ever,  is  laid  on  the  top  of  the  coals  and  covered 
with  charcoal  to  fill  up  the  furnace.  In  this  manner 
ore  and  fuel  are  supplied,  and  the  bellows  are  urged 
for  three  or  four  hours.  When  the  process  is 
stopped  and  the  temporary  wall  in  front  broken 
down,  the  bloom  is  removed  with  a  pair  of  tongs 
from  the  bottom  of  the  furnace." 

It  has  seemed  necessary  to  give  this  account  of  a 
rery  ancient  method  of  iron  smelting,  because, 
from  the  difficulties  which  attend  it.  and  the  intense 
heat  which  is  required  to  separate  the  metal  from 
the  ore,  it  has  been  asseited  that  the  allusions  to 


MINGLED  PEOPLE 

iron  and  iron  manufacture  in  the  Old  Testament 
are  anachronisms.  But  if  it  w<?re  possible  amoin,' 
the  ancient  Indians  in  a  veiy  primitive  state  of 
civilization,  it  might  hare  been  known  to  the 
Hebrews,  who  may  have  acquired  their  knowledge 
by  working  as  slaves  in  the  iron  furnaces  of  Egypt 
(comp.  Deut.  iv.  20). 

The  question  of  the  early  use  of  iron  among  the 
Egyptians,  is  fully  disposed  of  in  the  following  re 
marks  of  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  (Ancient  Egyp 
tians,  ii.  pp.  154-156): — 

"In  the  infancy  of  the  arts  and  sciences,  the 
difficulty  of  working  iron  might  long  withhold  the 
secret  of  its  superiority  over  copper  and  bronze; 
but  it  cannot  reasonably  be  supposed  that  a  nation 
so  advanced,  and  so  eminently  skilled  in  the  art  of 
working  metals  as  the  Egyptians  and  Sidonians, 
should  have  remained  ignorant  of  its  use,  even  if  we 
had  no  evidence  of  its  having  been  known  to  the 
Greeks  and  other  people ;  and  the  constant  employ 
ment  of  bronze  arms  and  implements  is  not  a  suffi 
cient  argument  against  their  knowledge  of  iron, 
since  we  find  the  Greeks  and  Romans  made  the 
same  things  of  bronze  long  after  the  period  when 

iron  was  universally  known To  conclude, 

from  the  want  of  iron  instruments,  or  arms,  bearing 
the  names  of  early  monarchs  of  a  Pharaonic  age, 
that  bronze  was  alone  used,  is  neither  just  nor 
satisfactory ;  since  the  decomposition  of  that  metal, 
especially  when  buried  for  ages  in  the  nitrous  soil 
of  Egypt,  is  so  speedy  as  to  preclude  the  possibility 
of  its  preservation.  Until  we  know  in  what  manner 
the  Egyptians  employed  bronze  tools  for  cutting 
stone,  the  discoveiy  of  them  affords  no  additional 
light,  nor  even  argument ;  since  the  Greeks  and 
Romans  continued  to  make  bronze  instruments  of 
various  kinds  so  long  after  iron  was  known  to  them  ; 
and  Herodotus  mentions  the  iron  tools  used  by  the 
builders  of  the  Pyramids.  Iron  and  copper  mines 
are  found  in  the  Egyptian  desert,  which  were  worked 
in  old  times ;  and  the  monuments  of  Thebes,  and 
even  the  tombs  about  Memphis,  dating  more  than 
4000  years  ago,  represent  butchers  sharpening  their 
knives  on  a  round  bar  of  metal  attached  to  their 
apron,  which  from  its  blue  colour  can  only  be  steel ; 
and  the  distinction  between  the  bronze  and  iron 
weapons  in  the  tomb  of  Remeses  III.,  one  painted 
red,  the  other  blut,  leaves  no  doubt  of  both  having 
been  used  (as  in  Rome)  at  the  same  periods.  In 
Ethiopia  iron  was  much  more  abundant  than  in 
Egypt,  and  Herodotus  states  that  copper  was  a  rare 
me'tal  there ;  though  we  may  doubt  his  assertion  of 
prisoners  in  that  country  having  been  bound  with 
fetters  of  gold.  The  speedy  decomposition  of  iron 
would  be  sufficient  to  prevent  our  finding  imple 
ments  of  that  metal  of  an  early  period,  and  the 
greater  opportunities  of  obtaining  copper  ore,  added 
to  the  facility  of  working  it,  might  be  a  reason 
for  preferring  the  latter  whenever  it  answered  the 
purpose  instead  of  iron."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MINGLED  PEOPLE.  This  phrase  (TWiT 
hd'ereb),  like  that  of  "  the  mixed  multitude,"  which 
the  Hebrew  closely  resembles,  is  applied  in  Jer. 
xxv.  20,  and  Ez.  xxx.  5,  to  denote  the  miscellaneous 
foreign  population  of  Egypt  and  its  frontier-tribes, 
including  every  one,  says  Jerome,  who  was  not  a 
native  Egyptian,  but  was  resident  there.  The 
Targum  of  Jonathan  understands  it  in  this  passage 
as  well  as  in  Jer.  1.  37,  of  the  foieign  mercenaries, 
though  in  Jer.  xxv.  24,  where  the  word  again 
occurs,  it  is  rtndeivd  "  Aiv.bs."  It  is  difficult  tc 


MINIAMIN 

ftMach  to  it  any  precise  meaning,  or  to  identify 
with  the  mingled  people  any  race  of  which  we  hiive 
knowledge.  "  The  kings  of  the  mingled  people  that 
dwell  in  the  desert,"  »  are  the  same  apparently  as 
the  tributary  kings  (A.  V.  "kings  of  Arabia") 
who  brought  presents  to  Solomon  (1  K.  x.  15);b 
the  Hebrew  in  the  two  cases  is  identical.  These 
have  been  explained  (as  in  the  Targum  on  1  K. 
x.  15)  as  foreign  mercenary  chiefs  who  were  in 
the  pay  of  Solomon,  but  Thenius  understands  by 
them  the  sheykhs  of  the  border  tribes  of  Bedouins, 
living  in  Arabia  Deserta,  who  were  closely  con 
nected  with  the  Israelites.  The  "  mingled  people  " 
in  the  midst  of  Babylon  (Jer.  1.  37),  were  pro 
bably  the  foreign  soldiers  or  mercenary  troops, 
who  lived  among  the  native  population,  as  the 
Targum  takes  it.  Kimchi  compares  Ex.  xii.  38, 
and  explains  ha'ereb  of  the  foreign  population  of 
Babylon0  generally,  "foreigners  who  were  in  Ba 
bylon  from  several  lands,"  or  it  may,  he  says,  be 
intended  to  denote  the  merchants,  'ereb  being  thus 
connected  with  the  "ijmyO  ^"ly,  'orebe  madrdbec, 
of  Ez.  xxvii.  27,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  occu 
piers  of  thy  merchandize."  His  first  interpretation 
is  based  upon  what  appears  to  be  the  primary  signi 
fication  of  the  root  my,  'Arab,  to  mingle,  while 

-T 

another  meaning,  "  to  pledge,  guarantee,"  suggested 
the  rendering  of  the  Targum  "  mercenaries,"-1  which 
Jarchi  adopts  in  his  explanation  of  "  the  kings  of 
ha'ereb,"  in  1  K.  x.  15,  as  the  kings  who  were 
pledged  to  Solomon  and  dependent  upon  him.  The 
equivalent  which  he  gives  is  apparently  intended  to 
represent  the  Fr.  garantie. 

The  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is  supported  by 
the  LXX.  <rvfj./j.iKTos  in  Jer.,  and  M^LKTOS  in 
Ezekiel.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MIN'IAMIN  (P»T'3» :  Bevianiv;  Alex.  Eev- 
laueiV:  Benjamin).  1.  One  of  the  Levites  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah  appointed  to  the  charge  of  the 
freewill  offerings  of  the  people  in  the  cities  of  the 
wiests,  and  to  distribute  them  to  their  brethren 
2  Chr.  xxxi.  15).  The  reading  "Benjamin"  of 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  is  followed  by  the  Peshito 
Syriac. 

2.  (Vlia.fj.iv;  Miamin).    The  same  as  MIAMIN  2 
and  MIJAMIN  2  (Neh.  xii.  17). 

3.  (BeviaiJ.iv;    Alex.  Eevta.fj.eiv).      One   of  the 
priests  who  blew  the  trumpets  at  the  dedication  of 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xii.  41). 

MIN'NI  (*3t3  :  Menni],  a  country  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  Ararat  and  Ashchenoz  (Jer.  li.  27). 
The  LXX.  erroneously  renders  it  Trap  ^/uoC.  It 
has  been  already  noticed  as  a  portion  of  Armenia. 
[ARMENIA.]  The  name  may  be  connected  with 
the  Mint/as  noticed  by  Nicolaus  of  Damascus 
(Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §6),  with  the  Minnai  of  the 
Assyrian  inscriptions,  whom  Rawlinson  (Herod,  i. 
464)  places  about  lake  Urumiyeh,  and  with  the 


MINISTER 


371 


Minnas  who  appears  in  the  list  of  Armenian  kings 
in  the  inscription  at  Wan  (Layard's  Nin.  and  Bab. 
p.  401).  At  the  time  when  Jeremiah  prophesied, 
Armenia  had  been  subdued  by  the  Median  kings 
(Herod,  i.  103,  177).  [W.  L.  B.j' 

MINISTER.  This  term  is  used  in  the  A.  V. 
to  describe  various  officials  of  a  religious  and  civil 
character.  In  the  0.  T.  it  answers  to  the  Hebrew 
meshareth*  which  is  applied,  (1)  to  an  attendant 
upon  a  person  of  high  rank,  as  to  Joshua  in  rela 
tion  to  Moses  (Ex.  xxiv.  13;  Josh.  i.  1)  and  to 
the  attendant  on  the  prophet  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  43) ; 
(2)  to  the  attaches  of  a  royal  court  (1  K.  x.  5, 
where,  it  may  be  observed,  they  are  distinguished 
from  the  "  servants "  or  officials  of  higher  rank, 
answering  to  our  ministers,  by  the  different  titles 
of  the  chambers  assigned  to  their  use,  the  "sitting" 
of  the  servants  meaning  rather  their  abode,  and  the 
."attendance"  of  the  ministers  the  ante-room  in 
which  they  were  stationed)  ;  persons  of  high  rank 
held  this  post  in  the  Jewish  kingdom  (2  Chron. 
xxii.  8)  ;  and  it  may  be  in  this  sense,  as  the  attend 
ants  of  the  King  of  Kings,  that  the  term  is  applied 
to  the  angels  (Ps.  civ.  4)  ;  (3)  to  the  Priests  and 
Levites,  who  are  thus  described  by  the  prophets 
and  later  historians  (Is.  Ixi.  6  ;  Ez.  xliv.  11  ;  Joel 
i.  9,  13;  Ezr.  viii.  17;  Neh.  x.  36),  though  the 
verb,  whence  meshareih  is  derived,  is  not  uncom 
monly  used  in  reference  to  their  services  in  the 
earlier  books  (Ex.  xxviii.  43  ;  Num.  iii.  31 ;  Dent, 
xviii.  5,  a/.).  In  the  N.  T.  we  have  three  terms, 
each  with  its  distinctive  meaning  —  \eirovpyos, 
inrripf-rris,  and  SIO.KOVOS.  The  first  answers  most 
nearly  to  the  Hebrew  meshareth  and  is  usually 
employed  in  the  LXX.  as  its  equivalent.  It  be 
tokens  a  subordinate  public  administrator,  whether 
civil  or  sacerdotal,  and  is  applied  in  the  former 
sense  to  the  magistrates  in  their  relation  to  the 
Divine  authority  (Rom.  xiii.  6),  and  in  the  latter 
sense  to  our  Lord  in  relation  to  the  Father  (Heb. 
viii.  2),  and  to  St.  Paul  in  relation  to  Jesus  Christ 
(Rom.  xv.  16),  where  it  occurs  among  other  expres 
sions  of  a  sacerdotal  character,  "ministering" 

|  (Ifpovpyovvra),  "offering  up"   (irpocrQopd,  &c.). 

I  In  all  these  instances  the  original  and  special  mean 
ing  of  the  word,  as  used  by  the  Athenians,1*  is 

|  preserved,   though  this  comes,  perhaps,  yet  more 

|  distinctly  forward  in  the  cognate  terms  \etrovpyia 
and  \eirovpyftv,  applied  to  the  sacerdotal  office  of 
the  Jewish  priest  (Luke  i.  23  ;  Heb.  ix.  21,  x.  11),  to 
the  still  higher  priesthood  of  Christ  (Heb.  viii.  6), 
and  in  a  secondary  sense  to  the  Christian  priest 
who  offers  up  to  God  the  faith  of  his  converts 
(Phil.  Hi.  17;  \eirovpyia  rrjs  irf<rrews),and  to  any 
act  of  public  self-devotion  on  the  part  of  a  Christian 
disciple  (Rom.  xv.  27  ;  2  Cor.  ix.  12  ;  Phil.  ii.  30). 
The  second  term,  viryptTris,  differs  from  the  two 
others  in  that  it  contains  the  idea  of  actual  and 
personal  attendance  upon  a  superior.  Thus  it  is 
used  of  the  attendant  in  the  synagogue,  the  hha- 


«  Kimchi  observes  that  these  are  distinguished  from 
the  mingled  people  mentioned  in  ver.  20  by  the  addition 
"  that  dwell  in  the  desert." 

»  In  the  parallel  passage  of  2  Chr.  li.  i4  the  reading  Is 
3^li/  'arab,  or  Arabia. 

*  The  same  commentator  refers  the  expression  in  Is. 
ix.  14,  "  they  shall  every  man  turn  to  his  own  people,"  to 
the  dispersion  of  the  mixed  population  of  Babylon  at  its 
capture. 


b  The  term  is  derived  from  \tlrov  ifyov,  "  public 
work,"  and  the  Icitourgia  was  the  name  of  certain  per 
sonal  services  which  the  citizens  of  Athens  and  some 
other  states  had  to  perform  gratuitously  for  the  public 
good.  From  the  sacerdotal  use  of  the  word  in  the 
N.  T.,  it  obtained  the  special  sense  of  a  "  public  divire 
service,"  which  is  perpetuated  in  our  word  "  liturgy." 
The  verb  Aciroupyeic  is  used  in  this  sense  in  Acts 
ziii.  Z 

2  B  2 


372 


MINXITH 


xan  e  of  the  Talmiidists  (Luke  iv.  20),  whose  duty 
it  was  to  open  and  close  the  building,  to  produce 
and  replace  the  books  employed  in  the  service,  and 
generally  to  wait  on  the  officiating  priest  or  teacher  d 
(Carpzov,  Apparat.  p.  314).     It  is  similarly  ap 
plied  to  Mark,  who,  as  the  attendant  on  Barnabas 
and   Saul   (Acts   xiii.   5),   was   probably   charged 
with  the  administration  of  baptism  and  other  as 
sistant  duties  (De  Wette,  in  foe.)  ;  and  again  to  the 
subordinates  of  the  high-priests  (John  vii.  32,  45, 
xviii.  3,  a/.),  or  of  a  jailor  (Matt.  v.  25  =  irpd- 
VTup  in  Luke  xii.  58  ;*Acts  v.  22).     The  idea  of 
personal  attendance  comes  prominently  forward  in 
Luke  i.  2;  Acts  xxvi.  16,  in  both  of  which  places 
it  is  alleged  as  a  ground  of  trustworthy  testimony 
(ipsi   viderunt,   et,    quod   plus   est,    ministrarunt, 
Bengel).     Lastly,  it  is  used  interchangeably  with 
SictKoyos  in  1  Cor.  iv.  1  compared  with  iii.  5,  but 
in  this  instance  the  term  is  designed  to  convey  the 
notion  of  subordination  and  humility.     In  all  thesg 
cases   the  etymological   sense   of  the   word    ( 
iptriis,  literally,  a   "sub-rower,"   one  who   rows 
nder  command  of  the  steersman)  comes  out.     The 
term  that  most  adequately  represents   it   in    our 
language  is  "attendant."      The   third   term,  Sid- 
Koros,  is  the  one  usually  employed  in  relation  to 
the   ministry   of  the   Gospel  :    its    application   is 
twofold,  in  a  general  sense  to  indicate  ministers  of 
any  order,  whether  superior  or  inferior,  and  in  a 
siwcial  sense  to  indicate  an  order  of  inferior  minis 
ters.     In  the  former  sense  we  have  the  cognate 
term   SiaKnvia  applied  in  Acts  vi.  1,  4,  both  to 
the  ministration  of  tables  and  to  the  higher  minis 
tration  of  the  word,  and  the  term  SMKOVOS  itseli 
applied,  without  defining  the  office,  to  Paul  an 
Apollos  (1  Cor.  iii.  5),  to  Tychicus  (Eph.  vi.  21  ; 
Col.  iv.  7),  to  Epaphras  (Col.  i.  7),  to  Timothy 
(1  Thess.  iii.  2),  and  even  to  Christ  himself  (Rom 
xv.    8;    Gal.  ii.   17).     In   the   latter   sense   it   is 
applied  in  the  passages  where  the  Sidicovus  is  con 
tradistinguished  from  the  Bishop,  as  in  Phil.  i.  1 
1  Tim.  iii.  8-13.     It  is,  perhaps,  worthy  of  ob 
servation  that  the  word  is  of  very  rare  occurrence 
in  the  LXX.  (Esth.  i.  10,  ii.  2,  vi.  3),  and  thei 
only  in  a  general  sense  :  its  special  sense,  as  known 
to  us  in  its  derivative  "  deacon,"  seems  to  be  o 
purely  Christian  growth.  [DEACON.]  [  W.  L.  B.] 

MIN'NITH  (rV3»  :  &XP<*  '^pviav  ;  Alex.  « 
2e/icuei0;"  Joseph.  w6\is  MaAjdOrjy:  Pesch.Syriac 
Machir:  Vulg.  MennitK),  a  place  on  the  east  of  th 
Jordan,  named  as  the  point  to  which  Jcphthah' 
slaughter  of  the  Ammonites  extended  (Judg.  xi 
33).  "  From  Aroer  to  the  approach  to  Minnith  ' 
('D  ^1803  iy)  seems  to  have  been  a  district  con 
taining  twenty  cities.  Minnith  was  in  the  neighboui 
nood  of  Abel-Ceramim,  the  "meadow  of  vineyards.' 
Both  places  are  mentioned  in  the  Onomasticon  — 
"  Mennith"  or  "  Maanith"  as  4  miles  from  Heshbon 
on  the  road  to  Philadelphia  (Amman),  and  Abel  a 
6  or  7  miles  from  the  latter,  but  in  what  directio 
is  not  stated.  A  site  bearing  the  name  Menjah 
is  marked  in  Van  de  Velde's  Map,  perhaps  on  th 
authority  of  Buckingham,  at  7  Roman  miles  ens 
of  Heshbon  on  a  road  to  Amman,  though  not  o 


••  The  vmjpeVrjs  of  ecclesiastical  history  occupie 
precisely  the  same  position  In  the  Christian  Clmrc 
that  the  khazan  did  in  the  synagogue  :  in  I^tin  he  wn 
•iyled  sub-<liacomif,  or  sub-deacon  (Blngham,  Ant.  iii.  2 

»  efc*  TOU  eXeeit-  ets  <ren<oei9,    is    the    reading  of   th 


MINSTREL 

frequented  track.  But  we  must  await  further 
nvestigation  of  these  interesting  regions  before  we 
in  pronounce  for  or  against  its  identity  with 
linnith. 

The  variations  of  the  ancient  versions  as  given 
bove  are  remarkable,  but  they  have  not  suggested 
nything  to  the  writer.  Schwarz  proposes  to  find 
Minnith  in  MAGED,  a  trans- Jordanic  town  named 
n  the  Maccabees,  by  the  change  of  3  to  3.  An  epis- 
opal  city  of  "  Palestina  secunda,"  named  Mennith, 

quoted  by  Ileland  (Pal.  211),  but  with  some 
uestion  as  to  its  being  located  in  this  direction 
comp.  209). 

The  "  wheat  of  Minnith  "  is  mentioned  in  Ez. 
xxvii.  17,  as  being  supplied  by  Judah  and  Israel  to 
jre;  but  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  the 
ame  place  is  intended,  and  indeed  the  word  is 
thought  by  some  not  to  be  a  proper  name.  Philistia 
ind  Sharon  were  the  great  corn-growing  districts  of 
^alestine — but  there  were  in  these  eastern  regions 
ilso  "  fat  of  kidneys  of  wheat,  and  wine  of  the  pure 
blood  of  the  grape"  (Deut.  xxxii.  14).  Of  that 
:ultivation  Minnith  and  Abel-Ceramim  may  have 
>een  the  chief  seats. 

In  this  neighbourhood  were  possibly  situated  the 
ineyards  in  which  Balaam  encountered  the  angel 
on  his  road  from  Mesopotamia  to  Moab  (Num. 
xii.  24).  [G.J 

MINSTREL.  The  Hebrew  word  in  2  K.  iii 
15  (J33O,  menaggen)  properly  signifies  a  playci 

upon  a  stringed  instrument  like  the  harp  or  kinnor 
[HARP],  whatever  its  precise  character  may  have 
been,  on  which  David  played  before  Saul  (1  Sam. 
xvi.  16,  xviii.  10,  xix.  9),  and  which  the  harlots  of 
the  great  cities  used  to  carry  with  them  as  they 
walked  to  attract  notice  (Is.  xxiii.  1C).  The  pas 
sage  in  which  it  occurs  has  given  rise  to  much  con 
jecture  ;  Elisha,  upon  being  consulted  by  Jehorarn 
as  to  the  issue  of  the  war  with  Moab,  at  first  in 
dignantly  refuses  to  answer,  and  is  only  induced  to 
do" so  by  the  presence  of  Jehoshaphat.  He  calls  for 
a  harper,  apparently  a  camp  follower  (one  of  the 
Levites  according  to  Procopius  of  Gaza),b  "  And 
now  bring  me  a  harper;  and  it  came  to  pass  as 
the  harper  harped  that  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  on 
him.*'  Other  instances  of  the  same  divine  influence 
or  impulse  connected  with  music,  are  seen  in  the 
case  of  Saul  and  the  young  prophets  in  1  Sam. 
x.  5,  6,  10,  11.  In  the  present  passage  the  reason 
of  Elisha's  appeal  is  variously  explained.  Jarchi 
says  that  "  on  account  of  anger  the  Shechinah  had 
departed  from  him ;"  Ephrem  Syrus,  that  the 
object  of  the  music  was  to  attract  a  crowd  to  hear 
the  prophecy;  J.  H.  Michael  is,  that  the  prophet's 
mind,  disturbed  by  the  impiety  of  the  Israelites, 
might  be  soothed  and  prepared  for  divine  things  by 
a  spiritual  song.  According  to  Keil  (Comm.  on 
Kings,  i.  359,  Eng.  tr.),  "Elisha  calls  for  a  min 
strel,  in  order  to  gather  in  his  thoughts  by  th  '  soft 
tones  of  music  from  the  impression  of  the  outer 
world,  and  by  repressing  the  life  of  self  and  of  the 
world  to  be  transferred  into  the  state  of  internal 
vision,  by  which  his  spirit  would  be  prepared  to 
receive  the  Divine  revelation."  This  in  effect  is  the 


Alex.  Codex,  ingeniously  corrected  by  Grabe  to  ecus  TOV 
eXfleif  <rt  tis  Mwei0. 

b  The  Targum  translates,  "  and  now  bring  me  n  roan 
who  knows  how  to  play  upon  the  harp,  and  it  came,  ts 
p.iss  ;is  the  harper  harped  there  rested  upoa  him  the  spirt" 
of  prophecy  from  before  Jehovah." 


MINT 

triew  taken  by  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  3,  §1),  and  the 
same  is  expressed  by  Maimonides  in  a  passage  which 
embodies  the  opinion  of  the  Jews  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  "  All  the  prophets  were  not  able  to  pro 
phesy  at  any  time  that  they  wished  ;  but  they  pre 
pared  their  minds,  and  sat  joyful  and  glad  of  heart, 
and  abstracted ;  for  prophecy  dwelleth  not  in  the 
midst  of  melancholy  nor  in  the  midst  of  apathy, 
but  in  the  midst  of  joy.  Therefore  the  sons  of  the 
prophets  had  before  them  a  psaltery,  and  a  tabret, 
and  a  pipe,  and  a  harp,  and  (thus)  sought  after  pro 
phecy  "  (or  prophetic  inspiration),  ( Yad  hachaza- 
kah,  vii.  5,  Bernard's  Creed  and  Ethics  of  the 
Jews,  p.  16  ;  see  also  note  to  p.  114).  Kimchi 
quotes  a  tradition  to  the  effect  that,  after  the  ascen 
sion  of  his  master  Elijah,  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
had  not  dwelt  upon  Elisha  because  he  was  mourn 
ing,  and  the  spirit  of  holiness  does  not  dwell  but  in 
the  midst  of  joy.  In  1  Sam.  xviii.  10,  on  the  con 
trary,  there  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  employ- 
msnt  of  music  to  still  the  excitement  consequent 
upon  an  attack  of  frenzy,  which  in  its  external 
manifestations  at  least  so  far  resembled  the  rapture 
with  which  the  old  prophets  were  affected  when 
delivering  their  prophecies,  as  to  be  described  by 
the  same  term.  "  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the 
morrow,  that  the  evil  spirit  from  God  came  upon 
Saul,  and  he  prophesied  in  the  midst  of  the  house: 
and  David  played  with  his  hand  as  at  other  times." 
Weemse  (Christ.  Synagogue,  c.  vi.  §3,  par.  6, 
p.  143)  supposes  that  the  music  appropriate  to 
such  occasions  was  "  that  which  the  Greeks  called 
apfioviav,  which  was  the  greatest  and  the  saddest, 
and  settled  the  affections." 

The  "  minstrels  "  in  Matt.  ix.  23,  were  the  flute- 
players  who  were  employed  as  professional  mourners 
to  whom  frequent  allusion  is  made  (Eccl.  xii.  5 ; 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  25 ;  Jer.  ix.  17-20),  and  whose  repre- 
tatives  exist  in  great  numbers  to  this  day  in  the 
cities  of  the  East.  [MOURNING.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

MINT  (^SiW/u.ov :  menthd)  occurs  only  in 
Matt,  xxiii.  23,  and  Luke  xi.  42,  as  one  of  those 
herbs,  the  tithe  of  which  the  Jews  were  most  scru 
pulously  exact  in  paying.  Some  commentators 
have  supposed  that  such  herbs  as  mint,  anise  (dill), 
and  cummin,  were  not  titheable  by  law,  and  that 
the  Pharisees  solely  from  an  overstrained  zeal  paid 
tithes  for  them  ;  but  as  dill  was  subject  to  tithe 
(Massroth,  cap.  iv.  §5),  it  is  most  probable  that  the 
other  herbs  mentioned  with  it  were  also  tithed,  and 
this  is  fully  corroborated  by  our  Lord's  own  words : 
"  these  ought  ye  to  have  done."  The  Pharisees 
therefore  are  not  censured  for  paying  tithes  of  things 
untitheable  by  law,  but  foi  paying  more  regard  to 
i  scrupulous  exactness  in  these  minor  duties  than 
f/o  important  moral  obligations. 

There  cannot  be  the  slightest  doubt  that  the 
4.  V.  is  correct  in  the  translation  of  the  Greek 
word,  and  all  the  old  versions  are  agreed  in  under 
standing  some  species  of  mint  (Mentha)  by  it. 
Dioscorides  (iii.  36,  ed.  Sprengel)  speaks  of  ijSvoff- 
u.oi>  rifttpov  (Mentha  tatiotf] ;  the  Greeks  used  the 
terms  /jiivOa,  or  /j.ivdr)  and  fj.iv8os  for  mint,  whence 
the  derivation  of  the  English  word  ;  the  Romans 
have  mentha,  mcnta,  mentastrum.  According  to 
1'liny  (If.  N.  xix.  8)  the  old  Greek  word  for  mint 
was  n'iv6a,  which  was  changed  to  ^SiW/xov  ("  the 
sweet  smelling"),  on  account  of  the  fragrant  pro 
perties  of  this  plant.  Mint  was  used  by  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  both  as  a  carminative  in  medicine  and 
«  condiment  in  cookery.  Apicius  mentions  the  use 


MIRACLES  373 

of  fresh  (viridis)  and  dried  (arida)  mint  Compare 
also  Pliny,  H,  N.  xix.  8,  xx.  14  ;  Dioscor.  iii.  36  ; 
the  Epityrum  of  the  Romans  had  mint  as  one  of  its 
ingredients  (Cato,  de  R.  Rus.  §  120).  Martial, 
Epig.  x.  47,  speaks  of  "ructatrix  mentha,"  mint 
being  an  excellent  carminative.  "  So  amongst  the 
Jews,"  says  Celsius  (Hierob.  i.  547),  "  the  Tal- 
mudical  writers  manifestly  declare  that  mint  was 
used  with  their  food."  Tract,  Shem.  Ve  Jobel,  ch. 
vii.  §2,  and  Tr.  Oketzin,  ch.  i.  §2  ;  Sheb.  ch.  7.  1. 
Lady  Calcott  (Script.  Herb.  280)  makes  the  fol 
lowing  ingenious  remark :  "  I  know  not  whether 
mint  was  originally  one  of  the  bitter  herbs  with 
which  the  Israelites  eat  the  Paschal  lamb,  but  oui 
use  of  it  with  roast  lamb,  particularly  about  Eastei 
time,  inclines  me  to  suppose  it  was."  The  same 
writer  also  observes  that  the  modern  Jews  eat 
horseradish  and  chervil  with  lamb.  The  woodcut 
represents  the  horse  mint  (J/.  si/lvsstns]  which  is 


Utntha  sylreitm. 

common  in  Syria,  and  according  to  Russell  (/fist,  of 
Aleppo,  p.  39)  found  in  the  gardens  at  Aleppo; 
M.  sativa  is  generally  supposed  to  be  only  a  variety 
of  M.  arvensis,  another  species  of  mint ;  perhaps  all 
these  were  known  to  the  ancients.  The  mints  belong 
to  the  large  natural  order  Labiatae.  [W.  H.] 

MIPH'KAD,  THE  GATE  (*Jj«»n  "W 
irv\rt  TOV  Mo</>e/ca8 :  porta  judicialis),  one  of  the 
spates  of  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of 
the  wall  after  the  return  from  captivity  (Neh.  iii. 
31).  According  to  the  view  taken  in  this  work  ol 
the  topography  of  the  city  this  gate  was  probably 
not  in  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  proper,  but  in  that  of 
the  city  of  David,  or  Zion,  and  somewhere  near  to 
the  junction  of  the  two  on  the  north  side  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  1027).  The  name  may  refer  to  some  memorable 
census  of  the  people,  as  for  instance  that  of  David 
2  Sam.  xxiv.  9,  and  1  Chr.  xxi.  5  (in  each  of  which 
the  word  used  for  "  number "  is  miphkadj,  or  to 
the  superintendents  of  some  portion  of  tne  worship 
(Pekidim,  see  2  Chr.  xxxi.  13).  [G.J 

MIRACLES.      The  word   "miracle"   is   the 

ordinary  translation,  in  our  Authorized  English  ve>- 
sion,  of  the  Greek  <ri]fJL«~iov.  Our  translators  did 
not  borrow  it  from  the  Vulgate  (in  which  signum 
u  the  customary  rendering  of  o >;,.<,« Toi>) ,  t»t.  apjiu- 


374  MIKACLES 

rently,  from  their  Knglish  predecessors,  Tyndale, 
Covenlale,  &c.  ;  and  it  had,  probably  before  their 
time,  acquired  a  fixed  technical  import  in  theological 
language,  which  is  not  directly  suggested  by  its 
etymology.  The  Latin  miraculum,  from  which  it 
is  merely  accommodated  to  an  English  termination, 
corresponds  best  with  the  Greek  Oavfia,  and  denotes 
any  object  of  wonder,  whether  supernatural  or  not, 
Thus  the  "  Seven  Wonders  of  the  World  "  were  called 
miracula,  though  they  were  only  miracles  of  art. 
it  will  perhaps  be  found  that  the  habitual  use  of 
the  term  "  mii-acle"  has  tended  to  fix  attention  too 
much  on  the  physical  strangeness  of  the  facts  thus 
described,  and  to  divert  attention  from  what  may 
be  called  their  sijnaliti/.  In  reality,  the  practical 
importance  of  the  strangeness  of  miraculous  facts 
consists  in  this,  that  it  is  one  of  the  circumstances 
which,  taken  together,  make  it  reasonable  to  under 
stand  the  phenomenon  as  a  mark,  seal,  or  attestation 
of  the  Divine  sanction  to  something  else.  And  if  we 
suppose  the  Divine  intention  established  that  a  given 
phenomenon  is  to  be  taken  as  a  mark  or  sign  of 
Divine  attestation,  theories  concerning  the  mode  in 
which  that  phenomenon  was  produced  become  of 
comparatively  little  practical  value,  and  are  only 
serviceable  as  helping  our  conceptions.  In  the  case 
af  such  signs,  when  they  vary  from  the  ordinary 
course  of  nature,  we  may  conceive  of  them  as  imme 
diately  wrought  by  the  authorized  intervention  of 
some  angelic  being  merely  exerting  invisibly  his 
natural  powers ;  or  as  the  result  of  a  provision  made 
in  the  original  scheme  of  the  universe,  by  which  such 
an  occurrence  was  to  take  place  at  a  given  moment  ;• 
or  as  the  result  of  the  interference  of  some  higher 
law  with  subordinate  laws;  or  as  a  change  in  the 
ordinary  working  of  God  in  that  course  of  events 
which  we  call  nature ;  or  as  a  suspension  by  His 
immediate  power  of  the  action  of  certain  forces 
vhich  He  had  originally  given  to  what  we  call 
natural  agents.  These  may  be  hypotheses  more  or 
less  probable  of  the  mode  in  which  a  given  pheno 
menon  is  to  be  conceived  to  have  been  produced ; 
but  if  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case  taken  together 
make  it  reasonable  to  understand  that  phenomenon 
as  a  Divine  sign,  it  will  be  of  comparatively  little 
practical  importance  which  of  them  we  adopt.  In 
deed,  in  many  cases,  the  phenomenon  which  con 
stitutes  a  Divine  sign  may  be  one  not,  in  itself, 
at  all  varying  from  the  known  course  of  nature. 
This  is  the  common  case  of  prophecy :  in  which  the 
fulfilment  of  the  prophecy,  which  constitutes  the 
sign  of  the  prophet's  commission,  may  be  the  result 
of  ordinary  causes,  and  yet,  from  being  incapable  of 
having  been  anticipated  by  human  sagacity,  it  may 
1*  an  adequate  mark  or  sign  of  the  Divine  sanction. 
In  such  cases,  the  miraculous  or  wonderful  element 
is  to  be  sought  not  in  the  fulfilment,  but  in  the 
prediction.  Thus,  although  we  should  suppose,  for 
example,  that  the  destruction  of  Sennacherib's  army 
was  accomplished  by  an  ordinary  simoom  of  the 
desert,  called  figuratively  the  Angel  of  the  Lord, 
it  would  still  be  a  SIGN  of  Isaiah's  prophetic  mission, 
and  of  God's  care  for  JeVusalem.  And  so,  in  the 
case  of  the  passage  of  thd  Red  Sea  by  the  Israelites 
under  Moses,  and  many  other  instances.  Our  Lord's 
prediction  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  a  clear 
example  of  an  event  brought  about  in  the  ordinary 

»  This  is  said  by  Maimonides  (Mwdi  Xivochim,  part  ii. 
c.  29)  to  have  been  the  opinion  of  sonw  of  the  elder 
Rnbbius  :  "  Nam  dicunt,  qmindo  Dcus  0.  M.  hiuic  exislcu 
tisun  crc.-uH,  ilium  iiini  nnirui<iuc  ?n*.i  naturum  siuun 


MIRACLES 

course  of  things,  and  yet  being  a  sign  of  the  I  'i  vine 
mission  of  Jesus,  and  of  the  just  displeasure  of  <;:\1 
against  the  Jews. 

It  would  appear,  indeed,  that  in  almost  all  cases 
of  signs  or  evidential  miracles  something  pro],  hetic 
is  involved.  In  the  common  case,  for  maniple,  of 
healing  sickness  by  a  word  or  touch,  the  word  or 
gesture  may  be  regarded  as  a  prediction  of  the  cure ; 
and  then,  it  the  whole  circumstances  be  such  as  to 
exclude  just  suspicion  of  (1)  a  natural  auticij>ation 
of  the  event,  and  (2)  a  casual  coincidence,  it,  will  be 
indifferent  to  the  signality  of  the  cure  whether  we 
regard  it  as  effected  by  the  operation  of  ordinary 
causes,  or  by  an  immediate  Intel-position  of  the  Deity 
reversing  the  course  of  nature.  Hypotheses  by  which 
such  cures  are  attempted  to  be  accounted  for  by 
ordinary  causes  are  indeed  generally  wild,  impro 
bable,  and  arbitrary,  and  are  (on  that  ground)  justly 
open  to  objection ;  but,  if  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  predictive  antecedent  be  admitted,  they  do 
not  tend  to  deprive  the  phenomenon  of  its  signality : 
and  there  are  minds  who,  from  particular  associa 
tions,  find  it  easier  to  conceive  a  miraculous  agency 
operating  in  the  region  of  mind,  than  one  operating 
in  the  region  of  matter. 

It  may  be  further  observed,  in  passing,  that  the 
proof  of  the  actual  occurrence  of  a  sign,  when  in 
itself  an  ordinary  event,  and  invested  with  signality 
only  by  a  previous  prediction,  may  be,  in  some 
respects,  better  circumstanced  than  the  proof  of  the 
occurrence  of  a  miraculous  sign.  For  the  prediction 
and  the  fulfilment  may  have  occurred  at  a  long 
distance  of  time  the  one  from  the  other,  and  be 
attested  by  separate  sets  of  independent  witnesses, 
of  whom  the  one  was  ignorant  of  the  fulfilment, 
and  the  other  ignorant,  or  incredulous,  of  the  pre 
diction.  As  each  of  these  sets  of  witnesses  are  de 
posing  to  what  is  to  them  a  mere  ordinaiy  fact, 
there  is  no  room  for  suspecting,  in  the  case  of  those 
witnesses,  any  colouring  from  religious  prejudice, 
or  excited  feeling,  or  fraud,  or  that  craving  for  the 
marvellous  which  has  notoriously  produced  many 
legends.  But  it  must  be  admitted  that  it  is  only 
such  sources  of  suspicion  that  are  excluded  iu  such 
a  case ;  and  that  whatever  inherent  improbability 
there  may  be  in  a  fact  considered  as  miraculous — or 
varying  from  the  ordinary  course  of  nature — remains 
still :  so  that  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  say  that  the 
two  facts  together — the  prediction  and  the  fulfil 
ment — required  no  stronger  evidence  to  make  them 
credible  than  any  two  ordinary  facts.  This  will 
appear  at  once  from  a  parallel  case.  That  A  B 
was  seen  walking  in  Bond  Street,  London,  on  a 
certain  day,  and  at  a  ceitain  hour,  is  a  common 
ordinary  fact,  credible  on  very  slight  evidence.  That 
A  B  was  seen  walking  in  Broadway,  New  York,  on 
a  certain  day,  and  at  a  certain  hour,  is,  when  taken 
by  itself,  similarly  circumstanced.  But  if  the  day 
and  hour  assigned  in  both  reports  be  the  same,  the 
case  is  altered.  We  conclude,  at  once,  that  one  or 
other  of  our  informants  was  wrong,  or  both,  until 
convinced  of  the  correctness  of  their  statements  by 
evidence  much  stronger  than  would  suffice  to  esta 
blish  an  ordinary  fact.  This  brings  us  to  consider 
the  peculiar  improbability  supposed  to  attach  to 
miraculous  signs,  as  such. 

The  peculiar  improbability  of  Miracles  is  resolved 


ordinasse  ct  determinasse,  illisque  naturis  vlrtutem  Indi- 
disste  mlraciila  ilia  prodiicvmli :  ct  ^iRiiuni  prophet  ac  niliil 
uliud  pssc,  <i»am  qmxl  IH'iis  MtitiiMfaril  prophelir 
quo  diccrc  hoc  vcl  illud  dcbtant,"  &c. 


MIRACLES 

Ly  Hume,  in  his  famous  Essay,  into  the  circum 
stance  that  they  are  "  contrary  to  experience." 
This  expression  is,  as  has  often  been  pointed  out, 
strictly  speaking,  incorrect.  In  strictness,  that 
only  can  be  said  to  be  contrary  to  experience,  which 
is  contradicted  by  the  immediate  perceptions  of 
pei-sons  present  at  the  time  when  the  tact  is  alleged 
to  have  occurred.  Thus,  if  it  be  alleged  that  all 
metals  are  ponderous,  this  is  an  assertion  contrary 
to  experience ;  because  daily  actual  observation 
shows  that  the  metal  potassium  is  not  ponderous. 
But  if  any  one  were  to  assert  that  a  particular 
piece  of  potassium,  which  we  had  never  seen,  was 
ponderous,  our  experiments  on  other  pieces  of  the 
same  metal  would  not  prove  his  report  to  be,  in 
the  same  sense,  contrary  to  our  experience,  but  only 
contrary  to  the  analogy  of  our  experience.  In  a 
looser  sense,  however,  the  terms  "  contrary  to  ex 
perience,"  are  extended  to  this  secondary  applica 
tion  ;  and  it  must  be  admitted  that,  in  this  latter, 
less  strict  sense,  miracles  are  contrary  to  general 
experience,  so  far  as  their  mere  physical  circum 
stances,  visible  to  us,  are  concerned.  This  should 
not  only  be  admitted,  but  strongly  insisted  upon, 
by  the  maintainers  of  miracles,  because  it  is  an 
essential  element  of  their  signal  character.  It  is 
only  the  analogy  of  general  experience  (necessarily 
narrow  as  all  human  experience  is)  that  convinces 
us  that  a  word  or  a  touch  has  no  efficacy  to  cure 
diseases  or  still  a  tempest.  And,  if  it  be  held  that 
the  analogy  of  daily  experience  furnishes  us  with  no 
measure  of  probability,  then  the  so-called  miracles 
of  the  Bible  will  lose  the  character  of  marks  of  the 
Divine  Commission  of  the  workers  of  them.  They 
will  not  only  become  as  probable  as  ordinary  events, 
but  they  will  assume  the  character  of  ordinary 
events.  It  will  be  just  as  credible  that  they  were 
wrought  by  enthusiasts  or  impostors,  as  by  the 
true  Prophets  of  Cod,  and  we  shall  be  compelled  to 
own  that  the  Apostles  might  as  well  have  appealed 
to  any  ordinary  event  in  proof  of  Christ's  mission 
as  to  His  resurrection  from  the  dead.  It  is  so  far, 
therefore,  from  being  true,  that  (as  has  been  said 
with  something  of  a  sneer)  "  religion,  following  in 
the  wake  of  science,  has  been  compelled  to  acknow 
ledge  the  government  of  the  universe  as  being  on 
the  whole  carried  on  by  general  laws,  and  not  by 
special  interpositions,"  that,  religion,  considered  as 
standing  on  miraculous  evidence,  necessarily  pre 
supposes  a  fixed  order  of  nature,  and  is  compelled 
to  assume  that,  not  by  the  discoveries  of  science, 
but  by  the  exigency  of  its  own  position ;  and  thei  e 
nre  few  books  in  which  the  general  constancy  of 
the  order  of  nature  is  more  distinctly  recognized 
than  the  Bible.  The  witnesses  who  report  to  us 
miraculous  facts  are  so  far  from  testifying  to  the 
absence  of  general  laws,  or  the  instability  of  the 
order  of  nature,  that,  on  the  contrary,  their  whole 
testimony  implies  that  the  miracles  which  they 
record  were  at  variance  with  their  own  general 
experience — with  the  general  experience  of  their 
contemporaries — with  what  they  believed  to  have 
been  the  general  experience  of  their  predecessors, 
,in-l  with  what  they  anticipated  would  be  the 
general  experience  of  posterity.  It  is  upon  the  very 
ground  that  the  apparent  natural  causes,  in  the 
cases  to  which  they  testify,  are  known  by  uniform 
experience  to  be  incapable  of  producing  the  effects 
&ai<l  to  have  taken  place,  that  therefore  these  wit 
nesses  refer  those  events  to  the  intervention  of  a 
supernatural  cause,  and  sre?\  cf  these  occurrences 
as  I>ivine  Miracles. 


MIRACLES  376 

And  this  leads  us  to  notice  one  grand  di.ferencf 
between  Divine  Miracles  and  other  alleged  facta 
that  seem  to  vary  from  the  ordinary  course  ol 
nature.  It  is  manifest  that  there  is  an  essential 
difference  between  alleging  a  case  in  which,  al!  the 
real  antecedents  or  causes  being  similar  to  those 
which  we  have  daily  opportunities  of  observing,  a 
consequence  is  said  to  have  ensued  quite  different 
from  that  which  general  experience  finds  to  be 
uniformly  conjoined  with  them,  and  alleging  a  case 
in  which  there  is  supposed  and  indicated  by  all  the 
circumstances,  the  intervention  of  an  invisible 
antecedent,  or  cause,  which  we  know  to  exist,  and 
to  be  adequate  to  the  production  of  such  a  result ; 
for  the  special  operation  of  which,  in  this  case,  wt 
can  assign  probable  reasons,  and  also  for  its  not 
generally  operating  in  a  similar  manner.  This 
latter  is  the  case  of  the  Scripture-miracles.  They 
are  wrought  under  a  solemn  appeal  to  God,  in  prooi 
of  a  revelation  worthy  of  Him,  the  scheme  of  which 
may  be  shewn  to  bear  a  striking  analogy  to  the 
constitution  and  order  of  nature ;  and  it  is  manifest 
that,  in  order  to  make  them  fit  sigm  for  attesting 
a  revelation,  they  ought  to  be  phenomena  capable 
of  being  shewn  by  a  full  induction  to  vary  from 
what  is  known  to  us  as  the  ordinary  course  of 
nature. 

To  this  it  is  sometimes  replied  that,  as  we  collect 
the  existence  of  God  from  the  course  of  nature,  we 
have  no  right  to  assign  to  Him  powers  and  attri 
butes  in  any  higher  degree  than  we  find  them  in 
the  course  of  nature ;  and  consequently  neither  the 
power  nor  the  will  to  alter  it.  But  such  pereons 
must  be  understood  verbis  ponere  Deum,  re  tollere ; 
because  it  is  impossible  really  to  assign  Power, 
Wisdom,  Goodness,  &c.  to  the  first  cause,  as  an 
inference  from  the  course  of  nature,  without  attri 
buting  to  Him  the  power  of  making  it  otherwise. 
There  can  be  no  design,  for  example,  or  anything 
analogous  to  design,  in  the  Author  of  the  Universe, 
unless  out  of  other  possible  collocations  of  things, 
He  selected  those  fit  for  a  certain  purpose.  And  it 
is,  in  truth,  a  violation  of  all  analogy,  and  an 
utterly  wild  and  arbitrary  chimera,  to  infer,  with 
out  the  fullest  evidence  of  such  a  limitation,  the 
existence  of  a  Being  possessed  of  such  power  and 
intelligence  as  we  see  manifested  in  the  course  of 
nature,  and  yet  unable  to  make  one  atom  of  matter 
move  an  inch  in  any  other  direction  than  that  in 
which  it  actually  does  move. 

And  even  if  we  do  not  regard  the  existence  of 
God  (in  the  proper  sense  of  that  term)  as  proved  by 
the  course  of  nature,  still  if  we  admit  His  existence 
to  be  in  any  degree  probable,  or  even  possible, 
the  occurrence  of  miracles  will  not  be  incredible. 
For  it  is  surely  going  too  far  to  say,  that,  because 
the  ordinary  course  of  nature  leaves  us  in  doubt 
whether  the  author  of  it  be  able  or  unable  to  alter 
it,  or  of  such  a  character  as  to  be  disposed  to  alter 
it  for  some  great  purpose,  it  is  therefore  incredible 
that  He  should  ever  have  actually  altered  it.  The 
true  philosopher,  when  he  considers  the  narrowness 
of  human  experience,  will  make  allowance  for  the 
possible  existence  of  many  causes  not  yet  observed 
by  man,  so  as  that  their  operation  can  be  reduced  to 
fixed  laws  understood  by  us ;  and  the  operation  ot 
which,  therefore,  when  it  reveals  itself,  must  seem 
to  vary  from  the  ordinary  course  of  things.  Other 
wise,  there  could  be  no  new  discoveries  in  physical 
science  itself.  It  is  quite  true  that  such  forces  as 
magnetism  and  electricity  arc  now  to  a  great  extent 
reduced  to  known  laws :  but  it  is  equally  true  that 


?7li  MIRACLES 

no  one  woidd  have  taken  the  trouble  to  fird  out  the 
laws,  if  he  had  not  first  believed  in  the  facts.  Our 
knowledge  of  the  law  was  not  the  ground  of  our 
belief  of  the  fact ;  but  our  belief  of  the  fact  wa> 
that  which  set  us  on  investigating  the  law.  And 
it  is  easy  to  conceive  that  there  may  be  forces  in 
nature,  unknown  to  us,  the  regular  periods  of  the 
recurrence  of  whose  operations  within  the  sphere  of 
onr  knowledge  (if  they  ever  recur  at  all)  may  be 
immensely  distant  from  each  other  in  time — (as, 
e.  <j.  the  causes  which  produce  the  appearance  or 
disappearance  of  stars) — so  as  that,  when  they 
occur,  they  may  seem  wholly  different  from  all  the 
rest  of  man's  present  or  past  experience.  Upon 
such  a  supposition,  the  rarity  of  the  phenomenon 
should  not  make  it  incredible,  because  such  a  rarity 
would  be  involved  in  the  conditions  of  its  existence. 
Now  this  is  analogous  to  the  case  of  miracles.  Upon 
the  supposition  that  there  is  a  God,  the  immediate 
volition  of  the  Deity,  determined  by  Wisdom.  Good 
ness,  &c.,  is  a  VERA  CAUSA  ;  because  all  the  phe 
nomena  of  nature  have,  on  that  supposition,  such 
volitions  as  at  least  their  ultimate  antecedents;  and 
that  physical  effect,  whatever  it  may  be,  that  stands 
next  the  Divine  volition,  is  a  case  of  a  physical  effect 
having  such  a  volition,  so  determined,  for  its  imme 
diate  antecedent.  And  as  for  the  unusualness  of 
the  way  of  acting,  that  is  involved  in  the  very  con 
ditions  of  the  hyi>othesis,  because  this  very  unusual- 
ness  would  be  necessary  to  fit  the  phenomenon  fern 
miraculous  sign. 

In  the  foregoing  remarks,  we  have  endeavoured 
to  avoid  all  metaphysical  discussions  of  questions 
concerning  the  nature  of  causation — the  funda 
mental  principle  of  induction,  and  the  like  ;  not  be 
cause  they  are  unimportant,  but  because  they  could 
not  be  treated  of  satisfactorily  within  the  limits 
which  the  plan  of  this  work  prescribes.  They  are, 
for  the  most  part,  matters  of  an  abstruse  kind,  and 
much  difficulty;  but  (fortunately  for  mankind) 
questions  of  great  practical  moment  may  generally 
be  settled,  for  practical  purposes,  without  solving 
those  higher  problems— »'.  e.  they  may  be  settled 
on  principles  which  will  hold  good,  whatever  solu 
tion  we  may  adopt  of  those  abstruse  questions.  It 
will  be  proper,  however,  to  say  a  few  words  here 
upon  some  popular  fomis  of  expression  which  tend 
greatly  to  increase,  in  many  minds,  the  natural 
prejudice  against  miracles.  One  of  these  is  the 
usual  description  of  a  miracle,  as,  "  a  violation  of 
the  laws  of  nature."  This  metaphorical  expres 
sion  suggests  directly  the  idea  of  natural  agents 
breaking,  of  their  own  accord,  some  rule  which  has 
the  authority  and  sanctity  of  a  law  to  them.  Such 
••\  figure  can  only  be  applicable  to  the  case  of  a  sup 
posed  causeless  and  arbitrary  variation  from  the 
uniform  order  of  sequence  in  natural  things,  and  is 
wholly  inapplicable  to  a  change  in  that  order  caused 
by  God  Himself.  The  word  "  law,"  when  applied  to 
material  things,  ought  only  to  be  understood  as  de 
noting  a  number  of  observed  and  anticipated  se 
quences  of  phenomena,  taking  place  with  such  a 
resemblance  or  analogy  to  each  other  us  if  a  rule 
had  been  laid  down,  which  those  phenomena  were 
constantly  observing.  But  the  rule,  in  this  case, 
is  nothing  different  from  the  actual  order  itself; 
and  there  is  no  cause  of  these  sequences  but  the  will 
of  God  choosing  to  produce  those  phenomena,  and 
choosing  to  produce  them  in  a  certain  order. 

Again,  the  term  "  nature"  suggests  to  many  per 
sons  the  idea  of  a  great  system  of  things  endowed 
with  powers  and  forces  <.!'  its  own — a  sort  of  ma- 


MIBACLE8 

chine,  set  a-going  originally  by  a  first  muse,  but 
continuing  its  motions  of  itself.  Hence  we  are  apt 
to  imagine  that  a  change  in  the  motion  or  operation 
of  any  part  of  it  by  God,  would  produce  the  sam<> 
disturbance  of  the  other  parts,  as  such  a  chan<_*<- 
would  be  likely  to  produce  in  them,  if  made  by  us 
or  any  other  natural  agent.  But  if  the  motions 
and  operations  of  material  things  be  produced  really 
by  the  Divine  will,  then  His  choosing  to  change, 
for  a  special  purpose,  the  ordinary  motion  of  one 
part,  does  not  necessarily,  or  probably,  infer  his 
choosing  to  change  the  ordinary  motions  of  other 
pails  in  a  way  not  at  all  requisite  for  the  accom 
plishment  of  that  special  purpose.  It  is  as  easy  for 
Him  to  continue  the  ordinary  course  of  the  rest,  with 
the  change  of  one  part,  as  of  all  the  phenomena  with 
out  any  change  at  all.  Thus,  though  the  stoppage 
of  the  motion  of  the  earth  in  the  ordinary  courst 
of  nature,  would  be  attended  with  terrible  con 
vulsions,  the  stoppage  of  the  earth  miraculously, 
for  a  special  pui-pose  to  be  served  by  that  only, 
would  not  of  itself,  be  followed  by  any  such  conse 
quences. 

From  the  same  conception  of  nature,  as  a  ma 
chine,  we  are  apt  to  think  of  interferences  with  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature  as  implying  some  imper 
fection  in  it.  Because  machines  are  considered  moi-e 
and  more  perfect  in  proportion  as  they  less  and  less 
need  the  interference  of  the  workman.  But  it  is 
manifest  that  this  is  a  false  analogy  ;  for,  the  reason 
why  machines  are  made  is,  to  save  us  trouble  ;  and, 
therefore,  they  are  more  perfect  in  proportion  as 
they  answer  this  purpose.  But  no  one  can  seri 
ously  imagine  that  the  universe  is  a  machine  for 
the  purpose  of  saving  trouble  to  the  Almighty. 

Again,  when  miracles  are  described  as  "  inter 
ferences  with  the  laws  of  nature,"  this  description 
makes  them  appear  improbable  to  many  minds, 
from  their  not  sufficiently  considering  that  the  laws 
of  nature  interfere  with  one  another;  and  that  we 
cannot  get  rid  of  "  interferences  "  upon  any  hypo 
thesis  consistent  with  experience.  When  organiza 
tion  is  superinduced  upon  inorganic  matter,  the 
laws  of  inorganic  matter  are  interfered  with  aim 
controlled  ;  when  animal  life  comes  in,  there  ai-e 
new  interferences  ;  when  reason  and  conscience  are 
superadded  to  will,  we  have  a  new  class  of  con 
trolling  and  interfering  powers,  the  laics  of  which 
are  moral  in  their  character.  Intelligences  of  pure 
speculation,  who  could  do  nothing  but  observe  and 
reason,  surveying  a  portion  of  the  universe — such 
as  the  greater  part  of  the  material  universe  may 
be — wholly  destitute  of  living  inhabitants,  mi^ht 
have  reasoned  that  such  powers  us  active  beings 
possess  were  incredible — that  it  was  incredible  that 
the  Great.  Creator  would  suffer  the  majestic  uni 
formity  of  laws  which  He  was  constantly  main 
taining  through  boundless  space  and  innumerable 
worlds,  to  be  controlled  and  interfered  with  at  the 
caprice  of  such  a  creature  as  man.  Yet  we  know 
by  experience  that  God  has  enabled  us  to  control 
and  interfere  with  the  laws  of  external  nature  for  our 
own  purposes:  nor  does  this  seem  less  improbable 
beforehand  (but  rather  more  ,  than  that  He  should 
Himself  interfere  with  those  laws  for  our  advantage. 
This,  at  least,  is  manifest — that  the  purposes  for 
which  man  was  made,  whatever  they  are,  involved 
the  necessity  of  producing  a  power  capable  of  con 
trolling  and  interfering  with  the  laws  of  external 
nature;  and  consequently  that  those  piir]»i>es  in 
volve  in  some  sense  the  necessity  or*  mterteroncos 
with  the  laws  of  nature  extern;*]  to  nnin;  and  how 


MIRACLES 

Rir  that  necessity  may  reach — whether  it  extend 
only  to  interferences  proceeding  from  man  himself, 
or  extend  to  interferences  proceeding  from  other 
creatures,  or  immediately  from  God  also,  it  is  im- 
oossible  for  reason  to  determine  beforehand. 

Furthermore,  whatever  ends  may  be  contem 
plated  by  the  Deity  for  the  laws  of  nature  in 
reference  to  the  rest  of  tb.3  universe — (in  which 
question  we  have  as  little  information  as  interest) — 
we  know  that,  in  respect  of  us,  they  answer  dis- 
rernible  moral  ends — that  they  place  us,  practi 
cally,  under  government,  conducted  in  the  way  of 
rewards  and  punishment — a  government  of  which 
the  tendency  is  to  encourage  virtue  and  repress 
vice — and  to  form  in  us  a  certain  character  by  dis 
cipline  ;  which  character  our  moral  nature  compels 
us  to  consider  as  the  highest  and  worthiest  object 
which  we  can  pursue.  Since,  therefore,  the  laws 
of  nature  have,  in  reference  to  us,  moral  purposes 
to  answer,  which  (as  far  as  we  can  judge)  they 
have  not  to  serve  in  other  respects,  it  seems  not 
incredible  that  these  peculiar  purposes  should  occa 
sionally  require  modifications  of  those  laws  in  rela 
tion  to  us,  which  are  not  necessary  in  relation  to 
other  parts  of  the  universe.  For  we  see — as  has 
been  just  observed — that  the  power  given  to  man 
of  modifying  the  laws  of  nature  by  which  He  is 
surrounded,  is  a  power  directed  by  moral  and  ra 
tional  influences,  such  as  we  do  not  find  directing 
the  power  of  any  other  creature  that  we  know  of. 
And  how  far,  in  the  nature  of  things,  it  would  be 
possible  or  eligible,  to  construct  a  system  of  ma 
terial  laws  which  should  at  the  same  time,  and  by 
the  same  kind  of  operations,  answer  the  other  pur 
poses  of  the  Creator,  and  also  all  His  moral  purposes 
with  respect  to  a  creature  endowed  with  such  facul 
ties  as  free  will,  reason,  conscience,  and  the  other 
peculiar  attributes  of  man,  we  cannot  be  supposed 
capable  of  judging.  And  as  the  regularity  of  the 
laws  of  nature  in  themselves,  is  the  very  thing 
which  makes  them  capable  of  being  usefully  con 
trolled  and  interfered  with  by  man — (since,  if  their 
sequences  were  irregular  and  capricious  we  could 
not  know  how  or  when  to  interfere  with  them) — so 
that  same  regularity  is  the  very  thing  which  makes 
it  possible  to  use  Divine  interferences  with  them  as 
attestations  of  a  supernatural  revelation  from  God 
to  us  ;  so  that,  in  both  cases  alike,  the  usual  regu 
larity  of  the  laws,  in  themselves,  is  not  superfluous, 
but  necessary  in  order  to  make  the  interferences 
with  that  regularity  serviceable  for  their  proper  ends. 
In  this  point  of  view,  miracles  are  to  be  considered 
as  cases  in  which  a  higher  law  interferes  with  and 
controls  a  lower:  of  which  circumstance  we  see  in 
stances  around  us  at  every  turn. 

It  seems  further  that,  in  many  disquisitions  upon 
this  subject,  some  essentially  distinct  operations  of 
the  human  mind  have  been  confused  together  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  spread  unnecessary  obscurity 
over  the  discussion.  It  may  be  useful,  therefore, 
briefly  to  indicate  the  mental  operations  which  are 
chiefly  concerned  in  this  matter. 

In  the  first  place  there  seems  to  be  a  law  of  our 
mind,  in  virtue  of  which,  upon  the  experience  of  any 
new  external  event,  any  phenomenon  limited  by  the 
circumstances  of  time  and  place,  we  refer  it  to  a 
cause,  or  powerful  agent  producing  it  as  an  effect. 
The  relative  idea  involved  in  this  reference  appears 
to  be  a  simple  one,  incapable  of  definition,  and  is 
denoted  by  the  term  efficiency. 

From  this  conception  it  has  been  supposed  by 
some  that  a  scientific  proof  of  the  stability  of  t) 


MIKACLES 


;377 


laws  of  nature  could  be  constructed ;  but  the  attempt 
has  signally  miscarried.  Undoubtedly,  while  w« 
abide  in  the  strict  metaphysical  conception  of  a  cause 
is  such,  the  axiom  that  "  similar  causes  produce 
similar  effects*'  is  intuitively  evident;  but  it  ij  M 
>ecause,  in  thnt  point  of  view,  it  is  merely  a  barren 
ruism.  For  my  whole  conception,  within  these 
narrow  limits,  of  the  cause  of  the  given  phenomenon 
i  is  that  it  is  the  cause  or  power  producing  B. 
conceive  of  that  cause  merely  as  the  term  of 
certain  relation  to  the  phenomenon  ;  and  therefore 
my  conception  of  a  cause  similar  to  it,  precisely  as  a 
cause,  can  only  be  the  conception  of  a  cause  of  a 
phenomenon  similar  to  B. 

But  when  the  original  conception  is  enlarged 
nto  affording  the  wider  maxim,  that  causes  similar 
as  things,  considered  in  themselves,  and  not  barely 
n  relation  to  the  effect,  are  similar  in  their  effects 
Iso,  the  case  ceases  to  be  not  equally  clear. 

And,  in  applying  even  this  to  practice,  we  are 
met  with  insuperable  difficulties. 

For,  first,  it  may  reasonably  be  demanded,  on 
what  scientific  ground  we  are  justified  in  assuming 
,hat  any  one  material  phenomenon  or  substance  is, 
n  this  proper  sense,  the  cause  of  any  given  material 
)henomenon  ?  It  does  not  appear  at  all  self-evident, 
a  priori,  that  a  material  phenomenon  must  have  a 
material  cause.  Many  have  supposed  the  contrary ; 
,nd  the  phenomena  of  the  apparent  results  of  our 
iwn  volitions  upon  matter  seem  to  indicate  that 
such  a  law  should  not  be  hastily  assumed.  Upon 
the  possible  supposition,  then,  that  the  material 
jhenomena  by  which  we  are  surrounded  are  the 
effects  of  spiritual  causes — such  as  the  volitions  of 
the  Author  of  Nature — it  is  plain  that  these  are 
causes  of  which  we  have  no  direct  knowledge,  and 
;he  similarities  of  which  to  each  other  we  can, 
without  the  help  of  something  more  than  the  funda 
mental  axiom  of  cause  and  effect,  discover  only  from 
the  effects,  and  only  so  far  as  th^  •-'fleets  cany  us  in 
ach  particular. 

But,  even  supposing  it  conceded  that  material 
effects  must  have  material  causes,  it  yet  remains  to 
be  settled  upon  what  ground  we  can  assume  that 
we  have  ever  yet  found  the  true  material  cause  of 
any  effect  whatever,  so  as  to  justify  us  in  predicting 
that,  wherever  it  recurs,  a  certain  effect  will  follow. 
All  that  our  abstract  axiom  tells  us  is,  that  if  we 
have  the  true  cause  we  have  that  which  is  always 
attended  with  the  effect :  and  all  that  experience  can 
tell  us  is  that  A  has,  so  far  as  we  can  observe,  been 
always  attended  by  B :  and  all  that  we  can  infer 
from  these  premises,  turn  them  how  we  will,  is 
merely  this :  that  the  case  of  A  and  B  is,  so  far  as 
we  have  been  able  to  observe,  like  a  case  of  true 
causal  connexion  ;  and  beyond  this  we  cannot  advance 
a  step  towards  proving  that  the  case  of  A  and  B  is 
a  case  of  causal  connexion,  without  assuming  further 
another  principle  (which  would  have  saved  us  much 
trouble  if  we  had  assumed  it  in  the  beginning1), 
that  likeness  or  verisimilitude  is  a  ground  of  belief, 
gaining  strength  in  proportion  to  the  closeness  and 
constancy  of  the  resemblance. 

Indeed,  physical  analysis,  in  its  continual  advance, 
is  daily  teaching  us  that  those  things  which  we  once 
regarded  as  the  true  causes  of  certain  material  phe 
nomena  are  only  marks  of  the  presence  of  other 
things  which  we  now  regard  as  the  true  causes, 
and  which  we  may  hereafter  find  to  be  only  assem 
blages  of  adjacent  appearances,  more  or  less  closely 
connected  with  what  may  better  claim  that  title. 
It  is  quite  jxjssible,  for  example,  that  gravitation 


378 


MIRACLES 


may  at  some  future  time  be  demonstrated  to  be  th 
result  of  a  complex  system  of  forces,  residing  (as 
some  philosophers  love  to  speak)  in  material  sub 
stances  hitherto  undiscovered,  and  as  little  suspectec 
to  exist  as  the  gases  were  in  the  time  of  Aristotle. 

(2.)  Nor  can  we  derive  much  more  practica' 
assistance  from  the  maxim,  that  similar  antecedents 
have  similar  consequents.  For  this  is  really  no  more 
than  the  former  rule.  It  differs  therefrom  only  in 
dropping  the  idea  of  efficiency  or  causal  connexion ; 
and,  however  certain  and  universal  it  may  be  sup 
posed  in  the  abstract,  it  tails  in  the  concrete  just  at 
the  point  where  we  most  need  assistance.  For  it  is 
plainly  impossible  to  demonstrate  that  any  two 
actual  antecedents  are  precisely  similar  in  the  sense 
of  the  maxim  ;  or  that  any  one  given  apparent  ante 
cedent  is  the  true  unconditional  antecedent  of  any 
given  apparently  consequent  phenomenon.  Unless, 
for  example,  we  know  the  whole  nature  of  a  given 
antecedent  A,  and  also  the  whole  nature  of  another 
given  antecedent  B,  we  cannot,  by  comparing  them 
together,  ascertain  their  precise  similarity.  They 
may  be  similar  in  all  respects  that  we  have  hitherto 
observed,  and  yet  in  the  very  essential  quality  which 
may  make  A  the  unconditional  antecedent  of  a  given 
effect  C,  in  this  respect  A  and  6  may  be  quite 
dissimilar. 

It  will  be  found,  upon  a  close  examination  of  all 
the  logical  canons  of  inductive  reasoning  that  have 
been  constructed  for  applying  this  principle,  that 
such  an  assumption — of  the  real  similarity  of  things 
apparently  similar — pervades  them  all.  Let  us  take, 
e.  g.,  what  is  called  the  first  canon  of  the  "  Method 
of  Agreement,"  which  is  this :  "  If  two  or  more 
instances  of  the  phenomenon  under  investigation 
have  only  one  circumstance  in  common,  the  circum 
stance  in  which  alone  all  the  instances  agree,  is  the 
cause  (or  effect)  of  the  given  phenomenon."  Now, 
in  applying  this  to  any  practical  case,  how  can  we 
be  possibly  certain  that  any  two  instances  have 
only  one  circumstance  in  common  ?  We  can  remove, 
indeed,  by  nicely  varied  experiments,  all  the  different 
agents  known  to  us  from  contact  with  the  substances 
we  are  examining,  except  those  which  we  choose  to 
employ ;  but  how  is  it  possible  that  we  can  remove 
unknown  agents,  if  such  exist,  or  be  sure  that  no 
agents  do  exist,  the  laws  and  periods  of  whose  ac 
tivity  we  have  had  hitherto  no  means  of  estimating, 
but  which  may  reveal  themselves  at  any  moment, 
or  upon  any  unlooked-for  occasion?  It  is  plain 
that,  unless  we  can  know  the  whole  nature  of  all 
substances  present  at  every  moment  and  every  place 
that  we  are  concerned  with  in  the  universe,  we  cannot 
know  that  any  two  phenomena  have  but  one  circum 
stance  in  common.  All  we  can  say  is,  that  unknown 
agencies  count  for  nothing  in  practice;  or  (in  other 
words)  we  must  assume  that  things  which  appear 
to  us  similar  are  similar. 

This  being  so,  it  becomes  a  serious  question 
whether  scch  intuitive  principles  as  we  have  been 
discussing  are  of  any  real  practical  value  whatever 
in  mere  j-hysical  inquiries.  Because  it  would  seem 
that  they  cannot  be  made  use  of  without  bringing 
in  another  principle,  which  seems  quite  sufficient 
without  them,  that  the  likeness  of  one  thing  to 
?.nother  m  observable  respects,  is  a  ground  for  pre 
suming  likeness  in  other  respects — a  ground  strong 
in  proportion  to  the  apparent  closeness  of  the  re 
semblances,  and  the  number  of  times  in  which  we 
have  found  ourselves  right  in  acting  upon  such  a 
presumption.  Let  us  talk  as  we  will  of  theorems 
deduced  from  intuitive  axiom:,  about  true  caus«s  or 


MIRACLES 

antecedents,  ttill  all  that  we  c;m  know  in  fact  of  any 
particular  case  is,  that,  as  fur  as  tee  can  observe,  it 
reiembles  what  reason  teaches  us  would  l>e  the  case 
of  a  true  cause  or  a  true  antecedent :  and  if  this 
justifies  us  in  drawing  the  inference  that  it  is  such  a 
case,  then  certainly  we  must  admit  that  resemblance 
is  a  just  ground  in  itself  of  inference  in  practical 
reasoning. 

And  "  therefore,  even  granting,"  it  will  be  said, 
"  the  power  of  the  Deity  to  work  miracles,  we  can 
have  no  better  grounds  of  deteiTnining  how  He  is 
likely  to  exert  that  power,  than  by  observing  how 
He  has  actually  exercised  it.     Now  we  find  Him, 
by  experience,  by  manifest  traces  and  records,  through 
countless  ages,  and  in  the  most  distant  regions  of 
space,  continually — (if  we  do  but  set  aside  these 
comparatively  few  stories  of  miraculous  interposi 
tions) — working  according  to  what  we  call,  and 
rightly  call,  a  settled  order  of  nature,  and  we  ob 
serve  Him   constantly  preferring  an  adherence  to 
this  order  before  a  departure  from  it,  even  in  cir 
cumstances  in  vbjch  (apart  from  experience)  w« 
should  suppose  that  His  goodness  would  lead  Him 
to  vary  from   that  order.     In  particular,  we  find 
that  the  greatest  part  of  mankind  have  been  le!l 
wholly  in  past  ages,  and  even  at  present,  without 
the  benefit  of  that  revelation  which  you  suppose 
Him  to  have  made.     Yet  it  would  appear  that  the 
multitudes  who  are  ignorant  of  it  needed  it,  and 
deserved  it,  just  as  much  as  the  few  who  have  been 
made  acquainted  with  it.    And  thus  it  appears  that 
experience  refutes  the  inference  in  favour  of  the 
likelihood  of  a  revelation,  which  we  might  be  apt 
to  draw  from  the  mere  consideration  of  His  good 
ness,  taken  by  itself."     It  cannot  be  denied  that 
there  seems  to  be  much  real  weight  in  some  of 
these  considerations.      But  there  are  some  things 
which  diminish  that  weight: — 1.  With  respect  to 
remote  ages,  known  to  us  only  by  physical  traces, 
and  distant  regions  of  the  universe,  we  have  no 
record  or  evidence  of  the  moral  government  carried 
on  therein.    We  do  not  know  of  any.    And,  if  there 
be  or  was  any,  we  have  no  evidence  to  determine 
whether  it  was  or  was  not,  is  or  is  not,  connect<?d 
with  a  system  of  miracles.     There  is  no  shadow  of 
a  presumption  that,  if  it  be  or  were,  we  should  have 
records  or  traces  of  such  a  system.     2.  With  respect 
;o  the  non-interruption  of  the  course  of  nature,  in 
a  vast  number  of  cases,  where  goodness  would  set-in 
;o  require  such  interruptions,  it  must  be  considered 
;hat  the  very  vastness  of  the  number  of  such  occa 
sions  would  make  such  interruptions  so  frequent  as 
»  destroy  the  whole  scheme  of  governing  the  uni- 
•erse  by  general  laws  altogether,  and  consequently 
also  any  scheme  of  attesting  a  revelation  by  miracles 
— i.  e.  facts  varying  from  an  established  general 
aw.    This,  therefore,  is  rather  a  presumption  against 
God's  interfering  so  often  as  to  destroy  the  scheme 
of  general  laws,  or  makes  the  sequences  of  things 
rregular  and  capricious,  than  against  His  interfering  - 
>y  miracles  to  attest  a  revelation,  which,  alter  that 
attestation,  should    be  left  to  be  propagated  and 
maintained  by  ordinary  means ;  and  the  very  man 
ner  of  the  attestation  of  which  (»'.  c.  by  miracles) 
mplies  .hat  there  is  a  regular  and  uniform  course 
of  nature,  to  which  God  is  to  be  expected  to  adhere 
n  all  other  cases.     3.  It  should  be  considered  whe 
ther  the  just  conclusion  from  the  rest  of  the  pre 
misses  be  (not  so  mucii  this — that  it  is  unlikely  God 
would  make  a  revelation — as)  this — that  it  is  likely 
,hat,  if  God  made  a  revelation,  he  would  make  it 
ubjcct  to  similar  conditions  to  thosi  under  which 


MIRACLES 

He  bestows  His  other  special  favours  upon  man 
kind — i.  e.  bestow  it  first  directly  upon  some  small 
part  of  the  race,  and  impose  upon  them  the  respon 
sibility  of  communicating  its  benefits  to  the  rest. 
It  is  thus  that  He  acts  with  respect  to  superior 
strength  and  intelligence,  and  in  regard  to  the  bless 
ings  of  civilization  tuid  scientific  knowledge,  of 
which  the  greater  part  of  mankind  have  always 
been  left  destitute. 

Indeed,  if  by  "the  course  of  nature"  we  mean 
the  whole  course  and  series  of  God's  government 
jf  the  universe  canned  on  by  fixed  laws,  we  cannot 
at  all  determine  beforehand  that  miracles  ft.  e.  oc 
casional  deviations,  under  certain  moral  circum 
stances,  from  the  mere  physical  series  of  causes  and 
effects)  are  not  a  part  of  the  course  of  nature  in 
that  sense ;  so  that,  for  aught  we  know,  beings  with 
a  larger  experience  than  ours  of  the  history  of  the 
universe,  might  be  able  confidently  to  predict,  from 
that  experience,  the  occurrence  of  such  miracles  in 
a  world  circumstanced  like  ours.  In  this  point  of 
view,  as  Bishop  Butler  has  truly  said,  nothing  less 
than  knowledge  of  another  world,  placed  in  circum 
stances  similar  to  our  own,  can  furnish  an  argument 
from  analogy  against  the  credibility  of  miracles. 

And,  again,  for  aught  we  know,  personal  inter 
course,  or  what  Scripture  seems  to  call  "  seeing 
God  face  to  face,"  may  be  to  myriads  of  beings  the 
normal  condition  of  God's  intercourse  with  His 
intelligent  and  moral  creatures ;  and  to  them  the 
state  of  things  in  which  we  are,  debarred  from  such 
direct  perceptible  intercourse,  may  be  most  contrary 
to  their  ordinary  experience ;  so  that  what  is  to  us 
miraculous  in  the  history  of  our  race  may  seem 
most  accordant  with  the  course  of  nature,  or  their 
customary  experience,  and  what  is  to  us  most  na 
tural  may  appear  to  them  most  strange. 

After  all  deductions  and  abatements  have  been 
made,  however,  it  must  be  allowed  that  a  certain 
antecedent  improbability  must  always  attach  to 
miracles,  considered  as  events  varying  from  the 
ordinary  experience  of  mankind  as  known  to  us: 
because  likelihood,  verisimilitude,  or  resemblance  to 
what  we  know  to  have  occurred,  is,  by  the  consti 
tution  of  our  minds,  the  very  ground  of  proba 
bility  ;  and,  though  we  can  perceive  reasons,  from 
the  moral  character  of  God,  for  thinking  it  likely 
that  He  may  have  wrought  miracles,  yet  we  know 
too  little  of  His  ultimate  designs,  and  of  the  best 
mode  of  accomplishing  them,  to  argue  confidently 
from  His  character  to  His  acts,  except  where  the 
connexion  between  the  character  and  the  acts  is 
demonstrably  indissoluble — as  in  the  case  of  acts 
rendered  necessary  by  the  attributes  of  veracity 
and  justice.  Miracles  are,  indeed,  in  the  notion  of 
them,  no  breach  of  the  high  generalization  that 
"  similar  antecedents  have  similar  consequents ;" 
nor,  necessarily,  of  the  maxim  that  "  God  works  by 
general  laws;"  because  we  can  see  some  laws  of 
miracles  (as  e.  g.  that  they  are  infrequent,  and 
that  they  are  used  as  attesting  signs  of,  or  in  con 
junction  with,  revelations),  and  may  suppose  more  ; 
but  they  do  vary,  when  taken  apart  from  their 
proper  evidence,  from  this  rule,  that  "  what 
general  experience  would  lead  us  to  regard  as 
similar  antecedents  are  similar  antecedents ;"  be 
cause  the  only  assignable  specific  difiererce  observ 
able  by  us  in  the  antecedents  in  the  case  of  miracles, 
and  in  the  case  of  the  experiments  from  the  analogy 
of  which  they  vary  in  their  physical  phenomena, 
consists  in  the  moral  antecedents  ;  and  these,  in 
cases  of  physical  phenomena,  we  generally  throw 


MIKACLES 


379 


out  of  the  account ;  nor  have  we  grounds  h  firiori 
:hr  concluding  with  confidence  that  these  are  not  la 
se  thrown  out  of  the  account  here  also,  although 
we  can  see  that  the  moral  antecedents  here  (such  as 
the  fitness  for  attesting  a  revelation  like  the  Chrii- 
;ian)  are,  in  many  important  respects,  different  from 
those  which  the  analogy  of  experience  teaches  us  to 
disregard  in  estimating  the  probability  of  physical 
events. 

But,  in  order  to  form  a  fair  judgment,  we  must 
take  in  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and, 
amongst  the  rest,  the  testimony  on  which  the 
miracle  is  reported  to  us. 

Our  belief,  indeed,  in  human  testimony  seems  to 
rest  upon  the  same  sort  of  instinct  on  which  our 
belief  in  the  testimony  (as  it  may  be  called)  of 
nature  is  built,  and  is  to  be  checked,  modified,  ai'd 
confirmed  by  a  process  of  experience  similar  to  that 
which  is  applied  in  the  other  case.  As  we  learn, 
by  extended  obsei-vation  of  nature  and  the  com 
parison  of  analogies,  to  distinguish  the  real  laws  of 
physical  sequences  from  the  casual  conjunctions  of 
phenomena,  so  are  w«  taught  in  the  same  manner 
to  distinguish  the  circumstances  under  which  human 
testimony  is  certain  or  incredible,  probable  or  sus 
picious.  The  circumstances  of  our  condition  force 
us  daily  to  make  continual  observations  upon  the 
phenomena  of  human  testimony  ;  and  it  is  a  matter 
upon  which  we  can  make  such  experiments  with 
peculiar  advantage,  because  every  man  carries  within 
his  own  breast  the  whole  sum  of  the  ultimate 
motives  which  can  influence  human  testimony. 
Hence  arises  the  aptitude  of  human  testimony  for 
overcoming,  and  more  than  overcoming,  almost  any 
antecedent  improbability  in  the  thing  reported. 

'  The  conviction  produced  by  testimony,"  says 
Bishop  Young,  "  is  capable  of  being  carried  much 
higher  than  the  conviction  produced  by  experience : 
and  the  reason  is  this,  because  there  may  be  con 
current  testimonies  to  the  truth  of  one  individual 
fact;  whereas  there  can  be  no  concurrent  experi 
ments  with  regard  to  an  individual  experiment. 
There  may,  indeed,  be  analogous  experiments,  in 
the  same  manner  as  there  may  be  analogous  testi 
monies;  but,  in  any  course  of  nature,  there  is  but 
one  continued  series  of  events :  whereas  in  testi 
mony,  since  the  same  event  may  be  observed  by 
different  witnesses,  their  concurrence  is  capable  of' 
producing  a  conviction  more  cogent  than  any  that  is 
derived  from  nny  other  species  of  events  in  the 
course  of  nature.  In  material  phenomena  the  pro 
bability  of  an  expected  event  arises  solely  from 
analogous  experiments  made  previous  to  the  event; 
and  this  probability  admits  of  indefinite  increase 
from  the  unlimited  increase  of  the  number  of  these 
previous  experiments.  The  credibility  of  a  witness 
likewise  arises  from  our  experience  of  the  veracity 
of  previous  witnesses  in  similar  cases,  and  admits  o1 
unlimited  increase  according  to  the  number  of  tl« 
previous  witnesses.  But  there  is  another  source  of 
the  increase  of  testimony,  likewise  unlimited,  derived 
from  the  number  of  concurrent  witnesses.  The 
evidence  of  testimony,  therefore,  admitting  of  un 
limited  increase  on  two  different  accounts,  and  the 
physical  probability  admitting  only  of  one  of  them, 
the  former  is  capable  of  indefinitely  surpassing  the 
latter." 

It  is  to  be  observed  also  that,  in  the  case  of  the 
Christian  miracles,  the  truth  of  the  facts,  varying 
:\x  they  do  from  our  ordinal  y  experience,  is  far  mora 
credible  than  the  falsehood  of  a  testimony  so  cir 
cumstanced  as  that  by  which  they  are  attested  ; 


380 


MIKACLES 


because  of  the  former  strange  phenomena — the 
miracles — a  reasonable  known  cause  may  be  assigned 
adequate  to  the  effect — namely,  the  will  of  God 
producing  them  to  accredit  a  revelation  that  seems 
not  unworthy  of  Him  ;  whereas  of  the  latter — the 
falsehood  of  such  testimony — no  adequate  cause 
wnatever  can  be  assigned,  or  reasonably  conjectured. 

So  manifest,  indeed,  is  this  inherent  power  of 
testimony  to  overcome  antecedent  improbabilities, 
that  Hume  is  obliged  to  allow  that  testimony  may 
be  so  circumstanced  as  to  require  us  to  believe,  in 
some  cases,  the  occurrence  of  things  quite  at  variance 
with  genera/  experience ;  but  he  pretends  to  shew 
that  testimony  to  such  facts  when  connected  with 
religion  can  never  be  so  circumstanced.  The  reasons 
for  this  paradoxical  exception  are  partly  general 
remarks  upon  the  proneness  of  men  to  believe  in 
portents  and  prodigies  ;  upon  the  temptations  to  the 
indulgence  of  pride,  vanity,  ambition,  and  such  like 
passions  which  the  human  mind  is  subject  to  in 
religious  matters,  and  the  strange  mixture  of  enthu 
siasm  and  knavery,  sincerity  and  craft,  that  is  to  be 
found  in  fanatics,  and  partly  particular  instances  of 
confessedly  false  miracles  that  seem  to  be  supported 
by  an  astonishing  weight  of  evidence — such  as 
those  alleged  to  have  been  wrought  at  the  tomb  of 
the  Abod  Paris. 

But  (1)  little  weight  can  be  attached  to  such 
general  reflexions,  as  discrediting  any  particular 
body  of  evidence,  until  it  can  be  shewn  in  detail  that 
they  apply  to  the  special  circumstances  of  that 
particular  body  of  evidence.  In  reality,  most  of 
his  general  objections  are,  at  bottom,  objections  to 
human  testimony  itself — ».  e.  objections  to  the  me 
dium  by  which  alone  we  can  know  what  is  called 
the  general  experience  of  mankind,  from  which 
general  experience  it  is  that  the  only  considerable 
objection  to  miracles  arises.  Thus,  by  general 
reflexions  upon  the  proverbial  fallaciousness  of 
"  travellers'  stories  "  we  might  discredit  all  ante 
cedently  improbable  relations  of  the  manners  or 
physical  peculiarities  of  foreign  lands.  By  general 
reflexions  upon  the  illusions,  and  even  temptations 
to  fraud,  under  which  scientific  observers  labour, 
we  might  discredit  all  scientific  observations.  By 
general  reflexions  upon  the  way  in  which  supine 
credulity,  and  passion,  and  party-interest  have  dis 
coloured  civil  history,  we  might  discredit  all  ante 
cedently  improbable  events  in  civil  history — such 
as  the  conquests  of  Alexander,  the  adventures  of  the 
Buonaparte  family,  or  the  story  of  the  late  mutiny 
in  India.  (2)  The  same  experience  which  informs  us 
that  credulity,  enthusiasm,  craft,  and  a  mixture  of 
these,  have  produced  many  false  religions  and  false 
stories  of  miracles,  informs  us  also  what  sort  of 
religions,  and  what  sort  of  legends,  these  causes  have 
produced,  and  are  likely  to  produce  ;  and,  if,  upon 
a  comparison  of  the  Christian  religion  and  miracles 
with  these  products  of  human  weakness  or  cunning, 
there  appear  specific  differences  between  the  two, 
unaccountable  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  common 
origin,  this  not  only  diminishes  the  presumption  of 
a  common  origin,  but  raises  a  distinct  presumption 
the  other  way — a  presumption  strong  in  proportion 
to  the  extent  and  accuracy  of  our  induction.  Re 
markable  specific  differences  of  this  kind  have  been 
j>otnted  out  by  Christian  apologists  in  respect  of  the 
nature  of  the  religion — the  nature  of  the  miracles — 
and  the  circumstances  of  the  evidence  by  which 
they  are  attested. 

Of  the  first  kind  are,  for  instance,  those  assigned 
by  Warturion.  in  his  Divine  Legation ;  and  by 


MIRACLES 

Archbp.  Whately,  in  his  Essays  on  the  Peculiari 
ties  of  the  Christian  Religion,  and  on  Romanism. 

Differences  of  the  second  and  third  kind  ar« 
largely  assigned  by  almost  every  writer  on  Christian 
evidences.  We  refer,  specially,  for  sample  sake,  to 
Leslie's  Short  Method  with  the  Deists — to  Bisnop 
Douglas's  Criterion,  in  which  he  fully  examines  tho 
pretended  parallel  of  the  cures  at  the  tomb  of  Abbe" 
Paris, — and  to  Paley's  Evidences,  which  may  be 
most  profitably  consulted  in  the  late  edition  by 
Archbp.  Whately. 

Over  and  above  the  direct  testimony  of  humnn 
witnesses  to  the  Bible-miracles,  we  have  also  wh  it 
may  be  called  the  indirect  testimony  of  events  con 
firming  the  former,  and  raising  a  distinct  presump 
tion  that  some  such  miracles  must  have  been  wrc ugh-.. 
Thus,  for  example,  we  know,  by  a  copious  induc 
tion,  that,  in  no  nation  of  the  antient  world,  and  in 
no  nation  of  the  modem  world  unacquainted  with 
the  Jewish  or  Christian  revelation,  has  the  know 
ledge  of  the  one  true  God  as  the  Creator  and 
Governor  of  the  world,  and  the  public  worship  of 
Him,  been  kept  up  by  the  mere  light  of  nature,  or 
formed  the  groundwork  of  such  religions  as  men 
have  devised  for  themselves.  Yet  we  do  find  that, 
in  the  Jewish  people,  though  no  way  distinguished 
above  others  by  mental  power  or  high  civilization, 
and  with  as  strong  natural  tendencies  to  idolatry  as 
others,  this  knowledge  and  worship  was  kept  up 
from  a  very  early  period  of  their  history,  and, 
according  to  their  uniform  historical  tradition,  kept 
up  by  revelation  attested  by  undeniable  miracles. 

Again,  the  existence  of  the  Christian  religion,  as 
the  belief  of'  the  most  considerable  and  intelligent 
part  of  the  world,  is  an  undisputed  fact ;  and  it  is 
also  certain  that  this  religion  originated  (as  far  as 
human  means  are  concerned)  with  a  handful  of 
Jewish  peasants,  who  went  about  preaching — on 
the  very  spot  where  Jesus  was  crucified — that  He 
had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  had  been  seen  by,  and 
had  conversed  with  them,  and  afterwards  iscended 
into  heaven.  This  miracle,  attested  by  them  as 
eyewitnesses,  was  the  very  ground  and  foundation 
of  the  religion  which  they  preached,  and  it  was 
plainly  one  so  circumstanced  that,  if  it  had  been 
false,  it  could  easily  have  been  proved  to  be  false. 
Yet,  though  the  preachers  of  it  were  everywhere 
persecuted,  they  had  gathered,  before  they  died, 
large  churches  in  the  country  where  the  facts  were 
best  known,  and  through  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  Egypt, 
and  Italy ;  and  these  churches,  notwithstanding  the 
severest  persecutions,  went  on  increasing  till,  ir. 
about  300  years  after,  this  religion — »'.  e.  a  religion 
which  taught  the  worship  of  a  Jewish  peasant  who 
had  been  ignominiously  executed  as  a  malefactor- 
became  the  established  religion  of  the  Roman  empire 
and  has  ever  since  continued  to  be  the  prevailing 
religion  of  the  civilized  world. 

It  would  plainly  be  impossible,  in  such  an  article 
as  this,  to  enumerate  all  the  various  lines  of  con* 
firmation — from  the  prophecies,  from  the  morality, 
from  the  structure  of  the  Bible,  from  the  state  of 
the  world  before  and  after  Christ — &c.,  which  all 
converge  to  the  same  conclusion.  But  it  will  be 
manifest  that  almost  all  of  them  are  drawn  ulti 
mately  from  the  analogy  of  experience,  and  that  the 
conclusion  to  which  they  tend  cannot  be  rejected 
without  holding  something  contrary  to  the  analogies 
of  experience  from  which  they  are  drawn.  For,  it 
must  be  remembered  that  rftsbelieving  one  thing 
necessarily  involves  believing  its  contradictory. 

It  is  manifest   that,  if  the  miraculous  far.ts  o/ 


MIRACLES 

rhristianity  did  not  really  occur,  the  stones  about 
them  must  have  originated  either  in  fraud,  or  in 
fancy.  The  ;oarse  explanation  of  them  by  the 
hypothesis  of  unlimited  fraud,  has  been  generally 
abandoned  in  modern  times:  but,  in  Germany 
especially,  many  persons  of  great  acuteness  have 
long  laboured  to  account  for  them  by  referring 
them  to  fancy.  Of  these  there  have  been  two  prin 
cipal  schools — the  Naturalistic,  and  the  Mythic. 

1.  The  Naturalists  suppose  the  miracles  to  have 
been  natural  events,  more  or  less  unusual,  that  were 
mistaken  for  miracles,  through  ignorance  or  enthu 
siastic  excitement.     But  the  result  of  their  labours 
in  detail  has  been  (as  Strauss  has  shewn  in  his  Leben 
Jesii)  to  turn  the  New  Testament,  as  interpreted  by 
them,  into  a  narrative  far  less  credible  than  any 
narrative  of  miracles  could  be:  just  as  a  novel,  made 
up  of  a   multitude  of  surprising  natural   events 
crowded  into  a  few  days,  is  less  consistent  with  its 
own  data  than  a  tale  of  genii  and  enchanters.  "  Some 
infidels,"  says  Archbishop  Whately, "  have  laboured 
to  prove,  concerning  some  one  of  our  Lord's  miracles 
that  it  might  have  been  the  result  of  an  accidental 
conjuncture   of  natural   circumstances ;    and   they 
endeavour  to  prove  the  same  concerning  another, 
and  so  on ;  and  thence  infer  that  all  of  them,  occur 
ring  as  a  series,  might  have  been  so.     They  might 
argue,  in  like  manner,  that,  because  it  is  not  very 
improbable  one  may  throw  sixes  in  any  one  out  of 
an  hundred  throws,  therefore  it  is  no  more  impro 
bable  that  one  may  throw  sixes  a  hundred  times 
running."     The  truth  is,  that  everything  that  is 
improbable   in   the  mere  physical  strangeness  of 
miracles  applies  to  such  a  series  of  odd  e  rents  as 
these  explanations  assume  ;  while  the  hypothesis  of 
their  non-miraculous  character  deprives  us  of  the 
means  of  accounting  for  them  by  the  extraordinary 
intei-position  of  the  Deity.     These  and  other  objec 
tions  to  the  thorough-going  application  of  the  natu 
ralistic  method,  led  to  the  substitution  in  its  place  o: 
2.  The    Mythic    theory — which    supposes    the 
N.  T.  Scripture-narratives  to  have  been  legends 
not  stating  the  grounds  of  men's  belief  in  Chris 
tianity,  but  springing  out  of  that  belief,  and  em 
bodying  the  idea  of  what  Jesus,  if  he  were  the 
Messiah,  must  have  been  conceived  to  have  done  in 
order  to  fulfil  that  character,   and   was  therefore 
supposed  to  have  done.     But  it  is  obvious  that  this 
leaves  the  origin  of  the  belief,  that  a  man  who  die 
not  fulfil  the  idea  of  the  Messiah  in  any  one  re 
markable  particular,  was  the  Messiah — wholly  un 
accounted  for.     It   begins  with    assuming  that 
person  of  mean  condition,  who  was  publicly  executei 
as  a  malefactor,  and  who  wrought  no  miracles,  was 
so  earnestly  believed  to  be  their  Messiah  by  a  grea 
multitude  of  Jews,  who  expected  a  Messiah  tha 
toos  to  work  miracles,  and  was  not  to  die,  but  to 
be  a  great  conquering  prince,  that  they  modifie 
their  whole  religion,  in  which  they  had  been  brough 
up,  into  accordance  with  that  new  belief,  and  ima 
gined  a  whole  cycle  of  legends  to  embody  their  ide? 
and  brought  the  whole  civilized  world  ultimate! 
to  accept  their  system.     It  is  obvious,  also,  that  ai 
the  arguments  for  the  genuineness  and  authenticit 
of  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.  bring  them  up  to 
date  when  the  memory  of  Christ's  real  history  wa 


so  recent,  as  to  make  the  substitution  of  a  set  of 
mere  legends  in  its  place  utterly  incredible ;  and  it 
is  obvious,  also,  that  the  gravity,  simplicity,  histo 
rical  decorum,  and  consistency  with  what  we  know 
of  the  circumstances  of  the  times  in  which  the 
events  are  said  to  have  occurred,  observable  in  the 


381 

narratives  of  the  N.  T.,  make  it  impossible  reason 
ably  to  accept  them  as  mere  m;/ths.     The  same 
apj>ears  from  a  comparison  of  them  with  the  style 
of  writings  really  mythic — as  the  Gospels  of  the  in 
fancy,  of  Nicodemus,  &c. — and  with  heathen  or  Mo- 
amedan  legends ;  and  from  the  omission  of  matters 
hich  a  mythic  fancy  would  certainly  have  fas- 
ened  on.    Thus,  though  John  Baptist  was  typified 
y    Elijah,  the   great  wonder-worker  of  the  Old 
estement,  there  are  no  miracles  ascribed  to  John 
Baptist.     There  are  no  miracles  ascribed  to  Jesus 
uring  His  infancy  and  youth.     There  is  no  de- 
cription  of  His  personal  appearance;  no  account  of 
lis  adventures  in  the  world  of  spirits ;  no  miracles 
iscribed  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  very  little  said 
bout  her  at  all ;  no  account  of  the  martyrdom  of 
ny  apostle,  but  of  one,  and  that  given  in  the  driest 
nanner,  &c. — and   so  in  a  hundred   other  parti- 
ulars. 

It  is  observable  that,  in  the  early  ag-js,  the  fact 
hat  extraordinary  miracles  were  wrought  by  Jesus 
\nd  His  apostles,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  gene 
rally  denied  by  the  opponents  of  Christianity.  They 
,eem  always  to  have  preferred  adopting  the  expe 
dient  of  ascribing  them  to  art  magic  and  the  power 
if  evil  spirits.  This  we  learn  from  the  N.  T. 
tself;  from  such  Jewish  writings  as  the  Sepher 
Toldoth  Jeshu ;  from  the  Fragments  of  Celsius, 
Porphyry,  Hierocles,  Julian,  &c.,  which  have  come 
down  to  us,  and  from  the  popular  objections  which 
;he  ancient  Christian  Apologists  felt  themselves 
concerned  to  grapple  with.  We  are  not  to  suppose, 
icwever,  that  this  would  have  been  a  solution 
which,  even  in  those  days,  would  have  been  natu 
rally  preferred  to  a  denial  of  the  foots,  if  the  tacts 
could  have  been  plausibly  denied.  On  the  contrary, 
it  was  plainly,  even  then,  a  forced  and  improbable 
solution  of  such  miracles.  For  man  did  not  com 
monly  ascribe  to  magic  or  evil  demons  an  unlimited 
power,  any  more  than  we  ascribe  an  unlimited 
power  to  mesmerism,  imagination,  and  the  occult 
and  irregular  forces  of  nature.  We  know  that  in 
two  instances,  in  the  Gospel  narrative, —  the  cure  of 
the  man  born  blind  and  the  Resurrection — the 
Jewish  priests  were  unable  to  pretend  such  a  solu 
tion,  and  were  driven  to  maintain  unsuccessfully  a 
charge  of  fraud  ;  and  the  circumstances  of  the  Chris 
tian  miracles  were,  in  almost  all  respects,  so  utterly 
unlike  those  of  any  pretended  instances,  of  magical 
wonders,  that  the  apologists  have  little  difficulty  in 
refuting  this  plea.  This  they  do  generally  fom  the 
following  considerations. 

(1.)  The  greatness,  number,  completeness,  and 
publicity  of  the  miracles.  (2.)  The  natural  bene 
ficial  tendency  of  the  doctrine  they  attested.  (15.) 
The  connexion  of  them  with  a  whole  scheme  of  re 
velation  extending  from  the  first  origin  of  the  hu 
man  race  to  the  time  of  Christ. 

It  is  also  to  be  considered  that  the  circumstance 
that  the  world  was,  in  the  times  of  the  apostles, 
full  of  Thaumaturgists,  in  the  shape  of  exorcists, 
magicians,  ghost-seers,  &c.,  is  a  strong  presumption 
that,  in  order  to  command  any  special  attention  and 
gain  any  large  and  permanent  success,  the  apostles 
and  their  followers  must  have  exhibited  works  quite 
different  from  any  wonders  which  people  had  been 


accustomed  to  see.  This  presumption  is  confirmed 
by  what  we  read,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  con 
cerning  the  effect  produced  upon  the  Samaritans  by 
Philip  the  Evangelist  in  opposition  to  the  prestige* 
of  Simon  Magus. 

This  evasion  of  the  force  of  the  Christian  minv 


382 


MIRACLES 


cles,  by  referring  them  to  the  power  of  evil  spirits, 
has  seldom  been  seriously  recurred  to  in  modern 
limes;  but  the  English  infidels  of  the  last  century 
employed  it  as  a  kind  of  argumcntum  ad  hominem, 
to  tease  and  embarrass  their  opponents— contending 
that,  as  the  Bible  speaks  of  «'  lying  wonders  "  of 
Antichrist,  and  relates  a  long  contest  of  apparent 
miracles  between  Moses  and  the  Egyptian  magi 
cians,  Christians  could  not  on  their  own  principles, 
have  any  certainty  that  miracles  were  not  wrought 
by  evil  spirits. 

In  answer  to  this,  some  divines  (as  Bishop  Fleet- 
wood  in  his  Dialogues  on  Miracles')  have  endea 
voured  to  establish  a  distinction  in  the  nature  of 
the  works  themselves,  between  the  seeming  miracles 
within  the  reach  of  intei-mediate  spirits, — and  the 
true  miracles,  which  can  only  be  wrought  by  God — 
and  others  (as  Bekker,  in  his  curious  work  Le 
Monde  Enchante,  and  Fanner,  in  his  Case  of  the 
Demoniacs)  have  entirely  denied  the  power  of  in 
termediate  spirits  to  interfere  with  the  course  of 
nature.  But,  without  entering  in*o  these  ques 
tions,  it  is  sufficient  to  observe — 

(1.)  That  the  light  of  nature  gives  us  no  reason  to 
believe  that  there  are  any  evil  spirits  having  power 
to  interfere  with  the  course  of  nature  at  all. 

(2.)  That  it  shows  us  that,  if  there  be,  they  are 
continually  controlled  from  exercising  any  such 
power. 

(3.)  That  the  records  we  are  supposed  to  have 
of  such  an  exercise  in  the  Bible,  show  us  the  power 
there  spoken  of,  as  eterted  completely  under  the 
control  of  God,  and  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it 
evident  to  all  candid  observers  where  the  advantage 
lay,  and  to  secure  all  well-disposed  and  reasonable 
persons  from  any  mistake  in  the  matter. 

(4.)  That  the  circumstances  alleged  by  the  early 
Christian  apologists — -the  number,  greatness,  bene 
ficence,  and  variety  of  the  Bible  miracles — their 
connexion  with  prophecy  and  a  long  scheme  of 
things  extending  from  tne  creation  down — the  cha 
racter  of  Christ  and  His  apostles — and  the  manifest 
tendency  of  the  Christian  religion  to  serve  the  cause 
of  truth  and  virtue — make  it  as  incredible  that  the 
miracles  attesting  it  should  have  been  wrought  by 
evil  beings,  as  it  is  that  the  order  of  nature  should 
proceed  from  such  beings.  For,  as  we  gather  the 
character  of  the  Creator  from  His  works,  and  the 
moral  instincts  which  He  has  given  us  ;  so  we  gather 
the  character  of  the  author  of  revelation  from  His 
works,  and  from  the  drift  and  tendency  of  that 
revelation  itself.  This  last  point  is  sometimes 
shortly  and  unguardedly  expressed  by  saying,  that 
"  the  doctrine  proves  the  miracles :"  the  meaning  of 
which  is  not  that  the  particular  doctrines  which 
miracles  attest  must  first  be  proved  to  be  true 
nliunda,  before  we  can  believe  that  any  such  works 
were  wrought — (which  would,  manifestly,  be  making 
the  miracles  no  attestation  at  all) — but  the  mean 
ing  is,  that  the  whole  body  of  doctrine  in  connexion 
with  which  the  miracles  are  alleged,  and  its  ten 
dency,  if  it  were  divinely  revealed,  to  answer  visible 
good  ends,  makes  it  reasonable  to  think  that  the 
miracles  by  which  it  is  attested  were,  if  they  were 
wrought  at  all,  wrought  by  God. 

Particular  theories  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
miracles  have  been  wrought  are  matters  rather 
curious  than  practically  useful.  In  all  such  cases 
we  must  bear  in  mind  the  great  maxim  Suim- 
LITA9  NATURAE  LONGE  SUPERAT  SUBTILITATKM 
MENTIS  HUMAXAE.  Malebranche  regarded  the 
Deity  ai  the  sole  agent  in  nature,  acting  always  by 


MIRACLES 

general  laws  ;  but  He  conceived  those  general  laws 
to  contain  the  original  provision  that  the  manner  ol 
the  Divine  acting  should  modify  itself,  under  certain 
conditions,  according  to  the  particular  volitions  ol 
finite  intelligences.  Hence,  He  explained  man  s 
apparent  power  over  external  nature;  and  hence 
also  He  regarded  miracles  as  the  result  of  particular 
volitions  of  angels,  employed  by  the  Deity  in  the 
government  of  the  world.  This  was  called  the 
system  of  occasional  causes. 

The  system  of  Clarke  allowed  a  proper  real, 
though  limited,  efficiency  to  the  wills  of  inferior 
intelligences,  but  denied  any  true  powers  to  matter. 
Hence  he  referred  the  phenomena  of  the  course  of 
material  nature  immediately  to  the  will  of  God  as 
their  cause ;  nr.aking  the  distinction  between  natural 
events  and  miracles  to  consist  in  this,  that  the 
former  happen  according  to  what  is,  relatively  to 
us,  God's  usual  way  of  working,  and  the  latter  ac 
cording  to  His  unusual  way  of  working. 

Some  find  it  easier  to  conceive  of  miracles  as  not 
really  taking  place  in  the  external  order  of  nature, 
but  in  the  impressions  made  by  it  upon  our  minds. 
Others  deny  that  there  is,  in  any  miracle,  the  pro 
duction  of  anything  new  or  the  alteration  of  any 
natural  power  ;  and  maintain  that  miracles  are  pro 
duced  solely  by  the  intensifying  of  known  natural 
powers  already  in  existence. 

It  is  plain  that  these  various  hypotheses  are 
merely  ways  in  which  different  minds  find  it  more 
or  less  easy  to  conceive  the  mode  in  which  miracle* 
may  have  been  wrought. 

Another  question  more  curious  than  practical,  is 
that  respecting  the  precise  period  when  miracles 
ceased  in  the  Christian  Church.  It  is  plain,  that 
whenever  they  ceased  in  point  of  fact,  they  ceased 
relatively  to  us  wherever  a  sufficient  attestation  of 
them  to  our  faith  fails  to  be  supplied. 

It  is  quite  true,  indeed,  that  a  real  miracle,  and 
one"  sufficiently  marked  out  to  the  spectators  as  a 
real  miracle,  may  be  so  imperfectly  reported  to  us, 
as  that,  if  we  have  only  that  imperfect  report,  there 
may  be  little  to  show  conclusively  its  miraculous 
character;  and  that,  therefore,  in  rejecting  ac 
counts  of  miracles  so  circumstanced,  we  may  pos 
sibly  be  rejecting  accounts  of  what  were  real  mi 
racles.  But  this  is  an  inconvenience  attending 
probable  evidence  from  its  very  nature.  In  reject 
ing  the  improbable  testimony  of  the  most  menda 
cious  of  witnesses,  we  may,  almost  always,  be 
rejecting  something  which  is  really  true.  But  this 
would  be  a  poor  reason  for  acting  on  the  testimony 
of  a  notorious  liar  to  a  story  antecedently  impro 
bable.  The  narrowness  and  imperfection  of  the 
human  mind  is  such  that  our  wisest  and  most  prudent 
calculations  are  continually  baffled  by  unexpected 
combinations  of  circumstances,  upon  which  we 
could  not  have  reasonably  reckoned.  But  this  is 
no  good  ground  for  not  acting  upon  the  calculations 
of  wisdom  and  prudence ;  because,  after  all,  such 
calculations  are  in  the  long  run  our  surest  guides. 

It  is  quite  true,  also,  that  several  of  the  Scripture 
miracles  are  so  circumstanced,  that  if  the  reports 
we  have  of  them  stood  alone,  and  came  down  to  us 
only  by  the  channel  of  ordinary  history,  we  should 
be  without  adequate  evidence  of  their  miraculous 
character;  and  therefore  those  particular  miracles 
are  not  to  us  (though  they  doubtless  were  to  the 
original  spectators,  who  could  mark  all  the  circum 
stances),  by  themselves  and  taken  alone,  sign  d — or 
proper  evidences  of  revelation.  But,  then,  thej 
may  be  very  proper  o>ije<-ts  of'  faith,  though  not  the 


MIRACLES 

grounds  of  it.  For  (1.)  these  incidents  are  really 
reported  to  us  as  parts  of  a  course  of  things  which 
we  have  good  evidence  for  believing  to  have  been 
miraculous ;  and,  as  Bishop  Butler  justly  observes, 
"  supposing  it  acknowledged,  that  our  Saviour  spent 
some  years  in  a  course  of  working  miracles,  there  is 
no  more  peculiar  presumption  worth  mentioning, 
against  His  having  exerted  His  miraculous  powers 
in  a  certain  degree  greater,  than  in  a  certain  degree 
less ;  in  one  or  two  more  instances,  than  in  one  or 
two  fewer :  in  this,  than  in  another  manner."  And 
(2.)  these  incidents  are  reported  to  us  by  writers 
whom  we  have  good  reasons  for  believing  to  have 
been,  not  ordinary  historians,  but  persons  specially 
assisted  by  the  Divine  Spirit,  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  a  correct  account  of  the  ministry  of  our  Lord 
and  His  apostlis. 

In  the  case  of  the  Scripture  miracles,  we  must 
Je  careful  to  distinguish  the  particular  occasions 
upon  which  they  were  wrought,  from  their  general 
purpose  and  design  ;  yet  not  so  as  to  overlook  the 
connexion  between  these  two  things. 

There  are  but  few  miracles  recorded  in  Scripture 
of  which  the  whole  character  was  merely  evidential 
— few,  that  is,  that  were  merely  displays  of  a  super 
natural  power  made  for  the  sole  purpose  of  attesting 
a  Divine  Ilevelation.  Of  this  character  were  the 
change  of  Moses'  rod  into  a  serpent  at  the  burning 
bush,  tha  burning  bush  itself,  the  going  down 
of  the  shadow  upon  the  sun-dial  of  Ahaz,  and  some 
Others. 

In  general,  however,  the  miracles  recorded  in 
Scripture  have,  besides  the  ultimate  purpose  of 
affording  evidence  of  a  Divine  interposition,  some 
immediate  temporary  purposes  which  they  were 
apparently  wrought  to  serve, — such  as  the  curing 
of  diseases,  the  feeding  of  the  hungry,  the  relief  of 
innocent,  or  the  punishment  of  guilty  persons. 
These  immediate  temporary  ends  are  not  without 
value  in  reference  to  the  ultimate  and  general  design 
of  miracles,  as  providing  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
revelation  ;  because  they  give  a  moral  character  to 
the  works  wrought,  which  enables  them  to  display 
not  only  the  power,  but  the  other  attributes  of  the 
agent  performing  them.  And,  in  some  cases,  it 
would  appear  that  miraculous  works  of  a  particular 
tind  were  selected  as  emblematic  or  typical  of  some 
characteristic  of  the  revelation  which  they  were 
intended  to  attest.  Thus,  e.  g,,  the  cure  of  bodily 
diseases  not  only  indicated  the  general  benevolence 
of  the  Divine  Agent,  but  seems  sometimes  to  be 
referred  to  as  an  emblem  of  Christ's  power  to  remove 
the  disorders  of  the  soul.  The  gift  of  tongues  appears 
to  have  been  intended  to  manifest  the  universality 
of  the  Christian  dispensation,  by  which  all  languages 
were  consecrated  to  the  worship  of  God.  The  cast 
ing  out  of  demons  was  a  type  and  pledge  of  the 
presence  of  a  Power  that  was  ready  to  "  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil,"  in  every  sense. 

In  this  point  of  view,  Christian  miracles  may  be 
fitly  regarded  as  specimens  of  a  Divine  Power,  alleged 
to  be  present — specimens  so  circumstanced  as  to 
make  obvious,  and  bring  under  the  notice  of  common 
understandings,  the  operations  of  a  Power — the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost — which  was  really  supernatural, 
but  did  not,  in  its  moral  effects,  reveal  itself  exter 
nally  as  supernatural.  In  this  sense,  they  seem  to 
be  called  the  manifestation  or  exhibition  of  the  Spirit 
— outward  phenomena  which  manifested  sensibly 
His  presence  and  operation  in  the  Church :  and  the 
record  of  these  miracles  becomes  evidence  to  us  of 
the  invisible  presence  of  Christ  in  His  Church,  and 


MIRACLES 


383 


of  His  government  of  it  through  all  ages ;  though 
that  presence  is  of  such  a  nature  as  not  to  be  imme 
diately  distinguishable  from  the  operation  of  known 
moral  motives,  and  that  government  is  carried  on  so 
as  not  to  interrupt  the  ordinary  course  of  things. 

In  the  case  of  the  Old  Testament  miracles,  again, 
in  order  fully  to  understand  their  evidential  cha 
racter,  we  must  consider  the  general  nature  and 
design  of  the  dispensation  with  which  they  were 
connected.  The  general  design  of  that  dispensation 
appears  to  have  been  to  keep  up  in  one  particular 
race  a  kuowledge  of  the  one  true  God,  and  of  the 
promise  of  a  Messiah  in  whom  "  all  the  families  of 
the  earth  "  should  be  "  blessed."  And  in  order  to 
this  end,  it  appears  to  have  been  necessary  that,  for 
some  time,  God  should  have  assumed  the  character 
of  the  local  Tutelary  Deity  and  Prince  of  that  parti 
cular  people.  And  from  this  peculiar  relation  in 
which  He  stood  to  the  Jewish  people  (aptly  called 
by  Josephus  a  THEOCRACY)  resulted  the  necessity 
of  frequent  miracles,  to  manifest  and  make  sensibly 
perceptible  His  actual  presence  among  and  govern 
ment  over  them.  The  miracles,  therefore,  of  the 
Old  Testament  are  to  be  regarded  as  evidential  of 
the  theocratic  government ;  and  this  again  is  to  be 
conceived  of  as  subordinate  to  the  further  purpose 
of  preparing  the  way  for  Christianity,  by  keeping  up 
in  the  world  a  knowledge  of  the  true  God  and  of 
His  promise  of  a  Redeemer.  In  this  view,  we  can 
readily  understand  why  the  miraculous  administra 
tion  of  the  theocracy  was  withdrawn,  as  soon  as  the 
purpose  of  it  had  been  answered  by  working  deeply 
and  permanently  into  the  mind  of  the  Jewish  people 
the  two  great  lessons  which  it  was  intended  to  teach 
them  ;  so  that  they  might  be  safely  left  to  the 
ordinary  means  of  instruction,  until  the  publication 
of  a  fresh  revelation  by  Christ  and  His  Apostles 
rendered  further  miracles  necessary  to  attest  their 
mission.  Upon  this  view  also  we  can  perceive  that 
the  miracles  of  the  Old  Testament,  upon  wh  itever 
immediate  occasions  they  may  have  been  wrought, 
were  subordinate  (and,  in  general,  necessaiy)  to  the 
design  of  rendering  possible  the  establishment  in 
due  time  of  such  a  religion  as  the  Christian ;  and 
we  can  perceive  further  that,  though  the  Jewish 
theocracy  implied  in  it  a  continual  series  of  miracles, 
yet — as  it  was  only  temporary  and  local — those 
miracles  did  not  violate  God's  general  purpose  of 
carrying  on  the  government  of  the  world  by  the 
ordinary  laws  of  nature ;  whereas  if  the  Christian 
dispensation — which  is  permanent  and  universal — 
necessarily  implied  in  it  a  series  of  constant  miracles, 
that  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  general  purpose 
of  carrying  on  the  government  of  the  world  by  those 
ordinary  laws. 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  the  Old  Testa 
ment  miracles,  we  must  also  remember  that  the 
whole  structure  of  the  Jewish  O3conomy  had  re 
ference  to  the  peculiar  exigency  of  the  circum 
stances  of  a  people  imperfectly  civilized,  and  is  so 
distinctly  described  in  the  New  Testament,  as  deal 
ing  with  men  according  to  the  "  hardness  of  their 
hearts,"  and  being  a  system  of  "  weak  and  beg 
garly  elements,"  and  a  rudimentary  instruction  for 
"  children"  who  were  in  the  condition  of  "slaves." 
We  are  not,  therefore,  to  judge  of  the  probability 
of  the  miracles  wrought  in  support  of  that  O2conomy 
(so  far  as  the  forms  under  which  they  were  wrought 
are  concerned)  as  if  those  miracles  were  immediately 
intended  for  ourselves.  We  are  not  justified  in 
arguing  either  that  those  miracles  are  incredible 
because  wrought  in  such  a  manner  as  tl:nt,  \i 


383  a 


MIRACLES 


addressed  to  us,  they  would  lower  our  conceptions 
of  the  Divine  Being ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
because  those  miracles — vought  under  the  circum 
stances  of  the  Jewish  o>xmomy — are  credible  and 
ought  to  be  believed,  there  is  therefore  no  reason 
for  objecting  against  stories  of  similar  miracles  al 
leged  to  have  been  wrought  under  the  quite  different 
«rcumstances  of  the  Christian  dispensation. 

in  dealing  with  human  testimony,  it  may  be 
further  needful  to  notice  (though  very  briefly) 
some  refined  subtilties  that  have  been  occasionally 
introduced  into  this  discussion. 

It  has  been  sometimes  alleged  that  the  freedom 
of  the  human  will  is  a  circumstance  which  renders 
reliance  upon  the  stability  of  laws  in  the  case  of 
human  conduct  utterly  precarious.  "  In  arguing," 
it  is  said,  "  that  human  beings  cannot  be  supposed 
to  have  acted  in  a  particular  way,  because  that 
would  involve  a  violation  of  the  analogy  of  human 
conduct,  so  far  as  it  has  been  observed  in  all  ages, 
we  tacitly  assume  that  the  human  mind  is  unalter 
ably  determined  by  fixed  laws,  in  the  same  way  as 
material  substances.  But  this  is  not  the  case  on 
the  hypothesis  of  the  freedom  of  the  will.  The 
very  notion  of  a  free  will  is  that  of  a  faculty  which 
determines  itself ;  and  which  is  capable  of  choosing 
a  line  of  conduct  quite  repugnant  to  the  influence 
of  any  motive  however  strong.  There  is  therefore 
no  reason  for  expecting  that  the  operations  of  human 
volition  will  be  conformable  throughout  to  any  fixed 
rule  or  analogy  whatever." 

In  reply  to  this  far-sought  and  barren  refinement, 
we  may  observe — 1.  That,  if  it  be  worth  anything, 
it  is  an  objection  not  merely  against  the  force  of 
human  testimony  in  religious  matters,  but  against 
human  testimony  in  general,  and,  indeed,  against 
all  calculations  of  probability  in  respect  of  human 
conduct  whatsoever.  2.  That  we  have  already 
shown  that,  even  in  respect  of  material  phenomena, 
our  practical  measure  of  probability  is  not  derived 
from  any  scientific  axioms  about  cause  and  effect, 
or  antecedents  and  consequences,  but  simply  from 
the  likeness  or  unlikeness  of  one  thing  to  another; 
and  therefore,  not  being  deduced  from  premises 
which  assume  causality,  cannot  be  shaken  by  the 
denial  of  causality  in  a  particular  case.  3.  That 
the  thing  to  be  accounted  for,  on  the  supposition  of 
the  falsity  of  the  testimony  for  Christian  miracles, 
is  not  accounted  for  by  any  such  capricious  principle 
as  the  arbitrary  freedom  of  the  human  will;  be 
cause  the  thing  to  be  accounted  for  is  the  agreement 
of  a  number  of  witnesses  in  a  falsehood,  for  the 
propagation  of  which  they  could  have  no  intelligible 
inducement.  Now,  if  we  suppose  a  number  of  in 
dependent  witnesses  to  have  determined  themselves 
bj  rational  motives,  then,  under  the  circumstances 
of  this  particular  instance,  their  agreement  in  a 
true  story  is  sufficiently  accounted  for.  But,  if  we 
suppose  them  to  have  each  determined  themselves 
by  mere  whim  and  caprice,  then  their  agreement 
in  the  same  false  story  is  not  accounted  for  at  all. 
The  concurrence  of  such  a  number  of  chances  is 
utterly  incredible.  4.  And  finally  we  remark  that 
no  sober  maintainers  of  the  freedom  of  the  human 
will  claim  for  it  any  such  unlimited  power  of  self- 
determination  as  this  objection  supposes.  The  free 
dom  of  the  huuan  will  exhibits  itself  either  in 
cases  where  there  is  no  motive  for  selecting  one 
rather  than  ano  her  among  many  possible  courses 
of  action  that  li<  before  us — in  which  cases  it  is  to 
be  observed  that  there  is  nothing  moral  in  its  elec 
tions  whatsoever : — or  in  cases  in  which  there  is  a 


MIRACLES 

conflict  of  motives,  and,  e.  g.,  passion  nnd  appetite, 
or  custom  or  temporal  interest,  draw  us  one  way, 
and  reason  or  conscience  another.  In  these  lattei 
cases  the  maintainers  of  the  freedom  of  the  will 
contend  that,  under  certain  limits,  we  can  determine 
ourselves  (not  by  no  motive  at  all,  but)  by  either 
of  the  motives  actually  operating  upon  our  minds. 
Now  it  is  manifest  that  if,  in  the  case  of  the  wit 
nesses  to  Christianity,  we  can  show  that  theirs  was 
a  case  of  a  conflict  of  motives  (as  it  clearly  teas), 
and  can  show,  further,  that  their  conduct  is  incon 
sistent  with  one  set  of  motives,  the  reasonable 
inference  is  that  they  determined  themselves,  in 
point  of  fact,  by  the  other.  Thus,  though  in  the 
case  of  a  man  strongly  tried  by  a  conflict  of 
motives,  we  might  not,  even  with  the  fullest  know 
ledge  of  his  character  and  circumstances,  have  been 
able  to  predict  beforehand  how  he  would  act,  that 
would  be  no  reason  for  denying  that,  after  we  had 
come  to  know  how  he  did  act,  we  could  tell  by 
what  motives  he  had  determined  himself  in  choosing 
that  particular  line  of  conduct. 

It  has  been  often  made  a  topic  of  complaint 
against  Hume  that,  in  dealing  with  testimony  as  a 
medium  for  proving  miracles,  he  has  resolved  its 
force  entirely  into  our  experience  of  its  veracity, 
and  omitted  to  notice  that,  antecedently  to  all  ex 
perience,  we  are  predisposed  to  give  it  credit  by  a 
kind  of  natural  instinct.  But,  however  metaphy 
sically  erroneous  Hume's  analysis  of  our  belief  in 
testimony  may  have  been,  it  is  doubtful  whether, 
in  this  particular  question,  such  a  mistake  is  of  any 
great  practical  importance.  Our  original  predis 
position  is  doubtless  (whether  instinctive  or  not) 
a  predisposition  to  believe  all  testimony  indiscrimi 
nately  :  but  this  is  so  completely  checked,  modified, 
and  controlled,  in  after-life,  by  experience  of  the 
circumstances  under  which  testimony  can  be  safely 
relied  upon,  and  of  those  in  which  it  is  apt  to  mis 
lead  us,  that,  practically,  our  experience  in  these 
respects  may  be  taken  as  a  not  unfair  measure  of 
its  value  as  rational  evidence.  It  is  also  to  be 
observed  that,  while  Hume  has  omitted  this  original 
instinct  of  belief  in  testimony,  as  an  element  in  his 
calculations,  he  has  also  omitted  to  take  into  ac 
count,  on  the  other  side,  any  original  instinctive 
belief  in  the  constancy  of  the  laws  of  nature,  or 
expectation  that  our  future  experiences  will  resemble 
our  past  ones.  In  reality,  he  seems  to  have  resolved 
both  these  principles  into  the  mere  association  of 
ideas.  And,  however  theoretically  erroneous  he 
may  have  been  in  this,  still  it  seems  manifest  that, 
by  making  the  same  mistake  on  both  sides,  he  has 
made  one  error  compensate  another ;  and  so — as  fat 
as  this  branch  of  the  argument  is  concerned — 
brought  out  a  practically  correct  result.  As  we 
can  only  learn  by  various  and  repeated  experiences 
under  what  circumstances  we  can  safely  trust  our 
expectation  of  the  recurrence  of  apparently  similar 
phenomena,  that  expectation,  being  thus  continually 
checked  and  controlled,  modifies  itself  into  accord 
ance  with  its  rule,  and  ceases  to  spring  at  all  when- 
it  would  be  manifestly  at  variance  with  its  director. 
And  the  same  would  seem  to  be  the  case  with  our 
belief  in  testimony. 

The  argument,  indeed,  in  Hume's  celebrated 
Essay  on  Miracles,  was  very  far  from  being  a  new 
one.  It  had,  as  Mr.  Coleridge  has  pointed  out,  been 
distinctly  indicated  by  South  in  his  sermon  on  the 
incredulity  of  St.  Thomas  ;  and  there  is  a  remark 
able  statement  of  much  the  same  argument  pit 
into  the  mouth  of  VVoolston's  Advocate,  in  Sherlurk's 


MIRACLES 

Trial  of  the  Witnesses.  The  restatement  ot  it, 
however,  by  a  TOrson  of  Hume's  abilities,  was  of 
service  in  putting  men  upon  a  more  accurate  ex 
amination  of  the  true  nature  and  measure  of  proba 
bility  ;  and  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Hume's  bold 
statement  of  his  unbounded  scepticism  had,  as  he 
contended  it  would  have,  many  useful  results  in 
stimulating  inquiries  that  might  not  otherwise  have 
been  suggested  to  thoughtful  men,  or,  at  least,  not 
prosecuted  with  sufficient  zeal  and  patience. 

Bishop  Butlei  seems  to  have  been  very  sensible 
of  the  imperfect  state,  in  his  own  time,  of  the  logic 
of  Probability;  and,  though  he  appears  to  have 
formed  a  more  accurate  conception  of  it,  than  the 
Scotch  school  of  Philosophers  who  succeeded  and 
undertook  to  refute  Hume ;  yet  there  is  one  passage 
in  which  we  may  perhaps  detect  a  misconception  of 
the  subject  in  the  pages  of  even  this  great  writer. 

"There  is,"  he  observes,  "a  very  strong  pre 
sumption  against  common  speculative  truths,  and 
against  the  most  ordinary  facts,  before  the  proof 
of  them,  which  yet  is  overcome  by  almost  any 
proof.  There  is  a  presumption  of  millions  to  one 
against  the  story  of  Caesar  or  any  other  man.  For, 
suppose  a  number  of  common  facts  so  and  so  cir 
cumstanced,  of  which  one  had  no  kind  of  proof, 
should  happen  to  come  into  one's  thoughts  ;  every 
one  would,  without  any  possible  doubt,  conclude 
them  to  be  false.  And  the  like  may  be  said  of  a 
single  common  fact.  And  from  hence  it  appears 
that  the  question  of  importance,  as  to  the  matter 
before  us,  is,  concerning  the  degree  of  the  peculiar 
presumption  against  miracles :  not,  whether  there 
be  any  peculiar  presumption  at  all  against  them. 
For  if  there  be  a  presumption  of  millions  to  one 
against  the  most  common  facts,  what  can  a  small 
presumption,  additional  to  this,  amount  to,  though 
it  be  peculiar  ?  It  cannot  be  estimated,  and  is  as 
nothing."  (Analogy,  part  2,  c.  ii.) 

It  is  plain  that,  in  this  passage,  Butler  lays  no 
stress  upon  the  peculiarities  of  the  story  of  Caesar, 
which  he  casually  mentions.  For  he  expressly  adds 
"  or  of  any  other  man ;"  and  repeatedly  explains 
that  what  he  says  applies  equally  to  any  ordinary 
facts,  or  to  a  single  feet ;  so  that,  whatever  be  his 
drift  (and  it  must  be  acknowledged  to  be  somewhat 
obscure),  he  is  not  constructing  an  argument  similai 
to  that  which  has  been  pressed  by  Archbishop 
Whately,  in  his  Historic  Doubts  respecting  Napo 
leon  Bonaparte.  And  this  becomes  still  more 
evident,  when  we  consider  the  extraordinary  medium 
by  which  he  endeavours  to  show  that  there  is  a 
presumption  of  millions  to  one  against  such  "  com* 
mon ordinary  facts"  as  he  is  speaking  of.  For  th< 
way  in  which  he  proposes  to  estimate  the  presump 
tion  against  ordinary  facts  is,  by  considering  thi 
likelihood  of  their  being  anticipated  beforehand  bj 
a  person  guessing  at  random.  But,  surely,  this  i 
not  a  measure  of  the  likelihood  of  the  facts  con 
sidered  in  themselves,  but  of  the  likelihood  of  th 
coincidence  of  the  facts  with  a  rash  and  arbitrary 
anticipation.  The  case  of  a  person  guessing  before 
hand,  and  the  case  of  a  wihiess  reporting  what  has 
occun-ed,  are  essentially  different.  In  the  commoi 
instance,  for  example,  of  an  ordinary  die,  before  th 
cast,  there  is  nothing  to  determine  my  mind,  wit 
any  probability  of  a  correct  judgment,  to  the  selec 
tion  of  any  one  of  the  six  faces  rather  than  another 
and,  therefore,  we  rightly  say  that  there  arc  fiv 
chances  to  one  against  any  one  side,  considered  a 
thus  arbitrarily  selected.  But  when  a  person,  wh 
has  had  opportunities  of  observing  the  cast,  report 
VOL.  ii. 


MIRACLES 


3834 


o  me  the  presentation  of  a  particular  face,  inere  is 
vidently,  no  such  presumption  against  the  coinci- 
ence  of  his  statement  and  the  actual  fact ;  because 
e  has,  by  the  supposition,  had  ample  means  of 
scertaining  the  real  state  of  the  occurrence.  And 
t  seems  plain  that,  in  the  case  of  a  credible  witness, 
we  should  as  readily  believe  his  report  of  the  cast  ot 
die  with  a  million  of  sides,  as  of  one  with  only 
ix ;  though  in  respect  of  a  random  guess  before- 
iand,  the  chances  against  the  correctness  of  the 
;uess  would  be  vastly  greater  in  the  former  case, 
han  in  that  of  an  ordinary  cube. 

Furthermore,  if  any  common  by-stander  were  to 
•eport  a  series  of  successive  throws,  as  having  taken 
ilace  in  the  following  order — 1,  6,  3,  5,  6,  2 — no 
me  would  feel  any  difficulty  in  receiving  his  testi 
mony  ;  but  if  we  further  become  aware  that  he,  or 
anybody  else,  had  beforehand  professed  to  guess  or 
>redict  that  precise  series  of  throws  upon  that  par- 
icular  occasion,  we  should  certainly  no  longer  give 
lis  report  the  same  ready  and  unhesitating  acquies 
cence.  We  should  at  once  suspect,  either  that  the 
witness  was  deceiving  us,  or  that  the  die  was 
oaded,  or  tampered  with  in  some  way,  to  produce 
a  conformity  with  the  anticipated  sequence.  This 
places  in  a  clear  light  the  difference  between  the  case 
of  the  coincidence  of  an  ordinary  event  with  a 
random  predetermination ,  and  the  case  of  an  ordi- 
naiy  event  considered  in  itself. 

The  truth  is,  that  the  chances  to  which  Butler 
seems  to  refer  as  a  presumption  against  ordinary 
events,  are  not  in  ordinary  cases  overcome  by  testi 
mony  at  all.  The  testimony  has  nothing  to  do  with 
them ;  because  they  are  chances  against  the  event 
considered  as  the  subject  of  a  random  vaticination, 
not  as  the  subject  of  a  report  made  by  an  actual 
observer.  It  is  possible,  however,  that,  throughout 
this  obscure  passage,  Butler  is  arguing  upon  the 
principles  of  some  objector  unknown  to  us ;  and, 
indeed,  it  is  certain  that  some  wiiters  upon  the 
doctrine  of  chances  (who  were  far  from  friendly  to 
revealed  religion)  have  utterly  confounded  together 
the  questions  of  the  chances  against  the  coincidence 
of  an  ordinary  event  with  a  random  guess,  and  ot 
the  probability  of  such  an  event  considered  by  itselt. 
But  it  should  be  observed  that  what  we  com 
monly  call  the  chances  against  an  ordinary  event  are 
not  specific,  but  particular.  They  are  chances 
against  this  event,  not  against  this  kind  of  event. 
The  chances,  in  the  case  of  a  die,  are  the  chances 
against  a  particular  face  ;  not  against  the  coming 
up  of  some  face.  The  coming  up  of  some  face  is 
not  a  thing  subject  to  random  anticipation,  and, 
therefore,  we  say  that  there  are  no  chances  against 
it  at  all.  But,  as  the  presumption  that  some  fact 
will  come  up  is  a  specific  presumption,  quite  dif 
ferent  from  the  presumption  against  any  particulai 
face  ;  so  the  presumption  against  no  face  coming 
up  (which  is  really  the  same  thing,  and  equivalent, 
to  the  presumption  against  a  miracle,  considered 
merely  in  its  physical  strangeness)  must  be  specific 
also,  and  different  from  the  presumption  against  any 
particular  form  of  such  a  miracle  selected  before 
hand  by  an  arbitrary  anticipation.  For  miraculous 
facts,  it  is  evident,  are  subject  to  the  doctrine  of 
chances,  each  in  particular,  in  the  same  way  as 
ordinary  facts.  Thus,  e.  g.  supposing  a  miracie  to 
be  wrought,  the  cube  might  be  changed  into  any 
geometrical  figure ;  and  we  can  see  no  reason  for 
selecting  one  rather  than  another,  or  the  substance 
might  be  changed  from  ivory  to  metal,  and  then  out 
metal  would  be  as  likely  as  another.  But  no  one. 

3B* 


d83  c  MIRACLES 

prol>ably,  would  sny  that  he  would  believe  the 
tpucilic  fact  of  such  a  miracle  upon  the  same  proof, 
.»•  anything  like  the  same  proof,  as  that  on  which, 
socA  a  miracle  being  supposed,  he  would  believe  the 
report  of  any  particular  form  of  it — such  form  being 
just  as  likely  beforehand  as  any  other. 

Indeed,  if  "almost  any  proof"  were  capable  of 
overcoming  presumptions  of  millions  to  one  against 
a  fact,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  we  could  reasonably 
reject  any  report  of  anything,  on  the  ground  of 
antecedent  presumptions  against  its  credibility. 

The  Ecclesiastical  Miracles  are  not  delivered  to 
us  by  inspired  historians  ;  nor  do  they  se»m  to  form 
any  part  of  the  same  series  of  events  as  the  miracles 
of  the  New  Testament. 

The  miracles  of  the  New  Testament  (setting 
aside  those  wrought  by  Christ  Himself)  appear  to 
have  been  worked  by  a  power  conferred  upon  parti 
cular  persons  according  to  a  regular  law,  in  virtue 
of  which  that  power  was  ordinarily  transmitted 
from  one  person  to  another,  and  the  only  persons 
privileged  thus  to  transmit  that  power  were  the 
Apostles.  The  only  exceptions  to  this  rule  were, 
(1.)  the  Apostles  themselves,  and  (2.)  the  family  of 
Cornelius,  who  were  the  first-fruits  of  the  Gentiles. 
In  all  other  cases,  miraculous  gifts  were  conferred 
only  by  the  laying  on  of  the  Apostles'  hands.  By 
this  arrangement,  it  is  evident  that  a  provision  was 
made  for  the  total  'ceasing  of  that  miraculous  dis 
pensation  within  a  limited  period :  because,  on  the 
death  of  the  last  of  the  Apostles,  the  ordinary  chan 
nels  would  be  all  stopped  through  which  such  gifts 
were  transmitted  in  the  Church. 

Thus,  in  Acts  viii.,  though  Philip  is  described  as 
working  many  miracles  among  the  Samaritans,  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  ever  thought  of  imparting 
the  same  power  to  any  of  his  converts.  That  is 
reserved  for  the  Apostles  Peter  and  John,  who 
confer  the  miraculous  gifts  by  the  imposition  of 
their  hands :  and  this  power,  of  imparting  mira 
culous  gifts  to  others,  is  clearly  recognized  by  Simon 
Magus  as  a  distinct  privilege  belonging  to  the  Apos 
tles,  and  quite  beyond  anything  that  He  had  seen 
exercised  before.  "  When  Simon  saw  that  through 
laying  on  of  the  Apostles'  hands  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
given,  he  offered  them  money,  saying,  Give  me  also 
this  power,  that,  on  whomsoever  I  lay  hands,  he  may 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost." 

This  separation  of  the  Rite  by  which  miraculous 
gifts  were  conferred  from  Baptism,  by  which  mem 
bers  were  admitted  into  the  Church,  seems  to  have 
been  wisely  ordained  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the 
two  ideas,  of  ordinary  and  extraordinary  gifts, 
distinct,  and  providing  for  the  approaching  cessation 
of  the  former  without  shaking  the  stability  of  an 
-.  institution  which  was  designed  to  be  a  permanent 
Sacrament  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ. 

,And  it  may  also  be  observed  in  passing,  that  this 
sante  separation  of  the  effects  of  these  two  Rites, 
affords  a  presumption  that  the  miraculous  gifts, 
bestowed,  as  far  as  we  can  see,  only  in  the  former, 
were  not  merely  the  result  of  highly  raised  enthu 
siasm  ;  because  experience  shows  that  violent  symp 
toms  of  enthusiastic  transport  would  have  been 
much  more  likely  to  have  shown  themselves  in  the 
rirst  ardour  of  conversion  than  at  a  later  period — in 
the  very  crisis  of  a  change,  than  after  that  change 
had  been  confirmed  and  settled, 

One  passage  has,  indeed,  been  appealed  to  as 
seeming  to  indicate  the  permanent  residence  of  mi- 
ivu'iilous  powers  in  the  Christian  Church  through 
»li  ages,  Mark  ivi.  17,  18.  But— 


MIUACLE8 

(1 .)  That  passage  itself  is  of  doubtful  authority, 
since  we  know  that  it  was  omitted  in  most  of  the 
Greek  MSS.  which  Eusebius  was  able  to  examine 
in  the  4th  century ;  and  it  is  still  wanting  in  somf 
of  the  most  important  that  remain  to  us. 

(2.)  It  does  not  necessarily  imply  more  than  a 
promise  that  such  miraculous  powers  should  exhibit 
themselves  among  the  immediate  converts  of  the 
Apostles. 

And  (3.)  this  latter  interpretation  is  supported 
by  what  follows — "  And  they  went  forth,  and 
preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them, 
and  confirming  the  word  with  the  accompanying 
signs." 

It  is,  indeed,  confessed  by  the  latest  and  ablest 
defenders  of  the  -ecclesiastical  miracles  that  the 
great  mass  of  them  were  essentially  a  new  dispen 
sation  ;  but  it  is  contended,  that  by  those  who  believe 
in  the  Scripture  miracles,  no  strong  antecedent  im 
probability  against  such  a  dispensation  can  be  rea 
sonably  entertained  ;  because,  for  them,  the  Scripture 
miracles  have  already  "  borne  the  brunt "  of  the 
infidel  objection,  and  "  broken  the  ice." 

But  this  is  wholly  to  mistake  the  matter. 

If  the  only  objection  antecedently  to  proof  against 
the  ecclesiastical  miracles  were  a  presumption  of 
their  impossibility  or  incredibility — simply  as  mi 
racles,  this  allegation  might  be  pertinent ;  because 
he  that  admits  that  a  miracle  has  taken  place,  can 
not  consistently  hold  that  a  miracle  as  such  is  im 
possible  or  incredible.  But  the  antecedent  pre 
sumption  against  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  rises 
upon  four  distinct  grounds,  no  one  of  which  can  I* 
properly  called  a  ground  of  infidel  objection. 

(1 .)  It  arises  from  the  very  nature  of  probabi 
lity,  and  the  constitution  of  the  human  mind,  which 
compels  us  to  take  the  analogy  of  general  expe 
rience  as  a  measure  of  likelihood.  And  this  pre 
sumption  it  is  manifest  is  neither  religious  nor 
irreligious,  but  antecedent  to,  and  involved  in,  all 
probable  reasoning. 

A  miracle  may  be  said  to  take  place  when,  under 
certain  moral  circumstances,  a  physical  consequent 
follows  upon  an  antecedent  which  general  experience 
shows  to  have  no  natural  aptitude  for  producing 
such  a  consequent ;  or,  when  a  consequent  fails  to 
follow  upon  an  antecedent  which  is  always  attended 
by  that  consequent  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature. 
A  blind  man  recovering  sight  upon  his  touching 
the  bones  of  SS.  Gervasius  and  Protasius,  is  an  in 
stance  of  the  former.  St.  Alban,  walking  after  his 
head  was  cut  off,  and  carrying  it  in  his  hand,  may 
be  given  as  an  example  of  the  latter  kind  of  miracle. 
Now,  though  such  occurrences  cannot  be  called  im 
possible,  because  they  involve  no  self-contradiction 
in  the  notion  of  them,  and  we  know  that  there  is  a 
power  in  existence  quite  adequate  to  produce  them, 
yet  they  must  always  remain  antecedently  impro 
bable,  unless  we  can  see  reasons  for  expecting  that 
that  power  will  produce  them.  The  invincible 
original  instinct  of  our  nature — without  reliance  on 
which  we  could  not  set  one  foot  before  another — 
teaches  as  its  first  lesson  to  expect  similar  eonse 
quents  upon  what  seem  similar  physical  antecedents . 
and  the  results  of  this  instinctive  belief,  checked, 
modified,  and  confirmed  bf  the  experience  of  man 
kind  in  countless  times,  piaces,  and  circumstances, 
constitutes  what  is  called  our  knowledge  of  the 
laws  of  nature.  Destroy,  or  even  shake,  this  know 
ledge,  as  applied  to  practice  in  ordinary  life,  and 
all  the  uses  and  purposes  of  life  are  at  an  end.  If 
the  real  sequences  of  things  were  liable,  like  those 


MIRACLES 

m  A  dream,  to  random  and  capricious  variations, 
on  which  no  one  could  calculate  beforehand,  there 
would  DC  no  measures  of  probability  or  improba 
bility.  If  e.  g.  it  were  a  measuring  case  whether, 
upon  immersing  a  lighted  candle  in  water,  the 
candle  should  be  extinguished,  or  the  water  igniled, 
—or,  whether  inhaling  the  common  air  should  sup 
port  life  or  produce  death — it  is  plain  that  the 
whole  course  of  the  world  would  be  brought  to  a 
stand-still.  There  would  be  no  order  of  nature  at 
all ;  and  all  the  rules  that  are  built  on  the  sta 
bility  of  that  order,  and  all  the  measures  of  judg 
ment  that  are  derived  from  it,  would  be  worth 
nothing.  We  should  be  living  in  fairy-land,  not  on 
earth. 

(2.)  This  general  antecedent  presumption  against 
miracles,  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of  general 
experience,  is  (as  we  have  said)  neither  religious  nor 
irreligious — neither  rational  nor  irrational — but 
springs  from  the  very  nature  of  probability :  and  it 
cannot  be  denied  without  shaking  the  basis  of  all 
probable  evidence,  whether  for  or  against  religion. 

Nor  does  the  admission  of  the  existence  of  the 
Deity,  or  the  admission  of  the  actual  occurrence  of 
the  Christian  miracles,  tend  to  remove  this  ante- 
c«jdent  improbability  against  miracles  circumstanced 
as  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  generally  are. 

If,  indeed,  the  only  presumption  against  miracles 
were  one  against  their  possibility — this  might  be 
truly  described  as  an  atheistic  presumption ;  and 
then  the  proof,  from  natural  reason,  of  the  existence 
of  a  God,  or  the  proof  of  the  actual  occurrence  of 
any  one  miracle  would  wholly  remove  that  pre 
sumption  ;  and,  upon  the  removal  of  that  presump 
tion,  there  would  remain  none  at  all  against  miracles, 
however  frequent  or  however  strange ;  and  mira 
culous  occurrences  would  be  as  easily  proved,  and 
also  as  likely  beforehand,  as  the  most  ordinary 
events ;  so  that  there  would  be  no  improbability  of 
a  miracle  being  wrought  at  any  moment,  or  upon 
any  conceivable  occasion ;  and  the  slightest  testi 
mony  would  suffice  to  establish  the  truth  of  any 
story,  however  widely  at  variance  with  the  analogy 
of  ordinary  experience. 

But  the  true  presumption  against  miracles  is  not 
against  their  possibility,  but  their  probability.  And 
this  presumption  cannot  be  wholly  removed  by 
showing  an  adequate  cause ;  unless  we  hold  that 
ail  presumptions  drawn  from  the  analogy  of  expe 
rience  or  the  assumed  stability  of  the  order  of 
nature  are  removed  by  showing  the  existence  of  a 
cause  capable  of  changing  the  order  of  nature — 
i.  e.  unless  we  hold  that  the  admission  of  God's 
existence  involves  the  destruction  of  all  measures 
of  probability  drawn  from  the  analogy  of  expe 
rience.  The  ordinary  sequences  of  •  nature  are, 
doubtless,  the  result  of  the  Divine  will.  But  to 
suppose  the  Divine  will  to  vary  its  mode  of  opera 
tion  in  conjunctures,  upon  which  it  would  be  im 
possible  to  calculate,  and  under  circumstances  appa 
rently  similar  to  these  which  are  perpetually 
recurring,  would  be  to  suppose  that  the  course  of 
things  is  (to  all  intents  and  purposes  of  human  life) 
as  mutable  and  capricious  at.  if  it  were  governed 
by  mere  chance. 

Nor  can  the  admission  that  God  has  actually 
wrought  such  miracles  as  attest  the  Christian  re 
ligion,  remove  the  general  presumption  against 
miracles  as  improbable  occurrences.  The  evidence 
ou  which  revelation  stands  has  proved  that  the 
Almighty  has.  umie"  special  circumstances  and  lor 
special  cuds,  exerted  his  power  of  changing  the 


MIRACLES 


383  d 


ordinary  course  of  nature.  This  may  be  fairly  reii«j 
on  as  mitigating  the  presumption  against  miracles 
under  the  same  circumstances  as  those  which  it  liac 
established  :  but  miracles  which  cannot  avail  them 
selves  of  the  benefit  of  that  law  (as  it  may  be  called) 
of  miracles,  which  such  conditions  indicate,  are 
plainly  involved  in  all  the  antecedent  difficulties 
which  attach  to  miracles  in  general,  as  varying  from 
the  law  of  nature,  besides  the  special  difficulties 
which  belong  to  them  as  vaiying  from  the  law  of 
miracles,  so  far  as  we  know  anything  of  that  law. 
And  it  is  vain  to  allege  that  God  may  have  other 
ends  for  miracles  than  those  plain  ones  for  which 
the  Scripture  miracks  were  wrought.  Such  a  plea 
can  be  of  no  weight,  unless  we  can  change  at  plea 
sure  the  "  may  "  into  a  "  must "  or  "  has."  Until 
the  design  appear,  we  cannot  use  it  as  an  element 
of  probability;  but  we  must,  in  the  meanwhile, 
determine  the  question  by  the  ordinary  rules  whicn 
regulate  the  proof  of  facts.  A  mere  "  may  "  is 
counterbalanced  by  a  "may  not."  It  cannot  surely 
be  meant  that  miracles  have,  by  the  proof  of  a 
revelation,  ceased  to  be  miracles  — »'.  e.  rare  and 
wonderful  occurrences — so  as  to  make  the  chances 
equal  of  a  miracle  and  an  ordinary  event.  And  it 
this  be  not  held,  then  it  must  be  admitted  that  the 
laws  which  regulate  miracles  are,  in  some  way  or 
other,  laws  which  render  them  essentially  strange 
or  unusual  events,  and  insure  the  general  stability 
of  the  course  of  nature.  Whatever  other  elements 
enter  into  the  law  of  miracles,  a  necessary  infre- 
quency  is  one  of  them :  and  until  we  can  see  some 
of  the  positive  elements  of  the  law  of  miracles  in 
operation  (i.  e.  some  of  the  elements  which  do  not 
check,  but  require  miracles)  this  negative  element, 
which  we  do  see,  must  act  strongly  against  the  pro 
bability  of  their  recurrence. 

It  is  indeed  quite  true  that  Christianity  has 
revealed  to  us  the  permanent  operation  of  a  super 
natural  order  of  things  actually  going  on  around  us. 
But  there  is  nothing  in  the  notion  of  such  a  super 
natural  system  as  the  Christian  dispensation  is,  to 
lead  us  to  expect  continual  interferences  with  the  com 
mon  course  of  nature.  Not  the  necessity  of  proving 
its  supernatural  character:  for  (1.)  that  has  been 
sufficiently  proved  once  for  all,  and  the  proof  suffi 
ciently  attested  to  us,  and  (2.)  it  is  not  pretended 
that  the  mass  of  legendary  miracles  are,  in  this 
sense,  evidential.  Nor  are  such  continual  miracles 
involved  in  it  by  express  promise,  or  by  the  very 
frame  of  its  constitution.  For  they  manifestly  are 
not.  "So  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  if  a  man 
should  cast  seed  into  the  ground,  and  should  sleep 
and  rise,  night  and  day,  and  the  seed  should  spring 
and  grow  up  he  knoweth  not  how,"  &c. — the  pi- 
rable  manifestly  indicating  that  the  ordinary  visible 
course  of  things  is  only  interfered  with  by  the 
Divine  husbandman,  in  planting  and  reaping  the 
great  harvest.  Nor  do  the  answers  given  to  prayer, 
or  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  our  minds, 
interfere  discoverably  with  any  one  law  of  outward 
nature,  or  of  the  inward  economy  of  our  meuta" 
frame.  The  system  of  grace  is,  indeed,  superna  • 
tural,  but,  in  no  sense  and  in  no  case,  preternatural. 
It  disturbs  in  no  way  the  regular  sequences  which 
all  men's  experience  teaches  them  to  anticipate  as 
not  improbable. 

(3.)  It  is  acknowledged  by  the  ablest  defenders  of 
the  ecclesiastical  miracles  that,  for  the  most  part, 
they  belong  to  those  classes  of  miracles  which  arc 
described  ao  ambiguous  and  tentative — i.  e.  they  aiv 
casts  111  winch  the  eficct  if  it  occurred  at  all)  may 


383  « 


MIRACLES 


have  been  the  result  of  natural  causes,  and  where, 
.pon  the  application  of  the  same  means,  the  desired 
eflect  was  only  sometimes  produced.  These  cha- 
i  actors  are  always  highly  suspicious  marks.  And 
though  it  is  quite  true — as  has  been  remarked 
already — that  real  miracles,  and  such  as  were 
clearly  discernible  as  such  to  the  original  spectators, 
m;iy  be  so  imperfectly  reported  to  us  as  to  wear 
an  ambiguous  appearance — it  still  remains  a  viola 
tion  of  all  the  laws  of  evidence  to  admit  a  narrative 
which  leaves  a  miracle  ambiguous  as  the  ground  of 
our  belief  that  a  miracle  has  really  been  wrought. 
If  an  inspired  author  declare  a  particular  effect  to 
have  been  wrought  by  the  immediate  interposition 
of  God,  we  then  admit  the  miraculous  nature  of 
that  event  on  his  authority,  though  his  description 
of  its  outward  circumstances  may  not  be  full  enough 
to  enable  us  to  form  such  a  judgment  of  it  from 
the  report  of  those  circumstances  alone :  or  if, 
amongst  a  series  of  indubitable  miracles,  some  are 
but  hastily  and  loosely  reported  to  us,  we  may 
safely  admit  them  as  a  part  of  that  series,  though 
if  we  met  them  in  any  other  connexion  we  should 
view  them  in  a  different  light.  Thus,  if  a  skilful 
ind  experienced  physician  records  his  judgment  o( 
the  nature  of  a  particular  disorder,  well  known  to 
him,  and  in  the  diagnosis  of  which  it  was  almost 
impossible  for  him  to  be  mistaken,  we  may  safely 
take  his  word  for  that,  even  though  he  may  have 
mentioned  only  a  few  of  the  symptoms  which 
marked  a  particular  case :  or,  if  we  knew  that  the 
plague  was  raging  at  a  particular  spot  and  time, 
•t  would  require  much  less  evidence  to  convince  us 
that  a  particular  person  had  died  of  that  distemper 
thsre  and  then,  than  if  hrs  death  were  attributed  to 
that  disease  in  a  place  which  the  plague  had  never 
visited  for  centuries  before  and  after  the  alleged 
occurrence  of  his  case. 

(4.)  Though  it  is  not  true  that  the  Scripture- 
miracles  have  so  "  borne  the  brunt "  of  the  a  priori 
objection  to  miracles  as  to  remove  all  peculiar  pre 
sumption  against  them  as  improbable  events,  there 
is  a  sense  in  which  they  may  be  truly  said  to  have 
prepared  the  way  for  those  of  the  ecclesiastical 
legends.  But  it  is  one  which  aggravates,  instead 
of  extenuating,  their  improbability.  The  narratives 
of  the  Scripture-miracles  may  veiy  probably  have 
tended  to  raise  an  expectation  of  miracles  in  the 
minds  of  weak  and  credulous  persons,  and  to  en 
courage  designing  men  to  attempt  an  imitation  of 
them.  And  this  suspicion  is  confirmed  when  we 
observe  that  it  is  precisely  those  instances  of  Scrip 
ture-miracles  which  are  most  easily  imitable  by 
fraud,  or  those  which  are  most  apt  to  strike  a  wild 
and  mythical  fancy,  which  seem  to  be  the  types 
which — with  extravagant  exaggeration  and  distor 
tion — are  principally  copied  in  the  ecclesiastical 
miracles.  In  thi»  sense  it  may  be  said  that  the 
Scripture  narratives  "  broke  the  ice,"  and  prepared 
the  way  for  a  whole  succession  of  legends  ;  just  as 
any  great  and  striking  character  is  followed  by  a 
host  of  imitators,  who  endeavour  to  reproduce  him, 
not  by  copying  whai  is  reilly  essential  to  his  great 
ness,  but  by  exaggerating  :md  distorting  some  minor 
peculiarities  in  which  iiis  great  qualities  may  some 
times  have  been  exhibited. 

But. — apart  from  any  leading  preparation  thus 
afforded — we  know  that  the  ignorance,  fraud,  and 
enthusiasm  of  mankind  have  in  almost  every  ac;<> 
and  country  produced  such  a  numerous  spawn  of 
spurious  prodigies,  as  to  make  false  stories  of  mi- 
nelcs,  under  certain  circumstances,  a  flung  ro  be 


MIRACLES 

naturally  expocted.  Heiue.  unless  it  can  be  di* 
tinctly  shown,  from  the  nature  of  the  ca.<e,  that 
narratives  of  miracles  are  not  attributable  to  suck 
causes — that  they  are  not  the  offspring  of  such  a 
parentage — the  reasonable  rules  of  evidence  seem  to 
require  that  we  should  refer  them  to  their  usual 
and  best  known  causes. 

Nor  can  there  be,  as  some  weak  persons  are  apt 
to  imagine,  any  impiety  in  such  a  course.  On  th<> 
contrary,  true  piety,  or  religious  reverence  of  God, 
requires  us  to  abstain  with  scrupulous  care  from 
attributing  to  Him  any  works  which  we  have  not 
good  reason  for  believing  Him  to  have  wrought. 
It  is  not  piety,  but  profane  audacity,  which  ven 
tures  to  refer  to  God  that  which,  according  to  the 
best  rules  of  probability  which  He  has  Himseli 
furnished  us  with,  is  most  likely  to  have  been  the 
product  of  human  ignorance,  or  fraud,  or  folly. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  we  may  conclude  thai 
the  mass  of  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  do  not  form 
any  part  of  the  same  series  as  those  related  in 
Scripture,  which  latter  are,  therefore,  unafl'ected  by 
any  decision  we  may  come  to  with  respect  to  the 
former ;  and  that  they  are  pressed  by  the  weight 
of  three  distinct  presumptions  against  them  — being 
improbable  (1)  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of 
nature;  (2)  as  varying  from  the  analogy  of  the 
Scripture-miracles ;  (3)  as  resembling  those  legend 
ary  stories  which  are  the  known  product  of  the 
credulity  or  imposture  of  mankind. 

The  controversy  respecting  the  possibility  of  mi 
racles  is  as  old  as  philosophic  literature.  There  is  a 
very  clear  view  of  it,  as  it  stood  in  the  Pagan  world, 
given  by  Cicero  in  his  books  de  Divinatwne.  In  the 
works  of  Josephus  there  are,  occasionally,  suggestions 
of  naturalistic  explanations  of  0.  T.  miracles :  but 
these  seem  rather  thrown  out  for  the  purpose  of 
gratifying  sceptical  Pagan  readers  than  as  expressions 


of  his  own  belief. 
Jewish  opinion  are, 


The  other  chief  authorities  for 
Maimonides,  Moreh  Nebochim, 


lib.  2,  c.  35,  and  the  Pirke  Aboth,  in  Surenhusius' 
Mishna,  torn.  iv.  p.  469,  and  Abarbanel,  Miphaloth 
Elohim,  p.  93.  It  is  hardly  worth  while  noticing 
the  extravagant  hypothesis  of  Cardan  (De  contra- 
dictione  Medicorum,  1.  2,  tract.  2)  and  of  some 
Italian  atheists,  who  referred  the  Christian  miracles 
to  the  influence  of  the  stars.  But  a  new  era  in  the 
dispute  began  with  Spinoza's  Tractatus  Thcologico- 
politici,  which  contained  the  germs  of  almost  all  the 
infidel  theories  which  have  since  appeared.  A  list 
of  the  principal  replies  to  it  may  be  seen  in  Fabricius. 
Delectus  Argumentorum,  &c.,  c.  43,  p.  697,  Ham 
burg,  1725. 

A  full  account  of  the  controversy  in  England  with 
the  deists,  during  the  last  century,  will  be  found  in 
Leland's  View  of  the  Deistical  Writers,  reprinted  at 
London,  1836. 

The  debate  was  renewed,  about  the  middle  of  that 
centuiy,  by  the  publication  of  Hume's  celebrateo. 
essay  —  the  chief  replies  to  which  are:  Principal 
Campbell's  Dissertation  on  Miracles;  Key's  Nor- 
•isian  Lectures,  vol.  i.  pp.  127-200 ;  Bp.  Elrington's 
Donnellan  Lectures,  Dublin,  1796 ;  Dr.  Thomas 
Brown,  On  Cause  and  Effect;  Paley's  Evidences 
[  Introduction) ;  Archbp.  Whately,  Logic  (Appendix), 
and  his  Historic  Doubts  respectintj  Napoleon  Bono- 
tarte  [the  argument  of  which  the  writer  of  this 
article  has  attempted  to  apply  to  the  objections  of 
Strauss  in  Historic  Certainties,  or  the  Chronicle*  oj 
Ecnarf,  Parker,  London,  18'>-].  .Sec  also  an  in 
teresting  work  bv  the  lato  Dean  Lyail,  I'rujjocilia 
Prophctica,  reprinted  18ol,  Kivinvjton.  London 


MIRIAM 

Con/pare  also  Bp.  Douglas,  Criterion,  or  Miracles  \ 
Examined,  &c.,  London,  1754. 

Within  the  last  few  years  the  controversy  has 
been  reopened  by  the  late  Professor  Baden  Powell  in 
The  Unity  of  Worlds,  and  some  remarks  on  the 
study  of  evidences  published  in  the  now  celebrated 
volume  of  Essays  and  Reviews.  It  would  be  pre 
mature,  at  present,  to  give  a  list  of  the  replies  to  so 
recent  a  work. 

The  question  of  the  ecclesiastical  miracles  was 
clightly  touched  by  Spencer  in  his  notes  on  Origen 
against  Celsus,  and  more  fully  by  Le  Moine;  but 
did  not  attract  general  attention  till  Middleton  pub 
lished  his  famous  Free  Enquiry,  1748.  Several 
replies  were  written  by  Dodwell  (junior),  Chapman, 
Church,  &c.,  which  do  not  seem  to  have  attracted 
much  permanent  attention.  Some  good  remarks  on 
the  general  subject  occur  in  Jortin's  Remarks  on 
Ecclesiastical  History,  and  in  Warburton's  Julian. 
This  controversy  also  has  of  late  years  been  re 
opened  by  Dr.  Newman,  in  an  essay  on  miracles 
originally  prefixed  to  a  translation  of  Fleury's 
Ecclesiastical  History,  and  since  republished  in  a 
separate  form.  Dr.  Newman  had  previously,  while 
a  Protestant,  examined  the  whole  subject  of  miracles 
in  an  article  upon  Apollonius  Tyanaeus  in  the 
Encyclopaedia  Metropolitans.  [W.  F.] 

MIK'IAM  (D'-IO,   "their  rebellion:"   LXX. 
x    T  :  • 

Mapidp. ;  hence  Joseph.  Ma.ptdu.vr] :  in  the  N.  T. 
Napid/j.  or  yiapia  ;  Mapidfj.  being  the  form  always 
employed  for  the  nominative  case  of  the  name  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  though  it  is  declined  Wlapias,  Wlapicf. ; 
while  J/lapla,  is  employed  in  all  cases  for  the  three 
other  Maries).  The  name  in  the  0.  T.  is  given  to 
two  persons  only ;  the  sister  of  Moses,  and  a  de 
scendant  of  Caleb.  At  the  time  of  the  Christian 
era  it  seems  to  have  been  common.  Amongst  others 
who  bore  it  was  Herod's  celebrated  wife  and  victim, 
Mariamne.  And  through  the  Virgin  Mary,  it  has 
become  the  most  frequent  female  name  in  Chris 
tendom. 

1.  MIRIAM,  the  sister  of  Moses,  was  the  eldest  of 
that  sacred  family ;  and  she  first  appears,  probably 
as  a  7oung  girl,  watching  her  infant  brother's  cradle 
in  the  Nile  (Ex.  ii.  4),  and  suggesting  her  mother 
as  a  nurse  (ib.  7).  The  independent  and  high  posi 
tion  given  by  her  superiority  of  age  she  never  lost. 
"  The  sister  of  Aaron  "  is  her  Biblical  distinction 
(Ex.  xv.  20).  In  Num.  xii.  1  she  is  placed  before 
Aaron  ;  and  in  Mic.  vi.  4  reckoned  as  amongst  the 
Three  Deliverers — "  I  sent  before  thee  Moses  and 
Aaron  and  Miriam."  She  is  the  first  personage  in 
that  household,  to  whom  the  prophetic  gifts  are 
directly  ascribed — "  Miriam  the  Prophetess"  is  her 
acknowledged  title  (Ex.  xv.  20).  The  prophetic 
power  showed  itself  in  her  under  the  same  form  as 
that  which  it  assumed  in  the  days  of  Samuel  and 
David, — poetry,  accompanied  with  music  and  pro- 
»-«ssions.  The  only  instance  of  this  prophetic  gift 
«  when,  after  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  she  takes 
a  cymbal  in  her  hand,  and  goes  forth,  like  the 
Hebrew  maidens  in  later  times  after  a  victory 
(Judg.  v.  1,  xi.  34  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6  ;  Ps.  Ixviii. 
11,  25),  followed  by  the  whole  female  population 
of  Israel,  also  beating  their  cymbals  and  striking 

their    guitars   (ri?hp,  mistranslated    "  dances"). 

It  does  not  appear  how  far  they  joined  in  the  whole 
nf  the  song  (Ex.  xv.  1-19)  ;  but  the  opening  words 
are  repeated  again  by  Miriam  herself  at  the  close, 
in  the  form  cf  a  command  to  the  Hebrew  women. 


MIRIAM 


383  j 


"She  answered  them,  saying,  Sing  ye  to  JEHOVAH, 
for  He  hath  triumphed  gloriously :  the  horse  and 
his  rider  hath  He  thrown  into  the  sea." 

She  took  the  lead,  with  Aaron,  in  the  complaint 
against  Moses  for  his  marriage  with  a  Cushite. 
[ZIPPORAH].  "  Hath  JEHOVAH  spoken  by  Moses? 
Hath  He  not  also  spoken  by  us?"  (Num.  xii.  1,  2). 
The  question  implies  that  the  prophetic  gift  was 
exercised  by  them ;  while  the  answer  implies  that  it 
was  communicated  in  a  less  direct  form  than  to  Moses. 
"  If  there  be  a  prophet  among  you,  I  JEHOVAH  will 
make  myself  known  unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will 
speak  unto  him  in  a  dream.  My  servant  Moses  is 

not  so With  him  will  I  speak  mouth  to  mouth, 

even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark  speeches"  (Num. 
,xii.  6-8).  A  stern  rebuke  was  administered  in 
front  of  the  sacred  Tent  to  both  Aaron  and  Miriam. 
But  the  punishment  fell  on  Miriam,  as  the  chief 
offender.  The  hateful  Egyptian  leprosy,  of  which 
for  a  moment  the  sign  had  been  seen  on  the  hand 
of  her  younger  brother,  broke  out  over  the  whole 
person  of  the  proud  prophetess.  How  grand  was 
her  position,  and  how  heavy  the  blow,  is  implied  in  the 
cry  of  anguish  which  goes  up  from  both  her  brothers 
— "  Alas,  my  lord !  .  .  .  Let  her  not  be  as  one  dead, 
of  whom  the  flesh  is  half  consumed  when  he  cometh 
out  of  his  mother's  womb.  . . .  Heal  her  now,  0  God ! 
I  beseech  thee."  And  it  is  not  less  evident  in  the 
silent  grief  of  the  nation  :  "  The  people  journeyed 
not  till  Miriam  was  brought  in  again"  (Num.  xii. 
10-15).  The  same  feeling  is  reflected,  though  in  a 
strange  and  distorted  form,  in  the  ancient  tradition  of 
the  drying-up  and  re-flowing  of  the  marvellous  well 
of  the  Wanderings.  [BEER,  vol.  i.  p.  179  a.] 

This  stroke,  and  its  removal,  which  took  place  at 
Hazeroth,  form  the  last  public  event  of  Miriam's  life. 
She  died  towards  the  close  of  the  wanderings  at 
Kadesh,  and  was  buried  there  (Num.  xx.  1).  Her 
tomb  was  shown  near  Petra  in  the  days  of  Jerome 
(De  Loc.  Heb.  in  voce  "  Cades  Barnea  ").  Accord 
ing  to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  4,  §6), 
her  death  took  place  on  the  new  moon  of  the  month 
Xanthicus  (i.  e.  about  the  end  of  February) ;  which 
seems  to  imply  that  the  anniversary  was  still  ob 
served  in  the  time  of  Josephus.  The  burial,  he 
adds,  took  place  with  great  pomp  on  a  mountain 
called  Zin  (i.  e.  the  wilderness  of  Zin) ;  and  the 
mourning — which  lasted,  as  in  the  case  of  her 
brothers,  for  thirty  days — was  closed  by  the  insti 
tution  of  the  purification  through  the  sacrifice  of 
the  heifer  (Num.  xix.  1-10),  which  in  the  Pentateuch 
immediately  precedes  the  story  of  her  death. 

According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  2,  §4,  and  6,  §1). 
she  was  married  to  the  famous  HUR,  and,  through 
him,  was  grandmother  of  the  architect  BEZALEEL. 

In  the  Koran  (ch.iii.)  she  is  confounded  with  the 
Virgin  Mary;  and  hence  the  Holy  Family  is  called 
the  Family  of  Amram,  or  Imran.  (See  also  D'Her- 
belot,  Bibl.  Orient.  "  Zakaria")  In  other  Arabic 
traditions  her  name  is  given  as  Kolthum  (see  Weil's 
Bibl.  Legends,  101). 

2.  (Both  Vat.  and  Alex,  rov  Hauav:  Mariam). 
A  person — whether  man  or  woman  does  not  appear 
— mentioned  in  the  genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
and  house  of  Caleb  (1  Chr.  iv.  17);  but  in  the 
present  state  of  the  Hebrew  text  it  is  impossible  to 
say  more  than  that  Miriam  was  sister  or  brother  to 
the  founder  of  the  town  of  Eshtemoa.  Out  of  the 
numerous  conjectures  of  critics  and  translators  the 
following  may  be  noticed  :  (a)  that  of  the  LXX,, 
"  and  Jether "begat  M. ;"  and  (6)  that  of  Bertheau 
(Chronik,  ad  loc.),  that  Miriam,  Shar^mai.  and 


381}  <7  M1RMA 

Islihah  are  the  children  of  Mered  by  his  Egyptian 
wife  Bithiah,  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh :  the  last 
clause  of  ver.  18  having  been  erroneously  transposed 
from  its  proper  place  in  ver.  17.  [A.  P  S.] 

MIR'MA  (HEnO  :  Map/J.d :  Marma).  A  Ben- 

jamite,  "  chief  of  the  fathers,"  son  of  Shaharaim  by 
his  wife  Hodesh ;  born  in  the  land  of  Moab  (1  Chr. 
viii.  10). 

MIRROR.      The  two  words,  n&OD,  marah 
(Ex.  xxxviii.  8 ;  Karov-rpov,  speculum],  and  *K"1, 

rgi  (Job  xxxvii.  18),  are  rendered  "  looking  glass" 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  from  the  context  evidently  denote 


M1KROK 

I  a  mirror  of  polished  metal.  The  miritrs  of  the 
women  o/  the  congregation,  according  to  the  foi  ir.cr 
passage,  furnished  the  bronze  for  the  laver  of  the 
tabernacle,  and  in  the  latter  tha  beauty  of  the  figure 
is  heightened  by  rendering  "  Wilt  thou  beat  out 
with  him  the  clouds,  strong  as  a  molten  mirror  ?  "  . 
the  word  translated  "spread  out"  in  the  A  V. 
being  that  which  is  properly  applied  to  the  ham 
mering  of  metals  into  plates,  and  from  which  the 
Hebrew  term  for  "  firmament "  is  derived.  [FlR- 
MAMENT.]  The  metaphor  in  Deut.  xxviii.  23, 
"  Thy  heaven  that  is  over  thy  head  shall  be  brass," 
derived  its  force  from  the  smiie  popular  belief  in  the 
solidity  of  the  sky. 


Egyptian  Mirrors.    1,  3,  4,  from  Mr.  Salt's  collection ;  2,  from  a  painting  at  Thebes;  4  is  about  11  inches  high. 


The  Hebrew  women  on  coming  out  of  Egypt 
probably  brought  with  them  mirrors  like  those 
which  were  used  by  the  Egyptians,  and  were  made 
of  a  mixed  metal,  chiefly  copper,  wrought  with 
such  admirable  skill,  says  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  (Anc. 
Eg,  iii.  384),  that  they  were  "  susceptible  of  a 
lustre,  which  has  even  been  partially  revived  at  the 
present  day,  in  some  of  those  discovered  at  Thebes, 
though  buried  in  the  earth  for  many  centuries.  The 
mirror  itself  was  nearly  round,  inserted  into  a  handle 
of  wood,  stone,  or  metal,  whose  form  varied  accord 
ing  to  the  taste  of  the  owner.  Some  presented  the 
figure  of  a  female,  a  flower,  a  column,  or  a  rod 
ornamented  with  the  head  of  Athor,  a  bird,  or  a 
fancy  device ;  and  sometimes  the  face  of  a  Typho- 
nian  monster  was  introduced  to  support  the  mirror, 
serving  as  a  contrast  to  the  features  whose  beauty 
was  displayed  within  it."  With  regard  to  the 
metal  of  which  the  ancient  mirrors  were  composed 
there  is  not  much  difference  of  opinion.  Pliny 
mentions  that  anciently  the  best  were  made  at 
Brundusium  of  a  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  (xxxiii. 
45),  or  of  tin  alone  (xxxiv.  48).  Praxiteles,  in  the 
time  ot  Pompey  the  Great,  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  who  made  them  of  silver,  though  these  were 

*  Sliver  mirrors  are  alluded  to  in  Plautus  (Mo&tdL.  i.  4, 
ver.  101)  and  Philostratus  (Icon.  i.  6)  ;  and  one  of  steel  Is 
said  to  have  been  found.  They  were  even  made  of  gold 
(Enr./Tec.  925;  Sen.  Nat.  Quaest.  i.  17). 

b  Apparently  in  allusion  to  this  custom  Moore  (Jipicit- 
neon  •':.  fi),  in  describing  the  maidens  wuo  danced  at  the 


afterwards  so  common  as,  in  the  time  of  Pliny,  to 
be  used  by  the  ladies'  maids.*  They  are  mentioned 
by  Chrysostom  among'  the  extravagances  of  fashion 
for  which  he  rebuked  the  ladies  of  his  time,  and 
Seneca  long  before  was  loud  in  his  denunciation  of 
similar  follies  (Natur.  Quaest.  i.  17).  Mirrors  were 
used  by  the  Roman  women  in  the  worship  of  June 
(Seneca,  Ep.  95;  Apuleius,  Metam.  xi.  c.  9,  p.  770). 
In  the  Egyptian  temples,  says  Cyril  of  Alexandria 
(De  odor,  in  Spir.  ix. ;  Opera,  i.  p.  314,  ed.  Paris, 
1638),  it  was  the  custom  for  the  women  to  worship 
in  linen  garments,  holding  a  mirror  in  their  left 
hands  and  a  sistrum  in  their  right,  and  the  Israelites, 
having  fallen  into  the  idolatries  of  the  country,  had 
brought  with  them  the  mirrors  which  they  used  in 
their  worship.1" 

According  to  Beckmann  (Hist,  of  fnv.  ii.  64, 
Bohn),  a  mirror  which  was  discovered  near  Naples 
was  tested,  and  found  to  be  made  of  a  mixture  of 
copper  and  regulus  of  antimony,  with  a  little  laid. 
Beckmann's  editor  (Mr.  Francis)  gives  in  a  note  the 
result  of  an  analysis  of  an  Etruscan  mirror,  which 
he  examined  and  found  to  consist  of  67'12  copper, 
24-93  tin,  and  8'13  lead,  or  nearly  8  parts  of  copper 
to  3  of  tin  and  1  of  lead,  but  neither  in  this,  nor  in 


Island  Temple  of  tbe  Moon,  says,  "  As  they  passed  under 
the  lump,  a  gleam  of  light  flashed  from  their  bosoms, 
which,  1  could  perceive,  was  the  reflection  of  a  small 
mirror,  that  iu  the  manner  of  the  women  of  the 
each  ol  the  dancers  wore  beneath  her 


MIRROR 

ims  analysed  by  Klaproth,  was  there  any  trace  of 
antimony,  which  Beckmauu  asserts  was  unknown  to 
the  ancients.  Modern  experiments  have  shown  that 
the  mixture  of  copper  and  tin  produces  the  best 
metal  for  specula  (Phil.  Trans,  vol.  67,  p.  296). 


MISGAB 


383  A 


Egy|.ti 


Much  curious  information  will  be  found  in  Beckmann 
upon  the  various  substances  employed  by  the  ancients 
for  mirrors,  but  which  has  no  bearing  upon  the 
subject  of  this  article.  In  his  opinion  it  \vas  not  till 


liK.M>i><i>]  Mirror.  2  and  3  show  the  bottom  of  the  handle,  to 
which  something  has  been  fastened.  (Was  in  tho  possession 
of  Dr.  Hogg.) 

the  13th  century  that  glass,  covered  at  the  back  with 
tin  or  lead,  was  used  for  this  purpose,  the  doubtful 
allusion  in  Pliny  (xxxvi.  66) c  to  the  mirrors  made 
in  the  glass-houses  of  Sidon,  having  reference  to 


"  Sidone  quondam  iis  offlcinis  nobill :  siquidem  etiam 
specula  excogitaverat." 

*  In  this  passage  it  is  without  the  article.  As  a  mere 
appellative,  the  word  Misgab  is  frequently  used  in  the 
poetical  ports  of  Scripture,  In  the  sense  of  a  lofty  plac* 


experiments  which  were  unsuccessful.  Other  allu 
sions  to  bronze  mirrors  will  be  found  in  a  fragment 
of  Aeschylus  preserved  in  Stobaeus  (Sern.  xvii: 
p.  164,  ed.  Gesner,  1608),  and  in  Callirnachus 
(Hym.  in  Lav.  Pall.  21).  Convex  mirrors  of  po 
lished  steel  are  mentioned  as  common  in  the  East, 
in  a  manuscript  note  of  Chardin's  upon  Ecclus.  iii. 
11,  quoted  by  Harmer  (Observ.  vol.  iv.  c.  11, 
obs.  55). 

The  metal  of  which  the  mirrors  were  composed 
being  liable  to  rust  and  tarnish,  required  to  be  con 
stantly  kept  bright  (Wisd.  vii.  26 ;  Ecclus.  xii.  1 1). 
This  was  done  by  means  of  pounded  pumice-stone, 
rubbed  on  with  a  sponge,  which  was  generally  sus 
pended  from  the  mirror.  The  Persians  used  emery- 
powder  for  the  same  purpose,  according  to  Chardin 
(quoted  by  Hartmann,  die  Hebr.  am  Putztischc,  ii. 
245).  The  obscure  image  produced  by  a  tarnished 
or  imperfect  mirror,  appears  to  be  alluded  to  in 
1  Cor.  xiii.  .12.  On  the  other  hand  a  polishe.1 
mirror  is  among  the  Arabs  the  emblem  of'  a  pure 
reputation.  "  More  spotless  than  the  mirror  of  a 
foreign  woman,"  is  with  them  a  proverbial  expres 
sion,  which  Meidani  explains  of  a  woman  who  has 
married  out  of  her  country,  and  polishes  her  mirror 
incessantly  that  no  pail  of  her  face  may  escape  her 
observation  (De  Sacy,  Chrest.  Arab.  iii.  p.  236). 

The  obscure  word  D*01  v3,  gilyonim  (Is.  iii.  23), 

rendered  "  glasses"  in  the  A.  V.  after  the  Vulgate 
specula,  and  supported  by  the  Targum,  and  the 
commentaries  of  Kimchi,  Abarbanel,  and  .Tarchi,  is 
explained  by  Schroeder  (de  Vest.  Mul.  Hebr.  ch. 
18)  to  signify  "  transparent  dresses  "  of  fine  linen, 
as  the  LXX.  (T&  Sia(paif1j  AaKo>i/tK<£),  and  even 
Kimchi  in  his  Lexicon  understand  it  (comp.  mul- 
ticia,  Juv.  Sat.  n.  66,  76).  In  support  of  this 
view,  it  is  urged  that  the  terms  which  follow  denote 
articles  of  female  attire  ;  but  in  Is.  viii.  1,  a  word 
closely  resembling  it  is  used  for  a  smooth  writing 
tablet,  and  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.  is  approved 
by  Gesenius  (Jesaia  i.  215)  and  the  best  authorities. 

[W.  A.  W.j 

MIS'AEL  (Mio-cwjA:  Misael).  1.  The  same  as 
MISHAEL  2  (1  Esd.  ix.  44  ;  comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

2.  =  MISHAEL  3,  the  Hebrew  name  of  Meshacn 
(Song  of  the  Three  Child.  66). 

MIS'GAB  (2|b>En,  with  the  def.  article: 
'Ajuafl :  fortis.  sublimia),  a  place  in  Moab  named 
in  company  with  NEBO  and  KIRIATHAIM  in  the 
denunciation  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1).  It  appears 
to  be  mentioned  also  in  Is.  xxv.  12,"  though  there 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  high  fort."  [MoAB,  p.  397.] 
In  neither  passage  is  there  any  clue  to  its  situation 
beyond  the  fact  of  its  mention  with  the  above  two 
places ;  and  even  that  is  of  little  avail,  as  neither 
of  them  have  been  satisfactorily  identified. 

The  name  may  be  derived  from  a  root  signi 
fying  elevation  (Gesenius,  Tlies.  1320),  and  in 
that  ease  was  probably  attached  to  a  town  situated 
on  a  height.  It  is  possibly  identical  with  MIZPKII 
OF  MOAB,  named  only  in  1  Sam.  xxiii.  3.  Fiirst 
(Handwb.  794 a)  understands  "the  Misgab"  to 
mean  the  highland  country  of  Moab  generally,  but 
its  mention  in  company  with  other  places  which 


of  refuge.  Thus  2  Sam.  xxii.  3 ;  Ps.  ix.  9,  llx.  9 ;  ie. 
xxxiii.  16 ;  in  which  and  other  places  it  is  vartonsly 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "high  tower,"  "refuge,"  "tie- 
IVnce,"  &c.  See  Stanley,  S.  cfc  /'.  App.  $31. 


:?b4 


MISIIAEL 


we  know  to  have  been  definite  spots,  even  though 
not  yet  identified  with  certainty,  seems  to  forbid 
this.  [G.] 

MISH'AEL  (VxBJ'» :  M«ro^\  in  Ex. ;  MJ- 
raSdi) ;  Alex.  MiffoSefj  in  Lev. :  MisaSl,  Misaele). 
1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Uzziel,  the  uncle  of  Aaron 
and  Moses  (Ex.  vi.  22).  When  Nadab  and  Abihu 
were  struck  dead  for  offering  strange  fire,  Mishael 
and  his  brother  Elzaphan,  at  the  command  of  Moses, 
removed  their  bodies  .from  the  sanctuary,  and  buried 
them  without  the  camp,  their  loose  fitting  tunics b 
(cutt&noth,  A.  V.  "  coats  "),  the  simplest  of  eastern 
dresses,  serving  for  winding-sheets  (Lev.  x.  4,  5). 
The  late  Prof.  Blunt  (  Unties.  Coincidences,  pt.  i. 
§xiv.)  conjectured  that  the  two  brothers  were  the 
"  men  who  were  defiled  by  the  dead  body  of  a  man  " 
'Num.  ix.  6),  and  thus  prevented  from  keeping  the 
jecond  passover. 

2.  (Mi<red)A. ;  Alex.  Metffo^A. :  Misael).   One  of 
those  who  stood  at  Ezra's  left  hand,  on  the  tower  of 
wood  in  the  street  of  the  water  gate,  when  he  read 
the   law  to    the   people   (Neh.    viii.   4).      Called 
MISAEL  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  44. 

3.  One  of  Daniel's  three  companions  in  captivity, 
and  of  the  blood-royal  of  Judah  (Dan.  i.  6,  7,  11, 
19,  ii.  17).     He  received  the  Babylonian  title  of 
MESIIACH,  by  which  he  is  better  known.     In  the 
Sons;  of  the  Three  Children  he  is  called  MISAEL. 


MISUEPHOTH 

fourth  of  the  twelve  lion-faced  Gadites,  meu  of  the 
host  for  the  battle,  who  "  separated  themselves  ucto 
David  "  in  the  hold  of  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  10>. 


MISH'AL,  and  MISH'EAL  (both 
TV  BoffeAXov,  Alex.  McwaaA. ;  Maairtt,  Alex. 
Maircty :  Messal,  Misal),  one  of  the  towns  in  the 
territory  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix.  26),  allotted  to  the 
Gershonite  Levites  (xxi.  30).  It  occurs  between 
Amad  and  Carmel,  but  the  former  remains  un 
known,  and  this  catalogue  of  Asher  is  so  imperfect, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  conclude  with  certainty  that 
Mishal  was  near  Carmel.  True,  Eusebius  (Onorn. 
"  Masan ")  says  that  it  was,  but  he  is  evidently 
merely  quoting  the  list  of  Joshua,  and  not  speaking 
from  actual  knowledge.  In  the  catalogue  of  1  Chr. 
vi.  it  is  given  as  MASHAL,  a  form  which  suggests  its 
identity  with  the  MASALOTH  of  later  history ;  but 
there  is  nothing  to  remark  for  or  against  this  iden 
tification.  [G.] 

MISH'AM  (DVE'D:  Uiffad\:  Misaam).  A 
Benjamite,  son  of  Elpaal,  and  descendant  of  Shaha- 
raim  (1  Chr.  viii.  12;. 

MISH'MA  (J7W1D,  Maer/irf:  Masma). 

1.  A   son  of  Ishmael   and  Vrother  of  MIBSAM 
(Gen.  xxv.  14;   1  Chr.  i.  30).     The  Masamani  of 
Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  §21),  may  represent  the  tribe  of 
Mishma;  their  modern  descendants  are  not  known 
to  the  writer,  but  the  name  (Misma') c  exists  in 
Arabia,  and  a  tribe  is  called  the  Benee-Misma'.    In 
the  Mir-dt  ez-Zemifn   (MS.),  Mishma   is  written 
Misma' — probably  from  Rabbinical  sources;  but  it 
is  added  "and  he  is  Mesma"ah.d     The  Arabic  word 
has  the  same  signification  as  the  Hebrew. 

2.  A  son  of  Simeon  (1  Chr.  iv.  25),  brother  of 
MIIISAM.    These  brothers  were  perhaps  named  after 
the  older  brothers,  Mishma  and  Mibsam.   [E.  S.  P.] 

MISHMAN'NAH  (H3O^D :  Ma.fffj.avd ;  Alex. 
Mafffj.dv;  K.  A.  Ma<re/iow^ :  Masmand).  The 

b  Their  priestly  frocks,  or  cassocks  (Ex.  xl.  14),  which, 
9£  Jurchi  remarKs,  were  not.  burned. 

-  o 


MISH'EAITES,  THE 

paeiV;  Alex,  ijjuocrapaeiv  :  Maserei),  the  fourth  of 
the  four  "  families  of  Kirjath-jearim,"  »'.  e.  colonies 
proceeding  therefrom  and  founding  'towns  (1  Chr. 
ii.  53).  Like  the  other  three,  Mishra  is  not  else 
where  mentioned,  nor  does  any  trace  of  it  appear  to 
have  been  since  discovered.  But  in  its  turn  it 
founded  —  so  the  passage  is  doubtless  to  be  under 
stood  —  the  towns  of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  the  former 
of  which  has  been  identified  in  our  own  times., 
while  the  latter  is  possibly  to  be  found  in  the  sam» 
neighbourhood.  [MAHANEH-DAN.]  [G.] 

MISPER'ETH  (rnSDO  :  Ma<r^>op(£0  ;  F.  A 
MaffcpapdS  :  Mespharaiti).  One  of  those  who  ic 
turned  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  from  Babylon 
Neh.  vii.  7).  In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called  MIZPAK 
and  in  1  Esdr.  v.  8  ASPHAKASUS. 


MIS'REPHOTH-MA'IM  (D?D  n'lSWp,  and 
in  xiii.  6,  'D  nbl.K'O  :  Matrepiav,  and  Mao-fpe* 

fj.fptiiifj.ai/jL;  Alex.  Ma<rpe<f>o>0  p-aeifj.,  and  Mcwe- 
pf<pu>0  (JLai/j,  :  aquae  Miscrephoth},  a  place  in 
northern  Palestine,  in  close  connexion  with  Zidon- 
rabbah,  j.  e.  Sidon.  From  "  the  waters  of  Merom  " 
Joshua  chased  the  Canaanite  kings  to  Zidon  and 
Misrephoth-maim,  and  then  eastward  to  the  "  plain 
of  Mizpeh,"  probably  the  great  plain  of  Baalbek  — 
the  Bikah  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Buka'a  of  the  modem 
Syrians  (Josh.  id.  8).  The  name  occurs  once  again 
in  the  enumeration  of  the  districts  remaining  to  be 
conquered  (xiii.  6)  —  "  all  the  inhabitants  of  the 
mountain  from  Lebanon  unto  M.  Maim,  'all  the 
Zidonians."  Taken  as  Hebrew,  the  literal  mean 
ing  of  the  name  is  "  burnings  of  waters,"  and  ac 
cordingly  it  is  taken  by  the  old  interpreters  to  mean 
"  warm  waters,"  whether  natural,  t.  e.  hot  baths 
or  springs  —  as  by  Kimchi  and  the  interpolation  in 
the  Vulgate  ;  or  artificial,  *.  e.  salt,  glass,  or  smelt- 
ing-works  —  as  by  Jarchi,  and  the  others  mentioned 
by  Fttrst  (Hdwb.  8036),  Rodiger  (in  Gesen.  Thes. 
1341),  and  Keil  (Josua,  ad  Ion.). 

Lord  A.  Hervey  (Genealogies  &c  ,  228  note) 
considers  the  name  as  conferred  in  consequence  of 
the  "  burning"  of  Jabin's  chariots  there.  But  were 
they  burnt  at  that  spot  ?  and,  if  so,  why  is  the 
name  the  "  burning  of  waters  f  The  probability 
here,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  is,  that  a  meaning 
has  been  forced  on  a  name  originally  belonging  to 
another  language,  and  therefore  unintelligible  to  the 
later  occupiers  of  the  country. 

Dr.  Thomson  (Land  and  Book,  ch.  xv.),  reviving 
the  conjecture  of  himself  and  Schultz  (Bibl.  Sacra, 
1855),  treats  Misrephoth-maim  as  identical  with  a 
collection  of  springs  called  Ain-Musheirift  \,  on  the 
sea-shore,  close  under  the  Ras  en-Nakhura  ;  but 
this  has  the  disadvantage  of  being  very  far  from 
Sidon.  May  it  not  rather  be  the  place  with  which 
we  are  familiar  in  the  later  history  as  Zarephath  ? 
In  Hebrew,  allowing  for  a  change  not  unfrequent 
of  S  to  Z  (reversed  in  the  form  of  the  name  current 
still  later  —  Sarepta),  the  two  are  from  roots  almost 
identical,  not  only  in  sound,  but  also  in  meaning  ; 
while  the  close  connexion  of  Zarephath  with  Zidon  — 
"  Zarephath  which  belongeth  to  Zidon,"  —  is  another 
point  of  strong  resemblance.  [G.] 


e  The   "and''   here   inserd'il   hi   Ui  •   A.  V.  is  i,uiu 
gratuitous. 


MITE 

MITE  (Xewi  &v),  a  coin  current  in  Palestine  in 
the  time  of  our  Lord.  It  took  its  name  from  a 
very  small  Greek  copper  coin,  of  which  with  the 
Athenians  seven  went  to  the  -)(ai\Kovs.  It  seems 
in  Palestine  to  have  been  the  smallest  piece  in 
money,  being  the  half  of  the  farthing,  which  was  a 
coin  of  very  low  value.  The  mite  is  famous  from 
its  being  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  pooi 
widow's  piety  whom  Christ  saw  casting  two  mites 
into  the  treasury  (Mark  xii.  41-44  ;  Luke  xxi. 
i-4).  From  St.  Mark's  explanation,  "  two  mites, 
which  make  a  farthing  "  (Xeirros  5uo,  'A  iffn 
KoSpdvrris,  ver.  42),  it  may  perhaps  be  inferred 
that  the  KO$  pdvrris  or  farthing  was  the  commoner 
coin,  for  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed  to  be  there 
spoken  of  as  a  money  of  account,  though  this  might 
be  the  case  in  another  passage  (Matt.  v.  26).  In 
the  Graeco-Roman  coinage  of  Palestine,  in  which 
we  include  the  money  of  the  Herodian  family,  the 
two  smallest  coins,  of  which  the  assarion  is  the  more 
common,  seem  to  correspond  to  the  farthing  and 
the  mite,  the  larger  weighing  about  twice  as  much 
as  the  smaller.  This  correspondence  is  made  more 
probable  by  the  circumstance  that  the  larger  seems 
to  be  reduced  from  the  earlier  "quarter"  of  the 
Jewish  coinage.  It  is  noticeable,  that  although  the 
supposed  mites  struck  about  the  time  referred  to 
in  the  Gospels  are  rare,  those  of  Alex.  Jannaeus' 
coinage  are  numerous,  whose  abundant  money 
must  have  long  continued  in  use.  [MONEY  ; 
FARTHING.]  [K.  S.  P.] 

MITH'CAH  (nprnp:    Ma0e/c/ca  :    Methcai), 

the  name  of  an  unknown  desert  encampment  of  the 
Israelites,  meaning,  perhaps,  "place  of  sweetness" 
(Num.  xxxiii.  28,  29).  [H.  H.] 

MITH'NITE,   THE  ('JJlBn  :    6 


Alex.  &  MaOOavt  :  Mathanites),  the  designation  of 
JOSHAPHAT,  one  of  David's  guard  in  the  catalogue 
of  1  Chr.  xi.  (ver.  43).  No  doubt  it  signifies  the 
native  of  a  place  or  a  tribe  bearing  the  name  of 
Methen  ;  but  no  trace  exists  in  the  Bible  of  any 
such.  It  should  be  noticed  that  Joshaphat  is  both 
preceded  and  followed  by  a  man  from  beyond  Jor 
dan,  but  it  would  not  be  safe  to  infer  therefrom  that 
Methen  was  also  in  that  region.  [G.] 

MITH'REDATH 


Mithridates).  1.  The  treasurer  ("13T5,  gizbdr)  of 
Cyrus  king  of  Persia,  to  whom  the  king  gave  the 
vessels  of  the  Temple,  to  be  by  him  transferred  to 
the  hands  of  Sheshbazzar  (Ear.  i.  8).  The  LXX. 
take  gizbdr  as  a  gentilic  name,  Ya.ff$a,pT)v6s,  the 
Vulgate  as  a  patronymic,  filius  Gazabar,  but  there 
is  little  doubt  as  to  its  meaning.  The  word  occurs 
in  a  slightly  different  form  in  Dan.  iii.  2,  3,  and  is 
there  rendered  "  treasurer  ;"  and  in  the  parallel 
history  of  1  Esdr.  ii.  11,  Mithredath  is  called  Mi- 
TMRIDATES  the  treasurer  (ya(o<t>v\a£).  The  name 
Mithredath,  "  given  by  Mithra,"  is  one  of  a  class  of 
compounds  of  frequent  occurrence,  formed  from  the 
oame  of  Mithra,  the  Iranian  sun-god. 

2.  A  Persian  officer  stationed  at  Samaria,  in  the 
reign  of  Artaxerxes,  or  Smerdis  the  Magian  (Ezr. 
iv.  7).  He  joined  with  his  colleagues  in  prevailing 
upon  the  king  to  hinder  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple. 
In  1  Esdr.  ii.  16  he  is  called  MITHRIDATES. 


•  Derived  from  pHO'  "  sweetness,"  with  the  suffix  H 
of  locality,  which  (or'  its  plur.   J-|'l)  Is  often  found  in 


names. 
VOL.  IT. 


1I1XED  MULTITUDE  385 

MITHRIDA'TES  (Mjfy>a8a-n7S ;  Alei.  Mjfy. 
:  Mithridatus). 

1.  (1  Esdr.  ii.  11)  =  MITHREDATH  1. 

2.  (1  Esdr.  ii.  16)  =  MITHREDATH  2. 
MITRE.    [CROWN.] 

MITYLE'NE  (Mirv^vri,  in  classical  authors 
and  on  inscriptions  frequently  MtmA^pr;),  the  chief 
town  of  Lesbos,  and  situated  on  the  east  coast  of 
the  island.  Its  position  is  very  accurately,  though 
incidentally,  marked  (Acts  xx.  14,  15)  in  the  ac 
count  of  St.  Paul's  return-voyage  from  Ins  third 
apostolical  journey.  Mitylene  is  the  iniormediate 
place  where  he  stopped  for  the  night  between  ASS08 
and  CHIOS.  It  may  be  gathered  from  the  circum 
stances  of  this  voyage  that  the  wind  was  blowing 
from  the  N.W. ;  and  it  is  worth  while  to  notice 
that  in  the  harbour  or  in  the  roadstead  of  Mitylene 
the  ship  would  be  sheltered  from  that  wind.  More 
over  it  appears  that  St.  Paul  was  there  at  the  time 
of  dark  moon :  and  this  was  a  sufficient  reason  for 
passing  the  night  there  before  going  through  the 
intricate  passages  to  the  southward.  See  Life  and 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  xx.,  where  a  view  of  the 
place  is  given,  showing  the  fine  forms  of  the  moun 
tains  behind.  The  town  itself  was  celebrated  in 
Roman  times  for  the  beauty  of  its  buildings  ("  Mi 
tylene  pulchra,"  Hor.  Epist.  I.  xi.  17  ;  see  Cic. 
c.  Rull.  ii.  16).  In  St.  Paul's  day  it  had  the 
privileges  of  a  free  city  (Plin.  N.  H.  v.  39).  It 
is  one  of  the  few  cities  of  the  Aegean  which  have 
continued  without  intermission  to  flourish  till  the 
present  day.  It  has  given  its  name  to  the  whole 
island,  and  is  itself  now  called  sometimes  Castro, 
sometimes  Mitylen.  Tournefort  gives  a  rude  pic 
ture  of  the  place  as  it  appeared  in  1700  (  Voyage 
du  Levant,  i.  148,  149).  It  is  more  to  our  pur 
pose  to  refer  to  our  own  Admiralty  charts,  Nos. 
1665  and  1654.  Mitylene  concentrates  in  itself 
the  chief  interest  of  Lesbos,  an  island  peculiarly 
famous  in  the  history  of  poetry,  and  especially  of 
poetry  in  connexion  with  music.  But  for  these 
points  we  must  refer  to  the  articles  in  the  Diet,  of 
Geography.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MIXED  MULTITUDE.  With  the  Israelites 
who  journeyed  from  Rameses  to  Succoth,  the  first 
stage  of  the  Exodus  from  Egypt,  there  went  up  (Ex. 
xii.  38)  "  a  mixed  multitude  "  (H^V :  tirlfititTos  •. 

milgus  promiscuurn),  who  have  not  hitherto  been 
identified.  In  the  Targum  the  phrase  is  vaguely  ren 
dered  "  many  foreigners,"  and  Jarchi  explains  it  as 
"a  medley  of  outlandish  people."  Aben  Ezra  goes 
further  and  says  it  signifies  "  the  Egyptians  who 
were  mixed  with  them,  and  they  are  the  '  mixed 
multitude '  (5J-1DQDN.  Num.  xi.  4),  who  were  ga 
thered  to  them."  Jarchi  on  the  latter  passage  also 
identifies  the  '•  mixed  multitude "  of  Num.  and 
Exodus.  During  their  residence  in  Egypt  marriages 
were  naturally  contracted  between  the  Israelites 
and  the  natives,  and  the  son  of  such  a  marriage  be 
tween  an  Israelitish  woman  and  an  Egyptian  is 
especially  mentioned  as  being  stoned  for  blasphemy 
(Lev.  xxiv,  11),  the  same  law  holding  good  for  the 
resident  or  naturalized  foreigner  as  for  the  native 
Israelite  (Josh.  viii.  35).  This  hybrid  race  is  evi 
dently  alluded  to  by  Jarchi  and  Aben  Ezra,  and  is 
most  probably  that  to  which  reference  is  made  in 
Exodus.  Knotel  understands  by  the  "  mixed  mul 
titude  "  the  remains  of  the  Hyksos  who  left  Egypt 
with  the  Hebrews.  Dr.  Kalisch  (Comm.  on  Ex. 
xii.  38)  interprets  it  of  the  native  Egyptians  who 

'1  0 


386 


MIZAK,  THE  HJT.L 


MIZPAII 


were  involved  in  the  same  oppression  with  the 
Hebrews  by  the  new  dynasty,  which  invaded  and 
subdued  Lower  Egypt  ;  and  Kurtz  (Hist,  of  Old 
Cw.  ii.  312,  Eng.  tr.),  while  he  supposes  the 
"  mixed  multitude"  to  have  been  Egyptians  of  the 
lower  classes,  attributes  their  emigration  to  their 
having  "  endured  the  same  oppression  as  the 
Israelites  from  the  proud  spirit  of  caste  which  pre 
vailed  in  Egypt,"  in  consequence  of  which  they 
attached  themselves  to  the  Hebrews,  "  and  served 
henceforth  as  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water." 
That  the  "  mixed  multitude  "  is  a  general  term  in 
cluding  all  those  who  were  not  of  pure  Israelite 
blood  is  evident;  more  than  this  cannot  be  posi 
tively  asserted.  In  Exodus  and  Numbers  it  pro 
bably  denoted  the  miscellaneous  hangers-on  of  the 
Hebrew  camp,  whether  they  were  the  issue  of  spu 
rious  marriages  with  Egyptians,  or  were  themselves 
Egyptians  01  belonging  to  other  nations.  The  same 
happened  on  the  return  from  Babylon,  and  in  Neh. 
xiii.  3,  a  slight  clue  is  given  by  which  the  meaning 
of  the  "  mixed  multitude"  may  be  more  definitely 
ascertained.  Upon  reading  in  the  law  "  that  the 
Ammonite  and  the  Moabite  should  not  come  into 
the  congregation  of  God  for  ever,"  it  is  said,  "  they 
separated  from  Israel  all  the  mixed  multitude." 
The  remainder  of  the  chapter  relates  the  expulsion 
of  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  from  the  Temple,  of  the 
merchants  and  men  of  Tyre  from  the  city,  and  of 
the  foreign  wives  of  Ashdod,  of  Ammon,  and  of 
Moab,  with  whom  the  Jews  had  intermarried.  All 
of  these  were  included  in  the  "  mixed  multitude," 
and  Nehemiah  adds,  "  thus  cleansed  I  them  from  all 
foreigners."  The  Targ.  Jon.  on  Num.  xi.  4,  ex 
plains  the  "  mixed  multitude  "  as  proselytes,  and 
this  view  is  apparently  adopted  by  Ewald,  but  there 
does  not  seem  any  foundation  for  it.  [W.  A.  W.] 


MIZ'AE,    THE   HTLL 

fj.eiK[>6s:  mons  modicus),  a  mountain  —  for  the 
reader  will  observe  that  the  word  is  har  in  the  ori 
ginal  (see  vol.  i.  816a)  —  apparently  in  the  northern 
part  of  trans-Jordanic  Palestine,  from  which  the 
author  of  Psalm  xlii.  utters  his  pathetic  appeal 
(ver.  6).  The  name  appears  nowhere  else,  and  the 
only  clue  we  have  to  its  situation  is  the  mention 
of  the  "  land  of  Jordan  "  and  the  "  Hermons,"  com 
bined  with  the  general  impression  conveyed  by  the 
Psalm  that  it  is  the  cry  of  an  exile  *  from  Jeru 
salem,  possibly  on  his  road  to  Babylon  (Ewald, 
Dichter,  ii.  185).  If  taken  as  Hebrew,  the  word 
is  derivable  from  a  root  signifying  smallness  —  the 
same  by  which  Zoar  is  explained  in  Gen.  xix.  20- 
22.  This  is  adopted  by  all  the  ancient  versions, 
and  in  the  Prayer-book  Psalms  of  the  Church  of 
England  appears  in  the  inaccurate  form  of  "  the 
little  hill  of  Hermon."  [G.j 

MIZ'PAH,  and  MIZ'PEH.  The  name  borne 
by  several  places  in  ancient  Palestine.  Although 
in  the  A.  V.  most  frequently  presented  as  MIZPEH, 
yet  in  the  original,  with  but  few  exceptions,  the 
name  is  Mizpah,  and  with  equally  few  b  exceptions  is 
accompanied  with  the  definite  article  — 
ham-Mitzpah. 


1.  MIZPAII  (nBXGrt;  Samar.  H3VOn,  i.e. 
the  pillar  :  ^  Speurts  ;  Yeneto-Gk.  6  areviff^t  : 
Vulg.  omitf).  The  earliest  of  all,  iu  order  of  the 
narrative,  is  the  heap  of  stones  piled  up  by  Jacob 
and  Laban  (Gen.  xxxi.  48)  on  Mount  Gilead  (ver. 
25),  to  serve  both  as  a  witness  to  the  covenant 
then  entered  into,  and  also  as  a  landmark  of  the 
boundary  between  them  (ver.  52).  This  heap 
received  a  name  from  each  of  the  two  chief  actois 
in  the  transaction  —  GALEED  and  JEGAB  SAHA- 
DUTHA.  But  it  had  also  a  third,  viz.  MIZPAH, 
which  it  seems  from  the  terms  of  the  narrative  to 
have  derived  from  neither  party,  but  to  have  pos 
sessed  already  ;  which  third  name,  in  the  address 
of  Laban  to  Jacob,  is  seized  and  played  upon  after 
the  manner  of  these  ancient  people:  —  "Therefore 
he  called  the  name  of  it  Galeed,  and  the  Mizpah  ; 
for  he  said,  Jehovah  watch  (itzeph,  SJV*)  between 

me  and  thee,"  &c.  It  is  remarkable  that  this 
Hebrew  paronomasia  is  put  into  the  mouth,  not  of 
Jacob  the  Hebrew,  but  of  Laban  the  Syrian,  the 
difference  in  whose  language  is  just  before  marked 
by  "Jegar-Sahadutha."  Various  attempts*  have  been 
made  to  reconcile  this  ;  but,  whatever  may  be  the 
result,  we  may  rest  satisfied  that  in  Mizpah  we  pos 
sess  a  Hebraized  form  of  the  original  name,  whatever 
that  may  have  been,  bearing  somewhat  the  same 
relation  to  it  that  the  Arabic  Beit-ur  bears  to  the 
Hebrew  Beth-horon,  or  —  as  we  may  afterwards  see 
reason  to  suspect  —  as  Safieh  and  S/iafat  hear  to 
ancient  Mizpehs  on  the  western  side  of  Jordan.  ID 
its  Hebraized  form  the  word  is  derived  from  the  root 
tsdphdh,  nQV,  "to  look  out"  (Gesen.  Lexicon, 
ed.  Robinsou,  s.  v.  HQV),  and  signifies  a  watch- 
tower.  The  root  has  also  the  signification  of  breadth 
—  expansion.  But  that  the  original  name  had  the 
same  signification  as  it  possesses  in  its  Hebrew 
form  is,  to  say  the  least,  unlikely  ;  because  in  such 
linguistic  changes  the  meaning  always  appears  to 
be  secondary  to  the  likeness  in  sound. 

Of  this  early  name,  whatever  it  may  have  been,  we 
find  other  traces  on  both  sides  of  Jordan,  not  only  in 
the  various  Mizpahs,  but  in  such  names  as  Zophim, 
which  we  know  formed  part  of  the  lofty  Pisgah  ; 
Zaphon,  a  town  of  Moab  (Josh.  xiii.  27);  Zuph 
and  Ramathaim-Zophim,  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Mizpeh  of  Benjamin  ;  Zephathah  in  the  neighbour 
hood  of  Mizpeh  of  Judah  ;  possibly  also  in  Safed, 
the  well-known  city  of  Galilee. 

But,  however  this  may  be,  the  name  remained 
attached  to  the  ancient  meeting-place  of  Jacob  and 
Laban,  and  the  spot  where  their  conference  had 
been  held  became  a  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  and  a 
place  for  solemn  conclave  and  deliberation  in  times 
of  difficulty  long  after.  On  this  natural  "  watch- 
tower"  (LXX.  ffKoitid},  when  the  last  touch  had 
been  put  to  their  '•  misery  "  by  the  threatened 
attack  of  the  Bene-Ammon,  did  the  children  ot 
Israel  assemble  for  the  choice  of  a  leader  (Judg.  x. 
17,  comp.  ver.  16)  ;  and  when  the  outlawed  Jeph- 
thah  had  been  prevailed  on  to  leave  his  exile  and 
take  the  head  of  his  people,  his  first  act  was  to  go  to 
"  the  Mizpah,"  and  on  that  consecrated  ground  utter 


»  In  the  PeshitoSyriac  it  bears  the  title,  "  The  Psalm  3.  Mizpeh  with  the  article  in  Josh.  xv.  33  only ;  4.  In  every 
which  David  sang  when  he  was  in  exlte,  and  longing  to  other  case  the  Hebrew  text  presents  the  name  as  ham- 
return  to  Jerusalem."  1  Mltzpah. 


b  These  exceptions  may  be  collected  here  with  conve 
nience: — 1.  Mizpeh,  without  the  article,  is  found  in  the 


See  Ewald,  Komposition  der  Genesis.    Thus  in  tn« 
LXX.  and  Vulg.  versions  of  ver.  49,  the  word  itizp?\  ii 


Hebrew  In  Josh.  xi.  8,  Judg.  xi.  29,  and  1  Sam.  xxti.  3    not  treated  as  a  proper  name  at  all ;  and  a  diflert-nt  nun 
only;   2.  Mizpah  without  the  article  in  His.  v.  1  ouly ;    is  given  to  the  verge. 


MIZPAH 

»1!  bis  wonte  "  before  Jehovah."  It  was  doubtless 
from  Mizpah  that  he  made  his  appeal  tothekingof  the 
Ammonites  (xi.  12),  and  invited,  though  fruitlessly, 
the  aid  of  h:s  kinsmen  of  Ephraim  on  the  other  side 
nf  Jordan  (xii.  2).  At  Mizpah  he  seems  to  have 
henceforward  resided  ;  there  the  fatal  meeting  took 
place  with  his  daughter  on  his  return  from  the 
war  (xi.  34),  and  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  on  the 
altar  of  that  sanctuary  the  father's  terrible  vow 
was  consummated.  The  topographical  notices  of 
Jephthah's  course  in  his  attack  and  pursuit  (ver. 
29)  are  extremely  difficult  to  unravel ;  but  it  seems 
most  piobable  that  the  "  Mizpeh-Gilead  "  which  is 
mentioned  here,  and  here  only,  is  the  same  as  the 
ham-Mizpah  of  the  other  parts  of  the  narrative ; 
and  both,  as  we  shall  see  afterwards,  are  probably 
identical  with  the  RAMATH-MIZPEH  and  RAMOTH- 
GlLEAD,  so  famous  in  the  later  history. 

It  is  still  more  difficult  to  determine  whether 
this  was  not  also  the  place  at  which  the  great 
assembly  of  the  people  was  held  to  decide  on  the 
measures  to  be  taken  against  Gibeah  after  the 
outrage  on  the  Levite  and  his  concubine  (Judg.  xx. 
1,  3,  xxi.  1,  5,  8).  No  doubt  there  seems  a  certain 
violence  in  removing  the  scene  of  any  part  of  so 
local  a  story  to  so  great  a  distance  as  the  other  side 
of  Jordan.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  are  the  limits 
of  the  story  so  circumscribed  ?  The  event  is  repre 
sented  as  one  affecting  not  a  part  only,  but  the 
whole  of  the  nation,  east  of  Jordan  as  well  as  west 
— "  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  and  the  land  of  Gilead  " 
(xx.  1).  The  only  part  of  the  nation  excluded  from 
the  assembly  was  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  that 
no  communication  on  the  subject  was  held  with 
them,  is  implied  in  the  statement  that  they  only 
"  heard  "  of  its  taking  place  (xx.  3)  ;  an  expression 
which  would  be  meaningless  if  the  place  of  assembly 
were — as  Mizpah  of  Benjamin  was — within  a  mile  or 
two  of  G  ibeah ,  in  the  very  heart  of  their  own  territory, 
though  perfectly  natural  if  it  were  at  a  distance  from 
them.  And  had  there  not  been  some  reason  in  the  cir 
cumstances  of  the  case,  combined  possibly  with  some 
special  claim  in  Mizpah — and  that  claim  doubtless 
its  ancient  sanctity  and  the  reputation  which  Jeph 
thah's  success  had  conferred  upon  it — why  was  not 
either  Bethel,  where  the  ark  was  deposited  (xx. 
26,  27),  or  Shiloh,  chosen  for  the  purpose?  Sup 
pose  a  Mizpah  near  Gibeah,  and  the  subject  is  full 
of  difficulty :  remove  it  to  the  place  of  Jacob  and 
Labau's  meeting,  and  the  difficulties  disappear ;  and 
the  allusions  to  Gilead  (xx.  1),  to  Jabesh-Gilead 
(xxi.  8,  &c.),  and  to  Shiloh,  as  "  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,"  all  fall  naturally  into  their  places  and 
acquire  a  proper  force. 

Mizpah  is  probably  the  same  as  RAMATH-MIZPEH 
(HSVBn  "1),  mentioned  Josh.  xiii.  26  only.  The 
prefix  merely  signifies  that  the  spot  was  an  elevated 
one,  which  we  already  believe  it  to  have  been  ;  and 
if  the  two  are  not  identical,  then  we  have  the 
anomaly  of  an  enumeration  of  the  chief  places  of 
Gilead  with  the  omission  of  its  most  famous  sanc 
tuary.  Ramath  ham-Mizpeh  was  most  probably 
identical  also  with  Ramoth-Gilead  ;  but  this  is  a 
point  which  will  be  most  advantageously  discussed 
under  the  latter  head. 


MIZPAH 


387 


d  The  word  here  used  — ND-llntD  "I^K  —  exhibits 
the  transition  from  the  "  Jegar"  of  the  ancient  Aramaic 
rf  Laban  to  the  Hajar  of  the  modern  Arabs— the  word 
by  which  they  designate  the  heaps  which  it  is  their 
custom,  as  it  was  Laban'g,  to  erect  as  landmarks  of  a 
botuuiary. 


Mizpah  still  retained  its  name  in  the  days  of  th« 
Maccabees,  by  whom  it  was  l>esieged  and  taken  with 
the  other  cities  of  Gilead  (1  Mace.  v.  35).  From 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomasticon,  "Maspha") 
it  receives  a  bare  mention.  It  is  probable,  both 
from  their  notices  (Onom.  "  Rammoth")  and  from 
other  considerations,  that  Ramoth-Gilead  is  the 
modem  es-Salt  ;  but  it  is  not  ascertained  whether 
Mizpah  is  not  rather  the  great  mountain  Jebel 
Osha,  a  short  distance  to  the  north-west.  The 
name  Safut  appears  in  Van  de  Velde's  map  a  few 
miles  east  of  es-Salt. 

A  singular  reference  to  Mizpah  is  found  in  the 
title  of  Ps.  lx.,  as  given  in  the  Targum,  which  runs 
as  follows  :  —  "  For  the  ancient  testimony  of  the  sons 
of  Jacob  and  Laban  ....  when  David  assembled 
his  army  and  passed  over  the  heap  d  of  witness." 

2.  A  second  Mizpeh,  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  was  the 
MlZPEH-MOAB   (3Ni»    nQVD:    Mao-o^a   rfjs 

Muidf)  :  Maspha  quae  est  Moab),  where  the  king 
of  that  nation  was  living  when  David  committed 
his  parents  to  his  care  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3).  The  name 
does  not  occur  again,  nor  is  there  any  clue  to  the 
situation  of  the  place.  It  may  have  been,  as  is 
commonly  conjectured,  the  elevated  and  strong 
natural  fortress  afterwards  known  as  KiR-MoAB, 
the  modem  Kerak.  But  is  it  not  at  least  equally 
possible  that  it  was  the  great  Mount  Pisgah,  which 
was  the  most  commanding  eminence  in  the  whole 
of  Moab,  which  contained  the  sanctuary  of  Nebo, 
and  of  which  one  part  was  actually  called  Zophim 
(Num.  xxiii.  14),  a  name  derived  from  the  same 
root  with  Mizpeh  ? 

3.  A  third  was  THE    LAND  OF  MIZPEH,  or 
more   accurately  "  OF  MIZPAH  "  (ilSXSn  ^N 

TTJJ'  Mcwef/ua  :  *  terra  Mispha],  the  residence  of 
the  Hivites  who  joined  the  northern  confederacy 
against  Israel,  headed  by  Jabin  king  of  Hazor 
(Josh.  xi.  3).  No  other  mention  is  found  of  this 
district  in  the  Bible,  unless  it  be  identical  with 

4.  THE  VALLEY  OF  MIZPEH 


riav  ireSiuv  Maffffdx  :  campus  Misplie~),  to  which 
the  discomfited  hosts  of  the  same  confederacy 
were  chased  by  Joshua  (xi.  8).  It  lay  eastward 
from  MISREPHOTH-MAIM  ;  but  this  affords  us 
no  assistance,  as  the  situation  of  the  latter  place 
is  by  no  means  certain.  If  we  may  rely  on  the 
peculiar  term  here  rendered  "  valley  "  —  a  term  ap 
plied  elsewhere  in  the  records  of  Joshua  only  to  the 
"  valley  of  Lebanon,"  which  is  also  said  to  have 
been  "  under  Mount  Hermon,"  and  which  contained 
the  sanctuary  of  Baal-gad  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii.  7)  — 
then  we  may  accept  the  "  land  of  Mirpah  "  or  "  the 
valley  of  Mizpeh  "  as  identical  with  that  enormous 
tract,  the  great  country  of  Coele-Syria,  the  JBuka'a 
alike  of  the  modern  Arabs  and  of  the  ancient  He 
brews  (comp.  Am.  i.  5).  which  contains  the  great 
sanctuary  of  Baal-bek,  and  may  be  truly  said  to  lie 
at  the  feet  of  Hermon  (see  -Stanley,  S.  $  P.  392 
note).  But  this  must  not  be  taken  for  more  than 
a  probable  inference,  and  it  should  not  be  over 
looked  that  the  name  Mizpeh  is  here  connected  with 
a  "  valley  "  or  "  plain  "  —  not,  as  in  the  other  cases, 
with  an  eminence.  Still  the  valley  may  have  de- 


e  Here  the  LXX.  (ed.  Mai)  omit  "  Hivites,"  and  perhaps 
read  "Hermon"  (fOin),  «s  "Arabah"  (n3"lj?)— the 
two  words  are  more  alike  to  the  ear  than  the  eye— and 
thus  give  the  sentence,  "  they  under  the  desert  in  the 
Maseuma."  A  somewhat  similar  substitution  is  found  In 
the  LXX.  version  of  Gen.  xxxv.  27. 

2  C  2 


888 


MIZPAH 


MIZPAH 


rived  its  appellation  from  an  eminence  of  sanctit1 
or  repute  situated  therein;  and  it  may  be  re 
marked  that  a  name  not  impossibly  derived  from 
Mizpeh—  Haush  Tell-Safiyeh — is  now  attached  tc 
a  hill  a  short  distance  north  of  Baalbek. 

5.  MIZPEH  (riB^tpn:  NcurQd:  Mespha),  a 
city  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  38)  ;  in  the  district  of  the 
Shefelah  or  maritime  lowland ;  a  member  of  the 
same  group  with  Dilean,  Lachish,  and  Eglon,  an< 
apparently  in  their  neighbourhood.  Van  de  Veld 
(Memoir,  335)  suggests  its  identity  with  tb 
present  Tell  es-S&fiyeh — the  Blanchegarde  of  thi 
Crusaders ;  a  conjecture  which  appears  very  feasibli 
on  the  ground  both  of  situation  and  of  the  likeness 
between  the  two  names,  which  are  nearly  iden 
tical — certainly  a  more  probable  identification  than 
those  proposed  with  GATH  and  with  LIBNAH.  Tina, 
which  is  not  improbably  Dilean,  is  about  3  miles 
N.W.,  and  Ajlun  and  urn  Lakis,  respectively  10  and 
12  to  the  S.W.  of  Tell  es-S&fieh,  which  itself 
stands  on  the  slopes  of  the  mountains  of  Judah, 
completely  overlooking  the  maritime  plain  (Porter, 
Handbk.  252).  It  is  remarkable  too  that,  just  as 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  other  Mizpahs  we  find 
Zophim,  Zuph,  or  Zaphon,  so  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Tell  es-S&fieh  it  is  very  probable  that  the  valley 


of  ZEPHATHAH  was  situated, 
ii.  31.) 


(See  Rob.  B.  R. 


6.  MIZPEH,  in  Josh,  and  Samuel;  elsewhere 
MIZPAH  (HBV»n  in  Joshua  ;  elsewhere  HBys 
Ma<r<nj<J>«f0 ;  in  Josh.  McfenrTj/ua  ;  Chron.  and  Neh. 
T\  Ma<r<f>3,  and  6  McurQe ;  Kings  and  Hos.  in  both 
MSS.  i;  ffKovia ;  Alex.  Motrrj^a :  Mesphe ;  Mas- 
pha ;  MasphatK),  a  "  city  "  of  Benjamin,  named  in 
the  list  of  the  allotment  between  Beeroth  and  Che- 
phirah,  and  in  apparent  proximity  to  Ramah  and 
Gibeon  (Josh,  xviii.  26).  Its  connexion  with  the 
two  last-named  towns  is  also  implied  in  the  later  his 
tory  (1  K.  xv.  22 ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  6  ;  Neh.  iii.  7).  It 
was  one  of  the  places  fortified  by  Asa  against  the 
incursions  of  the  kings  of  the  northern  Israel  (1  K. 
xv.  22  ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  6  ;  Jer.  xli.  9)  ;  and  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  it  became  the  residence  of 
the  superintendent  appointed  by  the  king  of  Baby 
lon  (Jer.  xl.  7,  &c.),  and  the  scene  of  his  murder  and 
of  (he  romantic  incidents  connected  with  the  name  of 
Ishmael  the  son  of  Nethaniah. 

But  Mizpah  was  more  than  this.  In  the  earlier 
periods  of  the  history  of  Israel,  at  the  first  foun 
dation  of  the  monarchy,  it  was  the  great  sanc 
tuary  of  Jehovah,  the  special  resort  of  the  people 
in  times  of  difficulty  and  solemn  deliberation.  In 
the  Jewish  traditions  it  was  for  some  time  the 
residence  of  the  ark  (see  Jerome,  Qu.  Hebr.  on 
I  Sam.  vii.  2 ;  Reland,  Antiq.  i.  §vi.)  ; '  but  this 
is  possibly  an  inference  from  the  expression  "  before 
Jehovah"  in  Judg.  xx.  1.  It  is  suddenly  brought 
before  us  in  the  history.  At  Mizpah,  when  suf 
fering  the  very  extremities  of  Philistine  bondage, 
the  nation  assembled  at  the  call  of  the  great  Pro 
phet,  and  with  strange  and  significant  rites  con- 
•essed  their  sins,  and  were  blessed  with  instant  and 
signal  deliverance  (1  Sam.  vii.  5-13).  At  Mizpah 
took  place  no  less  an  act  than  the  public  selection 
and  appointment  of  Saul  as  the  first  king  of  the 
nation  (1  Sam.  x.  17-25).  It  was  one  of  the  three 


'  Rabbi   Schwarz  (127  note)   very  ingeniously  finds  a 
reference  to  Mizpeh  in  1  Sam.  iv.  13;  where  he  would 


point  the  word  HSVP  (A.  V.  "  watching")  as 
and  thus  read  "by  the  road  to  Mizpeh." 


holy  cities  (LXX.  rots  fiyiafffitvois  rovrott)  which 
Samuel  visited  in  turn  as  judge  of  the  people  (vii. 
6,  16),  the  other  two  being  Bethel  and  Gilgal.  But, 
unlike  Bethel  and  Gilgal,  no  record  is  preserved  o* 
the  cause  or  origin  of  a  sanctity  so  abruptly  an 
nounced,  and  yet  so  fully  asserted.  We  have  seen 
that  there  is  at  least  some  ground  for  believing  that 
the  Mizpah  spoken  of  in  the  transactions  of  tho 
early  part  of  the  period  of  the  judges,  was  thf 
ancient  sanctuary  in  the  mountains  of  Gilead.  There 
is,  however,  no  reason  for,  or  rather  every  reason 
against,  such  a  supposition,  as  applied  to  the  event* 
last  alluded  to.  In  the  interval  between  the  de 
struction  of  Gibeah  and  the  rule  of  Samuel,  a  very 
long  period  had  elapsed,  during  which  tb?  ravages  of 
Ammonites,  Amalekites,  Moabites,  and  Midianites 
(Judg.  iii.  13,  14,  vi.  1,  4,  33,  x.  9)  in  the  districts 
beyond  Jordan,  in  the  Jordan  valley  itself  at  both 
its  northern  and  southern  ends — at  Jericho  no  less 
than  Jezreel — and  along  the  passes  of  communication 
between  the  Jordan  valley  and  the  western  table 
land,  must  have  rendered  communication  between 
west  and  east  almost,  if  not  quite,  impossible.  Is 
it  possible  that  as  the  old  Mizpah  became  inacces 
sible,  an  eminence  nearer  at  hand  was  chosen  and 
invested  with  the  sanctity  of  the  original  spot  and 
used  for  the  same  purposes?  Even  if  the  name 
did  not  previously  exist  there  in  the  exact  shape  of 
Mizpah,  it  may  easily  have  existed  in  some  shape 
sufficiently  near  to  allow  of  its  formation  by  a 
process  both  natural  and  frequent  in  Oriental 
speech.  To  a  Hebrew  it  would  require  a  very  slight 
inflexion  to  change  Zophim  or  Zuph — both  of  which 
names  were  attached  to  places  in  the  tribe  of  Ben 
jamin — to  Mizpah.  This,  however,  must  not  be 
taken  for  more  than  a  mere  hypothesis.  And  against 
it  there  is  the  serious  objection  that  if  it  had  been 
necessary  to  select  a  holy  place  in  the  territory  of 
Ephraim  or  Benjamin,  it  would  Seem  more  natural 
:hat  the  choice  should  have  fallen  on  Shiloh,  or 
Bethel,  than  on  one  which  had  no  previous  claim 
jut  that  of  its  name. 

With  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  and  the  establish 
ment  there  of  the  Ark,  the  sanctity  of  Mizpah,  or 
at  least  its  reputation,  seems  to  have  declited.    The 
'  men  of  Mizpah  "  (Neh.  iii.  7),  and  the  "  ruler  of 
Hizpah,"  and  also  of  "part  of  Mizpah"  (19  and 
15) — assisted  in  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  of  Jeru 
salem.     The  latter  expressions  perhaps  point  to  a 
listinction  between  the  sacred  and  the  secular  pails 
if  the  town.     The  allusion  in  ver.  7  to  the  "  throne 
f  the  governor  on  this  side  the  river  "  in  connexion 
with  Mizpah  is  curious,  and  recals  the  fact  that  Geda- 
iah,  who  was  left  in  charge  of  Palestine  by  Nebu- 
:hadnezzar,  had  his  abode  there.  But  we  hear  of  no 
eligious  act  in  connexion  with  it  till  that  affecting 
assembly  called  together  thither,  as  to  the  ancient 
»anctuary   of  their  forefathers,  by  Judas   Macca- 
aaeus,  "  when  the  Israelites  assembled  themselves 
x>gether  and  came  to  Massepha  over  against  Jerusa- 
;ri  ;  for  in  Maspha  was  there  aforetime  a  place  of 
>rayer  (r6ircs  irpofffvxijs}  for  Israel     (1  Mace.  in. 
6).  The  expression  "  over  against"  (KoreVajri),  IK 
ess  than  the  circumstances  of  tbc  story,  seems  to 
require  that  from  Mizpah  the  City  or  the  Temple 
was  visible:    an    indication    of  some  importance, 
since,  scanty  as  it  is,  it  is  the  only  information 
given  us  in  the  Bible  as  to  the  situation  of  the 
place.     Josephus  omits  all  mention  of  the  circum 
stance,  but  on  another  occasion  he  names  the  place 
so  as  fully  to  corroborate  the  inference.     It  is  in 
his  account  of  the  vviit  of  Alexander  the  Great  tc 


MIZPAH 

Jerusalem  (Ant.  xi.  8,  §5),  where  he  relates  that 
Jaddua  the  high-priest  went  to  meet  the  king  "  to  a 
certain  place  called  Sapha  (2ot</><£) ;  which  name,  if 
interpreted  in  the  Greek  tongue,  signifies  a  look-out 
place  (ffKOiri\v),  for  from  thence  both  Jerusalem 
and  the  sanctuary  are  visible."  Sapha  is  doubtless 
a  corruption  of  the  old  name  Mizpah  through  its 
Greek  form  Maspha ;  and  there  can  be  no  reason 
able  douot  that  this  is  also  the  spot  which  Josephus 
011  other  occasions — -adopting  as  he  often  does  the 
Greek  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  name  as  if  it  were 
the  original  (witness  the  &v<a  ayopd,  "A/cpa,  7)  T<av 
Tvpoiroitov  <j>dpa.y£,  &c.  &c.) — mentions  as  "  appro 
priately  named  Scopus"  (SKoirds),  because  from  it 
a  clear  view  was  obtained  both  of  the  city  and  of 
the  great  size  of  the  Temple  (B.  J.  v.  2,  §3). 
The  position  of  this  he  gives  minutely,  at  least 
twice  {B.  J.  ii.  19,  §4,  and  v.  2,  §3),  as  on  the  north 
quarter  of  the  city,  and  about  7  stadia  therefrom  ; 
that  is  to  say,  as  is  now  generally  agreed,  the 
broad &  ridge  which  forms  the  continuation  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives  to  the  north  and  east,  from  which 
the  traveller  gains,  like  Titus,  his  first  view,  and 
takes  his  last  farewell,  of  the  domes,  walls,  and 
towers  of  the  Holy  City. 

Any  one  who  will  look  at  one  of  the  numerous 
photographs  of  Jerusalem  taken  from  this  point, 
will  satisfy  himself  of  the  excellent  view  of  both 
city  and  temple  which  it  commands ;  and  it  is  the 
only  spot  from  which  such  a  view  is  possible,  which 
could  answer  the  condition  of  the  situation  of  Miz 
pah.  Neby  Samwil,  for  which  Dr.  Robinson  argues 
(B.  E.  i.  460),  is  at  least  five  miles,  as  the  crow  flies, 
from  Jerusalem ;  and  although  from  that  lofty 
station  the  domes  of  the  "  Church  of  the  Sepulchre," 
and  even  that  of  the  Sakrah  can  be  discerned,  the 
distance  is  too  great  to  allow  us  to  accept  it  as  a 
spot  "  over  against  Jerusalem,"  or  from  which 
either  city  or  temple  could  with  satisfaction  be  in 
spected.  Nor  is  the  moderate  height  of  Scopus,  as 
compared  with  Neby  Samwil,  any  argument  against 
it,  for  we  do  not  know  how  far  the  height  of  a 
"  high  place  "  contributed  to  its  sanctity,  or  indeed 
what  that  sanctity  exactly  consisted  in.h  On  the  other 
hand,  some  corroboration  is  afforded  to  the  identifi 
cation  of  Scopus  with  Mizpah,  in  the  fact  that 
Mizpah  is  twice  rendered  by  the  LXX.  ffKoirid. 

Titus's  approach  through  the  villages  of  ancient 
Benjamin  was,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  a  close  parallel  to 
that  of  an  earlier  enemy  of  Jerusalem — Sennacherib. 
In  his  case,  indeed,  there  is  no  mention  of  Mizpah. 
It  was  at  NOB  that  the  Assyrian  king  remained  for 
a  day  feasting  his  eyes  on  "  the  house  of  Zion  and  the 
hill  of  Jerusalem,"  and  menacing  with  "  his  hand  " 
the  fair  booty  before  him.  But  so  exact  is  the 
correspondence,  that  it  is  difficult  not  to  suspect  that 
Nob  and  Mizpah  must  have  been  identical,  since 
that  part  of  the  rising  ground  north  of  Jerusalem 
which  is  crossed  by  the  northern  road  is  the  only 
spot  from  which  a  view  of  both  city  and  temple 
at  once  can  be  obtained,  without  making  a  long 
de'tour  by  way  of  the  Mount  of  Olives.  This,  how 
ever,  will  be  best  discussed  under  NOB.  Assuming 
that  the  hill  in  question  is  the  Scopus  of  Josephus, 


MIZRAIM 


389 


and  that  that  again  was  the  Mizpah  of  the  He 
brews,  the  skopia  (ffKovia)  and  Massephath  of  ths 
LXX.  translators,  it  is  certainly  startling  to  find  a 
village  named  Shafat  '  lying  on  the  north  slope  of 
the  mountain  a  very  short  distance  below  the  sum 
mit  —  if  summit  it  can  be  called  —  from  which  the 
view  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  Zion  (now  occupied  by 
the  Sakrah),  is  obtained.  Can  Shafat,  or  Safat,  be, 
as  there  is  good  reason  to  believe  in  the  case  of 
Tell-es  Sdfieh,  the  remains  of  the  ancient  Semitic 
name  ?  Our  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the 
Holy  Land,  even  of  the  city  and  environs  of  Jeru 
salem,  is  so  very  imperfect,  that  the  above  can  only 
be  taken  as  suggestions  which  may  be  not  unworthy 
the  notice  of  future  explorers  in  their  investigations. 
Professor  Stanley  appears  to  have  been  the  first 
to  suggest  the  identity  of  Scopus  with  Mizpah 
(S.  $  P.  1st  edit.  222).  But  since  writing  the 
above,  the  writer  has  become  aware  that  the  same 
view  is  taken  by  Dr.  Bonar  in  his  Land  of  Promise 
(Appendix,  §viii.).  This  traveller  has  investigated 
the  subject  with  great  ability  and  clearness  ;  and 
he  points  out  one  circumstance  in  favour  of  Scopus 
being  Mizpah,  and  against  Neby  Samwil,  which 
had  escaped  the  writer,  viz.  that  the  former  lay 
directly  in  the  road  of  the  pilgrims  from  Samaria 
to  Jerusalem  who  were  murdered  by  Ishmael  (Jer. 
xli.  7),  while  the  latter  is  altogether  away  from  it. 
Possibly  the  statement  of  Josephus  (see  vol.  i. 
p.  8956)  that  it  was  at  Hebron,  not  Gibeon,  that 
Ishmael  was  overtaken,  coupled  with  Dr.  B.'s  own 
statement  as  to  the  pre-occupation  of  the  districts 
east  of  Jerusalem  —  may  remove  the  only  scruple 
which  he  appears  to  entertain  to  the  identification 
of  Scopus  with  Mizpah.  [G.] 

MIZ'PAR  OBp»  :  McuHpdp  :  Mesphar).  Pro 

perly  MISPAR,  as  in  the  A.  V.  of  1611  and  the  Geneva 
version  ;  the  same  as  MISPKEETH  (Ezr.ii.  2). 

MIZPEH.     [MIZPAH.] 

MIZ'RAIM  (Dn*»:  Metrpafi/:  Mesraim^ 
the  usual  name  of  Egypt  in  the  0.  T.,  the  dual  of 
Mazor,  "11  XD,  which  is  less  frequently*  employed: 
gent,  noun,  *"1^p. 

If  the  etymology  of  Mazor  be  sought  in  He 
brew  it  might  signify  a  "  mound,"  "  bulwark,""' 
or  "  citadel,"  or  again  "  distress  ;"  but  no  one  of 
these  meanings  is  apposite.  We  prefer,  with  Ge- 
senius  (Thes.  s.  v.  "11XO),  to  look  to  the  Arabic, 
and  we  extract  the  article  oil  the  corresponding  word 

o 
from  the  Kamoos,  "    ^q^-  a  partition  between  two 


things,  as  also 


'•  a  limit  between  two  lands  : 


a  receptacle  :  a  city  or  a  province  [the  explanation 
means  both]  :  and  red  earth  or  mud.  The  well- 
known  city  [Memphis]."  Gesenius  accepts  the 
meaning  "  limit  "  or  the  like,  but  it  is  hard  to  see 
its  fitness  with  th,e  Shemites,  who  had  no  idea  that 
the  Nile  or  Egypt  was  on  the  border  of  two  conti- 


*  The  word  used  by  Josephus  in  speaking  of  it  (B.  J. 
v.  2,  }i)  Is  xfloMoAos ;  and  it  will  be  observed  that  the  root 
Of  the  word  Mizpah  has  the  force  of  breadth  as  well  as  of 
elevation.  See  above. 

k  In  the  East,  at  the  present  time,  a  sanctity  is  at 
tached  to  the  spot  from  which  any  holy  place  is  visible. 
Such  spots  may  be  met  with  all  through  the  hills  a 
law  miles  north  of  Jerusalem,  distinguished  by  thr  little 


heaps  of  stones  erected  by  thoughtful  or  pious  Mussul 
mans.    (See  Miss  Beaufort's  Egypt.  Sepulchres,  &c.  ii.  88.) 

1  This  is  the  spelling  given  by  Van  de  Velde  in  his 
map.  Robinson  gives  it  as  ShSfat  (t.  e.  with  the  Mri), 
and  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  in  the  Arabic  lists  attached  to  Robin 
son's  1st  edition  (iii.  App.  121),  Sa'fdt. 

a  It  occurs  ( nly  2  K.  six.  24 ;  Is.  siz.  6,  xxxvil.  26 
Mic.  vii.  12. 


390 


MIZRAIM 


nents,  unless  it  be  supposed  to  denote  the  divided 
land.  We  believe  that  the  hist  meaning  but  one, 
"  red  earth  or  mud"  is  the  true  one,  from  its  cor 
respondence  to  the  Egyptian  name  of  the  country, 
XEM,  which  signifies  "  black,"  and  was  given  to  it 
for  the  blackness  of  its*  alluvial  soil.  It  must  be  re- 


collected  that  the  term  "  red  " 


is  not  used 


in  the  Kamoos,  or  indeed  in  Semitic  phraseology,  in 
the  limited  sense  to  which  Indo-European  ideas  have 
accustomed  us  ;  it  embraces  a  wide  range  of  tints, 
from  what  we  call  red  to  a  reddish  brown.  So,  in 
.ike  manner,  in  Egyptian  the  word  "  black  "  signifies 
dark  in  an  equally  wide  sense.  We  have  already 
shown  that  the  Hebrew  word  Ham,  the  name  of  the 
ancestor  of  the  Egyptians,  is  evidently  the  same  as 
the  native  appellation  of  the  country,  the  former 
signifying  "  warm  "  or  "  hot,"  and  a  cognate  Arabic 

*--^ 

word,  t»>-  meaning  "  black  fetid  mud"  (Ka 
moos),  or  "black  mud"  (Sihdh,  MS.),  and  sug 
gested  that  Ham  and  Mazor  may  be  identical  with 
the  Egyptian  KEM  (or  KHEM),  which  is  virtually 
the  same  in  both  sound  and  sense  as  the  former, 
and  of  the  same  sense  as  the  latter.  [EGYPT  ;  HAM]. 
How  then  are  we  to  explain  this  double  naming  of 
the  countiy?  A  recent  discovery  throws  light 
upon  the  question.  We  had  already  some  reason 
for  conjecturing  that  there  were  Semitic  equivalents, 
with  the  same  sense,  for  some  of  the  Egyptian  geo 
graphical  names  with  which  the  Shemites  were  well 
acquainted.  M.  de  Rouge'  has  ascertained  that 
Zoan  is  the  famous  Shepherd-stronghold  Avaris,  and 
that  the  Hebrew  name  |i?S,  from  |yX,  "  he  moved 
tents,  went  forward,"  is  equivalent  to  the  Egyptian 
one  HA-WAR,  "  the  place  of  departure  "  (Revue 
Archeologique,  1861,  p.  250).  This  discovery,  it 
should  be  noticed,  gives  remarkable  significance  to 
the  passage,  "  Now  Hebron  was  built  seven  years 
before  Zoan  in  Egypt"  (Num.  xiii.  22).  Perhaps  a 
similar  case  may  be  found  in  Kush  and  Phut,  both 
of  which  occur  in  Egyptian  as  well  as  Hebrew.  In 
the  Bible,  African  Gush  is  Ethiopia  above  Egypt,  and 
Phut,  an  African  people  or  land  connected  with 
Egypt.  In  the  Egyptian  inscriptions,  the  same 
Ethiopia  is  KEESH,  and  an  Ethiopian  people  is 
called  ANU-PET-MERU,  "the  Anu  of  the  island 
of  the  bow,"  probably  Mcroe,  where  the  Nile  makes 
an  extraordinary  bend  in  its  course.  We  have  no 
Egyptian  or  Hebrew  etymology  _  for  KEESH,  or 
'Jush,  unless  we  may  compare  B>1p,  which  would 
give  the  same  connexion  with  bow  that  we  find  in 
Phut  or  PET,  for  which  our  only  derivation  is  from 
the  Egyptian  PET,  "  a  bow."  There  need  be  no 
difficulty  in  thus  supposing  that  Mizraim  is  merely 
the  name  of  a  country,  and  that  Ham  and  Mazor 
may  have  been  the  same  person,  for  the  very  form 
of  Mizraim  forbids  any  but  the  former  idea,  and  the 
tenth  chapter  of  Genesis  is  obviously  not  altogethe: 
a  genealogical  list.  Egyptian  etymologies  have  been 


sought  in   vain  for  Mizraim; 

"  kingdom"  (Gesen.  Thcs.  s.  v.  IIXE),  is  not  an 

ancient  form,  aiv?  the  old  name,  TO-MAR  (Brugsch, 
Qcog.  Inschr.  Pi.  x.  nos.  367-370,  p.  74),  sug 
gested  as  the  source  of  Mizraim  oy  Dr.  Hincks,  is 
too  different  to  be  accepted  as  a  derivation. 

MIZRAIM  first  occurs  in  the  account  of  the  Karaites 
in  Gen.  x.,  where  we  read,  "  And  the  sons  of  Ham  ; 
dish,  aii'l  Mizraim,  and  Flint,  and  Canaan"  (ver.  <3 


MIZRAIM 

como.  1  Chr.  i.  8).  Here  we  have  conjectured  thai 
iswad  of  tha  ''-ml,  the  original  text  had  the  gentile 
noun  in  the  plural  (suggesting  D>-l¥p  instead  of  tee 
jresent  DHVO),  since  it  seems  strange  that  a  duaj 
form  should  occur  in  the  first  generation  after  Ham, 
and  since  the  plural  of  the  gentile  noun  would  be 
consistent  with  the  plural  forms  of  the  names  of 
the  Mizraite  nations  or  tribes  afterwards  enumerated, 
as  well  as  with  the  like  singular  forms  of  the  names 
of  the  Canaauites,  excepting  Sidon.  [HAM.] 

If  the  names  be  in  an  order  of  seniority,  whether 
as  indicating  children  of  Ham,  or  older  and  younger 
aranches,  we  can  form  no  theory  as  to  their  settle 
ments  from  their  places ;  but  if  the  arrangement  be 
geographical,  which  is  probable  from  the  occurrence 
of  the  form  Mizraim,  which  in  no  case  can  be  a  man's 
name,  and  the  order  of  some  of  the  Mizraites,  the 
placing  may  afford  a  clue  to  the  positions  of  the 
Hamite  lands.  Gush  would  stand  first  as  the  most 
widely  spread  of  these  peoples,  extending  from  Baby 
lon  to  the  upper  Nile,  the  territory  of  Mizraim  would 
be  the  next  to  the  north,  embracing  Egypt  and  its 
colonies  on  the  north-west  and  north-east.  Phut  as 
dependent  on  Egypt  might  follow  Mizraim,  and  Ca 
naan  as  the  northernmost  would  end  the  list.  Egypt, 
the  "  land  of  Ham,"  may  have  been  the  primitive 
seat  of  these  four  stocks.  In  the  enumeration  of  the 
Mizraites,  though  we  have  tribes  extending  far  be 
yond  Egypt,  we  may  suppose  that  they  all  had 
their  first  seat  in  Mizraim,  and  spread  thence, 
as  is  distinctly  said  of  the  Philistines.  Here 
the  order  seems  to  be  geographical,  though  the 
;«ime  is  not  so  clear  of  the  Ganaanites.  The 
list  of  the  Mizraites  is  thus  given  in  Gen.  x. : — 
"  And  Mizraim  begat  Ludim,  and  Anamim,  and 
Lehabim,  and  Naphtuhim,  and  Pathrusim,  and 
Casluhim  (whence  came  forth  the  Philistines),  and 
Caphtorim"  (13,  14;  comp.  1  Chr.  i.  11,  12). 
Here  it  is  certain  that  we  have  the  names  of  nations 
or  tribes,  and  it  is  probable  that  they  are  all  derived 
from  names  of  countries.  We  rind  elsewhere  Pathros 
and  Caphtor,  probably  Lud  (for  the  Mizraite  Ludim), 
and  perhaps,  Lub  for  the  Lubim,  which  are  almost 
certainly  the  same  as  the  Lehabim.  There  is  a  diffi 
culty  in  the  Philistines  being,  according  tD  the 
present  text,  traced  to  the  Casluhim,  whereas  in 
other  places  they  come  from  the  land  of  Caphtor, 
and  are  even  called  Caphtorim.  It  seems  probable 
that  there  has  been  a  misplacement,  and  that  tne 
parenthetic  clause  originally  followed  the  name  of 
the  Caphtorim.  Of  these  names  we  have  not  yet 
identified  the  Anamim  and  the  Casluhim ;  the  Leha 
bim  are,  as  already  said,  almost  certainly  the  same 
as  the  Lubim,  the  REBU  of  the  Egyptian  monu 
ments,  and  the  primitive  Libyans ;  the  Naphtuhim 
we  put  immediately  to  the  west  of  northern  Egypt ; 
and  the  Pathrusim  and  Caphtorim  in  that  country, 
where  the  Casluhim  may  also  be  placed.  There 
would  therefore  be  a  distinct  order  from  west  t« 
east,  and  if  the  Philistines  be  transferred,  this  order 
would  be  perfectly  preserved,  though  perhaps  these 
last  would  necessarily  be  placed  with  their  imme 
diate  parent  among  the  tribes. 

Mizraim  therefore,  like  Cush,  and  perhaps  Ham, 
geographically  represents  a  centre  whence  colonies 
went  forth  in  the  remotest  period  of  post-diluvian 
history.  The  Philistines  were  originally  settled  in  the 
land  of  Mizraim,  and  there  is  reason  to  suppose  the 
same  of  the  Lehabim,  if  they  be  those  Libyans  who 
revolted,  .urnnlm^  to  Manetho,  from  the  EgyptJMH 
in  a  very  early  age.  [Luiuu.]  The  list,  liowi-vcr 


MIZZAH 

probably  arranges  them  according  to  the  settlements 
they  held  at  a  later  time,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
notice  of  the  Philistines'  migration ;  but  the  men 
tion  of  the  spread  of  the  Canaaiiites  must  be  con 
sidered  on  the  other  side.  We  regard  the  distri 
bution  of  the  Mizraites  as  showing  that  their 
colonies  were  but  a  part  of  tba  great  migration 
that  gave  the  Cushites  the  command  of  the  Indian 
Ocean,  and  which  explains  the  affinity  the  Egyptian 
monuments  show  us  between  the  pre-Hellenic  Cretans 
and  Carians  (the  latter  no  doubt  the  Leleges  of  the 
G'-eek  writers)  and  the  Philistines. 

The  history  and  ethnology  of  the  Mizraite  nations 
have  been  given  under  the  article  HAM,  so  that  here 
it  is  not  needful  to  do  more  than  draw  attention  to 
some  remarkable  particulars  which  did  not  fall  under 
our  notice  in  treating  of  the  early  Egyptians.  We 
find  from  the  monuments  of  Egypt  that  the  white 
nations  of  western  Africa  were  of  what  we  call  the 
Semitic  type,  and  we  must  therefore  be  careful  not 
to  assume  that  they  formed  part  of  the  stream  of 
Arab  colonization  that  has  lor  full  two  thousand 
years  steadily  flowed  into  northern  Africa.  The 
seafaring  race  that  first  passed  from  Egypt  to  the 
west,  though  physically  like,  was  mentally  different 
from,  the  true  pastoral  Arab,  and  to  this  day  the 
two  elements  have  kept  apart,  the  townspeople  of  the 
coast  being  unable  to  settle  amongst  the  tribes  of  the 
interior,  and  these  tribes  again  being  as  unable  to 
settle  on  the  coast. 

The  affinity  of  the  Egyptians  and  then-  neighbours 
was  long  a  safeguard  of  the  empire  of  the  Pharaohs, 
and  from  the  latter,  whether  Cretans,  Lubim,  or 
people  of  Phut  and  Cush,  the  chief  mercenaries  of  the 
Egyptian  armies  were  drawn  ;  facts  which  we  mainly 
learn  from  the  Bible,  confirmed  by  the  monuments. 
In  the  days  of  the  Persian  dominion  Libyan  Inaros 
made  a  brave  stand  for  the  liberty  of  Egypt.  Pro 
bably  the  tie  was  more  one  of  religion  than  of  com 
mon  descent,  for  the  Egyptian  belief  appears  to  have 
mainly  prevailed  in  Africa  as  far  as  it  was  civilised, 
though  of  course  changed  in  its  details.  The  Phii 
listines  had  a  different  religion,  and  seem  to  have 
been  identified  in  this  matter  with  the  Canaanites, 
and  thus  they  may  have  lost,  as  they  seem  to  have 
lone,  their  attachment  to  their  mother  country. 

In  the  use  of  the  names  Mazor  and  Mizraim  for 
Egypt  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  dual  indicates 
the  two  regions  into  which  the  country  has  always 
been  divided  by  nature  as  well  as  by  its  inhabit 
ants.  Under  the  Greeks  and  Romans  there  was 
indeed  a  third  division,  the  Heptanomis,  which  has 
been  called  Middle  Egypt,  as  between  Upper  and 
Lower  Egypt,  but  we  must  rather  regard  it  as 
forming,  with  the  Thebais,  Upper  Egypt.  It  has 
been  supposed  that  Mazor,  as  distinct  from  Mizrairn. 
signifies  Lower  Egypt ;  but  this  conjecture  cannot 
be  maintained.  For  fuller  details  on  the  subject 
of  this  article  the  reader  is  referred  to  HAM,  EGYPT, 
and  the  articles  on  the  several  Mizraite  nations  or 
tribes.  [R.  S.  P.] 

MIZ'ZAH  (H-TO:     MoC«  ;     Alex.    Mox<=    in 
1  Chr. :  Mezd).  Son  of  Reuel  and  grandson  of  Esau 
descended   likewise  through  Bashemath  from  Ish- 
mael.     He  was  one  of  the  "  dukes  "  or  chiefs  o:" 
tnbes  in  the  land  of  Edom  (Gen.  xxxvi.  13,  17 
1  Chr.  i.  37).     The  settlements  of  his  descendants 
are  believed  by  Mr.  Forster  (Hist.  Geog.  of  Arab 
ii.  55)  to  be  indicated  in  the  ptaavirtis  K6\iroi 
or  1'hrat-l/i'sfW,  at  the  head  of  the  Persian  gulf. 
MNA'SON  (yivdawv)  is  honourably  mentionec 


MOAB 


391 


u  Script 'ire,  like  Gaius,  Lydia,  an  I  others,  as  one 
if  the  hosts  of  the  Apostle  Paul  (Acts  xxi.  16). 
One  or  two  questions  of  some  little  interest,  though 
>f  no  great  importance,  are  raised  by  the  context, 
t  is  most  likely,  in  the  first  place,  that  his  resi- 
lence  at  this  time  was  not  Caesarea,  but  Jerusalem, 
le  was  well  known  to  the  Christians  of  Caesarea, 
and  they  took  St.  Paul  to  his  house  at  Jerusalem. 
?o  translate  the  words  &yovres  Trap'  $  £ti>i<r6w(i.tv, 
as  in  the  A.  V.,  removes  no  grammatical  difficulty, 
and  introduces  a  slight  improbability  into  the  nar 
rative.  He  was,  however,  a  Cyprian  by  birth,  and 
may  have  been  a  friend  of  Barnabas  (Acts  iv.  36), 
md  possibly  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  Chri»- 
ianity  by  him.  The  Cyprians  who  are  so  promi 
nently  mentioned  in  Acts  xi.  19,  20,  may  have 
ncluded  Mnason.  It  is  hardly  likely  that  he  could 
ave  been  converted  during  the  journey  of  Paul  and 
Barnabas  through  Cyprus  (Acts  xiii.  4-13),  other 
wise  the  Apostle  would  have  been  personally  ac- 
[uainted  with  him,  which  does  not  appear  to  have 
>een  the  case.  And  the  phrase  apxaios  fna6r)T^s 
wints  to  an  earlier  period,  possibly  to  the  day  of 
r'entecost  (compare  Iv  &PXV>  Acts  xi.  15),  or  to 
lirect  intercourse  with  our  blessed  Lord  Himself. 
;CYPRUS.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

MO'AB  (2Ni» :  Mox£)3  ;  Josephus,  MtiojSos  : 
Moab},  the  name  of  the  son  of  Lot's  eldest  daughter, 
he  elder  brother  of  Ben-ammi,  the  progenitor  of 
the  Ammonites  (Gen.  xix.  37)  ;  also  of  the  nation 
descended  from  him,  though  the  name  "  Moab- 
tes"  is  in  both  the  original  and  A.  V.  more 
requently  used  for  them. 

No  explanation  of  the  name  is  given  us  in  the 
original  record,  and  it  is  not  possible  to  throw  an 
nterpretation  into  it  unless  by  some  accommodation. 
Various  explanations  have  however  been  proposed, 
'a.)  The  LXX.  insert  the  words  \tyovffa-  £K  rov 
rarp6s  fjiov,  "  saying  '  from  my  father,' "  as  if 
ND.  This  is  followed  by  the  old  interpreters ;  as 
Josephus  (Ant.  i.  11,  §5),  Jerome's  Quaest.  Hebr. 
in  Genesim,  the  gloss  of  the  Pseudojon.  Targum  ; 
and  in  modern  times  by  De  Wette  (Bibel\ Tuch  (Gen. 
370),  and  J.  D.  Michaelis  (B.  fur  Ungelehrteri). 
(6.)  By  Killer  (Onom.  414),  Simonis  (Onom.  479), 
it  is  derived  from  3K  N21O,  "  ingressus,  »'.  e. 
coitus,  patris."  (c.)  Rosenmiiller  (see  Schumann, 
Genesis,  302)  proposes  to  treat  \12  as  equivalent 
for  D*O,  in  accordance  with  the  figure  employed  by 
Balaam  in  Num.  xxiv.  7.  This  is  countenanced  by 
Jerome — "  aqua  patema  "  (  Comm.  inMic.  vi.  8) — 
and  has  the  great  authority  of  Gesenius  in  its  favour 
( Thes.  775  a)  ;  also  of  Fiirst  (ffandwb.  707)  and 
Bunsen  (BibelwerK).  (d.)  A  derivation,  probably 
more  correct  etymologically  than  either  of  the  above, 
is  that  suggested  by  Maurer  from  the  root  3NV 
"  to  desire" — "  the  desirable  land" — with  reference 
to  the  extreme  fertility  of  the  region  occupied  by 
Moab.  (See  also  Fiirst,  ffwb.  707  &.)  No  hint,  how 
ever,  has  yet  been  discovered  hi  the  Bible  records  of 
such  an  origin  of  the  name. 

Zoar  was  the  cradle  of  the  race  of  Lot.  The  situa 
tion  of  this  town  appears  to  have  been  in  the  district 
cast  of  the  Jordan,  and  to  the  north  or  north-east 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  [ZoAR,  p.  1857  a.]  From  this 
centre  the  brother-tribes  spread  themselves.  AMMOJS  . 
whose  disposition  seems  throughout  to  have  been 
more  roving  and  unsettled,  went  to  the  north-east 
and  took  possession  of  the  pastures  and  waste  tracts 


592 


MOAB 


which  lay  outside  the  district  of  tne  mountains ; 
that  which  in  earlier  titr.js  seems  to  hare  been 
Known  as  Ham,  and  inhabited  by  the  Zuzim  or 
Zamzumndm  (Gen.  xiv.  5 ;  Deut.  ii.  20).  MOAB, 
whose  habits  were  more  settled  and  peaceful,  re 
mained  nearer  their  original  seat.  The  rich  high 
lands  which  crown  the  eastern  side  of  the  chasm  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  extend  northwards  as  far  as  the 
foot  of  the  mountains  of  Gilead,  appear  at  that  early 
date  to  have  borne  a  name,  which  in  its  Hebrew 
form  is  presented  to  us  as  Shaven- Kiriathaim,  and  to 
have  been  inhabited  by  a  branch  of  the  great  race 
of  the  kephaim.  Like  the  Horim  before  the  de 
scendants  of  Esau,  the  Avim  before  the  Philistines, 
or  the  indigenous  races  of  the  New  World  before  the 
settlers  from  the  West,  this  ancient  people,  the 
Emim,  gradually  became  extinct  before  the  Moabites, 
who  thus  obtained  possession  of  the  whole  of  the  rich 
elevated  tract  referred  to— a  district  forty  or  fifty 
:.niles  in  length  by  ten  or  twelve  in  width,  the  cele- 
nrated  Belka  and  Kerrak  of  the  modern  Arabs,  the 
most  fertile  on  that  side  of  Jordan,  no  less  eminently 
titted  for  pastoral  pursuits  than  the  maritime  plains 
of  Philistia  and  Sharon,  on  the  west  of  Palestine, 
are  for  agriculture.  With  the  highlands  they  occu 
pied  also  the  lowlands  at  their  feet,  the  plain  which 
intervenes  between  the  slopes  of  the  mountains  and 
the  one  perennial  stream  of  Palestine,  and  through 
which  they  were  enabled  to  gain  access  at  pleasure 
to  the  fords  of  the  river,  and  thus  to  the  country 
beyond  it.  Of  the  valuable  district  of  the  high 
lands  they  were  not  allowed  to  retain  entire  pos 
session.  The  warlike  Amorites — either  forced  from 
their  original  seats  on  the  west,  or  perhaps  lured 
over  by  the  increasing  prosperity  of  the  young 
nation — crossed  the  Jordan  and  overran  the  richer 
portion  of  the  territory  on  the  north,  driving  Moab 
back  to  his  original  position  behind  the  natural  bul 
wark  of  the  Arnon.  The  plain  of  the  Jordan-valley, 
the  hot  and  humid  atmosphere  of  which  had  per 
haps  no  attraction  for  the  Amorite  mountaineers, 
appear?;  to  have  remained  in  the  power  of  Moab. 
When  Israel  reached  the  boundary  of  the  country, 
this  contest  had  only  very  recently  occurred.  Sihon, 
the  Amorite  king  under  whose  command  Heshbon 
had  been  taken,  was  still  reigning  there — the  ballads 
commemorating  the  event  were  still  fresh  in  the 
popular  mouth  (Num.  xxi.  27 — 30).» 

Of  these  events,  which  extended  over  a  period, 
according  to  the  received  Bible  chronology,  of  not  less 
than  500  years,  from  the  destruction  of  Sodom  to  the 
arrival  of  Israel  on  the  borders  of  the  Promised 
Land,  we  obtain  th»  above  outline  only  from  the 
fragments  of  ancient  documents,  which  are  found 
embedded  in  the  records  of  Numbers  and  Deutero 
nomy  (Num.  xxi.  26-30 ;  Deut.  ii.  10,  11). 

The  position  into  which  the  Moabites  were  driven 
by  the  incursion  of  the  Amorites  was  a  very  circum 
scribed  one,  in  extent  not  so  much  as  half  that  which 
they  had  lost.  But  on  the  other  hand  its  position  was 
much  more  secure,  and  it  was  well  suited  for  the 
occupation  of  a  people  whose  disposition  was  not  so 
warlike  as  that  of  their  neighbours.  It  occupied  the 
southern  half  of  the  high  table-lands  which  rise  above 
tne  eastern  side  of  the  Dead  Sea.  On  every  side  it 
was  strongly  fortified  by  nature.  On  the  north 
was  the  tremendous  chasm  of  the  Arnon.  On  the 

*•  For  an  examination  of  ttiis  remarkable  passage,  in 
sonje  respects  without  a  parallel  in  the  Old  Testament, 
Me  NUMBERS. 

»  The  word   *J1N9  (A.V.  "corrers")  is  twice  used 


MOAB 

west  it  was  limited  by  the  precipices,  01  more  M 
curately  the  cliffs,  which  descend  almost  perpendi 
cularly  to  the  shore  of  the  lake,  and  are  intersec<ed 
only  by  one  or  two  steep  and  narrow  passes.  Lastly, 
on  the  south  and  east,  it  was  protected  by  a  half 
circle  of  hills  which  open  only  to  allow  the  passage 
of  a  branch  of  the  Arnon  and  another  of  the  torrents 
which  descend  to  the  Dead  Sea. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  description 
that  the  territoiy  occupied  by  Moab  at  the  period 
of  its  greatest  extent,  before  the  invasion  of  the 
Amorites,  divided  itself  naturally  into  three  distinct 
and  independent  portions.  Each  of  these  portions 
appears  to  have  had  its  name  by  which  it  is  almost 
invariably  designated.  (1)  The  enclosed  corner b  or 
canton  south  of  the  Arnon  was  the  "  field  of  Moab  * 
(Ruth  i.  1,2,  6,  &c.).  (2)  The  more  open  rolling 
country  north  of  the  Arnon,  opposite  Jericho,  and 
up  to  the  hills  of  Gilead,  was  the  "  land  of  Moab  " 
(Deut.  i.  5,  xxxii.  49,  &c.).  (3)  The  sunk  district 
in  the  tropical  depths  of  the  Jordan  valley,  taking 
its  name  from  that  of  the  great  valley  itself— the 
Arabah — was  the  Arboth-Moab,  the  dry  regions — 
in  the  A.  V.  very  incorrectly  rendered  the  "  plains 
of  Moab"  (Num.  xxii.  1,  &c.). 

Outside  of  the  hills,  which  enclosed  the  "  field 
of  Moab,"  or  Moab  proper,  on  the  south-east, 
and  which  are  at  present  called  the  Jebel  Uru- 
Karaiyeh  and  Jebel  el  Tarfwjeh,  lay  the  vast 
pasture  grounds  of  the  waste  uncultivated  coun 
try  or  "  Midbar,"  which  is  described  as  "  facing 
Moab"  on  the  east  (Num.  xxi.  11).  Through  this 
latter  district  Israel  appears  to  have  approached 
the  Promised  Land.  Some  communication  had 
evidently  taken  place,  though  of  what  nature  it  is 
impossible  clearly  to  ascertain.  For  while  in  Deut. 
ii.  28,  29,  the  attitude  of  the  Moabites  is  men 
tioned  as  friendly,  this  seems  to  be  contradicted 
by  the  statement  of  xxiii.  4,  while  in  Judg.  xi.  17, 
again,  Israel  is  said  to  have  sent  from  Kadesh 
asking  permission  to  pass  through  Moab,  a  permis 
sion  which,  like  Edom,  Moab  refused.  At  any  rate 
the  attitude  perpetuated  by  the  provision  of  Deut. 
xxiii.  3 — a  provision  maintained  in  full  force  by 
the  latest  of  the  Old  Testament  reformers  (Neh. 
xiii.  1,  2,  23) — is  one  of  hostility. 

But  whatever  the  communication  may  have 
been,  the  result  was  that  Israel  did  not  traverse 
Moab,  but  turning  to  the  right  passed  outside  the 
mountains  through  the  "  wilderness,"  by  the  east 
side  of  the  territory  above  described  (Deut.  ii.  8 ; 
Judg.  xi.  18),  and  finally  took  up  their  position  in 
the  country  north  of  the  Arnon,  from  which  Moab 
had  so  lately  been  ejected.  Here  the  head-quarters 
of  the  nation  remained  for  a  considerable  time  while 
the  conquest  of  Bashan  was  being  effected.  It  waj 
during  this  period  that  the  visit  of  Balaam  took  place 
The  whole  of  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan,  with  the 
exception  of  the  one  little  corner  occupied  by  Moab, 
was  in  possession  of  the  invaders,  and  although  at  the 
period  in  question  the  main  body  had  descended  from 
the  upper  level  to  the  plains  of  Shittim,  the  Ar 
both-Moab,  in  the  Jordan  valley,  yet  a  great 
number  must  have  remained  on  the  upper  level, 
and  the  towns  up  to  the  very  edge  of  the  ravine  of 
the  Arnon  were  still  occupied  by  their  settlement* 
(Num.  xxi.  24  ;  Judg.  xi.  26).  It  was  a  situation 


with  respect  to  Moab  (Num.  xxlv.  17  ;  Jer.  xlvili.  45), 
No  one  appears  yet  to  have  discovered  its  force  in  tbu 
relation.  It  can  hardly  have  any  connexion  wii  the 
shape  of  the  territory  as  noticed  in  the  text. 


MOAU 

fill.'  of  alarm  for  a  nation  which  had  already  suffered 
90  severely.  In  his  extremity  the  Moabite  king,  Balak 
• — whose  father  Zippor  was  doubtless  the  chieftain 
who  had  lost  his  lite  in  the  encounter  with  Sihon 
(Num.  xxi.  26) — appealed  to  the  Midianites  for  aid 
(Num.  xxii.  2-4).  With  a  metaphor  highly  ap 
propriate  both  to  his  mouth  and  to  the  ear  of  the 
pastoral  tribe  he  was  addressing, c  he  exclaims  that 
"  this  people  will  lick  up  all  round  about  us  as  the 
ox  licketh  up  the  grass  of  the  field."  What  rela 
tion  existed  between  Moab  and  Midian  we  do  not 
know,  but  there  are  various  indications  that  it  was 
a  closer  one  than  would  arise  merely  from  their  com 
mon  descent  from  Terah.  The  tradition  of  the 
Jewsd  is,  that  up  to  this  time  the  two  had  been  one 
nation,  with  kings  taken  alternately  from  each,  and 
that  Balak  was  a  Midianite.  This,  however,  is  in  con 
tradiction  to  the  statements  of  Genesis  as  to  the  origin 
of  each  people.  The  whole  story  of  Balaam's  visit 
and  of  the  subsequent  events,  both  in  the  original 
narrative  of  Numbers  and  in  the  remarkable  state 
ment  of  Jephthah — whose  words  as  addressed  to 
Ammonites  must  be  accepted  as  literally  accurate — 
bears  out  the  inference  already  drawn  from  the 
earlier  history  as  to  the  pacific  character  of  Moab. 

The  account  of  the  whole  of  these  transactions  in 
the  Book  of  Numbers,  familiar  as  we  are  with  its 
phrases,  perhaps  hardly  conveys  an  adequate  idea 
of  the  extremity  in  which  Balak  found  himself  in 
his  unexpected  encounter  with  the  new  nation  and 
their  mighty  Divinity.  We  may  realise  it  better 
(and  certainly  with  gratitude  for  the  opportunity), 
if  we  consider  what  that  last  dreadful  agony  was  in 
which  a  successor  of  Balak  was  placed,  when,  all 
hope  of  escape  for  himself  and  his  people  being  cut 
off,  the  unhappy  Mesha  immolated  his  own  son  on 
the  wall  of  Kir-haraseth, — and  then  remember  that 
Balak  in  his  distress  actually  proposed  the  same 
awful  sacrifice — "  his  first-born  for  his  transgres 
sion,  the  fruit  of  his  body  for  the  sin  of  his  soul " 
(Mic.  vi.  7),  a  sacrifice  from  which  he  was  re 
strained  only  by  the  wise,  the  almost  Christian  8 
counsels,  of  Balaam.  This  catastrophe  will  be 
noticed  in  its  proper  place. 

The  connexion  of  Moab  with  Midian,  and  the 
comparatively  inoffensive  character  of  the  former,  are 
shown  in  the  narrative  of  the  events  which  followed 
the  departure  of  Balaam.  The  women  of  Moab  are 
indeed  said  (Num.  xxv.  1)  to  have  commenced  the 
idolatrous  fornication  which  proved  so  destructive  to 
Israel,  but  it  is  plain  that  their  share  in  it  was  insig 
nificant  compared  with  that  of  Midian.  It  was  a 
Midianitish  woman  whose  shameless  act  brought 
down  the  plague  on  the  camp,  the  Midianitish  women 
were  especially  devoted  to  destruction  by  Moses  (xxv. 
16-18,  xxxi.  16),  and  it  was  upon  Midian  that  the 
vengeance  was  taken.  Except  in  the  passage  already 
mentioned,  Moab  is  not  once  named  in  the  whole 
transaction. 

The  latest  date  at  which  the  two  names  appear  in 
conjunction,  is  found  in  the  notice  of  the  defeat  of 
Midian  "  in  the  field  of  Moab "  by  the  Edomite 
king  Hadad-ben-Bedad,  which  occurred  five  genera 
tions  before  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy  of 


MOAB 


393 


Israel  (Gen.  xxxvi.  35;  1  Chr.  i.  46,!.  Bj  the 
Jewish  interpreters — e.  g.  Solomon  Jarchi  in  his 
commentary  on  the  passage — this  is  treated  as  im 
plying  not  alliance,  but  war  between  Moab  and 
Midian  (comp.  1  Chr.  iv.  22). 

It  is  remarkable  that  Moses  iliould  have  taken  his 
view  of  the  Promised  Land  from  a  Moabite  sanctuary, 
and  been  buried  in  the  land  of  Moab.  It  is  singular  too 
that  his  resting-place  is  marked  in  the  Hebrew  Records 
only  by  its  proximity  to  the  sanctuary  of  that  deitj 
to  whom  in  his  lifetime  he  had  been  such  an  enemy. 
He  lies  in  a  ravine  in  the  land  of  Moab,  facing  Beth- 
Peor,  i.e.  the  abode  of  Baal-Peor  (Deut.  xxxiv.  6). 

After  the  conquest  of  Canaan  the  relations  of 
Moab  with  Israel  were  of  a  mixed  character.  With 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  whose  possessions  at  their 
eastern  end  were  separated  from  those  of  Moab  only 
by  the  Jordan,  they  had  at  least  one  severe  struggle, 
in  union  with  their  kindred  the  Ammonites,  and 
also,  for  this  time  only,  the  wild  Amalekites  from 
the  south  (Judg.  iii.  12-30).  The  Moabite  king, 
Eglon,  actually  ruled  and  received  tribute  in  Jericho 
for  eighteen  years,  but  at  the  end  of  that  time  he 
was  killed  by  the  Benjamite  hero  Ehud,  and  the 
return  of  the  Moabites  being  intercepted  at  the 
fords,  a  large  number  were  slaughtered,  and  a 
stop  put  to  such  incursions  on  their  pail;  for  the 
future.'  A  trace  of  this  invasion  is  visible  in  the 
name  of  Chephar-ha-Ammonai,  the  "  hamlet  of  the 
Ammonites,"  one  of  the  Benjamite  towns ;  and 
another  is  possibly  preserved  even  to  the  present 
day  in  the  name  of  Mukhmas,  the  modern  repre 
sentative  of  Michmash,  which  is  by  some  scholars 
believed  to  have  received  its  name  from  Chemosh 
the  Moabite  deity. 

The  feud  continued  with  true  Oriental  perti 
nacity  to  the  time  of  Saul.  Of  his  slaughter  of  the 
Ammonites  we  have  full  details  in  1  Sam.  xi.,  and 
amongst  his  other  conquests  Moab  is  especially  men 
tioned  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  There  is  not,  however,  as 
we  should  expect,  any  record  of  it  during  Ishbosh- 
eth's  residence  at  Mahanaim  on  the  east  of  Jordan. 

But  while  such  were  their  relations  to  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin,  the  story  of  Ruth,  on  the  other  hand, 
testifies  to  the  existence  of  a  friendly  intercourse 
between  Moab  and  Bethlehem,  one  of  the  towns  01 
Judah.  The  Jewish?  tradition  ascribes  the  death 
of  Mahloti  and  Chilion  to  punishment  for  having 
broken  the  commandment  of  Deut.  xxiii.  3,  but  no 
trace  of  any  feeling  of  the  kind  is  visible  in  the 
Book  of  Ruth  itself — which  not  only  seems  to  imply 
a  considerable  intercourse  between  the  two  nations, 
but  also  a  complete  ignorance  or  disregard  of  the  pre 
cept  in  question,  which  was  broken  in  the  most  flag 
rant  manner  when  Ruth  became  the  wife  of  Boaz.  By 
his  descent  from  Ruth,  David  may  be  said  to  have 
had  Moabite  blood  in  his  veins.  The  relationship 
was  sufficient,  especially  when  combined  with  the 
blood-feud  between  Moab  and  Benjamin,  already 
alluded  to,  to  warrant  his  visiting  the  land  of  his 
ancestress,  and  committing  his  parents  to  the  protec 
tion  of  the  king  of  Moab,  when  hard  pressed  by 
Saul  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3,  4).  But  here  all  friendly 
relation  stops  for  ever.  The  next  time  the  name  is 


•  Midian  was  eminently  a  pastoral  people.     See  the 
account  of  the  spoil  taken  from  them  (Num.  xxxl.  32-41). 
For  the  pastoral  wealth  of  Moab.  even  at  this  early  period, 
seo  the  expressions  in  Mic.  vi.  6,  7. 

d  See  Targum  Pseudojonathan  on  Num.  xxii.  4. 

•  Balaam' 8  word*  (Mic.  vi.  8)  are  nearly  identical  with 
huse  quoted  by   ivr  Lord  Himself  (Matt,  ix    13,  and 

til.  H 


f  The  account  of  Shaharaim,  a  man  of  Benjamin,  who 
"  begat  children  in  the  field  of  Moab,"  in  1  Chr.  viii.  8. 
seems,  from  the  mention  of  Ehud  (ver.  6),  to  belong  to 
this  time ;  but  the  whole  passage  is  very  obscure. 

g  See  Targum  Jonathan  on  Ruth  1.  4.  The  marriage 
of  Boaz  with  the  stranger  is  vindicated  by  making  Hull)  a 
proselyte  in  desire,  if  not  by  actual  initiation. 


394 


MOAB 


mentioned  is  in  the  account  of  David's  war,  at  least 
twenty  years  after  the  last  mentioned  event  (2  Sam. 
viii.  '2 ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  2). 

The  abrupt  manner  in  which  this  war  is  intro 
duced  into  the  history  is  no  less  remarkable  than 
the  brief  and  passing  terms  in  which  its  horrors  are 
recorded.  The  account  occupies  but  a  few  words 
in  either  Samuel  or  Chronicles,  and  yet  it  must 
have  been  fcr  the  time  little  short  of  a  virtual  ex 
tirpation  of  the  nation.  Two-thirds  of  the  people 
were  put  to  death,  and  the  remainder  became  bond 
men,  and  were  subjected  to  a  regular  tribute.  An 
incident  of  this  war  is  probably  recorded  in  2  Sam. 
jxiii.  20,  and  1  Chr.  xi.  22.  The  spoils  taken  from 
the  Moabite  cities  and  sanctuaries  went  to  swell 
the  treasures  acquired  from  the  enemies  of  Jehovah, 
which  David  was  amassing  for  the  future  Temple 
(2  Sam.  viii.  11,  12  ;  1  Chr.  xviii.  11).  It  was 
the  first  time  that  the  prophecy  of  Balaam  had 
been  fulfilled, — "  Out  of  Jacob  shall  come  he  that 
shall  have  dominion,  and  shall  destroy  him  that  re- 
maineth  of  Ar,"  that  is  of  Moab. 

So  signal  a  vengeance  can  only  have  been  occa 
sioned  by  some  act  of  perfidy  or  insult,  like  that 
which  brought  down  a  similar  treatment  on  the 
Ammonites  (2  Sam.  x.).  But  as  to  any  such  act  the 
narrative  is  absolutely  silent.  It  has  been  conjec 
tured  that  the  king  of  Moab  betrayed  the  trust  which 
David  reposed  in  him,  and  either  himself  killed  Jesse 
and  his  wife,  or  surrendered  them  to  Saul.  But 
this,  though  not  improbable,  is  nothing  more  than 
conjecture. 

It  must  have  been  a  considerable  time  before 
Moab  recovered  from  so  severe  a  blow.  Of  this 
we  hare  evidence  in  the  fact  of  their  not  being 
mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  campaign  in  which 
the  Ammonites  were  subdued,  when  it  is  not  pro 
bable  they  would  have  refrained  from  assisting 
their  relatives  had  they  been  in  a  condition  to  do 
so.  Throughout  the  reign  of  Solomon,  they  no 
doubt  shared  in  the  universal  peace  which  sur 
rounded  Israel  ;  and  the  only  mention  of  the 
name  occurs  in  the  statement  that  there  were 
Moabites  amongst  the  foreign  women  in  the  royal 
harem,  and,  as  a  natural  consequence,  that  the 
Moabite  worship  was  tolerated,  or  perhaps  encou 
raged  (1  K.  xi.  1,  7,  33).  The  high  place  for 
Chemosh,  "the  abomination  of  Moab,"  was  conse 
crated  "  on  the  mount  facing  Jerusalem,"  where  it 
remained  till  its  "defilement"  by  Josiah  (2  K. 
ixiii.  1 3),  nearly  four  centuries  afterwards. 

At  the  disruption  of  the  kingdom,  Moab  seems  to 
have  fallen  to  the  northern  realm,  probably  for 
the  same  reason  that  has  been  already  remarked  in 
the  case  of  Eglon  and  Ehud- — that  the  fords  of 
Jordan  Lay  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin,  who 
for  some  time  after  the  separation  clung  to  its 
ancient  ally  the  house  of  Ephraim.  But  be  this  as 
it  may,  at  the  death  of  Ahab,\  eighty  years  later,  we 
find  Moab  paying  him  the  enormous  tribute,  appa 
rently  annual,  of  100,000  ratals,  and  the  same 
number  of  wethers  with  their  i?eeces;  an  amount 
wmch  testifies  at  once  to  the  seventy  of  the  terms 
imposed  by  Israel,  and  to  the  remarkable  vigour  of 


MOAB 

character,  ar.d  wealth  of  natural  resr.irc.ps,  whici 
could  enable  a  little  country,  not  so  large  as  the 
county  of  Huntingdon,  to  raise  year  by  year  this 
enormous  impost,  and  at  the  same  time  support 
its  own  people  in  prosperity  and  affluence.1  It 
is  not  surprising  that  the  Moabites  should  have 
seized  the  moment  of  Ahab's  death  to  throw  off  so 
burdensome  a  yoke ;  but  it  is  surprising,  that  not 
withstanding  such  a  drain  on  their  resources,  they 
were  ready  to  incur  the  risk  and  expense  of  a  war 
with  a  state  in  every  respect  far  their  superior. 
Their  first  step,  after  asserting  their  independence, 
was  to  attack  the  kingdom  of  Judah  in  company 
with  their  kindred  the  Ammonites,  and, as  seems  pro 
bable,  th"e  Mehunim,  a  roving  semi-Edomite  people 
from  the  mountains  in  the  south-east  of  Palestine 
(2  Chr.  xx.).  The  army  was  a  huge  heterogeneous 
horde  of  ill-assorted  elements.  The  route  chosen 
for  the  invasion  was  round  the  southern  end  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  thence  .along  the  beach,  and  by  the  pass 
of  En-gedi  to  the  level  of  the  upper  country.  But 
the  expedition  contained  within  itself  the  elements 
of  its  own  destruction.  Before  they  reached  the 
enemy  dissensions  arose  between  the  heathen  strangers 
and  the  children  of  Lot ;  distrust  followed,  and  finally 
panic ;  and  when  the  army  of  Jehoshaphat  came  in 
light  of  them  they  found  that  they  had  nothing  to  do 
but  to  watch  the  extermination  of  one  half  the  huge 
host  by  the  other  half,  and  to  seize  the  prodigious 
booty  which  was  left  on  the  field. 

Disastrous  as  was  this  proceeding,  that  which 
followed  it  was  even  still  more  so.  As  a  natural  con 
sequence  of  the  late  events,  Israel,  Judah,  and 
Edom  united  in  an  attack  on  Moab.  For  reasons 
which  are  not  stated,  but  one  of  which  we  may 
reasonably  conjecture  was  to  avoid  the  passage  of 
the  savage  Edomites  through  Judah,  the  three 
confederate  armies  approached  not  as  usual  by  the 
north,  but  round  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
through  the  parched  valleys  of  upper  Edom.  As 
the  host  came  near,  the  king  of  Moab,  doubtless  the 
same  Mesha  who  threw  off  the  yoke  of  Ahab,  as 
sembled  the  whole  of  his  people,  from  the  youngest 
who  were  of  age  to  bear  the  sword-girdle,1  on  the 
boundary  of  his  territory,  probably  on  the  outer 
slopes  of  the  line  of  hills  which  encircles  the  lower 
portion  of  Moab,  overlooking  the  waste  which  ex 
tended  below  them  towards  the  east.k  Here  they 
remained  all  night  on  the  watch.  With  the  approach 
of  morning  the  sun  rose  suddenly  above  the  horizon 
of  the  rolling  plain,  and  as  his  level  beams  burst 
through  the  night^mists  they  revealed  no  masses  of 
the  enemy,  but  shone  with  a  blood-red  glare  on  a 
multitude  of  pools  in  the  bed  of  the  wady  at  theii 
feet.  They  did  not  know  that  these  pools  had  been 
sunk  during  the  night  by  the  order  of  a  mighty 
Prophet  who  was  with  the  host  of  Israel,  and  that 
they  had  been  filled  by  the  sudden  flow  of  water 
rushing  from  the  distant  highlands  of  Edom.  To 
them  the  conclusion  was  inevitable.  The  army 
had,  like  their  own  on  the  late  occasion,  fallen  out 
in  the  night ;  these  red  pools  were  the  blood  of  the 
slain;  those  who  were  not  killed  had  fled,  and  nothing 
stood  between  them  and  the  pillage  of  the  camp. 


literally.  "  and  all  gathered  themselves  together  that  were 
girt  with  a  girdle  and  upward."  This  the  LXX.  originally 
rendered  di/e/Sorjo-ay  CK  irnvras  irepiefuxr/XfVoi  ^ujnji'  icai 
firdvia-  which  the  Alexandrine  Codex  still  retains ;  but  in 
the  Vatican  MS.  the  last  words  have  actually  been  cor 
rupted  into  »coi  flirov,  <i-— "  and  they  said,  Oh ! " 
k  Compare  Num.  xxi.  11—"  towarie  the  sun-rising. " 


*  This  affluence  Is  shown  by  the  treasures  which  they 
left  on  the  field  of  Berachah  (2  Chr.  xx.  25),  no  less  than 
by  the  general  condition  of  the  country,  indicated  in  the 
narrative  of  Joram's  Invasion  ;  and  in  the  passages  of 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  which  are  cited  further  on  in  this 
article. 

2  K.  iii.  21.    This  passage  exhibits  one  of  the  most 
fciii'-ular  variations  of  the  LXX.     The  Hebrew  tc/t  is 


MOAB 

The  ay  "  Moab  to  the  spoil!"  *»s  raised. 
Down  the  slopes  they  rushed  in  headlt/ng  disorder. 
But  not,  as  they  expected,  to  empty  tents ;  they 
f  ,'iind  an  enemy  ready  prepared  to  reap  the  result 
cf  his  ingenious  stratagem."  Then  occurred  one  of 
those  scenes  of  carnage  which  can  happen  but  once 
Di  twice  in  the  existence  of  a  nation.  The  Moabites 
fled  back  in  confusion,  followed  and  cut  down  at 
every  step  by  their  enemies.  Far  inwards  did  the 
pursuit  reach,  among  the  cities  and  farms  and 
orchards  of  that  rich  district :  nor  when  the  slaughter 
was  over  was  the  horrid  work  of  destruction  done. 
The  towns  both  fortified  and  unfortified  were  de 
molished,  and  the  stones  strewed  over  the  carefully 
tilled  fields.  The  fountains  of  water,  the  life  n  of  an 
eastern  land,  were  choked,  and  all  timber  of  any 
size  or  goodness  felled.  Nowhere  else  do  we  hear 
of  such  sweeping  desolation  :  the  very  besom  of  de 
struction  passed  over  the  land.  At  last  the  struggle 
collected  itself  at  KIR-HARASETH,  apparently  a 
newly  constructed  fortress,  which,  if  the  modern 
Kerak — and  there  is  every  probability  that  they 
are  identical — may  well  have  resisted  all  the  efforts 
of  the  allied  kings  in  its  native  impregnability. 
Here  Mesha  took  refuge  with  his  family  and  with 
the  remnants  of  his  army.  The  heights  around,  by 
which  the  town  is  entirely  commanded,  were  co 
vered  with  slingers,  who  armed  partly  with  the 
ancient  weapon  of  David  and  of  the  Benjamites, 
partly  perhaps  with  the  newly-invented  machines 
shortly  to  be  famous  in  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxvi. 
15),  discharged  their  volleys  of  stones  on  the  town. 
At  length  the  annoyance  could  be  borne  no  longer. 
Then  Mesha,  collecting  round  him  a  forlorn  hope 
of  700  of  his  best  warriors,  made  a  desperate 
sally,  with  the  intention  of  cutting  his  way  through 
to  his  special  foe  the  king  of  Edom.  But  the 
enemy  were  too  strong  for  him,  and  he  was  driven 
back.  And  then  came  a  fitting  crown  to  a  tragedy 
already  so  terrible.  An  awful  spectacle  amazed  and 
horrified  the  besiegers.  The  king  and  his  eldest 
son,  the  heir  to  the  throne,  mounted  the  wall,  and, 
in  the  sight  of  the  thousands  who  covered  the  sides 
of  that  vast  amphitheatre,  the  father  killed  and 
burnt  his  child  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice  to  the 
cruel  gods  of  his  country.  It  was  the  same 
dreadful  act  to  which,  as  we  have  seen,  Balak  had 
been  so  nearly  tempted  in  his  extremity.0  But  the 
danger,  though  perhaps  not  really  greater  than  his, 
was  more  imminent ;  ,and  Mesha  had  no  one  like 
Balaam  at  hand,  to  counsel  patience  and  submis- 


MOAB 


395 


ion  to  a  mightier  Power  than  Chemosh  or  Baal- 
'eor. 

Hitherto,  though  able  and  ready  to  fight  when  ne 
cessary,  the  Moabites  do  not  appear  to  have  been  a 
ighting  people ;  perhaps,  as  suggested  elsewhere, 
,he  Ammonites  were  the  warriors  of  the  nation  of 
iOt.  But  this  disaster  seems  to  have  altered  their 
lisposition  at  any  rate  for  a  time.  Shortly  after 
Jiese  events  we  hear  of  "bands" — that  is  pillaging 
marauding  parties  p — of  the  Moabites  making  theii 
ncursions  into  Israel  in  the  spring,  as  if  to  spoil 
;he  early  corn  before  it  was  fit  to  cut  (2  K.  xiii. 
20).  With  Edom  there  must  have  been  many  a 
contest.  One  of  these  marked  by  savage  vengeance — • 
•ecalling  in  some  degree  the  tragedy  of  Kir-haraseth, 
s  alluded  to  by  Amos  (ii.  1),  where  a  king  of 
lidom  seems  to  have  been  killed  and  burnt  by  Moab. 
This  may  have  been  one  of  the  incidents  of  the 
)attle  of  Kir-haraseth  itself,  occurring  perhaps  after 
the  Edomites  had  parted  from  Israel,  and  were 
overtaken  on  their  road  home  by  the  furious  king 
f  Moab  (Gesenius,  Jesaia,  i.  504) ;  or  according 
to  the  Jewish  tradition  (Jerome,  on  Amos  ii.  1),  it 
was  a  vengeance  still  more  savage  because  more 
protracted,  and  lasting  even  beyond  the  death  of 
;he  king,  whose  remains  were  torn  from  his  tomb 
and  thus  consumed: — Non  dico  crudelitatem  sed 
rabiem  ;  ut  incenderent  ossa  regis  Idumaeae,  et  non 
paterentur  mortem  esse  omnium  extremum  malo- 
rum  (Ib.  ver.  4). 

In  the  "  Burden  of  Moab "  pronounced  by 
[saiah  (chaps,  xv.  xvi.),  we  possess  a  document  full 
of  interesting  details  as  to  the  condition  of  the 
nation,  at  the  time  of  the  death  of  Ahaz  king  ot 
Judah,  B.C.  726.  More  than  a  century  and  a  half 
had  elapsed  since  the  great  calamity  to  which  we 
bave  just  referred.  In  that  interval,  Moab  has  re 
gained  all,  and  more  than  all  of  his  former  pro 
sperity,  and  has  besides  extended  himself  over  the 
district  which  he  originally  occupied  in  the  youth 
of  the  nation,  and  which  was  left  vacant  when  the 
removal  of  Reuben  to  Assyria,  which  had  been  begun 
by  Pul  in  770,  was  completed  by  Tiglath-pileser 
about  the  year  740  (1  Chr.  v.  25,  26). 

This  passage  of  Isaiah  cannot  be  considered  apart 
from  that  of  Jeremiah,  chap,  xlviii.  The  latter 
was  pronounced  more  than  a  century  later,  about 
the  year  600,  ten  or  twelve  years  before  the  inva 
sion  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  by  which  Jerusalem  was 
destroyed.  In  many  respects  it  is  identical  with 
that  of  Isaiah,  and  both  are  believed  by  the  best 


m  The  lesson  was  not  lost  on  king  Joram,  who  proved 
himself  more  cautious  on  a  similar  occasion  (2  K.  vii. 
12, 13). 

a  Prius  erat  luxuria  propter  irriguos  agros  (Jerome, 
on  Is.  xv.  9). 

0  Jerome  alone  of  all  the  commentators  seems  to  have 
noticed  this.  See  his  Comm.  in  Mick.  vl. 

p  H-IIS.  The  word  "  bands,"  by  which  this  is 
commonly  rendered  with  A.V.  has  not  now  the  force 
of  the  original  term.  T11.3  is  derived  from 
to  rush  together  and  fiercely,  and  signifies  a  troop  ol 
irregular  marauders,  as  opposed  to  the  regular  soldiers  ol 
an  army.  It  is  employed  to  denote  (1.)  the  bands  of  the 
Amalekites  and  other  Bedouin  tribes  round  Palestine 
us  1  Sam.  xxx.  8,  15,  23  (A.V.  "  troop "  and  "  com 
pany ")  ;  2  K.  vi.  23;  xiii.  20,  21 ;  xxiv.  2;  1  Chr.  xii 
21 ;  2  Chr.  xxii.  1  (A.V.  "  band  ").  It  is  in  this  con 
i»exjon  that  it  occurs  in  the  elaborate  play  on  the  name 
(•f  Gad,  contained  in  Gen.  xlix.  19  [see  vol.  i.  647  a] 
&  passage  strikingly  corroborated  by  1  Chr.  xii.  18,  where 
ihe  Gadites  who  resorted  to  David  in  his  difficulties- 
swift  as  roes  on  the  mountains,  with  faces  like  the  face 


of  lions — were  formed  by  him  into  a  "  band."  In  1  K. 
xi.  24  it  denotes  the  roving  troop  collected  -by  Kezou 
from  the  remnants  of  the  army  of  Zobah.who  took  the  city 
of  Damascus  by  surprise,  and  by  their  forays  molested 
—literally  "  played  the  Satan  to  "—Solomon  (ver.  25). 
How  formidable  these  bands  were,  may  be  gathered  from 
2  Sam.  xxil.  30,  where  in  a  moment  of  most  solemn 
exultation  David  speaks  of  breaking  through  one  of  them 
as  among  the  most  memorable  exploits  of  his  life. 

(2.)  The  word  is  used  in  the  general  sense  of  hired 
soldiers— mercenaries ;  as  of  the  host  of  100,000  Eph- 
raimites  hired  by  Amaziah  in  2  Chr.  xxv.  9,  10,  13; 
where  the  point  is  missed  in  the  A.V.  by  the  use  of  the 
word  "  army."  No  Bedouins  could  have  shown  a  keener 
appetite  for  plunder  than  did  these  Israelites  (ver.  13). 
In  this  sense  it  Is  probably  used  in  2  Chr.  xxvi.  11,  for  the 
irregular  troops  kept  by  Uzziah  for  purposes  of  plunder, 
and  who  are  distinguished  from  his  "army"  (ver.  13) 
maintained  for  regular  engagements. 

(3.)  In  2  Sam.  iii.  22  ("  troop ")  and  2  K.  v.  2  ("  bj 
companies")  it  refers  to  marauding  raids  for  the  purpost 
of  plunder. 


396 


MOAB 


tuoderij  scholars,  on  account  of  the  archaisms  ana 
other  peculiarities  of  language  which  they  contain, 
to  be  adopted  from  a  common  source — the  work  of 
some  much  more  ancient  prophet.* 

Isaiah  ends  his  denunciation  by  a  prediction — in 
his  own  words — that  within  three  years  Moab 
should  be  greatly  reduced.  This  was  probably 
with  a  view  to  Shalmaneser  who  destroyed  Samaria, 
and  no  doubt  overran  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  * 
in  725,  and  again  in  723  (2  K.  xvii.  3,  xviii.  9). 
The  only  event  of  which  we  have  a  record  to  which 
it  would  seem  possible  that  the  passage,  as  origin 
ally  uttered  by  the  older  prophet,  applied,  is  the 
invasion  of  Pul,  who  about  the  year  770  appears  to 
have  commenced  the  depoitation  of  Reuben  (1  Chr. 
v.  26),  and  who  very  probably  at  the  same  time 
molested  Moab.»  The  difficulty  of  so  many  of  the 
towns  of  Reuben  being  mentioned,  as  at  that  early 
date  already  in  the  possession  of  Moab,  may  perhaps 
be  explained  by  remembering  that  the  idolatry  of 
the  neighbouring  nations — and  therefore  of  Moab, 
had  been  adopted  by  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes  for 
some  time  previously  to  the  final  deportation  by 
Tiglath-pileser  (see  1  Chr.  v.  25),  and  that  many 
of  the  sanctuaries  were  probably  even  at  the  date 
of  the  original  delivery  of  the  denunciation  in  the 
hands  of  the  priests  of  Chemosh  and  Milcom.  If, 
ts  Ewald  (Gesch.  iii.  588)  with  much  probability 
infers,  the  Moabites,  no  less  than  the  Ammonites, 
were  under  the  protection  of  the  powerful  Uzziah  * 
(2  Chr.  xxvi.  8),  then  the  obscure  expressions  of 
the  ancient  seer  as  given  in  Is.  xvi.  1-5,  referring 
to  a  tribute  of  lambs  (comp.  2  K.  iii.  4)  sent 
from  the  wild  pasture-grounds  south  of  Moab  to 
Zion,  and  to  protection  and  relief  from  oppression 
afforded  by  the  throne"  of  David  to  the  fugi 
tives  and  outcasts  of  Moab — acquire  an  intelligible 
sense. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  calamities  which  Jere 
miah  describes,  may  have  been  inflicted  in  any  one 
of  the  numerous  visitations  from  the  Assyrian  army, 
under  which  these  unhappy  countries  suffered  at 
the  period  of  bis  prophecy  in  rapid  succession. 

But  the  uncertainty  of  the  exact  dates  referred  to 
in  these  several  denunciations,  does  not  in  the  least 
affect  the  interest  or  the  value  of  the  allusions  they 
contain  to  the  condition  of  Moab.  They  bear  the 
evident  stamp  of  portraiture  by  artists  who  knew 
their  subject  thoroughly.  The  nation  appears  in  them 
as  high-spirited,1  wealthy,  populous,  and  even  to  a 
certain  extent,  civilised,  enjoying  a  wide  reputation 
and  popularity.  With  a  metaphor  which  well  ex 
presses  at  once  the  pastoral  wealth  of  the  country 


MOAB 

and  it;,  commanding,  almost  regal,  }«sitioa,  but 
which  auinot  be  conveyed  in  a  translation,  Monb  is 
depicted  ia  the  strong  sceptre/  the  beautiful  staff, ' 
whose  fracture  will  be  bewailed  by  all  about  him, 
and  by  all  who  know  him.  In  his  cities  we  discern 
a  "  great  multitude  "  of  people  living  in  "glory," 
and  in  the  enjoyment  of  great  "  treasure,"  crowding 
the  public  squares,  the  housetops,  and  the  ascents 
and  descents  of  the  numerous  high  places  and  sanc 
tuaries  where  the  "  priests  and  princes  "  of  Chemosh 
or  Baal-Peor,  minister  to  the  anxious  devotees.  Out 
side  the  towns  lie  the  "  plentiful  fields,"  luxuriant 
as  the  renowned  Carmela — the  vineyards,  and  gar 
dens  of  "  summer  fruits  " ; — the  harvest  is  being 
reaped,  and  the  "  hay  stored  in  its  abundance,"  the 
vineyards  and  the  presses  are  crowded  with  peasants, 
gathering  and  treading  the  grapes,  the  land  resounds 
with  the  clamour  b  of  the  vintagers.  These  charac 
teristics  contrast  very  favourably  with  any  traits 
recorded  of  Ammon,  Edom,  Midian,  Amalek,  the 
Philistines,  or  the  Canaanite  tribes.  And  since  the 
descriptions  we  are  considering  are  adopted  by  cer 
tainly  two,  and  probably  three  prophets— Jeremiah. 
Isaiah,  and  the  older  seer — extending  over  a  period 
of  nearly  200  years,  we  may  safely  conclude  that 
they  are  not  merely  temporary  circumstances,  but 
were  the  enduring  characteristics  of  the  people. 
In  this  case  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  amongst 
the  pastoral  people  of  Syria,  Moab  stood  next  to 
Israel  in  all  matters  of  material  wealth  and  civili 
sation. 

It  is  very  interesting  to  remark  the  feeling  which 
actuates  the  prophets  in  these  denunciations  of  a 
people  who,  though  the  enemies  of  Jehovah,  were 
the  blood-relations  of  Israel.  Half  the  allusions  of 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  in  the  passages  referred  to, 
must  for  ever  remain  obscure.  We  shall  never 
know  who  the  "  lords  of  the  heathen  "  were  who,  in 
that  terrible  *  night,  laid  waste  and  brought  to  silence 
the  prosperous  Ar-moab  and  Kir-moab.  Or  the 
occasion  of  that  flight  over  the  Arnon,  when  the 
Moabite  women  were  huddled  together  at  the  ford, 
like  a  Sock  of  young  birds,  pressing  to  cross  to  the 
safe  side  of  the  stream, — when  the  dwellers  in 
Aroer  stood  by  the  side  of  the  high  road  which 
passed  their  town,  and  eagerly  questioning  the 
fugitives  as  they  hurried  up,  "  What  is  done  ¥'—• 
received  but  one  answer  from  all  alike — "  All  ia 
lost  I  Moab  is  confounded  and  broken  down ! " 

Many  expressions,  also,  such  as  the  "weeping 
of  Jazer,"  the  "heifer  of  three  years  old,"  the 
"  shadow  of  Heshbon,"  the  "  lions,"  must  remain 
obscure.  But  nothing  can  obscure  or  render  obso- 


*  See    Ewald    (_Propheten,  229-31).     He   seems    to 
believe  that  Jeremiah  has  preserved  the  old  prophecy 
more  nearly  in  Its  original  condition  than  Isaiah. 

'  Amos,  B.C.  cir.  780,  prophesied  that  a  nation  should 
afflict  Israel  from  the  entering  In  of  Hamath  unto  the 
14  torrent  of  the  desert"  (probably  one  of  the  wadys  on 
the  S.E.  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea);  that  is,  the  whole  of 
the  country  East  of  Jordan. 

•  Knobel  refers  the  original  of  Is.  xv.  xvi  to  the  time 
of  Jeroboam  II.,  a  great  conqueror  beyond  Jordan. 

'  He  died  758,  t.  e.  12  years  after  the  invasion  of  PuL 
"  The  word  used  in  this  passage  for  the  palace  of 
David  in  Zion,  viz.  "  tent"  (A.  V.  "  tabernacle "),  is 
remarkable  as  an  Instance  of  the  persistence  with  which 
the  memory  of  the  original  military  foundation  of  Jeru 
salem  by  the  warrior-king  was  preserved  by  the  Prophets. 
Thus,  in  Ps.  Ixxvi.  2  and  Lam.  il.  6  It  is  the  "  booth  or 
Mvonacking-hut  of  Jehovah ;  "  and  in  Is.  xxix.  1  the  city 
where  Itevl/  " pitched,'1  or  "encamped"  (not  "dwelt," 
MinAV.'). 


*  Is.  xvi.  6;  Jer.  xlviil.  29.  The  word 
like  our  own  word  "  pride,"  is  susceptible  of  a  good  as  well 
as  a  bad  sense.  It  Is  the  term  used  for  the  "  majesty  "  and 
"  excellency"  of  Jehovah  (Is.  ii.  10,  &c.,  Ex.  xv.  7),  and  is 
frequently  in  the  A.  V.  rendered  by  "  pomp." 

7  ntSO  ;  the  "  rod  "  of  Moses,  and  of  Aaron,  and  of 
the  heads  of  the  tribes  (Num.  xvii.  2,  &c.).  The  term  also 
means  a  "  tribe."  No  English  word  expresses  all  these 
meanings. 

1  7J5D ;  the  word  used  for  the  "  rods "  of  Jacob's 
stratagem ;  also  for  the  " staves"  in  the  pastoral  parable 
of  Zecharlah  (xi.  7-14). 

a  Carmel  is  the  word  rendered  "  plentiful  field  "  in 
Is.  xvi.  10  and  Jer.  xlviil.  33. 

i>  What  the  din  of  a  vintage  in  Palestine  wks  may  be 
Inferred  from  Jer.  xxv.  30 :  "  Jehovah  shall  roar  frcm  on 
high.  ...  He  shall  mightily  roar.  ...  He  stall  give  a 
rOiout  as  those  that  tread  the  grapes." 

"  La  nocfte  triste. 


MOAB 

lete  the  toned  of  tenderness  and  affection  which 
makes  itself  felt  in  a  hundred  expressions  through 
out  these  precious  documents.  Ardently  as  the 
Prophet  longs  for  the  destruction  of  the  enemy  of 
his  country  and  of  Jehovah,  and  earnestly  as  he 
curses  the  man  "  that  doeth  the  work  of  Jehovah 
deceitfully,  that  keepeth  back  his  sword  from 
blood,"  yet  he  is  constrained  to  bemoan  and  lament 
such  dreadful  calamities  to  a  people  so  near  him 
both  in  blood  and  locality.  His  heart  mourns — it 
sounds  like  pipes — for  the  men  of  Kir-heres ;  his 
heart  cries  out,  it  sounds  like  a  harp  for  Moab. 

Isaiah  recurs  to  the  subject  in  another  passage  of 
extraordinary  force,  and  of  fiercer  character  than  be 
fore,  viz.,  xxv.  10-12.  Here  the  extermination,  the 
utter  annihilation,  of  Moab,  is  contemplated  by  the 
Prophet  with  triumph,  as  one  of  the  first  results 
of  the  re-establishment  of  Jehovah  on  Mount  Zion : 
"  lu  this  mountain  shall  the  hand  of  Jehovah  rest, 
and  Moab  shall  be  trodden  down  under  Him,  even  as 
straw — the  straw  of  his  own  threshing-floors  at  Mad- 
menah — is  trodden  down  for  the  dunghill.  And  He 
shall  spread  forth  His  hands  in  the  midst  of  them — 
namely,  of  the  Moabites — as  one  that  swimmetb 
spreadeth  forth  his  hands  to  swim,  buffet  following 
buffet,  right  and  left,  with  terrible  rapidity,  as  the 
strong  swimmer  urges  his  way  forward :  and  He 
shall  bring  down  their  pride  together  with  the 
spoils  of  their  hands.  And  the  fortress  of  Misgab  e 
— thy  walls  shall  He  bring  down,  lay  low,  and  bring 
to  the  ground,  to  the  dust." 

If,  according  to  the  custom  of  interpreters,  this 
and  the  preceding  chapter  (xxiv.)  are  understood  as 
referring  to  the  destruction  of  Babylon,  then  this 
sudden  burst  of  indignation  towards  Moab  is  ex 
tremely  puzzling.  But,  if  the  passage  is  exam 
ined  with  that  view,  it  will  perhaps  be  found  to 
contain  some  expressions  which  suggest  the  possi 
bility  of  Moab  having  been  at  least  within  the 
ken  of  the  Prophet,  even  though  not  in  the  fore 
ground  of  his  vision,  during  a  great  part  of 
the  passage.  The  Hebrew  words  rendered  "  city  " 
in  xxv.  2 — two  entirely  distinct  terms — are  posi 
tively,  with  a  slight  variation,  the  names  of  the 
two  chief  Moabite  strongholds,  the  same  which  are 
mentioned  in  xv.  1,  and  one  of  which'  is  in  the 
Pentateuch  a  synonym  for  the  entire  nation  of 
Moab.  In  this  light,  verse  2  may  be  read  as 
follows :  "  For  Thou  hast  made  of  Ar  a  heap ;  of 
Kir  the  defenced  a  ruin  ;  a  palace  f  of  strangers  no 
longer  is  Ar,  it  shall  never  be  rebuilt."  The  same 
words  are  found  in  verses  10  and  12  of  the  pre 
ceding  chapter,  in  company  with  hutsoth  (A.  V. 
"  streets  ")  which  we  know  from  Num.  xxii.  39  to 
have  been  the  name  of  a  Moabite  town.  [KiRJATH- 
HUZOTH.]  A  distinct  echo  of  them  is  again  heard  in 
xxv.  3,  4 ;  and  finally  in  xxvi.  1,  5,  there  seems  to 
be  yet  another  reference  to  the  same  two  towns, 
acquiring  new  force  from  the  denunciation  which 


MOAB 


39-J 


closes  the  preceding  chapter: —  '  ifoab  shall  b* 
brought  down,  the  fortress  and  the  walls  c  f  Misgab 
shall  be  laid  low ;  but  in  the  land  of  Judah  this 
song  shall  be  sung,  '  Our  Ar,  our  city,  is  strong 
.  .  .  Trust  in  the  Lord  Jehovah  who  bringeth 
down  those  that  dwell  on  high :  the  lofty  Kir  He 
layeth  it  low,'  "  &c. 

It  is  perhaps  an  additional  corroboration  to  this 
view  to  notice  that  the  remarkable  expressions  in 
xxiv.  17,  "Fear,  and  the  pit,  and  the  snare," 
&c.,  actually  occur  in  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  43),  in  his 
denunciation  of  Moab,  embedded  in  the  old  pro 
phecies  out  of  which,  like  Is.  xv.  xvi.,  this  passage 
is  compiled,  and  the  rest  of  which  had  certainly,  as 
originally  uttered,  a  direct  and  even  exclusive  re 
ference  to  Moab. 

Between  the  time  of  Isaiah's  denunciation  and 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  we  have  hardly  a 
reference  to  Moab.  Zephaniah,  writing  in  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  reproaches  them  (ii.  8-10)  for 
their  taunts  against  the  people-  of  Jehovah,  but  no 
acts  of  hostility  are  recorded  either  on  the  one  side 
or  the  other.  From  one  passage  in  Jeremiah  (xxv. 
9-21)  delivered  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
just  before  the  first  appearance  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
it  is  apparent  that  it  was  the  belief  of  the  Prophet 
that  the  nations  surrounding  Israel — and  Moab 
among  the  rest — were  on  the  eve  of  devastation  by 
the  Chaldaeans  and  of  a  captivity  for  seventy  years 
(see  ver.  11),  from  which  however,  they  should 
eventually  be  restored  to  their  own  countiy  (ver. 
12,  and  xlviii.  47).  From  another  record  of  the 
events  of  the  same  period  or  of  one  only  just 
subsequent  (2  K.  xxiv.  2),  it  would  appear,  how 
ever,  that  Moab  made  terms  with  the  Chaldaeans, 
and  for  the  time  acted  in  concert  with  them  in 
harassing  and  plundering  the  kingdom  of  Je 
hoiakim. 

Four  or  five  years  later,  in  the  first  year  of  Zede- 
kiah  (Jer.  xxvii.  l),h  these  hostilities  must  have 
ceased,  for  there  was  then  a  regular  intercourse  be 
tween  Moab  and  the  court  at  Jerusalem  (ver.  3),  pos 
sibly,  as  Bunsen  suggests  (Bihelwerk,  Propheten,  536) 
negotiating  a  combined  resistance  to  the  common 
enemy.  The  brunt  of  the  storm  must  have  fallen 
on  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  The  neighbouring  nations, 
including  Moab,  when  the  danger  actually  arrived 
probably  adopted  the  advice  of  Jeremiah  (xxvii, 
11)  and  thus  escaped,  though  not  without  much 
damage,  yet  without  being  carried  away  as  the 
Jews  were.  That  these  nations  did  not  suffer  tc 
the  same  extent  as  Judaea  is  evident  from  the  fact 
that  many  of  the  Jews  took  refuge  there  when 
their  own  land  was  laid  waste  (Jer.  xl.  11).  Jere 
miah  expressly  testifies  that  those  who  submitted 
themselves  to  the  King  of  Babylon,  though  they 
would  have  to  bear  a  severe  yoke — so  severe  that 
their  very  wild  animals1  would  be  enslaved — yet 
by  such  submission  should  purchase  the  privilege 


d  It  is  thus  characterized  by  Ewald  (Propheten,  230). 
Elne  so  ganz  von  Trauer  und  Mitleid  hingerissene,  von 
Weichheit  zerfliessende,  mehr  elegisch  als  prophetisch 
gestimmte  Empfindung  steht  unter  den  altern  Propheten 
einzig  da ;  sogar  bei  Hosca  1st  nichts  ganz  aehnliches. 

e  In  the  A.  V.  rendered  "  the  high  fort."  But  there  is 
good  reason  to  take  it  as  the  name  of  a  place  (Jer. 
xlviii.  1).  [MISGAB.] 

f  Gesenius  believes  Ar,  "1J?.  to  be  a  Moabite  form  of  Ir, 
"VJ?>  one  of  the  two  words  spoken  of  above.  Num.  xxiv.  19 
acquires  a  new  force,  If  the  word  rendered  "  city  "  is  inter 
preted  &B  Ar,  that  is  Moab.  So  also  in  Mic.  vi.  9,  at  the 


close  of  the  remarkable  conversation  between  Balak  and 
Balaam  there  preserved,  the  word  ^JJ  occurs  again,  in 
such  a  manner  that  it  is  difficult  not  to  believe  that  the 
capital  city  of  Moab  is  intended  :  "  Jehovah's  voice  crleth 

unto  Ar hear  ye  the  rod,  and  who  hath  appointed 

it." 

g  Armdn.  The  same  word  is  used  by  Amos  (ii.  2)  in 
his  denunciation  of  Moab. 

b  There  can  be  no  doubt  that '  Jehoiakim  '  in  this  verse 
should  be  "  Zedckiab."  See  vei  3  cf  the  same  chap.,  and 
xxviii.  1. 

'  Jtr.  xxlii.  6. 


398 


MOAH 


of  remaining  in  theircwn  country.  The  removal  from 
home,  so  dreadful  to  the  Semitu  mind,k  was  to  be 
the  fate  only  of  those  who  resisted  (Jer.  xxvii.  10, 
11,  xxviii.  14).  This  is  also  supported  by  the 
allusion  of  Ezekiel,  a  few  years  later,  to  the  cities 
of  Moab,  cities  formerly  belonging  to  the  Israel 
ites,  which,  at  the  time  when  the  Prophet  is 
speaking,  were  still  flourishing,  "  the  glory  of  the 
country,"  destined  to  become  at  a  future  day  a  prey 
to  the  Bene-kedem,  the  "men  of  the  East" — the 
Bedouins  of  the  great  desert  of  the  Euphrates m 
(Ezek.  xxv.  8-11). 

After  the  return  from  the  captivity  it  was 
a  Moabite,  Sanballat  of  Horonaim,  who  took 
the  chief  part  in  annoying  and  endeavouring  to 
hinder  the  operations  of  the  rebuilders  of  Jeru 
salem  (Neh.  ii.  19,  iv.  1,  vi.  1,  &c.).  He  confines 
himself,  however,  to  the  same  weapons  of  ridicule 
and  scurrility  which  we  have  already  noticed 
Zephaniah"  resenting.  From  Sanballat's  words  (Neh. 
ii.  19)  we  should  mfer  that  he  and  his  country 
were  subject  to  "  the  king,"  that  is,  the  King  of  Ba 
bylon.  During  the  interval  since  the  return  of 
the  first  caravan  from  Babylon  the  illegal  practice 
of  marriages  between  the  Jews  and  the  other 
people  around,  Moab  amongst  the  rest,  had  become 
frequent.  So  far  had  this  gone,  that  the  son 
of  the  high  priest  was  married  to  an  Ammonite 
woman.  Even  among  the  families  of  Israel  who 
returned  from  the  captivity  was  one  bearing  the 
name  of  PAHATH-MOAB  (Ezr.  ii.  6,  viii.  4;  Neh. 
iii.  11,  &c.),  a  name  which  must  certainly  denote 
a  Moabite  connexion,0  though  to  the  nature  of  the 
connexion  no  clue  seems  to  have  been  yet  discovered. 
By  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  the  practice  of  foreign  mar 
riages  was  strongly  repressed,  and  we  never  hear 
of  it  again  becoming  prevalent. 

In  the  book  of  Judith,  the  date  of  which  is  laid 
shortly  after  the  return  from  captivity  (iv.  3), 
Moabites  and  Ammonites  are  represented  as  dwell 
ing  in  their  ancient  seats  and  as  obeying  the  call 
of  the  Assyrian  general.  Their  "  princes "  (ap- 
X<JvTos)  and  "  governors  "  (riyovfjiivoi)  are  men 
tioned  (v.  2,  vii.  8).  The  Maccabees,  much  as  they 
ravaged  the  country  of  the  Ammonites,  do  not  appear 
to  have  molested  Moab  proper,  nor  is  the  name 
either  of  Moab  or  of  any  of  the  towns  south  of 
the  Arnon  mentioned  throughout  those  books. 
Josephus  not  only  speaks  of  the  district  in  which 
Heshbon  was  situated  as  "  Moabitis  "  (Ant.  xiii.  15, 
§4;  also  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2),  but  expressly  says  that 
even  at  the  time  he  wrote  they  were  a  "  very  great 
nation"  (Ant.  i.  11,  §5.)  (See  5  Mace.  xxix.  19). 

In  the  time  of  Eusebius  (Onomast.  MwrfjS),  i.e. 
cir.  A.D.  380,  the  name  appears  to  have  been  attached 
to  the  district,  as  well  as  to  the  town  of  Rabbath — 
both  of  which  were  called  Moab.  It  also  lingered  for 
some  time  in  the  name  of  the  ancient  Kir-Moab, 
which,  as  Charakmoba,  is  mentioned  by  Ptolemy  f 
(Reland,  Pal.  463),  and  as  late  as  the  Council  of 
.Jerusalem,  A.D.  536,  formed  the  see  of  a  bishop  un 
der  the  same  title  (»'&.  533).  Since  that  time  the 


MOAB 

modern  name  Kerdk  has  superseded  the  older  ona 
and  no  trace  of  Moab  has  been  found  either  in  re 
cords  or  in  the  country  itself. 

Like  the  other  countries  east  of  Jordan  Moab  has 
been  very  little  visited  by  Europeans,  and  beyond 
ik  general  characteristics  hardly  anything  is  known 
of  it.  The  following  travellers  have  passed  through 
the  district  of  Moab  Proper,  from  Wady  Mojeb  on 
the  N.  to  Kerak  on  the  S.  :— 

Seetzen,  March,  1806,  and  January,  1807.  (U.  I.  Seet- 
zen's  Reisen,  &c.,  von  Prof.  Kruse,  &c.,  vol.  1.  405- 
26 ;  ii.  320-7?.  Also  the  editor's  notes  thereon,  in 
vol.  iv.) 

Burckhardt,  1812,  July  13,  to  Aug.  4.  (Travels,  Lon 
don,  1822.  See  also  the  notes  of  Oesenius  to  the 
German  translation,  Weimar,  1824,  vol.  Ii.,  1061- 
64.) 

Irby  and  Mangles,  1818,  June  5  to  8.  (Travels  in  Egypt., 
&c.,  1822,  8vo. ;  1847,  12mo.  Chap,  viii.) 

De  Saulcy,  1851,  January.  (Voyage  autour  de  la  Mer 
Morte,  Paris,  1853.  Also  translated  into  Englisb.) 

Of  the  character  of  the  face  of  the  country  these 
travellers  only  give  slight  reports,  and  among  these 
there  is  considerable  variation  even  when  the  same 
district  is  referred  to.  Thus  between  Kerak  and 
Rabba,  Irby  (141  a)  found  "a  fine  country,"  of  great 
natural  fertility,  with  "  reapers  at  work  and  the 
corn  luxuriant  in  all  directions ;"  and  the  same  dis 
trict  is  described  by  Burckhardt  as  "  very  fertile, 
and  large  tracts  cultivated"  (Syr.  July  15)  ;  while 
De  Saulcy,  on  the  other  hand,  pronounces  that 
"  from  Shihan  V6  miles  N.  of  JRabba)  to  the  Wady 
Kerak  the  country  is  perfectly  bare,  not  a  tree  or  a 
bush  to  be  seen" — "Toujoui-s  aussi  nu  .  .  .  pas  un 
arbre,  pas  un  arbrisseau  "  (  Voyage,  i.  353) ;  which 
again  is- contradicted  by  Seetzen,  who  not  only  found 
the  soil  very  good,  but  encumbered  with  •vormwood 
and  other  shrubs  (Seetzen,  i.  410).  These  dis 
crepancies  are  no  doubt  partly  due  to  difference  in 
the  time  of  year,  and  other  temporary  causes ;  but 
they  also  probably  proceed  from  the  disagree 
ment  which  seems  to  be  inherent  in  all  descrip 
tions  of  the  same  scene  or  spot  by  various  de- 
scribers,  and  which  is  enough  to  drive  to  despair 
those  whose  task  it  is  to  endeavour  to  combine  them 
into  a  single  account. 

In  one  thing  all  agree,  the  extraordinary  num 
ber  of  ruins  which  are  scattered  over  the  countiy, 
and  which,  whatever  the  present  condition  of  the 
soil,  are  a  sure  token  of  its  wealth  in  former 
ages.  "  Wie  schrecklich,"  says  Seetzen,  "  ist  diese 
Residenz  alter  Konige  und  ihr  Land  verwiistet!" 
(i.  412). 

The  whole  country  is  undulating,  and,  after  the 
general  level  of  the  plateau  is  reached,  without  any 
serious  inequalities  ;  and  in  this  and  the  absence  of 
conspicuous  vegetation  has  a  certain  resemblance  to 
the  downs  of  our  own  southern  counties. 

Of  the  language  of  the  Moabites  we  know  nothing 
or  next  to  nothing.  In  the  few  communications 
recorded  as  taking  place  between  them  and  Israelites 
no  interpreter  is  mentioned  (see  Ruth  ;  1  Sam.  xxii. 


*  This  feeling  is  brought  out  very  strongly  in  Jer. 
xlviii.  11,  where  even  the  successive  devastations  from 
which  Moab  .had  suffered  are  counted  as  nothing— as 
absolute  immunity — since  captivity  had  been  escaped. 

"»  To  the  incursions  of  these  people,  true  Arabs,  it  is 
possibly  due  that  the  LXX.  in  Is.  xv.  9  introduce  'Apa/3as 
— '  I  will  bring  Arabs  upon  Dimon." 

»  The  word  nB^H.  rendered  "  reproach  "  in  Zeph.  ii.  8, 
occurs  several  times  in  Nehemiuh  in  reference  to  the 


taunts  of  Sanballat  and  his  companions.  (See  iv.  4, 
vi.  13,  &c.) 

o  It  will  be  observed  that  this  name  occurs  tn  conjunc 
tion  with  Joab,  who,  if  the  well-known  son  of  Zeruiah 
would  be  a  descendant  of  Ruth  the  Moabltess.  Bui 
this  is  uncertain.  [Vol.  i.  10?4o.] 

P  From  the  order  of  the  lists  as  they  now  stand,  and 
tbc  latitude  affixed  to  Charakmoba,  Ptolemy  appears  t/t 
refer  to  a  place  south  of  Petra. 


MO  A  II 

3,  4,  &c.).  And  from  the  origin  of  the  nation 
and  other  considerations  we  may  perhaps  conjecture 
that  their  language  was  more  a  dialect  of  Hebrew 
than  a  different  tongue.*  This  indeed  would  follow 
from  the  connexion  of  Lot,  their  founder,  with 
Abraham. 

The  narrative  of  Num.  xxii.-xxiv.  must  be  founded 
on  a  Moabite  chronicle,  though  in  its  present  con 
dition  doubtless  much  altered  from  what  it  originally 
Was  before  it  came  into  the  hands  of  tbe  author  of 
the  Book  of  'Numbers.  No  attempt  seems  yet  to 
have  been  made  to  execute  the  difficult  but  interest 
ing  task  of  examining  the  record,  with  the  view  of 
restoring  it  to  its  pristine  form. 

The  following  are  the  names  of  Moabite  persons 
preserved  in  the  Bible  —  probably  Hebraized  in  their 
adoption  into  the  Bible  records.  Of  such  a  tran 
sition  we  seem  to  have  a  trace  in  Shomer  and  Shim- 
rith  (see  below). 

Zlppor. 
Balak. 
Kglon. 
Ruth. 


Mesha 

Ithmah  (1  Chr.  xi.  46). 

Shomer  (2  K.  xii.  21),  or  Shimrlth  (2  Ohtr.  xxiv.  26). 

Sanballat. 

Add  to  these  — 

Kmim,  the  name  by  which  they  called  the  Rephaim 
who  originally  inhabited  their  country,  and  whom 
the  Ammonites  called  Zamzummim  or  Zuzim. 

Cemdsh,  or  Cemlsh  (Jer.  xlviii.  7),  the  deity  of  the 
nation. 

Of  names  of  places  the  following  may  be  men 
tioned  :  — 

Moab,  with  its  compounds,  SedS-Moab,  the  fields  of 
M.  (A.  V.  "  the  country  of  M.")  ;  Arboth-Moab, 
the  deserts  (A.  V.  "the  plains")  of  M..  that  is, 
the  part  of  the  Arabah  occupied  by  the  Moabites. 

Kam-Mishor,  the  high  undulating  country  of  Moab 

Proper  (A.  V.  "  the  plain"). 

-  Ar,  or  Ar-Moab  ("1J?)-  This  Gesenius  conjectures  to 
be  a  Moabite  form  of  the  word  which  in  Hebrew 
appears  as  Ir  ("VJ?)>  a  city. 

Anion,  the  river  OJ^tf). 

Bamoth  Baal. 

Beer  Kliin. 

Beth-diblathaim. 

Dibou,  or  Dimon. 

Eglaim,  or  perhaps  Eglalh-Shelishiya  (Is.  xv.  5). 

Horonaim. 

Kiriathaim. 

Kirjath-huzoth  (Num.  xxxii.  39;  comp.  Is.  xxiv.  11). 

Kir-haraseth,  -haresh,  -heres. 

Kir-Moab. 

Luhith. 

Medeba. 

Nimrim,  or  Nimrah. 

Nobah,  or  Nophah  (Num.  xxi.  30). 

hap-Bsgah. 

hap-Peor. 

Shaveh-Kariathaim  (?) 

Zophim. 

Zoar. 


MODI*,  3«9 

It  should  be  noticed  how  large  a  pr  portion  of 
these  names  end  in  im.* 

For  the  religion  of  the  Moabites  see  CHEMOSH; 
MOLECH,  PEOB. 

Of  their  habits  and  customs  we  have  hardly  a 
trace.  The  gesture  employed  by  Balak  when  he 
found  that  Balaam's  interference  was  fruitless— 
"  he  smote  his  hands  together  " — is  not  mentioned 
again  in  the  Bible,  but  it  may  not  on  that  account 
have  been  peculiar  to  the  Moabites.  Their  mode 
of  mourning,  viz.  cutting  off  the  hair  at  the  back  * 
of  the  head  and  cropping  the  beard  (Jer.  xlviii. 
37),  is  one  which  they  followed  in  common  with 
the  other  non-Israelite  nations,  and  which  was  for 
bidden  to  the  Israelites  (Lev.  xxi.  5),  who  indeed 
seem  to  have  been  accustomed  rather  to  leave  theii 
hair  and  beard  disordered  and  untrimmed  when  in 
grief  (see  2  Sam.  xix.  24;  xiv.  2). 

For  a  singular  endeavour  to  identify  the  Moabites 
with  the  Druses,  see  Sir  G.  H.  Rose's  pamphlet 
The  Affghans  the  Ten  Tribes,  &c.  (London,  1852)] 
especially  the  statement  therein  of  Mr.  Wood,  latt 
British  consul  at  Damascus,  (p.  154-157).  [G.] 


MOADI-  AH  (nnjJin  :   MaoSof;    F.  A.,  3rd 

hand,  tv  Kaipols:  Moadia).  A  priest,  or  family  of 
priests,  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel.  The  chief 
of  the  house  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  son  of 
Jeshua  was  Piltai  (Neh.  xii.  17).  Elsewhere  (Neh, 
xii.  5-)  called  MAADIAH. 


MOCHMUR,  THE  BROOK  (6 

Mox/j.ovp  ;  Alex,  omits  Max-  :  Vulg.  omits  :  Syr. 
Nachal  de  Pear),  a  torrent,  i.  e.  a  wady  —  the  word 
"  brook  "  conveys  an  entirely  false  impression  — 
mentioned  only  in  Jud.  vii.  18  ;  and  there  as  speci 
fying  the  position  of  Ekrebel  —  "  near  unto  Chusi, 
and  upon  the  brook  Mochmur."  EKREBEL  has 
been  identified,  with  great  probability,  by  Mr. 
Van  de  Velde  in  Akrabeh,  a  ruined  site  in  the 
mountains  of  Central  Palestine,  equidistant  from 
Nabulus  and  Seilun,  S.E.  of  the  former  and  N.E. 
of  the  latter;  and  the  torrent  Mochmour  may  be 
either  the  Wady  Makfuriyeh,  on  the  northern 
slopes  of  which  Akrabeh  stands,  or  the  Wady 
Ahmar,  which  is  the  continuation  of  the  former 
eastwards. 

The  reading  of  the  Syriac  possibly  points  to 
the  existence  of  a  sanctuary  of  Baal-Peor  in  this 
neighbourhood,  but  is  more  probably  a  corruption 
of  the  original  name,  which  was  apparently  "VlOnQ 
(Simonis,  Onomasticon  N.  T.  &c.  p.  111).  [G,] 

MO'DIN  (MeoSeW  ;  Alex.  MwSeeiju,  Ma>8i«;,u, 
MwSaet/M,  and  in  ch.  ii.  MwSeew;  Joseph.  MwSiciju, 
and  once  McuoWy  :  Modin  :  the  Jewish  form  is, 
in  the  Mishna,  Q^TlDn,  in  Joseph  ben-Gorion, 
ch.  xx.,  JVjnitOn  ;  the  Syriac  version  of  Macca 
bees  agrees  with  the  Mishna,  except  in  the  absence  ot 
the  article,  and  in  the  usual  substitution  of  r  for  d, 
Mora'im),  a  place  not  mentioned  in  either  Old  or 
New  Testament,  though  rendered  immortal  by  its 
connexion  with  the  history  of  the  Jews  in  the  in 
terval  between  the  two.  It  was  the  native  city 
of  the  Maccabaean  family  (1  Mace.  xiii.  25),  and  as 


i  Some  materials  for  an  investigation  of  this  subject 
may  be  found  in  the  curious  variations  of  some  of  the 
Moabite  names— Chemosh,  Chemish ;  Kir-harasetb,  Kir- 
Dpres  &c. ;  Shomer,  Shimrith  and— remembering  the 
close  connexion  of  Ammon  with  Moab— the  names  of  the 
Ammonite  god,  Molech,  Milcom,  Malcham. 

r  If  this  suggestion  is  correct— and  there  must  be  some 


truth  in  it — then  this  passage  of  Numbers  becomes  no  less 
historically  important  than  Gen.  xiv.,  which  Ewald  ((?«• 
sckichte,  i.  73,  131,  &c.)  with  grtat  reason  maintains  to  be 
the  work  of  a  Canaanite  chronicler. 

"  So  also  does  Shaharaim,  a  person  who  hai  a  special 
connexion  with  Moab  (1  Chr.  viii.  8). 

'  DTfc!'  as  distinguished  from  H33. 


400 


MODIN 


a  necessary  consequence  contained  their  ancestral 
sepulchre  (jdfos)  (ii.  70,  i*  19).  Hither  Mat- 
tathias  removed  from  Jerusalem,  where  up  to  that 
time  he  seems  to  have  been  residing,  at  the  com 
mencement  of  the  Antiochian  persecution  (ii.  1). 
It  was  here  that  he  struck  the  first  blow  of  re 
sistance,  by  slaying  on  the  heathen  altar  which 
had  been  erected  in  the  place,  both  the  commissioner 
of  Antiochus  and  a  recreant  Jew  whom  he  had 
induced  to  sacrifice,  and  then  demolishing  the  altar. 
Mattathias  himself,  and  subsequently  his  sons  Judas 
and  Jonathan,  were  buried  in  the  family  tomb,  and 
ever  them  Simon  erected  a  structure  which  is  mi 
nutely  described  in  the  book  of  Maccabees  (xiii. 
25-30),  aud,  with  less  detail,  by  Josephus  (Ant. 
xiii.  6,  §6),  but  the  restoration  of  which  has  hitherto 
proved  as  difficult  a  puzzle  as  that  of  the  mauso 
leum  of  Artemisia. 

At  Modin  the  Maccabaean  armies  encamped  on 
the  eves  of  two  of  their  most  memorable  victories — 
that  of  Judas  over  Antiochus  Eupator  (2  Mace.  xiii. 
14),  and  that  of  Simon  over  Cendebeus  (1  Mace, 
xvi.  4) — the  last  battle  of  the  veteran  chief  before 
his  assassination.  The  only  indication  of  the  posi 
tion  of  the  place  to  be  gathered  from  the  above 
notices  is  contained  in  the  last,  from  which  we  may 
infer  that  it  was  near  "  the  plain  "  (rb  ireSiov),  »'.  e. 
the  great  maritime  lowland  of  Philistia  (ver.  5).  By 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  ( Onom.  MTjSeeijtt  and  "  Mo- 
dim  ")  it  is  specified  as  near  Diospolis,  i.e.  Lydda ; 
while  the  notice  in  the  Mishna  (Pesachim,  ix.  2), 
and  the  comments  of  Bartenora  and  Maimonides, 
state  that  it  was  15  (Roman)  miles  from  Jerusalem. 
At  the  same  time  the  description  of  the  monument 
seems  to  imply  (though  for  this  see  below)  that  the 
spot  was  so  lofty  a  as  to  be  visible  from  the  sea,  and 
so  near  that  even  the  details  of  the  sculpture  were 
discernible  therefrom.  All  these  conditions,  except 
ing  the  last,  are  tolerably  fulfilled  in  either  of  the 
two  sites  called  Latrun  and  Kubab}  The  former 
of  these  is,  by  the  shortest  road — that  through 
Wady  Ali — exactly  15  Roman  miles  from  Jeru 
salem;  it  is  about  8  English  miles  from  Lydd,  15 
from  the  Mediterranean,  and  9  or  10  from  the  river 
Rubin,  on  which  it  is  probable  that  Cedron — the 
position  of  Cendebeus  in  Simon's  battle — stood. 
Jfubdb  is  a  couple  of  miles  further  from  Jerusalem, 
and  therefore  nearer  to  Lydd  and  to  the  sea,  on 
the  most  westerly  spur  of  the  hills  of  Benjamin. 
Both  are  lofty,  and  both  apparently — Latrun  cer 
tainly — command  a  view  of  the  Mediterranean. 
In  favour  of  Latrun  are  the  extensive  ancient 
remains  with  which  the  top  of  the  hill  is  said  to  be 
covered  (Rob.  B.  E.iii.  151 ;  Tobler,  Dritte  Wand. 
186),  though  of  their  age  and  particulars  we  have 
at  present  no  accurate  information.  Kubdb  appears 
to  possess  no  ruins,  but  on  the  other  hand  its  name 
may  retain  a  trace  of  the  monument. 


MODIN 

The  mediaeval  and  modem  tradition  c  place* 
Modin  at  Soba,  an  eminence  smth  of  Kurict  el- 
cnab  ;  but  this  being  not  more  than  7  miles  from 
Jerusalem,  while  it  is  as  much  as  25  from  Lydd 
and  30  from  the  sea,  and  also  far  removed  from 
the  plain  of  Philistia.  is  at  variance  with  every  one 
of  the  conditions  implied  in  the  records.  It  has 
found  advocates  in  our  own  day  in  M.  de  Saulcy 
(PArt  Judaique,  &c.,  377,  8)  and  M.  Salzmann  ;  d 
the  latter  of  whom  explored  chambers  there  which 
may  have  been  tombs,  though  he  admits  that  there 
was  nothing  to  prove  it.  A  suggestive  fact,  which  Dr. 
Robinson  first  pointed  out,  is  the  want  of  unanimity 
in  the  accounts  of  the  mediaeval  travellers,  some  of 
whom,  as  William  of  Tyre  (viii.  1),  place  Modin  in 
a  position  near  Emmaus-Nicopolis,  Nob  (Anuabeh), 
and  Lydda.  M.  Mislin  also  —  usually  so  vehement 
in  favour  of  the  traditional  sites  —  has  recommended 
further  investigation.  If  it  should  turn  out  that 
the  expression  of  the  book  of  Maccabees  as  to  the 
monument  being  visible  from  the  sea  has  been  mis 
interpreted,  then  one  impediment  to  the  reception  of 
Soba  will  be  removed  ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  account 
for  the  origin  of  the  tradition  in  the  teeth  of  those 
which  remain. 

The  descriptions  of  the  tomb  by  the  author  of 
the  book  of  Maccabees  and  Josephus,  who  had  both 
apparently  seen  it,  will  be  most  conveniently  com 
pared  by  being  printed  together. 

1  Mace.  xiii.  27-30.  Josephns,  Ant.  xiii.  «,  }6. 

"  And  Simon  made  a 
building  over  the  se 
pulchre  of  his  father  and 
his  brethren,  and  raised 
it  aloft  to  view  with  po 
lished6  stone  behind  and 
before.  And  be  set  up 
upon  it  seven  pyramids, 
one  against  another,  for 
his  father  and  his  mother 
and  his  four  brethren. 
And  on  these  he  made 
engines  of  war,  and  set 
great  pillars  round  about, 
and  on  the  pillars  lie 
made  suits  of  armour  for 
a  perpetual  memory  ;  and 
by  the  suits  of  armour 
ships  carved,  so  that  they 
might  be  seen  by  all  that 
sail  on  the  sea.  This 
sepulchre  he  made  at 
Modin,  and  it  stands  unto 
this  day." 


"  And  Simon  built  a 
very  large  monument  to 
his  father  and  his  brethren 
of  white  and  polished 
stone.  And  he  raised  it 
up  to  a  great  and  con 
spicuous  height,  and 
threw  cloisters  around, 
and  set  up  pillars  of  a 
single  stone,  a  work 
wonderful  to  behold  :  and 
near  to  these  he  built 
seven  pyramids  to  hi* 
parents  and  his  brother?, 
one  for  each,  terrible  to 
behold  both  for  size  and 
beauty. 


And  these  things  are 
preserved  even  to  thi» 
day." 


The  monuments  are  said  by  Eusebius 
to  have  been  still  shown  when  he  wrote  —  A.  D. 
circa  320. 

Any  restoration  of  the  structure  from  so  imperfec* 
an  account  as  the  above  can  never  be  anything  more 


•  Thus  the  Vulg.  of  1  Mace.  ii.  1  has  Mont  Modin. 

»>  Ewald  (G«c&.  iv.  350  note)  suggests  that  the  name 
Mcdln  may  be  still  surviving  in  Deir  Jlfa'in.  But  is  not  this 
questionable  on  philological  grounds?  and  the  position  of 
Deir  Ma'in  is  less  in  accordance  with  the  facts  than  that 
of  the  two  named  in  the  text. 

•  See  the  copious  references  given  by  Robinson  (B.  B. 
U.  7 .note) 

•  The    lively   account   of  M.  Salzmann  (Jerusalem, 
Etude,  &C.,  pp  37,  38)  would  be  more  satisfactory  if  it 
were  less  encumbered  with  mistakes.    To  name  but  two. 
The  great  obstacle  which  interposes  itself  in  his  quest  of 
Modin  is  that  Kusebius  and  Jerome  stato  that  it  was 
•  near  Diospolis,  on  a  mountain  in  the  trib*  cl  Judah.'' 


This  difficulty  (which  however  is  entirely  imaginary,  for 
they  do  not  mention  the  name  cf  Jmlah  in  connexion 
with  Modin)  would  have  been  "  enough  to  deter  him 
entirely  from  the  task,"  if  he  had  not  "  found  in  the 
book  of  Joshua  that  M'dim  (from  which  Modim  is  derived) 
was  part  of  the  territory  allotted  to  the  tribe  of  Judah.  * 
Now  Mlddin  (not  M'dim)  was  certainly  in  the  tribe  of 
Judah,  but  not  within  many  miles  of  the  spot  In  question, 
since  it  was  one  of  the  six  towns  which  lay  in  the  district 
Immediately  bordering  on  the  Dead  Sea,  probably  In  the 
depth?  of  the  Ghor  itself  (Josh.  xv.  61). 

•  \i8tp  feorw.     This  Ewald  (iv.  388)  renders  "  irv 
scribed,"  or  "  graven  " — beschriebe~*tn  Steintn. 


MOETH 


MOLE 


401 


than  conjecture.  Something  has  been  already  at-  I  as  in  the  interior  of  Daroma  (a  district  which 
tempttd  under  MACCABEES  (p.  170).  But  m  its  .  answered  to  the  Negeb  or  "South"  of  the  He- 
abseuct  one  or  two  questions  present  themselves.  'brews);  and  further,  under  "Arath"  or  Apa/ud 


(1.;  The  "  ships"' (ir A.o?o,  naves).  The  sea  and 
its  pursuits  were  so  alien  to  the  ancient  Jews,  and 
the  life  of  the  Maccabaean  hferoes  who  preceded 
Simon  was — if  we  except  their  casual  relations  with 
Joppa  and  Jamnia  and  the  battle-field  of  the  mari 
time  plain— so  unconnected  therewith,  that  it  is 
difficult  not  to  suppose  that  the  word  is  corrupted 
from  what  it  originally  was.  This  was  the  view 
of  J.  D.  Michaelis,  but  he  does  not  propose  any 
satisfactory  word  in  substitution  for  irA.o?a  (see  his 
suggestion  in  Grimm,  ad  loc.).  True,  Simon  appeai-s 
to  have  been  to  a  certain  extent  alive  to  the  im 
portance  of  commerce  to  his  country,'  and  he  is 
especially  commemorated  for  having  acquired  the 
harbour  of  Joppa,  and  thus  opened  an  inlet  for  the 
isles  of  the  sea  (1  Mace.  xiv.  5).  But  it  is  difficult 
to  see  the  connexion  between  this  and  the  placing 
of  ships  on  a  monument  to  his  father  and  brothers, 
whose  memorable  deeds  had  been  of  a  different  de 
scription.  It  is  perhaps  more  feasible  to  suppose 
that  the  sculptures  were  intended  to  be  symbolical 
of  the  departed  heroes.  In  this  case  it  seems  not 
improbable  that  during  Simon's  intercourse  with 
the  Romans  he  had  seen  and  been  struck  with  their 
war-galleys,  no  inapt  symbols  of  the  fierce  and 
rapid  career  of  Judas.  How  far  such  symbolical 
representation  was  likely  to  occur  to  a  Jew  jof  that 
period  is  another  question. 

(2.)  The  distance  at  which  the  "ships"  were  to 
be  seen.  Here  again,  when  the  necessary  distance 
of  Modin  from  the  sea — Latrun  15  miles,  Kubab 
13,  Lydda  itself  10 — and  the  limited  size  of  the 
sculptures  are  considered,  the  doubt  inevitably  arises 
whether  the  Greek  text  of  the  book  of  Maccabees 
accurately  represents  the  original.  De  Saulcy  (L'Art 
Judaique,  377)  ingeniously  suggests  that  the  true 
meaning  is,  not  that  the  sculptures  could  be  dis 
cerned  from  the  vessels  in  the  Mediterranean,  but 
that  they  were  worthy  to  be  inspected  by  those  who 
were  sailors  by  profession.  The  consideration  of 
this  is  recommended  to  scholars.  [G.] 

MO'ETH  (MtatO :  Medias).  In  1  Esd.  viii.  63 
"  NOADIAH  the  son  of  Binnui"  (Ezr.  viii.  33),  a 
Levite,  is  called  "  Moeth  the  son  of  Sabban." 

MO'LADAH  (rVlVto ;  but  in  Neh. 
MwXuSo,  Alex.  MwSttSa ;    Ko>\a\d/j.,  Alex.  Ma>- 
\dSa ;  MwciASot,  Alex.  Mw\o8a :  Molada),  a  city 
of  Judah.  one  of  those  which  lay  in  the  district  of 
"  the  south,"  next  to  Edom.     It  is  named  in  the 
original  list  between  Shema  and  Hazar-gaddah,  in 
the  same  group  with  Beer-sheba  (Josh.  xv.  26) 
and  this  is  confirmed  by  another  list  in  which  i 
appears  as  one  of  the  towns  which,  though  in 
allotment  of  Judah,  were  given  to  Simeon  (xix.  2) 
In  the  latter  tribe  it  remained  at  any  rate  till  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  iv.  28),  but  by  the  time  o 
the  captivity  it  seems  to  have  come  back  into  th 
hands  of  Judah,  by  whom  it  was  reinhabited  afte 
the  captivity  (Neh.  xi.  26).    It  is,  however,  omittec 
from  the  catalogue   of  the   places   frequented   by 
David  during  his  wandering  life  (1  Sam.  xxx.  27-3V 

In  the  Onomasticon  it  receives  a  bare  mentio 
under  the  head  of  "  Molada,"  but  under  "  Ether 
end  "  lether  "  a  place  named  Malatha  is  spoken  o 


.  e.  Arad)  it  is  mentioned  as  4  miles  from  the 
atter  place  and  20  from  Hebron.  Ptolemy  slso 
>eaks  of  a  Maliattha  as  near  Elusa.  And  lastly, 
osephus  states  that  Herod  Agrippa  retired  to  a 
ertain  tower  "  in  Malatha  of  Idumaea"  (^v  MoXoi- 
ois  rfjs  '15.).  The  requirements  of  these  notices 
re  all  very  fairly  answered  by  the  position  of  th« 
lodern  el-Milli,  a  site  of  ruins  of  some  extent,  and 
wo  large  wells,  one  of  the  regular  stations  on  the 
oad  from  Petra  and  Ain  el-  Weibeh  to  Hebron. 
yi-Milli  is  about  4  English  miles  from  Tell  Arad, 
7  or  18  from  Hebron,  and  9  or  10  due  east  of 
teersheba.  Five  miles  to  the  south  is  Ararah,  the 
^ROER  of  1  Sam.  xxx.  28.  It  is  between  20  and  30 
•om  Elusa,  assuming  el-Khulasah  to  be  that  place ; 
nd  although  Dr.  Robinson  is  probably  correct  in 
aying  that  there  is  no  verbal  affinity,  or  only  a  slight 
ne,  between  Molada  or  Malatha  and  ei-Milh,*  yet, 
akingthat  slight  resemblance  into  account  with  the 
ther  considerations  above  named,  it  is  very  probable 
liat  this  identification  is  correct  (see  B.  R.  ii.  201). 
t  is  accepted  by  Wilson  (Lands,  i.  347),  Van  de 
relde  (Memoir,  335),  Bonar,  and  others.  [G.] 

MOLE,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
lebrew  words  Tinshemeth  and  Chifph6r  per 6th. 
1.  Tinshemeth  (T\ft&)F\ :  a<nr<£\o£,  Aid.    trird- 

Vaf ,  in  Lev.  xi.  30  ;  Xapos,   Aid.  Aapos :  cygnus, 
alpa,  ibis}.    This  word  occurs  in  the  list  of  unclean 
lirdsinLev.  xi.  18;  Dent.  xiv.  16,  where  it  is  trans- 
ated  "  swan  "  by  the  A.  V. ;  in  Lev.  xi.  30,  where 
he    same   word   is   found    amongst   the    unclean 
creeping  things  that  creep  upon  the  earth,"  it 
evidently   no   longer   stands   for   the   name  of  a 
>ird,    and   is   rendered   "  mole "   by   the   A.   V. 
adopting  the  interpretation  of  the  LXX.,  Vulg., 
Dnkelos,  and  some  of  the  Jewish  doctors.     Bochart 
las,  however,  shown  that  the  Hebrew  Chokd,  the 
Arabic  Khuld  or  Khild,  denotes  the  "  mole,"  and 
las  argued  with  much  force  in  behalf  of  the  "  cha 
meleon  "  being  the  tinshemeth.     The  Syriac  version 
nd  some  Arabic  MSS.  understand  "a  centipede" 
•y  the  original  word,  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  a 
'salamander,"    some   Arabic   versions  read   sam- 
mdbras,  which  Golius  renders  "  a  kind  of  lizard." 
In  Lev.  xi.  30,  the  "  chameleon  "  is  given  by  the 


7or  the  notlc*  of  this  fact  I  am  indebted  to  the  Rev 
B.  F.  WesVjott. 

•  Bj  Schwarz  (100)  the  Arabic  name  is  quoted 
VOL.  II. 


The  Chameleon.     (Chumetco  vulgar 


A.  V.  as  the  translation  of  the  Hebrew  choach, 
which  in  all  probability  denotes  some  larger  kind  of 
lizard.  [CHAMELEON.]  The  only  clue  to  an  iden 
tification  of  tinshemeth  is  to  be  found  in  its  etymo 
logy,  and  in  the  context  in  which  the  word  occurs. 
Bochart  conjectures  that  the  root*  from  which  the 
Heb.  name  of  this  creature  is  derived,  has  reference 


Mvladak;    by  Stewart  (Tent  and  KJian,  217;   as 
Iftleck.  _ 

b  DK>3.  "  to  breathe,"  whence  JIlDB^.  "bream." 
T  T  :     2  D 


402 


MOLE 


to  a  vulgar  opinion  amongst  the  ancients  that  the  | 
chameleon  lived  on  air  (comp.  Ov.  Met.  rv.  411, ' 
"  Id  quoque  quod  ventis  animal  nutritur  et  aura," 
and  see  numerous  quotations  from  classical  authors 
cited  by  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  ">05).  The  lung  of 
the  chameleon  is  very  large,  L.  id  when  filled  with 
air  it  renders  the  body  semi-transparent ;  from  the 
creature's  power  of  abstinence,  no  doubt  arose  the 
fable  that  it  lived  on  air.  It  is  probable  that  the 
animals  mentioned  with  the  tinshemeth  (Lev.  xi. 
30)  denote  different  kinds  of  lizards  ;  perhaps  there 
fore,  since  the  etymology  of  the  word  is  favourable 
to  that  view,  the  chameleon  may  be  the  animal  in 
tended  by  tinshemeth  in  Lev.  xi.  30.  As  to  the 
change  of  colour  in  the  skin  of  this  animal  numerous 
theories  have  been  proposed ;  but  as  this  subject  has 
no  Scriptural  bearing,  it  will  be  enough  to  refer  to 
the  explanation  given  by  Milne-Edwards,  whose 
paper  is  translated  in  vol.  xvii.  of  the  Edinburgh 
New  Philosophical  Journal.  The  chameleon  be 
longs  to  the  tribe  Dendrosaura,  order  Saura ;  the 
family  inhabits  Asia  and  Africa,  and  the  south  of 
Europe ;  the  C.  vulgaris  is  the  species  mentioned 
in  the  Bible.  As  to  the  bird  tinshemeth,  see  SWAN. 
2.  Chlphor  peroth  (riTfo  niSH  :c  T£  ndraia: 

talpae)  is  rendered  "  moles"  by  the  A.  V.  in  Is.  ii. 
20 ;  three  MSS.  read  these  two  Hebrew  words  as 
one,  and  so  the  LXX.,  Vulg.,  Aquila,  Symmachus, 
and  Theodotion,  with  the  Syriac  and  Arabic  ver 
sions,  though  they  adopt  different  interpretations  of 
the  word  (Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  449).  It  is  difficult 
to  see  what  Hebrew  word  the  LXX.  could  have 
read ;  but  compare  Schleusner,  Nov.  Thes.  in  LXX. 
8.  v.  ndraios.  Gesenius  follows  Bochart  in  consi 
dering  the  Hebrew  words  to  be  the  plural  feminine 
of  the  noun  chapharperdh,A  but  does  not  limit  the 
meaning  of  the  word  to  "  moles."  Michaelis  also 
(Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb,  p.  «76  and  2042)  believes 
the  words  should  be  read  as  one,  but  that  "  sepul 
chres,"  or  "  vaults  "  dug  in  the  rocks  are  intended. 
The  explanation  of  Oedmann  (  Vermischt.  Samm.  iii. 
82,  83)  that  the  Hebrew  words  signify  "  (a  bird) 
that  follows  cows  for  the  sake  of  their  milk,"  and 
that  the  goat-sucker  (Caprimulgits  Europaeus)  is 
intended,  is  improbable.  Perhaps  no  reference  is 
made  by  the  Hebrew  words  (which,  as  so  few 
MSS.  join  them,  it  is  better  to  consider  distinct)  to 
any  particular  animal,  but  to  the  holes  and  burrows 
of  rats,  mice,  &c.,  which  we  know  frequent  ruins 
and  deserted  places.  (Harmer's  Observ.  ii.  456.) 
"  Remembering  the  extent  to  which  we  have  seen," 
says  Kitto  (Pict .  Bib.  on  Is.  xx.),  "  the  forsaken 
sites  of  the  East  perforated  with  the  holes  of 
various  cave-digging  animals,  we  are  i  iclined  to 
suppose  that  the  words  might  generally  denote  any 
animals  of  this  description."  Rosenmiiller's  expla 
nation,  " in  efossionem,  i.  e.  foramen  Murium" 
appears  to  be  decidedly  the  best  proposed ;  for  not 
only  is  it  the  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew,  but 
it  is  more  in  accordance  with  the  natural  habits  of 
rats  and  mice  to  occupy  with  bats  deserted  places 
than  it  is  with  the  habits  of  moles,  which  for  the 
most  part  certainly  frequent  cultivated  lands,  and 
this  no  doubt  is  true  of  the  particular  species, 
Spalax  typhlus,  the  mole-rat  of  Syria  and  Mesopo 
tamia,  which  by  some  has  been  supposed  to  repre 
sent  the  mole  of  the  Scriptures  ;  if,  moreover,  the 
prophet  intended  to  speak  exclusively  of  "  moles," 


c  "  Holes  ui  rats." 
Heb  word  was  from  n°1B>  "  a  now 


.  as  ,f  ihe 


MOLECH 

i«  it  not  probable  that  he  would  have  used  the 
term  Choled  (see  above)  ?    [WEASEL.]    [W.  H.] 

MO'LECH  O&ten,  with  the  article,  except  in 
1  K.  xi.  7 :  &px<w,  m  Lev. ;  6  &affi\tiit  avruv, 
1  K.  xi.  7  ;  6  MoXdx,  2  K.  xxiii.  10 ;  and  6  MoA.J>x 
/3a(TiA.«vs,  Jer.  xxxii.  35 :  Moloch).  The  fire-god 
Molech  was  the  tutelary  deity  of  the  children  of 
Ammon,  and  essentially  identical  with  the  Moabitish 
Ghemosh.  Fire-gods  appear  to  have  been  common 
to  all  the  Ganaanite,  Syrian,  and  Arab  tribes,  who 
worshipped  the  destructive  element  under  an  out 
ward  symbol,  with  the  most  inhuman  rites.  Among 
these  were  human  sacrifices,  purifications  and 
ordeals  by  fire,  devoting  of  the  firstborn,  mutila 
tion,  and  vows  of  perpetual  celibacy  and  virginity. 
To  this  class  of  divinities  belonged  the  old  Canaan- 
itish  Molech,  against  whose  worship  the  Israelites 
were  warned  by  threats  of  the  severest  punish 
ment.  The  offender  who  devoted  his  offspring  to 
Molech  was  to  be  put  to  death  by  stoning ;  and  in 
case  the  people  of  the  land  refused  to  inflict  upon  him 
this  judgment,  Jehovah  would  Himself  execute  it,  and 
cut  him  off  from  among  His  people  (Lev.  rviii.  21, 
rx.  2-5).  The  root  of  the  word  Molech  is  the  same 

as  that  of  TPO,  melee,  or  "  king,"  and  hence  he  is 
iv  v 

identified  with  Malcham  ("  their  king")  in  2  Sam. 
xii.  30,  Zeph.  i.  5,  the  title  by  which  he  was 
known  to  the  Israelites,  as  being  invested  with 
regal  honours  in  his  character  as  a  tutelary  deity, 
the  lord  and  master  of  his  people.  Our  translators 
have  recognized  this  identity  in  their  rendering  of 
Am.v.  26  (where  "your Moloch"  is  literally  " your 
king,"  as  it  is  given  in  the  margin),  following 
the  Greek  in  the  speech  of  Stephen,  in  Acts  vii.  43. 
Dr.  Geiger,  in  accordance  with  his  theory  that  the 
worship  of  Molech  was  far  more  widely  spread 
among  the  Israelites  than  appears  at  first  sight 
from  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  many  traces  are 
obscured  in  the  text,  refers  "  the  king,"  in  Is.  xxx. 
33,  to  that  deity  :  "  for  Tophet  is  ordained  of  old ; 
yea  for  the  king  it  is  prepared."  Again,  of  the 
Israelite  nation,  personified  as  an  adulteress,  it  is 
said,  "  Thou  wentest  to  the  king  with  oil"  (Is.  Ivii. 
9) ;  Amaziah  the  priest  of  Bethel  forbade  Amos  to 
prophesy  there,  "  for  it  is  the  king's  chapel"  (Am. 
vii.  13)  ;  and  in  both  these  instances  Dr.  Geiger 
would  find  a  disguised  reference  to  the  worship  of 
Molech  (  Urschrift,  &c.,  pp.  299-308).  But  whe 
ther  his  theory  be  correct  or  not,  the  traces  of 
Molech- worship  in  the  Old  Testament  ai-e  sufficiently 
distinct  to  enable  us  to  form  a  correct  estimate  of 
its  character.  The  first  direct  historical  allusion  to 
it  is  in  the  description  of  Solomon's  idolatry  in  his 
old  age.  He  had  in  his  harem  many  women  of  the 
Ammonite  race,  who  "  turned  away  his  heart  after 
other  gods,"  and,  as  a  consequence  of  their  influence, 
high  places  to  Molech,  "  the  abomination  of  the 
children  of  Ammon,"  were  built  on  "  the  mount 
that  is  facing  Jerusalem  " — one  of  the  summits  of 
Olivet  (1  K.  xi.  7).  Two  verses  before,  the  same 
deity  is  called  MILCOM,  and  from  the  circumstance 
of  the  two  names  being  distinguished  in  2  K.  xxiii. 
10, 13,  it  has  been  inferred  by  Movers,  Ewald,  and 
others,  that  the  two  deities  were  essentially  distinct. 
There  does  not  appear  to  be  sufficient  ground  for 
this  conclusion.  It  is  true  that  in  the  later  history 
of  the  Israelites  the  worship  of  Molech  is  connected 
with  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  while  the  high  place  of 
Milcom  was  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and  that  no 
mention  is  made  of  human  sacrifices  to  the  latter 


MOLECH 

But  it  seems  impossible  to  resist  the  conclusion 
that  in  1  K.  xi.  "  Milcom  the  abomination  of  the 
Ammonites,"  in  ver.  5,  is  the  same  as  "  Molech 
the  abomination  of  the  children  of  Ammon,"  in 
ver.  7.  To  avoid  this  Movers  contends,  not  very 
convincingly,  that  the  latter  verse  is  by  a  different 
hand.  Be  this  as  it  may,  in  the  reformation  carried 
out  by  Josiah,  the  high  place  of  Milcom,  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  mount  of  corruption,  and  Tophet 
in  the  valley  of  the  children  of  Hinnom  were 
defiled,  that  "  no  man  might  make  his  son  or  his 
daughter  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech  "  (2  K. 
xxiii.  10, 13).  In  the  narrative  of  Chronicles  these 
are  included  under  the  general  term  "  Baalim," 
and  the  apostasy  of  Solomon  is  not  once  alluded  to. 
Tophet  soon  appears  to  have  been  restored  to  its 
original  uses,  for  we  find  it  again  alluded  to,  in  the 
reign  of  Zedekiah,  as  the  scene  of  child-slaughter 
and  sacrifice  to  Molech  (Jer.  xxxii.  35). 

Most  of  the  Jewish  interpreters,  Jarchi  (on  Lev. 
xviii.  21),  Kimchi,  and  Maimonides  (Mor.  Neb.  iii. 
38)  among  the  number,  say  that  in  the  worship  of 
Molech  the  children  were  not  burnt  but  made  to 
pass  between  two  burning  pyres,  as  a  purificatory 
rite.  But  the  allusions  to  the  actual  slaughter  are 
too  plain  to  be  mistaken,  and  Aben  Ezra  in  his  note 
on  Lev.  xviii.  21,  says  that  "to  cause  to  pass 
through"  is  the  same  as  "  to  burn."  "  They  sa 
crificed  their  sons  and  their  daughters  unto  devils, 
and  shed  innocent  blood,  the  blood  of  their  sons  and 
of  their  daughters,  whom  they  sacrificed  unto  the 
idols  of  Canaan"  (Ps.  cvi.  37,  38).  In  Jer.  vii. 
31,  the  reference  to  the  worship  of  Molech  by  hu 
man  sacrifice  is  still  more  distinct :  "  they  have 
built  the  high  places  of  Tophet  .  .  .  to  burn  their 
sons  and  their  daughters  in  the  fire,"  as  "  burnt- 
offerings  unto  Baal,"  the  sun-god  of  Tyre,  with 
whom,  or  in  whose  character,  Molech  was  wor 
shipped  (Jer.  xix.  5).  Compare  also  Deut.  xii.  31 ; 
Ez.  xvi.  20,  21,  xxiii.  37.  But  the  most  remark 
able  passage  is  that  in  2  Chr.  xxviii.  3,  in  which 
the  wickedness  of  Ahaz  is  described :  "  Moreover, 
he  burnt  incense  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinuom, 
and  burnt  (IJQ'1)  his  children  in  the  fire,  after  the 

abominations  of  the  nations  whom  Jehovah  had 
driven  out  before  the  children  of  Israel."  Now,  in 
the  parallel  narrative  of  2  K.  xvi.  3,  instead  of 
"TW1 ,  "  and  he  burnt,"  the  reading  is  Y3yn,  "  he 

••  :--  °  ••'::• 

made  to  pass  through,"  and  Dr.  Geiger  suggests 
that  the  former  may  be  the  true  reading,  of  which 
the  latter  is  an  easy  modification,  serving  as  a  euphe 
mistic  expression  to  disguise  the  horrible  nature  of 
the  sacrificial  rites.  But  it  is  more  natural  to 
suppose  that  it  is  an  exceptional  instance,  and  that 
the  true  reading  is  "Qi^l,  than  to  assume  that  the 

other  passages  have  been  intentionally  altered." 
The  worehip  of  Molech  is  evidently  alluded  to, 
though  not  expressly  mentioned,  in  connexion  with 
star-worship  and  the  worship  of  Baal  in  2  K.  xvii. 
16, 17,  xxi.  5,  6,  which  seems  to  shew  that  Molech, 
the  flame-god,  and  Baal,  the  sun-god,  whatever 
their  distinctive  attributes,  and  whether  or  not 
the  latter  is  a  general  appellation  including  the 
former,  were  worshipped  with  the  same  rites.  The 
sacrifice  of  children  is  said  by  Movers  to  have  been 
not  so  much  an  expiatory,  as  a  purificatory  rite,  by 


MOLECH 


40,j 


"  We  may  infer  from  the  expression,  "  after  the  abo 
minations  of  the  nations  whom  Jehovah  had  driven  out 
before  the  children  of  Israel,"  that  the  character  of  the 


which  tlie  victims  were  purged  from  the  dross  of 
the  body  and  attained  union  with  the  deity.  Iu 
support  of  this  he  quotes  the  myth  of  Baaltis  or 
Isis,  whom  Malcander,  king  cf  Byblus,  employed  as 
nurse  for  his  child.  Isis  suckled  the  infant  with 
her  finger,  and  each  night  burnt  whatever  was 
mortal  in  its  body.  When  Astarte  the  mother  saw 
this  sne  uttered  a  cry  of  terror,  and  the  child  was 
thus  deprived  of  immortality  (Plut.  Is.  fy  Os. 
ch.  16).  But  the  sacrifice  of  Mesha  king  of  Moab, 
when,  in  despair  at  failing  tc  Lut  his  way  through 
the  overwhelming  forces  of  Judah,  Israel,  and  Edom, 
he  offered  up  his  eldest  son  a  burnt-offering,  pro 
bably  to  Chemosh,  his  national  divinity,  has  more 
of  the  character  of  an  expiatory  rite  to  appease  an 
angry  deity,  than  of  a  ceremonial  purification.  Be 
sides,  the  passage  from  Plutarch  bears  evident  traces 
of  Egyptian,  if  not  of  Indian  influence. 

According  to  Jewish  tradition,  from  what  source 
we  know  not,  the  image  of  Molech  was  of  brass, 
hollow  within,  and  was  situated  without  Jeru 
salem.  Kimchi  (on  2  K.  xxiii.  10)  describes  it  as 
"  set  within  seven  chapels,  and  whoso  offered  fine 
flour  they  open  to  him  one  of  them,  (whoso  offered) 
turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons  they  open  to  him 
two ;  a  lamb,  they  open  to  him  three ;  a  ram,  they 
open  to  him  four ;  a  calf,  they  open  to  him  five ;  an 
ox,  they  open  to  him  six,  and  so  whoever  offered  his 
son  they  open  to  him  seven.  And  his  face  was 
(that)  of  a  calf,  and  his  hands  stretched  forth  like 
a  man  who  opens  his  hands  to  receive  (something) 
of  his  neighbour.  And  they  kindled  it  with  fire, 
and  the  priests  took  the  babe  and  put  it  into  the 
hands  of  Molech,  and  the  babe  gave  up  the  ghost. 
And  why  was  it  called  Tophet  and  Hinnom  ?  Be 
cause  they  used  to  make  a  noise  with  drums  (to- 
phirri),  that  the  father  might  not  hear  the  cry  of  his 
child  and  have  pity  upon  him,  and  return  to  him. 
Hinnom,  because  the  babe  wailed  (D!"tiO,  mena- 
hem*),  and  the  noise  of  his  wailing  went  up.  An 
other  opinion  (is  that  it  was  called)  Hiunom,  because 
the  priests  used  to  say — "May  it  profit  (i"!3i"P) 
thee !  may  it  be  sweet  to  thee !  may  it  be  of  sweet 
savour  to  thee!"  All  this  detail  is  probably  as 
fictitious  as  the  etymologies  are  unsound,  but  we 
have  nothing  to  supply  its  place.  Selden  con 
jectures  that  the  idea  of  the  seven  chapels  may 
have  been  borrowed  from  the  worship  of  Mithra, 
who  had  seven  gates  corresponding  to  the  seven 
planets,  and  to  whom  men  and  women  were  sacri 
ficed  (De  Dis  Syr.  Synt.  i.  c.  6).  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  describes  the  remains  of  an  ancient  Am 
monite  temple  which  he  saw  at  Gebal,  in  which 
was  a  stone  image  richly  gilt  seated  on  a  throne. 
On  either  side  sat  two  female  figures,  and  before  it 
was  an  .altar  on  which  the  Ammonites  anciently 
burned  incense  and  offered  sacrifice  (Early  Travels 
in  Palestine;  p.  79,  Bohn).  By  these  chapels 
Lightfoot  explains  the  allusion  in  Am.  v.  26 ;  Acts 
vii.  43,  to  "  the  tabernacle  of  Moloch  ;"  "  these  seven 
chapels,  (if  there  be  truth  in  the  thing)  help  us  to 
understand  what  is  meant  by  Moleeh's  tabernacle, 
and  seem  to  give  some  reason  why  in  the  Prophet 
he  is  called  Siccuth,  or  the  Covert  God,  because  he 
was  retired  within  so  many  Cancelli  (for  that  word 
Kimchi  useth)  before  one  could  come  at  him" 
(Comm.  on  Acts  vii.  43).  It  was  more  probably  a 
shrine  or  ark  in  which  the  figure  cf  the  god  was 


Molech-worship  of  the  time  of  Ahaz  was  essentially  the 
same  as  that  of  the  old  Canaanites,  although  Moveir 


maintains  the  contrary. 


2  D  2 


i04  MOLECH 

3arried  in  processions,  or  which  contained,  as  Movers 
conjectures,  the  bones  of  children  who  had  been 
sacrificed  and  were  used  for  magical  purposes. 
TAMMON,  vol.  i.  p.  60  a.] 

Many  instances  of  human  sacrifices  are  found  in 
ancient  writers,  which  may  be  compared  with  the 
descriptions  in  the  Old  Testament  of  the  manner  in 
which  Molech  was  worshipped.  The  Carthaginians, 
according  to  Augustine  (De  Civit.  Dei,  vii.  19), 
offered  children  to  Saturn,  and  by  the  Gauls  even 
grown-up  persons  were  sacrificed,  under  the  idea 
that  of  all  seeds  the  best  is  the  human  kind.  Euse- 
bius  (Praep.  Ev.  iv.  16)  collected  from  Porphyry 
numerous  examples  to  the  same  effect,  from  which 
the  following  are  selected.  Among  the  Rhodians  a 
man  was  offered  to  Kronos  on  the  6th  July ;  after 
wards  a  criminal  condemned  to  death  was  substi 
tuted.  The  same  custom  prevailed  in  Salamis,  but 
was  abrogated  by  Diiphilus  king  of  Cyprus,  who 
substituted  an  ox.  According  to  Manetho,  Amosis 
abolished  the  same  practice  in  Egypt  at  Heliopolis 
sacred  to  Juno.  Sanchoniatho  relates  that  the 
Phoenicians,  on  the  occasion  of  any  great  calamity, 
sacrificed  to  Saturn  one  of  their  relatives.  Istrus 
jays  the  same  of  the  Curetes,  but  the  custom  was 
abolished,  according  to  Pallas,  in  the  reign  of  Ha 
drian.  At  Laodicea  a  virgin  was  sacrificed  yearly 
to  Athene,  and  the  Dumatii,  a  people  of  Arabia, 
buried  a  boy  alive  beneath  the  altar  each  year. 
Diodorus  Siculus  (xx.  14)  relates  that  the  Cartha 
ginians  when  besieged  by  Agathocles,  tyrant  of 
Sicily,  offered  in  public  sacrifice  to  Saturn  200  of 
their  noblest  children,  while  others  voluntarily  de 
voted  themselves  to  the  number  of  300.  His  de 
scription  of  the  statue  of  the  god  differs  but  slightly 
from  that  of  Molech,  which  has  oeen  quoted.  The 
image  was  of  brass,  with  its  hands  outstretched 
towards  the  ground  in  such  a  manner  that  the  child 
when  placed  upon  them  fell  into  a  pit  full  of  fire. 

Molech,  "  the  king,"  was  the  lord  and  master  of 
the  Ammonites ;  their  country  was  his  possession 
(Jer.  xlix.  1),  as  Moab  was  the  heritage  of  Che- 
mosh  ;  .the  princes  of  the  land  were  the  princes  of 
Malcham  (Jer.  xlix.  3;  Am.  i.  15).  His  priests 
were  men  of  rank  (Jer.  xlix.  3),  taking  precedence 
of  the  princes.  So  the  priest  of  Hercules  at  Tyre  was 
second  to  the  king  (Justin,  xviii.  4,  §5),  and  like 
Molech,  the  god  himself,  Baal  Chamman,  is  Melkart, 
"  the  king  of  the  city."  The  priests  of  Molech,  like 
those  of  other  idols,  were  called  Chemarim  (2  K. 
xxiii.  5;  Hos.  x.  5;  Zeph.  i.  4). 

Traces  of  the  root  from  which  Molech  is  derived 
are  to  be  found  in  the  Milichus,  Malica,  and  Mal- 
cander  of  the  Phoenicians ;  with  the  last  mentioned 
may  be  compared  Adrammelech,  the  fire-god  of 
Sepharvaim.  These,  as  well  as  Chemosh  the  fire- 
god  of  Moab,  Urotal,  Dusares,  Sair,  and  Thyan- 
drites,  of  the  Edomites  and  neighbouring  Arab 
tribes,  and  the  Greek  Dionysus,  were  worshipped 
under  the  symbol  of  a  rising  flame  of  fire,  which 
was  imitated  in  the  stone  pillars  erected  in  their 
honour  (Movers,  Phoen.  i.  A,  9).  Tradition  refers 
the  origin  of  the  fire-worship  to  Chaldea.  Abraham 
and  his  ancestors  are  said  to  have  been  fire-wor 
shippers,  and  the  Assyrian  and  Chaldean  armies 
took  with  them  the  sacred  fire  accompanied  by  the 
Magi. 

There  remains  to  be  noticed  one  passage  (2  Sam. 


MONEY 

xii.  31)  in  which  the  Hebrew  written  b?xt  hag    37D 
malken,  while  the  marginal  reading  is  |3pL>,  wu/- 

'>en,  which  is  adopted  by  our  translators  in  their 
rendering  "  brick-kiln."  Kimchi  explains  malken  as 
"  the  place  of  Molech,"  where  sacrifices  were  offered 
to  him,  and  the  children  of  Ammon  made  their  sons 
to  pass  through  the  fire.  And  Milcom  and  Malken, 
he  says,  are  one.b  On  the  other  hand  Movers, 
rejecting  the  points,  reads  |3pD,  malcdn,  "  our 

king,"  which  he  explains  as  the  title  by  which  he  was 
known  to  the  Ammonites.  Whatever  may  be  thought 
of  these  interpretations,  the  reading  followed  by  the 
A.  V.  is  scarcely  intelligible.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MO'LI  (MooXf :  Moholi).  MAIILI  the  son  of 
Merari  (1  Esdr.  viii.  47;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  18). 

MO'LID  (T^ID:  Ma^jX ;  Alex.  M«5d8 : 
Molid).  The  son  of  Abishur  by  his  wife  Abihail, 
and  descendant  of  Jerahmeel  (1  Chr.  ii.  29). 

MO'LOCH.  The  Hebrew  corresponding  to 
"  your  Moloch"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Amos  v.  26  is 

D33pD,  malkekem,  "  your  king,"  as  in  the  margin. 

In  accordance  with  the  Greek  of  Acts  vii.  43  (6 
Mo\o"x:  Moloch),  which  followed  the  LXX.  of 
Amos,  our  translators  have  adopted  a  form  of  the 
name  MOLECH  which  does  not  exist  in  Hebrew. 
Kimchi,  following  the  Targum,  takes  the  word  as 
an  appellative,  and  not  as  a  proper  name,  while 
with  regard  to  siccuth  (JT13D,  A.  V.  "  tabernacle") 
he  holds  the  opposite  opinion.  His  note  is  as  fol 
lows  : — "  Siccuth  is  the  name  of  an  idol ;  and  (as 
for)  malkekem  he  spake  of  a  star  which  was  made 
an  idol  by  its  name,  and  he  calls  it '  king,'  because 
they  thought  it  a  king  over  them,  or  because  it 
was  a  great  star  in  the  host  of  heaven,  which  was 
as  a  king  over  his  host ;  and  so  '  to  burn  incense  to 
the  queen  of  heaven,'  as  I  have  explained  in  the 
book  of  Jeremiah."  Gesenius  compares  with  the 
"  tabernacle  "  of  Moloch  the  sacred  tent  of  the  Car 
thaginians  mentioned  by  Diodorus  (xx.  65).  Rosen- 
miiller,  and  after  him  Ewald,  understood  by  siccuth 
a  pole  or  stake  on  which  the  figure  of  the  idol  was 
placed.  It  was  more  probably  a  kind  of  palanquin  in 
which  the  image  was  carried  in  processions,  a  custcra 
which  is  alluded  to  in  Is.  xlvi.  1 ;  Epist.  of  Jer.  4 
(Selden,  De  Dis  Syr.  synt.  i.  c.  6).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MOM'DIS  (Mo/i5foy  ;  Alex.  Mo/xSe/s  :  Mon- 
dias).  The  same  as  MAADAI,  of  the  sons  of  Bani 
(1  Esdr.  ix.  34 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  34). 

MONEY.  This  article  treats  of  two  principal 
matters,  the  uncoined  money  and  the  coined  money 
mentioned  in  the  Bible.  Before  entering  upon  the 
first  subject  of  inquiry,  it  will  be  necessary  to  speak 
of  uncoined  money  in  general,  and  of  the  antiquity 
of  coined  money.  An  account  of  the  principal  mo 
netary  systems  of  ancient  times  is  an  equally  needful 
introduction  to  the  second  subject,  which  requires  a 
special  knowledge  of  the  Greek  coinages.  A  notice 
of  the  Jewish  coins,  and  of  the  coins  current  in 
Judaea  as  late  as  the  time  of  Hadrian,  will  be 
interwoven  with  the  examination  of  the  passages  in 
the  Bible  and  Apocrypha  relating  to  them,  instead 
of  being  separately  given. 

I.  UNCOINED  MONEY.  1.  Uncoined  Money  in 
general. — It  has  been  denied  by  some  that  there 


b  The  crown  of  Malcbam.  taken  by  David  at  Kabbah,  is 
Kiki  to  bave  had  in  it  a  precious  stone  (a  magnet,  according 
to  Klnx-hl),  -vhlch  Is  described  by  Cyril  on  Amos  as 


transparent  and  like  the  daystar,  whence  Molech  ha* 
groundlessly  been  identified  with  the  planet  Venus 
(Vosslus,  De  Orig.  Idol  fi.  c  5  p.  331). 


MONEY 

ever  has  been  any  money  not  coined,  but  this  is 
merely  a  question  of  terms.  It  is  well  known  that 
ancient  nations  that  were  without  a  coinage  weighed 
Uie  precious  metals,  a  practice  represented  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments,  on  which  gold  and  silver  are 
shown  to  have  been  kept  in  the  form  of  rings  (see 
cut,  p.  406).  The  gold  rings  found  in  the  Celtic 
countries  have  been  held  to  have  had  the  same  use. 
It  has  indeed  been  argued  that  this  could  not  have 
been  the  case  with  the  latter,  since  they  show  no 
monetary  system  ;  yet  it  is  evident  from  their 
weights  that  they  all  contain  complete  multiples  or 
parts  of  a  unit,  so  that  we  may  fairly  suppose  that 
the  Celts,  before  they  used  coins,  had,  like  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  the  practice  of  keeping  money 
in  rings,  which  they  weighed  when  it  was  necessary 
to  pay  a  fixed  amount.  We  have  no  certain  record 
of  the  use  of  ring-money  or  other  uncoined  money  in 
antiquity  excepting  among  the  Egyptians.  With  them 
the  practice  mounts  up  to  a  remote  age,  and  was 
probably  as  constant,  and  perhaps  as  regulated  with 
respect  to  the  weight  of  the  rings,  as  a  coinage.  It 
can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  highlj  civilized 
rivals  of  the  Egyptians,  the  Assyrians  and  Baby 
lonians,  adopted  if  they  did  not  originate  this  custom, 
clay  tablets  having  been  found  specifying  grants  of 
money  by  weight  (Rawlinson,  Her.  vol.  i.  p.  684) ; 
and  there  is  therefore  every  probability  that  it  ob 
tained  also  in  Palestine,  although  seemingly  unknown 
in  Greece  in  the  time  before  coinage  was  there  intro 
duced.  There  is  no  trace  in  Egypt,  however,  of  any 
different  size  in  the  rings  represented,  so  that  there 
is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  this  further  step  was 
taken  towards  the  invention  of  coinage. 

2.  The  Antiquity  of  Coined  Money. — Respecting 
the  origin  of  coinage,  there  are  two  accounts  seem 
ingly  at  variance :  some  saying  that  Phidon  king  of 
Argos  first  struck  money,  and  according  to  Ephorus, 
in  Aegina  ;  but  Herodotus  ascribing  its  invention  to 
the  Lydians.  The  former  statement  probably  refers 
to  the  origin  of  the  coinage  of  European  Greece, 
the  latter  to  that  of  Asiatic  Greece ;  for  it  seems, 
judging  from  the  coins  themselves,  that  the  electrum 
staters  of  the  cities  of  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  were 
first  issued  as  early  as  the  silver  coins  of  Aegina,  both 
classes  appearing  to  comprise  the  most  ancient  pieces 
of  money  that  are  known  to  us.  When  Herodotus 
speaks  of  the  Lydians,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
he  refers  not  to  the  currency  of  Lydia  as  a  king 
dom,  which  seems  to  commence  with  the  darics 
and  similar  silver  pieces  now  found  near  Sardis, 
and  probably  of  the  time  of  Croesus,  being  per 
haps  the  same  as  the  staters  of  Croesus  (Kpoi(T«Ioi, 
Jull.  Poll.),  of  the  ancients ;  but  that  he  intends 
the  money  of  Greek  cities  at  the  time  when  the 
coins  were  issued  or  later  under  the  authority  of 
the  Lydians.  If  we  conclude  that  coinage  com 
menced  in  European  and  Asiatic  Greece  about  the 
same  time,  the  next  question  is  whether  we  can 
approximately  determine  the  date.  This  is  ex 
tremely  difficult,  since  there  are  no  coins  of  known 
period  before  the  time  of  the  expedition  of  Xerxes. 
The  pieces  of  that  age  are  of  so  archaic  a  style,  that 
it  is  hard,  at  first  sight,  to  believe  that  there  is  any 
length  of  time  between  them  and  the  rudest  and 
tnerefore  earliest  of  the  coins  of  Aegina  or  the  Asiatic 
coast.  It  must,  however,  be  recollected  that  in  some 
conditions  of  art  its  growth  or  change  is  extremely 
slow,  and  that  this  was  the  case  in  the  early  period 
of  Gritek  art  seems  evident  from  the  results  of  the 
excavations  on  what  we  may  believe  to  be  the  oldest 
sites  in  Greece.  The  lower  limit  obtained  from  the 


MONEY 


405 


evidence  of  the  ovins  of  known  date,  may  perhaps  be 
conjectured  to  ce  two,  or  at  most  three,  centuries 
before  their  time;  the  higher  limit  is  as  vaguely 
determined  by  the  negative  evidence  of  the  Homeric 
writings,  of  which  we  cannot  guess  the  age,  excepting 
as  before  the  first  Olympiad.  On  the  whole  it  seems 
reasonable  to  carry  up  Greek  coinage  to  the  8th  cen 
tury  B.C.  Purely  Asiatic  coinage  cannot  be  taken 
up  to  so  early  a  date.  The  more  archaic  Persian  coins 
seem  to  be  of  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  or  pos 
sibly  Cyrus,  and  certainly  not  much  older,  and  there 
is  no  Asiatic  money,  not  of  Greek  cities,  that  can  be 
reasonably  assigned  to  an  earlier  period.  Croesus 
and  Cyrus  probably  originated  this  branch  of  the 
coinage,  or  else  Darius  Hystaspis  followed  the 
example  of  the  Lydian  king.  Coined  money  may 
therefore  have  been  known  in  Palestine  as  early  as 
the  fall  of  Samaria,  but  only  through  commerce  with 
the  Greeks,  and  we  cannot  suppose  that  it  was  then 
current  there. 

3.  Notices  of  Uncoined  Money  in  the  0.  T.  — 
There  is  no  distinct  mention  of  coined  money  in  the 
books  of  the  0.  T.  written  before  the  return  from 
Babylon.  The  contrary  was  formerly  supposed  to 
be  the  case,  partly  because  the  word  shekel  has  a 
vague  sense  in  later  times,  being  used  for  a  coin  as 
well  as  a  weight.  Since  however  there  is  some 
seeming  ground  for  the  older  opinion,  we  may  here 
examine  the  principal  passages  relating  to  money, 
and  the  principal  terms  employed,  in  the  books  of 
the  Bible  written  before  the  date  above  mentioned. 

In  the  history  of  Abraham  we  read  that  Abime- 
lech  gave  the  patriarch  "  a  thousand  [pieces]  of 
silver,"  apparently  to  purchase  veils  for  Sarah  and 
her  attendants  ;  but  the  passage  is  extremely  diffi 
cult  (Gen.  xx.  16).  The  LXX.  understood  shekels 
to  be  intended  (%1&M  Sitipaxp-a,  I.  c.  also  ver.  14), 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  were  right, 
though  the  rendering  is  accidentally  an  unfortunate 
one,  their  equivalent  being  the  name  of  a  coin. 
The  narrative  of  the  purchase  of  the  burial  place 
from  Ephron  gives  us  further  insight  into  the  use 
of  money  at  that  time.  It  is  related  that  Abraham 
offered  "  full  silver  "  for  it,  and  that  Ephron  valued 
it  at  "  four  hundred  shekels  of  silver,"  which  accord 
ingly  the  patriarch  paid.  We  read,  "And  Abraham 
hearkened  unto  Ephron  ;  and  Abraham  weighed 
(?pjy*1)  to  Ephron  the  silver,  which  he  had  named 
in  the  audience  of  the  sons  of  Heth,  four  hundred 
shekels  of  silver,  current  with  the  merchant" 


?,  xxiii.  3  ad  fin.  esp.  9,  16).  Here  a  currency 
is  clearly  indicated  like  that  which  the  monuments 
of  Egypt  show  to  have  been  there  used  in  a  very 
remote  age  ;  for  the  weighing  proves  that  this 
currency,  like  the  Egyptian,  did  not  bear  the 
stamp  of  authority,  and  was  therefore  weighed 
when  employed  in  commerce.  A  similar  purchase 
is  recorded  of  Jacob,  who  bought  a  parcel  of  a  field 
at  Shalem  for  a  hundred  kesitahs  (xxxiii.  18,  19). 
The  occurrence  of  a  name  different  from  shekel  and 
unlike  it  not  distinctly  applied  in  any  other  passage 
to  a  weight  favours  the  idea  of  coined  money. 
But  what  is  the  kesitah  (HKC'bj?)  ?  The  old  in 
terpreters  supposed  it  to  mean  a  lamb,  and  it  has 
been  imagined  to  have  been  a  coin  bearing  the  figure 
of  a  lamb.  There  is  no  known  etymological  ground 
for  this  meaning,  the  lost  root,  if  we  compare  the 

Arabic  t«tw«.  "  he  or  it  divided  equally,"  being 
perhaps  connected  with  the  idea  of  division.     Yet 


406 


MONEY 


the  sanction  of  the  LXX.,  and  the  use  of  weights 
Saving  the  forms  of  lions,  bulls,  and  geese,  by  the 
Egyptians,  Assyrians,  and  probably  Persians,  must 


From  Lepsius,  Dmkmaler,  Abth.  UL  Bl.  39,  No.  3.  See  also  Wil 
kinson's  Am.  Eg.  U.  10,  for  weights  in  the  form  of  a  crouching 
antelope  :  and  comp.  Layard's  A'in.  and  Bab.  pp.  600-602. 

make  us  hesitate  before  we  abandon  a  rendering  so 
singularly  confirmed  by  the  relation  of  the  Latin 
pecunia  and  pecus.  Throughout  the  history  of  Jo 
seph  we  find  evidence  of  the  constant  use  of  money 
in  preference  to  barter.  This  is  clearly  shown  in  the 
case  of  the  famine,  when  it  is  related  that  all  the 
money  of  Egypt  and  Canaan  was  paid  for  corn,  and 
that  then  the  Egyptians  had  recourse  to  barter 
(xlvii.  13-26).  It  would  thence  appear  that  money 
was  not  very  plentiful.  In  the  narrative  of  the  visits 
of  Joseph's  brethren  to  Egypt,  we  find  that  they 
purchased  com  with  money,  which  was,  as  in 
Abraham's  time,  weighed  silver,  for  it  is  spoken  of 
by  them  as  having  been  restored  to  their  sacks  in 
"its  [full]  weight"  (xliii.  2T).  At  the  time  of 
the  exodus  money  seems  to  have  been  still  weighed, 
for  the  ransom  ordered  in  the  Law  is  stated  to  be 
half  a  shekel  for  each  man — "  half  a  shekel  after 
the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary  [of]  twenty  gerahs  the 
shekel"  (Ex.  xxx.  13).  Here  the  shekel  is  evi 
dently  a  weight,  and  of  a  special  system  of  which 
the  standard  examples  were  probably  kept  by  the 
priests.  Throughout  the  Law  money  is  spoken  of 
as  in  ordinary  use ;  but  only  silver  money,  gold 
being  mentioned  as  valuable,  but  not  clearly  as  used 
»n  the  same  manner.  This  distinction  appears  at 
the  time  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  when  covetous 
Achan  found  in  Jericho  "  a  goodly  Babylonish  gar 
ment,  and  two  hundred  shekels  of  silver,  and  a 
tongue  of  gold  of  fifty  shekels  weight "  (Josh.  vii. 
21).  Throughout  the  period  before  the  return 
from  Babylon  \this  distinction  seems  to  obtain: 
whenever  anything  of  the  character  of  money  is 
mentioned  the  usual  metal  is  silver,  and  gold  gene 
rally  occurs  as. the  material  of  ornaments  and  costly 
works.  A  passage  in  Isaiah  has  indeed  been  supposed 
to  show  the,  use  of  gold  coins  in  that  prophet's  time : 
speaking  of  the  makers  of  idols,  he  says, "  They  lavish 
gold  out  of  the  bag,  and  weigh  silver  in  the  balance  " 
(xlvi.  6).  The  mention  of  a  bag  is,  however,  a 
very  insufficient  reason  for  the  supposition  that  the 
gold  was  coined  money.  Rings  of  gold  may  have 
been  used  for  money  in  Palestine  as  early  as  this 
time,  since  they  had  been  long  previously  so  used  in 
Kgypt ;  but  the  passage  probably  refers  to  the  people 
»f  Babylon,  who  may  have  had  uncoined  money  in 


MONEY 

both  metals  like  the  Egyptians.  A  still  more  r» 
mark-able  passage  would  be  that  in  Eztkiel,  which 
Gesenius  supposes  {Lex.  s.  v.  fllJ'rti)  to  mention 
brass  as  money,  were  there  any  sound  reason  for 
following  the  Vulg.  in  the  literal  rendering  of 
"^FIBTW  "'jQK'n  }JP,  quia  effusum  est  aes  tuum, 
instead  of  reading  "  because  thy  filthiness  was 
poured  out"  with  the  A.  V.  (xvi.  36).  The  con 
text  does  indeed  admit  the  idea  of  money,  but  the 
sense  of  the  passage  does  not  seem  to  do  so,  whereas 
the  ether  translation  is  quite  in  accordance  with  it, 
as  well  as  philological ly  admissible  (see  Gesen. 
Lex.  I.  c.).  The  use  of  brass  money  at  this  period 
seems  unlikely,  as  it  was  of  later  introduction  in 
Greece  than  money  of  other  metals,  at  least  silver 
and  electrum :  it  has,  however,  been  supposed  that 
there  was  an  independent  copper  coinage  in  further 
Asia  before  the  introduction  of  silver  money  by  the 
Seleucidae  and  the  Greek  kings  of  Bactriana. 

We  may  thus  sum  up  our  results  respecting  the 
money  mentioned  in  the  books  of  Scripture  written 
before  the  return  from  Babylon.  From  the  time  of 
Abraham  silvermoney  appears  to  have  been  in  general 
use  in  Egypt  and  Canaan.  This  money  was  weighed 
when  its  value  had  to  be  determined,  and  we  may 
therefore  conclude  that  it  was  not  of  a  settled 
system  of  weights.  Since  the  money  of  Egypt  and 
that  of  Canaan  are  spoken  of  together  in  the  account 
of  Joseph's  administration  during  the  famine,  we 
may  reasonably  suppose  they  were  of  the  same  kind ; 
a  supposition  which  is  confirmed  by  our  finding, 
from  the  monuments,  that  the  Egyptians  used 
uncoined  money  of  gold  and  of  silver.  It  is 
even  probable  that  the  form  in  both  cases  was 
similar  or  the  same,  since  the  ring-money  of  Egypt 
resembles  the  ordinary  ring-money  of  the  Celts, 
among  whom  it  was  probably  first  introduced  by 
the  Phoenician  traders,  so  that  it  is  likely  that  this 
form  generally  prevailed  before  the  introduction  of 
coinage.  We  find  no  evidence  in  the  Bible  of  the 
use  of  coined  money  by  the  Jews  before  the  time  of 
Ezra,  when  other  evidence  equally  shews  that  it  was 
current  in  Palestine,  its  general  use  being  probably 
a  very  recent  change.  This  first  notice  of  coinage, 
exactly  when  we  should  expect  it,  is  not  to  be  over 
looked  as  a  confirmation  of  the  usual  opinion  as  to  the 
dates  of  the  several  books  of  Scripture  founded  on 
their  internal  evidence  and  the  testimony  of  ancient 
writers ;  and  it  lends  no  support  to  those  theorists 
who  attempt  to  shew  that  there  have  been  great 
changes  in  the  text.  Minor  confirmations  of  this 
nature  will  be  found  in  the  later  part  of  this  article. 

II.  COINED  MONEY.  1.  The  Principal  Mone 
tary  Systems  of  Antiquity. — Some  notice  of  the 
principal  monetary  systems  of  antiquity,  as  deter 
mined  by  the  joint  evidence  of  the  coins  and  of 
a.'cient  writers,  is  necessary  to  render  the  next 
sn-lion  comprehensible.  We  must  here  distinctly 
lay  down  what  we  mean  by  the  different  systems 
with  which  we  shall  compare  the  Hebrew  coin 
age,  as  current  works  are  generally  very  vague  and 
discordant  on  this  subject.  The  common  opinions 
respecting  the  standards  of  antiquity  have  been 
formed  from  a  study  of  the  statements  of  writers 
of  different  age  and  authority,  and  without  a  due 
discrimination  between  weights  and  coins.  The 
coins,  instead  of  being  taken  as  the  basis  of  all 
hypotheses,  have  been  cited  to  confirm  or  refute 
previous  theories,  and  thus  no  legitimate  induction 
has  been  formed  from  their  study.  If  the  contrary 
method  is  adopted,  it  has  firstly  the  advantage  of 


MONEY 

renting  i  pon  the  indisputable  authority  of  monu 
ments  which  have  not  been  tampered  with  ;  and.  in 
ihe  second  place,  it  is  of  an  essentially  inductive 
character.  The  result  simplifies  the  examination 
of  the  statements  of  ancient  writers,  by  shewing  that 
they  speak  of  the  same  thing  by  different  names  on 
account  of  a  change  which  the  coins  at  once  explain, 
<uid  by  indicating  that  probably  at  least  one  talent 
was  only  a  weight,  not  used  for  coined  money  unless 
weighed  in  a  mass. 

The  earliest  Greek  coins,  by  which  we  here 
intend  those  struck  in  the  age  before  the  Persian 
War,  are  of  three  talents  or  standards ;  the  Attic, 
the  Aeginetan,  and  the  Macedonian  or  earlier 
Phoenician.  The  oldest  coins  of  Athens,  of  Aegina, 
and  of  Macedon  and  Thrace,  we  should  select  as 
typical  respectively  of  these  standards  ;  obtaining  as 
the  weight  of  the  Attic  drachm  about  67 '5  grains 
troy ;  of  the  Aeginetan,  about  96 ;  and  of  the  Mace 
donian,  about  58 — or  116,  if  its  drachm  be  what  is 
now  generally  held  to  be  the  didrachm.  The  electrum 
coinage  of  Asia  Minor  probably  affords  examples  of 
the  use  by  the  Greeks  of  a  fourth  talent,  which  may 
be  called  the  later  Phoenician,  if  we  hold  the  staters 
to  have  been  tetradrachms,  for  their  full  weight  is 
about  248  grs. ;  but  it  is  possible  that  the  pure  gold 
which  they  contain,  about  186  grs.,  should  alone  be 
taken  into  account,  in  which  case  they  would  be 
didrachros  on  the  Aeginetan  standard.  Their  division 
into  sixths  (hectae)  may  be  urged  on  either  side. 
It  may  be  supposed  that  the  division  into  oboli  was 
retained  ;  but  then  the  half  hecta  has  its  proper  name, 
and  is  not  called  an  obolus.  However  this  may  be, 
the  gold  and  silver  coins  found  at  Sardis,  which  we 
may  reasonably  assign  to  Croesus,  are  of  this  weight, 
and  may  be  taken  as  its  earliest  examples,  without 
of  course  proving  it  was  a  Greek  system.  They  give 
a  tetradrachm,  or  equivalent,  of  about  246  grains, 
and  a  drachm  of  61*5  ;  but  neither  of  these  coins  is 
found  of  this  early  period.  Among  these  systems 
the  Attic  and  the  Aeginetan  are  easily  recognized  in 
the  classical  writers;  and  the  Macedonian  is  pro 
bably  their  Alexandrian  talent  of  gold  and  silver, 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  Alexandrian  talent  of 
copper.  Respecting  the  two  Phoenician  talents  there 
is  some  difficulty.  The  Eubolc  talent  of  the  writers 
we  recognize  nowhere  in  the  coinage.  It  is  useless 
to  search  for  isolated  instances  of  Eubolc  weight  in 
Euboea  and  elsewhere,  when  the  coinage  of  the  island 
and  ancient  coins  generally  afford  no  class  on  the 
stated  Eubolc  weight.  It  is  still  more  unsound  to 
force  an  agreement  between  the  Macedonian  talent 
of  the  coins  and  the  Euboic  of  the  writers.  It  may 
be  supposed  that  the  Euboic  talent  was  never  used 
for  money;  and  the  statement  of  Herodotus,  that 
the  king  of  Persia  received  his  gold  tribute  by  this 
weight,  may  mean  no  more  than  that  it  was 
weighed  in  Euboic  talents.  Or  perhaps  the  near 
ness  of  the  Eubolc  talent  to  the  Attic  caused  the 
•»ms  struck  on  the  two  standards  to  approximate 
in  their  weights  ;  as  the  Cretan  coins  on  the  Aeginetan 
standard  were  evidently  lowered  in  weight  by  the 
influence  of  the  Asiatic  ones  on  the  later  Phoenician 
standard. 

We  must  now  briefly  trace  the  history  of  these 
talents. 

(a.)  The  Attic  talent  was  from  a  very  early  period 


MONEY 


40? 


the  standard  of  Athens.  If  Solon  really  reduced  th« 
weight,  we  have  no  money  of  the  city  of  the  older 
currency.  Corinth  followed  the  same  system ;  And 
its  use  was  diffused  by  the  great  influence  of  these 
two  leading  cities.  In  Sicily  and  Italy,  after,  in  the 
case  of  the  former,  a  limited  use  of  the  Aeginetan 
talent,  the  Attic  weight  became  universal.  In 
Greece  Proper  the  Aeginetan  talent,  to  the  north  the 
Macedonian,  and  in  Asia  Minor  and  Africa  the  latei 
Phoenician,  were  long  its  rivals,  until  Alexander 
made  the  Attic  standard  universal  throughout  his 
empire,  and  Carthage  alone  maintained  an  inde 
pendent  system.  After  Alexander's  time  the  other 
talents  were  partly  restored,  but  the  Attic  always 
remained  the  chief.  From  the  earliest  period  of 
which  we  have  specimens  of  money  on  this  standard 
to  the  time  of  the  Roman  dominion  it  suffered  a 
gre»t  depreciation,  the  drachm  falling  from  67'5  grs. 
to  about  65'5  under  Alexander,  and  about  55  under 
the  early  Caesars.  Its  later  depreciation  was  rather 
by  adulteration  than  by  lessening  of  weight. 

(o.)  The  Aeginetan  talent  was  mainly  used  in 
Greece  Proper  and  the  islands,  and  seems  to  have 
been  annihilated  by  Alexander,  unless  indeed  after 
wards  restored  in  one  or  two  remote  towns,  as 
Leucas  in  Acarnania,  or  by  the  general  issue  of  a 
coin  equally  assignable  to  it  or  the  Attic  standard 
as  a  hemidrachm  or  a  tetrobolon. 

(c.)  The  Macedonian  talent,  besides  being  used 
in  Macedon  and  in  some  Thracian  cities  before 
Alexander,  was  the  standard  of  the  great  Phoenician 
cities  under  Persian  rule,  and  was  afterwards  re 
stored  in  most  of  them.  It  was  adopted  in  Egypt  by 
the  first  Ptolemy,  and  also  mainly  used  by  the  later 
Sicilian  tyrants,  whose  money  we  believe  imitates 
that  of  the  Egyptian  sovereigns.  It  might  have  been 
imagined  that  Ptolemy  did  not  borrow  the  talent 
of  Macedon,  but  struck  money  on  the  standard  of 
Egypt,  which  the  commerce  of  that  country  might 
have  spread  in  the  Mediterranean  in  a  remote  age, 
had  not  a  recent  discovery  shown  that  the  Egyptian 
standard  of  weight  was  much  heavier,  and  even  in 
excess  of  the  Aeginetan  drachm,  the  unit  being  above 
140  grs.,  the  half  of  which,  again,  is  greater  than 
any  of  the  drachms  of  the  other  three  standards.  It 
cannot  therefore  be  compared  with  any  of  them. 

(d.~)  The  later  Phoenician  talent  was  always  used 
for  the  official  coinage  of  the  Persian  kings  and 
commanders,"  and  after  the  earliest  period  was  very 
general  in  the  Persian  empire.  After  Alexander  it 
was  scarcely  used  excepting  in  coast-towns  of  Asia 
Minor,  at  Carthage,  and  in  the  Phoenician  town  of 
Aradus. 

Respecting  the  Roman  coinage  it  is  only  necessary 
here  to  state  that  the  origin  of  the  weights  of  its 
gold  and  silver  money  is  undoubtedly  Greek,  and 
that  the  denarius,  the  chief  coin  of  the  latter  roptal, 
was  under  the  early  emperors  equivalent  to  the 
Attic  drachm,  then  greatly  depreciated. 

2.  Coined  rri&ney  mentioned  in  the  Bible. — The 
earliest  distinct  mention  of  coins  in  the  Bible  is  held 
to  refer  to  the  Persian  money.  In  Ezra  (ii.  69, 
viii.  27)  and  Nehemiah  (vii.  70,  71,  72)  current 
gold  coins  are  spoken  of  under  the  name  IIDS"!"5! 
J13T7N,  which  only  occurs  in  the  plural,  and 
appears  to  correspond  to  the  Greek  arrar^p  Aaptt 


Mr.  Waddington  has  shewn  (Melanges  de  Nunds- 
tfq'w)  that  the  so-called  coins  of  the  satraps  were 
never  Issued  excepting  jrhen  these  governors  were  in 
comruand  of  expecition?,  and  were  therefore  invested 


with  special  powers.  This  discovery  explains  the  putting 
to  death  of  Aryandes,  satrap  of  Kgypt,  fcr  striking  a 
coinage  of  hie  own. 


408 


MONEY 


MONEY 


*6t  or  AaptiKiis,  the  Daric  of  numismatists.  The  | 
renderings  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  xpvtrovs,  soli- 
rftts,  drachma,  especially  the  first  and  second,  lend 
weight  to  the  idea  that  this  was  the  standard  gold 
coin  at  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  this 
would  explain  the  use  of  the  same  name  in  the 
First  Book  of  Chronicles  (MIX.  7),  in  the  account  of 
the  offerings  of  David's  great  men  for  the  Temple, 
where  it  would  be  employed  instead  of  shekel,  as 
A  Greek  would  use  the  term  stater.  [See  Art. 
DARIC.] 


Doric.    Obv.  :  King  of  Persia  to  the  right,  kneeling,  bearing  bow 
and  javelin.   Rev.  :  Irregular  incuse  square.    British  Museum. 

The  Apocrypha  contains  the  earliest  distinct  allu 
sion  to  the  coining  of  Jewish  money,  where  it  is 
narrated,  in  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees,  that  An- 
tiochus  VII.  granted  to  Simon  the  Maccabee  permis 
sion  to  coin  money  with  his  own  stamp,  as  well  as 
other  privileges  (Kal  tirtrpetyd  trot  iroiifffai  K&HHC. 
"Kiov  v6fj.icrij.a  ry  X^Pt  ffov-  xv-  6).  This  was  in 
the  fourth  year  of  Simon's  pontificate,  B.C.  140.  It 
must  be  noted  that  Demetrius  II.  had  in  the  first 
year  of  Simon,  B.C.  143,  made  a  most  important 
decree  granting  freedom  to  the  Jewish  people,  which 
gave  occasion  to  the  dating  of  their  contracts  and 
covenants,  —  "  In  the  first  year  of  Simon  the  great 
high-priest,  the  leader,  and  chief  of  the  Jews" 
(xiii.  34-42),  a  form  which  Josephus  gives  differ 
ently,  "  In  the  first  year  of  Simon,  benefactor  of  the 
Jews,  and  ethnarch  "  (Ant.  xiii.  6). 

The  earliest  Jewish  coins  were  until  lately  con 
sidered  to  have  been  struck  by  Simon  on  receiving 
the  permission  of  Antiochus  VII.  They  may  be 
thus  described,  following  M.  de  Saulcy's  arrange 
ment  :  — 


1.        lBpt?,"  Shekel  of  Israel."  Vase,  above 
which  N  [Year]  1. 

$    nBHp  D?BnT,    "  Jerusalem     the    holy." 
Branch  bearing  three  flowers.     JR. 


,  "  Half-shekel."     Same  type  and 


2.  !?pt?n 
date. 

I>  ntnp  theft.   Same  type.  JR.  (Cut)  B.M. 

3.  ^N-lB*  ^pt?,  "  Shekel  of  Israel."    Same  type, 
above  which  3E>  (3  IW),  "  Year  2." 

#  nE>npn  D^W.     Same  type.    Al. 

4.  ^>pt?n  »m    "  Half-shekel."    Same  type  and 
date. 

Same  type.     M. 


Shekel  of  Israel."    Same  type, 
(J  n3B>).  "  Year  3." 

Same  type.    A.   (Cut, 


5. 
above  which 

#  ne>npn 
B.M. 

COPPER. 

1.  'VH  WIN  r»3B>,"  Year  four  -.Half."  A  fruit, 
between  two  sheaves  1 


fy  JVX  rR,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Ziou. 
Palm-tree  between  two  baskets?    JE. 


2.  J^mymKfUtr,   "Year  four:    Quarter. 
Two  sheaves  i 

$  JVV  n/>N:6,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Zion." 
A  fruit.     M.     (Cut)  Mr.  Wigan's  collection. 


3.  JO-IK  1135?, 
two  fruits? 


Year  four."     A  sheaf  betweea 


,  "  Of  the  redemption  of  Zion." 
Vase.     JE.     (Cut)  Wigan. 

The  average  weight  of  the  silver  coins  is  about 
220  grains  troy  for  the  shekel,  and  1  10  for  the  half- 
shekel.1"  The  name,  from  ?pt^,  shews  that  th« 
shekel  was  the  Jewish  stater.  The  determination  of 
the  standard  weight  of  the  shekel,  which,  be  it  re- 
membered,  was  a  weight  as  well  as  a  coin,  and  of  its 
relation  to  the  other  weights  used  by  the  Hebrews, 
belongs  to  another  article  [WEIGHTS  AND  MEA 
SURES]  :  here  we  have  only  to  consider  its  relation 
to  the  different  talents  of  antiquity.  The  shekel  cor 
responds  almost  exactly  to  the  tetradrachm  or  di- 
drachm  of  the  earlier  Phoenician  talent  in  use  in  the 
cities  of  Phoenicia  under  Persian  rule,  and  after  Alex 
ander's  time  at  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Berytus,  as  well 
as  in  Egypt.  It  is  represented  in  the  LXX.  by 
didrachm,  a  rendering  which  has  occasioned  great 
difficulty  to  numismatists.  Col.  Leake  suggested, 
but  did  not  adopt,  what  we  have  no  doubt  is  the 
true  explanation.  After  speaking  of  the  shekel  as 


*  Coins  arc  not  always  exact  in  relative  weight :  in    heavier  than   they  would  be  if  exact  divisions  cf  th» 
*oine  modern  coinages  the  smaller  coins  are  intentionally  ;  larger. 


MONEY 

probably  its  Phoenician  and  Hebrew  unit  of 
weight,  he  adds:  "  This  weight  appears  to  have 
been  th>  same  as  the  Egyptian  unit  of  weight,  for 
we  learn  from  Horapollo  that  the  Movbs,  or  unit, 
which  they  held  to  be  the  basis  of  all  numeration, 
was  equal  to  two  drachmae ;  and  StSpax/j.ov  is  em 
ployed  synonymously  with  ffiit\os  tor  the  Hebrew 
word  shekel  by  the  Greek  Septuagint,  consequently, 
Ihe  shekel  and  the  didrachmon  were  of  the  same 
weight.  I  am  aware  that  some  learned  commen 
tators  are  of  opinion  that  the  translators  here  meant 
a  didrachmon  of  the  Graeco-Egyptian  scale,  which 
weighed  about  110  grains ;  but  it  is  hardly  credible 
that  SiSpaxnov  should  have  been  thus  employed 
without  any  distinguishing  epithet,  at  a  time  when 
the  Ptolemaic  scale  was  yet  of  recent  origin  [in 
Egypt],  the  word  didrachmon  on  the  other  hand, 
having  for  ages  been  applied  to  a  silver  money,  of 
about  130  grains,  in  the  currency  of  all  cities  which 
follow  the  Attic  or  Corinthian  standard,  as  well  as 
in  the  silver  money  of  Alexander  the  Great  and 
[most  of]  his  successors.  In  all  these  currencies, 
as  well  as  in  those  of  Lydia  and  Persia,  the  stater 
was  an  Attic  didrachmon,  or,  at  least,  with  no 
greater  difference  of  standard  than  occurs  among 
modern  nations  using  a  denomination  of  weight  or 
measure  common  to  all ;  and  hence  the  word  8t- 
Spaxjiov  was  at  length  employed  as  a  measure  of 
weight,  without  any  reference  to  its  origin  in  the 
Attic  drachma.  Thus  we  find  the  drachma  of  gold 
described  as  equivalent  to  ten  didrachma,  and  the 
half-shekel  of  the  Pentateuch,  translated  by  the 
Septuagint  rb  ^fniffv  rov  5i5pc£xM°u-  There  can 
be  no  doubt,  therefore,  that  the  Attic,  and  not  the 
Graeco-Egyptian  didrachmon,  was  intended  by 
them."  He  goes  on  to  conjecture  that  Moses 
adopted  the  Egyptian  unit,  and  to  state  the  import 
ance  of  distinguishing  between  the  Mosaic  weight 
and  the  extant  Jewish  shekel.  "It  appears,"  he 
continues,  "  that  the  half-shekel  of  ransom  had,  in 
the  time  of  our  Saviour,  been  converted  into  the 
payment  of  a  didrachmon  to  the  Temple  ;  and  two 
of  these  didrachma  formed  a  stater  of  the  Jewish 
currency.  This  stater  was  evidently  the  extant 
'  Shekel  Israel,'  which  was  a  tetradrachmon  of  the 
Ptolemaic  scale,  though  generally  below  the  standard 
weight,  like  most  of  the  extant  specimens  of  the 
Ptolemies;  the  didrachmon  paid  to  the  Temple 
was,  therefore,  of  the  same  monetary  scale.  Thus 
the  duty  to  the  Temple  was  converted  from  the  half 
of  an  Attic  to  the  whole  of  a  Ptolemaic  didrachmon, 
and  the  tax  was  nominally  raised  in  the  proportion 
of  about  105  to  65 ;  but  probably  the  value  of 
silver  had  fallen  as  much  in  the  two  preceding  cen 
turies.  It  was  natural  that  the  Jews,  when  they 
began  to  strike  money,  should  have  revived  the  old 
name  shekel,  and  applied  it  to  their  stater,  or  prin 
cipal  coin  ;  and  equally  so,  that  they  should  have 
adopted  the  scale  of  the  neighbouring  opulent  and 
powerful  kingdom,  the  money  of  which  they  must 
have  long  been  in  the  habit  of  employing.  The  in 
scription  on  the  coin  appears  to  have  been  expressly 
intended  to  distinguish  the  monetary  shekel  or  stater 
from  the  Shekel  ha-Kodesh,  or  Shekel  of  the  Sanc 
tuary."  Appendix  to  Numismata  Hettenica,  pp.  2, 3. 
The  great  point  here  gained  «s  that  the  Egyptian 
unit  was  a  didrachm,  a  conclusion  confirmed  by  the 
discovery  of  an  Egyptian  weight  npt  greatly  exceed 
ing  the  Attic  didrachm.  The  conjecture,  however, 
that  the  LXX.  intend  the  Attic  weight  is  forced, 
and  leads  to  this  double  dilemma,  the  supposition 
that  the  didrachm  of  the  LXX.  is  a  .shekel  and  that 
'>f  the  N.  T.  half  a  stater,  which  is  the  same  as  half 


MONEY 


403 


a  shekel,  and  that  the  tribute  was  greatly  raised, 
whereas  there  is  no  evidence  that  in  the  N.  T.  the 
term  didrachm  is  not  used  in  exactly  the  same  sense 
as  in  the  LXX.  The  natural  explanation  seems  to 
us  to  be  that  the  Alexandrian  Jews  adopted  for  the 
shekel  the  term  didrachm  as  the  common  name  of 
the  coin  corresponding  in  weight  to  it,  and  that  .t 
thus  became  in  Hebraistic  Greek  the  equivalent  of 
shekel.  There  is  no  ground  for  supposing  a  dif 
ference  in  use  in  the  LXX.  and  N.  T.,  more  especially 
as  there  happen  to  have  been  few,  if  any,  didrachms 
current  in  Palestine  in  the  time  of  Our  Lord,  a 
fact  which  gives  great  significance  to  the  finding  of 
the  stater  in  the  fish  by  St.  Peter,  showing  the 
minute  accuracy  of  the  Evangelist.  The  Ptolemaic 
weight,  not  being  Egyptian  but  Phoenician,  chanced 
to  agree  with  the  Hebrew,  which  was  probably  de 
rived  from  the  same  source,  the  primitive  system 
of  Palestine,  and  perhaps  of  Babylon  also. — Respect 
ing  the  weights  of  the  copper  coins  we  cannot  as 
yet  speak  with  any  confidence. 

The  fabric  of  the  silver  coins  above  described  is 
so  different  from  that  of  any  other  ancient  monej , 
that  it  is  extremely  hard  to  base  any  argument  on 
it  alone,  and  the  cases  of  other  special  classes,  as  the 
ancient  money  of  Cyprus,  show  the  danger  of  such 
reasoning.  Some  have  been  disposed  to  consider 
that  it  proves  that  these  coins  cannot  be  later  than 
the  time  of  Nehemiah,  others  will  not  admit  it  to 
be  later  than  Alexander's  time,  while  some  still  hold 
that  it  is  not  too  archaic  for  the  Maccabean  period. 
Against  its  being  assigned  to  the  earlier  d;  *es  we 
may  remark  that  the  forms  are  too  exact,  ai,J  that 
apart  from  style,  which  we  do  not  exclude  in  con 
sidering  fabric,  the  mere  mechanical  work  is  like 
that  of  the  coins  of  Phoenician  towns  struck  under 
the  Seleucidae.  The  decisive  evidence,  however,  is 
to  be  found  by  a  comparison  of  the  copper  coins 
which  cannot  be  doubted  to  complete  the  series. 
These,  though  in  some  cases  of  a  similar  style  to 
the  silver  coins,  are  generally  far  more  like  the  un 
doubted  pieces  of  the  Maccabees. 

The  inscriptions  of  these  coins,  and  all  the  other 
Hebrew  inscriptions  of  Jewish  coins,  are  in  a  character 
of  which  there  are  few  other  examples.  As  Gesenius 
has  observed  ( Gram.  §  5)  it  bears  a  strong  resem 
blance  to  the  Samaritan  and  Phoenician,  and  we 
may  add  to  the  Aramean  of  coins  which  must  be 
carefully  distinguished  from  the  Aramean  of  the 
papyri  found  in  Egypt.0  The  use  of  this  character 
does  not  afford  any  positive  evidence  as  to  age ;  but 
it  is  important  to  notice  that,  although  it  is  found 
upon  the  Maccabean  coins,  there  is  no  palaeogra- 
phic  reason  why  the  pieces  of  doubtful  time  bearing 
it  should  not  be  as  early  as  the  Persian  period. 

The  meaning  of  the  inscriptions  does  not  offer 
matter  for  controversy.  Their  nature  would  in 
dicate  a  period  of  Jewish  freedom  from  Greek  in 
fluence  as  well  as  independence,  and  the  use  of  an 
era  dating  from  its  commencement.  The  form  used 
on  the  copper  coins  clearly  shows  the  second  and 
third  points.  It  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  dating 
is  by  the  sabbatical  or  jubilee  year,  since  the  re 
demption  of  Zion  is  particularised.  These  are  sepa 
rated  from  the  known  Maccabean  and  later  coins 
by  the  absence  of  Hellenism,  and  connected  with 
them  by  the  want  of  perfect  uniformity  in  their  in 
scriptions,  a  point  indicative  of  a  time  of  national 
decay  like  that  which  followed  the  dominion  of  the 
earlier  Maccabees.  Here  it  may  be  remarked  that  the 

c  See  Mr.  Waddington's  paper  on  the  so-called  satrap 
coins  (Melange  de  Numismatv^ue). 


410  MONEY 

idea  of  Cavedoni,  that  the  form  D  vlW,  succeeding 
in  the  second  year  to  D7K>n%  is  to  be  taken  as  a 
dual,  because  in  that  year  (according  to  his  view  of 
the  age  of  the  coins)  the  fortress  of  Sion  was  taken 
from  the  Syrians  (Num.  Bibl.  p.  23),  notwith 
standing  its  ingenuity  must,  as  De  Saulcy  has  already 
Raid,  be  considered  untenable. 

The  old  explanation  of  the  meaning  of  the  types 
of  the  shekels  and  half-shekels,  that  they  represent 
the  pot  of  manna  and  Aaron's  rod  that  budded, 
seems  to  us  remarkably  consistent  with  the  inscrip 
tions  and  with  what  we  should  expect.  Cavedoni 
has  suggested,  however,  that  the  one  type  is  simply 
a  vase  of  the  Temple,  and  the  other  a  lily,  arguing 
against  the  old  explanation  of  the  former  that  the 
pot  of  manna  had  a  cover,  which  this  vase  has 
not.  But  it  may  be  replied,  that  perhaps  this 
vase  had  a  flat  cover,  that  on  later  coins  a  vase  is 
represented  both  with  and  without  a  cover,  and 
that  the  different  forms  given  to  the  vase  which  is 
so  constant  on  the  Jewish  coins  seem  to  indicate 
that  it  is  a  representation  of  something  like  the  pot 
of  manna  lost  when  Nebuchadnezzar  took  Jeru 
salem,  and  of  which  there  was  therefore  only  a  tra 
ditional  recollection. 

Respecting  the  exact  meaning  of  the  types  of  the 
copper,  save  the  vase,  it  is  difficult  to  form  a  pro 
bable  conjecture.  They  may  reasonably  be  sup 
posed  to  have  a  reference  to  the  great  festivals  of 
the  Jewish  year,  which  were  connected  with  thanks 
giving  for  the  fruits  of  the  earth.  But  it  may,  on 
the  other  hand,  be  suggested  that  they  merely  in 
dicate  the  products  of  the  Holy  Land,  the  fertility 
of  which  is  so  prominently  brought  forward  in  the 
Scriptures.  With  this  idea  the  representation  of  the 
vine-leaf  and  bunch  of  grapes  upon  the  later  corns 
would  seem  to  billy ;  but  it  must  be  recollected  that 
the  lower  portion  of  a  series  generally  shows  a  depar 
ture  or  divergence  from  the  higher  in  the  intention  of 
its  types,  so  as  to  be  an  unsafe  guide  in  interpretation. 

Upon  the  copper  coins  we  have  especially  to  ob 
serve,  as  already  hinted,  that  they  form  an  import 
ant  guide  in  judging  of  the  age  of  the  silver.  That 
they  really  belong  to  the  same  time  is  not  to  be 
doubted.  Everything  but  the  style  proves  this. 
Their  issue  in  the  4th  year,  after  the  silver  cease  in 
the  3rd  year,  their  types  and  inscriptions,  leave  no 
room  for  doubt.  The  style  is  remarkably  different, 
and  we  have  selected  two  specimens  for  engraving, 
which  afford  examples  of  their  diversity.  We  ven 
ture  to  think  that  the  difference  between  the  silver 
coins  engraved,  and  the  small  copper  coin,  which 
most  nearly  resembles  them  in  the  form  of  the  letters, 
is  almost  as  great  as  that  between  the  large  copper 
one  and  the  copper  pieces  of  John  Hyrcanus.  The 
small  copper  coin,  be  it  remembered,  more  nearly 
resembles  the  silver  money  than  does  the  large  one. 

From  this  inquiry  we  may  lay  down  the  follow 
ing  particulars  as  a  basis  for  the  attribution  of  this 
class.  1 .  The  shekels,  half-shekels,  and  correspond 
ing  copper  coins,  may  be  on  the  evidence  of  fabric 
ind  inscriptions  of  any  age  from  Alexander's  time 
intil  the  earlier  period  of  the  Maccabees.  2.  They 
must  belong  to  a  time  of  independence,  and  one  at 
which  Greek  influence  was  excluded.  3.  They  date 
from  an  era  of  Jewish  independence. 

M.  de  Saulcy,  struck  by  the  ancient  appearance 
of  the  silver  coins,  and  disregarding  the  difference 
in  style  of  the  copper,  has  conjectured  that  the 
whole  class  was  struck  at  some  early  period  of 
pros|«rity.  He  fixes  upon  the  pontificate  of  Jaddua, 
.iii-i  supposes  them  to  have  been  first  issui-«l  when 


MONEY 

A)*xander  granted  great  privileges  to  the  Jews 
If  it  be  admitted  that  this  was  an  occasion  from 
which  an  era  might  be  reckoned,  there  is  a  seriour 
difficulty  in  the  style  of  the  copper  coins,  and  those 
who  have  practically  studied  the  subject  of  the 
fabric  of  coins  will  inltnit  that  though  archaic  style 
may  be  long  preserve,!,  there  can  be  no  mistake  as 
to  late  style,  the  earlier  limits  of  which  are  far  more 
rigorously  fixed  than  the  later  limits  of  archaic 
style.  But  there  is  another  difficulty  of  even  a 
graver  nature.  Alexander,  who  was  essentially  a 
practical  genius,  suppressed  all  the  varying  weights 
of  money  in  his  empire  excepting  the  Attic,  which 
he  made  the  lawful  standard.  Philip  had  struck 
his  gold  on  the  Attic  weight,  his  silver  on  the 
Macedonian.  Alexander  even  changed  hi'  native 
currency  in  carrying  out  this  great  commercial  re- 
foiTn,  of  which  the  importance  has  never  been  rc/og- 
nized.  Is  it  likely  that  he  would  have  allowed  a 
new  currency  to  have  been  issued  by  Jaddua  on  a 
system  different  from  the  Attic?  If  it  be  urged 
that  this  was  a  sacred  coinage  for  the  tribute,  and 
that  therefore  an  exception  may  have  been  made, 
it  must  be  recollected  that  an  excess  of  weight 
would  have  not  been  so  serious  a  matter  as  a  defi 
ciency,  and  besides  that  it  is  by  no  means  clear  that 
the  shekels  follow  a  Jewish  weight.  On  these 
grounds,  therefore,  we  feel  bound  to  reject  M.  de 
Saulcy's  theory. 

The  basis  we  have  laid  down  is  in  entire  accord 
ance  with  the  old  theory,  that  this  class  of  coins 
was  issued  by  Simon  the  Maccabee.  M.  de  Saulcy 
would,  however,  urge  against  our  conclusion  the  cir 
cumstance  that  he  has  attributed  small  copper  coins 
all  of  one  and  the  same  class  to  Judas  the  Maccabee, 
Jonathan,  and  John  Hyrcanus,  and  that  the  very 
dissimilar  coins  hitherto  attributed  to  Simon,  must 
therefore  be  of  another  period.  If  these  attribu 
tions  be  correct,  his  deduction  is  perfectly  sound, 
but  the  circumstance  that  Simon  alone  is  unrepre 
sented  in  the  series,  whereas  we  have  most  reason 
to  look  for  coins  of  him,  is  extremely  suspicious. 
We  shall,  however,  show  in  discussing  this  class, 
that  we  have  discovered  evidence  which  seems  to  us 
sufficient  to  induce  us  to  abandon  M.  de  Saulcy's 
classification  of  copper  coins  to  Judas  and  Jonathan, 
and  to  commence  the  series  with  those  of  John 
Hyrcanus.  For  the  present  therefore  we  adhere  to 
the  old  attribution  of  the  shekels,  half-shekels,  and 
similar  copper  coins,  to  Simon  the  Maccabee. 

We  now  give  a  list  of  all  the  principal  copper 
coins  of  a  later  date  than  those  of  the  class  described 
above  and  anterior  to  Herod,  according  to  M.  Ic 
Saulcy's  arrangement. 

COPPER  COINS. 
1.  Judas  Maccabaeus. 


-nrv 


-  Judab, 

the  illustrious  jrtest, 
and  friend  of  tbe  Jews.' 


Within  a  wreath  of  olive? 

fy.  Two  cornua  copiae  united,  within   wlucli  » 
jMimi'gnmate.     ^'>.     W. 


niv 


"  Jonathan 

the  high-priest, 

friend  of  the  Jews.* 


Within  a  wreath  of  olive  ? 
the  same.    JE.    W. 


npsn 
nan- 

The  same.     JE.     W. 

3.  Simon. 
(Wanting.) 

4.  John  Hyrcanus. 


"  John 

the  high-priest, 
and  friend  of  the  Jews." 


Within  a  wreath  of  olive? 
fy.  Two  comua  copiae,  within  which  a  pome 
granate.     jE 


rnrv 
inanja 


DH- 
#.  The  same.     JE.     W. 

5.  Judas- Aristobulus  and  Antiyonus. 
IOYAA  .  . 
BA2IA? 
A? 

Within  a  crown. 

9-  Two  comua  copiae,  within  which  a  pome' 
gianatc. 

Similar  coins. 


MONEY 
7.  Alexander  Jannaeus. 


411 


(A).  BA2IAEO OY   (.3ASIAEQ3 

AAEHANAPOY).    Anchor. 

-  *ltan  jnCW,  "  Jonathan  the  king ;"  within 
the  spokes  of  a  wheel.     JE.     W. 


(B).  A2 AEHANAPO.   Anchor. 

9-  "l?0n  jn3  •  •  •  * ;  within  the  spokes  of  a  wheel. 

.    W. 

(C).  BA2IAE02  AAEfiANAPOY.   Anchor. 

•pOPI  jnaiflS  "  Jonathan  the  king."    Flower. 

The  types  of  this  last  coin  resemble  those  of  on« 
of  Antiochus  VII. 

(D).  BA2IAEH2  AAEHANA  .  .  .    Anchor. 
9.  Star. 

Alexandra. 

BA2IAI2  AAEHANA     Anchor. 

9-  Star :  within  the  rays  nearly-effaced  Hebrew 
ascription. 

Hyrcanus  (no  coins), 

Aristobulus  (no  coins). 

Hyrcanus  restored  (no  coins). 

Oligarchy  (no  coins). 

Aristobulus  and  Alexander  (no  coins). 

Hyrcanus  again  restored  (no  coins). 
Antigonus. 


ITONOY  (BA2IAEO2  ANTirONOY) 

around  a  crown.  . 

$ 'nn»  6ian  jnan  n»nnt3  ?) 

"  Mattathiah  the  high-priest"?     M.     W. 

This  arrangement  is  certainly  the  most  satisfactory 
that  has  been  yet  proposed,  but  it  presents  serious 
difficulties.  The  most  obvious  of  these  is  the  absence 
of  coins  of  Simon,  for  whose  money  we  have  more 
reason  to  look  than  for  that  of  any  other  Jewish  ruler, 
M.  de  Saulcy's  suggestion  that  we  may  some  day  find 
his  coins  is  a  scarcely  satisfactory  answer,  for  this 
would  imply  that  he  struck  very  few  coins,  whereas 
all  the  other  princes  in  the  list,  Judas  only  excepted, 
struck  many,  judging  from  those  found.  That  Judas 
should  have  struck  but  few  coin*  is  extremely  pro- 


412  MONEY 

boble  from  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country  during 
his  rule ;  but  the  prosperous  government  of  Simon 
seems  to  require  a  large  issue  o/  money.  A  second 
difficulty  is  that  the  series  of  small  copper  coins, 
having  thd  same,  or  essentially  the  same,  reverse- 
type,  commences  with  Judas,  and  should  rather 
commence  with  Simon.  A  third  difficulty  is  that 
Judas  bears  the  title  of  priest,  and  probably  of  high- 
priest,  for  the  word  71?3  is  extremely  doubtful,  and 
the  extraordinary  variations  and  blunders  in  the  in 
scriptions  of  these  copper  coins  make  it  more  pro 
bable  that  pllJ  is  the  term,  whereas  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  that  he  took  the  office  of  high-priest. 
It  is,  however,  just  possible  that  he  may  have  taken 
an  inferior  title,  while  acting  as  high-priest  during 
the  lifetime  of  Alcimus.  These  objections  are,  how 
ever,  all  trifling  in  comparison  with  one  that  seems 
never  to  have  struck  any  inquirer.  These  small 
copper  coins  have  for  the  main  part  of  their  reverse- 
type  a  Greek  symbol,  the  united  cornua  copiae,  and 
they  therefore  distinctly  belong  to  a  period  of  Greek 
influence.  Is  it  possible  that  Judas  the  Maccabee, 
the  restorer  of  the  Jewish  worship,  and  the  sworn 
enemy  of  all  heathen  customs,  could  have  struck 
money  with  a  type  derived  from  the  heathen,  and 
used  by  at  least  one  of  the  hated  family  that  then 
oppressed  Israel,  a  type  connected  with  idolatry, 
and  to  a  Jew  as  forbidden  as  any  other  of  the  repre 
sentations  on  the  coins  of  the  Gentiles  ?  It  seems 
to  us  that  this  is  an  impossibility,  and  that  the  use 
of  such  a  type  points  to  the  time  when  prosperity 
had  corrupted  the  ruling  family  and  Greek  usages 
once  more  were  powerful  in  their  influence.  This 
period  may  be  considered  to  commence  in  the  rule  of 
John  Hyrcanus,  whose  adoption  of  foreign  customs 
is  evident  in  the  naming  of  his  sons  far  more  than 
m  the  policy  he  followed.  If  we  examine  the 
whole  series,  the  coins  bearing  the  name  of  "  John 
the  high-priest"  are  the  best  in  execution,  and 
therefore  have  some  claim  to  be  considered  the 
earliest. 

It  is  important  to  endeavour  to  trace  the  origin 
of  the  type  which  we  are  discussing.  The  two 
cornua  copiae  first  occur  on  the  Egyptian  coins,  and 
indicate  two  sovereigns.  In  the  money  of  the  Se- 
leucidae  the  type  probably  originated  at  a  marriage 
with  an  Egyptian  princess.  The  comua  copiae,  as 
represented  on  the  Jewish  coins,  are  first  found,  as 
far  as  we  are  aware,  on  a  coin  of  Alexander  II., 
Zebina  (B.C.  128-122),  who,  be  it  recollected,  was 
set  up  by  Ptolemy  Physcon.  The  type  occurs, 
however,  in  a  different  form  on  the  unique  tetra- 
drachm  of  Cleopatra,  ruling  alone,  in  the  British 
Museum,  but  it  may  have  been  adopted  on  her 
marriage  with  Alexander  I.,  Balas  (B.C.  150).  Yet 
evew  this  earlier  date  is  after  the  rule  of  Judas 
(B.C.  267-161),  and  in  the  midst  of  that  of  Jona 
than  ;  and  Alexander  Zebina  was  contemporary 
with  John  Hyrcanus.  We  have  seen  that  Alex 
ander  Jannaeus  (B.C.  105-78)  seems  to  have  fol 
lowed  a  type  of  Antiochus  VII.,  Sidetes,  of  which 
there  are  coins  dated  B.C.  132-131. 

Thus  far  there  is  high  probability  that  M.  de 
Saulcy's  attributions  before  John  Hyrcanus  are  ex 
tremely  doubtful.  This  probability  has  been  almost 
changed  to  certainty  Vy  a  discovery  the  writer  has 
recently  had  the  good  fortune  to  make.  The  acute 
Barthelemy  mentions  a  coin  of  "  Jonathan  the 
high-priest,"  on  which  he  perceived  traces  of  the 
words  BA21AEfl2  AAEEANAPOT,  and  he  accord 
ingly  conjectures  that  these  coins  are  of  the  same 


MONEY 

class  as  the  bilingual  ones  of  Alexander  JaLnaea;, 
holding  them  both  to  be  of  Jonathan,  and  the  lattci 
to  mark  the  close  alliance  between  that  rulei  anil 
Alexander  I.  Balas.  An  examination  of  the  money  of 
Jonathan  the  high-priest  has  led  us  to  the  discovery 
that  many  of  his  coins  are  restruck,  that  some  of 
these  restruck  coins  exhibit  traces  of  Greek  inscrip 
tions,  showing  the  original  pieces  to  be  probably  of 
the  class  attributed  to  Alexander  Jannaeus  by  M.  de 
Saulcy,  and  that  one  of  the  latter  distinctly  bears 
the  letters  ANAI.  T  [AAEEANAPOT].  The  two 
impressions  of  restruck  coins  are  in  general  of  closely 
consecutive  dates,  the  object  of  restriking  having 
usually  been  to  destroy  an  obnoxious  coinage.  Tliat 
this  was  the  motive  in  the  present  instance  appears 
from  the  large  number  of  restruck  coins  among  those 
with  the  name  of  Jonathan  the  high-priest,  whereas 
we  know  of  no  other  restruck  Jewish  coins,  and 
from  the  change  in  the  style  from  Jonathan  the 
king  to  Jonathan  the  high-priest. 

Under  these  circumstances  but  two  attributions 
of  the  bilingual  coins,  upon  which  everything  de 
pends,  can  be  entertained,  either  that  they  are  of 
Jonathan  the  Maccabee  in  alliance  with  Alexander  I. 
Balas,  or  that  they  are  of  Alexander  Jannaeus ; 
the  Jewish  prince  having,  in  either  case,  changed 
his  coinage.  We  learn  from  the  case  of  Anti- 
gonus  that  double  names  were  not  unknown  in  the 
family  of  tne  Maccabees.  To  the  former  attribution 
there  are  the  following  objections.  1.  On  the  bilin 
gual  coins  the  title  Jonathan  the  king  corresponds 
to  Alexander  the  king,  implying  that  the  same 
prince  is  intended,  or  two  princes  of  equal  rank. 
2.  Although  Alexander  I.  Balas  sent  presents  of  a 
royal  character  to  Jonathan,  it  is  extremely  un 
likely  that  the  Jewish  prince  would  have  taken  the 
regal  title,  or  that  the  king  of  Syria  would  have 
actually  granted  it.  3.  The  Greek  coins  of  Jewish 
fabric  with  the  inscription  Alexander  the  king,  would 
have  to  be  assigned  to  the  Syrian  Alexander  I., 
instead  of  the  Jewish  king  of  the  same  name.  4.  It 
would  be  most  strange  if  Jonathan  should  have 
first  struck  coins  with  Alexander  I.,  and  then  can 
celled  that  coinage  and  issued  a  fresh  Hebrew  coin 
age  of  his  own  and  Greek  of  the  Syrian  king,  the 
whole  series  moreover,  excepting  those  with  only 
the  Hebrew  inscription  having  been  issued  within 
the  years  B.C.  153-146,  eight  out  of  the  nineteen 
of  Jonathan's  rule.  5.  The  reign  of  Alexander  Jan 
naeus  would  be  unrepresented  in  the  coinage.  To 
the  second  attribution  there  is  this  objection,  that 
it  is  unlikely  that  Alexander  Jannaeus  would  have 
changed  the  title  of  king  for  that  of  high-priest ; 
but  to  this  it  may  be  replied,  that  his  quarrel  with 
the  Pharisees  with  reference  to  his  performing  the 
duties  of  the  latter  office,  the  turning-point  of  his 
reign,  might  have  made  him  abandon  the  recent 
kingly  title  and  recur  to  the  sacerdotal,  already 
used  on  his  father's  coins,  for  the  Hebrew  currency, 
while  probably  still  issuing  a  Greek  coinage  with 
the  regal  title.  On  these  grounds,  therefore,  we 
maintain  Bayer's  opinion  that  the  Jewish  coinage 
begins  with  Simon,  we  transfer  the  coins  of  Jona 
than  the  high-priest  to  Alexander  Jannaeus,  and 
propose  the  following  arrangement  of  the  known 
money  of  the  princes  of  the  period  we  have  becu 
just  considering 

John  Hyrcanus,  B.C.  135-106. 

Copper  coins,  with  Hebrew  inscription,  "  John 
the  high-priest ;"  on  some  A,  marking  alliance  with 
Antiochus  VII.,  Sidetes. 


MONEY 

Aristobulus  and  Antigonus,  B.C.  106-105. 
(Probable  Attribution.) 

Copper  coins,  with  Hebrew  inscription,  "  Judah 
the  high  (?)  priest ;"  copper  coins  with  Greek  in 
scription,  "  Judah  the  king,"  and  A.  for  Antigonus  ? 
M.  de  Saulcy  supposes  that  Aristobulus  bore  the 
Hebrew  name  Judah,  and  there  is  certainly  some 
probability  in  the  conjecture,  though  the  classifi 
cation  of  these  coins  cannot  be  regarded  as  more 
than  tentative. 

Alexander  Jannaeus,  B.C.  105-78. 

First  coinage:  copper  coins  with  bilingual  in 
scriptions — Greek,  "  Alexander  the  king  ;"  Hebrew, 
"  Jonathan  the  king." 

Second  coinage:  copper  coins  with  Hebrew  in 
scription,  "  Jonathan  the  high-priest ;"  and  copper 
coins  with  Greek  inscription,  "  Alexander  the  king." 
'The  assigning  of  these  latter  two  to  the  same  ruler 
is  confirmed  by  the  occurrence  of  Hebrew  coins  of 
"  Judah  the  high-priest,"  and  Greek  ones  of  "  Judas 
the  king,"  which  there  is  good  reason  to  attribute 
to  one  and  the  same  person.) 

Alexandra,  B.C.  78-69. 

The  coin  assigned  to  Alexandra  by  M.  de  Saulcj 
may  be  of  this  sovereign,  but  those  of  Alexandei 
are'so  frequently  blundered  that  we  are  not  certaii 
that  it  was  not  struck  by  him. 

ffyrcanus,  B.C.  69-66  (no  coins). 
Aristobulus,  B.C.  66-63  (no  coins). 
ffyrcanus  restored,  B.C.  63-57  (no  coins). 
Oligarchy,  B.C.  57-47  (no  coins). 
Aristobulus  and  Alexander,  B.C.  49  (no  coins). 
ffyrcanus  again,  B.C.  47-40  (no  coins). 
Antigonus,  B.C.  40-37.     Copper  coins,  with  bi 
lingual  inscriptions. 

It  must  be  observed  that  the  whole  period  unre 
presented  in  our  classification  is  no  more  than 
twenty-nine  years,  only  two  years  in  excess  of  the 
length  of  the  reign  of  Alexander  Jannaeus,  that  it 
was  a  very  troublous  time,  and  that  Hyrcanus, 
whose  rule  occupied  more  than  half  the  period,  was 
so  weak  a  man  that  it  is  extremely  likely  that  he 
would  have  neglected  to  issue  a  coinage.  It  is  pos 
sible  that  some  of  the  doubtful  small  pieces  are  of 
this  unrepresented  time,  but  at  present  we  cannot 
even  conjecturally  attribute  any. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  describe  in  detail  the  money 
of  the  time  commencing  with  the  reign  of  Herod 
and  closing  under  Hadrian.  We  must,  however, 
speak  of  the  coinage  generally,  of  the  references 
to  it  in  the  N.  T.,  and  of  two  important  classes — 
the  money  attributed  to  the  revolt  preceding  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  of  the  famous  Barko- 
kab. 

The  money  of  Herod  is  abundant,  but  of  inferior 
interest  to  the  earlier  coinage,  from  its  generally 
having  a  thoroughly  Greek  character.  It  is  of  copper 
only,  and  seems  to  be  of  three  denominations,  the 
smallest  being  apparently  a  piece  of  brass  (xaA 
the  next  larger  its  double  ($ixa\Kos),  and  the 
largest  its  triple  (rpixa\ieos),  as  M.  de  Saulcy  has 
ingeniously  suggested.  The  smallest  is  the  com 
monest,  and  appears  to  be  the  farthing  of  the  N.  T. 
The  coin  engraved  below  is  of  the  smallest  deno- 
rniuation  of  *,hese :  it  may  be  th  is  described : — 


MONEY 


413 


HPCOA  BACI.    Anchor. 

$  Two  cornua  copiae,  within  which  a  c&duteus 
(degraded  from  pomegranate).  M.  W. 

We  have  chosen  this  specimen  from  its  remark- 
,ble  relation  to  the  coinage  of  Alexander  Jannaeus, 
which  makes  it  probable  that  the  latter  was  still 
current  money  in  Herod's  time,  having  been  abund 
antly  issued,  and  so  tends  to  explain  the  seeming 
neglect  to  coin  in  the  period  from  Alexander  or 
Alexandra  to  Antigonus. 

The  money  of  Herod  Archelaus,  and  the  similar 
coinage  of  the  Greek  Imperial  class,  of  Roman  rulers 
with  Greek  inscriptions,  issued  by  the  procurators  of 
Judaea  under  the  emperors  from  Augustus  to  Nero, 
present  no  remarkable  peculiarities,  nor  do  the  coins 
attributed  by  M.  de  Saulcy  to  Agrippa  I.,  but  pos 
sibly  of  Agrippa  II.  We  engrave  a  specimen  of  the 
monev  last  mentioned  to  illustrate  this  class. 


BA2IAta>C  AFPIHA.    State  umbrella. 
R  Corn-stalk  bearing  three  ears  of  bearded  wheat. 
L  S    Year  6.    JE. 

There  are  several  passages  in  the  Gospels  which 
throw  light  upon  the  coinage  of  the  time.  When 
the  twelve  were  sent  forth  Our  Lord  thus  com 
manded  them,  "  Provide  neither  gold,  nor  silver, 
nor  brass  in  your  purses"  (lit.  "girdles"),  Matt, 
x.  9.  In  the  parallel  passages  in  St.  Mark  (vi.  8), 
copper  alone  is  mentioned  for  money,  the  Palesti 
nian  currency  being  mainly  of  this  metal,  although 
silver  was  coined  by  some  cities  of  Phoenicia  and 
Syria,  arid  gold  and  silver  Roman  money  was  also 
in  use.  St.  Luke,  however,  uses  the  term  "  money," 
apyvpiov  (ix.  3),  which  may  be  accounted  for  by 
his  less  Hebraistic  style. 

The  coins  mentioned  by  the  Evangelists,  and  first 
those  of  silver,  are  the  following: — the  stater  is 
spoken  of  in  the  account  of  the  miracle  of  the  tribute 
money.  The  receivers  of  didrachms  demanded  the 
tribute,  but  St.  Peter  found  in  the  fish  a  stater, 
which  he  paid  for  our  Lord  and  himself  (Matt. 
xvii.  24-27).  This  stater  was  therefore  a  tetra- 
drachm,  and  it  is  very  noteworthy  that  at  this 
period  almost  the  only  Greek  Imperial  silver  coin 
in  the  East  was  a  tetradrachm,  the  didrachm  being 
probably  unknown,  or  very  little  coined. 

The  didrachm  is  mentioned  as  a  money  of  account 
in  the  passage  above  cited,  as  the  equivalent  of  the 
Hebrew  shekel.  [SHEKEL.] 

The  denarius,  or  Roman  penny,  as  well  as  the 
Greek  drachm,  then  of  about  the  same  weight,  arc 
spoken  of  as  current  coins.  There  can  be  little 
doubt  that  the  latter  is  merely  employed  as  another 
name  for  the  former.  In  the  famous  passages  re 
specting  the  tribute  to  Caesar,  the  Roman  clenari  is  of 


414 


MONEY 


the  time  is  correctly  described  (Matt.  xxii.  15-21; 
Luke  xx.  19-25).  It  bears  the  head  of  Tiberius, 
wno  has  the  title  Caesar  in  the  accompanying  in 
scription,  most  later  emperors  having,  after  their 
accession,  the  title  Augustus:  here  again  therefore 
we  have  an  evidence  of  the  date  of  the  Gospels. 
[DENARIUS  ;  DRACHM.] 

Of  copper  coins  the  farthing  and  its  half,  the 
mite,  are  spoken  of,  and  these  probably  formed  the 
chief  native  currency.  [FARTHING  ;  MITE.] 

To  the  revolt  of  the  Jews,  which  ended  in  the 
capture  and  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  M.  de  Saulcy 
assigns  some  remarkable  coins,  one  of  which  is  re 
presented  in  the  cut  beneath. 


MONEY-CHANGERB 

Jirff&     «  Of  the  deliverance  jf  Jjru 
salem.       Bunch  of  fruits  ? 

9  \WW.  "Simeon."  Tetrastyle temple :  abow 
which  star.  At.  B.  M.  (Shekel.) 

The  half-shekel  is  not  known,  but  the  quarter, 
which  is  simply  a  restruck  denarius  is  common. 
Ine  specimen  represented  below  shows  traces  of  th? 
old  types  of  a  denarius  of  Trajan  on  both  sides. 


"  The  liberty  of  Zion."      Vine-stalk, 
with  leaf  and  tendril. 

#  DTlt?  rut?.     "  Year  two."     Vase.    JE. 

•    There  are  other  pieces   of  the   year  following, 
w.hich  slightly  vary  in  their  reverse-type,  if  indeed 
we  be  right  in  considering  the  side  with  the  date 
to  be  the  reverse. 
Same  obverse. 

#  Vfo&  n3B>.  "  Year  three."    Vase  with  cover. 
M.  de  Saulcy  remarks  on  these  pieces : — "  De  ces 

deux  monnaies,  celle  de  1'an  III.  est  incomparable- 
ment  plus  rare  que  celle  de  1'an  II.  Cela  tient 
probablement  a  ce  que  la  liberte  des  Juifs  e'tait  a 
son  apogee  dans  la  deuxteme  annee  de  la  guerre  ju- 
dalque,  et  deja  a  son  de'clin  dans  1'anne'e  troisifeme. 
Les  pieces  analogues  des  annees  I.  et  IV.  manquent,  et 
cela  doit  etre.  Dans  la  premiere  anne'e  de  la  guerre 
juda'ique,  1'autonomie  ne  fut  pas  re'tablie  &  Jerusa 
lem  ;  et  dans  la  quatrieme  amide  1 'anarchic  et  les 
divisions  intestines  avaient  deja  prepare  et  facility 
&  Titus  la  conqulte  qu'il  avait  entreprise  "  (p.  154). 

The  subjugation  of  Judaea  was  not  alone  signalised 
by  the  issue  of  the  famous  Roman  coins  with  the 
inscription  IVDAEA  CAPTA,  but  by  that  of  simi 
lar  Greek  Imperial  coins  in  Judaea  of  Titus,  one  of 
which  may  be  thus  described : — 

ATVOKP  TIT02  KAI2AP.  Head  of  Titus,  lau 
reate,  to  the  right. 

9  IOVAAIA2  EAAQKYIAS.  Victory,  to  the  right, 
writing  upon  a  shield :  before  her  a  palm-tree.  /E. 

The  proper  Jewish  series  closes  with  the  money 
of  the  famous  Barkobab,  who  headed  the  revolt  in 
the  time  of  Hadrian.  His  most  important  coins  are 
shekels,  of  which  we  here  engrave  one. 


"Simeon,"     Bunch  of  grapes. 

nnr6.    «  Of  the  deliverance  of  Jeru- 
salem. '     Two  trumpets.     jR.     B.  M. 

The  denarius  of  this  time  was  so  nearly  a  quarter 
of  a  shekel,  that  it  could  be  used  for  it  without  oc 
casioning  any  difficulty  in  the  coinage.  The  copper 
coins  of  Barkokab  are  numerous,  and  like  his 
silver  pieces,  have  a  clear  reference  to  the  money  of 
Simon  the  Maccabee.  It  is  indeed  possible  that  the 
name  Simon  is  not  that  of  Barkokab,  whom  we 
know  only  by  his  surnames,  but  that  of  the  earlier 
ruler,  employed  here  to  recall  the  foundation  of 
Jewish  autonomy.  What  high  importance  was 
attached  to  the  issue  of  money  by  the  Jews,  is  evi 
dent  from  the  whole  history  of  their  coinage. 

The  money  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  Roman  Colonia 
JElia  Capitolina,  has  no  interest  here,  and  we  con 
clude  this  article  with  the  last  coinage  of  an  inde 
pendent  Jewish  chief. 

The  chief  works  on  Jewish  coins  are  Bayer's 
treatise  De  Numis  Hebrceo-Samaritanis ;  De  Saulcy's 
Numismatique  Judatque;  Cavedoni's  Numismatica 
Biblica,  of  which  there  is  a  translation  under  the 
title  BMische  Numismatik,  by  A.  von  Werlhof,  with 
large  additions.     Since  writing  this  article  we  find 
that  the  translator  had  previously  come  to  the  con 
clusion  that  the  coins  attributed  by  M.  de  Saulcy  to 
Judas  Maccabaeus  are  of  Aristobolus,  and  that  Jo 
nathan  the  high-priest  is  Alexander  Jannseus.     We 
have  to  express  our  sincere  obligations  to  Mr.  Wigan 
for  permission  to  examine  his  valuable  collection,  and 
have  specimens  drawn  for  this  article.     [R.  S.  P.] 
MONEY-CHANGERS  (KOXA^.O^J,  Matt 
xxi.  12  ;  Mark  xi.  15;  John  ii.  15).     According  tc 
Ex.  xxx.  13-15,  every  Israelite,   whether  rich  or 
poor,  who  had  reached  or  passed  the  age  of  twenty, 
must  pay  into  the  sacred  treasury,  whenever  the 
nation  was  numbered,  a  half-shekel  as  an  offering 
to  Jehovah.    Maimonides  (Shekal.  cap.  1)  says  that 
this  was  to  be  paid  annually,  and  that  even  paupers 
were  not  exempt.     The  Talmud  exempts  priests  and 
women.    The  tribute  must  in  every  case  be  paid  in 
coin  of  the  exact  Hebrew  half-shekel,  about  15jrf. 
sterling  of  English  money.  The  premium  for  obtain 
ing  by  exchange  of  other,  money  the  halt-shekel  nl 
Hebrew  coin,  according  to  the  Talmud,  WHS  a  (trfA- 
\v0os  (collybus),  and  hence  the  money- bioker  who 
made  the  exchange  was  called  KoAAu£i«rijj.     The 
collybus,  according  to  the  same  authority,  was  equal 
in  value  to  a  silver  oboliis,  which  has  a  weight  of  12 
grains,  and  its  money  value  is  about  l%d.  sterling 
The  money-changers  (Ko\\v/3iff-rai)  whom  Christ, 
fortheir  impiety,  avarice,  and  fraudulent  dealing,  ex- 


MONTH 

pfllcA  from  the  Temple,  were  the  dealers  who  sup 
plied  half-shekels,  for  such  a  premium  as  they  might 
be  able  to  exact,  to  the  Jews  from  all  parts  of  the 
world,  who  assembled  at  Jerusalem  during  the  great 
festivals,  and  were  required  to  pay  their  tribute  or 
ransom  money  in  the  Hebrew  coin  ;  and  also  for  other 
purposes  of  exchange,  such  as  would  be  necessary  in 
so  great  a  resort  of  foreign  residents  to  the  ecclesi 
astical  metropolis.  The  word  rpairftfrns  (trape- 
zites),  which  we  find  in  Matt.  xxv.  29,  is  a  general 
term  for  banker  or  broker.  Of  this  branch  of  bu 
siness  we  find  traces  very  early  both  in  the  Oriental 
and  classical  literature  (comp.  Matt.  xvii.  24-27  :  see 
Lio-htfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  on  Matt.  xxi.  12  ;  Buxtorf,  Lex. 
Rabbin.  2032).  [C.  E.  S.] 

MONTH  (BHn  ;  fTV)  .  The  terms  for  "  month  " 
and  "  moon  "  have  the  same  close  connexion  in  the 
Hebrew  language,  as  in  our  own  and  in  the  Indo- 
European  languages  generally  ;  we  need  only  in 
stance  the  familiar  cases  of  the  Greek  i/d\v  and 
jU^joj,  and  the  Latin  mensis  ;  the  German  mond  and 
monal  ;  and  the  Sancrit  mdsa,  which  answers  to 
both  month  and  moon.  The  Hebrew  chodesh,  is 
perhaps  more  distinctive  than  the  corresponding 
terms  in  other  languages  ;  for  it  expresses  not  simply 
the  idea  of  a  lunation,  but  the  recurrence  of  a  period 
commencing  definitely  with  the  new  moan  •  it  is  de 
rived  from  the  word  chdddsh,  "  new,"  which  was 
transferred  in  the  first  instance  to  the  *  new  moon," 
and  in  the  second  instance  to  the  "  month,"  or  as  it 
is  sometimes  more  fully  expressed,  D1" 


MONTH 


415 


month  of  days"  (Gen.  xxix.  14  ;  Num.  xi.  20,  21  ; 
oomp.  DeuL  xxi.  13;  2  K.  xv.  13).  The  term 
ysrach  is  derived  from  ydreach,  "  the  moon  ;"  it 
occurs  occasionally  in  the  historical  (Ex.  ii.  2  ;  1  K. 
vi.  37,  38,  viii.  2  ;  2  K.  xv.  13),  but  more  fre 
quently  in  the  poetical  portions  of  the  Bible. 

The  most  important  point  in  connexion  with  the 
month  of  the  Hebrews  is  its  length,  and  the  mode 
by  which  it  was  calculated.  The  difficulties  attend 
ing  this  enquiry  are  considerable  in  consequence  o 
the  scantiness  of  the  data.  Though  it  may  fairly 
be  presumed  from  the  terms  used  that  the  month 
originally  corresponded  to  a  lunation,  no  reliance 
can  be  placed  on  the  mere  verbal  argument  to  prov< 
the  exact  length  of  the  month  in  historical  times 
The  word  appears  even  in  the  earliest  times  to  hav 
passed  into  its  secondary  sense,  as  describing  a  period 
approaching  to  a  lunation;  for,  in  Gen.  vii.  11,  viii 
4,  where  we  first  meet  with  it,  equal  periods  o 
30  days  are  described,  the  interval  between  the 
17th  days  of  the  second  and  the  seventh  month 
being  equal  to  150  days  (Gen.  vii.  11,  viii.  3,  4) 
We  have  therefore  in  this  instance  an  approximation 
to  the  solar  month,  and  as,  in  addition  to  this,  an 
indication  of  a  double  calculation  by  a  solar  and  a 
lunar  year  has  been  detected  in  a  subsequent  date 
(for  from  viii.  14  compared  with  vii.  11,  we  fm<~ 
that  the  total  duration  of  the  flood  exceeded  tb 
year  by  eleven  days,  in  other  words  by  the  precis 
difference  between  the  lunar  year  of  354  days  am 
the  solar  one  of  365  days),  the  passage  has  attracte 
considerable  attention  on  the  part  of  certain  critics 
who  have  endeavoured  to  deduce  from  it  argument 
prejudicial  to  the  originality  of  the  Biblical  nar 
rative.  It  has  been  urged  that  the  Hebrews  them 
selves  knew  nothing  of  a  solar  month,  that 
must  have  derived  their  knowledge  of  it  fron 
more  easterly  nations  (Ewald,  Jahrbuch.  1854,  p 
8),  and  consequently  that  the  materials  for  th 
narrative,  and  the  date  of  its  composition  must  b< 


eferred  to  the  period  when  close  intercourse  existed 
etween  the  Hebrews  and  the  Babylonians  (Vou 
Johlen's  Introd.  to  Gen.  ii.  155  ff.)  It  is  unne- 
essary  for  us  to  discuss  in  detail  the  arguments  on 
•hich  these  conclusions  are  founded  ;  we  submit  in 
nswer  to  them  that  the  data  are  insufficient  to 
orm  any  decided  opinion  at  all  on  the  matter,  and 
hat  a  more  obvious  explanation  of  the  matter  is 
o  be  found  in  the  Egyptian  system  of  months.  To 
irove  the  first  of  these  points,  it  will  be  only  neces- 
ary  to  state  the  various  calculations  founded  on  this 
>assage :  it  has  been  deduced  from  it  (1)  that  there 
vere  12  months  of  30  days  each  [CHRONOLOGY]  ; 
2)  that  there  were  12  months  of  30  days  with  5  in- 
;ercalated  days  at  the  end  to  make  up  the  solar  year 
Ewald,  I.  c.) ;  (3)  that  there  were  7  months  of  30 
days,  and  5  of  31  days  (Von  Bohlen) ;  (4)  that 
there  were  5  months  of  30  days,  and  7  of  29  days 
^Knobel,  in  Gen.  viii.  1-3) :  or,  lastly,  it  is  possible 
£  cut  away  the  foundation  of  any  calculation  what 
ever  by  assuming  that  a  period  might  have  elapsed 
between  the  termination  of  the  150  days  and  the 
17th  day  of  the  7th  month  (Ideler,  Chronol. 
i.  70).  But,  assuming  that  the  narrative  implies 
equal  months  of  30  days,  and  that  the  date  given  in 
viii.  1 4,  does  involve  the  fact  of  a  double  calcula 
tion  by  a  solar  and  a  lunar  year,  it  is  unnecessary 
to  refer  to  the  Babylonians  for  a  solution  of  the 
difficulty.  The  month  of  30  days  was  in  use 
among  the  Egyptians  at  a  period  long  anterior 
to  the  period  of  the  exodus,  and  formed  the 
basis  of  their  computation  either  by  an  uninter- 
calated  year  of  360  days  or  an  intercalated  one 
of  365  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  ii.  283-286). 
Indeed,  the  Bible  itself  furnishes  us  with  an  indica 
tion  of  a  double  year,  solar  and  lunar,  in  that  it 
assigns  the  regulation  of  its  length  indifferently  to 
both  sun  and  moon  (Gen.  i.  14).  [YEAR.] 

From  the  time  of  the  institution  of  the  Mosaic 
law  downwards  the  month  appears  to  have  been  a 
lunar  one.  The  cycle  of  religious  feasts,  com 
mercing  with  the  Passover,  depended  not  simply 
on  the  month,  but  on  the  moon  (Joseph.  Ant.  iii. 
10,  §5)  ;  the  14th  of  Abib  was  coincident  with  the 
full  moon  (Philo,  Vit.  Mos.  iii.  p.  686) ;  and  the 
new  moons  themselves  were  the  occasions  of  regular 
festivals  (Num.  x.  10,  xxviii.  11-14).  The  state 
ments  of  the  Talmudists  (Mishna,  Rosh  hash.  1-3) 
are  decisive  as  to  the  practice  in  their  time,  and 
the  lunar  month  is  observed  by  the  modern  Jews. 
The  commencement  of  the  month  was  generally 
decided  by  observation  of  the  new  moon,  which 
may  be  detected  about  forty  hours  after  the  period 
of  its  conjunction  with  the  sun :  in  the  later  times 
of  Jewish  history  this  was  effected  according  to 
strict  rule,  the  appearance  of  the  new  moon  being 
reported  by  competent  witnesses  to  the  local  autho 
rities,  who  then  officially  announced  the  commence 
ment  of  the  new  month  by  the  twice  repeated  word, 
"  Mekfldash,"  i.  e.  consecrated. 

According  to  the  Rabbinical  rule,  however,  there 
must  at  all  times  have  been  a  little  uncertainty 
beforehand  as  to  the  exact  day  on  which  the  month 
would  begin  ;  for  it  depended  not  only  on  the  ap 
pearance,  but  on  the  announcement :  if  the  important 
word  Mekudash  were  not  pronounced  until  after 
dark,  the  following  day  was  the  first  of  the  month  ; 
if  before  dark,  then  that  day  (Rosh  hash.  3,  §1), 
But  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  such  a  strict  rul« 
of  observation  prevailed  in  early  times,  nor  was  it 
in  any  way  necessary ;  the  recurrence  of  the  new 
moon  can  be  predicted  with  considerable  accuracy 


416 

by  a  calculation  of  the  interval  that  would  elapse 
eithsr  from  the  last  new  moon,  from  the  full  moon 
^which  can  be  detected  by  a  practised  eye),  or  from 
the  disappearance  of  the  waning  moon.  Hence, 
David  announces  definitely  "  To-morrow  is  the  new 
moon, '  that  being  the  first  of  the  month  (1  Sam. 
rx.  5,  24,  27)  though  the  new  moon  could  not  have 
been  as  yet  observed,  and  still  less  announced. 
The  length  of  the  month  by  observation  would  be 
alternately  29  and  30  days,  nor  was  it  allowed  by 
the  Talmudists  that  a  month  should  fall  short  of 
the  former  or  exceed  the  latter  number,  whatever 
might  be  the  state  of  the  weather.  The  months 
containing  only  29  days  were  termed  in  Talmudical 
language  chdsar,  or  "  deficient,"  and  those  with  30 
male,  or  "  full." 

The  usual  number  of  months  in  a  year  was  twelve, 
as  implied  in  1  K.  iv.  7 ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  1-15 , 
but  inasmuch  as  the  Hebrew  months  coincided,  as 
we  shall  presently  show,  with  the  seasons,  it  follows 
•is  a  matter  of  course  that  an  additional  month 
must  have  been  inserted  about  every  thud  year, 
which  would  bring  the  number  up  to  thirteen. 
No  notice,  however,  is  taken  of  this  month  in  the 
Bible.  We  have  no  reason  to  think  that  the  inter 
calary  month  was  inserted  according  to  any  exact 
rule ;  it  was  sufficient  for  practical  purposes  to  add 
it  whenever  it  was  discovered  that  the  barley  harvest 
did  not  coincide  with  the  ordinary  return  of  the 
month  of  Abib.  In  the  modem  Jewish  calendar 
the  intercalary  month  is  introduced  seven  times  in 
every  19  years,  according  to  the  Metonic  cycle, 
which  was  adopted  by  the  Jews  about  A.D.  360 
(Prideaux's  Connection,  i.  209  note).  At  the  same 
time  the  length  of  the  synodical  month  was  fixed 
by  R.  Hillel  at  29  days,  12  hours,  44  min.,  3£  sec., 
which  accords  very  nearly  with  the  truth. 

The  usual  method  of  designating  the  months  was 
by  their  numerical  order,  e.g."  the  second  month  " 
(Gen.  vii.  11),  "the  fourth  month"  (2  K.  xxv. 
3) ;  and  this  was  generally  retained  even  when  the 
names  were  given,  e.  g.  "  in  the  month  Zif,  which 
is  the  second  month "  (1  K.  vi.  1),  "  in  the  third 
month,  that  is,  the  month  Sivan"  (Esth.  viii.  9). 
An  exception  occurs,  however,  in  regard  to  Abib b 
in  the  early  portion  of  the  Bible  (Ex.  xiii.  4,  xxiii. 
15;  Deut.  xvi.  1),  which  is  always  mentioned  by 
name  alone,  inasmuch  as  it  was  necessarily  coin 
cident  with  a  certain  season,  while  the  numerical 
order  might  have  changed  from  year  to  year.  The 
practice  of  the  writers  of  the  post-Babylonian  period 
in  this  respect  varied :  Ezra,  Esther,  and  Zechariah 
specify  both  the  names  and  the  numerical  order ; 


MONTH 

Nehemiah  only  the  former ;  Daniel  aad  Haggai  only 
the  latter.  The  names  of  the  months  belong  tc 
two  distinct  periods;  in  the  first  place  we  have 
those  peculiar  to  the  period  of  Jewish  independence, 
of  which  four  only,  even  including  Abib,  which  we 
hardly  regard  as  a  proper  name,  are  mentioned, 
viz.:  Abib,  in  which  the  Passover  fell  (Ex.  riii.  4. 
xxiii.  15,  xxxiv.  18;  Deut.  xvi.  l),and  which  was 
established  as  the  first  month  in  commemoration  of 
the  exodus  (Ex.  xii.  2) ;  Zif,  the  second  montn 
(1  K.  vi.  1,  37) ;  Bui,  the  eighth  (1  K.  vi.  38) ; 
and  Ethanim,  the  seventh  (1  K.  viii.  2) — the  three 
latter  being  noticed  only  in  connection  with  the 
building  and  dedication  of  the  Temple,  so  that  we 
might  almost  infer  that  their  use  was  restricted  to 
the  official  documents  of  the  day,  and  that  they 
never  attained  the  popular  use  which  the  later 
names  had.  Hence  it  »s  not  difficult  to  account  for 
their  having  been  superseded.  In  the  second  place 
we  have  the  names  which  prevailed  subsequently  to 
the  Babylonish  captivity;  of  these  the  following 
seven  appear  in  the  Bible: — Nisan,  the  first,  in 
which  the  passover  was  held  (Neh.  ii.  1 ;  Esth.  iii, 
7)  ;  Sivan,  the  third  (Esth.  viii.  9 ;  Bar.  i.  8) ;  Elul, 
the  sixth  (Neh.  vi.  15 ;  1  Mace.  xiv.  27) ;  Chisleu, 
the  ninth  (Neh.  i.  1 ;  Zech.  vii.  1 ;  1  Mace.  i.  54) ; 
Tebeth,  the  tenth  (Esth.  ii.  16) ;  Sebat,  the  eleventh 
(Zech.  i.  7 ;  1  Mace.  xvi.  14) ;  and  Adar,  the 
twelfth  (Esth.  iii.  7,  viii.  12;  2  Mace.  xv.  36). 
The  names  of  the  remaining  five  occur  in  the  Talmud 
and  other  works ;  they  were  lyar,  the  second  (Tar- 
gum,  2  Chr.  xxx.  2)  ;  Tammuz,  tie  fourth  (Mishn. 
Taan.  4,  §5)  ;  Ab,  the  fifth,  and  Tisri,  the  seventh 
(Bosh  hash.  1,  §3) ;  and  Marcheshvan,  the  eighth 
(Taan.  1,  §3  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  3,  §3).  The  name 
of  the  intercalary  month  was  Veadar,*  »'.  e.  the  ad 
ditional  Adar. 

The  first  of  these  series  of  names  is  of  Hebrew 
origin,  and  has  reference  to  the  characteristics  of 
the  seasons — a  circumstance  which  clearly  shows 
that  the  months  returned  at  the  same  period  of 
the  year,  in  other  words,  that  the  Jewish  year 
was  a  solar  one.  Thus  Abib  *  was  the  month  of 
"ears  of  corn,"  Zife  the  month  of  "  blossom," 
and  Bui f  the  month  of  "  rain,"  With  regard  to 
Ethanim  *  there  may  be  some  doubt,  as  the  usual 
explanation,  "  the  month  of  violent  or,  rather,  inces 
sant  rain  "  is  decidedly  inappropriate  to  the  seventh 
month.  With  regard  to  the  second  series,  both  the 
origin  and  the  meaning  of  the  name  is  controverted. 
It  was  the  opinion  of  the  Talmudista  that  tht 
names  were  introduced  by  the  Jews  who  returned 
from  the  Babylonish  captivity  (Jerusalem  Talmud, 


a  Jahn  (Ant.  iii.  3,  }352)  regards  the  discrepancy  of  the 
dates  in  2  K.  xxv.  27,  and  Jer.  HI.  31,  as  originating  in  the 
different  modes  of  computing,  by  astronomical  calculation 
and  by  observation.  It  is  more  probable  that  it  arises 
from  a  mistake  of  a  copyist,  substituting  f  for  |-|,  as  a 
similar  discrepancy  exists  in  2  K.  xxv.  19  and  Jer.  Iii.  25, 
without  admitting  of  a  e'milar  explanation. 

•>  We  doubt  indeed  whether  Abib  was  really  a  proper 
name.  In  the  first  place  It  is  always  accompanied  by  the 
article,  "  the  Abib ;"  In  the  second  place.  It  appears  almost 
impossible  that  It  could  have  been  superseded  by  Nisan, 
if  it  had  been  regarded  as  a  proper  name,  considering  the 
important  associations  connected  with  It. 

«  The  name  of  the  intercalary  month  originated  in  its 
position  in  the  calendar  after  Adar  and  before  Nisan.  The 
opinion  of  Ideler  (Chranol.  i.  539),  that  the  first  Adar  was 
regarded  as  the  intercalary  month,  because  the  feast  of 
Purim  was  held  in  Veadar  in  the  intercalary  year,  has 
little  foundation. 

[See  CHRONOLOGY.] 


e  \\  or  VT>  or,  more  fully,  as  In  the  Targnm,  1*T 

'2¥3>  "  the  bloom  of  flowers."     Another  explanation 

is  given  in  Rawllnson's  Herodotus,  1.  622 ;  viz.  that  Ziv 

is  the  same  as  the  Assyrian  Giv,  "  bull,"  and  answers  to 

the  zodiacal  sign  of  Taurus. 

^-13.  I"06  name  occurs  in  a  recently  discovered 
Phoenician  inscription  (Ewald,  Jalirb.  1856,  p.  135).  A 
cognate  term,  7'13!D«  Is  used  for  the  "  deluge  "  (Gen.  vi. 
17,  &c.) ;  but  there  is  no  ground  for  the  inference  drawn 
by  Von  Bohlen  (Introd.  to  Gen.  Ii.  156),  that  there  Is  ary 
allusion  to  the  month  Bui. 

Thenius  on  1  K.  viii.  2,  suggest*  that  the  true  name  was 
ntf.  as  in  the  LXX.  '\8aviii.,  and  that  its  meaning 
was  the  "month  of  gifts,"  i.e.,  of  fruit,  from  H3R- 
"  to  give."  There  is  the  same  peculiarity  in  this  as  CD 
Abib.  viz.,  the  addition  of  the  definite  article. 


MONTH 

Rosh  hash.  1,  §1),  and  they  are  certainly  used 
exclusively  by  writers  of  the  post-Babylonian 
period.  It  was,  therefore,  perhaps  natural  to  seek 
ibr  their  origin  in  the  Persian  language,  and  this 
iris  done  some  years  since  by  Benfey  (Jfonats- 
namen)  in  a  manner  more  ingenious  than  satis 
factory.  The  view,  though  accepted  to  a  certain 
extent  by  Goenius  in  his  Thesaurus,  has  been  since 
abandoned,  both  on  philological  grounds  and  be 
cause  it  meets  with  no  confirmation  from  the 
monumental  documents  of  ancient  Persia.11  The 
names  are  probably  borrowed  from  the  Syrians,'  in 
whose  regular  calendar  we  find  names  answering 
to  Tisri,  Sebat,  Adar,  Nisan,  lyar,  Tammuz,  Ab, 
and  Elul  (Ideler,  Chronol.  i.  430),  while  Chisleu 
r.nd  Tebeth k  appear  on  the  Palmyrene  inscriptions 
(Gesen.  Thesaur.  pp.  702,  543).  Sivan  may  be 
borrowed  from  the  Assyrians,  who  appear  to  have 
had  a  month  so  named,  sacred  to  Sin  or  the 
moon  (Rawlinson,  i.  615).  Marcheshvan,  coin 
ciding  as  it  did  with  the  rainy  season  in  Palestine, 
was  probably  a  purely  Hebrew m  term.  With 
regard  to  the  meaning  of  the  Syrian  names  we 
can  only  conjecture  from  the  case  of  Tammuz, 
which  undoubtedly  refers  to  the  festival  of  the 
deity  of  that  name  mentioned  in  Ez.  viii.  14,  that 
some  of  them  may  have  been  derived  from  the 
names  of  deities."  Hebrew  roots  are  suggested 
by  Gesenius  for  others,  but  without  much  con 
fidence.0 

Subsequently  to  the  establishment  of  the  Syrc- 
Maoedonian  empire,  the  use  of  the  Macedonian 
ca'«ndar  was  gradually  adopted  for  purposes  of 
literature  or  intercommunication  with  other  coun 
tries.  Josephus,  for  instance,  constantly  uses  the 
Macedonian  months,  even  where  he  gives  the 
Hebrew  names  (e.  g.  in  Ant.  i,  3,  §3,  he  iden 
tifies  Marcheshvan  with  Dius,  and  Nisan  with 
Xanthicus,  and  in  xii.  7,  §G,  Chisleu  with  Appel- 
laeus).  The  only  instance  in  which  the  Mace 
donian  names  appear  in  the  Bible  is  in  2  Mace.  xi. 
30,  33,  38,  where  we  have  notice  of  Xanthicus  in 
combination  with  another  named  Dioscorinthius 
(ver.  21),  which  does  not  appear  in  the  Macedonian 
calendar.  Various  explanations  have  been  offered 
in  respect  to  the  latter.  Any  attempt  to  connect 
it  with  the  Macedonian  Dius  fails  on  account  of 
the  interval  being  too  long  to  suit  the  narrative, 
Dius  being  the  first  and  Xanthicus  the  sixth  month. 
The  opinion  of  Scaliger  (Emend.  Temp.  ii.  94), 
that  it  was  the  Macedonian  intercalary  month, 
rests  on  no  foundation  whatever,  and  Ideler's 
assumption  that  that  intercalary  month  preceded 
Xanthicus  must  be  rejected  along  with  it  (Chronol. 
i.  399).  It  is  most  probable  that  the  author  of 
2  Mace,  or  a  copyist  was  familiar  with  the  Cretan 


h  The  names  of  the  months,  as  read  on  the  Behistun 
Inscriptions,  Garmapada,  Bagayadish,  Atriyata,  £c.,  bear 
no  resemblance  to  the  Hebrew  names  (Rawlinson's  Hero 
dotus,  il.  593-6). 

i  The  names  of  the  months  appear  to  have  been  in 
many  instances  of  local  use :  for  instance,  the  calendar  of 
Heliopolis  contains  the  names  of  Ag  and  Gelon  (Ide 
ler,  i.  440),  which  do  not  appear  in  the  regular  Syrian 
calendar,  while  that  of  Palmyra,  again,  contains  names 
unknown  to  either. 

k  The  resemblance  in  sound  between  Tebeth  and  the 
Kgyptian  Tobi,  as  well  as  its  correspondence  in  the  order 
of  the  months,  was  noticed  by  Jerome,  ad  Ez.  xxxix.  1. 

"'  Von  Bohlen  connects  it  with  the  root  rdchash  (J?ITI  ) 

•  to  boil  over"   (Introd.  to  Gen.  il.  156).    The  modern 

Jews  consider  it  a  compound  word,  war,  "  drop,"  »nd 

VOL.  II. 


MOON  417 

calendar,  whici  contained  a  month  named  Dios- 
curus,  holding  the  same  place  in  the  calendar  as 
the  Macedonian  Dystrus  ^Ideler,  i.  426),  t.  e.  im 
mediately  before  Xanthicus,  and  that  he  substituted 
one  for  the  other.  This  view  derives  some  con 
firmation  from  the  Vulgate  rendering,  Dioscorus. 
We  have  further  to  notice  the  reference  to  the 
Egyptian  calendar  in  3  Mace.  vi.  38,  Pachon  and 
Epiphi  in  that  passage  answering  to  Pachons  *nd 
Epep,  the  ninth  and  eleventh  months  (Wilkinson, 
Anc.  Egyp.  i.  14,  2nd  ser.). 

The  identification  of  the  Jewish  months  with 
our  own  cannot  be  effected  with  piecision  on  ac 
count  of  the  variations  that  must  inevitably  exist 
between  the  lunar  and  the  solar  month,  each  of  the 
former  ranging  over  portions  of  two  of  the  latter. 
It  must,  therefore,  be  understood  that  the  following 
remarks  apply  to  the  general  identity  on  an  average 
of  years.  As  the  Jews  still  retain  the  names  Nisan, 
&c.,  it  may  appear  at  first  sight  needless  to  do 
more  than  refer  the  reader  to  a  modern  almanack, 
and  this  would  have  been  the  case  if  it  were  not 
evident  that  the  modern  Nisan  does  not  correspond  to 
the  ancient  one.  At  present  Nisan  answers  to  March, 
but  in  early  times  it  coincided  with  April ;  for  the 
barley  harvest — the  first  fruits  of  which  were  to  be 
presented  on  the  15th  of  that  month  (Lev.  xxiii. 
10) — does  not  take  place  even  in  the  warm  district 
about  Jericho  until  the  middle  of  April,  and  in 
the  upland  districts  not  before  the  end  of  that 
month  (Robinson's  Researclies,  i.  551,  iii.  102, 
145).  To  the  same  effect  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  14, 
§6)  synchronizes  Nisan  with  the  Egyptian  Phar- 
muth,  which  commenced  on  the  27th  of  March 
(Wilkinson,  I.  c.),  and  with  the  Macedonian  Xan 
thicus,  which  answers  generally  to  the  early  part 
of  April,  though  considerable  variation  occurs  in 
the  local  calendars  as  to  its  place  (comp.  Ideler,  i. 
435,  442).  He  further  informs  us  (iii.  10,  §5) 
that  the  Passover  took  place  when  the  sun  was  in 
Aries,  which  it  does  not  enter  until  near  the  end 
of  March.  Assuming  from  these  data  that  Abib 
or  Nisan  answers  to  April,  then  Zif  or  lyar  would 
correspond  with  May,  Sivan  with  June,  Tammuz 
with  July,  Ab  with  August,  Elul  with  September. 
Ethanim  or  Tisri  with  October,  Bui  or  Marcheshvan 
with  November,  Chisleu  with  December,  Tebeth 
with  January,  Sebat  with  February,  and  Adar 
with  March.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MOON  (1VV ;  i"!3:6).  It  is  worthy  of  obser 
vation  that  neither  of  the  terms  by  v.hich  the 
Hebrews  designated  the  moon,  contains  any  reference 
to  its  office  or  essential  character;  they  simply 
describe  it  by  the  accidental  quality  of  colour, 
ijareack,  signifying  "  pale,"  or  "  yellow,"  leband/t,* 


Cheskvan,  the  former  betokening  that  it  was  wet,  and 
the  latter  being  the  proper  name  of  the  month  (De  Sola's 
JUishna,  p.  168  note). 

n  We  draw  notice  to  the  similarity  between  Elul  and 
the  Arabic  name  of  Venus  Urania,  Alil-at  (Herod,  iii.  8); 
and  again  between  Adar,  the  Egyptian  Athor,  and  th« 
Syrian  Atar-gatis. 

0  The  Hebrew  forms  of  the  names  are  :—  fD*3f  "VN. 

3K, 


rno,  oaipt  TJK,  and 

a  The  term  lebdndlt  occurs  only  three  times  in  the 
Bible  (Cant.  vi.  1  0  ;  Is.  xxiv.  23,  xxx.  26).  Another  expla 
nation  of  the  term  is  proposed  in  Kawlinson's  Iferodotut 
1.  615,  to  the  effect  that  it  has  reference  to  leb^nak,  "  a 
brick."  and  embodies  the  Babylonian  notion  of  Sin,  the 

2  E 


418 


MOON 


"  white."  The  Indo-European  languages  recognized 
the  moon  as  the  measurer  of  time,  and  have  ex 
pressed  its  office  in  this  respect,  all  the  terms  applied 
to  it,  fj.'fiv,  moon,  &o.,  finding  a  common  element 
with  (tfTotlv,  to  measure,  in  the  Sanscrit  root  ma 
[Pott's  Etym.  Forsch.  i.  194).  The  nations  with 
whom  the  Hebrews  were  brought  into  more  imme 
diate  contact  worshipped  the  moon  under  various 
designations  expressive  of  its  influence  in  the  king 
dom  of  nature.  The  exception  which  the  Hebrew 
language  thus  presents  would  appear  to  be  based  on 
the  repugnance  to  nature-worship,  which  runs 
through  their  whole  system,  and  which  induced  the 
precautionary  measure  of  giving  it  in  reality  no 
name  at  all,  substituting  the  circuitous  expressions 
"lesser  light"  (Gen.  i.  16),  the  "pale,"  or  the 
"  white."  The  same  tendency  to  avoid  the  notion 
of  personality  may  perhaps  be  observed  in  the 
indifference  to  gender,  ydreach  being  masculine, 
and  lebdndh  feminine 

The  moon  held  an  important  place  in  the  kingdom 
of  nature,  as  known  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the  history 
of  the  creation  (Gen.  i.  14-16),  it  appears  simul 
taneously  with  the  sun,  and  is  described  in  terms 
which  imply  its  independence  of  that  body  as  far  as 
its  light  is  concerned.  Conjointly  with  the  sun,  it 
was  appointed  "  for  signs  and  for  seasons,  and  for 
days  and  years ; "  though  in  this  respect  it  exercised 
a  more  important  influence,  if  by  the  "  seasons  " 
we  understand  the  great  religious  festivals  of  the 
Jews,  as  is  particularly  stated  in  Ps.  civ.  19  ("  He 
appointed  the  moon  for  seasons "),  and  more  at 
length  in  Keel  us.  xliii.  6,  7.  Besides  this,  it  had  its 
special  office  in  the  distribution  of  light;  it  was 
appointed  "  to  rule  over  the  night,"  as  the  sun  over 
the  day,  and  thus  the  appearance  of  the  two  founts 
of  light  served  "  to  divide  between  the  day  and 
between  the  night."  In  order  to  enter  fully  into 
this  idea,  we  must  remember  both  the  greater  bril 
liancy1"  of  the  moonlight  in  eastern  countries,  and 
the  larger  amount  of  work,  particularly  travelling, 
that  is  carried  on  by  its  aid.  The  appeals  to  sun 
and  moon  conjointly  are  hence  more  frequent  in  the 
literature  of  the  Hebrews  than  they  might  otherwise 
have  been  (Josh.  x.  12  ;  Ps.  Ixxii.  5,  7,  17 ;  Eccl. 
xii.  2  ;  Is.  xxiv.  23,  &c.) ;  in  some  instances,  indeed, 
the  moon  receives  a  larger  amount  of  attention  than 
the  sun  (e.g.  Ps.  viii.  3,  Ixxxix.  37 e).  The  in 
feriority  of  its  light  is  occasionally  noticed,  as  in 
Gen.  i.  16  ;  in  Cant.  vi.  10,  where  the  epithets 
"  fair,"  and  "  clear"  (or  rather  spotless,  and  hence 
extremely  brilliant)  are  applied  respectively  to  moon 
and  sun ;  and  in  Is.  xxx.  26,  where  the  equalizing 
of  its  light  to  that  of  the  sun  conveys  an  image  of 
the  highest  glory.  Its  influence  on  vegetable  or 
animal  life  receives  but  little  notice  ;  the  expression 
in  Deut.  xxxiii.  14,  which  the  A.  V.  refers  to  the 
moon,  signifies  rather  months  as  the  period  of 
ripening  fruits.  The  coldness  of  the  night-dews  is 
prejudicial  to  the  health,  and  particularly  to  the 
eyes  of  those  who  are  exposed  to  it,  and  the  idea 


MOON 

expressed  in  Ps.  cixi.6  ("  Theiroon  ihall  n3tsmit« 
thee  by  nigh*. ")  may  have  reference  to  the  genera) 
or  the  particular  evil  effect:  blindness  is  still  attri 
buted  to  the  influence  of  the  moon's  rays  c«  those 
who  sleep  under  the  open  heaven,  both  by  the  Arabs 
(Carne's  Letters,  i.  88),  and  by  Europeans.  The 
connexion  between  the  moon's  phases  and  certain 
forms  of  disease,  whether  madness  or  epilepsy,  is 
expressed  in  the  Greek  <r(\Tivid£f<rOeu  (Matt.  iv. 
24,  xvii.  15),  in  the  Latin  derivative  "lunatic," 
and  in  our  "  moon-struck." 

The  worship  of  the  moon  was  extensively  practised 
by  the  nations  of  the  East,  and  under  a  variety  of 
aspects.  In  Egypt  it  was  honoured  under  the  form 
of  Isis,  and  was  one  of  the  only  two  deities  which 
commanded  the  reverence  of  all  the  Egyptians 
(Herod,  ii.  42,  47).  In  Syria  it  was  represented 
by  that  one  of  the  Ashtaroth  (».  e.  of  the  varieties 
which  the  goddess  Astarte,  or  Ashtoreth,  under 
went),  surnamed  "  Karnaim,"  from  the  herns  of 
the  crescent  moon  by  which  she  was  distinguished. 
[ASKTORETH.]  In  Babylonia,  it  foi-med  one  of  a 
triad  in  conjunction  with  Aether,  ana  the  sun,  and, 
under  the  name  of  Sin,  received  the  honoured  titles 
of  "  Lord  of  the  month,"  "  King  of  the  Gods,"  &c. 
(Rawlinson's  fferodotits,  i.  614.)  There  are  indi 
cations  of  a  very  early  introduction  into  the  countries 
adjacent  to  Palestine  of  a  species  of  worship  distinct 
from  any  that  we  have  hitherto  noticed,  viz.  of 
the  direct  homage  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  which  is  the  characteristic  of 
Sabianism.  The  first  notice  we  have  of  this  is  in 
Job  (xxxi.  26,  27),  and  it  is  observable  that  the 
warning  of  Moses  (Deut.  iv.  19)  is  directed  against 
this  nature-worship,  rather  than  against  the  form  of 
moon-worship,  which  the  Israelites  must  have  wit 
nessed  in  Egypt.  At  a  later  period,*  however,  the 
worship  of  the  moon  in  its  grosser  form  of  idol- 
worship  was  introduced  from  Syria:  we  have  no 
evidence  indeed  that  the  Ashtoreth  of  the  Zidonians, 
whom  Solomon  introduced  (1  K.  xi.  5)  was  identi 
fied  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews  with  the  moon,  but 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  moon  was  worshipped 
under  the  form  of  an  image  in  Manasseh's  reign, 
although  Movers  (Phoenix,  i.  66,  164)  has  taken 
up  the  opposite  view ;  for  we  are  distinctly  told 
that  the  king  "  made  an  asherah  (A.  V.  "  grove  ") 
i.e.  an  image  of  Ashtoreth,  and  worshipped  all  the 
host  of  heaven  "  (2  K.  xxi.  3),  which  asherah  was 
destroyed  by  Josiah,  and  the  priests  that  burned 
incense  to  the  moon  were  put  down  (xxiii.  4,  5). 
At  a  somewhat  later  period  the  worship  of  the 
"  queen  of  heaven  "  was  practised  in  Palestine  ( Jer. 
vii.  18,  xliv.  17);  the  title  has  been  generally  sup 
posed  to  belong  to  the  moon,  but  we  think  it  more 
probable  that  the  Oriental  Venus  is  intended,  for  the 
following  reasons:  (1)  the  title  of  Urania  "of 
heaven "  was  peculiarly  appropriated  to  Venus, 
whose  worship  was  borrowed  by  the  Persians  from 
the  Arabians  and  Assyrians  (Herod,  i.  131.  199) : 
(2)  the  votaries  of  this  goddess,  whose  chief  function 


moon,  as  being  the  god  of  architecture.  The  strictly 
parallel  use  of  y&reach,  in  Joel  ii.  31  and  Ez.  xxxii.  7,  as 
well  as  the  analogy  in  the  sense  of  the  two  words,  seems 
a  strong  argument  against  the  view. 

•>  The  Greek  o-eAjjirj,  from  o-e'Aas,  expresses  this  Idea 
of  brilliancy  more  vividly  than  the  Hebrew  terms. 

«  In  the  former  of  these  passages  the  sun  may  be  In 
cluded  in  the  general  expression  "  heavens  "  in  tlic  i>re- 
Mding  verse.  In  the  latter,  "  the  faithful  witnebS  in 
heaven"  is  undoubtedly  the  moon,  and  not  the  rawhow. 
AS  some  explain  it.  The  regularity  of  the  moon's  changes 


impressed  the  mind  with  a  sense  of  durability  and  cer 
tainty  ;  and  hence  the  moon  was  specially  qualified  to  be 
a  witness  to  God's  promise. 

<J  The  ambiguous  expression  of  Hosea  (v.  7),  "  Now 
shall  a  month  devour  them  with  their  portions,"  is  under 
stood  by  Bnnsen  (Sibelicerk,  in  loc.)  as  referring  to  an 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  new  moon.  It  Is  more  generally 
understood  of  "  a  month  "  as  a  short  space  of  time.  Hitzig 
(Comment.  In  lc>c.)  explains  it  in  a  novel  manner  of  the 
crescent  moon,  as  a  symbol  of  destruction,  from  Its 
rcseinbhmoc  to  a  sriniitar. 


MOON,  NEW 

it  was  to  preside  over  births,  were  women,  and  we 
find  that  in  Palestine  the  married  women  are  specially 
noticed  as  taking  a  prominent  part :  (3)  the  pecu 
liarity  of  the  title,  which  occurs  only  in  the  passages 
quoted,  looks  as  if  the  worship  was  a  novel  one  ; 
and  this  is  corroborated  by  the  term  cavvdn  e  applied 
to  the  "  cakes,"  which  is  again  so  peculiar  that  the 
LXX.  has  retained  it  (xavdv),  deeming  it  to  be, 
as  it  not  improbably  was,  a  foreign  word.  Whether 
the  Jews  derived  their  knowledge  of  the  "  queen  of 
heaven  "  from  the  Philistines,  who  possessed  a  very 
ancient  temple  of  Venus  Urania  at  Askalon  (Herod. 
i.  105),  or  from  the  Egyptians,  whose  god  Athor 
was  of  the  same  character,  is  uncertain. 

In  the  figurative  language  of  Scripture  the  moon 
is  frequently  noticed  as  presaging  events  of  the 
greatest  importance  through  the  temporary  or  per 
manent  withdrawal  of  its  light  (Is.  xiii.  10 ;  Joel 
ii.  31;  Matt.  xxiv.  29;  Mark  xiii.  24);  in  these 
and  similar  passages  we  have  an  evident  allusion  to 
the  mysterious  awe  with  which  eclipses  were  viewed 
by  the  Hebrews  in  common  with  other  nations  of 
antiquity.  With  regard  to  the  symbolic  meaning 
of  the  moon  in  Rev.  xii.  1,  we  have  only  to  observe 
that  the  ordinary  explanations,  viz.  the  sublunary 
world,  or  the  changeableness  of  its  affairs,  seem  to 
derive  no  authority  from  the  language  of  the  0.  T., 
or  from  the  ideas  of  the  Hebrews.  [W.  L.  B.] 

MOON,  NEW.     [NEW  MOON.] 

MOOSI'AS  (Moom'ar  :  Moosias).  Apparently 
the  same  as  MAASEIAH  4  (1  Esdr.  ix.  31  ;  comp. 
Ezr.  x.  30). 

MORASTHITE,  THE  (*r)Kni»n ;  in  Micah, 
^r)tjn?3n  :  6  ^.wpaStlr^,  6  rov  KwpatrOfi ;  Alex. 

in  Micah,  MtapaOet :  de  Morasthi,  Morasthites), 
that  is,  the  native  of  a  place  named  MORESHETH, 
such  being  the  regular  formation  in  Hebrew. 

It  occurs  twice  (Jer.  xxvi.  18 ;  Mic.  i.  1),  each 
time  as  the  description  of  the  prophet  MICAH. 

The  Targum,  on  each  occasion,  renders  the  word 
"  of  Mareshah  ;"  but  the  derivation  from  Mareshah 
would  be  Mareshathite,  and  not  Morasthite,  or  more 
accurately  Morashtite.  [G.j 

MOR'DECAI  Ca'nO  :  MapBoxaTos  :  Har- 
docliaeus),  the  deliverer,  under  Divine  Providence, 
of  the  Jews  from  the  destruction  plotted  against 
them  by  Haman  [ESTHER],  the  chief  minister  of 
Xerxes;  the  institutor  of  the  feast  of  Purim  [Pa- 
RIM],  and  probably  the  author  as  well  as  the 
hero  of  the  book  of  Esther,  which  is  sometimes 
called  the  book  of  Mordecai."  The  Scripture  nar 
rative  tells  us  concerning  him  that  he  was  a  Ben- 
jamite,  and  one  of  the  captivity,  residing  in  Shushan, 
whether  or  not  in  the  king's  service  before  Esther 
was  queen,  does  not  appear  certainly.  From  the 
time,  however,  of  Esther  being  queen  he  was  one  of 
those  "  who  sat  in  the  king's  gate."  In  this  situa 
tion  he  saved  the  king's  life  by  discovering  the  con 
spiracy  of  two  of  the  eunuchs  to  kill  him.  When 
the  decree  for  the  massacre  of  all  the  Jews  in  the 
empire  was  known,  it  was  at  his  earnest  advice  and 
exhoitation  that  Esther  undertook  the  perilous  task 
of  interceding  with  the  king  on  their  behalf.  He 


MORDECAI 


419 


•  Pe  Wette  thinks  that  "  the  opinion  that  Mordecai 
wrote  the  book  does  not  deserve  to  be  confuted,"  although 
the  author  "designed  that  the  book  should  be  considered 
tt  written  by  Mordecai."  His  translator  adds,  that  "  the 


might  feel  the  more  impelled  to  exert  himself  tt 
save  them,  as  he  was  himself  the  cause  of  the  medi« 
tated  destruction  of  his  countrymen.  Whether,  as 
some  think,  his  refusal  to  bow  before  Haman,  arose 
from  religious  scruples,  as  if  such  salutation  as  was 
practised  in  Persia  (TtpoffKvvuffis)  were  akin  to 
idolatry,  or  whether,  as  seems  far  more  probable, 
he  refused  from  a  stern  unwillingness  as  a  Jew  to 
bow  before  an  Amalekite,  in  either  case  the  affront 
put  by  him  upon  Haman  was  the  immediate  cause 
of  the  fatal  decree.  Any  how,  he  and  Esther  were 
the  instruments  in  the  hand  of  God  of  averting  the 
threatened  ruin.  The  concurrence  of  Esther's  fa 
vourable  reception  by  the  king  with  the  Providential 
circumstance  of  the  passage  in  the  Medo-Persian 
chronicles,  which  detailed  Mordecai's  fidelity  in  dis 
closing  the  conspiracy,  being  read  to  the  king  that 
very  night,  before  Haman  came  to  ask  leave  to  hang 
him  ;  the  striking  incident  of  Haman  being  made 
the  instrument  Of  the  exaltation  and  honour  of  his 
most  hated  adversary,  which  he  lightly  interpreted 
as  the  presage  of  his  own  downfall,  and  finally  the 
hanging  of  Haman  and  his  sons  upon  the  very 
gallows  which  he  had  reared  for  Mordecai,  while 
Mordecai  occupied  Hainan's  post  as  vizier  of  the 
Persian  monarchy  ;  are  incidents  too  well  known  to 
need  to  ^e  further  dwelt  upon.  It  will  be  more 
useful,  probably,  to  add  such  remarks  as  may  tend 
to  point  out  Mordecai's  place  in  sacred,  profane,  and 
rabbinical  history  respectively.  The  first  thing  is 
to  fix  his  date.  This  is  pointed  out  with  great 
particularity  by  the  writer  himself,  not  only  by  the 
years  of  the  king's  reign,  but  by  his  own  genealogy 
in  ch.  ii.  5,  6.  Some,  however,  have  understood 
this  passage  as  stating  that  Mordecai  himself  was 
taken  captive  with  Jeconiah.  But  that  any  one 
who  had  been  taken  captive  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in 
the  8th  year  of  his  reign  should  be  vizier  after  the 
12th  year  of  any  Persian  king  among  the  successors 
of  Cyrus,  is  obviously  impossible.  Besides  too,  the 
absurdity  of  supposing  the  ordinary  laws  of  human 
life  to  be  suspended  in  the  case  of  any  person  men 
tioned  in  Scripture,  when  the  sacred  history  gives 
no  such  intimation,  there  is  a  peculiar  defiance  of 
probability  in  the  supposition  that  the  cousin 
german  of  the  youthful  Esther,  her  father's  bro 
ther's  son,  should  be  of  an  age  ranging  from  90 
to  170  years,  at  the  time  that  she  was  chosen  to 
be  queen  on  account  of  her  youth  and  beauty.  But 
not  only  is  this  interpretation  of  Esth.  ii.  5,  6,  ex 
cluded  by  chronology,  but  the  rules  of  grammatical 
propriety  equally  point  out,  not  Mordecai,  but 
Kish,  as  being  the  person  who  was  taken  captive  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  at  the  time  when  Jeconiah  was 
carried  away.  Because,  if  it  had  been  intended  to 
speak  of  Mordecai  as  led  captive,  the  ambiguity 
would  easily  have  been  avoided  by  either  placing 
the  clause  rP3i"l  "It^N,  &c.,  immediately  afte> 


and  then  adding  his  name  and 
genealogy,  "D  \G&^,  or  else  by  writing  N-IHI  in 
stead  of  "IK'N,  ai  the  beginning  of  verse  6.  Again, 
as  the  sentence  stands,  the  distribution  of  the  copu 
lative  1  distinctly  connects  the  sentence  JJD&  S"P1 


greatest  part  of  ihe  Jewish  and  Christian  scholars"  refer 
it  to  him.  But  he  adds,  "  more  modern  writers,  with 
better  judgment,  affirm  only  their  ignorance  of  the  author 
ship  "  (fntrfxl.  ii.  345-347).  But  the  objections  to  Mor 
decai's  authorship  are  only  such  as,  if  valid,  would  impugn 
tl>«  truth  anil  authenticity  of  the  book  itself. 

•2  E  2 


420 


MORDECAl 


ill  ver.  7,  with  H^H  in  ver.  5,  showing  that,  three 

things  are  predicated  of  Mcrdecai :  (1)  that  he  lived 
in  Shushan;  (2)  that  his  name  was  Mordecai,  son 
of  Jair,  son  of  Shimei,  son  of  Kish  the  Benjamite 
w'.io  was  taken  captive  with  Jehoiachin ;  (3)  that 
he  brought  up  Esther.  This  genealogy  does  then 
fix  with  great  certainty  the  age  of  Mordecai.  He 
was  great  grandson  of  a  contemporary  of  Jehoia 
chin.  Now  four  generations  cover  120  years — 
and  120  years  from  B.C.  599  bnng  us  to  B.C.  479, 
».  e.  to  the  6th  year  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes ;  thus 
confirming  with  singular  force  the  arguments  which 
led  to  the  conclusion  that  Ahasuerus  is  Xerxes. 
[AHA.SUERUS.]  b  The  carrying  back  the  genealogy 
of  a  captive  to  the  time  of  the  captivity  has  an 
obvious  propriety,  as  connecting  the  captives  with 
the  family  record  preserved  in  the  public  genealo 
gies,  before  the  captivity,  just  as  an  American  would 
be  likely  to  carry  up  his  pedigree  to  the  ancestor 
who  emigrated  from  England.  And  now  it  would 
seem  both  possible  and  probable  C  though  it  cannot 
be  certainly  proved)  that  the  Mordecai  mentioned 
in  the  duplicate  passage,  Ezr.  ii.  2 ;  Neh.  vii.  7,  as 
one  of  the  leaders  of  the  captives  who  returned  from 
time  to  time  from  Babylon  to  Judaea  [EZRA],  was 
the  same  as  Mordecai  of  the  book  of  Esther.  It  is 
very  probable  that  on  the  death  of  Xerxes,  or  pos 
sibly  during  his  lifetime,  he  may  have  obtained 
leave  to  lead  back  such  Jews  as  were  willing  to  ac 
company  him,  and  that  he  did  so.  His  age  need 
not  have  exceeded  50  or  60  years,  and  his  character 
points  him  out  as  likely  to  lead  his  countrymen 
back  from  exile,  if  he  had  the  opportunity.  The 
name  Mordecai  not  occurring  elsewhere,  makes  this 
supposition  the  more  probable. 

As  regards  his  place  in  profane  history,  the  do 
mestic  annals  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes  are  so  scanty, 
that  it  would  not  surprise  us  to  find  no  mention 
of  Mordecai.  But  there  is  a  person  named  by 
Ctesias,  who  probably  saw  the  very  chronicles  of 
the  kings  of  Media  and  Persia  referred  to  in  Esth. 
x.  2,  whose  name  and  character  present  some 
points  of  resemblance  with  Mordecai,  viz.  Matacas, 
or  Natacas  (as  the  name  is  variously  written), 
whom  he  describes  as  Xerxes's  chief  favourite, 
and  the  most  powerful  of  them  all.  His  brief 
notice  of  him  in  these  words,  ri/j.iafyfvwv  St  /at- 
yurrov  fitivvaro  NaraKar,  is  in  exact  agreement 
with  the  description  of  Mordecai,  Esth.  ix.  4,  x. 
2,  3.  He  further  relates  of  him,  that  when  Xerxes 
after  his  return  from  Greece  had  commissioned  Me- 
gabyzus  to  go  and  plunder  the  temple  of  Apollo  at 
Delphi,*  upon  his  refusal,  he  sent  Matacas  the 
eunuch,  to  insult  the  god,  and  to  plunder  his  pro 
perty,  which  Matacas  did,  and  returned  to  Xerxes. 
It  is  obvious  how  grateful  to  the  feelings  of  a  Jew, 
such  as  Mordecai  was,  would  be  a  commission  to 
desecrate  and  spoil  a  heathen  temple.  There  is  also 
much  probability  in  the  selection  of  a  Jew  to  be 
his  prime  minister  by  a  monarch  of  such  decided 
iconoclastic  propensities  as  Xerxes  is  known  to  have 
M  (Prideauz,  Connect,  i.  231-233).  Xerxes 
would  doubtless  see  much  analogy  between  the 
Magian  tenets  cf  which  he  was  such  a  zealous 


MORDECAI 

patron,  and  those  of  t  le  Jews'  religion  ;  just  at 
Pliny  actually  reckons  Moses  (whom  he  couple! 
with  Jannes)  among  the  leaders  of  the  Migian  seci, 
in  the  very  same  passage  in  which  he  relates  that 
Osthanes  the  Magian  author  and  heresiarch  accom 
panied  Xerxes  in  his  Greek  expedition,  and  widely 
diffused  the  Magian  doctrines  (lib.  xxx.  cap.  i.  §2)  ; 
and  in  §4  seems  to  identify  Christianity  also  with 
Magic.  From  the  context  it  seems  highly  probable 
that  this  notice  of  Moses  and  of  Jaunes  may  be  derived 
from  the  work  of  Osthanes,  and  if  so,  the  probable 
intercourse  of  Osthanes  with  Mordecai  would  readily 
account  for  his  mention  of  them.  The  point,  how 
ever,  here  insisted  upon  is,  that  the  known  hatred 
of  Xerxes  to  idol-worship  makes  his  selection  of  a 
Jew  for  his  prime  minister  very  probable,  and  that 
there  are  strong  points  of  resemblance  in  what  is 
thus  related  of  Matacas,  and  what  we  know  from 
Scripture  of  Mordecai.  Again,  that  Mordecai  was, 
what  Matacas  is  related  -to  have  been,  a  eunuch, 
seems  not  improbable  from  his  having  neither  wife 
nor  child,  from  his  bringing  up  his  cousin  Esther 
in  his  own  house,d  from  his  situation  in  the  king's 
gate,  from  his  access  to  the  court  of  the  women, 
and  from  his  being  raised  to  the  highest  post  of 
power  by  the  king,  which  we  know  from  Persian 
history  was  so  often  the  case  with  the  king's 
eunuchs.  With  these  points  of  agreement  between 
them,  there  is  sufficient  resemblance  in  their  names 
to  add  additional  probability  to  the  supposition  of 
their  identity.  The  most  plausible  etymology  usually 
given  for  the  name  Mordecai  is  that  favoured  by 
Gesenius,  who  connects  it  with  Merodach  the  Ba 
bylonian  idol  (called  Mardok  in  the  cuneiform  in 
scriptions)  and  which  appears  in  the  names  Mesessi- 
Mordacus,  Sisi-Mordachug,  in  nearly  the  same  form 
as  in  the  Greek,  MapSoxatos.  But  it  is  highly 
improbable  that  the  name  of  a  Babylonian  idol 
should  have  been  given  to  him  under  the  Persian 
dynasty,'  and  it  is  equally  improbable  that  Mor 
decai  should  have  been  taken  into  the  king's  service 
before  the  commencement  of  the  Persian  dynasty. 
If  then  we  suppose  the  original  form  of  the  name 
to  have  been  Matacai,  it  would  easily  in  the  Chaldee 
orthography  become  Mordecai,  just  as  KD~|3  is  for 


KB3,  B»3-K5>  for  B3K>,  pB>»TT  for  ptttsn,  &c. 

...  r  ..    ....          r  ..  ..  _> 

In  the  Targum  of  Esther  he  is  said  to  be  called 

Mordecai,  because  he  was  like  JOSH  NTO/5,  "  to 
pure  myrrh." 

As  regards  his  place  in  Rabbinical  estimation, 
Mordecai,  as  is  natural,  stands  very  high.  The 
intei-polations  in  the  Greek  book  of  Esther  are  one 
indication  of  his  popularity  with  his  countrymen. 
The  Targum  (of  late  date)  shows  that  this  increased 
rather  than  diminished  with  the  lapse  of  centuries, 
There  Shimei  in  Mordecai's  genealogy  is  identified 
with  Shimei  the  son  of  Gera,  who  cursed  I)tivi<), 
and  it  is  said  that  the  reason  why  David  would  not 
permit  him  to  be  put  to  death  then  was,  that  it 
was  revealed  to  him  that  Mordecai  and  Esther 
should  descend  from  him  ;  but  that  in  his  old  age, 
when  this  reason  no  longer  applied,  he  w;ts  slain. 
It  is  also  said  of  Mordecai  that  he  knew  the  seventy 


b  Justin  bos  the  singular  statement,  "  Primum  Xerxes, 
rex  I'ersarmn,  JucVos  domuit"  (lib.  xxxvl.  cap.  iii.). 
May  not  this  arise  from  a  confused  knowledge  of  the 
events  recorded  in  Esther  ? 

1  It  seems  probable  that  some  other  temple,  not  that 
it  lirlplii,  was  at  this  time  ordered  by  Xerxes  to  be 
(polled,  as  no  other  writer  mentions  it.  It  might  be  that 


of  Apollo  Didymaeus,  near  Miletus,  which  was  destroyed 
by  Xerxes  after  his  return  (Strab.  xiv.  cap.  i.  }5). 

*  To  account  for  this,  the  Targum  adds  that  he  *«u 
75  years  old. 

Mr.  Rawlinson  {Herod.  1.  270)  points  out  Mr.  Layard's 
conclusion  (.Vin.  ii.  441),  that  the  Persians  adopted  gcc«- 
rally  the  Assyrian  religion,  as  "quitu  a  mistake.'' 


MOREH 

languages,  i.  e.  the  languages  of  all  the  nations 
mentioned  in  Gen.  x.,  which  the  Jews  count  as 
seventy  nations,  and  that  his  age  exceeded  400 
years  (Juchasin  ap.  Wolf,  and  Stehelin,  Rabb. 
Liter,  i.  179).  He  is  continually  designated  by 
the  appellation  Np'^V,  "  the  Just,"  and  the  ampli 

fications  of  Esth.  viii.  15  abound  in  the  most  glow 
ing  descriptions  of  the  splendid  robes,  and  Persian 
buskins,  and  Median  scimitars,  and  golden  crowns, 
and  the  profusion  of  precious  stones  and  Macedonian 
gold,  on  which  was  engraved  a  view  of  Jerusalem, 
and  of  the  phylactery  over  the  crown,  and  the 
streets  strewed  with  myrtle,  and  the  attendants, 
and  the  heralds  with  trumpets,  all  proclaiming  the 
glory  of  Mordecai  and  the  exaltation  of  the  Jewish 
people.  Benjamin  of  Tudela  mentions  the  ruins  of 
Shushan  and  the  remains  of  the  palace  of  Ahasuerus 
as  still  existing  in  his  day,  but  places  the  tomb  of 
Mordecai  and  Esther  at  Hamadan,  or  Ecbatana 
(p.  128).  Others,  however,  place  the  tomb  of  Mor 
decai  in  Susa,  and  that  of  Esther  in  or  near  Baram 
in  Galilee  (note  to  Asher's  Benj.  of  Tad.  p.  166). 
With  reference  to  the  above-named  palace  of  Aha 
suerus  at  Shushan,  it  may  be  added  that  consider 
able  remains  of  it  were  discovered  by  Mr.  Loftus's 
excavations  in  1  8o2,  and  that  he  thinks  the  plan 
of  the  great  colonnade,  of  which  he  found  the  bases 
remaining,  corresponds  remarkably  to  the  descrip 
tion  of  the  palace  of  Ahasuerus  in  Esth.  i.  (Loftus, 
Clialdaea,  ch.  xxviii.).  It  was  built  or  begun  by 
Darius  Hystaspis.  [A.  C.  H.] 

MO'REH.  A  local  name  of  central  Palestine, 
one  of  the  very  oldest  that  has  come  down  to  us. 
It  occurs  in  two  connexions. 

1.  THE  PLAIN,  or  PLAINS  (or,  as  it  should 
rather  be  rendered,  the  OAK  or  OAKS),  OF  MOREH 

pK  and  rnb  \:'l^X  ;  Samar.  in  both  cases, 


MORESHETH-GATH 


421 


N  :  ri  Spvs  i]  wfdjA.^}  :  convallis  illustris, 
vallis  tendens),  the  first  of  that  long  succession  of 
sacred  and  venerable  trees  which  dignified  the  chief 
places  of  Palestine,  and  foimed  not  the  least  interest 
ing  link  in  the  chain  which  so  indissolubly  united 
the  land  to  the  history  of  the  nation. 

The  Oak  of  Moreh  was  the  first  recorded  halting- 
place  of  Abram  after  his  entrance  into  the  land  of 
Canaan  (Gen.  xii.  6).  Here  Jehovah  "  appeared  " 
to  him,  and  here  he  built  the  first  of  the  series  of 
altars  "  which  marked  the  various  spots  of  his  resi 
dence  in  the  Promised  Land,  and  dedicated  it  "  to 
Jehovah,  who  appeared  b  unto  him  "  (ver.  7).  It 
was  at  the  "  place  of  :  Shechem  "  (xii.  6),  close  to 
(7VK)  the  mountains  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim  (Deut. 
xi.  30),  where  the  Samar.  Cod.  adds  "  over  against 
Shechem." 

There  is  reason  for  believing  that  this  place,  the 
scene  of  so  important  an  occurrence  in  Abram  's 
early  residence  in  Canaan,  may  have  been  also  that 
of  one  even  more  important,  the  crisis  of  his  later 
life,  the  offering  of  Isaac,  on  a  mountain  in  "  the 
land  of  Moriah."  [MORIAH.] 

A  trace  of  this  ancient  name,  curiously  reappeai- 
itig  after  many  centuries,  is  probably  to  be  found  iu 
Morthia,  which  is  given  on  some  ancient  coins  as  one 

»  It  may  be  roughly  said  that  Abraham  built  altars  ; 
Isaac  dog  wells  j  Jacob  erected  stones. 


OSn.    This  is  a  play  upon  the  same  word  which, 

as  we  shall  see  afterwards,  performs  an  important  part  iu 
(he  name  of  MORIAII. 


of  the  titles  of  Neapolis,  t.  e.  Shechem, and  by  Pliny 
and  Josephus  as  Mamortha  d  or  Mabortha  (  Keland. 
Diss.  III.  §8).  The  latter  states  (B.  J.  iv.  8,  §1  )j 
that  "it  was  the  name  by  which  the  place  was 
called  by  the  country-people"  (&r«x<fy"oi),  wht 
thus  kept  alive  the  ancient  appellation  just  as  the 
peasants  of  Hebron  did  that  of  Kirjath-arba  down 
to  the  date  of  Sir  John  Maundeville's  visit.  [See 
p.  41  a.] 

Whether  the  oaks  of  Moreh  had  any  counexitKi 
with 

2.  THE  HILL  OF  MOREH  (rnten  DJQjl :  Fa- 
j8aa#a/io6pa ;  Alex,  airo  rov  £a>juov  rov  a/3iap  : 
collis  excelsus),  at  the  foot  of  which  the  Midianites 
and  Amalekites  were  encamped  before  Gideon's 
attack  upon  them  (Judg.  vii.  1),  seems,  to  say  the 
least,  most  uncertain.  Copious  as  are  the  details 
furnished  of  that  great  event  of  Jewish  histoiy, 
those  which  enable  us  to  judge  of  its  precise  situation 
are  very  scanty.  But  a  comparison  of  Judg.  vi.  33 
with  vii.  1  makes  it  evident  that  it  lay  in  the  valley 
of  Jezreel,  rather  on  the  north  side  of  the  valley, 
and  north  also  of  the  eminence  on  which  Gideon's 
little  band  of  heroes  was  clustered.  At  the  foot 
of  this  latter  eminence  was  the  spring;  of  Ain- 
Charod  (A.  V.  "the  well  of  Harod"),  and  a 
sufficient  sweep  of  the  plain  intervened  between  it 
and  the  hill  Moreh  to  allow  of  the  encampment  of 
the  Amalekites.  No  doubt — although  the  fact  i& 
not  mentioned — they  kept  near  the  foot  of  Mount 
Moreh,  for  the  sake  of  some  spring  or  springs  which 
issued  from  its  base,  as  the  Ain-Charod  did  from 
that  on  which  Gideon  was  planted.  These  con 
ditions  are  most  accurately  fulfilled  if  we  assume 
Jebel  ed-Duhy,  the  "  Little  Hermon  "  of  the  modern 
travellers,  to  be  Moreh,  the  Ain-Jalood  to  be  the 
spring  of  Harod,  and  Gideon's  position  to  have  been 
on  the  north-east  slope  of  Jebel  Fuk&a  (Mount 
Gilboa),  between  the  village  of  Naris  and  the  last- 
mentioned  spring.  Between  Ain  Jaluod  and  the 
foot  of  the  "Little  Hermon,"  a  space  of  between 
2  and  3  miles  intervenes,  ample  in  extent  for  the 
encampment  even  of  the  enormous  horde  of  the 
Amalekites.  In  its  general  form  this  identification 
is  due  to  Professor  Stanley.  The  desire  to  find 
Moreh  nearer  to  Shechem,  where  the  "  oak  of 
Moreh"  was,  seems  to  have  induced  Mr.  Van  de  Velde 
to  place  the  scene  of  Gideon's  battle  many  miles  to 
the  south  of  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  "  possibly  on  the 
plain  of  Tubas  or  of  Ydsir;"  in  which  case  the 
encampment  of  the  Israelites  may  have  been  on  the 
ridge  between  Wadi  Ferra'  and "  Wadi  Tubas,  near 
Burj  el-Ferra'  (Syr.  $  Pal.  ii.  34 1-2).  But  this  in 
volves  the  supposition  of  a  movement  in  the  position 
of  the  Amalekites,  for  which  there  is  no  warrant 
either  in  the  narrative  or  in  the  circumstances  of 
the  case ;  and  at  any  rate,  in  the  present  state  of 
our  knowledge,  we  may  rest  tolerably  certain  that 
Jebel  ed-Duhy  is  the  HILL  OF  MOREH.  [G.] 

MORESH'ETH-GATH  (H|  JTBhiD:  K\rf 
povofj.ta  r«6:  haereditas  GetK),  a  place  named  by 
the  prophet  Micah  only  (Mic.  i.  14),  in  company 
with  Lachish,  Achzib,  Mareshah,  and  other  towns 
of  the  lowland  district  of  Judah.  His  words, 
"  therefore  shalt  thou  give  presents  to  Moresheth- 

c  Ecclus.  1.  26  perhaps  contains  a  play  on  the  name 
Moreh—"  that  foolish  people  (6  Aabs  6  it.  ia  p  6  s)  who  dwell 
iu  Sichem."  If  the  pun  existed  In  the  Hebrew  text  it 
may  have  l>ecn  between  Sichem  and  Slchor  (drunken). 

d  This  form  is  possibly  due  to  a  confu^ou  between 
Moreh  and  Mamrc.  (See  Udund  as  above.) 


*22  MORIAH 

gath  "  are  explained  by  Ewald  (Prophetcn,  330,  1) 
as  referring  to  Jerusalem,  and  as  containing  an 
allusion  to  the  signification  of  the  name  Moresheth, 
which,  though  not  so  literal  as  the  play  on  those  of 
Achzib  and  Mareshah,  is  yet  tolerably  obvious : — 
"  Therefore  shalt  thou,  0  Jerusalem,  give  com 
pensation  to  Moresheth-gath,  itself  only  the  posses 
sion  of  another  city." 

Micah  was  himself  the  native  of  a  place  called 
Moresheth,  since  he  is  designated,  in  the  only  two 
cases  in  which  his  name  is  mentioned,  "  Micah  the 
Morashtite,"  which  latter  word  is  a  regular  deriva 
tion  from  Moresheth  ;  but  whether  Moresheth-gath 
was  that  place  cannot  be  ascertained  from  any  in 
formation  given  us  in  the  Bible. 

Eusebius  and  Jerome,  in  the  Onomasticon,  and 
Jerome  in  his  Commentary  on  Micah  (Prologus), 
give  Morasthi  as  the  name,  not  of  the  person,  but 
of  the  place ;  and  describe  it  as  "  a  moderate-sized 
village  (haud  grandis  viculus)  near  Eleutheropolis, 
the  city  of  Philistia  (Palaestinae),  and  to  the  east 
thereof." 

Supposing  Beit-jibrin  to  be  Eleutheropolis,  no 
traces  of  the  name  of  Moresheth-gath  have  been  yet 
discovered  in  this  direction.  The  ruins  of  Maresha 
lie  a  mile  or  two  due  south  of  Beit-jibrin  ;  but  it 
is  evident,  from  Mic.  i.  14,  15,  that  the  two  were 
distinct. 

The  affix  "  gath"  may  denote  a  connexion  with  the 
famous  Philistine  city  of  that  name — the  site  of 
which  cannot,  however,  be  taken  as  yet  ascertained — 
or  it  may  point  to  the  existence  of  vineyards  and 
wine-presses,  "  gath  "  in  Hebrew  signifying  a  wine 
press  or  vat.  [  ~ 

MORI' AH.  A  name  which  occurs  twice  in  the 
Bible  (Gen.  x-xii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  iii.  1). 

l.THELANDOF"MoRiAH(n»T8n  fltf ;  Samar. 
nfcOIOn  'N:  T\  y»?  %  tyr/X^:  terra  ^  visionis). 
On  "one  of  the  mountains"  in  this  district  took 
place  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.  2).  What 
the  name  of  the  mountain  was  we  are  not  told ;  but 
it  was  a  conspicuous  one  visible  from  "afar  off" 
(ver.  4).  Nor  does  the  narrative  afford  any  data 
for  ascertaining  its  position;  for  although  it  was 
more  than  two  days'  journey  from  the  "  land  of  the 
Philistines" — meaning  no  doubt  the  district  ol 
Gerar  where  Beersheba  lay,  the  last  place  men 
tioned  before  and  the  first  after  the  occurrence  in 
question — yet  it  is  not  said  how  much  more  than 
two  days  it  was.  The  mountain — the  "  place  " — 
came  into  view  in  the  course  of  the  third  day  ;  bul 
the  time  occupied  in  performing  the  remainder  of 
the  distance  is  not  stated.  After  the  deliverance  o: 
Isaac,  Abraham,  with  a  play  on  the  name  of  Moriah 
impossible  to  convey  in  English,  called  the  spot 
Jehovah-jireh,  "  Jehovah  sees  "  (f.  e.  provides),  anc 
thus  originated  a -proverb  referring  to  the  provi 
dential  and  opportune  interference  of  God.  "  In 
the  mount  of  Jehovah,  He  will  be  seen." 

It  is  most  natural  to  take  the  "  land  of  Moriah 
as  the  same  district  with  that  in  which  the  "  Oak 
(A.  V.  "plain")  of  Moreh"  was  situated,  and  not 
as  that  which  contains  Jerusalem,  as  the  modern 


MORIAH 

radition,  which  would  identify  the  Moriah  of  Gen« 
xxii.  and  that  of  2  Chr.  iii.  1  affirms.  The  Ibrmer 
was  well-known  to  Abraham.  It  was  the  hint 
pot  on  which  he  had  pitched  his  tent  in  the  Pro- 
mised  Land,  and  it  was  hallowed  and  endeared  to 
lim  by  the  first  manifestation  of  Jehovah  with 
which  he  had  been  favoured,  and  by  the  erection  of 
lis  first  altar.  With  Jerusalem  on  the  other  hand, 
except  as  possibly  the  residence  of  Melchizedek,  he 
lad  not  any  connexion  whatever ;  it  lay  as  entirely 
out  of  his  path  as  it  did  out  of  that  of  Isaac  anc 
Jacob.  The  LXX.  appear  to  have  thus  read  or  in 
terpreted  the  original,  since  they  render  both  Moreh 
and  Moriah  in  Gen.  bj  tyr\\ii,  while  in  2  Chr. 
iii.  they  have  ' A.fj.taptia.  The  one  name  is  but  the 
feminine  of  the  other6  (Simonis,  Onom.  414),  and 
there  is  hardly  more  difference  between  them  than 
between  Maresha  and  Mareshah,  and  not  so  much 
as  between  Jerushalem  and  Jerushalaim.  The 
Jewish  tradition,  which  first  appears  in  Josephus — 
unless  2  Chr.  iii.  1  be  a  still  earlier  hint  of  its 
existence — is  fairly  balanced  by  the  rival  tradition 
of  the  Samaritans,  which  affirms  that  Mount  Ge- 
rizim  was  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac,  and 
which  is  at  least  as  old  as  the  3rd  century  after 
Christ.  [GERIZIM.] 

2.  MOUNT  MORIAH  (il'^On  "VI :   Spot  rot 

'A.p.tapfta ;  Alex.  Ajuopta  :  Mons  Moria).  The 
name  ascribed,  in  2  Chr.  iii.  1  only,  to  the  eminence 
on  which  Solomon  built  the  Temple.  "  And  Solo 
mon  began  to  build  the  house  of  Jehovah  in  Jeru 
salem  on  the  Mount  Moriah,  where  He  appeared  to 
David  his  father,  in  a  place  which  David  prepared 
in  the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah  the  Jebusite." 
From  the  mention  of  Araunah,  the  inference  is 
natural  that  the  "  appearance  "  alluded  to  occurred 
at  the  time  of  the  purchase  of  the  threshing-floor 
by  David,  and  his  erection  thereon  of  the  altar 
(2  Sam.  xxiv. ;  1  Chr.  xxi.)  But  it  will  be  ob 
served  that  nothing  is  said  in  the  narratives  of  that 
event  of  any  "  appearance  "  of  Jehovah.  The  earlier 
and  simpler  record  of  Samuel  is  absolutely  silent  on 
the  point.  And  in  the  later  and  more  elaborate 
account  of  1  Chr.  xxi.  the  only  occurrence  which 
can  be  construed  into  such  a  meaning  is  that 
"  Jehovah  answered  David  by  fire  on  the  altar  of 
burnt-offering." 

A  tradition  which  first  appears  in  a  definite  shajie 
in  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  13,  §1,  2,  vii.  13,  §4),  and 
is  now  almost  universally  accepted,  asserts  that  the 
"  Mount  Moriah "  of  the  Chronicles  is  identical 
with  the  "  mountain  "  in  "  the  land  of  Moriah  "  of 
Genesis,  and  that  the  spot  on  which  Jehovah  ap 
peared  to  David,  and  on  which  the  Temple  was  built, 
was  the  very  spot  of  the  sacrifice  of  Isaac.  In  the 
early  Targum  of  Onkelos  on  Gen.  xxii.,  this  belief 
is  exhibited  in  a  very  mild  form.  The  land  of 
Moriah  is  called  the  "  land  of  worship, "  d  and  ver. 
14  is  <iven  as  follows:  "  And  Abraham  sacrificed 
and  prayed  in  that  place ;  and  he  said  before  Je 
hovah,  In  this  place  shall  generations  worship,  be 
cause  it  shall  be  said  in  that  day,  In  this  mountain 
did  Abraham  worship  before  Jehovah."  But  in 


*  Mk'haelis  (Suppl.  No.  1458)  suggests  that  the  name 
may  be  more  accurately  Hammorlah,  since  It  is  not  the 
practice  in  the  early  names  of  districts  to  add  the  article. 
Thus  the  land  of  Canaan  is  {JJJ3  V1N,  not 
[See  LABHAKON.] 


l>  Following  Aquiki,  TT/IV  yr)V 


',  and  Sym- 


«  Others  take  Moriah  as  Moreh-jah  (i.e.  Jehovah), 
but  this  would  be  to  anticipate  the  existence  of  tie  name 
of  Jehovah,  and,  as  Mlchaclis  has  pointed  out  {Suppl. 
No.  1458),  the  name  would  more  probably  be  M  oriel, 
Y.I  being  the  name  by  which  God  was  knows  to  Atrm- 


m*chus,  TT)I/  yiji/  TTJS  oirrao-ias.     The  same  rendering  is 
adopted  by  the  Samaritan  version. 


MORIAH 

the  Jerusalem  Targura  the  latter  passage  is  thus 
given.  "  Because  in  generations  to  come  it  shall  be 
said,  In  the  mount  of  the  house  of  the  sanctuary  of 
Jehovah  did  Abraham  ofi'er  up  Isaac  his  son,  and 
in  this  mountain  which  is  the  house  of  the  sanc 
tuary  was  the  glory  of  Jehovah  much  manifest." 
And  those  who  wish  to  see  the  tradition  in  its  com 
plete  and  detailed  form,  may  consult  the  Targum 
of  R.  Joseph  on  1  Chr.  xxi.  15,  and  2  Chr.  iii.  1, 
and  the  passages  collected  by  Beer  (Leben  Abra 
hams  nackjudische  Sage,  57-7  !).«  But  the  single 
occurrence  of  the  name  in  this  one  passage  of  Chro 
nicles  is  surely  not  enough  to  establish  a  coinci 
dence,  which  if  we  consider  it  is  little  short  of 
miraculous.'  Had  the  fact  been  as  the  modern 
belief  assorts,  and  had  the  belief  existed  ill  the 
minds  of  the  people  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament, 
there  could  not  fail  to  be  frequent  references  to  it, 
in  the  narrative — so  detailed — of  the  original  dedi 
cation  of  the  spot  by  David ;  in  the  account  of  So 
lomon's  building  in  the  book  of  Kings ;  of  Nehe- 
miah's  rebuilding  (compare  especially  the  reference 
to  Abraham  in  ix.  7);  or  of  the  restorations  and  puri 
fications  of  the  Maccabees.  It  was  a  fact  which  must 
have  found  its  way  into  the  paronomastic  addresses 
of  the  prophets,  into  the  sermon  of  St.  Stephen,  so 
full  of  allusion  to  the  Founders  of  the  nation,  or 
into  the  argument  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews.  But  not  so  ;  on  the  contrary,  except 
in  the  case  of  Salem,  and  that  is  by  no  means  ascer 
tained — the  name  of  Abraham  does  not,  as  far  as 
the  writer  is  aware,  appear  once  in  connexion  with 
Jerusalem  or  the  later  royal  or  ecclesiastical  glories 
of  Israel.  Jerusalem  lies  out  of  the  path  of  the 
patriarchs,  and  has  no  part  in  the  history  of  Israel 
till  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy.  The  "  high 
places  of  Isaac,"  as  far  as  we  can  understand  the 
allusion  of  Amos  (vii.  9,  16)  were  in  the  northern 
kingdom.  To  connect  Jerusalem  in  so  vital  a  manner 
with  the  life  of  Abraham,  is  to  antedate  the  whole 
of  the  later  history  of  the  nation  and  to  commit  a 
serious  anachronism,  warranted  neither  by  the  direct 
nor  indirect  statements  of  the  sacred  records. 

But  in  addition  to  this,  Jerusalem  is  incompatible 
with  the  circumstances  of  the  narrative  of  Gen.  xxii. 
To  name  only  two  instances — (1.)  The  Temple 
mount  cannot  be  spoken  of  as  a  conspicuous  emi 
nence.  "  The  towers  of  Jerusalem,"  says  Professor 
Stanley  (S.  fy  P.  251),  "  are  indeed  seen  from  the 
ridge  of  Mar  Elias  at  the  distance  of  three  miles  to 
the  south,  but  there  is  no  elevation  ;  nothing  cor 
responding  to  the  '  place  afar  off'  to  which  Abra 
ham  '  lifted  up  his  eyes.'  And  the  special  locality 
which  Jewish  tradition  has  assigned  for  the  place, 
and  whose  name  is  the  chief  guarantee  for  the  tra 
dition — Mount  Moriah,  the  hill  of  the  Temple — is 
not  visible  till  the  traveller  is  close  upon  it  at  the 
southern  edge  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  from  whence 
he  looks  down  upon  it  as  on  a  lower  B  eminence." 

(2.)  If  Salem  was  Jerusalem,  then  the  trial  of 


MORTAR 


423 


Abraham's  faith,  instead  of  taking  place  in  the  lonely 

and  desolate  spot  implied  by  the  narrative,  where 

not  even  fire  was  to  be  obtained,  and  where  no  help 

j  but  that  of  the  Almighty  was  nigh,  actually  took 

j  place  under  the  very  walls  of  the  city  of  Melchi 

j  zedck. 

But,  while  there  is  no  trace  except  in  the  single 
passage  quoted  of  Moriah  being  attached  to  any 
part  of  Jerusalem — on  the  other  hand  in  the  slightly 
different  form  of  MOREH  it  did  exist  attached  to 
the  town  and  the  neighbourhood  of  Shechem,  the 
spot  of  Abram's  first  residence  in  Palestine.  The 
arguments  in  favour  of  the  identity  of  Mount  Ge- 
rizim  with  the  mountain  in  the  land  of  Moriah  of 
Gen.  xxii.,  are  stated  under  GERIZIM  (vol.  i.  p. 
679,  680).  As  far  as  they  establish  that  identity, 
they  of  course  destroy  the  claim  of  Jerusalem.  [G.] 

MORTAR.  The  simplest  and  probably  most 
ancient  method  of  preparing  corn  for  food  was  by 
pounding  it  between  two  stones  (Virg.  Aen.  i.  179). 
Convenience  suggested  that  the  lower  of  the  two 
stones  should  be  hollowed,  that  the  corn  might  not 
escape,  and  that  the  upper  should  be  shaped  so  as 
to  be  convenient  for  holding.  The  pestle  and  mor 
tar  must  have  existed  from  a  very  early  period. 
The  Israelites  in  the  desert  appear  to  have  possessed 
mortars  and  handmills  among  their  necessary  do 
mestic  utensils.  When  the  manna  fell  they  gathered 
it,  and  either  ground  it  in  the  mill  or  pounded  it 
in  the  mortar  (PO'ltD,  midocah}  till  it  was  fit  for 

use  (Num.  xi.  8).  So  in  the  present  day  stone 
mortars  are  used  by  the  Arabs  to  pound  wheat  for 
their  national  dish  kibby  (Thomson,  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  ch.  viii.  p.  94).  Niebuhr  describes  one  of  a 
very  simple  kind  which  was  used  on  board  the  vessel 
in  which  he  went  from  Jidda  to  Loheia.  Every 
afternoon  one  of  the  sailors  had  to  take  the  durra, 
or  millet,  necessary  for  the  day's  consumption  and 
pound  it  "  upon  a  stone,  of  which  the  surface  was 
a  little  curved,  with  another  stone  which  was  long 
and  rounded  "  (Descr.  de  I' Arab.  p.  45).  Among 
the  inhabitants  of  Ezzehhoue,  a  Druse  village, 
Burckhardt  saw  coffee-mortars  made  out  of  the 
trunks  of  oak-trees  (Syria,  p.  87, 8).  The  spices  for 
the  incense  are  said  to  have  been  prepared  by  ths 
house  of  Abtines,  a  family  set  apart  for  the  pur 
pose,  and  the  mortar  which  they  used  was,  with 
other  spoils  of  the  Temple,  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  by  Titus,  carried  to  Rome,  where  it  re 
mained  till  the  time  of  Hadrian  (Reggio  in  Mar 
tinet's  Hebr.  Chrest.  p.  35).  Buxtorf  mentions  a 
kind  of  mortar  (KWI3,  cuttash)  in  which  olives 
were  slightly  braised  before  they  were  taken  to  th* 
olive-presses  (Lex.  Talm.  s.  v.  JJ>fl3).  From  the 
same  root  as  this  last  is  derived  mactesh  (B>r)3D> 
Prov.  xxvii.  22),  which  probably  denotes  a  mortar  of 
a  larger  kind  in  which  corn  was  pounded.  "  Though 
thou  bray  the  fool  in  the  mortar  among  the  bruised 


«  The  modem  form  of  the  belief  Is  well  expressed  by 
the  latest  Jewish  commentator  (Kalisch,  Genesis,  444,  5)  : 
"  The  place  of  the  future  temple,  where  It  was  prjruised 
the  glory  of  God  should  dwell,  and  whence  atonement  and 
peace  were  to  bless  the  hearts  of  the  Hebrews,  was  hal- 
1  jwed  by  the  most  brilliant  act  of  piety,  and  the  deed  of 
their  ancestor  was  thus  more  prominently  presented  to  the 
Imitation  of  his  descendants."  The  spot  of  toe  sacrifice  of 
Isaac  is  actually  shewi  In  Jerusalem  (Barclay,  City,  109). 

'  There  Is  in  the  East  a  natural  tendency  when  a  plaw 
la  established  as  a  sanctuary  to  make  it  the  sow.  of  all 
UM  notable  events,  po&iblc  or  impossible,  wlucti  can  by 


any  play  of  words  or  other  pretext  be  connected  with  it. 
Of  this  kind  were  the  early  Christian  legends  that  Gol 
gotha  was  the  place  of  the  burial  of  the  first  Adum  as 
well  as  of  the  death  of  the  Second  (see  Mislin,  Sainif 
Liewx,  il.  304,  5).  Of  this  kind  also  are  the  Mohammedan 
legends  which  cluster  round  all  the  shrines  and  holy  places, 
both  of  Palestine  and  Arabia.  In  the  Targum  of  Chronicles 
(2  Chr.  iii.  1)  alluded  to  above,  the  Temple  nuunt  is  mad; 
to  be  also  the  scene  of  the  vision  of  Jacob. 

K  See  JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  985  6,  and  the  plate  in  Bartlett'  j 
H'oJfcs  there  referred  to 


424 


M OUTER 


MOSES 


corn  with  the  pestle,  yet  will  not  his  folly  depart  I  granite,  and  used  for  taking  stains  cut  of  cloth; 


him."  Corn  may  be  separated  from  k*  hu»K 
and  all  its  good  properties  preserved  by  such  an 
operation,  but  the  fool's  folly  is  so  essential  a  part 
of  himself  that  no  analogous  process  can  remove  it 
from  him.  Such  seems  the  natural  interpretation 
of  this  remarkable  proverb.  The  language  is  in 
tentionally  exaggerated,  and  there  is  no  necessity 
for  supposing  an  allusion  to  a  mode  of  punishment 
by  which  criminals  were  put  to  death,  by  being 
pounded  in  a  mortar.  A  custom  of  this  kind  existed 
nmong  the  Turks,  but  there  is  no  distinct  trace  of 
it  among  the  Hebrews.  The  Ulemats,  or  body  of 
lawyers,  in  Turkey  had  the  distinguished  privilege, 
according  to  De  Tott  (Mem.  i.  p.  28.  Eng.  tr.),  of 
being  put  to  death  only  by  the  pestle  and  the  mortar. 
Such,  however,  is  supposed  to  be  the  reference  in 
the  proverb  by  Mr.  Roberts,  who  illustrates  it  from 
his  Indian  experience.  "  Large  mortars  are  used 
in  the  East  for  the  purpose  of  separating  the  rice 
from  the  husk.  When  a  considerable  quantity  has 
to  be  prepared,  the  mortar  is  placed  outside  the 
door,  and  two  women,  each  with  a  pestle  of  five 
feet  long,  begin  the  work.  They  strike  in  rotation, 
as  blacksmiths  do  on  the  anvil.  Cruel  as  it  is,  this 
is  a  punishment  of  the  state:  the  poor  victim  is 
thrust  into  the  mortar,  and  beaten  with  the  pestle. 
The  late  king  of  Kandy  compelled  one  of  the  wives 
of  his  rebellious  chiefs  thus  to  beat  nor  own  infant 
to  death.  Hence  the  saying,  '  Though  you  beat 
that  loose  woman  in  a  mortar,  she  will  not  leave 
her  ways :'  which  means,  Though  you  chastise  her 
ever  so  much,  she  will  never  improve"  (Orient. 


Illustr.  p.  368). 


[W.  A.  W.] 


MORTER*  (Gen.  xi.  3;  Ex.  i.  14;  Lev.  xiv. 
42,  45;  Is.  xli.  25  ;  2z.  xiii.  10,  11,  14,  15,  xxii. 
28  ;  Nah.  iii.  14).  Omitting  iron  cramps,  lead, 
[HANDICRAFT],  and  the  instances  in  which  large 
stones  are  found  in  close  apposition  without  cement, 
the  various  compacting  substances  used  in  Oriental 
buildings  appeal-  to  be  —  1.  bitumen,  as  in  the  Ba 
bylonian  structures  ;  2.  common  mud  or  moistened 
clay;  3.  a  very  firm  cement  compounded  of  sand, 
ashes,  and  lime,  in  the  proportions  respectively  of 
1,  2,  3,  well  pounded,  sometimes  mixed  and  some 
times  coated  with  oil,  so  as  to  form  a  surface  almost 
impenetrable  to  wet  or  the  weather.  [PLASTER.] 
In  Assyrian,  and  also  Egyptian  brick  buildings 
stubble  or  straw,  as  hair  or  wool  among  ourselves, 
was  added  to  increase  the  tenacity  (Shaw,  Tram. 
p.  206  ;  Volney,  Tram.  ii.  p.  436  ;  Chardin,  Voy. 
iv.  116).  If  the  materials  were  bad  in  themselves, 
as  mere  mud  would  necessarily  be,  or  insufficiently 
mixed,  or,  as  the  Vulgate  seems  to  understand  (Ez. 
xiii.  10),  if  straw  were  omitted,  the  mortar  or  cob- 
wall  would  be  liable  to  crumble  under  the  influence 
of  wet  weather.  (See  Shaw,  Tram.  136,  and  Ges.  p. 
1  515,  s.  v.  ?QFl  :  a  word  connected  with  the  Arabic 
Tafalf*  a  substance  resembling  pipe-clay,  believed 
by  Burckhardt  to  be  the  detritus  of  the  felspar  of 

•  1.  1OH  ;  mjXos,  caementum  a  word  from  the  same 
loot  ODH.  "  boil  ")  as  "1DH-  "  slime  "  or  "  bitumen," 
Iked  in  Uie  same  passage.  Gen.  xi.  3.  GhotneY  is  also 
tendered  "clay,"  evidently  plastic  clay,  Is.  xxix.  16,  and 


Burcknardt,  Syria,  p.  488  j  Mishn.  Ptsach.  x.  3). 
Wheels  for  grinding  chalk  or  lime  for  morter 
closely  resembling  our  own  machines  fir  the  gam* 
purpose,  are  in  use  in  Egypt  (Niebuhr,  Voy.  i. 
122,  pi.  17  ;  Burckhardt,  Nubia,  p.  82,  97,  102, 
140  ;  Hasselquist,  Trav.  p.  90).  [House  ;  CLAY.! 

[H.  W.  P.]  " 
MO'SERAH  (rnDIB  :  MwrovpovO  :  Mosera, 


ehewhere.     2.  "!£$• 


lutum,  also  limus,  pulvit, 


A.V. 
li.7. 


dust,"  "powder."  as  In  2  K.  xxiii.  6,  and  Gen. 


Deut.  x.  6,  apparently  the  same  as  Moseroth,  Num. 
xx.xiii.  30,  its  plural  form),  the  name  of  a  place 
near  Mount  Hor.  Hengstenbcrg  (Authent.  der 
Pentat.)  thinks  it  lay  in  the  Arabah,  where  that 
mountain  overhangs  it.  Burckhardt  suggests  that 
possibly  Wady  Mousa,  near  Petra  and  Mount  Hor. 
may  contain  a  corruption  of  Mosera.  This  does 
not  seem  likely.  Used  as  a  common  noun,  the  word 
means  "  bonds,  fetters."  In  Deut.  it  is  said  that 
"there  Aaron  died."  Probably  the  people  en 
camped  in  this  spot  adjacent  to  the  mount,  which 


Aaron  ascended,  and  where  he  died. 
MO'SES  (Heb.  Mosheh,   HE'D  = 


[H.  H.] 
drawn  "  : 


LXX.,  Josephus,  Philo,  the  most  ancient  MSS.  of 
N.  T.,  MWVCTTJS,  declined  Muvcreus,  Muvcrtl  or 
Mwtiffp,  M«0(T«'a  or  Moavffrjy :  Vulg.  Moyses,  de 
clined  Moysi,  gen.  and  dat.,  Moysen,  ace. :  Rec. 
Text  of  N.  T.  and  Protestant  versions,  Moses : 
Arabic,  Musa :  Numenius  ap.  Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix. 
8,  27,  Movcraws:  Artapauus  ap.  Eus.  Ibid.  27, 
Mw'iiffos :  Manetho  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  26,  28,  31, 
Osarsiph:  Chaeremon,  ap.  to.  32,  Tisithen:  "the 
man  of  God,"  Ps.  xc.,  title,  1  Chr.  xxiii.  14 ;  "  the 
slave  of  Jehovah,"  Num.  xii.  7,  Deut.  xxxiv.  5,  Josh, 
i.  1,  Ps.  cv.  26  ;  "  the  chosen,"  Ps.  cvi.  23).  The 
legislator  of  the  Jewish  people,*  and  in  a  certain 
sense  the  founder  of  the  Jewish  religion.  No  one 
else  presented  so  imposing  a  figure  to  the  external 
Gentile  world  ;  and  although  in  the  Jewish  nation 
his  fame  is  eclipsed  by  the  larger  details  of  the  life 
of  David,  yet  he  was  probably  always  regarded  as 
their  greatest  hero. 

The  materials  for  his  life  are — 

I.  The  details  preserved  in  the  four  last  books  of 
the  Pentateuch. 

II.  The  allusions  in  the  Prophets  and  Psalms, 
which  in  a  few  instances  seem  independent  of  the 
Pentateuch. 

III.  The  Jewish  traditions  preserved  in  the  N.  T. 
(Acts  vii.  20-38 ;  2  Tim.  iii.  8,  9 ;  Hcb.  xi.  23- 
28 :  Jude  9) ;  and  in  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.,  iii.,  iv.), 
Philo  (  Vita  Jfoysis),  and  Clemens.  Alex.  (Strom). 

IV.  The  heathen  traditions  of  Manetho,   Lysi- 
machus,  and   Chaeremon,   preserved   in  Josephus 
(c.  Ap.  i.   26-32),  of  Artapanus   and  others   in 
Eusebius   (Praep.   Ev.    ix.   8,    26,    27),  and   of 
Hecataeus  in  Diod.  Sic.  xl.,  Strabo  xvi.  2. 

V.  The  Mussulman  traditions  in  the  Koran  (ii. 
vii.   x.   xviii.   xx.   xxviii.   xl.),   and    the    Arabian 
legends,    as    given    in    Weil's   Biblical   Legends; 
D'Herbelot  ("Moussa"),   and    Lane's  Selections, 
p.  182. 

VI.  Apocryphal  Books  of  Moses  (Fabricius,  Cod. 
Pseud.  V.  T.  i.  p.  825)  :— (1)  Prayers  of  Moses. 
(2^  Apocalypse  of  Moses.     (3)  Ascension  of  Moses. 
(These  are  only  known  by  fragments.) 

VII.  In  modem  times  his  career  ana  legislator 
has  been  treated  by  Warburton,  Michaelis,  Ewald, 
and  Bunsen. 


1  npioTO\  anarrun>  6  flavfiaorbs  OtoAoyov  it  KOI  »ou» 
T,S,  Kus.  y>)(uj).  i'p.  vii.  «.   Coinp.  Philo.  K.  Hot.  \  Ml. 


MOSES 

His  life,  in  the  later  period  of  the  Jewish  history, 
was  divided  into  three  equal  portions  of  forty  years 
each  (Acts  vii.  23,  30,  36).  This  agrees  with  the 
natural  arrangement  of  his  history  into  the  three 
parts  of  his  Egyptian  education,  his  exile  in  Arabia, 
and  his  government  of  the  Israelite  nation  in  the 
Wilderness  and  on  the  confines  of  Palestine. 

I.  His  birth  and  education  The  immediate  pe 
digree  of  Moses  is  as  follows : — 

LEW 


MOSES 


425 


KoLth 


Amram  =  Jochebed 


Aaron  =--  Elisheba 


Mu«s    =  Zipporah 
I 


Gershom     Elieier 


Phmehas.  Jonathan. 

In  the  Koran,  by  a  strange  confusion,  the  family 
of  Moses  is  confounded  with  the  Holy  Family  of 
Nazareth,  chiefly  through  the  identification  of  Mary 
and  Miriam,  and  the  3rd  chapter,  which  describes  the 
evangelical  history,  bears  the  name  of  the  "  Family 
of  Amram."  Although  little  is  known  of  the  family 
except  through  its  connexion  with  this  its  most  illus 
trious  member,  yet  it  was  not  without  influence  on 
his  after-life. 

The  fact  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  no 
doubt  contributed  to  the  selection  of  that  tribe 
as  the  sacred  caste.  The  tie  that  bound  them  to 
Moses  was  one  of  kinship,  and  they  thus  naturally 
rallied  round  the  religion  which  he  had  been  the 
means  of  establishing  (Ex.  xxxii.  28)  with  an  ardour 
which  could  not  have  been  found  elsewhere.  His 
own  eager  devotion  is  also  a  quality,  for  good  or 
evil,  characteristic  of  the  whole  tribe. 

The  Levitical  parentage  and  the  Egyptian  origin 
both  appear  in  the  family  names.  Gershom,  Eleazar 
are  both  repeated  in  the  younger  generations.  Moses 
(vide  infra)  and  Phinehas  (see  Brugsch,  Hist,  de 
I'Egypte,  i.  173)  are  Egyptian.  The  name  of  his 
mother,  Jochebed,  implies  the  knowledge  of  the  name 
of  JEHOVAH  in  the  bosom  of  the  family.  It  is  it 
first  distinct  appearance  in  the  sacred  history. 

Miriam,  who  must  have  been  considerably  olde 
than  himself,  and  Aaron,  who  was  three  year* 
older  (Ex.  vii.  7),  afterwards  occupy  that  inde 
pendence  of  position  which  their  superior  age  woul" 
naturally  give  them.  . 

Moses  was  born  according  to  Manetho  (Jos.  c 
Ap.  i.  26,  ii.  2)  at  Heliopolis,  at  the  time  of  th 
deepest  depression  of  his  nation  in  the  Egyp 
tian  servitude.  Hence  the  Jewish  proverb,  "  Whe 
the  tale  of  bricks  is  doubled  then  comes  Moses. 
His  birth  (according  to  Josephus,  Ant.  ii.  9,  §2,  c 
4)  had  been  foretold  to  Pharaoh  by  the  Egyptia 
magicians,  and  to  his  father  Amram  by  a  dream — 
as  respectively  the  future  destroyer  and  deliverer 
The  pangs  of  his  mother's  labour  were  alleviate 
so  as  to  enable  her  to  evade  the  Egyptian  midwives 
The  story  of  his  birth  is  thoroughly  Egyptian  i 
its  scene.  The  beauty  of  the  new-bora  babe — i 
the  later  versions  of  the  story  amplified  into 


*  She  was  (according  to  Artapanus,  Eus.  Praep.  Bv.  ix 
27)  tbe  daughter  of  Palmauothes,  who  was  reigning  a 
Heliopolis,  and  the  wife  of  Chenepbres,  who  was  reignin 
•t  Memphis.  In  this  tradition,  and  that  of  Philo  (  V.  M 
i.  4),  she  has  no  child,  and  hence  her  delight  at  finding  on 

c  Rrugsch,  however  (L'Histoire  d'Egypte,  pp.  157,  173 
renders  the  name  Mcs  or  Mcsson  =  child,  borne  by  one 
the  princes  of  Kthiopia  under  Rameses  II.    In  the  Arab 
traditions  the  n.mie  is  derived  from  hi=  discovery  in  th 


jeauty  and  size  (Jos.  Ibid.  §1,  5)  almos.  divin* 
•«tos  Ttf  Off,  Acts  vii.  20 ;  the  word  currfiot 
s  taken  from  the  LXX.  version  of  Ex.  ii.  2,  and 
s  used  again  in  Heb.  xi.  23,  and  is  applied  to 
one  but  Moses  in  the  N.T.) — induced  the  mother 
o  make  extraordinary  efforts  for  its  preservation 
rom  the  general  destruction  of  the  male  children 
f  Israel.  For  three  months  the  child  was  con- 
ealed  in  the  house.  Then  his  mother  placed  hire 
n  a  small  boat  or  basket  of  papyrus — perhaps  from 
a  current  Egyptian  belief  that  the  plant  is  a  protec- 
,ion  from  crocodiles  (Plut.  Is.  $  Os.  358) — closed 
against  the  water  by  bitumen.  Thi?  was  placed 
among  the  aquatic  vegetation  by  the  side  of  one  of 
the  canals  of  the  Nile.  [NILE.]  The  mother  de- 
>arted  as  if  unable  to  bear  the  sight.  The  sister 
ingered  to  watch  her  brother's  fate.  The  basket 
^Jos.  Ibid.  §4)  floated  down  the  stream. 

The  Egyptian  princess  (to  whom  the  Jewish  tra 
ditions  gave  the  name  of  Thermuthis,  Jos.  Ant.  ii. 
9,  §5 ;  Artapanus,  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  27,  the  name  of 
Merrhis,  and  the  Arabic  traditions  that  of  Asiat, 
Jalaladdin,  387)  came  down,  after  the  Homeric  sim 
plicity  of  the  age,  to  bathe  in  the  sacred  river,b  or 
;jos.  Ant.  ii.  9,  §5)  to  play  by  its  side.  Her  at 
tendant  slaves  followed  her.  She  saw  the  basket  in 
the  flags,  of  (Jos.  Ibid.)  borne  down  the  stream, 
and  dispatched  divers  after  it.  The  divers,  or  one 
of  the  female  slaves,  brought  it.  It  was  opened, 
and  the  cry  of  the  child  moved  the  princess  to 
compassion.  She  determined  to  rear  it  as  her 
own.  The  child  (Jos.  Ibid.)  refused  the  milk  of 
Egyptian  nurses.  The  sister  was  then  at  hand  to 
recommend  a  Hebrew  nurse.  The  child  was  brought 
up  as  the  princess's  son,  and  the  memory  of  the 
incident  was  long  cherished  in  the  name  given  to 
the  foundling  of  the  water's  side — whether  accord 
ing  to  its  Hebrew  or  Egyptian  form.  Its  Hebrew 
form  is  HK'D,  Mosheh,  from  HtW,  Mdshdh,  "  to 


draw  out " — "  because  I  have  drawn  him  out  of 
the  water."  But  this  (as  in  many  other  instances, 
Babel,  &c.)  is  probably  the  Hebrew  form  given  to 
a  foreign  word.  In  Coptic,  mo  =  water,  and  ushe 
—  saved.  This  is  the  explanation'  given  by  Jo 
sephus  (Ant.  ii.  9,  §6 ;  c.  Apion,  i.  31  d),  and  con 
firmed  by  the  Greek  form  of  the  word  adopted  in 
the  LXX.,  and  thence  in  the  Vulgate,  Mo>i><r7js, 
Moyses,  and  by  Artapanus  Vldvffos  (Eus.  Praep. 
Ev.  ix.  27).  His  former  Hebrew  name  is  said  to 
have  been  Joachim  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  p.  343). 
The  child  was  adopted  by  the  princess.  Tradition 
describes  its  beauty  as  so  great  that  passers-by 
stood  fixed  to  look  at  it,  and  labourers  left  their 
work  to  steal  a  glance  (Jos.  Ant.  ii.  9,  §6). 

From  this  time  for  many  years  Moses  must  b3 
considered  as  an  Egyptian.  In  the  Pentateuch  this 
period  is  a  blank,  but  in  the  N.  T.  he  is  represented 
as  "  educated  (tvaiSftOri)  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians,"  and  as  "  mighty  in  words  and  deeds  " 
(Acts  vii.  22).  The  following  is  a  brief  summary 
of  the  Jewish  and  Egyptian  traditions  which  fill  up 
the  silence  of  the  sacred  writer.  He  was  educated  at 
Heliopolis  (comp.  Strabo,  xvii.  1),  and  grew  up  there 

water  and  among  the  trees ;  "  for  in  the  Egyptian  lan« 
guage  ma  Is  the  name  of  water,  and  se  is  that  of  a  tree  " 
(Jalaladdin,  387). 

*  Philo  (V.M.  i.  4),  mos  =  water;  Clem.  Alex.  (Strom. 
i.  p.  343),  mou  —  water.  Clement  (ib.)  derives  Moses  from 
"drawing  breath."  In  an  ancient  Egyptian  treatise  ou 
agriculture  cited  by  Chwolson  (Ueberreste,  &c.,  12  nolt) 
his  name  Is  given  as  Monios. 


426 


MOSES 


»s  a  priest,  under  his  Egyptian  name  of  Osarsiph 
(Manetho,  aj.ud  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  26,  28, 31)  or  Tisithen 
(Chaeremon,  apud  16.  32).  "Osarsiph"  is  derived 
by  Manetho  from  Osiris,  i.  e.  (Osiri-tsf  ?)  "  saved 
by  Osiris"  (Osburn,  Monumental  Egypt).  He  was 
taught  the  whole  range  of  Greek,  Chaldee,  and 
Assyrian  iterature.  From  the  Egyptians  espe 
cially  he  learned  mathematics,  to  train  his  mind 
for  the  unprejudiced  reception  of  truth  (Philo, 
V.  M.  i.  5).  "  He  invented  boats  and  e/i(Hnes  for 
building — instruments  of  war  and  of  hyiMaulics — 
hieroglyphics— division  of  lands"  (Artajtanus,  ap. 
Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  is.  27).  He  taught  Orpheus,  and 
was  hence  called  by  the  Greeks  Musaeus  lib.),  and 
by  the  Egyptians  Hermes  (ib.).  He  taught  jjrammar 
to  the  Jews,  whence  it  spread  to  Phoenicia  nad  Greece 
(Eupolemus,ap.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  p.  ?43).  He 
was  sent  on  an  expedition  against  the  Ethiopians. 
He  got  rid  of  the  serpents  of  the  country  to  be 
traversed  by  turning  baskets  full  of  ibises  iipon  them 
(Jos.  Ant.  ii.  10,  §2),  and  founded  the  cr.y  of  Her- 
mopolis  to  commemorate  his  victory  (Arte  panus,  ap. 
Eus.  ix.  27).  He  advanced  to  Saba,  Hie  capital 
of  Ethiopia,  and  gave  it  the  name  of  11  -roe,  from 
his  adopted  mother  Merrhis,  whom  he  b>.  <ied  there 
(ib.).  Tharbis,  the  daughter  of  the  king  o»  Ethiopia, 
fell  in  love  with  him,  and  be  returned  in  triumph 
to  Egypt  with  her  as  his  wife  (Jos.  Ibid.}. 

LI.  The  nurture  of  his  mother  is  probably  spoken 
of  as  the  link  which  bound  him  to  his  own  people, 
and  the  time  had  at  last  arrived  when  he  was 
resolved  to  reclaim  his  nationality.  Here  again  the 
N.  T.  preserves  the  tradition  in  a  distincter  form 
than  the  account  in  the  Pentateuch.  "  Moses,  when 
he  was  come  to  years,  refused  to  be  called  the  son 
of  Pharaoh's  daughter;  choosing  rather  to  suffer 
affliction  with  the  people  of  God  than  to  enjoy  the 
pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season;  esteeming  the  re- 
pirach  of  Christ  greater  riches  than  the  treasures  " 
— the  ancient  accumulated  treasure  of  Rhampsiuitus 
and  the  old  kings—"  of  Egypt "  (Heb.  xi.  24-26). 
In  his  earliest  infancy  he  was  reported  to  have  re 
fused  the  milk  of  Egyptian  nurses  (Jos.  Ant.  ii.  9, 
§5),  and  when  three  years  old  to  have  trampled 
under  his  feet  the  crown  which  Pharaoh  had  play 
fully  placed  on  his  head  (ib.  7).  According  to 
th*  Alexandrian  representation  of  Philo  ( V.  M. 
i.  6),  he  led  an  ascetic  life,  in  order  to  pursue 
his  high  philosophic  speculations.  According  to  the 
Egyptian  tradition,  although  a  priest  of  Heliopolis, 
he  always  performed  his  prayers,  according  to  the 
custom  of  his  lathers,  outside  the  walls  of  the  city, 
in  the  open  air,  turning  towards  the  sun-rising  (Jos. 
c.  Apion.  ii.  2).  The  king  was  excited  to  hatred 
by  the  priests  of  tgypt,  who  foresaw  their  destroyer 
(ib.),  or  by  his  own  envy  (Artapanus,  ap.  Eus.  Pr. 
Ev.  ix.\27).  Various  plots  of  assassination  were 
contrive^  against  him,  which  failed.  The  last  was 
after  he  nad  already  escaped  across  the  Nile  from 
Memphis,  warned  by  his  brother  Aaron,  and  when 
pursued  by  the  assassin  he  killed  him  (ib.).  The 
same  general  account  of  conspiracies  against  his  life 
appears  in  Joseph  us  (Ant.  ii.  10).  All  that  remains 
of  these  traditions  in  the  sacred  narrative  is  the 
simple  and  natural  inJ  lent,  that  seeing  an  Israelite 
Buffering  the  bastinado  from  an  Egyptian,  and  think 
ing  that  they  were  alone,  he  slew  the  Egyptian  (the 
later  tradition,  preserved  by  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
said,  "  with  a  word  of  his  mouth  "),  and  buried  the 
corpse  in  the  sand  (the  sand  of  the  desert  then,  as 
now,  running  close  up  to  the  cultivated  tract). 
The  lire  of  patriotuir  which  thus  turned  him  into 


MOSEO 

a  deliverer  from  the  oppressors,  turns  him  iu  the 
same  story  into  the  peace-maker  of  the  oppressed. 
It  is  characteristic  of  the  faithfulness  of  the  Jewish 
records  that  his  flight  is  there  occasioned  rather  by 
the  malignity  of  his  countrymen  than  by  the  enmity 
of  the  Egyptians.  And  in  St.  Stephen's  speech  it . 
this  part  of  the  story  which  is  drawn  out  at  greatei 
length  than  in  the  original,  evidently  with  the  view 
of  showing  the  identity  of  the  narrow  spirit  which 
had  thus  displayed  itself  equally  against  their  first 
and  their  last  Deliverer  (Acts  vii.  25-35). 

He  fled  into  Midian.  Beyond  the  fact  that  it  was 
in  or  near  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  its  precise  situation 
is  unknown.  Arabian  tradition  points  to  the  country 
east  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  (see  Laborde).  Josephus 
(Ant.  ii.  11,  §1)  makes  it  '  by  the  Red  Sea." 
There  was  a  famous  well  ("  tie  well,"  Ex.  ii.  15) 
surrounded  by  tanks  for  the  watering  of  the  flocks 
of  the  Bedouin  herdsmen.  By  thia  well  the  fugi 
tive  seated  himself  "at  noon"  (Jos.  Ibid.],  and 
watched  the  gathering  of  the  sheep.  There  were 
the  Arabian  shepherds,  and  there  were  also  seven 
maidens,  whom  the  shepherds  rudely  drove  away 
from  the  water.  The  chivalrous  spirit  (if  we  may 
so  apply  a  modern  phrase)  which  had  already  broken 
forth  in  behalf  of  his  oppressed  countrymen,  broke 
forth  again  in  behalf  of  the  distressed  maidens. 
They  returned  unusually  soon  to  their  father,  and 
told  him  of  their  adventure.  Their  father  was  a 
person  of  whom  we  know  little,  but  of  whom  that 
little  shows  how  great  an  influence  he  exercised 
over  the  future  career  of  Moses.  It  was  JETHRO, 
or  RECEL,  or  HOBAB,  chief  or  priest  ("  Sheykh  " 
exactly  expresses  the  union  of  the  religious  and 
political  influence)  of  the  Midianite  tribes. 

Moses,  who  up  to  this  time  had  been  "  an  Egyp 
tian"  (Ex.  ii.  19),  now  became  for  an  unknown 
period,  extended  by  the  later  tradition  over  foity 
years  (Acts  vii.  30),  an  Arabian.  He  married  Zip- 
porah,  daughter  of  his  host,  to  whom  he  also  became 
the  slave  and  shepherd  (Ex.  ii.  21,  iii.  1). 

The  blank  which  during  the  stay  in  Egypt  is  filled 
up  by  Egyptian  traditions,  can  here  only  be  supplied 
from  indirect  allusions  in  other  parts  of  the  0.  T. 
The  alliance  between  Israel  and  the  Kenite  branch  of 
the  Midianites,  now  first  formed,  was  never  broken. 
[KENITES.]  Jethro  became  their  guide  througn 
the  desert.  If  from  Egypt,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
derived  the  secular  and  religious  learning  of  Moses, 
and  with  this  much  of  their  outward  ceremonial, 
so  from  Jethro  was  derived  the  organization  of  their 
indicia!  and  social  arrangements  during  their  nomndie 
state  (Ex.  xriii.  21-23).  Nor  is  the  conjecture  of 
Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  59,  60)  improbable,  that  in  this 
pastoral  and  simple  relation  there  is  an  indication  of 
a  wider  concert  than  is  directly  stated  between  the 
rising  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  and  the  Arabian 
tribes,  who,  under  the  name  of  "  the  Shepherds," 
had  been  recently  expelled.  According  to  Artapanus 
(Eus.  Pr.  Ev.  ix.  27)  Reuel  actually  urged  Moses  to 
make  war  upon  Egypt.  Something  of  a  joint  action 
is  implied  in  the  visit  of  Aaron  to  the  desert  (Ex. 
iv.  27  ;  comp.  Artapanus,  ut  supra)  ;  something  alsc 
in  the  sacredness  of  Sinai,  already  recognised  both 
by  Israel  and  by  the  Arabs  (Ex.  via.  27  ;  Jos.  Ant. 
ii.  12,  §1). 

But  the  chief  effect  of  this  stay  in  Arabia  is  on 
Moses  himself.  It  was  in  the  seclusion  and  sim 
plicity  of  his  shepherd-life  that  he  received  his  rail 
as  a  prophet.  The  traditional  scene  of  this  pvn' 
event  is  in  the  valley  of  Shoayb,  or  Hobat,  on  the 
N.  side  of  Jcbrl  Mfba.  Its  exact  spot  is  maiiei? 


MOSES 

by  the  convent  of  S.  Catherine,  of  which  the  altar 
is  said  to  stand  ou  the  site  of  the  Burning  Bush. 
The  original  indications  are  too  slight  to  enable  us 
to  fix  the  spot  with  any  certainty.  It  was  at  "  the 
back"  of  "the  wilderness"  at  Horeb  (Ex.  Hi.  1): 
to  which  the  Hebrew  adds,  whilst  the  LXX.  omits, 
"  the  mountain  of  God."  Josephus  further  par 
ticularises  that  it  was  the  loftiest  of  all  the  moun 
tains  in  that  region,  and  best  for  pasturage,  from 
its  good  grass ;  and  that,  owing  to  a  belief  that  it 
was  inhabited  by  the  Divinity,  the  shepherds  feared 
to  approach  it  (Ant.  ii.  12,  §1).  Philo  (  V.  M.  i. 
1 2)  adds  "  a  grove  "  or  "  glade." 

Upon  the  mountain  was  a  well-known  acacia 
[SHITTIM]  (the  definite  article  may  indicate  either 
"  the  particular  celebrated  tree,"  sacred  perhaps 
already,  or  "  the  tree "  or  "  vegetation  peculiar 
to  the  spot "),  the  thorn-tree  of  the  desert,  spread 
ing  out  its  tangled  branches,  thick  set  with  white 
thorns,  over  the  rocky  ground.  It  was  this  tree 
which  became  the  symbol  of  the  Divine  Presence : 
m  flame  of  fire  in  the  midst  of  it,  in  which  the  dry 
branches  would  naturally  have  crackled  and  burnt 
iu  a  moment,  but  which  played  round  it  without 
consuming  it.  In  Philo  (  V.  M.  i.  12)  "  the  angel " 
is  described  as  a  strange,  but  beautiful  creature. 
Artapanus  (Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  27)  represents  it 
as  a  fire  suddenly  bursting  from  the  bare  ground, 
and  feeding  itself  without  fuel.  But  this  is  far  less 
expressive  than  the  Biblical  image.  Like  all  the 
visions  of  the  Divine  Presence  recorded  in  the  0.  T., 
as  manifested  at  the  outset  of  a  prophetical  career, 
this  was  exactly  suited  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
tribe.  It  was  the  true  likeness  of  the  condition  oi 
Israel,  in  the  furnace  of  affliction,  yet  not  destroyed 
(comp.  Philo,  V.  M.  i.  12).  The  place  too,  in  the 
desert  solitude,  was  equally  appropriate,  as  a  sign 
that  the  Divine  protection  was  not  confined  either 
to  the  sanctuaries  of  Egypt,  or  to  the  Holy  Land, 
but  was  to  be  found  with  any  faithful  worshipper, 
fugitive  and  solitary  though  he  might  be.  The  rocky 
ground  at  once  became  "  holy,"  and  the  shepherd's 
sandal  was  to  be  taken  off  no  less  than  on  the 
threshold  of  a  palace  or  a  temple.  It  is  this  feature 
of  the  incident  on  which  St.  Stephen  dwells,  as  a 
proof  of  the  universality  of  the  true  religion  (Acts 
vii.  29-33). 

The  call  or  revelation  was  twofold — 

1.  The  declaration  of  the  Sacred  Name  expresses 
the   eternal   self-existence   of  the  One  God.     The 
name  itself,  as  already  mentioned,  must  have  beer 
known  in  the  family  of  Aaron.      But  its  gram 
significance  was  now  first  drawn  out.  [JEHOVAH." 

2.  The  mission  was  given  to  Moses  to  delive 
his  people.     The  two  signs  are  characteristic — th 
one  of  his  past  Egyptian  life — the.other  of  his  activ 
shepherd   life.      In  the   rush  of  leprosy   into  hi 
h;tnd e  is   the   link  between   him   and  the  peopl 
whom  the  Egyptians  called  a  nation  of  lepers.     Ii 
the  transformation  of  his  shepherd's   staff  is  th 
glorification  of  the  simple  pastoral  life,  of  whic 
that  staff  was  the  symbol,  into  the  great  caree 
which  lay  before   it.      The  humble   yet   wondei 

vorking  crook  is,  in  the  history  of  Moses,  as  Ewal 
finely  observes,  what  the  despised  Cross  is  in  th 
first  history  of  Christianity. 


MOSES 


427 


In  this  call  of  Moses,  as  of  the  aj  oslles  liter* 
ards,  the  man  is  swallowed  up  in  the  cause.  Yet 
lis  is  the  passage  in  his  history  which,  nore  than 
other,  brings  out  his  outward  and  domestic 
elations. 

He  returns  to  Egypt  from  his  exile.  His  Arabian 
wife  and  her  two  infant  sons  are  with  him.  She  is 
:ated  with  them  on  the  ass — (the  ass  was  known  as 
le  animal  peculiar  to  the  Jewish  people  from  Jacob 
own  to  David).  He  apparently  walks  by  their  side 
nth  his  shepherd's  staff.  (The  LXX.  substitute  the 
eneral  term  ret  uirofi/yio.) 

On  the  journey  back  to  Egypt  a  mysterious  in- 
ident  occurred  in  the  family,  which  can  only  be 
xplained  with  difficulty.  The  most  probable  ex- 
lanation  seems  to  be,  that  at  the  caravanserai 
ither  Moses  or  Gershom  (the  context  of  the  pre- 
eding  verses,  iv.  22,  23,  rather  points  to  the  latter) 
was  struck  with  what  seemed  to  be  a  mortal  illness, 
n  some  way,  not  apparent  to  us,  this  illness  was 
onnected  by  Zipporah  with  the  fact  that  her  son 
lad  not  been  circumcised — whether  in  the  general 
icglect  of  that  rite  amongst  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, 
r  in  consequence  of  his  birth  in  Midian.  She 
nstantly  performed  the  rite,  and  threw  the  sharp 
nstrument,  stained  with  the  fresh  blood,  at  the 
eet  of  her  husband,  exclaiming  in  the  agony  of  a 
mother's  anxiety  for  the  life  of  her  child — "  A 
iloody  husband  thou  art,  to  cause  the  death  of  my 
on."  Then,  when  the  recovery  from  the  illness 
ook  place  (whether  of  Moses  or  Gershom),  she 
exclaims  again,  "  A  bloody  husband  still  thou  art, 
>ut  not  so  as  to  cause  the  child's  death,  but  only  to 
>ring  about  his  circumcision."  * 

It  would  seem  to  have  been  in  consequence  of  this 
vent,  whatever  it  was,  that  the  wife  and  her  children 
were  sent  back  to  Jethro,  and  remained  with  him 
till  Moses  joined  them  at  Rephidim  (Ex.  xviii.  2-6), 
which  is  the  last  time  that  she  is  distinctly  men- 
;ioned.  In  Num.  xii.  1  we  hear  of  a  Cushite  wife 
who  gave  umbrage  to  Miriam  and  Aaron.  This 
may  be — (1)  an  Ethiopian  (Cushite)  wife,  taken 
after  Zipporah's  death  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  229). 
(2)  The  Ethiopian  princess  of  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  10. 
§2) :  (but  that  whole  story  is  probably  only  an 
inference  from  Num.  xii.  1).  (3)  Zipporah  herself, 
which  is  rendered  probable  by  the  juxtaposition  oi 
Cushan  with  Midian  in  Hab.  iii.  7. 

The  two  sons  also  sink  into  obscurity.  Theiir 
names,  though  of  Levitical  origin,  relate  to  their 
foreign  birth-place.  Gershom,  "  stranger,"  and 
Eli-ezer,  "  God  is  my  help,"  commemorated  their 
father's  exile  and  escape  (Ex.  xviii.  3,  4).  Gershom 
was  the  father  of  the  wandering  Levite  Jonathan 
(Judg.  xviii.  30),  and  the  ancestor  of  Shebuel, 
David's  chief  treasurer  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  16,  xxiv.  20). 
Eliezer  had  an  only  son,  Rehabiah  (1  Chr.  xxiii.  17), 
who  was  the  ancestor  of  a  numerous  but  obscure 
progeny,  whose  representative  in  David's  time — the 
last  descendant  of  Moses  known  to  us — was  Shelo- 
mith,  guard  of  the  consecrated  treasures  in  the 
Temple  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  25-28). 

After  this  parting  he  advanced  into  the  desert, 
and  at  the  same  spot  where  he  had  had  his  vision 
encountered  Aaron  (Ex.  iv.  27).  From  that  meet 
ing  and  cooperation  we  have  the  first  distinct  in- 


'  The  Mussulman  legends  speak  of  his  white  shinin 
band  as  the  instrument  of  his  miracles  (D'Hcrbelot 
Hence  "  the  white  hand"  is  proverbial  for  the  healing  ar 

'  So  Ewald  (Geschiclite.,  vol.  ii.  pi.  2,  p.  105),  taking  th 
sickness  to  have  visited  Moses.  Roscnmiiller  makes  Oe 


shorn  the  victim,  and  makes  Zipporah  address  Jehovah, 
the  Arabic  word  for  "  marriage "  being  a  synonym  to 
"  circumcision."  It  is  possible  that  on  this  story  is 
founded  the  tradition  of  Artapanus  (Eus.  Pr.  Kv.  ix.  27) 
that  the  Ethiopians  derived  circumcision  fro 


428 


MOSBS 


dication  of  his  personal  appearance  aud  character. 
The  traditional  representatit  ns  of  him  in  some 
respects  well  agree  with  that  which  we  derive 
from  Michael  Angelo's  famous  statue  in  the  church 
of  S.  Pietro  in  Vinculi  at  Rome.  Long  shaggy 
bair  and  beard  is  described  as  his  characteristic 
equally  by  Josephus,  Diodorus  (i.  p.  424),  and 
Artapanus  (KO/IX^TTJS,  apud  Eus.  Pr.  Ev.  ix.  27). 
To  this  Artapanus  adds  the  curious  touch  that  it 
was  of  a  reddish  hue,  tinged  with  gray  (iru^iiojs, 
wo\i6f).  The  traditions  of  his  beauty  and  size  as 
a  child  have  been  already  mentioned.  They  are 
continued  to  his  manhood  in  the  Gentile  descrip 
tions.  "  Tall  and  dignified,"  says  Artapanus  (/«£• 
Kpos,  ofjw/xoTwcbs)  — "  Wise  and  beautiful  as  his 
father  Joseph  "  (with  a  curious  confusion  of  genea 
logies),  says  Justin  (xxxvi.  2). 

But  beyond  the  slight  glance  at  his  infantine 
beauty,  no  hint  of  this  grand  personality  is  given 
in  the  Bible.  What  is  described  is  rather  the 
reverse.  The  only  point  there  brought  out  is  a 
singular  and  unlocked  for  infirmity.  "  0  my  Lord, 
I  am  not  eloquent,  neither  heretofore  nor  since  Thou 
hast  spoken  to  Thy  servant ;  but  I  am  slow  of 
speech  and  of  a  slow  tongue. . . .  How  shall  Pharaoh 
hear  me,  which  am  of  uncircumcised  lips?"  (f.  e. 
slow,  without  words,  stammering,  hesitating:  laxvi- 
(puivos  Kal  &apvy\<a<rffos,  LXX.),  his  "speech 
contemptible,"  like  St.  Paul's — like  the  English 
Cromwell  (comp.  Carlyle's  Cromwell,  ii.  219) — like 
the  first  efforts  of  the  Greek  Demosthenes.  In  the  so 
lution  of  this  difficulty  which  Moses  offers,  we  read 
both  the  disinterestedness,  which  is  the  most  distinct 
trait  of  his  personal  character,  and  the  future  rela 
tion  of  the  two  brothers.  "  Send,  I  pray  Thee,  by 
the  hand  of  him  whom  Thou  wilt  send  "  (i.  e. "  make 
any  one  Thy  apostle  rather  than  me").  In  outward 
appearance  this  prayer  was  granted  Aaron  spoke 
and  acted  for  Moses,  and  was  the  permanent  in 
heritor  of  the  sacred  staff  of  power.  But  Moses 
was  the  inspiring  soul  behind ;  and  so  as  time  rolls 
on,  Aaron,  the  prince  and  priest,  has  almost  dis 
appeared  from  view,  and  Moses,  the  dumb,  back 
ward,  disinterested  prophet,  is  in  appearance,  what 
he  was  in  truth,  the  foremost  leader  of  the  chosen 
people. 

III.  The  history  of  Moses  henceforth  is  the  his 
tory  of  Israel  for  forty  years.  But  as  the  incidents 
of  this  history  are  related  in  other  articles,  under 
the  heads  of  EGYPT,  EXODUS,  PLAGUES,  SINAI, 
LAW,  PASSOVER,  WANDERINGS,  WILDERNESS,  it 
will  be  best  to  confine  ourselves  here  to  such  indica 
tions  of  his  personal  character  as  transpire  through 
the  general  framework  of  the  narrative. 

It  is  important  to  trace  his  relation  to  his  im 
mediate  circle  of  followers.  In  the  Exodus,  he 
takes  the  decisive  lead  on  the  night  of  the  flight. 
Up  to  that  point  he  and  Aaron  appear  almost  on  an 
equality.  But  after  that,  Moses  is  usually  men 
tioned  alone.  Aaron  still  held  the  second  place, 
but  the  character  of  interpreter  to  Moses  which  he 
had  borne  in  speaking  to  Pharaoh  withdraws,  and 
H  would  seem  as  if  Moses  henceforth  became  alto 
gether  what  hitherto  he  had  only  been  in  part,  the 
prophet  of  the  people.  Another  who  occupies  a 
place  nearly  equal  to  Aaron,  though  we  know  but 
little  of  him,  is  HUE,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  husband 
of  Miriam,  and  grandfather  of  the  artist  Bezaleel 
(Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  2,  §4).  He  and  Aaron  are  the 
chief  supporters  of  Moses  in  moments  of  weariness 
or  excitement.  His  adviser  in  regard  to  the  route 
through  the  wilderness  as  well  as  in  the  judicial 


MOSES 

arrangements,  was,  as  we  have  seen,  JuTiiiiO.  His 
servant,  occupying  the  same  relation  to  him  as  Elisha 
to  Elijah,  or  Gehazi  to  Elisha,  was  the  youthful 
Hoshea  (afterwards  JOSHUA).  MIRIAM  alwaye 
held  the  independent  position  to  which  her  a?e 
entitled  her.  Her  part  was  to  supply  the  voice 
and  song  to  her  brother's  prophetic  power. 

But  Moses  is  incontestably  the  chief  personage  of 
the  history,  in  a  sense  in  which  no  one  else  is  de 
scribed  before  or  since.  In  the  narrative,  the  phrase 
is  constantly  recurring,  "The  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,"  "  Moses  spake  unto  the  children  of  Israel." 
In  the  traditions  of  the  desert,  whether  late  or 
early,  his  name  predominates  over  that  of  everj 
one  else,  "  The  Wells  of  Moses  "—on  the  shores  01 
the  Red  Sea.  "  The  Mountain  of  Moses  "  (Jebel 
Mfisa) — near  the  convent  of  St.  Catherine.  The 
Ravine  of  Moses  (Shuk  Mflsa) — at  Mount  St.  Cathe 
rine.  The  Valley  of  Moses  (Wady  Mftsa) — at 
Petra.  "  The  Books  of  Moses "  are  so  called  (as 
afterwards  the  Books  of  Samuel),  in  all  probability 
from  his  being  the  chief  subject  of  them.  The  very 
word  "  Mosaic  "  has  been  in  later  times  applied  (as 
the  proper  name  of  no  other  saint  of  the  0.  T.)  to 
the  whole  religion.  Even  as  applied  to  tesselated 
pavement  ("  Mosaic,"  Musivum,  /jLovcrewv,  IJLOV- 
ffaitc6v),  there  is  some  probability  that  the  expres 
sion  is  derived  from  the  variegated  pavement  of  the 
later  Temple,  which  had  then  become  the  represen 
tative  of  the  religion  of  Moses  (see  an  Essay  of 
Redslob,  Zeitschrift  der  Deutsch.  Morgenl.  Gesells. 
xiv.  663). 

It  has  sometimes  been  attempted  to  reduce  this 
great  character  into  a  mere  passive  instrument  of 
the  Divine  Will,  as  though  he  had  himself  borne 
no  conscious  part  in  the  actions  in  which  he  figures, 
or  the  messages  which  he  delivers.  This,  however, 
is  as  incompatible  with  the  general  tenor  of  the 
Scriptural  account,  as  it  is  with  the  common  lan 
guage  in  which  he  has  been  described  by  the  Church 
in  all  ages.  The  frequent  addresses  of  the  Divinity 
to  him  no  more  contravene  his  personal  activity 
and  intelligence,  than  in  the  case  of  Elijah,  Isaiah, 
or  St.  Paul.  In  the  N.  T.  the  Mosaic  legislation  is 
expressly  ascribed  to  him : — "  Moses  gave  you  cir 
cumcision"  (Johnvii.  22).  "Moses,  because  of  the 
hardness  of  your  hearts,  suffered  you  "  (Matt.  six.  8). 
"  Did  not  Moses  give  you  the  law?  "  (John  vii.  19). 
"Moses  accuseth  you  "  (John  v.  45).  St.  Paul  goes 
so  far  as  to  speak  of  him  as  the  founder  of  ths 
Jewish  religion:  "They  were  all  baptized  unto 
Moses  "  (1  Cor.  x.  2).  He  is  constantly  called  "a 
Prophet."  In  the  poetical  language  of  the  0.  T. 
(Num.  xxi.  18  ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  21),  and  in  the  popular 
language  both  of  Jews  and  Christians,  he  is  knowr 
as  "  the  Lawgiver."  The  terms  in  which  his  legis 
lation  is  described  by  Philo  (  V,  M.  ii.  1-4)  is  deci 
sive  as  to  the  ancient  Jewish  view.  He  must  be 
considered,  like  all  the  saints  and  heroes  of  the  Bible, 
as  a  man,  of  marvellous  gifts,  raised  up  by  Divine 
Providence,  for  a  special  purpose ;  but  as  led,  both 
by  his  own  disposition  and  by  the  peculiarity 
of  the  Revelation  which  he  received,  into  a  closer 
communion  with  the  invisible  world  than  was  vouch 
safed  to  any  other  in  the  Old  Testament. 

There  are  two  main  characters  in  which  he  ap 
pears,  as  a  Leader  and  as  a  Prophet.  The  two  are 
more  frequently  combined  in  the  East  than  in  the 
West.  Several  remarkable  instances  occur  in  the 
history  of  Mahometanism  :  —  Mahomet  himself, 
Abd-el-Kader  in  Algeria,  Schamyl  in  Circassia. 

(a.)  As  a  Leader,  his  life  divides  itself  mto  the  thre^ 


MOSES 

epoch-* — of  the  march  to  Sinai ;  the  march  from 
Sinai  to  Kadesh  ;  and  the  conquest  of  the  Trans- 
jordanic  kingdoms.  Of  his  natural  gifts  in  this 
capacity,  we  have  but  few  means  of  judging.  The 
two  main  difficulties  which  he  encountered  were 
the  reluctance  of  the  people  to  submit  to  his  guid 
ance,  and  the  impracticable  nature  of  the  country 
which  they  had  to  traverse.  The  patience  with 
which  he  bore  their  murmurs  is  often  described — 
at  the  Red  Sea,  at  the  apostacy  of  the  golden  calf, 
at  the  rebellion  of  Korah,  at  the  complaints  of  Aaron 
and  Miriam.  The  incidents  with  which  his  name 
was  specially  connected  both  in  the  sacred  narrative, 
and  in  the  Jewish,  Arabian,  and  heathen  traditions, 
were  those  of  supplying  water,  when  most  wanted. 
This  is  the  only  point  in  his  life  noted  by  Tacitus, 
who  describes  him  as  guided  to  a  spring  of  water 
by  a  herd  of  wild  asses  (Hist.  v.  3).  In  the  Penta 
teuch  these  supplies  of  water  take  place  at  Marah, 
at  Horeb,  at  Kadesh,  and  in  the  land  of  Moab.  That 
at  Marah  is  produced  by  the  sweetening  of  waters 
through  a  tree  in  the  desert,  those  at  Horeb  and 
at  Kadesh  by  the  opening  of  a  rift  in  the  "  rock  " 
and  in  the  "cliff;"  that  in  Moab,  by  the  united 
efforts,  under  his  direction,  of  the  chiefs  and  of  the 
people  (Num.  xxi.  18).f  (See  Philo,  V,  M.  i.  40.) 
Of  the  three  first  of  these  incidents,  traditional 
sites,  bearing  his  name,  are  shown  in  the  desert 
at  the  present  day,  though  most  of  them  are 
rejected  by  modem  travellers.  One  is  AyAn 
Mftsa,  ''the  wells  of  Moses,"  immediately  south 
of  Suez,  which  the  tradition  (probably  from  a 
confusion  with  Marah)  ascribes  to  the  rod  of  Moses. 
Of  the  water  at  Horeb,  two  memorials  are  shown. 
One  is  the  Shuk  MAsa,  or  "cleft  of  Moses," 
in  the  side  of  Mount  St.  Catherine,  and  the  other 
is  the  remarkable  stone,  first  mentioned  expressly 
iu  the  Koran  fii.  57),  which  exhibits  the  12  marks 
or  mouths  out  of  which  the  water  is  supposed  to 
have  issued  for  the  12  tribes.h  The  fourth  is  the 
celebrated  "Sik,"  or  ravine,  by  which  Petra  is 
approached  from  the  East,  and  which,  from  the 
story  of  its  being  torn  open  by  the  rod  of  Moses, 
has  given  his  name  (the  Wady  Musa)  to  the 
whole  valley.  The  quails  and  the  manna  are  less 
directly  ascribed  to  the  intercession  of  Moses.  The 
brazen  serpent  that  was  lifted  up  as  a  sign  of  the 
Divine  protection  against  the  snakes  of  the  desert 
(Num.  xxi.  8,  9),  was  directly  connected  with  his 
name,  down  to  the  latest  times  of  the  nation  (2  K. 
xviii.  4 ;  John  iii.  14).  Of  all  the  relics  of  his  time, 
with  the  exception  of  the  Ark,  it  was  the  one 
longest  preserved.  [NEHUSHTAN.] 

The  route  through  the  wilderness  is  described 
as  having  been  made  under  his  guidance.  The 
particular  spot  of  the  encampment  is  fixed  by  the 
cloudy  pillar.  But  the  direction  of  the  people  first 
to  the  Red  Sea,  and  then  to  Mount  Sinai  (where 
he  had  been  before),  is  communicated  through 
Moses,  or  given  by  him.  According  to  the  tradition 
of  Memphis,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  was  effected 
through  Moses's  knowledge  of  the  movement  of 
the  tide  (Bus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  27).  And  in  all  the 
wanderings  from  Mount  Sinai  he  is  said  to  have 
had  the  assistance  of  Jethro.  In  the  Mussulman 
legends,  as  if  to  avoid  this  appearance  of  human 
aid,  the  place  of  Jethro  is  taken  by  El  Khudr,  the 


K  An  illustration  of  these  passages  is  to  be  funnel  in 
ar.e  of  the  representations  of  Rameses  II.  (contemporary 
«AUi  Moses),  in  like  manner  calling  ont  water  from  the 
ic.sert-rocb!  (see  Brugsch,  Hist,  de  I'Eg.  i.  p.  153). 

*  See  S.  <fc  P.,  46-7,  also  Wolffs  Travels.  2nd  Ed.  125. 


MOSES  4'_>9 

mysterious  benefactor  of  mankind  (D'Herhtlot, 
Moussa).  On  approaching  Palestine  the  office  ol 
the  leader  becomes  blended  with  that  of  the  general 
or  the  conqueror.  By  Moses  the  spies  were  sent  to 
explore  the  country.  Against  his  advice  took  place 
the  first  disastrous  battle  at  Herman.  To  his  guidance 
is  ascribed  the  circuitous  route  by  which  the  nation 
approached  Palestine  from  the  East,  and  to  his  gene 
ralship  the  two  successful  campaigns  in  which  SIHDN 
and  OG  were  defeated.  The  narrative  is  told  so 
shortly,  that  we  are  in  danger  of  forgetting  that  at 
this  last  stage  of  his  life  Moses  must  have  been  as 
much  a  conqueror  and  victorious  soldier  as  Joshua. 

(6.)  His  character  as  a  Prophet  is,  from  the  nature 
of  the  case,  more  distinctly  brought  out.  He  is  the 
first  as  he  is  the  greatest  example  of  a  Prophet  in 
the  0.  T.  The  name  is  indeed  applied  to  Abraham 
before  (Gen.  xx.  7),  but  so  casually  as  not  to  enforce 
our  attention.  But,  in  the  case  of  Moses,  it  is  givea 
with  peculiar  emphasis.  In  a  certain  sense,  he  ap 
pears  as  the  centre  of  a  prophetic  circle,  now  for  the 
first  time  named.  His  brother  and  sister  were  both 
endowed  v.*ith  prophetic  gifts.  Aaron's  fluent  speech 
enabled  him  to  act  the  part  of  Prophet  for  Moses 
in  the  first  instance,  and  Miriam  is  expressly  called 
"  the  Prophetess."  The  seventy  elders,  and  Eldad 
and  Medad  also,  all  "  prophesied  "  (Num.  xi.  25-27). 

But  Moses  (at  least  after  the  Exodus)  rose  high 
above  all  these.  The  others  are  spoken  of  as  more 
or  less  inferior.  Their  communications  were  made 
to  them  in  dreams  and  figures  (Deut.  xiii.  1-4 ; 
Num.  xii.  6).  But  "Moses  was  not  so."  With 
him  the  Divine  revelations  were  made,  "  mouth  to 
mouth,  even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark  speeches, 
and  the  similitude  of  JEHOVAH  shall  he  behold" 
(Num.  xii.  8).  In  the  Mussulman  legends  his  sur 
name  is  "  Kelim  Allah,"  "  the  spoken  to  by  God." 
Of  the  especial  modes  of  this  more  direct  communi 
cation,  four  great  examples  are  given,  corresponding 
to  four  critical  epochs  in  his  historical  career,  which 
help  us  in  some  degree  to  understand  what  is  meant 
by  these  expressions  in  the  sacred  text.  (1.)  The 
appearance  of  the  Divine  presence  in  the  flaming 
acacia-tree  has  been  already  noticed.  The  usual 
pictorial  representations  of  that  scene — of  a  winged 
human  form  in  the  midst  of  the  bush,  belongs  to 
Philo  ( V.  M.  i.  12),  not  to  the  Bible.  No  form 
is  described.  "  The  Angel,"  or  "  Messenger,"  is 
spoken  of  as  being  "in  the  flame."  On  this  it 
was  that  Moses  was  afraid  to  look,  and  hid  his 
face,  in  order  to  hear  the  Divine  voice  (Ex.  iii. 
2-6).  (2.)  In  the  giving  of  the  Law  from  Mount 
Sinai,  the  outward  form  of  the  revelation  was  a 
thick  darkness  as  of  a  thunder-cloud,  out  of  which 
proceeded  a  voice  ("Ex.  xix.  19,  xx.  21).  The  re 
velation  on  this  occasion  was  especially  of  the  Name 
of  JEHOVAH.  Outside  this  cloud  Moses  himself 
remained  on  the  mountain  (Ex.  xxiv.  1,  2,  15),  and 
received  the  voice,  as  from  the  cloud,  which  re 
vealed  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  a  short  code  of 
laws  in  addition  (Ex.  xx.-xxiii).  On  two  occasions 
he  is  described  as  having  penetrated  within  the 
darkness,  and  remained  there,  successively,  for  two 
periods  of  forty  days,  of  which  the  second  was  spent  in 
absolute  seclusion  and  fasting  (Ex.  xxiv.  18,  xxxiv. 
28).  On  the  first  occasion  he  received  instiuctions 
respecting  the  tabernacle,  from  "  a  pattern  showed  to 
him  "  (xxv.  9, 40 ;  xxvi.,  xxvii.),  and  respecting  the 
priesthood  (xxviii.-xxxi.).  Of  the  second  occasion 
hardly  anything  is  told  us.  But  each  of  these  periods 
was  concluded  by  the  production  of  the  two  slabs  or 
tables  of  granite,  ceauuning  the  successive  editicns 


430 


MOSES 


of  the  Ten  Commandments  (Ex.  xxxii.  15,  16).  On 
the  first  of  the  two  occasions  the  ten  moral  com 
mandments  are  those  commonly  so  called  (comp. 
Ex.  xx.  1-17,  xxxii.  15 ;  Deut.  v.  6-22).  On  the 
second  occasion  (if  we  take  the  literal  sense  of  Ex. 
xxxiv.  27,  28),  they  are  the  ten  (chiefly)  ceremo 
nial  commandments  of  Ex.  xxxiv.  14-26.  The  first 
are  said  to  have  been  the  writing  of  God  (Ex.  xxxi. 
18,  xxxii.  16;  Deut.  v.  22);  the  second,  the 
writing  of  Moses  (Ex.  xxxiv.  28).  (3)  It  was  nearly 
at  the  close  of  those  communications  in  the  moun 
tains  of  Sinai  that  an  especial  revelation  was  made 
to  him  personally,  answering  in  some  degree  to  that 
which  tii.st  callol  him  to  his  mission.  In  the  de 
spondency  produced  by  the  apostacy  of  the  molten 
calf,  he  besought  JEHOVAH  to  show  him  "His 
glory."  The  wish  was  thoroughly  Egyptian.  The 
same  is  recorded  of  Amenoph,  the  Pharaoh  pre 
ceding  the  Exodus.  But  the  Divine  answer  is  tho 
roughly  Biblical.  It  announced  that  an  actual  vision 
of  God  was  impossible.  "  Thou  canst  not  see  my 
face  ;  for  there  shall  no  man  see  my  face  and  live." 
He  was  commanded  to  hew  two  blocks  of  stone, 
like  those  which  he  had  destroyed.  He  was  to 
come  absolutely  alone.  Even  the  flocks  and  herds 
which  fed  in  the  neighbouring  valleys  were  to  be 
removed  out  of  the  sight  of  the  mountain  (Ex. 
xxxiii.  18,  20 ;  xxxiv.  1,  3).  He  took  bis  place  on  a 
well-known  or  prominent  rock  ("  the  rock  ")  (xxxiii. 
21).  The  cloud  passed  by  (xxxiv.  5,  xxxiii.  22). 
A  voice  proclaimed  the  two  immutable  attributes 
of  God,  Justice  and  Love — in  vords  which  became 
part  of  the  religious  creed  of  Israel  and  of  the  world 
(xxxiv.  6,  7).  The  importance  of  this  incident  in 
the  life  of  Moses  is  attested  not  merely  by  the 
place  which  it  holds  in  the  sacred  record,  but  by 
the  deep  hold  that  it  has  taken  of  the  Mussulman 
traditions,  and  the  local  legends  of  Mount  Sinai. 
It  is  told,  with  some  characteristic  variations,  in 
the  Koran  (vii.  139),  and  is  commemorated  in  the 
Mussulman  chapel  erected  on  the  summit  of  the 
mountain  which  from  this  incident  (rather  than 
from  any  other)  has  taken  the  name  of  the  Moun 
tain  of  Moses  (jebel  Musa).  A  cavity  is  shown  in 
the  rock,  as  produced  by  the  pressure  of  the  back 
of  Moses,  when  he  shrank  from  the  Divine  glory' 
(S.  #  P.  30). 

(4).  The  fourth  mode  of  Divine  manifestation 
was  that  which  is  described  as  commencing  at  this 
juncture,  and  which  continued  with  more  or  less  con 
tinuity  through  the  rest  of  his  career.  Immediately 
after  the  catastrophe  of  the  worship  of  the  calf,  and 
apparently  in  consequence  of  it,  Moses  removed  the 
chief  tent k  outside  the  camp,  and  invested  it  with 
a  sacred  character  under  the  name  of  "  the  Tent  or 
Tabernacle  of  the  Congregation"  (xxxiii.  7).  This 
tent  became  henceforth  the  chief  scene  of  his  com 
munications  with  God.  He  left  the  camp,  and  it  is 
described  how,  as  in  the  expectation  of  some  great 
event,  all  the  people  rose  up  and  stood  every  man 
at  his  tent  door,  and  looked — gazing  after  Moses 
until  he  disappeared  within  the  tent.  As  he  disap 
peared  the  entrance  was  closed  behind  him  by  the 
cloudy  pillar,  at  the  sight  of  which"  the  peojie 
prostrated  themselves  (xxxiii.  10).  The  communi 
cations  within  the  tent  were  described  as  being 
still  more  intimate  than  those  on  the  mountain. 
'•  JEHOVAH  spake  unto  Moses  face  to  face,  as  a 


*  It  Is  this  moment  which  is  seized  in  the  recent  senlp 
tnre  by  Mr.  Woolner  in  Llandaff  Cathedral. 

*  According  to  the  LXX.  it,  was  his  cvn  t^-.V 

*  Kwald.  titerthiimer.  p.  ;-29. 


MOSES 

man  speaketh  unto  his  friend  "  (xxxiii.  1 1).  He  waa 
apparently  accompanied  on  these  mysterious  visit* 
by  his  attendant  Hoshea  (or  Joshua),  who  remained 
in  the  tent  after  his  master  had  left  it  (xxxiii.  11). 
All  the  revelations  contained  in  the  books  of  Leviticus 
and  Numbers  seem  to  have  been  made  in  this  manner 
(Lev.  i.  1 ;  Num.  i.  1). 

It  was  during  these  communications  that  a  pecu 
liarity  is  mentioned  which  apparently  had  not  been 
seen  before.  It  was  on  his  final  descent  from 
Mount  Sinai,  after  his  second  long  seclusion,  that  a 
splendour  shcne  on  his  face,  as  if  from  the  glory  of 
the  Divine  Presence.  It  is  from  the  Vulgate  trans 
lation  of  "  ray  "  (pp),  "  cornutam  habens  faciem," 
that  the  conventional  representation  of  the  horns  of 
Moses  has  arisen.  The  rest  of  the  story  is  told  so 
differently  in  the  different  versions  that  both  musl 
be  given.  (1.)  In  the  A.  V.  and  most  Protestant 
versions,  Moses  is  said  to  wear  a  veil  in  order  to 
hide  the  splendour.  In  order  to  produce  this  sense, 
the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  xxxiv.  33  reads,  "  and  [till]  Moses 
had  done  speaking  with  them  " — and  other  versions, 
"  he  had  put  on  the  veil."  (2.)  In  the  LXX.  and 
the  Vulgate,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  said  to  put  on 
the  veil,  not  during,  but  after,  the  conversation 
with  the  people — in  order  to  hide,  not  the  splendour, 
but  the  vanishing  away  of  the  splendour ;  and  to 
have  worn  it  till  the  moment  •  of  his  return  to  the 
Divine  Presence  in  order  to  rekindle  the  light  there. 
With  this  reading  agrees  the  obvious  meaning  of 
the  Hebrew  words,  and  it  is  this  rendering  of  the 
sense,  which  is  followed  by  St.  Paul  in  2  Cor.  iii.  13, 
14,  where  he  contrasts  the  fearlessness  of  the  Apos 
tolic  teaching  with  the  concealment  of  that  of  the 
0.  T.  "  We  have  no  fear,  as  Moses  had,  that  our 
glory  will  pass  away." 

There  is  another  form  of  the  prophetic  gift, 
in  which  Moses  more  nearly  resembles  the  later 
prophets.  We  need  not  here  determine  (what  is 
best  considered  under  the  several  books  which  bear 
his  name,  PENTATEUCH,  &c.)  the  extent  of  his 
authorship,  or  the  period  at  which  these  books 
were  put  together  in  their  present  form.  Eupole- 
mus  (Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  26)  makes  him  the 
author  of  letters.  But  of  this  the  Hebrew  narra 
tive  gives  no  indication.  There  are  two  portions 
of  the  Pentateuch,  and  two  only,  of  which  the 
actual  writing  is  ascribed  to  Moses:  (1.)  The 
second  Edition  of  the  Ten  Commandments  (Ex. 
xxx'iv.  28),  (2.)  The  register  of  the  Stations  in  the 
Wilderness  (Num.  xxxiii.  1).  But  it  is  clear 
that  the  prophetical  office,  as  represented  in  the 
history  of  Moses,  included  the  poetical  form  of  com 
position  which  characterizes  the  Jewish  prophecy 
generally.  These  poetical  utterances,  whether  con 
nected  with  Moses  by  ascription  or  by  actual  au 
thorship,  enter  so  largely  into  the  full  Biblical  con 
ception  of  his  character,  that  they  must  be  here 
mentioned. 

1 .  "  The  song  which  Moses  and  the  children 
of  Israel  sung "  (after  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea, 
Ex.  xv.  1-19).  It  is.  unquestionably,  the  earliest 
written  account  of  that  event ;  and,  although  it  may 
have  been  in  part,  according  to  the  conjectures  of 
Ewald  and  Bunsen,  adapted  to  the  sanctuary  of 
Gerizim  or  Shiloh,  yet  its  framework  and  ideas  are 
essentially  Mosaic.  It  is  probably  this  song  to 
which  allusion  is  made  ;n  Rev.  xv.  2,  3 :  "  They  stand 


In  Ex.  xxxiv.  34,  35.  the  Vulgate,  apparently  by  fol 
lowing  a  different  reading,   DP1X.    "  with  them "   tot 
with  him,"  differs  botli  from  the  lA'X.  ami  A  V. 


MOSES 

•n  the  ssa  of  glass  mingled  with  fire  ...  and  sing 
Uie  song  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God." 

'2.  A  fragment  of  a  war -song  against  Amalek — 
"  As  the  hand  is  on  the  throne  of  Jehovah, 
&>  will  Jehovah  war  with  Amalek 
From  generation  to  generation." 

(Ex.  xvii.  16). 

3.  A  fragment  of  a  lyrical  burst  of  indignation — 
"  Not  the  voice  of  them  that  shout  for  mastery, 

Nor  the  voice  of  them  that  cry  for  being  overcome, 
But  tbe  noise  of  them  that  sing  do  1  hear." 

(Ex.  xxxii.  18). 

4.  Probably,  either  from  him  or  his  immediate 
prophetic  followers,  the  fragments  of  war-songs  in 
Num.  xxi.  14, 15,  27-30,  preserved  in  the  "  book  of 
the  wars  of  Jehovah,"    Num.   xxi.   14 ;    and  the 
jddress  to  the  well,  xxi.  16,  17,  18. 

5.  The  song  of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxii.  1-43),  setting 
forth  the  greatness  and  the  failings  of  Israel.     It  is 
remarkable  as  bringing  out  with  much  force  the  idea 
of  God  as  the  Rock  (xxxii.  4,  15,  18,  30,  31,  37). 
The  special  allusions  to  the  pastoral  riches  of  Israel 
point  to  the  trans-Jordanic  territory  as  the  scene  of 
its  composition  (xxxii.  13,  14). 

6.  The  blessing  of  Moses  on  the  tribes  (Deut. 
xxxiii.  1-29).     If  there  are  some  allusions  in  this 
psalm  to  circumstances  only  belonging  to  a  later 
time  (such  as  the  migration  of  Dan,  xxxiii.  22),  yet 
there  is  no  one,  in  whose  mouth  it  could  be  so  ap 
propriately  placed,  as  in  that  of  the  great  leader  on 
the  eve  of  the  final  conquest  of  Palestine.     This 
poem  combined  with  the  similar  blessing  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xlix.),  embraces  a  complete  collective  view  ol 
the  characteristics  of  the  tribes. 

7.  The  90th  Psalm,  "  A  prayer  of  Moses,  the 
man  of  God."     The  title,  like  all  the  titles  of  the 
Psalms  is  of  doubtful  authority — and  the  Psalm 
has  often  been  referred  to  a  later  author.     But 
Ewald  (Psalmen,  p.  91)  thinks  that,  even  though 
this  be  the  case,  it  still  breathes  the  spirit  of  the 
venerable  lawgiver.     There  is  something  extremely 
characteristic  of  Moses,  in  the  view  taken,  as  from 
tiie  summit  or  base  of  Sinai,  of  the  eternity  of  God 
greater  even    than  the  eternity  of  mountains,  in 
contrast  with  the  fleeting  generations  of  man.    On 
expression  in  the  Psalm,  as  to  the  limit  of  human 
life  (70,  or  at  most  80  years)  in  verse  10,  would 
if  it  be  Mosaic,  fix  its  date  to  the  stay  at  Sinai 
Jerome  (Adv.  Ruffin.  i.  §13),  on  the  authority  o 
Origen,  ascribes  the  next  eleven  Psaims  to  Moses 
Cosmas  (Cosmogr.  v.  223)  supposes  that  it  is  by  a 
younger  Moses  of  the  time  of  David. 

How  far  the  gradual  development  of  these  re 
velations  or  prophetic  utterances  had  any  connexior 
with  his  own  character  and  history,  the  material 
are  not  such  as  to  justify  any  decisive  judgment 
His  Egyptian  education  must,  on  the  one  hand,  hav 
supplied  him  with  much  of  the  ritual  of  the  Israelit 
worship.  The  coincidences  between  the  arrange 
ments  of  the  priesthood,  the  dress,  the  sacrifices 
the  ark,  in  the  two  countries,  are  decisive.  On  th 
other  hand,  the  proclamation  of  the  Unity  of  Go 
not  merely  as  a  doctrine  confined  to  the  priestl 
order,  but  communicated  to  the  whole  nation,  im 
plies  distinct  antagonism,  almost  a  conscious  reco 
against  the  Egyptian  system.  And  the  absence  o 
the  doctrine  of  a  future  state  ("without  adopting  t 
its  full  extent  the  paradox  of  Warburton)  proves  a 
least  a  remarkable  independence  of  the  Egyptia 
theology,  in  which  that  great  doctrine  held  so  pn 
minent  a  place.  Some  modern  critics  have  suppose 
that  the  Levitical  ritual  was  an  after-growth  of  tl 


MOSES 


431 


osaic  system,  necessitated  or  suggested  by  the  in 
capacity  ot  the  Israelites  to  retain  the  higher  and 
mpler  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Unity, — as  proved  by 
leir  return  to  the  worship  of  the  Heliopolitan  call 
nder  the  sanction  of  the  brother  of  Moses  himself, 
here  is  no  direct  statement  of  this  connexion  in 
he  sacred  narrative.  But  there  are  indirect  indi- 
tions  of  it,  sufficient  to  give  some  colour  to  such 
n  explanation.  The  event  itself  is  described  as  a 
•isis  in  the  life  of  Moses,  almost  equal  to  that  in 
fhich  he  received  his  first  call.  In  an  agony  of 
age  and  disappointment  he  destroyed  the  rnonu- 
nent  of  his  first  revelation  (Ex.  xxxii.  19).  He 
irew  up  his  sacred  mission  (ib.  32).  He  craved 
nd  he  received  a  new  and  special  revelation  of  tho 
ttributes  of  God  to  console  him  (i&.  xxxiii.  18). 
\.  fresh  start  was  made  in  his  career  (ib.  xxxiv.  29). 
[is  relation  with  his  countrymen  henceforth  became 
more  awful  and  mysterious  (ib.  32-35).  In  point 
f  fact,  the  greater  part  of  the  details  of  the  Levi- 
cal  system  were  subsequent  to  this  catastrophe, 
'he  institution  of  the  Levitical  tribe  grew  directly 
ut  of  it  (xxxii.  26).  And  the  inferiority  of  this 
»rt  of  the  system  to  the  rest  is  expressly  stated  in 
lie  Prophets,  and  expressly  connected  with  the  idol- 
trous  tendencies  of  the  nation.  "  Wherefore  I  gave 
hem  statutes  that  were  not  good,  and  judgments 
whereby  they  should  not  live"  (Ez.  xx.  25). 
I  spake  not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded 
hem  iu  the  day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the 
and  of  Egypt,  concerning  burnt-offerings  or  saci ^ 
ices  "  (Jer.  vii.  22). 

Other  portions  of  the  Law,  such  as  the  regula 
ions  of  slavery,  of  blood-feud,  of  clean  and  urckau 
bod,  were  probably  taken,  with  the  necessary  modi- 
ications,  from  the  customs  of  the  desert-tribes. 

But  the  distinguishing  features  of  the  law  of 
'srael,  which  have  remained  to  a  considerable  extent 
in  Christendom,  are  peculiarly  Mosaic: — the  Ten 
Commandments  ;  and  the  general  spirit  of  justice, 
humanity,  and  liberty,  that  pervades  even  the  moie 
detailed  and  local  observances. 

The  prophetic  office  of  Moses,  however,  can  only 
be  fully  considered  in  connexion  with  his  whole 
character  and  appearance.  "  By  a  prophet  Jehovah 
brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  and  by  a  prophet 
was  he  preserved"  (Hos.  xii.  13).  He  was  in  a 
sense  peculiar  to  himself  the  founder  and  represen 
tative  of  his  people.  And,  in  accordance  with  this 
complete  identification  of  himself  with  his  nation,  is 
the  only  strong  personal  trait  which  we  are  able  to 
gather  from  his  history.  "  The  man  Moses  was 
very  meek,  above  all  the  men  that  were  upon  the 
face  of  the  earth  "  (Num .  xii.  3).  The  word  "  meek" 
is  hardly  an  adequate  reading  of  the  Hebrew  term 
13y,  which  should  be  rather  "  much  enduring  ;"  and, 

in  fact,  his  onslaught  on  the  Egyptian,  and  his 
sudden  dashing  the  tables  on  the  ground,  indicate 
rather  the  reverse  of  what  we  should  call "  meekness." 
It  represents  what  we  should  now  designate  by 
the  word  •'  disinterested."  All  that  is  told  of  hiir. 
indicates  a  withdrawal  of  himself,  a  preference  of 
the  cause  of  his  nation  to  his  own  interests,  which 
makes  him  the  most  complete  example  of  Jewish 
patriotism,  He  joins  his  countrymen  in  their 
degrading  servitude  (Ex.  ii.  11,  v.  4).  He  forgets 
himself  to  avenge  their  wrongs  (ii.  14).  He  de 
sires  that  his  brother  may  take  the  lead  instead  of 
himself  (Ex.  iv.  13).  He  wishes  that  not  he  only, 
but  all  the  nation  were  gifted  alike : — "  Envitst  thou 
for  mv  sake?"  (Num.  xi  29).  Whrci  the  offei  i* 


132 


MOSKS 


made  that  the  people  shouM  l«e  destroyed,  and  that 
he  should  be  made  "  a  great  nation"  (Ex.  xxni.  10), 
he  prays  that  they  may  be  forgiven — "  if  not,  blot 
me,  I  pray  Thee,  out  of  Thy  book  which  Thou  hast 
written  "  (xxxii.  32).  His  sons  were  not  raised  to 
honour.  The  leadership  of  the  people  passed,  after 
his  death,  to  another  tribe.  In  the  books  which  benr 
his  name,  Abraham,  and  not  himself,  appears  as  the 
real  father  of  the  nation.  In  spite  of  his  great  pre 
eminence,  they  are  never  "  the  children  of  Moses." 

In  exact  conformity  with  his  life  is  the  account  of 
his  end.  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy  describes,  and 
is,  the  long  last  farewell  of  the  prophet  to  his 
people.  It  takes  place  on  the  first  day  of  the 
eleventh  month  of  the  fortieth  year  of  the  wander 
ings,  in  the  plains  of  Moab  (Deut.  i.  3,  5),  in'the 
palm-groves  of  Abila  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §1). 
[ABEI>-SHITTIM.]  He  is  described  as  120  years  of 
age,  but  with  his  sight  and  his  freshness  of  strength 
unabated  (Deut.  xxxiv.  7).  The  address  from  ch.  i. 
to  ch.  xxx.  contains  the  recapitulation  of  the  Law. 
Joshua  is  then  appointed  his  successor.  The  Law  is 
written  out,  and  ordered  to  be  deposited  in  the  Ark 
(ch.  xxxi.).  The  song  and  the  blessing  of  the  tribes 
conclude  the  farewell  (ch.  xxxii.  xxxiii.). 

And  then  comes  the  mysterious  close.  As  if  to 
carry  out  to  the  last  the  idea  that  the  prophet  was 
to  live  not  for  himself,  but  for  his  people,  he  is  told 
that  he  is  to  see  the  good  land  beyond  the  Jordan, 
but  not  to  possess  it  himself.  The  sin  for  which 
this  penalty  was  imposed  on  the  prophet  is  difficult 
to  ascertain  clearly.  It  was  because  he  and  Aaron 
rebelled  against  Jehovah,  and  "  believed  Him  not  to 
sanctify  Him,"  in  the  murmurings  at  Kadesh  (Num. 
xx.  12,  xjcvii.  14 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  51),  or,  as  it  is  ex 
pressed  in  the  Psalms  (cvi.  33),  because  he  spoke 
unadvisedly  with  his  lips.  It  seems  to  have  been  a 
feeling  of  distrust.  "  Can  we  (not,  as  often  ren 
dered,  can  we)  bring  water  out  of  the  cliff?"  (Num. 
xx.  10;  LXX.  fj.i]  ^|<£|o/xe»',  "surely  we  cannot.") 
The  Talmudic  tradition,  characteristically,  makes 
the  sin  to  be  that  he  called  the  chosen  people  by  the 
opprobrious  name  of  "  rebels."  He  ascends  a  moun 
tain  in  the  range  which  rises  above  the  Jordan  valley. 
Its  name  is  specified  so  particularly  that  it  must  have 
been  well  known  in  ancient  times,  though,  owing  to 
the  difficulty  of  exploring  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Jordan,  it  is  unknown  at  present.  The  mountain 
tract  was  known  by  the  general  name  of  THE  PISGAH. 
Its  summits  apparently  were  dedicated  to  different 
divinities  (Num.  xxiii.  14).  On  one  of  these, 
consecrated  to  Nebo,  Moses  took  his  stand,  and 
surveyed  the  four  great  masses  of  Palestine  west 
of  the  Jordan — so  far  as  it  could  be  discerned 
from  that  height.  The  view  has  passed  into  a 
proverb  for  all  nations.  In  two  remarkable  re-  j 
spects  it  illustrates  the  office  and  character  of 
Moses.  First,  it  was  a  view,  in  its  full  extent, 
to  he  imagined  rather  than  actually  seen.  The 
foreground  alone  could  be  clearly  discernible :  its  i 
distance  had  to  be  supplied  by  what  was  beyond,  | 
though  suggested  by  what  was  within,  the  actual 
prospect  of  the  seer. 

Secondly,  it  is  the  likeness  of  the  great  dis-  | 
coveret  pointing  out  what  he  himself  will  never  j 
reach.  To  English  readers  this  has  been  made ; 
familiar  by  the  application  of  this  passage  to  Lord  i 
Bacon,  originally  in  the  noble  poem  of  Cowley,  and 
then  drawn  out  at  length  by  Lord  Macaulay. 


MOSES 

41  So  Moses  the  servant  of  Jehovah  died  there  in 
the  land  of  Moab,  according  to  the  word  of  Jehovah, 
?nd  He  buried  him  in  a  '  ravine '  in  the  land  ot 
Moab,  *  before'  Beth-peor — but  no  man  knowetl  of 
his  sepulchre  unto  this  day  ....  And  the  children 
of  Israel  wept  for  Moses  in  the  plains  of  Moab  thirty 
days  "  (Deut.  xxxiv.  5-8).  This  is  all  that  is  said 
in  the  sacred  record.  Jewish,  Arabian,  and  Chris 
tian  traditions  have  laboured  to  fill  up  the  detail. 
44  Amidst  the  tears  of  the  people—  the  women 
beating  their  breasts,  and  the  children  giving  way 
to  uncontrolled  wailing — he  withdrew.  At  a  cer 
tain  point  in  his  ascent  he  made  a  sign  to  the 
weeping  multitude  to  advance  no  farther,  taking 
with  him  only  the  elders,  the  high-priest  Eliezar, 
and  the  general  Joshua.  At  the  top  of  the  moun 
tain  he  dismissed  the  elders — and  then,  as  he  was 
embracing  Eliezar  and  Joshua,  and  still  speaking  to 
them,  a  cloud  suddenly  stood  over  him,  and  he 
vanished  in  a  deep  valley.  He  wrote  the  account 
of  his  own  death  P  in  the  sacred  books,  fearing 
lest  he  should  be  deified  "  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  48). 
"  He  died  in  the  last  month  of  the  Jewish  year."* 
After  his  death  he  is  called  "  Melki "  (Clem.  Al. 
Strom,  i.  343). 

His  grave,  though  studiously  concealed  in  the 
sacred  narrative,  in  a  manner  which  seems  to  point 
a  warning  against  the  excessive  veneration  of  all 
sacred  tombs,  and  though  never  acknowledged  by 
the  Jews,  is  shown  by  the  Mussulmans  on  the  west 
(and  therefore  the  wrong)  side  of  the  Jordan,  between 
the  Dead  Sea  and  St.  Saba  (X.  &  P.  p.  302). 

The  Mussulman  traditions  are  chiefly  exaggera 
tions  of  the  0.  T.  accounts.  But  there  are  some 
stories  independent  of  the  Bible.  One  is  the  striking 
story  (Koran,  xviii.  65-80)  on  which  is  founded 
Parnell  s  Hermit.  Another  is  the  proof  given  by 
Moses  of  the  existence  of  God  to  the  atheist  king 
(Chardin,  x.  836,  and  in  Fabricius,  836). 

In  the  0.  T.  the  name  of  Moses  does  not  occur  sc 
frequently  after  the  close  of  the  Pentateuch,  as 
might  be  expected.  In  the  Judges  it  occurs  only 
once— in  speaking  of  the  wandering  Levite  Jonathan 
his  grandson.  In  the  Hebrew  copies,  followed  t>y 
the  A.  V.,  it  has  been  superseded  by  "  Manasseh," 
in  order  to  avoid  throwing  discredit  on  the  family 
of  so  great  a  man.  [MANASSEH,  p.  225  6.]  In  the 
Psalms  and  the  Prophets,  however,  he  is  frequently 
named  as  the  chief  of  the  prophets. 

In  the  N.  T.  he  is  referred  to  partly  as  the 
representative  of  the  Law — as  in  the  numerous 
passages  cited  above — and  in  the  vision  of  the 
Transfiguration,  where  he  appears  side  by  side  with 
Elijah.  It  is  possible  that  the  peculiar  word  ren 
dered  "decease  "  (?{o8os)—  used  only  in  Luke  ix.  3J 
and  2  Pet.  i.  15,  where  i'.  may  have  been  drawn 
from  the  context  of  the  Transfiguration—  was  sug 
gested  by  the  Exodus  of  Moses. 

As  the  author  of  the  Law  he  is  contrasted  with 
Christ,  the  Author  of  the  Gospel:  "  The  law  was 
given  by  Moses  "  (John  i.  17).  The  ambiguity  and 
transitory  nature  of  his  glory  is  set  against  the 
permanence  and  clearness  of  Christianity  (2  Cor.  iii. 
13-18),  and  his  mediatorial  character  ("  the  law 
in  the  hand  of  a  mediator ")  against  the  unbroken 
communication  of  God  in  Christ  (Gal.  iii.  19). 
His  "  service  "  of  GcJ  is  contrasted  with  Christ's 
sonship  (Heb.  iii.  5,  o>  But  he  is  also  spoken  of  as 
a  likeness  of  Christ ;  and,  as  this  is  a  point  of  view 


T  According  to  the  view  also  of  1'hilo  (V.  M.  iii.  39).        q  In  the  Arabic  .rort'tions  the  7th  of  Adar  ^ 
atosee  wrote  the  account  of  his  death.  388). 


MOSES 

which  1ms  been  almost  lost  in  the  Church,  compared 
with  the  more  familiar  comparisons  of  Christ  to 
Adam,  David,  Joshua,  and  yet  has  as  firm  a  basis 
in  fact  as  any  of  them,  it  may  be  well  tc  draw  it 
out  in  detail. 

1.  Moses  is,  as  it  would  seem,  the  only  character 
of  the  O.  T.  to  whom  Christ  expressly  likens  Himself, 
— "  Moses  wrote  of  me  "  (John  v.  46).  It  is 
uncertain  to  what  passage  our  Lord  alludes,  but 
the  general  opinion  seems  to  be  the  true  one — that 
it  is  the  remarkable  prediction  in  Deut.  xviii.  15, 
18,  19, — "The  Lord  thy  God  will  raise  up  unto 
thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee,  from  thy 
brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  unto  him  ye  shall  hearken 
....  1  will  raise  them  up  a  prophet  from  among 
their  brethren,  like  unto  thee,  and  will  put  my 
words  in  his  mouth ;  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them 
all  that  I  shall  command  him.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  that  whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  my 
words  which  he  shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will 
require  it  of  him."  This  passage  is  also  expressly 
quoted  by  Stephen  (Acts  vii.  37),  and  it  is  probably 
iii  allusion  to  it,  that  at  the  Transfiguration,  in  the 
presence  of  Moses  and  Elijah,  the  words  were 
uttered,  "  Hear  ye  Him." 

It  suggests  three  main  points  of  likeness : — 
(a.)  Christ  was,  like  Moses,  the  great  Prophet  of 
the  people — the  last,  as  Moses  was  the  first.  In 
greatness  of  position,  none  came  between  them. 
Only  Samuel  and  Elijah  could  by  any  possibility  be 
thought  to  fill  the  place  of  Moses,  and  they  only  in 
a  very  secondary  degree.  Christ  alone  appears,  like 
Moses,  as  the  Revealer  of  a  new  name  of  God — of  a 
new  religious  society  on  earth.  The  Israelites  "  were 
baptized  unto  Moses"  (1  Cor.  x.  2).  The  Christians 
were  baptized  unto  Christ.  There  is  no  other  name 
in  the  Bible  that  could  be  used  in  like  manner. 

(6.)  Christ,  like  Moses,  is  a  Lawgiver :  "  Him 
shall  ye  hear."  His  whole  appearance  as  a  Teacher, 
differing  in  much  beside,  has  this  in  common  with 
Moses,  unlike  the  other  prophets,  that  He  lays  down 
a  code,  a  law,  for  His  followers.  The  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  almost  inevitably  suggests  the  parallel 
of  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai. 

(c.)  Christ,  like  Moses,  was  a  Prophet  out  of  the 
midst  of  the  nation — "  from  their  brethren."  As 
Moses  was  the  entire  representative  of  his  people, 
feeling  for  them  more  than  for  himself,  absorbed 
in  their  interests,  hopes,  and  fears,  so,  with  re 
verence  be  it  said,  was  Christ.  The  last  and 
greatest  of  the  Jewish  prophets,  He  was  not  only  a 
Jew  by  descent,  but  that  Jewish  descent  is  insistec 
upon  as  an  integral  part  of  His  appearance.  Two 
of  the  Gospels  open  with  His  genealogy.  "  Of  the 
Israelites  came  Christ  after  the  flesh"  (Rom.  ix.  5) 
He  wept  and  lamented  over  His  country.  He 
confined  himself  during  His  life  to  their  needs 
He  was  not  sent  "  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  th< 
house  of  Israel "  (Matt.  xv.  24).  It  is  true  thai 
His  absorption  into  the  Jewish  nationality  was  bui 
Jie  symbol  of  His  absorption  into  the  far  wider  anc 
deeper  interests  of  all  humanity.  But  it  is  only  bi 
understanding  the  one  that  we  are  able  to  under 


MOTH 


433 


tand  the  other  ;  and  the  life  ot  Moses  is  the  lx:s» 
means  of  enabling  us  to  understand  them  both. 

2.  In  Heb.  iii.  1-19,  xii.  24-29,  Acts  vii.  37 
Christ  is  described,  though  more  obscurely,  as  the 
Vloses  ot  the  new  dispensation  —  as  the  Apertle,  or 

lessenger,  or  Mediator,  of  God  to  the  people  —  as  the 
Controller  and  Leader  of  the  flock  or  household  of 
God.  No  other  person  in  the  0.  T.  could  have  fur- 
lished  this  parallel.  In  both,  the  revelation  was  com 
municated  partly  through  the  life,  partly  through 
.he  teaching  ;  but  in  both  the  Prophet  was  incessantly 
united  with  the  Guide,  the  Ruler,  the  Shepherd. 

3.  The  details  of  their  lives  are  sometimes,  though 
lot  often,  compared.     Stephen  (Acts  vii.   24-28, 
35)  dwells,  evidently  with  this  view,  on  the  likeness1 
of  Moses  in  striving  to  act  as  a  peacemaker,  and  mis 
understood  and  rejected  on  that  very  account.    The. 
death  of  Moses,  especially  as  related  by  Josephus 

ut  supra),  immediately  suggests  the  Ascension  of 
Christ  ;  and  the  retardation  of  the  rise  of  the 
Christian  Church,  till  after  its  Founder  was  with 
drawn,  gives  a  moral  as  well  as  a  material  resem- 
)lance.  But  this,  though  dwelt  upon  in  the  ser 
vices  of  the  Church,  has  not  been  expressly  laid 
down  in  the  Bible. 

In  Jude  9  is  an  allusion  to  an  altercation  between 
Michael  and  Satan  over  the  body  of  Moses.  It  has 
seen  endeavoured  (by  reading  'Iriaov  for  Mwvfftcos) 
to  refer  this  to  Zech.  iii.  2.  But  it  probably  refers  to 
a  lost  apocryphal  book,  mentioned  by  Origen,  called 
the  '  Ascension,  or  Assumption,  of  Moses.'  All 
that  is  known  of  this  book  is  given  in  Fabricius,  Cod. 
Pseudepigr.  V.  T.  i.  839-844.  The  "dispute  of 
Michael  and  Satan  "  probably  had  reference  to  the 
concealment  of  the  body  to  prevent  idolatry.  Gal.  v. 
6  is  by  several  later  writers  said  to  be  a  quotation 
from  the  '  Revelation  of  Mosey"  (Fabricius,  Ibid. 
i.  838).*  [A.  P.  S.] 

MOSOL'LAM  (Wloff6\\ufj.os  :  Bosoramus)  — 
MESHULLAM  11  (1  Esdr.  ix.  14;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  15). 

MOSOL'LAMON  (Moo-dAAo/toy:  Mosolamus) 
=  MESHULLAM  10  (1  Esdr.  viii.  44;  comp.  Ezr. 
viii.  16). 


'  In  later  history,  the  name  of  Moses  has  not  been  fix 
gotten.  In  the  early  Christian  Church  he  appears  in  the 
Roman  catacombs  in  the  likeness  of  St.  Peter,  partly 
iloubtVcss,  from  his  being  the  leader  of  the  Jewish,  a 
Peter  of  the  Christian  Church,  partly  from  his  connexion 
with  tie  Eocfe.  It  is  as  striking  the  Rock  that  he  appear 
tindtr  Fetor's  name. 

In  the  Jewish,  as  In  the  Arabian  nation,  his  nam 
^ai.  iu  Iclt-r  yeare  btcn  jacre  common  than  in  former  age? 

VOl4.      II. 


MOTH 


,*  'ash: 


Xpdvos;  Sym.  evpws;  Aq.  Ppuxrts:  tinea,  araned). 
By  the  Hebrew  word  we  are  certainly  to  under 
stand  some  species  of  clothes-moth  (tinea)  ;  for  the 
Greek  ffris,  and  the  Latin  tinea,  are  used  by  ancient 
authors  to  denote  either  the  larva  or  the  imago  of 
this  destructive  insect,  and  the  context  of  the  se 
veral  passages  where  the  word  occurs  is  sufficiently 
indicative  of  the  animal.  Reference  to  the  de 
structive  habits  of  the  clothes-moth  is  made  in  Job 
iv.  19,  xiii.  28  ;  Ps.  xxxix.  11  ;  Is.  1.  9,  li.  8;  Hos. 
v.  12  ;  Matt.  vi.  19,  20  ;  Luke  xii.  33,  and  in 
Ecclus.  xix.  3,  xlii.  13;  indeed,  in  every  in 
stance  but  one  where  mention  of  this  insect  is 
made,  it  is  in  reference  to  its  habit  of  destroying 
garments  ;  in  Job  xxvii.  18,  "  He  buildeth  his 
house  as  a  moth,"  it  is  clear  that  allusion  is  made 
either  to  the  well-known  case  of  the  Tinea  pellio- 

though  never  occurring  again  (perhaps,  as  in  the  case  of 
David,  and  of  Peter  in  the  Papacy,  from  motives  of  re 
verence)  in  the  earlier  annals,  as  recorded  in  the  Bible. 
Moses  Maimonides,  Moses  Mendelssohn,  Mftsa  the  con- 
queror  of  Spain,  are  obvious  instances.  Of  the  first  c< 
these  three  a  Jewish  proverb  testifies  that  "  From  MotOE 
to  Moses  there  was  none  like  Moses." 
•  From  the  root  &&]),  "  to  fall  away." 


t34  MOTHER 

nclla  (see  woodcut),  or  some  allied  species,  or  else 
to  the  leaf-building  larvae  of  some  other  member 
of  the  Lepidoptera.  "  I  will  be  to  Ephraim  as  a 
moth,"  in  Hos.  v.  12,  clearly  means  "  I  will  con 
sume  him  as  a  moth  consumes  garments."  The 
expression  of  the  A.  V.  in  Job  iv.  19,  "  are  crushed 
before  the  moth,"  is  certainly  awkward  and  ambi 
guous  ;  for  the  different  interpretations  of  this  pas- 
cage  see  Rosenmiiller's  Schol.  ad  loc.,  where  it  is 
argued  that  the  words  rendered  "  before  the  moth  " 
signify,  "  as  a  moth  (destroys  garments)."  So  the 
Vulg.  "  consumentur  veluti  a  tinea  "  (for  this  use 
of  the  Hebrew  phrase,  see  1  Sam.  i.  16.  Similar 
is  the  Latin  ad  faciem,  in  Plaut.  Cistell.  i.  1,  73). 
Others  take  the  passage  thus — "  who  are  crushed 
even  as  the  frail  moth  is  crashed."  Either  sense 
will  suit  the  passage ;  but  see  the  different  explana 
tion  of  Lee  (Comment,  on  Job,  ad.  loc.).  Some 
writers  understand  the  word  /3p£xns  of  Matt.  vi. 
19,  20,  to  denote  some  species  of  moth  (tinea  gra- 
nella  ?) ;  others  think  that  a^s  Kal  ppuffis  by  hen- 
diadys  =  <r^s  fiifip&ffKovffa.  (see  Scultet.  Ex.  Evang. 
ii.  c.  35).  [RuST.]  The  Orientals  were  fond  of 
forming  repositories  of  rich  apparel  (Hammond, 
Annot.  on  Matt.  vi.  19),  whence  the  frequent  allu 
sion  to  the  destructiveness  of  the  clothes-moth. 


The  Clothes-Moth.    (Tinai  pellvmdia.) 
n.  Larva  in  a  case  constructed  out  of  the  substance  on  which  it 

Is  feeding. 

' .  Case  cut  at  the  ends. 

<r.  Case  cut  open  by  the  larra  for  enlarging  it. 
d,  e.  The  perfect  insect. 

The  British  tineae  which  are  injurious  to  clothes, 
fur,  &c.,  are  the  following :  tinea  tapetzella,  a  com 
mon  species  often  found  in  carriages,  the  larva 
feeding  under  a  gallery  constructed  from  the  lining  ; 
t.  pellionella,  the  larva  of  which  constracts  a  port 
able  case  out  of  the  substance  in  which  it  feeds, 
and  is  very  partial  to  feathers.  This  species,  writes 
Mr.  H.  T.  Stainton  to  the  author  of  this  article, 
"  certainly  occurs  in  Asia  Minor,  and  I  think  you 
may  safely  conclude,  that  it  and  biselliata  (an 
abundant  species  often  found  in  horse-hair  linings 
of  chairs)  will  be  found  in  any  old  furniture  ware 
house  at  Jerusalem."  For  an  interesting  account 
cf  the  habits  and  economy  of  the  clothes-moths, 
see  Rennie's  Insect  Architecture,  p.  190,  and  for 
a  systematic  enumeration  of  the  British  species  of 
the  genus  Tinea,  see  Insecta  Britannica,  vol.  iii. 
The  clothes-moths  belong  to  the  group  Tineina, 
order  Lepidoptera.  For  the  Hebrew  DD  (Sas)  see 
WORM.  T  [W.  H.] 

MOTHER  (DK  :  ^rt\f :  mater}.     The  supe- 


»  In  the  same  manner  "  The  Peak,"  originally  tbe  name 
of  the  highest  mountain  of  Derbyshire,  has  now  been 
extended  to  the  whole  district. 


MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN 

riority  of  the  Hebrew  over  all  contemporaneous 
systems  of  legislation  and  of  morals  is  strongly 
shown  in  the  higher  estimation  of  the  mother  in 
the  Jewish  family,  as  contrasted  with  modem 
Oriental,  as  well  as  ancient  Oriental  and  classical 
usage.  The  king's  mother,  as  appears  in  the  case 
of  Bathsheba,  was  treated  with  especial  honour 
(1  K.  ii.  19;  Ex.  xx.  12;  Lev.  xix.  3;  Deut.  v. 
16,  xxi.  18,  21 ;  Prov.  x.  1,  xv.  20,  xvii.  25,  xxix. 
15,  xxxi.  1,30).  [CHILDREN;  FATHER;  KIN- 
DKED  ;  KING,  vol.  ii.  196 ;  WOMEN.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN.     In  the  0.  T.  our 

translators  have  employed  this  word  to  represent 
the  following  terms  only  of  the  original:  (1)  the 
Hebrew  "in,  har,  with  its  derivative  or  kindred 
Yin,  harar,  or  Yin,  herer ;  and  (2)  the  Chaldee 

"nt3,  tur :  this  last  occurs  only  in  Dan.  ii.  35,  45. 
In  the  New  Testament  it  is  confined  almost  exclu 
sively  to  representing  Spos.  In  the  Apocrypha  the 
same  usage  prevails  as  in  the  N.  T.,  the  only  excep 
tion  being  in  1  Mace.  xii.  36,  where  "  mount "  is 
put  for  ttyos,  probably  a  mound,  as  we  should  now 
say,  or  embankment,  by  which  Simon  cut  off  the 
communication  between  the  citadel  on  the  Temple 
mount  and  the  town  of  Jerusalem.  For  this  Josephus 
(Ant.  xiii.  5,  §11)  has  riixos,  a  wall. 

But  while  they  have  employed  "  mount"  and 
"  mountain  "  for  the  above  Hebrew  and  Greek  terms 
only,  the  translators  of  the  A.  V.  have  also  occa 
sionally  rendered  the  same  terms  by  the  English 
word  "  hill,"  thereby  sometimes  causing  a  confusion 
and  disconnexion  between  the  different  parts  of  the 
narrative  which  it  would  be  desirable  to  avoid. 
Examples  of  this  are  given  under  HILLS  (vol.  i. 
p.  816  a).  Others  will  be  found  in  1  Mace.  xiii. 
52,  compared  with  xvi.  20;  Jud.  vi.  12, 13,  comp. 
with  x.  10,  xiii.  10. 

The  Hebrew  word  har,  like  the  English  "  moun 
tain,"  is  employed  both  for  single  eminences  more 
or  less  isolated,  such  as  Sinai,  Gerizim,  Ebal,  Zion, 
and  Olivet,  and  for  ranges,  such  as  Lebanon.  It  is 
also  applied  to  a  mountainous  country  or  district, 
as  in  Josh.  xi.  16,  where  "  the  mountain  of  Israel " 
is  the  highland  of  Palestine,  as  opposed  to  the 
"  valley  and  the  plain  ;"  and  in  Josh.  xi.  21,  xx.  7, 
where  "  the  mountain  of  Judah "  (A.  V.  in  the 
former  case  "mountains")  is  the  same  as  "the 
hill-country  "  in  xxi.  11.  Similarly  Mount  Ephraim 
(Har  Ephraim)  is  the  mountainous  district  occupied 
by  that  tribe,  which  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
the  Mount  Gaash,  Mount  Zemaraim,  the  hill  of 
Phinehas,  and  the  towns  of  Shechem,  Shamir, 
Timnath-Serach,  besides  other  cities  (2  Chr.  xv.  8), 
were  all  situated  upon  it."  So  also  the  "  mountain 
of  the  Amorites  "  is  apparently  the  elevated  country 
east  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  Jordan  (Deut.  i.  7, 19,  20), 
and  "  Mount  Naphtali"  the  very  elevated  and  hilly 
tract  allotted  to  that  tribe. 

The  various  eminences  or  mountain-districts  to 
which  the  word  har  is  applied  in  the  0.  T.  are  at 
follow . — 

AHARIM  ;  AMANA ;  OF  THE  AMALEKITES  ;  OF 
THE  AMORITES  ;  ARARAT  ;  BAALAH  ;  BAAL- 
HERMON  ;  BASHAN  ;  BETHEL ;  BETHER  ;  CAR- 
MEL;  EBAL;  EPHRAIM;  EPHRON;  ESAU;  GAASH; 
GERIZIM;  GILBOA  ;  GILEAD;  HALAK  ;  HERES; 
HERMON;  HoRb  (2);  HOREB;  OF  ISRAEL;  .Ii> 


b  Mount  Hor  is  probably  the  "  great  mountain  " — tht 
mountain  of  mountains,"  according  to  the  Oriental  ais 
torn  of  ciiphaslxing  an  expression  by  doubling  the  vorl 


MOUNT,  MOUNTAIN 

IKTM;  JUDAH  ;  OLIVET,  or  OF  OLIVES;  MIZAU; 
MORIAH;  NAPHTALI  ;  NEBO  ;  PARAN  ;  PERAZIM  ; 
CSAMARIA;  SEIR;SEPIIAR;  SINAI;  SIOX.SIRION, 
or  SHENIR  (all  names  for  Hermon; ;  SHAPHER  ; 

1  ABOR  ;  ZALMON  ;  ZEMARAIM  ;  Ziox. 

The  MOUNT  OF  THE  VALLEY  (pEJJn  "IH :  6 
$eos  yE?d8;  Alex.  d'Evo/c:  mons  convallis)  was  a 
district  on  the  East  of  Jordan,  within  the  territory 
allotted  to  Reuben  (Josh.  xiii.  19),  containing  a 
number  of  towns.  Its  name  recalls  a  similar  juxta 
position  of  "  mount "  and  "valley"  in  the  name 
of  "  Langdale  Pikes,"  a  well-known  mountain  in 
our  own  country. 

The  word  har  became,  at  least  in  one  instance, 
incorporated  with  the  name  which  accompanied  it, 
so  as  to  form  one  word.  Har  Gerizzim,  Mount  Ge- 
rizim,  appears  in  the  writers  of  the  first  centuries  of 
the  Christian  era  as  ir6\ts  'Ap-yapj^tEupolemus), 
opos  'Ap-yapt'Coy  (Marinus),  inons  Agazaren  (Itin. 
Hierosolym.  p.  587).  This  is  also,  as  has  already 
been  noticed  (see  vol.  i.  p.  108  a),  the  origin  of  the 
name  of  Armageddon ;  and  it  may  possibly  be  that  of 
Atabyrion  or  Itabyriou,  the  form  under  which  the 
name  of  Mount  Tabor  is  given  by  the  LXX.,  Ste- 
phatius  of  Byzantium,  and  others,  and  which  may 
have  been  a  corruption,  for  the  sake  of  euphony, 
from  'Apr  a.0v  piot>  : — 'Arafivpiov,  'Irafivpiov. 

The  frequent  occurrence  throughout  the  Scrip 
tures  of  personification  of  the  natural  features  of  the 
country  is  very  remarkable.  The  following  are,  it 
is  believed,  all  the  words6  used  with  this  object  in 
relation  to  mountains  or  hills : — 

1.  HEAD,  EMO,  Rosh,  Gen.  viii.  5  ;  Ex.  xix.  20  ; 
Deut.  xxxiv.  1 ;   1  K.  xviii.  42  ;  (A.  V.  "  top  "). 

2.  EARS,  J113TN,  Aznoih.     Aznoth-Tabor,  Josh. 
xix.  34 :  possibly  in  allusion  to  some  projection  on 
the  top  of  the  mountain.    The  same  word  is  perhaps 
found  in  UZZEN-SHERAH. 

3.  SHOULDER,  CjriS,  Catheph.   Deut.  xxxiii.  12  ; 
Josh.  xv.  8,  and  xviiu  16  ("side");  all  referring 
to  the  hills  on  or  among  which  Jerusalem  is  placed. 
Josh.  xv.  10,  "the  side  of  Mount  Jearim." 

4.  SIDE,  1¥,   Tsad.      (See  the  word  for  the 
"side"  of  a  man  in  2  Sam.  ii.  16,  Ez.  iv.  4,  &c.) 
Used  in  reference  to  a  mountain  in  1  Sam.  xxiii.  26, 

2  Sam.  xiii.  34. 

5.  LOINS  or  FLANKS,  Jl?p3,  Cisloth.    Chisloth- 
Tabor,  Josh.  xix.  12.    It  occurs  also  in  the  name  of  a 
village,  probably  situated  on  this  part  of  the  moun- 


e  1  K.  xvi.  24,  "  the  hill  Samaria ;"  accurately,  "  the 
mountain  Shomcron." 

<«  The  same  reading  is  found  in  the  LXX.  of  Jer.  xlvil. 
5,  xlix.  4. 

«  With  perhaps  four  exceptions,  all  the  above  terms  are 
used  in  our  own  language ;  but,  in  addition,  we  speak  of 
the  "  crown,"  the  "  instep,"  the  "  foot,"  the  "  toe,"  and 
the  "  breast "  or  "  bosom  "  of  a  mountain  or  hill.  "  Top  " 
is  perhaps  only  a  corruption  of  Tcopf,  "  head."  Similarly 
we  speak  of  the  "  mouth,"  and  the  "  gorge "  (t.  e.  the 
"  throat")  of  a  ravine ;  and  a  "  tongue  "  of  land.  Compare 
too  the  word  col,  "  neck,"  In  French. 

•  1.  To  mourn.     ?3X>  vevOeta,  lugeo. 

2.  (a)   ]3K>  yoyyu£a>,  and  (b)   !"I3X>  irtvQeia,  moereo. 
From  (6)  iTJX  and  iT3Nn>  crrei'ayiu.ds,  gemitut.     In 
Lam.  ii.  5,  TctTretj/ov/nei-o?,  humiliatus ;  A.  V.  "mourn 
ing,"  "  lamentation." 

3.  TV133>  TrfvBo<:,fletus;  A.V.  Bzchuth.    Also  JV33, 
o.u.1  K33-  Baca.  hcu  H33.  K\aita.  flea. 


MOURNING  435 

tain,  Ha-Cesulloth,  JTI^pSn,  t.  e.   the   "  loins" 

(Josh.  Xix.  18).       [CllESULLOTH.] 

6.  RIB,  J?7X,  Tseld.     Only  used  once,  in  speak. 

ing  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  2  Sam.  xvi.  13,  ana 
there  translated  "  side,"  ^»c  irAeupas  rov  opt  us. 

7.  BACK,  DSC',  Shecem.    Possibly  the  root  of  the 
name  of  the  town  Shechem,  which  may  be  derive! 
from  its  situati__,  as  it  were  on  the  back  of  Gerizim 

8.  THIGH,  HS1!',  Jarcdh.     (See  the  word  for 
the  "thigh"  of  a  man  in  Judg.  iii.  16,  21.)     Ap 
plied  to  Mount  Ephraim,  Judg.  xix.  1,  18 ;  and  to 
Lebanon,  2  K.  xix.  23 ;   Is.  xxxvii.  24.     Used  also 
for  the  "  sides  "  of  a  cave,  1  Sam.  xxiv.  3. 

9.  The  word  translated  "  covert "  in  1  Sam.  xxv. 
20  is  "IHP,  Sether,  from  "IftP,  "  to  hide,"  and  pro 
bably  refers  to  the  shrubbery  or  thicket  through 
which  Abigail's  path  lay.     In  this  passage  "  hill  " 
should  be  "  mountain." 

The  Chaldee  "1-113,  tur,  is  the  name  still  given  to 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  the  Jebel  et-  Tur. 

The  above  is  principally  taken  from  the  Appendix 
to  Professor  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine,  §23. 
See  also  249,  and  338  note,  of  that  work.  [G.J 

MOUNT  (Is.  xxix.  3 ;  Jer.  vi.  6,  &c.).    [SIEGE.] 

MOUNTAIN     OF     THE     AMORITES 

CnDXH  ~in  :  8pos  rov  '  Afiop'paiov :  Mons  Amor- 
rhaei),  specifically  mentioned  Deut.  i.  19,  20  (comp. 
44),  in  reference  to  the  wandering  of  the  Israelites 
in  the  desert.  It  seems  to  be  trie  range  which  rises 
abruptly  rrom  the  plateau  otet-Tih,  running  from  a 
little  S.  of  W.  to  the  N.  of  E.,  and  of  which  the  ex 
tremities  are  the  Jebel  Araif  en-Nakah  west-ward, 
and  Jebel  el-Mukrah  eastward,  and  from  which  line 
the  country  continues  mountainous  all  the  way  to  He 
bron.  [WILDERNESS  OF  WANDERING.]  [H.  H.~| 

MOURNING.*  The  numerous  list  of  words 
employed  in  Scripture  to  express  the  various  actions 
which  are  characteristic  of  mourning,  show  in 
a  great  degree  the  nature  of  the  Jewish  customs 
in  this  respect.  They  appear  to  have  consisted 
chiefly  in  the  following  particulars : — 

1.  Beating  the  breast  or  others  parts  of  the  body. 

2.  Weeping  and  screaming  in  an  excessive  degree. 

3.  Wearing  sad-coloured  garments. 

4.  Songs  of  lamentation. 

5.  Funeral  feasts. 

6.  Employment  of  persons,  especially  women,  to 
lament. 


4.  *ri3-  fyiJKos,  cantus.  In  Ez.  ii.  10,  ^H.  Spi/i-o*, 
lamentatio.  In  Ez.  xxvii.  32,  *3>  flpiji-os,  carmen  lugubre, 
from  nnj>  6pr)Vfui,  canto. 

5-  1-13,  8pr)ve<a,  lugeo. 

6.  TQOD.    (coTreros,    planctus,    from    "ISO'    ICOJTTW, 
plango.    See  Eccl.  xii.  5. 

7.  °np.   0-KOTe'oju.ai,   contristor,  i.  e.    to    wear   dart- 
coloured  clothes.    Jer.  viii.  21. 

8.  |1S>  dolor.    [BKN-QNI.J 

9.  n3n.  jit'Aos,  carmen.    Ez.  ii.  10. 

10.  nt"lJO>  0tWo?,  convivium ;  A.  V.  marg.  "  mourn 
ing  feast."    Jer.  xvi.  5.  .     . 

11.  J-lp,   or    pp.    "to  beat."    Hence  part.  J"ll331pQ. 
Jer.  ix.  1 6 ;  flpiji-oOcrat,  lamentatrices, "  mourning  women!" 

In  N.  T.  Opyveia  aAaXa^w,  &AoAi)£co,  0opu/3e'oj^ai,  •nevQtu, 
icAato),  (cdn-TOnai,  KOTrerd?,  TreVOo?,  K\av0n6<;,  o6upM<* 
lugeo,  fleo,  ploro,  plango,  moereo  ejulo,  luctttt,  flztui 
wioeiw,  planctus,  ululatus 

2  )•'  '* 


436 


MOURNING 


Aud  we  may  remark  that  the  same  words,  and 
in  many  points  the  same  customs  prevailed,  not 
only  in  the  case  of  death,  but  in  cases  of  affliction 
or  calamity  in  general. 

(1.)  Although  in  some  respects  a  similarity 
exists  between  Eastern  and  Western  usage,  a  simi 
larity  which  in  remote  times  and  in  particular 
r.ations  was  stronger  than  is  now  the  case,  the 
difference  between  each  is  on  the  whole  very  strik 
ing.  One  marked  feature  of  Oriental  mourning  is 
what  may  be  called  its  studied  publicity,  and  the 
careful  observance  of  the  prescribed  ceremonies. 
Thus  Abraham,  after  the  death  of  Sarah,  came,  as 
it  were  in  state,  to  mourn  and  weep  for  her,  Gen 
xxiii.  2,  Job,  after  his  misfortunes,  "  arose  and 
rent  his  mantle  (meil,  DRESS,  p.  4546)  and  shaved 
his  head,  and  fell  down  upon  the  ground,  01  the 
ashes,"  Job.  i.  20,  ii.  8,  and  in  like  manner  his 
friends,  "rent  every  one  his  mantle,  and  spriukled 
dust  upon  their  heads,«and  sat  down  with  him  on 
the  ground  seven  days  and  seven  nights  "  witnout 
speaking,  ii.  12,  13.  We  read  also  of  high  places, 
streets,  and  house-tops,  as  places  especially  chosen 
for  mourning,  not  only  by  Jews  but  by  ether 
nations,  Is.  xv.  3;  Jer.  iii.  21,  xlviii.  38;  1  Sam. 
xi.  4,  xxx.  4 ;  2  Sam.  xv.  30. 

(2.)  Among  the  particular  forms  observed  the 
following  may  be  mentioned : 

a.  Rending   the   clothes,    Gen.  xxxvii.  29,  C4, 
xliv.  13;    2  Chr.  xxxiv.  27;  Is.  xxxvi.  22;  Jer. 
xxxvi.  24  (where  the  absence  of  the  form  is  to  be 
noted),  xli.  5  ;  2  Sam.  iii.  31,  xv.  32  ;  Josh.  vii. 
6;  Joel  ii.  13;    Ezr.  ix.  5 ;  2  K.  v.  7,  xi.  14; 
Matt.  xxvi.  65,  IfuiTiov;  Mark  xiv.  63,  xir^v- 

b.  Dressing  in   sackcloth    [SACKCLOTH],    Gen. 
xxxvii.  34 ;  2  Sam.  iii.  31,  xxi.  10;  Ps.  xxxv.  13 ; 
Is.  xxxvii.  1;    Joel  i.  8,  13;  Am.  viii.  10;   Jon. 
iii.  8,  man  and  beast;  Job  xvi.  15 ;  Esth.  iv.  3,  4 ; 
Jer.  vi.  26  ;  Lam.  ii.  10 ;  1  K.  xxi.  27. 

c.  Ashes,  dust,  or  earth  sprinkled  on  the  person, 
2  Sam.  xiii.  19,  xv.  32 ;  Josh.  vii.  6  ;  Esth.  iv.  1, 
3 ;  Jer.  vi.  26  ;  Job  ii.  12,  xvi.  15,  xiii.  6  ;  Is.  Ixi. 
3;  Rev.  xviii.  19. 

d.  Black  or  sad-coloured  garments,  2  Sam.  xiv. 
2 ;  Jer.  viii.  21 ;   Ps.  xxxviii.  6,  xiii.  9,  xliii.  2 ; 
Mai.  iii.  14,  marg. ;  Ges.  p.  1195. 

e.  Removal  of  ornaments  or  neglect  of  person, 
Deut.  xxi.   12,  13;  Ex.  xxxiii.  4;   2  Sam.  xiv.  2, 
xix.  24;   Ez.  xxvi.  16  ;  Dan.  x.  3 ;  Matt.  vi.  16, 
17.    [NAIL.] 

/.  Shaving  the  head,  plucking  out  the  hair  of  the 
head  or  beard,  Lev.  x.  6  ;  2  Sam.  xix.  24  ;  Ezr.  ix. 
3 ;  Job  i.  20  ;  Jer.  vii.  29,  xvi.  6. 

g.  Laying  bare  some  part  of  the  body.  Isaiah 
himself  naked  and  barefoot,  Is.  xx.  2.  The  Egyp 
tian  and  Ethiopian  captives,  ib.  ver.  4 ;  Is.  xlvii.  2, 
1.  6 ;  Jer.  xiii.  22,  26  ;  Nah.  iii.  5  ;  Mic.  i.  11  ; 
Am.  viii.  10. 

h.  Fasting  or  abstinence  in  meat  and  drink,  2 
Sam.  i.  12,  iii.  35,  xii.  16,  22;  1  Sam.  xxxi.  13; 
Ezr.  x.  6  ;  Neh.  i.  4  ;  Dan.  x.  3,  vi.  18;  Joel  i. 
14,  ii.  12  ;  Ez.  xxiv.  17 ;  Zech.  vii.  5,  a  periodical 
fast  during  captivity  ;  1  K.  xxi.  9,  12  ;  Is.  Iviii.  3, 
4,  5,  xxiv.  7,9,  11;  Mai.  iii.  14 ;  Jer.  xxxvi.  9 ; 
Jon.  iii.  5,  7  (of  Nineveh) ;  Judg.  xx.  26  ;  2  Chr. 
jtx.  3;  Ezr.  viii.  21;  Matt.  ix.  14,  15. 

t.  In  the  same  direction  may  be  mentioned  dimi 
nution  in  offerings  to  God,  and  prohibition  to  par 
take  in  sacrificial  food.  Lev.  vii.  20;  Deut.  xxvi. 
14;Hos.  is.  4;  Joel  i.  9,  13,  16. 

k.  Covering  the  "  upper  lip,"  f.  e.  the  lower  part 
of  the  face,  and  sometimes  the  head,  in  token  of 


MOURNING 

silence;  specially  in  the  case  of  the  leper,  Le».  siii 
45  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  30,  xix.  4  ;  Jer.  xiv.  4 ;  Ez.  xxiv 
17 ;  Mic.  iii.  7. 

/.  Cutting  the  flesh,  Jer.  xvi.  6,  7  ;  xli  5 
[CUTTINGS  in  the  FLESH.]  Beating  the  body,  Ez. 
xxi.  12 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  19. 

m.  Employment  of  persons  hired  for  tie  purpose 
of  mourning,  women  "skilful  in  lamentation," 
Eccl.  xii.  5 ;  Jer.  ix.  17 ;  Am.  v.  16 ;  Matt.  ix.  23. 
Also  flute-players,  Matt.  ix.  23  [MINSTREL]  ;  2  Chr 
xxxv.  25. 

n.  Akin  to  this  usage  the  custom  for  friends  01 
passers-by  to  join  in  the  lamentations  of  bereaved  01 
afflicted  persons,  Gen.  1.  3 ;  Judg.  xi.  40 ;  Job  ii. 

11,  xxx.  25,  xxvii.  15;  Ps.  Ixxviii.  64;  Jer.  ix.  1, 
xxii.  18  ;  1  K.  xiv.  13,  18 ;  1  Chr.  vii.  22 ;  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  24,  25  ;  Zech.  xii.  11 ;  Luke  vii.  12  ;  John  xi. 
31 ;  Acts  viii.  2,  ix.  39;  Rom.  xii.  15.     So  also  in 
times  of  general  sorrow  we  find  large  numbers  of 
persons  joining  in  passionate  expressions  of  grief, 
Judg.  ii.  4,  xx.  26  ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  3,  xxx.  4 ;  2  Sam. 
i.  12  ;  Ezr.  iii.  13  ;  Ez.  vii.  16,  and  the  like  is  men 
tioned  of  the  priests,  Joel  ii.  17 ;  Mai.  ii.  13 ;  see 
below. 

o.  The  sitting  or  lying  posture  in  silence  indi 
cative  of  grief,  Gen.  xxiii.  3 ;  Judg.  xx.  26 ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  'l6,  xiii.  31  ;  Job  i.  20,  ii.  13;  Ezr.  ix.  3; 
Lam.  ii.  10  ;  Is.  iii.  26. 

p.  Mourning  feast  and  cup  of  consolation,  Jer. 
xvi.  7,  8. 

The  period  of  mourning  varied.  In  the  case  of 
Jacob  it  was  seventy  days,  Gen.  1.  3 ;  of  Aaron, 
Num.  xx.  29,  and  Moses,  Deut.  xxxiv.  8,  thirty. 
A  further  period  of  seven  days  in  Jacob's  case,  Gen. 
1.  10.  Seven  days  for  Saul,  which  may  have  been 
an  abridged  period  in  time  of  national  danger,  1  Sam. 
xxxi,  13. 

Excessive  grief  in  the  case  of  an  individual  may 
be  noticed  in  2  Sam.  iii.  16 ;  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  and  the 
same  hypocritically,  Jer.  xli.  6. 

(3.)  Similar  practices  are  noticed  in  the  Apocry 
phal  books, 

a.  Weeping,  fasting,  rending  clothes,  sackcloth, 
ashes,  or  earth  on  head,  1  Mace.  ii.  14,  iii.  47,  iv. 
39,  v.  14,  xi.  71,  xiii.  45 ;  2  Mace.  iii.  19,  x.  25, 
xiv.  15;  Jud.  iv.  10,  11 ;  viii.  6,  ix.  1,  xiv.  19 
(Assyrians),  x.  2,  3,  viii.  5  ;  3  Mace.  iv.  6  ;  2  Esdr. 
x.  4 ;  Esth.  xiv.  2. 

6.  Funeral  feast  with  wailing,  Bar.  vi.  32 :  also 
Tob.  iv.  17 ;  see  in  reproof  of  the  practice,  Aug. 
Civ.  D.  viii.  27. 

c.  Period  of  mourning,  Jud.  viii.  6;  Ecclus.  xxii. 

12,  seven  days,  so  also  perhaps  2  Esdr.  v.  20.    Bel 
and  Dragon  ver.  40. 

d.  Priests   ministering   in   sackcloth  and  ashes, 
the  altar  dressed  in  sackcloth,  Jud.  iv.  11,  14,  15. 

e.  Idol  priests  with  clothes  rent,  head  and  beard 
shorn,  and  head  bare,  Bar.  vi.  31. 

(4.)  In  Jewish  writings  not  Scriptural,  these 
notices  are  in  the  main  confirmed,  and  in  some  cases 
enlarged. 

a.  Tearing  hair  and  beating  breast,  Joseph.  Ant. 
xvi.  7,  §5,  xv.  3,  §9. 

6.  Sackcloth  and' ashes,  Joseph.  Ant .  xi.  6,  §1 .  xix. 
8,  §2,  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  12,  §5 ;  clothes  rent,  ii.  15,  §4. 

c.  Seven  days  mourning  for  a  father,  Joseph.  Ant. 
xvii.  8,  §4,  Bell.  Jud.  ii.  1,  §1 ;  for  thirty  days, 
B.  J.  iii.  9,  §5. 

d.  Those  who  met  a  funeral  required  to  join  it, 
Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  26;  see  Luke  vii.  12,  and  Rom. 
xii.  15. 

e.  Flute-players  at  a  funeral,  Bell.  Jiui.  hi.  9,  §5 


MOUKNINQ 

The  Mishna  prescribes  seven  days  mourning  for  a 
ft»ther,  a  mother,  son,  daughter,  brother,  sister,  or 
wife  (Bartenora,  on  Moed  Katon  iii.  7). 

Rending  garments  is  regularly  graduated  ac 
cording  to  the  degree  of  relationship.  For  a  father 
or  mother  the  garment  was  to  be  rent,  but  not  with 
an  instrument,  so  as  to  chow  the  breast ;  to  be  sewn 
up  roughly  after  thirty  (lays,  but  never  closed.  The 
Mime  Ibr  one's  own  teacher  in  the  Law,  but  for 
other  relatives  a  palm  breadth  of  the  upper  garment 
to  suffice,  to  be  sewn  up  roughly  after  seven  days 
and  fully  closed  after  thirty  days,  Moed  Kat.  iii. 
7 ;  Shabb.  xiii.  3 ;  Carpzov,  App.  Bib.  p.  650. 
Friendly  mourners  were  to  sit  on  the  ground,  not 
on  the  bed.  On  certain  days  the  lamentation  was 
to  be  only  partial.  Moed  Kat.  1.  c.  For  a  wife 
there  was  to  be  at  least  one  hired  mourner  and  two 
pipers,  Cetuboth.  iv.  4. 

(5.)  In  the  last  place  we  may  mention  a.  the 
idolatrous  "  mourning  for  Tammuz,"  Ez.  viii.  14, 
as  indicating  identity  of  practice  in  certain  cases 
among  Jews  and  heathens ;  and  the  custom  in  later 
days  of  offerings  of  food  at  graves,  Ecclus.  xxx.  18. 
6.  The  prohibition  both  to  the  high-priest  and  to 
Nazarites  against  going  into  mourning  even  for  a 
father  or  mother,  Lev.  xxi.  10,  11;  Num.  vi.  7  ; 
see  Nezir,  vii.  1.  The  inferior  priests  were  limited 
to  the  cases  of  their  near  relatives,  Lev.  xxi.  1,  2,  4. 
c.  The  food  eaten  during  the  time  of  mourning  was 
regarded  as  impure,  Deut.  xxvi.  14  ;  Jer.  xvi.  5,  7 ; 
Ez.  xxiv.  17  ;  Hos.  ix.  4. 

(6.)  When  we  turn  to  heathen  writers  we  find 
similar  usages  prevailing  among  various  nations  of 
antiquity.  Herodotus,  speaking  of  the  Egyptians, 
says,  "  When  a  man  of  any  account  dies,  all  the 
womankind  among  his  relatives  proceed  to  smear 
their  heads  and  faces  with  mud.  They  then  leave 
the  corpse  in  the  house,  and  parade  the  city  with 
their  breasts  exposed,  beating  themselves  as  they 
go,  and  in  this  they  are  joined  by  all  the  womm 
belonging  to  the  family.  In  like  manner  the  men 
also  meet  them  from  opposite  quarters,  naked  to  the 
waistand  beating  themselves"  (Her.  ii.  85).  He  also 
mentions  seventy  days  as  the  period  of  embalming 
(ii.  86).  This  doubtless  includes  the  whole  mourn 
ing  period.  Diodorus,  speaking  of  a  king's  death, 
mentions  rending  of  garments,  suspension  of  sacri 
fices,  heads  smeared  with  clay,  and  breasts  bared, 
and  says  men  and  women  go  about  in  companies  of 
200  or  300,  making  a  wailing  twice-a-day,  fvpvO- 
ftus  per'  uSfjs.  They  abstain  from  flesh,  wheat- 
bread,  wine,  the  bath,  dainties,  and  in  general  all 
pleasure ;  do  not  lie  on  beds,  but  lament  as  for  an 
only  child  during  seventy-two  days.  On  the  last  day 
a  sort  of  trial  was  held  of  the  merits  of  the  deceased, 
and  according  to  the  verdict  pronounced  by  the  ac 
clamations  of  the  crowd,  he  was  treated  with  funeral 
honours,  or  the  contrary  (Diod.  Sic.  i.  72).  Similar 
usages  prevailed  in  the  case  of  private  persons,  ib. 
91,  92. 

The  Egyptian  paintings  confirm  these  accounts 
as  to  the  exposure  of  the  person,  the  beating,  and 
the  throwing  clay  or  mud  upon  the  head ;  and 
women  are  represented  who  appear  to  be  hired 
irourners  (Long,  Eg.  Ant.  ii.  154-159  ;  Wilkinson, 
Eg.  Ant.  ii.  p.  358,  387).  Herodotus  also  mentions 
the  Persian  custom  of  rending  the  garments  with 
wailing,  and  also  cutting  off  the  hair  on  occasions 
of  death  or  calamity.  The  last,  he  says,  was  also 
usual  among  the  Scythians  (Her.  ii.  66,  viii.  99, 
ix.  24,  iv.  71). 

Lucian,  in  his  discourse  concerning  Greek  numrn- 


MOURNING 


437 


ing,  speaks  of  tearing  the  hair  avid  flesh,  aaJ 
wailing,  and  beating  the  breast  to  the  sound  of  a 
flute,  burial  of  slaves,  horses,  and  ornaments  ai 
likely  to  be  useful  to  the  deceased,  and  the  practice 
for  relatives  to  endeavour  to  persuade  the  parents 
of  the  deceased  to  partake  of  the  funeral-feast  (ir«- 
plSfiirvov)  by  way  of  recrviting  themselves  after 
their  three  days'  fast  (De  Luctu,  vol.  ii.  p.  303,  305, 
307,  ed.  Amsterdam).  Plutarch  mentions  that  the 
Greeks  regarded  all  mourners  as  unclean,  and  that 
women  in  mourning  cut  their  hair,  but  the  men 
let  it  grow.  Of  the  Romans,  in  carrying  corpses  of 
parents  to  the  grave,  the  sons,  he  says,  cover  their 
heads,  but  the  daughters  uncover  th«n,  contrary  to 
their  custom  in  each  case  (Quaest.  £om.  vol.  vii.  p. 
74,  82,  ed.  Reiske.) 

Greeks  and  Romans  both  made  use  of  hired  mour 
ners,  praeficae,  who  accompanied  the  funeral  pro 
cession  with  chants  or  songs.  Flowers  and  per 
fumes  were  also  thrown  on  the  graves  (Ov.  Fast. 
vi.  660;  Trist.  v.  1,  47;  Plato,  legg.  vii.  9; 
Diet,  of  Antiq.  ait.  Funus).  The  praeficae  seem 
to  be  the  predecessors  of  the  "  mutes  "  of  modern 
funerals. 

(7.)  With  the  practices  above  mentioned,  Oriental 
and  other  customs,  ancient  and  modern,  in  great 
measure  agree.  D'Arvieux  says,  Arab  men  are 
silent  in  grief,  but  the  women  scream,  tear  their 
hair,  hands,  and  face,  and  throw  earth  or  sand  on 
their  heads.  The  older  women  wear  a  blue  veil 
and  an  old  abba  by  way  of  mourning  garments. 
They  also  sing  the  praises  of  the  deceased  (Trav. 
p.  269,  270).  Niebuhr  says  both  Mahometans 
and  Christians  in  Egypt  hire  wailing  women,  and 
wail  at  stated  times  ( Voy.  i.  150).  Burckhardt 
says  the  women  of  Atbara  in  Nubia  shave  their 
heads  on  the  death  of  their  nearest  relatives,  a 
custom  prevalent  also  among  several  of  the  peasant 
tribes  of  Upper  Egypt.  In  Berber  on  a  death  they 
usually  kill  a  sheep,  a  cow,  or  a  camel.  He  also 
mentions  walling  women,  and  a  man  in  distress 
besmearing  his  face  with  dirt  and  dust  in  token  of 
grief  (Nubia,  pp.  176,  226,  374).  And,  speaking 
of  the  ancient  Arab  tribes  of  Upper  Egypt,  "  I  have 
seen  the  female  relations  of  a  deceased  man  dance 
before  his  house  with  sticks  and  lances  in  their 
hands  and  behaving  like  furious  soldiers "  (Notes 
on  Bed.  i.  280).  Shaw  says  of  the  Arals  of 
Barbary,  after  a  funeral  the  female  relations  during 
the  space  of  two  or  three  months  go  once  a  week 
to  weep  over  the  grave  and  offer  eatables  (see 
Ecclus.  xxx.  18).  He  also  mentions  mourning 
women  (Trav.  pp.  220,  242).  "In  Oman," 
Wellsted  says,  "  there  are  no  hired  mourning 
women,  but  the  females  from  the  neighbourhood 
assemble  after  a  funeral  and  continue  for  eight 
days,  from  sunrise  to  sunset,  to  utter  loud  lamenta 
tions"  (Trav.  i.  216).  In  the  Arabian  Nights 
are  frequent  allusions  to  similar  practices,  as  rend 
ing  clothes,  throwing  dust  on  the  head,  cutting  off 
the  hair,  loud  exclamation,  visits  to  the  tomb, 
plucking  the  hair  and  beard  (i.  65,  263,  297, 
358,  518,  ii.  354,  237,  409).  They  also  mention 
ten  days  and  forty  days  as  periods  of  mourning 
(i.  427,  ii.  409).  Sir  J.  Chardin,  speaking  of 
Persia,  says,  the  tombs  are  visited  periodically  oy 
women  ( Voy.  vi.  489).  He  speaks  also  of  the 
tumult  at  a  death  (ib.  482).  Mourning  lasts  forty 
days:  for  eight  days  a  fast  is  observed,  and  visits 
are  piid  by  friends  to  the  bereaved  relatives ;  on 
the  ninth  day  the  men  go  to  the  bath,  shave  the 
head  and  beard,  and  return  the  visits,  but  tlm 


438 


MOUSE 


lair.nitntion  continues  two  or  three  times  a  week 
till  the  fortieth  day.  The  mourning  garments  are 
unrk-coloured,  but  never  black  (ib.  p.  481).  Rus 
sell,  speaking  of  the  Turks  at  Aleppo,  says,  "  the 
instant  the  death  takes  place,  the  women  who  are 
in  the  chamber  give  the  alarm  by  shrieking  as  if 
distracted,  and  are  joined  by  all  the  other  females 
^n  the  harem.  This  conclamation  is  termed  the 
wulwaly  :b  it  is  so  shrill  as  to  be  heard,  especially 
:'n  the  uight,  at  a  prodigious  distance.  The  men 
disapprove  of  and  take  no  share  in  it ;  they  drop  a 
few  tears,  assume  a  resigned  silence,  and  retire  in 
private.  Some  of  the  near  female  relations,  when 
apprised  of  what  has  happened,  repair  to  the  house, 
p.nd  the  wulwaly,  which  had  paused  for  some  time, 
is  renewed  upon  the  entrance  of  each  visitant  into 
the  harem"  (Aleppo,  \.  306).  He  also  mentions 
professional  mourners,  visits  to  the  grave  on  the 
third,  seventh,  and  fortieth  days,  prayers  at  the 
tomb,  flowers  strewn,  and  food  distributed  to  the 
poor.  At  these  visits  the  shriek  of  wailing  is 
renewed:  the  chief  mourner  appeals  to  the  de 
ceased  and  reproaches  him  fondly  for  his  departure. 
The  men  make  no  change  in  their  dress ;  the 
women  lay  aside  their  jewels,  dress  in  their  plainest 
garments,  and  wear  on  the  head  a  handkerchief  of  a 
dusky  colour.  They  usually  mourn  twelve  months 
for  a  husband  and  six  for  a  f'athe.  (ib.  311,312).  Of 
the  Jews  he  says,  the  conclafnatiou  is  practised  by 
the  women,  but  hired  mourners  are  seldom  called 
in  to  assist  at  the  wulwaly.  Both  sexes  make  some 
alteration  in  dress  by  way  of  mourning.  The  women 
lay  aside  their  jewels,  the  men  make  a  small  rent  in 
their  outer  vestment  (ii.  86,  87). 

Lane,  speaking  of  the  modern  Egyptians,  says, 
"  After  death  the  women  of  the  family  raise  cries 
of  lamentation  called  welweleb  or  wilwdl,  uttering 
the  most  piercing  shrieks,  and  calling  upon  the 
name  of  the  deceased,  '  O,  my  master !  0,  my 
resource !  0,  my  misfortune !  0,  my  glory '  (see 
Jor.  xxii.  18).  The  females  of  the  neighbourhood 
come  to  join  with  them  in  this  conclamation :  gene 
rally,  also1,  the  family  send  for  two  or  more  neddd- 
behs,  or  public  wailing  women.  Each  brings  a 
tambourine,  and  beating  them  they  exclaim, '  Alas  for 
him."  The  female  relatives,  domestics,  and  friends, 


MOUSE 

with  their  hair  dishevelled,  and  sometin.es  with 
rent  clothes,  beating  their  faces,  cry  in  like  manner, 
Alas,  for  him !'  These  mane  no  alteration  iu 
dress,  but  women,  in  some  cases,  dye  their  shirts, 
head-veils,  and  handkerchiefs  of  a  dark-blue  colour. 
They  visit  the  tombs  at  stated  periods  "  (Mod.  Eg. 
iii.  152,  171,  195).  Wealthy  families  in  Cairo 
have  in  the  burial-grounds  regularly  furnished 
houses  of  mourning,  to  which  the  females  repair 
at  stated  periods  to  bewail  their  dead.  The  art  of 
mourning  is  only  to  be  acquired  by  long  practice, 
and  regular  professors  of  it  are  usually  hired  on  the 
occasion  of  a  death  by  the  wealthier  classes  (Mrs. 
Poole,  Engliskw.  in  Egypt,  ii.  100).  Dr.  Wolff 
mentions  the  wailing  over  the  dead  in  Abyssinia, 
Autobiog.  ii.  273.  Pietro  della  Valle  mentions 
a  practice  among  the  Jews  of  burning  perfumes 
at  the  site  of  Abraham's  tomb  at  Hebron,  for 
which  see  2  Chr.  xvi.  14,  xxi.  19 ;  Jer.  xxxiv. 
5;  P.  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  i.  306.  The  cus 
toms  of  the  N.  American  Indians  also  resemble 
those  which  have  been  described  in  many  par 
ticulars,  as  the  howling  and  wailing,  and  speeches 
to  the  dead:  among  some  tribes  the  practice  of 
piercing  the  flesh  with  arrows  or  sharp  stones, 
visits  to  the  place  of  the  dead  (Carver,  Travels, 
p.  401;  Bancroft,  Hist,  of  U.  States,  ii.  912; 
Catlin,  N.  A.  Indians,  i.  90). 

The  former  and  present  customs  of  the  Welsh, 
Irish,  and  Highlanders  at  funerals  may  also  b« 
cited  as  similar  in  several  respects,  e.g.  wailing 
and  howling,  watching  with  the  corpse,  funeral 
entertainments  ("  funeral  baked  meats  "),  flowers 
on  the  grave,  days  of  visiting  the  grave  (Brand, 
Pop.  Antiq.  ii.  128,  &c. ;  Harmer,  06s.  iii. 
40). 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  instances  of  tradi 
tional  customary  lamentation  is  found  in  the 
weekly  wailing  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  at  a  spot 
as  near  to  the  Tempte  as  could  be  obtained.  This 
custom,  noticed  by  St.  Jerome,  is  alluded  to  by 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  and  exists  to  the  present  day. 
Jerome,  ad  Sophon.  i.  15 ;  ad  Paulam  Ep.  xxxix. ; 
Early  Trav.  in  Pal.  p.  83 ;  Kaiimer,  Palastina,  p 
293  ;  Martineau,  Eastern  Life,  p.  471 ;  Robinson, 
i.  237.  [H.  W.  P.] 


Copper  Coins  of  Vespasian,  representing  the  mourning  of  Judaea  for  her  captivity. 


MOUSE  133P,  'akbdr :  (ivs :  mus)  occurs  in 
Lev.  xi.  29  as  one  of  the  unclean  creeping  things 
which  were  forbidden  to  be  used  as  food.  In  1  Sam. 


vi.  4,  5,  five  golden  mice,  "  images  of  the  mice  that 
mar  the  land,"  are  mentioned  as  part  of  the  trespas* 
offering  which  the  Philistines  were  to  send  to  th« 


>-'v^  IIIUIIY    uuiguuBtra.     See   Ges.   p.   596;    Scboebel,    Anal- 

£nb.    \    \  Hub.    77*.  Gk.  6AoAu£w,  iXoAofw.;  Constit.  p.  54  ;  and  Russell,  rol.  i.  note  83,  chiefly  froar 

"5J*  Schultcns, 

Lilt   cjulo,  uiulo,  an  oiwmatopoetic  wcri'  common  lo  | 


MOWING 

Israelites  when  they  returned  the  ark.  In  Is.  Ixvi. 
17,  it  is  said,  "  They  that  sanctify  themselves  .... 
eating  swine's  flesh,  and  the  abomination,  <md  the 
mouse,  shall  be  consumed  together."  The  Hebrew 
word  is  in  all  probability  generic,  and  is  not  in 
tended  to  denote  any  particular  species  of  mouse ; 
although  Bochart  (ffieroz.  ii.  427),  following  the 
Arabic  version  of  Is.  Ixvi.  17,  rest."'cts  its  meaning 
to  the  jerboa  (Dipus  jaculus).  The  original  word 
denotes  a  field-ravager,a  and  may  therefore  compre 
hend  any  destructive  rodent.  It  is  probable,  how 
ever,  that  in  1  Sam.  vi.  5,  "  the  mice  that  mar  the 
land"  may  include  and  more  particularly  refer  to 
the  short-tailed  field-mice  (Arvicola  agrestis,  Flem.), 
which  Dr.  Kitto  says  cause  great  destruction  to  the 
corn-lauds  of  Syria.  "  Of  all  the  smaller  rodentia 
which  are  injurious,  both  in  the  fields  and  in  the 
woods,  there  is  not,"  says  Prof.  Bell  (Hist.  Brit.  Quad. 
p.  325),  "  one  which  produces  such  extensive  de 
struction  as  this  little  animal,  when  its  increase,  as 
is  sometimes  the  case,  becomes  multitudinous." 
The  ancient  writers  frequently  speak  of  the  great 
ravages  committed  by  mice.  Herodotus  (ii.  141) 
ascribes  the  loss  of  Sennacherib's  army  to  mice, 
which  in  the  night  time  gnawed  through  the  bow 
strings  and  shield-straps. 

Col. Hamilton  Smith  (Kitto's  Cycl.  art.  "Mouse") 
says  that  the  hamster  and  the  dormouse  are  still 
eaten  in  common  with  the  jerboa  by  the  Bedoueens ; 
and  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v.)  believes  some  esculent 
species  of  dormouse  is  referred  to  in  Is.  Ixvi.  17. 

[W.  H.] 

MOWING  (T3  ;  tonszo,  Am.  vii.  1— LXX.  reads 

Vwy  6  &affi\fvs,  either  from  a  various  reading  or 
*  confusion  of  the  letters  f  and  3 — a  word  signify 
ing  also  a  shorn  fleece,  and  rendered  in  Ps.  Ixxii.  6 
"  mown  grass  ").  As  the  great  heat  of  the  climate 
in  Palestine  and  other  similarly  situated  countries 
soon  dries  up  the  herbage  itself,  hay-making  in  our 
sense  of  the  term  is  not  in  use.  The  term  "hay," 
therefore,  in  P.  B.  version  of  Ps.  cvi.  20,  for  3bjJ, 
is  incorrect.  A.  V.  "grass."  So  also  Prov.  xxvii. 
25,  and  Is.  xv.  6.  The  corn  destined  for  forage  is 
cut  with  a  sickle.  The  term  "lXp»  A.  V.  "mower," 
Ps.  cxxix.  7,  is  most  commonly  in  A.  V.  "  reaper ;" 
and  once,  Jer.  ix.  22,  "  harvest-man." 

The  "  king's  mowings,"  Am.  vii.  1,  i.  e.  mown 
grass,  Ps.  Ixxii.  6,  may  perhaps  refer  to  some  royal 
right  of  early  pasturage  for  the  use  of  the  cavalry. 
See  1  K.  xviii.  5.  (Shaw,  Trav.  138;  Wilkin 
son,  Anc.  Eg.  abridgm.  ii.  43,  50;  Early  Trav. 
305.  Pietro  della  Valle,  Viaggi,  ii.  237  ;  Char- 
din,  Voy.  iii.  370;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  330; 
Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I'Ar.  139;  Harmer,  Obs. 
iv.  386  ;  Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  210.) 

[H.  W.  P.] 

MO'ZA(N¥'1E:  Mw<rd;  Alex.  'Iwffd:  Mosa). 

1.  Son  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Hezron  by  his  concubine 
Kphah  (1  Chr.  ii.  46). 

2.^(Moi(7o,  1  Chr.  viii.  36,  37 ;  Maffffd,  Alex. 
Mao-a,  1  Chr.  ix.  42,  43).  Son  of  Zimri,  and  de 
scendant  of  Saul  through  Micah  the  son  of  Mephi- 
bosheth. 

MO'ZAH  (il^bn,  with  the  definite  article, 
nam-Motsah  :  'A.fj.wKt] ;  Alex.  A/u.oxra :  Ammosa'), 
one  of  the  cities  in  the  allotment  of  Benjamin 


"   Bochart   derives    it    from  73$?,  "  to  devour,"  and 
3-  "  com." 


MULBERRY-TREES  43i) 

(Josh,  xviii.  26  only),  named  between  hac-Ccphirah 
and  Rekem.  The  former  of  these  has  probaUy  beet' 
identified  with  Kefir,  2  miles  east  of  Yalo,  but  no 
trace  of  any  name  resembling  Motsah  has  hitherto 
been  discovered.  Interpreting  the  name  according 
to  its  Hebrew  derivation,  it  may  signify  "  the 
spring-head " — the  place  at  which  the  water  of  a 
spring  gushes  out  (Stanley,  S.  fy  P.  App.  §52). 
A  place  of  this  name  is  mentioned  in  the  Mishna 
(Succah,  iv.  §5)  as  follows : — "  There  was  a  place 
below  Jerusalem  named  Motsa;  thither  they  de 
scended  and  gathered  willow-branches,"  i.e.  for  the 
"  Feast  of  Tabernacles "  so  called.  To  this  the 
Gemaraadds,  "  the  place  was  a  Colonia*  (X^?1p), 
that  is,  exempt  from  the  king's  tribute"  (Buxtorf, 
Lex.Talm.  2043),  which  other  Talmudists  reconcile 
with  the  original  name  by  observing  that  Motsah 
signifies  an  outlet  or  liberation,  e.  g.  from  tribute. 
Bartenora,  who  lived  at  Jerusalem,  and  now  lies  in 
the  "  valley  of  Jehoshaphat "  there,  says  (in  Su- 
renhusius'  Mishna,  ii.  274)  that  Motsah  was  but  a 
short  distance  from  the  city,  and  in  his  time  re 
tained  the  name  of  Colonia.  On  these  grounds 
Schwarz  (127)  would  identify  Mozah  with  the  pre 
sent  Kulonieh,  a  village  about  4  miles  west  of  Jeru 
salem  on  the  Jaffa  road,  at  the  entrance  of  the  great 
Wady  Beit  Haninah.  The  Interpretations  of  the 
Rabbis,  just  quoted,  are  not  inconsistent  with  the 
name  being  really  derived  from  its  having  been 
the  seat  of  a  Roman  colonia,  as  suggested  by  Robin 
son  (B.R.  iii.  158).  The  only  difficulty  in  the  way 
of  the  identification  is  that  Kulonieh  can  hardly  be 
spoken  of  as  "  below  Jerusalem  "—an  expression 
which  is  most  naturally  interpreted  of  the  ravine 
beneath  the  city,  where  the  Bir-Eyub  is,  and  the 
royal  gardens  formerly  were.  Still  there  are 
vestiges  of  much  vegetation  about  Kulonieh,  and 
when  the  country  was  more  generally  cultivated 
and  wooded,  and  the  climate  less  arid  than  at  pre 
sent,  the  dry  river-bed  which  the  traveller  now 
crosses  may  have  flowed  with  water,  and  have 
formed  a  not  unfavourable  spot  for  the  growth  of 
willows.  [G.] 

MULBERRY-TREES  (D^a,  bccdim : 
K\avd/j.<i>v,  &TTIOL  :  pyri)  occurs  only  in  2  Sam.  v. 
23  and  24,  and  in  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Chr. 
xiv.  14.  The  Philistines  having  spread  themselves 
in  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  David  was  ordered  to 
fetch  a  compass  behind  them  and  come  upon  them 
over  against  the  mulberry-trees ;  and  to  attack  them 
when  he  heard  the  "  sound  of  a  going  in  the  tops  of 
the  mulberry-trees." 

We  are  quite  unable  to  determine  what  kind 
of  tree  is  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  fcOS  ;  manj 

attempts  at  identification  have  been  made,  but  they 
are  mere  conjectures.  The  Jewish  Rabbis,  with  seve 
ral  modern  versions,  understand  the  mulberry-tree  • 
others  retain  the  Hebrew  word.  Celsius  (Hierob.  i. 
335)  believes  the  Hebrew  bdcd  is  identical  with  a 
tree  of  similar  name  mentionel  in  a  MS.  work  of  the 
Arabic  botanical  writer  Abu'l  Fadli,  namely,  some 
species  of  Amyris  or  Balsamodcndron.  Most  lexico 
graphers  are  satisfied  with  this  explanation.  Some 
modern  English  authors  have  adopted  the  opinion 
of  Dr.  Royle,  who  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  Baca~)  refers 


a  Can  this  title  be  in  any  way  connected  with  the 
Koulon  (icoCAoi/),  which  is  one  of  the  eleven  names 
inserted  by  the  LXX.  in  the  catalogue  of  the  cities  of 
Judah,  between  verses  59  and  60  of  Josh,  xv  f 


i40  MULE 

the  Hebrew  bacd  to  the  Arabic  Shajrat-al-bak,'3 
*'  the  gnat-tree,"  which  he  identifies  with  some 
species  of  poplar,  several  kinds  of  which  are  found 
in  Palestine.  Rosenmiiller  follows  the  LXX.  of 
1  Chr.  xiv.  14,  and  believes  "pear-trees"  are  sig 
nified.  As  to  the  claim  of  the  mulbeiry-tree  to 
represent  the  becalm  of  Scripture,  it  is  difficult  to 
sec  any  foundation  for  such  an  interpretation — for, 
as  Rosenmiiller  has  observed  (Bib.  Bot.  p.  256),  it 
is  neither  "  countenanced  by  the  ancient  versions 
nor  by  the  occurrence  of  any  similar  term  in  the 
cognate  languages" — unless  we  adopt  the  opinion 
of  Ursinus,  who  (Arbor.  Bib.  iii.  75),  having  in 
view  the  root  of  the  word  &aco/i,k  "  to  wit  p,"  iden 
tifies  the  name  of  the  tree  in  question  with  the 
mulberry,  "  from  the  blood-like  tears  which  the 
pressed  berries  pour  forth."  Equally  unsatisfactory 
is  the  claim  of  the  "pear-tree"  to  represent  the 
bdcd;  for  the  uncertainty  of  the  LXX.,  in  the  ab 
sence  of  further  evidence,  is  enough  to  show  that 
little  reliance  is  to  be  placed  upon  this  rendering. 

As  to  the  tree  of  which  Abu'l  Fadli  speaks,  and 
which  Spi-eiigel  (ffist.  lid  herb.  p.  12)  identifies 
with  Amyris  gileadensis,  Lin.,  it  is  impossible  that 
it  can  denote  the  bdcd  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  although 
there  is  an  exact  similarity  in  form  between  the  He 
brew  and  Arabic  terms :  for  the  Amyridaceae  are 
tropical  shrubs,  and  never  could  have  grown  in  the 
valley  of  Rephaim,  the  Scriptural  locality  for  the 
bccdim. 

The  explanation  given  by  Royle,  that  some  poplar 
is  signified,  although  in  some  respects  it  is  well 
suited  to  the  context  of  the  Scriptural  passages,  is 
untenable ;  for  the  Hebrew  bdcd  and  the  Arabic  baka 
are  clearly  distinct  both  in  form  and  signification, 
as  is  evident  from  the  difference  of  the  second  radical 
letter  in  each  word.' 

As  to  the  ND3  of  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  6,  which  the  A.  V. 
retains  as  a  proper  name,  we  entirely  agree  with 
Hengstenberg  (Com.  on  Ps.  ad  loc.)  that  the  word 
denotes  "  weeping,"  and  that  the  whole  reference 
to  Baca  trees  must  be  given  up,  but  see  BACA. 

Though  there  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the 
mulberry-tree  occurs  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  yet  the 
fruit  of  this  tree  is  mentioned  in  1  Mace.  vi.  34, 
-is  having  been,  together  with  grape-juice,  shown 
to  the  elephants  of  Antiochus  Eupator  in  order  to 
irritate  these  animals  and  make  them  more  formid 
able  opponents  to  the  army  of  the  Jews.  It  is  well 
known  that  many  animals  are  enraged  when  they 
see  blood  or  anything  of  the  colour  of  blood.  For 
further  remarks  on  the  mulberry-trees  of  Palestine 
see  SYCAMINE.  [W.  H.] 

MULE,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of 
the  following  Hebrew  words, — Pered  or  Pirdah, 
Rechesh,  and  Yemim. 

1.  Pered,  Pirdah  ("PB,  nTlS;-1    &  rj/xWos, 

^    v  v '        T  :  • 

f]  j}fi.(ovos:  mulus,  mula),  the  common  and  feminine 
Hebrew  nouns  to  express  the  "  mule ;"  the  first  of 
which  occurs  in  numerous  passages  of  the  Bibie, 
the  latter  only  in  1  K.  i.  33,  38,  44.  It  is  an 
interesting  fact  that  we  do  not  read  of  mules  till 
the  time  of  David  (as  to  the  yemtm,  A.  V. 


g  ^SXCi'  of  whlch-  however,  Freytag  says, 
"  Arbor  culicum,  ulmus,  quia  ex  succo  In  folliculls  exslc- 
.ato  culices  gigmmtur." 

b  H33,  "  *o  flow  by  drcps,"  "to  weep." 
«  3  tn  t>  Hclrew,  J  in  the  Arabic;  &C3.  UJU 


MUI.K 

"  mules,"  of  Gen.  xxxvi.  '24,  see  below',,  juetat  the 
time  when  the  Israelites  were  becoming  well  ac 
quainted  with  horses.  After  this  time  horses  and 
mules  are  in  Scripture  often  mentioned  together. 
After  the  first  half  of  David's  reign,  as  Michaelis 
(Comment,  on  Laws  of  Moses,  ii.  477)  observes, 
they  became  all  at  once  very  common.  In  Ezr.  ii. 
66,  Neh.  vii.  68,  we  read  of  two  hundred  and  forty- 
five  mules ;  in  2  Sam.  xiii.  29,  "  all  the  king's  sons 
arose,  and  eveiy  man  gat  him  up  upon  his  mule." 
Absalom  rode  on  a  mule  in  the  battle  of  the  wood 
of  Kphraim  at  the  time  when  the  animal  went 
away  from  under  him  and  so  caused  his  death. 
Mules  weie  amongst  the  presents  which  were 
brought  year  by  year  to  Solomon  (1  K.  x.  25). 
The  Levitical  law  forbade  the  coupling  together  of 
animals  of  different  species  (Lev.  xix.  19),  conse 
quently  we  must  suppose  that  the  mules  were  im 
ported,  unless  the  Jews  became  subsequently  less 
strict  in  their  observance  of  the  ceremonial  injunc 
tions,  and  bred  their  mules.  We  learn  from  Ezekiel 
(xxvii.  14)  that  the  Tyrians,  after  the  time  of  Solo 
mon,  were  supplied  with  both  horses  and  mules 
from  Armenia  (Togarmah),  which  country  was  cele 
brated  for  its  good  horses  (see  Strabo,  xi.  13,  §7, 
ed.  Kramer ;  comp.  also  Xenoph.  Anab.  iv.  5,  36 ; 
Herod,  vii.  40).  Michaelis  conjectures  that  the 
Israelites  first  became  acquainted  with  mules  in  the 
war  which  David  can-fed  on  with  the  king  of  Nisibis 
(Zobah),  (2  Sam.  viii.  3,  4).  In  Solomon's  time  it 
is  possible  that  mules  from  Egypt  occasionally  ac 
companied  the  horses  which  we  know  the  king  of 
Israel  obtained  from  that  country ;  for  though  the 
mule  is  not  of  frequent  occurrence  in  the  monu 
ments  of  Egypt  (Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  386, 
Lond.  1854),  yet  it  is  not  easy  to  believe  that  the 
Egyptians  'were  not  well  acquainted  with  this 
animal.  That  a  friendship  existed  between  Solo 
mon  and  Pharaoh  is  clear  from  1  K.  ij.  16,  as  well 
as  from  the  fact  of  Solomon  haring  married  the 
daughter  of  the  king  of  Egypt ;  but  after  Shishak 
came  to  the  throne  a  veiy  different  spirit  prevailed 
between  the  two  kingdoms :  perhaps,  therefore, 
from  this  date  mules  were  obtained  from  Armenia. 
It  would  appear  that  kings  and  great  men  only 
rode  on  mules.  We  do  not  read  of  mules  at  all  in 
the  N.  T.,  perhaps  therefore  they  had  ceased  to  be 
imported. 

2.  Rechesh  (Bb"!p-     See  DROMEDARY,  in  Ap 
pendix  A. 

3.  Yemim  (DD*  :•  ri>i>  'lapely,  Vat.  and  Alex. 
rbv  tan\v,  Compl. ;  TOVS  lauflv,  Aq.  and  Sym. : 
aquae  calidae)  is  found  only  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  24, 
where  the  A.  V.  has  "mules"  as  the  rendering  of 
the  word.     The  passage  where  the  Hebrew  name 
ocelli's  is  one  concerning  which  various  explanations 
have  been  attempted.    Whatever  may  be  the  proper 
translation  of  the  passage,  it  is  quite  certain  that 
the  A.  V.  is  incorrect  in  its  rendering : — "  This  was 
that  Anah  that  found  the  mules  in  the  wiKlernoss 
as  he  fed  the  asses  of  Zibeon  his  father."    Miehaeli:- 
has  shown  that  at  this  time  horses  were  unknown 
in    Canaan ;   consequently   mules   could    not  have 


a  A  word  of  doubtful  etymology.    Gesenius  refers  It  to 

7 

the  Syriac  J«-^,  "  avolavit."    Comp.  GerciAn  Pftrd 
Lat.  burdo,  and  see  Michaelis'  remarks. 

*  From  unused  root  QV,  "  quae  calons  pott>6»at«B 
habuisse  videtur  "  (Gesen.  THet.'). 


MUPP1M 

toeni  bred  there.  The  Talmudical  writers  believe 
that  Anah  was  the  Hist  to  find  out  the  manner  of 
Dreeding  mules:  but,  besides  the  objection  urged 
above,  it  may  be  stated  that  neither  the  Hebrew 
nor  its  cognates  have  any  such  a  word  to  signify 
"  mules."  Bochart  (Hicroz.  i.  209,  10),  following 
the  reading  of  the  Samaritan  Version  and  Onkelos, 
renders  yemim  by  "emims"  or  "giants"  (Gen. 
xiv.  5)  ;  but  this  explanation  has  been  generally 
abandoned  by  modern  critics  (see  Rosenmiiller, 
Schol.  in  Gen. ;  Geddes,  Crit.  Rcm.  xiv.  5).  The 
most  probable  explanation  is  that  which  inter 
prets  yemim  to  mean  "  warm  springs,"  as  the  Vulg. 
has  it ;  and  this  is  the  interpretation  adopted  by 
Geseuius  and  modern  scholars  generally :  the  pas 
sage  will  then  read,  "  this  was  that  Anah  who 
while  he  was  feeding  his  father's  asses  in  the  desert 
discovered  some  hot  springs."  This  would  be  con 
sidered  an  important  discovery,  and  as  such  worthy 
of  record  by  the  historian ;  but  if,  with  some  writers, 
we  are  to  understand  merely  that  Anah  discovered 
water,  there  is  nothing  very  remarkable  in  the 
fact,  for  his  father's  asses  could  not  have  survived 
without  it.'  [W.  H.] 

MUP'PIM  (D^SE  :  Man^-ftp. :  Mophim),  a 
Benjamite,  and  one  of  the  fourteen  descendants  of 
Rachel  who  belonged  to  the  original  colony  of  the 
sons  of  Jacob  in  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvi.  21).  In  Num. 
xxvi.  39  the  name  is  written  Shupham,  and  the 
family  sprung  from  him  are  called  Shuphamites. 
In  1  Chr.  vii.  12,  15,  it  is  Shuppim  (the  same  as 
xxvi.  16),  and  viii.  5  Shephuphan.  Hence  it  is 
probable  that  Muppim  is  a  corruption  of  the  text, 
and  that  Shupham  is  the  true  form.  [BECKER.] 
According  to  1  Chr.  vii.  12,  he  and  his  brother 
Huppim  were  the  sons  of  Ir,  or  Iri  (ver.  7),  the  son 
of  Bela,  the  son  of  Benjamin,  and  their  sister  Maa- 
chah  appears  to  have  married  into  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  (ib.  15,  16).  But  ver.  15  seems  to  be 
In  a  most  corrupt  state.  1  Chr.  viii.  3,  5,  assigns 
in  like  manner  Shephuphan  to  the  family  of  Bela, 
as  do  the  LXX.  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21.  As  it  seems  to  be 
impossible  that  Benjamin  could  have  had  a  great- 
grandson  at  the  time  of  Jacob's  going  down  into 
Egypt  (comp.  Gen.  1.  23),  and  as  Machir  the  hus 
band  of  Maachah  was  Manasseh's  son,  perhaps  the 
explanation  of  the  matter  may  be  that  Shupham  was 
Benjamin's  son,  as  he  is  represented  Num.  xxvi.  39, 
but  that  his  family  were  afterwards  reckoned  with 
that  of  which  Ir  the  son  of  Bela  was  chief  (comp. 
1  Chr.  xxv.  9-31,  xxvi.  8,  9,  11).  [A.  0.  H.] 

MURDER.*  The  principle  on  which  the  act 
of  taking  the  life  of  a  human  being  was  regarded 
by  the  Almighty  as  a  capital  offence  is  stated  on 
its  highest  ground,  as  an  outrage,  Philo  calls  it 
sacrilege,  on  the  likeness  of  God  in  man,  to  be 
punished  even  when  caused  by  an  animal  (Gen.  ix. 
5,  6,  with  Bertheau's  note ;  see  also  John  viii.  44  ; 
1  John  iii.  12,  15;  Philo,  De  Spec.  Leg.  iii.  15, 
vol.  ii.  313).  Its  secondary  or  social  ground  ap 
pears  to  be  implied  in  the  direction  to  replenish  the 
earth  which  immediately  follows  (Gen.  ix.  7).  The 
exemption  of  Cain  from  capital  punishment  may 
thus  be  regarded  by  anticipation  as  founded  on  the 


MURDER 


441 


al  ground  either  of  expediency  or  of  example 
(Gen.  iv.  12,  15).  The  postdiluvian  command, 
enlarged  and  infringed  by  the  practice  cf  blocd- 
revenge,  which  it  seems  to  some  extent  to  sanction, 
was  limited  by  the  Law  of  Moses,  which,  while  it 
protected  the  accidental  homicide,  defined  with  ad 
ditional  strictness  the  crime  of  murder.  It  pro 
hibited  compensation  or  reprieve  of  the  murderer, 
or  his  protection  if  he  took  refuge  in  the  refuge- 
city,  or  even  at  the  altar  of  Jehovah,  a  principle 
which  finds  an  eminent  illustration  in  the  case  of 
Joab  (Ex.  xxi.  12,  14;  Lev.  xxiv.  17,  21;  Num. 
xxxv.  16,  18,  21,  31  ;  Deut.  six.  11,  13;  2  Sam. 
xvii.  25,  xx.  10;  1  K.  ii.  5,  6,  31;  Philo,  /.  c. ; 
Michaelis,  On  Laws  of  Moses,  §132).  Bloodshed 
even  in  warfare  was  held  to  involve  pollution  (Num. 
xxxv.  33,  34;  Deut.  xxi.  1,  9;  1  Chr.  xxviii.  3). 
Philo  says  that  the  attempt  to  murder  deserves 
punishment  equally  with  actual  perpetration ;  and 
the  Mishna,  that  a  mortal  blow  intended  for  an 
other  is  punishable  with  death ;  but  no  express 
legislation  on  this  subject  is  found  in  the  Law 
(Philo,  /.  c. ;  Mishn.  Sank.  ix.  2). 

No  special  mention  is  made  in  the  Law  (a)  of 
child-murder,  (6)  of  parricide,  nor  (c)  of  taking  life 
by  poison,  but  its  animus  is  sufficiently  obvious  in 
all  these  cases  (Ex.  xxi.  15, 17  ;  1  Tim.  i.  9 ;  Matt. 
xv.  4),  and  the  3rd  may  perhaps  be  specially  in 
tended  under  the  prohibition  of  witchcraft  (Ex.  xxii. 
18  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §34 ;  Philo,  De  Spec.  Leg, 
iii.  17,  vol.  ii.  p.  315). 

It  is  not  certain  whether  a  master  who  killed  his 
slave  was  punished  with  death  (Ex.  xxi.  20 ;  Knobel, 
ad  foe.).  In  Egypt  the  murder  of  a  slave  was 
punishable  with  death  as  an  example  a  fortiori  in 
the  case  of  a  freeman  ;  and  parricide  was  punished 
with  burning ;  but  child-murder,  though  treated  as 
an  odious  crime,  was  not  punished  with  death  (Diod. 
Sic.  i.  77).  The  Greeks  also,  or  at  least  the  Athe 
nians,  protected  the  life  of  the  slave  (Diet,  of  Antiq. 
art.  Sewus,  p.  1036  ;  Miiller,  Dorians,  iii.  3,  §4 ; 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  208,  209). 

No  punishment  is  mentioned  for  suicide  attempted, 
nor  does  any  special  restriction  appear  to  have  at 
tached  to  the  property  of  the  suicide  (2  Sam.  xvii.  23). 

Striking  a  pregnant  woman  so  as  to  cause  her 
death  was  punishable  with  death  (Ex.  xxi.  23; 
Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §33). 

If  an  animal  known  to  be  vicious  caused  the 
death  of  any  one,  not  only  was  the  animal  destroyed, 
but  the  owner  also,  if  he  had  taken  no  steps  to 
restrain  it,  was  held  guilty  of  murder  (Ex.  xxi.  29, 
31 ;  Michaelis,  §274,  vol.  iv.  234,  5). 

The  duty  of  executing  punishment  on  the  mur 
derer  is  in  the  Law  expressly  laid  on  the  "  revenger 
of  blood ;"  but  the  question  of  guilt  was  to  be 
previously  decided  by  the  Levitical  tribunal.  A 
strong  bar  against  the  licence  of  private  revenge 
was  placed  by  the  provision  which  required  the 
concurrence  of  at  least  two  witnesses  in  any  capita! 
question  (Num.  xxxv.  19-30;  Deut;  xvii.  6-12, 
xix.  12,  17).  In  regal  times  the  duty  of  execution 
of  justice  on  a  murderer  seems  to  have  been  as 
sumed  to  some  extent  by  the  sovereign,  as  well  as 
the  privilege  of  pardon  (2  Sam.  xiii.  39,  xiv.  7, 11 : 


f  The  plural  form  of  a  noun  (D^JlhJJ'nS).  which  is 
ipparently  of  Persian  origin,  rendered  "camel"  by  the 
A..  V.,  occurs  in  Esth.  viii.  10,  14,  and  seeins  to  denote 
seme  fine  breed  of  mules.  See  Bochart  (Hieroz.  i.  219). 

"  O'wb.)  1.  n^"l»  "  to  crush,1'  "  to  kill,"  whence  pan. 


Pl¥"l  !  o  <t>ovevnis ;  interfector,  reus  Aomtcidit,  Gea.  1307 
2-  JIH-  "kill;"  airoKreivia,  fyovevia ;  interftcio,  occido; 
whence  J^n  (subs.),  "murder-'  <r<j>ayrj ;  occitio,  Ges,  388 
3.  -JEp.  from  7J3p,  "  kill,"  :»es.  1212. 

*•   •_•>  -  '» 


442 


MUSII1 


1  K.  ii.  34).  During  this  period  also  the  practice 
of  assassination  became  frequent,  especially  in  the 
kingdom  of  Israel.  Among  modes  of  eH'ecting  this 
object  may  be  mentioned  the  murder  of  Benhadad 
of  Damascus  by  Hazael  by  means  of  a  wet  cloth 
f  1  K.  xv.  27,  xvi.  9  ;  2  K.  viii.  15;  Thenius,  ad 
foe.;  Jahn,  Hist.  i.  137;  2  K.  x.  7,  xi.  1,  16,  xii. 
20,  xiv.  5,  xv.  14,  25,  30). 

It  was  lawful  to  kill  a  burglar  taken  at  night  in 
the  act,  but  unlawful  to  do  so  after  sunrise  (Ex. 
xxii.  2,  3). 

The  Koran  forbids  child-murder,  and  allows  blood- 
revenge,  but  permits  money-compensation  for  blood 
shed  (ii.  21,  iv.  72,  xvii.  230,  ed.  Sale).  [BLOOD, 
REVENGER  OF;  MANSLAYER.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

MUSHI  (»B*ID :  'OpoiNrf,  Ex.  vi.  19;  6  Movffi, 
1  Chr.  vi.  19,  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  26,  30  ;  Motxrf, 
Num.  iii.  20;  1  Chr.  vi.  47,  xxiii.  23;  Alex. 
'Q/jiovfffi,  Ex.  vi.  19 ;  'O/ioucri,  Num.  iii.  20 ; 
1  Chr.  vi.  47  ;  6  Movffi,  1  Chr.  vi.  19,  xxiv.  30 ; 
Mouo-f,  1  Chr.  xxiii.  21,  xxiv.  26:  Musi}.  The 
son  of  Merari  the  son  of  Kohath. 

MUSIC.  Of  music  as  a  science  among  the 
Hebrews  we  have  no  certain  knowledge,  and  the 
traces  of  it  are  so  slight  as  to  afford  no  ground  for 
reasonable  conjecture.  But  with  regard  to  its 
practice  there  is  less  uncertainty.  The  inventor 
of  musical  instruments,  like  the  first  poet  and  the 
first  forger  of  metals,  was  a  Cainite.  According 
to  the  narrative  of  Gen.  iv.,  Jubal  the  son  of 
Lamech  was  "  the  father  of  all  such  as  handle  the 
harp  and  organ,"  that  is  of  all  players  upon 
stringed  and  wind  instruments."  It  has  been  con 
jectured  that  Jubal's  discovery  may  have  been  per 
petuated  by  the  pillars  of  the  Sethites  mentioned 
by  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  2),  and  that  in  this  way  it 
was  preserved  till  after  the  Flood ;  but  such  con 
jectures  are  worse  than  an  honest  confession  of 
ignorance.  The  first  mention  of  music  in  the 
times  after  the  Deluge  is  in  the  narrative  of  Laban's 
interview  with  Jacob,  when  he  reproached  his 
son-in-law  with  having  stolen  away  unawares, 
without  allowing  him  to  cheer  his  departure 
"  with  songs,  with  tabret,  and  with  harp "  (Gen. 
xxxi.  27).  So  that,  in  whatever  way  it  was  pre 
served,  the  practice  of  music  existed  in  the  upland 
country  of  Syria,  and  of  the  three  possible  kinds 
of  musical  instruments,  two  were  known  and  em 
ployed  to  accompany  the  song.  The  three  kinds 
are  alluded  to  in  Job  xxi.  12.  On  the  banks  of  the 
Red  Sea  sang  Moses  and  the  children  of  Israel  their 
triumphal  song  of  deliverance  from  the  hosts  of 
Egypt;  and  Miriam,  in  celebration  of  the  same 
event,  exercised  one  of  her  functions  as  a  pro 
phetess  by  leading  a  procession  of  the  women  of 
the  camp,  chanting  in  chorus  the  burden  to  the 
song  of  Moses,  "  Sing  ye  to  Jehovah,  for  He  hath 
triumphed  gloriously ;  the  horse  and  his  rider  hath 
He  thrown  into  the  sea."  Their  song  was  accom 
panied  by  timbrels  and  dances,  or,  as  some  take 
the  latter  word,  by  a  musical  instrument  of  which 
the  shape  is  unknown  but  which  is  supposed  to 
ha"?  r<xa>robl«d  the  modern  tambourine  (DANCE, 
vol.  i.  p.  389),  and,  like  it,  to  have  been  used  as  an 


MUSIC 

accompaniment  to  dancing.  The  expression  in  thi 
A.  V.  of  Ex.  xv.  21,  "  and  Miriam  answered  them.' 
seems  to  indicate  that  the  song  was  alternate, 
Miriam  leading  off  with  the  solo  while  the  women 
responded  in  full  chorus.  But  it  is  probable  thaf 
the  Hebrew  word,  like  the  corresponding  Arabic, 
has  merely  the  sense  of  singing,  which  is  retained 
in  the  A.  V.  of  Ex.  xxxii.  18 ;  Num.  xxi.  17  ;  1 
Sam.  xxix.  5;  Ps.  cxlvii.  7;  Hos.  ii.  15.  The 
same  word  is  used  for  the  shouting  of  soldiers  in 
battle  (Jer.  li.  14),  and  the  cry  of  wild  beasts 
(Is.  xiii.  22),  and  in  neither  of  these  cases  can  the 
notion  of  response  be  appropriate.  All  that  can 
be  inferred  is  that  Miriam  led  off  the  song,  and 
thi?  is  confirmed  by  the  rendering  of  the  Vulg. 
praecinebat.  The  triumphal  hymn  of  Moses  had 
unquestionably  a  religious  character  about  it,  but 
the  employment  of  music  in  religious  service, 
though  idolatrous,  is  more  distinctly  marked  in  the 
festivities  which  attended  the  erection  of  the  golden 
calf.b  The  wild  cries  and  shouts  which  reached 
the  ears  of  Moses  and  Joshua  as  they  came  down 
from  the  mount,  sounded  to  the  latter  as  the 
din  of  battle,  the  voices  of  victor  and  vanquished 
blending  in  one  harsh  chorus.  But  the  quicker 
sense  of  Moses  discerned  the  rough  music  with 
which  the  people  worshipped  the  visible  repre 
sentation  of  the  God  that  brought  them  out  of 
Egypt.  Nothing  could  show  more  clearly  than 
Joshua's  mistake  the  rude  character  of  the  He 
brew  music  at  this  period  (Ex.  xxxii.  17,  18),  as 
untrained  and  wild  as  the  notes  of  their  Syrian 
forefathers.0  The  silver  trumpets  made  by  the 
metal  workers  of  the  tabernacle,  which  were  used 
to  direct  the  movements  of  the  camp,  point  to 
music  of  a  very  simple  kind  (Num.  x.  1-10),  and 
the  long  blast  of  the  jubilee  horns,  with  which 
the  priests  brought  down  the  walls  of  Jericho,  had 
probably  nothing  very  musical  about  it  (Josh,  vi.), 
any  more  than  the  rough  concert  with  which  the 
ears  of  the  sleeping  Midianites  were  saluted  by 
Gideon's  three  hundred  warriors  (Judg.  vii.).  The 
song  of  Deborah  and  Barak  is  cast  in  a  distinctly 
metrical  form,  and  was  probably  intended  to  be 
sung  with  a  musical  accompaniment  as  one  of  the 
people's  songs,  like  that  with  which  Jephthah's 
daughter  and  her  companions  met  her  father  on 
his  victorious  return  (Judg.  xi.). 

The  simpler  impromptu  with  which  the  women 
from  the  cities  of  Israel  greeted  David  after  th« 
slaughter  of  the  Philistine,  was  apparently  struck 
off  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  under  the  influence 
of  the  wild  joy  with  which  they  welcomed  their 
national  champion,  "  the  darling  of  the  songs  of 
Israel."  The  accompaniment  of  timbrels  and  in 
struments  of  music  must  have  been  equally  simple, 
and  such  that  all  could  take  part  in  it  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  6,  7).  Up  to  this  time  we  meet  with  no 
thing  like  a  systematic  cultivation  of  music  among 
the  Hebrews,  but  the  establishment  of  the  schools 
of  the  prophets  appears  to  have  supplied  this 
want.  Whatever  the  students  of  these  schools 
may  have  been  taught,  music  was  an  essential  part 
of  their  practice.  At  Bethel  (1  Sam.  x.  5)  was  a 
school  of  this  kind,  as  well  as  at  Naioth  in  Ramah 


plains  of  Dura  (Dan.  iii.),  the  commencement  of  which 
was  to  be  the  signal  for  the  multitude  to  prostrate  them 
selves  in  worship. 

c  Compare  Lam.  ii.  1,  where  the  war-cry  of  the  enemj 
in  the  Temple  is  likened  to  the  noise  of  thf  multitude  on 
;i  solemu  feast-day ;  "  They  have  made  a  noise  in  the  huuM 
of  Jehovah  as  in  tin  day  »\  a  Milcmn  tc;u.-t." 


•  From  the  occurrence  of  the  name  Mahalaleel,  third 
In  descent  from  Seth,  which  signifies  "  giving  praise  to 
God,"  Schneider  concludes  that  7ocal  music  in  religious 
services  must  have  been  still  earlier  in  use  among  the 
Sethi  tfs  (Bibl.-gesch.  Darstettimg  der  Hebr.  Mutik,  p.  xi.) 

*  With  this  may  be  compared  the  musical  service  which 

the  dedication  of  the  gulden  image  in  me 


MUSIC 

1  SaTYi.  xix.  19,  20),  at  Jericho  (2  K.  ii.  5,  7, 
iti),  Gilgal  (2  K.  iv'.  38),  and  perhaps  at  Jeru 
salem  (2  K.  xxii.  14).  Professional  musicians  soon 
became  attached  to  the  court,  and  though  Saul,  a 
hardy  warrior,  had  only  at  intervals  recourse  to 
the  soothing  influence  of  David's  harp,  yet  David 
seems  to  have  gathered  round  him  "  singing  men 
and  singing  women,"  who  could  celebrate  his  vic 
tories  and  lend  a  charm  to  his  hours  of  peace  (2 
Sam.  six.  35).  Solomon  did  the  same  (Eccl.  ii.  8), 
adding  to  the  luxury  of  his  court  by  his  patronage 
of  art,  and  obtaining  a  reputation  himself  as  no 
mean  composer  (IK.  iv.  32). 

But  the  Temple  was  the  great  school  of  music, 
and  it  was  consecrated  to  its  highest  service  in  the 
worship  of  Jehovah.  Before,  however,  the  elabo 
rate  arrangements  had  been  made  by  David  for  the 
temple  choir,  there  must  have  been  a  considerable 
body  of  musicians  throughout  the  country  (2  Sam. 
vi.  5),  and  in  the  procession  which  accompanied 
the  ark  from  the  house  of  Obededom,  the  Levites, 
with  Chenaniah  at  their  head,  who  had  acquired 
skill  from  previous  training,  played  on  psalteries, 
harps,  and  cymbals,  to  the  words  of  the  psalm  of 
thanksgiving  which  David  had  composed  for  the 
occasion  (1  Chr.  xv.  xvi.).  It  is  not  improbable 
that  the  Levites  all  along  had  practised  music  and 
that  some  musical  service  was  part  of  the  worship 
of  the  tabernacle ;  for  unless  this  supposition  be 
made,  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  body  of  trained 
singers  and  musicians  should  be  found  ready  for 
an  occasion  like  that  on  which  they  make  their 
first  appearance.  The  position  which  the  tribe  of 
Levi  occupied  among  the  other  tribes  naturally 
favoured  the  cultivation  of  an  art  which  is  essen 
tially  characteristic  of  a  leisurely  and  peaceful 
life.  They  were  free  from  the  hardships  attend 
ing  the  struggle  for  conquest  and  afterwards  for 
existence,  which  the  Hebrews  maintained  with  the 
nations  of  Canaan  and  the  surrounding  countries, 
and  their  subsistence  was  provided  for  by  a  national 
tax.  Consequently  they  had  ample  leisure  for 
the  various  ecclesiastical  duties  devolving  upon 
them,  and  among  others  for  the  service  of  song, 
for  which  some  of  their  families  appear  to  have 
possessed  a  remarkable  genius.  The  three  great 
divisions  of  the  tribe  had  each  a  representative 
family  in  the  choir:  Heman  and  his  sons  repre 
sented  the  Kohathites,  Asaph  the  Gershonites,  and 
Ethan  (or  Jeduthun)  the  Merarites  (1  Chr.  xv.  17, 
xxiii.  6,  xxv.  1-6).  Of  the  38,000  who  com 
posed  the  tribe  in  the  reign  of  David,  4000  are 
said  to  have  been  appointed  to  praise  Jehovah  with 
the  instruments  which  David  made  (1  Chr.  xxiii. 
5)  and  for  which  he  taught  them  a  special  chant. 
This  chant  for  ages  afterwards  was  known  by  his 
name,  and  was  sung  by  the  Levites  before  the  army 
of  Jehoshaphat,  and  on  laying  the  foundation  of  the 
second  temple  (comp.  1  Chr.  xvi.  34,  41 ;  2  Chr. 
vii.  6,  xx.  21  ;  Ezr.  iii.  10,  11)  ;  and  again  by  the 
Maccabaean  army  after  their  great  victory  over 
Gorging  (1  Mace.  iv.  24).  Over  this  great  body  of 
musicians  presided  the  sons  of  Asaph,  Heman,  and 
Jeduthun,  twenty- four  in  number,  as  heads  of  the 
twenty -four  courses  of  twelve  into  which  the  skilled 
minstrels  were  divided.  These  skilled  or  "  cunning" 
(P2ID,  1  Chr.  xxv.  6,  7)  men  were  288  in  number, 

and  under  them  appear  to  have  been  the  scholars 
("VD7J;)  1  Chr.  xxv.  8)  whom,  perhaps,  they 
trained,  and  who  made  up  the  fuil  number  of 
4000.  Supposing  4000  to  be  merely  a  round 


MUSIC 


44S 


number,  each  course  would  consist  of  a  full  band 
of"  166  musicians  presided  over  by  a  body  of  twelve 
skilled  players,  with  one  of  the  sons  of  Asapa, 
Heman,  or  Jeduthun  as  conductor.  Asaph  him 
self  appears  to  have  played  on  the  cymbals  (1  Chr, 
xvi.  5),  and  this  was  the  case  with  the  other  leaders 
(1  Chr.  xv.  19),  perhaps  to  mark  the  time  more 
distinctly,  while  the  rest  of  the  band  played  on 
psalteries  and  harps.  The  singers  were  distinct 
from  both,  as  is  evident  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  25,  "the 
singers  .vent  before,  the  players  on  instruments 
followed  after,  in  the  midst  of  the  damsels  playing 
with  timbrels;"  unless  the  singers  in  this  case 
were  the  cymbal  players,  like  Heman,  Asaph,  and 
Ethan,  who,  in  1  Chr.  xv.  19,  are  called  "  singers," 
and  perhaps  while  giving  the  timt  with  their 
cymbals  led  the  choir  with  their  voices.  The 
"  players  on  instruments"  (D^JJ,  n6g£nim),  as  the 
word  denotes,  were  the  performers  upon  stringed 
instruments,  like  the  psaltery  and  harp,  who  have 
been  alluded  to.  The  "  players  on  instruments  " 
(DvpH,  cholelim),  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  were  different 
from  these  last,  and  were  properly  pipers  or  per 
formers  on  perforated  wind-instruments  (see  1  K. 
i.  40).  "The  damsels  playing  with  timbrels" 
(comp.  1  Chr,  xiii.  8)  seem  to  indicate  that  women 
took  part  in  the  temple  choir,  and  among  the 
family  of  Heman  are  specially  mentioned  three 
daughters,  who,  with  his  fourteen  sons,  were  all 
"  under  the  hands  of  their  father  for  song  in  the 
house  of  Jehovah  "  (1  Chr.  srr.  5,  6).  Besides, 
with  those  of  the  captivitf  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  were  "  200  singing  men  and  singing 
women"  (Ezr.  ii.  65).  Bartenora  adds  that  chil 
dren  also  were  included. 

The  trumpets,  which  are  mentioned  among  the 
instruments  played  before  the  ark  (1  Chr.  xiii.  8), 
appear  to  have  been  reserved  for  the  priests  alone 
(1  Chr.  xv.  24,  xvi.  6).  As  they  were  also  used 
in  royal  proclamations  (2  K.  xi.  14),  they  were 
probably  intended  to  set  forth  by  way  of  symbol 
the  royalty  of  Jehovah,  the  theocratic  king  of  His 
people,  as  well  as  to  sound  the  alarm  against  His 
enemies  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12).  A  hundred  and  twenty 
priests  blew  the  trumpets  in  harmony  with  the 
choir  of  Levites  at  the  dedication  of  So.omon's 
temple  (2  Chr.  v.  12, 13,  vii.  6),  as  in  the  restoration 
of  the  worship  under  Hezekiah,  in  the  description 
of  which  we  find  an  indication  of  one  of  the  uses 
of  the  temple  music..  "  And  Hezekiah  commanded 
to  offer  the  burnt-offering  upon  the  altar.  And 
when  the  burnt-offering  began,  the  song  of  Jehovah 
began  also,  with  the  trumpets  and  with  the  instru 
ments  of  David  king  of  Israel.  And  all  the  con 
gregation  worshipped,  and  the  singers  sang,  and 
the  trumpeters  sounded ;  all  until  the  burnt-offering 
was  finished  "  (2  Chr.  xxix.  27,  28).  The  altar 
was  the  table  of  Jehovah  (Mai.  i.  7),  and  the 
sacrifices  were  His  feasts  (Ex.  xxiii.  18),  so  the 
solemn  music  of  the  Levites  corresponded  to  the 
melody  by  which  the  banquets  of  earthly  monarchs 
were  accompanied.  The  Temple  was  His  palace, 
and  as  the  Levite  sentries  watched  the  gates  by 
night  they  chanted  the  songs  of  Zion ;  one  of  these 
it  has  been  conjectured  with  probability  is  Ps.  cxxxiv. 

The  relative  numbers  of  the  instruments  in  the 
temple  band  have  been  determined  in  the  tradi 
tions  of  Jewish  writers.  Of  psalteries  there  were 
to  be  not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  six ;  of  flutes 
not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  twelve ;  of  trum 
pets  not  less  than  two  but  as  many  an  were 


444 


MUSIC 


wished;  of  harps  or  citherns  not  less  than  nine 
l»ut  as  many  as  were  wished;  while  of  cymbals 
there  was  only  one  pair  (Forkel,  Allg.  Gesch.  der 
Musik,  c.  iii.  §28).  The  enormous  number  of 
instruments  and  dresses  for  the  Levites  provided 
during  the  magnificent  reign  of  Solomon  would 
teem,  if  Josephus  be  correct  (Ant.  viii.  3,  §8)  to 
have  been  intended  for  all  time.  A  thousand  dresses 
for  the  high-priest,  linen  garments  and  girdles  of 
purple  for  the  priests  10,000 ;  trumpets  200,000 ; 
psalteries  and  harps  of  electrum  40,000;  all  these 
were  stored  up  in  the  temple  treasury.  The  cos 
tume  of  the  Levite  singers  at  the  dedication  of  the 
Temple  was  of  fine  linen  (2  Chr.  v.  12). 

In  the  private  as  well  as  in  the  religious  life  of 
the  Hebrews  music  held  a  prominent  place.  The 
icings  had  their  court  musicians  (Eccl.  ii.  8)  who 
bewailed  their  death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25),  and  in  the 
luxurious  times  of  the  later  monarchy  the  effemi 
nate  gallants  of  Israel,  reeking  with  perfumes  and 
stretched  upon  their  couches  of  ivory,  were  wont 
at  their  banquets  to  accompany  the  song  with  the 
tinkling  of  the  psalteiy  or  guitar  (Am.  vi.  4-6), 
and  amused  themselves  with  devising  musical  in 
struments  while  their  nation  was  perishing,  as 
Nero  fiddled  when  Rome  was  in  flames.  Isaiah 
denounces  a  woe  against  those  who  sat  till  the 
morning  twilight  over  their  wine,  to  the  sound 
of  "the  harp  and  the  viol,  the  tabret  and  pipe" 
(Is.  v.  11,  12).  But  while  music  was  thus  made 
to  minister  to  debauchery  and  excess,  it  was  the 
legitimate  expression  of  mirth  and  gladness,  and  the 
indication  of  peace  and  prosperity.  It  was  only 
when  a  curse  was  upon  the  land  that  the  prophet 
could  say,  "  the  mirth  of  tabrets  ceaseth,  the  noise 
of  them  that  rejoice  endeth,  the  joy  of  the  harp 
ceaseth,  they  shall  not  drink  wine  with  a  song" 
(Is.  xxiv.  8,  9).  In  the  sadness  of  captivity  the 
harps  hung  upon  the  willows  of  Babylon  and  the 
voices  of  the  singers  refused  to  sing  the  songs  of 
Jehovah  at  their  foreign  captors'  bidding  (Ps. 
cxxxvii.).  The  bridal  processions  as  they  passed 
through  the  streets  were  accompanied  with  music 
and  song  (Jer.  vii.  34),  and  these  ceased  only  when 
the  land  was  desolate  (Ez.  xxvi.  13).  The  high 
value  attached  to  music  at  banquets  is  indicated  in 
the  description  given  in  Ecclus.  xxxii.  of  the  duties 
of  the  master  of  a  feast.  "  Pour  not  out  words 
where  there  is  a  musician,  and  show  not  forth 
wisdom  out  of  time.  A  concert  of  music  in  a 
banquet  of  wine  is  as  a  signet  of  carbuncle  set  in 
gold.  As  a  signet  of  an  emerald  set  in  a  work  of 
gold,  so  is  the  melody  of  music  with  pleasant 
wine."  And  again,  the  memory  of  the  good  king 
Josiah  was  "  as  music  at  a  banquet  of  wine " 
(Ecclus.  xlix.  1).  The  music  of  the  banquets  was 
accompanied  with  songs  and  dancing  (Luke  xv. 
25).d  The  triumphal  processions  which  celebrated 
a  victory  were  enlivened  by  minstrels  and  singers 
(Ex.  xv.  1,  20;  Judg.  v.  1,  xi.  34;  1  Sam.  xviii. 
6,  xxi.  11 ;  2  Chr.  xx.  28  ;  Jud.  xv.  12,  13),  and 
on  extraordinary  occasions  they  even  accompanied 


MUSIC 

armies  to  battle.  Thus  the  Levites  sang  the  chant 
of  David  before  .he  army  of  Jehosh:\phat  as  \\f. 
went  forth  against  the  hosts  of  Ammon,  and  Moab, 
and  Mt.  Seir  (2  Chr.  xx.  19,  21) ;  and  the  victory 
of  Abijah  over  Jeroboam  is  attributed  to  the  encou 
ragement  given  to  Judah  by  the  priests  sounding 
their  trumpets  before  the  ark  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12,  14). 
It  is  clear  from  the  narrative  of  Elisha  and  the 
minstrel  who  by  his  playing  calmed  the  prophet's 
spirit  till  the  hand  of  Jehovah  was  upon  him,  that 
among  the  camp  followers  of  Jehoshaphat's  army 
on  that  occasion  there  were  to  be  reckoned  musi 
cians  who  were  probably  Levites  (2  K.  iii.  15). 
Besides  songs  of  triumph  there  were  also  religious 
songs  (Is.  xxx.  29 ;  Am.  v.  23 ;  Jam.  v.  13), 
"  songs  of  the  temple "  (Am.  viii.  3),  and  songs 
which  were  sung  in  idolatrous  worship  (Ex.  xxxii. 
18).«  Love  songs  are  alluded  to  in  Ps.  xlv.  title, 
and  Is.  v.  1.  There  were  also  the  doleful  songs 
of  the  funeral  procession,  and  the  wailing  chant  of 
the  mourners  who  went  about  the  streets,  the  pro 
fessional  "  keening"  of  those  who  were  skilful  in 
lamentation  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25  ;  Eccl.  xii.  5 ;  Jer. 
ix.  17-20;  Am.  v.  16).  Lightfoot  (Hor.  Heb.  on 
Matt.  ix.  23)  quotes  from  the  Talmudists  (Chetvbh. 
cap.  4,  hal.  6)  to  the  effect  that  every  Israelite  on 
the  death  of  his  wife,  "  will  afford  her  not  less  than 
two  pipers  and  one  woman  to  make  lamentation." 
The  grape  gatherers  sang  as  they  gathered  in  the 
vintage,  and  the  wine-presses  were  trodden  with 
the  shout  of  a  song  (Is.  xvi.  10 ;  Jer.  xlviii.  33) ; 
the  women  sang  as  they  toiled  at  the  mill,  and  on 
eveiy  occasion  the  land  of  the  Hebrews  during  their 
national  prosperity  was  a  land  of  music  and  melody. 
There  is  one  class  of  musicians  to  which  allusion  is 
casually  made  (Ecclus.  ix.  4),  and  who  were  pro 
bably  foreigners,  the  harlots  who  frequented  the 
streets  of  great  cities  and  attracted  notice  by  singing 
and  playing  the  guitar  (Is.  sxiii.  15,  16). 

There  are  two  aspects  in  which  music  appears, 
and  about  which  little  satisfactory  can  be  said : 
the  mysterious  influence  which  it  had  in  driving 
out  the  evil  spirit  from  Saul ,  and  its  intimate  con 
nexion  with  prophecy  and  prophetical  inspiration. 
Miriam  "  the  prophetess  "  exercised  her  prophetical 
functions  as  the  leader  of  the  chorus  of  women 
who  sang  the  song  of  triumph  over  the  Egyptians 
(Ex.  xv.  20).  The  company  of  prophets  whom 
Saul  met  coming  down  from  the  hill  of  God  had 
a  psaltery,  a  tabret,  a  pipe,  and  a  harp  before  them, 
and  smitten  with  the  same  enthusiasm  he  "pro 
phesied  among  them"  (1  Sam.  x.  5,  10).  The 
priests  of  Baal,  challenged  by  Elijah  at  Carmel, 
cried  aloud,  and  cut  themselves  with  knives,  anH 
prophesied  till  sunset  (1  K.  xviii.  29).  The  sons 
of  Asaph,  Heman,  and  Jeduthun,  set  apart  by 
David  for  the  temple  choir,  were  to  "prophesy 
with  harps,  with  psalteries,  and  with  cymbals" 
(1  Chr.  xxv.  1) ;  Jeduthun  "prophesied  with  the 
harp"  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3),  and  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  15 
is  called  "  the  king's  seer"  a  term  which  is  applied 
to  Heman  (1  Chr.  xxv.  5)  and  Asaph  (2  Chr. 


d  At  the  royal  banquets  of  Babylon  were  sung  hymns 
of  praise  in  honour  of  the  gods  (Dan.  v.  4,  23),  and  per 
haps  on  some  such  occasion  as  the  feast  of  Belshazzar 
the  Hebrew  captives  might  have  been  brought  in  to  sing 
the  songs  of  their  native  land  (Ps.  cxxxvii.). 

•  The  use  of  music  in  the  religious  services  of  the 
Therapeutae  Is  described  by  Philo  (De  Vaa  contempl.  p. 
901,  td.  Frankof.l.  At  a  certain  period  in  the  service  one 
of  the  worshippers  rose  and  sang  a  song  of  praise  to  God 
either  cf  his  own  composition,  or  one  from  the  oldo 


poets.  He  was  followed  by  others  in  a  regular  order,  the 
congregation  remaining  quiet  till  the  concluding  prayer, 
in  which  all  joined.  After  a  simple  meal,  the  whole  con 
gregation  arose  and  formed  two  choirs,  one  of  men  and 
one  of  women,  with  the  most  skilful  smger  of  each  for 
leader;  and  in  this  way  sang  hymns  to  God,  sometime* 
with  the  full  chorus,  and  sometimes  with  each  choir  al 
ternately.  In  conclusion,  both  men  and  women  joined  iu 
a  sinpk1  choir,  in  imitation  of  that  on  the  shores  of  tb« 
Red  Sea,  which  was  led  by  Moses  and  Miri  mi. 


MUSIC 

tm,  30)  as  musicians,  as  well  as  to  Gad  the 
prophet  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  11;  1  Chr.  xxix.  29).  The 
spirit  of  Jenovah  came  upon  Jahaziel,  a  Levite  of 
the  sons  of  Asaph,  in  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  and 
fie  foretold  the  success  of  the  royal  army  (2  Chr. 
xx.  14-).  From  all  these  instances  it  is  evident 
that  the  same  Hebrew  root  (X33)  is  used  to 
denote  the  inspiration  under  which  the  prophets 
spoke  and  the  minstrels  sang :  Gesenius  assigns  the 
latter  as  a  secondary  meaning.  In  the  case  of 
Elisha,  the  minstrel  and  the  prophet  are  distinct 
personages,  but  it  is  not  till  the  minstrel  has 
played  that  the  hand  of  Jehovah  comes  upon  the 
prophet  (2  K.  iii.  15).  This  influence  of  music 
has  been  explained  as  follows  by  a  learned  divine 
of  the  Platonist  school:  "  These  divine  enthusiasts 
were  commonly  wont  to  compose  their  songs  and 
nymns  at  the  sounding  of  some  one  musical  instru 
ment  or  other,  as  we  find  it  often  suggested  in  the 


Psalms.     So  Plutarch 
of  the  oracle  antiently 


describes  the  dictate 
;  how  that  it  was 


uttered  in  verse,  in  pomp  of  words,  similitudes,  and 
metaphors,  at  the  sound  of  a  pipe.'  Thus  we  have 
Asaph,  Heman,  and  Jeduthun  set  forth  in  this 

prophetical   preparation,   1   Chr.  xxv.   1 

Thus  R.  Sal.  expounds  the  place  .  .  .  .  '  when 
they  played  upon  their  musical  instruments  they 
prophesied  after  the  manner  of  Elisha' 


And  this  sense  of  this  place,  I  think,  is  much  more 
genuine  than  that  which  a  late  author  of  our  own 
would  fasten  upon  it,  viz.,  that  this  prophesying 
was  nothing  but  the  singing  of  psalms.  For  it  is 
manifest  that  these  prophets  were  not  mere  singers 
but  composers,  and  such  as  were  truly  called  pro 
phets  or  enthusiasts"  (Smith,  Select  Discourses, 
vi  c.  7,  pp.  238,  239,  ed.  1660).  All  that  can 
be  safely  concluded  is  that  in  their  external  mani 
festations  the  effect  of  music  in  exciting  the  emo 
tions  of  the  sensitive  Hebrews,  the  frenzy  of  Saul's 
madness  (1  Sam.  xviii.  10),  and  the  religious 
enthusiasm  of  the  prophets,  whether  of  Baal  or 
Jehovah,  were  so  nearly  alike  as  to  be  described  by 
the  same  word.  The  case  of  Saul  is  more  diffi 
cult  still.  We  cannot  be  admitted  to  the  secret 
of  his  dark  malady.  Two  turning  points  in  his 
history  are  the  two  interviews  with  Samuel,  the 
first  and  the  last,  if  we  except  that  dread  encounter 
which  the  despairing  monarch  challenged  before  the 
fatal  day  of  Gilboa.  On  the  first  of  these,  Samuel 
foretold  his  meeting  with  the  company  of  prophets 
with  their  minstrelsy,  the  external  means  by  which 
the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  should  come  upon  him,  and  he 
should  be  changed  into  another  man  (1  Sam.  x.  5). 
The  last  occasion  of  their  meeting  was  the  disobedience 
of  Saul  in  sparing  the  Amalekites,  for  which  he  was 
rejected  from  being  king  (1  Sam.  xv.  26).  Imme 
diately  after  this  we  are  told  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah 
departed  from  Saul,  and  an  "  evil  spirit  from  Jehovah 
troubled  him"  (1  Sam.  xvi.  14) ;  and  his  attendants, 
who  had  perhaps  witnessed  the  strange  transforma 
tion  wrought  upon  him  by  the  music  of  the  pro 
phets,  suggested  that  the  same  means  should  be 
employed  for  his  restoration.  "  Let  our  lord  now 
command  thy  servants  before  thee,  to  seek  out  a  man, 
a  cunning  player  on  an  harp :  and  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  when  the  evil  spirit  from  God  is  upon  thee, 
that  he  shall  play  with  his  hand,  and  thou  shalt  be 


MUSICAL  INSTRUMENTS      445 

anger  and  jealousy  supervened,  the  remedy  which 
ha<l  soothed  the  frenzy  of  insanity  had  -lost  its  charm 
(1  bam.  xvm.  10,  1  1,  xix.  9,  10).  It  seems  therefore 
that  the  passage  of  Seneca,  which  has  often  beeo 
quoted  in  explanation  of  this  phenomenon,  "  Pytha 
goras  perturbationeslyracomponebat"  (De  Ira,  iii. 
9)  is  scarcely  applicable,  and  we  must  be  content  to 
leave  the  narrative  as  it  stands.  [W.  A.  W.] 

MUSICAL  INSTRUMENTS.  In  addition  to 
the  instruments  of  music  which  have  been  represented 
in  our  version  by  some  modem  word,  and  are  treated 
under  their  respective  titles,  there  are  other  terms 
which  are  vaguely  or  generally  rendered.  These  are  — 

1.  Jirn,  dachavdn,  Chald.,  rendered  "  instru 
ments  of  musick"  in  Dan.  vi.  18.    The  margin  gives 
"  or  table,  perhaps  lit.  concubines."     The  last-men 
tioned  rendering  is  that  approved  by  Geseuius,  and 
seems  most  probable.     The  translation,  "  instru 
ments  of  musick,"  seems  to  have  originated  with 
the  Jewish  commentators,  R.  Nathan,  K.  Levi,  and 
Aben  Ezra,  among  others,  who  represent  the  word 
by  the  Hebrew  neginoth,  that  is,  stringed  instru 
ments  which  were  played  by  being  struck  with  the 
hand  or  the  plectrum. 

2.  D*3D,  minnim,  rendered  with  great  proba 
bility  "  stringed-instruments"   in    Ps.  cl.  4.      It 
appears   to   be  a  general   term,   but   beyond   this 
nothing  is  known  of  it  ;  and  the  word  is  chiefly 
interesting  from  its  occurrence  in  a  difficult  passage 
in  Ps.  xlv.  8,  which  stands  in  the  A.  V.  "  out  of  the 
ivory  palaces  whereby  (*3O,  minni)  they  have  made 
thee  glad,"  a  rendering  which  is  neither  intelligible 
nor   supported   by  the  Hebrew  idiom.      Geseuius 
and  most  of  the  moderns  follow  Sebastian  Schmid 
in  translating,  "  out  of  the  ivory  palaces  the  stringed- 
instruments  make  thee  glad." 

3.  "litJ>y,  'dsor,  "  an  instrument  of  ten  strings," 
Ps.  xcii.  3.     The  full  phrase  is  iVtPy  ^33,  ncbel 


'dsor,  "  a  ten-striiiged  psaltery,"  as  in  Ps.  xxxiii.  2, 
cxliv.  9  ;  and  the  true  rendering  of  the  first-men 
tioned  passage  would  be  "  upon  an  instrument  of 
ten  strings,  even  upon  the  psaltery."  [PSALTERY.] 


4.  rnjJ',  shidddh,  is  found  only  in  one  very 
obscure  passage,  Eccl.  ii.  8,  "  I  gat  me  men-singers 
and  women-singers,  and  the  delights  of  the  sons  of 
men,  musical  instruments,  and  that  of  all  sorts" 
i"nK>,  shidddh  veshiddoth).  The  words 
thus  rendered  have  received  a  great  variety  of  mean 
ings.  They  are  translated  "  drinking- vessels  "  by 
Aquila  and  the  Vulgate;  "  cup-bearers"  by  the 
LXX.,  Peshito-Syriac,  Jerome,  and  the  Arabic  ver 
sion  ;  "  baths  "  by  the  Chaldee  ;  and  "  musical 
instruments"  by  Dav.  Kimchi,  followed  by  Luther 
and  the  A.  V.,  as  well  as  by  many  commentators. 
By  others  they  are  supposed  to  refer  to  the  women  of 
the  royal  harem.  But  the  most  probable  interpre 
tation  to  be  put  upon  them  is  that  suggested  by  the 
usage  of  the  Talmud,  where  H'VK',  sIAdali,  denotes 
a  "palanquin"  or  "litter"  for  women.  The  whole 
question  isfdiscussed  in  Gesenius'  Thesaurus,  p.  1365. 

5. 

musick ' 
margin 


shdlishim,  rendered  "  instruments  of 
in  the  A.  V.  of  1  Sam.  xviii.  6,  and  in  the 
three-stringed  instruments,"  from  the  root 


well And  it  came  to  pass  when  the  spirit  \shdlosh,  "three."    Roediger  (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1429) 


from  God  was  upon  Saul,  that  David  took  an  harp 
and  played  with  his  hand.  So  Saul  was  refreshed, 
and  was  well,  and  the  evil  spirit  departed  from  him  " 
(1  Sam.  xvi.  16,  23).  But  on  two  occasions,  when 


translates  "  triangles,"  which  are  said  to  have  been 
invented  in  Syria,  from  the  same  root.  We  have 
no  means  of  deciding  which  is  the  more  correct. 
The  LXX.  and  Syriac  give  "  cymbals/'  ami  tha 


446 


MUSTARD 


Vulgate  "  sistra ;"  while  others  render  it  "  noble 
songs  "  (comp.  Prov.  xxii.  20).  [W.  A.  W.] 

MUSTARD  (trivairi :  sinapis)  occurs  in  Matt, 
xiii.  31 ;  Mark  iv.  31  ;  Lukn  xiii.  19,  in  which 
passages  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  compared  to  a 
grain  of  mustard-seed  which  a  man  took  and  sowed 
in  his  garden  ;  and  in  Matt.  xvii.  20,  Luke  xvii.  6, 
where  our  Lord  says  to  His  apostles,  "if  ye  had 
faith  as  a  grain  of  mustard-seed,  ye  might  say  to 
this  mountain,  remove  hence  to  yonder  place." 

The  subject  of  the  mustard-tree  of  Scripture  has 
of  late  years  been  a  matter  of  considerable  contro 
versy,  the  common  mustard-plant  being  supposed 
unable  to  fulfil  the  demands  of  the  Biblical  allu- 
ikm.  In  a  paper  by  the  late  Dr.  Royle,  read 
before  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society,  and  published  in 
No.  xv.  of  their  Journal  (1844),  entitled,  "  On  the 
Identification  of  the  Mustard-tree  of  Scripture,"  the 
^uthor  concludes  that  the  Sahadora  persica  is  the 
tree  in  question.  He  supposes  the  Sahadora  per- 
tica  to  be  the  same  as  the  tree  called  Khardal  (the 
Arabic  for  mustard),  seeds  of  which  are  employed 
throughout  Syria  as  a  substitute  for  mustard,  of 
which  they  have  the  taste  and  properties.  This 
tree,  according  to  the  statement  of  Mr.  Ameuny,  a 
Syrian,  quoted  by  Dr.  Royle,  is  found  all  along  the 
banks  of  the  Jordan,  near  the  lake  of  Tiberias,  and 
near  Damascus,  and  is  said  to  be  generally  recog 
nised  in  Syria  as  the  mustard-tree  of  Scripture. 
It  appears  that  Captains  Irby  and  Mangles,  who 
had  observed  this  tree  near  the  Dead  Sea,  were 
struck  with  the  idea  that  it  was  the  mustard-tree 
of  the  parable.  As  these  travellers  were  advancing 
towards  Kerek  from  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  after  leaving  its  borders  they  entered  a 
wooded  country  with  high  rushes  and  marshes. 
"  Occasionally,"  they  say,  "  we  met  with  specimens 
of  trees,  &c.,  such  as  none  of  our  party  had  seen 
before  .  .  .  Amongst  the  trees  which  we  knew,  were 
various  species  of  Acacia,  and  in  some  instances  we 
met  with  the  dwarf  Mimosa  .  .  .  There  was  one 
curious  tree  which  we  observed  in  great  num 
bers,  and  which  bore  a  fruit  in  bunches,  resembling 
in  appearance  the  currant,  with  the  colour  of  the 
plum ;  it  has  a  pleasant,  though  strong  aromatic 
taste,  resembling  mustard,  and  if  taken  in  any 
quantity,  produces  a  similar  irritability  in  the  nose 
and  eyes.  The  leaves  of  this  tree  have  the  same 
pungent  flavour  as  the  fruit,  though  not  so  strong. 
We  think  it  probable  that  this  is  the  tree  our 
Saviour  alluded  to  in  the  parable  of  the  mustard- 
seed,  and  not  the  mustard-plant  which  is  to  be 
found  in  the  north"  (Trav.  May  8).  Dr.  Royle 
thus  sums  up  his  arguments  in  favour  of  the 
Salvadora  persica  representing  the  mustard-tree 
of  Scripture : — "  The  S.  persica  appears  better 
calculated  than  any  other  tree  that  has  yet  been 
adduced  to  answer  to  every  thing  that  is  re 
quired,  especially  if  we  take  into  account  its 
name  and  the  opinions  held  respecting  it  in  Syria. 
We  ha\re  in  it  a  small  seed,  which  sown  in  cul 
tivated  ground  grows  up  and  abounds  in  fo 
liage.  This  being  pungent,  may  like  the  seeds 
have  been  used  as  a  condiment,  as  mustard-and- 
oress  is  with  us.  The  nature  of  the  plant  is  to  be 
come  arboreous,  and  thus  it  will  form  a  large  shrub 
or  a  tree,  twenty-five  feet  high,  under  which  a  horse 
man  may  stand  when  the  soil  and  climate  are  fa 
vourable  ;  it  produces  numerous  branches  and  leaves, 
under  which  birds  may  and  do  take  shelter,  as  well 
as  build  their  uests  ;  it  has  a  name  in  Syria  which 
may  be  considered  iis  traditional  from  the  earliest 


MUSTARD 

times,  of  which  the  Greek  is  a  correct  translation ; 
its  seeds  are  used  for  the  same  purposes  as  mustard  ; 
and  in  a  country  where  trees  are  not  plentiful, 
that  is,  the  shores  of -the  lake  of  Tiberias,  this  tret 
is  said  to  abound,  that  is  in  the  very  locality  where 
the  parable  was  spoken"  (Treatise  on  the  Mus 
tard-tree,  &c.,  p.  24). 


Salvadora  Persica. 


Notwithstanding  all  that  has  been  adduced  by 
Dr.  Royle  in  support  of  his  argument,  we  confess 
ourselves  unable  to  believe  that  the  subject  of  the 
mustard-tree  of  Scripture  is  thus  finally  settled. 
But,  before  the  claims  of  the  Sahadora  persica  are 
discussed,  it  will  be  well  to  consider  whether  some 
mustard-plant  (Sinapis),  may  not  after  all  be  the 
mustard-tree  of  the  parable:  at  any  rate  this  opi 
nion  has  been  held  by  many  writers,  who  appeal- 
never  to  have  entertained  any  doubt  upon  the 
subject.  Hiller,  Celsius,  Rosenmiiller,  who  all 
studied  the  botany  of  the  Bible,  and  older  writers, 
such  as  Erasmus,  Zezerus,  Grotius,  are  content  to 
believe  that  some  common  mustard -plant  is  the 
plant  of  the  parable ;  and  more  recently  Mr.  Lam 
bert  in  his  "  Note  on  the  Mustard-plant  of  Scrip 
ture"  (see  Linnean  Trans,  vol.  xvii.  p.  449),  has 
argued  in  behalf  of  the  Sinapis  nigra. 

The  objection  commonly  made  against  any  Sina 
pis  being  the  plant  of  the  parable  is,  that  the 
seed  grew  into  "  a  tree"  (SfvSpov),  or  as  St.  Luke 
has  it,  "  a  great  tree "  (SfvSpov  (ieya),  in  the 
branches  of  which  the  fowls  of  the  air  are  said  to 
come  and  lodge.  Now  in  answer  to  the  above  ob 
jection  it  is  urged  with  great  truth,  that  the  ex 
pression  is  figurative  and  Oriental,  and  that  in  a 
proverbial  simile  no  literal  accuracy  is  to  be  ex 
pected  ;  it  is  an  error,  for  which  the  language  of 
Scripture  is  not  accountable,  to  assert,  as  Dr.  Koyle 
and  some  others  have  done,  that  the  passage  implies 
that  birds  "built  their  nests"  in  the  tree,  the 
Greek  word  Ka.T3.ffKitvo<i>  lias  no  such  meaning,  the 
word  merely  means  "  to  settle  or  rest  upon  "  any 
thing  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time ;  the  birds  came, 
"insidendi  et  versandi  cansa"  as  Hiller  (7/i'cro- 
phyi.  ii.  (53)  explains  the  i«lir:;*> :  nor  is  tin-re  an) 


MUSTARD 

occasion  to  suppose  that  the  expression  "  fowls  of 
the  air  "  denotes  any  other  than  the  smaller  inses- 
aorial  kinds,  linnets,  finches,  &c.,  and  not  the 
"  aquatic  fowls  by  the  lake  side,  or  partridges  and 
pigeons  hovering  over  the  rich  plain  of  Gennesa- 
reth,"  which  Prof.  Stanley  (S.  $  P.  427)  recog 
nises  as  "  the  birds  that  came  and  devoured  the  seed 
Ly  the  way  side" — for  the  larger  birds  are  wild  and 
avoid  the  way  side — or  as  those  "  which  took  refuge 
in  the  spreading  branches  of  the  mustard-tree." 
Killer's  explanation  is  probably  the  correct  one ; 
that  the  birds  came  and  settled  on  the  mustard- 
plant  for  the  sake  of  the  seed,  of  which  they  are 
very  fond.  Again,  whatever  the  fflvoari  may  be, 
it  is  expressly  said  to  be  a  herb,  or  more  properly 
"  a  garden  herb "  (\dxavov,  olus).  As  to  the 
plant  being  called  a  "  tree  "  or  a  "  great  tree,"  the 
expression  is  not  only  an  Oriental  one,  but  it  is 
clearly  spoken  with  reference  to  some  other  thing  ; 
the  fftvairt  with  respect  to  the  other  herbs  of  the 
garden  may,  considering  the  size  to  which  it  grows, 
justly  be  called  "  a  great  tree,"  though  of  course, 
with  respect  to  trees  properly  so  named,  it  could 
not  be  called  one  at  all.  This,  or  a  somewhat 
similar  explanation  is  given  by  Celsius  and  Hiller, 


MUSTARD 


447 


Huiapis  Nigra. 


and  old  commentators  generally,  and  we  confess  w 
see  no  reason  why  we  should  not  be  satisfied  wit! 
it.     Irby  and  Mangles  mention  the  large  size  whic! 
the  mustard-plant  attains  in   Palestine.     In  thei 
journey  from   Bysan  to   Adjeloun,  in  the  Jordan 
valley,  they  crossed  a  small    plain  very    thickly 
covered   with   herbage,   particularly   the    mustard- 
plant,  which  reached  as  high  as  their  horses'  heads. 
'Trav.  March  12.)     Dr.  Kitto  says  this  plant  was 


robably  the  Sinapis  orientalis  (nujra\  wnich  attains 
nder  a  favouring  climate  a  stature  which  it  will  not 
each  in  our  country.    Dr.  Thomson  also  (  The  Land 
nd  the  Book,  p.  414),  says  he  has  seen  the  Wild 
dustard  on  the  rich  plain  of  Akkar  as  tall  as  the 
lorse  and  the  rider.    Now,  it  is  clear  from  Scriptur? 
hat  the  ffivairt  was  cultivated  in  our  Lord's  time, 
he  seed  a  "  man  took  and  sowed  in  his  field ;"  St. 
,uke  says,  "cast  into  his  garden:"  if  then,  the 
rild  plant  on  the  rich  plain  of  Akkar  grows  as 
igh  as  a  man  on  horseback,  it  might  attain  to  the 
ame   or  a   greater   height  when   in  a  cultivated 
garden ;  and  if,  as  Lady  Callcott  has  observed,  wf 
ke  into  account  the  very  low  plants  and  shrubs 
ipon  which  birds  often  roost,  it  will  readily  be  seen 
;hat  some  common  mustard-plant  is  able  to  fulfil  all 
,he  Scriptural  demands.     As  to  the  story  of  the 
Rabbi  Simeon  Ben  Calaphtha  having  in  his  garden 
a  mustard-plant,  into  which  he  was  accustomed  to 
climb  as  men  climb  into  a  fig-tree,  it  can  only  be 
taken  for  what  Talmudical   statements   generally 
are  worth,  and  must  be  quite  insufficient  to  afford 
grounds  for  any  argument.     But  it  may  be  asked, 
Why  not  accept  the  explanation  that  the  Salvadora 
persica  is  the  tree  denoted  ? — a  tree  which  will  lite 
rally  meet  all  the  demands  of  the  parable.     Be 
cause,  we  answer,  where  the  commonly  received 
opinion  can  be  shown  to  be  in  full  accordance  witn 
the  Scriptural  allusions,  there  is  no  occasion  to  be 
dissatisfied  with  it ;  and  again,  because  at  present 
we  know  nothing  certain  of  the  occurrence  of  the 
Salvadora  persica  in  Palestine,  except  that  it  occurs 
in  the  small  tropical  low  valley  of  Engedi,  near  the 
Dead  Sea,  from  whence  Dr.  Hooker  saw  specimens, 
but  it    is   evidently    of   rare   occurrence.       Mr. 
Ameuny  says  he  had  seen  it  all  along  the  banks 
of  the  Jordan,  near  the  lake  of  Tiberias  and  Da 
mascus  ;  but  this  statement  is  certainly  erroneous. 
We  know  from  Pliny,  Dioscorides,  and  other  Greek 
and  Roman  writers,  that  mustard-seeds  were  much 
valued,  and  were  used  as  a  condiment ;  and  it  is 
more  probable  that  the  Jews  of  our  Lord's  time 
were  in  the  habit  of  making  a  similar  use  of  the 
seeds  of  some  common  mustard  (Sinapis~),  than  that 
they  used  to  plant  in  their  gardens  the  seed  of  a 
tree  which  certainly  cannot  fulfil  the  Scriptural  de 
mand  of  being  called  "  a  pot-herb." 

The  expression  "  which  is  indeed  the  least  of  all 
seeds,"  is  in  all  probability  hyperbolical,  to  denote 
a  very  small  seed  indeed,  as  there  are  many  seeds 
which  are  smaller  than  mustard.  "  The  Lord 
in  his  popular  teaching,"  says  Trench  (Notes  on 
Parables,  108),  "adhered  to  the  popular  lan 
guage  ; "  and  the  mustard-seed  was  used  prover 
bially  to  denote  anything  very  minute  (see  the 
quotations  from  the  Talmud  in  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm 
p.  322  :  also  the  Koran,  Sur.  31). 

The  parable  of  the  mustard-plant  may  be  thus 
paraphrased : — "  The  Gospel  dispensation  is  Jike  a 
grain  of  mustard-seed  which  a  man  sowed  in  his 
garden,  which  indeed  is  one  of  the  least  of  ah  seeds  ; 
but  which,  when  it  iprings  up,  becomes  a  tall 
branched  plant,  on  the  branches  of  which  the  birds 
come  and  settle  seeking  their  food."*  [W.  H.] 


»  Dr.  Hooker  has  read  the  proof-sheet  of  this  article, 
•nd  returned  it  with  the  following  remarks :  "  I  quite 
agree  with  all  you  say  about  Mustard.  My  best  inform 
ants  laughed  at  the  Idea  of  the  Salradora  persica  either 
being  the  mustard,  or  as  being  sufficiently  well  known  to 
be  made  use  of  In  a  parable  at  all.  I  am  satisfied  that 
It  is  a  very  rare  plant  in  Syria,  and  is  probably  confined 
Vo  the  hot  low  sub  tropical  Kngedl  valley,  where  various 


other  Indian  and  Arabian  types  appear  at  the  Ultima 
Thule  of  their  northern  wanderings.  Of  the  mustard- 
plants  which  I  saw  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  one  was 
10  feel  high,  drawn  up  amongst  bushes,  &c.,  and  not 
thicker  than  whipcord.  I  was  told  it  was  a  well-kniv  n 
condiment,  and  cultivated  by  the  Arabs  •  it  is  tht 
common  wild  Sin&fit  nigra." 


448 


MUTH-LABBEN 


MUTH-LAB'BEN.     "  To  the  chief  musician 

upon  Muth-labben"    (]&   TND  by  :    faip  ruv 

Kpv<t>luv  TOW  viov:  pro  occultis  filii),  is  the  title 

of  Ps.   ix.,   which  has  given  rise  to  infinite  con 

jecture.     Two  difficulties  in  connexion  with  it  have 

to  be  resolved  ;  first,  to  determine  the  true  reading 

of  the  Hebrew,  and  then  to  ascertain  its  meaning. 

Neither  of  these  points  has  been  satisfactorily  ex 

plained.     It  is  evident  that  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate 

must  have  read  J"rtB7J?  ?y»  "  concerning  the  mys 

teries,"  and  so  the  Arabic  and  Ethiopic  versions. 

The  Targum,   Symmachus,a  and  Jerome,b  in  his 

translation  of  the  Hebrew,  adhered  to  the  received 

text,  while  Aquila,0  retaining  the  consonants  as  they 

at  present  stand,  -cad  al-muth  as  one  word,  JTlJDpy. 

"youth,"  which  would  be  the  regular  form  of  the 

abstract  noun,  though  it  does  not  occur  in  Biblical 

Hebrew.     In  support  of  the  reading  niE?y  as  one 

•vord,  we  have  the  authority  of  28  of  Kennicott's 

MSS.,  and  the  assertion  of  Jarchi  that  he  had  seen 

it  so  written,  as  in  Ps.  xlviii.  14,  in  the  Great  Ma- 

sorah.     If  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate  and  LXX.  be 

correct  with  regard  to  the  consonants,  the  words 

might  be  pointed  thus,  fl'lD^}  7JJ,  'al  'alamfith, 

"  upon  Alamoth,"  as  in  the  title  of  Ps.  xlvi.,  and 

p?  is  possibly  a  fragment  of  PFlp  l|33/,  Hbnt  Ko- 

rach,  "  for  the  sons  of  Korah,"  which,  appears  in 

the  same  title.      At  any  rate  such  a  reading  would 

have  the  merit  of  being  intelligible,  which  is  more 

than  can  be  said  of  most  explanations  which  have 

been  given.     But  if  the  Masoretic  reading  be  the 

true  one,  it  is  hard  to  attach  any  meaning  to  it. 

The  Targum  renders  the  title  of  the  psalm,  —  "  on 

the  death  of  the  man  who  came  forth  from  between 

(J*3)  the  camps,"  alluding  to  Goliath,  the  Philis 

tine   champion  (D^SH   B^X,    1    Sam.   xvii.  4). 

That  David  composed  the   psalm  as  a  triumphal 

song  upon  the  slaughter  of  his  gigantic  adversary, 

was   a  tradition  which   is  mentioned   by   Kimchi 

merely  as  an  on  dit.     Others  render  it  "  on   the 

death  of  the  son,"  and  apply  it  to  Absalom  ;  but,  as 

Jarchi  remarks,  there  is  nothing  in  the  character  of 

the  psalm  to   wan-ant  such   an  application.     He 

mentions  another  interpretation,  which  appears  to 

have  commended  itself  to  Grotius  and  Hengsten- 

berg,  by  which  labben  is  an  anagram  of  nabal,  and 

the  psalm  is  referred  to  the  death  of  Nabal,  but  the 

Rabbinical  commentator  had  the  good  sense  to  reject 

it  as  untenable,  though  there  is  as  little  to  be  said 

in  favour  of  his  own  view.     His  words  are  —  ''  but 

I  say  that  this  song  is  of  the  future  to  come,  when 

the  childhood  and  youth  of  Israel  shall  be  made 

white  (p?JV),  and  their  righteousness  be  revealed 

and  their  salvation  draw  nigh,  when  Esau  and  his 

seed  shall  be  blotted  out."     He  takes  JT1D?y  as  om 


word,  signifying  "youth,"  and  J3p  =  }3?p,  "to 
whiten."  Menahem,  a  commentator  quoted  by 
Jarchi,  interprets  the  title  as  addressed  "  to  the  mu 
sician  upon  the  stringed  instruments  called  Alamoth, 
to  instruct,"  taking  }37  as  if  it  were  pin? 
T313A  Donesh  supposes  that  labben  was  the  name 
of  a  man  who  warred  with  David  in  those  days,  and 
to  whom  reference  is  made  as  "  the  wicked  "  i 
rerse  5.  Arama  (quoted  by  Dr.  Gill  in  his  Expo- 


*•  irepi  Oavarov  rov  viov.  b  Super  morte  fdii. 

*    f€OI'lOT»)TO«    TOU    VIOV. 


MYRA 

tition)  identifies  him  with  Saul.  As  a  last  resource 
vimchi  suggests  that  the  title  was  intended  to  con 
ey  instructions  to  the  Levite  minstrel  Ben,  wliwr 
name  occurs  in  1  Chr.  xv.  18  among  the  temple 
choir,  and  whose  brethren  played  "  with  psalteries 
on  Alamoth."  There  is  reason,  however,  to  suspect 
;hat  the  reading  in  this  verse  is  corrupt,  as  the 
name  is  not  repeated  with  the  others  in  verse  20. 
There  still  remain  to  be  noticed  the  conjectures  of 
Delitzsch,  that  Muth-labben  denotes  the  tone  or 
melody  with  the  words  of  the  song  associated  with 
t,  of  others  that  it  was  a  musical  instrument,  an<* 
of  Hupfeld  that  it  was  the  commencement  of  an  old 
song,  either  signifying  "  die  for  the  son,"  or  "  death 
;o  the  son."  Hitzig  and  others  regard  it  as  an 
abbreviation  containing  a  reference  to  Ps.  xlviii.  14. 
The  difficulty  of  the  question  is  sufficiently  indi 
cated  by  the  explanation  which  Gesenius  himself 
[Thes.  p.  741  a)  was  driven  to  adopt,  that  the 
title  of  the  psalm  signified  that  it  was  "to  be 
chanted  by  boys  with  virgins'  voices." 

The  renderings  of  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  induced 
the  early  Christian  commentators  to  refer  the 
psalm  to  the  Messiah.  Augustine  understands  "  the 
son"  as  "the  only  begotten  son  of  Gm\"  The 
Syriac  version  is  auotpH  m  support  of  this  interpre 
tation,  but  the  titles  of  the  Psalms  in  that  version 
are  generally  constructed  without  any  reference  tb 
the  Hebrew,  and  therefore  it  cannot  be  appealed  to 
as  an  authority. 

On  all  accounts  it  seems  extremely  probable  tiwt 
the  title  in  its  present  form  is  only  a  fragment  of 
the  original,  which  may  have  been  in  full  what  h«4 
been  suggested  above.  But,  in  the  words  of  the 
Assembly's  Annotations,  "  when  all  hath  been  said 
that  can  be  said  the  conclusion  must  be  the  same  as 
before  ;  that  these  titles  are  very  uncertain  things,  il 
not  altogether  unknown  in  these  days."  [W.  A.  W.] 

MYN'BUS  (MwSos),  a  town  on  the  coast  of 
CARIA,  between  MILETUS  and  HALICARNASSUS. 
The  convenience  of  its  position  in  regard  to  trade 
was  probably  the  reason  why  we  find  in  1  Mace, 
xv.  23  that  it  was  the  residence  of  a  Jewish  popu 
lation.  Its  ships  were  well  known  in  very  early 
times  (Herod,  v.  33),  and  its  harbour  is  specially 
mentioned  by  Strabo  (xiv.  658).  The  name  still 
lingers  in  the  modern  Mcntesche,  though  the  re 
mains  of  the  city  are  probably  at  Gumishlu,  where 
Admiral  Beaufort  found  an  ancient  pier  and  other 
ruins.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MY'KA  (rei  Mupa),  an  important  town  in 
LYCIA,  and  interesting  to  us  as  the  place  where 
St.  Paul,  on  his  voyage  to  Rome  (Acts  xxvii.  5), 
was  removed  from  the  Adramyttian  ship  which  had 
brought  him  from  Caesarea,  and  entered  the  Alex 
andrian  ship  in  which  he  was  wrecked  on  the  coast 
of  Malta.  [ADRAMYTTIUM.]  The  travellers  had 
availed  themselves  of  the  first  of  these  vessels  be 
cause  their  course  to  Italy  necessarily  took  them 
past  the  coasts  of  the  province  of  ASIA  (ver.  2), 
expecting  in  some  harbour  on  these  coasts  to  find 
another  vessel  bound  to  the  westward.  This  ex 
pectation  was  fulfilled  (ver.  6"). 

It  might  be  asked  how  it  happened  that  an 
Alexandrian  ship  bound  for  Italy  was  so  far  out 
of  her  course  as  to  be  at  Myra.  This  question  is 
easily  answered  by  those  who  have  some  ac 
quaintance  with  the  navigation  of  the  Levant. 
Myra  is  nearly  due  north  of  Alexandria,  the 
harbours  in  the  neighbourhood  are  numerous 
and  good,  the  mountains  high  mid  easily  ^'•'ii; 


ftlYRKH 

stud  the  current  sets  along  the  coast  to  the  west 
ward  (Smith's  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St. 
Paul).  Moreover,  to  say  nothing  of  the  possibility 
of  landing  or  taking  in  passengers  or  goods,  the 
wind  was  blowing  about  this  time  continuously 
and  violently  from  the  N.W.,  and  the  same  weather 
which  impeded  the  Adramyttian  ship  (ver.  4)  would 
be  a  hindrance  to  the  Alexandrian  (see  ver.  7;  Life 
and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ch.  xxiii.). 

Some  unimportant  MSS.  having  \ixrrpa  in  this 
passage,  Grotius  conjectured  that  the  true  reading 
might  be  Aipvpa  (Bentleii  Critica  Sacra,  ed.  A.  A. 
Ellis).  This  supposition,  though  ingenious,  is  quite 
unnecessary.  Both  Limyra  and  Myra  were  well 
known  among  the  maritime  cities  of  Lycia.  The 
harbour  of  the  latter  was  strictly  Andriace,  distant 
from  it  between  two  and  three  miles,  but  the 
rivur  was  navigable  to  the  city  (Appian,  B.  C. 
iv.  82). 

Myra  (called  Dembra  by  the  Greeks)  is  remark 
able  still  for  its  remains  of  various  periods  of  his 
tory.  The  tombs,  enriched  with  ornament,  and 
many  of  them  having  inscriptions  in  the  ancient 
Lycian  character,  show  that  it  must  have  been 
wealthy  in  early  times.  Its  enormous  theatre 
attests  its  considerable  population  in  what  may  be 
called  its  Greek  age.  In  the  deep  gorge  which 
leads  into  the  mountains  is  a  large  Byzantine  church, 
a  relic  of  the  Christianity  which  may  have  begun 
with  St.  Paul's  visit.  It  is  reasonable  to  conjecture 
that  this  may  have  been  a  metropolitan  church, 
inasmuch  as  we  find  that  when  Lycia  was  a  pro 
vince,  in  the  later  Roman  empire,  Myra  was  its 
capital  (Hierocl.  p.  684).  In  later  times  it  was 
curiously  called  the  port  of  the  Adriatic,  and  visited 
by  Anglo-Saxon  travellers  (Early  Travels  in  Pa 
lestine,  pp.  33, 138).  Legend  says  that  St.  Nicholas, 
the  patron  saint  of  the  modem  Greek  sailors,  was 
born  at  PATARA,  and  buried  at  Myra,  and  his  sup 
posed  relics  were  taken  to  St.  Petersburgh  by  a 
Russian  frigate  during  the  Greek  revolution. 

The  remains  of  Myra  have  had  the  advantage  of 
very  full  description  by  the  following  travellers: 
Leake,  Beaufort,  Fellows,  Texier,  and  Spratt  and 
Forbes.  [J.  S.  H.] 

MYRRH,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Hebrew  words  Mor  and  L6t. 

1.  MorC^Q*:  ffpvpva,  ffraicr'fi,  fj.vpvivos,  KpA- 
KOS  :  myrrha,  myrrhinus,  myrrha)  is  mentioned  in 
Ex.  xxx.  23,  as  one  of  the  ingredients  of  the  "  oil 
of  holy  ointment;"  in  Esth.  ii.  12,  as  one  of  the 
substances  used  in  the  purification  of  women  ;  in 
Ps.  xlv.  8,  Prov.  vii.  17,  and  in  several  passages 
in  Canticles,  as  a  perfume.  The  Greek  ir/iv 
occurs  in  Matt.  ii.  11  amongst  the  gifts  brought 
by  the  wise  men  to  the  infant  Jesus,  and  in  Mark 
xv.  23,  it  is  said  that  "  wine  mingled  with  myrrh  " 
(oIi/os  iff/jivpifffifvos)  was  offered  to,  but  refused 
by,  our  Lord  on  the  cross.  Myrrh  was  also  used 
for  embalming  (see  John  xix.  39,  and  Herod,  ii.  8 
Various  conjectures  have  been  made  as  to  the  real 
nature  of  the  substance  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
m6r  (see  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  522) ;  and  much  doubt 
has  existed  as  to  the  countries  in  which  it  is  pro 
duced.  According  to  the  testimony  of  Herodotus 
(iii.  107),  Dioscorides  (i.  77),  Theophrastus  (is. 
4,  §1),  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  49),  Strabo,  Pliny, 
&c.,  the  tree  which  produces  myrrh  grows  in 
Arabia,  PUnv  (rii,  16'i  says,  in  different  parts  of 

*  From  root  "HE,  ••  to  drop." 

*  Plutarch,  however,  was  probably  In  error,  and  has 


MYRItH 


449 


Arabia,  and  asserts  that  there  sire  several  Kinds  of 
myrrh  both  wild  and  cultivated:  it  is  probable 
,hat  under  tl  o  name  of  myrrha  he  is  describing 
different  resinous  productions.  Theophrastus,  wlrj 
s  generally  pretty  accurate  in  his  observations,  rt- 
marks  (is.  4.  §1),  that  myrrh  is  produced  in  the 
middle  of  Arabia,  around  Saba  and  Adramytta. 
Some  ancient  writers,  as  Propertius  (i.  2,  3)  and 
Oppian  (Halieut.  iii.  403),  speak  of  myrrh  as 
found  in  Syria  (see  also  Belon,  Observ.  ii.  ch.  80) ; 
'thers  conjecture  India  and  Aethiopia;  Plutarch 
(fs.  et  Osir.  p.  383)  asserts  that  it  is  produced  in 
Egypt,  and  is  there  called  Bal.  "  The  fact,"  ob 
serves  Dr.  Royle  (s.  v.  Mor,  Kitto's  Cycl.),  "  of 
myrrh  being  called  bal  among  the  Egyptians  is  ex 
tremely  curious,  for  bol  is  the  Sanscrit  bold,  the 
name  for  myrrh  throughout  India."  b 

It  would  appear  that  the  ancients  generally  are 
correct  in  what  they  state  of  the  localities  where 
myrrh  is  produced,  for  Ehrenberg  and  Hemprich 
have  proved  that  myrrh  is  found  in  Arabia  Felix, 
thus  confirming  the  statements  of  Theophrastus  and 
Pliny;  and  Mr.  Johnson  (Travels  in  Abyssinia,  i. 
249)  found  myrrh  exuding  from  cracks  in  the  back 
of  a  tree  in  Koran-hedulah  in  Adal,  and  Forsk&l  men 
tions  two  myrrh-producing  trees,  Amyris  Kata.fa.nd 
Amyris  Kafal,  as  occurring  near  Haes  in  Arabia 
Felix.  The  myrrh-tree  which  Ehrenberg  and  Hemp- 
rich  found  in  the  borders  of  Arabia  Felix,  and  that 
which  Mr.  Johnson  saw  in  Abyssinia  are  believed 
to  be  identical ;  the  tree  is  the  Balsamodendron 
myrrha,  "  a  low  thorny  ragged-looking  tree,  with 
bright  trifoliate  leaves:"  it  is  probably  the  Mwrr 
of  Abu  '1  Fadli,  of  which  he  says  "  murr  is  the 
Arabic  name  of  a  thorny  tree  like  an  acacia,  from 
which  flows  a  white  liquid,  which  thickens  anJ 
becomes  a  gum." 


Bclbdmodemlron  Mytrha. 

That  myrrh  has  been  long  exported  from  Africa 
we  learn  from  Arrian,  who  mentions  ffptpva  8.6 
one  of  the  articles  of  export  from  the  ancient 
district  of  Barbaria:  the  Egyptians  perhaps  ob' 

confounded  the  Copti-  sal,  "  myrrh,"  with  bal, "  aa  eye." 
See  Jablonski,  Opusc.  \.  49,  ed.  te  Water. 
I  2  0 


450 


MYRRH 


tamed  their  myrrh  from  the  country  of  the  Trog 
lodytes  (Nubia),  as  the  best  wild  myrrh-trees  are 
said  by  Pliny  (xii.  15)  to  come  from  that  district. 
Piiny  states  also  that  "  the  Sabaei  even  cross  the 
se.i  to  procure  it  in  the  country  of  the  Troglodytae." 
From  what  Atheaaeus  (XT.  689)  says,  it  would 
appear  that  myrrh  was  imported  into  Egypt,  and 
that  the  Greeks  received  it  from  thence.  Dioscorides 
describes  many  kinds  of  myrrh  under  various  names, 
for  which  see  Sprengel's  Annotations,  i.  73,  &c. 

The  Balsainodendron  myrrha,  which  produces 
the  myrrh  of  commerce,  has  a  wood  and  bark 
which  emit  a  strong  odour;  the  gum  which  exudes 
from  the  bark  is  at  first  oily,  but  becomes  hard  by 
exposure  to  the  air :  it  belongs  to  the  natural  order 
Terebintlutceae.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
this  tree  is  identical  with  the  Murr  of  Abu'l  Fadli, 
the  ffntpva.  of  the  Greek  writers,  the  "  stillata 
cortice  myrrha  "  of  Ovid  and  the  Latin  writers,  and 
the  mor  of  the  Hebrew  Scripture*. 

The  "  wine  mingled  with  myrrh,"  which  the 
Roman  soldiers  presented  to  our  Lord  on  the  cross, 
was  given,  according  to  the  opinion  of  some  com 
mentators,  in  order  to  render  him  less  sensitive  to 
pain  ;  but  there  are  differences  of  opinion  on  this 
subject,  for  which  see  GALL,  Appendix  A. 


2.   Lot  (cc  :    ffrcutT-fi  :    stacte),  erroneously 
translated  "  myrrh"  in  the  A.  V.  in  Gen.  xxxvii.  25, 


MYRTLE 

xliii.  11.  the  only  two  passages  w.iere  the  word  M 
found,  is  generally  considered  to  denote  the  odor  - 
ous  resin  which  exudes  from  the  branches  of  the 
Cistus  creticus,  known  by  the  name  of  ladanitm  or 
labdanum.  It  is  clear  that  lot.  cannot  signify 
"  myrrh,"  which  is  not  produced  in  Palestine,  yet 
the  Scriptural  passages  in  Genesis  speak  of  this 
substance  as  being  exported  from  Gilead  into  Egypt. 
Ladanum  was  known  to  the  early  Greeks,  for  He 
rodotus  (iii.  107,  112)  mentions  \-fiSavov,  or  Act- 
Savov,  as  a  product  of  Arabia,  and  says  it  is  found 
"  sticking  like  gum  to  the  beards  of  he-goats,  which 
collect  it  from  the  wood ;"  similar  is  the  testimony 
of  Dioscorides  (i.  128),  who  says  that  the  best  kind 
is  "  odorous,  in  colour  inclining  to  green,  easy  to 
soften,  fat,  free  from  particles  of  sand  and  dirt ; 
such  is  that  kind  which  is  produced  in  Cyprus, 
but  that  of  Arabia  and  Libya  is  inferior  in  quality." 
There  are  several  species  of  Cistus,  all  of  which 
are  believed  to  yield  the  gum  ladanum ;  but  the 
species  mentioned  by  Dioscorides  is  in  all  proba 
bility  identical  with  the  one  which  is  found  in  Pa 
lestine,  viz.,  the  Cistus  creticus  (Strand,  Flor.  Pc<- 
laest.  No.  289).  The  C.  ladanifents,  a  native  of 
Spain  and  Portugal,  produces  the  greatest  quantity 
of  the  ladanum ;  it  has  a  white  flower,  while  that 
of  the  C.  creticus  is  rose-coloured.  Tournefort 
(  Voyage,  i.  79)  has  given  an  interesting  account 
of  the  mode  in  which  the  gum  ladanum  is  gathered, 
and  has  figured  the  instrument  commonly  employed 
by  the  people  of  Candia  for  the  purpose  of  collect 
ing  it.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hebrew 
lit,  the  Arabic  ladan,  the  Greek  &l)5avo»r,  the 
Latin  and  English  ladanum,  are  identical  (see  Ro- 
senmiiller,  Bib.  Bot.  p.  158 ;  Celsius,  Hierob.  i. 
|  288).  Ladanum  was  formerly  much  Used  as  a 
stimulant  in  medicine,  and  is  now  of  repute  amongst 
the  Turks  as  a  perfume. 

The  Cistus  belongs  to  the  Natural  order  Cista- 
ceae,  the  Rock-rose  family.  [VV.  H.] 

MYETLE  (DIPI/  hadas:  pvpfflrn,  Spos-^ 
myrtus,  myrtetum).  There  is  no  doubt  that  the 
A.  V.  is  correct  in  its  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
word,  for  all  the  old  versions  are  agreed  upon  the 
point,  and  the  identical  noun  occurs  in  Arabic — in 
the  dialect  of  Yemen,  S.  Arabia — as  the  name  of 
the  "  myrtle."  e 

Mention  of  the  myrtle  is  made  in  Neh.  viii.  15; 
Is.  xli.  19,  Iv.  13;  Zech.  i.  8,  10,  11.  When  th« 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  celebrated  by  the  Jews 
on  the  return  from  Babylon,  the  people  of  Jeru 
salem  were  ordered  to  "  go  forth  unto  the  mount 
and  fetch  olive-branches,  and  pine-branches,  and 
myrtle-branches,  and  to  make  booths."  The  prophet 
Isaiah  foretells  the  coming  golden  age  of  Israel,  when 
the  Lord  shall  plant  in  the  wilderness  "  the  shittah- 
tree  and  the  myrtle-tree  and  the  oil-tree."  The 
modern  Jews  still  adorn  with  myrtle  the  booths 
and  sheds  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  Myrtles 
(Myrtus  communis)  will  grow  either  on  hills  or  in 
valleys,  but  it  is  in  the  latter  locality  where  they 
attain  to  their  greatest  perfection.  Formerly,  as 
we  learn  from  Nehemiah  (viii.  1 5),  myrtles  grew 
on  the  hills  about  Jerusalem.  "  On  Olivet,"  says 
Prof.  Stanley,  "  nothing  is  now  to  be  seen  but  the 
olive  and  the  fig  tree:"  on  some  of  the  hills,  ho\v- 


«  From  root  ft.  "  to  cover ;"  the  gum  covering  the 

phot 

»  The  derivation  of  tills  word  Is  uncertain ;  but  see  the 
Hebrew  Lexicons. 


b  The  LXX.  reading 

5    *•     *• 


,  instead  of  D^fl- 


\  Vdieis).    Knmus  (Freytag,  Ar.  Itx.  s  v.X 


MYSIA 

*?er,  near  Jerusalem,  Hasselquist  (  Trav.  127,  Lend. 
1766)  observed  the  myrtle.  Dr.  Hooker  says  it 
a  not  uncommon  in  Samaria  and  Galilee.  Irby  and 
Mangles  (p.  222)  describe  the  rivers  from  Tripoli 
towards  Galilee  as  having  their  banks  covered  with 
inyrtles  (see  also  Kitto,  Pkys.  Hist,  of  Palest. 
p.  268). 


NAA11AH 


451 


Myrtu 


The  myrtle  (hadas)  gave  her  name  to  Hadassali 
or  Esther  (Esth.  ii.  7):  the  Greek  names  Myrtilus, 
Myrtoe'ssa,  &c.,  have  a  similar  origin.  There  are 
several  species  of  the  genus  Myrtus,  but  the 
Myrtus  communis  is  the  only  kind  denoted  by 
the  Hebrew  Hadas :  it  belongs  to  the  natural  order 
Mt/rtaceae,  and  is  too  well  known  to  need  descrip 
tion.  £Wt  H.] 

MY'SIA  (Mvfftd).  If  we  were  required  to  fix 
*.he  exact  limits  of  this  north-western  district  of 
Asia  Minor,  a  long  discussion  might  be  necessary. 
But  it  is  mentioned  only  once  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts 
xvi.  7,  8),  and  that  cursorily  and  in  reference  to  a 
passing  journey.  St.  Paul  "and  his  companions,  on 
the  second  missionary  circuit,  were  divinely  pre 
vented  from  staying  to  preach  the  Gospel  either  in 
ASIA  or  BITHYNIA.  They  had  then  come  Karck 
T7>  Viva-lav,  and  they  were  directed  to  Troas, 
Trapf\66vres  T)\V  Vivffiav ;  which  means  either 
that  they  skirted  its  border,  or  that  they  passed 
through  the  district  without  staying  there.  In 
fact  the  best  description  that  can  be  given  of  Mysia 
at  this  time  is  that  it  was  the  region  about  the 
frontier  of  the  provinces  of  Asia  and  Bithynia.  The 
term  is  evidently  used  in  an  ethnological,  not  a 
political  sense.  Winer  compares  it,  in  this  point  of 
view,  to  such  German  terms  as  Suabia,  Breisgau, 
&c.  Illustrations  nearer  home  might  be  found  in 
such  districts  as  Craven  in  Yorkshire  or  Appin  in 
Argyllshire.  Assos  and  ADRAMYTTIUM  were  both 
in  Mysia.  Immediately  opposite  was  the  island  of 
Lesbos.  [MiTYiENE.]  TROAS,  though  within  the 
same  range  of  country,  had  a  small  district  of  its 
cwa,  which  was  viewed  as  politically  separate. 

U.S.  H.] 


N 

NA'AM  (DJJ3:  NoJ/x:  Naham}.    One  of  tin 

sons  of  Caleb  the  son  of  Jephunneh  (1  Chr.  iv.  15). 

NA'AMAH  (HlSJtt).      1.  (Nof/wf:    Noema.) 

One  of  the  four  women  whose  names  are  preserved  in 
the  records  of  the  world  before  the  Flood  ;  all  except 
Eve  being  Cainites.  She  was  daughter  of  Lamech  by 
his  wife  Zillah,  and  sister,  as  is  expressly  mentioned, 
to  Tubaicain  (Gen.  iv.  22  only).  No  reason  is 
given  us  why  these  women  should  be  singled  out 
for  mention  in  the  genealogies ;  and  in  the  absence 
of  this  most  of  the  commentators  have  sought  a 
clue  in  the  significance  of  the  names  interpreted  a« 
Hebrew  terms ;  endeavouring,  in  the  characteristic 
words  of  one  of  the  latest  Jewish  critics,  by  "  due 
energy  to  strike  the  living  water  of  thought  ever 
out  of  the  rocky  soil  of  dry  names"  (Kalisch, 
Genesis,  149).  Thus  Naamah,  from  Na'am, 
"  sweet,  pleasant,"  signifies,  according  to  the  same 
interpreter,  "  the  lovely  beautiful  woman,"  and 
|  this  and  other  names  in  the  same  genealogy  of  the 
'  Cainites  are  interpreted  as  tokens  that  the  human 
race  at  this  period  was  advancing  in  civilization 
and  arts.  But  not  only  are  such  deductions  -it  all 
times  hazardous  and  unsatisfactory,  but  in  this  par 
ticular  instance  it  is  surely  begging  the  question  tc 
assume  that  these  early  names  are  Hebrew ;  at  any 
rate  the  onus  probcmdi  rests  on  those  who  make  im 
portant  deductions  from  such  slight  premises.  In 
the  Targum  Pseudojonathan,  Naamah  is  commemo 
rated  as  the  "  mistress  of  lamenters  and  singers ;" 
and  in  the  Samaritan  Version  her  name  is  given  as 
Zalkipha. 

2.  (Maaxo-fJ.,  Naavdv,  Koo/t/xa  ;  Alex.  Naajua, 
Noo/x/xa;  Joseph.  Noo/xas :  JVaama.)  Mother  of 
king  Rehoboam  (1  K.  xiv.  21,  31*;  2  Chr.  xii. 
13).  On  each  occasion  she  is  distinguished  by  the 
title  "  the  (not «  an,'  as  in  A.  V.)  Ammonite."  She 
was  therefore  one  of  the  foreign  women  whom 
Solomon  took  into  his  establishment  (1  K.  xi.  1). 
In  the  LXX.  (1  K.  xii.  24,  answering  to  xiv.  31 
of  the  Hebrew  text)  she  is  stated  to  have  been  the 
"  daughter  of  Ana  (t.  e.  Hanun)  the  son  of  Nahash." 
If  this  is  a  translation  of  a  statement  which  once 
formed  part  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and  may  be  taken 
as  authentic  history,  it  follows  that  the  Ammonite 
war  into  which  Hanun 's  insults  had  provoked 
David  was  terminated  by  a  re-alliance  ;  and,  since 
Solomon  reigned  forty  years,  and  Rehoboam  was 
forty-one  years  old  when  he  came  to  the  throne, 
we  can  fix  with  tolerable  certainty  the  date  of  the 
event.  It  took  place  before  David's  death,  during 
that  period  of  profound  quiet  which  settled  down 
on  the  nation,  after  the  failure  of  Absalom's  re 
bellion  and  of  the  subsequent  attempt  of  Sheba  the 
son  of  Bichri  had  strengthened  more  than  ever  the 
affection  of  the  nation  for  the  throne  of  David  ;  and 
which  w?.s  not  destined  to  be  again  disturbed  till 
put  an  enu  to  by  the  shortsighted  rashness  of  the 
son  of  Naamah.  G.] 

NA'AMAH  (iinjtt  :  No^a"  5  Alex.  Nw/uo: 
Neema),  one  of  the  towns  of  Judah  in  the  district 
of  the  lowland  or  Shefelah,  belonging  to  the  same 
group  with  Lachish,  Eglon,  and  Makkedah  (Josh. 
xv.  41).  Nothing  more  is  known  of  it,  nor  ha* 

"  The  T..XX.  transpose  this  to  ch.  xii.  after  ver.  24. 
2  G   2 


452  NAAMAN  NAAMAJS 

His  lequest  to  be  allowed  to  take  nway  twtJ 
mules'  burthen  of  earth  is  not  easy  to  understand. 
The  natural  explanation  is  that,  w  ith  a  feeling  akin 
to  that  which  prompted  the  Pisan  invaders  to  take 
away  the  earth  of  Aceldama  for  the  Campo  Santo 
&t  Pisa,  and  in  obedience  to  which  the  pilgrims  to 
Mecca  are  said  to  bring  back  stones  from  that 
sacred  territory,  the  grateful  convert  to  Jehovah 
wished  to  take  away  some  of  the  earth  of  Hia 
country,  to  form  an  altar  for  the  burnt-offering  and 
sacrifice  which  henceforth  he  intended  to  dedicate 
to  Jehovah  only,  and  which  would  be  inappropriate 
if  offered  on  the  profane  earth  of  the  country  ot 
Rimmon  or  Hadad.  But  it  should  be  remembered 
that  in  the  narrative  there  is  no  mention  of  an 
altar  ;d  and  although  Jehovah  had  on  one  occasion 
ordered  that  the  altars  put  up  for  offerings  to  Him 
should  be  of  earth  (Ex.  xx.  24),  yet  Naaman  could 
hardly  have  been  aware  of  this  enactment,  unless 
indeed  it  was  a  custom  of  older  date  and  wider 
existence  than  the  Mosaic  law,  and  adopted  into 
that  law  as  a  significant  and  wise  precept  for  some 
reason  now  lost  to  us. 

How  long  Naaman  lived  to  continue  a  worshipper 
of  Jehovah  while  assisting  officially  at  that  of  Rim 
mon,  we  are  not  told.  When  next  we  hear  of  Syria, 
another,  Hazael,  apparently  holds  the  position  which 
Naaman  formerly  filled.  But,  as  has  been  else 
where  noticed,  the  reception  which  Elisha  met  with 
on  this  later  occasion  in  Damascus  probably  implies 
that  the  fame  of  "  the  man  of  God,"  and  of  the 
mighty  Jehovah  in  whose  name  he  wrought,  had 
not  been  forgotten  in  the  city  of  Naaman. 

Jt  is  singular  that  the  narrative  of  Naaman's 
cure  is  not  found  in  the  present  text  of  Josephus. 
Its  absence  makes  the  reference  to  him  as  the  slayer 
of  Ahab,  already  mentioned,  still  more  remarkable. 

It  is>  quoted  by  our  Lord  (Luke  iv.  27)  as  an 
instance  of  mercy  exercised  to  one  who  was  not  of 
Israel,  and  it  should  not  escape  notice  that  the 
reference  to  this  act  of  healing  is  recorded  by  none 
of  the  Evangelists  but  St.  Luke  the  physician.  [G.] 

NA'AMAN  (]&])}  :    Netful).     One  of   the 

family  of  Benjamin  who  came  down  to  Egypt  with 
Jacob,  as  we  read  in  Gen.  xlvi.  21.  According  to 
the  LXX.  version  of  that  passage  he  was  the  son  of 
Bela,  which  is  the  parentage  assigned  to  him  in 
Num.  xxvi.  40,  where,  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
sons  of  Benjamin,  he  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  Bela, 
and  head  of  the  family  of  the  Naamites.  He  is  also 
reckoned  among  the  sons  of  Bela  in  1  Chr.  viii. 
3,  4.  Nothing  is  known  of  his  personal  history,  or 
of  that  of  the  Naamites.  For  the  account  of  the 
migrations,  apparently  compulsory,  of  some  of  the 
sons  of  Benjamin  from  Geba  to  Manahath,  in  1  Chr. 
viii.  6,  7,  is  so  confused,  probably  from  the  corrup 
tion  of  the  text,  that  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether 
the  family  of  Naaman  was  or  was  not  included  in 
it.  The  repetition  in  ver.  7  of  the  three  names 
Naaman,  Ahiah,  Gera,  in  a  context  to  which  thej 
do  not  seem  to  belong,  looks  like  the  mere  error 
of  a  copyist,  inadvertently  copying  over  again  the 
same  names  which  he  had  written  in  the  «.me  order 
in  ver.  4,  5,— Naaman,  Ahoah,  Gera.  If,  however, 
the  names  are  in  their  place  in  ver.  7,  it  woulj 
seem  to  indicate  that  the  family  of  Naaman  did  mi- 

I  AX.  euorox«>s,  t.  e.  "  with  good  aim,"  possibly  a  j  went  in  and  'old  his  master"  (i.  t.  the  king).  The  word 
transcriber's  variation  from  CUTUX^S.  j  rendered  "  lord  "  is  the  same  as  Is  rendered  "  master"  ID 

>>  It  did  drive  a  king  into  strict  seclusion  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  21).    ver.  1. 

0  The  A.  V.  of  ret.  4  conveys  a  wrong  impression.  It  <J  The  LXX.  (Vat.  MSS  )  omits  even  the  wont,  "ot 
Isaccurately  Lot  "one  went  in,"  bvt  "ho  (t.  e.  Naaman)  ?arth,"  ver.  17 


any  name  corresponding  with  it  been  yet  discovered 
in  the  proper  direction.  But  it  seems  probable  that 
Naamah  should  be  connected  with  the  Naamathites, 
who  again  were  perhaps  identical  with  the  Mehunim 
or  Minaeans,  traces  of  whom  are  found  on  the  south 
western  outskirts  of  Judah ;  one  such  at  Minois  or 
el-Minyay,  a  few  miles  below  Gaza.  [G.] 

NA'AMAN  (|»J»  :  Nai^;  N.  T.  Rec.  Text, 

Neejucij',  butLachm.  with  A  B  D,  tiaifj.dv;  Joseph. 
'A/xofoy :  N  laman) — or  to  give  him  the  title  con 
ferred  on  him  by  our  Lord,  "  Naaman  the  Syrian." 
An  Aramite  warrior,  a  remarkable  incident  in  whose 
life  is  preserved  to  us  through  his  connexion  with  the 
prophet  Elisha.  The  narrative  is  given  in  2  K.  v. 

The  name  is  a  Hebrew  one,  and  that  of  ancient 
date  (see  the  next  article),  but  it  is  not  im 
probable  that  in  the  present  case  it  may  have  been 
slightly  altered  in  its  insertion  in  the  Israelite 
records.  Of  Naaman  the  Syrian  there  is  no  men 
tion  in  the  Bible  except  in  this  connexion.  But  a 
Jewish  tradition,  at  least  as  old  as  the  time  of 
Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  15,  §5),  and  which  may  very 
ivell  be  a  genuine  one,  identifies  him  with  the 
archer  whose  arrow,  whether  at  random  or  not," 
struck  Ahab  with  his  mortal  wound,  and  thus 
"  gave  deliverance  to  Syria."  The  expression  is 
remarkable — "  because  that  by  him  Jehovah  had 
given  deliverance  to  Syria."  To  suppose  the  inten 
tion  to  be  that  Jehovah  was  the  universal  ruler, 
and  that  therefore  all  deliverance,  whether  afforded 
to  His  servants  or  to  those  who,  like  the  Syrians, 
acknowledged  Him  not,  was  wrought  by  Him,  would 
be  thrusting  a  too  modern  idea  into  the  expression 
of  the  writer.  Taking  the  tradition  above-mentioned 
into  account,  the  most  natural  explanation  perhaps 
is  that  Naaman,  in  delivering  his  country,  had 
killed  one  who  was  the  enemy  of  Jehovah  not  less 
than  he  was  of  Syria.  Whatever  the  particular 
exploit  referred  to  was,  it  had  given  Naaman  a 
great  position  at  the  court  of  Benhadad.  In  the 
first  rank  for  personal  prowess  and  achievements,  he 
was  commander-in-chief  of  the  army,  while  in  civil 
matters  he  was  nearest  to  the  person  of  the  king, 
whom  he  accompanied  officially,  and  supported, 
when  the  king  went  to  worship  in  the  temple  of 
Rimmou  (ver.  18).  He  was  afflicted  with  a  leprosy 
of  the  white  kind  (ver.  27),  which  had  hitherto 
defied  cure.  In  Israel,  according  to  the  enactments 
of  the  Mosaic  Law,  this  would  have  cut  off  even  b 
Naaman  from  intercourse  with  every  one;  he  would 
there  have  been  compelled  to  dwell  in  a  "  several 
house."  But  not  so  in  Syria ;  he  maintained  his 
access  e  to  the  king,  and  his  contact  with  the  mem 
bers  of  his  own  household.  The  circumstances  of  his 
visit  to  Elisha  have  been  drawn  out  under  the  latter 
head  [vol.  i.  5386],  and  need  not  be  repeated  here. 
Naaman's  appearance  throughout  the  occurrence  is 
most  characteristic  and  consistent.  He  is  every  inch 
a  soldier,  ready  at  once  to  resent  what  he  considers 
as  a  slight  cast  either  on  himself  or  the  natural 
glories  of  his  country,  and  blazing  out  in  a  moment 
iuto  sudden  "  rage,"  but  calmed  as  speedily  by  a 
lew  goodhumoured  and  sensible  words  from  his 
dependants,  and,  after  the  cure  has  been  effected, 
evincing  a  thankful  and  simple  heart,  whose  grati 
tude  knows  no  bounds  and  will  listen  to  no  refusal. 


TfAAMATHlTE 

grate  with  the  sons  of  Ehud  (called  Abihud  m  r-e*  . 
3)  from  Ceba  to  Manahath.  [A.  C.  H.J 

NAAM'ATHITE  (»n»J»  :  Mtrafow  jSocriAtfo, 
£  yiivaius:  Naamathites),  the  gentilic  name  ot  one 
jif  Job's  friends,  Zophar  the  Naamathite  (Job  ii. 
11,  xi.  1,  xx.  1,  xlii.  9).  There  is  no  other  trac? 
of  this  name  in  the  Bible,  and  the  town,  HfDyj, 
whence  it  is  derived,  is  unknown.  If  we  may  judge 
from  modern  usage,  several  places  so  called  pro 
bably  existed  on  the  Arabian  borders  of  Syria. 
Thus  in  the  Geographical  Dictionary,  Marasia-el 
Ittdlia,  are  Noam,  a  castle  in  the  Yemen,  and  a 
place  on  the  Euphrates;  Niameh  a  place  belonging 
to  the  Ai-abs  ;  and  Noamee,  a  valley  in  Tihameh. 
The  name  Naama"n  (of  unlikely  derivation  however, 
is  very  common.  Bochart  (Phaleg,  cap.  xxii.),  as 
might  be  expected,  seizes  the  LXX.  reading,  and  in 
the  "  king  of  the  Minaei"  sees  a  confirmation  to  his 
theory  respecting  a  Syrian,  or  northern  Arabian 
settlement  of  that  well-known  people  of  classical 
antiquity.  It  will  be  seen,  in  art.  DiKLA,  that  the 
present  writer  identifies  the  Minaei  with  the  people 
of  Ma'een,  in  the  Yemen  ;  and  there  is  nothing  im 
probable  in  a  northern  colony  of  the  tribe,  besides 
the  presence  of  a  place  so  named  in  the  Syro-Arabian 
desert.  But  we  regard  this  point  as  apart  from  the 
subject  of  this  article,  thinking  the  LXX.  reading, 
unsupported  as  it  is,  to  be  too  hypothetical  for  ac 
ceptance.  [E.  S.  P.] 

NA'AMITES,  THE  (<»J?3n  :  Samar. 


NABAL 


463 


Sijjuos  6  Noefj-avel  ;  Alex,  omits  :  familia  Naami- 
tarum,  and  Noemanitarurri),  the  family  descended 
from  NAAMAN,  the  grandson  of  Benjamin  (Num. 
xxvi.  40  only).  [NAAMAN,  p.  4526.]  The  name  is 
a  contraction,  of  a  kind  which  does  not  often  occur 
in  Hebrew.  Accordingly  the  Samaritan  Codex,  as 
will  be  seen  above,  presents  it  at  length  —  "  the 
Naamanites."  [G.] 

NA'ARAH  (rnjn_:  ©oaSS;  Alex.  Noopa: 
Naara)  the  second  wife  of  Ashur,  a  descendant  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  5,  6).  Nothing  is  known  of  the 
persons  (or  places)  recorded  as  the  children  of  Naa- 
rah.  In  the  Vat.  LXX.  the  children  of  the  two 
wives  are  interchanged. 

NAABA'I  Cnj?3  :   Naapaf  :  NaarcH).     One  of 

the  valiant  men  of  David's  armies  (1  Chr.  xi.  37). 
In  1  Chr.  he  is  called  the  son  of  Ezbai,  but  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  35  he  appears  as  "  Paarai  the  Arbite."  Ken- 
nicott  (Diss.  pp.  209-211)  decides  that  the  former 
is  correct. 

NA'AEAN  (fljtt  :    Kaapvdv;  Alex.  Naa/jw. 

Norari),  a  city  of  Ephraim,  which  in  a  very  ancient 
record  (1  Chr.  vii.  28)  is  mentioned  as  the  eastern 
limit  of  the  tribe.  It  is  very  probably  identical  with 
NAARATH,  or  more  accurately  Naarah,  which  seems 
to  have  been  situated  in  one  of  the  great  valleys  or 
torrent-beds  which  lead  down  from  the  highlands  of 
Bethel  to  the  depths  of  the  Jordan  valley. 

In  1  Sam.  vi.  21  the  Peshito-Syriac  and  Arabic 
versions  have  respectively  Naarin  and  Naaran  for 
the  Kirjath-jearim  of  the  Hebrew  and  A.  V.  If 
this  is  anything  more  than  an  error,  the  Naaran  to 
which  it  refers  can  hardly  be  that  above  spoken  of, 
but  must  have  been  situated  much  nearer  to  Beth- 
shemesh  and  the  Philistine  lowland.  [G.] 


•  Perhaps  treating  HlVi.  "  a  damsel,"  as  equivalent 
to  ri2>  "  a  daughter,"  the  term  commonly  used  to  ex 
press  the  hamlets  dependent  on  a  city. 


NA'ARATH  (theHeb.is  nmj?3=:to  Naarah, 
!"njp,  which  is  therefore  the  real  form  of  the  name: 

at  *  KUfj.ai  ai/rcav ;  Alex.  Naapada  Kai  at  KCKUCU 
avrcav:  Naratha),  a  place  named  ( losli.  xvi.  7, 
only)  as  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the  (southern) 
boundary  of  Ephraim.  It  appears  to  have  Iain 
between  Ataroth  and  Jericho.  If  Ataroth  be  thf 
present  Atara,  a  mile  and  a  half  south  of  el-Bireh 
and  close  to  the  great  natural  boundary  of  the 
Wady  Suweintt,  then  Naarah  was  probably  some 
where  lower  down  the  wady.  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
(Onomast.}  speak  of  it  as  if  well  known  to  them — 
"  Naorath,b  a  small  village  of  the  Jews  five  miles 
from  Jericho."  Schwarz  (147)  fixes  it  at  "  Neama," 
also  "  five  miles  from  Jericho,"  meaning  perhaps 
Na'imeh,  the  name  of  the  lower  part  of  the  great 
Wady  Mutyah  or  el-Asas,  which  runs  from  the 
foot  of  the  hill  of  Eummon  into  the  Jordan  valley 
above  Jericho,  and  in  a  direction  generally  parallel 
to  the  Wady  Suweinit  (Rob.  B.  B.  iii.  290).  A 
position  in  this  direction  is  in  agreement  with 
1  Chr.  vii.  28,  where  NAAKAN  is  probably  the  same 
name  as  that  we  are  now  considering.  [*-*•] 

NAASH'OK    [NAHSHON.] 

NAASS'ON  (NaaoWj/ :  Naasson).  The 
Greek  form  of  the  name  NAHSHON  (Matt.  i.  4 ; 
Luke  iii.  32  only). 

NA'ATHUS  (Nc£a0oj:  Naathus}.  One  of  the 
family  of  Addi,  according  to  the  list  of  1  Esdr.  is. 
31.  There  is  no  name  corresponding  in  Ezr.  x.  30. 

NA'BAL  frl)  =  "  fool":  Na0ci\),  one  of  the 

characters  introduced  to  us  in  David's  wanderings, 
apparently  to  give  one  detailed  glimpse  of  his  whole 
state  of  life  at  that  time  (1  Sam.  xxv.).  Nabal 
himself  is  remarkable  as  one  of  the  few  examples 
given  to  us  of  the  private  life  of  a  Jewish  citi 
zen.  He  ranks  in  this  respect  with  BOAZ,  BAR- 
ZILLAI,  NABOTIT.  He  was  a  sheepmaster  on  the 
confines  of  Judaea  and  the  desert,  in  that  part  of 
the  country  which  bore  from  its  great  conqueror 
the  name  of  CALEB  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14,  xxv.  3 ;  so 
Vulgate,  A.  V.,  and  Ewald).  He  was  himself,  ac 
cording  to  Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  13,  §6)  a  Ziphite, 
and  his  residence  Emmaus,  a  place  of  that  name  nor 
otherwise  known,  on  the  southern  Carniel,  in  the 
pasture  lands  of  Maon.  (In  the  LXX.  of  xxv.  4  he 
is  called  "  the  Carmelite,"  and  the  LXX.  read 
"  Maon"  for  "Paran"  in  xxv.  1).  With  a  usage 
of  the  word,  which  reminds  us  of  the  like  adapta 
tion  of  similar  words  in  modern  times,  he,  like 
Barzillai,  is  styled  "  very  great,"  evidently  from 
his  wealth.  His  wealth,  as  might  be  expected  from 
his  abode,  consisted  chiefly  of  sheep  and  goats, 
which,  as  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the  Christian 
era  (Matt,  xxv.),  and  at  the  present  day  (Stanley, 
8.  $  P.),  fed  together.  The  tradition  preserved 
in  this  case  the  exact  number  of  each — 3000  of  the 
former,  1000  of  the  latter.  It  was  the  custom  of 
the  shepherds  to  drive  them  into  the  wild  downs  on 
the  slopes  of  Carmel ;  and  it  was  whilst  they  were 
on  one  of  these  pastoral  excursions,  that  they  met 
a  band  of  outlaws,  who  showed  them  unexpected 
kindness,  protecting  them  by  day  and  night,  and  never 
themselves  committing  any  depredations  (xxv.  7, 
15,  16).  Once  a  year  there  was  a  grand  banquet, 


b  The  'Oopd.6  in  the  present  text  of  Kusebius  sheuW 
obviously  have  prefixed  to  it  the  v  from  the  iorir  whicii 
precedes  it  Compare  NASOU. 


454 


NABAL 


on  C/irmel,  when  they  brought  back  their  shee 
from  the  wilderness  for  shearing — with  eating  an 
drinking  "like  the  feast  of  a  king"  (xxv.  2, 
3S). 

It  was  on  one  of  these  occasions  that  Nabal  cam 
across  the  path  of  the  man  to  whom  he  owes  h 
place  in  history.     Ten  youths  were  seen  approacl 
ing  xhe  hill ;  in  them  the  shepherds  recognized  tl 
slaves  or  attendants  of  the  chief  of  the  freeboote 
who  had  defended  them  in  the  wilderness.  To  Nabs 
they  were  unknown.     They  approached  him  wit 
a  triple  salutation — enumerated  the  services  of  the 
master,  and  ended  by  claiming,  with  a  mixture  < 
courtesy  and  defiance,  characteristic  of  the  Easi 
"  whatsoever  cometh  into  thy  hand  for  thy  servants 
(LXX.  omit  this — and  have  only  the  next  words' 
and  for  thy  son  David."     The  great  sheepmaste 
was  not  disposed  to  recognise  this  unexpected  pa 
rental  relation.     He  was  a  man  notorious  for  hi 
obstinacy   (::uch  seems  the  meaning,  of  the  wor 
translated  "  churlish  ")  and  for  his  general  low  con 
duct  (xxv.  3,  "evil  in  his  doings;"  rxv.  17,  " 
man  of  Belial").     Josephus  and  the  LXX.  takin: 
the  word  Caleb  not  as  a  proper  name,  but  as  a  qua 
lity  (to  which  the  context  certainly  lends  itself) — 
add  "of  a  disposition  like  a  dog" — cynical — Kwixbs 
On  hearing  the  demand  of  the  ten  petitioners,  h 
sprang  up  (LXX.  ai/eir^STjere),  and  broke  out  iut< 
fury,  "  Who  is   David  ?   and  who  is  the   son  o 
Jesse?" — "What  runaway  slaves  are  these  to  in 
terfere  with  my  own  domestic  arrangements  ?"  (xxv 
10, 11 ).  The  moment  that  the  messengers  were  gone 
the  shepherds  that  stood  by  perceived  the  dange 
that  their  master  and  themselves  would  incur.     T< 
Nabal  himself,  they  durst  not  speak  (xxv.  17).    Bu 
the  sacred  writer,  with  a  tinge  of  the  sentimem 
which  such  a  contrast  always  suggests,  proceeds  to 
describe  that  this  brutal  ruffian  was  married  to  a 
wife  as  beautiful  and  as  wise,  as  he  was  the  reverse 
(xxv.  3).  •  [ABIGAIL.]    To  her,  as  to  the  good  ange 
of  the  household,  one  of  the  shepherds  told  the  state 
of  affairs.     She,  with  the  offerings  usual  on  such 
occasions  (xxv.  18,  comp.  xxx.  11,  2  Sam.  rvi.  1, 
1  Chr.  xii.  40),  loaded  the  asses  of  Nabal's  large 
establishment— herself  mounted  one  of  them,  and, 
with  her  attendants  running  before  her,  rode  down 
the  hill  towards  David's  encampment.     David  had 
already  made    the    fatal    vow    of   extermination, 
couched   in    the   usual    terms    of  destroying   the 
household  of  Nabal,  so  as  not  even  to  leave  a  dog 
behind  (xxv.  22).     At  this  moment,  as  it  would 
seem,  Abigail  appeared,  threw  herself  on  her  face 
before  him,  and  poured  forth  her  petition  in  lan 
guage  which  both  in  form  and  expression  almost 
assumes  the  tone  of  poetry : — "  Let  thine  handmaid, 
I  pray  thee,  speak  in  thine  audience,  and  hear  the 
words  of  thine  handmaid."     Her  main  argument 
rests  on  the  description  of  her  husband's  character, 
which  she  draws  with  that  mixture  of  playfulness 
and  seriousness  which  above  all  things  turns  away 
wrath.      His  name  here  came   in   to  his   rescue. 
"  As   his   name   is,  so  is  he :  Nabal  [foot]  is  his 
name,  and  folly  is  with  him  "  (xxv.  25 ;  see  also 
ver.  26).     She  returns  with  the  news  of  David's 
recantation  of  his  vow.     Nabal  is  then  in  at  the 
height  of  his  orgies.      Like  the  revellers  of  Pa 
lestine   in   the   later   times  of  the  monarchy,   he 
had  drunk  to  excess,  and  his  wife  dared  not  com 
municate  to  him  either  his  danger  or  his  escape 
(xxv.  36).     At  break  of  day  she  told  him  both. 


NABOTH 

The  stupid  reveller  was  suddenly  rouse!  to  a  scnwr 
of  that  which  impended  over  him.  "  His  heart  died 
within  him,  and  he  became  as  a  stone."  It  was  -^s 
if  a  stroke  of  apoplexy  or  paralysis  had  fallen  upon 
him.  Ten  days  he  lingered,  "  and  the  Lord  smote 
Nabal,  and  he  died  "  (xxv.  37,  38).  The  suspi 
cions  entertained  by  theologians  of  tne  last  century, 
that  there  was  a  conspiracy  between  David  and 
Abigail  to  make  away  with  Nabal  for  their  own 
alliance  (see  Winer  "  Nabal"),  have  entirely  givci. 
place  to  the  better  spirit  ot  modern  criticism,  and 
it  is  one  of  the  many  proofs  of  the  reverential,  as 
well  as  truthful  appreciation  of  the  Sacred  Narrative 
now  inaugurated  in  Germany,  that  Ewald  enters  fully 
into  the  feeling  of  the  narrator,  and  closes  his  sum 
mary  of  Nabal's  death,  with  the  reflection  that  "  it 
was  not  without  justice  regarded  as  a  Divine  judg 
ment."  According  -to  the  (not  improbable)  LXX. 
version  of  2  Sam.  iii.  33,  the  recollection  of  Nabal's 
death  lived  afterwards  in  David's  memory  to  point 
the  contrast  of  the  death  of  Abner :  "  Died  Abuer 
as  Nabal  died  ?"  [A.  P.  S.] 

NABAKI'AS  (Na0api'aj:  Nabarias).  Appa 
rently  a  corruption  of  Zechariah  (1  Esdr.  x.  44 ; 
comp.  Neh.  viii.  4). 

NA'BATHITES,  THE  (ol  Naftarraioi,  and 
paraioi ;  Alex.  NajSareot :  Nabuthaef),  1  Mace, 
v.  25  ;  is.  35.     [NKBAIOTH.J 

NA'BOTH  (TVQ3  :  Nci/Sofiaf),  victim  of  Ahab 
and  Jezebel.     He  was  a  Jezreelite,  and  the  owner 
of  a  small  portion  of  ground  (2  K.  ix.  25,  26^ 
ihat    lay   on    the    eastern    slope   of    the   hill   of 
Jezreel.     He  had  also  a  vineyard,  of  which  the 
situation  is  not  quite  certain.     According  to  the 
Hebrew  text  (1  K.  xxi.  1)  it  was  in  Jezreel,  but 
he    LXX.   render    the    whole   clause    differently, 
omitting  the  words  "  which  was  in  Jezreel,"  and 
reading  instead  of  "  the  palace,"  "  the  threshiny- 
floor  of  Ahab  king  of  Samaria."     This  points  to 
;he  view,  certainly  most  consistent  with  the  sub- 
equent  narrative,  that  Naboth's  vineyard  was  on 
he  hill  of  Samaria,  close  to  the  "  threshing-floor  " 
the  word  translated  in  A.  V.  "void  place")  which 
undoubtedly  existed  there,  hard  by  the  gate  of  the 
ity  (1  K.  xxiv.).     The  royal  palace  of  Ahab  was 
lose  upon  the  city  wall  at  Jezreel.     According  to 
>oth  texts  it  immediately  adjoined  the  vineyard 
1  K.  xxi.  1,2,  Heb. ;  1  K.  xxi.  2,  LXX. ;  2  K.  ix. 
0,  36),  and  it  thus  became  an  object  of  desire  to 
!ie  king,  who  offered  an  equivalent  in  money,  or 
nother  vineyard  in  exchange  for  this.     Naboth,  in 
le  independent  spirit  of  a  Jewish  landholder,*  re 
used.     Perhaps  the  turn  of  his  expression  implies 
lat  his    objection  was  mingled  with  a  religious 
cruple   at  forwarding  the  acquisitions  of  a  half- 
eathen  king:    "Jehovah  forbid  it  to  me  th.it  I 
lould  give  the  inheritance   of  my  fathers  untt 
ice."     Ahab  was  cowed  by  this  reply ;  but  the 
roud  spirit  of  Jezebel  was  roused.     She  and  her 
usband  were  apparently  in  the  city  of  Samaria 
I    K.  xxi.   18).     She  took  the  matter  into   her 
wn   hands,  and  sent  a  warrant  in  Ahab's  name 
nd   sealed   with   Ahab's  seal,  to  the   elders   and 
ibles  of  Jezreel,  suggesting  the  mode  of  destroying 
le  man  who  had  insulted  the  royal  power.     A 
ilemn  fast  was  proclaimed  as  on  the  announce- 
ent  of  some  great  calamity.     Naboth  was  "set 
n  high"b  in  the  public  place  ot'  .Samaria:    two 


•  Compare  the  cases  of  David  and  Araunah  (2  Sum. 
xi.-),  Orari  and  Shemer  (1  K.  xvi.). 


b  The  Hebrew  word  which  is  rendered,  here  only, 
on  high,"  is  more  accurately  "  at  the  head  of  "  or 


NABUCHODONOSOR 

men  of  worthless  character  accused  him  of  having 
"cursed0  God  and  the  king."  He  and  his  children 
(2  K.  ix.  26),  who  else  might  have  succeeded  to 
his  father's  inheritance,  were  dragged  out  of  the 
city  and  despatched  the  same  night.d  The  place 
of  execution  there,,  as  at  Hebron  (2  Sam.  iii.), 
was  by  the  large  tank  or  reservoir,  which  still 
remains  on  the  slope  of  the  hill  of  Sama:  ia,  imme 
diately  outside  the  walls.  The  usual  punishment 
for  blasphemy  was  enforced.  Naboth  and  his  sons 
were  stoned  ;  their  mangled  remains  were  de 
voured  by  the  dogs  (and  swine,  LXX.)  that  prowled 
under  the  walls  ;  and  the  blood  from  their  wounds 
ran  down  into  the  waters  of  the  tank  below,  which 
was  the  common  bathing-place  of  the  prostitutes  of 
the  city  (comp.  1  K.  xxi.  19,  xxii.  38,  LXX). 
Josephus  (Ant.  15,  6)  makes  the  execution  to  have 
been  at  Jezreel,  where  he  also  places  the  washing 
of  Ahab's  chariot. 

For  tie  signal  retribution  taken  on  this  judicial 
murder  —  a  remarkable  proof  of  the  high  regard 
paid  in  the  old  dispensation  to  the  claims  of  justice 
and  independence  —  see  AHAB,  JEHU,  JEZEBEL, 
JEZKEEL.  [A.  P.  S.] 


NADAB 


455 


NABUCHODONO'SOR  (Naftov 

Nabuchodonosor).  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon 
(1  Esdr.  i.  40,  41,  45,  48  ;  Tob.  xiv.  15;  Jud.  i.  1, 
5,  7,  11,  12,  ii.  1,  4,  19,  iii.  2,  8,  iv.  1,  vi.  2,  4, 
xi.  7,  23,  xii.  13,  xiii.  18). 

NA'CHON'S  THRESHING-FLOOR  (jnj 
|1D3  :  S.K<as  'nSctjS  ;  Alex.  aXtaptavos  Naxw  : 
Area  Nachori),  the  place  at  which  the  ark  had 
arrived  in  its  progress  from  Kirjath-jearim  to  Je 
rusalem,  when  Uzzah  lost  his  life  in  his  too  hasty 
zeal  for  its  safety  (2  Sam.  vi.  6).  In  the  parallel 
narrative  of  Chronicles  the  name  is  given  as  CHI- 
DON,  which  is  also  found  in  Josephus.  After  the 
catastrophe  it  received  the  name  of  Perez-  uzzah. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  narrative  to  guide  us 
to  a  conclusion  as  to  the  situation  of  this  threshing- 
floor,  —  whether  nearer  to  Jerusalem  or  to  Kiijath- 
jearim.  The  words  of  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  4,  §2), 
however,  imply  that  it  was  close  to  the  former." 
Neither  is  it  certain  whether  the  name  is  that  of 
the  place  or  of  a  person  to  whom  the  place  be 
longed.  The  careful  Aquila  translates  the  words 
e'oay  aAwi'os  eTotV»Jf  —  "to  the  prepared*1  threshing- 
floor,"  which  is  also  the  rendering  of  the  Targum 
Jonathan.  [G.] 

NA'CHOR.  The  fomi  (slightly  the  more  accu 
rate)  in  which  on  two  occasions  the  name  elsewhere 
given  as  NAHOR  is  presented  in  the  A.  V. 

1.  ("linj  :  Naxcfy  :  Nachor).  The  brother  of 
Abraham  (Josh.  xxiv.  2).  [NAUOR  1.] 

Ch  is  commonly  used  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  Old 
Testament  to  represent  the  Hebrew  3,  and  only 


"  in  the  chiefest  place  among"  (1  Sam.  ix.  22).  The 
passage  is  obscured  by  our  ignorance  of  the  nature 
of  the  ceremonial  in  which  Naboth  was  made  to  take 
part ;  but,  in  default  of  this  knowledge,  we  may 
accept  the  explanation  of  Josephus,  that  an  assembly 
(ticKA7)<na)  was  convened,  at  the  head  of  which  Na 
both,  in  virtue  of  his  position,  was  placed,  in  order 
that  the  charge  of  blasphemy  and  the  (subsequent 
catastrophe  might  be  more  telling-. 

c  By  the  LXX.  this  is  given  euAdvijo-e,  "  blessed  ;" 
possibly  merely  for  the  sake  of  euphemism. 

d  tWtf.  The  word  rendered  "  yesterday  "  in  2  K. 
ix.  Z(  has  reilly  the  meaning  of  yesternight,  and 


very  rarely  for  l"l,  as  in  Nachor.  Charashiir,  llnchel, 
Mareheshvan,  are  further  examples  of  the  Litter 
usage. 

2.  (Nax<fy>).  The  grandfather  of  Abraham  (Luke 
iii.  34).  [NAHOR  2.J  [G.j 

NA'DAB  (313).      1.  The  eldest  son  of  Aaron 

and  Klisheba,  Ex.  vi.  23  ;  Num.  iii.  2.  Hej  hi? 
father  and  brother,  and  seventy  old  men  of  Israel 
were  led  out  from  the  midst  of  the  assembled  people 
(Ex.  xxiv.  1),  and  were  commanded  to  stay  and 
worship  God  "afar  off,"  below  the  lofty  summit  of 
Sinai,  where  Moses  alone  was  to  come  near  to  the 
Lord.  Subsequently  (Lev.  x.  1)  Nadab  and  his 
brother  [AuiHUJ  were  struck  dead  before  the  sanc 
tuary  by  fire  from  the  Lord.  Their  offence  was 
kindling  the  incense  in  their  censers  with  "  strange  " 
fire,  i.  e.,  not  taken  from  that  which  burned  perpe 
tually  (Lev.  vi.  13)  on  the  altar.  From  the  in 
junction  given,  Lev.  x.  9,  10,  immediately  after 
their  death,  it  has  been  inferred  (Kosenmiiller,  in 
loco)  that  the  brothers  were  in  a  state  of  intoxica 
tion  when  they  committed  the  offence.  The  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  injunction  is  drawn  out  at  great  length 
by  Origen,  Jfim.  vii.  in  Levitic.  On  this  occasion, 
as  if  to  mair;  more  decidedly  the  divine  displeasure 
with  the  offenders,  Aaron  and  his  surviving  son 
were  forbidden  to  go  through  the  ordinary  outward 
ceremonial  of  mourning  for  the  dead. 

2.  King  Jeroboam's  son,  who  succeeded  to  the 
throne  of  Israel  B.C.  954,  and  reigned  two  years, 
1  K.  xv.  25-31.    Gibbethon  in  the  territory  of  Dan 
(Josh.  xix.  44),  a  Levitical  town  (Josh.  xxi.  23), 
was  at  that  time  occupied  by  the  Philistines,  per 
haps  having  been  deserted  by  its  lawful  possessors 
in  the  general  self-exile  of  the  Levites  from   the 
polluted  territory  of  Jeroboam.      Nadab  and   all 
Israel  went  up  and  laid  siege  to  this  frontier-town. 
A  conspiracy  broke  out  in  the  midst  of  the  army, 
and  the  king  was  slain  by  Baasha,  a  man  of  Is- 
sachar.     Ahijah's   prophecy  (1   K.  xiv.    10)    was 
literally  fulfilled  by  the  murderer,  who  proceeded 
to  destroy  the  whole  house  of  Jeroboam.     So  pe 
rished  the  first  Israelitish  dynasty. 

We  are  not  told  what  events  led  to  the  siege  of 
Gibbethon,  or  how  it  ended,  or  any  other  incident 
in  Nadab's  short  reign.  It  does  not  appear  what 
ground  Ewald  and  Newman  have  for  describing  the 
war  with  the  Philistines  as  unsuccessful.  It  is 
remarkable  that  when  a  similar  destruction  tell 
upon  the  family  of  the  murderer  Baasha  twenty- 
four  years  afterwards,  the  Israelitish  army  was 
again  engaged  in  a  siege  of  Gibbethon.  1  K.  xvi. 
15. 

3.  A  son  of  Shammai,  1  Chr.  ii.  28,  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah. 

4.  A  son  of  Gibeon,  1  Chr.  viii.  30,  ix.  36,  01 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  [W.  T.  13.] 


thus  bears  testimony  to  the  precipitate  haste  both  of 
the  execution  and  of  Ahab's  entrance  -on  his  new 
acquisition.  [See  ELIJAH,  vol.  i.  529a.] 

»  His  words  are,  "  Having  brought  the  ark  into  Jeru 
salem"  (eis  'lepocroAvfia).  In  some  of  the  Greek  versions 
or  variations  of  the  LXX.,  of  which  fragments  are  pre 
aerved  by  Barhdt,  the  name  is  given  T)  oA<os  'Epva 
(Oman)  TOV  Ie/Sou<raiou,  identifying  it  witt  the  floor  of 
Araunuh. 

b  As  if  from  MJ,  to  make  ready.  A.  similar  rendering, 
Ji?np  inX.  is  cnployed  in  tte  Targniu  josopb  of 
1  Chr.  xiii.  9  for  the  floor  rf  Cnidon 


456 


NADABATHA 


NADAB'ATHA  (Nc&dO  ;    Alex.   NaSo/3a0  : 

f    • 
Syriae,  -g-^-l,  Nobot:    Madaba),   a  place   from 

which  the  bride  was  being  conducted  by  the  children 
cf  Jambri,  when  Jonathan  and  Simon  attacked  them 
(1  Mace.  ix.  37).  Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  1,  §4)  gives 
the  name  rafiaOd.  Jerome's  conjecture  (ii  the  Vul 
gate)  cao  hardly  be  admitted,  because  Medeba  was 
the  city  of  the  Jambrites  (see  ver.  36)  to  which  the 
bride  was  being  brought,  not  that  from  which  she 
came.  That  Nadabatha  was  on  the  east  of  Jordan  is 
most  probable  ;  for  though,  even  to  the  time  of  the 
Gospel  narrative,  by  "  Chanaanites  "  —  to  which  the 
bride  in  this  case  belonged  —  is  signified  Phoenicians, 
yet  we  have  the  authority  (such  as  it  is)  of  the  Book 
of  Judith  (v.  3)  for  attaching  that  name  especially 
to  the  people  of  Moab  and  Ammon  ;  and  it  is  not 
probable  that  when  the  whole  country  was  in  such 
disorder  a  wedding  cortege  would  travel  for  so  great 
a  distance  as  from  Phoenicia  to  Medeba. 

On  the  east  of  Jordan  the  only  two  names  that 
occur  as  possible  are  Nebo  —  by  Eusebius  and  Je 
rome  written  Nabo  and  Nabau  —  and  Nabathaea. 
Compare  the  lists  of  places  round  es-Salt,  in  Robin 
son,  1st  ed.  iii.  167-70.  [G.] 

NAG'GE  (Vayyai,  or,  as  some  MSS.  read, 
Uayai),  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25). 
It  represents  the  Heb.  P133,  Nogah  (Nayai,  LXX.), 
which  was  the  name  of  one  of  David's  sons,  as  we 
read  in  1  Chr.  iii.  7.  Nagge  must  have  lived 
about  the  time  of  Onias  I.  and  the  commencement 
of  the  Macedonian  dynasty.  It  is  interesting  to 
notice  the  evidence  afforded  by  this  name,  both  as 
a  name  in  the  family  of  David,  and  from  its 
meaning,  that,  amidst  the  revolutions  and  conquests 
which  overthrew  the  kingdoms  of  the  nations,  the 
house  of  David  still  cherished  the  hope,  founded  upon 
promise,  of  the  revival  of  the  splendour  (nogah)  of 
their  kingdom.  [A.  C.  H.] 


NAH'ALAL  (H3  :  2eAAa  ;  Alex.  NaaAcoA  : 

Natal),  one  of  the  cities  of  Zebulun,  given  with  its 
"  suburbs  "  to  the  Merarite  Levites  (Josh.  xxi.  35). 
It  is  the  same  which  in  the  list  of  the  allotment  of 
Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  15)  is  inaccurately  given  in 
the  A.  V.  as  NAHALLAL,  the  Hebrew  being  in  both 
cases  identical.  Elsewhere  it  is  called  NAHALOL. 
It  occurs  in  the  list  between  Kattath  and  Shimron, 
but  unfortunately  neither  of  these  places  has  yet 
been  recognised.  The  Jerusalem  Talmud,  however 
(Megillah,  ch.  i.  ;  Maaser  Sheni,  ch.  v.),  as  quoted 
by  Schwarz  (172),  and  Reland  (Pal.  717)  asserts 
that  Nahalal  (or  Mahalal,  as  it  is  in  some  copies) 
was  in  post-biblical  times  called  Mahlul  ;  and  this 
Schwarz  identifies  with  the  modern  Malul,  a  village 
in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  under  the  mountains  which 
cn<  lose  the  plain  on  the  north,  4  miles  west  of  Naza 
reth,  and  2  of  Japhia;  an  identification  concurred 
in  by  Van  de  Velde  (Memoir).  Onfi  Hebrew  MS. 

<"30  K.)  lends  countenance  to  it  by  reading  77HD, 
i.i'.  Mahalal,  in  Josh.  xxi.  35.  If  the  town  was 
m  the  great  plain  we  can  understand  why  the 
Israelites  were  unable  to  drive  out  the  Canaanites 
from  it,  since  their  chariots  must  have  been  ex 
tremely  formidable  as  long  as  they  remained  on 
level  or  smooth  ground. 


•  The  statPinent  in  1  Sam.  xii.  12  appears  to  be  at 
variance  with  that  of  vi.i.  4,  5  ;  but  it  bears  a  remarkable 
t*5,umor  J  to  the  dread  entertained  of  this  savage  chief; 


N  A  1  1  Ab  II 

NAH'ALLAL  (^>n3  :  NoflaaA  ;  Alex.  No*. 
AeoA  :  Nealat),  an  inaccurate  mode  of  spelling,  in 
Josh.  xix.  15,  the  name  vhich  in  Josh.  xxi.  35,  is 
accurately  given  as  NAHALAL.  The  original  is 
precisely  the  same  in  both.  [G.] 

NAHA'LEEL  6«^m  =  "  torrent  of  God  ;" 
Siimar.  7K/T13  :  Maya^A  ;  Alex.  NaaAirjA  :  Naha- 
lief),  one  of  the  halting-places  of  Israel  in  the  latter 
part  of  their  progress  to  Canaan  (Num.  xxi.  19). 
It  lay  "  beyond,"  that  is,  north  of  the  Arnon  (ver. 
13),  and  between  Mattenah  and  Bamoth,  the  next 
after  Bamoth  being  Pisgah.  It  does  pot  occur  in 
the  catalogue  of  Num.  xxxiii.,  nor  anywhere  besides 
the  passage  quoted  above.  By  Eusebius  and  Je 
rome  (Onomast.  "Naaliel")  it  is  mentioned  as 
close  to  the  Arnon.  Its  name  seems  to  imply  that 
it  was  a  stream  or  wady,  and  it  is  not  impossibly 
preserved  in  that  of  the  Wady  Encheyle,  which 
runs  into  the  Mojeb,  the  ancient  Arnon,  a  short 
distance  to  the  east  of  the  place  at  which  the  road 
between  Rabba  and  Aroer  crosses  the  ravine  of  the 
latter  river.  The  name  Encheyle,  when  written 
in  Hebrew  letters  (JITTliK),  is  little  more  than 


transposed.  Burckhardt  was  perhaps  the 
first  to  report  this  name,  but  he  sngge»ts  the  Wady 
Wale  as  the  Nahaliel  (Syria,  July  14)  This, 
however,  seems  unnecessarily  far  4  the  north,  and, 
in  addition,  it  retains  no  likeness  to  the  origina. 
name.  ^G.~\ 

NAH'ALOL  (^>n3  :   AW/XOKO  ;   Alex.  Exo«- 

fuu'  :  Naalol),  a  variation  in  the  mode  of  giving  ue 
name  (both  in  Hebrew  and  A.V.)  of  the  place  els, 
where  called  Nahalal.    It  occurs  only  in  Judg.  i.  30. 
The  variation  of  the  LXX.  is  remarkable.        [G.] 
NA'HAM  (DPO:    Nc^of/i  :    Naham).     The 

brother  of  Hodiah,  or  Jehudijah,  wife  of  Ezra,  and 
father  of  Keilah  and  Eshtemoa  (1  Chr.  iv.  19). 

NAHAMA'NI  (WIV  :  Nw/tavf  ;  FA.  Naaji- 

Havet:  Nahamani).  A  chief  man  among  those 
who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  and 
Jeshua  (Neh.  vii.  7).  His  name  is  omitted  in 
Ezr.  ii.  2,  and  in  the  parallel  list  of  1  Esdr.  v.  8,  is 
written  ENENIOS. 


NAHARA'I  (nr]3  :  Naxfy  ;  Alex.  Naapai  : 
Naarai).  The  armourbearer  of  Joab,  called  in  the 
A.V.  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  37,  NAUARI.  He  was  a  native 
ofBeeroth  (1  Chr.  xi.  39). 

NA'HARI(nn3:    FtAwpe  ;    Alex,   rftupt: 

Naharai).  The  same  as  NAHARAI,  Joab's  armo  T- 
bearer  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  37).     In  the  A.  V.  of  Kill 
the  name  is  printed  "  NAHARAI  the  Berotbite." 
NA'HASH  (B>rj3,  "  serpent").    1.  (Nefes,  but 

in  Chr.  'Avaj  ;  Alex,  in  both  Naas  :  Naas). 
"  Nahash  the  Ammonite,"  king  of  the  Bene-Ammon 
at  the  foundation  of  the  monarchy  in  Israel,  who 
dictated  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh-Gilead  that 
cruel  alternative  of  the  loss  of  their  right  eyes  or 
slavery,  which  roused  the  swift  wrath  of  Saul,  and 
caused  the  destruction  of  the  whole  of  the  Ammonite 
force  (1  Sam.  xi.  1,  2-11).  According  to  Josephus 
(Ant.  vi.  5,  §1)  the  siege  of  Jabesh  was  but  the 
climax  of  a  long  career  of  similar*  ferocity  with 


In  ascribing  the  adoption  of  monarchy  by  Israel  to  th« 
panic  caused  by  his  approach. 


rjAHASH 

V;hirh  Nahash  had  oppi'essed  the  whole  of  the 
Hebrews  on  th ;  east  of  Jordan,  and  his  success  in 
which  had  rendered  him  so  self-confident  that  he 
despised  the  chance  of  relief  which  the  men  of  Jabesh 
eagerly  caught  at.  If,  as  Josephus  (Ib.  §3)  also 
states,  Nahash  himself  was  killed  in  the  rout  of  his 
army,  then  the  Nahash  who  was  the  father  of  the 
foolish  young  king  Hanun  (2  Sam.  x.  2 ;  1  Chr.  xix. 
1,  2)  must  have  been  his  son.  In  this  case,  like 
Pharaoh  in  Egypt,  and  also  perhaps  like  Benhadad, 
Achish,  and  Agag,  in  the  kingdoms  of  Syria,  Phi- 
listia,  and  Amalek,  "  Nahash  "  would  seem  to  have 
been  the  title  of  the  king  of  the  Ammonites  than 
the  name  of  an  individual. 

However  this  was,  Nahash  the  father  of  Hanun 
had  rendered  David  some  special  and  valuable  service, 
which  David  was  anxious  for  an  opportunity  of  re 
quiting  (2  Cam.  x.  2).  No  doubt  this  had  been 
during  his  •panderings,  and  when,  as  the  victim  of 
Saul,  the  Ammonite  king  would  naturally  sympa 
thise  with  and  assist  him.  The  particulars  of  the 
service  are  not  related  in  the  Bible,  but  the  Jewish 
traditions  affirm  that  it  consisted  in  his  having 
afforded  protection  to  one  of  David's  brothers,  who 
escaped  alone  when  his  family  were  massacred  by 
the  treacherous  king  of  Moab,  to  whose  care  they 
had  been  entrusted  by  David  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3,  4), 
and  who  found  an  asylum  with  Nahash.  (See  the 
Midrash  of  R.  Tanchum,  as  quoted  by  S.  Jarchi 
on  2  Sam.  x.  2.) 

The  retribution  exacted  by  David  for  the  annoying 
insults  of  Hanun  is  related  elsewhere.  [DAVID, 
vol.  i.  4106;  JOAB,  vol.  i.  10826 ;  URIAH.]  One 
casual  notice  remains  which  seems  to  imply  that  the 
ancient  kindness  which  had  existed  between  David 
and  the  family  of  Nahash  had  not  been  extinguished 
even  by  the  horrors  of  the  Ammonite  war.  When 
David  was  driven  to  Mahanaim,  into  the  very 
neighbourhood  of  Jabesh-Gilead,  we  find  "  Shobi 
the  son  of  Nahash  of  Kabbah  of  the  Bene-Ammon" 
(2  Sam.  xvii.  27)  among  the  great  chiefs  who  were 
so  forward  to  pour  at  the  feet  of  the  fallen  monarch 
the  abundance  of  their  pastoral  wealth,  and  that 
not  with  the  grudging  spirit  of  tributaries,  but 
rather  with  the  sympathy  of  friends,  "  for  they 
said,  the  people  is  hungry  and  weaiy  and  thirsty 
in  the  wilderness"  (ver.  29). 

2.  (Noas).  A  person  mentioned  once  only  (2  Sam 
xvii.  25)  in  stating  the  parentage  of  Amasa,  the 
commander-in-chief  of  Absalom's  army.  Amasa  is 
there  said  to  have  been  the  son  b  of  a  certain  Ithra, 
by  Abigail,  "daughter  of  Nahash,  and  sister c  to 
Zeruiah."  By  the  genealogy  of  1  Chr.  ii.  16  it 
appears  that  Zeruiah  and  Abigail  were  sisters  of 
David  and  the  other  children  of  Jesse.  The  question 
then  arises,  How  could  Abigail  have  been  at  the 
same  time  daughter  of  Nahash  and  sister  to  the 
children  of  Jesse  ?  To  this  three  answers  may  be 
given :  — 

1.  The  universal  tradition  of  the  Rabbis  that 
Nahash  and  Jesse  were  identical."1  "  Nahash,"  says 
Solomon  Jarchi  (in  his  commentary  on  2  Sam.  xvii. 
25 „  "was  Jesse  the  father  of  David,  because  he 
died  without  sin,  by  the  counsel  of  the  serpent" 
(nachasK)  •  i.  e.  by  the  infirmity  of  his  tlillen  human 


NAHOR 


467 


b  The  whole  expression  seems  to  denote  that  he  was  an 
illegitimate  son. 

0  The  Alex.  LXX.  regards  Nahash  as  brother  of  Zeruiah 
— Bvya-rtpa.  Naas  a6«A</>ov  Sapovias. 

1  See  the  extract  from  the  Targum  on  Ruth  iv.  22 
given  ic  tte  note  to  JBSSE,  vol.  i.  p.  1038a.    Also  the  cita- 


nature  only.  It  must  be  owned  that  it  is  easier  to 
allow  the  identity  of  th«  two  than  to  accept  the 
reason  thus  assigned  for  it. 

2.  The  explanation  first  put  forth  by  Professor 
Stanley  in  this  work  (vol.  i.  4016),  that  Nahash 
was   the   king  of  the  Ammonites,    and   that   the 
same  woman  had  first  been   his  wife   or   concu 
bine  —  in  which   capacity  she   had  given  birth  to 
Abigail  and  Zeruiah  —  and  afterwards  wife  to  Jesse, 
and  the  mother  of  his  children.     In  this  manner 
Abigail  and  Zeruiah  would   be  sisters  to  David, 
without  being  at  the  same  time  daughters  of  Jesse. 
This  has  in  its  favour  the  guarded  statement  of 
1  Chr.  ii.  16,  that  the  two  women  were  not  them 
selves  Jesse's  children,  but  sisters  of  his  children  ; 
and  the   improbability    (otherwise  extreme)  of  so 
close  a  connexion  between  an  Israelite  and  an  Am 
monite  king  is  alleviated  by  Jesse's  known  descent 
from  a  Moabitess,  and  by  the  connexion  which  1m 
been  shown  above  to  have  existed  between  David 
and  Nahash  of  Ammon. 

3.  A,  third  possible  explanation  is  that  Nahash 
was    the    name    not   of  Jesse,    nor   of  a   former 
husband   of   his   wife,    but    of   his   wife  herself. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  name  to  prevent  its  being 
borne  equally  by  either  sex,  and  other  instances 
may  be  quoted  of  women  who  are  given  in  th« 
genealogies  as  the  daughters,  not  of  their  fathers, 
but  of  their  mothers  :  e.  g.  Mehetabel,  daughter  of 
Matred,  daughter  of  Mezahab.     Still  it  seems  very 
improbable  that  Jesse's  wife  would   be  suddenly 
intruded  into  the  narrative,  as  she  is  if  this  hypo 
thesis  be  adopted.  [G.] 

NA'HATH   (JirU:    N<*x<te;    Alex. 


Gen.  xxxvi.  13  ;  Nax<«>0  ;  Alex.  Nax<50,  Gen.  xxxvi. 
17  ;  Nax«s,  1  Chr.  i.  37;  Nahath).  1.  One  of  the 
"  dukes"  or  phylarchs  in  the  land  of  Edom,  eldest 
son  of  Reuel  the  son  of  Esau. 

2.  (Kaivade  ;  Alex.  Ki/afl).   A  Kohathite  Levite, 
son  of  Zophai  and  ancestor  of  Samuel  the  prophet 
(1  Chr.  vi.  26). 

3.  (Na«'0).     A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
who  with  others  was  overseer  of  the  tithes  and  de 
dicated  things  under  Cononiah  and  Shimei  (2  Chr. 
xxxi.  13). 

NAH'BI  Oam  :  Na#  ;  Alex.  Na0<{:  Nahabi}. 

The  son  of  Vophsi,  a  Naphtalite,  and  one  of  the 
twelve  spies  (Num.  xiii.  14). 

NA'HOR  (-lira  :  Nox«p  ;  Joseph.  Nax^TJJ  : 
*Nahor,  and  Nachor),  the  name  of  two  persons  in 
the  family  of  Abraham. 

1.  His  grandfather  :  the  sen  of  Serug  and  father 
of  Terah  (Gen.  xi.  22-25).     He  is  mentioned  in  the 
genealogy  of  our  Lord,  Luke  iii.  34,  though  there 
the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V.  in  the  Greek  form 
of  NACHOR. 

2.  Grandson  of  the  preceding,  son  of  Terah  and 
brother  of  Abraham  and  Haran  (Gen.  xi.  26,  27). 
The  members  of  the  family  are  brought  together  in 
the  following  genealogy.    (See  the  next  page.) 

It  has  been  already  remarked,  under  LOT  (p.  143 
note),  that  the  order  of  the  ages  of  the  family  of 


tions  from  the  Talmud  in  Meyer,  Seder  Olam,  569 ;  also 
Jerome,  Quaest.  hebr.  ad  loc. 

»  This  is  the  form. given  in  the  Benedictine  Edition  r,l 
Jerome's  Bibliotheca  Divina,  The  other  is  fount!  :a  ths 
ordinary  copies  of  the  Vulgate. 


458 


NAIIOB 


NAHSHON 


Terah 


Milcah = N  AHOR = Jleuman 


Iwac 


1 

1 
Tebah 

Hus 
Job 

Buz      Keiuu«-l      Cbesed      Hazo 
(father  of 
Chasdim  or 
Chaldeans) 
Ellhu     Aram  ; 
(Ram, 
Job  xxxii.  2). 

Pildash    Jidlaph 

|                              '.  .taiji 

Betlmtl              Thahash 
Maacdh 

l^aban 
1 

llebekab  =  Isaac 
1 

1                1 

1              1 

..,. 


Lot 


Terah  is  not  improbably  inverted  in  the  narrative ; 
in  which  case  Nahor,  instead  of  being  younger  than 
Abraham,  was  really  older.  He  married  Milcah,  the 
daughter  of  his  brother  Haran  ;  and  when  Abraham 
aud  Lot  migrated  to  Canaan,  Nahor  remained  behind 
in  the  land  of  his  birth,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Euphrates — the  boundary  between  the  Old  and  the 
New  World  of  that  early  age — and  gathered  his 
family  around  him  at  the  sepulchre  of  his  father.b 
(Comp.  2  Sam.  six.  37). 

Like  Jacob,  and  also  like  Ishmael,  Nahor  was  the 
rather  of  twelve  sons,  and  further,  as  in  the  case  of 
Jacob,  eight  of  them  were  the  children  of  his  wife, 
and  four  of  a  concubine  (Gen.  xxii.  21-24).  Special 
care  is  taken  in  speaking  of  the  legitimate  branch  to 
specify  its  descent  from  Milcah — "  the  son  of  Milcah, 
which  she  bare  unto  Nahor."  It  was  to  this  pure 
itnd  unsullied  race  that  Abraham  aud  Rebekah  in 
turn  had  recourse  for  wives  for  their  sons.  But  with 
Jacob's  flight  from  Haran  the  intercourse  ceased. 
The  heap  of  f  res  which  he  and  "  Laban  the 
Syrian"  erecte  on  Mount  Gilead  (Gen.  xxxi.  46) 
may  be  said  tc  nave  formed  at  once  the  tomb  of 
their  past  com^xion  and  the  barrier  against  its 
continuance.  Even  at  that  time  a  wide  variation 
had  taken  place  in  their  language  (ver.  47),  and 
not  only  in  their  language,  but,  as  it  would  seem, 
m  the  Object  of  their  worship.  The  "  God  of  Nahor  " 
appears  as  a  distinct  divinity  from  the  "  God  of 
Abraham  and  the  Fear  of  Isaac  "  (ver.  53).  Doubt 
less  this  was  one  of  the  "  other  gods  "  which  before 
the  Call  of  Abraham  were  worshipped  by  the  family 
of  Terah  ;  whose  images  were  in  Rachel's  possession 
during  the  conference  on  Gilead  ;  and  which  had  to 
be  discarded  before  Jacob  could  go  into  the  Presence 
of  the  "  God  of  Bethel "  (Gen.  xxxv.  2 ;  comp.  xxxi. 
1 3).  Henceforward  the  line  of  distinction  between 
the  two  families  is  most  sharply  drawn  (as  in  the 
allusion  of  Josh.  xxiv.  2),  and  the  descendants  of 
Nahor  confine  their  communications  to  their  own 
immediate  kindred,  or  to  the  members  of  other  non- 
Israelite  tribes,  as  in  the  case  of  Job  the  man  of  Uz, 
and  his  friends,  Elihu  the  Buzite  of  the  kindred  of 
Kani,  Eliphaz  the  Temanite,  and  Bildad  the  Shuhite. 
Many  centuries  later  David  appeal's  to  have  come 
into  collision — sometimes  friendly,  sometimes  the 
reverse — with  one  or  two  of  the  more  remote 
Nahorite  tribes.  Tibhath,  probably  identical  with 
Tebah  and  Maacah,  are  mentioned  in  the  relation 
of  his  wars  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Israel  (1  Chr. 


*  The  statements  of  Gen.  xi.  27-32  appear  to  Imply 
that  Nahor  did  not  advance  from  Ur  to  Haran  at  the  same 
time  with  Terah,  Abraham,  and  Lot,  but  remained  there 
till  a  later  date.  Coupling  this  with  the  statement  of 
Judith  v.  8,  and  the  universal  tradition  of  the  Kast,  that 
'li-r.«)jV  departure  from  Ur  was  a  relinquishmcnt  of  fake 
worahi;>,  an  additional  force  is  given  tc  the  mention  of 


xviii.  8,  xix.  6)  ;  and  the  mother  of  Absalom  either 
belonged  to  or  was  connected  with  the  latter  of  the 
ths  above  nations. 

No  certain  traces  of  the  name  of  Nahor  have  been 
recognised  in  Mesopotamia.  Ewald  (Geschichte,  i. 
359)  proposes  ffaditha,  a  town  on  the  Euphrates 
just  above  Hit,  and  bearing  the  additional  name 
of  el-Naura  ;  also  another  place,  likewise  called 
el-Na'ura,  mentioned  by  some  Arabian  geographers 
as  lying  further  north  ;  and  Nachrein,  which,  how 
ever,  seems  to  lie  out  of  Mesopotamia  to  the  east. 
Others  have  mentioned  Naarda,  or  Nehardea,  a  town 
or  district  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  above,  cele 
brated  as  the  site  of  a  college  of  the  Jews  (Diet. 
of  Geogr.  "  Naarda"). 

May  not  Aram-Naharaim  have  originally  derived 
its  name  from  Nahor?  The  fact  that  in  its  present 
form  it  has  another  signification  in  Hebrew  is  no 
argument  against  such  a  derivation. 

In  Josh.  xxiv.  2  the  name  is  given  in  the  A.  V. 
in  the  form  (more  nearly  approaching  the  Hebrew 
than  the  other)  of  NACHOR.  [G.] 


NAH'SHON,  orNAASH'ON  (fllTTO  : 
ffd»>,  LXX.  and  N.  T.  :  Nahasson,  0.  T.  ;  Naasson, 
N.  T.),  son  of  Amminadab,  and  prince  of  the  children 
of  Judah  (as  he  is  styled  in  the  genealogy  of  Judah, 
1  Chr.  ii.  10)  at  the  time  of  the  first  numbering 
in  the  wilderness  (Exod.  vi.  23  ;  Num.  i.  7,  &c.). 
His  sister,  Elisheba,  was  wife  to  Aaron,  and  his 
son,  Salmon,  was  husband  to  Rahab  after  the 
taking  of  Jericho.  From  Elisheba  being  described 
as  "  sister  of  Naashon  "  we  may  infer  that  he  was 
a  person  of  considerable  note  and  dignity,  which 
his  being  appointed  as  one  of  the  twelve  princes 
who  assisted  Moses  and  Aaron  in  taking  the  census. 
and  who  were  all  "  renowned  of  the  congregatioc 
.....  heads  of  thousands  in  Israel,"  shows  him 
to  have  been.  No  less  conspicuous  for  high  rank 
and  position  does  he  appear  in  Num.  ii.  3,  vii.  12, 
x.  14,  where,  in  the  encampment,  in  the  offerings 
of  the  princes,  and  in  the  order  of  march,  the  first 
place  is  assigned  to  Nahshon  the  son  of  Amminadah 
as  captain  of  the  host  of  Judah.  Indeed,  on  these 
three  last-named  occasions  he  appears  as  the  first 
man  in  the  state  next  to  Moses  and  Aaron,  whereas 
at  the  census  he  comes  after  the  chiefs  of  the  tribes 
of  Reuben  and  Simeon.»  Nahshon  died  in  the 
wilderness  according  to  Num.  xxvi.  64,  65,  but  no 
further  particulars  of  his  life  are  given.  In  the 


*  the  god  of  Nahor"  (Gen.  xxxi.  53)  as  distinct  from  the 
God  of  Abraham's  descendants.  Two  generations  later 
Nahor's  family  were  certainly  living  at  Huran  (Gen 
xxvili.  10,  xxix.  4). 

»  It  is  curious  to  notice  that,  In  the  second  numlx-rins 
(Num.  xxvi.),  Iteubcn  still  comes  first,  and  Judah  fcnrtc. 
So  also  1  Chr.  ii.  1- 


NAHUM 

N.T.  he  occurs  twice,  viz.  in  Matt.  i.  4  MM  Luke 
Hi.  :'2,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ,  where  i»is 
uncage  in  the  preceding  and  following  descents  are 
exactly  the  same  as  in  Ruth  iv.  18-20 ;  1  Ohr.  ii. 
10-12,  which  makes  it  quite  certain  that  he  was 
the  sixth  in  descent  from  Judah,  inclusive,  and  that 
David  was  the  fiilh  generation  after  him.  [AMMIN- 

ADAB.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

NA'HUM  (D-1TO :  Naoi$/x:  Nahum}.  "The 
book  of  the  vision,  of  Nahum  the  Elkoshite  "  stands 
seventh  in  order  among  the  writings  of  the  minor 
prophets  in  the  present  arrangement  of  the  canon. 
Of  the  author  himself  we  have  no  more  knowledge 
than  is  afforded  us  by  the  scanty  title  of  his  book, 
which  gives  no  indication  whatever  of  his  date,  and 
leaves  his  origin  obscure.  The  site  of  Elkosh,  his 
native  place,  is  disputed,  some  placing  it  in  Galilee, 
with  Jerome,  who  was  shewn  the  ruins  by  his  guide ; 
others  in  Assyria,  where  the  tomb  of  the  prophet  is 
still  visited  <ts  a  sacred  spot  by  Jews  from  all  parts. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela  (p.  53,  Heb.  text,  ed.  Asher) 
thus  briefly  alludes  to  it : — "  And  in  the  city  of 
Asshur  (Mosul)  is  the  synagogue  of  Obadiah,  and 
the  synagogue  of  Jonah  the  son  of  Amittai,  and  the 
synagogue  of  Nahum  the  Elkoshite."  [ELKOSH.] 
Those  who  maintain  the  latter  view  assume  that 
the  prophet's  parents  were  earned  into  captivity  by 
Tiglath-pileser,  and  planted,  with  other  exile  co 
lonists,  in  the  province  of  Assyria,  the  modern  Kur 
distan,  and  that  the  prophet  was  bom  at  the  village 
of  Alkush,  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Tigris,  two  miles 
north  of  Mosul.  Ewald  is  of  opinion  that  the  pro 
phecy  was  written  there  at  a  time  when  Nineveh 
was  threatened  from  without.  Against  this  it  may 
be  urged  that  it  does  not  appeal-  that  the  exiles 
were  carried  into  the  province  of  Assyria  Proper, 
but  into  the  newly-conquered  districts,  such  as 
Mesopotamia,  Babylonia,  or  Media.  The  arguments 
in  favour  of  an  Assyrian  locality  for  the  prophet  are 
supported  by  the  occurrence  of  what  are  presumed  to 
be  Assyrian  words  :  3ttn,  ii.  8;  "!|nT3».  "H^pQB' 

iii.  17,  and  the  strange  form  PGDNpE  in  ii.  14, 

which  is  supposed  to  indicate  a  foreign  influence. 
In  addition  to  this  is  the  internal  evidence  supplied 
l>y  the  vivid  description  of  Nineveh,  of  whose  splen 
dours  it  is  contended  Nahum  must  have  been  an 
eye-witness  ;  but  Hitzig  justly  observes  that  these 
descriptions  display  merely  a  lively  imagination,  and 
such  knowledge  of  a  renowned  city  as  might  be  pos 
sessed  by  any  one  in  Anterior  Asia.  The  Assyrian 
warriors  were  no  strangers  in  Palestine,  and  that 
there  was  sufficient  intercourse  between  the  two 
countries  is  rendered  probable  by  the  history  of  the 
prophet  Jonah.  There  is  nothing  in  the  prophecy 
of  Nahum  to  indicate  that  it  was  written  in  the 
immediate  neighbourhood  of  Nineveh,  and  in  full 
view  of  the  scenes  which  are  depicted,  nor  is  the 
language  that  of  an  exile  in  an  enemy's  country. 
No  allusion  is  made  to  the  captivity  ;  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  imagery  is  such  as  would  be  na 
tural  to  an  inhabitant  of  Palestine  (i.  4),  to  whom 
the  rich  pastures  of  Bashan ,  the  vineyards  of  Carmel , 
and  the  blossom  of  Lebanon,  were  emblems  of  all 
that  was  luxuriant  and  fertile.  The  language  em 
ployed  in  i.  15,  ii.  2,  is  appropriate  to  one  who 
wrote  for  his  countrymen  in  their  native  land.*  In 

•  Capernaum,  literally  "  village  of  Nahum,1'  is  supposed 
to  hcve  derived  its  name  from  the  prophet.  Schwarz 
(ixscr.  of  I'&l.  p.  1881  mentions  u  Ke/ar  Tandium  or 
,  close  on  Chinncicth,  and  24  Kn^lisb  miles  N. 


NAHUM 


459 


iact,  the  sole  origin  of  the  theory  that  Nahum 
flounshed  in  Assyria  is  the  name  of  the  village 
Alkush,  which  contains  his  supposed  tomb,  anr' 
from  its  similarity  to  Elkosh  was  apparently  selected 
by  mediaeval  tradition  as  a  shrine  for  pilgrims, 
with  as  little  probability  to  recommend  it  as  exists 
in  the  case  of  Obadiah  and  Jephthah,  whose  burial- 
places  are  still  shown  in  the  same  neighbourhood. 
This  supposition  is  more  reasonable  than  another 
which  has  been  adopted  in  order  to  account  for  the 
existence  of  Nahum's  tomb  at  a  place,  the  name  of 
which  so  closely  resembles  that  of  his  native  town. 
Alkush,  it  is  suggested,  was  founded  by  the  Israel- 
itish  exiles,  and  so  named  by  them  in  memory  of 
Elkosh  in  their  own  country.  Tradition,  as  usual, 
has  usurped  the  province  of  history.  According  to 
Pseudo-Epiphanius  (De  Vitis  Proph.  Opp.  ii.  p. 247), 
Nahum  was  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  "  from  Elcesei 
beyond  the  Jordan  at  Begabar  (Brtya^dp  ;  Chron. 
Pasch.  150  B.  B^rajSap/j),"  or  Bethabara,  where 
he  died  in  peace  and  was  buried.  In  the  Roman 
Martyrology  the  1st  of  December  is  consecrated  to 
his  memory. 

The  date  of  Nahum's  prophecy  can  be  determined 
with  as  little  precision  as  his  birthplace.  In  the 
Seder  Olam  Rabba  (p.  55,  ed.  Meyer)  he  is  mad* 
contemporary  with  Joel  and  Habakkuk  in  the  reign 
of  Manasseh.  Syncellus  (Chron.  p.  201  d)  places 
him  with  Hosea,  Amos  and  Jonah  in  the  reign  of 
Joash  king  of  Israel,  more  than  a  century  earlier ; 
while,  according  to  Eutychius  (Ann.  p.  252),  he 
was  contemporary  with  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and 
Malachi,  and  prophesied  in  the  fifth  year  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  11, 
§3)  mentions  him  as  living  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Jotham;  "about  this  time  was  a  certain 
prophet,  Nahum  by  name ;  who,  prophesying  con 
cerning  the  downfall  of  Assyrians  and  of  Nine 
veh,  said  thus,"  &c. ;  to  which  he  adds,  "  and  all 
that  was  foretold  concerning  Nineveh  came  to  pass 
after  115  years."  From  this  Carpzov  concluded 
that  Nahum  prophesied  in  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Ahaz,  about  B.C.  742.  Modern  writers 
are  divided  in  their  suffrages.  Bertholdt  thinks  it 
probable  that  the  prophet  escaped  into  Judah  when 
the  ten  tribes  were  carried  captive,  and  wrote  in 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Keil  (Lehrb,  d.  EM.  in  d. 
A.  T.}  places  him  in  the  latter  half  of  Hezekiah's 
reign,  after  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib.  Vitringa 
( Typ.  Doctr.  proph.  p.  37)  was  of  the  like  opinion, 
and  the  same  view  is  taken  \>j  De  Wette  (Einl.  p. 
328),  who  suggests  that  the  rebellion  of  the  Medes 
against  the  Assyrians  (B.C.  710),  and  the  election 
of  their  own  king  in  the  person  of  Dei'oces,  may 
have  been  present  to  the  prophet's  mind.  But  the 
history  of  Deloces  and  his  very  existence  are  now 
generally  believed  to  be  mythical.  This  period  also 
is  adopted  by  Knobel  (Prophet,  ii.  207,  &c.)  as  the 
date  of  the  prophecy.  He  was  guided  to  his  con 
clusion  by  the  same  supposed  facts,  and  the  destruc 
tion  of  No  Ammon,  or  Thebes  of  Upper  Egypt, 
which  he  believed  was  effected  by  the  Assyrian 
monarch  Sargon  (B.C.  717-715),  and  is  referred 
to  by  Nahum  (iii.  8)  as  a  recent  event.  In  this 
case  the  prophet  would  be  a  younger  contemporary 
of  Isaiah  (comp.  Is.  xx.  f).  Ewald,  again,  con 
ceives  that  the  siege  of  Nineveh  by  the  Median 
king  Phraortes  (B.C.  630-625),  may  have  suggested 


of  Tiberias.  "  They  point  out  there  the  graves  of  Nahum 
the  prophet,  of  Rabbis  Tanchum  and  Tanchuma,  who  iUl 
reposo  there,  and  through  these  the  oncU-nt  petition  o4 
the  villa^a  io  easiiy  knowu." 


460 


NAHUM 


Nahum's  prophecy  of  its  destruction.  The  exist 
ence  of  Phraortes,  at  the  period  to  which  he  is 
assigned,  is  now  believed  to  be  an  anachronism. 
[MEDE8.]  Junius  and  Tremellius  select  the  last 
years  of  Josiah  as  the  period  at  which  Nahum  pro 
phesied,  but  at  this  time  not  Nineveh  but  Babylon 
was  the  object  of  alarm  to  the  Hebrews.  The  argu 
ments  by  which  Strauss  (Nahumi  de  Nino  Vatici- 
niwn,  prol.  c.  1,  §3)  endeavours  to  prove  that,  the 
prophecy  belongs  to  the  time  at  which  Manasseh 
was  in  captivity  at  Babylon,  that  is  between  the 
years  680  and  667  B.C.,  are  not  convincing.  As 
suming  that  the  position  which  Nahum  occupies  in 
the  canon  between  Micah  and  Habakkuk  supplies, 
as  the  limits  of  his  prophetical  career,  the  reigns  of 
Hezekiah  and  Josiah,  he  endeavours  to  show  from 
certain  apparent  resemblances  to  the  writings  of  the 
older  prophets,  Joel,  Jonah,  and  Isaiah,  that  Nahum 
must  have  been  familiar  with  their  writings,  and 
consequently  later  in  point  of  time  than  any  of 
them.  But  a  careful  examination  of  the  passages 
by  which  this  argument  is  maintained,  will  show 
that  the  phrases  and  turns  of  expression  upon  which 
the  resemblance  is  supposed  to  rest,  are  in  no  way 
remarkable  or  characteristic,  and  might  have  been 
freely  used  by  any  one  familiar  with  Oriental  me 
taphor  and  imagery,  without  incurring  the  charge 
of  plagiarism.  Two  exceptions  are  Nah.  ii.  10, 
where  a  striking  expression  is  used  which  only 
occurs  besides  in  Joel  ii.  6,  and  Nah.  i.  15  (Heb. 
ii.  1),  the  first  clause  of  which  is  nearly  word  for 
word  the  same  as  that  of  Is.  lii.  7.  But  these  pas 
sages,  by  themselves,  would  equally  prove  that 
Nahum  was  anterior  both  to  Joel  and  Isaiah,  and 
that  his  diction  was  copied  by  them.  Other  refer 
ences  which  are  supposed  to  indicate  imitations  of 
older  writers,  or,  at  least,  familiarity  with  their 
writings,  are  Nah.  i.  3  compared  with  Jon.  iv.  2  ; 
Nah.  i.  13  with  Is.  x.  27  ;  Nah.  iii.  10  with  Is.  xiii. 
16;  Nah.  ii.  2  [1]  with  Is.  xxiv.  1  ;  Nah.  iii.  5 
with  Is.  xlvii.  2,  3  ;  and  Nah.  iii.  7  with  Is.  Ii.  19. 
For  the  purpose  of  showing  that  Nahum  preceded 
Jeremiah,  Strauss  quotes  other  passages  in  which 
the  later  prophet  is  believed  to  have  had  in  his 
mind  expressions  of  his  predecessor  with  which  he 
was  familiar.  The  most  striking  of  these  are  Jer. 
x.  19  compared  with  Nah.  iii.  19  ;  Jer.  xiii.  26  with 
Nah.  iii.  5 ;  Jer.  1.  37,  Ii.  30  with  Nah.  iii.  13. 
Words,  which  are  assumed  by  the  same  commen 
tator  to  be  peculiar  to  the  times  of  Isaiah,  are 
appealed  to  by  him  as  evidences  of  the  date  of  the 
prophecy.  But  the  only  examples  which  he  quotes 
prove  nothing:  f)L5t^,  sheteph  (Nah.  i.  8,  A.  V. 
"flood"),  occurs  in  Job,  the  Psalms,  and  in  Pro- 
rtrbs,  but  not  once  in  Isaiah ;  and  !WI¥C>,  metsu- 
rah  (Nah.  ii.  1  [2],  A.  V.  "  munition")' is  found 
only  once  in  Isaiah,  though  it  occurs  frequently  in 
the  Chronicles,  and  is  not  a  word  likely  to  be  un 
common  or  peculiar,  so  that  nothing  can  be  inferred 
from  it.  Besides,  all  this  would  be  as  appropriate 
to  the  times  of  Hezekiah  as  to  those  of  Manasseh. 
That  the  prophecy  was  written  before  the  final 
downfall  of  Nineveh,  and  its  capture  by  the  Medes 
and  Chaldeans  (cir.  B.C.  625),  will  be  admitted. 
The  allusions  to  the  Assyrian  power  imply  that  it 
«ras  still  unbroken  (i.  12,  ii.  13,  14,  iii.  15-17). 
The  glory  of  the  kingdom  was  at  its  brightest  ill 
the  reign  of  Ksarhaddon  (B.C.  680-660),  who  for 
13  years  made  Babylon  the  seat  of  the  empire,  and 
this  tact  would  incline  us  to  fix  the  date  of  Nahum 
rather  iu  1he  reign  of  his  father  Sennacherib,  foi 


NAHUM 

Nineveh  alone  is  contemplated  in  the  destructior 
threatened  to  the  Assyrian  power,  and  no  hint  is 
given  that  its  importance  in  the  kingdom  was  dimi 
nished,  as  it  necessarily  would  be,  by  the  establish 
ment  of  another  capital.  That  Palestine  was  suffer- 
ing  from  the  ellccts  of  Assyrian  invasion  at  the 
time  of  Nahum's  writing  seems  probable  from  the 
allusions  in  i.  11,  12,  13,  ii.  2  ;  and  the  vivid  de 
scription  of  the  Assyrian  armament  in  ii.  3,  4.  At 
such  a  time  the  prophecy  would  be  appropriate, 
and  if  i.  14  refers  to  the  death  of  Sennacherib  in  the 
house  of  Nisroch,  it  must  have  been  written  before 
that  event.  The  capture  of  No  Ammon,  or  Thebes, 
has  not  been  identified  with  anything  like  certainty. 
It  is  referred  to  as  of  recent  occurrence,  and  it,  has 
been  conjectured  with  probability  that  it  was  sacked 
by  Sargon  in  the  invasion  of  Egypt  alluded  to  in  Is. 
xx.  1.  These  circumstances  seem  to  determine  the 
14th  year  of  Hezekiah  (B.C.  712)  as  the  period 
before  which  the  prophecy  of  Nahum  could  not  have 
been  written.  The  condition  of  Assyria  in  the  reign 
of  Sennacherib  would  correspond  with  the  state  of 
things  implied  in  the  prophecy,  and  it  is  on  all 
accounts  most  probable  that  Nahum  flourished  in 
the  latter  half  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  and  wrote 
his  prophecy  soon  after  the  date  above  mentioned, 
either  in  Jerusalem  or  its  neighbourhood,  where  the 
echo  still  lingered  of  "  the  rattling  of  the  wheels, 
and  of  the  prancing  horses,  and  of  the  jumping 
chariots "  of  the  Assyrian  host,  and  "  the  flame  of 
the  sword  and  lightning  of  the  spear,"  still  flashed 
in  the  memory  of  the  beleaguered  citizens. 

The  subject  of  the  prophecy  is,  in  accordance 
with  the  superscription,  "  the  burden  of  Nineveh." 
The  three  chapters  into  which  it  is  divided  form  a 
consecutive  whole.  The  first  chapter  is  introduc 
tory.  It  commences  with  a  declaration  of  the  cha 
racter  of  Jehovah,  "  a  God  jealous  and  avenging," 
as  exhibited  in  His  dealings  with  His  enemies,  and 
the  swift  and  terrible  vengeance  with  which  He 
pursues  them  (i.  2-6),  while  to  those  that  trust  in 
Him  He  is  "  good,  a  stronghold  in  ihe  day  of 
trouble"  (i.  7),  in  contrast  with  the  overwhelming 
flood  which  shall  sweep  away  His  foes  (i.  8).  The 
language  of  the  prophet  now  becomes  more  special, 
and  points  to  the  destruction  which  awaited  the 
hosts  of  Assyria  who  had  just  gone  up  out  of  Judab 
(i.  9-11).  In  the  verses  that  follow  the  intention 
of  Jehovah  is  still  more  fully  declared,  and  addressed 
first  to  Judah  (i.  12,  13),  and  then  to  the  monarch 
of  Assyria  (i.  14).  And  now  the  vision  grows 
more  distinct.  The  messenger  of  glad  tidings,  the 
news  of  Nineveh's  downfall,  trod  the  mountains 
that  were  round  about  Jerusalem  (i.  15),  and  pro- 
claimed  to  Judah  the  accomplishment  of  her  vows. 
But  round  the  doomed  city  gathered  the  destroying 
armies;  "  the  breaker  in  pieces"  hail  gone  up,  and 
Jehovah  mustered  His  hosts  to  the  battle  to  avenge 
His  people  (ii.  i.  2).  The  prophet's  mind  in  vision 
sees  the  burnished  bronze  shields  of  the  scarlet-clad 
warriors  of  the  besieging  army,  the  flashing  steeJ 
scythes  of  their  war-chariots  as  they  are  draw  u  up 
in  battle  array,  and  the  quivering  cypress-shafts  o. 
their  spears  (ii.  3).  The  Assyrians  hasten  to  the 
defence:  their  chariots  rush  madly  through  the 
streets,  and  run  to  and  fro  like  the  lightning  in  the 
broad  ways,  which  glare  with  their  bright  armour 
like  torches.  But  a  panic  has  seized  their  mighty 
ones ;  their  ranks  are  broken  as  they  march,  and 
they  hurry  to  the  wall  only  to  see  the  covered  bat 
tering-rams  of  the  besiegers  ready  for  the  attack 
(ii.  4,  5).  The  crisis  hastens  on  with  terrible 


NAIDUS 

rapidity.  The  river-gates  are  broken  in,  and  the  j 
royal  palace  is  in  the  hands  of  the  victors  (ii.  6).  j 
And  then  comes  the  end;  the  city  is  taken  and 
carried  captive,  and  her  maidens  "  moan  as  with 
the  voice  of  doves,"  beating  their  breasts  with  sorrow 
(ii.  7).  The  flight  becomes  general,  and  the  leaders 
in  vain  endea-  our  to  stem  the  torrent  of  fugitives 
(ii.  8).  The  wealth  of  the  city  and  its  accumu 
lated  treasures  become  the  spoil  of  the  captors,  and 
the  conquered  suffer  all  the  horrors  that  follow  the 
assault  and  storm  (ii.  9,  10).  Over  the  charred 
and  blackened  ruins  the  prophet,  as  the  mouth 
piece  of  Jehovah,  exclaims  in  triumph,  "  Where  is 
the  lair  of  the  lions,  the  feeding  place  of  the  young 
lions,  where  walked  lion,  lioness,  lion's  whelp,  and 
none  made  (them)  afraid?"  (ii.  11,  12).  But  for 
nil  this  the  downfall  of  Nineveh  was  certain,  for 
"behold  !  I  am  against  thee,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts" 
(h.  1ft).  The  vision  ends,  and  the  prophet  recalled 
from  the  scenes  of  the  future  to  the  realities  of  the 
present,  collects  himself  as  it  were,  for  one  final 
outburst  of  withering  denunciation  against  the  As 
syrian  city,  not  now  threatened  by  her  Median  and 
Ohaldean  conquerors,  but  in  the  full  tide  of  pros 
perity,  the  oppressor  and  corrupter  of  nations. 
Mingled  with  this  woe  there  is  no  touch  of  sadness 
or  compassion  for  her  fate  ;  she  will  fall  unpitied 
and  unlamented,  and  with  terrible  calmness  the 
prophet  pronounces  her  final  doom :  "all  that  hear 
the  bruit  of  thee  shall  clap  the  hands  over  thee :  for 
upon  whom  has  not  thy  wickedness  passed  conti 
nually?"  (iii.  19). 

As  a  poet,  Nahum  occupies  a  high  place  in  the 
first  rank  of  Hebrew  literature.  In  proof  of  this  it 
is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  the  opening  verses  of 
his  prophecy  (i.  2-6),  and  to  the  magnificent  de 
scription  of  the  siege  and  destruction  of  Nineveh  in 
ch.  ii.  His  style  is  clear  and  uninvolved,  though 
pregnant  and  forcible ;  his  diction  sonorous  anc 
rhythmical,  the  words  re-echoing  to  the  sense 
(comp.  ii.  4,  iii.  3).  Some  words  and  forms  o: 
words  are  almost  peculiar  to  himself;  as,  for  example 
rnj?b>  for  myp,  in  i.  3,  occurs  only  besides  in  Job 
ix.  17  ;  N13p  for  N3p,  in  i.  2,  is  found  only  in 
Josh.  xxiv.  19  ;  rtfDf),  ii.  9  [10],  is  found  in  Job 
xxiii.  3,  and  there  not  in  the  same  sense  ;  "liT5!,  in 
iii.  2,  is  only  found  in  Judg.  v.  22 ;  JYITPQ  and 

fyn,  ii.  3  [4],  an:,  a.  i  [$],  np^ia  and  npT4;Q» 

ii.  10  fll  I,  DntSlb,  iii.  17,  and  nn3,  iii.  19,  d 

L         J'  ,T  .     .  T  .. 

not  occur  elsewhere.  The  unusual  form  of  the  pro 
nominal  suffix  in  rOS^D,  ii.  13  [14],  WQ3  fo 
•1^Q3,  iii.  18,  are  peculiar  to  Nahum ;  "1JJJO,  iii.  5 
is  only  found  in  I  K.  vii.  36  ;  ^213,  iii.  17,  occur 
besides  only  in  Am.  vii.  1 ;  and  the  foreign  won 
"IDDIO,  iii.  17,  in  the  slightly  different  fonr 
"1DQD,  is  found  only  in  Jer.  Ii.  27. 

For  illustrations  of  Nahum's  prophecy,  see  th 
article  NINEVEH.  [W.  A.  W.] 

NA'IDUS  (NafSos  ;  Alex.  Nati'Sos :  Raanas 
=  BENAIAH  of  the  sons  of  Pahath  Moab  ( 1  Esdr 
is.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  30). 

NAIL.    I.  (of  finger).* — 1.  A  nail  or  claw  of  ma 


NAIL 


461 


or  animal.     2.  A  point  or  style,  e.g.  for  writing: 
see  Jer.  xvii.  1.     Tzipporen  occurs  in  Deut.  xxi.  12, 
connexion  with  the  verb  nbj?,  dsHh, "  to  make," 
ere    rendered    -jrepiowxlfo,    circumcido,    A.  V. 
pare,"  but  in  marg.  "  dress,"  "  suffer  to  grow." 
esenius  explains  "  make  neat." 
Much  controversy  has  arisen  on  the  meaning  of 
lis   passage ;    one  set   of  interpreters,    including 
osephus  and  Philo,  regarding  the  action  as  indi- 
ative  of  mourning,  while  others  refer  it  to  the 
eposition  of  mourning.     Some,  who  would  thus 
ilong  to  the  latter  class,  refer  it  to  the  practice  of 
mining  the  nails  with  henneh. 
The    word    asah,    "  make,"   is    used    both    of 
dressing,"  i.  e.  making  clean  the  feet,  and  also  of 
trimming,"  i.  e.  combing  and  making  neat  the 
>eavd,  in  the  case  of  Mephibosheth,  2  Sam.  xix. 
4.     It  seems,  therefore,  on  the  whole  to  mean 
make  suitable"   to  the   particular   purpose   in- 
ended,  whatever  that  may  be:    unless,  as  Gese- 
ius  thinks,  the  passage  refers  to  the  completion 
f  the  female  captive's  month   of  seclusion,  that 
urpose  is  evidently  one  of  mourning — a  month's 
mourning  inteiposed  for  the  purpose  of  preventing 
n  the  one  hand  too  hasty  an  approach  on  the  part 
f  the  captor,  and  on  the  other  too  sudden  a  shock 
o  natural  feeling  in  the  captive.     Following  tin? 
ine   of  interpretation,    the    command   will   stand 
hus :  The  captive  is  to  lay  aside  the  "  raiment  of 
ler  captivity,"  viz.  her  ordinary  dress  in  which 
he  had  been  taken  captive,  and  she  is  to  remain 
n  mourning  retirement  for   a  month  with   hair 
hortened  and  nails  made  suitable  to  the  same  pur- 
>ose,  thus  presenting  an  appearance  of  woe  to  which 
,he  nails  untrimmed  and  shortened  hair  would  seem 
each  in  their  way  most  suitable  (see  Job  i.  20). 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  we  suppose  that  the 
shaving  the  head,  &c.,  indicate  the  time  of  re 
tirement  completed,  we  must  suppose  also  a  sort 
of  Nazaritic  initiation  into  her  new  condition,  a 
supposition  for  which  there  is  elsewhere  no  warrant 
in  the  Law,  besides  the  fact  that  the  "making," 
whether  paring  the  nails  or  letting  them  grow,  is 
lowhere  mentioned  as  a  Nazaritic  ceremony,  and 
also  that  the  shaving  the  head  at  the  end  of  the 
month  would  seem  an  altogether  unsuitable  intro 
duction  to  the  condition  of  a  bride. 

We  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  captive's  head 
was  shaved  at  the  commencement  of  the  month, 
and  that  during  that  period  her  nails  were  to  be 
allowed  to  grow  in  token  of  natural  sorrow  and 
consequent  personal  neglect.  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8-23 ; 
Philo,  vepi  <f>i\av6p.  c.  14,  vol.  ii.  p.  394,  ed. 
Mangey;  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  ii.  c.  18,  iii.  c.  11. 
vol.  ii.  pp.  475,  543,  ed.  Potter;  Calmet,  Patrick, 
Crit.  Sacr.  on  Deut.  xxi.  12  ;  Schleusner,  Lex. 
V.  T.  irepiovvxlfa  ?  Selden,  de  Jur.  Nat.  v.  xiii. 
p.  644;  Harmer,  06s.  iv.  104;  Wilkinson,  Anc. 
Eg.  ii.  345  ;  Lane,  M.  E.  i.  64 ;  Gesenius,  p. 
1075;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  art.  88,  vol.  i. 
p.  464,  ed.  Smith ;  Numb.  vi.  2,  18. 

II. — 1  >  A  nail  (Is.  xli.  7),  a  stake  (Is.  xxxiii.  20), 
also  a  tent-peg.  Tent-pegs  are  usually  of  wood  and  of 
large  size,  but  sometimes,  as  was  the  case  with  those 
used  to  fasten  the  curtains  of  the  Tabernacle,  of  metal 
(Ex.  xxvii.  19,  xxxviii.  20  ;  see  Lightfoot,  Spicil.  ia 
Ex.  §42  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  v.  5,  4).  [JAEL,  TENT.] 


»  "IDp.  t'fhar,  a  Chaldee  form  of  the  Heb.  ftSV 
trippvren,  from  the  root  "IB¥>  connected  with  "ISO 
wphar,  "  t-  scrape,"  or  " pare ;"  oi/v| ;  wnguis. 


b  "'IT'  JathM !  iroo-CToAos  ;  paxittus,  clavui ;  akin  to 
Arab.  jJ      wata<3a>  "  to  fix  a  pc£." 


462 


NAIN 


2.«  A  nail,  jrimarily  a  point.*  We  are  told  that 
David  prepared  iron  for  the  nails  to  be  used  in  the 
Temple  ;  and  as  the  holy  of  holies  was  plated  with 
gold,  the  nails  also  for  fastening  the  plates  were 
probably  of  gold.  Their  weight  is  said  to  have 
been  50  shekels,  ^  25  ounces,  a  weight  obviously 
so  much  too  small,  unless  mere  gilding  be  sup 
posed,  for  the  total  weight  required,  that  LXX. 
and  Vulg.  render  it  as  expressing  that  of  each  nail, 
which  is  equally  excessive.  To  remedy  this  diffi 
culty  Thenius  suggests  reading  500  for  50  shekels 
(1  Chr.  xxii.  3;  2  Chr.  iii.  9;  Bertheau,  on  Chro 
nicles,  in  Kurzgef.  Handb.). 

"  Nail,"  Vulg.  palus,  is  the  rendering  of  -jrdff- 
ffa\os  in  Ecclus.  xxvii.  2.  In  N.  T.  we  have 
*}A.os  and  irpoerijAo'w  in  speaking  of  the  nails  of  the 
Cross  (John  xx.  25  ;  Col.  ii.  14).  [H.  W.  P.] 

NAIN  (Nerfj/).  There  are  no  materials  for  a 
long  histoiy  or  a  detailed  description  of  this  village 
of  Galilee,  the  gate  of  which  is  made  illustrious  by 
the  raising  of  the  widow's  son  (Lukevii.  12).  But 
two  points  connected  with  it  are  of  extreme  interest 
to  the  Biblical  student.  The  site  of  the  village  is 
certainly  known  ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to 
the  approach  by  which  our  Saviour  was  coming 
when  He  met  the  funeral.  The  modern  Nein  is  si 
tuated  on  the  north-western  edge  of  the  "  Little 
Hennon,"  orJebel  ed-Duhy,  where  the  ground  falls 
into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  Nor  has  the  name 
ever  been  forgotten.  The  crusaders  knew  it,  and 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  mention  it,  in  its  right  con 
nexion  with  the  neighbourhood  of  Endor.  Again, 
the  entrance  to  the  place  must  probably  always 
have  been  up  the  steep  ascent  from  the  plain  ;  and 
here,  on  the  west  side  of  the  village,  the  rock  is 
full  of  sepulchral  caves.  It  appears  also  that  there 
are  similar  caves  on  the  east  side.  (Robinson,  Bib. 
Res.  ii.  361  ;  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  and  Palestine, 
ii.  382  ;  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  357  ; 
Thomson,  Tlie  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  445  ;  Porter, 
Handbook  to  Syria,  p.  358.)  [J.  S.  H.] 

NA'IOTH  (flta,  according  to  the  Keri  or  cor 
rected  text  of  the  Masorets;  which  is  followed  by  the 
A.  V.,  but  in  the  Cethib  or  original  text  TV13,» 
t.  e.  Nevaioth  :  Au<£0  ;  Alex.  Nautwfl  :  Najoth},  or 
more  fully  ,b  "  Naioth  in  Ramah  ;"  a  place  in 
which  Samuel  and  David  took  refuge  together,  after 
the  latter  had  made  his  escape  from  the  jealous  fury 
of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xix.  18,  19,  22,  23,  xx.  1).  It  is 
evident  from  ver.  18,  that  Naioth  was  not  actually 
in  Ramah,  Samuel's  habitual  residence,  though  from 
the  affix  it  must  have  been  near  it  (Ewald,  iii.  66). 
In  its  corrected  form  (Kerf)  the  name  signifies 
"  habitations,"  and  from  an  early  date  has"  been 
interpreted  to  mean  the  huts  or  dwellings  of  a  school 
or  college  of  prophets  over  which  Samuel  presided, 
as  Elisha  did  over  those  at  Gilgal  and  Jericho. 

This  inteipretation  was  unknown  to  Josephus, 
who  gives  the  name  ra\pdaO,  to  the  translators  of 


c  "IDpO>  masmdr,1  only  used  in  plur.  ;  ijAos  ;  claims. 

*  From  "1OD,  "  stand  on  end,"  as  hair  (Ges.  p.  961). 

8  The  plural  of  D13.  The  original  form  (Cethib') 
would  be  the  plural  of  H*13  (Slmonis,  Onom.  30),  a  word 
fthlch  does  not  appear  to  have  existed. 


Closely  allied  to  Arab .    Ij>uwu1}.  wiwmdr,  'a  nail." 


NAOMI 

th<>  LXX.  and  the  Peshito-Syriac  (Jonath},  and  tj 
Jeroine.c  It  appears  first  in  the  Targum-Jonathan. 
where  for  Naioth  we  find  throughout  N^Q^-IN  JV3- 
"  tne  house  of  instruction,"  the  termd  which  appear: 
in  later  times  to  have  been  regularly  applied  to  thi- 
schools  of  the  Rabbis  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  106)— 
and  where  ver.  20  is  rendered,  "  and  they  saw  the 
company  of  scribes  singing  praises,  and  Samuel  teach 
ing,  standing  over  them,"  thus  introducing  the  idea 
of  Samuel  as  a  teacher.  This  interpretation  ot 
Naioth  is  now  generally  accepted  by  the  lexicogn  - 
phers  and  commentators.  [G.T 

NANE'A  (Noj/ai'a:  Nanea}.  The  last  act  oi 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  (vol.  i.  p.  756)  was  his  at- 
tempt  to  plunder  the  temple  of  Nanea  at  Elymais, 
which  had  been  enriched  by  the  gifts  and  trophies 
of  Alexander  the  Great  (1  Mace.  vi.  1-4;  2  Mace, 
i.  13-16).  The  Persian  goddess  Nanea,  called  also 
'A.VCUTIS  by  Strabo  (xv.  p.  733),  is  apparently  the 
Moon  goddess,  of  whom  the  Greek  Artemis  was  the 
nearest  representative  in  Poljrbius  (quoted  by  Joseph. 
Ant.  xii.  9,  §1).  Beyer  calls  her  the  "Elymaean 
Venus  "  (ad  Joh.  Seldeni,  &c.,  addit.  p.  345),  and 
Winer  (Eealw.)  apparently  identifies  Nanea  with 
Meni,  and  both  with  the  planet  Venus,  the  star  of 

i7 

luck,  called  by  the  Syrians  <-AJJ,  Nani,  and  in 
Zend  Nahid  or  Anahid. 

Elphinstone  in  1811  found  coins  of  the  Sassanians 
with  the  inscription  NANAIA,  and  on  the  reverse 
a  figure  with  nimbus  and  lotus-flower  (Movers, 
Phoen.  i.  626).  It  is  probable  that  Nanea  is  iden 
tical  with  the  deity  named  by  Strabo  (xi.  p.  532)  as 
the  numen  patrium  of  the  Persians,  who  was  also 
honoured  by  the  Medes,  Armenians,  and  in  many 
districts  of  Asia  Minor.  Other  forms  of  the  name 
are  'Avala,  given  by  Strabo,  Afvrj  by  Polybius, 
'Averts  by  Plutarch,  and  Tacafs  by  Clemens 
Alexandrinus,  with  which  last  the  variations  of 
some  MSS.  of  Strabo  correspond.  In  consequence 
of  a  confusion  between  the  Greek  and  Eastern  mytho 
logies,  Nanea  has  been  identified  with  Artemis  and 
Aphrodite,  the  probability  being  that  she  corre 
sponds  with  the  Tauric  or  Ephesian  Artemis,  who 
was  invested  with  the  attributes  of  Aphrodite,  and 
represented  the  productive  power  of  nature.  In  this 
case  some  weight  may  be  allowed  to  the  conjecture, 
that  "  the  desire  of  women  "  mentioned  in  Dan.  xi.  37 
is  the  same  as  the  goddess  Nanea. 

In  2  Mace.  ix.  1,  2,  appeal's  to  be  a  different  ac 
count  of  the  same  sacrilegious  attempt  of  Antiochus ; 
but  the  scene  of  the  event  is  there  placed  at  Perse- 
polis,  "  the  city  of  the  Persians,"  where  there  might 
well  have  been  a  temple  to  the  national  deity.  But 
Grimm  considers  it  far  more  probable  that  it  was  an 
Elymaean  temple  which  excited  the  cupidity  of  the 
king.  See  Gesenius,  Jesaia,  iii.  337,  and  Grimm's 
Commentar  in  the  Kurzgef.  Handb.  [W.  A.  W.] 

NA'OMI  (>pyj  :    Jiuffidv  ;    Alex.  NOOMM*^, 


<>  "  Naioth  "  occurs  both  In  Heb.  and  A.  V.  in  Sam.  xlx. 
18,  only.  The  LXX.  supply  eV'Pa/no  in  that  verse.  The 
Vulgate  adheres  to  the  Hebrew. 

e  In  his  notice  of  this  name  in  the  Uit<nnattic0n 
("  Namoth  "),  Jerome  refers  to  his  observations  thereoc 
in  the  "libri  Hobraicarum  qnaestionnm.'  As,  however 
we  at  present  possess  those  books,  they  contain  no  re 
ference  to  Naioth. 

<•  It  occurs  ajrain  in  tue  Targtim  for  the  nuktoiioe  ot 
Huldah  the  prophetess  (2  K.  xxii.  14). 


NAPHISH 

Vfcf^|Uci»',  Wooft.ti,  &c. :  Nvemi),  the  wife  of  Eli- 
melech,  and  mother-in-law  of  Ruth  (Ruth  i.  2,  &c., 
ii.  1,  &c.,  iii.  1,  iv.  3,  &c.).  The  name  is  derived 
from  a  root  signifying  sweetness,  or  pleasantness, 
and  this  significance  contributes  to  the  point  of  the 
paronomasia  in  i.  20,  21.  though  the  passage  con 
tains  also  a  play  on  the  mere  sound  of  the  name : — 
"  Call  me  not  Naomi  (pleasant),  call  me  Mara 
(bitter)  ....  why  call  ye  me  Naomi  when  Jehovah 
hath  testified  (anah,  n5j?J  against  me?"  [G.] 

NA'PHISH  (B"B3,  "according  to  the  Syriac 
usage,  •  refreshment,'  "  Ges. :  Name's,  Nct(J>i(reuoj : 
Nap/iis),  the  last  but  one  of  the  sons  of  Ishmael 
(Gen.  xxv.  15  ;  1  Chr.  i.  31).  The  tribe  descended 
from  Nodab  was  subdued  by  the  Reubenites,  the 
Gadites,  and  the  half  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh. 
when  "  they  made  war  with  the  Hagarites,  with 
Jetur,  and  Nephish  (Ncupiffaiwif,  LXX.),  and 
Nodab"  (1  Chr.  v.  19).  The  tribe  is  not  again 
found  in  the  sacred  records,  nor  is  it  mentioned  by 
later  writers.  It  has  not  been  identified  with  any 
Arabian  tribe ;  but  identifications  with  Ishmaelite 
tribes  are  often  difficult.  The  difficulty  in  question 
arises  from  intermarriages  with  Keturahites  and 
Joktanites,  from  the  influence  of  Mohammadan  his 
tory,  and  from  our  ignorance  respecting  many  of 
the  tribes,  and  the  towns  and  districts,  of  Arabia. 
The  influence  of  Mohammadan  history  is  here  men 
tioned  as  the  strongest  instance  of  a  class  of  in 
fluences  very  common  among  the  Arabs,  by  which 
prominence  has  been  given  to  certain  tribes  remark 
able  in  the  rise  of  the  religion,  or  in  the  history  ot 
the  country,  its  language,  &c.  But  intermarriages 
exercise  even  a  stronger  influence  on  the  names  of 
tribes,  causing  in  countless  instances  the  adoption 
of  an  older  name  to  the  exclusion  of  the  more 
recent,  without  altering  the  pedigree.  Thus  Mo 
hammad  claimed  descent  from  the  tribe  of  Muddd, 
although  he  gloried  in  being  an  Ishmaelite :  Mudad 
took  its  name  from  the  father  of  Ishmael's  wife, 
and  the  name  of  Ishmael  himself  is  merged  in  that 
of  the  older  race.  [ISHMAEL.] 

If  the  Hagarenes  went  southwards,  into  the  pro 
vince  of  Hejer,  after  their  defeat,  Naphish  may  have 
gone  with  them,  and  traces  of  his  name  should  in 
this  case  be  looked  for  in  that  obscure  province  of 
Arabia.  He  is  described  in  Chronicles,  with  the 
confederate  tribes,  as  pastoral,  and  numerous  in  men 
and  cattle.  [NODAB.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

NAPH'ISI  (ycupeurel  ;  Alex.  Na<J>«n :  Na- 
:issim),  1  Esdr.  v.  31.  [NEPHUSIM.] 

NAPH'TALI  (^FIQ3  :  Ned>0aAei'jU>  and  so  also 


NAPHTALI 


463 


Josephus:  Nephthali).  The  fifth  son  of  Jacob; 
the  second  child  borne  to  him  by  Bilhah,  Rachel's 
•ilave.  His  birth  and  the  bestowal  of  his  name  are 
recorded  in  Gen.  xxx.  8  : — "  and  Rachel  said  '  wrest 
lings  (or  contortions — naphtule)  of  God*  have  J 


»  That  is,  according  to  the  Hebrew  idiom,  "  immense 
wrestlings."  afnjxanjTOS  olov,  "  as  if  irresistible,"  is  the 
explanation  of  the  name  given  by  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  19 

b  An  attempt  has  been  made  by  Redslob,  in  his  singular 
treatise  Die  Alttest.  ffamen,  &c.  (Hamb.  1846,  pp.  88,  9) 
to  show  that  "  Naphtali  "  is  nothing  but  a  synonyme  for 
"  Galilee,"  and  tnat  again  for  "  Cabul,"  all  three  being 
opprooriocs  appellations.  But  if  there  were  no  other 
difficulties  in  the  way,  this  has  the  disadvantage  of  being 
In  direct  contradiction  to  the  high  estimation  in  which  tli 
tribe  was  held  at  the  date  of  the  composition  of  the  Songs 
.'*  r>Dbcrah  and  Jacob. 


wrestled  (niphtaltf)  with  my  sister  ana  have  pre 
vailed.'     And  she  called  his  name  bNaphtali." 

By  his  birth  Naphtali  was  thus  allied  to  Dan 
Gen.  xxxv.  25)  ;  and  he  also  belonged  to  the  same 
jortion  of  the  family  as  Ephraim  and  Benjamin,  the 
sons  of  Rachel ;  but,  as  we  I'hall  see,  these  connexions 
appear  to  have  been  only  imperfectly  maintained  by 
the  tribe  descended  from  him. 

At  the  migration  to  Egypt  four  sons  are  attri 
buted  to  Naphtali  (Gen.  xlvi.  24 ;  Ex.  i.  4 ;  1  Chr. 
vii.  13).  Of  the  individual  patriarch  not  a  single 
trait  is  given  in  the  Bible  ;  but  in  the  Jewish  tra 
ditions  he  is  celebrated  for  his  powers  as  a  swift 
runner,  and  he  is  named  as  one  of  the  five  who  were 
chosen  by  Joseph  to  represent  the  family  before  Pha 
raoh  (Targ.  Pseudojon.onGen.  1.  13  and  xlvii.  2).« 

When  the  census  was  taken  at  Mount  Sinai  the 
tribe  numbered  no  less  than  53,400  fighting  men 
(Num.  i.  43,  ii.  30).  It  thus  held  exactly  the 
middle  position  in  the  nation,  having  five  above  it 
in  numbers,  and  six  below.  But  when  the  borders 
of  the  Promised  Land  were  reached,  its  numbers 
were  reduced  to  45,400,  with  four  only  below  it 
in  the  scale,  one  of  the  four  being  Ephraim  (Num. 
xxvi.  48-50  ;  coinp.  37).  The  leader  of  the  tribe 
at  Sinai  was  Ahira  ben-Enan  (Num.  ii.  29)  ;  and  at 
Shiloh,  Pedahel  ben-Ammihud  (xxxiv.  28).  Amongst 
the  spies  its  representative  was  Nahbi  ben-Vophsi 
(xiii.  14). 

During  the  march  through  the  wilderness  Naph 
tali  occupied  a  position  on  the  north  of  the  Sacred 
Tent  with  Dan,  and  also  with  another  tribe,  which 
though  not  originally  so  intimately  connected  be 
came  afterwards  his  immediate  neighbour — Asher 
(Num.  ii.  25-31).  The  three  formed  the  "Camp 
of  Dan,"  and  their  common  standard,  according  to 
the  Jewish  traditions,  was  a  serpent  or  basilisk, 
with  the  motto,  "  Return,  0  Jehovah,  unto  the 
many  thousands  of  Israel!"  {Targ.  Pseudojon.  on 
Num.  ii.  25). 

In  the  apportionment  of  the  land,  the  lot  of 
Naphtali  was  not  drawn  till  the  last  but  one.  The 
two  portions  then  remaining  unappropriated  were 
the  noble  but  remote  district  which  lay  between  the 
strip  of  coast-land  already  allotted  to  Asher  and  the 
upper  part  of  the  Jordan,  and  the  little  canton  or 
corner,  more  central,  but  in  every  other  respect  far 
inferior,  which  projected  from  the  territory  of  Judah 
into  the  country  of  the  Philistines,  and  formed  the 
"  marches "  between  those  two  never-tiring  com 
batants.  Naphtali  chose  the  former  of  these,  leaving 
the  latter  to  the  Danites,  a  large  number  of  whom 
shortly  followed  their  relatives  to  their  home  in  the 
more  remote  but  more  undisturbed  north,  and  thus 
testified  to  the  wisdom  of  Naphtali's  selection. 

The  territory  thus  appropriated  was  enclosed  on 
three  sides  by  those  of  other  tribes.  On  the  west, 
as  already  remarked,  lay  Asher;  on  the  south  Zebu- 
lun,  and  on  the  east  the  trans-jordanic  Manasseh. 


c  In  the  •  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs, 
Naphtali  dies  in  his  132nd  year,  in  the  7th  month,  on 
the  4th  day  of  the  month.  He  explains  his  name  as  given 
"  because  Rachel  had  dealt  deceitfully "  (ev  iravovpyiif 
en-oiTjerc).  He  also  gives  the  genealogy  of  his  mother : — 
Balla  (Bilhah),  the  daughter  of  Routbalos,  the  brother  of 
Deborah,  Rebekah's  nurse,  was  born  the  same  day  with 
Rachel.  Routhaios  was  a  Chaldaean  of  the  kindred  of 
Abraham,  who,  being  taken  captive,  was  bought  as  a  slave 
by  Laban.  Laban  gave  him  his  maid  Aina  or  Eva  to  wife, 
by  whom  he  had  Zelipba  (Zilpah)— so  called  from  the 
place  in  which  he  had  been  captive — and  Balla  (Tabr'.cius, 
Cod.  PKUdejrior.  V.  T.  659,  &c.). 


464 


KAFHTAL1 


The  north  terminated  with  the  ravine  of  the  LitAn 
or  Leontes,  and  oj#ned  into  the  splendid  valley  whic 
•eparates  the  two  ranges  of  Lebanon.     According  t 
Josephus  {Ant.  v.  1,  §22)  the  eastern  side  of  th 
tribe  reached  as  far  as  Damascus ;  but  of  this— 
though  not  impossible  in  the  early  times  of  the  natio 
and  before  the  rise  of  the  Syrian  monarchy — ther 
is  no  indication  in  the  Bible.     The  south  boundar_ 
•was  probably  very  much  the  same  as  that  which  a 
a  later  time  separated  Upper  from  Lower  Galilee 
and  which  ran  from  or  about  the  town  of  Alika 
the  upper  part  of  the  Sea  of  Gennesaret.     Thus 
Naphtali   was   cut  off  from    the   great   plain   o 
Esdraelon — the  favourite   resort  of  the  hordes  o 
plunderers  from  beyond  the  Jordan,  and  the  gres 
Battlefield  of  the  country — by  the  mass  of  the  moun 
tains  of  Nazareth  ;  while  on  the  east  it  had  a  com 
munication  with  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  the  rich  distric 
of  the  Ard  el-Huleh  and  the  Merj  Ay&n,  and  al 
the  splendidly  watered  country  about  Banias  an 
Hasbeya,  the  springs  of  Jordan.     "  0  Naphtali,' 
thus   accurately  does  the  Song  attributed  to  th< 
dying  lawgiver  express  itself  with  regard  to  thi? 
part  of  the  territory  of  the  tribe — "  0  Naphthali, 
satisfied  with  favour  and  full  of  Jehovah's  blessing, 
the  sea''  and  the  south  possess  thou  I"  (Deut.  xxxiii. 
23).     But  the  capabilities  of  these  plains  and  of  the 
access  to  the  Lake,  which  at  a  later  period  raised 
GALILEE  and  GENNESARETH  to  so  high  a  pitch  oi 
crowded  and  busy  prosperity,  were  not  destined  to 
be  developed  while  they  were  in  the  keeping  of  the 
tribe  of  Naphtali.    It  was  the  mountainous  country 
("  Mount  Naphtali,"  Josh.  xx.  7)  which  formed  the 
chief  part  of  their  inheritance,  that  impressed  or 
brought  out  the  qualities  for  which  Naphtali  was 
remarkable  at  the  one  remarkable  period  of  its  his 
tory.    This  district,  the  modem  Belad-Besharah,  or 
"  land  of  good  tidings,"  comprises  some  of  the  most 
beautiful  scenery,  and  some  of  the  most  fertile  soil 
in  Palestine  (Porter,  363),  forests  surpassing  those 
of  the  renowned  Carmel  itself  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  293) ; 
as  rich  in  noble  and  ever-varying  prospects  as  any 
country  in  the  world  (ii.  407).     As  it  is  thus  de 
scribed  by  one  of  the  few  travellers  who  have  crossed 
its  mountains  and  descended  into  its  ravines,  so  it 
was  at  the  time  of  the  Christian  era : — "  The  soil," 
says  Jcsephus  (J9.  /.  iii.  3,  §2),  "  universally  rich 
and  productive ;  full  of  plantations  of  trees  of  all 
sorts  ;,so  fertile  as  to  invite  the  most  slothful  to  cul 
tivate  it."    But,  except  in  the  permanence  of  these 
natural  advantages,  the  contrast  between  the  present 
and  that  earlier  time  is  complete  ;  for  whereas,  in 
the  time  of  Josephus,  Galilee  was  one  of  the  most 
populous  and  busy  districts  of  Syria,  now  the  popu 
lation  is  in  an  inverse  proportion  to  the  luxuriance 
of  the  natural  vegetation  (Van  de  Velde,  i.  170). 

Three  of  the  towns  of  Naphtali  were  allotted  to 
thb>  Gershonite  Levites — Kedesh  (already  called 
Kode^h-in-Galilee),  Hammoth-dor,  and  Kartan.  Of 
these,  vthe  first  was  a  city  of  refuge  (Josh.  xx.  7, 
xxi.  32).  Naphtali  was  one  of  Solomon's  commis 
sariat  districts,  under  the  charge  of  his  son-in-law 
Ahimaaz ;  \v;ho  with  his  wife  Basmath  resided  in 
his  presidency, \and  doubtless  enlivened  that  remote 
and  rural  locality-'^by  a  miniature  of  the  court  of  his 
august  father- in-la\w,  held  at  Safed  or  Kedesh,  or 
wherever  his  residencV"  may  have  been  (1  K.  iv.  15). 
Here  he  doubtless  watched  the  progress  of  the  un- 


NAPHTALI 

promising  new  district  presented  to  Solomjo  b* 
Hiram— the  twenty  citi*«  of  Cabul,  whit  h  seem  ta 
have  been  within  the  territory  of  Naphtali,  perliapg 
the  nucleus  of  the  Galilee  of  later  date.  The  ruler 
of  the  tribe  (TJ3)—  a  different  dignity  altogether 
from  that  of  Ahimaaz— was,  in  the  reign  of  David, 
Jerimoth  ben-Azriel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  19). 

Naphtali  had  its  share  in  those  incursions  and 
molestations  by  the  surrounding  heathen,  which 
were  the  common  lot  of  all  the  tribes  (Judah  per 
haps  alone  excepted)  during  the  first  centuries  after 
the  conquest.  One  of  these,  apparently  the  severest 
struggle  of  all,  fell  with  special  violence  on  the  north 
of  the  country,  and  the  leader  by  whom  the  invasion 
was  repelled — BARAK  of  Kedesh-Naphtali — was  the 
one  great  hero  whom  Naphtali  is  recorded  to  have  pro 
duced.  How  gigantic  were  the  efforts  by  which  these 
heroic  mountaineers  saved  their  darling  highlands 
from  the  swarms  of  Canaanites  who  followed  Jabin 
and  Sisera,  and  how  grand  the  position  which  they 
achieved  in  the  eyes  of  the  whole  nation,  may  b« 
gathered  from  the  narrative  of  the  war  in  Judg.  iv., 
and  still  more  from  the  expressions  of  the  triumphal 
song  in  which  Deborah,  the  prophetess  of  Ephraim, 
immortalised  the  victors,  and  branded  their  reluctant 
countrymen  with  everlasting  infamy.  Gilead  and 
Reuben  lingered  beyond  the  Jordan  amongst  their 
flocks  :  Dan  and  Asher  preferred  the  luxurious  calm 
of  their  hot  lowlands  to  the  free  air  and  fierce 
strife  of  the  mountains ;  Issachar  with  characteristic 
sluggishness  seems  to  have  moved  slowly  if  he 
moved  at  all ;  but  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  on  the 
summits  of  their  native  highlands  devoted  them 
selves  to  death,  even  to  an  extravagant  pitch  of 
leroism  and  self-devotion  (Judg.  v.  18): — 
"  Zebulun  are  a  people  that  threw  «  away  their  lives  even 

unto  death— 
And  Naphtali,  on  the  high  places  of  the  field." 

The  -mention  of  Naphtali  contained  in  the  Song 
attributed  to  Jacob — whether  it  is  predictive,  or  as 
some  writers  believe,  retrospective — must  have  re- 
"erence  to  this  event :  unless  indeed,  which  is  hardly 

be  believed,  some  other  heroic  occasion  is  referred 
x>,  which  has  passed  unrecorded  in  the  history.  The 
ranslation  of  this  difficult  passage  given  by  Ewald 
Geschichte,  ii.  380),  has  the  merit  of  being  more 
ntelligible  than  the  ordinary  version,  and  also  more 
n  harmony  with  the  expressions  of  Deborah's 
Son: 

"  Naphtali  is  a  towering  Terebinth ; 

He  hath  a  goodly  crest." 
'he  allusion,  at  once  to  the  situation  of  the  tribe  at 
he  very  apex  of  the  country,  to  the  heroes  who 
x)wered  at  the  head  of  the  tribe,  and  to  the  lofty 
nountains  on  whose  summits  their  castles,  then  as 
.ow,  were  perched — is  very  happy,  and  entirely  in 
he  vein  of  these  ancient  poems. 

After  this  burst  of  heroism,  the  Naphtalitcs 
ppear  to  have  resigned  themselves  to  the  intcr- 
ourse  with  the  '  heathen,  which  was  the  bane  of  the 
orthern  tribes  in  general,  and  of  which  there  are 
Iready  indications  in  Judg.  i.  33.  The  location  by 
eroboam  within  their  territory  of  the  great  sane 
uary  for  the  northern  part  of  his  kingdom  must 
ave  given  an  impulse  to  their  nationality,  and  for  a 
me  have  revived  the  connexion  with  their  brethren 
earer  the  centre.  But  there  was  one  circumstanc* 


*  Toon,  rendered  "  west "    ln  the  A.  V.,  but  obviously 
the  "Sea"  of  Galilee. 

•  8c  Swald.  u'tgwcrfenf-*  (Dichta;  i.  '.SO). 


f  This  is  implied  in  the  name  of  Galilee,  which  at  ar 
.rlydate.is  styled  D^'lS  fl  7yJ,0eZK  hag-goyim,Qa\r** 


the  Gentiles. 


NAPHTALl,  MOUNT 

fatal  to  the  prosperity  of  the  tribe,  namely,  that 
it  lay  in  the  very  path  of  the  northern  invaders. 
Syrian  and  Assyrian,  Benhadad  and  Tiglath-pileser, 
each  had  their  first  taste  of  the  plunder  of  the 
Israelites  from  the  goodly  land  of  Naphtali.  At 
length  in  the  reign  of  Pekah  king  of  Israel  (cir. 
B.C.  730),  Tiglath-pileser  overran  the  whole  of  the 
north  of  Israel,  swept  off  the  population,  and  bore 
them  away  to  Assyria. 

But  though  the  history  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali 
ends  here,  and  the  name  is  not  again  mentioned 
except  in  the  well-known  citation  of  St.  Matthew 
(ir.  15),  and  the  mystical  references  of  Ezekiel 
(xlviii.  3,  4,  34)  and  of  the  writer  of  the  Apoca 
lypse  (Rev.  vii.  6),  yet  under  the  title  of  GALILEE 
— apparently  an  ancient  name,  though  not  brought 
prominently  forward  till  the  Christian  era — the  dis 
trict  which  they  had  formerly  occupied  was  destined 
to  become  in  every  way  far  more  important  than  it 
had  ever  before  been.  For  it  was  the  cradle  of  the 
Christian  faith,  the  native  place  of  most  of  the 
Apostles,  and  the  "  home"  of  our  Lord.  [GALILEE, 
vol.  i.  p.  6456;  CAPERNAUM,  273a.] 

It  also  became  populous  and  prosperous  to  a 
degree  far  beyond  anything  of  winch  we  have  any 
indications  in  the  Old  Testament ;  but  this,  as  well 
as  the  account  of  its  sufferings  and  heroic  resist 
ance  during  the  campaign  of  Titus  and  Vespasian 
prior  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  must  be  given 
elsewhere.  [GALILEE  ;  PALESTINE.]  [G.] 

NAPH'TALI,  MOUNT  cbfitt  1H  :  iv  r$ 
opei  ry  Ne<J>0oAet :  Mons  Nephtali).  The  moun 
tainous  district  which  formed  the  main  part  of  the 
inheritance  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xx.  7),  answering  to 
"  Mount  Ephraim "  in  the  centre  and  "  Mount 
Judah  "  in  the  south  of  Palestine. 

NAPH'THAB  (vt<p6ap  :  Nephthar').  The 
name  given  by  Nehemiah  to  the  substance'  which 
after  the  Return  from  Babylon  was  discovered  in 
the  dry  pit  in  which  at  the  destruction  of  the 
Temple  the  sacred  Fire  of  the  altar  had  been  hidden 
(2  Mace.  i.  36,  comp.,19).  The  legend  is  a  curious 
one ;  and  it  is  plain,  from  the  description  of  the 
substance — "  thick  water ,"b  which,  being  poured 
over  the  sacrifice  and  the  wood,  was  kindled  by  the 
great  heat  of  the  sun,  and  then  burnt  with  an 
exceedingly  bright  and  clear  flame  (ver.  32) — that 
it  was  eithe.  the  same  as  or  closely  allied  to  the 
naphtha  of  modern  commerce  {Petroleum).  Th< 
narrative  is  not  at  all  extravagant  in  its  terms 
and  is  very  probably  grounded  on  some  actual e  oo 
muTence.  The  only  difficulty  it  presents  is  the 
explanation  given  of  the  name  :  "  Naphthar,  which 
is,  being  interpreted,  cleansing  "  (KaOapifffiAi),  " 
which  has  hitherto  puzzled  all  the  interpreters.  I' 
is  perhaps  due  to  some  mistake  in  copying.  A  lis 
of  conjectures  will  be  found  in  Grimm  {Kurzgef 
Handb.  ad  loo.),  and  another  in  Reland's  Diss.  di 
vet.  Ling.  Pers.  Ixviii. 

The  place  from  which  this  combustible  water  was 
taken  was  enclosed  by  the  "  king  of  Persia  "  (Arta 
xerxes  Longimanus),  and  converted  into  a  sanctuar 
^such  seems  the  force  of  Itpbv  itoitiv,  ver.  34.).  Ii 
modern  times  it  has  been  identified  with  the  larg 
well  called  by  the  Arabs  Bir-eyvb,  situated  beneat 


NAPHTUHIM 


465 


erusalem,  at  the  confluence  of  the  valleys  of  KidroD 
id  Hinnom  with  the  Wady  cn-Nar  (or  "  vallej 
'the  fire"),  and  from  which  the  main  water  supply 
'  the  city  is  obtained. 

This  well,  the  Arab  name  of  which  may  be  the 
well  of  Joab  or  of  Job,  and  which  is  usually  iden- 
h'ed  with  En-rogel,  is  also  known  to  the  Frank 
hristians  as  the  "  Well  of  Nehemiah."  According 
o  Dr.  Robinson  {Bib.  Res.  i.  331,  2  note),  the  first 
race  of  this  name  is  in  Quaresmius  (Elucidatio,  &c., 
.  270-4),  who  wrote  in  the  early  part  of  the  17th 
int.  (1616-25).  He  calls  it  "the  well  of  Nehe- 
niah  and  of  fire,"  in  words  which  seem  to  imply 
lat  such  was  at  that  time  its  recognized  name  : 

Celebris  ille  et  nominatus  puteus,  Nehemiae  et 
;nis  appellatus."  The  valley  which  runs  from  it 
o  the  Dead  Sea  is  called  Wady  en-Nar,  "  Valley 
f  the  Fire  ;"  but  no  stress  can  be  laid  on  this,  as 
be  name  may  have  originated  the  tradition.  A 
ascription  of  the  Bir-eyub  is  given  by  Williams 
Holy  City,  ii.  489-95),  Barclay  (C%,&c.,  513-16), 
nd  by  the  careful  Tobler  (Umgebungen,  &c.,  50).. 
At  present  it  would  be  an  equally  unsuitable  spot 
ither  to  store  fire  or  to  seek  for  naphtha.  One  thing 
s  plain,  that  it  cannot  have  been  En-rogel  (which 

as  a  living  spring  of  water  from  the  days  of  Joshua 
lownwards),  and  a  naphtha  well  also.  [G.] 

NAPHTUHIM  (QTiriM:  Ne(J>0aA.£(jtt  :  Neph 

uim,  Nephthuim),  a  Mizraite  nation  or  tribe,  men- 
ioned  only  in  the  account  of  the  descendants  of 
'Joah  (Gen.  x.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.  1  1).  If  we  may  judge 
rom  their  position  in  the  list  of  the  Mizraites,  ac 

cording  to  the  Masoretic  text  (in  the  LXX.  in  Gen. 

x.  they  follow  the  Ludim  and  precede  the  Anamim, 
E.vefj.friflfji\  immediately  after  the  Lehabim,  who 

doubtless  dwelt  to  the  west  of  Egypt,  and  before 
,he  Pathrusim,  who  inhabited  that  country,  the 
tfaphtuhim  were  probably  settled  at  first,  or  at  the 
;ime  when  Gen.  x.  was  written,  either  in  Egypt 

or  immediately  to  the  west  of  it.  In  Coptic 
;he  city  Marea  and  the  neighbouring  territory, 

which  probably  corresponded  to  the  older  Mareotic 

nome,  is  called 


8  Not  to  the  place,  as  In  the  Vulgate,— hunc  locum. 

b  The  word  "  water  "  is  here  used  merely  for  "  liquid 
us  in  aqua  vitae.  Native  naphtha  is  sometimes  obtaim 
without  colour,  and  in  appearance  not  unlike  water. 

«  Qrimm  (p.  50)  notice*  a  passage  In  the  "  Adambook 
>f  the  Ethiopian  Christians,  in  whkh  Kzra  is  said 


a   name   composed   of  the   word 

.,  of  unknown  meaning,  with  the  plural 


definite  article  Itl  prefixed.  In  hieroglyphics  men 
tion  is  made  of  a  nation  or  confederacy  of  tribes  con 
quered  by  the  Egyptians  called  "  the  Nine  Bows,"  » 
a  name  which  Champollion  read  Naphit,  or,  as  we 
should  write  it,  NA-PETU,  "  the  bows,"  though 
he  called  them  "  the  Nine  Bows."  b  It  seemg, 
however,  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  we  should 
read  (ix)  PETU  "  the  Nine  Bows  "  literally.  It  is 
also  doubtful  whether  the  Coptic  name  of  Marea 
contains  the  word  "  bow,"  which  is  only  found  in  the 

forms  TUT6  (S.  masc.)  and  4>rf~  (M.  fern,  "a 
rainbow");  but  it  is  possible  that  the  second  part 
of  the  former  may  have  been  originally  the  same  as 
the  latter.  It  is  noteworthy  that  there  should  be 
two  geographical  names  connected  with  the  bow  in 
hieroglyphics,  the  one  of  a  country,  MERU-PET, 
"  the  island  of  the  bow,"  probably  MERGE,  and  the 
other  of  a  nation  or  confederacy,  "  the  Nine  Bows," 

have  discovered  in  the  vaults  of  the  Temple  a  censet 
full  of  the  Sacred  Fire  which  had  formerly  burnt  in  th« 
Sanctuary. 

•  Dr.  Brugscb  reads  this  name  "the  Nlue  Pe<?l*s 
(Geograpkische  ln&:hriften,  11.  p.  20). 

t>  A  bow  in  hieroglyphics  is  PET,  PEET  or  PETER 


466 


NARCISSUS 


Mid  that  in  the  list  of  the  Karaites  there  should  be 
two  similar  names,  Phut  and  Naphtuhim,  besides 
Cush,  probably  of  like  sense.  No  important  his 
torical  notice  of  the  Nine  Bows  has  been  found  in 
the  Egyptian  inscriptions :  they  are  only  spoken  of 
in  a  general  manner  when  the  kings  are  said,  in 
laudatory  inscriptions,  to  have  subdued  great  na 
tions,  such  as  the  Negroes,  or  extensive  countries, 
such  as  KEESH,  or  Cush.  Perhaps  therefore  this 
name  is  that  of  a  confederacy  or  of  a  widely-spread 
fcation,  of  which  the  members  or  tribes  are  spoken 
of  separately  in  records  of  a  more  particular  cha 
racter,  treating  of  special  conquests  of  the  Pharaohs 
or  enumorat-ng  their  tributaries.  [R.  S.  P.] 

NARCIS'SUS  (NdpKtffffos).  A  dweller  at 
Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  11),  some  members  of  whose 
household  were  known  as  Christians  to  St.  Paul. 
Some  persons  have  assumed  the  identity  of  this 
Narcissus  with  the  secretary  of  the  emperor  Clau 
dius  (Suetonius,  Claudius,  §28).  But  that  wealthy 
and  powerful  freedman  satisfied  the  revenge  of 
.Agrippina  by  a  miserable  death  in  prison  (Tac. 
Ann.  xiii.  1),  in  the  first  year  of  Nero's  reign  (A.D. 
54-55),  about  three  years  before  this  Epistle  was 
written.  Dio  Cassius,  Ixiv.  3,  mentions  another 
Narcissus,  who  probably  was  living  in  Rome  at  that 
time ;  he  attained  to  some  notoriety  as  an  associate 
of  Nero,  and  was  put  to  an  ignominious  death  with 
Helius,  Patrobius,  Locusta,  and  others,  on  the  ac 
cession  of  Galba,  A.D.  68.  His  name,  however 
(see  Reimar's  note,  in  loco),  was  at  that  time  too 
common  in  Rome  to  give  any  probability  to  the 
guess  that  he  was  the  Narcissus  mentioned  by  St. 
Paul.  A  late  and  improbable  tradition  (Pseudo- 
Hippolytus)  makes  Narcissus  one  of  the  seventy  dis 
ciples,  and  bishop  of  Athens.  [W.  T.  B.] 

NARD.    [SPIKENARD.] 

NAS'BAS  (Naff&ds :  Nabath}.  The  nephew  of 
Tobit  who  came  with  Achiacharus  to  the  wedding 
of  Tobias  (Tob.  xi.  18).  Grotius  considers  him  the 
same  with  Achiacharus  the  son  of  Anael,  but  ac 
cording  to  the  Vulgate  they  were  brothers.  The 
margin  of  the  A.  V.  gives  "  Junius"  as  the  equi 
valent  of  Nasbas. 

NA'SITH  (Naffl;  Alex.  Noo-ffl :  Nasty  = 
NFZIAH  (1  Esdr.  v.  32  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  54). 

NA'SOR,  THE  PLAIN  OF  (T&  vrtlov 
Neurefy):  campus  Asor),  the  scene  of  an  action 
between  Jonathan  the  Maccabee  and  the  forces  of 
Demetrius  (1  Mace.  xi.  67,  comp.  63).  It  was 
near  Cades  (Kadesh-Naphtali)  on  the  one  side,  and 
the  water  of  Gennesar  (Lake  of  Gennesareth)  on  the 
other,  and  therefore  may  be  safely  identified  with 
the  Hazor  which  became  so  renowned  in  the  history 
of  the  conquest  for  the  victories  of  Joshua  and  Barak 
(vol.  i.  765  a).  Jn  fact  the  name  is  the  same,  except 
that  through  the  error  of  a  transcriber  the  N  from 
the  preceding  Greek  word  has  become  attached  to  it. 
Josephus  (Ant.  xiii.  5,  §7 )  gives  it  correctly,  'Affdp. 
[Comp.  NAARATH,  p.  453  note.]  [G.] 

NATHAN  (fni:  Ud6av:  Nathan],  an  eminent 
Hebrew  prophet  in  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solo 
mon.  If  the  expression  "  first  and  last,"  in  2  Chr. 
is.  29,  is  to  be  taken  literally,  he  must  have  lived 
late  into  the  life  of  Solomon,  in  which  case  he  must 
have  been  considerably  younger  than  David.  At 
any  rate  he  seems  to  have  been  the  younger  of  the 
two  prophets  who  accompanied  him,  and  may  be 
considered  as  the  latest  direct  representative  of  the 
of  Sam ue~.. 


NATHAN 

A  Jewish  tradition  mentioned  by  Jerome  (Qu. 
ffeb.  on  1  Sam.  xvii.  12)  identifies  him  with  tht 
eighth  son  of  Jesse.  [DAVID,  vol.  i.  p.  402a.]  But 
of  this  there  »a  no  proof. 

He  tirst  appears  in  the  consultation  with  David 
about  the  building  of  the  Temple.  He  begins  by 
advising  it,  and  then,  after  a  vision,  withdraws  his 
advice,  on  the  ground  that  the  time  was  not  yet 
come  (2  Sam.  vii.  2, 3,  17).  He  next  comes  forward 
as  the  reprover  of  David  for  the  sin  with  Bathshela ; 
and  his  famous  apologue  on  the  rich  man  and  the 
ewe  lamb,  which  is  the  only  direct  example  of  his 
prophetic  power,  shows  it  to  have  been  of  a  very 
high  order  (2  Sam.  xii.  1-12). 

There  is  an  indistinct  trace  of  his  appearing  also 
at  the  time  of  the  plague  which  fell  on  Jerusalem 
in  accordance  with  the  warning  of  Gad.  "  Au 
angel,"  says  Eupolemus  (Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  30), 
"  pointed  him  to  the  place  where  the  Temple  was 
to  be,  but  forbade  him  to  build  it,  as  being  stained 
with  blood,  and  having  fought  many  wars.  His 
name  was  Dianathan."  This  was  probably  occa 
sioned  by  some  confusion  of  the  Greek  version,  8«a 
Nrfflac,  with  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Chr.  xxii.  8, 
where  the.  bloodstained  life  of  David  is  given  as  a 
reason  against  the  building,  but  where  Nathan  is 
not  named. 

On  the  birth  of  Solomon  he  was  either  specially 
charged  with  giving  him  his  name,  JEDIDIAH,  or 
else  with  his  education,  according  as  the  words  of 
2  Sam.  xii.  25,  "  He  sent  (or  '  sent  him ')  by  (or 
'  into  ')  the  hand  of  Nathan,"  are  understood.  At 
any  rate,  in  the  last  years  of  David,  it  is  Nathan 
who,  by  taking  the  side  of  Solomon,  turned  the  scale 
in  his  favour.  He  advised  Bathsheba;  he  himself 
ventured  to  enter  the  royal  presence  with  a  remon 
strance  against  the  king's  apathy ;  and  at  David's 
request  he  assisted  in  the  inauguration  of  Solomon 
(1  K.  i.  8,  10,  11,  22,  23,  24,  32,  34,  38,  45). 

This  is  the  last  time  that  we  hear  directly  of  his 
intervention  in  the  history.  His  son  Zabud  occu 
pied  the  post  of  "  King's  Friend,"  perhaps  suc 
ceeding  Nathan  (2  Sam.  xv.  37 ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  33). 
His  influence  may  be  traced  in  the  perpetuation  of  his 
manner  of  prophecy  in  the  writings  ascribed  to  Solo 
mon  (compare  Eccl.  ix.  14-16  with  2  Sam.  xii.  1-4). 

He  left  two  works  behind  him — a  Life  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  and  a  Life  of  Solomon  (2  Chr. 
ix.  29).  The  last  of  these  may  have  been  incom 
plete,  as  we  cannot  be  sure  that  he  outlived  Solo 
mon.  But  the  biography  of  David  by  Nathan  is, 
of  all  the  losses  which  antiquity,  sacred  or  profane, 
has  sustained,  the  most  deplorable. 

The  consideration  in  which  he  was  held  at  the 
time  is  indicated  by  the  solemn  announcement  of 
his  approach — "  Behold  Nathan  the  prophet"  (1  K. 
i.  23).  The  peculiar  affix  of  "  the  prophet,"  as  distin 
guished  from  «'  the  seer,"  given  to  Samuel  and  Gad 
(1  Chr.  xxix.  29),  shows  his  identification  with  the 
later  view  of  the  prophetic  office  indicated  in  1  Sam. 
ix.  9.  His  grave  is  shown  at  ffalhul  near  Hebrcn 
(see  Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  216  note).  [A.  P.  S.] 

2.  A  son  of  David ;  one  of  the  four  who  were 
borne  to  him  by  Bathsheba  (1  Chr.  iii.  5;  comp. 
xiv.  4,  and  2  Sam.  v.  14).  He  was  thus  own  bro 
ther  lo  Solomon — if  the  order  of  the  lists  is  to  be 
accepted,  elder  brother ;  though  this  is  at  variance 
with  the  natural  inference  from  the  narrative  ol 
2  Sam.  xii.  24,  which  implies  that  Solomon  w;is 
Bathshebu's  second  son.  The  name  was  not  un 
known  in  David's  family ;  Nethan-eel  was  one  of 
his  brothers,  and  Jo-riathan.  his  neplu-w. 


NATHAN AEL 

Nathan  apjioars  to  have  taken  no  part  in  the 
events  of  his  lather's  or  his  brother's  reigns.  He  is 
interesting  to  us  from  his  appearing  as  one  of  the 
forefathers  of  Joseph  in  the  genealogy  of  St.  Luke 
(iii.  31) — "the  private  genealogy  of  Joseph,  exhi 
biting  his  line  as  David's  descendant,  and  thus  show 
ing  how  he  was  heir  to  Solomon's  crown"  (vol.  i. 
666a).  The  hypothesis  of  Lord  Arthur  Hervey  is 
that  on  the  failure  of  Solomon's  line  in  Jehoiachin 
or  Jeconiah,  who  died  without  issue,  Salathiel  of 
Nathan's  house  became  heir  to  David's  throne,  and 
then  was  entered  in  the  genealogical  tables  as  "  son 
of  Jecouiah  "  (i.  6666).  That  the  family  of  Nathan 
was,  as  this  hypothesis  requires,  well  known  at  the 
time  of  Jehoiachin's  death,  is  implied  by  its  men 
tion  in  Zech.  xii.  12,  a  prophecy  the  date  of  which 
is  placed  by  Ewald  (Propheten,  i.  391)  as  fifteen 
years  after  Habbakuk,  and  shortly  before  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar — that  is, 
a  few  years  only  after  Jehoiachin's  death. 

3.  Son,  or  brother,  of  one  of  the  members  of 
David's  guard  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  36 ;  1  Chr.  si.  38). 
In  the  former  of  these  two  parallel  passages  he  is 
stated  to  be  "of  Zobah,"  i.  e.  Aram-Zobah,  which 
Kennicott  in  his  investigation  (Dissert.  215,  216) 
decides  to  have  been  the  original  reading,  though 
he  also  decides  for  "  brother  "  against  "  son." 

4.  One  of  the  head  men   who   returned  from 
Babylon  with  Ezra  on  his  second  expedition,  and 
whom  he  despatched  from  his  encampment  at  the 
river  Ahava  to  the  colony  of  Jews  at  Casiphia,  to 
obtain  thence  some  Levites  and  Nethinim  for  the 
Temple  service  (Ezr.  viii.  16;  1  Esdr.  viii.  44). 
That  Nathan  and  those  mentioned  with  him  were 
laymen,  appeal's  evident  from  the  concluding  words 
of  the  preceding  verse,  and  therefore  it  is  not  im 
possible  that  he  may  be  the  same  with  the  "  son  of 
Bani  "  who  was  obliged  to  relinquish  his  foreign 
wife  (Ezr.  x.  39),  though  on  the  other  hand  these 
man-iages  seem  rather  to  have  been  contracted  by 
those  who  had  been  longer  in  Jerusalem  than  he, 
who  had  so  lately  arrived  from  Babylon,  could  be. 

[G.] 

NATH'ANAEL  (Nafcw/aH,  "  gift  of  God"), 
a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ  concerning  whom,  under 
that  name  at  least,  we  learn  from  Scripture  little 
more  than  his  birth-place,  Cana  of  Galilee  (John 
xxi.  2),  and  his  simple  truthful  character  (John  i. 
47).  We  have  no  particulars  of  his  life.  Indeed 
the  name  dees  not  occur  in  the  first  three  Gospels. 

We  learn,  however,  from  St.  John  that  Jesus  on 
the  third  or  fourth  day  after  His  retura  from  the 
scene  of  His  temptation  to  that  of  His  baptism, 
having  been  proclaimed  by  the  Baptist  as  the  Lamb 
of  God,  was  minded  to  go  into  Galilee.  He  first 
then  called  Philip  to  follow  Him,  but  Philip  could 
not  set  forth  on  his  journey  without  communicating 
to  Nathanael  the  wonderful  intelligence  which  he 
had  received  from  his  master  the  Baptist,  namely, 
that  the  Messiah  so  long  foretold  by  Moses  and  the 
Prophets  had  at  last  appeared.  Nathanael,  who 
seems  to  have  heard  the  announcement  at  first  with 
some  distrust,  as  doubting  whether  anything  good 
could  come  out  of  so  small  and  inconsiderable  a 
place  as  Nazareth — a  place  nowhere  mentioned  in 
the  Old  Testament — yet  readily  accepted  Philip's 
invitation  to  go  and  satisfy  himself  by  his  own 
personal  observation  (John  i.  46).  What  follows  is 
a  testimony  to  the  humility,  simplicity,  and  sin 
cerity  of  his  own  character  from  One  who  could 
read  his  heart,  such  as  is  recorded  of  hai-dly  any 
other  person  in  the  Bible.  Nathanael,  on  his  ap- 


NATHANAEL 


467 


proach  to  Jesus,  is  saluted  by  Him  as  "  an  Israelite 
indeod,  in  whom  is  no  guile  " — a  true  child  ol 
Abraham,  and  not  simply  according  to  the  flesh. 
So  little,  however,  did  he  expect  any  such  distinctive 
praise,  that  he  could  not  refrain  from  asking  how  it 
was  that  he  had  become  known  to  Jesus.  The 
answer  "  before  that  Philip  called  thee,  when  thoti 
wast  under  the  fig-tree  I  saw  thee,"  appears  to  have 
satisfied  him  that  the  speaker  was  more  than  man — 
that  he  must  have  read  his  secret  thoughts,  and 
heard  his  unuttered  prayer  at  a  time  when  he  was 
studiously  screening  himself  from  public  observa 
tion.  The  conclusion  was  inevitable.  Nathanael  at 
once  confessed  "  Rabbi,  thou  art  the  Son  of  God  ; 
thou  art  the  King  of  Israel"  (John  i.  49).  The 
name  of  Nathanael  occurs  but  once  again  in  the 
Gospel  narrative,  and  then  simply  as  one  of  the  small 
company  of  disciples  to  whom  Jesus  showed  Himself 
at  the  sea  of  Tiberias  after  His  resurrection..  On 
that  occasion  we  may  fairly  suppose  that  he  joined 
his  brethren  in  their  night's  venture  on  the  lake — 
that,  having  been  a  sharer  of  their  fruitless  toil,  he 
was  a  witness  with  them  of  the  miraculous  draught 
of  fishes  the  next  morning — and  that  he  afterwards 
partook  of  the  meal,  to  which,  without  daring  to 
ask,  the  disciples  felt  assured  in  their  hearts,  that 
He  who  had  called  them  was  the  Lord  (John  xxi. 
12).  Once  therefore  at  the  beginning  of  our  Savi 
our's  ministry,  and  once  after  His  resurrection,  does 
the  name  of  Nathanael  occur  in  the  Sacred  Record. 

This  scanty  notice  of  one  who  was  intimately 
associated  with  the  very  chiefest  apostles,  and  was 
himself  the  object  of  our  Lord's  most  emphatic 
commendation,  has  not  unnaturally  provoked  the 
enquiry  whether  he  may  not  be  identified  with 
another  of  the  well-known  disciples  of  Jesus.  It  is 
indeed  very  commonly  believed  that  Nathanael  and 
Bartholomew  are  the  same  person.  The  evidence 
for  that  belief  is  as  follows :  St.  John,  who  twice 
mentions  Nathanael,  never  introduces  the  name  of 
Bartholomew  at  all.  St.  Matt.  x.  3;  St.  Mark  iii. 
18 ;  and  St.  Luke  vi.  14,  all  speak  of  Bartholomew, 
but  never  of  Nathanael.  It  may  be,  however,  that 
Nathanael  was  the  proper  name,  and  Bartholomew 
(son  of  Tholmai)  the  surname  of  the  same  disciple, 
just  as  Simon  was  called  Bar-Jona,  and  Joses,  Bar 
nabas. 

It  was  Philip  who  first  brought  Nathanael  to 
Jesus,  just  as  Andrew  had  brought  his  brother 
Simon,  and  Bartholomew  is  named  by  each  of  the 
first  three  Evangelists  immediately  after  Philip ; 
while  by  St.  Luke  he  is  coupled  with  Philip 
precisely  in  the  same  way  as  Simon  with  his 
brother  Andrew,  and  James  with  his  brother  John. 
It  should  be  observed,  too,  that  as  all  the  other 
disciples  mentioned  in  the  first  chapter  of  St.  John 
became  Apostles  of  Christ,  it  is  difficult  to  suppose 
that  one  who  had  been  so  singularly  commended  by 
Jesus,  and  who  in  his  turn  had  so  promptly  and  so 
fully  confessed  Him  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  should 
be  excluded  from  the  number.  Again,  that  Na 
thanael  was  one  of  the  original  twelve,  is  inferred 
with  much  probability  from  his  not  being  proposed 
as  one  of  the  candidates  to  fill  the  place  of  Judas. 
Still  we  must  be  careful  to  distinguish  conjecture, 
however  well  founded,  from  proof. 

To  the  argument  based  upon  the  fact,  that  in  St. 
John's  enumeration  of  the  disciples  to  whom  our 
Lord  showed  Himself  at  the  Sea  of  Tiberias  Nn- 
thanael  stands  before  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  it  is  replied 
that  this  was  to  be  expected,  as  the  writer  was  him 
self  n  son  of  Zebedee  •  and  further  that  NathanaeJ 

2  H  2 


468 


NA  THAN!  AS 


is  placed  after  Thomas  in  this  list,  while  Bartholo 
mew  comes  before  Thomas  in  St.  Matthew,  St. 
Mark,  and  St.  Luke.  But  as  in  the  Acts  St.  I.uke 
reverses  the  order  of  the  two  names,  putting  Thomas 
first,  and  Bartholomew  second,  we  cannot  attach 
much  weight  to  this  argument. 

<**..  Augustine  not  only  denies  the  claim  of  Xa- 
thauae'i  tc  be  one  of  the  Twelve,  but  assigns  as  a 
reason  for  his  opinion,  that  whereas  Nathanael  was 
most  likely  a  learned  man  in  the  law  of  Moses,  it 
was,  as  St.  Paul  tells  us,  1  Cor.  i.  26,  the  wisdom 
of  Christ  to  make  choice  of  rude  and  unlettered 
men  to  confound  the  wise  (in  Johan.  Ev.  c.  i.  §17). 
St.  Gregory  adopts  the  same  view  (on  John  i.  33, 
c.  16.  B).  In  a  dissertation  on  John  i.  46,  to  be 
found  in  Thes.  Tkeo.  philolog.  ii.  370,  the  author, 
J.  Kindler,  maintains  that  Bartholomew  and  Na- 
thanaal  are  different  persons. 

There  is  a  tradition  that  Nathanael  was  the 
bridegroom  at  the  marriage  of  Cana  (Calmet),  and 
Epiphanius,  Adv.  Haer.  i.  §223,  implies  his  belief 
that  of  the  two  disciples  whom  Jesus  overtook  on  the 
road  to  Emmaus  Nathanael  was  one. 

2.  1  Esdr.  i.  9.    [NETHANEEL.] 

3.  C^aBavdri\os.~)  lEsdr.  ix.  22.     [NETHAN 
EEL.] 

4.  (Nathanias.)  Son  of  Samael  ;  one  of  the  an 
cestors  of  Judith   (Jud.  viii.  1  ),  and  therefore  a 
Simeonite  (is.  2).  [E.  H.  .  .  .  s.] 

NATHANI'AS  (Nofloi/faj  :  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
NATHAN  of  the  sons  of  Bani  (I  Esdr.  ix.  34  ;  comp. 
Ezivx.  39). 

NATHAN-MEL'ECH    or™ 


Ba<ri\fvs:  Nathan-melecK).  A'  eunuch  (A.  V. 
"  chamberlain  ")  in  the  court  of  Josiah,  by  whose 
chamber  at  the  entrance  to  the  Temple  were  the 
horses  which  the  kings  of  Judah  had  dedicated  to 
the  sun  (2  K.  xxiii.  11).  The  LXX.  translate  the 
latter  part  of  the  name  as  an  appellative,  "  Nathan 
the  king." 

NA'UM  (NOOV/JL),  son  of  Esli,  and  father  of 
Amos,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ  (Luke  iii.  25), 
about  contemporary  with  the  high-priesthood  of 
Jason  and  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The 
only  point  to  be  remarked  is  the  circumstance  of 
the  two  consecutive  names,  Naum  and  Amos,  being 
the  same  as  those  of  the  prophets  N.  and  A.  But 
whether  this  is  accidental  or  has  any  peculiar  sig 
nificance  is  difficult  to  say.  Naum  is  also  a  Phoe 
nician  proper  name  (Gesen.  s.  v.  and  Mon.  Phoen. 
p.  134).  Nehemiah  is  formed  from  the  same  root, 
Dili,  "  to  comfort."  [A.  C.  H.] 

NAVE.  The  heb.  33,  gav,  conveys  the  notion 
of  convexity  or  protuberance.  It  is  rendered  in 
A.  V.  boss  of  a  shield,  Job  xv.  26  ;  the  eyebrow, 
Lev.  xiv.  9  ;  an  eminent  place,  Ez.  xvi.  31  ;  once 
only  in  plur.  naves,  carrot,  radii,  1  K.  vii.  33;  but 
in  Ez.  i.  18  twice,  vtarot,  "rings,"  and  marg. 
"  strakes,"  an  old  word  apparently  used  both  for 
tne  nave  of  a  wheel  from  which  the  spokes  pro 
ceed,  and  also  more  probably  the  felloe  or  the  tire, 
as  making  the  streak  or  stroke  upon  the  ground. 
Halliwell,  Phillips,  Bailey,  Ash,  Eng.  Dictionaries, 
"strake."  Gesenius,  p.  256,  renders  curvatura 
rotarum.  [CHARIOT;  LAYER;  GABBATHA.] 

[H.  W.  P.] 

NATE  (Noi^  :  Xme).  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun 
is  always  called  in  the  LXX.  "  the  son  of  Nave," 
und  this  form  is  retained  in  Ecclus.  xlvi.  1. 


NAZARKNE 

NAZABENE  (Nafo>po7os,  NafaprjKjj),  an 
inhabitant  of  Nazareth.  This  appellative  is  found 
in  the  N.  T.  applied  to  Jesus  by  the  demons  in  the 
synagogue  at  Capernaum  (Mark  i.  24 ;  Luke  iv. 
34) ;  by  the  people,  who  so  describe  him  to  Barti- 
meus  (Mark  x.  47  ;  Luke  xviii.  37) ;  by  the  soldiers 
who  arrested  Jesus  (John  xviii.  5,  7)  ;  by  the 
servants  at  His  trial  (Matt.  xxvi.  71 ;  Mark  xiv. 
67) ;  by  Pilate  in  the  inscription  on  the  cross  (John 
xix.  19) ;  by  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus 
(Luke  xxiv.  19) ;  by  Peter  (Acts  ii.  '22,  iii.  6,  iv. 
10) ;  by  Stephen,  as  reported  by  the  false  witness 
(Acts  vi.  14) ;  by  the  ascended  Jesus  (Acts  xxii.  8) ; 
and  by  Paul  (Acts  xxvi.  9).  This  name,  made 
striking  in  so  many  ways,  and  which,  if  first  given 
in  scorn,  was  adopted  and  gloried  in  by  the  disciples, 
we  are  told,  in  Matt.  ii.  23,  possesses  a  prophetic 
significance.  Its  application  to  Jesus,  in  consequence 
of  the  providential  arrangements  by  which  His 
parents  were  led  to  take  up  their  abode  in  Nazareth, 
was  the  filling  out  of  the  predictions  in  which  the 
promised  Messiah  is  described  as  a  Netser  (1V3), 
i.  e.  a  shoot,  sprout,  of  Jesse,  a  humble  and  de 
spised  descendant  of  the  decayed  royal  family. 
Whenever  men  spoke  of  Jesus  as  the  Nazarene, 
they  either  consciously  or  unconsciously  pronounced 
one  of  the  names  of  the  predicted  Messiah,  a  name 
indicative  both  of  his  royal  descent  and  his  humble 
condition.  This  explanation,  which  Jerome  men 
tions  as  that  given  by  learned  (Christian)  Jews  in 
his  day,  has  been  adopted  by  Surenhusius,  Fritzsche, 
Gieseler,  Krabbe  (Leben  Jesu),  Drechsler  (on  Is. 
xi.  IV  Schirlitz  (N.  T.  WSrterb.),  Robinson  (N.  T. 
Lex.),  Hengslenberg  (Christol.),  De  Wette,  and 
MeyeA  It  is  confirmed  by  the  following  consider 
ations: — (1)  Netser,  as  Hengstenberg,  after  deDieu 
and  others,  has  proved,  was  the  proper  Hebrew 
name  of  Nazareth.  (2)  The  reference  to  the  ety 
mological  signification  of  the  word  is  entirely  in 
keeping  with  Matt.  ii.  21-23.  (3)  The  Messiah  is 
expressly  called  a  Netser  in  Is.  xi.  1.  (4)  The 
same  thought,  and  under  the  same  image,  although 
expressed  by  a  different  word,  is  found  in  Jer.  xxiii. 
5,  xxxiii.  15  ;  Zech.  iii.  8,  vi.  12,  which  accounts 
for  the  statement  of  Matthew  that  this  prediction 
was  uttered  "  by  the  prophets  "  in  the  plural. 

It  is  unnecessary  therefore  to  resort  to  the  hypo 
thesis  that  the  passage  in  Matt.  ii.  23  is  a  quotation 
from  some  prophetical  book  now  lost  (Chrysost., 
Theophyl.,  Clericus),  or  from  some  apocryphal  book 
(Ewald),  or  was  a  traditional  prophecy  (Calovius ; 
Alexander,  Connexion  and  Harmony  of  the  Old  and 
N.  T.),  all  which  suppositions  are  refuted  by  the 
fact  that  the  phrase  "  by  the  prophets,"  in  the 
N.  T.,  refers  exclusively  to  the  canonical  books  of 
the  0.  T.  The  explanation  of  others  (Tert.,  Erasm., 
Calv.,  Bez.,  Grot.,  Wetstein),  according  to  whom 
the  declaration  is  that  Jesus  should  be  a  Nazarite 
(TT3),  i.  e.  one  specially  consecrated  or  devoted  to 
God  (Judg.  xiii.  5),  is  inconsistent,  to  say  nothing 
of  other  objections,  with  the  Sept.  mode  of  spelling 
the  word,  which  is  generally  Nafipatoj,  and  never 
Nafapalos.  Within  the  last  century  the  inter 
pretation  which  finds  the  key  of  the  passage  in  the 
contempt  in  which  Nazareth  may  be  supposed  to 
have  been  held  has  been  widely  received.  So 
Paulus,  Rosenm.,  Kuin.,  Van  der  Palm.,  Gersdorf, 
A.  Barnes,  Olsh.,  Davidson,  Ebrard,  Lange.  Ac 
cording  to  this  view  the  reference  is  to  the  despised 
cciidition  of  the  Messiah,  as  predicted  in  Ps.  xxii., 
Is.  liii.  That  idea,  however,  is  more  surely  ej- 


NAZARETH 

pressed  in  the  first  explanation  given,  which  has 
i>!»j  the  advantage  of  recognising  the  apparent  im 
portance  attached  to  the  signification  of  the  name 
(«  Ha  shall  be  called").  Recently  a  suggestion 
which  Witsius  borrowed  from  Socinus  has  been 
revived  by  Zuschlag  and  Riggenbach,  that  the  true 
word  is  ~\W  or  H^'  miJ  Saviour,  with  reference 
to  Jesus  as  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  but  without 
much  success.  Once  (Acts  xxiv.  5)  the  term  ^a- 
zarenes  is  applied  to  the  followers  of  Jesus  by 
way  of  contempt.  The  name  still  exists  in  Arabic 
as  the  ordinary  designation  of  Christians,  and  the 
recent  revolt  in  India  was  connected  with  a  pre 
tended  ancient  prophecy  that  the  Nazarenes,  after 
holding  power  for  one  hundred  years,  would  be 
expelled.  (Spanheim,  Dubia  Evangelica,  ii.  583- 
648;  Wolf,  Curae  Philologicae,  i.  46-48;  Heng- 
stenberg,  Christology  of  the  0.  T.  ii.  106-112; 
Zuschlag  in  the  Zeitschrift  fur  die  Lutherische 
Theologie,  1854,  417-446 ;  Riggenbach  in  the  Stu- 
dien  und  Kritiken,  1855,  588-612.)  [G.  E.  D.] 

NAZ'ARETH  (written  NaCapeV  andNafape'0) 
is  not  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament  or  in  Jose- 
phus,  but  occurs  first  in  Matt.  ii.  23,  though  a 
town  could  hardly  fail  to  have  existed  on  so  eligible 
a  spot  from  much  earlier  times.  It  derives  its 
celebrity  almost  entirely  from  its  connexion  with 
the  history  of  Christ,  and  in  that  respect  has  a 
hold  on  the  imagination  and  feelings  of  men  which 
it  shares  only  with  Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem.  ,It 
is  situated  among  the  hills  which  constitute  the  south 
ridges  of  Lebanon,  just  before  they  sink  down  into 
the  Plain  of  Esdraelon.  Among  those  hills  is  a 
valley  which  runs  in  a  waving  line  nearly  east  and 
west,  about  a  mile  long  and,  on  the  average,  a 
quarter  of  a  mile  broad,  but  which  at  a  certain 
point  enlarges  itself  considerably  so  as  to  form  a 
sort  of  basin.  In  this  basin  or  enclosure,  along  the 
lower  edge  of  the  hill-side,  lies  the  quiet  secluded 
village  in  which  the  Saviour  of  men  spent  the 
greater  part  of  His  earthly  existence.  The  sur 
rounding  heights  vary  in  altitude,  some  of  them 
rise  to  400  or  500  feet.  They  have  roundec 
tops,  are  composed  of  the  glittering  limestone 
which  is  so  common  in  that  country,  and,  though 
on  the  whole  sterile  and  unattractive  in  appear 
ance,  present  not  an  unpleasing  aspect  diversified  as 
they  are  with  the  foliage  of  fig-trees  and  wile 
shrubs  and  with  the  verdure  of  occasional  fields  o 
grain.  Our  familiar  hollyhock  is  one  of  the  gay 
flowers  which  grow  wild  there.  The  enclosec 
valley  is  peculiarly  rich  and  well  cultivated :  it  is 
rilled  with  corn-fields,  with  gardens,  hedges  o 
cactus,  and  clusters  of  fruit-bearing  trees.  Being 
so  sheltered  by  hills,  Nazareth  enjoys  a  mild  atmos 
phere  and  climate.  Hence  all  the  fruits  of  tfo 
country, — as  pomegranates,  oranges,  figs,  olives, — 
ripen  early  and  attain  a  rare  perfection. 

Of  the  identification  of  the  ancient  site  there  can 
be  no  doubt.  The  name  of  the  present  village  is 
en-N&zirah,  the  same,  therefore,  as  of  old;  it  L 
formed  on  a  hill  or  mountain  (Luke  iv.  29)  ;  it  is 
within  the  limits  of  the  province  of  Galilee  (Marl 
i.  9);  it  is  near  Cana  (whether  we  assume  Kane 
on  the  east  or  Kana  on  the  north-east  as  the  sceni 
of  the  first  miracle),  according  to  the  implication  in 
John  ii.  1,  2, 11 ;  a  precipice  exists  in  the  neighbour 
hood  (Luke  iv.  29)  ;  and,  finally,  a  series  of  testi 
monies  (Reland,  Pal.,  905)  reach  back  to  Eusebius 
the  father  of  Church  history,  which  represent  the 
jilace  as  having  occupied  an  invariable  position. 


NAZARETH 


469 


The  modern  Naaareth  belongs  to  the  bettor  class 
f  eastern  villages.  It  has  a  population  of  3000 
r  4000,  a  few  are  Mohammedans,  the  rest  Latin 
and  Greek  Christians.  There  is  one  mosque,  a 
''ranciscan  convent  of  huge  diironsions  but  dis- 
>laying  no  great  architectural  beauty,  a  small  Ma- 
•onite  church,  a  Greek  church,  and  perhaps  a 
church  or  chapel  of  some  of  the  other  confessions, 
r'rotestant  missions  have  been  attempted,  but  with 
no  very  marked  success.  Most  of  the  houses  are 
well  built  of  stone,  and  have  a  neat  and  comfortable 
appearance.  As  streams  in  the  rainy  season  are 
.able  to  pour  down  with  violence  from  the  hills, 
every  "  wise  man,"  instead  of  building  upon  the 
loose  soil  on  the  surface,  digs  deep  and  lays  his 
foundation  upon  the  rock  (tirl  t}\v  irerpav)  which 
is  found  so  generally  in  that  country  at  a  cer 
tain  depth  in  the  earth.  The  streets  or  lanes  are 
narrow  and  crooked,  and  after  rain  are  so  full  of 
mud  and  mire  as  to  be  almost  impassable. 

A  description  of  Nazareth  would  be  incomplete 
without  mention  of  the  remarkable  view  from  the 
tomb  of  Neby  Ismail  on  one  of  the  hills  behind 
the  town.  It  must  suffice  to  indicate  merely  the 
objects  within  sight.  In  the  north  are  seen  the 
ridges  of  Lebanon  and,  high  above  all,  the  white 
top  of  Hermon ;  in  the  west,  Carmel,  glimpses  of 
the  Mediterranean,  the  bay  and  the  town  of  Akka ; 
east  and  south-east  are  Gilead,  Tabor,  Gilboa ;  and 
south,  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  and  the  mountains  of 
Samaria,  with  villages  on  every  side,  among  which 
are  Kana,  Nein,  Endor,  Zerin  (Jezreel),  and  Ta- 
annuk  (Taanach).  It  is  unquestionably  one  of  the 
most  beautiful  and  sublime  spectacles  (for  it  com 
bines  the  two  features)  which  earth  has  to  show. 
Dr.  Robinson's  elaborate  description  of  the  scene 
(Bib.  Res.,  ii.  336,  7)  conveys  no  exaggerated  idea 
of  its  magnificence  or  historical  interest.  It  is  easy 
to  believe  that  the  Saviour,  during  the  days  of  His 
seclusion  in  the  adjacent  valley,  came  often  to  this 
very  spot  and  looked  forth  thence  upon  those  glori 
ous  works  of  the  Creator  which  so  lift  the  soul  up 
ward  to  Him. 

The  passages  of  Scripture  which  refer  expressly 
to  Nazareth  though  not  numerous  are  suggestive 
and  deserve  to  be  recalled  here.  It  was  the  home 
of  Joseph  and  Mary  (Luke  ii.  39).  The  angel  an 
nounced  to  the  Virgin  there  the  birth  of  the  Messiah 
(Luke  i.  26-28).  The  holy  family  returned  thither 
after  the  flight  into  Egypt  (Matt.  ii.  23).  Naza 
reth  is  called  the  native  country  (y  trarph  avrov) 
of  Jesus:  He  grew  up  there  from  infancy  to 
manhood  (Luke  iv.  16),  and  was  known  through 
life  as  "  The  Nazarene."  He  taught  in  the  syna 
gogue  there  (Matt.  xiii.  54 ;  Luke  iv.  16),  and  was 
dragged  by  His  fellow-townsmen  to  the  precipice 
in  order  to  be  cast  doTrn  thence  and  be  killed  («. 
fb  /caraKpTj/ij/iVat  airiv).  "Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
king  of  the  Jews "  was  written  over  His  Cross 
(John  xi.t.  19),  and  after  His  ascension  He  revealed 
Himself  under  that  appellation  to  the  persecuting 
Saul  (Acts  xxii.  8).  The  place  has  given  name  to 
His  followers  in  all  ages  and  all  lands,  a  name  which 
will  never  cease  to  be  one  of  honour  and  reproach. 

The  origin  of  the  disrepute  in  which  Nazareth 
stood  (John  i.  47)  is  not  certainly  known.  All  thf 
inhabitants  of  Galilee  were  looked  upon  with  con 
tempt  by  the  people  of  Judaea  because  they  spoke 
a  ruder  dialect,  were  less  cultivated,  and  were 
more  exposed  by  their  position  to  contact  with  the 
heathen.  But  Nazareth  laboured  under  a  special 
opprobrium,  for  it  was  a  Galilean  and  not  a  south- 


470 


NAZAKETH 


ern  Jew  who  asked  the  reproachful  question,  whe-  death 
ther  "  any  good  thing "  could  come  from  that 
source.  The  term  "  good  "  (iyad6i/\  having  more 
commonly  an  ethical  sense,  it  has  been  suggested 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Nazareth  may  have  had  a 
bad  name  among  their  neighbours  for  irreligion  or 
some  laxity  of  morals.  The  supposition  receives 
support  from  the  disposition  which  they  manifested 
towards  the  person  and  ministry  o^  our  Lora. 
They  attempted  to  kill  Him ;  they  expelled  Him 
twice  (for  Luke  iv.  16-29,  and  Matt.  xiii.  54-58, 
relate  probably  to  different  occurrences)  from  their 
borders;  they  were  so  wilful  and  unbelieving  that 
He  performed  not  many  miracles  among  them 
(Matt.  xiii.  58)  ;  and,  finally,  they  compelled  Him 
to  turn  his  back  upon  them  and  reside  at  Caper 
naum  (Matt.  iv.  13). 

It  is  impossible  to  speak  of  distances  with  much 
exactness.  Nazareth  is  a  moderate  journey  of 
three  days  from  Jerusalem,  seven  hours,  or  about 
twenty  miles,  from  Akka  or  Ptolemais  (Acts  xxi. 
7),  five  or  six  hours,  or  eighteen  miles,  from  the 
sea  of  Galilee,  six  miles  west  from  Mount  Tabor, 
two  hours  from  Cana,  and  two  or  three  from  Endor 
and  Nain.  The  origin  of  the  name  is  uncertain. 
For  the  conjectures  on  the  subject,  see  NAZAEENE. 

We  pass  over,  as  foreign  to  the  proper  object  of 
this  notice,  any  particular  account  of  the  "  holy 
places  "  which  the  legends  have  sought  to  connect 
with  events  in  the  life  of  Christ.  They  are  de 
scribed  in  nearly  all  the  books  of  modern  tourists ; 
but,  having  no  sure  connexion  with  biblical  geo 
graphy  or  exegesis,  do  not  require  attention  here. 
Two  localities,  however,  form  an  exception  to  this 
statement,  inasmuch  as  they  possess,  though  in  dif 
ferent  ways,  a  certain  interest  which  no  one  will 
fail  to  recognise.  One  of  these  is  the  "  Fountain 
of  the  Virgin,"  situated  at  the  north-eastern  extre 
mity  of  the  town,  where,  according  to  one  tradition, 
the  mother  of  Jesus  received  the  angel's  salutation 
(Luke  i.  28).  Though  we  may  attach  no  import- 
ance  to  this  latter  belief,  we  must,  on  other 
accounts,  regard  the  spring  with  a  feeling  akin  to 
that  of  religious  veneration.  It  derives  its  name 
from  the  fact  that  Mary,  during  her  life  at  Naza 
reth,  no  doubt  accompanied  often  by  "  the  child 
Jesus,"  must  have  been  accustomed  to  repair  to 
this  fountain  for  water,  as  is  the  practice  of  the 
women  of  that  village  at  the  present  day.  Cer 
tainly,  as  Dr.  Clarke  observes  (Travels,  ii.  427), 
"  if  there  be  a  spot  throughout  the  holy  land  that 
was  undoubtedly  honoured  by  her  presence,  we 
may  consider  this  to  have  been  the  place  ;  because 
the  situation  of  a  copious  spring  is  not  liable  to 
change,  and  because  the  custom  of  repairing  thither 
to  draw  water  has  been  continued  among  the  female 
inhabitants  of  Nazareth  from  the  earliest  period  of 
its  history."  The  well-worn  path  which  leads  thither 
from  the  town  has'  been  trodden  by  the  feet  of  almost 
countless  generations.  It  presents  at  all  hours  a 
busy  scene,  from  the  number  of  those,  hurrying  to 
and  fro,  engaged  in  the  labour  of  water-carrying. 
See  the  engraving,  i.  632  of  this  Dictionary. 

The  other  place  is  that  of  the  attempted  Pre 
cipitation.  We  are  directed  to  the  true  scene  of 
this  occurrence,  not  so  much  by  any  tradition  as 
by  internal  indications  in  the  Gospel  history  itself. 
A  prevalent  opinion  of  the  country  has  transferred 
the  event  to  a  hill  about  two  miles  south-east  of 
the  town.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  Nazareth 
ever  occupied  a  different  site  from  the  present  one; 
and  that  &  mob  whose  determination  was  to  put  V> 


NAZARETH 

the  object  of  their  rage,  should  repair  to  y, 
distant  a  place  for  that  purpose,  is  entirely  incre 
dible.  The  present  village,  as  already  stated,  lies 
along  the  hill-side,  but  much  nearer  the  base  than 
the  summit.  Above  the  bulk  of  the  town  are 
several  rocky  ledges  over  which  a  person  could  not 
be  thrown  without  almost  certain  destruction.  But 
there  is  one  very  remarkable  precipice,  almost  per 
pendicular  and  forty  or  fifty  feet  high,  near  the 
Maronite  church,  which  may  well  be  supposed  to 
be  the  identical  one  over  which  His  infuriated 
townsmen  attempted  to  hurl  Jesus. 

The  singular  precision  with  which  the  narrative 
relates  the  transaction  deserves  a  remark  or  two. 
Casual  readers  would  understand  from  the  account 
that  Nazareth  was  situated  on  the  summit,  and 
that  the  people  brought  Jesus  down  thence  to  the 
brow  of  the  hill  as  if  it  was  between  the  town  and 
the  valley.  If  these  inferences  were  correct,  th<: 
narrative  and  the  locality  would  then  be  at  vari 
ance  with  each  other.  The  writer  is  free  to  say 
that  he  himself  had  these  erroneous  impressions, 
and  was  led  to  correct  them  by  what  he  observed 
on  the  spot.  Even  Reland  (Pal.  905)  says :  "  Na- 
faptQ — urbs  aedificata  super  rupem,  unde  Chris 
tum  precipitare  conati  sunt."  But  the  language 
of  the  Evangelist,  when  more  closely  examined,  is 
found  neither  to  require  the  inferences  in  question 
on  the  one  hand,  nor  to  exclude  them  on  the  other. 
What  he  asserts  is,  that  the  incensed  crowd  "  rose 
up  and  cast  Jesus  out  of  the  city,  and  brought  him 
to  the  brow  of  the  hill  on  which  the  city  was  built, 
that  they  might  cast  him  down  headlong."  It  will 
be  remarked  here,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  not 
said  that  the  people  either  went  up  or  descended  in 
order  to  reach  the  precipice,  but  simply  that  they 
brought  the  Saviour  to  it,  wherever  it  was ;  and  in 
the  second  place,  that  it  is  not  said  that  the  city 
was  built  "  on  the  brow  of  the  hill,"  but  equally 
as  well  that  the  precipice  was  "  on  the  brow," 
without  deciding  whether  the  cliff  overlooked  the 
town  (as  is  the  fact)  or  was  below  it.  It  will  be 
seen,  therefore,  how  very  nearly  the  terms  of  the 
history  approach  a  mistake  and  yet  avoid  it.  As 
Paley  remarks  in  another  case,  none  but  a  true 
account  could  advance  thus  to  the  very  brink  of 
contradiction  without  falling  into  it. 

The  fortunes  of  Nazareth  have  been  various. 
Epiphanius  states  that  no  Christians  dwelt  there 
until  the  time  of  Constantine.  Helena,  the  mother 
of  that  emperor,  is  related  to  have  built  the  first 
Church  of  the  Annunciation  here.  In  the  time  of 
the  Crusaders,  the  Episcopal  See  of  Bethsean  was 
transferred  there.  The  birthplace  of  Christianity 
was  lost  to  the  Christians  by  their  defeat  at  Hattin 
in  1183,  and  was  laid  utterly  in  ruins  by  Sultan 
Bibars  in  1263.  Ages  passed  away  before  it  rose 
again  from  this  prostration.  In  1620  the  Fran 
ciscans  rebuilt  the  Church  of  the  Annunciation  and 
connected  a  cloister  with  it.  In  1799  the  Turks 
assaulted  the  French  general  Junot  at  Nazareth ; 
and  shortly  after,  2100  French,  under  Kleber  and 
Napoleon,  defeated  a  Turkish  army  of  25,000  at 
the  foot  of  Mount  Tabor.  Napoleon  himself,  after 
that  battle,  spent  a  few  hours  at  Nazareth,  and 
reached  there  the  northern  limit  of  his  Eastern  ex 
pedition.  The  earthquake  which  destroyed  Safcd, 
in  1837,  injured  also  Nazareth.  No  Jews  reside 
there  at  present,  which  may  be  ascribed  pevhapo 
as  much  to  the  hostility  of  the  Ch-istian  sects  :>.s 
t.o  their  own  hatred  of  "the  prophf  who  was  sent 
'•  to  redeem  Israel."  [II.  B.  H.] 


NAZAK1TE 

NAZ'ARITE,  more  properly    NAZ'IRITE 
T3  and  D^n?N  T'TJ  :  i\viifvos  and  fv^dfj-evos, 


NAZARITE 


471 


Num.  vi.  ;  yafrpcuos,  Judg.  xiii.  7,  Lam.  iv.  7  : 
Nazaraeus),  one  of  either  sex  who  was  bound  by  a 
vow  of  a  peculiar  kind  to  be  set  apart  from  others 
for  the  service  of  God.  The  obligation  was  either 
for  life  or  for  a  defined  time.  The  Mishna  names 
the  two  classes  resulting  from  this  distinction, 
D?iy  I|TIT3,  "  perpetual  Nazarites  "  (Nazaraci 
nativi),  and  D^D11  ^VM,  "  Nazarites  of  days" 
(Nazaraei  votivi). 

I.  There  is  no  notice  in  the  Pentateuch  of  Na 
zarites  for  life  ;  but  the  regulations  for  the  vow  of 
a  Nazarite  of  days  are  given  Num.  vi.  1-21. 

The  Nazarite,  during  the  term  of  his  consecra 
tion,  was  bound  to  abstain  from  wine,  grapes,  with 
every  production  of  the  vine,  even  to  the  stones  and 
skin  of  the  grape,  and  from  every  kind  of  intoxi 
cating  drink.  He  was  forbidden  to  cut  the  hair  of 
his  head,  or  to  approach  any  dead  body,  even  that  of 
his  nearest  relation.  When  the  period  of  his  vow 
was  fulfilled,  he  was  brought  to  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  and  was  required  to  offer  a  he  lamb  for 
a  burnt-offering,  a  ewe  lamb  for  a  sin-offering,  and 
a  ram  for  a  peace-offering,  with  the  usual  accom 
paniments  of  peace-offerings  (Lev.  vii.  12,  13)  and 
of  the  offering  made  at  the  consecration  of  priests 
(Ex.  xxix.  2)  "  a  basket  of  unleavened  bread,  cakes 
of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil,  and  wafers  of  un 
leavened  bread  anointed  with  oil"  (Num.  vi.  15). 
He  brought  also  a  meat-offering  and  a  drink-offering, 
which  appear  to  have  been  presented  by  themselves 
as  a  distinct  act  of  service  (ver.  17).  He  was  to 
cut  off  the  hair  of  "  the  head  of  his  separation  " 
(that  is,  the  hair  which  had  grown  during  the 
period  of  his  consecration)  at  the  door  of  the  Taber 
nacle,  and  to  put  it  into  the  fire  under  the  sacrifice 
on  the  altar.  The  priest  then  placed  upon  his 
hands  the  sodden  left  shoulder  of  the  ram,  with  one 
of  the  unleavened  cakes  and  one  of  the  wafers,  and 
then  took  them  again  and  waved  them  for  a  wave- 
offering.  These,  as  well  as  the  breast  and  the 
heave,  or  right  shoulder  (to  which  he  was  entitled 
in  the  case  of  ordinary  peace-offerings,  Lev.  vii. 
32-34),  were  the  perquisite  of  the  priest.  The 
Nazarite  also  gave  him  a  present  proportioned  to 
his  circumstances  (ver.  21).  • 

If  a  Nazarite  incurred  defilement  by  accidentally 
touching  a  dead  body,  he  had  to  undergo  certain 
rites  of  purification  and  to  recommence  the  full 
period  of  his  consecration.  On  the  seventh  day  of 
his  uncleanness  he  was  to  cut  off  his  hair,  and  on 
the  following  day  he  had  to  bring  two  turtle-doves 
or  two  young  pigeons  to  the  priest,  who  offered  one 
for  a  sin-offering  and  the  other  for  a  burnt-offering. 
He  then  hallowed  his  head,  offered  a  lamb  of  the  first 
year  as  a  trespass-offering,  and  renewed  his  vow  under 
the  same  conditions  as  it  had  been  at  first  made. 

It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  Nazarite  vow 
was  at  first  taken  with  some  formality,  and  that 
it  was  accompanied  by  an  offering  similar  to  that 
prescribed  at  its  renewal  in  the  case  of  pollu 
tion.  But  if  any  inference  may  be  drawn  from 


the  early  sections  of  the  Mishnical  treatise  Nazirt 
it  seems  probable  that  the  act  of  se'f-consecration 
was  a  privata  matter,  not  accompanied  by  any  pre 
scribed  rite. 

There  is  nothing  whatever  said  in  the  Old  Testa 
ment  of  the  duration  of  the  period  of  the  vow  01 
the  Naaarits  of  days.  According  to  Nazir  (cap.  i. 
§3,  p.  148)  the  usual  time  was  thirty  days,  but 
double  vows  for  sixty  days,  and  treble  vows  for 
a  hundred  days,  were  sometimes  made  (cap.  iii.  1-4;. 
One  instance  is  related  of  Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene 
(of  whom  some  particulars  are  given  by  Josephus, 
Ant.  xx.  2),  who,  with  the  zeal  of  a  new  convert, 
took  a  vow  for  seven  years  in  order  to  obtain 
the  divine  favour  on  a  military  expedition  which 
her  son  was  about  to  undertake.  When  her  period 
of  consecration  had  expired  she  visited  Jerusalem, 
and  was  there  informed  by  the  doctors  of  the  school 
of  Hillel  that  a  vow  taken  in  another  conutry 
must  be  repeated  whenever  the  Nazarite  might 
visit  the  Holy  Land.  She  accordingly  continued 
a  Nazarite  for  a  second  seven  years,  and  happening 
to  touch  a  dead  body  just  as  the  time  was  about  to 
expire,  she  was  obliged  to  renew  her  vow  according 
to  the  law  in  Num.  vi.  9,  &c.  She  thus  continued 
a  Nazarite  for  twenty-one  years.b 

There  are  some  other  particulars  given  in  the 
Mishna.  which  are  curious  as  showing  how  the  in 
stitution  was  regarded  in  later  times.  The  vow 
was  often  undertaken  by  childless  parents  in  the 
hope  of  obtaining  children:  this  may,  of  course, 
have  been  easily  suggested  by  the  cases  of  Manoah's 
wife  and  Hannah. — A  female  Nazarite  whose  vow 
was  broken  might  be  punished  with  forty  stripes. — 
The  Nazarite  was  permitted  to  smooth  his  hair 
with  a  brash,  but  not  to  comb  it,  lest  a  single  hair 
might  be  torn  out. 

II.  Of  the  Nazarites  for  life  three  are  mentioned 
in  the  Scriptures :  Samson,  Samuel,  and  St.  John  the 
Baptist.  The  only  one  of  these  actually  called  a 
Nazarite  is  Samson.  The  Rabbis  raised  the  question 
whether  Samuel  was  in  reality  a  Nazarite.'  In 
Hannah's  vow,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  no  razor 
should  come  upon  her  son's  head  (1  Sam.  i.  11) ; 
but  no  mention  is  made  of  abstinence  from  wine. 
It  is,  however,  worthy  of  notice  that  Philo  m;vkes 
a  particular  point  of  this,  and  seems  to  refer  the 
words  of  Hannah,  1  Sam.  i.  15,  to  Samuel  himself."1 
In  reference  to  St.  John  the  Baptist,  the  Angel  makes 
mention  of  abstinence  from  wine  and  strong  dr'.nk, 
but  not  of  letting  the  hair  grow  (Luke  i.  15). 

We  are  but  imperfectly  informed  of  the  difference 
between  the  observances  of  the  Nazarite  for  life  and 
those  of  the  Nazarite  for  days.  The  later  Rabbis 
slightly  notice  this  point.'  We  do  not  know  whether 
the  vow  for  life  was  ever  voluntarily  taken  by  the 
individual.  In  all  the  cases  mentioned  in  the  sacred 
history,  it  was  made  by  the  parents  before  the  birth 
of  the  Nazarite  himself.  According  to  the  general 
law  of  vows  (Num.  xxx.  8),  the  mother  could  net 
take  the  vow  without  the  father,  and  this  is  ex 
pressly  applied  to  the  Nazarite  vow  in  the  Mishna.' 
Hannah  must  therefore  either  have  presumed  on  her 
husband's  concurrence,  or  secured  it  beforehand. 


*  It  Is  saiJ  that  at  the  south-east  corner  of  the  court 
of  the  women,  in  Herod's  temple,  there  was  an  aoart- 
ment  appropriated  to  the  Nazarites,  in  which  they  used 
to  boil  their  peace-offerings  and  cut  off  their  hair.  Light- 
fi>ot.  Prospect  of  the  Temple,  c.  xvii;  Keland,  A.  S.  p.  . 


A'azir,  cap.  3,  $6,  p.  166. 


«  }fazir,  cap.  9,  }5,  with  Bartenora's  note,  p.  178. 

0  Ata  TOVTO  b  »at    |3a<nA.e'w>'    na.1  wptxf>i)riav   fxr 
2a/x.ou»)A   dlvov   KOL    p.t'(Hi0>ia,   <os   6   iepb?   Adyof  <frij<TtV. 
axpt  T«A«vTij«  oil  jriVnu.— Phil,  de  Etnietate,  vol.  i.  p 
379,  edit.  Mangey. 

•  See  Petikta,  quoted  by  Drusius  on  Ninn.  Vt 

1  -Vcuir,  cap.  4,  96,  p.  159. 


472 


NAZARITE 


The  Mishca8  makes  a  distinction  between  the  or 
dinary  Nazarite  for  life  and  the  Samson-Nazarite 
(\\Wiyff  TT3).  The  former  made  a  strong  point  of 
his  parity,  and,  if  he  was  polluted,  offered  corban. 
But  as  regards  &s  hair,  when  it  became  inconve 
niently  long,  he  was  allowed  to  trim  it,  if  he  was 
willing  to  offer  the  appointed  victims  (Num.  vi.  14). 
The  Samson-Nazarite,  on  the  other  hand,  gave  no 
corban  if  he  touched  a  dead  body,  but  he  was  not 
suffered  to  trim  his  hair  under  any  conditions.  This 
distinction,  it  is  pretty  evident,  was  suggested  by 
the  freedom  with  which  Samson  must  have  come  in 
the  way  of  the  dead  (Judg.  xv.  16,  &c.),  and  the 
terrible  penalty  which  he  paid  for  allowing  his  hair 
to  be  cut. 

III.  The  consecration  of  the  Nazarite  bore  a  strik 
ing  resemblance  to  that  of  the  high-priest  (Lev.  xxi. 
10-12).  In  one  particular,  this  is  brought  out  more 
plainly  in  the  Hebrew  text  than  it  is  in  our  version, 
in  the  LXX.,  or  in  the  Vulgate.  One  word  (TT3),h 
derived  from  the  same  root  as  Nazarite,  is  used  for 
the  long  hair  of  the  Nazarite,  Num.  vi.  19,  where 
the  A.  V.  has  "  hair  of  his  separation,"  and  for  the 
anointed  head  of  the  high-priest,  Lev.  xxi.  12,  where 
it  is  rendered  "  crown."  The  Mishna  points  out 
the  identity  of  the  law  for  both  the  high-priest 
and  the  Nazarite  in  respect  to  pollution,  in  that 
neither  was  permitted  to  approach  the  corpse  of  even 
the  nearest  relation,  while  for  an  ordinary  priest 
the  law  allowed  more  freedom  (Lev.  xxi.  2).  And 
Maimonides  (More  Nevochim,  iii.  48)  speaks  of 
the  dignity  of  the  Nazarite,  in  regard  to  his  «anctity, 
as  being  equal  to  that  of  the  high-priest.  The 
abstinence  from  wine  enjoined  upon  the  high-priest 
on  behalf  of  all  the  priests  when  they  were  about 
to  enter  upon  their  ministrations,  is  an  obvious, 
but  perhaps  not  such  an  important  point  in  the 
comparison.  There  is  a  passage  in  the  account 
given  by  Hegesippus  of  St.  James  the  Just 
(Eusebius,  Hist.  Ecc.  ii.  23),  which,  if  we  may 


NAZARITE 

that,  on  his  way  from  Corinth  to  Jerusalem,  he 
"  shaved  his  head  in  Cenchreae,  for  he  had  a  vow." 
It  would  seem  that  the  cutting  off  the  hair  was  at 
the  commencement  of  the  period  over  which  the 
vow  extended ;  at  all  events,  the  hair  was  not  cut 
off  at  the  door  of  the  Temple  when  the  sacrifices 
were  offered,  as  was  required  by  the  law  of  tha 
Nazarite.  It  is  most  likely  that  it  was  a  sort  of 
vow,  modified  from  the  proper  Nazarite  vow,  whirli 
had  come  into  use  at  this  time  amongst  the  re 
ligious  Jews  who  had  been  visited  by  sickness,  or 
any  other  calamity.  In  reference  to  a  vow  of  this 
kind  which  was  taken  by  Bernice,  Josephus  says 
that  "  they  were  accustomed  to  vow  that  they 
would  refrain  from  wine,  and  that  they  would  cut 
off  their  hair  thirty  days  before  the  presentation  of 
their  offering." '  No  hint  is  given  us  of  the  pur 
pose  of  St.  Paul  in  this  act  of  devotion.  Spencer 
conjectures  that  it  might  have  been  performed  with 
a  view  to  obtain  a  good  voyage ; m  Neander,  with 
greater  probability,  that  it  was  an  expression  of 
thanksgiving  and  humiliation  on  account  of  some 
recent  illness  or  affliction  of  some  kind. 

The  other  reference  to  a  vow  taken  by  St.  Paul 
is  in  Acts  xxi.  24,  where  we  find  the  brethren  at 
Jerusalem  exhorting  him  to  take  part  with  four 
Christians  who  had  a  vow  on  them,  to  sanctify 
(not  purify,  as  in  A.  V.)  himself  with  them,  and  to 
be  at  charges  with  them,  that  they  might  shave 
their  heads.  The  reason  alleged  for  this  advice  is 
that  he  might  prove  to  those  who  misunderstood 
him,  that  he  walked  orderly  and  kept  the  law 
Now  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  this  was  a  strictlj 
legal  Nazarite  vow.  He  joined  the  four  men  for 
the  last  seven  days  of  their  consecration,  until  the 
offering  was  made  for  each  one  of  them,  and  their 
hair  was  cut  off  in  the  usual  form  (ver.  26,  27).  It 
appears  to  have  been  no  uncommon  thing  for  those 
charitable  persons  who  could  afford  it  to  assist  in 
paying  for  the  offerings  of  poor  Nazarites.  Josephus 


assume  it  to  represent  a  genuine  tradition,  is  worth  I  relates  that  Herod  Agrippa  I.,  when  he  desired  to 
a  notice,  and  seems  to  show  that  Nazarites  were    sh°w  his  zeal  for  the  religion  of  his  fathers,  gave 


permitted  even  to  enter  into  the  Holy  of  Holies. 
He  says  that  St.  James  was  consecrated  from  his 
birth  neither  to  eat  meat,  to  drink  wine,  to  cut 
his  hair,  nor  to  indulge  in  the  use  of  the  bath, 
and  that  to  him  alone  it  was  permitted  (rointf 
n6v<f  ^ITJJ')  to  enter  the  sanctuary.  Perhaps  it 
would  not  be  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
half  sacerdotal  character  of  Samuel  might  have  been 
connected  with  his  prerogative  as  a  Nazarite.  Many 
of  the  Fathers  designate  him  as  a  priest,  although 
St.  Jerome,  on  the  obvious  ground  of  his  descent, 
denies  that  he  had  any  sacerdotal  rank.1 

IV.  Of  the  two  vows  recorded  of  St.  Paul,  that 
in  Acts  xviii.  18,k  certainly  cannot  be  regarded  as  a 
regular  Nazarite  vow.  All  that  we  are  told  of  it  is 


*  Nazir,  cap.  1,  }2,  p.  147. 

h  The  primary  meaning  of  this  word  is  that  of  separa 
tion  with  a  holy  purpose.  Hence  it  is  used  to  express  the 
consecration  of  the  Nazarite  (Num.  vi.  4,  5,  9).  But  it 
appears  to  have  been  especially  applied  to  a  badge  of  con 
secration  and  distinction  worn  on  the  head,  such  as  the 
crown  of  a  king  (2  Sam.  i.  10;  2  K.  xl.  12),  the  diadem 
(f  ¥)  of  the  high-priest  (Ex.  xxix.  6,  xxxix.  30),  as  well  as 
bis  anointed  hair,  the  long  hair  of  the  Nazarite,  and,  drop 
ping  the  idea  of  consecration  altogether,  to  long  hair  in  a 
general  sense  (Jer.  vii.  29).  This  may  throw  light  on  Gen. 
tlix.20and  Dent,  xxxiii.  16.  See  section  VI.  of  this  anicle. 

if.  C.  Ortlob,  in  an  essay   In  the  Tlatauruf  Xovus 


direction  that  many  Nazarites  should  have  their 
heads  shorn :  n  and  the  Gemara  (quoted  by  Reland, 
Ant.  Sac.),  that  Alexander  Jannaeus  contributed 
towards  supplying  nine  hundred  victims  for  three 
hundred  Nazarites. 

V.  That  the  institution  of  Nazaritism  existed 
and  had  become  a  matter  of  course  amongst  the 
Hebrews  before  the  time  of  Moses  is  beyond  a 
doubt.  The  legislator  appeal's  to  have  done  no 
more  than  ordain  such  regulations  for  the  vow 
of  the  Nazarite  of  days  as  brought  it  under  the 
cognizance  of  the  priest  and  into  harmony  with 
the  general  system  of  religious  observance.  It  has 
been  assumed,  not  unreasonably,  that  the  conse 
cration  of  the  Nazarite  for  life  was  of  at  least 


Theologico-Philalogicus,  vol.  i.  p.  587,  entitled  "  Samuel 
Judex  et  Propheta,  mm  Pontifexautsacerdossacrificaris," 
has  brought  forward  a  mass  of  testimony  on  this  surject, 
k  Grotius,  Meyer,  Howson,  and  a  few  others,  refer  this 
vow  to  Aqnila,  not  to  St.  Paul.  The  best  arguments  in 
favour  of  this  view  are  given  by  Mr.  Howson  (Life  q* 
St.  Paul,  vol.  1.  p.  453).  Dean  Alford,  in  his  note  on  Actt 
xviii.  18,  has  satisfactorily  replied  to  them. 

I  See  Neander's  Planting  and  Training  the  Church, 
208  (Ryland's  translation).     In   the  passage  translate. 
fiom  Joseph.  />'.  J.  li.  15.  (1,  an  emendation  of  Neaikke 
is  adopted.    See  also  Kuinoel  on  Acts  xviii.  18. 

•»  De  Leg.  Bebr.  lib.  iii.  c.  vi.  Jl. 

II  Atitiij.  xix.  fl,  }1. 


NAZAEJTK 

squol  antiquity.0  It  may  not  have  needed  any 
notice  or  modification  in  the  law,  and  hence,  pro 
bably,  the  silence  respecting  it  in  the  Pentateuch. 
But  it  is  doubted  in  regard  to  Nazaritism  in 
general,  whether  it  was  of  native  or  foreign  origin. 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  considered  that  the  letting  the 
hair  grow,  the  most  characteristic  feature  in  the 
vow,  was  taken  from  the  Egyptians.  This  notion 
has  been  substantially  adopted  by  Fagius,P  Spencer,* 
Michaelis,'  Hengstenberg,8  and  some  other  critics. 
Hengstenberg  affirms  that  the  Egyptians  and  the 
Hebrews  wore  distinguished  amongst  ancient  nations 
by  cutting  their  hair  as  a  matter  of  social  pro 
priety  ;  and  thus  the  marked  significance  of  long 
hair  must  have  been  common  to  them  both.  The 
arguments  of  Bahr, .  however,  to  show  that  the 
wearing  long  hair  in  Egypt  and  all  other  heathen 
nations  had  a  meaning  opposed  to  the  idea  of  the 
Nazarite  vow,  seem  to  be  conclusive;'  and  Winer 
justly  observes  that  the  points  of  resemblance  be 
tween  the  Nazarite  vow  and  heathen  customs  are 
too  fragmentary  and  indefinite  to  furnish  a  safe 
foundation  for  an  argument  in  favour  of  a  foreign 
origin  for  the  former. 

Ewald  supposes  that  Nazarites  for  life  were 
numerous  in  very  early  times,  and  that  they  mul 
tiplied  in  periods  of  great  political  and  religious 
excitement.  The  only  ones,  however,  expressly 
named  in  the  Old  Testament  are  Samson  and 
Samuel.  The  rabbinical  notion  that  Absalom  was 
a  Nazarite  seems  hardly  worthy  of  notice,  though 
Spencer  and  Lightfoot  have  adopted  it."  When 
Amos  wrote,  the  Nazarites,  as  well  as  the  prophets, 
suffered  from  the  persecution  and  contempt  of  the 
ungodly.  The  divine  word  respecting  them  was, 
"  I  raised  up  of  your  sons  for  prophets  and  of 
your  young  men  for  Nazarites.  But  ye  gave  the 
Nazarites  wine  to  drink,  and  commanded  the  pro 
phets,  saying,  Prophesy  not"  (Am.  ii.  11,  12). 
In  the  time  of  Judas  Maccabaeus  we  find  the  devout 
Jews,  when  they  were  bringing  their  gifts  to  the 
priests,  stirring  up  the  Nazarites  of  days  who  had 
completed  the  time  of  their  consecration,  to  make 
the  accustomed  offerings  (1  Mace.  iii.  49).  From 
this  incident,  in  connexion  with  what  has  been  re 
lated  of  the  liberality  of  Alexander  Jaimaeus  and 
Herod  Agrippa,  we  may  infer  that  the  number  of 
Nazarites  must  have  been  very  considerable  during 
the  two  centuries  and  a  half  which  preceded  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  instance  of  St. 
John  the  Baptist  and  that  of  St.  James  the  Just 
(if  we  accept  the  traditional  account)  show  that 
the  Nazarite  for  life  retained  his  original  character 
till  later  times ;  and  the  act  of  St.  Paul  in  joining 
himself  with  the  four  Nazarites  at  Jerusalem  seems 
to  prove  that  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  of  days 
was  as  little  altered  in  its  important  features. 

VI.  The  word  "Vp  occurs  in   three  passages  of 

the  Old  Testament,  in  which  it  appears  to  mean 
ona  separated  from  others  as  a  prince.  Two  of 
the  passages  refer  to  Joseph :  one  is  in  Jacob's 


NAZA  BITE 


473 


benediction  of  his  sons  (Gen.  xlix.  26),  the  othei 
in  Moses'  benediction  of  the  tribes  (Deut.  xxxiii. 
16).  As  these  texts  stand  in  our  version,  the 
blessing  is  spoken  of  as  falling  "  on  the  crown  o' 
the  head  of  him  who  was  separated  from  his  bre 
thren."  The  LXX.  render  the  words  in  one  place, 
iirl  KopiKprjs  Siv  fiyijffaTO  a5(\(pwf,  and  in  the 
other  ^iri  Kopi<j>^f  So^affderros  tv  &5e\<£ots. 
The  Vulgate  translates  them  in  each  place  "  iu 
vertice  Nazaraei  inter  fratres."  The  expression  i* 
strikingly  like  that  used  of  the  high-priest  (Lev. 
xxi.  10-12),  and  seems  to  derive  illustration  from 
the  use  of  the  word  "IT}.* 

The  third  passage  is  that  in  which  the  prophet 
is  mourning  over  the  departed  prosperity  and 
beauty  of  Sion  (Lam.  iv.  7,  8).  In  the  A.  V. 
the  words  are  "  Her  Nazarites  were  purer  than 
snow,  they  were  whiter  than  milk,  they  were 
more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies,  their  polishing 
was  of  sapphire,  their  visage  is  blacker  than  a 
coal,  they  are  not  known  in  the  streets,  their 
skin  cleaveth  to  their  bones,  it  is  withered,  it  is 
become  like  a  stick."  In  favour  of  the  application 
of  this  passage  to  the  Nazarites  are  the  renderings 
of  the  LXX.,  the  Vulg.,  and  nearly  all  the  ver 
sions.  But  Gesenius,  de  Wette,  and  other  modern 
critics  think  that  it  refers  to  the  young  princes  of 
Israel,  and  that  the  word  TT3  is  used  in  the  same 
sense  as  it  is  in  regard  to  Joseph,  Gen.  xlix.  26 
and  Deut.  xxxiii.  16. 

VII.  The  vow  of  the  Nazarite  of  days  must 
have  been  a  self-imposed  discipline,  undertaken 
with  a  specific  purpose.  The  Jewish  writers 
mostly  regarded  it  as  a  kind  of  penance,  and  hence 
accounted  for  the  place  which  the  law  regulating 
it  holds  in  Leviticus  immediately  after  the  law 
relating  to  adultery .7  As  the  quantity  of  hair 
which  grew  within  the  ordinary  period  of  a  vow 
could  not  have  been  very  considerable,  and  as  a 
temporary  abstinence  from  wine  was  probably  not  a 
more  noticeable  thing  amongst  the  Hebrews  than 
it  is  in  modern  society,  the  Nazarite  of  days  might 
have  fulfilled  his  vow  without  attracting  much 
notice  until  the  day  came  for  him  to  make  his 
offering  in  the  Temple. 

But  the  Nazarite  for  life,  on  the  other  hand, 
must  have  been,  with  his  flowing  hair  and  per 
sistent  refusal  of  strong  drink,  a  marked  man. 
Whether  in  any  other  particular  his  daily  life  was 
peculiar  is  uncertain.1  He  may  have  had  some 
privileges  (as  we  have  seen)  which  gave  him 
something  of  a  priestly  character,  and  (as  it  has. 
been  conjectured)  he  may  have  given  up  much 
of  his  time  to  sacred  studies.*  Though  not  neces 
sarily  cut  off"  from  social  life,  when  the  turn  of 
his  mind  was  devotional,  consciousness  of  his  pecu 
liar  dedication  must  have  influenced  his  habits  and 
manner,  and  m  some  cases  probably  led  him  to 
retire  from  the  world. 

But  without  our  resting  on  anything  that  may 
be  called  in  question,  he  must  have  been  a  public 


0  Ewald  seems  to  think  that  it  was  the  more  ancient 
of  the  two  (Alterthiimer,  p.  96). 

p  Critid  Sacri,  on  Num.  vi.  8. 

1  De  Leg.  Hebr.  lib.  iii.  c.  vi.  }1. 

'  Commentaries  on  the  Law  of  Motes,  bk.  iii.  $145. 

•  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,  p.  190  (English  vers.). 

1  Bahr,  Symbolik,  vol.  ii.  p.  439. 

u  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Hebr.  lib.  ill.  c.  vi.  {1.  Lightfoot, 
Kxercit.  in  1  Cor.  xi.  14.  Some  have  imagined  that 
Jephtba's  daughter  was  consigned  to  a  Nazaritc  vow  by 


her  father.    See  Carpzov.  p.  156. 

*  See  note  h  p.  472. 

r  Mairnonides,  Mor.  Nev.  ii.  48. 

»  Nicolas  Fuller  has  discussed  the  subject  of  the  drees 
of  the  Nazarites  (as  well  as  of  the  prophets)  in  his  MisctL- 
lanea  Sacra.  See  Critid  Sacri,  vol.  ix.  p.  1023.  Those 
who  have  imagined  that  the  Nazarites  wore  a  pesuliar 
dress,  doubt  whether  it  was  of  royal  purp'e,  of  :c«^b 
hair-cloth  (like  St  John's),  or  of  some  white  material 

*  VaUblus  on  Num.  vi.  (Critid  Sacrf). 


474 


NAZARITE 


witness  for  the  idea  of  legal  strictness  and  of  what 
ever  else  Nazaritism  was  intended  to  express :  and 
Ra  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  for  life  was  taken  by  his 
parents  before  he  was  conscious  of  it,  his  observance 
of  it  was  a  sign  of  filial  obedience,  like  the  peculi 
arities  of  the  Kechabites. 

The  meaning  of  the  Nazarite  vow  has  beon  re 
garded  in  different  lights.  Some  consider  it  as  a 
symbolical  expression  of  the  Divine  nature  working 
in  man,  and  deny  that  it  involved  anything  of  a 
strictly  ascetic  character ;  others  see  in  it  the  prin 
ciple  of  stoicism,  and  imagine  that  it  was  intended 
to  cultivate,  and  bear  witness  for,  the  sovereignty 
of  tne  will  over  the  lower  tendencies  of  human 
nature :  while  some  regard  it  wholly  in  the  light  of 
a  sacrifice  of  the  person  to  God. 

(a.)  Several  of  the  Jewish  writers  have  taken  the 
first  view  more  or  less  completely.  Abarbanel  ima 
gined  that  the  hair  represents  the  intellectual  power, 
the  power  belonging  to  the  head,  which  the  wise 
man  was  not  to  suffer  to  be  diminished  or  to  be 
interfered  with,  by  drinking  wine  or  by  any  other 
indulgence ;  and  that  the  Nazarite  was  not  to  ap 
proach  the  dead  because  he  was  appointed  to  bear 
witness  to  the  eternity  of  the  divine  nature.b  Of 
modem  critics,  Bahr  appears  to  have  most  com 
pletely  trodden  in  the  same  track.8  While  he  denies 
that  the  life  of  the  Nazarite  was,  in  the  proper 
sense,  ascetic,  he  contends  that  his  abstinence  from 
wine,d  and  his  not  being  allowed  to  approach 
the  dead,  figured  the  separation  from  other  men 
which  characterises  the  consecrated  servant  of  the 
Lord  ;  and  that  his  long  hair  signified  his  holiness. 
The  hair,  according  to  his  theory,  as  being  the 
bloom  of  manhood,  is  the  symbol  of  growth  in  the 
vegetable  as  well  as  the  animal  kingdom,  and  there 
fore  of  the  operation  of  the  Divine  power.8 

(6.)  But  the  philosophical  Jewish  doctors,  for  the 
most  part,  seem  to  have  preferred  the  second  view. 
Thus  Bechai  speaks  of  the  Nazarite  as  a  conqueror 
who  subdued  his  temptations,  and  who  wore  his 
long  hair  as  a  crown,  "  quod  ipse  rex  sit  cupidita- 
tibus  imperans  praeter  morem  reliquorum  homi- 
num,  qui  cupiditatum  sunt  servi."'  He  supposed 
that  the  hair  was  worn  rough,  as  a  protest  against 
foppery.*  But  others,  still  taking  it  as  a  regal 
emblem,  have  imagined  that  it  was  kept  elabo 
rately  dressed,  and  fancy  that  they  see  a  proof  of 
the  existence  of  the  custom  in  the  seven  locks  of 
Samson  (Judg.  xvi.  13-19).h 

(c.)  Philo  has  taken  the  deeper  view  of  the  sub 
ject.  In  his  work,  On  Animals  ft  for  sacrifice,* 
he  gives  an  account  of  the  Naaarite  vow,  and  calls 
it  ri  ei/xb  p.fyd\ri.  According  to  him  the  Naza 
rite  did  not  sacrifice  merely  his  possessions  but 
his  person,  and  the  act  of  sacrifice  was  to  be 
performed  in  the  compl«test  manner.  The  out 
ward  observances  enjoined  upon  him  were  to  be 
the  genuine  expressions  of  his  spiritual  devotion. 


NAZARITE 

To  represent  spotless  purity  within,  he  was  fco  shun 
defilement  from  the  dead,  at  the  expense  even  ol 
the  obligation  of  the  closest  family  ties.  As  no 
spiritual  state  or  act  can  be  signified  by  any  single 
symbol,  he  was  to  identify  himself  with  each  one 
of  the  three  victims  which  he  had  to  offer  as  often 
as  he  broke  his  vow  by  accidental  pollution,  or 
when  the  period  of  his  vow  came  to  an  end.  He 
was  to  realise  in  himself  the  ideas  of  the  whole 
burnt-offering,  the  sin-offering,  and  the  peace-offer 
ing.  That  no  mistake  might  be  made  in  regard  to 
the  three  sacrifices  being  shadows  of  one  and  th« 
same  substance,  it  was  ordained  that  the  victims 
should  be  individuals  of  one  and  the  same  species  o ' 
animal.  The  shorn  hair  was  put  on  the  fire  of  tht 
alter  in  order  that,  although  the  divine  law  did 
not  permit  the  offering  of  human  blood,  something 
might  be  offered  up  actually  a  portion  of  his  own 
person.  Ewald,  following  in  the  same  line  tf 
thought,  has  treated  the  vow  of  the  Nazarite  as  an 
act  of  self-sacrifice ;  but  he  looks  on  the  preservation 
of  the  hair  as  signifying  that  the  Nazarite  is  so  set 
apart  for  God,  that  no  change  or  diminution  should 
be  made  in  any  part  of  his  person,  and  as  serving 
to  himself  and  the  world  for  a  visible  token  of  his 
peculiar  consecration  to  Jehovah  .k 

That  the  Nazarite  vow  was  essentially  a  sacrifice 
of  the  person  to  the  Lord  is  obviously  in  accordance 
with  the  terms  of  the  Law  (Num.  vi.  2).  ,  In  the 
old  dispensation  it  may  have  answered  to  that 
"  living  sacrifice,  holy,  acceptable  unto  God,"  which 
the  believer  is  now  called  upon  to  make.  As  the 
Nazarite  was  a  witness  for  the  straitness  of  the  law, 
as  distinguished  from  the  freedom  of  the  Gospel,  his 
sacrifice  of  himself  was  a  submission  to  the  letter  of 
a  rule.  Its  outward  manifestations  were  restraints 
and  eccentricities.  The  man  was  separated  from 
his  brethren  that  he  might  be  peculiarly  devoted  to 
the  Lord.  This  was  consistent  with  the  purpose  of 
divine  wisdom  for  the  time  for  which  it  was  or 
dained.  Wisdom,  we  are  told,  was  justified  of  her 
child  in  the  life  of  the  great  Nazarite  who  preached 
the  baptism  of  repentance  when  the  Law  was  about 
to  give  way  to  the  Gospel.  Amongst  those  born  of 
women,  no  greater  than  he  had  arisen,  "  but  he 
that  is  least  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  is  greater 
than  he."  The  sacrifice  which  the  believer  now 
makes  of  himself  is  not  to  cut  him  off  from  his 
brethren,  but  to  unite  him  more  closely  with  them  ; 
not  to  subject  him  to  an  outward  bond,  but  to  con 
firm  him  in  the  liberty  with  which  Christ  has  made 
him  free.  It  is  not  without  significance  that  win* 
under  the  Law  was  strictly  forbidden  to  the  priest 
who  was  engaged  in  the  service  of  the  sanctuary, 
and  to  the  few  whom  the  Nazarite  vow  bound  to 
the  special  service  of  the  Lord  ;  while  in  the  Church 
of  Christ  it  is  consecrated  for  the  use  of  every  be 
liever  to  whom  the  command  has  come,  "  drink  ye 
all  of  this."  « 


*•  Quoted  by  De  Muis  on  Num.  vl.  (Critici  Sacri). 

c  Symbolik,  vol.  ii.  p.  410-430. 

d  He  v!li  not  allow  that  this  abstinence  at  all  resembled 
In  its  meaning  that  of  the  priests,  when  engaged  In  their 
ministrations,  which  was  Intended  only  to  secure  strict 
propriety  in  the  discharge  of  their  duties. 

*  Bahr  defends  this  notion  by  several  philological  argu 
ments,  which  do  not  seem  to  be  much  to  the  point.  The 
nearest  to  the  purpose  is  that  derived  from  Lev.  xxv.  5, 
where  the  unpruned  vines  of  the  sabbatical  year  are  called 
Nazarites.  But  this,  of  course,  can  be  well  explained  as  a 
metaphor  from  unshorn  hair. 

'  Carpzov,  App.  Grit.  p.  152.  Abenezra  uses  very  similar 
language  (Itruniiif,  on  Num.  vl.  7) 


g  This  was  also  the  opinion  of  Llghtfoot,  Exercit.  in 
1  Cor.  xi.  14,  and  Sermon  on  Judg.  xl.  39. 

h  Spencer,  De  Leg.  ffebr,  ill.  vi.  $l. 

*  Opera,  vol.  il.  p.  249  (ed.  Mangey.) 

k  Lightfoot  Is  inclined  to  favour  certain  Jewish  writer* 
who  identify  the  vine  with  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  and  to  connect  the  Nazarite  law  with  the  con 
dition  of  Adam  before  he  fell  (Esercit.  in  Luc.  1.  15). 
This  strange  notion  is  made  still  more  fanciful  by  Magce 
(Atonement  and  Sacrifice,  Illustration  xxxviii.). 

">  This  consideration  might  surely  have  furnished  SL 
Jerome  with  a  better  answer  to  the  Tatiamsts,  who  al 
leged  Amos  ii.  VI  in  defence  of  their  abstinence  frott 
wuio,  than  his  bitter  taant  that  they  were  bringing  "  Jir 


NEAH 

Caqzov,  Apparatus  Criticus,  p.  148;  Reland, 
Ant.  Sacrae,  p.  II.  c.  10  ;  Meinhard,  Pauli  Nazirae~ 
ntus  (Thesaurus  Thsologico-philologicus,  ii.  473). 
The  notes  of  De  Muis  and  Drusius  on  Num.  vi. 
(Critici  Sacri}  ;  the  notes  of  Grotius  on  Luke  i. 
15,  and  Kuinoel  on  Acts  xviii.  18;  Spencer,  De 
Legibus  Hebraeorum,  lib.  Hi.  cap.  vi.  §1 ;  Mi- 
chaelis,  Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  Moses,  Book 
iii.  §145 ;  the  Mishnical  treatise  Nazir,  with  the 
notes  in  Surenhusius'  Mishna,  iii.  146,  &c. ;  Bahr, 
Symbolik,  ii.  416-430  ;  Ewald,  Alterthiimer,  p.  96; 
also  Geschichte,  ii.  43.  Carpzov  mentions  with 
praise  Naziraeus,  sen,  Commentarius  literalis  et 
mysticus  in  Legem  Naziraeorum,  by  Cremer.  The 
essay  of  Meinhard  contains  a  large  amount  of  infor 
mation  on  the  subject,  besides  what  bears  imme 
diately  on  St.  Paul's  vows.  Spencer  gives  a  full 
account  of  heathen  customs  in  dedicating  the  hair. 
The  Notes  of  De  Muis  contain  a  valuable  collection 
of  Jewish  testimonies  on  the  meaning  of  the  Nazarite 
vow  in  general.  Those  of  Grotius  relate  especially 
to  the  Nazarites'  abstinence  from  wine.  Hengsten- 
berg  (Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses,  p.  190,  Eng 
lish  translation)  confutes  Bahr's  theory.  [S.  C.] 

NE'AH  (Hi?  3n,  with  the def.  article :  Vat.  omits; 
Alex.  Avvova : s  Aned),  a  place  which  was  one  of  the 
landmarks  on  the  boundary  of  Zebulun  (Josh.  six. 
13  only).  Bj  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomast. 
"  Anua ")  it  is  mentioned  merely  with  a  caution 
that  there  is  a  place  of  the  same  name,  10  miles  S. 
of  Neapolis.  It  has  not  yet  been  identified  even  by 
Schwarz.  If  el  Meshhad,  about  2 J  miles  E.  of 
Seffurieh,  be  GATH-HEPHER,  and  Rummaneh  about 
4  miles  N.E.  of  the  same  place,  RIMMON,  then 
Neah  must  probably  be  sought  somewhere  to  the 
north  of  the  last  named  town.  [G.] 

NEAP'OLTS  (N«t£iro\«s)  is  the  place  in  northern 
Greece  where  Paul  and  his  associates  first  landed  in 
Europe  (Acts  xvi.  11) ;  where,  no  doubt,  he  landed 
also  on  his  second  visit  to  Macedonia  (Acts  xx.  1), 
and  whence  certainly  he  embarked  on  his  last  journey 
through  that  province  to  Troas  and  Jerusalem  (Acts 
tx.  6).  Philippi  being  an  inland  town,  Neapolis 
was  evidently  the  port ;  and  hence  it  is  accounted 
for,  that  Luke  leaves  the  verb  which  describes  the 
voyage  from  Troas  to  Neapolis  (eiiOvtipofj.'fiffafiev), 
to  describe  the  continuance  of  the  journey  from 
Neapolis  to  Philippi.  It  has  been  made  a  question 
whether  this  harbour  occupied  the  site  of  the  present 
Kavalla,  a  Turkish  town  on  the  coast  of  Roumelia, 
or  should  be  sought  at  some  other  place.  Cousine'ry 
( Voyage  dans  la  Macedoine)  and  Tafel  (De  Via 
Militari  Rvmanorum  Egnatia,  &c.)  maintain, 
against  the  common  opinion,  that  Luke's  Neapolis 
was  not  at  Kavalla,  the  inhabited  town  of  that 
name,  but  at  a  deserted  harbour  ten  or  twelve  miles 
further  west,  known  as  Eski  or  Old  Kavalla.  Most 
of  those  who  contend  for  the  other  identification 
assume  the  point  without  much  discussion,  and  the 
subject  demands  still  the  attention  of  the  biblical 


NEAPOLIS  471- 

geographer.  It  may  be  well,  therefore,  to  mentiou 
with  some  fulness  the  reasons  which  support  the 
cla:m  of  Kavalla  to  be  regarded  as  the  ancient  Nea 
polis,  in  opposition  to  those  which  are  urged  in 
favour  of  the  other  harbour. 

First,  the  Roman  and  Greek  ruins  at  Kavalla 
prove  that  a  port  existed  there  in  ancient  times. 
Neapolis,  wherever  it  was,  formed  the  point  of  con 
tact  between  Northern  Greece  and  Asia  Minor,  at  a 
period  of  great  commercial  activity,  and  would  be 
expected  to  have  left  vestiges  of  its  former  import 
ance.  The  antiquities  found  still  at  Kavalla  fulfil 
entirely  that  presumption.  One  of  these  is  a  massive 
aqueduct,  which  brings  water  into  the  town  from  a 
distance  of  ten  or  twelve  miles  north  of  Kavalla, 
along  the  slopes  of  Symbolum.  It  is  built  on  two 
tiers  of  arches,  a  hundred  feet  long  and  eighty  feet 
high,  and  is  carried  over  the  narrow  valley  between 
the  promontory  and  the  mainland.  The  upper  part 
of  the  work  is  modem,  but  the  substructions  are 
evidently  Roman,  as  is  seen  from  the  composite 
character  of  the  material,  the  cement,  and  the  style 
of  the  masonry.  Just  out  of  the  western  gate  are 
two  marble  sarcophagi,  used  as  watering-troughs, 
with  Latin  inscriptions,  of  the  age  of  the  emperor 
Claudius.  Columns  with  chaplets  of  elegant  Ionic 
workmanship,  blocks  of  marble,  fragments  of  hewn 
stone,  evidently  antique,  are  numerous  both  in  the 
town  and  the  suburbs.  On  some  of  these  are  inscrip 
tions,  mostly  in  Latin,  but  one  at  least  in  Greek. 
In  digging  for  the  foundation  of  new  houses  the 
walls  of  ancient  ones  are  often  brought  to  light,  and 
sometimes  tablets  with  sculptured  figures,  which 
would  be  deemed  curious  at  Athens  or  Corinth. 
For  fuller  details,  see  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  October, 
1860.  On  the  contrary,  no  ruins,  have  been  found 
at  Eski  Kavalla,  or  Paleopoli,  as  it  is  also  called, 
which  can  be  pronounced  unmistakeably  ancient. 
No  remains  of  walls,  no  inscriptions,  and  no  indica 
tions  of  any  thoroughfare  leading  thence  to  Philippi, 
are  reported  to  exist  there.  Cousine'ry,  it  is  true, 
speaks  of  certain  ruins  at  the  place  which  he  deems 
worthy  of  notice ;  but  according  to  the  testimony 
of  others  these  ruins  are  altogether  inconsiderable, 
and,  which  is  still  more  decisive,  are  modern  in  their 
character.15  Cousine'ry  himself,  in  fact,  corroborates 
this,  when  he  says  that  on  the  isthmus  which  binds 
the  peninsula  to  the  main  land,  "  on  trouve  les  mines 
de  I'ancienne  Neapolis  ou  celles  d'un  chateau  re~ 
construit  dans  le  moyen  agef  It  appears  that  a 
mediaeval  or  Venetian  fortress  existed  there ;  but 
as  far  as  is  yet  ascertained,  nothing  else  has  been 
discovered,  which  points  to  an  earlier  period. 

Secondly,  the  advantages  of  the  position  render 
Kavalla  the  probable  site  of  Neapolis.  It  is  the  first 
convenient  harbour  south  of  the  Hellespont,  on 
coming  from  the  east.  Thasos  serves  as  a  natural 
landmark.  Tafel  says,  indeed,  that  Kavalla  has  no 
port,  or  one  next  to  none;  but  that  is  incorrect. 
The  fact  that  the  place  is  now  the  seat  of  an  active 
commerce  proves  the  contrary.  It  lies  open  some- 


daicaa  fabulas "  into  the  church,  and  that  they  were 
bound,  on  their  own  ground,  neither  to  cut  their  hair,  to 
eat  grapes  or  raisins,  or  to  approach  the  corpse  of  a  dead 
parent  (in  Amos  it.  12). 

•  This  is  the  reading  of  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  given 
in  the  Benedictine  Edition  of  Jerome.  The  ordinary  copies 
have  Noa. 

b  Colonel  Leake  did  not  visit  cither  this  Kavalla  or  the 
other,  and  his  assertion  that  there  are  "  the  ruins  of  a 
Greek  city  "  there  (which  he  supposes,  however,  to  have 
been  Galepsus,  and  not  Neapolis)  apptars  to  rest  on 


Cousinery's  statement.  But  as  involving  this  claim  of 
Eski  Kavalla  in  still  greater  doubt,  it  may  t-e  added 
that  the  situation  of  Galepsus  Itself  is  quite  uncertain. 
Dr.  Arnold  (note  on  Thucyd.  iv.  107)  places  it  near  the 
mouth  of  the  Strymon,  and  hence  much  further  west  than 
Leake  supposes.  According  to  Cousinery,  Galepsus  is  to 
be  sought  at  Kavalla. 

c  On  p.  119  he  says  again :  "  Les  mines  de  1'ancienn* 
villc  de  Neapolis  se  composent  principalement  des  restes 
d'un  chateau  du  moyen  age  entierement  abandoune  et 
peu  accessible." 


176 


NEAPOL1S 


what  to  the  south  and  south-west,  but  is  other 
wise  well  sheltered.  There  is  no  danger  in  going 
into  the  harbour.  Even  a  rock  which  lies  off  the 
point  of  the  town  has  twelve  fathoms  alongside  of 
.t.  The  bottom  affords  good  anchorage  ;  and  although 
the  bay  may  not  be  so  large  as  that  of  Eski  Kavalla, 
it  is  ample  for  the  accommodation  of  any  number 
of  vessels  which  the  course  of  trade  or  travel  be 
tween  Asia  Minor  and  Northern  Greece  wouli  be 
likely  to  bring  together  there  at  any  one  time. 

Thirdly,  the  facility  of  intercourse  between  this 
port  and  Philippi  shows  that  Kavalla  and  Neapolis 
must  be  the  same.  The  distance  is  ten  miles,  and 
hence  not  greater  than  Corinth  was  from  Cenchreae, 
and  Ostia  from  Rome.  Both  places  are  in  sight  at 
once  from  the  top  of  Symbolum.  The  distance 
between  Philippi  and  Eski  Kavalla  must  be  nearly 
twiae  as  great.  Nature  itself  has  opened  a  passage 
from  the  one  place  to  the  other.  The  mountains 
which  guard  the  plain  of  Philippi  on  the  coast-side 
fall  apart  just  behind  Kavalla,  and  render  the  con 
struction  of  a  road  there  entirely  easy.  No  other 
such  defile  exists  at  any  other  point  in  this  line  of 
formidable  hills.  It  is  impossible  to  view  the  con 
figuration  of  the  country  from  the  sea,  and  not  feel  at 
once  that  the  only  natural  place  for  crossing  into  the 
interior  is  this  break-down  in  the  vicinity  of  Kavalla. 

Fourthly,  the  notices  of  the  ancient  writers  lead 
us  to  adopt  the  same  view.  Thus  Dio  Cassius  says 
(Hist.  Bom.  xlvii.  35)  that  Neapolis  was  opposite 
Thasos  ((car'  avnirfpas  ©tiffov),  and  that  is  the 
situation  of  Kavalla.  It  would  be  much  less  cor 
rect,  if  correct  at  all,  to  say  that  the  other  Kavalla 
was  so  situated ,  since  no  part  of  the  island  extends 
to  far  to  the  west.  Appian  says  {Bell.  Civ.  iv. 
106)  that  the  camp  of  the  Republicans  near  the 
Gangas,  the  river  (irora/ubs)  at  Philippi,  was  nine 
Roman  miles  from  their  triremes  at  Neapolis  (it 
was  considerably  further  to  the  other  place),  and 
that  Thasos  was  twelve  Roman  miles  from  their 
naval  station  (so  we  should  understand  the  text) ; 
the  latter  distance  appropriate  again  to  Kavalla,  but 
not  to  the  harbour  further  west. 

Finally,  the  ancient  Itineraries  support  entirely 
the  identification  in  question.  Both  the  Antonine 
and  the  Jerusalem  Itineraries  show  that  the  Egna- 
tian  Way  passed  through  Philippi.  They  mention 
Philippi  and  Neapolis  as  next  to  each  other  in  the 
order  of  succession ;  and  since  the  line  of  travel 
which  these  Itineraries  sketch  was  the  one  which 
led  from  the  west  to  Byzantium,  or  Constantinople, 
it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  road,  after 
leaving  Philippi,  would  pursue  the  most  convenient 
and  direct  course  to  the  east  which  the  nature  of 
the  country  allows.  If  the  road,  therefore,  was 
constructed  on  this  obvious  principle,  it  would 
follow  the  track  of  the  present  Turkish  road,  and 
the  next  station,  consequently,  would  be  Neapolis, 
or  Kavalla,  on  the  coast,  at  the  termination  of  the 
only  natural  defile  across  the  intervening  mountains. 
The  distance,  as  has  been  said,  is  about  ten  miles. 
The  Jerusalem  Itinerary  gives  the  distance  between 
Philippi  and  Neapolis  as  ten  Roman  miles,  and  the 
Antonine  Itinerary  as  twelve  miles.  The  difference 
in  the  latter  case  is  unimportant,  and  not  greater 
than  in  some  other  instances  where  the  places  in 
the  two  Itineraries  are  unquestionably  the  same. 
It  must  be  several  miles  further  than  this  from 
Philippi  to  Old  Kavalla,  and  hence  the  Neapolis  of 
the  Itineraries  could  not  be  at  that  point.  The 
theory  of  Tafel  is,  that  Akontisma  or  Herkontroin:i 
(the  §amc  placei  without  doubt),  which  the  Itin-> 


NtBAlOTH 

raries  mentic  n  next  to  Neapolis,  war  at  the  pr&eni 
Kavalla,  ant.  Neapolis  at  Leuter  or  Eski  Kavallsu 
This  theory,  it  is  true,  arranges  the  places  in  the 
order  of  the  Itineraries  ;  but,  as  Leake  objects,  there 
would  be  a  needless  detour  of  nearly  twenty  miles, 
and  that  through  a  region  much  more  difficult  than 
the  direct  way.  The  more  accredited  view  is  that 
Akontisma  was  beyond  Kavalla,  further  east. 

Neapolis,  therefore,  like  the  present  Kavalla,  was 
on  a  high  rocky  promontory  which  juts  out  iuto 
the  Aegean.  The  harbour,  a  mile  and  a  half  wide 
at  the  entrance,  and  half  a  mile  broad,  lies  on  the 
west  side.  The  indifferent  roadstead  on  the  east 
should  not  be  called  a  harbour.  Symbolum,  1  670 
1'eet  high,  with  a  defile  which  leads  into  the  plain 
of  Philippi,  comes  down  near  to  the  coast  a  little  to 
the  west  of  the  town.  In  winter  the  sun  sinks 
behind  Mount  Athos  in  the  south-west  as  early  as 
4  o'clock  P.M.  The  land  along  the  eastern  shore  is 
low,  and  otherwise  unmarked  by  any  peculiarity. 
The  island  of  Thasos  bears  a  little  to  the  S  E.,  twelve 
or  fifteen  miles  distant.  Plane-trees  just  beyond  the 
walls,  not  less  than  four  or  five  h^.ndi  ed  years  old, 
cast  their  shadow  over  the  road  which  f'aul  followed 
on  his  way  to  Philippi.  Kavalla  has  a  population  ol 
five  or  six  thousand,  nine-tenths  of  whom  are  Mussul 
mans,  and  the  rest  Greeks.  For  fuller  or  supple 
mentary  information,  see  Biblioth.  Sacra,  as  above, 
and  also  Diet,  of  Geog.  ii.  p.  411. 

For  Neapolis  as  the  Greek  name  of  Shechem,  now 
Nabulus,  see  SHECHEM.  [H.  B.  H.] 


NEARI'AH  (nnjtt  :  NwaSt'a:  Naaria).     1. 

One  of  the  six  sons  of  Shemaiah  in  the  line  of  the 
royal  family  of  Judah  after  the  captivity  (1  Chr. 
Hi.  22,  23). 

2.  A  son  of  Ishi,  and  one  of  the  captains  of  the 
500  Simeonites  who,  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah.  drove 
out  the  Amalekites  from  Mount  Seir  (1  Chr.  iv.  42). 

NEBA'I  0313;   Keri,  »T3  :  Nwflof:  Nebal). 

A  family  of  the  heads  of  the  people  who  signed  the 
covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  19).  The  LXX. 
followed  the  written  text,  while  the  Vulgate  adopted 
the  reading  of  the  margin. 

NEBAI'OTH,  NEBAJ'OTH  (DV33  :   Na- 

/3ai'a>0  :  NabajotK),  the  "  first-bora  of  Ishmael  " 
(Gen.  xxv.  13  ;  1  Chr.  i.'  29),  and  father  of  a  pas- 
toral  tribe  named  after  him,  the  "  rams  of  Ne- 
baioth"  being  mentioned  by  the  prophet  Isaiah 
(Ix.  7)  with  the  flocks  of  Kedar.  From  the  days 
of  Jerome  {Comment,  in  Gen.  xx.  13),  this  people 
had  been  identified  with  the  Nabathaeans,  until  M. 
Quatremere  first  investigated  the  origin  of  the  latter, 
their  language,  religion,  and  history  ;  and  by  the 
light  he  threw  on  a  very  obscure  subject  enabled  us 
to  form  a  clearer  judgment  respecting  this  assume! 
identification  than  was,  in  the  previous  state  of 
knowledge,  possible.  It  will  be  convenient  to  reca 
pitulate,  briefly,  the  results  of  M.  Quatiemfcre's 
labours,  with  those  of  the  later  works  of  M  .  Chwolson 
and  others  on  the  same  subject,  before  we  consider 
the  grounds  for  identifying  the  Nabathaeaus  with 
Nebaioth. 

From  the  works  of  Arab  authors,  M.Quatrem«*r« 
(Memoire  sur  les  Nabateens,  Paris,  1835,  reprinjtj 
from  the  Nauveau  Journ.  Asiai.  Jan.-Mar.,  1835) 
proved  the  existence  of  a  nation  called  NaK-il 

' 


or  Nabeet 


I'1-  Anl);tt 


NEBAIOTH 

(Sihah  And  Kdmoos],  reputed  iu  be  of  ancient 
origin,  of  whom  scattered  remnants  existed  in  Arab 
times,  after  the  era  of  the  Flight.  The  Natat,  in 
the  days  of  their  early  prosperity,  inhabited  the 
country  chiefly  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris, 
Beyn  en  Nahreyn  and  El-lnik  (the  Mesopotamia 
and  Chaldaea  o."  the  classics).  That  this  was  their 
shief  seat  and  that  they  were  Aramaeans,  or  more 
accurately  Syrc-Chaldaeans,  seems,  in  the  present 
state  of  the  inquiry  (for  it  will  presently  be  seen 
that,  by  the  publication  of  Oriental  texts,  our  know 
ledge  may  be  very  greatly  enlarged)  to  be  a  safe 
conclusion.  The  Arabs  loosely  apply  the  name 
Nabat  to  the  Syrians,  or  especially  the  eastern 
Syrians,  to  the  Syro-Chaldaeans,  &c.  Thus  El- 
Mes'oodee  (ap.  Quatremfere,  /.  c.)  says,  "  The  Sy 
rians  are  the  same  as  the  Nabathaeans  (Nabat). 
.  .  .  The  Nimrods  were  the  kings  of  the  Syrians 
whom  the  Arabs  call  Nabathaeans.  .  .  .  The  Chal- 
dacans  are  the  same  as  the  Syrians,  otherwise  called 
Nabat  (Kitdb  et-Tenbeeh}.  The  Nabathaeans  .  .  . 
founded  the  city  of  Babylon.  .  .  .  The  inhabitants 
of  Nineveh  were  part  of  those  whom  we  call  Nabeet 
or  Syrians,  who  form  one  nation  and  speak  one 
language ;  that  of  the  Nabeet  differs  only  in  a 
small  number  of  letters ;  but  the  foundation  of  the 
language  is  identical"  (Kitdb  Murooj-edh-Dhahab). 
These,  and  many  other  fragmentary  passages,  prove 
sufficiently  the  existence  of  a  great  Aramaean  people 
called  Nabat,  celebrated  among  the  Arabs  for  their 
knowledge  of  agriculture,  and  of  magic,  astronomy, 
medicine,  and  science  (so  called)  generally.  But 
we  have  stronger  evidence  to  this  effect.  Quatre- 
meire  introduced  to  the  notice  of  the  learned  world 
the  most  important  relic  of  that  people's  literature, 
a  treatise  on  Nabat  agriculture.  A  study  of  an 
imperfect  copy  of  that  work,  which  unfortunately 
was  all  he  could  gain  access  to,  induced  him  to  date 
it  about  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  dr.  B.C. 
600.  M.  Chwolson,  professor  of  Oriental  lan 
guages  at  St.  Petersburg,  who  had  shown  himself 
fitted  for  the  inquiry  by  his  treatise  on  the  Sabians 
and  their  religion  (Die  Ssabier  und  der  Ssabis- 
mus),  has  since  made  that  book  a  subject  of  special 
study  ;  and  in  his  Remains  of  Ancient  Babylonian 
Literature  in  Arabic  Translations  (  Ueber  die  Ueber 
reste  der  Alt-  Baby lonischen  Literatur  in  Ara- 
bischen  Uebersetzungen,  St.  Petersburg,  1859),  he 
has  published  the  results  of  his  inquiry.  Those 
results,  while  they  establish  all  M.  Quatremere 
had  advanced  respecting  the  existence  of  the  Nabat, 
go  far  beyond  him  both  in  the  antiquity  and  the 
importance  M.  Chwolson  claims  for  that  people. 
Ewald,  however,  in  1857,  stated  some  grave  causes 
for  doubting  this  antiquity,  and  again  in  1859 
(both  papers  appeared  in  the  Cfoettingische  gelehrte 
Anzeujen)  repeated  moderately  but  decidedly  his 
misgivings.  M.  Renan  followed  on  the  same  side 
(Joum.  de  I' [nstitut,  Ap.-May,  1860);  and  more 
recently,  M.  de  Gutschmid  (Zeitschrift  d.  Deutsch. 
Morgenland.  Gesellschaft,  xv.  1-100)  has  attacked 
the  whole  theory  in  a  leugthy  essay.  The  limits 
of  this  Dictionary  forbid  us  to  do  more  than  reca 
pitulate,  as  shortly  as  possible,  the  bearings  of  this 
remarkable  inquiry,  as  far  as  they  relate  to  the 
subject  of  the  article. 

The  remains  of  the  literature  of  the  Nabat  consist 
of  four  works,  one  of  them  a  fragment : — the  '  Book 
of  Nabat  Agriculture '  (already  mentioned) ;  the 
'  Book  of  Poisons ;'  the  '  Book  of  Tenkeloosha 
the  Babylonian ;'  and  the  '  Book  of  the  Secrets  of 
the  Sun  end  Moon '  (Chwolson,  Ueberreste,  p.  10, 


47? 

11).  They  purport  to  have  been  translated,  in  the 
year  P04,  by  Aboo-Bekr  Ahmad  Ibn-'Alee  the 
Chaldean  of  Kisseen,*  better  known  as  Ibn-Wah- 
sheeyeh.  The  'Book  of  Nabat  Agriculture'  was, 
according  to  the  Arab  translator,  commenced  by 
Daghreeth,  continued  by  Yanbusha"dh,  and  com 
pleted  by  Kuthamee.  Chwolson,  disregarding  the 
dates  assigned  to  these  authors  by  the  translator, 
thinks  that  the  earliest  lived  some  2500  years  B.C., 
the  second  some  300  or  400  years  later,  and  Ku 
thamee,  to  whom  he  ascribes  the  chief  authorship 
(Ibn-Wahsheeyeh  says  he  was  little  more  than  edi 
tor),  at  the  earliest  under  the  6th  king  of  a  Canaanite 
dynasty  mentioned  in  the  book,  which  dynasty 
Chwolson — with  Bunsen — makes  the  same  as  the 
5th  (or  Arabian)  dynasty  of  Berosus  (Chwolson. 
Ueberreste,  68,  &c.;  Bunsen,  Egypt,  iii.  432,  &c. , 
Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd  ed.  p.  60),  or  of 
the  13th  century  B.C.  It  will  thus  be  seen  that 
he  rejects  most  of  M.  Quatremere's  reasons  for 
placing  the  work  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
It  is  remarkable  that  that  great  king  is  not  men 
tioned,  and  the  author  or  authors  were,  it  is  argued 
by  Chwolson,  ignorant  not  only  of  the  existence  of 
Christianity,  but  of  the  kingdom  and  faith  of  Israel . 
Wiiile  these  and  other  reasons,  if  granted,  strengthen 
M.  Chwolson's  case  for  the  antiquity  of  the  work, 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  urged  that  even  neglecting 
the  difficulties  attending  an  Arab's  translating  so 
ancient  a  writir.g  (and  we  reject  altogether  the  sup 
position  that  it  was  modernised  as  being  without  a 
parallel,  at  least  in  Arabic  literature),  and  conced 
ing  that  he  was  of  ChakLean  or  Nabat  race — we 
encounter  formidable  intrinsic  difficulties.  The 
book  contains  mentions  of  personages  bearing  names 
closely  resembling  those  of  Adam,  Seth,  Enoch, 
Noah,  Shem,  Nimrod,  and  Abraham ;  and  M.  Chwol 
son  himself  .is  forced  to  confess  that  the  particulars 
related  of  them  are  in  some  respects  similar  to  those 
recorded  of  the  Biblical  patriarchs.  If  this  diffi 
culty  proves  insurmountable,  it  shows  that  the  author 
boiTowed  from  the  Bible,  or  from  late  Jews,  and 
destroys  the  claim  of  an  extreme  antiquity.  Other 
apparent  evidences  of  the  same  kind  are  not  want 
ing.  Such  are  the  mentions  of  Ermeesk  (Hermes), 
Agathadeemoou  (Agathodaemon),  Tammuz  (Ado 
nis),  and  Yoonan  (lonians).  It  is  even  a  question 
whether  the  work  should  not  be  dated  several  cen 
turies  after  the  commencement  of  our  era.  Ana 
chronisms,  it  is  asserted,  abound;  geographical, 
linguistic  (the  use  of  late  words  and  phrases),  his 
torical,  and  religious  (such  as  the  traces  of  Hel 
lenism,  as  shown  in  the  mention  of  Hermes,  &c., 
and  influences  to  be  ascribed  to  Neoplatonism). 
The  whole  style  is  said  to  be  modern,  wanting  the 
rugged  vigour  of  antiquity  (this,  however,  is  a 
delicate  issue,  to  be  tried  only  by  the  ripest  scho 
larship).  And  while  Chwolson  dates  the  oldest 
part  of  the  Book  of  Agriculture  B.C.  2500,  and 
the  Book  of  Tenkeloosha  in  the  1st  century,  A.i>. 
at  the  latest  (p.  136),  Renan  asserts  that  the  two 
are  so  similar  as  to  preclude  the  notion  of  their 
being  separated  by  any  great  interval  of  time 
(Journal  de  I' Institut), 

Although  Quatreinere  recovered  the  broad  out 
lines  of  the  religion  and  language  of  the  Nabat,  a 
more  extended  knowledge  of  these  points  hangs 
mainly  on  the  genuineness  or  spuriousness  of  the 
work  of  Kuthimee.  If  M.  Chwolson's  theory  ba 


•  Or  Kcysfce.    See  Chwolson,  Ueberreste,  p.  8,  fooljoota 
De  Lary's  'Aba-Kl-Latepf,  p.  484. 


478  NEBAIOTH 

correct,  tnat  people  present  to  us  one  of  the  most 
ancient  forms  of  idolatry ;  and  by  their  writings 
we  can  trace  the  origin  and  rise  of  successive 
phases  of  pantheism,  and  the  roots  of  the  compli 
cated  forms  of  idolatry,  heresy,  and  philosophical 
infidelity,  which  abound  in  the  old  seats  of  the 
Aramaean  race.  At  present,  we  may  conclude 

that  they  were  Sabians  (o^xjL^),h  at  least  in  late 

times,  as  Sabeism  succeeded  the  older  religions ;  and 
their  doctrines  seem  to  have  approached  (how 
nearly  a  further  knowledge  of  these  obscure  sub 
jects  will  show)  those  of  the  Menda'ees,  Mendaites, 
or  Gtfostics.  Their  language  presents  similar  diffi 
culties  ;  according  to  M.  Chwolson,  it  is  the  ancient 
language  of  Babylonia.  A  cautious  criticism  would 
(till  we  know  more)  assign  it  a  place  as  a  compara 
tively  modern  dialect  of  Syro-Chaldee  (comp. 
Quatremere,  Mem.  100-3). 

Thus,  if  M.  Chwolson's  results  are  accepted, 
the  Book  of  Nabat  Agriculture  exhibits  to  us 
an  ancient  civilization,  before  that  of  the  Greeks, 
and  at  least  as  old  as  that  of  the  Egyptians,  of  a 
great  and  powerful  nation  of  remote  antiquity  ; 
making  us  acquainted  with  sages  hitherto  unknown, 
and  with  the  religions  and  sciences  they  either 
founded  or  advanced ;  and  throwing  a  flood  of 
light  on  what  has  till  now  been  one  of  the  darkest 
pages  of  the  world's  history.  But  until  the 
original  text  of  Kuthamee's  treatise  is  published, 
we  must  withhold  our  acceptance  of  facts  so  start 
ling,  and  regard  the  antiquity  ascribed  to  it  even 
by  Quatremere  as  extremely  doubtful.  It  is  suffi 
cient  for  the  present  to  know  that  the  most  im 
portant  facts  advanced  by  the  latter — the  most 
important  when  regarded  by  sober  criticism — are 
supported  by  the  results  of  the  later  inquiries  of 
M.  Chwolson  and  others.  It  remains  for  us  to 
state  the  grounds  for  connecting  the  Nabat  with  the 
Nabathaeans. 

As  the  Arabs  speak  of  the  Nabat  as  Syrians,  so 
conversely  the  Greeks  and  Romans  knew  the  Na 
bathaeans  (ol  NajSoTTaiot  and  Na/Saraioi,  LXX;  ; 
Alex.  Na/3ar«oi ;  Nabuthaei,  Vulg. ;  'AiroTOioi,  or 
VoiraTo7oj,  Pt.  vi.  7,  §21;  NajSciroj,  Suid.  s.  c. ; 
Nabathae)  as  Arabs.  While  the  inhabitants  of  the 
peninsula  were  comparative  strangers  to  the  classical 
writers,  and  very  little  was  known  of  the  further- 
removed  peoples  of  Chaldaea  and  Mesopotamia,  the 
Nabathaeans  bordered  the  well-known  Egyptian 
and  Syrian  provinces.  The  nation  was  famous  for 
;ts  wealth  and  commerce.  Even  when,  by  the  de 
fine  of  its  trade  (diverted  through  Egypt),  its 
prosperity  waned,  Petra  is  still  mentioned  as  a 
centre  of  the  trade  both  of  the  Sabaeans  of  South 
ern  Arabia  [_t>1IK1JA]  and  the  Gerrhaeans  on  the 
Persian  gulf.  It  is  this  extension  across  the  desert 
that  most  clearly  connects  the  Nabathaean  colony 
with  the  birthplace  of  the  nation  in  Chaldaea. 
The  notorious  trade  of  Petra  across  the  well- 
trodden  desert^road  to  the  Persian  gulf  is  sufficient 
to  account  for  the  presence  of  this  colony  ;  just  as 
traces  of  Abrahamic  peoples  [DEDAN,  &c.]  are 

h  Sdbi-oon  is  commonly  held  by  the  Arabs  to  signify 
originally  "  Apostates." 

c  We  have  not  entered  into  the  subject  of  the  language 
of  the  Nabathaeans.  The  little  that  is  known  of  it  tends 
tn  strengthen  the  theory  of  the  Chaldaean  origin  of  that 
people.  The  Due  de  Luynes,  in  a  paper  on  the  coins  of 
the  latter  in  the  Revue  Numisnatique  (nouv.  se"rie,  iii. 
•>S58),  adduces  facts  to  show  that  they  called  themselves 


NKBAIOTH 

found,  demonstrably,  on  the  shores  of  that  sea  trt 
the  east,  and  on  the  borders  of  Palestine  on  Iht 
west,  while  along  the  northern  limits  of  the  Ara 
bian  peninsula  remains  of  the  caravan  stations  still 
exist.  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  the  existence  of 
this  great  stream  of  commerce,  from  remote  times, 
until  the  opening  of  the  Egyptian  route  gradually 
destroyed  it.  Josephus  (Ant.  i.  12,  §4)  speaks  o'l 
Nabataea  (Na/Saraiot,  Strab. ;  NajSaTiji^,  Joseph.) 
as  embracing  the  country  from  the  Euphrates  to 
the  Red  Sea — i.  e.  Petraea  and  all  the  desert  fait 
of  it.  The  Nabat  of  the  Arabs,  however,  are  de 
scribed  as  famed  for  agriculture  and  science;  in 
these  respects  offering  a  contrast  to  the  Naba 
thaeans  of  Petra,  who  were  found  by  the  expedi 
tion  sent  by  Antigonus  (B.C.  312)  to  be  dweller* 
in  tents,  pastoral,  and  conducting  the  trade  of  the 
desert ;  but  in  the  Red  Sea  again  they  were  pi 
ratical,  and  by  sea-faring  qualities  showed  a  non- 
Semitic  character. 

We  agree  with  M.  Quatrem&re  (Mem.  p.  81), 
while  rejecting  other  of  his  reasons,  that  the  civili 
zation  of  the  Nabathaeans  of  Petra,  far  advanced 
on  that  of  the  surrounding  Arabs,  is  not  easily  ex 
plained  except  by  supposing  them  to  be  a  different 
people  from  those  Arabs.  A  remarkable  confir 
mation  of  this  supposition  is  found  in  the  character 
of  the  buildings  of  Petra,  which  are  unlike  anything 
constructed  by  a  purely  Semitic  race.  Architecture 
is  a  characteristic  of  Arian  or  mixed  races.  IK 
Southern  Arabia,  Nigritians  and  Semites  (Joktan- 
ites)  together  built  huge  edifices  ;  so  in  Babylonia 
and  Assyria,  and  so  too  in  Egypt,  mixed  races  left 
this  unmistakeable  mark.  [ARABIA.]  Petra, 
while  it  is  wanting  in  the  colossal  features  of  those 
more  ancient  remains,  is  yet  unmistakeably  foreign 
to  an  unmixed  Semitic  race.  Further,  the  subjects  of 
the  literature  of'the  Nabat,  which  are  scientific  and 
industrial,  are  not  such  as  are  found  in  the  writings 
of  pure  Semites  or  Arians,  as  Renan  (Hist,  des 
Langues  Semitiques,  227)  has  well  observed ;  and 
he  points,  as  we  have  above,  to  a  foreign 
("  Couschite,"  or  partly  Nigritian)  settlement  in 
Babylonia.  It  is  noteworthy  that  'Abd-el-Lateef 
(at  the  end  of  the  fourth  section  of  his  first  book, 
or  treatise,  see  De  Lacy's  ed.)  likens  the  Copts  in 
Egypt  (a  mixed  race)  to  the  Nabat  in  El-'Irdk. 

From  most  of  these,  and  other  considerations,*  we 
think  there  is  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  Nabath 
aeans  of  Arabia  Petraea  were  the  same  people  as  the 
Nabat  of  Chaldaea ;  though  at  what  ancient  epoch 
the  western  settlement  was  formed  remains  un 
known."1  That  it  was  not  of  any  importance  until 
after  the  captivity  appears  from  the  notices  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Edom  in  the  canonical  books,  and 
their  absolute  silence  respecting  the  Nabathaeaue, 
except  (if  Nebaioth  be  identified  with  them)  the 
passage  in  Isaiah  (Ix.  7). 

The  Nabathaeans  were  allies  of  the  Jews  after  tha 
Captivity,  and  Judas  the  Maccabee,  with  Jonathan, 
while  at  war  with  the  Edomites,  came  on  them 
three  days  south  of  Jordan  ( 1  Mace.  v.  3,  24,  &c. ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  8,  §3),  and  afterwards  "  Jona 
than  had  sent  his  brother  John,  a  captain  of  the 


Nabat 

•'  It  is  remarkable  that  while  remnants  of  the  Nabat 
are  mentioned  by  trustworthy  Arab  writers  as  existing 
in  their  own  day,  no  Arab  record  connecting  that  people 
with  Petra  has  been  found.  Caussin  believes  this  to  have 
arisen  from  the  Cbaldaean  speech  of  the  Nabathaeans, 
and  their  corruption  of  Arabic  (A'ffai  sur  mist.  de( 
AraUts  ^va^^t  V Itlam;fr.t..  i.  381. 


NEBALLAT 

l>e<oj>le,  to  pray  his  friends  the  Nabathites  that 
they  might  leave  with  them  their  cairiage,  which 
was  much"  (ix.  85,  36).  Diod.  Sic.  gives  much 
information  regarding  them,  and  so  too  Strabo, 
from  the  expedition  under  Aelius  Callus,  the  object 
of  which  was  defeated  by  the  treachery  of  the 
Nabathaeans  (see  the  Diet,  of  Geography,  to  which 
the  history  of  Nabataea  in  classical  times  properly 
belongs). 

Lastly,  did  the  Nabathaeans,  or  Nabat,  derive 
their  name,  and  were  they  in  part  descended,  from 
Nebaioth,  son  of  Ishmael  ?  Josephus  says  that 
Nabataea  was  inhabited  by  the  twelve  sons  of  Ish- 
mael;  and  Jerome,  "  Nebaioth  omnis  regio  ab  Eu- 
phrate  usque  ad  Mare  Rubrum  Nabathena  usque 
nodie  dicitur,  quae  pare  Arabiae  est"  (Comment,  in 
3en.  xxv.  13).  Quatremfcre  rejects  the  identification 

for  an  etymological  reason — the  change  of  T\  to  ^  > 

but  this  change  is  not  unusual ;  in  words  Arabicized 
rrom  the  Greek,  the  like  change  of  T  generally 
occurs.  Kenan,  on  the  other  hand,  accepts  it ;  regard 
ing  Nebaioth,  after  his  manner,  merely  as  an  ancient 
name  unconnected  with  the  Biblical  history.  The 

Arabs  call  Nebaioth  Nabit  (tIX»LS)>  ^^  do  not 

connect  him  with  the  Nabat,  to  whom  they  give  a 
different  descent ;  but  all  their  Abrahamic  genealo 
gies  come  from  late  Jews,  and  are  utterly  untrust 
worthy.  When  we  remember  the  darkness  that 
enshrouds  the  early  history  of  the  "  sons  of  the 
concubines "  after  they  were  sent  into  the  east 
country,  we  hesitate  to  deny  a  relationship  between 
peoples  whose  names  are  strikingly  similar,  dwell 
ing  in  the  same  tract.  It  is  possible  that  Nebaioth 
went  to  the  far  east,  to  the  country  of  his  grand 
father  Abraham,  intermarried  with  the  Chaldaeans, 
and  gave  birth  to  a  mixed  race,  the  Nabat. 
Instances  of  ancient  tribes  adopting  the  name  of 
more  modern  ones,  with  which  they  have  become 
fused,  are  frequent  in  the  history  of  the  Arabs 
(ste  MIDIAN,  foot-note) ;  but  we  think  it  is  also 
admissible  to  hold  that  Nebaioth  was  so  named  by 
the  sacred  historian  because  he  intermarried  with 
the  Nabat.  It  is,  however,  safest  to  leave  unsettled 
the  identification  of  Nebaioth  and  Nabat  until  an 
other  link  be  added  to  the  chain  that  at  present 
seems  to  connect  them.  [E.  S.  P.] 

NEBAL'LAT  (t3j>33 :  Vat.  omits.,  Alex.  Na- 

/3aAA.or :  Neballat),  a  town  of  Benjamin,  one  of 
those  which  the  Benjamites  reoccupied  after  the 
captivity  (Neh.  xi.  34),  but  not  mentioned  in  the 
original  catalogue  of  allotment  (comp.  Josh,  xviii. 
11-28).  It  is  here  named  with  ZEBOIM,  LOD,  and 
ONO.  Lod  is  Lydda,  the  modern  Ludd,  and  Ono 
not  impossibly  Kefr  Anna,  four  miles  to  the  north 
or  it.  East  of  these,  and  forming  nearly  an 
equilateral  triangle  with  them,"  is  Beit  Nebala 
(Rob.  ii.  232),  which  is  possibly  the  locum  tenens 
of  the  ancient  village.  Another  place  of  very 
nearly  the  same  name,  Bir  Nebdla,  lies  to  the  east 
of  el  Jib  (Gibeon),  and  within  half  a  mile  of  it. 
This  would  also  be  within  the  territory  of  Benjamin, 
and  although  further  removed  from  Lod  and  Ono, 
yet  if  ZEBOIM  should  on  investigation  prove  (as  is 
not  impossible)  to  be  in  one  of  the  wadys  which 
ponetrate  the  eastern  side  of  this  district  and  lead 


NEBO 


479 


»  Schwarz  (p.  134),  with  less  than  usual  accuracy,  places 
"  Beth-Naballa  "  at  "  five  miles  south  of  Rair.leh."  It  is 
ita'ly  about  that  distance  N.K.  of  it. 


down  to  the  Jordan  valley  (comp.  I  Sam.  xiii.  18), 
then,  in  that  case,  this  situation  might  not  be  un« 
suitable  for  Neballat.  [G.] 

NE'BAT  (B33 :  Ne/Sar :  Nabat,  but  Nabatk 
in  1  K.  xi.)  The  father  of  Jeroboam,  whose  name 
is  only  preserved  in  connexion  with  that  of  his  dis 
tinguished  son  (1  K.  xi.  26,  xii.  2,  15,  xv.  1,  xvi. 
3,  26,  31,  xxi.  22,  xxii.  52 ;  2  K.  iii.  3,  ix.  9,  x. 
29,  xiii.  2,  11,  xiv.  24,  xv.  9,  18,  24,  28,  xvii.  21, 
xxiii.  15  ;  2  Chr.  ix.  29,  x.  2,  15,  xiii.  6).  He  is 
described  as  an  Ephrathite,  or  Ephraimite,  of  Zeredn 
in  the  Jordan  valley,  and  appears  to  have  died  while 
his  son  was  young.  The  Jewish  tradition  preserved 
in  Jerome  (Quaest.  ffebr.  in  lib.  Reg.}  identifies 
him  with  Shimei  of  Gera,  who  was  a  Benjamite. 
[JEROBOAM."! 

NE'BO,  MOUNT  (tapn  :  Tb  Spos  Na/3aC: 
mons  Nebo}.  The  mountain  from  which  Moses 
took  his  first  and  last  view  of  the  Promised  Land 
(Deut.  xxxii.  49,  xxxiv.  1).  It  is  so  minutely  de 
scribed,  that  it  would  seem  impossible  not  to  recog 
nise  it: — in  the  land  of  Moab;  facing  Jericho  ;  the 
head  or  summit  of  a  mountain  called  the  Pisgah, 
which  again  seems  to  have  formed  a  portion  of  the 
general  range  of  the  "  mountains  of  Abarim."  Its 
position  is  further  denoted  by  the  mention  of  the 
valley  (or  perhaps  more  correctly  the  ravine)  in 
which  Moses  was  buried,  and  which  was  apparently 
one  of  the  clefts  of  the  mount  itself  (xxxii.  50) — 
"  the  ravine  in  the  land  of  Moab  facing  Beth-Peor  " 
(xxxiv.  6).  And  yet,  notwithstanding  the  minute^ 
ness  of  this  description,  no  one  has  yet  succeeded  in 
pointing  out  any  spot  which  answers  to  Nebo. 
Viewed  from  the  western  side  of  Jordan  (the  nearest 
point  at  which  most  travellers  are  able  to  view 
them)  the  mountain  of  Moab  present  the  appearance 
of  a  wall  or  cliff,  the  upper  line  of  which  K  almost 
straight  and  horizontal.  "  There  is  no  peak  or  point 
perceptibly  higher  than  the  rest;  but  all  is  one 
apparently  level  line  of  summit  without  peaks  or 
gaps"  (Rob.  B.  R.  i.  570).  '-On  ne  distingue 
pas  un  sommet,  pas  la  moindre  cime ;  seulement  on 
aperfoit,  9^  et  Ik,  de  legeres  inflexions,  comme  si 
la  main  da  peintre  qui  a  trad  cette  ligne  horizon- 
tale  sur  le  del  cut  tremble  dans  quelques  endroits  " 
(Chateaubriand,  Itineraire,  part  3).  "  Possibly," 
continues  Robinson,  "  on  travelling  among  these 
mountains,  some  isolated  point  or  summit  might 
be  found  answering  to  the  position  and  character 
of  Nebo."  Two  such  points  have  been  named. 
(1.)  Seetzen  (March  17,  1806  ;  Seise,  vol.  i.  408) 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  to  suggest  the  Dschib- 
bal  Attarus  (between  the  Wady  Zerka-main  and  the 
Arnon,  3  miles  below  the  former,  and  10  or  12 
south  of  Heshbon)  as  the  Nebo  of  Moses.  In  this 
he  is  followed  (though  probably  without  any 
communication)  by  Burckhardt  (July  14,  1812), 
who  mentions  it  as  the  highest  point  in  that  locality, 
and  therefore  probably  "  Mount  Nebo  of  the  Scrip 
ture."  This  is  adopted  by  Irby  and  Mangles,  though 
with  hesitation  (Travels,  June  8,  1818). 

(2.)  The  other  elevation  above  the  general  sum 
mit  level  of  these  highlands  is  the  Jebel  'Osha,  or 
Aiisha',  or  Jebel  el-Jil'dd,  "  the  highest  point  in  all 
the  eastern  mountains,1"  "  overtopping  the  whole  of 
the  Belka,  and  rising  about  3000  feet  above  th« 
Gh6r"  (Burckhardt,  July  2,  1812;  Robinson,  i. 
527  note,  570). 

But  these  eminences  are  alike  wanting  in  oii< 
main  essential  of  the  Nebo  of  the  .scripture,  which 


480 


NEBO 


is  stuted  to  have  been  " fa, ing  Jericho,"  woras 
rvhich  in  the  widest  interpretation  must  imply  that 
it  was  "  some  elevation  immediately  over  the  last 
stage  of  the  Jordan,"  while  'Osha  and  Attar&s  are 
equally  remote  in  opposite  directions,  the  one  15 
miles  north,  the  other  15  miles  south  of  a  line  drawn 
eastward  from  Jericho.  Another  requisite  for  the 
identification  is,  that  a  view  should  be  obtainable 
from  the  summit,  corresponding  to  that  prospect 
over  the  whole  land  which  Moses  is  said  to  have 
had  from  Mount  Nebo :  even  though,  as  Professor 
Stanley  has  remarked  (S.  $  P.  301),  that  was  a 
view  which  in  its  full  extent  must  have  been  ; 
imagined  rather  than  actually  seen.*  The  view  from 
JebelJil'ad  has  been  briefly  described  by  Mr.  Porter 
( Handbk.  309),  though  without  reference  to  the 
possibility  of  its  being  Nebo.  Of  that  from  Jebel 
Attards,  no  description  is  extant,  for,  almost  incre 
dible  as  it  seems,  none  of  the  travellers  above  named, 
although  they  believed  it  to  be  Nebo,  appear  to  have 
made  any  attempt  to  deviate  so  far  from  thair  route 
as  to  ascend  an  eminence,  which  if  their  conjectures 
be  correct  must  be  the  most  interesting  spot  in  the 
world.  [G .] 

NEBO  03?).  1.  (No/SaO:  Nebo  and  Nabo}. 
A  town  on  the  eastern  side  of  Jordan,  situated  in  the 
pastoral  country  (Num.  xxxii.  3),  one  of  those  which 
were  taken  possession  of  and  rebuilt  by  the  tribe  of 
Reuben  (ver.  38).b  In  these  lists  it  is  associated 
with  Kiijathaim  and  Baal-meon  or  Beon  ;  and  in 
another  record  (1  Chr.  v.  8)  with  Aroer,  as  mark 
ing;  cue  extremity,  possibly  the  west,  of  a  principal 
part  of  the  tribe.  In  the  remarkable  prophecy 
adopted  e  by  Isaiah  (xv.  2)  and  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1 , 
22)  concerning  Moab,  Nebo  is  mentioned  in  the  same 
connexion  as  before,  though  no  longer  an  Israelite 
town,  but  in  the  hands  of  Moab.  It  does  not  occur 
in  the  Catalogue  of  the  towns  of  Reuben  in  Joshua 
(xiii.  15-23) ;  but  whether  this  is  an  accidental 
omission,  or  whether  it  appears  under  another  name, 
— according  to  the  statement  of  Num.  xxxii.  38, 
that  the  Israelites  changed  the  names  of  the  heathen 
cities  they  retained  in  this  district — is  uncertain.  In 
the  case  of  Nebo,  which  was  doubtless  called  after 
the  deity d  of  that  name,  there  would  be  a  double 
reason  for  such  a  change  (see  Josh,  xxiii.  7). 

Neither  is  there  anything  to  shew  whether  there 
was  a  connexion  between  Nebo  the  town  and  Mount 
Nebo.  The  notices  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Ono- 
masticori)  are  confused,  but  they  at  least  denote 
that  the  two  were  distinct,  and  distant  from  each 
other .«  The  town  (Na/Scop  and  "  Nabo  ")  they  iden 
tify  with  Nobah  or  Kenath,  and  locate  it  8  miles 
south'  of  Heshbon,  where  the  ruins  of  el-Habis 
appear  to  stand  at  present ;  while  the  mountain 
(NojSaS  and  "  Naban ")  is  stated  to  be  6  miles  east 
(Jer.)  or  west  (Eus.)  from  the  same  spot. 


NEBO 

lu  the  list  of  places  south  of  es-Salt  given  by 
Dr.  Robinson  (Bib.  Res.  1st  ed.  vol.  iii.  App.  170) 
one  occurs  named  Neba,  which  may  possibly  be  iden 
tical  with  Nebo,  but  nothing  is  known  of  its  situation 
or  of  the  character  of  the  spot. 

2.  (Na/3oD,  Alex.  No/8w ;  in  Neh.  NajBtaa: 
Nebo).  The  children  of  Nebo  (Bene-Nebo)  to  the 
number  of  fifty-two,  are  mentioned  in  the  catalogue 
of  the  men  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  who  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  29  ;  Neh. 
vii.  33*).  Seven  of  them  had  foreign  wives, 
whom  they  were  compelled  to  discard  (Ezr.  x.  43). 
The  name  occurs  between  Bethel  and  Ai,  and 
Lydda,  which,  if  we  may  trust  the  arrangement  of 
the  list,  implies  that  it  was  situated  in  the  territory 
of  Benjamin  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem.  This  is 
possibly  the  modern  Beit-N&bah,  about  12  miles 
N.W.  by  W.  of  Jerusalem,  8  from  Lydda,  and  close 
to  Yalo,  which  seems  to  be  the  place  mentioned  by 
Jerome  (  Onom.  "  Anab,"  and  "  Anob ;"  and  Epit. 
Paulae,  §8)  as  Nob  the  city  of  the  priests  (though 
that  identification  is  hardly  admissible),  and  both 
in  his  and  later  times  known  as  Bethannaba  or 
Bettcnuble> 

It  is  possible  that  this  Nebo  was  an  offshoot  of 
that  on  the  east  of  Jordan ;  in  which  case  we  have 
another  town  added  to  those  already  noticed  in  the 
territory  of  Benjamin  which  retain  the  names  of 
foreign  and  heathen  settlers.  [BENJAMIN,  i.  1 88 
note;  MICHMASII  ;  OPHNI.]. 

A  town  named  Nomba,  is  mentioned  by  the  LXX. 
(not  in  Heb.)  amongst  the  places  in  the  south  of 
Judah  frequented  by  David  (1  Sam.  xxx.  30),  but 
its  situation  forbids  any  attempt  to  identify  this  with 
Nebo.  [G.] 

NE'BO  (fo2:  Na#$:  Nabo),  which  occurs, 
both  in  Isaiah  (xlvi.  1)  and  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  1) 
as  the  name  of  a  Chaldaean  god,  is  a  well-known 
deity  of  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  The 
original  native  name  was,  in  Hamitic  Babylonian, 
Nabiu,  in  Semitic  Babylonian  and  Assyrian,  Nabu. 
It  is  reasonably  conjectured  to  be  connected  with 
the  Hebrew  N33,  "  to  prophesy,"  whence  the 
common  word  fc033>  "  prophet "  (Arab.  Neby}. 
Nebo  was  the  god  who  presided  over  learning  and 
letters.  He  is  called  "  the  far-hearing,"  "he  who 
possesses  intelligence,"  "he  who  teaches  or  in 
structs."  The  wedge  or  arrow-head — the  essential 
element  of  cuneiform  writing — appears  to  have 
been  his  emblem  ;  and  hence  he  bore  the  name  of 
Tir,  which  signifies  "  a  shaft  or  arrow."  His  gene 
ral  character  corresponds  to  that  of  the  Egyptian 
Thoth,  the  Greek  Hermes,  and  the  Latin  Mercury. 
Astronomically  he  is  identified  with  the  planet 
nearest  the  sun,  called  Nebo  also  by  the  Mendaeans, 
and  Tir  by  the  ancient  Persians. 


•  This  view  was  probably  identical  with  that  seen  by 
Balaam  (Num.  xxiii.  14).    It  is  beautifully  drawn  out  in 
detail  by  Prof.  Stanley  (S.  <fe  P.  299). 

h  The  name  is  omitted  in  this  passage  in  the  Vatican 
UXX.  The  Alex.  MSS.  has  rriv  /Safia. 

«  See  MOAB,  p.  3956. 

d  Selden  (De  Dis  Syr.  Synt.  il.  cap.  12)  assumes  on  the 
authority  if  Hesychius'  interpretation  of  Is.  xv.  1,  that 
Oibon  contained  a  temple  or  sanctuary  of  Nebo.  But  it 
would  appear  that  Nebo  the  place,  and  not  Nebo  the 
Jivinity,  is  referred  to  in  that  passage 

•  In  another  passage  (ad  Esaiam  xv.  2),  Jerome  sraies 
tliat  the  "consecrated  idol  of  Chemosh— that   Is,  Bol- 
plie»or" — Raal  Peor,  resided  in  Nebo 


'  Kenawct,  the  representative  of  Kenath,  Is  100  Romac 
miles  N.E.  of  Heshbon. 

g  In  Neh.  the  name  is  given  'as  the  "other  Nebo," 
"HIS  133,  (comp.  ELAM),  as  if  two  places  of  that  name 
were  mentioned,  but  this  is  not  the  case. 

h  The  words  of  William  of  Tyre  (xiv.  8}  are  well  worth 
quoting.  They  are  evidently  those  of  an  eye-witness 
"  Nobe  qui  hodie  vulgar!  appellatione  dicitur  Bettennble, 
m  descensu  mantium,  in  primis  auspiciis  (aspiciis  ?)  com- 

pfttrium,  via  qua  itur  Liddam ibi  enim  In  fancibns 

montium  inter  angustias  inevitabiles  ....  Ascalonitis 
I  sxibitas  irrnptiones  illic  facere  consuetis."  Just  as  the 
!  Philistines  did  in  the  time  of  Saul.— Can  this  bo  Goh  or 
i  Nob,  where  they  were  90  frequently  en  x>unteml  ? 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

Nebo  was  of  Babylonian  rather  than  of  Assyrian 
srigiu.  In  the  early  Assyrian  Pantheon  he  occupies 
a  very  inferior  position,  being  either  omitted  from 
the  lists  altogether,  or  occurring  as  the  last  of  the 
minor  gods.  The  king  supposed  to  be  Pul  first 
brings  him  prominently  forward  in  Assyria,  and 
then  apparently  in  consequence  of  some  peculiar 
connexion  which  he  himself  had  with  Babylon. 
A  statue  of  Nebo  was  set  up  by  this  monarch  at 
Calah  (Nimrud),  which  is  now  in  the  British 
Museum.  It  has  a  long  inscription,  written  across 
the  body,  and  consisting  chiefly  of  the  god's  various 
epithets.  In  Babylonia  Nebo  held  a  prominent 
place  from  an  early  time.  The  ancient  town  of 
Borsippa  was  especially  under  his  protection,  and 
the  great  temple  there  (the  modem  Birs-Nimnid) 
was  dedicated  to  him  from  a  very  remote  age. 
[BABEL,  TOWER  OF.]  He  was  the  tutelar  god  of 
the  most  important  Babylonian  kings,  in  whose 
names  the  word  Nabu,  or  Nebo,  appears  as  an 
element:  e.g.  Nabo-nassar,  Nabo-polassar,  Nebu 
chadnezzar,  and  Nabo-nadius  or  Labynetus  :  and  ap 
pears  to  have  been  honoured  next  to  Bel-merodach 
by  the  later  kings.  Nebuchadnezzar  completely 
rebuilt  his  temple  at  Borsippa,  and  called  after  him 
his  famous  seaport  upon  the  Persian  Gulf,  which 
became  known  to  the  Greeks  as  Teredon  or  Diridotis 
— "  given  to  Tir,"  i.  e.  to  Nebo.  The  worship  of 
Nebo  appears  to  have  continued  at  Borsippa  to  the 
3rd  or  4th  century  after  Christ,  and  the  Sabaeans 
of  Harran  may  have  preserved  it  even  to  a  later 
date.  (See  the  Essay  On  the  Religion  of  the  Ba 
bylonians  and  Assyrians,  by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  in 
the  1st  vol.  of  Kawlinson's  Herodotus,  pp.  637- 
640 ;  and  compare  Norberg's  Onomasticon,  s.  v. 
Nebo,  pp.  98,  9.)  [G.  R.] 

NEBUCHADNEZ'ZAR,  or  NEBUCHAD- 

REZ'ZAR  ownuna-nj,  or  -vvarnana :  N*. 

Povxo5ov6ffop :  Nabuchodonosor),  was  the  greatest 
and  most  powerful  of  the  Babylonian  kings.  His 
name,  according  to  the  native  orthography,  is  read 
as  Nabu-kuduri-utsur,  and  is  explained  to  mean 
"  Nebo  is  the  protector  against  misfortune,"  kudari 
being  connected  with  the  Hebrew  "IVV2),  "  trouble  " 
or  "  attack,"  and  utsur  being  a  participle  from  the 
root  "1¥3,  "to  protect."  The  rarer  Hebrew  form, 

used  by  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel, — Nebuchadrezzar,  is 
thus  very  close  indeed  to  the  original.  The  Persian 
form,  Nabutnidrachara  (Beh.  Inscr.  col.  i.  par.  16), 
is  less  correct;  while  the  Greek  equivalents  are 
sometimes  very  wide  of  the  mark.  Na/3ot>Ko8p<J- 
•ropos,  which  was  used  by  Abydenus  and  Megas- 
thenes,  is  the  best  of  them ;  Na|8o(coA.o<rapo$, 
which  appears  in  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy,  the  worst. 
Strabo's  Ual3oKoSp6ffopos  (xv.  1,  §6)  and  Berosus's 
NafiovxoSovoffopos  lie  between  these  extremes. 

Nebuchadnezzar  was  the  son  and  successor  of 
Nabopolassar,  the  founder  of  the  Babylonian  Em 
pire.  He  appears  to  have  been  of  marriageable  age 
at  the  time  of  his  father's  rebellion  against  Assyria, 
B.C.  625 ;  for,  according  to  Abydenus  (ap.  Euseb. 
Chron.  Can.  i.  9),  the  alliance  between  this  prince 
and  the  Median  king  was  cemented  by  the  betrothal 
of  Amuhia,  the  daughter  of  the  latter,  to  Nebu 
chadnezzar,  Nabopolassar's  son.  Little  further  is 
known  of  him  during  his  lather's  lifetime.  It  is 

»  Herodotus  terms  this  leader  Labynetus  (i.  74) ;  a  word 
which  does  not  rightly  render  the  Babylonian  Nabu- 
Ituduri-uzur  but  does  render  another  Babylonian  name, 
VOL.  II. 


NEBUCHADNEZZA  R 


481 


suspected,  rather  than  proved,  that  he  was  the 
leader  of  a  Babylonian  contingent  which  accom 
panied  Cyaxares  in  his  Lydian  war  ""MEDES],  by 
whose  interposition,  on  the  occasion  of  an  eclipse 
that  war  was  brought  to  a  close,*  B.'"  610  A 
any  rate,  a  few  years  later,  he  was  placed  at  the 
head  of  a  Babylonian  army,  and  sent  by  his  father 
who  was  now  old  and  infirm,  to  chastise  the  inso 
lence  of  Pharaoh-Necho,  king  of  Egypt.  This  prince 
had  recently  invaded  Syria,  defeated  Josiah,  king  of 
Judah,  at  Megiddo,  and  reduced  the  whole  tract, 
from  Egypt  to  Carchemish  on  the  upper  Euphrates 
[CARCHEMISH],  which  in  the  partition  of  the  As 
syrian  territories  on  the  destruction  of  Nineveh  had 
been  assigned  to  Babylon  (2  K.  xxiii.  29,  30  ;  Beros. 
ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  19).  Necho  had  held  pos 
session  of  these  countries  for  about  three  years, 
when  (B.C.  605)  Nebuchadnezzar  led  an  army 
against  him,  defeated  him  at  Carchemish  in  a 
great  battle  (Jer.  xlvi.  2-12),  recovered  Coele- 
syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine,  took  Jerusalem 
(Dan.  i.  1,  2),  pressed  forward  to  Egypt,  and  was 
engaged  in  that  country  or  upon  its  borders  when 
intelligence  arrived  which  recalled  him  hastily  to 
Babylon.  Nabopolassar,  after  reigning  21  years, 
had  died,  and  the  throne  was  vacant ;  for  there  is 
no  reason  to  think  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  though  he 
appeared  to  be  the  "  king  of  Babylon  "  to  the  Jews, 
had  really  been  associated  by  his  father.  In  some 
alarm  about  the  succession  he  hurried  back  to  the 
capital,  accompanied  only  by  his  light  troops  ;  and 
crossing  the  desert,  probably  by  way  of  Tadmor  or 
Palmyra,  reached  Babylon  before  any  disturbance 
had  arisen,  and  entered  peaceably  on  his  kingdom 
(B.C.  604).  The  bulk  of  the  army,  with  the  cap 
tives — Phoenicians,  Syrians,  Egyptians,  and  Jews — 
returned  by  the  ordinary  route,  which  skirted  in 
stead  of  crossing  the  desert.  It  was  at  this  time  that 
Daniel  and  his  companions  were  brought  to  Baby 
lon,  where  they  presently  grew  into  favour  with 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  became  persons  of  very  consi 
derable  influence  (Dan.  i.  3-20). 

Within  three  years  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  first  ex 
pedition  into  Syria  and  Palestine,  disaffection  again 
showed  itself  in  those  countries.  Jehoiakim — who, 
although  threatened  at  first  with  captivity  (2  Chr. 
xxxvi.  6)  had  been  finally  maintained  on  the  throne 
as  a  Babylonian  vassal — after  three  years  of  service 
"  turned  and  rebelled "  against  his  suzerain,  pro 
bably  trusting  to  be  supported  by  Egypt  (2  K. 
xxiv.  1).  Not  long  afterwards  Phoenicia  seems  to 
have  broken  into  revolt ;  and  the  Chaldaean  monarch, 
who  had  previously  endeavoured  to  subdue  the  dis 
affected  by  his  generals  (ib.  ver.  2),  once  more  took 
the  field  in  person,  and  marched  first  of  all  against 
Tyre.  Having  invested  that  city  in  the  seventh 
year  of  his  reign  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21),  and  left  a 
portion  of  his  army  there  to  continue  the  siege,  he 
proceeded  against  Jerusalem,  which  submitted  with 
out  a  struggle.  According  to  Josephus,  who  is 
here  our  chief  authority,  Nebuchadnezzar  punished 
Jehoiakim  with  death  (Ant.  x.  6,  §3;  comp.  Jer. 
xxii.  18,  19,  and  xxxvi.  30),  but  placed  his  son 
Jehoiachin  upon  the  throne.  Jehoiachin  reigned 
only  three  months ;  for,  on  his  showing  symptoms 
of  disaffection,  Nebuchadnezzar  came  up  against 
Jerusalem  for  the  third  time,  deposed  tht  young 
prince  (whom  he  carried  to  Babylon,  together  with 


A'abu-nchit.  Nabopolassar  ma;/  have  had  a  son  of  thl» 
name;  or  the  Labynetus  of  Herod,  i.  74  may  be  Nabo- 
polassar  himsetf. 

2  I 


482 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


a  large  portion  of  the  population  of  the  city,  and 
the  chief  of  the  Temple  treasures),  anJ  made  his 
uncle,  Zedekiah,  king  in  his  room.  Tyre  still  held 
out  ;  and  it  was  not  till  the  thirteenth  year  from 
the  time  of  its  first  investment  that  the  city  of  mer 
chants  fell  (B.C.  585).  Ere  this  happened,  Jerusa 
lem  had  been  totally  destroyed.  This  consummation 
was  owing  to  the  folly  of  Zedekiah,  who,  despite  the 
warnings  of  Jeremiah,  made  a  treaty  with  Apries 
(Hophra),  king  of  Egypt  (Ez.  xvii.  15),  and  on 
the  strength  of  this  alliance  renounced  his  alle 
giance  to  the  king  of  Babylon.  Nebuchadnezzar 
commenced  the  final  siege  of  Jerusalem  in  the 
ninth  year  of  Zedekiah,  —  his  own  seventeenth 
year  (B.C.  588),  and  took  it  two  years  later 
(B.C.  586).  One  effort  to  carry  out  the  treaty 
seems  to  htve  been  made  by  Apries.  An  Egyptian 
army  crossed  the  frontier,  and  began  its  march 
towards  Jerusalem  ;  upon  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
raised  the  siege,  and  set  off  to  meet  the  new  foe. 
According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  7,  §3)  a  battle 
was  fought,  in  which  Apries  was  completely  de 
feated  ;  but  the  Scriptural  account  seems  rather  to 
imply  that  the  Egyptians  retired  on  the  advance  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  recrossed  the  frontier  without 
risking  an  engagement  (Jer.  xxxvii.  5-8).  At  any 
rate  the  attempt  failed,  and  was  not  repeated ;  the 
"  broken  reed,  Egypt,"  proved  a  treacherous  sup 
port,  and  after  an  eighteen  months'  siege  Jerusalem 
tell.  Zedekiah  escaped  from  the  city,  but  was  cap 
tured  near  Jericho  (ib.  xxxix.  5)  and  brought  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  at  FJiblah  in  the  territory  of  Ha- 
math,  where  his  eyes  were  put  out  by  the  king's 
order,  while  his  sons  and  his  chief  nobles  were  slain. 
Nebuchadnezzar  then  returned  to  Babylon  with 
Zedekiah,  whom  he  imprisoned  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life  ;  leaving  Nebuzar-adan,  the  captain  of  his 
guard,  to  complete  the  destruction  of  the  city  and 
the  pacification  of  Judaea.  Gedaliah,  a  Jew,  was 
appointed  governor,  but  he  was  shortly  murdered, 
and  the  rest  of  the  Jews  either  fled  to  Egypt,  or 
were  carried  by  Nebuzar-adan  to  Babylon. 

The  military  successes  of  Nebuchadnezzar  cannot 
I>e  traced  minutely  beyond  this  point.  His  own 
annals  have  not  come  down  to  us;  and  the  historical 
allusions  which  we  find  in  his  extant  inscriptions 
are  of  the  most  vague  and  general  character.  It 
may  be  gathered  from  the  prophetical  Scriptures 
and  from  Josephus,  that  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem 
was  rapidly  followed  by  the  fall  of  Tyre  and  the 
complete  submission  of  Phoenicia  (Ez.  xxvi.-xxviii. ; 
Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  21)  ;  after  which  the  Babylonians 
carried  their  arms  into  Egypt,  and  inflicted  severe 
injuries  on  that  fertile  country  (Jer.  xlvi.  13-26; 
Ez.  xxix.  2-20;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7).  But  we 
have  no  account,  on  which  we  can  depend,  of  these 
campaigns.  Our  remaining  notices  of  Nebuchadnez 
zar  present  him  to  us  as  a  magnificent  prince  and 
beneficent  ruler,  rather  than  a  warrior;  and  the 
great  fame  which  has  always  attached  to  his  name 
among  the  Eastern  nations  depends  rather  on  his 
buildings  and  other  grand  constructions  than  on  any 
victories  or  conquests  ascribed  to  him. 

We  are  told  by  Berosus  that  the  first  care  of 
Ntbtichadnezzar,  on  obtaining  quiet  possession  of 
his  kingdom  after  the  first  Syrian  expedition,  was 
to  rebuild  the  temple  of  Bel  (Bel-MerodacK)  at 
Babylon  out  of  the  spoils  of  the  Syrian  war  (ap. 
Joseph.  Ant.  x.  11,  §1).  He  next  proceeded  to 
strengthen  and  beautify  the  city,  which  he  reno 
vated  throughout,  and  surrounded  with  several  linos 
oj  fortification,  himsd  f  adding  one  entirely  new 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

quarter.  Having  finished  the  walls  and  adorned  the 
gates  magnificently,  he  constructed  a  new  palace, 
adjoining  the  old  residence  of  his  father — a  superb 
edifice,  which  he  completed  in  fifteen  days  !  In  the 
grounds  of  this  palace  he  formed  the  celebrated 
"  hanging  garden,"  which  was  a  pleasaunce,  built 
up  with  huge  stones  to  imitate  the  varied  surface 
of  mountains,  and  planted  with  trees  and  shrubs  of 
every  kind.  Diodorus,  probably  following  Ctesias, 
describes  this  marvel  as  a  square,  four  plethra 
(400  feet)  each  way,  and  50  cubits  (75  feet; 
high,  approached  by  sloping  paths,  and  supported 
on  a  series  of  arched  galleries  increasing  in  height 
from  the  base  to  the  summit.  In  these  galleries 
were  various  pleasant  chambers ;  and  one  of  them 
contained  the  engines  by  which  water  was  raised 
from  the  river  to  the  surface  of  the  mound. 
This  curious  construction,  which  the  Greek  writers 
reckoned  among  the  seven  wonders  of  the  world, 
was  said  to  have  been  built  by  Nebuchadnezzar  for 
the  gratification  of  his  wife,  Amuhia,  who,  having 
been  brought  up  among  the  Median  mountains, 
desired  something  to  remind  her  of  them.  Possibly, 
however,  one  object  was  to  obtain  a  pleasure-ground 
at  a  height  above  that  to  which  the  musquitoes  are 
accustomed  to  rise. 

This  complete  renovation  of  Babylon  by  Nebu 
chadnezzar,  which  Berosus  asserts,  is  confirmed  to 
us  in  every  possible  way.  The  Standard  Inscription 
of  the  king  relates  at  length  the  construction  of  the 
whole  series  of  works,  and  appears  to  have  been  the 
authority  from  which  Berosus  drew.  The  ruins  con 
firm  this  in  the  most  positive  way,  for  nine-tenths 
of  the  bricks  in  situ  are  stamped  with  Nebuchadnez 
zar's  name.  Scripture,  also,  adds  an  indirect  but 
important  testimony,  in  the  exclamation  of  Nebu 
chadnezzar  recorded  by  Daniel,  "  Is  not  this  great 
Babylon  which  I  have  built  ?  "  (Dan.  iv.  30). 

But  Nebuchadnezzar  did  not  confine  his  efforts 
to  the  ornamentation  and  improvement  of  his 
capital.  Throughout  the  empire,  at  Borsippa,  Sip- 
para,  Cutha,  Chilmad,  Duraba,  Teredon,  and  a 
multitude  of  other  places,  he  built  or  rebuilt  cities, 
repaired  temples,  constructed  quays,  reservoirs, 
canals,  and  aqueducts,  on  a  scale  of  grandeur  and 
magnificence  surpassing  everything  of  the  kind 
recorded  in  history,  unless  it  be  the  constructions 
of  one  or  two  of  the  greatest  Egyptian  monarchs. 
"  I  have  examined,"  says  Sir  H.  Hawlinson,  "  the 
bricks  in  situ,  belonging  perhaps  to  a  hundred 
different  towns  and  cities  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Baghdad,  and  I  never  found  any  other  legend  than 
that  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  son  of  Nabopolassar,  king 
of  Babylon  "  (  Comm.  on  the  Inscr.  of  Assyria  and 
Babylonia,  76,  77).  "  Nebuchadnezzar,"  says 
Abydenus,  "  on  succeeding  to  the  throne,  fortified 
Babylon  with  three  lines  of  walls.  He  dug  the 
Nahr  Malcha,  or  Royal  River,  which  was  a  branch 
stream  derived  from  the  Euphrates,  and  also  the 
Acracanus.  He  likewise  made  the  great  reservoir 
above  the  city  of  Sippara,  which  was  thirty  pare- 
sangs  (90  miles)  in  circumference,  and  twenty 
fathoms  (120  feet)  deep.  Here  he  placed  sluices  01 
flood-gates,  which  enabled  him  to  irrigate  the  lo-.v 
country.  He  also  built  a  quay  along  the  shore  ot 
the  Red  Sea  'Persian  Gulf),  and  founded  the  city  m 
Tei^edon  on  the  boixlers  of  Arabia."  It  is  reasonably 
concluded  from  these  statements,  that  an  extensive 
system  of  irrigation  was  devised  by  this  monarch, 
to  whom  the  Babylonians  were  probably  indebted 
for  the  greater  portion  of  that  vast  net-work  of 
canals  which  covered  the  whole  alluvial  tract  br~ 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

tueen  the  two  rivers,  and  extended  on  the  light 
bank  of  the  Euphrates  to  the  extreme  verge  of  the 
stony  desert.  On  that  side  the  principal  work  was 
^  canal  of  the  largest  dimensions,  still  to  be  traced, 
which  left  the  Euphrates  at  Hit,  and  skirting  the 
lesert  ran  south-east  a  distance  of  above  400  miles 
ic  the  Persian  Gulf,  where  it  emptied  itself  into  the 
Bay  of  Grane. 

The  wealth,  greatness,  and  general  prosperity  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  are  strikingly  placed  before  us  in 
the  book  of  Daniel.  "  The  God  of  Heaven  "  gave 
him,  not  a  kingdom  only,  but  "  power,  strength, 
and  glory"  (Dan.  ii.  37).  His  wealth  is  evidenced 
by  the  image  of  gold,  60  cubits  in  height,  which  he 
set  up  in  the  plain  of  Dura  (ib.  iii.  1).  The  gran 
deur  and  careful  organization  of  his  kingdom  appears 
from  the  long  list  of  his  officers,  "  princes,  governors, 
captains,  judges,  treasurers,  councillors,  sheriffs, 
*nd  rulers  of  provinces,"  of  whom  we  have  repeated 
mention  (ib.  verses  2,  3  and  27).  We  see  the 
existence  of  a  species  of  hierarchy  in  the  "  magi 
cians,  astrologers,  sorcerers,"  over  whom  Daniel 
was  set  (ib.  ii.  48).  The  "  tree,  whose  height  was 
great,  which  grew  and  was  strong,  and  the  height 
thereof  reached  unto  the  heavens,  and  the  sight 
thereof  to  the  end  of  all  the  earth ;  the  leaves 
whereof  were  fair,  and  the  fruit  much,  and  in  which 
was  food  for  all ;  under  which  the  beasts  of  the 
field  had  shadow,  and  the  fowls  of  heaven  dwelt  in 
the  branches  thereof,  and  all  flesh  was  fed  of  it " 
(ib.  iv.  10-12),  is  the  fitting  type  of  a  kingdom  at 
once  so  flourishing  and  so  extensive. 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  (De  Wette,  Th. 
Parker,  &c.),  that  the  book  of  Daniel  represents  the 
satrapial  system  of  government  (Satrapen-Ein- 
richtung)  as  established  throughout  the  whole  em 
pire  ;  but  this  conclusion  is  not  justified  by  a  close 
examination  of  that  document.  Nebuchadnezzar, 
iike  his  Assyrian  predecessors  (Is.  x.  8),  is  repre 
sented  as  a  "  king  of  kings  "  (Dan.  ii.  37)  ;  and 
the  officers  enumerated  in  ch.  ii.  are  probably  the 
authorities  of  Babylonia  proper,  rather  than  the 
governors  of  remoter  regions,  who  could  not  be  all 
spared  at  once  from  their  employments.  The  in 
stance  of  Gedaliah  (Jer.  xl.  5  ;  2  K.  xxv.  22)  is  not 
that  of  a  satrap.  He  was  a  Jew ;  and  it  may  be 
doubted  whether  he  stood  really  in  any  different 
relation  to  the  Babylonians  from  Zedekiah  or  Jehoi- 
achin ;  although  as  he  was  not  of  the  seed  of  David, 
the  Jews  considered  him  to  be  "  governor  "  rather 
than  king. 

Towards  the  close  of  his  reign  the  glory  of  Ne 
buchadnezzar  suffered  a  temporary  eclipse.  As  a 
punishment  for  his  pride  and  vanity,  that  strange 
form  of  madness  was  sent  upon  him  which  the 
Greeks  called  Lycanthropy  (\vKavdptimla) ;  wherei 
the  sufferer  imagines  himself  a  beast,  and  quitting 
the  haunts  of  men,  insists  on  leading  the  life  of  a 
beast  (Dan.  iv.  33).  Berosus,  with  the  pardonabl 
tenderness  of  a  native,  anxious  for  the  good  fame  o: 
his  country's  greatest  king,  suppressed  this  fact; 
and  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Herodotus  in  hii 
Babylonian  travels,  which  fell  only  about  a  century 
after  the  time,  obtained  any  knowledge  of  it.  Ne 
buchadnezzar  himself,  however,  in  his  great  inscrip 
tion  appears  to  allude  to  it,  although  in  a  studiec 
ambiguity  of  phrase  which  renders  the  passage  very 
difficult  of  translation.  After  describing  the  con 
struction  of  the  most  important  of  his  great  works 
he  appears  to  say — "  For  four  years  (?)...  the 
seat  of  my  kingdom  .  .  .  did  not  rejoice  my  heart 
In  all  my  dominions  I  did  not  build  ;i  hi<jh  place  o 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


483 


wwer,  the  precious  treasures  of  my  kirgdom  I  dm 
not  lay  up.  In  Babylon,  buildings  for  myself  and 
~or  the  honour  of  my  kingdom  I  did  not  lay  out 
n  the  worship  of  Merodach,  my  lord,  the  joy  o> 
my  heart,  in  Babylon  the  city  of  his  sovereignty, 
and  the  seat  of  my  empire,  I  did  not  sing  his 
)raises,  I  did  not  furnish  his  altars  with  victims, 
nor  did  I  clear  out  the  canals  "  (Rawlinson's  Herod. 
i.  586).  Other  negative  clauses  follow.  It  is 
jlain  that  we  have  here  narrated  a  suspension — 
apparently  for  four  years — of  all  those  works  and 
occupations  on  which  the  king  especially  prided 
limself — his  temples,  palaces,  worship,  offerings, 
and  works  of  irrigation  ;  and  though  the  cause 
of  the  suspension  is  not  stated,  we  can  scarcely  ima 
gine  anything  that  would  account  for  it  but  some 
uch  extraordinary  malady  as  that  recorded  in 
Daniel. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that  Herodotus 
ascribes  to  a  queen,  Nitocris,  several  of  the  im 
portant  works,  which  other  writers  (Berosus,  Aby- 
deuus)  assign  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  conjecture 
naturally  arises  that  Nitocris  was  Nebuchadnez 
zar's  queen,  and  that,  as  she  carried  on  his  con 
structions  during  his  incapacity,  they  were  by  some 
considered  to  be  hers.  It  is  no  disproof  of  this 
to  urge  that  Nebuchadnezzar's  wife  was  a  Median 
princess,  not  an  Egyptian  (as  Nitocris  must  have 
been  from  her  name),  and  that  she  was  called,  not 
Nitocris,  but  Amyitis  or  Amyhia ;  for  Nebuchad  • 
nezzar,  who  married  Amyitis  in  B.C.  625,  and 
who  lived  after  this  marriage  more  than  sixty  years, 
may  easily  have  married  again  after  the  decease 
of  his  first  wife,  and  his  second  queen  may  have 
been  an  Egyptian.  His  later  relations  with  Egypt 
appear  to  have  been  friendly ;  and  it  is  remarkable 
that  the  name  Nitocris,  which  belonged  to  very 
primitive  Egyptian  history,  had  in  fact  beei'  resus 
citated  about  this  time,  and  is  found  in  the  Egyp 
tian  monuments  to  have  been  borne  by  a  princess 
belonging  to  the  family  of  the  Psammetiks. 

After  an  interval  of  four,  or  perhaps b  seven 
years  (Dan.  iv.  16),  Nebuchadnezzar's  malady  left 
him.  As  we  are  told  in  Scripture  that  "  his  reason 
returned,  and  for  the  glory  of  his  kingdom  his  ho 
nour  and  brightness  returned  ;"  and  he  "  was  esta 
blished  in  his  kingdom,  and  excellent  majesty  was 
added  to  him "  (Dan.  iv.  36),  so  we  find  in  the 
Standard  Inscription  that  he  resumed  his  great  works 
after  a  period  of  suspension,  and  added  fiesh  "  won 
ders"  in  his  old  age  to  the  marvellous  construc 
tions  of  his  manhood.  He  died  in  the  year  B.C. 
561,  at  an  advanced  age  (83  or  84),  having  reigned 
43  years.  A  son,  EVIL-MERODACH,  succeeded  him. 
The  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar  must  be  gathered 
principally  from  Scripture.  There  is  a  conventional 
formality  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  which  de 
prives  them  of  almost  all  value  for  the  illustration 
of  individual  mind  and  temper.  Ostentation  and 
vainglory  are  characteristics  of  the  entire  series, 
each  king  seeking  to  magnify  above  all  ot'hers  his 
own  exploits.  We  can  only  observe  as  peculiar  fo 
Nebuchadnezzar  a  disposition  to  rest  his  famn  on  his 
great  works  rather  than  on  his  military  achieve 
ments,  and  a  strong  religious  spirit,  manifesting 
itself  especially  in  a  devotion,  which  is  almost  ex 
clusive,  to  one  particular  god.  Though  his  own 
tutelary  deity  and  that  of  his  father  v;as  Nebo 
(Mercury),  yet  his  worship,  his  ascriptions  of  praise, 


*>  Daniel's  expression  is  "  seven  times."    We  cannot  be 
sure  that  by  a  "  time  "  is  meant  a  year. 

2  I  2 


£84 


NEBUCHADNEZZAR 


his  thanksivings,  have  in  almost  every  case  for  their 
object  the  god  Merodach.  Under  his  protection 
he  placed  his  son,  Evil-Merodach.  Merodach  i» 
•*  his  lord,"  "  his  great  lord,"  "the  joy  of  his  heart," 
"  the  great  lord  who  has  appointed  him  to  the  em 
pire  of  the  world,  and  has  confided  to  his  care  the 
far-spread  people  of  the  earth,"  "  the  great  lord  who 
bos  established  him  in  strength,"  &c.  One  of  the 
first  of  his  own  titles  is,  "  he  who  pays  homage  to 
Merodach."  Even  when  restoring  the  temples  of 
other  deities,  he  ascribes  the  work  to  the  sugges 
tions  of  Merodach,  and  places  it  under  his  pro 
tection.  We  may  hence  explain  the  appearance  of  a 
sort  of  monotheism  (Dan.  i.  2  ;  iv.  21,  32,  34,  37), 
mixed  with  polytheism  (ib.  ii.  47  ;  iii.  12,  18,  29 ; 
V.  9),  in  the  Scriptural  notices  of  him.  While 
admitting  a  qualified  divinity  in  Nebo,  Nana,  and 
other  deities  of  his  country,  Nebuchadnezzar  main 
tained  the  real  monarchy  of  Bel-Merodach.  HE 
was  to  him  "  the  supreme  chief  of  the  gods,"  "  the 
most  ancient,"  "  the  king  of  the  heavens  and  the 
earth."'  It  was  his  image,  or  symbol,  undoubt 
edly,  which  was  "  set  up  "  to  be  worshipped  in  the 
"  plain  of  Dura"  (ib.  iii.  1),  and  his  "  house"  in 
which  the  sacred  vessels  from  the  Temple  were 
treasured  (ib.  i.  2).  Nebuchadnezzar  seems  at  some 
times  to  have  identified  this,  his  supreme  god,  with 
the  God  of  the  Jews  (ib.  ch.  iv.)  ;  at  others,  to  have 
regarded  the  Jewish  God  as  one  of  the  local  and  in 
ferior  deities  (ch.  iii.)  over  whom  Merodach  ruled. 

The  genius  and  grandeur  which  characterised 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  which  have  handed  down  his 
name  among  the  few  ancient  personages  known  ge 
nerally  throughout  the  East,  are  very  apparent  in 
Scrpture,  and  indeed  in  al!  the  accounts  of  his 
reign  and  actions.  Without  perhaps  any  strong  mili 
tary  turn,  he  must  have  possessed  a  fair  amount  of 
such  talent  to  have  held  his  own  in  the  east  against 
the  ambitious  Medes,  and  in  the  west  against  the 
Egyptians.  Necho  and  Apries  were  both  princes 
of  good  warlike  capacity,  whom  it  is  some  credit  to 
have  defeated.  The  prolonged  siege  of  Tyre  is  a 
proof  of  the  determination  with  which  he  prose 
cuted  his  military  enterprises.  But  his  greatness 
lay  especially  in  the  arts  of  peace.  He  saw  in  the 
uatural  fertility  of  Babylonia,  and  its  ample  wealth 
of  waters,  the  foundation  of  national  prosperity, 
and  so  of  power.  Hence  his  vast  canals  and  elabo 
rate  system  of  irrigation,  which  made  the  whole 
country  a  garden  ;  and  must  have  been  a  main  cause 
of  the  full  treasury,  from  which  alone  his  palaces  and 
temples  can  have  received  their  magnificence.  The 
forced  labour  of  captives  may  have  raised  the  fabrics  ; 
but  the  statues,  the  enamelled  bricks,  the  fine  wood 
work,  the  gold  and  silver  plating,  the  hangings  and 
curtains,  had  to  be  bought;  and  the  enormous  ex 
penditure  of  this  monarch,  which  does  not  appear 
l<i  have  exhausted  the  country,  and  which  cannot 
have  been  very  largely  supported  by  tribute,  must 
have  been  really  supplied  in  the  main  from  that 
agricultural  wealth  which  he  took  so  much  pains  to 
develop.  We  may  gather  from  the  productiveness 
of  Babylonia  under  the  Persians  (Herod,  i.  192, 
V93,  iii.  92),  after  a  conquest  and  two  (three  ?) 
tvolts,  some  idea  of  its  flourishing  condition  in  the 
period  of  independence,  for  which  (according  to  the 
consentient  testimony  of  the  monuments  and  the  best 
authors)  it  was  indebted  to  this  king. 

•  These  expressions  are  all  applied  to  7-lerodach  by 
Xebuchadnczzar  In  his  Inscriptions. 

*  in  tlie  usual  copies  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  tills  final  n 
Is  written  small,  and  noted  in   the  Masora  Accordingly. 


NEBUSHASBAN 

The  moral  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  not 
such  as  entitles  him  to  our  approval.  Besides  the 
overweening  pride  which  brought  upou  him  «o 
terrible  a  chastisement,  we  note  a  violence  and  fi.ry 
(Dan.  ii.  12,  iii.  19)  common  enough  among  Oriental 
monarchs  of  the  weaker  kind,  but  from  which  the 
greatest  of  them  have  usually  been  free  ;  while  at 
the  same  time  we  observe  a  cold  and  relentless 
cruelty  which  is  particularly  revolting.  The  blind 
ing  of  Zedekiah  may  perhaps  be  justified  as  an  ordi 
nary  eastern  practice,  though  it  is  the  earliest  case 
of  the  kind  on  record  ;  but  the  refinement  of  crueltr 
by  which  he  was  made  to  witness  hie  sons'  execu 
tion  before  his  eyes  were  put  out  (2  K.  xxv.  7)  is 
worthier  of  a  Dionysius  or  a  Dotnitian  than  of  a 
really  great  king.  Again,  the  detention  of  Jehoia- 
chin  in  prison  for  36  years  for  an  offence  committed 
at  the  age  of  eighteen  (2  K.  xxiv.  8),  is  a  severity 
surpassing  Oriental  harshness.  Against  these  grave 
faults  we  have  nothing  to  set,  unless  it  be  a  feeble 
trait  of  magnanimity  in  the  pardon  accorded  to 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  when  he  found 
that  he  was  without  power  to  punish  them  (Dan. 
iii.  26). 

It  has  been  thought  remarkable  that  to  a  man  of 
this  character,  God  should  have  vouchsafed  a  reve 
lation  of  the  future  by  means  of  visions  (Dan.  ii.  29, 
iv.  2).  But  the  circumstance,  however  it  may 
disturb  our  preconceived  notions,  is  not  really  at 
variance  with  the  general  laws  of  God's  providence 
as  revealed  to  us  in  Scripture.  As  with  His  natural, 
so  with  His  supernatural  gilts,  they  are  not  confined 
to  the  worthy.  Even  under  Christianity,  miraculous 
powers  were  sometimes  possessed  by  those  who  made 
an  ill  use  of  them  (1  Cor.  xiv.  2-33).  And  God, 
it  is  plain,  did  not  leave  the  old  heathen  world 
without  some  supernatural  aid,  but  made  His  pre 
sence  felt  from  time  to  time  in  visions,  through 
prophets,  or  even  by  a  voice  from  Heaven.  It  is 
only  necessary  to  refer  to  the  histories  of  Pharaoh 
(Gen.  xli.  1-7,  and  28),  Abimelech  (ib.  xx.  3).  Job 
(Job  iv.  13,  xxxviii.  1,  xl.  6;  comp.  Dan.  iv.  bl;, 
and  Balaam  (Num.  xxii.-xxiv.),  in  order  to  establish 
the  parity  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  visions  with  other 
facts  recorded  in  the  Bible.  He  was  warned,  and 
the  nations  over  which  he  ruled  were  warned 
through  him,  God  leaving  not  Himself  "  without 
witness  "  even  in  those  dark  times.  In  conclusion, 
we  may  notice  that  a  heathen  writer  (Abydenus), 
who  generally  draws  his  inspirations  from  Berosus, 
ascribes  to  Nebuchadnezzar  a  miraculous  speech 
just  before  his  death,  announcing  to  the  Babylonians 
the  speedy  coming  of  "  a  Persian  mule,"  who  with 
the  help  of  the  Medes  would  enslave  Babylon  (Abyd. 
ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  41).  [G.  R.] 

NEBUSHAS'BAN  (a|3-n;i,  ».  e.   Nebu- 


shazban  :  LXX.  omits  :  Nabusezban),  one  of  the 
officers  of  Nebuchadnezzar  at  the  time  of  the  cap 
ture  of  Jerusalem.  He  was  Rab-saris,  i.  e.  chief  of 
the  eunuchs  (Jer.  xxxix.  13),  as  Nchuzaradan  was 
Rab-tabbachim  (chief  of  the  body-guard,  and  Ner- 
gal-sharezer,  Kab-Mag  (chief  of  the  magicians),  the 
three  being  the  most  important  officers  then  present, 
probably  the  highest  dignitaries  of  the  Bnbylonian 
court>  Nebu-sliasban's  office  and  title  were  the 
same  us  those  of  Ashpenaz  (Dan.  i.  3;,  whom  he 
]>niliitl)ly  succeeded.  In  the  list  given  (ver.  3)  of 


In  several  of  Kennicott's  MSS.  z  (f)  Is  found  Instead  ol 
n  (p,  making  the  name  Nebushazbaz,  with  perhaps  an 
intentional  play  of  sound,  baz  in<Miiing  prey  or  spoil. 

So  at  the  A^yriim   invasion  in  the  time  <  f  Hf/i-klul) 


NEBUZARADAN 

those  who  took  possession  of  the  city  in  the  dead  of 
the  night  of  the  llth  Tammuz,  Nebu-shasban  is  not 
Mentioned  by  name,  but  merely  by  his  title  Kab- 
saris.  His  name,  like  that  of  Nebu-chadnezzar  and 
Nebu-zaradan,  is  a  compound  of  Nebo,  the  Babylo 
nian  deity,  with  some  word  which  though  not  quite 
ascertained,  probably  signified  adherence  or  attach 
ment  (see  Gesen.  Thes.  8406;  Ftirst,  Handwb. 
ii.  76).  [G-] 


NEHELAMITE,  THE 


485 


NEBUZAR'ADAN 

Sdv  ;  in  Jer.  Na/SouCapSay  >  Joseph.  Na/8oi/Cap- 
8j£i/7)S  :  Nebuzardan),  the  Kab-tabbachim,  »'.  e.  chief 
of  the  slaughterers  (A.  V.  "  captain  of  the  guard"), 
a  high  officer  in  the  court  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
apparently  (like  the  Tartan  in  the  Assyrian  army) 
the  next  to  the  pereon  of  the  monarch.  He 
appears  not  to  have  been  present  during  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem;  probably  he  was  occupied  at  the 
more  important  operations  at  Tyre,  but  as  soon  as 
the  city  was  actually  in  the  hands  of  the  Babylo 
nians  he  arrived,  and  from  that  moment  everything 
was  completely  directed  by  him.  It  was  he  who 
decided,  even  to  the  minutest  details  of  fire-pans 
and  bowls  (2  K.  xxv.  15),  what  should  be  carried 
off  and  what  burnt,  which  persons  should  be  taken 
away  to  Babylon,  and  which  left  behind  in  the 
country.  One  act  only  is  referred  directly  to  Ne 
buchadnezzar,  the  appointment  of  the  governor  or 
superintendent  of  the  conquered  district.  All  this 
Nebuzaradau  seems  to  have  carried  out  with  wisdom 
and  moderation.  His  conduct  to  Jeremiah,  to  whom 
his  attention  had  been  directed  by  his  master  (Jer. 
xxxix.  11),  is  marked  by  even  higher  qualities  than 
these,  and  the  prophet  has  preserved  (xl.  2-5)  a 
speech  of  Nebuzaradan's  to  him  on  liberating  him 
from  his  chains  at  Ramah,  which  contains  expres 
sions  truly  remarkable  in  a  heathen.  He  seems  to 
have  left  Judea  for  this  time  when  he  took  down 
the  chief  people  of  Jerusalem  to  his  master  at 
Kiblah  (2  K.  xxv.  18-20).  In  four  years  he  again 
appeared  (Jer.  Hi.  30).  Nebuchadnezzar  in  his 
twenty-third  year  made  a  descent  on  the  regions 
east  of  Jordan,  including  the  Ammonites  and  Moab- 
ites  (Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7),  who  escaped  when  Jeru 
salem  was  destroyed.  [MoAB,  p.  397,  8].  Thence 
he  proceeded  to  Egypt  (Joseph,  ibid.),  and,  either  on 
the  way  thither  or  on  the  return,  Nebuzaradan  again 
passed  through  the  country  and  carried  off  seven 
hundred  and  forty-five  more  captives  (Jer.  Hi.  30). 

The  name,  like  Nebu-chadnezzar  and  Nebu- 
shasban,  contains  that  of  Nebo  the  Babylonian 
deity.  The  other  portion  of  the  word  is  less  certain. 
Gesenius  (Thes.  8396)  translates  it  by  "Mercurii 
dux  dominus,"  taking  the  "IT  as  =  "1K>,  "  prince," 
and  pK  as  =  |'nx,  "  lord."  Furst,  on  the  other 

hand  (Handwb.  ii.  6),  treats  it  as  equivalent  in 
meaning  to  the  Hebrew  rab-tabbachim,  which  usu 
ally  follows  it,  and  sometimes  occurs  by  itself 
(2  K.  xxv.  18;  Jer.  xl.  2,  5).  To  obtain  this 
meaning  he  compares  the  hist  member  of  the  name 
to  the  Sailer.  ddna,  from  do,  "  to  cut  off."  Ge- 
seuius  also  takes  zaradan  as  identical  with  the  first 
element  in  the  name  of  Sardan-apalus.  But  this 
latter  name  is  now  explained  by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson 
9S  Assur-dan-i-pal  (Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  460). 

[G.] 


NE'CHO  OOJ  :  N«x««),  2  Chr.  xxxv.  20,  22  ; 
xxxvi.  4.  [PHARAOH-NECHO.] 

NEC'ODAN  (KeKwUv :  Nechodaicus)  =  NE- 
KODA  (1  Esdr.  v.  37 ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  60). 

NEDABI'AH  (iVnn} :  NoflaSi'as:  Nadabia). 
Apparently  one  of  the  sons  of  Jeconiah,  or  Jehoia- 
chin,  king  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  18).  Lord  A. 
Hervey,  however,  contends  that  this  list  contains 
the  order  of  succession  and  not  of  lineal  descent, 
and  that  JNedabiah  and  his  brothers  were  sons  ol 
N.eri. 

NEEMI'AS  (Neffiias:  Nehemias]  =  NEHK 
MIAH  the  son  of  Hachaliah  (Ecclus.  xlix.  Id ;  2  Mace. 
i.  18,  20,  21,  23,  31,  36,  ii.  13). 

NEG'INAH  (H^JJ),  properly  Neginath,  as 
the  text  now  stands,  occurs  in  the  title  of  Ps.  Ixi., 
"  to  the  chief  musician  upon  Neginath."  If  the 
present  reading  be  correct,  the  form  of  the  word 
may  be  compared  with  that  of  Mahalath  (Ps.  liii.). 
But  the  LXX.  (iv  fyivois),  and  Vulg.  (in  hymnis), 
evidently  read  "Neginoth"  in  the  plural,  which 
occurs  in  the  titles  of  five  Psalms,  and  is  perhaps 
the  true  reading.  Whether  the  word  be  singular 
or  plural,  it  is  the  general  term  by  which  all 
stringed  instruments  are  described.  In  the  singular 
it  has  the  derived  sense  of  "  a  song  sung  to  the  accom 
paniment  of  a  stringed  instrument,"  and  generally 
of  a  taunting  character  (Job  xxx.  9 ;  Ps.  Ixix.  12  ; 
Lam.  iii.  14).  [NEGINOTH.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

NEG'INOTH  (n'WJJ).  This  word  is  found  in 
the  titles  of  Ps.  iv.  vi.  liv.  Iv.  Ixvii.  Ixxvi.,  and 
the  margin  of  Hab.  iii.  19,  and  there  seems  but 
little  doubt  that  it  is  the  general  term  denoting  all 
stringed  instruments  whatsoever,  whether  played 
with  the  hand,  like  the  harp  and  guitar,  or  with  a 
plectrum.'  It  thus  includes  all  those  instruments 
which  in  the  A.  V.  are  denoted  by  the  special  terms 
"  harp,"  "  psaltery  "  or  "  viol,"  "  sackbut,"  as  well 
as  by  the  general  descriptions  "  stringed  instru 
ments"  (Ps.  cl.  4),  "instruments  of  music"  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  6),  or.  as  the  margin  gives  it,  "  three-stringed 
instruments,"  and  the  "  instrument  of  ten  strings ' 
(Ps.  xxxiii.  2,  xcii.  3,  cxliv.  9).  "  The  chief  mu 
sician  on  Neginoth  "  was  therefore  the  conductor  of 
that  portion  of  the  Temple-choir  who  played  upon 
the  stringed  instruments,  and  who  are  mentioned 
in  Ps.  Ixviii.  25  (D'OSll,  nogenim).  The  root 
(|33  =  upoveiv)  from  which  the  word  is  derived 
occurs  in  1  Sam.  xvi.  16,  17,  18,  23,  xviii.  10,  xix. 
9,  Is.  xxxviii.  20,  and  a  comparison  of  these  passages 
confirms  what  has  been  said  with  regard  to  ite 
meaning.  The  author  of  the  Shilte  Haggibborim 
quoted  by  Kircher  (Musurgia,  i.  4,  p.  48),  describes 
the  Neginoth  as  instruments  of  wood,  long  and 
round,  pierced  \vith  several  apertures,  and  having 
three  strings  of  gut  stretched  across  them,  which 
were  played  with  a  bow  of  horsehair.  It  is  ex 
tremely  doubtful,  however,  whether  the  Hebrews 
were  acquainted  with  anything  so  closely  resembling 
the  modern  violin.  [W.  A.  W.] 

NEHELAMITE,  THE  OP/'OSn  :  &  'AiAa- 
/m'rTjs:  Nehelamttes).  The  designation  of  a  man 
named  Shemaiah,  a  false  prophet,  who  went  with 


Tartac,  Rab-saris,  and  Rab-shakeh,  as  the  three  highest    Syrian  court  answered  to  the  three  named  above  in  the 

dignitaries,  addressed  the  Jews  from  the  head  of  their  army  j  Babylonian. 

(2  K.  xviii.  17).    Possibly  these  three  officers  in  the  As-  !      »  Hence  Symmachus  renders  Sin  i|/aAr>jpiW. 


•186 


NKHEMIAH 


the  captivity  to  Babylon  (Jer.  MIX.  24,  31,  32). 
The  name  is  no  doubt  formed  from  that  either  of 
Shemaiah's  native  place,  or  the  progenitor  of  his 
family ;  which  of  the  two  is  uncertain.  No  place 
called  Nehelam  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  or  known 
to  have  existed  in  Palestine,*  nor  does  it  occur  in 
any  of  the  genealogical  lists  of  families.  It  re 
sembles  the  name  which  the  LXX.  have  attached  to 
Ahijah  the  Prophet,  namely  the  Enlamite —  &  f.v- 
kapfl ;  but  by  what  authority  they  substitute  that 
name  for  "  the  Shilonite "  of  the  Hebrew  text  is 
doubtful.  The  word  "  Nehelamite  "  also  probably 
contains  a  play  on  the  "  dreams "  (halam)  and 
"  dreamers,"  whom  Jeremiah  is  never  wearied  of 
denouncing  (see  chaps,  xxiii.  xxvii.  xxix.).  This  is 
hinted  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V. — from  what  source 
the  writer  has  not  been  able  to  discover.  [G/j 

NEHEMI'AH  (friDITI:  N«/*fas).  1.  Son 
of  Hachaliah,  and  apparently  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
since  his  fathers  were  buried  at  Jerusalem,  and  Ha- 
nani  his  kinsman  seems  to  have  been  of  that  tribe 
(i.  2,  ii.  3,  vii.  2).  He  is  called  indeed  "  Nehe- 
miah  the  Priest"  (Neh.  sacerdos)  in  the  Vulgate  of 
2  Mace.  i.  21 ;  but  the  Greek  has  it,  that "  Nehemiah 
ordered  the  priests  (If pels)  to  pour  the  water,"  &c. 
Nor  does  the  expression  in  ver.  18,  that  Nehemiah 
"  offered  sacrifice,"  imply  any  more  than  that  he 
provided  the  sacrifices.  Others  again  have  inferred 
that  he  was  a  priest  from  Neh.  x.  1-8 ;  but  the 
words  "  these  were  the  priests,"  naturally  apply  to 
the  names  which  follow  Nehemiah's,  who  signed 
first  as  the  head  of  the  whole  nation.  The  opinion 
that  he  was  connected  with  the  house  of  David  is 
more  feasible,  though  it  cannot  be  proved.  The 
name  of  Hanani  his  kinsman,  as  well  as  his  own 
name,  are  found  slightly  varied  in  the  house  of 
David,  in  the  case  of  Hananiah  the  son  of  Zerub- 
babel  (1  Chr.  iii.  19),  and  Naum  (Luke  iii.  25)  .b 
If  he  were  of  the  house  of  David,  there  would  be 
peculiar  point  in  his  allusion  to  his  "  fathers' 
sepulchres "  at  Jerusalem.  Malalas  of  Antioch 
(Chronogr.  vi.  p.  160),  as  cited  by  Grimm,  on 
2  Mace.  i.  21,  singularly  combines  the  two  views, 
and  calls  him  "  Nehemiah  the  priest,  of  the  seed  of 
David." 

All  that  we  know  certainly  concerning  this  emi 
nent  man  is  contained  in  the  book  which  bears  his 
name.  'His  autobiography  first  finds  him  at  Shu- 
shan,  the  winter6  residence  of  the  kings  of  Persia, 
in  high  office  as  the  cupbearer  of  king  Artaxerxes 
Lougimanus.  In  the  20th  year  of  the  king's  reign, 
i.  e.  B.C.  445,  certain  Jews,  one  of  whom  was  a 
near  kinsman  of  Nehemiah's,  arrived  from  Judea, 
and  gave  Nehemiah  a  deplorable  account  of  the 
state  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  residents  in  Judea. 
He  immediately  conceived  the  idea  of  going  to 
Jerusalem  to  endeavour  to  better  their  state. 
After  three  or  four  months  (from  Chisleu  to 
Nisan),  in  which  he  earnestly  sought  God's  bless 
ing  upon  his  undeiiaking  by  frequent  prayer  and 
fasting,  an  opportunity  presented  itself  of  obtaining 

*  The Targum  gives  the  name  as Helam,  Q^H-    A  place 
of  this  name  lay  somewhere  between  the  Jordan  and  the 
Euphrates.    See  vol.  i.  7  80  a. 

•>  See  Genealog.  of  our  Lord  J.  C.,  p.  145.  [NEHEMIAH, 
SON  OF  AZBDK.] 

c  Ecbatana  wan  the  summer,  Babylon  the  spring,  and 
iVrscpolis  the  autumn  residence  of  the  kings  of  Persia 
'PilktngtoD).  Susa  was  the  principal  palace  (Strab.  lib.  xv. 
xip.  iii.  V3). 

*  TIG.  the  term  applied  to  himself  and  otb*-  batraps 


NEHEMIAH 

the  king's  consent  to  his  mission.  Having  receiviil 
his  appointment  as  governor  d  of  Judea,  a  troop  of 
cavalry,  and  letters  from  the  king  to  the  different 
satraps  through  whost  provinces  he  was  to  pass,  us 
well  as  to  Asaph  the  keeper  of  the  king's  forests, 
to  supply  him  with  timber,  he  started  upon  his 
journey:  being  under  promise  to  return  to  Persia 
within  a  given  time.  Josephus  says  that  he  went 
in  the  first  instance  to  Babylon,  and  gathered 
round  him  a  band  of  exiled  Jews,  who  returned 
with  him.  This  is  important  as  possibly  indi 
cating  that  the  book  which  Josephus  followed, 
understood  the  Nehemiah  mentioned  in  Ezr.  ii.  2 ; 
Neh.  vii.  7,  to  be  the  son  of  Hachaliah. 

Nehemiah's  great  work  was  rebuilding,  for  th« 
first,  time  since  their  destruction  by  Nebuzar- 
adan,  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  and  restoring  that 
city  to  its  former  state  and  dignity,  as  a  fortified 
town.  It  is  impossible  to  over  estimate  the  im 
portance  to  the  future  political  and  ecclesiastical 
prosperity  of  the  Jewish  nation  of  this  great 
achievement  of  their  patriotic  governor.  How  low 
the  community  of  the  Palestine  Jews  had  fallen, 
is  apparent  from  the  fact  that  from  the  6th  of 
Darius  to  the  7th  of  Artaxerxes,  there  is  no  history 
of  them  whatever  ;  and  that  even  after  Ezra's  com 
mission,  and  the  ample  grants  made  by  Artaxerxes 
in  his  7th  year,  and  the  considerable  reinforce 
ments,  both  in  wealth  and  numbers,  which  Ezra's 
government  brought  to  them,  they  were  in  a  state 
of  abject  "  alllktion  and  reproach  "  in  the  20th  of 
Artaxerxes;  their  country  pillaged,  their  citizens 
kidnapped  and  made  slaves  of  by  their  heathen 
neighbours,  robbery  and  murder  rife  in  their  very 
capital,  Jerusalem  almost  deserted,  and  the  Temple 
falling  again  into  decay.  The  one  step  which  could 
resuscitate  the  nation,  preserve  the  Mosaic  insti 
tutions,  and  lay  the  foundation  of  future  inde 
pendence,  was  the  restoration  of  the  city  walls. 
Jerusalem  being  once  again  secure  from  the  attacks 
of  the  marauding  heathen,  civil  government  would 
become  possible,  the  spirit  of  the  people,  and  their 
attachment  to  the  ancient  capital  of  the  monarchy 
would  revive,  the  priests  and  Levites  would  be 
encouraged  to  come  into  residence,  the  tithes  and 
first-fruits  and  other  stores  would  be  safe,  and 
Judah,  if  not  actually  independent,  would  preserve 
the  essentials  of  national  and  religious  life.  To  this 
great  object  therefore  Nehemiah  directed  his  whole 
energies  without  an  hour's  unnecessary  delay.6 
By  word  and  example  he  induced  the  whole  popu 
lation,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  Tekoite 
nobles,  to  commence  building  with  the  utmost 
vigour,  even  the  lukewarm  high-priest  Eliashib 
performing  his  part.  In  a  wonderfully  short  time 
the  walls  seemed  to  emerge  from  the  heaps  of 
burnt  rubbish,  and  to  encircle  the  city  as  in  the 
days  of  old.  The  gateways  also  were  rebuilt,  and 
ready  for  the  doors  to  be  hung  upon  them.  But 
it  soon  became  apparent  how  wisely  Nehemiah  had 
acted  in  hastening  on  the  work.  On  his  very  first 
arrival,  as  governor,  Sanballat  and  Tobiah  had 


by  Nehemiah.  The  meaning  and  etymology  of  Tirshatha, 
which  is  applied  only  to  Nehemiah,  are  doubtful.  It  is  by 
most  modem  scholars  thought  to  mean  governor  (Gesen. 
s.  v  ) ;  but  the  sense  cupbearer,  given  by  older  common- 
tators,  seems  more  probable. 

«  The  three  days,  mentioned  Neh.  Ii.  11,  and  Ezr.  viii.  32, 
seems  to  point  to  some  customary  interval,  perhaps  for 
purification  after  a  journey.  See  in  Crudec'fr  Conaordanu 
•  Third  l>ay"  and  "Three  Days." 


NEHEMIAH 

giv^n  unequivocal  proof  of  their  mortification  at 
his  appointment;  and,  before  the  work  was  even 
commenced,  had  scornfully  asked  whether  he  in 
tended  to  rebel  against  the  king  of  Persia.  But 
when  the  restoration  was  seen  to  be  rapidly  pro 
gressing,  their  indignation  knew  no  bounds.  They 
not  only  poured  out  a  torrent  of  abuse  and  con 
tempt  upon  all  engaged  in  the  work,  but  actually 
made  a  great  conspiracy  to  fall  upon  the  builders 
with  an  armed  force  and  put  a  stop  to  the  under 
taking.  The  project  was  defeated  by  the  vigilance 
and  prudence  of  Nehemiah,  who  armed  all  the 
people  after  their  families,  and  showed  such  a 
strong  front  that  their  enemies  dared  not  attack 
them.  This  armed  attitude  was  continued  from 
that  day  forward.  Various  stratagems  were  then 
resorted  to  to  get  Nehemiah  away  from  Jerusalem, 
and  if  possible  to  take  his  life.  But  that  which 
most  nearly  succeeded  was  the  attempt  to  bring 
him  into  suspicion  with  the  king  of  Persia,  as  if  he 
intended  to  set  himself  up  for  an  independent  king, 
as  soon  as  the  walls  were  completed.  It  was 
thought  that  the  accusation  of  rebellion  would  also 
frighten  the  Jews  themselves,  and  make  them  cease 
from  building.  Accordingly  a  double  line  of  action 
was  taken.  On  the  one  hand  Sanballat  wrote  a 
letter  to  Nehemiah,  in  an  apparently  friendly  tone, 
telling  him,  on  the  authority  of  Geshem,  that  it  was 
reported  among  the  heathen  (»'.  e.  the  heathen  nations 
settled  in  Samaria,  and  Galilee  of  the  nations),  that 
he  was  about  to  head  a  rebellion  of  the  Jews,  and 
that  he  had  appointed  prophets  to  aid  in  the  design 
by  prophesying  of  him,  "  thou  art  the  king  of 
Judah ;  and  that  he  was  building  the  walls  for 
this  purpose.  This  was  sure,  he  added,  to  come  to 
the  ears  of  the  king  of  Persia,  and  he  invited  Nehe 
miah  to  confer  with  him  as  to  what  should  be  done. 
At  the  same  time  he  had  also  bribed  Noadiah  tho 
prophetess,  and  other  prophets,  to  induce  Nehemiah 
by  representations  of  his  being  in  danger,  to  take 
refuge  in  the  fortress  of  the  Temple,  with  a  view 
to  cause  delay,  and  also  to  give  an  appearance  of 
conscious  guilt.  While  this  portion  of  the  plot  was 
conducted  by  Sanballat  and  Tobiah,  a  yet  more 
important  line  of  action  was  pursued  in  concert 
with  them  by  the  chief  officers  of  the  king  of  Persia 
in  Samaria.  In  a  letter  addressed  to  Artaxerxes 
they  represented  that  the  Jews  had  rebuilt  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  intent  of  rebelling 
against  the  king's  authority  and  recovering  their 
dominion  on  "this  side  the  river."  Referring  to 
former  instances  of  the  seditious  spirit  of  the 
Jewish  people,  they  urged  that  if  the  king  wished 
to  maintain  his  power  in  the  province  he  must 
immediately  put  a  stop  to  the  fortification.  This 
artful  letter  so  far  wrought  upon  Artaxerxes,  that 
he  issued  a  decree  stopping  the.  work  till  further 
orders.'  It  is  probable  that  at  the  same  time  he 
recalled  Nehemiah,  or  perhaps  Nehemiah's  leave  of 
absence  had  previously  expired  ;  in  either  case  had 
the  Tirshatha  been  less  upright  and  less  wise,  and 
had  he  fallen  into  the  trap  laid  for  him,  his  life 
might  have  been  in  great  danger.  The  sequel, 
however,  shows  that  his  perfect  integrity  was  ap 
parent  to  the  king.  For  after  a  delay,  perhaps  of 
several  years,  he  was  permitted  to  return  to  Jeru 
salem,  and  to  crown  his  work  by  repairing  the 
Temple,  and  dedicating  the  walls.  What,  however, 

f  The  reader  must  remember  that  this  application  of 
Kzr.  Iv.  7-23  to  this  time  Is  novel,  and  must  exercise  bis 
awn  judgment  as  to  Its  admissibility. 

8  Such  as  the  collection  of  money  and  priests'  garments 


NEHEMIAH 


48? 


we  have  here  to  notice  is,  that  owing  to  Nehemiah's 
wise  haste,  and  his  refusal  to  pause  for  a  day  in 
his  work,  in  spite  of  threats,  plots,  and  insinua 
tions,  the  designs  of  his  enemies  were  frustrated. 
The  wall  was  actually  finished  and  ready  to  recei  ve 
the  gates,  before  the  king's  decree  for  suspending 
the  work  arrived.  A  little  delay  therefore  was  all 
they  were  able  to  effect.  Nehemiah  does  not  in 
deed  mention  this  adverse  decree,  which  may  have 
arrived  during  his  absence,  nor  give  us  any  clue  to 
the  time  of  his  return  ;  nor  should  we  have  sus 
pected  his  absence  at  all  from  Jerusalem,  but  for 
the  incidental  allusion  in  ch.  ii.  6,  xiii.  6,  coupled 
with  the  long  interval  of  years  between  the  earlier 
and  later  chapters  of  the  book.  But  the  interval 
between  the  close  of  ch.  vi.  and  the  beginning  of 
ch.  vii.  is  the  only  place  where  we  can  suppose 
a  considerable  gap  in  time,_  either  from  the  appear 
ance  of  the  text,  or  the  nature  of  the  events  nan- 
rated.  It  seems  to  suit  both  well  to  suppose  that 
Nehemiah  returned  to  Persia,  and  the  work  stopped 
immediately  after  the  events  narrated  in  vi.  16-19, 
and  that  chapter  vii.  goes  on  to  relate  the  measures 
adopted  by  him  upon  his  return  with  fresh  powers. 
These  were,  the  setting  up  the  doors  in  the  various 
gates  of  the  city,  giving  a  special  charge  to  Hanani 
and  Hananiah,  as  to  the  time  of  opening  and  shut 
ting  the  gates,  and  above  all  providing  for  the  due 
peopling  of  the  city,  the  numbers  of  which  were 
miserably  small,  and  the  rebuilding  of  the  nume 
rous  decayed  houses  within  the  walls.  Then  fol 
lowed  a  census  of  the  returned  captives,  a  large 
collection  of  funds  for  the  repair  of  the  Temple, 
the  public  reading  of  the  law  to  the  people  by 
Ezra  (who  now  appears  again  on  the  scene,  perhaps 
having  returned  from  Persia  with  Nehemiah),  a 
celebration  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  such  as  had 
not  been  held  since  the  days  of  Joshua  ;  a  no  less 
solemn  keeping  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  when  the 
opportunity  was  taken  to  enter  into  solemn  cove 
nant  with  God,  to  walk  in  the  law  of  Moses  and  to 
keep  God's  commandments. 

It  may  have  been  after  another  considerable  in 
terval  of  time,  and  not  improbably  after  another 
absence  of  the  Tirshatha  from  his  government,  that 
the  next  event  of  interest  in  Nehemiah's  life  oc 
curred,  viz.,  the  dedication  of  the  walls  of  Jeru 
salem,  including,  if  we  may  believe  the  author  of 
2  Mace,  supported  by  several  indications  in  the 
Book  of  Nehemiah,  that  of  the  Temple  after  its 
repair  by  means  of  the  funds  collected  from  the 
whole  population.  This  dedication  was  conducted 
with  great  solemnity,  and  appeai-s  to  have  been  the 
model  of  the  dedication  by  Judas  Maccabeus,  when 
the  Temple  was  purified  and  the  worship  restored 
at  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  as  related 
1  Mace.  iv.  The  author  of  2  Mace,  says  that  on 
this  occasion  Nehemiah  obtained  the  sacred  fire 
which  had  been  hid  in  a  pit  by  certain  priests  at 
the  time  of  the  captivity,  and  was  recovered  by 
their  descendants,  who  knew  were  it  was  concealed 
When,  however,  these  priests  went  to  the  place,  they 
found  only  muddy  water.  By  Nehemiah's  command 
they  drew  this  water,  and  sprinkled  it  upon  the 
wood  of  the  altar  and  upon  the  victims,  and  when 
the  sun,  which  had  been  overclouded,  presently 
shone  out,  a  great  fire  was  immediately  kindled, 
which  consumed  the  sacrifices,  to  the  great  wonder 


mentioned  in  Neh.  vii.,  70,  Ezr.  li.  68 ;  the  allusion  to  the 
pollution  of  the  Temple,  xlii.  7-9 ;  and  the  nature  oi  tbe 
ceremonies  described  in  ch.  xii.  27-43. 


•i«b  NEHEMIAH 

af  all  present.  The  author  also  inserts  the  prayer, 
a  simple  and  beautiful  one,  said  to  have  been 
uttered  by  the  pries  .s,  and  responded  to  by  Nehe 
miah,  during  the  sacrifice ;  and  adds,  that  the  king 
of  Persia  enclosed  the  place  where  the  fire  was 
found,  aud  that  Nehemiah  gave  it  the  name  of 
Naphthar,  or  cleansing.  [NAPHTHAR.]  He  tells 
ns  further  that  an  account  of  this  dedication  was 
contained  in  the  "  writings  and  commentaries  of 
Nehemiah"  (2  Mace.  ii.  13),  and  that  Nehemiah 
founded  "  a  library,  and  gathered  together  the  acts 
of  the  kings,  and  the  prophets,  and  of  David,  and 
the  epistles  of  the  kings  (of  Persia)  concerning  the 
holy  gifts."  How  much  of  this  has  any  historical 
foundation  is  difficult  to  determine.  It  should  be 
added,  however,  that  the  son  of  Siiuch,  in  celebrat 
ing  Nehemiah's  good  deeds,  mentions  only  that  he 
"  raised  up  for  us  the  walls  that  were  fallen,  and 
set  up  the  gates  and  the  bars,  and  raised  up  our 
ruins  again,"  Ecclus.  xlix.  13.  Returning  to  the 
sure  ground  of  the  sacred  narrative,  the  other  prin 
cipal  achievements  of  this  great  and  good  governor 
may  be  thus  signalised.  He  firmly  repressed  the 
exactions  of  the  nobles,  aud  the  usuiy  of  the  rich, 
and  rescued  the  poor  Jews  from  spoliation  and 
slavery.  He  refused  to  receive  his  lawful  allow 
ance  as  governor  from  the  people,  in  consideration 
of  their  poverty,  during  the  whole  twelve  years 
that  he  was  in  office,  but  kept  at  his  own  charge 
a  table  for  150  Jews,  at  which  any  who  returned 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  O* 

his  during  his  government  bespeaks  one  who  ii.-'d 
no  selfishness  in  his  nature.  All  he  did  was  noble, 
generous,  high-minded,  courageous,  and  to  the 
highest  degree  upright.  But  to  stern  integrity  he 
united  great  humility  and  kindness,  and  a  princely 
hospitality.  As  a  statesman  he  combined  fore 
thought,  prudence,  and  sagacity  in  counsel,  with 
vigour,  promptitude,  and  decision  in  action.  In 
dealing  with  the  enemies  of  his  country  he  was 
wary,  penetrating  and  bold.  In  directing  the  internal 
economy  of  the  state,  he  took  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  real  welfare  of  the  people,  and  adopted  the 
measures  best  calculated  to  promote  it.  In  dealing 
whether  with  friend  or  foe,  he  was  utterly  free 
from  favour  or  fear,  conspicuous  for  the  simplicity 
with  which  he  aimed  only  at  doing  what  was  right, 
without  respect  of  persons.  But  in  nothing  was 
he  more  remarkable  than  for  his  piety,  and  the 
singleness  of  eye  with  which  he  walked  before  God. 
He  seems  to  have  undertaken  everything  in  de 
pendence  upon  God,  with  prayer  for  His  blessing 
and  guidance,  and  to  have  sought  his  reward  only 
from  God. 

The  principal  authorities  for  the  events  of  Nehe 
miah's  life,  after  Josephus,  are  Carpzov's  Intro- 
duct,  ad  N.  T.;  Eichhorn,  Einleitung;  Havemick's 
Einleit. ;  Rambach  in  Lib.  Nehem. ;  Leclerc  in  Lib. 
histor.  N.  T.,  besides  those  referred  to  in  the 
following  article.  Those  who  wish  to  see  the 
questions  discussed  of  the  20th  Artaxerxes,  as 


from   captivity  were   welcome.      He   made   most  i  the  terminus  a  quo  Daniel's    seventy  weeks  com- 


careful  provision  for  the  maintenance  of  the  minis 
tering  priests  and  Levites,  and  for  the  due  and  con 
stant  celebration  of  Divine  worship.  He  insisted 
upon  the  sanctity  of  the  precincts  of  the  Temple 
being  preserved  inviolable,  and  peremptorily  ejected 
the  powerful  Tobias  from  one  of  the  chambers 
which  Eliashib  had  assigned  to  him.  He  then  re 
placed  the  stores  and  vessels  which  had  been  re 
moved  to  make  room  for  him,  and  appointed  proper 
Levitical  officers  to  superintend  and  distribute  them. 
With  no  less  firmness  and  impartiality  he  expelled 
from  all  sacred  functions  those  of  the  high-priest's 
family  who  had  contracted  heathen  marriages,  and 
rebuked  and  punished  those  of  the  common  people, 
who  had  likewise  intermarried  with  foreigners ;  and 
lastly,  he  provided  for  keeping  holy  the  Sabbath 
day,  which  was  shamefully  profaned  by  many,  both 
Jews  and  foreign  merchants,  and  by  his  resolute 
conduct  succeeded  in  repressing  the  lawless  traffic 
on  the  day  of  rest. 

Beyond  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes,  to  which 
Nehemiah's  own  narrative  leads  us,  we  have  no 
account  of  him  whatever.  Neither  had  Josephus. 
For  when  he  tells  us  that  "  when  Nehemiah  had 
done  many  other  excellent  things  ...  he  came  to  a 
great  age  and  then  died,"  he  sufficiently  indicates 
that  he  knew  nothing  more  about  him.  The  most 
probable  inference  from  the  close  of  his  own  memoir, 
and  the  i'bsence  of  any  further  tradition  concerning 
him  is,  that  he  returned  to  Persia  and  died  there. 
On  reviewing  the  character  of  Nehemiah,  we  seem 
unable  to  find  a  single  fault  to  counterbalance  his 
many  and  great  virtues.  For  pure  and  disinterested 
patriotism  he  stands  unrivalled.  The  man  whom 
the  account  of  the  misery  and  ruin  of  his  native 
country,  and  the  perils  with  which  his  countiymen 
were  beset,  prompted  to  leave  his  splendid  banish 
ment,  and  a  post  of  wealth,  power,  and  influence, 
in  the  first  court  in  the  world,  that  he  migh*.  ihare 
and  alleviate  the  sorrows  of  his  native  land,  must 
have  been  pre-eminently  a  patriot.  Every  act  of 


mence,  and  also  the  general  chronology  of  the 
times,  may  refer  to  Genealogy  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  ch.  xi. ;  and  for  a  different  view  to  Pri- 
deaax,  Connect,  i.  251,  &c.  The  view  of  Sea- 
liger,  Hottinger,  &c.,  adopted  by  Dr.  Mill,  Vindic. 
of  our  Lord's  Genealogy,  p.  165  note ;  that  Ar 
taxerxes  Mnemon  was  Nehemiah's  patron,  is  almost 
universally  abandoned.  The  proof  from  the  parallel 
genealogies  of  the  kings  of  Persia  and  the  high- 
priests,  that  he  was  Longimanus,  is  stated  in  3 
paper  printed  for  the  Chronolog.  Institute  by  the 
writer  of  this  article. 

2.  One  of  the  leaders  of  the  first  expedition  from 
Babylon  to  Jerusalem  under  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  2 : 
Neh.  vii.  7). 

3.  Son  of  Azbuk,  and  ruler  of  the  half  part  of 
Beth-zur,  who  helped  to  repair  the  wall  of  Jeru 
salem  (Neh.  iii.   16).      Beth-zur    was  a  city  of 
Judah  (Josh.  xv.  58 ;  1  Chr.  ii.  45),  belonging  to  a 
branch  of  Caleb's  descendants,  whence  it  follows 
that  this  Nehemiah  was  also  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 

[A.  C.  H.J 

NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF.  The  latest  of  all 
the  historical  books  of  Scripture,  both  as  to  the 
time  of  its  composition  and  the  scope  of  its  narra 
tive  in  general,  and  as  to  the  supplementary  matter 
of  ch.  xii.  in  particular,  which  reaches  down  to 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  This  book,  hke 
the  preceding  one  of  Ezra  [EZRA,  BOOK  OF],  is 
clearly  and  certainly  not  all  by  the  same  hand. 
By  far  the  principal  portion,  indeed,  is  the  work 
of  Nehemiah,  who  gives,  in  the  first  person,  a 
simple  narrative  of  the  events  in  which  he  himself 
was  concerned ;  but  other  portions  are  either  ex 
tracts  from  various  chronicles  and  registers,  or  sup 
plementary  narratives  aud  reflections,  some  appa 
rently  by  Ezra,  others,  perhaps,  the  work  of  the 
same  pei-son  who  inserted  the  latest  genealogical 
extracts  from  the  public  chronicles. 

1.  The  main  history  contained  in  th<>  book  01 
Xehemiiih  rovm  about  12  years,  vu.,  from  tin 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

'20th  to  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus, 
i.  e.  from  B.C.  445  to  433.  For  so  we  seem  to 
learn  distinctly  from  v.  14  compared  with  xiii.  6  ; 
nor  does  there  seem  to  be  any  historical  ground 
whatever  for  asserting  with  Prideaux  and  many 
others  that  the  government  of  Nehemiah,  after  his 
return  in  the  32nd  of  Artaxerxes,  extended  to  the 
15th  year  of  Darius  Nothus,  and  that  the  events  of 
eh.  xiii.  belong  to  this  later  period  (Prid.  Connect. 
B.C.  409).  The  argument  attempted  to  be  derived 
fiom  Neh.  xiii.  28,  that  Eliashibwas  then  dead  and 
Joiada  his  son  high-priest,  is  utterly  without  weight. 
There  is  a  precisely  parallel  phrase  in  2  Chr.  xxxv. 
8,  where  we  read  "  the  house  which  Solomon  the 
son  of  David  king  of  Israel  did  build."  But  the 
doubt  whether  the  title  "  king  of  Israel "  applies  to 
David  or  Solomon  is  removed  by  the  following 
verse,  where  we  read,  "  according  to  the  writing  of 
David  king  of  Israel,  and  according  to  the  writing 
of  Solomon  his  son."  The  LXX.  also  in  that  pas 
sage  have  /3affi\f<as  agreeing  with  David.  There 
is,  therefore,  not  the  slightest  pretence  for  asserting 
that  Nehemiah  was  governor  after  the  32nd  of 
Artaxerxes  (see  below).  . 

The  whole  narrative  gives  us  a  graphic  and 
interesting  account  of  the  state  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  returned  captives  in  the  writer's  times,  and, 
incidentally,  of  the  nature  of  the  Persian  govern 
ment  and  the  condition  of  its  remote  provinces. 
The  documents  appended  to  it  also  give  some 
further  information  as  to  the  times  of  Zerubbabel 
on  the  one  hand,  and  as  to  the  continuation  of- 
the  genealogical  registers  and  the  succession  of  the 
high-priesthood  to  the  close  of  the  Persian  empire 
on  the  other.  The  view  given  of  the  rise  of  two 
factions  among  the  Jews — the  one  the  strict  reli 
gious  party,  adhering  with  uncompromising  faith 
fulness  to  the  Mosaic  institutions,  headed  by  Nehe 
miah;  the  other,  the  gentilizing  party,  ever  imi 
tating  heathen  customs,  and  making  heathen  con 
nexions,  headed,  or  at  least  encouraged  by  the 
high-priest  Eliashib  and  his  family — sets  before  us 
the  germ  of  much  that  we  meet  with  in  a  more 
developed  state  in  later  Jewish  history  from  the 
commencement  of  the  Macedonian  dynasty  till  the 
final  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Again,  in  this  history  as  well  as  in  the  book  of 
Ezra,  we  see  the  hitter  enmity  between  the  Jews 
and  Samaritans  acquiring  strength  and  definitive 
form  on  both  religious  and  political  grounds.  It 
would  seem  from  iv.  I,  2,  8  (A.  V.),  and  vi.  2, 
6,  &c.,  that  the  depression  of  Jerusalem  was  a 
fixed  part  of  the  policy  of  Sanballat,  and  that  he 
had  the  design  of  raising  Samaria  as  the  head  of 
Palestine,  upon  the  ruin  of  Jerusalem,  a  design 
which  seems  to  have  been  entertained  by  the  Sama 
ritans  in  later  times. 

The  book  also  throws  much  light  upon  the 
domestic  institutions  of  the  Jews.  We  learn  inci 
dentally  the  prevalence  of  usury  and  of  slavery  as  its 
consequence,  the  frequent  and  burdensome  oppres 
sions  of  the  governors  (v.  15),  the  judicial  use  of 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF         48« 

Temple  service  (xiii.  10-3),  the  much  freer  promulga 
tion  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  the  public  reading  oi 
them  (viii.  1,  ix.  3,  xiii.  1),  and  the  more  general 
acquaintance  •  with  them  arising  from  their  collec 
tion  into  one  volume  and  the  multiplication  of 
copies  of  them  by  the  care  of  Ezra  the  scribe  and 
Nehemiah  himself  (2  Mace.  ii.  13),  as  well  SF 
from  the  stimulus  given  to  the  art  of  reading 
among  the  Jewish  people  during  their  residence  in 
Babylon  [HILKIAH]  ;  the  mixed  form  of  political 
government  still  surviving  the  ruin  of  their  inde 
pendence  (v.  7, 13,  x.),  the  reviving  trade  with  Tyrt 
(xiii.  16),  the  agricultural  pursuits  and  wealth  oJ 
the  Jews  (v.  11,  xiii.  15),  the  tendency  to  take 
heathen  wives,  indicating,  possibly,  a  disproportion 
in  the  number  of  Jewish  males  and  females  among 
the  returned  captives  (x.  30,  xiii.  3,  23),  the  danger 
the  Jewish  language  was  in  of  being  corrupted  b 
(xiii.  24),  with  other  details  which  only  the  narrative 
of  an  eye-witness  would  have  preserved  to  us. 

Some  of  these  details  give  us  incidentally  infor 
mation  of  great  historical  importance. 

(a.)  The  account  of  the  building  and  dedication  of 
the  wall,  iii.,  xii.,  contains  the  most  valuable  mate 
rials  for  settling  the  topography  of  Jerusalem  to  be 
found  in  Scripture.  [JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  pp.  1026- 
27.]  ^Thrupp's  Ancient  Jerusalem.} 

(6.)  The  list  of  returned  captives  who  came 
under  different  leaders  from  the  time  of  Zerubbabel 
to  that  of  Nehemiah  (amounting  in  all  to  only 
42,360  adult  males,  and  7337  servants),  which  is 
given  in  ch.  vii.,  conveys  a  faithful  picture  of  the 
political  weakness  of  the  Jewish  nation  as  com 
pared  with  the  times  when  Judah  alone  numbered 
470,000  fighting  men  (1  Chr.  xxi.  5).  It  justifies 
the  description  of  the  Palestine  Jews  as  "  the 
remnant  that  are  left  of  the  captivity  "  (Neh.  i.  3), 
and  as  "  these  feeble  Jews  "  (iv.  2),  and  explains 
the  great  difficulty  felt  by  Nehemiah  in  peopling 
Jerusalem  itself  with  a  sufficient  number  of  inha 
bitants  to  preserve  it  from  assault  (vii.  3,  4,  xi. 
1,  2).  It  is  an  important  aid,  too,  in  under 
standing  the  subsequent  history,  and  in  appreciating 
the  patriotism  and  valour  by  which  they  attained 
their  independence  under  the  Maccabees. 

(c.)  The  lists  of  leaders,  priests,  Levites,  and  of 
those  who  signed  the  covenant,  reveal  incidentally 
much  of  the  national  spirit  as  well  as  of  the  social 
habits  of  the  captives,  derived  from  older  times. 
Thus  the  fact  that  twelve  leaders  are  named  in 
Neh.  vii.  7,  indicates  the  feeling  of  the  captives  that 
they  represented  the  twelve  tribes,  a  feeling  further 
evidenced  in  the  expression  "  the  men  of  the  people 
of  Israel."  The  enumeration  of  21  and  22,  or,  if 
Zidkijah  stands  for  the  head  of  the  house  of  Zadok, 
23  chief  priests  in  x.  1-8,  xii.  1-7,  of  whom  9 
bear  the  names  of  those  who  were  heads  of  courses 
in  David's  name  (1  Chr.  rxiv.)  [JEHOIARIIJ], 
shows  how,  even  in  their  wasted  and  reduced  num 
bers,  they  struggled  to  preserve  these  ancient  in 
stitutions,  and  also  supplies  the  reason  of  the 
mention  of  these  particular  22  or  23  names.  But 


corporal  punishment  (xiii.  25),  the  continuance  of  i  it  does  more  than  this.  Taken  in  conjunction  with 
false  prophets  as  an  engine  of  policy,  as  in  the  days  of  j  the  list  of  those  who  sealed  (x.  1-27),  it  proves 
the  kings  of  Judah  (vi.  7,12,  14),  the  restitution  of  the  existence  of  a  social  custom,  the  knowledge  of 


which   is   of  absolute   necessity  to  keep  us  from 
gross    chronological    error,    that,   viz.,   of  calling 


the  Mosaic  provision  for  the  maintenance    of  the 
Priests  and  Levites  and  the  due  performance  of  the 

•  This  lately  acquired  acquaintance  with  the  Scriptures  '  vernacular  language  of  the  Jews,  which  some  find  in 
appears  incidentally  In  the  large  quotations  in  the  prayers  Neh.  vlii.  8,  is  very  doubtful,  and  depcndenl  in  th« 
of  Nehemiah  and  the  Levites,  chaps,  i.,  ix.,  xiii.  26,  &c.  ' 

b  The  evidence  of  Hehre  w  having  ceased  to  be  the 


meaninc  " 


±yi)         NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

chiefs  by  the  name  of  the  clan  or  house  of  which 
ihey  were  chiefs.  One  of  the  causes  of  the  absurd 
confusion  which  has  prevailed,  as  to  the  times 
of  Zerubbabel  and  Nehemiah  respectively,  has 
been  the  mention,  e.  g.  of  Jeshua  and  Kadmiel 
(Ezr.  iii.  9)  as  taking  part  with  Zerubbabel  in 
building  the  Temple,  while  the  very  same  Levites 
take  an  active  part  in  the  reformation  of  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  ix.  4,  5,  x.  9,  10) ;  and  the  statement  that 
some  21  or  22  priests  came  up  with  Zerubbabel 
(xii.  1-7),  coupled  with  the  fact  that  these  very 
same  names  were  the  names  of  those  who  sealed 
the  covenant  under  Nehemiah  (x.  1-8).  But 
immediately  we  perceive  that  these  were  the  names 
of  the  courses,  and  of  great  Levitical  houses  (as  a 
comparison  of  1  Chr.  xxiv. ;  Ezr.  ii.  40 ;  Neh.  vii. 
43  ;  and  of  Neh.  x.  14-27  with  vii.  8-38,  proves 
that  they  were),  the  difficulty  vanishes,  and  we 
have  a  useful  piece  of  knowledge  to  apply  to  many 
other  passages  of  Scripture.  It  would  be  very  de 
sirable,  if  possible,  to  ascertain  accurately  the  rules, 
if  any,  under  which  this  use  of  proper  names  was 
confined. 

(d.)  Other  miscellaneous  information  contained  in 
this  book,  embraces  the  hereditary  crafts  practised  by 
certain  priestly  families,  e.g.  the  apothecaries,  or 
makers  of  the  sacred  ointments  and  incense  (iii.  8), 
and  the  goldsmiths,  whose  business  it  probably  was 
to  repair  the  sacred  vessels  (iii.  8),  and  who  may 
have  been  the  ancestors,  so  to  speak,  of  the  money 
changers  in  the  Temple  (John  ii.  14,  15);  the 
situation  of  the  garden  of  the  kings  of  Judah  by 
which  Zedekiah  escaped  (2  K.  xxv.  4),  as  seen 
iii.  15  ;  and  statistics,  reminding  one  of  Domesday- 
Book,  concerning  not  only  the  cities  and  families  of 
the  returned  captives,  but  the  number  of  their 
horses,  mules,  camels,  and  asses  (ch.  vii.) :  to  which 
more  might  be  added. 

The  chief,  indeed  the  only  real  historical  diffi 
culty  in  the  narrative,  is  to  determine  the  time  of 
the  dedication  of  the  wall,  whether  in  the  32nd  year 
of  Artaxerxes  or  before.  The  expression  in  Neh. 
xiii.  1,  "On  that  day,"  seems  to  fix  the  reading  of 
the  law  to  the  same  day  as  the  dedication  (see 
xii.  43).  But  if  so  the  dedication  must  have  been 
after  Nehemiah's  return  from  Babylon  (mentioned 
xiii.  7) ;  for  Eliashib's  misconduct,  which  occurred 
"  before  "  the  reading  of  the  law,  happened  in  Nehe 
miah's  absence.  But  then,  if  the  wall  only  took 
52  days  to  complete  (Neh.  vi.  15),  and  was  begun 
immediately  Nehemiah  entered  upon  his  govern 
ment,  how  came  the  dedication  to  be  deferred 
till  12  years  afterwards?  The  answer  to  this  pro 
bably  is  that,  in  the  first  place,  the  52  days  are 
Opt  to  be  reckoned  from  the  commencement  of 
the  building,  seeing  that  it  is  incredible  that  it 
should  be  completed  in  so  short  a  time  by  so  feeble 
a  community  and  with  such  frequent  hindrances 
and  interruptions;  seeing,  too,  that  the  narrative 
itself  indicates  a  much  longer  time.  Such  pas 
sages  as  Nehemiah  iv.  7,  8,  12,  v.,  and  v.  16  in 
particular,  vi.  4,  5,  coupled  with  the  indications 
of  temporary  cessation  from  the  work  which  ap 
pear  at  iv.  6,  10,  15,  seem  quite  irreconcileable 
with  the  notion  of  less  than  two  months  for  the 
whole.  The  52  days,  therefore,  if  the  text  is 
sound,  may  be  reckoned  from  the  resumption  of 
the  work  after  iv.  IS,  and  a  time  exceeding  two 
years  may  have  elapsed  from  the  commencement 
of  the  building.  But  even  then  it  would  not  be 
ready  for  dedication.  There  were  the  gates  to  be 
fciiD^,  perhaps  much  rubbish  to  be  removed,  and 


NEHEMIAH.  BOOK  OF 

the  ruined  houses  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Ih* 
walls  to  be  repaired.  Then,  too,  as  we  shall  se; 
below,  there  were  repairs  to  be  done  to  the  Temple, 
and  it  is  likely  that  the  dedication  of  the  walls 
would  not  take  place  till  those  repairs  were  com 
pleted.  Still,  even  these  causes  would  not  be 
adequate  to  account  for  a  delay  of  12  years. 
Josephus,  who  is  seldom  in  harmony  with  the  book 
of  Nehemiah,  though  he  justifies  our  suspicion  that 
a  longer  time  must  have  elapsed,  by  assuming  two 
years  and  four  months  o  the  rebuilding,  ami 
placing  the  completion  in  the  28th  year  of  the 
king's  reign  whom  he  calls  Xerxes  (thus  interposing 
an  interval  of  8  years  between  Nehemiah's  arrival 
at  Jerusalem  as  governor  and  the  completion),  yet 
gives  us  no  real  help.  He  does  not  attempt  to 
account  for  the  length  of  time,  he  makes  no  allu 
sion  to  the  dedication,  except  as  far  as  his  state 
ment  that  the  wall  was  completed  in  the  ninth 
month,  Chisleu  (instead  of  Elul,  the  sixth,  as  Neh. 
vi.  15),  may  seem  to  point  to  the  dedication 
(1  Mace.  iv.  59),  and  takes  not  the  slightest 
notice  of  Nehemiah's  return  to  the  king  of  Persia. 
We  are  lefj,  therefore,  to  inquire  for  ourselves 
whether  the  book  itself  suggests  any  further  causes 
of  delay.  One  cause  immediately  presents  itself, 
viz.,  that  Nehemiah's  leave  of  absence  from  the 
Persian  court,  mentioned  ii.  6,  may  have  drawn 
to  a  close  shortly  after  the  completion  of  the 
wall,  and  before  the  other  above-named  works 
were  complete.  And  this  is  rendered  yet  more 
probable  by  the  circumstance,  incidentally  brought 
to  light,  that,  in  the  32nd  year  of  Artaxerxes,  we 
know  he  was  with  the  king  (xiii.  6). 

Other  circumstances,  too,  may  have  concurred 
to  make  it  imperative  for  him  to  return  to  Persia 
without  delay.  The  last  words  of  ch.  vi.  point  to 
some  new  effort  of  Tobiah  to  interrupt  his  work, 
and  the  expression  used  seems  to  indicate  that  it 
was  the  threat  of  being  considered  as  a  rebel  by  the 
king.  If  he  could  make  it  appear  that  Artaxerxes 
was  suspicious  of  his  fidelity,  then  Nehemiah  might 
feel  it  matter  of  necessity  to  go  to  the  Persian 
court  to  clear  himself  of  the  charge.  And  this 
view  both  receives  a  remarkable  confirmation  from, 
and  throws  quite  a  new  light  upon,  the  obscure 
passage  in  Ezr.  iv.  7-23.  We  have  there  a  de 
tailed  account  of  the  opposition  made  by  the  Sama 
ritan  nations  to  the  building  of  the  WALLS  ot 
Jerusalem,  in  the  reign  of  ARTAXERXES,  and  a 
copy  of  the  letter  they  wrote  to  the  king,  accusing 
the  Jews  of  an  intention  to  rebel  as  soon  as  the 
wall  should  be  finished;  by  which  means  they 
obtained  a  decree  stopping  the  building  till  the 
king's  further  orders  should  be  received.  Now,  if 
we  compare  Neh.  vi.  6,  7,  where  mention  is  made 
of  the  report  "  among  the  heathen  "  as  to  the 
intended  rebellion  of  Nehemiah,  with  the  letter  of 
the  heathen  nations  mentioned  in  Ezr.  iv.,  and  also 
recollect  that  the  only  time  when,  as  far  as  WP 
know,  the  WALLS  of  Jerusalem  were  attempted  10 
be  rebuilt,  was  when  Nehemiah  was  governor,  it  is 
difficult  to  resist  the  conclusion  that  Ezra  iv.  7-23 
relates  to  the  time  of  Nehemiah's  government,  and 
explains  the  otherwise  unaccountable  circumstance 
that  12  years  elapsed  before  the  dedication  of  the 
walls  was  completed.  Nehemiab  may  have  started 
on  his  journey  on  receiving  the  letters  from 
Persia  (if  such  they  were)  sent  him  by  Tobiah, 
leaving  his  lieutenants  to  carry  on  the  works,  and 
after  his  departure  Rehum  and  Shirashai  and  their 
companions  may  have  come  up  to  Jerusalem  with 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

t)ie  king's  decree  and  obliged  them  to  desist.  It 
should  seem,  however,  that  at  Nehemiah's  arrival 
in  Persia,  he  was  able  to  satisfy  the  king  of  his  per 
fect  integrity,  and  that  he  was  permitted  to  return 
to  his  government  in  Judaea.  His  leave  of  absence 
may  again  have  been  of  limited  duration,  and  the 
business  of  the  census,  of  repeopling  Jerusalem,  set 
ting  up  the  city  gates,  rebuilding  the  ruined  houses, 
and  repairing  the  Temple,  may  have  occupied  his 
whole  time  till  his  second  return  to  the  king. 
During  this  second  absence  another  evil  arose  — 
the  gentilizing  party  recovered  strength,  and  the 
intrigues  with  Tobiah  (vi.  17),  which  had  already 
begun  before  his  first  departure,  were  more  actively 
carried  on,  and  led  so  tar  that  Eliashib  the  high- 
priest  actually  assigned  one  of  the  store-chambers 
in  the  Temple  to  Tobiah's  use.  This  we  are  not 
told  of  till  xiii.  4-7,  when  Nehemiah  relates  the 
steps  he  took  on  his  return.  But  this  very  cir 
cumstance  suggests  that  Nehemiah  does  not  relate 
the  events  which  happened  in  his  absence,  and 
would  account  for  his  silence  in  regard  to  Rehum 
and  Shimshai.  We  may  thus,  then,  account  for 
10  or  11  years  having  elapsed  before  the  dedication 
of  the  walls  took  place.  In  fact  it  did  not  take 
place  till  the  last  year  of  his  government ;  and 
this  leads  to  the  right  interpretation  of  ch.  xiii.  6 
and  brings  it  into  perfect  harmony  with  v.  14,  a 
passage  which  obviously  imports  that  Nehemiah's 
government  of  Judaea  lasted  only  12  years,  viz., 
from  the  20th  to  the  32nd  of  Artaxerxes.  For 
the  literal  and  grammatical  rendering  of  xiii.  6 
is,  "  And  in  all  this  time  was  not  I  at  Jeru 
salem:  BUT  in  the  two-and-thirtieth  year  of  Ar 
taxerxes  king  of  Babylon,  came  I  unto  the  king, 
and  after  certain  days  obtained  I  leave  of  the 
king,  and  I  came  to  Jerusalem  "  —  the  force  of 
*3  after  a  negative  being  but  rather  than  for 
(Gesen.  Thes.  p.  680)  ;  the  meaning  of  the  passage 
being,  therefore,  not  that  he  left  Jerusalem  to  go 
to  Persia  in  the  32nd  of  Artaxerxes,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  that  in  that  year  he  returned  from  Persia 
to  Jerusalem.  The  dedication  of  the  walls  and  the 
other  reforms  named  in  ch.  xiii.  were  the  closing 
acts  of  his  administration. 

It  has  been  already  mentioned  that  Josephus  does 
not  follow  the  authority  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah. 
He  detaches  Nehem.  viii.  from  its  context,  and  ap 
pends  the  narratives  contained  in  it  to  the  times  of 
Ezra.  He  makes  Ezra  die  before  Nehemiah  came  to 
Jerusalem  as  Governor,  and  consequently  ignores  any 
part  taken  by  him  in  conjunction  with  Nehemiah. 
He  makes  no  mention  either  whatever  of  Sanballat  in 
the  events  of  Nehemiah's  government,  but  places 
him  in  the  time  of  Jaddua  and  Alexander  the  Great. 
He  also  makes  the  daughter  of  Sanballat  marry  a 
son,  not  of  Joiada,  as  Neh.  xiii.  28,  but  of  Jona 
than,  viz.  Manasseh  the  brother  of  the  High  Priest 
Jaddua,  thus  entirely  shifting  the  age  of  Sanballat 
from  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  to  that 
of  Darius  Codomanus,  and  Alexander  the  Great. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe,  that  as  Arta 
xerxes  Longimanus  died  B.C.  424,  and  Alexander 
the  Great  was  not  master  of  Syria  and  Palestine 
till  B.C.  332,  all  attempts  to  reconcile  Josephus 
with  Nehemiah  must  be  lost  labour.  It  is  equally 
clear  that  on  every  ground  the  authority  of  Josephus 
must  yield  to  that  of  Nehemiah.  The  only  ques- 


NEHEMIAH.  BOOK  OF        491 

tion  therefore  is  what  was  the  cause  of  Josephus'E 
variations.  Now,  as  regards  the  appending  the 
history  in  Neh.  viii.  to  the  times  of  Ezra,  we  know 
that  he  was  guided  by  the  authority  of  the  Apocry 
phal  1  Esdr.  as  he  had  been  in  the  whole  story  of 
Zerubbabel  and  Darius.  From  the  florid  additions 
to  his  narrative  of  Nehemiah's  first  application  to 
Artaxerxes,  as  well  as  from  the  passage  below  re 
ferred  to  in  2  Mace.  i.  23,  we  may  be  sure  that  there 
were  apocryphal  versions  of  the  story  of  Nehemiah.' 
The  account  of  Jaddua's  interview  with  Alexander 
the  Great  savours  strongly  of  the  same  origin. 
There  can  be  little  doubt,  therefore,  that  in  aU 
the  points  in  which  Josephus  differs  from  Nehe 
miah,  he  followed  apocryphal  Jewish  writings, 
some  of  which  have  since  perished.  The  causes 
which  led  to  this  were  various.  One  doubtless 
was  the  mere  desire  for  matter  with  which  to  fill 
up  his  pages  where  the  narrative  of  the  canonical 
Scriptures  is  meagre.  In  making  Nehemiah  suc 
ceed  to  the  government  after  Ezra's  death,  he  was 
probably  influenced  partly  by  the  wish  to  give 
an  orderly,  dignified  appearance  to  the  succession 
of  Jewish  governors,  approximating  as  nearly  as 
possible  to  the  old  monarchy,  and  partly  by  the 
desire  to  spin  out  his  matter  into  a  continuous 
history.  Then  the  difficulties  of  the  books  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  which  the  compiler  of  1  Esdr.  had 
tried  to  get  over  by  his  arrangement  of  the  order 
of  events,  coupled  with  Josephus' s  g~jss  ignorance 
of  the  real  order  of  the  Persian  Kings,  and  his  utter 
misconception  as  to  what  monarchs  are  spoken  of 
in  the  books  of  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  Esther,  had  also 
a  large  influence.  The  writer,  however,  who  makes 
Darius  Codomanus  succeed  Artaxerxes  Longimanus, 
and  confounds  this  last-named  king  with  Artaxerxes 
Mnemon ;  who  also  thinks  that  Xerxes  reigned 
above  32  years,  and  who  falsifies  his  best  authority, 
altering  the  names,  as  in  the  case  of  the  substitu 
tion  of  Xerxes  for  Artaxerxes  throughout  the  book 
of  Nehemiah,  and  suppressing  the  facts,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  omission  of  all  mention  of  Ezra,  Tobias, 
and  Sanballat  during  the  government  of  Nehemiah, 
is  not  entitled  to  much  deference  on  our  parts. 
What  has  been  said  shows  clearly  how  little  Jose 
phus's  unsupported  authority  is  worth ;  and  how 
entirely  the  authenticity  and  credibility  of  Nehe 
miah  remains  unshaken  by  his  blunders  and  confu 
sions,  and  that  there  is  no  occasion  to  resort  to  the 
improbable  hypothesis  of  two  Sanballats,  or  to 
attribute  to  Nehemiah  a  patriarchal  longevity,  in 
order  to  bring  his  narrative  into  harmony  with  that 
of  the  Jewish  historian. 

2.  As  regards  the  authorship  of  the  book,  it  i? 
admitted  by  all  critics  that  it  is,  as  to  its  main 
parts,  the  genuine  work  of  Nehemiah.  But  it  is 
no  less  certain  that  interpolations  and  additions 
have  been  made  in  it  since  his  time ; d  and  there  is 
considerable  diversity  of  opinion  as  to  what  are  the 
portions  which  have  been  so  added.  From  i.  1  to 
vii.  6,  no  doubt  or  difficulty  occurs.  The  writer 
speaks  throughout  in  the  first  person  singular,  and 
in  his  character  of  governor,  !"inS.  Again,  from 
xii.  31,  to  the  end  of  the  book  (except  xii.  44-47), 
the  narrative  is  continuous,  and  the  use  of  the  first 
person  singular  constant  (xii.  30,  38,  40,  xiii.  6,  7, 
&C.).  It  is  therefore  only  in  the  intermediate 
chapters,  vii.  6  to  xii.  26,  ard  xii.  44-47),  that  we 


c  It  is  worth  remarking,  that  the  apocryphal  book  *  K.  F.  Keil,  ia  his  Sinletlung,  endeavours  indeed  tc 
looted  in  2  Mace.  i.  23  seems  to  have  made  Nehemiah  vindicate  Nehemiah's  authorship  for  the  whole  book,  but 
xuitemporary  with  Jonathan,  or  Johanan,  the  high-priest  i  without  success. 


192 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


have  to  enquire  into  the  question  of  authorship 
and  this  we  will  do  by  sections : — 

(a.)  The  first  section  begins  at  Neh.  vii.  6,  and 
ends  in  the  first  half  of  viii.  1,  at  the  words  "  one 
man."  It  has  already  been  asserted  [EZRA,  BOOK 
OF,  vol.  i.  p.  607a]  that  this  section  is  identical  with 
the  paragraph  beginning  Ezr.  ii.  1,  and  ending  iii.  1 ; 
and  it  was  there  also  asserted  that  the  paragraph 
originally  belonged  to  the  book  of  Nehemiah,  and 
was  afterwards  inserted  in  the  place  it  occupies  in 
Ezra.*  Both  these  assertions  must  now  be  made 
good;  and  first  as  to  the  identity  of  the  two 
passages.  They  are  actually  identical  word  for 
word,  and  letter  for  letter,  except  in  two  points. 
One  that  the  numbers  repeatedly  vary.  The  other 
that  there  is  a  difference  in  the  account  of  the 
offerings  made  by  the  governor,  the  nobles,  and  the 
people.  But  it  can  be  proved  that  these  are  merely 
variations  (whether  accidental  or  designed)  of  the 
same  text.  In  the  first  place  the  two  passages  are 
one  and  the  same.  The  heading,  the  contents,  the 
narrative  about  the  sons  of  Barzillai,  the  fact  of  the 
offerings,  the  dwelling  in  their  cities,  the  coming  of 
the  seventh  month,  the  gathering  of  all  the  people  to 
Jerusalem  as  one  man,  are  in  words  and  in  sense  the 
very  self-same  passage.  The  idea  that  the  very 
same  words,  extending  to  70  verses,  describe  differ 
ent  events,  is  simply  absurd  and  irrational.  The 
numbers  therefore  must  originally  have  been  the 
same  in  both  books.  But  next,  when  we  examine 
the  varying  numbers,  we  see  the  following  particu 
lar  proofs  that  the  variations  are  corruptions  of  the 
original  text.  Though  the  items  vary,  the  sum 
total,  42,360,  is  the  same  (Ezr.  ii.  64 ;  Neh.  vii. 
66.)  In  like  manner  the  totals  of  the  servants, 
the  singing  men  and  women,  the  horses,  mules, 
and  asses  are  all  the  same,  except  that  Ezra  has  two 
hundred,  instead  of  two  hundred  and  forty-five, 
singing  men  and  women.  The  numbers  of  the 
Priests  and  of  the  Levites  are  the  same  in  both, 
except  that  the  singers,  the  sons  of  Asaph,  are  128 
in  Ezra  against  148  in  Nehemiah,  and  the  porters 
139  against  138.  Then  in  each  particular  case 
when  the  numbers  differ,  we  see  plainly  how  the 
difference  might  arise.  In  the  statement  of  the 
number  of  the  sons  of  Arab  (the  first  case  in  which 
the  lists  differ),  Ezr.  ii.  5,  we  read,  JYIKD  J?3^ 
D'{?!3l?l  nt^DH,  "  seven  hundred  five  and  seventy," 
whereas  in  Neh.  vii.  10,  we  read,  fl'lNO  £>£/ 
D^K'-I  D^Dn.  But  the  order  of  the  numerals  in 
Ezr.  ii.  5,  where  the  units  precede  the  tens,  is  the 
only  case  in  which  this  order  is  found.  Obviously, 
therefore,  we  ought  to  read  D^tpn,  instead  of 
ntJ'Dn,  fifty  instead  of  five.  No  less  obviously 
be  a  corruption  of  the  almost  identical 
,  and  probably  caused  the  preceding  change 
of  nt^Dn  into  D*B*pn.f  Bat  the  tens  and  units 
being  identical,  it  is  evident  that  the  variation  in 
the  hundreds  is  an  error,  arising  from  both  six  and 
seven  beginning  with  the  same  letter  B>.  The 
very  same  interchange  of  six  and  seven  takes  place 
in  the  number  of  Adonikam,  and  Bigvai,  only  in 


•  So  also  Qrotius  (notes  on  Ezr.  ii.  Neh.  vii.),  with  his 
ciiual  clear  sense  and  sound  judgment.  See  especially  bis 
note  on  Fa.-,  ii.  1.  where  he  says  that  many  Greek  copies 
of  Ezra  om ,t  ch. .;. 

r  Or  if  V3K>  is  the  right  reading  in  Kzr.  ii.  5  (instead  of 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

the  units  (Neh.  vii.  18,  19;  Ezr.  ii.  13,14";.  In 
Pahath-Moab,  the  variation  from  2812,  Ezr.  ii.  6,  to 
2818  Neh.  vii.  11 ;  in  Zattu,  from  945  Ezr.  ii.  8, 
to  845  Neh.  vii.  13 ;  in  Binnui,  from  642  to  648 
in  Bebai,  from  623  to  628 ;  in  Hashum,  from  223 
to  328  ;  in  Senaah,  from  3630  to  3930  ;  the  same 
cause  has  operated,  viz.  that  in  the  numbers  two 
and  eight,  three  and  eight,  nine  and  six,  the  same 
initial  K*  is  found ;  and  the  resemblance  in  these 
numbers  may  probably  have  been  greatly  increased 
by  abbreviations.  In  Azgad  (1222  and  2322)  as 
in  Senaah,  the  mere  circumstance  of  the  tens  and 
units  being  the  same  in  both  passages,  while  the 
thousands  differ  by  the  mere  addition  or  omission  oi 
a  final  D,  is  sufficient  proof  that  the  variation  is  a 
clerical  one  only.  In  Adin,  Neh.  vii.  20,  sir  for 
four,  in  the  hundreds,  is  probably  caused  by  the 
six  hundred  of  the  just  preceding  Adonikans.  In 
the  four  remaining  cases  the  variations  are  equally 
easy  of  explanation,  and  the  result  is  to  leave  not 
the  slightest  doubt  that  the  enumeration  was 
identical  in  the  first  instance  in  both  passages.  It 
may,  however,  be  added  as  completing  the  proof 
that  these  variations  do  not  arise  from  Ezra  giving 
the  census  in  Zerubbabel's  time,  and  Nehemiah 
that  in  his  own  time  (as  Ceillier,  Prideaux,  and 
other  learned  men  have  thought),  that  in  the  cases 
of  Parosh,  Pahath-Moab,  Elam,  Shephatiah,  Bebai, 
Azgad,  and  Adonikam,  of  which  we  are  told 
in  Ezr.  viii.  3-14,  that  considerable  numbers 
came  up  to  Judaea  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes — 
long  subsequent  therefore  to  the  time  of  Zerub- 
babel — the  numbers  are  either  exactly  the  same  in 
Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii.,  or  exhibit  such  variations  as 
have  no  relation  whatever  to  the  numbers  of  those 
families  respectively  who  were  added  to  the  Jewish 
residents  in  Palestine  under  Artaxerxes. 

To  turn  next  to  the  offerings.  The  Book  of  Ezra 
(ii.  68,  69)  merely  gives  the  sum  total,  as  follows  : 
6 1 ,000  *  drachms  of  gold,  5,000  pounds  of  silver,  and 
1 00  priests'  garments.  The  Book  of  N  ehemiah  gives 
no  sum  total,  but  gives  the  following  items  (vii.  72) : 

The  Tirshatha  gave  1000*  drachms  of  gold,  50 
basons,  530  priests'  garments. 

The  chief  of  the  fathers  gave  20,000  drachms  of 
gold,  and  2,200  pounds  of  silver. 

The  rest  of  the  people  gave  20, 000  drachms  of  gold, 
2000  pounds  of  silver,  and  67  priests'  garments. 

Here  then  we  learn  that  these  offerings  were 
made  in  three  shares,  by  three  distinct  parties :  the 
governor,  the  chief  fathers,  the  people.  The  sum 
total  of  drachms  of  gold  we  learn  from  Ezra,  was 
61,000.  The  shares,  we  learn  from  Nehemiah, 
were  20,000  in  two  out  of  the  three  donors,  but 
1000  in  the  case  of  the  third  and  chief  donor !  Is 
it  not  quite  evident  that  in  the  case  of  Nehemiah 
the  20  has  slipped  out  of  the  text  (as  in  1  Esdr. 
v.  45,  60,000  has),  and  that  his  real  contribution 
was  21,000  ?  his  generosity  prompting  him  to  give 
in  excess  of  his  fair  third.  Next,  as  regards  the 
pounds  of  silver.  The  sum  total  was,  according  to 
Ezra,  5000.  The  shares  were,  according  to  Nehe 
miah,  2200  pounds  from  the  chiefs,  and  2000  from 
the  people.  But  the  LXX.  give  2300  for  the 
chiefs,  and  2200  for  the  people,  making  4500  in 
all.  and  so  leaving  a  deficiency  of  500  pounds  as 


D'JDBO.  then  the  DJ3B'  of  Neh.  vii.  10  is  easily  ac 
counted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  two  preceding  numwrt 
of  Parosh  and  Shephatiah  both  end  with  the  same  cumbu 
ttvo. 
B  Observe  tlio  odd  thousand  in  both  cases 


NEIIEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

compared  with  Ezra's  total  of  5000,  and  ascribing 
no  silver  offering  to  the  Tirshatha.  As  regards  the 
priests'  garments.  The  sum  total  as  given  in  both 
the  Hebrew  and  Greek  text  of  Ezra,  and  in  1  Esdr. 
b  100.  The  items  as  given  in  Neh.  vii.  70.  are 
530  +  67  =  597.  But  the  LXX.  give  30  +  67'  = 
97,  and  that  this  is  nearly  correct  is  apparent  from 
the  numbers  themselves.  For  the  total  being  100, 
33  is  the  nearest  whole  number  to  'J°,  and  67  is  the 
nearest  whole  number  to  §  X  100.  So  that  we 
cannot  doubt  that  the  Tirshatha  gave  33  priests' 
garments,  and  the  rest  of  the  people  gave  67,  pro 
bably  in  two  gifts  of  34  and  33,  making  in  all  100. 
But  how  came  the  500  to  be  added  on  to  the 
Tirshatha's  tale  of  garments  ?  Clearly  it  is  a  frag 
ment  of  the  missing  500  pounds  of  silver,  which, 
with  the  50  bowls,  made  up  the  Tirshatha's  dona 
tion  of  silver.  So  that  Neh.  vii.  70  ought  to  be 
read  thus,  "  The  Tirshatha  gave  to  the  treasure 
21,000  drachms  of  gold,  50  basons,  500  pounds  of 
silver,  and  33  priests'  garments."  The  offerings 
then,  as  well  as  the  numbers  in  the  lists,  were  once 
identical  in  both  books,  and  we  learn  from  Ezr.  ii. 
68,  what  the  book  of  Nehemiah  does  not  expressly 
tell  us  (though  the  priests'  garments  strongly  in 
dicate  it),  what  was  the  purpose  of  this  liberal 
contribution,  viz.  "  to  set  up  the  House  of  God  in 
his  place"  (ij'DO  *?y  iTDJM^).  From  this  phrase 

occurring  in  Ezr.  ii.  just  before  the  account  of  the 
building  of  the  Temple  by  Zerubbabel,  it  has  usually 
been  understood  as  referring  to  the  rebuilding. 
But  it  really  means  no  such  thing.  The  phrase 
properly  implies  restoration  and  preservation,  as 
may  be  seen  in  the  exactly  similar  case  of  the 
restoration  of  the  Temple  by  Jehoiada,  2  Chr.  xxiv. 
lo,  after  the  injuries  and  neglect  under  Athaliah, 
where  we  read,  ty  D'r6«n  JV3TIK  -nnSJJM 
irOBTlO,  "  they  set  the  House  of  God  in  its  state" 
(comp.  also  1.  K.  xv.  4).  The  fact  then  was  that, 
when  all  the  rulers  and  nobles  and  people  were 
gathered  together  at  Jerusalem  to  be  registered  in 
the  seventh  month,  advantage  was  taken  of  the 
opportunity  to  collect  their  contributions  to  restore 
the  Temple  also  (2  Mace.  i.  18),  which  had  naturally 
partaken  of  the  general  misery  and  affliction  of 
Jerusalem,  but  which  it  would  not  have  been  wise 
to  restore  till  the  rebuilding  of  the  wall  placed  the 
city  in  a  st;.te  of  safety.  At  the  same  time,  and  in 
the  same  spirit,  they  formed  the  resolutions  recorded 
in  Neh.  x.  32-39,  to  keep  up  the  Temple  ritual. 

It  already  follows,  from  what  has  been  said,  that 
the  section  under  consideration  is  in  its  right  place 
in  the  book  of  Nehemiah,  and  was  inserted  subse 
quently  in  the  book  of  Ezra  out  of  its  chronological 
order.  But  one  or  two  additional  proofs  of  this 
mast  be  mentioned.  The  most  convincing  and 
palpable  of  these  is  perhaps  the  mention  of  the 
Tirshatha  in  Ezr.  ii.  63,  Neh.  vii.  65.  That  the 
Tirshatha,  here  and  at  Neh.  vii.  70,  means  Nehe 
miah,  we  are  expressly  told  Neh.  viii.  9,  x.  l,h  and 
therefore  it  is  perfectly  certain  that  what  is  related 
Ezr.  ii.  62,  Neh.  vii.  64,  happened  in  Nehemiah's 
time,  and  not  in  Zerubbabel's.  Consequently  the 
taking  of  the  census,  which  gave  rise  to  that  inci 
dent,  belongs  to  the  same  time.  In  other  words, 
the  section  we  are  considering  is  in  its  original  and 
right  place  in  the  book  of  Nehemiah.  and  was 

h  It  Is  worth  noticing  that  Nehemiah's  name  is  men 
tioned  SB  the  Tirshatha  in  1  Esdr.  v.  40. 
<  Were  it  not  for  the  mention  of  Nehemiah  and  Mor- 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF        493 

transferred  from  thence  to  the  book  of  Ezra,  tvhert 
it  stands  out  of  its  chronological  order.  And  this  is 
still  further  evident  from  the  circumstance  that 
the  closing  portion  of  this  section  is  an  abbreviation 
of  the  same  portion  as  it  stands  in  Nehemiah, 
proving  that  the  passage  existed  in  Nehemiah  before 
it  was  inserted  ia  Ezra.  Another  proof  is  the  men 
tion  of  Ezra  as  taking  part  in  that  assembly  of  the 
people  at  Jerusalem  which  is  described  in  Ezr.  iii.  1, 
Neh.  viii.  1  ;  for  Ezra  did  not  come-  to  Jerusalem 
till  the  reign  of  Artitxerxes  (Ezr.  vii.).  Another  is 
the  mention  of  Nehemiah  as  one  of  the  leaders 
under  whom  the  captives  enumerated  in  the  census 
came  up,  Ezr.  ii.  2,  Neh.  vii.  7:  in  both  which 
passages  the  juxtaposition  of  Nehemiah  with  Seraiah, 
when  compared  with  Neh.  x.  1,  2,  greatly  strengthens 
the  conclusion  that  Nehemiah  the  Tirshatha  is 
meant.  Then  again,  that  Nehemiah  should  sum 
mon  all  the  families  of  Israel  to  Jerusalem  to  take 
their  census,  and  that,  having  done  so  at  great  cost 
of  time  and  trouble,  he,  or  whoever  was  employed 
by  him,  should  merely  transcribe  an  old  census 
taken  nearly  100  years  before,  instead  of  recording 
the  result  of  his  own  labours,  is  so  improbable  that 
nothing  but  the  plainest  necessity  could  make  one 
believe  it.  The  only  difficulty  in  the  way  is  that 
the  words  in  Neh.  vii.  5,  6,  seem  to  describe  the 
register  which  follows  as  "  the  register  of  the 
genealogy  of  them  which  came  up  at  the  first," 
and  that  the  expression  "  and  found  written  therein  " 
requires  that  the  words  which  follow  should  be  a 
quotation  from  that  register  (comp.  vi.  6).  To 
this  difficulty  (and  it  is  a  difficulty  at  first  sight) 
it  is  a  sufficient  answer  to  say  that  the  words 
quoted  are  only  those  (in  Neh.  vii.  6)  which  con 
tain  the  title  of  the  register  found  by  Nehemiah. 
His  own  new  register  begins  with  the  words  at 
ver.  7  :  D^BH,  &c.,  "  The  men  who  came  with 


Zerubbabel,"  &c.,  which  form  the  descriptive  title 
of  the  following  catalogue.'  Nehemiah,  or  those 
employed  by  him  to  take  the  new  census,  doubtless 
made  use  of  the  old  register  (sanctioned  as  it  had 
been  by  Haggai  and  Zechariah)  as  an  authority  by 
which  to  decide  the  genealogies  of  the  present  gene 
ration.  And  hence  it  was  that  when  the  sons  of 
Barzillai  claimed  to  be  entered  into  the  register  of 
priestly  families,  but  could  not  produce  the  entry 
of  their  house  in  that  old  register,  Nehemiah  re 
fused  to  admit  them  to  the  priestly  office  (39-42), 
but  made  a  note  of  their  claim,  that  it  might  be 
decided  whenever  a  competent  authority  should 
arise.  From  all  which  it  is  abundantly  clear  that 
the  section  under  consideration  belongs  properly  to 
the  book  of  Nehemiah.  It  does  not  follow,  however, 
that  it  was  written  in  its  present  form  by  Nehemiah 
himself.  Indeed  the  sudden  change  to  the  third 
person,  in  speaking  of  the  Tirshatha,  in  ver.  65,  70 
(a  change  which  continues  regularly  till  the  section 
beginning  xii.  31),  is  a  strong  indication  of  a  change 
in  the  writer,  as  is  also  the  use  of  the  term  Tirshatha 
instead  of  Pechah,  which  last  is  the  official  designa 
tion  by  which  Nehemiah  speaks  of  himself  and 
other  governors  (v.  14,  18,  ii.  7,  9,  iii.  7).  It 
seems  probable,  therefore,  that  ch.  vii.,  from  ver.  7, 
contains  the  substance  of  what  was  found  in  this 
part  of  Nehemiah  's  narrative,  but  abridged,  and  ir 
the  form  of  an  abstract,  which  may  account  for  the 
difficulty  of  separating  Nehemiah's  register  from 


chcai  in  ver.  7,  one  might  have  thought  Nehemiah's  re 
gister  began  with  the  words,  "The  number  of  the  tieu,' 

in   -cr.  7. 


494         NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

Zerubbabel's,  and  also  for  the  very  abrupt  mention 
of  the  gifts  of  the  Tirshatha  and  the  people  at  the 
end  of  the  chapter.  This  abstract  formed  a  tran 
sition  from  Nehemiah's  narrative  in  the  preceding 
chapters  to  the  entirely  new  matter  inserted  in  the 
following  sections. 

(6.)  The  next  section  commences  Neh.  viii.,  latter 
part  of  ver.  1,  and  ends  Neh.  xi.  3.  Now  through  - 
cut  this  section  several  things  are  observable. 
(1.)  Nehemiah  does  not  once  speak  in  the  first  per 
son  (viii.  9,  x.  1).  (2.)  Nehemiah  is  no  longer  the 
principal  actor  in  what  is  done,  but  almost  dis 
appears  from  the  scene,  instead  of  being,  as  in  the 
first  six  chapters,  the  centre  of  the  wTiole  action. 
(3.)  Ezra  for  the  first  time  is  introduced,  and 
throughout  the  whole  section  the  most  prominent 
place  is  assigned  either  to  him  personaHy,  or  to 
strictly  ecclesiastical  affairs.  (4.)  The  prayer  in 
ch.  ix.  is  very  different  in  its  construction  from 
Nehemiah's  prayer  in  ch.  i.,  and  in  its  frequent 
references  to  the  various  books  of  the  0.  T.  singu 
larly  suited  to  the  character  and  acquirements  of 
Ezra,  "  the  ready  scribe  in  the  law  of  Moses." 
(5.)  The  section  was  written  by  an  eye-witness  and 
actor  in  the  events  described.  This  appears  by  the 
minute  details,  e.  g.  viii.  4,  5,  6,  &c.,  and  the  use 
of  the  first  person  plural  (x.  30-39).  (6.)  There  is 
a  strong  resemblance  to  the  style  and  manner  of 
Ezra's  narrative,  and  also  an  identity  in  the  use  of 
particular  phrases  (comp.  Ezr.  iv.  18,  Neh.  viii.  8 ; 
Ezr.  vi.  22,  Neh.  viii.  17).  This  resemblance  is 
admitted  by  critics  of  the  most  opposite  opinions 
(see  Keil's  EMeitung,  p.  461).  Hence,  as  Ezra's 
manner  is  to  speak  of  himself  in  the  third  as  well 
as  in  the  first  person,  there  is  great  probability  in 
the  opinion  advocated  by  Havernick  and  Kleinert,k 
that  this  section  is  the  work  of  Ezra.  The  fact  too 
that  1  Esdr.  ix.  38  sqq.  annexes  Neh.  viii.  1-13  to 
Ezr.  x.,  in  which  it  is  followed  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xi. 
5,  §5),  is  perhaps  an  indication  that  it  was  known 
to  be  the  work  of  Ezra..  It  is  not  necessary  to 
suppose  that  Ezra  himself  inserted  this  or  any  other 
part  of  the  present  book  of  Nehemiah  in  the  midst 
of  the  Tirshatha's  history.  But  if  there  was  extant 
an  account  of  these  transactions  by  Ezra,  it  may 
have  been  thus  incorporated  with  Nehemiah's  his 
tory  by  the  last  editor  of  Scripture.  Nor  is  it  im 
possible  that  the  union  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  as 
one  book  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  arrangement  (as 
Jerome  testifies),  under  the  title  of  the  Book  of 
Ezra,  mav  have  had  its  origin  in  this  circumstance. 

(c.)  The  third  section  consists  of  ch.  xi.  3-36.  It 
contains  a  list  of  the  families  of  Judah,  Benjamin, 
and  Levi  (priests  and  Levites),  who  took  up  their 
abode  at  Jerusalem,  in  accordance  with  the  reso 
lution  of  the  volunteers,  and  the  decision  of  the  lot, 
mentioned  in  xi.  1,  2.  This  list  forms  a  kind  of 
supplement  to  that  in  vii.  8-60,  as  appears  by  the 
'allusion  in  xi.  3  to  that  previous  document.  For 
ver.  3  distinguishes  the  following  list  of  the  "  dwellers 
at  Jerusalem  "  from  the  foregoing  one  of  "  Israel, 
priests,  Levites,  Nethinim,  and  children  of  Solo 
mon's  servants,"  who  dwelt  in  the  cities  of  Israel, 
as  set  forth  in  ch.  vii.  This  list  is  an  extract  from 
the  official  roll  preserved  in  the  national  archives, 
only  somewhat  abbreviated,  as  appears  by  a  com 
parison  with  1  (Jhr.  ix.,  where  an  abstract  of  the 
d«me  roll  is  also  preserved  in  a  fuller  form,  and  in 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OP 

the  lattei  pait  especially  with  considerable  raris* 
tions  and  additions :  it  seems  also  to  be  quite  out 
of  its  place  in  Chronicles,  and  its  insertion  there 
probably  caused  the  repetition  of  1  Chr.  viii.  29-4(> 
which  is  found  in  duplicate  ix.  35-44 :  in  the 
latter  place  wholly  unconnected  with  ix.  1-34,  but 
connected  with  what  follows  (ch.  x.  sqq.),  as 
well  as  with  what  precedes  ch.  ix.  Whence  it  ap 
pears  clearly  that  1  Chr.  ix.  2-34  is  a  later  inser 
tion  made  after  Nehemiah's  census,™  but  proving 
by  its  very  incoherence  that  the  book  of  Chronicles 
existed  previous  to  its  insertion.  But  this  by  the 
way.  The  nature  of  the  information  in  this  section, 
and  the  parallel  passage  in  1  Chr.,  would  rather 
indicate  a  Levitical  hand.  It  might  or  might  not 
have  been  the  same  which  inserted  the  preceding 
section.  If  written  later,  it  is  perhaps  the  work 
of  the  same  person  who  inserted  xii.  1-30,  44-47. 
In  conjunction  with  1  Chr.  ix.  it  gives  us  minute 
and  interesting  information  concerning  the  families 
residing  at  Jerusalem,"  and  their  genealogies,  and 
especially  concerning  the  provision  for  the  Temple- 
service.  The  grant  made  by  Artaxerxes  (ver.  23) 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  singers  is  exactly  parallel 
to  that  made  by  Darius  as  set  forth  in  Ezr.  vi.  8, 
9,  10.  The  statement  in  ver.  24  concerning  Petha- 
hiah  the  Zarhite,  as  "  at  the  king's  hand  in  all 
matters  concerning  the  people,"  is  somewhat  ob 
scure,  unless  perchance  it  alludes  to  the  time  of 
Nehemiah's  absence  in  Babylon,  when  Pethahiah 
may  have  been  a  kind  of  deputy-governor  ad  in 
terim. 

(d.~)  From  xii.  1  to  26  is  clearly  and  certainly  an 
abstract  from  the  official  lists  made  and  inserted 
here  long  after  Nehemiah's  time,  and  after  the 
destruction  of  the  Persian  dynasty  by  Alexander 
the  Great,  as  is  plainly  indicated  by  the  expression 
Darius  the  Persian,  as  well  as  by  the  mention  of 
Jaddua.  The  allusion  to  Jeshua,  and  to  Nehemiah 
and  Ezra,  in  ver.  26,  is  also  such  as  would  be  made 
long  posterior  to  their  lifetime,  and  contains  a  re 
markable  reference  to  the  two  censuses  taken  and 
written  down,  the  one  in  Jeshua  and  Zerubbabel's 
time,  the  other  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah ;  for  it  is 
evidently  from  these  two  censuses,  the  existence  of 
which  is  borne  witness  to  in  Neh.  vii.  5,  that  the 
writer  of  xii.  26  drew  his  information  concerning 
the  priestly  families  at  those  two  epochs  (compare 
also  xii.  47). 

The  juxtaposition  of  the  list  of  priests  in  Zerub 
babel's  time,  with  that  of  those  who  sealed  the 
covenant  in  Nehemiah's  time,  as  given  below,  both 
illustrates  the  use  of  proper  names  above  referred 
to,  and  also  the  clerical  fluctuations  to  which  proper 
names  are  subject. 


Neh.  x.  1-8. 
Seralah  .. 
A/.uriah  . . 
Jeremiah 
Pashur    . . 
Amariah . . 
Malchijah 
Hattnsh 
Shebaniah 
Malluch  . . 
Harim     .. 
Mcremoth 
Obadiah  .. 
Daniel     . . 


Neh.  xii.  1-7. 
Seraiab 
Ezra 
Jeremiah 

Amariah 

Malluch 

Hattush 

Sh  team  ah 

JUailuch  (above) 

Rebum 

Meremoth 

Iddo 


'  Kleinert  ascribes  ch.  viii.  to  an  assistant,  ix.  and  x.  to 
Krra  himself.    See  I)e  Wette,  Parker's  transl.  ii.  332. 
01  Comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  2  with  Neh.  vii.  73. 


11  That  these  families  were  cbjeots  of  especial  interest 
appears  frcm  Neh.  xi.  '£. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


Ueh.  x.  1-8. 
Glnnethon 
Baruch  . . 
Meshullam 
Abrjah  .. 
Mijamin . . 
Muaziah  . . 
Bilgai  . . 
Shemaiah 


Neh.  xii.  1-7. 
Ginnetho 


Abijah 

Miami  ii 

Maadlah 

Bilgah 

Shemaiah 

Joiarib 

Jedaiah 

Sallu 

Amok 

Hilkiah 

Jedaiah. 


<  j.)  xii.  44-47  is  an  explanatory  interpolation, 
ir-ade  in  later  times,  probably  by  the  last  reviser 
tt  the  book,  whoever  he  was.  That  it  is  so  is  evi- 
'L'.nt  not  only  from  the  sudden  change  from  the 
fiist  person  to  the  third,  and  the  dropping  of  the 
personal  narrative  (though  the  matter  is  one  in 
which  Nehemiah  necessarily  took  the  lead),  but  from 
the  fact  that  it  describes  the  identical  transaction 
described  in  xiii.  10-13  by  Nehemiah  himself,  where 
he  speaks  as  we  should  expect  him  to  speak :  "  And 
I  made  treasurers  over  the  treasuries,"  &c.  The 
language  too  of  ver.  47  is  manifestly  that  of  one 
looking  back  upon  the  times  of  Zerubbabel  and 
those  of  Nehemiah  as  alike  past.  In  like  manner 
xii.  27-30  is  the  account  by  the  same  annotator  of 
what  Nehemiah  himself  relates,  xiii.  10-12. 

Though,  however,  it  is  not  difficult  thus  to  point 
out  those  passages  of  the  book  which  were  not  part 
of  Nehemiah's  own  work,  it  is  not  easy,  by  cutting 
them  out,  to  restore  that  work  to  its  integrity. 
For  Neh.  xii.  31  does  not  fit  on  well  to  any  part 
of  ch.  vii.,  or,  in  other  words,  the  latter  portion 
of  Nehemiah's  work  does  not  join  on  to  the  former. 
Had  the  former  part  been  merely  a  kind  of  diary 
entered  day  by  day,  one  might  have  supposed  that 
it  was  abruptly  interrupted  and  as  abruptly  re 
sumed.  But  as  Neh.  v.  14  distinctly  shows  that 
the  whole  history  was  either  written  or  revised  by 
the  auth'  r  after  he  had  been  governor  twelve  years, 
such  a  supposition  cannot  stand.  It  should  seem, 
therefore,  that  we  have  only  the  first  and  last  parts 
of  Nehemiah's  work,  and  that  for  some  reason  the 
intermediate  portion  has  been  displaced  to  make 
room  for  the  narrative  and  documents  from  Neh. 
vii.  7  to  xii.  27. 

And  we  are  greatly  confirmed  in  this  supposition 
by  observing  that  in  the  very  chapter  where  we 
first  notice  this  abrupt  change  of  person,  we  have 
another  evidence  that  we  have  not  the  whole  of 
what  Nehemiah  wrote.  For  at  the  close  of  chap.  vii. 
we  have  an  account  of  the  offerings  made  by  the 
governor,  the  chiefs,  and  the  people ;  but  we  are 
not  even  told  for  what  purpose  these  offerings  were 
made.  Only  we  are  led  to  guess  that  it  must  have 
been  for  the  Temple,  as  the  parallel  passage  in 
Ezr.  ii.  tells  us  it  was,  by  the  mention  of  the  priests' 
garments  which  formed  a  part  of  the  offerings. 
Obviously,  therefore,  the  original  work  must  have 
contained  an  account  of  some  transactions  connected 
with  repairing  or  beautifying  the  Temple,  which 
led  to  these  contributions  being  made.  Now,  it  so 
happens  that  there  is  a  passage  in  2  Mace.  ii.  13,  in 

°  It  is  not  necessary  to  believe  that  Nehemiah  wrote 
ill  that  is  attribute?,  to  him  in  2  Mace.  It  is  very  pro- 
bab.e  that  there  was  an  apocryphal  version  of  his  book, 
with  additions  and  embellishments.  Still  even  the  ori 
ginal  work  may  have  contained  matter  either  not  strictly 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF         495 

which  "  the  writings  and  commentaries  of  Nehe- 
miah  "  are  referred  to  in  a  way  which  shows  that 
they  contained  matter  relative  to  the  sacred  fire 
having  consumed  the  sacrifices  offered  by  Nehemiab 
on  some  solemn  occasion  when  he  repaired  and 
dedicated  the  Temple,  which  is  not  found  in  the 
present  book  of  Nehemiah  ;  and  if  any  dependance 
can  be  placed  upon  the  account  there  given,  and  in 
i.  18-36,  we  seem  to  have  exactly  the  two  facts 
that  we  want  to  justify  our  hypothesis.  The  one, 
that  Neherniah's  narrative  at  this  part  contained 
some  things  which  wera  not  suited  to  form  part  of 
the  Bible ;  °  the  other,  that  it  formerly  contained 
some  account  which  would  be  the  natural  occasion 
for  mentioning  the  offerings  which  come  in  so 
abruptly  at  present.  If  this  were  so,  and  the  ex 
ceptional  matter  was  consequently  omitted,  and  an 
abridged  notice  of  the  offerings  retained,  we  should 
have  exactly  the  appearance  which  we  actually  have 
in  chap.  vii. 

Nor  is  such  an  explanation  less  suited  to  connect 
the  latter  portion  of  Nehemiah's  narrative  with  the 
former.  Chap.  xii.  31,  goes  on  to  describe  the  dedica 
tion  of  the  wall  and  its  ceremonial.  How  naturally 
this  would  be  the  sequel  of  that  dedication  of  the  re 
stored  Temple  spoken  of  by  the  author  of  2  Mace, 
it  is  needless  to  observe.  So  that  if  we  suppose  the 
missing  portions  of  Nehemiah's  history  which  de 
scribed  the  dedication  service  of  the  Temple  to  have 
followed  his  description  of  the  census  in  ch.  vi;.., 
and  to  have  been  followed  by  the  account  of  the 
offerings,  and  then  to  have  been  succeeded  by  the 
dedication  of  the  wall,  we  have  a  perfectly  natural 
and  consistent  narrative.  In  erasing  what  was  irre 
levant,  and  inserting  the  intervening  matter,  of 
course  no  pains  were  taken,  because  no  desire  existed, 
to  disguise  the  operation,  or  to  make  the  joints 
smooth;  the  object  being  simply  to  preserve  an 
authentic  record  without  reference  to  authorship  or 
literary  perfection. 

Another  circumstance  which  lends  much  proba 
bility  to  the  statement  in  2  Mace.,  is  that  the  writer 
closely  connects  what  Nehemiah  did  with  what 
Solomon  had  done  before  him,  in  this,  one  may 
guess,  following  Nehemiah's  narrative.  But  in  the 
extant  portion  of  our  book,  Neh.  i.  6,  we  have  a 
distinct  allusion  to  Solomon's  prayer  (1  K.  viii. 
28,  29),  as  also  in  Neh.  xiii.  26,  we  have  to  another 
part  of  Solomon's  life.  So  that  on  the  whole  the 
passage  in  2  Mace,  lends  considerable  support  to  the 
theory  that  the  middle  portion  of  Nehemiah's  work 
was  cut  out,  and  that  there  was  substituted  for  it 
partly  an  abridged  abstract,  and  partly  Ezra's  nar 
rative  and  other  appended  documents.* 

We  may  then  affirm  with  tolerable  certainty  that 
all  the  middle  part  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  has 
been  supplied  by  other  hands,  and  that  the  first  six 
chapters  and  part  of  the  seventh,  and  the  last  chapter 
and  half,  were  alone  written  by  him,  the  interme- 
mediate  portion  being  inserted  by  those  who  had 
authority  to  do  so,  in  order  to  complete  the  history 
of  the  transactions  of  those  times.  The  difference 
of  authorship  being  marked  especially  by  this,  that, 
in  the  first  and  last  portions,  Nehemiah  invariably 
speaks  in  the  first  person  singular  (except  in  the 
inserted  verses  xii.  44-47),  but  in  the  middle  por 
tion  never.  It  is  in  this  middle  portion  alone  that 


authentic,  or  for  some  other  reason  not  suited  to  have  a 
place  in  the  canon. 

P  Ceilller  also  supposes  that  part  of  Nehemiah's  w  orh 
may  be  now  lost. 


496 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 


matter  unsuited  to  Nehemiah's  times  (as  e.g.  Neh. 
xii.  11,  22),  is  found,  that  obscurity  of  connection 
exists,  and  that  the  variety  of  style  (as  almost  all 
critics  admit)  suggests  a  different  authorship.  But 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  book  of  Nehemiah 
is  in  fact  a  continuation  of  the  Chronicles,"!  being 
reckoned  by  the  Hebrews,  as  Jerome  testifies,  as 
one  with  Ezra,  which  was  confessedly  so,  and 
that,  as  we  have  seen  under  EZRA,  CHRONICLES, 
and  KINGS,  the  customary  method  of  composing 
the  national  Chronicles  was  to  make  use  of  contem 
porary  writings,  and  work  them  up  according  to 
the  requirements  of  the  case,  it  will  cease  to  surprise 
us  in  the  least  that  Nehemiah's  diary  should  have 
been  so  used  :  nor  will  the  admixture  of  other  con 
temporary  documents  with  it,  or  the  addition  of 
any  reflections  by  the  latest  editor  of  it,  in  any  way 
detract  from  its  authenticity  or  authority. 

As  regards  the  time  when  the  Book  of  Nehemiah 
was  put  into  its  present  form,  we  have  only  the 
following  data  to  guide  us.  The  latest  high-priest 
mentioned,  Jaddua,  was  doubtless  still  alive  when 
his  name  was  added.  The  descriptive  addition  to 
the  name  of  Darius  (xii.  22)  "  the  Persian,"  indi 
cates  that  the  Persian  rule  had  ceased,  and  the  Greek 
rule  had  begun.  Jaddua's  name,  therefore,  and 
the  clause  at  the  end  of  ver.  22,  were  inserted  early 
in  the  reign  of  Alexander  the  Great.  But  it  ap 
pears  that  the  registers  of  the  Levites,  entered  into 
the  Chronicles,  did  not  come  down  lower  than  the 
time  of  Johanan  (ver.  23)  ;  and  it  even  seems  from 
the  distribution  of  the  conjunction  "and"  in 
ver.  21,  that  the  name  of  Jaddua  was  not  included 
when  the  sentence  was  first  written,  but  stopped 
at  Johanan,  and  that  Jaddua  and  the  clause  about 
the  priests  were  added  later.  So  that  the  close  of 
the  Persian  dominion,  and  the  beginning  of  the 
Greek,  is  the  time  clearly  indicated  when  the  latest 
additions  were  made,  But  whether  this  addition 
was  anything  more  than  the  insertion  of  the  docu 
ments  contained  from  ch.  xi.  3  to  xii.  26,  or  even 
much  less ;  or  whether  at  the  same  time,  or  at  an 
earlier  one,  the  great  alteration  was  made  of  sub 
stituting  the  abridgment  in  ch.  vii.  in  the  contem 
porary  narratives  in  ch.  viii.  ix.  x.,  for  what 
Nehemiah  had  written,  there  seems  to  be  no  means 
of  deciding."  Nor  is  the  decision  of  much  conse 
quence,  except  that  it  would  be  interesting  to  know 
exactly  when  the  volume  of  Holy  Scripture  defi 
nitively  assumed  its  present  shape,  and  who  were 
the  persons  who  put  the  finishing  hand  to  it. 

3.  In  respect  to  language  and  style,  this  book  is 
very  similar  to  the  Chronicles  and  Ezra.  Nehemiah 
has,  it  is  true,  quite  his  own  manner,  and,  as  De 
Wette  has  observed,  certain  phrases  and  modes  of 
expression  peculiar  to  himself.  He  has  also  some  few 
words  and  forms  not  found  elsewhere  in  Scripture  ; 
but  the  general  Hebrew  style  is  exactly  that  of  the 
books  purporting  to  be  of  the  same  age.  Some 
words,  as  D*JT?¥p,  "  cymbals,"  occur  in  Chron., 
Ezr.,  and  Neh.,  but  nowhere  else.  3;J3nn  occurs 
frequently  in  the  same  three  books,  but  only  twice  (in 
Judg.  v.)  besides.  rPSN  or  KrHSK,  "  a  letter,"  is 
common  only  to  Neh.,  Esth.,  Ezr.,  and  Chron.  i"!T3, 
and  its  Chaldee  equivalent,  K"V3,  whether  spoken  of 


•i  So  Ewald  also. 

'  If  we  knew  the  real  history  of  the  title  Tirshatha, 
it  might  assist  us  in  determining  the  date  of  the  passage 
whero  it  appears. 


NEHI  MIAIi,  BOOK  OF 

the  palace  at  Susa,  or  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  an 
common  only  to  Neh.,  Ezr.,  Esth.,  Dan.,  and  Chron. 
^>3K>  to  Neh.,  and  Dan.,  and  Ps.  xlv.  The  phran 
DVDBJn  *H?X,  and  its  Chaldee  equivalent,  "  th« 
God  of'Heavens,"  are  common  to  Ezr.,  Neh.,  and  Dan 
KnbO,  "  distinctly,"  is  common  to  Ezr.  and  Neh 
Such  words  as  T3D,  n3HO,  DT^S,  and  such 

•T  T  T     •   :  ••   :  - 

Aramaisms  as  the  use  of  71H,  i.  7,  "»|71S)*i  v.  7. 
n^D,  v.  4,  &c.,  are  also  evidences  of  the  age  when 
Nehemiah  wrote.  As  examples  of  peculiar  words 
or  meanings,  used  in  this  book  alone,  the  following 
may  be  mentioned :  —  !}  "OK*,  "  to  inspect,"  ii 
13,  15;  HNO,  in  the  sense  of  "interest,"  v.  11, 
fj-IJ  (in  Hiph.),  "  to  shut,"  vii.  3 ;  ^JTlO,  «  a  lift 
ing  up,"  viii.  6  ;  J"I1T H,  "  praises,"  or  "  choirs,' 
xii.  8  ;  PG'l/nJ5),  "  a  procession,"  xii.  32  ;  fcOj5D. 
in  sense  of  "  reading,"  viii.  8 ;  mxfo,  for 
fl"VSRK»  xiii.  3,  where  both  form  and  sense  are 
alike  unusual. 

The  Aramean  form,  min*,  Hiph.  of  PIT  for 

v      :  TT 

("Hi*,   is   very   rare,    only  five1   other  analogous 

examples  occurring  in  the  Heb.  Scriptures,  though 
it  is  very  common  in  Biblical  Chaldee. 

The  phrase  D?»H  mhv  B»K,  iv.  17  (which  is 
omitted  by  the  LXX.)  is  incapable  of  explanation. 
One  would  have  expected,  instead  of  D^SH. 
1T3,  as  in  2  Chr.  xxiii.  10. 

JtnBnRn,  "  the  Tirshatha,"  which  only  occurs 

in  Ezr.  ii.  63,  Neh.  vii.  65,  70,  viii.  9,  x.  1,  is  of 
uncertain  etymology  and  meaning.  It  is  a  term 
applied  only  to  Nshemiah,  and  seems  to  be  more 
likely  to  mean  "  cupbearer "  than  "  governor," 
though  the  latter  interpretation  is  adopted  by 
Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  v.). 

The  text  of  Nehemiah  is  generally  pure  and  free 
from  corruption,  except  in  the  proper  names,  in 
which  there  is  considerable  fluctuation  in  the  ortho 
graphy,  both  as  compared  with  other  parts  of  the 
same  book  and  with  the  same  names  in  other  parts 
of  Sci-ipture ;  and  also  in  numerals.  Of  the  latter  we 
have  seen  several  examples  in  the  parallel  passages 
Ezr.  ii.  and  Neh.  vii. ;  and  the  same  lists  will  give 
variations  in  names  of  men.  So  will  xii.  1-7,  com 
pared  with  xii.  12,  and  with  x.  1-8. 

A  comparison  of  Neh.  xi.  3,  &c.,  with  1  Chr. 
ix.  2,  &c.,  exhibits  the  following  fluctuations: — 
Neh.  xi.  4,  Athaiah  of  the  children  of  Perez 
=  1  Chr.  ix.  4,  Uthai  of  the  children  of  Perez  ; 
v.  5,  Maaseiah  the  son  of  Shiloni  =  v.  5,  of  th« 
Shilonites,  Asaiah  ;  v.  9,  Judah  the  son  of  Senuah 
(Heb.  Hasenuah)  =  v.  7,  Hodaviah  the  son  of  Ha- 
senuah  ;  v.  10,  Jedaiah  the  son  of  Joiarib,  Jachin 
=  v.  10,  Jedaiah,  Jehoiarib,  Jachin  ;  v.  13,  Amasai 
son  of  Azareel  =  v.  12,  Maasai  son  of  Jahzerah  ; 
v.  17,  Micah  the  son  of  Zabdi=v.  15,  Micah  the 
son  of  Zichri  (comp.  Neh.  xii.  35).  To  which 
many  others  might  be  added. 

Many  various  readings  are  also  indicated  by  the 
LXX.  version.  For  example,  at  ii.  13.  for  D^SF). 


•  Ps.  xlv.  18,  cxvi.  6j   l  Sam.  xrii.  47  ;   In.  lii.  £  ;  Ki 
xlvl.  22  (Journ.  of  Sac.  Lit.  .Jan.  l£oi,  p.  383J. 


NEHEMIAH,  BOOK  OF 

"dragon,"  they  rend  D*3Nn,  "  figs,"  and  render  it 
iwv  ffvitwr.  At  ii.  20,  for  D-1p3,  "  we  will  arise," 
they  read  D^pX  "  pure,"  and  render  it  Ka.6a.poL 
At  iii.  2,  for  133,  "  they  built,"  they  read  twice 
*33,  vltav ;  and  so  at  ver.  14.  At  iii.  15,  for 
'n/Qn  J3?  HT'CS'n  rO13,  "  the  pool  of  Siloah  by 
the  king's  garden,"  they  read  "H  T3p  "H  "3,  "  the 
king's  fleece,"  and  render  it  Ko\vp.&l)9pa.s  TUIV 
Kiafiicav  rrj  xovpd  TOV  Ba/n\e<as'  Kovpa,  being  the 
word  by  which  T3  is  rendered  in  Deut.  xviii.  4. 
n?t^n  is  rendered  by  KtaSitav,  "  sheep-skins,"  in 
the  Chaldee  sense  of  PI 7&  or  Xlr?^,  a  fleece 
recently  stripped  from  the  animal  (Castell.  Lex.). 
At  iii.  16,  for  133,  "  over  against,"  they  read 
J2,  "  the  garden  ;"  comp.  ver.  26  :  in  iii.  34,  35 
(iv.  2,  3),  they  seem  to  have  had  a  corrupt  and 
unintelligible  text.  At  v.  5,  for  D^lflS,  "  others," 
they  read  DHPin,  "the  nobles:"  v.  11,  for  DNO. 
"  the  hundredth,"  they  read  flXO,  "  some  of," 
rendering  4W:  vi.  1,  for  ^15  H3,  there  was  left  no 
''  breach  in  it,"  viz.,  the  wall,  they  read  fill  D3, 

?  -  T 

"  spirit  in  them,"  viz.,  Sanballat,  &c.,  rendering 
iv  avTols  irvo-ff  vi.  3,  for  H31N,  "  I  leave  it," 
they  read  HKQ1N,  "I  complete  it,"  rf\eid>ffia- 

T      ••  :  - 

which  gives  a  better  sense.  At  vii.  68,  sqq.,  the 
number  of  asses  is  2700  instead  of  6720  ;  of  priests' 
garments,  30  instead  of  530 ;  of  pounds  of  silver, 
2300  and  2200,  instead  of  2200  end  2000,  as  has 
been  noticed  above ;  and  ver.  70,  T$  Neejiua,  for 
"  the  Tirshatha."  At  xi.  11,  for  T33,  "ruler," 
they  read  133,  "  over  against,"  dirtvavri.  At  xii. 

8,  for  mi'n,  "  thanksgiving,"   flllM,  iirl  rwv 
Xeip&v  '•    «i.    25,   for   *BDX,    "  the   treasuries," 
*Sp'S,    "  my  gathering  together,"    iv  T$   ffvva- 
yayfiv  pe" :  and  at  xii.  44,  for  *1B>,  "  the  fields," 
they  read  ^IB*,  "  the  princes,"  &pxovfft  raiv  iro- 

\f<av:  with  other  minor  variations.  The  prin 
cipal  additions  are  at  viii.  8,  15,  and  ix.  6,  where 
the  name  of  Ezra  is  introduced,  and  in  the  first 
passage  also  the  words  iv  iviffr-fi/jiri  Kvpiov.  The 
omissions  of  words  and  whole  verses  are  numerous : 
as  at  iii.  37,  38  j  iv.  17  (23,  A.  V.  and  LXX.); 
vi.  4,  5,  6,  10,  11 ;  vii.  68,  69 ;  viii.  4,  7,  9,  10  ; 
is.  3,  5,  23  ;  xi.  13, 16-21,  23-26,  28-35  ;  xii.  3-7, 

9,  25,  28,  29,  the  whole  of  38, 40, 41,  and  half  42  ; 
xiii.  13,  14,  16,  20,  24,  25. 

The  following  discrepancies  seem  to  have  their 
origin  in  the  Greek  text  itself: — viii.  16,  ir\a,Ttiais 
-T)J  v6\eias,  instead  of  iruATjy,  Heb.  D^JSH  "ly^  •' 
x.  2,  TIO2  APAIA  for  KAI  2APAIA  :  xi.  4,  2~a- 
fiapia  for  'Ayuapfa,  the  final  2  of  the  preceding 
vlos  having  stuck  to  the  beginning  of  the  name : 
xii.  31,  dv-fiveyKav,  instead  of  — KO.-  "  I  brought 
up:"  xii.  39,  Ix^vpdv,  instead  of  IxOvripdv,  as  in 
iii.  3.  It  is  also  worthy  of  remark  that  a  number 
of  Hebrew  words  are  left  untranslated  in  the  Greek 
version  of  the  LXX.,  which  probably  indicates  a 
want  of  learning  in  the  translator.  The  following 
are  the  chief  instances: — Chaps,  i.  1,  and  vii.  '2 
i&tpd,  and  Ttjs  @ipd,  for  m*3n  ;  ii.  13,  rov  yta- 
\tl\d  for  H?v  XH3n  ;  ib.  14,  rnv  div  for  J^yn  » 

VOL.  II. 


NEHILOTH  407 

iii.  5,  ol  0eK«fyi  for  D^yipRn  ;  .l>.  aSwpi/u  foi 
DiWIN  ;  ib.  6,  laffavat  for  113^  ;  ib.  8,  ^aiKcfrt 
for  Q^npin  ;  ib.  11,  rS>v  Oavovpl/j.  for  Q^I-lSrin 
iii.  16,  /Srjflaryap'V  for  Dn3|in  JV3  ;  ib.  20,21, 
for  3't^N  rP3,  cf.  24  ;  ib.  22 
•dp  for  133n  ;  ib.  31,  TOV  trapf<pi  foi 
,  and  pi]0a,v  'NaOtvifi  for  D*3^r|3n  71^3  5 
vii.  34,  'HAofiacJp  for  "inN  D?^  ;  ib.  65,  dOfp- 
craffOd,  and  x.  1,  dpraffaff&d,  for  NnLJHfin  ;  vii. 

T  T    :  •  - 

70,  72,  xvQwdO  for  HWHS  ;  xii.  27,  0o>8a0a  for 
rtlin ;  xiii.  5,  9,  T^V  pavaa.  for  nH3?3n. 

4.  The  Book  of  Nehemiah  has  always  had  an 
undisputed  place  in  the  Canon,  being  included  by 
the  Hebrews  under  the  general  head  of  the  Book 
of  Ezra,  and  as  Jerome  tells  us  in  the  Prolog.  Gal. 
by  the  Greeks  and  Latins  under  the  name  of  the 
second  Book  of  Ezra.  [EsoRAS,  FIRST  BOOK  OF.] 
There  is  no  quotation  from  it  in  the  N.  T.,  and  i* 
has  been  comparatively  neglected  by  both  the  Greek 
and  Latin  fathers,  perhaps  on  account  of  its  simple 
character,  and  the  absence  of  anything  supernatural, 
prophetical,  or  mystical  in  its  contents.  St.  Jerome 
(ad  Paulinam)  does  indeed  suggest  that  the  account 
of  the  building  of  the  walls,  and  the  return  of  the 
people,  the  description  of  the  Priests,  Levites,  Israel 
ites,  and  proselytes,  and  the  division  of  the  labour 
among  the  different  families,  have  a  hidden  mean 
ing:  and  also  hints  that  Nehemiah's  name,  which 
he  interprets  consolator  a  Domino,  points  to  a 
mystical  sense.  But  the  book  does  not  easily  lend 
itself  to  such  applications,  which  are  so  mani 
festly  forced  and  strained,  that  even  Augustine  says 
of  the  whole  Book  of  Ezra  that  it  is  simply  his 
torical  rather  than  prophetical  (De  Civit.  Dei,  xviii. 
36).  Those  however  who  wish  to  see  St.  Jerome's 
hint  elaborately  carried  out,  may  refer  to  the  Ven, 
Bede's  Allegorica  Expositio  in  Librum  Nehemia;, 
qui  et  Ezrce  Secundus,  as  well  as  to  the  preface  to 
his  exposition  of  Ezra ;  and,  in  another  sense,  to 
Bp.  Pilkington's  Exposition  upon  Nehemiah,  and 
John  Fox's  Preface  (Park.  Soc.).  It  may  be  added 
that  Bede  describes  both  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  as 
prophets,  which  is  the  head  under  which  Josephus 
includes  them  in  his  description  of  the  sacred  books 
(C.  Ap.  i.  8). 

Keil's  Einleitung ;  Winer's  Realwvrt. ;  De  Wette's 
Einleitung,  by  Th.  Parker ;  Prideaux's  Connection ; 
Ceillier's  Auteurs  Ecclesiast. ;  Wolf,  Bill.  Hebraic. ; 
Ewald,  Geschichte,i.  225,  iv.  144;  Thrupp's  Ancient 
Jerusalem ;  Bosanquet's  Times  of  Ezra  and  Nehe 
miah.  [A.  C.  H.] 

NEHEMI'AS  (N«ejJas :  Nehemias).  1.  Ne 
hemiah,  the  contemporary  of  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
(1  Esdr.  v.  8). 

2.  Nehemiah  the  Tirshatha,  son  of  Hachaliah 
(1  Esdr.  v.  40). 

NE'HILOTH.    The  title  of  Ps.  v.  in  the  A.  V. 

is  rendered  "  to  the  chief  musician  upon  Nehiloth" 
(ni?'in3rr?N) ;  LXX.,  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and 
Theodotion  translate  the  last  two  words  virtp  TTJS 
n\T]povop.ovo"r)s,  and  the  Vulgate,  "  pro  ea  quae 
haereditatem  consequitur,"  by  which  Augustine  un 
derstands  the  Church.  The  origin  of  their  error  was 
a  mistaken  etymology,  by  which  Nehiloth  is  derived 
from  ?n3,  ndchal,  to  inherit.  Other  etymologies 
have  been  proposed  which  are  equaUy  unsound.  In 

O     I/" 

-     rS 


i98  NEHUM 

Chaldee  ?'H3,  nichil,  signifies  "  a  swarm  of  bees, 
and  hence  .Tarchi  attributes  to  Nehiloth  the  notion 
of  multitude,  the  Psalm  being  sung  by  the  whole 
people  of  Israel.  R.  Hai,  quoted  by  Kimchi,  adopt 
ing  the  same  origin  for  the  word,  explains  it  as  an 
instrument,  the  sound  of  which  was  like  the  hum 
»f  bees,  a  wind  instrument,  according  to  Sonntag 
(de  tit.  Psal.  p.  430),  which  had  a  rough  tone. 
Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  p.  1629)  suggests, 
with  not  unreasonable  timidity,  that  the  root  is  to 

be  found  in  the  Arab.  V^yj.  nachala,  to  winnow, 


and  hence  to  separate  and  select  the  better  part,  indi 
cating  that  the  Psalm,  in  the  title  of  which  Nehiloth 
occurs,  was  "  an  ode  to  be  chanted  by  the  purified 
and  better  portion  of  the  people."  It  is  most  likely, 
as  Gesenius  and  others  explain,  that  it  is  derived 

from  the  root  ??!"!,  chdlal,  to  bore,  perforate, 
whence  ?vl"l,  chalil,  a  flute  or  pipe  (1  Sam.  x.  5; 

1  K.  i.  40),  so  that  Nehiloth  is  the  general  term 
for  perforated  wind-instruments  of  all  kinds,  as  Ne- 
ginoth  denotes  all  manner  of  stringed  instruments. 
The  title  of  Ps.  v.  is  therefore  addressed  to  the  con 
ductor  of  that  portion  of  the  Temple-choir  who 
played  upon  flutes  and  the  like,  and  are  directly 

alluded  to  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  where  (D  v/H,  choUlim] 

"  the  players  upon  instruments  "  who  are  associated 
with  the  singers,  are  properly  "  pipers"  or  "  flute- 
players."  fW.  A.  W.] 

NE'HUM  (n-im  :  'Iwtofyi  :  Nahum).    One  of 

those  who  returned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel 
(Neh.  vii.  7).  In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called  KEHUM, 
and  in  1  Esdr.  v.  8  ROIMUS. 

NEHUSHTA(Kfi8?rU:  N«V0a;  Alex.NcJ.o-0a: 
NoJiesta).  The  daughter  of  Elnathan  of  Jerusalem, 
wife  of  Jehoiakim,  and  mother  of  Jehoiachin,  kings 
of  Judah  (2  K.  xxiv.  8). 

NEHUSH'TAN  (JPlK'nJ  :  Nee<r0(fi>,  but  Mai's 
ed.  Neo-floAf  /  ;  Alex.  VletrOdv  :  Nohestan).  One  of 
the  first  acts  of  Hezekiah,  upon  coming  to  the  throne 
of  Judah,  was  to  destroy  all  traces  of  the  idolatrous 
rites  which  had  gained  such  a  fast  hold  upon  the 
people  during  the  reign  of  his  father  Ahaz.  Among 
other  objects  of  superstitious  reverence  and  worship 
was  the  brazen  serpent,  made  by  Moses  in  the  wil 
derness  (Num.  xxi.  9),  which  was  preserved  through 
out  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites,  probably  as  a 
memorial  of  their  deliverance,  and  according  to  a 
late  tradition  was  placed  in  the  Temple.  The  lapse 
of  nearly  a  thousand  years  had  invested  this  ancient 
relic  with  a  mysterious  sanctity  which  easily  dege 
nerated  into  idolatrous  reverence,  and  at  the  time 
of  Hezekiah's  accession  it  had  evidently  been  long 
an  object  of  worship,  "  for  unto  those  days  the 
cnndren  of  Israel  did  bum  incense  to  it,"  or  as  the 
Hebrew  more  fully  implies,  "  had  been  in  the  habit 
of  burning  incense  to  it."  The  expression  points  to 
a  settled  practice.  The  name  by  which  the  brazen 
serpent  was  known  at  this  time,  and  by  which  it 
had  been  worshipped,  was  Nehushtan  (2  K.  xviii.  4). 
It  is  evident  that  our  translators  by  their  rendering, 
'•'  and  he  called  it  Nehushtan,"  understood  with 
many  commentators  that  the  subject  of  the  sentence 
is  Hezekiah,  and  that  when  he  destroyed  the  brazen 
serpent  he  gave  it  the  name  Nehushtan,  "  a  brazen 
tiling,"  in  token  of  his  utter  contempt,  and  to  im 
press  upon  the  people  the  idea  of  its  worthlessness. 
This  rendering  has  the  support  of  the  LXX.  and 


NEPHEQ 

Vulgate,  Jut-ius  and  Tremellius,  Biunster,  Claricns, 
and  others  ;  but  it  is  better  to  understand  the  Hebrew 
as  referring  to  the  name  by  which  the  serpent  was 
generally  known,  the  subject  of  the  verb  being  in 
definite  —  "  and  one  called  it  '  Nehushtan.'  "  Such  a 
construction  is  common,  and  instances  of  it  may  be 
found  in  Gen.  xxv.  26,  xxxviii.  29,  30,  where  our 
translators  correctly  render  "  his  name  was  called," 
and  in  Gen.  xlviii.  1,  2.  This  was  the  view  taken  in 
the  Targ.  Jon.  and  in  the  Peshito-Syriac,  "  and  they 
called  it  Nehushtan,"  which  Buxtorf  approves  (Hist. 
Serp.  Aen.  cap.  vi.).  It  has  the  support  of  Luther, 
Pfeiffer  (Dub.  Vex.  cent.  3,  loc.  5),  J.  D.  Michaelie 
(Bibelfiir  Ungel.\  and  Bunsec  (Bibelwerk),  as  well 
asof  Ewald  (Gesch.  Hi.  622),  Keil,  Thenius,  and  most 
modem  commentators.  [SERPENT.]  [W.  A.  W.] 

NE'IEL  (ta-'Jtt  :  'Iva^X  ;  Alex.  AyirjA.  :  Ne- 
hief),  a  place  which  formed  one  of  the  landmarks 
of  the  boundary  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  (Josh.  xbc. 
27  only).  It  occurs  between  JIPHTHAH-EL  and 
CABITL.  If  the  former  of  these  be  identified  with 
Jefat,  and  the  latter  with  Kabul,  8  or  9  miles 
E.S.E.  of  Akka,  then  Neiel  may  possibly  be  repre 
sented  by  Mi'ar,  a  village  conspicuously  placed  on 
a  lofty  mountain  brow,  just  half-way  between  the 
two  (Rob.  iii.  87,  103;  also  Van  de  Velde's  Map, 
1858).  The  change  of  N  into  M,  and  L  into  R,  is 
frequent,  and  Miar  retains  the  Am  of  Neiel.  [G.] 

NEK'EB  (3J2J)n,  with  the  def.  article  :  KO!  Na- 
/3(t>K  ;  Alex.  Na»ce/3  :  quae  est  Neceb),  one  of  the 
towns  on  the  boundary  of  Naphtali  (Josh.  xix.  33 
only).  It  lay  between  ADAMI  and  JABNEEL. 

A  great  number  of  commentators,  from  Jonathan 
the  Targumist  and  Jerome  (  Vulgate  as  above)  to 
Keil  (Josua,  ad  loc.),  have  taken  this  name  as  being 
connected  with  the  preceding  —  Adami-han-Nekeb 
(  Junius  and  Tremellius,  "  Adamaei  fossa  ")  ;  and 
indeed  this  is  the  force  of  the  accentuation  of  the 
present  Hebrew  text.  But  on  the  other  hand  the 
LXX.  give  the  two  as  distinct,  and  in  the  Talmud  the 
post-biblical  names  of  each  are  given,  that  of  han- 
Nekeb  being  Tsiadathah  (Gemara  Hieros.  Cod. 
Megilla,  in  Reland,  Pal.  545,  717,  817;  also 
Sehwarz,  181). 

Of  this  more  modern  name  Sehwarz  suggests  that 
a  trace  is  to  be  found  in  "  Hazedhi,"  3  English 
miles  N.  from  al  Chatti.  [G.] 

NEK'ODA  (jn'lpJ  :    NeKwScf  ;   Alex,  in  Exr. 

ii.  48,  Ne/cwSoV  :  Necoda).  1.  The  descendants  of 
Nekoda  returned  among  the  Nethinim  after  the 
captivity  (Ezr.  ii.  48  ;  Neh.  vii.  50). 

2.  The  sons  of  Nekoda  were  among  those  who 
went  up  after  the  captivity  from  Tei-melah,  Tel- 
harsa  and  other  places,  but  were  unable  to  prove 
their  descent  from  Israel  (Ezr.  ii.  60  ;  Neh.  vii.  62). 

NEM'UEL  (^>N-1O3  :  No/uou^A.  :  Namuet). 
1.  A  Reubenite,  son  of  Eliab,  and  eldest  brother  of 
Dathan  and  Abirain  (Num.  xxvi.  9). 

2.  The  eldest  son  of  Simeon  (Num.  rxvi.  12  ; 
1  Chr.  iv.  24),  from  whom  were  descended  the 
family  of  the  Nemuelites.  In  Gen.  xlvi.  10  he  is 
called  JEMUEL. 


NEMU'ELITES,  THE 

Nafj.oinj\(  ;  Alex.  Na/jiovr)\«l,  and  so  Mai  :  Na- 
•nuelitae).  The  descendants  of  Nemuel  the  first 
born  of  Simeon  (Num.  xxvi.  12). 

NE'PIIEG  (JQj  :  No**'*  :  Nc}>heg°).     1.  On* 


NEPHI 


NER 


499 


of  the  sous  of  Izhar  the  son  of  Kohath,  and  there-  iof  the  Wadij  Aly*  (Mislin,  ii.  155)  ;   but  these, 
fore  brother  of  Korah  (Ex.  vi.  21).  I  especially  the  last,  are  unsuitable  in  their  situation 

2.  (Na</>aO  in  1  Chr.  xiv.  6  ;   Alex.  Vatjtey  in  '  as  respects  Jerusalem  and  Kirjath-jearim,  and  have 
I  Chr.  iii.  7).     One  of  David's  sons  bom  to  him  in  i  the  additional  drawback  that  the  features  of  the 


Jerusalem  after  he  was  come  from  Hebron  (2  Sam. 


v.  15;  1  Chr.  iii.  7,  xiv.  6). 
NE'Pffl  (NeQOaet  ;    Ale* 


Nepki). 


The  name  by  which  the  NAPHTHAR  of  Nehemiah 
was  usually  (irapo  rots  TroAAoTs)  called  (2  Mace.  i. 
35).  The  A.  V.  has  here  followed  the  Vulgate. 

NE'PHIS  (Ni<f>ls:  Liptis).  In  the  corrupt 
list  of  1  Esdr.  v.  21,  "  the  sons  of  Nephis,"  appa 
rently  correspond  with  "  the  children  of  Nebo  "  in 
Ezr.  ii.  29,  or  else  the  name  is  a  corruption  of 
MAGBISII. 

NE'PHISH  (ETQ3  :  Na<p«ra5a«oi ;  Alex.  Na- 
<t>tcraioi:  Naphis).  An  inaccurate  variation  (found 
in  1  Chr.  v.  19  only)  of  the  name  elsewhere  cor- 


country  there  are  not  such  as  to  permit  a  boundary- 
line  to  be  traced  along  it,  while  the  line  through 
Ain  Lifta  would,  in  Barclay's  words,  "  pursue  a 
course  indicated  by  nature." 

The  name  of  Lifta  is  not  less  suitable  to  this 
identification  than  its  situation,  since  N  and  L  fre 
quently  take  the  place  of  each  other,  and  the  rest 
of  the  word  is  almost  entirely  unchanged.  The 
earliest  notice  of  it  appears  to  be  by  Stewart b  (Tent 
and  Khan,  349),  who  speaks  of  it  as  at  that  time 


(Feb.  1854)  "recognised." 
NEPH'USIM 


[G.] 
Keri,  D^p-la? :    Nt- 

;  Alex.  Ne<f>ot><r6i/i :  Nephusim).   The  same 
NEPHISHESIM,   of  which  name  according  to 


.    .  - 

rectly  given  in  the  A.V.  NAPHISH,  the  form  always    Geseuius  it  is  the  proper  form  (Ezr.  ii.  50). 


The 


preserved  in  the  original. 
NEPHISH'ESIM(D''ptpQJ;  Keri, 

Nefjxatratri ;  Alex.  Ne<f>axraei'/i  :  Nephussim). 
children  of  Nephishesim  were  among  the  Nethinim 
who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  52).  The 
name  elsewhere  appears  as  NEPHUSIM  and  NA- 
PHISI.  Gesenius  decides  that  it  is  a  corruption  cf 
the  former  (  Hies.  p.  899). 

NEPH'THALI  (N€<J>0a\efyi ;  Alex.  Ne^flaAi : 
NephthaK).  The  Vulgate  form  of  the  name  NAPH- 
TALi(Tob.  i.  1,2,4,  5). 

NEPH'THALIM  (NfQQaXei ;  Alex.  Ne^fla- 
\fifi,  and  so  N.  T. :  Nephthali,  Nephthalim). 
Another  form  of  the  same  name  as  the  preceding 
(Tob.  vii.  5  ;  Matt.  iv.  13,  15  ;  Rev.  vii.  6). 

NEPHTO'AH,    THE    WATER    OF    (»0 

mriD3 :  SSup  Mcup0<&,  and  NcupOd :  aqua,  and 
aquae,  Nephthoa).  The  spring  or  source  (}*JJ,  A.  V. 
"  fountain  "  and  "  well ")  of  the  water  or  (inaccu- 
'  rately)  waters  of  Nephtoah,  was  one  of  the  land 
marks  in  the  boundary-line  which  separated  Judah 
from  Benjamin  (Josh.  XT.  9,  xviii.  15).  It  was 
situated  between  the  "  head,"  or  the  "  end,"  of 
the  mountain  which  faced  the  valley  of  Hinnom  on 
the  west,  and  the  cities  of  Ephron,  the  next  point 
beyond  which  was  Kirjath-jearim.  It  lay  therefore 
N.W.  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  direction  it  seems  to 
have  been  satisfactorily  identified  in  Ain  Lifta,  a 
spring  situated  a  little  distance  above  the  village 
of  the  same  name,  in  a  short  valley  which  runs 
into  the  east  side  of  the  great  Wady  Beit  Hanina, 
about  2^  miles  from  Jerusalem  and  6  from  Kuriet 
el  Enab  (K.-jearim).  The  spring — of  which  a  view 
is  given  by  Dr.  Barclay  (City,  &c.,  544) — is  very 
abundant,  and  the  water  escapes  in  a  considerable 
stream  into  the  valley  below. 

Nephtoah  was  formerly  identified  with  various 
springs — the  spring  of  St.  Philip  (Ain  Haniyeh)  in 
the  Wady  el  Word;  the  Ain  Yalo  in  the  same  val 
ley,  but  nearer  Jerusalem ;  the  Ain  Karim,  or  Foun 
tain  of  the  Virgin  of  mediaeval  times  (Doubdan, 
Voyage,  187  ;  see  also  the  citations  of  Tobler,  To- 
pographie,  351 ;  and  Sandys,  lib.  iii.  p.  184) ;  and 
even  the  so-called  Well  of  Job  at  the  western  end 

*  This  must  arise  from  a  confusion  between  Yalo 
(AJalon),  near  which  the  "  well  of  Job  "  is  situated,  and  the 
Ain  Yalo. 

b  Stewart,  while  accusing  Dr.  Robinson  of  inaccuracy 
fp.  319)  his  himself  fallen  into  a  curious  confusion  between 


NER  (13  :  N^p  :  Ner),  son  of  Jehiel,  according  to 

1  Chr.  viii.  33,  father  of  Kish  and  Abner,  and  grand 
father  of  king  Saul.  Abner  was,  therefore,  uncle  to 
Saul,  as  is  expressly  stated  1  Sam.  xiv.  50.  But 
some  confusion  has  arisen  from  the  statement  in 
1  Chr.  ix.  36,  that  Kish  and  Ner  were  both  sons  of 
Jehiel,  whence  it  has  been  concluded  that  they 
were  brothers,  and  consequently  that  Abner  and  Saul 
were  first  cousins.  But,  unless  there  was  an  elder 
Kish,  uncle  of  Saul's  father,  which  is  not  at  all 
probable,  it  is  obvious  to  explain  the  insertion  of 
Kish's  name  (as  that  of  the  numerous  names  by  the 
side  of  it)  in  1  Chr.  ix.  36,  by  the  common  prac 
tice  in  the  Chronicles  of  calling  all  the  heads  of 
houses  of  fathers,  sons  of  the  phylarch  or  demarch 
from  whom  they  sprung,  or  under  whom  they  were 
reckoned  in  the  genealogies,  whether  they  were 
sons  or  grandsons,  or  later  descendants,  or  even 
descendants  of  collateral  branches.  [BECHEK.] 

The  name  Ner,  combined  with  that  of  his  son 
Abner,  may  be  compared  with  Nadab  in  ver.  36,  and 
Abinadab  ver.  39 ;  with  Jesse,  1  Chr.  ii.  13,  and 
Abishai,  ver.  16  ;  and  with  Juda,  Luke  iii.  26,  and 
Abiud,  Matt.  i.  13.  The  subjoined  table  shows 
Ner's  family  relations. 

Benjamin 

Becher,  or  Bechorath  (1  Sam.  ix.  1 ;  1  Chr.  vii.  6,E, 

Abiah.  or  Aphiah  (ib.) 

Zeror,  <  r  Zur  (1  Chr.  viii.  80) 

Abiel,  or  Jehiel  (1  Chr.  ix.  8S) 


Abdon 

Zur       Kish 

Baal       h 

IT 

Nadab       Gedor 

Ahioj 

Zochariah 

Mtklotu 

K»h 
Saul." 


The  family  seat  of  Ner  was  Gibeon,  where  his 
father  Jehiel  was  probably  the  first  to  settle  (1 
Chr.  ix.  35).  From  the  pointed  mention  of  his 
mother,  Maachah,  as  the  wife  of  Jehiel,  she  was 
perhaps  the  heiress  of  the  estate  in  Gibeon.  This 
inference  receives  some  confirmation  from  the  fact 
that  "  Maachah,  Caleb's  concubine,"  is  said,  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  49,  to  have  borne  "  Sheva  the  father  of 


Nephtoah  and  Netophah.   Dr.  Robinson  is  in  this  instance 
perfectly  right. 

c  There  are  doubtless  some  links  missing  in  this  gene* 
logy,  jj>  at  all  events  toe  hfaa  of  the  family  of  Matri. 

2  K  2 


500 


NEREUS 


Machbenah  and  the  father  of  Gibea,"  where,  thoagh 
the  text  is  in  ruins,  yet  a  connexion  of  some  sort 
between  Maachah  (whoever  she  was)  and  Gibeah, 
often  called  Gibeah  of  Saul,  and  the  same  as  Gibeon 
1  Chr.  xiv.  16,  is  apparent.  It  is  a  curious  cir- 
nmstance  that,  while  the  name  (Jehiel)  of  the 
"  father  of  Gibeon "  is  not  given  in  the  text  of 
1  Chr.  viii.  29,  the  same  is  the  case  with  "  the 
father  of  Gibea"  in  1  Chr.  ii.  49,  naturally  sug 
gesting,  therefore,  that  in  the  latter  passage  the 
same  name  Jehiel  ought  to  be  supplied  which  is 
supplied  for  the  former  by  the  duplicate  passage 
1  Chr.  is.  35.  If  this  inference  is  correct  it  would 
place  the  time  of  the  settlement  of  Jehiel  at  Gibeon 
— where  one  would  naturally  expect  to  find  it — 
near  the  time  of  the  settlement  of  the  tribes  in 
their  respective  inheritances  under  Joshua.  Maa 
chah,  his  wife,  would  seem  to  be  a  daughter  or 
descendant  of  Caleb  by  Ephah  his  concubine.  That 
she  was  not  "  Caleb's  concubine "  seems  pretty 
certain,  both  because  Ephah  is  so  described  in  ii.  46 
and  because  the  recurrence  of  the  name  Ephah  in 

ver.  47,  separated  from  the  words  373  £W7^S  only 
by  the  name  Shaaph,d  creates  a  strong  presumption 
that  Ephah,  and  not  Maachah,  is  the  name  to  which 
this  description  belongs  in  ver.  47  as  in  ver.  46. 
Moreover,  Maachah  cannot  be  the  nom.  case  to 

the  masculine  verb  "P\  Supposing,  then,  Maa 
chah,  the  ancestress  of  Sai.l,  to  have  been  thus  a 
daughter  or  granddaughter  of  Caleb,  we  have  a 
curious  coincidence  in  the  occurrence  of  the  came 
SAUL,  as  one  of  the  Edomitish  kings,  1  Chr.  i.  48, 
and  as  the  name  of  a  descendant  of  the  Edomitish 
Caleb.  [CALEB.]  The  element  Baal  (1  Chr.  ix. 
36,  &c.)  in  the  names  Esh-baal,  Meribbaal,  the 
descendants  of  Saul  the  son  of  Kish,  may  also,  then, 
be  compared  with  Baal-hanan,  the  successor  of  Saul 
of  Rehoboth  Cl  Chr.  i.  49),  as  also  the  name  Matred, 
(ib.  50)  with  Matri  (1  Sam.  x.  21).  [A.  C.  H.] 

NE'REUS  (Ntj/>e(5j :  Nereus).  A  Christian  at 
Rome,  saluted  by  St.  Paul,  Rom.  xvi.  15.  Origen 
conjectures  that  he  belonged  to  the  household  of  Phi- 
lologus  and  Julia.  Estius  suggests  that  he  may  be 
identified  with  a  Nereus,  who  is  said  to  have  been 
baptized  at  Rome  by  St.  Peter.  A  legendary  account 
of  him  is  given  in  Bolland,  Acta  Sanctorum,  12th 
May ;  from  which,  in  the  opinion  of  Tillemont, 
H.  E.  ii.  139,  may  be  gathered  the  fact  that  he 
was  beheaded  at  Terracina,  probably  in  the  reign  of 
Nerva.  His  ashes  are  said  to  be  deposited  in  the 
ancient  church  of  SS.  Nereo  ed  Archilleo  at  Rome. 

There  is  a  reference  to  his  legendary  history 
in  Bp.  Jeremy  Taylor's  Sermon,  The  Marriage- 
ring,  Part.  i.  [W.  T.  B.] 

NER'GAL(?an3:  'Ep-yt'X:  Nergel),  one  of  the 
chief  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  deities,  seems  to 
have  corresponded  closely  to  the  classical  Mars.  He 
was  of  Babylonian  origin,  and  his  name  signifies,  in 
the  early  Cushite  dialect  of  that  country,  "  the 
great  man,"  or  "  the  great  hero."  His  monumental 
titles  are — "  the  storm-ruler,"  "  the  king  of  battle," 
"  the  champion  of  the  gods,"  "  the  male  principle  " 
(or  "the  strong  begetter").,  "the  tutelar  god  of 
Babylonia,"  and  "  the  god  of  the  chace."  Of  this 
last  he  is  the  god  pre-eminently;  another  deity, 
Nin,  disputing  with  him  the  presidency  over  war 
and  battles.  It  is  conjectured  that  he  may  repre 
sent  the  deified  Nimrod — "  the  mighty  hunter  before 

d  Sh.aa.ph  has  nearly  the  same  letters  as  Kpluui. 


NERGAL-SHAREZER 

the  Lord  "  —  from  whom  the  kings  both  of  Labylon 
and  Nineveh  were  likely  to  claim  descent.  The  ?ity 
peculiarly  dedicated  to  his  worship  is  found  it  the 
inscriptions  to  be  Cutha  or  Tiggaba,  which  is  In 
Arabian  tradition  the  special  city  of  Nimrod.  Tiif 
only  express  mention  of  Nergal  contained  in  sacra) 
Scripture  is  in  2  K.  xvii.  30,  where  "  the  men  or 
Cutha,"  placed  in  the  cities  of  Samaria  by  a  king 
of  Assyria  (Esar-haddon?),  are  said  to  have  "made 
Nergal  their  god  "  when  transplanted  to  their  new 
tountry  —  a  fact  in  close  accordance  with  the  fre 
quent  notices  in  the  inscriptions,  which  mark  him 
as  the  tutelar  god  of  that  city.  NergaFs  name  occurs 
as  the  initial  element  in  Nergal-shar-ezer  (Jer. 
xxxix.  3  and  13)  ;  and  is  also  found,  under  a  con 
tracted  form,  in  the  name  of  a  comparatively  late 
king  —  the  Abeanerigus  of  Josephus  (Ant.  xx.  2,  §1). 

Nergal  appears  to  have  been  worshipped  under 
the  symbol  of  the  "  Man-Lion."  The  Semitic  name 
for  the  god  of  Cutha  was  Aria,  a  word  which  sig 
nifies  "  lion  "  both  in  Hebrew  and  Syriac.  Nir, 
the  first  element  of  the  god's  name,  is  capable  of 
the  same  signification.  Perhaps  the  habits  of  the 
lion  as  a  hunter  of  beasts  were  known,  and  he  was 
thus  regarded  as  the  most  fitting  symbol  of  the  god 
who  presided  over  the  chace. 

It  is  in  connexion  with  their  hunting  excursions 
that  the  Assyrian  kings  make  most  frequent  men 
tion  of  this  deity.  As  early  as  B.C.  1150,  Tiglath- 
pileser  I.  speaks  of  him  as  furnishing  the  arrows 
with  which  he  slaughtered  the  wild  animals. 
Assur-dani-pal  (Sardanapalus),  the  son  and  suc 
cessor  of  Esar-haddon,  never  fails  to  invoke  his  aid, 
and  ascribes  all  his  hunting  achievements  to  his 
influence.  Pul  sacrificed  to  him  in  Cutha,  and 
Sennacherib  built  him  a  temple  in  the  city  of 
Tarbisa  near  Nineveh  ;  but  in  general  he  was  not 
much  worshipped  either  by  the  earlier  or  the  later 
kings  (see  the  Essay  of  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  in  Raw- 
linson's  Herodotus,  i.  631-634).  [G.  R.] 

NER'GAL  -  SHARE'ZEB 


:  Nergel-Sereser)  occurs  only  in 
Jeremiah  xxxix.  3  and  13.  There  appear  to  have 
been  two  persons  of  the  name  among  the  "  princes 
of  the  king  of  Babylon,"  who  accompanied  Nebu 
chadnezzar  on  his  last  expedition  against  Jerusalem. 
One  of  these  is  not  marked  by  any  additional  title  ; 
but  the  other  has  the  honourable  distinction  of 
Rab-mag  (3O~3"1),  and  it  is  to  him  alone  that  any 
particular  interest  attaches.  In  sacred  Scripture  he 
appears  among  the  persons,  who,  by  command  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  released  Jeremiah  from  prison  ;  pro 
fane  history  gives  us  reason  to  believe  that  he  was  a 
personage  of  great  importance,  who  not  long  after 
wards  mounted  the  Babylonian  throne.  This  iden 
tification  depends  in  part  upon  the  exact  resemblance 
of  name,  which  is  found  on  Babylonian  bricks  in 
the  form  of  Nergal-shar-uzur  ;  but  mainly  it  rests 
upon  the  title  of  Rubu-emga,  or  Rab-Mag,  which 
this  king  bears  in  his  inscriptions,  and  on  the  im 
probability  of  there  having  been,  towards  the  ck»e 
of  the  Babylonian  period  —  when  the  monumental 
monarch  must  have  lived  —  two  persons  of  exactly 
the  same  name  holding  this  office.  [RAB-MAG.] 

Assuming  on  these  grounds  the  identity  of  the 
Scriptural  "  Nergal-sharezer,  Rab-Mag,"  with  the 
monumental  "  Neryal-shar-vz>ir,  Hubu-emga,"  we 
may  learn  something  of  the  history  of  the  prince  in 
question  from  profane  authors.  There  cannot  be  a 
doubt  that  he  was  tne  monarch  callai  Neriglis&ar 
or  Neriglis.'toor  by  Berosus  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  20), 


NERI 

who  murdered  Evil-Merodach,  the  son  of  Nebu 
chadnezzar,  and  succeeded  him  upon  the  throne. 
Tim  prince  was  married  to  a  daughter  of  Nebuchad 
nezzar,  and  was  thus  the  brother-in-law  of  his  pre 
decessor,  whom  he  put  to  death.  His  reign  lasted 
between  three  and  four  years.  He  appears  to  have 
died  a  natural  death,  and  certainly  left  his  crown 
to  i\  young  son,  Laborosoarchod,  who  was  murdered 
after  a  reign  of  nine  months.  In  the  canon  of  Pto 
lemy  he  appears,  under  the  designation  of  Nerigas- 
solassar,  as  reigning  four  years  between  llloaru- 
damus  (Evil-Merodach)  and  Nabonadius,  his  son's 
reign  not  obtaining  any  mention,  because  it  fell 
short  of  a  year. 

A  palace,  built  by  Neriglissar,  has  been  disco 
vered  at  Babylon.  It  is  the  only  building  of  any 
txtent  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Euphrates.  (See 
plan  of  BABYLON.)  The  bricks  bear  the  name  of 
Nergal-shar-uzur,  the  title  of  Rab-mag,  and  also  a 
statement — which  is  somewhat  surprising  —  that 
Nergal-shar-uzur  was  the  son  of  a  certain  "  Bel-zik- 
kariskun,  king  of  Babylon."  The  only  explanation 
which  has  been  offered  of  this  statement,  is  a  con 
jecture  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  vol.  i.  p.  518), 
that  Bel-zikkar-iskun  may  possibly  have  been  the 
"chief  Chaldaean,"  who  (according  to  Berosus) 
kept  the  royal  authority  for  Nebuchadnezzar  during 
the  interval  between  his  father's  death  and  his  own 
arrival  at  Babylon.  [NEBUCHADNEZZAR.]  Neri 
glissar  could  scarcely  have  given  his  father  the  title 
of  king  without  some  ground ;  and  this  is  at  any 
rate  a  ]>ossible  ground,  and  one  compatible  with  the 
non-appearance  of  the  name  in  any  extant  list  of  the 
later  Babylonian  monarchs.  Neriglissar's  office  of 
Rab-Mag  will  be  further  considered  under  that 
word.  It  is  evident  that  he  was  a  personage  of 
importance  before  he  mounted  the  throne.  Some 
(as  Larcher)  have  sought  to  identify  him  with  Da 
rius  the  Mede.  But  this  view  is  quite  untenable. 
There  is  abundant  reason  to  believe  from  his  name 
and  his  office  that  he  was  a  native  Babylonian — a 
grandee  of  high  rank  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  who 
regarded  him  as  a  fitting  match  for  one  of  his 
daughters.  He  did  not,  like  Darius  Medus,  gain 
Babylon  by  conquest,  but  acquired  his  dominion 
by  an  internal  revolution.  His  reign  preceded  that 
of  the  Median  Darius  by  17  years.  It  lasted  from 
B.C.  559  to  B.C.  556,  whereas  Darius  the  Mede 
cannot  have  ascended  the  throne  till  B.C.  538,  on 
the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus.  [G.  R.] 

NE'RI  (Nrjpt,  representing  the  Heb.  »"13,  which 
would  be  a  short  form  for  nj")3,  Neriah,  "  Jeho 
vah  is  my  lamp:"  Neri),*  son  of  Melchi,  and 
father  of  Salathiel,  in  the  genealogy  of  Christ, 
Luke  iii.  27.  Nothing  is  known  of  him,  but  his 
name  is  very  important  as  indicating  the  prin 
ciple  on  which  the  genealogies  of  our  Lord  are 
framed.  He  was  of  the  line  of  Nathan ;  but  his 
son  Salathiel  became  Solomon's  heir  on  the  failure 
of  Solomon's  line  in  king  Jeconiah,  and  was  there 
fore  reckoned  in  the  royal  genealogy  among  the 
sons  of  Jeconiah;  to  whose  status  and  preroga 
tives  he  succeeded,  1  Chr.  iii.  17;  Matt.  i.  12. 
The  supposition  that  the  son  and  heir  of  David  and 
Solomon  would  be  called  the  son  of  Neri,  an  obscure 
individual,  because  he  had  married  Neri's  daughter, 
as  many  pretend,  is  too  absurd  to  need  refutation. 
The  information  given  us  by  St.  Luke — that  Neri, 
if  the  line  of  Nathan,  was  Salathiel's  father — does, 


NET 


501 


jn  point  of  fact,  clear  up  and  settle  the  whole  ques 
tion  of  the  genealogies.  [GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS 
CHRIST.]  [A.  C.  H.] 

NERI'AH  (nnj) :  V-npias,  but  Vypeias  in 
Jer.  h.  59:  Nerias,  but  Neri  in  xxxii.  12.  The 
son  of  Maaseiah,  and  father  of  Baruch  (Jer.  xxxil 
12,  xxxvi.  4,  xliii.  3),  and  Seraiah  (Jer.  li.  59). 

NERI' AS  (Nijpfos :  Nerias).  The  father  of 
Baruch  and  Seraiah  (Bar.  i.  1). 

NET.  The  various  terms  applied  by  the  Hebrews 
to  nets  had  reference  either  to  the  construction  of  the 
article,  or  to  its  use  and  objects.  To  the  first  of  these 
we  may  assign  the  following  terms : — Macmor,*  and 
its  cognates,  micmdr*  and  micmorethf  all  of  which 
are  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  weave ;"  and, 
again,  sebdcdh*  and  sebdc,e  derived  from  another 
root  of  similar  signification.  To  the  second  head 
we  may  assign  cheremf  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
enclose;"  mdtzodf  with  its  cognates,  me'tzoddh* 
and  metzudah,1  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  lie  in 
wait;"  and  resheth,1'  from  a  root  signifying  "  to 
catch."  Great  uncertainty  prevails  in  the  equiva 
lent  terms  in  the  A.  V. :  mdtzod  is  rendered  "  snare  " 
in  Eccl.  vii.  26,  and  "  net"  in  Job  xix.  6  and  Prov. 
xii.  12,  in  the  latter  of  which  passages  the  true 
sense  is  "prey;"  stbacah  is  rendered  "snare"  in 
Job  xviii.  8;  metzadah  "snare"  in  Ez.  xii.  13, 
xvii.  20,. and  "net"  in  Ps.  Ixvi.  11;  micmoreth, 
"drag"  or  "flue-net"  in  Hab.  i.  15,  16.  What 
distinction  there  may  have  been  between  the  various 
nets  described  by  the  Hebrew  terms  we  are  unable 
to  decide.  The  etymology  tells  us  nothing,  and 
the  equivalents  in  the  LXX.  vary.  In  the  New 
Testament  we  meet  with  three  terms, — <rayi\vi\ 
(from  ffdrroa,  "  to  load""),  whence  our  word  seine, 
a  large  hauling  or  draw-net;  it  is  the  term  used 
in  the  parable  of  the  draw-net  (Matt.  xiii.  47):  a/j.- 
$l$\i}<npov  (from  oju4>t0ctoAa>,  "  to  cast  around"" 
a  casting-net  (Matt.  iv.  18;  Mark  i.  16):  and 
S'IKTVOV-  (from  SUea,  "  to  throw "),  of  the  same 
description  as  the  one  just  mentioned  (Matt.  iv. 
20  ;  John  xxi.  6,  a/.).  The  net  was  used  for  the 
purposes  of  fishing  and  hunting :  the  mode  in  which 
it  was  used  has  been  already  described  in  the 
articles  on  those  subjects.  [FISHING  ;  HUNTING.] 
The  Egyptians  constructed  their  nets  of  flax-string : 
the  netting-needle  was  made  of  wood,  and  in  shape 
closely  resembled  our  own  (Wilkinson,  ii.  95). 


»  6ce  Geneal.  of  Our  Lord      C ,  P-  159- 


Egyptian  lanuiiig-net     (Wilkinson. 


The  nets  varied  in  form  according  to  their  use ;  the 
landing-net  has  been  already  represented ;  we  here 
give  a  sketch  of  the  draw-net  from  the  same  source. 


e  Tim 


m'm 


1  rriim 


so  a 


NETHANERL 


As  the  nets  of  Egypt  were  well  Known  to  the 
early  Jews  (Is.  zix.  8),  it  is  not  improbable  that 
the  material  and  form  was  the  same  in  each 
country.  The  nets  used  for  birds  in  Egypt  were 
of  two  kinds,  clap-nets  and  traps.  The  latter  con- 
•isted  of  network  strained  over  a  frame  of  wood, 
which  was  so  constructed  that  the  sides  would 
collapse  by  pulling  a  string  and  catch  any  birds 
that  may  have  alighted  on  them  while  open.  The 
former  was  made  on  the  same  principle,  consisting 
of  a  double  frame  with  the  network  strained  over 
it,  which  might  be  caused  to  collapse  by  pulling  a 
string.10 


Egyptian  draw-net  (Wilkinson). 


The  metaphorical  references  to  the  net  are  very 
numerous :  it  was  selected  as  an  appropriate  image 
of  the  subtle  devices  of  the  enemies  of  God  on  the 
one  hand  (e.  g.  Ps.  is.  15,  xxv.  15,  xxxi.  4),  and 
of  the  unaveiiable  vengeance  of  God  on  the  other 
hand  (Lam.  i.  13;  Ez.  xii.  13;  Hos.  vii.  12). 

We  must  still  notice  the  use  of  the  term  sebdc, 
in  an  architectural  sense,  applied  to  the  open  orna 
mental  work  about  the  capital  of  a  pillar  (1  K. 
vii.  17),  and  described  in  similar  terms  by  Josephus, 
BliCTVov  t\drg  xaA./ceia  irepnreir\ty/j.fvov  (Ant. 
viii.  3,  §4).  [W.  L.  B.] 

NETffANEEL  (^3713 :  Na0eu/a^\ :  Nath- 
anaef).  1.  The  son  of  Zuar,  and  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Issachar  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus.  With  his 
54,400  men  his  post  in  the  camp  was  on  the  east, 
next  to  the  camp  of  Judah,  which  they  followed  in 


NETHINIM 

the  march.  The  same  order  was  observed  n  th« 
offerings  at  the  dedication  of  the  tabernacle,  when 
Nethaneel  followed  Nahshon  the  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Num.  i.  8,  ii.  5,  vii.  18,  23,  x.  15). 

2.  The  fourth  son  of  Jesse  and  brother  of  David 
(1  Chr.  ii.  14). 

3.  A  priest  in  the  reign  of  David  who  blew  the 
trumpet  before  the  ark,  when  it  was  brought  fro-n 
the  house  of  Obed-edom  (1  Chr.  rv.  24). 

4.  A  Levite,  father  of  Shemaiah  the  scribe  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  6). 

5.  The  fifth  son  of  Obed-edom  the  doorkeeper  of 
the  ark  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  4). 

6.  One  of  the  princes  of  Judah,  whom  Jehosha- 
phat  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign  sent  to  teach  in 
the  cities  of  his  kingdom  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7). 

7.  A  chief  of  the  Levites  in  the  reign  of  Josiah, 
who  took  part  in  the  solemn  passover  kept  by  that 
king  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  9). 

8.  A  priest  of  the  family  of  Pashur  in  the  time 
of  Ezra  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife  (Ezr.  x. 
22).     He  is  called  NATHANAEL  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  22. 

9.  The  representative  of  the  priestly  family  of 
Jedaiah  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  21). 

10.  A  Levite,  of  the  sons  of  Asaph,  who  with 
his  brethren  played  upon  the  musical  instruments 
of  David,  in  the  solemn  procession  which  accom 
panied  the  dedication  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  under 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  36).     [W.  A.  W.] 

NETHANI'AH(nT*3713,  and  in  the  lengthened 
form  •IH'OrO,  Jer.  xl.  8,  xii.  9 :   Naflai/tas,  exc. 

2  K.  xxv.  23,  where  the  Alex.  MS.  has  Ma.06a.vieu: 
Nathania).  1.  The  son  of  Elishama,  and  father 
of  Ishmael  who  murdered  Gedaliah  (2  K.  xxv.  23, 
25;  Jer.  xl.  8,  14,  15,  xii.  1,  2,  6,  7,  9,  10,  11, 
12,  15,  16,  18).  He  was  of  the  royal  family  ot 
Judah. 

2.  (-111*3713,  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  12).   One  of  the  four 
sons  of  Asaph  the  minstrel,  and  chief  of  the  5th  ol 
the  24  courses  into  which  the  Temple  choir  was 
divided  (I  Chr.  xxv.  2,  12). 

3.  (-111*3713).   A  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  who  with  eight  others  of  his  tribe  and  two 
priests  accompanied  the  princes  of  Judah  who  were 
sent  by  the  king  through  the  country  to  teach  the 
law  of  Jehovah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  8). 

4.  The  father  of  Jehudi  (Jer.  xxxvi.  14). 

NETH'INIM  (0*3*713  :  Kaetixaoi,  Neh.  xi.  21 

NaOivlfi,  Ezr.  ii.  43  ;  ol  Se5o/ufVoi,  1  Chr.  ix.  2: 
Nathinaef).  As  applied  specifically  to  a  distine4 
body  of  men  connected  with  the  services  of  the 
Temple,  this  name  first  meets  us  in  the  later  books 
of  the  0.  T. ;  in  1  Chron.,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah. 
The  word,  and  the  ideas  embodied  in  it  may,  how 
ever,  be  traced  to  a  much  earlier  period.  As  derive! 
from  the  verb  }713,  ndthan  (  =  give,  set  apart,  dedi 
cate),  it  was  applied  to  those  who  were  specially 
appointed  to  the  liturgical  offices  of  the  Tabernacle.* 
Like  many  other  official  titles  it  appears  to  have  had 
at  first  a  much  higher  value  than  that  afterwards 


"•  Prov.  i.  17,  is  accurately  as  follows :—"  Surely  in  the 
eyes  of  any  bird  the  net  is  spread  for  nothing."  As  it 
stands  in  the  A.  V.  it  is  simply  contrary  to  fact.  This  is 
one  of  the  admirable  emendations  of  the  late  Mr.  Bernard. 
(See  Mason  and  Bernard's  Hebrew  Grammar.) 

•  This  U  the  received  interpretation.  Bochart  (Plialeg, 
Ii  I)  gives  a  more  active  meaning  to  the  words,  "  Those 


who  have  devoted  themselves."  So  Theodorct  (Qu.  th 
1  Paralip.),  who  explains  the  name  as=id<ns  'low,  rovr- 
eVrt,  rov  ovros  8tov,  and  looks  on  them  as  Israelites  of 
other  tribes  voluntarily  giving  themselves  to  the  service 
of  the  Sanctuary.  This  is,  however,  without  adequate 
grounds,  and  at  variance  with  facts.  Comp.  Pfttlingej 
De  ffathinaeis,  in  Ugolini's  Tkt'saurut,  rol.  xliL 


NETKINIM 

Assigned  to  it.  We  must  not  forget  that  the  Levites 
were  given  to  Aaron  and  his  sous,  i.e.  to  the  priests 
as  an  order,  and  were  accordingly  the  first  Nethimm 
[D3-1T13,  Num.  iii.  9,  viii.  19).  At  first  they  were 
the  only  attendants,  and  their  work  must  have  been 
laborious  enough.  The  first  conquests,  however, 
brought  them  their  share  of  the  captive  slaves  of  the 
Midianites,  and  320  were  given  to  them  as  having 
charge  of  the  Tabernacle  (Num.  xxxi.  47),  while  32 
only  were  assigned  specially  to  the  priests.  This 
disposition  to  devolve  the  more  laborious  offices  of 
their  ritual  upon  slaves  of  another  race  showed  itself 
again  in  the  treatment  of  the  Gibeonites.  They,  too, 
were  "  given  "  (A.  V.  "  made  ")  to  be  "  hewers  of 
wood  and  drawers  of  water "  for  the  house  of  God 
(Josh.  ix.  27),  and  the  addition  of  so  large  a  number 
(the  population  of  five  cities)  must  have  relieved  the 
Levites  from  much  that  had  before  been  burdensome. 
We  know  little  or  nothing  as  to  their  treatment. 
It  was  a  matter  of  necessity  that  they  should  be 
circumcised  (Exod.  xii.  48),  and  conform  to  the 
religion  of  their  conquerors,  and  this  might  at  first 
seem  hard  enough.  On  the  other  hand  it  must  be 
remembered  that  they  presented  themselves  as  re 
cognizing  the  supremacy  of  Jehovah  (Josh.  ix.  9), 
and  that  for  many  generations  the  remembrance  of 
the  solemn  covenant  entered  into  with  them  made 
men  look  with  horror  on  the  shedding  of  Gibeonite 
blood  (2  Sam.  xxi.  9),  and  protected  them  from 
much  outrage.  No  addition  to  the  number  thus 
employed  appears  to  have  been  made  during  the 
period  of  the  Judges,  and  they  continued  to  be 
known  by  their  old  name  as  the  Gibeonites.  The 
want  of  a  further  supply  was  however  felt  when 
the  reorganization  of  worship  commenced  under 
David.  Either  the  massacre  at  Nob  had  involved 
the  Gibeonites  as  well  as  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii. 
19 >,  or  else  they  had  fallen  victims  to  some  other 
outburst  of  Saul's  fury,  and.  though  there  were 
survivors  (2  Sam.  xxi.  2),  the  number  was  likely 
to  be  quite  inadequate  for  the  greater  stateliness 
of  the  new  worship  at  Jerusalem.  It  is  to  this 
period  accordingly  that  the  origin  of  the  class 
bearing  this  name  may  be  traced.  The  Nethinim 
were  those  "  whom  David  and  the  princes  ap 
pointed  (Heb.  gave)  for  the  service  of  the  Levites" 
(Ezr.  viii.  20).  Analogy  would  lead  us  to  conclude 
that,  in  this  as  in  the  former  instances,  these  were 
either  prisoners  taken  in  war,  or  else  some  of  the 
remnant  of  the  Canaanites  ; b  but  the  new  name  in 
which  the  old  seems  to  have  been  merged  leaves  it 
uncertain.  The  foreign  character  of  the  names  in 
Ezr.  ii.  43-54  is  unmistakeable,  but  was  equally 
•jatural  on  either  hypothesis. 

From  this  time  the  Nethinim  probably  lived 
within  the  precincts  of  the  Temple,  doing  its  rougher 
work,  and  so  enabling  the  Levites  to  take  a  higher 
position  as  the  religious  representatives  and  in 
structors  of  the  people.  [LEVITES.]  They  answered 
in  some  degree  to  the  male  lfp&8ov\oi,  who  were 
attached  to  Greek  and  Asiatic  temples  (Josephus, 
Ant.  r.\.  5,  §1,  uses  this  word  of  them  in  his  para 
phrase  of  the  decree  of  Darius),  to  the  grave- 
diggers,  gate-keepers,  bell-ringers  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Ewald  (Alterthum.  p.  299)  refers  to  the 
custom  of  the  more  wealthy  Arabs  dedicating  slaves 
to  the  special  service  of  the  Kaaba  at  Mecca,  or  the 
Sepulchre  of  the  Prophet  at  Medina. 

*  The  identity  of  the  Gibeonites  and  Nethinim.  ex- 
eluding  the  Idea  of  any  addition,  is.  however  maintained 
by  Pfefflnger 


NETHINIM 


503 


The  example  set  by  David  was  followed  by  hi« 
successor.  In  close  uiiion  with  the  Nethinim  in 
the  statistics  of  the  return  from  the  captivity, 
attached  like  them  to  the  Priests  and  Levites,  we 
find  a  body  of  men  described  as  "  Solomon's  ser 
vants"  (Ezr.  ii.  55;  Nehem.  vii.  60,  xi.  3),  and 
these  we  may  identify,  without  much  risk  of  error, 
with  some  of  the  "  pec  pie  that  were  left"  of  the 
earlier  inhabitants  whom  he  made  "  to  pay  tribute 
of  bond-service"  (1  K.  ix.  20 ;  2  Chron.  viii.  7). 
The  order  in  which  they  are  placed  might  even  seem 
to  indicate  that  they  stood  to  the  Nethinim  in  the 
same  relation  that  the  Nethinim  did  to  the  Levitos. 
Assuming,  as  is  probable,  that  the  later  Rabbinic 
teaching  represents  the  traditions  of  an  earlier  period, 
the  Nethinim  appear  never  to  have  lost  the  stigma 
of  their  Canaanit*"  origin.  They  had  no  jus  connubii 
(Gemar.  Babyl.  Jebam.  ii.  4 ;  Kiddusch.  iv.  1,  in 
Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  deNeth.),  and  illicit  intercourse 
with  a  woman  o)  Israel  was  punished  with  scourging 
(Carpzov,  1.  c.) ;  but  their  quasi-sacred  position 
raised  them  in  some  measure  above  the  level  of  their 
race,  and  in  the  Jewish  order  of  precedence,  while 
they  stood  below  the  Mamzerim  (bastards,  or  children 
of  mixed  marriages),  they  were  one  step  above  the 
Proselytes  fresh  come  from  heathenism  and  eman 
cipated  slaves  (Gemar.  Hieros.  Horajoth,  fol.  482 ; 
in  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  ad  Mutt,  xxiii.  14).  They 
were  thus  all  along  a  servile  and  subject  caste.  The 
only  period  at  which  they  rise  into  anything  like 
prominence  is  that  of  the  return  from  the  captivity. 
In  that  return  the  priests  were  conspicuous  and  nu 
merous,  but  the  Levites,  for  some  reason  unknown 
to  us,  hung  back.  [LEVITES.]  Under  Zerubbabel 
there  were  but  341  to  4289  priests  (Ezr.  ii.  36-42). 
Under  Ezra  none  came  up  at  all  till  after  a  special 
and  solemn  call  (Ezr.  viii.  15).  The  services  of 
the  Nethinim  were  consequently  of  more  im 
portance  (Ezr.  viii.  17),  but  in  their  case  also, 
the  small  number  of  those  that  joined  (392  under 
Zerubbabel,  220  under  Ezra,  including  "  Solomon's 
servants")  indicates  that  many  preferred  remaining 
in  the  land  of  their  exile  to  returning  to  their  old 
service.  Those  that  did  come  were  consequently 
thought  worthy  of  special  mention.  The  names  of 
their  families  were  registered  with  as  much  care  as 
those  of  the  priests  (Ezr.  ii.  43-58).  They  were 
admitted,  in  strict  conformity  to  the  letter  of  the 
rule  of  Deut.  xxix.  11,  to  join  in  the  great  covenant 
with  which  the  restored  people  inaugurated  its  new 
life  (Neh.  x.  28).  They,  like  the  Priests  and 
Levites,  were  exempted  from  taxation  by  the  Persian 
Satraps  (Ezr.  vii.  24).  They  were  under  the  con 
trol  of  a  chief  of  their  own  body  (Ezr.  ii.  43  ; 
Nehem.  vii.  46).  They  took  an  active  part  in  the 
work  of  rebuilding  the  city  (Nehem.  iii.  26),  and 
the  tower  of  Ophel,  convenient  from  its  proximity 
to  the  Temple,  was  assigned  to  some  of  them  as  a 
residence  (Neh.  xi.  21),  while  others  dwelt  with 
the  Levites  in  their  cities  (Ezr.  ii.  70).  They  took 
their  place  in  the  chronicles  of  the  time  as  next  in 
order  to  the  Levites  (1  Chr.  ix.  2). 

Neither  in  the  Apocrypha,  nor  in  the  N.  T.,  nor 
yet  in  the  works  of  the  Jewish  historian,  do  we  find 
any  additional  information  about  the  Nethinim. 
The  latter,  however,  mentions  incidentally  a  festival, 
that  of  the  Xylophoria,  or  wood  carrying,  of  which 
we  may  perhaps  recognize  the  beginning  in  Neh. 
*..  34,  and  in  which  it  was  the  custom  for  all  the 
people  to  bring  large  supplies  of  firewood  for  the 
sacrifices  of  the  year.  This  may  have  been  designwi 
\  to  relieve  them.  They  were  at  any  rate  likely  to 


504 


NBTOPHAH 


bear  a  conspicuous  part  in  it  (Joseph.  B.  J .    ii. 
17,  §6). 

Two  hypotheses  connected  with  the  Nethinim  are 
mentioned  by  Pfeffinger  in  the  exhaustive  'mono 
graph  already  cited:  (1),  that  of  Forster  (Diet. 
Hebr.,  Basil,  1564),  that  the  first  so  called  were 
sons  of  David,  i.  e.,  younger  branches  of  the  royal 
house  to  whom  was  given  the  defence  of  the  city 
and  the  sanctuary  ;  (2),  that  of  Boulduc  (referred 
to  also  by  Selden,  De  Jure  Nat.  et  Gent.),  connected 
apparently  with  (1),  that  Joseph  the  husband  of  the 
Virgin  was  one  of  this  class.c  [E.  H.  P.] 

NBT'OPHAH  (riBba:  NeTo^eJ,  'Aru^d; 
Alex.  N«4>a>Ta :  Netupha),  a  town  the  name  of  which 
occurs  only  in  the  catalogue  of  those  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  from  the  Captivity  (Ezr.  ii.  22 ; 
Neh.  vii.  26 ;  1  Esdr.  v.  18).  But,  though  not 
directly  mentioned  till  so  late  a  period,  Netophah 
was  really  a  much  older  place.  Two  of  David's 
guard,  MAHARAI  and  HELEB  or  HELDAI,  leaders 
also  of  two  of  the  monthly  courses  (1  Chr.  xxvii. 
13,  15),  were  Netophathites,  and  it  was  the  native 
place  of  at  least  one  •  of  the  captains  who  remained 
under  arms  near  Jerusalem  after  its  destruction  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.  The  "  villages  of  the  Netopha 
thites"  were  the  residence  of  the  Levites  (1  Chr. 
is.  16),  a  fact  which  shows  that  they  did  not  confine 
themselves  to  the  places  named  in  the  catalogues  of 
Josh.  xxi.  and  1  Chr.  vi.  From  another  notice  we 
icarn  that  the  particular  Levites  who  inhabited 
these  villages  were  singers  (Neh.  xii.  28). 

That  Netophah  belonged  to  Judah  appears  from 
the  fact  that  the  two  heroes  above  mentioned  be 
longed,  the  one  to  the  Zarhites — that  is,  the  great 
family  of  Zerah,  one  of  the  chief  houses  of  the 
tribe—and  the  other  to  Othniel,  the  son-in-law  of 
Caleb.  To  judge  from  Neh.  vii.  26  it  was  in  the 
neighbourhood  of,  or  closely  connected  with,  Beth 
lehem,  which  is  also  implied  by  1  Chr.  ii.  54, 
though  the  precise  force  of  the  latter  statement 
cannot  now  be  made  out.  The  number  of  Neto 
phathites  who  returned  from  Captivity  is  not  exactly 
ascertainable,  but  it  seems  not  to  have  been  more 
than  sixty — so  that  it  was  probably  only  a  small 
village,  which  indeed  may  account  for  its  having 
escaped  mention  in  the  lists  of  Joshua. 

A  remarkable  tradition,  of  which  there  is  no 
trace  in  the  Bible,  but  which  nevertheless  is  not 
improbably  authentic,  is  preserved  by  the  Jewish 
authors,  to  the  effect  that  the  Netophathites  slew 
the  guards  which  had  been  placed  by  Jeroboam  on 
the  roads  leading  to  Jerusalem  to  stop  the  passage 
of  the  firstfruits  from  the  country  villages  to  the 
Temple  (Targum  on  1  Chr.  ii.  54 ;  on  Ruth  iv.  20, 
and  Eocl.  iii.  11).  Jeroboam's  obstruction,  which 
is  said  to  have  remained  in  force  till  the  reign  of 
Hoshea  (see  the  notes  of  Beck  to  Targum  on  1  Chr. 
ii.  54),  was  commemorated  by  a  fast  on  the  23rd 
Sivan,  which  is  still  retained  in  the  Jewish  calendar 
(see  the  calendar  given  by  Basnage,  Hist,  des  Juifs, 
vi.  ch.  29). 

It  is  not  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  and 
although  in  the  Mishna  reference  is  made  to  the 
"oil  of  Netophah"  (Peak  7,  §1,  2),  and  to  the 


«  The  only  trace  of  any  tradition  corresponding  to  this 
theory  is  the  description  in  the  Arabian  History  of  Joseph 
(c.  a),  according  to  which  he  is  of  the  city  of  David  and 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  yet,  on  account  of  his  wisdom  and 
ploty,  "  sacerdos  factus  est  in  Tcmplo  Domini "  (Tischen- 
&>rf,  Evang-  ^J»c.,  p.  116). 

•  Gjjnp.  2  K.  xxv.  23,  with  Jcr.  xl.  8 


NETTLE 

"  valley  of  Beth  Netophah,"  in  which  artuhokM 
flourished,  whose  growth  determned  the  date  of 
some  ceremonial  observance  (Sheviith  9,  §  7), 
nothing  is  said  as  to  the  situation  of  the  place. 
The  latter  may  well  be  the  present  village  of  Beit 
Netttf,  which  stands  on  the  edge  of  the  great  valley 
of  the  Wady  es  Sumt  (Rob.  Bib.  Res.  ii.  16,  17  ; 
Porter,  Handbk.  248)  ;  but  can  hardly  be  the  Ne 
tophah  of  the  Bible,  since  it  is  not  near  Bethlehem, 
but  in  quite  another  direction.  The  only  name  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem  suggestive  of  Ne 
tophah  is  that  which  appears  in  Van  de  Velde's  map 
(1858)  as  AntMeh,  and  in  Tobler  (3tte  Wand.  80)  as 

Om  Tuba  (LJs   -1),  attached  to  a  village  about 

2  miles  N.E.  of  Bethlehem  and  a  wady  which  falls 

therefrom  into  the  Wady  en-Nar,  or  Kidron.    [G.] 

NETO'PHATHI  011803:  Vat.  omits;  Alex. 

UfTuQaOi  :  Nethuphati),  Neh.  xii.  28.  The  same 
word  which  in  other  passages  is  accurately  rendered 
"  the  Netophathite,"  except  that  here  it  is  not  ac 
companied  by  the  article. 

NETO'PHATHITE,  THE    (»nab|n,    in 
Chron.  *J1Q1t33n  :  &  'ErruQart  I'TIJJ, 


Neflaxparef,  6  iic  titrov^dr:  Netophathites),  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  28,  29  ;  2  K.  xxv.  23  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  30,  xxvii. 
13,  15;  Jer.  xl.  8.  The  plural  form,  THE  NETO 
PHATHITES  (the  Hebrew  word  being  the  same  as 
the  above)  occurs  in  1  Chr.  ii.  54,  ix.  16.  [G.] 

NETTLE.     The  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of 
the  Hebrew  words  chdr&l  and  ktmmosh  or  kimosh. 


1.  Charul  (>nn  :  <f>pvyava  aypta  :  b  sent  is,  ur- 
tica,  spina)  occurs  in  Job  xxx.  7  —  the  patriarch 
complains  of  the  contempt  in  which  he  was  held  by 
the  lowest  of  the  people,  who,  from  poverty,  were 
obliged  to  live  on  the  wild  shrubs  of  the  desert  : 
"  Among  the  bushes  they  brayed,  under  the  chdrid 
they  were  gathered  together,"  and  in  Prov.  xxiv. 
31,  where  of  "  the  field  of  the  slothful,"  it  is  said, 
"  it  was  all  grown  over  with  thorns  (kimme'shorAin), 
and  charullim  had  covered  the  face  thereof;"  see  also 
Zeph.  ii.  9  :  the  curse  of  Moab  and  Ammon  is  that 
they  shall  be  "  the  breeding  of  chdrul  and  salt-pits." 

There  is  very  great  uncertainty  as  to  the  meaning 
of  the  word  char&l,  and  numerous  are  the  plants 
which  commentators  have  sought  to  identify  with 
it:  brambles,  sea-orache,  butchers'  broom,  thistles, 
have  all  been  proposed  (see  Celsius,  Hierob.  ii.  165). 
The  generality  of  critics  and  some  modern  versions 
are  in  favour  of  the  nettle.  Some  have  objected  to 
the  nettle  as  not  being  of  a  sufficient  size  to  suit  the 
passage  in  Job  (/.  c.)  ;  but  in  our  own  country  nettles 
grow  to  the  height  of  six  or  even  seven  feet  when 
drawn  up  under  trees  or  hedges  ;  and  it  is  worthy  of 
remark  that,  in  the  passage  of  Job  quoted  above, 
bushes  and  chdrul  are  associated.  Not  much  better 
founded  is  Dr.  Royle's  objection  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art. 
Charul)  that  both  thorny  plants  and  nettles  must  be 
excluded,  "as  no  one  would  voluntarily  resort  to  such 
a  situation  ;"  for  the  people  of  whom  Job  is  speak 
ing  might  readily  be  supposed  to  resort  to  such  a 
shade,  as  in  a  sandy  desert  the  thorn-bushes  and 
tall  nettles  growing  by  their  side  would  afford  ;  or 
we  may  suppose  that  those  who  "  for  want  and 
famine  "  were  driven  into  the  wilderness  were 


•>  rfipvyava  (from  4>pvyu>,  "  to  burn,"  "  to  roast,"  with 
reference  to  the  derivation  of  the  Hebrew  word)  property 
signifies  •'  dry  t-tickn,"  "  fagot*." 


NEW  MOON 

gathered  together  under  the  nettles  for  the  purpose 
cf  gathering  them  for  food,  together  with  the  sea- 
orachs  and  juniper-roots  (ver.  4).  Celsius  believes 
the  chariil  is  identical  with  the  Christ-thorn  (Zizy- 
phus  Paliurus} — the  Paliurus  aculeatus  of  modern 
botanists — but  his  opinion  is  by  no  means  well 
founded.  The  passage  in  Proverbs  (I.  c.)  appears 
to  forbid  us  identifying  the  charul  with  the  Paliut- 
rus  aculeatus ;  for  the  context,  "  I  went  by,  and 
!o  it  was  all  grown  over  with  kimshon  and  charul- 
llm,"  seems  to  point  to  some  weed  of  quicker 
growth  than  the  plant  proposed  by  Celsius.  Dr. 
Koyle  has  argued  in  favour  of  some  species  of  wild 
mustard,  and  refers  the  Hebrew  word  to  one  of 
somewhat  similar  form  in  Arabic,  viz.  Jfhardul,  to 
which  he  traces  the  English  charlock  or  kedlock,  the 
well-known  troublesome  weed.  The  Scriptural  pas 
sages  would  suit  this  interpretation,  and  it  is  quite 
passible  that  wild  mustard  may  be  intended  by 
charul.  The  etymology e  too,  we  may  add,  is  as 
much  in  favour  of  the  wild  mustard  as  of  the  nettle, 
one  or  other  of  which  plants  appeal's  to  be  denoted 
by  the  Hebrew  word.  We  are  inclined  to  adopt 
Dr.  Royle's  opinion,  as  the  following  word  probably 
denotes  the  nettle. 

2.  Kimm6shorkim6sh(Vr\ft\)>  KnO^:  a.Kdv8iva 
|uAa,  &KavOa,  8\eOpos  :  urticae).  "  Very  many 
interpreters,"  says  Celsius  (Hierob.  ii.  207),  "  un 
derstand  the  nettle  by  this  word.  Of  the  older 
Jewish  doctors,  K.  Ben  Melech,  on  Prov.  xxiv.  31, 
asserts  that  kimmosh  is  a  kind  of  thorn  (spind) 
commonly  called  a  nettle."  The  Vulgate,  Arias 
Montanus,  Luther,  Deodatius,d  the  Spanish  and 
English  versions,  are  all  in  favour  of  the  nettle. 

The  word  occurs  in  Is.  xxxiv.  13:  of  Edom  it  is 
said  that  "  there  shall  come  up  nettles  and  brambles 
in  the  fortresses  thereof:"  and  in  Hos.  ix.  6.  Another 
form  of  the  same  word,  kimmSshonim  *  ("  thorns," 
A.  V.),  occurs  in  Prov.  xxiv.  31 :  the  "  field  of  the 
slothful  was  all  grown  over  with  kimmeshyntm." 
Modern  commentators  are  generally  agreed  upon 
the  signification  of  this  'term,  which,  as  it  is  ad 
mirably  suited  to  all  the  Scriptural  passages,  may 
well  be  understood  to  denote  some  species  of  nettle 
(  Urtica).  [W.  H.] 

NEW  MOON  (en'n,  trjhn  eton  •.  Vf0^via 

vovn.t}v'ia.:  calendae,  neomenia).  The  first  day  01 
the  lunar  month  was  observed  as  a  holy  day.  In 
addition  to  the  daily  sacrifice  there  were  offered 
two  young  bullocks,  a  ram  and  seven  lambs  of  the 
first  year  as  a  burnt-offering,  with  the  proper  meat 
offerings  and  drink-offerings,  and  a  kid  as  a  sin- 
offering  (Num.  xxviii.  11-15).R  It  was  not  a  day 
of  holy  convocation  [FESTIVALS],  and  was  no< 
therefore  of  the  same  dignity  as  the  Sabbath.  But, 
as  on  the  Sabbath,  trade  and  handicraft-work  were 
stopped  (Am.  viii.  5),  the  Temple  was  opened  for 
public  worship  (Ez.  xlvi.  3;  Is.  Ixvi.  23),  and,  in 
the  kingdom  of  Israel  at  least,  the  people  seem  to 


NEW  MOON 


50£ 


nave  resorted  to  the  prophets  for  religious  inatruc- 
ion.k  The  trumpets  were  blown  at  the  offering  of 
he  special  sacrifices  for  the  day,  as  on  the  solemn 
estivals  (Num.  x.  10;  Ps.  Ixxxi.  3).  That  it 
was  an  occasion  for  state-banquets  may  be  inferred 
Vom  David's  regarding  himself  as  especially  bound 
o  sit  at  the  king's  table  at  the  new  moon  (1  Sam. 
xx.  5-24).  In  later,  if  not  in  earlier  times,  fasting 
was  intermitted  at  the  new  moons,  as  it  was  on  the 
Sabbaths  and  the  great  feasts  and  their  eves  (Jud. 
viii.  6).  [FASTS."] 

The  new  moons  are  generally  mentioned  so  as  to 
show  that  they  were  regarded  as  a  peculiar  class  of 
loly  days,  to  be  distinguished  from  the  solemn  feasts 
and  the  Sabbaths  (Ez.  xlv.  17;  1  Chr.  xxiii.  31; 
2  Chr.  ii.  4,  viii.  13,  xxxi.  3 ;  Ezr.  iii.  5 ;  Neh.  x.  33). 

The  seventh  new  moon  of  the  religious  year,  being 
that  of  Tisri,  commenced  the  civil  year,  and  had  a 
significance  and  rites  of  its  own.  It  was  a  day  of 
holy  convocation.  [TRUMPETS,  FEAST  OF.] 

By  what  method  the  commencement  of  the  month 
was  ascertained  in  the  time  of  Moses  is  uncertain 
The  Mishnac  describes  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
determined  seven  times  in  the  year  by  observing 
the  first  appearance  of  the  moon,  which,  according 
to  Maimonides,  derived  its  origin,  by  tradition,  from 
Moses,  and  continued  in  use  as  long  as  the  San 
hedrim  existed.  On  the  30th  day  of  the  month 
watchmen  were  placed  on  commanding  heights 
round  Jerusalem  to  watch  the  sky.  As  soon  as 
each  of  them  detected  the  moon  he  hastened  to  a 
house  in  the  city,  which  was  kept  for  the  purpose, 
and  was  there  examined  by  the  president  of  the 
Sanhedrim.  When  the  evidence  of  the  appearance 
was  deemed  satisfactory,  the  president  rose  up  and 
formally  announced  it,  uttering  the  words,  "  It  is 
consecrated  "  (BHIpJD).  The  information  was  im 
mediately  sent  throughout  the  land  from  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  by  beacon-fires  on  the  tops  of  the  hills. 
At  one  period  the  Samaritans  are  said  to  have 
deceived  the  Jews  by  false  fires,  and  swift  mes 
sengers  were  afterwards  employed.  When  the  moon 
was  not  visible  on  account  of  clouds,  and  in  the  five 
months  when  the  watchmen  were  not  sent  out,  the 
month  was  considered  to  commence  on  the  morning 
of  the  day  which  followed  the  30th.  According  to 
Maimonides  the  Rabbinists  altered  their  method 
when  the  Sanhedrim  ceased  to  exist,  and  have  ever 
since  determined  the  month  by  astronomical  calcu 
lation,  while  the  Caraites  have  retained  the  old 
custom  of  depending  on  the  appearance  of  the  moon. 

The  religious  observance  of  the  day  of  the  new 
moon  may  plainly  be  regarded  as  the  consecratior 
of  a  natural  division  of  time.  Such  a  usage  would 
so  readily  suggest  itself  to  the  human  mind  that  it 
is  not  wonderful  that  we  find  traces  of  it  amongst 
other  nations.  There  seems  to  be  but  little  ground 
for  founding  on  these  traces  the  notion  that  the 
Hebrews  derived  it  from  the  Gentiles,  as  Spencer 
and  Michaelis  have  done  ;d  and  still  less  for  attaching 


c  >1"in,  from  "111  ("nn,  «•  to  bum"),  "addita  ter 
minationc  hypochoristica  ul."  See  Ktirst,  Heb.  Cone.  ;  cf 
urtica  ab  uro. 

d  i.  e.  the  Italian  version  of  Diodati.  We  have  often 
retained  the  Latin  forms  of  writers,  as  being  familiar  tc 
the  readers  of  Celsius  and  Bochart. 


Sj?.  plur.  from 

•  The  day  of  the  new  moon  is  not  mentioned  in  Exodus 
Leviticus,  or  Deuteronomy. 

•>  2  K.  iv.  23.  When  the  Shunammite  is  going  to  tin 
prcphet,  her  husband  asks  her,  "  Wherefore  wilt  them  g( 


to  him  to-day  ?  It  is  neither  new  moon  nor  sabbath.' 
See  the  notes  of  Vatablus,  firotius,  and  Keil. 

c  RosK  Bashanah,  Surenhusius,  ii.  338,  sq. 

d  The  three  passages  from  ancient  writers  which  seem 
moat  to  the  point  of  those  which  are  quoted  are  in  Ma- 
crobius,  Horace,  and  Tacitus.  The  first  says,  "Priscia 
tcmporibus  pontifici  minor!  haec  provincia  delegata  fuit, 
ut  novae  lunae  primum  observaret  aspectum  visamque 
regi  sacrificulo  nuntiaret"  (Sat.  1. 15).  In  the  second  the 
day  is  referred  to  as  a  social  festival  (Od.  iii.  23,  9) ;  and 
in  Tacitus  we  are  informed  that  the  ancient  GennaM 
aiifcmbled  on  the  days  of  new  and  full  moon,  considering 


606 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


to  it  ju/  of  those  symbolical  meanings  which  have 
been  imagined  by  kome  other  writers  (see  Carpzov, 
App.  Crit.  p.  425).  Ewald  thinks  that  it  was  at 
first  a  simple  household  festival,  and  that  on  this 
account  the  law  does  not  take  much  notice  of  it.  He 
also  considers  that  there  is  some  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  day  of  the  full  moon  was  similarly  observed 
by  the  Hebrews  in  very  remote  times.  (Carpzov, 
Apparat.  Hist.  Crit.  p.  423 ;  Spencer,  'De  Leg. 
Heb.  lib.  iii.  dissert,  iv. ;  Selden,  De  Am.  Civ.  Heb. 
iv.  xi. ;  Mishna,  Bosh  Hashanah,  vol.  ii.  p.  338,  ed. 
Surenhus. ;  Buxtorf,  Synagoga  Judaica,  cap.  xxii.  ; 
Ewald,  Altertlmmer,  p.  394;  Cudworth  on  the 
Lord's  Supper,  c.  iii. ;  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service, 
cap.  xi.)  [S.  C.] 

NEW  TESTAMENT.  The  origin,  history, 
and  characteristics  of  the  constituent  books  and  of 
the  great  versions  of  the  N.  T.,  the  mutual  relations 
of  the  Gospels,  and  the  formation  of  the  Canon, 
are  discussed  in  other  articles.  It  is  proposed  now 
to  consider  the  Text  of  the  N.  T.  The  subject 
naturally  divides  itself  into  the  following  heads, 
which  will  be  examined  in  succession : — 

I.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  WRITTEN  TEXT. 

§§1-11.  The  earliest  history  of  the  text. 
Autographs.  Corruptions.  The  text  of 
Clement  and  Origen. 

§§12-15.  Theories  of  recensions  of  the  text. 

§§16-25.  External  characteristics  of  MSS. 

§§26-29.  Enumeration  of  MSS.  §28.  Un 
cial.  §29.  Cursive. 

§§30—40.  Classification  of  various  readings. 

II.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  PRINTED  TEXT. 

§1.  The  great  periods. 

§§2-5.  §2.  The  Complutensian  Polyglott. 
§3.  The  editions  of  Erasmus.  §4.  The 
editions  of  Stephens.  §5.  Beza  and  El 
zevir  (English  version). 

§§6-10.  §6.  Walton;  Curcellaeus;  Mill. 
§7.  Bentley.  §8.  G.  v.  Maastricht ;  Wet- 
stein.  §9.  Grieshach;  Matthaei.  §10. 
Scholz. 

§§11-13.  §11.  Lachmann.  §12.  Tisehen- 
dorf.  §13.  Tregelles;  Alford. 

III.  PRINCIPLES  OF  TEXTUAL  CRITICISM. 

§§1-9.  External  evidence. 
§§10-13.  Internal  evidence. 

IV.  THE  LANGUAGE  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


I.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  WRITTEN  TEXT. 

1.  The  early  history  of  the  Apostolic  writings 
offers  no  points  of  distinguishing  literary  interest. 
Externally,  as  far  as  it  can  be  traced,  it  is  the  same 
as  that  of  other  contemporary  books.  St.  Paul, 
like  Cicero  or  Pliny,  often  employed  the  services  of 
an  amanuensis,  to  whom  he  dictated  his  letters, 
affixing  the  salutation  "  with  his  own  hand " 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  21;  2  Thess.  iii.  17;  Col.  iv.  18). 
In  one  case  the  scribe  has  added  a  clause  in  his 
own  name  (Rom.  xvi.  22).  Once,  in  writing  to  the 
Galatians,  the  Apostle  appears  to  apologise  for  the 
mdeness  of  the  autograph  which  he  addressed  to 
them,  as  if  from  defective  sight  (Gal.  vi.  11).  If 
we  pass  onwards  one  step,  it  does  not  appear  that 
any  special  care  was  taken  in  the  first  age  to  pre 
serve  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  from  the  various 

ttxna  to  be  auspicious  for  new  undertakings  (Germ. 
c.  xL). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

injuries  of  time,  or  to  insure  perfect  aecurv.y  » 
transcriptic  i.  They  were  given  as  a  heritage  tc 
man,  and  it  was  some  time  before  men  felt  the  tuu 
value  of  the  gift.  The  original  copies  seem  to  hav£ 
soon  perished ;  and  we  may  perhaps  see  in  this  a 
providential  provision  against  that  spirit  of  super 
stition  which  in  earlier  times  converted  the  symbols 
of  God's  redemption  into  objects  of  idolatry  (2  K. 
xviii.  4).  It  is  certainly  remarkable  that  in  the 
controversies  at  the  close  of  the  second  century, 
which  often  turned  upon  disputed  readings  of  Scrip 
ture,  no  appeal  was  made  to  the  Apostolic  originals. 
The  few  passages  in  which  it  has  been  si  pposed 
that  they  are  referred  to  will  not  bear  examination. 
Ignatius,  so  far  from  appealing  to  Christian  archives, 
distinctly  turns,  as  the  whole  context  shows,  to  the 
examples  of  the  Jewish  Church  (ret  fy>xa'« — °d  Phi- 
lad.  8).  Tertullian  again,  when  he  speaks  of  "  the 
authentic  epistles"  of  the  Apostles  (De  Praescr. 
Haer.  xxxvi.,  "  apud  quas  ipsae  authenticae  litterae 
eorum  recitantur  "),  uses  the  term  of  the  pure  Greek 
text  as  contrasted  with  the  current  Latin  version 
(comp.  De  Monog.  xi.,  "  sciamus  plane  non  sic  esse 
in  Graeco  authentico"  •).  The  silence  of  the  gub- 
Apostolic  age  is  made  more  striking  by  the  legends 
which  were  circulated  after.  It  was  said  that  when 
the  grave  of  Barnabas  in  Cyprus  was  opened,  in  the 
fifth  century,  in  obedience  to  a  vision,  the  saint  was 
found  holding  a  (Greek)  copy  of  St.  Matthew  writ 
ten  with  his  own  hand.  The  copy  was  taken  to 
Constantinople,  and  used  as  the  standard  of  the 
sacred  text  (Credner,  Einl.  §39 ;  Assem.  Bibl.  Or, 
ii.  81).  The  autograph  copy  of  St.  John's  Gospel 
(avrb  rb  i5i^x€'POJ/  fov  eOayyeXioToD)  was  said 
to  be  preserved  at  Ephesus  "  by  the  grace  of  God, 
and  worshipped  (irpoffKWfirai)  by  the  faithful 
there,"  in  the  fourth  century  (?),  ([Petr.  Alex.]  p. 
518,  ed.  Migne,  quoted  from  Chron.  Pasch.  p.  5)  ; 
though  according  to  another  account  it  was  found 
in  the  ruins  of  the  Temple  when  Julian  attempted 
to  rebuild  it  (Philostorg.  vii.  14).  A  similar  belief 
was  current  even  in  the  last  century.  It  was  said 
that  parts  of  the  (Latin)  autograph  of  St.  Mark 
were  preserved  at  Venice  and  Prague;  but  on 
examination  these  were  shown  to  be  fragments  of  a 
MS.  of  the  Vulgate  of  the  sixth  century  (Dobrowsky, 
Fragmentum  Pragense  Ev.  S.  Marci,  1778). 

2.  In  the  natural  course  of  things  the  Apostolic 
autographs  would  be  likely  to  perish  soon.  The 
material  which  was  commonly  used  for  letters,  the 
papyrus-paper  to  which  St.  John  incidentally  alludes 
(2  John  1 2,  Sick  x^PTOV  Ka^  /teXafos ;  comp.  3 
John  13,  5tck  jueAacos  Kal  /caAa/uotO,  was  singularly 
fragile,  and  even  the  stouter  kinds,  likely  to  be  used 
for  the  historical  books,  were  not  fitted  to  bear 
constant  use.  The  papyrus  fragments  which  have 
come  down  to  the  present  time  have  been  preserved 
under  peculiar  circumstances,  as  at  Herculaneum  01 
in  Egyptian  tombs;  and  Jerome  notices  that  the 
library  of  Pamphilus  at  Caesarea  was  already  ir. 
part  destroyed  (ex  parte  corruptam)  when,  in  iess 
than  a  century  after  its  formation,  two  presbyter* 
of  the  Church  endeavoured  to  restore  the  papyrus 
MSS.  (as  the  context  implies)  on  parchment  ("  in 
membranis,"  Hieron.  Ep.  xxxiv.  (141),  quoted  by 
Tischdf.  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  Bibeltext  des  N.  T. 
p.  159).  Parchment  (2  Tim.  iv.  13,  juc/u/Spai/a), 
which  was  more  durable,  was  proportionately  ram 
and  more  costly.  And  yet  more  than  this.  In  the 


*  Griesbach  (Opuscttla,  ii.  69-76)  endeavours  to  e.ho-» 
that  tbc  word  t  Imply  tteans  pure,  uncorrupted. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

first  age  the  written  word  of  the  Apostles  occupied 
no  authoritative  position  above  their  spoken  word, 
and  the  vivid  memory  of  their  personal  teaching. 
And  when  the  true  value  of  the  Apostclic  writings 
was  afterwards  revealed  by  the  progress  of  the 
Church,  then  collections  of  "  the  divine  oracles " 
would  be  chiefly  sought  for  among  Christians.  On 
all  accounts  it  seems  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
the  autographs  perished  during  that  solemn  pause 
which  followed  the  Apostolic  age,  in  which  the 
idea  of  a  Christian  Canon,  parallel  and  supple 
mentary  to  the  Jewish  Canon,  was  first  distinctly 
realized. 

3.  In  the  time  of  the  Dioc'etian  persecution  (A.D. 
303)  copies  of  the  Christian  Scriptures  were  suffi 
ciently  numerous  to  furnish  a  special  object  for  per 
secutors,  and  a  characteristic  name  to  renegades  who 
saved  themselves  by  surrendering  the  sacred  books 
(traditores,  August.  Ep.  Ixxvi.  2).    Partly,  perhaps, 
owing  to  the  destruction  thus  caused,  but  still  more 
from  the  natural  effects  of  time,  no  MS.  of  the 
N.  T.  of  the  first  three  centuries  remains.*    Some 
of  the  oldest   extant  were   certainly   copied  from 
others  which  dated  from  within  this  period,  but  as 
yet  no  one  can  be  placed  further  back  than  the 
time  of  Constantine.    It  is  recorded  of  this  monarch 
that  one  of  his  first  acts  after  the  foundation  of 
Constantinople  was  to  order  the  preparation  of  fifty 
MSS.  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  required  for  the  use 
of  the  Church,  "  on  fair  skins  (ev  8j</>0epots  ei;- 
KaTcuTKetiots)    by   skilful    caligraphists "    (Euseb. 
Vit.  Const,  iv.  36) ;  <unl  to  the  general  use  of  this 
better  material  we  probably  owe  our  most  venerable 
copies,  which  are  written  on  vellum  of  singular 
excellence  and  fineness.     But  though  no  fragment 
of  the  N.  T.  of  the  first  century  still  remains,  the 
Italian  and  Egyptian  papyri,  which  are  of  that  date, 
give  a  clear  notion  of  the  caligraphy  of  the  period. 
In  these  the  text  is  written  in  columns,  rudely 
divided,    in    somewhat    awkward    capital    letters 
(uncials),  without  any  punctuation  or  division  of 
words.     The  iota,  which  was  afterwards  subscribed, 
is  commonly,  but  not  always,  adscribed ;  and  there 
is  no  trace  of  accents  or  breathings.     The  earliest 
MSS.  of  the  N.  T.  bear  a  general  resemblance  to 
this  primitive  type,  and  we  may  reasonably  believe 
that   the  Apostolic   originals    were   thus   written. 
(Plate  i.  fig.  1.) 

4.  In  addition  to  the  later  MSS.,  the  earliest  ver 
sions  and  patristic  quotations  give  very  important 
testimony  to  the  character  and  history  of  the  ante- 
Niceue  text.     Express  statements  of  readings  which 
are  found  in  some  of  the  most  ancient  Christian 
writers  are,  indeed,  the  first  direct  evidence  which 
we  have,  and  are  consequently  of  the  highest  im 
portance.     But  till  the  last  quarter  of  the  second 
century  this  source  of  information  fails  us.     Nol 
only  are  the  remains  of  Christian  literature  up  to 
that  time   extremely  scanty,  but  the   practice  ol 
verbal  quotation  from  the  N.  T.  was  not  yet  pre 
valent.      The  evangelic  citations  in  the  Apostolic 
Fathers  and  in  Justin  Martyr  show  that  the  ora* 
tradition  was  still  as  widely  current  as  the  written 
Gospels  (Comp.  Westcott's  Canon  of  the  N.  T.  pp 
125-195),  and  there  is  not  in  those  writers  one  ex 
press  verbal  citation  from  the  other  Apostolic  books.1 
This  latter  phenomenon  is  in  a  great  measure  to  be 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


507 


explained  by  tha  nature  of  their  writings.  As  SOOD 
as  definite  controversies  arose  among  Christians,  the 
,ext  of  the  N.  T.  assumed  its  true  importance.  Tht 
earliest  monuments  of  these  remain  in  the  works  ot 
Tenaeus,  Hippolytus  (Pseudo-Origen),  and  Tertul 
ian,  who  quote  many  of  the  arguments  of  the  lead 
ng  adversaries  of  the  Church.  Charges  of  corrupt- 
ng  the  sacred  text  are  urged  on  both  sides  with 
great  acrimony.  Dionysius  of  Corinth  (f  cir.  A.D. 
176,  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  23),  Irenaeus  (cir.  A.D. 
177 ;  iv.  6, 1),  Tertullian  (cir.  A.D.  210  ;  De  Carne 
Viristi,  19,  p.  385 ;  Adv.  Marc.  iv.  v.  passim), 
ilement  of  Alexandria  (cir.  A.D.  200 ;  Strom,  iv.  6, 
ij41),  and  at  a  later  time  Ambrose  (cir.  A.D.  375  •. 
De  Spir.  S.  iii.  10),  accuse  their  opponents  of  this 
offence ;  but  with  one  great  exception  the  instances 
which  are  brought  forward  in  support  of  the  accu 
sation  generally  resolve  themselves  into  various 
readings,  in  which  the  decision  cannot  always  b> 
jiven  in  favour  of  the  catholic  disputant ;  and  even 
where  the  unorthodox  reading  is  certainly  wrong 
it  can  be  shown  that  it  was  widely  spread  among 
writers  of  different  opinions  (e.  g.  Matt.  xi.  27, 
nee  Filium  nisi  Pater  et  cui  voluerit  Filius 
revelare :"  John  i.  13,  t>s  — lftvvi)9'n).  Wilful 
iutei-polations  or  changes  are  extremely  rare,  if  they 
'xist  at  all  (comp-  Valent.  ap.  Iren.  i.  4,  5,  add. 
6e6rt)Tfs,  Col.  i.  16),  except  in  the  case  of  Marcion, 
His  mode  of  dealing  with  the  writings  of  the  N.  T.; 
in  which  he  was  followed  by  his  school,  was,  as 
Tertullian  says,  to  use  the  knife  rather  than  subtlety 
of  interpretation.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  he  dealt  in  the  most  arbitrary  manner  with 
whole  books,  and  that  he  removed  from  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Luke  many  passages  which  were  opposed  to 
his  peculiar  views.  But  when  these  fundamental 
changes  were  once  made  he  seems  to  have  adhered 
scrupulously  to  the  text  which  he  found.  In  the 
isolated  readings  which  he  is  said  to  have  altered, 
it  happens  not  unfrequently  that  he  has  retained 
the  right  reading,  and  that  his  opponents  are  in 
error  (Luke  v.  14  om.  rb  Supov,  Gal.  ii.  5,  oils 
ou5e;  2  Cor.  iv.  5?).  In  very  many  cases  the 
alleged  corruption  is  a  various  reading,  more  or 
less  supported  by  other  authorities  (Luke  xii.  38, 
(ffirepivy;  1  Cor.  x.  9,  Xpurr6v;  1  Thess.  ii.  15, 
add.  ISiovs).  And  where  the  changes  seem  most 
arbitrary  there  is  evidence  to  show  that  the  inter 
polations  were  not  wholly  due  to  his  school :  Luke 
xviii.  19,  b  var-fip;  xxiii.  2;  1  Cor.  x.  19  (28), 
add.  ifpoOvrov.  (Comp.  Hahn,  Evangelium  Mar- 
cionis;  Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  403-486;  Ritschl, 
Das  Evang.  Marc.  1846  ;  Volckmar,  Das  Evang 
Marc.,  Leipsic,  1852 :  but  no  examination  of  Mar 
cion' s  text  is  completely  satisfactory). 

5.  Several  very  important  conclusions  follow  from 
this  earliest  appearance  of  textual  criticism.  It  is 
in  the  first  place  evident  that  various  readings 
existed  in  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  at  a  time  prior  to 
all  extant  authorities.  History  affords  no  trace  of 
the  pure  Apostolic  originals.  Again,  from  the  pre 
servation  of  the  first  variations  noticed,  which  are 
often  extremely  minute,  in  one  or  more  of  the  pri 
mary  documents  still  left,  we  may  be  certain  that 
no  important  changes  have  been  made  in  the  sacred 
text  which  we  cannot  now  detect.  The  materials 
for  ascertaining  the  true  reading  are  found  to  be 


*•  Papyrus  fragments  of  part  of  St.  Matthew,  dating 
from  the  first  century  (??),  are  announced  (1361)  for  pub 
lication  by  Dr.  Simonides. 

•  In  the  epistle  of  Polycarp  some  interesting  various 


readings  occur,  which  are  found  also  in  later  copies.  Acts 
ii.  24,  TOW  a8ou  for  TOV  SavarvV,  1  Tiai.  vi.  7,  aAA'  ov&i 
for  &f)\oi>  on  ovSf',  I  John  Iv.  3,  »  rapid  t 
Comp.  1  Pet  i.  8  (Polyc.  ad  I'hil.  i.  *.: 


538 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


complete  when  tested  by  the  earliest  witnesses. 
And  yet  further:  from  the  minuteness  of  some  of 
the  variations  which  are  urged  in  controversy,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  words  of  the  N.  T.  were  watched 
With  the  most  jealous  care,  aud  that  the  least 
differences  of  phrase  were  guarded  with  scrupulous 
and  faithful  piety,  to  be  used  in  after-time  by  that 
wide-reaching  criticism  which  was  foreign  to  the 
spirit  of  the  first  ages.d 

6.  Passing  from  these  isolated  quotations  we  find 
the  first  great  witnesses  to  the  apostolic  text  in  the 
early  Syriac  and  Latin  versions,  and  in  the  rich 
quotations  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (fcir.  A.D.  220) 
and  Origen  (A.D.  184-254).     The  versions  will  be 
treated   of  elsewhere,   and  with   them   the  Latin 
quotations   of  the   translator   of  Irenaeus  and   of 
Tertullian.     The  Greek  quotations  in  the  remains 
of  the  original  text  of  Irenaeus  and  in  Hippolytus 
are  of  great  value,  but  yield  in  extent  and  import 
ance   to   those    of  the    two   Alexandrine   fathers. 
From  the  extant  works  of  Origen  alone  no  incon 
siderable  portion  of  the  whole  N.  T.,  with  the  ex 
ception  of  St.  James,  2  Peter,  2  and  3  John,  and  the 
Apocalypse,  might  be  transcribed,  and  the  recur 
rence  of  small  variations  in  long  passages  proves 
that  the  quotations  were  accurately  made  and  not 
simply  from  memory. 

7.  The  evangelic  text  of  Clement  is  far  from 
pure.     Two  chief  causes  contributed  especially  to 
corrupt  the  text  of  the  Gospels,  the  attempts  to 
harmonize  parallel  narratives,  and  the  influence  of 
tradition.     The  former  assumed  a  special  import 
ance  from  the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian  (cir.  A.D.  170. 
Comp.  Hist,  of  N.T.  Canon,  358-362  ;  Tischdf.  on 
Matt,  xxvii.  49)*  and  the  latter,  which  was,  as 
has   been   remarked,   very   great   in  the   time   of 
Justin   M.,    still    lingered.*      The    quotations    of 
Clement  suffer  from  both  these  disturbing  forces 
(Matt.  viii.  22,  x.  30,  xi.  27,  xix.  24,  xxiii.  27, 
xxv.  41,  x.  26,  omitted  by  Tischdf.  Luke  iii.  22), 
and  he  seems  to  have  derived  from  his  copies  of  the 
Gospels  two  sayings  of  the  Lord  which  form  no 
part  of  the  canonical  text.    (Comp.  Tischdf.  on  Matt, 
vi.  33;  Luke  xvi.  11).     Elsewhere  his  quotations 
are  free,  or  a  confused  mixture  of  two  narratives 
(Matt.  v.  45,  vi.  26,  32  f.,  xxii.  37  ;  Mark  xii.  43), 
but  in  innumerable  places  he  has  preserved  the  true 
reading  (Matt.  v.  4,  5,  42,  48,  viii.  22,  xi.  17, 
riii.  25,  xxiii.  26  ;  Acts  ii.  41,  xvii.  26).     His  quo 
tations  from  the  Epistles-  are  of  the  very  highest 
value.     In  these  tradition  had  no  prevailing  power, 
though  Tatian  is  said  to  have  altered  in  parts  the 
language  of  the  Epistles  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  29) ; 
and  the  text  was  left  comparatively  free  from  cor 
ruptions.     Against  the  few  false  readings  which  he 
supports  {e.g.  1  Pet.  ii.  3,  Xptffr6s;  Rom.  iii.  26, 
'Iriffovif ;    viii.  11,    Stk  rov   IVOIK.   irv.)  may  be 
brought  forward  a  long  list  of  passages  in  which 
he  combines  with  a  few  of  the  best  authorities  in 
upholding  the  true  text  (e.  g.  1  Pet.  ii.  2 ;  Rom. 
ii.  17,  x.  3,  xv.  29 ;  1  Cor.  ii.  13,  vii.  3,  5,  35,  39, 
viii.  2,  x.  24). 

8.  But   Origen   stands  as   far   first  of  all  the 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

ante-Nicene  fathers  in  critical  authority  as  hn  do« 
in  commanding  genius,  and  his  writings  are  an 
almost  inexhaustible  storehouse  for  the  history  o( 
the  text.  In  many  places  it  seems  that  the  printed 
text  of  his  works  has  been  modernized;  and  till  f- 
new  and  thorough  collation  of  the  MSS.  has  been 
made,  a  doubt  must  remain  whether  his  quotations 
have  not  suffered  by  the  hands  of  scribes,  as  the 
MSS.  of  the  N.  T.  have  suffered,  though  in  a  less 
degree.  The  testimony  which  Origen  bears  as  to 
the  corruption  of  the  text  of  the  Gospels  in  his 
time  differs  from  the  general  statements  whirl: 
have  been  already  noticed  as  being  the  deliberaU 
judgment  of  a  scholar  and  not  the  plea  of  a  con 
troversialist.  "  As  the  case  stands,"  he  says,  "  it 
is  obvious  that  the  difference  between  the  copies  is 
considerable,  partly  from  the  carelessness  of  indi 
vidual  scribes,  partly  from  the  wicked  daring  ol 
some  in  correcting  what  is  written,  partly  also 
from  [the  changes  made  by]  those  who  ada  or 
remove  what  seems  good  to  them  in  the  process  of 
correction  "e  (Orig.  In  Matt.  t.  xv.  §14).  In  the 
case  of  the  LXX.,  he  adds,  he  removed  or  at  least 
indicated  those  corruptions  by  a  comparison  o'~ 
"editions"  (ttSdfffis),  and  we  may  believe  that 
he  took  equal  care  to  ascertain,  at  least  for  his 
own  use,  the  true  text  of  the  N.  T.,  though  he 
did  not  venture  to  arouse  the  prejudice  of  his 
contemporaries  by  openly  revising  it,  as  the  old 
translation  adds  (In  Matt.  rv.  vet.  int.  "  in  exem- 
plaribus  autem  Novi  Testament!  hoc  ipsum  me  posse 
facere  sine  periculo  non  putavi ").  Even  in  the  form 
in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us,  the  writing** 
of  Origen,  as  a  whole,  contain  the  noblest  early 
memorial  of  the  apostolic  text.  And,  though  there 
is  no  evidence  that  he  published  any  recension  of 
the  text,  yet  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  wrote  out 
copies  of  the  N.  T.  with  his  own  hand  (Redepen- 
ning,  Origenes,  ii.  184),  which  were  spread  widely 
in  after  time.  Thus  Jerome  appeals  to  "  the 
copies  of  Adamantius,"  ».  e.  Origen  (In  Mat.  xxiv. 
36 ;  Gal.  iii.  1),  and  the  copy  of  Pamphiius  can 
hardly  have  been  other  than  a  copy  of  Origen's  text 
(Cod.  H,  Subscription,  Inf.  §26).  From  Pamphiius 
the  text  passed  to  Eusebius  and  Euthalius,  and  it  is 
scarcely  rash  to  believe  that  it  can  be  traced,  though 
imperfectly,  in  existing  MSS.  as  C  L.  (Comp. 
Griesbach,  Symb.  Grit.  i.  Ixrvi.  ff. ;  cxxx.  ff.) 

9.  In  thirteen  cases  (Norton,  Genuineness  of  the 
Gospels,  i.  234-236)  Origen  has  expressly  noticed 
varieties  of  reading  in  the  Gospels  (Matt.  viii.  28, 
xvi.  20,  xviii.  1,  xxi.  5,  xxi.  9,  15,  xxvii.  17  ; 
Mark  iii.  18  ;  Luke  i.  46,  ix.  48,  xiv.  19,  xxiii 
45  ;  John  i.  3,  4 ;  28).h  In  three  of  these  passage* 
the  variations  which  he  notices  are  no  longer  foun-1 
in  our  Greek  copies  (Matt.  xxi.  9  or  15  olWy  fct 
vif ;  Tregelles,  ad  foe.;  Mark  iii.  18  (ii.  14). 
AejSV  rbv  rov  'AA<f>.  (?)  ;  Luke  i.  46,  'E\tffdftet 
for  Mapid/n. ;  so  in  some  Latin  copies)  ;  in  seven 
our  copies  are  still  divided ;  in  two  (Matt.  viii.  28, 
TaSapr]vuv ;  John  i.  28,  B7j0o£ap$)  the  reading 
which  was  only  found  in  a  few  MSS.  is  now 
widely  spread :  in  the  remaining  place  (Matt. 


<•  Irenaeus  notices  two  various  readings  of  Importance, 
in  which  he  maintains  the  true  text,  Matt.  1.  ?8,  TOV  Si 
Xpurrov  (Iii.  16,  2),  Apoc.  xiii.  18  (v.  30,  1). 

The  letter  of  Ptolemaeus  (clr.  A.D.  150)  to  Flora  (Epiph. 
i.  216)  contains  some  important  early  variations  in  the 
evangelic  text. 

e  Jerome  notices  the  result  of  this  in  his  time  In  strong 
onus,  Pratef.  in  Kvang. 

•  To  what  extent  tradition  might  modify  the  current 


text  is  still  clearly  seen  from  the  Codtx  Bezat  and  torn* 
Lathi  copies,  which  probably  give  a  text  dating  in  essome 
from  the  close  of  the  2nd  century. 

«  These  words  seem  to  refer  to  the  professional  cor 
rector  (fiiopOunjO- 

h  To  these  Mr.  Hort  (to  wfiom  the  writer  owes  many 
suggestions  and  corrections  in  this  article)  adJs  Matt.  » 
22,  from  Cramer,  Cat.  in  Eph.  iv.  31,  where  Ori^cs 
Mamo  the  insertion  of  ti<rfj. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


509 


jczvii.  17,  '\ri70iiv  Bapa^jSaf)  a  few  copies  of  no 
grent  age  retain  the  interpolation  which  was  found 
in  his  time  "  in  very  ancient  copies."  It  is  more 
remarkable  that  Origen  asserts,  in  answer  to  Celsus, 
that  our  Lord  is  nowhere  called  "  the  carpenter  " 
in  the  Gospels  circulated  in  the  churches,  though 
this  is  undoubtedly  the  true  reading  in  Mark  vi.  3 
(Oiig.  c.  Cels.  vi.  36). 

10.  The  evangelic  quotations  of  Origen  are  not 
wholly   free   ftom    the   admixture    of    traditional 
glosses  which  have  been  noticed  in  Clement,  and 
often  present  a  confusion  of  parallel  passages  (Matt. 
v.  44,  vi.  (3b),  vii.  '21  ff.,  xiii.  11,  xxvi.  27  f.  ; 
1  Tim.  iv.  1)  ;   but  there  is  little  difficulty  in  se 
parating  his  genuine  text  from  these  natural  cor 
ruptions,  and  a  few  references  are  sufficient  to  indi 
cate  its  extreme  importance  (Matt.  iv.  10,  vi.  13, 
xv.  8,  35;  Mark  i.  2,  x.  29;   Luke  xxi.  19;  John 
vii.  39  ;  Acts  x.  10  ;  Kom.  viii.  28). 

11.  In  the  Epistles  Origen  once  notices  a  striking 
variation  in  Heb.  ii.  9,  XWP^S  ^60"  f°r  X<*PITI  9f°Vi 
which  is  still  attested  ;  but,  apart  from  the  specific 
reference  to  variations,  it  is  evident  that  he  himself 
used  MSS.  at  different  times  which  varied  in  many 
details  (Mill,  Prolegg.  §687).    Griesbach,  who  has 
investigated  this  fact  with  the  greatest  care  (Mele- 
tema  i.  appended  to  Comm.  Grit.  ii.  ix.-xl.),  seems 
to  have  exaggerated  the  extent  of  these  differences 
while  he  establishes  their  existence  satisfactorily. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  Origen's  time  the 
variations  in  the  N.  T.  MSS.,  which  we  have  seen 
to  have  existed  from  the  earliest  attainable  date, 
and  which  Origen  describes  as  considerable  and  wide 
spread,  were  beginning  to  lead  to  the  formation  of 
specific  groups  of  copies. 

Though  the  materials  for  the  history  cf  the  text 
during   the   first    three    centuries    are    abundant, 
nothing  has  been  written  in  detail  on  the  subject 
since  the  time  of  Mill  (Prolegg.  240  ff.)  and  R.  Simon 
(Histoire  Critique  .......  1685-93).     What  is 

wanted  is  nothing  less  than  a  complete  collection  at 
full  length,  from  MS.  authority,  of  all  the  ante- 
Nicene  Greek  quotations.      These  would   form   a 
centre  round  which  the  variations  of  the  versions 
and  Latin  quotations  might  be  grouped.      A  first 
step  towards  this  has  been  made  by  Anger  in  his 
Synopsis  Em,  Matt.    Marc.,   Luc  ......  1851. 

The  Latin  quotations  are  well  given  by  Sabatier, 
Bibliorum  Sacrorum  Latinae  versiones  antiquae, 
1751. 

12.  The  most  ancient  MSS.  and  versions  now 
extant  exhibit  the  characteristic  differences  which 
have  been  found  to  exist  in  different  parts  of  the 
works  of  Origen.  These  cannot  have  had  heir 
source  later  than  the  beginning  of  the  third  cen 
tury,  and  probably  were  much  earlier.  In  classical 
texts,  where  the  MSS.  are  sufficiently  numerous, 
it  is  generally  possible  to  determine  a  very  few 
primary  sources,  standing  in  definite  relations  to 
one  another,  from  which  the  other  copies  can  be 
shown  to  flow  ;  and  from  these  the  scholar  is  able 
to  discover  one  source  of  all.  In  the  case  o 
the  N.  T.  the  authorities  for  the  text  are  infi 
nitely  more  varied  and  extensive  than  elsewhere, 
and  the  question  has  been  raised  whether  it  may 
not  be  possible  to  distribute  them  in  like  mannei 
and  divine  from  later  documents  the  earliest  his 
tory  of  the  text.  Various  answers  have  been  mad< 
which  are  quite  valueless  as  far  as  they  profess  to 
rest  on  historical  evidence  ;  and  yet  are  all  more 
or  less  interesting  as  explaining  the  true  conditions 
of  the  problem.  The  chief  facts,  it  must 


noticed,  are  derived  from  later  documents,  but  the 
[uestion  itself  belongs  to  the  last  half  of  the  second 
century. 

Bengel  was  the  first  (1734)  who  pointed  out  the 
affinity  of  certain  groups  of  MSS.,  which,  as  he  re 
marks,  must  have  arisen  before  the  first  versions  were 
made  (Apparatus  Criticus,  ed.  Burk,  p.  425). 
Originally  he  distinguished  three  families,  of  which 
,he  Cod.  Alex.  (A),  the  Graeco-Latin  MSS.,  and 
;he  mass  of  the  more  recent  MSS.  were  respec- 
;ively  the  types.  At  a  later  time  (1737)  he 
adopted  the  simpler  division  of"  two  nations,"  the 
Asiatic  and  the  African.  In  the  latter  he  included 
Cod.  Alex.,  the  Graeco-Latin  MSS.,  the  Aethiopic, 

Coptic  [Memphitic],  and  Latin  versions :  the  mass 
of  the  remaining  authorities  formed  the  Asiatic 
class.  So  far  no  attempt  was  made  to  trace  the 
listory  of  the  groups,  but  the  general  agreement  of 
the  most  ancient  witnesses  against  the  more  recent, 
a  fact  which  Bentley  announced,  was  distinctly 
asserted,  though  Bengel  was  not  prepared  to  accept 
the  ancient  reading  as  necessarily  true.  Semler 
contributed  nothing  of  value  to  Bengel's  theory, 
but  made  it  more  widely  known  (Spicilec/ium  Ob- 
servationum,  $c.,  added  to  his  edition  of  Wetstein's 
Libelli  ad  Crisin  atque  Int.  N.  T.  1766 ;  Appa> 

•atus,  fyc.  1767).  The  honour  of  carefully  deter 
mining  the  relations  of  critical  authorities  for  the 
N.  T.  text  belongs  to  Griesbach.  This  great 
scholar  gave  a  summary  of  his  theory  in  his 
Historia  Text.  Gr.  Epist.  Paul.  (1777,  Opusc. 
ii.  1-135)  and  in  the  preface  to  his  first  edition  of 
the  Greek  Test.  His  earlier  essay,  Dissert.  Crit.  de 
Codd.  quat.  Evang.  Origenianis  (1771.  Opusc.  i.), 
is  incomplete.  According  to  Griesbach  (Nov.  Test. 
Praef.  pp.  Ixx.  ff.)  two  distinct  recensions  of  the 
Gospels  existed  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century :  the  Alexandrine,  represented  by  B  C  L, 

1,  13,  33,  69,   106,  the  Coptic,  Aethiop.,  Arm., 
and  later  Syrian  versions,  and  the   quotations  of 
Clem.  Alex.,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Cyril.  Alex.,  Isid. 
Pelus. ;   and  the  Western,  represented  by  D,  and 
in  part  by   1,   13,  69,  the  ancient  Latin  version 
and   Fathers,  and   sometimes   by   the   Syriac   and 
Arabic  versions.     Cod.  Alex,  was  to  be  regarded 
as  giving  a  more  recent  (Constantinopolitan)  text 
in  the  Gospels.     As  to  the  origin  of  the  variations 
in  the  text,  Griesbach  supposed  that  copies  were 
at  first  derived  from  the  separate  autographs  or 
imperfect  collections  of  the  apostolic  books.     These 
were   gradually   interpolated,    especially    as    they 
were  intended  for  private  use,  by  glosses  of  various 
kinds,  till  at  length  authoritative  editions  of  the 
collection  of  the  Gospels  and  the  letters  (€11077*- 
\iov,  &  dir6ffro\os,  rb  a.iro<rTo\iit6v)  were  made. 
These  gave  in  the  main  a  pure  text,  and  thus  two 
classes  of  MSS.  were  afterwards  current,  those  de 
rived  from  the  interpolated  copies  (  Western),  and 
those  derived  from  the   tvayye\tov  and  a.Tro<rro- 
\i*6v   (Alexandrine,   Eastern;    Opusc.  ii.  77-99; 
Meletemata,  xliv.).     At  a  later   time   Griesbach 
rejected  these  historical  conjectures  (Nov.  Test.  eJ. 

2,  1796;  yet  comp.  Melelem.  1.  c.),  and  repeated 
with  greater  care  and  fulness,  from  his  enlarged 
knowledge  of  the  authorities,  the  threefold  division 
which  he  had  originally  made  (N.  T.  i.  Praef. 
Ixx.-lxxvii.  ed.  Schulz).    At  the  same  time  he  recog 
nized  the  existence  of  mixed  and  transitional  texts  • 
and  when  he  characterized  by  a  happy  epigram 
(grammaticum  egit  Alexandrinus    censor,    inter- 
pretem   occidentalis)    the    difference    of   the   twa 
ancient  families,  he  frankly  admitted  that  no  exist- 


510 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


ing  document  exhibited  either  "  recension "  in  a 
pure  form.  His  great  merit  was  independent  of  the 
details  of  his  system :  he  established  the  existence 
of  a  group  of  ancient  MSS.  distinct  from  those  which 
could  be  accused  of  Latinizing  (Tregelles,  Home, 
p.  105). 

13.  The  chief  object  of  Griesbach  in  propounding 
his  theory  of  recensions  was  to  destroy  the  weight 
of  mere  numbers.1  The  critical  result  with  him 
had  far  more  interest  than  the  historical  process ; 
and,  apart  from  all  consideration  as  to  the  origin 
of  the  variations,  the  facts  which  he  pointed  out 
are  of  permanent  value.  Others  canned  on  the 
investigation  from  the  point  where  he  left  it. 
Hug  endeavoured,  with  much  ingenuity,  to  place 
the  theory  on  a  historical  basis  (Einleitung  in  N.  T. 
1st  ed.  1808 ;  3rd,  1826).  According  to  him, 
the  text  of  the  N.  T.  fell  into  a  state  of  consider 
able  corruption  during  the  second  century.  To 
this  form  he  applied  the  term  KOIV^I  eieoWts 
(common  edition),  which  had  been  applied  by 
Alexandrine  critics  to  the  unrevised  text  of  Homer, 
and  in  later  times  to  the  unrevised  text  of  the 
LXX.  (i.  144).  In  the  coarse  of  the  third  cen 
tury  this  text,  he  supposed,  underwent  a  threefold 
revision,  by  Hesychius  in  Egypt,  by  Lucian  at 
Antioch,  and  by  0-rigen  in  Palestine.  So  that  our 
existing  documents  represent  four  classes:  (1)  The 
unrevised,  D.  1,  13,  69  in  the  Gospels;  D  E,j  in 
the  Acts ;  Ds  ¥2  G8  in  the  Pauline  Epistles :  the  old 
Latin  and  Thebaic,  and  in  part  the  Peshito  Syriac ; 
and  the  quotations  of  Clement  and  Origen.  (2) 
The  Egyptian  recension  of  Hesychius;  B  C  L  in 
Gospels ;  A  B  C  17  in  the  Pauline  Epistles ;  A  B  C 
Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles ;  A  C  in  the  Apocalypse : 
the  Memphitic  version  ;  and  the  quotations  of 
Cyril.  Alex,  and  Athanasius.  (3)  The  Asiatic 
(Antioch-Constantinople)  recension  of  Lucian ;  E  F 
G  H  S  V  and  the  recent  MSS.  generally ;  the  Gothic 
and  Slavonic  versions  and  the  quotations  of  Theo- 
phylact.  (4)  The  Palestinian  recension  of  Origen 
(of  the  Gospels}  ;  A  K  M ;  the  Philoxenian  Syriac ; 
the  quotations  of  Theodoret  and  Chrysostom.  But 
tne  slender  external  proof  which  Hug  adduced  in 
support  of  this  system  was,  in  the  main,  a  mere 
misconception  of  what  Jerome  said  of  the  labours 
of  Hesychius  and  Lucian  on  the  LXX.  (Praef.  in 
Paralip.;  c.  Ruff.  ii.  27;  and  Ep.  cvi.  (135)  §2. 
The  only  other  passages  are  De  Viris  illustr. 
oap.  Ixxvii.  Lucianus  ;  Praef.  in  quat.  Ev.~) ;  the 
assumed  recension  of  Origen  rests  on  no  historical 
evidence  whatever.  Yet  the  new  analysis  of  the 
internal  character  of  the  documents  was  not  with 
out  a  valuable  result.  Hug  showed  that  the  line 
of  demarcation  between  the  Alexandrine  and  West 
ern  families  of  Griesbach  was  practically  an  ima 
ginary  one.  Not  only  are  the  extreme  types  of 
the  two  classes  connected  by  a  series  of  inter 
mediate  links,  but  many  of  the  quotations  of 
Clement  and  Origen  belong  to  the  so-called  Western 
text.  Griesbach  in  examining  Hug's  hypothesis, 
explained  this  phenomenon  by  showing  that  at 
various  times  Origen  used  MSS.  of  different  types, 
and  admitted  that  many  Western  readings  are 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

found  in  Alexandrine  copies  (Meletem.  xlviii.  conip. 
Laurence,  Remarks  on  the  Systematic  Classification 

of  MSS 1814). 

14.  Little  remains  to  be  said  of  later  theories 
Eichhorn  accepted  the  classification  of  Hug  (Ein 
leitung,  1818-27).  Matthaei,  the  bitter  adversary 
of  Griesbach,  contented  himself  with  asserting  the 
paramount  claims  of  the  later  copies  against  the  more 
ancient,  allowing  so  far  their  general  difference 
(  Ueber  die  sog.  Kecensionen  ....  1804 ;  N.  T. 
1782-88).  Scholz  returning  to  a  simpler  arrange 
ment  divided  the  authorities  into  two  classes,  AJer- 
andrine  and  Constantinopolitan  (N.  T,  i.  pp.  xv.  ff.); 
and  maintained  the  superior  purity  of  the  latter  on 
the  ground  of  their  assumed  unanimity.  In  prac 
tice  he  failed  to  carry  out  his  principles ;  and  the 
unanimity  of  the  later  copies  has  now  been  shown 
to  be  quite  imaginary.  Since  the  time  of  Scholz 
theories  of  recensions  have  found  little  favour. 
Lachmann,  who  accepted  only  ancient  authorities, 
simply  divided  them  into  Eastern  (Alexandrine)  and 
Western.  Tischendorf,  with  some  reserve,  proposes 
two  great  classes,  each  consisting  of  two  pairs,  the 
Alexandrine  and  Latin,  the  Asiatic  and  Byzantine. 
Tregelles,  discarding  all  theories  of  recension  as  his 
toric  facts,  insists  on  the  general  accordance  of  ancient 
authorities  as  giving  an  ancient  text  in  contrast  with 
the  recent  text  of  the  more  modern  copies.  At  the 
same  time  he  points  out  what  we  may  suppose  to 
be  the  "  genealogy  of  the  text."  This  he  exhibits 
in  the  following  form : 


D 


KBZ 

C  L  H  1  33 
PQTR 
X  (A)  69 


A 

KMH 

E  F  G  S  U,  &c> 


15.  The  fundamental  error  of  the  recension  theo 
ries  is  the  assumption  either  of  an  actual  recension 
or  of  a  pure  text  of  one  type,  which  was  variously 
modified  in  later  times,  while  the  fact  seems  to  be 
exactly  the  converse.  Groups  of  copies  spring  not 
from  the  imperfect  reproduction  of  the  character  of 
one  typical  exemplar,  but  from  the  multiplication 
of  characteristic  variations.  They  are  the  results 
of  a  tendency,  and  not  of  a  fact.  They  advance 
towards  and  do  not  lead  from  that  form  of  text 
which  we  regard  as  their  standard.  Individuals, 
as  Origen,  may  have  exercised  an  important  in 
fluence  at  a  particular  time  and  place,  but  the 
silent  and  continual  influence  of  circumstances  was 
greater.  A  pure  Alexandrine  or  Western  text  is 
simply  a  fiction.  The  tendency  at  Alexandria  or 
Carthage  was  in  a  certain  direction,  and  necessarily 
influenced  the  character  of  the  current  texts  with 
accumulative  force  as  far  as  it  was  unchecked  by 
other  influences.  This  is  a  general  law,  and  the 
history  of  the  apostolic  books  is  no  exception  to 
it.  The  history  of  their  text  differs  from  that  of 
other  books  chiefly  in  this,  that,  owing  to  the  great 
multiplicity  of  testimony,  typical  copies  are  here 
represented  by  typical  groups  of  copies,  and  the 
intermediate  stages  are  occupied  by  mixed  texts. 
But  if  we  look  beneath  this  complication  general 


'  This  he  states  distinctly  (Synib.  Crit.  1.  cxxii.)  :— 
'  "'raecipuua  vero  rccensionum  In  criseos  gacrae  exercitio 
nsus  hie  est,  ut  eorum  auctorltate  lectiones  bonus,  sect  in 
paucis  libris  snperstites  defendamus  advcrsus  juniorum  et 
vwlgarium  codicum  innumerabilem  poene  turbam."  Comp. 
id.  ii.  624,  n.  The  necessity  of  destroying  this  grand  source 
of  error  was  supreme,  as  may  be  seen  not  only  from  such 
canons  as  0.  v.  Maettricht  ,ii.  $8,  n.V  nut  also  from 


Wetstein's  Rule  xviit .  "  Lectio  plurium  codicum  caeterlt 
paribus  praeferenda  est." 

1  "  Those  codices  are  placed  together  which  appear  to 
demand  such  an  arrangement;  and  those  which  stand 
below  others  are  such  as  show  still  more  and  more  of  tl>« 
intermixture  of  modernized  readings  "  (Tregelles.  Horn*. 
p.  106). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


511 


lines  of  change  may  be  detected.  All  experience 
shows  that  certain  types  of  variation  propagate 
and  perpetuate  themselves,  and  existing  documents 
prove  that  it  was  so  with  the  copies  of  the  N.  T. 
Many  of  the  links  in  the  genealogical  table  of  our 
MSS.  may  be  wanting,  but  the  specific  relations 
between  the  groups,  and  their  comparative  anti 
quity  of  origin,  are  clear.  This  antiquity  is  deter 
mined,  not  by  the  demonstration  of  fhe  immediate 
dependence  of  particular  copies  upon  one  another, 
but  by  reference  to  a  common  standard.  The 
secondary  uncials  (E  S  U,  &c.)  are  not  derived 
from  the  earlier  (B  C  A)  by  direct  descent,  but 
rather  both  are  derived  by  different  processes  from 
one  original.  And  here  various  considerations  will 
assist  the  judgment  of  the  critic.  The  accumu 
lation  of  variations  may  be  more  or  less  rapid  in 
certain  directions.  A  disturbing  force  may  act  for 
a  shorter  time  with  greater  intensity,  or  its  effects 
may  be  slow  and  protracted.  Corruptions  may  be 
obvious  or  subtle,  the  work  of  the  ignorant  copyist 
or  of  the  rash  scholar;  they  may  lie  upon  the 
surface  or  they  may  penetrate  into  the  fabric  of 
the  text.  But  on  such  points  no  general  rules  can 
be  laid  down.  Here  as  elsewhere,  there  is  an 
instinct  or  tact  which  discerns  likenesses  or  relation 
ships  and  refuses  to  be  measured  mechanically.  It 
is  enough  to  insist  on  the  truth  that  the  varieties 
in  our  documents  are  the  result  of  slow  and  natural 
growth  and  not  of  violent  change.  They  are  due  to 
the  action  of  intelligible  laws  and  rarely,  if  ever, 
to  the  caprice  or  imperfect  judgment  of  individuals. 
They  contain  in  themselves  their  history  and  their 
explanation. 

16.  From  the  consideration  of  the  earliest  history 
of  the  N.  T.  text  we  now  pass  to  the  aera  of  MSS. 
The  quotations  of  DIONYSIUS  ALEX.  (fA.D.  264), 
PETRUS  ALEX.  (fc.  A.D.  312),  METHODIUS  (|A.D. 
311),  and  EUSEBIUS  (|A.D.  340),  confirm  the 
prevalence  of  the  aucient  type  of  text;  but  the 
public  establishment  of  Christianity  in  the  Roman 
empire  necessarily  led  to  important  changes.  Not 
only  were  more  copies  of  the  N.  T.  required  for 
public  use  (Comp.  §3),  but  the  nominal  or  real  ad 
herence  of  the  higher  ranks  to  the  Christian  faith 
must  have  lai-gely  increased  the  demand  for  costly 
MSS.  As  a  natural  consequence  the  rude  Hellenistic 
forms  gave  way  before  the  current  Greek,  and  at 
the  same  time  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  that 
smoother  and  fuller  constructions  were  substituted 
for  the  rougher  turns  of  the  apostolic  language. 
In  this  way  the  foundation  of  the  Byzantine  text 
was  laid,  and  the  same  influence  which  thus  began 
to  work,  continued  uninterruptedly  till  the  fall  of 
the  Eastern  empire.  Meanwhile  the  multiplication 
of  copies  in  Africa  and  Syria  was  checked  by  Mo 
hammedan  conquests.  The  Greek  language  ceased  to 
be  current  in  the  West.  The  progress  of  the  Alex 
andrine  and  Occidental  families  of  MSS.  was  thus 
checked  ;  and  the  mass  of  recent  copies  necessarily 
represent  the  accumulated  results  of  one  tendency. 


17.  The  appearance  of  the  oldest  MSS.  his  been 
already  described    (§3).      The  MSS    of  the   4th 
century,  of  which  Cod.  Vatican.  (B)  may  be  taken 
as  a  type,  present  a  close  resemblance  to  these. 
The  writing  is   in   elegant  continuous    (capitals) 
uncials,"1  in  three  columns,*  without  initial  letters 
or  iota  subscript,   or  ascript.     A  small  interval 
serves  as  a  simple  punctuation ;  and  there  are  no 
accents  or  breathings  by  the  hand  of  the  first  writer, 
though  these  have  been  added  subsequently.    Uncial 
writing  continued  in  general  use  till  the  middle  c« 
the  10th  century.0     One  uncial  MS.  (S),  the  earliest 
dated  copy,  bears  the  date  949  ;  and  for  service 
books  the  same  style  was  retained  a  century  later. 
From  the  llth  century  downwards  cursive  writing 
prevailed,  but  this  passed  through  several  forms 
sufficiently  distinct  to  fix  the  date  of  a  MS.  with 
tolerable  certainty.     The  earliest   cursive  Biblical 
MS.  is  dated  964  A.D.  (Gosp.  14,  Scrivener,  Intro 
duction,  p.  36  note),  though  cursive  writing  was  used 
a  century  before  (A.D.  888,  Scrivener,  I.  c.).     The 
MSS.  of  the  14th  and  15th  centuries  abound  in 
the  contractions  which  afterwards  passed  into  the 
early  printed  books.     The  material  as  well  as  the 
writing  of  MSS.  underwent  successive  changes.    The 
oldest  MSS.  are  written  on  the  thinnest  and  finest 
vellum :  in  later  copies  the  parchment  is  thick  and 
coarse.     Sometimes,  as  in  Cod.  Cotton.  (N  =  J),  the 
vellum  is  stained.  Papyrus  was  very  rarely  used  after 
the  9th  century.     In  the  10th  century  cotton  paper 
(charta  bambycina,  or  Damascena)  was  generally 
employed  in  Europe;   and  one  example   at   least 
occurs  of  its  use  in  the  9th  century  (Tischdf.  Not. 
Cod.  Sin.  p.  54,  quoted  by  Scrivener,  Introduction, 
p.  21).     In  the  12th  century  the  common  linen  or 
rag  paper  came  into  use ;  but  paper  was  "  seldom 
used  for  Biblical  MSS.  earlier  than  the  13th  cen 
tury,  and  had  not  entirely  displaced  parchment  at 
the  aera  of  the  invention  of  printing,  c.  A.D.  1450  " 
(Scrivener,  Introduction,  p.  21).     One  other  kind 
of  material  requires  notice,   redressed  parchment 
(iraXifji^/riffros,  charta  deleticia).     Even  at  a  very 
early  period  the  original  text  of  a  parchment  MS. 
was  often  erased,  that  the  material  might  be  used 
afresh  (Cic.  ad  Fam.  vii.  18;  Catull.  xxii.).P     In 
lapse  of  time  the  original  writing  frequently  re 
appears  in  faint  lines  below  the  later  text,  and  in 
this  way  many  precious  fragments  of  Biblical  MSS. 
which  had  been  once  obliterated  for  the  transcrip 
tion  of  other  works  have  been  recovered.     Of  these 
palimpsest  MSS.  the  most  famous  are  those  noticed 
below  under  the  letters  C.  R.  Z.  E.     The  earliest 
Biblical  palimpsest  is  not  older  than  the  5th  century 
(Plate  i.  fig.  3). 

18.  In  uncial  MSS.   the   contractions  are  usu 
ally  limited  to  a  few  very  common   forms  (0C, 
1C,  IIHP,  AAA,  &c.,  ».  e.  6f6s,  'Iijffovs,  irarfip, 
AaveiS ;  comp.   Scrivener,  Introduction,  p.  43). 
A  few  more  occur  in  later  uncial  copies,  in  which 
there  are  also  some  examples  of  the  ascript  iota, 


">  Jerome  describes  the  false  taste  of  many  In  his  time 
(c.  A.D.  400)  with  regard  to  MSS.  of  the  Bible :  "  Habeant 
qui  volunt  veteres  libros,  vel  in  membranis  purpureis 
auro  argentoque  descriptos,  vel  uncialibus,  ut  vulgo 
liunt  litteris  onera  magis  exarata,  quam  codices ;  dum- 
niodo  mihi  meisque  pennittant  pauperes  habere  schedulas, 
et  non  tarn  pulcros  codices  quam  emendates  "  (Praef.  in 
Jobum,  ix.  1084,  ed.  Migne). 

"  The  Codex  Sinaitic-is  (Cod.  Frid.  Aug.)  has  four 
columns ;  Cod.  Alex.  (A)  wo.  Cf.  Scrivener,  Introduction, 
D  25,  n.,  for  other  examples. 


A  full  and  Interesting  account  of  the  various  cnanges 
in  the  uncial  alphabet  at  different  times  is  given  by  Scri 
vener,  Introduction,  pp.  27-36. 

P  This  practice  was  condemned  at  the  Qulnisextlne 
Council  (A.D.  692),  Can.  68 ;  but  the  Commentary  of  Bal 
samon  shows  that  in  his  time  (fA.D.  1204)  the  practico 
had  not  ceased :  <r>)jneia)(rai  ravra.  Sta  TOWS  /3i/3A.ioica- 
TTIJ\OVS  TOUS  ajraAci</>oi'Ta5  Tas  fte/i/Spaya?  Ttav  Otitav 
ypa&iav.  A  Biblical  fragment  in  the  British  Museum  haf 
been  erased,  and  used  twice  afterwards  for  iyrian  writlup 
(Add.  17, 136.  Cod.  N*>  Tischdf.). 


512 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


which  occurs  rarely  in  the  Codex  Sinaiticus.*  Ac 
cents  are  not  found  in  MSS.  older  than  the  8th 
century.'  Breathings  and  the  apostrophus  (Ti«chdf. 
Proleg.  cxxxi.)  occur  somewhat  earlier.  The  oldest 
punctuation  after  the  simple  interval,  is  a  stop  like 
the  modern  Greek  colon  (in  A  C  D),  which  is 
accompanied  by  an  interval,  proportioned  in  some 
cases  to  the  length  of  the  pause.1  In  E  (Gospp.) 
and  Bg  (Apoc.),  which  are  MSS.  of  the  8th  century, 
this  point  marks  a  full  stop,  a  colon,  or  a  comma, 
according  as  it  is  placed  at  the  top,  the  middle,  or 
the  base  of  the  letter  (Scrivener,  p.  42).*  The 
present  note  of  interrogation  (;)  came  into  use  in 
the  9th  century. 

J  9.  A  very  ingenious  attempt  was  made  to  supply 
at.  effectual  system  of  punctuation  for  public  read 
ing,  by  Euthalius,  who  published  an  arrangement 
of  St.  Paul's  Epistles  in  clauses  (ffrlxoi)  in  458, 
and  another  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles  in 
4-90.  The  same  arrangement  was  applied  to  the 
Gospels  by  some  unknown  hand,  and  probably  at 
an  earlier  date.  The  method  of  subdivision  was 
doubtless  suggested  by  the  mode  in  which  the  poetic 
books  of  the  O.  T.  were  written  in  the  MSS.  of 
the  LXX.  The  great  examples  of  this  method  of 
writing  are  D  (Gospels),  H3  (Epp.),  D2  (Epp.).  The 
Cod.  Laud.  (E,,  Acts)  is  not  strictly  stichometrical, 
but  the  parallel  texts  seem  to  be  arranged  to  esta 
blish  a  verbal  connexion  between  the  Latin  and 
Greek  (Tregelles,  Home,  187).  The  trrixot  vary 
considerably  in  length,  and  thus  the  amount  of 
vellum  consumed  was  far  more  than  in  an  ordinary 
MS.,  so  that  the  fashion  of  writing  in  "  clauses  " 
soon  passed  away ;  but  the  numeration  of  the 
vrlxot  in  the  several  books  was  still  preserved,  and 
many  MSS.  (e.g.  A  Ep.,  K  Gosp.)  bear  traces  of 
having  been  copied  from  older  texts  thus  arranged.* 

20.  The   earliest   extant  division  of  the  N.  T. 
into  sections  occurs  in  Cod.  B.     This  division  is 
elsewhere  found  only  in  the  palimpsest  fragment  of 
St.  Luke,  B.    In  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  there  is  a 
double  division  in  B,  one  of  which  is  by  a  later  hand. 
The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  treated  as  one  un 
broken  book   divided   into  93  sections,  in  which 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  originally  stood  between 
the  EpistJes  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Ephesians. 
This  appears  from  the  numbering  of  the  sections, 
which  the  writer  of  the  MS.  preserved,  though  he 
transposed  the  book  to  the  place  before  the  pastoral 
epistles.' 

21.  Two  other  divisions  of  the  Gospels  must  be 


1  As  to  the  use  of  cursive  MSS.  in  this  respect  of  iota 
ascript  or  subscript,  Mr.  Scrivener  found  that  "  of  forty- 
three  MSS.  now  in  England,  twelve  have  no  vestige  of 
either  fashion,  fifteen  represent  the  ascript  use,  nine  the 
tubseri.pt  exclusively,  while  the  few  that  remain  have  both 
indifferently  "  (Introduction,  p.  39).  The  earliest  use  of 
the  subscript  is  In  a  MS.  (71)  dated  1160  (Scrivener,  I.  c.). 

r  Mr.  Scrivener  makes  an  exception  in  the  case  of  "  the 
first  four  lines  of  each  column  of  the  book  of  Genesis  "  In 
Cod.  A,  which,  he  says,  is  furnished  with  accents  and 
breathings  by  the  first  hand  (Introduction,  p.  40).  Dr. 
Tregelles,  to  whose  kindness  I  am  indebted  for  several 
remarks  on  this  article,  expressed  to  me  his  strong  doubts 
as  to  the  correctness  of  this  assertion ;  and  a  very  careful 
examination  of  the  MS.  leaves  no  question  but  that  the 
accents  and  breathings  were  the  work  of  the  later  scribe 
ivho  accentuated  the  whole  of  the  first  three  columns. 
There  is  a  perceptible  difference  in  the  shade  of  the  red 
pigment,  which  is  decisively  shown  In  the  initial  K. 

*  The  division  In  John  i.  3,  4,  6  yfyovev  ev  aurci  fcor)  7/v 
(cf.  Tregelles,  ad  Joe.),  Rom.  vlli.  20  (Orlgen),  ix.  5,  shows 
Lbe  Attention  given  to  this  question  In  the  earliest  tlmos 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

noticed.  The  first  of  these  was  a  division  hit* 
"  chapters  "  Kt<t>d\aia,  rir\ot,  breves],  which  cor 
respond  with  distinct  sections  of  the  narrative,  anJ 
are  on  an  average  a  little  more  than  twice  as  long 
as  the  sections  in  B.  This  division  is  found  in  A, 
C,  R,  Z,  and  must  therefore  have  come  into  general 
use  some  time  before  the  5th  century.*  The  other 
division  was  constructed  with  a  view  to  a  harmony 
of  the  Gospels.  It  owes  its  origin  to  Ammonius  of 
Alexandria,  a  scholar  of  the  3rd  century,  who  con 
structed  a  Haimony  of  the  Evangelists,  taking  St. 
Matthew  as  the  basis  round  which  .he  grouped  the 
parallel  passages  from  the  other  Gospels.  Eusebius 
of  Caesarea  completed  his  labour  with  great  inge 
nuity,  and  constructed  a  notation  and  a  series  of 
tables,  which  indicate  at  a  glance  the  parallels  which 
exist  to  any  passage  in  one  or  more  of  the  other 
Gospels,  and  the  passages  which  are  peculiar  to 
each.  There  seems  every  reason  to  believe  that 
the  sections  as  they  stand  at  present,  as  well  as 
the  ten  "  Canons,"  which  give  a  summary  of  the 
Harmony,  are  due  to  Eusebius,  though  the  sections 
sometimes  occur  in  MSS.  without  the  corresponding 
Canons.*  The  Cod.  Alex.  (A),  and  the  Cottonian 
fragments  (N),  are  the  oldest  MSS.  which  conta.n 
both  in  the  original  hand.  The  sections  occur  in 
the  palimpsests  C,  R,  Z,  P,  Q,  and  it  is  possible 
that  the  Canons  may  have  been  there  originally, 
for  the  vermilion  ( Ktwd&apis,  Euseb.  Ep.  ad 
Carp.),  or  paint  with  which  they  were  marked 
would  entirely  disappear  in  the  process  of  preparing 
the  parchment  afresh.? 

22.  The  division  of  the  Acts  and  Epistles  into 
chapters  came  into  use  a*  a  later  time.     It  does 
not  occur  in  A  or  C,  which  give  the  Arnmonian 
sections,  and  is   commonly   referred  to  Euthalius 
(Comp.  §19),  who,  however,  says  that  he  borrowed 
the  divisions  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  from  an  earlier 
father  ;  and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  divi 
sion  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles   which  he 
published  was  originally  the  work  of  Pamphilus 
the   Martyr    (Montfaucon,  Bill.  Coislin.  p.   78). 
The  Apocalypse  was  divided  into  sections  by  An 
dreas  of  Caesarea  about  A.D.  500.     This  division 
consisted  of  24   \6yoi,   each  of  which  was  sub 
divided  into  three  "  chapters  "  (Kf<pd\ata).* 

23.  The  titles  of  the  sacred  books  are  from  their 
nature  additions  to  the  original  text.     The  distinct 
names  of  the  Gospels  imply  a  collection,  and  the 
titles  of  the  Epistles  are  notes  by  the  possessors 
and   not   addresses  by   the  writers  ('ludvvov   a , 


t  Dr.  Tregelles,  whose  acquaintance  with  ancient  MSS. 
Is  not  inferior  to  that  of  any  scholar,  expresses  a  doubt 
"  whether  this  is  at  all  uniformly  the  case." 

0  Comp.  Tischdf.  Jf.  T.  ed.  1859,  under  the  subscriptions 
to  the  several  books.    Wetstein,  f'rokgg.  pp.  100-102. 

»  The  oldest  division  is  not  found  In  2  Pet  (ed.  Vercell. 
p.  125.)  (Mr.  Hort).  Jt  is  found  in  Jnde ;  2,  3  John. 

"  The  Kf(j>a\aia  do  not  begin  with  the  beginning  of  the 
books  (Griesbach,  Comm.  Crit.  it.  4fl).  This  is  important 
in  reference  to  the  objections  raised  against  Matt.  i. 

*  These  very  useful  canons  and  sections  are  printed  in 
the  Oxford  Text  (Lloyd)  in  Tischendorf  (1859),  and  the 
notation  Is  very  easily  mastered.  A  more  complete  ar 
rangement  of  the  canons,  giving  the  order  of  the  section*, 
in  each  Evangelist,  originally  drawn  up  by  Dr.  Tregelles 
is  fonnd  In  Dr.  Wordsworth's  Gk.  Test.  vol.  1. 

7  A  comparative  table  of  the  ancient  and  modern  divi 
sions  of  the  N.  T.  is  given  by  Scrivener  (Introduction 
p.  58). 

1  For  the  later  division  of  the  Bible  Into  our.  present 
chapters  and  verses,  see  BIBIJ:,  i.  '214. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

8',  Itc.^.  In  their  earliest  form  they  a.-e  unite 
simple,  According  to  Matt/tew,  &c.  (xo.ro.  ViaOOatov 
K.T.A.)  ;  To  the  Romans,  &c.  (irpbs  'Vtafnaiovt 
•C.T.A..)  ;  First  of  Peter,  &c.  (Tltrpov  a')  ;  Acts  of 
Apostles  (irpdfcts  airoffT  fault) ;  Apocalypse.  Tt.tse 
headings  were  gradually  amplified  till  they  as 
sumed  such  forms  as  The  holy  Gospel  according  to 
John ;  The  first  Catholic  Epistle  of  the  holy  and 
all-praiseu:ortky  Peter ;  The  Apocalypse  of  the 
holy  and  most  glorious  Apostle  and  Evangelist, 
the  beloved  virgin  who  rested  on  the  bosom  of 
Jesus,  John  the  Divine.  In  the  same  way  the 
original  subscriptions  (ifiroypcupoti),  which  were 
merely  repetitions  of  the  titles,  gave  way  to  vague 
traditions  as  to  the  dates,  &c.,  of  the  books.  Those 
appended  to  the  Epistles,  which  have  been  trans 
lated  in  the  A.  V.,  are  attributed  to  Euthalius, 
and  their  singular  inaccuracy  (Paley,  Horae  Pau- 
linae,  ch.  xv.)  is  a  valuable  proof  of  the  utter  absence 
of  historical  criticism  at  the  time  when  they  could 
find  currency. 

24.  Very  few  MSS.  contain  the  whole  N.  T., 
"  twenty-seven  in  all  out  of  the  vast  mass  of  extant 
documents"    (Scrivener,    Introduction,    61).     The 
MSS.  of  the  Apocalypse  are  rarest;  and  Chrysostom 
complained  that  in  his  time  the  Acts  was  very 
little  known.     Besides  the  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  or 
of  parts  of  it,  there  are  also  Lectionaries,  which 
contain  extracts  arranged  for  the  Church-services. 
These  were    taken    from   the  Gospels  (€110776X1- 
ffrdpia),  or  from  the  Gospels  and  Acts  (irpa£air6- 
<rro\oi),  or  rarely  from  the  Gospels  and  Epistles 
(airotrTQ\otva.'Yyf\id).    The  calendars  of  the  lessons 
(ffvva^dpta),  are  appended  to  very  many  MSS.  of 
the  N.  T. ;  those  for  the  saints'-day  lessons,  which 
varied  very  considerably  in  different  times  and  places, 
were  called  Mi)vo\6yia  (Scholz,  N.  T.,  453-493 ; 
Scrivener,  68-75). 

25.  When  a  MS.  was  completed  it  was  com 
monly   submitted,   at   least   in   early  times,  to  a 
areful  revision.     Two  tenns  occur  in  describing 
this  process,  o   avrifid\\a>v   and    SiopOwrris.     It 
nas  been  suggested  that  the  work  of  the  former  an 
swered  to  that  of  "  the  corrector  of  the  press," 
while  that  of  the  latter  was  more  critical  (Tregelles, 
fforne,   85,  86).     Possibly,    however,    the  words 
only  describe  two  parts  of  the  same  work.     Several 
MSS.  still  preserve  a  subscription  which  attests  a 
revision  by  comparison  with  famous  copies,  though 
this  attestation  must  have  referred  to  the  earlier 
exemplara     (Comp.  Tischdf.  Jude  subscript.)  ;   but 
the  Coislinian  fragment  (H3)  may  have  been  itself 
compared,  according  to  the  subscription,  "  with  the 
copy  in  the  library  at  Caesarea,   written  by  the 
hand  of  the  holy  Pamphilus."     (Comp.  Scrivener, 
Introduction,  p.  47).     Besides  this  official  correc 
tion  at  the  time  of  transcription,  MSS.  were  often 
corrected  by  different  hands  in  later  times.     Thus 
Tischendorf  distinguishes   the   work   of  two  cor 
rectors  in  C,  and  of  three  chief  correctors  in  D^.    In 
later  MSS.  the  corrections  are  often  much  more  va 
luable  than  the  original  text,  as  in  67  (Epp.) ;  and 
m  the  Cod.  Sinait.  the  readings  of  one  corrector 
(2  b)  are  frequently  as  valuable  as  those  of  the 
original  text.* 

(The  work  of  Montfau9on  still  remains  the  clas- 


NEW  TESTAMENT  *13 

s!cal  authority  on  Greak  P.-ilaeography  (Falc.eo- 
^raphia  Graeca,  Paris,  1708),  though  much  lias 
been  discovered  since  his  time  which  modifies  some 
of  his  statements.  The  plates  in  the  magnificent 
work  of  Silvestre  and  Champollion  (Paleographie 
Univcrselle,  Paris,  1841,  Eng.  Trans,  by  Sir  F. 
Madden,  London,  1850)  give  a  splendid  and  fairly 
accurate  series  of  facsimiles  of  Greek  MSS.  (r  lates, 
liv.-xciv.).  Tischendorf  announces  a  new  work  on 
Palaeography  (N.  T.  Praef.  cxxxiii.),  and  this,  if 
published,  will  probably  leave  nothing  to  be  desired 
in  the  Biblical  branch  of  the  study. 

26.  The  number  of    uncial    MSS.    remaining, 
though   great   when   compared   with   the  ancient 
MSS.  extant  of  other  writings,  is  inconsiderable.1 
Tischendorf  (N.  T.  Praef.  cxxx.)  reckons  40  in  the 
Gosj>els,  of  which  5  are  entire,  B  K  M  S  U ;  3 
nearly  entire,  E  L  A;  10  contain  very  considerable 
portions,  ACDFGHVXTA;ofthe  remainder 
14  contain  very  small  fragments,  8  fragments  more 
(I  P  Q  R  Z)    or   less  considerable    (N  T  Y).     To 
these  must  be  added  X  (Cod.  Sinait.),  which  is 
entire  ;  2  (?)  a  new  MS.  of  Tischendorf  (Not.  Cod 
Sin.  pp.  51-52),  which  is  nearly  entire;  and  E 
(Cod.  Zacynth.),  which  contains  considerable  frag 
ments  of  St.  Luke.     Tischendorf  has  likewise  ob 
tained  6  additional  fragments  (1.  c.).     In  the  Acts 
there  are  9  (10  with  N).  of  which  4  contain  the 
text  entire  (K  A  B),  or  nearly  (E2)  so ;  4  have  large 
fragments,  (C  D  H2  G2  =  L2)  ;  2  small  fragments, 
In  the  Catholic  Epistles  5,  of  which  4,  A  B  K8  G^ 
=  L2  are  entire  ;  1  (C)  nearlv  entire.     In  the  Pau 
line  Epistles  there  are  14,  2  nearly  entire,  D2  L2 ; 
7  have  very  considerable  portions,  A  B  C  E,  F8  G3 
K2  (but  E3  should  not  be  reckoned"! ;  the  remaining 
5  some  fragments.    In  the  Apocalypse  3,  two  entire 
(A  Bg),  one  nearly  entire  (C).     To  these  three  last 
classes  must  be  added   X,  which  is  entire. 

27.  According  to  ckte  these  MSS.  are  classed  as 
follows : — 

Fourth  century.   N  B. 

Fifth  century.  A  C,  anu  some  fragments  in 
cluding  Q  T. 

Sixth  century.  D  P  R  Z,  E2,  D2  H3,  and  4 
smaller  fragments. 

Seventh  centuiy.   Some  fragments  including©. 

Eighth  century.  E  L  A  E,  B2  and  some  frag 
ments. 

Ninth  century.  F  K  M  X  T  A,  H2  Ga  =  L2, 
F2  G2  K2  M2  and  fragments. 

Tenth  century.     G  H  S  U,  (Es). 

28.  A  complete  description   of  these   MSS.    is 
given  in  the  great  critical  editions  of  the  N.  T. : 
here  those  only  can  be  briefly  noticed  which  are  of 
primary  importance,  the  first  place  being  given  to 
the   latest   discovered   and    most   complete   Codex 
Sinaiticus. 

A  (i).  Primaiy  Uncials  of  the  Gospels. 

K  (Codex Sinaiticus-  Cod.  Frid.  Aug.  ofLXX.\ 
at  St.  Petei-sburgh,  obtained  by  Tiscbendorrfrom  the 
convent  of  St.  Catherine,  Mount  Sinai,  n  1859. 
The  fragments  of  LXX.  published  as  Cod.  Frid. 
Aug.  (1846),  were  obtained  at  the  same  place  by 
Tischendorf  in  1844.  The  N.  T.  is  entire,  and  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas  and  parts  of  the  Shepherd  of 


•  Examples  of  the  attestation  and  signature  of  MSS  , 
with  a  list  of  the  names  of  scribes,  are  given  by  Mont- 
f:\iicoc  (Palatoyraphia,  pp.  39-108). 

•  Since  the  time  of  Wetstein  the  uncial  MSS.  have  been 
mart*d  by  capital  letters,  the  cursives  by  numbers  (and 

VOL.  II. 


later  by  small  letters).  In  consequence  of  the  confusion 
which  arises  from  applying  the  same  letter  to  different 
MSS.,  I  have  distinguished  the  different  MSS.  by  tn« 
notation  M,  M2,  Ms,  retaining  the  asterisk  (is  originally 
used)  to  mark  the  first,  fee.,  hanijg. 

2  L 


514 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


Hennas  are  added.  The  whole  MS.  is  to  be  pub 
lished  in  18G2  by  Tischendorf  at  the  expense  of  the 
Emperor  of  Russia.  It  is  probably  the  oldest  of 
the  MSS.  of  the  N.  TM  and  of  the  4th  century 
(Tiwfldf.  Not.  God.  Sin.  1860). 

A  (Codex  Alexandrintis,  Bnt.  Mus.),  a  MS.  of 
the  entire  Greek  Bible,  with  the  Epistles  of  Clement 
added.  It  was  given  by  Cyril  Lucar,  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  to  Charles  I.  in  1628,  and  is  now 
in  the  British  Museum.  It  contains  the  whole  of 
the  N.  T.  with  some  chasms  :  Matt,  i.-xxv.  6, 
^PX«ff**»  ^onn  v'-  *>0»  fr«-viii.  52,  A.ey«;  2 
Cor.  iv.  13,  ixiffTtvo-a-xii.  6,  ^{  Ifiov.  It  was 
probably  written  in  the  first  half  of  the  5th  cen 
tury.  The  N.  T.  has  been  published  by  Woide 
(fol.  1786),  and  with  some  corrections  by  Cowper 
(8vo.  1860).«  Comp.  Wetstein,  frolegg.  pp.  13-30 
(od.  Lotze).  (Plate  i.  tig.  2.) 

B  (Codex  Vaticanus,  1209),  a  MS.  of  the  entire 
Greek  Bible,  which  seems  to  have  been  in  the 
Vatican  Library  almost  from  its  commencement 
(c.  A.D.  1450).  It  contains  the  N.  T.  entire  to 
Heb.  ix.  14,  KtuBa:  the  rest  of  the  EpLstle  to  the 
Hebrews,  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse 
were  added  in  the  loth  century.  Various  collations 
of  the  N.  T.  were  made  by  Bartolocci  (1669),  by 
Mico  for  Bentley  (c.  1720),  whose  collation  was 
in  part  revised  by  Rulotta  (1726),  and  by  Birch 
(1788).  An  edition  of  the  whole  MS.,  on  which 
Mai  had  been  engaged  for  many  years,  was  pub 
lished  three  years  after  his  death  in  1858  (V  voll. 
4to.  ed.  Vercellone;  N.  T.  reprinted  Lond.  and 
Leipsic).  Mai  had  himself  kept  back  the  edition 
(printed  1828-1838),  being  fully  conscious  of  its 
imperfections,  and  had  prepared  another  edition  of 
the  N.  T.,  which  was  published  also  by  Vercellone 
in  1859  (8vo.).  The  errors  in  this  are  less  nu 
merous  than  in  the  former  collation  ;  but  the  literal 
text  of  B  is  still  required  by  scholars.  The  MS.  is 
assigned  to  the  4th  century  (Tischdf.  N.  T.  cxxrvi.- 
cxlix.). 

C  (  Codex  Ephraemt  rescriptus.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp. 
9),  a  palimpsest  MS.  which  contains  fragments  of  the 
LXX.  and  of  every  part  of  the  N.  T.  In  the  12th 
century  the  original  writing  was  eflaced  arid  some 
Greek  writings  of  Ephraem  Syrus  were  written 
over  it.  The  MS.  was  brought  to  Florence  from 
the  East  at  the  beginning  of  the  1  6th  century,  and 
came  thence  to  Paris  with  Catherine  de'  Medici. 
tWetstein  was  engaged  to  collate  it  for  Bentley 
1.716),  but  it  was  first  fully  examined  by  Tischen- 
-  -f,  who  published  the  N.  T.  in  1843  :  the  0.  T. 
i  Anents  in  1845.  The  only  entire  books  which 
ascript  icrished  are  2  Thess.  anJ  2  John,  but  lacunae 
three  Mt'er  or  iess  extent  occur  constantly.  It  is  of 
either  fasl.,  same  <jate  ^  QOf[f  Alex. 
"*S**S>(  Bezae.  Univ.  Libr.  Cambridge),  a 

iy,  in  MS.  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  with  a 
the  subscript  ii.   .,...,,  .    ,  .    ,,     r.   .        .. 

r  Mr  gcriven?*  °*  3  •*  onn>  presented  to  the  University 
first  four  lines  of»7  Beza  in  1581.  Some  readings  from 
Cod.  A,  which,  hel  in  Italy  for  Stephens'  edition  ;  but 
breathings  by  the  .  found  it  at  the  sack  of  Lyons  in 
Tregelles,  to  whose 


,  . 

remarks  on  this  artlcl^egretted  that  the  editor  has  followed 
as  to  the  correctness  of  &  Mai  In  tntrotfsclng  modem  puno 
examination  of  the  MS.  accents,  which  are  by  no  means 
accents  and  breathings  we.uke  vii.  12,  avrf  xnp<f  is  given 
who  accentuated  the  wholly  fie  MS.  represents  av-ni 
There  is  a  perceptible  differei/ely  less  unfortunate  that  he 
pigment,  which  is  decisively  signal  punctuation,  however 
The  division  In  John  i.  3,  4,  e  few  contractions  whirh 
|(cf.  Tregelles.  ad  Joe.),  Rom.  viii.  fliwbacks,  tie  text  seems 
i  Attention  given  to  this  question'  v- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

1562  in  the  monastery  of  St.  Irenaeus.  The  text 
is  very  remarkable,  and,  especially  in  the  Acts, 
abounds  in  singular  interpolations.  The  MS.  lui 
many  lacunae.  It  was  edited  in  a  splendid  form 
by  Kipling  (1793,  2  vols.  fol.),  and  no  com 
plete  collation  has  been  since  made ;  but  arrange 
ments  have  lately  been  (1861)  made  for  a  new 
edition  under  the  care  of  the  Rev.  F.  H.  Scrivener 
The  MS.  is  referred  to  the  6th  century.  Cf.  Credner, 
Beitrage,  i.  452-518;  Bornemann,  Acta  Aposto- 
forum,  1848 ;  Schulz,  De  Codice  D,  Cantab.  1827.d 

L  (Paris.  Cod.  Imp.  62),  one  of  the  most  im 
portant  of  the  late  uncial  MSS.  It  contains  the 
four  Gospels,  with  the  exception  of  Matt.  iv.  22- 
v.  14,  xxviii.  17-20;  Mark  x.  10-20,  xv.  2-20, 
John  xxi.  15-25.  The  text  agrees  in  a  remarkable 
manner  with  B  and  Origen.  It  has  been  published 
by  Tischendorf,  Monwnenta  Sacra  Inedita,  1846. 
Cf.  Griesbach,  Symb.  Grit.  i.  Ixvi.-cxli.  It  is  ot 
the  8th  century. 

R  (Brit.  Mus.  Add.  17,211),  a  very  valuable 
palimpsest,  brought  to  England  in  1847  from  the 
convent  of  St.  Mary  Deipara  in  the  Nitrian  desert. 
The  original  text  is  covered  by  Syrian  writing  of 
the  9th  or  10th  century.  About  585  vei-ses  of 
St.  Luke  were  deciphered  by  Tregelles  in  1854,  and 
by  Tischendorf  in  1855.  The  latter  has  published 
them  in  his  Man.  Sacra  Inedita,  ii.  1855.  It  is 
assigned  to  the  6th  century.  (Plate  i.  fig.  3.) 

X  (Codex  Monrtcensis),  in  the  University  Library 
at  Munich.  Collated  by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles. 
Of  the  10th  century. 

Z  (Cod.  Dublinensis  rescriptus,  in  the  Library 
of  Trin.  Coll.  Dublin),  a  palimpsest  containing  large 
portions  of  St.  Matthew.  It  was  edited  by  Barrett 
(1801);  and  Tregelles  has  since  (1853)  re-examined 
the  MS.  and  deciphered  all  that  was  left  undeter 
mined  before  (History  of  Printed  Text,  pp.  166-9X 
It  is  assigned  to  the  6th  century. 

A  (Codex  Sangallensis),  a  MS.  of  the  Gospels, 
with  an  interlinear  Latin  translation,  in  the  Library 
of  St.  Gall.  It  once  formed  part  of  the  same  vo 
lume  with  Gs.  Published  in  lithographed  fac-simile 
by  Hettig  (Zurich,  1836). 

H  (Codex  Zacynthius),  a  palimpsest  in  possession 
of  the  Bible  Society,  London,  containing  important 
fragments  of  St.  Luke.  It  is  probably  of  the  8th 
century,  and  is  accompanied  by  a  Catena.  The 
later  writing  is  a  Greek  Lectionary  of  the  13th 
century.  It  has  been  transcribed  and  published  by 
Tregelles  (London,  1861). 

The  following  are  important  fragments : — 

I  (Tischendorf),  various  fi-agments  of  the  Gos 
pels  (Acts,  Pauline  Epistles),  some  of  great  value, 
published  by  Tischendorf,  Monwnenta  Sacra,  ii. 
1855. 

N  (Cod.  Cotton.'),  (formerly  J  N),  twelve  kavw 
of  purple  vellum,  the  writing  being  in  silver.  Four 
leaves  are  in  Brit.  Mus.  (Cotton.  C.  xv).  Pub 
lished  by  Tischendorf,  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.,  184(1. 
Saec.  vi. 

N*  (Brit.  Mus.  Add.  17,  136),  a  palimpsest. 
Deciphered  by  Tregelles  and  Tischendorf,  and  pub 
lished  by  the  latter :  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.  ii.  Saec.  iv. ,  v. 


d  An  edition  of  four  great  texts  of  the  Gospels  (A,  B 

C,  D)  is  at  present  (1861)  in  preparation  at  Oxford  by 

ehe  Rev.  K.  H.  Hansell.     The  Greek  text  of  D  has  been 

I  influenced  in  orthography  by  the  I  ,;ilin ;  e.  g.  Sofxopi- 

1  raiviov,  AeVpoxros,  <J>AayeAAw<ra9  (Wetstein,  Prolefig.  40)' 

hut  tlio  charRp  of  more  serious  altcraiiors  from  this  sc  nr-> 

cannot  he  maintained. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


515 


P  Q  (Codd.  Gwlpherbi/tani,  Wolfenbiittel),  two  published  by  Tischendorf,  who  had  been  engaged  or, 
j.suimpsests,  respectively  of  the  6th  and  oth  cen-  it  as  early  as  1840.  The  MS.  was  independently 
turies.  Published  by  Knittel,  1762  and  P  again,  examined  by  Tregelles,  who  communicated  the 
more  completely,  by  Tischendorf,  Mon.  Soar.  ined.  \  results  of  his  collation  to  Tischendorf,  and  by  their 


iii.  1860,  who  has  Q  ready  for  publication. 


combined  la'>ours  the  original  text,  which  has  been 


T  (Cod.  Borgianus:  Propaganda  at  Rome),  of  I  altered   by   numerous   correctors,    has   be«n   com- 
the  5th  century.    The  fragments  of  St.  John,  edited    pletely  ascertained.     The  MS.  is  entire  except  Rom. 


by  Giorgi  (1789);  those  of  St.  Luke,  collated  by 
B.  H.  Alford  (1859).  Other  fragments  were  pub 
lished  by  Woide.  (Tischdf.  N.  T.  Proleg.  clxvii.). 

T  {Cod.  Barberini,  225,  Home).  Saec.  viii, 
Edited  by  Tischendorf,  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.  1846. 

e  (Cod.  Tischendorf,  i.,  Leipsic).  Saec.  vii. 
Edited  by  Tischendorf,  in  Mon.  Sacr.  ined.  1846. 

(ii.)  The  Secondary  Uncials  are  in  the  Gospels: — 

E  (Basileensis,  K.  iv.  35,  Basle).  Collated  by 
Tischendorf,  Mueller,  Tregelles.  Saec.  viii. 

F  (Rheno-trajectinus.  Utrecht,  formerly  Bor- 
reeli).  Coll.  by  Heringa,  Traj.  1843.  Saec.  ix. 

G  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5684).  Coll.  by  Tregelles 
and  Tischendorf.  Saec.  ix.  x. 

H  (Hamburgensis.  Seidelii).  Coll.  by  Tregelles, 
1850.  Saec.  ix. 

K  (Cod.  Cyprius.  Pans,  Bibl.  Imp.  63).  Coll. 
by  Tregelles  and  Tischendorf.  Saec.  ix. 

M  (Cod.  Campianus.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  48).  Coll. 
by  Tregelles,  and  transcribed  by  Tischendorf.  Saec.  x. 

S  (Vaticanus,  354).     Coll.  by  Birch.     Saec.  x. 

U  (Cod.  Navianus.  Venice).  Coll.  by  Tregelles 
and  Tischendorf.  Saec.  x. 

V  (Mosquensis).     Coll.  by  Matthaei.     Saec.  ix. 

T  (Bodleianus).  Saec.  ix.  Cf.  Tischdf.,  N.  T. 
p.  clxxiii.  Coll.  by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles. 
Fresh  portions  of  this  MS.  have  lately  been  taken 
by  Tischendorf  to  St.  Petersburgh. 

A  (Bodleianus).  Saec.  viii.  (?).  Cod.  Tischen 
dorf  iii.  (Bodleian).  Saec.  viii.  ix.  Coll.  by  Tisch 
endorf  and  Tregelles. 

2  (St.  Petersburgh).  Saec.  viii.  ix.  (?).  A 
new  MS.  as  yet  uncollated. 

B  (i.).  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic 
Epistles. 

S,  A  B  C  D. 

Eg  {Codex  Laudianus,  35),  a  Graeco-Latin  MS. 
of  the  Acts,  probably  brought  to  England  by  Theo 
dore  of  Tarsus,  668,  and  used  by  Bede.  It  was 
given  to  the  University  of  Oxford  by  Archbishop 
Laud  in  1630.  Published  by  Hearne,  1715;  but 
a  new  edition  has  been  lately  undertaken  (1861) 
by  Scrivener,  and  is  certainly  required.  Saec.  vi. 
vii. 

(ii.)  The  Secondary  Uncials  are — 

G2  =  L2  (Cod.  Angelicus  (Passionei)  Rome). 
Coll.  by  Tischdf.  and  Treg.  Saec.  ix. 

Ht  (Cod.  Mutinensis,  Modena),  of  the  Acts. 
Call,  by  Tischdf.  and  Treg.  Saec.  ix. 

K2  (Mosquensis),  of  the  Catholic  Epistles.  Coll. 
by  Matthaei.  Saec.  ix. 

C  (i.).  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Pauline  Epistles : 

K  ABC. 

Dt  (^  Codex  Claromontanus,  f.  e.  from  Clermont, 
new  Beauvais,  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  107),  aGraeco-Latin 
MS.  of  the  Pauline  Epistles,  once  (like  D)  in  the 
possession  of  Beza.  It  passed  to  the  Royal  Library 
at  Paris  in  1707,  where  it  has  since  remained. 
Wetstein  collated  it  carefully,  and,  in  1 S52,  it  was 


At  the  end  of  the  lacuna  after  Philemon  20  G2  adds, 
ad       laudicenses      incipit     epistola 

AaouScucrjcras    apteral    e7H<rroAr) ; 


i.  1-7.  The  passages  Rom.  i.  27-30  (in  Latin,  i. 
24-27)  were  added  at  the  close  of  the  6th  century, 
and  1  Cor.  xiv.  13-22  by  another  ancient  hand. 
The  MS.  is  of  the  middle  of  the  6th  century.  Cf. 
Griesbach,  Symb.  Crit.  ii.  31-77. 

Fg  (Codex  Augiensis.  Coll.  SS.  Trin.  Cant.  B, 
17,  1),  a  Graeco-Latin  MS.  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
bought  by  Bentley  from  the  Monastery  of  Reichenau 
(Augia  Major)  in  1718,  and  left  to  Trin.  Coll.  by 
his  nephew  in  1786.  This  and  the  Cod.  Boer- 
nerianus  (G,)  were  certainly  derived  from  the 
same  Greek  original.  The  Greek  of  the  Ep.  to 
the  Hebrews  is  wanting  in  both,  and  they  have 
four  common  lacunae  in  the  Greek  text:  1  Cor.  iii. 
8-16,  vi.  7-14;  Col.  ii.  1-8;  Philem.  21-25. 
Both  likewise  have  a  vacant  space  between  2  Tim. 
ii.  4  and  5.  The  Latin  version  is  complete  from  the 
beginning  of  the  MS.  Rom.  iii.  19,  /na?  Ae-yei,  dicit. 
The  MS.  has  been  admirably  edited  by  F.  H. 
Scrivener,  Cambr.  1859.  It  is  assigned  to  the  9th 
century.  The  Latin  version  is  of  singular  interest; 
it  is  closer  to  the  best  Hieronymian  text  than  that 
in  Gs,  especially  when  the  Greek  text  is  wanting 
(Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  xxviii.),  but  has  many  pecu 
liar  readings  and  many  in  common  with  Gs. 

G3  (Codex  Boerneriamis.  Dresden),  a  Grapco- 
Latin  MS.,  which  originally  formed  a  part  of  the 
same  volume  with  A.  It  was  derived  from  the 
same  Greek  original  as  Fz,  which  was  written 
continuously,  but  the  Latin  version  in  the  two 
MSS.  is  widely  different.6  A  and  G2  seem  to  have 
been  written  by  an  Irish  scribe  in  Switzerland 
(St.  Gall)  in  the  9th  century.  The  Greek  with 
the  interlinear  Latin  version  was  carefully  edited 
by  Matthaei,  1791.  Scrivener  has  given  the  varia 
tions  from  F2  in  his  edition  of  that  MS. 

The  following  fragments  are  of  great  value : — 
H,  (Codex  Coislinianus.  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  202), 
part  of  a  stichometrical  MS.  of  the  6th  century, 
consisting  of  twelve  leaves :  two  more  are  at  St. 
Petersburgh.  Edited  by  Montfaucon,  Bibl.  Coislin. 
251-61  ;  and  again  transcribed  and  prepared  for  the 
press  by  Tischendorf.  It  was  compared,  according 
to  the  subscription  (Tischdf.  N.  T.  p.  clxxxix.), 
with  the  autograph  of  Pamphilus  at  Caesarea. 

Mg  (Hamburg;  London),  containing  Heb.  i.  1- 
iv.  3;  xii.  20-end,  and  1  Cor.  xv.  52-2  Cor.  i.  15 
2  Cor.  x.  13-xii.  5,  written  in  bright  red  ink  in  the 
10th  century.  The  Hamburg  fragments  were  col 
lated  by  Tregelles:  all  were  published  by  Tischen 
dorf,  Anecdot.  Sacr.  et  Prof.  1855. 

(ii.).  The  Secondary  Uncials  are : — 

K,,  L2. 

Eg  (Cod.  Sangcrmanensis,  St.  Petsrsburgh).  a 
Graeco-Latin  MS.,  of  which  the  Greek  text  was 
badly  copied  from  D8  after  it  had  been  thrice  cor 
rected,  and  is  of  no  value.  The  Latin  text  is  of 
some  slight  value,  but  has  not  been  wel 
Griesbach,  Symb.  Crit.  ii.  77-85. 


bi.»ttli<?  form  of  ttwGrask  name  shows  almost  conclusively  i  was  found. 


that  the  Greek  words  are  only  a  translation  cf  'ihe  Latir 
title  whlcn  the  scribe  found  ir.  his  Latin  Ms.,  in  which, 
as  in  many  others,  the  apocryphal  epistle  to  the  Laodiceam 


2  L  2 


516 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


D  (i.).  The  Primary  Uncials  of  the  Apocalypse. 

KAC. 

(ii.).  The  Secondary  Uncial  is — 

B2  (Codex  Vaticanus  (Basilianus),  2066). 
Edited  (rather  imperfectly)  by  Tischendorf.  Man. 
Sacr.  1846,  and  by  Mai  in  his  edition  of  B.  Tisch- 
endorf  gives  a  collation  of  the  differences,  N.  T. 
Praef.  cxlii-iii. 

29.  The  number  of  the  cursive  MSS.  (minus- 
cities')  in  existence  cannot  be  accurately  calculated. 
1  ischendorf  catalogues  about  500  of  the  Gospels, 
200  of  the  Acts  and  Catholic  Epistles,  250  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  and  a  little  less  than  100  of 
the  Apocalypse  (exclusive  of  lectionaries)  ;  but  this 
enumeration  can  only  be  accepted  as  a  rough 
approximation.  Many  of  the  MSS.  quoted  are 
only  known  by  old  references ;  still  more  have  been 
"  inspected  "  most  cursorily ;  few  only  have  been 
thoroughly  collated.  In  this  last  work  the  Rev. 
F.  H.  Scrivener  (Collatim  of  about  30  MSS.  of 
the  Holy  Gospels,  Camb.  1853 ;  Cod.  Aug.,  $c., 
Camb.  1859)  has  laboured  with  the  greatest  suc 
cess,  and  removed  many  common  errors  as  to  the 
character  of  the  later  text.'  Among  the  MSS.  which 
are  well  known  and  of  great  value  the  following 
are  the  most  important : — 

A.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Gospels. 

1  (Act.  i. ;  Paul.  i. ;  Basileensis,  K.  iii.  3). 
Saec.  x.  Very  valuable  in  the  Gospels.  Coll.  by 
Roth  and  Tregelles. 

33  (Act.  13;  Paul.  17;  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  14). 
Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Tregelles. 

59  (Coll.  Gonv.  et  Cai.  Cambr.).  Saec.  xii.  Coll. 
by  Scrivener,  1860,  but  as  yet  unpublished. 

69  (Act.  31:  Paul.  37;  Apoc.  14;  Cod.  Lei- 
cestrensis).  Saec.  xiv.  The  text  of  the  Gospels 
is  especially  valuable.  Coll.  by  Treg.  1852,  and 
by  Scriv.  1855,  who  published  his  collation  in  Cod. 
Aug.  $c.,  1859. 

118  (Bodleian.  Miscell.  13;  Marsh  24).  Saec. 
xiii.  Coll.  by  Griesbach,  Symb.  Grit.  i.  ccii.  ff. 

124  (Caesar.  Vindob.  Nessel.  188).  Saec.  xii. 
Coll.  by  Treschow,  Alter,  Birch. 

127  (Cod.  Vaticanus,  349).  Saec.  3d.  ColL  by 
Birch. 

131  (Act.  70;  Paul.  77;  Apoc.  66;  Cod.  Vati 
canus,  360).  Saec.  xi.  Formerly  belonged  to 
Aldus  Manutius,  and  was  probably  used  by  him 
in  his  edition.  Coll.  by  Birch. 

157  (Cod.  Urbino-Vat.  2).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Birch. 

218  (Act.  65;  Paul.  57;  Apoc.  33;  Caesar- 
Vindob.  23).  Saec.  xiii.  Coll.  by  Alter. 

238,  259  (Moscow,  S.  Synod.  42,  45).  Saec. 
xi.  Coll.  by  Matthaei. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

262,  300  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  53,  Iftfii.  S&e;:. 
i.  xi.  Coll.  (?)  by  Scholz. 

346  (Milan.  Ambros.  23).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  (?) 
by  Scholz. 

2>«  (St.  Petersburgh.  Petropol.  vi.  470).  Sox. 
ix.  Coll.  by  Muralt.  (Transition  cursive.) 

ctcr,  g'CT  (Lambeth,  1177,  528,  Wetstein,  71). 
Saec.  xii.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

p»e»  (Brit.  Mus.  Burney  20).  Saec.  xiii.  Coll. 
by  Scrivener. 

w«*  (Cambr.  Coll.  SS.  Trin.  B.  x.  16).  Saec. 
xiv.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

To  these  must  be  added  the  Evangelistarium 
(B.  M.  Burney,  22),  marked  yier,  collated  by 
Scrivener.*  (Plate  ii.  fig.  4.) 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  need  careful 
collation  :h 

13  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp. 50).  Coll.  1797.  Saec. 
xii.  (Cf.  Griesbach,  Symb.  Crit.  i.  cliv.-clxvi.). 

22  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  72).     Saec.  xi. 

28  (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  379).     Coll.  Scholz. 

72  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5647).     Saec.  xi. 

106  (Cod.  Winchelsea).  Saec.  x.  Coll.  Jackson 
(used  by  Wetstein),  1748. 

113,  114  (B.  M.  Harl.  1810,  5540). 

126  (Cod.  Guelpherbytanus,  ivi.  16).     Saec.  xi. 

130  (Cod.  Vaticanus,  359).     Saec.  xiii. 

209  (Act.  95;  Paul.  138;  Apoc.  46;  Venice. 
Bibl.  S.  Marci  10).  Saec.  xv.  The  text  of  the 
Gospels  is  especially  valuable. 

225  (Vienna,  Bibl.  Imp.  Kollar.  9,  Forlos.  31). 
Saec.  xii. 

372,  382  (Rome,  Vatican.  1161,  2070).  Saec. 
xv.  xiii. 

405,  408,  409  (Venice,  S.  Marci,  i.  10,  14,  15V 
Saec.  xi.,  xii. 

B.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Acts  and  Catholis 
Epistles. 

13=Gosp.  33,  Paul.  17. 

31  =  Gosp.  69  (Codex  Leicestrensis). 

65  =  Gosp.  218. 

73  (Paul.  80.     Vatican.  367).     Saec.  xi.     Coll. 
by  Birch. 

95,  96  (Venet.  10,  11).  Saec.  xiv.  xi.  Coll. 
by  Rinck. 

180  (Argentor.  Bibl.  Sem.  M.).  Coll.  by 
Arendt. 

lo«  =  p*'  61  (Tregelles),  (Brit.  Mus.  Add. 
20,003).  Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

a«*  (Lambeth,  1182).  Saec.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

c*«  (Lambeth,  1184).  Coll.  Sanderson  ap. 
Scrivener. 

The  following  are  valuabls,  but  require  more 
careful  collation. 


f  Mr.  Scrivener  has  kindly  furnished  me  with  the  fol 
lowing  summary  of  his  catalogue  of  N.  T.  MSS,  which  is 
by  for  the  most  complete  and  trustworthy  enumeration 
yet  made  (Plain  Introduction,  p.  225)  :— 

25,  27  (Paul.  31,  Apoc.  7  ;  Paul.  33.  Brit.  Mus. 

8  The  readings  marked  102  (Matt.  xxiv.-Mark  viii.  1) 
which  were  taken  by  Wetstein  from  the  margin  ot  a 
printed  copy,  and  said  to  have  been  derived  from  a  Me- 
dicean  MS.,  cannot  have  been  derived  from  any  other 
source  than  an  imperfect  collation  of  B.    I  have  noticed 
85  places  in  which  it  is  quoted  in  St.  Mark,  and  in  every 
one,  except  ii.  22,  it  agrees  with  B.    In  St.  Matthew  H  is 
noticed  as  agreeing  with  B  70  times,  while  it  differs  from 
H  5  times.     These  few  variations  are  not  difficult  ot 
explanation. 
h  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  scholars  may  combine  to  accom 
plish  complete  collations  of  the  MSS.  given  in  these  lists. 
One  or  two  summer  vacations,  with  proper  co-operation 
niign:  accomplish  the  work. 

Undid. 

Coral  re. 

Duplicates 
mlre«dy 
deducted. 

34 
10 
14 
4 
68 
7 

601 
229 
283 
102 
183 
05 

32 
12 
14 

*8 

Act.  Oath.  Epp.     .   . 
Paul     

Evangeligtarla  .   .   . 

ToUl   .... 

127 

1463 

64 

IBrit  Mas.-Hwl.  «««.-<».  Jota.  i.  1,1.) 


J 


Brit.  Mufc—  Add.  *>,OOS.-{Acto  xiii.  18-20.) 


*  Brit    Mm—  R«rL  6MO.—  <»t  John  1. 


Brit.  Mm—  BOTM7  «.-<0t.  John  i.  1  4.) 


bijou    "\o  v°  a  >*  yxbw 

v     /_\A  Al      v      •  ^>  »  -* 


OVTOCTNUe, 

X      I  x-^ 


SPECIMENS    OF  CREEK    MSS.    FROM    THE    IS.T  TO    THE    VIT.H    CENTURY. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

Harl.  5537,  5620).     Cf.  Griesbach,  Symb.    Grit, 
a.  184,  185. 

29  (Paul.  35,  Genev.  20)      Saec.  xi.  xii 

36  (Coll.  Nov.  Oxon). 

40  (Paul.  46,  Apoc.  12.  Alex.  Vatican.  179). 
Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Zacagni. 

66  (Paul.  67). 

68  (Paul.  73,  Upsal).     Saec.  xii.  xi. 

69  (Paul.  74,  Apoc.  30,  Guelph.  xvi.  7).    Saec. 
Xiv.  xiii. 

81  (Barberini,  377).    Saec.  xi. 
137  (Milan,  Ambros.  97).      Saec.  xi.  Coll.   by 
Schdz. 

142  (Mutinensis,  243).     Saec.  xii.1 

C.  Primary  Cursives  in  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

17  =  Gosp.  33. 

37  =  Gosp.  69  (Cod.  Lcicestrensis). 
57  =  Gosp.  218. 

108,  109  =  Act,  95,  96. 

115,  116  (Act.  100,  101,  Mosqu.  Matt.  d.  f.). 

137  (Gosp.  263,  Act.  117,  Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.  61). 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  require  more 
careful  collation. 

5  =  Act.  5. 

23  (Paris,  Coislin.  28).  Saec.  xi.  Descr.  by 
Montfaucon. 

31  (Brit.  Mus.  ffarl.  5537)  =  I1".  Apoc.  Saec. 
xiii. 

33  (Act.  33.  Oxford,  Coll.  Lincoln.  2). 

46  =  Act.  40. 

47  (Oxford,  Bodleian.  Roe  16).    Saec.  xi. 
55  (Act.  46.     Monacensis). 

67  (Act.  66.   Vindob.    Lambec.  34).     The  cor 
rections  are  especially  valuable. 

70  (Act.  67.    Vindob.    Lambec.  37). 

71  (Vindob.   Forlos.  19).     Saec.  xii. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


517 


»  Three  other  MSS.,  containing  the  Catholic  Epistles, 
require  notice,  not  from  their  intrinsic  worth,  but  from 
their  connexion  with  the  controversy  on  1  John  v.  1, 8. 

34  (Gosp.  61,  ColL  SS.  Trin.  Dublin,  Codex  Mont- 
fortianui).  Saec.  xv.  xvi.  There  is  no  doubt  that  this 
was  the  Codex  Sritannicus,  on  the  authority  of  which 
Erasmus,  according  to  his  promise,  inserted  the  inter 
polated  words,  iv  T<?  ovpacc}!,  franjp,  Ao^cs  icai.  irvev^a 
ayiov  KOJ.  olroi  oi  r.  «.  «.  KOJ.  T.  e.  01  p.  tv  T.  y. ;  but  did 
not  omit,  on  the  same  authority  (which  exactly  follows 
the  late  Latin  MSS.),  the  last  clause  of  ver.  8,  xal  ot  rp. 
— eio-iV.  The  page  on  which  the  verse  stands  is  the  only 
glazed  page  in  the  volume.  A  collation  of  the  MS.  has 
been  published  by  Dr.  Dobbin,  London,  1854. 

162  (Paul.  200.  Vat.  Ottob.  298.)  Saec.  xv.  A  Graeco- 
Latin  MS.  It  reads,  awb  TOU  ovpavov,  Tranjp,  Aoyos  *cal 
irccvfua  iyiov  KOJ.  oi  rpets  ets  TO  £v  fltri  (Tregelles, 
Horw.  p.  217).  Scholz  says  that  the  MS.  contains  "  innu 
merable  transpositions,"  but  gives  no  clear  account  of  its 
character. 

173  (Paul.  211.  Naples,  Bibl.  Borbon.)  Saec.  xi.  The 
Interpolated  words,  with  the  articles,  and  the  last  clause 
of  ver.  8,  are  given  by  a  second  hand  (Saec.  xvi.). 

Codete  Ravianus  (no  Gosp.)  is  a  mere  transcript  of  the 
N.  T.  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglott,  with  variations  from 
Erasmus  and  Stephens.  Comp.  Griesbach,  ftynib.  Crit.  i. 
clxxxi.-clxxxxii. 

k  The  accompanying  plates  will  give  a  good  idea  of  the 
different  forms  of  biblical  Gk.  MSS.  For  permission  to 
take  the  tracings,  from  which  the  engravings  have  been 
admirably  made  by  Mr.  Netherclift,  my  sincere  thanks  are 
due  to  Sir  F.  Madden,  K.H. ;  and  1  am  also  much  indebted 
to  the  other  officers  of  the  MSS.  department  of  the  British 
Museum,  for  the  help  which  they  gave  me  in  making  them. 

Fl.  i.  fig.  1.  A  few  lines  from  the  Aoyo?  e7n.Ta<|>ios  of 
Hyperidea  (col.  9, 1. 4,  of  the  edition  of  Rev.  C.  Babington), 
a  papyrus  of  the  first  century,  or  not  much  later.  In 
Mr.  Bitbicgton's  facsimile  the  e  adscript  after  i/o/uw  fs 


73  (Act.  68). 

80  (Act.  73.    Vatican.  367). 

177-8-9  (Mutin.). 

D.  Primary  Cursives  of  the  Apocalyps". 

7  =  I**  (Act.  25.  Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5537). 
Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

14  =  Gosp.  69  (Cod.  Leicestrensis). 

31  =  c*"  (Brit.  Mus.  Harl.  5678).  Saec.  xv, 
Coll.  by  Scrivener. 

38  (Vatican.  579).  Saec.  xiii.  Coll.  by  B.  11. 
Alford. 

47  (Cod.  Dresdensis).  Saec.  xi.  Coll.  by  Mat- 
thaei. 

51   (Paris,  Bibl.  Imp.}.     Coll.  by  Reiche. 

gier.  (Parham,  17).  Saec.  xi.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

m«cr.  (Middlehill)  =  87.  Saec.  xi.  xii.  Coll.  by 
Scrivener. 

The  following  are  valuable,  but  require  more 
careful  collation. 

2  (Act.  10.  Paul.  12.  Paris.  Bibl.  Imp.  237). 

6  (Act.  23.  Paul.  28.  Bodleian.  Barooc.  3). 
Saec.  xii.  xiii. 

11  (Act.  39.  Paul.  45). 

12  =  Act.  40. 

17,  19  (Ev.  35.    Act.  14.    Paul.  18  ;   Act.  17, 
Paul.  21.  Paris.  Coislin.  199,  205). 
28  (Bodleian.  Barocc.  48',,. 
36  (Vindob.  Forlos.  29).     Saec.  xiv. 
41  (Alex- Vatican.  68).    Saec.  xiv. 
46  =  Gosp.  209. 
82  (Act.  179.    Paul.  128.    Monac.  211). 

30.  Having  surveyed  in  outline  the  history  of 
the  transmission  of  the  written  text,  and  the  chief 
characteristics  of  the  MSS.k  in  which  it  is  preserved, 


omitted  wrongly.  It  is  in  fact  partly  bidden  under  a  fibre 
of  the  papyrus,  but  easily  seen  from  the  side.  Two  cha 
racteristic  transcriptural  errors  occur  in  the  passage :  Tta 
rov-rif  Tpoirta  for  T<J>  TOVTOV  rpoirta,  and  (by  itacism,  }31) 
avvi^ovrai  for  o-vve\ovTi. 

Fig.  2.  The  opening  verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel  from  the 
Cod.  Ale*.  The  two  first  lines  are  rubricated.  The  spe 
cimen  exhibits  the  common  contractions,  0C,  A.NfJN,  and 
an  example  of  itacism,  x<«>P«'s-  The  stop  at  the  end  of  the 
fifth  line,  ovSe  tv ,  is  only  visible  in  a  strong  light,  but 
certainly  exists  there,  as  in  C  D  L,  &c. 

Fig.  3.  A  very  legible  specimen  of  the  Nitrian  pa 
limpsest  of  St.  Luke.  The  Greek  letters  in  the  original 
are  less  defined,  and  very  variable  in  tint:  the  Syriac 
somewhat  heavier  than  in  the  engraving,  which  is  on  the 
whole  very  faithful.  The  dark  lines  shew  where  the 
vellum  was  folded  to  form  the  new  book  for  the  writings 
of  Severus  of  Antioch.  The  same  MS.  contained  fragments 
of  the  1  Had,  edited  by  Dr.  Cureton,  and  a  piece  of  Enclld. 

PI.  ii.  fig.  1.  Part  of  the  first  column  of  the  famous 
Harleian  Evcmgelistarium,  collated  by  Scrivener.  It  is 
dated  A.D.  995  (Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  p.  xlviii.).  The  letters 
on  this  page  are  all  in  gold.  The  initial  letter  is  illu 
minated  with  red  and  blue.  The  MS.  is  a  magnificent 
example  of  a  service-book. 

Fig.  2.  From  Tischendorf 's  valuable  MS.  of  the  Acts 
(61  Tregelles).  It  was  written  A.D.  1044  (Scrivener,  Cod. 
Aug.  Ixix.).  The  specimen  contains  the  itacisms  xpoviav 
(jtpovov)  and  jrei/Tucoi>Ta. 

Fig.  3.  The  beginning  of  St.  John,  from  Cod.  114  of  tl:e 
Gospels  (Griesbach,  Symb.  Crit.  i.  cxciii.),  a  MS.  of  the 
13th  cent. 

Fig.  4.  Part  of  the  beginning  of  St.  John,  from  UM 
very  valuable  Evangelistarium  ysc*.  (Scrivener,  ColLittu>r\ 
&c.,  pp.  Ixi.  ff.).  The  initial  letter  of  the  Gospel  is  a  rude 
illumination.  The  MS.  bears  a  date  1319;  but  Mr.  Scri 
vener  justly  doubts  whether  this  iu  in  the  haud  of  tb< 
original  scribe. 


518 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


we  ar«  ;n  a  oosition  to  consider  the  e.vent  anc 
not'jre  of  the  variations  which  exist  in  litferen 
oopies.  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  r.  amber  o 
these  exactly,  but  they  cannot  be  less  than  120,000 
in  all  (Scrivener,  Introduction,  3),  though  of  these 
»  very  large  proportion  consist  of  differences  o 
spelling  and  isolated  aberrations  of  scribes,1  and  o 
the  remainder  comparatively  few  alterations  are 
sufficiently  well  supported  to  create  reasonable 
doubt  as  to  the  final  judgment.  Probably  there 
are  not  more  than  1600-2000  places  in  which 
the  true  reading  is  a  matter  of  uncertainty,  even  i 
we  include  in  this  questions  of  order,  inflexion  am 
orthography :  the  doubtful  readings  by  which  th 
souse  is  in  any  way  affected  are  very  much  fewer 
and  those  of  dogmatic  importance  can  be  easily 
numbered. 

31.  Various  readings  are  due  to  different  causes 
some  arose  from  accidental,  others  from  intentiona 
alterations  of  the  original  text,  (i)  Accidental  va 
riations  or  errata,  are  by  far  the  most  numerous 
class,  and  admit  of  being  referred  to  several  obvious 
sources,  (o)  Some  are  errors  of  sound.  The  most 
frequent  form  of  this  error  is  called  Itacism,  a  con 
fusion  of  different  varieties  of  the  I-sound,  by 
which  (01,  v)  i\,  i,  ««,  «,  &c.,  are  constantly  inter 
changed.  '  Other  vowel-changes,  as  of  o  and  to,  ov 
and  a,  &c.,  occur,  but  less  frequently.  Very  few 
MSS.  are  wholly  free  from  mistakes  of  this  kind, 
but  some  abound  in  them.  As  an  illustration  the 
following  variants  occur  in  Fs  in  Rom.  vi.  1-16: 
1  tpevufv.  2  Znves,  efrei  («T»)'  3  ayvotirai 
(-TS).  •  5  fffu^aiOa.  8  airo6d.vofi.ev.  9  airo- 
Ov-flffKt,  (rd.  1 1  V/MS,  \oyi£(ff6cu.  13  irapao 
ffarat.  14  &rra(  (-re).  15  '6r(t.  16  otoarai, 
OTd,  Trapfiffrdi'(Tat  (irupi<TT<ivtr(),  IWai,  vira- 
Koixrai.  An  instance  of  fair  doubt  as  to  the  true 
nature  of  the  reading  occurs  in  ver.  2,  where  tfi 
ptv  may  be  an  error  for  fflffoptv,  or  a  real  va 
riant."  Other  examples  of  disputed  readings  of 
considerable  interest  which  involve  this  considera 
tion  of  Itacism  are  found,  Horn.  xii.  2,  ffvffx-nna 
faffOcu  -Of ;  xvi.  20,  ffwrptytt  -eu.  James  iii.  3, 
ci  Sf  (foe).  Rom.  v.  1,  (^ta^fv,  €X0M€"  (c^  yi- 
15).  Luke  iii.  12,  14;  John  xiv.  23  ;  Hebr.  vi. 
3  ;  James  iv.  15  (iroi^crw/icc  -o^fv).  Matt,  xxvii. 
60,  Kaivf,  Ktv$.  John  xv.  4,  pdvri,  /tt'i/p  (cf. 
1  John  ii.  27).  Matt.  xi.  16,  (rtpo'is,  iraipois. 
Matt.  xx.  15  ti,  (I.  2  Cor.  xii.  1,  5«?,  8^.  1  Tim. 
v.  21,  irpoffK\i]ffiv,  irp6ffK\uriv.  1  Pet.  ii.  3, 
XprjffTbt  6  Kvpios,  xpurrbs  &  Kvpios. 

To  these  may  be  added  such  variations  as  Matt, 
xxvi.  29,  &c.  yevtjfi.a,  ytvvTjua.  2  Pet.  ii.  12,  yt- 
y(WT]iJ.4va.,  y(y(vri/j.«i>a.  Matt.  i.  18  ;  Luke  i.  14, 
y(vvriffis,  ytv«ris.  Matt,  xxvii.  35,  0d\\ovrfs, 
&a\6vret.  1  Pet.  ii.  1,  <p66vos,  <p6vos. 

32.  (£)  Other  variations  are  due  to  errors  of 
sit/ht.  These  arise  commonly  from  the  confusion 
of  similar  letters,  or  from  the  repetition  or  omission 
of  the  same  letters,  or  from  the  recurrence  of  a 
similar  ending  in  consecutive  clauses  which  often 
causes  one  to  be  passed  over  when  the  eye  mechanic 
ally  returns  to  the  copy  (Sfiotor (\evrov).  To  these 
naay  be  added  the  false  division  of  words  in  tran 
scribing  the  text  from  the  continuous  uncial  writing. 

i  The  whole  amount  U  considerably  less  in  number 
than  is  found  In  the  copies  of  other  texts,  if  account  be 
taken  of  the  number  of  the  MSS.  existing.  Comp.  Norton, 
Uenmnentst  of  the  Gospel*,  i.  p.  191  n. 

•  The  readings  nre  taken  Iron  Mr.  Scrivener's  admir 
able  transcript.  In  tlic  same  volume  Mr.  Scrivener  has 
H\ven  valuable  summaries  of  the  frequcnc5  of  the  occur- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

The  uncial  letters  0,  O,  C,  E,  are  peculiarly  liabl* 
to  confusion,  and  examples  may  easily  be  quoted  tc 
show  how  their  similarity  Jed  to  mistakes ;  1  Tim. 
iii.  18,  OC.  0C;  2  Cor.  ii.  3,  tXfl  CXfl ;  Mark  iv. 
22,  CAN,  O€AN,  OCAN. 

The  repetition  or  omission  of  similar  letters  may 
be  noticed  in  Matt.  xxi.  18,  EnANAFArflN, 
EHANArflN.  Lukex.27;  Rom.xiii.  9;  Tit.ii.  7, 
James  i.  '_>7,  C€ATTON,  tATTOtf  (cf.  Tischdf. 
ad  £om.  xiii.  9).  Luke  vii.  21,  EXAPI2ATO 
BAEHEIN,  EXAPI2ATO  TO  BAETIEIN.  Mark 
viii.  17,  2TNIETE,  2TNIETE  ETI.  Luke  ii.  38, 
(ATTH)  ATTH  T.  flPA.  Matt.  xi.  23,  KA*AP- 
NAOTM  MH,  KA*APNAOTM  H.  1  Thess.  ii. 
7,  EFENH0HMEN  NHHIOI,  ErENH0HMEN 
HHIOI.  Luke  ix.  49,  EKBAAAONTA  AAI- 
MONIA,  EKBAAAONTA  TA  AA1M.  Mark  xiv. 
35,  riPOCEA0nN,  HPOEAenN.  2Cor.  iii.  10, 
OT  AEAOZA2TAI,  OTAE  AEAOZA2TAI. 
I  Pet.  iii.  20,  AIIAE  EAEXETO,  ATIEE- 
EAEXETO.  Acts  x.  36,  TON  AOFON  AIIE- 
2TEIAE,  TON  AOFON  ON  ADE2TE1AE. 
Sometimes  this  cause  of  error  leads  to  further 
change:  2  Cor.  iii.  15,  HNIKA  AN  ANAFI- 
NX12KHTAI,  HNIKA  ANAriNn2KETAI. » 
Examples  of  omission  from  Homoioteleuton  occur 
John  vii.  7  (in  T) ;  1  John  ii.  23,  iv.  3 ;  Apoc.  ix. 
1,  2,  xiv.  1  ;  Matt.  v.  20  (D).  Cf.  1  Cor.  xv. 
25-27,  54  (F2,  G3)  ;  xv.  15  (Origen).  And  some  have 
sought  to  explain  on  this  principle  the  absence 
from  the  best  authorities  of  the  disputed  clause  in 
Matt.  x.  23,  and  the  entire  verses,  Luke  xvii.  36, 
Matt,  xxiii.  14. 

Instances  of  false  division  are  found,  Mark  xv.  6. 
'6vit(p  PTOVVTO,  Si  irapjjT00»TO.  Fhii.  i.  i,  <rvv(- 
iricritoirois,  ffvv  firiffKOirois.  Matt.  xx.  23,  &AAo($, 
dX\"  ofs.  Gal.  i.  9,  irpocipjJKa/ucp,  irpueipTjKa 
(t.*v.  Acts  xvii.  25,  Kara  irarra,  ica^  ri  iravro. 
In  a  more  complicated  example,  ffpa  iv  (arurrjpa 

ffovv)  is  changed  into  apiav  (ffumipiav)  in 
Acts  xiii.  23  ;  and  the  remarkable  reading  of  Latin 
authorities  in  1  Cor.  vi.  20  et  portate  arose  from 
confounding  &pa  re  and  &par(.  In  some  places 
the  true  division  of  the  words  is  still  doubtful. 
2  Cor.  xii.  19,  -rdSe  irdfra,  ra  5*  Ttdrra.  Acts 
xvii.  26,  irposT(Tayn(vov$  tccupovs,  irpos  T(ray* 

ovs  Kaipovs.  In  Cod.  AtKj.  (Fz)  the  false  divi 
sions  of  the  original  scribe  have  been  carefully  cor 
rected  by  a  contemporary  hand,  and  the  frequency 
of  their  occurrence  is  an  instructive  illustration  of 
;he  corruption  to  which  the  text  was  exposed  from 
this  source  (e.  g.  in  Gal.  i.  there  are  15  sik,h  cor- 
•ections,  and  four  mistakes,  vers.  13,  16,  18  are 
eft  uncorrected).  Errors  of  breathing,  though  ne 
cessarily  more  rare,  are  closely  connected  wiln 
hese:  Matt.  ix.  18,  (Is  f \6tav,  (lff(\6iav.  John 
x.  30,  (v  Tofrry,  Ir  rovro.  Luke  vii.  12  ;  Rom. 
•ii.  10  ;  1  Cor.  vii.  12,a£»r»j,  avri).  Mark  xii.  31, 
at/Ti;,  airjj. 

There  are  yet  some  other  various  readings  which 
ire  errors  of  sight,  which  do  not  fall  under  any  of 
he  heads  already  noticed :  e.  g.  2  Pet.  i.  3,  i'8/a 
p,  Sj&  %6£t)s.  2  Cor.  v.  10,  ra  SA  TOV  trwjua- 


ence  of  the  different  forms  of  Itacism  in  other  MSS.  which 

ic  bos  collated. 

The  remarkable  reading  in  Matt,  xxvii.  17,  'ITJO-OU* 
Bapa/3/Sai',  seems  to  have  originated  in  this  way  :  YMIN 
BAPABBAN  bring  written  VMIMN  BAPABBAN,  aiO 

«ncc  YMININ.  i.  e.  vulv  '\i\oovv  (TreRelli's,  ua.  loc.}. 


Vol.  II. 


i.  Brit.  MW.-P*  n. 


PL  II. 


nO  TO  YTHHQiKQYJUi&X  HnYrkHKO 

o 


7 


2.  Brit.  MM.—  Ood.  A^x.-(gt.  John  L  1-4.) 


MA 


e  M  ApK  Mil  J»OCTO  M  0N 


Ore  ro  M  € 


C  KOTi 


.  Brit.  Mm—  Add.  17,  211.—  (81  Lute  xx.  »,  10.) 


^uJNv 

JJVOTo 

•S  jr»«?^ 

}&Jl;<f 

A! 

•it 

S<t 
2 


KAIPcu 


SPECIMENS     OF     GREEK     MSS.     FROM    TW  C      YTH    rn     -rue     v,w 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

roj.  rft  )f5»a  rov  ffu^aros.0  Horn.  xii.  13,  xp«'«»*> 
;-j>tlais.  Hebr.  ii.  9,  x'fy"*.  X<fynT'('>)-  And  the 
remarkable  substitution  of  /cuipy  for  icvpitp  in  Rom. 
zii.  1  1  seems  to  have  been  caused  by  a  false  render 
ing  of  an  unusual  contraction  The  same  expla 
nation  may  also  apply  to  the  variants  in  1  Cor.  ii.  1, 
fiaprvpiov,  ff.vtrr-f)piov.  1  Tim.  i.  4,  oiKoyo/j.tav, 
oiKoSo/j.lav,  oiKoSofMrji/. 

33.  Other  variations  may  be  described  as  errors 
of  impression  or  memory.     The  copyist  after  read 
ing  a  sentence  from  the  text  before  him  often  failed 
to  reproduce  it  exactly.     He  transposed  the  words, 
or  substituted  a  synonym  for  some  very  common 
term,  or  gave  a  direct  personal  turn  to  what  was 
objective  before.     Variations  of  order  are  the  most 
frequent,  and  very  commonly  the  most  puzzling 
questions  of  textual  criticism.     Examples  occur  in 
every  page,  almost  in  every  verse  of  the  N.  T.  The 
exchange  of  synonyms  is  chiefly  confined  to  a  few 
words  of  consUoit  use,  to  variations  between  simple 
and  compound  words,  or  to  changes  of  tense  or 
number:  \eyfiv,  dire^v,  tpdvai,  \a\ttv  Matt.  xii. 
48,  xv.  12,  xix.  21  ;  Mark  xiv.  31  ;  John  xiv.  10, 
&c.    tyflpw,    Sifyttpov    Matt.    i.    24.    iyepOrivcu, 
avamrivai   Matt.  xvii.   9  ;   Luke  ix.  22.    t\Qfiv, 
a.ire\8e'iv,    £|cA.06?ir   Matt.    xiv.  25  ;    Luke   xxiii. 
33  ;  Acts  xvi.  39.     'I.  X.,  'Iij<rot/s,  Xpi<rr6s,  6 
itvpios  Hebr.   iii.   1  ;    1  Pet.  v.  10  ;   Col.  iii.  17  ; 
Acts  xviii.  25,  xxi.  13.   ford,  air6,  IK  Matt.  vii.  4; 
Mark  i.  26,  viii.  31  ;  Rom.  xiii.  1,  &c.    l5«Ka,  8e- 
5w*ca,  SiSoofjii  Luke  x.  19;  John  vii.  19,  xii.  49, 
&c.  sing,  and  plur.  Matt.  iii.  8  ;  1  Pet.  ii.  1  ;  Matt. 
xxiv.  18.     The  third  form  of  change  to  a  more  per 
sonal  exhortation  is  seen  constantly  in  the  Epistles 
in  the  substitution  of  the  pronoun  of  the  first  person 
(fi/j.e?s)  for  that  of  the  second  (fyieTs)  :   1  Pet,  i.  4, 
10,  12,  &c.  To  these  changes  may  be  added  the  in 
sertion  of  pronouns  of  reference  (abrds,  &c.)  :  Matt. 
vi.  4,  xxv.  17,  &c.  uaOyrai,  juaflijTol  av-rov  Matt. 
xxvi.  36,  45,   56  ;  xxvii.  64,  &c.  irar'fip,  irar-fip 
fiov  John  vi.  65,  viii.  28,  &c.     And  it  may  be 
doubtful  whether  the  constant  insertion  of  connect 
ing  particles  Kal,  8e,  ydp,  olv,  is  not  as  much  due 
to  an  unconscious  instinct  to  supply  natural  links 
in  the  narrative  or  argument,  as  to  an  intentional 
effort  to  give  greater  clearness  to  the  text.     Some 
times  the  impression  is  more  purely  mechanical,  as 
when  the  copyist  repeats  a  termination  incorrectly  : 
Apoc.  xi.  9  (C)  ;  1  Thess.  v.  4  (?)  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  7  (?)  v 

34.  (ii.)  Of  intentional  changes  some  affect  the 
expression,  others   the   substance  of  the   passage. 
(a)  The  intentional  changes  in  language  are  partly 
changes  of  Hellenistic  forms  for  those  in  common 
nse,  and  partly  modifications  of  harsh  constructions. 
These  may  in  many  cases   have   been   made  un 
consciously,  just  as  might  be  the  case  if  any  one 
now  were  to  transcribe  rapidly  one  of  the  original 
MS.  pages  of  Milton  ;  but  more  commonly  the  later 
scribe   would   correct  as   mere   blunders   dialectic 
peculiarities  which  were  wholly  strange   to   him. 
Thui   the  forms  refffffpdtcovra,   ipavvav,   e/ca0s- 
piffOri,  \*yi<av,  &c.,    %\0a,  eireera,  &c.,  and  the 
irregular  constructions  of  fdv,  8rav,  are  removed 
almost  without  exception  from  all  but  a  few  MSS. 
Imperfect  constructions  are  completed  in  different 
ways:  Mark  vii.  2,  add.  f/j.i^avro,  or  KaTtyvto- 
<rav  ;  Rom.  i.  32,  add.  OVK  fv6i)<ra.v,  &c.  ;  2  Cor. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


619 


By  a  similar  change  Athanasius  (Delncarn.  Verbi,  5) 
others  give  in  Wisd.  ii.  23,  KO.T    tlxova  -nit  i&ias 
ionjTOs  for  the  reading,  TTJS  iiias  iSioTrjTO*. 
It   w»»    apparently,  by   a  similar    error  (Tregrlles 


viii.  4,  add.  5e£a<r0a<  ;  1  Cor.  x.  24,  add.  ?/ca<rroj. 
Apparent  solecisms  are  corrected  :  Matt.  v.  28, 
otTTJs  for  avrfiv;  xv.  32,  77/u.t'pa.v  for  ruifpat;  Heb. 
iv.  2,  ffvyKdtfpafffjLfvos  for  -/teroi/s.  The  Apo 
calypse  has  suffered  especially  from  this  grammatical 
revision,  owing  to  the  extreme  boldness  of  the  rude 
Hebraizing  dialect  in  which  it  is  written  :  e.  y. 
Apoc.  iv.  1,  8,  vi.  11,  xi.  4,  xxi.  14,  &c.  Variations 
in  the  orthography  of  proper  names  ought  probably 
to  be  placed  under  this  head,  and  in  some  cases  it  is 
perhaps  impossible  to  detennine  the  original  form 


•ad,  -ar,  -«T). 

35.  (j8)  The  changes  introduced  into  the  sub 
stance  of  the  text  are  generally  additions,  borrowed 
either   from   parallel   passages    or   from   marginal 
glosses.     The  first  kind  of  addition  is  particularly 
frequent  in  the  Gospels,  where,  however,  it  is  often 
very  difficult  to  determine  how  far  the  parallelism 
of  two   passages   may   have   been   carried   in   the 
original  text.      Instances  of  unquestionable  inter 
polation  occur  :  Luke  iv.  8,  xi.  4  ;  Matt.  i.  25,  v. 
44,  viii.  13,  xxvii.  35  (49)  ;  Mark  xv.  28;  Matt. 
xix.  17  (compare  Acts  ix.  5,  6,  xxii.  7,  xxvi.  14;. 
Similar  interpolations  occur  also  in  other  books: 
Col.  i.  14;  1  Pet.  i.  17;  Jude  15  (Rom.  xvi.  27); 
Apoc.  xx.  2  ;  and  this  is  especially  the  case  in  quo 
tations  from  the  LXX.,  which  are  constantly  brought 
into  exact  harmony  with  the  original  text  :  Luke  iv. 
18,  19,  xix.  46;  Matt.  xii.  44,  xv.  8;  Heb.  ii.  7, 
xii.  20. 

Glosses  are  of  more  partial  occurrence.  Of  all 
Greek  MSS.  Cod.  Bezae  (D)  is  the  most  remarkable 
for  the  variety  and  singularity  of  the  glosses  which 
it  contains.  Examples  of  these  may  be  seen  :  Matt. 
xx.  28  ;  Luke  v.  5,  xxii.  26-28  ;  Acts  i.  5,  xiv.  2. 
In  ten  verses  of  the  Acts,  taken  at  random,  the  fol 
lowing  glosses  occur:  Acts  xii.  1,  Iv  rp  'lovSaia; 
3,  T\  cirixfigtlffis  4irl  roiis  iriffrovs  ;  5,  •jroAA.r;  S( 
irpofffvxfl  1\v  Iv  €KTfvd<£  irepl  av-rov  ;  7  ,  eittffTTi 
r$  Tltrptf  ;  10,  Ktntfii)ffa.v  rovs  £  ftaO/Jiots.  Some 
simple  explanatory  glosses  have  passed  into  the 
common  text  :  Matt.  vi.  1,  4\fi)(i.off6vriv  for  SIKCUO- 
<ri>vt\v  ;  Mark  vii.  5,  ivlirrots  for  Koivais  ;  Matt. 
v.  11,  ^ev8(fyi«'oi:  comp.  John  v.  4  (Luke  xxii. 
43,  44). 

36.  (7)  Many  of  the  glosses  which  were  intro 
duced  into  the  text  spring  from  the  ecclesiastical 
use  of  the  N.  T.,  just  as  in  the  Gospels  of  our  own 
Prayer-Book  introductory  clauses  have  been  inserted 
here  and  there  (e.  g.  3rd  and  4th  Sundays  after 
Easter:  "  Jesus  said  to  His  disciples").     These  ad 
ditions  are  commonly  notes  of  person  or  place  :  Matt. 
iv.  12,  xii.  25,  &c.,  6  'itjffovs  inserted  ;  John  xiv 
1,  Kal  flirty  rols  /uad^rais  avrov  ;  Acts  iii.  11, 
xxriii.  1  (cf.  Mill,  Prolegg.  1055-6).     Sometimes 
an  emphatic  clause  is  added  :  Matt.  xiii.  23,  xxv. 
29;  Mark  vii.  16;  Luke  viii.  15,  xii.  21,  6  ex<av 
«Ers  K.T.X.  ;  Luke  xiv.  24,  iroAAol  ydp  elffiv  K\ri- 
rol  K.T,\.     But  the  most  remarkable  liturgical  in 
sertion  is  the  doxology  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  Matt. 
vi.  13;  and  it  is  probable  that  the  interpolated  verse 
Acts  viii.  37  is  due  to  a  similar  cause.     An  in 
structive  example  of  the  growth  of  such  an  addition 
may  be  seen  in  the  readings  of  Luke  i.  55,  as  given 
in  the  text  of  the  G  >spel  and  in  the  collections  of 
ecclesiastical  hymns. 


Home,  227)  that,  in  the  A.  V.  of  Hebr.  x.  23,  "  the  pro 
fession  of  our  faith  "  stands  for  "  the  profession  of  uut 
tope."  The  former  i«  found  in  no  document  whatever 


620 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


87.  (8)  Sometimes,  though  rarely,  various  read 
ings  noted  on  the  margin  are  incorporated  in  the 
text,  though  this  may  be  reckoned  as  the  effect  of 
ignorance  rather  than  design.  Signal  examples  of 
this  confusion  occur:  Matt.  xvii.  26,  xxvi.  59,  60 
(D) ;  Rom.  vi.  12.  Other  instances  are  found,  Matt. 
v.  19  ;  Rom.  xiv.  9  ;  2  Cor.  i.  10 ;  1  Pet.  iii.  8. 

38.  («)  The  number  of  readings  which  seem  to 
have  been  altered  for  distinctly  dogmatic  reasons  is 
extremely  small.     In  spite  of  the  great  revolutions 
in  thought,  feeling,  and  practice  through  which  the 
Christian   Church   passed   in   fifteen  centuries,  the 
copyists  of  the  N.  T.  faithfully  preserved,  according 
to   their   ability,   the  sacred   trust  committed  to 
them.     There  is  not  any  trace  of  intentional  re 
vision  designed  to  give  support  to  current  opinions 
'Matt.  xvii.  21  ;  Mark  ix.  29 ;   1  Cor.  vii.  5,  need 
scarcely  be  noticed).      The   utmost   that  can   be 
urged   is   that   internal   considerations    may  have 
decided  the  choice  of  readings:  Acts  xvi.  7,  xx.  28  ; 
Rom.  v.  14  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  51 ;  2  Cor.  v.  7  ;   1  Tim. 
jii.  16  ;   1  John  v.  7,  in  Latin  copies;  (Rom.  viii. 
1 1).    And  in  some  cases  a  feeling  of  reverence  may 
have  led  to  a  change  in  expression,  or  to  the  intro 
duction  of  a  modifying  clause:  Lukeii.  33,  'la><rfi<t> 
for  6  WOT);P  avrov ;  ii.  43,  'Iwffty  xal  fi  ^rrip 
avrov  for  oi  yoveis  avrov  ;  John  vii.  39,  ovvw  yap 
$v  irvev/j.a  SfSofjLfvov ;  Acts  xix.  2  (D) ;  Gal.  ii.  5 ; 
Mark  xiii.  32,  om.  ovSe  6  vt6s  (cf.  Matt.  xxiv.  36)  ; 
Matt.  v.  22,  add.  elufi ;  1  Cor.  xi.  29,  add.  ava^ius 
(Luke  xxii.  43,  44,  om.). 

But  the  general  effect  of  these  variations  is 
scarcely  appreciable ;  nor  are  the  corrections  of 
assumed  historical  and  geographical  errors  much 
more  numerous:  Matt.  i.  11,  viii.  28,  Ttpyea-nviiv ; 
xxiii.  35,  om.  vlov  Bapaxiov ;  xxvii.  9,  om.  'lepi- 
miov,  or  Za^api'ou  ;  Mark  i.  2,  iv  TO""  vpcxp-firais 
for  tv  'Hff.  rtf  irp. ;  ii.  28,  om.  eirl  'A£.  ap%ie- 
pfus ;  John  i.  28,  B7j0aj8ap£ ;  v.  2,  $v  tie  for  tffri 
St ;  vii.  8,  oviru  for  OVK  (?) ;  viii.  57,  reffffepd- 
Kovra  for  irevr-fiKovra ;  xix.  14,  8>pa  ?\v  aiy  Tpirrf 
for  e/fTTj ;  Acts  xiii.  33,  Tip  Sevreptf  for  r$  icpcorip. 

39.  It  will  be  obvious  from  an  examination  of 
the  instances  quoted  that  the  great  mass  of  various 
readings  are  simply  variations  in  form.     The.re  are, 
however,  one  or  two  greater  variations  of  a  different 
character.     The  most  important  of  these  are  John 
vii.  53-viii.  12  ;  Mark  xvi.  9-end  ;  Rom.  xvi.  25-27. 
The  first  stands  quite  by  itself;  and  there  seems  to 
be  little  doubt  that  it  contains  an  authentic  narra 
tive,  but  not  by  the  hand  of  St.  John.     The  two 
others,  taken  in  connexion  with  the  last  chapter  of 
St.  John's  Gospel,  suggest  the  possibility  that  the 
apostolic  writings  may  have  undergone   in   some 
cases  authoritative  revision :  a  supposition  which 
does  not  in  any  way  affect  their  canonical  claims: 
but  it  would  be  impossible  to  enter  upon  the  details 
of  such  a  question  here. 

40.  Manuscripts,  it  must  be  remembered,  are  but 


q  The  history  and  characteristics  of  the  Versions  are 
discussed  elsewhere.    It  may  be  useful  to  add  a  short  table 

Ephraem  Syrus,  1  378. 
BASILIUS  MAGMUS,  329- 

379. 

fUlariut,  f  449. 
Theodoretus,  393-458. 
Euthallus,  c.  450. 

of  the  Fathers  whose  works  are  of  the  greatest  importance 

HIERONYMVS,  340-420. 

Caisiodarus,  c.  468-566. 

for  the  history  of  the  text.    Those  of  the  first  rank  are 

Ambrosius,  34(1-397. 

Victor  Antiochenus. 

marked  by  capitals  ;  the  Latin  Fathers  by  italics. 

AM  BSOS1ASTES,  c.  360. 

Theophylactus,  f  c.  62?. 

Justinus  M.,  c.  103-163. 

Dionysius  Alex.,  f  265. 

Victorinut,  c.  360. 

ANDREAS  (Apoc.),  c.  636 

IRENAEUS,  c.  120-190. 

Petrus  Alex.,  1  313. 

CHRTSOSTOMUS,  347-407. 

700. 

Irenaei  Interpret,  c.  180. 

Methodius,  fc.  311. 

DIDYMUS,  1  396. 

Primasius  (Apoc.) 

TF.nTVl.Ll  ANUS     (Mar- 

KUSEBICS  CAESAR,  264- 

EPIPHANIUS,  1  402. 

Johannes  Damascene*, 

cion).  o.  100-240. 

340. 

Rufmus,  c.  345-410. 

t  c.  756. 

CLEMENS  ALKX.,  t  ~  220. 

ATHANASIUB,  296-373. 

AVGUSTINUS,  364-430. 

Oecumonius,  c.  960. 

ORir.ENtS,  1X6-253. 

Cyrillus  Hiero»c\.,  315- 

Theodoras  Mops,  f  429. 

Evthymlua,  c.  1100. 

Hippolytus. 

386. 

CTKII.LUS  ALKX.,  f  444. 

CVPR1AXVS,  f25? 

LVCltER,  f370 

. 

NEW  TESTAMENT 

one  of  tne  three  sources  of  textual  crit'^Jsm.  The 
versions  and  patristic  quotations  are  scarcely  less 
important  in  doubtful  cases.*  But  the  texts  ol  the 
versions  aad  the  Fathers  were  themselves  liable  t>> 
corruption,  and  careful  revision  is  necessary  befDre 
they  can  be  used  with  confidence.  These  consider 
at  ions  will  sufficiently  show,  how  intricate  a  problem 
it  is  to  determine  the  text  of  the  N.  T.,  where 
"  there  is  a  mystery  in  the  very  order  of  the  words," 
and  what  a  vast  amount  of  materials  the  critic 
must  have  at  his  command  before  he  can  offer  a 
satisfactory  solution.  It  remains  to  inquire  next 
whether  the  first  editors  of  the  printed  text  had 
such  materials,  or  were  competent  to  make  use  of 
them. 

II.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  PRINTED  TEXT. 

1.  The  history  of  the  printed  text  of  the  N.  T. 
may  be  divided  into  three  periods.  The  first  of 
these  extends  from  the  labours  of  the  Complutensian 
editors  to  those  of  Mill :  the  second  from  Mill  to 
Scholz :  the  third  from  Lachmann  to  the  present 
time.  The  criticism  of  the  first  period  was  neces 
sarily  tentative  and  partial :  the  materials  available 
for  the  construction  of  the  text  were  few,  and  im 
perfectly  known :  the  relative  value  of  various  wit 
nesses  was  as  yet  undetermined ;  and  however  highly 
we  may  rate  the  scholarship  of  Erasmus  or  Beza. 
this  could  not  supersede  the  teaching  of  long  expe 
rience  in  the  sacred  writings  any  more  than  in  the 
writings  of  classical  authors.  The  second  period 
marks  a  great  progress:  the  evidence  of  MSS.,  of 
versions,  of  Fathers,  was  collected  with  the  greatest 
diligence  and  success :  authorities  were  compared 
and  classified :  principles  of  observation  and  judgment 
were  laid  down.  But  the  influence  of  the  former 
period  still  lingered.  The  old  i:  received"  text  was 
supposed  to  have  some  prescriptive  right  in  virtue 
of  its  prior  publication,  and  not  on  the  ground  of 
its  merits :  this  was  assumed  as  the  copy  which 
was  to  be  corrected  only  so  far  as  was  absolutely 
necessary.  The  third  period  was  introduced  by  the 
declaration  of  a  new  and  sounder  law.  It  was  laid 
down  that  no  right  of  possession  could  be  pleaded 
against  evidence.  The  "received"  text,  as  such,  was 
allowed  no  weight  whatever.  Its  authority,  on  this 
view,  must  depend  solely  on  its  critical  worth.  From 
first  to  last,  in  minute  details  of  order  and  ortho 
graphy,  as  well  as-  in  graver  questions  of  substantial 
alteration,  the  text  must  be  formed  by  a  free  and 
unfettered  judgment.  Variety  of  opinions  may  exist 
as  to  the  true  method  and  range  of  inquiry,  as  to 
the  relative  importance  of  different  forms  of  testi 
mony  :  all  that  is  claimed  is  to  rest  the  letter  of 
the  N.  T.  completely  and  avowedly  on  a  critical 
and  not  on  a  conventional  basis.  This  principle, 
which  seems,  indeed,  to  be  an  axiom,  can  only  b« 
called  iu.  question  by  supposing  that  in  the  first 
instance  the  printed  text  of  the  N.  T.  was  guarded 


NEW  TK3TAMENT 

from  the  errors  and  imperfections  which  attended 
the  early  editions  of  every  classical  text ;  and  next 
that  the  laws  of  evidence  which  hold  good  every 
where  else  fail  in  the  veiy  case  where  they  might 
be  expected  to  find  their  noblest  and  most  fruitful 
application — suppositions  which  are  refuted  by  the 
whole  history  of  the  Bible.  Each  of  these  periods 
will  now  require  to  be  noticed  more  in  detail. 

(i)  From  the  Complutensian  Polyglott  to  Mill. 

2.  The  Complutensian  Polyqlott. — The  Latin 
Vulgate  and  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  had  been 
published  some  time  before  any  part  of  the  original 
Greek  of  the  N.  T.  The  Hebrew  text  was  called 
for  by  numerous  and  wealthy  Jewish  congrega 
tions  (Soncino,  1482-88),  the  Vulgate  satisfied 
ecclesiastical  wants;  and  the  few  Greek  scholars 
who  lived  at  the  close  of  the  15th  century  were 
hardly  likely  to  hasten  the  printing  of  the  Greek 
Testament.  Yet  the  critical  study  of  the  Greek  text 
hadnotbeen  wholly  neglected.  Laurentius  Valla,  who 
was  second  to  none  of  the  scholars  of  nis  age  (comp. 
Russell's  Life  of  Bp.  Andrewes,  pp.  282-310,  quoted 
by  Scrivener),  quotes  in  one  place  (Matt,  xxvii.  12) 
three,  and  in  anothei  (John  vii.  29),  seven  Greek 
MSS.  in  his  commentaries  on  the  N.  T.,  which  were 
published  in  1505,  nearly  half  a  century  after  his 
death  (Michaelis,  Introd.  ed.  Marsh,  ii.  339,  340). 
J.  Faber  (1512)  made  use  of  five  Greek  MSS.  of 
St.  Paul's  Epistles  (Michaelis,  p.  420).  Meanwhile 
the  Greek  Psalter  had  been  published  several  times 
(first  at  Milan,  1481  ?),and  the  Hymns  of  Zacharias 
and  the  Virgin  (Luke  i.  42-56,  68-80)  were  ap 
pended  to  a  Venetian  edition  of  1486,  as  frequently 
happens  in  MS.  Psalters.  This  was  the  first  part 
of  the  N.  T.  which  was  printed  in  Greek.  Eighteen 
years  afterwards  (1504),  the  first  six  chapters  of 
St.  John's  Gospel  were  added  to  an  edition  of  the 
poems  of  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  published  by  Aldus 
(Guericke,  EM.  §41).  But  the  glory  of  printing 
the  first  Greek  Testament  is  due  to  the  princely 
Cardinal  XIMENES.  This  great  prelate  as  early  as 
1502  engaged  the  services  of  a  number  of  scholars 
to  superintend  an  edition  of  the  whole  Bible  in  the 
original  Hebrew  and  Greek,  with  the  addition  of  the 
Chaldee  Targum  of  Onkelos,  the  LXX.  version,  and 
the  Vulgate.  The  work  was  executed  at  Alcala 
(Complutum),  where  he  had  founded  a  university. 
The  volume  containing  the  N.  T.  was  printed  first, 
and  was  completed  on  Jan.  10,  1514.  The  whole 
work  was  not  finished  till  July  10,  1517,  about 
four  months  before  the  death  of  the  Cardinal.  Va 
rious  obstacles  still  delayed  its  publication,  and  it 
was  not  generally  circulated  till  1522,  though 
Leo  X.  (to  whom  it  was  dedicated)  authorized  the 
publication  March  22,  1520  (Tregelles,  Hist,  of 
Printed  Text  of  N.  T. ;  Mill,  Prolegg.*). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


521 


The  most  celebrated  men  who  were  engaged  on 
the  N.  T..  which  forms  the  fifth  volume  of  the  entire 
work,  were  Lebrixa  (Nebrissensis)  and  Stumca, 
Considerable  discussion  has  been  raised  as  to  tht 
MSS.  which  they  used.  The  editors  describe  these 
generally  as  "  copies  of  the  greatest  accuracy  and 
antiquity,"  sent  from  the  Papal  Library  at  Home ; 
and  in  the  dedication  to  Leo  acknowledgment  is 
made  of  his  generosity  in  sending  MSS.  of  both 
"the  Old  and  N.  T."r  Very  little  time,  how 
ever,  could  have  been  given  to  the  examination  cf 
the  Roman  MSS.  of  the  N.  T.,  as  somewhat  less 
than  eleven  months  elapsed  between  the  election  of 
Leo  and  the  completion  of  the  Complutensian  Tes 
tament  ;  and  it  is  remarkable  that  while  an  entry 
is  preserved  in  the  Vatican  of  the  loan  and  return 
of  two  MSS.  of  parts  of  the  LXX.  there  is  no  trace 
of  the  transmission  of  any  N.  T.  MS.  to  Alcala 
(Tischdf.  N.  T.  1859,  p.  Ixxxii.  n.).  The  whole 
question,  however,  is  now  rather  of  bibliographical 
than  of  critical  interest.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  the  copies,  from  whatever  source  they  came, 
were  of  late  date,  and  of  the  common  type."  The 
preference  which  the  editors  avow  for  the  Vulgate, 
placing  it  in  the  centre  column  in  the  0.  T. 
"  between  the  Synagogue  and  the  Eastern  Church, 
tanquam  duos  hinc  et  inde  latrones,"  to  quote  the 
well-known  and  startling  words  of  the  Preface  "  me 
dium  autem  Jesum,  hoc  est,  Romanam  sive  Latinam 
ecclesiam  "  (vol.  i.  p.  iii.  b.),  has  subjected  them  to 
the  charge  of  altering  the  Greek  text  to  suit  the 
Vulgate.  But  except  in  the  famous  interpolation 
and  omission  in  1  John  v.  7,  8,  and  some  points  of 
orthography  (BeeXfe/Sov/S,  BeAfoA,  'tischdf.  p. 
Ixxxiii.)  the  charge  is  unfounded  (Alarsh,  on  Mi 
chaelis  ii.  p.  851,  gives  the  literature  of  the  contro 
versy).  The  impression  was  limited  to  six  hundred 
copies,  and  as,  owing  to  the  delays  which  occurred 
between  the  printing  and  publication  of  the  book, 
its  appearance  was  forestalled  by  that  of  the  edition 
of  Erasmus,  the  Complutensian  N.  T.  exercised 
comparatively  small  influence  on  later  texts,  except 
in  the  Apocalypse  (comp.  §3).  The  chief  editions 
which  follow  it  in  the  main,  are  those  of  (Pfantin , 
Antwerp,  1564-1612;  Geneva,  1609-1632;  Mainz 
1753  (Keuss,  Gesch.  d.  N.  T.  §401 ;  Le  Long,  Bi- 
blioth.  Sacra,  ed.  Masch,  i.  191-195);  Mill  re 
gretted  that  it  was  not  accepted  as  the  standard 
text  (Proleg.  1115);  and  has  given  a  long  list  of 
passages  in  which  it  otf'ers,  in  his  opinion,  better 
readings  than  the  Stephanie  or  Elzevirian  texts 
(Proleg.  1098-1114). 

3.  The  editions  of  Erasmus, — The  history  of 
the  edition  of  ERASMUS,  which  was  the  first 
published  edition  of  the  N.  T.,  is  happily  free 
from  all  obscurity.  Erasmus  had  paid  consider- 


'  "  Testari  possumus,  Pater  sanctissime  [f.  e.  Leo  X.], 
maximum  laboris  nostri  partem  in  eo  praecipue  versatam 

fuisse  ut castlgatissima  omni  ex  parte  vetus- 

tisaimaque  exemplaria  pro  archetypis  habcremus,  quotum 
^uidem  tarn  Hebraeorum  quam  Graecorum  ac  Latinorum 
multiplicem  copiam  variis  ex  locis  uon  sine  summo  labore 
conquisivimus.  Atque  ex  ipsis  quidem  Graeca  Sanctitati 
tuae  detemus :  qui  ex  ista  Apostolica  Bibliotheca  anti- 
quissimos  turn  Veteris  turn  Novl  Testamenti  codices  pcr- 
quam  humane  ad  nos  misisti ;  qui  nobis  In  hoc  negocio 
maxime  fuerunt  adjumento"  (Prol.  iii.  a).  And  again, 
torn.  v.  Praef. :  "  Illud  lectoreiu  non  lateat,  non  quaevis 
exemplaria  impressioni  huic  archetypa  fuisse,  sed  anti- 
quissima  emendatissimaque  ac  t?.utae  praeterea  vetus- 
latis  ut  fidem  eis  abrogare  nefas  videatur  (n-pbs  SuoxoAoc 
ttwn  TDiro^aTTaf  KCU  fttftt)\ui',  iic)  quae  sanctissimus 


In  Christo  pater  Leo  X.  pontifex  maximua  Luic  institute 
favere  cupiens  ex  Apostolica  Bibliotheca  educta  mlsit." 

"  One  MS.  is  specially  appealed  to  by  Stunica  in  his 
controversy  with  Erasmus,  the  Cod.  Rhodiensis,  but 
nothing  is  known  of  It  which  can  lead  to  its  identification. 
The  famous  story  of  the  destruction  of  MSS.  by  the  fire 
work  maker,  as  useless  parchments,  has  been  fully  and 
clearly  refuted.  All  the  MSS.  of  Ximenes  which  were 
used  for  the  Polyglott  are  now  at  Madrid,  but  there  Is  no 
MS.  of  any  part  of  the  Gk.  Test,  among  them  (Tregelles, 
Hist  of  Printed  Text,  pp.  12-18).  The  edition  has  many 
readings  in  common  with  the  Laudlan  MS.  numbered 
51  Gosp.,  32  Acts,  38  Paul  (Mill,  Proleg.  1090,  1436-38) 
Many  of  the  peculiar  readings  are  collected  by  1*111! 
(Prolog.  10&2-1095). 


5?,2 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


tble  attention  to  the  study  of  the  N.  T  when 
te  received  an  application  from  Frobcn,  a  printer 
>f  Basic  with  whom  he  was  acquainted,  to  pre 
pare  a  Greek  text  for  the  press.  Froben  was 
anxious  to  anticipate  the  publication  of  the  Com- 
plutensian  edition,  and  the  haste  with  which  the 
work  of  Erasmus  was  completed,  shows  that  little 
consideration  was  paid  to  the  exigences  of  textual 
criticism.  The  request  was  made  on  April  17, 
1515,  while  Erasmus  was  in  England.  The  details 
of  the  printing  were  not  settled  in  September 
in  the  same  year,  and  the  whole  work  was 
finished  in  February  1516  Tregelles,  Hist,  of 
Printed  Text,  19,  20).  The  work,  as  Erasmus 
afterwards  confessed,  was  done  in  reckless  haste 
("  praecipitatuin  verius  quam  editum.  Comp. 
Epp.  \.  "26 ;  xii.  19),  and  that  too  in  the  midst  of 
other  heavy  literary  labours  (Ep.  i.  7.  Comp.  Wet- 
stein,  Prolegg.  p.  166-7).*  The  MSS.  which  formed 
the  basis  of  his  edition  are  still,  with  one  exception, 
preserved  at  Basle ;  and  two  which  he  used  for  the 
press  contain  the  corrections  of  Erasmus  and  the 
printer's  marks  (Michaelis,  ii.  220,  221).  The  one 
is  a  MS.  of  the  Gospels  of  the  1 6th  century  of  the 
ordinary  late  type  (marked  2  Gosp.  in  the  cata 
logues  of  MSS.  since  Wetstein) ;  the  other  a  MS.  of 
the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  (2  Acts.  Epp.),  somewhat 
older  but  of  the  same  general  character."  Erasmus 
also  made  some  use  of  two  other  Basle  MSS.  (1 
Gosp. ;  4  Acts.  Epp.) ;  the  former  of  these  is  of 
great  value,  but  the  important  variations  from  the 
common  text  which  it  offers,  made  him  suspect  that 
it  had  been  altered  from  the  Latin."  For  the  Apo 
calypse  he  had  only  an  imperfect  MS.  which  be 
longed  to  Keuchlin.  The  last  six  verses  were 
wanting,  and  these  he  translated  from  the  Latin,* 
a  process  which  he  adopted  in  other  places  where  it 
was  less  excusable.  The  received  text  contains  two 
memorable  instances  of  this  bold  interpolation.  The 
one  is  Acts  viii.  37,  which  Erasmus,  as  he  says,  found 
written  in  the  margin  of  a  Greek  MS.,  though  it 
was  wanting  in  that  which  he  used :  the  other  is 
Acts  ix.  5,  6,  ffKKitpov  <rot  — avdffrridt  for  a\\a 
avdffTriBi,  which  has  been  found  as  yet  in  no  Greek 
MS.  whatsoever,  though  it  is  still  perpetuated  on 
the  ground  of  Erasmus"  conjecture.  But  he  did 

«  A  marvellous  proof  of  haste  occurs  on  the  title-page, 
In  which  he  quotes  "  Vulgarius  "  among  the  chief  fathers 
whose  authority  he  followed.  The  name  was  formed  from 
the  title  of  the  see  of  Theophylact  (Bulgaria),  and  Theo- 
ohylact  was  converted  into  an  epithet.  This  "  Vulgarius  " 
is  quoted  on  Luke  xi.  35,  and  the  name  remained  un 
changed  in  subsequent  editions  (Wetstein,  Proleg.  169). 

u  According  to  Mill  (Proleg.  1120),  Erasmus  altered  the 
text  in  a  little  more  than  fifty  places  in  the  Acts,  and  in 
about  two  hundred  places  in  the  Epistles,  of  which  changes 
all  but  about  forty  were  improvements.  Specimens  of  the 
corrections  on  the  margin  of  the  MS.  are  given  by  Wet- 
sietn  (Proleg.  p.  56,  ed.  Lotze).  Of  these  several  were 
simply  on  the  authority  of  the  Vulgate,  one  of  which 
(Matt.  ii.  11,  ttpov  for  elSov')  has  retained  its  place  in  the 
received  text. 

»  The  reading  In  the  received  text,  Mark  vi.  15,  jj  <Js 
«I?  riai-  7Tpo^>r)Tu>i',  in  place  of  ws  el;  -n>n  irpo<j»jraii',  is  a 
change  introduced  by  Erasmus  on  the  authority  of  this 
MS.,  which  has  been  supported  by  some  slight  additional 
evidence  since.  Mill  (Proleg.  $$1117,  18)  states  that 
Knisimis  usod  the  uncial  Basle  MS.  of  the  Gospels  (E), 
"  correcting  it  rightly  in  about  sixty-eight  places,  wrongly 
in  about  fifty-seven."  This  opinion  has  been  refuted 
by  Wetstein  (Proleg.  p.  50).  The  MS.  was  not  then  at 
Kasln :  "  Hlcce  codex  Basileonsi  Academiae  dono  datus  est 
.ULLO  1659  (Lotze  ad  Wetsteto,  I.  c.; 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

not  insert  the  testimony  of  the  heavenly 
(1  John  v.  7),  an  act  of  critical  faithfulness  which 
exposed  him  to  the  attacks  of  enemies.  Among 
these  was  Stuni<a — his  rival  editor — and  when  ar 
gument  failed  to  silence  calumny,  he  promised  to 
insert  the  words  in  question  on  the  authority  of 
any  one  Greek  MS.  The  edition  of  Erasmus,  like 
the  Complutensian,  was  dedicated  to  Leo  X. ;  and  it 
is  a  noble  trait  of  the  generosity  of  Cardinal  Xi- 
menes,  that  when  Stunica  wished  to  disparage  the 
work  of  Erasmus  which  robbed  him  of  his  well- 
earned  honour,  he  checked  him  in  the  words  of 
Moses,  "  I  would  that  all  might  thus  piophecy," 
Num.  xi.  29  (Tregelles,  p.  19).  After  his  first  edi 
tion  was  published  Erasmus  continued  his  labours 
on  the  N.  T.  Ep.  iii.  31;  and  in  March,  1519,  a 
second  edition  appeared  which  was  altered  in  about 
400  places,  of  which  Mill  reckons  that  330  were 
improvements  {Prolegg.  §1134).  But  his  chief 
labour  seems  to  have  been  spent  upon  the  Latin 
version,  and  in  exposing  the  "solecisms"  of  the 
common  Vulgate,  the  value  of  which  he  completely 
misunderstood  (comp.  Mill,  Prolegg.  1 1 24-11 33 }.r 
These  two  editions  consisted  of  3300  copies,  and 
a  third  edition  was  required  in  1522,  when  the 
Complutensiaii  Polyglott  also  came  into  circulation. 
In  this  edition  1  John  v.  7  was  inserted  for  the 
first  time,  according  to  the  promise  of  Erasmus, 
on  the  authority  of  the  "Codex  Britannicus "  (i.  c. 
Cod.  Montfortianus),  in  a  form  which  obviously 
betrays  its  origin  as  a  clumsy  translation  from 
the  Vulgate  ("  ne  cui  foret  causa  calumuiandi," 
Apol.  ad  Stunicam,  ad  loc.).1  The  text  was 
altered  in  about  118  places  (Mill,  Prolegg.  1138' 
Of  these  corrections  36  were  borrowed  from  aw 
edition  published  at  Venice  in  the  office  of  ALDUS, 
1518,  which  was  taken  in  the  main  from  the  first 
edition  of  Erasmus,  even  so  as  to  preserve  errors  of 
the  press,  but  yet  differed  from  it  in  about  200 
places,  partly  from  error  and  partly  on  MS.  au 
thority  (Mill,  §1122).  This  edition  is  further 
remarkable  as  giving  a  few  (19)  various  readings. 
Three  other  early  editions  give  a  text  formed  from 
the  second  edition  of  Erasmus  and  the  Aldine,  thost 
of  Hagenau,  1521,  of  Cephalaeus  at  Strasburg,  1524, 
of  Bebelius  at  Basle,  1531.  Erasmus  at  length 


*  Traces  of  this  unauthorized  retranslation  remain  in 
the  received  text :  Apoc.  xxii.  16,  bp6pit>6<.  1 7.  &0c  (bis) 
f \9eria  ;  \anfiaveTia  TO.  1 8.  (rumxaprvpovpai  yap,  eiri 
Ttflfl  Trpo?  rauTO.  19.  ai/>aipo  /3t'/3Aov,  airo  |3i'£Aov  T.  4. 
Some  of  these  tire  obvious  blunders  in  rendering  from  thu 
Latin,  and  yet  they  are  consecrated  by  uj-e. 

J  Luther's  German  version  was  made  from  this  text 
(Keuss,  (Sack.  d.  H.  S.  $400).  One  conjecture  of  Erasmus.. 
1  Pet  iii.  20,  a*ro£  tfeie^ero,  supported  by  no  MS.,  pasted 
from  this  edition  into  the  received  text. 

1  In  the  course  of  the  controversy  on  this  passage  tb* 
Cod.  Vatic.  B  was  appealed  to  (1521).  Some  v«ars  later 
(1534)  Sepulveda  describes  the  MS.  in  a  letter  to  Erasmus, 
giving  a  general  description  of  its  agreement  with  the 
Vulgate,  and  a  selection  of  various  readings.  In  reply  to 
this  Erasmus  appeals  to  a  supposed  foedut  cum  (fraecit, 
made  at  the  Council  of  Florence,  1439,  in  accordance  with 
which  Greek  copies  were  to  be  altered  to  agree  with  the 
Latin ;  and  argues  that  B  may  have  been  so  altered. 
When  Sepulveda  answers  that  no  such  compact  was  made, 
Erasmus  replies  that  he  had  heard  from  Culhbert  [Tonstall] 
of  Durham  that  it  was  agreed  that  the  Greek  MSS.  should 
be  corrected  to  harmonize  with  the  Latin,  and  took  the  >tate- 
ment  for  granted.  Yet  on  this  simple  misunderstanding 
the  credit  of  the  oldest  MSS.  has  been  impugned.  The  in 
fluence  of  the  idea  in  "/oediw  cum  Graecis"  has 
all  belief  in  the  fact  (Trebles,  Uorne,  iv.  pp.  xv. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

ribt/Jned  a  copy  of  the  Complutensian  text,  and  in 
Ins  fourth  edition  in  1527,  gave  some  various  read 
ings  from  it  iu  addition  to  those  which  he  had 
already  noted,  and  used  it  to  correct  his  own  text 
In  the  Apocalypse  in  90  places,  while  elsewhere  he 
introduced  only  16  changes  (Mill,  §1141).  His 
fifth  and  last  edition  (1535)  differs  only  in  4 
places  from  the  fourth,  and  the  fourth  edition  after 
wards  became  the  basis  of  the  received  text.  This, 
it  will  be  seen,  rested  on  scanty  and  late  Greek  evi- 
dance,  without  the  help  of  any  versions  except  the 
Latin,  which  was  itself  so  deformed  in  common 
copies,  as  not  to  show  its  true  character  and  weight. 
4.  The  editions  of  Stephens. — The  scene  of  our 
history  now  changes  from  Basle  to  Paris.  In  1543, 
Simon  de  Colines  (  COLINAEUS)  published  a  Greek 
text  of  the  N.  T..  corrected  in  about  150  places  on 
fresh  MS.  authority.  He  was  charged  by  Beza 
with  making  changes  by  conjecture ;  but  of  the  ten 
examples  quoted  by  Mill,  all  but  one  (Matt.  viii. 
33,  &irai>Ta  for  irdvra)  are  supported  by  MSS., 
and  four  by  the  Parisian  MS.  Reg.  85  (119  Gospp.).» 
The  edition  of  Colinaeus  does  not  appear  to  nave- 
obtained  any  wide  influence.  Not  long  after  it  ap 
peared,  K.  Estienne  (STEPHANUS)  published  his 
first  edition  (1546),  which  was  based  on  a  collation 
of  MSS.  in  the  Royal  Library  with  the  Compluten 
sian  text.b  He  gives  no  detailed  description  of  the 
MSS.  which  he  used,  and  their  character  can  only 
be  discovered  by  the  quotation  of  their  readings, 
which  is  given  in  the  third  edition.  According  to 
Mill,  the  text  differs  from  the  Complutensian  in 
581  places,  and  in  198  of  these  it  follows  the  last 
edition  of  Erasmus.  The  former  printed  texts  are 
abandoned  in  only  37  places  in  favour  of  the  MSS., 
and  the  Erasmian  reading  is  often  preferred  to  that 
supported  by  all  the  other  Greek  authorities  with 
which  Stephens  is  known  to  have  been  acquainted : 
e.  g.  Matt.  vi.  18,  viii.  5,  ix.  5.  &c.e  A  second 
edition  veiy  closely  resembling  the  first  both  in 
form  and  text,  having  the  same  preface  and  the 
same  number  of  pages  and  lines,  was  published  in 
1549;  but  the  great  edition  of  Stephens  is  that 
known  as  the  Regia,  published  in  1550.*  In  this 
a  systematic  collection  of  various  readings,  amount- 
ing,  it  is  said,  to  2194  (Mill,  §1227),  is  given  for 
the  first  time;  but  still  no  consistent  critical  use 
was  made  of  them.  Of  the  authorities  which  he 
quoted  most  have  been  since  identified.  They  were 
the  Complutensian  text,  10  MSS.  of  the  Gospels, 
8  of  the  Acts,  7  of  the  Catholic  Epistles,  8  of  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  2  of  the  Apocalypse,  in  all  15 
distinct  MSS.  One  of  these  was  the  Codex  Bezae 

a  An  examination  of  the  readings  quoted  from  Colinaeus 
by  Mill  shows  conclusively  that  he  used  Cod.  119  of  the 
Gospels,  10  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  (8  of  the  Acts,  the 
MS.  marked  ta  by  Stephens),  and  probably  33  of  the 
Gospels  arid  5  of  the  Catholic  Kpistles.  The  readings  in 
1  Cor.  xiv.  2,  1  Pet.  v.  2,  2  Pet.  iii.  17,  seem  to  be  mere 
errors,  and  are  apparently  supported  by  no  authority. 

•>  This  edition  and  its  counterpart  (1549)  are  known  as 
the  "  (j  mirificam"  edition,  from  the  opening  words  of 
the  preface :  "  0  mirificam  regis  nostri  optlmi  et  praestan- 
tissimi  principis  liberalitatem,"  in  allusion  to  the  new 
fount  of  small  Greek  type  which  the  king  had  ordered  to 
be  cut,  and  which  was  now  used  for  the  first  time. 

"  The  Complutensian  influence  on  these  editions  has 
boen  over-estimated.  In  the  last  versos  of  the  Apc>c:ilypse 
($3)  they  follow  what  Erasmus  supplied,  and  not  any 
Ureek  authority"  (Tregelles). 

c  Stephens'  own  description  of  his  edi'.ion  cannot  be 
recoived  literally.  "  Codices  nacti  aliquot  ip*a  vetustatis 
?P»<:!o  pene  adorandos,  quorum  copium  nobis  bibliothtta 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


523 


(D',.  Two  have  not  yet  been  recognised  (tomp. 
Griesbach,  N.  T.  ft',  xxiv.-xxxvi.).  The  collation* 
were  made  by  his  son  Henry  Stephens ;  but  they 
fail  entirely  to  satisfy  the  requirements  of  exact 
criticism.  The  various  readings  of  D  alone  in  tin 
Gospels  and  Acts  are  more  thai)  the  whole  number 
given  by  Stephens;  or,  to  take  another. example, 
while  only  598  variants  of  the  Complutensian  are 
given,  Mill  calculates  that  700  are  omitted  (Prolegg. 
§1226).  Nor  was  the  use  made  of  the  materials 
more  satisfactory  than  their  quality.  Less  than 
thirty  changes  were  made  on  MS.  authority  (Mill. 
1228) ;  and  except  in  the  Apocalypse,  which 
follows  the  Complutensian  text  most  closely,  "  it, 
hardly  ever  deseiis  the  last  edition  of  Erasmus" 
(Tregelles).  Numerous  instances  occur  in  which 
Stephens  deserts  his  former  text  and  all  his  MSSt 
to  restore  an  Erasmian  reading.  Mill  quotes  the 
following  examples  among  others,  which  are  the 
most  interesting,  because  they  have  passed  from  the 
Stephanie  text  into  our  A.  V.  Matt.  ii.  11,  tvpov 
for  eitiov  (without  the  authority  of  any  Greek 
MS.,  as  far  as  I  know,  though  Scholz  says  "  cum 
codd.  multis  "),  iii.  8,  icapiroiis  a£iovs  for  Kapirbf 
&£iov.  Mark  vi.  33  add.  ol  oxXot :  xvi-  8  add. 
raxv.  Luke  vii.  31  add.  tlire  8e  6  Kvpws.  John 
xiv.  30  add.  rovrov.  Acts  v.  23  add.  l|w.  Rom. 
ii.  5  om.  Kal  before  SucaioKpiffias.  James  v.  9, 
KaraKpiOriTf  for  KpiOrjTf.  Prescription  as  yet  oc 
cupied  the  place  of  evidence ;  and  it  was  well  that 
the  work  of  the  textual  critic  was  reserved  for  a 
time  when  he  could  command  trustworthy  and 
complete  collations.  Stephens  published  a  fourth 
edition  in  1537  (Geneva),  which  is  only  remarkable 
as  giving  for  the  first  time  the  present  division 
into  verses. 

5.  The  editions  of  Beza  and  Elzevir. — Nothing 
can  illustrate  more  clearly  the  deficiency  among 
scholars  of  the  first  elements  of  the  textual  criti 
cism  of  the  N.  T.  than  the  annotations  of  BEZA 
(1556).  This  great  divine  obtained  from  H.  Ste 
phens  a  copy  of  the  N.  T.  in  which  he  had  noted 
down  various  readings  from  about  twenty-five  MSS. 
and  from  the  early  editions  (Cf.  Marsh,  on  Mi- 
chaelis,  ii.  858-60),  but  he  used  the  collection 
rather  for  exegetical  ..han  for  critical  purposes. 
Thus  he  pronounced  in  favour  of  the  obvious  inter 
polations  in  Matt.  i.  11 ;  John  xviii.  13,  which  have 
consequently  obtained  a  place  in  the  margin  of  the 
A.  V.,  and  elsewhere  maintained  readings  which, 
on  critical  grounds,  are  wholly  indefensible :  Matt 
ii.  17;  Mark  iii.  1 6,  xvi.  2.  The  interpolation  in 
Apoc.  xi.  11,  Kal  6  ayye\os  eiffrijKd  has  passed 

regia  facile  suppeditablt,  ex  iis  ita  hunc  nostrum  recen- 
suimus,  ut  nullam  omnino  litteram  secus  esse  paleremur, 
quam  plures  iique  meliores  libri,  tanquam  testes.  com- 
probarent.  Adjuti  praeterea  sumus  cum  allis  (i.e.  Erasnil) 
turn  vero  Complutensl  editione,  quam  ad  vetustissimos 
bibliothecae  Leonis  X.  Pont,  codices  excudl  jusserat  His- 
pan.  Card.  Fr.  Siraenlus :  quos  cum  nostris  miro  consensu 
saepissime  convenire  ex  ipsa  collatione  deprehendlmus " 
(I"ref.  edit.  1546-9).  In  the  preface  to  the  third  edition, 
he  says  that  he  used  the  same  16  copies  for  these  edition* 
as  for  that. 

*  "  Novum  JESU  Christ!  D.  N.  Testamentum.  Ex  Bi- 
bliotheca  Regia.  Lntetiae.  Ex  officinft  Robert!  Stephani 
typographi  regii,  regiis  typis.  MIJL."  In  this  edition 
Stephens  simply  says  of  his  "  16  copies,"  that  the  first  IE 
the  Complutensian  edition,  the  second  (Codex  Jiezae)  "a 
most  ancient  copy,  collated  by  friends  in  Italy ;  3-8,  10. 
15,  copies  from  the  Royal  Library;  "  caetera  sunt  ca  quag 
undique  corrogare  licuit "  (l"ref.). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

into  me  text  of  the  A.  V.  The  Greek  text  of  Beta  j 
Medicated  to  Queen  Elizabeth)  was  printed  by 
H.  Stephens  in  1565,  and  again  in  1576;  but  his  | 
chief  edition  was  the  third,  printed  in  1582,  which 
contained  readings  from  the  Codices  Bezae  and  t 
Claromontanus.  The  reading  followed  by  the  text 
of  A.  V.  in  Rom.  vii.  6  (biro6a.vovra.s  tor  laro- 
flewoWes),  which  is  supported  by  no  Greek  MS.  or 
'ersiuu  whatever,  is  due  to  this  edition.  Other 
editions  oj  .tieza  appeared  in  1588-9,  1598,  and 
His  (third)  text  found  a  wide  currency.6  Among 
other  editions  which  were  wholly  or  in  part  based 
upon  it,  those  of  the  ELZEVIRS  alone  require  to 
be  noticed.  The  first  of  these  editions,  famous  for 
the  beauty  of  their  execution,  was  published  at 
Leyden  in  1624.  It  is  not  known  who  acted  as 
editor,  but  the  text  is  mainly  that  of  the  third  edition 
of  Stephens.  Including  every  minute  variation  in 
orthography,  it  differs  from  this  in  278  places 
(Scrivener,  N.  T.  Cambr.  1860,  p.  vi.).  In  these 
cases  it  generally  agrees  with  Beza,  more  rarely  it 
differs  from  both,  either  by  typographical  errors 
(Matt.  vi.  34,  xv.  27 ;  Luke  x.  6  add.  6,  xi.  12, 
liii.  19;  John  iii.  6)  or  perhaps  by  manuscript 
authority  (Matt.  xxiv.  9,  cm.  ruv.  Luke  vii.  12, 
viii.  29;  John  xii.  17,  OTI).  In  the  second  edition 
(Leyden,  1633)  it  was  announced  that  the  text 
was  that  which  was  universally  received  (textum 
ergo  habes  nunc  ab  omnibus  receptum),  and  the 
declaration  thus  boldly  made  was  practically  ful 
filled.  From  this  time  the  Elzevirian  text  was 
generally  reprinted  on  the  continent,  and  that  of  the 
third  edition  of  Stephens  in  England,  till  quite 
recent  times.  Yet  it  has  been  shown  that  these 
texts  were  substantially  formed  on  late  MS.  au 
thority,  without  the  help  of  any  complete  colla 
tions  or  of  any  readings  (except  of  D)  of  a  first 
class  MS.,  without  a  good  text  of  the  Vulgate,  and 
without  the  assistance  of  oriental  versions.  No 
thing  short  of  a  miracle  could  have  produced  a 
critically  pure  text  from  such  materials  and  those 
treated  without  any  definite  system.  Yet,  to  'use 
Bentley's  words,  which  are  not  too  strong,  "  the 


•  The  edition  of  Beza  of  1589  and  the  third  of  Stephens 

may  be  regarded  as  giving  th    fundamental  Greek  text 

sf  the  A.  V.    In  the  following  passages  in  the  Gospels  the 

A..  V.  differs  from  Stephens,  and  agrees  with  Beza:— 

Matt.  ix.  33,  om.  on.  Yet  this  particle  might  be  omitted 

in  translation. 

„      xxi.  1,  frreKa0tcrai<  for  eirfKa0t<Tev. 
„     xxiii.  13, 14,  transposed  in  Steph. 
Mark  vi.  29,  om.  T&>. 

„      Viii.  24,  w?  SdvSpa  for  OTI  (!>f  SevSpa. 

„     ix.  40,  r)iuav  for  i'fuav,  "  against  most  MSS."  as 

Beza  remarks. 
Luke  1.  35,  add  «  (not  in  1"  ed.). 

„      ii.  22,  airrijs  for  avTiav. 

„      X.  22,  am.  <cal  errpaifreis  —  elire.      Yet   given   ia 

marg.,  and  noticed  by  Beza. 
„     xv.  26,  om.  avrov. 
,     xvii.  36,  add  verse.     The  omission  noticed  in 

marg.  and  by  Beza. 
„     xx.  31,  add  KO.I.    So  Beza  !•*  ed.,  but  not  3*  (by 

error  F) 
John  xiU.  30,  ore  oiv  e£jX0e.    "  Against  all  the  old 

MSS."  (Beza). 
„     xviii.  24,  add  oJ>v. 

In  others  it  agrees  with  Stephens  against  Beza  :— 
Matt.  i.  23.  KoAeVouo-i  for  <e<zAe'<rei«.    The  marg.  may  be 

intended  to  give  the  other  reading. 
„      XX.  15,  fl  for  rj. 
.V.?Jk  xvi.  20,  add  'A^qfr  at  the  cod. 
j:>hn  iv.  6, 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

text  stood  as  if  an  npostle  were  R.  Stephens'  oom- 
positor."  Habit  hallowed  what  w;is  commonly 
used,  and  the  course  of  textual  polemics  contri- 
uiited  not  a  little  to  preserve  without  change  tht 
common  Held  on  which  controversialists  were  pre 
pared  to  engage. 

ii.  From  Mill  to  Scholz. — 6.  The  second  period 
of  the  history  of  the  printed  text  may  be  treated 
with  less  detail.  It  was  influenced,  more  or  less, 
throughout  by  the  textus  receptus,  though  the 
authority  of  this  provisional  text  was  gradually 
shaken  by  the  increase  of  critical  materials  and  the 
bold  enunciation  of  principles  of  revision.  The 
first  important  collection  of  various  readings — for 
that  of  Stephens  was  too  imperfect  to  deserve  the 
name — was  given  by  WALTON  in  the  6th  volume 
of  his  Polyglott.  The  Syriac,  Arabic,  Aetbiopic, 
and  Persian  versions  of  the  N.  T.,  together  with 
the  readings  of  Cod.  Alex.,  were  printed  in  the 
5th  volume  together  with  the  text  of  Stephens. 
To  these  were  added  in  the  6th  the  readings  col 
lected  by  Stephens,  others  from  an  edition  by 
Wechel  at  Frankfort  (1597),  the  readings  of  the 
Codices  Bezae  and  Claromont.,  and  of  fourteen 
other  MSS.  which  had  been  collated  under  the  care 
of  Archbp.  Ussher.  Some  of  these  collations  were 
extremely  imperfect  (Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  p.  Ixvii. ; 
Introduction,  p.  148),  as  appears  from  later  ex 
amination,  yet  it  is  not  easy  to  overrate  the  im 
portance  of  the  exhibition  of  the  testimony  of  the 
oriental  versions  side  by  side  with  the  current 
Greek  text.  A  few  more  MS.  readings  were  given 
by  CURCELLAEUS  (de  Courcelles)  in  an  edition  pub 
lished  at  Amsterdam,  1658,  &c.,  but  the  great 
names  of  this  period  continue  to  be  those  of  Eng 
lishmen.  The  readings  of  the  Coptic  and  Gothic 
versions  were  first  given  in  the  edition  of  (Bp.  Fell) 
Oxford,  1675;  ed.  Gregory,  1703 ;  but  the  greatest 
service  which  Fell  rendered  to  the  criticism  of  th« 
N.T.  was  the  liberal,  encouragement  which  he  gave  to 
Mill.  The  work  of  MILL  (cf.  Oxon.  1707 ;  Amstelod. 
ed.  Kuster,  1710;  other  copies  have  on  the  title-page 
1723,  1746,  &c.j  marks  an  epoch  in  the  history 


John  xviii.  20,  navrore  for  wavrodev.    "  So  in  the  old 
MSS."  (Beza). 

In  other  parts  of  the  N.  T.  1  have  noticed  the  following 
passages  In  which  the  A.  V.  agrees  with  the  text  of  Beza's 
edition  of  1589  against  Stephens  (Acts  xvii.  25,  xxi.  8 
xxii.  25,  xxiv.  13, 18 ;  Rom.  vii.  6  (note),  vili.  11  (note), 
xii.  11,  xvi.  20;  1  Cor.  v.  11,  xv.  31 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  1,  vi.  15, 
vii.  12,  16,  xi.  10;  Col.  1.  1,  24,  ii.  10;  1  Thess.  il.  15; 
2  Thess.  ii.  4 ;  Tit.  11.  10 ;  Hebr.  Ix.  2  (note) ;  James  ii.  13 
(note),  iv.  13,  15,  v.  12;  1  Pet.  i.  4  (note);  2  Pet.  iii.  7; 
1  John  i.  4,  ii.  23  (in  italics),  111.  16 ;  2  John  3 ;  3  John  7 ; 
Jude  24 ;  Apoc.  iii.  1,  v.  11,  vii.  2,  10,  14,  viii.  11,  xi.  1,  2, 
xiii.  3,  xiv.  18,  xvi.  14,  xvii.  4.  On  the  other  hand  the 
A.  V.  agrees  with  Stephens  against  Beza,  Acts  iv.  27 
xvi.  17,  xxv.  6  (note),  xxvl.  8 ;  Horn.  v.  17 ;  1  COT.  iii.  3. 
vii,  29,  xi.  22,  x.  38  (error  of  press?);  2  Cor.  ill.  14 ;  Gal 
iv.  17  (note);  PhiL  i.  23;  Tit,  ii.  7;  Hebr.  x.  2;  1  Pet 
ii.  21,  iii.  21;  2  Pet.  ii.  12;  Apoc.  iv.  10,  ix.  f  xii.  14, 
xiv.  2,  xviii.  6,  xix.  1.  The  enumeration  given  by  Scri 
vener  (A  Supplement  to  the  Authorized  Version,  pp.  7,  8) 
differs  slightly  from  this,  which  includes  a  few  more 
passages ;  other  passages  are  doubtful :  Acts  vii.  26,  xv. 
32,  xix.  27 ;  2  Cor.  xi.  1,  xiii.  4 ;  Apoc.  iv.  8,  xviii.  16. 
In  other  places,  Matt  ii.  11,  x.  10;  John  xviii.  1 ;  Acts 
xxvii.  29 ;  2  Pet.  i.  1.  they  follow  neither.  In  James  iv. 
15,  fi)<ro/iev  seems  to  be  a  conjecture.  The  additional 
notes  on  readings.  Matt.  i.  11,  xxvi.  26;  Mark  ix.  16; 
Luke  ii.  38;  John  xviii.  13;  Acts  xxv.  6;  Eph.  vi.  9; 
James  il.  18;  2  IVt.  ii.  '2,  11,  1H ;  1  Jota  ii.  33;  2  John  8, 
all  come  from  lieu. 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

ol  tlic  N.  T.  text.  There  is  much  in  it  which  will 
not  bear  the  test  of  historical  inquiry,  much  that 
)s  imperfect  in  the  materials,  much  that  is  crude 
and  capricious  in  criticism,  but  when  every  draw 
back  has  been  made,  the  edition  remains  a  splendid 
monument  of  the  labours  of  a  life.  The  work 
occupied  Mill  about  thirty  years,  and  was  finished 
only  a  fortnight  before  his  death.  One  great  merit 
of  Mill  was  that  he  recognized  the  importance  of 
each  element  of  critical  evidence,  the  testimony  of 
MSS.  versions  and  citations,  as  well  as  internal 
evidence.  In  particular  he  asserted  the  claims  of 
the  Latin  version  and  maintained,  against  much 
opposition,  even  from  his  patron  Bp.  Fell,  the  great 
value  of  patristic  quotations.  He  had  also  a  clear 
view  of  the  necessity  of  forming  a  general  estimate 
M'  the  character  of  each  authority,  and  described  in 
detail  those  of  which  he  made  use.  At  the  same 
time  he  gave  a  careful  analysis  of  the  origin  and 
histoiy  of  previous  texts,  a  labour  which,  even 
now,  lias  in  many  parts  not  been  superseded.  But 
while  he  pronounced  decided  judgments  on  various 
readings  both  in  the  notes  and,  without  any  refer 
ence  or  plan,  in  the  Prolegomena,  he  did  not 
venture  to  introduce  any  changes  into  the  printed 
text.  He  repeated  the  Stephanie  text  of  1550 
without  any  intentional  change,  and  from  his 
edition  this  has  passed  (as  Mill's)  into  general  use 
in  England.  His  caution,  however,  could  not  save 
him  from  vehement  attacks.  The  charge  which 
was  brought  against  Walton'  of  unsettling  the 
sacred  text,  was  renewed  against  Mill,  and,  un 
happily,  found  an  advocate  in  Whitby  (Ex- 
amen  variantium  lectionum  J,  Millii  S.  T.  P.  an 
nexed  to  his  Annotations),  a  man  whose  genius 
was  worthy  of  better  things.  The  30,000  various 
readings  which  he  was  said  to  have  collected  formed 
a  common-place  with  the  assailants  of  the  Bible 
(Bentley,  Remarks,  iii.  348-358,  ed.  Dyce).  But 
the  work  of  Mill  silently  produced  fruit  both  in 
England  and  Gel-many.  Men  grew  familiar  with 
the  problems  of  textual  criticism  and  were  thus 
prepared  to  meet  them  fairly. 

7.  Among  those  who  had  known  and  valued 
Mil)  was  R.  BENTLEY,  the  greatest  of  English 
scholars.  In  his  earliest  work  (Epist.  ad  J.  Mil- 
Hum,  ii.  362,  ed.  Dyce),  in  1691,  Bentley  had 
expressed  generous  admiration  of  the  labours  of 
Mill,  and  afterwards,  in  1713,  in  his  Remarks, 
triumphantly  refuted  the  charges  of  impiety  with 
which  they  were  assailed.  But  Mill  had  only 
"  accumulated  various  readings  as  a  promptuary  to 
the  judicious  and  critical  reader ;"  Bentley  would 

' '  make  use  of  that  promptuary and  not 

leave  the  reader  in  doubt  and  suspense"  (Answer 
to  Remarks,  iii.  503).  With  this  view  he  an 
nounced,  in  1716,  his  intention  of  publishing  an 
edition  of  the  Greek  Testament  on  the  authority  of 
the  oldest  Greek  and  Latin  MS.,  "  exactly  as  it  was 
in  the  best  examples  at  the  time  of  the  Council  of 
Nice,  so  that  there  shall  not  be  twenty  words  nor 
even  particles'  difference"  (iii.  477  to  Archbp. 
Wake).  Collations  were  shortly  afterwards  under 
taken  both  at  Paris  (including  C)  and  Rome  (B), 
and  Beutley  himself  spared  neither  labour  nor 
money.  In  1720  he  published  his  Proposals  and 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


525 


a  Specimen  (Apoc.  xxii.).  In  this  notice  ).e  an 
nounces  his  design  of  publishing  "  a  new  edition  of 
the  Greek  and  Latin  ....  as  represented  in  the 
most  ancient  and  venerable  MSS.  in  Greek  and 
Roman(?)  capital  letters."  In  this  way  "  he  be 
lieves  that  he  has  retrieved  (except  in  a  very 
few  places)  the  true  exemplar  of  Origen  .... 
and  is  sure  that  the  Greek  and  Latin  MSS.,  by 
their  mutual  assistance,  do  so  settle  the  original 
text  to  the  smallest  nicety  as  cannot  be  per 
formed  now  in  any  classic  author  whatever."  He 
purposed  to  add  all  the  various  readings  of  the 
first  five  centuries,  "  and  what  has  crept  into  any 
copies  since  is  of  no  value  or  authority.1'  The 
proposals  were  immediately  assailed  by  Middleton 
A  violent  controversy  followed,  but  Bentley  con 
tinued  his  labours  till  1729  (Dyce,  iii.  483). 
After  that  time  they  seemed  to  have  ceased.  The 
troubles  in  which  Bentley  was  involved  render  ii 
unnecessary  to  seek  for  any  other  explanation  of 
the  suspension  of  his  work.  The  one  chapter 
which  he  published  shows  clearly  enough  that  he 
was  prepared  to  deal  with  variations  in  his  copies, 
and  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  concluding  that 
the  disagreement  of  his  ancient  codices  caused  him 
to  abandon  the  plan  which  he  had  proclaimed  with 
undoubting  confidence  (Scrivener,  Cod.  Aug.  p.  xix.). 
A  complete  account  of  Bentley's  labours  on  the 
N.  T.  is  prepared  for  publication  (1861)  bytheRev. 
A.  A.  Ellis,  under  the  title  Bentleii  Critics  Sacra. 
8.  The  conception  of  Bentley  was  in  advance 
both  of  the  spirit  of  his  age  and  of  the  materials  at 
his  command.  Textual  criticism  was  forced  to 
undergo  a  long  discipline  before  it  was  prepared  to 
follow  out  his  principles.  During  this  time  German 
scholars  hold  the  first  place.  Foremost  among  these 
was  BENGEL  (1687-1752),  who  was  led  to  study 
the  variations  of  the  N.  T.  from  a  devout  sense  of 
the  infinite  value  of  every  divine  word.  His  merit 
in  discerning  the  existence  of  families  of  documents 
has  been  already  noticed  (i.  §12)  ;  but  the  evidence 
before  him  was  not  sufficient  to  show  the  paramount 
authority  of  the  most  ancient  witnesses.  His  most 
important  rule  was,  Proclivi  scriptioni  praestat 
ardua ;  but  except  in  the  Revelation  he  did  not 
venture  to  give  any  reading  which  had  not  been 
already  adopted  in  some  edition  (Prodromus  N.  T. 
Gr.  recte  cauteque  adornandi,  1725 ;  Nov.  Testam. 
.  .  .  .  1734  ;  Apparatus  criticus,  ed.  2dm  cura  P.  D. 
Burk,  1763).  But  even  the  partial  revision  which 
Bengel  had  made  exposed  him  to  the  bitterest 
attacks ;  and  Wetstein,  when  at  length  he  published 
his  great  edition,  reprinted  the  received  text.  The 
labours  of  WETSTEIN  (1693-1754)  formed  an  im 
portant  epoch  in  the  histoiy  of  the  N.  T.  While- 
still  very  young  (1716)  he  was  engaged  to  collate 
for  Bentley,  and  he  afterwards  continued  the  work 
for  himself.  In  1733  he  was  obliged  to  leave  Basle, 
his  native  town,  from  theological  differences,  and 
his  Greek  Testament  did  not  appear  till  1751-2  at 
Amsterdam.  A  first  edition  of  the  Prolegomena 
had  been  published  previously  in  1730 ;  but  the 
principles  which  he  then  maintained  were  after 
wards  much  modified  by  his  opposition  to  Bengel 
(Com  p.  Preface  to  N.  T.  cura  Gerardi  de  Trajecto, 
ed.  2**,  1735).'  The  great  service  which  Wetstein 


*  Especially  by  the  great  puritan  Owen  In  his  Consi 
derations.  Walton  replied  with  severity  in  The  Const- 
Aerator  considered. 

t  Gerhard  von  Maestricht's  N.  T.  first  appeared  in 
1711,  with  a  selection  of  various  readings,  and  a  series 
of  canons  composed  to  justify  the  received  text.  Some 


of  these  canons  deserve  to  be  quoted,  as  an  illustration 
of  the  bold  assertion  of  the  claims  of  the  printed  text,  a* 
such. 

CAN.  Is.  "  Uma  codex  non  facifc  variantem  lectionem  .... 
modo  rectpta  lectio  sit  secundum  analogiam  ftdei  "... 

CAN.  x.  "  Ncque  duo  codices  faciunt  variantem  Ico 


526  NEW  TESTAMENT 

renJereJ  to  sacred  criticism  was  by  the  collection 
of  materials.  He  made  nearly  as  great  an  advance 
on  Mill  as  Mill  had  made  on  thase  who  preceded 
him.  But  in  the  use  of  his  materials  he  showed 
little  critical  tact ;  and  his  strange  theory  of  the 
Latinization  of  the  most  ancient  MSS.  proved  for 
R  long  time  a  serious  drawback  to  the  sound  study 
of  the  Greek  text  (Prolegomena,  ed.  Semler,  1766, 
ed.  Lotze,  1831). 

9.  It  was  the  work  of  GRIESBACH  C1745-1812) 
to  place  the  comparative  value  of  existing  docu 
ments  in  a  clearer  light.     The  time  was  now  come 
when  the  results  of  collected  evidence  might  be  set 
out ;  and  Griesbach,  with  singular  sagacity,  courtesy, 
and  zeal,  devoted  his  life  to  the  work.     His  first 
editions  (Synopsis,  1774;  Nov.  Test.  ed.  1,  1777- 
5)   were  based  for  the  most  part  on  the  critical 
collections  of  Wetsteiu.     Not  long  afterwards  MAT- 
THAEI  published  an  edition  based  on  the  accurate 
collation  of  Moscow  MSS.  (N.  T.  ex  Codd.  Mos- 
quensibus  ....  Riga,  1782-88,  12  vols. ;  ed.  2d», 
1803-7,  3  vols.).     These  new  materials  were  fur 
ther  increased  by  the  collections  of  Alter  (1786-7), 
Birch,  Adler,  and  Moldenhawer  (1788-1801),  as 
well  as  by  the  labours  of  Griesbach  himself.     And 
when  Griesbach  published  his  second  edition  ( 1796- 
1806,  2nd  ed.  of  vol.  i.  by  D.  Schulz,  1827)  he 
made  a  noble  use  of  the  materials  thus  placed  in  his 
hands.     His  chief  error  was  that  he  altered  the 
received  text  instead  of  constructing  the  text  afresh  ; 
but  in  acuteness,  vigour,  and  candour  he  stands 
below  no  editor  of  the  N.  T.,  and  his  judgment  will 
always  retain  a  peculiar  value.     In  1805  he  pub 
lished  a  manual  edition  with  a  selection  of  readings 
which  he  judged   to  be  more  or  less   worthy  of 
notice,  and  this  has  been  often  reprinted  (Comp. 
Symbolae    Criticae,    1785-1793 ;     Opuscula,    ed. 
Gabler,   1824-5;     Commentaries    Criticus,  1798- 
181 1 ;  White's  Criseos  Griesbachianae  . . .  Synopsis, 
1811). 

10.  The  edition  of  SCHOLZ  contributed  more  in 
appearance  than  reality  to  the  furtherance  of  cri 
ticism  (N.  T.  adfidem  test,  crit 1830-1836). 

This  laborious  scholar  collected  a  greater  mass  of 
various  readings  than  had  been  brought  together 
before,  but  his  work  is  very  inaccurate,  and  his 
own  collations  singularly  superficial.     Yet  it  was 
of  service  to  call  attention  to  the  mass  of  unused 
MSS. ;   and,  while  depreciating  the  value  of  the 
more  ancient  MSS.,    Scholz   himself  showed   the 
powerful    influence   of  Griesbach 's    principles    by 
accepting  frequently  the  Alexandrine  in  preference 
to  the  Constantinopolitan  reading  (i.  §14.    Comp. 
Biblisch-Kritische  lleise  .  .  .  1823  ;  Curae  Criticae 
.  .  .  1820-1845). 

iii.  From  Lachmann  to  the  present  time. — 11.  In 
the  year  after  the  publication  of  the  first  volume 
of  Scholz's  N.  T.  a  small  edition  appeared  in  a 
series  of  classical  texts  prepared  by  LACHMANN 
(f  1851).  In  this  the  admitted  principles  of  scho 
larship  were  for  the  first  time  applied  through 
out  to  the  construction  of  the  text  of  the  N.  T. 
The  prescriptive  right  of  the  textus  receptus  was 
wholly  set  aside,  and  the  text  in  every  part  was 

lionem  ....  contra  receptam  et  editam  et  sani  lensus 
kciionem  ....  maximc  in  omittendo"  .  . . 

CAN.  xlv.  "  Versiones  i-tiam  antiquissimae  ab  editit  et 
nutnuRcriptts  diCferentes  . .  .  oatemlunt  oscitantiam  inter- 
preUa. 

CAN.  xvii.  ••  Citatianes  Pati-wn  textus  N.  T.  non  facers 
tebent  variantem  versionem." 

CAN.  xxix.  "  Efficacior  lectio  testus  rectfti " 


NEW  TESTA  1MENT 

regulated  oy  ancient  authority.  Before  publishing 
his  small  edition  (N,  T.  Gr.  ex  recensione  C.  Lnoli- 
manni,  Berol.  1831)  Lachmann  had  given  a  short 
account  of  his  design  (Stud.  M.  Krit.  1830,  iv.),  tc 
which  he  referred  his  readers  hi  a  brief  postscript, 
but  the  book  itself  contained  no  Apparatus  or  Pro« 
legomena,  and  was  the  subject  of  great  and  painful 
misrepresentations.  When,  however,  the  distinct 
assertion  of  the  primary  claims  of  evidence  through 
out  the  N.  T.  was  more  fairly  appreciated,  I>ach- 
mann  felt  himself  encouraged  to  undertake  a  larger 
edition,  with  both  Latin  and  Greek  texts.  Th? 
Greek  authorities  for  this,  limited  to  the  primer; 
uncial  MSS.  (A  B  C  D  P  Q  T  Z  Eg  Gs  D,  H8), 
and  the  quotations  of  Irenaeus  and  Origen,  were 
airanged  by  the  younger  Buttmann.  Lachmann 
himself  prepared  the  Latin  evidence  (Tregelles,  Hist 
of  Gr.  Text,  p.  101),  and  revised  both  texts.  Tht 
first  volume  appeared  in  1842,  the  second  was 
printed  in  1845,  but  not  published  till  1850,  owing 
in  a  great  measure  to  the  opposition  which  Lach 
mann  found  from  his  friend  De  Wette  (N.  T.  ii. 
Praef.  iv. ;  Tregelles,  p.  111).  The  text  of  the  new 
edition  did  not  differ  much  from  that  of  the  former ; 
but  while  in  the  former  he  had  used  Western 
(Latin)  authority  only  to  decide  in  cases  where 
Eastern  (Greek)  authorities  were  divided ;  in  the 
latter  he  used  the  two  great  sources  of  evidence 
together.  Lachmann  delighted  to  quote  Bentley  as 
his  great  precursor  (§7) ;  but  there  was  an  im 
portant  difference  in  their  immediate  aims.  Bentley 
believed  that  it  would  be  possible  to  obtain  the  time 
text  directly  by  a  comparison  of  the  oldest  Greek 
authorities  with  the  oldest  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate. 
Afterwards  very  important  remains  of  the  earlier 
Latin  versions  were  discovered,  and  the  whole  ques 
tion  was  complicated  by  the  collection  of  fresh  docu 
ments.  Lachmann  therefore  wished  in  the  first 
instance  only  to  give  the  current  text  of  the  fourth 
century,  which  might  then  become  the  basis  of  fur 
ther  criticism.  This  at  least  was  a  great  step 
towards  the  truth,  though  it  must  not  be  accepted 
as  a  final  one.  Griesbach  had  changed  the  current 
text  of  the  15th  and  16th  centuries  in  numberless 
isolated  passages,  but  yet  the  late  text  was  the 
foundation  of  his  own :  Lachmann  admitted  the 
authority  of  antiquity  everywhere,  in  orthography, 
in  construction,  in  the  whole  complexion  and  ar 
rangement  of  his  text.  But  Lachmann's  edition, 
great  as  its  merits  are  as  a  first  appeal  to  ancient 
evidence,  is  not  without  serious  faults.  The  mn- 
terials  on  which  it  was  based  were  imperfect.  The 
range  of  patristic  citations  was  limited  arbitrarily. 
The  exclusion  of  the  Oriental  versions,  however 
necessary  at  the  time,  left  a  wide  margin  for  later 
change  (t.  i.  Praef.  p.  xxiv.).  The  negiect  of 
primary  cursives  often  necessitated  absolute  con 
fidence  on  slender  MS.  authority.  Lachmann  wa» 
able  to  use,  but  little  fitted  to  collect,  evidence  (t.  i. 
pp.  xxv.,  xxxviii.,  xxxix.).  It  was,  however,  enough 
for  him  to  have  consecrated  the  highest  scholarship 
by  devoting  it  to  the  service  of  the  N.  T.,  and  to 
have  claimed  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  a  field  tor 
reverent  and  searching  criticism.  (The  best  account 


As  examples  of  CAD.  ix.  we  find.  Matt  i.  16,  xpurnk  for 
"I.  6  Ary.  \p. ;  1.  25,  om.  TOV  vptaroroicov ;  Rom.  i.  31.  om. 
aoTnii/Soi*.  On  1  John  v.  7,  8,  the  editor  refers  to  the 
Complutensian  edition,  and  adds :  "  Ex  lute  editione,  quae 
ad  fidem  praestantissimoruin  MSS.  cdita  t.st,  indicium 
claruiu  habemns,  quod  in  plurimiS  wamistnptl.s  locus  MC 
inveatus  et  lectus  sit "  (p.  35). 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

»f  Lachinaim's  plan  and  edition  is  in  Tregelles, 
Hat.  of  Printed  Text,  97-115.  His  most  important 
critics  are  Fritzsche,  De  Conformation  N.  T.  Cri- 
tica  .  .  .  184-1  ;  Tischendorf,  Prolegg.  cii.-cxii.) 

12.  The  chief  defects  of  Lachmann's  edition  arise 
from  deficiency  of  authorities.     Another  German 
•scholar,  TISCHENDORF,  has  devoted  twenty  years 
10  enlarging  our  accurate  knowledge  of  ancient  MSS. 
The  first  edition  of  Tischendorf  (184P  has  now  no 
special  claims  for  notice.     In  his  second  (Leipsic) 
adition  (1849)  he  fully  accepted  the  great  principle 
of  Lachmann    (though   he   widened    the   range  of 
ancient  authorities),  that  the  text  "  must  be  sought 
solely  from  ancient  authorities,  and  not  from  the 
so-called   received   edition"   (Praef.  p.  xii.),  and 
gave  many  of  the  results  of  his  own  laborious  and 
valuable  collations.    The.  size  of  this  manual  edition 
necessarily  excluded  a  full  exhibition  of  evidence: 
the  editor's  own  judgment  was  often  arbitrary  .and 
inconsistent ;  but  the  general  influence  of  the  edition 
was  of  the  very  highest  value,  and  the  text,  as  a 
whole,  probably  better  than  any  which  had  preceded 
it.     During  the  next  few  years  Tischendorf  prose 
cuted  his  labours  on  MSS.  with  unwearied  diligence, 
and  in  1855-9  he  published  his  third  (seventh1) 
critical  edition.    In  this  he  has  given  the  authorities 
for  and  against  each  reading  in  considerable  detail, 
and  included  the  chief  results  of  his  later  discoveries. 
The  whole  critical  apparatus  is  extremely  valuable, 
and  absolutely  indispensable  to  the  student.     The 
text,  except  in  details  of  orthography,  exhibits  gene 
rally  a  retrograde  movement  from  the  most  ancient 
testimony.     The  Prolegomena  are  copious  and  full 
of  interest. 

13.  Meanwhile  the  sound  study  of  sacred  cri 
ticism  had  revived  in  England.    In  1 844  TREGELLES 
published  an  edition  of  the  Apocalypse  in  Greek  and 
English,  and  announced  an  edition  of  the  N.  T.1 
From  this  time  he  engaged  in  a  systematic  examina 
tion  of  all  unpublished  uncial   MSS.,  going  over 
much  of  the  same  ground  as  Tischendorf,  and  com 
paring  results  with  him.     In  1854  he  gave  a  de- 
lailed  account  of  his  labours  and  principles  (An 
Account  of  the  Printed  Text  of  the  Greek  New 
Testament  ....  London),  and   again   in  his   new 
edition  of  Home's  Introduction  (1856).     The  first 
part  of  his  Greek  Testament,  containing  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Mark,  appeared  in  1857 ;  the  second,  com 
pleting  the  Gospels,  has  just  appeared  (1861).     In 
this  he  gives  at  length  the  evidence  of  all  uncial 
MSS.,  and  of  some  peculiarly  valuable  cursives :  of 
all  versions  up  to  the  7th  century :  of  all  Fathers 
to  Eusebius  inclusive.    The  Latin  Vulgate  is  added, 
chiefly  from  the  Cod.  Amiatinus  with  the  readings 
of  the  Clementine  edition.    This  edition  of  Tregelles 
differs  from  that  of  Lachmann  by  the  greater  width 
of  its  critical  foundation ;  and  from  that  of  Tischen 
dorf  by  a  more  constant  adherence  to  ancient  evi 
dence.     Every  possible  precaution  has  been  taken  to 
insure  perfect  accuracy  in  the  publication,  and  the 
work  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  important 
contributions,  as  it  is  perhaps  the  most  exact,  which 
has  been  yet  made  to  the  cause  of  textual  criticism. 
The  editions  of  Knapp  (1797,  &c.),  Vater  (1824), 
Tittmann  (1820,  &c.),  and  Hahn  (1840,  &c.)  havi 
no  peculiar  critical  value.     Meyer  (1829,  &c.)  paid 
greater  attention  to  the  revision  of  the  text  which 


NEW    TESTAMENT 


527 


h  The  second  and  third  editions  were  Graeco-Latin 
editions,  published  at  Paris  in  1842,  of  uo  critical  value 
(cf.  Prolog,  cxxiv.-v.).  The  fifth  was  a  simple  text,  with 
ihe  variations  of  Elzevir,  chiefly  a  reprint  of  the  (fourth 


accompanies  his  great  commentary ;  but  his  critical 
lotes  are  often  arbitraiy  and  unsatisfactory.  In 
;he  Greek  Testament  of  Alford,  as  in  that  of  Meyer, 
;he  text  is  subsidiary  to  the  commentary ;  but  it  is 
mpossible  not  to  notice  the  important  advance 
which  has  been  made  by  the  editor  in  true  principles 
of  criticism  during  the  course  of  its  publication. 
The  fourth  edition  of  the  1st  vol.  (1859)  contains 
clear  enunciation  of  the  authority  of  ancient  evi 
dence,  as  supported  both  by  its  external  and  internal 
claims,  and  corrects  much  that  was  vague  and 
subjective  in  former  editions.  Other  annotated 
editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  valuable  for  special 
merits,  may  be  passed  over  as  having  little  bearing 
on  the  history  of  the  text.  One  simple  text,  how 
ever,  deserves  notice  (Cambv.  1860),  in  which,  by 
a  peculiar  arrangement  of  type,  Scrivener  has  re 
presented  at  a  glance  all  the  changes  which  hav*. 
been  made  in  the  text  of  Stephens  (1550),  Elzevir 
(1624),  and  Beza  (1565),  by  Lachmann,  Tischen 
dorf,  and  Tregelles. 

14.  Besides  the  critical  editions  of  the  text  of  the 
N.  T.  various  collections  of  readings  have  been  pub 
lished  separately,  which  cannot  be  wholly  omitted. 
In  addition  to  those  already  mentioned  (§9),  the  most 
important  are  by  Rinck,  Lucubratio  Critica,  1830 ; 
Reiche,  Codicum  MSS.  N.  T.  Gr.  aliquot  insigniorum 
in  Bibl.  Reg.  Paris  .  .  .  collatio  1847 ;  Scrivener, 
A  Collation  of  about  Twenty  Greek  MSS.  of  the  Holy 
Gospels  . . .  1853  ;  A  Transcript  of  the  Cod.  Aug., 
with  a  full  Collation  of  Fifty  MSS.  1859 ;  and 
E.  de  Muralt,  of  Russian  MSS.  (N.  T.  1848).  The 
chief  contents  of  the  splendid  series  of  Tischendorf 's 
works  (Codex  Ephraemi  Rescriptus,  1843 ;  Codex 
Claromontanus,  1852;  Monumenta  sacra  inedita, 
1846-1856  ;  Anecdota  sacra  et  prof  ana,  1855  ; 
Notitia  Cod.  Sinaitici,  1860;  are  given  in  his  own 
and  other  editions  of  the  N.  T.  (The  chief  works 
on  the  histoiy  of  the  printed  text  are  those  of 
Tregelles,  Hist,  of  Printed  Text,  1854;  Reuss, 
Geschichte  d.  H.  Schrift.  §§395  ff.,  where  are  very 
complete  bibliographical  references ;  and  the  Prole 
gomena  of  Mill,  Wetstein,  Griesbach,  and  Tischen 
dorf.  To  these  must  be  added  the  promised  (1861) 
Introduction  of  Mr.  Scrivener. 

III.  PRINCIPLES  OF  TEXTUAL  CRITICISM. 
The  work  of  the  critic  can  never  be  shnped  by 
definite  rules.  The  formal  enunciation  of  prin 
ciples  is  but  the  first  step  in  the  process  of  revi 
sion.  Even  Lachmann,  who  proposed  to  follow  the 
most  directly  mechanical  method,  frequently  allowed 
play  to  his  own  judgment.  It  could  not,  indeed, 
be  otherwise  with  a  true  scholar ;  and  if  there  is 
need  anywnere  for  the  most  free  and  devout  exer 
cise  of  every  faculty,  it  must  be  in  tracing  out  the 
very  words  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  Lord  Him 
self.  The  justification  of  a  method  of  revision  lies 
in  the  result.  Canons  of  criticism  are  more  fre 
quently  corollaries  than  laws  of  procedure.  Vet 
such  canons  are  not  without  use  in  marking  the 
course  to  ta  followed,  but  they  are  intended  -july 
to  guide  and  not  to  dispense  with  the  exercise  of 
tact  and  scholarship.  The  student  will  judge  for 
himself  how  far  they  are  applicable  in  every  par 
ticular  case  ;  and  no  exhibition  of  general  principles 
can  supersede  the  necessity  of  a  careful  examina- 


edition  of  1849.    The  sixth  was  a  Triglott  N.  T.  1S54-S 
(Greek,  Latin,  German) ;  1858  (Greek  and  Latin). 

i  Dr.  Tregelles'  first  specimen  was  published  in  183* 
(Hist,  of  I'rinted  Text,  p.  153). 


528 


MEW  TESTAMENT 


tion  of  the  characteristics  of  separate  witnesses  and 
of  groups  of  witnesses.  The  text  of  Holy  Scrip 
ture,  like  the  test  of  all  other  books,  depends  on 
evidence.  Rules  may  classify  the  evidence  and 
facilitate  the  decision,  but  the  final  appeal  must  be 
to  the  evidence  itself.  What  appears  to  be  the 
only  sound  system  of  criticism  will  be  seen  from 
the  rules  which  follow.  The  examples  which  are 
edded  can  be  worked  out  in  any  critical  edition  of 
the  Greek  Testament,  and  will  explain  better  than 
any  lengthened  description  the  application  of  the 
iniles. 

1.  The  text  must  throughout  be  determined  by 
evidence  without  allowing  any  prescriptive  right  to 
printed  editions.     In   the   infancy  of  criticism    it 
was  natural  that  early  printed  editions  should  pos 
sess  a  greater  value  than  individual  MSS.     The 
hnguage  of  the   Complutensiau    editors,   and    of 
Erasmus  and  Stephens,  was  such  as  to  command 
respect  for  their  texts  prior  to  examination.     Com 
paratively  few  MSS.  were  known,  and  none  tho 
roughly;    but  at  present  the  whole  state  of  the 
question  is  altered.     We  are  now  accurately  ac 
quainted  with  the  materials  possessed  by  the  two 
latter  editors  and  with  the   use  which  they  made 
of  them.      If  there   is   as   yet  no  such  certainty 
with   regard    to   the   basis   of  the  Complutensian 
text,  it  is  at  least  clear  that  no  high  value  can  be 
assigned  to  it.    On  the  other  hand  we  have,  in  addi 
tion  to  the  early  apparatus,  new  sources  of  evidence 
of  infinitely  greater  variety  and  value.    To  claim  for 
the  printed  text  any  right  of  possession  is,  there 
fore,  to  be  faithless  to   *he   principles  of  critical 
truth.      The  received  text   may   or   may  not   be 
correct  in  any  particular  case,  but  this  must  be 
determined  solely  by  an  appeal  to  the  original  autho 
rities.     Nor  is  it  right  even  to  assume  the  received 
text  as  our  basis.     The  question  before  us  is  not 

What  is  to  be  changed?  but,  What  is  to  be  read? 
It  would  be  supei-fluous  to  insist  on  this  if  it  were 
not  that  a  natural  infirmity  makes  every  one 
unjustly  conservative  in  criticism.  It  seems  to  be 
Irreverent  to  disturb  an  old  belief,  when  real  irre 
verence  lies  in  perpetuating  an  error,  however 
slight  it  may  appear  to  be.  This  holds  good 
universally.  In  Holy  Scripture  nothing  can  be 
indifferent ;  and  it  is  the  supreme  duty  of  the  critic 
to  apply  to  details  of  order  and  orthography  the 
same  care  as  he  bestows  on  what  may  be  judged 
weightier  points.  If,  indeed,  there  were  anything 
in  the  circumstances  of  the  first  publication  of  the 
N.  T.  which  might  seem  to  remove  it  from  the 
ordinary  fortunes  of  books,  then  it  would  be  impos 
sible  not  to  respect  the  pious  sentiment  which 
accepts  the  early  text  as  an  immediate  work  of 
Providence.  But  the  history  shows  too  many 
marks  of  human  frailty  to  admit  of  such  a  sup- 
jwsition.  The  text  itself  contains  palpable  and 
admitted  errors  (Matt.  ii.  11,  tvpov;  Acts  viii. 
37,  ix.  5.  6 ;  Apoc.  v.  14,  xxii.  1 1  ;  not  to  men 
tion  1  John  v.  7),  in  every  way  analogous  to  those 
arhich  occur  in  the  first  classical  texts.  The  con 
clusion  is  obvious,  and  it  is  supei«tition  rather 
than  reverence  which  refuses  to  apply  to  the  ser 
vice  of  Scripture  the  laws  which  have  restored  so 
much  of  their  native  beauty  to  other  ancient 
writings.  It  may  not  be  possible  to  fix  the 
reading  in  every  case  finally,  but  it  is  no  less 
the  duty  of  the  scholar  to  advance  as  far  as  he 
can  and  mark  the  extreme  range  of  uncertainty. 

2.  Every  clement  of  evidence  must  be  taken  into 
account  before  a  decision  is  made.     Some  uncer- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

]  tainty  must  necessarily  remain  ,  for,  when  it  if 
'  said  that  the  text  must  rest  upon  evidence,  it  is 
implied  that  it  must  rest  on  an  examination  of  the 
whole  evidence.  But  it  can  never  be  said  that  the 
mines  of  criticism  are  exhausted.  Yet  even  hen 
the  possible  limits  of  variation  ars  narrow.  The 
available  evidence  is  so  full  and  manifold  that  it 
is  difficult  to  conceive  that  any  new  authorities 
could  do  more  than  turn  the  scale  in  cases  which 
are  at  present  doubtful.  But  to  exclude  remote 
chances  of  error  it  is  necessary  to  take  account  of 
every  testimony.  No  arbitral  y  line  can  be  drawi' 
excluding  MSS.  versions  or  quotations  below  a 
certain  date.  The  true  text  must  (as  a  rule) 
explain  all  variations,  and  the  most  recent  forms 
may  illustrate  the  original  one.  In  practice  it  will 
be  found  that  certain  documents  may  be  neglected 
after  examination,  and  that  the  value  of  others  is 
variously  affected  by  determinate  conditions  ;  but 
still,  as  no  variation  is  inherently  indifferent,  no 
testimony  can  be  absolutely  disregarded. 

3.  The  relative  weight  of  the  several  classes  of 
evidence  is  modified  by  their  generic  character. 
Manuscripts,  versions,  and  citation*,  the  three  great 
classes  of  external  authorities  for  the  text,  are 
obviously  open  to  characteristic  errors.  The  first 
are  peculiarly  liable  to  en-ore  from  transcription 
(comp.  i.  §31  ff.).  The  two  last  are  liable  to  this 
cause  of  corruption  and  also  to  others.  The  genius 
of  the  language  into  which  the  translation  is  made 
may  require  the  introduction  of  connecting  par 
ticles  or  words  of  reference,  as  can  be  seen  from 
the  italicised  woi-ds  in  the  A.  V.  Some  uses  of 
the  article  and  of  prepositions  cannot  be  expressed 
or  distinguished  with  certainty  in  translation , 
Glosses  or  marginal  additions  are  moi-e  likely  to 
pass  into  the  text  in  the  process  of  translation  than 
in  that  of  transcription.  Quotations,  on  the  other 
hand,  are  often  partial  or  from  memory,  and  long 
use  may  give  a  traditional  fixity  to  a  slight  confu 
sion  or  adaptation  of  passages  of  Scripture.  These 
grounds  of  inaccuracy  are,  however,  easily  deter 
mined,  and  there  is  generally  little  difficulty  in  de 
ciding  whether  the  rendering  of  a  version  or  the  tes 
timony  of  a  Father  can  be  fairly  quoted.  Moreover, 
the  most  important  versions  are  so  close  to  the 
Greek  text  that  they  preserve  the  order  of  the 
original  with  scrupulous  accuracy,  and  even  in 
representing  minute  shades  of  expression,  observe 
a  constant  uniformity  which  could  not  have  been 
anticipated  (Comp.  Lachmann,  N.  T.  i.  p.  xlv.  ff.). 
It  is  a  far  more  serious  obstacle  to  the  critical  use 
of  these  authorities  that  the  texts  of  the  versions 
and  Fathers  generally  are  in  a  very  imperfect 
state.  With  the  exception  of  the  Latin  Version 
there  is  not  one  in  which  a  thoroughly  satisfactory 
text  is  available ;  and  the  editions  of  Clement  and 
Origen  are  little  qualified  to  satisfy  strict  demand? 
of  scholarship.  As  a  general  rule  the  evidence  of 
both  may  be  trusted  where  they  differ  from  the 
late  text  of  the  N.  T.,  but  where  they  agree  with 
this  against  other  early  authorities,  there  is  reason 
to  entertain  a  suspicion  of  corruption.  This  is 
sufficiently  clear  on  comparing  the  old  printed  text 
of  Chrysostom  with  the  text  of  the  best  MSS. 
But  when  full  allowance  has  been  made  for  all 
these  drawbacks,  the  mutually  corrective  power  of 
the  three  kinds  of  testimony  is  of  the  highest 
value.  The  evidence  of  versions  may  show  at  one* 
that  a  MS.  reading  is  a  transciiptural  error: 
John  i.  14,  6  ttab*(BC};  Juie  12  cnrdroa *  (  A) ; 
Uohn  i.  '2,  icnl  1>  iopdicatifv  (B),  i.  8,  IIK'I*  fra 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

(A),  iii.  21,  ?x«  (B);  2  Pet-  "•  16»  *" 
ii'flf.'win  is ;  and  the  absence  of  their  support  throws 
doubt  upon  readings  otherwise  of  the  highest  pro 
bability:  2  Pet.  ii.  4,  fftipots,  ii.  6,  a.crtftt(nv. 
The  testimony  of  an  early  Father  is  again  sufficient 
to  give  preponderating  weight  to  slight  MS.  au 
thority:  Matt.  i.  18,  TOV  5e  xptffro"  *7  ytveiru; 
and  since  versions  and  Fathei-s  go  back  to  a  time 
anterior  to  any  existing  MSS.,  they  furnish  a 
standard  bj  which  we  may  measure  the  conformity 
of  any  MS.  with  the  most  ancient  text.  On  ques 
tions  of  orthography  MSS.  alone  have  authority. 
The  earliest  Fathers,  like  our  own  writers,  seem 
(if  we  may  judge  from  printed  texts)  to  have 
adopted  the  current  spelling  of  their  time,  and 
not  to  have  aimed  at  preserving  in  this  respect 
ihe  dialectic  peculiarities  of  N.  T.  Greek.  But 
MSS.,  again,  are  not  free  from  special  idiosyn 
crasies  (if  the  phrase  may  be  allowed)  both  in  con 
struction  and  orthography,  and  unless  account  be 
taken  of  these  a  wrong  judgment  may  be  made  in 
isolated  passages. 

4.  The  mere  preponderance  of  numbers  is  in 
itself  of  no  weight.  If  the  multiplication  of  copies 
of  the  N.  T.  had  been  uniform,  it  is  evident  that 
the  number  of  later  copies  preserved  from  the 
accidents  of  time  would  have  far  exceeded  that  of 
the  earlier,  yet  no  one  would  have  preferred  the 
fuller  testimony  of  the  13th  to  the  scantier  docu 
ments  of  the  4th  century.  Some  changes  are  ne 
cessarily  introduced  in  the  most  careful  copying, 
and  these  are  rapidly  multiplied.  A  recent  MS. 
may  have  been  copied  from  one  of  great  antiquity, 
but  this  must  be  a  rare  occurrence.  If  all  MSS. 
were  derived  by  successive  reproduction  from  one 
source,  the  most  ancient,  though  few,  would  claim 
supreme  authority  over  the  more  recent  mass.  As 
it  is,  the  case  is  still  stronger.  It  has  been  shown 
that  the  body  of  later  copies  was  made  under  one 
influence.  They  give  the  testimony  of  one  church 
only,  and  not  of  all.  For  many  generations  By 
zantine  scribes  must  gradually,  even  though  uncon 
sciously,  have  assimilated  the  text  to  their  current 
form  of  expression.  Meanwhile  the  propagation  of 
the  Syrian  and  African  types  of  text  was  left  to 
the  casual  reproduction  of  an  ancient  exemplar. 
These  were  necessarily  far  rarer  than  later  and 
modified  copies,  and  at  the  same  time  likely 
to  be  far  less  used.  Representatives  of  one  class 
were  therefore  multiplied  rapidly,  while  those  of 
other  classes  barely  continued  to  exist.  From  this 
it  follows  that  MSS.  have  no  abstract  numerical 
value.  Variety  of  evidence,  and  not  a  crowd  of 
witnesses,  n.ust  decide  on  each  doubtful  point ;  and 
it  happens  by  no  means  rarely  that  one  or  two 
MSS.  alone  support  a  reading  which  is  unques 
tionably  right  (Matt.  i.  25,  v.  4,  5  ;  Mark  ii. 
22,  &c.). 

5.  The  more  ancient  reading  is  generally  pre 
ferable.     This   principle  seems   to    be    almost    a 
truism.     It  can  only  be  assailed  by  assuming  that 
the  recent  reading  is  itself  the  representative  of  an 
authority  still  more  ancient.     But  this  carries  the 
decision  from  the  domain  of  evidence  to  that  o: 
conjecture,  and  the  issue  must  be  tried  on  indi- 
vid  ual  passages. 

6.  The  more  ancient  reading  is  generally  the 
reading  <jf  the  more  ancient  MSS.     This  proposi 
tion  is  fully  established  by  a  comparison  of  explici 
early  testimony  with  the  text  of  the  oldest  copies 
It  would  be  strange,  indeed,  if  it  were  otherwise 
In  this  respect  the  discovery  of  the  Codex  Sinai 

VOL.  II. 


NKW  TESTAMENT 


529 


'icus  cannot  but  have  a  powerful  influence  upon 
>iblical  criticism.  Whatever  may  be  its  individual 
Hjculiarities,  it  preserves  the  ancient  readings  in 
characteristic  passages  (Luke  ii.  14  ;  John  i.  4,  18  ; 
.  Tim.  iii.  16).  If  the  secondary  uncials  (EPS 
J,  &c.)  are  really  the  direct  representatives  of  a  text 
more  ancient  than  that  in  N  B  C  Z,  it  is  at  least 
•emarkable  that  no  unequivocal  early  authority  pre- 
ients  their  characteristic  readings.  This  difficulty 
s  greatly  increased  by  internal  considerations.  The 
characteristic  readings  of  the  most  ancient  MSS.  are 
,hi)se  which  preserve  in  their  greatest  integrity  those 
ubtle  characteristics  of  style  which  are  too  minute 
to  attract  the  attention  of  a  transcriber,  atd  yet  too 
marked  in  their  recurrence  to  be  due  to  anything 
ess  than  an  unconscious  law  of  composition.  The 
aborious  investigations  of  Gersdorf  (Beitrage  zur 
Sprach-Characteristik  d.  Schriftsteller  •  d.  N.  T. 
Leipzig,  1816)  have  placed  many  of  these  pecu- 
iarities  ki  a  clear  light,  and  it  seems  impossible  to 
study  his  collections  without  gaining  the  assurance 
;hat  the  earliest  copies  have  preserved  the  truest 
mage  of  the  Apostolic  texts.  This  conclusion  from 
style  is  convincingly  confirmed  by  the  appearance  of 
he  genuine  dialectic  forms  of  Hellenistic  Greek  in 
those  MSS.,  and  those  only,  which  preserve  charac 
teristic  traits  of  construction  and  order.  As  long  as 
it  was  supposed  that  these  forms  were  Alexandrine, 
their  occurrence  was  naturally  held  to  be  a  mark 
of  the  Egyptian  origin  of  the  MSS.,  but  now  that 
t  is  certain  that  they  were  characteristic  of  a  class 
and  not  of  a  locality,  it  is  impossible  to  resist  the 
nference  that  the  documents  which  have  preserved 
delicate  and  evanescent  traits  of  apostolic  language 
must  have  preserved  its  substance  also  with  the 
greatest  accuracy. 

7.  The  ancient  text  is  often  preserved  substan 
tially  in  recent  copies.    But  while  the  most  ancient 
copies,  as  a  whole,  give  the  most  ancient  text,  yet  it 
is  by  no  means  confined  exclusively  to  them.     The 
text  of  D  in  the  Gospels,  however  much  it  has  been 
interpolated,  preserves  in  several  cases  almost  alone 
the  true  reading.    Other  MSS.  exist  of  almost  every 
date  (8th  cent.  L  E,  9th  cent.  X  A  F2  G3, 10th  cent. 
1,106,  llth  cent.  33,  22,  &c.),  which  contain  in 
the  main  the  oldest  text,  though  in  these  the  ortho 
graphy  is  modernised,  and  other  changes  appear 
which  indicate  a  greater  or  less  departure  from  the 
original  copy.     The  importance  of  the  best  cursives 
has  been  most  strangely  neglected,  and  it  is  but  re 
cently  that  their  true  claims  to  authority  have  been 
known.     In  many  cases  where  other  ancient  evi 
dence  is  defective  or  divided  they  are  of  the  highest 
value,  and  it  seldom  happens  that  any  true  reading 
is  wholly  unsupported  by  late  evidence. 

8.  The  agreement  of  ancient  MSS.,  or  of  MSS. 
containing  an  ancient  text,  with  all  the  earliest 
versions  and  citations  marks  a  certain  reading.   Tl  e 
final  argument  in  favour  of  the  text  of  the  most  an 
cient  copies  lies  in  the  combined  support  which  they 
receive  in  characteristic  passages  from  the  most  ancient 
versions  and  patristic  citations.     The  reading  of  the 
oldest  MSS.  is,  as  a  general  rule,  upheld  by  the 
true  reading  of  Versions  and  the  certain  testimony 
of  the  Fathers,  where  this  can  be  ascertained.     The 
later  reading,  and  this  is  not  less  worthy  of  notice,  is 
with  equal  constancy  repeated  in  the  corrupted  text 
of  the  Versions,  and  often  in  inferior  MSS.  of  Fathers. 
The  force  of  this  combination  of  testimony  can  only 
be  apprehended  after  a  continuous  examination  o 
passages.     A  mere  selection  of  texts  conveys  only  a 
partial  impression ,  and  it  is  most  important  to  ob- 

2  M 


630 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


icrve  the  errors  of  the  weightiest  authorities  when 
isolated,  in  order  to  appreciate  rightly  their  inde 
pendent  Talue  when  combined.  For  this  purpose 
the  student  is  urged  to  note  for  himself  the  readings 
of  a  few  selected  authorities  (A  B  C  D  L  X  1, 33, 69, 
&c.,  the  MSS.  of  the  old  Latin  abcffk,&K.,  the 
best  MSS.  of  the  Vulgate,  am,  for.  hart.,  &c.,  the 
great  Oriental  versions)  through  a  few  chapters ;  and 
it  may  certainly  be  predicted  that  the  result  will 
be  a  perfect  confidence  in  the  text,  supported  by  the 
combined  authority  of  the  classes  of  witnesses, 
though  frequently  one  or  two  Greek  MSS.  are  to 
be  followed  against  all  the  remainder. 

9.  The  disagreement  of  the  most  ancient  autho 
rities  often  marks  the  existence  of  a  coiruption  an 
terior  to  them.     But  it  happens  by  no  means  rarely 
that  the  most  ancient  authorities  are  divided.     In 
this  case  it  is  necessary  to  recognise  an  alternative 
reading ;  and  the  inconsistency  of  Tischendorf  in  his 
various  editions  would  have  been  less  glaring,  if  he 
had  followed  the  example  of  Griesbach  in  noticing 
prominently  those  readings  to  which  a  slight  change 
in  the  balance  of  evidence  would  give  the  prepon 
derance.     Absolute  certainty  is  not  in  every  case 
Attainable,  and  the  peremptory  assertion  of  a  critic 
cannot  set  aside  the  doubt  which  lies  on  the  con 
flicting  testimony  of  trustworthy  witnesses.     The 
differences  are  often  in  themselves  (as  may  appear) 
of  little  moment,  but  the  work  of  the  scholar  is  to 
present  clearly  in  its  minutest  details  the  whole  re 
suit  of  his  materials.    Examples  of  legitimate  doubt 
as  to  the  true  reading  occur  Matt.  vii.   14,  &c. ; 
Luke  x.  42,  &c. ;  John  i.  18,ii.  8,  &c. ;  Uohniii.  1, 
v.  10,  &c. ;  Rom.  iii.  26,  iv.  1,  &c.     In  rare  cases 
this  diversity  appears  to  indicate  a  corruption  which 
is  earlier  than  any  remaining  documents  :  Matt.  xi. 
27  ;  Mark  i.  27 ;  2  Peter  i.  21 ;  James  iii.  6,  iv.  14 ; 
Rom.  i.  32,  v.  6  (17),  xiii.  5,  xvi.  25  ff.     One 
special  form  of  variation  in  the  most  valuable  au 
thorities  requires  particular   mention.     An  early 
difference  of  order  frequently  indicates  the  interpo 
lation  of  a  gloss ;  and  when  the  best  authorities  are 
thus  divided,  any  ancient  though  slight  evidence 
Cor  the  omission  of  the  transferred  clause  deserves 
the  greatest  consideration:  Matt.  i.  18,  v.  32,  39, 
xii.  38,  &c. ;  Rom.  iv.  1,  &c. ;  Jam.  i.  22.     And 
generally  serious  variations  in  expression  between 
the  primary  authorities  point  to  an  early  corruption 
by  addition:   Matt.  x.   29;   Rom.  i.  27,  29,   iii. 
22,  26. 

10.  The   argument  from   internal  evidence  is 
always  precarious.     If  a  reading  is  in  accordance 
with  the  general  style  of  the  writer,  it  may  be  said 
on  the  one  side  that  this  fact  is  in  its  favour,  and 
on  the  other  that  an  acute  copyist  probably  changed 
the  exceptional  expression  for  the  more  usual  one : 
e.  g.  Matt.  i.  24,  ii.  14,  vii.  21,  &c.     If  a  reading  is 
more  emphatic,  it  may  be  urged  that  the  sense  is 
improved  by  its  adoption:  if  less  emphatic,  that 
scnbes  were  habitually  inclined  to  prefer  stronger 
terms:  e.g.  Matt.  v.  13,  vi.  4,  &c.     Even  in  the 
case  of  the  supposed  influence  of  parallel  passages  in 
the  synoptic  Evangelists,  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to 
resist  the  weight  of  ancient  testimony  when  it  sup 
ports  the  parallel  phrase,  in  favour  of  the  natural 
tanon  which  recommends  the  choice  of  variety  in 
preference  to  uniformity:  e.g.  Matt.  iii.  6,  iv.  9, 
viii.  32,  ix.  1 1,  &c.    But  though  internal  evidence  is 
commonly  only  of  subjective  value,  there  are  some 
general  rules  which  are  of  very  wide,  if  not  of  uni 
versal  application.     These  have  ftrr?s  to  decide  orfn 
confirm  n  judgment ;  but  in  every  instance  t.hoy 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

must  be  used  only  in  combination  with  direct  t>-.y 
timony. 

1 1 .  The  more  difficult  reading  is  preferable  to 
the  simpler  (proclivi  lectioni  praestat  ardua,  Itengel/. 
Except  in  cases  of  obvious  corruption  this  canon 
probably  holds  good  without  exception,  in  questions 
of  language,  construction,  and  sense.     Rare  or  pro 
vincial  forms,    irregular   usages   of  words,  rough 
turns  of  expression,  are  universally  to  be  taken  in 
preference  to  the  ordinary  and  idiomatic  phrases. 
The  bold  and  emphatic  agglomeration  of  clauses, 
with   the   fewest  connecting   particles,   is  always 
likely  to  be  nearest  to  the  original  text.     The  usage 
of  the  different  apostolic  writers  varies  in  this  re 
spect,  but  there  are  veiy  few,  if  any,  instances  where 
the  mass  of  copyists  have  left  out  a  genuine  con 
nexion;  and  on  the  other  hand  there  is  hardly  a 
chapter  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  where  they  have  not 
introduced  one.     The  same  rule  is  true  in  questions 
of  interpretation.     The  hardest  reading  is  generally 
the  true  one:  Matt.vi.  l,xix.  17,xxi.31  (6  Sffrtpos); 
Rom.  viii.  28  (6  0f6s) ;  2  Cor.  v.  3,;  unless,  indeed, 
the  difficulty  lies  below  the  surface :  as  Rom.  xii. 
11  (Kcup$  for  Kvplcf],  xii.  13  (jivftcus  for  xp«f««). 
The  rule  admits  yet  further  of  another  modified  ap 
plication.     The  less  definite   reading  is  generally 
preferable  to  the  more  definite.     Thus  the  future  is 
constantly  substituted  for  the  pregnant   present, 
Matt.  vii.  8;  Rom.  xv.  18:  compound  for  simple 
words,  Matt.  vii.  28,  viii.  17,  xi.  25  ;  and  pro 
nouns  of  reference  are  frequently  introduced  to  em 
phasize  the  statement,  Matt.  vi.  4.     But  caution 
must  be  used  lest  our  own  imperfect  sense  of  the 
naturalness  of  an  idiom  may  lead  to  the  neglect  ot 
external  evidence  (Matt.  xxv.  16,  iirolr)fffv  wrongly 
for  iKfp$T\ffev). 

12.  The  shorter  reading  is  generally  preferable 
to  the  longer.     This  canon  is  very  often  coincident 
with  the  former  one ;  but  it  admits  also  of  a  wider 
application.     Except   in   very  rare   cases  copyists 
never  omitted  intentionally,  while  they  constantly 
introduced  into  the  text  marginal  glosses  and  even 
various   readings  (comp.  §13),  either  from  igno 
rance  or  from  a  natural  desire  to  leave  out  nothing 
which  seemed  to  come  with  a  claim  to  authority. 
The  extent  to  which  this  instinct  influenced  the  cha 
racter  of  the  later  text  can  be  seen  from  an  exami 
nation  of  the  various  readings  in  a  few  chapters. 
Thus  in  Matt.  vi.  the  following  interpolations  occur : 
4  (ourcJs),  iv  rf  <pavfp<2.         5  (&v~)  8n  far.    6  iv 
rf  <f>avepif.     10  iirl  TTJS  7.     13  Sri  ffov  .  .  au-ffv. 
15  (TO  irapairT.  avrwv).         16  Sri  air.    19  iv  T$ 
(pav€p'f.     The  synoptic  Gospels  were  the  most  ex 
posed  to  this  kind  of  corruption,  but  it  occurs  in  all 
parts  of  the  N.  T.    Everywhere  the  fuller,  rounder, 
more  complete  form  of  expression  is  open  to  the 
suspicion  of  change ;  and  the  pre-eminence  of  the 
ancient  authorities  is  nowhere   seen  more  plainly 
than  in  the  constancy  with  which  they  combine  in 
preserving  the  plain,  vigorous,  and  abrupt  phrase 
ology  of  the  apostolic  writings.     A  few  examples 
taken  almost  at  random  will  illustrate  the  various 
cases  to  which  the  rule  applies:  Matt.  ii.  15,  iv.  6, 
xii.  25;  James  iii.  12;  Rom.  ii.  1,  viii.  23,  x.  15, 
xv.  29  (comp.  §13). 

13.  That  reading  is  preferable  which  explains 
the  origin  of  the  others.     This  rule  is  chiefly  of  use 
in  cases  of  great  complication,  and  it  would  be  im 
possible  to  find  a  better  example  than  one  which  has 
been  brought  forward  by  Tischendorf  for  a  different 
purpose  (N.  T.  Praef.  pp.  xxxiii-iv.).      The  com 
mon  reading  in  Mark  ii.  2'J  is  6  ciivos  fKxt?Tat  KC^ 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

it  curKol  airokovvrcu,  which  is  perfectly  simple  in 
.4self,  and  the  undoubted  reading  in  the  parallel 
passage  of  St.  Matthew.  But  here  there  are  great 
variations.  One  important  MS.  (L)  reads  6  atvos 
€KX«iVat  Kal  ol  acr/cof:  another  (D  with  it.)  & 
olvos  Kai  affKol  diro\ovi>Tai :  another  (B)  &  oivos 
dir&\\vTa,i  Kal  ol  dffKoi.  Here,  if  we  bear  in 
mind  the  reading  in  St.  Matthew,  it  is  morally 
certain  that  the  text  of  B  is  correct.  This  may 
have  been  changed  into  the  common  text,  but  can 
not  Ijave  arisen  out  of  it.  Compare  James  iv.  4, 
12  ;  Matt.  xxiv.  38  ;  Jude  18  ;  Rom.  vii.  25  ;  Mark 
i.  16,  27. 

[For  the  principles  of  textual  criticism  compare 
Griesbaeh,  jV.  T.  Prolegg.  §3,  pp.  Iviii.  ft'.;  Tischen- 
dorf,  JV.  T.  Prolegg.  xxxii.— xliv. ;  Tregelles,  Printed 
Text,  pp.  132  tf. ;  (Home's)  Introduction,  pp.  342  ft'. 
The  Crisis  of  Wetstein  (Prolegg.  pp.  206-40,  Lotze) 
is  very  unsatisfactory.] 

IV.  THE  LANGUAGE  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

1.  The  eastern  conquests  of  Alexander  opened  a 
new  field  for  the  development  of  the  Greek  language. 
It  may  be  reasonably  doubted  whether  a  specific 
Macedonian  dialect  is  uot  a  mere  fiction  of  gram 
marians  ;  but  increased  freedom  both  in  form  and 
construction  was   a   necessaiy   consequence   of  the 
wide  diffusion  of  Greek.     Even  in  Aristotle  there 
is  a  great  declension  from  the  classical  standard  of 
purity,  though  the  Attic  formed  the  basis  of  his 
language ;  and  the  rise  of  the  common  or  Grecian 
dialect  (8i<xA.e/cTos  KOIVI'I,  or  8.  'EAATjvt/clj)  is  dated 
from  his  time.     In  the  writings  of  educated  men 
who  were  t'amiliar  with  ancient  models,  this  "  com 
mon  "  dialect  always  preserved  a  close  resemblance 
to  the  normal  Attic,  but  in  the  intercourse  of  ordi 
nary  life  the  corruption  must  have  been  both  great 
and  rapid. 

2.  At  no  place  could  the  corruption  have  been 
greater  or  more  rapid  than  at  Alexandria,  where  a 
motley  population,   engaged   in   active  commerce, 
adopted  Greek  as  their  common  medium  of  com 
munication.     [ALEXANDRIA,  i.  p.  48.]     And  ;t  is 
in  Alexandria  that  we  must  look  for  the  origin  of 
the  language  of  the  New  Testament.     Two  distinct 
elements  were  combined  in  this  marvellous  dialect 
which  was  destined  to  preserve  for  ever  the  fullest 
tidings  of  the  Gospel.     On  the  one  side  there  was 
Hebrew  conception,  on   the   other   Greek  expres 
sion.     The  thoughts  of  the  East  were  wedded  to 
the  words  of  the  West.     This  was  accomplished  by 
the  gradual  translation  of  the   Hebrew  Scriptures 
into  the  vernacular  Greek.    The  Greek  had  already 
lost  the  exquisite  symmetry  of  its  first  form,  so 
that  it  could    take   the  clear  impress  of  Hebrew 
ideas ;  and  at  the  same  time  it  had  gained  rather  than 
lost  in  richness  and  capacity.     In  this  manner  what 
may  be  called  the  theocratic  aspect  of  Nature  and 
History  was  embodied  in  Greek  phrases,  and  the 
power  and  freedom  of  Greek  quickened  and  defined 
Eastern  speculation.    The  theories  of  the  "  purists  " 
of  the  17th  century  (comp.  Winer,  Grammatik,  §1 ; 
Ueuss,  Gesch.  d.  H.  S.  §47)  were  based  on  a  com 
plete  misconception  of  what  we  may,  without  pre 
sumption,  feel  to  have  been  required  for  a  universal 
Gospel.     The  message  was  not  for  one  nation  only, 
but  for   all ;    and  the  language  in  which   it.  was 
promulgated — like  its  most  successful  preacner — 
united  in  one  complementary  attributes.     [  HEL- 

IENI8T,  i.  p.  783.J 

3.  The  Greek  of  the  LXX.— like  the  Eng]  sh  of 
&£  A    V.  or  the  German  of  Luther — naturally 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


531 


defennined  the  Greek  dialect  of  the  m;iss  of  the 
Jews.  It  is  quite  possible  that  numerous  provin  • 
cialisms  existed  among  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  of 
Egypt,  Palestine,  and  Asia  Minor,  but  the  diaiect 
of  their  common  Scriptures  must  have  given  a 
general  unity  to  their  language.  It  is,  therefore, 
more  correct  to  call  the  N.  T.  dialect  Hellenistic 
than  Alexandrine,  though  the  form  by  which  it 
is  characterised  may  have  been  peculiarly  Alexan 
drine  at  first.  Its  local  character  was  lost  when 
the  LXX.  was  spread  among  the  Greek  Dispersion; 
and  that  which  was  originally  confined  to  one  city 
or  one  work  was  adopted  by  a  whole  nation.  At 
the  :>ame  time  much  of  the  extreme  harshness  of 
the  LXX.  dialect  was  softened  down  by  intercourse, 
with  Greeks  or  graecising  foreigners,  and  conversely 
the  wide  spread  of  proselytism  familiarised  the 
Greeks  with  Hebrew  ideas. 

4.  The  position  of  Palestine  was  peculiar.     The 
Aramaic  (Syro-Chaldaic),  which  was  the  national 
dialect  after  the  Return,  existed  side  by  side  with 
the  Greek.    Both  languages  seem  to  have  been  gene 
rally  understood,  though,  if  we  may  judge  from  other 
instances  of  bilingual  countries,  the  Aramaic  would 
be  the  chosen  language  tor  the  common  intercourse 
of  Jews  (2  Mace.  vii.  8,  21,  27).     It  was  in  this 
language,  we  may  believe,  that  our  Lord  was  accus 
tomed  to  teach  the  people ;  and  it  appears  that  He 
used  the  same  in  the  more  private  acts  of  His  life 
(Mark  iii.  17,  v.  41,  vii.  34 ;  Matt,  xxvii.  46  ;  John 
i.  43 ;  cf.  John  xx.  1 6).     But  the  habitual  use  ot 
the  LXX.  is  a  sufficient,  proof  of  the  familiarity  of 
the  Palestinian  Jews  with  the  Greek  dialect ;  and 
the  judicial  proceedings  before  Pilate  must  have  been 
conducted  in  Greek.  (Comp.  Grinfield,  Apology  for 
the  LXX.,  pp.  76  ff.) 

5.  The  Roman  occupation  of  Syria  was  not  alto 
gether  without  influence  upon  the  language.     A 
considerable  number  of  Latin  words,  chiefly  refer 
ring  to  acts  of  government,  occur  in  the  N.  T.,  and 
they  are  probably  only  a  sample  of  larger  inno 
vations   (Krjvffos,   \fyitav,   KovtrraiSia,    airadoiov, 
KoSpdvrrjs,    Syvdptov,    fj.i\iov,    irpaiT&ptov,    <f>pa- 
ye\\ovv,  St.  Matt.  &c. ;  KfVTvpiiov,  ffireKov\arcap, 
rb  IKO.VUV  voirffftu,  St.  Mark ;  \tvTtov,  ffovSdpiov, 
rlr\os,  St.  John,  &c. ;  \if}epTivos,  Ko\uvia,  (TI/J.I.- 
ttivQiov,  fftitdpios,  St.  Luke  ;  /j,dKf\\ov,  uffifipdva, 
St.  Paul).     Other  words  in  common  use  were  of 
Semitic  (bppa.$tav,    £t£dviov,   Kopj3aiw,   oaS/Sei), 
Persian  (ayyapevu,  (idyot,  ridpa,  iraodStiffos),  or 
Egyptian  origin  (fidiov). 

6.  The  language  which  was  moulded  under  thesp 
various  influences  presents  many  peculiarities,  both 
philological  and   exegetical,    which  have   not   yet 
been  placed  in  a  clear  light.     For  a  long  time  it 
has  been  most  strangely  assumed  that  the  linguistic 
forms  preserved  in  the  oldest  MSS.  are  Alexan 
drine  and  not  in  the  widest  sense  Hellenistic,  and 
on  the  other  hand  that  the  Aramaic  modifications 
of  the  N.  T.  phraseology  remove  it  from  the  sphere 
of  strict  grammatical  analysis.      These  errors  are 
necessarily  fatal  to  all  real  advance  in  the  accurate- 
study  of  the  words  or  sense  of  the  apostolic  writ 
ings.     In  the  case  of  St.  Paul,  no  less  than  in  the 
case   of  Herodotus,   the   evidence    of  the   earliest 
witnesses  must  be  decisive  as  to  dialectic  forms. 
Egyptian  scribes  preserved  the   characters  sties    of 
other  books,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
they  altered  those  of  the  N.  T.     Nor  is  it  reason 
able  to  conclude  that  the  later  stages  of  a  language 
are  governed  by  no  law  or  that  the  introduction 
of  fresh  elements  destroys  the  symmetry  which  iu 

2  M  2 


532 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


reality  it  only  changes.  But  if  old  misconception* 
still  linger,  very  much  has  been  done  lately  to 
open  the  way  to  a  sounder  understanding  both 
of  the  form  and  the  substance  of  the  N.  T.  by 
Tischencbrf  (as  to  the  dialect,  N.  T.  Prolegg. 
xlvi.-lxu.),  by  Winer  (as  to  the  grammatical  laws, 
Qramm.  d.  N.  T.  Sprachid.  6th  ed.  1855;  comp. 
Green's  Grammar  of  N.  T.  dialect,  1842),  and 
by  the  later  commentators  (Fritzsche,  Liicke, 
Bleek,  Meyer,  Alford).  In  detail  comparatively 
little  remains  to  be  done,  but  a  philosophical  view 
of  the  N.  T.  language  as  a  whole  is  yet  to  be 
desired.  For  this  it  would  be  necessary  to  take 
account  of  the  commanding  authority  of  the  LXX. 
over  the  religious  dialect,  of  the  constant  and  living 
^ower  of  the  spoken  Aramaic  and  Greek,  of  the 
mutual  influence  of  inflexion  and  syntax,  of  the 
inherent  vitality  of  words  and  forms,  of  the  history 
of  technical  terms,  and  of  the  creative  energy  of 
Christian  truth.  Some  of  these  points  may  be 
discussed  in  other  articles  ;  for  the  present  it  must 
be  enough  to  notice  a  few  of  the  most  salient 
characteristics  of  the  language  as  to  form  and  ex 
pression. 

7.  The  formal  differences  of  the  Greek  of  the 
N.  T.  from  classical  Greek  are  partly  differences  of 
vocabulary  and  partly  differences  of  construction. 
Old  words  are  changed  in  orthography  (1)  or  in 
inflection  (2),  new  words  (3)  and  rare  or  novel 
constructions  (4)  are  introduced.  One  or  two 
examples  of  each  of  these  classes  may  be  noticed. 
But  it  must  be  again  remarked  that  the  language 
of  the  N.  T.,  both  as  to  its  lexicography  and  as 
to  its  grammar,  is  based  on  the  language  of  the 
LXX.  The  two  stages  of  the  dialect  cannot  be 
examined  satisfactorily  apart.  The  usage  of  the 
earlier  books  often  confirms  and  illustrates  the 
usage  of  the  later ;  and  many  characteristics  of 
N.  T.  Greek  have  been  neglected  or  set  aside  from 
ignorance  of  the  fact  that  they  are  undoubtedly 
found  in  the  LXX.  With  regard  to  the  forms  of 
words,  the  similarity  between  the  two  is  perfect ; 
with  regard  to  construction,  it  must  always  be 
remembered  that  the  LXX.  is  a  translation,  exe 
cuted  under  the  immediate  influence  of  the  Hebrew, 
while  the  books  of  the  N.  T.  (with  a  partial  excep 
tion  in  the  case  of  St.  Matthew)  were  written  freely 
in  the  current  Greek. 

(1)  Among  the  most  frequent  peculiarities  of 
orthography  of  Hellenistic  Greek  which   are  sup 
ported  by  conclusive  authority,  are — the  preserva 
tion  of  the  n  before  ty  and  <p  in  \anf}dva>  and  its 
derivations,  A^mf/erat,  cuTi^fififyfis ;  and  of  v  in 
compounds  of  avv  and  Iv,  ffvvtfiv,  ffvvfia.OrjT 
4vyfypa^fin\.     Other  variations  occur  in  rtff 
pditovTa,    tpavvav,    &c.,    lKa.6epla<)i\  &c.      It   is 
more  remarkable  that  the  aspirate  appears  to  have 
been  introduced  into  some  words,  as  ^Airfy  (Rom. 
viii.  20 ;  Luke  vi.  35).      The  v  t<pe\icvffT  titty  in 
verbs  (but  not  in  nouns)  and  the  s  of  o&rus  are 
idways  preserved  before  consonants,  and  the  hiatus 
(with    oAAck    especially)    is    constantly    (perhaps 
always)  disregarded.     The  forms  in  -«-,  -i-,  are 
more  difficult  of  determination,  and  the  question  is 
not  limited  to  later  Greek. 

(2)  Peculiarities  of  inflection  are  found  in  jta- 
salpy,  -TJJ,  x««P«"(?)t  tnryyeViji^?),  0a0e'a>j,  &c. 
These  peculiarities   are   much   more    common    in 
verbs.    The  augment  is  sometimes  doubled :  airt 
TfffTaOti,  sometimes  omitted  :  oiKoSSfJiijafv,  Ka 
ffx^vGri.      The   doubling   of  p    is   commonly    ne 
glected:  Ipdvrifffv.     Unusual  forms  of  tenses  are 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

used  :  fv«ra,  c?ira,  &c.  ;  unusaal  moons  :  «cav6> 
/j.ai  (1  Cor.  xiii.  4?);  and  unusual  conjug*- 

tions  :  viKovvrt  for  vut  Oavri,  4\x6ya,  for  (\\6yu, 
pfiffftiviiffav  for  irapfifffSvffav  (Jude  4). 

(3)  The  new  words  are   generally  formed   ac 
cording  to  old  analogy  —  oixoSfoWri);,  fvKaifit'tr, 

rinepivfa,  a.iroKa.pa.SoKf'iv  ;  and  in  this  res]*ct 
the  frequency  of  compound  words  is  particularly 
worthy  of  notice.  Other  words  receive  new  senses  : 
rj/MiT/feiv,  tyapiov,  icfpiffiraarOcu,  ffvviffri\fjii  ; 
and  some  are  slightly  changed  in  form  :  avABffM 
(-rj/to),  t^diriva  (-171),  j9c«r/A.«<r«ra  (comp.  Winer, 
Gramm.  §2). 

(4)  The  most  remarkable  construction,  which  is 
well  attested  both  in  the  LXX.  and  in  the  N.  T., 
is  that  of  the  conjunctions  Jva,   frrav,  with    the 
present  indicative:  Gal.  vi.  12(?),  Iva  Suanotncu, 
Luke  xi.  2,  Zrav  irpoffeb-xeaOf,  as  well  as  with 
the  future  indicative  (Ccxnp.  Tischdf.  Mark  iii.  2). 
"Orav  is  even  found  with  the  imperfect  and  aor. 
indie.,  Mark  iii.  11,  orav  tQtiapovv;  Apoc.  viii.  1, 
Srav  ffvoi^tv.      Other  irregular  constructions  in 
the  combination  of  moods  (Apoc.  iii.  9)  and  in 
defective  concords  (Mark  ix.  26)  can  be  paralleled 
in  classical  Greek,  though  such  constructions  are 
more  frequent  and   anomalous  iu  the  Apocalypse 
than  elsewhere. 

8.  The  peculiarities  of  the  N.  T.  language  which 
have  been  hitherto  mentioned  have  only  a  rare 
and  remote  connexion  with  interpretation.  They 
illustrate  more  or  less  the  general  history  of  the 
decay  of  a  language,  and  offer  in  some  few  instances 
curious  problems  as  to  the  corresponding  changes 
of  modes  of  conception.  Other  peculiarities  have 
a  more  important  bearing  on  the  sense.  These  are 
in  part  Hebraisms  (Aramaisms)  in  (1)  expression 
or  (2)  construction,  and  in  part  (3)  modification* 
of  language  resulting  from  the  substance  of  the 
Christian  revelation. 

(1)  The  general  characteristic  of  Hebraic  expres 
sion  is  vividness,  as  simplicity  is  of  Hebraic  syntax. 
Hence  there  is  found  constantly  in  the  N.  T.  a  per 
sonality  of  language  (if  the  phrase  may  be  used)  which 
is  foreign  to  classical  Greek.  At  one  time  this 
occurs  in  the  substitution  of  a  pregnant  metaphor 
for  a  simple  word  :  oiKoSojuciV  (St.  Paul),  ffirAay- 
Xvi^ofnat  (Gospels),  ir\arvi>ftv  r^v  KapSiav  (St. 
Paul),  irp6<r<OTrov  Xap.fid.vtiv,  irpoffci>iro\r]/j.if/ia, 
trpofftnroKwirTflv.  At  another  time  in  the  use 
of  prepositions  in  place  of  cases  :  Kpd£tiv  4v  ftf- 
yd\ri  (pwvfj,  if  fjiaxaipa  droXfffBai,  dB&os  dirb 
rov  a'luaros.  At  another  in  the  use  of  a  vivid 
phrase  for  a  preposition:  5ia  xeip&v  TWOS  yt- 
vfffOat,  diroffrf\\fiv  ffvv  Xe'pl  dyytXov,  tv  xf'P* 
fiefflrov,  <ptvy(ii>  airb  rpoffcairov  riv6s.  And 
sometimes  the  one  personal  act  is  used  to  describe 
the  whole  spirit  and  temper:  iropeveffdat  o-wiata 


(2)  The  chief  peculiarities  of  the  syntax  of  the 
N.  T.  lie  in  the  reproduction  of  Hebrew  forms. 
Two  great  features  by  which  it  is  distinguished 
from  classical  syntax  may  be  specially  singled  out. 
It  is  markedly  deficient  in  the  use  of  particles  and 
of  oblique  and  participial  constructions.  Sentences 
are  more  frequently  co-ordinated  than  subordinated. 
One  clause  follows  another  rather  in  the  way  of 
constructive  parallelism  than  by  distinct  logical 
sequence.  Only  the  simplest  woixls  of  connexion 
are  used  in  place  of  the  subtle  varieties  of  expres 
sion  by  which  Attic  writers  exhibit  the  interde 
pendence  of  numerous  ideas.  The  repetitkn  ••«  » 
key-word  (John  i.  1,  v.  31,  32.  xi.  33)  ««•  of 


NEW  TESTAMENT 

feading  thought  (John  x.  11  ff.,  xvii.  14-19)  often 
serves  in  place  of  all  other  conjunctions.  The 
words  quoted  from  another  are  given  in  a  dirtci 
objective  shape  (John  vii.  40,  41).  Illustrative 
details  are  commonly  added  in  abrupt  parenthesis 
(John  iv.  6).  Calm  emphasis,  solemn  repetition, 
grave  simplicity,  the  gradual  accumulation  of  truths, 
give  to  the  language  of  Holy  Scripture  a  depth 
and  permanence  of  effect  found  nowhere  else.  It 
is  difficult  to  single  out  isolated  phrases  m  illus 
tration  of  this  general  statement,  since  the  final 
impression  is  more  due  to  the  iteration  of  many 
small  points  than  to  the  striking  power  of  a  few. 
Apart  from  the  whole  context  the  influence  of 
details  is  almost  inappreciable.  Constructions  which 
are  most  distinctly  Hebraic  (irkiiOfouv  ir\i\Qvvu>t 
6a.va.rff  -reKfvrav,  ev5o/ce?i/  If  nvi,  <r&p{  a/uap- 
rias,  &c.)  are  not  those  which  give  the  deepest 
Hebrew  colouring  to  the  N.  T.  diction,  but  rather 
that  pervading  monotony  of  form  which,  though 
correct  in  individual  clauses,  is  wholly  foreign  to  the 
vigour  and  elasticity  of  classical  Greek.  If  the  stu 
dent  will  carefully  analyse  a  few  chapters  of  St.  John, 
in  whom  the  Hebrew  spirit  is  most  constant  and 
marked,  inquiring  at  each  step  how  a  classical 
writer  would  have  avoided  repetition  by  the  use  of 
pronouns  and  particles,  how  he  would  have  indi 
cated  dependence  by  the  use  of  absolute  cases  and 
the  optative,  how  he  would  have  united  the  whole 
by  establishing  a  clear  relation  between  the  parts, 
he  will  gain  a  true  measure  of  the  Hebraic  style 
more  or  less  pervading  the  whole  N.  T.  which 
cannot  be  obtained  from  a  mere  catalogue  of 
phrases.  The  character  of  the  style  lies  in  its 
total  effect  and  not  in  separable  elements:  it  is 
seen  in  the  spirit  which  informs  the  entire  text  far 
more  vividly  than  in  the  separate  members  (comp. 
Introduction  to  the  Gospels,  pp.  241-252). 

(3)  The  purely  Christian  element  in  the  N.  T. 
requires  the  most  careful  handling.  Words  and 
phrases  already  partially  current  were  transfigured 
by  embodying  new  truths  and  for  ever  consecrated 
to  their  service.  To  trace  the  history  of  these  is  a 
delicate  question  of  lexicography  which  has  not 
yet  been  thoroughly  examined.  There  is  a  danger 
of  confounding  the  apostolic  usage  on  the  one  side 
with  earlier  Jewish  usage,  and  on  the  other  with 
later  ecclesiastical  terminology.  The  steps  by  which 
the  one  served  as  a  preparation  for  the  apostolic 
sense  and  the  latter  naturally  grew  out  of  it  re 
quire  to  be  diligently  observed.  Even  within  the 
range  of  the  N.  T.  itself  it  is  possible  to  notice 
various  phases  of  fundamental  ideas  and  a  consequent 
modification  of  terms.  Language  and  thought  are 
both  living  powers,  mutually  dependent  and  illus 
trative.  Examples  of  words  which  show  this  pro 
gressive  history  are  abundant  and  full  of  instruc- 
ti'"!.  Among  others  may  be  quoted,  iriffTis, 
ir«TTO»,  *"Vrf6fiv  efs  riva;  $lica.ios,  5iicai6a>; 
Syios,  aytdfa;  KoAerp,  K\rjffts,  K\ijr6s,  IK\€K- 
'i  fva,yye\ioi>,  fiiay- 


NEW  TESTAMENT 


533 


os,  SIO.KOVOS',  liprov  K\d<rai, 


os,  fftartjpia,  a<S)£tiv\  \VTpovff0ai,  Kara\- 
\dfffffiv.  Nor  is  it  too  much  to  say  that  in  the 
history  of  these  and  such  like  words  lies  the  his 
tory  of  Christianity.  The  perfect  truth  of  the 
apostolic  phraseology,  when  examined  by  this  most 
rigorous  criticism,  contains  the  fulfilment  of  earlier 
anticipations  and  the  genn  of  later  growth. 
9.  For  the  language  of  the  N.  T.  calls  for  the 


exercise  of  the  most  rigorous  criticism.  The  com 
plexity  of  the  element*  which  it  involves  makes  the 
nquiry  wider  and  deeper,  but  does  not  set  it  aside. 
The  overwhelming  importance,  the  manifold  expres 
sion,  the  gradual  development  of  the  message  which 
t  conveys,  call  for  more  intense  devotion  in  the  use 
)f  every  faculty  trained  in  other  schools,  but  do 
not  suppress  inquiry.  The  gospel  is  for  the  whole 
nature  of  man,  and  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  reason 
as  well  as  the  spirit.  Words  and  idioms  admit  of 
nvestigation  in  all  stages  of  a  language.  Decay 
tself  is  subject  to  law.  A  mixed  and  degenerate 
dialect  is  not  less  the  living  exponent  of  definite 
.nought,  than  the  most  pure  and  vigorous.  Rude 
and  unlettered  men  may  have  characteristic  modes 
f  thought  and  speech,  but  even  (naturally  speaking) 
;here  is  no  reason  to  expect  that  they  will  be  less 
exact  than  others  in  using  their  own  idiom.  The 
iteral  sense  of  the  apostolic  writings  must  be 
gained  in  the  same  way  as  the  literal  sense  of  any 
>ther  writings,  by  the  fullest  use  of  every  appliance 
if  scholarship,  and  the  most  complete  confidence  in 
;he  necessary  and  absolute  connexion  of  words  and 
;houghts.  No  variation  of  phrase,  no  peculiarity 
of  idiom,  no  change  of  tense,  no  change  of  order, 
can  be  neglected.  The  truth  lies  in  the  whole 
expression,  and  no  one  can  presume  to  set  aside  any 
Dart  as  trivial  or  indifferent. 

10.  The  importance  of  investigating  most  pa 
tently  and  most  faithfully  the  literal  meaning  of 
;he  sacred  text  must  be  felt  with  tenfold  force, 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  literal  sense  is  the 
outward  embodiment  of  a  spiritual  sense,  which  lies 
Beneath  and  quickens  every  part  of  Holy  Scripture 
"OLD  TESTAMENT].  Something  of  the  same  kind 
)f  double  sense  is  found  in  the  greatest  works  of 
luman  genius,  in  the  Orestea  for  example,  or 
Hamlet ;  and  the  obscurity  which  hangs  over  the 
deepest  utterances  of  a  dramatist  may  teach  humility 
to  those  who  complain  of  the  darkness  of  a  prophet. 
The  special  circumstances  of  the  several  writers, 
their  individual  characteristics  reflected  in  their 
books,  the  slightest  details  which  add  distinctness 
or  emphasis  to  a  statement,  are  thus  charged  with  a 
divine  force.  A  spiritual  harmony  rises  out  of  an 
accurate  interpretation.  And  exactly  in  proportion 
as  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the  Bible  is  felt  to  be 
truly  its  primary  meaning,  will  the  importance  of 
a  sound  criticism  of  the  text  be  mvenized  as  ihe 
one  necessary  and  sufficient  foundation  ci  tne  noble 
superstructure  of  higher  truth  which  is  afterwards 
found  to  rest  upon  it.  Faith  in  words  is  the 
beginning,  faith  in  the  WORD  is  the  completion  of 
Biblical  interpretation.  Impatience  may  destroy 
the  one  and  check  the  other ;  but  the  true  student 
will  find  the  simple  text  of  Holy  Scripture  evei 
pregnant  with  lessons  for  the  present  and  promises 
for  ages  to  come.  The  literal  meaning  is  one  and 
fixed :  the  spiritual  meaning  is  infinite  and  multi 
form.  The  unity  of  the  literal  meaning  is  not 
disturbed  by  the  variety  of  the  inherent  spiritual 
applications.  Truth  is  essentially  infinite.  There 
is  thus  one  sense  to  the  words,  but  countless  rela 
tions.  There  is  an  absolute  fitness  in  the  parables 
and  figures  of  Scripture,  and  hence  an  abiding 
pertinence.  Tne  spiritual  meaning  is,  so  to  speak, 
the  life  of  the  whole,  living  on  with  unchanging 
power  through  every  change  of  race  and  age.  To 
this  we  can  approach  only  (on  the  human  side)  by 
unwavering  trust  in  the  ordinary  laws  of  scholar* 
ship,  which  finds  in  Scripture  its  finil  consecra 
ticn. 


534 


NEW  YEAR 


NICANOR 

ahaz),  a  deity  of  the  Avites,  intrcduccd  by  them 
into  Samaria  in  the  time  of  ShalmancxT  ('2  K. 
xvii.  31).  There  is  no  certain  information  a;  to 
the  character  of  the  deity,  or  the  form  of  Mie  idol 
so  named.  The  Rabbins  derived  the  name  from  a 
Hebrew  root  ndbach  (!"Q3),  "  to  bark,"  and  hence 
assigned  to  it  the  figure  of  a  dog,  or  a  dog-headeJ 
man.  There  is  no  a  priori  improbability  in  this ;  the 
Egyptians  worshipped  the  dog  (Plut.  DC  fs.  44),  and 
according  to  the  opinion  current  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  they  represented  Anubis  as  a  dog- 
headed  man,  though  Wilkinson  (Anc.  Egypt,  i.  440; 
Second  Series)  asserts  that  this  was  a  mistake,  the 
head  being  in  reality  that  of  a  jackal.  Some  indi 
cations  of  the  worship  of  the  dog  have  been  found  in 
Syria,  a  colossal  figure  of  a  dog  having  formerly 
existed  between  Berytus  and  Tripolis  (Winer,  Realw. 
s.  c.).  It  is  still  more  to  the  point  to  observe  that 
on  one  of  the  slabs  found  at  Khorsabad  and  repre 
sented  by  Botta  (pi.  141),  we  have  the  front  of  a 
temple  depicted  with  an  animal  near  the  entrance, 
which  can  be  nothing  else  than  a  bitch  suckling  a 
puppy,  the  head  of  the  animal  having,  however, 
disappeared.  The  worship  of  idols  representing  the 
human  body  surmounted  by  the  head  of  an  animal 
(as  in  the  well-known  case  of  Nisroch)  was  com 
mon  among  the  Assyrians.  According  to  anothei 
equally  unsatisfactory  theory,  Nibhaz  is  identified 
with  the  god  of  the  nether  world  of  the  Sabian 
worship  (Gesen.  Thesaur.  p.  842).  [W.  L.  B.] 
NIB'SHAN  (with  the  definite  article,  "  JB^Sn : 
No^A-dCwy;  Alex.  Nfftffaf :  Nebsan).  One  of  the 
six  cities  of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  62)  which  were  ir 
the  district  of  the  Midbar  (A.  V.  "  wilderness"), 
which  probably  in  this  one  case  only  designates  th« 
depressed  region  on  the  immediate  shore  of  the  Dead 
Sea,  usually  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  called  the 
Arabah.  [Vol.  i.  11566.]  Under  the  name  of 
Nempsan  or  Nebsan  it  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon,  but  with  no  at 
tempt  to  fix  its  position.  Nor  does  any  subsequent 
traveller  appear  to  have  either  sought  for  or  dis 
covered  any  traces  of  the  name.  [G.]  , 
NICA'NOR  (Niicdi'up:  Nicanor),  the  son  of 
Patroclus  (2  Mace.  viii.  9),  a  general  who  was  en 
gaged  in  the  Jewish  wars  under  Antiochus  Kpiphanes 
and  Demetrius  I.  He  took  part  in  the  first  expedition 
of  Lysias,  B.C.  166  ( 1  Mace.  iii.  38),  and  was  defeated 
with  his  fellow-commander  at  Emmatis  (1  Mace, 
iv. ;  cf.  2  Mace.  viii.  9  ff.).  After  the  death  of 
Antiochus  Eupator  and  Lysias,  he  stood  high  ir 
the  favour  of  Demetrius  (1  Mace.  vii.  26),  who 
appointed  him  governor  of  Judaea  (2  Mace.  xiv. 
12),  a  command  which  he  readily  undertook  as  one 
"who  bare  deadly  hate  unto  Israel"  (1  Mace.  vii. 
26).  At  first  he  seems  to  have  endeavoured  to  win 
the  confidence  of  Judas,  but  when  his  treacherous 
designs  were  discovered  he  had  recourse  to  violence. 
A  battle  took  place  at  Capharsalama,  which  wao 
indecisive  in  its  results ;  but  shortly  after  Judas 
met  him  at  Adasa  (B.C.  161),  and  he  fell  "  fiv^t  in 
the  battle."  A  general  rout  followed,  and  the  1 3th 
of  Adar,  on  which  the  engagement  took  place,  ••  the 
day  before  Mardocheus"  day,"  was  ordained  to  be 
kept  for  ever  as  a  festival  (I  Mr.cc.  vii.  49  ;  2  Maco 
xv.  36). 

'  The  wonl  netsib,  identical  with  the  above  name,  Is    Philistine  place.    Bat  the  application  of  the  term  to  tb» 
several  times  employed  for  a  garrison  or  an  officer  of  the     Philistines,  though  frequent,  is  not  exclusive. 
Philistines  (see  1  Sam.  x.  5;  xiii.  :!,  •!  ;  1  C'hr.  :xi.  16).  .      *  If  originally  :\  Hebrew  name,  prohahly  fron-  tiit  saint 
lids  suggests  the  possibility  of  Nczih  having  been  a  !  root  as  Bashan -a  sandy  soil 


For  the  study  of  the  language  of  the  N.  T.,  Tisci-  j 
sndorfs  7th  edition  (1859),  Grinfield's  Editio 
Hellenistica  (with  the  Scholia,  1843-8),  Bruder's 
Concordance  (1842)  and  Winer's  Grammatik 
'6th  edition,  1853,  t. unstated  by  Masson,  Edinb. 
1859),  are  indispensable.  To  these  may  be  added 
lYommius'  Concordantius  .  .  .  LXX  interpretum, 
1718,  for  the  usage  of  the  LXX,  and  Suicer's 
Thesaurus,  1682,  for  the  later  history  of  some 
words.  The  lexicons  of  Schleusner  to  the  LXX. 
(1820-1),  and  N.T.  (1819)  contain  a  large  mass  of 
materials,  but  are  most  uncritical.  Those  of  Wahl 
(N.T.  1822;  Apocrypha,  1853)  are  much  better 
:n  point  of  accuracy  and  scholarship.  On  questions 
of  dialect  and  grammar  there  are  important  collec 
tions  in  Sturz,  De  Dialecto  Maced.  et  Alex.  (1786) ; 
Thiersch,  De  Pent.vers.  Alex.  (1841);  Lobeck's 
Phrynichw  (1820),  Paralipomena  Gr.  Gr.  (1837), 
Pathol.  Serm.  Gr.  Proleijg.  (1843),  Pathol.  Serm. 
Gr.  Elem.  (1846).  The  Indices  of  Jacobson  to 
the  Patres  Apostolici  (1840)  are  very  complete  and 
useful.  The  parallels  gathered  by  Ott  and  Krebs 
from  Josephus,  and  by  Loesner  and  Kiihn  from 
Philo  have  been  fully  used  by  most  recent  commen 
tators.  Further  bibliographical  references  are  given 
by  Winer,  Gramm.  pp.  1-38 ;  Reuss,  Gcsch.  d. 
Heil.  Schrift,  pp.  28-37  ;  Grinfield's  N.  T.  Editio 
Hellenistica,  Praef..  xi.,  xii.  [B.  F.  W.] 

NEW  YEAR.  [TRUMPETS,  FEAST  OF.] 
NEZI'AH  (IVy3:  Nwrfli*  ;  Alex.  Neflte  in 
Ezr. ;  titffid  in  Neh. :  Nasia).  The  descendants  of 
Neziah  were  among  the  Nethinim  who  returned 
with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  54 ;  Neh.  vii.  56).  The 
name  appears  as  NASITH  in  1  Esdr.  v.  32. 

NE'ZIB  (3*¥3  :  Na<refj3  ;  Alex.  Ne<n0:  Nesib\ 
a  city  of  Judah  (josh.  xv.  43  only),  in  the  district 
of  the  Shefelah  or  Lowland,  one  of  the  same  group 
with  Keilah  and  Mareshah.  To  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  it  was  evidently  known.  They  place  it  on 
the  road  between  Eleutheropolis  and  Hebron,  7,  or 
9  v'Euseb.),  miles  from  the  former,  and  there  it 
still  stands  under  the  almost  identical  name  of  Beit 
Nusib,  or  Chirbeh  Nasib,  2 J  hours  from  Beit  Jibrin, 
on  a  rising  ground  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Wady 
cs-S&r,  and  with  Keilah  and  Mareshah  within  easy 
distance.  It  has  been  visited  by  Dr.  Ilobinson  (ii. 
220,  1)  and  Tobler  (Site  Wanderung,  150).  The 
former  mentions  the  remains  of  ancient  buildings, 
especially  one  of  apparently  remote  age,  120  feet 
long  by  30  broad.  This,  however — with  the  curious 
discrepancy  which  is  so  remarkable  in  Eastern 
explorers — is  denied  by  the  later  traveller,  who 
states  that  "  but  for  the  ancient  name  no  one  would 
suspect  this  of  being  an  ancient  site." 

Nezib*  adds  another  to  the  number  of  places 
which,  though  enumerated  as  in  the  Lowland,  have 
been  found  in  the  mountains.  [JiPHTAH ;  KEILAH.] 

[G.] 

NIBHAZ  (Tn?3,  and  in  some  MSS.  |rO3  and 
tn,3J:  N«0x<£s  or  Nona's ;  for  which  there  is 
substituted  in  some  copies  an  entirely  different 
name,  'A.0aa(fp,  Na0oaff'p»  or  'E/3AaC*'p,  the  latter 
being  probably  the  more  correct,  answering  to  the 
Hebrew  -|¥jr:>3N,  "  grief  of  the  ruler":  Neb- 


NICODEMUS 

There  are  some  discrepancies  between  the  narra 
tives  in  the  two  books  of  Maccabees  as  to  Nicanor. 
In  1  Mace,  he  is  represented  as  acting  with  deli 
berate  treachery :  in  2  Mace,  he  is  said  to  have  been 
won  over  to  a  sincere  friendship  with  Judas,  which 
was  only  interrupted  by  the  intrigues  of  Alcimus, 
who  induced  Demetrius  to  repeat  his  orders  for  the 
rapture  of  the  Jewish  hero  (2  Mace.  xiv.  23  ff.). 
Internal  evidence  is  decidedly  in  favour  of  1  Mace. 
According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  10,  §4),  who  does 
not,  however,  appear  to  have  had  any  other  autho 
rity  than  1  Mace,  before  him,  Judas  was  defeated 
it  Capharsalama ;  and  though  his  account  is  obvi 
ously  inaccurate  (itvayicdtei  rbv  'lovSav  .  .  .  M 
r^if  &Kpai>  Qevytiv),  the  events  which  followed 
(1  Mace.  vii.  33  ff. ;  comp.  2  Mace.  xiv.  33  ff.) 
seem  at  least  to  indicate  that  Judas  gained  no  ad 
vantage.  In  2  Mace,  this  engagement  is  not  no 
ticed,  but  another  is  placed  (2  Mace.  xiv.  17)  before 
the  connexion  of  Nicanor  with  Judas,  while  this 
was  after  it  (1  Mace.  vii.  27  ff.),  in  which  "  Simon 
Judas'  brother "  is  said  to  have  been  "  somewhat 
discomfited." 

2.  One  of  the  first  seven  deacons  (Acts  vi.  5). 
According  to  the  Pseudo-Hippoly  tus  he  was  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples,  and  "  died  at  the  time  of  the  mar 
tyrdom  of  Stephen  "  (p.  953,  ed.  Migne).  [B.  F.  W.] 

NICODE'MUS  (NiireteTj/ios :  Nicodemus),  a 
Pharisee,  a  ruler  of  the  Jews,  and*  teacher  of  Israel 
(John  iii.  1,10),  whose  secret  visit  to  our  Lord  was 
the  occasion  of  the  discourse  recorded  by  St.  John. 
The  name  was  not  uncommon  among  the  Jews 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  3,  §2),  and  was  no  doubt  bor 
rowed  from  the  Greeks.  In  the  Talmud  it  appears 
under  the  form  JIDHpJ,  and  some  would  derive  it 
from  *p3,  innocent,  Q1,  blood  (f.  e.  "  Sceleris 
purus");  Wetstein,  N.  T.  i.  150.  In  the  case  of 
Nicodemus  Ben  Gorion,  the  name  is  derived  by 
R.  Nathan  from  a  miracle  which  he  is  supposed  to 
have  performed  (Otho,  Lex.  Rob.  s.  v.). 

Nicodemus  is  only  mentioned  by  St.  John,  who 
narrates  his  nocturnal  visit  to  Jesus,  and  the  con- 
vefsation  which  then  took  place,  at  which  the 
Evangelist  may  himself  have  been  present.  The 
nigh  station  of  Nicodemus  as  a  member  of  the 
Jewish  Sanhedrim,  and  the  avowed  scorn  under 
which  the  rulers  concealed  their  inward  conviction 
(John  iii.  2)  that  Jesus  was  a  teacher  sent  from 
God,  are  sufficient  to  account  for  the  secrecy  of  the 
interview.  A  constitutional  timidity  is  discernible 
in  the  character  of  the  enquiring  Pharisee,  which 
could  not  be  overcome  by  his  vacillating  desire  to 
befriend  and  acknowledge  One  whom  he  knew  to  be 
a  Prophet,  even  if  he  did  not  at  once  recognise  in 
ftim  the  promised  Messiah.  Thus  the  few  words 
which  he  interposed  against  the  rash  injustice  of 
his  colleagues  are  cautiously  rested  on  a  general 
principle  (John  vii.  50),  and  betray  no  indication 
of  his  faith  in  the  Galilean  whom  his  sect  despised. 
And  even  when  the  power  of  Christ's  love,  mani 
fested  on  the  cross,  had  made  the  most  timid  disciples 
bold,  Nicodemus  does  not  come  forward  with  his 
splendid  gifts  of  affection  until  the  example  had 
been  set  by  one  of  his  own  rank,  and  wealth,  and 
station  in  society  (xix.  39). 

In  these  three  notices  of  Nicodemus  a  noble  can 
dour,  and  a  simple  love  of  truth  shine  out  in  the 
midst  of  hesitation  and  fear  of  man.  We  can  there- 

"  The  article  In  John  iii.  10  (6  Sifidox.)  is  probably  only 
^coeric,  although  Winer  and  I?p.  Middleton  suppose  that 
•t  Imp"  IB  a  rebuke. 


NICOLA1TANS 


535 


I  fore  easily  believe  the  tradition  that  afttr  the 
resurrection  (which  would  supply  the  last  outward 
impulse  necessary  to  confirm  his  faith  and  increase 
his  courage)  he  became  a  professed  disciple  of  Christ, 
and  received  baptism  at  the  hands  of  Peter  ano 
John.  411  the  rest  that  is  recorded  of  him  is  highly 
uncertain.  It  is  said,  however,  that  the  Jews,  in 
revenge  for  his  conversion,  deprived  him  of  his  office, 
beat  him  cruelly,  and  drove  him  rrcin  Jerusalem  ; 
that  Gamaliel,  who  was  his  kinsman,  hospitably 
sheltered  him  until  his  death  in  a  country  house, 
and  finally  gave  him  honourable  burial  near  the 
body  of  Stephen,  where  Gamaliel  himself  was  after 
wards  interred.  Finally,  the  three  bodies  are  said 
to  have  been  discovered  on  Aug.  3,  A.D.  415,  which 
day  was  set  apart  by  the  Romish  Church  in  honour 
of  the  event  (Phot.  Biblicth.  Cod.  171;  Lucian, 
De  S.  Steph.  inventione). 

The  conversation  of  Christ  with  Nicodemus  is 
appointed  as  the  Gospel  for  Trinity  Sunday.  The 
choice  at  first  sight  may  seem  strange.  There  are 
in  that  discourse  no  mysterious  numbers  which  might 
shadow  forth  truths  in  their  simplest  relations  ; 
no  distinct  and  yet  simultaneous  actions  of  the  divine 
persons ;  no  separation  of  divine  attributes.  Yet 
the  instinctb  which  dictated  this  choice  was  a  right 
one.  For  it  is  in  this  conversation  alone  that  we 
see  how  our  Lord  himself  met  the  difficulties  of  a 
thoughtful  man ;  how  he  checked,  without  noticing, 
the  self-assumption  of  a  teacher  ;  how  he  lifted  the 
half-believing  mind  to  the  light  of  nobler  truth. 

If  the  Nicodemus  of  St.  John's  Gospel  be  identical 
with  the  Nicoicmus  Ben  Gorion  of  the  Talmud,  he 
must  have  lived  till  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  which  is 
not  impossible  since  the  term  yepuv,  in  John  iii.  4, 
may  not  be  intended  to  apply  to  Nicodemus  himself 
The  arguments  for  their  identification  are  that  both 
are  mentioned  as  Pharisees,  wealthy,  pious,  and 
members  of  the  Sanhedrim  (Taantth,  f.  19,  &n. 
See  Otho,  Lex.  Sab.  s.  v.) ;  and  that  in  Taanith 
the  original  name  (altered  on  the  occasion  of  a 
miracle  performed  by  Nicodemus  in  order  to  procure 
rain)  is  said  to  have  been  '313,  which  is  also  the 
name  of  one  of  five  Rabbinical  disciples  of  Christ 
mentioned  in  Sanhed.  f.  43,  1  (Otho,  s.  v.  Christvs). 
Finally,  the  family  of  this  Nicodemus  are  said  tc 
have  been  reduced  from  great  wealth  to  the  most 
squalid  and  horrible  poverty,  which  however  may 
as  well  be  accounted  for  by  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  > 
as  by  the  change  of  fortune  resulting  from  an  accept 
ance  of  Christianity. 

On  the  Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  see  Fabricius,  Cod. 
Pseudepigr.  i.  213;  Thilo,  Cod.  Apocr.  i.  478. 
In  some  MSS.  it  is  also  called  '  The  Acts  of 
Pilate.'  It  is  undoubtedly  spurious  (as  the  con 
clusion  of  it  sufficiently  proves),  and  of  very  little 
value.  [F.  W.  F.] 

NICOLA'ITANS  (NtKoXai?ai:  Nicolditae}. 
The  question  how  far  the  sect  that  is  mentioned  by 
this  name  in  Rev.  ii.  6,  1 5,  was  connected  with  the 
Nicolas  of  Acts  vi.  5,  and  the  traditions  that  have 
gathered  round  his  name,  will  be  discussen  below. 
[NICOLAS.]  It  will  here  be  considered  how  far  we 
can  get  at  any  distinct  notion  of  what  the  sect  itsel 
was,  and  in  what  relation  it  stood  to  the  life  of  thd 
Apostolic  age. 

It  has  been  suggested  as  one  step  towards  thir 
result  that  the  name  before  us  was  symbolic  rathei 

t  The  writer  is  Indebted  for  this  remark  to  o  MS.  benaol 
by  Mr  Westcott. 


536 


NICOLAITANS 


than  historical.  The  Greek  NiKoXao?  is,  it  has. 
Deen  siid,  an  approximate  equivulent  to  the  Hebrew 
Balaam,  the  lord  (Vitringa,  deriving  it  from  7J73), 
or,  according  to  another  derivation,  the  devourer  of 
the  people  (so  Hengsteiiberg,  as  from  JP3).m  If 
we  accept  this  explanation  we  have  to  deal  with  one 
sect  instead  of  two — we  are  able  to  compare  with 
what  we  find  in  Rev.  ii.  the  incidental  notices  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  followers  of  Balaam  in 
Jude  and  2  Peter,  and  our  task  is  proportionately 
j\n  easier  one.  It  may  be  urged  indeed  that  this 
theory  rests  upon  a  fake  or  at  least  a  doubtful 
etymology  (Gesenius,  s.  ».  DJP3,  makes  it  =  pere- 
grinus),  and  that  the  message  to  the  Church  of  Per- 
gamos  (Rev.  ii.  14,  15)  appears  to  recognise  "  those 
that  hold  the  doctrine  of  Balaam,"  and  "  those  that 
hold  the  doctrine  of  the  Nicolaitanes,"  as  two  dis 
tinct  bodies.  There  is,  however,  a  sufficient  answer 
to  both  these  objections.  (1)  The  whole  analogy 
of  the  mode  of  teaching  which  lays  stress  on  the 
significance  of  names  would  lead  us  to  look,  not  for 
philological  accuracy,  but  for  a  broad,  strongly- 
marked  paronomasia,  such  as  men  would  recognise 
and  accept.  It  would  be  enough  for  those  who 
were  to  hear  the  message  that  they  should  perceive 
the  meaning  of  the  two  words  to  be  identical.* 
(2)  A  closer  inspection  of  Rev.  ii.  15  would  show 
that  the  ovrus  %Xtl*>  *• r-  x-  imply  tne  resem 
blance  of  the  teaching  of  the  Nicolaitans  with  that 
of  the  historical  Balaam  mentioned  in  the  preceding 
verse,  rather  than  any  kind  of  contrast. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  form  a  clearer  judg 
ment  of  the  characteristics  of  the  sect.  It  comes 
before  us  as  presenting  the  ultimate  phase  of  a  great 
controversy,  which  threatened  at  one  time  to  destroy 
the  unity  of  the  Church,  and  afterwards  to  taint  its 
purity.  The  controversy  itself  was  inevitable  as 
soon  as  the  Gentiles  were  admitted,  in  any  large 
numbers,  into  the  Church  of  Christ.  Were  the 
new  converts  to  be  brought  into  subjection  to  the 
whole  Mosaic  law  ?  Were  they  to  give  up  their 
old  habits  of  life  altogether — to  withdraw  entirely 
from  the  social  gatherings  of  their  friends  and  kins 
men  ?  Was  there  not  the  risk,  if  they  continued  to 
join  in  them,  of  their  eating,  consciously  or  un 
consciously,  of  that  which  had  been  slain  in  the 
sacrifices  of  a  false  worship,  and  of  thus  sharing  in 
the  idolatry  ?  The  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem 
met  the  question  calmly  and  wisely.  The  burden 
of  the  Law  was  not  to  be  imposed  on  the  Gentile 
disciples.  They  were  to  abstain,  among  other  things, 
from  "  meats  offered  to  idols "  and  from  "  fornica 
tion  "  (Acts  xv.  20,  29),  and  this  decree  was  wel 
comed  as  the  great  charter  of  the  Church's  freedom. 
Strange  as  the  close  union  of  the  moral  and  the 
positive  commands  may  seem  to  us,  it  did  not  seem 
so  to  the  synod  at  Jerusalem.  The  two  sins  were 
very  closely  allied,  often  even  in  the  closest  proximity 
of  time  and  place.  The  fathomless  impurity  which 


NICOLAS 

overspread  the  empire  made  the  one  almost  as  in 
separable  as  the  other  from  its  daily  social  life. 

The  messages  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  and  thi 
later  Apostolic  Epistles  (2  Peter  and  Jude)  indicate 
that  the  two  evils  appeared  at  that  jieriod  also  in 
close  alliance.  The  teachers  of  the  Church  branded 
them  with  a  name  which  expressed  their  true  cha 
racter.  The  men  who  did  and  taught  such  things 
were  followers  of  Balaam  (2  Pet.  ii.  15;  Jude  11). 
They,  like  the  false  prophet  of  Pethor,  united  brave 
words  with  evil  deeds.  They  made  their  "  liberty  " 
a  cloak  at  once  for  cowardice  and  licentiousness. 
In  a  time  of  persecution,  when  the  eating  or  not 
eating  of  things  sacrificed  to  idols  was  more  than 
ever  a  crucial  test  of  faithfulness,  they  persuaded 
men  more  than  ever  that  it  was  a  thing  indifferent 
(Rev.  ii.  13,  14).  This  was  bad  enough,  but  there 
was  a  yet  worse  evil.  Mingling  themselves  in  the 
orgies  of  idolatrous  feasts,  they  brought  the  im 
purities  of  those  feasts  into  the  meetings  of  the 
Christian  Church.  There  was  the  most  imminent 
risk  that  its  Agapae  might  become  as  full  of  abomi 
nations  as  the  Bacchanalia  of  Italy  had  been  (2  Pet. 
ii.  12, 13, 18  ;  Jude  7,  8  ;  comp.  Liv.  xxxix.  8-19). 
Their  sins  had  already  brought  scandal  and  dis 
credit  on  the  "  way  of  truth."  And  all  this  was 
done,  it  must  be  remembered,  not  simply  as  an 
indulgence  of  appetite,  but  as  part  of  a  system, 
supported  by  a  "  doctrine,"  accompanied  by  the 
boast  of  a  prophetic  illumination  (2  Pet.  ii.  1). 
The  trance  of  the  son  of  Beor  and  the  sensual  debase 
ment  into  which  he  led  the  Israelites  were  strangely 
reproduced. 

These  were  the  characteristics  of  the  followers  of 
Balaam,  and,  worthless  as  most  of  the  traditions 
.about  Nicolas  may  be,  they  point  to  the  same  dis 
tinctive  evils.  Even  in  the  absence  of  any  teacher 
of  that  name,  it  would  be  natural  enough,  as  has 
been  shown  above,  that  the  Hebrew  name  of  igno 
miny  should  have  its  Greek  equivalent.  If  there 
were  such  a  teacher,  whether  the  proselyte  01 
Antioch  or  another,0  the  application  of  the  name 
to  his  followers  would  be  proportionately  more 
pointed.  It  confirms  the  view  which  has  been 
taken  of  their  chaiacter  to  find  that  stress  is  laid  in 
the  first  instance  on  the  "  deeds"  of  the  Nicolaitans. 
To  hate  those  deeds  is  a  sign  of  life  in  a  Church 
that  otherwise  is  weak  and  faithless  (Rev.  ii.  6). 
To  tolerate  them  is  well  nigh  to  forfeit  the  gloiy 
of  having  been  faithful  under  persecution  (Rev.  ii. 
14,  15).  (Comp.  Neander's  Apostelgesch.  p.  620, 
Gieseler's  Eccl.  Hist,  §  29 ;  Hengstenberg  and 
Alford  on  Rev.  ii.  6 ;  Stier,  Words  of  the  Risen 
Saviour,  x.)  [E.  H.  P.] 

NIC'OLAS  (N«(c<{Aaoj:  Nicolaus),  Acts  vi.  5. 
A  native  of  Antioch,  and  a  proselyte  to  the  Jewish 
faith.  When  the  church  was  still  confined  to  Jeru 
salem  he  became  a  convert ;  and  being  a  man  of 
honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom, 
he  was  chosen  by  the  whole  multitude  of  the  dis>- 


•  Cocceius  (Cogitat,  in  Rev.  ii.  6)  has  the  credit  of  being 
the  first  to  suggest  this  identification  of  the  NicolalUms 
witli  the  followers  of  Balaam.  He  has  been  followed  by 
the  elder  Vitringa  (Dissert,  de  Argum.  Epist.  Petri  poster. 
iu  Base's  Thesaurus,  ii.  987),  Hecgstenberg  (in  loc.),  Stier 
( Words  oftlie  Risen  Lord,  p.  125  Eng.  transl.).  and  others. 
Ligbtfoot  (Ilor.  Heb.,  in  Act.  Apost.  vi.  5)  suggests  another 
and  more  startling  paronomasia.  The  word,  in  his  view, 
wag  chosen,  as  identical  in  souud  with  fcwIS'J,  "  let  us 
e»t."  and  as  thus  marking  out  the  special  cvAracterigtic 
of  ti-vteoi. 


b  Vitringa  (I.  c.)  finds  another  instance  of  this  Indirect 
expression  of  feeling  iu  the  peculiar  form,  "  Balaam  the 
son  of  Bosor,"  In  2  Pet.  ii.  15.  The  substitution  of  the 
latter  name  for  the  Beiip  of  the  LXX.  originated,  according 
to  his  conjecture,  in  the  wish  U^point  to  his  antitype  iu 
the  Christian  Church  as  a  true  "IK'S'IS,  afdius  carnis. 

«  It  is  noticeable  (though  the  documenss  themselves  are 
not  of  much  weight  as  evidence)  that  in  two  instances  the 
Nicolaitans  are  said  to  be  "  falsely  so  called  "  (^cv&uvvjiafc 
Ignat.  ad  Trail,  xi.  Const  Afoit.  vi.  8) 


NICOLAS 

rjplfs  to  be  0112  of  the  first  seven  deacons,  and  he 
OTIS  ordained  by  the  apostles,  A.D.  33. 

A  sect  of  Nitolaitans  is  mentioned  in  Rev.  ii.  6, 
15 ;  and  it  has  been  questioned  whether  this  Nicolas 
was  connected  with  them,  and  if  so,  how  closely. 

The  Nieokiitans  themselves,  at  least  as  early  as 
the  time  of  Irenaeus  (Contr.   ffaer.  i.  26,   §3), 
claimed  him  as  their  founder.     Epiphamus,  an  in 
accurate  writer,  relates  (Adv.  ffaer.  i.  2,  §25,  p. 
76)  some  details  of  the  life  of  Nicolas  the  deacon, 
and  describes  him   as  gradually  sinking  into  the 
grossest  impurity,  and  becoming  the  originator  of 
the  Nicolaitans  and  other  immoral  sects.     Stephen 
Gobar  (Photii  Biblioth.  §232,  p.  291,  ed.  1824) 
states — and  the   statement  is  corroborated  by  the 
recently  discovered  Philosophumena,  bk.  vii.  §36 — 
that  Hippolytus  agreed  with  Epiphanius  in  his  un 
favourable  view  of  Nicolas.     The  same  account  is 
believed,  at  least  to  some  extent  by  Jerome  (Ep. 
147,  t.  i.  p.   1082,  ed.  Vallars.  &c.)  and  other 
writers  in  the  4th  century.     But  it  is  irreconcile- 
able  with  the  traditionary  account  of  the  character 
of  Nicolas,  given  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom. 
iii.  4,  p.  187,  Sylb.  and  apud  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  29  ; 
see  also  Hammond,  Annot.  on  Rev.  ii.  4),  an  earlier 
and  more  discriminating  writer  than  Epiphanius. 
He  states  that  Nicolas  led  a  chaste  life  and  brought 
up  his  children  in  purity,  that  on  a  certain  occasion 
having  been  sharply  reproved  by  the  apostles  as  a 
jealous  husband,  he  repelled  the  charge  by  offering 
to  allow  his  wife  to  become  the  wife  of  any  other 
person,  and  that  he  was  in  the  habit  of  repeating  a 
saying  which  is  ascribed  to  the  apostle  Matthias 
alSO) — that  it  is  our  duty  to  fight  against  the  flesh 
and  to  abuse  (irapaxpyo-Bai)  it.     His  words  were 
perversely  interpreted  by  the  Nicolaitans  as  an  au 
thority   for  their    immoral   practices.     Theodoret 
(Haeret.  Fab.  iii.  1),  in  his  account  of  the  sect 
repeats  the  foregoing  statement  of  Clement ;  and 
charges  the  Nicolaitans  with  false  dealing  in  bor 
rowing  the  name  of  the  deacon.     Ignatius,"  who 
was  contemporary  with  Nicolas,  is  said  by  Stephen 
Gobar  to  have  given  the  same  account  as  Clement, 
Eusebius,  and    Theodoret,  touching    the  personal 
character  of  Nicolas.     Among  modern  critics,  Co- 
telerius  in  a  note  on   Constit,  Apost.  vi.  8,  after 
reciting  the  various  authorities,  seems  to  lean  to 
wards  the  favourable  view  of  the  character  of  Nico 
las.     Professor  Burton  (Lectures  on  Ecclesiastical 
History,  Lect.  xti.  p.  364,  ed.  1833)  is  of  opinion 
that  the  origin  of  the  term  Nicolaitans  is  uncertain ; 
and  that,   "  though  Nicolas  the  deacon  has  been 
mentioned  as  their    founder,  the    evidence  is  ex 
tremely  slight  which  would  convict   that  person 
himself  of  any  immoralities."     Tillemont  (H.  E 
ii.  47),  possibly   influenced   by   the   fact   that  no 
honour  is  paid  to  the  memory  of  Nicolas  by  any 
branch  of  the  Church,  allows  perhaps  too  much 
weight  to  the  testimony  against  him ;  rejects  pe 
remptorily  Cassian's  statement — to  which  Neander 
(Planting  of  the  Church,  bk.  v.  p.  390,  ed.  Bonn 
gives  his  adhesion — that  some  other  Nicolas  wa 
the  founder  of  the  sect ;  and  concludes  that  if  no 
the  actual  founder,  he  was  so  unfortunate  as  to  give 
occasion  to  the  formation  of  the  sect,  by  his  indis 
creet   speaking.     Grotius'  view  as  given  in  a  not* 
en  Rav.  ii.  6,  is  substantially  the  same  as  that  o 
Tillemont. 

The  name  Balaam  is  perhaps   (but  see  Gesen 


NICOPOLIS 


537 


•  Usher  conjectures  that  this  reference  is  to  the  Inter 
iwlated  copy  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Iranians,  ch.  xi.  (De 


s  210)  capiole  of  being  interpreted  as  a  Hebrew 
equivalent  of  the  Greek  Nicolas.  Some  commentator! 
hink  that  this  is  alluded  to  oy  St.  John  in  Itev.  ii. 
4;    and  C.  Vitringa  (06s.  Sacr.  iv.  9)    argues 
orcibly  in  support  of  this  opinion.        [W.  T.  B.I 

NICOP'OLIS  (NiKoVoAts :  Nicopolis)  is  men- 
ioned  in  Tit.  iii.  12,  as  the  place  where,  at  the  time 
f  writing  the  Epistle,  St.  Paul  was  intending  to  pass 
he  coming  winter,  and  where  he  wished  Titus  to 
meet  him.  Whether  either  or  both  of  these  purposes 
were  accomplished  we  cannot  tell.  Titus  was  at 
his  time  in  Crete  (Tit.  i.  5).  The  subscription  to 
he  Epistle  assumes  that  the  Apostle  was  at  Nico- 
x>lis  when  he  wrote ;  but  we  cannot  conclude  this 
rom  the  form  of  expression.  We  should  rather 
nfer  that  he  was  elsewhere,  possibly  at  Ephesus  or 
Corinth.  He  urges  that  no  time  should  be  lost 
ffirot/Saffov  fade'iv) ;  hence  we  conclude  that  winter 
ivas  near. 

Nothing  is  to  be  found  in  the  Epistle  itself  to  de- 
ermine  which  Nicopolis  is  here  intended.  There 
were  cities  of  this  name  in  Asia,  Africa,  and  Europe, 
f  we  were  to  include  all  the  theories  which  have 
)een  respectably  supported,  we  should  be  obliged  to 
write  at  least  three  articles.  One  Nicopolis  was  in 
Thrace,  near  the  borders  of  Macedonia.  The  sub 
scription  (which,  however,  is  of  no  authority)  fixes 
on  this  place,  calling  it  the  Macedonian  Nicopolis : 
and  such  is  the  view  of  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret. 
De  Wette's  objection  to  this  opinion  (Pastoral 
Brief e,  p.  2 1 ) ,  that  the  place  did  not  exist  till  Trajan's 
reign,  appears  to  be  a  mistake.  Another  Nicopolis 
was  in  Cilicia ;  and  Schrader  (Der  Apostel  Paulus, 
.  pp.  115-119)  pronounces  for  this ;  but  this  opinion 
is  connected  with  a  peculiar  theory  regarding  the 
Apostle's  journeys.  We  have  little  doubt  that  Je 
rome's  view  is  correct,  and  that  the  Pauline  Nico 
polis  was  the  celebrated  city  of  Epirus  ("scribit 
Apostolus  de  Nicopoli,  quae  in  Actiaco  littore  sita," 
Hieron.  Prooem.  ix.  195).  For  arrangements  of  St. 
Paul's  journeys,  which  will  harmonise  with  this, 
and  with  the  other  facts  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
see  Birks,  Horae  Apostolicae,  pp.  296-304 ;  and 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Epp.  of  St.  Paul 
(2nd  ed.),  ii.  564-573.  It  is  very  possible,  as 
is  observed  there,  that  St.  Paul  was  arrested 
at  Nicopolis  and  taken  thence  to  Rome  for  his  final 
trial. 

This  city  (the  "  City  of  Victory  ")  was  built  by 
Augustus  in  memory  of  the  battle  of  Actium,  and 
on  the  ground  which  his  army  occupied  before  the 
engagement.  It  is  a  curious  and  interesting  cir 
cumstance,  when  we  look  at  the  matter  from  a 
Biblical  point  of  view,  that  many  of  the  handsomest 
parts  of  the  town  were  built  by  Herod  the  Great 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  5,  §3).  It  is  likely  enough 
that  many  Jews  lived  there.  Moreover,  it  was 
conveniently  situated  for  apostolic  journeys  in  the 
eastern  parts  of  Achaia  and  Macedonia,  and  also  to 
the  northwards,  where  churches  perhaps  were 
founded.  St.  Paul  had  long  before  preached  the 
Gospel,  at  least  on  the  confines  of  Illyricum  (Rom. 
xv.  19),  and  so«n  after  the  very  period  under  con 
sideration  Titus  himself  was  sent  on  a  mission  to 
Dalmatia  (2  Tim.  iv.  10). 

Nicopolis  was  on  a  peninsula  to  the  west  of  the 
bay  of  Actium,  in  a  low  and  unhealthy  situation, 
and  it  is  now  a  very  desolate  place.  The  remains 
have  been  often  described.  We  may  refer  to  Leake's 

Ignatii  EpisMis  $6.  apud  Cottier.  Pair.  Apost.  ii.  196. 
ed.  1724.) 


538 


NIGER 


Northern  Greece,  i.  178,  and  in.  491;  Bowen  c 
Atlujs  and  Epirus,  211;  Wolfe  in  Joiim.  of  R 
G3<jg.  Soc.  iii.  92  ;  Meri  vale's  Rome,  iii.  327,  328 
Wordsworth's  Greece,  2'29-232.  In  tb«  last  men 
tioned  work,  and  in  the  Diet,  of  Greek  and  Roman 
(feog.  maps  of  the  place  will  be  found.  [J.  S.  H.] 

NTGER  (Wiytp  :  Niger)  is  the  additional  o: 
distinctive  name  given  to  the  Symeon  (Sv(i.«&v),  who 
was  one  of  the  teachers  and  prophets  in  the  Church 
at  Antioch  (Acts  ziii.  1).  He  is  not  known  except  in 
that  passage.  The  name  was  a  common  one  among 
the  Romans;  and  the  conjecture  that  he  was  an 
African  proselyte,  and  was  called  Niger  on  accounl 
of  his  complexion,  is  unnecessary  as  well  as  destitute 
otherwise  of  any  support.  His  name,  Symeon,  shows 
that  he  was  a  Jew  by  birth  ;  and  as  in  other  simi 
lar  cases  (e.g.  Saul,  Paul  —  Silas,  Silvan  us)  he  may 
be  supposed  to  have  taken  the  other  name  as  more 
convenient  in  his  intercourse  with  foreigners.  He 
is  mentioned  second  among  the  five  who  officiated 
at  Antioch,  and  perhaps  we  may  infer  that  he  had 
some  pre-eminence  among  them  in  point  of  activity 
and  influence.  It  is  impossible  to  decide  (though 
Meyer  makes  the  attempt)  who  of  the  number 
were  prophets  (irpo^)  TJTO«),  and  who  were  teachers 
(SiSdffKa\oi).  [H.  B.  H.] 

NIGHT.  The  period  of  darkness,  from  sunset 
to  sunrise,  including  the  morning  and  evening  twi 
light,  was  known  to  the  Hebrews  by  the  term 
7V,  layil,  or  !1/>y,  laytlah.  It  is  opposed  to 
"  day,"  the  period  of  light  (Gen.  i.  5).  Following 
the  Oriental  sunset  is  the  brief  evening  twilight 
(P|K>3,  nesheph,  Job  xxiv.  15,  rendered  "night"  in 
Is.  v.  11,  xxi.  4,  lix.  10),  when  the  stars  appeared 
Job  iii.  9).  This  is  also  called  "  evening"  (3] 
''ereb,  Prov.  vii.  9,  rendered  "  night"  in  Gen.  xlix. 
27,  Job  vii.  4),  but  the  term  which  especially  de 
notes  the  evening  twilight  is  HuPJJ,  aldtdh  (Gen. 

xv.  17,  A.  V.  "  dark;"  Ez.  xii/6,7,  12).  'Ereb 
also  denotes  the  time  just  before  sunset  (Deut.  xxiii. 
1  1  ;  Josh.  viii.  29),  when  the  women  went  to  draw 
water  (Gen.  xxiv.  11),  and  the  decline  of  the  day 
is  called  "the  turning  of  evening"  (S^J?  flfaS 
pgnoth  'ereb,  Gen.  xxiv.  63),  the  time  of  prayer. 
This  period  of  the  day  must  also  be  that  which  is 
described  as  "  night  "  when  Boaz  winnowed  his 
barley  in  the  evening  breeze  (Ruth  iii.  2),  the  cool 
of  the  day  (Gen.  iii.  8),  when  the  shadows  begin 
to  fall  (Jer.  vi.  4),  and  the  wolves  prowl  about 
(Hab.  i.  8  ;  Zeph.  iii.  3).  The  time  of  midnight 
¥[1,  cA#s»  hallaySlah,  Ruth  iii.  7,  and 


n,  chStsoth  hallayem,  Ex.  xi.  4)  or 
greatest  darkness  is  called  in  Prov.  vii.  9  "  the 
oupil  of  night  "  (fbb  flt$"N,  tsMn  layildh,  A.  V. 
"  black  night  ").  The  period  between  midnight 
and  the  morning  twilight  was  generally  selected  for 
attacking  an  enemy  by  surprise  (Judg.  vii.  19). 
The  morning  twilight  is  denoted  by  the  same  term, 
nes/ieph,  as  the  »-vening  twilight,  and  is  unmistake- 
ably  intended  in  Sam.  xxxi.  12;  Job  vii.  4;  Ps. 
cxix.  147  ;  possibly  also  in  Is.  v.  11.  With  sunrise 


suilpslt,  unguibue  vulueravlt /ac?'«m.    See 


NIGHT-HAWK 

the  night  ended.      In  one  passage,  J(b  nvi    10 
"ijBTI,  chdfhec,  "  darkness"  is  rendered  "  night  '  m 

the  A.  V.,  but  is  correctly  given  in  the  margin. 

For  the  artificial  divisions  of  the  night  see  the 
articles  DAY  and  WATCHES.  [W.  A.  W.] 


NIGHT-HAWK  (DOHn,  tachmds  : 
noctud).  Bochart  (Hieroz.  i:.  830)  has  endeavoured 
to  prove  that  the  Hebrew  word,  which  occurs 
only  (Lev.  xi.  16;  Deut.  xir.  15)  amongst  thi 
list  of  unclean  birds,  denotes  the  "male  ostrich,'' 
the  preceding  term,  bath-ya&n&h  *  (owl,  A.  V.) 
signifying  the  female  bird.  The  etymology  of  the 
word  points  to  some  bird  of  prey,  though  there  is 
great  uncertainty  as  to  the  particular  species  indi 
cated.  The  LXX.,  Vulg.,  and  perhaps  Onkelos, 
understand  some  kind  of  "  owl  ;"  most  of  the  Jewish 
doctors  indefinitely  render  the  word  "  a  rapacious 
bird:"  Gesenius  (Thes.  s.  r.)  and  Rosenmiiller 
(Schol.  ad  Lev.  xi.  16)  follow  Bochart.  Bochart's 
explanation  is  grounded  on  an  overstiained  interpre 
tation  of  the  etymology  of  the  verb  chamas,  the 
root  of  tachmds  ;  he  restricts  the  meaning  of  the 
root  to  the  idea  of  acting  "  unjustly  "  or  "  deceit 
fully,"  and  thus  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
"unjust  bird"  is  the  male  ostrich  [OSTRICH]. 
Without  stopping  to  consider  the  etymology  of  the 
word  further  than  to  refer  the  reader  to  Gesenius, 
who  gives  as  the  first  meaning  of  ch&mas  "  he 
acted  violently,"  and  to  the  Arabic  chamash,  "  to 
wound  with  claws,"  b  it  is  not  at  all  probable  that 
Moses  should  have  specified  both  the  male  and 
female  ostrich  in  a  list  which  was  no  doubt  in 
tended  to  be  as  comprehensive  as  possible.  The 
not  unfrequent  occurrence  of  the  expression  "  after 
their  kind  "  is  an  argument  in  favour  of  this  asser 
tion.  Michaelis  believes  some  kind  of  swallow 
(ffirundo)  is  intended  :  the  word  used  by  the 
Targum  of  Jonathan  is  by  Kitto  (Pict.  Sib.  Lev. 
xi.  16)  and  byOedmann  (  Vermisch.  Samm.  i.  p.  3, 
c.  iv.)  referred  to  the  swallow,  though  the  last- 
named  authority  says,  "  it  is  uncertain,  however, 
what  Jonathan  really  meant."  Buxtorf  (Lex. 
Rabbin,  s.  v.  KTVQtOn.)  translates  the  word  used 


by  Jonathan,  "  a  name  of  a  rapacious  bird,  harpyja." 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  claim  the  swallow  can 
have  to  represent  the  tachmds,  neither  is  it  at  all 
probable  that  so  small  a  bird  should  have  been 
noticed  in  the  Levitical  law.  Ths  rendering  of  th; 
A.  V.  rests  on  no  authority,  though  from  the  alwu:  v 
properties  which,  from  the  time  of  Aristotle,  have 
been  ascribed  to  the  night-hawk  or  goat-sucker, 
and  the  superstitions  connected  with  this  bird,  its 
claim  is  not  so  entirely  destitute  of  every  kind  o{ 
evidence. 

As  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  are  agreed  that  tachmds 

denotes  some  kind  of  owl,  we  believe  it  is  safer  to 

follow  these  versions  than  modern  commentators. 

The  Greek  y\av£  is  used  by  Aristotle  for  some 

common  species  of  owl,  in  all  probability  for  the 

Strix  flammca  (white  owl)  or  the  Syrnium  stridnla 

tawny   owl)  ;  e    the    Veneto-Greek    reads    VVKTI- 

6pa£,  a  synonym  of  &TOS,  Aristot..  ».  e.  the  Otus 

•uigaris,  Flem.  (long-eared  owl)  :  this  is  the  species 

which  Oedmann  (see  above)  identifies  with  tachmds. 


Not  to  be  confounded  with  the  Nycticarax  ol 
modern  ornithology,  which  is  «  genus  of  Ardtidat 
(herons). 


NILE 

14  Thfi  name."  he  says,  "indicates  a  bird  which 
Rxercises  power,  but  the  force  of  the  power  is  in 
the  Arabic  root  chamash,  '  to  tear  a  face  with 
rlaws.'  Now,  it  is  well  known  in  the  East  that 
there  is  a  species  of  owl  ot  which  people  believe 
that  it  glides  into  chambers  by  night  and  tears  the 
ilesh  off  the  t'ices  of  sleeping  children."  Hassel- 
quist  (Trav.  p.  196,  Lond.  1766)  alludes  to  this 
nightly  terror,  but  he  calls  it  the  "Oriental  owl" 
(Strix  Orientalis)  and  clearly  distinguishes  it  from 
the  Strix  otus,  Lin.  The  Arabs  in  Egypt  call  this 
Infant-killing  owl  massasa,  the  Syrians  bana. 
It  is  believed  to  be  identical  with  the  Syrnium 
strvMa,  out  what  foundation  there  may  be  for 
the  belief  in  its  child-killing  propensities  we  know 
not.  It  is  probable  that  some  common  species  of  owl 
is  denoted  by  tachmds,  perhaps  the  Strix  flammea 
or  the  Attiene  meridionalis,  which  is  extremely  com 
mon  in  Palestine  and  Egypt.  [OwL.]  [W.  H.] 

NILE.  1.  Names  of  the  Nile.— The  Hebrew 
names  of  the  Nile,  excepting  one  that  is  of  ancient 
Egyptian  origin,  all  distinguish  it  from  other  rivers. 
With  the  Hebrews  the  Euphrates,  as  the  great  stream 
of  their  primitive  home,  was  always  "  the  river," 
and  even  the  long  sojourn  in  Egypt  could  not  put 
the  Nile  in  its  place.  Most  of  their  geographical 
terms  and  ideas  are,  however,  evidently  traceable 
to  Canaan,  the  country  of  the  Hebrew  language. 
Thus  the  sea,  as  lying  on  the  west,  gave  its  name 
to  the  west  quarter.  It  was  only  in  such  an  excep 
tional  case  as  that  of  the  Euphrates,  which  had  no 
rival  in  Palestine,  that  the  Hebrews  seem  to  have 
retained  the  ideas  of  their  older  country.  These 
circumstances  lend  no  support  to  the  idea  that  the 
Shemites  and  their  language  came  originally  from 
Egypt.  The  Hebrew  names  of  the  Nile  are  Shichor, 
"  the  black,"  a  name  perhaps  of  the  same  sense  as 
Nile ;  Ye6r, "  the  river,"  a  word  originally  Egyptian ; 
'  -th«  river  of  Egypt ;"  "  the  Nachal  of  Egypt "  (i: 
v.iis  appellation  designate  the  Nile,  and  Nachal  be 
a  proper  name) ;  and  "  the  rivers  of  Cush,"  01 
"  Ethiopia."  It  must  be  observed  that  the  won 
Nile  nowhere  occurs  in  the  A.  V. 

(a.)  Shichor,  -|i!TE>,  lint?,  "lhK>,  "  the  black,' 
from  inE>,  "  he  or  it  was  or  became  black."     The 
idea  of  blackness  conveyed  by  this  word  has,  as  wi 
should  expect  in  Hebrew,  a  wide  sense,  applying  no 
only  to  the  colour  of  the  hair  (Lev.  xiii.  31,  37),  ba 
also  to  that  of  a  face  tanned  by  the  sun  (Cant.  i.  5 
6),  and  that  of  a  skin  black  through  disease  (Job  xxx 
30).     It  seems,  however,  to  be  indicative  of  a  ver; 
dark  colour ;  for  it  is  said  in  the  Lamentations,  as  t 
the  famished  Nazarites  in  the  besieged  city,  "  Theii 
visage  is   darker  than  blackness'    (iv.   8).     Tha 
the  Nile  is  meant  by  Shihor  is  evident  from  it. 
mention  as  equivalent  to  Year,  "  the  river,"  and  as 
a  great  river,  where  Isaiah  says  of  Tyre,  "  And  b; 
£reat  waters,  the  sowing  of  Shihor,  the  harvest  o 
the  river  OtO)  [is]  her  revenue  "  Qxxiii.  3) ;  from 
its  being  put  as  the  western  boundary  of  the  Pro 
mised  Land  (Josh.  xiii.  3 ;  1  Chr.  xiii.  5),  insteac 
of  "  the  river  of  Egypt"  (Gen.  xv.  18)  ;  and  from 
its  being  spoken  of  as  the  great  stream  of  Egypt 
just  as  the  Euphrates  was  of  Assyria  (Jer.  ii.  18) 
If,  but  this  is  by  no  means  certain,  the  name  Nil 
JJsTXos,  be  really  indicative  of  the  colour  of  th 

»  In  Is.  xxxvll.  25  the  reference  seems  to  be  to 
.Assyrian  conquest  of  Kgypt. 

*>  The  Mile  was  probably  mentioned  by  this  name  i 


NILE 


539 


iver,  it  must  be  compared  with  the  Sunskiil 
1  blue"  especially,  probab:y  "dark 
hie,"  also  even  "  black,"  as  «f  [<?f  MCfl  I,  "black 

mud,"  and  must  be  considered  to  be  the  Indo- 
luropean  equivalent  of  Shihor.  The  signification 
blue  "  is  noteworthy,  especially  as  a  great  con- 
uent,  which  most  nearly  corresponds  to  the  Nile 
i  Egypt,  is  called  the  Blue  River,  or,  by  Europeans, 
he  Blue  Nile. 

(6.)  Yedr,  "VlN\  "VS*1.  is  the  same  as  the  ancient 
Egyptian  ATUR,  AUR,' and  the  Cootie  GIGpO, 
<LpO,  I<LpU3  (M),  IGpO  (S).  It  is  im- 
•ortant  to  notice  that  the  second  form  of  the  ancient 
Egyptian  name  alone  is  preserved  in  the  later  lan 
guage,  the  second  radical  of  the  first  having  been 
ost,  as  in  the  Hebrew  form  ;  so  -that,  on  this 
double  evidence,  it  is  probable  that  this  commoner 
brm  was  in  use  among  the  people  from  early 
,imes.  Yeor,  in  the  singular,  is  used  of  the  Nile 
alone,  excepting  in  a  passage  in  Daniel  (xii.  5,  6,  7), 
where  another  river,  perhaps  the  Tigris  (comp. 
x.  4),  is  intended  by  it.  In  the  plural,  D<I")'S),  this 
name  is  applied  to  the  branches  and  canals  of  the 
Nile  (Ps.lxxviii.44;  Ezek.  xxix.  3,  seqq.,  xxx.  12), 
and  perhaps  tributaries  also,  with,  in  some  places, 
the  addition  of  the  names  of  the  country,  Mitsrai'm, 
Matsor,  Dny»  '!**?  CIs-  vii-  18'  Al  V-  "  "vers  of 
Egypt"),  "I1XO  """YIN*  (xix.  6,  "  brooks  of  defence;" 
xxxvii.  25,*  "rivers  of  the  besieged  places"); 
but  it  is  also  used  of  streams  or  channels,  in  a 
general  sense,  when  no  particular  ones  are  indi 
cated  (see  Is.  xxxiii.  21 ;  Job  xxviii.  10).  It  is 
thus  evident  that  this  name  specially  designates 
the  Nile ;  and  although  properly  meaning  a  river, 
and  even  used  with  that  signification,  it  is  pro 
bably  to  be  regarded  as  a  proper  name  when 
applied  to  the  Egyptian  river.  The  latter  inference 
may  perhaps  be  drawn  from  the  constant  mention 
of  the  Euphrates  as  "  the  river;"  but  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  Shihor,  or  "  the  river  of  Egypt,"  is 
used  when  the  Nile  and  the  Euphrates  are  spoken 
of  together,  as  though  Yeor  could  not  be  well 
employed  for  the  former,  with  the  ordinary  term 
for  river,  ndhdr,  for  the  latter.b 

(c.~)  "  The  river  of  Egypt,"  D^*?  "lit},  is  men 
tioned  with  the  Euphrates  in  the  promise  of  the  ex 
tent  of  the  land  to  be  given  to  Abraham's  posterity, 
the  two  limits  of  which  were  to  be  "  the  river  of 
Egypt"  and  "the  great  river,  the  river  Euphrates' 
(Gen.  xv.  18). 

(d.)  «  The  Nachal  of  Egypt,"  Dny»  7H3,  has 
generally  been  understood  to  mean  "  the  torrent "  01 
"  brook  "of  Egypt,"  and  to  designate  a  desert  stream 
at  Rhinocorura,  now  El-'Areesh,  on  the  eastern  bor 
der.  Certainly  ?H3  usually  signifies  a  stream  or  tor 
rent,  not  a  river;  and  when  a  river,  one  of  small  size, 
and  dependent  upon  mountain-rain  or  snow ;  but  as  it 
is  also  used  for  a  valley,  corresponding  to  the  Arabic 

wddee  (<<A\   )>  which  is  in  like  manner  employed 


in  both  senses,  it  may  apply  like  it,  in  the  case  oi 


the  original  of  Ecclcsiasticus  xxiv.  27,  where  the  Greek 
text  roads  w?  </><us,  "1X3  having  be3n  mie understood 
(Oescaius,  77ics  s  v.). 


540 


NILE 


the  Guadalquivir,  &c.,  to  great  rivers.  This  name 
must  signify  the  Nile,  for  it  occurs  in  cases  parallel 
to  those  where  Shihor  is  employed  (Num.  xxxiv. 
5,  Josh.  xv.  4,  47,  1  K.  viii.  65,  2  K.  xxiv.  7, 
Is.  xxvii.  12),  both  designating  the  easternmost 
or  Pelusiac  branch  of  the  river  as  the  border  of  the 
Philistine  territory,  where  the  Egyptians  equally 
put  the  border  of  their  country  towards  Kanaan 
or  Kanana  (Canaan).  It  remains  for  us  to  decide 
whether  the  name  signify  the  "  brook  of  Egypt,"  or 
whether  Nachal  be  a  Hebrew  form  of  Nile.  On  the 
one  side  may  be  urged  the  unlikelihood  that  the 
middle  radical  should  not  be  found  in  the  Indo- 
European  equivalents,  although  it  is  not  one  of  the 
most  permanent  letters;  on  the  other,  that  it  is 
improbable  that  naliar  "  river  "  and  nachal  "  brook  " 
would  be  used  for  the  same  stream.  If  the  latter  be 
here  a  proper  name,  NciXor  must  be  supposed  to 
be  the  same  word ;  and  the  meaning  of  the  Greek 
as  well  as  the  Hebrew  name  would  remain  doubt 
ful,  for  we  could  not  then  positively  decide  on  an 
Indo-European  signification.  The  Hebrew  word 
nachal  might  have  been  adopted  as  veiy  similar  in 
sound  to  an  original  proper  name ;  and  this  idea  is 
supported  by  the  forms  of  various  Egyptian  words 
in  the  Bible,  which  are  susceptible  of  Hebrew 
etymologies  in  consequence  of  a  slight  change. 
It  must,  however,  be  remembered  that  there  are 
traces  of  a  Semitic  language,  apparently  distinct 
from  Hebrew,  in  geographical  names  in  the  east  of 
Lower  Egypt,  probably  dating  from  the  Shepherd- 
period;  and  therefore  we  must  not,  if  we  take 
nachal  to  be  here  Semitic,  restrict  its  meaning  to 
that  which  it  bears  or  could  bear  in  Hebrew. 

(e.)  "  The  rivers  of  Cush,"  BM3  »nnj,  are  alone 
mentioned  in  the  extremely  difficult  prophecy  con 
tained  in  Is.  xviii.  From  the  use  of  the  plural,  a 
single  stream  cannot  be  meant,  and  we  must  suppose 
"  the  rivers  of  Ethiopia  "  to  be  the  confluents  or  tri 
butaries  of  the  Nile.  Gesenius  (Lex.  s.  v.  "inj)  makes 
them  the  Nile  and  the  Astaboras.  Without  attempt 
ing  to  explain  this  prophecy,  it  is  interesting  to 
remark  that  the  expression,  "  Whose  land  the 
rivers  have  spoiled  "  (vers.  2,  7),  if  it  apply  to  any 
Ethiopian  nation,  may  refer  to  the  ruin  of  great 
part  of  Ethiopia,  for  a  long  distance  above  the  First 
Cataract,  in  consequence  of  the  fall  of  the  level  of 
the  river.  This  change  has  been  effected  through 
the  breaking  down  of  a  barrier  at  that  cataract,  or 
at  Silsilis,  by  which  the  valley  has  been  placed  above 
the  reach  of  the  fertilizing  annual  deposit.  The  Nile 
is  sometimes  poetically  called  a  sea,  D*  (Is.  xviii.  2 ; 
Nah.  iii.  8;  Job  xli.  31;  but  we  cannot  agree 
with  Gesenius,  Thes.  s.  v.,  that  it  is  intended  in 
Is.  xix.  5):  this,  however,  can  scarcely  be  con 
sidered  to  be  one  of  its  names. 

It  will  be  instructive  to  mention  the  present  ap 
pellations  of  the  Nile  in  Arabic,  which  may  illus 
trate  the  Scripture  terms.  By  the  Arabs  it  is 
called  Bahr-en-Neel,  "the  river  Nile,"  the  word 
"  bahr  "  being  applied  to  seas  and  the  greatest  rivers. 
The  Egyptians  call  it  Bahr,  or  "  the  river  "  alone ; 
and  call  the  inundation  En-Neel,  or  "  the  Nile."  This 
latter  use  of  what  is  properly  a  name  of  the  river 
resembles  the  use  of  the  plural  of  Ye6r  in  the  Bible 
for  the  various  channels  or  even  streams  of  Nile- 
water. 

With  the  ancient  Egyptians,  the  river  was  sacred, 
and  had,  besides  its  ordinary  name  already  given, 
a  tiered  name,  under  which  it  was  worshipped, 


NILE 

HAPEK,  or  HAPEE-MU,  "  the  abyss,"  or  "  the  alyta 
of  waters,"  or  "  the  hidden."  Corresponding  to 
the  two  regions  of  Egypt,  the  Upper  Country  and 
the  Lower,  the  Nile  was  cal)>d  HAPEE-RES,  "  the 
Southern  Nile,"  and  HAPEE-MEHEET,  "  the  North 
ern  Nile,"  the  former  name  applying  to  the  river  in 
Nubia  as  well  as  in  Upper  Egypt.  The  god  Nilu» 
was  one  of  the  lesser  divinities.  He  is  represented 
as  a  stout  man  having  woman's  breasts,  and  is 
sometimes  painted  red  to  denote  the  river  during 
its  rise  and  inundation,  or  High  Nile,  and  some 
times  blue,  to  denote  it  during  the  rest  of  the  year, 
or  Low  Nile.  Two  figures  of  HAPEE  are  frequently 
represented  on  each  side  of  the  throne  of  a  royal 
statue,  or  in  the  same  place  in  a  bas-relief,  binding 
it  with  waier-plants,  as  though  the  prosperity  oi 
the  kingdom  depended  upon  the  produce  of  the 
river.  The  r...me  HAPEE,  perhaps,  in  these  cases, 
HEPEE,  was  also  applied  to  one  of  the  four  children 
of  Osiris,  called  by  Egyptologers  the  genii  of  AMENT 
or  Hades,  and  to  the  bull  Apis,  the  most  revered 
of  all  the  sacred  animals.  The  genius  does  not 
seem  to  have  any  connection  with  the  river,  except 
ing  indeed  that  Apis  was  sacred  to  Osiris.  Apis 
was  worshipped  with  a  reference  to  the  inundation, 
perhaps  because  the  myth  of  Osiris,  the  conflict  of 
good  and  evil,  was  supposed  to  be  represented  by 
the  struggle  of  the  fertilizing  river  or  inundation 
with  the  desert  and  the  sea,  the  first  threatening 
the  whole  valley,  and  the  second  wasting  it  along 
the  northern  coast. 

2.  Description  of  the  Nile. — We  cannot  as  yet 
determine  the  length  of  the  Nile,  although  recent 
discoveries  have  narrowed  the  question.  There  is 
scarcely  a  doubt  that  its  largest  confluent  is  fed  by 
the  great  lakes  on  and  south  of  the  equator.  It  has 
been  traced  upwards  for  about  2700  miles,  measured 
by  its  course,  not  in  a  direct  line,  and  its  extent 
is  probably  upwards  of  1000  miles  more,  making 
it  longer  than  even  the  Mississippi,  and  the  longest 
of  rivors.  In  Egypt  and  Nubia  it  flows  through  a 
bed  of  silt  and  slime,  resting  upon  marine  or  num- 
mulitic  limestone,  covered  by  a  later  formation,  over 
which,  without  the  valley,  lie  the  sand  and  rocky 
debris  of  the  desert.  Beneath  the  limestone  is  a 
sandstone  formation,  which  rises  and  bounds  the 
valley  in  its  stead  in  the  higher  part  of  the  Thebais. 
Again  beneath  the  sandstone  is  the  breccia  verde, 
which  appears  above  it  in  the  desert  eastward  of 
Thebes,  and  yet  lower  a  group  of  azoic  rocks, 
gneisses,  quartzes,  mica  schists,  and  clay  slates, 
resting  upon  the  red  granite  and  syenite  that  ris» 
through  all  the  upper  strata  at  the  First  Cataract. 
The  river's  bed  is  cut  through  these  layers  of  rock, 
which  often  approach  it  on  either  side,  and  some 
times  confine  it  on  both  sides,  and  even  obstruct  its 
course,  forming  rapids  and  cataracts.  To  trace 
it  downwards  we  must  first  go  to  equatorial 
Africa,  the  mysterious  half-explored  home  of  the 
negroes,  where  animal  and  vegetable  life  flourishes 
around  and  in  the  vast  swamp-land  that  waters  the 
chief  part  of  the  continent.  Here  are  two  great 
shallow  lakes,  one  nearer  to  the  coast  than  the  other. 
From  the  more  eastern  (the  Ukerewe,  which  is  on 
the  equator),  a  chief  tributary  of  the  White  Nile 
probably  takes  its  rise,  and  the  more  western  (th« 
Ujeejee),  may  feed  another  tributary.  These  lakes 
are  filled,  partly  by  the  heavy  rains  of  the  equatorial 
region,  partly  by  the  melting  of  the  snows  of  the 


c  The  geology  of  the  Nile-valley  is  excellently  given  by 
Hugh  Miller  (Tcttimony  of  the  Kocks,  p.  409,  scqq.). 


NILE 

Tnftj  mountains  discovered  by  the  missionaries  Krapf 
and  Kebmann.     Whether  the  lakes  supply  two  tri 
butaries  or  not,   it  is  certain  that  from  the  great 
region  of  waters  where  they  lie,  several  streams  fall 
into  the  Bahr  el-Abyad,  or  White  Nile.     Great, 
however,  as  is  the  body  of  water  of  this  the  longer 
cr  the  two  chief  confluents,  it  is  the  shorter,  the 
Bahr  el-Azrak,  or  Blue  River,  which  brings  down 
the  alluvial  soil  that  makes  the  Nile  the  great  fer 
tilizer  of  Egypt  and  Nubia.     The  Bahr  el-Azrak 
rises  in  the  mountains  of  Abyssinia,  and  carries  down 
from  them  a  great  quantity  of  decayed  vegetable 
matter  and  alluvium.     The  two  streams  form  a 
junction  at  Khartoom,  now  the  seat  of  government 
of  Soodftn,  or  the  Black  Country  under  Egyptian 
rule.     The  Bahr  el-Azrak  is  here  a  narrow  river, 
with  high  steep  mud-banks  like  those  of  the  Nile  in 
Egypt,  and  with  water  of  the  same  colour  ;  and  the 
Bahr  el-Abyad  is  broad  and  shallow,  with  low  banks 
and  clear  water.    Further  to  the  north  another  great 
river,  the  Atbara,  rising,  like  the  Bahr  el-Azrak,  in 
Abyssinia,  falls  into  the  main  stream,  which,  for  the 
remainder  of  its  course,  does  not  receive  one  tributary 
more.     Throughout  the  rest  of  the  valley  the  Nile 
does  not  greatly  vary,  excepting  that  in  Lower  Nubia, 
through  the  fall  of  its  level  by  the  giving  way  of  a 
Darrier  in  ancient  times,  it  does  not  inundate  the 
valley  on  either   hand.      From   time  to  time   its 
course  is  impeded  by  cataracts  or  rapids,  sometimes 
extending  many  miles,  until,  at  the  First  Cataract; 
the  boundary  of  Egypt,  it  surmounts  the  last  ob 
stacle.     After  a  course  of  about  550  miles,  at  a 
short  distance  below  Cairo  and  the  Pyramids,  the 
river  parts  into  two  great  branches,  which  water  the 
Delta,  nearly  forming  its  boundaries  to  the  east  anc 
west,  and  flowing  into  the  shallow  Mediterranean 
The  references  in  the  Bible  are  mainly  to  the  charac 
teristics  of  the  river  in  Egypt.     There,  above  the 
Delta,  its  average  breadth  may  be  put  at  from  half 
mile  to  three-quarters,  excepting  where  large  islands 
increase  the  distance.    In  the  Delta  its  branches  are 
usually  narrower.     The  water  is  extremely  sweet 
especially  at  the  season  when  it  is  turbid.      It  is 
said  by  the  people  that  those  who  have  drunk  o 
it  and  left  the  country  must  return  to  drink  of  i 
again. 

The  great  annual  phenomenon  of  the  Nile  is  th 
inundation,  the  failure  of  which  produces  a  famine 
for  Egypt  is  virtually  without  rain  (see  Zech.  xiv 
17,  18).  The  country  is  therefore  devoid  of  th 
constant  changes  which  make  the  husbandmen  o 
other  lands  look  always  for  the  providential  car 
of  Clod.  "  For  the  land,  whither  thou  goest  in  t 
possess  it,  [is]  not  as  the  land  of  Egypt,  from  whenc 
ye  came  out ,  where  thou  sowedst  thy  seed,  and  wa 
teredst  [it]  with  thy  foot,  as  a  garden  of  herbs :  bu 
the  land,  whither  ye  go  to  possess  it,  [is]  a  land 
hills  and  valleys,  [and]  drinketh  water  of  the  rain 
heaven :  a  land  which  the  LORD  thy  God  careth  for 
the  eyes  of  the  LORD  thy  God  [are]  always  upon  i 
from  the  beginning  of  the  year  even  unto  the  end  < 
the  year"  (Deut.  xi.  10-12).  At  Khartoom  the  in 
crease  of  the  river  is  observed  early  in  April,  but  i 
Egypt  the  first  signs  of  rising  occur  about  th 
summer  solstice,  and  generally  the  regular  increas 
does  not  begin  until  some  days  after,  the  inundatio 
commencing  about  two  months  after  the  solstic 
The  river  then  pours,  through  canals  and  cuttings  i 
the  backs,  which  are  a  little  higher  than  the  rest 
the  soil,  over  ( he  valley,  which  it  covers  with  shee 
of  water.  It  attains  to  its  greatest  height  abou 
or  not  long  after,  the  autumnal  equinox.  apH  fhe*i 


NILE 


541 


'iLg  moi«  slowly  than  it  had  risen  sinks  to  it« 
west  point  at  the  end  of  nine  months,  there  re- 
aining  stationary  for  a  few  days  before  it  again  be 
ns  to  rise.  The  inundations  are  very  various,  and 
hen  they  are  but  a  lew  feet  deficient  or  excessive 
use  great  damage  and  distress.  The  rise  during 

good  inundation  is  about  40  feet  at  the  First 
ataract,  about  36  at  Thebes,  and  about  4  at  the 
osetta  and  Damietta  mouths.  If  the  river  at  Cairo 
ttain  to  no  greater  height  than  18  or  20  feet,  the 
ise  is  scanty;  if  only  to  2  or  4  more,  insufficient; 
*  to  24  feet  or  more,  up  to  27,  good ;  if  to  a  greater 
eight,  it  causes  a  flood.  Sometimes  the  inundation 
as  failed  altogether,  as  for  seven  years  in  the  reign 
f  the  Fktimee  Khaleefeh  El-Mustansir  bi-llah, 
hen  there  was  a  seven  years'  famine ;  and  this 
nust  have  been  the  case  with  the  great  famine  of 
oseph's  time,  to  which  this  later  one  is  a  remark- 
ble  parallel  [FAMINE].  Low  inundations  always 
ause  dearths;  excessive  inundations  produce  or 
oster  the  plague  and  murrain,  besides  doing  great 
njury  to  the  crops.  In  ancient  times,  when  every 
quare  foot  of  ground  must  have  been  cultivated, 
nd  a  minute  system  of  irrigation  maintained,  both 
or  the  natural  inundation  and  to  water  the  fields 
uring  the  Low  Nile,  and  when  there  were  many 
fish-pools  as  well  as  canals  for  their  supply,  far 
greater  ruin  than,  now  must  have  been  caused  by  ex- 
.essive  inundations.  It  was  probably  to  them  that 
he  priest  referred,  who  told  Solon,  when  he  asked  if 
he  Egyptians  had  experienced  a  flood,  that  there  had 
>een  many  floods,  instead  of  the  one  of  which  he 
lad  spoken,  and  not  to  the  successive  past  destruc- 
ions  of  the  world  by  water,  alternating  with  others 
>y  fire,  in  which  some  nations  of  antiquity  believed 
P\a.t.  Timaeus,  21  seqq.). 

The  Nile  in  Egypt  is  always  charged  with  allu 
vium,  especially  during  the  inundation ;  but  the 
annual  deposit,  excepting  under  extraordinary  cir 
cumstances,  is  very  small  in  comparison  with  what 
would  be  conjectured  by  any  one  unacquainted  with 
subjects  of  this  nature.  Inquirers  have  come  to 
different  results  as  to  the  rate,  but  the  discrepancy 
does  not  generally  exceed  an  inch  in  a  century.  The 
ordinary  average  increase  of  the  soil  in  Egypt  is  about 
four  inches  and  a  half  in  a  century.  The  cultivable 
;oil  of  Egypt  is  wholly  the  deposit  of  the  Nile,  hut 
it  is  obviously  impossible  to  calculate,  from  its  pre 
sent  depth,  when  the  river  first  began  to  flow  in  ths 
rocky  bed  now  so  deeply  covered  with  the  rich  allu 
vium.  An  attempt  has  however  been  made  to 
use  geology  as  an  aid  to  history,  by  first  endeavour 
ing  to  ascertain  the  rate  of  increase  of  the  soil,  then 
digging  for  indications  of  man's  existence  in  the 
country,  and  lastly  applying  to  the  depth  at  which 
any  such  remains  might  be  discovered  the  scale  pre 
viously  obtained.  In  this  manner  Mr.  Homer  (Phil. 
Transactions,  vol.  148),  when  his  labourers  had 
found,  or  pretended  to  find,  a  piece  of  pottery  at 
a  great  depth  on  the  site  of  Memphis,  argued  that 
man  must  have  lived  there,  and  not  in  the  lowest 
state  of  barbarism,  about  13,000  years  ago.  He 
however  entirely  disregarded  various  causes  by 
which  an  object  could  have  been  deposited  at  such 
a  depth,  as  the  existence  of  canals  and  wells,  from 
the  latter  of  which  water  could  be  anciently  as 
now  drawn  up  in  earthen  pots  from  a  very  low 
level,  and  the  occurrence  of  fissures  in  the  earth. 
He  formed  his  scale  on  the  supposition  that  the 
ancient  Egyptians  placed  a  great  statue  before  the 
principal  temple  of  Memphis  in  such  a  position  that 
the  inundation  each  year  reached  its  base,  wheieai 


542 


NILE 


we  know  that  they  were  very  careful  to  put  ail 
their  stone  works  where  they  thought  they  would 
be  out  of  the  reach  of  its  injurious  influence;  and, 
what  is  still  more  serious,  he  laid  stress  upon  the 
discovery  of  burnt  brick  even  lower  than  the  piece 
»f  pottery,  being  unaware  that  there  is  no  evidence 
that  the  Egyptians  in  early  times  used  any  but 
crude  brick,  a  burnt  brick  being  as  sure  a  record  of 
the  Roman  dominion  as  an  imperial  coin.  It  is 
imj»ortant  to  mention  this  extraordinary  mistake,  as 
it  was  accepted  as  a  correct  result  by  the  late  Baron 
Bunsen,  and  urged  by  him  and  others  as  a  proof  of 
the  great  antiquity  of  man  in  Egypt  (Quarterly 
Review,  Apr.  1859,  No.  cex. ;  Modern  Egyptians, 
5th  ed.,  note  by  Ed.,  p.  593  seqq.). 

In  Upper  Egypt  the  Nile  is  a  very  broad  stream, 
flowing  rapidly  between  high,  steep  mud-banks, 
which  are  scarped  by  the  constant  rush  of  the  water, 
which  from  time  to  time  washes  portions  away,  and 
«tratified  by  the  regular  deposit.  On  either  side 
rise  the  bare  yellow  mountains,  usually  a  few  hun 
dred  feet  high,  rarely  a  thousand,  looking  from  the 
river  like  cliffs,  and  often  honeycombed  with  the 
entrances  of  the  tombs  which  make  Egypt  one 
freat  city  of  the  dead,  so  that  we  can  understand 
^e  meaning  of  that  murmur  of  the  Israelites  to 
Moses,  "  Because  [there  were]  no  graves  in  Egypt, 
"lust  thou  taken  us  away  to  die  in  the  wilderness  ?' 
'Ex.  xiv.  11).  Frequently  the  mountain  on  either 
side  approaches  the  river  in  a  rounded  promontory, 
against  whose  base  the  restless  stream  washes,  and 
then  retreats  and  leaves  a  broad  bay-like  valley, 
bounded  by  a  rocky  curve.  Rarely  both  moun 
tains  confine  the  river  in  a  narrow  bed,  rising 
steeply  on  either  side  from  a  deep  rock-cut  channel 
through  which  the  water  pours  with  a  rapid  cur 
rent.  Perhaps  there  is  a  remote  allusion  to  the  rocky 
channels  of  the  Nile,  and  especially  to  its  primaeval 
3ed  wholly  of  bare  rock,  in  that  passage  of  Job 
where  the  plural  of  Yeor  is  used.  "  He  cutteth 
out  rivers  (D*^iO)  among  the  rocks,  and  his  eye 

seeth  every  precious  thing.  He  bindeth  the  floods 
from  overflowing"  (xxviii.  10,  11).  It  must  be 
recollected  that  there  are  allusions  to  Egypt,  and 
especially  to  its  animals  and  products,  in  this  book, 
so  that  the  Nile  may  well  be  here  referred  to,  if 
the  passage  do  not  distinctly  mention  it.  In  Lower 
Egypt  the  chief  differences  are  that  the  view  is  spread 
out  in  one  rich  plain,  only  bounded  on  the  east  and 
west  by  the  desert,  of  which  the  edge  is  low  and 
sandy,  unlike  the  mountains  above,  though  essentially 
the  same,  and  that  the  two  branches  of  the  river  are 
narrower  than  the  undivided  stream.  On  either 
bank,  during  Low  Nile,  extend  fields  of  com  and 
barley,  and  near  the  river-side  stretch  long  groves 
of  palm-trees.  The  villages  rise  from  the  level  plain, 
standing  upon  mounds,  often  ancient  sites,  and 
surrounded  by  palm-groves,  and  yet  higher  dark- 
brown  mounds  mark  where  of  old  stood  towns,  with 
which  often  "their  memorial  is  perished"  (Ps.  ix.  6). 
The  villages  are  connected  by  dykes,  along  which  pass 
.he  chief  roads.  During  the  inundation  the  whole 
valley  and  plain  is  covered  with  sheets  of  water, 
above  which  rise  the  villages  like  islands,  only  to  be 
reached  along  the  half-ruined  dykes.  The  aspect  of 
the  country  is  as  though  it  were  overflowed  by  a  de 
structive  flood,  while  between  its  banks,  here  and 
there  broken  through  and  constantly  giving  way, 

*  The  use  of  "  nachal "  here  atiords  a  strong  armament 
ki  tuvour  of  the  opinion  that  tt  Is  applied  to  the  Nile. 


NIJJJ 

rushes  a  vast  turbid  stream,  agai'.ist  wiich  no  boat 
could  make  its  way,  excepting  by  tacking,  were  it 
not  for  the  north  wind  that  blows  ceaselessly  diirint; 
the  season  of  the  inundation,  making  the  river 
seem  more  powerful  as  it  beats  it  into  waves.  The 
prophets  more  than  once  allude  to  this  striking 
condition  of  the  Nile.  Jeremiah  says  of  Pharaoh- 
Necho's  army,  "  Who  [is]  this  [that]  cometh  tip 
as  the  Nile  [Yeor],  whose  waters  are  moved  as  the 
rivers  ?  Egypt  riseth  up  like  the  Nile,  and  [his] 
waters  are  moved  like  the  rivers;  and  he  saith, 
I  will  go  up,  [and]  will  cover  the  land;  1  will 
destroy  the  city  and  the  inhabitants  thereof"  (xlvi. 
7,  8).  Again,  the  prophecy  "against  the  Philis 
tines,  before  that  Pharaoh  smote  Gaza,"  com 
mences,  "  Thus  saith  the  LORD  ;  Behold,  waters 
rise  up  out  of  the  north,  and  shall  be  as  an  over 
flowing  stream  (nachal),A  and  shall  overflow  the  land, 
and  all  thai  is  therein ;  the  city,  and  them  that 
dwell  therein"  (xlvii.  1,  2).  Amos, also,  a  prophet 
who  especially  refers  to  Egypt,  uses  the  inundation 
of  the  Nile  as  a  type  of  the  utter  desolation  of  his 
countiy.  "  The  LORD  hath  sworn  by  the  excellency 
of  Jacob,  Surely  I  will  never  forget  any  of  their 
works.  Shall  not  the  land  tremble  for  this,  and 
every  one  mourn  that  dwelleth  therein?  and  it 
shall  rise  up  wholly  as  the  Nile  p'X3);  and  it 
shall  be  cast  out  and  drowned,  as  [by]  the  Nile 
(Dnv»  -I'laOS)  of  Egypt"  (viii.  7,  8;  seek.  5), 

The  banks  of  the  river  are  enlivened  by  the 
women  who  come  down  to  draw  water,  and,  like 
Pharaoh's  daughter,  to  bathe,  and  the  herds  of 
kine  and  buffaloes  which  are  driven  down  to  drink 
and  wash,  or  to  graze  on  the  grass  of  the  swamps, 
like  the  good  kine  that  Pharaoh  saw  in  his  dream 
as  "  he  stood  by  the  river,"  which  were  "  coming 
up  out  of  the  river,"  and  "  fed  in  the  marsh-grass  " 
(Gen.  xli.  1,  2). 

The  river  itself  abounds  in  fish,  which  anciently 
formed  a  chief  means  of  sustenance  to  the  inhabit 
ants  of  the  country.  Perhaps,  as  has  been  acutely 
remarked  in  another  article,  Jacob,  when  blessing 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  used  for  their  multiplying 
the  term  HH't  (Gen.  slviii.  16),  which  is  connected 

with  JR,  a  fish,  though  it  does  not  seem  certain 

which  is  the  primitive;  as  though  he  had  been 
struck  by  the  abundance  of  fish  in  the  Nile  or  the 
canals  and  pools  fed  by  it.  [MANASSEH,  p.  2186.] 
The  Israelites  in  the  desert  looked  back  with  regret 
to  the  fish  of  Egypt :  "  We  remember  the  fish,  which 
we  did  eat  in  Egypt  freely"  (Num.  xi.  5).  In  the 
Thebais  crocodiles  are  found,  and  during  Low  Nile 
they  may  be  seen  basking  in  the  sun  upon  the  sand 
banks.  The  crocodile  is  constantly  spoken  of  in 
the  Bible  as  the  emblem  of  Pharaoh,  especially  in 
the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel.  [EGYPT,  vol.  i.  p.  5006.] 
The  great  difference  between  the  Nile  of  Egypt  in 
the  present  day  and  in  ancient  times  is  caused  by 
the  failure  of  some  of  its  branches,  and  the  ceasing  <>t 
some  of  its  chief  vegetable  products ;  and  the  chief 
change  in  the  aspect  of  the  cultivable  land,  as 
dependent  on  the  Nile,  is  the  result  of  the  ruin  of 
the  fish-pools  and  their  conduits,  and  the  consequent 
decline  of  the  fisheries.  The  river  was  famous  for 
its  seven  branches,  and  under  the  Roman  dominion 
eleven  were  counted,  of  which,  however,  there 
were  but  seven  principal  ones.  Herodotus  notices 
that  there  were  seven,  of  which  he  says  that  two, 
the  present  Damietta  and  Rosetta  branches,  were 
oiiginally  artificial,  and  he  therefore  speak*  of 


NILE 

e'th«  five  mouths"  (ii.  10).  Now,  as  for  a  long 
period  past,  there  are  no  navigable  and  unob 
structed  branches  but  these  two  that  Herodotus  dis 
tinguishes  as  iu  origin  works  of  man.  This  change 
ivas  prophesied  by  Isaiah  :  "  And  the  waters  shall 
fail  from  the  sea,  and  the  river  shall  be  wasted  and 
dried  up"  (xix.  5).  Perhaps  the  same  prophet,  in 
yet  mors  precise  words,  predicts  this,  where  he  says, 
"  And  the  LORD  shall  utterly  destroy  the  tongue  of 
the  Egyptian  sea ;  and  with  his  mighty  wind  shall  he 
>hake  his  hand  over  the  river,  and  shall  smite  it  in 
the  [or  '  into  "I  seven  streams,  and  make  [men]  go 
overdryshod  f*  in  shoes']"  (xi.  15).  However,  from 
the  context,  and  a  parallel  passage  in  Zechariah  (x. 
10,  11),  it  seems  probable  that  the  Euphrates  is 
intended  in  this  passage  by  "  the  river."  Ezekiel 
also  prophesies  of  Egypt  that  the  Lord  would  "  make 
the  rivers  drought"  (xxx.  12),  here  evidently  re 
ferring  to  either  the  branches  or  canals  of  the  Nile. 
In  exact  fulfilment  of  these  prophecies  the  bed  of  the 
nighest  part  of  the  Gulf  of  Suez  has  dried,  and  all 
the  streams  of  the  Nile,  excepting  those  which  He 
rodotus  says  were  originally  artificial,  have  wasted, 
go  that  they  can  be  crossed  without  fording. 

The  monuments  and  the  narratives  of  ancient 
writers  show  us  in  the  Nile  of  Egypt  in  old  times,  a 
stream  bordered  by  flags  and  reeds,  the  covert  of 
abundant  wild-fowl,  and  bearing  on  its  waters  the 
fragrant  flowers  of  the  various-coloured  lotus.  Now, 
'.n  Egypt  scarcely  any  reeds  or  water-plants — the 
famous  papyrus  being  nearly  if  not  quite  extinct,  and 
the  lotus  almost  unknown — are  to  be  seen,  except 
ing  in  the  marshes  near  the  Mediterranean.  This 
»lso  was  prophesied  by  Isaiah  :  "  The  papyrus-reeds 
(?  rrtiy)  in  the  river  ("IIN)),  on  the  edge  of  the 

river,  and  everything  growing  [lit.  "sown"]  in 
the  river  shall  be  dried  up,  driven  away  [by  the 
wind],  and  [shall]  not  be"  (xix.  7).  When  it  is 
recollected  that  the  water-plants  of  Egypt  were  so 
abundant  as  to  be  a  great  source  of  revenue  in  the 
prophet's  time,  and  much  later,  the  exact  fulfilment 
of  his  predictions  is  a  valuable  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  the  old  opinion  as  to  "  the  sure  word  of 
prophecy."  The  failure  of  the  fisheries  is  also 
foretold  by  Isaiah  (xix.  8,  10),  and  although  this 
was  no  doubt  a  natural  result  of  the  wasting  of  the 
river  and  streams,  its  cause  could  not  have  been 
anticipated  by  human  wisdom.  Having  once  been 
very  productive,  and  a  main  source  of  revenue  as 
well  as  of  sustenance,  the  fisheries  are  now  scarcely 
of  any  moment,  excepting  about  Lake  Menzeleh, 
and  in  some  few  places  elsewhere,  chiefly  in  the 
north  of  Egypt. 

Of  old  the  great  river  must  have  shewn  a  more 
fair  and  busy  scene  than  now.  Boats  of  many  kinds 
were  ever  pissing  along  it,  by  the  painted  walls  of 
temples,  and  the  gardens  that  extended  around  the 
light  summer  pavilions,  from  the  pleasure-galley, 
with  one  great  square  sail,  white  or  with  variegated 
pattern,  and  many  oars,  to  the  little  papyrus  skiff', 
dancing  on  the  water,  and  carrying  the  seekers  of 
plo-asure  where  they  could  shoot  with  arrows,  or 
knock  down  with  the  throw-stick,  the  wild-fowl  that 
abounded  among  the  reeds,  or  engage  in  the  dan- 
{Ttrous  chace  of  the  hippopotamus  or  the  crocodile. 
bi  the  Bible  the  papyrus-boats  are  mentioned  ;  and 
they  are  shewn  to  have  been  used  for  their  swiftness 
to  c-arry  tidings  to  Ethiopia  (Is.  xviii.  2). 

The  great  river  is  constantly  before  us  in  the 
history  of  Israel  in  Egypt.  Into  it  the  male  children 
veier.to.st;  in  it.  or  rather  in  some  canal  or  pool, 


NILE 


543 


was  the  ark  of  Moses  put,  and  found  by  Fhmraoh's 
daughter  when  she  went  down  to  bathe.  When 
the  plagues  were  sent,  the  sacred  river — a  main 
support  of  the  people — and  its  waters  everywhere; 
were  turned  into  blood.  [PLAGUES  OF  EGYPT.] 

The  prophets  not  only  tell  us  of  the  future  of  the 
Nile ;  they  speak  of  it  as  it  was  in  their  days. 
Ezekiel  likens  Pharaoh  to  a  crocodile,  fearing  no 
one  in  the  midst  of  his  river,  yet  dragged  forth 
with  the  fish  of  his  rivers,  and  left  to  perish  in  the 
wilderness  (xxix.  1-5;  comp.  xxxii.  1-6).  Nahun- 
thus  speaks  of  the  Nile,  when  he  warns  Nineveh  by 
the  ruin  of  Thebes :  "  Art  thou  better  than  No-Amon, 
that  was  situate  among  the  rivers,  [that  had]  the 
waters  round  about  it,  whose  rampart  [was]  the 
sea,  [and]  her  wall  [was]  from  the  sea?"  (iii.  8). 
Here  the  river  is  spoken  of  as  the  varnpart,  and 
perhaps  as  the  support  of  the  capital,  and  the  situa 
tion,  most  remarkable  in  Egypt,  of  the  city  on  the 
two  banks  is  indicated  [No-AMON].  But  still  more 
striking  than  this  description  is  the  use  which  we 
have  already  noticed  of  the  inundation,  as  a  figure  of 
the  Egyptian  armies,  and  also  of  the  coming  of  utter 
destruction,  probably  by  an  invading  force. 

In  the  New  Testament  there  is  no  mention  of  tne 
Nile.  Tradition  says  that  when  Our  Lord  was 
brought  into  Egypt,  His  mother  came  to  Heliopolis. 
[ON.]  If  so,  He  may  have  dwelt  in  His  childhooc 
by  the  side  of  the  ancient  river  which  witnessed  so 
many  events  of  sacred  history,  perhaps  the  coming 
of  Abraham,  certainly  the  rule  of  Joseph,  and 
the  long  oppression  and  deliverance  of  Israel  theii 
posterity.  [R.  S.  P.] 

NIM'RAH  (PniM  :  Hdp/Spa ;  Alex.  A/ujSpo/* 
Nemra),  a  place  mentioned,  by  this  name,  in  Num. 
xxxii.  3  only,  among  those  which  formed  the  dis 
tricts  of  the  "  land  of  Jazer  and  the  land  of  Gilead," 
on  the  east  of  Jordan,  petitioned  for  by  Reuben 
and  Gad.  It  would  appear  from  this  passage  to 
have  been  near  Jazer  and  Heshbon,  and  therefore 
on  the  upper  level  of  the  country.  If  it  is  the 
same  as  BETH-NIMRAH  (ver.  36)  it  belonged  to 
the  tribe  of  Gad.  By  Eusebius,  however  (Onomast. 
Ne&pd),  it  is  cited  as  a  "  city  of  Reuben  in  Gilead," 
and  said  to  have  been  in  his  day  a  very  large  place 
(iccfynj  jite-yitrTTj)  in  "Batanaea,  bearing  the  name 
of  Abara.  This  account  is  full  of  difficulties,  for 
Reuben  never  possessed  the  country  of  Gilead,  and 
Batanaea  was  situated  several  days'  journey  to  the 
N.W.  of  the  district  of  Heshbon,  beyond  not  only 
the  territory  of  Reuben,  but  even  that  of  Gail. 
A  wady  and  a  town,  both  called  Nimreh,  have, 
however,  been  met  with  in  Betheniyeh,  east  of  the 
Lejah,  and  five  miles  N.W.  of  Kunawdt  (see  Ine 
maps  of  Porter,  Van  de  Velde,  and  Wetzstein). 
On  the  other  hand  the  name  of  Nimrin  is  said  to 
be  attached  to  a  watercourse  and  a  site  of  ruins  in 
the  Jordan  vaHey,  a  couple  of  miles  east  of  the 
river,  at  the  embouchure  of  the  Wady  Shoaib. 
[BETH-NIMRAH  .]  But  this  again  is  too  far  from 
Heshbon  in  the  other  direction. 

The  name  Nimr  ("  panther  ")  appears  to  be  a  com 
mon  one  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  it  must  be  left 
to  future  explorers  (when  exploration  in  that  region 
becomes  possible)  to  ascertain  which  (if  either)  of  the 
places  so  named  is  the  Nimrah  in  question.  [G.] 

NIM'RIM,  THE  WATERS  OF  (DntM  'O ; 
in  Is.  TO  vS<ep  TTJS  NejujpeijU,  Alex.  TTJS  Nfjupetju; 


•  The  present  Greek  text  has  Karavaia ;  but  the  cor. 
rection  is  obvious. 


644 


NIMROD 


in  Jer.  rb  vSwp  N«  j9p€tV,  Alex.  Ve^pdft :  Aquae 
Nemrim),  a  stream  or  brook  (not  improbably  a 
stream  with  pools)  within  the  country  of  Moab, 
which  is  mentioned  in  the  denunciations  of  that 
nation  uttered,  or  quoted,  by  Isaiah  (xv.  6)  and 
Jeremiah  (xlviii.  34).  From  the  former  of  these 
passages  it  appears  to  have  been  famed  for  the 
abundance  of  its  grass. 

If  the  view  taken  of  these  denunciations  under 
the  head  of  MOAB  (p.  392, 6)  be  correct,  we  should 
look  for  the  site  of  Nimrim  in  Moab  proper,  i.  e. 
on  the  south-eastern  shoulder  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
a  position  which  agrees  well  with  the  mention  of 
the  "  brook  of  the  willows  "  (perhaps  Wady  Beni 
Hammed)  and  the  "  borders  of  Moab,"  that  is,  the 
range  of  hills  encircling  Moab  at  the  lower  part  of 
the  territory. 

A  name  resembling  Nimrim  still  exists  at  the 
Bouth-tastern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  in  the  Wady 
tn-Nemeirah  and  Burj  en-Nemeirah,  which  are 
situated  on  the  beach,  about  half-way  between  the 
southern  extremity  and  the  promontory  of  el-Lissan 
(DeSaulcy,  Voyage,  i.  284,  &c. ;  Seetzen,  ii.  354). 
Eusebius  (Onom.  NeKijpfyt)  places  it  N.  of  Soora, 
i.  e.  Zoar.  How  far  the  situation  of  en-Nemeirah 
corresponds  with  the  statement  of  Eusebius  cannot 
be  known  until  that  of  Zoar  is  ascertained.  If  the 
Wady  en-Nemeirah  really  occupies  the  place  of  the 
waters  of  Nimrim,  Zoar  must  have  been  consider 
ably  further  south  than  is  usually  supposed.  On 
the  other  hand  the  name  b  is  a  common  one  in  the 
transjordanic  localities, 'and  other  instances  of  its 
occurrence  may  yet  be  discovered  more  in  accordance 
with  the  ancient  statements.  [G.] 

NIM'KOD  (VIB3  :  Ne)8pc68  :  Nemrod),  a  son 
of  Cush  and  grandson  of  Ham.  The  events  of  his 
life  are  recorded  in  a  passage  (Gen.  x.  8  ff.)  which, 
from  the  conciseness  of  its  language,  is  involved  in 
considerable  uncertainty.  We  may  notice,  in  the 
first  place,  the  terms  in  ver.  8.  9,  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "mighty"  and  "  mighty  hunter  before  the 
Lord."  The  idea  of  any  moral  qualities  being 
conveyed  by  these  expressions  may  be  at  once 
rejected ;  for,  on  the  one  hand,  the  words  "  before 
the  Lord"  are  a  mere  superlative  adjunct  (as  in 
the  parallel  expression  in  Jon.  iii.  3),  and  contain 
no  notion  of  Divine  approval ;  and,  on  the  other 
hard,  the  ideas  of  violence  and  insolence  with 
which  tradition  invested  the  character  of  the  hero, 
as  delineated  by  Josephusc  (Ant.  i.  4,  §2),  are 
aot  necessarily  involved  in  the  Hebrew  words, 
though  the  term  gibb6rd  is  occasionally  taken  in 
a  bad  sense  (e.  g.  Ps.  Iii.  1).  The  term  may 


NIMROD 

be  regarded  as  betokening  personal  prowess  witk 
the  accessory  notion  of  gigantic  *>tat  aft  (as  in  tkt 
LXX.  yiyas).  It  is  somewhat  doubtful  whether 
the  prowess  of  Nimrod  rested  on  his  achievements 
as  a  hunter  or  as  a  conqueror.  The  literal  ren 
dering  of  the  Hebrew  words  would  undoubtedly 
apply  to  the  former,  but  they  may  be  regarded 
as  a  translation  of  a  proverbial  expression  ori 
ginally  current  in  the  land  of  Nimrod,  where  th<« 
terms  significant  of  "hunter"  and  "hunting'' 
appear  to  have  been  applied  to  the  forays  of  the 
sovereigns  against  the  surrounding  nations.*  Tho 
two  phases  of  prowess,  hunting  and  conquering, 
may  indeed  well  have  been  combined  in  the  same 
person  in  a  rude  age,  and  the  Assyrian  monuments 
abound  with  scenes  which  exhibit  the  skill  of  the 
sovereigns  in  the  chase.  But  the  context  certainly 
favours  the  special  application  of  the  term  to  the 
case  of  conquest,  for  otherwise  the  assertion  in 
ver.  8,  "he  began  to  be  a  mighty  one  in  the 
earth,"  is  devoid  of  point — while,  taken  as  intro 
ductory  to  what  follows,  it  seems  to  indicate 
Nimrod  as  the  first  who,  after  the  flood,  establishel 
a  powerful  empire  on  the  earth  the  limits  of  which 
are  afterwards  defined.  The  next  point  to  be 
noticed  is  the  expression  in  ver.  10,  "  The  be 
ginning  of  his  kingdom,"  taken  in  connexion  with 
the  commencement  of  ver.  11,  which  admits  of 
the  double  sense :  "  Out  of  that  land  went  forth 
Asshur,"  as  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V.,  and  "  out 
of  that  land  he  went  forth  to  Assyria,"  as  in  the 
margin.  These  two  passages  mutually  react  on 
each  other ;  for  if  the  words  "  beginning  of  his 
kingdom "  mean,  as  we  believe  to  be  the  case, 
"his  first  kingdom,"  or,  as  Gesenius  (Thes.  p. 
1252)  renders  it  "  the  territory  of  which  it  wa» 
at  first  composed,"  then  the  expression  implies  a 
subsequent  extension  of  his  kingdom,  in  other 
words,  that  "  he  went  forth  to  Assyria."  If, 
however,  the  sense  of  ver.  11  be,  "out  of  that 
land  went  forth  Asshur,"  then  no  other  sense 
can  be  given  to  ver.  10  than  that  "the  capital  of 
his  kingdom  was  Babylon,"  though  the  expression 
must  be  equally  applied  to  the  towns  subsequent!) 
mentioned.  This  rendering  appears  untenable  m 
all  respects,  and  the  expression  may  therefore  be 
cited  in  support  of  the  marginal  rendering  of  ver. 
11.  With  regard  to  the  latter  passage,  either 
sense  is  permissible  in  point  of  grammatical  con 
struction,  for  the  omission  of  the  local  affix  to  the 
word  Asshur,  which  forms  the  chief  objection  to 
the  marginal  rendering,  is  not  peculiar  to  this 
passage  (comp.  1  K.  xi.  17;  2  K.  xv.  14),  nor  is 
it  necessary  even  to  assume  a  prolepsis  in  the 


b  A  racy  and  characteristic  passage,  aimed  at  the  doc- 
trina  haereticorum,  and  playing  on  the  name  as  signify 
ing  a  leopard,  will  be  found  in  Jerome's  Commentary  on 
Is.  xv.  6. 

«  The  view  of  Nimrod' g  character  taken  by  this  writer 
originated  partly  perhaps  in  a  false  etymology  of  the 
name,  as  though  it  were  connected  with  the  Hebrew  root 
ruarad  (Tltt)'  "  to  rebel,"  and  partly  from  the  supposed 
connexion  of  the  hero's  history  with  the  building  of  the 
tower  of  Babe.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  first  of  these 
assumptions:  the  name  is  either  Cushite  or  Assyrian. 
Nor,  again,  does  the  Bible  connect  Nimrod  with  the  build 
ing  of  the  tower ;  for  it  only  states  that  Babel  formed  one 
of  his  capitals.  Indications  have,  indeed,  been  noticed  by 
Bunseu  (Bibdwerk,  v.  74)  of  a  connexion  between  the  two 
narratives ;  they  have  undoubtedly  a  common  Jehovistic 
character ;  but  the  point  on  which  he  lays  most  stress  (the 
exiiression  in  i.  2,  ••  from  the  east,"  or  "eastward""  is  in 


reality  worthless  for  the  purpose.  The  influence  of  the 
view  taken  by  Josephus  is  curiously  developed  in  the 
identification  of  Nimrod  with  the  constellation  Orion,  the 

Hebrew  name  ce*il  (?^D3);  "  foolish,"  being  regarded  as 
synonymous  with  Nimrod,  and  the  giant  form  of  Orion, 
together  with  its  Arabic  name,  "  the  giant,''  supplying 
another  connecting  link.  Josephus  follows  the  LXX.  in 
his  form  of  the  name,  Nc/3p<ifii)«.  The  variation  in  the 
LXX.  is  of  no  real  importance,  as  it  may  be  paralleled  by 
a  similar  exchange  of  /3  for  Q  in  the  case  of  ^e/SAi  (1  Chr. 
i.  47),  and,  in  a  measure,  by  the  insertion  of  the  ft  before 
the  liquids  in  other  cases,  such  as  Mafx0p^  (Gen.  xiv.  13). 
The  variation  hardly  deserves  the  attention  it  has  received 
in  Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  596. 

d  133. 

•  Tiglath-pileser  I.,  for  instance,  is  described  ae  hr 
that  "  pursues  after  "  or  "  hunts  the  people  of  Biln-Nfpriu* 
So  also  of  other  k'ngs  (Rawlinson's  Iltrod.  1.  58T  ) 


NIMItOD 

application  cf  the  term  Asshur  to  tne  land  of 
Assyria  at  the  time  of  Nimrod's  invasion,  inas 
much  as  the  historical  date  of  this  event  may  be 
considerably  later  than  the  genealogical  statement 
would  imply.  Authorities  both  ancient  and  mo 
dern  are  divided  on  the  subject,  but  the  most 
weighty  names  of  modem  times  support  tho  mar 
ginal  rendering,  as  it  seems  best  to  accord  with 
historical  truth.  The  unity  of  the  passage  is 
moreover  supported  by  its  peculiarities  both  of 
style  and  matter.  It  does  not  seem  to  have 
formed  part  of  the  original  genealogical  statement 
but  to  be  an  interpolation  of  a  later  date  ;f  it  is 
the  only  instance  in  which  personal  characteristics 
are  attributed  to  any  of  the  names  mentioned  ;  the 
proverbial  expression  which  it  embodies  bespeaks 
its  traditional  and  fragmentary  character,  and  there 
is  nothing  to  connect  the  passage  either  with  what 
precedes  or  with  what  follows  it.  Such  a  frag 
mentary  record,  though  natural  in  reference  to  a 
single  mighty  hero,  would  hardly  admit  of  the 
introduction  of  references  to  others.  The  only 
subsequent  notice  of  the  name  Nimrod  occurs  in 
Mic.  v.  6,  where  the  "laud  of  Nimrod"  is  a 
synonym  either  for  Assyria,  just  before  mentioned, 
or  for  Babylonia. 

The  chief  events  in  the  life  of  Nimrod,  then,  are 
(1)  that  he  was  a  Cushite  ;  (2)  that  he  established 
an  empire  in  Shinar  (the  classical  Babylonia),  the 
chief  towns  being  Babel,  Erech,  Accad,  and  Calneh ; 
and  (3)  that  he  extended  this  empire  northwards 
along  the  course  of  the  Tigris  over  Assyria,  where 
he  founded  a  second  group  of  capitals,  Nineveh, 
Rehoboth,  Calah,  and  Kesen.  These  events  cor 
respond  to  and  may  be  held  to  represent  the 
salient  historical  facts  connected  with  the  earliest 
stages  of  the  great  Babylonian  empire.  1.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  abundant  evidence  that  the  race 
that  first  held  sway  in  the  lower  Babylonian  plain 
was  of  Cushite  or  Hamitic  extraction.  Tradition 
assigned  to  Belus,  the  mythical  founder  of  Baby 
lon,  an  Egyptian  origin,  inasmuch  as  it  described 
him  as  the  son  of  Poseidon  and  Libya  (Diod.  Sicul. 
i.  28;  Apollodor.  ii.  1,  §4;  Pausan.  iv.  23,  §5); 
the  astrological  system  of  Babylon  (Diod.  Sicul.  i. 
81)  and  perhaps  its  religious  rites  (Hestiaeus  S  ap. 
Joseph.  Ant.  i.  4,  §3)  were  referred  to  the  same 
quarter ;  and  the  legend  of  Cannes,  the  great  teacher 
of  Babylon,  rising  out  of  the  Erythraean  sea,  pre 
served  by  Synceilus  (Chronogr.  p.  28),  points  in 
the  same  direction.  The  name  Gush  itself  was 
preserved  in  Babylonia  and  the  adjacent  countries 
under  the  forms  of  Cossaei,  Cissia,  Cuthah,  and 
Susiana  or  Chuzistan.  The  earliest  written  lan 
guage  of  Babylonia,  as  known  to  us  from  existing 
inscriptions,  bears  a  strong  resemblance  to  that  of 
Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  and  the  same  words  have 
been  found  in  each  country,  as  in  the  case  of 
Mirikh,  the  Meroe  of  Ethiopia,  the  Mars  of 
Babylonia  (Rawlinson,  i.  442).  Even  the  name 
Nimrod  appears  in  the  list  of  the  Egyptian  kings 
of  the  22nd  dynasty,  but  there  are  reasons  for 
thinking  that  dynasty  to  have  been  of  Assyrian 


NIMROD 


545 


'  The  expressions  "1133,  7HH,  and  still  more  the  nee 
of  the  term  Din*,  are  regarded  as  indications  of  a  Jeho- 

T       t 

vistic  original,  while  the  genealogy  itself  Is  Elohistic.  It 
should  be  further  noticed  that  there  is  nothing  to  mark 
the  connexion  or  distinction  between  Nimrod  and  the 
other  sons  of  Cush. 

8  The  passage  quoted  by  Josephus  is  of  so  fragmentary  a 

VOL.  II. 


extraction.  Putting  the  above-ment.oued  consi 
derations  together,  they  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
connexion  between  the  ancient  Babylonians  and  the 
Ethiopian  or  Egyptian  stock  (respectively  the 
Nimrod  and  the  Cush  of  the  Musaic  table).  More 
than  this  cannot  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  data, 
and  we  must  therefore  withhold  cur  asstnt  from 
Bunsen's  view  (Bibelwerk,  v.  69)  that  the  Cushite 
origin  of  Nimrod  betokens  the  westward  progress 
of  the  Scythian  or  Turanian  races  from  the  coun 
tries  eastward  of  Babylonia ;  for,  though  branches 
of  the  Cushite  family  (such  as  the  Cossaei)  had 
pressed  forward  to  the  east  of  the  Tigris,  and 
though  the  early  language  of  Babylonia  bears  in 
its  structure  a  Scythic  or  Turanian  character,  yet 
both  these  features  are  susceptible  of  explanation  in 
connexion  with  the  original  eastward  progress  of 
the  Cushite  race. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  the  earliest  seat  of  empire 
was  in  the   south  part  of  the  Babylonian  plain. 
The  large  mounds,  which  for  a  vast  number   of 
centuries  have  covered  the  ruins  of  ancient  cities, 
have  already  yielded  some  evidences  of  the  dates 
aud  names  of  their  founders,  and  we  can  assign  the 
highest  antiquity  to  the  towns  represented  by  the 
mounds  of  Niffer  (perhaps  the  early  Babel,  though 
also  identified  with  Calneh),  Warka  (the  Biblical 
Erech),   Mugheir   (Ur),   and   Senkereh   (Ellasar), 
while  the  name  of  Accad  is  preserved  in  the  title 
Kinzi-Akkad,  by  which  the  founder  or  embellisher 
of  those  towns   was   distinguished  (Rawlinson,  i. 
435).     The  date  of  their  foundation  may  be  placed 
at  about  B.C.  2200.     We  may  remark  the  coinci 
dence  between  the   quadruple   groups  of  capitals 
noticed   in   the   Bible,    and   the    title   Kiprat  or 
Kiprat-arba,  assumed  by  the  early  kings  of  Baby 
lon  and  supposed  to  mean  "  four  races  "  (Rawlin 
son,  i.  438,  447). 

3.  In   the  third  place,  the  Babylonian   empire 
extended  its  sway  northwards  along  the  course  of 
the  Tigris  at  a  period  long  anterior  to  the  rise  of 
the  Assyrian  empire  in  the  13th  century  B.C.     We 
have  indications  of  this  extension  as  early  as  about 
1860  when   Shamas-Iva,-  the   son   of  Ismi-dagon 
king  of  Babylon  founded  a  temple  at  Kileh-shergal 
(supposed  to  be  the  ancient  Asshur).     The  exist 
ence  of  Nineveh  itself  can  be  traced  up  by  the  aid 
of  Egyptian   monuments  to  about  the  middle   of 
the  15th  century  B.C.,  and  though  the  historical 
name  of  its   founder  is  lost  to  us,  yet   tradition 
mentions  a  Belus  as  king  of  Nineveh  at  a  period 
anterior  to  that  assigned  to  Ninus  (Layard's  Ni 
neveh,  ii.  231),  thus  rendering  it  frobf.ble  that  the 
dynasty  represented  by  the  latter  name  was  pre 
ceded  by  one  of  Babylonian  origin. 

Our  present  information  does  not  permit  us  to 
identify  Nimrod  with  any  personage  known  to  us 
either  from  inscriptions  or  from  classical  writers. 
Ninus  and  Belus  are  representative  titles  rather 
than  personal  names,  and  are  but  equivalent  terms 
for  "  the  lord,"  who  was  regarded  as  the  founder  of 
the  empires  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  We  have  no 
reason  on  this  account  to  doubt  the  personal  exist- 


character,  that  its  original  purport  can  hardly  be  guessed. 
He  adduces  it  apparently  to  illustrate  the  name  Shinar, 
but  the  context  favours  the  supposition  that  the  writer 
referred  to  the  period  subsequent  to  the  flood,  in  which 
case  we  may  infer  the  belief  (1)  that  the  population  of 
Babylonia  was  not  autochthonous,  but  immigrant ;  (2)  that 
the  point  from  which  it  immigrated  was  from  the  west 
Belus  being  identified  with  Zeus  Enyallus. 

2  N 


546 


NIMSHI 


race  h  ol  Nimrod,  for  the  events  with  which  he  is  con 
nected  full  within  the  shadows  of  a  remote  antiquity. 
l<ut  we  may,  nevertheless,  consistently  with  this 
relief,  assume  that  a  large  portion  of  the  interest 
with  which  he  was  invested  was  the  mere  reflection 
of  the  sentiment*  with  which  the  nations  of  west 
ern  Asia  looked  back  on  the  overshadowing  great 
ness  of  the  ancient  Babylonian  empire,  the  very 
monuments  of  which  seemed  to  tell  of  days  when 
"  there  were  giants  in  the  earth."  The  feeling 
which  suggested  the  colouring  of  Nimrod  as  a 
vepresentative  hero  still  finds  place  in  the  land  of 
his  achievements,  and  to  him  the  modem  Arabs' 
ascribe  all  the  great  works  of  ancient  times,  such  as 
the  Birs-Nimrud  near  Babylon,  Tel  Nimrud  near 
ftayhdad,  the  dam  of  Sahr  el  Nimrud  across  the 
Tigris  below  Mosul,  and  the  well-known  mound  of 
Nimrud  in  the  same  neighbourhood.  [W.  L.  B.] 

NIM'SHI  (»K»IM  :  Vla^fffcri ;  in  2  Chr.  Nojue 
ffft :  Namsi).     The  grandfather  of  Jehu,  who  is 
generally  called  "  the  son  of  Nimshi"  (1  K.  xix.  16  • 
2  K.  ix.  2,  14,  20 ;  2  Chr.  xxii.  7). 

NIN'EVEH  (PIWJ :    Vttvevi,  Nw>s :  Ninus, 

Ninos,  Ninive),  the  capital  of  the  ancient  kingdom 
and  empire  of  Assyria ;  a  city  of  great  power,  size, 
and  renown,  usually  included  amongst  the  most 
ancient  cities  of  the  world  of  which  there  is  any 
historic  record.  The  name  appears  to  be  com 
pounded  from  that  of  an  Assyrian  deity,  "  Nin," 
corresponding,  it  is  conjectured,  with  the  Greek 
Hercules,  and  occurring  in  the  names  of  several  As 
syrian  kings,  as  in  "  Ninus,"  the  mythic  founder, 
according  to  Greek  tradition,  of  the  city.  In  the 
Assyrian  Inscriptions  Nineveh  is  also  supposed  to  be 
called  "  the  city  of  Bel." 

Nineveh  is  first  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  in  con 
nexion  with  the  primitive  dispersement  and  migra 
tions  of  the  human  race.  Asshur,  or,  according  to 
the  marginal  reading,  which  is  generally  preferred, 
Nimrod,  is  there  described  (Gen.  x.  11)  as  extending 
his  kingdom  from  the  land  of  Shinar.  or  Babylonia, 
in  the  south,  to  Assyria  in  the  north,  and  found 
ing  four  cities,  of  which  the  most  famous  was 
Nineveh.  Hence  Assyria  was  subsequently  known 
to  the  Jews  as  "  the  land  of  Nimrod  "  (cf.  Mic.  v.  6), 
and  was  believed  to  have  been  first  peopled  by  a 
c-olony  from  Babylon.  The  kingdom  of  Assyria  and 
of  the  Assyrians  is  referred  to  in  the  0.  T.  as  con 
nected  with  the  Jews  at  a  very  early  period ;  as  in 
Num.  xxiv.  22,  24,  and  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  8  :  but  after  the 
notice  of  the  foundation  of  Nineveh  in  Genesis  no 
further  mention  is  made  of  the  city  until  the  time 
of  the  book  of  Jonah,  or  the  8th  centurv  B.C.,  sup 
posing  we  accept  the  earliest  date  for  Ihiat  narrative 
[JONAH],  which,  however,  according  to  some  critics, 
must  be  brought  down  300  years  later,  or  to  the 


h  We  must  notice,  without  however  adopting,  the  views 
lately  propounded  by  M.  D.  Chwolson  in  his  pamphlet, 
Ueber  die  Ueberreste  der  altbdbylonischen  Literatur.  He 
has  discovered  the  name  Nemrod  or  Nemroda  in  the 
manuscript  works  of  an  Arabian  writer  named  Ibn- 
Wa'hschijjah,  who  professes  to  give  a  translation  of  cer 
tain  original  literary  works  in  the  Nabatbaean  language, 
one  of  which,  "on  Nabathaean  agriculture,"  is  in  part 
assigned  by  him  to  a  writer  named  (jut'aml.  This  (jut.  ami 
incidentally  mentions  that  he  lived  in  Babylon  under  a 
dynasty  of  Canaanitea,  which  had  been  founded  by  a  priest 
named  Nemrod.  M.  Cbwolson  assigns  Ibn-Wa'lischijjuh 
to  the  end  of  the  9th  century  of  our  new  era,  and  Qut'aml 
u>  U)«  early  part  of  the  13th  century  B.C.  He  regar's  the 


NINETKH 

5th  century  B.C.  In  this  book  neither  Assyria  nor 
the  Assyrians  are  mentioned,  the  king  to  whora  thf 
prophet  was  sent  being  temed  the  "  kit£  ot  Nine 
veh."  and  his  subjects  "  the  people  of  Nineveh.'' 
|  Ab»yna  is  lirst  called  a  kingdom  in  the  time  of 
|  Menahem,  about  B.C.  770.  Nahum  (?  B.C.  64.i) 
directs  his  prophecies  against  Nineveh ;  only  once 
against  the  king  of  Assyria,  ch.  iii.  18.  In  2  Kings 
(xix.  36)  and  Isaiah  (xxxvii.  37)  the  city  is  first  dis 
tinctly  mentioned  as  the  residence  of  the  monarch, 
Sennacherib  was  slain  there  when  worshipping  in  the 
temple  of  Nisroch  his  god.  In  2  Chronicles  (xxxii. 
21),  where  the  same  event  is  described,  the  name  of 
the  place  where  it  occurred  is  omitted.  Zephaniah, 
about  B.C.  630,  couples  the  capital  and  the  kingdom 
together  (ii.  13) ;  and  this  is  the  last  mention  of 
Nineveh  as  an  existing  city.  He  probably  lived  to 
witness  its  destruction,  an  event  impending  at  the 
time  of  his  prophecies.  Although  Assyria  and  the 
Assyrians  are  alluded  to  by  Ezekiel  and  Jeremiah, 
by  the  former  as  a  nation  in  whose  miserable  ruin 
prophecy  had  been  fulfilled  (xxxi.),  yet  they  do  not 
refer  by  name  to  the  capital.  Jeremiah,  when  enu 
merating  "  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  which  an 
upon  the  face  of  the  earth"  (ch.  jjcv.),  omits  all 
mention  of  the  nation  and  the  city.  Habakkuk  only 
speaks  of  the  Chaldaeans,  which  may  lead  to  the 
inference  that  the  date  of  his  prophecies  is  somewhat 
later  than  that  usually  assigned  to  them.  [HABAK 
KUK.]  From  a  comparison  of  these  data,  it  has  been 
generally  assumed  that  the  destruction  of  Nineveh 
and  the  extinction  of  the  empire  took  place  between 
the  time  of  Zephaniah  and  that  of  K/ekiel  and  Jere 
miah.  The  exact  period  of  these  events  has  conse 
quently  been  fixed,  with  a  certain  amount  of  con 
current  evidence  derived  from  classical  history,  at 
B.C.  606  (Clinton,  Fasti  Hellen.  i.  269).  It  has  been 
shewn  that  it  may  have  occurred  20  yeai's  earlier. 
[ASSYRIA.]  The  city  was  then  laid  waste,  its 
monuments  destroyed,  and  its  inhabitants  scattered 
or  earned  away  into  captivity.  It  never  rose  again 
from  its  ruins.  This  total  disappearance  of  Nineveh 
is  fully  confirmed  by  the  records  of  profane  history. 
There  is  no  mention  of  it  in  the  Persian  cuneiform 
inscriptions  of  the  Achaemenid  dynasty.  Herodotus 
(i.  193)  speaks  of  the  Tigris  as  "  the  river  upon 
which  the  town  of  Nineveh  formerly  stood."  He 
must  have  passed,  in  his  journey  to  Babylon,  very 
near  the  site  of  the  city — perhaps  actually  over 
it.  So  accurate  a  recorder  of  what  he  saw  would 
scarcely  have  omitted  to  mention,  if  not  to  describe, 
any  ruins  of  importance  that  might  have  existed 
there.  Not  two  centuries  had  then  elapsed  since 
the  fall  of  the  city.  Equally  conclusive  proof  of 
its  condition  is  afforded  by  Xenophon,  who  with  the 
ten  thousand  Greeks  encamped  during  his  retreat 
on,  or  very  near,  its  site  (B.C.  401).  The  very 
name  had  then  been  forgotten,  or  at  least  he  does 

term  Nabathaean  as  meaning  old- Baby  Ionian,  and  the 
works  of  Qut'ami  as  the  remains  of  a  Babylonian  litera 
ture.  He  further  identifies  the  Canaauite  dynasty  with 
the  fifth  or  Arabian  dynasty  of  Berosus,  and  adduces  the 
legend  of  Cepheus,  the  king  of  Joppa,  who  reigned  from 
the  Mediterranean  to  the  Erythraean  sea,  in  confirmation 
of  such  a  Canaanitish  invasion.  It  would  be  beyond  OUT 
province  to  discuss  the  various  questions  raised  by  this 
curious  discovery.  The  result,  if  established,  would  be 
to  bring  the  date  of  Nimrod  down  to  about  B.C.  1500. 

The  Arabs  retain  Josephus"  view  of  the  impiety  ol 
Nimrod,  and  have  a  collection  of  legends  respecting  hia 
idolatry,  his  enmity  against  Abraham,  &c.  (l^ayard'a 
Nvnevek,  i.  24  aote). 


NINEVEH 

not  appeal  co  hare  been  acquainted  with  it,  for  he 
calls  one  gioup  of  ruins  "  Larissa,"  and  merely  states 
that  a  second  group  was  near  the  deserted  town  of 
Mespila  (Anab.  b.  iii.  4,  §7).  The  ruins,  as  he 
describes  them,  correspond  in  many  resjiects  with 
those  which  exist  at  the  present  day,  except  tha* 
he  assigns  to  the  walls  near  Mespila  a  circuit  of 
six  parasangs,  or  nearly  three  times  their  actual 
dimensions.  Ctesias  placed  the  city  on  the  iu- 
phrates  (Frag.  i.  2),  a  proof  either  of  his  igno 
rance  or  of  the  entire  disappearance  of  the  place. 
He  appears  to  have  led  Diodorus  Siculus  into  the 
same  error  (ii.  27,  28).»  The  historians  of  Alex 
ander,  with  the  exception  of  Arrian  (Ind.  42,  3),  do 
not  even  allude  to  the  city,  over  the  ruins  of  which 
the  conqueror  must  have  actually  marched.  His 
great  victory  of  Arbela  was  won  almost  in  sight  of 
them.  It  is  evident  that  the  later  Greek  and  Roman 
writers,  such  as  Strabo,  Ptolemy,  and  Pliny,  could 
only  have  derived  any  independent  knowledge  they 
[possessed  of  Nineveh  from  traditions  of  no  authority. 
They  concur,  however,  in  placing  it  on  the  eastern 
bank  of  the  Tigris.  During  the  Roman  period,  a 
small  castle  or  fortified  town  appears  to  have  stood 
on  some  part  of  the  site  of  the  ancient  city.  It  was 
probably  built  by  the  Persians  (Amm.  Mai-cell, 
xxiii.  22)  ;  and  subsequently  occupied  by  the  Romans, 
and  erected  by  the  Emperor  Claudius  into  a  colony. 
It  appears  to  have  borne  the  ancient  traditional 
name  of  Nineve,  as  well  as  its  corrupted  form  of 
Ninos  and  Ninus,  and  also  at  one  time  that  of 
Hierapolis.  Tacitus  (Ann.  xii.  13),  mentioning  its 
capture  by  Meherdates,  calls  it  "  Nines ;  "  on  coins 
of  Trajan  it  is  "  Ninus,"  on  those  of  Maximinus 
"  Niniva,"  in  both  instances  the  epithet  Claudiopolis 
being  added.  Many  Roman  remains,  such  as  sepul 
chral  vases,  bronze  and  other  ornaments,  sculp 
tured  figures  in  marble,  terracottas,  and  coins,  have 
been  discovered  in  the  rubbish  covering  the  Assyrian 
ruins ;  besides  wells  and  tombs,  constructed  long 
after  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  edifices.  The 
Roman  settlement  appears  to  have  been  in  its  turn 
abandoned,  for  there  is  no  mention  of  it  when 
Heraclius  gained  the  great  victory  over  the  Per 
sians  in  the  battle  of  Nineveh,  fought  on  the  very 
site  of  the  ancient  city,  A.D.  627.  After  the  Arab 
conquest,  a  fort  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Tigris 
bore  the  name  of  "  Ninawi  "  (Rawlinson,  As.  Soc. 
Journal,  vol.  xii.  418).  Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in 
the  12th  century,  mentions  the  site  of  Nineveh  as 
occupied  by  numerous  inhabited  villages  and  small 
townships  (ed.  Asher,  i.  91).  The  name  remained 
attached  to  the  ruins  during  the  Middle  Ages ;  and 
from  them  a  bishop  of  the  Chaldaean  Church  derived 
his  title  (Assemani,  iv.  459) ;  but  it  is  doubtful 
whether  any  town  or  fort  was  so  called.  Early 
English  travellers  merely  allude  to  the  site  (Pur- 
chas,  ii.  1387).  Niebuhr  is  the  first  modern  tra 
veller  who  speaks  of  "Nuniyah  "  as  a  villagt  stand 
ing  on  one  of  the  ruins  which  he  describes  as  "  a 
considerable  hill "  (ii  353).  This  may  be  a  cor 
ruption  of  "  Nebbi  Yunus,"  the  Prophet  Jonah,  a 
name  still  given  to  a  village  containing  his  apo 
cryphal  tomb.  Mr.  Rich,  who  sui-veyed  the  site  in 
1820,  does  not  mention  Nuniyah,  and  KJ  such  place 
now  exists.  Tribes  of  Turcomans  and  sedentary 
Arabs,  and  Chaldaean  and  Syrian  Christians,  dwell  in 
wnall  mud-built  villages,  and  cultivate  tlie  soil  in  the 


NINEVEH 


547 


•  In  a  fragment  from  Ctesias,  preserved  by  Nicolaus 
Damascene,  the  city  is  restored  to  its  true  sitt. 
(Mailer,  Frag.  Hint.  Grace,  iii.  358.) 


country  around  the  rains  ;  and  occasicnally  a  trite  of 
wandering  Kurds,  or  of  Bedouins  driven  by  hunger 
from  the  desert,  will  pitch  their  tents  amongst 
them.  After  the  Arab  conquest  of  the  west  of 
Asia,  Mosul,  at  one  time  the  flourishing  capital  of 
an  independent  kingdom,  rose  Dn  the  opposite  or 
western  bank  of  the  Tigris.  Some  similarity  in 
the  names  has  suggested  its  identification  with  the 
Mespila  of  Xenophon  ;  but  its  first  actual  mention 
only  occurs  after  the  Arab  conquest  (A.M.  16,  arid 
A.D.  637).  It  was  sometimes  known  as  Athur,  and 
was  united  with  Nineveh  as  an  episcopal  see  of  the 
Chaldaean  Church  (Assemani,  iii.  269).  It  has  lost 
all  its  ancient  prosperity,  and  the  greater  part  01 
the  town  is  now  in  ruins. 

Traditions  of  the  unrivalled  size  and  magnificence 
of  Nineveh  were  equally  familiar  to  the  Greek  and 
Roman  writers,  and  to  the  Arab  geographers.  But 
the  city  had  fallen  so  completely  into  decay  before 
the  period  of  authentic  histoiy,  that  no  description 
of  it,  or  even  of  any  of  its  monuments,  is  to  be 
found  in  any  ancient  author  of  trust.  Diodorus 
Siculus  asserts  (ii.  3)  that  the  city  formed  a  quad 
rangle  of  150  stadia  by  90,  or  altogether  of  480 
stadia  (no  less  than  60  miles),  and  was  surrounded  by 
walls  100  feet  high,  broad  enough  for  three  chariots 
to  drive  abreast  upon  them,  and  defended  by  1500 
towers,  each  200  feet  in  height.  According  to  Strabo 
(xvi.  737)  it  was  larger  than  Babylon,  which  was 
385  stadia  in  circuit.  In  the  O.T.  we  find  only  vague 
allusions  to  the  splendour  and  wealth  of  the  city, 
and  the  very  indefinite  statement  in  the  book  of 
Jonah  that  it  was  "  an  exceeding  great  city,"  or 
"  a  great  city  to  God,"  or  "  for  God"  ({.  e.  in  the 
sight  of  God),  "  of  three  days'  journey  ;"  and  that 
it  contained  "  six  score  thousand  persons  who  could 
not  discern  between  their  right  hand  and  their  left 
hand,  and  also  much  cattle"  (iv.  11).  It  is  ob 
vious  that  the  accounts  of  Diodorus  are  for  the 
most  part  absurd  exaggerations,  founded  upon  fabu 
lous  traditions,  for  which  existing  remains  afford 
no  warrant.  It  may,  however,  be  remarked  that 
the  dimensions  he  assigns  to  the  area  of  the  city 
would  correspond  to  the  three  days'  journey  of 
Jonah — the  Jewish  day's  journey  being  20  miles — 
if  that  expression  be  applied  to  the  circuit  of  the 
walls.  "  Persons  not  discerning  between  their 
right  hand  and  their  left"  may  either  allude  to 
children,  or  to  the  ignorance  of  the  whole  population. 
If  the  first  be  intended,  the  number  of  inhabitants, 
according  to  the  usual  calculation,  would  have 
amounted  to  about  600,000.  But  such  expressions 
are  probably  mere  Eastern  figures  of  speech  to 
denote  vastness,  and  far  too  vague  to  admit  of  exact 
interpretation. 

The  political  history  of  Nineveh  is  that  of  As- 
syria,  of  which  a  sketch  has  already  been  given. 
[ASSYRIA.]  It  has  been  observed  that  the  territory 
included  within  the  boundaries  of  the  kingdom  ol 
Assyria  proper  was  comparatively  limited  in  extent, 
and  that  almost  within  the  immediate  neighbour 
hood  of  the  capital  petty  kings  appear  to  have  ruled 
over  semi-independent  states,  owning  allegiance  and 
paying  tribute  to  the  great  Lord  of  the  Empire, 
"  the  King  of  Kings,"  according  to  his  Oriental  title, 
who  dwelt  at  Nineveh.  (Cf.  Is.  x.  8 :  "  Aie  not 
my  princes  altogether  kings  ?  ")  These  petty  kings 
were  in  a  constant  state  of  rebellion,  which  usually 
shewed  itself  by  their  refusal  to  pay  the  apportioned 
tribute — the  principal  link  between  the  sovereign  and 
the  dependent  states — and  repeated  expeditions  wen 
undertaken  against  them  to  enforce  this  act  of  ob* 

2  N  2 


548 


NINEVEH 


NINEVEH 


iicnw     (Cf.  2  K.  xvi.  7,  xvii.  4,  where  it  is  staled  |  furnished    remains   which   identify  11  •€   period   oj 


that  thr  war  made  by  the  Assyrians  upon  the 
was  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  the  payment  of 
tribute.)  There  was,  consequently,  no  bond  of 
sympathy  arising  out  of  common  interests  between 
the  various  populations  which  made  up  the  empire. 
Its  political  condition  was  essentially  weak.  When 
an  independent  monarch  was  sufficiently  powerful 
to  carry  on  a  successful  war  against  the  great 
king,  or  a  dependent  prince  sufficiently  strong  to 
throw  off  his  allegiance,  the  empire  soon  came  to 
an  end.  The  fall  of  the  capital  was  the  signal  for 
universal  disruption.  Each  petty  state  asserted  its 
independence,  until  reconquered  by  some  warlike 
chief  who  could  found  a  new  dynasty  and  a  new 
empire  to  replace  those  which  had  fallen.  Thus 
on  the  borders  of  the  great  rivers  of  Mesopotamia 
arose  in  turn  the  first  Babylonian,  the  Assyrian, 
the  Median,  the  second  Babylonian,  the  Persian, 
and  the  Seleucid  empires.  The  capital  was  how 
ever  invariably  changed,  and  generally  transferred 
to  the  principal  seat  of  the  conquering  race.  In 
the  East  men  have  rarely  rebuilt  great  cities 
which  have  once  fallen  into  decay — never  perhaps 
on  exactly  the  same  site.  If  the  position  of  the  old 
capital  was  deemed,  from  political  or  commercial 
reasons,  more  advantageous  than  any  other,  the 
population  was  settled  in  its  neighbourhood,  as  at 
Delhi,  and  not  amidst  its  ruins.  But  Nineveh, 
having  fallen  with  the  empire,  never  rose  again.  It 
was  abandoned  at  once,  and  suffered  to  perish 
utterly.  It  is  probable  that,  in  conformity  with 
an  Eastern  custom,  of  which  we  find  such  remark 
able  illustrations  in  the  history  of  the  Jews,  the 
entire  population  was  removed  by  the  conquerors, 
and  settled  as  colonists  in  some  distant  province. 

The  Ruins. — Previous  to  recent  excavations  and 
researches,  the  ruins  which  occupied  the  presumed 
site  of  Nineveh  seemed  to  consist  of  mere  shapeless 
heaps  or  mounds  of  earth  and  rubbish.  Unlike 
the  vast  masses  of  brick  masonry  which  mark  the 
site  of  Babylon,  they  showed  externally  no  signs  of 
artificial  construction,  except  perhaps  here  and  there 
the  traces  of  a  rude  wall  of  sun-dried  bricks.  Some 
of  these  mounds  were  of  enormous  dimensions — 
looking  in  the  distance  rather  like  natural  elevations 
than  the  work  of  men's  hands.  Upon  and  around 
them,  however,  were  scattered  innumerable  frag 
ments  of  pottery — the  unerring  evidence  of  former 
habitations.  Some  had  been  chosen  by  the  scat 
tered  population  of  the  land  as  sites  for  villages,  or 
for  small  mud-built  forts,  the  mound  itself  affording 
means  of  refuge  and  defence  against  the  marauding 
parties  of  Bedouins  and  Kurds  which  for  generations 
have  swept  over  the  face  of  the  country.  The 
summits  of  others  were  sown  with  com  or  barley. 
During  the  spring  months  they  were  covered  with 
grass  and  flowers,  bred  by  the  winter  rains.  The 
Arabs  call  these  mounds  «'  Tel,"  the  Turcomans  and 
Turks  "  Teppeh,"  both  words  being  equally  applied 
to  natural  hills  and  elevations,  and  the  first  having 
been  used  in  the  same  double  sense  by  the  most 

ancient  Semitic  races  (cf.  Hebrew  ?fl,  " a  hill,"  "a 

mound,"  "  a  heap  ot  rubbish,"  Ez.iii.  15,  Ezr.  ii.59; 
Neh.  vii.  61 ;  2  K.  xix.  12).  They  are  found  in 
vast  numbers  throughout  the  whole  region  watered 
by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  and  their  confluents, 
from  the  Taurus  to  the  .Persian  Gulf.  They  are 
seen,  but  are  less  numerous,  in  Syria,  parts  of 
-Asia  Minor,  and  in  the  plains  of  Armenia.  VVhere- 
c/er  they  have  been  examined  they  appiar  to  h.ve 


their  construction  with  that  of  the  alrtnrUe  supre 
macy  of  the  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  and  Persian  em 
pires.  They  differ  greatly  in  form,  size  and  height. 
Some  are  mere  conical  heaps,  varyi.ig  from  50  i.'. 
150  feet  high;  others  have  a  broad  flat  summit, 
and  very  precipitous  cliff-like  sides,  furrowed  by 
deep  ravines  worn  by  the  winter  rains.  Such 
mounds  are  especially  numerous  in  the  region  to 
the  east  of  the  Tigris,  in  which  Nineveh  stood,  and 
some  of  them  must  mark  the  ruins  of  the  As 
syrian  capital.  There  is  no  edifice  mentioned  by 
ancient  authors  as  forming  part  of  the  city,  which 
we  are  required,  as  in  the  case  of  Babylon,  to 
identify  with  any  existing  remains,  except  the  tomb, 
according  to  some,  of  Ninus,  according  to  others  of 
Sardanapalus,  which  is  recorded  to  have  stood  at 
the  entrance  of  Nineveh  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  7  ;  Amynt. 
Frag.  ed.  Muller,  p.  136).  The  only  difficulty  is 
to  determine  which  ruins  are  to  be  comprised 
within  the  actual  limits  of-  the  ancient  city.  The 
northern  extremity  of  the  principal  collection  ot 
mounds  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Tigris  may  be 
fixed  at  Shereef  Khan,  and  the  southern  at  Nim- 
roud,  about  6$  miles  from  the  junction  of  that 
river  with  the  great  Zab,  the  ancient  Lycus.  East 
ward  they  extend  to  Khorsabad,  about  10  miles 
N.  by  E.  of  Shereef  Khan,  and  to  Karamless,  about 
15  miles  N.E.  of  Nimroud.  Within  the  area  of  this 
irregular  quadrangle  are  to  be  found,  in  every 
direction,  traces  of  ancient  edifices  and  of  former 
population.  It  comprises  various  separate  and  dis 
tinct  groups  of  ruins,  four  of  which,  if  not  more, 
are  the  remains  of  fortified  inclosures  or  strong, 
holds,  defended  by  walls  and  ditches,  towers  and 
ramparts.  The  principal  are — 1,  the  group  imme 
diately  opposite  Mosul,  including  the  great  mounds 
of  Kouyunjik  (also  called  by  the  Arabs,  Armoushee- 
yah)  and  Nebbi  Yunus ;  2,  that  near  the  junction 
of  the  Tigris  and  Zab,  comprising  the  mounds  of 
Nimroud  and  Athur ;  3,  Khorsabad,  about  10  miles 
to  the  east  of  the  former  river ;  4,  Shereef  Khan, 
about  5J  miles  to  the  north  of  Kouyunjik  ;  and  5, 
Selamiyah,  3  miles  to  the  north  of  Nimroud. 
Other  large  mounds  are  Baaskeikhah,  and  Karam 
less,  where  the  remains  of  fortified  inclosures  may 
perhaps  be  traced,  Baazani,  Yarumjeh,  and  Bellawat. 
It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe  that  all  these 
names  are  comparatively  modem,  dating  from  after 
the  Mohammedan  conquest.  The  respective  position 
of  these  ruins  will  be  seen  in  the  accompanying 
map  (p.  549).  We  will  describe  the  most  important 
The  ruins  opposite  Mosul  consist  of  an  inclo 
sure  formed  by  a  continuous  line  of  mounds,  re 
sembling  a  vast  embankment  of  earth,  but  marking 
the  remains  of  a  wall,  the  western  face  of  which  is 
interrupted  by  the  two  great  mounds  of  Kouyunjik 
and  Nebbi  Yunus  (p.  550).  To  the  east  of  this  inclo- 
sure  are  the  remains  of  an  extensive  line  of  defences, 
consisting  of  moats  and  ramparts.  The  inner  wall 
forms  an  irregular  quadrangle  with  very  unequal 
sides — the  northern  being  2333  yards,  the  western, 
or  the  river-face,  4533,  the  eastern  (where  the 
wall  is  almost  the  segment  of  a  circle)  5300  yards, 
and  the  southern  but  little  more  than  1000 ;  alto 
gether  13,200  yards,  or  7  English  miles  4  fur 
longs.  The  present  height  of  this  earthen  wall  is 
between  40  and  50  feet.  Here  and  there  a  mound 
more  lofty  than  the  rest  covers  the  remains  of  a 
tower  or  a  gateway.  The  walls  appear  to  have 
been  originally  faced,  at  least  to  a  certain  height, 
with  stone  masonry,  some  remains  of  which  havf 


NINEVEH 

been  discovered.  Tne  mound  of  Kouyunjik  is  of 
irregular  form,  being  nearly  square  at  the  S.W. 
comer,  and  ending  almost  in  a  point  at  the  N.E. 
It  is  about  1300  yards  in  length,  by  500  in  its 
greatest  width ;  its  greatest  height  is  96  feet,  and 
its  sides  are  precipitous,  with  occasional  deep  ravines 
or  watercourses.  The  summit  is  nearly  flat,  but  falls 
from  the  W.  to  the  E.  A  small  village  formerly  stood 
upon  it,  but  has  of  late  years  been  abandoned.  The 
Khosr,  a  narrow  but  deep  and  sluggish  stream, 
sweeps  round  the  southern  side  of  the  mound  on  its 


NINEVEH 


549 


way  to  join  the  Tigris.  Anciently  dividing  itself  into 
two  branches,  it  completely  surrounded  Kouytusjik. 
Nebbi  Yunus  is  considerably  smaller  than  Kouyuujik, 
being  about  530  yards  by  430,  and  occupying  an 
area  of  about  40  acres.  In  height  it  is  about  the 
same.  It  is  divided  into  two  nearly  equal  parts  by 
a  depression  in  the  surface.  Upon  it  is  a  Turcoman 
village  containing  the  apocryphal  tomb  of  Jonah, 
and  a  burial-ground  held  in  great  sanctity  by  Mo 
hammedans  from  its  vicinity  to  this  sacred  edifice. 
Remains  of  entrances  or  gateways  have  been  dis- 


Piau  of  nxius  wliiuti  comprise  aDckmt  NluovtJi. 


650 


NINEVEH 


covered  in  the  N.  and  E.  walls  (o,.  The  Tigris 
formerly  ran  beneath  the  W.  wall,  and  at  the  foot 
of  the  two  great  mounds.  It  is  now  about  a  mile 
distant  from  them,  but  during  very  high  spring 
floods  it  sometimes  readies  its  ancient  bed.  The 
W.  face  of  the  incbsure  (a)  was  thus  protected  by 


Flan  of  Kouyunjik  and  Nebbi  Yunos. 

the  riTer.  The  N.  and  S.  faces  (6  and  d)  were 
strengthened  by  deep  and  broad  moats.  The  E.  (c) 
being  most  accessible  to  an  enemy,  was  most  strongly 
fortified,  and  presents  the  remains  of  a  very  elaborate 
system  of  defences.  The  Khosr,  before  entering  the 
inclosure,  which  it  divides  into  two  nearly  equal 
parts,  ran  for  some  distance  almost  parallel  to  it  (/), 
and  supplied  the  place  of  an  artificial  ditch  for  about 
half  the  length  of  the  E.  wail.  The  remainder  of 
the  wall  was  protected  by  two  wide  moats  (A), 
fed  by  the  stream,  the  supply  of  water  being  regu 
lated  by  dams,  of  which  traces  still  exist.  In 
addition,  one  or  more  ramparts  of  earth  were 
thrown  up,  and  a  moat  excavated  between  the 
inner  walls  and  the  Khosr,  the  eastern  bank  of 
which  was  very  considerably  raised  by  artificial 
means.  Below,  or  to  the  S.  of  the  stream,  a  third 


ouoti  of  Nlmtoou 


NINEVEH 

ditcn,  excavated  in  the  compact  conglomerate  rock 
and  about  200  feet  broad,  extended  almost  the  whole 
length  of  the  E.  face,  joining  the  moat  on  the  S. 
An  enormous  outer  rampart  of  earth,  still  in  some 
places  above  80  feet  in  height  (»'),  completed  the 
defences  on  this  side.  A  few  mounds  outside  thii 
rampart  probably  mark  the  sites 
of  detached  towers  or  fortified 
posts.  This  elaborate  system  of 
fortifications  was  singularly  well 
devised  to  resist  the  attacks  of 
an  enemy.  It  is  remarkable  that 
within  the  inclosure,  with  the 
exception  of  Kouyunjik  and  Nebbf 
Vunus,  no  mounds  or  irregulari 
ties  in  the  surface  of  the  soil 
denote  ruins  of  any  size.  The 
ground  is,  however,  strewed  in 
every  direction  with  fragments 
of  brick,  pottery,  and  the  usual 
signs  of  ancient  population. 

Nimroud  consists  of  a  similar 
inclosure  of  consecutive  mounds 
— the  remains  of  ancient  walls. 
The  system  of  defences  is  how 
ever  very  inferior  in  importance 
and  completeness  to  that  of  Kou- 
yunjik.  The  indications  of  towers 
occur  at  regular  intervals ;  108 
may  still  be  traced  on  the  N. 
and  E.  sides.  The  area  forms 
an  irregular  square,  about  2331 
yards  by  2095,  containing  about 
1000  acres.  The  N.  and  E.  sides 
were  defended  by  moats,  the  W. 
and  S.  walls  by  the  river,  which 
once  flowed  immediately  beneath 
them.  On  the  S.W.  face  is  a 
great  mound,  700  yards  by  400, 
and  covering  about  60  acres, 
with  a  cone  or  pyramid  of  earth  about  140  feet 
high  rising  in  the  N.W.  comer  of  it.  At  the  S.E. 
angle  of  the  inclosure  is  a  group  of  lofty  mounds 
called  by  the  Arabs,  after  Nimroud's  lieutenant, 
Athur  (cf.  Gen.  x.  11).  According  to  the  Arab 
geographers  this  name  at  one  time  applied  to  all 
the  ruins  of  Nimroud  (Layardr  Nin.  and  its  Hem. 
ii.  245,  note).  Within  the  inclosure  a  few  slight 
irregularities  in  the  soil  mark  the  sites  of  ancient 
habitations,  but  there  are  no  indications  of  ruins  of 
buildings  of  any  size.  Fragments  of  brick  ana 
pottery  abound.  The  Tigris  is  now  1 J  mile  distant 
from  the  mound,  but  sometimes  reaches  them  during 
extraordinary  floods. 

The  mclosure-walls  of  Khorsabad  form  a  square 
of  about  2000  yards.  They  show  the  remains  01 
towers  and  gateways.  There  are  apparently  no 
traces  of  moats  or 
catches.  The  mound 
which  gives  its  name 
to  this  group  of  ruins 
rises  on  the  N.W. 
face.  It  may  be  di 
vided  into  two  parts 
cr  stages,  the  uppei 
about  650  ft.  squar?, 
and  30  ft.  high,  and 
the  lower  adjoining 
it,  ak>ut  1350  by 
300.  Its  sunmii't 
was  formerly  occu 
pied  by  an  A  rah  vil- 


NINEVEH 

l?-ge.  ID  one  corner  there  is  a  pyramid  or  cone, 
similar  to  that  at  Nimroud,  but  very  inferior  in 
height  and  size.  Within  the  interior  are  a  few 
mounds  marking  the  sites  of  propylaea  and  similar 
detached  monuments,  but  no  traces  of  considerable 
buildings.  These  ruins  were  known  to  the  early 
Arab  geographers  by  the  name  of  "  Saraoun,"  pro 
bably  a  traditional  corruption  of  the  name  of  Sar- 
gon,  the  king  who  founded  the  palaces  discovered 
there. 

Shereef  Khan,  so  called  from  a  small  village  in 
the  neighbourhood,  consists  of  a  group  of  mounds 
of  no  great  size  when  compared  with  other  Assy 
rian  ruins,  and  without  traces  of  an  outer-wall. 
Selamiyah  is  an  inclosure  of  irregular  form,  situated 
upon  a  high  bank  overlooking  the  Tigris,  about 
5000  yards  in  circuit,  and  containing  an  area  of 
about  410  acres,  apparently  once  surrounded  by 
a  ditch  or  moat.  It  contains  no  mound  or  ruin, 
and  even  the  earthen  rampart  which  marks  the 
walls  has  in  many  places  nearly  disappeared.  The 
name  is  derived  from  an  Arab  town  once  of  some 
importance,  but  now  reduced  to  a  miserable  village 
inhabited  by  Turcomans. 

The  greater  part  of  the  discoveries  which,  of  late 
years,  have  thrown  so  much  light  upon  the  history 
and  condition  of  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  Nineveh 
were  made  in  the  ruins  of  Nimroud,  Kouyunjik, 
and  Khorsabad.  The  first  traveller  who  carefully 
examined  the  supposed  site  of  the  city  was  Mr. 
Rich,  formerly  political  agent  for  the  East  India 
Company  at  Baghdad ;  but  his  investigations  were 
almost  entirely  confined  to  Kouyunjik  and  the  sur 
rounding  mounds,  of  which  he  made  a  survey  in 
1820.  From  them  he  obtained  a  few  relics,  such 
as  inscribed  pottery  and  bricks,  cylinders,  and  gems. 
Some  time  before  a  bas-relief  representing  men  and 
animals  had  been  discovered,  but  had  been  destroyed 
by  the  Mohammedans.  He  subsequently  visited  the 
mound  of  Nimroud,  of  which,  however,  he  was 
unable  to  make  more  than  a  hasty  examination 
(Narrative  of  a  Residence  in  Kurdistan,  ii.  131). 
.Several  travellers  described  the  ruins  after  Mr.  Rich, 
but  no  attempt  was  made  to  explore  them  syste 
matically  until  M.  Botta  was  appointed  French 
consul  at  Mosul  in  1843.  Whilst  excavating  in  the 
mound  of  Khorsabad,  to  which  he  had  been  directed 
by  a  peasant,  he  discovered  a  row  of  upright  ala 
baster  slabs,  forming  the  panelling  or  skirting  of 
the  lower  part  of  the  walls  of  a  chamber.  This 
chamber  was  found  to  communicate  with  others  of 
similar  construction,  and  it  soon  became  evident 
that  the  remains  of  an  edifice  of  considerable  size 
were  buried  in  the  mound.  The  French  Govern 
ment  having  given  the  necessary  funds,  the  ruins 
were  fully  explored.  They  consisted  of  the  lower 
part  of  a  number  of  halls,  rooms,  and  passages,  for 
the  most  part  wainscoted  with  slabs  of  coarse  gray 
alabaster,  sculptured  with  figures  in  relief,  the  prin 
cipal  entrances  being  formed  by  colossal  human- 
headed  winged  bulls.  No  remains  of  exterior  archi 
tecture  of  any  great  importance  were  discovered. 
The  calcined  limestone  and  the  great  accumulation 
of  charred  wood  and  charcoal  showed  that  the 
building  had  been  destroyed  by  fire.  Its  upper  part 
had  entirely  disappeared,  and  its  general  plan  could 
unly  be  restored  by  the  remains  of  the  lower  story. 
The  collection  of  Assyrian  sculptures  in  the  Louvre 
same  from  these  ruius. 


NINEVEH 


551 


The  excavations  subsequently  carried  on  by  MM. 
Place  and  Fresnel  at  Khorsabad  led  to  the  discovery, 
in  the  inclosure  below  the  platform,  of  propylaea, 
flanked  by  colossal  human-headed  bulls,  and  of  other 
detacned  buildings  forming  the  approaches  to  the 
palace,  and  also  of  some  of  the  gateways  in  the 
inclosure-walls,  ornamented  with  similar  mythic 
figures. 

M.  Botta's  discoveries  at  Khorsabad  were  followed 
by  those  of  Mr.  Layard  at  Nimroud  and  Kouyunjik, 
made  between  the  years  1845  and  1850.  The 
mound  of  Nimroud  was  found  to  contain  the  ruins  of 
several  distinct  edifices,  erected  at  different  periods 
— materials  for  the  construction  of  the  latest  hav 
ing  been  taken  from  an  earlier  building.  The  most 
ancient  stood  at  the  N.W.  corner  of  the  platfoim, 
the  most  recent  at  the  S.E.  In  general  plan  and 
in  construction  they  resembled  the  ruins  at  Khorsa 
bad — consisting  of  a  number  of  halls,  chambers, 
and  galleries,  panelled  with  sculptured  and  inscribed 
alabaster  slabs,  and  opening  one  into  the  other  by 
doorways  generally  formed  by  pairs  of  colossal 
human-headed  winged  bulls  or  lions.  The  exterior 
architecture  could  not  be  traced.  The  lofty  com: 
or  pyramid  of  earth  adjoining  this  edifice  covered 
the  ruins  of  a  building  the  basement  of  which  was 
a  square  of  165  feet,  and  consisted,  to  the  height 
of  20  feet,  of  a  solid  mass  of  sun-dried  bricks,  faced 
on  the  four  sides  by  blocks  of  stone  carefully 
squared,  bevelled,  and  adjusted.  This  stone  facing 
singularly  enough  coincides  exactly  with  the  height 
assigned  by  Xenophon  to  the  stone  plinth  of  the 
walls  (Anab.  iii.  4),  and  is  surmounted,  as  he 
describes  the  plinth  to  have  been,  by  a  super 
structure  of  bricks,  nearly  every  kiln-burnt  brick 
bearing  an  inscription.  Upon  this  solid  substructure 
there  probably  rose,  as  in  the  Babylonian  temples,  a 
succession  of  platforms  or  stages,  diminishing  in 
size,  the  highest  having  a  shrine  or  altar  upon  it 
(BABEL;  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  ch.  v.).  A 
vaulted  chamber  or  gallery,  100  feet  long,  6  broad, 
and  12  high,  crossed  the  centre  of  the  mound  on  a 
level  with  the  summit  of  the  stone-masonry.  It 
had  evidently  been  broken  into  and  rifled  of  its  con 
tents  at  some  remote  period,  and  may  have  been  a 
royal  sepulchre — the  tomb  of  Ninus,  or  Sardana- 
palus,  which  stood  at  the  entrance  of  Nineveh.  It 
is  the  tower  described  by  Xenophon  at  Larissa  as 
being  1  plethron  (100  feet)  broad  and  2  plethra 
high.  It  appears  to  have  been  raised  by  the  son  of 
the  king  who  built  the  N.W.  palace,  and  whose 
name  in  the  cuneiform  inscriptions  is  supposed  to  be 
identified  with  that  of  Sardanapalus.  Shalmanubar 
or  Shalmaneser,b  the  builder  of  this  tomb  or  tower, 
also  erected  in  the  centre  of  the  great  mound  a 
second  palace,  which  appears  to  have  been  destroyed 
to  furnish  materials  for  later  buildings.  The  black 
obelisk  now  in  the  British  Museum  was  found 
amongst  its  ruins.  On  the  W.  face  of  the  mound 
and  adjoining  the  centre  palace,  are  the  remains 
of  a  third  edifice,  built  by  the  grandson  of  Shal- 
manuhar,  whose  name  is  read  Iva-Lush,  and  who 
is  believed  to  be  the  Pul  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip 
tures.  It  contained  some  important  inscribed  slabs, 
but  no  sculptures.  Essarhaddon  niised  (about  B.C. 
680)  at  the  S.W.  corner  of  the  platform  another 
royal  abode  of  considerable  extent,  but  constructed 
principally  with  materials  brought  from  his  prede 
cessor's  palaces.  In  the  opposite  or  S.E.  corner 


0  It  must  be  observed,  once  for  all,  that  whilst  the 
Assyrian  proper  names  are  given  in  the  text  according 


to  the  latest  interpretations  of  the  cuneiform  icxsrip- 
tions,  they  are  very  doubtful. 


662 


NINEVEH 


are  the  ruins  of  a  still  Inter  palace  built  \.j  his 
grandson  Ashur-emit-ili,  very  inferior  in  size  and 
in  splendour  to  other  Assyrian  edifices.  Its  rooms 
urn  small ;  it  appears  to  have  had  no  gi«at  halls, 


i 


and  the  chamber  wen.  panelled  with  slabs  of  com 
mon  stone  without  scuJp.ure  or  inscriptions.  Some 
important  detached  figures,  believed  to  bear  file 
name  of  the  historical  Semirimis,  were,  however 


found  in  its  ruins.  At  tht  S.W.  ccrner  of  fh« 
mound  of  Kouyunjik  stood  a  palace  built  by  Sen 
nacherib  (about  B.C.  700),  exceeding  iu  size  and 
in  magnificence  of  decoration  all  others  hitherto 
explored.  It  occupied  nearly  100  acres.  A. 
though  much  of  the  building  yet  remains  to  I* 
examined,  and  much  has  altogether  perished,  about 
60  courts,  halls  (some  nearly  150  feet  square), 
rooms,  and  passages  (one  200  feet  long),  have  been 
discovered,  all  panelled  with  sculptured  slabs  ot 
alabaster.  The  entrances  to  the  edifice  and  to  the 
principal  chain  hers  were  flanked  by  groups  of  wingei 
human-headed  lions  and  bulls  of  colossal  propor 
tions — some  nearly  20  feet  in  height;  27  portals 
thus  formed  were  excavated  by  Mr.  Layard.  A 
second  palace  was  erected  on  the  same  platform 
by  the  son  of  Essarhaddon,  the  third  king  of  the 
name  of  Sardanapalus.  In  it  were  discovered 
sculptures  of  great  interest  and  beauty,  amongst 
them  the  series  representing  the  lion-hunt  now  in 
the  British  Museum.  Owing  to  the  sanctity  at 
tributed  by  Mohammedans  to  the  supposed  tomb 
of  Jonah,  great  difficulties  were  experienced  in  ex 
amining  the  mound  upon  which  it  stands.  A 
shaft  sunk  within  the  walls  of  a  private  house  led 
to  the  discovery  of  sculptured  slabs ;  and  excava 
tions  subsequently  carried  on  by  agents  of  the 
Turkish  Government  proved  that  they  formed  part 
of  a  palace  erected  by  Essarhaddon.  Two  entrances 
or  gateways  in  the  great  inclosure-walls  have  been 
excavated — one  (at  6  on  plan)  flanked  by  colossal 
human-headed  bulls  and  human  figures.  They,  as 
well  as  the  walls,  appear,  according  to  the  inscrip 
tions,  to  have  been  constructed  by  Sennacherib. 
No  propylaea  or  detached  buildings  have  as  yet  been 
discovered  within  the  inclosure.  At  Shereeff  Khan 
are  the  ruins  of  a  temple,  but  no  sculptured  slabs 
have  been  dug  up  there.  It  was  founded  by  Sen 
nacherib,  and  added  to  by  his  grandson.  At  Ma- 
miyah  no  remains  of  buildings  nor  any  fragments  t>t 
sculpture  or  inscriptions  have  been  discovered. 

The  Assyrian  edifices  were  so  nearly  alike  in 
general  plan,  construction,  and  decoration,  that  one 
description  will  suffice  for  all.  They  were  built 
upon  artificial  mounds  or  platforms,  varying  in 
height,  but  generally  from  30  to  50  feet  above  the 
level  of  the  surrounding  country,  and  solidly  con 
structed  of  regular  layers  of  sun-dried  bricks,  as  at 
Nimroud,  or  consisting  merely  of  earth  and  rubbish 
heaped  up,  as  at  Kouyunjik.  The  mode  of  raising 
the  latter  kind  of  mound  is  represented  in  a  series 
of  bas-reliefs,  in  which  captives  and  prisoners  arc 
seen  amongst  the  workmen  (Layard,  Man.  of  Nin* 
2nd  scries,  pi.  14, 15).  This  platform  was  probably 
faced  with  stone-masonry,  remains  of  which  were 
discovered  at  Nimroud,  and  broad  flights  of  steps 
(such  as  were  found  at  Khorsabad)  or  inclined 
ways  led  up  to  its  summit.  Although  only  the 
general  plan  of  the  ground-floor  can  now  be  trace  I, 
it  is  evident  that  the  palaces  had  several  stories 
built  of  wood  and  sun-dried  bricks,  which,  when  the 
building  was  deserted  and  allowed  to  fall  to  decay, 
gradually  buried  the  lower  chambers  with  their 
ruins,  and  protected  the  sculptured  slabs  from  th« 
effects  of  the  weather.  The  depth  of  soil  and 
rubbish  above  the  alabaster  slabs  varied  from  a 
few  inches  to  about  20  feet.  It  is  to  this  accumu 
lation  of  rubbish  above  them  that  the  bas-ielieti 
owe  their  extraordinary  preservation.  The  portions 
of  the  edifices  still  remaining  consist  of  halls,  cham 
bers,  and  galleries,  opening  lor  tin-  most  part  inU 
large  uncovered  courts.  The  partition  walls  van 


NINEVEH 

from  6  to  15  feet  in  thickness,  and  arc  solidly 
built  of  sun-dried  bricks,  against  which  are  placed 
the  panelling  or  skirting  of  alabaster  slabs.  No 
windows  have  hitherto  been  discovered,  and  it  is 
probable  that  in  most  of  the  smaller  chambers  light 
was  only  admitted  through  the  doors.  The  wall, 
above  the  wainscoting  of  alabaster,  was  plastered, 
and  painted  with  figures  and  ornaments.  The  pave 
ment  was  formed  ei  ther  of  inscribed  slabs  of  alabaster, 
or  large  flat  kiln-burnt  bricks.  It  rested  upon  layers 
of  bitumen  and  fine  sand.  Of  nearly  similar  con 
struction  are  the  modern  houses  of  Mosul,  the  archi 
tecture  of  which  has  probably  been  preserved  from 
the  earliest  times  as  that  best  suited  to  the  climate 
and  to  the  manners  and  wants  of  an  Oriental  people. 
The  rooms  are  grouped  in  the  same  manner  round 
open  courts  or  large  halls.  The  same  alabaster, 
usually  carved  with  ornaments,  is  used  for  wains 
coting  the  apartments,  and  the  walls  are  constructed 
of  sun-dried  bricks.  The  upper  part  and  the  ex 
ternal  architecture  of  the  Assyrian  palaces,  both 
of  which  have  entirely  disappeared,  can  only  be 
restored  conjecturally,  from  a  comparison  of  monu 
ments  represented  in  the  bas-reliefs,  and  of  edifices 
built  by  nations,  such  as  the  Persians,  who  took 
their  arts  from  the  Assyrians.  By  such  means 
Mr.  Fergusson  has,  with  much  ingenuity,  attempted 
to  reconstruct  a  palace  of  Nineveh  (The  Palaces  of 
Nineveh  and  Persepolis  restored).  He  presumes 
that  the  upper  stories  were  built  entirely  of  sun- 
dried  bricks  and.  wood — a  supposition  warranted  by 
the  absence  of  stone  and  marble  columns,  and  of 
remains  of  stone  and  burnt-brick-masonry  in  the 
rubbish  and  soil  which  cover  and  surround  the 
rains ;  that  the  exterior  was  richly  sculptured  and 
painted  with  figures  and  ornaments,  or  decorated 
with  enamelled  bricks  of  bright  colours,  and  that 
light  was  admitted  to  the  principal  chambers  on 
the  ground-floor  through  a  kind  of  gallery  which 
formed  the  upper  part  of  them,  and  upon  which 
rested  the  wooden  pillars  necessary  for  the  sup 
port  of  the  superstructure.  The  capitals  and 
various  details  of  these  pillars,  the  friezes  and 
architectural  ornaments,  he  restores  from  the  stone 
columns  and  other  remains  at  Persepolis.  He  con 
jectures  that  curtains,  suspended  between  the  pillars, 
kept  out  the  glaring  light  of  the  sun,  and  that  the 
ceilings  were  of  wood-work,  elaborately  painted  witl: 
patterns  similar  to  those  represented  in  the  sculp 
tures,  and  probably  ornamented  with  gold  and  ivory. 
The  discovery  at  Khorsabad  of  an  arched  entrance 
of  considerable  size  and  depth,  constructed  of  sun- 
dried  and  kiln-burnt  bricks,  the  latter  enamelled 
with  figures,  leads  to  the  inference  that  some  of  the 
smaller  chambers  may  have  been  vaulted. 

The  sculptures,  with  the  exception  of  the  human- 
headed  lions  and  bulls,  were  for  the  most  part  in 
low  relief.  The  colossal  figures  usualiy  represent 
the  king,  his  attendants,  and  the  gods ;  the  smaller 
sculptures,  which  either  cover  the  whole  face  of 
the  slab,  or  are  divided  into  two  compartments  by 
bands  of  inscriptions,  represent  battles,  sieges,  the 
chase,  single  combats  with  wild  beasts,  religious 
ceremonies,  &c.  &c.  All  refer  to  public  or  national 
events ;  the  hunting-scenes  evidently  recording  the 
prowess  and  personal  valour  of  the  king  as  the 
head  of  the  people—  "  the  mighty  hunter  before 
the  Lord.1'  The  sculptures  appear  to  have  been 
painted — remains  of  colour  having  been  found  on 
most  of  them.  Thus  decorated,  without  and  within, 
the  Assyrian  palaces  must  have  displayed  a  bar- 
laiic  magnificent,  not  however  devoid  of  a  cer- 


NINEVKH 


653 


tain  grandeur  and  beauty,  which  no  ancient  01 
modern  edifice  has  probably  exceeded.  Amongst  the 
mall  objects,  undoubtedly  of  tha  Assyrian  period, 
found  in  the  ruins,  were  copper- vessels  (some  em 
bossed  and  incised  with  figures  of  men  and  animals 
and  graceful  ornaments),  bells,  various  instruments 
and  tools  of  copper  and  iron,  arms  (such  as  spear 
and  arrow  heads,  swords,  daggers,  shields,  helmets, 
and  fragments  of  chain  and  plate  armour),  ivory 
ornaments, "glass  bowls  and  vases,  alabaster  urns, 
figures  and  other  objects  in  terra-cotta,  pottery, 
parts  of  a  throne,  inscribed  cylinders  and  seals  of 
agate  and  other  precious  materials,  and  a  few  de 
tached  statues.  All  these  objects  show  great  me 
chanical  skill  and  a  correct  and  refined  taste,  in 
dicating  considerable  advance  in  civilization. 

These  great  edifices,  the  depositories  of  the  na 
tional  records,  appear  to  have  been  at  the  same  time 
the  abode  of  the  king  and  the  temple  of  the  gods — 
thus  corresponding,  as  in  Egypt,  with  the  character 
of  the  monarch,  who  was  both  the  political  and 
religious  chief  of  the  nation,  the  special  favourite 
of  the  deities,  and  the  interpreter  of  their  decrees. 
No  building  has  yet  been  discovered  which  possesses 
any  distinguishing  features  to  mark  it  specially  as  a 
temple.  They  are  all  precisely  similar  in  general 
plan  and  construction.  Most  probably  a  part  of  the 
palace  was  set  apart  for  religious  worship  and  cere 
monies.  Altars  of  stone,  resembling  the  Greek  tripod 
in  form,  have  been  found  in  some  of  the  chambers 
— in  one  instance  before  a  figure  of  the  king  him 
self  (Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  351).  According  to 
the  inscriptions,  it  would,  however,  appear  that  the 
Assyrian  monarchs  built  temples  of  great  magnifi 
cence  at  Nineveh,  and  in  various  parts  of  the  empire, 
and  profusely  adorned  them  with  gold,  silver,  and 
other  precious  materials. 

Site  of  the  City. — Much  diversity  of  opinion 
exists  as  to  the  identification  of  the  ruins  which 
may  be  properly  included  within  the  site  of  ancient 
Nineveh.  According  to  Sir  H.  Kawlinson  and  those 
who  concur  in  his  interpretation  of  the  cuneiform 
characters,  each  group  of  mounds  we  have  described 
represents  a  separate  and  distinct  city.  The  name 
applied  in  the  inscriptions  to  Nimroud  is  supposed 
to  read  "  Kalkhu,"  and  the  ruins  are  consequently 
identified  with  those  of  the  Calah  of  Genesis  (x.  11) ; 
Khorsabad  is  Sargina,  as  founded  by  Sargon,  the 
name  having  been  retained  in  that  of  Sarghun,  or  Sa- 
raoun,  by  whicn  the  ruins  were  known  to  the  A  rab 
geographers;  Shereef  Khan  is  Tarbisi.  Selamiyah  has 
not  yet  been  identified,  no  inscription  having  beer 
found  in  the  ruins.  The  name  of  Nineveh  is  limited 
to  the  mounds  opposite  Mosul,  including  Kon- 
yunjik  and  Nebbi  Yunus.  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  was  at 
one  time  inclined  to  exclude  even  the  former  mound 
from  the  precincts  of  the  city  (Journ.  of  As.  Soc. 
xii.  418).  Furthermore,  the  ancient  and  primitive 
capital  of  Assyria  is  supposed  to  have  been  not 
Nineveh,  but  a  city  named  Asshur,  whose  ruins 
have  been  discovered  at  Kalah  Sherghat,  a  mound 
on  the  right  or  W.  bank  of  the  Tigris,  about  60 
miles  S.  of  Mosul.  It  need  scarcely  be  observed 
that  this  theory  rests  entirely  upon  the  presumed 
accuracy  of  the  interpretation  of  the  cuneiform 
inscriptions,  and  that  it  is  totally  at  variance  with 
the  accounts  and  traditions  preserved  by  sacred  and 
classical  history  of  the  antiquity,  size,  and  impor 
tance  of  Nineveh.  The  area  of  the  inclosure  ol 
Kouyunjik,  about  1800  acres,  is  far  too  small  te 
represent  the  site  of  the  rity,  built  as  it  must  hav« 
been  in  accordance  with  eastern  customs  and  iniii> 


r-54 


NINEVEH 


ners,  even  »fter  allowing  for  every  exaggeration  on 
the  part  ot'  ancient  writers.  Captain  Jones  (To 
pography  of  Nineveh,  /own.  of  R.  Asiat.  Soc.  xv. 
p.  324)  computes  that  it  would  contain  174,000 
inhabitants.  50  square  yards  being  given  jo  each 
person ;  but  the  basis  of  this  calculation  would 
scarcely  apply  to  any  modem  Eastern  city.  If 
Kcuyunjik  represents  Nineveh,  and  Nimroud  Calah, 
where  are  we  to  place  Resen,  "  a  great  city  "  be 
tween  the  two?  (Gen.  x.  12.)  Scarcely  at  Sela- 
miyah,  enly  three  miles  from  Nimroud,  and  where 
no  ruins  of  any  importance  exist.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  these  groups 
of  mounds  are  not  ruins  of  separate  cities,  but  of 
fortified  royal  residences,  each  combining  palaces, 
.emples,  propylaea,  gardens,  and  parks,  and  having 
its  peculiar  name ;  and  that  they  all  formed  part 
of  one  great  city  built  and  added  to  at  different 
periods,  and  consisting  of  distinct  quarters  scattered 
over  a  very  large  area,  and  frequently  very  distant 
one  from  the  other.  Nineveh  might  thus  be  com 
pared  with  Damascus,  Ispahan,  or  perhaps  more 
appropriately  with  Delhi,  a  city  rebuilt  at  various 
periods,  but  never  on  exactly  the  same  site,  and 
whose  ruins  consequently  cover  an  area  but  little 
inferior  to  that  assigned  to  the  capital  of  Assyria. 
The  primitive  site,  the  one  upon  which  Nineveh 
was  originally  founded,  may  possibly  have  been 
that  occupied  by  the  mound  of  Kouyunjik.  It  is 
thus  alone  that  the  ancient  descriptions  of  Nineveh, 
if  any  value  whatever  is  to  be  attached  to  them, 
can  be  reconciled  with  existing  remains.  The  ab 
sence  of  all  traces  of  buildings  of  any  size  within 
the  inclosures  of  Nimroud,  Kouyunjik,  and  Khor- 
sabad,  and  the  existence  of  propylaea  forming  part 
of  the  approaches  to  the  palace,  beneath  and  at  a 
considerable  distance  from  the  great  mound  at 
Khorsabad,  seem  to  add  weight  to  this  conjecture. 
Even  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  is  compelled  to  admit  that 
all  the  ruins  may  have  formed  part  of  "  that  group 
of  cities,  which  in  the  time  of  the  prophet  Jonah, 
was  known  by  the  common  name  of  Nineveh  "  (On 
the  Inscriptions  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  Journ. 
As.  Soc.).  But  the  existence  of  fortified  palaces  is 
consistent. with  Oriental  custom,  and  with  authentic 
descriptions  of  ancient  Eastern  cities.  Such  were 
the  residences  of  the  kings  of  Babylon,  the  walls  of 
the  largest  of  which  were  GO  stadia,  or  7  miles  in 
circuit,  or  little  less  than  those  of  Kouyunjik,  and 
considerably  greater  than  those  of  Nimroud  [BA 
BYLON].  The  Persians,  wno  appear  to  have  closely 
imitated  the  Assyrians  in  most  things,  constructed 
similar  fortified  parks,  or  paradises — as  they  were 
called — which  included  royal  dwelling  places  (Quint. 
Curt.  1.  7,  c.  8).  Indeed,  if  the  interpretation  of 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  is  to  be  trusted,  the 
Assyrian  palaces  were  of  precisely  the  same  cha- 
lacter;  for  that  built  by  Essarhaddon  at  Nebbi 
Yunus,  is  stated  to  have  been  so  large  that  horses 
and  other  animals  were  not  only  kept,  but  even 
bred  within  its  walls  (Fox  Talbot,  Assyr.  Texts 
translated,  17,  18).  It  is  evident  that  this  de 
scription  cannot  apply  to  a  building  occupying  so 
conlined  an  area  as  the  summit  of  this  mound,  but 
to  a  vast  inclosed  space.  This  aggregation  of 
strongholds  may  illustrate  the  allusion  in  Nahum 
(iii.  14),  "  Draw  thee  waters  for  the  siege,  fortify 


c  To  support  the  theory  of  the  ancient  capital  of 
Assyria  being  Asshur,  a  further  identification  is  re 
quired  of  two  kings  whose  names  :irc  read  Tiglath- 
pilcser,  one  found  in  a  rock-cut  inscription  ut  Baviun 


NINEVKH 

thy  strong  holds,"  and  "  repair  thy  fortified  places.' 
They  were  probably  surrounded  by  the  dwelling* 
of  the  mass  of  the  population,  either  collected  in 
groups,  or  scattered  singly  in  the  midst  of  fields, 
orchards,  and  gardens.  There  are  still  sufficient 
indications  in  the  country  around  of  the  sites  of 
such  habitations.  The  fortified  inclosures,  whilst 
including  the  residences  of  the  king,  his  family  or 
immediate  tribe,  his  principal  officers,  and  probably 
the  chief  priests,  may  also  have  served  as  places  of 
refuge  for  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  at  large  in 
times  of  danger  or  attack.  According  to  Diodorus 
(ii.  9)  and  Quintus  Curtius  (v.  1),  there  was  land 
enough  within  the  precincts  of  Babylon,  besides 
gardens  and  orchards,  to  furnish  corn  for  the  wants 
of  the  whole  population  in  case  of  siege ;  and  in  the 
book  of  Jonah,  Nineveh  is  said  to  contain,  besides  its 
population,  "much  cattle"  (iv.  11).  As  at  Baby 
lon,  no  great  consecutive  wall  of  inclosure  comprising 
all  the  ruins,  such  as  that  described  by  Diodorus, 
has  been  discovered  at  Nineveh,  and  no  such  wall 
ever  existed,  otherwise  some  traces  of  so  vast  and 
massive  a  structure  must  have  remained  to  this 
day.  The  river  Gomel,  the  modern  Ghazir-Su, 
may  have  formed  the  eastern  boundary  or  defence 
of  the  city.  As  to  the  claims  of  the  mound  of 
Kalah  Sherghat  to  represent  the  site  of  the  pri 
mitive  capital  of  Assyria  called  Asshur,  they  must 
rest  entirely  on  the  interpretation  of  the  inscrip 
tions.  This  city  was  founded,  or  added  to,  they  are 
supposed  to  declare,  by  one  Shamas-Iva,  the  son 
and  viceroy,  or  satrap,  of  Ismi-Dagon,  king  of  Ba 
bylon,  who  reigned,  it  is  conjectured,  about  B.C. 
1 840.  Assyria  and  its  capital  remained  subject  to 
Babylonia  until  B.C.  1273,  when  an  independent 
Assyrian  dynasty  was  founded,  of  which  fourteen 
kings,  or  more,  reigned  at  Kalah  Sherghat.  Abotii 
B.C.  930  the  seat  of  government,  it  is  asserted, 
was  transferred  by  Sardanapalus  (the  second  of 
the  -name,  and  the  Sardanapalus  of  the  Greeks) 
to  the  city  of  Kalkhu  or  Calah  (Nimroud),  which 
had  been  founded  by  an  earlier  monarch  named 
Shalmanubar.  There  it  continued  about  250 
years,  when  Sennacherib  made  Nineveh  the  cap 
ital  of  the  empire  [ASSYRIA].  These  assumptions 
seem  to  rest  upon  very  slender  grounds  ;  and 
Dr.  Hincks  altogether  rejects  the  theory  of  the 
Babylonian  character  of  these  early  kings,  believing 
them  to  be  Assyrian  (Report  to  Trustees  of  Brit 
Mus.  on  Cylinders  and  Terra- Cottas).  It  is  believea 
that  on  an  inscribed  terra-cotta  cylinder  discovered 
at  Kalah  Sherghat,  the  foundation  of  a  temple  is 
attributed  to  this  Shamas-Iva.  A  royal  name 
similar  to  that  of  his  father,  Ismi-Dagon,  is  read  ou 
a  brick  from  some  ruins  in  southern  Babylonia,  and 
the  two  kings  are  presumed  to  be  identical,  although 
there  is  no  other  evidence  of  the  fact  (Rawl.  Herod. 
i.  p.  456,  note  5)  ;  indeed  the  only  son  of  this  Bu 
bylonian  king  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  is 
read  Ibil-anu-duma,  a  name  entirely  different  from 
that  of  the  presumed  viceroy  cf  Asshur.  It  is 
by  no  means  an  uncommon  occurrence  that  the 
same  names  should  be  found  in  royal  tjofftim 
of  very  different  periods.0  The  Assyrian  dynas- 
ties  furnish  more  than  one  example.  It  may  be 
further  observed  that  no  remains  of  sufficient 
antiquity  and  importance  Kve  been  discovemi  :it 


in  the  mountains  to  the  E.  of  Mosul,  tnc  other  occur 
ring  on  the  Kalah  Sherghat  cylinder.  M.  Opprrt  ha.> 
questioned  the  identity  of  tho  two  (Rawl.  UcroiL  v 
4  J'J,  and  note;. 


NINEVEH 

Kalah  Sherghat  tc  justify  the  opinion  that  it  was 
the  ancient  capital.     The  only  sculpture  found  in 
the  ruins,  the  seated  figure   in  black  basalt  now 
in  the  British  Museum,  belongs  to  a  later  period 
than  the   monuments   from   the   N.W.   palace   at 
Nimroud.     Upon  the  presumed  identification  above 
indicated,  and  upon  no  other  evidence,  as  far  as  we 
can  understand,  an  entirely  new  system  of  Assyrian 
history  and   chronology  has   been   constructed,  of 
which  a  sketch  has  been  given  under  the  title  AS 
SYRIA  (see  also  Rawlinson's  Herod,  vol.  i.  p.  489). 
It  need  only  be  pointed  out  here  that  this  system 
is  at  variance  with  sacred,  classical,  and  monumental 
history,  and  can  scarcely  be   accepted  as  proven, 
until  the  Assyrian  ruins  have  been  examined  with 
more  completeness  than  has  hitherto  been  possible, 
\nd  until  the  decipherment  of  the  cuneiform  in 
scriptions  has  made  far  greater  progress.     It   has 
been   shown  how  continuously  tradition  points  to 
Nineveh  as  the  ancient  capital  of  Assyria.     There  is 
no  allusion  to  any  other  city  which  enjoyed  this 
rank.     Its  name  occurs  in  the  statistical  table  of 
Kaniak,  in  conjunction  with  .Naharaina  or  Meso 
potamia,  and  on  a  fragment  recently  discovered  by 
M.  Mariette,  of  the  time  of  Thotmas  III.,  or  about 
B.C.  1490  (Birch,  Trans.  R.  Soc.  of  Lit.  ii.  345, 
second  Series)  ;  and  no  mention  has  been  found  on 
any  Egyptian  monument  of  such  cities  as  Asshur 
and   Calah.     Sir   H.  Rawlinson,  in   a  paper  read 
before  the  R.  S.  of  Lit.,  has,  however,  contended 
that   the   Naharayn,    Saenkar,  and   Assuri  of  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions  are  not  Mesopotamia,  Singar, 
and  Assyria,  and  that  Nin-i-iu  is  not  Nineveh  at  all, 
but  refers  to  a  city  in  the  chain  of  Taurus.     But 
these  conclusions  are  altogether  rejected  by  Egyp 
tian  scholars.     Further  researches  may  show  that 
Sennacherib's  palace  at  Kouyunjik,  and  that  of  Sar- 
danapalus  at  Nimroud,  were  built  upon   the  site, 
and  above  the  remains  of  very  much  earlier  edifices. 
According  to  the  interpretation  of  the  inscriptions, 
Sardanapalus  himself  founded  a  temple  at "  Nineveh" 
(Rawl.  Herod,  i.  462),  yet  no  traces  of  this  building 
have  been  discovered  at  Kouyunjik.    Sargon  restored 
the  walls  of  Nineveh,  and  declares  that  he  erected 
his  palace  "  near  to  Nineveh "   (id.  474),  whilst 
Sennacherib  only  claims  to  have  rebuilt  the  palaces, 
which  were  "  rent  and  split  from  extreme  old  age" 
(id.  475),  employing  360,000  men,  captives  from 
Chaldaea,  Syria,  Armenia,  and  Cilicia,  in  the  under 
taking,  and  speaks  of  Nineveh  as  founded  of  old, 
and  governed  by  his  forefathers,  "  kings  of  the  old 
time"  (Fox  Talbot,  on  Bellino's  cylinder,  Journ. 
of  As.  Soc.  vol.  xviii.).    Old  palaces,  a  great  tower, 
and  ancient  temples  dedicated  to  Ishtar  and  Bar 
Muri,  also  stood  there.     Hitherto  the  remains  of  no 
other  edifices  than  those  attributed  to  Sennacherib 
and  his  successors  have  been  discovered  in  the  group 
of  ruins  opposite  Mosul. 

Prophecies  relating  to  Nineveh,  and  Illustra 
tions  of  the  0.  T. — These  are  exclusively  contained 
in  the  Books  of  Nahum  and  Zephaniah ;  for 
although  Isaiah  foretells  the  downfall  of  the  Assy 
rian  empire  (ch.  x.  and  xiv.),  he  makes  no  mention 
of  its  capital.  Nahum  threatens  the  entire  de 
struction  of  the  city,  so  that  it  shall  not  rise  again 
from  its  ruins :  "  With  an  overrunning  flood  he 
will  make  ;in  utter  end  of  the  place  thereof."  "  He 
will  make  an  utter  end ;  affliction  shall  not  rise  up 
the  second  time"  (i.  8,  9).  "Thy  people  is  scat 
tered  upon  the  mountains,  and  no  one  gathereth 
ihem.  Th<:re  is  no  healing  of  thy  bruise  "  (ii 
18,  I:;).  The  manner  in  which  the  city  should  be 


NINEVEH 


565 


xiken  seems  to  be  indicated.  "  The  defence  shall 
>e  prepared"  (ii.  5)  is  rendered  in  the  margina 
•eading  "  the  covering  or  coverer  shall  be  prepared,' 
ind  by  Mr.  Vance  Smith  (Prophecies  on  Assyria 
and  the  Assyrians,  242),  "the  covering  machine," 
the  covered  battering-ram  or  tower  supposed  tc  be 
•epresented  in  the  bas-reliefs  as  being  used  in  sieges. 
Some  commentators  believe  that  "  the  overrunning 
lood  "  refers  to  the  agency  of  water  in  the  lestruc- 
;iou  of  the  walls  by  an  extraordinary  overflow  of 
the  Tigris,  and  the  consequent  exposure  of  the  city 
to  assault  through  a  breach  ;  others,  that  it  applies 
to  a  large  and  devastating  army.  An  allusion  to 
the  overflow  of  the  river  may  be  contained  in  ii.  6, 
The  gates  of  the  rivers  shall  be  opened,  and  the 
palace  shall  be  dissolved,"  a  prophecy  supposed  to 
iave  been  fulfilled  when  the  Medo-Babylonian  army 
captured  the  city.  Diodorus  (ii.  27)  relates  of  that 
event,  that  "  there  was  an  old  prophecy  that  Ni 
neveh  should  not  be  taken  till  the  river  became  an 
enemy  to  the  city :  and  in  the  third  year  of  the 
siege  the  river  being  swoln  with  continued  rains, 
overflowed  part  of  the  city,  and  broke  down  the 
wall  for  twenty  stadia ;  then  the  king  thinking 
that  the  oracle  was  fulfilled  and  the  river  become 
an  enemy  to  the  city,  built  a  large  funeral  pile  in 
the  palace,  and  collecting  together  all  his  wealth, 
and  his  concubines  and  eunuchs,  burnt  himself  and 
the  palace  with  them  all :  and  the  enemy  entered 
the  breach  that  the  waters  had  made,  and  took  the 
city."  Most  of  the  edifices  discovered  had  been 
destroyed  by  fire,  but  no  part  of  the  walls  of  either 
Nimroud  or  Kouyunjik  appears  to  have  been  washed 
away  by  the  river.  The  Tigris  is  still  subject 
to  very  high  and  dangerous  floods  during  the 
winter  and  spring  rains,  and  even  now  frequently 
reaches  the  ruins.  When  it  flowed  in  its  ancient 
bed  at  the  foot  of  the  walls  a  part  of  the  city 
might  have  been  overwhelmed  by  an  extraordinary 
inundation.  The  likening  of  Nineveh  to  ''a  pool 
of  water"  (ii.  8)  has  been  conjectured  to  refer  to 
the  moats  and  dams  by  which  a  portion  of  the 
country  around  Nineveh  could  be  flooded.  The 
city  was  to  be  partly  destroyed  by  fire,  "  The  fire 
shall  devour  thy  bars,"  "  then  shall  the  fire  devour 
thee"  (iii.  13,  15).  The  gateway  in  the  northern 
wall  of  the  Kouyunjik  inclosure  had  been  destroyed 
by  fire  as  well  as  the  palaces.  The  population  was 
to  be  surprised  when  unprepared,  "  while  they  arc 
drunk  as  drunkards  they  shall  be  devoured  «s 
stubble  fully  dry "  (i.  10).  Diodorus  states  that 
the  last,  and  fatal  assault  was  made  when  they  werf 
overcome  with  wine.  In  the  bas-reliefs  carousing 
scenes  are  represented,  in  which  the  king,  his  cour 
tiers,  and  even  the  queen,  reclining  on  couches  or 
seated  on  thrones,  and  attended  by  musicians,  appear 
to  be  pledging  each  other  in  bowls  of  wine  (Botta, 
Mon.  de  Nin.  pi.  63-67, 112, 113,  and  one  very  in 
teresting  slab  in  the  Brit.  Mus.,  figured  on  p.  556). 
The  captivity  of  the  inhabitants,  and  their  removal  to 
distant  provinces,  are  predicted  (iii.  18).  Their 
dispersion,  which  occurred  when  the  city  fell,  was 
in  accordance  with  the  barbarous  custom  of  the 
age.  The  palace-temples  were  to  be  plundered  or 
their  idols,  "  out  of  the  house  of  thy  gods  will 
I  cut  off  the  graven  image  and  the  molten  image  " 
(i.  14),  and  the  city  sacked  of  its  wealth :  "  Take 
ye  the  spoil  of  silver,  take  the  spoil  of  gold"  (ii.  9). 
For  ages  the  Assyrian  edifices  have  been  despoiled 
of  their  sacred  images ;  and  enormous  .mounts  oi 
gold  and  silver  were,  according  to  tradition,  takfc 
to  Ecbatana  by  the  conquering  Modes  (Diod.  Sit. 


556 


NINEVEH 


ii.).  Only  one  or  two  fragments  of  the  precious 
metals  were  found  in  the  rains.  Nineveh,  after  its 
fall,  Wits  to  be  "empty,  and  void,  and  waste"  (ii. 
10);  "  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  all  they  that  look 
upon  thee  shall  flee  from  thee,  and  say,  Nineveh  is 
laid  waste  "  (iii.  7).  These  epithets  describe  the 
present  state  of  the  site  cf  the  city.  But  the 


NINEVEH 

fullest  and  the  most  vivid  and  poetical  picture  d 
its  ruined  and  deserted  condition  is  that  given  by 
Zephaniah,  who  probably  lived  to  see  its  fall.  "  He 
will  make  Nineveh  a  desolation,  and  diy  like  a 
wilderness.  And  flocks  shall  lie  down  in  the  midst 
of  her,  all  the  beasts  of  the  nations :  both  the  cor. 
morant  and  the  bittern  shall  lodge  in  the  np)>er 


King  feasting.     From  Kouyunjilf 


lintels  of  it :  their  voice  shall  sing  in  the  windows  : 
desolation  shall  be  in  the  thresholds :  for  he  shall 
uncover  the  cedar  work  ....  how  is  she  become 
a  desolation,  a  place  for  beasts  to  lie  down  in  ! 
every  one  that  passeth  by  her  shall  hiss  and  wag 
his  hand"  (ii.  13,  14,  15).  The  canals  which 
once  fertilised  the  soil  are  now  dry.  Except  wheu 
the  earth  is  green  after  the  periodical  rains  the  site 
of  the  city,  as  well  as  the  surrounding  country, 
is  an  arid  yellow  waste.  Flocks  of  sheep  and  herds 
of  camels  may  be  seen  seeking  scanty  pasture 
amongst  the  mounds.  From  the  unwholesome 
swamp  within  the  ruins  of  Khorsabad,  and  from  the 
reedy  banks  of  the  little  streams  that  flow  by  Kou- 
yunjik  and  Nimroud  may  be  heard  the  croak  of  the 
cormorant  and  the  bittern.  The  cedar-wood  which 
adorned  the  ceilings  of  the  palaces  has  been  uncovered 
by  modern  explorers  (Layard,  Nin.  fy  Bab.  357),  and 
in  the  deserted  halls  the  hyena,  the  wolf,  the  fox,  and 
the  jackall,  now  lie  down.  Many  allusions  in  the 
O.  T.  to  the  dress,  arms,  modes  of  warfare,  and 
customs  of  the  people  of  Nineveh,  as  well  as  of  the 
Jews,  are  explained  by  the  Nineveh  monuments. 
Thus  (Nah.  ii.  3),  "the  shield  of  his  mighty  men 
is  made  red,  the  valiant  men  are  in  scarlet."  The 
shields  and  the  dresses  of  the  warriors  are  generally 
punted  red  in  the  sculptures.  The  magnificent 
description  of  the  assault  upon  the  city  (iii.  1 ,  2,3) 
is  illustrated  in  almost  every  particular  (Layard, 
Nin.  and  its  Mem.  ii.,  part  ii.,  ch.  v.).  The  mounds 
built  up  against  the  walls  of  a  besieged  town  (Is. 
xxxvii.  33 ;  2  K.  xix.  32  ;  Jer.  xxxii.  24,  &c.),  the 
battering-ram  (Ez.  iv.  2),  the  various  kinds 
of  armour,  helmets,  shields,  spears,  and  swords, 
used  in  battle  and  during  a  siege ;  the  chariots  /• 
and  horses  (Nah.  iii.  3 ;  CHARIOT),  are  all  * 
seen  in  various  bas-reliefs  (Layard,  Nin.  and 
its  Ran.  ii.,  part  ii.,  chaps,  iv.  and  v.). 
The  custom  of  cutting  off  the  heads  of  the 
dain  and  placing  them  in  heaps  (2  K.  x.  8) 
b  constantly  represented  (Layard,  ii.  184). 
The  allusion  in  2  K.  xix.  28,  "  I  will  put  my 
hoos  ia  thy  nose  and  my  bridle  in  thy  lips," 
is  illustrated  in  a  bas-relief  from  Khorsabad 
'id.  376}. 


The  interior  decoration  of  the  Assyrian  palaces 
is  described  by  Ezekiel,  himself  a  captive  in  As 
syria  and  an  eye-witness  of  their  magnificence 
(xxiii.  14,  15).  "She  saw  men  of  sculptured  work, 
manship  upon  the  walls ;  likenesses  of  the  Chal- 
daeans  pictured  in  red,  girded  with  girdles  upon 
their  loins,  with  coloured  flowing  head-dresses  upon 
their  heads,  with  the  aspect  of  princes  all  of  them  " 
(Lay.  Nin.  and  its  Rem.  ii.  307) ;  a  description 
strikingly  illustrated  by  the  sculptured  likenesses  of 
the  Assyrian  kings  and  warriore  (see  especially  Botta, 
Mon.  de  Nin.  pi.  12).  The  mystic  figures  seen  by  the 
prophet  in  his^ vision  (ch.  i.),  uniting  the  man,  the 
lion,  the  ox,  and  the  eagle,  may  have  been  suggested 
by  the  eagle-headed  idols,  and  man-headed  bulls  and 
lions  (by  some  identified  with  the  cherubim  of  the 
Jews  [CHERUB]),  and  the  sacred  emblem  ot  the 


Winged  deity. 

"  wheel  within  wheel "  by  the  winged  circle  01 
globe  frequently  represented  in  the  bas-reliefs  (Lay. 
Nin.  and  its  Rem.  fi.  p.  465). 


NINEVEH 

Arts, — The  origin  of  Assyrian  art  is  a  subject  at 
present  involved  in  mystery,  and  one  which  offers  a 
wide  field  for  speculation  and  research.     Those  who 
derive  the  civilisation  and  political  system  of  the 
Assyrians  from  Babylonia  would  trace  their  arts  to 
the  same  source.     One  of  the  principal  features  of 
their  architecture,  the  artificial  platform  serving  as 
a  substructure  for  their  national  edifices,  may  have 
been  taken  from  a  people  inhabiting  plains  perfectly 
flat,  such  as  those  of  Shinar,  rather  than  an  undu 
lating  country  in  which  natural  elevations  are  not  un 
common,  such  as  Assyria  proper.  But  it  still  remains 
lo  be  proved  that  there  are  artificial  mounds  in 
Babylonia  of  an  earlier  date  than  mounds   on  or 
near  the  site  of  Nineveh.  Whether  other  leading  fea- 
eures  and  the  details  of  Assyrian  architecture  came 
from  the  same  source,  is  much  more  open  to  doubt. 
Such  Babylonian  edifices  as  have  been  hitherto  ex 
plored  are  of  a  later  date  than  those  of  Nineveh, 
to  which   they  appear  to   bear   but  little  resem 
blance.     The  only  features  in  common  seem  to  be 
the  ascending  stages  of  the  temples  or  tombs,  and 
the  use  of  enamelled  bricks.    The  custom  of  panelling 
walls  with  alabaster  or  stone  must  have  originated 
in  a  country  in  which  such  materials  abound,  as  in 
Assyria,  and  not  in  the  alluvial  plains  of  southern 
Mesopotamia,  where  they  cannot  be  obtained  except 
at  great  cost  or  by  great  labeur.     The  use  of  sun- 
dried  and  kiln-burnt  bricks  and  of  wooden  columns 
would  be  common  to  both  countries,  as  also  such 
arrangements  for  the  admission  of  light  and  exclu 
sion  of  heat  as  the  climate  would  naturally  suggest. 
In  none  of  the  arts  of  the  Assyrians  have  any 
traces  hitherto  been  found  of  progressive  change. 
In  the  architecture   of  the  most   ancient   known 
edifice  all  the  characteristics  of  the  style  are  already 
fully  developed ;  no  new  features  of  any  import 
ance  seem  to  have  been  introduced  at  a  later  period 
The   palace  of  Sennacherib  only  excels  those   o: 
his  remote  predecessors  in  the  vastness  of  its  pro 
portions,    and   in    the    elaborate    magnificence  o 
its   details.     In   sculpture,  as  probably  in   paint 
ing  also,  if  we  possessed  the  means  of  comparison 
the  same    thing  is  observable  as   in   the  remains 
of  ancient    Egypt.     The  earliest  works    hitherto 
discovered  show  the  result  of  a  lengthened  period  o 
gradual  development,  which,  judging  from  the  slo 
progress  made  by  untutored  men  in  the  arts,  mus 
have  extended  over  a  vast  number  of  years.     The; 
exhibit  the  arts  of  the  Assyrians  at  the  highes 
stage  of  excellence   they  probably  ever  attained 
The  only  change  we  can  trace,  as  in  Egypt,  is  on 
of  decline  or  "  decadence."     The  latest  monuments 
such  as  those  from  the  palaces  of  Essarhaddon  am 
his  son,  show  perhaps  a  closer  imitation  of  nature 
especially  in  the  representation  of  animals,  such  as 
the  lion,  dog,  wild  ass,  &c.,  and  a  more  careful  an 
minute  execution  of  details  than  those  from  th 
earlier  edifices ;  but  they  are  wanting  in  the  sim 
plicity  yet  grandeur  of  conception,  in  the  invention 
and  in  the  variety  of  treatment  displayed  in  th 
most  ancient   sculptures.      This  will   at  once  b 
perceived  by  a  comparison  of  the  ornamental  detai 
of  the  two  periods.     In  the  older  sculptures  thei 
occur  the  most  graceful  and  varied  combinations 
flowers,  beasts,  birds,  and  other  natural  objects 
treated  in  a  conventional  and  highly  artistic  man 
ner ;  in  the  later  there  is  only  a  constant  and  moiv 
torious  repetition  of  rosettes  and  commonplace  form 
without  much  display  of  invention  or  imagmatio 
(compare   Layard,  Mon.  of  Nineveh,    1st    serie 
specially  plates  5,  8,  43-48.  50.  with  2ud  serie 


NINEVEH 


557 


zssi'm ;  and  with  Botta,  Monumens  de  Ntnive).  Th< 
,me  remark  applies  to  animals.  The  lions  of  th* 
arlier  period  are  a  grand,  ideal,  and,  to  a  cerfcun 
xtent,  conventional  representation  of  the  beast — iiot 
ery  different  from  that  of  th"  Greek  sculptor  in 
IB  noblest  period  of  Greek  art  (Layard,  Mon.  of 
'in.  2nd  series,  pi.  2).  In  the  later  bas-reliefs,  such 
s  those  from  the  palace  of  Sardanapalus  III.,  now 

the  British  Museum,  the  lions  are  more  closely 
mitated  from  nature  without  any  conventional 
'evatiou;  but  what  is  gained  in  truth  is  lost  in 
ignity. 

The  same  may  be  observed  in  the  treatment  of 
le  human  form,  though  in  its  representation  the  As- 
yrians,  like  the  Egyptians,  would  seem  to  have  been, 
t  all  times,  more  or  less  shackled  by  religious  pre- 
udices  or  laws.  For  instance,  the  face  is  almost  in- 
ariably  in  profile,  not  because  the  sculptor  was 
nable  to  represent  the  full  face,  one  or  two  examples 
f  it  occurring  in  the  bas-reliefs,  but  probably  be- 
ause  he  was  bound  by  a  generally  received  custom, 
tirough  which  he  would  not  break.  No  new  forms 
r  combinations  appear  to  have  been  introduced  into 
Assyrian  ail  during  the  four  or  five  centuries,  if  not 
onger  period,  with  which  we  are  acquainted  with  it. 
»Ve  trace  throughout  the  same  eagle-headed,  lion- 
icaded,  and  fish-headed  figures,  the  same  winged 
ivinities,  the  same  composite  forms  at  the  doorways, 
n  the  earliest  works,  an  attempt  at  composition, 
hat  is  at  a  pleasing  and  picturesque  grouping  of 
he  figures,  is  perhaps  more  evident  than  in  the 
ater, — as  may  be  illustrated  by  the  Lion-hunt 
rom  the  N.  W.  Palace,  now  in  the  British  Museum 
Layard,  Mon.  of  Nin.  pi.  10).  A  parallel  may  in 
many  respects  be  drawn  between  the  arts  of  the 
Assyrians  from  their  earliest  known  period  to  their 
atest,  and  those  of  Greece  from  Phidias  to  the 
^ornan  epoch,  and  of  Italy  from  the  15th  to  tha 
L8th  century. 

The  ail  of  the  Nineveh  monuments  must  in  the 
present  state  of  our  knowledge  be  accepted  as  an 
original  and  national  art,  peculiar,  if  not  to  the 
Assyrians  alone,  to  the  races  who  at  various  periods 
xissessed  the  country  watered  by  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates.  As  it  was  undoubtedly  brought  to  its 
lighest  perfection  by  the  Assyrians,  and  is  espe 
cially  characteristic  of  them,  it  may  well  and  con 
veniently  bear  their  name.  From  whence  it  was 
originally  derived  there  is  nothing  as  yet  to  show. 
If  from  Babylon,  as  some  have  conjectured,  there  are 
no  remains  to  prove  the  fact.  Analogies  may  per 
haps  be  found  between  it  and  that  of  Egypt,  but  they 
are  not  sufficient  to  convince  us  that  the  one  was 
the  offspring  of  the  other.  These  analogies,  if  not 
accidental,  may  have  been  derived,  at  some  very 
remote  period,  from  a  common  source.  The  two 
may  have  been  offshoots  from  some  common  trunk 
which  perished  ages  before  either  Nineveh  or  Thebes 
was  founded ;  or  the  Phoenicians,  as  it  has  been 
suggested,  may  have  introduced  into  the  two  coun 
tries,  between  which  they  were  placed,  and  between 
which  they  may  have  formed  a  commercial  link, 
the  arts  peculiar  to  each  of  them.  Whatever  the 
origin,  the  development  of  the  arts  of  the  two 
countries  appears  to  have  been  affected  and  directed 
by  very  opposite  conditions  of  national  character, 
climate,  geographical  and  geological  position,  politics, 
and  religion.  Thus,  Egyptian  architecture  seems  to 
have  been  derived  from  a  stone  prototype,  Assyrian 
from  a  wooden  one — in  accordance  with  the  physical 
nature  of  the  two  countries.  Assyrian  art  is  the 
type  of  power,  vigour,  and  action  ;  Egyptian  that  of 


558 


NINEVEH 


calm  dignity  and  repose.  The  one  is  the  expression 
of  an  ambitious,  conquering,  and  restless  nature  ;  the 
other  of  a  race  which  seems  to  have  worked  for  itself 
ilone  and  for  eternity.  At  a  late  period  of  Assyrian 
History,  at  the  time  of  the  building  of  the  Khorsa'jad 
palace  (about  the  8th  century  B.C.),  a  more  iiti- 
nr.ate  intercoui-se  with  Egypt  through  war  or  dynastic 
alliances  than  had  previously  existed,  appears  to 
have  led  to  the  introduction  of  objects  of  Egyptian 
manufacture  into  Assyria,  and  may  have  influenced 
to  a  limited  extent  its  arts.  A  precisely  similar 
influence  proceeding  from  Assyria  has  been  remarked 
at  the  same  period  in  Egypt,  probably  arising  from 
the  conquest  and  temporary  occupation  of  the 
latter  country  by  the  Assyrians,  under  a  king 
whose  name  is  read  Asshur-bani-pal,  mentioned  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  (Birch,  Trans,  of  Ji.  Soc. 
of  Lit.,  new  series).  To  this  age  belong  the  ivories, 
bronzes,  and  nearly  all  the  small  objects  of  an 
Egyptian  character,  though  not  apparently  of 
Egyptian  workmanship,  discovered  in  the  Assyrian 
ruins.  It  has  been  asserted,  on  the  authority  of  an 
inscription  believed  to  contain  the  names  of  certain 
Hellenic  artists  from  Idalium,  Citium,  Salamis, 
Paphos,  and  other  Greek  cities,  that  Greeks  were 
employed  by  Essarhaddon  and  his  sou  in  executing 
the  sculptured  decorations  of  their  palaces  (Rawl. 
Herod,  i.  483).  But,  passing  over  the  extreme  un 
certainty  attaching  to  the  decipherment  of  proper 
names  in  the  cuneiform  character,  it  roust  be  ob 
served  that  no  remains  whatever  of  Greek  art  of 
so  early  a  period  are  known,  which  can  be  com 
pared  in  knowledge  of  principles  and  in  beauty  of 
execution  and  of  design  with  the  sculptures  of 
Assyria.  Niebuhr  has  remarked  of  Hellenic  art, 
that  "  anything  produced  before  the  Persian  war 
was  altogether  barbarous "  (34th  Lecture  on  An 
cient  History}.  If  Greek  artists  could  execute  such 
monuments  in  Assyria,  why,  it  may  be  asked,  did 
they  not  display  equal  skill  in  their  own  country  ? 
The  influence,  indeed,  seems  to  have  been  entirely 
in  the  opposite  direction.  The  discoveries  at  Nine 
veh  show  almost  beyond  a  doubt  that  the  Ionic  ele 
ment  in  Greek  art  was  derived  from  Assyria,  as  the 
Doric  came  from  Egypt.  There  is  scarcely  a  lead 
ing  form  or  a  detail  in  the  Ionic  order  which  cannot 
be  traced  to  Assyria — the  volute  of  the  column,  the 
frieze  of  griffins,  the  honeysuckle-border,  the  guil- 
loche,  the  Caryatides,  and  many  other  ornaments 
peculiar  to  the  style. 

The  arts  of  the  Assyrians,  especially  their  archi 
tecture,  spread  to  surrounding  nations,  as  is  usually 
the  case  when  one  race  is  brought  into  contact  with 
another  in  a  lower  state  of  civilisation.  They  appear 
to  have  crossed  the  Euphrates,  and  to  have  had  more 
'«r  less  influence  on  the  countries  between  it  and 
the  Mediterranean.  Monuments  of  an  Assyrian 
character  have  been  discovered  in  various  parts 
of  Syria,  and  further  researches  would  probably 
disclose  many  more.  The  arts  of  the  Phoenicians, 
judging  from  the  few  specimens  preserved,  show 
the  same  influence.  In  the  absence  of  even  the 
most  insignificant  remains,  and  of  any  implements 
vhich  may  with  confidence  be  attributed  to  the 
Jews  [ARMS],  there  are  no  materials  for  comparison 
between  Jewish  and  Assyrian  art.  It  is  possible 
that  the  bronzes  and  ivories  discovered  at  Nineveh 
were  of  Phoenician  manufacture,  like  the  vessels  in 
Solomon's  temple.  On  the  lion-weights,  now  in 
the  British  Museum,  are  inscriptions  both  in  the 
cuneiform  and  Phoenician  charactei-s.  The  Assy 
ria;!  inscriptions  seem  to  indicate  a  direct  depeud- 


NINEVEH 

ence  of  Judaea  upon  Assyria  from  a  very  carl\ 
period.  From  the  descriptions  of  the  temple  and 
"houses"  of  Solomon  (cf.  1  K.  vi.,  vii. ;  2  Chr 
iii.,  iv. ;  Joseph,  viii.  2 ;  Fcrgusson's  Palaces  of 
Nineveh;  and  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  642),  it  would 
appear  that  there  was  much  similarity  between 
them  and  the  palaces  of  Nineveh,  if  not  in  the 
exterior  architecture,  certainly  in  the  interior  de 
corations,  such  as  the  walls  panelled  or  wains 
coted  with  sawn  stones,  the  sculptures  on  the 
slabs  representing  trees  and  plants,  the  remainder 
of  the  walls  above  the  skirting  painted  with  various 
colours  and  pictures,  the  figures  of  the  winged 
cherubim  carved  "  all  the  house  round,"  and  espe 
cially  on  the  doorways,  the  ornaments  of  open 
flowers,  pomegranates,  and  lilies  (apparently  corre 
sponding  exactly  with  the  rosettes,  pomegranates, 
and  honey-suckle  ornaments  of  the  Assyrian  bas- 
reliefs,  Botta,  Man.  de  Nin.  and  Layard,  Mon.  of 
Nin.),  and  the  ceiling,  roof,  and  beams  of  cedar- 
wood.  The  Jewish  edifices  were  however  very  much 
inferior  in  size  to  the  Assyrian.  Of  objects  of  art  (if 
we  may  use  the  term)  contained  in  the  Temple  we 
have  the  description  of  the  pillars,  of  the  brazen 
sea,  and  of  various  bronze  or  copper  vessels.  They 
were  the  work  of  Hiram,  the  son  of  a  Phoenician 
artist  by  a  Jewish  woman  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali 
(1  K.  vii.  14),  a  fact  which  gives  us  some  insight 
into  Phoenician  art,  and  seems  to  show  that  the 
Jews  had  no  art  of  their  own,  as  Hiram  was 
fetched  from  Tyre  by  Solomon.  The  Assyrian 
character  of  these  objects  is  very  remarkabi*. 
The  two  pillars  and  "  chapiters "  of  brass  had 
ornaments  of  lilies  and  pomegranates  ;  the  brazen 
sea  was  supported  on  oxen,  and  its  rim  was  orna 
mented  with  flowers  of  lilies,  whilst  the  bases  were 
graven  with  lions,  oxen,  and  cherubim  on  the  bor 
ders,  and  the  plates  of  the  ledges  with  cherubim, 
lions,  and  palm-trees.  The  vail  of  the  temple,  of 
different  colours,  had  also  cherubim  wrought  upon 
it.  (Cf.  Layard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  woodcut,  p.  588,  in 
which  a  large  vessel,  probably  of  bronze  or  copper, 
is  represented  suppoited  upon  oxen,  and  Mon.  of 
Nin.  series  2,  pi.  60,  65,  68, — in  which  vessels- 
with  embossed  rims  appirently  similar  to  those  in 
Solomon's  temple  are  figured.  Also  series  1,  pi.  8, 
44,  48,  in  which  embroideries  with  cherubim 
occur.) 

The  influence  of  Assyria  to  the  eastward  was 
even  more  considerable,  extending  far  into  Asia. 
The  Persians  copied  their  architecture  (with  such 
modifications  as  the  climate  and  the  building- 
materials  at  hand  suggested),  their  sculpture,  pro 
bably  their  painting  and  their  mode  of  writing, 
from  the  Assyrians.  The  ruined  palaces  of  Perse- 
polis  show  the  same  general  plan  of  construction 
as  those  of  Nineveh — the  entrances  formed  by 
human-headed  animals,  the  skirting  of  sculptured 
stone,  and  the  inscribed  slabs.  The  various  religious 
emblems  and  the  ornamentation  have  the  same  As 
syrian  character.  In  Persia,  however,  a  stone  archi 
tecture  prevailed,  and  the  columns  in  that  material 
have  resisted  to  this  day  the  ravages  of  time. 

The  Persians  made  an  advance  in  one  respect 
upon  Assyrian  sculpture,  and  probably  painting 
likewise,  in  an  attempt  at  a  natural  representation  01 
drapery  by  the  introduction  of  folds,  of  which  there  is 
only  the  slightest  indication  on  Assyrian  monuments. 
It  may  have  been  partly  through  Persia  that  the  in 
fluence  of  Assyrian  art  passed  into  Asia  Minor  and 
thence  into  Greece;  but  it  had  probably  penetnited 
far  into  the  former  country  long  befoie  the  Pcrsiar 


NINEVEH 


NINEVEH 


55S 


domination.     We  find   it  strongly  shown   in   the  '  afterwards  baked  in  a  furnace  or  ktin.    (Cf.  Ezekiel. 


farliest  monuments,  as  in  those  of  Lycia  and 
Phrygia,  and  in  the  archaic  sculptures  of  Branchidae. 
Bat  the  early  art  of  Asia  Minor  still  offers  a  most 
interesting  field  for  investigation.  Amongst  the 
Assyrians,  the  arts  were  principally  employed,  as 
amongst  all  nations  in  their  earlier  stages  of  civili 
sation,  for  religious  and  national  purposes.  The 
colossal  figures  at  the  doorways  of  the  palaces  were 
mythic  combinations  to  denote  the  attributes  of  a 
•Jeity.  The  "  Man-Bull"  and  the  "  Man-Lion,"  are 
conjectured  to  be  the  gods  "Nin"  and  "  Nergal," 
presiding  over  war  and  the  chace  ;  the  eagle-headed 
jnd  fish-headed  figures  so  constantly  repeated  in 
the  sculptures,  and  as  ornaments  on  vessels  of 
metal,  or  in  embroideries — Nisroch  and  Dagon.  The 
bas-reliefs  almost  invariably  record  some  deed  of  the 
King,  as  head  of  the  nation,  in  war,  and  in  combat 
with  wild  beasts,  or  his  piety  in  erecting  vast 
palace-temples  to  the  gods.  Hitherto  no  sculptures 
specially  illustrating  the  pri 
vate  life  of  the  Assyrians  have  Y  >_>X_/// 
been  discovered,  except  one  or 
two  incidents,  such  as  men 
baking  bread  or  tending  horses, 
introduced  as  mere  accessories 
into  the  historical  bas-reliefs. 
This  may  be  partly  owing  to 
the  fact  that  no  traces  what 
ever  have  yet  been  found  of 
their  burial  places,  or  even  of 
their  mode  of  dealing  with 
the  dead.  It  is  chiefly  upon  the  walls  of  tombs 
that,  the  domestic  life  of  the  Egyptians  has  been  so 
fully  depicted.  In  the  useful  arts,  as  in  the  fine 
arts,  the  Assyrians  had  made  a  progress  which 
denotes  a  very  high  state  of  civilisation  [ASSYRIA]. 
When  the  inscriptions  have  been  fully  examined  and 
deciphered,  it  will  probably  be  found  that  they 
had  made  no  inconsiderable  advance  in  the  sciences, 
especially  in  astronomy,  mathematics,  numeration, 
and  hydraulics.  Although  the  site  of  Nineveh 
afforded  no  special  advantages  for  commerce,  and 
although  she  owed  her  greatness  rather  to  her  poli 
tical  position  as  the  capital  of  the  empire,  yet, 
situated  upon  a  navigable  river  communicating  with 
the  Euphrates  and  the  Persian  Gulf,  she  must  have 
soon  formed  one  of  the  great  trading  stations  between 
that  important  inland  sea,  and  Syria,  and  the  Medi 
terranean,  and  must  have  become  a  depot  for  the 
merchandise  supplied  to  a  great  part  of  Asia  Minor, 
Armenia,  and  Persia.  Her  merchants  are  described 
in  Ezekiel  (xxvii.  24)  as  trading  in  blue  clothes 
and  broidered  work  (such  as  is  probably  represented 
in  the  sculptures),  and  in  Nahum  (iii.  16)  as 
"  multiplied  above  the  stars  of  heaven."  The  ani 
mals  represented  on  the  black  obelisk  in  the  British 
Museum  and  on  other  monuments,  the  rhinoceros, 
the  elephant,  the  double-humped  camel,  and  various 
kinds  of  apes  and  monkeys,  show  a  communication 


iv.  1,  "Take  thee  a  tile  .  .  .  and  pourtriy  upon 
it  the  city,  even  Jerusalem.")  The  cylindars  art 
hollow,  and  appear,  from  the  bole  pierced  through 
them,  to  have  been  mounted  ,'.•  as  to  turn  round, 
and  to  present  their  several  sirtes  to  the  reader.  The 
character  employed  was  the  arro«"-headed  or  cunei 
form — so  called  from  each  letter  being  formed  by 
marks  or  elements'  resembling  an  arrow-head  or  ,1 
wedge.  This  mode  of  writing,  believed  by  some  to 
be  of  Turanian  or  Scythic  origin,  prevailed  through 
out  the  provinces  comprised  in  the  Assyrian,  Babylo 
nian,  and  the  eastern  portion  of  the  ancient  Persian 
empires,  from  the  earliest  times  to  which  any  known 
record  belongs,  or  at  least  20  centuries  before  the 
Christian  era,  down  to  the  period  of  the  conquests 
of  Alexander ;  after  which  epoch,  although  occa 
sionally  employed,  it  seems  to  have  gradually  fallen 
into  disuse.  It  never  extended  into  Syria,  Arabia, 
or  Asia  Minor,  although  it  was  adopted  in  Armenia. 


<MKT 

Specimen  of  the  arrow-headed  or  cuneiform  writing. 

A  cursive  writing  resembling  the  ancient  Syrian 
and  Phoenician,  and  by  some  believed  to  be  the 
original  form  of  all  other  cursive  writing  used  in 
Western  Asia,  including  the  Hebrew,  appears  to  have 
also  been  occasionally  employed  in  Assyria,  probably 
for  documents  written  on  parchment  or  papyrus,  or 
perhaps  leather  skins.  The  Assyrian  cuneiform  cha 
racter  was  of  the  same  class  as  the  Babylonian, 
only  differing  from  it  in  the  less  complicated  nature 
of  its  forms.  Although  the  primary  elements  in  the 
later  Persian  and  so-called  Median  cuneiform  were 
the  same,  yet  their  combination  and  the  value  of 
the  letters  were  quite  distinct.  The  latter,  indeed, 
is  but  a  form  of  the  Assyrian.  Herodotus  temis  all 
cuneiform  writing  the  "  Assyrian  writing  "  (Herod, 
iv.  87).  This  character  may  have  been  derived 
from  some  more  ancient  form  of  hieroglyphic 
writing ;  but  if  so,  all  traces  of  such  origin  have 
disappeared.  The  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  alpha 
bet  (if  the  term  may  be  applied  to  above  20C 
signs)  is  of  the  most  complicated,  imperfect,  and 
arbitrary  nature — some  characters  being  phonetic, 
others  syllabic,  others  ideographic — the  same  cha 
racter  being  frequently  used  indifferently.  This 
constitutes  one  of  the  principal  difficulties  in 
the  process  of  decipherment.  The  investigation 
first  commenced  by  Grotefend  (Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  vol.  ii.  App.  2)  has  since  been  carried 


direct  or  indirect  with  the  remotest  parts  of  Asia,  on  with  much  success  by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  Dr. 
This  intercourse  with  foreign  nations,  and  the  prac-  Hincks,  Mr.  Norris,  and  Mr.  Fox  Talbot,  in  Eng- 
tice  of  carrying  to  Assyria  as  captives  the  skilled  land,  and  by  M.  Oppert  in  France  (see  papers  by 
artists  and  workmen  of  conquered  countries,  must  those  gentlemen  in  the  Journals  of  the  JRoy.  As. 
have  contributed  greatly  to  the  improvement  of  j  Soc.,  in  Transactions  of  Royal  Irish  Academy,  in 


Assyrian  manufactures. 

Writing  and  Language. — The  ruins  of  Nineveh 
nave  furnished  a  vast  collection  of  inscriptions  partly 


Journal  of  Sacred  Literature,  and  in  the  Athe 
naeum).  Although  considerable  doubt  may  still 
reasonably  prevail  as  to  the  interpretation  of  details. 


carved  on   marble  or  stone  slabs,  and  partly  im-  j  as  to  grammatical  construction,  and  especially  as  to 


pressed  upon  bricks,  and  upon  clay  cylinders,  or 
j-ix-sided  and  eight-sided  prisms,  barrels,  and  tablets, 
which,  used  for  the  puipose  when  still  moist,  were 


the  rendering  of  proper  names,  sufficient  progress: 
has  been  made  to  enable  the  student  to  ascertain 
vr:th  some  degree  of  confidence  the  general  me.viiiig 


560 


NINEVEH 


and  contents  of  an  inscription.  The  people  of  Ni 
neveh  spoke  a  Semitic .  dialect,  connected  with  the 
Hebrew  and  with  the  so-called  Chaldee  of  the 
Books  of  Daniel  and  Ezra.  This  agrees  with  the 
testimony  of  the  0.  T.  But  it  is  asserted  that 
there  existed  in  Assyria,  as  well  as  in  Babylonia, 
a  more  ancient  tongue  belonging  to  a  Turanian  or 
Scythic  race,  which  is  supposed  to  have  inhabited 
the  plains  watered  by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates 
long  before  the  rise  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  and 
from  which  the  Assyrians  derived  their  civilisation 
and  the  greater  part  of  their  mythology.  It  was 
retained  for  sacred  purposes  by  the  conquering  race, 
as  the  Latin  was  retained  after  the  fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire  in  the  Catholic  church.  In  frag 
ments  of  vocabularies  discovered  in  the  record- 
chaaiber  at  Kouyunjik  words  in  the  two  languages 
are  placed  in  parallel  columns,  whilst  a  centre  column 
contains  a  monographic  or  ideographic  sign  repre 
senting  both.  A  large  number  of  Turanian  words 
or  roots  are  further  supposed  to  have  existed  in  the 
Assyrian  tongue,  and  tablets  apparently  in  that  lan 
guage  have  been  discovered  in  the  ruins.  The 
monumental  inscriptions  occur  on  detached  stelae 
and  obelisks,  of  which  there  are  several  specimens  in 
the  British  Museum  from  the  Assyrian  ruins,  and 
one  in  the  Be/lin  Museum  discovered  in  the  island 
of  Cyprus ;  on  the  colossal  human-headed  lions  and 
bulls,  upon  parts  not  occupied  by  sculpture,  as  be 
tween  the  legs ;  on  the  sculptured  slabs,  generally 
in  bands  between  two  bas-reliefs,  to  which  they  seem 
to  refer ;  and,  as  in  Persia  and  Armenia,  carved  on 
the  face  of  rocks  in  the  hill-country.  At  Nimroud 
the  same  inscription  is  carved  on  nearly  every  slab  in 
the  N.  W.  palace,  and  generally  repeated  on  the  back, 
and  even  earned  across  the  sculptured  colossal  figures. 
The  Assyrian  inscriptions  usually  contain  the  chro 
nicles  of  the  king  who  built  or  restored  the  edifice 
in  which  they  are  found,  records  of  his  wars  and 
expeditions  into  distant  countries,  of  the  amount  of 
tribute  and  spoil  taken  from  conquered  tribes,  of 
the  building  of  temples  and  palaces,  and  invocations 
to  the  gods  of. Assyria.  Frequently  every  stone 
and  kiln-burnt  brick  used  in  a  building  bears  the 
name  and  titles  of  the  king,  and  generally  those 
of  his  father  and  grandfather  are  added.  These 
inscribed  bricks  are  of  the  greatest  value  in  restor 
ing  the  royal  dynasties.  The  longest  inscription  on 
stone,  that  from  the  N.  W.  palace  of  Nineveh  con 
taining  the  records  of  Sardanapalus  II.,  has  325 


NINEVEH 

lines,  that  on  the  black  obelisk  has  210.  The 
most  important  hitherto  discovered  in  connexion 
with  Biblical  history,  is  that  upon  a  pair  of  colossa! 
human-headed  bulls  from  Kouyunjik,  now  in  t.h* 
British  Museum,  containing  the  records  of  Senna 
cherib,  and  describing,  amongst  other  events,  his 
wars  with  Hezekiah.  Jt  is  accompanied  by  a  series 
of  bas-reliefs  believed  to  represent  the  siege  and 
capture  of  Lachish  (LACHISH;  Layard,  Nin.  anti 
Bab.  p.  148-153). 


Jtiwlch  Cauiiv.«  from  I.arliish  (nouyunjik) 


Sennacherib  on  Mi  Throne  before  1-acl  Ua. 

A  long  list  might  be  given  of  Biblical  names  oc 
curring  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  (id.  626). 
Those  of  three  Jewish  kings  have  been  read,  Jehu 
son  of  Khumri  (Omri),  on  the  black  obelisk  (  JEHU  ; 
Layaixl,  Nin.  and  Bab.  613),  Mena- 
hem  on  a  slab  from  the  S.  W. 
palace,  Nimroud,  now  in  the  British 
Museum  (id.  617),  and  Hezekiah  ir 
the  Kouyunjik  records.  The  most 
important  inscribed  terra-cotta  cy 
linders  are  —  those  from  KalaK 
Sherghat,  with  the  annals  of  a 
king,  whose  name  is  believed  t» 
read  Tiglath  Pileser,  not  the  same 
mentioned  in  the  2nd  Book  of 
Kings,  but  an  earlier  monarch,  who 
is  supposed  to  have  reigned  about 
B.C.  1110  (Rawl.  Herod,  i.  457), 
those  from  Khorsabad  containing  the 
annals  of  Sargon  ;  those  from  Kou 
yunjik,  especially  one  known  as 
Bellino's  cylinder,  with  the  cluoni- 
cles  of  Sennacherib ;  that  from  Nebbi 
Yunus  with  the  records  of  Essarhad- 
don,  and  the  fragments  of  thrfg 
cylinders  with  those  of  his  son  Th 


NINEVEH 

\ontjestinscriptiononacylinderi.sof820  lines.  Such 
cylinders  and  inscribed  slabs  were  generally  buried 
beneath  the  foundations  of  great  public  buildings. 
Many  fragments  of  cylinders  and  a  vast  collection 
of  inscribed  clay  tablets,  many  in  perfect  preser 
vation,  and  some  bearing  the  impressions  of  seals, 
were  discovered  in  a  chamber  at  Kouyunjik,  and  are 
now  deposited  in  the  British  Museum.  They  ap 
pear  to  include  historical  documents,  vocabularies, 
astronomical  and  other  calculations,  calendars,  direc 
tions  for  the  performance  of  religious  ceremonies, 
lists  of  the  gods,  their  attributes,  and  the  days  ap 
pointed  for  their  worship,  descriptions  of  countries, 
lists  of  animals,  grants  of  lands,  &c.  &c.  In  this 
chamber  was  also  found  the  piece  of  clay  bearing  the 
seal  of  the  Egyptian  king,  So  or  Sabaco,  and  that  of 
an  Assyrian  monarch,  either  Sennacherib  or  his  son, 
probably  affixed  to  a  treaty  between  the  two,  which 
having  been  written  on  parchment  or  papyrus,  had 
entirely  perished  CLayard,  Nin.  and  Bab.  p.  150). 


NJS110CH 


561 


ImjroaaionB  o!  the  Signets*  at  the  Kings  of  Assyria  and  Egypt 
(Oriprinnl  si/..-.) 


Part  of  Cartouche  of  Sabaco,  enlarged  from  the  impression  of 
his  Signet. 

The  most  important  results  may  be  expecte< 
when  inscriptions  so  numerous  and  so  varied  in  cha 
racter  are  deciphered.  A  list  of  nineteen  or  twent1 
kings  can  already  be  compiled,  and  the  annals  of  th 
greater  number  of  them  will  probably  be  restored  tt 
the  lost  history  of  one  of  the  most  powerful  empire 
of  the  ancient  world,  and  of  one  which  appears  tc 
have  exercised  perhaps  greater  influence  than  an; 
other  upon  the  subsequent  condition  and  develop 
ment  of  civilised  man.  [ASSYRIA.] 

The  only  race  now  found  near  the  ruins  of  Nine 
veh  or  in  Assyria  which  may  have  any  claim  to  be 
considered  descendants  from  the  ancient  inhabitants 
of  the  country  are  the  so-called  Chaldaean  or  Nes- 
torian  tribes,  inhabiting  the  mountains  of  Kur 
distan,  the  plains  round  the  lake  of  Ooroomiyah  in 
Persia,  and  a  few  villages  in  the  neighbourhood  o 
Moml.  They  still  speak  a  Semitic  dialect,  aimos 
identical  with  the  Chaldee  of  the  books  of  Danie 
ami  Ezra.  A  resemblance,  which  may  be  bv.t  fan 

VOL,.  TI. 


nful,  has  been  traced  between  them  and  the  repre- 
•>entations  of  the  Assyrians  in  the  bas-reliefs.  Their 
)hysical  characteristics  at  any  rate  seem  to  mark 
,hem  as  of  the  same  race.  The  inhabitants  of  this 
>art  of  Asia  have  been  exposed  perhaps  more  than 
,hose  of  any  other  country  in  the  world  to  the  de 
vastating  inroads  of  stranger  hordes.  Conquering 
ribes  of  Arab*,  and  of  Tartars  have  more  than  onos 
well-nigh  exterminated  the  population  which  they 
found  there,  and  have  occupied  their  places.  The 
few  survivors  from  these  terrible  massacres  have 
taken  refuge  in  the  mountain  fastnesses,  where  they 
may  still  linger.  A  curse  seems  to  hang  over  a 
land  naturally  rich  and  fertile,  and  capable  of  sus 
taining  a  vast  number  of  human  beings.  Those 
who  now  inhabit  it  are  yearly  diminishing,  and 
there  seems  no  prospect  that  for  generations  to  come 
this  once-favoured  country  should  remain  other  than 
a  wilderness. 

(Layard's  Nineveh  and  its  Remains ;  Nineveh  and 
Babylon ;  and  Monuments  of  Nineveh,  1st  and  2nd 
Series;  Botta's  Monument  de  Ninive ;  Fergusson, 
Palaces  of  Nineveh  and  Persepolis  restored  ;  Vaux's 
Nineveh  and  Persepolis.)  [A.  H.  L.] 

NIN'EVITES  (Nti/eufW:  Ninevitae').  The 
inhabitants  of  Nineveh  (Luke  xi.  30). 

NI'SAN.    [MONTHS.] 

NIS'ROCH  OpD3 :  TAefffodx,  Mai's  ed.  'E<r- 

Spdx  ;  Alex.  'Effopdx  in  2  K. ;  Noo-ope^x  '"  Is- : 
Nesroch).  The  proper  name  of  an  idol  of  Nineveh, 
in  whose  temple  Sennacherib  was  worshipping  when 
assassinated  by  his  sons,  Adrammelech  and  Sharezer 
(2  K.  xix.  37  ;  Is.  xxxvii.  38).  Selden  confesses  his 
ignorance  of  the  deity  denoted  by  this  name  (de  Dis 
Syris,  synt.  ii.  c.  10) ;  but  Beyer,  in  his  Addita- 
menta  (pp.  323-325)  has  collected  several  conjec 
tures.  Jarchi,  in  his  note  on  Is.  xxxvii.  38,  explains 
Nisroch  as  "  a  beam,  or  plank,  of  Noah's  ark,"  from 
the  analysis  which  is  given  of  the  word  by  Kab- 
binical  expositors  ("pD3  =  KniJ  &OD3).  What  the 
true  etymology  may  be  is  extremely  doubtful.  If 
the  origin  of  the  word  be  Shemitic,  it  may  be  de 
rived,  as.Gesenius  suggests,  from  the  Heb.  ~)t?3, 
which  is  in  Arab,  nisr,  "  an  eagle,''  with  the  ter 
mination  och  or  dch,  which  is  intensive  in  Persian," 
so  that  Nisroch  would  signify  "  the  great  eagle  " 
(comp.  ARIOCH).  But  it  must  he  confessed  that 
this  explanation  is  far  from  satisfactory.  It  is 
adopted,  however,  by  Mr.  Layard,  who  identifies 
with  Nisroch  the  eagle-headed  human  figure,  which 
is  one  of  the  most  prominent  on  the  earliest  A  ssyrian 
monuments,  and  is  always  represented  as  contending 
with  and  conquering  the  lion  or  the  bull  (Nineveh, 
ii.  458,  459).  In  another  passage  he  endeavours 
to  reconcile  the  fact  that  Asshur  was  the  supreme 
god  of  the  Assyrians,  as  far  as  can  be  determined 
from  the  inscriptions,  with  the  appearance  of  the 
name  Nisroch  as  that  of  the  chief  god  of  Nineveh, 
by  supposing  that  Sennacherib  may  have  been  slain 
in  the  temple  of  Asshur,  and  that  the  Hebrews, 
seeing  everywhere  the  eagie-headed  figure,  "  may 
have  believed  it  to  be  that  of  the  peculiar  god  of  the 
Assyrians,  to  whom  they  consequently  gave  a  name 
denoting  an  eagle  "  {Nin.  fy  Bab.  637,  note).  Other 
explanations,  based  upon  the  same  etymology,  have 
been  given  ;  such  as  that  suggested  by  Beyer  (Addit. 
p.  324),  that  Nisroch  denotes  "  Noah's  eagle," 
that  is  "  Noah's  bird,"  that  is  "  Noah's  dove,"  the 

"  So  lie  says  in  his  Thes.,  but  in  his  Jesaia  (1.  976)  h« 
correctly  calls  it  a  diminutive. 

2  C 


562 


NITRE 


love  lieing  an  object  of  worship  among  the  Assyrians 
,'Luciau,  de  Jov.  tray.  c.  42);  or  that  mentioned 
M  more  probable  by  Winer  (Realm,  s.  v.),  that  it 
was  the  constellation  Aquila,  the  eagle  being  in  the 
Persian  religion  a  symbol  of  Ormuzd.  Parkhurst, 
deriving  the  word  from  the  Chaldee  root  "ipp,  serac 
'which  occurs  in  Dan.  vi. in  the  form  K'3"iD,  sd- 
recat/t/i,  and  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "presidents"), 
conjectures  fhat  Nisroch  may  be  the  impersonation 
of  the  M.Kir  fire,  and  substantially  identical  with 
Molech  and  Milcom,  which  are  both  derived  from  a 
»-oot  similar  in  meaning  to  serac.  Nothing,  however, 
is  certain  with  regard  to  Nisroch,  except  that  these 
conjectures,  one  and  all,  are  very  little  to  be  de 
pended  oc.  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  says  that  Asshur  had 
no  temple  at  Nineveh  in  which  Sennacherib  could 
have  been  worshipping  (Rawlinson,  Herod.  I.  p. 
590).  He  conjectures  that  Nisroch  is  not  a  genuine 
reading.  Josephus  has  a  curious  variation.  He 
says  (Ant.  X.  1  §5)  that  Sennacherib  was  buried 
in  his  own  temple  called  Arasce  (iv  r$  iSlt 
vajif  'ApdffKy  \eyofievtf).  [W.  A.  W.j 

NITEE  CirO,  nether:  ?\KOS,  vlrpov :  nitrum) 
occurs  in  Prov.  xxv.  20,  "  As  he  that  taketh  away  a 
garment  in  cold  weather,  and  as  vinegar  upon  nether, 
so  is  he  that  singeth  songs  to  an  heavy  heart ;" 
and  in  Jer.  ii.  22,  where  it  is  said  of  sinful  Judah, 
"  though  thou  wash  thee  with  nether  and  take  thee 
much  borith  [SOAP],  yet  thine  iniquity  is  marked 
before  me."  The  substance  denoted  is  not  that 
which  we  now  understand  by  the  term  nitre,  i.  e. 
nitrate  of  potassa — "  saltpetre  " — but  the  vlrpov 
or  Klrpov  of  the  Greeks,  the  nitrum  of  the  Latins, 
and  the  natron  or  native  carbonate  of  soda  of 
modern  chemistry.  Much  has  been  written  on 
the  subject  of  the  nitrum  of  the  ancients ;  it  will 
be  enough  to  refer  the  reader  to  Beckmann,  who 
(History  of  Inventions,  ii.  482,  Bonn's  ed.)  has 
devoted  a  chapter  to  this  subject,  and  to  the  authi 
rities  mentioned  in  the  notes.  It  is  uncertain  at  what 
time  the  English  term  nitre  first  ca?ae  to  be  used 
for  saltpetre,  but  our  translators  no  doubt  under 
stood  thereby  the  carbonate  of  soda,  for  nitre  is  so 
used  by  Holland  in  his  translation  of  Pliny  (xxxi. 
10)  in  contradistinction  to  saltpetre,  which  he  gives 
as  the  marginal  explanation  of  aphronitrum. 

The  latter  part  of  the  passage  in  Proverbs  is  well 
explained  by  Shaw,  who  says  (Trav.  ii.  387),  "the 
unsuitableness  of  the  singing  of  songs  to  a  heavy 
heart  is  very  finely  compared  to  the  contrariety 
there  is  between  vinegar  and  natron."  This  is 
far  preferable  to  the  explanation  given  by  Michaelis 
(De  Nitro  Hebraeor.  in  Commentat.  Societ.  Reg. 
praelect.  i.  166;  and  Suppl.  Lex.  Heb.  p.  1704), 
that  the  simile  alludes  to  the  unpleasant  smell 
arising  from  the  admixture  of  the  acid  and  alkali ; 
it  points  rather  to  the  extreme  mental  agitation 
produced  by  ill-timed  mirth,  the  grating  against 
the  feelings,  to  make  use  of  another  metaphor. 
Natrum  was  and  is  still  used  by  the  Egyptians  for 
washing  linen,  the  value  of  soda  in  this  respect  is 
well  known ;  this  explains  Jer.  /.  c.,  "  though  thou 
wash  thee  with  soda,"  &c.  Hasselquist  (Trav. 
275)  says  that  natrum  is  dug  out  of  a  pit  or  mine 
near  Mantura  in  Egypt,  ana  is  mixed  with  lime- 
itone  and  is  of  a  whitish-brown  colour.  The 
Egyptians  use  it,  ( 1 )  to  put  into  bread  instead  of 
feast,  (2)  instead  of  soap,  (3)  as  a  cure  for  the 
toothache,  being  mixed  with  vinegar.  Compare 
•Iso  ForskSl  (Flor.  Aegypt.  Arab.  p.  xlvi.),  who 
gires  its  Arabic  names,  atrun  or  natrun. 


NOAH 

Natron  is  found  abundantly  in  the  wcll-kicvm 
soda  lakes  of  Egypt  described  by  Pliny  (xxxi.  10), 
and  referred  to  by  Strabo  (xv:i.  A.  1155.  ed. 
Kramer),  which  are  situated  in  the  barren  valley  o< 
Bahr-bela-ma  (the  Waterless  Sea),about  50  miles  W. 
of  Cairo ;  the  natron  occurs  in  whitish  or  yellowish 
efflorescent  crusts,  or  in  beds  three  or  four  feet 
thick,  and  very  hard  (Volney,  Trav.  i.  15),  which 
in  the  winter  are  covered  with  water  about  two 
feet  deep;  during  the  other  nine  months  of  the 
year  the  lakes  are  dry,  at  which  period  the  natron 
is  procured.  (See  Andrebssi,  Memoire  sur  la  Vallet 
des  Lacs  de  Natron,  in  Mtm.  sur  flSgypte,  ii. 
276,  &c. ;  Berthollet,  Obsercat.  sur  le  Natron, 
ibid.  p.  310;  Descript.  de  fjSgypte,  xxi.  205.) 

[W.  H.] 

NO.     [No-AMON.] 

NOADI'AH   (iTnyU:    VtudSia:    Noadaia). 

1.  A  Levite,  son  of  Biiiuui,  who  with  Meremoth, 
Eleazar,  and  Jozabad,  weighed  the  vessels  of  gold  and 
silver  belonging  to  the  Temple  which  were  brought 
back  from  Babylon  (Ezr.  viii.  33).  In  1  Esd.  viii. 
63,  he  is  called  "  Moeth  the  son  of  Sabbaa." 

2.  (Noadia).  The  prophetess  Noadiah  joined 
Sanballat  and  Tobiah  in  their  attempt  to  intimidate 
Nehemiah  while  rebuilding  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  vi.  14).  She  is  only  mentioned  in  Nehe- 
miah's  denunciation  of  his  enemies,  and  is  not  pro 
minent  in  the  narrative. 

NO'AH  (Hi) :  Nwe;  Joseph.  Ntfooy:  Ao£),  the 
tenth  in  descent  from  Adam,  in  the  line  of  Seth, 
was  the  son  of  Lamech,  and  grandson  of  Methu 
selah.  Of  his  father  Lamech  all  that  we  know  is 
comprised  in  the  words  that  he  uttered  on  the  birth 
of  his  son,  words  the  more  significant  when  we 
contrast  them  with  the  saying  of  the  other  Lamech 
of  the  race  of  Cain,  which  have  also  been  preserved. 
The  one  exults  in  the  discovery  of  weapons  by 
which  he  ma  /  defend  himself  in  case  of  need.  The 
other,  a  tiller  of  the  soil,  mourns  over  the  curse 
which  rests  on  the  ground,  seeing  in  it  evidently 
the  consequence  of  sin.  It  is  impossible  to  mistake 
the  religious  feeling  which  speaks  of  "  the  ground 
which  Jehovah  hath  cursed."  Not  less  evident  is 
the  bitter  sense  of  weary  and  fruitless  labour,  min 
gled  with  better  hopes  for  the  future.  We  read 
that  on  the  birth  of  a  son  "  he  called  his  name 
Noah,  saying,  This  shall  comfort  us,  for  our  work 
and  labour  of  our  hands,  because  of  (or  from)  the 
ground  which  Jehovah  hath  cursed."  Nothing  can 
be  more  exquisitely  time  and  natural  than  the  way 
in  which  the  old  man's  saddened  heart  turns  fondly 
to  his  son.  His  own  lot  had  been  cast  in  evil  times  ; 
"  but  this,"  he  says,  "  shall  comfort  us."  One 
hardly  knows  whether  the  sorrow  or  the  hope  pre 
dominates.  Clearly  there  is  an  almost  prophetic 
feeling  in  the  name  which  he  gives  his  son,  and 
hence  some  Christian  writers  have  seen  in  the  lan 
guage  a  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  and  have  sup 
posed  that  as  Eve  was  mistaken  on  the  birth  of 
Cain,  so  Lamech  in  like  manner  was  deceived  in  his 
hope  of  Noah.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  infer  from 
the  language  of  the  narrative  that  the  hopes  of 
either  were  of  so  definite  a  nature.  The  knowledge 
of  a  personal  Deliverer  was  not  vouchsafed  till  a 
much  later  period. 

In  the  reason  which  Lamech  gives  for  calling  his 
son  Noah,  there  is  a  play  upon  the  name  which  it 
is  impossible  to  preserve  in  English.  He  ceJle^ 
tiis  same  Noah  (H3,  Noach,  rest),  nay iug,  "thissr.uv 


NOAH 

ju.\li  comfort  us"  (}JOn3»,  yenachamenu).  It  is 
quite  plain  that  the  name  "  rest,"  and  the  verb 
"comfort,"  are  of  different  roots  ;  and  we  must 
not  try  to  make  a  philologist  of  Lamech,  and  sup 
pose  that  he  was  giving  an  accurate  derivation  of 
the  name  Noah.  He  merely  plays  upon  the  name, 
after  a  fashion  common  enough  in  all  ages  and 
countries. 

Of  Noah  himself  from  this  time  we  hear  no 
thing  more  till  he  is  500  years  old,  when  it  is  said 
he  begat  three  sons,  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japhet.m 

Very  remarkable,  however,  is  the  glimpse  which 
we  get  of  the  state  of  society  in  the  ante-diluvian 
world.  The  narrative  it  is  true  is  brief,  and  on 
many  points  obscure:  a  mystery  hangs  over  it 
which  we  cannot  penetrate.  But  some  few  facts 
are  clear.  The  wickedness  of  the  world  is  described 
as  hiiving  reached  a  desperate  pitch,  owing  it  would 
seem  in  a  great  measure  to  the  fusion  of  two  races 
which  had  hitherto  been  distinct.  And  further  the 
marked  features  of  the  wickedness  of  the  age  were 
lust  and  brutal  outrage.  "  They  took  them  wives 
of  all  which  they  chose;"  and,  "  the  earth  was  filled 
with  violence."  "  The  earth  was  corrupt ;  for  all 
flesh  had  corrupted  his  way  upon  the  earth."  So 
far  the  picture  is  clear  and  vivid.  But  when  we 
rome  to  examine  some  of  its  details,  we  are  left 
greatly  at  a  loss.  The  narrative  stands  thus : 

"And  it  came  to  pass  when  men  (the  Adam) 
began  to  multiply  on  the  face  of  the  ground  and 
daughters  were  born  unto  them  ;  then  the  sons  of 
God  (the  Elohim )  saw  the  daughters  of  men  (the 
Adam)  that  they  were  fair,  and  they  took  to  them 
wives  of  all  that  they  chose.  And  Jehovah  said, 
My  spirit  shall  not  for  ever  rule  (or  be  humbled) 
in  men,  seeing  that  they  are  [or,  in  their  error  they 
are]  but  flesh,  and  their  days  shall  be  a  hundred 
and  twenty  years.  The  Nephilim  were  in  the  earth 
in  those  days  ;  and  also  afterwards  when  the  sons  of 
God  (the  Elohim)  came  in  unto  the  daughters  of 
men  (the  Adam),  and  children  were  born  to  them, 
these  were  the  heroes  which  were  of  old,  men  of 
renown." 

Here  a  number  of  perplexing  questions  present 
themselves :  Who  were  the  sons  of  God  ?  Who  the 
daughters  of  men  ?  Who  the  Nephilim  ?  What  is 
the  meaning  of  "  My  spirit  shall  not  always  rule, 
or  dweii,  or  be  humbled  in  men  ;"  and  of  the  words 
which  follow,  "  But  their  days  shall  be  an  hundred 
and  twenty  years  ?" 

We  will  briefly  review  the  principal  solutions 
which  have  been  given  of  these  difficulties. 

«.  Sons  of  God  and  daughters  of  men. 

Three  diiFerent  interpretations  have  from  very  early 
times  been  given  of  this  most  singular  passage. 

1 .  T  he  "  sons  of  Elohim  "  were  explained  to  mean 
sons  of  princes,  or  men  of  high  rank  (as  in  Ps. 
'xxxii.  6,  b'ne  'Ely6n,  sons  of  the  Most  High)  who 


NOAH  5i5S 

degraded  themselves  by  contracting  mai  riages  with 
"  the  daughters  of  men."  i.  e.  with  women  of  in 
ferior  position.  This  intei-pretation  was  defended 
by  Ps.  xlix.  3,  where  "  sons  of  men,"  b'n6  dd&m, 
means  "  men  of  low  degree,"  ^  opposed  to  b'ne  feA, 
"  men  of  high  degree."  Here,  however,  the  oppo 
sition  is  with  b'ne  ha-Elohim,  and  not  with  b'ne  ish, 
and  therefore  the  passages  are  not  parallel.  This 
is  the  interpretation  of  the  Targum  of  Onkelos, 
following  the  oldest  Palestinian  Kabbala,  of  thr. 
later  Targum,  and  of  the  Samaritan  Vers.  So  also 
Symmachus,  Saadia,  and  the  Arabic  of  Erpenius, 
Aben  Ezra,  and  R.  Sol.  Isaaki.  In  recent  times 
this  view  has  been  elaborated  and  put  in  the  most 
favourable  light  by  Schiller  ( Werke,  x.  401,  &c.)  ; 
but  it  has  been  entirely  abandoned  by  every  modern 
commentator  of  any  note. 

2.  A  second  interpretation,  perhaps  not  less  an 
cient,  understands  by  the  "  sons  of  Elohim,"  angels. 
So  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  which  according  to 
Procopius  and  Augustine  (De  Civit.  Dei,  xv.  23), 
had  the  reading  SyyeXoi  rov  0eoO,  whilst  others 
had  viol  rov  Qeov,  the  last  having  been  generally 
preferred  since  Cyril  and  Augustine ;  so  Joseph. 
Ant.  i.  3;  Philo  De  Gigantibus  [perhaps  Aquila, 
who  has  viol  rov  ®tov,  of  which  however  Jerome 
says,  Deos  intelligens  angelos  swe  scmctos] ;  the 
Book  of  Enoch  as  quoted  by  Georgius  Syncellus 
in  his  Chronographia,  where  they  are  termed  ol 
typ-fiyopoi,  ".the  watchers"  (as  in  Daniel);  the 
Book  of  Jubilees  (translated  by  Dillmann  from 
the  Ethiopic) ;  the  later  Jewish  Hagada,  whence 
we  have  the  story  of  the  fall  of  Shamchazai  and 
Azazel,b  given  by  Jellinek  in  the  Midrash  Abchir ; 
and  most  of  the  older  Fathers  of  the  Church,  find 
ing  probably  in  their  Greek  MSS.  &yy(\oi  rov 
Qeov,  as  Justin,  Tatian,  Athenagoras,  Clemens 
Alex.,  Tertullian,  and  Lactantius.  This  view,  how 
ever,  seemed  in  later  times  to  be  too  monstrous 
to  be  entertained.  R.  Sim.  b.  Jochai  anathema 
tized  it.  Cyrill  calls  it  a.roir<t>rarov.  Theodoret 
(Quaest. 'in  Gen.~)  declares  the  maintainers  of  it 
to  have  lost  their  senses,  ^ujfyxWrjToi  ical  &yav 
il\lBioi ;  Philastrius  numbers  it  among  heresies, 
Chrysostom  among  blasphemies.  Finally,  Calvin 
says  of  it,  "  Vetus  illud  commentum  de  angelorum 
concubitu  cum  mulieribus  sua  absurditate  abunde 
refellitur,  ac  mirum  est  doctos  viros  tarn  crassis 
et  prodigiosis  deliriis  f'uisse  olim  fascinates."  Not 
withstanding  all  which,  however,  many  modern 
German  commentators  very  strenuously  assert  this 
view.  They  rest  their  argument  in  favour  of  it 
mainly  on  these  two  particulai-s ;  first,  that  "  sons 
of  God  "  is  everywhere  else  in  the  O.  T.  a  name  of 
the  angels;  and  next,  that  St.  Jude  seems  to  lend 
the  sanction  of  his  authority  to  this  interpretation. 
With  regard  to  the  first  of  these  reasons,  it  is  not  even 
certain  that  in  all  other  passages  of  Scripture  where 
"  the  sons  of  God  "  are  mentioned  angels  are  meant. 


B  In  marked  contrast  with  the  simplicity  and  soberness 
of  the  JMblical  narrative,  is  the  wonderful  story  told  of 
Noah's  birth  in  the  book  of  Enoch.  Lamech's  wife,  it 
is  said,  "  brought  forth  a  child,  the  flesh  of  which  was 
(vhite  as  snow,  and  red  as  a  rose ;  the  hair  of  whose  head 
was  white  like  wool,  and  long;  and  whose  eyes  were 
beautiful.  When  he  opened  them  he  illuminated  all  the 
house  like  the  sun.  And  when  he  was  taken  from  the 
hand  of  the  midwife,  opening  also  his  mouth,  b/>  spoke  to 
the  Lord  of  righteousness."  Lamech  Is  terrified  at  the 
prodigy,  and  goes  to  his  father  Mathusala,  and  tells  him 
Lfcat  he  has  begotten  a  son  who  is  ur.llke  other  children. 
'M  hewing  the  story,  Mathusala  proceeds,  al  Lasecb's 


entreaty,  to  consult  Enoch,  "  whose  residence  is  with  the 
angels."  Enoch  explains  that,  in  the  days  of  his  father 
Jared,  "  those  who  w«re  from  heaven  disregarded  the  word 
of  the  Lord  . . .  laid  aside  their  class  and  intermingled  with 
women ;"  that  consequently  a  deluge  was  to  be  sent  upon 
the  earth,  whereby  it  should  be  "  washed  from  all  cor 
ruption  ;"  that  Noah  and  his  children  should  be  saved ; 
and  that  his  posterity  should  beget  on  the  earth  giants, 
not  spiritual,  but  carnal  (Book  of  Enoch,  ch.  cv.  p.  161-3). 
b  In  Beresh.  Rab.  in  Gen.  vi.  2,  this  Az&zel  is  declared  U 
be  the  tutelary  deity  of  women's  ornaments  and  i>aint 
and  is  identified  with  the  Azazcl  in  I^cv.  svi.  8. 

202 


564 


NOAH 


It  is  not  absolutely  necessary  so  to  understand  the  de 
signation  either  in  Ps.  xxix.  t  or  l.xxxix.  6,  cr  even 
in  Job  i.,  ii.  In  any  of  these  passages  it  might 
mean  holy  men.  Job  xxxviii.  7,  and  Dan.  iii.  25, 
are  the  only  places  in  which  it  certainly  means 
angels.  The  argument  from  St.  Jude  is  of  more 
force  ;  for  he  does  compare  the  sin  of  the  angels  to 
that  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  (roinois  in  ver.  7 
must  refer  to  the  angels  mentional  in  ver.  6),  as  if 
it  were  of  a  like  unnatural  kind.  And  that  this 
was  the  meaning  of  St.  Jude  is  rendered  the  more 
probable  when  we  recollect  his  quotation  from  the 
Uook  of  Enoch  where  the  same  view  is  taken.  Fur 
ther,  that  the  angels  had  the  power  of  assuming  a 
corporeal  form  seems  clear  from  many  parts  of  the 
0.  T.  All  that  can  be  urged  in  support  of  this  view 
has  been  said  by  Delitzsch  in  his  Die  Genesis  ausge- 
legt,  and  by  Kurtz,  Gesch.  des  Alien  Bundes,  and 
his  treatise,  Die  Ehen  der  SBhne  Qottes.  And  it 
must  be  confessed  that  their  arguments  are  not 
without  weight.  The  early  existence  of  such  an 
interpretation  seems  at  any  rate  to  indicate  a  start 
ing-point  for  the  heathen  mythologies.  The  fact, 
too,  that  from  such  an  intercourse  "  the  mighty 
men  "  were  born,  points  in  the  same  direction.  The 
Greek  "  heroes  "  were  sons  of  the  gods  ;  OVK  dlffQa 
says  Plato  in  the  Cratylus,  8rt  ij/j.idfot  ol  ripiats ; 
Trdvre s  S^iroti  yty6vaffiv  ipaffQtmts  ft  dfbs  9vi\- 
rfjs  t)  9vi}ro\  Otas.  Even  Hesiod's  account  of  the 
birth  of  the  giants,  monstrous  and  fantastic  as  it  is, 
bears  tokens  of  having  originated  in  the  same  belief. 
In  like  manner  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  stories  of 
incitbi  and  succubi,  so  commonly  believed  in  the 
middle  ages,  and  which  even  Heidegger  {Hist.  Sacr. 
\.  289)  does  not  discredit,  had  reference  to  a  com 
merce  between  demons  and  mortals  of  the  same 
kind  as  that  narrated  in  Genesis.0 

Two  modern  poets,  Byron  (in  his  drama  of  Cain) 
and  Moore  (in  his  Loves  of  the  Angels),  have  availed 
themselves  of  this  last  interpretation  for  the  pur 
pose  of  their  poems. 

3.  The  interpretation,  however,  which  is  now  most 
generally  received,  is  that  which  understands  by 
"the  sons  of  the  Elohim"  the  family  and  descend 
ants   of  Seth,   and    by   "  the   daughters   of  man 
(Adam),"   the  women  of  the  family  of  Cain.     So 
the  Clementine  Recognitions  interpret  "  the  sons  of 
the  Elohim  "  as  Homines  justi  qui  angelorum  vix- 
erant  vitam.    So  Ephrem,  and  the  Christian  Adam- 
Book  of  the  East:  so  also,  Theodoret,  Chrysostom, 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Jerome,  Augustine,  and  others; 
and  in  later  times  Luther,  Melancthon,  Calvin,  and 
a  whole  host  of  recent  commentators.     They  all 
suppose  that  whereas  the  two  lines  of  descent  from 
Adam — the  family  of  Seth  who  preserved  their  faith 
in  God,  and  the  family  of  Cain  who  lived  only  for 
this  world — had  hitherto  kept  distinct,  now  a  min 
gling  of  the  two  races  took  place  which  resulted  in 
the  thorough  corruption  of  the  former,  who  falling 
away,  plunged  into  the  deepest  abyss  of  wickedness, 
and  that  it  was  this  universal  corruption  which  pro 
voked  the  judgment  of  the  Flood. 

4.  A  fourth  interpretation  has  recently  been  ad 
vanced  and  maintained  with  considerable  ingenuity, 
by  the  author  of  the  Genesis  of  the  Earth  and 
Jfftn.     He   understands  by  "the  sons  of  the  Elo 
him  "  the  "  servants  or  worshippers  of  false  gods" 
[taking  Klohim  to  mean  not  God  but  gods],  whom 
h«  supposes  to  have  belonged   to  a  distinct  pre- 

<•  Thomas  Aquin.  (pare  i.  qu.  51,  art.  3)  argues  that  it 
vaa  possible  for  angels  to  have  children  Dy  mortal  women 


NOAH 

Adamite  race.  "  The  daughters  of  men,"  ho  con 
tends,  should  be  rendered  "  the  daughters  of  Adam, 
or  the  Adamites,"  women,  that  is,  descended  from 
Adam.  These  last  had  hitherto  remained  true  in 
their  faith  and  worship,  but  were  now  perverted 
by  the  idolatei-s  who  intermarried  with  them.  But 
this  hypothesis  is  opposed  to  the  direct  statements 
in  the  early  chapters  of  Genesi*,  wh-ch  plainly 
teach  the  descent  of  all  mankind  frou.  OLB  common 
source. 

Whichever  of  these  interpretations  we  adopt  ;the 
third  perhaps  is  the  most  probable),  one  thing  at 
least  is  clear,  that  the  writer  intends  to  describe  a 
fusion  of  races  hitherto  distinct,  and  to  connect 
with  this  two  other  facts ;  the  one  that  the  off 
spring  of  these  mixed  marriages  were  men  remark 
able  for  strength  and  prowess  (which  is  only  in  ac 
cordance  with  what  has  often  been  observed  since, 
viz.,  the  superiority  of  the  mixed  race  as  compared 
with  either  of  the  parent  stocks)  ;  the  other,  thdt 
the  result  of  this  intercourse  was  the  thorough  ana 
hopeless  corruption  of  both  families  alike. 

6.  But  who  were  the  Nephilim  ?  It  should  be 
observed  that  they  are  not  spoken  of  (as  has  some 
times  been  assumed),  as  the  offspring  of  the  "  sons 
of  the  Elohim  "  and  "  the  daughters  of  men."  The 
sacred  writer  says,  "  the  Nephilim  were  on  the  earth 
in  those  days,"  before  he  goes  on  to  speak  of  the 
children  of  the  mixed  marriages.  The  name,  which 
has  been  variously  explained,  only  occurs  once  again 
in  Num.  xiii.  33,  where  the  Nephilim  are  said  to 
have  been  one  of  the  Canaanitish  tribes.  They  are 
there  spoken  of  as  "  men  of  great  stature,"  and  hence 
probably  the  rendering  ylyavrts  of  the  LXX.  and 
"the  giants"  of  our  A.  V.  But  there  is  nothing 
in  the  word  itself  to  justify  this  interpretation.  If 
it  is  of  Hebrew  origin,  (which  however  may  be 
doubted)  it  must  mean  either  "  fallen,"  t.  e.  apostate 
ones ;  or  those  who  "  fall  upon "  others,  violent 
men,  plunderers,  freebooters,  &c.  It  is  of  far  more 
importance  to  observe  that  if  the  Nephilim  cf 
Canaan  were  descendants  of  the  Nephilim  in  Gen. 
vi.  4,  we  have  here  a  very  strong  argument  for  the 
non-universality  of  the  Deluge. 

c.  In  consequence  of  the  grievous  and  hopeless 
wickedness  of  the  world  at  this  time,  God  resolves  to 
destroy  it.  "  My  spirit,"  He  says,  "  shall  not  always 
"  dwell  "  (LXX.  Vulg.  Saad.) — or  "  bear  sway  " 
In  man — inasmuch  as  he  is  but  flesh.  The  mean 
ing  of  which  seems  to  be  that  whilst  God  had  put 
His  Spirit  in  man,  i.  e.  not  only  the  breath  of  life, 
but  a  spiritual  part  capable  of  recognising,  loving, 
and  worshipping  Him,  man  had  so  much  sunk 
down  into  the  lowest  and  most  debasing  of  fleshly 
pleasures,  as  to  have  almost  extinguished  the  higher 
light  within  him ;  as  one  of  the  Fathei-s  says :  animn 
victa  libidine  fit  caro :  the  soul  and  spirit  became 
transubstantiated  into  flesh.  Then  follows :  "  But 
his  days  shall  be  a  hundred  and  twenty  years,"  which 
has  been  interpreted  by  some  to  mean,  that  still  a 
time  of  grace  shall  be  given  for  repentance,  viz., 
120  years  before  the  Flood  shall  come;  and  by 
others,  that  the  duration  of  human  life  should  in 
future  be  limited  to  this  term  of  years,  instead  of 
extending  over  centuries  as  before.  This  last  seems 
the  most  natural  interpretation  of  the  Hebrew 
words.  Of  Noah's  life  during  this  age  of  almost 
universal  apostasy  we  are  told  but  little.  It  is 
merely  said,  that  he  was  a  righteous  man  ami  perfett 
in  his  generations  (i.e.  amongst  his  cont<>ni|>orarie8), 
and  that  he,  like  Enoch,  walked  with  God.  Thii 
last  expressive  phrase  is  used  of  none  other  b.t? 


NOAH 

these  two  only .  To  him  God  revealed  His  purpose 
to  destroy  the  world,  commanding  him  to  prepare 
an  ark  for  the  saving  of  his  house.  And  from  that 
time  till  the  day  came  for  him  to  enter  into  the 
Ark,  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  he  was  engaged  in 
active,  but  as  it  proved  unavailing  efforts  to  win 
those  about  him  from  their  wickedness  and  uu- 
belief.  Hence  St.  Peter  calls  him  "  a  preacher  of 
righteousness."  Besides  this  we  are  merely  told  that 
he  had  three  sons,  each  of  whom  had  married  a  wife ; 
that  he  built  the  Ark  in  accordance  with  Divine 
direction ;  and  that  he  was  600  years  old  when  the 
Flood  came. 

Both  about  the  Ark  and  the  Flood  so  many  ques 
tions  have  been  raised,  that  we  must  consider  each 
of  these  separately. 

'  The  Ark. — The  precise  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
word  (HSR,  tebah)  is  uncertain.  The  word  only 
occurs  here  and  in  the  second  chapter  of  Exodus, 
where  it  is  used  of  the  little  papyrus  boat  in  which 
the  mother  of  Moses  entrusted  her  child  to  the 
Nile.  In  all  probability  it  is  to  the  old  Egyptian  that 
•  we  are  to  look  for  its  original  form. 

Bunsen,  in  his  vocabulary,11  gives  tba,  "  a  chest," 
tpt,  "  a  boat,"  and  in  the  Copt.  Vers.  of  Exod.  ii. 
3,  5,  OR&.I,  is  the  rendering  of  tebah.  The 
LXX.  employ  two  different  words.  In  the  narrative 
of  the  flood  they  use  KL^WT&S,  and  in  that  of  Moses 
Ol&ts,  or  according  to  some  MSS.  07jj84j.  The  Book 
of  Wisdom  has  irxeSj'a ;  Berosus  and  Nicol. 
Damasc.  quoted  in  Josephus,  i:\olov  and  \dpva£. 
The  last  is  also  found  in  Lucian,  Lie  Dea  Syr.  c.  12. 
In  the  Sibylline  Verses  the  ark  is  Sovpdrfov  5o>yua, 
ol/cos  and  KI&COTOS.  The  Targum  and  the  Koran 
have  each  respectively  given  the  Chaldee  and  the 
Arabic  form  of  the  Hebrew  word. 

This  "  chest,"  or  "  boat,"  was  to  be  made  of 
gopher  (i.  e.  cypress)  wood,  a  kind  of  timber  which 
both  for  its  lightness  and  its  durability  was  em 
ployed  by  the  Phoenicians  for  building  their  vessels. 
Alexander  the  Great,  Arrian  tells  us(vii.  19),  made 
use  of  it  for  the  same  purpose.  The  planks  of  the 
ark,  after  being  put  together,  were  to  be  protected 
by  a  coating  of  pitch,  or  rather  bitumen  OM> 
LXX.  iff(pa\ros),  which  was  to  be  laid  on  both  inside 
and  outaiile,  as  the  most  effectual  means  of  making  it 
water-tight,  and  perhaps  also  as  a  protection  against 
the  attacks  of  marine  animals.  Next  to  the  material, 


NOAH  5o5 

the  method  of  construction  is  described.  Th*  sir1? 
was  to  consist  of  a  number  of  "  neste"  (D*3j5),  Of 

small  compartments,  with  a  view  no  doubt  to  the 
convenient  distribution  of  the  different  animals  and 
their  food.  These  were  to  be  arranged  in  three 
tiers,  one  above  another  ;  "  with  lower,  second,  and 
third  (stories)  shalt  thou  make  it. '  Means  were 
also  to  be  provided  for  letting  light  into  the  ark. 
In  the  A.  V.  we  read,  "  A  window  shalt  thou 
make  to  the  ark,  and  in  a  cubit  shalt  thou  finish  it 
above :" — words  which  it  must  be  confessed  convey 
no  very  intelligible  idea.  The  original,  however,  is 
obscure,  and  has  been  differently  interpreted.  What 
the  "  whiflow,"  or  "  light-hole  "  (IHS,  tsoliar) 
was,  is  very  puzzling.  It  was  to  be  at  the  top  of 
the  ark  apparently.  If  the  words  "  unto  a  cubit 
(njSN"?N)  shalt  thou  finish  it  above,"  refei-  to  the 

window  and  not  to  the  ark  itself,  they  seem  to 
imply  that  this  aperture,  or  skylight,  extended  to 
the  breadth  of  a  cubit  the  whole  length  of  the  roof.' 
But  if  so,  it  could  not  have  been  merely  an  open  slit, 
for  that  would  have  admitted  the  rain.  Are  we  then 
to  suppose  that  some  transparent,  or  at  least  translu 
cent,  substance  was  employed  ?  Itwould  almost  seem 
so.*  A  different  word  is  used  in  chap.  viii.  6,  where 
it  is  said  that  Noah  opened  the  window  of  the  ark. 

There  the  word  is  p?H  (challdn),  which  frequently 

occurs  elsewhere  in  the  same  sense.  Certainly  the 
story  as  there  given  does  imply  a  transparent 
window  as  Saalschiitz  (Archaeol.  i.  311)  has  re 
marked.*  For  Noah  could  watch  the  motions  of  the 
birds  outside,  whilst  at  the  same  time  he  had  to 
open  the  window  in  order  to  take  them  in.  Sup 
posing  then  the  tsohar  to  be,  as  we  have  said,  a 
skylight,  or  series  of  skylights  running  the  whole 
length  of  the  ark  (and  the  tern,  form  of  the  noun 
inclines  one  to  regard  it  as  a  collective  noun),  the 
challdn*  might  very  well  be  a  single  compartment 
of  the  larger  window,  which  could  be  opened  at  will. 
But  besides  the  window  there  was  to  be  a  door. 
This  was  to  be  placed  in  the  side  of  the  ark.  "  The 
door  must  have  been  of  some  size  to  admit  the 
larger  animals,  for  whose  ingress  it  was  mainly 
intended.  It  was  no  doubt  above  the  highest 
draught  mark  of  the  ark,  and  the  animals  ascended 
to  it  probably  by  a  sloping  embankment.  A  door 


<»  Eg~iir.es  Place,  &c.,  i.  482. 

•  Kaobel's  explanation  is  different.   By  the  words,  "  to 
a  cubit  (or  within  a  cubit)  shalt  thou  finish  it  above,"  he 
understands  that,  the  window  being  in  the  side  of  the  ark, 
a  space  of  a  cubit  was  to  be  left  between  the  top  of  the 
window  and  the  overhanging  roof  of  the  ark  which  Noah 
removed  after  the  flood  had  abated  (viii.  13).    There  is 
however  no  reason  to  conclude,  as  he  does,  that  there  was 
only  one  light.    The  great  objection  to  supposing  that  the 
window  was  in  the  side  of  the  ark,  is  that  then  a  great 
part  of  the  interior  must  have  been   left  in  darkness. 
And  agiin  we  are  told  (viii.  13),  that  when  the  Flood 
aliated  Noah  removed  the  covering  of  the  ark,  to  look 
alxjut  bAm  to  see  if  the  earth  were  dry.    This  would  have 
been  unnecessary  if  the  window  had  been  in  the  side. 
"  Unto  a  cubit  shalt  tbou  finish  it  above "  can  hardly 
mean,  ;is  some  have  supposed,  that  the  roof  of  the  ark 
was  to  have  this  pitch ;  for,  considering  that  the  ark  was 
to  be  50  cubits  in  breadth,  a  roof  of  a  cubit's  pitch  would 
have  teen  almost  flat. 

*  Symm.  renders  the  word  Sia<J>ai/«'«.     Theodoret  has 
merely  Ovpav ;  Gr.  Venet.  <j>u>Ta.yutyov ;  Vulg.  J'enestram. 
I'bi  LXX.  translate,  strangely  enough,  iiturvvdytav  jroirj- 
»n.s  7Ttv  KifliJToy.    The  root  of  tht  woro.  indicates  that 


the  tsdhar  was  something  shining.  Hence  probably  the 
Talmudic  explanation,  that  God  told  Noah  to  fix  precious 
stones  in  the  ark,  that  they  might  give  as  much  liett  M 
midday  (Sanh.  108  b). 

S  The  only  serious  objection  to  this  explanation  is 
the  supposed  improbability  of  any  substance  like  glass 
having  been  discovered  at  that  early  period  of  the 
world's  history.  But  we  must  not  forget  that  even 
according  to  the  Hebrew  chronology  the  world  had  been 
in  existence  1656  years  at  the  time  of  the  Flood,  and 
according  to  the  LXX.,  which  is  the  more  probable,  2262. 
Vast  strides  must  have  been  made  in  knowledge  and 
civilization  in  such  a  lapse  of  time.  Arts  and  sciences 
may  have  reached  a  ripeness,  of  which  the  record,  from 
its  scantiness,  conveys  no  adequate  conception.  The 
destruction  caused  by  the  Flood  must  have  obliterated 
a  thousand  discoveries,  and  left  men  to  recover  again 
by  slow  and  patient  steps  the  ground  they  had  lost. 

h  A  different  word  from  either  of  these  is  used  in  vli.  11 
of  the  windows  of  heaven,  D3~IN>  'arubbvth  (3roi> 
2~IN-  "  to  interweave"),  lit,  "  net-works"  or  ' 
(Ges.  Tkts.  iu  v.  > 


55fi  NO/U1 

in  the  side  is  not  mure  difficult  to  understand  than 
tiip  port  holes  in  the  sides  of  our  vessels." ' 

Of  the  shape  of  the  ark  nothing  is  said  ;  but  its 
dimensions  are  given.  It  was  to  be  300  cubits  in 
length,  50  in  breadth,  and  30  in  height.  Sup 
posing  the  cubit  here  to  be  the  cubit  of  natural 
measurement,  reckoning  from  the  elbow  to  the  top 
of  the  middle  finger,  we  may  get  a  rough  approxi 
mation  as  to  the  size  of  the  ark.  The  cubit,  so 
measured  (called  in  Deut.  iii.  11,  "  the  cubit  of  a 
man  "),  must  of  course,  at  first,  like  all  natural  mea 
surements,  have  been  inexact  and  fluctuating.  In 
later  times  no  doubt  the  Jews  had  a  standard 
common  cubit,  as  well  as  the  royal  cubit  and  sacred 
cubit.  We  shall  probably,  however,  be  near  enough 
to  the  mark  if  we  take  the  cubit  here  to  be  the 
common  cubit,  which  was  leckoned  (according  to 
Mich.,  Jahn,  Gesen.  and  others)  as  equal  to  six 
hand-breadths,  the  hand-breadth  being  3J  inches. 
This  therefore  gives  21  inches  for  the  cubit.k  Ac 
cordingly  the  ark  would  be  525  feet  in  length, 
87  feet  6  inches  in  breadth,  and  52  feet  6  inches  in 
height.  This  is  very  considerably  larger  than  the 
largest  British  man-of-war.  The  Great  Eastern, 
however,  is  both  longer  and  deeper  than  the  ark, 
being  680  feet  in  length(691  on  deck),  83  in  breadth, 
and  58  in  depth.  Solomon's  Temple,  the  propor 
tions  of  which  are  given  1  K.  vi.  2,  was  the  same 
height  as  the  ark,  but  only  one-fifth  of  the  length, 
and  less  than  half  the  width. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  this  huge  structure 
was  only  intended  to  float  on  the  water,  and  was 
not  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word  a  ship.  It 
had  neither  mast,  sail,  nor  rudder  ;  it  was  in  fact 
nothing  but  an  enormous  floating  house,  or  oblong 
box  rather,  "  as  it  is  very  likely,"  says  Sir  W. 
Raleigh,  "  that  the  ark  \aAfundum  planum,  a  flat 
bottom,  and  not  raysed  in  form  of  a  ship,  with  a 
sharpness  forward,  to  cut  the  waves  for  the  better 
speed."  The  figure  which  is  commonly  given  to  it 
by  painters,  there  can  be  no  doubt  is  wrong.  Two 
objects  only  were  aimed  at  in  its  construction: 
the  one  was  that  it  should  have  ample  stowage,  and 
the  other  that  it  should  be  able  to  keep  steady  upon 
the  water.  It  was  never  intended  to  be  carried  to 
any  great  distance  from  the  place  where  it  was 
originally  built.  A  curious  proof  of  the  suitability 
of  the  ark  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  in 
tended  was  given  by  a  Dutch  merchant,  Peter 
Jansen.  the  Mennonite,  who  in  the  year  1604  had 
a  ship  built  at  Hoorn  of  the  same  proportions 


NOAH 

(though  of  course  not  of  the  same  size)  as  Noah's 
ark.  It  was  120  feet  long,  20  broad,  and  12  deep. 
This  vessel,  unsuitable  as  it  was  for  quick  voyages, 
was  found  remarkably  well  adapted  for  freightage.1 
It  was  calculated  that  it  would  hold  a  third  more 
lading  than  other  vessels  without  requiring  more 
hands  to  work  it.  A  similar  experiment  is  also  saia 
to  have  been  made  in  Denmark,  where,  according 
to  Reyher,  several  vessels  called  "  fleuten  "  or  floats 
were  built  after  the  model  of  the  ark. 

After  having  given  Noah  the  necessary  instruc 
tions  for  the  building  of  the  ark,  God  tells  him  the 
purpose  for  which  it  was  designed.  Now  for  the 
first  time  we  hear  how  the  threatened  destruction 
was  to  be  accomplished,  as  well  as  the  provi 
sion  which  was  to  be  made  for  the  repeopling  of  the 
earth  with  its  various  tribes  of  animals.  The  earth 
is  to  be  destroyed  by  water.  "  And  I,  behold  I  do 
bring  the  flood  (7-13Bn) — waters  upon  the  earth— 
to  destroy  all  flesh  wherein  is  the  breath  of  life  .  .  . 
but  I  will  establish  my  covenant  with  thee,  &c." 
(vi.  17,  18).  The  inmates  of  the  ark  are  then 
specified.  They  are  to  be  Noah  and  his  wife,  and 
his  three  sons  with  their  wives : — whence  it  is  plain 
that  he  and  his  family  had  not  yielded  to  the  prevail 
ing  custom  of  polygamy.  Noah  is  also  to  take  a  pair 
of  each  kind  of  animal  into  the  ark  with  him  that 
he  may  preserve  them  alive  ;  birds,  domestic  animals 
(i"lDn3),m  and  creeping  things  are  particularly 

mentioned.  He  is  to  provide  for  the  wants  of 
each  of  these  stores  "  of  every  kind  of  food  that  is 
eaten."  It  is  added,  "  Thus  did  Noah  ;  according 
to  all  that  God  (Elohim)  commanded  him,  so  did  he." 
A  remarkable  addition  to  these  directions  occurs 
in  the  following  chapter.  The  pairs  of  animals  are 
now  limited  to  one  of  unclean  animals,  whilst  of 
clean  animals  and  birds  (ver.  2),  Noah  is  to  take  to 
him  seven  pairs,  (or  as  others  think,  seven  indi 
viduals,  that  is  three  pairs  and  one  supernumerary 
male  for  sacrifice)."  How  is  this  addition  to  be 
accounted  for?  May  we  not  suppose  that  we  have 
here  traces  of  a  separate  document  interwoven  by  a 
later  writer  with  the  former  history  ?  The  passage 
indeed  has  not,  to  all  appearance,  been  incoi'porated 
intact,  but  there  is  a  colouring  about  it  which  seems 
to  indicate  that  Moses,  or  whoever  put  the  Book  of 
Genesis  into  its  present  shape,  had  here  consulted  a 
different  narrative.  The  distinct  use  of  the  Divine 
names  in  the  same  phrase,  vi.  22,  and  vii.  5 — in 
the  former  Elohim,  in  the  latter  Jehovah — suggests 


*  Kitto,  Bible  Ittttstrations,  Antediluvian*,  &c.,  p.  142. 
The  Jewish  notion  was  that  the  ark  was  entered  by  means 
of  a  ladder.  On  the  steps  of  this  ladder,  the  story  goes, 
OR,  king  of  Bashan,  was  sitting  when  the  Flood  came ;  and 
cu  his  pledging  himself  to  Noah  and  his  sons  to  be  their 
slave  for  ever,  he  was  suffered  to  remain  there,  and 
Noah  gave  him  his  food  each  day  out  of  a  hole  in  the  ark 
(Pirk.  R.  Kliezer). 

k  See  Winer,  Realw.  "  Elle."  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  in 
his  History  of  t/te  World,  reckons  the  cubit  at  18  inches. 
Dr.  Kitto  calls  this  a  safe  way  of  estimating  the  cubit  in 
Scripture,  but  gives  it  himself  as  =  21-888  inches.  For 
this  inconsistency  be  is  taken  to  task  by  Hugh  Miller, 
wio  adopts  the  measurement  of  Sir  W.  Raleigh. 

1  Augustine  (De  Civ.  D.  lib.  xv.)  long  ago  discovered 
another  excellence  in  the  proportion*  of  the  ark ;  and  that 
is,  that  they  were  the  same  as  the  proportions  of  the 
perfect  human  figure,  the  length  of  which  from  the  sole 
to  the  crown  is  six  times  the  width  across  the  chest,  and 
ten  times  the  depth  of  the  recumbent  figure  measured  In 
a  right  line  from  the  ground. 


m  Only  tame  animals  of  the  larger  kinds  are  expressly 
mentioned  (vi.  30)  ;  and  if  we  could  be  sure  that  none 
others  were  taken,  the  difficulties  connected  with  the 
necessary  provision,  stowage,  &c,  would  be  materially 
lessened.  It  may,  however,  be  urged  that  in  the  first 
instance  "  every  living  thing  of  all  flesh  "  (vi.  19)  was  U 
come  into  the  ark,  and  that  afterwards  (vii.  14)  "  erery 
living  thing  "  is  spoken  of  not  as  including,  but  as  distinct 
from  the  tame  cattle,  and  that  consequently  the  inference 
is  that  wild  animals  were  meant. 

»  Calv.,  Ges.,  Tuch,  Baumg.,  and  Delitzsch,  understand 
seven  individuals  of  each  species.  Del.  argues  that  ii 
we  take  njQK'  here  to  mean  seven  pairs,  we  must  also 


take  the  D*J(?  before  to  mean  two  pairs  (and  Origeii 
does  so  take  it,  cant.  Cell.  iv.  41).  But  without  arguing. 
with  Knobel,  that  the  repetition  of  the  numeral  in  this 
case,  and  not  in  the  other,  may  perhapt  be  designed  to 
denote  that  here  pairs  are  to  be  understood,  at  any  raw 
the  addition  "  male  and  his  female"  renders  this  the  mow 
probable  interpretation. 


NOAH 

Jiat  this  may  have  been  the  case.0  It  does  not 
follow,  however,  from  the  mention  of  clean  and 
unclean  animals  that  this  section  reflects  a  Levitical 
or  post-Mosaic  mind  and  handling.  There  were 
sacrifices  before  Moses,  and  why  may  there  not  have 
been  a  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  animals? 
It  may  be  true  of  many  other  things  besides  cir 
cumcision ;  Moses  gave  it  you,  not  because  it  was 
of  Moses,  but  because  it  was  of  the  fathers. 

Are  we  then  to  understand  that  Noah  literally 
conveyed  a  pair  of  all  the  animals  of  the  world  into 
the  ark  ?  This  question  virtually  contains  in  it 
another,  viz.,  whether  the  deluge  was  universal,  or 
only  partial  ?  If  it  was  only  partial,  then  of  course 
it  was  necessary  to  rind  room  but  for  a  compara 
tively  small  number  of  animals  ;  and  the  dimensions 
of  the  ark  are  ample  enough  for  the  required  pur 
pose.  The  argument  on  this  point  has  already  been 
so  well  stated  by  Hugh  Miller  in  his  Testimony  of 
the  Rocks,  that  we  need  do  little  more  than  give  an 
abstract  of  it  here.  After  saying  that  it  had  for 
ages  been  a  sort  of  stock  problem  to  determine 
whether  all  the  animals  in  the  world  by  sevens, 
and  by  pairs,  with  food  sufficient  to  serve  them  for 
a  twelvemonth  could  have  been  accommodated  in 
the  given  space,  he  quotes  Sir  W.  Raleigh's  calcu 
lation  on  the  subject.'  Sir  Walter  proposed  to  allow 
"  for  eighty-nine  distinct  species  of  beasts,  or  lesl 
any  should  be  omitted,  for  a  hundred  several  kinds.' 
He  then  by  a  curious  sort  of  estimate,  in  which 
he  considers  "  one  elephant  as  equal  to  four  beeves 
one  lion  to  two  wolves,"  and  so  on,  reckons  that  the 
space  occupied  by  the  different  animals  would  be 
equivalent  to  the  spaces  required  for  91  (or  say  120 
beeves,  four  score  sheep,  and  three  score  and  foui 
wolves.  "  All  these  two  hundred  and  eighty  beastsi 
might  be  kept  in  one  storey,  or  room  of  the  ark,  in 
their  several  cabins  ;  their  meat  in  a  second  ;  tb 
birds  and  their  provision  in  a  third,  with  space  t< 
spare  for  Noah  and  his  family,  and  all  their  neces 
saries."  "Such,"  says  Hugh  Miller,  "was  the 
calculation  of  the  great  voyager  Raleigh,  a  man  whi 
had  a  more  practical  acquaintance  with  stotvay, 
than  perhaps  any  of  the  other  writers  who  have 
speculated  on  the  capabilities  of  the  ark,  and  hi 
estimate  seems  sober  and  judicious."  He  then  goe 
on  to  show  how  enormously  these  limits  are  ex 
ceeded  by  our  present  knowledge  of  the  extent  o 
the  ahiiv.al  kingdom.  Buffon  doubled  Raleigh' 
number  of  distinct  species.  During  the  last  thirt; 
years  so  astonishing  has  been  the  progress  of  dis 
covery,  that  of  mammals  alone  there  have  beei 
ascertained  to  exist  more  than  eight  times  the  numbe 
which  Buflbn  gives.  In  the  first  edition  of  John 
ston's  Physical  Atlas  (1848),  one  thousand  si 
hundred  and  twenty-six  different  species  of  mammal 
are  enumerated;  and  in  the  second  edition  (1856" 
one  thousand  six  hundred  and  fifty-eight  species 
To  these  we  must  add  the  six  thousand  two  hundrec 
and  sixty-six  birds  of  Lesson,  and  the  six  hundret 
and  fifty-seven  or  (subtracting  the  sea-snakes,  an 


NOAH  567 

>erhaps  the  turtles),  the  six  hundred  uiA  forty  tw« 
eptiles  of  Charles  Bonaparte. 

Take  the  case  of  the  clean  animals  alone .  of  which 
lere  were  to  be  seven  introduced  into  the  ark. 
dmitting,  for  argument  sake,  that  only  seven 
ndividuals,  and  not  seven  pairs,  were  introduced, 
tie  number  of  these  alone,  as  now  known,  is  sufh. 
ient  to  settle  the  question.  Mr.  Waterhouse,  in 
he  year  1856,  estimated  the  oxen  at  twenty  species  ; 
he  sheep  at  twenty-seven  species ;  the  goats  at 
wenty ;  and  the  deer  at  fifty-one.  "  In  short,  if, 
xcluding  the  lamas  and  the  musks  as  doubtfully 
'•lean,  tried  by  the  Mosaic  test,  we  but  add  to  the 
•heep,  goats,  deer,  and  cattle  the  forty-eight  species 
)f  unequivocally  clean  antelopes,  and  multiply  the 
whole  by  seven,  we  shall  have  as  the  result  a  sum 
:otal  of  one  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty-two 
ndividuals,  a  number  more  than  four  times  greatei 
;han  that  for  which  Haleigh  made  provision  in  the 
ark."  It  would  be  curious  to  ascertain  what 
number  of  animals  could  possibly  be  stowed,  together 
with  sufficient  food  to  last  for  a  twelvemonth,  on 
aoard  the  Great  Eastern. 

But  it  is  not  only  the  inadequate  size  of  the  ark 
to  contain  all,  or  anything  like  all,  the  progenitors 
of  our  existing  species  of  animals,  which  is  con 
clusive  against  a  universal  deluge.  Another  fact 
points  with  still  greater  force,  if  possible,  in  the 
same  direction,  and  that  is  the  manner  in  which 
we  now  find  these  animals  distributed  over  the 
earth's  surface.  "  Linnaeus  held,  early  in  the  last 
century,  that  all  creatures  which  now  inhabit  the 
globe  had  proceeded  originally  from  some  such 
common  centre  as  the  ark  might  have  furnished ; 
but  no  zoologist  acquainted  with  the  distribution 
of  species  can  acquiesce  in  any  such  conclusion  now. 
We  now  know  that  every  great  continent  has  its 
own  peculiar  fauna;  that  the  original  centres  ot 
distribution  must  have  been  not  one,  but  many  ; 
further  that  the  areas  or  circles  around  these  centres 
must  have  been  occupied  by  their  pristine  animals 
in  ages  long  anterior  to  that  of  the  Noachian 
Deluge ;  nay  that  in  even  the  latter  geologic  ages 
they  were  preceded  in  them  by  animals  of  the  same 
general  type."  Thus,  for  instance,  the  animals  of 
S.  America,  when  the  Spaniards  first  penetrated 
into  it,  were  found  to  be  totally  distinct  from  those 
of  Europe,  Asia,  or  Africa.  The  puma,  the  jaguar, 
the  tapir,  the  lama,  the  sloths,  the  annadilloes,  the 
opossums,  were  animals  which  had  never  been  seen 
elsewhere.  So  again  Australia  has  a  whole  class 
of  animals,  the  marsupials,  quite  unknown  to  other 
parts  of  the  world.  The  various  species  of  kan 
garoo,  phascolomys,  dasyurus,  and  peiameles,  the 
flying  phalangers,  and  other  no  less  singular  crea 
tures,  were  the  astonishment  of  naturalists  when 
this  continent  was  first  discovered.  New  ZeaLu.d 
likewise,  "  though  singularly  devoid  of  indigenous 
mammals  and  reptiles  .  .  .  has  a  scarcely  less  re 
markable  fauna  than  either  of  these  great  conti 
nents.  It  consists  almost  exclusively  of  birds,  some 


0  It  is  remarkable,  moreover,  that  whilst  In  ver.  2  It 
s«id,  "  Uf  every  clean  beast  thou  shall  take  to  thee  b 
tfvens,"  in  vers.  8,  9,  it  is  said,  "  Of  clean  beasts,  and 
beasts  that  are  not  clean,"  &c.  "  there  went  in  two  and  tu. 
unto  Noah  into  the  ark."     This  again  looks  like  a  com 
pllation  from  different  sources. 

P  The  earliest  statement  ou  the  subject  I  have  met  wit 
is  in  the  1'irke  H.  Eliezer,  where  it  is  said  that  Noah  too 
12  kinds  of  birds,  and  365  species  of  Deasts,  with  him  into 
Die  ark. 

•>  Heidegger  in  like  manuer  {Hist.  Sacr.  i.  p.  518)  thinks 


he  is  very  liberal  in  allowing  300  kinds  of  animals  to  have 
been  taken  into  the  ark,  and  considers  that  this  would 
give  50  cubits  of  solid  contents  for  each  kind  of  animal 
He  then  subjoins  the  far  more  elaborate  and  really  very 
curious  computation  of  Joh.  Temerarins  in  his  Chronol, 
Demonstr.,  who  reckons  after  Sir  W.  Raleigh's  fashion, 
but  enumerates  all  the  different  species  of  known  animal* 
(amongst  which  he  mentions  Pegasi,  Sphinxes,  and  Satyrs^ 
the  kind  and  quantity  of  provision,  the  method  of  stowage 
&c.  See  Heidegger,  as  above,  pp.  606,  7,  and  518-21. 


oG8  NOAH 

.  jf  them  so  ill  provided  with  wingr,  that,  like  the 
•mka  of  the  natives,  they  can  only  run  along  the 
i<round."  And  what  is  very  remarkable,  this  law 
with  regard  to  the  distribution  of  animaCs  does  not 
date  merely  from  the  human  period.  We  find  the 
gigantic  forms  of  those  different  species  which 
during  the  later  tertiary  epochs  preceded  or  accom 
panied  the  existing  forms,  occupying  precisely  the 
same  habitats.  In  S.  America,  for  instance,  there 
lived  then,  side  by  side,  the  gigantic  sloth  (mega 
therium)  to  be  seen  in  the  British  Museum,  and  the 
smaller  animal  of  the  same  species  which  has  sur 
vived  the  extinction  of  the  larger.  Australia  in 
like  manner  had  then  its  gigantic  marsupials,  the 
very  counterpart  in  everything  but  in  size  of  the 
existing  species.  And  not  only  are  the  same  mam 
mals  found  in  the  same  localities,  but  they  are  sur 
rounded  in  every  respect  by  the  same  circumstances, 
and  exist  in  company  with  the  same  birds,  the 
same  insects,  the  same  plants.  In  fact  so  stable  is 
this  law  that,  although  prior  to  the  pleistocene 
period  we  find  a  different  distribution  of  animals, 
we  still  find  each  separate  locality  distinguished  by 
its  own  species  both  of  fauna  and  of  flora,  and  we 
find  these  grouped  together  :n  the  same  manner  as 
in  the  later  periods.  It  is  quite  plain,  then,  that 
if  all  the  animals  of  the  world  were  literally 
gathered  together  in  the  ark  and  so  saved  from  the 
waters  of  a  universal  deluge,  this  could  only  have 
been  effected  (even  supposing  there  was  space  for 
them  in  the  ark)  by  a  most  stupendous  miracle. 
The  sloth  and  the  armadillo  must  have  been  brought 
across  oceans  and  continents  from  their  South  Ame 
rican  home,  the  kangaroo  from  his  Australian  forests 
and  prairies,  and  the  polar  bear  from  his  icebergs, 
to  that  part  of  Armenia,  or  the  Euphrates  valley, 
where  the  ark  was  built.  These  and  all  the  other 
animals  must  have  been  brought  in  perfect  subjec 
tion  to  Noah,  and  many  of  them  must  have  been 
taught  to  forget  their  native  ferocity  in  order  to 
prevent  their  attacking  one  another.  They  must 
then  further,  having  been  brought  by  supernatural 
means  from  the  regions  which  they  occupied,  have 
likewise  been  carried  back  to  the  same  spots  by 
supernatural  means,  care  having  moreover  been 
taken  that  no  trace  of  their  passage  to  and  fro 
should  be  left. 

But  the  narrative  does  not  compel  us  to  adopt  so 
tremendous  an  hypothesis.  We  shall  see  more 
clearly  when  we  come  to  consider  the  language 
used  with  regard  to  the  Flood  itself,  that  even 
that  language,  strong  as  it  undoubtedly  is,  does 
not  oblige  us  to  suppose  that  the  Deluge  was 
universal.  But  neither  does  the  language  em 
ployed  with  regard  to  the  animals  lead  to  this 
conclusion.  It  is  true  that  Noah  is  told  to  take 
two  "  of  every  living  thing  of  all  flesh,"  but  that 
could  only  mean  two  of  every  animal  then  known 
to  him,  unless  we  suppose  him  to  have  had  super 
natural  information  in  zoology  imparted — a  thing 
quite  incredible.  In  fact,  but  for  some  misconcep 
tions  as  to  the  meaning  of  certain  expressions,  no  one 
would  ever  have  suspected  that  Noah's  knowledge, 
or  the  knowledge  of  the  writer  of  the  narrative, 
could  have  extended  beyond  a  very  limited  portion 
of  the  globe. 

Again,  how  were  the  carnivorous  animals  sup- 
flied  with  food  during  their  twelve  mouths'  abode 
in  th»  ark  ?  This  would  have  been  difficult  even 
for  the  veiy  limited  number  of  wild  animals  in 
Ncah's  immediate  neighbourhood.  For  the  very 
larjje  numbers  which  the  theory  9!'  a  universal 


NOAH 

Deluge  supposes,  t  would  have  l>een  quite  impos 
sible,  unless  again  we  have  recourse  to  miracle,  and 
either  maintain  that  they  were  miraculously  sup 
plied  with  food,  or  that  for  the  time  being  the 
nature  of  their  teeth  and  stomach  was  changed,  so 
that  they  were  able  to  live  on  vegetables.  But 
these  hypotheses  are  so  extravagant,  and  so  utterly 
unsupported  by  the  narrative  itself,  that  they  may 
be  safely  dismissed  without  further  comment. 

The  Flood. — The  ark  was  finished,  and  all  its 
living  freight  was  gathered  into  it  as  in  a  place  of 
safety.  Jehovah  shut  him  in,  says  the  c  I  run  cler 
speaking  of  Noah.  And  then  there  ensu»:d  a  >v,lenm 
pause  of  seven  days  before  the  threatened  destruction 
was  let  loose.  At  last  the  Flood  came ;  the  waters 
were  upon  the  earth.  The  narrative  is  vivid  and 
forcible,  though  entirely  wanting  in  tiat  sort  oi 
description  which  in  a  modem  historian  or  poet 
would  have  occupied  the  largest  space.  We  see 
nothing  of  the  death-struggle  ;  we  hear  not  the  cry 
of  despair ;  we  are  not  called  upon  to  witness  the 
frantic  agony  of  husband  and  wife,  and  parent  and 
child,  as  they  fled  in  terror  before  the  rising  waters. 
Nor  is  a  word  said  of  the  sadness  of  the  one 
righteous  man  who,  safe  himself,  looked  upon  the 
destruction  which  he  could  not  avert.  But  one 
impression  is  left  upon  the  mind  with  peculiar 
vividness,  from  the  very  simplicity  of  the  narrative, 
and  it  is  that  of  utter  desolation.  This  is  heightened 
by  the  contrast  and  repetition  of  two  ideas.  On 
the  one  hand  we  are  reminded  no  less  than  six  times 
in  the  narrative  in  chaps,  vi.,  vii.,  viii.,  who  *he 
tenants  of  the  ark  were  (vi.  18-21,  vii.  1-3,  7-9, 
13-16,  viii.  16,  17,  18,  19),  the  favoured  and 
rescued  few ;  and  on  the  other  hand  the  total  and 
absolute  blotting  out  of  everything  else  is  not  less 
emphatically  dwelt  upon  (vi.  13, 17,  vii.  4,  21-23). 
This  evidently  designed  contrast  may  especially  be 
traced  in  chap.  vii.  First,  we  read  in  ver.  6,  "  And 
Noah  was  six  hundred  years  old  when  the  flood 
came, — waters  upon  the  earth."  Then  follows  an 
account  of  Noah  and  his  family  and  the  animals 
entering  into  the  ark.  Next  verses  10-12  resume 
the  subject  of  ver.  7:  "And  it  came  to  pass  after 
seven  days  that  the  waters  of  the  flood  were  upon 
the  earth.  In  the  six  hundredth  year  of  Noah's 
life,  in  the  second  month,  on  the  seventeenth  day 
of  the  month,  on  the  selfsame  day  were  all  the 
fountains  of  the  great  deep  broken  up,  and  the 
windows  (or  floodgates)  of  heaven  were  opened. 
And  the  rain  was  upon  the  earth  forty  days  anJ 
forty  nights."  Again  the  narrative  returns  to  Noah 
and  his  companions  and  their  safety  in  the  ark  (ver. 
13-16).  And  then  in  ver.  17  the  words  of  ver.  12 
are  resumed,  and  from  thence  to  the  end  of  th* 
chapter  a  very  simple  but  very  powerful  and 
impressive  description  is  given  of  the  appalling 
catastrophe:  "And  the  flood  was  forty  days  upon 
the  earth;  and  the  waters  increased  and  bare  up 
the  ark,  and  it  was  lift  up  from  off  the  earth.  An  J 
the  waters  prevailed  and  increased  exceedingly  upon 
the  earth:  and  the  ark  went  on  the  face  of  the 
waters.  And  the  waters  prevailed  very  exceedingly 
upon  the  earth,  and  all  the  high  mountains  which 
[were]  under  the  whole  heaven  were  covered. 
Fifteen  cubits  upwards  did  the  waters  prevail,  and 
the  mountains  were  covered.  And  all  flesh  died 
which  moveth  upon  the  earth,  of  fowl,  and  of  cattle, 
and  of  wild  beasts,  and  of  every  creeping  thiag 
which  creepeth  upon  the  earth,  and  every  man. 
All  in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breath  of  life,  of  all 
that  wa-;  in  the  dry  land,  died.  And  every  sub- 


NOAH 

stance  which  was  on  the  face  of  the  ground  was 
blotted  out,  as  well  man  as  cattle  and  creeping 
thing  and  fowl  of  the  heaven :  they  were  blotted 
Hit  from  the  earth,  and  Noah  only  was  left,  and 
they  that  were  with  him  in  the  ark.  And  the 
waters  prevailed  on  the  earth  a  hundred  and  fifty 
Jays." 

The  waters  of  the  Flood  increased  for  a  period  of 
190  days  (40  +  150,  comparing  vii.  12  and  24). 
And  then  "  God  remembered  Noah,"  and  made  a 
jrind  to  pass  over  the  earth,  so  that  the  waters 
were  assuaged.  The  ark  rested  on  the  seventeenth 
day  of  the  seventh  month'  on  the  mountains  of 
Ararat.  After  this  the  waters  gradually  decreased 
till  the  first  day  of  the  tenth  month,  when  the  tops 
of  the  mountains  were  seen.  It  was  then  that 
'Noah  sent  forth,  first,  the  raven,"  which  flew  hither 
una  thither,  resting  probably  on  the  mountain-tops, 
but  not  returning  to  the  ark ;  and  next,  after  an 
interval  of  seven  days  (cf.  ver.  10),  the  dove,  "  to 
see  if  the  waters  were  abated  from  the  ground " 
(f.  e.  the  lower  plain  country).  "  But  the  dove," 
it  is  beautifully  said,  "  found  no  rest  for  the  sole 
of  her  foot,  and  she  returned  unto  him  into  the 
ark."  After  waiting  for  another  seven  days  he 
again  sent  forth  the  dove,  which  returned  this  time 
.with  a  fresh  (SptS)  olive-leaf  in  her  mouth,  a  sign 
that  the  waters  were  still  lower.*  And  once  more, 
after  another  interval  of  seven  days,  he  sent  forth 
the  dove,  and  she  "  returned  not  again  unto  him 
any  more,"  having  found  a  home  for  herself  upon 
the  earth.  No  picture  in  natural  history  was  ever 
drawn  with  more  exquisite  beauty  and  fidelity  than 
this :  it  is  admirable  alike  for  its  poetry  and  its 
truth. 

On  reading  this  narrative  it  is  difficult,  it  must 
be  confessed,  to  reconcile  the  language  employed 
with  the  hypothesis  of  a  partial  deluge.  The 
difficulty  does  not  lie  in  the  largeness  of  most  of 
the  terms  used,  but  rather  in  the  precision  of  one 
single  expression.  It  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
the  writer,  when  he  speaks  of  "  all  flesh,"  "  all 
in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breath  of  life,"  refers 
only  to  his  own  locality.  This  sort  of  language 
is  common  enough  in  the  Bible  when  only  a  small 
part  of  the  globe  is  intended.  Thus,  for  instance, 
it  is  said  that  "  all  countries  came  into  Egypt  to 
Joseph  to  buy  corn;"  and  that  "a  decree  went 
out  from  Caesar  Augustus  that  all  the  world  should 
be  taxed."  In  these  and  many  similar  passages 
the  expressions  of  the  writer  are  obviously  not 
to  be  taken  in  an  exactly  literal  sense.  Even 
the  apparently  very  distinct  phrase  "  all  the  high 
hills  that  were  under  the  whole  heaven  were 
covered "  may  be  matched  by  another  precisely 
similar,  where  it  is  said  that  God  would  put  the 
fear  and  the  dread  of  Israel  upon  evert/  nation  under 
heaven.  It  requires  no  effort  to  see  that  such  lan 
guage  is  framed  with  a  kind  of  poetic  breadth.  The 
real  difficulty  lies  in  the  connecting  of  this  state 
ment  with  the  district  in  which  Noah  is  supposed 
to  have  lived,  and  the  assertion  that  the  waters 


NOAH 


5C9 


prevailed  fifteen  cubits  upward.  If  the  Ararat  on 
which  the  ark  rested  be  the  present  mo  intaiu  ol 
the  same  name,  the  highest  peak  of  which  is  more 
than  17,000  feet  above  the  sea  [ARARAT],  it  would 
have  been  quite  impossible  for  this  to  have  been 
covered,  the  water  reaching  15  cubits,  t.  e.  26  feet 
above  it,  unless  the  whole  earth  were  submerged. 
The  author  of  the  Genesis  of  the  Earth,  &c.,  has 
endeavoured  to  escape  this  difficulty  by  shifting  the 
scene  of  the  catastrophe  to  the  low  country  on  the 
banks  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  (a  miraculous 
overflow  of  these  rivers  being  sufficient  to  account 
for  the  Deluge),  and  supposing  that  the  "fifteen 
cubits  upward  "  are  to  be  reckoned,  not  from  the 
top  of  the  mountains,  but  from  the  surface  of  the 
plain.  By  "  the  high  hills  "  he  thinks  may  be  meant 
only  slight  elevations,  called  "  high  "  because  they 
were  the  highest  parts  overflowed.  But  fifteen 
cubits  is  only  a  little  more  than  twenty-six  feet, 
and  it  seems  absurd  to  suppose  that  such  trifling 
elevations  are  described  as  "  all  the  high  hills  under 
the  whole  heaven."  At  this  rate  the  ark  itself  must 
have  been  twice  the  height  of  the  highest  mountain. 
The  plain  meaning  of  the  narrative  is,  that  far  as 
the  eye  could  sweep,  not  a  solitary  mountain  reared 
its  head  above  the  waste  of  waters.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  is  no  necessity  for  assuming  that  the 
ark  stranded  on  the  high  peaks  of  the  mountain 
now  called  Ararat,  or  even  that  that  mountain  was 
visible.  A  lower  mountain-range,  such  as  the 
Zagros  range  for  instance,  may  be  intended.  And 
in  the  absence  of  all  geographical  certainty  in  the 
matter  it  is  better  to  adopt  some  such  explanation 
of  the  difficulty.  Indeed  it  is  out  of  the  question 
to  imagine  that  the  ark  rested  on  the  top  of  a 
mountain  which  is  covered  for  4000  feet  from  the 
summit  with  perpetual  snow,  and  the  descent  from 
which  would  have  been  a  very  serious  matter  both 
to  men  and  other  animals.  The  local  tradition, 
according  to  which  fragments  of  the  ark  are  still 
believed  to  remain  on  the  summit,  can  weigh  no 
thing  when  balanced  against  so  extreme  an  impro 
bability.  Assuming,  then,  that  the  Ararat  here 
mentioned  is  not  the  mountain  of  that  name  in 
Armenia,  we  may  also  assume  the  inundation  to 
have  been  partial,  and  may  suppose  it  to  have  ex 
tended  over  the  whole  valley  of  the  Euphrates,  and 
eastward  as  far  as  the  range  of  mountains  running 
down  to  the  Persian  gulf,  or  further.  As  thtt 
inundation  is  said  to  have  been  caused  by  the 
breaking  up  of  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep,  AS 
well  as  by  the  rain,  some  great  and  sudden  sub 
sidence  of  the  land  may  have  'aker  pl.ve,  aci-oi.i- 
panied  by  an  inrush  of  the  waters  of  the  Persian 
gulf,  similar  to  what  occurred  in  the  Runn  ol 
Cutch,  on  the  eastern  arm  of  the  Indus,  in  1819, 
when  the  sea  flowed  in,  and  in  a  few  hours  con 
verted  a  tract  of  land,  2000  square  miles  in  area, 
into  an  inland  sea  or  lagoon  (see  the  account  of 
this  subsidence  of  the  Delta  of  the  Indus  in  I.yell's 
Principles  of  Geology,  pp.  460-3). 

It  has  sometimes  been  asserted  that  the  facts  of 


*  It  is  impossible  to  say  how  this  reckoning  of  time 
was  made,  and  whether  a  lunar  or  a  solar  year  is  meant. 
Much  ingenuity  has  been  expended  on  this  question  Csee 
Delitzsch'fl  Comment.'),  but  with  no  satisfactory  results. 

•  The  raven  was  supposed  to  foretell  changes  in  the 
weather  both  by  its  flight  and  its  cry  (Aelian,  H.  A.  vii. 
* ;  Virg.  Georg.  i.  382,  410).    According  to  Jewish  tradi 
tion,  the  raven  was  preserved  in  the  ark  in  order  to  be 
the  progenitor  of  the  birds  which  afterwards  fed  E'.jjuh  by 
Cie  brook  Cberith 


*  The  olive-tree  Is  an  evergreen,  and  sceins  to  have 
the  power  of  living  under  water,  according  to  Theo- 
phrastus  (Hist,  plant,  iv.  8)  and  Pliny  (If.  JV.  xlii.  50), 
who  mention  olive-trees  in  the  Red  Sea.  The  olive 
grows  in  Armenia,  but  only  in  the  valleys  on  the  south 
side  of  Ararat,  not  on  the  slopes  of  the  mountain.  It 
will  not  flourish  at  an  elevation  where  even  the  rani 
berry,  waliuu,  and  apricot  are  found  'Kilter,  k'rd<cu>sdt 
x.  920), 


jl 


670 


NOAH 


geology  are  conclusive  against  the  possibility  of  a 
universal  deluge.  Formerly,  indeed,  the  existence 
A!'  shells  and  corals  at  the  top  of  high  mountains 
was  taken  to  be  no  less  conclusive  evidence  the 
other  way.  They  were  constantly  appealed  to  as 
A  proof  of  the  literal  truth  of  the  Scripture  narra 
tive.  And  so  troublesome  and  inconvenient  a  proof 
did  it  seem  to  Voltaire,  that  he  attempted  to  ac 
count  for  the  existence  of  fossil  shells  by  arguing 
that  either  they  were  those  of  fresh-water  lakes  and 
rivers  evaporated  during  dry  seasons,  or  of  land- 
snails  developed  in  unusual  abundance  during  wet 
ones ;  or  that  they  were  shells  that  had  been  dropped 
from  the  hats  of  pilgrims  on  their  way  from  the 
Holy  Land  to  their  own  homes ;  or  in  the  case  of 
the  ammonites,  that  they  were  petrified  reptiles. 
It  speaks  ill  for  the  state  of  science  that  such  argu 
ments  could  be  advanced,  on  the  one  side  for,  and 
on  the  other  against,  the  universality  of  the  Deluge. 
And  this  is  the  more  extraordinary — and  the  fact 
shows  how  very  slowly,  where  prejudices  stand  in 
the  way,  the  soundest  reasoning  will  be  listened  to 
— when  we  remember  that  so  early  as  the  year 
1517  an  Italian  named  Fracastoro  had  demonstrated 
the  untenableness  of  the  vulgar  belief  which  asso 
ciated  these  fossil  remains  with  the  Mosaic  Deluge. 
"  That  inundation,"  he  observed,  "  was  too  tran 
sient  ;  it  consisted  principally  of  fluviatile  waters ; 
and  if  it  had  transported  shells  to  great  distances, 
must  have  strewed  them  over  the  surface,  not 
buried  them  at  vast  depths  in  the  interior  of  moun 
tains.  .  .  .  But  the  clear  and  philosophical  views 
of  Fracastoro  were  disregarded,  and  the  talent  and 
argumentative  powers  of  the  learned  were  doomed 
for  three  centuries  to  be  wasted  in  the  discussion 
of  these  two  simple  and  preliminary  questions: 
first,  whether  fossil  remains  had  ever  belonged  to 
liring  creatures  ;  and  secondly,  whether,  if  this  be 
admitted,  all  the  phenomena  could  not  be  explained 
by  the  deluge  of  Noah"  (Lyell,  Principles  of  Geo 
logy,  p.  20,  9th  ed.).  Even  within  the  last  thirty 
years  geologists  like  Cuvier  and  Buckland  have 
thought  that  the  superficial  deposits  might  be 
referred  to  the  period  of  the  Noachian  Flood.  Sub 
sequent  investigation,  however,  showed  that  if  the 
received  chronology  were  even  approximately  cor 
rect,  this  was  out  of  the  question,  as  these  deposits 
must  have  taken  place  thousands  of  years  before 
the  time  of  Noah,  and  indeed  before  the  creation  of 
man.  Hence  the  geologic  diluvium  is  to  be  care 
fully  distinguished  from  the  historic.  And  although, 
singularly  enough,  the  latest  discoveries  give  some 
support  to  the  opinion  that  man  may  have  been  in 
existence  during  the  formation  of  the  drift,"  yet 
even  then  that  formation  could  not  have  resulted 
from  a  mere  temporary  submersion  like  that  of  the 
Mosaic  Deluge,  but  must  have  been  the  effect  of 
causes  in  operation  for  ages.  So  far  then,  it  is  clear, 
there  is  no  evidence  now  on  the  earth's  surface  in 
favour  of  a  universal  deluge. 

But  is  there  any  positive  geological  evidence 
against  it  ?  Hugh  Miller  and  other  geologists  have 
maintained  that  there  is.  They  appeal  to  the  fact 
that  in  various  parts  of  the  world,  such  as  Auvergne 
in  France,  and  along  the  flanks  of  Aetna,  there  are 
cones  of  loose  scoriae  and  ashes  belonging  to  long 
extinct  volcanoes,  which  must  be  at  least  triple  the 


NOAH 

antiquity  of  the  Noachian  Deluge,  and  which  vet 
exhibit  no  traces  of  abrasion  by  the  action  of  water. 
These  loose  cones,  they  argue,  must  have  been  swept 
away  had  the  water  of  the  Deluge  ever  reached 
them.  But  this  argument  is  by  no  means  con 
clusive.  The  heaps  of  scoriae  are,  we  have  been 
assured  by  careful  scientific  observers,  not  of  that 
loose  incoherent  kind  which  they  suppose.  And  it 
would  have  been  quite  possible  for  a  gradually  ad 
vancing  inundation  to  have  submerged  these,  and 
then  gradually  to  have  retired  without  leaving  any 
mark  of  its  action.  Indeed,  although  there  is  no 
proof  that  the  whole  world  ever  was  submerged  at 
one  time,  and  although,  arguing  from  the  observed 
facts  of  the  geological  cataclysms,  we  snould  be  dis 
posed  to  regard  such  an  event  as  in  the  highest 
degree  improbable,  it  cannot,  on  geological  ground* 
alone,  be  pronounced  impossible.  The  water  of  the 
globe  is  to  the  land  in  the  proportion  of  three-fifths 
to  two-fifths.  There  already  existed  therefore,  in 
the  different  seas  and  lakes,  water  sufficient  to  cover 
the  whole  earth.  And  the  whole  earth  might  have 
been  submerged  for  a  twelvemonth,  as  stated  in 
Genesis,  or  even  for  a  much  longer  period,  without 
any  trace  of  such  submei-sion  being  now  discernible. 

There  is,  however,  other  evidence  conclusive 
against  the  hypothesis  of  a  universal  deluge,  miracle 
apart.  "  The  first  effect  of  the  covering  of  the 
whole  globe  with  water  would  be  a  complete  change 
in  its  climate,  the  general  tendency  being  to  lower 
and  equalize  the  temperature  of  all  pa  its  of  its  sur 
face.  Part  passii  with  this  process  .  .  .  would 
ensue  the  destruction  of  the  great  majority  of  ma 
rine  animals.  And  this  would  take  place,  partly  by 
reason  of  the  entire  change  in  climatal  conditions, 
too  sudden  and  general  to  be  escaped  by  migration  j 
and,  in  still  greater  measure,  in  consequence  of  the 
sudden  change  in  the  depth  of  the  water.  Great 
multitudes  of  marine  animals  can  only  live  between 
tide-marks,  or  at  depths  less  than  fifty  fathoms, 
and  as  by  the  hypothesis  the  laud  had  to  be  de 
pressed  many  thousands  of  feet  in  a  few  months, 
and  to  be  raised  again  with  equal  celerity,  it  follows 
that  the  animals  could  not  possibly  have  accommo 
dated  themselves  to  such  vast  and  rapid  changes. 
All  the  littoral  animals,  therefore,  would  have  been 
killed.  The  race  of  acorn-shells  and  periwinkles 
would  have  been  exterminated,  and  all  the  coral- 
reefs  of  the  Pacific  would  at  once  have  been  con 
verted  into  dead  coral,  never  to  grow  again.  But 
so  far  is  this  from  being  the  case,  that  acorn-shells 
periwinkles,  and  coral  still  survive,  and  there  is 
good  evidence  that  they  have  continued  to  exist  and 
flourish  for  many  thousands  of  years.  On  the  other 
hand  Noah  was  not  directed  to  take  marine  animals 
of  any  kind  into  the  ark,  nor  indeed  is  it  easy  to 
see  how  they  could  have  been  preserved. 

"  Again,  had  the  whole  globe  been  submerged 
the  sea-water  covering  the  land  would  at  once  have 
destroyed  eveiy  fresh-water  fish,  mollusk,  and 
worm  ;  and  as  none  of  these  were  taken  into  the 
ark,  the  several  species  would  have  become  extinct. 
Nothing  of  the  kind  has  occurred. 

"  Lastly,  such  experiments  as  have  been  made 
with  regard  to  the  action  of  sea-water  upon  ter 
restrial  plants  leave  very  little  doubt  that  sub 
mergence  in  sea-water  for  ten  or  eleven  months 


•  In  a  valuable  paper  by  Mr.  Joseph  Prest  wich  (recently 
published  in  the  Philosophical  Tiun  suctions'),  It  is  sug 
gested  that  in  all  probability  the  origin  of  man  will  have 
to  oe  Cirown  back  into  a  greatly  earlier  antiquity  than 


that  usually  assigned  to  it,  but  the  pleistocene  deposit* 
to  be  brought  down  to  a  much  more  recent  period,  geolo 
gically  speaking,  than  geologist.-,  have  hitherto  allowed. 


NOAH 

x-ould  have  effectually  destroyed  not  only  the  gieat 
majority  of  the  plants,  but  their  seeds  as  well. 
And  yet  it  is  not  said  that  Noah  took  any  stock  of 
plants  with  him  into  the  ark,  or  that  the  animals 
»hich  issued  from  it  had  the  slightest  difficulty  in 
obtaining  pasture. 

"  There  are,  then,  it  must  be  confessed,  very 
strong  grounds  for  believing  that  no  universal 
deluge  ever  occurred.  Suppose  the  Flood,  on  the 
other  hand,  to  have  been  local :  suppose,  for  in 
stance,  the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  to  have  been 
submerged ;  and  then  the  necessity  for  preserving 
all  the  species  of  animals  disappears.  For,  in  the 
first  place,  there  was  nothing  to  prevent  the  birds 
and  many  of  the  large  mammals  from  getting 
away ;  and  in  the  next,  the  number  of  species 
peculiar  to  that  geographical  area,  and  which  would 
be  absolutely  destroyed  by  its  being  flooded,  sup 
posing  they  could  not  escape,  is  insignificant." 

All  these  considerations  point  with  overwhelming 
force  in  the  same  direction,  and  compel  us  to 
believe,  unless  we  suppose  that  a  stupendous  miracle 
was  wrought,  that  the  Flood  of  Noah  (like  other 
deluges  of  which  we  read)  extended  only  over  a 
limited  area  of  the  globe. 

It  now  only  remains  to  notice  the  later  allusions 
to  the  catastrophe  occurring  in  the  Bible,  aud  the 
traditions  of  it  preserved  in  other  nations  besides  the 
Jewish. 

The  word  specially  used  to  designate  the  Flood 
of  Noah  (>13?3n,  hammabbul)  occurs  in  only  one 

other  passage  of  Scripture,  Ps.  xxix.  1 0.  The  poet 
there  sings  of  the  Majesty  of  God  as  seen  in  the 
storm.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  heavy  rain 
accompanying  the  thunder  and  lightning  had  been 
such  as  to  swell  the  torrents,  and  perhaps  cause  a 
partial  inundation.  This  earned  back  his  thoughts 
to  the  Great  Flood  of  which  he  had  often  read, 
and  he  sang,  "  Jehovah  sat  as  king  at  the  Flood," 
and  looking  up  at  the  clear  face  of  the  sky,  and  on 
the  freshness  and  glory  of  nature  around  him,  he 
added,  "and  Jehovah  remaiueth  a  king  for  ever." 
In  Is.  liv.  9,  the  Flood  is  spoken  of  as  "the  waters 
of  Noah."  God  Himself  appeals  to  His  promise 
made  after  the  Flood  as  a  pledge  of  His  faithfulness 
to  Israel :  "  For  this  is  as  the  waters  of  Noah  unto 
Me :  for  as  I  have  sworn  that  the  waters  of  Noah 
should  at-  more  go  over  the  earth  ;  so  have  I  sworn 
that  I  would  not  be  wroth  with  thee  nor  rebuke 
thee." 

In  the  N.  T.  our  Lord  gives  the  sanction  of  His 
own  authority  to  the  historical  truth  of  the 
narrative,  Matt.  xxiv.  37  (cf.  Luke  xvii.  26),  de 
claring  that  the  state  of  the  world  at  His  Second 
Coming  shall  be  such  as  it  was  iu  the  days  of  Noah 
St.  Peter  speaks  of  the  "long  suffering  of  God," 
which  "  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah  while  the  ark 
was  a  preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls, 
were  saved  by  water,"  and  sees  in  the  waters  of  the 
Flood  by  which  the  ark  was  borne  up  a  type  01 
Baptism,  by  which  the  Church  is  separated  from 
the  world.  And  again,  in  his  Second  Epistle  (ii. 
he  cites  it  as  an  instance  of  the  righteous  judgmenl 
of  God  who  spared  not  the  old  world,  &c. 

The  traditions  of  many  nations  have  preservec 
the  memory  of  a  great  and  destructive  flood  from 
which  but  a  small  part  of  mankind  escaped.  It 


NOAH 


571 


national   growtn,    and  embody  merely   records  oi 
catastrophes,   such   as   especially    in    mountainous 
countries  are  of  no  rare  occurrence.     In  some  it- 
stances  no  doubt  the  resemblances  between  the  hea 
then  a^d  the  Jewish  stories  are  so  striking  as  to 
render  it  morally  certain  that  the  former  were  bor 
rowed  from  the  latter.     We  find,  indeed,  a  mytho 
logical  element,  the  absence  of  all  moral  purpose, 
and  a  national  and  local  colouring,  but,  discerniWe 
amongst  these,  undoubted  features  of  the  primitive 
history.     The  traditions  which  come  nearest  to  the 
iiblical  account  are  those  of  the  nations  of  Western 
Asia.    Foremost  amongst  these  is  the  Chaldean.    It 
s  preserved  in  a  Fragment  of  Berosus,  and  is  as 
bllows :  "  After  the  death  of  Ardates,  his  son  Xisu» 
ihrus  reigned  eighteen  sari.     In  his  time  happened, 
a  great  Deluge :  the  histoiy  of  which  is  thus  de 
scribed.     The  Deity  Kronos  appeared  to  him  in  a 
vision,  and  warned  him  that  on  the  15th  daj  of  the 
month  Daesius  there  would  be  a  flood  by  whicn 
mankind  would  be  destroyed.     He  therefore  enjoined 
him  to  write  a  histoiy  of  the  beginning,  course,  and 
end  of  all  things ;  and  to  bury  it  in  the  City  of  the 
Sun  at  Sippara ;  and  to  build  a  vessel  (<ncd<f>os) 
and  to  take  with  him  into  it  his  friends  and  rela 
tions  ;  and  to  put  on  board  food  and  drink,  together 
with  different  animals,  b.rds,  and  quadrupeds ;  and 
as  scon  as  he  had  made  all  arrangements,  to  commit 
himself  to   the   deep.      Having   asked   the   Deity 
whither  he  was  to  sail  1  he  was  answered,  '  To  the 
gods,  after  having  offered  a  prayer  for  the  good  of 
mankind.'     Whereupon,  not  being  disobedient  (to 
the  heavenly  vision),  he  built  a  vessel  five  stadia  in 
length,  and  two  in  breadth.    Into  this  he  put  every 
thing  which  he  had  prepared,  and  embarked  in  it 
his  wife,   his  children,   and   his  personal   friends. 
After  the  flood  had  been  upon  the  earth  and  was  in 
time  abated,  Xisuthrus  sent  out  some  birds  from 
the  vessel,   which  not  finding  any  food,  nor  any 
place  where  they  could  rest,  returned  thither.   After 
an  interval  of  some  days  Xisuthrus  sent  out  the 
birds  a  second  time,  and  now  they  returned  to  the 
ship  with  mud  on  their  feet.     A  third  time  he  re 
peated  the  experiment  and  then  they  returned  no 
more:  whence  Xisuthrus  judged  that  the  earth  was 
visible  above  the  waters  ;  and  accordingly  he  made 
an  opening  in  the  vessel  (?),  and  seeing  that  it  was 
stranded  upon  the  site  of  a  certain  mountain,  he 
quitted   it  with  his  wife   and   daughter,  and  the 
pilot.     Having  then  paid  his  adoration  to  the  earth, 
and  having  built  an  altar  and  offered  sacrifices  to 
the  gods,  he,  together  with  those  v/ho  had  left  the 
vessel  with  him,  disappeared.     Those  who  had  re 
mained  behind,  when  they  found  that  Xisuthrus 
and  his  companions  did  not  return,  in  their  turn 
left  the  vessel  and  began  to  look  for  him,  calling 
him  by  his  name.     Him  they  saw  no  more,  but  a 
voice  came  to  them  from  heaven,  bidding  them  lead 
pious  lives,  and  so  join  him  who  was  gone  to  live 
with  the  gods  ;  and  further  informing  them  that  his 
wife,  his  daughter,  and  the  pilot  had  shared  the 
same  honour.     It  told  them,  moreover,  that  they 
should  return  to  Babylon,  and  how  it  was  ordainsd 
that  they  should  take  up  the  writings  that  had  been 
buried  in    Sippara  and   impart  them  to  mankind, 
;iiid  that  the  country  where  they  then  were  was  the 
land  of  Armenia.     The   rest   having   heard   these 
words,  offered  sacrifices  to  the  gods,  and  taking  a 
circuit  journeyed  to  Babylon.     The  vessel  being 
thus  stranded  in  Armenia,  some  part  of  it  still  re 
mains  in  the  mountains  of  the  Corcyraeans  (or  Cor- 
vaa.'Ured  east  and  west,  or  whether  they  were  n  i  dyaeans,  t.  e.  the  Kurds  or  Kurdistan)  in  Armenia; 


clear    whether    they    poini 
centre,   whence    they   were 
carried  by  the  different  families  of  men  as  they 


not   always 
back   to 


very 
common 


572 


NOAH 


Mid  the  people  scrape  oft'  the  bitumen  from  the 
vessel  and  mak«  use  of  it  by  way  of  charms.  Now, 
when  those  of  whom  we  have  spoken  returned  to 
Babylon,  they  dug  up  the  writings  which  had  been 
buried  at  Sippara ;  they  also  founded  many  cities 
and  built  temples,  and  thus  the  country  of  Babylon 
became  inhabited  again"  (Cory's  Ancient  Frag 
ments,*  pp.  26-29).  Another  version  abridged,  but 
substantially  the  same,  is  given  from  Abydenus 
(Ibid.  pp.  33,  34).  The  version  of  Eupolemus 
(quoted  by  Eusebius,  Praep.  Evang.  x.  9)  is  curious : 
"  The  city  of  Babylon,"  he  says,  "  owes  its  founda 
tion  to  those  who  were  saved  from  the  Deluge  ;  they 
were  giants,  and  they  built  the  tower  celebrated  in 
history."  Other  notices  of  a  Flood  may  be  found  (a) 
in  the  Phoenician  mythology,  where  the  victory  of 
Pontus  (the  sea)  over  Demarous  (the  earth)  is 
mentioned  (see  the  quotation  from  Sanchoniathon 
in  Cory,  as  above,  p.  13):  (b)  in  the  Sibylline 
Oracles,  partly  borrowed  no  doubt  from  the  Biblical 
narrative,  and  partly  perhaps  from  some  Babylonian 
story.  In  these  mention  is  made  of  the  Deluge, 
after  which  Kronos,  Titan,  and  Japetus  ruled  the 
world,  each  taking  a  separate  portion  for  himself, 
and  remaining  at  peace  till  after  the  death  of  Noah, 
when  Kronos  and  Titan  engaged  in  war  with  one 
another  (76.  p.  52).  To  these  must  be  added  (c) 
the  Phrygian  story  of  king  Annakos  or  Nannakos 
(Enoch)  in  Iconium,  who  reached  an  age  of  more 
than  300  years,  foretold  the  Flood,  and  wept  and 
prayed  for  his  people,  seeing  the  destruction  that 
was  coming  upon  them.  Very  curious,  as  showing 
what  deep  root  this  tradition  must  have  taken  in 
the  country,  is  the  fact  that  so  late  as  the  time  of 
Septimius  Severus,  a  medal  was  struck  at  Apamea, 
on  which  the  Flood  is  commemorated.  "  The  city 
is  known  to  have  been  formerly  called  '  Kibotos ' 
or  '  the  Ark ;'  and  it  is  also  known  that  the  coins  of 
cities  in  that  age  exhibited  some  leading  point  in 
their  mythological  history.  The  medal  in  question 
represents  a  kind  of  square  vessel  floating  in  the 
water.  Through  an  opening  in  it  are  seen  two 
persons,  a  man  and  a  woman.  Upon  the  top  of  this 
chest  or  ark  is  perched  a  bird,  whilst  another  flies 
towards  it  carrying  a  branch  between  its  feet. 
Before  the  vessel  are  represented  the  same  pair  as 
naving  just  quitted  it,  and  got  upon  the  dry  land. 
Singularly  enough,  too,  on  some  specimens  of  this 
medal  the  letters  Nil,  or  NGE,  have  been  found  on 
the  vessel,  as  in  the  annexed  cut.  (See  Eckhel  iii. 
up.  132,  133  ;  Wiseman,  Lectures  on  Science  and 


cc  a  of  Apamoa  in  PhrygU.  representing  the  Deluge. 


'  \Ve  have  here  and  there  made  an  alteration,  where 
'.b<>  translator  seemed  to  us  not  quite  to  have  caught  the 
meaning  of  the  original. 

J   Dr.  Gutzlaff,  in  a  paper  '  On  Bnddhism  in  China,' 

:  •  mm iicair.1  to  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society  (Journal,  xvi. 

19),  says  that  he  saw  in  one  of  the  Buddhist  temples,  "  in 

boautlful  etucto,  the  scene  where  Kwaa-yin,  the  (jodi\et« 


NOAH 

Revealed  Religion,  ii.  pp.  128,  129.)  This  fiw  t  is  nc 
doubt  remarkable,  but  too  much  stress  must  not  bt 
laid  upon  it ;  for,  making  full  allowance  for  the 
local  tradition  as  having  occasioned  it,  we  must  not 
forget  the  influence  which  the  Biblical  account 
would  have  in  modifying  the  native  story. 

As  belonging  to  this  cycle  of  tradition,  must  be 
reckoned  also  (1)  the  Syrian,  related  by  Lucian 
(De  Dea  Syrd,  c.  13),  and  connected  with  a  huge 
chasm  in  the  earth  near  Hieropolis  into  which  the 
waters  of  the  Flood  are  supposed  to  have  drained 
and  (2)  the  Armenian  quoted  by  Josephus  (Ant. 
i.  3)  from  Nicolaus  Damascenus,  who  flourished 
about  the  age  of  Augustus.  He  says:  "There  is, 
above  Minyas  in  the  land  of  Amienia,  a  great 
mountain,  which  is  called  Baris  [».  e.  a  ship],  to 
which  it  is  sair1  that  many  persons  fled  at  the  time 
of  the  Deluge,  and  so  were  saved  ;  and  that  one  iu 
particular  was  carried  thither  upon  an  ark  (firl 
AapvaKos),  and  was  landed  upon  its  summit;  and 
that  the  remains  of  the  vessel's  planks  and  timbers 
were  long  preserved  upon  the  mountain.  Perhaps 
this  was  the  same  person  of  whom  Moses  the  Legis 
lator  of  the  Jews  wrote  an  account." 

A  second  cycle  of  traditions  is  that  of  Eastern 
Asia.  To  this  belong  the  Persian,  Indian,  and 
Chinese.  The  Persian  is  mixed  up  with  its  cos 
mogony,  and  hence  loses  anything  like  an  historical 
aspect.  "  The  world  having  been  corrupted  by 
Ahriman,  it  was  necessary  to  bring  over  it  a  uni 
versal  flood  of  water  that  all  impurity  might  be 
washed  away.  The  rain  came  down  in  drops  as 
large  as  the  head  of  a  bull ;  the  earth  was  under 
water  to  the  height  of  a  man,  and  the  creatures  of 
Ahriman  were  destroyed." 

The  Chinese  story  is,  in  many  respects,  singu 
larly  like  the  Biblical,  according  to  the  Jesuit 
M.  Martiuius,  who  says  that  the  Chinese  computed 
it  to  have  taken  place  4000  years  before  the  Chris 
tian  era.  Fdh-he,  the  reputed  author  of  Chinese 
civilization,  is  said  to  have  escaped  from  the  waters 
of  the  Deluge.  He  reappears  as  the  first  man  at 
the  production  of  a  renovated  world,  attended  by 
seven  companions— his  wife,  his  three  sons,  and 
three  daughters,  by  whose  intermarriage  the  whole 
circle  of  the  universe  is  finally  completed  (Hard- 
wick,  Christ  and  other  Masters,  iii.  18).)r 

The  Indian  tradition  appears  in  various  forms. 
Of  these,  the  one  which  most  remarkably  agrees 
with  the  Biblical  account  is  that  contained  in  th« 
MuhabhaYata.  We  are  there  told  that  Brahma, 
having  taken  the  form  of  a  fish,  appeared  to  the 
pious  Manu  (Satya,  i.  e.  the  righteous,  as  Noah 
is  also  called)  on  the  banks  of  the  river  Wlriui. 
Thence,  at  his  request,  Manu  trant'erred  him  when 
he  grew  bigger  to  the  Ganges,  and  finally,  when 
he  was  too  large  even  for  the  Ganges,  to  the  ocean. 
Brahma  now  announces  to  Manu  the  approach  of 
the  Deluge,  and  bids  him  build  a  ship  and  put  in 
it  all  kinds  of  seeds  together  with  the  seven  Kishis, 
or  holy  beings.  The  Flood  begins  and  covers  the 
whole  earth.  Brahma  himself  appeal's  in  the  tbrm  of 
a  horned  fish,  and  the  vessel  being  made  fast  to  him 
he  draws  it  for  many  years,  and  finally  lands  on 
the  loftiest  summit  of  Mount  Himarat  (i.  c.  tlw 


of  Mercy,  looks  down  from  heaven  upon  the  lone-Iy  Noah 
in  his  ark,  amidst  the  raging  waves  of  the  deluge,  with 
the  dolphins  swimming  around  as  his  last  means  of  safety, 
and  tne  dove  with  an  olive-branch  in  its  beak  flying 
towards  the  vessel.  Nothing  could  have  exceeded  the 
beauty  of  the  execution." 


NOAH 

nim.ila.ya).  Then,  by  the  command  ot  God,  the 
ih:p  is  made  fast,  and  in  memory  of  the  event  the 
mountain  called  Naubandhana  (i.  e.  ship-binding'). 
By  the  favour  of  Brahma,  Manu,  after  the  Flood, 
creates  the  new  race  of  mankind,  which  are  hence 
termed  Manudsha,  f.  e.  born  of  Manu  (Bo^p,  die 
Sundfluth).  The  Pur£nic  or  popular  version  is  of 
much  later  date,  and  is,  "  according  to  its  own 
admission,  coloured  and  disguised  by  allegorical 
imagery."  Another  and  perhaps  the  most  ancient 
version  of  all  is  that  contained  in  the  Catapat'ha- 
Pji'cdimana.  The  peculiarity  of  this  is  that  its 
locality  is  manifestly  north  of  the  Himalaya  range, 
over  which  Manu  is  supposed  to  have  crossed  into 
India.  Both  versions  will  be  found  at  length  in 
I  lard  wick's  Christ  and  other  Masters,  ii.  145-152. 
The  account  of  the  Flood  in  the  Koran  is  drawn 
apparently,  partly  from  Biblical,  and  partly  from 
Persian  sources.  In  the  main,  no  doubt,  it  follows 
the  narrative  in  Genesis,  but  dwells  at  length  on 
the  testimony  of  Noah  to  the  unbelieving  (Sale's 
Koran,  ch.  xi.  p.  181).  He  is  said  to  have  tarried 
among  his  people  one  thousand,  save  fifty  years 
(ch.  xxix.  p.  327).  The  people  scoffed  at  and 
derided  him ;  and  "  thus  were  they  employed  until 
our  sentence  was  put  in  execution  and  the  oven 
poured  forth  water."  Different  explanations  have 
been  given  of  this  oven  which  may  be  seen  in  Sale's 
note.  He  suggests  (after  Hyde,  de  Rel.  Pers.) 
that  this  idea  was  borrowed  from  the  Persian 
Magi,  who  also  fancied  that  the  first  waters  of  the 
Deluge  gushed  out  of  the  oven  of  a  certain  old  woman 
named  Zala  Cftfa.  But  the  word  Tcmn&r  (oven), 
he  observes,  may  mean  only  a  receptacle  in  which 
waters  are  gathered,  or  the  fissure  from  which  they 
brake  forth.*  Another  peculiarity  of  this  version 
is,  that  Noah  calls  in  vain  to  one  of  his  sons  to 
enter  into  the  ark:  he  refuses,  in  the  hope  of 
escaping  to  a  mountain,  and  is  drowned  before  his 
father's  eyes.  The  ark,  moreover,  is  said  to  have 
rested  on  the  mountain  Al  JQdi,  which  Sale  sup 
poses  should  be  written  Jordi  or  Giordi,  and  con 
nects  with  the  Gordyaei.  Cardu,  &c.,  or  Kurd 
Mountains  on  the  borders  of  Armenia  and  Mesopo 
tamia  (ch.  xi.  pp.  181-183,  and  notes'). 

A  third  cycle  of  traditions  is  to  be  found  among 
the  American  nations.  These,  as  might  be  ex 
pected,  show  occasionally  some  marks  of  resem 
blance  to  the  Asiatic  legends.  The  one  in  exist 
ence  among  the  Cherokees  reminds  us  of  the  story 
in  the  Mah&bhdrata,  only  that  a  dog  here  renders 
the  same  service  to  his  master  as  the  fish  does 
there  to  Manu.  "  This  dog  was  very  pertinacious 
in  visiting  the  banks  of  a  river  for  several  days, 
where  he  stood  gazing  at  the  water  and  howling 
piteously.  Being  sharply  spoken  to  by  his  master 
and  ordered  home,  he  revealed  the  coming  evil.  He 
concluded  his  prediction  by  saying  that  the  escape 
of  his  master  and  family  from  drowning  depended 
upon  their  throwing  him  into  the  water ;  that  to  es 
cape  drowning  himself  he  must  take  a  boat  and 
put  in  it  all  he  wished  to  save:  that  it  would  then 
rain  hard  a  long  time,  and  a  great  overflowing  of 
the  land  would  take  place.  By  obeying  this  pre 
diction  the  man  and  his  family  were  saved,  and  from 
them  the  earth  was  again  peopled."  (Schoolcraft, 
Notes  on  the  froquois,  pp.  358,  359.) 

"Of  the  different  nations  that  inhabit  Mexico," 
says  A.  von  Humboldt,  "  the  following  had  paint- 


NOAH 


573 


»  Tlo  ros.d  from  Salzburg  to  Bad-Gastein  passes  by 
M  very  singular  fissures  made  in  the  limestone  by  the 


ings  resembling  the  deluge  of  Cc.xccx,  viz.,  the 
Aztecs,  the  Mixtecs,  the  Zapotecs,  the  Tlascaltecs: 
and  the  Mechoacans.  The  Noah,  Xisuthrus,  or 
Manu  of  these  nations  is  termed  Coxcox,  Teo- 
Cipactli,  or  Tezpi.  He  saved  himself  with  his 
wife  Xochiquetzatl  in  a  bark,  or,  according  to  other 
traditions,  on  a  raft.  The  painting  represents 
Coxcox  in  the  midst  of  the  water  waiting  for  a 
bark.  The  mountain,  the  summit  of  which  rises 
above  the  waters,  is  the  peak  of  Colhuacan,  the 
Ararat  of  the  Mexicans.  At  the  foot  of  the  moun 
tain  are  the  heads  of  Coxcox  and  his  wife.  The 
latter  is  known  by  two  tresses  in  the  form  of 
horns,  denoting  the  female  sex.  The  men  born 
after  the  Deluge  were  dumb:  the  dove  from  the 
top  of  a  tree  distributed  among  them  tongues, 
represented  under  the  form  of  small  commas." 
Of  the  Mechoacan  tradition  he  writes,  "  that  Cox 
cox,  whom  they  called  Tezpi,  embarked  in  a 
spacious  acalli  with  his  wife,  his  children,  several 
animals,  and  grain.  When  the  Great  Spirit  or 
dered  the  waters  to  withdraw,  Tezpi  sent  out  from 
his  bark  a  vulture,  the  zopilote  or  vultur  aura. 
This  bird  did  not  return  on  account  of  the  car 
cases  with  which  the  earth  was  strewed.  Tezpi 
sent  out  other  birds,  one  of  which,  the  humming 
bird,  alone  returned,  holding  in  its  beak  a  branch 
clad  with  leaves.  Tezpi,  seeing  that  fresh  verdure 
covered  the  soil,  quitted  his  bark  near  the  moun 
tain  of  Colhuacan  "  (  Vues  des  Cordilleres  et  Monu- 
mens  de  I'Amerique,  pp.  226,  227).  A  pecu 
liarity  of  many  of  these  American  Indian  traditions 
must  be  noted,  and  that  is,  that  the  Flood,  accord 
ing  to  them,  usually  took  place  in  the  time  of  the 
First  Man,  who,  together  with  his  family  escape. 
But  Miiller  (Americanischen  Urreligioneri)  goes 
too  far  when  he  draws  from  this  the  conclusion 
that  these  traditions  are  consequently  cosmogonic  and 
have  no  historical  value.  The  fact  seems  rather  to 
be  that  all  memory  of  the  age  between  the  Creation 
and  the  Flood  had  perished,  and  that  hence  these 
two  great  events  were  brought  into  close  juxtapo 
sition.  This  is  the  less  unlikely  when  we  see  how 
very  meagre  even  the  Biblical  history  of  that  age  is. 
It  may  not  be  amiss,  before  we  go  on  to  speak 
of  the  traditions  of  more  cultivated  races,  to  men 
tion  the  legend  still  preserved  among  the  inhabit 
ants  of  the  Fiji  islands,  although  not  belonging  to 
our  last  group.  They  say  that,  "  after  the  islands 
had  been  peopled  by  the  first  man  and  woman,  a 
great  rain  took  place  by  which  they  were  finally 
submerged ;  but  before  the  highest  places  were 
covered  by  the  waters,  two  large  double  canoes 
made  their  appearance.  In  one  of  these  was 
Rokora  the  god  of  carpenters,  in  the  other  Rokola 
his  head  workman,  who  picked  up  some  of  the 
people  and  kept  them  on  board  until  the  waters 
had  subsided,  after  which  they  were  again  landed 
on  the  island.  It  is  reported  that  in  former  times 
canoes  were  always  kept  in  readiness  against 
another  inundation.  The  persons  thus  saved,  eight 
in  number,  were  landed  at  Mbenga,  where  the 
highest  of  their  gods  is  said  to  have  made  his 
first  appearance.  By  virtue  of  this  tradition,  the 
chiefs  of  Mbenga  take  rank  before  all  others  and 
have  always  acted  a  conspicuous  part  among  the 
Fijis.  They  style  themselves  Ngali-duva-ki-langi 
—  subject  to  Heaven  alone "  (Wilkes,  Exploring 
Expedition). 


course  of  the  stream,  which  are  known  by  the  r.ame  of 
"  Die  Oferi,"  or  "  the  Ovens." 


074 


NOAH 


NOAH 


One  more  cycle  of  traditions  we  shall  notice —  |  imagination  of  man's  heart  is  evil  from  his  youth  , 
•*  ~:~    -f  iU~  neither  will   I  again  smite  any  more  every  living 


that,  viz.,  of  the  Hellenic  races. 

Hellas  has  two  versions  of  a  flood,  one  associated 
with  Ogyges  (JtU.  Afric.  as  quoted  by  Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  x.  10)  and  the  other,  in  a  far  more 
elaborate  form,  with  Deucalion.  Both,  however, 
are  of  late  origin, — they  were  unknown  to  Homer 
and  Hesiod.  Herodotus,  though  he  mentions  Deu 
calion  as  one  of  the  first  kings  of  the  Hellenes,  says 
not  a  word  about  the  Flood  (i.  56).  Pindar  is 
the  first  writer  who  mentions  it  (Olymp.  ix.  37ff.). 
In  Apollodorus  (B&lio.  i.  7)  and  Ovid  (Metam. 
i.  260)  the  story  appears  in  a  much  more  definite 


shape. 
Syr. 


Finally,  Lucian  gives  a  narrative  (De  Ded 
12,   13),  not  very  different  from  that  of 


Ovid,  except  that  he  makes  provision  for  the 
safety  of  the  animals  which  Ovid  does  not.  He 
attributes  the  necessity  for  the  Deluge  to  the  ex 
ceeding  wickedness  of  the  existing  race  of  men,  and 
declares  that  the  earth  opened  and  sent  forth 
waters  to  swallow  them  up,  as  well  as  that  heavy 
rain  fell  upon  them.  Deucalion,  as  the  one  righteous 
man,  escaped  with  his  wives  and  children  and  the 
animals  he  had  put  into  the  chest  (\d.pvaKa),  and 
landed,  after  nine  days  and  nine  nights,  on  the  top 
of  Parnassus,  whilst  the  chief  part  of  Hellas  was 
under  water,  and  nearly  all  men  perished,  except 
a  few  who  reached  the  tops  of  the  highest  moun 
tains.  Plutarch  (de  Sollert.  Anim.  §13)  mentions 
the  dove  which  Deucalion  made  use  of  to  ascertain 
whether  the  flood  was  abated. 

Most  of  these  accounts,  it  must  be  observed, 
localize  the  Flood,  and  confine  it  to  Greece  or  some 
part  of  Greece.  Aristotle  speaks  of  a  local  inunda 
tion  near  Dodona  only  (Meteorol.  i.  14). 

It  must  also  be  confessed,  that  the  later  the  nar 
rative,  the  more  definite  the  form  it  assumes,  and  the 
more  nearly  it  resembles  the  Mosaic  account. 

It  seems  tolerably  certain  that  the  Egyptians 
had  no  records  of  the  Deluge,  at  least  if  we  are  to 
credit  Manetho.  Nor  has  any  such  record  been 
detected  on  the  monuments,  or  preserved  in  the 
mythology  of  Egypt.  They  knew,  however,  of  the 
flood  of  Deucalion,  but  seem  to  have  been  in  doubt 
whether  it  was  to  be  regarded  as  partial  or  uni 
versal,  and  they  supposed  it  to  have  baen  pi-eceded 
by  several  others. 

Everybody  knows  Ovid's  story  of  Deucalion  and 
Pyrrha.  It  may  be  mentioned,  however,  in  refer 
ence  to  this  as  a  very  singular  coincidence  that, 
just  as,  according  to  Ovid,  the  earth  was  repeopled 
by  Deucalion  and  Pyrrha  throwing  the  bones  of 
their  mother  (i.  e.  stones)  behind  their  backs,  so 
among  the  Tamanaki,  a  Carib  tribe  on  the  Orinoko, 
the  story  goes  that  a  man  and  his  wife  escaping 
from  the  flood  to  the  top  of  the  high  mountain 
Tapanacu,  threw  over  their  heads  the  fruit  of 
the  Mauritia-palm,  whence  sprung  a  new  race  of 
men  and  women.  This  curious  coincidence  be 
tween  Hellenic  and  American  traditions  seems  ex 
plicable  only  on  the  hypothesis  of  some  common 
centre  of  tradition. 

After  the  Flood. — Noah's  first  act  after  he  left  the 
ark  was  to  build  an  altar,  and  to  offer  sacrifices. 
This  is  the  first  altar  of  which  we  read  in  Scripture, 
and  the  first  burnt  sacrifice.  Noah,  it  is  said,  took 
of  every  clean  beast,  and  of  every  clean  fowl,  and 
offered  burnt  offerings  on  the  altar.  And  then  the 
narrative  adds  with  childlike  simplicity :  "  And 
Jehovah  smelled  a  smell  of  rest  (or  satisfaction), 
and  Jehovah  said  in  His  heart,  I  will  nut  :u;aiii 
curse  the  ground  any  more  for  man's  sake  ;  for  the 


thing  as  I  have  done."  Jehovah  accepts  the  sacri 
fice  of  Noah  as  the  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of 
man  that  he  desires  reconciliation  and  Communion 
with  God ;  and  therefore  the  renewed  earth  shull 
no  more  be  wasted  with  a  plague  of  watei-s,  but  so 
long  as  the  earth  shall  last,  seed-time  and  harvest, 
cold  and  heat,  summer  and  winter,  day  and  night 
shall  not  cease. 

Then  follows  the  blessing  of  God  (Elohim )  upon 
Noah  and  his  sons.  They  are  to  be  fruitful  and 
multiply :  they  are  to  have  lordship  over  the  inferior 
animals ;  not,  however,  as  at  the  first  by  native 
right,  but  by  terror  is  their  rule  to  be  established. 
All  living  creatures  are  now  given  to  man  for  food  ; 
but  express  provision  is  made  that  the  blood  (in 
which  is  the  life)  should  not  be  eaten.  This  does 
not  seem  necessarily  to  imply  that  animal  food  was 
not  eaten  before  the  flood,  but  only  that  now  the 
use  of  it  was  sanctioned  by  divine  permission.  The 
prohibition  with  regard  to  blood  reappears  with 
fresh  force  in  the  Jewish  ritual  (Lev.  iii.  17,  vii. 
26, 27,  xvii.  10-14 ;  Deut.  xii.  16,  23,  24,  xv.  23), 
and  seemed  to  the  Apostles  so  essentially  human  as 
well  as  Jewish  that  they  thought  it  ought  to  be 
enforced  upon  Gentile  converts.  In  later  times  the 
Greek  Church  urged  it  as  a  reproach  against  the 
Latin  that  they  did  not  hesitate  to  eat  things 
strangled  (suffocata  in  quibits  sanguis  tenetwr). 

Next,  God  makes  provision  for  the  security  of 
human  life.  The  blood  of  man,  in  which  is  his 
life,  is  yet  more  precious  than  the  blood  of  beasts. 
When  it  has  been  shed  God  will  require  it,  whether 
of  beast  or  of  man :  and  man  himself  is  to  be  the 
appointed  channel  of  Divine  justice  upon  the 
homicide :  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man 
shall  his  blood  be  shed ;  for  in  the  image  of  God 
made  He  man."  Hence  is  laid  the  first  foundation 
of  the  civil  power.  And  just  as  the  priesthood  is 
declared  to  be  the  privilege  of  all  Israel  before  it  is 
made  representative  in  certain  individuals,  so  here 
the  civil  authority  is  declared  to  be  a  right  of  human 
nature  itself,  before  it  is  delivered  over  into  the 
hands  of  a  particular  executive. 

Thus  with  the  beginning  of  a  new  world  God 
gives,  on  the  one  hand,  a  promise  which  secures  the 
stability  of  the  natural  order  of  the  universe,  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  consecrates  human  life  with  a 
special  sanctity  as  resting  upon  these  two  pillars — 
the  brotherhood  of  men,  and  man's  likeness  to  God. 

Of  the  seven  precepts  of  Noah,  as  they  are  called, 
the  observance  of  which  was  required  of  all  Jewish 
proselytes,  three  only  are  here  expressly  mentioned  • 
the  abstinence  from  blood ;  the  prohibition  o( 
murder  ;  and  the  recognition  of  the  civil  authority. 
The  remaining  four :  the  prohibition  of  idolatry,  of 
blasphemy,  of  incest,  and  of  .theft  rested  apparently 
on  the  general  sense  of  mankind. 

It  is  in  the  terms  of  the  blessing  and  the  covenant 
made  with  Noah  after  the  Flood  that  we  find  the 
strongest  evidence  that  in  the  sense  of  the  writer  it 
was  universal,  i.e.,  that  it  extended  to  all  the  then 
known  world.  The  literal  truth  of  the  narrative 
obliges  us  to  believe  that  the  whole  human  race, 
except  eight  persons,  perished  by  the  waters  of  the 
flood.  Noah  is  clearly  the  head  of  a  new  human 
family,  the  representative  of  the  whole  race.  It  is 
as  such  that  God  makes  His  covenant  with  him ; 
and  h>:nce  selects  a  natural  phenomenon  as  the  sign 
of  thf.t  covenant,  just  as  later  in  makiug  a  national 


coveiant  with  Abraham,  Hf  made  the  sea  of  it  tc 


NOAH 

t>e  tu  arbitrary  sigr.  in  the  flesh.  The  bow  in  the 
cloud,  seen  by  every  nation  under  heaven,  is  an 
unfailing  witness  to  the  truth  of  God.  Was  the 
rainbow,  then,  we  ask,  never  seen  before  the  flood  ? 
Was  this  "  sign  in  the  heavens"  beheld  for  the  first 
time  by  the  eight  dwellers  in  the  ark  when,  after 
their  long  imprisonment,  they  stood  again  upon  the 
green  earth,  and  saw  the  dark  humid  clouds  spanned 
by  its  glorious  arch  ?  Such  seems  the  meaning  of 
the  naiTator.  And  yet  this  implies  that  there  was 
no  rain  before  the  flood,  and  that  the  laws  of  nature 
were  changed,  at  least  in  that  part  of  the  globe,  by 
,  that  event.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  in 
the  world  at  large  there  has  been  such  change  in 
meteorological  phenomena  as  here  implied.  That  a 
rertain  portion  of  the  earth  should  never  have  been 
visited  by  rain  is  quite  conceivable.  Egypt,  though 
not  absolutely  without  rain,  very  rarely  sees  it. 
But  the  country  of  Noah  and  the  Ark  was  a  moun 
tainous  country;  and  the  ordinary  atmospherical 
conditions  must  have  been  suspended,  or  a  rev* 
law  must  have  come  into  operation  after  the  flood, 
if  the  rain  then  first  fell,  and  if  the  rainbow  had 
consequently  never  before  been  painted  on  the  clouds. 
Hence,  many  writers  have  supposed  that  the  meaning 
ol  the  passage  is,  not  that  the  rainbow  now  appeared 
for  the  first  time,  but  that  it  was  now  for  the  first 
time  invested  with  the  sanctity  of  a  sign ;  that  not  a 
new  phenomenon  was  visible,  but  that  a  new  mean 
ing  was  given  to  a  phenomenon  already  existing. 
It  must  be  confessed,  however,  that  this  is  not  the 
natural  interpretation  of  the  words  :  "  This  is  the 
sign  of  the  covenant  which  I  do  set  between  me  and 
you,  and  every  living  thing  which  is  with  you  for 
evei'lasting  generations :  my  bow  have  I  set  in  the 
cloud,  and  it  shall  be  for  the  sign  of  a  covenant 
between  me  and  the  earth.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass  that  when  I  bring  a  cloud  over  the  earth,  then 
the  bow  shal1  be  seen  in  the  cloud,  and  I  will 
remember  my  covenant  which  is  between  me  and 
you  and  every  living  thing  of  all  flesh,"  &c. 

Noah  now  for  the  rest  of  his  life  betook  himself 
to  agricultural  pursuits,  following  in  this  the  tra 
dition  of  his  family.  It  is  particularly  noticed  that 
he  planted  a  vineyard,  and  some  of  the  older  Jewish 
writers,  with  a  touch  of  poetic  beauty,  tell  us  that 
he  took  the  shoots  of  a  vine  which  had  wandered 
out  of  paradise  wherewith  to  plant  his  vineyard.* 
Whether  in  ignorance  of  its  properties  or  otherwise, 
we  are  not  informed,  but  he  drank  of  the  juice  of 
the  grape  till  he  became  intoxicated  and  shamefully 
exposed  himself  in  his  own  tent.  One  of  his  sons, 
Ham,  mocked  openly  at  his  father's  disgrace.  The 
others,  with  dutiful  care  and  reverence,  endeavoured 
to  hide  it.  Noah  was  not  so  drunk  as  to  be  un 
conscious  of  the  indignity  which  his  youngest  son 
had  put  upon  him  ;  and  when  he  recovered  from 
the  effects  of  his  intoxication,  he  declared  that  in 
requital  for  this  act  of  brutal  unfeeling  mockery,  a 
curse  should  rest  upon  the  sons  of  Ham,  that  he 
who  knew  not  the  duty  of  a  child,  should  see  his 
own  son  degraded  to  the  condition  of  a  slave.  With 
the  curse  on  his  youngest  son  was  joined  a  blessing 
in  the  other  two.  It  ran  thus,  in  the  old  poetic 
or  rather  rhythmical  and  alliterative  form  into 


NOAH 


575 


which  the  moie  solemn  utterances  »f  intiquitv 
commonly  tell.  And  he  said : — 

Cursed  be  Canaan, 

A  slave  of  slaves  shall  he  be  to  his  trethren. 

And  he  said  : — 

Blessed  be  Jehovah,  God  of  Shem, 

And  let  Canaan  be  their  slave  ! 

May  God  enlarge  Japhet,b 

And  let  him  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem, 

And  let  Canaan  be  their  slave  ! 

Of  old  a  father's  solemn  curse  or  blessing  was  held 
to  have  a  mysterious  power  of  fulfilling  itself.  And 
in  this  case  the  words  of  the  righteous  man,  though 
strictly  the  expression  of  a  wish  (Dr.  Pye  Smith  is 
quite  wrong  in  translating  all  the  verbs  as  futures  ; 
they  are  optatives)  did  in  fact  amount  to  a  prophecy. 
I*  has  been  asked  why  Noah  did  not  curse  Ham, 
instead  of  cursing  Canaan.  It  might  be  sufficient 
to  reply  that  at  such  times  men  are  not  left  to 
themselves,  and  that  a  divine  purpose  as  truly 
guided  Noah's  lips  then,  as  it  did  the  hands  of 
Jacob  afterwards.  But,  moreover,  it  was  surely  by 
a  righteous  retribution  that  he,  who  as  youngest 
son  had  dishonoured  his  father,  should  see  the  curse 
light  on  the  head  of  his  own  youngest  son.  The 
blow  was  probably  heavier  than  if  it  had  lighted 
directly  on  himself.  Thus  early  in  the  world's 
history  was  the  lesson  taught  practically  which  the 
law  afterwards  expressly  enunciated,  that  God  visits 
the  sins  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children.  The 
subsequent  history  of  Canaan  shows  in  the  clearest 
manner  possible  the  fulfilment  of  the  curse.  When 
Israel  took  possession  of  his  land,  he  became  the 
slave  of  Shem :  when  Tyre  fell  before  the  arms  op 
Alexander,  and  Carthage  succumbed  to  her  Roman 
conquerors,  he  became  the  slave  of  Japhet :  and  we 
almost  hear  the  echo  of  Noah's  curse  in  Hannibal's 
Agnosco  fortunam  Carthaginis,  when  the  head  of 
Hasdrubal  his  brother  was  thrown  contemptuously 
into  the  Punic  lines.0 

It  is  uncertain  whether  in  the  words  "And  let 
him  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem,"  "  God,"  or 
"  Japhet,"  is  the  subject  of  the  verb.  At  first  it 
seems  more  natural  to  suppose  that  Noah  prays  that 
God  would  dwell  there  (the  root  of  the  verb  is  the 
same  -as  that  of  the  noun  Shechina/i).  But  the 
blessing  of  Shem  has  been  spoken  already.  It  is 
better  therefore  to  take  Japhet  as  the  subject.  What 
then  is  meant  by  his  dwelling  in  the  tents  of  Shem  ? 
Not  of  course  that  he  should  so  occupy  them  as  to 
thrust  out  the  original  possessors;  nor  even  that 
they  should  melt  into  one  people ;  but  as  it  would 
seem,  that  Japhet  may  enjoy  the  religious  privileges 
of  Shem.  So  Augustine  :  "  Latificet  Dens  Japheth 
et  habitet  in  tentoriis  Sem,  id  est,  in  Ecclesiis  quas 
filii  Prophetarum  Apostoli  construxerunt."  The 
Talmud  sees  this  blessing  fulfilled  in  the  use  of  the 
Greek  language  in  sacred  things,  such  as  the  trans 
lation  of  the  Scriptures.  Thus  Shem  is  blessed  with 
the  knowledge  of  Jehovah :  and  Japhet  with  tem 
poral  increase  and  dominion  in  the  first  instance, 
with  the  fur,  her  hope  of  sharing  afterwards  in 
spiritual  advantages.  After  this  prophetic  blessing 
we  hear  no  more  of  the  patriarch  but  the  sfcin  of  his 


•  Armenia,  it  has  been  observed,  is  still  favourable  to 
the  growth  of  the  vine.  Xenophon  (Anab.  iv.  4,  9)  speaks 
of  the  excellent  wines  of  the  country,  and  his  account 
has  teen  confirmed  in  more  recent  times  (Ritter,  Erdk. 
a.  554,  319,  &c.).  The  Greek  myth  referred  tne  discovery 


to  one  version  brought  it  from  India  (Diod.  Sic.  iii.  32), 
according  to  another  from  Phrygia  (Strabo,  x.  469).  Asia 
at  all  events  Is  the  acknowledged  home  of  the  vine. 

b  There  is  an  alliterative  play  upon  words  here  IvLJtt 
cannot  be  preserved  in  a  translation. 


snd  cultivation  of  the  vine  to  Dionysos,  who  according  |      °  See  Delitzsch,  Cc^r.'-n  in  Joe. 


c-75  NO-AMON 

yuftrs.  "  And  Noah  lived  after  the  flood  three  hun 
dred  and  fifty  years.  And  thus  all  the  days  of  Noah 
were  nine  hundred  and  fifty  years :  and  he  died." 

For  the  literature  of  this  article  the  various  com 
mentaries  on  Genesis,  especially  those  of  modem 
iite,  may  be  consulted.  Such  are  those  of  Tuch, 
1838  ;  of  Baumgarten,  1843  ;  Knobel,  1852;  Schro 
der,  1846  ;  Delitzsch,  3d  ed.  1860.  To  the  last  of 
these  especially  the  present  writer  is  much  indebted. 
Other  works  bearing  on  the  subject  more  or  less  di 
rectly  are  Lyell's  Principles  of  Geology,  1853  ; 
Pfaff's  Schdpfungs  Geschichte,  1855;  Wiseman's 
Lectures  on  Science  and  Revealed  Religion ; 
Hugh  Miller's  Testimony  of  the  Rocks.  Hardwick's 
Christ  and  other  Masters,  1857;  Miiller's  Die 
Americanischen  Urreligionen ;  Bunsen's  Bibelwcrk, 
and  Ewald's  Jahrbiicher,  have  also  been  consulted. 
The  writer  has  further  to  express  his  obligations 
both  to  Professor  Owen  and  to  Professor  Huxley, 
and  especially  to  the  latter  gentleman,  for  much 
valuable  information  on  the  scientific  questions 
touched  upon  in  this  article.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

NO'AH(ny3:  Noua:  ^Voa).  One  of  the  five 
daughters  of  Zelophehad  (Num.  xxvi.  33,  xxvii.  1, 
xxxvi.  11,  Josh.  xvii.  3). 

NO-A'MON,  NO  (jiON  N3  :  fitplj  'AWu»»' : 

Alexandria  (populorum),  Nah.  iii.  8 :  S3 :  A«5<r- 
iroAty:  Alexandria,  Jer.  xlvi.  25,  Ez.  xxx.  14,  15, 
16),  a  city  of  Egypt,  Thebae  (Thebes),  or  Dios- 
polis  Magna.  The  second  part  of  the  first  form  is 
the  name  of  AMEN,  the  chief  divinity  of  Thebes, 
mentioned  or  alluded  to  in  connexion  with  this 
place  in  Jeremiah,  "  Behold,  I  will  punish  Amon  [or 
'the  multitude,' with  reference  to  Amen']  in  No, 
and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with  their  gods,  and  their 
kings"  (I.  c.);  and  perhaps  also  alluded  to  in  Ezekiel 
(xxx.  15).  [AMON.]  The  second  part  of  the  Egyp 
tian  sacred  name  of  the  city,  HA-AMEN,  "  the 
abode  of  Amen,"  is  the  same.  There  is  a  difficulty 
as  to  the  meaning  of  No.  It  has  been  supposed,  in 
accordance  with  the  LXX.  rendering  of  No-Amon  by 
U6/HS  'A/u/xeSi',  that  the  Coptic  ItO£,>  ItOT£,» 
funis,  funiculus,  once  funis  mensorius  (Mic.  ii.  4), 
instead  of  ItOPj  ItpCOClJ.  might  indicate  that 
it  signified  "  portion,"  so  that  the  name  would 
mean  "  the  portion  of  Amon."  But  if  so,  how 
are  we  to  explain  the  use  of  No  alone'  It  thus 
occurs  not  only  in  Hebrew,  but  also  in  the  lan 
guage  of  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  in  which  it  is 
written  Ni'a,  according  to  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson 
('  Illustrations  of  Egyptian  History  and  Chronology,' 
&c.,  Trans.  Roy.  Soc.  Lit.,  2nd  Ser.  vii.  p.  166).b 
The  conjectures  that  Thebes  was  called  Tl  HI  It 
^.JULOTf  It>. "  the  abode  of  Amen,"  or,  still  nearer 
the  Hebrew,  It<L  <JJUlOYIt,  "the  [city]  of 
Amen,"  like  n<LHCI,  "  the  [city]  of  Isis,"  or, 

as  Gesenitis  prefers.  JLJL<L  ^JULOYIt?  "the 
place  of  Amen"  \Thes.  s.  v.),  are  all  liable  to  two 
serious  objections,  that  they  neither  repi«scnt  the 
Egyptian  name,  nor  afford  an  explanation  of  the  use 
of  No  alone.  It  seems  most  reasonable  to  suppose 

*  The  former  is  the  more  probable  reading,  as  the  gods 
of  Kpypt  are  mentioned  almost  immediately  after. 

b  Sir  Henry  llawlinson  identifies  Ni'a  with  No-Amon. 
The  whole  paper  (pp.  137,  seqq.)  is  of  great  importance, 
e«  illustrating  the  reference  in  Nahum  to  the  capture  of 
Thebes,  by  shewing  that  Kgypt  was  conquereil  by  both 
>r.  anil  Asshur-hanl-pal,  and  that  the  latter 


NOB 

that  No  is  a  Semitic  name,  and  that  Amon  is  .itWf>:I 
n  Nahum  (/.  c.)  to  distinguish  Thebes  from  some 
other  place  bearing  the  same  name,  or  on  account 
of  the  connection  of  Amen  with  tint  city.  Thebes 
also  bears  in  ancient  Egyptian  the  common  name, 
if  doubtful  signification,  AP-T  or  T-AP,  which  the 
j  reeks  represented  by  Thebae.  The  whole  metro 
polis,  on  both  banks  of  the  river,  was  called  TAM. 
ee  Brugsch,  Gcogr.  Inschr.  i.  pp.  175,  seqq.) 
Jerome  supposes  No  to  be  either  Alexandria  or 
Egypt  itself  (In  Jesaiam,  lib.  v.  t.  iii.  col.  125,  ed. 
Pans,  1704).  Champollion  takes  it  to  be  Dios- 
polis  in  Lower  Egypt  (L'figypte  sous  les  Pharaons, 
ii.  p.  131);  but  Gesenius  (/.  c.)  well  observes  that 
it  would  not  then  be  compared  in  Nahum  to  Nineveh. 
This  and  the  evidence  of  the  Assyrian  record  leave 
no  doubt  that  it  is  Thebes.  The  description  of 
No-Amon,  as  "  situate  among  the  rivers,  the  waters 
round  about  it"  (Nah.  I.  c.),  remarkably  charac 
terizes  Thebes,  the  only  town  of  ancient  Egypt  which 
we  know  to  have  been  built  on  both  sides  of  the  Nile ; 
and  the  prophecy  that  it  should  "  be  rent  asunder  " 
(Ez.  xxx.  16)  cannot  fail  to  appear  remarkably 
significant  to  the  observer  who  stands  amidst  the 
vast  ruins  of  its  chief  edifice,  the  great  temple  of 
Amen,  which  is  rent  and  shattered  as  if  by  an 
earthquake,  although  it  must  be  held  to  refer  pri 
marily,  at  least,  rather  to  the  breaking  up  or  capture 
of  the  city  (comp.  2  K.  xxv.  4,  Jer.  Iii.  7),  than  to 
its  destruction.  See  THEBES.  [R.  S.  P.] 

NOB  (33 :  Nofi/Sd ;  Alex.  Kofid,  exc.  Xo&dB 
1  Sam.  xxili.  11,  N<J0  Neh.  xi.  32:  Nobe,  Nob  iu 
Neh.)  was  a  sacerdotal  city  in  the  tribe  of  Benja 
min,  and  situated  on  some  eminence  near  Jerusalem. 
That  it  was  on  one  of  the  roads  which  led  from 
the  north  to  the  capital,  and  within'  sight  of  it,  is 
certain  from  the  illustrative  passage  in  which  Isaiah 
(x.  28-32)  describes  the  approach  of  the  Assyrian 
army : — 

"  He  comes  to  Al,  passes  through  Mlgron, 

At  Michmash  deposits  his  baggage ; 

They  cross  the  pass,  Geba  is  otir  night-station ; 

Terrified  is  Uamah,  Gibeah  of  Saul  flees. 

Shriek  with  thy  voice,  daughter  of  Gallim ; 

Listen,  O  Lalsh !    Ah,  poor  Anatboth  ! 

Madmenah  escapes,  dwellers  in  Gebim  take  flight.' 

Yet  this  day  he  halts  at  Nob : 

He  shakes  his  hand  against  the  mount,  daughter 
ofZ'.on, 

The  hill  of  Jerusalem." 

In  this  spirited  sketch  the  poet  sees  the  enemy 
pouring  down  from  the  north  ;  they  reach  at  length 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  devoted  city ;  they  take 
possession  of  one  village  after  another;  while  the 
inhabitants  flee  at  their  approach,  and  fill  the 
country  with  cries  of  terror  and  distress.  It  i* 
implied  here  clearly  that  Nob  was  the  last  station 
in  their  line  of  march,  whence  the  invaders  could 
see  Jerusalem,  and  whence  they  could  be  seen,  as 
they  "  shook  the  hand  "  in  proud  derision  of  their 
enemies.  Lightfoot  also  mentions  a  Jewish  tradition 
(Opp.  ii.  p.  203)  that  Jerusalem  and  Nob  stood 
within  sight  of  each  other. 

Nob  was  one  of  the  places  where  the  tabernacle, 
or  ark  of  Jehovah,  was  kept  for  a  time  during  the 
days  of  its  wanderings  before  a  home  was  provided 


twice  took  Thebes.  If  these  wars  were  after  the  prophet's 
time,  the  narrative  of  them  makes  it  more  probable  than 
it  before  seemed  that  there  was  a  still  earlier  conquest  of 
Kgypt  by  the  Assyrians. 

"  "  The  full  Idea,"  says  Gesenius,  "  is  that  they  Imnj 
off  to  conceal  Ihrir  treusim-v" 


NOB 

for  it  OE  mount  Zion  (2  Sam.  vi.  1  &c.).  A  com 
pany  ot  the  Benjamites  settled  here  after  the  return 
from  the  exile  (Neh.  xi.  32).  But  the  event  for 
which  Nob  was  most  noted  in  the  Scripture  annals, 
was  a  frightful  massacre  which  occurred  there  in 
the  reign  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxii.  1 7-19).  David  had 
fled  thither  from  the  court  of  the  jealous  king ;  and 
the  circumstances  under  which  he  had  escaped  being 
unknown,  Ahimelech,  the  high  priest  at  Nob,  gave 
him  some  of  the  shew-bread  from  the  golden  table, 
and  the  sword  of  Goliath  which  he  had  in  his  charge 
as  a  sacred  trophy.  Doeg,  an  Edomite,  the  king's 
shepherd,  who  was  present,  reported  the  affair  to 
nis  master.  Saul  was  enraged  on  hearing  that  such 
favour  had  been  shown  to  a  man  whom  he  hated  as 
a  rival ;  and  nothing  would  appease  him  but  the 
indiscriminate  slaughter  of  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Nob.  The  king's  executioners  having  refused  to 
perform  the  bloody  deed  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17),  he  said 
to  Doeg,  the  spy,  who  had  betrayed  the  un 
suspecting  Ahimelech,  "  Turn  thou,  and  fall  upon 
the  priests.  And  Doeg  the  Edomite  turned,  and 
he  fell  upon  the  priests,  and  slew  on  that  day  four 
score  and  five  persons  that  did  wear  a  linen  ephod. 
And  Nob,  the  city  of  the  priests,  smote  he  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  both  men  and  women,  children 
and  sucklings,  and  oxen,  and  asses,  and  sheep,  with 
the  edge  of  the  sword."  Abiathar,  a  son  of  Ahi 
melech,  was  the  only  person  who  survived  to  re 
count  the  sad  story. 

It  would  be  a  long  time  naturally  before  the 
doomed  city  could  recover  from  such  a  blow.  It 
appears  in  fact  never  to  have  regained  its  ancient 
importance.  The  references  in  Is.  x.  32,  and  Neh. 
*i.  32,  are  the  only  later  allusions  to  Nob  which 
we  find  in  the  0.  T.  All  trace  of  the  name  has 
disappeared  from  the  country  long  ago.  Jerome 
states  that  nothing  remained  in  his  time  to  indicate 
where  it  had  been.  Geographers  are  not  agreed  as 
to  the  precise  spot  with  which  we  are  to  identify 
the  ancient  locality.  Some  of  the  conjectures  on 
this  point  may  deserve  to  be  mentioned.  "  It  must 
have  been  situated,"  says  Dr.  Robinson  (Researches, 
vol.  i.  p.  464),  "  somewhere  upon  the  ridge  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  north-east  of  the  city.  We  sought 
all  along  this  ridge,  from  the  Damascus  road  to  the 
summit  opposite  the  city,  for  some  traces  of  an 
ancient  site  which  might  be  regarded  as  the  place 
of  Nob ;  but  without  the  slightest  success."  Kie- 
pert's  Map  places  Nob  at  El-lsdwieh,  not  far  from 
Andtd  about  a  mile  north-west  of  Jerusalem. 
Tobler  (Topographie  von  Jems.  ii.  §719)  describes 
this  village  as  beautifully  situated,  and  occupying 
unquestionably  an  ancient  site.  But  it  must  be 
regarded  as  fatal  to  this  identification  that  Jeru 
salem  is  not  to  be  seen  from  that  point.  El-lsawieh 
is  in  a  valley,  and  the  dramatic  representation  of 
the  prophet  would  be  unsuited  to  such  a  place. 
Mr.  Porter  (Handb.  ii.  324)  expresses  the  confi 
dent  belief  that  Nob  is  to  be  sought  on  a  low 
peaked  tell,  a  little  to  the  right  of  the  northern 
road  and  opposite  to  Shafat.  He  found  there 
several  cisterns  hewn  in  the  rock,  large  building 
stones,  and  various  other  indications  of  an  ancient 
town.  The  top  of  this  hill  affords  an  extensive 
view,  and  Mount  Zion  is  distinctly  seen,  though 
Moriah  and  Olivet  are  hid  by  an  intervening  ridge. 

The  Nob  spoken  of  above  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  another  which  Jerome  mentions  in  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  not  far  from  Lydda.  (See  Von  Kau- 
mer's  Palaestina,  p.  196.)  No  allusion  is  made  to 
this  latter  place  in  the  Bible.  The  Jews  after  re- 

VOL.  II. 


NODAB 


577 


covering  the  ark  of  Jehovah  from  the  Philistine* 
would  bf>  likely  to  keep  it  beyond  the  reach  of  8 
similar  disaster;  and  the  Nob  which  was  the  seat 
of  the  sanctuary  in  the  time  of  Saul,  must  have 
been  among  the  mountains.  This  Nob,  or  Niobe 
as  Jerome  writes,  now  Beit  Nuba,  could  not  be 
the  village  of  that  name  near  Jerusalem.  The 
towns  with  which  Isaiah  associates  the  place  put 
that  view  out  of  the  question.  [H.  B.  H.j 

NO'BAH(nn!l:  Naflcofl.Na/Saf;  Alex.Na£«0, 

Na/8e0 :  Noba).  The  name  conferred  by  the  con 
queror  of  KENATH  and  the  villages  in  dependence  on 
it  on  his  new  acquisition  (Num.  xxxii.  42).  For  a 
certain  period  after  the  establishment  of  the  Israelite 
rule  the  new  name  remained,  and  is  used  to  mark 
the  coui-se  taken  by  Gideon  in  his  chase  after  Zcbah 
and  Zalmunna  (Judg.  viii.  11).  But  it  is  not  again 
heard  of,  and  the  original  appellation,  as  is  usual  in 
such  cases,  appeal's  to  have  recovered  its  hold,  which 
it  has  since  retained ;  for  in  the  slightly  modified 
form  of  Kunawat  it  is  the  name  of  the  place  to  the 
present  day  (see  Onomasticon,  Nabo). 

Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  268,  note  2)  identifies  the 
Nobah  of  Gideon's  pursuit  with  Nophah  of  Num. 
xxi.  30,  and  distinguishes  them  both  from  Nobah  of 
Num.  xxxii.  42,  on  the  ground  of  their  being  men 
tioned  with  Dibon,  Medeba,  and  Jogbehah.  But  if 
Jogbehah  be,  as  he  elsewhere  (ii.  504,  note  4)  sug 
gests,  el-Jebeibeh,  between  Amman  and  es-Salt, 
there  is  no  necessity  for  the  distinction.  In  truth 
the  lists  of  Gad  and  Reuben  in  Num.  xxxii.  are  so 
confused  that  it  is  difficult  to  apportion  the  towns 
of  each  in  accordance  with  our  present  imperfect 
topographical  knowledge  of  those  regions.  Ewald 
also  (ii.  392  note)  identifies  Nobah  of  Num.  xxxii. 
42  with  Nawa  or  Neve,  a  place  15  or  16  miles  east 
of  the  north  end  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  (Ritter, 
Jordan,  356).  But  if  Kenath  and  Nobah  are  the 
same,  and  Kunawat  be  Kenath,  the  identification 
is  both  unnecessary  and  untenable. 

Eusebius  and  Jerome,  with  that  curious  disregard 
of  probability  which  is  so  puzzling  in  some  of  the 
articles  in  the  Onomasticon,  identify  Nobah  of 
Judg.  viii.  with  Nob,  "  the  city  of  the  Priests, 
afterwards  laid  waste  by  Saul"  (Onom.  No/tj8c£  and 
"  Nabbe  sive  Noba  ").  [G.] 

NO'BAH  (nib  :  Na/SaD:  Noba}.    An  Israelite 

warrior  (Num.  xxxii.  42  only),  probably,  like  Jair, 
a  Manassite,  who  during  the  conquest  of  the  terri 
tory  on  the  east  of  Jordan  possessed  himself  of  the 
town  of  Kenath  and  the  villages  or  hamlets  de 
pendent  upon  it  (Heb.  "  daughters"),  and  gave  them 
his  own  name.  According  to  the  Jewish  tradition 
(Seder  Olam  Rabba,  is.)  Nobah  was  bom  in  Egypt, 
died  after  the  decease  of  Moses,  and  was  buried 
during  the  passage  of  the  Jordan. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  form  of  the  name  in 
the  LXX.  is  the  same  as  that  given  to  Nebo.  [G.] 

NOD.    [Cxm.] 

NO'DAB  (3113  :  Na5a£a?oi :  Nodab},  the  name 
of  an  Arab  tribe  mentioned  only  in  1  Chr.  v.  19, 
in  the  account  of  the  war  of  the  Reubenites,  the 
Gadites,  and  the  half  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh, 
against  the  Hagarites  (ve.ses  9-22);  "and  they 
made  war  with  the  Hagarites,  with  Jetur,  and 
Nephish,  and  Nodab"  (ver.  19 ).  In  Gen.  xxv. 
15  and  1  Chr.  i.  31,  Jetur,  Naphish,  and  Kedo- 
mah  are  the  last  three  sons  of  Ishmaei,  and  it 
has  been  therefore  supposed  that  Nodab  also  was 

'2  1J 


578 


NOE 


tue  of  his  song.  But  we  have  no  other  mention 
cf  Nodab,  and  it  is  probable,  in  the  absence  of 
additional  evidence,  that  he  was  a  grandson  or  other 
descendant  of  the  patriarch,  and  that  the  name,  in 
the  time  of  the  record,  was  that  of  a  tribe  sprung 
from  such  descendant.  The  Hagarites,  and  Jetur, 
Nephish,  and  Nodab,  were  pastoral  people,  for  the 
Reubenites  dwelt  in  their  tents  throughout  all  the 
east  [land]  of  Gilead  (ver.  10),  and  in  the  war  a 
great  multitude  of  cattle  —  camels,  sheep,  and  asses 
—  were  taken.  A  hundred  thousand  men  were  taken 
prisoners  or  slain,  so  that  the  tribes  must  have 
been  very  numerous  ;  and  the  Israelites  "  dwelt  in 
their  steads  until  the  captivity."  If  the  Hagarites 
(or  Hagarenes)  were,  as  is  most  probable,  the  people 
who  afterwards  inhabited  Hejer  [HAGARENES], 
they  were  driven  southwards,  into  the  north-eastern 
province  of  Arabia,  bordering  the  mouths  of  the 
Euphrates,  and  the  low  tracts  surrounding  them. 
[JETUR  ;  ITURAEA  ;  NAPHISH.]  [E.  S.  P.] 

NO'E  (Nut  :  NoS).  The  patriarch  Noah  (Tob. 
iv.  12;  Matt.  xxiv.  37,  38;  Luke  iii.  36,  xvii. 
26.  27). 

NO'EBA  (NoejSet  :  Nachoba)  =  NEKODA  1 
(1  Esdr.  v.  31  ;  comp.  Ezr.  ii.  48). 

NO'GAH(P133:  Noyaf,  Uaytt:  Noge,  Nogd). 
One  of  the  thirteen  sons  of  David  who  were  born  to 
him  in  Jerusalem  (1  Chr.  iii.  7,  xiv.  6).  His 
name  is  omitted  from  the  list  in  2  Sam.  v. 

NO'HAH  (niTia  :  Had  :  Nohaa~).  The  fourth 
son  of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  viii.  2). 

NON  (  j'13  :  Votv  :  Nun).  Nun,  the  fother  of 
Joshua  (1  Chr.  vii.  27). 

NOPH,  MOPH  (5)3:  Me'^is:  Memphis,  Is. 
six.  13,  Jer.  ii.  16,  Ez.  xxx.  13,  16  ;  C)ta:  M«V<f>«: 
Memphis,  Hos.  ix.  6),  a  city  of  Egypt,  Memphis. 
These  forms  are  contracted  from  the  ancient 
Egyptian  common  name,  MEN-NUFR,  or  MEN- 
NEFRU,  "  the  good  abode,"  or  perhaps  "  the  abode 
of  the  good  one  :"  also  contracted  in  the  Coptic 

forms  juLenqi,  ju.eju.qi,  jmen&e, 

JUL€JUL&e  (M),  JULGJULqe  (S)  ;  in  the 


Greek  Men<f>is  ;  and  in  the  Arabic  Menf, 

The  Hebrew  forms  are  to  be  regarded  as  represent 
ing  colloquial  forms  of  the  name,  current  with  the 
Shemites,  if  not  with  the  Egyptians  also.  As  to 
the  meaning  of  Memphis,  Plutarch  observes  that  it 
was  interpreted  to  signify  either  the  haven  of  good 
ones,  or  the  sepulchre  of  Osiris  (<cal  rrjv  pey  ir6\iv 
ol  fjifv  op/j-ov  ayadiav  ep[ii)Vfvovfftv,  ot  5"[t8i]cos 
riLtyov  'Offlpitios,  De  hide  et  Osiride,  20).  It  is 
probable  that  the  epithet  "  good  "  refers  to  Osins, 
whose  sacred  animal  Apis  was  here  worshipped,  and 
here  had  its  burial-place,  the  Serapeum,  whence  the 
name  of  the  village  Busiris  (PA-HESAR?  "the 


NUMBSK 

"abode?]  of  Osiris"),  now  rej  resented  ii;  name,  il 
iot  in  exact  site,  by  Aboo-Seer,fc  pr<  bably  i  ngmally 
a  quarter  of  Memphis.  As  the  great  upper  Egyptian 
city  is  characterized  in  Nahum  as  "  situate  among 
the  rivers "  (iii.  8),  so  in  Hosea  the  lower  Egyptian 
one  is  distinguished  by  its  Necropolis,  in  this  passage 
as  to  the  fugitive  Israelites :  "  Mizraim  shall  gathei 
them  up,  Noph  shall  bury  them  ; "  for  its  burial 
ground,  stretching  for  twenty  miles  along  the  edge 
of  the  Libyan  desert,  greatly  exceeds  that  of  any 
other  Egyptian  town.  (See  Brugsch,  Geogr.  Inschr. 
i.  pp.  234,  seqq.,  and  MEMPHIS.)  [R.  S.  P.] 

NO'PHAH  (HB3,  Nophach ;  the  Samar.  has  th- 

article,  PISiH :  of  yvvalites,  Alex,  at  y.  afa-&t> . 
Nophe),  a  place  mentioned  only  in  Num.  xxi.  30 
in  the  remarkable  song  apparently  composed  by 
the  Amorites  after  their  conquest  of  Heshbon  from 
the  Moabites,  and  therefore  of  an  earlier  date 
than  the  Israelite  invasion.  It  is  named  with 
Dibon  and  Medeba,  and  was  possibly  in  the  neigh 
bourhood  of  Heshbon.  A  name  very  similar  to 
Nophah  is  Nobah,  which  is  twice  mentioned  ;  once 
as  bestowed  by  the  conqueror  of  the  same  name 
on  Kenath  (a  place  still  existing  more  than  70  miles 
distant  from  the  scene  of  the  Amorite  conflict),  and 
again  in  connexion  with  Jogbehah,  which  latter, 
from  the  mode  of  its  occurrence  in  Num.  xxxii.  36, 
would  seem  to  have  been  in  the  neighbourhood  ot 
Heshbon.  Ewald  ( Gesch.  ii.  268  note)  decides 
(though  without  giving  his  grounds)  that  Nophah 
is  identical  with  the  latter  of  these.  In  this  case  the 
difference  would  be  a  dialectical  one,  Nophah  being 
the  Moabite  or  Amorite  form.  [NOBAH.]  [G.] 

NOSE-JEWEL  (DT3,  pi.  constr.  »O{3 :  lv&- 
Tia. :  inaures :  A.  V.,  Gen.  xxiv.  22 ;  Ex.  xxxv.  22 
"earring;"  Is.  iii.  21 ;  Ez.  xvi.  12,  "jewel  on  the 
forehead :"  rendered  by  Theod.  and  Symm.  tiridfitviov, 
Ges.  870).  A  ring  of  metal,  sometimes  of  gold  cr 
silver,  passed  usually  through  the  right  nostril,  and 
worn  by  way  of  ornament  by  women  in  the  East. 
Its  diameter  is  usually  1  in.  or  1£  in.,  but  some 
times  as  much  as  3J  in.  Upon  it  are  strung 
beads,  coral,  or  jewels.  In  Egypt  it  is  now  almost 
confined  to  the  lower  classes.  It  is  mentioned  in 
the  Mishna,  Shabb.  vi.  1  ;  Celfm,  xi.  8.  Layard 
remarks  that  no  specimen  has  been  found  in  As 
syrian  remains.  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  51, 
232  ;  Niebuhr,  Descr.  de  I' Arab.  p.  57  ;  Voyages, 
i.  133,  ii.  56  ;  Chardin,  Voy.  viii.  200  ;  Lane,  Mod. 
Eg.  i.  78;  App.  iii.  p.  226;  Saalschiite,  Hebr. 
Arch.  i.  3,  p.  25 ;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  p.  262 
544.)  [H.W.  P.] 

NUMBER.1"  Like  most  Oriental  nations,  it  is 
probable  that  the  Hebrews  in  their  written  calcu 
lations  made  use  of  the  letters  of  the  alphabet. 
That  they  did  so  in  post^Babylonian  times  we  have 
conclusive  evidence  in  the  Maccabaean  coins ;  and 
it  is  highly  probable  that  this  was  the  case  also  111 
earlier  times,  both  from  internal  evidence,  of  which 


•  This  Arabic  name  affords  a  curious  instance  of  the 
use  of  Semitic  names  of  similar  sound  but  different  signi 
fication  in  the  place  of  names  of  other  languages. 

b  i.  1|?n,  apifyi6«,  properly  enquiry,  investigation 
CQes.  p.  515). 

2.  nDDO,  opidfios,  numenu. 

3.  *3D,  Tvxr/,  Fvrtuna,  probably  a  deity  (Ges.  p.  798) ; 
rendered  "  number,"  Is.  Ixv.  11. 

4.  P3D,  Chald.  from  same  root  as  (3). 


6.  rniQD  in  plur.  Ps.  Ixxi.  15,  irpay/ioreiiu,  litftivl 
tura. 


To  number  is  (1)  i"!3O,  dptdp.e'u>,  numero.  (2) 
Xo-yi'£o/j.ai,  t.  e.  value,  account,  as  in  Is.  xlii.  17.  In  Fiel 
count,  or  number,  which  Is  the  primary  notion  of  the 
word(GeB.  p.  631). 


NUMBER 

#.-e  sluu'  presently  speak,  and  also  from  the  practice 
>if  the  Greeks,  who  borrowed  it  with  their  earliest 
alphabet  from  the  Phoenicians,  whose  alphabet  again 
was,  witli  some  slight  variations,  the  same  as  that 
of  the  Samaritans  and  Jews  (Chardin,  Voy.  ii.  421, 
iv.  288  and  foil.,  Langles;  Thieisch,  Gr.  Gr.  §xii., 
Ixxiii.  pp.  23,  153;  Jelf,  Gr.  Gr.  i.  3;  Miiller, 
Etrusher,  ii.  31  7, 321 ;  Eng.  Cycl,  "  Coins,"  "  Nu 
meral  Characters ;"  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  91 ;  Donald- 
ton,  New  Cratylus,  pp.  146,  151 ;  Winer,  Zahlen). 
But  though,  on  the  one  baud,  it  is  certain  that  in 
all  existing  MSS.  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  0.  T.  the 
numerical  expressions  are  written  at  length  (Lee, 
Hebr.  Gram.  §§19,  22),  yet,  on  the  other,  the  vari 
ations  in  the  several  versions  between  themselves 
and  from  the  Hebrew  text,  added  to  the  evident 
inconsistencies  in  numerical  statement  between  cer 
tain  passages  of  that  text  itself,  seem  to  prove  that 
some  shorter  mode  of  writing  was  originally  in 
vogue,  liable  to  be  misunderstood,  and  in  fact  mis 
understood  by  copyists  and  translators.  The  fol 
lowing  may  serve  as  specimens: — 

1.  In  2  K.  xxiv.  8  Jehoiachin  is  said  to  have 
been  18  years  old,  but  in  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  9  the  num 
ber  given  is  8. 

2.  In  Is.  vii.  8  Vitringa  shows  that  for  threescore 
and  five  one  reading  gives  sixteen  and  five,  the  letter 
jod  *  (10)  after  shesh  (6)  having  been  mistaken  for 
the  Rabbinical  abbreviation  by  omission  of  the  mem 
from  the  plural  shishim,  which  would  stand  for 
sixty.     Six  +  ten  was  thus  converted  into  sixty  -f- 
ten. 

3.  In  1  Sam.  vi.  19  we  have  50,070,  but  the 
Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  have  5070. 

4.  In  1  K.  iv.  26  we  read  that  Solomon  had 
40,000  stalls  for  chariot-horses,  but  4000  only  in 
•i.  Chr.  ix.  25. 

5.  The  letters  vaw  (6)  and  zayin  (7)  appear  to 
have  been  interchanged  in  some  readings  of  Gen. 
ii.  2. 

These  variations,  which  are  selected  from  a  copious 
list  given  by  Glass  (De  Caussis  Corruptionis,  i. 
§23,  vol.  ii.  p.  188,  ed.  Dathe),  apperj  to  have  pro 
ceeded  from  the  alphabetic  method  of  writing  num 
bers,  in  which  it  is  easy  to  see  how,  e.  g.,  such 
letters  as  vau  0)  ami  jod  0),  nun  O)  and  caph  (3), 
may  have  been  confounded  and  even  sometimes 
omitted.  The  final  letters  also,  which  were  un 
known  to  the  early  Phoenician  or  Samaritan  alpha 
bet,  were  used  as  early  as  the  Alexandrian  period  to 
denote  hundreds  between  500  and  1000.° 

But  whatever  ground  these  variations  may  afford 
for  reasonable  conjecture,  it  is  certain,  from  the  fact 
mentioned  above,  that  no  positive  rectification  of 
them  can  at  present  be  established,  more  especially 
as  there  is  so  little  variation  in  the  numbers  quoted 
from  the  0.  T.,  both  in  N.  T.  and  in  the  Apocrypha ; 
e.g.  (1)  Num.  xxv.  9,  quoted  1  Cor.  x.  8.  (2)  Ex. 
xii.  40,  quoted  Gal.  iii.  17.  (3)  Fz.  xvi.  35  and 
Ps.  xcv.  10,  quoted  Acts  xiii.  1'?.  (4)  Gen.  xvii.  1, 
quoted  Rom.  iv.  19.  (5)  Nura.  i.  46,  quoted 
Ecclus.  xvi.  10. 

Josephus  also  in  the  main  agrees  in  his  state 
ments  of  numbers  with  our  existing  copies. 

There  can  be  little  doubt,  however,  as  was  re 
marked  by  St.  Augustine  (Civ.  D.  x.  13,  §1),  that 
some  at  least  of  the  numbers  mentioned  in  Scripture 
are  intended  to  be  representative  rather  than  deter 
minative.  Certain  numbers,  as  7,  10,  40,  100, 
vere  regarded  as  giving  the  idea  of  completeness. 

c  "I  «'ei v>l«8  500,  Q  600,  }  700,  S)  800,  ^  900. 


NUMBEB 


579 


Without  entering  into  his  theory  of  this  usage,  w« 
may  remark  that  the  notion  of  representative  Lum 
bers  in  certain  cases  is  one  extremely  common  among 
Eastern  nations,  who  have  a  prejudice  against  count, 
ing  their  possessions  accurately ;  that  it  en  tew  largely 
into  many  ancient  systems  of  chronology,  and  that 
it  is  found  in  the  philosophical  and  metaphysical 
speculations  not  only  of  the  Pythagorean  and  othei 
ancient  schools  of  philosophy,  both  Greek  and  Ro 
man,  but  also  in  those  of  the  later  Jewish  writers, 
of  the  Gnostics,  and  also  of  such  Christian  writers 
as  St.  Augustine  himself  (August.  De  Doctr.  Christ. 
ii.  16,  25  ;  Civ.  D.  xv.  30 ;  Philo,  DcMund.  Opif. 
i.  21 ;  De  Abrah.  ii.  5 ;  De  Sept.  Num.il  281,  ed. 
Mangey ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  5,  §5  ;  Mishna,  Pirke 
Abotli,  v.  7,  8;  Irenaeus,  i.  3,  ii.  1,  v.  29,  30; 
Hieronym.  Com.  in  Is.  iv.  1,  vol.  jv.  p.  72,  ed. 
Migne  ;  Arist.  Metaphys.  i.  5, 6,  xii.  6,  8  ;  Ael/an, 
V.  H.  iv.  17  ;  Varro,  ffebdom.  fragm.  i.  p.  255,  ed. 
Bipont. ;  Niebuhr,  Hist,  of  Home,  ii.  72,  ed.  Hare ; 
Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Arabia,  i.  75 ;  Syria,  p.  560, 
comp.  with  Gen.  xiii.  16  and  xxii.  17  ;  also  see  papers 
on  Hindoo  Chronology  in  Sir  W.  Jones's  Works, 
Suppl.  vol.  ii.  pp.  968,  1017). 

We  proceed  to  give  some  instances  of  numbers 
used  a.  representatively,  and  thus  probably  by 
design  indefinitely,  or  6.  definitely,  but,  as  ws  may 
say  preferentially,  i.e.,  because  some  meaning  (which 
we  do  not  in  all  cases  understand)  was  attached  to 
them. 

1.  Seven,  as  denoting  either  plurality  or  com 
pleteness,  is  so  frequent  as  to  make  a  selection  only 
of  instances  necessary,    e.  g.  seven-fold,   Gen.  iv. 
24;  seven  times,  i.  e.  completely,  Lev.    xxvi.  24; 
Ps.  xii.  6  ;  seven  (i.e.  many)  way's,  Deut.  xxviii.  25. 
See  also  1  Sam.  ii.  5 ;  Job  v.  19,  where  six  also  is 
used;  Prov.  vi.  16,  ix.  1;  Eccl.  xi.  2,  where  eight 
also  is  named ;    Is.  iv.  1  ;    Jer.  xv.  9  ;    Mic.  v.  5 ; 
also  Matt.  xii.  45,  seven  spirits  ;  Mark  xvi.  9,  seven 
devils;    Rev.   iv.    5,  seven  Spirits,  xv.   1,  seven 
plagues.      Otho,   Lex.  Rabb.   p.  411,  says    that 
Scripture  uses  seven  to  denote  plurality.    "See  also 
Christian  authorities  quoted  by  Suicer,  Thcs.  Eccl. 
s.  v.  e/35o/ios,  Hofmann,  Lex.  s.  v.  "  Septem,"  and 
the  passages  quoted  above  from  Varro,  Aristotle, 
and  Aelian,  in  reference  to  the  heathen  value  for 
the  number  7. 

2.  Ten  as  a  preferential  number  is  exemplified 
in  the  Ten  Commandments  and  the  law  of  Tithe. 
It  .plays  a  conspicuous  part  in   the  later   Jewish 
ritual  code.     See  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  410. 

3.  Seventy,  as  compounded  of  7  X  10,  appears 
frequently,  e.g.,  seventy  fold  (Gen.  iv.  24;  Matt. 
xviii.  22).     Its  definite  use  appears  in  the  offering!. 
of  70  shekels  (Num.  vii.  13,  19,  and  foil.);  the 
70   elders  (xi.  16)  ;    70   years  of  captivity  (Jer. 
xxv.  1 1).    To  these  may  be  added  the  70  descendants 
of  Noah  (Gen.  x.),  and  the  alleged  Rabbinical  quali 
fication  for  election  to  the  office  of  Judge  among 
the  71   members  of  the  Great  Sanhedrim,  of  the 
knowledge  of  70  languages  (Sank.  ii.  6  ;  and  Carp- 
zov,  App.  Bibl.  p.  576).     The  number  of  72  trans 
lators  may  perhaps  also  be  connected  with  the  same 
idea. 

4.  Five  appears  in  the  table  of  punishments,  of 
legal  requirements  (Ex.  xxii.  1 ;    Lev.  v.    16,  xxii. 
14,  xxvii.   15;  Num.  v.  7,  xviii.  16),  and  in  the 
five  empires  of  Daniel  (Dan.  ii.). 

5.  Four  is  used  in  reference  to  the  4  winds  (Dan. 
vii.  2) ;  and  the  so-called  4  corners  of  the  earth  ; 
the  4  creatures,  each  with  4  wings  and  4  faces,  of 
Ezekiel  (i.  5  and  foil.) ;  4  river*  of  Parsulige  (Gen 

2  P  2 


ceo 


NUMBERING 


ii.  10)  ;  4  beasts  (Dan.  vii.,  and  Rev.  iv.  6);  the 
4  equal-sided  Temple-chamber  (Ez.  xl.  47). 

6.  Three  was  regarded,  both  by  the  Jews  and 
ether  nations,  ^as  a  specially  complete  and  mjrstic 
number  (Plato,  De  Leg.  iv.  p.  715  ;  Dionys.  Halic. 
iii.  c.  12).     It  appears  in  many  instances  in  Scrip 
ture  as  a  definite  number,  e.  g.  3  feasts  (Ex.  xxiii. 
14,  17;  Deut.  xvi.  16),  the  triple  offering  of  the 
Nazarite,  and  the  triple  blessing  (Num.  vi.  14,  24), 
the  triple  invocation  (Is.  vi.  3;  Rev.  i.  4),  Daniel's 
3  hours  of  prayer  (Dan.  vi.  10,  comp.  Ps.  Iv.  17), 
the  third  heaven,  (2  Cor.  jui.  2),  and  the  thrice- 
repeated  vision  (Acts  x.  16). 

7.  Twelve  (3  X  4)  appears  in  12  tribes,  12  stones 
in  the  high-priest's  breast-plate,   12  Apostles,  12 
foundation-stones,  and  12  gates  (Rev.  xxi.  19-21)  ; 
12,000  furlongs  of  the  heavenly  city  (Rev.  jcri.  16)  ; 
144,000  sealed  (Rev.  vii.  4). 

8.  Forty  appears  in  many  enumerations  ;  40  days 
jf  Moses  Ez.  (zziv.  18)  ;  40  years  in  the  wilder 
ness  (Num.  xiv.  34)  ;  40  days  and  nights  of  Elijah 

1  K.  xix.  8)  ;  40  days  of  Jonah's  warning  to  Nineveh 
Jon.  iii.  4)  ;  40  days  of  temptation  (Matt.  iv.  2). 
Add  to  these  the  very  frequent  use  of  the  number 
40  in  regnal  years,  and  in  political  or  other  periods 
(Judg.  iii.  11,  ziii.  1  ;  1  Sam.  iv.  18  ;  2  Sam.  v.  4, 
rv.  7;  1  K.  zi.  42;  Ez.  zziz.  11,  12;  Acts 
xiii.  21). 

9.  One  hundred.  —  100  cubits'  length  of  the  Taber 
nacle-court  (Ex.  xxvii.  18)  ;  100  men,  i.  e.  a  large 
number  (Lev,  xxvi.  8)  ;  Gideon's  300  men  (Judg. 
vii.  6)  ;  the  selection  «f  10  out  of  every  100,  (xx. 
10)  ;  100  men  (2  K.  iv.  43)  ;  leader  of  100  men 
(1  Chr.  xii.  14)  ;   100  stripes  (Prov.  zvii.   10)  ; 
100  times  (Eccl.  viii.  12)  ;  100  children  (vi.  3)  ; 
100  cubits'  measurements  in  Ezekiel's  Temple  (Ez. 
xl.,  xli.,  xlii.)  ;  100  sheep  (Matt,  xviii.  12)  ;    100 
pence  (Matt,  xviii.  28)  ;    100  measures  of  oil  or 
wheat  (Luke  zvi.  6,  7). 

10.  Lastly,  the  mystic  number  666  (Rev.  xiii.  18), 
of  which  the  earliest  attempted  explanation  is  the 
conjecture  of  Irenaeus,  who  of  three  words,  Euauthas, 
Lateinos,  and  Teitan,  prefers  the  last  as  fulfilling  ite 
conditions  best.     (For  various  other  interpretations 
see  Calmet,  Whitby,  and  Irenaeus,  De  Antichrist. 
v.  c.  29,  30). 

It  is  evident,  on  the  one  hand,  that  whilst  the 
representative,  and  also  the  typical  character  of 
certain  numbers  must  be  maintained  (e.  g.,  Matt. 
xix.  28),  there  is,  on  the  other,  the  greatest  danger 
of  over-straining  any  particular  theory  on  the 
subject,  and  of  thus  degenerating  into  that  subtle 
trifling,  from  which  neither  the  Gnostics,  nor  some 
also  of  their  orthodox  opponents  were  exempt  (see 
Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  vi.  c.  11,  p.  782,  ed.  Potter 
and  August.  /.  c.),  and  of  which  the  Rabbinical 
writings  present  such  striking  instances.  [OHHO- 
NOLOGY,  CENSUS.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

NUMBERING.    [CENSUS.] 
NUMBERS  OS}?!,  from  the  first  word  ;   or 
,  from   the  words  WO  "O"1O3,  in  i.  1  : 


i  :  Numeri  :  called  also  by  the  later  Jews 
ISO,  or  Dnipan),  the  Fourth  Book 
of  the  Law  or  Pentateuch.  It  takes  its  name  in 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  (whence  our  '  Numbers  ') 
from  the  double  numbering  or  census  of  the  people  ; 
the  first  of  which  is  given  in  chaps,  i.-iv.,  and  the 
oecond  in  chap.  xxvi. 

A.  Contents.  —  The  Book  may  be  said  to  contain 
generally  the  history  of  the  Israelites  from  the  time 


NUMBERS 

of  their  leaving  Sinai,  in  the  second  year  after  the 
Exodus,  till  their  arrival  at  the  borders  of  the  Pro 
mised  Land  in  the  fortieth  year  of  their  jouraeyiugs. 
It  consists  of  the  following  principal  divisions : — 

I.  The  preparations  for  the  departure  from  Sinai 
(i.  t-x.  1C). 

II.  The  journey  from  Sinai    to  the  borders  of 
Canaan  (x.  11-xiv.  45). 

III.  A  brief  notice  of  laws   given,  and  events 
which   transpired,  during   the  thirty-seven   years' 
wandering  in  the  wilderness  (zv.  1-xix.  22). 

IV.  The  history  of  the  last  year,  from  the  second 
arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  Kadesh  till  they  reach 
"  the  plains  of  Moab  by  Jordan  near  Jericho  "  (zz. 
1-zzzvi.  13). 

I.  (a.)  The  object  of  the  encampment  at  Sinai  has 
been  accomplished.     The  Covenant  has  been  made, 
the  Law  given,  the  Sanctuary  set  up,  the  Priests 
consecrated,  the  service  of  God  appointed,  and  Je 
hovah  dwells  in  the  midst  of  His  chosen  people.     It 
is  now  time  to  depart  in  order  that  the  object  may 
be  achieved  for  which  Israel  has  been  sanctified. 
That  object  is  the  occupation  of  the  Promised  Land. 
But  this  is  not  to  be  accomplished  by  peaceable 
means,  but  by  the  forcible  expulsion  of  its  present  in 
habitants  ;  for  "  the  iniquity  of  the  Amorites  is  full," 
they  are  ripe  for  judgment,  and  this  judgment 
Israel  is  to  execute.     Therefore  Israel  must  be  or 
ganized  as  Jehovah's  army :  and  to  this  end  a  mus 
tering  of  all  who  are  capable  of  bearing  aims  is 
necessary.     Hence  the  book  opens  with  the  num 
bering  of  the  people,*  chapters  i.-iv.     These  con 
tain,  first,  the  census  of  all  the  tribes  or  clans, 
amounting  in  all  to  six  hundred  and  three  thousand, 
five  hundred  and  fifty,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Levites,  who  were  not  numbered  with  the  rest  (chap, 
i.)  ;  secondly,  the  arrangement  of  the  camp,  and  the 
order  of  march  (chap,  ii.);  thirdly,  the  special  and 
separate  census  of  the  Levites,  who  are  claimed  by 
God  instead  of  all  the  first-born,  the  three  families 
of  the  tribe  having  their  peculiar  offices  in  the  Taber 
nacle  appointed  them,  both  when  it  was  at  rest  and 
when  they  were  on  the  march  (chaps,  iii.,  iv.). 

(6.)  Chapters  v.,  vi.  Certain  laws  apparently 
supplementary  to  the  legislation  in  Leviticus ;  the 
removal  of  the  unclean  from  the  camp  (v.  1-4) ; 
the  law  of  restitution  (v.  5-10) ;  the  trial  of  jea 
lousy  (v.  11-31),  the  law  of  the  Nazarites  (vi. 
1-21)  ;  the  form  of  the  priestly  blessing  (vi.  22-27). 

(c)  Chapters  vii.  1-x.  10.  Events  occurring  at 
this  time,  and  regulations  connected  with  them. 
Chap.  vii.  gives  an  account  of  the  offerings  of 
the  princes  of  the  different  tribes  at  the  dedica 
tion  of  the  Tabernacle ;  chap.  viii.  of  the  con 
secration  of  the  Levites  (ver.  89  of  chap,  vii.,  and 
verses  1-4  of  chap.  viii.  seem  to  be  out  of  place) ; 
chap.  ix.  1-14,  of  the  second  observance  of  the 
Passover  (the  first  in  the  wilderness)  on  the  14th 
day  of  the  second  month,  and  of  certain  provisions 
made  to  meet  the  case  of  those  who  by  reason  of 
defilement  were  unable  to  keep  it.  Lastly,  chap, 
ix.  15-23,  tells  how  the  cloud  and  the  fire  regulated 
the  march  and  the  encampment ;  and  x.  1-10,  how 
two  silver  trumpets  were  employed  to  give  the 
signal  for  public  assemblies,  for  war,  and  for  festal 
occasions. 

II.  March  from  Sinai  to  the  borders  of  Canaan. 

(a.)  We  have  here,  first,  the  order  of  inarch  de 
scribed  (x.  14-28);  the  appeal  of  Moses  to  hie 
father-in-law,  Hobab,  to  accompany  them  in  their 
journeys  ;  a  request  urged  probably  because,  from  hit 

•  See  Kurt*,  Getch.  da  Alton  Bttndet.  ii.  :m. 


NUMBERS  NUMBERS  6tJj 

desert  life,  he  would  be  well  acquainted  with  the  within  the  Edomite  territory,  whilst  it  migl  t  hart 
beet  spots  to  encamp  in,  and  also  would  have  in-  been  perilous  for  a  larger  number  to  attei  ipt  to 
flumce  with  the  various  wandering  and  predatory  penetrate  it,  these  unarmed  wayfarers  would  not  bt 
tribes  who  inhabited  the  peninsula  (29-32);  and  the  molested,  or  might  escape  detection.  Bunsen  sug- 
ihjint  which  accompanied  the  moving  and  the  gests  that  Aaron  was  taken  to  Mount  Hor,  in  tht 
resting  of  the  ark  (vers.  35,  36).  I  hope  that  the  fresh  air  of  the  mountain  might  be 

(6.)  An  account  of  several  of  the  stations  and  of  beneficial  to  his  recovery ;  but  the  narrative  does 
the  events  which  happened  at  them.  The  first  was  not  justify  such  a  supposition, 
at  Taberah,  where,  because  of  their  impatient  mur- I  After  Aaron's  death,  the  march  is  continued 
murings,  several  of  the  people  were  destroyed  by  southward  ;  but  when  the  Israelites  approach  the 
lightning  (these  belonged  chiefly,  it  would  seem,  head  of  the  Akabah  at  the  southernmost  point  of  the 
to  the  motley  multitude  which  came  out  of  Egypt  Edomite  territory,  they  again  murmur  by  reason 
with  the  Israelites)  ;  the  loathing  of  the  people  tor  of  the  roughness  of  the  way,  and  many  perish  by 
the  manna  ;  the  complaint  of  Moses  that  he  cannot  the  bite  of  venomous  serpents  (xx.  22-xxi.  9).  The 
bear  the  burden  thus  laid  upon  him,  and  the  ap-  passage  (xxi.  1-3)  which  speaks  of  the  Canaanite 
pointment  in  consequence  of  seventy  elders  to  serve  king  of  Arad  as  coming  out  against  the  Israelites  is 
and  help  him  in  his  office  (xi.  10-29) ;  the  quails  clearly  out  of  place,  standing  as  it  does  after  the 
sent,  and  the  judgment  following  thereon,  which  mention  of  Aaron's  death  on  Mount  Hor.  Arad  is 
gave  its  name  to  the  next  station,  Kibroth-hat-  |  in  the  south  of  Palestine.  The  attack  therefore 
taavah  (the  graves  of  lust),  xi.  31-35  (cf.  Ps.  i  must  have  been  made  whilst  the  people  were  yet  in 
Ixxxviii.  30,  31,  cvi.  14,  15)  ;  arrival  at  Hazeroth,  i  the  neighbourhood  of  Kadesh.  The  mention  of 
where  Aaron  and  Miriam  are  jealous  of  Moses,  and  Hormah  also  shows  that  this  must  have  been  the 
Miriam  is  in  consequence  smitten  with  leprosy  (xii.  ,  case  (comp.  xiv.  45).  It  is  on  this  second  occasion 
1-15)  ;  the  sending  of  the  spies  from  the  wilderness  \  that  the  name  of  Hormah  is  said  to  have  been  given, 
of  Paran  (et  Tyh),  their  report,  the  refusal  of  the  j  Either  therefore  it  is  used  proleptically  in  xiv.  45,  or 
people  to  enter  Canaan,  their  rejection  in  conse-  there  is  some  confusion  in  the  narrative.  What 


quence,  and  their  rash  attack  upon  the  Amalekites, 
which  resulted  in  a  defeat  (xii.  16-xiv.  45). 

III.  What  follows  must  be  referred  apparently 
to  the  thirty-seven  years  of  wanderings ;   but  we 


"  the  way  of  Atharim  "  (A.  V.  "  the  way  of  the 
spies  ")  was,  we  have  no  means  now  of  ascertaining. 
(6.)  There  is  again  a  gap  in  the  narrative.     We 
are  told  nothing  of  the  march  along  the  eastern  edge 


have  no  notices  of  time  or  place.  We  have  laws  |  of  Edom,  but  suddenly  find  ourselves  transported 
respecting  the  meat  and  drink  offerings,  and  other  j  to  the  borders  of  Moab.  Here  the  Israelites  suc- 
sacrilices  (xv.  1-31)  ;  an  account  of  the  punishment ;  cessively  encounter  and  defeat  the  kings  of  the 
of  a  Sabbath-breaker,  perhaps  as  an  example  of  the  j  Amorites  and  of  Bashan,  wresting  from  them  their 
presumptuous  sins  mentioned  in  vers.  30,  31  (xv.  |  territory  and  permanently  occupying  it  (xii.  10-35). 
32-36) ;  the  direction  to  put  fringes  on  their  gar-  j  Their  successes  alarm  the  king  of  Moab,  who,  dis- 
ments  as  mementos  (xv.  37-41) ;  the  history  of  the  i  trusting  his  superiority  in  the  field,  sends  for  a  ma- 
rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  and  the  i  gician  to  curse  his  enemies ;  hence  the  episode  of 
murmuring  of  the  people  (xvi.)  ;  the  budding  of  |  Balaam  (xxii.  1-xxiv.  25).  Other  artifices  are  em- 
Aaron's  rod  as  a  witness  that  the  tribe  of  Levi  was  !  ployed  by  the  Moabites  to  weaken  the  Israelites, 
chosen  (xvii.)  ;  the  direction  that  Aaron  and  his  sons  j  especially  through  the  influence  of  the  Moabitish 
should  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  people,  and  the  duties  j  women  (xxv.  1),  with  whom  the  Midianites  (ver.  6) 
of  the  priests  and  Levites  (xviii.)  ;  the  law  of  the  i  are  also  joined  ;  this  evil  is'  averted  by  the  zeal  of 


water  of  purification  (xix.). 

IV.  (a.)  The  narrative  returns  abruptly  to  the 
second  encampment  of  the  Israelites  in  Kadesh. 
Here  Miriam  dies,  and  the  people  murmur  for 
water,  and  Moses  and  Aaron,  "  speaking  unad 
visedly,"  are  not  allowed  to  enter  the  Promised 
Land  (xx.  1-13).  They  intended  perhaps,  as  before, 
to  enter  Canaan  from  the  south.  This,  however, 
was  not  to  be  permitted.  They  therefore  desired  a 
passage  through  the  country  of  Edom.  Moses  sent 
a  conciliatory  message  to  the  king,  asking  permis 
sion  to  pass  through,  and  promising  carefully  to 
abstain  from  all  outrage,  and  to  pay  for  the  provi 
sions  which  they  might  find  necessary.  The  jealousy, 
however,  of  this  fierce  and  warlike  people  was 
araused.  They  refused  the  request,  and  turned  out 
in  arms  to  defend  their  border.  And  as  those  almost 
inaccessible  mountain-passes  could  have  been  held  by 
a  mere  handful  of  men  against  a  large  and  well- 
trained  army,  the  Israelites  abandoned  the  attempt 
as  hopeless  and  turned  southwards,  keeping  along 
the  western  borders  of  Idumaea  till  they  reached 
Kzion-gebcr  (xx.  14-21). 

Ou  their  way  southwards  they  stop  at  Mount 


Phinehas  (xxv.  7,  8) ;  a  second  numbering  of  the  Is 
raelites  takes  place  in  the  plains  of  Moab  preparatory 
to  their  crossing  the  Jordan  (xxvi.).  A  question  arises 
as  to  the  inheritance  of  daughters,  and  a  decision  is 
given  thereon  (xxvii.  1-11)  ;  Moses  is  warned  of  his 
death,  and  Joshua  appointed  to  succeed  him  (xxvii. 
1 2-23).  Certain  laws  are  given  concerning  the  daily 
sacrifice,  and  the  offerings  tor  sabbaths  and  festivals 
(xxviii.,  xxix.) ;  and  the  law  respecting  vows  (xxx.)  ; 
the  conquest  of  the  Midianites  is  narrated  (xxxi.)  ; 
and  the  partition  of  the  countiy  east  of  the  Jordan 
among  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  and  the  half 
tribe  of  Manasseh  (xxxii.).  Then  follows  a  recapitu 
lation,  though  with  some  difference,  of  the  various 
encampments  of  the  Israelites  in  the  desert  (xxxiii. 
1-49) ;  the  command  to  destroy  the  Canaanites, 
(xxxiii.  50-56) ;  the  boundaries  of  the  Promised 
Land,  and  the  men  appointed  to  divide  it  (xxxiv.)  ; 
the  appointment  of  the  cities  of  the  Levites  and  the 
cities  of  refuge  (xxxv.)  ;  further  directions  respect 
ing  heiresses,  with  special  reference  to  the  case 
mentioned  in  chap,  xxvn.,  and  conclusion  of  the 
book  (xxxvi.). 

B.  Integrity. — This,  like  the  other  books  of  ths 


Hor,  or   rather  at  Moserah,   on    the  edge  of  the  I  Pentateuch,  is  supposed  by  many  critics  to  consist 
Edomite  territory;  and  from  this  spot  it  would  j  of  a  compilation  from  two  or  three,  or  more,  earlier 


seem  that  Aaron,  accompanied  by  his  brother  Moses 
and  his  son  Eleazar,  quitted  the  camp  in  order  to 
ascend  the  mountain  Mount  Hor  lying  itself 


documents.  According  to  De  Wette,  the  following 
portions  are  the  work  of  the  Elohist  [PENTA 
TEUCH]: — Chap.  i.  1-r.  28;  xiii.  2-16  (in  its  on- 


582 


NUMliEUS 


£inal,  though  not  in  its  present  form) ;  xv. ;  xvi.  I, 
•2-11,  16-23.  24^?);  xvii.-xix.;  xx.  1-13,  22-29; 
xxv.-xxxi.  (except  perhaps  xxvi.  8-11);  xxxii.  5, 
28-42  (vers.  1-4  uncertain);  xxxiii.-xxxvi.  The 
rest  of  the  book  is,  according  to  him,  by  the 
Jehovist  or  later  editor.  Vou  Lengerke  (Kenaan, 
t.  Ixxxi.)  and  StHhelin  (§23)  make  a  similar  divi 
sion,  though  they  differ  as  to  some  verses,  and  even 
whole  chapters.  Vaihinger  (in  Herzog's  Encyclo- 
pafiie,  art.  "  Pentateuch  ")  finds  traces  of  three  dis 
tinct  documents,  which  he  ascribes  severally  to  the 


xxxii.  33-42 ;  xxxiii.  55,  56.  To  the  Elohist  be 
long  chap.  i.  1-x.  28;  xi.  1-xii.  16;  xiii.  1-xx. 
13;  xx.  22-29;  xxi.  10-12;  xxi:.  1 ;  xxv.  1-xxxi. 
54 ;  xxxii.  1-32 ;  xxxiii.  1-xxxvi.  19.  To  the 
Jehovist,  xi.  1-xii.  16  (iiberarbeitet) ;  xxii.  2-xxiv, 
25;  xxxi.  8,  &c. 

But  the  grounds  on  which  this  distinction  of 
documents  rests  are  in  every  respect  most  unsatis 
factory.  The  use  of  the  divine  names,  which  was 
the  starting-point  of  this  criticism,  ceases  to  be  a 
criterion;  and  certain  words  and  phrases,  a  par 
ticular  manner  or  colouring,  the  narrative  of 
miracles  or  prophecies,  are  supposed  to  decide  whe 
ther  a  passage  belongs  to  the  earlier  or  the  later 
document.  Thus,  for  instance,  Stahelin  alleges  as 
reasons  for  assigning  chaps,  xi.  xii.  to  the  Jehovist, 
the  coming  down  of  Jehovah  to  speak  with  Moses, 
xi.  17,  25;  the  pillar  of  a  cloud,  xii.  5 ;  the  rela 
tion  between  Joshua  and  Moses,  xi.  28,  as  in  Ex. 
xxxiii.  xxxiv. ;  the  seventy  elders,  xi.  16,  as  Ex. 
xxiv.  1,  and  so  on.  So  again  in  the  Jehovistic 
section,  xiii.  xiv.,  he  finds  traces  of  "  the  author  oi 
the  First  Legislation"  in  one  passage  (xiii.  2-17), 
because  of  the  use  of  the  word  HDD,  signifying 
"  a  tribe,"  and  K*5J>3,  as  in  Num.  i.  and  vii.  But 
N*B>3  is  used  also  by  the  supposed  supplementist, 
as  in  Ex.  xxii.  27,  xxxiv.  31 ;  and  that  Ht3D  is  not 
peculiar  to  the  older  documents  has  been  shown  by 
Keil  (CWm.  on  Joshua,  s.  xix.).  Von  Lengerke  goes 
still  further,  and  cuts  off  xiii.  2-16  altogether  from 
what  follows.  He  thus  makes  the  story  of  the 
spies,  as  given  by  the  Elohist,  strangely  maimed. 
We  only  hear  of  their  being  sent  to  Canaan,  bul 
nothing  of  their  return  and  their  report.  The  chiei 
reason  for  this  separation  is  that  in  xiii.  27  occurs 
the  Jehovistic  phrase,  "  flowing  with  milk  and 
honey,"  and  some  references  to  other  earlier  Jeho 
vistic  passages.  De  Wette  again  finds  a  repetition 
in  xiv.  26-38  of  xiv.  11-25,  and  accordingly  gives 
these  passages  to  the  Elohist  and  Jehovist  respec 
tively.  This  has  more  colour  of  probability  about 
it,  but  has  been  answered  by  Ranke  (  Untersuch.  ii. 
*.  197  ff.).  Again,  chap.  xvi.  is  supposed  to  be  a 
combination  of  two  different  accounts,  the  original 
or  Elohistic  document  having  contained  only  the 
story  of  the  rebellion  of  Korah  and  his  company, 
whilst  the  Jehovist  mixed  up  with  it  the  insurrec 
tion  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  which  was  directed 
rather  against  the  temporal  dignity  than  againsl 
the  spiritual  authority  of  Moses.  But  it  is  against 
this  view,  that,  in  order  to  justify  it,  verses  12, 14, 
27,  and  32,  arc  treated  as  interpolations.  Besides, 
the  discrepancies  which  it  is  alleged  have  arisen 
from  the  fusing  of  the  two  narratives  disappeai 
when  fairly  looked  at.  There  is  no  contradiction, 
for  instance,  between  xvi.  19,  where  Koiah  appeai-s 
at  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  and  ver.  27, 
where  Dathan  and  Abiram  stand  at  the  door  ol 


NUMJERS 

their  tents.  In  the  last  passage  Korah  is  no*  m«u 
tioned,  and,  even  if  we  suppose  him  to  be  inclndcj 
the  narrative  allows  time  for  his  having  left  th« 
Tabernacle  and  returned  to  his  own  tent.  Nor 
again,  does  the  statement,  ver.  35,  that  the  250 
men  who  offered  incense  were  destroyed  by  fire, 
and  who  had,  as  we  learn  from  ver.  2,  joined  the 
leaders  of  the  insurrection,  Korah,  Dathan,  and 
Abiram,  militate  against  the  narrative  in  ver.  32, 
according  to  which  Dathan  and  Abiram  and  all  that 
appertained  unto  Korah  were  swallowed  up  alive 
by  the  opening  of  the  earth.  Further,  it  is  clear, 
as  Keil  remarks  (Einleit.  94),  that  the  earlier 
document  (die  Grundschriff)  implies  that  persons 
belonging  to  the  other  tribes  were  mixed  up  in 
Korah's  rebellion,  because  they  say  to  Moses  and 
Aaron  (ver.  3),  "  All  the  congregation  is  holy,'' 
which  justifies  the  statement  in  vers.  1,  2,  that, 
besides  Korah  the  Levite,  the  Reubenites  Dathan, 
Abiram,  and  On,  were  leaders  of  the  insurrection. 

In  chap.  xii.  we  have  a  remarkable  instance  of 
the  jealousy  with  which  the  authority  of  Moses 
was  regarded  even  in  his  own  family.  Considering 
the  almost  absolute  nature  of  that  authority,  this 
is  perhaps  hardly  to  be  wondered  at.  On  the  other 
hand,  as  we  are  expressly  reminded,  there  was 
everything  in  his  personal  character  to  disarm 
jealousy.  "  Now  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek 
above  all  the  men  which  were  upon  the  face  of  the 
earth,". says  the  historian  (ver.  3).  The  pretext  for 
the  outburst  of  this  feeling  on  the  part  of  Miriam 
and  Aaron  was  that  Moses  had  married  an  Ethio 
pian  woman  (a  woman  of  Cush).  This  was  pro 
bably,  as  Ewald  suggests,  a  second  wife  married 
after  the  death  of  Zipporah.  But  there  is  no 
reason  for  supposing,  as  he  does  (Gesch.  ii.  229, 
note),  that  we  have  here  a  confusion  of  two  ac 
counts.  He  observes  that  the  words  of  the  bro 
ther  and  sister,  il  Hath  the  Lord  indeed  spoken  only 
by  Moses,  hath  He  not  also  spoken  by  us?"  show 
that  the  real  ground  of  their  jealousy  was  the  ap 
parent  superiority  of  Moses  in  the  prophetical  office ; 
whereas,  according  to  the  narrative,  their  dislike 
was  occasioned  by  his  marriage  with  a  foreigner  and 
a  person  of  inferior  rank.  But  nothing  surely  can 
ba  more  natural  than  that  the  long  pent-'.p  feeling 
of  jealousy  should  have  fastened  upon  the  marriage 
as  a  pretext  to  begin  the  quarrel,  and  then  have 
shown  itself  in  its  true  character  in  the  words 
recorded  by  the  historian. 

It  is  not  perhaps  to  be  wondered  at  that  the 
episode  of  Balaam  (xxii.  2-xxiv.  25)  should  hare 
been  regarded  as  a  later  addition.  The  language  is 
peculiar,  as  well  as  the  general  cast  of  the  narra 
tive.  The  prophecies  are  vivid  and  the  diction 
of  them  highly  finished:  very  different  from  the 
rugged,  vigorous  fragments  of  ancient  poetry  which 
meet  us  in  chap.  xxi.  On  these  grounds,  as  well 
as  on  the  score  of  the  distinctly  Messianic  charactei 
of  Balaam's  prophecies,  Ewald  gives  this  episode  to 
his  Fifth  Narrator,  or  the  latest  editor  of  the  Penta 
teuch.  This  writer  he  supposes  to  have  lived  in 
the  former  half  of  the  8th  century  B.C.,  and  hence 
he  accounts  for  the  reference  to  Assyria  and  the 
Cypriotes  (the  Kittim) ;  the  latter  nation  about 
that  time  probably  infesting  as  pirates  the  coasts 
of  Syria,  whereas  Assyria  might  be  joined  with 
Eber,  because  as  yet  the  Assyrian  power,  though 
hostile  to  the  southern  nations,  was  rather  friendly 
than  otherwise  to  Judah.  The  allusions  to  Edonr 
and  Moab  as  vanquished  enemies  have  reference, 
it  is  said,  to  the  time  of  David  ''Ewald,  (?<!so/\. 


NUMBERB 

i.  143  ff.,  and  compare  ii.  277  ft'.).  The  prophecies 
if  Balaam  therefore,  on  this  hypothesis,  are  vati- 
cinia  fx  eventu,  put  into  his  mouth  by  a  clever, 
but  not  very  scrupulous,  writer  of  the  time  of 
Isaiah,  who,  finding  some  mention  of  Balaam  as  a 
prince  of  Midian  in  the  older  records,  put  the  story 
into  shape  as  we  have  it  now.  But  this  sort  of 
criticism  is  so  purely  arbitrary  that  it  scarcely 
merits  a  serious  refutation,  not  to  mention  that  it 
rests  entirely  on  the  assumption  that  in  prophecy 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  prediction.  We  will  only 
observe  that,  considering  the  peculiarity  of  the  man 
and  of  the  circumstances  as  given  in  the  history, 
we  might  expect  to  find  the  narrative  itself,  and 
certainly  the  poetical  portions  of  it,  marked  by 
some  peculiarities  of  thought  and  diction.  Even 
granting  that  this  episode  is  not  by  the  same  writer 
as  the  rest  of  the  book  of  Numbers,  there  seems  no 
valid  reason  to  doubt  its  antiquity,  or  its  rightful 
claim  to  the  place  which  it  at  present  occupies. 
Nothing  can  be  more  improbable  than  that,  as  a 
later  invention,  it  should  have  found  its  way  into 
the  Book  of  the  Law. 

At  any  rate,  the  picture  of  this  great  magician  is 
wonderfully  in  keeping  with  the  circumstances 
under  which  he  appeal's  and  with  the  prophecies 
which  he  utters.  This  is  not  the  place  to  enter 
into  all  the  questions  which  are  suggested  by  his 
appearance  on  the  scene.  How  it  was  that  a  heathen 
became  a  prophet  of  Jehovah  we  are  not  informed ; 
but  such  a  fact  seems  to  point  to  some  remains  of 
a  primitive  revelation,  not  yet  extinct,  in  other  na 
tions  besides  that  of  Israel.  It  is  evident  that  his 
knowledge  of  God  was  beyond  that  of  most  heathen, 
and  he  himself  could  utter  the  passionate  wish  to 
be  found  in  his  death  among  the  true  servants  of 
Jehovah ;  but,  because  the  soothsayer's  craft  pro 
mised  to  be  gainful,  and  the  profession  of  it  gave 
him  an  additional  importance  and  influence  in  the 
eyes  of  men  like  Balak,  he  sought  to  combine  it 
with  his  higher  vocation.  There  is  nothing  more 
remarkable  in  the  early  history  of  Israel  than 
Balaam's  appearance.  Summoned  from  his  home 
by  the  Euphrates,  he  stands  by  his  red  altar-fires, 
weaving  his  dark  and  subtle  sorceries,  or  goes  to 
seek  for  enchantment,  hoping,  as  he  looked  down 
upon  the  tents  of  Israel  among  the  acacia-groves  of 
the  valley,  to  wither  them  with  his  word,  yet 
constrained  to  bless,  and  to  foretell  their  future 
greatness. 

The  Book  of  Numbers  is  rich  in  fragments  of 
ancient  poetry,  some  of  them  of  great  beauty,  and 
all  throwing  an  interesting  light  on  the  character  of 
the  times  in  which  they  were  composed.  Such,  for 
instance,  is  the  blessing  of  the  high-priest  (vi. 
24-26)  :— 

"  Jehovah  bless  thee  and  keep  thee : 
Jehovah  make  His  countenance  shine  upon  thee, 

And  be  gracious  unto  thee : 
Jehovah  lift  up  His  countenance  upon  thee, 
And  give  thee  peace." 

Such  too  are  the  chants  which  were  the  signal 
for  the  Ark  to  move  when  the  people  journeyed, 
and  for  it  to  rest  when  they  were  about  to  en 
camp: — 

"  Arise.  0  Jehovah  !  let  Thine  enemies  be  scattered : 

Let  thi'sn  also  that  hate  Thee  flee  before  Thee." 
And, 

"  Return,  O  Jehovah, 
To  the  ten  thousands  of  the  tamilies  of  Israel !" 

In  chap.  xxi.  we  have  a  passage  cited  from  a 
bvh  colled  the  '  BCM&  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah.' 


NUMBERS 


583 


This  was  probably  a  collection  of  ballads  and  songs 
composed  on  different  occasions  by  the  watel>firee 
of  the  camp,  and  for  the  most  part,  though  not 
perhaps  exclusively,  in  commemoration  of  the  vic 
tories  of  the  Israelites  over  their  enemies.  The 
title  shows  us  that  these  were  written  b/  men  im 
bued  with  a  deep  sense  of  religion,  and  who  were 
therefore  foremost  to  acknowledge  that  not  their 
own  prowess,  but  Jehovah's  Right  Hand,  had  given 
them  the  victory  when  they  went  forth  to  battle. 
Hence  it  was  called,  not  '  The  Book  of  the  Ware  of 
Israel,'  but  '  The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah. 
Possibly  this  is  the  book  referred  to  in  Ex.  xvii. 
14,  especially  as  we  read  (ver.  16)  that  when 
Moses  built  the  altar  which  he  called  Jehovah- 
Nissi  (Jehovah  is  my  banner),  he  exclaimed,  "  Je 
hovah  will  have  war  with  Amalek  from  generation 
to  generation."  This  expression  may  have  given 
the  name  to  the  book. 

The  fragment  quoted  from  this  collection  is  diffi 
cult,  because  the  allusions  in  it  are  obscure.  The 
Israelites  had  reached  the  Arnon,  "  which,"  says 
the  historian,  "  forms  the  border  of  Moab,  and 
separates  between  the  Moabites  and  Amorites." 
"  Wherefore  it  is  said,"  he  continues,  "  in  the  Book 
of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah, 

'  Vaheb  in  Suphah  and  the  torrent-beds ; 
Arnon  and  the  slope  of  the  torrent-beds 
Which  turneth  to  where  Ar  Heth, 
And  which  leaneth  upon  the  border  of  Moab.'  " 
The  next  is  a  song  which  was  sung  on  the  digging 
of  a  well  at  a  spot  where  they  encamped,  and  which 
from  this  circumstance  was  called  Beer,  or  '  The 
Well.'     It  runs  as  follows : — 

"  Spring  up,  O  well !  sing  ye  to  It : 
Well,  which  the  princes  dug, 
Which  the  nobles  of  the  people  bored 
With  the  sceptre-of-office,  with  their  staves." 

This  song,  first  sung  at  the  digging  of  the  well, 
was  afterwards  no  doubt  commonly  used  by  those 
who  came  to  draw  water.  The  maidens  of  Israel 
chanted  it  one  to  another,  verse  by  verse,  as  they 
toiled  at  the  bucket,  and  thus  beguiled  their  labour. 
"  Spring  up,  0  well !"  was  the  burden  or  refrain  of 
the  song,  which  would  pass  from  one  mouth  to  an 
other  at  each  fresh  coil  of  the  rope,  till  the  full 
bucket  reached  the  well's  mouth.  But  the  peculiar 
charm  of  the  song  lies  not  only  in  its  antiquity, 
but  in  the  characteristic  touch  which  so  manifestly 
connects  it  with  the  life  of  the  time  to  which  the 
narrative  assigns  it.  The  one  point  which  is 
dwelt  upon  is,  that  the  leaders  of  the  people  took 
their  part  in  the  work,  that  they  themselves  helped 
to  dig  the  well.  In  the  new  generation,  who  were 
about  to  enter  the  Land  of  Promise,  a  strong  feel 
ing  of  sympathy  between  the  people  iind  their  rulers 
had  sprung  up,  which  augured  well  for  the  future, 
and  which  left  its  stamp  even  on  the  ballads  and 
songs  of  the  time.  This  little  carol  is  fresh  and 
lusty  with  young  life  ;  it  sparkles  like  the  water 
of  the  well  whose  springing  up  first  occasioned  it ; 
it  is  the  expression,  on  the  part  of  those  who  sung 
it,  of  lively  confidence  in  the  sympathy  and  co 
operation  of  their  leaders,  which,  manifested  in  fhii> 
one  instance,  might  be  relied  upon  in  all  emer 
gencies  (Ewald,  Gesch.  ii.  264,  5). 

Immediately  following  this  «  Song  of  the  Well,' 
comes  a  song  of  victory,  composed  after  a  defeat  of 
the  Moabites  and  the  occupation  of  their  territory. 
It  is  in  a  taunting,  mocking  strain ;  and  is  commonly 
considered  to  have  been  written  by  some  Israelitish 
bard  on  the  occupation  of  the  Amorite  Urritory. 


584 


NUMENIUS 


Yet  the  manner  in  which  it  is  introduced  would 
rather  lead  to  the  belief  that  we  have  here  the 
translation  of  an  old  Amorite  ballad.  The  history 
tells  us  that  when  Israel  approached  the  country  of 
Sihon  they  sent  messengers  to  him,  demanding  per 
mission  to  pass  through  his  territory.  The  request 
was  refused.  Sihon  came  out  against  them,  but 
was  defeated  in  battle.  "  Israel,"  it  is  said,  "  smote 
nim  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  took  his  land 
in  possession,  from  the  Arnon  to  the  Jabbok  and  as 
far  as  the  children  of  Ammon  ;  for  the  border  of  the 
children  of  Ammon  was  secure  (»'.  e.  they  made  no 
encroachments  upon  Ammonitish  territory).  Israel 
also  took  all  these  cities,  and  dwelt  in  all  the  cities 
n{  the  Amorites  in  Heshbon,  and  all  her  daughters 
(i.  e.  lesser  towns  and  villages)."  Then  follows  a 
little  scrap  of  Amorite  history  :  "  For  Heshbon  is 
the  city  of  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  and  he  had 
waged  war  with  the  former  king  of  Moab,  and  had 
taken  from  him  all  his  land  as  far  as  the  Arnon. 
Wherefore  the  ballad-singers  (D  v&Wn)  say, — 

'  Come  ye  to  Heshbon, 

Let  the  city  of  Sihon  be  built  and  established ! 
For  fire  went  forth  from  Heshbon, 

A  flame  out  of  the  stronghold  (n*"lp)  of  Sihon, 
Which  devoured  Ar  of  Moab, 
The  lords  a  of  the  high  places  ot  Arnon. 

Woe  to  thee,  Moab ! 

Thou  art  undone,  0  people  of  Chemosb  ! 
He  (i.  e.  Chemosh  thy  god)  hath  given  up  his  sons  as 

fugitives, 

And  his  daughters  into  captivity, 
To  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites. 
Then  we  cast  them  downb  ;  Heshbon  perished  even 

unto  Dibon. 

And  we  laid  (it)  waste  nnto  Nophah,  which  (reacheth) 
unto  Medeba.' " 

If  the  song  is  of  Hebrew  origin,  then  the  former 
part  of  it  is  a  biting  taunt,  "  Come,  ye  Amorites, 
into  your  city  of  Heshbon,  and  build  it  up  again. 
Ye  boasted  that  ye  had  burnt  it  with  fire  and 
driven  out  its  Moabite  inhabitants ;  but  now  we 
are  come  in  our  turn  and  have  burnt  Heshbon,  and 
driven  you  out  as  ye  once  burnt  it  and  drove  out 
its  Moabite  possessors." 

C.  The  alleged  discrepancies  between  many  state 
ments  in  this  and  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch, 
will  be  found  discussed  in  other  articles,  DEUTERO 
NOMY  ;  EXODUS  ;  PENTATEUCH.  [J.  J.  S.  P.] 

NUME'NIUS  (Nov/i^irtos :  Numeniiis),  son  of 
Antiochus,  was  sent  by  Jonathan  on  an  embassy  to 
Home  (1  Mace.  xii.  16)  and  Sparta  (xii.  17),  to  rer 
new  the  friendly  connexions  between  these  nations 
and  the  Jews,  c.  B.C.  144.  It  appears  that  he  had 
not  returned  from  his  mission  at  the  death  of  Jona 
than  (1  Mace.  xiv.  22,  23).  He  was  again  des 
patched  to  Rome  by  Simon,  c.  B.C.  141  (1  Mace.  xiv. 
24),  where  he  was  well  received  and  obtained  letters 
in  favour  of  his  countrymen,  addressed  to  the  various 
'Oastern  powers  dependent  on  the  Republic,  B.C.  139 
(1  Mace.  xv.  15  ff.).  [LUCIUS.]  [B.  F.  W.] 

NUN  (J-13,  or  fa  1  Chr.  vii.  27:  Nawj:  Nun). 
The  father  of  the  Jewish  captain  Joshua  (Ex.  xxxiii. 
11,  &c.).  His  genealogical  descent  from  Ephraim 
is  recorded  in  1  Chr.  vii.  Nothing  is  known  of  his 


»  Or  "  the  possessors  of,  the  men  of,  the  high  places,"  &c. 

b  So  In  Zunz's  Bible,  and  this  is  the  simplest  rendering. 
Kwald  and  Bunsen :  "  We  burned  them."  Others :  "  We 
Shot  at  them." 

•  1.  |DK,  TO.,  Tt&jpot,  nutrix,  nutritiuf,  J"13O°K.  /., 
'10IJI/0?,  nutria,  from  JOK,  to  carry  (bee  la.  Ix.  4). 


NUTS 

life,  which  was  doubtless  spent  in  Egypt.  The 
mode  of  spelling  his  name  in  the  LXX.  has  not  oeen 
satisfactorily  accounted  for.  Gesenius  asserts  that 
it  is  a  very  early  mistake  of  transcribers,  who  wrote 
NATH  for  NATN.  But  Ewald  (Gesch.  ii.  298^ 
gives  some  good  etymological  reasons  for  tho  more 
probable  opinion  that  the  final  N  is  omitted  inten 
tionally.  [W.  T.  B.] 

NURSE.0  It  is  clear,  both  from  Scripture  and 
from  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  that  in  ancient  times 
the  position  of  the  nurse,  wherever  one  was  main 
tained,  was  one  of  much  honour  aad  importance. 
(See  Gen.  xxiv.  59,  xxxv.  8 ;  2  Sam.  iv.  4 ;  2  K. 
xi.  2 ;  3  Mace.  i.  20  ;  Horn.  Od.  ii.  361,  xix.  15, 
251,  466  ;  Eurip.  Ton,  1357  ;  Hippol.  267  and  foil. ; 
Virg.  Aen.  vii.  1.)  The  same  term  is  applied  to  a 
foster-father  or  mother,  e.  g.,  Num.  xi.  12  ;  Ruth 
iv.  16  ;  Is.  xlix.  23.  In  great  families  male  ser 
vants,  probably  eunuchs  in  later  times,  were  en 
trusted  with  the  charge  of  the  boys,  2  K.  x.  1, 5. 
[CHILDREN.]  See  also  Kuran,  iv.  p.  63,  Tegg's  ed. ; 
Mrs.  Poole,  Englw.  in  Eg.  iii.  p.  201.  [H.  W.  P.] 

NUTS.  The  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
words  butnim  and  egoz. 

1.  Botnim  (D*jp3 :   rtotBivQus :    terebinthus). 

Among  the  good  things  of  the  land  which  the  sons 
of  Israel  were  to  take  as  a  present  to  Joseph  in 
Egypt,  mention  is  made  of  botnim.  There  can 
scarcely  be  a  doubt  that  the  botnim  denote  the  fruit 
of  the  Pistachio  tree  (Pistacia  vera],  though  most 


modern  versions  are  content  with  the  general  tcrrn 
nuts.  (See  Bochart,  Chanaan,  i.  10.)  For  other  at 
tempted  explanations  of  the  Hebrew  term,  comp. 
Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  24.  The  LXX.  and  Vulj;.  read 


2.  nj53*D,  part.  f.  Hiph.,  from  P3J,  "  suck,"  wlUi 
ilB>N,  yvnj  rpo^tvouo-a  (Kx.  ii.  7).    Coiinectc.l  with  M, 
is  the  doubtful  verb  p-IJ,  0>]Aa£u  :iut>'io  (Ge»  361 X 

3.  In  N.  T.  rpo<(>6f,  nutrix  (1  Thess.  ii.  7). 


NUTS 

irtbinth,  tne  Persian  version  Itaspusteh,  from  which 
it  is  believed  the  Arabic  fostak  is  derived,  whence 
ths  Greek  iriffrditia,  and  the  Latin  pistacia ;  the 
Pistacia  vera  is  in  form  not  unlike  the  P.  tere- 
linthus,  another  species  of  the  same  genus  of  plants  ; 
it  is  probable  therefore  that  the  terebinthns  of 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  is  used  generically,  and  is 
here  intended  to  denote  the  Pistachio-tree,  for  the 
terebinth  does  not  yield  edible  fruit.'  Syria  and 
Palestine  have  been  long  famous  for  Pistachio-trees, 
see  Dioscorides  (i.  177)  and  Pliny  (xiii.  5),  who 
says  "  Syria  has  several  trees  that  are  peculiar  to 
itself;  among  the  nut-trees  there  is  the  well-known 
pistacia;"  in  another  place  (xv.  22)  he  states  that 
Vitellius  introduced  this  tree  into  Italy,  and  that 
Flaccus  Pompeius  brought  it  at  the  same  time  into 
Spain.  The  district  around  Aleppo  is  especially  cele- 
bi-ated  for  the  excellence  of  the  Pistachio  nuts,  see 
Russell  (Hist.  ofAlep.  i.  p.  82,  2nd  ed.)  and  Galeu 
(de  Fac.  Alim.  2,  p.  612),  who  mentions  Berrhoea 
(Aleppo)  as  being  rich  in  the  production  of  these 
trees  ;  the  town  of  Batna  in  the  same  district  is  be 
lieved  to  derive  its  name  from  this  circumstance : 
Betouim,  a  town  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh.  xiii.  26), 
has  in  all  probability  a  similar  etymology.  [BETO- 
NIM.]  Bochart  draws  attention  to  the  fact  that 
pistachio -nuts  are  mentioned  together  with  almonds 
in  Gen.  xliii.  11,  and  observes  that  Dioscorides, 
Theophrastus,  and  others,  speak  of  the  pistachio-tree 
conjointly  with  the  almond-tree ;  as  there  is  no 
mention  in  early  writers  of  the  Pistacia  vera  grow 
ing  in  Egypt  (see  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  27),  it  was 
doubtless  not  found  there  in  Patriarchal  times, 
wherefore  Jacob's  present  to  Joseph  would  have  been 
most  acceptable.  There  is  scarcely  any  allusion  to 
the  occurrence  of  the  Pistacia  vera  in  Palestine 
amongst  the  writings  of  modern  travellers  ;  Kitto 
(Phys.  Hist.  Pal.  p.  323)  says  "  it  is  not  much  cul 
tivated  in  Palestine,  although  found  there  growing 
wild  in  some  very  remarkable  positions,  as  on 
Mount  Tabor,  and  on  the  summit  of  Mount  Atta- 
rous"  (see  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  334).  Dr.  Thomson 
( The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  267)  says  that  the 
terebinth-trees  near  Mais  el  Jebel  had  been  grafted 
with  the  pistachio  from  Aleppo  by  order  of  Ibrahim 
Pasha,  but  that  ' '  the  peasants  destroyed  the  grafts, 
lest  their  crop  of  oil  from  the  berries  of  these  trees 
should  be  diminished."  Dr.  Hooker  saw  only  two 
or  three  pistachio-trees  in  Palestine.  These  were 
outside  the  north  gate  of  Jerusalem.  But  he  says 
the  tree  is  cultivated  at  Beirut  and  elsewhere  in 
Syria.  The  Pistacia  vera  is  a  small  tree  varying 
from  15  to  30  ft.  in  height ;  the  male  and  female 
flowers  grow  on  separate  trees ;  the  fruit,  which  is 
a  green-coloured  oily  kernel,  not  unlike  an  almond, 
is  enclosed  in  a  brittle  shell.  Pistachio-nuts  are 
much  esteemed  as  an  article  of  diet  both  by  Orien 
tals  and  Europeans;  the  tree,  which  belongs  to 
the  Natural  Order  Anacardiaceae,  extends  from 
Syria  to  Bokhara,  and  is  naturalised  over  the  South 
of  Europe ;  the  nuts  are  too  well-known  to  need 
minute  description. 

2.  Egoz  (T13K :    Kapva. :     nux)  occurs  only  in 

Cant.  vi.  11,  "I  went  into  the  garden  of  nuts." 
The  Hebrew  word  in  all  probability  is  here  to  be 


OAK  f,8B 

understood  to  refer  to  the  Walnut-tree  ;  the  Greek 
Kapva  is  supposed  to  denote  the  tree,  Kapvov  the 
nut  (see  Soph.  Fr.  892).  Although  xdpvov  ;ind 
nux  may  signify  any  kind  of  nut,  yet  the  walnut, 
as  the  nut  HUT'  ^ox"fl",  is  more  especially  that 
which  is  denoted  by  the  Greek  and  Latin  terms 
(see  Casaubon  on  Athenaeus,  ii.  65 ;  Ovid,  Nux 
Elegia;  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  28).  The  Hebrew 
term  is  evidently  allied  to  the  Arabic  jawz,  which 
is  from  a  Persian  word  of  very  similar  form ;  whence 
Abu'l  Fadli  (in  Celsius)  says  "  the  Arabs  have  bor 
rowed  the  word  Gjaus  from  the  Persian,  in  Arabic 
the  term  is  Chusf,  which  is  a  tall  tree."  The 
Chusf  or  Chasf,  is  translated  by  Freytag,  "an 
esculent  nut,  the  walnut."  The  Jewish  Rabbis 
understand  the  walnut  by  Egoz. 

According  to  Josephus  (£.  J.  iii.  10,  §  8) 
the  walnut-tree  was  formerly  common,  and  grew 
most  luxuriantly  around  the  lake  of  Gennesareth ; 
Schulz,  speaking  of  this  same  district,  says  he  often 
saw  walnut-trees  growing  there  large  enough  to 
shelter  four-and-twenty  persons.  See  also  Kitto 
(Phys.  Hist.  Pal.  p.  250)  and  Burckhardt  (Syria, 
p.  265).  The  walnut-tree  (Juglans  regia)  belongs 
to  the  Natural  Order  Juglandaceae ;  it  is  too  well- 
known  to  require  any  description.  [W.  H.] 

NYM'PHAS  (NvfKpas:  Nymphas),  a  wealthy 
and  zealous  Christian  in  Laodicea,  Col.  iv.  15.  His 
house  was  used  as  a  place  of  assembly  for  the 
Christians ;  and  hence  Grotius  making  an  extraor 
dinarily  high  estimate  of  the  probable  number  of 
Christians  in  Laodicea,  infers  that  he  must  have 
lived  in  a  rural  district. 

In  the  Vatican  MS.  (B)  this  name  is  taken  for 
that  of  a  woman ;  and  the  reading  appears  in  some 
Latin  writers,  as  pseudo-Ambrose,  pseudo-Anselm, 
and  it  has  been  adopted  in  Lachmann's  N.  T.  The 
common  reading,  however,  is  found  in  the  Alexan 
drian  MS.  and  in  that  of  Ephrem  Syrus  (A  and  C), 
and  is  the  only  one  known  to  the  Greek  Fathers. 

[W.  T.  B.I 


OAK.  The  following  Hebrew  words,  which 
appear  to  be  merely  various  forms  of  the  same  root,1 
occur  in  the  0.  T.  as  the  names  of  some  species  of 
oak,  viz.  el,  eldh,  elon,  ilan,  allah,  and  alien. 

1.  El   (^N  :    LXX.  Vat.   -repffrvOos  ;    Alex 

Tfoffitv6os  ;  Aq.,  Sym.,  Theod.,  Spj>s:  campestria) 
occurs  only  in  the  sing,  number  in  Gen.  xiv.  6 
("  El-paran").  It  is  uncertain  whether  el  should 
be  joined  with  Paran  to  form  a  proper  name,  or 
whether  it  is  to  be  taxen  separately,  as  the  "  tere 
binth,"  or  the  "oat,"  or  the  "grove"  of  Paran. 
Onkelos  and  Saadias  follow  the  Vulg.,  whence  the 
"  plain"  of  the  A.  V.  (margin) ;  (see  Stanley,  S.  4'  P. 
519,  520,  App.).  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.  ad  1.  c.) 
follows  Jarchi  (Comment,  in  Pent,  ad  Gen.  xiv. 
6),  and  is  for  retaining  the  proper  name.  Three 
plural  forms  of  el  occur :  elim,  eloth,  and  elath. 
Elim,  the  second  station  where  the  Israelites  halted 


The  Arabic 


(butm)  appears  to  be  also  used 


generically.  It  is  mort  generally  applied  to  the  terebinth, 
but  may  comprehend  the  pistachio-tree,  as  Gesenius  con 
jectures,  and  Or.  Koj  le  (Kitto's  Cycl.}  has  proved.  HP 


says  the  word  is  applied  in  some  Arabic  works  to  a  trov 
which  has  green-coloured  kernels.  This  must  be  tl)« 
1'istacia  vera,. 

»  From  >1N,    ?*K  or  7?N,  ••  to  be  strong." 


586 


OAK 


after  they  had  crossed  the  Red  Sea,  in  all  probability 
arrived  its  name  from  the  seventy  palm-trees  there ; 
the  name  el,  which  more  particularly  signifies  an 
"  ••ak,"  being  here  put  for  any  grove  or  plantation. 
Similarly  the  other  plural  form,  eloth  or  Math, 
/nay  refer,  as  Stanley  (S.  fy  P.  p.  20)  conjectures, 
to  the  palm-grove  at  Akaba.  The  plural  elim 
occurs  ir.  Is.  i.  29,  where  probably  "oaks"  are 
intended  in  Is.  Ixi.  3,  and  Ez.  xxxi.  14,  any  strong 
6ourishing  trees  may  be  denoted. 

2.  El&h  (rb$:  Tfpffrveos,  Spvs,  'HAo,  Stv- 
8/»ov,  StvSpov  ffvfficla^ov  Symm. ;  it \dravos  in 
Hos.  iv.  13;  SfvSpoi'ffvffKlov:  tcrebinthus,  quercus : 
"  OAk,"  "  elah,"  "  teil-tree  "  in  Is.  vi.  13  ;  "  elms  " 
in  Hos.  iv.  13).  There  is  much  difficulty  in  deter 
mining  the  exact  meanings  of  the  several  varieties 
of  the  term  mentioned  above :  the  old  versions  are 
so  inconsistent  that  they  add  but  little  by  way  of 
elucidation.  Celsius  (Hierob.  i.  34)  has  endeavoured 
to  shew  that  el,  elim,  elon,  elah,  and  allah,  all 
stand  for  the  terebinth-tree  (Pistacia  terebinthus), 
while  allon  alone  denotes  an  oak.  Royle  (in  Kitto's 
Cyc.  art.  "  Alah  ")  agrees  with  Celsius  in  identi 
fying  the  e/d/»  (n?N)  with  the  terebinth,  and  the 
allon  (ji;>K)  with'the  oak.  Hillev  (Hierophyt.  1. 

348)  restricts  the  various  forms  of  this  word  to 
different  species  of  oak,  and  says  no  mention  is  made 
of  the  terebinth  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Rosen- 
mailer  (Bib.  Not.  p.  237)  gives  the  terebinth  to 
el  and  elah,  and  the  oak  to  allah,  allon,  and 


For  the  various  opinions  upon  the  meaning  of 
these  kindred  terms,  see  Gesen.  Thes.  pp.  47,  51, 
103,  and  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  519. 

That  various  species  of  oak  may  well  have  de 
served  the  appellation  of  mighty  trees  is  clear  from 
the  fact,  that  noble  oaks  are  to  this  day  occasionally 
seen  in  Palestine  and  Lebanon.  On  this  subject  we 
have  been  favoured  with  some  valuable  remarks  from 
Dr.  Hooker,  who  says,  "  The  forests  have  been  so 
completely  cleared  off  all  Palestine,  that  we  must 
not  look  for  existing  evidence  of  what  the  trees  were 
in  biblical  times  and  antecedently.  In  Syria  proper 
there  are  only  three  common  oaks.  All  form  large 
trees  in  many  countries,  but  very  rarely  now  in 
Palestine ;  though  that  they  do  so  occasionally  is 
proof  enough  that  they  once  did."  Abraham's  oak, 
near  Hebron,  is  a  familial*  example  of  a  noble  tree 
of  one  species.  Dr.  Robinson  (Bib.  Res.  ii.  81)  has 
given  a  minute  account  of  it ;  and  "  his  description," 
says  Dr.  Hooker,  "  is  good,  and  his  measurements 
tally  with  mine."  If  we  examine  the  claims  of  the 
terebinth  to  represent  the  elah,  as  Celsius  and 
others  assert,  we  shall  see  that  in  point  of 
size  it  cannot  compete  with  some  of  the  oaks  of 
Palestine ;  and  that  therefore,  if  elah  ever  denotes 
the  terebinth,  which  we  by  no  means  assert  it  does 
not,  the  term  etymologically  is  applicable  to  it  only 
in  a  second  degree ;  for  the  Pistacia  terebintkus, 
although  it  also  occasionally  grows  to  a  great  size, 
"  spreading  its  boughs,"  as  Robinson  (J?<6.  Res.  ii. 
222)  observes,  "  far  and  wide  like  a  noble  oak,"  yet 
it  does  not  form  so  conspicuously  a  good  tree  as 
either  the  Quercus  pseudo-coccifera  or  Q.  aegdops. 
Dr.  Thomson  (The  Land  and  the  Book,  p.  243)  re 
marks  on  this  point :  "  There  are  more  mighty  oaks 
here  in  this  immediate  vicinity  (Mejdel  es-S/iems) 
than  them  are  terebinths  in  all  Syria  and  Palestine 
together.  I  have  travelled  from  end  to  end  of  these 
countries,  and  across  them  iii  all  directions,  aini 


OAK 

speak  with  absolute  certainty."  At  p.  600,  the  same 
writer  remarks,  "  We  have  oaks  in  Lebanon  twice 
the  size  of  this  (Abraham's  oak),  and  every  way 
more  striking  and  majestic."  Dr.  Hooker  Li*  no 
doubt  that  Thomson  is  correct  in  saying  there  ire 
far  finer  oaks  in  Lebanon  ;  "  though,"  he  observes, 
"  I  did  not  see  any  larger,  and  only  one  or  two 
at  all  near  it.  Cyril  Graham  told  me  there  were 
forests  of  noble  oaks  in  Lebanon  north  of  the  cedar 
valley."  It  is  evident  from  these  observations  that 
two  oaks  (Quercus  pseudo-coccifera  and  Q.  aeiji- 
lops)  are  well  worthy  of  the  name  of  mighty  trees  ; 
though  it  is  equally  true  that  over  a  greater  part 
of  the  country  the  oaks  of  Palestine  are  at  present 
merely  bushes. 


3.  Elon  (|ft>K :  f,  Spvs  T\  ui| 

\<av  :  convallis  illustris,  quercus)  occurs  fre 
quently  in  the  0.  T.,  and  derates,  there  can  be  little 
doubt,  some  kind  of  oak.  Tlie  A.  V.,  following  the 
Targum,  translates  elon  by  "  plain."  (See  Stanley, 
S.  #  P.  520,  App.) 

4.  Ildn  (pNSt:   tifvb'pov:  arbor)  is  found  only 
in  Dan.  iv.  as  the  tree  which  Nebuchadnezzar  saw 
in  his  dream.     The  word  appears  to  be  used  foi 
any  "  strong  tree,"  the  oak  having  the  best  claim 
to  the  title,  to  which  tree  probably  indirect  allusion 
may  be  made. 

5.  Allah  (H?N :  »j  TfpfuvOos  ;  Aq.  and  Symm. 
rj  Spvs:  quercus)  occurs  only  in  Josh.  xxiv.  26, 
and  is  correctly  rendered  "  oak  "  by  the  A.  V. 

6.  Allon  ({TOK :  f/  0aAcu/os,  StvSpov  J3a\dvov, 
Spvs:  quercus)  is  uniformly  rendered  "oak"   by 
the  A.  V.,  and  has  always  been  so  understood  by 
commentators.     It  should  be  stated  that  allon  o_- 
curs  in  Hos.  iv.  13,  as  distinguished  from  the  other 
form  elali ;  consequently  it  is  necessary  to  suppose 
that  two  different  trees  are  signified  by  the  terms. 
We  believe,  for  reasons  given  above,  that  thadiffer- 
ence  is  specific,  and  not  generic — that  two  species  o( 
oaks  are  denoted  by  the  Hebrew  teims :  allon  may 
stand  for  an  evergreen  oak,  as  the  Quercus  p.sen<I<i- 
coccifera,  and  elah  for  one  of  the  deciduous  kinds. 
ThePistacia  vera  could  never  be  mistaken  for  an  oak. 
If,  therefore,  specific  allusion  was  ever  made  to  thif 
tree,  we  caiiuot  help  believing  that  it  \70~ild  havr 


OATH 

been  under  another  name  than  anyone  of  the  nume 
rous  forns  which  are  used  to  designate  the  different 
species  of  the  genus  Quercus  ;  perhaps  under  a 
Hebrew  form  allied  to  the  Arabic  butm,  "  the  tere 
binth."  The  oak-woods  of  Bashan  are  mentioned 
in  Is.  ii.  13,  Ez.  xxvii.  6,  Zech.  xi.  2.  The  oaks  of 
Bashan  belong  in  all  probability  to  the  species 
known  as  Quercus  aegilops,  the  Valonia  oak,  which 
is  said  to  be  common  in  Gilead  and  Bashan.  Sacri 
fices  were  offered  under  oaks  (Hos.  iv.  13  ;  Is.  i.  29) ; 
of  oak-timber  the  Tynans  manufactured  oars  (Ez. 
xxvii.  6),  and  idolaters  their  images  (Is.  xliv.  14)  ; 
under  the  shade  of  oak-trees  the  dead  were  sometimes 
interred  (Gen.  xxxv.  8  ;  see  also  1  Sam.  xxxi.  13). 


OATH 


687 


Another  species  of  oak,  besides  those  named  above, 
is  the  Quercus  infectoria,  which  is  common  in  Gal 
ilee  and  Samaria.  It  is  rather  a  small  tree  in 
Palestine,  and  seldom  grows  above  30  ft.  high, 
though  in  ancient  times  it  might  have  been  a  noble 
tree. 

For  a  description  of  the  oaks  of  Palestine,  see 
Dr.  Hooker's  paper  read  before  the  Linnean  Society, 
June,  1861.  [W.  H.] 

OATH."  I.  The  principle  on  which  an  oath  is 
held  to  be  binding  is  incidentally  laid  down  in  Heb. 
vi.  16,  viz.  as  an  ultimate  appeal  to  divine  autho 
rity  to  ratify  an  assertion  (see  the  principle  stated 
and  defended  by  Philo,  De  Leg.  Alleg.  iii.  73, 
i.  128,  ed.  Mang.).  There  the  Almighty  is  repre 
sented  as  promising  or  denouncing  with  an  oath, 
i.  e.  doing  so  in  the  most  positive  and  solemn 
manner  (see  such  passages  as  Gen.  xxii.  16,  xii.  7, 
compared  with  xxiv.  7  ;  Kx.  xvii.  16  and  Lev.  xxvi. 
14  with  Dan.  ix.  11  ;  2  Sam.  vii.  12, 13,  with  Acts 
ii.  30;  Ps.  ex.  4  with  Heb.  vii.  21,  28;  Is.  xlv. 
23;  Jer.  xxii.  5,  xxxii.  22).  With  this  Divine 
asseveration  we  may  compare  the  Stygian  oath  of 
Greek  mythology  (Horn.  //,  xv.  37 ;  Hes.  Theog. 
400,  805 ;  see  also  the  Laws  of  Menu,  c.  viii.  110 ; 
Sir  W.  Jones,  Works,  iii.. 291). 

II.  On  the  same  principle,  that  oath  has  always 


been  held  most  binding  which  appealed  to  tht 
highest  authority,  both  as  regards  individuals  ind 
communities,  (a.)  Thus  believers  in  Jehcvah  ap 
pealed  to  Him,  both  judicially  and  extra-jndicially, 
vrith  such  phrases  as  "  The  God  of  Abraham  judge  ;'' 
"  As  the  Lord  liveth , '  "  God  do  so  to  me  and 
more  also ;"  "  God  knoweth,"  and  the  like  (see 
Gen.  xxi.  23,  xxxi.  53  ;  Num.  xiv.  2,  xxx.  2 ;  1 
Sam.  xiv.  39,  44;  1  K.  ii.  42 ;  Is.  xlviii.  1,  Ixv. 
16;  Hos.  iv.  15).  So  also  our  Lord  himself  ac 
cepted  the  high-priest's  adjuration  (Matt.  xxvi. 
63),  and  St.  Paul  frequently  appeals  to  God  in  con 
firmation  of  his  statements  (Acts  xxvi.  29 ;  Kom. 
i.  9,  ix.  1 ;  2  Cor.  i.  23,  xi.  31 ;  Phil.  i.  8 ;  see 
also  Rev.  x.  6).  (6.)  Appeals  of  this  kind  to  autho 
rities  recognised  respectively  by  adjuring  parties 
were  regarded  as  bonds  of  international  security, 
and  their  infraction  as  being  not  only  grounds  of 
international  complaint,  but  also  offences  against 
divine  justice.  So  Zedekiah,  after  swearing  fidelity 
to  the  king  of  Babylon,  was  not  only  punished  by 
him,  but  denounced  by  the  prophet  as  a  breaker  of 
his  oath  (2  Chr.  xxxvi.  13  ;  Ez.  xvii.  13, 18).  Some, 
however,  have  supposed  that  the  Law  forbade  any 
intercourse  with  heathen  nations  which  involved  the 
necessity  of  appeal  by  them  to  their  own  deities 
(Ex.  xxiii.  32 ;  Selden,  De  Jur.  Nat.  ii.  13 ;  see 
Liv.  i.  24  ;  Laws  of  Menu,  viii.  113 ;  Diet,  of  Antiq. 
"  Jus  Jurandum"). 

III.  As  a  consequence  of  this  principle,  (a)  appeals 
to  God's  name  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  heathen 
deities  on  the  other,  are  treated  in  Scripture  as  tests 
of  allegiance  (Ex.  xxiii.  13,  xxxiv.  6 ;  Deut.  xxix. 
12;  Josh,  xxiii.  7,  xxiv.  16;  2  Chi-,  xv.  12,  14; 
Is.  xix.  18,  xlv.  23;   Jer.  xii.  16;   Am.  viii.  14; 
Zeph.  i.  5).     (6)  So  also  the  sovereign's  name  is 
sometimes  used  as  a  form  of  obligation,  as  was  the 
case  among  the  Romans  with  the  name  of  the  em 
peror  ;  and  Hofmann  quotes  a  custom  by  which  the 

'  kings  of  France  used  to  appeal  to  themselves  at 
their  coronation  (Gen.  xlii.  15 ;  2  Sam.  xi.  11,  xiv. 
19  ;  Martyr.  S.  Polycarp.  c.  ix. ;  Tertull.  Apol.  c. 
32  ;  Suet.  Calig.  c.  27  ;  Hofmann,  Lex.  art.  "  Ja- 
ramentum  "  ;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  u.  s. ;  Michaelis,  On 
Laws  of  Moses,  art.  256,  vol.  iv.  102,  ed.  Smith). 

IV.  Other  forms  of  oath,  serious  or  frivolous,  are 
mentioned ;   as,  by  the  "  blood  of  Abel "  (Selden, 
De  Jur.  Nat.  v.  8)  ;  by  the  "  head  ;"  by  "  Heaven," 
the  "  Temple,"  &c.,  some  of  which  are  condemned 
by  our  Lord  (Matt.  v.  33,  xxiii.  16-22 ;    and  see 
Jam.  v.  12).     Yet  He  did  not  refuse  the  solemn 
adjuration  of  the  high-priest  (Matt.  xxvi.  63,  64 : 
see  Juv.  Sat.  vi.  16  ;  Mart.  xi.  94  ;  Mishna,  Sank. 
iii.  2,  compared  with  Am.  viii.  7  ;  Spencer,  De  Leg. 
Hebr.  ii.  1-4). 

As  to  the  subject-matter  of  oaths  the  following 
cases  may  be  mentioned-: — 

1.  Agreement  or  stipulation  foi  performance  cf 
certain  acts  (Gen.  xiv.  22,  xxiv.  2,  8,  9 ;  Ruth  i. 
17  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  24 ;  2  Sam.  v.  3 ;  Ezr.  x.  5  ;  Neh. 
v.  12,  x.  29,  xiii.  25 ;  Acts  xxiii.  21 ;  and  see  Joseph. 
Vit.  a.  53). 

2.  Allegiance  to  a  sovereign,  or  obedience  from 
an  inferior  to  a  superior  (Eccl.  viii.  2 ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi. 
13;    IK.  xviii.  10).      Josephus  says  the  Essenes 
considered  oaths  unnecessary  for  the  initiated,  though 
they  required  them  previously  to  initiation  (B.  J. 
ii.  8,  §§6,  7 ;  Ant.  xv.  10,  §4 ;    Philo,  Quod  omnis 
probus,  I.  12,  ii.  458,  ed.  Mangey.) 


•  1.  n?K,  ipo,  maledictio,  juramentum,  with  affinity  |     2.  Hy-13^  and  ny2^»     from    y3t^>  "  seven,"  the 
7Ki  tbn  name  of  God  (Ge3.  pp.  44,  99).  sacied  number  (Ges.  pp.  1354, 1356),  opKos.juramtntum. 


586 


OATH 


3.  Promissory  oath  of  a  ruler   (Josh.   vi.  26  ; 

1  Sam.  xiv.  24,  28 ;   2  K.  xxv.  24  ;  Matt.  jav.  7). 
Priest*  took  no  oath  of  office  (Heb.  vii.  21). 

4.  Vow  made  in  the  form  of  an  oath  (Lev.  v.  4). 

5.  Judicial  oaths,    (a)  A  man  receiving  a  pledge 
from  a  neighbour  was  i-equired,  in  case  of  injury 
happening  to  the  pledge,  to  clear  himself  by  oath  of 
the  bkmeof  damage  (Ex.  xxii.  10,  11 ;  1  K.  viii.  81 ; 

2  Chr.  vi.  22).    A  wilful  breaker  of  trust,  especially 
if  he  added  perjury  to  his  fraud,  was  to  be  severely 
punished  (Lev.  vi.  2-5;  Deut.  xix.  16-18).     (6)  It 
appears  that  witnesses  were  examined  on  oath,  and 
that  a  false  witness,  or  one  guilty  of  suppression  of 
the  truth,  was  to  be  severely  punished  (Lev.  v.  1 ; 
Prov.  xxix.  24 ;  Michaelis,  /.  c.  art.  256,  iv.  109 ; 
Deut.  six.  16-19  ;  Grotius,  in  Grit.  Sacr.  on  Matt. 
xxvi.  63 ;   Knobel  on  Lev.  v.  1,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg. 
Hdb.}.     (c)  A  wife  suspected  of  incontinence  was 
required  to  clear  herself  by  oath  (Num.  v.  19-22). 

It  will  be  observed  that  a  leading  feature  of 
Jewish  criminal  procedure  was  that  the  accused 
person  was  put  upon  his  oath  to  clear  himself  (Ex. 
xxii.  11;  Num.  v.  19-22;  1  K.  viii.  31;  2  Chr. 
vi.  22 ;  Matt.  xxvi.  63). 

The  forms  of  adjuration  mentioned  in  Scripture 
are — 1.  Lifting  up  the  hand.  Witnesses  laid  their 
hands  on  the  head  of  the  accused  (Gen.  xiv.  22 ; 
Lev.  xxiv.  14 ;  Deut.  xxxii.  40 ;  Is.  iii.  7  ;  Ez.  xx. 
5,  6 ;  Sus.  v.  35 ;  Rev.  x.  5 ;  see  Horn.  //.  xix. 
254;  Virg.  Aen.  xii.  196;  Carpzov,  Apparatus, 
p.  652). 

2.  Putting  the  hand  under  the  thigh  of  the  per 
son  to  whom  the  promise  was  made.     As  Josephus 
describes  the  usage,  this  ceremony  was  performed 
by  each  of  the  contracting  parties  to  each  other.    It 
has  been  explained  (a)  as  having  reference  to  the  cove 
nant  of  circumcision  (Godwyn,  Moses  and  Aaron, 
vi.  6 ;  Carpzov,  1.  c.  p.  653) ;  (6)  as  containing 
a  principle  similar  to  that  of  phallic  symbolism 
(Her.  ii.  48 ;  Plut.  7s.  et  Osir.  vii.  412,  ed.  Keiske ; 
Kuobel  on  Gen.  xxiv.  2,  in  Kurzg.  Exeg.  Hdb.} ; 
(c)  as  referring  to  the  promised  Messiah  (Aug.  Qu. 
in  Hept.  62  ;  Civ.  Dei,  xvi.  33).     It  seems  likely 
that  the  two  first  at  least  of  these  explanations  may 
be  considered  as  closely  connected,  if  not  identical 
with  each  other  (Gen.  xxiv.  2,  xlvii.  29  ;  Nicolaus, 
De  Jur.  xi.  6  ;  Ges.  p.  631,  s.  v.  Ip* ;  Fagius  and 
others  in  Grit.  Sacr. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  16,  §1). 

3.  Oaths  were  sometimes  taken  before  the  altar, 
or,  as  some  understand  the  passage,  if  the  persons 
were  not  in  Jerusalem,  in  a  position  looking  towards 
the  Temple  (1  K.  viii.  31 ;    2  Chr.  vi.  22  ;  God 
wyn,  1.  c.  vi.  6 ;  Carpzov,  p.  654 ;  see  also  Juv. 
Sat.  xiv.  219 ;  Horn.  //.  xiv.  272). 

4.  Dividing  a  victim  and   passing  between  or 
distributing  lie  pieces  (Gen.  xv.  10, 17  ;  Jer.  xxxiv. 
18).     This  form  was  probably  used  to  intensify  the 
imprecation  already  ratified  by  sacrifice  according 
to  the  custom  described  by  classical  writers  under 
the  phrases  Sputa  rtfivtiv,  faedus  ferire,  &c.     We 
may  perhaps  regard  in  this  view  the  acts  recorded 
Judg.  xix.  29,  1  Sam.  xi.  7,  and  perhaps  Herod, 
vii.  39. 

As  the  sanctity  of  oaths  was  carefully  inculcated 
by  the  Law,  so  the  crime  of  perjury  was  strongly 
condemned ;  and  to  a  false  witness  the  same  punish 
ment  was  assigned  which  was  due  for  the  crime  to 
which  he  testified  (Ex.  xx.  7;  Lev.  xix.  12  ;  Deut. 
zix.  16-19  ;  Ps.  xv.  4  ;  Jer.  v.  2,  vii.  9  ;  Ez.  xvi. 
59;  Hos.  x.  4;  Zech.  viii.  17).  Whether  the 
"swearing  "  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  10)  and 


OltADlAB 

I  Dy  Hosea  (iv  2)  Was  false  swearing,  or  profane  »buf  e 
'  of  oaths,  is  not  certain.  If  the  latter,  the  crime  u 
one  which  had  been  condemned  by  the  Law  (Lev 
xxiv.  11,  16;  Matt.  xxvi.  74). 

From  the  Law  the  Jews  deduced  many  special 
cases  of  perjury,  which  are  thus  classified: — 1.  Jus 
jurandum  promissorium,  a  rash  inconsiderate  pro 
mise  for  the  future,  or  false  assertion  respecting  the 
past  (Lev.  v.  4).  2.  Vanum,  an  absurd  self-con 
tradictory  assertion.  3.  Depositi,  breach  of  con 
tract  denied  (Lev.  xix.  1 1 ).  4.  Testimonii,  judicial 
perjury  (Lev.  v.  1 ;  Nicolaus  and  Selden,  De  Jura- 
mentis,  in  Ugolini,  Thesaurus,  xxvi. ;  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Hebr.  on  Matt.  v.  33,  vol.  ii.  292 ;  Mishna, 
Sheb.  iii.  7,  iv.  1,  v.  1,  2 ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.,  art. 
"  Juramentum  "). 

Women  were  forbidden  to  bear  witness  on  oath, 
as  was  inferred  from  Deut.  xix.  17  (Mishna,  Skeb. 
iv.  1). 

The  Christian  practice  in  the  matter  of  oaths 
was  founded  in  great  measure  on  the  Jewish.  Thus 
the  oath  on  the  Gospels  was  an  imitation  of  the 
Jewish  practice  of  placing  the  hands  on  the  book 
of  the  Law  (P.  Fagius,  on  Onkel.  ad  Ex.  xxiii.  1  ; 
Justinian,  Nov.  c.  viii.  Epil. ;  Matth.  Paris,  Hist. 
p.  916). 

Our  Lord's  prohibition  of  swearing  was  clearly 
always  understood  by  the  Christian  Church  as  di 
rected  against  profane  and  careless  swearing,  not 
against  the  serious  judicial  form  (Bingham,  Antiq. 
Eccl.  xvi.  7,  §4,  5;  Aug.  Ep.  157,  c.  v.  40)  ;  and 
thus  we  find  the  fourth  Council  of  Carthage  (c.  61) 
reproving  clerical  persons  for  swearing  by  created 
objects. 

The  most  solemn  Mohammedan  oath  is  made  on 
the  open  Koran.  Mohammed  himself  used  the 
form,  "  By  the  setting  of  the  stars"  (Chardin,  Voy. 
vi.  87  ;  Sale's  Koran,  Ivi.  p.  437). 

Bedouin  Arabs  use  various  sorts  of  adjuration, 
one  of  which  somewhat  resembles  the  oath  "  by 
the  Temple."  The  person  takes  hold  of  the  middle 
tent-pole,  and  swears  by  tbs  life  of  the  tent  and  its 
owners  (Burckhardt,  Notts  on  Bed.  i.  127,  foil. ; 
see  also  another  case  mentioned  by  Burckhardt, 
Syria,  p.  398). 

The  stringent  nature  of  the  Roman  military  oath, 
and  the  penalties  attached  to  infraction  of  it,  are 
alluded  to,  more  or  less  certainly,  in  several  places 
in  N.  T.,  e.  g.  Matt.  viii.  9,  Acts  xii.  19,  xvi.  27, 
xxvii.  42  ;  see  also  Dionys.  Hal.  xi.  43,  and  Aul. 
Gell.  xvi.  4.  [PERJUBY.J  [H.  W.  P.] 

OBADI'AH(nH3y:  'AjSSfa:  Obdia).  The 
name  of  Obadiah  was  probably  as  common  among 
the  Hebrews  as  Abdallah  among  the  Arabians,  both 
of  them  having  the  same  meaning  and  etymology. 

1.  The  sons  of  Obadiah  are  enumerated  in  a  cor 
rupt  passage  of  the  genealogy  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(1  Chr.  iii.  21).     The  reading  of  the  LXX.,  and 
Vulg.  was  133,  "  his  son,"  and   of    the   Peshito 
Syriac  '}3,  "  son  of,"  for  \)3,  "  sons  of;"  so  that 
according  to  the  two  former  versions  Obadiah  was 
the  son  of  Arnan,  and  according  to  the  last  the  son 
of  Jesaiah. 

2.  ('A)85»oi5:   Obadia.}     According  to   the   re 
ceived  text,  one  of  the  five  sous  of  Izrahiah,  a  de 
scendant  of  Issachar  and  a  chief  man  of  his  tribj 
(1  Chr.  vii.  3).     Four  only,  however,   are  men 
tioned,  and  the  discrepancy  is  rectified  in  four  of 
Keunicott's  MSS.,  which  omit  the  words  "  and  the 
sons  of  Izrahiah  "  thus  making   Izrahiah  brother, 


OBADIAH      • 

«nd  not  father,  of  Obadiah,  and  both  sons  of  Uzzi. 
Tee  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  follow  the  received 
icxt,  but  read  "  four  "  instead  of  "  five." 

3.  ('n&Std:    Obdia.)     One  of  the  six  sons  of 
Azel,  a  descendant  of  Saul  (1  Chr.  viii.   38,  ix. 
44). 

4.  A  Levite,  son  of  Shemaiah,  and  descended 
from  Jeduthun  (1  Chr.  ix.  16).     He  appears  to 
have  been  a  principal  musician  in  the  Temple  choir 
in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  xii.  25).     It  is  evi- 
lent,  from  a  comparison  of  the  last-quoted  passage 
with  1  Chr.  ix.  15-17  and  Neh.  si.  17-19,  that  the 
first  three  names  "  Mattaniah,  and  Bakbukiah,  Oba 
diah,"  belong  to  ver.  24,  and  the  last  three,  "  Me- 
shullam,  Talraon,  Akkub,"   were  the  families  of 
porters.     The  name  is  omitted  in  the  Vat.  MS.  in 
Neh.  xii.  25,   where   the   Codex   Fred.   Aug.   has 
'OjSSi'as  and  the  Vulg.   Obedia.     In  Neh.  xi.  17, 
"  Obadiah  the  son  of  Shemaiah,"  is  called  "  ABDA 
the  son  of  Shammua." 

5.  (Obdias.)   The  second  in  order  of  the  lion- 
faced   Gadites,   captains  of  the  host,   who  joined 
David's  standard  at  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  9). 

6.  One  of  the  princes  of  Judah  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat,  who  were  sent  by  the  king  to  teach  in 
the  cities  of  Judah  (2  Chr.  xvii.  7). 

7.  (*A0a5fa:  Obedia.}  The  son  of  Jehiel,  of  the 
sons  of  Joab,  who  came  up  in  the  second  caravan 
with  Ezra,  accompanied  by  218  of  his  kinsmen 
(Ezr.  viii.  9). 

8.  ('Aj88(oe:    Obdias.)     A  priest,  or  family  of 
priests,  who  sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah 
(Neh.  x.  5).  [W.  A.  W.] 

9.  ('O/38ioi5 :  Abdias.)     The  prophet  Obadiah. 

We  know  nothing  of  him  except  what  we  can  ga 
ther  from  the  short  book  which  bears  his  name.  The 
Hebrew  tradition  adopted  by  St.  Jerome  (In  Abd.), 
and  maintained  by  Abarbanel  and  Kimchi,  that  he  is 
the  same  person  as  the  Obadiah  of  Ahab's  reign,  is 
as  destitute  of  foundation'  as  another  account,  also 
suggested  by  Abarbanel,  which  makes  him  to  have 
been  a  converted  Idumaean,  "  the  hatchet,"  accord 
ing  to  the  Hebrew  proverb,  "  returning  into  the 
wood  out  of  which  it  was  itself  taken  "  (Abarb.  In 
Obad  apud  Pfeifferi,  Opera,p.  1092,  Ultraj.  1704). 
The  question  of  his  date  must  depend  upon  the 
interpretation  of  the  llth  verse  of  his  prophecy. 
He  there  speaks  of  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  captivity  of  Jacob.  If  he  is  referring  to  the 
well-known  captivity  by  Nebuchadnezzar  he  must 
have  lived  at  the  time  of  the  Babylonish  captivity, 
and  have  prophesied  subsequently  to  the  year  B.C. 
588.  If,  further,  his  prophecy  against  Edom  found 
its  first  fulfilment  in  the  conquest  of  that  country 
by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  year  B.C.  583,  we  have 
its  date  fixed.  It  must  have  been  uttered  at  some 
time  in  the  five  years  which  intervened  between 
those  two  dates.  Jaeger  argues  at  length  for  an 
earlier  date.  He  admits  that  the  llth  verse  refers 
to  a  capture  of  Jerusalem,  but  maintains  that  it  may 
apply  to  its  capture  by  Shishak  in  the  reign  of  Re- 
hoboam  (1  K.  xiv.  25  ;  2  Chr.  xii.  2)  ;  by  the  Phi- 
iistines  and  Arabians  in  the  reign  of  Jehoram  (2  Chr. 
xxi.  16)  ;  by  Joash  in  the  reign  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr. 
ixv.  22) ;  or  by  the  Chaldaeans  in  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoiakim  and  of  Jehoiachin  (2  K.  xxiv.  2  and  10). 
The  Idumaeans  might,  he  argues,  have  joined  the 
enemies  of  Judah  on  any  of  these  occasions,  as 
their  inveterate  hostility  from  an  early  date  is 
proved  by  several  passages  of  Scripture,  e.  g.  Joel 
Hi.  19;  Am.  i.  11.  He  thinks  it  probable  that  the 
occasion  referred  to  by  Obadiah  is  the  capture  of 


OBADIAH 


58& 


Jerusalem  by  the  Ephraimites  in  the  reign  of  Ania- 
ziah  (2  Chr.  xxv.  22).  The  utmost  force  of  thes« 
statements  is  to  prove  a  possibility.  The  only 
argument  of  any  weight  for  the  early  date  of  Oba 
diah  is  his  position  in  the  list  of  the  books  of  the 
minor  prophets.  Why  should  he  have  been  inserted 
between  Amos  and  Jonah  if  his  date  is  about  B.C. 
585?  Schnurrer  seems  to  answer  this  question 
satisfactorily  when  he  says  that  the  prophecy  of 
Obadiah  is  an  amplification  of  the  last  five  verses  of 
Amos,  and  was  therefore  placed  next  after  the  book 
of  Amos.  Our  conclusion  is  in  favour  of  the  later 
date  assigned  to  him,  agreeing  herein  with  that  of 
Pfeiifer,  Schnurrer,  Rosenmfiller,  De  Wette,  Hende- 
werk,  and  Maurer. 

-  The  book  of  Obadiah  is  a  sustained  denunciation 
of  the  Edomites,  melting,  as  is  the  wont  of  the 
Hebrew  prophets  (cf.  Joel  iii.,  Am.  ix.),  into  a 
vision  of  the  future  glories  of  Zion,  when  the  arm 
of  the  Lord  should  have  wrought  her  deliverance 
and  have  repaid  double  upon  her  enemies.  Pre 
vious  to  the  captivity,  the  Edomites  were  in  a 
similar  relation  to  the  Jews  to  that  which  the 
Samaritans  afterwards  held.  They  were  near  neigh 
bours,  and  they  were  relatives.  The  result  was 
that  intensified  hatred  which  such  conditions  are 
likely  to  produce,  if  they  do  not  produce  cordiality 
and  good-will.  The  Edomites  are  the  types  of  those 
who  ought  to  be  friends  and  are  not — of  those  who 
ought  to  be  helpers,  but  in  the  day  of  calamity  are 
found  "  standing  on  the  other  side."  The  prophet 
first  touches  on  their  pride  and  self-confidence,  and 
then  denounces  their  "  violence  against  their  brother 
Jacob"  at  the  time  of  the  capture  of  Jerusalem. 
There  is  a  sad  tone  of  reproach  in  the  form  into 
which  he  throws  his  denunciation,  which  contrasts 
with  the  parallel  denunciations  of  Ezekiel  (xxv.  and 
xxxv.),  Jeremiah  (Lam.  iv.  21),  and  the  author  of 
the  137th  Psalm,  which  seem  to  have  been  uttered 
on  the  same  occasion  and  for  the  same  cause.  The 
psalmist's  "  Remember  the  children  of  Edom,  C 
Lord,  in  the  day  of  Jerusalem,  how  they  said, 
Down  with  it,  down  with  it,  even  to  the  ground !" 
coupled  with  the  immediately  succeeding  impreca 
tion  on  Babylon,  is  a  sterner  utterance,  by  the  side 
of  which  the  "Thou  shouldest  not"  of  Obadiah 
appears  rather  as  the  sad  remonstrance  of  disap 
pointment.  He  complains  that  they  looked  on  and 
rejoiced  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  that  they 
triumphed  over  her  and  plundered  her ;  and  that 
they  cut  off  the  fugitives  who  were  probably  making 
their  way  through  Idumaea  to  Egypt. 

The  last  six  verses  are  the  most  important  part 
of  Obadiah's  prophecy.  The  vision  presented  to  the 
prophet  is  that  of  Zion  triumphant  over  the  Idu 
maeans  and  all  her  enemies,  restored  to  her  ancient 
possessions,  and  extending  her  borders  northward 
and  southward  and  eastward  and  westward.  He 
sees  the  house  of  Jacob  and  the  house  of  Joseph 
(here  probably  denoting  the  ten  tribes  and  the  two) 
consuming  the  house  of  Esau  as  fire  devours  stubble 
(ver.  18).  The  inhabitants  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem, 
now  captive  at  Sepharad,  are  to  return  to  Jeru 
salem,  and  to  occupy  not  only  the  city  itself,  but 
the  southern  tract  of  Judaea  (ver.  20).  Those  who 
had  dwelt  in  the  southern  tract  are  to  overrun  and 
settle  in  Idumaea  (ver.  19).  The  former  inhabitants 
of  the  plain  country  are  also  to  establish  themselves 
in  Philistia  (ib.).  To  the  north  the  tribe  of  Judah  is 
to  extend  itself  as  far  as  the  fields  of  Ephraim  and 
Samaria,  while  Benjamin,  thus  displaced,  takes  pos 
session  of  Gilead  (ib.).  The  captives  of  the  ten 


690 


OBADIAH 


tribes  are  to  occupy  the  northern  region  from  the 
borders  of  the  enlarged  Judah  as  far  as  Sarepta  near 
Sidon  (ver.  20).  What  or  where  Sepharad  is  no 
one  knows.  The  LXX.,  perhaps  by  an  error  of  a 
copyist,  read  'E.<ppa.0d.  St.  Jerome's  Hebrew  tutor 
told  him  the  Jews  held  it  to  be  the  Bosporus.  St. 
Jerome  himself  thinks  it  is  derived  from  an  As 
syrian  word  meaning  "  bound "  or  "  limit,"  and 
understands  it  as  signifying  "  scattered  abroad."  So 
Maurer,  who  compares  ol  lv  rp  Suuriropp  of  Jam. 
i.  1.  Hardt,  who  has  devoted  a  volume  to  the  con 
sideration  of  the  question,  is  in  favour  of  Sipphara  in 
Mesopotamia.  The  modem  Jews  pronounce  for 
Spain.  Schultz  is  probably  right  in  saying  that  it 
is  some  town  or  district  in  Babylon,  otherwise 
.liknown. 

The  question  is  asked,  Have  the  prophet's  denun 
ciations  of  the  Edomites  been  fulfilled,  and  has  his 
vision  of  Zion's  glories  been  realised?  Typically, 
partially,  and  imperfectly  they  have  been  fulfilled, 
but,  as  Rosenmiiller  justly  says,  they  await  a  fuller 
"iccomplishment.  The  first  fulfilment  of  the  denun 
ciation  on  Edom  in  all  probability  took  place  a  few 


OBADIAB 

meant  Christians,  and  that  by  E-iom  is  meant  Rome 
Thus  Kimchi,  on  Obadiah,  lays  it  down  that  "  all 
that  the  prophets  have  said  about  the  destruction 
of  Edom  in  the  last  times  has  reference  to  Rome.' 
So  Rabbi  Bechai,  on  Is.  Ixvi.  17  ;  and  Abarbanel  ha* 
written  a  commentary  on  Obadiah  resting  on  thii 
hypothesis  as  its  basis.  Other  exampies  are  given 
by  Buxtorf  (Lex.  Talm.  in  voc.  DHN, 
goga  Judaica).  The  reasons  of  this  Rabbinical 
dictum  are  as  various  and  as  ridiculous  as  might  be 
imagined.  Nachmanides,  Bechai,  and  Abarbanel 
say  that  Janus,  the  first  king  of  Latium,  was  grand 
son  of  Esau.  Kimchi  (on  Joel  iii.  19)  says  that 
Julius  Caesar  was  an  Idumaean.  Scaliger  (ad 
Cliron.  Euseb.  n.  2152)  reports,  "  The  Jews,  both 
those  who  are  comparatively  ancient  and  those  who 
are  modem,  believe  that  Titus  was  an  Edomite,  and 
when  the  prophets  denounce  Edom  they  frequently 
refer  it  to  Titus."  Aben  Ezra  says  that  there  were 
no  Christians  except  such  as  were  Idumaeans  until 
the  time  of  Constantine,  and  that  Constantine  hav 
ing  embraced  their  religion  the  whole  Roman  em- 
Idumaean.  St.  Jerome  says 


years  after  its  utterance.     For  we  read  m  Josephus    f  «*»»-  r, 

(Ant.  x.  9,  §7)  that  five  yean  after  the  capture  of   that  some  of  the  Jews  read  .TOT,  Rome, 


Jerusalem  Nebuchadnezzar  reduced  the  Ammonites 
and  Moabites,  and  after  their  reduction  made  an 
expedition  into  Egypt.  This  he  could  hardly  have 
done  without  at  the  same  time  reducing  Idumaea. 
A  more  full,  but  still  only  partial  and  typical,  ful 
filment  would  have  taken  place  in  the  time  of  John 
Hyroanus,  who  utterly  reduced  the  Idumaeans, 
and  only  allowed  them  to  remain  in  their  country 
on  the  condition  of  their  being  circumcised  and 
accepting  the  Jewish  rites,  after  which  their  na 
tionality  was  lost  for  ever  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §1). 
Similarly  the  return  from  the  Babylonish  captivity 
would  typically  and  imperfectly  fulfil  the  promise 
of  the  restoration  of  Zion  and  the  extension  of  her 
borders.  But  "  magnificentior  sane  est  haec  pro- 
missio  quam  ut  ad  Sorobabelica  aut  Macabaica  tem- 
pora  referri  possit,"  says  Rosenmiiller  on  ver.  21. 
And  "  necessitas  cogit  ut  omnia  ad  praedicationem 
evangelii  referamus,"  says  Luther. 

The  full  completion  of  the  prophetical  descrip 
tions  of  the  glories  of  Jerusalem — the  future  golden 
age  towards  which  the  seers  stretched  their  hands 
with  fond  yearnings — is  to  be  looked  for  in  the 
Christian,  not  in  the  Jewish  Zion— in  the  antitype 
rather  than  in  the  type.  Just  as  the  fate  of  Jeru 
salem  and  the  destruction  of  the  world  are  inter 
woven  and  interpenetrate  each  other  in  the  prophecy 
uttered  by  our  Lord  on  the  mount,  and  His  words 
are  in  part  fulfilled  in  the  one  event,  but  only  fully 
accomplished  in  the  other ;  so  in  figure  and  in  type 
the  predictions  of  Obadiah  may  have  been  accom 
plished  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  Zerubbabel,  and  Hyr- 
canus,  but  their  complete  fulfilment  is  reserved  for 
the  fortunes  of  the  Christian  Church  and  her  ad 
versaries.  Whether  that  fulfilment  has  already 
occurred  in  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  through  the 
world,  or  whether  it  is  yet  to  come  (Rev.  xx.  4), 
cr  whether,  being  conditional,  it  is  not  to  be  ex 
pected  save  in  a  limited  and  curtailed  degree,  is 
not  to  be  determined  here. 

The  book  of  Obadiah  is  a  favourite  study  of  the- 
ir.odcrn  Jews.  It  is  here  especially  that  they  read 
th1)  future  fate  of  their  own  nation  and  of  the 
Christians.  Those  unversed  in  their  literature  may 
wonder  where  the  Christians  are  found  in  the  book 
of  Obadiah.  But  it  is  a  fixed  principle  of  Rabbinical 
interpretation  that  by  Kdomites  is  prophetically 


Dumah,  in  Is.  xxi.  11.  Finally,  some  of  the  Rabbis, 
and  with  them  Abarbanel,  maintain  that  it  was 
the  soul  of  Esau  which  lived  again  in  Christ. 

The  colour  given  to  the  prophecies  of  Obadiah, 
whcii  looked  at  from  this  point  of  view,  is  most 
curious.  The  following  is  a  specimen  from  Abar 
banel  on  ver.  1 : — "  The  true  explanation,  as  I  liave 
said,  is  to  be  found  in  this:  The  Idumaeans,  by 
v.-hich,  as  I  have  shown,  all  the  Christians  are  to  lie 
understood  (for  they  took  their  origin  from  Rome), 
will  go  up  to  lay  waste  Jerusalem,  which  is  the 
seat  of  holiness,  and  where  the  tomb  of  their  God 
Jesus  is,  as  indeed  they  have  several  times  gone  up 
already."  Again,  on  ver.  2 :  "  I  have  several  times 
shown  that  from  Edom  proceeded  the  kings  who 
reigned  in  Italy,  and  who  built  up  Rome  to  be 
great  among  the  nations  and  chief  among  the  pro 
vinces  ;  and  in  this  way  Italy  and  Greece  and  all 
the  western  provinces  became  filled  with  Idumaeans. 
Thus  it  is  that  the  prophets  call  the  whole  of  that 
nation  by  the  name  of  Edom."  On  ver.  8 :  "  There 
shall  not  be  found  counsel  or  wisdom  among  the 
Edomite  Christians  when  they  go  up  to  that  war." 
On  ver.  19  :  "  Those  who  have  gone  as  exiles  into 
the  Edomites',  that  is,  into  the  Christians'  laud,  and 
have  there  suffered  affliction,  will  deserve  to  have 
the  best  part  of  their  country  and  their  metropolis  as 
Mount  Seir."  On  ver.  20 :  "  Sarepta  "  is  "  France ;" 
"  Sepharad  "  is  "  Spain."  The  "  Mount  of  Esau," 
in  ver.  21,  is  "  the  city  of  Rome,"  which  is  to  be 
judged;  and  the  Saviours  are  to  be  "  the  [Jewish] 
Messiah  and  his  chieftains,"  who  are  to  be 
"  Judges." 

The  first  nine  verses  of  Obadiah  are  so  similar  to 
Jer.  xlix.  7,  &c.,  that  it  is  evident  that  one  of  the 
two  prophets  must  have  had  the  prophecy  of  the 
other  before  him.  Which  of  the  two  wrote  first  is 
doubtful.  Those  who  give  an  early  date  to  Obadiah 
thereby  settle  the  question.  Those  who  place  him 
later  leave  the  question  open,  as  he  would  in  that 
case  be  a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah.  Luther  holds 
that  Obadiah  followed  Jeremiah  Schnurrer  makea 
it  more  probable  that  Jeremiah's  prophecy  is  an 
altered  form  of  Obadiah 's.  Eiolihom,  Suhultz, 
Rosjnmiiller,  and  Maurer  agive  with  him. 

See  Ephrem  Syrus,  Kxpl.  in  Abd.  v.  239,  R"inr, 
1740;  St.  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Abd.  Op.  iii.  1-l.Vj 


OBAL 

Pjiris,  1704  ,  Luther,  Enarr.  in  Abd.  Op.  iii.  538, 
Jenae,  1612;  Pfeiffer,  Tract.  Phil.  Antirrabin. 
Op.  p.  1081,  Ultraj.  1704;  Schnurrer,  Dissertatio 
Philologicain  Obadiam,  Tttbing.  1787  ;  Schultzius, 
Scholia  in  Vet.  Test.  Norimb.  1793;  Rosenmiiller, 
Scholia  in  Vet.  Test.  Lips.  1813 ;  Maurer,  Comm. 
in  Vet.  Test.  Lips.  1836  ;  Jaeger,  Ueber  das  Zeit- 


OBED 


591 


alter  Obadja's,  Tubing.  1837. 
10.  (-irVOV--  'A/35io<5:  Abdias.) 


which  Knobel  (Genesis)  compares  with  the  («?- 
batitae  of  Pliny,  a  tribe  of  Southern  Arabia.  The 
similarity  of  the  name  with  that  of  the  Avalitae 
a  troglodyte  tribe  of  East  Africa,  in-luced  Bochari 
(Phaleg,  ii.  23)  to  conjecture  that  Obal  migrated 
thither  and  gave  his  aame  to  the  Sinus  Abalites 


[F.M.] 
An  officer  of 

high  rank  in' the  court  of  Ahab,  who  is  described  as 
"over  the  house,"  that  is,  apparently,  lord  high 
chamberlain,  or  mayor  of  the  palace  (1  K.  xviii.  3). 
His  influence  with  the  king  must  have  been  great  to 
enable  him  to  retain  his  position,  though  a  devout 
worshipper  of  Jehovah,  during  the  fierce  persecu 
tion  of  the  prophets  by  Jezebel.     At  the  peril  of 
his  life  he  concealed  a  hundred  of  them  in  caves, 
and  fed  them  there  with  bread  and  water.     But  he 
himself  does  not  seem  to  have  been  suspected  (1  K. 
xviii.  4,  13).     The  occasion  upon  which  Obadiah 
appears  in  the  history  shows  the  confidential  nature 
of  his  office.    In  the  third  year  of  the  terrible  famine 
with  which  Samaria  was  visited,  when  the  fountains 
ind  streams  were  dried  up  in  consequence  of  the 
long-continued  drought,  and  horses  and  mules  were 
perishing  for  lack  of  water,  Ahab  and  Obadiah  di 
vided  the  land  between  them  and  set  forth,  each 
unattended,   to   search   for  whatever   remnants  of 
herbage  might  still  be  left  around  the  springs  and 
in  the  fissures  of  the  river  beds.    Their  mission  was 
of  such  importance  that  it  could  only  be  entrusted 
to  the  two  principal  persons  in  the  kingdom.     Oba 
diah  was  startled  on  his  solitary  journey  by  the 
abrupt  apparition  of  Elijah,  who  had  disappeared 
since  the  commencement  of  the  famine,  and  now 
commanded  him  to  announce  to  Ahab,  "  Behold 
Elijah  1"     He  hesitated,  apparently  afraid  that  his 
long-concealed  attachment   to  the  worship  of  Je 
hovah  should  thus  be  disclosed  and  his  life  fall  a 
sacrifice.     At  the  same  time  he  was  anxious  that 
the  prophet  should  not  doubt  his  sincerity,   and 
appealed  to  what  he  had  done  in  the  persecution  by 
Jezebel.    But  Elijah  only  asserted  the  more  strongly 
his  intention  of  encountering  Ahab,  and  Obadiah 
had  no  choice  but  to  obey  (1  K.  xviii.  7-16).     The 
interview  and  its  consequences  belong  to  the  history 
of  Elijah  [vol.  i.  p.  527].    According  to  the  Jewish 
tradition  preserved  in  Ephrem  Syrus  (Assemani, 
Bibl.  Or.  Clem.  p.  70),  Obadiah  the  chief  officer  of 
Ahab  was  the  same  with  Obadiah  the  prophet.    He 
was  of  Shechem  in  the  land  of  Ephraim,  and  a  dis 
ciple  of  Elijah,  and  was  the  third  captain  of  fifty 
who  was  sent  by  Ahaziah  (2  K.  i.  13).     After  this 
he  left  the  king's  service,  prophesied,  died,  and 
buried  with  his  father.     The  "certain  woman  of 
the  wives  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  "  who  came 
to  Elisha  (2  K.  iv.  1)  was,  according  to  the  tra 
dition  in  Rashi,  his  widow. 

11.  ('AjSSfes.)     The   father  of  Ishmaiah,  who 
was  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulon  in  David's  reign 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  19). 

12.  AMerarite  Levite  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  and 
one  of  the  overseers  of  the  workmen  in  the  restora 
tion  of  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  12).  [W.  A.  W.] 

O'BAL  foy\]l  '•  EiictX:  Ebal).  A  sou  of  Joktan, 
and,  like  the"  rest  of  his  family,  apparently  the 
founder  of  an  Arab  tribe  (Gen.  x.  28),  which  has 
iv>t  yet  been  identified.  In  1  Chr.  i.  22  the  name 
b  written  EBAI*  (?3*JJ:  Alex.  Tfuiay.  Hebal), 


or  AvaKtes  of  Pliny  (vi.  34). 


[W.A.W.] 


OBDI'A  ('O0Sfa:  Obia).  Probably  a  corrup 
tion  of  Obaia,  the  form  in  which  the  name  HA- 
BAIAH  appeare  (comp.  1  Esdr.  v.  38  with  Ezr.  ii. 
61). 

O'BED  O3iy:  'fl#j5:  Obed).  1.  Son  of  Boaz 
and  Ruth  the  Moabitess  (Ruth  iv.  1 7).  The  circum 
stances  of  his  birth,  which  make  up  all  that  we  know 
about  him,  are  given  with  much  beauty  in  the  book 
of  Ruth,  and  form  a  most  interesting  specimen  of  the 
religious  and  social  life  of  the  Israelites  in  the  days  of 
Eli,  which  a  comparison  of  the  genealogies  of  David, 
Samuel,  and  Abiathar  shows  to  have  been  about 
the  time  of  his  birth.  The  famine  which  led  to 
Elimelech  and  his  sons  migrating  to  the  land  of 
Moab  may  naturallj  be  assigned  to  the  time  of  the 
Philistine  inroads  in  Eli's  old  age.  Indeed  there  is  a 
considerable  resemblance  between  the  circumstances 
described  in  Hannah's  song  (1  Sam.  ii.  5),  "  They 
that  were  hungry  ceased,  so  that  the  barren  hath 
born  seven,"  and  those  of  Obed's  birth  as  pointed 
at,  Ruth  i.  6,  and  in  the  speech  of  the  women  to 
Naomi :  "  He  shall  be  unto  thee  a  restorer  of  thy 
life,  and  a  nourisher  of  thine  old  age ;  for  thy 
daughter-in-law  which  loveth  thee,  which  is  better 
to  thee  than  seven  sons,  hath  borne  him :"  as  well 
as  between  the  prophetic  saying  (1  Sam.  ii.  7), 
'  The  Lord  maketh  poor,  and  maketh  rich :  He 
bringeth  low,  and  lifteth  up.  He  raiseth  up  the 
poor  out  of  the  dust,  and  lifteth  up  the  beggar 
from  the  dunghill,  to  set  them  among  princes,  and 
to  make  them  inherit  the  throne  of  glory :"  and 
the  actual  history  of  the  house  of  Elimelech,  whose 
glory  was  prayed  for  by  the  people,  who  said,  on 
the  marriage  of  Ruth  to  Boaz,  "  The  Lord  make 
the  woman  that  is  come  into  thine  house  like  Rachel 
and  like  Leah,  which  two  did  build  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  do  thou  worthily  in  Ephratah,  and  be 
famous  in  Bethlehem."  The  direct  mention  of  the 
Lord's  Christ  in  1  Sam.  ii.  10,  also  connects  the 
passage  remarkably  with  the  birth  of  that  chile 
who  was  grandfather  to  King  David,  and  the  lineal 
ancestor  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  name  of  Obed  occurs  only  Ruth  iv.  17,  and 
in  the  four  genealogies,  Ruth  iv.  21,  22;  1  Chr. 
ii.  12 ;  Matt.  i.  5  ;  Luke  iii.  32.  In  all  these  five 
passages,  and  in  the  first  with  peculiar  emphasis, 
he  is  said  to  be  the  father  of  Jesse.  It  is  incredible 
that  in  David's  reign,  when  this  genealogy  was 
compiled,  his  own  grandfather's  name  should  have 
been  forgotten,  and  therefore  there  is  no  escape  from 
the  conclusion  that  Obed  was  literally  Jesse's  father, 
and  that  we  have  all  the  generations  recorded  from 
Nahshon  to  David.  [JESSE  ;  NAHSHON.]  [A.  C.H.] 

2.  (Alex.  'Iw/3^8.)     A  descendant  of  Jarha,  the 
Egyptian  slave  of  Sheshan  in  the  line  of  Jerahmeel. 
He  was  grandson  of  Zabad,  one  of  David's  mighties 
(1  Chr.  ii.  37,  38). 

3.  ('flj3^0;    Alex.    'Iw/8^5.)     One   of   David's 
mighty  men  (1  Chr.  xi.  47). 

4.  ('ft/8^5 ;  Alex.  'Ia>j8T/8.)     Or.e  of  the  gate 
keepers  of  the  Temple:  son  of  Shemaiah  the  first 
born  of  Obed-cdom  (1  Chr.  xxv    7;. 


592 


OBED-EDOM 


ODOLLAM 


R.  (Alex. 'I 


Father  of  Azariah,  one  of   22,  the  place  of  Jozabad    n   Ezr.  x.  22, 


the  captains  of  hundreds  who  joined  with  Jehoiada 
in  the  revolution  by  which  Athaliah  fell  (2  Chr. 

[W.  A.  W.] 

'AfitSSapd  in 
Alex.  'AftfSSaSSft,  in 


xxiii.  1). 

O'BED-E'DOM 

Sam.,   'AfiSeSt/ji   in  Chr. ; 


2  Sam.  vi.  11 :  Obed-edom).  1.  A  Levite,  appa 
rently  of  the  family  of  Kohath.  He  is  described  as 
a  Gittite  (2  Sam.  vi.  10,  11),  that  is,  probably,  a 
native  of  the  Levitical  city  of  Gath-Kimmon  in 
Manasseh,  which  was  assigned  to  the  Kohathites 
(Josh.  xxi.  45),  and  is  thus  distinguished  from 
"  Obed-edom  the  son  of  Jeduthun,"  who  was  a 
Merarite.  After  the  death  of  Uzzah,  the  ark,  which 
was  being  conducted  from  the  house  of  Abinadab  in 
Gibeah  to  the  city  of  David,  was  earned  aside  into 
the  house  of  Obed-edom,  where  it  continued  three 
months,  and  brought  with  its  presence  a  blessing 
upon  Obed-edom  and  his  household.  Hearing  this, 
David,  at  the  head  of  a  large  choir  of  singers  and 
minstrels,  clothed  in  fine  linen,  and  attended  by  the 
elders  of  Israel  and  the  chief  captains,  "  went  to 
bring  up  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  out 
of  the  house  of  Obed-edom  with  joy "  (1  Chr.  xv. 
25 ;  2  Sam.  vi.  12). 

2.  "  Obed-edom  the  son  of  Jeduthun  "  (1  Chr. 
xvi.  38),  a  Merarite  Levite,  appears  to  be  a  different 
pei-son  from  the  last-mentioned.  He  was  a  Levite 
of  the  second  degree  and  a  gatekeeper  for  the  ark 
(1  Chr.  xv.  18,  24),  appointed  to  sound  "with 
harps  on  the  Sheminith  to  excel"  (1  Chr.  xv.  21, 
xvi.  5).  With  his  family  of  seven  sons  and  their 
children,  "  mighty  men  of  valour "  (1  Chr. 


is  a  manifest   corruption.     The  original  name  is 
more  clearly  traced  in  the  Vulgate. 

OCI'NA  ('OKfiva;  and  so  Alex.:  Vulg.  omits). 
"Sour  and  Ocina"  are  mentioned  (Jud.  a.  28) 
among  the  places  on  the  sea-coast  of  Palestine, 
which  were  terrified  at  the  approach  of  Holofcmes. 
The  names  seem  to  occur  in  a  regular  order  from 
north  to  south ;  and  as  Ocina  is  mentioned  between 
Sour  (Tyre)  and  Jemnaan  (Jabneh),  its  position 
agrees  with  that  of  the  ancient  ACCHO,  now  Akkal 
and  in  mediaeval  times  sometimes  called  Aeon  <"Bro- 


cardus;  William  of  Tyre,  &c.). 


OC'RAN(jn3y: 


[G.] 
Ochrari).  The  father 


of  Pagiel,  chief  of  the  tribe  of  Asher  after  the  Ex 
odus  (Num.  i.  13,  ii.  27,  vii.  72,  77,  x.  26). 


O'DEI)(TTiy: 


Alex.  'A8«l8:   Oded). 


1.  The  father  of  Azariah  the  prophet  in  the  reign 
of  Asa  (2  Chr.  xv.  1).  In  2  Chr.  xv.  8,  the  pro- 
phecy  in  the  preceding  verses  is  attributed  to  him, 
and  not  to  his  son.  The  Alex.  MS.  and  the  Vul 
gate  retain  the  reading  which  is  probably  the  true 
one,  "  Azariah  the  son  of  Oded."  These  are  sup 
ported  by  the  Peshito-Syriac,  in  which  "  Azur  "  is 
substituted  for  Oded. 

2.  A  prophet  of  Jehovah   in  Samaria,   at  the 


time  of  Pekah's  invasion  of  Judah. 
ix.   12,    §2)  calls  him 


Joseph  us  (Ant. 
On  the  return 

army  with  the  200,000  captives 
Jerusalem,  Oded  met  them  and  pre- 


vailed  upon  them  to  let  the  captives  go  free  (2  Chr. 


the  gatekeeper  and  Obed-edom  the  Gittite  may  have  I  ciotj,e(j 
been  the  same.     After  enumerating  his  seven  sons    tregs    ^  & 
the  chronicler  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  5)   adds,   "  for  God 
blessed  him,"  referring  apparently  to  2  Sam.  vi.  11, 
"  the  Lord  blessed  Obed-edom  and  all  his  house- 


hold."  The  family  still  remained  at  a  much  later 
time  as  keepers  of  the  vessels  of  the  Temple  in  the 
reign  of  Amaziah  (2  Chr.  xxv.  24).  [W.  A.  W.] 

O'BETH  ('f!j84j0:  om.  in  Vulg.).     EBED  the 
son  of  Jonathan  is  so  called  in  1  Esdr.  viii.  32. 

O'BIL  (^aitf:  'A&tca;  Alex.  OvjSt'as:   Z7WJ). 


An  Ishmaelite  who  was  appropriately  appointed 
keeper  of  the  herds  of  camels  in  the  reign  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  30).  Bochart  (Hieroz.  pt.  i.,  11.  2) 
conjectures  that  the  name  is  that  of  the  office, 
abdl  in  Arabic  denoting  "  a  keeper  of  camels." 

OBLATION.    [SACRIFICE.] 

O'BOTH  (Jlhfc:  'n&M:  Oboth),  one  of  the 
encampments  of  the  Israelites,  east  of  Moab  (Num. 
xxi.  10,  xxxiii.  43).  Its  exact  site  is  unknown. 
[WILDERNESS  OF  THE  WANDERING.] 

OCHI'ELCOxnjAos;  Alex.  'O{irj\os  :  OzieT). 
The  form  in  which  the  name  JEIEI,  appears  in 
1  Esdr.  i.  9  (comp.  2  Chr.  xxxv.  9).  The  Geneva 
version  has  CHIKLUS. 

OCLDE'LUS  ('fl*<$8jjAos  ;  Alex.  'flKefSrjXos  : 
Jussio,  Reddus),  This  name  occupies,  in  1  Esdr.  ix. 


•  Dr.  Bonar  has  suggested  to  us  tbat  the  name  Khu- 
rnttm  represents  the  ancient  Hareth  (Kliareth).  This  is 
ingenious,  and  may  be  correct ;  but  Tobler  (  Umgebungen. 
ftc.,  622, 3)  has  made  cut  a  strong  case  for  the  name  being 


norihem       gdo 


to  Jericho  the  cit    of     lm_ 
•  ^  of  ^  ^  d       of  fhe 
[W.  A.  W.] 


ODOL'LAM  ('O5o\\<in:  Odollam).  The  Greek 
form  of  the  name  ADULLAM;  found  in  2  Mace, 
xii.  38  only.  Adullam  is  stated  by  Eusebius  and 
Jerome  ( Onomast.  "  Adollam  ")  to  have  been  in 
their  day  a  large  village,  about  10  miles  east  of 
Elcutheropolis ;  and  here  (if  Beit-jibrin  be  Eleu- 
theropolis)  a  village  with  the  name  of  Bet  D6la 
(Tobler,  Bethlehem,  29;  Dritte  Wand.  151)  or 
Beit  Ula  (Robinson,  1st  ed.  App.  117)  now 
stands. 

The  obstacle  to  this  identification  is  not  that 
Adullam,  a  town  of  the  Shefelah,  should  be  found 
in  the  mountains,  for  that  puzzling  circumstance  is 
not  unfrequent  (comp.  KEILAH,  &c.  vol.  ii.  p.  9), 
so  much  as  that  in  the  catalogue  of  Joshua  xv. 
it  is  mentioned  with  a  group  of  towns  (Zoreah, 
Socoh,  &c.)  which  lay  at  the  N.W.  corner  of  Judah, 
while  Bet  D&la  is  found  with  those  (Nezib,  Keilah, 
&c.)  of  a  separate  group,  farther  south. 

Further  investigation  is  requisite  before  we  can 
positively  say  if  there  is  any  cavern  in  the  neigh 
bourhood  of  Bet  Dula  answering  to  the  "  cave  of 
Adullam."  The  cavern  at  Khureitiin*  3  miles 
south  of  Bethlehem,  usually  shown  to  travellers 
as  Adullam,  is  so  far  distant  as  to  put  it  out  of 
the  question.  ]t  is  more  probable  that  this  lattei 


that  of  Chareitfin,  or  Kreton,  a  famous  Rssene  nermit  of 
the  3rd  or  4th  cer.t ,  who  founded  a  taunt  iu  the  caven 
In  question.  (See  Acta  Sanct.  Sept  28.) 


ODONARKES 

is  the  cavern  in  the  wilderness  of  Engedi,  in  which 
the  adventure b  of  Saul  and  David  (1  Sam.  xxiv.) 
occurred.  Everything  that  can  be  said  to  identify 
it  with  the  cave  of  Adullam  has  been  said  by  Dr. 
Bonar  (Land  of  Promise,  248-50) ;  but  his  strongest 
argument — an  inference,  from  1  Sam.  xxii.  1,  in 
favour  of  its  proximity  to  Bethlehem— comes  into 
direct  collision  with  the  statement  of  Jerome  quoted 
above,  which  it  should  be  observed  is  equally  op 
posed  to  Dr.  Robinson's  proposal  to  place  it  at  Deir- 
Dubban. 

The  name  of  Adullam  appears  to  have  been  first 
applied  to  Khureitun  at  the  time  of  the  Crusades 
(Will,  of  Tyre,  xv.  6).  [G.] 

ODONAR'KES  (marg.  Odomarra :  'OSo/xrjpo, 
'OSoupp^s  :  Odares),  the  chief  of  a  nomad  tribe  slain 
by  Jonathan  (1  Mace.  ix.  66).  The  form  in  the  A.  V. 
does  not  appear  to  be  supported  by  any  authority. 
The  Geneva  version  has  "  Odomeras."  [B.  F.  W.] 

OFFERINGS.    [SACRIFICE.] 

OFFICER.0  It  is  obvious  that  most,  if  not  all, 
of  the  Hebrew  words  rendered  "  officer,"  are  either 
of  an  indefinite  character,  or  are  synonymous  terms 
for  functionaries  known  under  other  and  more  spe 
cific  names,  as  "scribe,"  "eunuch,"  &c. 

The  two  words  so  rendered  in  the  N.  T.  each  bear 
in  ordinary  Greek  a  special  sense.  In  the  case  of 
uirTjpeTTjs  this  is  of  no  very  definite  kind,  but  the 
word  is  used  to  denote  an  inferior  officer  of  a  court 
of  justice,  a  messenger  or  bailiff,  like  the  Roman 
viator  or  lictor.  Tipple-ropes  at  Athens  were  offi 
cers  whose  duty  it  was  to  register  and  collect  fines 
imposed  by  courts  of  justice  ;  and  "  deliver  to  the 
officer"  d  means,  give  in  the  name  of  the  debtor  to 
the  officer  of  the  court  (Demosthenes  (or  Dinarchus) 
c.  Theocr.  p.  1218,  Reiske;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  "  Prac- 
tores,"  "Hyperetes;"  Jul.  Poll.  viii.  114;  De- 
mosth.  c.  Arist.  p.  778  ;  Aesch.  c.  Timarch.  p.  5 ; 
Grotius,  on  Luke  xii.  58). e 

Josephus  says,  that  to  each  court  of  justice  among 
the  Jews,  two  Levites' were  to  be  attached  as  clerks  or 
secretaries,  Ant.  iv.  8,  §14.  The  Mishna  also  men 
tions  the  crier  and  other  officials,  but  whether  these 
answered  to  the  officers  of  Josephus  and  the  N.  T. 
cannot  be  determined.  Selden,  from  Maimonides, 
mentions  the  high  estimation  in  which  such  officials 
were  held.  Sanhedr.  iv.  3,  vi.  1 ;  Selden,  deSynedr. 
ii.  13,  11.  [PUNISHMENTS;  SERJEANTS.] 

The  word  "  officers  "  is  used  to  render  the  phrases 
of  OTrb  (or  ivi)  TWV  XP««»»')  1  Mace.  x.  41,  xiii. 
37,  in  speaking  of  the  revenue-officers  of  Demetrius. 


00 


593 


It  is  also  used  to  render  Aftrovpyoi,  Ecchis.  x. 
2,  where  the  meaning  is  clearly  the  subordinates  iu 
a  general  sense  to  a  supreme  authority.  [H.  \V.  P.] 
OG  (J'ly :  "fly  ••  Og),  an  Amoritish  king  of  Bashan, 
whose  rule  extended  over  sixty  cities,  of  which  the 
two  chief  were  Ashtaroth-Karnaim  and  Edrei  (Josh, 
xiii.  12).  He  was  one  of  the  last  representatives  o* 
the  giant-race  of  Rephaim.  According  to  Eastern 
traditions,  he  escaped  the  deluge  by  wading  beside 
the  ark  (Sale's  Koran,  ch.  v.  p.  86).  He  was  sup 
posed  to  be  the  largest  of  the  sons  of  Anak,  and  a 
descendant  of  Ad.  He  is  said  to  have  lived  no  less 
than  3000  years,  and  to  have  refused  the  warnings 
of  Jethro  (Shoaib),  who  was  sent  as  a  prophet  to 
him  and  his  people  (D'Herbelot,  s.  vv.  "Falasthin," 
"Anak  "  ).  Soiouthi  wrote  a  long  book  about  him 
and  his  race,  chiefly  taken  from  Rabbinic  traditions, 
and  called  Aug  fi  khaber  Aoug  (Id.  s.  v.  "  Aug";. 
See,  too,  the  Journal  Asiatique  for  1841 ,  and  Chro- 
nique  de  Tabari  trad,  du  persan,  par  Dubeux,  i. 
48,  f.  (Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  306). 

Passing  over  these  idle  fables,  we  find  from 
Scripture  that  he  was,  with  his  children  and  his 
people,  defeated  and  exterminated  by  the  Israelites 
at  Edrei,  immediately  after  the  conquest  of  Sihon, 
who  is  represented  by  Josephus  as  his  friend  and 
ally  (Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  5,  §3).  His  sixty  proud  fenced 
cities  were  taken,  and  his  kingdom  assigned  to  the 
Reubenites,  Gadites,  and  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh 
(Dent.  iii.  1-13 ;  Num.  xxxii.  33.  Also  Deut.  i.  4, 
iv.  47,  xxxi.  4 ;  Josh.  ii.  10,  ix.  10,  xiii.  12,  30). 
The  giant  stature  of  Og,  and  the  power  and  bravery 
of  his  people,  excited  a  dread  which  God  himself 
alleviated  by  his  encouragement  to  Moses  before  the 
battle  ;  and  the  memory  of  this  victory  lingered  long 
in  the  national  memory  (Ps.  cxxxv.  11,  cxxxvi.  20). 
The  belief  in  Og's  enormous  stature  is  corro 
borated  by  an  appeal  to  a  relic  still  existing  in  the 
time  of  the  author  of  Deut.  iii.  11.  This  was  an 
iron  bedstead,  or  bier,  preserved  in  "  Rabbath  of  the 
children  of  Ammon."  How  it  got  there  we  are  not 
told  ;  perhaps  the  Ammonites  had  taken  it  in  some 
victory  over  Og.  The  vei'se  itself  has  the  air  of  a 
later  addition  (Dathe),  although  it  is  of  course  pos 
sible  that  the  Hebrews  may  have  heard  of  so  curious 
a  relic  as  this  long  before  they  conquered  the  city 
where  it  was  treasured.  Rabbath  was  first  subdued 
in  the  reign  of  David  (2  Sam.  xii.  26)  ;  but  it  does 
not  therefore  follow  that  Deut.  iii.  11  was  not 
written  till  that  time  (Havernick  ad  foe.).  Some 
have  supposed  that  this  was  one  of  the  common  flat 
beds  [BEDS]  used  sometimes  on  the  housetops  of 


>>  Van  de  Velde  (Syr.  &  Pal.  ii.  33)  illustrates  this  j 
charming  narrative  more  forcibly  than  is  his  wont.    The 
cave,  he  says,  has  still  "  the  same  narrow  natural  vault-  j 
tog  at  the  entrance,  the  same  huge  chamber  in  the  rock,  \ 
probably  the  place  where  Saul  lay  down  to  rest  in  the 
heat  of  the  day  ;  the  same  side  vaults,  too,  where  David 
and  his  men  lay  concealed,  when,  accustomed  to  the  ob 
scurity  of  the  cavern,  they  saw  Saul  enter,  while  Saul, 
blinded  by  the  glare  of  light  outside,  saw  nothing  of' 
them." 

c  1.  2^V?>   Nao-t'jS,  Vulg.  super  omnia,  from    D¥3> 
"  to  place." 

2.  From  same,    3-X3,  part.  plur.  In  Niph.    D<I3'¥3' 
taoeo-Tanevoi,  praefecti,  1  K.  iv.  1. 

3.  D'"1D,  Gen.  xl.  2,  evvov\<K.    [EoNUCH.] 


,  Ksth.  Ii.  3, 


;  Gen.  xii.  33, 


Xoh.  xi.  9,  *iuV*u.,o?  ;  praepositus  ,  A.  V.  "  overseer." 
6.  n"-Jj?B,  7rpo<rTor<)s,  concr.  for  abstr.  ;  properly,  office, 
VOU  ti. 


like  "  authority "  in  Eng.    Both  of  these  words  (4)  anU 
(5)  from  *7£Q,  "  visit." 

6.  IP,  oiiroi'd/xo?,  frinceps,   Esth.  i.  8,   joined  with 
D'")D,  Pan.  i.  3. 

7.  "IDt^,  part,  from  "ItOK',  "  cut,"  or  "  inscribe,"  Ex. 
ii.   6,  ypofi/oiaTeus,  exactor ;  Num.   xi.   16,  ypoMnarns, 
Deut.  xvi.  18,7pafxju.aTO€«ra7<oYfv?,  magister,  Josh.  i.  10 
princeps. 

8.  The  word  "officer"  is  also  used,  Esth.  ix.  3,  to 

render  POfcODt    which   is  Joined    with    ^J?. 

T     T  :  ^ 

"  those  that   did  the   business,"    •ypa/o./j.o.Teis , 

tores. 

In  N.  T.  "  officer"  is  used  to  render,  (1)  in 
minister,  (2)  n-pi/cTwp,  Luke  xii.  58,  exactor. 

d  jrapaSovrcu  T<3  TrpaitT.  . 

•  TIpo/cTiup  U  used  in  LXV.  to  render  K'33,  Ic.  111.  12  • 
A.  V.  "  oppressor,"  one  vhc  persecutes  by  exaction. 

a  Q 


marg 


594 


CHAD 


Extern  cities,  but  made  of  iron  instead  of  palm- 
Lranches,  which  would  not  have  supported  the 
giant's  weight.  It  is  more  probable  that  the  words 
VP3  Kny,  eres  barzel,  mean  a  "  sarcophagus  of 
black  basalt,"  a  rendering  of  which  they  undoubtedly 
admit.  The  Arabs  still  regard  black  basalt  as  iron, 
because  it  is  a  stone  "  ferrei  colons  atque  duritiae' 
(Plin.  xxxvi.  11),  and  "  contains  a  large  percentage 
of  iron."  [IRON.]  It  is  most  abundant  in  the 
Hauran;  and  indeed  is  probably  the  cause  of  the 
name  Argob  (the  stony)  given  to  a  part  of  Ogs 
kingdom.  This  sarcophagus  was  9  cubits  ong,  and 
4  cubits  broad.  It  does  not  of  course  follow  that 
Og  was  1 5J  feet  high.  Maimonides  (More  Nevochim, 
ii.  48)  sensibly  remarks  that  a  bed  (supposing  "  a 
Vjd"  to  be  intended)  is  usually  one-third  longer 
than  the  sleeper ;  and  Sir  J.  Chardin,  as  well  as 
other  travellers,  have  observed  the  ancient  tendency 
to  make  mummies  and  tombs  far  larger  than  the 
natural  size  of  men,  in  order  to  leave  an  impression 
of  wonder. 

Other  legends  about  Og  may  be  found  in  Ben- 
Uzziel  on  Num.  xxi.  33,  Midrash  Jalqut,  lol.  19 
(quoted  by  Ewald),  and  in  Mahometan  writers:  as 
that  one  of  his  bones  long  served  for  a  bridge  over 
a  river ;  that  he  roasted  at  the  sun  a  fish  freshly 
caught,'&c.  An  apocryphal  book  of  king  Og,  which 
probably  contained  these  and  other  traditions,  was 
condemned!  by  Pope  Gelasius  (Decret.  vi.  13,  Sixt. 
Senensis,  Bibl.  Sanct.  p.  86).  The  origin  of  the 
name  is  doubtful :  some,  but  without  any  proba 
bility,  would  connect  it  with  the  Greek  Ogyges 
(Ewald,  Gesch.  i.  306,  ii.  269).  [F.  W.  F.] 

O'HADOnfc:  'Ac$S;  Alex.  'lowaSi  in  Ex.: 
AJiod).  One  of  the  six  sons  of  Simeon  (Gen.  xlvi 
10:  Ex.  vi.  15).  His  name  is  omitted  from  th< 
lists  in  1  Chr.  iv,  24  and  Num.  xxvi.  14,  though 
in  the  former  passage  the  Syriac  has  JCTlJ,  Ohor 
as  in  Gen.  and  Ex. 


O'HEL  pnfc  :  'O<5x  :  OhoT).  As  the  text  nov 
stands  Ohel  was  one  of  the  seven  sons  of  Zerub 
babel,  though  placed  in  a  group  of  five  who  fo 
some  cause  are  separated  from  the  rest  (1  Chr.  iii 
20).  Whether  they  were  by  a  different  mother,  o: 
were  born  after  the  return  from  Babylon,  can  onlj 
be  conjectured. 

OIL."  i.  Of  the  numerous  substances,  anima 
and  vegetable,  which  were  known  to  the  ancients  as 
yielding  oil,  the  olive-berry  is  the  one  of  which  mos 
frequent  mention  is  made  in  the  Scriptures.  It  i 
well-known  that  both  the  quality  and  the  value  o 
olive-oil  differ  according  to  the  time  of  gathering 
*.lie  fruit,  and  the  amount  of  pressure  used  in  th 
course  of  preparation.  These  processes,  which  d 
not  essentially  differ  from  the  modem,  are  describe 
minutely  by  the  Roman  writers  on  agriculture,  an- 
to  their  descriptions  the  few  notices  occurring  bot 
in  Scripture  and  the  Rabbinical  writings,  whie 
throw  light  on  the  ancient  Oriental  method,  nearl; 
correspond.  Of  these  descriptions  the  following  may 
be  taken  us  an  abstract.  The  best  oil  is  made  frorr 


OIL 

rnit  gathered  about  November  or  D<x*n  b*r,  whim 
,  has  begun  to  change  colour,  but  before  it  Iws  be- 
xmie  black.  The  berry  in  the  more  advan'.fd  et;ae 
ields  more  oil,  but  of  an  inferior  quality.  Oil  wa,t 
Iso  made  from  unripe  fruit  by  :.  special  process  as 
arly  as  September  or  October  while  the  bardrj 
orte  of  fruit  were  sometimes  deLyed  till  Februarj 
r  March,  Virg.  Georg.  ii.  519;  Palladius,  II.  A', 
ii.  4;  Columella,  R.  R.  xii.  47,  50  ;  Cato,  R.  R. 
.5  ;  Pliny,  N.  H.  xv.  1-8 ;  Varro,  R.  R.  i.  55 
Hor.  2  Sat.  ii.  46. 

1.  Gathering. — Great  care  is  necessary  in  ga- 
hering,  not  to  injure  either  the  fruit  itself  or  the 

boughs  of  the  tree ;  and  with  this  view  it  was  either 
gathered  by  hand  or  shaken  off  carefully  with  a 
ight  reed  or  stick.  The  "  boughing  "  of  Deut.  xxiv. 
20  (marg.),b  probably  corresponds  to  the  "shak- 
ng"c  of  Is.  xvii.  6,  xxiv.  13,  i.e.  a  subsequent 
jeating  for  the  use  of  the  poor.  See  Mishna,  Sliebiith, 
v.  2  ;  Peah,  vii.  2,  viii.  3.  After  gathering  and 
areful  cleansing,  the  fruit  was  either  at  once  carried 
»  the  press,  which  is  recommended  as  the  best 
ourse ;  or,  if  necessary,  laid  on  tables  with  hollow 
trays  made  sloping,  so  as  to  allow  the  first  juice 
'Amurca)  to  flow  into  other  receptacles  beneath, 
care  being  taken  not  to  heap  the  fruit  too  much, 
and  so  prevent  the  free  escape  of  the  juice,  which  is 
injurious  to  the  oil  though  itself  useful  in  other 
ways  (Colum.  it.  s.  xii.  30 ;  Aug.  Civ.  Dei,  i.  8,  2). 

2.  Pressing. — In  order  to  make  oil,   the  fruit 
was  either  bruised  in  a  mortar ;  crushed  in  a  press, 
loaded  with  wood  or  stones ;  ground  in  a  mill ;  or 
trodden  with  the  feet.     Special  buildings  used  for 
grape-pressing  were  used  also  for  the  purpose  of 
olive-pressing,  and  contained  both  the  press  and  the 
receptacle  for  the  pressed  juice.     Of  these  processes, 
the  one   least   expedient  was   the  last  (treading}, 
which  perhaps  answers  to  the  "  caualis  et  solea," 
mentioned  by  Columella,  and  was  probably  the  one 
usually  adopted  by  the  poor.     The  "  beaten"  oil  of 
Ex.  xxvii.   20 ;  Lev.  xxiv.  2,  and  Ex.  xxix.  40 ; 
Num.  xxviii.  5,  was  probably  made  by  bruising  in 
a  mortar.     These  processes,  and  also  the  place  and 
the  machine  for   pressing,   are  mentioned   in  th.' 
Mishna.     Oil-mills  are  often  made  of  stone,  and 
turned  by  hand.     Others  consist  of  cylinders  en- 
closing  a  beam,  which  is  turned  by  a  camel  or  other 
animal.     An  Egyptian  olive-press  is  described  by 
Niebuhr,  in  which  the  pressure  exerted  on  the  fruit 
is  given  by  means  of  weights  of  wood  and  stone 
placed  in  a  sort  of  box  above.     Besides  the  above 
cited  Scripture  references,   the  following  passages 
mention  either  the  places,  the  processes,  or  the  ma 
chines  used  in  olive-pressing:  Mic.  vi.  15  ;  Joel  ii. 
24,  iii.  13  ;   Is.  Ixiii.  3;   Lam.  i.  15  ;  Hag.  ii.  16  ; 
Mcnach.  viii.  4 ;  Shebiitk,  iv.  9,  vii.  6  (see  Ges.  p. 
179  s  t>."13);    Terum.  x.  7;   Shabb.  i.  9;  Baba 
Bat/ira,  iv.  5 ;  Ges.  pp.  351,  725,  848,  1096  ;  Vi- 
truvius,  x.  1 ;  Cato,  R.  R.  3  ;  Celsius,  Hiersb.  n. 
346,  350  ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  122,  pi.  xvii. ;  Arun- 
dell,  Asia  Minor,\\.  196;  Wellsted,  Trav.  ii.  430. 
[GETHSEMANE.] 

3.  Keeping.— Both  olives  and  oil  were  Up*  in 
jars  carefully  cleansed  ;  and  oil  was  drawn  out  fcl 
use  in  horns  or  other  small  vessels  (CRUSE).  1  nas* 


•  1    inV\  from  inS,  "  shine"  (Ges.  1152-3).  monj 
fXaior,  uUum,  clear  olive-oil,  as  distinguished  from 

2.  ]DK>.  "  pressed  juice,"  e'Xeuov,  oleum,  from  fD 
"  becoms  fat"  (Ges.  1437);  sometimes  joined  with  TV' 
i\ta.r  «£  tXatwf,  oleum  de  olivetit,  distinguishing  olivi 


Juice  from  oil  produced  from  other  sources.  AUo  some- 
times  in  A.  V.  "  ointment"  (Celsius,  liierob.  Ii.  278). 

3.  HE'D,  Cbald.  cAcaor,  oleum,  only  to  Ear.  vt  8 
vii  22. 

b  "INS.  ^li;!^,  KoAa|i>j<ra<j*<tt. 


OIL 


595 


vessels  fo-  k(*ping  oil  were  stored  in  cellars  or 
storehouse  ;  special  mention  cf  such  repositories  is 
made  in  the  inventories  of  royal  property  and  re 
venue  (1  Sam.  x.  l,xvi.  1, 13  ;  1  K.  i.  39,zvii.  16  ; 
2  K.  iv.  2,  6,  ix.  1,  3  ;  1  Chr.  xxvii.  28  ;  2  Chr.  xi. 
11,  xxxii.  28  ;  Prov.  xxi.  20  ;  Shebiith,  v.  7  ;  Ce- 
lim,  ii.  5,  xvii.  12 ;  Colutnell.  /.  c.). 

Oil  of  Tekoa  was  reckoned  the  best  (Menach. 
riii.  S).  Trade  in  oil  was  carried  on  with  the  Ty- 
rians,  by  whom  it  was  probably  often  re-exported 
to  Egypt,  whose  olives  do  not  for  the  most  part 
produce  good  oil.  Oil  to  the  amount  of  20,000 
baths  (2  Chr.  ii.  10;  Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  2,  §9),  or 
20  measures  (cors,  1  K.  v.  11)  was  among  the 
supplies  furnished  by  Solomon  to  Hiram.  Direct 
trade  in  oil  was  also  carried  on  between  Egypt  and 
Palestine  (1  K.  v.  11 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  10,  15  ;  Ezr.  iii. 
7;  Is.  xxx.  6,  Ivii.  9  ;  Ez.  xxvii.  17 ;  Hos.  xii.  1 ; 
S.  Hieronym.  Com.  in  Osee,  iii.  12;  Joseph.  Ant. 
viii.  2,  §9  ;  B.  J.  ii.  21,  §2 ;  Strabo,  xvii.  p.  809 ; 
Pliny,  xv.  4,  13;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  28,  sm. 
ed. ;"  Hasselquist,  Trav.  pp.  53,  li7).  [COM 
MERCE  ;  WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.] 

ii.  Besides  the  use  of  olives  themselves  as  food, 
common  to  all  olive-producing  countries  (Hor.  1  Od. 
xxxi.  15 ;  Martial,  xiii.  36  ;  Arvieux,  Trav.  p.  209  ; 
Terumoth,  i.  9,  ii.  6),  the  principal  uses  of  olive-oil 
may  be  thus  stated. 

1.  As  food. — Dried   wheat,   boiled   with   either 
butter  or  oil,  but  more  commonly  the  former,  is  a 
common  dish  for  all  classes  in  Syria.     Hasselquist 
speaks  of  bread  baked  in  oil  as  being  particularly 
sustaining;  and  Faber,  in  his  Pilgrimage,  mentions 
eggs  fried  in  oil  as  Saracen  and  Arabian  dishes.     It 
was  probably  on  account  of  the  common  use  of  oil 
in  food  that  the  "  meat-offerings  "  prescribed  by  the 
Law  were  so  frequently  mixed  with  oil  (Lev.  ii.  4, 
7.  15,  viii.  26,  31 ;  Num.  vii.  19,  and  foil. ;  Deut. 
xii.  17,  xxxii.  13;  IK.  xvii.  12,  15;  1  Chr.  xii. 
40 ;  Ez.  xvi.  13,  19 ;  S.  Hieronym.   Vit.  S.    Hi- 
larion.  c.  11,  vol.  ii.  32;  Ibn  Batuta,  Trav.  p.  60, 
ed.    Lee ;    Volney,   Trav.   i.    362,   406 ;    Russell, 
Aleppo,  i.  80,   il9;  Harmer,  Obs.  i.  471,  474; 
Shaw,  Trav.  p.  232  ;  Bertrandon  de  la  Brocquiere, 
Ef.rly  Trav.  p.  332  ;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Arab. 
i.  54 ;  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  59  ;  Arvieux,  1.  c. ;  Chardin, 
Voy.  iv.  84 ;  Niebuhr,  Voy.  ii.  302 ;   Hasselquist, 
Trav.  p.  132;  Faber,  Evagatorium,  vol.  i.  p.  197, 
u.  152,415).  [FOOD;  OFFERING.] 

2.  Cosmetic. — As  is  the  case  generally  in  hot 
climates,  oil  was  used  by  the  Jews  for  anointing 
the  body,  e.  g.  after  the  bath,  and  giving  to  the 
skin  and  hair  a  smooth  and  comely  appearance,  e.  g. 
before  an  entertainment.     To  be  deprived  of  the  use 
of  oil  was  thus  a  serious  privation,  assumed  voluntarily 
in  the  time  of  mourning  or  of  calamity.    At  Egyp 
tian  entertainments  it  was  usual  for  a  servant  to 
anoint  the  head  of  each  guest,  as  he  took  his  scat 
[OINTMENT],  (Deut.  xxviii.  40;  2  Sam.  xiv.  2  ; 
Ruth  iii.  3;  2  Sam.  xii.  20  ;  Ps.  xxiii.  5,  xcii.  10, 
civ.  15 ;  Dan.  x.  3 :  Is.  Ixi.  3;  Mic.  vi.  15  ;  Am. 
vi.    6;    Sus.    17;    Luke   vii.   46).     Strabo    men 
tions  the  Egyptian  use  of  castor-oil  for  this  purpose, 
xviii.  824.     The  Greek  and  Roman  usage  will  be 
found  mentioned  in  the  following  passages  :  Horn. 
II.  x.  577,  xviii.   596,  xxiii.  281;   Od.  vii.   107, 
vi.  96,  x.  364 ;   Hor.  3  Od.  xiii.  6  ;  1  Sat.  vi.  123  ; 
2   Sat.  i.  8 ;    Pliny,  xiv.   22 ;    Aristoph.    Wasps, 
608,  Clouds,  816  ;  Roberts,  pi.  164.    Butter,  as  is 
noticevi  by  Pliny,  is  used  by  the  negroes  and  the 
lower  class  of  Arabs  for  the  like  purposes  (Pliny, 
ri.  41;  BurcHiai  dt,  Trav.  i.  53;   Nubia,  p.  215; 


Lightfoot,  Hor.  flebr    ii.  375  ;  see  Deut.  ttxiii.  24  ; 
Job  xxix.  6  ;  Ps.  cix.  18). 

The  use  of  oil  preparatory  to  athletic  ticrcises 
customary  among  the  Greeks  and  Remans,  can 
scarcely  have  had  place  to  any  extent  among  the 
Jews,  who  in  their  earlier  times  ha"*  no  such  con 
tests,  though  some  are  mentioned  by  Joseph  us  with 
censure  as  taking  place  at  Jerusalem  and  Caesare? 
under  Herod  (Hor.  1  Od.  viii.  8 ;  Pliny,  xv.  4 
Athenaeus,  xv.  34,  p.  686;  Horn.  Od.  vi.  79,  215 
Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  8,  §1,  xvi.  5,  §1  ;  Diet,  of  An 
tiq.,  "  Aliptae"). 

3.  Funereal. — The  bodies  of  the  dead  were  an 
ointed  with  oil  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  pro 
bably  as  a  partial  antiseptic,  and  a  similar  custom 
appears  to  have  prevailed  among  the  Jews  (//.  xxiv. 
587;  Virg.  Aen.  vi.  219).  [ANOINT;  BURIAL.] 

4.  Medicinal. — As  oil  is  in  use  in  many  cases  in 
modern  medicine,  so  it  is  not  surprising,  that  it 
should  have  been  much  used  among  the  Jews  and 
other  nations  of  antiquity  for  medicinal  purposes. 
Celsus  repeatedly  speaks  of  the  use  of  oil,  especially 
old  oil,  applied   externally  with  friction  in  fevers, 
and  in  many  other  cases.     Pliny  says  that  olive-oil 
is  good  to.  warm  the  body  and  fortify  it  against 
cold,  and  also  to  cool  heat  in  the  head,  and  for 
various   other   purposes.     It   was   thus  used   pre 
viously  to  taking  cold-baths,  and  also  mixed  with 
water  for  bathing  the  body.     Josephus  mentions 
that   among  the   remedies  employed   in    the   case 
of  Herod,   he  was   put   into   a    sort  of  oil-bath. 
Oil  mixed  with   wine  is  also  mentioned  as  a  re 
medy  used  both  inwardly  and  outwardly   in  the 
disease  with  which  the   soldiers  of  the  army   of 
Aelius  Callus  were  affected,  a  circumstance  which 
recalls  the  use  of  a  similar  remedy  in  the  parable  of 
the  good  Samaritan.     The  prophet  Isaiah  alludes 
to  the  use  of  oil  as  ointment  in  medical  treatment ; 
and  it  thus   furnished  a   fitting  symbol,   perhaps 
also  an  efficient  remedy,  when  used  by  our  Lord's 
disciples  in  the  miraculous  cures  which  they  wer« 
enabled  to  perform.     With  a  similar  intention,  no 
doubt,  its  use  was  enjoined  by  St.  James,  and,  as  it 
appears,  practised  by  the  early  Christian  Church  in 
general.     An  instance  of  cure  through  the  medium 
of  oil  is  mentioned  by  Tertullian.     The  medicinal 
use  of  oil  is  also  mentioned  in  the  Mishna,  which 
thus  exhibits  the  Jewish  piaclice  of  that  day.     See, 
for  the  various  instances  above  named,  Is.  i.  6 ; 
Mark  vi.  13  ;  Luke  x.  34;  James  v.  14 ;  Josephus, 
Ant.  xvii.  6,  §5  ;  B.  J.  i.  33,  §5  ;  Shabb.  xiii.  4  ; 
Otho,  Lex.  Eabb.  pp.   11,  526;    Mosheim,  Eccl. 
Hist.  iv.  9 ;  Corn,  a  Lap.  on  James  v. ;  Tertull.  ad 
Scap.  c.  4;   Celsus,  De  Med.  ii.  14,  17 ;   iii.  6,  9, 

19,  22,  iv.  2;    Hor.   2  Sat.  i.  7;  Pliny,  xv.  4, 
7,  xxiii.  3,  4 ;  Dio  Cass.  liii.  29 ;   Lightfoot,  H.  If. 
ii.  304,  444;  S.  Hieronym.  I.  c. 

5.  Oil  for  light.— The  oil  for  "the  light"  wae 
expressly  ordered  to  be  olive-oil,  beaten,  i.  e.  made 
from  olives  bruised  in  a  mortar  (Ex.  xxv.  6,  xxvii. 

20,  21,  xxxv.  8;  Lev.  xxiv.  2;  2  Chr.  xiii.  11  ; 
1  Sam.  iii.  3  ;  Zech.  iv.  3,  12  ;  Mishna,  Demai,  i.  3  ; 
Menach.  viii.  4).     The  quantity  required  for  the 
longest  night  is  said  to  have  been  J  log  (13'79  cubit 
in.  =  '4166  of  a  pint),  Menach.  ix.  3;  Otho,  Lex. 
Rabb.  p.  159.  [CANDLESTICK.]  In  the  same  manner 
the  great  lamps  used  at  the  Feast  of  Tabernacle? 
were  fed  (Succah,  v.  2).     Oil  was  used  in  general 
for  lamps ;   it  is  used  in  Egypt  with  cotton  wicks 
twisted  round  a  piece  of  straw  ;  the  receptacle  beins 
a  glass  vessel,  into  which  water  is  first  poured  (Matt, 
xxv.  1-8;   Luke  xii.  35;  Lane.  Mod.  Eq.  i.  201). 

2  Q  2 


596 


OIL 


C.  Rituat. — a.  Oil  was  poured  on,  or  mixed 
with  the  flour  or  meal  used  in  offerings. 

i.  The  consecration  offering  of  priests,  Ex.  xxix. 
2,23;  Lev.  vi.  15,21. 

ii.  The  offering  of  "  beaten  oil "  with  flour,  which 
accompanied  the  daily  sacrifice,  Ex.  xxix.  40. 

iii.  The  leper's  purification  offering,  Lev.  xiv. 
10-18,  21,  24,  28,  where  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
the  quantity  of  oil  (1  log,  =  '833  of  a  pint,)  was  in 
variable,  whilst  the  other  objects  varied  in  quantity 
according  to  the  means  of  the  person  offering.  The 
cleansed  leper  was  also  to  be  touched  with  oil  on 
various  parts  of  his  body,  Lev.  xiv.  15-18. 

iv.  The  Nazarite,  on  completion  of  his  vow,  was 
to  offer  unleavened  bread  anointed  with  oil,  and 
cakes  of  fine  bread  mingled  with  oil,  Num.  vi.  15. 
v.  After  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle,  the  offer 
ings  of  the  "princes"  included  flour  mingled  with 
oil,  Num.  vii. 

vi.  At  the  consecration  of  the  Levites,  fine  flour 
mingled  with  oil  was  offered,  Num.  viii.  8. 

vii.  Meat-offerings  in  general  were  mingled  or 
anointed  with  oil,  Lev:  vii.  10,  12. 

On  the  other  hand,  certain  offerings  were  to  be 
devoid  of  oil;  the  sin-offering,  Lev.  v.  11,  and  the 
offering  of  jealousy,  Num.  v.  15. 

The  principle  on  which  both  the  presence  and 
the  absence  of  oil  were  prescribed  is  clearly,  that  as 
oil  is  indicative  of  gladness,  so  its  absence  denoted 
sorrow  or  humiliation  (Is.  Ixi.  3  ;  Joel  ii.  19;  Rev. 
vi.  6).  It  is  on  this  principle  that  oil  is  so  often 
used  in  Scripture  as  symbolical  of  nourishment  ana 
comfort  (Deut.  xxxii.  13,  xxxiii.  24  ;  Job  xxix.  6  ; 
Ps.  xlv.  7,  cix.  18 ;  Is.  Ixi.  3). 

6.  Kings,  priests,  and  prophets,  were  anointed 
with  oil  or  ointment.  [OINTMENT.] 

7.  a.  As  so  important  a  necessary  of  life,  the 
Jew  was  required  to  include  oil  among  his  first-fruit 
offerings  (Ex.  xxii.  29,  xxiii.  16 ;  Num.  xviii.  12  ; 
Deut.  xviii.  4;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  5 ;  Terum.  xi.  3).     In 
the  Mishna  various  limitations  are  laid  down  ;  bul 
they  are  of  little  importance  except  as  illustrating 
the  processes  to  which  the  olive-berry  was  subjectec 
in  the  production  of  oil,  and  the  degrees  of  esti 
mation  in  which  their  results  were  held. 

6.  Tithes  of  oil  were  also  required  (Deut.  xii 
17  ;  2  Chr.  xxxi.  5  ,  Neh.  x.  37,  39,  xiii.  12  ;  Ez 
xlv.  14). 

8.  Shields,  if  covered  with  hide,  were  anointec 
with  oil  or  grease  previous  to  use.  [ANOINT." 
Shields  of  metal  were  perhaps  rubbed  over  in  lik 
manner  to  polish  them.  See  Thenius  on  2  Sam.  i 
21  ;  Virg.  Aen.  vii.  625 ;  Plautus,  Mil.  i.  1,  2 ;  an 
Gesen.  p.  825. 

Oil  of  inferior  quality  was  used  in  the  composi 
tion  of  soap. 

Of  the  substances  which  yield  oil,  besides  th 
olive-tree,  myrrh  is  the  only  one  specially  men 
tioned  in  Scripture.  Oil  of  myrrh  is  the  juic 
which  exudes  from  the  tree  Balsamodendron  Myrrha 
but  olive-oil  was  an  ingredient  in  many  compound 
which  passed  under  the  general  name  of  oil  (Estl 
ii.  12 ;  Celsus, «.  5.  iii.  10,  18,  19  ;  Pliny,  xii.  26 
xiii.  1,  2,  xv.  7 ;  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  23 
Balfour,  Plants  of  Bible,  p.  52  ;  Winer,  Realw.  S.A 
Myrrhe.  [OINTMENT.]  [H.  W.  P.] 


»  1.  Shemen.    See  OIL  (2). 

2.  np"l.  nvpov.  unffuentum,  from  Hpl,  "  anoint. 

3.  nnP'IO  or  nnp"1D.  nvpov,  unguentum  (Ex. 
25).    Get vniug  '±inkg  it  may  le  the  vessel  in  which  th 
oirtnient  wa«  compounded  (p.  1309) 


OINTMENT 

OIL-TUKE  (]DK;  py,  ets  shemen:  i:nf 
ffffos,  {vAa  Kvirapiffffiva. :  lignum  olivae,  frondf* 
gni  pulcherrimi).  The  Hebrew  words  occur  ir. 
eh.  viii.  15,  1  K.  vi.  23,  and  in  Is.  xli.^19.  In 
lis  last  passage  the  A.  V.  has  "  oil-tree;"  tut  in 
ings  it  has  "  olive-tree,"  and  in  Nehimiah  "pine- 
ranches."  From  the  passage  in  Nehemiah, 
here  the  ets  shemen  is  mentioned  as  distinct  from 
le  zalth  or  "  olive-tree,"  writers  have  sought  to 
dentify  it  with  the  Elaeagnus  angustifolius,  Linn., 

metimes  called  "  the  wild  olive-tree,"  or  "  nar- 
ow-leaved  oleaster,"  the  zac&um-tree  of  the 
,rabs.  There  is,  however,  some  great  mistake  i  i 
lis  matter ;  for  the  zackum-tree  cannot  be  referred 
o  the  elaeagnus,  the  properties  and  characteristics 
f  which  tree  do  not  accord  with  what  travellers 
ave  related  of  the  famed  zacAwm-tree  of  Palestine. 
Ve  are  indebted  to  Dr.  Hooker  for  the  correction 
f  this  error.  The  zackuan  is  the  Balanitex 
Aegyptiaca,  a  well-known  and  abundant  shrub  01 
mall  tree  in  the  plain  of  Jordan.  It  is  found 


Salamltt  Atej/ptiaca. 

all  the  way  from  the  peninsula  of  India  and  the 
Ganges  to  Syria,  Abyssinia,  and  the  Niger.  The 
zackum-oil  is  held  in' high  repute  by  the  Arabs  f'oi 
its  medicinal  properties.  It  is  said  to  be^  very 
valuable  against  wounds  and  contusions.  Comp. 
Maundrell  (Journ.  p.  86),  Robinson  (Bib.  Ret.  i. 
560) :  see  also  BALM.  It  is  quite  probable  that 
the  zackitm,  or  Balanites  Aegyptiaca,  is  the  ets 
shemen,  or  oil-tree  of  Scripture.  Celsius  (Hierob. 
i.  309)  understood  by  the  Hebrew  words  any  "  fat 
01  resinous  tree;"  but  the  passage  in  Nehemiah 
clearly  points  to  some  specific  tree.  [W.  H.] 

OINTMENT.*     Besides  the  fact  that  olive-oil 

4.  nnK'Di    XP""5>   XP'ff/uta'   uwflf**1'"1*!  sometimes 
in  A.  V.  "oil." 

5.  OWP:  in  A.  V.  "things  for  purifying"  (KsC 
ii.   12);    I-XX.   tr^y^ara ;  by  Turgum  rendered  "  por- 


OINTMENT 

u>  itself  a  common  ingredient  in  ointments,  the  pur 
poses  to  which  ointment,  as  mentioned  in  Scripture, 
is  applied  agree  in  so  many  respects  with  those 
which  belong  to  oil,  that  we  need  not  be  surprised 
that  the  same  words,  especially  1  and  4,  should 
be  applied  to  both  oil  and  ointment.  The  following 
list  will  point  out  the  Scriptural  uses  of  ointment : — 
1.  Cosmetic. — The  Greek  and  Roman  practice  oi 
?nointing  the  head  and  clothes  on  festive  occasions 
prevailed  also  among  the  Egyptians,  and  appears  to 
have  had  place  among  the  Jews  (Ruth  iii.  3 ;  Eccl. 
vii.  1,  ix.  8  ;  Prov.  xxvii.  9, 16  ;  Cant.  i.  3,  if.  10  ; 
Am.  vi.  6 ;  Ps.  xlv.  7  ;  Is.  Ivii.  9 ;  Matt.  xxvi.  7  : 
Luke  vii.  46  ;  Rev.  xviii.  13 :  Yoma,  viii.  1 ;  Shabb. 
ix.  4;  Plato,  Symp.  i.  6,  p.  123;  see  authorities  in 
Hofmann,Ze.r.art. "  Ungeudi  ritus  ").  Oil  of  myrrh, 
for  like  purposes,  is  mentioned  Esth.  ii.  12.  Strabo 
says  that  the  inhabitants  of  Mesopotamia  use  oil  oi 
sesame',  and  the  Egyptians  castor-oil  (kiki),  both 
for  burning,  and  the  lower  classes  for  anointing  the 
body.  Chardin  and  other  travellers  confirm  this 
statement  as  regards  the  Persians,  and  show  that 
they  made  little  use  of  olive-oil,  but  used  other 
oils,  and  among  them  oil  of  sesame'  and  castor-oil. 
Chardin  also  describes  the  Indian  and  Persian  cus 
tom  of  presenting  perfumes  to  sjuesti  at  banquets 
(Strabo,  xvi.  746,  xvii.  824 ;  Chardin,  Voy.  rr.  43, 
84,  86  ;  Marco  Polo,  Trav.  (Early  Trav.},  p.  85 ; 
Olearius,  Trav.  p.  305).  Egyptian  paintings  repre 
sent  servants  anointing  guests  on  their  arrival  at 
their  entertainer's  house,  and  alabaster  vases  exist 
which  retain  the  traces  of  the  ointment  which  they 
were  used  to  contain.  Athenaeus  speaks  of  the 
extravagance  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  the  article 
of  ointments  for  guests,  as  well  as  of  ointments  of 
various  kinds  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  i.  78,  pi.  89, 
i.  157  ;  Athenaeus,  x.  53,  xv.  41).  [ALABASTER  ; 
ANOINT.] 

2.  Funereal. — Ointments   as   well   as  oil  were 
used  to  anoint  dead  bodies  and  the  clothes  in  which 
they  were  wrapped.     Our  Lord  thus  spake  of  His 
own  body  being  anointed  by  anticipation  (Matt. 
xxvi.  12;  Mark  xiv.  3,  8;  Luke  xxiii.  56;  John 
xii.  3,  7,  xix.  40  ;  see  also  Plutarch,  Consol.  p.  611, 
viii.  413,  ed.  Reiske).     [BURIAL.] 

3.  Medicinal. — Ointment  formed  an  important 
feature  in  ancient  medical  treatment  (Celsus,  De 
Med.  iii.  19,  v.  27;  Plin.  xxiv.   10,  xxix.  3,  8, 
9).    The  prophet  Isaiah  alludes  to  this  in  a  figure 
of  speech  ;  and  our  Lord,  in  his  cure  of  a  blind  man, 
adopted  as  the  outward  sign  one  which  represented 
the  usual  method  of  cure.     The  mention  of  balm 
of  Gilead  and  of  eye-salve  (collynurn)  point  to  the 
same  method  (Is.  i.  6 ;  John  ix.  6  ;  Jer.  viii.  22, 
xlvi.  11,  li.  8  ;  Rev.  iii.  18  ;  Tob.  vi.  8,  xi.  8,  13  ; 
Tertull.  De  Idololatr.  11). 

4.  Ritual. — Besides  the  oil  used  in  many  cere 
monial  observances,  a  special  ointment  was  appointed 
to  be  used  in  consecration  (Ex.  xxx.  23,  33,  xxix.  7, 
xxxvii.  29,  xl.  9,  15).     It  was  first  compounded  by 
Bezaleel,  and  its  ingredients   and   proportions  are 
precisely  specified ;  viz.  of  pure  myrrh  and  cassia 
500  shekels  (250  ounces)  each ;   sweet  cinnamon 
*nd  sweet  calamus  250  shekels  (125  ounces)  each; 
and  of  olive-oil  1  hin  (about  5  quarts,  330'96  cubic 
:nches).     These  were  to  be  compounded  according 
to  the  art  of  the  apothecary  b  into  an  oil  of  holy 


OINTMENT 


597 


ointment  (Ex.  xxx.  25).  It  was  to  be  used  lor 
anointing — 1.  the  tabernacle  itself;  2.  the  tabl» 
and  its  vessels  ;  3.  the  candlestick  and  its  furniture; 
4.  the  altar  of  incense;  5.  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offering  and  its  vessels;  6.  the  la\sr  and  its  foot; 
7.  Aaron  and  his  sons.  Strict  prohibition  was 
issued  against  using  this  unguent  for  any  secular 
purpose,  or  on  the  person  of  a  foreigner,  and  against 
imitating  it  in  any  way  whatsoever  (Ex.  xxx. 
32,  33). 

These  ingredients,  exclusive  of  the  oil,  must  have 
amounted  in  weight  to  about  47  Ibs.  8  oz.  Now 
olive-oil  weighs  at  the  rate  of  10  Ibs.  to  the  gallon. 
The  weight  therefore  of  the  oil  in  the  mixture 
would  be  12  Ibs.  8  oz.  English.  A  question  arises, 
in  what  form  were  the  other  ingredients,  and  what 
degree  of  solidity  did  the  whole  attain  ?  Myrrh, 
"  pure  "  (deror\c  free-flowing  (Ges.  355),  would 
seem  to  imply  the  juice  which  flows  from  the  tree 
at  the  first  incision,  perhaps  the  "  odorato  sudantia 
ligno  balsama"  (Georg.  ii.  118),  which  Pliny  says 
is  called  "stacte,"and  is  the  best  (xii.  15;  Dios- 
corides,  i.  73,  74,  quoted  by  Celsus,  i.  159  ;  and 
Knobel  on  Exodus,  I.  c.}. 

This  juice,  which  at  us  first  flow  is  soft  and  oily, 
becomes  harder  on  exposure  to  the  air.  According 
to  Maimonides,  Moses  (not  Bezaleel),  having  reduced 
the  solid  ingredients  to  powder,  steeped  them  in 
water  till  all  the  aromatic  qualities  were  drawn 
forth.  He  then  poured  in  the  oil,  and  boiled  the 
whole  till  the  water  was  evaporated.  The  residuum 
thus  obtained  was  preserved  in  a  vessel  for  use 
(Otho,  Lex.  Rabl.  "  Oleum  ").  This  account  is 
perhaps  favoured  by  the  expression  "  powders  of 
the  merchant,"  in  reference  to  myrrh  (Cant.  iii.  6 ; 
Keil,  Arch.  Hebr.  p.  173).  Another  theory  sup 
poses  all  the  ingredients  to  have  been  in  the  form 
of  oil  or  ointment,  and  the  measurement  by  weight 
of  all,  except  the  oil,  seems  to  imply  that  they  were 
in  some  solid  form,  but  whether  in  an  unctuous 
state  or  in  that  of  powder  cannot  be  ascertained. 
A  process  of  making  ointment,  consisting,  in  part  at 
least,  in  boiling,  is  alluded  to  in  Job  xii.  31.  The 
ointment  with  which  Aaron  was  anointed  is  said  to 
have  flowed  down  over  his  garments  (Ex.  xxix.  21 ; 
Ps.  cxxxiii.  2 :  "  skirts,"  in  the  latter  passage,  is 
literally  "  mouth,"  »'.  e.  the  opening  of  the  robe  at 
the  neck ;  Ex.  xxviii.  32). 

The  charge  of  preserving  the  anointing  oil,  as 
well  as  the  oil  for  the  light,  was  given  to  Eleazar 
(Num.  iv.  16).  The  quantity  of  ointment  made 
in  the  first  instance  seems  to  imply  that  it  was 
intended  to  last  a  long  time.  The  Rabbinical  writers 
say  that  it  lasted  900  years,  »'.  e.  till  the  captivity, 
because  it  was  said,  "  ye  shall  not  make  any  like 
it"  (Ex.  xxx.  32);  but  it  seems  clear  from  1  Chr. 
ix.  30  that  the  ointment  was  renewed  from  time  to 
time  (Cheriith,  i.  1). 

Kings,  and  also  in  some  cases  prophets,  were, 
as  well  as  priests,  anointed  with  oil  or  ointment ; 
but  Scripture  only  mentions  the  fact  as  actually 
taking  place  in  the  cases  of  Saul,  David,  Solomon, 
Jehu,  and  Joash.  The  Rabbins  say  that  Saul,  Jehu, 
and  Joash  were  only  anointed  with  common  oil, 
whilst  for  David  and  Solomon  the  holy  oil  was 
used  (1  Sam.  x.  1,  xvi.  1,  13 ;  1  K.  i.  39 -,  2  K. 
ix.  1,  3,  6,  xi.  12;  Godwyn,  Moses  and  Aaron, 


turned  ointment,"  from  pT3,  "  rub,"   "  cleanse "  (Ges. 
p.  820) 

In  N  T.  and  Apocrypha,  "  ointment "  is  the  A.  V.  ren- 
ipw  tttuiuentam. 


PIJ5"),  fivpe$6<;,  unguentariut,  pigjnentariut. 
THI,  eicAeKTTJ,  electa. 


598 


OLAMUS 


,.  4  ;  Carpzov,  Apparatus,  p.  56,  57  ;  Vofmann, 
JjCX.  art.  "  Ungeiidi  ritus";  8.  Hieron.  Com.  in  Osee, 
iii.  134).  It  is  evident  that  the  sacred  oil  was  used 
Ln  the  case  of  Solomon,  and  probably  in  the  cases 
of  Saul  and  David.  In  the  case  of  Saul  (1  Sam.  x. 
1)  the  article  is  used,  "  the  oil,"  as  it  is  also  in  the 
case  of  Jehu  (2  K.  ix.  1)  ;  and  it  seems  unlikely 
that  the  anointing  of  Joash,  performed  by  the  high- 
priust,  should  have  been  defective  in  this  respect. 

A  pei-son  whose  business  it  was  to  compound 
ointments  in  general  was  called  an  "apothecary" 
(Neh.  iii.  8d;  Eccl.  x.  1;  Ecclus.  xlix.  1).  The 
work  was  sometimes  carried  on  by  women  "  confec- 
tionaries"  (1  Sam.  viii.  13). 

In  the  Christian  Church  the  ancient  usage  of 
anointing  the  bodies  of  the  dead  was  long  retained, 
as  is  noticed  by  S.  Chrysostom  and  other  writers 
quoted  by  Suicer,  s.  v.  t\aiov.  The  ceremony  of 
Chrism  or  anointing  was  also  added  to  baptism. 
See  authorities  quoted  by  Suicer,  I.  c.,  and  under 
BcSirTtoyta  and  X/>iff/xa.  [H.  W.  P.] 

OLA'MUS('fUa/u($s:  Olamus).  MESHOLLAM 
of  the  sons  of  Bani  (1  Esd.  ix.  30;  comp.  Ezr. 
x.  29). 

OLD  TESTAMENT.  This  article  will  treat 
(A)  of  the  Text  and  (B)  of  the  Interpretation  of  the 
Old  Testament.  Some  observations  will  be  sub 
joined  respecting  (C)  the  Quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament  in  the  New. 

A.  —  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

1.  History  of  the  Text.—  A  history  of  the  text 
of  the  0.  T.  should  properly  commence  from  the 
date  of  the  completion  of  the  Canon  ;  from  which 
time  we  must  assume  that  no  additions  to  any  part 
of  it  could  be  legitimately  made,  the  sole  object  of 
those  who  transmitted  and  watched  over  it  being 
thenceforth  to  preserve  that  which  was  already 
written.  Of  the  care,  however,  with  which  the  text 
was  transmitted  we  have  to  judge,  almost  entirely, 
by  the  phenomena  which  it  and  the  versions  derived 
from  it  now  present,  rather  than  by  any  recorded 
facts  respecting  it.  That  much  scrupulous  pains 
would  be  bestowed  by  Ezra,  the  "  ready  scribe  in  the 
law  of  Moses,"  and  by  his  companions,  on  the  correct 
transmission  of  those  Scriptures  which  passed  through 
their  hands  is  indeed  antecedently  probable.  The 
best  evidence  of  such  pains,  and  of  the  respect  with 
which  the  text  of  the  sacred  books  was  consequently 
regarded,  is  to  be  found  in  the  jealous  accuracy 
with  which  the  discrepancies  of  various  parallel  pas 
sages  have  been  preserved,  notwithstanding  the 
temptation  which  must  have  existed  to  assimilate 
them  to  each  other.  Such  is  the  case  with  Psalms 
xiv.  and  liii.,  two  recensions  of  the  same  hymn, 
both  proceeding  from  David,  where  the  reasons  of 
the  several  variations  may  on  examination  be  traced. 
Such  also  is  the  case  with  Psalm  xviii.  and  2  Sam. 
xxii.,  where  the  variations  between  the  two  copies 
are  more  than  sixty  in  number,  excluding  those 
which  merely  consist  in  the  use  or  absence  of  the 
inatres  lectionis  ;  and  where  therefore,  even  though 
the  design  of  all  the  variations  be  not  perceived,  the 
hypothesis  of  their  having  originated  through  acci 
dent  would  imply  a  carelessness  in  transcribing  far 
beyond  what  even  the  rashest  critics  have  in  other 
passages  contemplated. 

As  regards  the  form  in  which  the  sacicil  writings 
>vere  preserved,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the 


9"!'  i';!/>itcnlariiu. 


OLD  TEKTAM1&T 

text  was  ordinarily  written  on  skins  roiled  ui>  int-j 
volumes,  like  the  modem  synagogue-rolls  (Ps.  xL 
7;  Jer.  xxxvi.  14;  Zech.  v.  1;  Ez.  ii.  9).  Jo- 
sephus  relates  that  the  copy  sent  from  Jerusalem  a> 
a  present  to  Ptolemy  in  Egypt,  was  written  with 
letters  of  gold  on  skins  of  admirable  thinness,  the 
joins  of  which  could  not  be  detected  (Ant.  xii. 
2,  §11). 

The  original  character  in  which  the  text  was  ex 
pressed  is  that  still  preserved  to  us,  with  the  excep 
tion  of  four  letters,  on  the  Maccabean  coins,  and 
having  a  strong  affinity  to  the  Samaritan  character, 
which  seems  to  have  been  treated  by  the  later  Jews 
as  identical  with  it,  being  styled  by  them  Dri3 
*~Oy.  At  what  date  this  was  exchanged  for  the 
present  Aramaic  or  square  character,  JV^IB'N  3J"D, 
or  J?3"lD  DH3,  is  still  as  undetermined  as  it  is  at 
what  date  the  use  of  the  Aramaic  language  in  Pa 
lestine  superseded  that  of  the  Hebrew.  The  old 
Jewish  tradition,  repeated  by  Origen  and  Jerome, 
ascribed  the  change  to  Ezra.  But  the  Maccabeau 
coins  supply  us  with  a  date  at  which  the  older  cha 
racter  was  still  in  use  ;  and  even  though  we  should 
allow  that  both  may  have  been  simultaneously  em 
ployed,  the  one  for  sacred,  the  other  for  more 
ordinary  purposes,  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  they 
existed  side  by  side  for  any  lengthened  period. 
Hassencamp  and  Gesenius  are  at  variance  as  to 
whether  such  errors  of  the  Septuagint  as  arose  from 
confusion  of  letters  in  the  original  text,  are  in  favour 
of  the  Greek  interpreters  having  had  the  older  or 
the  more  modern  character  before  them.  It  is 
sufficiently  clear  that  the  use  of  the  square  writing 
must  have  been  well  established  before  the  time  of 
those  authors  who  attributed  the  introduction  of  it 
to  Ezra.  Nor  could  the  allusion  in  Matt.  v.  18  to 
the  yod  as  the  smallest  letter  have  well  been  made, 
except  in  reference  to  the  more  modem  character. 
We  forbear  here  all  investigation  of  the  manner  in 
which  this  character  was  formed,  or  of  the  piecise 
locality  whence  it  was  derived.  Whatever  modifi 
cation  it  may  have  undergone  in  the  hands  of  the 
Jewish  scribes,  it  was  in  the  first  instance  introduced 
from  abroad ;  and  this  its  name  IVIIK'K  2H3,  t.  e. 
Assyrian  writing,  implies,  though  it  may  geogra 
phically  require  to  be  interpreted  with  some  lati 
tude.  (The  suggestion  of  Hupfeld  that  JV~I1C?N 
may  be  an  appellative,  denoting  not  Assyrian,  but 
firm,  writing,  is  improbable.)  On  the  whole  we 
may  best  suppose,  with  Ewald,  that  the  adoption 
of  the  new  character  was  coeval  with  the  rise  of  the 
earliest  Targums,  which  would  naturally  be  written 
in  the  Aramaic  style.  It  would  thus  be  shortly  an 
terior  to  the  Christian  era  ;  and  with  this  date  all 
the  evidence  would  well  accord.  It  may  be  right, 
however,  to  mention,  that  while  of  late  years  Keil 
has  striven  anew  to  throw  back  the  introduction  of 
the  square  writing  towards  the  time  of  Ezra,  Bleek, 
also,  though  not  generally  imbued  with  the  con 
servative  views  of  Keil,  maintains  not  only  that  the 
use  of  the  square  writing  for  the  sacred  books  owed 
its  origin  to  Ezra,  but  also  that  the  later  bocks  of 
the  0.  T.  were  never  expressed  in  any  other  cha 
racter. 

No  vowel  points  were  attached  to  the  text:  they 
were,  through  all  the  early  period  of  its  history, 
entirely  unknown.  Convenience  had  indeed,  at  thi 
time  when  the  later  books  of  the  0.  T.  were 
written,  suggested  a  larger  use  of  the  matrcs  leo- 
titmis:  it  is  thus  that  in  those  books  we  find  them 
introduced  into  many  words  that  had  \w:i  pn> 
vainly  -]dt  wit  limit  them:  CHID  lakt*  the  }>':i-< 


OLD  TES'lAMENT 

of  Cnp>  Tn  of  TIT.  An  elaborate  endi  tvour  has 
been  reciiitly  made  by  Dr.  Wall  to  prove  that,  up 
to  the  eaJy  part  of  the  second  century  of  the  Chris 
tian  era,  the  Hebrew  text  was  free  from  vowel 
letters  as  well  as  from  vowels.  His  theory  is  that 
•hey  were  then  interpolated  by  the  Jews,  with  a 
view  of  altering  rather  than  of  perpetuating  the 
former  pronunciation  of  the  words:  their  object 
being,  according  to  him,  to  pervert  thereby  the 
sense  of  the  prophecies,  as  also  to  throw  discredit 
on  the  Septuagiut,  and  thereby  weaken  or  evade  the 
force  of  arguments  drawn  from  thai  version  in  sup 
port  of  Christian  doctrines.  Improbable  as  such  a 
theory  is,  it  is  yet  more  astonishing  that  its  author 
should  never  have  been  deterred  from  prosecuting 
it  by  the  palpable  objections  to  it  which  he  himself 
discerned.  Who  can  believe,  with  him,  that  the 
Samaritans,  notwithstanding  the  mutual  hatred  ex 
isting  between  them  and  the  Jews,  borrowed  the 
interpolation  from  the  Jews,  and  conspired  with 
them  to  keep  it  a  secret?  Or  that  among  other 
words  to  which  by  this  interpolation  the  Jews  ven 
tured  to  impart  a  new  sound,  were  some  of  the  best 
known  proper  names ;  e.  g.  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  ?  Or 
that  it  was  merely  through  a  blunder  that  in  Gen. 
i.  24,  the  substantive  HTI  in  its  construct  state 
acquired  its  final  1,  when  the  same  anomaly  occurs 
in  no  fewer  than  three  passages  of  the  Psalms  ?  Such 
views  and  arguments  refute  themselves;  and  while 
the  high  position  occupied  by  its  author  commends 
the  book  to  notice,  it  can  only  be  lamented  that  in 
dustry,  learning,  and  ingenuity  should  have  been  so 
misspent  in  the  vain  attempt  to  give  substance  to  a 
shadow. 

There  is  reason  to  think  that  in  the  text  of  the 
0.  T.,  as  originally  written,  the  words  were  gene 
rally,  though  not  uniformly,  divided.  Of  the  Phoe 
nician  inscriptions,  though  the  majority  proceed 
continuously,  some  have  a  point  after  every  word, 
except  when  the  words  are  closely  connected.  The 
same  point  is  used  in  the  Samaritan  manuscripts ; 
and  it  is  observed  by  Gesenius  (a  high  authority  in 
respect  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch)  that  the  Sa 
maritan  and  Jewish  divisions  of  the  words  generally 
coincide.  The  discrepancy  between  the  Hebrew 
text  and  the  Septuagint  in  this  respect  is  suffi 
ciently  explained  by  the  circumstance  that  the 
Jewish  scribes  did  not  separate  the  words  which 
were  closely  connected :  it  is  in  the  case  of  such  that 
the  discrepancy  is  almost  exclusively  found.  The 
practice  of  separating  words  by  spaces  instead  of 
points  probably  came  in  with  the  square  writing. 
In  the  synagogue-rolls,  which  are  written  in  con 
formity  with  the  ancient  rules,  the  words  are  regu 
larly  divided  from  each  other ;  and  indeed  the 
Talmud  minutely  prescribes  the  space  which  should 
be  left  (Gesenius,  Gesch.  der  Heb.  Sprache,  §45). 

Of  ancient  date,  probably,  are  also  the  separations 
between  the  lesser  Parshioth  or  sections  ;  whether 
ffiade,  in  the  case  of  the  more  important  divisions, 
by  the  ccmmencement  of  a  new  line,  or,  in  the  case 
of  the  less  important,  by  a  blank  space  w'.thin  the 
line  [BIBLE].  The  use  of  the  letters  Q  and  D. 
however,  to  indicate  these  divisions  is  of  more  recent 
origin :  they  are  not  employed  in  the  synagogue- 
rolls.  These  lessor  and  earlier  Parshioth,  of  which 
there  are  in  the  Pentateuch  669,  must  not  be  con 
founded  with  the  greater  and  later  Parshioth,  or 
Sabbath-lessons,  which  are  first  mentioned  in  the 
Masorah.  The  name  Parshioth  is  in  the  Mishna 
(MeyiH.  iv.  4)  applied  to  the  divisions  in  the  Pro 
phet*  as  \\''l\  as  to  those  in  tho  Pentateuch  .  <•. ,/.  to 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


599 


Isaiah  Hi.  3-5  (to  the  greater  Parshioth  here  corre 
spond  the  Haphtaroth).  Even  the  separate  psalms 
are  in  the  Gemara  called  also  Painhioth  (Iterach, 
Bab.  fol.  9,  2  ;  10,  1).  Some  indication  of  the  an 
tiquity  of  the  divisions  between  the  Parshioth  may 
be  found  in  the  circumstance  that  the  Gemara  holds 
them  as  old  as  Moses  (Berach.  fol.  12,  2).  Oftheii 
real  age  we  know  but  little.  Hupfeld  has  founu 
that  they  do  not  .Jways  coincide  with  the  capitub 
of  Jerome.  That  they  are  nevertheless  more  ancient 
than  his  time  is  shown  by  the  mention  of  them  in 
the  Mishna.  In  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  con 
trary,  their  disaccordance  with  the  Kazin  of  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  which  are  966  in  number, 
seems  to  indicate  that  they  hail  a  historical  origin  ; 
and  it  is  possible  that  they  also  may  date  from  the 
period  when  the  0.  T.  was  first  transcribed  in  the 
square  character.  Our  present  chapters,  it  may  be 
remarked,  spring  from  a  Christian  source. 

Of  any  logical  division,  in  the  written  text,  of 
the  prose  of  the  0.  T.  into  Pesukim,  or  verses,  we 
find  in  the  Talmud  no  mention ;  and  even  in  the 
existing  synagogue-rolls  such  division  is  generally 
ignored.  While,  therefore,  we  may  admit  the  early 
currency  of  such  a  logical  division,  we  must  assume, 
with  Hupfeld,  that  it  was  merely  a  traditional  ob 
servance.  It  has  indeed,  on  the  other  hand,  beet 
argued  that  such  numerations  of  the  verses  as  the 
Talmud  records  could  not  well  have  been  mude  un 
less  the  written  text  distinguished  them.  But  to 
this  we  may  reply  by  observing  that  the  verses  of 
the  numbering  of  which  the  Talmud  speaks,  could 
not  have  thoroughly  accorded  with  those  of  modern 
times.  Of  the  former  there  were  in  the  Pentateuch 
5888  (or  as  some  read,  8888) ;  it  now  contains  but 
5845 :  the  middle  verse  was  computed  to  be  Lev. 
xiii.  33;  with  our  present  verses  it  is  Lev.  viii.  5. 
Had  the  verses  been  distinguished  in  the  written 
text  at  the  time  that  the  Talmudic  enumeration  was. 
made,  it  is  not  easily  explicable  how  they  should 
since  have  been  so  much  altered :  whereas,  were  the 
logical  division  merely  traditional,  tradition  would 
naturally  preserve  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of 
the  places  of  the  various  logical  breaks  than  of  their 
relative  importance,  and  thus,  without  any  disturb 
ance  of  the  syntax,  the  number  of  computed  verses 
would  be  liable  to  continual  increase  or  diminution, 
by  separation  or  aggregation.  An  uncertainty  in 
the  versual  division  is  even  now  indicated  by  the 
double  accentuation  and  consequent  vocalization  ol 
the  decalogue.  In  the  poetjcal  books,  the  Pesukim 
mentioned  in  the  Talmud  correspond  to  the  poetical 
lines,  not  to  our  modem  verses ;  and  it  is  probable 
both  from  some  expressions  of  Jerome,  and  from  the 
analogous  practice  of  other  nations,  that  the  poetical 
text  was  written  stichometrically.  It  is  still  so 
written  in  our  manuscripts  in  the  poetical  pieces  in 
the  Pentateuch  and  historical  books ;  and  even,  gene 
rally,  in  our  oldest  manuscripts.  Its  partial  discon 
tinuance  may  be  due,  first  to  the  desire  to  save  space, 
and  secondly  to  the  diminution  of  the  necessity  fo: 
it  by  the  introduction  of  the  accents. 

Of  the  documents  which  directly  bear  upon  the 
history  of  the  Hebrew  text,  the  two  earliest  are  the 
Samaritan  copy  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  Greek 
translation  of  the  LXX.  For  the  latter  we  must 
refer  to  the  article  SEPTUAGINT  :  of  the  former 
some  account  will  here  be  necessary.  Mention  had 
been  made  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  inci 
dentally,  of  some  of  its  peculiarities,  by  several  of 
the  Christian  Fathers.  Eusebius  had  taken  note  of 
it.1,  primeval  chronology :  Joromo  had  rpcordtd  it,, 


600 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


insertfons  in  Gen.  iv.  6 ;  Deut.  xzrii.  26 :  Proco- 
nius  of  Gaza  had  referred  to  its  containing,  at  Num. 
x.  10  and  Ex.  xviii.  24,  the  words  afterwards  found 
in  Deut.  i.  6,  v.  9:  it  had  also  been  spoken  of  by 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Diodore,  and  others.  When 
in  the  17th  century  Samaritan  MSS.  were  im 
ported  into  Europe  by  P.  delta  Valle  and  Abp. 
Ussher,  according  with  the  representations  that  the 
Fathers  had  given,  the  very  numerous  variations 
between  the  Samaritan  and  the  Jewish  Pentateuch 
could  not  but  excite  attention ;  and  it  became  thence 
forward  a  matter  of  controversy  among  scholars 
which  copy  was  entitled  to  the  greater  respect. 
The  co-ordinate  authority  of  both  was  advocated  by 
Kennicott,  who  however,  in  order  to  uphold  the 
credit  of  the  former,  defended,  in  the  celebrated 
passage  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  the  Samaritan  reading  Ge- 
rizim  against  the  Jewish  reading  Ebal,  charging 
corruption  of  the  text  upon  the  Jews  rather  tlian 
the  Samaritans.  A  full  examination  of  the  readings 
of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  at  length  made 
by  Gesenius  in  1815.  His  conclusions,  fatal  to  its 
credit,  have  obtained  general  acceptance ;  nor  have 
they  been  substantially  shaken  by  the  attack  of  a 
writer  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Lit.  for  July  1853 ; 
whose  leading  principle,  that  transcribers  are  more 
liable  to  omit  than  to  add,  is  fundamentally  un 
sound.  Gesenius  ranges  the  Samaritan  variations 
from  the  Jewish  Pentateuch  under  the  following 
heads : — grammatical  corrections ;  glosses  received 
into  the  text;  conjectural  emendations  of  difficult 
passages ;  corrections  derived  from  parallel  pas 
sages  ;  larger  interpolations  derived  from  parallel 
passages ;  alterations  made  to  remove  what  was 
offensive  to  Samaritan  feelings ;  alterations  to  suit 
the  Samaritan  idiom ;  and  alterations  to  suit  the 
Samaritan  theology,  interpretation,  and  worship. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  even  the  grains  of  gold 
which  he  thought  to  find  amongst  the  rubbish  really 
exist;  and  the  Samaritan  readings  which  he  was 
disposed  to  prefer  in  Gen.  iv.  18,  xiv.  14,  xxii.  13, 
xlix.  14,  will  hardly  approve  themselves  generally. 
The  really  remarkable  feature  respecting  the  Sama 
ritan  Pentateuch  is  its  accordance  with  the  Sep- 
tuagint  in  more  than  a  thousand  places  where  it 
differs  from  the  Jewish ;  being  mostly  those  where 
either  a  gloss  Iras  been  introduced  into  the  text,  or 
a  difficult  reading  corrected  for  an  easier,  or  the 
prefix  1  added  or  removal.  On  the  other  hand 
there  are  about  as  many  places  where  the  Septuagint 
supports  the  Jewish  text  against  the  Samaritan  ; 
and  some  in  which  the  Septuagint  stands  alone,  the 
Samaritan  either  agreeing  or  disagreeing  with  the 
Jewish.  Gesenius  and  others  suppose  that  the  Sep 
tuagint  and  the  Samaritan  text  were  derived  from 
Jewish  MSS.  of  a  different  recension  to  that  which 
afterwards  obtained  public  authority  in  Palestine, 
and  that  the  Samaritan  copy  was  itself  subsequently 
further  altered  and  interpolated.  It  is  at  least 
equally  probable  that  both  the  Greek  translators 
and  the  Samaritan  copyists  made  use  of  MSS.  with 
•A  large  number  of  traditional  marginal  glosses  and 
annotations,  which  they  embodied  in  their  own 
texts  at  discretion.  As  to  the  origin  of  the  exist 
ence  of  the  Pentateuch  among  the  Samaritans,  it 
was  probably  introduced  thither  when  Manasseh 
and  other  Jewish  priests  passed  over  into  Samaria, 
*nd  contemporarily  with  the  building  of  the  temple 
on  M  junt  Gerizim.  Hengstenberg  contends  for  this 
on  the  ground  that  the  Samaritans  were  entirely  of 
heathen  origin,  and  that  their  subsequent  religion 
was  derived  from  Judea  (Genuineness  of  Pent.  vol. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

i.):  the  same  conclusion  is  reached  alsc,  though  OD 
very  different  grounds,  by  Geseiiius,  De  Wette.  anJ 
Bleek.  To  the  hypothesis  that  the  Pentateuch  was 
perpetuated  to  the  Samaritans  from  the  Israelites  ol 
the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes,  and  still  more  to 
another,  that  being  of  Israelitish  origin  they  first  je- 
came  acquainted  with  it  under  Josiah,  there  is  the 
objection,  besides  what  has  been  urged  by  Heng- 
steuberg,  that  no  trace  appears  of  the  reception 
among  them  of  the  writings  of  the  Israelitish  pro 
phets  Hosea,  Amos,  and  Jonah,  which  yet  Josiah 
would  so  naturally  circulate  with  the  Pentateuch, 
in  order  to  bring  the  remnant  of  his  northern  coun 
trymen  to  repentance. 

While  such  freedom  in  dealing  with  the  sacred 
text  was  exercised  at  Samaria  and  Alexandria,  there 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  in  Palestine  the  text 
was  both  carefully  preserved  and  scrupulously  re- 
spected.  The  boast  of  Josephus  (c.  Apian,  i.  8), 
that  through  all  the  ages  that  had  passed  none  had 
ventured  to  add  to  or  to  take  away  from,  or  to  trans 
pose  aught  of  the  sacred  writings,  may  well  represent 
the  spirit  in  which  in  his  day  his  own  countrymen 
acted.  In  the  translations  of  Aquila  and  the  other 
Greek  interpreters,  the  fragments  of  whose  works 
remain  to  us  in  the  Hexapla,  we  have  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  a  text  differing  but  little  from  our 
own:  so  also  in  the  Targums  of  Onkelos  and 
Jonathan.  A  few  centuries  later  we  have,  in  the 
Hexapla,  additional  evidence  to  the  same  effect  in 
Origen's  transcriptions  of  the  Hebrew  text.  And 
yet  more  important  are  the  proofs  of  the  firm  es 
tablishment  of  the  text,  and  of  its  substantial  iden 
tity  with  our  own,  supplied  by  the  translation  of 
Jerome,  who  was  instructed  by  the  Palestinian 
Jews,  and  mainly  relied  upon  their  authority  for 
acquaintance  not  only  with  the  text  itself,  but  also 
with  the  traditional  unwritten  vocalization  of  it. 

This  brings  us  to  the  middle  of  the  Talmudic 
period.  The  learning  of  the  schools  which  had 
been  formed  in  Jerusalem  about  the  time  of  our 
Saviour  by  Hillel  and  Shammai.  was  preserved,  after 
the  destruction  of  the  city,  in  the  academies  of 
Jabneh,  Sepphoris,  Cesarai,  and  Tiberias.  The 
great  pillar  of  the  Jewish  literature  of  this  period 
was  R.  Judah  the  Holy,  to  whom  is  ascribed  the 
compilation  of  the  Mishna,  the  text  of  the  Talmud, 
and  who  died  about  A.D.  220.  After  his  death 
there  grew  into  repute  the  Jewish  academies  of 
Sura,  Nahardea,  and  Pum- Beditha,  on  the  Euphrates. 
The  twofold  Gemara,  or  commentary,  was  now  ap 
pended  to  the  Mishna,  thus  completing  the  Talmud. 
The  Jerusalem  Gemara  proceeded  from  the  Jews  of 
Tiberias,  probably  towards  the  end  of  the  4th  cen 
tury  :  the  Babylonian  from  the  academies  on  th« 
Euphrates,  perhaps  by  the  end  of  the  5th.  That 
along  with  the  task  of  collecting  and  commenting 
on  their  various  legal  traditions,  the  Jews  of  these 
several  academies  would  occupy  themselves  with 
the  text  of  the  sacred  writings  is  in  every  way  pro 
bable  ;  and  is  indeed  shown  by  various  Talmudic 
notices. 

In  these  the  first  thing  to  be  remarked  is  the  entire 
absence  of  allusion  to  any  such  glosses  of  interpreta 
tion  as  those  which,  from  having  been  previously  noted 
on  the  margins  of  MSS.,  had  probably  been  loosely 
incorporated  into  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  and  the 
Septuagint.  Interpretation,  properly  so  called,  had 
become  tne  province  of  the  Targumiit,  not  of  the 
transcriber;  and  the  result  of  the  entire  divorce  or' 
the  task  of  interpretation  from  that  of  transcrip 
tion  nad  been  to  obtain  greater  security  tor  iJi.* 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

transmission  of  the  text  in  its  purity.  In  place, 
however,  of  such  glosses  of  interpretation  had  crept 
in  the  more  childish  practice  of  reading  some  pas 
sages  differently  to  the  way  in  which  they  were 
written,  in  order  to  obtain  a  play  of  words,  or  to  fix 
them  artificially  in  the  memory.  Hence  the  formula 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


601 


K~lpn 


Read  not  so>  but  so-"    In 


other  cases  it  was  sought  by  arbitrary  modifications  of 
words  to  embody  in  them  some  casuistical  rule.  Hence 


the   formula 


ON  B», 


DK 


There  is  ground  for  the  traditional,  there  is  ground 
for  the  textual  reading"  (Hupfeld,  in  Stud,  und 
Kritiken,  1830,  pp.  554  seqq.).  But  these  tradi 
tional  and  confessedly  apocryphal  readings  were  not 
allowed  to  affect  the  written  text.  The  care  of  the 
lalmudic  doctors  for  the  text  is  shown  by  the  pains 
with  which  they  counted  up  the  number  of  verses 
in  the  different  books,  and  computed  which  were 
the  middle  verses,  words,  and  letters  in  the  Penta 
teuch  and  in  the  Psalms.  These  last  they  distin 
guished  by  the  employment  of  a  larger  letter,  or 
by  raising  the  letter  above  the  rest  of  the  text :  see 
Lev.  xi.  42;  Ps.  Ixxx.  14  (Kiddushin,  fol.  30,  1; 
Buxtorf's  Tiberias,  c.  viii.).  Such  was  the  origin 
of  these  unusual  letters :  mystical  meanings  were, 
however,  as  we  learn  from  the  Talmud  itself  (Baba 
Bathra,  fol.  109,  2),  afterwards  attached  to  them. 
These  may  have  given  rise  to  a  multiplication  of 
them,  and  we  cannot  therefore  be  certain  that  all 
had  in  the  first  instance  a  critical  significance. 

Another  Talmudic  notice  relating  to  the  sacred 
text  furnishes  the  four  following  remarks  (Ne- 
darim,  fol.  37,  2;  Buxt.  Tib.  c.  viii.):— 

D^"IQ1D  SOpO,  "  Reading  of  the  scribes ;"  re 
ferring  to  the  words  p« 


matized,  have  descended  to  us.     A  like  ohierrjitioa 
will  apply  to  the  Talmudic  notices  of  the  reading*; 
still  indicated  by  the  Masoretic  Keris  in  Job  xiii. 
15 ;  Hag.  i.  8  (Sotah,  v.  5 ;   Yoina,  fol.  21,2). 
The  scrupulousness  with  which  the  Talmudists  thns 
noted  what  they  deemed  the  truer  readings,  and  yet 
abstained  from  introducing  them  into  the  text,  indi 
cates  at  once  both  the  diligence  with  which  tb?y 
scrutinized  the  text,  and  also  the  care  with  which, 
even  white  acknowledging  its  occasional  imperfec 
tions,  they  guarded  it.     Critical  procedure  is  also 
evinced  in  a  mention  of  their  rejection  of  manuscripts 
which  were  found  not  to  agree  with  others  in  their 
readings  (Taanith  Hierosol.  fol.  68,  1);  and  the 
rules  given  with  reference  to  the  transcription  and 
adoption  of  manuscripts  attest  the  care  bestowed 
upon    them    (Shabbath,  fol.  103,  2 ;   Gittin,   fol. 
45,  2).     The  "  Rejection  of  the  scribes  "  mentioned 
above,  may  perhaps  relate  to  certain  minute  rectifi 
cations  which  the  scribes  had  ventured,  not  neces 
sarily  without  critical  authority,  to  make  in  the 
actual   written   text.     Wahner,  however,   who  is 
followed  by  Havernick  and  Keil,  maintains  that  it 
relates  to  rectification's  of  the  popular  manner  in 
which  the  text  was  read.     And  for  this  there  is 
some  ground  in  the  circumstance  that  the  "  Reading 
of  the  scribes "  bears  apparently  merely  upon  the 
vocalization,  probably  the  pausal  vocalization,  with 
which  the  words  p&5,  &c.,  were  to  be  pronounced. 
The  Talmud  further  makes  mention  of  the  eu 
phemistic  Keris,  which  are  still  noted  in  our  Bibles, 
e.  g.  at  2  K.  vi.  25  (Megillah,  fol.  25,  2).     It  also 
reckons  six  instances  of  extraordinary  points  placed 
over  certain  words,   e.  g.  at   Gen.  xviii.   9    (2V. 
Sophcr.  vi.  3)  ;  and  of  some  of  them  it  furnishes 


D'HQID  Tlt^y,  "  Rejection  of  the  scribes ;"  re 
ferring  to  the  omission  of  a  1  prefix  before  the  word 
inX  in  Gen.  xviii.  5,  xxiv.  55 ;  Num.  xxxi.  2,  and 
before  certain  other  words  in  Ps.  Ixviii.  26,  xxxvi. 
6.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  two  passages  of 
Genesis  are  among  those  in  which  the  Septuagint 
and  Samaritan  agree  in  supplying  1  against  the  au 
thority  of  the  present  Hebrew  text.  In  Num.  xxxi. 
2,  the  present  Hebrew  text,  the  Septuagint,  and  the 
Samaritan,  all  have  it. 

pTD  yh"\  pip,  "  Read  but  not  written  ;"  re 
ferring  to  something  which  ought  to  be  read, 
although  not  in  the  text,  in  2  Sam.  viii.  3,  xvi.  23  ; 
Jer.  xxxi.  38,  1.  29  ;  Ruth  ii.  11,  iii.  5,  17.  The 
omission  is  still  indicated  by  the  Masoretic  notes  in 
every  place  but  Ruth  ii.  11 ;  and  is  supplied  by  the 
Septuagint  in  every  place  but  2  Sam.  xvi.  23. 


P"lp 


Written  but  not  read  ;"  re 


ferring  to  something  which  ought  in  reading  to  be 
omitted  from  the  text  in  2  K.  v.  18  ;  Deut.  vi.  1  ; 
Jer.  Ii.  3  ;  Ez.  xiviii.  16  ;  Ruth  iii.  12.  The  Ma- 
sorttic  notes  direct  the  omission  in  every  place  but 
Deut.  vi.  1  :  the  Septuagint  preserves  the  word 
there,  and  in  2  K.  v.  18,  but  omits  it  in  the  other 
three  passages.  In  these  last,  an  addition  had  appa 
rently  crept  into  the  text  from  error  of  transcrip 
tion.  In  Jer.  Ii.  3,  the  won!  "pi*,  in  Ez.  xlviii.  16, 
the  word  {^IDP!  had  been  accidentally  repeated  :  in 
Ruth  iii.  12,  DN  *3  had  been  repeated  from  the  pre 
ceding  D3DN  '3. 

Of  these  four  remarks  then,  the  last  two,  there 


mystical  explanations  (Buxtorf,  Tib.  c.  xvii.).  The 
Masorah  enumerates  fifteen.  They  are  noticed  by 
Jerome,  Quaest.  in  Gen.  xviii.  35  [xix.  33].  They 
seem  to  have  been  originally  designed  as  marks  of 
the  supposed  spuriousness  of>  certain  words  or  letters. 
But  in  many  cases  the  ancient  versions  uphold  the 
genuineness  of  the  words  so  stigmatized. 

It  is  after  the  Talmudic  period  that  Hupfeld 
places  the  introduction  into  the  text  of  the  two 
large  points  (in  Hebrew  p1DS  f|1D,  Soph-pasuk) 
to  mark  the  end  of  each  verse.  They  are  mani 
festly  of  older  date  than  the  accents,  by  which  they 
are,  in  effect,  supplemented  (Stud,  und  Krit.  1837, 
p.  857).  Coeval,  perhaps,  with  the  use  of  the 
Soph-pasuk  is  that  of  the  Makheph,  or  hyphen,  tc 
unite  words  that  are  so  closely  conjoined  as  to  have 
but  one  accent  between  them.  It  must  be  older 
than  the  accentual  marks,  the  presence  or  absence 
of  which  is  determined  by  it.  It  doubtless  indicate; 
the  way  in  which  the  text  was  traditionally  read, 
and  therefore  embodies  traditional  authority  for  the 
conjunction  or  separation  of  words.  Internal  evi 
dence  shows  this  to  be  the  case  in  such  passages  as 
Ps.  xlv.  5,  p"l¥TI13J?1.  But  the  use  of  it  cannot 
be  relied  on,  as  it  often  in  the  poetical  books  con 
flicts  with  the  rhythm;  e.g.  in  Ps.  as.  9,  10  (ci 
Mason  and  Bernard's  Giammar,  ii.  p.  187). 

Such  modifications  of  the  text  as  these  were  the 
precursors  of  the  new  method  of  dealing  with  it 
which  constitutes  the  work  of  the  Masoretic  period. 
It  is  evident  from  the  notices  of  the  Tain  ud  that  a 
number  of  oral  traditions  had  been  gradually  accu- 


seems  scarcely  room  for  doubt,  point  to  errors  which  j  mulating  respecting  both  the  integrity  of  particular 
the  Jews  had  discovered,  or  believed  to  have  disco-  |  passages  of  the  text  itself,  and  also  the  manner  in 
wed,  in  their  copies  of  the  text,  but  which  they  which  it  was  to  be  read.  The  time  at  length  arriveu 
were  yet  generally  unwilling  to  correct  in  their  when  it  became  desirable  to  secure  the  permanence  of 
hi  lure  copies,  i.nd  which  accordingly,  although  stig-  all  such  tnditions  by  committing  them  to  writing. 


602 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


The  •  very  process  of  collecting  them  would  aJJ 
greatly  to  their  number;  the  traditions  of  various 
academies  would  be  superadded  the  one  upon  the 
other  ;  and  with  these  would  be  gradually  incor 
porated  the  various  critical  observations  of  the 
collectors  themselves,  and  the  results  of  their 
<»mj>arisons  of  different  manuscripts.  The  vast 
heterogeneous  mass  of  traditions  and  criticisms 
thus  compiled  and  embodied  in  writing,  forms  what 
is  known  as  the  iTTDD,  Masorah,  i.  e.  Tradition. 
A  similar  name  had  been  applied  in  the  Mishna  to 
the  oral  tradition  before  it  was  committed  to  writing, 
where  it  had  been  described  as  the  hedge  or  fence, 
3»>D,  of  the  Law  (Pirke  Aboth,  iii.  13). 

Buxtorf,  in  his  Tiberias,  which  is  devoted  to  an 
account  of  the  Masorah,  ranges  its  contents  under 
the  tli  ree  heads  of  obsen'ations  respecting  the  verses, 
words,  and  letters  of  the  sacred  text.  In  regard  of 
the  verses,  the  Masorets  recorded  how  many  there 
were  in  each  book,  and  the  middle  verse  in  each : 
also  how  many  verses  began  with  particular  letters, 
or  began  and  ended  with  the  same  word,  or  con 
tained  a  particular  number  of  words  and  letters,  or 
particular  words  a  certain  number  of  times,  &c.  In 
regard  of  the  words,  they  recorded  the  Keris  and 
Chethibs,  where  different  words  were  to  be  read 
from  those  contained  in  the  text,  or  where  words 
were  to  be  omitted  or  supplied.  They  noted  that 
certain  words  were  to  be  found  so  many  times  in 
the  beginning,  middle,  or  end  of  a  verse,  or  with  a 
particular  construction  or  meaning.  They  noted 
also  of  particular  words,  and  this  especially  in  cases 
where  mistakes  in  transcription  were  likely  to  arise, 
whether  they  were  to  be  written  plene  or  defective, 
i.  e.  with  or  without  the  matres  lectionis :  also  their 
vocalization  and  accentuation,  and  how  many  times 
they  occurred  so  vocalized  and  accented.  In  regard 
of  the  letters,  they  computed  how  often  each  letter 
of  the  alphabet  occurred  in  the  0.  T. :  they  noted 
fifteen  instances  of  letters  stigmatized  with  the  ex 
traordinary  points :  they  commented  also  on  all  the 
unusual  letters,  viz.  the  majusculce,  which  they 
variously  computed ;  the  minuscules,  of  which  they 
reckoned  thirty-three  ;  the  suspensce,  four  in  num 
ber  ;  and  the  inversce,  of  which,  the  letter  being  in 
each  case  3,  there  are  eight  or  nine. 

The  compilation  of  the  Masorah  did  not  meet 
vrith  universal  approval  among  the  Jews,  of  whom 
some  regretted  the  consequent  cessation  of  oral  tra 
ditions.  Others  condemned  the  frivolous  character 
of  many  of  ite  remarks.  The  formation  of  the 
written  Masorah  may  have  extended  from  the  sixth 
or  seventh  to  the  tenth  or  eleventh  century.  It  is 
essentially  an  incomplete  work  ;  and  the  labours  of 
the  Jewish  doctors  upon  the  sacred  text  might  have 
unendingly  furnished  materials  for  the  enlargement 
of  the  older  traditions,  the  preservation  of  which 
had  been  the  primary  object  in  view.  Nor  must  it 
be  implicitly  relied  on.  Its  computations  of  the 
number  of  letters  in  the  Bible  are  said  to  be  far 
from  correct ;  and  its  observations,  as  is  remarked 
by  Jacob  ben  Chaim,  do  not  always  agree  with  those 
of  the  Talmud,  nor  yet  with  each  other  ;  though  we 
have  no  means  of  distinguishing  between  its  earlier 
and  its  later  portions. 

The  most  valuable  feature  of  the  Masoiah  is  un 
doubtedly  its  collection  of  Keris.  The  first  rudi 
ments  of  this  collection  meet  us  in  the  Talmud.  Of 
those  subsequently  collected,  it  is  probable  that 
Diany  were  derived  from  the  collation  of  MSS., 
others  from  the  unsupported  judgment  of  the  Mas- 
oi»t*  IhnnxMvs.  Tln'y  ol'ti-n  nMcd  on  planMl  k1 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  superficial  grounds,  originating  in  the  dw'ic  tfl 
substitute  an  easier  for  a  more  difficult  reading  , 
and  to  us  it  is  of  little  consequence  whether  it  we.-« 
a  transcriber  or  a  Masoretic  doctor  by  whom  tli«* 
substitution  was  first  suggested.  It  seems  clear 
that  the  Keris  in  all  cases  represent  the  readings 
which  the  Masorets  themselves  approved  as  correct ; 
but  there  would  be  the  less  hesitation  in  sanctioning 
them  when  it  was  assumed  that  they  would  be 
always  preserved  in  documents  separate  from  the 
text,  and  that  the  written  text  itself  would  remain 
intact.  In  effect,  however,  our  MSS.  often  exhibit 
the  text  with  the  Keri  readings  incoi-porated.  The 
number  of  Kens  is,  according  to  Elias  I.evita,  whc 
spent  twenty  years  in  the  study  of  the  Masorah, 
848;  but  the  Bomberg  Bible  contains  1171,  the 
Plantin  Bible  793.  Two  lists  of  the  Keris — the  one 
exhibiting  the  variations  of  the  printed  Bibles  with 
respect  to  them,  the  other  distributing  them  into 
classes — are  given  in  the  beginning  of  Walton's 
Polyglot,  vol.  vi. 

The  Masorah  furnishes  also  eighteen  instances  of 
what  it  calls  DnDID  JlpTl,  "  Correction  of  the 
scribes."  The  real  import  of  this  is  doubtful ;  but 
the  recent  view  of  Bleek,  that  it  relates  to  altera 
tions  made  in  the  text  by  the  scribes,  because  of 
something  there  offensive  to  them,  and  that  there 
fore  the  rejected  reading  is  in  each  case  the  true 
reading,  is  not  borne  out  by  the  Septuagint,  which 
in  all  the  instances  save  one  (Job  vii.  20)  confirms 
the  present  Masoretic  text. 

Furthermore  the  Masorah  contains  certain  |H*3D, 
"  Conjectures,"  which  it  does  not  raise  to  the  dignity 
of  Keris,  respecting  the  true  reading  in  difficult 
passages.  Thus  at  Gen.  xix.  23,  for  K¥*  was  con" 
jectured  !"IKY\  because  the  word  JJ'DtJ'  is  usually 
feminine. 

The  Masorah  was  originally  preserved  in  distinct 
books  by  itself.  A  plan  then  arose  of  transferring 
it  to  the  margins  of  the  MSS.  of  the  Bible.  For 
this  purpose  large  curtailments  were  necessary  ;  and 
various  transcribers  inserted  in  their  margins  only 
as  much  as  they  had  room  for,  or  strove  to  give  it 
an  ornamental  character  by  reducing  it  into  fanciful 
shapes.  R.  Jacob  ben  Chaim,  editor  of  the  Bomberg 
Bible,  complains  much  of  the  confusion  into  which 
it  had  fallen  ;  and  the  service  which  he  i-endered  in 
bringing  it  into  order  is  honourably  acknowledged 
by  Buxtorf.  Further  improvements  in  the  arrange 
ment  of  it  were  made  by  Buxtorf  himself  in  his 
Rabbinical  Bible.  The  Masorah  is  now  distin 
guished  into  the  Masora  magna  and  the  Masora 
parva,  the  latter  being  an  abridgment  of  the  former, 
and  including  all  the  Keris  and  other  compendious 
observations,  and  being  usually  printed  in  Hebrew 
Bibles  at  the  foot  of  the  page.  The  Masora  magna, 
when  accompanying  the  Bible,  is  disposed  partly  -t 
the  side  of  the  text,  against  the  passages  to  which  its 
several  observations  refer,  partly  at  the  end,  where 
the  observations  are  ranged  in  alphabetical  order :  it 
is  thus  divided  into  the  Masora  textualis  and  the 
Masora  finalis. 

The  Masorah  itself  was  but  one  of  the  fruits  of 
the  labours  of  the  Jewish  doctors  in  the  Masoretic 
period.  A  far  more  important  work  was  the  fur 
nishing  of  the  text  with  vowel-marks,  by  which  the 
traditional  pronunciation  of  it  was  imperistably  re 
corded.  That  the  insertion  of  the  Hebrew  vowel- 
points  was  post-Talmudic  is  shown  by  the  absence 
from  the  Talmud  of  all  reference  to  them.  Jeromt 
also,  in  recording  the  trn-j  pronunciation  of  any 
word,  spt'iiks  only  of  tli<>  \v;iv  in  whirh  {•  \\:i  • 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

ind  occasionally  mentions  the  ambiguity  arising 
fyon  t-ie  variety  of  words  represented  by  the  same 
letter  (Hupfeld,  Stud,  und  Krit.  1830,  pp.  549, 
seqq.).  The  system  was  gradually  elaborated,  having 
been  moulded  in  the  first  instance  in  imitation  of 
the  Arabian,  which  was  itself  the  daughter  of  the 
Syrian.  (So  Hupfeld.  Ewald  maintains  the  He 
brew  system  to  have  been  derived  immediately  from 
the  Syrian.)  The  history  of  the  Syrian  and  Arabian 
vocalization  renders  it  probable  that  the  elaboration 
of  the  system  commenced  not  earlier  than  the 
seventh  or  eighth  century.  The  vowel-marks  are 
referred  to  in  the  Masorah ;  and  as  they  are  all 
mentioned  by  R.  Judah  Chiug,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  eleventh  century,  they  must  have  beeu  per 
fected  before  that  date.  The  Spanish  Rabbis  of  the 
eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  knew  nought  of  their 
recent  origin.  That  the  system  of  punctuation 
with  which  we  are  familiar  was  fashioned  in  Pales 
tine  is  shown  by  its  difference  from  the  Assyrian  or 
Persian  system  displayed  in  one  of  the  eastern  MSS. 
collated  by  Pinner  at  Odessa  ;  of  which  more  here 
after. 

Contemporaneous  with  the  written  vocalization 
was  the  accentuation  of  the  text.  The  import  of 
the  accents  was,  as  Hupfeld  has  shown,  essentially 
rhythmical  (Stud,  und  Krit.  1837):  hence  they 
had  from  the  first  both  a  logical  and  a  musical  sig 
nificance.  In  respect  of  the  former  they  were  called 
D^OytD,  "  senses ;"  in  respect  of  the  latter,  DI^JJ, 
"  tones."  Like  the  vowel- marks,  they  are  mentioned 
in  the  Masorah,  but  not  in  the  Talmud. 

The  controversies  of  the  sixteenth  century  re 
specting  the  late  origin  of  the  vowel-marks  and 
accents  are  well  known.  Both  are  with  the  Jews 
the  authoritative  exponents  of  the  manner  in  which 
the  text  is  to  be  read  :  "  Any  interpretation,"  says 
Aben  Ezra,  "  which  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 
arrangement  of  the  accents,  thou  shalt  not  consent 
to  it,  nor  listen  to  it."  If  in  the  Books  of  Job, 
Psalms,  and  Proverbs,  the  accents  are  held  by  some 
Jewish  scholars  to  be  irregularly  placed,"  the  expla 
nation  is  probably  that  in  those  books  the  rhythm  of 
the  poetry  has  afforded  the  means  of  testing  the 
value  of  the  accentuation,  and  has  consequently  dis 
closed  its  occasional  imperfections.  Making  allow 
ance  for  these,  we  must  yet  on  the  whole  admire 
the  marvellous  correctness,  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  of 
both  the  vocalization  and  accentuation.  The  diffi 
culties  which  both  occasionally  present,  and  which  a 
superficial  criticism  would,  by  overriding  them,  so 
easily  remove,  furnish  the  best  evidence  that  both 
faithfully  embody  not  the  private  judgments  of  the 
punctuators,  but  the  traditions  which  had  descended 
to  them  from  previous  generations. 

Besides  the  evidences  of  various  readings  con 
tained  in  the  Keris  of  the  Masorah,  we  have  two 
lists  of  different  readings  purporting  or  presumed  to 
be  those  adopted  by  the  Palestinian  and  Babylonian 
Jews  respectively.  Both  are  given  in  Walton's 
Polyglot,  vol.  vi. 

Ttie  first  of  these  was  printed  by  R.  Jacob  ben 
Chaim  in  the  Bomberg  Bible  edited  by  him,  with 
out  any  mention  of  the  source  whence  he  had  de 
rived  it.  The  different  readings  are  '2 1 t>  in  number  : 
all  relate  to  the  consonants,  except  two,  which  re 
late  to  the  Mappik  m  the  !"l.  They  are  generally 
of  but  little  importance :  many  of  the  differences 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


603 


are  orthographical,  many  identical  with  these  indi 
rated  by  the  Keris  and  Chethibs.  The  list  does  not 
extend  to  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  supposed  to  be  an 
cient,  but  post-Talmudic. 

The  other  is  the  result  of  a  collation  of  MSS 
made  in  the  eleventh  century  by  two  Jews,  R 
Aaron  ben  Asher,  a  Palestinian,  and  R.  Jacob  ber. 
Naphtali,  a  Babylonian.  The  differences,  864  in 
number,  relate  to  the  vowels,  the  accents,  the  Mak- 
keph,  and  in  one  instance  (Cant.  viii.  6)  to  the  divi 
sion  of  one  word  into  two.  The  list  helps  to  fur 
nish  evidence  of  the  date  by  which  the  punctuation 
and  accentuation  of  the  text  must  have  been  com 
pleted.  The  readings  of  our  MSS.  commonly  acccrd 
with  those  of  Ben  Asher. 

It  is  possible  that  even  the  separate  Jewish  aca 
demies  may  in  some  instances  have  had  their  own 
distinctive  standard  texts.  Traces  of  minor  varia 
tions  between  the  standards  of  the  two  Babylonian 
academies  of  Sura  and  Nahardea  are  mentioned  by 
De  Rossi,  Proleg.  §35. 

From  the  end,  however,  of  the  Masoretic  period 
onward,  the  Masorah  became  the  great  authority 
by  which  the  text  given  in  all  the  Jewish  MSS. 
was  settled.  It  may  thus  be  said  that  all  our  MSS. 
are  Masoretic :  those  of  older  date  were  either  suf 
fered  to  perish,  or,  as  some  think,  were  intentionally 
consigned  to  destruction  as  incorrect.  Various 
standard  copies  are  mentioned  by  the  Jews,  by 
which,  in  the  subsequent  transcriptions,  their  MSS. 
were  tested  and  corrected,  but  of  which  none  are 
now  known.  Such  were  the  Codex  Hillel  in  Spain  ; 
the  Codex  Aegyptius,  or  Hierosolymitanus,  of  Ben 
Asher  ;  and  the  Codex  Babylonius  of  Ben  Naphtali. 
Of  the  Pentateuch  there  were  the  Codex  Sinaiticus, 
of  which  the  authority  stood  high  in  regard  of  its 
accentuation  ;  and  the  Codex  Hierichuntinus,  which 
was  valued  in  regard  of  its  use  of  the  matres  lec- 
tionis  ;  also  the  Codex  Ezra,  or  Azarah,  at  Toledo, 
ransomed  from  the  Black  Prince  for  a  large  sum  at 
his  capture  of  the  city  in  1367,  but  destroyed  in  a 
subsequent  siege  (Scott  Porter,  Princ.  of  Text.  Crit. 
p.  74). 

2.  Manuscripts.  — We  must  now  give  an  accoun; 
of  the  0.  T.  MSS.  known  to  us.  They  tall  into  twc 
main  classes:  Synagogue-rolls  and  MSS.  for  private 
use.  Of  the  latter,  some  are  written  in  the  square, 
others  in  the  rabbinic  or  cursive  character. 

The  synagogue-rolls  contain,  separate  from  each 
other,  the  Pentateuch,  the  Haphtaroth,  or  appointed 
sections  of  the  Prophets,  and  the  so-called  Megilloth, 
viz.  Canticles,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
Esther.  The  text  of  the  synagogue-rolls  is  written 
without  vowels,  accents,  or  soph-pasuks :  the  greater 
par.ihioth  are  not  distinguished,  nor  yet,  strictly, 
the  verses  ;  these  last  are  indeed  often  slightly  sepa 
rated,  but  the  practice  is  against  the  ancient  tradi 
tion.  The  prescribed  rules  respecting  both  the  pre 
paration  of  the  skin  or  parchment  for  these  rolls, 
and  the  ceremonies  with  which  they  are  to  be  written, 
are  exceedingly  minute;  and,  though  superstitious, 
have  probably  greatly  contributed  to  the  preserva 
tion  of  the  text  in  its  integrity.  They  are  given  in 
the  Tract  Sopherim,  a  later  appendage  to  the  Baby 
lonian  Talmud.  The  two  modifications  of  the  square 
character  in  which  these  rolls  are  written  are  distin 
guished  by  the  Jews  as  the  Tarn  and  the  Welsh,  i. «., 
probably,  the  Perfect  and  the  Foreign :  the  fomier  it 


a  Mason  and  Uemard's  Grammar,  li.  p.  235.     The 

system  of  acci'itluaiion  in  these  books  is  peculiar;  but  it 


i'1!-:'  p.|My 


no  leas  than  thai  in  the  olher 


books.  The  latest  expositions  of  it  are  by  Bar,  a  Jewisli 
scholar,  appended  to  vol.  ii.  of  Drlitzsch'g  'Jvin/m.  mi  Uf- 
/W/.r  ;  ;IIM!  by  A.  Ii.  l'avii!-"li.  1*G1 


604 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


the  older  angular  writing  of  the  German  and  Polish 
the  latter  the  more  modern  round  writing  of  the 
Spanish  MSS.  These  rolls  are  not  sold ;  and  those 
in  Christian  possession  are  supposed  by  some  to 
be  mainly  those  rejected  from  synagogue  use  as 
vitiated. 

Private  MSS.  in  the  square  character  are  in  the 
hook-form,  either  on  parchment  or  on  paper,  and  ol 
various  sizes,  from  folio  to  12mo.  Some  contain 
the  Hebrew  text  alone ;  others  add  the  Targum,  01 
an  Arabic  or  other  translation,  either  interspersed 
with  the  text  or  in  a  separate  column,  occasionally 
in  the  margin.  The  upper  and  lower  margins  are 
generally  occupied  by  the  Masorah,  sometimes  by 
rabbinical  commentaries,  &c. ;  the  outer  margin, 
when  not  rilled  with  a  commentary,  is  used  for  cor 
rections,  miscellaneous  observations,  &c. ;  the  inner 
margin  for  the  Masora  parva.  The  text  marks  all 
the  distinctions  of  sections  and  verses  which  are 
wanting  in  the  synagogue- rolls.  These  copies  ordi 
narily  passed  through  several  hands  in  their  prepa 
ration  :  one  wrote  the  consonants  ;  another  supplied 
the  vowels  and  accents,  which  are  generally  in  a 
fainter  ink ;  another  revised  the  copy ;  another 
added  the  Masorah,  &c.  Even  when  the  same  per 
son  performed  more  than  one  of  these  tasks,  the 
consonants  and  vowels  were  always  written  sepa 
rately. 

The  date  of  a  MS.  is  ordinarily  given  in  the  sub 
scription  ;  but  us  the  subscriptions  ai-e  often  con 
cealed  in  the  Masorah  or  elsewhere,  it  is  occasionally 
difficult  to  find  them :  occasionally  also  it  is  diffi 
cult  to  decipher  them.  Even  when  found  and  de 
ciphered,  they  cannot  always  be  relied  on.  Sub 
scriptions  were  liable  to  be  altered  or  supplied  from 
the  desire  to  impart  to  the  MS.  the  value  either  of 
antiquity  or  of  newness.  For  example,  the  sub 
scription  of  the  MS.  Bible  in  the  University  Library 
at  Cambridge  (Kenn.  No.  89),  which  greatly  puz 
zled  Kennicott,  has  now  been  shown  by  Zunz  (Zur 
Gesch.  und  Lit.  p.  214)  to  assign  the  MS.  to  the 
year  A.D.  856  ;  yet  both  Kennicott  and  Bruns  agree 
that  it  is  not  older  than  the  13th  century;  and 
De  Rossi  too  pronounces,  from  the  form  of  the  Ma 
sorah,  against  its  antiquity.  No  satisfactory  criteria 
have  been  yet  established  by  which  the  ages  of  MSS. 
are  to  be  determined.  Those  that  have  been  relied 
on  by  some  are  by  others  deemed  of  little  value. 
Few  existing  MSS.  are  supposed  to  be  older  than 
the  12th  century.  Kennicott  and  Bruns  assigned 
one  of  their  collation  (No.  590)  to  the  10th  cen 
tury ;  De  Rossi  dates  it  A.D.  1018;  on  the  other 
hand,  one  of  his  own  (No.  634)  he  adjudges  to  the 
8th  century. 

It  is  usual  to  distinguish  in  these  MSS.  three 
modifications  of  the  square  character :  viz.  a  Spanish 
writing,  upright  and  regularly  formed ;  a  German, 
inclined  and  sharp-pointed  ;  and  a  French  and  Ita 
lian,  intermediate  to  the  two  preceding.  Yet  the 
character  of  the  writing  is  not  accounted  a  decisive 
criterion  of  the  country  to  which  a  MS.  belongs ; 
nor  indeed  are  the  criteria  of  country  much  more 
definitely  settled  than  those  of  age.  One  important 
distinction  between  the  Spanish  and  German  MSS. 
consists  in  the  difference  of  order  in  which  the  books 
are  generally  arranged.  The  former  follow  the 
Masorah,  placing  the  Chronicles  before  the  rest  of 
the  Hagiographa :  the  latter  conform  to  the  Talmud, 
placing  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  before  Isaiah,  and 
Huth,  separate  from  the  other  Megilloth,  before  the 
Psalms.  The  other  characteristics  of  Spanish  MSS., 
if/hicl'  iii'e  accounted  the  most  valuable,  are  thus 


OLD  TESTAMENT. 

given  by  Bruns: — They  are  written  with  paler  ink; 
their  pages  are  seldom  divided  into  three  columns; 
the  Psalms  are  arranged  stichometrically ;  the  Tar 
gum  is  not  interspersed  with  the  text,  but  assigned 
to  a  separate  column ;  words  are  not  divided  be 
tween  two  lines;  initial  and  unusual  letters  are 
eschewed,  so  also  figures,  ornaments,  and  flourishes  • 
the  parshioth  are  indicated  in  the  margin  rather 
than  in  the  text ;  books  are  separated  by  a  space  of 
four  lilies,  but  do  not  end  with  a  pffl ;  the  letters 
are  dressed  to  the  upper  guiding-line  rather  than 
the  lower  ;  Rapheh  is  employed  frequently,  Methcg 
and  Mappik  seldom. 

Private  MSS.  in  the  rabbinic  character  are 
mostly  on  paper,  and  are  of  comparatively  late  date. 
They  are  written  with  many  abbreviations,  and 
have  no  vowel-points  or  Masorah,  but  are  occa 
sionally  accompanied  by  an  Arabic  version. 

In  computing  the  number  of  known  MSS.,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  by  far  the  greater  part 
contain  only  portions  of  the  Bible.  Of  the  581 
Jewish  MSS.  collated  by  Kennicott,  not  more  than 
102  give  the  0.  T.  complete:  with  those  of  De 
Rossi  the  case  is  similar.  In  Kennicott' s  volumes 
the  MSS.  used  for  each  book  are  distinctly  enume 
rated  at  the  end  of  the  book.  The  number  collated 
by  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  together  were,  for  the 
book  of  Genesis,  490  ;  for  the  Megilloth,  collectively, 
549  ;  for  the  Psalms,  495 ;  for  Ezra  and  Nehemiah, 
172  ;  and  for  the  Chronicles,  211.  MS.  authority 
is  most  plenteous  for  the  book  of  Esther,  least  so  for 
those  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

Since  the  days  of  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi  modeia. 
research  has  discovered  various  MSS.  beyond  tht 
limits  of  Europe.  Of  many  of  these  there  seems  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  they  will  add  much  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  text.  Those  found  in 
China  are  not  essentially  different  in  character  to 
the  MSS.  previously  known  in  Europe :  that  brought 
by  Buchanan  from  Malabar  is  now  supposed  to  be  a 
European  roll.  It  is  different  with  the  MSS.  exa 
mined  by  Pinner  at  Odessa,  described  by  him  in 
the  Prospectus  der  Odessaer  G  esellscliaft  fur 
Gesch.  und  Alt.  gchorenden  dltesien  heb.  und 
•abb.  MSS.  One  of  these  MSS.  (A.  No.  1),  a 
Pentateuch  roll,  unpointed,  brought  from  Derbeud 
in  Daghestan,  appears  by  the  subscription  to  have 
been  written  previously  to  the  year  A.D.  580  ;  and, 
if  so,  is  the  oldest  known  Biblical  Hebrew  MS.  in 
existence.  It  is  written  in  accordance  with  the 
rules  of  the  Masorah,  but  the  fonns  of  the  letters 
are  remarkable.  Another  MS.  (B.  No.  3)  contain- 
ng  the  Prophets,  on  parchment,  in  small  folio, 
although  only  dating,  according  to  the  inscription, 
from  A.D.  916,  and  furnished  with  a  Masorah,  is  a 
yet  greater  treasure.  Its  vowels  and  accents  are 
wholly  different  from  those  now  in  use,  both  in 
'orm  and  in  position,  being  all  above  the  letters : 
they  have  accordingly  been  the  theme  of  much  dis 
cussion  among  Hebrew  scholars.  The  form  of  the 
etters  is  here  also  remarkable.  A  facsimile  has 
>een  given  by  Pinner  of  the  book  of  Habakfc.uk  from 
this  MS.  The  same  peculiarities  are  wholly  or 
jartially  repeated  in  some  of  the  other  Odessa  MSS. 
Various  readings  from  the  texts  of  these  MSS.  are 
nstanced  by  Pinner :  those  of  B.  No.  3  he  has  set 
brth  at  some  length,  and  speaks  of  as  of  great  im- 
x>rtance,  and  as  entitled  to  considerable  attention 
on  account  of  the  correctness  ot  the  MS. :  little  us* 
las  however  been  made  of  them. 

The  Samaritan  MSS.  collated  I y  Kennicott  are  a!! 
n  the  book-form,  though  the  Sainaritazjs,  like  tht 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Jows,  make  use  of  rolls  in  their  synagogues.  They 
have  no  vowel-points  or  accents,  and  their  diacritical 
si^ns  and  marks  of  division  arc  peculiar  to  them 
selves.  The  unusual  letters  of  the  Jewish  MSS. 
ar»  also  unknown  in  them.  They  are  written  on 
vellum  or  paper,  and  are  not  supposed  to  be  of  any 
great  antiquity.  This  is,  however,  of  little  im 
portance,  as  they  sufficiently  represent  the  Sama 
ritan  text. 

3.  Printed  Text.— The  history  of  the  printed 
toxt  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  commences  with  the  early 
Jewish  editions  of  the  separate  books.  First  ap 
peared  the  Psalter,  in  1477,  probably  at  Bologna, 
in  4to.,  with  Kimchi's  commentary  interspersed 
among  the  verses.  Only  the  first  four  psalms  had 
the  vowel-points,  and  these  but  clumsily  expressed. 
The  text  was  far  from  correct,  and  the  matres  lec- 
tionis  were  inserted  or  omitted  at  pleasure.  At 
Bologna  there  subsequently  appeared,  in  1482,  the 
Pentateuch,  in  folio,  pointed,  with  the  Targura  and 
the  commentary  of  Jarchi ;  and  the  five  Megilloth 
'Ruth — Esther),  in  folio,  with  the  commentaries  of 
Jarchi  and  Aben  Ezra.  The  text  of  the  Pentateuch 
is  reputed  highly  correct.  From  Soncino,  near  Cre 
mona,  issued  in  1486  the  Prophetae  priores  (Joshua 
— Kings),  folio,  unpointed,  with  Kimchi's  commen 
tary:  of  this  the  Prophetae  posteriores  (Isaiah — 
Malachi),  also  with  Kimchi's  commentary,  was  pro 
bably  the  continuation.  The  Megilloth  were  also 
printed,  along  with  the  prayers  of  the  Italian  Jews, 
at  the  same  place  and  date,  in  4to.  Next  year, 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


6)5 


expense  ot  Cardinal  Ximenes,  dated  1514  17,  lut 
not  issued  till  1522.  The  whole  work.  6  vols.  fol., 
is  said  to  have  cost  50,000  ducats:  its  original 
price  was  6^  ducats,  its  present  value  alout  40?. 
The  Hebrew,  Vulgate,  and  Greek  texts  of  the  0.  T. 
(the  latter  with  a  Latin  translation)  appear  in  three 
parallel  columns:  the  Targum  of  Onkelos,  with  a 
Latin  translation,  is  in  twc  columns  below.  The 
Hebrew  is  pointed,  but  unaccentuated :  it  was  taken 
from  seven  MSS.,  which  are  still  preserved  in  the 
University  Library  at  Madrid. 

To  this  succeeded  an  edition  which  has  had  more 
influence  than  any  on  the  text  of  later  times— the 
Second  Rabbinical  Bible,  printed  by  Bomberg  at 
Venice,  4  vols.  fol.,  1525-6.  The  editor  was  the 
learned  Tunisian  Jew,  R.  Jacob  ben  Chaim :  a  Latin 
translation  of  his  preface  will  be  found  in  Kennicott's 
Second  Dissertation,  pp.  229  seqq.  The  great  feature 
of  his  work  lay  in  the  correction  of  the  text  by  the 
precepts  of  the  Masorah,  in  which  he  was  pro 
foundly  skilled,  and  on  which,  as  well  as  on  the 
text  itself,  his  labours  were  employed.  Bomberg's 
Third  Rabbinical  Bible,  4  vols.  ibl.,  1547-9,  edited 
by  Adelkind,  was  in  the  main  a  reprint  of  the 
preceding.  Errors  were,  however,  corrected,  and 
some  of  the  rabbinical  commentaries  were  replaced 
by  others.  The  same  text  substantially  reappeared 
in  the  Rabbinical  Bibles  of  John  de  Gara,  Venice, 
4  vols.  fol.,  1568,  and  of  Bragadini,  Venice,  4  vols. 
fol.,  1617-18  ;  also  in  the  later  4to.  Bibles  of  Bom- 
berg  himself,  1528,  1533,  1544;  and  in  those  of 


1487,  the  whole   Hagiographa,   pointed,   but  un-    R.  Stephens,  Paris,  4to.,  1539-44   (so  Opitz  and 
accentuated,  with  rabbinical  commentaries,  appeared    Bleek :  others  represent  this  as  following  the  Brescian 
at  Naples,  in  either  small  fol.  or  large  4to.,  2  vols. 
Thus  every  separate  portion  of  the  Bible  was 


print  before  any   complete   edition  of  the  whole 
appeared. 

Th*  honour  of  printing  the  first  entire  Hebrew 
Bible  belongs  to  the  above-mentioned  town  of  Sonci 
no.  The  edition  is  in  folio,  pointed  and  accentuated 
Nine  copies  only  of  it  are  now  known,  of  which  one 
belongs  to  Exeter  College,  Oxford.  The  earlier 
printed  portions  were  perhaps  the  basis  of  the  text. 
This  was  followed,  in  1494,  by  the  4to.  or  8vo. 
edition  printed  by  Gersom  at  Brescia,  remarkable 
as  being  the  edition  from  which  Luther's  German 
translation  was  made.  It  has  many  peculiar  read 
ings,  and  instead  of  giving  the  Keris  in  the  margin, 
incorporates  them  generally  in  the  text,  which  is 


therefore  not  to  be  depended  upon, 
letters  also  are  not  distinguished. 


The  unusual 
This  edition, 


along  with  the  preceding,  formed  the  basis  of  the 
first  edition,  with  the  Masorah,  Targums,  and  rab 
binical  comments,  printed  by  Bomberg  at  Venice  in 
1518,  fol.,  under  the  editorship  of  the  converted 
Jew  Felix  del  Prato  ;  though  the  "  plurimis  collatis 
exemplaribus "  of  the  editor  seems  to  imply  that 
MSS.  were  also  used  in  aid.  This  edition  was  the 
first  to  contain  the  Masora  magna,  and  the  various 
readings  of  Ben  Asher  and  Ben  Naphtali.  On  the 
Brescian  text  depended  also,  in  greater  or  less  degree, 
Bomberg's  smaller  Bibles,  4to.,  of  1518,  1521. 
From  the  same  text,  or  from  the  equivalent  text 
of  Bomberg's  first  Rabbinical  Bible,  was,  at  a  sub 
sequent  period,  mainly  derived  that  of  Seb.  Miinster, 
printed  by  Froben  at  Basle,  4to.,  1534-5:  which 
is  valued,  however,  as  containing  a  list  of  various 
readings  which  must  have  been  collected  by  a  Jewish 
jditor,  and,  in  part,  from  MSS. 

After  the  Brescian,  the  next  primary  edition  was 
mat  contained  in  the  Complutensian  Polyglot,  pub 
lished  at  Ccmplutum  (Alcala)  in  Spain,  at  the 


;ext);  R.  Stephens,  Paris,  16mo.,  1544-6;  Justini- 
ani,  Venice,  4to.  1551,  18mo.  1552,  4to.  1563, 
4to.  1573  ;  De  la  Rouviere,  Geneva,  various  sizes, 
1618;  De  Gara,  Venice,  various  sizes,  1566,  68, 
32  ;  Bragadini,  Venice,  various  sizes,  1614, 15, 19, 
28;  Plantin,  Antwerp,  various  sizes,  1566;  Hart- 
mann,  Frankfort-on-Oder,  various  sizes,  1595,8; 
and  Crato  (Kraft),  Wittemberg,  4to.  1586. 

The  Royal  or  Antwerp  Polyglot,  printed  by 
Plantin,  8  vols.  fol.  1569-72,  at  the  expense  o: 
Philip  II.  of  Spain,  and  edited  by  Arias  Moiitanus 
and  others,  took  the  Complutensian  as  the  basis  of 
its  Hebrew  text,  but  compared  this  with  one  of 
Bomberg's,  so  as  to  produce  a  mixture  of  the  two. 
This  text  was  followed  both  in  the  Paris  Polyglot 
of  Le  Jay,  9  vols.  fol.  1645,  and  in  Walton's  Poly 
glot,  London,  6  vols.  fol.  1657.  The  printing  of 
the  text  in  the  Paris  Polyglot  is  said  to  be  very 
incorrect.  The  same  text  appeared  also  in  Plan  tin's 
later  Bibles,  with  Latin  translations,  fol.  1571, 
1584;  and  in  various  other  Hebrew-Latin  Bibles : 
Burgos,  fol.  1581 ;  Geneva,  fol.  1609,  1618  ;  Ley- 
den,  8vo.  1613;  FrankfortK>n-Maine  (by  Knoch), 
fol.  1681 ;  Vienna,  8vo.  1743 ;  in  the  quadrilingunl 
Polyglot  of  Reineccius,  Leipsic,  3  vols.  fol.  1750-1  ; 
and  also  in  the  same  edi tor's  earlier  8vo.  Bible, 
Leipsic,  1725,  for  which,  however,  he  professes  to 
have  compared  MSS. 

A  text  compounded  of  several  of  the  preceding 
was  issued  by  the  Leipsic  Professor,  Elias  H  utter, 
at  Hamburg,  fol.  1587 :  it  was  intended  for  stu 
dents,  the  servile  letters  being  distinguished  from 
the  radicals  by  hollow  type.  This  was  reprinted 
in  his  uncompleted  Polyglot,  Nuremberg,  fol.  1591, 
and  by  Nissel,  8vo.  1662.  A  special  mention  is 
also  due  to  the  labours  of  the  elder  Buxtorf,  whc 
carefully  revised  the  text  after  the  Masorah,  pub 
lishing  it  in  8vo.  at  Basle.  1611,  and  again,  aft« 
.1  fresh  revision,  in  his  valuable  Rabbinical  Bible, 


306  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Basle,  2  rols.  tbl.  1618-19.  This  text  was  also 
reprinted  at  Amsterdam,  8vo.  1639,  by  R.  Mana-sseh 
ben  Israel,  who  had  previously  issued,  in  1631, 
1635,  a  text  of  his  own  with  arbitrary  grammatical 
alterations. 

Neither  the  text  of  Hutter  nor  that  of  Buxtorf 
was  without  its  permanent  influence ;  but  the  He 
brew  Bible  which  became  the  standard  to  subse 
quent  generations  was  that  of  Joseph  Athias,  a 
learned  rabbi  and  printer  at  Amsterdam.  His  text 
was  based  on  a  comparison  of  the  previous  editions 
with  two  MSS. ;  one  bearing  date  1299,  the  other 
a  Spanish  MS  ,  boasting  an  antiquity  of  900  years. 
It  appeared  at  Amsterdam,  2  volk  8vo.  1661,  with 
a  preface  by  Leusden,  professor  at  Utrecht;  and 
again,'  revised  afresh,  in  1667.  These  Bibles  were 
much  prized  for  their  beauty  and  correctness;  and 
a  gold  chain  and  medal  were  conferred  on  Athias, 
in  token  of  their  appreciation  of  them,  by  the 
States  General  of  Holland.  The  progeny  of  the 
text  of  Athias  was  as  follows : — a.  That  of  Clodius, 
F  rankfort-on-Maine,  8vo.  i  677  ;  reprinted,  with 
alterations,  8vo.  1692,  4to.  1716.  6.  That  of 
Jablonsky,  Berlin,  large  8vo.  or  4to.  1699;  re 
printed,  but  less  correctly,  12mo.  1712.  Jablonsky 
collated  all  the  cardinal  editions,  together  with 
several  MSS.,  and  bestowed  particular  care  on  the 
vowel-points  and  accents.  c.  That  of  Van  der 
Hooght,  Amsterdam  and  Utrecht,  2  vols.  8vo. 
1705.  This  edition,  of  good  reputation  for  its 
accuracy,  but  above  all  for  the  beauty  and  distinct 
ness  of  its  type,  deserves  special  attention,  as  con 
stituting  our  present  textus  receptus.  The  text 
was  chiefly  formed  on  that  of  Athias:  no  MSS. 
were  used  for  it,  but  it  has  a  collection  of  various 
readings  from  printed  editions  at  the  end.  The 
Masoretic  readings  are  in  the  margin,  d.  That  of 
Opitz,  Kiel,  4to.  1709;  very  accurate:  the  text  of 
Athias  was  corrected  by  comparing  seventeen  printed 
editions  and  some  MSS.  e.  That  of  J.  H.  Michaelis, 
Halle,  8vo.  and  4to.  1720.  It  was  based  on  Jablon 
sky  :  twenty-four  editions  and  five  Erfurt  MSS.  were 
collated  for  it,  but,  as  has  been  found,  not  thoroughly. 
Still  the  edition  is  much  esteemed,  partly  for  its 
correctness,  partly  for  its  notes  and  parallel  re 
ferences.  Davidson  pronounces  it  superior  to  Van 
der  Hooght's  in  every  respect  except  legibility  and 
beauty  of  type. 

These  editions  show  that  on  the  whole  the  text 
was  by  this  time  firmly  and  permanently  established. 
We  may  well  regard  it  as  a  providential  circum 
stance  that,  having  been  early  conformed  by  Ben 
Chaim  to  the  Masorah,  the  printed  text  should  in 
the  course  of  the  next  two  hundred  years  have  ac 
quired,  in  this  its  Masoretic  form,  a  sacredness  which 
the  subsequent  labours  of  a  more  extended  criticism 
could  not  venture  to  contemn.  Whatever  errors, 
and  those  by  no  means  unimportant,  such  wider 
criticism  may  lead  us  to  detect  in  it,  the  grounds 
of  the  corrections  which  even  the  most  cautious 
critics  would  adopt  are  often  too  precarious  to 
enable  us,  in  departing  from  the  Masoretic,  to 
obtain  any  other  satisfactory  standard ;  while  in 
practice  the  mischief  that  would  have  ensued  from 
th°  introduction  into  the  text  of  the  emendations  of 
Houbigant  and  the  critics  of  his  school  would  have 
oeen  the  occasion  of  incalculable  and  irreparable 
harm.  From  all  such  it  has  been  happily  pre 
served  free ;  and  while  we  are  far  from  deeming  its 
authority  absolute,  we  yet  value  it,  because  all  ex 
perience  has  taught  u.->  that,  in  seeking;  to  remodel 

it,  we  should  be  Introducing  into  it  worse  iniiwr- 
3  i 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

fections  than  those  which  we  desire  to  remote, 
while  we  should  lose  that  which  is,  after  all,  nj 
light  advantage,  a  definite  textual  standard  ;uii- 
vers;illy  accepted  by  Christians  and  Jew.*  alike.  So 
essentially  different  is  the  tres  .rnent  demanded  by 
the  text  of  the  Old  Testament  and  by  that  of  the 
New. 

The  modem  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  now  in 
use  are  all  based  on  Van  der  Hooght.  The  earliest 
of  these  was  that  of  Simonis,  Halle,  1752,  and  more 
correctly  1767  ;  reprinted  1822, 1828.  In  England 
the  most  popular  edition  is  the  sterling  one  by 
Judah  D'Allemand,  8vo.,  of  high  repute  for  correct 
ness  :  there  is  also  the  pocket  edition  of  Bagster, 
on  which  the  same  editor  was  employed.  In  Ger 
many  there  are  the  8vo.  edition  of  Halm ;  the  12mo. 
edition,  based  on  the  last,  with  preface  by  Rosen 
miiller  (said  by  Keil  to  contain  some  conjectural 
alterations  of  the  text  by  Landschreiber) ;  and  the 
8vo.  edition  of  Theile. 

4.  Critical  LaJjours  and  Apparatus. — The  hiV 
tory  of  the  criticism  of  the  text  has  already  been 
brought  down  to  the  period  of  the  labours  of  the 
Masorets  and  their  immediate  successors.  It  must 
be  here  resumed.  In  the  early  part  of  the  13th 
century,  R.  Meir  Levita,  a  native  of  Burgos  and 
inhabitant  of  Toledo,  known  by  abbreviation  as 
Haramah,  by  patronymic  as  Todrosius,  wrote  a 
critical  work  on  the  Pentateuch  called  The  Book 
of  the  Masorah  the  Hedge  of  the  Law,  in  which  he 
endeavoured,  by  a  collation  of  MSS.,  to  ascertain  the 
true  reading  in  various  passages.  This  work  was 
of  high  repute  among  the  Jews,  though  it  long 
remained  in  manuscript :  it  was  eventually  printed 
at  Florence  in  1750  ;  again,  incorrectly,  at  Berlin, 
1761.  At  a  later  period  R.  Menahem  de  Lonzano 
collated  ten  MSS.,  chiefly  Spanish,  some  of  them 
five  or  six  centuries  old,  with  Bomberg's  4to.  Bible 
of  1544.  The  results  were  given  in  the  work 
min  "11N,  "  Light  of  the  Law,"  printed  in  thj 
J1VP  Tit?,  Venice,  1618  :  afterwards  by  itself,  but 
less  accurately,  Amsterdam,  1659.  They  relate  only 
to  the  Pentateuch.  A  more  important  work  was 
that  of  R.  Solomon  Norzi  of  Mantua,  in  the  17th 
century,  fHQ  "1113,  "  Repairer  of  the  Breach :"  a 
copious  critical  commentary  on  the  whole  of  the 
0.  T.,  drawn  up  with  the  aid  of  MSS.  and  editions., 
of  the  Masorah,  Talmud,  and  all  other  Jewish 
resources  within  his  reach.  In  the  Pentateuch  he 
relied  much  on  Todrosius :  with  R.  Menahem  he 
had  had  personal  intercourse.  His  work  was  first 
printed,  116  years  after  its  completion,  by  a  rich 
Jewish  physician,  Raphael  Chaim,  Mantua,  4  vols. 
4to.  1742,  under  the  title  »{?  nflJD :  the  emenda 
tions  on  Proverbs  and  Job  alone  had  appeared  in 
the  margin  of  a  Mantuan  edition  of  those  books  iu 
1725.  The  whole  was  reprinted  in  a  Vienna  0.  T., 
4to.  1813-16. 

Meanwhile  various  causes,  such  as  the  contro 
versies  awakened  by  the  Samaritan  text  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  the  advances  which  had  been  made 
in  N.  T.  criticism,  had  contributed  to  direct  the 
attention  of  Christian  scholars  to  the  importance  of 
a  more  extended  criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  the 
0.  T.  In  1746  the  expectations  or  tne  public  were 
i-aised  by  the  Prolegomena  of  Houbigant,  of  the 
Oratory  at  Paris;  anil  in  1753  his  edition  appeared, 
splendidly  printed,  in  4  vols.  fol.  The  text  was 
that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  divested  of  points,  and  of 
every  vestige  of  the  Masorah,  which  Houbigant, 
though  he  used  it,  rated  at  a  very  low  value.  In 
the  notes  copkr;s  etneiuiation*  were  iiitvoduoeJ. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

They  were  derived — (a)  from  the  Samaritan  Penta 
teuch,  which  Houbigant  preferred  in  many  respects 
to  the  Jewish;  (6)  from  twelve  Hebrew  MSS., 
which,  however,  do  not  appear  to  have  been  regu 
larly  collated,  their  readings  being  chiefly  given  in 
those  passages  where  they  supported  the  editor's 
emendations ;  (c)  from  the  Scptuagint  and  other 
ancient  versions;  and  (d)  from  an  extensive  ap 
pliance  of  critical  conjecture.  An  accompanying 
Latin  translation  embodied  all  the  emendations 
adopted.  The  notes  were  reprinted  at  Frankfort- 
on-Maine,  2  vols.  4to.  1777:  they  constitute  the 
cream  of  the  original  volumes,  the  splendour  of 
which  was  disproportionate  to  their  value,  as  they 
contained  no  materials  besides  those  on  which  the 
editor  directly  rested.  The  whole  work  was  indeed 
too  ambitious :  its  canons  of  criticism  were  thoroughly 
unsound,  and  its  ventures  rash.  Yet  its  merits  were 
also  considerable  ;  and  the  newness  of  the  path  which 
Houbigant  was  essaying  may  be  pleaded  in  extenua 
tion  of  its  faults.  It  effectually  broke  the  Masoretic 
,'oat  of  ice  wherewith  the  Hebrew  text  had  been 
encrusted ;  but  it  afforded  also  a  severe  warning  of 
the  difficulty  of  finding  any  sure  standing-ground 
beneath. 

In  the  same  year,  1753,  appeared  at  Oxford 
Kennicott's  first  Dissertation  on  the  state  of  the 
Printed  Text:  the  second  followed  in  1759.  The 
result  of  these  and  of  the  author's  subsequent 
annual  reports  was  a  subscription  of  nearly  10,000/. 
to  defray  the  expenses  of  a  collation  of  Hebrew 
MSS.  throughout  Europe,  which  was  performed 
from  1760  to  1769,  partly  by  Kennicott  himself, 
but  chiefly,  under  his  direction,  by  Professor  Bruns 
of  Helmstadt  and  others.  The  collation  extended 
in  all  to  581  Jewish  and  16  Samaritan  MSS.,  and 
40  printed  editions,  Jewish  works,  &c. ;  of  which, 
however,  only  about  half  were  collated  throughout, 
the  rest  in  select  passages.  The  fruits  appeared  at 
Oxford  in  2  vols.  fol.  1776-80 :  the  text  is  Van  der 
Hooght's,  unpointed ;  the  various  readings  are  given 
below ;  comparisons  are  also  made  of  the  Jewish 
and  Samaritan  texts  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  of  the 
parallel  passages  in  Samuel  and  Chronicles,  &c. 
They  much  disappointed  the  expectations  that  had 
been  raised.  It  was  found  that  a  very  large  part 
of  the  various  readings  had  reference  simply  to  the 
omission  or  insertion  of  the  matres  lectionis ;  while 
of  the  rest  many  obviously  represented  no  more 
than  the  mistakes  of  separate  transcribers.  Happily 
for  the  permanent  interests  of  criticism  this  had  not 
been  anticipated.  Kennicott's  own  weakness  of  judg 
ment  may  also  have  made  him  less  aware  of  the 
smallness  of  the  immediate  results  to  follow  from 
his  persevering  toil ;  and  thus  a  Herculean  task, 
which  in  the  present  state  of  critical  knowledge 
could  scarcely  be  undertaken,  was  providentially, 
once  for  all,  performed  with  a  thoroughness  for 
which,  to  the  end  of  time,  we  may  well  be  thankful. 

The  labours  of  Kennicott  were  supplemented  by 
those  of  De  Rossi,  nrofessor  at  Parma.  His  plan 
differed  materially  from  Kennicott's:  he  confined 
himself  to  a  specification  of  the  various  readings  in 
select  passages ;  but  for  these  he  supplied  also  the 
critical  evidence  to  be  obtained  from  the  ancient 
versions,  and  from  all  the  various  Jewish  authorities. 
In  regard  of  manuscript  resources,  he  collected  in 
nis  own  library  1031  MSS.,  more  than  Kennicott 
hail  collated  in  all  Europe;  of  these  he  collated  617, 
some  being  those  which  Kennicott  had  collated 
liefore-  he  collated  also  134  extraneous  MSS.  that 
had  escaped  Kennicott's  fellow-labourers ;  and  he 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


601 


recnpitulated  Kennicott'u  own  various  i  ratlings, 
The  readings  of  the  various  printed  editions  were 
also  well  examined.  Thus,  for  the  passages  OD 
which  it  treats,  the  evidence  in  De  Rossi's  work  may 
be  regarded  as  almost  complete.  It  a,es  not  con* 
tain  the  text.  It  was  published  at  Parma,  4  vols. 
4to.  1784-8 :  an  additional  volume  appeared  in 
1798. 

A  small  Bible,  with  the  text  of  Reineccius,  and  a 
selection  of  the  more  important  readings  of  Kenni 
cott  and  De  Rossi,  was  issued  by  Doderlein  and 
Meisner  at  Leipsic,  8vo.  1793.  It  is  printed  (except 
some  copies)  on  bad  paper,  and  is  reputed  very  in 
correct.  A  better  critical  edition  i.s  that  of  Jahn, 
Vienna,  4  vols.  8vo.  1806.  'I  he  text  is  Van  der 
Hooght's,  corrected  in  nine  or  ten  phices  :  the  more 
important  various  readings  are  subjoined,  With  tht 
authorities,  and  full  information  is  given.  But, 
with  injudicious  peculiarity,  the  books  are  arranged 
in  a  new  order;  those  of  Chronicles  are  split  up 
into  fragments,  for  the  purpose  of  comparison  with 
the  parallel  books;  and  only  the  principal  accents, 
are  retained. 

The  first  attempt  to  turn  the  new  critical  colla 
tions  to  public  account  was  made  by  Boothroyd, 
in  his  unpointed  Bible,  with  various  readings  and 
English  notes,  Pontefract,  4to.  1810-16,  at  a  time 
when  Houbigant's  principles  were  still  in  the 
ascendant.  This  was  followed  in  1821  by  Hamil 
ton's  Codex  Criticus,  modelled  on  the  plan  of  the 
N.  T.  of  Griesbach,  which  is,  however,  hardly 
adapted  to  the  0.  T.,  in  the  criticism  of  the  text 
of  which  diplomatic  evidence  is  of  so  much  less 
weight  than  in  the  case  of  the  N.  T.  The  most 
important  contribution  towards  the  formation  of  a 
revised  text  that  has  yet  appeared  is  unquestionably 
Dr.  Davidson's  Hebrew  Text  of  the  0.  T.,  revised 
from  critical  Sources,  1855.  It  presents  a  con 
venient  epitome  of  the  more  important  various 
readings  of  the  MSS.  and  of  the  Masorah,  with  the 
authorities  for  them  ;  and  in  the  emendations  of  the 
text  which  he  sanctions,  when  there  is  any  Jewish 
authority  for  the  emendation,  he  shows  on  the 
whole  a  fair  judgment.  But  he  ventures  on  few 
emendations  for  which  there  is  no  direct  Jewish 
authority,  and  seems  to  have  practically  fallen  into 
the  error  of  disparaging  the  critical  aid  to  be  derived 
from  the  ancient  versions,  as  much  as  it  had  by 
the  critics  of  the  last  century  been  unduly  exalted. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  little  has  yet  been  done 
for  the  systematic  criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text 
from  the  ancient  versions,  in  comparison  of  what 
might  be  accomplished.  We  have  even  yet  to  learn 
what  critical  treasures  those  versions  really  contain. 
They  have,  of  course,  at  the  cost  of  much  private 
labour,  been  freely  used  by  individual  scholars,  but 
the  texts  implied  in  them  have  never  yet  been  fairly 
exhibited  or  analysed,  so  as  to  enable  the  literary 
world  generally  to  form  any  just  estimate  of  their 
real  value.  The  readings  involved  in  their  render 
ings  are  in  Houbigant's  volumes  only  adduced  when 
they  support  the  emendations  which  he  desired  to 
advance.  By  De  Hos?  they  are  treated  merely  as 
subsidiary  to  the  MSS.,  and  are  therefore  only  ad 
duced  for  the  passages  to  which  his  manuscript 
collations  refer.  Nor  have  Boothroyd's  or  David 
son's  treatment  of  them  any  pretensions  whatever 
to  completeness.  Should  it  be  alleged  that  thej 
have  given  all  the  imioortant  version-readings,  it 
may  be  at  once  replied  thr.t  rnch  is  not  the  case, 
nor  indeed  does  it  seem  possible  to  decide  primd 
facie  of  any  version-reading  whether  it  le  irn- 


608 


OLD   TESTAMENT 


portent  or  not:  many  have  doubtless  been  passed 
over  again  and  again  as  unimportant,  which  yet 
either  are  genuine  readings  or  contain  the  elements 
of  them.  Were  the  whole  of  the  Septuagint  variations 
from  the  Hebrew  text  lucidly  exhibited  in  Hebrew, 
they  would  in  all  probability  serve  to  suggest  the 
true  reading  in  many  passages  in  which  it  has  not 
yet  been  recovered ;  and  no  better  service  could  be 
rendered  to  the  cause  of  textual  criticism  by  any 
scholar  who  would  undertake  the  labour.  Skill, 
scholarship,  and  patience  would  be  required  in 
deciphering  many  of  the  Hebrew  readings  which 
the  Septuagint  represents,  and  in  cases  of  uncer 
tainty  that  uncertainty  should  be  noted.  For  the 
books  of  Samuel  the  task  has  been  grappled  with, 
apparently  with  car",  by  Thenitis  in  the  Exegetisches 
Handbuch ;  but  the  readings  are  not  conveniently 
exhibited,  being  given  partly  in  the  body  of  the 
commentary,  partly  at  the  end  of  the  volume.  For 
the  Psalms  we  have  Reinke's  Kurze  Zusammen- 
stellung  aller  Abweichunyen  mm  heb.  Texte  in  der 
Ps.  Hbersetzung  der  LXX.  und  Vulg.,  &c. ;  but  the 
criticism  of  the  Hebrew  text  was  not  the  author's 
direct  object. 

It  might  be  well,  too,  if  along  with  the  version- 
readings  were  collected  together  all,  or  at  least  all 
the  more  important,  conjectural  emendations  of  the 
Hebrew  text  proposed  by  various  scholars  during 
the  last  hundred  years,  which  at  present  lie  buried 
in  their  several  commentaries  and  other  publica 
tions.  For  of  these,  also,  it  is  only  when  they  are 
so  exhibited  as  to  invite  an  extensive  and  simul 
taneous  criticism  that  any  true  general  estimate 
will  be  formed'of  their  worth,  or  that  the  pearls 
among  them,  whether  few  or  many,  will  become 
of  any  general  service.  That  by  fai  the  greater 
number  of  them  will  be  found  beside  the  mark  we 
may  at  once  admit ;  but  obscurity,  or  an  unpopular 
name,  or  other  cause,  has  probably  withheld  atten 
tion  from  many  suggestions  of  real  value. 

5.  Principles  of  Criticism. — The  method  of  pro 
cedure  required  in  the  criticism  of  the  0.  T.  is 
widely  different  from  that  practised  in  the  criticism 
of  the  N.  T.  Our  0.  T.  textus  receptus  is  a  far 
more  faithful  representation  of  the  genuine  Scrip 
ture,  nor  could  we  on  any  account  afford  to  part 
with  it ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  means  of  de 
tecting  and  correcting  the  errors  contained  in  it  are 
more  precarious,  the  results  are  more  uncertain,  and 
the  ratio  borne  by  the  value  of  the  diplomatic  evi 
dence  of  MSS.  to  that  of  a  good  critical  judgment 
and  sagacity  is  greatly  diminished. 

It  is  indeed  to  the  direct  testimony  of  the  MSS. 
that,  in  endeavouring  to  establish  the  true  text,  we 
must  first  have  recourse.  Against  the  general  con 
sent  of  the  MSS.  a  reading  of  the  textus  receptus, 
merely  as  such,  can  have  no  weight.  Where  the 
MSS.  disagree,  it  has  been  laid  down  as  a  canon 
that  we  ought  not  to  let  the  mere  numerical  ma 
jority  preponderate,  but  should  examine  what  is  the 
reading  of  the  earliest  and  best.  This  is  no  doubt 
theoretically  correct,  but  it  has  not  been  generally 
carried  out:  nor,  while  so  much  remains  to  be  done 
for  the  ancient  versions,  must  we  clamour  too  loudly 
for  the  expenditure,  in  the  sifting  of  MSS.,  of  the 
immense  labour  which  the  task  would  involve ;  for 
/nternal  evidence  can  alone  decide  which  MSS.  are 
entitled  to  greatest  authority,  and  the  researches  of 
any  single  critic  into  their  relative  value  could  not 
be  relied  on  till  checked  by  the  corresponding  re- 
wai  chos  of  others,  and  in  such  researches  few  com- 
j*"t*nt  persons  are  likoly  to  engage.  While,  how- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

ever,  we  content  ourselves  with  judging  of  the  testi 
mony  of  the  MSS.  to  any  particular  reading  by  the 
number  sanctioning  that  reading,  we  must  remember 
to  estimate  not  the  absolute  number,  but  the  rela 
tive  number  to  the  whol*  number  of  MSS.  collated 
for  that  passage.  The  circumstance  that  only  half 
of  Kennicott's  MSS.,  and  none  of  De  Rossi's,  were 
collated  throughout,  as  also  that  the  number  of 
MSS.  greatly  varies  for  different  books  of  the  0.  T., 
makes  attention  to  this  important.  Davidson,  in 
his  Revision  of  the  Heb.  Text,  has  gone  by  the  ab 
solute  number,  which  he  should  only  have  dot* 
when  that  number  was  very  small. 

The  MSS.  lead  us  for  the  most  part  only  to  out 
first  sure  standing-ground,  the  Masoi  etic  text :  in 
other  words,  to  the  average  written  text  of  a  period 
later  by  a  thousand  or  fifteen  hundred  years  than 
the  latest  book  of  the  0.  T.  It  is  possible,  how 
ever,  that  in  particular 'MSS.  pre-Masoretic  readingii 
may  be  incidentally  preserved.  Hence  isolated  MS. 
readings  may  serve  to  confirm  those  of  the  ancient 
versions. 

In  ascending  upwards  from  the  Masoretic  text, 
our  first  critical  materials  are  the  Masoretic  Keris, 
valuable  as  witnesses  to  the  preservation  of  many 
authentic  readings,  but  on  which  it  is  impossible  to 
place  any  degree  of  reliance,  because  we  can  never 
be  certain,  in  particular  instances,  that  they  repre 
sent  more  than  mere  unauthorized  conjectures.  A 
Keri  therefore  is  not  to  be  received  in  preference  to 
a  Chethib  unless  confirmed  by  other  sufficient  evi 
dence,  external  or  internal ;  and  in  reference  to  the 
Keris  let  the  rule  be  borne  in  mind,  "  Proclivi 
scriptioni  praestat  ardua,"  many  of  them  being  but 
arbitrary  softenings  down  of  difficult  readings  in 
the  genuine  text.  It  is  furthermore  to  be  observed, 
that  when  the  reading  of  any  number  of  MSS. 
agrees,  as  is  frequently  the  case,  with  a  Masoretic 
Keri,  the  existence  of  such  a  Keri  may  be  a  damage 
rather  than  otherwise  to  the  weight  of  the  testi 
mony  of  those  MSS.,  for  it  may  itself  be  the  un 
trustworthy  source  whence  their  reading  originated. 

The  express  assertions  of  the  Masorah,  as  also  ol 
the  Targum,  respecting  the  true  reading  in  par 
ticular  passages,  are  of  course  important:  they 
indicate  the  views  entertained  by  the  Jews  at  a 
period  prior  to  that  at  which  our  oldest  MSS.  were 
made. 

From  these  we  ascend  to  the  version  of  Jerome, 
the  most  thoroughly  trustworthy  authority  on  which 
we  have  to  rely  in  our  endeavours  to  amend  the 
Masoretic  text.  Dependent  as  Jerome  was,  for  his 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  text  and  everything  re 
specting  it,  on  the  Palestinian  Jews,  and  accurate 
as  are  his  renderings,  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that 
a  Hebrew  reading  which  can  be  shown  to  have  been 
received  by  Jerome,  should,  if  sanctioned  or  counte 
nanced  by  the  Targum,  be  so  far  preferred  to  one 
upheld  by  the  united  testimony  of  all  MSS.  what 
ever.  And  in  general  we  may  definitely  make  out 
the  reading  which  Jerome  followed.  There  are, 
no  doubt,  exceptions.  Few  would  think  of  placing 
much  reliance  on  any  translation  as  to  the  presence 
or  absence  of  a  simple  1  copular  in  the  original  text. 
Again  in  Psalm  cxliv.  2,  where  the  authority  ot 
Jerome  and  of  other  translators  is  alleged  for  the 
reading  D^DJ?,  "  peoples,"  while  the  great  majority 
of  MSS.  give  *Oy,  "  my  people,"  we  cannot  be 
certain  that  he  did  not  really  read  ^13]},  regarding 
it,  although  wrongly,  as  an  apocopated  plural. 
Hence  the  |>in;iiition  necessary  n  bringing  tlie  eyi- 
•lei ii-o  of  :i  vi-rvioii  to  la-ar  upon  tbe  toxt :  \vh.n  us,^. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

with  such  precaution,  the  version  of  Jerome  will  be 
found  of  the  very  greatest  service. 

Of  the  other  versions,  although  more  ancient, 
nono  can  on  the  whole  be  reckoned,  in  a  critical 
\x>int  of  view,  so  valuable  as  his.  Of  the  Greek 
versions  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion,  we 
possess  but  mere  fragments.  The  Syria;  bears  the 
impress  of  having  been  made  too  much  under  the 
influence  of  the  Septuagint.  The  Targums  are  too 
often  paraphrastic.  For  a  detailed  account  of  them 
the  reader  is  referred  to  the  various  articles  [VER 
SIONS,  &c.] .  Still  they  all  furnish  most  important 
material  for  the  correction  of  the  Masoi-etic  text ; 
and  th;ir  cumulative  evidence,  when  they  all  concur 
in  a  reading  different  to  that  which  it  contains,  is 
very  strong. 

The  Septuagint  itself,  venerable  for  its  antiquity, 
but  on  various  accounts  untrustworthy  in  the  read- 
rngs  which  it  represents,  must  be  treated  for  critical 
purposes  in  the  same  way  as  the  Masoretic  Keris. 
It  doubtless  contains  many  authentic  readings  of 
the  Hebrew  text  not  otherwise  preserved  to  us ;  but, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  presence  of  any  Hebrew 
reading  in  it  can  pass  for  little,  unless  it  can  be 
independently  shown  to  be  probable  that  that  read 
ing  is  the  true  one.  It  may,  however,  suggest  the 
true  reading,  and  it  may  confirm  it  where  sup 
ported  by  other  considerations.  Such,  for  example, 
is  the  case  with  the  almost  certain  correction  of 
"jinn,  "shall  keep  holyday  to  thee,"  for  "13(10, 
"  thou  shalt  restrain,"  in  Psalm  Ixxvi.  10.  In  the 
opposite  direction  of  confirming  a  Masoretic  reading 
against  which  later  testimonies  militate,  the  autho 
rity  of  the  Septuagint,  on  account  of  its  age,  neces 
sarily  stands  high. 

Similar  remarks  would,  a  priori,  seem  to  apply 
to  the  critical  use  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch :  it 
is,  however,  doubtful  whether  that  document  be  of 
any  real  additional  value. 

In  the  case  of  the  0.  T.,  unlike  that  of  the  N.  T., 
another  source  of  emendations  is  generally  allowed, 
viz.  critical  conjecture.  Had  we  any  reason  for 
believing  that,  at  the  date  of  the  first  translation  of 
the  0.  T.  into  Greek,  the  Hebrew  text  had  been  pre 
served  immaculate,  we  might  well  abstain  from 
venturing  on  any  emendations  for  which  no  direct 
external  wan-ant  could  be  found  ;  but  the  Septua 
gint  version  is  nearly  two  centuries  younger  than 
the  latest  book  of  the  0.  T. ;  and  as  the  history  of 
the  Hebrew  text  seems  to  show  that  the  care  with 
which  its  purity  has  been  guarded  has  been  conti 
nually  on  the  increase,  so  we  must  infer  that  it  is 
just  in  the  earliest  periods  that  the  few  corruptions 
which  it  has  sustained  would  be  most  likely  to 
accrue.  Few  enough  they  may  be  ;  but,  if  analogy 
may  be  trusted,  they  cannot  be  altogether  ima 
ginary.  And  thus  arises  the  necessity  of  admitting, 
besides  the  emendations  suggested  by  the  MSS.  and 
versions,  those  also  which  originate  in  the  simple 
skill  and  honest  ingenuity  of  the  critic ;  of  whom, 
however,  while  according  him  this  licence,  we  d< 
raand  in  return  that  he  shall  bear  in  mind  the  sole 
legitimate  object  of  his  investigations,  and  that  he 
shall  not  obtrude  upon  us  any  conjectural  reading, 
the  genuineness  of  which  he  cannot  fairly  establish 
by  circumstantial  evidence.  What  that  circum 
stantial  evidence  shall  be  it  is  impossible  to  define 
beforehand :  it  is  enough  that  it  be  such  as  shall, 
when  produced,  bring  home  conviction  to  a  reason 
ing  mind. 

There  are  cases  in  which  the  Septuagint  will 
supply  an  indirect  warrant  for  th°  reception  of  a 

VOL.  II. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


609 


reading  whk.ii  it  nevertheless  does  not  directly  sanc 
tion:  thus  in  Ez.  xli.  11,  where  the  present  text 
has  the  meaningless  word  DlpD,  "  place. '  while  the 
Septuagint  inappropriately  reads  "I1XO,  "  light," 
there  arises  a  strong  presumption  that  both  readings 
are  equally  corruptions  of  "IlpO,  "  fountain,"  re- 
fen-ing  to  a  water-gallery  running  along  the  walls 
of  the  Temple  exactly  in  the  position  described  in 
the  Talmud.  An  indirect  testimony  of  this  kinJ 
may  be  even  more  conclusive  than  a  direct  testi 
mony,  inasmuch  as  no  suspicion  of  design  can  attach 
to  it.  In  Is.  is.  3,  where  the  text,  as  emended  by 
Professor  Selwyn  in  his  Horae  ffebraicae,  runs 

otrn  n?i:in  ?»an  jrrin, «  Thou  hast  mul 
tiplied  the  gladness,  thou  hast  increased  the  joy,' 
one  confirmation  of  the  correctness  of  the  proposed 
reading  is  well  traced  by  him  in  the  circumstance 
that  the  final  7  of  the  second  and  the  initial  f]  of 
the  third  word  furnish  the  !"D,  "  to  it,"  implied  in 
the  ft  of  the  Septuagint,  and  according  with  the 
assumed  feminine  noun  JV3"in,  T&  irXtiff-rov,  or 
with  rP2")n  or  JV31D  which  was  substituted  for  it 
(see  this  fully  brought  out,  Hor.  Heb.  pp.  22,  sqq.). 

It  is  frequently  held  that  much  may  be  drawn 
from  parallel  passages  towards  the  correction  of 
portions  of  the  Hebrew  text ;  and  it  may  well  be 
allowed  that  in  the  historical  books,  and  especially 
in  catalogues,  &c.,  the  texts  of  two  parallel  passages 
throw  considerable  light  the  one  upon  the  other. 
Kennicott  commenced  his  critical  dissertations  by 
a  detailed  comparison  of  the  text  of  1  Chr.  xi. 
with  that  of  2  Sam.  v.,  xxiii. ;  and  the  comparison 
brought  to  light  some  corruptions  which  cannot  be 
gainsaid.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  poetical  and 
prophetical  books,  and  to  a  certain  extent  in  the 
whole  of  the  0.  T.,  critical  reliance  on  the  texts  of 
parallel  passages  is  attended  with  much  danger.  It 
was  the  practice  of  the  Hebrew  writers,  in  revising 
former  productions,  or  in  borrowing  the  language 
to  which  others  had  given  utterance,  to  make  com 
paratively  minute  alterations,  which  seem  at  fn-st 
sight  to  be  due  to  mere  carelessness,  but  which 
nevertheless,  when  exhibited  together,  cannot  well 
be  attributed  to  aught  but  design.  We  have  a 
striking  instance  of  this  in  the  two  recensions  ot 
the  .same  hymn  (both  probably  Davidic)  in  Ps. 
xviii.  and  2  Sam.  xxii.  Again,  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  14  is 
imitated  from  Ps.  liv.  3,  with  the  alteration  of 
D'HT,  "  strangers,"  into  OH!,  "proud."  A  head 
long  critic  would  naturally  assimilate  the  two  pas 
sages,  yet  the  general  purport  of  the  two  psalms 
makes  it  probable  that  each  word  is  correct  in  its 
own  place.  Similarly  Jer.  xlviii.  45,  is  derived 
from  Num.  xxi.  28,  xxiv.  17 :  the  alterations 
throughout  are  curious,  but  especially  at  the  end, 
where  for  nK^^n-?3  Iplpl,  "and  destroy  all 
the  children  of  Sheth,"  we  have  }1SB>  ^3  IpHpl, 
"  and  the  crown  of  the  head  of  the  children  of 
tumult ;"  yet  no  suspicion  legitimately  attaches  to 
the  text  of  either  passage.  From  such  instances, 
the  caution  needful  in  making  use  of  parallels  wij 
be  at  once  evident. 

The  comparative  purity  of  the  Hebrew  text  is 
probably  different  in  different  parts  of  the  0.  T.  In 
the  revision  of  Dr.  Davidson,  who  has  generally  re 
stricted  himself  to  the  admission  of  corrections 
warranted  by  MS.,  Masoretic,  or  Talmudic  autho 
rity,  those  in  the  book  of  Genesis  do  not  exceed  11 
those  in  the  Psalms  are  proportionately  three  timei 
as  numerous  ;  those  in  the  historical  books  and  thi 
Prophets  art  proportionately  more  numerous  thai". 

2  K 


tao 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


those  in  the  Psalms.  When  our  criticism  takes  a 
wider  range,  it  is  especially  in  the  less  familiar 
parts  of  Scripture  that  the  indications  of  corruption 
present  themselves  before  us.  In  some  of  these 
the  Septuagint  version  has  been  made  to  render  im 
portant  service :  in  the  genealogies,  the  errors  which 
have  been  insisted  on  are  for  the  most  part  found  in 
the  Septuagint  as  well  as  in  the  Hebrew,  and  are 
therefore  of  older  date  than  the  execution  of  the 
Septuagint.  It  has  been  maintained  l>y  Keil,  and 
perhaps  with  truth  (Apol.  Versuch.  ill)er  die  Biicher 
der  C/ironik,  pp.  185,  295),  that  many  of  these  are 
oldei  tluui  the  sacred  books  themselves,  and  had 
crept  into  the  documents  which  the  authors  incor 
porated,  as  they  found  them,  into  those  books.  This 
remark  will  not,  however,  apply  to  all ;  nor,  as  we 
have  already  observed,  is  there  any  ground  for  sup 
posing  that  the  period  immediately  succeeding  the 
production  of  the  last  of  the  canonical  writings  was 
joe  during  which  those  writings  would  be  preserved 
perfectly  immaculate.  If  Lord  A.  Hervey  be  right 
in  his  rectification  of  the  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  iii. 
19.  seqq.  (On  the  Geneal.  pp.  98-110),  the  inter 
polation  at  the  beginning  of  ver.  22  must  be  due  to 
some  transcriber  of  the  book  of  Chronicles ;  and  a 
like  observation  will  apply  to  the  present  text  of 
1  Chr.  ii.  6,  respecting  which  see  Thrupp's  Introd. 
to  the  Psalms,  ii.  p.  98,  note. 

In  all  emendations  of  the  text,  whether  made 
with  the  aid  of  the  critical  materials  which  we 
possess,  or  by  critical  conjecture,  it  is  essential  that 
the  proposed  reading  be  one  from  which  the  existing 
reading  may  have  been  derived :  hence  the  neces 
sity  of  attention  to  the  means  by  which  corrup 
tions  were  introduced  into  the  text.  One  letter  was 
accidentally  exchanged  by  a  transcriber  for  another : 
thus  in  Is.  xxiv.  15,  DHN3  may  perhaps  be  a  cor 
ruption  for  D^fcO  (so  Lowth).  In  the  square 
alphabet  the  letters  T  and  "I,  1  and  *,  were  espe 
cially  liable  to  be  confused :  there  were  also  simi 
larities  between  particular  letteis  in  the  older  alpha 
bet.  Words,  or  parts  of  words,  were  repeated  (cf. 
the  Talmudic  detections  of  this,  supra:  similar  is 
the  mistake  of  "  so  no  now  "  for  "  so  now  "  in  a 
modem  English  Bible) ;  or  they  were  dropped,  and 
this  especially  when  they  ended  like  those  that  pre 
ceded,  e.g.  ^>KV  after  ^N1»t?  (1  Chr.  vi.  13). 
A  whole  passage  seems  to  have  dropped  out  from 
the  same  cause  in  1  Chr.  xi.  13  (cf.  Kennicott, 
Diss.  i.  pp.  128,  seqq.).  Occasionally  a  letter  may 
have  travelled  from  one  word,  or  a  word  from  one 
verse,  to  another:  hence  in  Hos.  vi.  5,"V1K  "pt3DL?Q1 
has  been  supposed  by  various  critics  (and  so  Selwyn, 
Hor.  Heb.  pp.  154,  seqq.),  and  that  with  the  sanc 
tion  of  all  the  versions  except  Jerome's,  to  be  a  cor 
ruption  for  11KD  'Dae>D1.  This  is  one  of  those 
cases  where  it  is  difficult  to  decide  on  the  true 
reading ;  the  emendation  is  highly  probable,  but  at 
the  same  time  too  obvious  not  to  excite  suspicion ; 
a  scrupulous  critic,  like  Maurer,  rejects  it.  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  we  ought  to  reject  the  pro 
posed  emendations  of  Ps.  xlii.  5,  6,  by  the  trans 
ference  of  TPK  into  ver.  5,  or  by  the  supply  of  it 
in  that  verse,  in  order  to  assimilate  it  to  ver.  1 1 
and  to  Ps.  xliii.  5.  Ha*l  the  verses  in  so  familiar  a 
psalm  been  originally  alike,  it  is  almost  incredible 
that  any  transcriber  should  have  rendered  them  dif 
ferent.  With  greater  probability  in  Gen.  xxvii.  33, 
Hitzig  (  Begriff  der  Kritih,  p.  TJIi)  takes  the  final 
n*T,  and,  altering  it  into  rVHI,  transiers  it  into 
ver  MJ.  making  the  preceding  word  the  intini'ive. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

That  glosses  have  occasionally  found  their  wa\  into 
the  text  we  may  well  believe.  The  words  N1H 
D"T*3  in  Is.  x.  5  have  much  the  appearance  of  being 
a  gloss  explanatory  of  HOD  (Hitzig,  Begr.  pp.  157, 
158),  though  the  verse  can  be  well  construed  with 
out  their  removal ;  and  that  Deut.  x.  6,  7,  have 
crept  into  the  text  by  some  illegitimate  means, 
seems,  notwithstanding  Hengstenberg's  defence  of 
them  (Gen.  of  Pent,  ii.),  all  but  certain. 

Wilful  corruption  of  the  text  on  polemical  grounds 
has  also  been  occasionally  charged  upon  the  Jews ; 
but  the  allegation  has  not  been  proved,  and  their 
known  reverence  for  the  text  militates  against  it. 
More  trustworthy  is  the  negative  bearing  of  that 
hostility  of  the  Jews  against  the  Christians,  which, 
even  in  reference  to  the  Scriptures,  has  certainly 
existed ;  and  it  may  be  fairly  argued  that  if  Aquila, 
who  was  employed  by  the  Jews  as  a  translator  •  on 
polemical  grounds,  had  ever  heard  of  the  modern 
reading  *"1{<3,  "  as  a  lion,"  in  Ps.  xxii.  17  (16),  he 
would  have  been  too  glad  to  follow  it,  instead  cf 
translating  1")fcO,  "  they  pierced,"  by  rjffxvvav. 

To  the  criticism  of  the  vowel-marks  the  same 
general  principles  must  be  applied,  mutatis  mutan 
dis,  as  to  that  of  the  consonants.  Nothing  can  be 
more  remote  from  the  truth  than  the  notion  that 
we  are  at  liberty  to  supply  vowels  to  the  text  at 
our  unfettered  discretion.  Even  Hitzig,  who  does 
not  generally  err  on  the  side  of  caution,  holds  that 
the  vo^  el-marks  have  in  general  been  rightly  fixed 
by  tradition,  and  that  other  than  the  Masoretic 
vowels  are  seldom  required,  except  when  the  con 
sonants  have  been  first  changed  (Begr.  p.  119). 

In  conclusion,  let  the  reader  of  this  or  any  article 
on  the  method  of  dealing  with  errors  in  tht  text 
beware  of  drawing  from  it  the  impression  of  a 
general  corruptness  of  the  text  which  does  not  really 
exist.  The  works  of  Biblical  scholars  have  been  on 
the  whole  more  disfigured  than  adorned  by  the 
emendations  of  the  Hebrew  text  which  they  have 
suggested ;  and  the  cautions  by  which  the  more 
prudent  have  endeavoured  to  guard  against  the 
abuse  of  the  licence  of  emending,  are,  even  when 
critically  unsound,  so  far  commendable,  that  they 
show  a  healthy  respect  for  the  Masoretic  text  which 
might  with  advantage  have  been  more  generally 
felt.  It  is  difficult  to  reduce  to  formal  rules  the 
treatment  which  the  text  of  the  0.  T.  should  receive, 
but  the  general  spirit  ef  it  might  thus  be  given : — 
Deem  the  Masoretic  text  worthy  of  confidence,  but 
do  not  refuse  any  emendations  of  it  which  can  be 
fairly  established :  of  such  judge  by  the  evidence 
adduced  in  their  support,  when  advanced,  not  by 
any  supposed  previous  necessity  for  them,  respect 
ing  which  the  most  erroneous  views  have  bet;a 
frequently  entertained ;  and,  lastly,  remember  that 
the  judgment  of  the  many  will  correct  that  of  the 
few,  the  judgment  of  future  generations  that  of  the 
present,  and  that  permanent  neglect  generally  awaits 
emendations  which  approve  themselves  by  their 
brilliancy  rather  than  by  their  soundness.  (See 
generally  Walton's  Prolegomena  ;  Kennioott's  Dis- 
sertatio  Generate ;  De  Rossi's  Prolegomena ;  Bp. 
Marsh's  Lectures ;  Davidson's  Bib.  Criticism,  vol. 
i. ;  and  the  Introductions  of  Home  and  Davidson, 
of  De  Wette,  Havernick,  Keil,  and  Bleek.) 

B.  INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

.1.  History  of  the  Interpretation.  —  We  shall 
here  endeavour  to  present  a  brief  but  comprehensive 

ketch  of  the  treatment  which  the  scriptures  of  tht 
O.  T  have  in  different  ages  received. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

At  the  period  of  the  risi>  of  Christianity  two  op 
posite  tendencies  had  manifested  themselves  in  the 
interpretation  of  them  among  the  Jews  ;  the  one  to 
an  extreme  literalism,  the  other  to  an  arbitrary 
allegorisn.  The  former  of  these  was  mainly  deve 
loped  in  Palestine,  where  the  Law  of  Moses  was, 
from  the  aature  ot  tilings,  most  completely  observed. 
The  Jewish  teachers,  acknowledging  the  obligation 
of  that  law  in  its  minutest  precepts,  but  overlook 
ing  the  moral  principles  on  which  those  precepts 
were  founded  and  which  they  should  have  unfolded 
from  them,  there  endeavoured  to  supply  by  other 
means  the  imperfections  inherent  in  every  law  in  its 
mere  literal  acceptation.  They  added  to  the  number 
of  the  existing  precepts,  they  defined  more  minutely 
ths  method  of  their  observance ;  and  thus  practically 
further  obscured,  and  in  many  instances  overthrew, 
the  inward  spirit  of  the  law  by  new  outward  tradi 
tions  if  their  own  (Matt,  xv.,  xxiii.).  On  the  other 
hand  at  Alexandria  the  allegorizing  tendency  pre 
vailed.  Germs  of  it  had  appeared  in  the  apocry 
phal  writings,  as  where  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
(xviii.  24)  the  priestly  vestments  of  Aaron  had  been 
treated  as  symbolical  of  the  universe.  It  had  been 
fostered  by  Aristobulus,  the  author  of  the  >E|rj'y^- 
fffis  rfjs  Mcovfffws  ypa<prjs,  quoted  by  Clement  and 
Eusebius;  and  at  length,  two  centuries  later,  it 
culminated  in  Philo,  from  whose  works  we  best 
gather  the  form  which  it  assumed.  For  in  the  ge 
neral  principles  of  interpretation  which  Philo  adopted, 
he  was  but  following,  as  he  himself  assures  us,  in 
the  track  which  had  been  previously  marked  out  by 
those,  probably  the  Therapeutae,  under  whom  he 
had  studied.  His  expositions  have  chiefly  reference 
to  the  writings  of  Moses,  whom  he  regarded  as  the 
arch-prophet,  the  man  initiated  above  all  others 
into  divine  mysteries ;  and  in  the  persons  and  things 
mentioned  in  these  writings  he  traces,  without  deny 
ing  the  outward  reality  of  the  narrative,  the  mys 
tical  designations  of  different  abstract  qualities  and 
aspects  of  the  invisible.  Thus  the  three  angels 
who  came  to  Abraham  represent  with  him  God  in 
his  essential  being,  in  his  beneficent  power,  and  in 
his  governing  power.  Abraham  himself,  in  his 
dealings  with  Sarah  and  Hagar,  represents  the  man 
who  has  an  admiration  for  contemplation  and  know 
ledge:  Sarah,  the  virtue  which  is  such  a  man's  legi 
timate  partner:  Hagar,  the  encyclical  accomplish 
ments  of  all  kinds  which  serve  as  the  handmaiden 
of  virtue,  the  pre-requisites  for  the  attainment  of 
the  highest  wisdom :  her  Egyptian  origin  sets  forth 
that  for  the  acquisition  of  this  varied  elementary 
knowledge  the  external  senses  of  the  body,  of  which 
Egypt  is  the  symbol,  are  necessary.  Such  are 
Philo's  interpretations.  They  are  marked  through 
out  by  two  fundamental  defects.  First,  beautiful 
as  are  the  moral  lessons  which  he  often  unfolds,  he 
yet  shows  no  more  appreciation  than  the  Palestinian 
opponents  of  our  Saviour  of  the  moral  teaching  in- 
vclved  in  the  simpler  acceptation  of  Scripture. 
And,  secondly,  his  exposition  is  not  the  result  of  a 
legitimate  drawing  forth  of  the  spiritual  import 
which  the  Scripture  contains,  but  of  an  endeavour 
to  engraft  the  Gentile  philosophy  upon  it.  Of  a 
Messiah,  to  whom  the  0.  T.  throughout  spiritually 
pointed,  Philo  recked  but  little:  the  wisdom  of 
Plato  he  contrives  to  find  in  every  page.  It  was  in 
(uct  his  aim  so  to  find  it.  The  Alexandrian  inter 
preters  were  striving  to  vindicate  for  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  a  new  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  the  Gentile 
world,  by  showing  that  Moses  had  anticipated  all 
iur  iloi-trjies  of  the  philosophers  of  Greece.  Hence, 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


611 


with  Aristobulus,  Moses  was  an  earlier  Afist)tle 
with  Philo,  an  earlier  Plato.  The  Bible  was  will, 
them  a  storehouse  of  all  the  philosophy  which  the* 
had  veally  derived  from  other  sources ;  and,  in  sc 
treating  i't,  they  lost  sight  of  the  inspired  theology, 
the  revelation  of  God  to  man,  which  was  its  true 
and  peculiar  glo^  y. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  the  Palestinian 
literalism  and  the  Alexandrian  allegorism  ever  re 
mained  entirely  distinct.  On  the  one  hand  we  find 
the  Alexandrian  Philo,  in  his  treatise  on  the  special 
laws,  commending  just  such  an  observance  of  the 
letter  and  an  infraction  of  the  Jpirit  of  the  pro 
hibition  to  take  God's  name  in  vain,  as  our  Saviour 
exposes  and  condemns  in  Matt.  v.  33-87.  On  the 
other  hand,  among  the  Palestinians,  both  the  high- 
priest  Eleazar  (ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  viii.  9),  and  at 
a  later  period  the  historian  Josephus  (Ant.  prooem. 
4),  speak  of  the  allegorical  significance  of  the  Mosaic 
writings  in  terms  which  lead  us  to  suspect  that 
their  expositions  of  them,  had  they  come  down  to 
us,  would  have  been  found  to  contain  much  that 
was  arbitrary.  And  it  is  probable  that  traditional 
allegorical  interpretations  of  the  sacred  writings 
were  current  among  the  Essenes.  In  fact  the  two 
extremes  of  literalism  and  arbitrary  allegorism,  in 
their  neglect  of  the  direct  moral  teaching  and  pro 
phetical  import  of  Scripture,  had  too  much  in  com 
mon  not  to  mingle  readily  the  one  with  the  other. 

And  thus  we  may  trace  the  development  of  tho 
two  distinct  yet  co-existent  spheres  of  Halachah  and 
Hagadah,  in  which  the  Jewish  interpretation  o! 
Scripture,  as  shown  by  the  later  Jewish  writings, 
ranged.  The  former  (HD 7i"l,  "  repetition,"  "  follow 
ing")  embraced  the  traditional  legal  determinations 
for  practical  observance:  the  latter  (mUH,  "dis 
course")  the  unrestrained  interpretation,  of  no  au 
thentic  force  or  immediate  practical  interest.  Hold 
ing  fast  to  the  position  for  which,  in  theory,  the. 
Alexandrian  allegoristshad  so  strenuously  contended, 
that  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge,  in 
cluding  their  own  speculations,  were  virtually  con 
tained  in  the  Sacred  Law,  the  Jewish  doctors  pro 
ceeded  to  define  the  methods  by  which  they  were 
to  be  elicited  from  it.  The  meaning  of  Scripture 
was  according  to  them,  either  that  openly  expressed 
in  the  words  (JJEP'O,  sensus  innatw],  or  else  that 
deduced  from  them  (tjrno.  PlEm,  sensus  Hiatus). 
The  former  was  itself  either  literal,  JDK'S,  or  figu 
rative  and  mystical,  TlD-  The  latter  was  partly 
obtained  by  simple  logical  inference;  but  partly 
also  by  the  arbitrary  detection  of  recondite  mean 
ings  symbolically  indicated  in  the  places,  gramma 
tical  structure,  or  orthography  of  words  taken  apart 
from  their  logical  context.  This  last  was  the  cab 
balistic  interpretation  (n?2p,  "  reception,"  "  re 
ceived  tradition ").  Special  mention  is  made  ot 
three  processes  by  which  it  was  pursued.  By  the 
process  Gematria  (t^ltOD^J,  geometric?)  a  symbo 
lical  import  was  attached  to  the  number  of  times 
that  a  word  or  letter  occurred,  or  to  the  number 
which  one  or  more  letters  of  any  word  represented. 
By  the  process  Notarjekon  (jl"p'"ltD3,  notaricwn") 
new  significant  words  were  formed  out  of  the  initial 
or  final  words  of  the  text,  or  else  the  letters  of  a 
word  were  constituted  the  initials  of  a  new  signi 
ficant  series  of  words.  And  in  Temurah  (miDD. 
"change")  new  significant  words  were  obtained 
from  the  text  either  by  anagram  (e.  g.  H*K13, 
"Messiah"  from  HD^',  Ps.  xxi.  2),  or  by  tin 
ali)h:ibet  Atba.sh.  wherein  (he  letters  X,  3,  &(*., 

'2   l;  2 


were  replaced  by  n,  E*,  &c.  Of  such  artifices  the 
sacral  writers  had  jwssibly  for  special  purposes 
made  occasional  use ;  but  that  they  should  have  beei 
ever  applied  by  any  school  to  the  general  exegesis 
jf  the  0.  T.  shows  only  into  what  trifling  even 
labours  on  Scripture  may  occasionally  degenerate. 

The  earliest  Christian  non-apostolic  treatment  ol 
the  0.  T.  was  necessarily  much  dependent  on  that 
which  it  had  received  from  the  Jews.  The  Alex 
andrian  allegorism  reappears  the  most  fully  in  the 
fanciful  epistle  of  Barnabas ;  but  it  influenced  also 
(he  other  writings  of  the  sub-apostolic  Fathers.  Even 
ihe  Jewish  cabbalism  passed  to  some  extent  into  the 
Christian  Church,  and  is  said  to  have  been  largely 
employed  by  the  Gnostics  (Iren.  i.  3,  8,  16,  ii.  24). 
But  this  was  not  to  last.  Irenaeus,  himself  not  alto 
gether  free  from  it,  raised  his  voice  against  it ;  and 
Tertullian  well  laid  it  down  as  a  canon  that  the 
woris  of  Scripture  were  to  be  interpreted  only  in 
their  logical  connexion,  and  with  reference  to  the 
occasion  on  which  they  were  tittered  (De  Praescr. 
Haer.  9).  In  another  respect  all  was  changed. 
The  Christian  interpreters  by  their  belief  in  Christ 
stood  on  a  vantage-ground  for  the  comprehension  of 
the  whole  burden  of  the  0.  T.  to  which  the  Jews 
had  never  reached ;  and  thus,  however  they  may 
have  erred  in  the  details  of  their  interpretations, 
they  were  generally  conducted  by  them  to  the  right 
conclusions  in  regard  of  Christian  doctrine.  It  was 
through  reading  the  0.  T.  prophecies  that  Justin 
had  been  converted  to  Christianity  (Dial.  Tryph. 
pp.  224,  225).  The  view  held  by  the  Christian 
Fathers  that  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  N.  T.  had  been 
virtually  contained  and  foreshadowed  in  the  Old,  gene 
rally  induced  the  search  in  the  0.  T.  for  such  Chris 
tian  doctrine  rather  than  for  the  old  philosophical 
dogmas.  Thus  we  find  Justin  asserting  his  ability 
to  prove  by  a  careful  enumeration  that  all  the  ordi 
nances  of  Moses  were  types,  symbols,  and  disclosures 
of  those  things  which  were  to  be  realized  in  the 
Messiah  (Dial.  Tri/p.  p.  261).  Their  general  con 
victions  were  doubtless  here  more  correct  than  the 
details  which  they  advanced ;  and  it  would  be  easy 
to  multiply  from  the  writings  of  either  Justin,  Ter 
tullian,  or  Irenaeub,  typical  interpretations  that 
could  no  longer  be  defended.  Yet  even  these  were 
no  unrestrained  speculations :  they  were  all  designed 
to  illustrate  what  was  elsewhere  unequivocally  re 
vealed,  and  were  limited  by  the  necessity  of  con 
forming  in  their  results  to  the  Catholic  rule  of  faith, 
the  tradition  handed  down  in  the  Church  from  the 
Apostles  (Tert.  De  Praescr.  Haer.  1 3,  37  ;  Iren. 
iv.  26).  It  was  moreover  laid  down  by  Tertullian, 
that  the  language  of  the  Prophets,  although  gene 
rally  allegorical  and  figurative,  was  not  always  so 
(De  Res.  Cnrnis,  19)  ;  though  we  do  not  find  in  the 
early  Fathers  any  canons  of  interpretation  in  this 
respect.  A  curious  combination,  as  it  must  seem 
to  us,  of  literal  and  spiritual  interpretation  meets 
us  in  Justin's  exposition,  in  which  he  is  not  alone, 
of  those  prophecies  which  he  explains  of  millen 
nial  blessings;  for  while  he  believes  that  it  is 
the  literal  Jerusalem  which  will  be  restored  in  all 
her  splendour  for  God's  people  to  inhabit,  he  yet 
contends  that  it  is  the  spiritual  Israel,  not  the  Jews, 
that  will  eventually  dwell  there  (Dial.  Tr.  pp. 
306,  352).  Both  Justin  and  Irenaeus  upheld  the 
historical  reality  of  the  events  related  in  the  0.  T. 
narrative.  Both  also  fell  into  the  error  of  defend 
ing  the  less  commendable  proceedings  of  the  pa- 
trmrrhs — :is  the  polygamy  of  Jacob,  and  tin.1  incest 
of  Lot — on  the  strength  of  the  typical  fliura<  t.  r 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

assnmedly  attaching  to  them  (Just.  Dial.  Tr.  pp 
3*54  seqq.  ;  Iren.  v.  32  seqq.). 

It  was  at  Alexandria,  which  through  her  prevhnt 
learning  had  already  exerted  the  deepest  influence 
on  the  interpretation  of  the  0.  T.,  that  definite 
principles  of  interpretation  were  by  a  new  order  01 
men,  the  most  illustrious  and  influential  teachers  in 
the  Christian  Church,  first  laid  down.  Clement 
here  led  the  way.  He  held  that  in  the  Jewish  law 
a  fourfold  import  was  to  be  traced  ;  literal,  symbo 
lical,  moral,  prophetical  (Strom,  i.  c.  28).  Of  thtsc 
the  second,  by  which  the  persons  and  things  meu- 
tioned  in  the  law  were  treated  as  symbolical  of  the 
material  and  moral  universe,  was  manifestly  derived 
from  no  Christian  source,  but  was  rather  the  relic 
of  the  philosophical  element  that  others  had  pre 
viously  engrafted  on  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Thf 
new  gold  had  not  yet  shaken  off  the  old  alloy  ;  and 
in  practice  it  is  to  the  symbolical  class  that  the 
most  objectionable  of  Clement's  interpretations  will 
be  found  to  belong.  Such  are  those  which  he  .re 
peats  from  the  Book  of  Wisdom  and  from  Philo  of 
the  high-priest's  garment,  and  of  the  relation  ol 
Sarah  to  Hagar ;  or  that  of  the  branches  of  th«, 
sacred  candlestick,  which  he  supposes  to  denote  the 
sun  and  planets.  Nor  can  we  commend  the  prone- 
ness  to  allegorism  which  Clement  everywhere  dis 
plays,  and  which  he  would  have  defended  by  the 
mischievous  distinction  which  he  handed  down  to 
Origen  between  vicrrtt  and  yvStais,  and  by  the 
doctrine  that  the  literal  sense  leads  only  to  a  mere 
carnal  faith,  while  for  the  higher  Christian  life  the 
allegorical  is  necessary.  Yet  in  Clement's  recogni 
tion  of  a  literal,  a  moral,  and  a  prophetical  import 
in  the  Law,  we  have  the  germs  of  the  aspects  in 
which  the  0.  T.  has  been  regarded  by  all  subsequent 
ages ;  and  his  Christian  treatment  of  the  sacred 
oracles  is  shown  by  his  acknowledging,  equally  with 
Tertullian  and  Irenaeus,  the  rule  of  the  tradition  of 
the  Lord  as  the  key  to  their  true  interpretation 
(Strom,  vii.  c.  17). 

Clement  was  succeeded  by  his  scholar  Origen. 
With  him  biblical  interpretation  showed  itself  more 
decidedly  Christian;  and  while  the  wisdom  of  the 
Egyptians,  moulded  anew,  became  the  permanent 
inheritance  of  the  Church,  the  distinctive  symbolical 
meaning  which  philosophy  had  placed  upon  the 
[).  T.  disappeared.  Origen's  principles  of  interpre 
tation  are  fully  unfolded  by  him  in  the  De  Princip. 
v.  11  seqq.  He  recognizes  in  Scripture,  as  it  were, 
a  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  answering  to  the  body, 
soul,  and  spirit  of  man:  the  first  serves  lor  the 
edification  of  the  simple,  the  second  for  that  of  the 
more  advanced,  the  thii-d  for  that  of  the  perfect. 
The  reality  and  the  utility  of  the  first,  the  letter  of 
Scripture,  he  proves  by  the  number  of  those  whoso 
"aith  is  nurtured  by  it.  The  second,  which  is  in 
act  the  moral  sense  of  Scripture,  he  illustrates  by  the 
nterpretation  of  Deut.  xrv.  4  in  1  Cor.  ix.  9.  The 
,hird,  however,  is  that  on  which  he  principally 
dwells,  showing  how  the  Jewish  Law,  spiritually 
understood,  contained  a  shadow  of  good  things  tt 
3ome ;  and  how  the  N.  T.  had  recognized  such  ;• 
spiritual  meaning  not  only  in  the  narrative  of 
Moses,  and  in  his  account  of  the  tabernacle,  lu.t 
also  in  the  historical  narrative  of  the  other  book 
(1  Cor.  x.  11;  Gal.  iv.  21-31;  Heb.  viii.  5; 
torn.  xi.  4,  5).  In  regard  of  what  he  calls  the  soul 
of  Scripture  his  views  are,  it  must  be  owned,  some 
what  uncertain.  His  practice  with  reference  to  it 
seems  to  have  been  less  commendable  1han  his  j>r:ii 
•iplts.  It  should  have  bwn  tl  t  moral  tt-.-n-hin^of 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Scripture  arising  out  of  the  literal  sense  applied  in 
accordance  with  the  rules  of  analogy  ;  but  the  moral 
interpretations  actually  given  by  Origin  are  ordi 
narily  little  else  than  a  series  of  allegonsms  of  moral 
tendency ;  and  thus  he  is,  unfortunately,  more  con 
sistent  with  his  own  practice  when  he  assigns  to  the 
moral  exposition  not  the  second  but  the  third  place, 
exalting  it  above  the  mystical  or  spiritual,  and  so 
removing  it  farther  from  the  literal  (Horn,  in  Gen. 
u.  6).  Both  the  spiritual  and  (to  use  his  own 
term)  the  psychical  meaning  he  held  to  be  always 
present  in  Scripture :  the  bodily  not  always.  Alike 
ic  the  history  and  the  law,  he  found  things  inserted 
or  expressions  employed  which  could  not  be  lite 
rally  understood,  and  which  were  intended  to  direct 
us  to  the  pursuit  of  a  higher  interpretation  than 
the  purely  literal.  Thus  the  immoral  actions 
of  the  patriarchs  were  to  him  stumbling-blocks 
which  he  could  only  avoid  by  passing  over  the 
literal  sense  of  the  narrative,  and  tracing  in  it  a 
spiritual  sense  distinct  from  the  literal ;  though 
even  here  he  seems  to  reject  the  latter  not  as  untrue, 
but  simply  as  profitless.  For  while  he  held  the 
body  of  Scripture  to  be  but  the  garment  of  its 
spirit,  he  yet  acknowledged  the  things  in  Scripture 
which  were  literally  true  to  be  far  more  numerous 
than  those  which  were  not ;  and  occasionally,  where 
he  found  the  latter  tend  to  edifying,  as  for  instance 
in  the  moral  commandments  of  the  Decalogue  as 
distinguished  from  the  ceremonial  and  therefore 
typical  law,  he  deemed  it  needless  to  seek  any  alle 
gorical  meaning  (Horn,  in  Num.  xi.  1).  Origen's 
own  expositions  of  Scripture  were,  no  doubt,  less 
successful  than  his  investigations  of  the  principles 
on  which  it  ought  to  be  expounded.  Yet  as  the 
appliances  which  he  brought  to  the  study  of  Scrip 
ture  made  him  the  father  of  biblical  criticism,  so  of 
all  detailed  Christian  scriptural  commentaries  his 
were  the  first ;  a  fact  not  to  be  forgotten  by  those 
who  would  estimate  aright  their  several  merits  and 
detects. 

The  labours  of  one  genuine  scholar  became  the 
inheritance  of  the  next;  and  the  value  of  Origen's 
researches  was  best  appreciated,  a  century  later,  by 
Jerome.  He  adopted  and  repeated  most  of  Origen's 
principles;  but  he  exhibited  more  judgment  in  the 
practical  application  of  them :  he  devoted  more 
attention  to  the  literal  interpretation,  the  basis  of 
the  rest,  and  he  brought  also  larger  stores  of  learn 
ing  to  bear  upon  it.  With  Origen  he  held  that 
Scripture  was  to  be  understood  in  a  threefold  man 
ner,  literally,  tropologically,"  mystically :  the  first 
meaning  was  the  lowest,  the  last  the  highest  (torn. 
v.  p.  172,  Vail.).  But  elsewhere  he  gave  a  new 
threefold  division  of  Scriptural  interpretation  ;  iden 
tifying  the  ethical  with  the  literal  or  first  mean 
ing,  making  the  allegorical  or  spiritual  meaning 
the  second,  and  maintaining  that,  thirdly,  Scrip 
ture  was  to  be  understood  "  secundum  futurorum 
beatitudlnem"  (torn.  vi.  p.  270).  Interpretation  of 
this  last  kind,  vague  and  generally  untenable  as  it  is, 
was  that  denominated  by  succeeding  writers  the 
anagogical ;  a  term  which  had  been  used  by  Origen 
as  equivalent  to  spiritual  (cf.  De  Princ.  iv.  9), 
though  the  contrary  has  been  maintained  by  writers 
familiar  with  the  later  distinction.  Combining 
these  two  classifications  given  by  Jerome  of  the 
various  meanings  of  Scripture,  we  obtain  the  four- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


613 


bid  division  which  was  current  through  the  middle 
iges,  and  which  has  been  perpetuated  in  the  Komish 
Church  down  to  recent  times: — 

"  Littera  gesta  docet ;  quid  credas,  Allegoria; 

Moralis  quid  agas;  quo  lendas,  Atiagogia" — 
and  in  which,  it  will  be  observed,  in  conformity 
with  the  practice  rather  than  the  precept  of  Origen, 
the  moral  or  tropological  interpretation  is  raised 
above  the  Allegorical  or  spiritual. 

The  principles  laid  down  by  master-minds,  not 
withstanding  the  manifold  lapses  made  in  the  appli 
cation  of  them,  necessarily  exerted  the  deepest  in 
fluence  on  all  who  were  actually  engaged  in  the 
work  of  interpretation.  The  influence  of  Origen's 
writings  was  supreme  in  the  Greek  Church  tor  a 
hundred  years  after  his  death.  Towards  the  end  of 
the  4th  century  Diodore,  bishop  of  Tarsus,  pre 
viously  a  presbyter  at  Antioch,  wrote  an  exposition 
of  the  whole  of  the  0.  T.,  attending  only  to  the 
letter  of  Scripture,  and  rejecting  the  more  spiritual 
interpretation  known  as  Bewpia,  the  contemplation 
of  things  represented  under  an  outward  sign.  He 
also  wrote  a  work  on  the  distinction  between  this 
last  and  allegory.  Of  the  disciples  of  Diodore, 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  pursued  an  exclusively  gram 
matical  interpretation  into  a  decided  rationalism, 
rejecting  the  greater  part  of  the  prophetical  re 
ference  of  the  0.  T.,  and  maintaining  it  to  be  only 
applied  to  our  Saviour  by  way  of  accommodation. 
Chrysostom,  another  disciple  of  Diodore,  followed  ? 
sounder  course,  rejecting  neither  the  literal  nor  the 
spiritual  interpretation,  but  bringing  out  with  much 
force  from  Scripture  its  moral  lessons.  He  was 
followed  by  Theodoret,  who  inteipreted  both  lite 
rally  and  historically,  and  also  allegorically  and  pro 
phetically.  His  commentaries  display  both  dili 
gence  and  soberness,  and  are  uniformly  instructive 
and  pleasing:  in  some  respects  none  are  more  va 
luable.  Yet  his  mind  was  not  of  the  highest  order. 
He  kept  the  historical  and  prophetical  interpreta 
tions  too  widely  apart,  instead  of  making  the  one 
lean  upon  the  other.  Where  historical  illustration 
was  abundant,  he  was  content  to  rest  in  that,  in 
stead  of  finding  in  it  larger  help  for  pressing  onward 
to  the  development  of  the  spiritual  sense.  So  again 
wherever  prophecy  was  literally  fulfilled,  he  gene 
rally  rested  too  much  in  the  mere  outward  verifi 
cation,  not  caring  to  enquire  whether  the  literal 
fulfilment  was  not  itself  necessarily  a  type  of  some 
thing  beyond.  In  the  Canticles,  however,  where 
the  language  of  Scripture  is  directly  allegorical,  he 
severely  reprehends  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  for  im 
posing  a  historical  interpretation  upon  it :  even 
Diodore  the  literal  interpreter,  Theodore's  master, 
had  judged,  as  we  learn  from  Theodoret,  that  that 
book  was  to  be  spiritually  understood. 

In  the  Western  Church  the  influence  of  Origen, 
if  not  so  unqualified  at  the  first,  was  yet  perma 
nently  greater  than  in  the  Eastern.  Hilary  of 
Poitiers  is  said  by  Jerome  to  have  drawn  largely 
from  Origen  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Psalms. 
But  in  truth,  as  a  practical  interpreter,  he  greatly 
excelled  Origen  ;  carefully  seeking  out  not  what 
meaning  the  •  Scripture  might  bear,  but  what  it 
really  intended,  and  drawing  forth  the  evangelical 
sense  from  the  literal  with  cogency,  terseness,  and 
elegance.  Here  too  Augustine  stood  somewhat  in 
advanceof  Origen;  carefully  preserving  in  its  integr.ly 


•  That  is,  morally.  The  term  rpoTro\oyia,  which  had 
in  Justin  and  Origen  denoted  the  doctrine  of  tropes,  was 
perhaps  3rst  applied  by  Jerome  to  the  doctrins  of  manner* ; 


in  which  sense  it  is  also  used  by  later  Greek  writer.*,  as 
Andreas. 


614 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


the  literal  sense  of  the  historical  narrative  of  Scrip 
ture  as  the  substructure  of  the  mystical,  lest  other 
wise  the  latter  should  prove  to  be  but  a  building  in 
the  air  (Serin.  2.c.  6).  It  seems  therefore  to  have 
been  rather  as  a  traditional  maxim  than  as  the 
expression  of  his  own  conviction,  that  he  allowed 
that  whatever  in  Scripture  had  no  proper  or  literal 
reference  to  honesty  of  manners,  or  to  the  truth  of 
the  faith,  might  by  that  be  recognized  as  figurative 
(De  Doctr.  CAr.  iii.  10).  He  fully  acknowledges, 
however,  that  all,  or  nearly  all,  in  the  O.  T.  is  to 
be  taken  not  only  literally  but  also  figuratively 
(ib.  22)  ;  and  bids  us  earnestly  beware  of  taking 
literally  that  which  is  figuratively  spoken  (ib. 
5).  The  fourfold  classification  of  the  interpreta 
tion  of  the  0.  T.  which  had  been  handed  down  to 
him,  literal,  aetiological,  analogical,  allegorical,  is 
neither  so  definite  nor  so  logical  as  Origen's  (De 
Ut.il.  Cred.  1,  8 ;  De  Gen.  ad  Lit.  lib.  imp.  2) :  on 
the  other  hand  neither  are  the  rules  of  Tichonius, 
which  he  rejects,  of  much  value.  Still  it  is  not  so 
much  by  the  accuracy  of  his  principles  of  exposition 
as  by  what  his  expositions  contain  that  he  is  had  in 
honour.  No  more  spiritually-minded  interpreter 
ever  lived.  The  main  source  of  the  blemishes  by 
which  his  interpretations  are  disfigured,  is  his  lack 
of  acquaintance  with  Hebrew;  a  lack  indeed  far 
more  painfully  evident  in  the  writings  of  the  Latin 
Fathers  than  in  those  of  the  Greek.  It  was  partly, 
no  doubt,  from  a  consciousness  of  his  own  short 
comings  m  this  respect  that  Augustine  urged  the 
importance  of  such  an  acquaintance  (De  Doctr. 
C/n:  li.  11  seqq.)  ;  rightly  judging  also  that  all  the 
external  scientific  equipments  of  the  interpreter  of 
Scripture  were  not  more  important  lor  tne  uisco- 
very  of  the  literal  than  for  that  of  the  mystical 
meaning. 

But  whatever  advances  had  been  made  in  the 
treatment  of  O.  T.  scripture  by  the  Latins  since  the 
days  of  Origen  were  unhappily  not  perpetuated. 
We  may  see  this  in  the  Morals  of  Gregory  on  the 
Book  of  Job  ;  the  last  great  independent  work  of  a 
Latin  Father.  Three  senses  of  the  sacred  text  are 
here  recognized  and  pursued  in  separate  threads ; 
the  historical  and  literal,  the  allegorical,  and  the 
moral.  But  the  three  have  hardly  any  mutual 
connexion :  the  very  idea  of  such  a  connexion  is 
ignored.  The  allegorical  interpretation  is  conse 
quently  entirely  arbitrary  ;  and  the  moral  interpre 
tation  is,  in  conformity  with  the  practice,  not  with 
the  principles,  of  Origen,  placed  after  the  allego 
rical,  so  called,  and  is  itself  every  whit  as  allegorical 
as  the  foi-mer.  They  differ  only  in  their  aims :  that 
of  the  one  is  to  set  forth  the  history  of  Christ ;  that 
of  the  other  to  promote  the  edification  of  the  Church 
\  by  a  reference  of  the  language  to  the  inward  work- 
;  ings  of  the  soul.  No  effort  is  made  to  apprehend 
the  mutual  relation  of  the  different  parts  of  the 
book,  or  the  moral  lessons  which  the  course  of  the 
argument  in  that  pre-eminently  moral  book  was 
intended  to  bring  out.  Such  was  the  general  cha 
racter  of  the  interpretation  which  prevailed  through 
the  middle  ages,  during  which  Gregory's  work  stood 
in  high  repute.  The  mystical  sense  of  Scripture 
was  entirely  divorced  from  the  literal.  Some  guid 
ance,  however,  in  the  paths  of  even  the  most  arbi 
trary  allegorism  was  found  practically  necessary  ; 
and  this  was  obtained  in  the  uniformity  of  the 
mysti'.nl  sense  attached  to  the  several  scriptural 
tf-rm.s.  Hence  the  dictionary  of  the  allegorical 
meanings — partly  genuine,  partly  conventional — of 
•i-M|.t.ura!  terms  compiled  in  the  9th  century  liy 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

Kubnnus  Maurus.  An  exceptional  value  ma<*  Mtur). 
to  sonic  of  the  mediaeval  comments  on  the  O.  T., 
as  those  of  Rupert  of  Deutz  (f  1  loot ;  but  in  ge 
neral  even  those  which,  like  Gregory's  Morals,  arc 
prized  for  their  treasures  of  religious  thought,  nave 
little  worth  as  interpretations. 

The  fii-st  impulse  to  the  new  investigation  of  the 
literal  meaning  of  the  text  of  the  0.  T.  came  from 
the  great  Jewish  commentators,  mostly  of  Spanish 
origin,  of  the  llth  and  following  centuries;  Jarchi 
(t  1105),  Aben  Ezra  (f  1167),  Kimchi  (f  1240), 
and  others.  Following  in  the  wake  of  these,  the 
converted  Jew  Nicolaus  of  Lyre,  near  Evreux,  in 
Normandy  (f  1341),  produced  his  Postillae  Per- 
petuae  on  the  Bible,  in  which,  without  denying  the 
deeper  meanings  of  Scriptur«>,  he  justly  contended 
for  the  literal  as  that  on  which  they  all  must  rest. 
Exception  was  taken  to  these  a  century  later  by 
Paul  of  Burgos,  also  a  converted  Jew  (t  1435), 
who  upheld,  by  the  side  of  the  literal,  the  tradi 
tional  interpretations,  to  which  he  was  probably  at 
heart  exclusively  attached.  But  the  very  argu 
ments  by  which  he  sought  to  vindicate  them  showed 
that  the  recognition  of  the  value  of  the  literal  inter 
pretation  had  taken  firm  root.  The  Restoration  of 
Letters  helped  it  forward.  The  Reformation  con 
tributed  in  many  ways  to  unfold  its  importance ; 
and  the  position  of  Luther  with  regard  to  it  is 
embodied  in  his  saying  "  Optimum  grammaticum, 
eum  etiam  optimum  theologum  es&e."  That  gram, 
matical  scholarship  is  not  indeed  the  only  qualifica 
tion  of  a  sound  theologian,  the  German  commen 
taries  of  the  last  hundred  years  have  abundantly 
shown :  yet  where  others  have  sown,  the  Church 
eventually  reaps ;  and  it  would  be  ungrateful  to 
close  any  historical  sketch  of  the  interpretation  of 
the  0.  T.  without  acknowledging  the  immense  ser 
vice  rendered  to  it  by  modern  Germany,  through 
the  labours  and  learning  alike  of  the  disciples  of  the 
neologian  school,  and  of  those  who  have  again  reared 
aloft  the  banner  of  the  faith. 

In  respect  of  the  0.  T.  types,  an  important 
difference  has  prevailed  among  Protestant  inter 
preter  between  the  adherents  and  opponents  of  that 
school  which  is  usually,  from  one  of  the  most  emi 
nent  of  its  representatives,  denominated  the  Cocceian, 
and  which  practically,  though  perhaps  unconsci 
ously,  trod  much  in  the  steps  of  the  earlier  Fathers, 
Justin,  Irenaeus,  and  Tertullian.  Cocceius,  pro 
fessor  at  Leyden  (f  1669),  justly  maintained  that  a 
typical  meaning  ran  throughout  the  whole  of  the 
Jewish  scriptures  ;  but  his  principle  that  Scripture 
signifies  whatever  it  can  signify  (quicquid  potest 
significare),  as  applied  by  him,  opened  the  door  for 
an  almost  boundless  licence  of  the  interpreter's  fancy. 
The  arbitrariness  of  the  Cocceian  interpretations 
provoked  eventually  a  no  less  arbitrary  reply  ;  and, 
while  the  authority  of  the  N.  T.  as  to  the  existence 
of  scriptural  types  could  not  well  be  set  aside,  it 
became  a  common  principle  with  the  English  theo 
logians  of  the  early  part  of  the  present  century,  that 
only  those  persons  or  things  were  to  be  admitted  as 
typical  which  were  so  expressly  interpreted  in 
Scripture — or  in  the  N.  T. — itself.  With  sounder 
judgment,  and  not  without  considerable  success, 
Fairbairn  has  of  late  years,  in  his  Typology  of 
Scripture,  set  the  example  of  an  investigition  oi' the 
fundamental  principles  which  govern  the  typical 
connexion  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  New. 
(Sro,  for  further  information,  J.  G.  Roseim tiller's 
contemptuous  Iliatorid  Intcrprctnti<mis  't'i  Ajti^tv- 

in  Aci'itc  ttd  f.itcriintm  fnst<inr<itiifncin,  b  vols. 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

1795-1814 ;  Meyer's  Gesc/i.  der  Schrifter klarung 
Kit  der  Wiederherstellung  der  Wissentchaften, 
5  vols.,  1802-9 ;  Conybeare's  Hampton  Lectures, 
1824;  Olshausen's  little  tract,  Ein  Wort  iiber 
tiefern  Schriftsinn,  1824;  and  Davidson's  Sacred 
Hermeneutics,  1843.) 

2.  Principles  of  Interpretation. — From  the  fore 
going  sketch  it  will  have  appeared  that  it  has  been 
very  generally  recognized  that  the  interpretation  of 
the  0.  T.  embraces  the  discovery  of  its  literal, 
moral,  and  spiritual  meaning.  It  has  given  occa 
sion  to  misrepresentation  to  speak  of  the  existence 
in  Scripture  of  more  than  a  single  sense :  rather, 
then,  let  it  be  said  that  there  are  in  it  three  ele 
ments,  coexisting  and  coalescing  with  each  other, 
and  generally  requiring  each  other's  presence  in 
oixler  that  they  may  be  severally  manifested.  Cor 
respondingly  too  there  are  three  portions  of  the 
0.  T.  in  which  the  respective  elements,  each  in  'its 
turn,  shine  out  with  peculiar  lustre.  The  literal 
(and  historical)  element  is  most  obviously  displayed 
in  the  historical  narrative :  the  moral  is  specially 
honoured  in  the  Law,  and  in  the  hortatory  addresses 
of  the  Prophets:  the  predictions  of  the  Prophets 
bear  emphatic  witness  to  the  prophetical  or  spi 
ritual.  Still,  generally,  in  every  portion  of  the 
O.  T.  the  presence  of  all  three  elements  may  by 
the  student  of  Scripture  be  traced.  In  perusing 
the  story  of  the  journey  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  wilderness,  he  has  the  historical  element  in  the 
actual  occurrence  of  the  facts  narrated ;  the  moral, 
in  the  warnings  which  God's  dealings  with  the 
people  and  their  own  several  disobediences  convey; 
and  the  spiritual  in  the  prefiguration  by  that  jour 
ney,  in  its  several  features,  of  the  Christian  pil 
grimage  through  the  wilderness  of  life.  In  investi 
gating  the  several  ordinances  of  the  Law  relating  to 
sacrifice,  he  has  the  historical  element  in  the  ob 
servances  actually  enjoined  upon  the  Israelites  ;  the 
moral  in  the  personal  unworthiness  and  self-surren 
der  to  God  which  those  observances  were  designed 
to  express,  and  which  are  themselves  of  universal 
interest ;  and  the  spiritual  in  the  prefiguration  by 
those  sacrifices  of  the  one  true  sacrifice  of  Christ. 
In  bending  his  eyes  on  the  prophetical  picture  of 
the  conqueror  coming  from  Edom,  with  dyed  gar 
ments  from  Bozrah,  he  has  the  historical  element 
in  the  relations  subsisting  between  the  historical 
Edjm  and  Israel,  supplying  the  language  through 
which  the  anticipations  of  triumph  are  expressed; 
tli3  moral  element  in  the  assurance  to  all  the  per 
secuted  of  the  condemnation  of  the  unnatural  ma 
lignity  wherewith  those  nearest  of  kin  to  themselves 
may  have  exulted  in  their  calamities ;  and  the  spi 
ritual,  iu  the  prophecy  of  the  loneliness  of  Christ's 
passion  and  of  the  gloriousness  of  his  resurrection, 
in  the  strength  of  which,  and  with  the  signal  of 
victory  before  her,  the  Church  should  trample  down 
all  spiritual  foes  beneath  her  feet.  Yet  again,  in 
the  greater  number  of  the  Psalms  of  David  he  has 
the  historical  element  in  those  events  of  David's  life 
which  the  language  of  the  psalm  reflects ;  the  moral, 
hi  the  moral  connexion  between  righteous  faith  and 
eventual  deliverance  by  which  it  is  pervaded ;  and 
the  spiritual,  in  its  fore-embodiment  of  the  struggles 
of  Christ,  it>  whom  it  finds  its  essential  and  perfect 
fulfilment,  and  by  her  union  with  whom  the  Chris 
tian  Church  still  claims  and  appropriates  the  psalm 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


615 


k  Convenience  has  introduced,  and  still  sanctions,  the 
use  of  this  sow  jwhat  barbarous  word.  The  reader  will 
twr,\on  ^eing  T  iminded  that  the  term  grammatical  is 


as  her  own.  In  all  these  cases  it  is  requisite  to  the 
full  interpretation  of  the  O.  T.  that  tl.e  so-willed 
grammatico-historical,b  the  moral,  and  the  spiritual 
interpretation  should  advance  hand  in  hand :  the 
moral  interpretation  presupposes  the  grammatico- 
historical,  the  spiritual  rests  on  the  two  preceding. 
If  the  question  be  asked,  Are  the  three  several  ele 
ments  in  the  O.  T.  mutually  coextensive?  we  reply, 
They  are  certainly  coextensive  in  the  0.  T.,  taken 
as  a  whole,  and  in  the  several  portions  of  it,  largely 
viewed  ;  yet  not  so  as  that  they  are  all  to  be  traced 
in  each  several  section.  The  historical  element  may 
occasionally  exist  alone ;  for,  however  full  a  history 
may  be  of  deeper  meanings,  there  must  also  needs 
be  found  in  it  connecting  links  to  hold  the  signifi 
cant  parts  of  it  together :  otherwise  it  sinks  from  a 
history  into  a  mere  succession  of  pictures.  Not  to 
cite  doubtful  instances,  the  genealogies,  the  details 
of  the  route  through  the  wilderness  and  of  the  sub 
sequent  partition  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  account 
of  the  war  which  was  to  furnish  the  occasion  for 
God's  providential  dealings  with  Abraham  and  Lot 
(Gen.  xiv.  1-12),  are  obvious  and  simple  instances 
of  such  links.  On  the  other  hand  there  are  passages 
of  direct  and  simple  moral  exhortation,  e.  g.  a  con 
siderable  pait  of  the  book  of  Proverbs,  into  which 
the  historical  element  hardly  enters:  the  same  is 
the  case  with  Psalm  i.,  which  is,  as  it  weie,  the 
moral  preface  to  the  psalms  which  follow,  designed 
to  call  attention  to  the  moral  element  which  per 
vades  them  generally.  Occasionally  also,  as  in 
Psalm  ii.,  which  is  designed  to  bear  witness  of  the 
prophetical  import  running  through  the  Psalms,  the 
prophetical  element,  though  not  altogether  divorced 
from  the  historical  and  the  moral,  yet  completely 
overshadows  them.  It  is  moreover  a  maxim  which 
cannot  be  too  strongly  enforced,  that  the  historical, 
moral,  or  prophetical  interest  of  a  section  of  Scrii>- 
ture,  or  even  of  an  entire  book,  may  lie  rather  in 
the  general  tenour  and  result  of  the  whole  than  in 
any  number  of  separate  passages :  e.  g.  the  moral 
teaching  of  the  book  of  Job  lies  pre-eminently  not 
in  the  truths  which  the-  several  speeches  may  con 
tain,  but  in  the  great  moral  lesson  to  the  unfolding 
of  which  they  are  all  gradually  working. 

That  we  should  use  the  New  Testament  as  the 
key  to  the  true  meaning  of  the  Old,  and  should 
seek  to  interpret  the  latter  as  it  was  interpreted  by 
our  Lord  and  His  apostles,  is  in  accordance  both 
with  the  spirit  of  what  the  earlier  Fathers  asserted 
respecting  the  value  of  the  tradition  received  from 
them,  and  with  the  appeals  to  the  N.  T.  by  which 
Origen  defended  and  fortified  the  threefold  method 
of  interpretation.  But  here  it  is  the  analogy  of  the 
N.  T.  interpretations  that  we  must  follow ;  for  it 
were  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  whole  of  the 
Old  Testament  would  be  found  completely  inter 
preted  in  the  New.  Nor,  provided  only  a  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  Old  Testament  be  in  the  New  suffi 
ciently  recognized,  does  it  seem  much  more  reason 
able  to  expect  every  separate  type  to  be  there  indi 
cated  or  explained,  or  the  fulfilment  of  eveiy 
prophecy  noted,  than  it  would  be  to  expect  that  the 
N.  T.  should  unfold  the  historical  importanca  or 
the  moral  lesson  of  every  separate  portion  of  the 
0.  T.  history.  Why  indeed  should  we  assume  that 
a  full  interpretation  in  any  single  respect  of  the 
older  volume  would  be  given  in  another  of  less 

the  equivalent  of  literal;  using  derived  from  ypafiu/i. 
"  letter  "  not  from  -ypaufiaTt/oj,  "  grammar." 


616 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


than  a  quarter  of  its  bulk,  the  primary  design  of 
which  is  not  expository  at  all,  and  that  when  the 
use  actually  made  of  the  former  in  the  latter  is  in 
kind  so  manifold  ?  The  Apostles  nowhere  profess 
to  give  a  systematic  interpretation  of  the  0.  T. 
The  nearest  approach  to  any  such  is  to  be  found  in 
the  explanation  of  the  spiritual  meaning  of  the 
Mosaic  ritual  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  and 
even  here  it  is  expressly  declared  that  there  are 
many  things  "  of  which  we  cannot  now  speak  par 
ticularly"  (ix.  5).  We  may  well  allow  that  the 
Eiibsttince  of  all  the  0.  T.  shadows  is  in  the  N.  T. 
contained,  without  holding  that  the  several  relations 
between  the  substance  and  the  shadows  are  there  in 
each  case  authoritatively  traced. 

With  these  preliminary  obseiTations  we  may 
glance  at  the  several  branches  of  the  interpreter's 
t.isk. 

Fii'st,  then,  Scripture  has  its  outward  forni  or 
body,  all  the  several  details  of  which  he  will  have 
to  explore  and  to  analyse.  He  must  ascertain  the 
thing  outwardly  asserted,  commanded,  -foretold, 
prayed  for,  or  the  like ;  and  this  with  reference,  so 
far  as  is  possible,  to  the  historical  occasion  and  cir 
cumstances,  the  time,  the  place,  the  political  and 
social  position,  the  manner  of  life,  the  surrounding 
influences,  the  distinctive  character,  and  the  object 
in  view,  alike  of  the  writers,  the  persons  addressed, 
and  the  pel-sons  who  appear  upon  the  scene.  Taken 
in  its  wide  sense,  the  outward  form  of  Scripture 
will  itself,  no  doubt,  include  much  that  is  figurative. 
How  should  it  indeed  be  otherwise,  when  all  lan 
guage  is  in  its  structure  essentially  figurative  ? 
Even,  however,  though  we  should  define  the  litei^l 
bense  of  words  to 'be  that  which  they  signify  in 
their  tisual  acceptation,  and  the  figurative  that 
which  they  intend  in  another  than  their  usual 
acceptation,  under  some  foiTO  or  figure  of  speech, 
still  when  the  terms  literal  and  figurative  simply 
belong  (to  use  the  words  of  Van  Mildert)  "  to  the 
verbal  signification,  which  with  respect  to  the  sense 
may  be  virtually  the  same,  whether  or  not  ex 
pressed  by  trope  and  figure,"  and  when  therefore  it 
is  impossible  to  conceive  that  by  persons  o:  mode 
rate  understanding  any  other  than  the  figurative 
sense  could  ever  have  been  deduced  from  the  words 
employed,  we  rightfully  account  the  investigation 
of  such  sense  a  necessary  part  of  the  most  ele 
mentary  interpretation.  To  the  outward  form  of 
Scripture  thus  belong  all  metonymies,  in  wkich  one 
name  is  substituted  for  another,  e.  g.  the  cause  for 
the  effect,  the  mouth  for  the  word ;  and  metaphors, 
in  which  a  word  is  transformed  from  its  proper  to 
a  cognate  signification,  e.  g.  when  hardness  is  pre 
dicated  of  the  heart,  clothing  of  the  soul ;  so  also 
all  prosopopeias,  or  personifications;  and  even  all 
anthropomorphic  and  authropopathic  descriptions 
of  God,  which  could  never  have  been  understood  in 
a  purely  literal  sense,  at  least  by  any  of  the  right- 
minded  among  God's  people.  Nor  would  even  the 
exclusively  grammatico-historical  interpreter  deem 
it  no  part  of  his  task  to  explain  such  a  continued 
metaphor  as  that  in  Ps.  Ixxx.  3  seqq.,  or  such  a 
parable  as  that  iu  Is.  v.  1-7,  or  such  a  fable  as  that 
in  Judg.  ix.  8-15.  The  historical  element  in  such 
passages  only  comes  out  when  their  allegorical  cha 
racter  is  perceived ;  nor  can  it  be  supposed  that  it 
was  ever  unperceived.  Still  the  primary  allegorical 
meaning  in  such  passages  may  itself  be  an  allegory 
of  something  beyond,  with  which  latter  the  more 
rudimentary  interpretation  is  not  .strictly  concerned. 
An  uncxpectant  Jewish  reader  of  Is.  v.  1-7  might 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

have  traced  in  the  vineyard  an  image  of  the  land 
of  his  inheritance,  fenced  off  by  it.--  boundary 
heights,  deserts,  and  sea  from  the  tun-ounding 
territories — might  have  discerned  in  the  stones  the 
old  heathen  tribes  that  had  been  plucked  up  from 
off  it,  and  in  the  choice  vine  the  Israel  that  had 
been  planted  in  their  place — might  have  identified 
the  tower  with  the  city  of  David,  as  the  symbol  of 
the  protecting  Davidic  sovereignty,  and  the  wine 
press  with  the  Temple,  where  the  blood  of  the 
sacrifices  was  poured  forth,  as  the  symbol  of  Israel's 
worship  ;  and  this  without  inquiring  into  or  recking 
of  the  higher  blessings  of  which  all  these  tilings 
were  but  the  shadows.  Yet  it  is  not  to  be  denied 
that  it  is  difficult,  perhaps  impossible,  to  draw  the 
exact  line  where  the  province  of  spiritual  inter 
pretation  begins  and  that  of  historical  ends.  On 
the  one  hand  the  spiritual  significance  of  a  passage 
may  occasionally,  perhaps  often,  throw  light  on  the 
historical  element  involved  in  it:  on  the  other  hand 
the  very  large  use  of  figurative  language  in  the 
0.  T.,  and  more  especially  in  the  prophecies,  pie- 
pares  us  for  the  recognition  of  the  yet  more  deeply 
figurative  and  essentially  allegorical  import  '.vhich 
runs,  as  a  vw6voia,  through  the  whole. 

Yet  no  unhallowed  or  unworthy  task  can  it  ever 
be  to  study,  even  for  its  own  sake,  the  historical 
form  in  which  the  0.  T.  comes  to  us  clothed.  It 
was  probably  to  most  of  us  one  of  the  earliest 
charms  of  our  childhood,  developing  in  us  our  sense 
of  brotherhood  with  all  that  had  gone  before  us, 
!  leading  us  to  feel  that  we  were  not  singular  in  that 
j  which  befell  us,  and  therefore,  correspondingly,  that 
I  we  could  not  live  for  ourselves  alone.  Even  by 
I  itself  it  proclaims  to  us  the  historical  workings  of 
!  God,  and  reveals  the  care  wherewith  He  has  ever 
j  watched  over  the  interests  of  His  Church.  Above 
all  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  is  the  indispensable 
|  preface  to  the  historical  advent  of  the  Son  of  God 
in  the  flesh.  We  need  hardly  labour  to  prove  that 
the  N.  T.  recognizes  the  general  historical  character 
of  what  the  O.  T.  records.  It  is  everywhere  as 
sumed.  The  gospel-genealogies  testify  to  it :  so  too 
our  Lord  when  He  spoke  of  the  desires  of  tho  pro 
phets  and  righteous  men  of  old,  or  of  all  the 
righteous  blood  shed  upon  the  earth  which  should 
be  visited  upon  His  own  generation ;  so  too  Stephen 
and  Paul  in  their  speeches  in  the  council-chamber 
and  at  Antioch;  so  too,  again,  the  latter,  when  he 
spoke  of  the  things  which  "  happened "  unto  the 
Israelites  for  eusamples.  The  testimonies  borne  l>y 
our  Lord  and  His  apostles  to  the  outward  reality 
of  particular  circumstances  could  be  easily  drawn 
out  iu  array,  were  it  needful.  Of  course  in  reference 
to  that  which  is  not  related  as  plain  matter  of  his 
tory,  there  will  always  remain  the  question  how 
far  the  descriptions  are  to  be  viewed  as  definitely 
historical,  how  far  as  drawn,  for  a  specific  purpose, 
from  the  imagination.  Such  a  question  presents 
itself,  for  example,  in  the  book  of  Job.  It  is  one 
which  must  plainly  be  in  each  case  decided  accoi-d- 
ing  to  the  particular  circumstances.  Scenes  which 
could  never  have  any  outward  reality  may,  as  iu 
the  Canticles,  be  made  the  vehicle  of  spiritual  alle 
gory;  and  yet  even  here  the  historical  clfniPir 
meets  us  in  the  historical  person  of  the  typical 
bridegroom,  in  the  various  local  allusions  which  the 
allegorist  has  introduced  into  his  description,  and  in 
the  references  to  the  manners  and  customs  of  th« 
age.  In  examining  the  extent  of  the  historical  ele 
ment  in  the  prophecies,  both  of  t/ic  prophets 
tne  pbuJmisLs,  wu  mubt  distinguish  between 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

which  we  either  definitely  know  or  may  reasonably 
ussumc  to  have  been  fulfilled  at  a  period  not  en 
tirely  distant  from  that  at  which  they  wore  uttered, 
and  those  which  reached  far  beyond  in  their  pro 
spective  reference.  The  former,  once  fulfilled,  were 
thenceforth  annexed  to  the  domain  of  history  (Is. 
xvii.:  Ps.  cvii.  33).  It  must  be  observed,  however, 
that  the  prophet  often  beheld  in  a  single  vision,  and 
therefore  delineated  as  accomplished  all  at  once, 
what  was  really,  as  in  the  case  of  the  desolation  of 
Babylon,  the  gradual  work  of  a  long  period  (Is. 
xiii.) ;  or,  as  in  Ezekiel's  prophecy  respecting  the 
humiliation  of  Egypt,  uttered  his  predictions  in 
such  ideal  language  as  scarcely  admitted  of  a  literal 
fulfilment  (Ez.  xxix.  8-12;  see  Fairbairn  in  loco). 
With  tlie  prophecies  of  more  distant  scope  the  case 
stood  thus.  A  picture  was  presented  to  the  pro 
phet's  gaze,  embodying  an  outward  representation 
of  certain  future  spiritual  struggles,  judgments, 
triumphs,  or  blessings ;  a  picture  suggested  in 
general  by  the  historical  circumstances  of  the  pre 
sent  (Zech.  vi.  9-15  ;  Ps.  v.,  Ixxii.),  or  of  the  past 
(Ez.  xx.  35,  36  ;  Is.  xi.  15,  xlviii.  21 ;  Ps.  xcix.  6, 
sep.j.),  or  of  the  near  future,  already  anticipated 
.ind  viewed  as  present  (Is.  xlix.  7-26 ;  Ps.  Ivii. 
6-11),  or  of  all  these,  variously  combined,  altered, 
and  heightened  by  the  imagination.  But  it  does 
not  follow  that  that  picture  was  ever  outwardly 
brought  to  pass :  the  local  had  been  exchanged  for 
the  spiritual,  the  outward  type  had  merged  in  the 
inward  reality  before  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy 
took  ell'ect.  In  some  cases,  more  especially  those  in 
which  the  prophet  had  taken  his  stand  upon  the 
nearer  future,  there  was  a  preliminary  and  typical 
fulfilment,  or,  rather,  approach  to  it ;  for  it  seldom, 
if  ever,  corresponded  to  the  full  extent  of  the  pro 
phecy:  the  far-reaching  import  of  the  prophecy 
would  have  been  obscured  if  it  had.  The  measuring- 
line  never  outwardly  went  forth  upon  Gareb  and 
compassed  about  to  Goath  (Jer.  xxxi.  39)  till  the 
days  of  Herod  Agrippa,  after  our  Saviour's  final 
doom  upon  the  literal  Jerusalem  had  been  actually 
pronounced  ;  and  neither  the  temple  of  Zerubbabel 
nor  that  of  Herod  corresponded  to  that  which  had 
been  beheld  in  vision  by  Ezekiel  (xl.  seqq.).  There 
are  moreover,  as  it  would  seem,  exceptional  cases 
in  which  even  the  outward  form  of  the  prophet's 
predictions  was  divinely  drawn  from  the  unknown 
future  as  much  as  from  the  historical  circumstances 
witli  which  he  was  familiar,  and  in  which,  conse 
quently,  the  details  of  the  imagery  by  means  of 
which  he  concentrated  all  his  conscious  conceptions 
of  the  future  were  literally,  or  almost  literally, 
verified  in  the  events  by  which  his  prediction  was 
fulfilled.  Such  is  the  case  in  Is.  liii.  The  Holy 
Spirit  presented  to  the  prophet  thu  actual  death- 
scene  of  our  Saviour  as  the  form  in  which  his 
prophecy  of  that  event  was  to  be  embodied ;  and 
thus  we  trace  in  it  an  approach  to  a  literal  history 
of  our  Saviour's  endurances  before  they  came  to 
pass. 

(Respecting  the  rudiments  of  interpretation,  let 
the  following  here  suffice : — The  knowledge  of  the 
meanings  of  Hebrew  words  is  gathered  («)  from  the 
context,  (6)  from  parallel  passages,  (c)  from  the 
tj-aditional  interpretations  preserved  in  Jewish  com 
mentaries  and  dictionaries,  (d)  from  the  ancient 
versions,  (e)  from  the  cognate  languages,  Chaldee, 
Syriac,  and  Arabic.  The  syntax  must  be  almost 
wholly  gathered  from  the  0.  T.  itself;  and  for  the 
special  syntax  of  the  poetical  books,  while  the  im 
portance  of  a  study  of  thu  Hebrew  parallelism  is 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


017 


now  genenlly  recognized,  more  attention  1 1«\*  to 
be  bestowed  than  has  been  bestowed  hitherto  c<n  the 
centralism  and  inversion  by  which  the  poetical 
structure  and  language  is  often  marked.  It  may 
lere  too  be  in  place  to  mention,  that  of  the  various 
systematic  treatises  which  have  by  different  gene 
rations  been  put  forth  on  the  interpretation  of 
Scripture,  the  most  standard  work  is  the  Philologia 
Sacra  of  Sol.  Glassius  (Prof,  at  Jena,  fl656),  ori 
ginally  published  in  1623,  and  often  reprinted.  A 
new  edition  of  it,  "  accommodated  to  their  times," 
and  bearing  the  impress  of  the  theological  views  of 
the  new  editors,  was  brought  out  by  Datho  and 
Bau«r,  1776-97.  It  is  a  vast  storehouse  of  ma 
terials  ;  but  the  need  of  such  treatises  has  been  now 
much  superseded  by  the  special  labours  of  more  re 
cent  scholars  in  particular  departments.) 

From  the  outward  form  of  the  0.  T.  we  proceed 
to  its  moral  element  or  soul.  It  was  with  reference 
to  this  that  St.  Paul  declared  that  all  Scripture  was 
given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  was  profitable  for 
doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction 
in  righteousness  (2  Tim.  iii.  16) ;  and  it  is  in  the 
implicit  recognition  of  the  essentially  moral  cha 
racter  of  the  whole,  that  our  Lord  and  His  apostles 
not  only  appeal  to  its  direct  precepts  (e.  g.  Matt. 
xv.  4;  xix.  17-19),  and  set  forth  the  fulness  of 
their  bearing  (e.  g.  Matt.  ix.  13),  but  also  lay  bare 
moral  lessons  in  0.  T.  passages  which  lie  rather  be 
neath  the  surface  than  upon  it  (Matt.  xix.  5,  6,  xxii. 
32  ;  John  x.  34,  35  ;  Acts  vii.  48,  49 ;  1  Cor.  ix.  9, 
10  ;  2  Cor.  viii.  13-15).  With  regard  more  particu 
larly  to  the  Law,  our  Lord  shows  in  His  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  how  deep  is  the  moral  teaching  implied 
in  its  letter  ;  and  in  His  denunciation  of  the  Pharisees, 
upbraids  them  for  their  omission  of  its  weightier 
matters — judgment,  mercy,  and  faith.  The  history 
too  of  the  0.  T.  finds  frequent  reference  made  in 
the  N.  T.  to  its  moral  teaching  (Luke  vi.  3 ;  Mom. 
iv.,  ix.  17;  1  Cor.  x.  6-11;  Heb.  iii.  7-11,  xi. ; 
2  Pet.  ii.  15-16 ;  1  John  iii.  12).  No  doubt  it 
was  with  reference  to  the  moral  instruction  to  be 
drawn  from  them  that  that  history  had  been  made 
to  dwell  at  greatest  length  on  the  events  of  greatest 
moral  importance.  The  same  reason  explains  alsc 
why  it  should  be  to  so  large  an  extent  biographical. 
The  interpreter  of  the  0.  T.  will  have,  among  his 
other  tasks,  to  analyse  in  the  lives  set  before  him 
the  various  yet  generally  mingled  workings  of  the 
spirit  of  holiness  and  of  the  spirit  of  sin.  He  must 
not  fall  into  the  error  of  supposing  that  any  of  the 
lives  are  those  of  perfect  men-;  Scripture  nowhere 
asserts  or  implies  it,  and  the  sins  of  even  the  best 
testify  against  it.  Nor  must  he  expect  to  be  ex 
pressly  informed  of  each  recorded  action,  any  more 
than  of  each  sentiment  delivered  by  the  several 
speakers  in  the  book  of  Job,  whether  it  were  com 
mendable  or  the  contrary ;  nor  must  we  assume,  «a 
some  have  done,  that  Scripture  identifies  itself  with 
every  action  of  a  saintly  man  which,  without  openly 
cond'emning,  it  records.  The  moral  errors  by  which 
the  lives  of  even  the  greatest  0.  T.  saints  were  dis 
figured  are  related,  and  that  for  our  instruction, 
but  not  generally  criticized:  e.  g.  that  of  Abraham 
when,  already  once  warned  in  Egypt,  he  suffered 
the  king  of  Gerar  to  suppose  that  Sarah  was  merely 
his  sister;  or  th«t  of  David,  when,  by  feigning 
himself  mad,  he  practised  deceit  upon  Achish.  Ths 
interpreter  of  Scripture  has  no  warrant  for  shutting 
his  eyes  to  such  errors ;  certainly  not  the  warrant 
of  I>avid,  who  himself  virtually  confused  them  in 
PH.  xiiiv.  (sec  cspeciaily  ver.  13).  He  must  ao- 


518 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


knowledge  and  commend  the  holy  faith  which  lay 
Kt  the  root  of  the  earliest  recorded  deeds  of  Jacob,  a 
faith  rewarded  by  his  becoming  the  heir  of  God's 
promises ;  but  he  must  no  less  acknowledge  and 
condemn  Jacob's  unbrotherly  deceit  and  filial  dis 
obedience,  offences  punished  by  the  sorrows  that 
attended  him  from  his  flight  into  Mesopotamia  to 
the  day  of  his  death.  And  should  he  be  tempted 
to  desire  that  in  such  cases  the  0.  T.  had  distin 
guished  more  directly  and  authoritatively  the  good 
from  the  evil,  he  will  ask,  Would  it  in  that  case 
have  spoken  as  effectually  ?  Are  not  our  thoughts 
more  drawn  out,  and  our  affections  more  engaged, 
by  studying  a  mau's  character  in  the  records  of  his 
life  than  in  a  summary  of  it  ready  prepared  for  us  ? 
Is  it  in  a  dried  and  labelled  collection  of  specimens, 
or  in  a  living  garden  where  the  flowers  have  all  their 
several  imperfections,  that  we  best  learn  to  appre 
ciate  the  true  beauties  of  floral  nature  ?  The  true 
glory  of  the  0.  T.  is  here  the  choice  richness  of  the 
garden  into  which  it  conducts  us.  It  sets  before  us 
just  those  lives — the  lives  generally  of  religious 
men — which  will  best  repay  our  study,  and  will 
most  strongly  suggest  the  moral  lessons  that  God 
would  have  us  learn ;  and  herein  it  is  that,  in  regard 
of  the  moral  aspects  of  the  0.  T.  history,  we  may 
most  surely  trace  the  overruling  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  by  which  the  sacred  historians  wrote. 

But  the  O.  T.  has  further  its  spiritual  and  there 
fore  prophetical  element,  the  result  of  that  organic 
unity  of  sacred  history  by  means  of  which  the  same 
God  who  in  His  wisdam  delayed,  till  the  fulness  of 
time  should  be  come,  the  advent  of  His  Son  into  the 
world,  ordained  that  all  the  career  and  worship  of 
His  earlier  people  should  outwardly  anticipate  the 
glories  of  the  Redeemer  and  of  His  spiritually  ran 
somed  Church.  Our  attention  is  here  first  attracted 
to  the  avowedly  predictive  parts  of  the  0.  T.,  of 
the  prospective  reference  of  which,  at  the  time  that 
they  were  uttered,  no  question  can  exist,  and  the 
majority  of  which  still  awaited  their  fulfilment 
when  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  was  bora.  No 
ue-v  covenant  had  up  to  that  time  been  inaugu 
rated  (Jer.  xxxi.  31-40);  no  temple  built  corre 
sponding  to  that  which  Ezekiel  had  described  (xl. 
seqq.)  ;  nor  had  the  new  David  ere  that  arisen  to 
be  a  prince  in  Israel  (ib.  xxxiv.).  With  Christ  then 
the  new  era  of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy  com 
menced.  In  Him  were  to  be  fulfilled  all  things  that 
were  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  Pro 
phets,  and  in  the  Psalms,  concerning  Him  (Luke 
xxiv.  44 ;  cf.  Matt.  xxvi.  54,  &c.).  A  marvellous 
amount  there  was  in  His  person  of  the  verification 
of  the  very  letter  of  prophecy — partly  that  it  might 
be  seen  how  definitely  all  had  pointed  to  Him; 
partly  because  His  outward  mission,  up  to  the  time 
of  His  death,  was  but  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Ifrael,  and  the  letter  had  not  yet  been  finally 
superseded  by  the  spirit.  Yet  it  would  plainly  be 
impossible  to  suppose  that  the  significance  of  such 
prophecies  as  Zech.  is.  9  was  exhausted  by  the 
mere  outward  verification ;  and  with  the  delivery 
of  Christ  by  His  own  people  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
the  doom  on  the  city  of  Jerusalem  for  rejecting  Him, 
and  the  ratification  of  the  new  covenant  by  His 
death,  and  the  subsequent  mission  of  the  apostles 
to  all  nations,  all  consummated  by  the  final  blow 
which  fell  within  forty  years  on  the  once  chosen 
|*ople  of  God,  the  outward  blessings  had  merged 
for  ever  in  the  spiritual,  and  the  typical  Israelifish 
Tuition  in  the  Church  Universal. 

Hence  the  cn*ire  absence  fro  i  the  N.  T.  of  auy 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

recognition,  by  either  Christ  or  His  apostles,  of  fiich 
prospective  outward  glories  as  the  prophecies,  lite 
rally  interpreted,  would  still  have  implied.  No  hope 
of  outward  restoration  mingled  with  the  sentence  «< 
outward  doom  which  Christ  uttered  forth  on  tin- 
nation  from  which  He  Himself  had  spiung  (Matt.  xxi. 
43,  xxiii.  38,  xxiv.  2);  no  old  outward  deliverances 
with  the  spiritual  salvation  which  He  and  His 
apostles  declared  to  be  still  in  store  for  those  of  the 
race  of  Israel  who  should  believe  on  Him  (Ma't. 
xxiii.  39;  Acts  iii.  19-21;  Rom.  xi. ;  2  Cor.  iii. 
16).  The  language  of"  the  ancient  prophecies  is 
everywhere  applied  to  the  gathering  together,  the 
privileges,  and  the  triumphs  of  the  universal  body 
of  Christ  (John  x.  16,  xi.  52  ;  Acts  h.  39,  xv. 
15-17;  Rom.  ix.  25,  26,32,33,  x.  11,  13,  xi.  25, 
26,  27;  2  Cor.  vi.  16-18  ;  Gal.  iv.  27  ;  1  Pet.  ii. 
4-6,  10  ;  Rev.  iii.  7,  8,  xx.  8,  9,  xxi.  xxii.);  above 
all,  in  the  crowning  passage  of  the  apostolic  inter 
pretation  of  0.  T.  prophecy  (Heb.  xii.  22),  in  which 
the  Christian  Church  is  distinctly  marked  out  as 
the  Zion  of  whose  glory  all  the  prophets  had  spoken. 
Even  apart,  however,  from  the  authoritative  inter 
pretation  thus  placed  upon  them,  the  prophecies 
contain  within  themselves,  in  sufficient  measure, 
the  evidence  of  their  spiritual  import.  It  could  not 
be  that  the  literal  Zion  should  be  greatly  raised  in 
physical  height  (Is.  ii.  2),  or  all  the  Holy  Land 
levelled  to  a  plain  (Zech.  xiv.  10),  or  portioned  out 
by  straight  lines  and  in  rectangles,  without  regard 
to  its  physical  conformation  (Ez.  xlv.)  ;  or  that 
the  city  of  Jerusalem  should  lie  to  the  south  of  the 
Temple  (ib.  xl.  2),  and  at  a  distance  of  five  miles 
from  it  (ib.  xlv.  6),  and  yet  that  it  should  occupy 
its  old  place  (Jer.  xxxi.  38,  39 ;  Zech.  xii.  10) ;  or 
that  holy  waters  should  issue  from  Jerusalem,  in 
creasing  in  depth  as  they  roll  on,  not  through  the 
accession  of  any  tributary  streams,  but  simply  be 
cause  their  source  is  beneath  the  sanctuary  (Ez. 
xlvii.).  Nor  could  it  well  be  that,  after  a  long  loss 
of  genealogies  and  title-deeds,  the  Jews  should  be 
reorganized  in  their  tribes  and  families  (Zech.  xii. 
12-14;  Mai.  iii.  3;  Ez.  xliv.  15,  xlviii.),  and  set- 
tied  after  their  old  estates  (Ez.  xxxvi.  11).  Nor 
again,  that  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  should 
go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship,  not  only  to  the 
festivals  (Zech.  xiv.  16),  but  even  monthly  and 
weekly  (Is.  Ixvi.  23),  and  yet  that  while  Jerusalem 
were  thus  the  seat  of  worship  for  the  whole  world, 
there  should  also  be  altars  everywhere  (Is.  xix.  19, 
Zeph.  ii.  11;  Mai.  i.  11),  both  being  really  but 
different  expressions  of  the  same  spiritual  truth — 
the  extension  of  God's  pure  worship  to  all  nations. 
Nor  can  we  suppose  that  Jews  will  ever  again  out 
wardly  triumph  over  heathen  nations  that  hav« 
long  disappeared  from  the  stage  of  histoiy  (Am.  ix. 
11,  12;  Is.  xi.  14;  Mic.  v.  5;  Ob.  17-21).  Nor 
will  sacrifices  be  renewed  (Ez.  xliii.  &c.)  whea 
Christ  has  by  one  offering  perfected  for  ever  them 
that  are  sanctified ;  nor  will  a  special  sanctity  yet 
attach  to  Jerusalem,  when  the  hour  is  come  that 
"  neither  in  this  mountain  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem  " 
shall  men  worship  the  Father ;  nor  yet  to  the  na 
tural  Israel  (cf.  Joel  iii.  4),  when  in  Christ  there 
is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  all  believers  being  now 
alike  the  circumcision  (Phil.  iii.  3)  and  Abraham's 
seed  (Gal.  iii.  29),  and  the  name  Israel  being  fre 
quently  used  in  the  N.  T.  of  the  whole  Christian 
Church  (Matt.  xix.  28  •  Luke  xxii.  30;  Rom.  xi. 
26  ;  Gal.  vi.  16;  cf.  Rev.  vii.  4,  xxi.  12). 

The  substance  therefore  of  these  prophecies  is  the 
glory  of  the   Redeemer's  .spiritual   kiiifylum:   it  is 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

out  the  form  that  is  derived  from  the  outward  cir 
cumstances  of  the  career  of  God's  ancient  people, 
which  had   passed,  or  all  but  passed,  away  before 
the  fulfilment  of  the  promised  blessings  commenced. 
The  one  kingdom  was  indeed  to  merge  into  rather 
ih;m   to  be  violently  replaced  by  the  other;   the 
holy  seed  of  old  was  to  be  the  stock  of  the  new 
generation  ;  men  of  all  nations  were  to  take  hold  of 
this  skirt  of  the  Jew,  iind  Israelitish  apostles  were 
to  become  the  patriarchs  of  the  new  Christian  com 
munity.      Nor  was  even  the  form  in  which  the 
announcement  of  the  new  blessings  had  been  clothed 
to  be  rudely  cast  aside :  the  imagery  of  the  prophets 
is  on   every  account  justly  dear  to   us,  and  from 
love,  no  less  than  from  habit,  we  still  speak  the 
language  of  Canaan.     But  then  arises  the  question, 
Must  not  this  language  have  been  divinely  designed 
from  the  first  as  the  language  of  God's  Church  ? 
Is  it  easily  to  be  supposed  that  the  prophets,  whose 
writings  form  so  large  a  portion  of  the  Bible,  should 
have  so  extensively  used   the  history  of  the  old 
Israel  as  the  garment  wherein  to  enwrap  their  de 
lineations  of  the  blessings  of  the  new,  and  yet  that 
that  history  should  not  be  in  itself  essentially  an 
anticipation  of  what  the  promised  Redeemer  was  to 
bring  with  him  ?     Besides,  the  typical  import  of 
the  Israelitish  tabernacle  and  ritual  worship  is  im 
plied  in  Heb.  ix.  ("  The  Holy  Ghost  this  signi 
fying"),  and  is  almost  universally  allowed  ;  and  it 
is  not  easy  to  tear  asunder  the  events  of  Israel's 
history  from  the  ceremonies  of  Israel's  worship ; 
nor  yet,  again,  the  events  of  the  preceding  history 
of  the  patriarchs  from  those  of  the  history  of  Israel. 
The  N.  T.   itself  implies  the  typical  import  of  a 
large  part  of  the  0.  T.  narrative.      The  original 
dominion  conferred  upon  man  (1  Cor.  xv.  27  ;  Heb. 
ii.  8),  the  rest  of  God  on  the  seventh  day  (Heb.  iv. 
4),  the  institution  of  marriage  (Eph.  v.  31),  are  in 
it  all  invested  with  a  deeper  and  prospective  mean 
ing.     So  also  the  offering  and  martyrdom  of  Abel 
(Heb.  xi.  4,  xii.  24)  ;  the  preservation  of  Noah  and 
his  family  in  the  ark  (1  Pet.  iii.  21)  ;  the  priest 
hood  of  Melchizedek  (Heb.  vii.,  following  Ps.  ex. 
4)  ;  the  mutual  relation  of  Sarah  and  Hagar,  and  of 
their  children  (Gal.  iv.  22,  seqq.);    the  offering 
and  rescue  of  Isaac  (Rom.  viii.  32;  Heb.  xi.  19); 
the  favour  of  God  to  Jacob  rather  than  Esau  (Rom. 
ix.  10-13,  following  Mai.  i.  2,  3);  the  sojourn  of 
Israel  in  Egypt  (Matt.  ii.  15) ;  the  passover  feast 
'1  Cor.  v.  7,  8);  the  shepherdship  of  Moses  (Heb. 
xiii.  20,  cf.  Is.  Ixiii.  1 1 .  Sept.) ;  his  veiling  of  his 
face  at  Sinai  (2  Cor.  iii.  13)  ;  the  ratification  of  the 
covenant  by  blood  (Heb.  ix.  18,  seqq.)  ;  the  priestly 
character  of  the  chosen  people  (I  Pet.  ii.  9)  ;  God's 
outward  piesence  with  them  (2  Cor.  vi.  16);   the 
various    events   in    their   pilgrimage  through  the 
desert  (1  Cor.  x.),  and  specially  the  eating  of  manna 
from  heaven  (Matt.  iv.  4;  John  vi.  48-51);  the 
lifting  up  of  the  brasen  serpent  (John  iii.  14)  ;  the 
promise  of  the  divine  presence  with  Israel  after  the 
removal  of  Moses,  their  shepherd,  from  them  (Heb 
riii.  5,  cf.  Deut.  xxxi.  6)  ;  the  kingdom  of  Davic 
(Luke  i.   32,   33) ;    and  the  devouring  of  Jonah 
(Matt.  zii.  40).     If  some   of  these   instances  be 
deemed    doubtful,  let  at  least   the   rest   be   duly 
weighed,  aud  this  not  without  regard  to  the  cumu 
lative  force  of  the  whole.     In  the  0.  T.  itself  we 
have,  and  this  even  in  the  latest  times,  events  anc 
persons   expressly    treated    as    typical :     e.  g.    the 
making  the  once-rejected  stone  the  headstone  of  the 
corner  (probably  a  historical  incident  in  the  laying 
>f  the  foundation  of  (he  second  Temple,  Ps.  czviii 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


619 


2) ;  the  arraying  of  Joshua  the  high  priest  with 
air  garments  (Zech.  iii.),  and  the  placing  of  crowns 
n  his  head  to  symbolize  the  union  of  royalty  and 
iriesthood  (Zech.  vi.  9,  seqq.).  A  further  testi 
mony  to  the  typical  character  of  the  history  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  furnished  by  the  typical  character 
f  the  events  related  even  in  the  New.  All  our 
Cord's  miracles  were  essentially  typical,  and  are 
ilmost  universally  so  acknowledged :  the  works  of 
mercy  which  He  wrought  outwardly  on  the  body 
>etokening  His  corresponding  operations  withi* 
man's  soul.  So  too  the  outward  fulfilments  of  pro 
ihecy  in  the  Redeemer's  life  were  types  of  the 
deeper  though  less  immediately  striking  fulfilment 
which  it  was  to  continue  to  receive  ideally  ;  and  if 
is  deeper  and  more  spiritual  significance  underlie 
,he  literal  narrative  of  the  New  Testament,  how 
uch  more  that  of  the  Old,  which  was  so  essentially 
designed  as  a  preparation  for  the  good  things  to 
come !  A  remarkable  and  honourable  testimony  on 
this  subject  was  borne  in  his  later  years  by  De  Wette. 
Long  before  Christ  appeared,"  he  says,  "  the  world 
was  prepared  for  His  appearance :  the  entire  0.  T.  is 
a  great  prophecy,  a  great  type  of  Him  who  was  to 
lorne,  and  did  come.  Who  can  deny  that  the  holy 
seers  of  the  0.  T.  saw,  in  spirit,  the  advent  of  Christ 
ong  beforehand,  and  in  prophetic  anticipations  of 
greater  or  less  clearness  had  presages  of  the  new 
doctrine?  The  typological  comparison  too  of  the 
Old  Testament  with  the  New  was  no  mere  play  of 
"ancy  ;  and  it  is;  scarcely  altogether  accidental  that 
the  evangelic  history,  in  the  most  important  par 
ticulars,  runs  parallel  with  the  Mosaic"  (cited  by 
Tholuck,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  New). 

It  is  not  unlikely  that  there  is  in  many  quarters 
an  unwillingness  to  recognize  the  spiritual  element 
in  the  historical  parts  of  the  0.  T.,  arising  from 
the  fear  that  the  recognition  of  it  may  endangei 
that  of  the  historical  truth  of  the  events  recorded. 
Nor  is  such  danger  altogether  visionary ;  for  one 
sided  and  prejudiced  contemplation  will  be  ever 
so  abusing  one  element  of  Scripture  as  thereby  to 
cast  a  slight  upon  the  rest.  But  this  does  not  affect 
its  existence ;  and  on  the  other  hand  there  are  cer 
tainly  cases  in  which  the  spiritual  element  confirms 
the  outward  reality  of  the  historical  fact.  So  is  it 
with  the  devouring  of  Jonah ;  which  many  would 
consign  to  the  region  of  parable  or  myth,  not  appa 
rently  from  any  result  of  criticism,  which  is  indeed 
at  a  loss  to  find  an  origin  for  the  story  save  in  fact, 
but  simply  from  the  unwillingness  to  give  credit  to 
an  event  the  extraordinary  character  of  which  must 
have  been  patent  from  the  first.  But  if  the  divine 
purpose  were  to  prefigure  in  a  striking  aivl  effective 
manner  the  passage  of  our  Saviour  through  the 
darkness  of  the  tomb,  how  could  any  ordinary 
event,  akin  to  ordinary  human  experience,  ade 
quately  represent  that  of  which  we  have  no  expe 
rience?  The  utmost  perils  of  the  royal  psalmist 
required,  in  Ps.  xviii.,  to  be  heightened  and  com 
pacted  together  by  the  aid  of  extraneous  imagery  in 
order  that  they  might  typify  the  horrors  of  death. 
Those  same  horrors  were  more  definitely  prefigured 
by  the  incarceration  of  Jonah :  it  was  a  marve'Jous 
type,  but  not  more  marvellous  than  the  antitype 
which  it  foreshadowed :  it  testified  by  its  very  wou- 
drousness  that  there  are  gloomy  terrors  beyond  an  / 
of  which  this  world  supplies  the  experience,  butovc; 
which  Christ  should  triumph,  as  Jonah  was  deli 
vered  from  the  belly  of  the  fish. 

Of  another  danger  I  wetting  the  path  of  the  spi 
ritual  interpreter  of  the  0.  T..  we  have  a  warning 


320 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


:u  the  unedifying  puerilities  into  which  some  have 
fallen.  Against  such  he  will  guard  by  forgoing 
too  curious  a  search  for  mere  external  resemblances 
between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  though 
withal  thankfully  recognizing  them  wherever  they 
present  themselves.  His  true  task  will  be  rather  to 
investigate  the  inward  ideas  involved  in  the  0.  T. 
narratives,  institutions,  and  prophecies  themselves 
by  the  aid  of  the  more  perfect  manifestation  of  those 
ideas  in  the  transactions  and  events  of  gofpel-times. 
The  spiritual  interpretation  must  rest  upon  both 
the  literal  and  the  moral ;  and  there  can  be  no  spi 
ritual  analogy  between  things  which  have  nought 
morally  in  common.  One  consequence  of  this  prin 
ciple  will  of  course  be,  that  we  must  never  be  con 
tent  to  rest  in  any  mere  outward  fulfilment  of 
prophecy.  It  can  never,  for  example,  be  admitted 
that  the  ordinance  respecting  the  entireness  of  the 
passover-lamb  had  reference  merely  to  the  preserva 
tion  of  our  Saviour's  legs  unbroken  on  the  cross,  or 
that  the  concluding  words  of  Zech.  ix.  9,  pointed 
merely  to  the  animal  on  which  our  Saviour  should 
outwardly  ride  into  Jerusalem,  or  that  the  sojourn 
of  Israel  in  Egypt,  in  its  evangelic,  reference,  had 
respect  merely  \o  the  temporary  sojourn  of  our  Sa 
viour  in  the  same  country.  However  remarkable 
the  outward  fulfilment  be,  it  must  always  guide  us 
to  some  deeper  analogy,  in  which  a  moral  element 
is  involved.  Another  consequence  of  the  foregoing 
principle  of  interpretation  will  be  that  that  which  was 
ibrbidden  or  sinful  can,  so  far  as  it  was  sinful,  not 
be  regarded  as  typical  of  that  which  is  free  from  sin. 
We  may,  for  example,  reject,  as  altogether  ground 
less,  the  view,  often  propounded,  but  never  proved, 
that  Solomon's  marriage  with  Pharaoh's  daughter 
was  a  figure  of  the  reception  of  the  Gentiles  into 
the  Church  of  the  Gospel.  On  the  other  hand  there 
is  no  more  difficulty  in  supposing  that  that  which 
was  sinful  may  have  originated  the  occasion  for  the 
exhibition  of  some  striking  type,  than  there  is  in 
believing  that  disobedience  brought  about  the  need 
of  redemption.  The  Israelites  sinned  in  demanding 
a  king ;  yet  the  earthly  kingdom  of  David  was  a 
type  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ :  and  it  was  in  con 
sequence  of  Jonah's  fleeing,  like  the  first  Adam, 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  that  he  became  so 
signal  a  type  of  the  second  Adam  in  his  three  days' 
removal  from  the  light  of  heaven.  So  again  that 
which  was  tolerated  rather  than  approved  may  con 
tain  within  itself  the  type  of  something  imperfect,  in 
contrast  to  that  which  is  more  perfect.  Thus  Hagar, 
as  the  concubine  of  Abraham,  represented  the  cove 
nant  at  Sinai ;  but  it  is  only  the  bondage-aspect  of 
that  covenant  which  here  comes  directly  under  con 
sideration,  and  the  children  of  the  covenant,  sym 
bolized  by  Ishmael,  are  those  only  who  cleave  to 
the  element  of  bondage  in  it. 

Yet  withal,  in  laying  down  rules  for  the  Inter 
pretation  of  the  O.  T.,  we  must  abstain  from 
attempting  to  define  the  limits,  or  to  measure  the 
extent  of  its  fulness.  That  fulness  has  certainly 
not  yet  been,  nor  will  by  us  be,  exhausted.  Search 
after  truth,  and  reverence  for  the  native  worth  of 
the  written  Word,  authorize  us  indeed  to  reject  past 
interpretations  of  it  which  cannot  be  shown  to  rest 
on  any  solid  foundation.  Still  all  interpretation  is 
essentially  progressive ;  and  in  no  part  of  the  0.  T. 
GUI  we  tell  the  number  of  meanings  and  bearings, 
beyond  those  with  which  we  are  ourselves  familiar, 
which  may  one  day  be  brought  out,  and  which  then 
not  only  may  approve  themselves  by  their  intrinsic 
reaionablmess,  but  even  may  by  their  mutual  har- 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

mony  and  practical  interest  furnish  additional  evi 
dence  of  the  divine  source  of  that  Scripture  which 
cannot  be  broken. 

C.  QUOTATIONS  FROM  THE  Ou>  TESTAMENT  is 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  . 

The  New  Testament  quotations  from  the  OKI 
form  one  of  the  outward  bonds  of  connexion  between 
the  two  parts  of  the  Bible.  They  are  manifold  in 
kind.  Some  of  the  passages  quoted  contain  pro 
phecies,  or  involve  types  of  which  the  N.  T.  writers 
designed  to  indicate  the  fulfilment.  Others  are  in 
traduced  as  direct  logical  supports  to  the  doctrines 
which  they  were  enforcing.  In  all  cases  which  can 
be  clearly  referred  to  either  of  these  categories,  we 
are  fairly  warranted  in  deeming  the  use  which  has 
been  made  of  the  older  text  authoritative ;  and  from 
these,  and  especially  from  an  analysis  of  the  quota 
tions  which  at  first  sight  present  difficulties,  we 
may  study  the  principles  on  which  the  sacred  appre 
ciation  and  exegesis  of  the  older  scriptures  has  pro 
ceeded.  Let  it  only  be  borne  in  mind  that  however 
just  the  interpretations  virtually  placed  upon  the 
passages  quoted,  they  do  not  profess  to  be  necessa 
rily  complete.  The  contrary  is  indeed  manifest 
from  the  two  opposite  bearings  of  the  same  passage, 
Ps.  xxiv.  1,  brought  out  by  St.  Paul  in  the  course 
of  a  few  verses,  I  Cor.  x.  26,  28.  But  in  many 
instances  also  the  N.  T.  writers  have  quoted  the 
0.  T.  rather  by  way  of  illustration,  than  with  the 
intention  of  leaning  upon  it;  variously  applying 
and  adapting  it,  and  making  its  language  the  vehicle 
of  their  own  independent  thoughts.  It  could  hardly 
well  be  otherwise.  The  thoughts  of  all  who  have 
been  deeply  educated  in  the  Scriptures  naturally 
move  in  scriptural  diction :  it  would  have  beeii 
strange  had  the  writei-s  of  the  N.  T.  formed  excep 
tions  to  the  general  rule. 

It  may  not  be  easy  to  distribute  all  the  quota 
tions  into  their  distinctive  classes.  But  among 
those  in  which  a  prophetical  or  typical  force  is 
ascribed  in  the  N.  T.  to  the  passage  quoted,  may 
fairly  be  reckoned  all  that  are  introduced  with  an 
intimation  that  the  Scripture  was  "  fulfilled."  And 
it  may  be  observed  that  the  word  "  fulfil,"  as 
applied  to  the  accomplishment  of  what  had  been 
predicted  or  foreshadowed,  is  in  the  N..  T.  only  used 
by  our  Lord  Himself  and  His  companion-apostles, 
not  by  St.  Mark  nor  St.  Luke,  except  in  their  reports 
of  our  Lord's  and  Peter's  sayings,  nor  yet  by  St. 
Paul  (Mark  xv.  28,  is  not  genuine).  It  had  grown 
familial4  to  the  original  apostles  from  the  continual 
verification  of  the  O.  T.  which  they  had  beheld  in 
the  events  of  their  Master's  career.  These  had  tes- 
tifi«d  to  the  deep  connexion  between  the  utterances 
of  the  0.  T.  and  the  realities  of  the  Gospel ;  and, 
through  the  general  connexion  in  turn  casting  down 
its  radiance  on  the  individual  points  of  contact,  the 
higher  term  was  occasionally  applied  to  express  a 
relation  for  which,  viewed  merely  in  itself,  weaker 
language  might  have  sufficed.  Three  "  fulfilments  " 
of  Scripture  are  traced  by  St.  Matthew  in  the  inci 
dents  of  our  Saviour's  infancy  (ii.  15,  18,  2.'J). 
He  beheld  Him  marked  out  as  the  true  Israel,  the 
beloved  of  God  with  high  destiny  before  Him,  by 
the  outward  correspondence  between  His  and  Israel's 
sojourn  i~  'i-gypt.  The  sorrowing  of  the  mothers 
of  Bethlehem  for  their  children  was  to  him  a  re 
newal  of  the  grief  for  the  captives  at  Ramah,  which 
grief  Jeremiah  had  described  in  language  suggested 
by  the  record  of  the  patriarchal  grief  for  tho  loss  of 
Joseph :  it  was  thus  a  present  token  (we  need  account 


OLD  TESTAMENT 

it  no  more)  of  the  spiritual  captivity  which  all  out- 
frard  captivities  recalled,  and  from  which,  since  it 
had  been  declared  that  there  was  hope  in  the  end, 
Christ  was  to  prove  the  deliverer.  And  again, 
Christ's  sojourn  in  despised  Nazareth,  was  an  out 
ward  token  of  the  lowliness  of  his  condition  ;  and  if 
the  prophets  had  rightly  spoken,  this  lowliness  was  | 
the  necessary  prelude,  and  therefore,  in  part,  the 
pledge  of  his  future  glory.  In  the  first  and  last  of 
these  cases  the  evangelist,  in  his  wonted  phrase,  ex 
pressly  declares  that  the  events  came  to  pass  that 
that  which  was  spoken  "  might  be  fulfilled :"  Ian-  I 
guage  which  must  not  be  arbitrarily  softened  down. 
In  the  other  case  the  phrase  is  less  definitely  strong :  | 
"  Then  was  fulfilled,"  &c.  The  substitution  of  this  j 
phrase  can,  however,  of  itself  decide  nothing,  for  it 
is  used  of  an  acknowledged  prophecy  in  xxvii.  9. 
And  should  any  be  disposed  on  other  grounds  to 
new  the  quotation  from  Jer.  xxxi.  15,  merely  as 
Wi  adornment  of  the  narrative,  let  them  first  con 
sider  whether  the  evangelist,  who  was  occupied 
with  the  history  of  Christ,  would  be  likely  formally 
to  introduce  a  passage  from  the  0.  T.  merely  as  an 
illustration  of  maternal  grief. 

In  the  quotations  of  all  kinds  from  the  Old  Tes 
tament  in  the  New,  we  find  a  continual  variation  \ 
from  the  letter  of  the  older  Scriptures.     To  this 
variation  three  causes  may  be  specified  as  having 
contributed. 

First,  all  the  N.  T.  writers  quoted  from  the 
Septuagint ;  correcting  it  indeed  more  or  less  by 
the  Hebrew,  especially  when  it  was  needful  for  their 
purpose;  occasionally  deserting  it  altogether;  still 
abiding  by  it  to  so  large  an  extent  as  to  show  that 
it  was  the  primary  source  whence  their  quotations 
were  drawn.  Their  use  of  it  may  be  best  illus 
trated  by  the  corresponding  use  of  our  liturgical  j 
version  of  the  Psalms ;  a  use  founded  on  love  as 
well  as  on  habit,  but  which  nevertheless  we  forgo 
when  it  becomes  important  that  we  should  follow 
the  more  accurate  rendering.  Consequently,  when 
the  errors  involved  in  the  Septuagint  version  do  not 
interfere  with  the  purpose  which  the  N.  T.  writer 
had  in  view,  they  are  frequently  allowed  to  remain 
in  his  quotation :  see  Matt.  xv.  9  (a  record  of  our 
Lord's  words)  ;  Luke  iv.  18  ;  Acts  xiii.  41,  xv.  17  ; 
Rom.  xv.  10;  2  Cor.  iv.  13;  Heb.  viii.  9,  x.  5,xi.  21. 
The  current  of  apostolic  thought  too  is  frequently 
dictated  by  words  of  the  Septuagint,  which  differ 
much  from  the  Hebrew:  see  Rom.  ii.  24;  1  Cor. 
xv.  55  ;  2  Cor.  ix.  7 ;  Heb.  xiii.  15.  Or  even  an 
absolute  interpolation  of  the  Septuagint  is  quoted, 
Heb.  i.  6  (Dent,  xxxii.  43).  On  the  other  hand,  in 
Matt.  xxi.  5  ;  1  Cor.  iii.  19,  the  Septuagint  is  cor 
rected  by  the  Hebrew:  so  too  in  Matt.  ix.  13; 
Luke  xxii.  37,  there  is  an  effort  to  preserve  an 
expressiveness  of  the  Hebrew  which  the  Septuagint 
hxd  lost;  and  in  Matt.  iv.  15,  16 ;  John  xix.  37  ;  1  I 
Cor.  xv.  54,  the  Septuagint  disappears  altogether,  i 
In  Rom.  ix.  33,  we  have  a  quotation  from  the  j 
Septuagint  combined  with  another  from  the  Hebrew. 
In  Mark  xii.  30;  Luke  x.  27;  Rom.  xii.  19,  the  i 
Septuagint  and  Hebrew  are  superadded  the  one 
upoc  the  other.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
which  in  this  respect  stands  alone,  the  Septuagint  is 
uniformly  followed ;  except  in  the  one  remarkable 
quotation,  Heb.  x.  30,  which,  according  neither  with 
the  Hebrew  nor  the  Septuagint,  was  probably  derived 
from  the  last-named  passage,  Rorn.  xii.  19,  where 
with  it  exactly  coincides.  The  quotation  in  1  Cor. 
".  0  seems  to  have  been  derived  not  directly  from 
*!'«' 0.  T.,  b'lt  rather  from  'i  '  'hristian  liturgy  or 


OLD  TESTAMENT  6*21 

other  document  into  which  the  language  of  Is.  hiv. 
4,  had  been  transferred. 

Secondly,  the  N.  T.  writers  must  have  frequently 
quoted  from  memory.  The  0.  T.  had  been  deeply 
instilled  into  their  minds,  ready  for  service,  when 
ever  needed;  and  the  fulfilment  of  its  predictions 
which  they  witnessed,  made  its  utterances  rise  up 
in  life  before  them  :  cf.  John  ii.  17,  22.  It  was  of 
the  very  essence  of  such  a  living  use  of  0.  T.  scrip 
ture  that  their  q  notations  of  it  should  not  of  neces 
sity  be  verbally  exact. 

Thirdly,  combined  with  this,  there  was  an  alt* ra- 
tion  of  conscious  or  unconscious  design.  Sometimes 
the  object  of  this  was  to  obtain  increased  force  • 
hence  the  variation  from  the  original  in  the  form  of 
the  divine  oath,  Rom.  xiv.  11;  or  the  result  "I 
quake,"  substituted  for  the  cause,  Heb.  xii.  21  ;  or 
the  insertion  of  rhetorical  words  to  bring  out  the 
emphasis,  Heb.  xii.  26;  or  the  change  of  person  to 
show  that  what  men  perpetrated  had  its  root  in 
God's  determinate  counsel,  Matt.  xxvi.  31.  Some 
times  an  0.  T.  passage  is  abridged,  and  in  the 
abridgment  so  adjusted,  by  a  little  alteration,  as  to 
present  an  aspect  of  completeness,  and  yet  omit  what 
is  foreign  to  the  immediate  purpose,  Acts  i.  20  ; 
1  Cor.  i.  31.  At  other  times  a  passage  is  enlarged 
by  the  incorporation  of  a  passage  from  another 
source :  thus  in  Luke  iv.  18,  19,  although  the  con 
tents  are  professedly  those  read  by  our  Lord  from 
Is.  Ixi.,  we  have  the  words  "  to  set  at  liberty 
them  that  are  bruised,"  introduced  from  Is.  Iviii. 
6  (Sept.) :  similarly  in  Rom.  xi.  8,  Deut.  xxix.  4 
is  combined  with  Is.  xxix.  10.  In  some  cases  still 
greater  liberty  of  alteration  is  assumed.  In  Rom. 
x.  11,  the  word  iras  is  introduced  into  Is.  xxviii.  16, 
to  show  that  that  is  uttered  of  Jew  and  Gentile 
alike.  In  Rom.  xi.  26,  27,  the  "  to  Zion  "  of  Is. 
lix.  20  (Sept.  (vfKfv  'Sicai')  is  replaced  by  "  out  of 
Sion "  (suggested  by  Is.  ii.  3) :  to  Zion  the  Re 
deemer  had  already  come ;  from  Zion,  the  Christian 
Church,  His  law  was  to  go  forth ;  or  even  from  the 
literal  Jerusalem,  cf.  Luke  xxiv.  47  ;  Rom.  xv.  19, 
for,  till  she  was  destroyed,  the  type  was  still  in  a 
measure  kept  up.  In  Matt.  viii.  17,  the  words  of 
Is.  liii.  4  are  adapted  to  the  divine  removal  of  dis 
ease,  the  outward  token  and  witness  of  that  sin 
which  Christ  was  eventually  to  remove  by  His 
death,  thereby  fulfilling  the  prophecy  more  com 
pletely.  For  other,  though  less  striking,  instances 
of  variation,  see  1  Cor.  xiv.  21 ;  1  Pet.  iii.  15.  In 
some  places  again,  the  actual  words  of  the  original 
are  taken  up,  but  employed  with  a  new  meaning: 
thus  the  tyxoptvos,  which  in  Hab.  ii.  3  merely 
qualified  the  verb,  >s  in  Heb.  x.  37  made  fhe  subject 
to  it. 

Almost  more  remarkable  than  any  alteration  in 
the  quotation  itself,  is  the  circumstance  that  in 
Matt,  xxvii.  9,  Jeremiah  should  be  named  as  the 
author  of  a  prophecy  really  delivered  by  Zechariah: 
the  reason  being,  as  has  been  well  shown  by  Heng- 
stenberg  in  his  Christology,  that  the  prophecy  is 
based  upon  that  in  Jer.  xviii.,  xix.,  and  that  with 
out  a  reference  to  this  original  source  the  most 
essential  features  of  the  fulfilment  of  Zechariah  s 
prophecy  would  be  misunderstood.  The  case  is 
indeed  not  entirely  unique ;  for  in  the  Greek  of 
Mark  i.  2,  3,  where  Mai.  iii.  1  is  combined  with 
Is.  xl.  3,  the  name  of  Isaiah  alone  is  mentioned : 
it  was  on  his  prophecy  that  that  of  Malachi  partly 
depended.  On  the  other  hand  in  Matt.  ii.  23  ; 
John  vi.  45,  the  comprehensive  mention  of  the  pro 
phets  indicates  a  reference  not  only  to  the  passages 


(522 


OLD  TESTAMENT 


more  particularly  contemplated,  Is.  xi.  l.liv.  1.1, 
but  also  to  the  general  tenour  of  what  hud  been 
elsewhere  prophetically  uttered. 

The  above  examples  will  sufficiently  illustrate 
the  freedom  with  which  the  apostles  and  evangelists 
interwove  the  older  Scriptures  into  their  writings. 
It  could  only  result  in  failure  were  we  to  attempt 
any  merely  mechanical  account,  of  variations  from 
the  0.  T.  text  which  are  essentially  not  mechanical. 
That  which  is  still  replete  with  life  may  not  be 
dissected  by  the  anatomist.  There  is  a  spiritual 
meaning  in  their  employment  of  Scripture,  evf>n  as 
there  is  a  spiritual  meaning  in  Scripture  itself.  And 
though  it  would  be  as  idle  to  treat  of  their  quota 
tions  without  reference  to  the  Septuagint,  as  it 
would  be  to  treat  of  the  inner  meaning  of  the  Bible 
without  attending  first  to  the  literal  interpretation, 
<rtill  it  is  only  when  we  pay  regard  to  the  inner 
purpose  for  which  each  separate  quotation  was 
made,  and  the  inner  significance  to  the  writer's 
mind  of  the  passage  quoted,  that  we  can  arrive  at 
any  true  solution  of  the  difficulties  which  the  phe 
nomena  of  these  quotations  frequently  present. 
(Convenient  tables  of  the  quotations,  ranged  in  the 
order  of  the  N.  T.  passages,  are  given  in  the  Intro 
ductions  of  Davidson  and  Home.  A  much  fuller 
table,  embracing  the  informal  verbal  allusions,  and 
ranged  in  the  contrary  order,  but  with  a  reverse 
index,  has  been  compiled  by  Gough,  and  published 
separately,  1855.)  [J.  F.  T.] 

OLIVE  (JVt :  e'Ao/a).    No  tree  is  more  closely 

associated  with  the  history  and  civilization  of  man. 
Our  concern  with  it  here  is  in  its  sacred  relations, 
and  in  its  connexion  with  Judaea  and  the  Jewish 
people. 

Many  of  the  Scriptural  associations  of  the  olive- 
tree  are  singularly  poetical.  It  has  this  remarkable 
interest,  in  the  first  place,  that  its  foliage  is  the 
earliest  that  is  mentioned  by  name,  when  the  watere 
of  the  flood  began  to  retire.  "  Lo !  in  the  dove's 
mouth  was  an  olive-leaf  pluckt  off:  so  Noah  knew 
that  the  waters  were  abated  from  oft'  the  earth  " 
(Gen.  viii.  11).  How  far  this  early  incident  may 
have  suggested  the  later  emblematical  meanings  of 
the  leaf,  it  is  impossible  to  say :  but  now  it  is  as 
difficult  for  us  to  disconnect  the  thought  of  pence 
from  this  scene  of  primitive  patriarchal  history,  as 
from  a  multitude  of  allusions  in  the  Greek  and 
Roman  poets.  Next,  we  find  it  the  most  prominent 
tree  in  the  earliest  allegory.  When  the  trees  invited 
't  to  reign  over  them,  its  sagacious  answer  sets  it 
Defore  us  in  its  characteristic  relations  to  Divine 
worship  and  domestic  life.  "  Should  I  leave  my 
fatness,  wherewith  by  me  they  honour  God  and  man, 
And  go  to  be  promoted  over  the  trees  ?"  (Judg.  ix. 
8,  9).  With  David  it  is  the  emblem  of  prosperity 
and  the  divine  blessing.  He  compares  himself  to 
"  a  green  olive-tree  in  the  house  of  God  "  (Ps.  lii.  8) ; 
and  he  compares  the  children  of  a  righteous  man  to 
the  "olive-branches  round  about  his  table"  (Ps. 
cxxviii.  3).  So  with  the  later  prophets  it  is  the 
symbol  of  beauty,  luxuriance,  and  strength ;  and 
hence  the  symbol  of  religious  privileges :  "  His 
branches  shall  spread,  and  his  beauty  shall  be  as 
the  olive-tree,"  are  the  words  in  the  concluding 
promise  of  Hosta  (xiv.  6).  "  The  Lord  called  thy 
name  a  green  olive-tree,  fair,  and  of  goodly  fruit," 
is  the  expostulation  of  Jeremiah  when  he  foretells 
retribution  for  advantages  abused  (xi.  16).  Here 
we  may  compare  Ecclus.  1.  10.  We  must  bear 
in  mind,  n  reading  this  imagery,  that  the  olive 


OLIVE 

w:\*  among  the  most  abundant  ard  rnaraetjrist'c 
vegetation  of  Judaea.  Thus  after  the  ciplivit'., 
when  the  Israelites  kept  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles, 
we  fina  them,  among  other  branches  for  the  booths, 
bringing  "  olive-branches  "  from  the  "  inoiint  " 
(Neh.  viii.  15).  "The  mount"  is  doubtless  the 
famous  Olivet,  or  Mount  of  Olives,  the  "Olivetum  '' 
of  the  Vulgate.  [Ouvns,  MOUNT  OF.J  Here 
we  cannot  forget  that  the  trees  of  this  sacred  hili 
witnessed  not  only  the  humiliation  and  sorrow  of 
David  in  Absalom's  rebellion  (2  Sam.  xv.  30), 
but  also  some  of  the  most  solemn  scenes  in  the  life 
of  David's  Lord  and  Son  ;  the  prophecy  over  Jeru 
salem,  the  agony  in  the  garden  (GKTIISKMAXK 
itself  means  "  a  press  for  olive-oil "),  and  the 
ascension  to  heaven.  Turning  now  to  the  mystic 
imagery  of  Zechariah  (iv.  3,  11-14),  and  of  St.  John 
in  the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  xi.  3,4),  we  find  the  olive- 
tree  used,  in  both  cases,  in  a  very  remarkable  way. 
We  cannot  enter  into  any  explanation  of  "  the  two 
olive-trees  ...  the  two  olive-branches  .  .  .  the  two 
anointed  ones  that  stand  by  the  Lord  of  the  whole 
earth  "  (Zech.) ;  or  of  "  the  two  witnesses  ...  the 
two  olive-trees  standing  before  the  God  of  the  earth" 
(Rev.) :  but  we  may  remark  that  we  have  here  a 
very  expressive  link  between  the  prophecies  of  the 
0.  T.  and  the  N.  T.  Finally,  in  the  argumentation 
of  St.  Paul  concerning  the  relative  positions  of  the 
Jews  and  Gentiles  in  the  counsels  of  God,  this  tree 
supplies  the  basis  of  one  of  his  most  forcible  alle 
gories  (Rom.  xi.  16-25).  The  Gentiles  are  the 
"wild  olive"  (aypte Xatos),  grafted  in  upon  the 
"good  olive"  (/coAXt«\otos),  to  which  once  the 
Jews  belonged,  and  with  which  they  may  again  be 
incorporated.  It  must  occur  to  any  one  that  the 
natural  process  of  grafting  is  here  inverted,  the 
custom  being  to  engraft  a  good  branch  upon  a  bad 
stock.  And  it  has  been  contended  that  in  the  case 
of  the  olive-tree  the  inverse  process  is  sometimes 
practised,  a  wild  twig  being  engrafted  to  strengthen 
the  cultivated  olive.  Thus  Mr.  Ewbank  (Comm. 
on  Romans,  ii.  112)  quotes  from  Palladius: 
"  Fecundat  sterills  pingues  oleaster  olivas, 

Kt  quae  non  novit  munera  ferre  docet." 
But  whatever  the  fact  may  be,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
have  recourse  to  this  supposition :  and  indeed  it 
confuses  the  allegory.  'Nor  is  it  likely  that  St.  Paul 
would  hold  himself  tied  by  horticultural  laws  it. 
using  such  an  image  as  this.  Perhaps  the  very 
stress  of  the  allegory  is  in  this,  that  the  grafting  is 
contrary  to  nature  (iropa  <pvfftt>  tveKevrpiffB-ns 
v.  24). 

This  discussion  of  the  passage  in  the  Romans 
leads  us  naturally  to  speak  of  the  cultivation  of  the 
olive-tree,  its  industrial  applications,  and  general 
characteristics.  It  grows  freely  almost  everywhere 
on  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  ;  but,  as  has 
been  said  aboTe,  it  was  peculiarly  abundant  in  Pa 
lestine.  See  Dent.  vi.  11,  viii.  8,  xxviii.  40.  Olive- 
yards  are  a  matter  of  course  in  descriptions  of  the 
country,  like  vineyards  and  corn-fields  (Judg.  xv. 
5  ;  1  Sam.  viii.  14).  The  kings  had  very  extensive 
ones  (1  Chr.  xrvii.  28).  Even  now  the  tree  is  very 
abundant  in  the  country.  Almost  every  village  h;u 
its  olive-grove.  Certain  districts  may  be  specified 
where  at  various  times  this  tree  has  been  very 
luxuriant.  Of  Asher,  on  the  skirts  of  the  Lebanon, 
it  was  prophesied  that  he  should  "  dip  his  foot  in 
oil  "  (Deut.  xxxiii.  24).  The  immediate  neigh 
bourhood  of  Jerusalem  has  already  been  mentioned. 
In  the  article  on  GAZA  we  have  alluded  to  its  larse 
ninl  productive  olivo-wixxls  in  the  j>ro.-eut  day  :  ruul 


OLIVE 

we  rany  refer  to  Van  de  Velde's  Syria  (i.  386)  for 
their  extent  and  beauty  in  the  vale  of  Shechem. 
The  cultivation  of  the  olive-tree  had  the  closest 
connexion  with  the  domestic  life  of  the  Israelites, 
their  trade,  and  even  their  public  ceremonies  and 
religious  worship.  A  good  illustration  of  the  use 
of  olive-oil  for  food  is  furnished  by  2  Chr.  ii.  10, 
where  we  are  told  that  Solomon  provided  Hiram's 
men  with  "  twenty  thousand  baths  of  oil."  Com 
pare  Ezra  iii.  7.  Too  much  of  this  product  was 
supplied  tor  home  consumption  :  hence  we  find  the 
country  sending  it  as  an  export  to  Tyre  (Ez.  xxvii. 
17),  and  to  Egypt  (Hos.  xii.  I).  This  oil  was  used 
in  coronations :  thus  it  was  an  emblem  of  sove 
reignty  (1  Sam.  x.  1,  xii.  3,  5).  It  was  also  mixed 
with  the  offerings  in  sacrifice  (Lev.  ii.  1,  2,  6,  15). 
Even  in  the  wilderness  very  strict  directions  were 
^iven  that,  in  the  tabernacle,  the  Israelites  were 
U>  have  "  pure  oil  olive  beaten  for  the  light,  to 
cause  the  lamp  to  burn  always"  (Ex.  xxvii.  20). 
For  the  burning  of  it  in  common  lamps  see  Matt. 
xxv.  3,  4,  8.  The  use  of  it  on  the  hair  and  skin 
was  customary,  and  indicative  of  cheerfulness  (Ps. 
xxiii.  5,  Mitt.  vi.  17).  It  was  also  employed  medi 
cinally  in  surgical  cases  (Luke  x.  34)."  See  again 
Mark  vi.  13  ;  Jam.  v.  14,  for  its  use  in  combination 
with  prayer  on  behalf  of  the  sick.  [OiL  ;  ANOINT.] 
Nor,  in  enumerating  the  useful  applications  of  the 
olive-tree,  must  we  forget  the  wood,  which  is  hard 
and  solid,  with  a  fine  grain,  and  a  pleasing  yellowish 
tint.  In  Solomon's  temple  the  cherubim  were  "  of 
olive-tree"  (1  K.  vi.  23),  as  also  the  doors  (vers.  31, 
32)  and  the  posts  (ver.  33).  As  to  the  berries 
(Jam.  ifi.  12,  2  Esd.  xvi.  29),  which  produce  the 
oil,  they  were  sometimes  gathered  by  shaking  the 
tree  (Is.  xxiv.  13),  sometimes  by  beating  it  (Deut. 
xxiv.  20).  Then  followed  the  treading  of  the  fruit 
(Deut.  xxxiii.  24 ;  Mic.  vi.  15).  Hence  the  mention 
of  "  oil-fats"  (Joel  ii.  24).  Nor  must  the  flower 
be  passed  over  without  notice : 

"  SI  bene  floruerint  oleae,  nitidisslmus  annus." 

Ov.  Fast.  v.  265. 

The  wind  was  dreaded  by  the  cultivator  of  the 
olive;  for  the  least  ruffling  of  a  breeze  is  apt  to 
cause  the  flowers  to  fall : 

"  Florebant  oleae :  ventl  nocuere  protervi."— Ibid.  321. 
Thus  we  see  the  force  of  the  words  of  Eliphaz  the 
Temanite :  "  He  shall  cast  off  his  flower  like  the 
olive  "  (Job  xv.  33).  It  is  needless  to  add  that  the 
locust  was  a  formidable  enemy  of  the  olive  (Amos 
iv.  9).  It  happened  not  unfrequently  that  hopes 
were  disappointed,  and  that  "  the  labour  of  the 
olive  failed"  (Hab.  iii.  17).  As  to  the  growth  of  the 
tree,  it  thrives  beet  in  warm  and  sunny  situations. 
It  is  of  a  moderate  height,  with  knotty  gnarled 
trunks,  and  a  smooth  ash-coloured  bark.  It  grows 
slowly,  but  it  lives  to  an  immense  age.  Its  look  is 
singularly  indicative  of  tenacious  vigour :  and  this 


a  All  these  subjects  admit  of  very  full  illustration  from 
Greek  and  Roman  writers.  And  if  this  were  not  a  Biblical 
nrticle,  we  should  dwell  upon  other  classical  associations 
of  the  tree  which  supplied  the  victor's  wreath  at  the 
Olympic  games,  and  a  twig  of  which  is  the  familiar  mark 
on  the  coins  of  Athens.  See  Judith  xv.  13. 

b  DTlMP  rby®  :  a^/Wi?  n>v  eAaui»  :  clivus 
olivarum.  The  names  applied  to  the  mount  in  the  .Tar- 
gams  are  as  follows  :  — ND\T  "1-113  or  N'JVT  (2  Sam. 
xv.  30,  2  K.  xxiii.  13,  Ez.  xi.  23,  Zech.  xiv.  4),  NHK'D  '13 
(Cant  viii.  3;  and  Gen.  vlii.  11,  Pseudojon.  only)'.  The 
latter  Is  the  name  employed  in  the  MIshna  (Parah,  c.  3). 
Its  meaning  is  "  oil "  or  "  ointment."  The  modern  Arabic 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OP  62fc 

is  the  force  of  what  is  said  in  Scripture  of  its  "  green 
ness,"  as  emblematic  of  strength  and  prosperity. 
The  leaves,  too,  are  not  deciduous.  Those  who  see 
olives  for  the  first  time  are  occasionally  disappointed 
by  the  dusty  colour  of  their  foliage  ;  but  those  who 
are  familiar  with  them  find  an  inexpressible  charm 
in  the  rippling  changes  of  these  slender  grey-greer, 
leaves.  Mr.  Ruskin's  pages  in  the  Stones  of  Venice 
(iii.  175-177)  are  not  at  all  extravagant. 

The  literature  of  this  subject  is  very  extensive. 
All  who  have  written  on  the  trees  and  plants  of 
Scripture  have  devoted  some  space  to  the  olive. 
One  especially  deserves  to  be  mentioned,  viz.,  Thom 
son,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  pp.  51-57.  But,  for 
Biblical  illustration,  no  later  work  is  so  useful  as 
the  Hicrobotanicon  of  Celsius,  the  friend  and  patron 
of  Linnaeus.  [J.  S.  H.] 

OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF  (DTWn  "I"  :  rb 
opos  Ttav  t\aiS>v :  Mons  Olivarum).  The  exact 
expression  "the  Mount  of  Olives"  occurs  in  the 
0.  T.  in  Zech.  xiv.  4  only  ;  in  the  other  places  of  the 
0.  T.  in  which  it  is  referred  to  the  form  employed 
is  the  "ascent  of'b  the  olives"  (2  Sam.  xv.  30  ; 
A.  V.  inaccurately  "  the  ascent  of  Mount  Olivet  "), 
or  simply  "  the  Mount"  (Neh.  viii.  15),  "  the  mount 
facing  Jerusalem  "  (1  K.  xi.  7),  or  "  the  mountain 
which  is  on  the  east  side  of  the  city  "  (Ez.  xi.  23) 

In  the  N.  T.  three  forms  of  the  word  occur:  1 
The  usual  one,  "the  Mount  of  Olives"  (rd  bpos 
T&v  4\a.i£>v).  2.  By  St.  Luke  twice  (xix.  29  ; 
xxi.  37);  "the  mount  called  Elaion  "  (rb  6.  TO 
Ka\.  f\atcav  ;  Itec.  Text,  'EAotwi/,  which  is  followed 
by  the  A.  V.).  3.  Also  by  St.  Luke  (Acts  i.  12), 
the  "  mount  called  Olivet"  (8.  rd  Ka\.  t\aiwvos). 

It  is  the  well-known  eminence  on  the  east  of 
Jerusalem,  intimately  and  characteristically  con 
nected  with  some  of  the  gravest  and  most  signi 
ficant  events  of  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament, 
the  New  Testament,  and  the  intervening  times,  and 
one  of  the  firmest  links  by  which  the  two  are 
united  ;  the  scene  of  the  flight  of  David  and  the  tri 
umphal  progress  of  the  Son  of  David,  of  the  idolatry 
of  Solomon,  and  the  agony  and  betrayal  of  Christ. 

If  any  thing  were  wanting  to  fix  the  position  of 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  it  would  be  amply  settled  by 
the  account  of  the  first  of  the  events  just  named,  as 
related  in  2  Sam.  xv.,  with  the  elucidations  of  the 
LXX.  and  Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  9).  David's  object 
was  to  place  the  Jordan  between  himself  and 
Absalom.  He  therefore  flies  by  the  road  calls! 
"the  road  of  the  wilderness"  (xv.  23).  This  leads 
him  across  the  Kidron,  past  the  well-known  olive- 
tree0  which  marked  the  path,  tip  the  toilsome  ascent 
of  the  mount — elsewhere  exactly  described  as  facing 
Jerusalem  on  the  east  (1  K.  xL  7  ;  Ez.  xi.  23  ; 
Mk.  xiii.  3) — to  the  summit,*  where  was  a  conse 
crated  spot  at  which  he  was  accustomed  to  worship 
God.'  At  this  spot  he  again  performed  his  devo- 


name  for  the  whole  ridge  seems  to  be  Jebel  es-Zeittin,  i.  e. 
Mount  of  Olives,  or  Jebd  Tdr,  the  mount  of  the  mount, 
meaning,  the  important  mount. 

°  The  allusion  to  this  tree,  which  survives  in  the  LXX 
of  ver.  18,  has  vanished  from  the  present  Hebrew  text. 

d  The  mention  of  the  summit  marks  the  road  to  have 
been  that  over  the  present  Mount  of  the  Ascension.  The 
southern  road  keeps  below  the  summit  the  whole  way. 

•  The  expression  of  the  text  denotes  that  this  was  a 
known  arid  frequented  spot  for  devotion.  The  Tnlmudlste 
pay  that  it  was  the  place  at  which  the  Ark  and  Tabernacle 
were  first  caught  sight  of  in  approaching  Jerusalem  ove" 
the  Mount.  Spots  from  which  a  sanctuary  is  vtsi!  le  are 
still  considered  in  the  Fast  as  tttmsrlves  aacra)  (Se( 


624 


OLIVES, 


-  OF 


lions — it  must  have  seemed  for  the  last  time — and 
look  his  farewell  of  the  city,  "  with  many  tears,  as 
one  who  had  lost  his  kingdom."  He  then  turned 
the  summit,  and  after  passing  Bahurim,  probably 
about  where  Bethany  now  stands,  continued  the 
descent  through  the  "dry  and  thirsty'  land"  until 
he  arrived  "  weary  "  at  the  bank  of  the  river  (Joseph. 
Ant.  vii.  9,  §2-6  ;  2  Sam.  xvi.  14,  xvii.  21,  22). 

This,  which  is  the  earliest  mention  f  of  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  is  also  a  complete  introduction  to  it.  It 
stands  forth,  with  every  feature  complete,  almost  as 
if  in  a  picture.  Its  nearness  to  Jerusalem — the 
ravine  at  its  foot — the  olive-tree  at  its  base — the 
steep  road  through  the  trees*  to  the  summit— the 
remarkable  view  from  thence  of  Zion  and  the  city, 
spread  opposite  and  almost  seeming  to  rise  towards 
the  spectator— the  very  "  stones  and  dust"'  of  the 
vugged  and  sultry  descent— all  are  caught,  nothing 
essential  is  omitted. 

The  remaining  references  to  it  in  the  Old  Testa 
ment  are  but  slight.  The  "  high  places  "  which 
Solomon  constructed  for  the  gods  of  his  numerous 
wives,  were  in  the  mount  "  facing  Jerusalem  " 
(IK.  xi.  7) — an  expression  which  applies  to  the 
Mount  of  Olives  only,  ;\s  indeed  all  commentators 
apply  it.  Modern  tradition  (see  below)  has,  after 
some  hesitation,  fixed  the  site  of  these  sanctuaries 
on  the  most  southern  of  the  four  summits  into 
which  the  whole  range  of  the  mount  is  divided, 
mid  therefore  far  removed  from  that  principal 
summit  over  which  David  took  his  way.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  the  0.  T.  to  countenance  this, 
or  to  forbid  our  believing  that  Solomon  adhered  to 
the  spot  already  consecrated  in  the  time  of  his  father. 
The  reverence  which  in  our  days  attaches  to  the 
spot  on  the  very  top  of  the  principal  summit,  is 
probably  only  changed  in  its  object  from  what  it 
was  in  the  time  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

During  the  next  four  hundred  years  we  have  only 
the  brief  notice  of  Josiah's  iconoclasms  at  this  spot. 
Ahaz  and  Manasseh  hac  no  doubt  maintained  and 
enlarged  the  original  erections  of  Solomon.  These 
Josiah  demolished.  He  "  defiled  "  the  high  places, 
broke  to  pieces  the  uncouth  and  obscene  symbols 
which  deformed  them,  cut  down  the  images,  or  pos 
sibly  the  actual  groves,  of  Ashtaroth,  and  effectually 
disqualified  them  for  worship  by  filling  up  the 
cavities  with  human  bones  (2  K.  xxiii.  13,  14). 
Another  two  hundred  years  and  we  find  a  further 
mention  of  it — this  time  in  a  thoroughly  different 
connexion.  It  is  now  the  great  repository  for  the 
vegetation  of  the  district,  planted  thick  with  olive, 
and  the  bushy  myrtle,  and  the  feathery  palm. 
"  Go  out "  of  the  city  "  into  the  mount  " — was 
the  command  of  Ezra  for  the  celebration  of  the 
first  anniversary  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  after 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

the  Return  from  Babylon — "  and  fetch  olive  branches 
and  '  oil-tree '  branches,  and  myrtle-boughs,  uinl 
palm-leaves,  and  branches  of  thick  trees  to  make 
booths,  as  it  is  written"  (Neh.  viii.  15). 

The  cultivated  and  umbrageous  character  which 
is  implied  in  this  description,  as  well  as  in  the  name 
of  the  mount,  it  retained  till  the  N.  T.  times. 
Caphnatha,  Bethphage,  Bethany,  all  names  of  places 
on  the  mount,  and  all  derived  from  some  fruit  or 
vegetation,  are  probably  of  late  origin,  certainly  of 
late  mention.  True,  the  "  palm-branches  "  bonie 
by  the  crowd  who  flocked  out  of  Jerusalem  to 
welcome  the  "  Prophet  of  Nazareth,"  were  ob 
tained  trom  the  city  (John  xii.  13) — not  impossibly 
from  the  gardens  of  the  Temple  (Ps.  xcii.  12,  13)  ; 
but  the  boughs  which  they  strewed  on  the  gronnd 
before  Him,  were  cut  or  torn  down  from  the  fig  or 
olive  trees  which  shadowed  the  road  round  the  hill. 

At  this  point  in  the  history  it  will  be  convenient 
to  describe  the  situation  and  appearance  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives.  It  is  not  so  much  a  "  mount " 
as  a  ridge,  of  rather  more  than  a  mile  in  length, 
running  in  general  direction  north  and  south ;  cover 
ing  the  whole  eastern  side  of  the  city,  and  screening 
it  from  the  bare,  waste,  uncultivated  country — 
the  "  wilderness  " — which  lies  beyond  it,  and  fills 
up  the  space  between  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  the 
Dead  Sea.  At  its  north  end  the  ridge  bends  round 
to  the  west,  so  as  to  form  an  enclosure  to  the  city 
on  that  side  also.  But  there  is  this  difference,  that 
whereas  on  the  north  a  space  of  nearly  a  mile  of 
tolerably  level  surface  intervenes  between  the  walls 
of  the  city  and  the  rising  ground,  on  the  east  the 
mount  is  close  to  the  walls,  parted  only  by  that 
which  from  the  city  itself  seems  no  parting  at  all — 
the  narrow  ravine  of  the  Kidron.  You  descend  from 
the  Golden  Gateway,  or  the  Gate  of  St.  Stephen, 
by  a  sudden  and  steep  declivity,  and  no  sooner  is 
the  bed  of  the  valley  reached  than  you  again  com 
mence  the  ascent  of  Olivet.  So  great  is  the  effect 
of  this  proximity,  that,  partly  from  that,  and  partly 
from  the  extreme  clearness  of  the  air,  a  spectator 
from  the  western  part  of  Jerusalem  imagines  Olivet 
to  rise  immediately  from  the  side  of  the  Haram  area 
(Porter,  Handb.  103a ;  also  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  186). 

It  is  this  portion  which  is  the  real  Mount  of 
Olives  of  the  history.  The  northern  part — in  all 
probability  Nob,*  Mizprh,  and  Scopus — is,  though 
geologically  continuous,  a  distinct  mountain ;  and 
the  so-called  Mount  of  Evil  Counsel,  directly  south 
of  the  Coenaculum,  is  too  distant  and  too  completely 
isolated  by  the  trench  of  the  Kidron  to  claim  the 
name.  We  will  therefore  confine  ourselves  to  this 
portion.  In  general  height  it  is  not  very  much 
above  the  city :  300  feet  higher  than  the  Temple 
mount,™  hardly  more  than  100  above  the  so-called 


the  citations  in  Lightfoot  on  Luke  xxiv.  50 ;  and  compare 
MI/.PEH,  li.  389,  note.)  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the 
expression  is  "  where  they  worshipped  God,"  not  Jehovah : 
es  if  It  were  one  of  the  old  sanctuaries  of  Elohlm,  like 
Bethel  or  Moreh. 

'  Pfc.  Uiii.— by  its  title  and  by  constant  tradition— Is 
tsfs.Ted  to  this  duy.  The  word  rendered  "  thirsty "  :n 
ver.  1  is  the  same  as  that  rendered  "  weary "  in  2  S»ai. 
xrt.  14-^y. 

*  The  author  of  theTargum  Pseudojonathan  introduces 
it  still  earlier  According  to  him,  the  olive-leaf  which 
the  dove  brought  back  to  Noah  was  plucked  from  it. 

h  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  mount  had  not  yet 
acxpired  its  now  familiar  name.  All  that  Is  said  Is  thut 
IHvid  "  usot-mlcil  l>y  the  asrent  of  the  olives." 


'  At  Baburim,  while  David  and  his  men  kept  the  road 
Shimei  scrambled  along  the  slope  of  the  overhanging  hit] 
above,  even  with  him,  and  threw  stones  at  him,  and 
covered  him  with  dust  (xvi.  13). 
k  See  MIZPEH,  vol.  ii.  389. 

m  The  following  are  the  elevations,  of  the  neighbour 
hood  (above  the  Mediterranean),  according  to  Van  d« 
Velde  (.Memoir,  179)  :— 

Mount  of  Olives  (Church  of  Ascension)    2724  ft. 

"Zion"  (the  Coenaculum)     2537,, 

"Moriah"  (//oramarea)        2429,, 

N.W.  comer  of  city 2810  „ 

Valley  of  Kidron  (Gethsemane)    ..     ..    2281,, 

I)o.  (BireyuV) 1996  „ 

Bethany 1803,, 

ji.niftji      -rat*. 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

Zion.  But  this  is  to  some  extent  made  up  for  by 
the  close  proximity  which  exaggerates  its  height, 
especially  on  the  side  next  to  it. 

The  word  "  ridge  "  has  been  used  above  as  the 
only  one  available  for  an  eminence  of  some  length 
and  even  height,  but  that  word  is  hardly  accurate. 
There  is  nothing  "  ridge-like  "  in  the  appearance  of 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  or  of  any  other  of  the  lime 
stone  hills  of  this  district  of  Palestine ;  all  is  rounded, 
swelling,  and  regular  in  form.  At  a  distance  its 
outline  is  almost  horizontal,  gradually  sloping  away 
at  its  southern  end:  but  when  approached,  and 
especially  when  seen  from  below  the  eastern  wall 
of  Jerusalem,  it  divides  itself  into  three,  or  rather 
perhaps  four,  independent  summits  or  eminences. 
Proceeding  from  N.  to  S.  these  occur  in  the  follow 
ing  order : — Galilee,  or  Viri  Galilaei ;  Mount  of  the 
Ascension  ;  Prophets,  subordinate  to  the  last,  and 
almost  a  part  of  it ;.  Mount  of  Oifence. 

1.  Of  these  the  central  one,  distinguished  by  the 
minaret  and  domes  of  the  Church  of  the  Ascension, 
is  in  every  way  the  most  important.  The  church 
and  the  tiny  hamlet  of  wretched  hovels  which  sur 
round  it, — the  Kefr  et-T&r — are  planted  slightly 
on  the  Jordan  side  of  the  actual  top,  but  not  so  far 
as  to  hinder  their  being  seen  from  all  parts  of  the 
western  environs  of  the  mountain,  or,  in  their  turn, 
commanding  the  view  of  the  deepest  recesses  of  the 
Kidron  Valley  (Porter,  Handb.  103).  Three  paths 
lead  from  the  valley  to  the  summit.  The  first 
— a  continuation  of  the  path  which  descends  from 
the  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  tomb  of  the  Virgin — 
passes  under  the  north  wall  of  the  enclosure  o: 
Gethsemane,  and  follows  the  line  of  the  depression 
between  the  centre  and  the  northern  hill.  The 
second  parts  from  the  first  about  50  yards  beyonc 
Gethsemane,  and  striking  off  to  the  right  up  th 
very  breast  of  the  hill,  surmounts  the  projection  on 
which  is  the  traditional  spot  of  the  Lamentation  ovei 
Jerusalem,  and  thence  proceeds  directly  upwards  to 
the  village.  This  is  rather  shorter  than  the  former 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  much  steeper,  and  the 
ascent  extremely  toilsome  and  difficult.  The  thin 
leaves  the  other  two  at  the  N.E.  corner  of  Geth 
semane,  and  making  a  considerable  detour  to  thi 
south,  visits  the  so-called  "  Tombs  of  the  Prophets,' 
and,  following  a  very  slight  depression  which  occur 
at  that  part  of  the  mount,  arrives  in  its  turn  a 
the  village. 

Of  these  three  paths  the  first,  from  the  fac 
that  it  follows  the  natural  shape  of  the  ground,  is 
unquestionably,  older  than  the  others,  which  deviat 
in  pursuit  of  certain  artificial  objects.  Every  con 
sideration  is  in  favour  of  its  being  the  road  take 
by  David  in  his  flight.  It  is,  with  equal  probability 
that  usually  taken  by  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  i 
their  morning  and  evening  transit  between  Jeru 
salem  and  Bethany,  and  that  also  by  which  th 
Apostles  returned  to  Jerusalem  after  the  Ascension 
If  the  "  Tombs  of  the  Prophets  "  existed  before  th 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  (and  if  they  are  the  Pen 
stereon  of  Josephus  they  did),  then  the  third  road 
next  in  antiquity.  The  second — having  probabl 
been  made  for  the  convenience  of  reaching  a  spo 
the  reputation  of  which  is  comparatively  modern — 
must  be  the  most  recent. 

The  central  hill,  which  we  are  now  considering 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


62  5 


»  The  above  catalogue  has  been  compiled  from 
resmins,  Doubdan,  and  Mislin.  The  last  of  these  work 
with  great  pretension  to  accuracy,  is  very  inaccural 
Collateral  references  to  other  works  are  occasional 
#ven. 

VOL.  II. 


urports  to  contain  the  sites  of  some  of  the  most 

cred  and  impressive  events  of  Christian  history. 

uring  the  middle  ages  most  of  these  were  pro- 

cted  by  an  edifice  of  some  sort ;  and  to  judge  iron* 

reports  of  the  early  travellers,  the  mount  must 

one  time  have  been  thickly  covered  with  churches 

nd  convents.     The  following  is  a  complete  list  of 

lese,  as  far  as  the  writer  has  been  able  to  ascertain 

lem. 

1.  Commencing  at  the  Western  foot,  and  going 
•adually  up  the  Hill." 
Tomb  of  the  Virgin :   containing  also   those  of 

Joseph,  Joachim,  and  Anna. 
Gethsemane:  containing 
Olive  garden. 

"Cavern  of  Christ's  Prayer  and  Agony. 
(A  Church  here  in  the  time  of  Jerome 
and  Willibald.) 

Rock  on  which  the  3  disciples,  slept. 
*Place  of  the  capture  of  Christ.     (A  Church 

in  the  time  of  Bernard  the  Wise.) 
ipot  from  which  the  Virgin  witnessed  the  stoning 

of  St.  Stephen. 

Do.  at  which  her  girdle  dropped  during  her  As 
sumption. 

Do.  of  our  Lord's  Lamentation  over  Jerusalem, 
Luke  xir.  41 .  (A  Church  here  formerly,  called 
Dominus  flevtt ;  Surius,  in  Mislin,  ii.  476.) 
Do.  on  which  He  first  said  the  Lord's  Prayer,  or 
wrote  it  on  the  stone  with  His  finger  (Sae- 
wulf,  E.  Tr.  42).  A  splendid  Church  here 
formerly.  Maundeville  seems  to  give  this  as 
the  spot  where  the  Beatitudes  were  pronounced 
(E.  Tr.  177). 

Do.  at  which  the  woman  taken  in  adultery  was 
brought  to  Him  (Bernard  the  Wise,  E.  Tr.  28). 
*Tombs  of  the  Prophets  (Matt,  xxiii.  29):  contain 
ing,  according  to  the  Jews,  those  of  Haggai  and 
Zechariah. 

Cave  in  which  the  Apostles  composed  the  Creed  : 
called  also  Church  of  St.  Mark  or  of  the  12 
Apostles. 
Spot  at  which  Christ  discoursed  of  the  Judgment 

to  come  (Matt.  xxiv.  3). 

Cave  of  St.  Pelagia:  according  to  the  Jews,  sepul 
chre  of  Huldah  the  Prophetess. 
*Place   of  the   Ascension.     (Church,    with   subse 
quently  a  large  Augustine  convent  attached.) 
Spot  at  which  the  Virgin  was  warned  of  her  death 
by  an  angel.     In  the  valley  between  the  As 
cension  and  Viri  Galilaei  (Maundeville,  177, 
and  so   Doubdan) ;    but  Maundrell   (E.   Tr. 
470)  places  it  close  to  the  cave  of  Pelagia. 
Viri  Galilaei.      Spot   from   which   the    Apostles 
watched  the  Ascension:  or  at  which  Christ 
first  appeared  to  the  3  Maries  after  His  Resur 
rection  (Tobler,  76  note}. 

2.  On  the  East  side,  descending  from  the  Church 
of  the  Ascension  to  Bethany. 
The  field  in  which  stood  the  fruitless  fig-tree. 
Bethphage. 

Bethany :  House  of  Lazarus.     (A  Church  there  in 
Jerome's  time ;  Lib.  de  Situ,  &c.  "  Bethan-a.") 
*Tomb  of  Lazarus. 

*Stone  on  which  Christ  was  sitting  when  Martha 
and  Mary  came  to  Him. 


o  Plenary  Indulgence  is  accorded  by  the  Church  of  lloinc 
to  those  who  recite  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  the  Ave  M?jrte 
at  the  spots  marked  thus  (*). 


626 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


The  majority  of  these  sacred  spots  now  command 
little  or  no  attention ;  but  three  still  remain,  suffi 
ciently  sacred — if  authentic — to  consecrate  any  place. 
These  are :  1 .  Gethsemane,  at  the  foot  of  the  mount. 
2.  The  place  of  the  Lamentation  of  our  Saviour  over 
Jerusalem,  half-way  up:  and  3.  The  spot  from  which 
He  ascended,  on  the  summit. 

(1.)  Of  these,  Gethsemane  is  the  only  one  which 
has  any  claim  to  be  authentic.  Its  claims,  however, 
are  considerable  ;  they  are  spoken  of  elsewhere. 

(2.)  The  first  person  who  attached  the  Ascension 
of  Christ  to  the  Mount  of  Olives  seems  to  have  been 
the  Empress  Helena  (A.D.  325).  Eusebius  ( Vit. 
Const,  iii.  §43)  states  that  she  erected  as  a  memo 
rial  of  that  event  a  sacred  house  f  of  assembly  on 
Jie  highest  part  of  the  mount,  where  there  was  a 
cave  which  a  sure  tradition  (\6yos  £\7j(W)s)  testi 
fied  to  be  that  in  which  the  Saviour  had  imparted 
mysteries  to  His  disciples.  But  neither  this  account, 
nor  that  of  the  same  author  (Euseb.  Demonst. 
Evang.  vi.  18)  when  the  cave  is  again  mentioned,  do 
more  than  name  the  Mount  of  Olives,  generally,  as 
the  place  from  which  Christ  ascended :  they  fix  no 
definite  spot  thereon.  Nor  does  the  Bourdeaux  Pil 
grim,  who  arrived  shortly  after  the  building  of  the 
church  (A.D.  333),  know  anything  of  the  exact 
spot.  He  names  the  Mount  of  Olives  as  the  place 
where  our  Lord  used  to  teach  His  disciples ;  mentions 
that  a  basilica  of  Constantine  stood  there  ...  he 
carefully  points  out  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration 
in  the  neighbourhood  (1)  but  is  silent  on  the  As 
cension.  From  this  time  to  that  of  Arculf  (A.D. 
700)  we  have  no  information,  except  the  casual  re 
ference  of  Jerome  (A.D.  390),  cited  below.  In  that 
immense  interval  of  370  years,  the  basilica  of  Con 
stantine  or  Helena  had  given  way  to  the  round 
church  of  Modestus  (Tobler,  92  note),  and  the  tra 
dition  had  become  firmly  established.  The  church 
was  open  to  the  sky  "  because  of  the  passage  of  the 
Lord's  body,"  and  on  the  ground  in  the  centre  were 
the  prints  of  His  feet  in  the  dust  (pulvere).  The 
cave  or  spot  hallowed  by  His  preaching  to  His  dis 
ciples  appeai-s  to  have  been  moved  off  to  the  north 
of  Bethany  (Early  Travels,  6). 

Since  that  day  many  ctianges  in  detail  have 
occurred :  the  "  dust "  has  given  way  to  stone, 
in  which  the  print  of  first  one,  then  two  feet,  was 
recognized,1!  one  of  which  by  a  strange  fate  is  said 
now  to  rest  in  the  Mosk  of  the  Aksa.r  The  buildings 
too  have  gone  through  alterations,  additions,  and 
finally  losses,  which  has  reduced  them  to  their 
present  condition: — a  raosk  with  a  paved  and  un 
roofed  court  of  irregular  shape  adjoining,  round 
which  are  ranged  the  altars  of  various  Christian 
churches.  In  the  centre  is  the  miraculous  stone  sur 
mounted  by  a  cupola  and  screened  by  a  Moslim 
Kibleh  or  praying-place,*  with  an  alter  attached,  on 


f  itpbv  olxov  «KATj<ria«.  This  church  was  surmounted 
by  a  conspicuous  gilt  cross,  the  glitter  of  which  was  visible 
far  and  wide.  Jerome  refers  to  it  several  times.  See 
especially  Epitaph.  Paulae,  "  crux  rutilans,"  and  his  com 
ment  on  Zeph.  I.  IS. 

i  Even  the  toes  were  made  out  by  some  (Tobler,  p.  108, 
note). 

"  The  •'  Chapel  of  the  foot  of  Isa  "  is  at  the  south  end 
of  the  main  aisle  of  the  Aksa,  almost  under  the  dome. 
A  ttached  to  its  northern  side  Is  the  Pulpit.  At  the  time 
of  AH  Bey's  visit  (Ii.  218,  and  plate  Ixxi.)  it  was  called 
Sidna  Aisa,  Lord  Jesus ;  but  he  says  nothing  of  the  foot 
mark. 

•  See  th<"  plan  of  the  edifice,  in  its  present  condition,  on 
JiiP  margin  of  Sig.  Pierottt's  map,  ln61.  Other  plans  an- 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OP 

which  the  Christians  are  permitted  once  a  y««r  to 
say  mass  (Williams,  H.  C.  ii.  445).  But  through 
all  these  changes  the  locality  of  the  Ascension  has 
remained  constantly  the  same. 

The  tradition.no  doubt  arose  from  the  fact  of 
Helena's  having  erected  her  memorial  church  on 
the  summit  of  the  hill.  It  has  been  pointed  out 
that  she  does  not  appear  to  have  had  any  intention  of 
fixing  on  a  precise  spot ;  she  desired  to  erect  a  me 
morial  of  the  Ascension,  and  this  she  did  on  the 
summit  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,  partly  no  doubt 
because  of  its  conspicuous  situation,  but  munly 
because  of  the  existence  there  of  the  sacred  cavern 
in  which  our  Lord  had  taught.'  It  took  nearly  three 
centuries  to  harden  and  narrow  this  general  recognition 
of  the  connexion  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  with  Christ, 
into  a  lying  invention  in  contradiction  of  the  Gospel 
narrative  of  the  Ascension.  For  a  contradiction  it 
undoubtedly  is.  Two  accounts  of  the  Ascension 
exist,  both  by  the  same  author — the  one,  Luke  xxiv. 
50,  51,  the  other,  Acts  i.  6-11.  The  former  only  of 
these  names  the  place  at  which  our  Lord  ascended. 
That  place  was  not  the  summit  of  the  Mount,  but 
Bethany—"  He  led  them  out  as  far  as  to  Bethany  " 
— on  the  eastern  slopes  of  the  Mount  nearly  a  mile 
beyond  the  traditional  spot."  The  narrative  of  the 
Acts  does  not  name  the  scene  of  the  occurrence,  but 
it  states  that  after  it  had  taken  place  the  Apostles 
"returned  to  Jerusalem  from  the  mount  called 
Olivet,  which  is  from  Jerusalem  a  sabbath  day's 
journey."  It  was  their  natural,  their  only  route; 
but  St.  Luke  is  writing  for  Gentiles  ignorant  of  the 
localities,  and  therefore  he  not  only  names  Olivet, 
but  adds  the  general  information  that  it — that  is, 
the  summit  and  main  part  of  the  mount — was  a 
sabbath  day's  journey  from  Jerusalem.  The  speci 
fication  of  the  distance  no  more  applies  to  Bethany 
on  the  further  side  of  the  mount  than  to  Gethse- 
mane  on  the  nearer. 

And  if,  leaving  the  evidence,  we  consider  the  re 
lative  fitness  of  the  two  spots  for  such  an  event — 
and  compare  the  retired  and  wooded  slopes  around 
Bethany,  so  intimately  connected  with  the  last  period 
of  His  life  and  with  the  friends  who  relieved  the 
dreadful  pressure  of  that  peiiod,  and  to  whom  He 
was  attached  by  such  binding  ties,  with  an  open 
public  spot  visible  from  eveiy  part  of  the  city,  and 
indeed  for  miles  in  every  direction — we  shall  have 
no  difficulty  in  deciding  which  is  the  more  appro 
priate  scene  for  the  last  act  in  the  earthly  sojourn  of 
One  who  always  shunned  publicity  even  before  His 
death,  and  whose  communications  after  His  resur 
rection  were  confined  to  His  disciples,  and  marked 
by  a  singular  privacy  and  reserve. 
•  (8.)  The  third  of  the  three  traditionary  spots  men 
tioned — that  of  the  Lamentation  over  Jerusalem 
(Luke  xix.  41-44) — is  not  more  happily  chosen  than 

given  in  Quaresmlus,  ii.  318,  and  B.  Amieo,  No.  34. 
Arculf 's  sketch  is  in  Tobler  (Silnahquelle,  *c.). 

1  Since  writing  this,  the  writer  has  observed  that  Mr. 
Stanley  has  taken  the  same  view,  almost  in  the  sam«, 
words.  (See  S.  &  P.  ch.  xiv.  454.) 

•  The  Mount  of  Olives  seems  to  be  used  for  Bethany 
also  In  Luke  xxi.  37,  compared  with  Matt,  xxi.  17,  xxvi.  6, 
Mark  xiv.  3.  The  morning  walk  from  Bethany  did  not 
at  any  rate  terminate  with  the  day  after  His  arrival  at 
Jerusalem.  (See  Mark  xi.  20.)  One  mode  of  reconciling 
the  two  narratives— which  do  not  need  reconciling — is  to 
say  that  the  district  of  Bethany  extended  to  the  summit 
of  the  mount.  But  "  Bethany"  in  the  N.  T.  is  not  a  dis 
trict  but  a  village ;  and  it  was  "  as  far  as  "  that  well-known 
place  Unit  '  He  Ird  them  forth." 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

that  of  the  Ascension.  It  is  on  a  mamelon  or  pro 
tuberance  which  projects  from  the  slope  of  the  breast 
of  the  hill,  about  300  yards  above  Gethsemane.  The 
sacred  narrative  requires  a  spot  on  the  road  from 
Bethany,  at  which  the  city  or  temple  should  sud 
denly  come  into  view:  but  this  is  one  which  can 
only  be  reached  by  a  walk  of  several  hundred 
yards  over  the  breast  of  the  hill,  with  the  temple 
and  city  full  in  sight  the  whole  time.  It  is  also 
pretty  evident  that  the  path  which  now  passes  the 
spot,  is  subsequent  in  date  to  the  fixing  of  the  spot. 
As  already  remarked,  the  natural  road  lies  up  the 
valley  between  this  hill  and  that  to  the  north,  and 
no  one,  unless  with  the  special  object  of  a  visit  to  this 
spot,  would  take  this  very  inconvenient  path.  The 
inappropriateness  of  this  place  has  been  noticed  by 
many ;  but  Mr.  Stanley  was  the  first  who  gave  it  its 
death-blow,  by  pointing  out  the  true  spot  to  take  its 
p'ace.  In  a  well-known  passage  of  Sinai  and  Pales 
tine  (1 90-193),  he  shows  that  the  road  of  our  Lord's 
"  Triumphal  entry  "  must  have  been,  not  the  short 
and  steep  path  over  the  summit  used  by  small  parties 
of  pedestrians,  but  the  longer  and  easier  route  round 
the  southern  shoulder  of  the  southern  of  the  three 
divisions  of  the  mount,  which  has  the  peculiarity  of 
presenting  two  successive  views  of  Jerusalem  :  the 
first  its  south-west  portion — the  modern  Zion  ;  the 
second,  after  an  interval,  the  buildings  on  the  1  emple 
mount,  answering  to  the  two  points  in  the  narrative — 
the  Hosanna  of  the  multitude,  the  weeping  of  Christ. 
2.  We  have  spoken  of  the  central  and  principal 
portion  of  the  mount.  Next  to  it  on  the  southern 
side,  separated  from  it  by  a  slight  depression,  up 
which  the  path  mentioned  above  as  the  third  takes 
its  course,  is  a  hill  which  appears  neither  to  possess, 
nor  to  have  possessed,  any  independent  name.  It 
is  remarkable  only  for  the  fact  that  it  contains  the 
"  singular  catacomb  "  known  as  the  "  Tombs  of  the 
Prophets,"  probably  in  allusion  to  the  words  of 
Christ  (Matt,  xxiii.  29).  Of  the  origin,  and  even 
of  the  history,  of  this  cavern  hardly  anything  is 
known.  It  is  possible  that  it  is  the  "  rock  called 
Peristereon,"  named  by  Josephus  (B.J.  v.  12,  §2) 
in  describing  the  course  of  Titus' s  great  wall  *  of  cir- 
cumvallation,  though  there  is  not  much  to  be  said 
for  that  view  (see  Rob.  iii.  254  note).  To  the 
earlier  pilgrims  it  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
known ;  at  least  their  descriptions  hardly  apply  to 
its  present  size  or  condition.  Mr.  Stanley  (S.  fy  P. 
453)  is  inclined  to  identify  it  with  the  cave  men 
tioned  by  Eusebius  as  that  in  which  our  Lord 
taught  His  disciples,  and  also  with  that  which  is 
mentioned  by  Arculf  and  Bernard  as  containing 
"  the  four  tables "  of  our  Lord  (Early  Travels, 
4  and  28).  The  first  is  not  improbable,  but  the 
cave  of  Arculf  and  Bernard  seems  to  have  been 
down  in  the  valley  not  far  from  the  tomb  of  the 
Virgin,  and  on  the  spot  of  the  betrayal  (E.  T.  28), 
therefore  close  to  Gethsemane. 


OLIVES.  MOUNT  OF 


627 


*  The  wall  seems  to  have  crossed  the  Kidron  from 
about  the  present  St.  Stephen's  Gate  to  the  mount  on  the 
opposite  side.  It  then  "  turned  south  and  encompassed  the 
mount  as  far  as  the  rock  called  the  dovecot  (axpi  r>js 
iTepi<rTep«Ji'os  (coAovjixeV))?  TrtVpas),  and  the  other  hill 
which  lies  next  it,  and  is  over  the  valley  of  Slloam." 
Feristereon  may  be  used  as  a  synonym  for  columbarium, 
a  lute  Latin  word  for  an  excavated  cemetery ;  and  there  is 
parbaps  some  analogy  between  it  and  the  Wady  Hammam, 
or  Valley  of  Pigeons,  In  the  neighbourhood  of  Tiberias, 
the  rocky  sides  of  which  abound  In  caves  and  perforations. 
Or  it  may  be  one  of  those  half-Hebrew,  half-Greek  appel 
lations,  which  there  is  reason  to  believe  Josephus  bestows 
on  siMjie  of  '.he  localities  of  Palestine,  and  which  have  yet 


3.  The  most  southern  portion  of  the  Mount  OJ 
Olives  is  that  usually  known  as  the  "  Mount  ol 
Orlcnce  "  Mons  Offensionis,  though  by  the  Arabs 
called  Baten  el  ffawa,  "  the  bag  of  the  wind."  It 
rises  next  to  that  last  mentioned  ;  and  in  the  hollow 
between  the  two,  more  marked  than  the  depressions 
between  the  more  northern  portions,  runs  the  road 
from  Bethany,  which  was  without  doubt  the  road 
of  Christ's  entry  to  Jerusalem. 

The  title  Mount  of  Offence,*  or  of  Scandal,  was  be 
stowed  on  the  supposition  that  it  is  the  "  Mount  of 
Corruption,"*  on  which  Solomon  erected  the  high 
places  for  the  gods  of  his  foreign  wives  (2  K. 
xxiii.  13 ;  IK.  xi.  7).  This  tradition  appears  to 
be  of  a  recent  date.  It  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Jewish  travellers,  Benjamin,  hap-Parchi,  or  Pe- 
tachia,  and  the  first  appearance  of  the  name  or 
the  tradition  as  attached  to  that  locality  among 
Christian  writers,  appears  to  be  in  John  of  Wivtz- 
burg  (Tobler,  80  note)  and  Brocardus  (Descriptio 
Ter.  S.  cap.  ix.)  both  of  the  13th  century.  At 
that  time  the  northern  summit  was  believed  to 
have  been  the  site  of  the  altar  of  Chemosh  (Bro 
cardus),  the  southern  one  that  of  Molech  only 
(Thietmar,  Peregr.  xi.  2). 

The  southern  summit  is  considerably  lower  than 
the  centre  one,  and,  as  already  remarked,  it  is  much 
more  definitely  separated  from  the  surrounding  por 
tions  of  the  mountain  than  the  others  are.  It  is  also 
sterner  and  more  repulsive  in  its  form.  On  the  south 
it  is  bounded  by  the  Wady  en-Nar,  the  continua 
tion  of  the  Kidron,  curving  round  eastward  on  its 
dreary  course  to  S.  Saba  and  the  Dead  Sea.  From 
this  barren  ravine  the  Mount  of  Offence  rears  its 
rugged  sides  by  acclivities  barer  and  steeper  than 
any  in  the  northern  portion  of  the  mount,  and  its 
top  presents  a  bald  and  desolate  surface,  contrasting 
greatly  with  the  cultivation  of  the  other  summits, 
and  which  not  improbably,  as  in  the  case  of  Mount 
Ebal,  suggested  the  name  which  it  now  bears.  On 
the  steep  ledges  of  its  western  face  clings  the  ill- 
favoured  village  of  Silwdn,  a  few  dilapidated  towere 
rather  than  houses,  their  gray  bleared  walls  hardly 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  rock  to  which  they 
adhere,  and  inhabited  by  a  tribe  as  mean  and  re 
pulsive  as  their  habitations.  [SlLOAM.] 

Crossing  to  the  back  or  eastern  side  of  this  moun 
tain,  on  a  half-isolated  promontory  or  spur  which 
overlooks  the  road  of  our  Lord's  progress  from 
Bethany,  are  found  tanks  and  foundations  and  other 
remains,  which  are  maintained  by  Dr.  Barclay 
(City,  &c.  66)  to  be  those  of  Bethphage  (see  also 
Stewart,  Tent  and  Khan,  322). 

4.  The  only  one  of  the  four  summits  remaining 
to  be  considered  is  that  on  the  north  of  the  "  Mount 
of  Ascension  " — the  Karem  es-Seyad,  or  Vineyard 
of  the  Sportsman  ;  or,  as  it  is  called  by  the  modern 
Latin  and  Greek  Christians,  the  Viri  Galilaei.  This 
is  a  hill  of  exactly  the  same  character  as  the  Mount 

to  be  investigated.  Tischendorf  (  Travels  in  the  East,  176) 
is  wrong  in  saying  that  Josephus  "  always  calls  it  the 
Dovecot."  He  mentions  it  only  this  once. 

y  In  German,  Berg  des  Aergernisses. 

*  JVriK'Sn  "in.  This  seems  to  be  connected  etymo- 
loglcally  in  some  way  with  the  name  by  which  the  mount 
is  occasionally  rendered  in  the  Targums  —  NHK'JD  "1-113 
(Jonathan,  Cant.  viii.  9  ;  Pseudojon.  Gen.  vlli.  11).  One 
is  probably  a  play  on  the  other. 

Mr.  Stanley  (S.  &  P.  188,  note)  argues  that  the  Mount 
of  Corruption  was  the  northern  hill  (Viri  Galilaei),  becauss 
the  threp  sanctuaries  were  south  of  it,  and  therefore  on  the 
other  three  summits. 

2  S  2 


62b 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 


of  the  Ascension,  and  so  nearly  its  equal  in  height 
that  few  travellers  agree  as  to  which  is  the  more 
lofty.  The  summits  of  the  two  are  about  400 
yards  apart.  It  stands  directly  opposite  the  N.E. 
corner  of  Jerusalem,  and  is  approached  by  the 
path  between  it  and  the  Mount  of  Ascension,  which 
strikes  at  the  top  into  a  cross  path  leading  to  el- 
Isawiyeh  and  Anata.  The  Arabic  name  well  reflects 
the  fruitful  character  of  the  hill,  on  which  there  are 
several  vineyards,  besides  much  cultivation  of  other 
kinds.  The  Christian  name  is  due  to  the  singular 
tradition,  that  here  the  two  angels  addressed  the 
Apostles  after  our  Lord's  ascension — "  Ye  men  of 
Galilee ! "  This  idea,  which  is  so  incompatible,  on 
account  of  the  distance,  even  with  the  traditional 
spot  of  the  Ascension,  is  of  late  existence  and  inex 
plicable  origin.  The  first  name  by  which  we  en 
counter  this  hill  is  simply  "  Galilee,"  y  TaXiXo/a, 
(Perdiccas,  cir.  A.D.  1250,  in  Reland,  Pal.  cap. 
Hi.).  Brocardus  (A.D.  1280)  describes  the  moun 
tain  as  the  site  of  Solomon's  altar  to  Chemosh 
(Descr.  cap.  ix.),  but  evidently  knows  of  no  name 
tor  it,  and  connects  it  with  no  Christian  event. 
This  name  may,  as  is  conjectured  (Quaresmius  ii. 
319,  and  Reland,  341),  have  originated  in  its  being 
the  custom  of  the  Apostles,  or  of  the  Galilaeans 
generally,  when  they  came  up  to  Jerusalem,  to  take 
up  their  quarters  there;  or  it  may  be  the  echo  or 
distortion  of  an  ancient  name  of  the  spot,  possibly 
the  Geliloth  of  Josh,  xviii.  17 — one  of  the  land 
marks  of  the  south  boundary  of  Benjamin,  which 
has  often  puzzled  the  topographer.  But,  whatever 
its  origin,  it  came  at  last  to  be  considered  as  the 
actual  Galilee  of  northern  Palestine,  the  place  at 
which  our  Lord  appointed  to  meet  His  disciples 
after  His  resurrection  (Matt,  xxviii.  10),  the  scene 
of  the  miracle  of  Cana  (Reland,  338).  This  trans- 
rerence,  at  once  so  extraordinary  and  so  instructive, 
arose  from  the  same  desire,  combined  with  the  same 
astounding  want  of  the  critical  faculty,  which  en 
abled  the  pilgrims  of  the  middle  ages  to  see  without 
perplexity  the  scene  of  the  Transfiguration  (Bour- 
des-ir  Pilgr.),  of  the  Beatitudes  (Maundeville,  E.  T. 
177),  and  of  the  Ascension,  all  crowded  together 
on  the  single  summit  of  the  central  hill  of  Olivet. 
It  testified  to  the  same  feeling  which  has  brought 
together  the  scene  of  Jacob's  vision  at  Bethel,  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac  on  Moriah,  and  of  David's  offering 
in  the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah,  on  one  hill ;  and 
which  to  this  day  has  crowded  within  the  walls  of 
one  church  of  moderate  size  all  the  events  connected 
with  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ. 

In  the  8th  century  the  place  of  the  angels  was 
represented  by  two  columns  •  in  the  Church  of  the 
Ascension  itself  (Willibald,  E.  Tr.  19).  So  it  re 
mained  with  some  trifling  difference,  at  the  time  of 
Saewulf's  visit  (A.D.  1 102),  but  there  was  then  also 
a  chapel  in  existence — apparently  on  the  northern 
summit — purporting  to  stand  where  Christ  made  His 
first  appearance  after  the  Resurrection,  and  called 
"  Galilee."  So  it  continued  at  Maundeville's  visit 
(1322).  In  1580  the  two  pillars  were  still  shown 
in  the  Church  of  the  Ascension  (Radzivil),  but  in 
the  16th  century  (Tobler,  75)  the  tradition  had  re 
linquished  its  ancient  and  more  appropriate  seat,  and 
thenceforth  became  attached  to  the  northern  summit, 
where  Maundrell  (A.D.  1697)  encountered  it  (E.  T. 
471),  and  where  it  even  now  retains  some  hold,  the 

"  These  columns  appear  to  have  been  seek  as  late  as 
*..».  1580  by  Kudztvil  (Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  127,  note). 

»•  There  seems  to  be  some  doubt  whether  this  was  nn 
hnmuU  ceremony.  Jerome  {Epitaph.  r<iulae,  }1U)  dis- 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

name  Kalilea  being  occasionally  applied  to  it  by  th.? 
Arabs.  (See  Pococke  and  Scholz,  in  Tobler,  72.) 
An  ancient  tower  connected  with  the  tradition  was  ic 
course  of  demolition  during  Maundrell's  visit,  "* 
Turk  having  bought  the  field  in  which  it  stood." 

The  presence  of  the  crowd  of  ch.irohes  and  other 
edifices  implied  in  the  foregoing  description  must 
have  rendered  the  Mount  of  Olives,  during  the 
early  and  middle  ages  of  Christianity,  entirely  un 
like  what  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  Jewish  king 
dom  or  of  our  Lord.  Except  the  high  places  on  the 
summit  the  only  buildings  then  to  be  seen  were 
probably  the  walls  of  the  vineyards  and  gardens, 
and  the  towers  and  presses  which  were  their  inva 
riable  accompaniment.  But  though  the  churches 
are  nearly  all  demolished  there  must  be  a  consider 
able  difference  between  the  aspect  of  the  mountain 
now  and  in  those  days  when  it  received  its  name 
from  the  abundance  of  its  olive-groves.  It  does 
not  now  stand  so  preeminent  in  this  respect  among 
the  hills  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  "  It 
is  only  in  the  deeper  and  more  secluded  slope 
leading  up' to  the  northernmost  summit  that  these 
venerable  trees  spread  into  anything  like  a  forest." 
The  cedars  commemorated  by  the  Talmud  (Light- 
foot,  ii.  305),  and  the  date-palms  implied  in  the 
name  Bethany,  have  fared  still  worse :  there  is  not 
one  of  either  to  be  found  within  many  miles.  This 
change  is  no  doubt  due  to  natural  causes,  variations 
of  climate,  &c. ;  but  the  check  was  not  improbably 
given  by  the  ravages  committed  by  the  army  of 
Titus,  who  are  stated  by  Josiphus  to  have  stripped 
the  country  round  Jerusalem  for  miles  and  miles 
of  every  stick  or  shrub  for  the  banks  constructed 
during  the  siege.  No  olive  or  cedar,  however  sacred 
to  Jew  or  Christian,  would  at  such  a  time  escape 
the  axes  of  the  Roman  sappers,  and,  remembering 
how  under  similar  circumstances  every  root  and 
fibre  of  the  smallest  shrubs  were  dug  up  for  fuel  by 
the  camp-followers  of  our  army  at  Sebastopol,  it 
would  be  wrong  to  deceive  ourselves  by  the  belief 
that  any  of  the  trees  now  existing  are  likely  to  be 
the  same  or  even  descendants  of  those  which  were 
standing  before  that  time. 

Except  at  such  rare  occasions  as  the  passage  of 
the  caravan  of  pilgrims  to  the  Jordan,  there  must 
also  be  a  great  contrast  between  the  silence  and 
loneliness  which  now  pervades  the  mount,  and  the 
busy  scene  which  it  presented  in  later  Jewish  times. 
Bethphage  and  Bethany  are  constantly  referred  to 
in  the  Jewish  authors  as  places  of  much  resort  for 
business  and  pleasure.  The  two  large  cedars  already 
mentioned  had  below  them  shops  for  the  sale  of 
pigeons  and  other  necessaries  for  worshippers  in  the 
Temple,  and  appear  to  have  driven  an  enormous 
trade  (see  the  citations  in  Lightfoot,  ii.  39,  305). 
Two  religious  ceremonies  performed  there  must 
also  have  done  much  to  increase  the  numbers  who 
resorted  to  the  mount.  The  appearance  of  the  new 
moon  was  probably  watched  for,  certainly  pro 
claimed,  from  the  summit — the  long  torches  waving 
to  and  fro  in  the  moonless  night  till  answered  from 
the  peak  of  Kw-n  Surtabeh ;  and  an  occasion  to 
which  the  Jews  attached  so  much  weight  would  be 
sure  to  attract  a  concourse.  The  second  ceremony 
referred  to  was  burning  of  the  Red  Heifer.6  This 
soiemn  ceremonial  was  enacted  on  the  central  mount, 
and  in  a  spot  so  carefully  specified  that  it  would 


tinctly  says  so ;  but  the  Rabbis  assert  tnat  from  Moses  to 
the  Captivity  it  was  performed  but  once  ;  from  the  Cap 
tivity  to  the  Instruction  oight  times  (Lightfoot,  Ii.  306). 


OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF 

Seem  not  difficult  to  fix  it.  It  was  due  east  of  the 
tnncttuuy,  and  at  such  an  elevation  on  the  mount 
that  the  officiating  priest,  as  he  slew  the  animal 
and  sprinkled  her  blood,  could  see  the  facade  of  the 
sanctuary  through  the  east  gate  of  the  Temple. 
To  this  spot  a  viaduct  was  constructed  across  the 
valley  on  a  double  row  of  arches,  so  as  to  raise  it 
far  above  all  possible  proximity  with  graves  or 
other  defilements  (see  citations  in  Lightfoot,  ii.  39). 
The  depth  of  the  valley  is  such  at  this  place  (about 
350  feet  from  the  line  of  the  south  wall  of  the 
present  Haram  area)  that  this  viaduct  must  have 
been  an  important  and  conspicuous  work.  It  was 
probably  demolished  by  the  Jews  themselves  on  the 
approach  of  Titus,  or  even  earlier,  when  Pompey 
led  his  army  by  Jericho  and  over  the  Mount  of 
Olives.  This  would  account  satisfactorily  for  its 
not  being  alluded  to  by  Josephus.  During  the  siege 
the  10th  legion  had  its  fortified  camp  and  batteries 
on  the  top  of  the  mount,  and  the  first,  and  some  of 
the  fiercest,  encounters  of  the  siege  took  place  here. 

"  The  lasting  glory  of  the  Mount  of  Olives,"  it 
has  been  well  said,  "  belongs  not  to  the  Old  Dis 
pensation,  but  to  the  New.  Its  very  barrenness 
of  interest  in  earlier  times  sets  forth  the  abundance 
of  those  associations  which  it  derives  from  the 
closing  scenes  of  the  sacred  history.  Nothing,  per 
haps,  brings  before  us  more  strikingly  the  contrast 
of  Jewish  and  Christian  feeling,  the  abrupt  and 
inharmonious  termination  of  the  Jewish  dispen 
sation — if  we  exclude  the  culminating  point  of  the 
Gospel  history — than  to  contrast  the  blank  which 
Olivet  presents  to  the  Jewish  pilgrims  of  the  middle 
ages,  only  dignified  by  the  sacrifice  of  '  the  red 
heifer ;'  and  the  vision  too  great  for  words,  which 
it  offers  to  the  Christian  traveller  of  all  times,  as 
the  most  detailed  and  the  most  authentic  abiding- 
place  of  Jesus  Christ.  By  one  of  those  strange 
coincidences,  whether  accidental  or  borrowed,  which 
occasionally  appear  in  the  Rabbinical  writings,  it  is 
said  in  the  Midrash,"  that  the  Shechinah,  or  Pre 
sence  of  God,  after  having  finally  retired  from 
Jerusalem,  '  dwelt '  three  years  and  a  half  on  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  to  see  whether  the  Jewish  people' 
would  or  would  not  repent,  calling,  '  Return  to  me, 
0  my  sons,  and  I  will  return  to  you ;'  '  Seek  ye 
the  Lord  while  He  may  be  found,  call  upon  Him 
*vhile  He  is  near ;'  and  then,  when  all  was  in  vain, 
returned  to  its  own  place.  Whether  or  not  this 
story  has  a  direct  allusion  to  the  ministrations  of 
Christ,  it  is  a  true  expression  of  His  relation  respec 
tively  to  Jerusalem  and  to  Olivet.  It  is  useless  to 
seek  for  traces  of  His  presence  in  the  streets  of  the 
since  ten  times  captured  city.  It  is  impossible  not 
to  find  them  in  the  free  space  of  the  Mount  of 
Olives"  (Stanley,  Sin.  and  Pal.  189). 

A  monograph  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  exhausting 
every  source  of  information,  and  giving  the  fullest 
references,  will  be  found  in  Tobler's  Siloahquelle 
und  der  Oelberg,  St.  Gallen,  1852.  The  ecclesias 
tical  traditions  are  in  Quaresmius,  Elucidatio  Terrae 
Sanctae,  ii.  277-340,  &c.  Doubdan's  account  (Le 
Voyage  de  la  Tcrre  Sainte,  Paris,  1657)  is  excel 
lent  and  his  plates  very  correct.  The  passages 
relating  to  the  mount  in  Mr.  Stanley's  Sinai  and 
Palestine  (p.  185-195,  452-454)  are  full  of  in 
struction  and  beauty,  and  in  fixing  the  spot  of  our 
Lord's  lamentation  over  Jerusalem  he  has  certainly 


OMK1 


629 


made  one  of  the  most  important  disco? eri('s  evei 
made  in  relation  to  this  nteresting  locality.  [G.] 

OLIVET  (2  Sam.  xv.  30;  Acts  i.  12),  pro 
bably  derived  from  the  Vulgate,  mons  qui  vocatur 
Oliveti  in  the  latter  of  these  two  passages.  ~Se» 
OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF.] 

OLYM'PAS  ('OXtmiras:  Olympias},  a  Chris- 
tian  at  Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  15),  perhaps  of  the  house 
hold  of  PhilologMS.  It  is  stated  by  Pseudo-Hippo- 
lytus  that  he  was  one  of  the  seventy  disciples,  and 
underwent  martyrdom  at  Rome:  and  Baronius 
ventures  to  give  A.D.  69  as  the  date  of  his  death. 

[W.  T.  B.] 

OLYM'PIUS  ('OAV/MTI'OJ :  Otympius}.  One  of 
the  chief  epithets  of  the  Greek  deity  Zeus,  so  called 
from  Mount  Olympus  in  Thessaly,  the  abode  of 
the  gods  (2  Mace.  vi.  2).  [See  JUPITER,  vol.  i. 
p.  1175.] 

OMAE'RTJS  ('Iffparipos :  Abramus).  AMRAM 
of  the  sons  of  Bani  (1  Esd.  ix.  34;  comp.  Ezr.  x. 
34).  The  Syriac  seems  to  have  read  "  Ishmael." 

O'MAB  OD'lK :  'tlpdp ;  Alex,  'ft/iefi/  in  Gen. 

xxxvi.  11 :  Omar).  Son  of  Eliphaz  the  firstborn 
of  Esau,  and  "  duke  "  or  phylarch  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  11,  15;  1  Chr.  i.  36).  The  name  is  sup 
posed  to  survive  in  that  of  the  tribe  of  Amir  Arabs 
east  of  the  Jordan.  Bunsen  asserts  that  Omar  was 
the  ancestor  of  the  Bne  'Hammer  in  northern 
Edom  (Bibelwerk,  Gen.  xxxvi.  11),  but  the  names 
are  essentially  different. 

O'MEGA  (2).  The  last  letter  of  the  Greek 
alphabet,  as  Alpha  is  the  first.  It  is  used  meta 
phorically  to  denote  the  end  of  anything:  "  I  am 
Alpha  and  Omega,  the  beginning  and  the  ending  .  . . 
the  first  and  the  last"  (Rev.  i.  8, 11).  The  symbol 
HK,  which  contains  the  first  and  last  letters  of  the 
Hebrew  alphabet,  is,  according  to  Buxtorf  (Lex. 
Talm.  p.  244),  "among  the  Cabalists  often  put 
mystically  for  the  beginning  and  end,  like  A  and  ft 
in  the  Apocalypse."  Schoettgen  (ffor.  Heb.  p.  1086) 
quotes  from  the  Jalkut  Rubeni  on  Gen.  i.  1,  to  the 
effect  that  in  flN  are  comprehended  all  letters,  and 
that  it  is  the  name  of  the  Shechinah. 

OMEK.    [WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.] 
OM'EI  (nDy,  i.  e.  n»-)OV,  probably  "  servant 

of  Jehovah"  (Gesenius)  :  *Aju£pj,  LXX. ;  Afiapivos, 
Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  12, 5 :  Amri),  1.  originally  "  cap 
tain  of  the  host"  to  ELAH,  was  afterwards  himself 
king  of  Israel,  and  founder  of  the  third  dynasty. 
When  Elah  was  murdered  by  Zimri  at  Tirzah,  then 
capital  of  the  northern  kingdom,  Omri  was  engaged 
in  the  siege  of  Gibbethon,  situated  in  the  tribe  of  Dan, 
which  had  been  occupied  by  the  Philistines,  who  had 
retained  it,  in  spite  of  the  efforts  to  take  it  made 
by  Nadab,  Jeroboam's  son  and  successor.  As  soon  as 
the  army  heard  of  Elah's  death,  they  proclaimed 
Omri  king.  Thereupon  he  broke  up  the  sjege  of 
Gibbethon,  and  attacked  Tirzah,  where  Zimri  was 
holding  his  court  as  king  of  Israel.  The  city  was 
taken,  and  Zimri  perished  in  the  flames  of  the  palace, 
after  a  leign  of  seven  days.  [ZiMRi.]  Omri, however, 
was  not  allowed  to  establish  his  dynasty  without  a 
struggle  against  Tibni,  whom  "half  the  people" 
(1  K.  xvi.  21)  desired  to  raise  to  the  throne,  and 


0  Rabbi  Janna,  in  the  Midrath  Tehillim,  quoted  by 
lilgbtfoot,  ii.  39.  Can  this  statement  have  originated  in 
the  mysterious  passage,  Ez.  xi.  23,  in  which  the  g'  iry  of 


Jehovah  is  said  to  have  left  Jerusalem  and  taken  iti 
stand  on  the  Mount  of  Olives— the  mountain  ou  the  e«t 
side  of  tbc  city  i 


630 


ON 


who  was  bravely  assisted  by  his  brother  Joram." 
The  civil  war  lasted  four  years  (cf.  1  K.  xvi.  15, 
with  23).  After  the  defeat  and  death  of  Tibni 
and  Joram,  Omri  reigned  for  six  years  in  Tirzah, 
although  the  palace  there  was  destroyed  ;  but  at 
the  end  of  that  time,  in  spite  of  the  proverbial 
beauty  of  the  site  (Cant.  vi.  4),  he  transferred  his 
residence,  probably  from  the  proved  inability  of 
Tirzah  to  stand  a  siege,  to  the  mountain  Shomron, 
better  known  by  its  Greek  name  Samaria,  which  he 
bought  for  two  talents  of  silver  from  a  rich  man, 
otherwise  unknown,  called  Shemer.  It  is  situated 
about  six  miles  from  Shechem,  the  most  ancient 
of  Hebrew  capitals ;  and  its  position,  according  to 
Prof.  Stanley  (S.  #  P.,  p.  240),  "  combined,  in  a 
union  not  elsewhere  found  in  Palestine,  strength, 
fertility,  and  beauty."  Bethel,  however,  remained 
the  religious  metropolis  of  the  kingdom,  and  the 
calf-worship  of  Jeroboam  was  maintained  with  in 
creased  determination  and  disregard  of  God's  law 
(1  K.  xvi.  26).  At  Samaria  Omri  reigned  for  six 
years  more.  He  seems  to  have  been  a  vigorous  and 
unscrupulous  ruler,  anxious  to  strengthen  his 
dynasty  by  intercourse  and  alliances  with  foreign 
states.  Thus  he  made  a  treaty  with  Benhadad  I., 
king  of  Damascus,  though  on  very  unfavourable 
Conditions,  surrendering  to  him  some  frontier  cities 
(1  K.  xx.  34),  and  among  them  probably  Ramoth- 
Gilead  (1  K.  xxii.  3),  and  admitting  into  Samaria  a 
resident  Syrian  embassy,  which  is  described  by  the 
expression  "he  made  streets  in  Samaria"  for  Ben 
hadad.  (See  the  phrase  more  fully  explained  under 
AHAB;)  As  a  part  of  the  same  system,  he  united 
his  son  in  marriage  to  the  daughter  of  a  principal 
Phoenician  prince,  which  led  to  the  introduction 
into  Israel  of  Baal-worship,  and  all  its  attendant 
calamities  and  crimes.  This  worldly  and  irreligious 
policy  is  denounced  by  Micah  (vi.  16)  under  the 
name  of  the  "  statutes  of  Omri,"  which  appear  to 
be  contrasted  with  the  Lord's  precepts  to  His  people, 
"  to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk 
humbly  with  thy  God."  It  achieved,  however,  a 
temporary  success,  for  Omri  left  his  kingdom  in 
peace  to  his  son  Ahab ;  and  his  family,  unlike  the 
ephemeral  dynasties  which  had  preceded  him,  gave 
four  kings  to  Israel,  and  occupied  the  throne  for 
about  half  a  centuiy,  till  it  was  overthrown  by  the 
great  reaction  against  Baal-worship  under  Jehu. 
The  probable  date  of  Omri's  accession  (i.  e.  of  the 
deaths  of  Elah  and  Zimri)  was  B.C.  935  ;  of  Tibni's 
defeat  and  the  beginning  of  Omri's  sole  reign  B.C. 
931,  and  of  his  death  B.C.  919.  [G.  E.  L.  C.J 

2.  ('Apapid.)   One  of  the  sons  of  Becher  the  sou 
of  Benjamin  (1  Chr.  vii.  8). 

3.  ('A/*pi.)    A  descendant  of  Pharcz  the  son  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  ix.  4). 

4.  ("A/tjSp/ ;  Alex.  'A/uapf.)  Son  of  Michael,  and 
chief  of  the  tribe  of  Issacnar  in  the  reign  of  David 
(1  Chr.  xxvi.  18). 

ON(jiK:  Afc>;  Alex.  Afofo:  Hon).  The  son 
of  Peleth,  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the  tribe  of  Reuben 
who  took  part  with  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram  in 
their  revolt  against  Moses  (Num.  xvi.  1).  His  name 
iloes  not  again  appear  in  the  narrative  of  the  con- 


ON 

spiracy,  nor  is  he  alluded  to  when  reference  is  read* 
to  the  fii  al  catastrophe.  Possibly  he  repented  ;  and 
indeed  there  is  a  Rabbinical  tradition  to  the  effect 
that  he  was  prevailed  upon  by  his  wife  to  withdraw 
from  his  accomplices.  Abendana's  note  is,  "behold 
On  is  not  mentioned  again,  for  he  was  separated 
from  their  company  after  Moses  spake  with  them. 
And  our  Rabbis  of  blessed  memory  said  that  his 
wife  saved  him."  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  2,  §2)  omits 
the  name  of  On,  but  retains  that  of  his  father  in  the 
form  *oAaoCs,  thus  apparently  identifying  Peleth 
with  Phallu,  the  son  of  Reuben.  [\V.  A.  W.] 

ON  (|1K,  I'K,  }1K :  "flv,  'H\iobro\is :  Velio- 
polls'),  a  town  of  Lower  Egypt,  which  is  mentioned 
in  the  Bible  under  at  least  two  names,  BETH 
SHEMESH,  B'Dt?  JV2  (Jer.  xliii.  13),  correspond 
ing  to  the  ancient  Egyptian  sacred  name  HA-RA, 
"  the  abode  of  the  sun,"  and  that  above,  cor 
responding  to  the  common  name  AN,  and  perhaps 
also  spoken  of  as  Ir-ha-heres,  Dinn  1*1?,  or 
Dinn — ,  the  second  part  being,  in  this  case,  either 
the  Egyptian  sacred  name,  or  else  the  Hebrew 
Din,  but  we  prefer  to  read  "  a  city  of  destruc 
tion'."  [IR-HA-HERES.]  The  two  names  were 
known  to  the  translator  or  translators  of  Exodus 
in  the  LXX.  where  On  is  explained  to  be  Helic- 
polis  (*Qi>  $  iff-riv  'H\to{nro\ts,  i.  11);  but  in 
Jeremiah  this  version  seems  to  treat  Beth-Shemesh 
as  the  name  of  a  temple  (rovs  ffrv\ovs  'HAiow- 
WAews,  robs  Iv'Clv,  xliii.  13,  LXX.  1.  13).  The 
Coptic  version  gives  UJfJ  as  the  equivalent  of  the 
names  in  the  LXX.,  but  whether  as  an  Egyptian 
word  or  such  a  word  Hebraicised  can  scarcely  be 
determined.* 

The  ancient  Egyptian  common  name  is  written 
AN,  or  AN-T,  and  perhaps  ANU ;  but  the  essential 
part  of  the  word  is  AN,  and  probably  no  more  was 
pronounced.  There  were  two  towns  called  AN ;  Helio- 
polis,  distinguished  as  the  northern,  AN-MEHEET, 
and  Hermonthis,  in  Upper  Egypt,  as  the  southern, 
AN-RES  (Brugsch,  Geogr.  Inschr.  I.  pp.  254,  255, 
Nos.  1217  a,  b,  1218,  870,  1225).  As  to  the 
meaning,  we  can  say  nothing  certain.  Cyril,  who, 
as  bishop  of  Alexandria,  should  be  listened  to  ou 
such  a  question,  says  that  On  signified  the  sun 
Cflc  8e  iffn  KOT'  avrovs  &  ^Atov,  ad  Hos.  p. 

145),  and  the  Coptic  OTtUIItl  (M),  OTGIIt, 
OTOeilt  (S),  "light,"  has  therefore  been  com 
pared  (see  La  Croze,  Lex.  pp.  71,  189),  but  the 
hieroglyphic  form  is  UBEN,  "  shining,"  which  has 
no  connection  with  AN. 

Heliopolis  was  situate  on  the  east  side  of  the 
Pelusiac  branch  of  the  Nile,  just  below  the  point 
of  the  Delta,  and  about  twenty  miles  north-east  of 
Memphis.  It  was  before  the  Roman  time  the  capital 
of  the  Heliopolite  Nome,  which  was  included  in 
Lower  Egypt.  Now,  it*  site  is  above  the  point  of 
the  Delta,  which  is  the  junction  of  the  Phatmetic, 
or  Damietta  branch  and  the  Bolbitine,  or  Rosetta, 
and  about  ten  miles  to  the  north-east  of  Cairo.  The 
oldest  monument  of  the  town  is  the  obelisk,  which 


a  Tbe  LXX.  read  in  1  K.  xvi.  22,  xai  airedavt  &aftvl 
KOU  'luipafj.  b  a.Se\<f>oy  avrou  iv  Tip  xatpw  exeivia.  Ewald 
pronounces  this  an  "  offenbar  acbter  Zusatz." 

b  The  latter  is  perhaps  more  probable,  as  the  letter  we 
represent  by  A  is  not  commonly  changed  into  the  Coptic 
\\\,  unless  indeed  one  hieroglyphic  form  of  the  name 
•  read  ANII,  in  which  case  the  last  vowel  migl  t 


have  been  transposed,  and  the  first  incorporated  with  it. 
Brugsch  (Geogr.  Intchr.  i.  254)  supposes  AN  and  ON  to 
be  the  same,  ••  as  the  Kgyptian  A  often  had  a  sound  inter' 
mediate  between  a  and  <>."  But  this  docs  not  admit  of  the 
change  of  the  a  vowel  to  the  long  vowel  o,  from  which 
it  was  as  distinct  as  from  the  othjr  long  voivi  1  KK. 
respectively  like  j{  and  y  V  and  * 


ON 

was  pet  up  late  in  the  reign  of  Sesertesen  I.,  head  of 
the  12th  dynasty,  dating  B.C.  cir.  2050.  According 
to  Manetho,  the  bull  Mnevis  was  first  worshipped 
here  in  the  reign  of  Kaiechos,  second  king  of  the  2nd 
dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  2400).  In  the  earliest  times  it 
must  have  been  subject  to  the  1st  dynasty  so  long  as 
their  sole  rule  lasted,  which  was  perhaps  for  no  more 
than  the  reigns  of  Menes  (B.C.  cir.  2717)  and  Atho- 
ihis :  it  doubtless  next  came  under  the  government 
of  the  Memphites,  of  the  3rd  (B.C.  cir.  2640),  4th 
and  6th  dynasties :  it  then  passed  into  the  hands 
of  the  Diospolites  of  the  12th  dynasty,  and  the 
Shepherds  of  the  15th;  but  whether  the  former  or 
the  latter  held  it  first,  or  it  was  contested  between 
them,  we  cannot  as  yet  determine.  During  the 
long  period  of  anarchy  that  followed  the  rule  of 
the  l'2th  dynasty,  when  Lower  Egypt  was  subject 
to  the  Shepherd  kings,  Heliopolis  must  have  been 
under  the  government  of  the  strangers.  With  the 
accession  of  the  18th  dynasty,  it  was  probably 
recovered  by  the  Egyptians,  during  the  war  which 
Aahmes,  or  Amosis,  head  of  that  line,  waged  with 
the  Shepherds,  and  thenceforward  held  by  them, 
though  perhaps  more  than  once  occupied  by  invaders 
(comp.  Chabas,  Papyrus  Magique  Harris},  before 
the  Assyrians  conquered  Egypt.  Its  position,  near 
the  eastern  frontier,  must  have  made  it  always  a 
post  of  especial  importance.  [No  AMON.] 

The  chief  object  of  worship  at  Heliopolis  was  the 
sun,  under  the  forms  RA,  the  sun  simply,  whence 
the  sacred  name  of  the  place,  HA-RA,  "  the  abode 
of  the  sun,"  and  ATOM,  the  setting  sun,  or  sun 
of  the  nether  world.  Probably  its  chief  temple  was 
dedicated  to  both.  SHU,  the  son  of  Atum,  and 
TAFNET,  his  daughter,  were  also  here  worshipped, 
as  well  as  the  bull  Mnevis,  sacred  to  RA,  Osiris, 
Isis,  and  the  Phoenix,  BENNU,  probably  represented 
by  a  living  bird  of  the  crane  kind.  (On  the  my 
thology  see  Brugsch,  pp.  254  seqq.)  The  temple 
of  the  sun,  described  by  Strabo  (xvii.  pp.  805,  806), 
is  now  only  represented  by  the  single  beautiful  obe 
lisk,  which  is  of  red  granite,  68  feet  2  inches  high 
above  the  pedestal,  and  bears  a  dedication,  showing 
that  it  was  sculptured  in  or  after  his  30th  year  (cir. 
2050)  by  Sesertesei.  I.,  first  king  of  the  12th  dy 
nasty  (B.C.  cir.  2080-2045).  There  were  probably 
far  more  than  a  usual  number  of  obelisks  before  the 
gates  of  this  temple,  on  the  evidence  of  ancient 
writers,  and  the  inscriptions  of  some  yet  remaining 
elsewhere,  and  no  doubt  the  reason  was  that  these 
monuments  were  sacred  to  the  sun.  Heliopolis  was 
anciently  famous  for  its  learning,  and  Eudoxus  and 
Plato  studied  under  its  priests  ;  but,  from  the  extenl 
of  the  mounds,  it  seems  to  have  been  always  a  smal: 


ONAM 


C31 


mentions  three  "  strong  cities  "  instead  of  the  two 
'  treasure  cities  "  of  the  Heb.,  adding  On  to  Pithom 
and  Raamses  (Kol  <fK0^6^.j\ffa.v  ir6\fis  oxvpas  r<p 
aip,  TT}V  Tf  Utidw,  /col  'Pa/iceirirf),  /col  *Clv,  V> 
Iff-riv  'HXtouTToAis,  Ex.  i.  11).  If  it  be  intended 
hat  these  cities  were  founded  by  the  labour  of  the 
>eople,  the  addition  is  probably  a  mistake,  although 
ileliopolis  may  have  been  ruined  and  rebuilt  ;  but 
t  is  possible  that  they  were  merely  fortified,  pro- 
xibly  as  places  for  keeping  stores.  Heliopolis  lay 
,t  no  great  distance  from  the  land  ot'Goshen  and 
Tom  Raamses,  and  probably  Pithom  also. 
Isaiah  has  been  supposed  to  speak  of  On  when 
prophecies  that  one  of  the  five  cities  in  Egypt 
that  should  speak  the  language  of  Canaan,  should 
be  called  Ir-ha-heres,  which  may  mean  the  City  of 
the  Sun,  whether  we  take  "  heres  "  to  be  a  Hebrew 
or  an  Egyptian  word  ;  but  the  reading  "  a  city  of 
destruction  "  seems  preferable,  and  we  have  no  evi 
dence  that  there  was  any  large  Jewish  settlement  at 
Heliopolis,  although  there  may  have  been  at  one 
time  from  its  nearness  to  the  town  of  Onias.  [IR-HA- 
HERES  ;  ONIAS.]  Jeremiah  speaks  of  On  under  the 
name  Beth-shemesh,  "  the  house  of  the  sun,"  where 
he  predicts  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  "  He  shall  break  also 


the  pillars  [? 


,  but,  perhaps,  statues,  comp. 


Th.3  first  mention  of  this  place  in  the  Bible  is  in 
the  history  of  Joseph,  to  whom  we  read  Pharaoh 
gave  "  to  wife  Asenath  the  daughter  of  Poti-pherah, 
priest  of  On  "  (Gen.  xli.  45,  comp.  ver.  50,  and  xlvi 
20).  Joseph  was  probably  governor  of  Egypt  under 
a  king  of  the  15th  dynasty,  of  which  Memphis  was, 
at  least  for  a  time,  the  capital.  In  this  case  he  would 
doubtless  have  lived  for  part  of  the  year  at  Memphis, 
and  therefore  near  to  Heliopolis.  The  name  of  Ase- 
nath's  father  "was  appropriate  to  a  Heliopolite,  and 
especially  to  a  priest  of  that  place  (though  according 
to  some  he  may  have  been  a  prince),  for  it  means 
'  Belonging  to  Ha,"  or  "  the  sun."  The  name  of 
Joseph's  master  Potiphar  is  the  same,  but  with  a 
slight  difference  in  the  Hebrew  orthography.  Ac 
cording  to  the  LXX.  version,  On  was  one  of  the  cities 
built  ibr  Pharaoh  by  the  oppressed  Israelites,  for  it 


IDOL,  i.  850a]  of  Beth-shemesh,  that  [is]  in  the  land 
of  Egypt  ;  and  the  houses  of  the  gods  of  the 
Egyptians  shall  he  burn  with  fire"  (xliii.  13). 
By  the  word  we  have  rendered  "  pillars,"  obeusks 
are  reasonably  supposed  to  be  meant,  for  the  number 
of  which  before  the  temple  of  the  sun  Heliopolis 
must  have  been  famous,  and  perhaps  by  "  the  houses 
of  the  gods,"  the  temples  of  this  place  are  intended, 
as  their  being  burnt  would  be  a  proof  of  the  power- 
lessness  of  Ra  and  Atum,  both  forms  of  the  sun, 
Shu  the  god  of  light,  and  Tafnet  a  fire-goddess,  to 
save  their  dwellings  from  the  very  element  over 
which  they  were  supposed  to  rule.  —  Perhaps  it  was 
on  account  of  the  many  false  gods  of  Heliopolis, 
that,  in  Ezekiel,  On  is  written  Aven,  by  a  change 
in  the  punctuation,  if  we  can  here  depend  on  the 
Masoretic  text,  and  so  made  to  signify  "  vanity," 
and  especially  the  vanity  of  idolatry.  The  prophet 
foretells,  "  The  young  men  of  Aven  and  of  Pi-be-seth 
shall  fall  by  the  sword  :  and  these  [cities]  shall  go 
into  captivity  "  (xxx.  17).  Pi-beseth  or  Bubastis  is 
doubtless  spoken  of  with  Heliopolis  as  in  the  same  part 
of  Egypt,  and  so  to  be  involved  in  a  common  calamity 
at  the  same  time  when  the  land  should  be  invaded. 
After  the  age  of  the  prophets  we  hear  no  more 
in  Scripture  of  Heliopolis.  Local  tradition,  how 
ever,  points  it  out  as  a  place  where  Our  Lord  and 
the  Virgin  came,  when  Joseph  brought  them  into 
Egypt,  and  a  very  ancient  sycamore  is  shown  as  a 
tree  beneath  which  they  rested.  The  Jewish  settle 
ments  in  this  part  of  Egypt,  and  especially  the  town 
of  Onias,  which  was  probably  only  twelve  miles  dis 
tant  from  Heliopolis  in  a  northerly  direction,  but 
a  little  to  the  eastward  (Modern  Egypt  and  Thebes, 
i.  297,  298),  then  flourished,  and  were  nearer  to 
Palestine  than  the  heathen  towns  like  Alexandria,  in 
which  there  was  any  large  Jewish  population,  so 
that  there  is  much  probability  in  this  tradition. 
And,  perhaps,  Heliopolis  itself  may  have  had  a 
Jewish  quarter,  although  we  do  not  know  it  to 
have  been  the  Ir-hn-heres  of  Isaiah.  [R.  S.  P.]. 

O'NAM  (D 
Onam). 


:   'flpdp,  'flvdv;  Alex. 

1.  One  of  the  sons  of  Shobal  the 


son  of  Seir  (Gen.  xxxvi.  23  ;  1  Chr.  i.  4C).     Some 
Hebrew  MSS.  read  "  Onan." 


r>32  ONAN 

2.  ('Ofo>;  Alex.  OCvo/ua.)  The  son  of  Jerah- 
meel  by  his  wife  Atarah  (1  Chr.  ii.  26,  28). 

O'NAN  (j^K  :  AiWv :  Onan).  The  second  son 
of  Judah  by  the  Canaanitess,  "  the  daughter  of 
Shua"  (Gen.  xxxviii.  4;  1  Chr.  ii.  3).  On  the 
death  of  Er  the  first-born,  it  was  the  duty  of  Onan, 
according  to  the  custom  which  then  existed  and 
was  afterwards  established  by  a  definite  law  (Deut. 
xxv.  5-10),  continuing  to  the  latest  period  of  Jewish 
history  (Mark  xii.  19),  to  many  his  brother's 
widow  and  perpetuate  his  race.  But  he  found 
means  to  prevent  the  consequences  of  marriage, 
"  and  what  he  did  was  evil  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah, 
and  He  slew  him  also,"  as  He  had  slain  his  elder 
brother  (Gen.  xxxviii.  9).  His  death  took  place 
before  the  family  of  Jacob  went  down  into  Egypt 
(Gen.  xlvi.  12 ;  Num.  xxvi.  19).  [W.  A.  W.] 

ONE'SIMUS  ('OHj<n/uos :  Onesimus)  is  the 
name  of  the  servant  or  slave  in  whose  behalf  Paul 
wrote  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  He  was  a  native, 
or  certainly  an  inhabitant  of  Colossae,  since  Paul 
in  writing  to  the  Church  there  speaks  of  him  (Col. 
iv.  9)  as  Ss  iffnv  Q  v/j.iav,  "  one  of  you."  This 
expression  confirms  the  presumption  which  his 
Greek  name  affords,  that  he  was  a  Gentile,  and  not 
a  Jew,  as  some  have  argued  from  ft,d\iff-ra,  3/j.oi 
in  Phil.  16.  Slaves  were  numerous  in  Phrygia, 
and  the  name  itself  of  Phrygian  was  almost  syno 
nymous  with  that  of  slave.  Hence  it  happened 
that  in  writing  to  the  Colossians  (iii.  22-iv.  1) 
Paul  had  occasion  to  instruct  them  concerning  the 
duties  of  masters  and  servants  to  each  other.  Onesi 
mus  was  one  of  this  unfortunate  class  of  persons,  as 
is  evident  both  from  the  manifest  implication  in 
ovKfrt  &s  5ov\ov  in  Phil.  16,  and  from  the 
general  tenor  of  the  epistle.  There  appears  to  have 
been  no  difference  of  opinion  on  this  point  among 
the  ancient  commentators,  and  there  is  none  of  any 
critical  weight  among  the  modem.  The  man  escaped 
from  his  master  and  fled  to  Rome,  where  in  the 
midst  of  its  vast  population  he  could  hope  to  be 
concealed,  and  to  baffle  the  efforts  which  were  so 
often  made  in  such  cases  for  retaking  the  fugitive. 
(Walter,  Die  Geschichte  des  ROm.  Rechts,  ii. 
63  sq.)  It  must  have  been  to  Rome  that  he  directed 
his  way,  and  not  to  Cesarea,  as  some  contend  ;  for 
the  latter  view  stands  connected  with  an  inde 
fensible  opinion  respecting  the  place  whence  the 
letter  was  written  (see  Neander's  Pflanzuny,  ii.  s. 
506).  Whether  Onesimus  had  any  other  motive 
for  the  flight  than  the  natural  love  of  liberty,  we 
have  not  the  means  of  deciding.  It  has  been  very 
generally  supposed  that  he  had  committed  some 
offence,  as  theft  or  embezzlement,  and  feared  the 
punishment  of  his  guilt.  But  as  the  ground  of 
that  opinion  we  must  know  the  meaning  of  T)^liti\fff 
11  Phil.  18,  which  is  uncertain,  not  to  say  incon 
sistent  with  any  such  imputation  (see  Notes  in 
the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  by  the  American  Bible 
Union,  p.  60).  Commentators  at  all  events  go 
entirely  beyond  the  evidence  when  they  assert  (as 
Conybeare,  Life  and  Epistles  of  Paul,  ii.  p.  467) 
thnt  he  belonged  to  the  dregs  of  society,  that  he 
robbed  his  master,  and  confessed  the  sin  to  Paul. 
Though  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Onesimus  heard 
the  gospel  for  the  first  time  at  Rome,  it  is  beyond 
question  that  he  was  led  to  embrace  the  gospel 
there  through  the  apostle's  instrumentality.  The 
Anguage  in  ver.  10  of  the  letter  (ftp  lytviniffa.  iv 
Tens  Sffffi.o'is  fi.ov)  is  explicit  on  this  point.  As 
there  were  believers  in  Phrygia  when  the  apostle 


ONESIPHORU8 

passed  through  that  region  on  his  third  missiinnr? 
tour  (Acts  xviii.  23),  and  as  Onesimus  belonged 
to  a  Christian  household  (Phil.  2),  it  is  not  im 
probable  that  he  knew  something  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  before  he  went  to  Rome.  How  long  a 
time  elapsed  between  his  escape  and  conversion,  we 
cannot  decide;  for  irpbj  &pa.v  in  the  15th  verse,  to 
which  appeal  has  been  made,  is  purely  a  relative 
expression,  and  will  not  justify  any  infeience  as  to 
the  interval  in  question. 

After  his  conversion,  the  most  happy  and  frienJlj 
relations  sprung  up  between  the  teacher  and  the 
disciple.  The  situation  of  the  apostle  as  a  captive 
and  an  indefatigable  labourer  for  the  promotion  of 
the  gospel  (Acts  xrviii.  30,  31)  must  have  made 
him  keenly  alive  to  the  sympathies  of  Christian 
friendship  and  dependent  upon  others  for  various 
services  of  a  personal  nature,  important  to  his  effi 
ciency  as  a  minister  of  the  word.  Onesimus  appears 
to  have  supplied  this  twofold  want  in  an  eminent 
degree.  We  see  from  the  letter  that  he  won  en 
tirely  the  apostle's  heart,  and  made  himself  so 
useful  to  him  in  various  private  ways,  or  evinced 
such  a  capacity  to  be  so  (for  he  may  have  gone 
back  to  Colossae  soon  after  his  conversion),  that 
Paul  wished  to  have  him  remain  constantly  with 
him.  Whether  he  desired  his  presence  as  a  per 
sonal  attendant  or  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  is 
not  certain  from  tva  SiaKovrj  poi  in  ver.  13  of  the 
Epistle.  Be  this  as  it  may,  Paul's  attachment  to 
him  as  a  disciple,  as  a  personal  friend,  and  as  a 
helper  to  him  in  his  bonds,  was  such  that  he  yielded 
him  up  only  in  obedience  to  that  spirit  of  self-denial, 
and  that  sensitive  regard  for  the  feelings  or  the 
rights  of  others,  of  which  his  conduct  on  this  occa 
sion  displayed  so  noble  an  example. 

There  is  but  little  to  add  to  this  account,  when 
we  pass  beyond  the  limits  of  the  New  Testament. 
The  traditionary  notices  which  have  come  down 
to  us,  are  too  few  and  too  late  to  amount  to  much 
as  historical  testimony.  Some  of  the  later  fathers 
assert  that  Onesimus  was  set  free,  and  was  subse 
quently  ordained  Bishop  of  Beroea  in  Macedonia 
(Constit.  Apost.  7,  46).  The  person  of  the  same 
name  mentioned  as  Bishop  of  Ephesus  in  the  first 
epistle  of  Ignatius  to  the  Ephesians  (Hefele,  Patrum 
Apost.  Opp.,  p.  152)  was  a  different  person  (see 
Winer,  Realw.  ii.  175).  It  is  related  also  that 
Onesimus  finally  made  his  way  to  Rome  again,  ami 
ended  his  days  there  as  a  martyr  during  the  perse 
cution  under  Nero.  [H.  B.  H.] 

ONESIPH'ORUS  ('Orneriipopos)  is  named 
twice  only  in  the  N.  T.,  viz.,  2  Tim.  i.  16-18,  and 
iv.  19.  In  the  former  passage  Paul  mentions  him 
in  terms  of  grateful  love,  as  having  a  noble  courage 
and  generosity  in  his  behalf,  amid  his  trials  as  a 
prisoner  at  Rome,  when  others  from  whom  he  ex 
pected  better  things  had  deserted  him  (2  Tim.  iv. 
16) ;  and  in  the  latter  passage  he  singles  out  "  the 
household  of  Onesiphorus  "  as  worthy  of  a  special 
greeting.  It  has  been  made  a  question  whether 
this  friend  of  the  apostle  was  still  living  when  the 
letter  to  Timothy  was  written,  because  in  both  in 
stances  Paul  speaks  of" the  household "  (in  2  Tim, 
i.  1C,  Stfri  ?Aeos  6  Kvpios  r$  'Om)<n<p6pov  ofay), 
and  not  separately  of  Onesiphorus  himself.  If  we 
infer  that  he  was  not  living,  then  we  have  in 
2  Tim.  i.  18,  almost  an  instance  of  the  apostolic 
sanction  of  the  practice  of  praying  for  the  dend. 
But  the  probability  is  that  other  members  of 
the  family  were  also  active  Christians ;  and  at 
Paul  wished  to  remember  them  at  the  same  time, 


ON1ARES 

he  grouped  them  together  undei  the  compre 
hensive  rbv  'Of.  olicov  (2  Tim.  iv.  19),  and  thus 
delicately  recognised  the  common  merit,  as  a  sort 
of  f-rmily  distinction.  The  mention  of  Stephanas 
in  1  Cor.  xvi.  17,  shows  that  we  need  not  exclude 
nim  from  the  STe^cwa  O!KOV  in  1  Cor.  i.  16.  It 
is  evident  from  2  Tim.  i.  18  (oVa  tv  "Etyfocp  Siri- 
tc6vT\ffi],  that  Onesiphorus  had  his  home  at  Ephesus ; 
though  if  we  restrict  the  salutation  near  the  close 
df  the  Epistle  (iv.  19)  to  his  family,  he  himself 
may  possibly  have  been  with  Paul  at  Rome  when 
the  latter  wrote  to  Timothy.  Nothing  authentic 
is  known  of  him  beyond  these  notices.  According 
to  a  tradition  in  Fabricius  (Lux  Evang.  p.  117), 
quoted  by  Winer  (Realw.  ii.  175),  he  became  bishop 
of  Corone  in  Messenia.  £H.  B.  H.] 

ONIA'RES  ('Ovutpijs),  a  name  introduced  into 
the  Greek  and  Syriac  texts  of  1  Mace.  xii.  20  by 
a  veiy  old  corruption.  The  true  reading  is  pre* 
served  in  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  4,  §10)  and  the  Vul 
gate,  ('Ot>i<£  'Apelbs,  Oniae  Arius),  and  is  given  in 
the  margin  of  the  A.  V. 

ONI' AS  ('Ovias :  Onias\  the  name  of  five  high 
priests,  of  whom  only  two  (1  and  3)  are  mentioned 
in  the  A.  V.,  but  an  account  of  all  is  here  given  to 
prevent  confusion.  1.  The  son  and  successor  of 
Jaddua,  who  entered  on  the  office  about  the  time  of 
the  deatli  of  Alexander  the  Great,  c.  B.C.  330-309, 
or,  according  to  Eusebius,  300.  (Jos.  Ant.  si.  7, 
§7).  According  to  Josephus  he  was  father  of  Simon 
the  Just  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §4;  Ecclus.  1.  1).  [Ec- 

CLE8IASTICUS,  vol.  i.  p.  4796  ;    SlMON.] 

2.  The  son  of  Simon  the  Just  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  4, 
1).     He  was  a  minor  at  the  time  of  his  father's 
death  (c.  B.C.  29o),  and  the  high-priesthood  was 
occupied  in  succession  by  his  uncles  Eleazar  and 
Manasseh  to  his   exclusion.      He  entered   on  the 
office  at  last  c.  B.C.  240,  and  his  conduct  threatened 
to  precipitate  the  rapture  with  Egypt,  which  after- 
v  ards  opened  the  way  for  Syrian  oppression.    Onias, 
from  avarice,  it  is  said — a  vice  which  was  likely  to 
be  increased  by  his  long  exclusion  from  power — 
neglected  for  several  years  to  remit  to  Ptol.  Euer- 
getes  the  customary  annual  tribute  of  20  talents. 
The  king  claimed  the  arrears  with  threats  of  vio 
lence  in  case  his  demands  were  not  satisfied.    Onias 
still  refused  to  discharge    the   debt,    more,  as  it 
appears,  from  self-will  than  with  any  prospect  of 
successful  resistance.    The  evil  consequences  of  this 
obstinacy  were,  however,  averted  by  the  policy  of 
his  nephew  Joseph,  the  son  of  Tobias,  who  visited 
Ptolemy,  urged  the  imbecility  of  Onias,  won  the 
favour  of  the  king,  and  entered  into  a  contract  for 
farming  the  tribute,  which  he  carried  out  with  suc 
cess.      Onias  retained  the  high-priesthood  till  his 
death,  c.  B.C.  226,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  his 
son  Simon  II.  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  4). 

3.  The  son  of  Simon  II.,  who  succeeded  his 
father  in  the  high-priesthood,  c.  B.C.  198.     In  the 
interval  which  had  elapsed  since  the  government 
of  his  grandfather  the  Jews  had  transferred  their 
allegiance  to  the  Syrian  monarchy  (Dan.  xi.  14), 
and  for  a  time  enjoyed  tranquil  prosperity.    Internal 
dissensions  furnished  an  occasion  for  the  first  act 
of  oppression.     Seleucus  Philopator  was  informed 
by  Simon,  governor  of  the  Temple,  of  the  riches 
contained  in  the  sacred  treasury,  and  he  made  an 
attempt  to  seize  them  by  force.     At  the  prayer  of 
Onias,  according  to  the  tradition  (2  Mace,  iii.),  the 
sacrilege    was   averted  ;    but    the   high-priest  was 
obliged  to  appeal  tc  the  king  himself  lor  support 


ONIAS 


633 


agninst  the  machinati  ;ns  of  Simon.  Not  long  after 
wards  Seleucus  died  (B.C.  175),  and  Onias  found 
himself  supplanted  in  the  favour  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  by  his  brother  Jason,  who  received  the  high- 
priesthood  from  the  king.  Jason,  in  turn,  waa 
displaced  by  his  youngest  brother  Menelaus,  who 
procured  the  murder  of  Onias  (c.  B.C.  171),  in 
anger  at  the  reproof  which  he  had  received  from 
him  for  his  sacrilege  (2  Mace.  iv.  32-38).  But 
though  his  righteous  zeal  was  thus  fervent,  the 
punishment  which  Antiochus  inflicted  on  his  mur 
derer  was  a  tribute  to  his  "  sober  and  modest  be 
haviour  "  (9  Mace.  iv.  37)  after  his  deposition  from 
his  office.  [ANDRONICUS,  vol.  i.  p.  67.] 

It  was  probably  during  the  government  of  Onias 
III.  that  the  communication  between  the  Spartans 
and  Jews  took  place  (1  Mace.  xii.  19-23 ;  Jos.  Ant. 
xii.  4,  §10).  [SPARTANS.]  How  powerful  an  im 
pression  he  made  upon  his  contemporaries  is  seen 
from  the  remarkable  account  of  the  dream  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus  before  his  great  victory  (2  Mace.  xv. 
12-16). 

4.  The  youngest  brother  of  Onias  III.,  who  bore 
the  same  name,  which  he  afterwards  exchanged  for 
Menelaus  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1).     [MENELAUS.] 

5.  The  son  of  Onias  III.,  who  sought  a  refuge  in 
Egypt  from  the  sedition  and  sacrilege  which  dis 
graced  Jerusalem.     The  immediate  occasion  of  his 
flight  was  the  triumph  of  "  the  sons  of  Tobias, ' 
gained  by  the  interference  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
Onias,  to  whom  the  high-priesthood  belonged  by 
right,  appears  to  have  supported  throughout  the 
alliance  with  Egypt  (Jos.  B.  J.  i.  1,  §1),  and  re 
ceiving  the  protection  of  Ptol.  Philometor,  he  en 
deavoured  to  give  a  unity  to  the  Hellenistic  Jews, 
which  seemed  impossible  for  the  Jews  in  Palestine. 
With  this  object  he  founded  the  Temple  at  Leontc- 
polis  [ON],  which  occupies  a  position  in  the  history 
of  the  development  of  Judaism  of  which  the  im 
portance  is  commonly  overlooked :  but  the  discus 
sion  of  this  attempt  to  consolidate  Hellenism  belongs 
to  another  place,  though  the  connexion  of  the  at 
tempt  itself  with  Jewish  history  could  not  be  wholly 
overlooked  (Jos.  Ant.  xiii.  3  ;  B.  J.  i.   1,  §1,  vii. 
10,    §2;    Ewald,    Gesch.   iv.  405    ff. ;    Herzfeld, 
Gesch.  ii.  460  ff.,  557  ff.).  [B.  F.  W.] 

THE  CITY  OF  ONIAS,  THE  REGION  OF  ONIAS, 
the  city  in  which  stood  the  temple  built  by  Onias, 
and  the  region  of  the  Jewish  settlements  in  Egypt. 
Ptolemy  mentions  the  city  as  the  capital  of  the 
Heliopolite  nome :  'H\ioiro\l-n\s  yo/ud's,  Kal  /UT/- 
TP^TTO/XIS  'Ovlov  (iv.  5,  §53);  where  the  reading 
'HA.(ou  is  not  admissible,  since  Heliopolis  is  after 
wards  mentioned,  and  its  different  position  distinctly 
laid  down  (§54).  Josephus  speaks  of  "  the  region 
of  Onias,''  'Ovtov  x<fya  (Ant.  xiv.  8,  §1 ;  B.  J.  i.  9; 
§4;  coinp.  vn.  10,  §2),  and  mentions  a  place  there 
situate  called  "  the  Camp  of  the  Jews,"  'lovSa'itav 
(rrpar6irfSov  (Ant.  xiv.  8,  §2,  B.  J.  1.  c.).  In  the 
spurious  letters  given  by  him  in  the  account  of  the 
foundation  of  the  temple  of  Onias,  it  is  made  to  have 
been  at  Leontopolis  in  the  Heliopolite  nome,  and 
called  a  strong  place  of  Bubastis  (Ant.  xiii.  3,  §§1, 
2)  ;  and  when  speaking  of  its  closing  by  the  Romans, 
he  says  that  it  was  in  a  region  180  stadia  from 
Memphis,  in  the  Heliopolite  nome,  where  Onias 
had  founded  a  castle  (lit.  watch-post,  ippovpiot , 
B.  J.  vii.  10,  §§2,  3,  4).  Leontopolis  was  not  in 
the  Heliopolite  nome,  but  in  Ptolemy's  time  was 
the  capital  of  the  Leontopolite  (ir.  5,  §51),  and 
the  mention  of  it  is  altogether  a  blander.  There  is 
probably  :iJsu  a  confusion  as  to  the  city  Bubastis  ; 


63-1 


ONIAS 


unless,  indeed,  the  temple  which  Onias  adopted 
«md  restored  were  one  of  the  Egyptian  goddess  of 
tli.it  name. 

The  site  of  the  city  of  Onias  is  to  be  looked  for 
in  some  on;  of  those  to  the  northward  of  Heliopolis 
which  are  called  Tel-el- Yahood,  "  the  Mound  of  the 
Jews,"  or  Tel-el-  Yahoodeeyeh,  "the  Jewish  Mound." 
Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  thinks  that  there  is  littie 
doubt  that  it  is  one  which  stands  in  the  cultivated 
land  near  Shibbeen,  to  the  northward  of  Heliopolis, 
in  a  direction  a  little  to  the  east,  at  a  distance  of 
twelve  miles.  "  Its  mounds  are  of  very  great  height." 
He  remarks  that  the  distance  from  Memphis  (29 
miles)  is  greater  than  that  given  by  Josephus ;  but 
the  inaccuracy  is  not  extreme.  Another  mound  of 
the  same  name,  standing  on  the  edge  of  the  desert, 
a  short  distance  to  the  south  of  Belbays,  and  24 
miles  from  Heliopolis,  would,  he  thinks, correspond  to 
the  Vicus  Judaeorum  of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus. 
(See  Modern  Egypt  and  Thebes,  i.  pp.  297-300). 

During  the  writer's  residence  in  Egypt,  1842- 
1849,  excavations  were  made  in  the  mound  sup 
posed  by  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  to  mark  the  site  of 
the  city  of  Onias.  We  believe,  writing  only  from 
memory,  that  no  result  was  obtained  but  the  disco 
very  of  portions  of  pavement  very  much  resembling 
the  Assyrian  pavements  now  in  the  British  Museum. 

From  the  account  of  Josephus,  and  the  name 
given  to  one  of  them,  "  the  Camp  of  the  Jews," 
these  settlements  appear  to  have  been  of  a  half- 
military  nature.  The  chief  of  them  seems  to  have 
been  a  strong  place ;  and  the  same  is  apparently  the 
case  with  another,  that  just  mentioned,  from  the 
circumstances  of  the  history  even  more  than  from 
its  name.  This  name,  though  recalling  the  "  Camp" 
where  Psammetichus  I.  established  his  Greek  mer 
cenaries  [MiGDOL],  does  not  prove  it  was  a  mili 
tary  settlement,  as  the  "  Camp  of  the  Tynans  "  in 
Memphis  (Her.  ii.  112)  was  perhaps  in  its  name  a 
reminiscence  of  the  Shepherd  occupation,  for  there 
stood  there  a  temple  of  "  the  Foreign  Venus,"  of 
which  the  age  seems  to  be  shewn  by  a  tablet  of 
Amenoph  II.  (B.C.  cir.  1400}  in  the  quarries  oppo 
site  the  city  in  which  Ashtoreth  is  worshipped,  or 
else  it  may  have  b«en  a  merchant-settlement.  We 
may  also  compare  the  Coptic  name  of  El-Geezeh, 
opposite  Cairo,  *"f~nepCIOI»  which  has  been 
ingeniously  conjectured  to  record  the  position  of  a 
Persian  camp.  The  easternmost  part  of  Lower 
EgvP*»  ke  it  remembered,  was  always  chosen  for 
great  military  settlements,  in  order  to  protect  the 
country  from  the  incursions  of  her  enemies  beyond 
that  frontier.  Here  the  first  Shepherd  king  Salatis 
placed  an  enormous  garrison  in  the  stronghold  Avaris, 
the  Zoan  of  the  Bible  (Manetho,  ap.  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i. 
14).  Here  foreign  mercenaries  of  the  Salte  kings 
of  the  26th  dynasty  were  settled  ;  where  also  the 
greatest  body  of  the  Egyptian  soldiers  had  the  lands 
allotted  to  them,  all  being  established  in  the  Delta 
(Her.  ii.  164-166).  Probably  the  Jewish  settle 
ments  were  established  for  the  same  purpose,  more 
esj'w.ially  as  the  hatred  of  their  inhabitant*  towards 
the  kings  of  Syria  would  promise  their  opposing  the 
.strongest  resistance  in  case  of  an  invasion. 

The  history  of  the  Jewish  cities  of  Egypt  is  a 
*-ery  obscure  portion  of  that  of  the  Hebrew  nation. 
We  know  little  more  than  the  story  of  the  founda- 


•  In  Neh.  vl.  2  the  Vat.  MS.,  according  to  Mai,  reads 

V   ntfiiia   fl'tu... 

b  The  tradition  of  the  Talmudists  is  that  it  was  left 


ONO 

tion  and  overthrow  of  one  of  them,  though 
infer  that  they  were  populous  and  politically  im 
portant.  It  seems  at  first  sight  remarkable  tlu\t 
we  have  no  trace  of  any  literature  of  these  settle 
ments  ;  but  as  it  would  have  been  preserved  to  us 
by  either  the  Jews  of  Palestine  or  those  of  Alexandria, 
both  of  whom  must  have  looked  upon  the  worship 
pers  at  the  temple  of  Onias  as  schismatics,  it  could 
scarcely  have  been  expected  to  have  come  down 
to  us.  [R.  S.  P.] 

ONIONS  (DV3,   betsalim  :    ra 


caepe}.     There  is  no  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew  word,  which  occurs  only  in  Num  xi.  5,  as 
one  of  the  good  things  of  Egypt  of  which  the 
Israelites   regretted   the   loss.      Onions  have  been 
from  time  immemorial  a  favourite  article  of  food 
amongst  the  Egyptians.     (See  Her.  ii.  125  ;  Plin. 
xxxvi.    12.)      The    onions    of  Egypt    are    much 
milder  in  flavour  and  less  pungent  than  those  of 
this  country.      Hasselquist  (Trao.  p.  290)  says, 
"  Whoever  has  tasted  onions  in  Egypt  must  allow 
that  none  can  be  had  better  in  any  other  part  in 
the  universe  .  here  they  are  sweet  ;  in  other  coun 
tries  they  are  nauseous  and  strong  .......  They 

eat  them  roasted,  cut  into  four  pieces,  with  some 
bits  of  roasted  meat  which  the  Turks  in  Egypt  call 
kebab  ;  and  with  this  dish  they  are  so  delighted  that 
I  have  heard  them  wish  they  might  enjoy  it  in  Para 
dise.  They  likewise  make  a  soup  of  them."  [W.  H.] 

ONO  (falK,  and  once  13'X  :  in  Chron.  AiAa,u, 
Alex.  ASaju;  elsewhere  'tlvuv*  and  'flj/ui,  Alex. 
flv<a  :  Ono).  One  of  the  towns  of  Benjamin.  It 
does  not  appear  in  the  catalogues  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua,  but  is  first  found  in  1  Chr.  viii.  12,  where 
Shamed  or  Simmer  is  said  to  have  built  Ono  and 
Lod  with  their  "  daughter  villages."  It  was  there 
fore  probably  annexed  by  the  Benjamites  subse 
quently  to  their  original  settlement,1  like  Aijalon, 
which  was  allotted  to  Dan,  but  is  found  afterwards 
in  the  hands  of  the  Benjamites  (1  Chr.  viii.  13). 
The  men  of  Lod,  Hadid,  and  Ono,  to  the  number  ot 
725  (or  Neh.  721)  returned  from  the  captivity 
with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  33  ;  Neh.  vii.  37  ;  see 
also  1  Esdr.  v.  22).  [ONCS.] 

A  plain  was  attached  to  the  town,  and  bore  its 
name  —  Bikath-Ono,  "  the  plain  of  Ono"  (Neh.  vi. 
2),  perhaps  identical  with  the  "  valley  of  craftsmen  ' 
(Neh.  xi.  36).  By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  it  is  not 
named.  The  Rabbis  frequently  mention  it,  but  with 
out  any  indication  of  its  position  further  than  that  it 
was  three  miles  from  Lod.  (See  the  citations  from 
the  Talmud  in  Lightfoot,  Char.  Decad  an  S.  Mark, 
ch.  ix.  §3.)  A  village  called  Kefr  'Ana  is  enu 
merated  by  Robinson  among  the  places  in  the 
districts  of  Ramleh  and  Lydd  (B.  K.  1st  ed.  App 
120,  121).  This  village,  almost  due  N.  of  Lydd, 
is  suggested  by  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir,  337)  as 
identical  with  Ono.  Against  the  identification  how 
ever  are,  the  difference  in  the  names  —  the  modem 
one  containing  the  Ain;  —  and  the  distance  from 
Lydda,  which  instead  of  being  3  milliaria  is  fully 
5,  being  more  than  4  English  miles  according  to 
Van  de  Velde's  map.  Winer  remarks  that  Beit 
Unia  is  more  suitable  as  far  as  its  orthography  i? 
concerned;  but  on  the  other  hand  Beit  Uniu  is 
much  too  far  distant  from  Ludd  to  meet  the  re 
quirements  of  the  passages  quoted  above.  [G.] 

intact  by  Joshua,  but  burnt  during  the  war  of  GHboab 
(Judg.  xx.  48),  and  that  1  Chr.  viii.  12  describes  its  re 
storation.  (Sec  Turguin  on  this  latter  passage.) 


ONUS 

O'NUS  (T.vovsi  om.  in  Vulg.).  The  form  in 
which  the  name  ONO  appears  in  1  Esd.  v.  22. 

ONYCHA  (rbrVP,*  shecheleth:  «w|:  onyx) 
according  to  many  of  the  old  versions  denotes  the 
operculum  of  some  species  of  Strombus,  a  genus  of 
gasteropodous  Mollusca.  The  Hebrew  word,  which 
appears  to  be  derived  from  a  root  which  means  "  to 
shell  or  peel  off,"  occurs  only  in  Ex.  xxx.  34,  as 
one  of  the  ingredients  of  the  sacred  perfume ;  in 
Ecclus.  xxiv.  15,  Wisdom  is  compared  to  the  plea 
sant  odour  yielded  by  "  galbanum,  onyx,  and 
sweet  storax."  There  can  be  little  doubt  that 
the  JW|  of  Dioscorides  (ii.  10),  and  the  onyx 
of  Pliny  (xxxii.  10),  are  identical  with  the 
operculum  of  a  Strombus,  perhaps  S.  lentiginosus 
There  is  frequent  mention  of  the  onyx  in  the 
writings  of  Arabian  authors,  and  it  would  appear 
from  them  that  the  operculum  of  several  kinds  of 
Strombus  were  prized  as  perfumes.  The  following 
is  Dioscorides'  description  of  the  6Vt»| :  "  The  onyx 
is  the  operculum  of  a  shell-fish  resembling  ihepur- 
pura,  which  is  found  in  India  in  the  nard-producing 
lakes ;  it  is  odorous,  because  the  shell-fish  feed  on 
the  nard,  and  is  collected  after  the  heat  has 
dried  up  the  marshes :  that  is  the  best  kind  which 
comes  from  the  Red  Sea,  and  is  whitish  and 
shining;  the  Babylonian  kind  is  dark  and  smaller 
than  the  other;  both  have  a  sweet  odour  when 
burnt,  something  like  castoreum."  It  is  not  easy 
to  see  what  Dioscorides  can  mean  by  "  nard-pro 
ducing  lakes."  The  oVu|,  "  nail,"  or  "  claw," 
seems  to  point  to  the  operculum  of  the  Strom- 
bidae,  which  is  of  a  claw  shape  and  serrated,  whence 
the  Arabs  call  the  mollusc  "the  devil's  claw;" 


ONYX 


635 


A.  Strombut  Dtanat. 


B.  The  Oftrculum. 


the  Unguis  odoratus,  or  Blatta  bi/zantina, — 
for  under  both  these  terms  apparently  the  devil 
claw  (Teufelsklau  of  the  Germans,  see  Winer, 


>  an  unused  root,  i.  q.   Y^xw,  »   whence  pro 
bably  our  word  "  shell,"  "  scale."    (See  Gesenius,  *.  •».) 

b  Since  the  above  was  written,  we  have  been  favoured 
with  a  communication  from  Mr.  Daniel  Hanbury,  on  the 
fobject  of  the  Blatta  Byzantina  of  old  Pharmacological 
writers,  as  well  as  with  specimens  of  the  substance 
iteelf,  which  it  appears  is  still  found  in  the  bazaars  of 
the  East,  though  not  now  in  much  demand.  Mr.  Han- 
bury  procured  some  specimens  in  Damascus  in  October 
(1860),  and  a  friend  of  his  bought  some  in  Alexandria  a 
few  months  previously.  The  article  appears  to  be 
.ilways  mixed  with  the  opercula  of  some  species  of 
A'ums.  As  regards  the  perfume  ascribed  to  this  sub 
stance,  it  does  not  appear  to  us,  from  a  specimen  we 
burnt,  to  deserve  the  character  of  the  excellent  odour 
which  hits  been  ascribed  to  it,  though  it  is  not  without  an 
aromatic  scent.  See  a  iigure  of  the  true  B.  liyzant.  in 


Realw,  s.  v.)  is  alluded  to  in  old  English 
writers  on  Materia  Medica — has  by  some  been 
supposed  no  longer  to  exist.  Dr.  Lister  laments 
its  loss,  believing  it  to  have  been  a  good  medi 
cine  "  from  its  strong  aromatic  smell."  Dr, 
Gray  of  the  British  Museum,  who  has  favoured 
us  with  some  remarks  on  this  subject,  says  that 
the  opercula  of  the  different  kinds  of  Strombidae 
agree  with  the  figures  of  Blatta  byzantina  and 
Unguis  odoratus  in  the  old  books  ;  with  regard  to 
the  odour  he  writes — "The  horny  opercula  when 
burnt  all  emit  an  odour  which  some  may  call  sweet 
according  to  their  fancy."  Bochart  (ffieroz.  iii. 
797)  believes  some  kind  of  bdellium  is  intended ; 
but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  $vv£  of  the 
LXX.  denotes  the  operculum  of  some  one  or  more 
species  of  Strombus.  For  further  information  on 
this  subject  see  Rumph  (Amboinische  Raritdten- 
Kammer,  cap.  xvii.  p.  48,  the  German  ed.  Vienna, 
1766),  and  compare  also  Sprengel  (Comment,  ad 
Dioscor.  ii.  10)  ;  Forsk&l  (Desc.  Anim.  143,  21, 
"  Unguis  odoratus  "),  Philos.  Transac.  (xvii.  641) ; 
Johnston  (Introd.  to  Conchol.  p.  77) ;  and  Gesenius 
(  Thes.  s.  v.  nW)>  [W.  H.] 

ONYX  (DnfcV  sh6ham :  &  \lOos  d  irpdffivos, 
ff/j.dpaySos,  ffdpSios,  <r«ir<peipos,  &T\pti\\lov,  oWf; 
Aq.  ffap86vv£  ;  Symm.  and  Theod.  oVi>|  and  '6vv\  : 
onychinus  (lapis),  sardonychus,  onyx).  The  A.  V. 
uniformly  renders  the  Hebrew  shoham  by  "  onyx  ;" 
the  Vulgate  too  is  consistent  with  itself,  the  sard 
onyx  (Job  xxviii.  1 6)  being  merely  a  variety  of  the 
onyx ;  but  the  testimonies  of  ancient  interpreters 
generally  are,  as  Gesenius  has  remarked,  diverse 
and  ambiguous.  The  shoham  stone  is  mentioned 
(Gen.  ii.  12)  as  a  product  of  the  land  of  Havilah. 
Two  of  these  stones,  upon  which  were  engraven  the 
names  of  the  children  of  Israel,  six  on  either  stone, 
adorned  the  shoulders  of  the  high-priest's  ephod 
(Ex.  xxviii.  9-12),  and  were  to  be  worn  as  "  stones 
of  memorial  "  (see  Kalisch  on  Ex.  I.  c.).  A  sh6ham 
was  also  tha  second  stone  in  the  fourth  row  of  the 
sacerdotal  breastplate  (Ex.  xxviii.  20)  Shohain 
stones  were  collected  by  David  for  adorning  the 
Temple  (1  Chr.  xsix.  2).  In  Job  xxviii.  16,  it  i« 
said  that  wisdom  "  cannot  be  valued  with  the  gold  01 
Ophir,  with  the  "precious  shoham  or  the  sapphire.'' 
The  shoham  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  treasures  of 
the  king  of  Tyre  (Ez.  xxviii.  13).  There  is  nothing 
in  the  contexts  of  the  several  passages  where  the 
Hebrew  tern}  occurs  to  help  us  to  determine  its 
signification.  Braun  (De  Vest.  sac.  ffeb.  p.  727) 
has  endeavoured  to  shew  that  the  sardonyx  is  the 
stone  indicated,  and  his  remarks  are  well  worthy  of 
careful  perusal.  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  7,  §5,  and 

Matthiolus'  Comment,  in  Dioscor.  (il.  8),  where  there  is  a 
long  discussion  on  the  subject ;  also  a  fig.  of  Blatta  By 
zantina  and  the  operculum  of  Fusus  in  Pomet's  Iliftoirt 
des  Drogues,  1694,  part  2.  p.  97.  "  Mansfield  Parkyns," 
writes  Mr.  Hanbury,  "  in  his  Life  in  Abyssinia  (vol.  i. 
p.  419),  mentions  among  the  exports  from  Mussowah,  a 
certain  article  called  Doofu,  which  he  states  Is  the  oper 
culum,  of  a  shell,  and  that  it  is  used  in  Nubia  as  a 
perfume,  being  burnt  with  sandal-wood.  This  bit  of 
information  is  quite  confirmatory  of  Forskal's  statement 
concerning  the  Dofr  el  afrit — (Is  not  Parkyr.s's  "  Doofu  * 
meant  for  dofr,  ^j^  ?)— namely,  "  e  Mochha  per  Sues. 

Arabes  etlam  afferunt.    Nigritis  fumigatorium  est." 

a  The  Rev.  C.  W  King  writes  to  us  that  "  a  largp,  per 
fect  sardonyx  is  still  precious.  A  dealer  tells  me  he  saw 
this  summer  (1861)  in  Paris  one  valued  ut  1000Z.,  %io< 
engraved." 


836 


OPHEL 


B.  J.  v.  5,  §7)  expressly  states  that  the  shoulder' 
stones  of  the  high-priest  were  formed  of  two 
large  sardonyxes,  an  onyx  being,  in  h;s  description, 
the  second  stone  in  the  fourth  row  of  the  breastplate. 
Some  writers  believe  that  the  "  beryl "  is  intended, 
iml  the  authority  of  the  LXX.  and  other  versions 
has  been  adduced  in  proof  of  this  interpretation ; 
but  a  glance  at  the  head  of  this  article  will  shew 
that  the  LXX.  is  most  inconsistent,  and  that  nothing 
can,  in  consequence,  be  learnt  from  it.  Of  those 
who  identify  the  shoham  with  the  beryl  are  Beller- 
inann  (Die  Urim  und  Thummim,  p.  64),  Winer  (Sib. 
Realwort.  i.  333),  and  Rosenmiiller  (The  Minera 
logy  of  the  Bible,  p.  40,  Bib.  Cab.}.  Other  inter- 
oretations  of  shoham  have  been  proposed,  but  all 
are  mere  conjectures.  Braun  traces  shoham  to  the 
Arabic  sachma,  "  blackness"  :  "  Of  such  a  colour," 
says  he,  "  are  the  Arabian  sardonyxes,  which  have 
a  black  ground-colour."  This  agrees  essentially  with 
Mr.  King's  remarks  (Antique  Gems,  p.  9) :  "  The 
Arabian  species,"  he  says,  "  were  formed  of  black 
or  blue  strata,  covered  by  one  of  opaque  white ;  over 
which  again  was  a  third  of  a  vermilion  colour." 
But  Gesenius  and  Fiirst  refer  the  Hebrew  word  to  the 
Arabic  saham,  "  to  be  pale."  The  different  kinds 
of  onyx  and  sardonyx,b  however,  are  so  variable 
in  colour,  that  either  of  these  definitions  is  suitable. 
They  all  form  excellent  materials  for  the  engraver's 
art.  The  balance  of  authority  is,  we  think,  in 
lavour  of  some  variety  of  the  onyx.  We  are  con 
tent  to  retain  the  rendering  of  the  A.  V.,  supported 
as  it  is  by  the  Vulgate  and  the  express  statement  of 
so  high  an  authority  as  Josephus,*  till  better  proofs 
in  support  of  the  claims  of  some  other  stone  be 
forthcoming.  As  to  the  "onyx"  of  Ecclus.  xxiv. 
15,  see  ONY.CHA.  [W.  H.] 

OPHEL  (bayn,  always  with  the  def.  article : 

'OireA,  6"n<?>cU;  Alex.  6O<t>\a:  Ophel).  A  part  of 
ancient  Jerusalem.  The  name  is  derived  by  the  lexi 
cographers  from  a  root  of  similar  sound,  which  has 
the  force  of  a  swelling  or  tumour  (Gesenius,  Thes. ; 
Fiirst,  Hdwb.  ii.  1696).  It  does  not  come  forward 
till  a  late  period  of  Old  Test,  history.  In  2  Chr. 
xxvii.  3,  Jotham  is  said  to  have  built  much  "  on 
the  wall  of  Ophel."  Manasseh,  amongst  his  other 
defensive  works,  "compassed  about  Ophel"  (Ibid. 
xxxiii.  14).  From  the  catalogue  of  Nehemiah's 
repairs  to  the  wall  of  Jerusalem,  it  appears  to  have 
been  near  the  "  water-gate  "  (Neh.  iii.  26)  and  the 
"  great  tower  that  lieth  out  (ver.  27).  Lastly, 
the  former  of  these  two  passages,  and  Neh.  xi.  21, 
shew  that  Ophel  was  the  residence  of  the  Levites. 
It  is  not  again  mentioned,  though  its  omission  in 
the  account  of  the  route  round  the  walls  at  the 
sanctification  of  the  second  Temple,  Neh.  xii.  31- 
40,  is  singular. 

In  the  passages  of  his  history  parallel  to  those 
quoted  above,  Josephus  either  passes  it  over  alto 
gether,  or  else  refers  to  it  in  merely  general 
terms — "  veiy  large  towers"  (Ant.  ix.  11,  §2), 
"  very  high  towers "  (x.  3,  §2).  But  in  his  ac 
count  of  the  last  days  of  Jerusalem  he  mentions  it 
tour  times  as  Ophla  (6  'O^Aa,  accompanying  it  as 
in  the  Hebrew  with  the  article).  The  first  of  these 
(B.  J.  ii.  17,  §9)  tells  nothing  as  to  its  position; 

*>  The  onyx  has  two  strata,  the  sardonyx  three. 

€  "  Who  speaks  from  actual  observation  :  he  expressly 
notices  the  fine  quality  of  these  two  pieces  of  sardonyx." 
-[C.  W.  KINO.] 

•  Fiirst  (Hdwb.  ii.  169)  states,  without  a  word  that 
could  lead  a  reader  to  suspect  that  there  was  any  doubt 


OPHEL 

but  from  the  other  three  we  can  gather  something. 
(1.)  The  old  wall  of  Jerusalem  ran  above  the  spring 
of  Siloam  and  the  pool  of  Solomon,  and  on  reaching 
the  place  called  Ophla,  joined  the  eastern  porch  o( 
the  Temple  (B.  J.  v.  4,  §2).  (2.)  "  John  held 
the  Temple  and  the  places  round  it,  not  a  little  ill 
extent, — both  the  Ophla  and  the  valley  called  Ke- 
dron"  (Tb.  v.  6,  §1).  (3.)  After  the  capture  of 
the  Temple,  and  before  Titus  had  taken  the  upper 
city  (the  modern  Zion)  from  the  Jews,  his  soldiers 
burnt  the  whole  of  the  lower  city,  lying  in  the 
valley  between  the  two,  "  and  the  place  called  the 
Ophla  "(76.  vi.  6,  §3). 

From  this  it  appears  that  Ophel  was  outside  the 
south  wall  of  the  Temple,  and  that  it  lay  between 
the  central  valley  of  the  city,  which  debouches  above 
the  spring  of  Siloam,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  east 
portico  of  the  Temple  on  the  other.  The  east  por 
tico,  it  should  be  remembered,  was  not  on  the  line 
of  the  east  wall  of  the  present  haram,  but  330  feet 
further  west,  on  the  line  of  the  solid  wall  which 
forms  the  termination  of  the  vaults  in  the  eastern 
corner.  [See  JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  p.  1020 ;  and  the 
Plan,  1022.]  This  situation  agrees  with  the  mention 
of  the  "water-gate"  in  Neh.  iii.  26,  and  the  state 
ment  of  xi.  21,  that  it  was  the  residence  of  the  Le 
vites.  Possibly  the  "  great  tower  that  lieth  out," 
in  the  former  of  these  may  be  the  "  tower  of  Eder" — 
mentioned  with  "Ophel  of  the  daughter  of  Zion,"  by 
Micah  (iv.  8),  or  that  named  in  an  obscure  passage 
of  Isaiah — "Ophel  and  watch  tower"  (xxxii.  14; 
A.  V.  inaccurately  "  forts  and  towers"). 

Ophel,  then,  in  accordance  with  the  probable  root 
of  the  name,  was  the  swelling  declivity  by  which 
the  Mount  of  the  Temple  slopes  off  on  its  southern 
side  into  the  Valley  of  Hmnom — a  long  narrowish 
rounded  spur  or  promontory,  which  intervenes  be 
tween  the  mouth  of  the  central  valley  of  Jerusalem 
(the  Tyropoeon)  and  the  Kidron,  or  Valley  of  Jeho- 
shaphat.  Halfway  down  it  on  its  eastern  face  is  the 
"  Fount  of  the  Virgin,"  so  called;  and  at  its  foot  the 
lower  outlet  of  the  same  spring — the  Pool  of  Siloam. 
How  much  of  this  declivity  was  covered  with  the 
houses  of  the  Levites,  or  with  the  suburb  which 
would  naturally  gather  round  them,  and  where  the 
"  great  tower "  stood  we  have  not  at  present  the 
means  of  ascertaining." 

Professor  Stanley  (Sermons  on  the  Apostolic  Age, 
329,  330)  has  ingeniously  conjectured  that  the 
name  Oblias  ('flflAhw) — which  was  one  of  the  titles 
by  which  St.  James  the  Less  was  distinguished 
from  other  Jacobs  of  the  time,  and  which  is  ex 
plained  by  Hegesippos  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  ii.  23)  as 
meaning  "  bulwark  (irepiox^)  of  the  people,"— 

was  in  its  original  form  Ophli-am  b  (DyyBy).  In 
this  connexion  it  is  a  singular  coincidence  that 
St.  James  was  martyred  by  being  thrown  from 
the  comer  of  the  Temple,  at,  or  close  to,  the 
very  spot  which  is  named  by  Josephus  as  the 
boundary  of  Ophel.  [JAMES,  vol.  i.  924,  5; 
EN-ROGEL,  558a.]  Ewald,  however  (Geschichte, 

vi.  204  note),  restores  the  name  as  DyvSH,  as  if 
from  ^3H,  a  fence  or  boundary.  [CHEBEL.]  This 
has  in  its  favour  the  fact  that  it  more  closely 


on  the  point,  that  Ophel  is  identical  with  Mfllo.  It  may 
be  so,  only  there  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence  for  01 
against  it. 

b  Some  of  the  MSS.  of  Eusebius  have  the  name  Ozleam 
('fl£\«ili),  preserving  the  termination,  though  they  eoi- 
nipt  the  former  part  of  the  word. 


OPHIR 

agrees   in  sigi.Lficatiou  with  wtptoxji  than   Ophel 
does. 

The  Ophel  which  appears  to  have  been  the  re 
sidence  of  Klisha  at  the  time  of  Naaman's  visit  to 
him  (2  K.  v.  24;  A.  V.  "the  tower")  was  of 
course  a  different  place  from  that  spoken  of  above. 
The  narrative  would  seem  to  imply  that  it  was  not 
far  from  Samaria ;  but  this  is  not  certain.  The 
LXX.  and  Vulg.  must  have  read  /DK,  "  darkness," 
for  they  give  rb  <TKOTfiv6v  and  vesperi  respec 
tively.  [G.] 

O'PHIR  OBIK,  "VeiN :  Otye'tp :  Ophir).  1. 
The  eleventh  in  order  of  the  sons  of  Joktan,  coming 
immediately  after  Sheba  (Gen.  x.  29 ;  1  Chr.  i.  23). 
So  many  important  names  in  the  genealogical  table 
in  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis — such  as  Sidon, 
Canaan,  Asshur,  Aram  (Syria),  Mizraim  (the  two 
Egypts,  Upper  and  Lower),  Sheba,  Caphtorim,  and 
Philistim  (the  Philistines)— represent  the  name  of 
some  city,  country,  or  people,  that  it  is  reasonable 
to  infer  that  the  same  is  the  case  with  all  the 
names  in  the  table.  It  frequently  happens  that  a 
father  and  his  sons  in  the  genealogy  represent  dis 
tricts  geographically  contiguous  to  each  other ;  yet 
this  is  not  an  invariable  rule,  for  in  the  case  of 
Tarshish  the  son  of  Javan  (ver.  10),  and  of  Nimrod 
the  son  of  Gush,  whose  kingdom  was  Babel  or 
Babylon  (ver.  11),  a  son  was  conceived  as  a  dis 
tant  colony  or  offshoot.  But  there  is  one  marked 
peculiarity  in  the  sons  of  Joktan,  which  is  com 
mon  to  them  with  the  Canaanites  alone,  that 
precise  geographical  limits  are  assigned  to  their 
settlements.  Thus  it  is  said  (ver.  19)  that  the 
border  of  the  Canaanites  was  "  from  Sidon,  as  thou 
comest  to  Gerar,  unto  Gaza;  as  thou  goest,  unto 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  Admah,  and  Zeboim, 
even  unto  Lasha:"  and  in  like  manner  (ver.  29, 
30)  that  the  dwelling  of  the  sons  of  Joktan  was 
"  from  Mesha,  as  thou  goest  unto  Sephar  a  moun 
tain  of  the  east."  The  peculiar  wording  of  these 
geographical  limits,  and  the  fact  that  the  well-known 
towns  which  define  the  border  of  the  Canaanites  are 
mentioned  so  nearly  in  the  same  manner,  forbid  the 
supposition  that  Mesha  and  Sephar  belonged  to  very 
distant  countries,  or  were  comparatively  unknown : 
and  as  many  of  the  sons  of  Joktan — such  as  Sheba, 
Hazarmaveth,  Almodad,  and  others — are  by  com 
mon  consent  admitted  to  represent  settlements  in 
Arabia,  it  is  an  obvious  inference  that  all  the  set 
tlements  corresponding  to  the  names  of  the  other 
sons  are  to  be  sought  for  in  the  same  peninsula 
alone.  Hence,  as  Ophir  is  one  of  those  sons,  it  may 
be  regarded  as  a  fixed  point  in  discussions  con 
cerning  the  place  Ophir  mentioned  in  the  book  of 
Kings,  that  the  author  of  the  10th  chapter  of 
Genesis  regarded  Ophir  the  son  of  Joktan  as  cor 
responding  to  some  city,  region,  or  tribe  in  Arabia. 

Etymology. — There  is,  seemingly,  no  sufficient 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  word  Ophir  is  Semitic, 
although,  as  is  the  case  with  numerous  proper 
names  known  to  be  of  Hebrew  origin,  the  precise 
word  does  not  occur  as  a  common  name  in  the 
Bible.  See  the  words  from  ~)QK  and  ~)SJJ  in 
Gesenius's  Thesaurus,  and  compare  'A<pap.  the  me 
tropolis  of  the  Sabaeans  in  the  Periplus,  attributed 

a  This  strange  idea  of  one  of  the  most  learned  Spaniards 
of  his  time  (b.  1527,  A.D.,  d.  159«)  accounts  for  the  fol 
lowing  passage  in  Ben  Jonson's  Alchemist,  Act.  ii.  So.  I : 

"  Come  on,  sir ;  now  you  set  your  foot  on  shore 
In  Novo  Orbe.— Here's  the  rich  Peru; 


OPHIR 


637 


to  Arrian.  Cesenius  suggests  that  it  means  a 
"  fruitful  region,"  if  it  is  Semitic.  Baron  von 
Wrede,  who  explored  Hadhramaut  in  Arabia  in 
1843  (Journal  of  the  R.  Geographical  Society, 
vol.  xiv.  p.  110),  made  a  small  vocabulary  o! 
Himyaritic  words  in  the  vernacular  tongue,  and 
amongst  these  he  gives  ofir  as  signifying  red.  He 
says  that  the  Mahra  people  call  themselves  thr 
tribes  of  the  red  country  (ofir),  and  call  the  Red 
Sea,  bahr  ofir.  If  this  were  so,  it  might  han 
somewhat  of  the  same  relation  to  aphar,  "dust" 
or  "  dry  ground "  (K  and  JJ  being  interchange 
able),  that  adorn,  "red,"  has  to  adamah,  "the 
ground."  Still  it  is  unsafe  to  accept  the  use  of 
a  word  of  this  kind  on  the  authority  of  any  one 
traveller,  however  accurate ;  and  the  supposed  ex 
istence  and  meaning  of  a  word  ofir  is  recommended 
for  special  inquiry  to  any  future  traveller  in  the 
same  district. 

2.  (Zovtplp  and  2w<f>ip  •  Ophira,  1  K.  ix.  28, 
x.  11 ;  2  Chr.  viii.  18,  ix.  10:  in  1  K.  ix.  28  the 
translation  of  the  LXX.  is  els  ZtaQipa,  though  the 
ending  in  the  original  merely  denotes  motion  towards 
Ophir,  and  is  no  part  of  the  name.)  A  seaport  or 
region  from  which  the  Hebrews  in  the  time  of 
Solomon  obtained  gold,  in  vessels  which  went  thither 
in  conjunction  with  Tyrian  ships  from  Eziou- 
geber,  near  Elath,  on  that  branch  of  the  Red  Sea 
which  is  now  called  the  Gulf  of  Akabah.  The  gold 
was  proverbial  for  its  fineness,  so  that  "gold  of 
Ophir"  is  several  times  used  as  an  expression  for 
fine  gold  (Ps.  xlv.  10  ;  Job  xxviii.  16  ;  Is.  xiii.  12  ; 
1  Chr.  xxix.  4) ;  and  in  one  passage  (Job  xxii.  24) 
the  word  "  Ophir "  by  itself  is  used  for  gold  of 
Ophir,  and  for  gold  generally.  In  Jer.  x.  9  and 
Dan.  x.  5  it  is  thought  by  Gesenius  and  others  that 
Ophir  is  intended  by  the  word  "  Uphaz  " — there 
being  a  very  trifling  difference  between  the  words 
in  Hebrew  when  written  without  the  vowel-points. 
In  addition  to  gold,  the  vessels  brought  from  Ophir 
almug-wood  and  precious  stones. 

The  precise  geographical  situation  of  Ophir  has 
long  been  a  subject  of  doubt  and  discussion.  Calmet 
(Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  s.  v.  "Ophir")  regarded  it 
as  in  Armenia ;  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  (History  of  the 
World,  book  i.  ch.  8)  thought  it  was  one  of  the 
Molucca  Islands;  and  Arias  Montanus  (Bochart, 
Phaleg,  Pref.  and  ch.  9),  led  by  the  similarity  of 
the  word  Parvaim,  supposed  to  be  identical  with 
Ophir  (2  Chr.  iii.  6),  found  it  in  Peru."  But  these 
countries,  as  well  as  Iberia  and  Phrygia,  cannot 
now  be  viewed  as  affording  matter  for  serious  dis 
cussion  on  this  point,  and  the  three  opinions  which 
have  found  supporters  in  our  own  time  were  for 
merly  represented,  amongst  other  writers,  by  Huet 
(Sur  le  Commerce  et  la  Navigation  des  Anciens, 
p.  59),  by  Bruce  (Travels,  book  ii.  c.  4),  and  by 
the  historian  Robertson  (Disquisition  respecting 
Ancient  India,  sect.  1 ),  who  placed  Ophir  in  Africa ; 
by  Vitringa  (Geograph.  Sacra,  p.  114)  and  Reland 
(Dissertatio  de  Ophir},  who  placed  it  in  India  ;  and 
by  Michaelis  (Spicilegium,  ii.  184),  Niebuhr,  the 
traveller  (Description  de  I'Arabie,  p.  253),  Gos- 
sellin  (Recherches  sur  la  Geographie  des  Anciens, 
ii.  99),  and  Vincent  (History  of  the  Commerce  and 
Navigation  of  the  Ancients,  ii.  265-270),  who 


And  there  within,  sir,  are  the  golden  mines, 

Great  Solomon's  Ophir." 

Arias  Montanus  fancied  that  Parvaim  meant,  !n  the  dual 
number,  two  Perus ;  one  Peru  Pi-sper,  and  the  ctier  Jfw, 
Spain  CHS  D*n.B). 


338 


orniii 


placet!  it  in  Arabia.  Of  other  distinguished  geo 
graphical  writers,  Bochart  (Phalcg,  ii.  27)  admitted 
two  Ophirs,  one  in  Arabia  and  one  in  India,  i.  e.  at 
Ceylon ;  while  D'Anville  (Dissertation  sur  le  Pays 
d' Ophir,  Memoires  de  Littirature,  xxx.  83),  equally 
admitting  two,  placed  one  in  Arabia  and  one  in 
Africa.  In  our  own  days  the  discussion  has  been 
continued  by  Gesenius,  who  in  articles  on  Ophir  in 
his  Thesaurus  (p.  141),  and  in  Ersch  and  Gruber's 
Encyklopaedie  (s.  v.)  stated  that  the  question  lay 
between  India  and  Arabia,  assigned  the  reasons  to 
be  urged  in  favour  of  each  of  these  countries,  but 
declared  the  arguments  for  each  to  be  so  equally 
balanced  that  he  refrained  from  expressing  any 
opinion  of  his  own  on  the  subject.  M.  Quatremfere, 
however,  in  a  paper  on  Ophir  which  was  printed 
in  1842  in  the  Memoires  de  I'lnstitut,  again  in 
sisted  on  the  claims  of  Africa  (Academic  des  In 
scriptions  et  Belles  Lettres,  t.  xv.  ii.  362);  and  in 
his  valuable  work  on  Ceylon  (part  vii.  chap.  1)  Sir 
J.  Emerson  Tennant  adopts  the  opinion,  sanctioned 
by  Josephus,  that  Malacca  was  Ophir.  Otherwise 
the  two  countries  which  have  divided  the  opinions 
of  the  learned  have  been  India  and  Arabia — Lassen, 
Hitter.  Bertheau  (Exeget.  Handbuch,  2  Chr.  viii. 
18),  Thenius  (Exeget.  Handbuch,  1  K.  x.  22),  and 
^wald  (Geschichte,  iii.  347,  2nd  ed.)  being  in 
favour  of  India,  while  Winer  (Eealw.  s.  v.), 
Fiirst  (Hebr.  und  Chald.  Handw.  s.  v.),  Knobel 
(Volkertafel  der  Genesis,?.  190),  Forster  (Geogr. 
of  Arabia,  i.  161-167),  Crawford  (Descriptive  Dic 
tionary  of  the  Indian  Islands,  s.  v.),  and  Kalisch 
(Commentary  on  Genesis,  chap.  "  The  Genealogy 
of  Nations  ")  are  in  favour  of  Arabia.  The  fullest 
treatise  on  the  question  is  that  of  Ritter,  who  in 
his  Erdkunde,  vol.  xiv.,  published  in  1848,  devoted 
80  octavo  pages  to  the  discussion  (pp.  351-431), 
and  adopted  the  opinion  of  Lassen  (Ind.  Alt.  \. 
529)  that  Ophir  was  situated  at  the  mouth  of  the 
Indus. 

Some  general  idea  of  the  arguments  which  may 
be  advanced  in  favour  of  each  of  the  three  countries 
may  be  derived  from  the  following  statement.  In 
favour  of  Arabia,  there  are  these  considerations : — 
1st.  The  10th  chapter  of  Genesis  ver.  29,  contains 
what  is  equivalent  to  an  intimation  of  the  author's 
opinion,  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia.  [OPHiK  1.] 
2ndly.  Three  places  in  Arabia  may  be  pointed  out, 
the  names  of  which  agree  sufficiently  with  the  word 
Ophir :  viz.,  Aphar,  called  by  Ptolemy  Sapphara, 
now  Zafar  or  Saphar,  which,  according  to  the  Pe- 
riplus  ascribed  to  Arrian,  was  the  metropolis  of  the 
Sabaeans,  and  was  distant  twelve  days'  journey  from 
the  emporium  Muza  on  the  Red  Sea;  Doffir,  a 
city  mentioned  by  Niebuhr  the  traveller  (Descrip 
tion  de  I' Arabic,  p.  219),  as  a  considerable  town  of 
Yemen,  and  capital  of  Bellad  Hadsje,  situated  to 
the  north  of  Loheia,  and  1 5  leagues  from  the  sea ; 
and  Zafar  or  ZafaVi  [ARABIA,  p.  92]  (Sepher, 
Dlsafar)  now  Dofar,  a  city  on  the  southern  coast  of 
Arabia,  visited  in  the  14th  century  by  Ibn  Batuta, 
the  Arabian  traveller,  and  stated  by  him  to  be  a 
month's  journey  by  land  from  Aden,  and  a  month's 
voyage,  when  the  wind  was  fair,  from  the  Indian 
shores  (Lee's  Translation,  p.  57).  3rdly.  In  an 
tiquity,  Arabia  was  represented  as  a  country  pro 
ducing  gold  by  four  writers  at  least :  viz.,  by 
the  geographer  Agatharchides.  who  lived  in  the 
2nd  century  before  Christ  (in  Photius  250,  and 
Hudson's  Geograph.  Minores,  i.  60) ;  by  the 
geographer  Artemidorus,  who  lived  a  little  later, 
snd  whose  account  has  leen  preserved,  and,  as  it 


OPHIK 

were,  adopted  by  the  geographer  Strabo  (L\V.  18); 
by  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  50,  iii.  44) ;  and  by  Pliny 
the  Elder  (vi.  32).  4thly.  Eupolemus,  a  Greek 
historian,  who  lived  before  the  Christian  aera,  and 
who,  besides  other  writings,  wrote  a  work  respect 
ing  the  kings  of  Judaea,  expressly  states,  as  quotivi 
by  Eusebius  (Praep.  Evang.  ix.  30),  that  Ophir 
was  an  island  with  gold  mines  in  the  Erythraean 
Sea  (Ofy>4>r},  comp.  OvQfip,  the  LXX.  Translation 
in  Gen.  x.  29),  and  that  David  sent  miners  thither 
in  vessels  which  he  caused  to  be  built  at  Aelana 
=  Elath.  Now  it  is  true  that  the  name  of  the  Ery 
thraean  Sea  was  deemed  to  include  the  Persian 
Gulf,  as  well  as  the  Red  Sea,  but  it  was  always 
regarded  as  closely  connected  with  the  shores  ol 
Arabia,  and  cannot  be  shown  to  have  been  extended 
to  India.  Sthly.  On  the  supposition  that,  notwith 
standing  all  the  ancient  authorities  on  the  subject, 
gold  really  never  existed  either  in  Arabia,  or  in  any 
island  along  its  coasts,  Ophir  was  an  Arabian  em 
porium,  into  which  gold  was  brought  as  an  article 
of  commerce,  and  was  exported  into  Judaea.  There 
is  not  a  single  passage  in  the  Bible  inconsistent 
with  this  supposition  ;  and  there  is  something  like 
a  direct  intimation  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia. 

While  such  is  a  general  view  of  the  arguments  foi 
Arabia,  the  following  considerations  are  urged  in 
behalf  of  India.  1st.  Sofir  is  the  Coptic  word  for 
India ;  and  Sophir,  or  Sophira  is  the  word  used  for 
the  place  Ophir  by  the  Septuagint  translators,  and 
likewise  by  Josephus.  And  Josephus  positively 
states  that  it  was  a  part  of  India  (Ant.  viii.  6,  §4), 
though  he  places  it  in  the  Golden  Chersonese,  which 
was  the  Malay  peninsula,  and  belonged,  geographic 
ally,  not  to  India  proper,  but  to  India  beyond  the 
Ganges.  Moreover,  in  three  passages  of  the  Bible, 
where  the  Septuagint  has  ^uxpipd  or  ~S.ovfyip,  1  K.  ix. 
28,  x.  11 ;  Is.  xiii.  12,  Arabian  translators  have  used 
the  word  India.  2ndly.  All  the  three  imports  from 
Ophir,  gold,  precious  stones,  and  almug  wood,  are 
essentially  Indian.  Gold  is  found  in  the  sources  of 
the  Indus  and  the  Cabool  River  before  their  juncture 
at  Attock ;  in  the  Himalaya  mountains,  and  in  a 
portion  of  the  Deccan,  especially  at  Cochin.  India 
has  in  all  ages  been  celebrated  for  its  precious  stones 
of  all  kinds.  And  sandal-wood,  which  the  best 
modern  Hebrew  scholars  regard  as  the  almug-wood 
of  the  Bible,  is  almost  exclusively,  or  at  any  rate 
pre-eminently,  a  product  of  the  coast  of  Malabar. 
3rdly.  Assuming  that  the  ivory,  peacocks,  and  apes, 
which  were  brought  to  Ezion-geber  once  in  three 
years  by  the  navy  of  Tharshish  in  conjunction  with 
the  navy  of  Hiram  (1  K.  x.  22),  were  brought 
from  Ophir,  they  also  collectively  point  to  India 
rather  than  Arabia.  Moreover,  etymologically,  not 
one  of  these  words  in  the  Hebrew  is  of  Hebi-ew  or 
Semitic  origin  ;  one  being  connected  with  Sanscrit, 
another  with  the  Tamil,  and  another  with  the 
Malay  language.  [TARSHISH.]  4thly.  Two  places 
in  India  may  be  specified,  agreeing  to  a  certain 
extent  in  name  with  Ophir ;  one  at  the  mouths 
of  the  Indus,  where  Indian  writers  placed  a  people 
named  the  Abhira,  agreeing  with  the  name  2o- 
fifipia  of  the  geographer  Ptolemy  ;  and  the  other, 
the  Souirapo  of  Ptolemy,  the  "Ointtrapa  of  Arrian's 
Periplus,  where  the  town  of  Goa  is  now  situated, 
on  the  western  coast  of  India. 

Lastly,  the  following  pleas  have  been  urged 
in  behalf  of  Africa.  1st.  Of  the  thr.ee  conn- 
tries,  Africa,  Arabia,  and  India,  Africa  is  the 
only  one  which  can  be  seriously  regarded  as  con 
taining  districts  which  have  supplied  gold  in  any 


OPH1B 

great  quantity.  Although,  as  a  statistical  fact, 
gold  has  been  found  in  parts  of  India,  the  quan 
tity  is  so  small,  that  India  has  never  supplied 
cold  to  the  commerce  of  the  world ;  and  in 
modern  times  no  gold  at  all,  nor  any  vestiges  of 
exhausted  mines  have  been  found  in  Arabia.  2ndly. 
On  the  western  coast  of  Africa,  near  Mozambique, 
there  is  a  port  called  by  the  Arabians  Sofala,  which, 
as  the  liquids  I  and  are  r  are  easily  interchanged,  was 
probably  the  Ophir  of  the  Ancients.  When  the  Por 
tuguese,  in  A.D.  1500,  first  reached  it  by  the  Cape 
of  Good  Hope,  it  was  the  emporium  of  the  gold 
district  in  the  interior;  and  two  Arabian  vessels 
laden  with  gold  were  actually  offSofalab  at  the  time 
(see  Cadamusto,  cap.  58).  Srdly.  On  the  supposi 
tion  that  the  passage,  1  K.  x.  22,  applies  to  Ophir, 
Sofala  has  still  stronger  claims  in  preference  to 
India.  Peacocks,  indeed,  would  not  have  been 
brought  from  it ;  but  the  peacock  is  too  delicate  a 
bird  for  a  long  voyage  in  small  vessels,  and  the 
word  tukkiyim,  probably  signified  "  parrots."  At 
the  same  time,  ivory  and  apes  might  have  been 
supplied  in  abundance  from  the  district  of  which 
Sofala  was  the  emporium.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
Ophir  had  been  in  India,  other  Indian  productions 
might  have  been  expected  in  the  list  of  imports ; 
such  as  shawls,  silk,  rich  tissues  of  cotton,  per 
fumes,  pepper,  and  cinnamon.  4thly.  On  the  same 
supposition  respecting  1  K.  x.  22,  it  can,  according 
to  the  traveller  Bruce,  be  proved  by  the  laws  of 
the  monsoons  in  the  Indian  Ocean,  that  Ophir  was 
at  Sofala ;  inasmuch  as  the  voyage  to  Sofala  from 
Ezion-geber  would  have  been  performed  exactly  in 
three  years ;  it  could  not  have  been  accomplished  in 
less  time,  and  it  would  not  have  required  more  (vol. 
i.  p.  440). 

From  the  above  statement  of  the  different  views 
which  have  been  held  respecting  the  situation  of 
Ophir,  the  suspicion  will  naturally  suggest  itself 
that  no  positive  conclusion  can  be  arrived  at  on  the 
subject.  And  this  seems  to  be  true,  in  this  sense, 
that  the  Bible  in  all  its  direct  notices  of  Ophir  us  a 
place  does  not  supply  sufficient  data  for  an  inde 
pendent  opinion  on  this  disputed  point.  At  the 
same  time,  it  is  an  inference  in  the  highest  degree 
probable,  that  the  author  of  the  10th  chapter  of 
Genesis  regarded  Ophir  as  in  Arabia ;  and,  in  the 
absence  of  conclusive  proof  that  he  was  mistaken,  it 
seems  most  reasonable  to  acquiesce  in  his  opinion. 

To  illustrate  this  view  of  the  question  it  is  de 
sirable  to  examine  closely  all  the  passages  in  the 
historical  books  which  mention  Ophir  by  name. 
These  are  only  five  in  number :  three  in  the  Books 
of  Kings,  and  two  in  the  Books  of  Chronicles.  The 
latter  were  probably  copied  from  the  former ;  and, 
at  any  rate,  do  not  contain  any  additional  informa 
tion  ;  so  that  it  is  sufficient  to  give  a  reference  to 
them,  2  Cliron.  viii.  18,  ix.  10.  The  three  pas 
sages  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  however,  being  short, 
will  be  set  out  at  length.  The  first  passage  is  as 
follows :  it  is  in  the  history  of  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
"  And  king  Solomon  made  a  navy  ships  at  Ezion- 
geber,  which  is  beside  Eloth,  on  the  shore  of  the 
Red  Sea,  in  the  land  of  Edom.  And  Hiram  sent  in 
the  navy  his  servants,  shipmen  that  had  knowledge 
of  the  sea,  with  the  servants  of  Solomon.  And  they 


OPHIR 


63S 


came  to  Ophir,  and  fetched  from  thence  gold,  four 
hundred  and  twenty  talents,  and  brought  it  to  king 
Solomon,"  1  K.  ix.  26-29.  The  next  passage  is  in 
the  succeeding  chapter,  and  refers  to  the  same  reign. 
"  And  the  navy  also  of  Hiram  that  brought  gold 
from  Ophir,  brought  in  from  Ophir  great  plenty  ol 
almug-trees  and  precious  stones,"  1  K.  x.  11.  The 
third  passage  relates  to  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat 
king  of  Judah,  and  is  as  follows :  "  Jehoshaphat 
made  ships  of  Tharshish  to  go  to  Ophir  for  gold ;  but 
they  went  not :  for  the  ships  were  broken  at  Ezion- 
geber,"  1  K.  xxii.  48.  In  addition  to  these  three 
passages,  the  following  verse  on  the  Book  of  Kings 
has  very  frequently  been  referred  to  Ophir :  "  For 
the  king  (»'.  e.  Solomon)  had  at  sea  a  navy  of 
Tharshish  with  the  navy  of  Hiram :  once  in  three 
years  came  the  navy  of  Tharshish  bringing  gold  and 
silver,  ivory,  and  apes,  and  peacocks,"  1  K.  x.  22. 
But  there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  \f>  show  that 
the  fleet  mentioned  in  this  verse  was  identical  with 
the  fleet  mentioned  in  1  K.  ix.  26-29,  and  1  K.  x. 
11,  as  bringing  gold,  almug-trees,  and  precious 
stones  from  Ophir;  and  if,  notwithstanding,  the 
identity  of  the  two  is  admitted  as  a  probable  con 
jecture,  there  is  not  the  slightest  evidence  that  the 
fleet  went  only  to  Ophir,  and  that  therefore  th* 
silver,  ivory,  apes,  and  peacocks  must  have  come 
from  Ophir.  Indeed,  the  direct  contrary  might  be 
inferred,  even  on  the  hypothesis  of  the  identity  of 
the  two  fleets,  inasmuch  as  the  actual  mention  of 
Ophir  is  distinctly  confined  to  the  imports  of  gold, 
almug-trees,  and  precious  stones,  and  the  compiler 
might  seem  carefully  to  have  distinguished  between 
it  and  the  country  from  which  silver,  ivory,  apes, 
and  peacocks  were  imported.  Hence,  without  re 
ferring  farther  to  the  passage  in  1  K.  x.  22,  we  are 
thrown  back,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the 
situation  of  Ophir,  to  the  three  passages  from  the 
Book  of  Kings  which  were  first  set  forth.  And  if 
those  three  passages  are  carefully  examined,  it  will 
be  seen  that  all  the  information  given  respecting 
Ophir  is,  that  it  was  a  place  or  region,  accessible 
by  sea  from  Ezion-geber  on  the  Red  Sea,  from  which 
imports  of  gold,  almug-trees,  and  precious  stones 
were  brought  back  by  the  Tyrian  and  Hebrew 
sailors.  No  data  whatever  are  given  as  to  the  dis 
tance  of  Ophir  from  Ezion-geber ;  no  information 
direct  or  indirect,  or  even  the  slightest  hint,  is 
afforded  for  determining  whether  Ophir  was  the 
name  of  a  town,  or  the  name  of  a  district ;  whether 
it  was  an  emporium  only,  or  the  country  which 
actually  produced  the  three  articles  of  traffic.  Bear 
ing  in  mind  the  possibility  of  its  being  an  empo 
rium,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  may  not  have  l-een 
either  in  Arabia,  or  on  the  Persian  coast,  or  in 
India,  or  in  Africa  ;  but  there  is  not  sufficient  evi 
dence  for  deciding  in  favour  of  one  of  these  sugges 
tions  rather  than  of  the  o  there. 

Under  these  circumstances  it  is  well  to  revert  to 
the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis.  It  has  been  shown 
[OPHIR  1]  to  be  reasonably  certain  that  the  author 
of  that  chapter  regarded  Ophir  as  the  name  of  some 
city,  region,  or  tribe  in  Arabia.  And  it  is  almost 
equally  certain  that  the  Ophir  of  Genesis  is  the 
Ophir  of  the  Book  of  Kings.  There  is  no  mention, 
either  in  the  Bible  or  elsewhere,  of  any  other  Ophir ; 


t>  Mr.  Grove  has  pointed  out  a  passage  in  Milton's 
Farcuiiss  Lost,  xi.  399-401,  favouring  this  Sofala : — 
"  Mombaza,  and  Quiloa.  and  Melind, 
And  Sofala,  thought  Ophir,  to  the  realm 
Of  Congo  and  Angola  farthest  south," 


Milton  followed  a  passage  In  Purchas's  PUgrimet,  pngt 
1022  of  the  2nd  volume,  published  in  1625;  and  nil 
the  modern  geographical  names  In  vv.  3H7-411  are  in 
Purchas. 


640 


Ol'HIIl 


ond  the  idea  of  there  having  been  too  Ophirs,  evi 
dently  arose  from  a  perception  of  the  obvious  meaning 
of  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis,  on  the  one  hand,  cou 
pled  with  the  erroneous  opinion  on  the  other,  that 
the  Ophir  of  the  Book  of  Kings  could  not  have  been 
in  Arabia.  Now,  whatever  uncertainty  may  exist 
as  to  the  time  when  the  1  Oth  chapter  of  Genesis  was 
written  (Knobel,  VSlkertafel  der  Genesis,  p.  4,  and 
Hartmann's  Forschungen  uber  die  5  Biicher  Moses, 
p.  584),  the  author  of  it  wrote  while  Hebrew  was  yet 
a  living  language ;  there  is  no  statement  in  any  part 
of  the  Bible  inconsistent  with  his  opinion  ;  and  the 
most  ancient  writer  who  can  be  opposed  to  him  as 
an  authority,  lived,  under  any  hypothesis,  many  cen 
turies  after  his  death.  Hence  the  burden  of  proof 
lies  on  any  one  who  denies  Ophir  to  have  been  in 
Arabia. 

But  all  that  can  be  advanced  against  Arabia  falls 
very  short  of  such  proof.  In  weighing  the  evidence 
on  this  point,  the  assumption  that  ivory,  peacocks, 
and  apes  were  imported  from  Ophir  must  be  dis 
missed  from  consideration.  In  one  view  of  the 
subject,  and  accepting  the  statement  in  2  Chr.  ix. 
21,  they  might  have  connexion  with  Tarshish 
[TARSHISH]  ;  but  they  have  a  very  slight  bearing  on  i 
the  position  of  Ophir.  Hence  it  is  not  here  necessary  j 
to  discuss  the  law  of  monsoons  in  the  Indian  Ocean ; 
though  it  may  be  said  in  passing  that  the  facts 
on  which  the  supposed  law  is  founded,  which 
seemed  so  cogent  that  they  induced  the  historian  Ro 
bertson  to  place  Ophir  in  Africa  (Disquisition  on 
India,  sect.  2),  have  been  pointedly  denied  by  Mr. 
Salt  in  his  Voyage  to  Abyssinia  (p.  103).  More 
over,  the  resemblance  of  names  of  places  in  India 
and  Africa  to  Ophir,  cannot  reasonably  be  insisted 
on  ;  for  there  is  an  equally  great  resemblance  in  the 
names  of  some  places  in  Arabia.  And  in  reference 
to  Africa,  especially,  the  place  there  imagined  to  be 
Ophir,  viz.,  Sofala,  has  been  shown  to  be  merely 
an  Arabic  word,  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew 
Shephehih,  which  signifies  a  plain  or  low  country 
(Jer.  xxxii.  44;  Josh.  xi.  16;  the  2e^A.o  of  the 
Maccabees,  1  Mace.  xii.  38  ;  see  Gesenius,  Lex. 
s.  v.).  Again,  the  use  of  Sofir  as  the  Coptic  word 
for  Ophir  cannot  be  regarded  as  of  much  import 
ance,  it  having  been  pointed  out  by  Reland  that 
there  is  no  proof  of  its  use  except  in  late  Coptic, 
and  that  thus  its  adoption  may  have  been  the  mere 
consequence  of  the  erroneous  views  which  Josephus 
represented,  instead  of  being  a  confirmation  of  them. 
Similar  remarks  apply  to  the  Biblical  versions  by 
the  Arabic  translators.  The  opinion  of  Josephus 
himself  would  have  been  entitled  to  much  consi 
deration  in  the  absence  of  all  other  evidence  on  the 
subject ;  but  he  lived  about  a  thousand  years  after 
the  only  voyages  to  Ophir  of  which  any  record  has 
been  preserved,  and  his  authority  cannot  be  com 
pared  to  that  of  the  10th  chapter  of  Genesis.  Again, 
he  seems  inconsistent  with  himself;  for  in  Ant.  ix. 
1,  §4,  he  translates  the  Ophir  of  1  K.  xxii.  49,  and 
the  Tarshish  of  2  Chr.  xx.  36,  as  Pontus  and  Thrace. 
It  is  likewise  some  deduction  from  the  weight  of  his 
opinion,  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  opinion  of  Eupo- 
lemus,  who  was  an  earlier  writer ;  though  he  too 
lived  at  so  great  a  distance  of  time  from  the  reign 
of  Solomon  that  he  is  by  no  means  a  decisive 
authority.  Moreover,  imagination  may  have  acted 


c  The  general  meaning  of  "1J?DD>  a  prop  or  support, 
IB  certain  though  its  special  meaning  in  I  K.  x.  12  seems 
Inecovembly  lost.  It  is  translated  "  pillars  "  in  the  A.  V., 
*nd  vrwnjpiynaTa  in  the  LXX.  In  the  corresponding 


ornm 

on  Josephus  to  place  Ophir  in  the  Golden  Cherso 
nese,  which  to  the  ancients  was,  as  it  were  the 
extreme  eaut;  as  it  acted  on  Arias  Montanus  to 
place  it  in  Peru,  in  the  far  more  improbable  and 
distant  west.  All  the  foregoing  objections  having 
been  rejected  from  the  discussion,  it  remains  to 
notice  those  which  are  based  on  the  assertion  that 
sandal-wood  (assumed  to  be  the  same  as  almug- 
wood),  precious  stones,  and  gold,  are  not  productions 
of  Arabia.  And  the  following  observations  tend  to 
show  that  such  objections  are  not  conclusive. 

1st.  In  the  Periplus  attributed  to  Arrian,  sandal- 
wood  (|i5\a  ffavrdkiva)  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
imports  into  Omana,  an  emporium  on  the  Persian 
Gulf;  and  it  is  thus  proved,  if  any  proof  is  requi 
site,  that  a  sea-port  would  not  necessarily  be  in 
India,  because  sandal-wood  was  obtained  from  it. 
But  independently  of  this  circumstance,  the  reasons 
advanced  in  favour  of  almug-wood  being  the  same 
as  sandal-wood,  though  admissible  as  a  conjecture, 
seem  too  weak  to  justify  the  founding  any  argu 
ment  on  them.  In  2  Chr.  ii.  8,  Solomon  is  re 
presented  as  writing  to  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre,  in 
these  words :  "  Send  me  also  cedar- trees,  fir- 
trees,  and  algum-trees  out  of  Lebanon;  for  ^ 
know  that  thy  servants  can  skill  to  cut  timber  in 
Lebanon,"  a  passage  evidently  written  under  the 
belief  that  almug-trees  grew  in  Lebanon.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  this  was  a  mistake — but  this  is 
a  point  which  cannot  be  assumed  without  distinct 
evidence  to  render  it  probable.  The  LXX.  trans 
lator  of  the  Book  of  Kings,  1  K.  x.  12,  translates 
almug-wood  by  f^Aa  ireAeicTjTek,  or  &ireA.€KTjTi, 
which  gives  no  information  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
wood  ;  and  the  LXX.  translator  of  the  Chronicles 
renders  it  by  {i5Ao  ireuKiva,  which  strictly  means 
fir-wood  (compare  Ennius's  translation  of  Medea. 
v.  4),  and  which,  at  the  utmost,  can  only  be  ex 
tended  to  any  wood  of  resinous  trees.  The  Vulgate 
translation  is  "  thyina,"  t.  e.  wood  made  of  thya 
(0iW,  Ovia),  a  tree  which  Theophrastus  mentions 
as  having  supplied  peculiarly  durable  timber  for 
the  roofs  of  temples ;  which  he  says  is  like  the  wild 
cypress ;  and  which  is  classed  by  him  as  an  ever 
green  with  the  pine,  the  fir,  the  juniper,  the  yew- 
tree,  and  the  cedar  (Histor.  Plant,  v.  3,  §7,  i. 
9,  §3).  It  is  stated  both  by  Buxtorf  and  Gesenius 
(s.  ».)  that  the  Rabbins  understood  by  the  word, 
corals — which  is  certainly  a  most  improbable  mean 
ing — and  that  in  the  3rd  century,  almug  in  the 
Mishnah  (Kelim  13,  6)  was  used  for  coral  in  the 
singular  number.  In  the  13th  century,  Kimchi,  it 
is  said,  proposed  the  meaning  of  Brazil  wood.  And 
it  was  not  till  last  century  that,  for  the  first  time, 
the  suggestion  was  made  that  almug-wood  was  the 
same  as  sandal-wood.  This  suggestion  came  from 
Celsius,  the  Swedish  botanist,  in  his  Hierobotanicon ; 
who  at  the  same  time  recounted  thirteen  meanings 
proposed  by  others.  Now,  as  all  that  has  been 
handed  down  of  the  uses  of  almug-wood  is,  that  the 
king  made  of  it  a  propc  or  support  for  the  House 
of  the  Lord  and  the  king's  house ;  and  harps  also 
and  psalteries  for  singers  (1  K.  x.  12),  it  is  hard 
to  conceive  how  the  greatest  botanical  genius  that 
ever  lived  can  now  do  more  than  make  a  guess, 
more  or  less  probable,  at  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

Since  the  time  of  Celsius,  the  meaning  of  "  san- 


passage  of  2  Chr.  ix.  11,  the  word  i?  nUDJD.  the  usual 
meaning  of  which  is  highways ;  and  which  Is  translated  Ic 
the  A.  V.  terraces,  and  In  the  LXX.  oraBaans,  aecer.ta, 
or  stairs  Sec  Her.  1.  181 


OPHIR 

dal  wood"  has  been  defended  by  Sanscrit  etymo 
logies.  According  to  Gesenius  (Lexicon,  &.  v.), 
Bohleu  proposed,  as  a  derivation  lor  almuggim, 
the  Aiabic  article  Al,  and  micata,  from  simple 
mica,  a  name  for  red  sandal- wood.  Lassen,  in 
Indische  Alterthumskunde  (vol.  i.t  pt.  1,  p.  538), 
adopting  the  form  algummim,  says  that  if  the 
plural  ending  is  taken  iroiu  it,  there  remains  valgu, 
as  one  of  the  Sanscrit  names  for  sandal-wood, 
which  in  the  language  of  the  Deccan  is  valgum. 
Perhaps,  however,  these  etymologies  cannot  lay 
claim  to  much  value  un'.il  it  is  made  probable, 
independently,  that  almug-wood  is  sandal-wood. 
It  is  to  be  observed  that  there  is  a  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  whether  "  al "  in  algummim  is  an 
article  or  part  of  the  noun,  and  it  is  not  denied  by 
any  one  that  chandana  is  the  ordinary  Sanscrit 
word  for  sandal-wood.  Moreover,  Mr.  Crawfurd, 
who  resided  officially  many  years  in  the  East  and 
is  familiar  with  sandal-wood,  says  that  it  is  never 
— now,  at  least — used  for  musical  instruments,  and 
that  it  is  unfit  for  pillars,  or  stairs,  balustrades, 
or  bannisters,  or  balconies.  (See  also  his  Descrip 
tive  Dictionary  of  the  Indian  Islands,  pp.  310- 
375.)  It  is  used  for  incense  or  perfume,  or  as 
fancy  wood. 

2.  As  to   precious   stones,  they   take   up  such 
little   room,   and   can  be   so   easily   concealed,    if 
necessary,  and  conveyed  from  place  to  place,  that 
there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  they  came  from 
Ophir,  simply  as  from  an  emporium,  even  admit 
ting  that  there  were  no  precious  stones  in  Arabia. 
But  it  has  already  been  observed  [ARABIA,  i.  p.  916] 
that  the  Arabian  peninsula  produces  the  emerald 
and  onyx  stone ;  and  it  has  been  well  pointed  out 
by  Mr.  Crawfurd  that  it  is  impossible  to  identify 
precious  stones  under  so  general  a  name  with  any 
particular  country.     Certainly  it  cannot  be  shown 
that  the  Jews  of  Solomon's  time  included  under 
that  name  the  diamond,  for  which  India  is  pecu 
liarly  renowned. 

3.  As  to  gold,  far  too   great   stress  seems  to 
have  been  laid  on  the  negative  fact  that  no  golc 
nor  trace   of   gold-mines   has    been   discovered  in 
Arabia.     Negative  evidence  of  this  kind,  in  which 
Ritterd   has   placed   so   much  reliance   (vol.  xiv 
p.  408),  is  by  no  means  conclusive.     Sir  Roderick 
Murchison  and  Sir  Charles  Lyell  concur  in  stating 
that,  although  no  rock  is  known  to  exist  in  Arabia 
from  which  gold  is  obtained  at  the  present  day 
yet  the  peninsula   has  not  undergone  a  sufficiem 
geological  examination  to  warrant  the   conclusion 
that  gold  did  not  exist  there  formerly  or  that  it 
may  not   yet  be  discovered  there.      Under  these 
circumstances  there  is  no  sufficient  reason  to  reject 
the  accounts  of  the  ancient  writers  who  have  been 
already  adduced  as  witnesses  for  the  former  exist 
ence  of  gold  in  Arabia.     It  is  true  that  Artemi- 
dorus    and   Diodorus    Siculus    may   ma-ely   have 
relied  on  the  authority  of  Agatharchides,  but  it  is 
important  to  remark  that  Agatharchides  lived  in 
Egypt  and   was   guardian   to   one  of  the    young 
Ptolemies  during  his   minority,  so  that  he  musi 
have  been  familiar  with  the  general  nature  of  the 
commerce  between  Egypt  and  Arabia.     Although 
he  may  have  been  inaccurate  in  details,  it  is  noi 


OPHIlt 


641 


lightly  to  be  admitted  that  he  was  altogether 
mistaken  in  supposing  that  Arabia  produced  any 
gold  at  all.  And  it  is  in  his  favour  that  two  of 
his  statements  have  unexpectedly  received  confirma 
tion  in  our  own  time:  1st,  respecting  gold-mines 
in  Egypt,  the  position  of  which  in  the  Bisharee 
Desert  was  ascertained  by  Mr.  Linant  and  Mr. 
Bouomi  (Wilkinson's  Ancient  Egyptians,  ch.  ix.)  ; 
and  2nd,  as  to  the  existence  of  nuggets  of  pure 
gold,  some  of  the  size  of  an  olive-stone,  some  of  a 
medlar,  and  some  of  a  chestnut.  The  latter  state 
ment  was  discredited  by  Michaelis  (Spicilegium, 
p.  287,  "  Nee  credo  ullibi  massas  auri  non  experti 
castaneae  nucis  magnitudiue  reperiri  "),  but  it  has 
been  shown  to  be  not  incredible  by  the  result  of  the 
gold  discoveries  in  California  and  Australia. 

If,  however,  negative  evidence  is  allowed  to 
outweigh  on  this  subject  the  authority  of  Agathar 
chides,  Artemidorus,  Diodorus  Siculus,  Pliny,  and, 
it  may  be  added,  Strabo,  all  of  whom  may  possibly 
have  been  mistaken,  there  is  still  nothing  to  pre 
vent  Ophir  having  been  an  Arabian  emporium  for 
gold  (Winer,  Realw.  s.  v.  "Ophir").  The  Peri- 
plus,  attributed  to  Arrian,  gives  an  account  of 
several  Arabian  emporia.  In  the  Red  Sea,  for  ex 
ample,  was  the  Emporium  Muza,  only  twelve 
days  distant  from  Aphar  the  metropolis  of  the 
Sabaeans  and  the  Homerites.  It  is  expressly  stated 
that  this  port  had  commercial  relations  with  Bary- 
gaza,  f.  e.  Beroach,  on  the  west  coast  of  India,  and 
that  it  was  always  full  of  Arabs,  either  ship 
owners  or  sailors.  Again,  where  the  British  town 
of  Aden  is  now  situated,  there  was  another  em 
porium,  with  an  excellent  harbour,  called  Arabia 
Felix  (to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  district 
so  called),  which  received  its  name  of  Felix, 
according  to  the  author  of  the  Periplus,  from  its 
being  the  depdt  for  the  merchandize  both  of  the 
Indians  and  Egyptians  at  a  time  when  vessels  did 
not  sail  direct  from  India  to  Egypt,  and  when 
merchants  from  Egypt  did  not  dare  to  venture 
farther  eastward  towards  India.  At  Zatiir  or  Za- 
f&n,  likewise,  already  referred  to  as  a  town  in 
Hadramaiit,  there  was  an  emporium  in  the  middle 
ages,  and  there  may  have  been  one  in  the  time  of 
Solomon.  And  on  the  Arabian  side  of  the  Persian 
Gulf  was  the  emporium  of  Gerrha,  mentioned  by 
Strabo  (xvi.  p.  766),  which  seems  to  have  had 
commercial  intercourse  with  Babylon  both  by 
caravans  and  by  barges.  Its  exports  and  imports 
are  not  specified,  but  there  is  no  reason  why  the 
articles  of  commerce  to  be  obtained  there  should 
have  been  very  different  from  those  at  Omana  on 
the  opposite  side  of  the  gulf,  the  exports  from 
which  were  purple  cloth,  wine,  dates,  slaves,  and 
gold,  while  the  imports  were  brass,  sandal-wood, 
horn,  and  ebony.  In  fact,  whatever  other  diffi 
culties  may  exist  in  relation  to  Ophir,  no  difficulty 
arises  from  any  absence  of  emporia  along  the  Ara 
bian  coast,  suited  to  the  size  of  vessels  and  the  state 
of  navigation  in  early  times. 

There  do  not,  however,  appear  to  be  sufficient 
data  for  determining  in  lavour  of  any  one  empo 
rium  or  of  any  one  locality  rather  than  another  in 
Arabia  as  having  been  the  Ophir  of  Solomon. 
Mr.  Forster  (Geography  of  Arabia,  i.  167)  relies 


*  Bearing  this  In  mind,  it  is  remarkable  that  Ritter 
Bhoald  have  accepted  Lassen's  conjecture  respecting  the 
position  of  Ophir  at  the  mouths  of  the  Indus.  Attock  is 
distant  from  the  sea  942  miles  by  the  Indus,  and  648  in  a 
straight  line ;  and  the  upper  part  of  the  Ind  us  is  abou 
VOL.  II. 


860  miles  long  above  Attock  (Thornton's  Gazetteer  <tf 
India).  Hence  gold  would  be  so  distant  from  the  mouths 
of  the  Indus,  that  none  could  be  obtained  thence,  except 
from  an  emporium  situated  there. 

2  T 


842 


OPHIR 


r»n  an  Ofor  or  Ofir,  in  Sale  and  D'Anville's  maps, 
us  the  name  of  a  city  and  district  in  the  mountain 
of  Oman ;  but  he  does  not  quote  any  ancient  writer 
or  modern  traveller  as  an  authority  for  the  exist 
ence  of  such  an  Ofir,  though  this  may  perhaps  be 
reasonably  required  before  importance  is  attached, 
in  a  disputed  point  of  this  kind,  to  a  name  on 
a  map.  Niebuhr  the  traveller  (Description  de 
I'Arabie,  p.  253)  says  that  Ophir  was  probably 
the  principal  port  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Sabaeans, 
tiiat  It  was  situated  between  Aden  and  Dafar  (or 
Zafa-  ),  and  that  perhaps  even  it  was  Cane.  Gos- 
seiih,  on  the  other  hand,  thinks  it  was  Doffir,  the 
city  of  Yemen  already  adverted  to ;  and  in  reference 
to  the  obvious  objection  (which  applies  equally  to 
the  metropolis  Aphar)  that  it  is  at  some  distance 
from  the  sea,  he  says  that  during  the  long  period 
which  has  elapsed  since  the  time  of  Solomon,  sands 
have  encroached  on  the  coast  of  Loheia,  and  that 
Ophir  may  have  been  regarded  as  a  port,  although 
vessels  did  not  actually  reach  it  (Recherches  stir 
It  Getyraphie  des  Anciens,  1.  c.).  Dean  Vincent 
agrees  with  Gosselin  in  confining  Ophir  to  Sabaea, 
partly  because  in  Gen.  x.  Ophir  is  mentioned  in 
connexion  with  sons  of  Joktan  who  have  their 
residence  in  Arabia  Felix,  and  partly  because,  in 
I  K.  ix.,  the  voyage  to  Ophir  seems  related  as 
if  it  were  in  consequence  of  the  visit  of  the  Queen 
of  Sheba  to  Jerusalem  (History  of  the  Commerce 
and  Navigation  of  the  Ancients,  1.  c.).  But  the 
opinion  that  Jobab  and  Havilah  represent  parts 
of  Arabia  Felix  would  by  no  means  command  uni 
versal  assent ;  and  although  the  Book  of  Kings 
certainly  suggests  the  inference  that  there  was 
some  connexion  between  the  visit  of  the  Queen  of 
Sheba  and  the  voyage  to  Ophir,  this  would  be 
consistent  with  Ophir  being  either  contiguous  to 
Sabaea,  or  situated  on  any  point  of  the  southern  or 
eastern  coasts  of  Arabia  ;  as  in  either  of  these  cases 
it  would  have  been  politic  in  Solomon  to  conciliate 
the  good  will  of  the  Sabaeans,  who  occupied  a  long 
tract  of  the  eastern  coast  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  who 
might  possibly  have  commanded  the  Straits  of  Babel- 
mandel.  On  the  whole,  though  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  Ophir  was  in  Arabia,  there  does  not 
seem  to  be  adequate  information  to  enable  us  to 
point  out  the  precise  locality  which  once  bore  that 
name. 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  observed  that  objections 
against  Ophir  being  in  Arabia,  grounded  on  the 
fact  that  no  gold  has  been  discovered  in  Arabia  in 
the  present  day,  seem  decisively  answered  by  the 
parallel  case  of  Sheba.  In  the  72nd  Psalm,  v.  15, 
"  gold  of  Sheba,"  translated  in  the  English  Psalter 
"  gold  of  Arabia,"  is  spoken  of  just  as  "  gold  of 
Ophir  "  is  spoken  of  in  other  passages  of  the  0.  T., 
and  in  Ezekiel's  account  of  the  trade  with  Tyre 
(xxvii.  22),  it  is  stated  "  the  merchants  of  Sheba 
and  Raamah,  they  were  thy  merchants:  they  occu 
pied  in  thy  fairs  with  chief  of  all  spices  and  with 
all  precious  stones,  and  gold,"  just  as  in  IK.  x., 
precious  stones  and  gold  are  said  to  have  been 
brought  from  Ophir  by  the  navy  of  Solomon  and 
of  Hiram.  (Compare 'Plin.  vi.  28;  Horace,  Od. 
i.  29,  1,  ii.  12,  24,  iii.  24,  2;  Epist.  i.  7,  36  ; 
and  Judg.  -viii.  24.)  Now,  of  two  things  one  is 
true.  Either  the  gold  of  Sheba  and  the  precious 
stones  sold  to  the  Tynans  by  the  merchants  of 
Sheba  were  the  natural  productions  of  Sheba,  and 
in  this  case — as  the  Sheba  here  spoken  of  was 
confessedly  in  Arabia — the  assertion  that  Arabia 
did  not  produce  gold  falls  to  the  ground ;  or  the 


OPHRAH 

merchants  of  Sheba  obtained  precious  stones  and 
gold  in  such  quantities  by  trade,  that  they  became 
noted  for  supplying  them  to  the  Tynans  and  Jews, 
without  curious  inquiry  by  the  Jews  as  to  the 
precise  locality  whence  these  commodities  were 
originally  derived.  And  exactly  similar  remarks 
may  apply  to  Ophir.  The  resemblance  seems  com 
plete.  In  answer  to  objections  against  the  obvious 
meaning  of  the  tenth  chapter  of  Genesis,  the  alter 
natives  may  be  stated  as  follows.  Either  Ophir, 
although  in  Arabia,  produced  gold  and  precious 
stones ;  or,  if  it  shall  be  hereafter  proved  in  th« 
progress  of  geological  investigation  that  this  couta 
not  have  been  the  case,  Ophir  furnished  gold  and 
precious  stones  as  an  emporium,  although  the 
Jews  were  not  careful  to  ascertain  and  record  the 
fact.  [E.  T.] 

OPH'NI  (»3?yn,  with  the  def.  article—"  the 

Ophnite:"  LXX.  both  MSS.  omit:  Ophni).  A  town 
of  Benjamin,  mentioned  in  Josh,  xviii.  24  only 
apparently  in  the  north-eastern  portion  of  the  tribe 
Its  name  may  perhaps  imply  that,  like  others  of  the 
towns  of  this  region,  it  was  originally  founded  by 
some  non-Israelite  tribe — the  Ophnites — who  m 
that  case  have  left  but  this  one  slight  trace  of  their 
existence.  [See  note  to  vol.  i.  p.  188.]  In  the 
biblical  history  of  Palestine  Ophni  plays  no  part, 
but  it  is  doubtless  the  Gophna  of  Josephus,  a  place 
which  at  the  time  of  Vespasian's  invasion  was  appa 
rently  so  important  as  to  be  second  only  to  Jeru 
salem  (B.  J.  iii.  3,  §5).  It  was  probably  the 
Gufhith,  Gufna,  or  Beth-gufnin  of  the  Talmud 
(Schwarz,  126),  which  still  survives  in  the  modem 
Jifna  or  Jufna,  2-J  miles  north-west  of  Bethel 
(Keland,  Pal.  816;  Rob.  B.  B.  ii.  264).  The 
change  from  the  Ain,  with  which  Ophni  begins, 
to  G,  is  common  enough  in  the  LXX.  (Comp. 
Gomorrah,  Athaliah,  &c.)  [G.] 

OPH'RAH  (rnpy).  The  name  of  two  places  in 
the  central  part  of  Palestine. 

1.  (In  Judges,  'f,<ppa6d  ;  Alex.  A<ppa  ;  in  Sam. 

fyfpa. :  Ophra,  in  Sam.  Aphra.)  In  the  tribe  ot 
Benjamin  (Josh,  rviii.  23).  It  is  named  between 
hap-Parah  and  Chephar  ha-Ammonai,  but  as  the 
position  of  neither  of  these  places  is  known,  we  do 
not  thereby  obtain  any  clue  to  that  of  Ophrah.  It 
appeal's  to  be  mentioned  again  (1  Sam.  xiii.  17)  in 
describing  the  routes  taken  by  the  spoilers  who 
issued  from  the  Philistine  camp  at  Michmash.  One 
of  these  bands  of  ravagers  went  due  west,  on  the 
road  to  Beth-horon  ;  one  towards  the  "  ravine  of 
Zeboim,"  that  is  in  all  probability  one  of  the  clefts 
which  lead  down  to  the  Jordan  valley,  and  therefore 
due  east;  while  the  third  took  the  road  "  to  Ophrah 
and  the  land  of  Shual " — doubtless  north,  for  south 
they  could  not  go,  owing  to  the  position  held  by  Saul 
and  Jonathan.  [GiBEAH,  vol.  i.  p.  6906.]  In  ac 
cordance  with  this  is  the  statement  of  Jerome  (0»o 
masticon,  "  Aphra  "),  who  places  it  5  miles  east  of 
Bethel.  Dr.  Robinson  (B.  R.  i.  447)  suggests  its 
identity  with  et-Taiyibeh,  a  small  village  on  the 
irown  of  a  conical  and  very  conspicuous  hill,  4 
miles  E.N.E.  of  Beitin  (Bethel),  on  the  ground 
that  no  other  ancient  place  occurred  to  him  as  suit 
able,  and  that  the  situation  accords  with  the  notice  of 
Jerome.  In  the  absence  of  any  similarity  in  the 
name,  and  of  any  more  conclusive  evidence,  it  is 
mpossible  absolutely  to  adopt  this  identification. 

Ophrah  is  probably  the  same  place  with  thai 
which  is  mentioned  under  the  slightly  different  form 


OPHRAH 

Of  EPHRAIN  (or  Ephron)  and  EPHRAIM.  [See  vol. 
i.  p.  569a.)  It  may  also  have  given  its  name  to  the 
district  or  government  of  APHEREMA  (I  Mace. 
ri.  34). 

2.  ('E^paflo ;  aiA  so  Alex.,  excepting  ix.  5, 
E<f»f>aiju:  Ephra.)  More  fully  OPHRAH  OF  THE 
ABI-EZRITES,  the  native  place  of  Gideon  (Judg. 
vi.  1 1)  ;  the  scene  of  his  exploits  against  Baal  (ver. 
24) ;  his  residence  after  his  accession  to  power 
(ix.  5),  and  the  place  of  his  burial  in  the  family 
sepulchre  (viii.  32).  In  Ophrah  also  he  deposited 
the  ephod  which  he  made  or  enriched  with  the  orna 
ments  taken  from  the  Ishmaelite  followers  of  Zebah 
and  Zalmunnah  (viii.  27),  and  so  great  was  the 
attraction  of  that  object,  that  the  town  must  then 
have  been  a  place  of  great  pilgrimage  and  resort. 
The  indications  in  the  narrative  of  the  position 
of  Ophrah  are  but  slight.  It  was  probably  in  Ma- 
nasseh  (vi.  15),  and  not  far  distant  from  Shechem 
(ix.  t,  5).  Van  de  Velde  {Memoir}  suggests  a 
site  called  Erfai,  a  mile  south  of  Akraheh,  about 
8  miles  from  Nablus,  and  Schwarz  (158)  "  the  vil 
lage  Erafa,  north  of  Sanur,"  by  which  he  probably 
intends  Arabeh.  The  former  of  them  has  the  disad 
vantage  of  being  altogether  out  of  the  territory  of 
Manasseh.  Of  the  latter,  nothing  either  for  or 
against  can  be  said. 

Ophrah  possibly  derives  its  name  from  Epher,  who 
was  one  of  the  heads  of  the  families  of  Manasseh  in 
its  Gileadite  portion  (1  Chr.  v.  24),  and  who  ap 
pears  to  have  migrated  to  the  west  of  Jordan  with 
Abi-ezer  and  Shechem  (Num.  xxvi.  30;  Josh, 
rvii.  2).  [ABI-EZER  ;  EPHER,  vol.  i.  560a ;  MA 
NASSEH,  p.  220a.]  [G.] 

OPH'EAH  (rn^y :  To^fpi.  ;  Alex.  TotyopA. : 
Ophra).  The  son  of  Meonothai  (1  Chr.  iv.  14).  By 
the  phrase  "  Meonothai  begat  Ophrah,"  it  is  uncer 
tain  whether  we  are  to  understand  that  they  were 
father  and  son,  or  that  Meonothai  was  the  founder 
of  Ophrah. 

ORATOR.  1.  The  A.  V.  rendering  for  lachash, 
a  whisper,  or  incantation,  joined  with  neben,  skilful,' 
Is.  iii.  3,  A.  V.  "eloquent  orator,"  marg.  "skilful 
of  speech."  The  phrase  appears  to  refer  to  pretended 
skill  in  magic,  comp.  Ps.  Iviii.  5.  [DIVINATION.] 

2.  The  title  b  applied  to  Tertullus,  who  appeared 
as  the  advocate  or  patronus  of  the  Jewish  accusers 
of  St.  Paul  before  Felix,  Acts  xxiv.  1.  The  Latin 
language  was  used,  and  Roman  forms  observed  in 
provincial  judicial  proceedings,  as,  to  cite  an  ob 
viously  parallel  case,  Norman-French  was  for  so 
many  ages  the  language  of  English  law  proceedings. 
The  trial  of  St.  Paul  at  Caesarea  was  distinctly  one 
of  a  Roman  citizen  ;  and  thus  the  advocate  spoke  as 
a  Roman  lawyer,  and  probably  in  the  Latin  language 
(see  Acts  xxv.  9,  10  ;  Val.  Max.  ii.  2,  2  ;  Cic.  pro 
Coelio,  c.  30;  Brutus,  c.  37,  38,  41,  where  the 
qualifications  of  an  advocate  are  described :  Cony- 
beare  and  Howson,  Life  and  Travels  of  'St.  Paul, 
vol.  i.  3,  ii.  348).  [H.  W.  P.] 

ORCHARD.     [GARDEN,  vol.  i.  p.  651a.] 

O'REB  (3^'V  ;  in  its  second  occurrence  only, 
"  Alex.  flpi70 :  Oreb}.  The 


OREB 


643 


raven     or    '  crow,"  the  companion  of  Zt»eb,  the 
wolf."     One  of  the  chieftains  of  the  Midianitc 
lost  which  invaded  Israel,  and  was  defeated  and 
driven  back  by  Gideon.     The  title  given  to  then? 
,  A.  V.  "princes")  distinguishes  them  from 
Zebah  and  Zalmunna,    the    other   two   chieftains, 


who  are  called  "  kings"  (*3?D),  and  were  evi 
dently  superior  in  rank  to  Oreb  and  Zeeb.  They 
were  killed,  not  by  Gideon  himself,  or  the  people 
under  his  immediate  conduct,  but  by  the  men  of 
Ephraim,  who  rose  at  his  entreaty  and  intercepted 
;he  flying  horde  at  the  fords  of  the  Jordan.  This 
was  the  second  Act  of  this  great  Tragedy.  It  is  but 
lightly  touched  upon  in  the  narrative  of  Judges, 
but  the  terms  in  which  Isaiah  refers  to  it  (x.  26) 
are  such  as  to  imply  that  it  was  a  truly  awful 
slaughter.  He  places  it  in  the  same  rank  with  the 
two  most  tremendous  disasters  recorded  in  the 
whole  of  the  history  of  Israel  —  the  destruction  of 
the  Egyptians  in  the  Red  Sea,  and  of  the  army  of 
Sennacherib.  Nor  is  Isaiah  alone  among  the  poets 
of  Israel  in  his  reference  to  this  great  event.  While 
t  is  the  terrific  slaughter  of  the  Midianites  which 
points  his  allusion,  their  discomfiture  and  flight 
are  prominent  in  that  of  the  author  of  Ps.  Ixxxiii. 
In  imagery  both  obvious  and  vivid  to  every  native 
of  the  gusty  hills  and  plains  of  Palestine,  though 
to  us  comparatively  unintelligible,  the  Psalmist  de 
scribes  them  as  driven  over  the  uplands  of  Gilead 
like  the  clouds  of  chaff  blown  from  the  threshing- 
floors  ;  chased  away  like  the  spherical  masses  of 
dry  weeds*  which  course  over  the  plains  of  Es- 
draelon  and  Philistia  —  flying  with  the  dreadful 
hurry  and  confusion  of  the  flames,  that  rush  and 
leap  from  tree  to  tree  and  hill  to  hill  when  the 
wooded  mountains  of  a  tropical  country  are  by 
chance  ignited  (Ps.  Ixxxiii.  13,  14).  The  slaugh 
ter  was  concentrated  round  the  rock  at  which  Oreb 
fell,  and  which  was  long  known  by  his  name 
(Judg.  vii.  25;'  Is.'x.  26).  This  spot  appears  to 
have  been  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  from  whence  the 
heads  of  the  two  chiefs  were  brought  to  Gideon  to 
encourage  him  to  further  pursuit  after  the  fugitive 
Zebah  and  Zalmunna. 

This  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  the  value  of  the 
incidental  notices  of  the  later  books  of  the  Bible  in 
confirming  or  filling  up  the  rapid  and  often  neces 
sarily  slight  outlines  of  the  formal  history.  No 
reader  of  the  relation  in  Judges  would  suppose  that 
the  death  of  Oreb  and  Zeeb  had  been  accompanied 
by  any  slaughter  of  their  followers.  In  the  subse 
quent  pursuit  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  the  "  host  " 
is  especially  mentioned,  but  in  this  case  the  chiefs 
alone  are  named.  This  the  notices  of  Isaiah  and  the 
Psalmist,  who  evidently  referred  to  facts  with  which 
their  hearers  were  familiar,  fortunately  enable  us  to 
supply.  Similarly  in  the  narrative  of  the  exodus  of 
Israel  from  Egypt,  as  given  in  the  Pentateuch,  there 
is  no  mention  whatever  of  the  tempest,  the  thunder 
and  lightning,  and  the  earthquake,  which  from  the 
incidental  allusions  of  Ps.  Ixxvii.  16-18  we  know 
accompanied  that  event,  and  which  are  also  stated 
fully  by  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  16,  §3).  We  are  thus 
reminded  of  a  truth  perhaps  too  often  overlooked, 


2j  ;  (rvi/erbs  i<cpoaTij« ;  Vulg.  and  Symm 
frudens  eloquii  mystici ;  Aquila,  crvveros  \fiidvpi<riJ.<f 
Theodot.  (rvvtrbs  eirwSj/.  See  Ges.  pp.  202,  T54. 

b  pijrtop,  orator. 

«  See  a  good  passage  on  this  by  Thomson  (The  iMnd 
and  (tie  Book,  ch.  xxxvi .),   describing    the  flight  bo- 


fore  the  wind  of  the  dry  plants  of  the  wild  artichoke. 
He  gives  also  a  striking  Arab  imprecation  in  reference  to 
it,  which  recalls  in  a  remarkable  way  the  words  of  the 
Psalm  quoted  above  :— "  May  you  be  whirled  like  tha 
'akkub  before  the  wind,  until  you  we  caught  in  the  thorns, 
or  plunged  into  the  sea '." 

2  T  2 


6*4 


ORES,  THE  BOCK 


that  the  occurrences  preserved  in  the  Scriptures  are 
not  the  only  ones  which  happened  in  connexion  with 
tfie  various  events  of  the  Sacred  history:  a  consi 
deration  which  should  dispose  us  not  to  reject  too 
hastily  the  supplements  to  the  Bible  narrative  fur 
nished  by  Josephus,  or  by  the  additions  and  correc 
tions  of  the  Septuagint,  and  even  those  facts  which 
are  reflected,  in  a  distorted  form  it  is  true,  but  still 
often  with  considerable  remains  of  their  original 
shape  and  character,  in  the  legends  of  the  Jewish, 
Mahometan,  and  Christian  East.  [G.] 

O'REB  (Oreb},  i.  c.  Mount  Horeb  (2  Esd.  ii. 

33).      [HOREB.] 

O'REB,  THE  ROCK  (3TIJ7  "WV :  in  Judges 
2m'/p,  Alex.  2oi»peiv  ;  in  Is.  rAicos  flAtyews  in  both 
MSS. :  Petra  Oreb,  and  Horeb}.  The  "raven's 
crag,"  the  spot  at  which  the  Midianite  chieftain 
Oreb,  with  thousands  of  his  countrymen,  fell  by  the 
hand  of  the  Ephraimites,  and  which  probably  ac 
quired  its  name  therefrom.  It  is  mentioned  in  Judg. 
vii.  25  ; a  Is.  x.  20.  It  seems  pkin  from  the  terms  of 
Judg.  vii.  25  and  viii.  1  that  the  rock  Oreb  and  the 
winepress  Zeeb  were  on  the  east  sidek  of  Jordan. 
Perhaps  the  place  called  'Orbo  (13*1$?),  which  in  the 
Bereskith  Rabba  (Reland,  Pal.  913)  is  stated  to  have 
been  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethshean,  may  have 
some  connexion  with  it.  Rabbi  Judah  (Ber.  Rabba, 
ib.)  was  of  opinion  that  the  Orebim  ("  ravens  ") 
who  ministered  to  Elijah  were  no  ravens,  but  the 
people  of  this  Orbo  or  of  the  rock  Oreb,c  an  idea 
upon  which  even  St.  Jerome  himself  does  not  look 
with  entire  disfavour  (Comm.  in  Is.  xv.  7),  and 
which  has  met  in  later  times  with  some  supporters. 
The  present  defective  state  of  our  knowledge  of  the 
regions  east  of  the  Jordan  renders  it  impossible  to 
pronounce  whether  the  name  is  still  surviving.  [G.] 

O'REN  (pfc  :    'Apcfc ;   Alex.  'Apdv  :    Aram). 

One  of  the  sons  of  Jerahmeel  the  firstborn  of  Hezron 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25). 

ORGAN  (33-iy,  Gen.  iv.  21,  Job  xxi.  12  ; 
lay,  Job  xxx.  31,  Ps.  cl.  4).  The  Hebrew  word 
'ugdb  or  'uggdb,  thus  rendered  in  our  version,  pro 
bably  denotes  a  pipe  or  perforated  wind-instrument, 
as  the  root  of  the  word  indicates.*1  In  Gen.  iv.  21 
it  appears  to  be  a  general  term  for  all  wind-instru 
ments,  opposed  to  cinnor  (A.  V.  "harp"),  which 
denotes  all  stringed  instruments.  In  Job  xxi.  12 
are  enumerated  the  three  kinds  of  musical  instru 
ments  which  are  possible,  under  the  general  terms 
of  the  timbrel,  harp,  and  organ.  The  'ugdb  is  here 
distinguished  from  the  timbrel  and  harp,  as  in  Job 
xxx.  31,  compared  with  Ps.  cl.  4.  Our  translators 
adopted  their  rendering,  "  organ,"  from  the  Vulgate, 
which  has  uniformly  organum,  that  is,  the  double 
or  multiple  pipe.  The  renderings  of  the  LXX.  are 
various :  KiBdpa  in  Gen.  iv.  21,  tya\/j.6s  in  Job, 
and  Spyavov  in  Ps.  cl.  4.  The  Chaldee  in  every 
case  has  N3-13K ,  abbubd,  which  signifies  "  a  pipe," 
and  is  the  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  word  so  trans 
lated  in  our  version  of  Is.  xxx.  29,  Jer.  xlviii.  36. 
Joel  Bril,  in  his  2nd  preface  to  the  Psalms  in 
Mendelssohn's  Bible,  adopts  the  opinion  of  those 
who  identify  it  with  the  Pandean  pipes,  or  syrinx, 
an  instrument  of  unquestionably  ancient  origin,  and 


ui  instrument  or  onquesuonaoiy  ancient  origin, 

•  Theword  "upon"  In  the  Auth.  version  of  thispasL-,, 
8  not  correct.    The  preposition  is  3  =  "  in  "  or  "  at." 

•  Such  is  the  conclnsion  of  Reland  (I'al.  915,  'Oreb';- 


ORION 

common  m  the  East.  It  was  a  favourite  with  the 
shepherds  in  the  time  of  Homer  (//.  xviii.  526), 
and  its  invention  was  attributed  to  various  deities  : 
to  Pallas  Athene  by  Pindar  (Pyth.  xii.  12-14),  to 
Pan  by  Pliny  (vii.  57  ;  cf.  Virg.  Eel.  ii.  32  ;  Tibull. 
ii.  5,  30),  by  others  to  Marsyas  or  Silenus  (Athen. 
iv.  184).  In  the  last-quoted  passage  it  is  said 
that  Hermes  first  made  the  syrinx  with  one  reed, 
while  Silenus,  or,  according  to  others,  two  Medes, 
Seuthes  and  Rhonakes,  invented  that  with  many 
reeds,  and  Marsyas  fastened  them  with  wax.  The 
reeds  were  of  unequal  length  but  equal  thickness, 
generally  seven  in  number  (Virg.  Ed.  ii.  36),  but 
sometimes  nine  (Theocr.  Id.  viii.).  Those  in  use 
among  the  Turks  sometimes  numbered  fourteen  or 
fifteen  (Calmet,  Diss.  in  Mus.  Inst.  Haebr.,  in  Ugo- 
lini,  Thes.  xxxiL  p.  790).  Russell  describes  those  he 
met  with  in  Aleppo.  "The  syrinx,  or  Pan's  pipe, 
is  still  a  pastoral  instrument  in  Syria  ;  it  is  known 
also  in  the  city,  but  very  few  of  the  performers 
can  sound  it  tolerably  well.  The  higher  notes  are 
clear  and  pleasing,  but  the  longer  reeds  are  apt, 
like  the  dervis's  flute,  to  make  a  hissing  sound, 
though  blown  by  a  good  player.  The  number  of 
reeds  of  which  the  syrinx  is  composed  varies  in 
different  instrumEit«:,  from  five  to  twenty-three" 
(Aleppo,  b.  ii.  c.  2,  vol.  i.  p.  155,  2nd  ed.). 

If  the  root  of  the  word  'ugdb  above  given  be 
correct,  a  stringed  instrument  is  out  of  the  ques 
tion,  and  it  is  therefore  only  necessary  to  mention 
the  opinion  of  the  author  of  ShiltS  Jffaggibborim 
(Ugol.  vol.  xxxii.),  that  it  is  the  same  as  the  Italian 
viola  da  gamba,  which  was  somewhat  similar  in 
form  to  the  modem  violin,  and  was  played  upon 
with  a  bow  of  horsehair,  the  chief  difference  being 
that  it  had  six  strings  of  gut  instead  of  four. 
Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  ffebr.,  No.  1184)  iden 
tifies  the  'ugdb  with  the  psaltery. 

Winer  (Realw.  art.  "  Mubikalische  Instrument*  ") 
says  that  in  the  Hebrew  version  of  the  book  of 
Daniel  'ugdb  is  used  as  the  equivalent  of  rPJBft-ID. 

stimponydh  (Gr.  ffv^uvla),  rendered  "  dulcimer  " 
in  our  version.  [VV.  A.  W.] 

ORI'ON  (^03  :  "Eerirtpos,  Job  ix.  9  ;  'flpiW, 
Job  xxxviii.  31  :  Orion,  Arcturus,  in  Jobxxxviii.  31). 
That  the  constellation  known  to  the  Hebrews  by  the 
name  cesil  is  the  same  as  that  which  the  Greeks 
called  orion,  and  the  Arabs  "  the  giant,"  there 
seems  little  reason  to  doubt,  though  the  ancient 
vei-sions  vaiy  in  their  renderings.  In  Job  ix.  9  the 
order  of  the  words  has  evidently  been  transposed. 
In  the  LXX.  it  appears  to  have  been  thus,  —  cimdh, 
cesil,  'ash  :  the  Vulgate  retains  the  words  as  they 
stand  in  the  Hebrew  ;  while  the  Peshito  Syriac  read 
cimdh,  'ash,  cesil,  rendering  the  last-mentioned  word 
);,  ""1  I  ^.  gaboro,  "  the  giant,"  as  in  Job  xxxviii. 

31.  In  Am.  v.  8  there  is  again  a  difficulty  in 
the  Syriac  version,  which  represents  cesil  by 
.  'lyutho,  by  which  'dsh  in  Job  ix.  9. 


and  'aish  in  Job  xxxviii.  32  (A.  V.  "  Arcturus"), 
are  translated.  Again,  in  Job  xxxviii.  32,  'aish  is 
represented  by  *Effir«poy  in  the  LXX.,  which  raises 
a  question  whether  the  order  of  the  words  which 
the  translators  had  before  them  in  Job  ix.  9  was 
not,  as  in  the  Syr.,  cimdh,  'dsh,  cesil;  in  which 

Mnnasseh  ben-Israel,  Conciliator,  on  Lev.  ad.  16. 
32y,  to  blow,  or  breathe. 


ORNAMENTS,  PERSONA J, 

care  the  last  would  be  i-epresented  by  'ApKTOvpos, 
which  was  the  rendering  adopted  by  Jerome  from 
his  Hebrew  teacher  (Comm.  in  Jes.  xiii.  10).  But 
no  known  manuscript  authority  supports  any  such 
variation  from  the  received  Hebrew  text. 

The  "  giant"  of  Oriental  astronomy  was  Nimrod, 
the  mighty  hunter,  who  was  fabled  to  have  been 
bound  in  the  sky  for  his  impiety  The  two  dogs 
and  the  hare,  which  are  among  the  constellations  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Orion,  mad?  his  train  com 
plete.  There  is  possibly  an  allusion  to  this  belief 
in  "the  bands  of  cestl"  (Job  7.xxviii.  31),  with 
which  Gesenius  (Jes.  i.  458)  compares  Prov.  vii. 
22.  In  the  C/ironicon  Paschale  (p.  36)  Nimrod 
is  said  to  have  been  "  a  giant,  the  founder  of  Baby 
lon,  who,  the  Persians  say,  was  deified  and  placed 
among  the  stars  of  heaven,  whom  they  call  Orion" 
(comp.  Cedrenus,  p.  14).  The  name  cesil,  literally 
"  a  fool,"  and  then  "  an  Impious,  godless  man,"  is 
supposed  to  be  appropriate  to  Nimrod,  who,  accord 
ing  to  tradition,  was  a  rebel  against  God  in  building 
the  tower  of  Babel,  and  is  called  by  the  Arab  his 
torians  "  the  mocker."  All  this,  however,  is  the 
invention  of  a  later  period,  and  is  based  upon  a 
false  etymology  of  Nimrod's  name,  and  an  attempt 
to  adapt  the  word  cesil  to  a  Hebrew  derivation. 
Some  Jewish  writers,  the  Rabbis  Isaac  Israel  and 
Jonah  among  them,  identified  the  Hebrew  cesil 
with  the  Arabic  sohail,  by  which  was  understood 
either  Sirius  or  Canopus.  The  words  of  K.  Jonah 
( Abulwalid),  as  quoted  by  Kimchi  (Lex.  Heb.  s.  v.), 
are — "  Cesil  is  the  large  star  called  in  Arabic  Sohail, 
and  the  stars  combined  with  it  are  called  after  its 
name,  cesilim."  The  name  Sohail,  "  foolish,"  was 
derived  from  the  supposed  influence  of  the  star  in 
causing  folly  in  men,  and  was  probably  an  addi 
tional  reason  for  identifying  it  with  cesil.  These 
conjectures  proceed,  first,  upon  the  supposition  that 
the  word  is  Hebrew  in  its  origin,  and,  secondly,  that, 
if  this  be  the  case,  it  is  connected  with  the  root  of 
cesil,  "  a  fool ;"  whereas  it  is  more  probably  derived 
from  a  root  signifying  firmness  or  strength,  and 
so  would  denote  the  "  strong  one,"  the  giant  of  the 
Syrians  and  Arabs.  A  full  account  of  the  various 
theories  which  have  been  framed  on  the  subject 
will  be  found  in  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Hebr., 
No.  1192.  [W.  A.W.] 

ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL.  The  num 
ber,  variety,  and  weight  of  the  ornaments  ordinarily 
worn  upon  the  person  forms  one  of  the  charac 
teristic  features  of  Oriental  costume,  both  in  ancient 
and  modern  times.  The  monuments  of  ancient 
Egypt  exhibit  the  hands  of  ladies  loaded  with  rings, 
earrings  of  very  great  size,  anklets,  armlets,  brace 
lets  of  the  most  varied  character,  and  frequently 
inlaid  with  precious  stones  or  enamel,  handsome 
and  richly  ornamented  necklaces,  either  of  gold  or 
of  beads,  and  chains  of  various  kinds  (Wilkinson, 
ii.  335-341).  The  modern  Egyptians  retain  to  the 
full  the  same  taste,  and  vie  with  their  progenitors  in 


»  ffezem  (DT3)  ;  A.  V.  "  ear-ring."  The  term  is  used 
both  for  "  ear-ring  "  and  "  nose-ring."  That  it  was  the 
former  in  the  present  case  appears  from  ver.  47 :  "1  put 
the  nose-ring  upon  her  face "  (nBK"?y)-  The  term  is 
etymologically  more  appropriate  to  the  nose-ring  than  to 
the  ear-ring.  [EAR-RING  ;  NOSE-KING.] 

b  ndmvl  (TC¥).  a  particular  kind  of  bracelet,  w 
Darned  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  fasten."  [BRACELET.J 

«  CWt  (*?3);   A.  V.    "jewels."     The  word   signifies 


ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL        045 

the  number  and  beauty  of  their  ornaments  (Lauo, 
vol.  iii.  Appendix  A.).  Nor  is  the  display  confined, 
as  with  us,  to  the  upper  classes :  we  are  tcld  that 
even  "  most  of  the  women  of  the  lower  orders 
wear  a  variety  of  trumpery  ornaments,  such  as  ear 
rings,  necklaces,  bracelets,  &c.,  and  sometimes  a 
nose-ring"  (Lane,  i.  78).  There  is  sufficient  evi 
dence  in  the  Bible  that  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine 
were  equally  devoted  to  finery.  In  the  Old  Testa 
ment,  Isaiah  (iii.  18-23)  supplies  us  with  a  detailed 
description  of  the  articles  with  which  the  luxurious 
women  of  his  day  were  decorated,  and  the  picture 
is  filled  up  by  incidental  notices  in  other  places :  in 
the  New  Testament  the  apostles  lead  us  to  infer 
the  prevalence  of  the  same  habit  when  they  recom 
mend  the  women  to  adorn  themselves,  "  not  with 
broided  hair,  or  gold,  or  pearls,  or  costly  array, 
but  with  good  works"  (1  Tim.  ii.  9,  10),  even  with 
"  the  ornament  of  a  meek  and  quiet  spirit,  which  5c 
in  the  sight  of  God  of  great  price"  (1  Pet.  iii.  4). 
Ornaments  were  most  lavishly  displayed  at  festi 
vities,  whether  of  a  public  (Hos.  ii.  13)  or  a  private 
character,  particularly  on  the  occasion  of  a  wedding 
(Is.  Lxi.  10  ;  Jer.  ii.  32).  In  times  of  public  mourn 
ing  they  were,  on  the  other  hand,  laid  aside  (Ex. 
xxxiii.  4-6). 

With  regard  to  the  particular  articles  noticed  in 
the  Old  Testament,  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  ex 
plain  their  form  or  use,  as  the  name  is  the  only 
source  of  information  open  to  us.  Much  illus 
tration  may,  however,  be  gleaned  both  from  the 
monuments  of  Egypt  and  Assyria,  and  from  the 
statements  of  modern  travellers  ;  and  we  are  in  all 
respects  in  a  better  position  to  explain  the  meaning 
of  the  Hebrew  terms,  than  were  the  learned  men 
of  the  Reformation  era.  We  propose,  therefore,  to 
review  the  passages  in  which  the  personal  orna 
ments  are  described,  substituting,  where  necessary, 
for  the  readings  of  the  A.  V.  the  more  correct  senst 
in  italics,  and  referring  for  more  detailed  descrip 
tions  of  the  articles  to  the  various  heads  under 
which  they  may  be  found.  The  notices  which 
occur  in  the  early  books  of  the  Bible,  imply  the 
weight  and  abundance  of  the  ornaments  worn  at 
that  period.  Eliezer  decorated  Rebekah  with  "  a 
golden  nose-ring  *  of  half  a  shekel  weight,  and  two 
bracelets'*  for  her  hands  of  ten  shekels  weight  of 
gold"  (Gen.  xxiv.  22);  and  he  afterwards  added 
"  trinkets  e  of  silver  and  trinkets  c  of  gold  "  (verse 
53).  Earrings  *  were  worn  by  Jacob's  wives,  ap 
parently  as  charms,  for  they  are  mentioned  in  con 
nexion  with  idols : — "  they  gave  unto  Jacob  all  the 
strange  gods,  which  were  in  their  hand,  and  theit 
earrings  which  were  in  their  ears"  (Gen.  xxxv.  4). 
The  ornaments  worn  by  the  patriarch  Judah  were 
a  "  signet,"  •  which  was  suspended  by  a  string  * 
round  the  neck,  and  a  "staff"  (Gen.  xxxviii.  18): 
the  staff  itself  was  probably  ornamented,  and  thus 
the  practice  of  the  Israelites  would  be  exactly  simi 
lar  to  that  of  the  Babylonians,  who,  according  to 


generally  "  articles."  They  may  have  been  either  vet*eli 
or  personal  ornaments:  we  think  the  latter  sense  more 
adapted  to  this  passage. 

<>  The  word  nezem  is  again  used,  but  with  the  addition  ot 
,  "  in  their  ears." 


e  ChOth&m  (Dnn)-    [SEAL.] 

'  PaOtil  0*0  S)  ;  A.  V.  "  bracelets."  The  signet  is  still 
worn,  susiwnded  by  a  string,  in  parts  of  Arabia,  (llcbln 
sen  i.  36.^ 


643     ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

Herodotus  (i.  195),  "  each  carried  a  seal,  and  a 
walking-stick,  carved  at  the  top  into  the  form  of  an 
apple,  a  rose,  an  eagle,  or  something  similar."  The 
first  notice  of  the  ring  occurs  in  reference  to  Joseph : 
when  he  was  made  ruler  of  Egypt,  Pharaoh  "  took 
off  his  signet-nne^  f  from  his  hand  and  put  it  upon 
Joseph's  hand,  and  put  a  gold  chain k  about  his 
neck  "  (Gen.  xli.  42),  the  latter  being  probably  a 
"  simple  gold  chain  iu  imitation  of  string,  to  which 
a  stone  scarabaeus,  set  in  the  same  precious  metal, 
was  appended  "  (Wilkinson,  ii.  339).  The  number 
of  personal  ornaments  worn  by  the  Egyptians,  par 
ticularly  by  the  females,  is  incidentally  noticed  in 
Ex.  iii.  22: — "Every  woman  shall  ask  (A.  V. 
"  borrow  ")  of  her  neighbour  trinkets '  of  silver 
and  trinkets*  of  gold  ...  and  ye  shall  spoil  the 
Egyptians :"  in  Ex.  xi.  2  the  order  is  extended  to 
the  males,  and  from  this  time  we  may  perhaps  date 
the  more  frequent  use  of  trinkets  among  men ;  for, 
while  it  is  said  in  the  former  passage : — "  ye  shall 
put  them  upon  your  sons  and  upon  your  daugh 
ters,"  we  find  subsequent  notices  of  earrings  being 
worn  at  all  events  by  young  men  (Ex.  xxxii.  2), 
and  again  of  offerings  both  from  men  and  women 
of  "  nose-rings,)  and  ear-rings,  and  rings,  and  neck 
laces*  all  articles  of  gold  "  (Ex.  xxxv.  22).  The 
profusion  of  those  ornaments  was  such  as  to  supply 
sufficient  gold  for  making  the  sacred  utensils  for 
the  tabernacle,  while  the  laver  of  brass  was  con 
structed  out  of  the  brazen  mirrors1  which  the 
women  carried  about  with  them  (Ex.  xxxviii.  8). 
The  Midianites  appear  to  have  been  as  prodigal  as  the 
Egyptians  in  the  use  of  ornaments :  for  the  Israelites 

t  Jtibba'ath  (njJ2t3)-  The  signet-ring  in  this,  as  In 
other  cases  (Esth.  ill.  10,  vlil.  2 ;  1  Mace.  vi.  15),  was  not 
merely  an  ornament,  but  the  symbol  of  authority. 

i>  liubid  (TQI)-  The  term  is  also  applied  to  a  chain 
worn  by  a  woman  (Ez.  xvl.  11). 

'  Celt.    See  note  c  above. 

j  Ch&ch  (Pin) ;  A.  V.  "  bracelets."  The  meaning  of 
the  term  is  rather  doubtful,  some  authorities  preferring 
the  sense  "buckle."  In  other  passages  the  same  word 
signifies  the  ring  placed  through  the  nose  of  an  animal, 
each  as  a  bull,  to  lead  hiiX  by. 

k  C'Smdz  (TO-13)  ;  A.  V.  "  tablets."  It  means  a  neck 
lace  formed  of  perforated  gold  drops  strong  together. 
[NECKLACE.]. 

i  MarOth  (nitOO') ;  A.  V.  «  looking-glasses."  The 
use  of  polished  mirrors  is  alluded  to  in  Job  xxxvii.  18. 
[  MIRROR.] 

»  m*  'adSh  (HIV  W)  ;  A.  V.  "  chains."  A  cognate 
term,  used  in  Is.  iii.  20,  means  "step-chain ;"  but  the  word 
is  used  both  here  and  in  2  Sam.  i.  10  without  reference  to 
Its  etymological  sense.  [ARMLET.] 

•  'AgH  (?*3J?)  ;  a  circular  ear-ring,  of  a  solid  character. 

0  C&mdz ;  A.  V.  "  tablets."    See  note  k  above. 

p  Ntzem, ;  A.  V.  "  ear-rings."  See  note  •  above.  The 
term  is  here  undefined ;  but,  as  ear-rings  are  subsequently 
noticed  In  the  verse,  we  think  it  probable  that  the  nose 
ring  is  intended. 

1  Saharonim  (D'OinK')  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments."     The 
word  specifies  moon-shaped  disks  of  metal,  strung  on  a 
cord,  and  placed  round  the  necks  either  of  men  or  of  camels. 
Compare  ver.  21.    [CHAIN.] 

r  XetipMth.  (niD^a)  ;  A.  V.  "collars"  or  "sweet- 
Jewels."  The  etymological  sense  of  the  word  is  pendants, 
which  were  no  doubt  attached  to  ear-rings. 

•  TSrim  (D^YIF!)  ;  A.  V.  "  rows."    The  term  means, 
according  to  Gescnius  (Thts.  p.  1499),  rowt  of  prarls  or 


ORNAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

are  described  as  having  captured  "  trinkets  of  gold, 
armlets,"  and  bracelets,  rings,  earrings,0  and  neck 
laces"  °  the  value  of  which  amounted  to  16,750 
shekels  (Num.  xxxi.  50,  52).  Equally  valuable 
were  the  ornaments  obtained  from  the  same  people 
after  their  defeat  by  Gideon :  "  the  weight  of  th« 
golden  nose-rings  9  was  a  thousand  and  seven  hun 
dred  shekels  of  gold  ;  beside  collars  *  and  ear-pend 
ants'  (Judg.  viii.  26). 

The  poetical  portions  of  the  0.  T.  contain  nu 
merous  references  to  the  ornaments  worn  by  the 
Israelites  in  the  time  of  their  highest  prosperity. 
The  appearance  of  the  bride  is  thus  described  in  the 
book  of  the  Canticles : — "  Thy  cheeks  are  comely 
with  beads,*  thy  neck  with  perforated*  (pearls) ; 
we  will  make  thee  beads  of  gold  with  studs  ot 
silver"  (i.  10,  11).  Her  neck  rising  tall  and 
stately  "  like  the  tower  of  David  builded  for  an 
armoury,"  was  decorated  with  various  ornaments 
hanging  like  the  "  thousand  bucklers,  all  shields  of 
mighty  men,  on  the  walls  of  the  armoury  "  (iv.  4) : 
her  hair  falling  gracefully  over  her  neck  is  described 
figuratively  ns  a  "chain""  (iv.  9):  and  "the 
roundings  "  (not  as  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  joints ") 
of  her  thighs  are  likened  to  the  pendant  •  of  an  ear 
ring,  which  tapers  gradually  downwards  (vii.  1). 
So  again  we  read  of  the  bridegroom  : — "his  eyes 
are  ...  fitly  set,"  w  as  though  they  were  gems  fill 
ing  the  sockets  of  rings  (v.  12) :  "  his  hands  are 
as  gold  rings*  set  with  the  beryl,"  i.  e.  (as  ex 
plained  by  Gesenius,  Thesaur.  p.  287)  the  fingers 
when  curved  are  like  gold  rings,  and  the  nails  dyed 
with  henna  resemble  gems.  Lastly,  the  yearning 


beads ;  but,  as  the  etymological  sense  is  connected  with 
circle.  It  may  rather  mean  the  Individual  beads,  which 
might  be  strung  together,  and  so  make  a  row,  encircling 
the  cheeks.  In  the  next  verse  the  same  word  is  rendered 
In  the  A.  V.  "  borders."  The  sense  must,  however,  be  the 
same  in  both  verses,  and  the  point  of  contrast  may  per 
chance  consist  in  the  difference  of  the  material,  the  beads 
In  ver.  10  being  of  some  ordinary  metal,  while  those  hi 
ver.  11  were  to  be  of  gold. 

t  Charuzim  (DH'lin)  ;  A.  V.  "  chains."  The  word 
would  apply  to  any  perforated  articles,  such  as  beads, 
pearls,  coral,  &c. 

u  'Anak  (p3V)-  In  the  A.  V.  it  is  supposed  to  be  Hte- 
rally  a  chain :  and  hence  some  critics  explain  the  word 
attached  to  It,  "SpJT-W,  as  meaning  a  "collar,"  Instead  of 
a  "  neck."  The  latter,  which  is  the  correct  sense,  may  be 
retained  by  treating  anak  as  metaphorically  applied  to  e 
pendant  lock  of  hair. 

»  Chalaim  (D^N^H);  A. V.  "Jewels."  Gesenins under 
stands  the  term  as  referring  to  a  necklace,  and  renders  this 
passage,  "  the  roundings  of  thy  hips  are  like  the  knobs  or 
bosses  of  a  necklace."  The  two  notions  of  rounded  and 
polished  may  be  combined  in  the  word  in  this  case.  A 
cognate  term  is  used  In  Hos.  ii.  13,  and  is  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  "jewels." 

»  The  words  in  the  original  literally  mean  fitting  in 
fulness ;  and  the  previous  reference  to  "  rivers  of  waters  * 
would  rather  lead  us  to  adopt  a  rendering  In  harmony 
with  that  image,  as  is  done  in  the  LXX.  and  the  Vulgate, 
Ka.8ijfj.evcu.  irrl  nAnfxi/uuiTa  vSaruiv,  jitata  Jluenta  pU- 
nisfima.  i  • 

»  The  term  here  rendered  "  rings,"  gelttim  (D  v  v3)> 
is  nowhere  else  found  in  this  sense,  at  all  events  as  a  per 
sonal  ornament.  Its  etymological  sense  implies  something 
rounded,  and  therefore  the  word  admits  of  being  rendered 
"  staffs ;"  In  which  case  a  comparison  would  be  instituted 
between  the  outstretched  fingers  and  the  handsomely  de 
corated  staff,  of  which  we  have  already  spoken  (Hltzig 
in  lac.) 


OENAMENTS,  PERSONAL 

after  close  affection  is  expressed  thus : — "  Set  me  as 
\  seal  upon  thine  heart,  as  a  seal  upon  thine  arm," 
whether  that  the  seal  itself  was  the  most  valuable 
personal  ornament  worn  by  a  man,  as  in  Jer.  xxii. 
24;  Hag.  ii.  23,  or  whether  perchance  the  close 
3ontiguity  of  the  seal  to  the  wax  on  which  it  is  im 
pressed  may  not  rather  be  intended  (Cant.  viii.  6). 
We  may  further  notice  the  imagery  employed  in  the 
Proverbs  to  describe  the  effects  of  wisdom  in  beau 
tifying  the  character ;  in  reference  to  the  terms  used 
we  need  only  explain  that  the  "  ornament "  of  the 
A.  V.  in  i.  9,  iv.  9,  is  more  specifically  a  wreath  f 
or  garland;  the  "chains"  of  i.  9,  the  drops* 
of  which  the  necklace  was  formed  ;  the  "jewel  of 
gold  in  a  swine's  snout"  of  xi.  22,  a  nose-ring  ;• 
the  "jewel"  ofxx.  15,  a  trinket,  and  the  "orna 
ment"  of  xxv.  12,  an  ear-pendant.* 

The  passage  of  Isaiah  (iii,  18-23),  to  which  we 
have  already  referred,  may  be  rendered  as  follows : — 
(18)  "  In  that  day  the  Lord  will  take  away  the 
bravery  of  their  anklets,*  and  their  lace  caps,d  and 
their  necklaces;'  (19)  the  ear-pendants,1  and  the 
bracelets  f  and  the  light  veils  ;h  (20)  the  turbans,1 
and  the  step-chains^  and  the  girdles,*  and  the 
scent-bottles,1  and  the  amulets  ;m  (21)  the  rings 
and  nose-rings;*  (22)  the  state-dresses"  and  the 
cloaks,  and  the  shawls,  and  the  purses ;  f  (23)  the 
mirrors?  and  the  fine  linen  shirts,  and  the  tur 
bans,1  and  the  light  dresses."' 

The  following  extracts  from  the  Mishna  (Sabb. 
cap.  vi.)  illustrate  the  subject  of  this  article,  it 
being  premised  that  the  object  of  the  enquiry  was 
to  ascertain  what  constituted  a  proper  article  of 
dress,  and  what  might  be  regarded  by  rabbinical 
refinement  as  a  burden : — "  A  woman  must  not  go 
out  (on  the  Sabbath)  with  linen  or  woollen  laces, 
nor  with  the  straps  on  her  head :  nor  with  a  front 
let  and  pendants  thereto,  unless  sewn  to  her  cap : 
nor  with  a  golden  tower  (f.  e.  an  ornament  in  the 
shape  of  a  tower) :  nor  with  a  tight  gold  chain :  nor 
with  nose-rings:  nor  with  finger-rings  on  which 


ORTHOSIAS 


647 


there  is  no  seal :  nor  with  a  needle  Vrithout  an  eye 
(§  1) :  nor  with  a  needle  that  has  an  eye :  nor  with 
a  finger-ring  that  has  a  seal  on  it :  nor  with  a  dia 
dem  :  nor  with  a  smelling-bottle  or  balm-flask  (§  3). 
A  man  is  not  to  go  out  .  .  .  with  an  amulet,  unless 
it  be  by  a  distinguished  sage  (§  2) :  knee-buckles 
are  clean  and  a  man  may  go  out  with  them :  step- 
chains  are  liable  to  become  unclean,  and  a  man 
must  not  go  out  with  them  "  (§  4).  [W.  L.  B.] 

OR'NAN(jr)K:  'O^S":   Oman).    The  form 

in  which  the  name  of  the  Jebusite  king,  who  in  the 
older  record  of  the  Book  of  Samuel  is  called  Arau- 
nah,  Aranyah,  Ha-avamah,  or  Haoruah,  is  given  in 
Chronicles  (1  Chr.  xxi.  15,  18,  20-25,  28 ;  2  Chr. 
iii.  1).  This  extraordinary  variety  of  form  is  a 
strong  corroboration  to  the  statement  that  Ornan 
was  a  non-Israelite.  [ARAUKAH  ;  JEBUSITE,  vol. 
i.  9376.] 

In  some  of  the  Greek  versions  of  Origen's  Hexapla 
collected  by  Bahrdt,  the  threshing-floor  of  Ornan 
('Epvo  TOV  'lefiovffalov)  is  named  for  that  of  Nachon 
in  2  Sam.  vi.  6.  [G.] 

OR'PAH  (rtS'iy :  'OpQd:  Orpha).  A  Moabite 

womau,  wife  of  Chiliou  son  of  Naomi,  and  thereby 
sister-in-law  to  RUTH.  On  the  death  of  their  hus 
bands  Orpah  accompanied  her  sister-in-law  and  her 
mother-in-law  on  the  road  to  Bethlehem.  But  here 
her  resolution  failed  her.  The  offer  which  Naomi 
made  to  the  two  younger  women  that  they  should 
return  "  each  to  their  own  mother's  house,"  after 
a  slight  hesitation,  she  embraced.  "  Orpah  kissed 
her  mother-in-law,"  and  went  back  "  to  her  people 
and  to  her  gods,"  leaving  to  the  unconscious  Ruth 
the  glory,  which  she  might  have  rivalled,  of  being 
the  mother  of  the  most  illustrious  house  of  that  or 
any  nation.  L^f.] 

ORTHO'SIAS  ('Opfloxruk;  Alex.  'OpOuffia: 
Ort/eosias).  Tryphon,  when  besieged  by  Antiochus 
Sidetes  in  Dora,  fled  by  ship  to  Orthosias  (1  Mace. 


7  LivySh 

1  See  note  »  above. 

»  The  word  is  nezem.    See  note  •  above. 

•>  Ch&i.    See  note  »  above. 

«  'Acdsim  (D^DSJ?)  ;  A.  V.  "tinkling  ornaments  about 
their  feet."  The  effect  of  the  anklet  Is  described  in  ver.  1  6 
"  making  a  tinkling  with  their  feet."  [ANKLET.] 

*  SheWsim  (D'D*3B9;   A.  V.    "cauls"    or    M,el 
<*orks."   The  term  has  ijeen  otherwise  explained  as  i  wan 
ing  ornaments  shaped  like  the.  sun,  and  worn  as  a  necklace. 
[HAIR.] 

*  SaharOntm  ;  A.  V.  "  round  tires  like  the  moon."   See 
note  i  above. 

*  NetipMth;  A.  V."  chains"  or  "  sweet  balls."    See 
note  '  above. 

8  SMrSth  (ni"ttW-    The  word  refers  to  the  construc 
tion  of  the  bracelet  by  intertwining  cords  or  metal  rods. 

i>  Re'aUth  (HI  7JH)  ;  A.  V.  "  mufflers  "  or  "  spangled 
ornaments."  The  word  describes  the  tremulous  motion 
of  the  veil.  [VEIL.] 

i  Petrton  (D*")NS)  ;  A.  V.  "  bonnets."  The  peer  may 
mean  more  specifically  the  decoration  in  front  of  the 
turban.  [HEADDRESS.] 

i  Ts&ddth  (nnj?  V)  ;  A.  V.  "  ornaments  of  the  legs." 
S?e  note  m  above.  The  effect  of  the  step-chain  is  to  give 
*  '•  mincing  "  gait,  as  described  in  ver.  16. 

k  Xisfishurim  (D^B'p)  ;    A  V.    "  head-bands."      It 


probably  means  a  handsomely  decorated  girdle.    [GIRDLE.] 
It  formed  part  of  a  bride's  attire  (Jer.  ii.  32> 


»  Bottl  hannephesh  (t^BSn  *J|j3)  ;  A.  V.  "tablets," 
or  "  houses  of  the  soul,"  the  latter  being  the  literal  ren 
dering  of  the  words.  The  scent-bottle  was  either  attached 
to  the  girdle  or  suspended  from  the  neck. 

™  Lechashim,  (D^EJTl?) ;  A.  V.  "  ear-rings."  The  mean 
ing  of  this  term  is  extremely  doubtful :  it  is  derived  from 
a  root  signifying  "  to  whisper ;"  and  hence  is  applied  to 
the  mutterlngs  of  serpent  charmers,  and  in  a  secondary 
sense  to  amulets.  They  may  have  been  in  the  form  of 
ear-rings,  as  already  stated.  The  etymological  meaning 
might  otherwise  make  it  applicable  to  describe  light, 
rustling  robes  (Saalchutz,  Archaol.  i.  30). 

»  A.  V.  "  nose-jewels." 

0  For  this  and  the  two  following  terms  see  DRESS. 

p  Chartiim  (D^tp'Hn)  ;  A.  V.  "  crisping-pins."  Com 
pare  2  K.  v.  23.  According  to  Gesenius  (Thes.  p. 
519),  the  purse  is  so  named' from  its  round,  conical 
form.  . 

1  Gilytoilm  (D*3  vS)  ;  A.  V.  "  glasses."    The  term  ie 
not  the  same  as  was  before  used ;  nor  is  its  sense  "veil 
ascertained.     It  has  been  otherwise  understood  as  de 
scribing  a  transparent  material  like  gauze.    See  DBBSS. 

r  A.  V.  "  hoods."    [HEADDKESS.] 

•  A.  V.  "  vails."    [DRESS.] 

B  Declined  'Opi/<f ,  'Opviv,  in  the  Vat.  MS.  (Mai) ;  but 
in  the  Alex.  MS.  constantly  Opva.  In  the  Targurn,  cu 
Chronicles  the  name  is  given  in  four  different  forms : — 
usually  }1pN,  but  also  )'lJ"]N,  |3"]K.  JVHN,  MX! 
S-  See  the  edition  of  Beck  (Aug.  rind.  1680). 


648 


OSAIAS 


XT.  37).  Orthosia  is  described  by  Pliny  (v.  17)  as 
north  of  Trip^lis,  and  south  of  the  river  Eleutherus, 
near  wnich  it  was  situated  (Stiubo,  xvi.  p.  753). 
It  was  the  northern  boundary  of  Phoenice,  and 
distant  1130  stadia  from  the  Orontes  (id.  p.  760). 
Shaw  (Trav.  p.  270,  371,  2nd  ed.)  identifies  the 
Eleutherus  with  the  modern  Nahr  el-B&rid,  on  the 
north  bank  of  which,  corresponding  to  the  descrip 
tion  of  Strabo  (p.  753),  he  found  "  ruins  of  a  con- 
•iderable  city,  whose  adjacent  district  pays  yearly 
to  the  Bashaws  of  Tripoly  a  tax  of  fifty  dollars  by 
the  name  of  Or-tosa.  In  Peutinger*s  Table,  also, 
Orthosia  is  placed  thirty  miles  to  the  south  of  Antar- 
adus,  and  twelve  miles  to  the  north  of  Tripoly.  The 
.situation  of  it  likewise  is  further  illustrated  by  a 
medal  of  Antoninus  Pius,  struck  at  Orthosia  ;  upon 
the  reverse  of  which  we  have  the  goddess  Astarte 
treading  upon  a  river.  For  this  city  was  built  upon 
a  rising  ground  on  the  northern  banks  of  the  river, 
within  half  a  furlong  of  the  sea,  and,  as  the  rugged 
eminences  of  Mount  Libanus  lie  at  a  small  distance 
in  a  parallel  with  the  shore,  Orthosia  must  have 
been  a  place  of  the  greatest  importance,  as  it  would 
have  hereby  the  entire  command  of  the  road  (the 
only  one  there  is)  betwixt  Phoenice  and  the  mari 
time  .parts  of  Syria."  On  the  other  hand,  Mr. 
Porter,  who  identifies  the  Eleutherus  with  the 
modern  Nahr  el-Keblr,  describes  the  ruins  of  Or 
thosia  as  on  the  south  bank  of  the  Nahr  el-B£rid, 
"  the  cold  river  "  (Handbk.  p.  593),  thus  agreeing 
with  the  accounts  of  Ptolemy  and  Pliny.  The  state 
ment  of  Strabo  is  not  sufficiently  precise  to  allow 
the  inference  that  he  considered  Orthosia  north  of 
the  Eleutherus.  But  if  the  ruins  on  the  south 
bank  of  the  Nahr  el-Birid  be  really  those  of  Or 
thosia,  it  seems  an  objection  to  the  identification  of 
the  Eleutherus  with  the  Nahr  el-Kebir ;  for  Strabo 
at  one  time  makes  Orthosia  (xiv.  p.  670),  and  at 
another  the  neighbouring  river  Eleutherus  (6  irAij- 
<riov  iroTa.ft.6s),  the  boundary  of  Phoenice  on  the 
north.  This  could  hardly  have  been  the  case  if 
the  Eleutherus  were  3J  hours,  or  nearly  twelve 
miles,  from  Orthosia. 

According  to  Josephus  (Ant.  x.  7,  §2),  Tryphon 
fled  to  Apamea.  while  in  a  fragment  of  Charax, 
quoted  by  Grimm  (Kurzgef.  Handb,}  from  Miiller's 
Frag.  Oraec.  Hist.  iii.  p.  644,  fr.  14,  he  is  said  to 
have  taken  refuge  at  Ptolemais.  Grimm  recon 
ciles  these  statements  by  supposing  that  Tryphon 
fled  first  to  Orthosia,  then  to  Ptolemais,  and  lastly 
to  Apamea,  where  he  was  slain.  [W.  A.  W.] 

OSAI'AS  ('Clffaias  :  om.  in  Vulg.).  A  corrup 
tion  of  JESHAIAH  (1  Esd.  viii.  48 ;  comp.  Ezr. 
viii.  19). 

OSE'A  (Osee).  HOSHEA  the  son  of  Elah,  king 
of  Israel  (2  Esd.  xiii.  40). 

OSE'AS  (Osee).  The  prophet  Hosea  (2  Esd. 
i.  39). 

OSHE'A  Q^nn,  f.  e.  Hoshea;  Samar.  JflJIiT: 
Auirtj :   Osee).    The  original  name  of  Joshua  the 
son  of  Nun  (Num.  xiii.  8),  which  on  some  occasion 
not  stated — but  which  we  may  with  reason  conjec 
ture  to  have  been  his  resistance  to  the  factious  con 
duct  of  the  spies — received  from  Moses  (ver.  18)  j 
the  addition  of  the  great  name  of  Jehovah,  so  lately  j 
revealed  to  the  nation  (Ex.  vi.  3),  and  thus  from 
"  Help  "  became  "  Help  of  Jehovah."    The  Samari-  ' 
tan  Codex  has  Jehoshua  in  both  places,  and  therefore 
misses  the  point  of  the  change. 

The  original  form  of  the  name  recurs  in  Deut. 


OSPRAY 

xxxii.  44,  though  there  the  A.  V.  (with  more  ac 
curacy  than  here)  has  Hoshea. 

Probably  no  name  in  the  whole  Bible  appears  re 
so  many  forms  as  that  of  this  great  personage,  in 
the  original  five,  and  in  the  A.  V.  no  less  than 
seven— -Oshea,  Hoshea,  Jehoshua,  Jehoshuah,  Joshua, 
Jeshua,  Jesus  ;  and  if  we  add  Hosea  (also  identical 
with  Oshea)  and  Osea,  nine.  [G.] 

OSPEAY  (n»J?JJ,  ozniyydh :  S*ia.Uros  :  ha- 
liaeetus).  The  Hebrew  word  occurs  only  in  Lev.  xi. 
13,  and  Deut.  xiv.  12,  as  the  name  of  some  unclean 
bird  which  the  law  of  Moses  disallowed  as  food  to  the 
Israelites.  The  old  versions  and  many  commentators 
are  in  favour  of  this  interpretation  ;  but  Bochart 
(Hieroz.  ii.  774)  has  endeavoured,  though  on  no 
reasonable  grounds,  to  prove  that  the  bird  denoted 
by  the  Hebrew  term  is  identical  with  the  melon- 
aeetits  (/utAai/o/eToj)  of  Aristotle,  the  Valeria 
aquila  of  Pliny.  There  is,  however,  some  difficulty 
in  identifying  the  haliaeetus  of  Aristotle  and  Pliny, 
on  account  of  some  statements  these  writers  make 
with  respect  to  the  habits  of  this  bird.  The  genera! 
description  they  give  would  suit  either  the  ospray 
(Pandion  haliaeetus)  or  the  white-tailed  eagle 


Pandion  ha&ycetut. 


(Haliaeetus  albic&la).  The  following  passage,  how 
ever,  of  Pliny  (x.  3),  points  to  the  ospray :  "  The 
haliaeetus  poises  itself  aloft,  and  the  moment  it 
catches  sight  of  a  fish  in  the  sea  below  pounces 
headlong  upon  it,  and  cleaving  the  water  with  its 


OS8IFRAGE 

breast,  carries  off  its  booty."  Witli  this  may  be 
compared  the  description  of  a  modern  naturalist, 
Dr.  Richardson  :  •  When  looking  out  for  its  prey 
it  satis  with  great  ease  and  elegance,  in  undulating 
lines  at  a  considerable  altitude  above  the  water, 
from  whence  it  precipitates  itself  upon  its  quarry, 
and  bears  it  off  in  its  claws."  Again,  both  Aristotle 
and  Pliny  speak  of  the  diving  habits  of  the  haliaeetus. 
The  ospray  often  plunges  entirely  under  the  water 
in  pursuit  of  fish.  The  ospray  belongs  to  the  family 
Falcon.  dae,  order  Raptatores.  It  has  a  wide  geo 
graphical  range,  and  is  occasionally  seen  in  Egypt  ; 
but  as  it  is  rather  a  northern  bird,  the  Heb.  word 
may  refer,  as  Mr.  Tristram  suggests  to  us,  either  to 
the  Aquila  naevia,  or  A.  naevioides,  or  more  pro 
bably  still  to  the  very  abundant  Circaetus  gallicus 
which  feeds  upon  reptilia.  [W.  H.] 


OSSIPRAGE  (DnB,  peres  :    ypfy  :    gryps}. 

There  is  much  to  be  said  in  favour  of  this  transla 
tion  of  the  A.  V.  The  word  occurs,  as  the  name 
of  an  unclean  bird,  in  Lev.  xi.  13,  and  in  the  parallel 
passage  of  Deut.  xiv.  12.  (For  other  renderings  of 
peres  see  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  770.)  The  Arabic 
version  has  okab,  which  Bochart  renders  /j.f\av- 
attros,  "  the  black  eagle."  [OSPRAY.]  This  word, 
however,  is  in  all  probability  generic,  and  is  used 
to  denote  any  bird  of  the  eagle  kind,  for  in  the 
vernacular  Arabic  of  Algeria  okab  is  "  the  generic 


na^ie  ur*d  by  ths  Arabs  to  express  any  of  the  large 
kinds  of  the  Faioonidae."  (See  Loche's  Catalogue 
des  Oiseaux  observes  en  Algerie,  p.  37.)  There 
is  nothing  conclusive  to  be  gathered  from  the 
ypty  of  the  LXX.  and  the  gryps  of  the  Vulgate, 
which  is  the  name  of  a  fabulous  animal.  Etymo- 
logically  the  word  points  to  some  rapacious  bird 
with  an  eminently  "  hooked  beak  ;"  and  certainly 


•  D"1S,  from  D1S,  "  to  break,"  "  to  crash." 

•  nay  -  to  cry  out."  e  jy\ 


OSTRICH  649 

the  ossifrage  has  the  hooked  beak  characteristic  ot 
the  order  Raptatores  in  a  very  marked  degree.  If 
much  weight  is  to  be  allowed  to  etymology,  the 
peres*  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  may  well  be  repre 
sented  by  the  ossifrage,  or  bone-breaker  ;  for  peres 
in  Hebrew  means  "  the  breaker."  And  the  ossifrage 
(Gypaetus  barbatus)  is  well  deserving  of  his  name 
in  a  more  literal  manner,  it  will  appear,  than 
Colonel  H.  Smith  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  "  Peres")  is 
willing  to  allow  ;  for  not  only  does  he  push  kids 
and  lambs,  and  even  men,  off  the  rocks,  but  he 
takes  the  bones  of  animals  which  other  birds  of 
prey  have  denuded  of  the  flesh  high  up  into  the  air, 
and  lets  them  fall  upon  a  stone  in  order  to  crack 
them,  and  render  them  more  digestible  even  for  his 
enormous  powers  of  deglutition.  (See  Mr.  Simpson's 
very  interesting  account  of  the  Lammergeyer  in 
Ibis,  ii.  282.)  The  Lammergeyer,  or  bearded  vul 
ture,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  is  one  of  the  largest  of 
the  birds  of  prey.  It  is  not  uncommon  in  the  East  ; 
and  Mr.  Tristram  several  times  observed  this  bird 
"  sailing  over  the  high  mountain-  passes  west  of  the 
Jordan  "  (Ibis,  i.  23).  The  English  word  ossifrage 
has  been  applied  to  some  of  the  Falconidae;  but 
the  ossifraga  of  the  Latins  evidently  points  to  the 
Lammergeyer,  one  of  the  Vulturidae.  [W.  H.] 

OSTRICH.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the 
Hebrew  words  bath  haya'anah,  ya  en,  and  rdndn, 
denote  this  bird  of  the  desert. 


1.  Bath  haya'anah  (rOy'iTDS  :  <rrpov66s, 
,  <retpjiv:  struthio)  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  16, 
Deut.  xiv.  15,  in  the  list  of  unclean  birds;  and  in 
other  passages  of  Scripture.  The  A.V.  erroneously 
rendei-s  the  Hebrew  expression,  which  signifies  either 
"  daughter  of  greediness  "  or  "  daughter  of  shout 
ing,"  by  "  owl,"  or,  as  in  the  margin,  by  "  daughter 
of  owl."  In  Job  xxx.  29,  Is.  xxxiv.  13,  and  xliii.  20, 
the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  correctly  reads  "  ostriches." 
Bochart  considers  that  bath  haya'anah  denotes  the 
female  ostrich  only,  and  that  tachmds,  the  follow 
ing  word  in  the  Hebrew  text,  is  to  be  restricted  to 
the  male  bird.  In  all  probability,  however,  this 
latter  word  is  intended  to  signify  a  bird  of  another 
genus.  [NIGHT-HAWK.]  There  is  considerable 
difference  of  opinion  with  regard  to  the  etymology 
of  the  Hebrew  word  ya'anah.  Bochart  (Hieroz. 
ii.  81  1)  derives  it  from  a  rootb  meaning  to  "  cry 
out"  (see  also  Maurer,  Comment,  in  V.  T.  ad  Thren. 
iv.  3)  ;  and  this  is  the  interpretation  of  old  commen 
tators  generally.  Gesenius  (  Tlies.  s.  v.  n3V'^  refers 
the  word  to  a  root  which  signifies  "  to  be  greedy 
or  voracious  ;"  c  and  demurs  to  the  explanation 
given  by  Micliaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  p.  1127), 
and  by  Kosenmiiller  (Not.  ad  Hieroz.  ii.  829, 
and  Schol.  ad  Lev.  xi.  16),  who  trace  the  Hebrew 
word  ya'anah  to  one  which  in  Arabic  denotes 
"  hard  and  sterile  land  :"  d  bath  haya'anah  accord 
ingly  would  mean  "  daughter  cf  the  desert." 
Without  entering  into  the  merits  of  these  various 
explanations,  it  will  be  enough  to  mention  that  any 
one  of  them  is  well  suited  to  the  habits  tf  the 
ostrich.  This  bird,  as  is  well  known,  will  swallow 
almost  any  substance,  pieces  of  iron,  large  stones, 
&c.  &c.  ;  this  it  does  probably  in  order  to  assist 
the  triturating  action  of  the  gizzard  :  so  that  the 
Oriental  expression  of  "  daughter  of  voracily  "  if 


550 


OSTRICH 


eminently  characteristic  of  the  ostrich.*  With  regard 
to  the  two  other  derivations  of  the  Hebrew  word, 
we  may  add  that  the  cry  of  the  ostrich  is  said 
sometimes  to  resemble  the  lion,  so  that  the  Hot 
tentots  of  S.  Africa  are  deceived  by  it ;  and  that 
its  particular  haunts  are  the  parched  and  desolate 
tracts  of  sandy  deserts. 

The  loud  crying  of  the  ostrich  seems  to  be  re 
ferred  to  in  Mic.  i.  8 :  "I  will  wail  and  howl  .  .  .  . 
I  will  make  a  mourning  as  the  ostriches  "  (see  also 
Job  xxx.  29).  The  other  passages  where  bath  haya- 
'andh  occurs  point  to  the  desolate  places  which  are 
the  natural  habitat  of  these  birds. 

2.  Yd'en  (JJP)  occurs  only  in  the  plural  number 
D'?y\    yJenim  (LXX.   ffTpovOiov,   struthio),   in 
Lam.'  iv.  3,  where   the   context   shews   that   the 
ostrich  is  intended:  "  The  daughter  of  my  people 
is  become  cruel  like  the  ostriches  in  the  wilderness." 
This  is  important,  as  shewing  that  the  other  word 
(1),  which  is  merely  the  feminine  form  of  this  one, 
with   the  addition  of  bath,   "  daughter,"    clearly 
points  to  the  ostrich  as  its  correct  translation,  even 
if  all  the  old  versions  were  not  agreed  upon  the 
matter.     For  remarks  on  Lam.  iv.  3,  see  below. 

3.  Ednan  (jri).     The  plural  form  (DW,  re- 

namm:  LXX.  '-tpirSfj.fvoi:  struthio)  alone  occurs 
m  Job  xxxix.  13 ;  where,  however,  it  is  clear  from 
the  whole  passage  (13-18)  that  ostriches  are  in 
tended  by  the  word.  The  A.  V.  renders  renarAm 
by  "  peacocks,"  a  translation  which  has  not  found 
favour  with  commentators ;  as  "  peacocks."  for 
which  there  is  a  different  Hebrew  name,'  were 
probably  not  known  to  tne  people  of  Arabia  or 
Syria  before  the  time  of  Solomon.  [PEACOCKS.] 
The  "ostrich"  of  the  A.  V.  in  Job  xxxix.  13  is 
the  representative  of  the  Hebrew  ndtseh,  "  featners." 
The  Hebrew  rendnim  appears  to  be  derived  from 
the  root  rdnanjf  "  to  wail,"  or  to  "  utter  a  stri- 
dulous  sound,"  in  allusion  to  this  bird's  nocturnal 
cries.  Gesenius  compares  the  Arabic  zimar,  "  a 
female  ostrich,"  from  the  root  zamar,  "  to  sing." 

The  following  short  account  of  the  nidification  of 
the  ostrich  (Struthio  camelus)  will  perhaps  elucidate 
those  passages  of  Scripture  which  ascribe  cruelty  to 
this  bird  in  neglecting  her  eggs  or  young.  Ostriches 
are  polygamous:  the  hens  lay  their  eggs  promis 
cuously  in  one  nest,  which  is  merely  a  hole  scratched 
in  the  sand ;  the  eggs  are  then  covered  over  to  the 
depth  of  about  a  foot,  and  are,  in  the  case  of  those 
birds  which  are  found  within  the  tropics,  generally 
left  for  the  greater  part  of  the  day  to  the  heat  of 
the  sun,  the  parent-birds  taking  their  turns  at  incu 
bation  during  the  night.  But  in  those  countries 
which  have  not  a  tropical  sun  ostriches  frequently 
incubate  during  the  day,  the  male  taking  his  turn 
at  night,  and  watching  over  the  eggs  with  great 
care  and  affection,  as  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that 
jackals  and  other  of  the  smaller  carnivora  are 
occasionally  found  dead  near  the  nest,  having  been 
killed  by  the  ostrich  in  defence  of  the  eggs  or 
young.  "  As  a  further  proof  of  the  affection  of  the 
ostrich  for  its  young"  (we  quote  from  Shaw's 
Zoology,  xi.  426),  "  it  is  related  by  Thunberg  that 
he  once  rode  past  a  place  where  a  female  was  sitting 

'  Mr.  Tristram,  who  has  paid  considerable  attention  to 
the  habits  of  the  ostrich,  has  kindly  read  over  this  article ; 
he  says,  "  the  necessity  for  swallowing  stones,  &c.,  may 
b»  understood  from  the  favourite  food  of  the  tame  os- 
trtahes  1  have  seen  being  the  date-stone,  the  hardest  of 
rogetable  substances." 


OSTRICH 

on  her  nest,  when  the  bird  sprang  up  and  pursued 
him,  evidently  with  a  view  to  prevent  his  noticing 
her  eggs  or  young."  The  habit  of  the  wtrich 
leaving  its  eggs  to  be  matured  by  the  sun  s  heal 
is  usually  appealed  to  in  order  to  confirm  the  Scrijc 
tural  account,  "  she  leaveth  her  eggs  to  the  earth  ;" 
but,  as  has  been  remarked  above,  this  is  probably 
the  case  only  with  the  tropical  birds :  the  ostriches 
with  which  the  Jews  were  acquainted  were,  it  is 
likely,  birds  of  Syria,  Egypt,  and  North  Africa ; 
but,  even  if  they  were  acquainted  with  the  habits 
of  the  tropical  ostriches,  how  can  it  be  said  that 
"  she  forgetteth  that  the  foot  may  crush  "  the  eggs, 
when  they  are  covered  a  foot  deep  or.  more  in 
sand  ?  '  We  believe  the  true  explanation  of  this 


passage  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  ostrich 
deposits  some  of  her  eggs  not  in  the  nest,  but 
around  it ;  these  lie  about  on  the  surface  of  the 
sand,  to  all  appearance  forsaken ;  they  are,  however, 
designed  for  the  nourishment  of  the  young  birds, 
according  to  Levaillant  and  Bonjainville  (Cuvier, 
An.  King,  by  Griffiths  and  others,  viii.  432).  Are 
not  these  the  eggs  "  that  the  foot  may  crash,"  and 
may  not  hence  be  traced  the  cruelty  which  Scrip 
ture  attributes  to  the  ostrich  ?  We  have  had  occa 
sion  to  remark  in  a  former  artiele  [AST],  that  the 
language  of  Scripture  is  adapted  to  the  opinions 
commonly  held  by  the  people  of  the  East :  for  how 
otherwise  can  we  explain,  for  instance,  the  passages 
which  ascribe  to  the  hare  or  to  the  coney  the  habit 
of  chewing  the  cud  ?  And  this  remark  will  hold 
good  in  the  passage  of  Job  which  speaks  of  the 
ostrich  being  without  understanding.  It  is  a  general 
belief  amongst  the  Arabs  that  the  ostrich  is  a  very 
stupid  bird  :  indeed  they  have  a  proverb,  "  Stupid 
as  an  ostrich ;"  and  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  865)  ha* 
given  us  five  points  on  which  this  bird  is  supposed 
to  deserve  its  character.  They  may  be  briefly  stated 
thus: — (1)  Because  it  will  swallow  iron,  stones, 


h  See  Tristram  (Ibis,  li.  74):  "Two  Aribi  Degsn  tc 
dig  with  their  bands,  and  presently  brought  up  four  fn« 
fresh  eggs  from  the  depth  of  about  a  foot  under  the  wanr 

sand.' 


OTHNI 

Jic.  ;  (2)  Becsuse  when  it  is  huntad  it  thrusts  its 
head  into  a  bush  and  imagines  the  hunter  does  not 
see  it  ;  h  (3)  Because  it  allows  itself  to  be  deceived 
and  captured  in  the  manner  described  by  Strabo 
(xvi.  772,  ed.  Kramer)  ;  (4)  Because  it  neglects  its 
eggs  ;  *  (5)  Because  it  has  a  small  head  an  I  few 
brains.  Such  is  the  opinion  the  Arabs  have  ex 
pressed  with  regard  to  the  ostrich  ;  a  bird,  however, 
which  by  no  means  deserves  such  a  character,  as 
travellers  have  frequently  testified.  "  So  wary  is 
the  bird,"  says  Mr.  Tristram  (Ibis,  ii.  73),  "and  so 
open  are  the  vast  plains  over  which  it  roams,  that 
no  ambuscades  or  artifices  can  be  employed,  and 
the  vulgar  resource  of  dogged  perseverance  is  the 
only  mode  of  pursuit." 

Dr.  Shaw  (Travels,  ii.  345)  rektes  as  an  instance 
of  want  of  sagacity  in  the  ostrich,  that  he  "  saw 
one  swallow  several  leaden  bullets,  scorching  hot 
from  the  mould."  We  may  add  that  not  unf're- 
quently  the  stones  and  other  substances  which 
ostriches  swallow  prove  fatal  to  them.  In  this  one 
respect,  perhaps,  there  is  some  foundation  for  the 
character  of  stupidity  attributed  to  them. 

The  ostrich  was  forbidden  to  be  used  as  food  by 
the  Levitical  law,  but  the  African  Arabs,  says  Mr. 
Tristram,  eat  its  flesh,  which  is  good  and  sweet. 
Ostrich's  brains  were  among  the  dainties  that 
were  placed  on  the  supper-tables  of  the  ancient 
Romans.  The  fat  of  the  ostrich  is  sometimes 
used  in  medicine  for  the  cure  of  palsy  and  rheu 
matism  (Pococke,  Trav.  i.  209).  Bnrckhardt 
(Syria,  Append,  p.  664)  says  that  ostriches  breed 
in  the  Dhahy.  They  are  found,  and  seem  formerly 
to  have  been  more  abundant  than  now,  in  Arabia. 

The  ostrich  is  the  largest  of  all  known  birds,  and 
perhaps  the  swiftest  of  all  cursorial  animals.  The 
capture  of  an  ostrich  is  often  made  at  the  sacrifice  of 
the  lives  of  two  horses  (Ibis,  ii.  73).  Its  strength  is 
enormous.  The  wings  are  useless  for  flight,  but 
when  the  bird  is  pursued  they  are  extended  and  act 
as  sails  before  the  wind.  The  ostrich's  feathers  so 
much  prized  are  the  long  white  plumes  of  the 
wings.  The  best  come  to  us  from  Barbary  and 
the  west  coast  of  Africa.  The  ostrich  belongs  to 
the  family  Struthionidae,  order  Cursores.  [W.  H.] 


OTHNIEL 


651 


OTH'NI  03Jiy  :  'O6vl  ;  Alex.  ToOvl  :   Othnt). 

Son  of  Shemaiah,  the  firstborn  of  Obed-edom,  one 
of  the  "  able  men  for  strength  for  the  service  "  of 
the  tabernacle  in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr. 
xxvi.  7).  The  name  is  said  by  Gesenius  to  be  de 
rived  from  an  obsolete  word,  'Othen,  "  a  lion." 


OTH'NIEL  (ny,  "lion  of  God,"  cf.Othni, 

1  Chr.  xxvi.  7  :  ToOoviii\  :  Othoniel),  son  of  Ke 
naz,  and  younger  brother  of  Caleb,  Josh.  xv.  17  ; 
Judg.  i.  13,  iii.  9  ;  1  Chr.  iv.  13.  But  these  pas 
sages  all  leave  it  doubtful  whether  Kenaz  was  his 
father,  or,  as  is  more  probable,  the  more  remote 
ancestor  and  head  of  the  tribe,  whose  descendants 
were  called  Kenezites,  Num.  xxxii.  12,  &c.,  or  sons 
of  Kenaz.  If  Jephunneh  was  Caleb's  father,  then 
probably  he  was  lather  of  Othniel  also.  [CALEB.] 
The  first  mention  of  Othniel  is  on  occasion  of  the 
taking  of  Kirjath-Sepher,  or  Debir,  as  it  was  after 
wards  called.  Debir  was  included  in  the  moun 
tainous  territory  near  Hebron,  within  the  border  of 
Judah,  assigned  to  Caleb  the  Kenezite  (Josh.  xiv. 


h  This  is  an  old  conceit :  see  Pliny  (x.  1),  and  .he  r.i- 
mirk  of  Diodorus  Siculus  (ii.  50)  thereon. 
1  Ostriches  are  very  shy  birds,  and  will,  if  their  -est  Is 


12-14);  and  in  order  to  stimulate  the  valour  oi 
the  assailants,  Caleb  promised  to  give  his  daughter 
Achsah  to  whosoever  should  assault  and  take  the 
city.  Othniel  won  the  prize,  and  received  with  his 
wife  in  addition  to  her  previous  dowry  the  upper 
and  nether  springs  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood. 
These  springs  are  identified  by  Van  de  Velde,  after 
Stewart,  with  a  spring  which  rises  on  the  summit 
of  a  hill  on  the  north  of  Wady  Dilbeh  (2  hours 
S.W.  from  Hebron),  and  is  brought  down  by  an 
aqueduct  to  the  foot  of  the  hill.  (For  other  views 
see  DEBIR).  The  next  mention  of  Othniel  is  in 
Judg.  iii.  9,  where  he  appears  as  the  first  judge  of 
Israel  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  and  their  deliverer 
from  their  first  servitude.  In  consequence  of  their 
intermarriages  with  the  Canaanites,  and  their  fre 
quent  idolatries,  the  Israelites  had  been  given  into  the 
hand  of  Chushau-Rishathaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia, 
for  eight  years.  From  this  oppressive  servitude 
they  were  delivered  by  Othniel.  "  The  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  came  upon  him,  and  he  judged  Israel,  and 
went  out  to  war:  and  the  Lord  delivered  Chushan- 
Rishathaim  king  of  Mesopotamia  into  his  hand ;  ana 
his  hand  prevailed  against  Chushan-Rishathaim. 
And  the  land  had  rest  forty  years.  And  Othniel 
the  son  of  Kenaz  died.." 

This  with  his  genealogy,  1  Chr.  iv.  13,  14, 
which  assigns  him  a  son,  Hathath,  whose  posterity, 
according  to  Judith  vi.  15,  continued  till  the  time 
of  Holofernes,  is  all  that  we  know  of  Othniel.  But 
two  questions  of  some  interest  arise  concerning  him, 
the  one  his  exact  relationship  to  Caleb ;  the  other 
the  time  and  duration  of  his  judgeship. 

(1)  As  regards  his  relationship  to  Caleb,  the 
doubt  arises  from  the  uncertainty  whether  the 
words  in  Judg.  iii.  9,  "  Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz, 
Caleb's  younger  brother,"  indicate  that  Othniel  him 
self,  or  that  Kenaz,  was  the  brother  of  Caleb.  The 
most  natural  rendering,  according  to  the  canon  of 
R.  Moses  ben  Nachman,  on  Num.  x.  29,  that  in 
constructions  of  this  kind  such  designations  belong 
to  the  principal  person  in  the  preceding  sentence, 
makes  Othniel  to  be  Caleb's  brother.  And  this  is 
favoured  by  the  probability  that  Kenaz,  was  not 
Othniel's  father,  but  the  father  and  head  of  the 
tribe,  as  we  learn  that  Kenaz  was,  from  the  desig 
nation  of  Caleb  as  "  the  Kenezite,"  or  "  son  of 
Kenaz.'.'  Jerome  also  so  translates  it,  "  Othniel 
filius  Cenez,  frater  Caleb  junior;"  and  so  did  the 
LXX.  originally,  because  even  in  those  copies  which 
now  have  d5e\<f>ov,  they  still  retain  ve&Tfpoi  .11 
the  ace.  case.  Nor  is  the  objection,  which  influ 
ences  most  of  the  Jewish  commentators  to  under 
stand  that  Kenaz  was  Caleb's  brother,  and  Othniel 
his  nephew,  of  any  weight.  For  the  marriage  of 
an  uncle  with  his  niece  is  not  expressly  prohibited 
by  the  Levitical  law  (Le\.  xviii.  12,  xx.  19);  and 
even  if  it  had  been,  Caleb  and  Othniel  as  men  of 
foreign  extraction  would  have  been  less  amenable  to 
it,  and  more  likely  to  follow  the  custom  of  their 
own  tribe.  On  the  other  hand  it  must  be  acknow 
ledged  that  the  canon  above  quoted  does  not  hold 
universally.  Even  in  the  very  passage,  Num.  x. 
29,  on  which  the  canon  is  adduced,  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  whether  the  designation  "  the  Midianite, 
Moses'  father-in-law,"  does  not  apply  to  Reuel 
rather  than  to  Hobab,  seeing  that  Reuel,  and  not 
Hobab,  was  father  to  Moses'  wife  (Ex.  ii.  18).  In 


discovered,  frequently  forsake  the  eggs.    Surely  this  e  t 
mark  rather  of  sagacity  than  stupidity. 


652 


OTHONIAS 


Jcr.  xxxii.  7,  in  the  phrase  "  Hanameel  the  son  o 
Shallum  thine  uncle,"  the  words  "  thine  uncle ' 
certainly  belong  to  Shallum,  not  to  Hanameel,  as 
appears  from  rer.  8,  9.  And  in  2  Chr.  xxxv.  3,  4; 
Neh.  xiii.  28,  the  designations  "  King  of  Israel," 
and  "  high-priest,"  belong  respectively  to  David, 
and  to  Eliashib.  The  chronological  difficulties  as 
to  Othniel's  judgeship  would  also  be  mitigated  con 
siderably  if  he  were  nephew  and  not  brother  to 
Caleb,  as  in  this  case  he  might  well  be  25,  whereas 
in  the  other  he  could  not  be  under  40  years  ol 
age,  at  the  time  of  his  marriage  with  Achsah.  Still 
the  evidence,  candidly  weighed,  preponderates 
strongly  in  favour  of  the  opinion  that  Othniel  was 
Caleb's  brother. 

(2)  And  this  leads  to  the  second  question  sug 
gested  above,  viz.  the  time  of  Othniel's  judgeship. 
Supposing  Caleb  to  be  about  the  same  age  as  Joshua, 
as  Num.  xiii.  6, 8  ;  Josh.  xiv.  10,  suggest,  we  should 
have  to  reckon  about  25  years  from  Othniel's  mar 
riage  with  Achsah  till  the  death  of  Joshua  at  the 
age  of  110  years  (85+25  =  110).  And  if  we  take 
Africanus's  allowance  of  30  years  for  the  elders 
after  Joshua,  in  whose  lifetime  "  the  people  served 
the  Lord "  (Judg.  ii.  7),  and  then  allow  8  years 
for  Chushan-Rishathaim's  dominion,  and  40  years  of 
rest  under  Othniel's  judgeship,  and  suppose  Othniel 
to  have  been  40  years  old  at  his  marriage,  we  obtain 
(40+25+30+8+40  =  )  143  years  as  Othniel's 
age  at  his  death.  This  we  are  quite  sure  cannot 
be  right.  Nor  does  any  escape  from  the  difficulty 
very  readily  offer  itself.  It  is  in  fact  a  part  of  that 
larger  chronological  difficulty  which  affects  the 
whole  interval  between  the  exodus  and  the  building 
of  Solomon's  temple,  where  the  dates  and  formal 
notes  of  time  indicate  a  period  more  than  twice  as 
long  as  that  derived  from  the  genealogies  and  other 
ordinary  calculations  from  the  length  of  human  life, 
and  general  historical  probability.  In  the  case 
before  us  one  would  guess  an  interval  of  not  more 
than  25  years  between  Othniel's  marriage  and  his 
victory  over  Chushan-Rishathaim. 

In  endeavouring  to  bring  these  conflicting  state 
ments  into  harmony,  the  first  thing  that  occurs  to 
one  is,  that  if  Joshua  lived  to  the  age  of  110  years, 
»'.  e.  full  30  years  after  the  entrance  into  Canaan, 
supposing  him  to  have  been  40  when  he  went  as  a  spy, 
he  must  have  outlived  all  the  elder  men  of  the  gene 
ration  which  took  possession  of  Canaan,  and  that  10 
or  12  years  more  must  have  seen  the  last  of  the 
survivors.  Then  again,  it  is  not  necessaiy  to  sup 
pose  that  Othniel  lived  through  the  whole  80  years 
of  rest,  nor  is  it  possible  to  avoid  suspecting  that 
these  long  periods  of  40  and  80  years  are  due  to 
some  influences  which  have  disturbed  the  true  com 
putation  of  time.  If  these  dates  are  discarded,  and 
we  judge  only  by  ordinary  probabilities,  we  shall 
suppose  Othniel  to  have  survived  Joshua  not  more 
than  20,  or  at  the  outside,  30  years.  Nor,  how 
ever  unsatisfactory  this  may  be,  does  it  seem  pos 
sible,  with  only  our  present  materials,  to  arrive  at 
any  more  definite  result.  It  must  suffice  to  know 
the  difficulties  and  wait  patiently  for  the  solution, 
should  it  ever  be  vouchsafed  to  us.  [A.  C.  H.] 

OTHONI'AS  ('OOovlas:  Zochins).  A  connip 
tion  of  the  name  MATTANIAH  in  Ezr.  x.  27  (1  Esd. 
ix.  28). 


OWL 

OVEN  O-13JJ) :  KKiftavoi).  The  Eastern  over 
is  of  two  kinds — fixed  and  portable.  The  former  if 
found  only  in  towns,  where  regular  bakers  are  em 
ployed  (Hos.  vii.  4).  The  latter  is  adapted  to  the 
nomad  state,  and  is  the  article  generally  intended  by 
the  Hebrew  term  tanntir.  It  consists  of  a  large  jar 
made  of  clay,  about  three  feet  high,  and  widening 
towards  the  bottom,  with  a  hole  for  the  extrac 
tion  of  the  ashes  (Niebuhr,  Desc.  de  fArab.  p.  46). 
Occasionally,  however,  it  is  not  an  actual  jar,  but 
an  erection  of  clay  in  the  form  of  a  jar,  built  on 
the  floor  of  the  house  (Wellsted,  Travels,  i.  350). 
Each  household  possessed  such  an  article  (Ex.  viii. 
3)  ;  and  it  was  only  in  times  of  extreme  dearth  that 
the  same  oven  sufficed  for  several  families  (Lev. 
xxvi.  26).  It  was  heated  with  dry  twigs  and  grass 
(Matt.  vi.  30) ;  and  the  loaves  were  placed  both 
inside  and  outside  of  it.  It  was  also  used  for  roast 
ing  meat  (Mishna,  Taan.  3,  §8).  The  heat  of  the 
oven  furnished  Hebrew  writers  with  an  image  of 
rapid  and  violent  destruction  (Ps.  xxi.  9 ;  Hos.  vii. 
7;  Mai.  iv.  1).  fW.  L.  B.] 


OWL,  the  representative  in  the  A.  V.  of  the 
Hebrew    words    bath  haya'andh,    yanshuph,    cos, 
p6z,  and  With. 

1.  Bath  haya'andh  (n3J£;TTI3).     [OSTRICH.] 

2.  Yanshuph,  or  yanshoph  (5)-1KO»,  CptM* :  fj8w, 
•y\a<5|:*  ibis),  occurs  in  Lev.  xi.  17,  Deut.  xiv.  16, 
as  the  name  of  some  unclean  bird,  and  in  Is.  xxxiv. 
11,  in  the  description  of  desolate  Edom,  "the  yan- 
shoph  and  the  raven  shall  dwell  in  it."     The  A.  V. 
translates  yanshuph  by  "  owl,"   or  "  great  owl." 
The  Chaldee  and  Syriac  are  in  favour  of  some  kind 
of  owl ;  and  perhaps  the  etymology  of  the  word 
x>ints  to  a  nocturnal  bird.     Bochart  is   satisfied 
;hat  an  "  owl "  is  meant,  and  supposes  the  bird  is 
so  called  from  the  Hebrew  for  "  twilight "  (ffieroz 

ii.  29).  For  other  conjectures  see  Bochart  (ffieroz. 

ii.  24-29).     The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  read  f/3is  (ibis), 

.  e.  the  Ibis  religiosa,  the  sacred  bird  of  Egypt. 
Col.  H.  Smith  suggests  that  the  night  heron  (Ardea 
nycticorax,  Lin.)  is  perhaps  intended,  and  objects 

x>  the  Ibis  on  the  ground  that  so  rare  a  bird,  and 
one  totally  unknown  in  Palestine  could  not  be  the 
yanshuph  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  there  is,  however,  no 
occasion  to  suppose  that  the  yanshuph  was  ever  seen 

n  Palestine ;  the  Levitical  law  was  given  soon  after 
the  Israelites  left  Egypt,  and  it  is  only  natural  to 
suppose  that  several  of  the  unclean  animals  were 

Egyptian,  some  might  never  have  been  seen  or  heard 


•  It  Is  important  to  observe,  in  reference  to  the  LXX. 
renderings  of  the  Hebrew  names  of  the  different  unclean 
birds.  Stc..  that  the  verses  of  Deut.  xiv.  arc  some  of  them 


idently  transposed  (see  MIcbaellg,  Supp.  i.  p.  1240,  and 
ite) :  the  order  as  given  in  Lev.  xi.  Is,  therefore,  to  b* 
taken  as  the  standard. 


0\VL 

of  in  Palestine;  the  yanshuph  is  mentioned  as  a 
birdofEdom  (Is.  I.  c.),  and  the  Ibis  might  have 
formerly  been  seen  there ;  the  old  Greek  and  Latin 
jrriters  are  in  error  when  they  state  that  this  bird 
never  leaves  Egypt ;  Cuvier  says  it  is  found  through 
out  the  extent  of  Africa,  and  latterly  Dr.  Heuglin 
met  with  it  on  the  coast  of  Abyssinia  (List  of 
Birds  collected  in  the  Red  Sea  ;  Ibis,  i.  p.  347). 
The  Coptic  version  renders  yanshuph  by  "  Hippen," 
from  which  it  is  believed  the  Greek  and  Latin  word 
Ibis  is  derived  (see  Jablonski's  Opusc.  i.  93,  ed. 
te  Water).  On  the  whole  the  evidence  is  incon 
clusive,  though  it  is  in  favour  of  the  Ibis  religiosa, 
and  probably  the  other  Egyptian  species  (/.  falci- 
nellus)  may  be  included  under  the  term.  See  on 
the  subject  of  the  Ibis  of  the  ancients  Savigny's 
Histoire  naturelle  et  mythologique  de  I' Ibis  (Paris, 
1805,  8 vo.);  and  Cuvier's  Memoire  sur  I' Ibis  des 
Ancicns  Egyptians  (Ann.  Mus.  iv.  p.  116.) 


OWL 


655 


tended  by  it.  The  vvKTiK6pa£  of  the  LXX.  is  no 
dou';t  a  general  term  to  denote  the  different  specie* 
of  /.  >rned  oirl  known  in  Egypt  and  Palestine  ;  for 
Aristotle  (H.  An.  viii.  14,  §6)  tells  us  that  vimtv 
K<ipa£  is  identical  with  2>ros,  evidently,  from  his 
description,  one  of  the  horned  owls,  perhaps  either 
the  Otus  vulgaris,  or  the  0.  brachyotos.  The  owl 


3.  Cos  (D13  :  vvtiriKOpa^,  ep<a$i6s  :  bubo, 
herodius,  nycticorax),  the  name  of  an  unclean 
bird  (Lev.  xi.  17 ;  Deut.  xiv.  16) ;  it  occurs 
again  in  Ps.  cii.  6.  There  is  good  reason  for  be 
lieving  that  the  A.  V.  is  correct  in  its  rendering  of 
"  owl "  or  "  little  owl."  Most  of  the  old  versions 
and  paraphrases  are  in  favour  of  some  species  of 
"  owl  "  as  the  proper  translation  of  Cos  ;  Bochart 
is  inclined  to  think  that  we  should  understand  the 
pelican  (Hieroz.  iii.  17),  the  Hebrew  Cos  meaning 
a  "  cup,"  or  "  pouch  ;"  the  pelican  being  so  called 
from  its  membranous  bill-pouch.  He  compares  the 
Latin  truo,  "  a  pelican,"  from  trua,  "  a  scoop  "  or 
"  ladle."  But  the  ancient  versions  are  against  this 
theory,  and  there  does  not  seem  to  be  much  doubt 
that  Kaath  is  the  Hebrew  name  for  the  pelican. 
The  passage  in  Ps.  cii.  6,  "  I  am  like  a  pelican  of 
the  wilderness,  I  am  like  a  Cos  of  ruined  places," 
points  decidedly  to  some  kind  of  owl.  Michaelis, 
who  has  devoted  great  attention  to  the  elucidation 
of  this  word,  has  aptly  compared  one  of  the  Arabic 
names  for  the  owl,  urn  elchardb  ("  mother  of 
ruins  "),  in  reference  to  the  expression  in  the  psalm 
uist  quoted  (comp.  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  p.  1236, 
jnd  Rosenmiiller,  Not.  ad  Hieroz.  1.  c.).  Thus  the 
context  of  the  passage  in  the  Psalm  where  the  He 
brew  word  occurs,  as  well  as  the  authority  of  the 
old  versions,  goes  far  to  prove  that  an  owl  is  in- 


we  figure  is  the  Otus  ascalaphus,  the  Egyptian 'and 
Asiatic  representative  of  our  great  horned  owl  (Bubo 
maximus).  Mr.  Tristram  says  it  swarms  among 
the  ruins  of  Thebes,  and  that  he  has  been  informed 
it  is  also  very  abundant  at  Petra  and  Baalbec ;  it  is 
the  great  owl  of  all  Eastern  ruins,  and  may  well 
therefore  be  the  "  Cos  of  ruined  places." 

4.  Kippoz  (TiSp  :  f^lvos  :  ericius)  occurs  only 
in  Is.  xxxiv.  15 :  "  There  (i.  e.  in  Edom)  the 
kippoz  shall  make  her  nest,  and  lay  and  hatch  and 
gather  under  her  shadow."  It  is  a  hopeless  affair 
to  attempt  to  identify  the  animal  denoted  by  this 
word ;  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  give  "  hedgehog," 
reading  no  doubt  kippod  instead  of  kippoz,  which 
variation  six  Hebrew  MSS.  exhibit  (Michaelis,  Supp. 
p.  2199).  Various  conjectures  have  been  made 
with  respect  to  the  bird  which  ought  to  represent 
the  Hebrew  word,  most  of  which,  however,  may  be 
passed  over  as  unworthy  of  consideration.  We  can 
not  think  with  Bochart  (Hieroz.  iii.  194,  &c.)  that 
a  darting  serpent  is  intended  (the  aKovriat  of 
Nicander  and  Aelian,  and  the  jaculus  of  Lucan), 
for  the  whole  context  (Is.  xxxiv.  15)  seems  to  point 
to  some  bird,  and  it  is  certainly  stretching  the 
words  very  far  to  apply  them  to  any  kind  of  ser 
pent.  Bochart's  argument  rests  entirely  on  the  fact 
that  the  cognate  Arabic,  kipphaz,  is  used  by  Avi- 
cenna  to  denote  some  darting  tree-serpent ;  but  this 
theory,  although  supported  by  Gesenius,  Fiirst, 
Rosenmiiller,  and  other  high  authorities,  must  l-e 
rejected  as  entirely  at  variance  with  the  plain  and 
literal  meaning  of  the  prophet's  woids ;  though 
incubation  by  reptiles  was  denied  by  Cuvier,  and 
does  not  obtain  amongst  the  various  orders  and 
families  of  this  class  as  a  general  rule,  yet  some 
few  excepted  instances  are  on  record,  but  "  the 
gathering  under  the  shadow "  clearly  must  be  un 
derstood  of  the  act  of  a  bird  fostering  her  young 
under  her  wings  ;  the  kippoz,  moreover,  is  men- 


G54  OWL 

tioncd  iu  the  same  verse  with  "  vu.tureg  "  (kites), 
so  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  some  bird  is 
intended. 


Serf  i  atdnvan. 

Deodati,  according  to  Bochart,  conjectures  the 
•'  Scops  owl,"  being  led  apparently  to  this  inter 
pretation  on  somewhat  strained  etymological 
grounds.  See  on  this  subject  Bochart,  Hieroz.  iii. 
197  ;  and  for  the  supposed  connexion  of  <r/co>vj/  with 
ffKcairrw,  see  Aelian,  Nat.  Anim.  xv.  28 ;  Pliny, 
x.  49 ;  Eustathius,  on  Odys.  v.  66 ;  and  Jacobs' 
annotations  to  Aelian,  /.  c.  We  are  content  to 
believe  that  kippoz  may  denote  some  species  of 
owl,  and  to  retain  the  reading  of  the  A.  V.  till 
other  evidence  be  forthcoming.  The  woodcut  repre 
sents  the  Athene  meridwnaUs,  the  commonest  owl 
in  Palestine.  Mount  Olivet  is  one  of  its  favourite 
resorts  (Ibis,  i.  26).  Another  common  species  of 
owl  is  the  Scops  zorca ;  it  is  ol'len  to  be  seen  inha 
biting  the  mosque  of  Omar  at  Jerusalem  (see  Tris 
tram,  in  Ibis,  i.  26). 


5.  LVtth  (TV  :  fooiceinavpoi ;  Aq.  AiX/0 ; 
Symm.  Xajufa:  lamia).  The  A.  V.  renders  this 
word  by  "  screech  owl"  in  the  text  of  Is.  xxx.  14, 
and  by  "  night-monster "  in  the  margin.  The 
ttlith  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  desolation 
thai;  was  to  mark  Edom.  According  to  the  Rabbins 
the  With  was  a  nocturnal  spectre  in  the  form  of  a 
beautiful  woman  that  carried  oft'  children  at  night 


OX 

and  destroyed  tnem  (see  Bochart,  Jfieroz.  iii.  829 
Gesenius,  Tlies.  s.  v.  JV^*?  ;  Buxtorf,  Lfx.  Chald, 
et  Talm.  p.  1140).  With  the  luUh  may  be  com 
pared  the  ghule  of  the  Arabian  fables.  The  old 
versions  support  the  opinion  of  Bochart  that  a 
spectre  is  intended.  As  to  the  ovotctin-avpot  of  the 
LXX.,  and  the  lamia  of  the  Vulgate  translations 
of  Isaiah,  see  the  Hieroz.  iii.  832,  and  Gesenius 
(Jesaia,  i.  915-920).  Michaelis  (Suppl.  p.  1443* 
observes  on  this  word,  "in  the  poetical  description 
of  desolation  we  borrow  images  even  from  fables." 
If,  however,  some  animal  be  denoted  by  the  Hebrew 
term,  the  screech-owl  (strix  flammea)  may  well  be 
supposed  to  represent  it,  for  this  bird  is  found  in  the 
Bible  lands  (see  Ibis,  i.  26,  46),  and  is,  as  is  well 
known,  a  frequent  inhabiter  of  ruined  places.  The 
statement  of  Irby  and  Mangles  relative  to  Petra 
illustrates  the  passage  in  Isaiah  under  considera 
tion  :  —  "  The  screaming  of  eagles,  hawks,  and  owls, 
which  were  soaring  above  our  heads  in  consider 
able  numbers,  seemingly  annoyed  at  any  one  ap 
proaching  their  lonely  habitation,  added  much  to 
the  singularity  of  the  scene."  (See  also  Stephens, 
Incid.  of  Trav.  ii.  76).  [W.  H.] 


OX 
viii.  1). 


Idox),  an  ancestor  of  Judith  (Jud. 
[B.  F.  W.] 


OX,  the  representative  m  the  A.  V.  of  several 
Hebrew  words,  the  most  important  of  which  have 
been  already  noticed.  [BOLL  ;  BULLOCK.] 

We  propose  in  this  article  to  give  a  general  review 
of  what  relates  to  the  ox  tribe  (Bovidae),  so  far  as 
the  subject  has  a  Biblical  interest.  It  will  be  con 
venient  to  consider  (1)  the  ox  in  an  economic  point 
of  view,  and  (2)  its  natural  history. 

(1.)  There  was  no  animal  in  the  rural  economy 
of  the  Israelites,  or  indeed  in  that  of  the  ancient 
Orientals  generally,  that  was  held  in  higher  esteem 
than  the  ox  ;  and  deservedly  so,  for  the  ox  was  the 
animal  upon  whose  patient  laboui-s  depended  all  the 
ordinary  operations  of  farming.  Ploughing  with 
horses  was  a  thing  never  thought  of  in  those  days. 
Asses,  indeed,  were  used  for  this  purpose  [Ass]  ; 
but  it  was  the  ox  upon  whom  devolved  for  the  most 
part  this  important  service.  The  pre-eminent  value 
of  the  ox  to  "  a  nation  of  husbandmen  like  the 
Israelites,"  to  use  au  expression  of  Michaelis  in  his 
article  on  this  subject,  will  be  at  once  evident  from 
the  Scriptural  account  of  the  various  uses  to  which 
it  was  applied.  Oxen  were  used  for  ploughing 
(Deut.  xxii.  10;  1  Sam.  xiv.  14  ;  1  K.  xix.  19; 
Job  i.  14  ;  Am.  vi.  12,  &c.)  ;  for  treading  out  com 
(Deut.  xxv.  4;  Hos.  x.  11  ;  Mic.  iv.  13  ;  1  Cor. 
ix.  9;  1  Tim.v.  18)  [AGRICULTURE];  for  draught 
purposes,  when  they  were  generally  yoked  in  pairs 
(Num.  vii.  3  ;  1  Sam.  vi.  7  ;  2  Sam.  vi.  6)  ;  as 
beasts  of  burden  (  1  Chr.  xii.  40)  ;  their  flesh  was 
eaten  (Deut.  xiv.  4;  1  K.  i.  9,  iv.  23,  xix.  21; 
Is.  xxii.  13;  Prov.  xv.  17;  Neh.  v.  18);  they 
were  used  in  the  sacrifices  [SACRIFICES];  they 
supplied  milk,  butter,  &c.  (Deut.  xxxii.  14  ;  Is. 
vii.  22  ;  2  Sam.  xvii.  29)  [BUTTER,  MILK]. 

Connected  with  the  importance  of  oxen  in  the 
rural  economy  of  the  Jews  is  the  strict  code  of  laws 
which  was  mercifully  enacted  by  God  for  their  pro 
tection  and  preservation.  The  ox  that  threshed  the 
corn  was  by  no  means  to  be  muzzled  ;  he  was  to 
enjoy  rest  on  the  Sabbath  as  well  as  his  master 
(Ex.  xxiii.  12  ;  Deut.  v.  14)  ;  nor  was  this  only,  as 
Michaelis  has  observed,  on  the  people's  account, 
because  beasts  can  perfoiTn  no  work  without  man'* 


ox 

Assistance,  but  it  was  for  the  good  of  the  beasts 
"  that  thine  ox  and  thine  ass  may  rest." 

The  law  which  prohibited  the  slaughter  of  any 
clean  animal,  excepting  as  "  an  offering  unto  the 
Lord  before  the  tabernacle,"  during  the  time  that 
the  Israelites  abode  in  the  wilderness  (Lev.  xvii.  1-6), 
although  expressly  designed  to  keep  the  people  from 
idolatry,  no  doubt  contributed  to  the  preservation 
of  their  oxen  and  sheep,  which  they  were  not  allowed 
to  kill  excepting  in  public.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  during  the  forty  years'  wanderings  oxen  and 
sheep  were  rarely  used  as  food,  whence  it  was  flesh 
that  they  so  often  lusted  after.  (See  Michaelis, 
Laws  of  Moses,  art.  169.) 

It  is  not  easy  to  determine  whether  the  ancient 
Hebrews  were  in  the  habit  of  castrating  their  ani 
mals  or  not.  The  passage  in  Lev.  xxii.  24  may  be 
read  two  ways,  either  as  the  A.  V.  renders  it,  or 
thus,  "  Ye  shall  not  offer  to  the  Lord  that  which  is 
bruised,"  &c.,  "  neither  shall  ye  make  it  so  in  your 
land."  Le  Clerc  believed  that  it  would  have  been 
impossible  to  have  used  an  uncastrated  ox  for 
agricultural  purposes  on  account  of  the  danger. 
Michaelis,  on  the  other  hand,  who  cites  the  express 
testimony  of  Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  8,  §40),  argues  that 
castration  was  wholly  forbidden,  and  refers  to  the 
authority  of  Niebuhr  (Descr.  de  I' Arab.,  p.  81), 
who  mentions  the  fact  that  Europeans  use  stallions 
for  cavalry  purposes.  In  the  East  it  is  well  known 
horses  are  as  a  rule  not  castrated.  Michaelis  ob 
serves  (art.  168),  with  truth,  that  where  people 
are  accustomed  to  the  management  of  uncastrated 
animals,  it  is  far  from  being  so  dangerous  as  we 
from  our  experience  are  apt  to  imagine. 

It  seems  clear  from  Prov.  xv.  17,  and  1  K.  iv.  23, 
that  cattle  were  sometimes  stall-fed  [Fooo] ,  though 
as  a  general  rule  it  is  probable  that  they  fed  in  the 
plains  or  on  the  hills  of  Palestine.  That  the  Egyp 
tians  stall-fed  oxen  is  evident  from  the  representations 
on  the  monuments  (see  Wilkinson's  Anc.  Egypt,  i. 
27,  ii.  49,  ed.  1854).  The  cattle  that  grazed  at 
large  in  the  open  country  would  no  doubt  often 
become  fierce  and  wild,  for  it  is  to  be  remem 
bered  that  in  primitive  times  the  lion  and  other  wild 
beasts  of  prey  roamed  about  Palestine.  Hence,  no 
doubt,  the  laws  with  regard  to  "  goring,"  and  the 
expression  of  "  being  wont  to  push  with  his  horns" 
in  time  past  (Ex.  xxi.  28,  &c.)  ;  hence  the  force  of 
the  Psalmist's  complaint  of  his  enemies,  "  Many 
bulls  have  compassed  me,  the  mighty  ones  of  Bashan 
have  beset  me  round"  (Ps.  xxii.  13).  The  habit 
of  surrounding  objects  which  excite  their  suspicion 
is  very  characteristic  of  half-wild  cattle.  See  Mr. 
Culley's  observations  on  the  Chillingham  wild  cattle, 
in  Bell's  British  Quadrupeds  (p.  424). 

(2.)  The  monuments  of  Egypt  exhibit  repre 
sentations  of  a  long-horned  breed  of  oxen,  a  short- 
horned,  a  polled,  and  what  appears  to  be  a  variety 
of  the  zebu  (Bos  Indicus,  Lin.).  Some  have  iden 
tified  this  latter  with  the  Bos  Dante  (the  Bos 
Etegans  et  parvus  Africanus  of  Belon).  The  Abys 
sinian  breed  is  depicted  on  the  monuments  at  Thebes 
(see  Anc.  Egypt,  i.  385),  drawing  a  plaustrum  or 
car.  [CART.]  These  cattle  are  "  white  and  black  in 
clouds,  low  in  the  legs,  with  the  horns  hanging  loose, 
forming  small  homy  hooks  nearly  of  equal  thickness 
to  the  point,  turning  freely  either  way,  and  hanging 
against  the  cheeks"  (see  Hamilton  Smith  in  Griffiths' 
Anim.  Sing.  iv.  425).  The  drawings  or  Egyptian 
monuments  shew  that  the  cattle  of  ancient  Egypt 
were  fine  handsome  animals:  doubtless  these  may 
be  taken  as  a  sample  of  the  cattle  of  Palestine  in 


OX 


656 


ancient  times.  "  The  cattle  ol'  Egypt,"  says  Col. 
H.  Smith  (Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  '  Ox'),  a  high  authority 
on  the  Rwninantia,  "  continued  to  be  remarkable 
for  beauty  for  some  ages  after  the  Moslem  conquest, 
for  Abdollatiph  the  historian  extol;  their  bulk  and 
proportions,  and  in  particular  mentions  the  Al- 
chisiah  breed  for  the  abundance  of  the  milk  it  fur 
nished,  and  for  the  beauty  of  its  curved  horns." 
(See  figures  of  Egyptian  cattle  under  AGRICUL 
TURE.)  There  are  now  fine  cattle  in  Egypt  ;  but  the 
Palestine  cattle  appear  to  have  deteriorated,  in  size 
at  least,  since  Biblical  times.  "  Herds  of  cattle," 
says  Schubert  (Oriental  Christian  Spectator,  April, 
18.53),  "  are  seldom  to  be  seen  ;  the  bullock  of  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  is  small  and  insigni 
ficant  ;  beef  and  veal  are  but  rare  dainties.  Yet  the 
bullock  thrives  better,  and  is  more  frequently  seen, 
in  the  upper  valley  of  the  Jordan,  also  on  Mount 
Tabor  and  near  Nazareth,  but  particularly  east  of 
the  Jordan  on  the  road  from  Jacob'  s-bridge  to 
Damascus."  See  also  Thomson  (The  Land  and  the 
Book,  p.  322),  who  observes  (p.  335)  that  danger 
from  being  gored  has  not  ceased  "  among  the  half- 
wild  droves  that  range  over  the  luxuriant  pastures 
in  certain  parts  of  the  country." 

The  buttalo  (Bubalus  Buffalus)  is  not  uncommon 
in  Palestine  ;  the  Arabs  call  it  jdmus.  Robinson 
(Bib.  Res.  iii.  306)  notices  buffaloes  "  around  the 
lake  el-Huleh  as  being  mingled  with  the  neat 
cattle,  and  applied  in  general  to  the  same  uses. 
They  are  a  shy,  ill-looking,  ill-tempered  animal." 
These  animals  love  to  wallow  and  lie  for  hours  in 
water  or  mud,  with  barely  the  nostrils  above  the 
surface.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  domestic  buffalo 
was  known  to  the  ancient  people  of  Syria,  Egypt. 
&c.  ;  the  animal  under  consideration  is  the  bhainsa- 
or  tame  buffalo  of  India  ;  and  although  now  coin, 
mon  in  the  West,  Col.  H.  Smith  is  of  opinion  that 
it  was  not  known  in  the  Bible  lands  till  after  the 
Arabian  conquest  of  Persia  (A.D.  651).  Robinson's 
remark,  therefore,  that  the  buffalo  doubtless  existed 
anciently  in  Palestine  in  a  wild  state,  must  be  re 
ceived  with  caution.  [See  further  remarks  on  this 
subject  under  UNICORN.] 

The  A.  V.  gives  "  wild  ox"  in  Deut.  xiv.  5,  and 
"  wild  bull"  in  Is.  li.  20,  as  the  representatives  of 
the  Hebrew  word  ted  or  to. 


Tea  or  to'  Ofctfl,  KIR:  cpi;|,  ffevT\lot>*  ;  Aq., 

Symm.,  and  Theod.,  §pv£:  oryx].  Among  the 
beasts  that  were  to  be  eaten  mention  is  made  of 
the  tea  (Deut.  /.  c.)  ;  again,  in  Isaiah  "  they  lie  at 
the  head  of  all  the  streets  like  a  to  in  the  nets." 
The  most  important  ancient  versions  point  to  the 
oryx  (  Oryx  leucoryx)  as  the  animal  denoted  by  the 
Hebrew  words.  Were  it  not  for  the  fact  that 
another  Heb.  name  (yachmur)  seems  to  stand  for 
this  animal,  b  we  should  have  no  hesitation  in  re 
ferring  the  ted  to  the  antelope  above  named.  Col. 
H.  Smith  suggests  that  the  antelope  he  calls  the 
Nubian  Oryx  (Oryx  Tao),  may  be  the  animal  in 
tended  ;  this,  however,  is  probably  only  a  variety  of 
the  other.  Oedmann  (  Verm.  Samm.  p.  iv.  23)  thinks 
the  Bubule  (Alcephalus  Bubalis}  may  be  the  to  ; 
this  is  the  Bekker-el-wash  of  N.  Africa  mentioned 
by  Shaw  (Trav.  i.  310,  8vo  ed.).  The  point  must 
be  left  undetermined.  [See  FALLOW  DEER,  Ap 
pend.]  [W.  H.] 


a  As  to  this  word,  see  Schleusner,  I^st.  in  LXX.  s.  v. 
t>  Tachmur,  in  the  vernacular  Arabic  of  N.  Afrlc*,  is 
one  of  the  names  for  the  oryx. 


656 


OX-GO  AU 


OX-GOAD.    [GOAD.] 

O'ZEM  (DV&,  »'.  e.  OtsensJ.  Thti  name  of  two 
persons  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 

1.  ('A<r<fyt  :  Assam.)  The  siith  son  of  Jesse,  the 
uext'eldest  above  David  (1  Chr.  ii.  15).     His  name 
is  not  again  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  nor  do  the 
Jewish  traditions  appear  to  contain  anything  con 
cerning  him. 

2.  ('A.ffdv  ;  »  Alex.  A<ro/t  :   Asom.)   Son  of  Je- 
rahnieel,  a  chief  man  in  the  great  family  of  Hezron 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25).  [G.] 

OZI'AS  ('OCfas:  Ozias).  1.  The  son  of  Micha 
of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  one  of  the  "  governors  " 
of  Bethulia,  in  the  history  of  Judith  (Jud.  vi.  15, 
vii.  23,  viii.  10,  28,  35).  [B.  F.  W.] 

2.  Uzzi,  one  of  the  ancestors  of  Ezra  (2  Esd.  ii. 
2)  ;  also  called  SAVIAS  (1  Esd.  viii.  2). 

3.  UZZIAH,  King  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  8,  9). 

OZIEL  ('OfiTJA.:  Ozias),  an  ancestor  of  Judith 
(Jud.  viii.  1).  The  name  occurs  frequently  in 
O.  T.  under  the  form  UZZIEL.  [B.  F.  W.] 

OZ'NI  (<3JN:  'ACW;  Alex.  ^favl:  Ozni). 
One  of  the  sons  of  Gad  (Num.  xxvi.  16),  called 
EZBON  in  Gen.  xlvi.  16.  and  founder  of  the  family 
of  the 


OZ'NITES  (»3|«:  5V°s  ^  X«f  5  Alex.  5.  6 
A.£cuvi:  familia  Oznitarum),  Num.  xxvi.  16. 

OZO'BA  ('Efypd).  "ThesonsofMachnadebai," 
in  Ezr.  x.  40,  is  corrupted  into  "  the  sons  of  Ozora  " 
(1  Esd.  ix.  34). 


PA'ARAI  (njJB :    *«paef :    Pharal).    In  the 

list  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.  35,  "  Paarai  the  Arbite  "  is  one 
of  David's  mighty  men.  In  1  Chr.  xi.  37,  he  is 
called  "  Naarai  the  son  of  Ezbai,"  and  this  in  Ken- 
nicott's  opinion  is  the  true  reading  (Z>iss.  p.  209- 
211).  The  Vat.  MS.  omits  the  first  letter  of  the 
name,  and  reads  the  other  three  with  the  following 
word,  thus,  ovpatoepxi.  The  Peshitc-Syriac  has 
"  Gari  of  Arab,"  which  makes  it  probable  that 
"  Naarai "  is  the  true  reading,  and  that  the  Syriac 
translators  mistook  3  for  3. 

PA'DAN  (J^S  :    Meo-oirora^tia   TTJS   'S.vpia.s  : 
Mesopotamia).    Pudan-Aram  (Gen.  xlviii.  7). 
PA'DAN -A'BAM  (DnK-J^S  :    i?  Mecroiro- 

ranlaXvpias,  Gen.  xxv.  20,  xxviii.  6,  7,  xxxiii.  18; 
il  M.  Gen.  xxviii.  2,  5,  xxxi.  18;  M.  rijs  Sup. 
Gen.  xxxv.  9,  26,  xlvi.  15 ;  Alex.  77  M.  Gen.  xxv. 
20,  xxviii.  5,  7,  xxxi.  18 ;  r)  M.  2up.  Gen.  xxviii.  2, 
Kxiii.  IS-  Mesopotamia,  Gen.  xxv.  20,  xxxi.  18; 
Jf.  Syriae,  Gen.  xxviii.  2,  5,  6,  xxxiii.  18,  xxxv.  9, 
26,  xlvi.  15  ;  Syria,  Gen.  xxvi.  15).  By  this  name, 
more  properly  Paddan-Aram,  which  signifies  "  the 
table-land  of  Aram  "  according  to  Fiirst  and  Ge- 
lenius,  the  Hebrews  designated  the  tract  of  coun 
try  which  they  otherwise  called  Aram-naharaim, 


•  The  word  following  this  —  H'nS  —  A.  V. 
Vulg.  Achia.  Is  in  the  LXX   rendered  IM^ta  avrov 


PAHATH-MOAB 

"  Aram  of  the  two  rivers,"  the  Greek  Mesopotamia 
(Gen.  xxiv.  10),  and  "  the  field  (A.  V.  '  country') 
of  Aram"  (Hos.  xii.  12).  The  term  was  perhaps 
more  especially  applied  to  that  portion  which  bor 
dered  on  the  Euphrates,  to  distinguish  it  from  the 
mountainous  districts  in  the  N.  and  N.E.  of  Meso 
potamia.  Rashi's  note  on  Gen.  xxv.  20  is  curious 
"  Because  there  were  two  Arams,  Aram-naharaim 
and  Aram  Zobah,  he  (the  writer)  calls  it  Paddan- 
Aram  :  the  expression  '  yoke  of  oxen  '  is  in  the 
Targums  jn'lF)  J^Q,  paddan  tbrin  ;  and  some  in- 
terpret  Paddan-Aram  as  '  field  of  Aram,'  because 
in  the  language  of  the  Ishmaelites  they  call  a  field 

paddan  "  (Ar.  -.tosjj.  In  Syr.  JLlj-xSS,  pMont, 
is  used  for  a  "  plain  "  or  "  field  ;"  and  both  this 
and  the  Arabic  word  are  probably  from  the  root 


,  "  to  plough,"  which  seems  akin  to  fid- 

in  fidit,  from  findere.  If  this  etymology  be  true 
Paddan-Aram  is  the  arable  land  of  Syria  ;  "  either 
an  upland  vale  in  the  hills,  or  a  fertile  district 
immediately  at  their  feet"  (Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  129, 
note).  Paddan,  the  ploughed  laud,  would  thus 
correspond  with  the  Lat.  arvum,  and  is  analogous 
to  Eng.  field,  the  felled  land,  from  which  the  trees 
have  been  cleared. 

Padan-Aram  plays  an  important  part  in  the 
early  history  of  the  Hebrews.  The  family  of  their 
founder  had  settled  there,  and  were  long  looked 
upon  as  the  aristocracy  of  the  race,  with  whom 
alone  the  legitimate  descendants  of  Abraham  might 
intermarry,  and  thus  preserve  the  purity  of  their 
blood.  Thither  Abraham  sent  his  faithful  steward 
(Gen.  xxiv.  10),  after  the  news  had  reached  him  in 
his  southern  home  at  Beersheba  that  children  had 
been  born  to  his  brother  Nahor.  From  this  family 
alone,  the  offspring  of  Nahor  and  Milcah,  Abra 
ham's  brother  and  niece,  could  a  wife  be  sought  for 
Isaac,  the  heir  of  promise  (Gen.  xxv.  20),  and  Jacob 
the  inheritor  of  his  blessing  (Gen.  xxviii.). 

It  is  elsewhere  called  PADAN  simply  (Gen. 
xlviii.  7).  [W.  A.  W.j 

PA'DON  (fnS  :  *a$6v  :  Phadon).  The  an 
cestor  of  a  family  of  Nethinim  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  (Ezr.'ii.  44;  Neh.  vii.  47).  He  is 
called  PHALEAS  in  1  Esdr.  v.  29. 


PAG'IEL 


Alex. 


Phegiel).  The  son  of  Ocran,  and  chief  of  the  tribe 
of  Asher  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (Num.  i.  13,  ii. 
27,  vii.  72,  77,  x.  26). 

PAHATH-MOABpNID  HHS:  *aaflMa,<£0: 
Phahath-Moab,  "governor  of  Moab").  Head  of 
one  of  the  chief  houses  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  Of 
the  individual,  or  the  occasion  of  his  receiving  so 
singular  a  name,  nothing  is  known  certainly,  either 
as  to  the  time  time  when  he  lived,  or  the  particular 
family  to  which  he  belonged.  But  as  we  read  in 
1  Clir.  iv.  22,  of  a  family  of  Shilonites,  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  who  in  very  early  times  "  had 
dominion  in  Moab,"  it  may  be  conjectured  that  this 
was  the  origin  of  the  name.  It  is  perhaps  a  slight 
corroboration  of  this  conjecture  that  as  we  find  in 
Ezr.  ii.  6,  that  the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab  had  among 
their  number  "children  of  Joab,"  so  also  in  1  Chr.  iv. 
we  find  these  families  who  had  dominion  in  Moab 
very  much  mixed  with  the  sons  of  Caleb,  among 
whom,  in  1  Chr.  ii.  M,  iv.  14,  we  find  tiie  hou* 


PAHATH-MOAB 

of  Joab.»  It  may  further  be  conjecture)]  thai  this 
dominion  of  the  sons  ot'  Shelah  in  Moab,  had  some 
connexion  with  the  migration  of  Eiimelech  and  his 
sous  ;nto  the  country  of  Moab,  as  mentioned  in  the 
book  of  Ruth  ;  nor  should  the  close  resemblance  of 
the  names  niQV  (Ophrah),  1  Chr.  iv.  14,  and 
nB^y  (Orpah),  Ruth  i.  4,  be  overlooked.  Jerome, 
indeed,  following  doubtless  his  Hebrew  master, 
gives  a  mystical  interpretation  to  the  names  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  22,  and  translates  the  strange  word 
Jashubi-lehem,  "  they  returned  to  Leem "  (Beth 
lehem).  And  the  author  of  Quaest.  Heb.  in  Lib. 
Paraleip.  (printed  in  Jerome's  works)  follows  up 
this  opening,  and  makes  JOKIM  (qui  stare  fecit 
solem)  to  mean  ELIAKIM,  and  the  men  of  Chozeba 
(viri  mendacii),  Joash  and  Saraph  (secwrus  et 
incetidens),  to  mean  Mahlon  and  Chilion,  who  took 

wives  (}?JJ3)  in  Moab,  and  returned  (i.  e.  Ruth 
and  Naomi  did)  to  the  plentiful  bread  of  Bethlehem 
(house  of  bread)  ;  interpretations  which  are  so  far 
worth  noticing,  as  they  point  to  ancient  traditions 
connecting  the  migration  of  Eiimelech  and  his  sons 
with  the  Jewish  dominion  in  Moab  mentioned  in 
1  Chr.  iv.  21.b  However,  as  regards  the  name 
Pahath-Moab,  this  early  and  obscure  connexion 
of  the  families  of  Shelah  the  son  of  Judah  with 
Moab  seems  to  supply  a  not  improbable  origin  for 
the  name  itself,  and  to  throw  some  glimmering 
upon  the  association  of  the  children  of  Joshua  and 
Joab  with  the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab.  That  this 
t'amily  was  of  high  rank  in  the  tribe  of  Judah  we 
learn  from  their  appearing  fourth  in  order  in  the 
two  lists,  Ezr.  ii.  6  ;  Neh.  vii.  11,  and  from  their 
chief  having  signed  second,  among  the  lay  princes, 
in  Neh.  x.  14.  It  was  also  the  most  numerous 
(2818)  of  all  the  families  specified,  except  the 
Benjamite  house  of  Senaah  (Neh.  vii.  38).  The 
name  of  the  chief  of  the  house  of  Pahath-Moab,  in 
Nehemiah's  time,  was  Hashub;  and,  in  exact  ac 
cordance  with  the  numbers  of  his  family,  we  find 
him  repairing  two  portions  of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  iii.  11,  23).  It  may  also  be  noticed  as 
slightly  confirming  the  view  of  Pahath-Moab  being 
a  Shilonite  family,  that  whereas  in  1  Chr.  ix.  5-7, 
Neh.  xi.  5-7,  we  find  the  Benjamite  families  in 
close  juxta-position  with  the  Shilonites,  so  in  the 
building  of  the  wall,  where  each  family  built  the 
portion  over  against  their  own  habitation,  we  find 
Benjamin  and  Hashub  the  Pahath-Moabite  coupled 
together  (Neh.  iii.  23).  The  only  other  notices  of 
tiie  family  are  found  in  Ezr.  viii.  4,  where  200  of 
its  males  are  said  to  have  accompanied  Elihoenai, 
the  son  of  Zerahiah,  when  he  came  up  with  Ezra 
from  Babylon  ;  and  in  Ezr.  x.  30,  where  eight  of 
the  sons  of  Pahath-Moab  are  named  as  having 
taken  strange  wives  in  the  time  of  Ezra's  govern 
ment.  [A.  C.  H.] 

PAINT  [as  a  cosmetic].  The  use  of  cosmetic 
dyes  has  prevailed  in  all  ages  in  Eastern  countries. 
We  have  abundant  evidence  of  the  practice  of  paint 
ing  the  eyes  both  in  ancient  Egypt  (Wilkinson,  ii. 
342)  and  in  Assyria  (Layard's  Nineveh,  ii.  328)  ; 


PAINT  661} 

and  in  modern  times  no  usnge  is  more  generul.  It 
does  not  appear,  however,  to  have  been  by  any 
means  universal  among  the  Hebrews.  The  notices 
of  it  are  few ;  and  in  each  instance  it  seems  to  have 
been  used  as  a  meretricious  art,  unworthy  of  a 
woman  of  high  character.  Thus  Jezebel  "  put  her 
eyes  in  painting"  (2  K.  ix.  30,  margin);  Jeremiah 
says  of  the  harlot  city,  "  Though  thou  rentest  thy 
eyes  with  painting "  ( Jer.  iv.  30)  ;  and  Ezekiel 
again  makes  it  a  characteristic  of  a  harlot  (Ez.  xxih. 
40  j  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  9,  §10).  The  ex 
pressions  used  in  *hese^  passages  are  worthy  of  ob 
servation,  as  referring  to  the  mode  in  which  the 
process  was  effected.  It  is  thus  described  by 
Chandler  (Travels,  ii.  140):  "A  girl,  closing  one 
of  her  eyes,  took  the  two  lashes  between  the  fore 
finger  and  thumb  of  the  left  hand,  pulled  them 
forward,  and  then  thrusting  in  at  the  external  corner 
a  bodkin  which  had  been  immersed  in  the  soot,  and 
extracting  it  again,  the  particles  before  adhering  to 
it  remained  within,  and  were  presently  ranged  round 
the  organ."  The  eyes  were  thus  literally  "  put  in 
paint,"  and  were  "  rent "  open  in  the  process.  A 
broad  line  was  also  drawn  round  the  eye,  as  repre 
sented  in  the  accompanying  cut.  The  effect  was 


"Eye  ornamented  with  Kohl,  as  represented  in  ancient 
paintings."    (Lane,  p.  37,  new  od.) 

an  apparent  enlargement  of  the  eye ;  and  the  ex 
pression  in  Jer.  iv.  30  has  been  by  some  understood 
in  this  sense  (Gesen.  Thes.  p.  1239),  which  is 
without  doubt  admissible,  and  would  harmonize 
with  the  observations  of  other  writers  ( Juv.  ii.  94, 
"  obliqua,  producit  acu  ;"  Plin.  Ep.  vi.  2).  The 
term  used  for  the  application  of  the  dye  was  kakhal,* 
"  to  smear  ;"  and  Rabbinical  writers  described  the 
paint  itself  under  a  cognate  term  (Mishn.  Sabb.  8, 
§3).  These  words  still  survive  in  kohl*  the  mo 
dern  Oriental  name  for  the  powder  used.  The  Bibl<> 
gives  no  indication  of  the  substance  out  of  which 
the  dye  was  formed.  If  any  conclusion  were  de- 
ducible  from  the  evident  affinity  between  the  Hebrew 
puk,e  the  Greek  QVKOS,  and  the  Latin/wcus,  it  would 
be  to  the  effect  that  the  dye  was  of  a  vegetable  kind. 
Such  a  dye  is  at  the  present  day  produced  from  the 
henna  plant  (Lawsonia  inermis),  and  is  extensively 
applied  to  the  hands  and  the  hair  ( Russell's  Aleppo, 
i.  109,  110).  But  the  old  versions  (the  LXX., 
Chaldee,  Syriac,  &c.)  agree  in  pronouncing  the  dye 
to  have  been  produced  from  antimony,  the  very 
name  of  which  (a-ri&i,  stibium)  probably  owed  its 
currency  in  the  ancient  world  to  this  circumstance, 
the  name  itself  and  the  application  of  the  substance 
having  both  emanated  from  Egypt.'  Antimony  is 
still  used  for  the  purpose  in  Arabia  (Burckhardt's 
Travels,  i.  376),  and  in  Persia  (Morier's  Second 
Journey,  p.  61),  though  lead  is  also  used  in  the 
latter  country  (Russell,  i.  366) :  but  in  Egypt  the 
kohl  is  a  soot  produced  by  burning  either  a  kind  of 
frankincense  or  the  shells  of  almonds  (Lane,  i.  61). 
The  dye-stuff  was  moistened  with  oil,  and  kept  in 


*  The  resemblance  between  LaafcJi,  (PHy?,  1  Chr. 
Iv.  21),  one  of  tka  sons  of  Shelah,  and  London  (f'tJJ  ?),  an 
ncestor  of  Joshua  (1  Chr.  vii.  2G),  may  be  noted  in  con 
nexion  with  the  mention  of  Jeshua,  Ezr.  il.  6. 

*  1  Sain.  xxii.  3,  may  also  be  noticed  in  this  connexion. 

«bn3. 

-  T 

*  The  Hebrew  verb  has  even  been  introduced  into  the 
TT.IL.  Ii. 


Spanish  version :  "  Alcoholaste  tuos  ojos  "  (Gesen.  Thif. 
p.  676). 

•  tpB. 

'  This  mineral  was  imported  into  Egypt  for  the  pur 
pose.  One  of  the  pictures  at  Beni  Hassan  represents  tho 
arrival  of  a  party  of  traders  in  stibium.  The  powder  made 
from  antimony  has  been  always  supposed  to  have  a  bene 
ficial  effect  on  the  eyesight  (Din.  xxxiii.  34;  Kiuuell,  I 
111;  Lane,  i.  61). 

a  u 


668 


PAINT 


*  small  jar,  which  we  may  infer  to  have  beeu  made 
of  horn,  from  the  proper  name,  Keren-happuch, 
"  horn  for  paint"  (Job  xlii.  14).  The  probe  with 
which  it  was  applied  was  made 


either  of  wood,  silver,  or  ivory, 
and  had  a  blunted  point.  Both 
the  probe  and  the  jar  have 
frequently  been  discovered  in 


Egyptian 
ii.  343). 


tombs    (Wilkinson, 
In  addition  to  the 


passages  referring  to  eye-paint 
already  quoted  from  the  Bfble, 
we  may  notice  probable  allu 
sions  to  the  practice  in  Prov.  vi. 

Anclentyeajclnnd  Probe  05,  Ecclus.XXvi.9,Wld  Is.  Hi.  16, 
for  Kulil.  ,: 

the  term  rendered  "  wanton 
in  the  last  passage  bearing   the   radical  sense  of 
painted.     The  contrast  between  the  black  paint  and 


PALACE 

the  white  of  the  eye  led  to  the  transfer  of  the  t«ro 
p&k  to  describe  the  variegated  stones,  used  in  the 
string-courses  of  a  handsome  building  (1  Chr.  xm. 
2;  A.  V.  "glistering  stones,"  lit.  stones  of  eye- 
paint]  ;  and  again  the  dark  cement  in  which  marble 
or  other  bright  stones  were  imbedded  (Is.  liv.  1 1 ; 
A.  V.  "  I  will  lay  thy  stones  with  fair  colours"). 
Whether  the  custom  of  staining  the  hands  and  feet, 
particularly  the  nails,  now  so  prevalent  in  the  East, 
was  known  to  the  Hebrews,  is  doubtful.  The  plant, 
heniM,  which  is  used  for  that  purpose,  was  certainly 
known  (Cant.  i.  14  ;  A.  V.  "  camphire  "),  and  the 
expressions  in  Cant.  v.  14  may  possibly  refer  to  th« 
custom.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PAI.     [PAU.  | 

PALACE.  There  are  few  tasks  more  difficult 
or  puzzling  than  the  attempt  to  restore  an  ancient 
building  of  which  we  pos 
sess  nothing  but  two  verbal 
descriptions,  and  these  dif 
ficulties  are  very  much  en 
hanced  when  one  account 
is  written  in  a  language 
like  Hebrew,  the  scientific 
terms  in  which  are,  from 
our  ignorance,  capable  of 
the  widest  latitude  of  in 
terpretation  ;  and  the  other, 
though  written  in  a  lan 
guage  of  which  we  have 
a  more  definite  knowledge, 
was  composed  by  a  person 
who  never  could  have  seen 
the  buildings  he  was  de 
scribing. 

Notwithstanding  this, 
the  palace  which  Solomon 
occupied  himself  in  erect 
ing  during  the  thirteen 
years  after  lie  had  finished 
the  Temple  is  a  building 
of  such  world-wide  noto 
riety,  that  it  cannot  be 
without  interest  to  the 
Biblical  student  that  those 
who  have  made  a  special 
study  of  the  subject,  and 
who  are  familiar  with  the 
arrangements  of  Eastern 
palaces,  should  submit  their 
ideas  on  the  subject ;  and 
it  is  also  important  that 
our  knowledge  on  this,  as 
on  all  other  matters  con 
nected  with  the  Bible, 
should  be  brought  down 
to  the  latest  date.  Almost 
all  the  restorations  of  this 
celebrated  edifice  which  are 
found  in  earlier  editions  of 
the  Bible  are  what  may  be 
called  Vitruvian,  viz.  basec 
on  the  principles  of  Clas 
sical  architecture,  which 
were  the  only  cnes  known 
to  their  authors.  During 
the  earlier  part  of  this  cen 
tury  attempts  were  made 
to  introduce  the  principles 
of  Egyptian  design  into 
these  restorations,  but  with 
<>ven  less  success.  The  Jews 


PALACE 

hated  Egypt,  and  all  that  it  contained,  aiid  every 
thing  they  did,  or  even  thought,  was  antagonistic 
to  the  arts  and  feelings  of  that  land  of  bondage. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  exhumation  of  the  palaces 
of  Nineveh,  and  the  more  careful  examination  of 
those  at  Persepolis,  have  thrown  a  flood  of  light  on 
the  subject.  Many  expressions  which  before  were 
entirely  unintelligible  are  now  clear  and  easily  un 
derstood,  and,  if  we  cannot  yet  explain  everything, 
we  know  at  least  where  to  look  for  analogies,  and 
what  was  the  character,  even  if  we  cannot  predicate 
the  exact  form,  of  the  buildings  in  question. 

The  site  of  the  Palace  of  Solomon  was  almost 
certainly  in  the  city  itself,  on  the  brow  opposite  to 
the  Temple,  and  overlooking  it  and  the  whole  city 
of  David.  It  is  impossible,  of  course,  to  be  at  all 
certain  what  was  either  the  form  or  the  exact  dis 
position  of  such  a  palace,  but,  as  we  have  the 
dimensions  of  the  three  principal  buildings  given  in 
the  book  of  Kings,  and  confirmed  by  Josephus,  we 
may,  by  taking  these  as  a  scale,  ascertain  pretty 
nearly  that  the  building  covered  somewhere  about 
150,000  or  160,000  square  feet.  Less  would  not 
suffice  for  the  accommodation  specified,  and  more 
would  not  be  justified,  either  from  the  accounts  we 
have,  or  the  dimensions  of  the  city  in  which  it  was 
situated.  Whether  it  was  a  square  of  400  feet  each 
way,  or  an  oblong  of  about  550  feet  by  300,  as 


PALACE 


659 


represented  in  the  annexed  diagram,  must  always 
be  more  or  less  a  matter  of  conjecture.  The  form 
here  adopted  seems  to  suit  better  not  only  the 
exigencies  of  the  site,  but  the  known  disposition  ol 
the  parts. 

The  principal  building  situated  within  the  Palace 
was,  as  in  all  Eastern  palaces,  the  great  hall  of 
state  and  audience ;  here  called  the  "  House  of  the 
Forest  of  Lebanon."  Its  dimensions  were  100 
cubits,  or  150  feet  long,  by  half  that,  or  75  feet  in 
width.  According  to  the  Bible  (IK.  vii.  2)  it 
had  "four  rows  of  cedar  pillars  with  cedar  beams 
upon  the  pillars;"  but  it  is  added  in  the  next  verse 
that  "  it  was  covered  with  cedar  above  the  beams 
that  lay  on  45  pillars,  15  in  a  row."  This  would 
be  easily  explicable  if  the  description  stopped  there, 
and  so  Josephus  took  it.  He  evidently  considered 
the  hall,  as  he  afterwards  described  the  Stoa  basi 
lica  of  the  Temple,  as  consisting  of  four  rows  of 
columns,  three  standing  free,  but  the  fourth  built 
into  the  outer  wall  {Ant.  xi.  5) ;  and  his  expression 
that  the  ceiling  of  the  palace  hall  was  in  the  Co 
rinthian  manner  (Ant,  vii.  5.  §2)  does  not  mean 
that  it  was  of  that  order,  which  was  not  then  in 
vented,  but  after  the  fashion  of  what  was  called  in 
his  day  a  Corinthian  oecus,  viz.  a  hall  with  a 
clerestory.  If  we,  like  Josephus,  are  contented 
with  these  indications,  the  section  of  the  hall  was 


A.  B 

Fig.  2.    Diagram  Sections  cf  the  House  of  Ced&re  of  Lebanon. 


certainly  as  shown  in  fig.  A.  But  the  Bible  goes 
on  to  say  (ver.  4)  that  "  there  were  windows  in 
three  rows,  and  light  was  against  light  in  three 
ranks,"  and  in  the  next  verse  it  repeats,  "  and  light 
was  against  light  in  three  ranks."  Josephus  escapes 
the  difficulty  by  saying  it  was  lighted  by  "  6vp<a- 
(icuri  Tpiy\v<t>ois,"  or  by  windows  in  three  divi 
sions,  which  might  be  taken  as  an  extremely  pro 
bable  description  if  the  Bible  wei-e  not  so  very 
specific  regarding  it ;  and  we  must  therefore  adopt 
some  such  arrangement  as  that  shown  in  fig.  B. 
Though  other  arrangements  might  be  suggested, 
on  the  whole  it  appears  probable  that  this  is  the 
one  nearest  the  truth ;  as  it  admits  of  a  clerestory, 
to  which  Josephus  evidently  refers,  and  shows  the 
three  rows  of  columns  which  the  Bible  description 
requires.  Besides  the  clerestory  there  was  probably 
a  range  of  openings  under  the  cornice  of  the  walls, 
and  then  a  range  of  open  doorways,  which  would 
thus  make  the  three  openings  required  by  the 
Bible  description.  In  a  hotter  climate  the  first 
arrangement  (fig.  A)  would  be  the  more  probable ; 
but  on  a  site  so  exposed  and  occasionally  so  cold 
fa  Jerusalem,  it  is  scarcely  likely  that  the  great 
hall  of  the  Palace  was  permanently  open  even  on 
one  side. 

Another  difficulty  in  attempting  to  restore  this 
h»ll  ansea  from  the  number  of  pillars  being  un 


equal  ("  15  in  a  row"),  and  if  we  adopt,  the  last 
theory  (fig.  B),  we  have  a  row  of  columns  in  the 
centre  both  ways.  The  probability  is  that  it  was 
closed,  as  shown  Tn  the  plan,  by  a  wall  at  one  end, 
which  would  give  15  spaces  to  the  15  pillars,  and  so 
provide  a  central  space  in  the  longer  dimension 
of  the  hall  in  which  the  throne  might  have  been 
placed.  If  the  first  theory  be  adopted,  the  throne 
may  have  stood  either  at  the  end,  or  in  the  centre 
of  the  longer  side,  but,  judging  from  what  we  know 
of  the  arrangement  of  Eastern  palaces,  we  may  be 
almost  certain  that  the  latter  is  the  correct  po 
sition. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  building  just  described 
is  the  hall  or  porch  of  judgment  (ver.  7),  which 
Josephus  distinctly  tells  us  (Ant.  vii.  5,  §1 )  was  si 
tuated  opposite  to  the  centre  of  the  longer  side  of 
the  great  hall:  an  indication  which  may  be  ad 
mitted  with  less  hesitation,  as  such  a  position  is 
identical  with  that  of  a  similar  hall  at  Persepolis, 
and  with  the  probable  position  of  <ane  at  Khor- 
sabad. 

Its  dimensions  were  50  cubits,  or  75  teet  square 
(Josephus  says  30  in  one  direction  at  least),  and  its 
disposition  can  easily  be  understood  by  comparing 
the  descriptions  we  have  with  the  remains  of  the 
Assyrian  and  Persian  examples.  It  must  have  !>«>en 
supported  by  four  pillars  in  the  centie,  and  n»d 

2  U  2 


660 


PALACE 


three  entrances;  the  principal  opening  from  the 
street  and  facing  the  judgment-seat,  a  second  from 
the  court-yard  of  the  Palace,  by  which  the  coun 
cillors  and  officers  of  state  might  como  in,  and  a 
third  from  the  Palaoe,  res<Mpved  for  the  king  and  his 
V'Oiisehold  as  shown  in  th<  plan  (fig.  1,  N). 

The  third  edifice  is  merely  called  "  the  Porch." 
Ito  dimensions  were  50  by  30  cubit*,  or  75  feet  by 
45.  Josephus  does  not  describe  its  architecture ; 
and  we  are  unable  to  understand  the  description 
contained  in  the  Bible,  owing  apparently  to  our 
ignorance  of  the  synonyms  of  the  Hebrew  archi 
tectural  terms.  Its  use,  however,  cannot  be  consi 
dered  as  doubtful,  as  it  was  an  indispensable  adjunct 
to  an  Eastern  palace.  It  was  the  ordinary  place  of 
business  of  the  palace,  and  the  reception-room — the 
Guesten  Hall — where  the  king  received  ordinary 
visitors,  and  sat,  except  on  great  state  occasions,  to 
transact  the  business  of  the  kingdom. 

Behind  this,  we  are  told,  was  the  inner  court, 
adorned  with  gardens  and  fountains,  and  surrounded 
by  cloisters  for  shade ;  and  besides  this  were  other 
courts  for  the  residence  of  the  attendants  and  guards, 
and  in  Solomon's  case,  for  the  three  hundred  women 
of  his  hareem  :  all  of  which  are  shown  in  the  plan 
with  more  clearness  than  can  be  conveyed  by  a 
verbal  description. 

Apart  from  this  palace,  but  attached,  as  Josephus 
tells  us,  to  the  Hall  of  Judgment,  was  the  palace  of 
Pharaoh's  daughter — too  proud  and  important  a  per 
sonage  to  be  grouped  with  the  ladies  or'  the  hareem, 
and  requiring  a  residence  of  her  own. 

There  is  still  another  building  mentioned  by 
Josephus,  as  a  naos  or  temple,  supported  by  massive 
columns,  and  situated  opposite  the  Hall  of  Judgment. 
It  may  thus  have  been  outside,  in  front  of  the  palace 
in  the  city ;  but  more  probably  was,  as  shown  in 
the  plan,  in  the  centre  of  the  great  court.  It  could 
not  have  been  a  temple  in  the  ordinary  acceptation 
of  the  term,  as  the  Jews  had  only  one  temple,  and 
that  was  situated  on  the  other  side  of  the  valley ;  but 
it  may  have  been  an  altar  covered  by  a  baldachino. 
This  would  equally  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  de 
scription  as  well  as  the  probabilities  of  the  case ;  and 
so  it  has  been  represented  in  the  plan  (fig.  1). 

If  the  site  and  disposition  of  the  Palace  were  as 
above  indicated,  it  would  require  two  great  portals  ; 
one  leading  from  the  city  to  the  great  court,  shown 
at  M  ;  the  other  to  the  Temple  and  the  king's  garden, 
at  N.  This  last  was  probably  situated  where  the 
stairs  then  were  which  led  up  to  the  City  of  David, 
and  where  the  bridge  afterwards  joined  the  Temple 
to  the  city  and  palace. 

The  recent  discoveries  at  Nineveh  have  enabled 
us  to  understand  many  of  the  architectural  details 
of  this  palace,  which  before  they  were  made  were 
nearly  wholly  inexplicable.  We  are  told,  for  instance, 
that  the  walls  of  the  halls  of  the  palace  were  wain- 
scotted  with  three  tiers  of  stone,  apparently  versi 
coloured  marbles,  hewn  and  polished,  and  surmounted 
h<V  a  fourth  course,  elaborately  carved  with  repre- 
seMations  of  leafage  and  flowers.  Above  this  the 
wall*  were  plastered  and  ornamented  with  coloured 
arabesques.  At  Nineveh  the  walls  were,  like  these, 
wainscot  ted  to  a  height  of  about  eight  feet,  but  with 
alabaster,  a  peculiar  product  of  the  country,  and 
these  were  separated  from  the  painted  space  above 
by  an  architectural  band ;  the  real  difference  being 
that  the  Assyrians  revelled  in  sculptural  repre 
sentations  of  men  and  animals,  as  we  now  know 
from  the  sculptures  brought  home,  as  well  as  from 
the  passage  in  Ezekie!  (xiiii.  14)  where  he  describes 


PALESTINE 

"  men  pourtrayed  on  the  wall,  the  imagce  of  tht 
Chaldeans  pourtrayed  with  vermilion,"  &c.  These 
modes  of  decoration  were  forbidden  to  the  Jews  by 
the  second  commandment,  given  to  them  in  conse 
quence  of  their  residence  in  Egypt  and  their  con 
sequent  tendency  to  that  multiform  idolatry.  Soim 
difference  may  also  be  due  to  the  fact  that  the  soft 
alabaster,  though  admirably  suited  to  bassi-relievi, 
was  not  suited  for  sharp  deeply-cut  foliage  sculpture, 
like  that  described  by  Josephus  ;  while,  at  the  same 
time,  the  hard  material  used  by  the  Jews  might 
induce  them  to  limit  their  ornamentation  to  one 
band  only.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  a  consi 
derable  amount  of  colour  was  used  in  the  decoration 
of  these  palaces,  not  only  from  the  constant  refer 
ence  to  gold  and  gilding  in  Solomon's  buildings,  and 
because  that  as  a  colour  could  hardly  be  used  alone, 
but  also  from  such  passages  as  the  following: — 
'•  Build  me  a  wide  house  and  large" —  or  through- 
aired — "  chambers,  and  cutteth  out  windows ;  and 
it  is  cieled  with  cedar,  and  painted  with  ver 
milion"  (Jer.  xxii.  14).  It  may  also  be  added, 
that  in  the  East  all  buildings,  with  scarcely  an 
exception,  are  adorned  with  colour  internally, 
generally  the  three  primitive  colours  used  in  at 
their  intensity,  but  so  balanced  as  to  produce  tin 
most  harmonious  results. 

Although  incidental  mention  is  made  of  other 
palaces  at  Jerusalem  and  elsewhere,  they  are  all 
of  subsequent  ages,  and  built  under  the  influence 
of  Roman  art,  and  therefore  not  so  interesting  tc 
the  Biblical  student  as  this.  Besides,  none  of  them 
are  anywhere  so  described  as  to  enable  their  dis 
position  or  details  to  be  made  out  with  the  same 
degree  of  clearness,  and  no  instruction  would  be 
conveyed  by  merely  reiterating  the  rhetorical  flou 
rishes  in  which  Josephus  indulges  when  describing 
them ;  and  no  other  palace  is  described  in  the  Bible 
itself  so  as  to  render  its  elucidation  indispensable 
in  such  an  article  as  the  present.  [J.  F.] 


PA'LAL  a :  *a\dx  5  Ales-  *«A«f£:  Phalet). 
The  son  of  Uzai,  who  assisted  in  restoring  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (Neh.  iii. 
25). 

PALESTI'NA  and  PALESTINE.  These  two 
forms  occur  in  the  A.  V.  but  four  times  in  all, 
always  in  poetical  passages:  the  first,  in  Ex.  xv.  14, 
and  Is.  siv.  29,  31  ;  the  second,  Joel  iii.  4.  In  each 
case  the  Hebrew  is  flBvB,  Pelesheth,  a  word  found, 
besides  the  above,  only  in  Ps.  Is.  8,  Ixxxiii.  7, 
Ixxxvii.  4,  and  cviii.  9,  in  all  which  our  translators 
have  rendered  it  by  "  Philistia  "  or  "  Philistines." 
The  LXX.  has  in  Ex.  #uAj(nW/t,  but  in  Is.  and 
Joel  a.\\6<f>v\ot ;  the  Vulg.  in  Ex.  Philiathiim,  in 
Is.  Philisthoea,  in  Joel  Palaesthini.  The  apparent 
ambiguity  in  the  different  renderings  of  the  A.  V. 
is  in  reality  no  ambiguity  at  all,  for  at  the  date  of 
that  translation  "  Palestine  "  was  synonymous  with 
"  Philistia."  Thus  Milton,  with  his  usual  accui  wry 
in  such  points,  mentions  Dagon  as 

"  dreaded  through  the  coast 
Of  Palestine,  tu  Gath  and  Ascalon, 
And  Accaron  and  Gaza's  frontier  bounds  " : — 

(Par.  Lott,  I  464) 
and  again  as 

"  That  twice-battered  god  of  Palestine  ":— 

(Hymn  on  .\at.  199) 

— where  if  any  proof  be  wanted  that  his  meaning  a 
restricted  to  Philistia,  it  will  be  found  in  the  fad 


PALESTINE 

that  he  has  previously  connected  other  deities  with 
the  other  parts  of  the  Holy  Land.  See  also,  still 
more  decisively,  Samson  Ag.  144, 1098."  But  even 
without  such  evidence,  the  passages  themselves  show 
how  our  translators  understood  the  word.  Thus  in 
Sx.  xv.  14,  "  Palestine,"  Edom,  Moab,  and  Canaan 
are  mentioned  as  the  nations  alarmed  at  the  approach 
of  Israel.  In  Is.  xiv.  29,  31,  the  prophet  warns 
"  Palestine  "  not  to  rejoice  at  the  death  of  king  Ahaz, 
who  had  subdued  it.  In  Joel  iii.  4,  Phoenicia  and 
"  Palestine  "  we  upbraided  with  cruelties  practised 
on  Judah  and  Jerusalem. 

Palestine,  then,  in  the  Authorised  Version,  really 
means  nothing  but  Philistia.  The  original  Hebrew 
word  Pelesheth,  which,  as  shown  above,  is  else 
where  translated  Philistia,  to  the  Hebrews  signified 
merely  the  long  and  broad  strip  of  maritime  plain 
inhabited  by  their  encroaching  neighbours.  We  shall 
see  that  they  never  applied  the  name  to  the  whole 
country.  An  inscription  of  Iva-lush,  king  of  Assyria 
(probably  the  Pul  of  Scripture),  as  deciphered  by 
Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  names  "  Palaztu  on  the  Western 
Sea,"  and  distinguishes  it  from  Tyre,  Damascus, 
Samaria,  and  Edom  (Rawlinson's  Herod,  i.  467). 
In  the  same  restricted  sense  it  was  probably  em 
ployed — if  employed  at  all — by  the  ancient  Egyp 
tians,  in  whose  records  at  Karnak  the  name  Pulu- 
satu  has  been  deciphered  in  close  connexion  with 
that  of  the  Shairutana  or  Sharu,  possibly  the  Si- 
donians  or  Syrians  (Birch,  doubtfully,  in  Layard, 
Nineveh,  ii.  407  note).  Nor  does  it  appear  that  at 
first  it  signified  more  to  the  Greeks.  As  lying  next 
the  sea,  and  as  being  also  the  high  road  from  Egypt 
to  Phoenicia  and  the  richer  regions  north  of  it,  the 
Philistine  plain  became  sooner  known  to  the  western 
world  than  the  country  further  inland,  and  was  called 
by  them  Syria  Palaestina  —  ~S,vplri  Tla\aiffriifr)  — 
Philistine  Syria.  This  name  is  first  found  in  Hero 
dotus  (i.  105 ;  ii.  104  ;  iii.  5  ;  vii.  89)  ;  and  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  on  each  occasion  he  is  speaking  of 
the  coast,  and  the  coast b  only.  (See  also  the  testimony 
of  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  6,  §2.)  From  thence  it  was  gra 
dually  extended  to  the  country  further  inland,  till 
in  the  Roman  and  later  Greek  authors,  uoth  heathen 
and  Christian,  it  becomes  the  usual  appellation  for 
the  whole  country  of  the  Jews,  both  west  and  east 
of  Jordan.  (See  the  citations  of  Reland,  Pal.  chaps. 
vii.  viii.)  Nor  was  its  use  confined  to  heathen 
writers :  it  even  obtained  among  the  Jews  them 
selves.  Josephus  generally  uses  the  name  for  the 

»  Paradise  I^ost  was  written  between  1660  and  1670 
Shakspere,  on  the  other  hand,  uses  the  word  in  its  modern 
sense  in  two  passages,  Sing  John,  Actii.  Sc.  1,  and  Othetto, 
Act  iv.  Sc.  3 :  the  date  of  the  former  of  these  plays  is 
1596,  that  of  the  latter  1602.  But  Shakspere  and  Milton 
wrote  for  different  audiences ;  and  the  language  of  the 
one  would  be  as  modern  (for  the  time)  as  that  of  the  other 
was  classical  and  antique.  That  the  name  was  changing 
its  meaning  from  the  restricted  to  the  general  sense  just 
at  the  beginning  of  the  17th  century,  is  curiously  ascer- 
tainable  from  two  Indexes  "  of  the  Hardest  Wordes,' 
appended  to  successive  editions  of  Sylvester's  Du  Birtas 
(1605  and  1608),  in  one  of  which  it  is  explained  as  "  Judea 
the  Holy  I^and,  first  called  Canaan,"  and  in  the  other 
"  the  Land  of  the  Philistines."  Fuller,  in  his  '  Pisgah- 
sight  of  Palestine '  (1650),  of  course  uses  it  in  the  largest 
sense ;  but  it  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  he  says  nothing 
whatever  of  the  signification  of  the  name.  In  France  the 
original  narrow  signification  has  been  retained.  Thu 
chap.  xxxi.  of  Volney's  Travels  treats  of  "  Palestine,  i.  «. 
the  plain  which  terminates  the  country  of  Syria  on  the 
west,"  and  ''comprehends  the  whole  country  between  the 
Mediterranean  on  the  west,  the  mountains  on  the  east. 


PALESTINE 


661 


country  and  nation  of  the  Philistines  (Ant.  xr.i.  5, 
J10;  vi.  1,  §1,  &c.),  but  on  one  or  iwo  occasions 
employs  it  in  the  wider  sense  'Ant.  i.  6,  §4 ;  viii. 
10,  §3 ;  c.  Ap.  i.  22).  So  does  Philo,  De  Abrah. 
and  De  Vita  Mosis.  It  is  even  found  in  such 
;horoughly  Jewish  works  as  the  Talmudic  treatises 
Bereshith  Rabba  and  Echo,  Rabbathi  (Reland,  3y) ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  notice  how  much  the  feeling  of 
,he  nation  must  have  degenerated  before  they  could 
ipply  to  the  Promised  Land  the  name  of  its  bitterest 
enemies — the  "  uncircumcised  Philistines." 

Jerome  (cir.  A.n.  400)  adheres  to  the  ancient 
meaning  of  Palaestina,  which  he  restricts  to  Philistia 
(see  Ep.  ad  Dardanum,  §4 :  Comm.  in  Esaiam  xiv. 
29  ;  in  Amos  i.  6).c  So  also  does  Procopius  of  Gaz.i 
(cir.  A.D.  510)  in  a  curious  passage  on  Gerar,  in  hi3 
comment  on  2  Chr.  xiv.  13. 

The  word  is  now  so  commonly  employed  in  our 
more  familiar  language  to  designate  the  whole  coun 
try  of  Israel,  that,  although  biblically  a  misnomer, 
it  has  been  chosen  here  as  the  most  convenient  head 
ing  under  which  to  give  a  general  description  of 
THE  HOLY  LAND,  embracing  those  points  which 
have  not  been  treated  under  the  separate  headings 
of  cities  or  tribes. 

This  description  will  most  conveniently  divide 
itself  into  two  sections : — 

I.  The  Names  applied  to  the  country  of  Israel 

in  the  Bible  and  elsewhere. 
II.  The  Land :  its  situation,  aspect,  climate,  phy 
sical  characteristics,  in  connexion  with  its 
history ;  its  structure,  botany,  and  natural 
history.d 

The  history  of  the  country  is  so  fully  given 
under  its  various  headings  throughout  the  work, 
that  it  is  unnecessary  to  recapitulate  it  here. 

I.  THE  NAMES. 

PALESTINE,  then,  is  designated  in  the  Bible  by 
more  than  one  name : — 

1.  During  the  Patriarchal  period,  the  Conquest, 
and  the  age  of  the  Judges,  and  also  where  those  early 
periods  are  referred  to  in  the  later  literature  (as 
Ps.  cv.  1 1 ;  and  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  7  ;  8 ;  20 ;  v.  1 ,  &c.), 
it  is  spoken  of  as  "  Canaan,"  or  more  frequently 
"  the  Land  of  Canaan,"  meaning  thereby  the  coun 
try  west  of  the  Jordan,  as  opposed  to  "  the  Land 
of  Gilead "  on  the  east.  [CANAAN,  LAND  OF, 
vol.  i.  246.]  Other  designations,  during  the  same 


and  two  lines,  one  drawn  by  Khan  Younes,  and  the  other 
between  Kaisaria  and  the  rivulet  of  Yafa."  It  is  thus  used 
repeatedly  by  Napoleon  I.  in  his  despatches  and  corre 
spondence.  See  Cvtresp.  de  Nap.  Nos.  4020,  4035,  &c. 

b  In  the  second  of  these  passages,  he  seems  to  extend 
it  as  far  north  as  SeirM—lf  the  sculptures  of  the  Nahr  d 
Kelb  are  the  stelae  of  Sesostris. 

*  In  his  Epit.  Paulae  ($8)  he  extends  the  region  of  the 
Philistines  as  far  north  as  Dor,  close  under  Mount  Carmel. 
We  have  seen  above  that  Herodotus  extends  Palestine  to 
Beir&t.  Caesarea  was  anciently  entitled  C.  Palaestinae,  to 
distinguish  it  from  other  towns  of  the  same  name,  and  it 
would  seom  to  be  even  still  called  Kaisariyeh  Felistin  by 
the  Arabs  (see  note  to  Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  387,  July  15 ; 
alsoSchultens./ndea;.  Geogr.  'Caesarea 0-  Ramleh,  10  miles 
east  of  Jaffa,  retained  in  the  time  of  hap-Parchi  the  samu 
affix  (see  Asher's  B.  of  Tudela,  il.  439).  He  Identifies  the 
latter  with  Gath. 

d  The  reader  will  observe  that  the  botany  an-)  naturni 
history  have  been  treated  by  Dr.  Hooker  and  tne  Kev. 
W.  Houghton  (pp.  681 ;  687).  The  paper  of  the  forme; 
distinguished  botanist  derives  a  peculiar  value  frrm  lot 
fact  that  he  hag  visited  Palestine. 


662 


PALESTINE 


early  period,  are  "  the  land  of  the  Hebrews  "  (Gen. 
xl.  15  only — a  natural  phrase  in  the  mouth  of 
Joeeph);  the  "land  of  the  Hittites"  (Josh.  i.  4): 
a  remarkable  expression,  occurring  here  only  in  the 
Bible,  though  frequently  used  in  the  Egyptian  re 
cords  of  Rameses  11.,  in  which  Cheta  or  Chita  appears 
to  denote  the  whole  country  of  Lower  and  Middle 
Syria.  (Brugsch.  Geogr.  fnschrift.  ii.  21,  &c.) 
The  name  Ta-netr  (i.  e.  Holy  Land),  which  is 
found  in  the  inscriptions  of  Rameses  II.  and  Thoth- 
mes  III.,  is  believed  by  M.  Brugsch  to  refer  to 
Palestine  (Ibid.  17).  But  this  is  contested  by  M. 
de  Rouged  (Revue  Arche'ologique,  Sept.  1861,  p.  216). 
The  Phoenicians  appear  to  have  applied  the  title 
Holy  Land  to  their  own  country,  and  possibly  also 
to  Palestine  at  a  very  early  date  (Brugsch,  17).  If 
this  can  be  substantiated,  it  opens  a  new  view  to 
the  Biblical  student,  inasmuch  as  it  would  seem  to 
imply  that  the  country  had  a  reputation  for  sanctity 
before  its  connexion  with  the  Hebrews. 

2.  Durng    the   Monarchy    the    name    usually, 
though   not   frequently,   employed,   is   "  Land  of 
Israel "  ('»  f^N  ;  1  Sam.  xiii.  19  ;  2  K.  v.  2,  4, 

vi.  23 ;  1  Chr.  xxii.  2 ;  2  Chr.  ii.  17).  Of  course 
this  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  same  appel 
lation  as  applied  to  the  northern  kingdom  only 
(2  Chr.  xsx.  25 ;  Ez.  xxvii.  17).  It  is  Ezekiel's 
favourite  expression,  though  he  commonly  alters  its 
form  slightly,  substituting  HOIK  for  pK.  The 

T  T  -:  •  v  v 

pious  and  loyal  aspirations  of  Hosea  find  vent  in  the 
expression  "  land  of  Jehovah "  (Hos.  ix.  3  ;  comp. 
Is.  Ixii.  4,  &c.,  and  indeed  Lev.  xxv.  23,  &c.).  In 
Zechariah  it  is  "the  Holy  land"  (Zech.  ii.  12); 
and  in  Daniel  "the  glorious  land"  (Dan.  xi.  41). 
In  Amos  (ii.  10)  alone  it  is  "  the  land  of  the 
Amorite ;"  perhaps  with  a  glance  at  Deut.  i.  7. 
Occasionally  it  appeai-s  to  be  mentioned  simply  as 
"  The  Land ;"  as  in  Uuth  i.  1 ;  Jer.  xxii.  27  ;  1  Mace, 
xiv.  4 ;  Luke  iv.  25,  and  perhaps  even  xxiii.  44. 
The  later  Jewish  writers  are  fond  of  this  title,  of 
which  several  examples  will  be  found  in  Reland, 
1'al.  chap.  v. 

3.  Between  the  Captivity  and  the  time  of  our 
Lord  the  name  "  Judaea"  had  extended  itself  from 
the  southern  portion  to  the  whole  of  the  country," 
even  that  beyond  Jordan  (Matt.  xix.  1 ;  Mark  x.  1 ; 
Joseph.  Ant.  ix.  14,  §1  ;  xii.  4,  §11).    In  the  book 
of  Judith  it  is  applied  to  the  portion  between  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon  and  Samaria  (xi.  19),  as  it  is  in 
Luke  xxiii.  5  ;  though  it  is  also  used  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  Judaea  proper  (John  iv.  3,  vii.  1),  that  is, 
the  most  southern  of  the  three  main  divisions  west 
of  Jordan.     In  this  narrower  sense  it  is  employed 
throughout  1  Mace,  (see  especially  ix.  50,  x.  30, 38, 
xi.  34). 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (xi.  9)  we  find 
Palestine  spoken  of  as  "  the  land  of  promise ;" 
and  in  2  Esdr.  xiv.  31,  it  is  called  "  the  land 
cf  Sion." 

4.  The  Roman  division  of  the  country  hardly 
coincided  with  the  biblical  one,  and  it  does  not 
ap;>ear  that  the  Romans  had  any  distinct  name  for 
that  which  we  understand  by  Palestine.    The  pro 
vince  of  Syria,  established  by  Pompey,  of  which 


PALESTINE 

Scaurus  was  the  first  governor  (quaestor  propraetorj 
in  62  B.C.,  seems  to  have  embraced  the  whole  sea 
board  from  the  Bay  of  ISRUS  (IskanderGn)  to  Egypt, 
as  far  back  as  it  was  habitable,  that  is,  up  to  the 
desert  which  forms  the  background  to  the  whole 
district.  "  Judaea"  in  their  phrase  appears  to  have 
signified  so  much  of  this  country  as  intervened  be 
tween  Idumaea  on  the  south,  and  the  territories  of 
the  numerous  free  cities,  on  the  north  and  west, 
which  were  established  with  the  establishment  of 
the  province — such  as  Scythopolis,  Sebaste,  Joppa, 
Azotus,  &c.  (Diet,  of  Geography,  ii.  1077).  The 
district  east  of  the  Jordan,  lying  between  it  and  the 
desert — at  least  so  much  of  it  as  was  not  covered  by 
the  lands  of  Pella,  Gadara,  Canatha,  Philadelpheia, 
and  other  fi-ee  towns — was  called  Peraea. 

5.  Soon  after  the  Christian  era,  we  find  the  name 
Palaestina  in  possession  of  the  country.     Ptolemy 
(A.U.  161)  thus  applies  it  (Geogr.  v.  16).    "  The 
arbitrary  divisions  of  Palaestina  Prima,  Secunda,  and 
Tertia,  settled  at  the  end  of  the  4th  or  beginning 
of  the  5th  cent,  (see  the  quotations  from  the  Cod. 
Theodos.  in  Reland,  p.  205),  are  still  observed  in  the 
documents  of  the  Eastern  Church"  (Diet,  of  Geogr. 
ii.  533a).     Palaestina  Tertia,  of  which  Petra  was 
the  capital,  was  however  out  of  the  biblical  limits ; 
and  the  portions  of  Peraea  not  comprised  in  Pal. 
Secunda  were  counted  as  in  Arabia. 

6.  Josephus  usually  employs  the  ancient  name 
"  Canaan  "  in  reference  to  the  events  of  the  earlier 
history,  but  when  speaking  of  the  country  in  re 
ference  to  his  own  time  styles  it  Judaea  (Ant.  i.  6, 
§2,  &c.)  ;  though  as  that  was  the  Roman  name  for 
the  southern  province,  it  is  sometimes  (e.  g.  B.  J. 
i.  1,  §1 ;  iii.  3,  §56)  difficult  to  ascertain' whether 
he  is  using  it  in  its  wider  or  nairower*  sense.     In 
the  narrower  sense  he  certainly  does  often  employ  it 
(e.g.  Ant.  v.  1,  §22  ;  B.  J.  iii.  3,  §4, 5a).    Nicolaus 
of  Damascus  applies  the  name  to  the  whole  country 
(Joseph.  Ant.  i.  7,  §2). 

The  Talmudiste  and  other  Jewish  writers  use  the 
title  of  the  "  Land  of  Israel."  As  the  Greeks  styled 
all  other  nations  but  their  own  Barbarian,  so  the 
Rabbis  divide  the  whole  world  into  two  parts — the 
Land  of  Israel,  and  the  regions  outside  it.* 

7.  The  name  most  frequently  used  throughout 
the  middle  ages,  and  down  to  our  own  time,  is  Terra 
Sancta — the  Holy  Land.    In  the  long  list  of  Travels 
and  Treatises  given  by  Ritter  (Erdkwnde,  Jordan, 
31-55),  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  534-555),  and  Bonar 
(Land  of  Promise,  517-535),  it  predominates  far 
beyond  any  other  appellation.     Quaresmius,  in  his 
Elucidatio  Terrae  Sanctae  (i.  9,  10),  after  enu 
merating    the    various    names    above  mentioned, 
concludes   by  adducing    seven    reasons   why   thnt 
which  he  has  embodied  in  the  title  of  his  own  woi  k, 
"  though  of  later  date  than  the  rest,  yet  in  excel 
lency  and  dignity  surpasses  them  all ;"  closing  with 
the  words  of  Popu  Urban  II.  addressed  to  the  Coun 
cil  of  Clermont: — Quam  terram  merito  Sanctam 
diximus,  in  qua  non  est  etiam  passus  pedis  qutm  not) 
illustraverit  et  sanctificaverit  vet  corpus  vel  umbra 
Salvatoris,  vel  glorivsa  praesentia  Sanctae  Dei  ge- 
nitricis,  vel  amplectcndus  Apostolorum  commcatus, 
vel  martyrum  ebibendus  sanyvis  effusus. 


*  An  indication  of  this  is  discovered  by  Keland  (/'ai.32), 
w>  early  as  the  time  of  Solomon,  in  the  terms  of  2Chr.  ix.  11 ; 
but  there  is  nothing  to  imply  that "  J  udali "  in  that  passage 
mtvua  moro  tnan  the  actual  territory  of  the  tribe. 

(  This  very  ambiguity  is  a  sign  (notwithstanding  all 
Uut  Joseplws  says  of  the  imputation  and  importance  of 


Galilee)  that  the  southern  province  was  by  far  the  most 
important  part  of  the  country.  It  conferred  its  name  on 
tie  whole. 

g  See  the  citations  in  Otho.  tex.  Rabb.  "  Israelitae  Re- 
gio";  ami  tin-  1 1  incraries  of  Benjamin  •  Parcbi;  Isaac  bes 
Chelo,  in  Carnioly ;  &c. 


PALESTINE 

II.  THE  LAND. 

The  Holy  Land  is  not  in  size  or  physical  charac 
teristics  proportioned  to  its  moral  and  historical 
position,  as  the  theatre  of  the  most  momentous 
events  in  the  world's  history.  It  is  but  a  strip  of 
country,  about  the  size  of  Wales,  less  than  140 
miles11  in  length,  and  barely  40*  in  average  breadth, 
on  the  very  frontier  of  the  East,  hemmed  in  between 
the  Mediterranean  Sea  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
enormous  trench  of  the  Jordan-valley  on  the  other, 
by  which  it  is  effectually  cut  off  from  the  mainland 
of  Asia  behind  it.  On  the  north  it  is  shut  in  by 
the  high  ranges  of  Lebanon  and  anti-Lebanon,  and 
by  the  chasm  of  the  Litdny,3  which  runs  at  their 
feet  and  forms  the  main  drain  of  their  southern 
slopes.  On  the. south  it  is  no  less  enclosed  by  the 
arid  and  inhospitable  deserts  of  the  upper  part 
of  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  whose  undulating  wastes 
melt  imperceptibly  into  the  southern  hills  of 
Judaea. 

1.  Its  position  on  the  Map  of  the  World — as  the 
world  was  when  the  Holy  Land  first  made  its  ap 
pearance  in  history — is  a  remarkable  one. 

(1.)  It  is  on  the  very  outpost — on  the  extremest 
western  edge  of  the  East,  pushed  forward,  as  it 
were,  by  the  huge  continent  of  Asia,  which  almost 
seems  to  have  rejected  and  cut  off  from  commu 
nication  with  itself  this  tiny  strip,  by  the  broad  and 
impassable  desert  interposed  between  it  and  the 
vast  tracts  of  Mesopotamia  and  Arabia  in  its  rear. 
On  the  shore  of  the  Mediterranean  it  stands,  as  if  it 
had  advanced  as  far  as  possible  towards  the  West — 
towards  that  New  World  which  in  the  fulness  of 
time  it  was  so  mightily  to  affect ;  separated  there 
from  by  that  which,  when  the  time  arrived,  proved 
to  be  no  barrier,  but  the  readiest  medium  of  com 
munication — the  wide  waters  of  the  "  Great  Sea." 
Thus  it  was  open  to  all  the  gradual  influences  of 
the  rising  communities  of  the  West,  while  it  was 
saved  from  the  retrogression  and  decrepitude  which 
have  ultimately  been  the  doom  of  all  purely  Eastern 
States  whose  connexions  were  limited  to  the  Eastk 
only.  Aud  when  at  last  its  ruin  was  effected, 
and  the  nation  of  Israel  driven  from  its  home,  it 
transferred  without  obstacle  the  result  of  its  long 
training  to  those  regions  of  the  West  with  which 
by  virtue  of  its  position  it  was  in  ready  communi 
cation. 

(2.)  There  was  however  one  channel,  and  but 
one,  by  which  it  could  reach  and  be  reached  by  the 
great  Oriental  empires.  The  only  road  by  which 
the  two  great  rivals  of  the  ancient  world  could 
approach  one  another — by  which  alone  Egypt  could 
get  to  Assyria,  and  Assyria  to  Egypt — lay  along 
the  broad  flat  strip  of  coast  which  formed  the  ma- 


PALESTINE 


663 


>•  The  latitude  of  Baniat,  the  ancient  Dan,  is  33°  16', 
and  that  of  Beersheba  31°  16' ;  thus  the  distance  between 
these  two  points -the  one  at  the  north,  the  other  at  the 
couth—  is  2  degrees,  120  geogr.  or  139  English  miles. 

>  The  breadth  of  the  country  at  Gaza,  from  the  shore 
of  the  Mediterranean  to  that  of  the  Dead  Sea,  is  48  geogr. 
miles,  while  at  the  latitude  of  the  Litany  from  the  coast 
to  the  Jordan  It  Is  20.  The  average  of  the  breadths  be 
tween  these  two  parallels,  taken  at  each  half  degree, 
gives  34  geogr.  miles,  or  Just  40  English  miles. 

i  The  latitude  of  the  Litany  (or  Kasimiyeh.)  differs  but 
slightly  from  that  of  Banias.  Its  mouth  is  given  by 
Van  de  Velde  (Memoir,  59)  at  33°  20'. 

I  The  contrast  between  East  and  West,  and  the  position 
of  the  Holy  Land  as  on  the  confines  of  each,  is  happily 
glva/i  in  a  passage  in  Eotlien  (chap.  28) 


ritime  portion  of  the  Holy  Land,  and  thei.ce  by  the 
Plain  of  the  Lebanon  to  the  Euphrates.  True,  this 
road  did  not,  as  we  shall  see,  lie  actually  through 
the  country,  but  at  the  foot  of  the  highlands  which 
virtually  composed  the  Holy  Land  ;  still  the  proxi  • 
mity  was  too  close  not  to  be  full  of  danger ;  and 
though  the  catastrophe  was  postponed  for  manj 
centuries,  yet,  when  it  actually  arrived,  it  arrived 
through  this  channel. 

(3.)  After  this  the  Holy  Land  became  (like  tlie 
Netherlands  in  Europe)  the  convenient  arena  on 
which  in  successive  ages  the  hostile  powers  who 
contended  for  the  empire  of  the  East,  fought  their 
battles.  Here  the  Seleucidae  routed,  or  were  routed 
by,  the  Ptolemies;  here  the  Romans  vanquished  the 
Parthians,  the  Persians,  and  the  Jews  themselves ; 
and  here  the  armies  of  France,  England,  and  Germany, 
fought  the  hosts  of  Saladin. 

2.  It  is  essentially  a  mountainous  country.  No: 
that  it  contains  independent  mountain  chains,  as  in 
Greece  for  example,  dividing  one  region  from  another, 
with  extensive  valleys  or  plains  between  and  among 
them — but  that  every  part  of  the  highland  is  in 
greater  or  less  undulation.  From  its  station  in  th«> 
north,  the  range  of  Lebanon  pushes  forth  before  it  a 
multitude  of  hills  and  eminences,  which  crowd  one 
another  more  or  less  thickly1  over  the  face  of  the 
country  to  its  extreme  south  limit.  But  it  is  not 
only  a  mountainous  country.  It  contains  in  com 
bination  with  its  mountains  a  remarkable  arrange 
ment  of  plains,  such  as  few  other  countries  can  show, 
which  indeed  form  its  chief  peculiarity,  and  have 
had  an  equal,  if  not  a  more  important,  bearing  on 
its  history  than  the  mountains  themselves.  The 
mass  of  hills  which  occupies  the  centre  of  the  country 
is  bordered  or  framed  on  both  sides,  east  and  west, 
by  a  broad  belt  of  lowland,  sunk  deep  below  its 
own  level.  The  slopes  or  cliffs  which  form,  as  it 
were,  the  retaining  walls  of  this  depression,  are 
furrowed  and  cleft  by  the  torrent  beds  which  dis 
charge  the  waters  of  the  hills,  and  form  the  means 
of  communication  between  the  upper  and  lower 
level.  On  the  west  this  lowland  interposes  between 
the  mountains  and  the  sea,  and  is  the  Plain  of  Phi- 
listia  and  of  Sharon.  On  the  east  it  is  the  broad 
bottom  of  the  Jordan  valley,  deep  down  in  which 
rushes  the  one  river  of  Palestine  to  its  grave  in  the 
Dead  Sea. 

3.  Such  is  the  first  general  impression  of  the 
physiognomy  of  the  Holy  Land.  It  is  a  phy 
siognomy  compounded  of  the  three  main  features 
already  named — the  plains,  the  highland  hills,  and 
the  torrent  beds :  features  which  are  marked  in 
the  words  of  its  earliest  describers  (Num.  xiii.  29  ; 
Josh.  xi.  16,  xii.  8),  and  which  must  be  com 
prehended  by  every  one  who  wishes  to  understand 

1  The  district  of  the  Surrey  hills  about  Caterham,  in  Its 
most  regular  portions.  If  denuded  of  most  of  its  wood, 
turf,  and  soil,  would  be  not  unlike  many  parts  of  Palestine 
So  are  for  were)  the  hills  of  Roxburghshire  on  the  banks 
of  the  Tweed,  as  the  following  description  of  them  by 
Washington  Irving  will  shew : — "  From  a  hill  which " 
likeGerizlm  or  Olivet  "  commanded  an  extensive  prospect 

1  gazed  about  me  for  a  time  with  surprise,  I  may 

almost  say  with  disappointment.  I  beheld  a  succession 
of  grey  waving  hills,  line  beyond  line,  as  far  as  my  eye 
could  reach,  monotonous  in  thoir  aspect,  and  entirely 

destitute  of  trees The  far-famed  Tweed  appeared 

a  naked  stream  flowing  between  bare  hills.  And  yet" 
(what  is  even  more  applicable  to  the  Holy  Land)  "  such 
hiul  ocen  the  magic  web  thrown  over  the  whole,  that  11 
hod  a  greater  charm  than  the  richest  scenery  in  Rutland  " 


664 


PALESTINE. 


1.  Zidon. 

•2.  Tyre. 
.1.  Dan. 
4    Tiberias. 
•>   Tabor. 
6.  Carmel. 
7    Samaria. 

8.  Shechem. 

9.  Jerusalem. 
10.  Iluthlclmiii 
11    Hebron. 
12.  Juppa, 


MAT  OF  I'ALESriXE,  with  section  of  the  country  from  Jaffa  lo  lUe  mountain^  ol  Aluab. 


PALESTINE 

the  conn  try,  and  the  intimate  connexion  existing 
between  its  structure  and  its  history.  In  the  ac 
companying  sketch-map  an  attempt  has  been  made 
to  exhibit  these  features  with  greater  distinctness 
than  is  usual,  or  perhaps  possible,  in  maps  con 
taining  more  detail. 

On  a  nearer  view  we  shall  discover  some  traits 
not  observed  at  first,  which  add  sensibly  to  the 
expression  of  this  interesting  countenance.  About 
halfway  up  the  coast  the  maritime  plain  is  suddenly 
interrupted  by  a  long  ridge  thrown  out  from  the 
central  mass,  rising  considerably  *  above  the  general 
level,  and  terminating  in  a  bold  promontory  on  the 
very  edge  of  the  Mediterranean.  This  ridge  is  Mount 
Carmel.  On  its  upper  side,  the  plain,  as  if  to 
compensate  for  its  temporary  displacement,  invades 
the  centre  of  the  country  and  forms  an  undulating 
hollow  right  across  it  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the 
Jordan  valley.  This  central  lowland,  which  divides 
with  its  broad  depression  the  mountains  of  Ephraim 
from  the  mountains  of  Galilee,  is  the  plain  of  Es- 
draelon  or  Jezreel,  the  great  battle-field  of  Palestine. 
North  of  Girmel  the  lowland  resumes  its  position 
by  the  sea-side  till  it  is  again  interrupted  and  finally 
put  an  end  to  by  the  northern  mountains  which 
push  their  way  out  to  the  sea,  ending  in  the  white 
promontory  of  the  Has  Nakhura.  Above  this  is  the 
•ancient  Phoenicia — a  succession  of  headlands  sweep 
ing  down  to  the  ocean,  and  leaving  but  few  intervals 
of  beach.  Behind  Phoenicia — north  of  Esdraelon, 
and  enclosed  between  it,  the  Lit&ny,  and  the  upper 
valley  of  the  Jordan — is  a  continuation  of  the  moun 
tain  district,  not  differing  materially  in  structure  or 
character  from  that  to  the  south,  but  rising  gradually 
in  occasional  elevation  until  it  reaches  the  main 
ranges  of  Lebanon  and  anti-Lebanon  (or  Hermon), 
as  from  their  lofty  heights  they  overlook  the  whole 
land  below  them,  of  which  they  are  indeed  the 
parents. 

4.  The  country  thus  roughly  portrayed,  and 
which,  as  before  stated,  is  less  than  140  miles  in 
length,  and  not  more  than  40  in  average  breadth, 
is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  the  whole  Land  of 
Israel.  The  northern  portion  is  Galilee ;  the  centre, 
Samaria;  the  south,  Judaea.  This  is  the  Land  of 
Canaan  which  was  bestowed  on  Abraham  ;  the  co 
venanted  home  of  his  descendants.  The  two  tribes 
and  a  half  remained  on  the  uplands  beyond  Jordan, 
instead  of  advancing  to  take  their  portion  with  the 
rest  within  its  circumvallation  of  defence  ;  but  that 
act  appears  to  have  formed  no  part  of  the  original 
plan.  It  arose  out  of  an  accidental  circumstance, — 
the  abundan«e  of  cattle  which  they  had  acquired 
during  their  stay  in  Egypt,  or  during  the  transit 
through  the  wilderness, — and  its  result  was,  that 
the  tribes  in  question  soon  ceased  to  have  any  close 
connexion  with  the  others,  or  to  form  any  virtual 
part  of  the  nation.  But  even  this  definition  might 
without  impropriety  be  further  circumscribed ;  for 
during  the  greater  part  of  the  0.  T.  times  the  chief 
erents  of  the  history  were  confined  to  the  district 
south  of  Esdraelon,  which  contained  the  cities  of 
Hebron,  Jerusalem,  Bethel,  Shiloh,  Shechem,  and 
Samaria,  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and  the  Mount  Carmel. 
The  battles  of  the  Conquest  and  the  early  struggles 


PALESTINE 


665 


>f  the  era  of  the  Judges  once  passed,  Galilee  subsided 
nto  obscurity  and  unimportance  till  the  time  cf 
Christ. 

5.  Small  as  the  Holy  Land  is  on  the  map,  ani 
when  contrasted  either  with  modern  states  or  with 
the  two  enormous  ancient  empires  of  Egypt  and 
Assyria   between   which    it    lay,    it    seems    even 
smaller   to   the  traveller  as  he  pursues  his  way 
through  it.      The  long  solid  purple  wall  of  the 
Moab  and  Gilead  mountains,  which  is  always  in 
sight,  and  forms  the  background  to  almost  every 
view  to  the  eastward,  is  peipetually  reminding  him 
that  the  confines  of  the  country  in  that  direction 
are  close  at  hand.     There  are  numerous  eminences 
in  the  highlands  which  command  the  view  of  both 
frontiers  at  the  same  time — the  eastern  mountains 
of  Gilead  with  the  Jordan  at  their  feet  on  the  one 
hand,  on  the  other  the  Western  Sea,"  with  its  line 
of  white  sand  and  its  blue  expanse.     Hermon,  the 
apex  of  the  country  on  the  north,  is  said  to  have 
been  seen  from  the  southern  end  or'  the  Dead  Sea : 
it  is  certainly  plain  enough,  from  many  a  point 
nearer  the  centre.     It  is  startling  to  find  that  from 
the  top  of  the  hills  of  Neby  Samwil,  Bethel,  Tabor, 
Gerizim,  or  Safed,  the  eye  can   embrace   at  one 
glance,  and  almost  without  turning  the  head,  such 
opposite  points  as  the  Lake  of  Galilee  and  the  Bay 
of  Akka,  the  farthest   mountains  of  the  Hauran 
and  the  long  ridge  of  Carmel,  the  ravine  of  the 
Jabbok,  or  the  green  windings  of  Jordan,  and  the 
sand-hills  of  Jaifa.     The  impression  thus  produced 
is  materially  assisted  by  the  transparent  clearness  of 
the  air  and  the  exceeding  brightness  of  the  light, 
by  which  objects  that   in   our  duller  atmosphere 
would  be  invisible  from  each  other  or  thrown  into 
dim  uic-tance  are  made  distinctly  visible,  and  thus  ap 
pear  to  be  much  nearer  together  than  they  really  are. 

6.  The  highland  district,  thus  surrounded  and 
intersected  by  its  broad  lowland  plains,  preserves 
from  north  to  south  a  remarkably  even  and  hori 
zontal  profile.     Its  average  height  may  be  taken  as 
1500  to  1800  feet  above  the  Mediterranean.    It  can 
hardly  be  denominated  a  plateau,  yet  so  evenly  is  the 
general  level  preserved,  and  so  thickly  do  the  hills 
stand  behind  and  between  one  another,  that,  when 
seen  from  the  coast  or  the  western  part  of  the  mari 
time  plain,  it  has  quite  the  appearance  of  a  wall, 
standing  in  the  background  of  the  rich  district  be 
tween  it  and  the  observer — a  district  which  from  its 
gentle  undulations,  and  its  being  so  nearly  on  a  level 
with  the  eye,  appears  almost  immeasurable  in  extent. 
This  general  monotony  of  profile  is,  however,  accen 
tuated  at  intervals  by  certain  centres  of  elevation. 
These  occur  in  a  line  almost  due  north  and  south, 
but  lying  somewhat  east  of  the  axis  of  the  country. 
Beginning  from  the  south,  they  are  Hebron,0  3029 
feet  above  the  Mediterranean ;  Jerusalem  2610,  and 
Mount  of  Olives  2724,  with  Neby  Samwil  on  the 
north  2650 ;  Bethel,  2400  ;  Sinjil,  2685  ;  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  2700  ;  "  Little  Hermoii "  and  Tabor  (on  the 
north  side  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon)  1900 ;  Safed 
2775 ;  JebelJurmuk  4000.    Between  these  elevated 
points  runs  the  watershed'  of  the  country,  sending 
off  on  either  hand — to  the  Jordan  valley  on  the  east 
and  the  Mediterranean  on  the  west,  and  be  it  remem- 


m  The  main  ridge  of  Carmel  is  between  1700  and  1800 
leet  high.  The  hills  of  Samaria  immediately  to  the  S.E. 
of  it  are  only  about  1100  feet  (Van  de  Velde,  Memoir 
177.  8). 

«  The  name  word  is  used  in  Hebrew  for  "  sea  "  and  for 
"west," 


0  The  altitudes  are  those  given  by  Van  de  Velde,  aftei 
much  comparison  and  investigation,  in  his  Memoir  (pp 
170-183). 

p  For  the  watershed  see  Hitter,  Erdkunde,  Jordan,  474- 
480.  His  heights  have  been  somewhat  modified  by  more 
recent  observations,  for  which  see  Van  de  Velde's  Memiir 


666 


PALESTINE 


bered  cast  and  westi  only — the  long  tortuous  aims 
of  its  many  torrent  beds.  But  though  keeping  north 
and  south  as  its  general  direction,  the  line  of  the 
watershed  is,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  pre 
valent  equality  of  level  of  these  highlands,  and  the 
absence  of  anything  like  ridge  or  saddle,  very  irre 
gular,  the  heads  of  the  valleys  on  the  ona  side  often 
passing  and  "overlapping"  those  of  the  other. 
Thus  in  the  territory  of  the  ancient  Benjamin,  the 
heads  of  the  great  Wadys  Fuwar  (or  Suweinit)  and 
Mutyah  (or  Kelt) — the  two  main  channels  by 
which  the  torrents  of  the  winter  rains  hurry  down 
from  the  bald  hills  of  this  district  into  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan — are  at  Bireh  and  Beitin  respectively, 
while  the  great  Wady  Belat,  which  enters  the  Me 
diterranean  at  Nahr  Aujeh  a  few  miles  above  Jaffa, 
stretches  its  long  arms  as  far  as,  and  even  farther 
than,  Taiyibeh,  nearly  four  miles  to  the  east  of 
either  Bireh  or  Beitin.  Thus  also  in  the  more 
northern  district  of  Mount  Ephrsim  around  Nablus, 
the  ramifications  of  that  extensive  system  of  valleys 
which  combine  to  form  the  Wady  Ferruh — one  of 
the  main  feeders  of  the  central  Jordan — interlace 
and  cross  by  many  miles  those  of  the  Wady  Shair, 
whose  principal  arm  is  the  Valley  of  Nablus,  and 
which  pours  its  waters  into  the  Mediterranean  at 
Nahr  Falaik. 

7.  The  valleys  on  the  two  sides  of  the  watershed 
differ  considerably  in  character.  Those  on  the  east 
— owing  to  the  extraordinary  depth  of  the  Jordan 
valley  into  which  they  plunge,  and  also  to  the  fact 
already  mentioned,  that  the  watershed  lies  rather 
on  that  side  of  the  highlands,  thus  making  the  fall 
more  abrupt — are  extremely  steep  and  rugged.  This 
is  the  case  during  the  whole  length  of  the  southern 
and  middle  portions  of  the  country.  The  preci 
pitous  descent  between  Olivet  and  Jericho,  with 
which  all  travellers  in  the  Holy  Land  are  acquainted, 
is  a  type, and  by  no  means  an  unfair  type,  of  the  eastern 
passes,  from  Zuweirah  and  Ain-jidi  on  the  south  to 
Wady  Bidan  on  the  north.  It  is  only  when  the  junc 
tion  between  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon  and  the  Jordan 
Valley  is  reached,  that  the  slopes  become  gradual 
and  the  ground  tit  for  the  manoeuvres  of  anything 
but  detached  bodies  of  foot  soldiers.  But,  rugged 
and  difficult  as  they  are,  they  form  the  only  access 
to  the  upper  country  from  this  side,  and  every  man 
or  body  of  men  who  reached  the  territory  of  Judith, 
Benjamin,  or  Ephraim  from  the  Jordan  Valley, 
must  have  climbed  one  or  other  of  them.'  The 
Ammonites  and  Moabites,  who  at  some  remote 
date  left  such  lasting  traces  of  their  presence  in  the 
names  of  Chephar  ha-Ammonai  and  Michmash,  and 
the  Israelites  pressing  foi-ward  to  the  relief  of  Gibeon 
and  the  slaughter  of  Beth-horon,  doubtless  entered 
alike  through  the  great  Wady  Fuwar  already 
spoken  of.  The  Moabites,  Edomites,  and  Mehunim 
swarmed  up  to  their  attack  on  Judah  through  the 
crevices  of  Ain-jidi  (2  Chr.  xx.  12,  16).  The  pass 


PALESTINE 

of  Adummim  was  in  the  days  of  our  Lord — what  ii 
still  ia — 'the  regular  route  between  Jericho  and  Je 
rusalem.  By  it  Pompey  advanced  with  his  aimy 
when  he  took  the  city. 

8.  The  western    valleys   are    more   gradual   in 
their  slope.     The  level  of  the  external   pla.n    on 
this  side  is  higher,  and  therefore  the  fall  less,  while 
at  the  same  time  the  distance  to  be  traversed  it 
much  greater.    Thus  the  length  of  the  Wady  Beldi 
already  mentioned,  from  its  remotest  head  at  Tai 
yibeh  to  the  point  at  which  it  emerges  on  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  may  be  taken  as  20  to  25  miles,  with 
a  total  difference  of  level  during  that  distance  of 
perhaps  1800  feet,  while  the  Wady  el- Aujeh,  whiih 
falls  from  the  other  side  of  Taiyibeh  into  the  Jor 
dan,  has  a  distance  of  barely  10  miles  to  reach  the 
Jordan-valley,  at  the  same  time  falling  not  less 
than  2800  feet. 

Here  again  the  valleys  are  the  only  means  of 
communication  between  the  lowland  and  the  high 
land.  From  Jaffa  and  the  central  part  of  the  plait 
there  are  two  of  these  roads  "  going  up  to  Jeru 
salem  " :  the  one  to  the  right  by  Ramieh  and  the 
Wady  Aly ;  the  other  to  the  left  by  Lydda,  and 
thence  by  the  Bethhorons,  or  the  Wady  Suleiman, 
and  Gibeon.  The  former  of  these  is  modern,  but 
the  latter  is  the  scene  of  many  a  famous  incident 
in  the  ancient  history.-  Over  its  long  acclivities  th« 
Canaanites  were  driven  by  Joshua  to  their  native 
plains;  the  Philistines  ascended  to  Michmash  and 
Geba,  and  fled  back  past  Ajalon;  the  Syrian  forro 
was  stopped  and  hurled  back  by  Judas ;  the  Roman 
legions  of  Cestius  Gallus  were  chased  pell-mell  to 
their  strongholds  at  Antipatris. 

9.  Further  south,  the  communications  between 
the  mountains  of  Judah  and  the  lowland  of  Phi- 
listia  are  hitherto  comparatively  unexplored.    They 
were   doubtless  the   scene  of  many  a   foray  and 
repulse   during   the   lifetime   of  Samson   and   the 
struggles  of  the  Danites,   but  there  is  no  record 
of  their  having  been  used  for  the  passage  of  any 
important  force  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times.* 
'North  of  Jaffa  the  passes  are  few.     One  of  them, 
by    the   Wady    Belat,    led    from    Autipatris    ti 
Gophna.    By  this  route  St.  Paul  was  probably  con 
veyed  away  from  Jerusalem.     Another  leads  from 
the  ancient  sanctuary  of  Gilgal  near  Kefr  Suba,  to 
Nablus. — These  western  valleys,  though  easier  than 
those  on  the  eastern  side,  are  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
present  great  difficulties  to  the  passage  of  any  large 
force  encumbered  by  baggage.    In  fact  these  moun 
tain  passes  really  foraied  the  security  of  Israel,  and 
if  she  had  been  wise  enough  to  settle  her  own  in 
testinal  quarrels  without  reference  to  foreigners,  the 
nation  might,  humanly  speaking,  have  stood  to  the 
present  hour.    The  height,  and  consequent  strength, 
which  was  the  frequent  boast  of  the  Prophets  and 
Psalmiste  in  regard  to  Jerusalem,  was  no  less  true 
of  the  whole  country,    rising  as   it  does  on   all 


i  Except  In  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  Plain 
of  Ksdraelon,  and  in  the  extreme  north  — where  the 
drainage,  instead  of  being  to  the  Mediterranean  or  the 
'ortlai.,  ts  to  the  Littay— the  statement  in  the  text  is 
atrtctly  accurate. 

'  Nothing  can  afford  so  strong  a  testimony  to  the  really 
unmllitary  genius  of  the  Canaanites,  and  subsequently, 
in  their  turn,  of  the  Jews  also,  as  tbe  way  in  which  they 
suffered   their  conquerors  again  and  again  to  advance  j 
througn  tnese  denies,  where  their  destruction  might  so  j 
easily  have  been  effected.    They  always  retired  at  once,  ; 
and,  shutting  themselves  up  In  their  strongholds,  awaited 
the  utta  -k  there.    From  Jericho,  Hebron,  Jerusalem,  to  ! 

J 


Silistria,  tbe  story  Is  one  and  the  same, — the  dislike  of 
Orientals  to  fight  in  the  open  fie'd,  and  their  power  of 
determined  resistance  when  entrenched  behind  forti 
fications. 

•  Richard  I.,  when  intending  to  attack  Jerusalem,  moved 
from  Ascalon  to  Blanche  Garde  (Safir,  or  "Ml  a  Safieh), 
on  the  edge  of  the  mountains  of  Judaea :  and  then,  instead 
of  taking  a  direct  route  to  the  Holy  City  through  the  pusses 
of  thn  mountains,  turned  northwards  over  tbe  plain  and 
took  the  road  from  Kiinileh  to  Bettenuble  (A'tiftn),  that  ts 
the  ordinary  approach  from  Jaffa  to  Jerusalem  ;  a  circuit 
of  at  least  four  days.  (See  Vinisauf,  v  \i,  lu  Chrvn.  y 
Ciiaada.  2U4.) 


PALESTINE 


667 


sides  from  plains  so  much  below  it  in  level.  The 
armies  of  Egypt  and  Assyria,  as  they  traced  and 
retraced  their  path  between  Pelusium  and  Carche- 
mish,  must  have  looked  at  the  long  wall  of  heights 
which  closed  in  the  broad  level  roadway  they  were 
pursuing,  as  belonging  to  a  country  with  which 
they  had  no  concern.  It  was  to  them  a  natural 
mountain  fastness,  the  approach  to  which  was  beset 
with  difficulties,  while  its  bare  and  soilless  hills  were 
havdly  worth  the  trouble  of  conquering,  in  comparison 
with  the  rich  green  plains  of  the  Euphrates  and  the 
Nile,  or  even  with  the  boundless  cornfield  through 
which  they  were  marching.  This  may  be  fairly 
inferred  from  various  notices  in  Scripture  and  in 
contemporary  history.  The  Egyptian  kings,  from 
Kameses  II.  and  Thothmes  III.  to  Pharaoh  Necho, 
were  in  the  constant  habit '  of  pursuing  this  route 
during  their  expeditions  against  the  Chatti,  or 
Hittites,  in  the  north  of  Syria ;  and  the  two  last- 
uamed  monarchs"  fought  battles  at  Megiddo, 
without,  as  far  as  we"  know,  having  taken  the 
trouble  to  penetrate  into  the  interior  of  the  country. 
The  Pharaoh  who  was  Solomon's  contemporary 
came  up  the  Philistine  plain  as  far  as  Gezer  (pro 
bably  about  Ratnleh),  and  besieged  and  destroyed 
it,  without  leaving  any  impression  of  uneasiness 
in  the  annals  of  Israel.  Later  in  the  monarchy, 
Psammetichus  besieged  Ashdod  in  the  Philistine 
plain  for  the  extraordinary  period  of  twenty-nine 
years  (Herod,  ii.  157)  ;  during  a  portion  of  that 
time  an  Assyrian  army  probably  occupied  part  of 
the  sameT  district,  endeavouring  to  relieve  the  town. 
The  battles  must  have  been  frequent ;  and  yet  the 
only  reference  to  these  events  in  the  Bible  is  the  men 
tion  of  the  Assyrian  general  by  Isaiah  (xx.  1),  in  so 
casual  a  manner  as  to  lead  irresistibly  to  the  con 
clusion  that  neither  Egyptians  nor  Assyrians  had 
come  up  into  the  highland.  This  is  illustrated  by 
Napoleon's  campaign  in  Palestine.  He  entered  it 
from  Egypt  by  El-Arish,  and  after  overrunning  the 
•whole  of  the  lowland,  and  taking  Gaza,  Jaffa,  Ramleh, 
and  the  other  places  on  the  plain,  he  writes  to  the 
sheikhs  of  Nablus  and  Jerusalem,  announcing  that 
lie  has  no  intention  of  making  war  against  them 
( Corresp.  de  Nap.  No.  4020,  "  19  Ventose,  1799  "). 
To  use  his  own  words,  the  highland  country  "  did 
cot  lie  within  his  base  of  operations ;"  and  it  would 
have  been  a  waste  of  time,  or  worse,  to  ascend 
thither. 

In  the  later  days  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  during 
the  Crusades,  Jerusalem  became  the  great  object  of 
contest ;  and  then  the  battlefield  of  the  country, 
which  had  originally  been  Esdraelon,  was  trans 
ferred  to  the  maritime  plain  at  the  foot  of  the 
passes  communicating  most  directly  with  the  capital. 
Here  Judas  Maccabaeus  achieved  some  of  his  greatest 
triumphs  ;  and  here  some  of  Herod's  most  decisive 
actions  were  fought ;  and  Blanchegarde,  Ascalon, 
Jatfa,  and  Beituuba  (the  Bettenuble  of  the  Cru 


sading  historian),  still  shine  with  the  brightest  raye 
of  the  vaJour  of  Richard  the  First. 

10.  When  the  highlands  of  the  country  are  mote 
closely  examined,  a  considerable  difference  will  be 
found  to  exist  in  the  natural  condition  and  appearance 
of  their  different  portions.  The  south,  as  being  rearer 
the  arid  desert,  and  farther  removed  from  the  drainage 
of  the  mountains,  is  drier  and  less  productive  than 
the  north.  The  tract  below  Hebron,  which  forms 
the  link  between  the  hills  of  Judah  and  the  desert, 
was  known  to  the  ancient  Hebrews  by  a  term  ori 
ginally  derived  from  its  dryness  (Negeb).  This  was 
THE  SOUTH  country.  It  contained  the  territory 
which  Caleb  bestowed  on  his  daughter,  and  which 
he  had  afterwards  to  endow  specially  with  the 
"  upper  and  lower  springs"  of  a  less  parched 
locality  (Josh.  rv.  19).  Here  lived  Nabal,  so  chary 
of  his  "  water"  (1  Sam.  xxv.  11);  and  here  may 
well  have  been  the  scene  of  the  composition  of  the 
63rd  Psalm  * — the  "  dry  and  thirsty  land  where  no 
water  is."  As  the  traveller  advances  north  of  this 
tract  there  is  an  improvement ;  but  perhaps  no  coun 
try  equally  cultivated  is  more  monotonous,  bare, 
or  uninviting  in  its  aspect,  than  a  great  part  of  the 
highlands  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  during  the  largest 
portion  of  the  year.  The  spring  covers  even  those 
bald  grey  rocks  with  verdure  and  colour,  and  fills 
the  ravines  with  torrents  of  rushing  water ;  but  in 
summer  and  autumn  the  look  of  the  country  from 
Hebron  up  to  Bethel  is  very  dreary  and  desolate. 
The  flowers,  which  for  a  few  weeks  give  so  brilliant  • 
and  varied  a  hue  to  whole  districts,  wither  and  vanish 
before  the  first  fierce  rays  of  the  sun  of  summer : 
they  are  "  to-day  in  the  field — to-morrow  cast  into 
the  oven."  Rounded1*  hills  of  moderate  height 
fill  up  the  view  on  every  side,  their  coarse  greyc 
stone  continually  discovering  itself  through  the 
thin  coating  of  soil,  and  hardly  distinguishable 
from  the  remains  of  the  ancient  terraces  which  run 
round  them  with  the  regularity  of  contour  lines, 
or  from  the  confused  heaps  of  ruin  which  occupy 
the  site  of  former  village  or  fortress.  On  some  of 
the  hills  the  terraces  have  been  repaired  or  recon 
structed,  and  these  contain  plantations  of  olives  or 
figs,  sometimes  with  and  sometimes  without  vine 
yards,  surrounded  by  rough  stone  walls,  and  with 
the  watch-towers  at  the  corners,  so  familiar  to  us 
from  the  parables  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 
Others  have  a  shaggy  covering  of  oak  bushes  in 
clumps.  There  are  traditions  that  in  former  times 
the  road  between  Bethlehem  and  Hebron  was  lined 
with  large  trees  ;  but  all  that  now  remains  of  them 
are  the  large  oak-roots  which  are  embedded  in  the 
rocky  soil,  and  are  dug  up  by  the  peasants  for  fuel 
(Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  124).  The  valleys  of  denudation 
which  divide  these  monotonous  hills  are  also 
planted  with  figs  or  olives,  but  of*"ner  cultivated 
with  corn  or  dourra,  the  lung  reedlik«  suilks  of  which 
remain  on  the  stony  ground  till  the  next  seed  time, 


*  Rawlinson,  note  to  Herod,  ii.  $157. 

11  For  Tbothmes'  engagement  at  Megiddo,  see  De  Rouge's 
Interpretation  of  his  monuments  recently  discovered  at 
Thebes,  in  the  Kevue  Archeologique,  1861,  p.  384,  &c.  For 
Pharaoh  Necho,  see  2  K.  xxiil.  29. 

1  The  Identification  of  Megiddo,  coinciding  as  it  does 
with  the  statements  of  the  Bible,  is  tolerably  certain; 
but  at  present  as  much  can  hardly  be  said  of  the  other 
names  in  these  lists.  Not  only  docs  the  agreement  of  the 
names  appear  doubtful,  but  the  lists,  as  now  deciphered, 
prissent  an  amount  of  confusion — places  in  the  north  being 
iumbled  up  with  those  in  the  south,  &c.— which  raises  a 
constant  suspicion. 


y  Is.  xx.  1,  as  explained  by  Gesenius,  and  by  Rawlinson 
(ii.  !42,  note). 

1  This  Psalm  Is  also  referred  to  the  hot  and  waterless 
road  of  the  deep  descent  to  Jericho  and  the  Jordan.  See 
OLIVES,  MOUNT  OF,  p.  624  a. 

a  Stanley  (S.  &  P.  139)— not  prone  to  exaggerate  colonr 
(comp.  87,  "  Petra '') — speaks  of  it  as  "  a  blaze  of  scarlet." 

t>  "  Rounded  swelling  musses  like  huge  bubbles,"  says 
M  r.  Seddon  the  painter  (p.  122).  "  Each  one  uglier  than  JU 
neighbour  "  (Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  97).  See  also  the  descrip 
tion  of  Kussegger  the  geologist,  in  Ritter,  Jordan,  495. 

«  "  Often  looking  as  if  burnt  in  the  kiln "  (Anderson. 


668 


PALESTINE 


and  give  a  singularly  dry  and  slovenly  look  to  the 
fields.  The  general  absence  of  fences  in  the  valleys 
does  not  render  them  less  desolate  to  an  English  eye, 
r.nd  where  a  fence  is  now  and  then  encountered,  it  is 
either  a  stone  wall  trodden  down  and  dilapidated,  or 
a  hedge  of  the  prickly-pear  cactus,  gaunt,  irregular, 
and  ugly,  without  being  picturesque.  Often  the 
track  rises  and  falls  for  miles  together  over  the 
edges  of  the  white  strata  upturned  into  almost  a 
vertical  *  position  ;  or  over  sheets  of  bare  rock 
spread  out  like  flagstones,6  and  marked  with  fissures 
which  have  all  the  i-egularitjr  of  artificial  joints ; 
or  alcng  narrow  channels,  through  which  the  feet 
of  centuries  of  travellers  have  with  difficulty  re 
tained  their  hold  on  the  steep  declivities ;  or  down 
flights  of  irregular  steps  hewn  or  worn  in  the  solid 
rock  of  the  ravine,  and  strewed  thick  with  innu 
merable  loose f  stones.  Even  the  grey  villages — 
always  on  the  top  or  near  the  top  of  the  hills — do 
but  add  to  the  dreariness  of  the  scene  by  the  forlorn 
look  which  their  flat  roofs  and  absence  of  windows 
present  to  a  European  eye,  and  by  the  poverty  and 
ruin  so  universal  among  them.  At  Jerusalem 
this  reaches  its  climax,  and  in  the  leaden  ashy  hue 
which  overspreads,  for  the  major  part  of  the  year, 
much  of  the  landscape  immediately  contiguous  to 
the  city,  and  which  may  well  be  owing  to  the  de'bris  * 
of  its  successive  demolitions,  there  is  something  un 
speakably  affecting.  The  solitude  which  reigns 
throughout  most  of  these  hills  and  valleys  is  also 
very  striking.  "  For  miles  and  miles  there  is  often 
no  appearance  of  life  except  the  occasional  goat 
herd  on  the  hill-side,  or  gathering  of  women  at  the 
wells."  h 

To  the  west  and  north-west  of  the  highlands, 
where  the  sea  breezes  are  felt,  there  is  considerably 
more  vegetation.  The  Wady  es-Sumt  derives  its 
name  from  the  acacias  which  line  its  sides.  In  the 
«ftne  neighbourhood  olives  abound,  and  give  the 
country  "  almost  a  wooded  appearance "  (Rob.  ii. 
21,  22).  The  dark  grateful  foliage  of  the  butm,  or 
terebinth,  is  frequent ;  and  one  of  these  trees, 
perhaps  the  largest  in  Palestine,  stands  a  few 
minutes'  ride  from  the  ancient  Socho  (ib.  222). 
About  ten  miles  north  of  this,  near  the  site  of  the 
ancient  Kirjath-jearim,  the  "  city  of  forests,"  are 
some  thickets  of  pine  (snober)  and  laurel  (kebkdb), 
which  Tobler  compares  with  European  woods  (3tte 
Wanderung,  178). 

11.  Hitherto  we  have  spoken  of  the  central  and 
northern  portions  of  Judaea.  Its  eastern  portion — a 
tract  some  9  or  10  miles  in  width  by  about  35  in 
length — which  intervenes  between  the  centre  and 
the  abrupt  descent  to  the  Dead  Sea,  is  far  more  wild 
and  desolate,  and  that  not  for  a  portion  of  the  year 
only,  but  throughout  it.'  This  must  have  been 
always  what  it  is  now — an  uninhabited  desert, 
because  uninhabitable ;  "  a  bare  arid  wilderness  ;  an 
endless  succession  of  shapeless  yellow  and  ash- 

a  As  at  Beit-ur  (Beth-horon). 

*  As    south    of    Beitin    (Bethel),    and    many    other 
places. 

'  As  in  the  Wady  Aly,  1  miles  west  of  Jerusalem.  See 
Beamout's  description  of  this  route  in  his  Diary  of  a 
Journey,  &c.  i.  192. 

f  See  JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  p.  988  a.  The  same  remark 
will  be  found  in  Seddon's  Memoir,  198. 

fc  Stanley,  S.  &  I'.lll. 

•  Even  on  the  8th  January,  De  Saulcy  found  no  water. 

k  Van  de  Velde,  .S'.vn'a  >t-  I'al.  ii.  99 ;  and  see  the  same 
(till  more  forcibly  stated  on  p.  101 ;  and  a  graphic  descrip 
tion  by  Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  102, 103;  127,  128.  The  cha- 


PALESTINE 

coloured  hills,  without  grass  or  shrubs,  without 
water,  and  almost k  without  life," — even  without 
ruins,  with  the  rare  exceptions  of  Masada,  and  a 
solitary  watch-tower  or  two. 

1 2.  No  descriptive  sketch  of  this  j>art  of  the  coun 
try  can  be  complete  which  does  not  allude  to  the 
caverns,  characteristic  of  all  limestone  districts,  but 
here  existing  in  astonishing  numbers.     Every  hilj 
and  ravine  is  pierced  with  them,  some  very  large 
and  of  curious  formation — perhaps  partly  natural, 
partly  artificial — others  mere  grottos.      Many  of 
them  are  connected  with  most  important  and  inte 
resting  events  of  the  ancient  history  of  the  country. 
Especially  is  this  true  of  the  district  now  under 
consideration.   Machpelah,  Makkedah,  Adullam,  En- 
gedi,  names  inseparably  connected  with  the  lives, 
adventures,  and  deaths  of  Abraham,  Joshua,  David, 
and  other  Old  Testament  worthies,  are  all  within  the 
small  circle  of  the  territory  of  Judaea.     Moreover, 
there  is  perhaps  hardly  one  of  these  caverns,  however 
small,  which  has  not  at  some  time  or  other  furnished 
a  hiding-place  to  some  ancient  Hebrew  from  the 
sweeping  incursions  of  Philistine  or  Amalekite.    For 
the  bearing  which  the  present  treatment  of  many  of 
the  caverns  has  on  the  modern  religious  aspect  of 
Palestine,  and  for  the  remarkable  symbol   which 
they  furnish  of  the  life  of  Israel,  the  reader  must  bf 
referred  to  a  striking  passage  in  Sinai  and  Palestine 
(ch.  ii.  x.  3).    [CAVE.] 

13.  The  bareness  and  dryness  which  prevails  more 
or  less  in  Judaea  is  owing  partly  to  the  absence  of 
wood  (see  below),  partly  to  its  proximity  to  the 
desert,  and  partly  to  a  scarcity  of  water,  arising 
from  its  distance  from  the  Lebanon.     The  abun 
dant  springs  which  form  so  delightful  a  feature  of 
the   countiy  further   north,  and  many  of  which 
continue  to  flow  even  after  the  hottest  summers, 
are   here   very  rarely  met  with  after   the   rainy 
season  is  over,  and  their  place  is  but  poorly  supplied 
by  the  wells,  themselves  but  few  in  number,  bored 
down  into  the  white   rock  of  the  universal  sub 
stratum,  and  with  mouths  so  narrow  and  so  care 
fully  closed  that  they  may  be  easily  passed  without 
notice  by  travellers  unaccustomed  to  the  country." 
[WELLS.] 

14.  But  to  this  discouraging  aspect  there  are 
happily  some  important  exceptions.     The  valley  of 
Urtds,  south  of  Bethlehem,  contains  springs  which 
in  abundance  and  excellence  rival  even  those  of  Na- 
blus ;  the  huge  "  Pools  of  Solomon  "  are  enough  to 
supply  a  district  for  many  miles  round  them  ;  and 
the  cultivation  now  going  on  in  that  neighbourhood 
shows  what  might  be  done  with  a  soil  which  re 
quires  only  irrigation  and  a  moderate  amount  of 
labour  to  evoke  a  boundless  produce.    At  Bethlehem 
and  Mar  Ely&s,  too,  and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
Convent  of  the  Cross,  and  especially  ijear  Hebron, 
there  are  excellent  examples  of  what  can  be  done 
with  vineyards,  and  plantations  of  olives  and  fig- 


racter  of  th«  upper  part  of  the  district,  to  the  S.  K.  of  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  is  well  seized  by  Mr.Seddon:  "A  wilder 
ness  of  mountain-tops.  In  some  places  tossed  up  like  waves 
of  mud,  in  others  wrinkled  over  with  ravines,  like  models 
made  of  crumpled  broicn  paper,  the  nearer  ones  whitish, 
strewed  with  rocks  and  bushes  "  (Memoir,  204). 

m  There  is  no  adequate  provision  here  or  elsewhere  in 
Palestine  (except  perhaps  in  Jerusalem)  for  catching  and 
preserving  the  water  which  falls  In  the  heavy  rains  ol 
winter  and  spring :  a  provision  easily  made,  and  found  tu 
answer  admirably  in  countries  similarly  circumstanced, 
such  as  Malta  and  Bermuda,  where  the  rains  furnish  almost 
the  whole  water  supply 


PALESTINE 

trees.  And  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  during 
the  limited  time  when  the  plains  and  bottoms  are 
Dovered  with  waving  crops  of  green  or  golden  corn, 
and  when  the  naked  rocks  are  shrouded  in  that 
brilliant  covering  of  flowers  to  which  allusion  has 
a.readv  been  made,  the  appearance  of  things  must 
be  far  more  inviting  than  it  is  during  that  greater 
portion  of  the  year  which  elapses  after  the  harvest, 
and  which,  as  being  the  more  habitual  aspect  of  the 
scene,  has  been  dwelt  upon  above. 

15.  It  is  obvious  that  in  the  ancient  days  of  the  na 
tion,  when  Judah  and  Benjamin  possessed  the  teeming 
population  indicated  in  the  Bible,  the  condition  and 
aspect  of  the  country  must  have  been  very  different. 
Of  this  there  are  not  wanting  sure  evidences.    There 
is  no  country  in  which  the  ruined  towns  bear  so  large 
a  proportion  to  those  still  existing.     Hardly  a  hill 
top  of  the  many  within  sight  that  is  not  covered 
with  vestiges  of  some  fortress  or  city."     That  this 
numerous  population  knew  how  most  effectually  to 
cultivate  their  rocky  territory,   is  shewn  by  the 
remains  of  their  ancient  terraces,  which  constantly 
meet  the  eye,   the  only   mode   of  husbanding   so 
scanty  a  coating  of  soi!,  and  preventing  its  being 
washed  by  the  torrents  into  the  valleys.     These 
frequent  remains  enable  the  traveller  to  form  an 
idea  of  the  look  of  the  landscape  when  they  were 
Kept  up.     But,  besides  this,  forests  appear  to  have 
stood  in  many  parts  of  Judaea0  until  the  repeated 
invasions   and   sieges   caused    their   fall,    and   the 
wretched  government  of  the  Turks  prevented  their 
reinstatement ;  and  all  this  vegetation  must  have 
reacted  on  the  moisture  of  the  climate,  and,  by  pre 
serving  the  water  in  many  a  ravine  and  natural 
reservoir  where  now  it  is  rapidly  dried  by  the  fierce 
sun  of  the  early  summer,  must  have  influenced  mate 
rially  the  look  and  the  resources  of  the  countiy. 

16.  Advancing  northwards  from  Judaea  the  coun 
try  becomes  gradually  more  open  and  pleasant.  Plains 
of  good  soil  occur  between  the  hills,  at  first  small,' 
but  afterwards  comparatively  large.     In  some  cases 
(such  as  the  Mukhna,  which  stretches  away  from  the 
feet  of  Gerizim  for  several  miles  to  the  south  and 
east)  these  would  be  remarkable  anywhere.     The 
hills  assume  here  a  more  varied  aspect  than  in  the 
southern  districts,  springs  are  more  abundant  and 
more  permanent,  until  at  last,  when  the  district  of 
the  Jebel  Nablus  is  reached  —  the  ancient  Mount 
Ephraim — the  traveller  encounters  an  atmosphere 
and  an  amount  of  vegetation  and  water  which,  if 
not  so  transcendently  lovely  as  the  representations  of 
enthusiastic  travellers  would  make  it,  is  yet  greatly 
superior  to  anything  he  has  met  with  in  Judaea, 
and  even  sufficient  to  recall  much  of  the  scenery  of 
the  West. 

17.  Perhaps  the  Springs  are  the  only  objects  which 
in  themselves,  and  apart  from  their  associations,  really 
strike  an  Eng.ish  traveller  with  astonishment  and 
admiration.     Such  glorious  fountains   as  those  of 
Ain-ja/ud  or  tne  Has  el-Mukatta,  where  a  great 
body  of  the  clearest  water  wells  silently  but  swiftly 
out  from  deep  blue  recesses  worn  in  the  foot  of  a 
low  cliff  of  limestone  rock,  and  at  once  forms  a  con 
siderable  stream — or  as  that  of  Tell  el-Kady,  eddying 
forth  from  the  base  of  a  lovely  wooded  mound  into 
a  wide,  deep,  and  limpid  pool — or  those  of  Banias 
*ud  Fijeh,  where  a  large  river  leaps  headlong  foam- 

B  Stanley,  S.  dc  P.  117,  where  the  lessons  to  be  gathered 
from  these  ruins  of  so  many  successive  nations  and  races 
are  admirably  drawn  out. 

0  For  a  list  of  these,  see  FOREST. 

f  That  at  the  northern  foot  of  Neby  Ssmw-l,  out  of 


PALESTINE 


669 


ing  and  roaring  from  its  cave — or  even  as  that  cl 
Jenin,  bubbling  upwards  from  the  level  ground — are 
very  rarely  to  be  met  with  out  of  irregular,  rocky, 
mountainous  countries,  and  being  such  unusu»i 
sights  can  hardly  be  looked  on  by  the  tmvelkt 
without  surprise  and  emotion.  But,  added  to  this 
their  natural  impressiveness,  there  is  the  consider 
ation  of  the  prominent  part  which  so  many  of  these 
springs  have  played  in  the  history.  Even  the  caverns 
are  not  more  characteristic  of  Palestine,  or  oftener 
mentioned  in  the  accounts  both  of  the  great  national 
crises  and  of  more  ordinary  transactions.  It  is 
sufficient  here  to  name  En-hakkore,  En-gedi,  Gihon, 
and,  in  this  particular  district,  the  spring  of  Harod, 
the  fountain  of  Jezreel,  En-dor,  and  En-gannim, 
reserving  a  fuller  treatment  of  the  subject  for  the 
special  head  of  SPRINGS. 

18.  The  valleys  which  lead  down  from  the  upper 
level  in  this  district  to  the  valley  of  the  Jordan, 
and  the  mountains  through  which  they  descend, 
are  also  a  great  improvement  on  those  which  form 
the  eastern  portion  of  Judah,   and  even  of  Ben 
jamin.      The  valleys   are   (as    already   remarked) 
less  precipitous,  because  the  level  from  which  they 
start  in  their  descent  is  lower,  while  that  of  the 
Jordan  valley  is  higher ;  and  they  have  lost  that 
savage    character   which    distinguishes    the    naked 
clefts  of  the  Wadys  Suweinit  and  Kelt,  of  the  Ain- 
jidy  or  Zuweirah,  and  have  become  wider  and  shal 
lower,  swelling  out  here  and  there  into  basins,  and 
containing  much   land  under  cultivation  more  01 
less  regular.     Fine  streams  run  through  many  ol 
these  valleys,  in  which  a  considerable  body  of  water 
is  found  even  after  the  hottest  and  longest  summers, 
their  banks  hidden  by  a  thick  shrubbery  of  oleanders 
and  other  flowering  trees, — truly  a  delicious  sight, 
and  one  most  rarely  seen  to  the  south  of  Jerusalem, 
or  within  many  miles   to   the  north  of  it.     The 
mountains,  though  bare  of  wood  and  but  partially 
cultivated,    have   none   of    that    arid,   worn   look 
which  renders  those  east  of  Hebron,  and  even  those 
between  Mukhmas  and  Jericho,  so  repulsive.     In 
fact  the  eastern  district  of  the  Jebel  Nablus  con 
tains  some  of  the  most  fertile  and  valuable  spots  in 
Palestine.1! 

19.  Hardly  less  rich  is  the  extensive  region  which 
lies  north-west  of  the  city  of  Nablus,  between  it 
and  Carmel,   in  which   the  mountains   gradually 
break  down  into  the  Plain  of  Sharon.     This  has 
been  very  imperfectly  explored,  but  it  is  spoken  of 
as  extremely  fertile — huge  fields  of  corn,  with  occa 
sional  tracts  of  wood,  recalling  the  county  of  Kent* — 
hut  mostly  a  continued  expanse  of  sloping  downs. 

20.  But  with  all  its  richness,  and  all  its  advance  oc 
the  southern  part  of  the  country,  there  is  a  strange 
dearth  of  natural  wood  about  this  central  district. 
Olive-trees  are  indeed  to  be  found  everywhere,  but 
they  are  artificially  cultivated  for  their  fruit,  and  th« 
olive  is  not  a  tree  which  adds  to  the  look  of  a  landscape. 
A  few  caroobs  are  also  met  with  in  such  richer  spots 
as  the  valley  of  Nablus.     But  of  all  natural  non- 
fruit-bearing  trees  there  is  a  singular  dearth.     It  is 
this  which  makes  the  wooded  sides  of  Carmel  and  the 
parklike  scenery  of  the  adjacent  slopes  and  plains  so 
remarkable.     True,  when  compared  with  European 
timber,  the  trees  are  but  small,  but  their  abundance 
is  in  strong  contrast  with  the  absolute  dearth  of 


which  rise  the  gentle  hills  which  bear  the  ruins  of  Gibcon, 
Neballat,  &c.,  is  perhaps  the  first  of  these  in  the  advene* 
from  south  to  north. 

1  Robinson,  B.  R.  lii.  304. 

'  Lord  Lindsay  (Rolin's  ed.),  p.  256. 


*70  PALESTINE 

wood  in  the  neighbouring  mountains.  Carmel  is 
always  mentioned  by  the  ancient  prophets  and  poets 
as  remarkable  for  its  luxuriance  ;  and,  as  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  it  has  changed  its  character, 
we  have,  in  the  expressions  referred  to,  pretty  con 
clusive  evidence  that  the  look  of  the  adjoining  district 
of  Ephraim  was  not  very  different  then  from  what  it 
is  now. 

21.  No  sooner,  however,  is  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon 
passed,  than  a  considerable  improvement  is  per 
ceptible.    The  low  hills  which  spread  down  from  the 
mountains  of  Galilee,  and  form  the  bamer  between 
the  plains  of  Akka  and  Esdraelon,  are  covered  with 
timber,  of  modemte  size,  it  is  true,  but  of  thick 
vigorous  growth,  and  pleasant  to  the  eye.    Eastward 
of  these  hills  rises  the  round  mass  of  Tabor,  dark 
with  its  copses  of  oak,  and  set  off  by  contrast  with  the 
bare  slopes  of  Jebel  ed-Duhy  (the  so-called  "  Little 
Hermon  ")  and  the  white  hills  of  Nazareth.    North 
of  Tabor  and  Nazareth  is  the  plain  of  el-Bvttauf, 
an  upland  tract  hitherto  very  imperfectly  described, 
but  apparently  of  a  similar  nature  to  Esdraelon, 
Plough  much  more  elevated.      It  runs  from  east 
to  west,  in  which  direction  it  is  perhaps  ten  miles 
long,   by   two    miles   wide  at   its   broadest  part. 
Jt  is  described  as  extremely  fertile,  and  abound 
ing  in  vegetation.      Beyond   this  the  amount  of 
natural  growth  increases  at  every  step,  until  to 
wards  the  north  the  country  becomes  what  even 
ifi  the  West  would  be  considered  as  well  timbered. 
The  centre  part — the  watershed  between  the  upper 
end  of  the  Jordan  valley  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
Mediterranean  on  the  other,  is  a  succession  of  swell 
ing  hills,  covered  with  oak  and  terebinth,  its  occa 
sional  ravines  thickly  clothed  in  addition  with  maple, 
arbutus,  sumach,  and  other  trees.     So  abundant  is 
the  timber  that  large  quantities  of  it  are  regularly 
carried  to  the  sea-coast  at  Tyre,  and  there  shipped 
as  fuel  to  the  towns  on  the  coast  (Rob.  ii.  450). 
The  general  level  of  the  country  is  not  quite  equal 
to  that  of  Judaea  and  Samaria,  but  on  the  other 
hand  there  are  points  which  reach  a  greater  eleva 
tion    than    anything  in  the    south,    such    as   the 
prominent  group  of  Jebel  Jwmuk,  and    perhaps 
TibrAn — and  which  have  all  the  greater  effect  from 
the  surrounding  country  being  lower.     Tibnin  lies 
about  the  centre  of  the  district,  and  as  far  north  as 
this  the  valleys  run  east  and  west  of  the  watershed, 
but  above  it  they  run  northwards  into  the  Litiny, 
which  cleaves  the  country  from  east  to  west,  and 
forms   the   northern   border   of  the  district,   and 
indeed  of  the  Holy  Land  itself. 

22.  The  notices  of  this  romantic  district  in  the 
Bible  are  but  scanty ;  in  fact  till  the  date  of  the 
New  Testament,  when  it  had  acquired  the  name  of 
Galilee,  it  may  be  said,  for  all  purposes  of  history, 
to  be  hardly  mentioned.  And  even  in  the  New  Tes 
tament  times  the  interest  is  confined  to  a  very  small 
portion — the  south  and  south-west  corner  contain 
ing  Nazareth,  Cana,  and  Nain,  on  the  confines  of 
Esdraelon,  Capernaum,  Tiberias,  and  Gennesareth, 
on  the  margin  of  the  Lake.' 

In  the  great  Roman  conquest,  or  rather  destruc 
tion,  of  Galilee,  which  preceded  the  fall  of  Jerusalem, 
the  contest  penetrated  but  a  short  distance  into  the 
interior.  Jotapata  and  Giscala — neither  of  them 
caore  than  12  miles  fix>m  the  Lake — are  the  farthest 


'  The  associations  of  Mt.  Tabor,  dim  as  they  are,  belong 
to  the  Old  Testament :  for  there  can  be  very  little  doubt 
that  it  was  BO  mere  the  scene  of  the  Transfiguration  than 
the  Mount  o^OHve*  was.  [See  vol.  ii.  «26o.] 


PALESTINE 

points  to  which  we  know  of  the  struggle  extending 
in  that  wooded  and  impenetrable  district.  One  ol 
the  earliest  accounts  we  possess  describes  it  as  a 
land  "quiet  and  secure"  (Judg.  xviii.  27).  There 
is  no  thoroughfare  through  it,  nor  any  inducement 
to  make  one.  May  there  not  be,  retired  in  the  re 
cesses  of  these  woody  hills  and  intricate  valleys, 
many  a  village  whose  inhabitants  have  lived  on 
from  age  to  age  undisturbed  by  the  invasions  and  de 
populations  with  which  Israelites,  Assyrians,  Romans, 
and  Moslems  have  successively  visited  the  more  open 
and  accessible  parts  of  the  country  ? 

23.  From  the  present  appearance  of  this  district 
we    may,   with    some    allowances,  .perhaps   gain 
an    idea   of   what    the    more    southern    portions 
of  the  central  highlands  were  during  the  earlier 
periods  in  the  history.      There  is  little  material 
difference   in  the   natural  conditions   of  the  two 
regions.     Galilee  is  slightly  nearer  the  springs  and 
the  cool  breezes  of  the  snow-covered  Lebanon,  and 
further  distant  from  the  hot  siroccos  of  the  southern 
deserts,  and  the  volcanic  nature  of  a  portion  of  its 
soil  is  more   favourable   to   vegetation   than  the 
chalk  of  Judaea;  but  these  circumstances,  though 
they  would   tell   to  a  certain  degree,  would  not 
produce   any  very  marked  differences  in  the  ap 
pearance  of  the  country  provided  other  conditions 
were  alike.      It   therefore   seems  fair   to  believe 
that   the  hills  of  Shecherc,  Bethel,  and  Hebron, 
when  Abram  first  wandered  over  them,  were  not 
very  inferior  to  those  of  the  Belad  Besharah  or 
the  Belad  el-Buttauf.     The  timber  was  probably 
smaller,   but   the  oak-groves1   of  Moreh,   Mamre, 
Tabor,"  must  have  consisted  of  large  trees ;  and 
the    narrative    implies    that    the    "  forests"    or 
"  woods "  of  Hareth,  Ziph,  and  Bethel  were  more 
than  mere  scrub. 

24.  The  causes  of  the  present  bareness  of  the  face 
of  the  country  are  two,  which  indeed  can  hardly 
be  separated.     The  first  is  the  destruction  of  the 
timber  in  that  long  series  of  sieges  and  invasions 
which  began  with  the  invasion  of  Shishak  (B.C. 
circa  970)  and  has  not  yet  come  to  an  end.     This, 
by  depriving  the  soil  and  the  streams  of  shelter 
from   the  burning  sun,  at  once  made,  as  it  inva 
riably  does,  the  climate  more  arid  than  before,  and 
doubtless  diminished  the  rainfall.     The  second  is 
the  decay  of  the  terraces  necessary  to  retain  the 
soil  on  the  steep  slopes  of  the  round  hills.     This 
decay  is  owing  to  the  general  unsettleinent  and 
insecurity  which  have  been  the  lot  of  this  poor 
little  country  almost   ever  since  the  Babylonian 
conquest.      The    terraces   once   gone,    there   was 
nothing  to  prevent  the  soil  which  they  supported 
being  washed  away  by  the  heavy  rains  of  winter ; 
and  it  is  hopeless  to  look  for  a  renewal  of  the  wood, 
or  for  any  real  improvement  in  the  general  fa<« 
of  the  country,  until    they   have   been    first   re 
established.      This  cannot  happen    to   any  extent 
until  a  just  and  firm  government  shall  give  con 
fidence  to  the  inhabitants. 

25.  Few  things  are  a  more  constant  source  of 
surprise  to  the  stranger  in  the  Holy  Land  than  the 
manner   in  which   the  hill  tops  are,  throughout, 
selected  for  habitation.     A  town  in  n  valley  is  a 
rare  exception.     On  the  other  hand  scarce  a  single 
eminence  of  the  multitude  always  in  sight  but  is 


<  In  the  Authorised  Version  rendered  inaccurately 
"  plain." 

•  Tabor  (1  Sam.  x.  3)  has  no  connexion  with  the  moafit 
of  the  same  name. 


PALESTINE 

crowned  with  its  city  or  village,*  inhabited  or  in 
ruins,  often  so  placed  as  if  not  accessibility  but 
inaccessibility  had  been  the  object  of  its  builders." 
And  indeed  such  was  their  object.  These  groups 
of  naked  forlorn  structures,  piled  irregularly  one 
over  the  other  on  the  curve  of  the  hill-top,  their 
rectangular  outline,  flat  roofs,  and  blank  walls,  sug 
gestive  to  the  Western  mind  rather  of  fastness  than 
of  peaceful  habitation,  surrounded  by  filthy  heaps 
of  the  rubbish  of  centuries,  approached  only  by  the 
narrow  winding  path,  worn  white,  on  the  grey  or 
brown  breast  of  the  hill — are  the  lineal  descendants, 
if  indeed  they  do  not  sometimes  contain  the  actual 
remains,  of  the  "  fenced  cities,  great  and  walled  up 
to  heaven,"  which  are  so  frequently  mentioned  in 
the  records  of  the  Israelite  conquest.  They  bear 
witness  now,  no  less  surely  than  they  did  even  in 
that  early  age,  and  as  they  have  done  through  all 
the  ravages  and  conquests  of  thirty  centuries,  to 
the  insecurity  of  the  country  —  to  the  continual 
risk  of  sudden  plunder  and  destruction  incurred 
by  those  rash  enough  to  take  up  their  dwelling 
in  the  plp.in.  Another  and  hardly  less  valid 
reason  for  the  practice  is  furnished  in  the  terms 
of  our  Lords  well  known  apologue, — namely,  the 
treacherous  nature  of  the  loose  alluvial  "  sand " 
of  the  plain  under  the  sudden  rush  of  the  winter 
torrents  from  the  neighbouring  hills,  as  compared 
with  the  safety  and  firm  foundation  attainable  by 
building  on  the  naked  "  rock  "  of  the  hills  them 
selves  (Matt.  vii.  24-27). 

26.  These  hill-towns  were  not  what  gave  the 
Israelites  their  main  difficulty  in  the  occupation  of 
the  country.  Wherever  strength  of  arm  and  fleetness 
of  foot  availed,  there  those  hardy  warriors,  fierce  as 
lions,  sudden  and  swift  as  eagles,  sure-footed  and 
fleet  as  the  wild  deer  on  the  hills  (1  Chr.  xii.  8  ; 
2  Sam.  i.  23,  ii.  18),  easily  conquered.  It  was  in 
the  plains,  where  the  horses  and  chariots  of  the 
Canaauites  and  Philistines  had  space  to  manoeuvre, 
that  they  failed  in  dislodging  the  aborigines. 
"  Judah  drave  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountain, 
but  could  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  valley, 
because  they  had  chariots  of  iron  .  .  .  neither  could 
Manasseh  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Bethshean  . . . 
nor  Megiddo,"  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  ..."  nor 
could  Ephraim  drive  out  the  Canaanites  that  dwelt 
in  Gezer,"  on  the  maritime  plain  near  Itamleh  .  .  . 
"  nor  could  Asher  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Ac- 
cho"  .  .  .  "and  the  Amorites  forced  the  children  of 
Dan  into  the  mountain,  for  they  would  not  suffer 
them  to  come  down  into  the  valley  "  (Judg.  i.  19- 
35).  Thus  in  this  case  the  ordinary  conditions  of 
conquest  were  reversed — the  conquerors  took  the 
hills,  the  conquered  kept  the  plains.  To  a  people 
so  exclusive  as  the  Jew«  there  must  have  been  a  con 
stant  satisfaction  in  the  elevation  and  inaccessibility 
of  their  highland  regions.  This  is  evident  in  every 
page  of  their  literature,  which  is  tinged  throughout 
with  a  highland  colouring.  The  "  mountains  "  were 
to  "  bring  peace,"  the  "  little  hills,  justice  to  the 
people :"  when  plenty  came,  the  corn  was  to  flourish 
on  the  "  top  of  the  mountains"  (Ps.  Ixxii.  3,  16). 
In  like  manner  the  mountains  were  to  be  joyful 
before  Jehovah  when  He  came  to  judge  His  people 


PALESTINE 


671 


(xcviii.  8).  What  gave  its  keenest  sting  to  tht 
Babylonian  conquest,  was  the  consideration  tbat 
the  "  mountains  of  Israel,""  the  "  ancient  high 
places,"  were  become  a  "  prey  and  aderision ;"  while, 
on  the  other  hand,  one  of  the  most  joyful  circum 
stances  of  the  restoration  is,  that  the  mountains 
"  shall  yield  their  fruit  a.5  before,  and  be  settled 
after  their  old  estates"  (Ezek.  xxxvi.  1,  8,  11) 
But  it  is  needless  to  multiply  instances  of  this, 
which  pervades  the  writings  of  the  psalmists  and 
prophets  in  a  truly  remarkable  manner,  and  must 
be  familiar  to  every  student  of  the  Bible.  (See 
the  citations  in  Sinai  fy  Pal.  ch.  ii.  viii.)  Nor 
was  it  unacknowledged  by  the  surrtunding  heathen. 
We  have  their  own  testimony  that  in  their  estima 
tion  Jehovah  was  the  "  God  of  the  mountains  " 
(1  K.  xx.  28),  and  they  showed  their  appreciation 
of  the  fact  by  fighting  (as  already  noticed),  when 
possible,  in  the  lowlands.  The  contrast  is  strongly 
brought  out  in  the  repeated  expression  of  the  psalmists. 
"  Some,"  like  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines  of  the 
lowlands,  "  put  their  trust  in  chariots  and  some 
in  horses;  but  we" — we  mountaineers,  from  our 
"  sanctuary  "  on  the  heights  of  "  Zion  " — "  will 
remember  the  name  of  Jehovah  our  God,"  "  the 
God  of  Jacob  our  father,"  the  shepherd-warrior, 
whose  only  weapons  were  sword  and  bow — the  God 
who  is  now  a  high  fortress  for  us — "  at  whose  com 
mand  both  chariot  and  horse  are  fallen,"  "  who 
burneth  the  chariots  in  the  fire"  (Ps.  xx.  1,  7. 
xlvi.  7-11,  Ixxvi.  2,  6). 

27.  But  the  hills  were  occupied  by  other  edifices 
besides  the  "  fenced  cities."     The  tiny  white  domes 
which  stand  perched  here  and  there  on  the  summits 
of  the  eminences,  and  mark  the   holy  ground  in 
which  some  Mahometan  saint  is  resting — sometimes 
standing  alone,   sometimes    near    the   village,    in 
either  case  surrounded  with  a  rude  inclosure,  and 
overshadowed  with  the  grateful  shade  and  pleasant 
colour  of  terebinth  or  caroob— these  are  the  suc 
cessors  of   the  "  high  places "   or   sanctuaries   so 
constantly  denounced  by  the  prophets,  and  which 
were  set  up  "  on  every  high  hill  and  under  eveiy 
green  tree"  (Jer.  ii.  20;  Ez.  vi.  13). 

28.  From  the  mountainous  structure  of  the  Holy 
Land  and  the  extraordinary  variations  in  the  level 
of  its  different  districts,  arises  a  further  peculiarity 
most  interesting  and  most  characteristic — namely, 
the  extensive  views  of  the  country  which  can  be 
obtained   from   various  commanding  points.     The 
number  of  panoramas  which  present  themselves  to 
the  traveller  in  Palestine  is  truly  remarkable.     To 
speak  of  the  west  of  Jordan  only,  for  east  of  it  all  is 
at  present  more  or  less  unknown — the  prospects  from 
the  height  of  Beni  naim,J  near  Hebron,  from  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  from  Neby  Samwil,  from  Bethel, 
from  Gerizim  or  Ebal,  from  Jenin,  Camiel»  Tabor, 
Safed,  the  Castle  of  Banias,  the  Kvhbet  en-  Nasr 
above  Damascus — are  known  to  many  travellers. 
Their  peculiar  charm  resides  in  their  wide  extent, 
the  number  of  spots  historically  remarkable  which 
are  visible  at  once,  the  limpid  clearness  of  the  air, 
which  brings  the  most  distant  objects  comparatively 
close,  and  the  consideration  that  in  many  cases  the 
feet  must  be  standing  on  the  same  ground,  and  the 


»  The  same  thing  may  be  observed,  though  not  with 
the  same  exclusive  regularity,  in  Provence,  a  country 
which,  In  its  natural  and  artificial  features,  presents  many 
a  likeness  to  Palestine. 

»  Two  such  may  be  named  as  types  of  the  rest, — 
Kuriyet  Jitt  (perhaps  an  ancient  Gath  or  Gitta),  perched 


on  one  of  the  western  spurs  of  the  Jebd  NaMus,  and  de 
scried  high  up  beside  the  road  from  Jaffa  to  Nablw ;  and 
Wezr  or  Alazr,  on  the  absolute  top  of  the  lofty  peaked  h!U, 
at  the  foot  of  which  the  spring  of  Jalud  wnlls  iorth. 
i  Robinson,  Bib.  Bet.  i.  490. 


672 


PALESTINE 


tves  resting  on  the  same  spots  which  have  been 
stood  upon  and  gazed  at  by  the  most  famous  pa 
triarchs,  prophets,  and  heroes,  of  all  the  successive 
ages  in  the  eventful  history  of  the  country.  We 
can  stand  where  Abram  and  Lot  stood  looking  down 
from  Bethel  into  the  Jordan  valley,  when  Lot  chose 
to  go  to  Sodom  and  the  great  destiny  of  the  Hebrew 
people  was  fixed  for  ever ;  *  or  with  Abraham  on 
the  height  near  Hebron  gazing  over  the  gulf  towards 
Sodom  at  the  vast  column  of  smoke  as  it  towered 
aloft  tinged  with  the  rising  sun,  and  wondering 
whether  h  s  kinsman  had  escaped ;  or  with  Gaal 
the  son  of  Ebed  on  Gerizim  when  he  watched  the 
armed  men  steal  along  like  the  shadow  of  the  moun 
tains  on  the  plain  of  the  Mukhna ;  or  with  Deborah 
and  Barak  on  Mount  Tabor  when  they  saw  the  hosts 
of  the  Canaanites  marshalling  to  their  doom  on  the 
undulations  of  Esdraelon ;  or  with  Elisha  on  Carmel 
looking  across  the  same  wide  space  towards  Shunem, 
and  recognizing  the  bereaved  mother  as  she  urged  her 
course  over  the  flat  before  him  ;  or,  in  later  times, 
with  Mohammed  on  the  heights  above  Damascus, 
when  he  put  by  an  earthly  for  a  heavenly  paradise  ; 
or  with  Kichard  Coeur  de  Lion  on  Neby  Samwil  when 
he  refused  to  look  at  the  towers  of  the  Holy  City, 
in  the  Deliverance  of  which  he  could  take  no  part. 
These  we  can  see ;  but  the  most  famous  and  the  most 
extensive  of  all  we  cannot  see.  The  view  of  Balaam 
from  Pisgah,  and  the  view  of  Moses  from  the  same 
spot,  we  cannot  realize,  because  the  locality  of 
Pisgah  is  not  yet  accessible. 

These  views  are  a  feature  in  which  Palestine  is 
perhaps  approached  by  no  other  country,  certainly 
by  no  country  whose  history  is  at  all  equal  in  im 
portance  to  the  world.  Great  as  is  their  charm 
when  viewed  as  mere  landscapes,  their  deep  and 
abiding  interest  lies  in  their  intimate  connexion  with 
the  history  and  the  remarkable  manner  in  which 
they  corroborate  its  statements.  By  its  constant  re 
ference  to  localities — mountain,  rock,  plain,  river, 
tree — the  Bible  seems  to  invite  examination  ;  and, 
indeed,  it  is  only  by  such  examination  that  we  can 
appreciate  its  minute  accuracy  and  realize  how  far 
its  plain  matter  of  feet  statements  of  actual  occur 
rences,  to  actual  persons,  in  actual  places — how  far 
these  raise  its  records  above  the  unreal  and  un 
connected  rhapsodies,  and  the  vain  repetitions,  of 
the  sacred  books  of  other  religions.' 

29.  A  few  words  must  be  said  in  general  de 
scription  of  the  maritime  lowland,  which  it  will  be 
remembered  intervenes  between  the  sea  and  the 
highlands,  and  of  which  detailed  accounts  will  be 
found  under  the  heads  of  its  great  divisions. 

This  region,  only  slightly  elevated  above  the  level 
of  the  Mediterranean,  extends  without  interruption 
from  el-Artsh,  south  of  Gaza,  to  Mount  Carmel.  It 
naturally,  divides  itself  into  two  portions,  each  of 
about  half  its  length: — the  lower  one  the  wider; 
the  upper  one  the  narrower.  The  lower  half  is  the 
Plain  of  the  Philistines — Philistia,  or,  as  the  Hebrews 
called  it,  the  Shefelah  or  Lowland.  [SEPHELA.] 
The  upper  half  is  the  Sharon  or  Saron  of  the  Old 
and  Kew  Testaments,  the  "  Forest  country  "  of  Jc- 
sephus  and  the  LXX.  (Josephus,  Ant.  xiv.  13,  §3 ; 


PALESTINE 

LXX.  Is.  Ixv.  10).  [SHARON.]  Viewed  ftom  th« 
sea  this  maritime  region  appears  as  a  long  low  coast 
of  white  or  cream-coloured  sand,  its  slight  undula 
tions  rising  occasionally  into  mounds  or  cliffs,  which 
in  one  or  two  places,  such  as  Jaffa  and  Um-khalid, 
almost  aspire  to  the  dignity  of  headlands.  Over 
these  white  undulations,  in  the  farthest  background, 
stretches  the  faint  blue  level  line  of  the  highlands 
of  Judaea  and  Samaria. 

30.  Such  is  its  appearance  from  without.  But 
from  within,  when  traversed,  or  overlooked  from 
some  point  on  those  blue  hills,  such  as  Beit-w  or 
Beit-nettif,  the  prospect  is  very  different. 

The  Philistine  Plain  is  on  an  average  fifteen  or 
sixteen  miles  in  width  from  the  coast  to  the  first 
beginning  of  the  belt  of  hills,  which  forms  the  gra 
dual  approach  to  the  highland  of  the  mountains  of 
Judah.  This  district  of  inferior  hills  contains  many 
places  which  have  been  identified  with  those  named 
in  the  lists  of  the  conquest  as  being  in  the  Plain, 
and  it  was  therefore  probably  attached  originally  to 
the  plain,  and  not  to  the  highland.  It  is  described 
by  modem  travellers  as  a  beautiful  open  country, 
consisting  of  low  calcareous  hills  rising  from  the  allu 
vial  soil  of  broad  arable  valleys,  covered  with  inha 
bited  villages  and  deserted  ruins,  and  clothed  with 
much  natural  shrubbery  and  with  large  plantations 
of  olives  in  a  high  state  of  cultivation  ;  the  whole 
gradually  broadening  down  into  the  wide  expanse  of 
the  plain  b  itself.  The  Plain  is  in  many  parts  almost 
a  dead  level,  in  others  gently  undulating  in  long 
waves;  here  and  there  low  mounds  or  hillocks,  each 
crowned  with  its  villasre,  and  more  rarely  still  a 
hill  overtopping  the  rest,  like  Tell  es-Safieh  or 
Ajhln,  the  seat  of  some  fortress  of  Jewish  or  Ciu- 
sading  times.  The  larger  towns,  as  Gaza  and  Ash- 
dod,  which  stand  near  the  shore,  are  surrounded 
with  huge  groves  of  olive,  sycamore,  and  palm,  as 
in  the  days  of  King  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  23) — 
some  of  them  among  the  most  extensive  in  the 
country.  The  whole  plain  appears  to  consist  of  a 
brown  loamy  soil,  light,  but  rich,  and  almost  with 
out  a  stone.  This  is  noted  as  its  characteristic 
in  a  remarkable  expression  of  one  of  the  leaders  in 
the  Maccabean  wars,  a  great  part  of  which  were 
fought  in  this  locality  (1  Mace.  x.  73).  It  is  to  this 
absence  of  stone  that  the  disappearance  of  its  ancient 
towns  and  villages — so  much  more  complete  than 
in  other  parts  of  the  country — is  to  be  traced. 
The  common  matt-rial  is  brick,  made,  after  th« 
Egyptian  fashion,  of  the  sandy  loam  of  the  plain 
mixed  with  stubble,  and  this  has  been  washed 
away  in  almost  all  cases  by  the  rains  of  successive 
centuries  (Thomson,  563).  It  is  now,  as  it  was 
when  the  Philistines  possessed  it,  one  enormous 
cornfield ;  an  ocean  of  wheat  covers  the  wide  ex 
panse  between  the  hills  and  the  sand  dunes  of  the 
sea-shore,  without  interruption  of  any  kind  —  no 
break  or  hedge,  hardly  even  a  single  olive-tree 
(Thomson,  552;  Van  de  Velde,  ii.  175).  Its  fer 
tility  is  marvellous;  for  the  prodigious  crops  which 
it  raises  are  produced,  and  probably  have  been  pro 
duced  almost  year  by  year  for  the  last  40  cen 
turies,  without  any  of  the  appliances  which  we  fin  3 


«  Stanley,  S.  &  P.  218,  9. 

•  Nothing  can  be  more  instructive  than  »/>  compare  (In 
regard  to  tliis  one  only  of  the  many  point*  in  which  they 
differ)  the  Bible  with  the  Koran.  So  little  ascertainable 
connexion  has  the  Koran  with  the  life  or  career  of  Mo- 
harnmed,  that  It  seems  impossible  to  arrange  it  with  any 
certainty  in  the  order,  real  or  ostensible,  of  its  composition. 


With  the  Bible,  on  the  other  band,  each  buok  belongs  t  j 
a  certain  period.  It  describes  the  persons  of  that  period ; 
the  places  under  the  names  which  they  then  bore,  ace 
with  many  a  note  of  identity  by  which  they  can  often  bb 
still  recognized ;  so  that  it  may  be  said,  almost  without 
exaggeration,  U>  be  the  best  Handbook  to  Palestine. 
*TO>binson,  B'b.  Ret.  ii.  15,  20,  29,  32,  238 

9 


PALESTINE 

necessary  for  success — with  no  manure  beyond  that 
naturally  supplied  by  the  washing  down  of  the  hill- 
torrents- — without  irrigation,  witliont  succession  of 
crops,  and  with  only  the  rudest  method  of  husbandly. 
No  wonder  that  the  Jews  struggled  hard  to  get,  and 
the  Philistines  to  keep  such  a  prize:  no  wonder  that 
the  hosts  of  Egypt  and  Assyria  were  content  to  tra 
verse  and  re-traverse  a  region  where  their  supplies 
Df  corn  were  so  c  abundant  and  so  easily  obtained. 

The  southern  part  of  the  Philistine  Plain,  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Beit  Jibrin,  appears  to  have  been 
covered,  as  late  as  the  sixth  century,  with  a  forest, 
called  the  Forest  of  Gerar;  but  of  this  no  traces  are 
known  now  to  exist  (Procopius  of  Gaza,  Scholia  on 
2  Chr.  xiv.;. 

31.  The  Plain  of  Sharon  is  much  narrower  than 
Phiiistia.     It  is  about  ten  miles  wide  from  the  sea 
to  the  foot  of  the  mountains,  which  are  here  of  a  more 
abrupt  character  than  those  of  Phiiistia,  and  with 
out  the  intermediate  hilly  region  there  occurring. 
At  the  same  time  it  is  more  undulating  and  irregular 
than  the  former,  and  crossed  by  streams  from  the 
central  hills,  some  of  them  of  considerable  size,  and 
containing  water  during  the  whole  year.     Owing 
to  the  general  level  of  the  surface  and  to  the  accu 
mulation  of  sand  on  the  shore,   several  of  these 
streams  spread  out  into  wide  marshes,  which  might 
without  difficulty  be  turned  to  purposes  of  irriga 
tion,  but  in  their  present  neglected  state  form  large 
boggy  places.     The  soil  is  extremely  rich,  varying 
from  bright  red  to  deep  black,  and  producing  enor 
mous  crops  of  weeds  or  grain,  as  the  case  may  be. 
Here  and  there,  on  the  margins  of  the  streams  or 
the  borders  of  the  marshes,  are  large  tracts  of  rank 
meadow,  where  many  a  herd  of  camels  or  cattle 
may  be  seeu  feeding,  as  the  royal  herds  did  in  the 
time  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  26;.     At  its  northern 
end  Sharon  is  narrowed  by  the  low  hills  which  gather 
round  the  western  flanks  of  Carmel,  and  gradually 
encroach  upon  it  until  it  terminates  entirely  against 
the  shoulder  of  the  mountain  itself,  leaving  only  a 
narrow  beach  at  the  foot  of  the  promontory  by  which 
to  communicate  with  the  plain  on  the  north. 

32.  The  tract  of  white  sand  already  mentioned  as 
forming  the  shore  line  of  the  whole  coast,  is  gra 
dually  encroaching  on  this  magnificent  region.     In 
the  south  it  has  buried  Askelon,  and  in  the  north 
between  Caesarea  and  Jaffa  the  dunes  are  said  to  be 
as  much  as  three  miles  wide  and  300  feet  high. 
The  obstruction  which  is  thus  caused  to  the  out 
flow  of  the  streams  has  been  already  noticed.     All 
along  the  edge  of  Sharon  there  are  pools  and  marshes 
due  to  it.     In  some  places  the  sand  is  covered  by  a 
stunted  growth  of  maritime  pines,  the  descendants  of 
the  forests  which  at  the  Christian  em  gave  its  name 
to  this  portion  of  the  Plain,  and  which  seem  to 
have  existed  as  late  as  the  second  crusade  (Vinisauf 
in  Chron.  of  Cms.}.     It  is  probable,  for  the  reasons 
already  stated,  that  the  Jews  never  permanently 
occupied  more  than  a  small  portion  of  this  rich  and 
favoured  region.    Its  principal  towns  were,  it  is  true, 
allotted  to  the  different  tribes  (Josh.  xv.  45-47 ; 
xvi.  3,  Gezer;  xvii.  11,  Dor,  &c.);  but  this  was  in 
autiripation  of  the  intended  conquest  (xiii.   3-6). 
1'ha  live  cities  of  the  Philistines  remained  in  their 

c  Le  grenier  de  la  Syrie  (Due  de  Raguse,  Voyage). 

d  The  Bedouins  from  beyond  Jordan,  whom  Gideon 
repulsed,  destroyed  the  earth  "as  far  as  Gaza;"  i.  e.  they 
filled  the  plain  of  Ksdraelon,  and  overflowed  into  Sharon, 
aud  thence  southwards  to  the  richest  prize  of  the  day. 

•  ThU  district,  called  the  Sahel  Atklit.  between  the  sea 
VOL.  II. 


PALESTINE 


073 


possession  (1  Sam.  v.,  xxi  10,  xxvii.);  a:nl  the 
district  was  regarded  as  one  independent  of  ami 
apart  from  Israel  (xxvii.  2  ;  1  K.  ii.  39 ;  2  K.  viu. 
2,  3).  In  like  manner  Dor  remained  in  the  hand* 
of  the  Canaauites  (Judg.  i.  27),  and  Gezer  in  the 
hands  of  the  Philistines  till  taken  from  them  in 
Solomon's  time  by  his  father-in-law  (1  K.  is.  16). 
We  find  that  towards  the  end  of  the  monarchy  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  was  in  possession  of  Lydd,  Jrmzu, 
Ono,  and  other  places  in  the  plain  (Neh.  xi.  34  ;  2 
Chr.  xxviii.  18)  ;  but  it  was  only  by  a  gradual  pro 
cess  of  extension  from  their  native  hills,  in  the  rougti 
ground  of  which  they  were  safe  from  the  attack  of 
cavalry  and  chariots.  But,  though  the  Jews  never 
had  any  hold  on  the  region,  it  had  its  own  popu 
lation,  and  towns  probably  not  inferior  to  any  in 
Syria.  Both  Gaza  and  Askelon  had  regular  polls 
(majumas) ;  and  there  is  evidence  to  show  that  they 
were  veiy  important  and  verj  large  long  before  the 
fall  of  the  Jewish  monarchy  (Kenrick,  Phoenicia, 
27-29).  Ashdod,  though  on  the  open  plain,  resisted 
for  29  years  the  attack  of  the  whole  Egyptian  force : 
a  similar  attack  to  that  which  reduced  Jerusalem 
without  a  blow  (2  Chr.  xii.),  and  was  sufficient  on 
another  occasion  to  destroy  it  after  a  siege  of  a  year 
and  a  half,  even  when  fortified  by  the  works  of  a 
score  of  successive  monarchs  (2  K.  xxv.  1-3). 

33.  In  the  Roman  times  this  region  was  considered 
the  pride  of  the  country  (£.  J.  i.  29,  §9),  and  some 
of  the  most  important  cities  of  the  province  stood  in 
it — Caesarea,  Antipatris,  Diospolis.  The  one  ancient 
port  of  the  Jews,  the  "  beautiful "  city  of  Joppa, 
occupied  a  position  central  between  the  Shefelah  and 
Sharon.  Roads  led  from  these  various  cities  to  each 
other,  to  Jerusalem,  Neapolis,  and  Sebaste  in  the  in 
terior,  and  to  Ptolemais  and  Gaza  on  the  north  and 
south.  The  commerce  of  Damascus,  and,  beyond  Da 
mascus,  of  Persia  and  India,  passed  this  way  to  Egypt, 
Rome,  and  the  infant  colonies  of  the  west ;  and  that 
traffic  and  the  constant  movement  of  troops  back 
wards  and  forwards  must  have  made  this  plain  one 
of  the  busiest  and  most  populous  regions  of  Syria 
at  the  time  of  Christ.  Now,  Caesarea  is  a  wave- 
washed  ruin ;  Antipatris  has  vanished  both  in  name 
and  substance ;  Diospolis  has  shaken  off  the  appel 
lation  which  it  bore  iu  the  days  of  its  prosperity, 
and  is  a  mere  village,  remarkable  only  for  the  ruin 
of  its  fine  mediaeval  church,  and  for  the  palm-grove 
which  shrouds  it  from  view.  Joppa  alone  main 
tains  a  dull  life,  surviving  solely  because  it  is  the 
nearest  point  at  which  the  sea-going  travellers  from 
the  West  can  approach  Jerusalem.  For  a  few  miles 
above  Jaffa  cultivation  is  still  carried  on,  but  the 
fear  of  the  Binlouins  who  roam  (as  they  always 
have  d  roamed)  over  parts  of  the  plain,  plundering 
all  passers-by,  and  extorting  black  mail  from  the 
wretched  peasants,  has  desolated  a  large  district, 
and  effectually  prevents  it  being  used  any  longer 
as  the  route  for  travellers  from  south  to  north ; 
while  in  the  portions  which  are  free  from  this 
scourge,  the  teeming  soil  itself  is  doomed  to  un 
productiveness  through  the  folly  and  iniquity  of  its 
Turkish  rulers,  whose  exactions  have  driven,  and 
are  driving,  its  industrious  and  patient  inhabitants 
to  remoter  parts  of  the  land." 

and  the  western  flanks  of  Carmel,  has  been  within  a  very 
few  years  reduced  from  being  one  of  the  most  thriving 
and  productive  regions  of  the  country,  as  well  as  one  of  th* 
most  profitable  to  the  government,  to  desolation  and  de» 
sertion,  by  these  wicked  exactions.  The  taxes  are  paid  in 
kind ;  and  the  officers  who  gather  them  demand  so  »nneJ> 

2  X 


fi74 


PALESTINE 


34 .  The  characteristics  already  described  are  hardly 
peculiar  to  Palestine.    Her  hilly  surface  and  general 
height,  her  rocky  ground  and  thin  soil,  her  torrent 
beds  wide  and  dry  for  the  greater  part  of  the- year, 
ersn  her  belt  of  maritime  lowland — these  she  share* 
with  other  lands,  though  it  would  perhaps  be  difficult 
to  find  them  united  elsewhere.     But  there  is  one 
feature,  as  y*>t  only  alluded  to,  in  which  she  stands 
alone.     This  feature  is  the  .Ionian — the  one  Kiver 
of  the  country. 

35.  Properly  to  comprehend  this,  we  must  cast 
our  eyes  for  a  few  moments  north  and  south,  outside 
the  narrow  limits  of  the  Holy  Land.     From  top  to 
bottom — from  north  to  south  —  from  Antioch  to 
Akaba  at  the  tip  of  the  eastern  horn  of  the  Red  Sea, 
Syria  is  cleft  by  a  deep  and  narrow  trench  running 
parallel  with  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  and 
'dividing,  as  if  by  a  fosse  or  ditch,  the  central  range  of 
maritime  highlands  from  those  further  east/  At  two 
points  only  in  its  length  is  the  trench  interrupted : — 
by  the  range  of  Lebanon  and  Hermon,  and  by  the 
high  ground  south  of  the  Dead  Sea.     Of  the  three 
compartment ;  thus  formed,  the  northern  is  the  valley 


PALESTINE 

of  the  Orontes ;  the  southern  is  the  Waly  cl-Arahah , 
while  the  central  one  is  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  th* 
Arabah  of  the  Hebrews,  the  Aulon  of  the  Greeks,  aiH 
the  Glior  of  the  Arabs.  Whether  this  remarkabli 
fissure  in  the  surface  of  the  earth  originally  ran 
without  interruption  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the 
Red  Sea,  and  was  afterwards  (though  still  at  a 
time  long  anterior  to  the  historic  period)  broken  by 
the  protrusion  or  elevation  of  the  two  tracts  just 
named,  cannot  be  ascertained  in  the  present  state 
of  our  geological  knowledge  of  this  region.  The 
central  of  its  three  divisions  is  the  only  one  with 
which  we  have  at  present  to  do ;  it  is  also  the  most 
remarkable  of  the  three.  The  river  is  elsewhere 
described  in  detail  [JORDAN]  ;  but  it  and  the  valley 
through  which  it  rushes  down  its  extraordinary 
descent — and  which  seems  as  it  were  to  enclose  and 
conceal  it  during  the  whole  of  its  course — must  be 
here  briefly  characterized  as  essential  to  a  correct 
comprehension  of  the  country  of  which  they  form 
the  external  barrier,  dividing  Galilee,  Ephraim,  and 
Judah  from  Bashan,  Gilead,  and  Moab,  respec 
tively. 


Profile-Section  of  the  Holy  Land  from  the  Dead  8et  to  Mount  Hermon,  along  the  line  of  the  Jordan. 


'  36.  To  speak  first  of  the  Valley.  It  begins  with 
the  river  at  its  remotest  springs  of  Hasbeiya  on  the 
N.W.  side  of  Hermon,  and  accompanies  it  to  the 
lower  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  a  length  of  about  150 
miles.  During  the  whole  of  this  distance  its 
course  is  straight,  and  its  direction  nearly  due  north 
and  south.  The  springs  of  Hasbeiya  are  1700 
feet  above  the  level  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  the 
northern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  is  1317  feet  below  it, 
so  that  between  these  two  points  the  valley  falls 
with  more  or  less  regularity  through  a  height  of 
more  than  3000  feet.  But  though  the  river  dis 
appears  at  this  point,  the  valley  still  continues  its  I 
descent  below  the  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea  till  it  j 
reaches  a  further  depth  of  1308  feet.  So  that  the 
bottom'  of  this  extraordinary  crevasse  is  actually 
more  than  2600  feet  below  the  surface  of  the 
ocean.f  Even  that  portion  which  extends  down  to 
the  brink  of  the  lake  and  is  open  to  observation, 
is  without  a  parallel  in  any  other  part  of  the 
world.  It  is  obvious  that  the  road  by  which 
these  depths  are  reached  from  the  Mount  of  Olives 
or  Hebron  must  be  very  steep  and  abrupt.  But 
this  is  not  its  real  peculiarity.  Equally  great  and 
Ridden  descents  may  be  found  in  our  own  or  other 


mountainous  countries.  That  which  distinguishes 
this  from  all  others  is  the  fact  that  it  is  made  into 
the  very  bowels  of  the  earth.  The  traveller  who 
stands  on  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  has  reached  a 
point  nearly  as  far  below  the  surface  of  the  ocean  as 
the  miners  in  the  lowest  levels  of  the  deepest  mines 
of  Cornwall. 

37.  In  width  the  valley  varies.  In  its  upper  and 
shallower  portion,  as  between  Banias  and  the  lake 
of  Huleh,  it  is  about  five  miles  across ;  the  enclosing 
mountains  of  moderate  height,  though  tolerably 
vertical  in  character ;  the  floor  almost  an  absolute 
flat,  with  the  mysterious  river  hidden  from  sight 
in  an  impenetrable  jungle  of  reeds  and  marsh  vege 
tation. 

Between  the  Hflleh  and  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  as  far 
as  we  have  any  information,  it  contracts,  and  be 
comes  more  of  an  ordinary  ravine  or  glen. 

It  is  in  its  third  and  lower  portion  that  the 
valley  assumes  its  more  definite  and  regular  cha 
racter.  During  the  greater  part  of  this  portion, 
it  is  about  seven  miles  wide  from  the  one  wall 
to  the  other.  The  eastern  mountains  preserve 
their  straight  line  of  direction,  and  their  massive 
horizontal  wall-like  aspect,  during  almost  the  whole  h 


grain  for  their  own  perquisites  as  to  leave  the  peasant 
oareJy  enough  for  the  next  sowing.  In  addition  to  this, 
us  ?oug  as  any  people  remain  in  a  district  they  are  liable 
for  the  whole  of  the  tax  at  which  the  district  is  rated. 
No  wonder  that  under  such  pressure  the  inhabitants  of 
the  Sahd  Athlit  have  almost  all  emigrated  to  Egypt, 
where  the  system  is  better,  and  better  administered. 

'  So  remarkable  is  this  depression,  that  it  is  adopted  by 
the  great  geographer  Ritter  as  the  base  of  his  description 
of  Syria. 

ff  i>cepas  It  now  i*.  tb.fi  Dead  Sea  was  once  doubtless 
t»r  f.f.f^t.;  for  the  sediment  brought  into  it  by  the  Jordan 


must  be  gradually  accumulating.   No  data,  however,  exUt 
by  which  to  judge  of  the  rate  of  this  accumulation. 

•»  North  of  the  Wady  Zurka  their  character  alters 
They  lose  the  vertical  wall-like  appearance,  so  striking 
at  Jericho,  and  become  more  broken  and  sloping.  The 
writer  had  an  excellent  view  of  the  mountains  behind 
Belsan  from  the  Burj  at  Zerin  in  Oct.  1861.  Zerin,  though 
distant,  is  sufficiently  high  to  command  a  prospect  into 
the  Interior  of  the  mountains.  Thus  viewed,  their  wall- 
Uire  character  had  entirely  vanished.  There  appeared, 
instead,  an  infinity  of  separate  simmits,  fully  as  irregular 
and  multitudinous  as  any  distort  west  of  Jonlaa  nni'p 


PALESTINE 

Hare  and  there  they  are  cloven  by  the 
vnst  mysterious  rents,  through  which  the  Hiero- 
max,  the  Wady  Zurha,  and  other  streams  force 
their  way  down  to  the  Jordan.  The  western  moun- 
vains  are  more  irregular  in  height,  their  slopes 
less  vertical,  and  their  general  line  is  interrupted 
by  projecting  outposts  such  as  Tell  Fasail,  and 
Kurn  Surtabeh.  North  of  Jericho  they  recede 
in  a  kind  of  wide  amphitheatre,  and  the  valley 
becomes  twelve  miles  broad,  a  breadth  which  it 
thenceforward  retains  to  the  southern  extremity 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  What  the  real  bottom  of  this 
cavity  may  be,  or  at  what  depth  below  the  surface, 
is  not  yet  known,  but  that  which  meets  the  eye  is 
a  level  or  gently  undulating  surface  of  light  sandy 
soil,  about  Jericho  brilliant  white,  about  Beisan 
dark  and  reddish,  crossed  at  intervals  by  the  torrents 
of  the  Western  highlands  which  have  ploughed 
their  zigzag  course  deep  down  into  its  soft  sub 
stance,  and  even  in  autumn  betray  the  presence  of 
moisture  by  the  bright  green  of  the  thorn-bushes 
which  flourish  in  and  around  their  channels,  and 
cluster  in  greater  profusion  round  the  springheads 
at  the  foot  of  the  mountains.  Formerly  palms 
abounded  on  both  sides'  of  the  Jordan  at  its 
lower  end,  but  none  now  exist  there.  Passing 
through  this  vegetation,  such  as  it  is,  the  traveller 
emerges  on  a  plain  of  bare  sand  fuirowed  out  in 
innumerable  channels  by  the  rain-streams,  all  run 
ning  eastward  towards  the  river,  which  lies  there 
in  the  distance,  though  invisible.  Gradually  these 
channels  increase  in  number  and  depth  till  they  form 
steep  cones  or  mounds  of  sand  of  brilliant  white,  50 
to  100  feet  high,  their  lower  part  loose,  but  their 
upper  portion  indurated  by  the  action  of  the  rains 
and  the  tremendous  heat  of  the  sunJ  Here  and 
there  these  cones  are  marshalled  in  a  tolerably  re 
gular  line,  like  gigantic  tents,  and  form  the  bank  of 
a  ten-ace  overlooking  a  flat  considerably  lower  in 
level  than  that  already  traversed.  After  crossing 
this  lower  flat  for  some  distance,  another  descent, 
of  a  few  feet  only,  is  made  into  a  thick  growth 
of  dwarf  shrubs :  and  when  this  has  been  pursued 
until  the  traveller  has  well  nigh  lost  all  patience, 
he  suddenly  arrives  on  the  edge  of  a  "  hole"  filled 
with  thick  trees  and  shrubs,  whose  tops  rise  to  a 
level  with  his  feet.  Through  the  thicket  comes  the 
welcome  sound  of  rushing  waters.  This  is  the 
Jordan.11 

38.   Buried  as  it  is   thus  between   such   lofty 
ranges,  and  shielded  from  every  breeze,  the  climate 


PALESTINE 


C75 


gradually  In  height  as  they  receded  eastward.  Is  this  the 
case  with  this  locality  only?  or  would  the  whole  region 
east  of  the  Jordan  prove  equally  broken,  if  viewed 
sufficiently  near?  Prof.  Stanley  hint."  that  such  may  be 
the  case  (S.  &  1'.  320).  Certainly  the  hills  of  Judah  and 
Samaria  appear  as  much  a  "  wail "  as  those  cast  of  Jordan, 
when  viewed  from  the  sea-coast. 

1  Jericho  was  the  city  of  palm-trees  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  15) ; 
and  Josephus  mentions  the  palms  of  Abila,  on  the  eastern 
side  of  the  river,  as  the  scene  of  Moses'  last  address. 
"  The  whole  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea,"  says  Mr.  Poole,  "  is 
strewed  with  palms"  (Geogr.  Society's  Journal.  1856). 
Dr.  Anderson  (192)  describes  a  large  grove  as  standing  on 
the  lower  margin  of  the  sea  between  Wady  Mojeb  (Arnon) 
and  /nrka  Main  (Callirhoe). 

j  The  writer  is  here  speaking  from  his  own  observation 
of  the  lower  part.  A  similar  description  is  ctiven  by  Lynch 
of  the  upper  part  (Official  Report,  April  10 ;  t»ade  Veldc. 
Memoir,  125). 

»  The  lines  which  have  pive-i  many  a  young  mind  Its 
fogf  *iid  njoirt  lasting  impressiuu  ct'  the  Jordan  and  its 


of  the  Jordan  valley  is  extremely  hot  And  relaxing. 
Itfl  enervating  influence  is  shown  by  the  inhabitant* 
of  Jericho,  who  are  a  small  feeble  exhausted  race, 
dependent  for  the  cultivation  of  their  lands  on  the 
hardier  peasants  of  the  highland  villages  (Rob.  i. 
550),  and  to  this  day  prone  to  the  vices  which  are 
often  developed  by  tropical  climates,  and  which 
brought  destruction  on  Sodom  and  Gomorrah;  lint 
the  circumstances  which  are  unfavourab'e  to  monils 
are  most  favourable  to  fertility.  Whether  there 
was  any  great  amount  of  cultivation  and  habitation 
in  this  region  in  the  times  of  the  Israelites  the  Bible 
does  not  'say;  but  in  post-biblical  times  there  is 
no  doubt  on  the  point.  The  palms  of  Jericho,  and 
of  Abila  (opposite  Jericho  on  the  other  side  of  the 
river),  and  the  extensive  balsam  and  rose  gardens 
of  the  former  place,  are  spoken  of  by  Josephus,  who 
calls  the  whole  district  a  "  divine  spot"  (fle?oi/ 
Xapiov,  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §3 ;  see  vol.  i.  976).m  Beth- 
shan  was  a  proverb  among  the  Rabbis  for  its  fertility 
Succoth  was  the  site  of  Jacob's  first  settlement  west 
of  the  Jordan ;  and  therefore  was  probably  then, 
as  it  still  is,  an  eligible  spot.  In  later  times 
indigo  and  sugar  appear  to  have  been  grown  near 
Jericho  and  elsewhere  ;n  aqueducts  are  still  partially 
standing,  of  Christian  or  Saracenic  arches ;  and  there 
are  remains,  all  over  the  plain  between  Jericho  and 
the  river,  of  former  residences  or  towns  and  of 
systems  of  irrigation  (Ritter,  Jordan,  503,  512). 
Phosaelis,  a  few  miles  further  north,  was  built  by 
Herod  the  Great;  and  there  were  other  towns  either 
in  or  closely  bordering  on  the  plain.  At  present  this 
part  is  almost  entirely  desert,  and  cultivation  is 
confined  to  the  upper  portion,  between  Sakvt  and 
Beisan.  There  indeed  it  is  conducted  on  a  grand 
scale  ;  and  the  traveller  as  he  journeys  along  the 
road  which  leads  over  the  foot  of  the  western 
mountains,  overlooks  an  immense  extent  of  the 
richest  land,  abundantly  watered,  and  covered  with 
corn  and  other  grain.0  Here,  too,  as  at  Jericho,  the 
cultivation  is  conducted  principally  by  the  inhabit 
ants  of  the  villages  on  the  western  mountains. 

39.  All  the  irrigation  necessary  for  the  towns,  or 
for  the  cultivation  which  formerly  existed,  or  still 
exists,  in  the  Ghor,  is  obtained  from  the  torrents  and 
springs  of  the  western  mountains.  For  all  purposes 
to  which  a  river  is  ordinarily  applied,  the  Jordan  is 
useless.  So  rapid  that  its  course  is  one  continued 
cataract ;  so  crooked,  that  in  the  whole  of  its  lower 
and  main  course,  it  has  hardly  half  a  mile  straight ; 
so  broken  with  rapids  and  other  impediments,  that 

surrounding  scenery,  are  not  more  accurate  than  many 
other  versions  of  Scripture  scenes  and  facts : — 
"  Sweet  fields  beyond  the  swelling  flood 

Stand  dressed  in  living  green : 

So  to  the  Jews  old  Canaan  stood. 

While  Jordan  rolled  between." 

'•  Resides  (iilgal,  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  had  four  cities 
or  settlements  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jericho  (Josh, 
xviii.  21).  The  rebuilding  of  the  last-named  town  ia 
Ahab's  reign  probably  indicates  an  increase  fti  the 
prosperity  of  the  district. 

m  Tin's  seems  to  have  been  the  mrpi'xwpos,  or  "  region 
round  about"  Jordan,  mentioned  in  the  Gospels,  arm 
possibly  answering  to  the  Ciccar  of  the  ancient  Hebrews. 
(See  Stanley,  S.  &  P.  284,  488.) 

n  The  word  suklcar  (sugar)  is  found  In  the  names  of  places 
near  Tiberias  below  Sebbeh  (Masada),  and  near  Gaza,  as 
well  as  at  Jericho.  All  these  are  In  the  depressed  regions 
For  the  indigo,  see  Poole  (Geogr.  Journal,  xxvi.  57). 

0  Robinson,  ill.  314;  and  from  the  writer's  own  ol> 
Mrrattor 

2X2 


670 


PALESTINE 


uo  boat  can  swim  for  more  than  the  same  distance 
continuously ;  so  deep  below  the  surface  of  the  ad 
jacent  country  that  it  is  invisible,  and  can  only  with 
difficulty  be  approached ;  resolutely  refusing  all  com 
munication  with  the  ocean  and,  ending  in  a  lake, 
the  peculiar  conditions  of  wh'".h  render  navigation 
impossible — with  all  these  characteristics  the  Jordan, 
in  any  sense  whV'.i  we  attach  to  the  word  "  river,"  is 
.10  river  at  all : — r'ike  useless  for  iirigation  and  na 
vigation,  it  is  in  fact,  what  its  Arabic  name  signifies, 
nothing  but  a  "  great  watering  place  "  (Sheriat  el- 
K/iebir). 

40.  But  though  the  Jordan  is  so  unlike  a  river  in 
the  Western  sense  of  the  term,   it  is  far  less  so 
than  the  other  streams  of  the  Holy  Land.     It  is 
at  least  perennial,  while,  with  few  exceptions,  they 
are   meie  winter  torrents,    rushing  and    foaming 
during  the  continuance  of  the   rain,  and  quickly 
drying  up  after  the  commencement  of  summer : 
"  What  time  they  wax  warm  they  vanish  ;  when 
it  is  hot  they  are  consumed  out  of  their  place  .... 
they  go  to  nothing  and  perish"  (Job  vi.  15).     For 
fully  half  the  year,  these  "  rivers "  or  "  brooks," 
as  our  version  of  the  Bible  renders  the  special  term 
(nuchal)  which  designates  them  in  the  original,  are 
often  mere  dry  lan<»s  of  hot  white  or  grey  stones  ;  or 
if  their  water  still  continues  to  rim,  it  is  a  tiny  rill, 
working  its  way  through  heaps  of  parched  boulders 
in  the  centre  of  a  broad  flat  tract  of  loose  stones, 
often  only  traceable  by  the  thin  line  of  verdure 
which  springs  up  -vlong  its  course.    Those  who  have 
travelled  in  Provence  or  Granada  in  the  summer  will 
have  no  difficulty  i"  recognising:  this  description,  and 
in  comprehending  how  the  use  of  such  terms  as 
"river"  or  "brook"  must  mislead  those  who  can 
only  read  the  exact  and  vivid  narrative  of  the  Bible 
through  the  medium,  of  the  Authorised  Version. 

This  subject  will  be  more  fully  described,  and  a 
list  of  the  few  perennial  streams  of  the  Holy  Laud 
given  under  RIVER. 

41 .  How  far  the  Valley  of  the  Jordan  was  em 
ployed  by  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  Holy  Land 
as  a  medium  of  communication  between  the  northern 
and  southern  parts  of  the  country  we  can  only  con 
jecture.     Though  not  the  shortest  route  between 
Galilee  and  Judaea,  it  would  yet,  as  far  as  the  levels 
and  form  of  the  ground  are  concerned,  be  the  most 
practicable  for  large  bodies ;  though  these  advantages 
would  be  seriously  counterbalanced  by  the  sultry 
heat  of  its  climate,  as  compared  with  the  fresher  air 
of  the  more  difficult  road  over  the  highlands. 

The  ancient  notices  of  this  route  are  veiy  scanty. 

(1.)  From  2  Chr.  xxviii.  15,  we  find  that  the 
captives  taken  from  Judah  by  the  army  of  the 
northern  kingdom  were  sent  back  from  Samaria  to 
Jerusalem  by  way  of  Jericho.  The  route  pursued 
was  probably  by  Nablus  across  the  Mukhna,  and 
by  Wady  Ferrah  or  Fasail  into  the  Jordan  valley. 
Why  this  road  was  taken  is  a  mystery,  since  it  is 
not  stated  or  implied  that  the  captives  were  accom 
panied  by  any  heavy  baggage  which  would  make  it 
difficult  to  travel  over  the  central  route.  It  would 
seem ,  however,  to  have  been  the  usual  road  from 
the  north  to  Jerusalem  (comp.  Luke  xvii.  11  with 
xix.  1),  as  if  there  were  some  impediment  to  passing 
through  the  region  immediately  north  of  the  city. 

P  Willibald  omits  his  route  between  Caesareu  (?  C.  Phi- 
ippi=  Banias)  and  the  monastery  of  St.  John  the  Baptist 
uear  Jericho.  He  is  always  assumed  to  have  come  down 
tbe  valley. 

1  Sum.  xxl.  5.  '  Num.  xi.  -2'. 

•  Neb.  Ix  15.  «  1  Sain.  xiv.  J6. 


PALESTINE 

(2.)  Potnpey  brought  his  army  and  siege-trait 
from  Damascus  to  Jerusalem  (B.C.  40),  pas*  Scy- 
thopolis  and  Pella,  and  thence  by  Koreae  (possibly 
the  present  Kerawa  at  the  foot  of  the  Wadj  Ferrah} 
to  Jericho  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  3,  §4;  B.  J.  i.  6,  §5). 

(3.)  Vespasian  marched  from  Emmaus,  on  th« 
edge  cf  the  plain  of  Sharon,  not  far  east  of  Ramleh, 
past  Neapolis  (Nablus),  down  the  Wady  Ferrah  or 
Fas'iil  to  Koreae,  and  thence  to  Jericho  (B.  J.  iv. 
8,  §1);  the  same  route  as  that  of  the  captive  Ju- 
daeans  in  No.  1. 

(4.)  Antoninus  Martyr  (cir.  A.D.  600),  and 
possibly  Willibald*  (A.D.  722)  followed  this  route 
to  Jerusalem. 

(5.)  Baldwin  I.  is  said  to  have  journeyed  from 
Jericho  to  Tiberias  with  a  caravan  of  pilgrims. 

(6.)  In  our  own  times  the  whole  length  of  the 
valley  has  been  traversed  by  De  Bertou,  and  by 
Dr.  Anderson,  who  accompanied  the  American  Expe 
dition  as  geologist,  but  apparently  by  few  if  any 
other  travellers. 

42.  Monotonous  and  uninviting  as  much  of  the 
Holy  Land  will  appear  from  the  above  description  to 
English  readers,  accustomed  to  the  constant  verdure, 
the  succession  of  flowers,  lasting  almost  throughout 
the  year,  the  ample  streams  and  the  varied  surface 
of  our  own  country — we  must  remember  that  it* 
aspect  to  the  Israelites  after  that  weary  march 
of  forty  years  through  the  desert,  and  even  by 
the  side  of  the  brightest  recollections  of  Egypt 
that  they  could  conjure  up,  must  have  been  very 
different.  After  the  "great  and  terrible  wilder 
ness  "  with  its  "  fiery  serpents,"  its  "  scorpions," 
"drought,"  and  "rocks  of  flint" — the  slow  and 
sultry  march  all  day  in  the  dust  of  that  enormous 
procession — the  eager  looking  forward  to  the  well 
at  which  the  encampment  was  to  be  pitched — the 
crowding,  the  fighting,  the  clamour,  the  bitter  dis 
appointment  round  the  modicum  of  water  when  at 
last  the  desired  spot  was  reached  —  the  "  light 
bread  "  1  so  long  "  loathed  " — the  rare  treat  of  animal 
food  when  the  quails  descended,  or  an  approach  to  the 
sea  permitted  the  "  fish  "  *  to  be  caught ;  after  this 
daily  struggle  tor  a  painful  existence,  how  grateful 
must  have  been  the  rest  afforded  by  the  Land  of 
Promise ! — how  delicious  the  shade,  scanty  though 
it  were,  of  the  hills  and  ravines,  the  gushing  springs 
and  green  plains,  even  the  mere  wells  and  cisterns, 
the  vineyards  and  olive-yards  and  "  fruit  trees*  in 
abundance,"  the  cattle,  sheep,  and  goats,  covering 
the  country  with  their  long  black  lines,  the  bee» 
swarming  round  their  pendant  combs'  in  rock  or 
wood  !  Moreover  they  entered  the  country  at  the 
time  of  the  Passover,*  when  it  was  arrayed  in  the 
full  glory  and  freshness  of  its  brief  springtide, 
before  the  scorching  sun  of  summer  had  had  tiro* 
to  wither  its  flowers  and  embrown  its  verdure. 
Taking  all  these  circumstances  into  account,  and 
allowing  for  the  bold  metaphors*  of  oriental  speech 
— so  different  from  our  cold  depreciating  expres- 
sions — it  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  those  way 
worn  travellers  could  have  chosen  no  fitter  word* 
to  express  what  their  new  country  was  to  them 
than  those  which  they  so  often  employ  in  the 
accounts  of  the  conquest — "a  land  flowing  with 
milk  and  honey,  the  glory  of  all  lands." 


»  Josh,  v,  10,  11. 

*  See  some  useful  remarks  on  the  use  of  similar  language 
by  the  natives  of  the  East  at  the  present  day,  in  referent* 
to  spots  inadequate  to  such  expressions  in  The  Jews  in 
the  Kaxt,  by  Beaton  and  Frankl  (II.  359). 


PALESTINE 

43  Again,  tht  variations  of  the  seasons  may  appctv 
lo  us  slight,  and  the  atmosphere  dry  and  hot ;  but 
ifter  the  monotonous  cliirmte  of  Egypt,  where  rain 
is  a  i-are  phenomenon,  and  where  the  difference 
between  summer  and  winter  is  hardly  perceptible, 
the  "  rain  of  heaven "  must  have  been  a  most 
grateful  novelty  in  its  two  seasons,  the  foiTner  and 
the  latter — the  occasional  snow  and  ice  of  the  win 
ters  of  Palestine,  and  the  burst  of  returning  spring, 
must  have  had  double  the  effect  which  they  would 
produce  on  those  accustomed  to  such  changes.  Nor 
is  the  change  only  a  relative  one;  there  is  a  real 
difference — due  partly  to  the  higher  latitude  of 
Palestine,  partly  to  its  proximity  to  the  sea — be 
tween  the  sultry  atmosphere  of  the  Egyptian  valley 
and  the  invigorating  sea-breezes  which  blow  over 
the  hills  of  Ephraim  and  Judah. 

44.  The  contrast  with  Egypt  would  tell  also  in 
another  way.    In  place  of  the  huge  everHowing  river 
whose  only  variation  was  from  low  to  high,  and 
from  high   to   low  again,   and  which   lay  at   the 
lowest  level  of  that  level  country,  so  that  all  irri 
gation  had  to  be  done  by  artificial  labour — "a  land 
where  thou  sowedst  thy  seed  and  wateredst  it  with 
thy  foot  like  a  garden  of  herbs  " — in  place  of  this, 
they  were  to  find  themselves  in  a  land  of  constant 
and  considerable  undulation,  where  the  water,  either 
of  gushing  spring,  or  deep  well,  or  flowing  stream, 
could  be  procured  at  the  most  varied   elevations, 
requiring   only   to   be  judiciously  husbanded   and 
skilfully  conducted  to  find  its  own   way  through 
field  or  garden,  whether  terraced  on  the  hill-sides 
or  extended  in  the  broad  bottoms.*1     But  such  change 
was    not   compulsory.      Those   who  preferred    the 
climate  and  the  mode  of  cultivation  of  Egypt  could 
resort  to  the  lowland  plains  or  the  Jordan  valley, 
where  the  temperature  is  more  constant  and  many 
degrees  higher  than  on  the  more  elevated  districts 
of  the  country,  where  the  breezes  never  penetrate, 
where  the  light  fertile  soil  recalls,  as  it  did  in  the 
earliest  'times,  that  of  Egypt,  and  where  the  Jordan 
in  its  lowness  of  level  presents  at  least  one  point  of 
resemblance  to  the  Nile. 

45.  In  truth,  on  closer  consideiation,  it  will  be 
seen  that,  beneath  the  apparent  monotony,  there  is  a 
variety  in  the  Holy  Land  really  remarkable.    There 
is  the  variety  due  to  the  difference  of  level  between 
the  different  parts  of  the  country.     There  is  the 
variety  of  climate  and  of  natural  appearances,  pro 
ceeding,  partly  from  those  very  differences  of  level, 
and  partly  from  the  proximity  of  the  snow-capped 
Hermon   and   Lebanon   on   the   north    and  of  the 
torrid  desert  on  the  south  ;  and  which  approximate 
the  climate,  in  many  respects,  to   that  of  regions 
much  further   north.      There  is  also  the   variety 
which    is   inevitably  produced  by   the  presence  of 


PALESTINE 


677 


the  sea — "  the  eternal  freshness   and   liveliness   °' 
ocean." 

46.  Each  of  these  is  continually  leflected  in  the 
Hebrew  literature.     The  contrast  between  the  high 
lands  and  lowlands  is  more   than   implied  in  the 
habitual  forms  of  "expression,  "going  up"  to  Judah, 
Jerusalem,    Hebron;    "going  down"   to   Jericho, 
Capernaum,    Lydda,   Caesarea,   Gaza,   and   Egypt. 
More  than  this,  the  difference  is  marked  unmistake- 
ably  in  the  topographical  terms  which  so  abound 
in,  and  are  so  peculiar  to,  this  literature     "The 
mountain  of  Judah,"  "  the  mountain  of  Israel,'' 
"  the  mountain  of  Naphtali,"  are   the  names  by 
which  the 'three  great  divisions  of  the  highlands  are 
designated.     The  predominant  names  for  the  towns 
of  the  same  district — Gibeah,  Geba,  Gaba,  Gibeon 
(meaning  "hill") ;  Ramah,  Ramathaim  (the  "  brow " 
of  an  eminence) ;  Mizpeh,  Zophim,  Zephathah  (all 
modifications  of  a  root  signifying  a  wide  prospect) 
— all  reflect  the  elevation  jf  the  region  in  which 
they  were  situated.     On  the  other  hand,  the  great 
lowland  districts  have  each  their  peculiar  name. 
The  southern  pail  of  the  maritime  plain  is  "  the 
Shefelah;"  the  northern,  "Sharon;"  the  Valley  of 
the  Jordan,  "  ha-Arabah  ;"  names  which  are  never 
interchanged,  and  never  confounded  with  the  term* 
(such  as  emek,  nachal,  </a»)  employed  for  the  ravines, 
torrent-beds,  and  small  valleys  of  the  highlands.6 

47.  The  differences  in  climate  are  no  less  often 
mentioned.    The  Psalmists,  Prophets,  and c  historica. 
Books,  are  full  of  allusions  to  the  fierce  heat  of  the 
midday  sun  and  the  dryness  of  summer ;  no  lesi 
than  to  the  various  accompaniments  of  winter — 
the    rain,   snow,   frost,    ice,   and    fogs,    which   are 
experienced  at  Jerusalem  and  other  places  in  tht 
upper  country  quite  sufficiently  to  make  every  one 
familiar  with  them.     Even  the  sharp  alternations 
between  the  heat  of  the  days  and  the  coldness  of  tlte 
nights,  which  strike  every  traveller  in  Palestine,  are 
mentioned.1-     The  Israelites  practised  no  commerce 
by  sea ;  and,  with  the  single  exception  of  Joppa,  not 
only  possessed  no  harbour  along  the  whole  length  of 
their  coast,  but  had  no  word  by  which  to  denote  one. 
But  that  their  poets  knew  and  appreciated  the  phe 
nomena  of  the  sea  is  plain  from  such  expressions  as 
are  constantly  recurring  in  their  works — "  the  great 
and    wide   sea,"   its  "  ships,"  its  "  monsters,"  its 
roaring  and  dashing  "  waves,"   its  "  depths,"    its 
"  sand,"  its  mariners,  the  perils  of  its  navigation. 

It  is  unnecessary  here  to  show  how  materially  the 
Bible  has  gained  in  its  hold  on  Western  nations  by 
these  vivid  reflections  of  a  country  so  much  more 
like  those  of  the  West  than  are  most  oriental  regions , 
but  of  the  fact  there  can  be  no  doubt,  and  it  has  beer, 
admirably  brought  out  by  Professor  Stanley  in  Sinai 
and  Palestine,  chap.  ii.  sect.  vii. 


y  The  view  taken  above,  that  the  beauty  of  the  Pro 
mised  Land  was  greatly  enhanced  to  the  Israelites  by 
its  contrast  with  the  scenes  they  had  previously  passed 
through,  is  corroborated  by  the  fact  that  such  laudatory 
expressions  as  "  the  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey," 
'  the  glory  of  all  lands,"  &c.,  occur,  with  rare  exceptions, 
In  those  parts  of  the  Bible  only  which  purport  to  have 
wen  composed  just  before  their  entrance,  and  that  in  the 
few  cases  of  their  employment  by  the  Prophets  (Jer.  xi.  5, 
xxxii.  22;  Ez.  xx.  6,  15)  there  is  always  an  allusion  to 
'  Egypt,"  "  the  iron  furnace,"  the  passing  of  the  lied  Sea, 
or  the  wilderness,  to  point  the  contrast. 

«  Gen.  xlil.  10.  All  Bey  (ii.  21)9)  says  that  the  mari- 
timp  plain,  from  Khan  Younes  to  Jaffa,  is  "  of  rich  soil, 
aUnilar  to  the  slime  of  the  Nile."  Other  points  of  resem- 
ViUr.ct  arc  mentioned  by  Kobinson  (ti.  Ji.  ii.  22,  34,  36, 
226\  and  rtaBis:».i  (Land  and  Hwik,  cli.  36).  The  flail) 


of  Gennesareth  still  "  recalls  the  Valley  of  the  Nile " 
(Stanley,  S.  <Sc  P.  374).  The  papyrus  is  said  to  grow 
there  (Buchanan,  Cler.  Furlough,  392). 

•  The  same  expressions  are  still  used  by  the  Arabs  ol 
the  Nejd  with  reference  to  Syria  and  their  own  country 
(WaUin,  Geogr.  Soc.  Journal,  xxiv.  174). 

It  is  impossible  to  trace  these  correspondences  and 
distinctions  in  the  English  Bible,  our  translators  not 
having  always  rendered  the  same  Hebrew  by  the  same 
English  word.  But  the  corrections  will  be  found  in  the 
Appendix  to  Professor  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine. 

1's.  xix.  6,  xxxii.  4  ;  Is.  Iv.  6,  xxv.  6 ;  Gen.  xviii.  1 ; 
1  Sam.  xi.  S  ;  Neh.  vii.  3. 

d  Jer. xxxvl. 30.  Gen.  xxxl.  40  refers— unless  the  r«ctn! 
speculations  of  Mr.  Brke  should  prove  true — to  Meso 
potamia. 


678 


PALESTINE 


48  In  the  praceding  description  allusion  has 
been  made  to  many  of  the  characteristic  features  of 
the  Holy  Land.  But  it  is  impossible  to  close  this 
account  without  mentioning  a  defect  which  is  even 
more  characteristic — its  lack  of  monuments  and  per 
sonal  relics  of  the  nation  who  possessed  it  for  so 
many  centuries,  and  gave  it  its  claim  to  our  venera 
tion  and  affection.  When  compared  with  other  nations 
•yt  equal  antiquity — Egypt,  Greece,  Assyria — the 
contrast  is  truly  remarkable.  In  Egypt  and  Greece, 
and  also  in  Assyria,  as  far  as  our  knowledge  at 
present  extends,  we  find  a  series  of  buildings,  reach 
ing  down  from  the  most  remote  and  mysterious 
antiquity,  a  chain,  of  which  hardly  a  lirik  is  want 
ing,  and  which  records  the  progress  of  the  people 
iu  civilisation,  art,  and  religion,  as  certainly  as  the 
buildings  of  the  mediaeval  architects  do  that  of  the 
various  nations  of  modern  Europe.  We  possess  also 
a  multitude  of  objects  of  use  and  ornament,  belong 
ing  to  those  nations,  truly  astonishing  in  number, 
and  pertaining  to  every  station,  office,  and  act  in 
their  official,  religious,  and  domestic  life.  But  in 
Palestine  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  there  does 
not  exist  a  single  edifice,  or  part  of  an  edifice,  of 
which  we  can  be  sure  that  it  is  of  a  date  anterior 
to  the  Christian  era.  Excavated  tombs,  cisterns, 
flights  of  staire,  which  are  encountered  everywhere, 
are  of  course  out  of  the  question.  They  may  be — 
some  of  them,  such  as  the  tombs  of  Hinnom  and 
Shiloh,  probably  are — of  very  great  age,  older  than 
anything  else  in  the  country.  But  there  is  no 
evidence  either  way,  and  as  far  as  the  history  of  ait 
is  concerned  nothing  would  be  gained  if  their  age 
were  ascertained.  The  only  ancient  buildings  of 
which  we  can  speak  with  certainty  are  those  which 
were  erected  by  the  Greeks  or  Romans  during  their 
occupation  of  the  country.  Not  that  these  buildings 
have  not  a  certain  individuality  which  separates 
them  from  any  mere  Greek  or  Roman  building  in 
Greece  or  Rome.  But  the  fact  is  certain,  that  not 
one  of  them  was  built  while  the  Israelites  were 
masters  of  the  country,  and  before  the  date  at 
which  Western  nations  began  to  get  a  footing  in 
Palestine.  And  as  with  the  buildings  so  with 
other  memorials.  With  one  exception,  the  museums 
of  Europe  do  not  possess  a  single  piece  of  pottery  or 
metal  work,  a  single  weapon  or  household  utensil, 
an  ornament  or  a  piece  of  armour,  of  Israelite  make, 
which  can  give  us  the  least  conception  of  the 
manners  or  outward  appliances  of  the  nation  before 
;he  date  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus. 
The  coins  form  the  single  exception.  A  few  rare 
specimens  still  exist,  the  oldest  of  them  attributed — 
though  even  that  is  matter  of  dispute — to  the  Mac 
cabees,  and  their  rudeness  and  insignificance  furnish 
a  stronger  evidence  than  even  their  absence  could 
imply,  of  the  total  want  of  art  among  the  Israelites. 

It  may  be  said  that  Palestine  is  now  only  in  the 
same  condition  with  Assyria  before  the  recent  re 
searches  brought  so  much  to  light.  But  the  two 
cases  are  not  parallel.  The  soil  of  Babylonia  is  a 
loose  loam  or  sand,  of  the  description  best  fitted 
for  covering  up  and  preserving  the  relics  of  former 
ages.  On  the  other  hand,  the  greater  pirt  of  the 
Holy  Land  is  hard  and  rocky,  and  the  soil  lies  in 
the  valleys  and  lowlands,  where  the  cities  were  only 
very  rarely  built.  If  any  store  of  Jewish  relics 
were  remaining  embedded  or  hidden  in  suitable 
ground — as  for  example,  in  the  loose  mass  of  debris 
which  coats  the  slopes  around  Jerusalem — we  should 
expect  occasionally  to  find  articles  which  might  be. 
feoogaised  us  Jewish.  This  wn-s  the  cat*  in  Arsyria. 


PALESTINE 

LOOR  before  the  mounds  were  explored,  Ricft  trough 
home  many  fragments  of  inscriptions,  bricks,  and  en- 
graved  stones,  which  were  picked  up  on  the  surfci:*, 
and  were  evidently  the  predictions  of  some  natum 
whose  art  was  not  then  known.  But  in  Palestine  the 
only  objects  hitherto  discovered  have  all  belonged  t  > 
the  West — coins  or  arms  of  the  Greeks  or  Romans. 

The  buildings  already  mentioned  as  being  Jewish 
in  character,  though  carried  out  with  foreign  details 
are  the  following : — 

The  tombs  of  the  Kings  and  of  the  Judges :  the 
buildings  known  as  the  tombs  of  Absalom,  Zecha- 
riah,  St.  James,  and  Jehoshaphat ;  the  monolith  at 
Siloam  ; — all  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  • 
the  ruined  synagogues  at  Meiron  and  Kefr  Bhim 
But  there  are  two  edifices  which  seem  to  bear  a 
character  of  their  own,  and  do  cot  FO  clearly  betray 
the  style  of  the  West.  These  are,  the  enclosure 
round  the  sacred  cave  at  Hebron ;  and  portions  of 
the  western,  southern,  and  eastern  walls  of  the 
Harain  at  Jerusalem,  with  the  vaulted  passage 
below  the  Aksa.  Of  the  former  it  is  ini|x>ssible  to 
speak  in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge.  The 
latter  will  be  more  fully  noticed  under  the  head  of 
TEMPLE  ;  it  is  sufficient  here  to  name  one  or  two 
considerations  which  seem  to  bear  against  their  being 
of  older  date  than  Herod.  (1.)  Herod  is  distinctly 
said  by  Josephus  to  have  removed  the  old  founda 
tions,  and  laid  others  in  their  stead,  enclosing  double 
the  original  area  (Ant.  xv.  1 1 ,  §3 ;  B.  J.  i.  2 1 ,  §1 ). 
(2.)  The  part  of  the  wall  which  all  acknowledge  to 
be  the  oldest  contains  the  springing  of  an  arch.  This 
and  the  vaulted  passage  can  hardly  be  assigned  to 
builders  earlier  than  the  time  of  the  Romans.  (3.) 
The  masonry  of  these  magnificent  stones  (absurdly 
called  the  "  bevel "),  on  which  so  much  stress  has 
been  laid,  is  not  exclusively  Jewish  or  even  Eastern. 
It  is  found  at  Persepolis ;  it  is  also  found  at  Cuidus 
and  throughout  Asia  Minor,  and  at  Athens;  not  on 
stones  of  such  enormous  size  as  those  at  Jerusalem, 
but  similar  in  their  workmanship. 

M.  Renan,  in  his  recent  report  of  his  proceedings 
in  Phoriicia,  has  named  two  circumstances  which 
must  I.  ve  had  a  great  erlect  in  suppressing  art  or 
architecture  amongst  the  ancient  Israelites,  while 
their  very  existence  proves  that  the  people  had  no 
genius  in  that  direction.  These  are  (1)  the  pro 
hibition  of  sculptured  representations  of  living  crea 
tures,  and  (2)  the  command  not  to  build  a  temple 
anywhere  but  at  Jerusalem.  The  hewing  or  polish 
ing  of  building-stones  was  even  forbidden.  "  What," 
he  asks,  "  would  Greece  have  been,  if  it  had  been 
illegal  to  build  any  temples  but  at  Delphi  or  Eleusis  r 
In  ten  centuries  the  Jews  had  only  three  temples 
to  build,  and  of  these  certainly  two  were  erected 
under  the  guidance  of  foreignei-s.  The  existence  of 
synagogues  dates  from  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
and  the  Jews  then  naturally  employed  the  Greek 
style  of  architecture,  which  at  that  time  reigned 
universally." 

In  tact  the  Israelites  never  lost  the  feeling  or  the 
traditions  of  their  early  pastoral  nomad  life.  Long 
after  the  nation  had  been  settled  in  the  country, 
the  cry  of  those  earlier  days,  "  To  your  tents, 
0  Israel  !"  was  heard  in  periods  of  excitement.* 
The  prophets,  sick  of  the  luxury  of  the  cities,  are 
constantly  recalling'  the  "  tents"  of  that  simpler, 


•  2  Sam.  xx.  1 ;  1  K.  xll.  16  (that  the  words  are  aot  » 
mere  formula  of  the  historian  is  proved  by  their  occurreic. 
In  2  Chr.  x.  161;  2  K.  xiv.  !2. 

'  Jer.  xxx.   B;  iScch.  xii.  7  ;  I's.  '.xxviii  r,5,  Ac. 


PALESTINE 

Jew  artificial  life  ;  and  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  nay 
tven  perhaps  of  Zerubbabel,  was  spoken  of  to  the 
last  as  the  "  teiitf  of  the  Lord  of  hosts,"  the 
"  place  where  David  had  pitched  h  his  tent."  It  is 
a  remarkable  fact,  that  eminent  as  Jews  have  been 
in  other  departments  of  art,  science,1  and  affairs, 
no  Jewish  architect,  painter,  or  sculptor  has  ever 
achieved  any  signal  success. 

THE  GEOLOGY. — Of  the  geological  structure  of 
1'alestine  it  has  been  said  with  truth  that  our  in 
formation  is  but  imperfect  and  indistinct,  and  that 
much  time  must  elapse,  and  many  a  cherished  hypo 
thesis  be  sacrificed,  before  a  satisfactory  explanation 
can  be  arrived  at  of  its  more  remarkable  phenomena. 

It  is  not  intended  to  attempt  here  more  than  a  very 
cursory  sketch,  addressed  to  the  general  and  non- 
scientific  reader.  The  geologist  must  be  received  to 
the  original  works  from  which  these  remarks  have 
been  compiled. 

1.  The  main  sources  of  our  knowledge  are  (1)  the 
observations  contained  in  the  Travels  of  Kussegger, 
an  Austrian  geologist  and  mining  engineer  who 
visited  this  amongst  other  countries  of  the  East  in 
1886-8  (Reisen  in  Griechenland,  &c.,  4  vols.,  Stutt- 
gard,  1841-49,  with  Atlas)  ;  (2)  the  Report  of  H. 
J.  Anderson,  M.D.,  an  American  geologist,  formerly 
Professor  in  Columbia  Coll.,  New  York,  who  accom 
panied  Captain  Lynch  in  his  exploration  of  the 
Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea  (Geol.  Reconnaissance, in 
Lynch's  Official  Report,  4to.,  1852,  pp.  75-207) ; 
and  (3)  the  Diary  of  Mr.  H.  Poole,  who  visited 
Palestine  on  a  mission  for  the  British  government 
in  1 836  (Journal  of  Geogr.  Society,  vol.  xxvi.  pp. 
55-70).  Neither  of  these  contains  anything  ap 
proaching  a  complete  investigation,  either  as  to 
extent  or  to  detail  of  observations.  Russegger  tra 
velled  from  Sinai  to  Hebron  and  Jerusalem.  He 
explored  carefully  the  route  between  the  latter 
place  and  the  Dead  Sea.  He  then  proceeded  to 
Jaffa  by  the  ordinary  road ;  and  from  thence  to 
Beyrflt  and  the  Lebanon  by  Nazareth,  Tiberias, 
Cana,  Akka,  Tyre,  and  Sidon.  Thus  he  left  the 
Dead  Sea  in  its  most  interesting  portions,  the 
Jordan  Valley,  the  central  highlands,  and  the  im 
portant  district  of  the  Upper  Jordan,  untouched. 
His  wc-rk  is  accompanied  by  two  sections :  from 
the  Mount  of  Olives  to  the  Jordan,  and  from  Tabor 
to  the  Lake  of  Tiberias.  His  observations,  though 
"l<»arly  and  attractively  given,  and  evidently  those 
of  a.  practised  observer,  are  too  short  and  cursory 
for  the  subject.  The  general  notice  of  his  journey 
is  in  vol.  iii.  76-157;  the  scientific  observations, 
tables,  &c.,  are  contained  between  161  and  291. 
Dr.  Anderson  visited  the  south-western  portion  of 
the  Lebanon  between  Beyrut  and  Banias,  Galilee, 
the  Lake  of  Tiberias,  the  Jordan  ;  made  the  circuit 
of  the  Dead  Sea ;  and  explored  the  district  between 
that  Lake  and  Jerusalem.  His  account  is  evidently 
drawn  up  with  great  pains,  and  is  far  more  elaborate 
than  that  of  Russegger.  He  gives  full  analyses  of 
the  different  rocks  which  he  examined,  and  very  good 
lithographs  of  fossils ;  but  unfortunately  his  work  is 
deformed  by  a  very  unreadable  style.  Mr.  Poole's 
journey  was  confined  to  the  western  and  south 
eastern  portions  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Jordan,  the 
country  between  the  latter  and  Jerusalem,  and  the 


PALESTINE 


679 


(r  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  1,  xliii.  3,  Ixxvi.  2;  Judith  Ix.  8. 
'*  Is.  xxix.  1,  xvi.  5. 

&.'a  the  woll-knowr  passage  in  Coningsby,  bk.  iv.  ch.  15. 
*  Thf  surface  of  the  Dead  Sea  :s  1317  ft.  below  the 
Mlte/rancai:,  und  ita  depth  1308  ft 


beaten  track  of  the  central  highlands  from  Hebron 
to  Nablus. 

2.  From  the  reports  of  these  observers  it  appeal* 
that  the  Holy  Land  is  a  much-disturbed  moun 
tainous  tract  pf  limestone  of  the  secondary  period 
(Jurassic  and  cretaceous) ;  the  southern  offshoot  ol 
the  chain  of  Lebanon ;  elevated  considerably  above 
the  sea  level ;  with  partial  interruptions  from  ter 
tiary  and  basaltic  deposits.     It  is  part  of  a  vast 
mass  of  limestone,  stretching  in  every  direction  ex 
cept  west,  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Holy  Land. 
The  whole  of  Syria  is  cleft  from  north  to  south  by 
a  straight  crevasse  of  moderate  width,  but  extend 
ing  in  the  southern  portion  of  its  centre  division  to 
a  truly  remarkable  depth  (k  2625  ft.)  below  the  sea 
level.     This  crevasse,  which  contains  the  principal 
watercourse  of  the  country,  is  also  the  most  excep 
tional  feature  of  its  geology.     Such  fissures  are  not 
uncommon  in  limestone  formations ;  but  no  other  is 
known  of  such  a  length  and  of  so  extraordinary  a 
depth,  and  so  open  throughout  its  greatest  extent. 
It  may  have  been  volcanic  in  ita  origin  ;  the  result  of 
an  upheaval  from  beneath,  which  has  tilted  the  lime 
stone  back  on  each  side,  leaving  this  huge  split  in  the 
strata;  the  volcanic  force  having  stopped  short  at 
that  point  in  the  operation,  without  intruding  any 
volcanic  rocks  into  the  fissure.  This  idea  is  supported 
by  the  crater-like  form  of  the  basins  of  the  Lake  of 
Tiberias  and  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Russ.  206,  7),  and  by 
many  other  tokens  of  volcanic  action,  past  and  pre 
sent,  which  are  encountered  in  and  around  those 
Lakes,  and  along  the  whole  extent  of  the  Valley. 
Or  it  may  have  been  excavated  by  the  gradual  action 
of  the  ocean  during  the  immense  periods  of  geological 
operation.     The  latter  appears  to  be  the  opinion  of 
Dr.  Anderson  (79,  140,  205)  ;  but  further  exami 
nation  is  necessary  before  a  positive  opinion  can  be 
pronounced.     The  ranges  of  the  hills  of  the  surface 
take   the   direction   nearly  due  north   and   south, 
though  frequently  thrown  from  their  main  bearing 
and  much  broken  up  into  detached  masses.     The 
lesser  watercourses  run  chiefly  east  and  west  of  the 
central  highlands. 

3.  The  Limestone  consists  of  two  strata,  or  rather 
groups  of  strata.     The  upper  one,  which  usually 
meets  the  eye,  over  the  whole  country  from  Hebron 
to  Hermcn,  is  a  tolerably  solid  stone,  varying  in 
colour  from  white  to  reddish  brown,  with  very  few 
fossils,  inclining  to  crystalline  structure,  and  abound 
ing  in  caverns.     Its  general  surface  has  been  formed 
into   gently  rounded  hills,  crowded  more   or  lefs 
thickly  together,    separated   by  narrow  valleys  <f 
denudation  occasionally  spreading  into  small  plains. 
The  strata  are  not  well  defined,  and  although  some 
times  level m  (in  which  case  they  lend  themselves  to 
the  formation  of  terraces),  are  more  often  violently 
disarranged.11     Remarkable  instances  of  such  con 
tortions  are  to  be  found  on  the  road  from  Jeru 
salem  to  Jericho,  where  the  beds  are  seen  press?' I 
and  twisted  into  every  variety  of  form. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  these  ccnto^ 
tioiis,  as  well  as  the  general  form  of  the  surf  act;, 
are  due  to  forces  not  now  in  action,  but  are  part  o? 
the  general  configuration  of  the  country,  as  it  was 
left  after  the  last  of  that  succession  of  immersions 
below,  and'  upheavals  from,  the  ocean,  by  whicr. 


1  As  at  the  twin  hills  of  el-Jib,  the  ancient  Glbeon,  belli 
y  Samwil. 

As  ou  the  road  between  the  upper  and  lower  fieit-vr 
ut  live  miles  from  el-Jib. 


680 


PALESTINE 


PALESTINE 


its  present  form  was  given  it,  long  prior  to  the  his-  |      8.  On   the  west  of  Jordan  these  volcanic  rorki 


toric  period.  There  is  no  ground  for  believing  thai 
the  broad  geological  features  of  this  or  any  part  01 
the  country  are  appreciably  altered  from  what  they 
were  at  the  earliest  times  of  the  Bible  history. 
The  evidences  of  later  action  are,  however,  often 
visible,  as  for  instance  where  the  atmosphere  and 
»he  rains  have  furrowed  the  face  of  the  limestone 
cliffs  with  long  and  deep  vertical  channels,  often 
causing  the  most  fantastic  forms  (And.  89,  111 
Poole,  56). 

4.  This  limestone  is  often  found  crowned  with 
chalk,  rich  in  flints,  the  remains  of  a  deposit  which 
probably  once  covered  a  great  portion  of  the  country, 
aut  has  only  partially  sui-vived  subsequent  immer 
sions.    In  many  districts  the  coarse  flint  or  chert 
which  originally  belonged  to  the  chalk  is  found  in 
great  profusion.    It  is  called  in.  the  country  chalce 
dony  (Poole,  57). 

On  the  heights  which  border  the  western  side  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  this  chalk  is  found  in  greater  abun 
dance  and  more  undisturbed,  and  contains  numerous 
springs  of  salt  and  sulphurous  water. 

5.  Near  Jerusalem  the  mass  of  the  ordinary  lime 
stone  is  often  mingled  with  large  bodies  of  dolomite 
(mHgnesian  limestone),  a  hardish  semi-crystalline 
rock,  reddish  white  or  brown,  with  glistening  sur 
face  and  pearly  lustre,  often  containing  pores  and 
small  cellular  cavities  lined  with  oxide  of  iron  or 
minute  crystals  of  bitter  spar.    It  is  not  stratified  ; 
but  it  is  a  question  whether  it  has  not  been  pro 
duced  among  the  ordinary  limestone  by  some  subse 
quent  chemical  agency.     Most  of  the  caverns  near 
Jerusalem  occur  in  this  rock,  though  in  other  parts 
of  the  country  they  are  found  in  the  more  friable 
chalky  limestone.0    So  much  for  the  upper  stratum. 

6.  The   lower  stratum  is  in  two  divisions  or 
series  of  beis — the  upper,  dusky  in  colour,  contorted 
and  cavernous  like  that  just  described,  but  more 
ferruginous — the  lower  one  dark  grey,  compact  and 
solid,  and  characterised  by  abundant  fossils  ofcidaris, 
an  extinct  echinus,  the  spines  of  which  are  the  well- 
known  "  olives  "  of  the  convents.     This  last-named 
rock  appears  to  form  the  substratum  of  the  whole 
country,  east  as  well  as  west  of  the  Jordan. 

The  ravine  by  which  the  traveller  descends  from 
the  summit  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  (2700  teet 
above  the  Mediterranean)  to  Jericho  (900  below  it) 
cuts  through  the  strata  already  mentioned,  and 
affords  an  unrivalled  opportunity  for  examining 
them.  The  lower  formation  differs  entirely  in  cha 
racter  from  the  upper.  Instead  of  smooth,  common 
place,  swelling,  outlines,  everything  here  is  rugged, 
pointed,  and  abrupt.  Huge  fissures,  the  work  of 
the  earthquakes  of  ages,  cleave  the  rock  in  all  direc 
tions — they  are  to  be  found  as  much  as  1000  feet 
deep  by  not  more  than  30  or  40  feet  wide,  and 
with  almost  vertical  Psides.  One  of  them,  near  the 
ruined  khan  at  which  travellers  usually  halt,  pre 
sents  a  most  interesting  and  characteristic  section 
cf  the  strata  (Russegger,  247-251,  &c.). 

7.  After  'Jie  limestone  had  received  the  general 
form  which  its  surface  still  retains,  but  at  a  time 
far  anterior  to  any  historic  period,  it  was  pierced 
and  broken  by  large  eruptions  of  lava  pushed  up 
from  beneath,  which  has  broken  up  and  overflowed 
the  stratified  beds,  and  now  appears  in  the  form  of 
basalt  or  trap. 


0  See  the  description  of  the  caverns  of  Beu  Jibrin  and 
Oeir  luMan  in  Rob.  ii.  23,  51  3 ,  aui  Van  de  Vekle, 

n  m 


have  been  hitherto  found  only  north  of  the  moun 
tains  of  Samaria.  They  are  first  encountered  on 
the  south-western  side  of  the  Plain  of  Esdiaclon 
(Russ.  258):  then  they  are  lost  sight  of  till  the 
opposite  side  of  the  plain  is  reached,  being  probably 
hidden  below  the  deep  rich  soil,  except  a  few  pebbles 
here  and  there  on  the  surface.  Beyond  this  they 
abound  over  a  district  which  may  be  said  to  be  con 
tained  between  Delata  on  the  north,  Tiberias  on  the 
east,  Tabor  on  the  south,  and  Turan  on  the  west. 
There  seem  to  have  been  two  centres  of  eruption : 
one,  and  that  the  most  ancient  (And.  129,  134),  at 
or  about  the  Jiurn  Hattin .  (the  traditional  Mount 
of  Beatitudes),  whence  the  stream  flowed  over  the 
declivities  of  the  limestone  towards  the  lake  (  RUSE. 
259,  260).  This  mass  of  basalt  forms  the  cliffs  at 
the  back  of  Tiberias,  and  to  its  disintegration  is  due 
the  black  soil,  so  extremely  productive,  of  the  Ai-d 
el  Hamma  and  the  Plain  of  Genesareth,  which  lie, 
the  one  on  the  south,  the  other  on  the  north,  of  the 
ridge  of  Hattin.  The  other — the  more  recent — was 
more  to  the  north,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Safed, 
where  three  of  the  ancient  craters  still  exist,  con 
verted  into  the  reservoirs  or  lakes  of  el  Jish,  Taiteba, 
and  Delata  (And.  128,  9  ;  Caiman,  in  Kitto's  Phys. 
Geog.  119). 

The  basalt  of  Tiberias  is  fully  described  by  Dr. 
Anderson.  It  is  dark  iron-grey  in  tint,  cellular, 
but  firm  in  texture,  amygdaloidal,  the  cells  filled 
with  carbonate  of  lime,  olivine  and  augite,  with  a 
specific  gravity  of  2'6  to  2'9.  It  is  often  columnar 
in  its  more  developed  portions,  as,  for  instance,  on 
the  cliffs  behind  the  town.  Here  the  junctions  of 
the  two  formations  may  be  seen ;  the  base  of  the 
cliffs  being  limestone,  while  the  crown  and  brow 
are  massive  basalt  (124,  135,  136). 

The  lava  of  Delata  and  the  northern  centre  differs 
considerably  from  that  of  Tiberias,  and  is  pro 
nounced  by  Dr.  Anderson  to  be  of  later  date.  It 
is  found  of  various  colours,  from  clack-brown  to 
reddish-grey,  very  porous  in  texture,  and  contains 
much  pumice  and  scoriae ;  polygonal  columns  are 
seen  at  el  Jish,  where  the  neighbouring  cretaceous 
beds  are  contorted  in  an  unusual  manner  (And. 
128,  129,  130). 

A  third  variety  is  found  at  a  spur  of  the  hills  of 
Galilee,  projecting  into  the  Ard  el  Huleh  below 
Kedes,  and  referred  to  by  Dr.  Anderson  as  Tell  el 
Haiyeh ;  but  of  this  rock  he  gives  no  description,  and 
declines  to  assign  it  any  chronological  position  (134). 
9.  The  volcanic  action  which  in  pre-historic  times 
projected  this  basalt,  has  left  its  later  traces  in  th« 
ancient  records  of  the  country,  and  is  even  still  active 
n  the  form  of  earthquakes.  Not  to  speak  of  passages » 
n  the  poetical  books  of  the  Bible,  which  can  hardly 
lave  been  suggested  except  by  such  awful  cata 
strophes,  there  is  at  least  one  distinct  allusion  to 
them,  viz.  that  of  Zechariah  (xiv.  5)  to  an  earth 
quake  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  which  is  corroborated 
yj  Josephus,  who  adds  that  it  injured  the  Temple, 
and  brought  down  a  large  mass  of  rock  from  the 
Mount  of  Olives  (Ant.  ix.  10,  §4). 

Syria  and  Palestine,"  says  Sir  Charles  Lyell 
(Principles,  8th  ed,  p.  340),  "  abound  in  volcanic 
appearances ;  and  very  extensive  areas  havi  beeu 
shaken  at  different  periods,  with  great  destruction  of 
cities  and  loss  of  lives.  Continued  mention  is  miuit 


p  Similar  rents  were  cleft  in   the  rock  ofcLJith  by  tin 
arthquakc  of  1837  (Caiman,  in  Kitln,  1'k.  Guy.  1&3). 
«  Is.  xxlr.  17-20,  Aim*,  ix.  0,  .Vc.  xc. 


PALESTINE 

in  history  of  the  ravages  committed  by  earthquakes 
in  Sidon,  Tyre,  Beyrut,  Laodicea,  and  Antioch." 
The  same  author  (p.  342)  mentions  the  remark- 
at!e  feet  that  "  from  the  13th  to  the  17th  centuries 
there  was  an  almost  entire  cessation  of  earthquakes 
in  Syria  and  Judaea ;  and  that,  during  the  interval 
of  quiescence,  the  Archipelago,  together  with  part 
of  Asia  Minor,  Southern  Italy  and  Sicily  suffered 
greatly  from  earthquakes  and  volcanic  eruptions." 
^ince  they  have  again  begun  to  be  active  in  Syria, 
the  most  remarkable  earthquakes  have  been  those 
which  destroyed  Aleppo  in  1616  and  1822  (for 
this  see  Wolff,  Travels,  ch.  9),  Antioch  in  1737,  and 
Tiberias  and  Safed  in  1837  *  (Thomson,  ch.  19). 
A  list  of  those  which  are  known  to  have  affected 
th:  Holy  Land  is  given  by  Dr.  Pusey  in  his  Com 
mentary  on  Amos  iv.  11.  See  also  the  Index  to 
Kitter,  vol.  viii.  p.  1953. 

The  rocks  between  Jerusalem  and  Jericho  show 
many  an  evidence  of  these  convulsions,  as  we  have 
already  remarked.  Two  earthquakes  only  are  re 
corded  as  having  affected  Jerusalem  itself — that  in 
the  reign  of  Uzziah  already  mentioned,  and  that  at 
the  time  of  the  crucifixion,  when  "  the  rocks  were 
rent  and  the  rocky  tombs  torn  open  "  (Maft.  xxvii. 
51).  Slight*  shocks  are  still  occasionally  felt  there 
(e.  g.  Poole,  56),  but  the  general  exemption  of  that 
city  from  any  injury  by  earthquakes,  except  in  these 
two  cases,  is  really  remarkable.  The  ancient  Jewish 
writers  were  aware  of  it,  and  appealed  to  the  fact 
as  a  proof  of  the  favour  of  Jehovah  to  His  chosen 
city  (Ps.  xlvi.  1,  2). 

10.  But  in  addition  to  earthquakes,  the  hot  salt  and 
fetid  springs  which  are  found  at  Tiberias,  Callirhoe, 
and  other  spots  along  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and 
round  the  basins  of  its  lakes,'  and  the  rock-salt, 
nitre,  and  sulphur  of  the  Dead  Sea  are  all  evidences 
of  volcanic  or  plutonic  action.     Von  Buch  in  his 
.etter  to  Robinson  (B.  R.  ii.  525),  goes  so  far  as  to 
cite  the  bitumen  of  the  Dead  Sea  as  a  further  token 
of  it.     The  hot  springs  of  Tiberias  were  observed  to 
flow  more  copiously,  and  to  increase  in  temperature, 
at  the  time  of  the  earthquake  of  1837  (Thomson, 
ch.  19,  26). 

1 1 .  In  the  Jordan  Valley  the  basalt  is  frequently 
encountered.    Here,  as  before,  it  is  deposited  on  the 
limestone,  which  forms  the  substratum  of  the  whole 
country.     It  is  visible  from  time  to  time  on  the 
banks  and  in  the  bed  of  the  river  ;  but  so  covered 
with  deposits  of  tufa,  conglomerate,  and  alluvium,  as 
not  to  be  traceable  without  difficulty  (And.  136-152). 
On  the  western  side  of  the  lower  Jordan  and  Dead 
Sea  no  volcanic  formations  have  been  found  (And. 
81,  133;  Kuss.  205,  251);   nor  do  they  appear  on 


PALESTINE 


08) 


its  eastern  shore  till  the  Wady  Zurka  Mala  is  ap 
proached,  and  then  only  in  erratic  fragments  (And 
191).  At  Wady  Hemarah,  north  of  the  last-men 
tioned  stream,  the  igneous  rocks  first  make  their 
appearance  in  situ  near  the  level  of  the  water  (194). 

12.  It  is  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan  that  the  most 
extensive  and  remarkable  developments  of  igneous 
rocks  are  found.     Over  a  large  portion  of  the  sur 
face  from  Damascus  to  the  latitude  of  the  south 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  even  beyond  that,  they  occur 
in  the   greatest   abundance   all   over  the   surface. 
The  limestone,  however,  still  underlies  the  whole. 
These  extraordinary  formations  render  this  region 
geologically  the  most  remarkable  part  of  all  Syria. 
In  some  districts,  such  as  the  Lejah  (the  ancient 
Argob  or  Trachonitis),  the  Sufd  and  the  Harrdh, 
it  presents  appearances  and  characteristics  which 
are  perhaps  unique  on  the  earth's  surface.     These 
regions  are  yet  but  veiy  imperfectly  known,  but 
travellers  are  beginning  to  visit  them,  and  We  shall 
possibly  be  in  possession  ere  long  of  the  results  of 
further  investigation.     A  portion  of  them,  has  been 
recently  described  in  great  detail"  by  Mr.  Wetzstein, 
Prussian  consul  at  Damascus.    They  lie,  however, 
beyond  the  boundary  of  the  Holy  Land  proper,  and 
the  reader  must  therefore  be  referred  for  these  dis 
coveries  to  the  head  of  TRACHONITIS. 

13.  The  tertiary  and  alluvial  beds  remain  to  be 
noticed.    These  are  chiefly  remarkable  in  the  neigh 
bourhood  of  the  Jordan,  as  forming  the  floor  of 
the  valley,  and  as  existing  along  the  course,  and 
accumulated  at  the  mouths,  of  the  torrents  which 
deliver  their  tributary  streams  into  the  river,  and 
into  the  still  deeper  caldron  of  the  Dead  Sea.    They 
appear  to  be  all  of  later  date  than  the  igneous  rocks 
described,  though  even  this  cannot  be  considered 
as  certain. 

14.  The  floor  of  the  Jordan  valley  is  described  by 
Dr.  Anderson  (140)  as  exhibiting  throughout  more 
or  less  distinctly  the  traces  of  two  independent*  ter 
races.     The  upper  one  is  much  the  broader  of  the 
two.     It  extends  back  to  the  face  of  the  limestone 
mountains  which  form  the  walls  of  the  valley  ou 
east  and  west.     He  regards  this  as  older  than  the 
river,  though  of  course  formed  after  the  removal 
of  the  material  from  between  the  walls.     Its  upper 
and  accessible  portions  consist  of  a  mass  of  detritus 
brought  down  by  the  ravines  of  the  walls,  always 
chalky,  sometimes  "  an  actual  chalk  ;"  usually  ba're 
of  vegetation  (And.  143),  though  not  uniformly  so 
(Rob.  iii.  315). 

Below  this,  varying  in  depth  from  50  to  150  feet, 
is  the  second  terrace,  which  reaches  to  the  channe. 
of  the  Jordan,  and,  in  Dr.  Andereon's  opinion,  hat 


«  Four-fifths  of  the  population  of  Safed,  and  one-fourth 
of  that  of  Tiberias,  were  killed  on  this  occasion. 

•  Kven  the  tremendous  earthquake  of  May  20,  1202, 
only  did  Jerusalem  a  very  slight  damage  (Abdul-latlff,  in 
Kitto,  I'hys.  Geogr.  148). 

*  It  may  be  convenient  to  give  a  list  of  the  hot  or 
brackish  springs  of  Palestine,  as  far  as  they  can  be  col 
lected.    It  will  be  observed  that  they  are  all  in  or  about 
the  Jordan  Valley.     Beginning  at  the  north  :- 

Aln  Eyub,  and  Ain  Tabighah,  N.K.  of  Lake  of  Tiberias : 
•lightly  warm,  two  brackish  to  be  drinkable.  (Rob.  ii.  4(15.) 

Ain  el-Barideh,  on  shore  of  Lake,  S.  of  Mojdel :  80  t'ahr., 
fcllRhtly  brackish.  (Rob.  Ii.  396.) 

Tiberias:  144°  Fahr. ;  salt,  bitter,  sulphuieou*. 

Atnateh,  in  the  Wady  Mandhur  :  very  hot,  slightly  sul- 
pnureoiis.  (Burckhardt,  May  6.) 

V/Ady  Malih  (Sail  Valley),  in  tin-  GhOf  nca*  Sakftt : 
831'  t.thr. ;  very  snl,  fetid.  (Rob.  ill.  308.) 


Below  Ain-Feshkah :  fetid  and  brackish.  (Lynch 
Apr.  18.) 

One  day  N.  of  Ain-jidy :  80°  Fahr.:  salt.     (Poole,  67.) 

Between  Wady  Mahras  and  W.  Khusheibeh,  S.  of  Am- 
jidy:  brackish.  (Anderson,  177.) 

AVady  MuharSyat,  45'  E.  of  Usdum :  salt,  containing 
small  fish.  (Ritter,  Jordan,  736 ;  Poole,  61.) 

Wady  el-Ahsy,  S.E.  end  of  Dead  Sea :  hot.  (Burckhardt 
Aug.  7.) 

Wady  Beni-Hamed,  near  Rabba,  E.  side  of  Dead  Sea. 
(Ritter,  Syrien,  1223.) 

Wady  Zerka  Main  (Uallirboe),  E.  side  of  Dead  Sea: 
very  hot,  very  slightly  sulphureous.  (Seetzen,  Jan.  18 ; 
Irby,  June  8.) 

u  Krisebericht  iiber  Hawaii  und  die  J'raclianai,  I860; 
with  map  and  woodcuts. 

»  Compare  Robinson's  diary  of  bia  journey  acrois  Us 
Jordan  near  Sak(U  (iii.  313). 


6&2 


PALESTINE 


been  ezcavated  by  the  river  itself  before  it  had 
»hrunk  to  its  present  limits,  when  it  filled  the 
whole  space  between  the  eastern  and  western  faces 
of  the  upper  terrace.  The  inner  side  of  both  upper 
and  lower  terraces  is  furrowed  out  into  conical  knolls, 
by  the  torrents  of  the  rains  descending  to  the  lower 
level.  These  cones  often  attain  the  magnitude  of 
hills,  and  are  ranged  along  the  edge  of  the  terraces 
with  curious  regularity.  They  display  convenient 
sections,  which  show  sometimes  a  tertiary  limestone 
or  marl,  sometimes  quatenary  deposits  of  sands, 
gravels,  variegated  clays,  or  unstratified  detritus. 
The  lower  terrace  bears  a  good  deal  of  vegetation, 
oleander,  agnus  castus,  &c.  The  alluvial  deposits 
have  in  some  places  been  swept  entirely  away,  for 
Dr.  Anderson  speaks  of  crossing  the  upturned  edges 
of  nearly  vertical  strata  of  limestone,  with  neigh 
bouring  beds  contorted  in  a  very  violent  manner 
(148).  This  was  a  few  miles  N.  of  Jericho. 

All  along  the  channel  of  the  river  are  found 
mounds  and  low  cliffs  of  conglomerates,  and  breccias 
of  various  ages,  and  more  various  composition. 
Rolled  boulders  and  pebbles  of  flinty  sandstone  or 
chert,  which  have  descended  from  the  upper  hills,  are 
found  in  the  cross  ravines ;  and  tufas,  both  calcareous 
and  siliceous,  abound  on  the  terraces  (And.  147). 

1 5.  Round  the  margin  of  the  Dead  Sea  the  tertiary 
beds  assume  larger  and  more  important  proportions 
than  by  the  course  of  the  river.     The  marls,  gyp- 
sites,  and  conglomerates  continue  along  the  base  of 
the  western  cliff  as  far  as  the  VVady  Sebbeh,  where 
they  attain  their  greatest  development.    South  of  this 
they  form  a  sterile  waste  of  brilliant  white  marl 
and  bitter  salt  flakes,  ploughed  by  the  rain-torrents 
from  the  heights  into  pinnacles  and  obelisks  (180). 

At  the  south-eastern  corner  of  the  sea,  sand 
stones  begin  to  display  themselves  in  great  pro 
fusion,  and  extend  northward  beyond  Wady  Zurka 
Main  (189;.  Their  full  development  takes  place  at 
the  mouth  of  the  Wady  Mojeb,  where  the  beds  are 
from  100  to  400  feet  in  height.  They  are  deposited 
on  the  limestone,  and  have  been  themselves  gra 
dually  worn  through  by  the  waters  of  the  ravine. 
There  ire  many  varieties,  differing  in  colour,  com 
position,  and  date.  Dr.  A.  enumerates  several  of 
these  (190,  196),  and  states  instances  of  the  red 
sandstone  having  been  rilled  up,  after  excavation, 
by  nonconforming  beds  of  yellow  sandstone  of  a 
much  later  date,  which  in  its  turn  has  been  hol 
lowed  out,  the  hollows  being  now  occupied  by 
detritus  of  a  stream  long  since  extinct. 

Russegger  mentions  having  found  a  tertiary 
breccia  overlying  the  chalk  on  the  south  of  Carmel, 
composed  of  fragments  of  chalk  and  flint,  cemented 
by  lime  (257). 

16.  The  rich  alluvial  soil  of  the  wide  plains 
which  form  the  maritime  portion  of  the  Holy  Land, 
and  also  that  of  Esdraelon,  Gennesareth,  and  other 
similar  plains,  will   complete   our   sketch  of  the 
geology.     The  former  of  these  districts  is  a  region 
of  from  eight  to  twelve  miles  in  width,  intervening 
between  the  central  highlands  and  the  sea.     It  is 
formed  of  washings  from  those  highlands,  brought 
down  by  the  heavy  rains  which  fall  in  the  winter 
months,  and  which,  though  they  rarely  remain  as 
permanent  streams,  yet  last  long  enough  to  spread 
this  fertilising  manure  over  the  f;ice  of  the  country. 
The  soil  is  a  light  loamy- sand,  red  in  some  places, 


PALESTINE 

and  deep  black  in  others.  The  substratum  is  rurtly 
seen,  but  it  appears  to  be  the  same  limestone  which 
composes  the  central  mountains.  The  actual  c«is* 
is  formed  of  a  very  recent  sandstone  full  of  mtiine 
shells,  often  those  of  existing  species  (Russ.  256,  7), 
which  is  disintegrated  by  the  waves  and  thrown  on 
the  shore  as  sand,7  where  it  forms  a  tract  of  con- 
siderable  width  and  height.  This  sand  in  many 
places  stops  the  outflow  of  the  streams,  and  sends 
them  back  on  to  the  plain,  where  they  overflow  and 
form  marshes,  which  with  proper  treatment  might 
afford  most  important  assistance  to  the  fertility  of 
this  already  fertile  district. 

17.  The  plain  of  Gennesareth  is  under  similar  con 
ditions,  except  that  its  outer  edge  is  tounded  by  the 
lake  instead  of  the  ocean.    Its  superiority  in  fertility 
to  the  maritime  land  is  probably  due  to  the  abund 
ance  of  running  water  which  it  contains  all  the  year 
round,  and  to  the  rich  soil  produced  from  the  decay 
of  the  volcanic  TOCKS  on  the  steep  heights  which 
immediately  enclose  it. 

18.  The  plain  of  Esdraelon  lies  between  two  range* 
of  highland,  with  a  third  (the  hills  separating- it 
from  the  plain  of  Akka),  at  its  north- west  end.    It  is 
watered  by  some  of  the  finest  springs  of  Palestine, 
the  streams  from  which  traverse  it  both  east  and 
west  of  the  central  water-shed,  and  contain  water 
or  mud,  moisture  and  marsh,  even  during  the  hot 
test  months  of  the  year.     The  soil  of  this  plain  is 
also  volcanic,  though  not  so  purely  so  as  that  of 
Gennesareth. 

19.  Bitumen  or  asphaltum,  called  by  the  Arabs  el 
hummar  (the  slime  of  Gen.  si.  3 ),  is  only  met  with 
in  the  valley  of  Jordan.     At  Hasbeiya,  the  most 
remote  of  the  sources  of  the  river,  it  is  obtained 
from  pits  or  wells  which  are  sunk  through  a  mas* 
of  bituminous  earth  to  a  depth  of  about  180  feet 
(And.  115,  116).     It  is  also  found  in  small  frag 
ments  on  the  shore  of  the   Dead  Sea,  and  occa 
sionally,  though   rarely,  very  large  masses  of  it 
are  discovered  floating  in  the  water  (Rob.  i.  518). 
This  appears  to  have  been   more   frequently  the 
case  in  ancient  times  (Joseph.  B.  J .  iv.   8,  §4 ; 
Diod.  Sic.   ii.  48).    [SLIME.]     The  Arabs  report 
that  it  proceeds  from  a  source  in  one  of  the  preci 
pices  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Robu 
i.  517)  opposite  Ain-jidi  (Russ.  253) ;  but  this  U 
not  corroborated   by  the  observations  of  Lynch's 
party,  of  Mr.  Poole,  or  of  Dr.  Robinson,  who  exa 
mined  the  eastern  shore  from  the  western  side  with 
special  reference  thereto.     It  is  more  probable  that 
the  bituminous  limestone  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Neby  Musa  exists  in  strata  of  great  thickness,  and 
that  the  bitumen  escapes  from  its  lower  beds  into 
the   Dead    Sea,   and   there   accumulates   until    by 
some    accident   it   is   detached,   and    rises   to   the 
suiface. 

20.  Sulphur  is  found  on  the  W.  and  S.  and  S.E. 
portions  of  the  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  (Rob.  i.  512). 
In  many  spots  the  air  smells  strongly  of  sulphurous 
acid  and  sulphuretted  hydrogen  gas  (And.   176  ; 
Poole,  66 ;  Beaufort,  ii.  113),  a  sulphurous  crust  is 
spread  over  the  surface  of  the  beach,  and  lumps  of 
sulphur  are  found  in  the  sea  (Rob.  i.  512).     Poole 
(63)  speaks  of  "  sulphur  hills  "  on  the  peninsula  at 
the  S.E.  end  of  the  sea  (see  And.  187). 

Nitre  is  rare.     Mr.  Poole  did  not  discover  anv, 
though  he  made  special  search  for  it.     Irby  ana 


J  The  statement  in  the  text  is  from  Thomson  (Land  and 
Kock;  ch.  33).  But  the  wriUr  has  learned  that  In  the 
}  pinion  of  Cnj.t.  Manstll,  K.  N.  (than  whom  no  one  has  had 


more  opportunity  of  judging),  the  sand  of  the  whole  coa« 
ot  Syria  has  b»rn  brought  up  from  Kgypt  by  the  S.S.W 
wind.  This  is  also  stated  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xv.  1),  y6X 


PALESTINE 

Mangles,  Seetzen  and  Robinson,  however,  mention 
having  seen  it  (Rob.  i.  513). 

Rock-salt  abounds  in  large  masses.  The  salt 
mound  of  Kashm  Usdum  at  the  southern  end  of 
the  Dead  Sea  is  an  enormous  pile,  5  miles  long  by 
2^  broad,  and  some  hundred  i'eet  in  height  (And. 
181).  Its  inferior  portion  consists  entirely  of  rock- 
wlc,  and  the  upper  part  of  sulphate  of  lime  and 
salt,  often  with  a  large  admixture  of  alumina.  [G.] 

THE  BOTANY. — The  Botany  of  Syria  and  Pa 
lestine  differs  but  little  from  that  of  Asia  Minor, 
which  is  one  of  the  most  rich  and  varied  on  the 
globe.  What  differences  it  presents  are  due  to  a 
slight  admixture  of  Persian  forms  on  the  eastern 
frontier,  of  Arabian  and  Egyptian  on  the  southern, 
and  of  Arabian  and  Indian  tropical  plants  in  the 
low  torrid  depression  of  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea. 
These  latter,  which  number  perhaps  a  hundred 
different  kinds,  are  anomalous  features  in  the  other 
wise  Levantine  landscape  of  Syria.  On  the  other 
hand,  Palestine  forms  the  southern  and  eastern  limit 
of  the  Asia-Minor  flora,  and  contains  a  multitude 
of  ti«es,  shrubs,  and  herbs  that  advance  no  further 
south  and  east.  Of  these  the  pine,  oak,  elder, 
bramble,  dog-rose,  and  hawthorn  are  conspicuous 
examples;  their  southern  migration  being  checked 
by  the  drought  and  heat  of  the  regions  beyond 
the  hilly  country  of  Judea.  Owing,  however,  to 
the  geographical  position  and  the  mountainous  cha 
racter  of  Asia  Minor  and  Syria,  the  main  features 
of  their  flora  are  essentially  Mediterranean-European, 
and  not  Asiatic.  A  vast  proportion  of  the  com 
moner  arboreous  and  frutescent  plants  are  identical 
with  those  of  Spain,  Algeria,  Italy,  and  Greece ;  and 
as  they  belong  to  the  same  genera  as  do  British, 
Germanic,  and  Scandinavian  plants,  there  are  ample 
means  of  instituting  such  a  comparison  between  the 
Syrian  flora  and  that  familiar  to  us  as  any  intelligent 
non-botanical  observer  can  follow  and  understand. 

As  elsewhere  throughout  the  Mediterranean  re 
gions,  Syria  and  Palestine  were  evidently  once  thickly 
covered  with  forests,  which  on  the  lower  hills  and 
plains  have  been  either  entirely  removed,  or  else 
reduced  to  the  condition  of  brushwood  and  copse; 
but  which  still  abound  on  the  mountains,  and  along 
certain  parts  of  the  sea-coast.  The  low  grounds, 
plains,  and  rocky  hills  are  carpeted  with  herbaceous 
plants,  that  appear  in  rapid  succession  from  before 
Christmas  till  June,  when  they  disappear  ;  and  the 
brown  alluvial  or  white  calcareous  soil,  being  thei. 
exposed  to  the  scorching  rays  of  the  sun,  gives  an 
aspect  of  forbidding  sterility  to  the  most  productive 
rc-gions.  Lastly,  the  lofty  regions  of  the  mountains 
are  stony,  dry,  swardless,  and  swampless,  with  few 
alpine  or  arctic  plants,  mosses,  lichens,  or  ferns ; 
th'is  presenting  a  most  unfavourable  contrast  to  the 
Swiss,  Scandinavian,  and  British  mountain  floras  at 
analogous  elevations. 

To  a  traveller  from  England,  it  is  difficult  to  say 
whether  the  familiar  or  the  foreign  forms  predo 
minate.  Of  trees  he  recognizes  the  oak,  pine,  walnut, 
maple,  juniper,  alder,  poplar,  willow,  ash,  dwarf 
elder,  plane,  ivy,  arbutus,  rhamnus,  almond,  plum, 
pear,  and  hawthorn,  all  elements  of  his  own  forest 
ncenery  and  plantations;  but  misses  the  beech, 
chesnut,  lime,  holly,  birch,  larch,  and  spruce ; 
v/hile  he  sees  for  the  first  time  such  southern  forms 
as  Pride  of  India  (Melia),  carob,  sycamore,  fig, 
jujube,  pistaohio,  styrax,  olive,  phyllyraea,  vitex, 
elasagnus,  ceitis,  many  i>eir  kinds  of  oak,  the  pa 
pyrus,  castor  oil.  and  various  iiul  rvopica!  grasses. 


PALESTINE 


G83 


Of  cultivated  English  fruits  he  sees  the  vine, 
apple,  pear,  apricot,  quince,  plum,  mulLerrj ,  and 
fig;  but  misses  the  gooseberry,  raspberry,  rtraw- 
berry,  currant,  cherry,  and  other  northern  Kinds, 
which  are  as  it  were  replaced  by  such  southern  and 
subtropical  fruits  as  the  date,  pomegranate,  cordia 
myxa  (sebastan  of  the  Arabs),  orange,  shaddock,  lime, 
banana,  almond,  prickly  pear,  and  pistachio-nut. 

Amongst  cereals  and  vegetables  the  English  tra 
veller  finds  wheat,  barley,  peas,  potatos,  many 
varieties  of  cabbage,  carrots,  lettuces,  endive,  and 
mustard ;  and  misses  oats,  rye,  and  the  extensive 
fields  of  turnip,  beet,  mangold-wurzel,  and  fodder 
grasses,  with  which  he  is  familial'  in  England.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  sees  for  the  first  time  the  cotton, 
millet,  rice,  sorghum,  sesamum,  sugar-cane,  maize, 
egg-apple,  ochra,  or  Abelmeoschus  esculentus,  Cor- 
cliorus  olitorius,  various  beans  and  lentils,  as  Lablab 
valtjaris,  Phaseolus  mungos,  and  Cicer  arietinum ; 
melons,  gourds,  pumpkins,  cumin,  coriander,  fennel, 
anise,  sweet  potato,  tobacco,  yam,  colocasia,  and 
other  subtropical  and  tropical  field  and  garden  crops. 

The  flora  of  Syria,  so  far  as  it  is  known,  may 
be  roughly  classed  under  three  principal  Botanical 
regions,  corresponding  with  the  physical  characters 
of  the  country.  These  are  (1),  the  western  or  sea 
board  half  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  including  the 
lower  valleys  of  the  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon,  the 
plain  of  Coele-Syria,  Galilee,  Samaria,  and  Judea. 
(2)  The  desert  or  eastern  half,  which  includes  the 
east  flanks  of  the  Anti-Lebanon,  the  plain  of  Da 
mascus,  the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  valley.  (3)  The 
middle  and  upper  mountain  regions  of  Mount  Casius, 
and  of  Lebanon  above  8400  feet,  and  of  the  Anti-Le 
banon  above  4000  feet.  Nothing  whatever  is  known 
botanically  of  the  regions  to  the  eastward,  viz.  the 
Hauran,  Lejah,  Gilead,  Ammon,  and  Moab;  coun 
tries  extending  eastward  into  Mesopotamia,  the  flora 
of  which  is  Persian,,  and  south  to  Idumea,  where 
the  purely  Arabian  flora  begins. 

These  Botanical  regions  present  no  definite  boun 
dary  line.  A  vast  number  of  plants,  and  especially 
of  herbs,  are  common  to  all  except  the  loftiest  parts 
of  Lebanon  and  the  driest  spots  of  the  eastern  district, 
and  in  no  latitude  is  there  a  sharp  line  of  demarca 
tion  between  them.  But  though  the  change  is  gradual 
from  the  dry  and  semi-tropical  eastern  flora  to  the 
moister  and  cooler  western,  or  from  the  latter  to  the 
cold  temperate  one  of  the  Lebanon,  there  is  a  great 
and  decided  difference  between  the  floras  of  three 
such  localities  as  the  Lebanon  at  5000  feet,  Jeru 
salem,  and  Jericho ;  or  between  the  tops  of  Lebanon, 
of  Carmel,  and  of  any  of  the  hills  bounding  the  Jor 
dan  ;  for  in  the  first  locality  we  are  most  strongly 
reminded  of  northern  Europe,  in  the  second  of  Spain, 
and  in  the  third  of  western  India  or  Persia. 

I.  Western  Syria  and  Palestine. — The  flora 
throughor*.  this  district  is  made  up  of  such  a  mul 
titude  of  different  families  and  genera  of  plants, 
that  it  is  not  easy  to  characterise  it  by  the  mention 
of  a  few.  Amongst  trees,  oaks  are  by  far  the  most 
prevalent,  and  are  the  only  ones  that  form  conti 
nuous  woods,  except  the  Pinus  maritima  and  P.  Ila- 
lepensis  (Aleppo  Pine) ;  the  former  of  which  extends 
in  forests  here  and  there  along  the  shore,  and  the 
latter  crests  the  spurs  of  the  Lebanon,  Carmel,  and 
a  few  other  ranges  as  far  south  as  Hebron.  The 
most  prevalent  oak  is  the  Quercus  pseudo-coccifera, 
a  plant  scarcely  different  from  the  common  Q.  coc- 
cifera  of  the  western  Mediterranean,  and  which  it 
strongly  resembles  in  form,  habit,  and  evergresn 
foliage.  J  is  called  holly  by  cidiiy  travellers,  aid 


384 


PALESTINE 


Quercut  Ilex  by  othei-s,  both  very  different  trees. 
Q.  pseuJo-coccifera  is  perhaps  the  commonest  plant 
in  all  Syria  and  Palestine,  covering  as  a  low  dense 
bush  many  square  miles  of  hilly  country  every 
where,  but  rarely  or  never  growing  in  the  plains. 
It  seldom  becomes  a  large  tree,  except  in  the  valleys 
ot*  the  Lebanon,  or  where,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
famous  oak  of  Mamre,  it  is  allowed  to  attain  its  full 
size.     It  ascends  about  5000  feet  on  the  mountains, 
rut  docs  uot  descend  into  the  middle  and  lower  valley 
of  the  Jordan ;  nor  is  it  seen  on  the  east  slopes  of 
the  Anti-Lebanon,  and  scarcely  to  the  eastward  of 
Jerusalem ;  it  may  indeed  have  been  removed  by  man 
from  these  regions,  when  the  effect  ot  its  removal 
would  be  to  dry  the  soil  and  climate,  and  prevent 
its  re-establishment.     Even  around  Jerusalem  it  is 
rare,  though  its  roots  are  said  to  exist  in  abundance 
in  the  soil.     The  only  other  oaks  that  are  common 
are  the  Q.  infectoria  (a  gall  oak),  and  Q.  Aegilops. 
The  Q.  infectoria  is  a  small  deciduous-leaved  tree, 
found  here  and  there  in  Galilee,  Samaria,  and  on 
the   Lebanon;    it  is  very   conspicuous  from   the 
numbers  of  bright  chesnut-coloured  shining  viscid 
galls  whch  it  bears,  and  which  are  sometimes  ex 
ported  to  England,  but  which  are  a  poor  substitute 
tor  the  true  Aleppo  galls.     Q.  Aegilops  again  is  th 
Valonia  oak ;  a  low,  very  stout-trunked  sturdy  tree 
common  in  Galilee,  and  especially  on  Tabor  an 
Carmel,  where  it  grows  in  scattered  groups,  givinj 
a  park-like  appearance  to  the  landscape.     It  bear 
acorns  of  a  very  large  size,  whose  cups,  which  ar 
covered  with  long  recurved  spines,  are  exported  t< 
Europe  as  Valonia,  and  are  used,  like  the  galls  o 
Q.  infectoria,  in  the  operation  of  dyeing.     This, 
am  inclined  to  believe,  is  the  oak  of  Bashan,  botl 
on  account  of  its  sturdy  habit  and  thick  trunk, 
also  because  a  fine  piece  of  the  wood  of  this  tree  was> 
sent  from  Bashan  to  the  Kew  Museum  by  Mr.  Cyri 
Graham.     The  other  oaks  of  Syria  are  chiefly  con 
fined  to  the  mountains,  and  will  be  noticed  in  thei: 
proper  place. 

The  trees  of  the  genus  Pistacia  rank  next  in 
abundance  to  the  Oak, — and  of  these  there  are  three 
species  in  Syria,  two  wild  and  most  abundant,  bui 
the  third,  P.  vera,  which  yields  the  well-known 
pistachio  nut,  very  rare,  and  chiefly  seen  in  cultiva 
tion  about  Aleppo,  but  also  in  Beyrout  and  near 
Jerusalem.  The  wild  species  are  the  P.  Lentiscus 
and  P.  Terebinthus,  both  very  common :  the  P.  Len 
tiscus  rarely  exceeds  the  size  of  a  low  bush,  which  is 
conspicuous  for  its  dark  evergreen  leaves  and  num 
berless  small  red  berries ;  the  other  grows  larger, 
but  seldom  forms  a  fair-sized  tree. 

The  Carob  or  Locust-tree,  Ceratonia  Siliqua, 
ranks  perhaps  next  in  abundance  to  the  foregoing 
trees.  It  never  grows  in  clumps  or  forms  woods, 
but  appeal's  as  an  isolated,  rounded  or  oblong,  very 
dcnse-foliaged  tree,  branching  from  near  the  base, 
of  a  bright  lucid  green  hue,  affording  the  best  shade. 
Its  singular  flowers  are  produced  from  its  thick 
branches  in  autumn,  and  are  succeeded  by  the  large 
pendulous  pods,  called  St.  John's  Bread,  and  exten 
sively  exported  from  the  Levant  to  England  for 
feeding  cattle. 

The  oriental  Plane  is  far  from  uncommon,  and 
though  generally  cultivated,  it  is  to  all  appearance 
wild  in  the  valleys  of  the  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon. 
The  great  plane  of  Damascus  is  a  well-known  object 
to  travellers  ;  the  girth  of  its  trunk  was  nearly  40 
feet,  bu*,  it  is  now  a  mere  wreck. 

The  Sycamore-fig  is  common  in  the  neighboui  • 
!iood  of  town:-.,  and  attains  a  large  size  ;  its  wood  is 


PALESTINE 

much  used,  especially  in  Egypt,  where  the  mummy, 
cases  were  formerly  made  of  it.     Poplars,  espe« 
cially  the  aspen  and  white  poplar,  are  extremely 
common  by  streams ;  the  latter  is  generally  trimmed 
for   firewood,    so  as  to  resemble   the    Lombard} 
poplar.     The  Walnut   is   more  common  in  Syria 
than  in  Palestine,  and  in  both  countries  is  generally 
confined  to  gardens  and  orchards.     Of  large  nativ? 
shrubs  or  small  trees  almost  universally  spread  over 
this  district   are,    Arbutus  Andrachne,   which  is 
common  in  the  hilly  country  from  Hebron  north 
ward  ;  Crataegus  Aronia,  which  grows  equally  in 
dry  rocky  exposures,  as  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  and 
in  cool  mountain  valleys ;  it  yields  a  large  yellow 
or  red  haw  that  is  abundantly  sold  in  the  markets. 
Cypresses  are  common  about  villages,  and  especially 
near  all  religious  establishments,  often  attaining  a 
considerable  size,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  their  being 
indigenous  to  Syria.  Zizyphus  Spina-Christi,  Christ's 
Thorn — often  called  jujube — the  Nubk  of  the  Arabs, 
is  most  common  on  dry  open  plains,  as  that  of  Jeri 
cho,  where  it  is  either  a  scrambling  briar,  a  standard 
shrub,  or  rarely  even  a  middling-sized  tree  with 
pendulous  branches :  it  is  familiar  to  the  traveller 
from  its  sharp  hooks,  white  undersides  to  the  three- 
nerved  leaves,  and  globular  yellow  sweetish  fruit 
with  a  large  woody  stone.    The  Paliurus  aculeatus, 
also  called  Christ's  Thorn,  resembles  it  a  good  deal, 
but  is  much  less  common ;  it  abounds  in  the  Anti- 
Lebanon,  where  it  is  used  for  hedges,  and  may  be 
recognised  by  its  curved  prickles  and  curious  dry 
fruit,  with  a  broad  flat  wing  at  the  top.     Styrax 
officinalis,  which  used  to  yield  the  famous  Storax, 
abounds  in  all  parts  of  the  country  where  hilly  , 
sometimes,  as  on  the  east  end  of  Carmel  and  on 
Tabor,  becoming  a  very  large  bush  branching  from 
the  ground,  but  never  assuming  the  form  of  a  tree: 
it  may  be  known  by  its  small  downy  leaves,  white 
flowers  like  orange  blossoms,  and  round  yellow  fruit, 
pendulous  from  slender  stalks,  like  cherries.     Th« 
flesh  of  the  berry,  which  is  quite  uneatable,  is  of  a 
semi-transparent   hue,   and  contains  one   or  more 
large,  chesnut-coloured  seeds.     Tamarisk  is  com 
mon,  but  seldom  attains  a  large  size,  and  has  no 
thing  to  recommend  it  to  notice.     Oleander  claims 
a  separate  notice,  from  its  great  beauty  and  abun 
dance  ;  lining  the  banks  of  the  streams  and  lakes  in 
gravelly  places,  and  bearing  a  profusion  of  blossoms. 
Other  still  smaller  but  familiar  shrubs  are  Phylly- 
raea,  Rhamnus  alaternus,  and  others  of  that  genus. 
Rhus  Coriaria,  several  leguminous  shrubs,  as  Ana- 
gyris  foetida,  Caiycotome  and  Genista;  Cotoneas- 
ter,  the  common  bramble,  dog-rose,  and  hawthorn 
Elaeagnus,  wild  olive,  Lycium  Europaeuin,  Vitey 
agnus-castus,  sweet  bay  (Laurus  nobilis),  Ephedra, 
lematis,  Gum-Cistus,  and  the  caper  plant:  these 
nearly  complete  the  list  of  the  commoner  shrubs 
and  trees  of  the  western  district,  which  attain  a 
icight  of  four  feet  or  more,  and  are  almost  uni« 
•ersally  met  with,  especially  in  the  hilly  country. 
Of  planted  trees  and  large  shrubs,  the  first  in  im 
portance    is  the  Vine,   which  is  most  abundantly 
ultivated  all  over  the  country,  and  produces,  as  in 
the  time  of  the  Canaanites,  enormous  bunches  of 
grapes.     This  is  especially  the  case  in  the  southern 
istricts;  those  of  Eshcol  being  still   particularly 
amous.     Stephen  Schultz  states  that  at  a  village 
Ptolemais  (Acre)    he  supped   under   a   largo 
fine,  the  stem  of  which  measured  a  foot  and  a  half 
diameter,  its  height  being  30  feet ;   and  that 
e  whole  plant,  supported  on  trellis,  covered  an 
iva  5u   iivt   cither  \va»       1'hs  biuichts  of  grape* 


PALESTINE 

weighed  10-12  Ibs.,  and  the  berries  were  like 
smal  plums.  Mariti  relates  that  no  vines  can  vie 
for  produce  with  those  of  Judea,  of  which  a  bunch 
cannot  be  carried  far  without  destroying  the  fruit : 
And  we  have  ourselves  heard  that  the  bunches  pro 
duced  near  Hebron  are  sometimes  so  long  that, 
when  attached  to  a  stick  which  is  supported  on  the 
shoulders  of  two  men,  the  tip  of  the  bunch  trails  on 
the  ground. 

Next  to  the  vine,  or  even  in  some  respects  its 
superior  in  importance,  ranks  the  Olive,  which  no 
where  grows  in  greater  luxuriance  and  abundance 
than  in  Palestine,  where  the  olive  orchards  form  a 
prominent  feature  throughout  the  landscape,  and 
have  done  so  from  time  immemorial.  The  olive- 
tree  is  in  no  respects  a  handsome  or  picturesque 
object ;  its  bark  is  grey  and  rugged ;  its  foliage  is 
in  colour  an  ashy,  or  at  best  a  dusky  green,  and 
affords  little  shade ;  its  wood  is  useless  as  timber, 
its  flowers  are  inconspicuous,  and  its  fruit  uninvit 
ing  to  the  eye  or  palate ;  so  that,  even  where  most 
abundant  and  productive,  the  olive  scarcely  relieves 
the  aspect  of  the  dry  soil,  and  deceives  the  super- 
ticial  observer  as  to  the  fertility  of  Palestine.  In 
deed  it  is  mainly  owing  to  these  peculiarities  of 
the  olive-tree,  and  to  the  deciduous  character  of 
the  foliage  of  the  rig  and  vine,  that  the  impression 
is  so  prevalent  amongst  northern  travellers,  that 
the  Holy  Land  is  in  point  of  productiveness  not 
what  it  was  in  former  times ;  for  to  the  native 
of  northern  Europe  especially,  the  idea  of  fertility 
is  inseparable  from  that  of  verdure.  The  article 
OLIVE  must  be  referred  to  for  details  of  this  tree, 
which  is  perhaps  most  skilfully  and  carefully  culti 
vated  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron,  where  for 
many  miles  the  roads  run  between  stone  walls  en 
closing  magnificent  olive  orchards,  apparently  tended 
with  as  much  neatness,  care,  and  skill  as  the  best 
fruit  gardens  in  England.  The  terraced  olive-yards 
around  Sebastieh  must  also  strike  the  most  casual 
observer,  as  admirable  specimens  of  careful  culti 
vation. 

The  Fig  forms  another  most  important  crop  in 
Syria  and  Palestine,  and  one  which  is  apparently 
greatly  increasing  in  extent.  As  with  the  olive  and 
mulberry,  the  fig-trees,  where  best  cultivated,  are 
symmetrically  planted  in  fields,  whose  soil  is  freed 
from  stones,  and  kept  as  scrupulously  clean  of 
weeds  as  it  can  be  in  a  semi-tropical  climate.  As  is 
well  known,  the  fig  bears  two  or  three  crops  in  the 
year:  Josephus  says  that  it  bears  for  ten  months 
out  of  the  twelve.  The  early  figs,  which  ripen 
about  June,  are  reckoned  especially  good.  The 
summer  figs  again  ripen  in  August,  and  a  third 
crop  appears  still  later  when  the  leaves  are  shed ; 
tb.sse  are  occasionally  gathered  as  late  as  January. 
The  figs  are  dried  by  the  natives,  and  are  chiefly 
purchased  by  the  Arabs  of  the  eastern  deserts.  The 
Sycamore-fig,  previously  noticed,  has  much  smaller 
and  very  interior  fruit. 

The  quince,  apple,  almond,  walnut,  peach,  and 
apricot,  are  all  most  abundant  field  or  orchard 
crops,  often  planted  in  lines,  rows,  or  quincunx 
order,  with  the  olive,  mulberry,  or  fig ;  but  they 
are  by  no  means  so  abundant  as  these  latter.  The 
pomegranate  grows  everywhere  as  a  bush ;  but,  lik 
the  orange,  Elaeagnus,  and  other  less  common 
plants,  is  more  often  seen  in  gardens  than  in  fields 
The  fruit  ripens  in  August,  and  is  kept  througboui 
t.'ie  winter.  Three  Kinds  are  cultivated — the  acid 
Hvect,  and  insipid — and  all  are  used  in  preparing 
r.herSets  ;  while  the  bark  and  fruit  rind  of  nil  are 


PALESTINE 


685 


used  for  dyeing  and  as  medicine,  owing  to  theii 
astringent  properties. 

The  Banana  is  only  found  near  the  Mediterr*» 
ncan ;  it  ripens  its  fruit  as  far  north  as  Beyrout, 
and  occasionally  even  at  Tripoli,  but  more  constantly 
at  Sidon  and  Jaffa ;  only  one  kind  is  commonly  cul- 
ivated,  but  it  is  excellent.  Dates  are  not  frequent : 
hey  are  most  common  at  Caitta  and  Jaffa,  where 
he  fruit  ripens,  but  there  are  now  no  groves  ol 
his  tree  anywhere  but  in  Southern  Palestine,  such 
is  once  existed  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  near  the 
issumed  site  of  Jericho.  Of  that  well-known  grove 
no  tree  is  standing ;  one  log  of  date-palm,  now  lying 
n  a  stream  near  the  locality,  is  perhaps  the  last 
•emains  of  that  ancient  race,  though  that  they  were 
mce  abundant  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of 
he  Dead  Sea  is  obvious  from  the  remark  of  Mr. 
3oole,  that  some  part  of  the  shore  of  that  sea  is 
itrewn  with  their  trunks.  [See  p.  675  note.] 
Wild  dwarf  dates,  rarely  producing  fruit,  grow  by 
,he  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Tiberias  and  near  Caiffa ; 
ut  whether  they  are  truly  indigenous  date-palms,  or 
crab-dates  produced  from  seedlings  of  the  cultivated 
bran,  is  not  known. 

The  Opuntia,  or  Prickly  Pear,  is  most  abundant 
;hroughout  Syria,  and  though  a  native  of  the  New 
World,  has  here,  as  elsewhere  throughout  the  dry, 
lot  regions  of  the  eastern  hemisphere,  established 
"ts  claim  to  be  regarded  as  a  permanent  and  rapidly- 
ncreasing  denizen.  It  is  in  general  use  for  hedging, 
and  its  well-known  fruit  is  extensively  eaten  by  all 
classes.  I  am  not  aware  that  the  cochineal  insect 
las  ever  been  introduced  into  Syria,  where  there 
can,  however,  be  little  doubt  but  that  it  might  be 
successfully  cultivated. 

Of  dye-stuffs  the  Carthamus  (Safflower)  and 
[ndigo  are  both  cultivated ;  and  of  Textiles,  Flax, 
Hemp,  and  Cotton. 

The  Carob,  or  St.  John's  Bread  (Ceratonia  Si- 
liqud),  has  already  been  mentioned  amongst  the 
conspicuous  trees :  the  sweetish  pulp  of  the  pods  is 
used  for  sherbets,  and  abundantly  eaten ;  the  pods 
are  used  for  cattle-feeding,  and  the  leaves  and  bark 
for  tanning. 

The  Cistus  or  Rock-rose,  two  or  three  species  of 
which  are  abundant  throughout  the  hilly  districts 
of  Palestine,  is  the  shrub  from  which  in  former 
times  Gum-Labdanum  was  collected  in  the  islands 
of  Candia  and  Cyprus. 

With  regard  to  the  rich  and  varied  herbaceous 
vegetation  of  West  Syria  and  Palestine,  it  is  difficult 
to  afford  any  idea  of  its  nature  to  the  English  non- 
botanical  reader,  except  by  comparing  it  with  the 
British ;  which  I  shall  first  do,  and  then  detail  its 
most  prominent  botanical  features. 

The  plants  contained  in  this  botanical  region  pro 
bably  number  not  less  ftian  2000  or  2500,  of  which 
perhaps  500  are  British  wild  flowers ;  amongst  the 
most  conspicuous  of  these  British  ones  are  the  Ra 
nunculus  aquatilis,  arvensis,a.nd  Ficaria ;  the  yellow 
water-lily,  Papaver  Rhoeas  and  hybridum,  and  se 
veral  Fumitories;  fully  20  cruciferous  plants, 
including  Draba  verna,  water-cress,  Turritis glabra, 
Sisymbrium  Trio,  Capsella  Bursa-pastoris ,  Cakile 
maritima,  Lepidiitm  Draba,  charlock,  mustard 
(often  growing  8  to  9  feet  high),  two  mignionettes 
(Reseda  alba  and  lutea),  Silene  inflata,  various 
species  of  Cerastium,  Spergula,  Rtellaria  and  Are* 
naria,  mallows,  Geranium  mollc,  rotundifolium, 
lucidum,  dissectum,  and  Robertianum,  Erodium 
moschatum,  and  cicutarium.  Also  many  species  o< 
Lcgiiininosae,  especially  of  Medicago,  Trifolium. 


686 


PALESTINE 


Kdikttus,  Lotus,  Ononis,  Ervum,  Vicia  and  La- 
(ityrus.  Of  Rosaceae  the  common  bramble  and 
dog-rose.  Lvthrum  Salicaria,  Epilobium  hii-sutum, 
Bryonia  dioica,  Saxifraga  tridactylites,  Galinn* 
cerum,  Rubin  psregrina,  Asperula  arvensis.  Va 
rious  Umbelliferae  and  Compositac,  including 
the  daisy,  wormwood,  groundsel,  dandelion,  chi 
cory,  sowthistle,  and  many  o there.  Blue  and  white 
pimpernel,  Cyclamen  Europaeum,  Samolus  Vale- 
randi,  Erica  vagans,  Borage,  Veronica  Anagallis, 
Beccabunga,  agrestis,  triphyllos,  and  Chamaedrys, 
Lathraea  squamaria,  Vervain,  Lamium  amplexi- 
caule,  mint,  horehound,  Prunella,  Statice  Limo- 
nium,  many  Chenopodiaceae,  Polygonum  and  Ru- 
mex,  Pellitory,  Merciurialis,  Eup/iorbias,  nettles, 
box,  elm,  several  willows  and  poplars,  common 
duck-weed  and  pond-weed,  Orchis  mono,  Crocus 
aureiis,  butcher 's-broom,  black  Bryony,  autumnal 
Squill,  and  many  rushes,  sedges,  and  grasses. 

The  most  abundant  natural  families  of  plants  in 
West  Syria  and  Palestine  are — (1)  Leguminosae, 
(2)  Compositae,  (3)  Labiatae,  (4)  Cruciferae; 
after  which  come  (5)  Umbelliferae,  (6)  Caryophyl- 
leae,  (7)  Boragineae,  (8)  Scrophularineae,  (9) 
Gramineae,  and  (10)  Liliaeeae. 

(1.)  Leguminosae  abound  in  all  situations,  espe 
cially  the  genera  Trifolium,  Trigonella,  Medicago, 
Lotus',  Vicia,  and  Orobus,  in  the  richer  soils,  and 
Astragalus  in  enormous  profusion  in  the  drier  and 
more  barren  districts.  The  latter  genus  is  indeed 
the  largest  in  the  whole  country,  upwards  of  fifty 
species  belonging  to  it  being  enumerated,  either  as 
confined  to  Syria,  or  common  to  it  and  the  neigh 
bouring  countries.  Amongst  them  are  the  gum- 
bearing  Astragali,  which  are,  however,  almost  con 
fined  to  the  upper  mountain  regions.  Of  the  shrubby 
Leguminosae  there  are  a  few  species  of  Genista, 
Cytisus,  Ononis,  Retama,  Anagyris,  Calycotome, 
Coronilla,  and  Acacia.  One  species,  the  Ceratonia, 
is  arboreous. 

(2.)  Compositae. — No  family  of  plants  more 
strikes  the  observer  than  the  Compositae,  from  the 
Y!ut  abundance  of  thistles  and  centauries,  and  other 
spring-plants  of  the  same  tribe,  which  swann  alike 
over  the  richest  plains  and  most  stony  hills,  often 
towering  high  above  all  other  herbaceous  vegetation. 
By  the  unobservant  traveller  these  are  often  sup 
posed  to  indicate  sterility  of  soil,  instead  of  the 
contrary,  which  they  for  the  most  part  really  do, 
for  they  are  nowhere  so  tall,  rank,  or  luxuriant  as 
on  the  most  productive  soils.  It  is  beyond  the  limits 
of  this  article  to  detail  the  botanical  peculiarities 
of  this  vegetation,  and  we  can  only  mention  the 
genera  Centaurea,  Echinops,  Onopordum,  Cirsium, 
Cynara,  and  Carduus_  as  being  eminently  conspi 
cuous  for  their  numbers  or  size.  The  tribe  Cichoreae 
are  scarcely  less  numerous,  whilst  those  of  Gnapha- 
liae,  Asteroideae,  and  Senecionideae .  so  common  in 
more  northern  latitudes,  are  here  comparatively  rare. 

(3.)  Labiatae  form  a  prominent  feature  every 
where,  and  one  all  the  more  obtrusive  from  the  fra 
grance  of  many  of  the  genera.  Thus  the  lovely  hills 
of  Galilee- and  Samaria  are  inseparably  linked  in  the 
memory  with  the  odoriferous  herbage  of  marjoram, 
thymes,  lavenders,  calaminths,  sages,  and  teucriums ; 
c.f  all  which  there  are  many  species,  as  also  there 
are  ofSideritis,  Phlomis,  Stachys,  Ballota,  Nepeta, 
and  Mentha. 

(4.)  Of  Cruciferae,  there  is  little  to  remark  :  its 
species  are  generally  weed-like,  and  present  no 
marked  feature  in  the  landscape.  Among  the  most 
BOliceablc  are  the  gigantic  mustard,  previously 


PALESTINE 

cientiot;c<l,  which  does  not  differ  from  the  comimn 
mustard.  Sinapis  nigra,  save  in  size,  :u,d  the  Anas- 
tatica  hierochuntica,  or  rose  of  Jericho,  an  Fgvr>- 
tian  and  Arabian  plant,  which  is  said  to  grow  in 
the  Jordan  and  Dead  Sea  valleys. 

(5.)  Umbelliferae  present  li.ttle  to  remark  on 
save  the  abundance  of  fennels  and  Bupleurunis :  th« 
order  is  exceedingly  numerous  both  in  species  and 
individuals,  which  often  form  a  large  proportion  of 
the  tall  rank  herbage  at  the  edges  of  copse-wood  and 
in  damp  hollows.  The  erey  and  spiny  Eryngium,  so 
abundant  on  all  the  arid  hills,  belongs  to  this  order. 

(6.)  Caryophylleac  also  are  not  a  very  coii- 
spicuous  order,  though  so  numerous  that  the 
abundance  of  pinks,  Silene  and  Saponaria,  is  a 
marked  feature  to  the  eye  of  the  botanist. 

(7.)  The  Boragineae  are  for  the  most  part  annual 
weeds,  but  some  notable  exceptions  are  found  in 
the  Echiums,  Anchusas,  and  Onosmas,  which  are 
among  the  most  beautiful  plants  of  the  country. 

(8.)  Of  Scrophularineae  the  principal  genera  are 
Scrophularia,  Veronica,  Linaria,  and  Verbascum 
(Mulleins) :  the  latter  is  by  far  the  most  abundant, 
and  many  of  the  species  are  quite  gigantic. 

(9.)  Grasses,  though  very  numerous  in  species, 
seldom  afford  a  sward  as  in  moister  and  col-itr 
regions ;  the  pasture  of  England  having  for  its 
Oriental  equivalent  the  herbs  and  herbaceous  tips 
of  the  low  shrubby  plants  which  cover  the  country, 
and  on  which  all  herbivorous  animals  love  to  browse. 
The  Arundo  Donax,  Saccharum  Aegyptiacum,  and 
Erianthus  Ravennae,  are  all  conspicuous  for  their 
gigantic  size  and  silky  plumes  of  flowers  of  singular 
grace  and  beauty. 

(10.)  Liliaeeae. — The  variety  and  beauty  of  thin 
order  in  Syria  is  perhaps  nowhere  exceeded,  and 
especially  of  the  bulb-bearing  genera,  as  tulips, 
fritillaries,  squills,  gageas,  &c.  The  Urginea  Sctila, 
(medicinal  squill)  abounds  everywhere,  throwing  up 
a  tall  stalk  beset  with  white  flowers  at  its  upper 
half ;  and  the  little  purple  autumnal  squill  is  one  of 
the  commonest  plants  in  the  country,  springing  up 
in  October  and  November  in  the  most  arid  situations 
imaginable. 

Of  other  natural  orders  worthy  of  notice,  for  one 
reason  or  another,  are  Violaceae,  for  the  paucity  of 
its  species ;  Geraniaceae,  which  are  very  numerous 
and  beautiful ;  Rutaceae,  which  are  common,  and 
very  strong-scented  when  bruised.  Rosaceae  ai« 
not  so  abundant  as  in  more  northern  climates,  but 
are  represented  by  one  remarkable  plant,  Poteriwn 
spinosum,  which  covers  whole  tracts  of  arid,  hilly 
country,  much  as  the  ling  does  in  Britain.  Cras- 
sulaceae  and  Saxifrageae  are  also  not  so  plentiful 
as  in  cooler  regions.  Dipsaceae  are  very  abundant, 
especially  the  genera  Knautia,  Scabiosa,  Cephalaria, 
and  Pterocephalus.  Campanulaceae  are  common, 
and  Lobeliaceae  rare.  Primulaceae  and  Ericeae 
are  both  rare,  though  one  or  two  species  are  not 
uncommon.  There  are  very  few  Gentiancae,  but 
many  Convolvuli.  Of  Solancae,  Mandragora,  So- 
lanum,  and  Hyoscyam,ts  are  very  common,  also 
Physalis,  Capsicum,  and  Lycopersiaun,  all  probably 
escapes  from  cultivation.  Pluni'in-iiiteae  contain  a 
good  many  Statices,  and  the  blue-flowered  J'lum- 
b  /i/n  L'liropaea  is  a  very  common  weed.  Chcno- 
podiaceae  are  very  numerous,  especially  the  weedy 
Afriplices  and  Chenopodia  and  some  shrubby  >Sa/- 
solas.  Polygonae  are  very  common  indeed,  especially 
the  smaller  species  of  Polyijonum  itself.  Aristo- 
lo<:hie<tc  prex'iit  M'vcial  s|xrirs.  I'.'iphnrbinctne 
The  heibaccoi::;  p'nus  llnjik'jibi'i  i;-  v;i.  tly  abundant 


PALESTINE 

especially  in  fields:  upwards  of  fifty  Syrian  species 
*r°  known.  Crozophora,  Andrachne,  and  Ricinus, 
ali-  auuihwQ  types,  are  also  common.  Urticeae 
present  the  common  European  nettles,  Mercurialis, 
and  Pellitory.  Moreae,  the  common  and  sycamore 
figs,  and  the  black  and  white  mulberries.  Aroideae 
are  very  common,  and  many  of  them  are  handsome, 
having  deep-purple  lurid  spathes,  which  rise  out 
of  the  ground  before  the  leaves. 

Of  Balanophorae  ,  the  curious  Cynomorium  cocci- 
neum,  or  "  Fungus  Melitensis,"  used  as  a  styptic 
during  the  Crusades  by  the  Knights  of  Malta,  is 
found  in  the  valleys  of  Lebanon  near  the  sea. 
Naiadeae,  as  in  other  dry  countries,  are  scarce. 
Orcliideae  contain  about  thirty  to  forty  kinds, 
chiefly  South  European  species  of  Orchis,  Ophrys, 
Spiranthes,  and  Serapias. 

Amaryllideae  present  Pansratium,  Sternbergia, 
Ixiolirion,  and  Narcissus.  Irideae  has  many  species 
of  Iris  and  Crocus,  besides  Moraea,  Gladiolus, 
Trichoncma,  and  Romulea.  Dioscoreae,  Tamus 
communis.  Smilaceae,  several  Asparagi,  Smilax, 
and  Ruscus  aculeatus.  Melanthaceae  contain  many 
Colchicums,  besides  Merendera  and  Erythrostictus. 
Junceae  contain  none  but  the  commoner  British 
rushes  and  luzulas.  Cyperaceae  are  remarkably  poor 
in  species  ;  the  genus  Carex,  so  abundant  in  Europe, 
is  especially  rare,  not  half  a  dozen  species  being 
enumerated. 

Ferns  are  extremely  scarce,  owing  to  the  dryness 
of  the  climate,  and  most  of  the  species  belong  to 
the  Lebanon  flora.  The  common  lowland  ones  are 
Adiantum  capillus-veneris,  Cheilanthes  fragrans, 
Gymnogramma  leptophylla,  Ceterach  officinarum, 
Pteris  lanceolata,  and  Asplenium  Adiantum- 
nigrum.  Selaginella  denticulata  is  also  found. 

One  of  the  most  memorable  plants  of  this  region, 
and  indeed  in  the  whole  world,  is  the  celebrated 
Papyrus  of  the  ancients  (Papyrus  antiquoruni], 
which  is  said  once  to  have  grown  on  the  banks  of 
the  lower  Nile,  but  which  is  nowhere  found  now  in 
Africa  north  of  the  tropics.  The  only  other  known 
habitat  beside  Syria  and  tropical  Africa  is  one  spot 
in  the  island  of  Sicily.  The  Papyrus  is  a  noble 
plant,  forming  tufts  of  tall  stout  3-angled  green 
smooth  stems,  6  to  10  feet  high,  each  surmounted 
by  a  mop  of  pendulous  threads  :  it  abounds  in  some 
marshes  by  the  Lake  of  Tiberias,  and  is  also  said 
to  grow  near  CaifFa  and  elsewhere  in  Syria.  It  is 
certainly  the  most  remarkable  plant  in  the  country. 

Of  other  Cryptogamic  plants  little  is  known. 
Mosses,  lichens,  and  ffepaticae  are  not  generally 
common,  though  doubtless  many  species  are  to  be 
found  in  the  winter  and  spring  months.  The  marine 
Algae  are  supposed  to  be  the  same  as  in  the  rest  of 
the  Mediterranean,  and  of  Fungi  we  have  no  know 
ledge  at  all. 

Cucurbitaceae,  though  not  included  under  any  of 
the  above  heads,  are  a  veiy  frequent  order  in  Syria. 
Besides  the  immense  crops  of  melons,  gourds,  and 
pumpkins,  the  colocynth  apple,  which  yields  the 
<!UDDOUS  drug,  is  common  in  some  parts,  while  even 
.nore  so  is  the  Squirting  Cucumber  (Ecbalium  ela- 


PALESTINE 


687 


Of  plants  that  contribute  largely  to  that  showy 
character  for  which  the  herbage  of  Palestine  is 
famous,  may  be  mentioned  Adonis,  Ranunculus 
Asiaticus,  and  others  ;  Anemone  coronaria,  poppies, 
Glaucium,  Matthiola,  Malcolmia,  Alyssmn,  Bi- 
scvtella,  Helianthemum,  Cistus,  the  caper  plant, 
many  pinks,  Silene,  Saponaria,  and  Gypsophila  • 
various  Phloxes,  mallows,  Lavatcra  ffi/pericum  ; 


many  geraniums,  Erodiums,  and  Leguminosae, 
and  Labiatae  far  too  numerous  to  individualize  •, 
flcabiosa,  Cephalaria,  chrysanthemums,  Pyrethrwn, 
Inulas,  Achilleas,  Calendulas,  Ccntaureas,  Trago- 
poyons,  Scorzoneras,  and  Crepis ;  many  noble  Cam 
panulas,  cyclamens,  Convolvuli,  Anchusas,  Onos- 
mas,  and  Echiums,  Acanthus,  Verbascums  (most 
conspicuously),  Veronicas,  Celsias,  Hyoscyamus ; 
many  Arums  in  autumn,  orchis  and  Ophrys  in 
spring ;  Narcissus,  Tazetta,  irises,  Pancratiums, 
Sternbergia,  Gladiolus;  many  beautiful  crocuses 
and  colchioums,  squills,  Talipa  oculus-solis,  Gageas, 
fritillaries,  Alliums,  Star  of  Bethlehem,  Muscaris, 
white  lily,  Hyacinthus  orientalis,  Bellevalias,  and 
Asphodeli. 

With  such  gay  and  delicate  flowers  as  these,  in 
numberless  combinations,  the  ground  is  almost 
carpeted  during  spring  and  early  summer ;  and  as 
in  similar  hot  and  diy,  but  still  temperate  climates, 
as  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  Australia,  they  often 
colour  the  whole  landscape,  from  their  lavish 
abundance. 

II.  Botany  of  Eastern  Syria  and  Palestine. — 
Little  or  nothing  being  known  of  the  flora  of  the 
range  of  mountains  east  of  the  Jordan  and  Syrian 
desert,  we  must  confine  our  notice  to  the  valley  of 
the  Jordan,  that  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the  country 
about  Damascus. 

Nowhere  can  a  better  locality  be  found  for  show 
ing  the  contrast  between  the  vegetation  of  the 
eastern  and  western  districts  of  Syria  than  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  To  the  west  and 
south  of  that  city  the  valleys  are  full  of  the  dwarf 
oak,  two  kinds  otPistacia,  besides  Smilax,  Arbutus, 
rose,  Aleppo  Pine,  Rhamnus,  Phyllyraea,  bramble, 
and  Crataegus  Aronia.  Of  these  the  last  alone  is 
found  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  beyond  which,  east 
ward  to  the  Dead  Sea,  not  one  of  these  plants  appears, 
nor  are  they  replaced  by  any  analogous  ones.  For 
the  first  tew  miles  the  olive  groves  continue,  and 
here  and  there  a  carob  and  lentisk  or  sycamore 
recurs,  but  beyond  Bethany  thes»  are  scarcely  seen. 
Naked  rocks,  or  white  chalky  rounded  hills,  with 
bare  open  valleys,  succeed,  wholly  destitute  of  copse, 
and  sprinkled  with  sterile-looking  shrubs  of  Salsolas, 
Capparideae,  Zygophyllum,  rues,  Fagonia,  Poly- 
gonum,  Zizyphus,  tamarisks,  alhagi,  and  Artemisia, 
Herbaceous  plants  are  still  abundant,  but  do  not 
form  the  continuous  sward  that  they  do  in  Judea. 
Amongst  these,  Boragineae,  Alsineae,  Fagonia,  Poly- 
gonurn,  Crozophora,  Euphorbias,  and  Leguminosae 
are  the  most  frequent. 

On  descending  1000  feet  below  the  level  of  the 
sea  to  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  the  subtropical  and 
desert  vegetation  of  Arabia  and  West  Asia  is  en 
countered  in  full  force.  Many  plants  wholly  foreign 
to  the  western  district  suddenly  appear,  and  the 
flora  is  that  of  the  whole  dry  country  as  far 
east  as  the  Psiniab.  The  commonest  plant  is  the 
Zizyphus  Spina-Christi,  or  nubk  of  the  Arabs, 
forming  bushes  or  small  trees.  Scarcely  less  abun 
dant,  and  as  large,  is  the  Balanites  Aegypiiaca, 
whose  fruit  yields  the  oil  called  zuk  by  the  Arabs, 
which  is  reputed  to  possess  healing  properties,  and 
which  may  possibly  be  alluded  to  as  Balm  of  Gilead. 
Tamarisks  are  most  abundant,  together  with  Rhus 
(Syriaca  ?),  conspicuous  for  the  bright  green  cf  its 
few  small  leaves,  and  its  exact  resemblance  in  foli  ige, 
bark,  and  habit  to  the  true  Balm  of  Gilead.  tin- 
Amyris  Gileadensis  of  Arabia.  Other  most  alun- 
dant  shrubs  are  Ochradcnus  baccat'.is,  a  tall,  brai  ch- 
ing,  almost  leafless  plant,  with  small  white  bprri<* 


(588 


PALESTINE 


and  thj  twiggy,  leafless  broom  called  Retama. 
Acacia  Farnesiana  is  very  abundant,  and  cele 
brated  for  the  delicious  fragrance  of  its  yellow 
flowers.  It  is  chiefly  upon  it  that  the  superb  misletoe, 
Lyranthus  Acaciae,  grows,  whose  scarlet  flowers 
ure  brilliant  ornaments  to  the  desert  during  winter, 
giving  the  appearance  of  flame  to  the  bushes.  Cap- 
parts  spinosa,  the  common  caper-plant,  flourishes 
everywhere  in  the  Jordan  valley,  forming  clumps  in 
the  very  arid  rocky  bottoms,  which  are  conspicuous 
for  their  pale-blue  hue,  when  seen  from  a  distance. 
Alhagi  maurorum  is  extremely  common ;  as  is  the 
prickly  Solanutn  Sodomaeum,  with  purple  flowers 
and  globular  yellow  fruits,  commonly  known  as  the 
Dead  Sea  apple. 

On  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  itself  the  arboreous 
and  shrubby  vegetation  chiefly  consists  of  Populus 
Euphratica  (a  plant  found  all  over  Central  Asia, 
but  not  known  west  of  the  Jordan),  tamarisk, 
Osyris  alba,  Periploca,  Acacia  vera,  Prosopis 
Stephaniana,  Arundo  Donax,  Lycium,  and  Cap- 
parts  spinosa.  As  the  ground  becomes  saline,  Atri- 
plex  Halimus  and  large  Statices  (sea-pinks)  appear 
in  vast  abundance,  with  very  many  succulent 
shrubby  Salsolas,  Salicomias,  Suaedas,  and  other 
allied  plants  to  the  number  of  at  least  a  dozen, 
many  of  which  are  typical  of  the  salt  depressions 
of  the  Caspian  and  Central  Asia. 

Other  very  tropical  plants  of  this  region  are 
Zygophyllum  coccineum,  Boerhavia,  Indigofera; 
several  Astragali,  Cassias,  Gymnocarpum,  and 
Nitraria.  At  tne  same  time  thoroughly  European 
forms  are  common,  especially  in  wet  places  ;  as  dock, 
mint,  Veronica  Anagallis,  and  Sium.  One  remote 
and  little-visited  spot  in  this  region  is  particularly 
celebrated  for  the  tropical  character  of  its  vegetation. 
This  is  the  small  valley  of  Engedi  (Ain-jkli),  which 
is  on  the  west  shore  of  the  .Dead  Sea,  and  where 
alone,  it  is  said,  the  following  tropical  plants 
grow : — Sida  mutica  and  Asiatica,  Calotropis  pro- 
cera  (whose  bladdery  fruits,  full  of  the  silky  coma 
of  the  seeds,  have  even  been  assumed  to  be  the 
Apple  of  Sodom),  Amberboa,  Batatas  littoralis, 
Aerva  Javanica,  Pluchea  Dioscoridis. 

It  is  here  that  the  Salvadora  Persica,  supposed 
by  some  to  be  the  mustard-tree  of  Scripture,  grows : 
it  is  a  small  tree,  found  as  far  south  as  Abyssinia  or 
Aden,  and  eastward  to  the  peninsula  of  India,  but 
is  unknown  west  or  north  of  the  Dead  Sea.  The 
late  Dr.  Koyle — unaware,  no  doubt,  how  scarce  and 
local  it  was,  and  arguing  from  the  pungent  taste  of 
its  bark,  which  is  used  as  hoi-se-radish  in  India — 
supposed  that  this  tree  was  that  alluded  to  in  the 
parable  of  the  mustard-tree ;  but  not  only  is  the 
pungent  nature  of  the  bark  not  generally  known  to 
the  natives  of  Syria,  but  the  plant  itself  is  so  scarce, 
local,  and  little  known,  that  Jesus  Christ  could 
never  have  made  it  the  subject  of  a  parable  that 
would  reach  the  understanding  of  His  hearers. 

The  shores  immediately  around  the  Dead  Sea  pre 
sent  abundance  of  vegetation,  though  almost  wholly 
of  a  saline  character.  Juncus  maritimus  is  very 
common  in  large  clumps,  and  a  yellow-flowered 
groundsel-like  plant,  Inula  crithmoides  (also  com 
mon  on  the  rocky  shores  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  &c.), 
Sperguluria  maritima,  Atriplex  Halimus,  Bala- 
Kites  Aegyptiaca,  several  shrubby  Suaedas  and 
Salicomias,  Tamarix,  and  a  prickly-leaved  grass 
(Ftstuca'),  all  grow  more  or  less  close  to  the  edge  of 


•  >  sr  some  notices  of  the  oaks  of  Syria,  see  7>ur>*actiont        •  See  also  Dr.  Hooker's  paper  •  On  the  Cedars  o 
tfOu  Linn.  Society,  xxiii.  3x1.  and  plates  36-38.  non,'  &c,  in  the  Nat.  Hitt.  Reintw.  No.  5;  with  3  { 


PALESTINE 

the  water;  while  of  non-saline  pla-its  the  Solarium 
Sodomaeum,  Tamarix,  Centaur  ea,  and  immense 
brakes  of  Arundo  Donax  may  be  seen  all  around. 

The  most  singular  effect  is  however  experienced 
in  the  re-ascent  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  th?  hills  on  its 
N.W.  shore,  which  presents  first  a  sudden  steep 
rise,  and  then  a  series  of  vast  water-worn  ten-aces 
at  the  same  level  as  the  Mediterranean.  During 
this  ascent  such  familiar  plants  of  the  latter  region 
are  successively  met  with  as  Pjterium  gpirunum, 
Anchusa,  pink,  Hypericum,  fnula  viscosa,  &c.  ^ 
but  no  trees  are  seen  till  the  longitude  of  Jerusalem 
is  approached. 

III.  Flora  of  the  Middle  and  Upper  Mountain 
Regions  of  Syria.  —  The  oak  forms  the  prevalent 
arboreous  vegetation  of  this  region  below  5000  feet. 
The  Quercus  pseudo-coccifera  and  infcctoria  is  not 
soen  much  above  3000  feet,  nor  the  Valonia  oak 
at  so  great  an  elevation;  but  above  these  height  i 
£ome  magnificent  species  occur,  including  the  Qucr- 
cus  Cerris  of  the  South  of  Europe,  the  Q  Ehren- 
bergii,  or  castanaefolia,  Q.  Toza,  Q.  Libani,  and 
Q.  mannifera,  Lindl.,  which  is  perhaps  not  distinct 
from  some  of  the  forms  of  Q.  Robur,  or  sessiliflora.* 

At  the  same  elevations  junipers  become  common, 
but  the  species  have  not  been  satisfactorily  made 
out.  The  Juniperus  communis  is  found,  but  is 
not  so  common  as  the  tall,  straight,  black  kind 
(J.  excelsa,  or  foetidissimd).  On  Mount  Casius  the 
J.  drupacea  grows,  remarkable  for  its  large  plum- 
like  fruit  ;  and  /.  Sabina,  phoenicia,  and  oxycedrtfs, 
are  all  said  to  inhabit  Syria.  But  the  most  remark 
able  plant  of  the  upper  region  is  certainly  the  cedar  ; 
for  which  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  the  article 
CEDAR.' 

Lastly,  the  flora  of  the  npper  temperate  and 
alpine  Syrian  mountains  demands  some  notice. 
As  before  remarked,  no  part  of  the  Lebanon  pre 
sents  a  vegetation  at  all  similar,  or  even  analogous, 
to  that  of  the  Alps  of  Europe,  India,  or  North 
America.  This  is  partly  owing  to  the  heat  and 
extreme  dryness  of  the  climate  during  a  considerable 
part  of  the  year,  to  the  sudden  desiccating  influence 
of  the  desert  winds,  and  to  the  sterile  nature  of  the 
dry  limestone  soil  on  the  highest  summits  of  Lebanon, 
Hermon,  and  the  Anti-Lebanon  ;  but  perhaps  still 
muie  to  a  warm  period  having  succeeded  to  that 
cold  one  during  which  the  glaciers  were  formed 
(whose  former  presence  is  attested  by  the  moraines 
in  the  cedar  valley  and  elsewhere),  and  which  may 
have  obliterated  almost  every  trace  of  the  glacial 
flora.  Hence  it  happens  that  far  more  boreal  plants 
may  be  gathered  on  the  Himalaya  at  10-15,000  ft. 
elevation,  than  at  the  analogous  heights  on  Lebanon 
of  8-10,000  ft.  ;  and  that  whilst  fully  300  plants 
belonging  to  the  Arctic  circle  inhabit  the  ranges  of 
North  India,  not  half  that  number  are  found  on  the 
Lebanon,  though  those  mountains  are  in  a  far  higher 
latitude. 

At  the  elevation  of  4000  feet  on  the  Lebanon 
many  plants  of  the  mi  idle  and  northern  latitudes 
of  Europe  commence,  amongst,  which  the  most  con 
spicuous  are  hawthorn,  dwarf  elder,  dog-rose,  ivy, 
butcher's  broom,  a  variety  of  the  berberry,  honey 
suckle,  maple,  and  jasmine.  A  little  higher,  at 
7000  ft.,  occur  Cotoneaster,  Rhododendron  ponti- 
cum,  primrose,  Daphne  Oleoides,  several  other  roses, 
Poterium,  Juniperus  communis,  foctidissitna  (at 
excclta),  and  cedar.  Still  higher,  at  7-10,000  ft., 


PALESTINE 

:Viere  is  no  shrubby  vegetation,  properly  so  called. 
What  shrubs  thare  are  form  small,  rounded,  harsh, 
prickly  bushes,  and  belong  to  genera,  or  forms  of 
genera,  that  are  almost  peculiar  to  the  dry  moun 
tain  regions  of  the  Levant  and  Persia,  and  West 
Asia  generally.  Of  these  Astragali  are  by  far  the 
most  numerous,  including  the  A,  Tragacantha, 
which  yields  the  famous  gam  in  the  greatest  abun 
dance  ;  and  next  to  them  a  curious  tribe  of  Statices 
called  Acantholimon,  whose  rigid,  pungent  leaves 
spread  like  stars  over  the  whole  surface  of  the 
plant;  and,  lastly,  a  small  white  chenopodiaceous 
plant  called  Noaea.  These  are  the  prevalent  forms 
up  to  the  very  summit  of  Lebanon,  growing  in 
globular  masses  on  the  rounded  flank  of  Dhar-el- 
Ivhodib  itself,  10,200  ft.  above  the  sea. 

At  the  elevation  of  8-9000  ft.  the  beautiful 
silvery  Vicia  canescens  forms  large  tufts  of  pale 
blue,  where  scarcely  anything  else  will  grow. 

The  herbaceous  plants  of  7-10,000  ft.  altitude 
*re  still  chiefly  Levantine  forms  of  Campanula, 
Ranunculus,  Corydalis,  Draba,  Silene,  Arenaria, 
Saponaria,  Geranium,  Erodium,  several  Umbel- 
lifers,  Galium,  Erigeron,  Scorzonera,  Taraxacum, 
Androsnce,  Scrophularia,  Nepeta,  Sideritis,  Aspho- 
deline,  Crocus,  Ornithogalum ;  and  a  few  grasses 
and  sedges.  No  gentians,  heaths,  Primulas,  saxi 
frages,  anemones,  or  other  alpine  favourites,  are 
found. 

The  most  boreal  forms,  which  are  confined  to 
the  clefts  of  rocks,  or  the  vicinity  of  patches  of  snow 
above  9000  ft.,  are  Drabas,  Arenaria,  one  small 
Potentilla,  a  Festuca,  an  Arabis  like  alpina,  and 
the  Oxyria  reniformis,  the  only  decidedly  Arctic 
type  in  the  whole  country,  and  probably  the  only 
characteristic  plant  remaining  of  the  flora  which 
inhabited  the  Lebanon  during  the  glacial  period. 
It  is,  however,  extremely  rare,  and  only  found 
nestling  under  stones,  and  in  deep  clefts  of  rocks, 
on  the  very  summit,  and  near  the  patches  of  snow 
on  Dhar-el-Khodib. 

No  doubt  Cryptogamic  plants  are  sufficiently 
numerous  in  this  region,  but  none  have  been  col 
lected,  except  ferns,  amongst  which  are  Cystopteris 
fragilis,  Polypodium  vulgare,  Nephrodium  pallidum, 
and  Polystichum  angulare.  [J.  D.  H.] 

ZOOLOGY. — Much  information  is  still  needed  on 
this  subject  before  we  can  possibly  determine  with 
any  Jegree  of  certainty  the  fauna  of  Palestine ; 
indeed,  the  complaint  of  Linneus  in  1747,  thai 
"  we  are  less  acquainted  with  the  Natural  History 
of  Palestine  than  with  that  of  the  remotest  parts  oi 
India,"  is  almost  as  just  now  as  it  was  when  the 
remark  was  made.  "There  is  perhaps,"  writes 
a  recent  visitor  to  the  Holy  Land,  "  no  country 
frequented  by  travellers  whose  fauna  is  so  little 
known  as  that  of  Palestine "  (Ibis,  i.  22)  ;  indeed, 
the  complaint  is  general  amongst  zoologists. 

It  will  be  sufficient   in  this   article   to  give 
general    survey  of   the  fauna  of  Palestine,  as  the 
reader  will  rind  more  particular  information  in  the 
several  articles  which  treat  of  the  various  animals 
under  their  respective  names. 

Mammalia. — The  Cheiroptera  (bats)  are  pro- 
lably  represented  in  Palestine  by  the  species  which 
are  known  to  occur  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  but  we 


PALESTINE 


689 


want  precise  information  on  this  point.  [BAT.] 
Of  the  Insectiwra  we  find  hedgehogs  (L'rinaceu 
Europeus}  and  moles  ( Talpa  vulgaris,  T.  cotca  (?)), 
which  are  recorded  to  occur  in  great  numbers  and  to 
commit  much  damage  (Hasselquist,  Trav.  p.  120): 
doubtless  the  family  of  Soricidae  (Shrews)  is  also 
represented,  but  we  lack  information.  Of  the 
Carniwra  are  still  seen,  in  the  Lebanon,  the 
Syrian  bear  ( Ursus  Synacus'),*  and  the  panther 
(Leopardus  varius~),  which  occupies  the  central 
mountains  of  the  land.  Jackals  and  foxes  are 
common  ;  the  hyena  and  wolf  are  also  occasionally 
observed  ;  the  badger  (Meles  taxus)  is  also  said 
to  occur  in  Palestine;1"  the  lion  is  no  longer 
a  resident  in  Palestine  or  Syria,  though  in  Bi 
blical  times  this  animal  must  have  been  by  no 
means  uncommon,  being  frequently  mentioned  in 
Scripture.  [LiON.]  The  late  Dr.  Roth  informed 
Mr.  Tristram  that  bones  of  the  lion  had  recently 
been  found  among  the  gravel  on  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan  not  far  south  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  A 
species  of  squiirel  (Sciurus  Syriacus),  which  the 
Arabs  term  Orkidaun,  "  the  leaper,"  has  been  no 
ticed  by  Hemprich  and  Ehrenberg  on  the  lower  and 
middle  parts  of  Lebanon  ;  two  kinds  of  hare,  Lepus 
Syriacus,  and  L.  Aegi/ptius ;  rats  and  mice,  which 
are  said  to  abound,  but  to  be  partly  kept  down 
by  the  tame  Persian  cats ;  the  jerboa  (Dipns 
Aegyptius)  ;  the  porcupine  (Hystrix  cristata} ;  the 
short-tailed  field-mouse  (Arvicola  agrestis},  a  most 
injurious  animal  to  the  husbandman,  and  doubtless 
other  species  of  Castoridae,  may  be  considered  as 
the  representatives  of  the  Rodentia.  Of  the  Pachi/- 
dermata,  the  wild  boar  (Sus  scrofd),  which  is 
frequently  met  with  on  Tabor  and  little  Hermon, 
appears  to  be  the  only  living  wild  example.  The 
Syrian  hyrax  appears  to  be  now  but  rarely  seen. 
[CONEY,  APPENDIX  A.] 

There  does  not  appear  to  be  at  present  any  wild 
ox  in  Palestine,  though  it  is  very  probable  that  in 
Biblical  times  some  kind  of  Urus  or  Bison  roamed 
about  the  hills  of  Bashan  and  Lebanon.  [UNICORN.] 
Dr.  Thomson  states  that  wild  goats  (Ibex  ?)  are  still 
(see  1  Sam.  xxiv.  2)  frequently  seen  in  the  rocks  ot 
Engedi.  Mr.  Tristram  possesses  a  specimen  of  Ca- 
pra  Aegagrus,  the  Persian  ibex,  obtained  by  him  a 
little  to  the  south  of  Hebron.  The  gazelle  (Gazella 
dorcas)  occurs  not  unfrequently  in  the  Holy  Land, 
and  is  the  antelope  of  the  country.  We  want  in 
formation  as  to  other  species  of  antelopes  found  in 
Palestine :  probably  the  variety  named,  by  Hem 
prich  and  Ehrenberg,  Antilope  Arabica,  and  perhaps 
the  Gazella  Isabellina  belong  to  the  fauna.  The 
Arabs  hunt  the  gazelles  with  greyhound  and  falcon ; 
the  fallow-deer  (Dama  vulgaris}  is  said  to  be  not 
unfrequently  observed. 

Of  domestic  animals  we  need  only  mention  the 
Arabian  or  one-humped  camel,  asses,  and  mules,  and 
horses,  all  which  are  in  general  use.  The  buffalo 
(Hubalus  buffalo)  is  common,  and  is  on  account  ol 
its  strength  much  used  for  ploughing  and  draught 
purposes.  The  ox  of  the  country  is  small  and 
unsightly  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  but  in 
the  richer  pastures  of  the  upper  part  of  the  country, 
the  cattle,  though  small,  are  not  unsightly,  the  head 
being  very  like  that  of  an  Alderney  ;  the  common 


•  There  is  some  little  doubt  whether  the  fc.yjwn  bear 
U.  Arctos)  may  not  occasionally  be  found  in  Palestine 
Eoe  Schubert  (Keise  in  das  Morgeidand). 

t  Col.  H.  Smith,  in  Kitto's  Cyc.,  art.  •  Badger,'  denies 

thit  Uie  badger  occurs  iu  Palestine,  and  says  it  lias  not 

VOL.  H . 


yet  been  found  out  of  Europe.  This  animal,  however,  ie 
certainly  an  inhabitant  of  certain  parts  of  Asia ;  and  it  is 
mentioned,  together  with  wolves,  jackals,  porcupines,  Set;., 
by  Mr.  H.  Poole  as  abounding  at  Hebron  (see  titoyrapk 
Journal  for  1856,  p.  68). 

2  Y 


690 


PALESTINE 


sheep  of  Palestine  is  the  broad-tail  ( Oois  laticau- 
d<ttus),  with  its  varieties  [SHEEP]  ;  goats  are 
extremely  common  everywhere. 

Aves. — Palestine  abounds  in  numerous  kinds  of 
birds.  Vultures,  eagles,  falcons,  kites,  owls  of 
different  kinds,  represent  the  Raptorial  order.  Of 
the  smaller  birds  may  be  mentioned,  amongst  other*, 
the  Merops  Persicus,  the  Upupa  Epops,  the  Sitta 
Fyriaca  or  Dalmatian  nuthatch,  several  kinds  of 
Silviadae,  the  Cinnyris  osea,  or  Palestine  sunbird, 
the  Ixos  xanthopyyos,  Palestine  nightingale, — the 
finest  songster  in  the  country,  which  long  before 
sunrise  pours  forth  its  sweet  notes  from  the  thick 
jungle  which  fringes  the  Jordan ;  the  Amydrus  Tris- 
trarnii,  or  glossy  starling,  discovered  by  Mr.  Tristram 
in  the  gorge  of  the  Kedron  not  far  from  the  Dead 
Sea,  "  the  roll  of  whose  music,  something  like  that 
of  the  organ-bird  of  Australia,  makes  the  rocks 
resound"  —  this  is  a  bird  of  much  interest, 
inasmuch  as  it  belongs  to  a  purely  African  group 
not  befbre  met  with  in  Asia ;  the  sly  and  wary 
Crateropus  chalybeus,  in  the  open  wooded  district 
near  Jericho;  the  jay  of  Palestine  (Garrulus  mela- 
nocephalus) ;  kingfishers  (Ceryle  rudis,  and  perhaps 
Alcedo  ispida)  abound  about  the  Lake  of  Tiberias 
and  in  the  streams  above  the  Huleh ;  the  raven, 
and  carrion  crow ;  the  Pastor  roseus,  or  locust-bird 
[see  LOCUST]  ;  the  common  cuckoo ;  several  kinds 
of  doves  ;  sandgrouse  (Pterocles),  partridges,  fran- 
colins,  quails,  the  great  bustard,  storks,  both  the 
black  and  white  kinds,  seen  often  in  flocks. of  some 
hundreds ;  herons,  curlews,  pelicans,  sea-swallows 
(Sterna},  gulls,  &c.  &c.  For  the  ornithology  of 
the  Holy  Land  the  reader  is  referred  to  Hem- 
prich  and  Ehrenberg's  Symbolae  Physicae  (Berlin, 
1820-25),  and  to  Mr.  Tristram's  paper  in  the 
Ibis,  i.  22. 

Reptilia. — Several  kinds  of  lizards  (Saura)  occur. 
The  Lacerta  stellio,  Lin.,  which  the  Arabs  call 
Hardun,  and  the  Turks  kill,  as  they  think  it 
mimics  them  saying  their  prayers,  is  very  common 
in  ruined  walls.  The  Waran  el  hard  (Psamrno- 
saurus  scincus)  is  veiy  common  in  the  deserts. 
The  common  Greek  tortoise  (Testudo  Graeca) 
Dr.  Wilson  observed  at  the  sources  of  the  Jordan  ; 
fresh- water  tortoises  (probably  Emus  Caspica) 
are  found  abundantly  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
country  in  the  streams  of  Esdraelon  and  of  the 
higher  Jordan  valley,  and  in  the  lakes.  The  cha 
meleon  (Chameleo  vulgaris)  is  common ;  the  crocodile 
does  not  occur  in  Palestine ;  the  Monitor  Niloticus 
has  doubtless  been  confounded  with  it.  In  the 
south  of  Palestine  especially  reptiles  of  various 
/finds  abound ;  besides  those  already  mentioned,  a 
large  Acanthodactylus  frequents  old  buildings;  a 
large  species  of  Uromastix,  at  least  two  species  of 
Gecko  (Tarentola1),  a  Gongylus  (ocellatus?),  several 
other  Acanthodactyli  and  Seps  tridactylus  have 
been  observed.  Of  Ophidians,  there  is  more  than 
one  species  of  Echidna  •  a  Naia,  several  Tropido- 
noii,  a  Coronella,  a  Coluber  (trivirgatus?)  occur; 
and  on  the  southern  frontier  of  the  land  the  desert 
form  Cerastes  Hasselquistii  has  been  observed.  Of 
the  Batrachia  we  have  little  information  beyond 
that  supplied  by  Kitto,  viz.  that  frogs  (Rana  escu- 
lenta)  abound  in  the  marshy  pools  of  Palestine; 
that  they  are  of  a  large  size,  but  are  not  eaten  by 


c  This  statement  with  regard  to  the  total  absence  of 
•organic  life  in  the  Dead  Sea  is  confirmed  by  almost  every 
traveller,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  Its  general 
icciiv.K-y  It  is.  however,  but  riglit  to  state  that  Mr.  II. 


PALESTINE 

the  inhabitants.     The  tree-frog  (ffyla)   ard   toad 
(Bufo)  are  also  veiy  common. 

Pisces. — Fish  were  supplied  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Palestine  both  from  the  Mediterranean  and  from  the 
inland  lakes,  especially  from  the  Lake  of  Tiberias. 
The  men  of  Tyre  brought  fish  and  sold  on  the  Sab 
bath  to  the  people  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  xiii.  16). 
The  principal  kinds  which  are  caught  off  the 
shores  of  the  Mediterranean  are  supplied  by  the 
families  Sparidae,  Percidae,  Scomberidae,  Raiadae, 
and  Pleuronectidae.  The  Sea  of  Galilee  has  been 
always  celebrated  for  its  fish.  Burckhardt  (Syria, 
332)  says  the  most  common  species  are  the  binny 
(Cyprinus  lepidotus),  frequent  in  all  the  fresh  waters 
of  Palestine  and  Syria,  and  a  fish  called  Mesht, 
which  he  describes  as  being  a  foot  long  and  5  inches 
broad,  with  a  flat  body  like  the  sole.  The  Binny  is 
a  species  of  barbel ;  it  is  the  Barbus  Binni  of  Cuv.  and 
Valenc.,  and  is  said  by  Bruce  to  attain  sometimes  to 
a  weight  of  70  Ibs. ;  it  is  common  in  the  Nile,  and 
is  said  to  occur  in  all  the  fresh  waters  of  Syria ;  the 
Mesht  is  undoubtedly  a  species  of  Chromius,  one  o<" 
the  Labridae,  and  is  perhaps  identical  with  the  C. 
Niloticus,  which  is  frequently  represented  on  Egyp 
tian  monuments.  The  fish  of  this  lake  are,  according 
to  old  tradition,  nearly  identical  with  the  fish  of  the 
Nile ;  but  we  sadly  want  accurate  information  on 
this  point.  As  to  the  fishes  of  Egypt  and  Syria, 
see  Kiippell,  E.,  Neue  Fische  des  Nils,  in  Verhandl. 
Smckenberg .  Gesellsch.  Frankf.,  and  Heckel,  J.,  Die 
Fische  Syriens,  in  Russegger,  Seise  nach  Egypten 
nnd  Klein  Asien.  There  does  not  appear  to  be  any 
separate  work  publishedcn  the  fishes  of  the  Holy  Land. 

Concerning  the  other  divisions  of  the  animal  king 
dom  we  have  little  information.  Molluscs  are 
numerous ;  indeed  in  few  areas  ot  similar  extent 
could  so  large  a  number  of  land  molluscs  be  found ; 
Mr.  Tristram  collected  casually,  and  without  search, 
upwards  of  100  species  in  a  tew  weeks.  The  land 
shells  may  be  classified  in  four  groups.  In  the 
north  of  the  country  the  prevailing  type  is  that  of 
the  Greek  and  Turkish  mountain  region,  numerous 
species  of  the  genus  Clausilia,  and  of  opaque  Bulimi 
and  Pupae  predominating.  On  the  coast  and  in  the 
plains  the  common  shells  of  the  East  Mediterranean 
basin  abound,  e.  g.  Helix  Pisana,  H.  Syriaca,  &e. 
In  the  south,  in  the  hill  country  of  Judea,  occurs  a 
veiy  interesting  group,  chiefly  confined  to  the  genus 
Helix,  three  subdivisions  of  which  may  be  typified 
by  H.  Boissieri,  H.  Seetzena,  H.  tuberculosa,  re 
calling  by  their  thick,  calcareous,  lustreless  coating, 
the  prevalent  types  of  Egypt,  Arabia,  and  Sahara. 
In  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  the  prevailing  group  is 
a  subdivision  of  the  genus  Bulimus,  rounded,  semi- 
pellucid,  and  lustrous,  very  numerous  in  species, 
which  are  for  the  most  part  peculiar  to  this  district. 
The  reader  will  find  a  list  of  Mollusca  found  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  in  the  An.  and  Mag. 
of  Nat.  Hist.  vi.  No.  34.  p.  312.  The  following 
remark  of  a  resident  in  Jerusalem  may  be  mentioned. 
"  No  shells  are  found  in  the  Dead  Sea  or  on  its 
margin  except  the  bleached  specimens  of  Melanopsis, 
Neritinae,  and  various  Unionidae,  which  have  been 
washed  down  by  the  Jordan,  and  afterwards  drifted 
on  shore.  In  tact,  so  intense  is  the  bitter-saline 
quality  of  its  waters  that  no  mollusc  (cor,  so  far  as 
1  know,  any  other  living  creature)  can  exist  in  it.« 


Poole  discovered  some  small  fish  In  a  brine-spring,  about 
100  yds.  distant  from,  and  30  ft.  above  the  level,  of  tht 
Dead  Sea,  which  he  was  inclined  to  think  had  been  pro 
duced  from  fish  in  the  sea  (see  tieograph.  Journal  for 


PALESTINE 

These  may  be  typified  by  B.  Jordani  and  If.  Alep- 
pensis.  Of  the  Crustacea  we  know  scarcely  any 
thing.  Lord  Lindsay  observed  large  numbers  of  a 
small  crab  in  the  sands  near  Akaba.  Hnsselquist 
(Trav,  238)  speaks  of  a  "running  crab"  seen  by 
him  on  the  coasts  of  Syria  and  Egypt.  Dr.  Baird  has 
recently  (An.  and  Mag.  N.  H.  viii.  No.  45,  p.  209) 
described  an  interesting  form  of  Entomostracous 
Crustacean,  which  he  terms  Branchipus  Eximius, 
reared  from  mud  sent  him  from  a  pool  near  Jeru 
salem.  Five  other  species  of  this  group  are  described 
r»y  Dr.  Baird  in  the  An.  and  Mag.  N.  H.  for  Oct. 
.  1859.  With  regard  to  the  insects,  a  number  of  beetles 
may  be  seen  figured  in  the  Symbolae  Physicae. 

The  Lepidoptera  of  Palestine  are  as  numerous  and 
varied  as  might  have  been  expected  in  a  land  of 
flowei-s.  All  the  common  butterflies  of  southern 
Europe,  or  nearly  allied  congeners,  are  plentiful  in 
the  cultivated  plains  and  on  the  hill-sides.  Nu 
merous  species  of  Polyommatus  and  Lycaena,  The- 
cla  iiicis  and  acaciae ;  many  kinds  of  Pontia,  the 
lovely  Anthocaris  Eupheno  abounds  on  the  lower 
hil!a  in  spring,  as  does  Pamassius  Apollinus ;  more 
than  one  species  of  Thais  occurs ;  the  genera  Argyn- 
nis  and  Melitaea  are  abundantly  represented,  not 
so  ffipparchia,  owing  probably  to  the  comparative 
dryness  of  the  soil.  Libythea  (CeltisT)  is  found, 
and  the  gorgeous  genus  Vanessa  is  very  common 
in  all  suitable  localities;  the  almost  cosmopolitan 
Cynthia  Cardui  and  Vanessa  Atalanta,  V.  L. 
album,  and  V.  Antiopa,  may  bo  mentioned  ;  Pa- 
pilio  Alexanor  and  some  others  of  the  same  species 
(lit  over  the  plains  of  Sharon,  and  the  caterpillar 
of  the  magnificent  Sphinx  Nerii  feeds  in  swarms 
on  the  oleanders  by  the  banks  of  the  Jordan. 
Bees  are  common.  [BEE.]  At  least  three  species 
of  scorpions  have  been  distinguished.  Spiders  are 
common.  The  Abu  Hanakein,  noticed  as  occurring 
at  Sinai  by  Burckhardt,  which  appeare  to  be  some 
species  of  Galeodes,  one  of  the  Solpugidae,  probably 
may  be  found  in  Palestine.  Locusts  occasionally 
risit  Palestine  and  do  infinite  damage.  Ants  are 
numerous ;  some  species  are  described  in  the  Journal 
of  the  Linnean  Society,  vi.  No.  21,  which  were  col 
lected  by  Mr.  Hanbury  in  the  autumn  of  1860.  Of 
the  Annelida  we  have  no  information  ;  while  of  the 
whole  sub-kingdoms  of  Coelenterata  and  Protozoa 
we  are  completely  ignorant. 

It  has  been  remarked  that  in  its  physical  character 
Palestine  presents  on  a  small  scale  an  epitome  of  the 
natural  features  of  all  regions,  mountainous  and 
desert,  northern  and  tropical,  maritime  and  inland, 
pastoral,  arable,  and  volcanic.  This  fact,  which  has 
rendered  the  allusions  in  the  Scriptures  so  varied  as 
to  afford  familiar  illustrations  to  the  people  of  every 
climate,  has  had  its  natural  effect  on  the  zoology  of 
the  country.  In  no  other  district,  not  even  on  the 
southern  slopes  of  the  Himalayah,  are  the  typical 
fauna  of  so  many  distinct  regions  and  zones  brought 
jato  such  close  juxtaposition.  The  bear  of  the 


PALESTINE 


6S1 


These  fish  have  been  identified  by  Sir  J.  Richardson  with 
C^prinodon  Hammmis,  Cuv.  et  Val.  xvii.  169  ;  see  Pro 
ceed,  of  Zoolog.  Soc.  for  1856,  p.  37 1 .  Mr.  Tristram  observes 
that  he  found  in  the  Sahara  Cyprinodon  dispar  in  hot 
telt-springs  where  the  water  was  shallow,  but  that  these 
fish  are  never  found  in  deep  pools  or  lakes.  Mr.  Poole 
observed  also  a  number  of  aquatic  birds  diving  fre 
quently  in  the  Dead  Sea,  and  thence  concluded,  Justly, 
Sir  J.  Richardson  thinks,  "  that  they  must  have  found 
something  edible  there."  It  would,  moreover,  be  an  in 
teresting  question  to  determine  whether  some  species  ot 


snowy  heights  of  Lebanon  and  the  gizelle  of  the 
desert  may  be  hunted  within  two  days'  ipurney  of 
each  other;  sometimes  even  the  ostrich  approaches 
the  southern  borders  of  the  land ;  the  wolf  of  the 
north  and  the  leopard  of  the  tropics  howl  within 
hearing  of  the  same  bivouac ;  while  the  falcons,  the 
linnets,  and  buntings,  recall  the  familiar  inhabit 
ants  of  our  English  fields,  the  sparkling  little  sun- 
bird  (Cinnyris  osea),  and  the  grackle  of  the  glet 
(Amydnts  Tristramii)  introduce  us  at  once  to  the 
most  brilliant  types  of  the  bird  life  of  Asia  and 
S.  Africa. 

Within  a  walk  of  Bethlehem,  the  common  frog 
of  England,  the  chameleon,  and  the  gecko  of  Africa, 
may  be  found  almost  in  company;  and  descending  to 
the  lower  forms  of  animal  life,  while  the  northern 
valleys  are  prolific  in  Clausiliae  and  other  genera 
of  molluscs  common  to  Europe,  tha  valley  of  the 
Jordan  presents  types  of  its  own,  and  the  hill 
country  of  Judaea  produces  the  same  type  of  Helices 
as  is  found  in  Egypt  and  the  African  Sahara.  So 
in  insects,  while  the  familiar  forms  of  the  butter 
flies  of  Southern  Europe  are  represented  on  the  plain 
of  Sharon,  the  Apollo  butterfly  of  the  Alps  is  recalled 
on  Mount  Olivet  by  the  exquisite  Parnassius  Apol 
linus  hovering  over  the  same  plants  as  the  sparkling 
Thais  medicaste  and  the  Libythea  (  Celtis  ?  ) ,  northern 
representatives  of  sub-tropical  lepidoptera. 

If  the  many  travellers  who  year  by  year  visit 
the  Holy  Land  would  pay  some  attention  to  its 
zoology,  by  bringing  home  collections  and  by  in 
vestigations  in  the  country,  we  should  soon  hope 
to  have  a  fair  knowledge  of  the  fauna  of  a  land 
which  in  this  respect  has  been  so  much  neglected, 
and  should  doubtless  gain  much  towards  the  eluci 
dation  of  many  passages  of  Holy  Scripture.  [W.  H. 
and  H.  B.  TRISTRAM.] 

THE  CLIMATE. — No  materials  exist  for  an  ac 
curate  account  of  the  Climate  of  the  very  different 
regions  of  Palestine.  Besides  the  casual  notices  ol 
travellers  (often  unscientific  persons),  the  following 
observations  are  all  that  we  possess : — 

(1.)  Average  monthly  temperatures  at  Jerusa 
lem,  taken  between  June  1851,  and  Jan.  1855 
inclusive,  by  Dr.  R.  G.  Barclay,  of  Beyrout  and 
Jerusalem,  and  published  by  him  in  a  paper  '  On 
the  State  of  Medical  Science  in  Syria,'  in  the 
N.  American  Medico-Chirurgical  Review  (Phila 
delphia),  vol.  i.  .705-718.d 

(2.)  A  set  of  observations  of  temperature,  206  in 
all,  extending  from  Nov.  19, 1838,  to  Jan.  16, 1839, 
taken  at  Jerusalem,  Jaffa,  Nazareth,  and  Beyrout, 
by  Russegger,  and  given  in  his  work  (Reisen,  iii. 
170-185). 

(3.)  The  writer  is  indebted  to  his  friend  Mr.  James 
Glaisher,  F.R.S.,  for  a  table  shewing  the  mean  tem 
perature  of  the  air  at  Jerusalem  for  each  month, 
from  May,  1843,  to  May,  1844*;  and  at  Beyrout, 
from  April,  1842,  to  May,  1845. 


Artemia  (brine-shrimp)  may  not  exist  in  the  shall  ow  podE 
at  the  extreme  south  end  of  the  Salt  Lake.  In  the  open 
tanks  at  Lymington  myriads  of  these  transparent  little 
brine-shrimps  (they  are  about  half  an  inch  in  lergth)  are 
seen  swimming  actively  about  in  water  e very  pint  of  which 
contains  as  much  as  a  quarter  of  a  pound  of  salt ! 

d  These  observations  are  inserted  in  Dr.  Barclay's  work 
(City  of  the  Great  Kmg,  428),  and  are  accompanied  hy  hte 
comments,  the  result  of  a  residence  of  several  years  it 
Jerusalem  (see  also  pp.  48-56). 

e  There  te  ansideratte  variatlcn  in  thf  above  three  K'JS 
272 


692 


PALKSTINK 


(4.y  Register  of  the  fall  of  rain  at  Jerusalem  from 
1846  to  1849,  and  1850  to  1854,  by  Dr.  R.  G. 
Barclay  (as  above). 

1.  Temperature. — The  results  of  these  observa 
tions  at  Jerusalem  may  be  stated  generally  as  fol 
lows.  January  is  the  coldest  month,  and  July  and 
August  the  hottest,  though  June  and  September 
are  nearly  as  warm.  In  the  first-named  month  the 
average  temperature  is  49°'l  Fahr.,  and  greatest 
cold  28° ;  in  July  and  August  the  average  is  78°-4 ; 
with  greatest  he'at  92°  in  the  shade  and  143°  in 
the  sun.  The  extreme  range  in  a  single  year  was 
52°;  the  mean  annual  temperature  65°'6.  Though 
varying  so  much  during  the  different  seasons,  the 
climate  is  on  the  whole  pretty  uniform  from  year 
to  year.  Thus  the  thermometric  variation  in  the 
same  latitude  on  the  west  coast  of  North  America  is 
nearly  twice  as  great.  The  isothermal  line  of  mean 
annual  temperature  of  Jerusalem  passes  through 
California  and  Florida  (to  the  north  of  Mobile), 
and  Dr.  Barclay  remarks  that  in  temperature  and 
the  periodicity  of  the  seasons  there  is  a  close  analogy 
between  Palestine  and  the  former  state.  The  iso 
thermal  line  also  passes  through  Gibraltar,  and  near 
Madeira  and  the  Bermudas.  The  heat,  though  ex 
treme  during  the  four  midsummer  months,  is  much 
alleviated  by  a  sea-breeze  from  the  N.W.,  which  blows 
with  great  regularity  from  10  A.M.  till  10  P.M.; 
and  from  this  and  other  unexplained  causes  the  heat 
is  rarely  oppressive,  except  during  the  occasional 
presence  of  the  Khamsin  or  sirocco,  and  is  said  to  be 
much  more  bearable  than  even  in  many  parts  of  the 
western  world*  which  are  deemed  tropical.  The 
Khamsin  blows  during  February,  March,  and  April 
(Wildenbruch).  It  is  most  oppressive  when  it 
comes  from  the  east,  bearing  the  heat  and  sand 
of  the  desert  with  it,  and  during  its  continuance 
darkening  the  air  and  filling  everything  with  fine 
dust  (Miss  Beaufort,  ii.  223). 

During  January  and  February  snow  often  falls 
to  the  depth  of  a  foot  or  more,  though  it  may  not 
make  its  appearance  for  several  years  together.  In 
1854-5  it  remained  on  the  ground  for  a  fortnight.? 


of  observations,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  following  compa 
rative  table  of  the  mean  temperatures  of  Jerusalem :— 


Month. 

CD 

(2.) 

(3.) 

Jan. 

49-4 

47-7 

Feb. 

54-4 

53-7 

March 

55-7 

60- 

April 

61-4 

54-7 

May 

73-8 

66-3 

June 

75-2 

71-7 

July 

79-1 

77-3 

Aug. 

79-3 

7*6 

Sept. 
Oct. 
Nov. 
Dec. 

77- 
74-2 
63-8 
54-5 

(Mean  of  67 
ob*.    frcm 
Nov.  19  to 

l>ec.S.) 

62- 

72-2 
68-4 
58-9 
47-4 

Mean  for  i 
•-!.,•  y«ar  / 

66-5 

62-6 

It  Is  understood  that  a  regular  series  of  observations, 
with  standard  Barometer,  Thermometer,  and  Rain-gunge, 
was  made  for  10  years  by  the  late  Dr.  M'Gowau  of  the 
Hospital,  Jerusalem,  but  the  record  of  them  has  unfortu 
nately  been  mislaid. 

*  Barclay,  48 ;  Rob.  B.  R.  i.  430 ;  also  Schwarz.  327. 

f  JewUfi  InifUigencer,  1856,  p.  137,  note. 


PALESTINE 

Nor  is  this  of  late  occurrence  only,  but  is  reported 
by  Shaw  in  1722.  In  1818  it  was  between  T.WT 
and  three  feet  deep>  In  1754  a  heavy  fall  too* 
place,  and  twenty-five  persons  are  said  to  have  been 
frozen  to  death  at  Nazareth.1  Snow  is  repeatedly 
mentioned  in  the  poetical  books  of  the  Bible,  anc 
must  therefore  have  been  known  at  that  time 
(Ps.  Ixviii.  14,  cxlvii.  16;  Is.  Iv.  10,  &c.).  But  in 
the  narrative  it  only  appears  twice  (1  Mace.  xiii.  22 ; 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  20). 

Thin  ice  is  occasionally  found  on  pools  or  sheets 
of  water ;  and  pieces  of  ground  out  of  the  reach  of 
the  sun's  rays  remain  sometimes  slightly  frozen  for 
several  days.  But  this  is  a  rare  occurrence,  and  no 
injury  is  done  to  the  vegetation  by  frost,  nor  do 
plants  require  shelter  during  winter  (Barclay). 

Observations  made  at  Jerusalem  are  not  appli 
cable  to  the  whole  of  the  highland,  as  is  obvious 
from  Russegger's  at  Nazareth.  These  show  us  the 
result  of  fifty-five  observations,  extending  from  Dec. 
15  to  26:  highest  temp.  58-5°,  lowest  46°,  mean 
53°,  all  considerably  lower  than  those  taken  at 
Jerusalem  a  fortnight  before. 

2.  Rain. — The  result  of  Dr.  Barclay's  observa 
tions  is  to  show  that  the  greatest  fall  of  rain  at 
Jerusalem  in  a  single  year  was  85  inches,*  and 
the  smallest  44,  the  mean  being  61-6  inches.  The 
greatest  fall  in  any  one  month  (Dec.  1850)  was 
33-8,  and  the  greatest  in  three  months  (Dec.  1850, 
Jan.  and  Feb.  1851)  72-4.  These  figures  will  be 
best  appreciated  by  recollecting  that  the  average 
rain-fall  of  London  during  the  whole  year  is  only 
25  inches,  and  that  in  the  wettest  parts  of  the 
countiy,  such  as  Cumberland  and  Devon,  it  rarely 
exceeds  60  inches. 

As  in  the  time  of  our  Saviour  (Luke  xii.  54), 
the  rains  come  chiefly  from  th*>  S.  or  S.W.  They 
commence  at  the  end  of  October  or  beghming  of 
November,  and  continue  with  greater  or  less  con 
stancy  till  the  end  of  February  or  middle  of  March, 
and  occasionally,  though  rarely,  till  the  end  ot 
April.  It  is  not  a  heavy  continuous  rain,  so 
much  as  a  succession  of  severe  showers  or  storms 
with  intervening  periods  of  fine  bright  weather, 
permitting  the  grain  crops  to  grow  and  ripen. 
And  although  the  season  is  not  divided  by  any 
entire  cessation  of  rain  for  a  lengthened  interval, 
as  some  represent,  yet  there  appears  to  be  a 
diminution  in  the  fall  for  a  few  weeks  in  De 
cember  and  January,  after  which  it  begins  again, 
and  continues  during  February  and  till  the  conclu 
sion  of  the  season.  On  the  uplands  the  barley- 
harvest  (which  piecedes  the  wheat)  should  begin 
about  the  last  week  of  May,  so  that  it  is  preceded 
by  five  or  six  weeks  of  summer  weather.  '  Any 
falling-ott'  in  the  lain  during  the  winter  or  spring  i* 
very  prejudicial  to  the  harvest ;  and,  as  in  the  days 
of  the  prophet  Amos,  nothing  could  so  surely  occa 
sion  the  greatest  distress  or  be  so  fearful  a  threat 
as  a  drought  three  months  before  harvest  (Amos 
iv.  7). 

There  is  much  difference  of  opinion  as  to  whether 
the  former  and  the  latter  rain  of  Scripture  are  re 
presented  by  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  present 
rainy  season,  separated  by  the  slight  interval  meu- 


h  "  1  Elle  hock,"  Scholz,  quoted  by  Von  Ranmer,  79. 

*  S.  Schulz,  quoted  by  Von  Raumer.    Schwarz,  326. 

k  Here  again  there  is  a  considerable  discrepancy,  sf?  cr 
Mr.  Poole  (Geogr.  Journal,  xxvi.  57)  states  that  In 
M'liownn  had  registered  the  greatest  quantity  ti  orw 
year  at  108  incbf*. 


PALESTINE 

above  («.  </.  Kenrick,  Phoenicia,  33),  or 
\vhethrr,  as  Dr.  Barclay  (City,  &c.  54)  and  others 
affirm,  the  latter  rain  took  place  after  the  harvest, 
about  midsummer,  and  has  been  withheld  as  a 
punishment  for  the  sins  of  the  nation.  This  will 
be  best  discussed  under  RAIN. 

Between  April  and  November  there  is,  with  the 
rarest  exceptions,  an  uninterrupted  succession  of 
fine  weather,  and  skies  without  a  cloud.  Thus  the 
year  divides  itself  into  two,  and  only  two,  seasons — 
as  indeed  we  see  it  constantly  divided  in  the  Bible 
— "  winter  and  summer,"  "  cold  and  heat,"  "  seed 
time  and  harvest." 

During  the  summer  the  dews  are  very  heavy, 
and  often  saturate  the  traveller's  tent  as  if  a  shower 
had  passed  over  it.  The  nights,  especially  towards 
sunrise,  are  very  cold,  and  thick  fogs  or  mists  are 
common  all  over  the  country.  Thunder-storms 
of  great  violence  are  frequent  during  the  winter 
months. 

3.  So  much  for  the  climate  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
highland  generally.  In  the  lowland  districts,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  heat  is  much  greater  and  more 
oppressive,™  owing  to  the  quantity  of  vapour  in  the 
atmosphere,  the  absence  of  any  breeze,  the  sandy 
nature  of  the  soil,  and  the  manner  in  which  the  heat 
is  confined  and  reflected  by  the  enclosing  heights ; 
perhaps  also  to  the  internal  heat  of  the  earth, 
due  to  the  depth  below  the  sea  level  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  Jordan  valley,  and  the  remains  of 
volcanic  agency,  which  we  have  already  shown  to 
be  still  in  existence  in  this  very  depressed  region 
[p.  68 la].  No  indication  of  these  conditions  i 
discoverable  in  the  Bible,  but  Josephus  was  aware 
of  them  (B.  J.  iv.  8,  §3),  and  states  that  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jericho  was  so  much  warmer 
than  the  upper  country  that  linen  clothing  was 
worn  there  even  when  Judaea  was  covered  with 
snow.  This  is  not  quite  confirmed  by  the  expe 
rience  of  modern  travellers,  but  it  appeal's  thai 
when  the  winter  is  at  its  severest  on  the  highlands 
and  both  eastern  and  western  mountains  are  white 
with  snow,  no  frost  visits  the  depths  of  the  Jordai 
valley,  and  the  greatest  cold  experienced  is  producec 
by  the  driving  rain  of  tempests  (Seetzen,  Jan.  9 
ii.  300).  The  vegetation  already  mentioned  as 
formerly  or  at  present  existing  in  the  district — 
palms,  indigo,  sugar — testifies  to  its  tropical  heat 
The  harvest  in  the  Ghor  is  fully  a  month  in  advance 
of  that  on  the  highlands,  and  the  fields  of  wheai 
are  still  green  on  the  latter  when  the  grain  is  being 
threshed  in  the  former  (Rob.  B.  JR.  i.  431,  551 
lii.  314).  Thus  Burckhardt  on  May  5  found  the 
barley  of  the  district  between  Tiberias  and  Beisan 
nearly  all  harvested,  while  on  the  upland  plains  o 
the  Hauran,  from  which  he  had  just  descended,  th 
harvest  was  not  to  commence  for  fifteen  days.  In 
this  fervid  and  moist  atmosphere  irrigation  alone  i 


PALESTINE  6;)3 

necessary  to  ensure  aoundant  crop.i  of  the   fines* 
jrain  (Rob.  i.  550). 

4.  The  climate  of  the  maritime  lowland  exhibits 
many  of  the  characteristics  of  that  of  the  J<v-dar 
alley,"  but,  being  much  more  elevated,  and  exposed 
>n  its  western  side  to  the  sea-breezes,  is  net  so 
ippressively  hot.  Russegger's  observations  at  JalFa 
Dec.  7  to  12)  indicate  only  a  slight  advance  in  tem- 
>erature  on  that  of  Jerusalem.  But  Mr.  Glaisher's 
ibservations  at  Beyrout  (mentioned  above)  show 
>n  the  other  hand  that  the  temperature  there  is 
considerably  higher,  the  Jan.  being  54°,  July  82°, 
,nd  the  mean  for  the  year  69'3.  The  situation  of 
3eyrout  (which  indeed  is  out  of  the  confines  of  the 
loly  Land)  is  such  as  to  render  its  climate  very 
sultry.  This  district  retains  much  tropical  vegeta- 
;ion  ;  all  along  the  coast  from  Gaza  to  Beyrout,  and 
nland  as  far  as  Ramleh  and  Lydd,  the  date-palm 
lourishes  and  fruits  abundantly,  and  the  orange, 
sycamore  fig,  pomegranate,  and  banana  grow  lux 
uriantly  at  Jaffa  and  other  places.  Here  also  the 
larvest  is  in  advance  of  that  of  the  mountainous 
districts  (Thomson,  Land  and  Hook,  543).  In 
the  lower  portions  of  this  extensive  plain  frost  and 
snow  are  as  little  known  as  they  are  iu  the  Ghor. 
But  the  heights,  even  in  summer,  are  often  very 
chilly,0  and  the  sunrise  is  frequently  obscured  by 
a  dense  low  fog  (Thomson,  490,  542 ;  Rob.  ii.  19> 
North  of  Carmel  slight  frosts  are  occasionally 
experienced. 

In  the  winter  months  however  the  climate  of 
these  regions  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the  south  of 
France  or  the  maritime  districts  of  the  north  of 
Italy.  Napoleon,  writing  from  Gaza  on  the  "  8th 
Ventose  (26  Feb.)  1799,"  says,  "Nous  sommes  ici 
dans  1'eau  et  la  boue  jusqu'aux  genoux.  II  fait  ici 
le  meme  froid  et  le  m6me  temps  qu'a  Paris  dans 
cette  saison "  (Corr.  de  Napoleon,  No.  3993). 
Berthier  to  Marmont.  from  the  same  place  (29  Dec 
1798),  says,  "  Nous  trouvons  ici  un  pays  qui  res- 
semble  a  la  Provence  et  le  climat  a  celui  d'Europe  " 
(Mem.  du  Due  de  Rcujuse,  ii.  56). 

A  register  of  the  weather  and  vegetation  of  tha 
twelve  months  in  Palestine,  referring  especially  to 
the  coast  region,  is  given  by  Colonel  von  Wilden 
bruch  in  Geogr.  Society's  Journal,  xx.  232.  A 
good  deal  of  similar  information  will  be  found  in  a 
tabular  form  on  Petermann's  Physical  Map  of  Pales 
tine  in  the  Biblical  Atlas  of  the  Tract  Society. 

The  permanence  of  the  climate  of  Palestine,  on 
the  ground  that  the  same  vegetation  which  anciently 
flourished  there  still  exists,  is  ingeniously  maintained 
in  a  paper  on  The  Climate  of  Palestine  in  Moderr 
compared  to  Ancient  Times  in  the  Edinburgh  New 
Philosophical  Journal  for  April,  1862.  Reference 
is  therein  made  to  a  paper  on  the  same  subject 
by  Schouw  in  vol.  viii.  of  the  same  periodical, 
p.  311. 


••  At  5  P.M.  on  the  25th  Nov.  Russegger's  thermomete 
at  Jerusalem  shewed  a  temp,  of  62-8 ;  but  when  he  ar-  i 
nved  at  Jericho  at  5-30  P.M.  on  the  27th  it  had  risen  to  ' 
T2'5.  At  7'30  the  following  morning  it  was  63'5,  against 
68°  at  Jerusalem  on  the  25th ;  and  at  noou,  at  the  Jordan, 
It  had  risen  to  81.  At  Marsaba,  at  11  A.M.  of  the  29th,  it 
was  66  ;  and  on  returning  to  Jerusalem  on  the  1st  Dec.  it 
again  fell  to  an  average  of  61.  An  observation  recorded 
by  Dr.  Robinson  (iii.  310)  at  Sakut  (Succoth),  in  the  central 
part  of  the  Jordan  valley,  on  May  14,  1852,  in  the  shade, 
and  close  to  a  spring,  gives  92°,  which  is  the  very  highest 
reading  recorded  at  Jerusalem  in  July :  later  on  the  same 
day  It  was  93°,  in  a  strong  N.W.  wind  (314).  On  May 
J  i,  1H38,  at  Jericho,  it  was  91°  in  the  shade  and  the  bnxae. 


Dr.  Anderson  (184)  found  it  106°  Fahr.  "  through  the  first 
half  of  the  night"  at  the  S.E.  corner  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
In  a  paper  on  the  '  Climate  of  Palestine,'  &c.,  in  the 
Edinburgh,  New  Philos.  Journal  for  April,  1862,  published 
while  this  sheet  was  passing  through  the  press,  the  mean 
annual  temperature  of  Jericho  is  stated  as  72°  Fahr.,  but 
without  giving  any  authority. 

"  Robinson  (ii.  223),  on  June  8,  1838,  found  the  ther 
mometer  83°  Fahr.  before  sunrise,  at  Beit  Nettif,  on  the 
lower  hills  overlooking  the  plain  of  Philistia. 

o  Chilly  nights,  succeeding  scorching  days,  havo  formoJ 
a  characteristic  of  the  East  ever  since  the  days  of  Jaoak 
(Gen.  xxxl.  40 ;  Jer.  xxxvl.  3C). 


694 


PALESTINE 


LiTERATOKK. — The  list  of  works  on  the  Holy 
Land  is  of  prodigious  extent.  Dr.  Robinson,  in  the 
Appendix  to  his  Miblical  Researches,  enumerates  no 
less  than  183  ;  to  which  Bonar  (Land  of  Promise' 
adds  a  large  number ;  and  even  then  the  list  is 
far  from  complete.  Of  course  every  traveller  sees 
some  things  which  none  of  his  predecessors  saw,  and 
therefore  none  should  be  neglected  by  the  studenl 
anxious  thoroughly  to  investigate  the  nature  and 
customs  of  the  Holy  Land ;  but  the  following 
works  will  be  found  to  contain  nearly  all  necessary 
information : — * 

1.  Josephus. — Invaluable,  both  for  its  own  sake, 
and  as  an  accompaniment  and  elucidation  of  the 
Bible  narrative.      Josephus  had  a  very  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  country.     He  possessed  both  the 
Hebrew  Bible  and  the  Septuagiut,  and  knew  them 
well ;  and  there  are  many  places  in  his  works  which 
show  that  he  knew  how  to  compare  the  various  books 
together,  and  combine  their  scattered  notices  in  one 
narrative,  in  a  manner  more  like  the  processes  of 
modem  criticism  than  of  ancient  record.     He  pos 
sessed  also  the  works  of  several  ancient  historians, 
who  survive  only  through  the  fragments  he  has 
preserved.     And  it  is  evident  that  he  had  in  addi 
tion  other  nameless  sources  of  information,  now  lost 
to  us,  which  often  supplement  the  Scripture  history 
in  a  very  important  manner.    These  and  other  things 
in  the  writings  of  Josephus  have  yet  to  be  investi 
gated.     Two  tracts  by  Tuch  (Qrtaestioncs  de  F. 
Josephi  libria,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1859),  on  geographical 
points,  are  worth  attention. 

2.  The  Onomosticon  (usually  so  called)  of  Euse- 
bius  and  Jerome.      A  tract  of  Eusebius  (f  340), 
"  concerning  the  names  of  places  in  the  Sacred  Scrip 
tures  ;"  translated,  freely  and  with  many  additions, 
by  Jerome  (f  420),  and  included  in  his  works  as 
Liber  de  Situ  et  Nominibus  Locorum  Hebraicorum. 
The  original  arrangement  is  according  to  the  Books 
of  Scripture,  but  it  was  thrown  into  one  general 
alphabetical  order  by  Bonfrere  (1631,  &c.);   and 
finally  edited  by  J.  Clericus,  Amst.  1707,  &c.    This 
tract  contains   notices  (often  very  valuable,  often 
absolutely  absurd)  of  the  situation  of  many  ancient 
places  of  Palestine,  as  far  as  they  were  known  to 
the  two  men  who  in  their  day  were  probably  best 
acquainted  with  the  subject.    In  connexion  with  it, 
see  Jerome's  Ep.  ad  Eustochium ;  Epit.  Paidae—an 
itinerary  through  a  large  part  of  the  Holy  Land. 
Others  of  Jerome's  Epistles,  and  his  Commentaries, 
are  full  of  information  on  the  country. 

3.  The  most  important  of  the  early  travellers 
—from  Arculf  (A.D.  700)  to  Maundrell  (1697)— 
are  contained  in  Early  Travels  in  Palestine,  a  vo 
lume  published  by  Bonn.     The  shape  is  convenient, 
but  the  translation  is  not  always  to  be  implicitly 
relied  on. 

4.  Reland. — H.  Relandi  Palaeslina  ex  Jfonu- 
mentis  Veteribus  illustrata,  1714.     A  treatise  on 
the  Holy  Land  in  three  books  :  1.  The  country  ;  2. 
The  distances  ;  3.  The  places ;  with  maps  (excellent 
for  their  date),  prints  of  coins  and  inscriptions. 
Kel:ind  exhausts  all  the  information  obtainable  on 
his  subject  down  to  his  own  date  (he  often  quotes 
Maundrell,  1703).     His  learning  is  immense,  he  is 
extremely  accurate,  always  ingenious,  and  not  want 
ing  in  humour.      But  honesty  and  strong  sound 
sense   are   his   characteristics.     A  sentence  of  his 
own  might  be  his  motto :    "  Conjecturae,  quibus 


t  A  list  of  all  the  works  on  Palestine  which  have  any 
pretensions  to  importance,  with  lull  critical  remark*!,  ii 


PALESTINE 

non  delectamur"    (p.  139),  or  "Ego  nil  muto'* 
(671). 

5.  Benjamin  of  Tudela. —  Travels  of  Rabbi  Ben 
jamin  (in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa)  from  1160-73, 
The  best  edition  is  that  of  A.  Asher,  2  vols.  1840-1. 
The  part  relating  to  Palestine  is  contained  in  pp. 
61-87.      The  editor's  notes  contain  some  curious 
information  ;  but  their  most  valuable  part  (ii.  397. 
445)   is  a  translation  of  extracts  from   the  wcrk 
of  Esthori  B.  Mose  hap-Parchi  on  Palestine  (A.D. 
1314-22).     These  passages — notices  of  places  and 
identifications — are  very  valuable,   more   so   thai? 
those  of  Benjamin.     The  original  work,  Caftor  va- 
Pherach,  "  knop  and  flower,"  has  been  reprinted,  in 
Hebrew,  by  Edelmann,  Berlin,  1852.    Other  Itine 
raries  of  Jews  have  been  translated  and  published 
by  Carmoly  (Brux.  1847) ,  but  they  are  of  less 
value  than  the  two  already  named. 

6.  Abulfeda. — The  chief  Moslem  accounts  of  the 
Holy  Laud  are  those  of  Edrisi   (cir.  1150),   and 
Abulfeda  (cir.  1300),  translated  under  the  titles  of 
Tabula  Syriae,  and  Descr.  Arabiae.    Extracts  from 
these  and  from  the  great  work  of  Yakoot  are  given 
by  Schultens  in  an  Index  Geograpkicus  appended 
to  his  edition  of  Bohaeddin's  Life  of  Saladin,  folio, 
1755.    Yakoot  has  yet  to  be  explored,  and  no  doubt 
he  contains  a  mass  of  valuable  information. 

7.  Quaresmius. —  Terrae  Sanctae  Elrtcidatio,  &c. 
Ant.  1639,  2  vols.  folio.     The  work  of  a  Latin  monk 
who  lived  in  the  Holy  Land  for  more  than  twelve 
years,  and  rose  to  be  Principal  and  Commissary  Apos 
tolic  of  the  country.     It  is  divided  into  eight  books : 
the  first  three,  genoral  dissertations ;  the  remainder 
"  peregrinations  "  through  the  Holy  Land,  with  his 
torical  accounts,  and  identifications  (often  incorrect), 
and  elaborate  accounts  of  the  Latin  traditions  attach 
ing  to  each  spot,  and  of  the  ecclesiastical  establish 
ments,  military  orders,  &c.  of  the  time.     It  has  a 
copious  index.— -Similar  information  is  given  by  the 
Abt^  Mislin  (Les  Saints  Lieux,  Paris,  1858,  3  vols. 
8vo)  ;  but  with  less  elaboration  than  Quaresmius, 
and  in  too  hostile  a  vein  towards  Lamartine  and 
other  travellers. 

8.  The  great  burst  of  modern  travel  in  the  Holy 
Land  began  with  Seetzen  and  BurckhardL     Seetzen 
resided  in  Palestine  from   1805  to  1807,  during 
which  time  he  travelled  on  both  E.  and  W.  of  Jordan. 
He  was  the  first  to  visit  the  Hauran,  the  Ghor,  and 
the  mountains  of  Ajlun :   he  travelled  completely 
round  the  Dead  Sea,  besides  exploring  the  east  side 
a  second  time.     As  an  experienced  man  of  science, 
Seetzen  was  charged  with  collecting  antiquities  and 
natural  objects  for  the  Oriental  Museum  at  Gotha ; 
and  his  diaries  contain  inscriptions,  and  notices  of 
flora  and  fauna,  &c.      They  have   been  published 
in  3  vols.,  with  a  4th  vol.  of  notes  (but  without  an 
index),  by  Kruse  (Berlin,  1854-9).     The  Palestine 
journeys  are  contained  in  vols.  1  and  2.    His  Letters, 
founded  on  these  diaries,  and  giving  their  results,  are 
in  Zach's  Monatl.  Corresp.  vols.  17,  18,  26,  27. 

9.  Burckhardt. — Travels  in  Syria  and  the  Holy 
Land,  4to,  1822.     With  the  exception  of  an  ex 
cursion  ol   twelve  days   to   Safed   and    Nazareth, 
Surckhardt's  journeys,  S.  of  Damascus  were  con 
ined  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan.     These  regions  he 

explored  and  described  more  completely  than  Seetzen. 

or  any  later  traveller  till  Wetzstem  (1861),  and  even 
lis  researches  do  not  extend  over  so  wide  an  area, 
iurckhardt  made  two  tours  in  the  Hauran,  in  one 

given  by  Hitter  at  the  commencement  of  the  2nd  dlvlsloa 
i  hi*  viiith  volume  (Jordan). 


PALESTINE 

-,f  winch  ho  penetrated — first  of  EnropMM — into 
the  mysterious  Leja.  The  southern  portions  of  the 
Transjordsinic  country  he  traversed  in  his  journey 
f  10 in  Damascus  to  Petra  and  Sinai.  The  fulness  of 
the  notes  which  he  contrived  to  keep  under  the 
vvry  difficult  circumstances  in  which  he  travelled  is 
astonishing.  They  contain  a  multitude  of  inscrip 
tions,  long  catalogues  of  names,  plans  of  sites,  &c. 
The  strength  of  his  memory  is  shown  not  only  by 
these  notes  but  by  his  constant  references  to  books, 
from  which  he  was  completely  cut  off.  His  diaries 
are  interspersed  with  lengthened  accounts  of  the 
various  districts,  and  the  manners  and  customs, 
commei-ce,  &c.,  of  their  inhabitants.  Burckhardt's 
accuracy  is  universally  praised.  No  doubt  justly. 
But  it  should  be  remembered  that  on  the  E.  of 
Jordan  no  means  of  testing  him  as  yet  exist ;  while 
in  other  places  his  descriptions  have  been  found 
imperfect  or  at  variance  1  with  facts. — The  volume 
contains  an  excellent  preface  by  Col.  Leake,  but  is 
very  defective  from  the  want  of  an  index.  This  is 
partially  supplied  in  the  German  translation  (Wei 
mar,  1823-4,  2  vols.  8vo),  which  has  the  advantage 
of  having  been  edited  and  annotated  by  Gesenius. 

10.  Jrby  and  Mangles. — Travels  in  Egypt  and 
Nubia,  Syria  and  the  Holy  Land  (in  1817-18). 
Hardly  worth  special  notice  except  for  the  portions 
which   relate  their  route  on   the  east  of  Jordan, 
especially  about  Kerek  and  the  country  of  Moab  and 
Ammon,  which  are  very  well  told,  and  with  an  air 
of  simple  faithfulness.    These  portions  are  contained 
in  chapters  vi.  and  viii.     The  work  is  published  in 
the  Home  and  Col.  Library,  1847. 

11.  Robinson. — (1.)  Biblical  Researches  in  Pa 
lestine,  $c.,  in  1838  :   1st  ed.  1841,  3  vols.  8vo; 
2nd  ed.  1856,  2  vols.  8vo.     (2.)  Later  Bib.  Ees. 
in  1852,  8vo,  1856.      Dr.  Robinson's  is  the  most 
important  work  on  the  Holy  Land  since  Reland. 
His  knowledge  of  the  subject  and  its  literature  is 
very  great,  his  common  sense  excellent,  his  qualifi 
cations  as  an  investigator  and  a  describer  remark 
able.     He  had  the  rare  advantage  of  being  accom 
panied  on  both  occasions  by  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  long 
resident   in   Syria,   and   perfectly   versed   in   both 
classical   and   vernacular   Arabic.      Thus   he  was 
enabled  to  identify  a  host  of  ancient  sites,  which  are 
mostly  discussed  at   great   length,  and  with  full 
references  to  the  authorities.     The  drawbacks  to  his 
work  are  a  want  of  knowledge  of  architectural  art, 
and  a  certain  dogmatism,  which  occasionally  passes 
into  contempt  for  those  who  differ  with  him.     He 
too  uniformly  disregards  tradition,  an  extreme  fully 
as  bad  as  its  opposite  in  a  country  like  the  East. 

The  first  edition  has  a  most  valuable  Appendix, 
containing  lists  of  the  Arabic  names  of  modern 
places  in  the  country,  which  in  the  second  edition 
are  omitted.  Both  series  are  furnished  with  in 
dexes,  but  those  of  Geography  and  Antiquities  might 
be  extended  with  advantage. 

12.  Wilson. — The  Lands  of  the  Bible  visited,  $c., 
1847,  2  vols.  8vo.     Dr.  Wilson  traversed  the  Holy 
Land  twice,  but  without  going  out  of  the  usual 
routes.    He  paid  much  attention  to  the  topography, 
sind  keeps  a  constant  eye  on  the  reports  of  his  prede 
cessor  Dr.  Robinson.     His  book  cannot  be  neglected 
vith  safety  by  any  student  of  the  country  ;  but  it 
is  chiefly  valuable  for  its  careful  and  detailed  ac- 
cotuts  of  the  religious  bodies  of  the  East,  especially 
*bs  Jews    and    Samaritans.       His   Indian    labours 


PALESTINE 


695 


-,  Fcr  examples  of  this  see  Robinson,  B.  R.  111.  323 ; 
8  •  473 ;  494 :  Stanley,  Sinai  &  1'aL  61,  72. 


laving  accustomed  him  to  Arabic,  he  was  able  to 
converse  freely  with  all  the  people  he  met,  and  his 
nquiries  were  generally  made  in  the  direction  jus! 
named.  His  notice  of  the  Samaritans  is  unusually 
"ull  and  accurate,  and  illustrated  by  copies  and 
translations  of  documents,  and  information  not 
Isewhere  given. 

13.  Schwarz. — A  Descriptive   Geography,  $c., 
of  Palestine,  Philad.  1 850,  8vo.     A  translation  of 
a  work  originally  published  in  Hebrew  (Sepher  Te- 
buoth,  Jerusalem,  5605,  A.D.  1845)  by  Rabbi  Joseph 
Schwarz.     Taking  as  his  basis  the   catalogues  of 
Joshua,  Chronicles,  &c.,  and  the  numerous  topogra 
phical  notices  of  the  Rabbinical  books,  he  proceeds 
systematically  through  the  country,  suggesting  iden 
tifications,  and  often  giving  curious  and  valuable 
information.      The  American  translation  is  almost 
useless  for  want  of  an  index.     This  is  in  some  mea 
sure  supplied  in  the  German  version,  Das  heilige 
Land,  &c.,  Frankfurt  a.  M.  1852. 

14.  De  Saulcy. —  Voyage  autour  de  la  Mer  Morte, 
&c.,  1853,  2  vols.  8vo.,  with  Atlas  of  Maps  and 
Plates,   Lists   of  Plants   and  Insects.     Interesting 
rather  from  the  unusual  route  taken  by  the  author, 
the  boldness  of  his  theories,  and  the  atlas  of  ad 
mirably  engraved  maps  and  plates  which  accom 
panies  the  text,  than  for  its  own  merits.     Like 
many  French  works  it  has  no  index.   Translated  : — 
Narrative  of  a  Journey,  &c.,  2  vols.  8vo,  1854. — See 
The  Dead  Sea,  by  Rev.  A.  A.  Isaacs,  1857.    Also  a 
valuable  Letter  by  "  A  Pilgrim,"  in  the  Athenaum, 
Sept.  9,  1854. 

15.  Lynch. —  Official  Report  of  the  United  States 
Expedition  to  explore  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Jordan, 
4to.,  Baltimore,  1852.     Contains  the  daily  Record 
of  the  Expedition,  and  separate  Reports  on  the  Orni 
thology,  Botany,  and  Geology.     The  last  of  these 
Reports  is  more  particularly  described  at  p.  679. 

16.  Stanley. — Sinai  and  Palestine,  1853,  8vo. 
Professor  Stanley's  work  differs  from  those  of  his 
predecessors.      Like  them    he   made  a  lengthened 
journey  in  the  country,   is  intimately  acquainted 
with  all  the  authorities,  ancient  and  modern,  and 
has  himself  made  some  of  the  most  brilliant  identi 
fications  of  the  historical  sites.    But  his  great  object 
seems  to  have  been  not  so  much  to  make  fresh  dis 
coveries,  as  to  apply  those  already  made,  the  struc 
ture  of  the  country  and  the  peculiarities  of  the 
scenery,  to  the  elucidation  of  the  history.     This 
he  has  done  with  a  power  and  a  delicacy  truly 
remarkable.      To  the  sentiment  and  eloquence  of 
Lamartine,  the  genial  freshness  of  Miss  Martineau, 
and  the  sound  judgment  of  Robinson,  he  adds  a 
reverent  appreciation  of  the  subject,  and  a  care  for 
the  smallest  details  of  the  picture,  which  no  one 
else  has  yet  displayed,  and   which  render  his  de 
scriptions  a  most  valuable  commentary  on  the  Bible 
narrative.     The  work  contains  an  Appendix  on  the 
Topographical  Terms  of  the  Bible,  of  impoi-tance  to 
students  of  the  English  version  of  the  Scriptures. 

See  also  a  paper  on  '  Sacred  Geography '  by  Pro 
fessor  Stanley  in  the  Quarterly  Review,  No.  clxxxviii. 

17.  Tobler. — Bethlehem,  1849  :  Topographic  von 
Jerusalem   u.   seine    Umgebungen,   1854.      These 
works  are  models  of  patient  industry  and  research. 
They  contain   everything   that   has   been   said   by 
everybody  on  the  subject,  and  are  truly  valuable 
storehouses  for  those  who  are  unable  to  refer  to  the 
originals.     His  Dritte  Wanderung,  8vo,  1859,  de 
scribes  a  district  but  little  known,  viz.  part  of  1'hi- 
listia  and  the  country  between  Hebron  and  Ramleh, 
?.  id  thus  possesses,  in  addition  to  the  merits  abovt 


596 


PALB8TFNK 


na:ned,  that  of  novelt  •.  It  contains  a  sketch-map 
of  the  latter  district,  which  corrects  former  maps  in 
some  important  points. 

18.  Van  de  Velde. — Syria  and  Palestine,  2  vols. 
Bvo.  1854.     Contains  the  narrative  of  the  author's 
journeys  while  engaged  in  preparing  his  large  Map 
of  the  Holy  Land  (1858),  the  best  map  yet  pub 
lished.    A  condensed  edition  of  this  work,  omitting 
the  purely  personal  details  too  frequently  introduced, 
would  be  useful.      Van  de  Velde's  Memoir,  Svo, 
1858,   gives   elevations,    latitudes  and  longitudes, 
routes,  and  much  veiy  excellent  information.     His 
Pays  a"  Israel,  100  coloured  lithographs  from  original 
sketches,  are  accurate  and  admirably  executed,  and 
many  of  the  views  are  unique. 

19.  Hitter. — Die   Vergleichende   Erdkunde,  &c. 
The  six  volumes  of  Ritter's  great  geographical  work 
which  relate  to  the  peninsula  of  Sinai,  the  Holy 
Laud,   and  Syria,   and   form   together  Band  viii. 
They  may  be  conveniently  designated  by  the  follow 
ing  names,  which  the  writer  has  adopted  in  his  other 
articles: — I.Sinai.     2.  Jordan.     3.  Syria  (Index). 
I.  Paiestine.    5.  Lebanon.    6.  Damascus  (Index). 

20.  Of  more  recent  works  the  following  may  be 
i  oticed  : — Porter :    Five   Years  in  Damascus,  the 
JJauran,  &c.,  2  vols.   Svo.  1855:    Handbook  for 
Syria  and  Palestine,  1858.— Bonar,  The  Land  of 
Promise,  1858.  —  Thomson,   The   Land  and  the 
Book,  1859.     The  fruit  of  twenty-five  years'  resi 
dence  in  the  Holy  Land,  by  a  shrewd  and  intelligent 
observer.  —  Wetzstein,  Reisebericht   uber  Hauran 
und  die  beiden  Trachonen,  1860,  with  woodcuts, 
a  plate  of  inscriptions,  and  a  map  of  the  district 
by  Kiepert.     The  first  attempt  at  a  real  exploration 
of  those  extraordinary  regions  east  of  the  Jordan, 
which  were  partially  visited  by  Burckhardt,  and  re 
cently  by  Cyril  Graham  (Cambridge  Essays,  1858  ; 
Trans.  R.  S.  Lit.  1860,  &c.).  —  Drew,  Scripture 
Lands  in  Connexion  with  their  History,  1860. 

Two  works  by  ladies  claim  especial  notice. 
Egyptian  Sepulchres  and  Syrian  Shrines,  by  Miss 
E.  A.  Beaufort,  2  vols.  1861.  The  2nd  vol.  con 
tains  the  record  of  six  months'  travel  and  residence 
in  the  Holy  Land,  and  is  full  of  keen  and  delicate 
observation,  caught  with  the  eye  of  an  artist,  and 
characteristically  recorded. — Domestic  Life  in  Pa 
lestine,  by  Miss  Rogers  (1862),  is,  what  its  name 
purports,  an  account  of  a  visit  of  several  years  to 
the  Holy  Land,  during  which,  owing  to  her  brother's 
position,  the  author  had  opportunities  of  seeing 
at  leisure  the  interiors  of  many  unsophisticated 
Arab  and  Jewish  households,  in  places  out  of  the 
ordinary  track,  such  as  few  Englishwomen  ever 
before  enjoyed,  and  certainly  none  have  recorded. 
These  she  has  described  with  great  skill  and  fidelity, 
and  with  an  abstinence  from  descriptions  of  matters 
out  of  her  proper  path  or  at  second-hand  which  is 
truly  admirable. 

It  still  remains,  however,  for  some  one  to  do  for 
Syria  what  Mr.  Lane  has  so  faultlessly  accomplished 
for  Egypt,  the  more  to  be  desired  because  the  time 
is  fast  passing,  and  Syria  is  becoming  every  day 
more  leavened  by  the  West. 

Views. — Two  extensive  collections  of  Views  of  the 
Hily  Land  exist  -those  of  Bartlett  and  of  Roberts. 
Pictorially  beautiful  as  these  plates  are,  they  are  not 
so  useful  to  the  student  as  the  very  accurate  views 
of  William  Tipping,  Esq.,  published  in  Traill's 
Josephus),  some  of  which  have  been  inserted  in  the 
srticle  JERUSALEM.  There  are  some  instructive 
views  taken  from  photographs,  in  the  last  edition 
>f  Keith's  Land  of  Israel.  Photographs  have  been 


PALMER-WORM 

published  by  Frith,  Robertson,  Rev.  G.  \V.  Urines, 
and  others. 

Maps. — Mr.  Van  de  Velde's  map,  already  men 
tioned,  has  superseded  all  its  predecessors ,  but  much 
still  remains  to  be  done  in  districts  out  of  the  track 
usually  pursued  by  travellers.  On  the  east  of  Jor 
dan,  Kiepert's  map  (m  Wetzstein's  Hauran)  is  as  yet 
the  only  trustworthy  document.  The  new  Adm.- 
ralty  surveys  of  the  coast  are  understood  to  be  rapidly 
approaching  completion,  and  will  leave  nothing  to 
be  desired. 

Of  works  on  Jerusalem  the  following  may  be 
named :  — 

Williams. — The  Holy  City:  2nd  ed.  2  vois.  Svo. 
1849.  Contains  a  detailed  history  of  Jerusalem, 
an  account  of  the  modern  town,  and  an  essay  on 
the  architectural  history  of  the  Church  of  the 
Sepulchre  by  Professor  Willis.  Mr.  Williams  in 
most  if  not  all  cases  supports  tradition. 

Barclay.— The  City  of  the  Great  King:  Philad. 
1858.  An  account  of  Jerusalem  as  it  was,  is,  and 
will  be.  Dr.  B.  had  some  peculiar  opportunities  of 
investigating  the  subterranean  passages  of  the  city 
and  the  Haram  area,  and  his  book  contains  many- 
valuable  notices.  His  large  Map  of  Jerusalem  and 
Environs,  though  badly  engraved,  is  accurate  and 
useful,  giving  the  form  of  the  ground  very  well. 

Fergusson. —  The  Ancient  Topography  of  Jeru 
salem,  &c.,  1847,  with  7  plates.  Treats  of  the 
Temple  and  the  walls  of  ancient  Jerusalem,  and 
the  site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  and  is  full  of  the 
most  original  and  ingenious  views,  expressed  in  the 
boldest  language.  From  architectural  arguments 
the  author  maintains  the  so-called  Mosk  cf  Omar 
to  be  the  real  Holy  Sepulchre.  He  also  shows  that 
the  Temple,  instead  of  occupying  the  whole  of  the 
Haran  area,  was  confined  to  its  south-western 
comer.  His  arguments  have  never  been  answered 
or  even  fairly  discussed.  The  remarks  of  some  of 
his  critics  are,  however,  dealt  with  by  Mr.  F.  in  a 
pamphlet,  Notes  on  the  Site  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre* 
1861.  See  also  vol.  1.  of  this  Dictionary,,  pp. 
1017-1035. 

Thrupp. — Ancient  Jerusalem,  a  new  Investi 
gation,  &c.,  1855. 

A  good  resume  of  the  controversy  on  the  Holy 
Sepulchre  is  given  in  the  Museum  of  Classical 
Antiquities,  No.  viii.,  and  Suppl. 

Maps. — Besides  Dr.  Barclay's,  already  mentioned, 
Mr.  Van  de  Velde  has  published  a  very  clear  and 
correct  map  (1858).  So  also  has  Signer  Pierotti 
(1861).  The  latter  contains  a  great  deal  of  in 
formation,  and  shows  plans  of  the  churches,  &c., 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  city. 

Photographs  have  been  taken  by  Salzmann,  whose 
plates  are  accompanied  by  a  treatise,  Jerusalem 
Etude,  &c.  (Paris,  1856):  also  by  Frith  (Virtue, 
1858),  Robertson,  and  others.  [G.J 

PAL'LU  (N-1;>S:  *oAAo.5y :  Phallu).  The 
second  son  of  Reuben,  father  of  Eliab  and  founder 
of  the  family  of  the  PALLUITES  (Ex.  vi.  14;  Num. 
xxvi.  5,  8 ;  1  Chr.  v.  3).  In  the  A.  V.  of  Gen. 
xlvi.  9,  he  is  called  PHALLU,  and  Joseph  us  appears 
to  identify  him  with  Peleth  in  Num.  xvi.  1,  whom 
he  calls  *aAAoOs.  [See  ON.] 

PAL'LUITES,  THE 

Alex.  6  $a\\ovfi :  Phalluitae}.  The  descendants 
of  P;illu  the  son  of  Reuben  (Num.  xxvi.  5;. 

PALMER -WORM  (DT3,  gdzdm:  KU/*T>I  . 
eruca)  occurs  Joel  i.  4,  ii.  25 ;  Am.  iv.  9.  Boel.art 


PALM-TREE 

(ffieroz.  iii.  253)  has  endeavoured  to  show,  that 
$&zam  denotes  some  species  of  locust ;  it  has 
already  been  shown  that  the  ten  Hebrew  names 
to  which  Bochart  assigns  the  meaning  of  different 
kinds  of  locusts  cannot  possibly  apply  to  so  many, 
as  not  more  than  two  or  three  destructive  species 
of  locust  are  known  in  the  Bible  lands.  [LOCUST  ; 
CATERPILLAR.]  The  derivation  of  the  Hebrew 
word  from  a  root  which  means  "  to  cut  off,"  is  as 
applicable  to  several  kinds  of  insects,  whether  in 
their  perfect  or  larva  condition,  as  it  is  to  a  locust ; 
accordingly  we  prefer  to  follow  the  LXX.  and 
Vulg.,  which  are  consistent  with  each  other  in  the 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew  word  in  the  three  passages 
where  it  is  found.  The  /CO^TTTJ  cf  Aristotle  (Anim. 
Hist.  ii.  17,  4,  5,  6)  evidently  denotes  a  cater 
pillar,  so  called  from  its  "bending  itself"  up 
(KafiiTTw)  to  move,  as  the  caterpillars  called  geo 
metric,  or  else  from  the  hubit  some  caterpillars 
have  of  "  coiling "  themselves  up  when  handled. 
The  Eruca  of  the  Vulg.  is  the  Kd/j.irri  of  the  Greeks, 
as  is  evident  from  the  express  assertion  of  Columella 
(De  Re  Rust.  xi.  3,  63,  Script.  R.  R.  ed.  Schneider). 
The  ChaHee  and  Syriac  understand  some  locust 
larva  by  the  Hebrew  word.  Oedmarm  (  Verm.  Sctmm. 
tasc.  ii.  c.  vi.  p.  116)  is  of  the  same  opinion. 
Tychsen  (Comment,  de  locustis,  &c.,  p.  88)  iden 
tifies  the  gdzam  with  the  Gryllus  cristatus,  Lin.,  a 
South  African  species.  Michaelis  (Supp.  p.  220) 
follows  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  We  cannot  agree  with 
Mr.  Denham  (Kitto's  Cycl.,  art. "  Locust")  that  the 
depredations  ascribed  to  the  gdzdm  in  Amos  better 
agree  with  the  characteristics  of  the  locust  than  of 
a  caterpillar,  of  which  various  kinds  are  occasion 
ally  the  cause  of  much  damage  to  fruit-trees,  the 
fig  and  the  olive,  &c.  [W.  H.] 

PALM-TKEE  ("V3F\:    <polt>i£).     Under  this 

generic  term  many  species  are  botanically  included ; 
but  we  have  here  only  to  do  with  the  Date-palm, 
the  Phoenix  Dactylifera  of  Liunacus.  It  grew 
very  abundantly  (more  abundantly  than  now)  in 
many  parts  of  the  Levant.  On  this  subject  gene 
rally  it  is  enough  to  refer  to  Hitter's  monograph 
('•Ueber  die  geographische  Verbreitung  der  Dattel- 
palme  ')  in  his  Erdkunde,  and  also  published  sepa 
rately. 

While  this  tree  was  abundant  generally  in  the 
Levant,  it  was  regarded  by  the  ancients  as  pecu 
liarly  characteristic  of  Palestine  and  the  neighbour 
ing  regions.  (2wp£a,  '6-irov  (poivixes  ol  KapiroipSpoi, 
Xen.  Cyrop.  vi.  2,  §22.  Judaea  inclyta  est  palmis, 
Plin.  N.  H.  xiii.  4.  Palmetis  [Judaeis]  proceritas 
?t  decor,  Tac.  Hist.  v.  6.  Compare  Strabo  xvii. 
800,  818  ;  Theophrast.  Hist.  Plant,  ii.  8;  Paus. 
ix.  19,  §5).  The  following  places  may  be  enu 
merated  from  the  Bible  as  having  some  conuexbn 
with  the  palm-tree,  either  in  the  derivation  of  the 
name,  or  in  the  mention  of  the  tree  as  growing  on 
the  spot. 

(1.)  At  ELIM,  one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israel 
ites  between  Egypt  and  Siuai,  it  is  expressly  stated 
tha ;  there  were  "  twelve  wells  (fountains)  of  water, 
and  threescore  and  ten  palm-trees "  (Ex.  xv.  27  ; 
Num.  xxxiii.  9).  The  word  "fountains"  of  the 
latter  passage  is  more  correct  than  the  "  wells  "  of 
the  former:  it  is  more  in  harmony  too  with  the 
habits  of  the  tree  ;  for,  as  Theophrastus  says  (I.  c.), 
the  palm  ein£jjT«r  fia\\ov  r6  va^ancuov  uSiap, 
'l"here  are  still  palm-trees  and  fountains  in  Wadij 
GhZr&ndel,  which  is  generally  ideutiti<t)  with  Elim 
!  Rob.  Bib.  Res.  i.  69). 


PALM-TREE 


69ri 


C2.)  Next,  it  should  be  observed  that  ELATH  (Deut- 
ii.  8  ;  1  K.  ix.  26  ;  2  K.  xiv.  22,  xvi.  6 ;  2  Chr.  viii 
17,  xxvi.  2)  is  another  plural  form  of  the  same  word, 
and  may  likewise  mean  "  the  palm-trees."  Se« 
Prof.  Stanley's  remarks  (S.  and  P.  pp.  20,  84, 
519),  and  compare  Reland  (Palaest.  p.  930).  This 
place  was  in  Edom  (probably  Akaba) ;  and  we  arc 
reminded  here  of  the  "  Idumaeae  palmae  "  of  Virgil 
(Georg.  iii.  12)  and  Martial  (x.  50). 

(3.)  No  place  in  Scripture  is  so  closely  associated 
with  the  subject  before  us  as  JERICHO.  Its  rich 
palm-groves  are  connected  with  two  very  different 
periods, — with  that  of  Moses  and  Joshua  on  the 
one  hand,  and  that  of  the  Evangelists  on  the 
other.  As  to  the  former,  the  mention  of  "  Je 
richo,  the  city  of  palm-trees "  (Deut.  xxxiv.  3), 
gives  a  peculiar  vividness  to  the  Lawgiver's  last 
view  from  Pisgah :  and  even  after  the  narrative  oi 
the  conquest,  we  have  the  children  of  the  Kenite, 
Moses'  father-in-law,  again  associated  with  "  the 
city  of  palm-trees"  (Judg.  i.  16).  So  Jericho  is 
described  in  the  account  of  the  Moabite  invasion 
after  the  death  of  Othuiel  (Judg.  iii.  13)  ;  and,  long 
after,  we  find  the  same  phrase  applied  to  it  in  the 
reign  of  Ahaz  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  15).  What  the  extent 
of  these  palm-groves  may  have  been  in  the  desolate 
period  of  Jericho  we  cannot  tell ;  but  they  were  re 
nowned  in  the  time  of  the  Gospels  and  Josephus. 
The  Jewish  historian  mentions  the  luxuriance  of 
these  trees  again  and  again  ;  not  only  in  allusion  to 
the  time  of  Moses  (Ant.  iv.  6,  §1),  but  in  the 
account  of  the  Roman  campaign  under  Pompey 
(Ant.  xiv.  4,  §1 ;  B.  J.  i.  6,  §6),  the  proceedings 
of  Antony  and  Cleopatra  (Ant.  xv.  4,  §2),  and  the 
war  of  Vespasian  (B.  J.  iv.  8,  §2,  3).  Herod  the 
Great  did  much  for  Jericho,  and  took  great  interest 
in  its  palm-groves.  Hence  Horace's  "  Herodis  pal- 
metapinguia"  (Ep.  ii.  2, 184),  which  seems  almost 
to  have  been  a  proverbial  expression.  Nor  is  this  the 
only  Heathen  testimony  to  the  same  fact.  Strabo 
describes  this  immediate  neighbourhood  as  TrXeovd- 
£oi>  T(f  (poiviKi,  £irl  fj.rJKOS  cnatiiuv  £K<n6v  (xvi. 
763),  and  Pliny  says  "  Hiericuntem  palmetis  cpn- 
sitam"  (H.  N.  v.  14),  and  adds  elsewhere  that, 
while  palm-trees  grow  well  in  other  parts  in  Judaea, 
"  Hiericunte  maxime"  (xiii.  4).  See  also  Galen; 
De  Aliment,  facult.  ii.,  and  Justin,  xxxvi.  3 
Shaw  (Trav.  p.  371,  folio)  speaks  of  several  ot 
these  trees  still  remaining  at  Jericho  in  his  time. 

(4.)  ThenameofHAZEZON-TAMAR,  "the felling 
of  the  palm-tree,"  is  clear  in  its  derivation.  This 
place  is  mentioned  in  the  history  both  of  Abraham 
(Gen.  xiv.  7)  and  of  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xx.  2), 
In  the  second  of  these  passages  it  is  expressly  iden 
tified  with  Engedi,  which  was  on  the  western  edge 
of  the  Dead  Sea ;  and  here  we  can  adduce,  as  a 
valuable  illustration  of  what  is  before  us,  the  lan 
guage  of  the  Apocrypha,  "  I  was  exalted  like  a 
palm-tree  in  Engaddi "  (Eccl.  xxiv.  14).  Here 
again,  too,  we  can  quote  alike  Josephus  (yevvarcu 
(v  avrrj  tpoivil-  6  K<i\\iffTos,  Ant.  ix.  1,  §2)  and 
Pliny  (EngiidJa  oppidum  secundum  ab  Hierosolymis, 
fertilitate  palmetorumque  nemoribus,  H.  N.  v.  17% 

(5.)  Another  place  having  the  same  element  in 
its  name,  and  doubtless  the  same  characteristic  in 
its  scenery,  was  BAAL-TAMAR  (Judg.  xx.  33),  the 
'BiidBa/j.dp  of  Eusebius.  Its  position  was  near 
Gibeah  of  Benjamin :  and  it  could  not  be  far  from 
Deborah's  famous  palm-tree  (Judg.  iv.  5)  ;  ir'  indeed 
it  was  not  identical  with  it,  as  is  susrucsted  by 
Stanley  (S.  <y  P.  p.  146). 

(t>.)  We  must  next  mention  the  TAMAB,  "  the 


698 


PALM-TREE 


palm,"  which  is  set  before  us  iu  the  vision  of  Ezekiel 
(xlvii.  19,  xlviii.  28)  as  a  point  from  which  the 
southern  border  of  the  land  is  to  be  measured  cast- 
wards  and  westwards.  Robinson  identifies  it  with 
thueajuapai  of  Ptolemy  (v.  16),  and  thinks  its  sit* 
may  be  at  el-Milh,  between  Hebron  and  Wadij  Musa 
(Bib.  Res.  ii.  198,  202).  It  seems  from  Jerome  to 
have  been  in  his  day  a  Roman  fortress. 

(7.)  There  is  little  doubt  that  Solomon's  TADMOR, 
Afterwards  the  famous  Palmyra,  on  another  desert 
frontier  far  to  the  N.E.  of  Tamar,  is  primarily  the 
same  word ;  and  that,  as  Gibbon  says  (Decline  and 
Fall,  ii.  38),  "  the  name,  by  its  signification  in  the 
Syriac  as  well  as  in  the  Latin  language,  denoted  the 
multitude  of  palm-trees,  which  afforded  shade  and 
verdure  to  that  temperate  region."  In  fact,  while 
the  undoubted  reading  in  2  Chr.  viii.  4  is  "to'lPl, 
the  best  text  in  1  K.  ix.  18  is  "lOfl.  See  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  6,  §  1 .  Thesprings  which  he  mentions  there 
make  the  palm-trees  almost  a  matter  of  course. 

(8.)  Nor  again  are  the  places  of  the  N.  T.  with 
out  their  associations  with  this  characteristic  tree  of 
Palestine.  BETHANY  means  "  the  house  of  dates ;" 
and  thus  we  are  reminded  that  the  palm  grew  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  Mount  of  Olives.  This  helps 
our  realisation  of  Our  Saviour's  entry  into  Jerusalem, 
when  the  people  "  took  branches  of  palm-trees  and 
went  forth  to  meet  Him"  (John  xii.  13).  This 
again  carries  our  thoughts  backwards  to  the  time 
when  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  first  kept  after 
the  captivity,  when  the  proclamation  was  given  that 
they  should  "  go  forth  unto  the  mount  and  fetch 
palm-branches"  (Neh.  viii.  15) — the  only  branches, 
it  may  be  observed  (those  of  the  willow  excepted), 
which  are  specified  by  name  in  the  original  institu 
tion  of  the  festival  (Lev.  xxiii.  40).  From  this 
Gospel  incident  comes  Palm  Sunday  (Dominica  in 
Ramis  Palmarum),  which  is  observed  with  much 
ceremony  in  some  countries  where  true  palms  can  be 
had.  Even  in  northern  latitudes  (in  Yorkshire,  for 
Stance)  the  country  people  use  a  substitute  which 
,-onios  into  flower  just  before  Easter : — 
"  And  willow  branches  hallow, 

That  they  palmes  do  use  to  call." 

(9.)  The  word  Phoenicia  (*o«vf»cij),  which  occurs 
iwice  in  the  N.  T.  (Acts  xi.  19,  xv.  3)  is  in  all  pro 
bability  derived  from  the  Greek  word  (^ofvjf )  for  a 
palm.  Sidonius  mentions  palms  as  a  product  of 
Phoenicia  (Paneg.  Majorian.  44).  See  also  Plin. 
H.  N.  xiii.  4,  Athen.  i.  21.  Thus  we  may  imagine 
the  same  natural  objects  in  connexion  with  St.  Paul's 
journeys  along  the  coast  to  the  north  of  Palestine, 
as  with  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  through 
the  desert  on  the  south. 

(10.)  Lastly,  Phoenix  in  the  island  of  Crete,  the 
harbour  which  St.  Paul  was  prevented  by  the  storm 
from  reaching  (Acts  xxvii.  12),  has  doubtless  the 
same  derivation.  Both  Theophrastus  and  Pliny  say 
that  palm-trees  are  indigenous  in  this  island.  See 
Hoeck's  Kreta,  i.  38,  388.  [PHENICE.] 

From  the  passages  where  there  is  a  literal  refer 
ence  to  the  palm-tree,  we  may  pass  to  the  em 
blematical  uses  of  it  in  Scripture.  Under  this  head 
may  be  classed  the  following : — 

(1.)  The  striking  appearance  of  the  tree,  its  up 
rightness  and  beauty,  would  naturally  suggest  the 
giving  of  its  name  occasionally  to  women.  As  we 
find  in  the  Odyssey  (vi.  163)  Naasicaa,  the  daughter 
o*"  Alcinous,  compared  to  a  palm,  so  in  Cant.  vii.  7 
we  have  the  same  comparison :  "  Thy  stature  is 
like  to  a  palm-tree."  In  the  0.  T.  three  women 


PALM-TREK 

named  Tamar  are  mentioned:  JudiJ'.  s  daughter -inr 
law  (Gen.  xxxviii.  6),  Absalom'*  sistor  (2  Sam. 
xiii.  1),  and  Absalom's  daughter  (2  Sam.  xiv.  27). 
The  beauty  of  the  two  last  is  expressly  mentioned. 

(2.)  We  have  notices  of  the  employment  of  thif 
form  in  decorative  art,  both  in  the  red  temple  o< 
Solomon  and  in  the  visionary  temple  of  Ezekie!. 
In  the  former  case  we  are  told  (2  Chr.  iii.  5) 
of  this  decoration  in  general  terms,  and  else 
where  more  specifically  that  it  was  applied  to  the 
walls  (1  K.  vi.  29),  to  the  doors  (vi.  32,  35), 
and  to  the  "  bases "  (vii.  36).  So  in  the  pro 
phet's  vision  we  find  palm-trees  on  the  posts  of 
the  gates  (Ez.  xl.  16,  22,  26,  31,  34,  37),  and  also 
on  the  walls  and  the  dcors  (xli.  18-20,  25,  26). 
This  work  seems  to  have  been  in  relief.  We  do 
not  stay  to  inquire  whether  it  had  any  symbolical 
meanings.  It  was  a  natural  and  doubtless  cus 
tomary  kind  of  ornamentation  in  Eastern  archi 
tecture.  Thus  we  are  told  by  Herodotus  (ii.  169) 
of  the  hall  of  a  temple  at  Sais  in  Egypt,  which  vas 
^<TKT)/teV7j  ffrv\oiffi  (poiviKas  rck  SeVSpea  uffj.i/j.ij- 
fAfvoifft :  and  we  are  familiar  now  with  the  same 
sort  of  decoration  in  Assyrian  buildings  (Layard's 
Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  ii.  137,  396, 401).  The 
image  of  such  rigid  and  motionless  forms  may  pos 
sibly  have  been  before  the  mind  of  Jeremiah  when 
he  said  of  the  idols  of  the  heathen  (x.  4,  5),  "  They 
fasten  it  with  nails  and  with  hammers,  that  it 
move  not:  they  are  upright  as  the  palm-tree,  but 
speak  not." 


Falm-Tree     (Ploniz  Dact]/>\fm.) 

(Z.)  With  a  tree  so  abundant  in  Judaea,  and  so 
marked  in  its  growth  and  appearance,  as  the  palm, 
it  seems  rather  remarkable  that  it  does  not  appear 
more  frequently  in  the  imagery  of  the  0.  T.  There 
is,  however,  in  the  Psalms  (xcii.  12)  the  familiar 
comparison,  "  The  righteous  shall  flourish  like  the 
palm-tree,"  which  suggests  a  world  of  illustration, 
whether  respect  be  had  to  the  orderly  and  regular 
aspect  of  the  tree,  its  fruitfulness,  the  pei-petua! 
greenness  of  its  foliage,  or  the  height  at  which  tlw 
foliage  grows,  as  far  as  possible  from  earth  and  or 


PALM-TREE 

no«r  as  possible  to  heaven.  Perhaps  no  point  is 
score  worthy  of  mention,  it'  we  wish  to  pursue  the 
comparison,  tlian  the  elasticity  of  the  fibre  of  the 
fiiilm,  and  its  determined  growth  upwards,  even 
when  loaded  with  weights  ("nititur  m  pondus 
pahna  ").  Such  particulars  of  resemblance  to  the 
righteous  man  were  variously  dwelt  on  by  the 
early  Christian  writers.  Some  instances  are  given 
by  Celsius  in  his  Hierobotanicon  (Upsal,  1747), 
ii.  522-547.  One,  which  he  does  not  give,  is  worthy 
nf  quotation : — "  Well  is  the  life  of  the  righteous 
likened  to  a  palm,  in  that  the  palm  below  is  rough 
to  the  touch,  and  in  a  manner  enveloped  in  dry 
bark,  but  above  it  is  adorned  with  fruit,  fair  even 
to  the  eye ;  below,  it  is  compressed  by  the  enfbld- 
ings  of  its  bark ;  above,  it  is  spread  out  in  ampli 
tude  of  beautiful  greenness.  For  so  is  the  life  of 
the  elect,  despised  below,  beautiful  above.  Down 
below  it  is,  as  it  were,  enfolded  in  many  barks,  in 
that  it  is  straitened  by  innumerable  afflictions  ;  but 
on  high  it  is  expanded  into  a  foliage,  as  it  were,  of 
beautiful  greenness  by  the  amplitude  of  the  reward 
ing"  (St.  Gregory,  Mor.  on  Job  xix.  49). 

(4.)  The  passage  in  Rev.  vii.  9,  where  the  glori 
fied  of  all  nations  are  described  as  "  clothed  with 
white  robes  and  palms  in  their  hands,"  might  seem 
to  us  a  purely  classical  image,  drawn  (like  many 
of  St.  Paul's  images)  from  the  Greek  games,  the 
victors  in  which  carried  palms  in  their  hands.  But 
we  seem  to  trace  here  a  Jewish  element  also,  when 
we  consider  three  passages  in  the  Apocrypha.  In 
1  Mace.  xiii.  51  Simon  Maccabaeus,  after  the  sur 
render  of  the  tower  at  Jerusalem,  is  described  as 
entering  it  with  music  and  thanksgiving  "  and 
branches  of  palm-trees."  In  2  Mace.  x.  7  it  is  said 
that  when  Judas  Maccabaeus  had  recovered  the 
Temple  and  the  city  "  they  bare  branches  and  palms, 
and  sang  psalms  also  unto  Him  that  had  given 
them  good  success."  In  2  Mace.  xiv.  4  Demetrius 
is  presented  "  with  a  crown  of  gold  and  a  palm." 
Here  we  see  the  palm-branches  used  by  Jews  in 
token  of  victory  and  peace.  (Such  indeed  is  the 
case  in  the  Gospel  narrative,  John  xii.  13.) 

There  is  a  fourth  passage  in  the  Apocrypha,  as 
commonly  published  in  English,  which  approximates 
closely  to  the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse.  "  I  asked 
the  angel,  What  are  these  ?  He  answered  and  said 
unto  me,  These  be  they  which  have  put  off  the 
mortal  clothing,  and  now  they  are  crowned  and 
receive  palms.  Then  said  I  unto  the  angel,  What 
young  person  is  it  that  crowneth  them  and  giveth 
them  palms  in  their  hands  ?  So  he  answered  and 
said  unto  me,  It  is  the  Son  of  God,  whom  they  have 
confessed  in  the  world"  (2  Esd.  ii.  44-47).  This 
is  clearly  the  approximation  not  of  anticipation, 
but  of  an  imitator.  Whatever  may  be  determined 
concerning  the  date  of  the  rest  of  the  book,  this 
portion  of  it  is  clearly  subsequent  to  the  Christian 
era.  [ESDRAS,  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF.] 

As  to  the  industrial  and  domestic  uses  of  the 
palm,  it  is  well  known  that  they  are  very  nu 
merous  :  but  th?r3  is  no  clear  allusion  to  them  in 
the  Bible.  Th.it  the  ancient  Orientals,  however,  made 

•  The  palm-tree  being  dioecious — that  is  to  say,  the 
•taniens  and  pistils  (male  and  female  parts)  being  on  dif- 
>fvit  trees— it  is  evident  that  no  edible  fruit  can  be  pro 
duced  unless  fertilisation  is  effected  either  by  insects  or 
by  some  artificial  meazs.  That  the  mode  of  impregnating 
the  female  plarn  with  the  pollen  of  the  male  (b\vv6a.£tiv 
lav  foivixa.)  was  known  to  the  ancients,  is  evident  from 
rreophrastim  ('//.  P.  ii.  9),  and  Herodotus,  who  states  that 
Uw  LAJ>'i'/nmiis  adoyited  a  similar  plan.  The  modern 


PALTIEL 


099 


use  of  wine  and  honey  obtained  from  the  Palm-tret 
is  evident  from  Herodotus  (i.  193,  ii.  86),  Strabc 
(xvi.  ch.  14,  ed.  Kram.),  and  Pliny  (N.  H.  xiii.  4) 
It  is  indeed  possible  that  the  honey  mentioned  it 
some  places  may  be  palm-sugar.  (In  2  Chr.  xxxi. 
5  the  margin  has  "  dates.")  There  may  also  in 
Cant.  vii.  8,  "  I  will  go  up  to  the  palm-tree,  I 
will  take  hold  of  the  boughs  thereof,"  be  a  reference 
to  climbing  for  the  fruit.  The  LXX.  have  avafi-fi 
<TOfj.a.i  £v  Tif  fyutVLKL,  Kpar^ffta  rSiv  tytwv  avrov. 
So  in  ii.  3  and  elsewhere  (e.  g.  Ps.  i.  3)  the  fruit 
of  the  palm  may  be  intended :  but  this  cannot  be 
proved.*  [SUGAR ;  WINE.] 


Group  of  Dates. 

It  is  curious  that  this  tree,  once  so  abundant  in 
Judaea,  is  now  comparatively  rare,  except  in  the 
Philistine  plain,  and  in  the  old  Phoenicia  about 
Beyrout.  A  few  years  ago  there  was  just  one 
palm-tree  at  Jericho :  but  that  is  now  gone.  Old 
trunks  are  washed  up  in  the  Dead  Sea.  It  would 
almost  seem  as  though  we  might  take  the  history 
of  this  tree  in  Palestine  as  emblematical  of  that  of 
the  people  whose  home  was  once  in  that  land.  The 
well-known  coin  of  Vespasian  representing  the  palm- 
tree  with  the  legend  "  Judaea  capta,"  is  figured  in 
vol.  ii.  p.  438.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PALSY.    [MEDICINE,  p.  304.J 

PAL'TI  (»p^SB :  *a\ri :  Phalti).  The  son  of 
Raphu ;  a  Benjamite  who  was  one  of  the  tweltt 
spies  (Num.  xiii.  9). 

PAL'TIEL  ("?N^S  :  SaArdjA.:  Phalticl ). 
The  son  of  Azzan  and  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Issachai 


Arabs  of  Barbary,  Persia,  &c.,  take  care  to  hang  clustery 
of  male  flowers  on  female  trees.  The  ancient  Egyptians 
probably  did  the  same.  A  cake  of  preserved  dates  was 
found  by  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  at  Thebes  (ii.  181,  ed.  1854). 
It  is  certainly  curious  there  is  no  distinct  mention  of  dutoa 
in  the  Bible,  though  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  onoieiit 
Hebrews  used  the  fruit,  and  were  probably  acquainted 
with  the  art  of  fertilising  the  flowers  of  the  female  plan, 


700 


FALTITE,  THE 


(Num  xxxiv.  26).  He  was  one  of  the  twelve  ap 
pointed  to  divide  the  land  of  Canaan  among  the 
tribes  west  of  Jordan. 


PAL'TITE,  THE  OtDBSI  :  6  KeXwflf;  Alex. 

d  <f>t  \\wvei  :  de  Phalti).  '  Helez  "  the  Paltite  " 
i»  named  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  26  among  David's 
mighty  men.  In  1  Chr.  xi.  27,  he  is  called  "  the 
Pelonite."  and  such  seems  to  have  been  the  reading 
followed  by  the  Alex.  MS.  in  2  Sam.  The  Peshito- 
Syriac,  however,  supports  the  Hebrew,  "  Cholots  of 
Pelat."  But  in  1  Chr.  xxvii.  10,  "  Helez  the  Pe- 
lonite  "  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  is  again  mentioned 
as  captain  of  24,000  men  of  David's  army  for  the 
seventh  month,  and  the  balance  of  evidence  there 
fore  inclines  to  "Pelonite"  as  the  true  reading. 
The  variation  arose  from  a  confusion  between  the 
letters  31  and  13.  In  the  Syriac  of  1  Chr.  both 
readings  are  combined,  and  Helez  is  described  as 
"  of  Palton." 


PAMPHYLTA  (napQvXlti),  one  of  the  coast- 
regions  in  the  south  of  Asia  Minor,  having  CILICIA 
on  the  east,  and  LYCIA  on  the  west.  It  seems  in 
early  times  to  have  been  less  considerable  than  either 
of  these  contiguous  districts  ;  for  in  the  Persian  war, 
while  Cilicia  contributed  a  hundred  ships  and  Lycia 
Hfty,  Pamphylia  sent  only  thirty  (Herod,  vii.  91, 
92j.  The  name  probably  then  embraced  little  more 
than  the  crescent  of  comparatively  level  ground 
between  Taurus  and  the  sea.  To  the  north  ,  along  the 
heights  of  Taurus  itself,  was  the  region  of  PISIDIA. 
The  Roman  organization  of  the  country,  however, 
gave  a  wider  range  to  the  term  Pamphylia.  In 
St.  Paul's  time  it  was  not  only  a  regular  province, 
but  the  Emperor  Claudius  had  united  Lycia  with  it 
(Dio  Cass.  Ix.  17),  and  probably  also  a  good  part  of 
Pisidia.  However,  in  the  N.  T.,  the  three  terms  are 
used  as  distinct.  It  was  in  Pamphylia  that  St.  Paul 
first  entered  Asia  Minor,  after  preaching  the  Gospel 
in  Cyprus.  He  and  P>arnabas  sailed  up  the  river 
Cestrus  to  PERGA  (Acts  xiii.  13).  Here  they  were 
abandoned  by  their  subordinate  companion  John- 
Mark  ;  a  circumstance  which  is  alluded  to  again 
with  much  feeling,  and  with  a  pointed  mention  of 
the  place  where  the  separation  occurred  (Acts  xv. 
38).  It  might  be  the  pain  of  this  separation  which 
induced  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  leave  Perga  without 
<4elay.  They  did  however  preach  the  Gospel  there 
on  their  return  from  the  interior  (Acts  xiv.  24,  25). 
We  may  conclude,  from  Acts  ii.  10,  that  there  were 
many  Jews  in  the  province  ;  and  possibly  Perga  had 
a  synagogue.  The  two  missionaries  finally  left  Pam- 
phjlia  by  its  chief  seaport,  ATTALIA.  We  do  not 
know  that  St.  Paul  was  ever  in  this  district  again  : 
but  many  years  afterwards  he  sailed  near  its  coast, 
passing  through  "  the  sea  of  Cilicia  and  Pamphylia" 
on  his  way  to  a  town  of  Lycia  (Acts  xxvii.  5).  We 
notice  here  the  accurate  order  of  these  geographical 
terms,  as  in  the  above-mentioned  land-journey  we 
observe  how  Pisidia  and  Pamphylia  occur  in  their 
true  relations,  both  in  going  and  returning  (els 
TT}S  Tla/j.<f>v\ias  .  .  ,  airb  rfjs  Tltpyris  fls 


•  1.  "I*V3,  or  "1»3  ;Ae/3jj?  6  jufyas;  Itbes  (1  Sam.  1L 
14)  ;  elsewhere  "  laver  "  and  "  hearth,"  t.  e.  a  brazier  or 
Win  for  fire  (Zech.  xii.  6). 

o  2.  rilTO,  from  nin,  "bake"  (Ges.444),  rriyavov, 
tartago  (Lev.  11.  5),  where  it  follows  nKfn"|D,  icrxapa, 
craticula,  "  frying-pan,"  and  is  therefore  distinct  from  it. 

A  J"nb>D  ;  nryoxw  ;  «  a  bakiTig-pan  "  (2  Sam.  xiii.  9), 
Sea.  1313'. 


PAPHUS 

Avrioxdnv  TTJS  IIi<n5iaj,  xiii.  1  5,  14;  Sit 
TV  KurtS'iav  ?i\6oi>  tit  nan<t>v\tcu>,  xiv.  24). 

[J.  S.  H.] 

PAN.  Of  the  «six  words  so  rendered  in  A.  V... 
two,  machbath*  and  masreth,  seem  to  imply  a 
shallow  pan  or  plate,  such  as  is  used  by  Bedouins 
and  Syrians  for  baking  or  dressing  rapidly  their  cakes 
of  meal,  such  as  were  used  in  legal  oblations  :  the 
others,  especially  sir,  a  deeper  vessel  or  caldron  for 
boiling  meat,  placed  during  the  process  on  three 
stones  (Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  58  ;  Niebuhr, 
Descr.  de  I'Ar.  p.  46;  Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  181). 
[CALDRON.]  [H.  W.  P.") 

PANNAG  (33B),  an  article  of  commerce  ex 
ported  from  Palestine  to  Tyre  (Ez.  xxvii.  17).  the 
nature  of  which  is  a  pure  matter  of  conjecture,  as 
the  term  occurs  nowhere  else.  In  comparing  the 
passage  in  Ezekiel  with  Gen.  xliii.  1  1,  where  the  most 
valued  productions  of  Palestine  are  enumerated,  the 
omission  of  tragacanth  and  ladanum  (A.  V.  "spices 
and  myrrh")  in  the  former  is  very  observable,  and 
leads  to  the  supposition  that  pannag  represents  some 
of  the  spices  grown  in  that  country.  The  LXX., 
in  rendering  it  ttcuria,  favours  this  opinion,  though 
it  is  evident  that  cassia  cannot  be  the  particular 
spice  intended  (see  ver.  19).  Hitzig  observes  that  a 
similar  term  occurs  in  Sanscrit  (pannaga)  for  an 
aromatic  plant.  The  Syriac  version,  on  the  other 
hand,  understands  by  it  "millet"  (panicum  mi- 
liaceum)  ;  and  this  view  is  favoured  by  the  ex 
pression  in  the  book  of  Sonar,  quoted  by  Gesenius 
(s.  •».),  which  speaks  of  "  bread  of  paunag  :"  though 
this  again  is  not  decisive,  for  the  pannag  may  equally 
well  have  been  some  flavouring  substance,  as  seems 
to  be  implied  in  the  doubtful  equivalent  "  given  in 
the  Targum.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PAPER.     [WRITING.] 

PAPHOS  (Ha^os),  a  town  at  the  west  end  of 
CYPRUS,  connected  by  a  road  with  SALAMIS  at  the 
east  end.  Paul  and  Barnabas  travelled,  on  their 
first  missionary  expedition,  "  through  the  isle,"  from 
the  latter  place  to  the  former  (Acts  xiii.  6). 

What  took  place  at  Paphos  was  briefly  as  follows. 
The  two  missionaries  found  SERGIUS  PAULUS,  the 
proconsul  of  the  island,  residing  here,  and  were  en 
abled  to  produce  a  considerable  efl'ect  on  his  intel 
ligent  and  candid  mind.  This  influence  was  resisted 
by  ELYMAS  (or  Bar-Jesus),  one  of  those  Oriental 
"  sorcerers,"  whose  mischievous  power  was  so  great 
at  this  period,  even  among  the  educated  classes. 
Miraculous  sanction  was  given  to  the  Apostles,  and 
Elymas  was  struck  with  blindness.  The  proconsul's 
faith  having  been  thus  confirmed,  and  doubtless  a 
Christian  Church  having  been  founded  in  Paphos, 
Barnabas  and  Saul  crossed  over  to  the  continent  ami 
landed  in  PAMPHYLIA  (ver.  13).  It  is  observable 
that  it  is  at  this  point  that  the  latter  becomes  th< 
more  prominent  of  the  two,  and  that  his  name 
henceforward  is  Paul,  and  not  Saul  (SaCXor,  6  ical 
Uav\os,  ver.  9).  How  far  this  was  connected  with 
the  proconsul's  name,  must  be  discussed  elsewhere. 

4.  "VD  ;  A«?/3j,s  ;  o«o;  from  TD,  "boil,"  Joined  (2  K. 
iv.  38)  with  gfMldh,  "  great,''  i.  e.  the  great  keltic  ot 
caldron. 

6-  "VHS  ;  XvVpa  ;  <*«• 


6.  nrPV,  plur.;  Ae/SijTff  ;  Mat  (2  Chr  JUCIT.  13> 

In  Prov.  six.  24,  "  dish." 


PARABLE 

The  great  characteristic  ot'Paphos  wa<  the  worship 
jf  Aphrodite  or  Venus,  who  was  here  fabled  to 
have  risen  from  the  sea  (Horn.  Od.  viii.  362).  Her 
temple,  however,  was  at  "  Old  Paphob,"  now  called 
Kuklia,  The  harbour  and  the  chief  town  were  at 
"  New  Paphos,"  at  some  little  distance.  The  place 
is  still  called  Baffa.  The  road  between  the  two 
was  often  filled  with  gay  and  profligate  processions 
(Strabo,  xiv.  p.  683) ;  strar.gers  came  constantly  to 
Visit  the  shrine  (Athen.  xv.  18) ;  and  the  hold  which 
these  local  superstitions  had  upon  the  higher  minds 
at  this  very  period  is  well  exemplified  by  the  pil 
grimage  of  Titus  (Tac.  Hist.  ii.  2,  3)  shortly  before 
the  Jewish  war. 

For  notices  of  such  scanty  remains  as  are  found 
at  Paphos  we  must  refer  to  Pococke  (Disc,  of  the 
East,  ii.  325-328),  and  especially  Ross  (Reisen  nach 
Kos,  ffalikarnassos,  Rhodos  u.  Cyprus,  180-192). 
Extracts  also  are  given  in  Life  and  Epp.  of  St.  Paul 
(2nded.  i.  190,  191)  from  the  MS.  notes  of  Captain 
Graves,  R.N.,  who  recently  surveyed  the  island  of 
Cyprus.  For  all  that  relates  to  the  harbour  the 
Admiralty  Chart  should  be  consulted.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PAPYRUS.    [REED.] 

PARABLE  (b^O,  masMl:  irapo/SoAJj:  pa 
rabola}.  The  distinction  between  the  Parable  and 
one  cognate  form  of  teaching  has  been  discussed 
under  FABLE.  Something  remains  to  be  said  (1) 
as  to  the  word,  (2)  as  to  the  Parables  of  the  Gospels, 
(3)  as  to  the  laws  of  their  interpretation. 

I.  The  word  irapo/3oA.^j  does  not  of  itself  imply 
a  narrative.  The  juxta-position  of  two  things, 
differing  in  most  points,  but  agreeing  in  some,  is 
sufficient  to  bring  the  comparison  thus  produced 
within  the  etymology  of  the  word.  The  irapo^oA.^ 
of  Greek  rhetoric  need  not  be  more  than  the  sim 
plest  argument  from  analogy.  "  You  would  not 
choose  pilots  or  athletes  by  lot ;  why  then  should 
you  choose  statesmen  ?"  (Aristot.  Rhet.  ii.  20).  In 
Hellenistic  Greek,  however,  it  acquired  a  wider 
meaning,  co-extensive  with  that  of  the  Hebrew 
mds/idl,  for  which  the  LXX.  writers  with  hardly 
an  exception,  make  it  the  equivalent.*  That  word 
(  =  similitude),  as  was  natural  in  the  language  of 
a  people  who  had  never  reduced  rhetoric  to  an  art, 
had  a  large  range  of  application,  and  was  applied 
sometimes  to  the  shortest  proverbs  (1  Sam.  x.  12, 
xxiv.  13;  2  Chr.  vii.  20),  sometimes  to  dark  pro 
phetic  utterances  (Num.  xxiii.  7,  18,  xxiv.  3  ;  Ez.  xx. 
49),  sometimes  to  enigmatic  maxims  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  2 ; 
Prov.  i.  6),  or  metaphors  expanded  into  a  narrative 
(Ez.  xii.  22).  In  Ecclesiasticus  the  word  occurs 
with  a  striking  frequency,  and,  as  will  be  seen  here 
after,  its  use  by  the  son  of  Sirach  throws  light  on 
the  position  occupied  by  parables  in  Our  Lord's 
teaching.  In  the  N.  T.  itself  the  word  is  used  with 
a  like  latitude.  While  attached  most.  'Vequently  to 
the  illustrations  which  have  given  it  a  spinal  mean 
ing,  it  is  also  applied  to  a  short  saying  like,  "  Phy 
sician,  heal  thyself"  (Luke  iv.  23),  to  a  mere  com 
parison  without  a  narrative  (Matt.  xxiv.  32),  to  the 

•  The  word  jrapoi/ou'a  is  used  by  the  LXX.  in  Prov.  i.  1, 
xxv.  1,  xxvi.  7  ;  Ecclus.  vi.  37,  &c.,  and  in  some  other 
passages  by  Symmachus.  The  same  word,  it  will  be 
lemembered,  is  used  throughout  by  St.  John,  instead  of 
topciSoArj. 

b  It  should  be  mentioned  that  another  meaning  has 
been  given  by  some  interpreters  to  7rapa£oAr;  in  this 
liassugc,  but,  it  is  believed,  on  insufficient  grounds. 

«  Some  interesting  examples  of  these  may  be  seen  in 


PARADLK 


701 


figurative  character  of  the  Levitical  ordinances  (Heb. 
ix.  9),  or  of  single  facts  in  patriarchal  history  (Heb. 
xi.  19).b  The  later  history  of  the  word  is  not 
without  interest.  Naturalized  in  Latin,  chiefly 
through  the  Vulgate  or  earlier  versions,  it  loses  gra 
dually  the  original  idea  of  figurative  speech,  ani  is 
used  for  speech  of  any  kind.  Mediaeval  Latin  gives 
us  the  strange  form  of  parabolare,  and  the  descend 
ants  of  the  technical  Greek  word  in  the  Romance 
languages  are  parler,  parole,  parola,  palabras  (Diez. 
Roman.  WSrterb.  s.  v.  parola). 

II.  As  a  form  of  teaching,  the  Parable,  as  has 
been  shown,  differs  from  the  Fable,  (1)  in  excluding 
brute  or  inanimate  creatures  passing  out  of  the 
laws  of  their  nature,  and  speaking  or  acting  like 
men,  (2)  in  its  higher  ethical  significance.  It  differs, 
it  may  be  added,  from  t:/e  Mythus,  in  being  the 
result  of  a  conscious  deliberate  choice,  not  the  growth 
of  an  unconscious  realism,  personifying  attributes, 
appearing,  no  one  knows  how,  in  popular  belief.  It 
differs  from  the  Allegory,  in  that  the  latter,  with 
its  direct  personification  of  ideas  or  attributes,  and 
the  names  which  designate  them,  involves  really  no 
comparison.  The  virtues  and  vices  of  mankind 
appear,  as  in  a  drama,  in  their  own  character  and 
costume.  The  allegory  is  self-interpreting.  The 
parable  demands  attention,  insight,  sometimes  an 
actual  explanation.  It  differs  lastly  from  the  Pro 
verb,  in  that  it  must  include  a  similitude  of  some 
kind,  while  the  proverb  may  assert,  without  a  simi 
litude,  some  wide  generalization  of  experience.  So 
far  as  proverbs  go  beyond  this,  and  state  what  they 
affirm  in  a  figurative  form,  they  may  be  described 
as  condensed  parables,  and  parables  as  expanded  pro 
verbs  (comp.  Trench  on  Parables,  ch.  i. ;  and  Gro- 
tius  on  Matt.  xiii.). 

To  understand  the  relation  of  the  parables  of  the 
Gospels  to  our  Lord's  teaching,  we  must  go  back  to 
the  use  made  of  them  by  previous  or  contemporary 
teachers.  We  have  sufficient  evidence  that  they 
were  frequently  employed  by  them.  They  appear 
frequently  in  the  Gemara  and  Midrash  (comp. 
Lightfoot,  Hor.  Heb.  in  Matt.  xiii.  3 ;  Jost,  Juden- 
thum,\\.  216),  and  are  ascribed  to  Hiliel,  Shammai, 
and  other  great  Rabbis  of  the  two  preceding  cen 
turies.0  The  panegyric  passed  upon  the  great  Rabbi 
Meir,  that  after  his  death  men  ceased  to  speak  pa 
rables,  implies  that,  up  to  that  time,  there  had  been 
a  succession  of  teachers  more  or  less  distinguished 
for  them  (Sota,  fol.  49,  in  Jost,  Judenthurn,  ii. 
87  ;  Lightfoot,  I.  c.).  Later  Jewish  writers  have 
seen  in  this  employment  of  parables  a  condescension 
to  the  ignorance  of  the  great  mass  of  mankind,  who 
cannot  be  taught  otherwise.  For  them,  as  for  wo 
men  or  children,  parables  are  the  natural  and  fit 
method  of  instruction  (Maimonides,  Porta  Mosis, 
p.  84,  in  Wetstein,  on  Matt,  xiii.),  and  the  same 
view  is  taken  by  Jerome  as  accounting  for  the  com 
mon  use  of  parables  in  Syria  and  Palestine  (Hieron. 
»»  Matt,  xviii.  23).  It  may  be  questioned,  how 
ever,  whether  this  represents  the  use  made  of  them 
by  the  Rabbis  of  Our  Lord's  time.  The  language 


Trench's  Parables,  ch.  iv.  Others,  presenting  some  strik 
ing  superficial  resemblances  to  those  of  the  Pearl  of  Great 
Price,  the  Labourers,  the  Lost  Piece  of  Money,  the  Wise 
and  Foolish  Virgins,  may  be  seen  in  Wetstein's  notes  to 
those  parables.  The  conclusion  from  them  is,  that  there 
was  at  least  a  generic  resemblance  between  the  outward 
form  of  our  Lord's  teaching  and  that  of  the  Rabbis  of 
Jerusalem. 


702 


PARABLE 


af  the  Son  of  Sirach  confines  them  to  the  scribe  who 
devotes  himself  to  study.  They  are  at  oni*  his 
glory  and  his  reward  (Ecclus.  xxxix.  2,  3).  Oi  all 
who  eat  bread  by  the  sweat  tf  their  brow,  of  the 
great  mass  of  men  in  cities  and  country,  it  is  written 
that  "  they  shall  not  be  found  where  parable*  are 
spoken "  (Ibid,  xxrviii.  33).  For  these  therefore 
it  is  probable  that  the  scribes  and  teachers  of  the 
law  had  simply  rules  and  precepts,  often  perhaps 
burdensome  and  oppressive  (Matt,  xxiii.  3,  4),  for 
mulae  of  prayer  (Luke  xi.  1),  appointed  times  of 
fasting  and  hours  of  devotion  (Mark  ii.  18).  They, 
with  whom  they  would  not  even  eat  (comp.  Wetstein 
and  Lampe  on  John  vii.  49),  cared  little  to  give  even 
as  much  as  this  to  the  "  people  of  the  earth,"  whom 
they  scorned  as  "  knowing  not  the  law,"  a  brute  herd 
for  whom  they  co\jld  have  no  sympathy.  For  their 
own  scholars  they  had,  according  to  their  individual 
character  and  power  of  thought,  the  casuistry  with 
which  the  Mishna  is  for  the  most  part  filled,  or  the 
parables  which  here  and  there  give  tokens  of  some 
deeper  insight.  The  parable  was  made  the  instru 
ment  for  teaching  the  young  disciple  to  discern  the 
treasures  of  wisdom  of  which  the  "  accursed  "  multi 
tude  were  ignorant.  The  teaching  of  Our  Lord 
at  the  commencement  of  His  ministry  was,  in  every 
way,  the  opposite  of  this.  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  may  be  taken  as  the  type  of  the  "  words  of 
Grace"  which  he  spake,  "not  as  the  scribes." 
Beatitudes,  laws,  promises  were  uttered  distinctly, 
.  not  indeed  without  similitudes,  but  with  similitudes 
that  explained  themselves.  So  for  some  months  He 
taught  in  the  synagogues  and  on  the  sea-shore  of 
Galilee,  as  He  had  before  taught  in  Jerusalem,  and 
as  yet  without  a  parable.  But  then  there  comes 
a  change.  The  direct  teaching  was  met  with  scorn, 
unbelief,  hardness,  and  He  seems  for  a  time  to 
abandon  it  for  that  which  took  the  form  of  parables. 
The  question  of  the  disciples  (Matt.  xiii.  10)  implies 
that  they  were  astonished.  Their  Master  was  no 
longer  proclaiming  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  as 
before.  He  was  falling  back  into  one  at  least  of  the 
forms  of  Rabbinic  teaching  (comp.  Schoettgen's 
ffor.  Heb.  ii.,  Christus  Rabbinorum  Summits).  He 
was  speaking  to  the  multitude  in  the  parables  and 
dark  sayings  which  the  Rabbis  reserved  for  their 
chosen  disciples.  Here  for  them  were  two  grounds 
of  wonder.  Here,  for  us,  is  the  key  to  the  explana 
tion  which  He  gave,  that  He  had  chosen  this  form 
of  teaching  because  the  people  were  spiritually 
blind  and  deaf  (Matt.  xiii.  13),  and  in  order  that 
they  might  remain  so  (Mark  iv.  12).  Two  inter 
pretations  have  been  given  of  these  words.  (1.)  Spi 
ritual  truths,  it  has  been  said,  are  in  themselves 
hard  and  uninviting.  Men  needed  to  be  won  to 
them  by  that  which  was  more  attractive.  The  pa 
rable  was  an  instrument  of  education  for  those  who 
were  children  in  age  or  character.  For  this  reason 
it  was  chosen  by  the  Divine  Teacher  as  fables  and 
stories,  "  adminicula  imbeoillitntis"  (Seneca,  Epist. 
59),  have  been  chosen  by  human  teachers  (Chry- 
sost.  Horn,  in  Johann.  34).  (2.)  Others  again 
have  seen  in  this  use  of  parables  something  of  a 
penal  character.  Men  have  set  themselves  against 
the  truth,  and  therefore  it  is  hid  from  their  eyes, 
presented  to  them  in  forms  in  which  it  is  not  easy 
for  them  to  recognise  it.  To  the  inner  circle  of 
the  chosen  it  is  given  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the 
tingdom  of  God.  To  those  who  are  without,  all 


PARABLE 

these  thmgr>  are  done  in  parables. — Neither  vir  r  ii 
wholly  satisfactory.  Each  contains  a  partial  trutn. 
All  experience  shows  (1)  that  parables  do  attract, 
and,  when  once  understood,  are  sure  to  be  remem 
bered,  (2)  that  men  may  listen  to  them  and  sef 
that  they  have  a  meaning,  and  yet  never  care  t< 
ask  what  that  meaning  is.  Their  worth,  as  instru 
ments  of  teaching,  lies  in  their  being  at  once  a  test 
of  character,  and  in  their  presenting  each  form  of 
character  with  that  which,  as  a  penalty  or  blessing, 
is  adapted  to  it.  They  withdraw  the  light  from 
those  who  love  darkness.  They  protect  tne  truth 
which  they  enshrine  from  the  mockery  of  the  scoffer. 
They  leave  something  even  with  the  careless  which 
may  be  interpreted  and  understood  afterwards. 
They  reveal,  on  the  other  hand,  the  seekers  after 
truth.  These  ask  the  meaning  of  the  parable,  will 
not  rest  till  the  teacher  has  explained  it,  are  led 
step  by  step  to  the  laws  of  interpretation,  so  that 
they  can  "  understand  all  parables,"  and  then  pass 
on  into  the  higher  region  in  which  parables  are  no 
longer  necessary,  but  all  things  are  spoken  plainly. 
In  this  way  the  parable  did  its  work,  found  out  the 
fit  hearers  and  led  them  on.  And  it  is  to  be  re 
membered  also  that  even  after  this  self-imposed  law 
of  reserve  and  reticence,  the  teaching  of  Christ  pre 
sented  a  marvellous  contrast  to  the  narrow  exclu- 
siveness  of  the  Scribes.  The  mode  of  education  was 
changed,  but  the  work  of  teaching  or  educating  wa? 
not  for  a  moment  given  up,  and  the  aptest  scholars 
were  found  in  those  whom  the  received  system 
would  have  altogether  shut  out. 

From  the  time  indicated  by  Matt,  xiii.,  accord 
ingly,  parables  enter  largely  into  our  Lord's  recorded 
teaching.  Each  parable  of  those  which  we  read  in 
the  Gospels  may  have  been  repeated  more  than  once 
with  greater  or  less  variation  (as  e.  g.  those  of  the 
Pounds  and  the  Talents,  Matt.  xxv.  14 ;  Luke  xix. 
12  ;  of  the  Supper,  in  Matt.  xxii.  2,  and  Luke  xiv. 
16).  Everything  leads  us  to  believe  that  there 
were  many  others  of  which  we  have  no  record 
(Matt.  xiii.  34;  Mark  iv.  33).  In  those  which 
remain  it  is  possible  to  trace  something  like  an 
order.d 

(A.)  There  is  the  group  with  which  the  new 
mode  of  teaching  is  ushered  in,  and  which  have  for 
their  subject  the  laws  of  the  Divine  Kingdom,  in  iU 
growth,  its  nature,  its  consummation.  Under  this 
head  we  have — 

1.  The  Sower  (Matt.  xiii. ;  Markiv. ;  Lukeviii.). 

2.  The  Wheat  and  the  Tares  (Matt.  xiii.). 

3.  The  Mustard-Seed  (Matt.  xiii. ;  Mark  iv.). 

4.  The  Seed  cast  into  the  Ground  (Mark  iv.). 

5.  The  Leaven  (Matt.  xiii.). 

6.  The  Hid  Treasure  (Matt.  xiii.). 

7.  The  Pearl  of  Great  Price  (Matt.  xiii.). 

8.  The  Net  cast  into  the  Sea  (Matt.  xiii.). 

(B.)  After  this  there  is  an  interval  of  some 
months  of  which  we  know  comparatively  little. 
Either  there  was  a  return  to  the  more  direct  teach 
ing,  or  else  these  were  repeated,  or  others  like  them 
spoken.  When  the  next  parables  meet  us  they  are 
of  a  different  type  and  occupy  a  different  petition. 
They  occur  chiefly  in  the  interval  between  the  mis 
sion  of  th«j  seventy  and  the  last  approach  to  Jen* 
sal  em.  They  are  drawn  from  the  lite  of  men  rathei 
than  from  the  world  of  nature.  Often  they  occur, 
not,  as  in  Matt,  xiii.,  in  discourses  to  the  multitude, 


<»  The  number  of  parables  in  the  Gospels  will  of  course     Thus  Mr.  Greswell  reckons  twenty-seven ;  Dean  Trench, 
kpenrt  on  tUa  ratiRe  given  to  the  application  of  the  name,     thirty.   By  others,  the  number  has  been  extended  t)  afyr 


{'ARABLE 

but  lii  f.nswei-s  to  the  questions  of  the  disciples  or 
ather  inquirers.     They  are  such  as  these — 
S.  The  Two  Debtors  (Luke  vii.). 

10.  The  Merciless  Servant  (Matt,  xviii.). 

11.  The  Good  Samaritan  (Luke  x.). 

12.  The  Friend  at  Midnight  (Luke  xi.\ 

13.  The  Rich  Fooi  (Luke  xii.). 

14.  The  Wedding  Feast  (Luke  xii.). 

15.  The  Fig-Tree  (Luke  xiii.). 

16.  The  Great  Supper  (Luke  xiv.). 

17.  The  Lost  Sheep  (Matt,  xviii. ;  Luke  xv.). 

18.  The  Lost  Piece  of  Money  (Luke  xv.). 

19.  The  Prodigal  Son  (Luke  xv.). 

20.  The  Unjust  Steward  (Luke  xvi.). 

21    The  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus  (Luke  xvi.). 
42.  The  Unjust  Judge  (Luke  xviii.). 

23.  The  Pharisee  and  the  Publican  (Luke  xviii.). 

24.  The  Labourers  in  the  Vineyard  (Matt.  xx.). 
(C.)  Towards  the  close  of  Our  Lord's  ministry, 

immediately  before  and  after  the  entry  into  Jeru 
salem,  the  parables  assume  a  new  character.  They 
are  again  theocratic,  but  the  phase  of  the  Divine 
Kingdom,  on  which  they  chiefly  dwell,  is  that  of 
its  final  consummation.  They  are  prophetic,  in  part, 
of  the  rejection  of  Israel,  in  part  of  the  great  retri 
bution  of  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  They  are  to  the 
earlier  parables  what  the  prophecy  of  Matt.  xxiv. 
is  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  To  this  class  we 
may  refer — 

25.  The  Pounds  (Luke  xix.). 

26.  The  Two  Sons  (Matt.  xxi.). 

27.  The  Vineyard  let  out  to  Husbandmen  (Matt. 

xxi. ;  Mark  xii. ;  Luke  xx.). 

28.  The  Marriage-Feast  (Matt.  xxii.). 

29.  The  Wise  and  Foolish  Virgins  (Matt.  xxv.). 

30.  The  Talents  (Matt.  xxv.). 

31.  The  Sheep  and  the  Goats  (Matt.  xxv.). 

It  is  characteristic  of  the  several  Gospels  that  the 
greater  part  of  the  parables  of  the  first  and  third 
groups  belong  to  St.  Matthew,  emphatically  the 
Evangelist  of  the  kingdom.  Those  of  the  seconc 
are  found  for  the  most  part  in  St.  Luke.  They  are 
such  as  we  might  expect  to  meet  with  in  the  Gospel 
which  dwells  most  on  the  sympathy  of  Christ  fo 
all  men.  St.  Mark,  as  giving  vivid  recollections  of 
the  acts  rather  than  the  teaching  of  Christ  is  th 
scantiest  of  the  three  synoptic  Gospels.  It  is  not 
less  characteristic  that  there  are  no  parables  pro 
perly  so  called  in  St.  John.  It  is  as  if  he,  soonei 
than  any  other,  had  passed  into  the  higher  stage 
of  knowledge  in  which  parables  were  no  longer 
necessary,  and  therefore  dwelt  less  on  them. 
That  which  his  spirit  appropriated  most  readily 
were  the  words  of  eternal  life,  figurative  it  might 
be  in  form,  abounding  in  bold  analogies,  but 
not  in  any  single  instance  taking  the  form  of  a 
narrative.6 

Lastly  it  is  to  be  noticed,  partly  as  a  witness  to 
the  truth  of  the  four  Gospels,  partly  as  a  line  of 
demarcation  between  them  and  all  counterfeits, 
that  the  apocryphal  Gospels  contain  no  parables. 
Human  invention  could  imagine  miracles  (though 
these  too  in  the  spurious  Gospels  are  stripped  of  all 


PARABLE 


703 


that  gives  them  majesty  and  significance),  but  the 
parables  of  the  Gospels  were  inimitable  and  unap 
proachable  by  any  writers  of  that  or  the  succeeding 
ige.  They  possess  a  life  and  power  which  stamp 
them  as  with  the  "  image  and  superscription  "  of 
the  Son  of  Man.  Even  the  total  absence  of  any 
allusion  to  them  in  the  written  or  spoken  teaching 
of  the  Apostles  shows  how  little  their  minds  set 
afterwards  in  that  direction,  how  little  likely  they 
were  to  do  more  than  testify  what  they  had  actually 
heard.' 

III.  Lastly,  there  is  the  law  of  interpretation 
It  has  been  urged  by  some  writers,  by  none  with 
greater  force  or  clearness  than  by  Chrysostom 
(Horn,  in  Matt.  64),  that  there  is  a  scope  or  pur 
pose  for  each  parable,  and  that  our  aim  must  be 
to  discern  this,  not  to  find  a  special  significance 
in  each  circumstance  or  incident.  The  rest,  it  is 
said,  may  be  dealt  with  as  the  drapery  which  the 
parable  needs  for  its  grace  and  completeness,  but 
which  is  not  essential.  It  may  be  questioned, 
however,  whether  this  canon  of  interpretation  is 
likely  to  lead  us  to  the  full  meaning  of  this  portion 
of  Our  Lord's  teaching.  True  as  it  doubtless  is, 
that  there  was  in  each  parable  a  leading  thought 
to  be  learnt  partly  from  the  parable  itself,  partly 
from  the  occasion  of  its  utterance,  and  that  all  else 
gathers  round  that  thought  as  a  centre,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  in  the  great  patterns  of  interpre 
tation  which  He  himself  has  given  us,  there  is  more 
than  this.  Not  only  the  sower  and  the  seed  and  the 
several  soils  have  their  counterparts  in  the  spiritual 
life,  but  the  birds  of  the  air,  the  thorns,  the. 
scorching  heat,  have  each  of  them  a  significance. 
The  explanation  of  the  wheat  and  the  tares,  given 
with  less  fulness,  an  outline  as  it  were,  which  the 
advancing  scholars  would  be  able  to  fill  up,  is 
equally  specific.  It  may  be  inferred  from  these  two 
instances  that  we  are,  at  least,  justified  in  looking 
for  a  meaning  even  in  the  seeming  accessories  of  a 
parable.  If  the  opposite  mode  of  interpreting 
should  seem  likely  to  lead  us,  as  it  has  led  many,  to 
strange  and  forced  analogies,  and  an  arbitrary  dog 
matism,  the  safeguard  may  be  found  in  our  recol 
lecting  that  in  assigning  such  meanings  we  are  but 
as  scholars  guessing  at  the  mind  of  a  teacher  whose 
words  are  higher  than  our  thougnts,  recognizing 
the  analogies  which  may  have  been,  but  which 
were  not  necessarily  those  which  he  recognized. 
No  such  interpretation  can  claim  anything  like  autho 
rity.  The  very  form  of  the  teaching  makes  it 
probable  that  there  may  be,  in  any  case,  more  than 
one  legitimate  explanation.  The  outward  fact  in 
nature,  or  in  social  life,  may  correspond  to  spiritual 
facts  at  once  in  God's  government  of  the  world,  and 
in  the  history  of  the  individual  soul.  A  parable 
may  be  at  once  ethical,  and  in  the  highest  sense  of 
the  term  prophetic.  There  is  thus  a  wide  field  open 
to  the  discernment  of  the  interpreter.  There  are 
also  restraints  upon  the  mere  fertility  of  his  imagi 
nation.  (1.)  The  analogies  must  be  real,  not  arbi 
trary.  (2.)  The  parables  are  to  be  considered  as 
parts  of  a  whole,  and  the  interpretation  of  one  is 
not  to  over-ride  or  encroach  upon  the  lessons  taught 


«  See  an  ingenious  classification  of  the  parables  of  each 
3<>fcye!,  according  to  their  subject-matter,  in  Westcott, 
Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  ch.  vii.,  and 
Appendix  F. 

r  The  existence  of  Rabbinic  parables,  presenting  a 
hiifwriicial  resemblance  to  those  of  the  Gospel,  is  no  real 
exception  to  this  stat°Tncnt.  Whether  we  believe  them 


to  have  had  an  independent  origin,  and  so  to  be  fair 
specimens  of  the  genus  of  this  form  of  teaching  among 
the  Jews,  or  to  have  been  (as  chronologically  they  might 
have  been)  borrowed,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  from 
those  of  Christ,  there  is  still  in  the  latter  a  distinctive 
power,  and  purity,  which  place  the  otbsre  almost  beyotd 
the  range  of  comparison,  except  as  to  outward  fern. 


704 


PARADISE 


by  others.  (3.)  The  direct  teaching  of  Christ  pre 
sents  the  standard  to  wnich  all  our  interpretation! 
are  to  be  referred,  and  by  which  they  are  to  be 
measured.  (Comp.  Dean  Trench  on  the  Parables 
Introductory  Remarks ;  to  winch  one  who  has  once 
read  it  cannot  but  be  more  indebted  than  any  mere 
references  can  indicate ;  Stier,  Words  of  the  Lore 
Jesw,  on  Matt.  xiii.  11).  [E.  H.  J'.  \ 

PAEADISE  (DTJS,  Pardes :  •aa.pa.^iffos 
I'aradisus).  Questions  as  to  the  nature  and  locality 
of  Paradise  as  identical  with  the  garden  of  Gen.  ii 
And  iii.  have  been  already  discussed  under  EDEN 
It  remains  to  trace  the  history  of  the  word  ane 
the  associations  connected  with  it,  as  it  appears  in 
the  later  books  of  the  0.  T.  and  in  the  language  ot 
Chrir-t  and  His  Apostles. 

The  word  itself,  though  it  appears  in  the  above 
form  in  Song  of  Sol.  iv.  13,  Eccles.  ii.  5,  Neh.  ii.  8, 
may  be  classed,  with  hardly  a  doubt,  as  of  Aryan 
rather  than  of  Semitic  origin.  It  first  appears  in 
Greek  as  coming  straight  from  Persia  (Xen.  ut 
inf.}.  Greek  lexicographers  classify  it  as  a  Persian 
word  (Julius  Pollux,  Onomast.  ix.  3).  Modem 
philologists  accept  the  same  conclusion  with  hardly 
a  dissentient  voice  (Kenan,  Langues  Sdmitiques,  ii. 
1,  p.  153).  Gesenius  (s.  ».)  traces  it  a  step  further, 
and  connects  it  with  the  Sanscrit  para-def a  =  high, 
well-tilled  land,  and  applied  to  an  ornamental  gar 
den  attached  to  a  house.  Other  Sanscrit  scholars, 
however,  assert  that  the  meaning  of  para-deya  in 
classical  Sanscrit  is  "  foreign  country,"  and  although 
they  admit  that  it  may  also  mean  "  the  best  or 
most  excellent  country,"  they  look  on  this  as  an 
iastance  of  casual  coincidence  rather  than  derivation.' 
Other  etymologies,  more  fanciful  arid  Jar-fetched, 
have  been  suggested — (1.)  from  irapd  and  Sevu, 
giving  as  a  meaning,  the  "well-watered  ground" 
(Suidas,  s.  e.);  (2.)  from  irapd  and  Se^ra,  a  bar 
barous  word,  supposed  to  signify  a  plant,  or  collec 
tion  of  plants  ( Joann.  Damasc.  in  Suidas,  I.  c.)  ; 
(3)  from  N5JH  mQ,  to  bring  forth  herbs;  (4) 
DTH  i"l~IQ,  to  bring  forth  myrrh  (Ludwig,  de 
raptu  Pauli  in  Parad.  in  Menthen's  Thesaur. 
Theolog.  1702.) 

On  the  assumption  that  the  Song  of  Solomon  and 
Ecclesiastes  were  written  in  the  time  of  Solomon, 
the  occurrence  of  the  foreign  word  may  be  ac 
counted  for  either  (1.)  on  the  hypothesis  of  later 
forms  having  crept  into  the  text  in  the  process  of 
transcription,  or  (2.)  on  that  of  the  word  having 
found  its  way  into  the  language  of  Israel  at  the 
time  when  its  civilization  took  a  new  flight  under 
the  Son  of  David,  and  the  king  borrowed  from  the 
customs  of  central  Asia  that  which  made  the  royal 
park  or  garden  part,  of  the  glory  of  the  kingdom. 
In  Neh.  ii.  8,  as  might  be  expected,  the  word  is 
used  in  a  connexion  which  points  it  out  as  distinctly 
Persian.  The  account  given  of  the  hanging  gar 
dens  of  Babylon,  in  like  manner,  indicates  Media  as 
the  original  seat  both  of  the  word  and  of  the  thing. 
Nebuchadnezzar  constructed  them,  terrace  upon 
terrace,  that  he  might  reproduce  in  the  plains  of 
Mesopotamia  the  scenery  with  which  the  Median 
princess  he  had  married  had  been  familiar  in  her 
native  country ;  and  this  was  the  origin  of  the 
Kpf/auurrbs  irapdSeiffos  (Berosus,  in  Joseph,  c.  Ap. 
i.  19).  In  Xenophon  the  word  occurs  frequently, 
and  we  get  vivid  pictures  of  the  scene  which  it  im- 


PAEADISE 

I  plied.  A  wide  open  park,  enclosed  against  injury 
'  yet  with  its  natural  beauty  unspoiled,  with  stat/ly 
forest  trees,  many  of  them  bearing  fruit,  watei-ed 
by  clear  stream:,,  on  whose  banks  roved  large  herds 
of  antelopes  or  sheep — this  was  the  scenery  which 
connected  itself  in  the  mind  of  the  Greek  traveller 
with  the  word  irapdtitiffos,  and  for  which  his  own 
language  supplied  no  precise  equivalent.  (Comp. 
Anab.  i.  2,  §7, 4,  §9  ;  ii.  4,  §14 ;  Hellen.  iv.  1 ,  §15  ; 
Cyrop.  i.  3,  §14 ;  Oeconom.  4,  §13.)  Through  the 
writings  of  Xenophon,  and  through  the  general  ad 
mixture  of  Orientalisms  in  the  later  Greek  after  the 
conquests  of  Alexander,  the  word  gained  a  recog 
nized  place,  and  the  LXX.  writers  chose  it  for  a 
new  use  which  gave  it  a  higher  worth  and  secured 
for  it  a  more  perennial  life.  The  garden  of  Eden 
became  6  •jrapdScia'os  TT/S  TpvtpTJt  (Gen.  ii.  15, 
iii.  23  ;  Joel  ii.  3).  They  used  the  same  word 
whenever  there  was  any  allusion,  however  remote, 
to  the  fair  region  which  had  been  the  first  blissful 
home  of  man.  The  valley  of  the  Jordan,  in  their 
version,  is  the  paradise  of  God  (Gen.  xiii.  10). 
There  is  no  tree  in  the  paradise  of  God  equal  to 
that  which  in  the  prophet's  vision  symbolises  the 
glory  of  Assyria  (Ez.  xxxi.  1-9).  The  imagery  of 
this  chapter  furnishes  a  more  vivid  picture  of  the 
scenery  of  a  irapdSfiarot  than  we  find  elsewhere. 
The  prophet  to  whom  "  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  "  by  the  river  of  Chebar  may  well  have  seen 
what  he  describes  so  clearly.  Elsewhere,  however, 
as  in  the  translation  of  the  three  passages  in  which 
pardes  occurs  in  the  Hebrew,  it  is  used  in  a  more 
general  sense.  (Comp.  Is.  i.  30 ;  Num.  xxiv.  6  ; 
Jer.  xxix.  5  ;  Susann.  ver.  4.) 

It  was  natural,  however,  that  this  higher  mean 
ing  should  become  the  exclusive  one,  and  be  asso 
ciated  with  new  thoughts.  Paradise,  with  no 
other  word  to  qualify  it,  was  the  bright  region 
which  man  had  lost,  which  was  guarded  by  the 
flaming  sword.  Soon  a  new  hope  sprang  up. 
Over  and  above  all  questions  as  to  where  the  prime 
val  garden  had  been,  there  came  the  belief  that  it  did 
not  belong  entirely  to  the  past.  There  was  a  para 
dise  still  into  which  man  might  hope  to  enter.  It 
is  a  matter  of  some  interest  to  ascertain  with 
what  associations  the  word  was  connected  in 
the  minds  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine  and  other 
countries  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  teaching, 
what  sense  therefore  we  may  attach  to  it  in  the 
writings  of  the  N.T. 

In  this  as  in  other  instances  we  may  distinguish 
three  modes  of  thought,  each  with  marked  charac 
teristics,  yet  often  blended  together  in  different 
proportions,  and  melting  one  into  the  other  by 
lardiy  perceptible  degrees.  Each  has  its  counter- 
aart  in  the  teaching  of  Christian  theologians.  The 
anguage  of  the  N.T.  stands  apart  from  and  above 
all.  (1.)  To  the  Idealist  school  of  Alexandria,  of 
which  Philo  is  the  representative,  paradise  was  no 
thing  more  than  a  symbol  and  an  allegory.  Traces 
of  this  way  of  looking  at  it  had  appeared  previously 
n  the  teaching  of  the  Son  of  Sirach.  The  four 
ivers  of  Eden  are  figures  of  the  wide  streams  of 
Wisdom,  and  she  is  as  the  brook  which  becomes  a 
rher  and  waters  the  paradise  of  God  (Ecclus.  xxiv. 
25-30).  This,  however,  was  compatible  with  the 
recognition  of  Gen.  ii.  as  speaking  cf  a  fact.  To 
3hilo  the  thought  of  the  fact  was  unendurable. 
The  primeval  history  spoke  of  no  garden  such  at 


•  Professor  Monler  Williams  allows  the  writer  to  say 
that  be  is  of  this  opinion.    Comp.  also  Buschmann.  in 


Hmnboldt's  Cosmos,  ii.  note  130,  and  Krecli  u  Oniber 
Knct/olop.  8.  v. 


PARADISE 

men  plant  and  water.  Spiritual  perfection  (aper?/) 
was  the  only  paradise.  The  trees  that  grew  in  it 
were  the  thoughts  of  the  spiritual  man.  The  fruits 
which  they  bore  were  life  and  knowledge  and  im 
mortality.  The  four  rivers  flowing  from  one 
source  are  the  four  virtues  of  the  later  Platonists, 
each  derived  from  the  same  source  of  goodness 
(Philo,  de  Alleg.  i.).  It  is  obvious  that  a  system  of 
interpretation  such  as  this  was  not  likely  to  become 
popular.  It  was  confined  to  a  single  school,  pos 
sibly  to  a  single  teacher.  It  has  little  or  nothing 
corresponding  to  it  in  the  N.T. 

(2.)  The  Rabbinic  schools  of  Palestine  presented 
a  phase  of  thought  the  very  opposite  of  that  of  the 
Alexandrian  writer.  They  had  their  descriptions, 
definite  and  detailed,  a  complete  topography  of  the 
unseen  world.  Paradise,  the  garden  of  Eden,  ex 
isted  still,  and  they  discussed  the  question  of  its 
locality.  The  answers  were  not  always  consistent 
with  each  other.  It  was  far  off  in  the  distant  East, 
further  than  the  foot  of  man  had  trod.  It  was  a 
region  of  the  world  of  the  dead,  of  Sheol,  in  the 
heart  of  the  earth.  Gehenna  was  on  one  side,  with 
its  flames  and  torments.  Paradise  on  the  other, 
the  intermediate  home  of  the  blessed.  (Comp. 
Wetstein,  Grotius,  and  Schoettgen  on  Luc.  xxiii.) 
The  patriarchs  were  there,  Abraham,  and  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,  ready  to  receive  their  faithful  descend 
ants  into  their  bosoms  (Joseph,  de  Mace.  c.  13). 
The  highest  place  of  honour  at  the  feast  of  the 
blessed  souls  was  Abraham's  bosom  (Luke  xvi.  23), 
on  which  the  new  heir  of  immortality  reclined  as 
the  favoured  and  honoured  guest.  Or,  again,  para 
dise  was  neither  on  the  earth,  nor  within  it,  but 
above  it,  in  the  third  heaven,  or  in  some  higher 
orb.  [HEAVEN.]  Or  there  were  two  paradises, 
the  upper  and  the  lower — one  in  heaven,  for  those 
who  had  attained  the  heights  of  holiness — one  in 
earth,  for  those  who  had  lived  but  decently  (Schoett 
gen,  Hor.  Heb.  in  Apoc.  ii.  7),  and  the  heavenly 
paradise  was  sixty  times  as  large  as  the  whole 
lower  earth  (Eisenmenger,  Entdeckt.  Judenth.  ii. 
p.  297).  Each  had  seven  palaces,  and  in  each 
palace  were  its  appropriate  dwellers  (ib.  p.  302). 
As  the  righteous  dead  entered  paradise,  angels 
stripped  them  of  their  grave-clothes,  arrayed  them 
in  new  robes  of  glory,  and  placed  on  their  heads 
diadems  of  gold  and  pearls  (ib.  p.  310).  There 
was  no  night  there.  Its  pavement  was  of  precious 
stones.  Plants  of  healing  power  and  wondrous 
fragrance  grew  on  the  banks  of  its  streams  (ib.  p. 
313).  From  this  lower  paradise  the  souls  of  the 
dead  rose  on  sabbaths  and  on  feast-days  to  the  higher 
(ib.  318),  where  every  day  there  was  the  presence 
of  Jehovah  holding  council  with  His  saints  (ib.  p. 
320).  (Comp.  also  Schoettgen,  Hor.  Heb.  in  Luc. 
xxiii.) 

(3.)  Out  of  the  discussions  and  theories  of  the 
Rabbis,  there  grew  a  broad  popular  belief,  fixed 
in  the  hearts  of  men,  accepted  without  discussion, 
blending  with  their  best  hopes.  Their  prayer  for 
the  dying  or  the  dead  was  that  his  soul  might  rest 
in  paradise,  in  the  garden  of  Eden  (Maimonides, 
Porta  Mosis,  quoted  by  Wetstein  in  Luc.  xxiii. ; 
Taylor,  Funeral  Sermon  on  Sir  G.  Dalstori). 
The  belief  of  the  Essenes,  as  reported  by  Jose- 
phus  (B.  J.  ii.  8,  §11),  may  be  accepted  as  a 


PARADISP: 


705 


fair  representation  of  the  thoughts  of  those  who, 
like  them,  were  not  trained  in  the  Rabbinical 
schools,  living  in  a  simple  and  more  child-like 
faith.  To  them  accordingly  paradise  was  a  far-oft 
land,  a  region  where  there  was  no  scorching  heat, 
no  consuming  cold,  where  the  soft  west-wind  from 
the  ocean  blew  for  evermore.  The  visions  of  the 
2nd  book  of  Esdras,  though  not  without  an  admix 
ture  of  Christian  thoughts  and  phrases,  may  be 
looked  upon  as  representing  this  phase  of  feeling. 
There  also  we  have  the  picture  of  a  fair  garden, 
streams  of  milk  and  honey,  twelve  trees  laden  with 
divers  fruits,  mighty  mountains  whereon  grow 
lilies  and  roses  (ii.  19) — a  place  into  which  the 
wicked  shall  not  enter. 

It  is  with  this  popular  belief,  rather  than  with 
that  of  either  school  of  Jewish  thought,  that  the 
language  of  the  N.T.  connects  itself.  In  this,  as 
in  other  instances,  it  is  made  the  starting-point  for 
an  education  which  leads  men  to  rise  from  it  to 
higher  thoughts.  The  old  word  is  kept,  and  is 
raised  to  a  new  dignity  or  power.  It  is  significant, 
indeed,  that  the  word  "  paradise  "  nowhere  occurs 
in  the  public  teaching  of  our  Lord,  or  in  His  inter 
course  with  His  own  disciples.  Connected  as  it 
had  been  with  the  thoughts  of  a  sensuous  happi 
ness,  it  was  not  the  fittest  or  the  best  word  for 
those  whom  He  was  training  to  rise  out  of  sensuous 
thoughts  to  the  higher  regions  of  the  spiritual  life. 
For  them,  accordingly,  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  the 
kingdom  of  God,  are  the  words  most  dwelt  on.  The 
blessedness  of  the  pure  in  heart  is  that  .they  shall 
see  God.  If  language  borrowed  from  their  com 
mon  speech  is  used  at  other  times,  if  they  hear  ot 
the  marriage-supper  and  the  new  wine,  it  is  not 
till  they  have  been  taught  to  understand  parables 
and  to  separate  the  figure  from  the  reality.  Witk 
the  thief  dying  on  the  cross  the  case  was  different. 
We  can  assume  nothing  in  the  robber-outlaw  but 
the  most  rudimentary  fbims  of  popular  belief.  We 
may  well  believe  that  the  word  used  here,  and  here 
only,  in  the  whole  course  of  the  Gospel  history, 
had  a  special  fitness  for  him.  His  reverence,  sym 
pathy,  repentance,  hope,  uttered  themselves  in  the 
prayer, "  Lord,  remember  me  when  thou  comest  into 
thy  kingdom  !  "  What  were  the  thoughts  of  the 
sufferer  as  to  that  kingdom  we  do  not  know.  Un 
less  they  were  supernaturally  raised  above  the  level 
which  the  disciples  had  reached  by  slow  and  pain 
ful  steps,  they  must  have  been  mingled  with 
visions  of  an  earthly  glory,  of  pomp,  and  victory, 
and  triumph.  The  answer  to  his  prayer  gave  him 
what  he  needed  most,  the  assurance  of  immediate 
rest  and  peace.  The  word  Paradise  spoke  to  him,  as 
to  other  Jews,  of  repose,  shelter,  joy — the  greatest 
contrast  possible  to  the  thirst,  and  agony,  and  shame 
of  the  hours  upon  the  cross.  Rudimentary  as  his 
previous  thoughts  of  it  might  be,  this  was  the  word 
fittest  for  the  education  of  his  spirit. 

There  is  a  like  significance  in  the  general  absence 
of  the  word  from  the  language  of  the  Epistles. 
Here  also  it  is  found  nowhere  in  the  direct  teaching. 
It  occurs  only  in  passages  that  are  apocalyptic,  and 
therefore  almost  of  necessity  symbolic.  St.  Paul 
speaks  of  one,  apparently  of  himself,  as  having  been 
"  caught  up  into  paradise,"  as  having  there  heard 
things  that  might  not  be  uttered  (2  Cor.  xii.  3).b 


b  For  the  questions  (1)  whether  the  raptus  of  St  Paul 

was    corporeal    or    incorporeal,    (2)   whether  the  third 

heaven  is  to  be  identified  with   or  distinguished  from 

paradise,  (3)  whether  this  was  U«;  upper  or  the  lower 

VOL.  ir. 


paradise  of  the  Jewish  schools,  comp.  Meyer,  Wordsworth, 
Alford,  in  Joe. ;  August,  de  Gen.  ad  litt.  xii. ;  Ludwig, 
Jtiss.  de  raptu  1'auli,  in  Menthen's  Thesaurus.  Inter 
preted  by  the  current  Jewish  belief  of  the  period,  we 

2  Z 


706 


PAR  A  DISK 


In  the  message  to  the  first  of  the  Seven  Churches 
of  Asia,  "  the  tree  of  life  which  is  in  the  midst  of 
the  paradise  of  God,"  appears  as  the  reward  of  him 
that  overco'meth,  the  symbol  of  an  eternal  blessed 
ness.  (Comp.  Dean  Trench,  Comm.  on  the  Epistles 
to  the  Seven  Churches,  in  loc.)  The  thing,  though 
not  the  word,  appears  in  the  closing  visions  of 
Rev.  xxii. 

(4.)  The  eager  curiosity  which  prompts  men  to 
press  on  into  the  things  behind  the  veil,  has  led  them 
to  construct  hypotheses  more  or  less  definite  as  to 
the  intermediate  state,  and  these  have  affected  the 
thoughts  which  Christian  writers  have  connected 
with  the  word  paradise.  Patristic  and  later  inter 
preters  follow,  as  has  been  noticed,  in  the  footsteps 
of  the  Jewish  schools.  To  Origen  and  others  of  a 
like  spiritual  insight,  paradise  is  but  a  synonym  for 
a  region  of  life  and  immortality — one  and  the 
•ame  with  the  third  heaven  (Jerome,  Ep.  ad  Joh. 
ffieros.  in  Wordsworth  on  2  Cor.  xii.).  So  far  as 
it  is  a  place,  it  is  as  a  school  in  which  the  souls  of 
men  are  trained  and  learn  to  judge  rightly  of  the 
things  they  have  done  and  seen  on  earth  (Origen, 
de  Princ.  ii.  12).  The  sermon  of  Basil,  de  Para 
dise,  gives  an  eloquent  representation  of  the  common 
belief  of  Christians  who  were  neither  mystical  nor 
speculative.  Minds  at  once  logical  and  sensuous  ask 
questions  as  to  the  locality,  and  the  answers  are 
wildly  conjectural.  It  is  not  in  Hades,  and  is  there 
fore  different  from  Abraham's  bosom  (Tertull.  de 
Idol.  c.  13).  It  is  above  and  beyond  the  world, 
separated  from  it  by  a  wall  of  fire  (Tertull.  Apol.  c. 
47).  It  is  the  "refrigerium"  for  all  faithful  souls, 
where  they  have  the  vision  of  saints,  and  angels,  and 
of  Christ  himself  (Just.  M.  Respons.  ad  Orthodox. 
75  and  85),  or  for  those  only  who  are  entitled,  as 
martyrs,  fresh  from  the  baptism  of  blood,  to  a  spe 
cial  reward  above  their  fellows  (Tertull.  de  Anim. 
c.  55).«  It  is  in  the  fourth  heaven  (Clem.  Alex. 
Fragm.  §51).  It  is  in  some  unknown  region  of 
the  earth,  where  the  seas  and  skies  meet,  higher 
than  any  earthly  mountain  ( Joann.  Damasc.  de  Or- 
thod.  Fid.  ii.  1 1),  and  had  thus  escaped  the  waters 
of  the  Flood  (P.  Lombard,  Sentent.  ii.  17,  E.).  It 
has  been  identified  with  the  <f>v\aiti\  of  1  Pet.  iii. 
19,  and  the  spirits  in  it  are  those  of  the  antediluvian 
races  who  repented  before  the  great  destruction 
overtook  them  (Bishop  Horsley,  Sermons,  xx.). 
(Comp.  an  elaborate  note  in  Thilo,  Codex  Apocryph. 
N.  T.  p.  754.)  The  word  enters  largely,  as  might 
be  expected,  into  the  apocryphal  literature  of  the 
early  Church.  Where  the  true  Gospels  are  most 
reticent,  the  mythical  are  most  exuberant.  The 
Gospel  of  Nicodemus,  in  narrating  Christ's  victory 
over  Hades  (the  "  harrowing  of  hell  "  of  our  early 
English  mysteries),  tells  how,  till  then,  Enoch  and 
Klijah  had  been  its  sole  inhabitants'* — how  the 


may  refer  the  "  thifd  heaven  "  to  a  vision  of  the  Divine 
Glory ;  "paradise,"  to  a  vision  of  the  fellowship  of  the 
righteous  dead,  waiting  in  calmness  and  peace  for  their 
final  resurrection. 

c  A  special  treatise  by  Tertullian,  de  Paradiso,  Is 
unfortunately  lost. 

<»  One  trace  of  this  belief  is  found  in  the  Vulg.  of 
FJCCUIS.  xliv.  16,  "  translatus  est  in  paradisum,"  in  the 
absence  of  any  corresponding  word  in  the  Greek  text. 

•  Thus  it  occurs  in  the  Koran  in  the  formfirdaus;  and 
the  name  of  the  Persian  poet  Ferdusi  is  probably  derived 
from  it  (Humboldt's  Cosmos,  Ii.  note  230). 

f  The  passage  quoted  by  AH  is  from  Orat.  c.  Ariun.  II. 
(vol.  i.  p.  307,  Colon.  1686) :  Kal  0ia£<-T(U  iraAo'  eiircA- 
ttiv  fi<;  rbv  iropaSeicroc  T»j«  eKKAijvt'a?.  Ingenious  as  his 


PARAH 

penitent  robber  was  there  with  his  cross  on  the  night 
of  the  crucifixion — how  the  souls  of  the  patriarchs 
were  led  thither  by  Christ,  and  were  received  by  the 
archangel  Michael,  as  he  kept  watch  with"  the 
flaming  swords  at  the  gate.  In  the  apocryphal 
Acta  Philippi  (Tischendorf,  Act.  Apost.  p.  89), 
the  Apostle  is  sentenced  to  remain  for  forty  days 
outside  the  circle  of  paradise,1  because  he  had  given 
way  to  anger  and  cursed  the  people  of  Hierapolis 
for  their  unbelief. 

(5.)  The  later  history  of  the  word  presents  some 
facts  of  interest.  Accepting  in  this,  as  in  other 
instances,  the  mythical  elements  of  Eastern  Christi 
anity,  the  creed  of  Islam  presented  to  its  followers 
the  hope  of  a  sensuous  paradise,  and  the  Pereian  word 
was  transplanted  through  it  into  the  languages 
spoken  by  them.1  In  the  .West  it  passes  through 
some  strange  transformations,  and  descends  to  baser 
uses.  The  thought  that  men  on  entering  the  Church 
of  Christ  returned  to  the  blessedness  which  Adam  had 
forfeited,  was  symbolized  in  the  church  architecture 
of  the  fourth  century.  The  narthex,  or  atrium,  in 
which  were  assembled  those  who,  not  being  fideles 
in  full  communion,  were  not  admitted  into  the  in 
terior  of  the  building,  was  known  as  the  "  Paradise  " 
of  the  church  (Alt,  Cultus,  p.  59 1 ).  A thanasius,  it 
has  been  said,  speaks  scornfully  of  Arianism  as 
creeping  into  this  paradise,'  implying  that  it  ad 
dressed  itself  to  the  ignorant  and  untaught.  In 
the  West  we  trace  a  change  of  form,  and  one  singu 
lar  change  of  application.  Paradiso  becomes  in 
some  Italian  dialects  Paraviso,  and  this  passes  into 
the  French  paroisf  denoting  the  western  porch  of 
a  church,  or  the  open  space  in  front  of  it  (Ducange, 
s.  v.  'Parvisus';  Diez,  Etymolog.  Worterb.  p.  703). 
In  the  church  this  space  was  occupied,  as  we  have 
seen,  by  the  lower  classes  of  the  people.  The  word 
was  transferred  from  the  place  of  worship  to  the 
place  of  amusement,  and,  though  the  position  was 
entirely  different,  was  applied  to  the  highest  and 
cheapest  gallery  of  a  French  theatre  (Alt,  Cultus, 
1.  c.).  By  some,  however,  this  use  of  the  word  is 
connected  only  with  the  extreme  height  of  the  gal 
lery,  just  as  "  chemin  de  Paradis  "  is  a  proverbial 
phrase  for  any  specially  arduous  undertaking  (Be- 
scherelles,  Dictionnaire  Franqais).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PA'RAH  (niSn,  with  the  def.  article :  4>apd  ; 
Alex.  'Acpap:  Aphphard),  one  of  the  cities  in  the 
territory  allotted  to  Benjamin,  named  only  in  the 
lists  of  the  conquest  (Josh,  xviii.  23).  It  occurs  in 
the  first  of  the  two  groups  into  which  the  towns  of 
Benjamin  are  divided,  which  seems  to  contain  those 
of  the  northern  and  eastern  portions  of  the  tribe, 
between  Jericho,  Bethel,  and  Geba ;  the  towns  ot 
the  south,  from  Gibeon  to  Jerusalem,  being  enu 
merated  in  the  second  group. 


conjecture  is,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  sarcasm 
which  he  finds  in  the  words  is  not  the  creation  of  his  own 
imagination.  There  seems  no  ground  for  referring  the 
word  paradise  to  any  section  of  the  Church,  but  rather  to 
the  Church  as  a  whole  (romp.  August,  de  Gen.  ad  lltt.  xil.). 
The  Arians  were  to  it  what  the  serpent  had  been  to  the 
earlier  paradise. 

e  This  word  will  be  familiar  to  many  readers  from  the 
"  Responsiones  in  Parviio"  of  the  Oxford  system  of  exa 
mination,  however  little  they  may  previously  have  con 
nected  that  place  with  their  thoughts  of  paradise.  By 
others,  however,  Parvisum  (or  -sus)  is  derived  "a  parvig 
pueris  Ibi  edoctis"  (Menage,  Orig.  de  la,  Lanyue  fnii>(. 
i,  v.  •  Parvis "). 


PARAN 

In  the  Onomasticon  ("  Aphra ")  it  is  specified 
by  Jerome  only, — the  text  of  Eusebius  being  want 
ing — as  five  miles  east  of  Bethel.  No  traces  of  the 
name  have  yet  been  found  in  that  position  ;  but  the 
name  Farah  exists  further  to  the  S.E.  attached  to 
the  Wady  Farah,  one  of  the  southern  branches 
of  the  great  Wady  Suweinit,  and  to  a  site  of  ruins 
at  the  junction  of  the  same  with  the  main  valley. 

This  identification,  first  suggested  by  Dr.  Kobin- 
son  (i.  439),  is  supported  by  Van  de  Velde  (Memoir, 
339)  and  Schwarz  (126).  The  drawback  men 
tioned  by  Dr.  R.,  namely,  that  the  Arabic  word 
(  =  "mouse")  differs  in  signification  from  the 
Hebrew  ("  the  cow  ")  is  not  of  much  force,  since  it 
is  the  habit  of  modern  names  to  cling  to  similarity 
of  sound  with  the  ancient  names,  rather  than  of 
signification.  (Compare  Beit-ur ;  el  Aal,  &c.) 

A  riew  of  Wady  Farah  is  given  by  Barclay 
(City,  &c.  558),  who  proposes  it  for  AENON.  [G.] 

PA'RAN,  EL-PA 'RAN  (pX9,  pKS  "?'N  : 
Qapdv,  LXX.  and  Joseph.). 

1.  It  is  shown  under  KADESH  that  the  name 
Paran  corresponds  probably  in  general  outline  with 
the  desert  Et-Tih,  The  Sinaitic  desert,  including 
the  wedge  of  metamorphic  rocks,  granite,  syenite, 
and  porphyry,  set,  as  it  were,  in  a  superficial  margin 
of  old  red  sandstone,  forms  nearly  a  scalene  triangle, 
with  its  apex  southwards,  and  having  its  base  or 
upper  edge  not  a  straight,  but  concave  crescent  line 
— the  ridge,  in  short,  of  the  Et-Tih  range  of  moun 
tains,  extending  about  120  miles  from  east  to  west, 
with'  a  slight  dip,  the  curve  of  the  aforesaid  crescent 
southwards.  Speaking  generally,  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai  (Num.  x.  12,  xii.  16),  in  which  the  march- 
stations  of  Taberah  and  Hazeroth,  if  the  latter 
[HAZEROTH]  be  identical  with  Hudhera,  are  pro 
bably  included  towards  its  N.E.  limit,  may  be  said 
to  lie  S.  of  the  Et-Tih  range,  the  wilderness  of 
Paran  N.  of  it,  and  the  one  to  end  where  the  other 
begins.  That  of  Paran  is  a  stretch  of  chalky  forma 
tion,  the  chalk  being  covered  with  coarse  gravel, 
mixed  with  black  rlint  and  drifting  sand.  The  sur 
face  of  this  extensive  desert  tract  is  a  slope  ascending 
towards  the  north,  and  in  it  appear  to  rise  (by 
Hussegger's  map,  from  which  most  of  the  previous 
description  is  taken)  three  chalky  ridges,  as  it  were, 
terraces  of  mountainous  formation,  all  to  the  W. 
of  a  line  drawn  from  Ras  Mohammed  to  Kulat-el- 
Arisk  on  the  Mediterranean.  The  caravan-route 
from  Cairo  to  Akaba  crosses  the  Et-Tih,  desert  in 
a  line  from  W.  to  E.,  a  little  S.  In  this  wide  tract, 
which  extends  northwards  to  join  the  "  wilderness 
of  Beersheba"  (Gen.  xxi.  21,  cf.  14),  and  eastward 
probably  to  the  wilderness  of  Zin  [KADESH]  on  the 
Edomitish  border.  Ishmael  dwelt,  and  there  pro 
bably  his  posterity  originally  multiplied.  Ascending 
northwards  from  it  on  a  meridian  to  the  E.  of  Beer 
sheba,  we  should  reach  Maon  and  Carmel,  or  that 
southern  portion  of  the  territory  of  Judah,  W.  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  known  as  "  the  South,"  where  the 
waste  changes  gradually  into  an  uninhabited  pasture- 
land,  at  least  in  spring  and  autumn,  and  in  which, 
under  the  name  of  "  Paran,"  Nabal  fed  his  flocks 
(1  Sam.  xxv.  I).  Between  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
and  that  of  Zin  no  strict  demarcation  exists  in  the 
narrative,  nor  do  the  natural  features  of  the  region, 


PARAN 


707 


»  For  the  reasons  why  Serbdl  should  not  be  accepted, 
v»e  SINAI. 

b  Gesen.  s.  v.  pNQ,  says  the  wilderness  so  called, 
*  between  Midian  and  Egypt,  bears  this  name  at  the 


so  far  as  yet  ascertained,  yield  a  well-defined 
boundary.  The  name  of  Paran  seems,  as  in  the 
story  of  Ishmael,  to  have  predominated  towards  the 
western  extremity  of  the  northern  desert  frontier  of 
Et-Tih,  and  in  Num.  xxxiv.  4  the  wilderness  of 
Zin,  not  Paran,  is  spoken  of  as  the  southern  border 
of  the  land  or  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Josh.  iv.  3). 
If  by  the  Paran  region  we  understand  "  that  great 
and  terrible  wilderness  "  so  emphatically  described 
as  the  haunt  of  noxious  creatures  and  the  terror  of 
the  wayfarer  (Deut.  i.  19,  viii.  15),  then  we  might 
see  how  the  adjacent  tracts,  which  still  must  be 
called  "  wilderness,"  might,  either  as  having  less 
repulsive  features,  or  because  they  lay  near  to  some 
settled  country,  have  a  special  nomenclature  of  their 
own.  For  the  latter  reason  the  wildernesses  of  Zin, 
eastward  towards  Edom  and  Mount  Seir,  and  of 
Shur,  westward  towards  Egypt,  might  be  thus  dis 
tinguished  ;  for  the  former  reason  that  of  Sin  and 
Sinai.  It  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the  rules 
of  Scriptural  nomenclature,  if  we  suppose  these 
accessory  wilds  to  be  sometimes  included  under  the 
general  name  of  "  wilderness  of  Paran ;"  and  to  this 
extent  we  may  perhaps  modify  the  previous  general 
statement  that  S.  of  the  Et-  Tih  range  is  the  wilder 
ness  of  Sinai,  and  N.  of  it  that  of  Paran.  Still, 
construed  strictly,  the  wildernesses  of  Paran  and  Zin 
would  seem  to  b'e  as  already  approximately  laid 
down.  [KAUESH.]  If,  however,  as  previously 
hinted,  they  may  in  another  view  be  regarded  as 
overlapping,  we  can  more  easily  understand  how 
Chedorlaomer,  when  he  "  smote  "  the  peoples  S.  oi 
the  Dead  Sea,  returned  round  its  south-western 
curve  to  the  El-Paran,  or  "  terebinth-tree  of  Paran," 
viewed  as  indicating  a  locality  in  connexion  with 
the  wilderness  of  Paran,  and  yet  close,  apparently, 
to  that  Dead  Sea  border  (Gen.  xiv.  6). 

Was  there,  then,  a  Paran  proper,  or  definite  spot 
to  which  the  name  was  applied  ?  From  Deut.  i.  1 
it  should  seem  there  must  have  been.  This  is  con 
firmed  by  1  K.  xi.  18,  from  which  we  further  learn 
the  fact  of  its  being  an  inhabited  region ;  and  the 
position  required  by  the  context  here  is  one  between 
Midian  and  Egypt.  If  we  are  to  reconcile  these 
passages  by  the  aid  of  the  personal  history  of  Moses, 
it  seems  certain  that  the  local  Midian  of  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula  must  have  lain  near  the  Mount  Horeb 
itself  (Ex.  iii.  1,  xviii.  1-5).  The  site  of  the 
"  Paran  "  of  Hadad  the  Edomite  must  then  have 
lain  to  the  N.W.  or  Egyptian  side  of  Horeb.  This 
brings  us,  if  we  assume  any  principal  mountain, 
except  Serbal.*  of  the  whole  Sinaitic  group,  to  be 
"  the  Mount  of  God,"  so  close  to  the  Wady  Feiran 
that  the  similarity  of  name,b  supported  by  the 
recently  expressed  opinion  of  eminent  geographers, 
may  be  taken  as  establishing  substantial  identity. 
Ritter  (vol.  xiv.  p.  740-1)  and  Stanley  (p.  39-41) 
both  consider  that  Rephidim  is  to  be  found  in  Wady 
Feiran,  and  no  other  place  in  the  whole  peninsula 
seems,  from  its  local  advantages,  to  have  been  so 
likely  to  form  an  entrepot  in  Solomon's  time  be- 
tweeen  Edom  and  Egypt.  Burckhardt  (Syria,  $c. 
602)  describes  this  wady  as  narrowing  in  one  spot 
to  100  paces,  and  adds  that  the  high  mountains 
adjacent,  and  the  thick  woods  which  clothe  it,  con 
tribute  with  the  bad  water  to  make  it  unhealthy, 
but  that  it  is,  for  productiveness,  the  finest  valley  c 


present  day."     No  maps  now  in  use  give  any  closer 
approximation  to  the  ancient  name  than  Feiran. 

Compare,  however,  the  same  traveller's  statement  of 
the  claims  of  a  coast  wady  at  Ttir,  on  the  Gulf  of  Suez 

2  Z  2 


708 


PARBAR 


in  the  whole  peninsula,  containing  four  miles  of 
gardens  and  date-groves.  Yet  he  thinks  it  was  not 
the  Paran  of  Scripture.  Professor  Stanley,  on  the 
contrary,  seems  to  speak  on  this  point  with  greater 
confidence  in  the  affirmative  than  perhaps  on  any 
other  question  connected  with  the  Exodus.  See 
especially  his  remarks.  (39-41)  regarding  the  local 
term  "  hill  "  of  Ex.  xvii.  9,  10,  which  he  considers 
to  be  satisfied  by  an  eminence  adjacent  to  the  Wady 
Feiran.  The  vegetable  manna d  of  the  tamarisk 
grows  wild  there  (Seetzen,  Beisen,  iii.  p.  75),  as  does 
the  colocynth,  &c.  (Robinson,  i.  121-4).  What  could 
have  led  Winer  (s.  v.  Paran)  to  place  El-Paran  near 
Elath,  it  is  not  easy  to  say,  especially  as  he  gives 
DO  authority. 

2.  "Mount"  Paran  occurs  only  in  two  poetic 
passages  (Deut.  xxxiii.  2 ;  Hab.  iii.  3),  in  one  of 
which  Sinai  and  Seir  appear  as  local  accessories,  in 
the  other  Teman  and  (ver.  7)  Cushan  and  Midian. 
We  need  hardly  pause  to  inquire  in  what  sense 
Seir  can  be  brought  into  one  local  view  with  Sinai. 
It  is  clear  from  a  third  poetic  passage,  in  which 
Paran  does  not  appear  (Judg.  v.  4,  5),  but  which 
contains  "  Seir,"  more  literally  determined  by 
"  Edom,"  still  in  the  same  local  connexion  with 
"  Sinai,"  that  the  Hebrew  found  no  difficulty  in 
viewing  the  greater  scenes  of  God's  manifestation 
in  the  Exodus  as  historically  and  morally,6  if  not 
locally  connected.  At  any  rate  Mount  Paran  here 
may  with  as  good  a  right  be  claimed  for  the 
Sinaitic  as  for  the  Edomitish  side  of  the  difficulty. 
And  the  distance,  after  all,  from  Horeb  to  Mount 
Seir  was  probably  one  of  ten  days  or  less  (Deut.  i. 
2).  It  is  not  unlikely  that  if  the  Wady  Feiran  be 
the  Paran  proper,  the  name  "  Mount "  Paran  may 
have  been  either  assigned  to  the  special  member 
(the  north-western)  of  the  Sinaitic  mountain-group 
which  lies  adjacent,  to  that  wady,f  or  to  the  whole 
Sinaitic  cluster.  That  special  member  is  the  five- 
peaked  ridge  of  Serbal.  If  this  view  for  the  site 
of  Paran  is  correct,  the  Israelites  must  have  pror 
ceeded  from  their  encampment  by  the  sea  (Num. 
xxxiii.  10),  probably  Tayibeh  [WILDERNESS  OF 
THE  WANDERING],  by  the  "  middle  "  route  of  the 
three  indicated  by  Stanley  (p.  38-9).  [H.  H.] 

PAR'BAR  ("lansn,  with  the  definite  article : 

•  StdSe\ofjitifovs :  cettulae).  A  word  occurring  in 
Hebrew  and  A.  V.  only  in  1  Chr.  xxvi.  18,  but 
there  found  twice :  "  At  the  Parbar  westward  four 
(Levites)  at  the  causeway  two  at  the  Parbar." 
From  this  passage,  and  also  from  the  context,  it 
would  seem  that  Parbar  was  some  place  on  the 
west  side  of  the  Temple  enclosure,  the  same  side 
with  the  causeway  and  the  gate  Shallecheth.  The 


PARMENAS 

latter  was  close  to  the  causeway — perhaps  on  it,  as 
the  Bab  Silsilis  now  is — and  we  know  from  its 
remains  that  the  causeway  was  at  the  extreme  north 
of  the  western  wall.  Parbar  therefore  must  have 
been  south  of  Shallecheth. 

As  to  the  meaning  of  the  name,  the  Rabbis  gene 
rally  agree b  in  translating  it  "  the  outside  place  ;" 
while  modern  authorities  take  it  as  equivalent  to 
the/>arran'/ncin  2  K.xxiii.  11  (A.  V.  "suburbs"), 
a  word  almost  identical  with  parbar,  and  used  by 
the  early  Jewish  interpreters  as  the  equivalent  of 
mifjrdshim,  the  precincts  (A.  V.  "  suburbs")  of  the 
Levitical  cities.  Accepting  this  interpretation,  there 
is  no  difficulty  in  identifying  the  Parbar  with  the 
suburb  (TO  vpodffreiov)  mentioned  by  Josephus  in 
describing  Herod's  Temple  (Ant.  xv.  11,  §5),  as 
lying  in  the  deep  valley  which  separated  the  west 
wall  of  the  Temple  from  the  city  opposite  it ;  in 
other  words,  the  southern  end  of  the  Tyropoeon, 
which  intervenes  between  the  Wailing  Place  and 
the  (so-called)  Zion.  The  two  gates  in  the  original 
wall  were  in  Herod's  Temple  increased  to  four. 

It  does  not  follow  (as  some  have  assumed)  that 
Parbar  was  identical  with  the  "  suburbs"  of  2  K. 
xxiii.  11 ,  though  the  words  denoting  each  may  have 
the  same  signification.  For  it  seems  most  consonant 
with  probability  to  suppose  that  the  "  horses  of  the 
Sun"  would  be  kept  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Temple  mount,  in  full  view  of  the  rising  rays  of 
the  god  as  they  shot  over  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
and  not  in  a  deep  valley  on  its  western  side. 

Parbar  is  possibly  an  ancient  Jebusite  name, 
which  perpetuated  itself  after  the  Israelite  conquest 
of  the  city,  as  many  a  Danish  and  Saxon  name 
has  been  perpetuated,  and  still  exists,  only  slightly 
disguised,  in  the  city  of  London.  [G.] 

PARCHMENT.    [WRITING.] 

PARLOUR.d  A  word  in  English  usage  mean 
ing  the  common  room  of  the  family,  and  hence 
probably  in  A.  V.  denoting  the  king's  audience- 
chamber,  so  used  in  reference  to  Eglon  (Judg.  iii. 
20-25 ;  Richardson,  Eng.  Diet.}.  [HOUSE,  vol.  i. 
p.  838.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PARMASH'TA  (KnBWB  ••  Mappon/ict  ; 
Alex.  Mapuam/j.i>d :  Pherinesta).  One  of  the  ten 
sons  of  Haman  slain  by  the  Jews  in  Shushan  (Esth. 
ix.  9). 

PAR'MENAS  (Hapntvas).  One  of  the  seven 
deacons,  "  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  wisdom,"  selected  by  the  whole  body  of 
the  disciples  to  superintend  the  ministration  of  their 
alms  to  the  widows  and  necessitous  poor.  Parmenas 
is  placed  sixth  on  the  list  of  those  who  were  ordained 


(Burckhardt,  Arab.  11.  362;  comp.  Wellsted,  ii.  9),  "re 
ceiving  all  the  waters  which  flow  down  from  the  higher 
range  of  Sinai  to  the  sea"  (Stanley,  p.  19). 

d  The  Tamarix  Gattica  mannifera  of  Ehrenberg,  the 
TUrfa  of  the  Arabs  (Robinson,  i.  115). 

«  The  language  in  the  three  passages,  Deut.  xxxiii.  2, 
Hab.  Hi.,  Judg.  v.  4,  5,  is  as  strikingly  similar  as  Is  the 
purport  and  spirit  of  all  ihe  three.  All  describe  a  spiritual 
presence  manifested  by  natural  convulsions  attendant; 
an*  all  are  confirmed  by  Ps.  Ixvlii.  T,  8,  in  which  Sinai 
alohe  is  named.  We  may  almost  regard  this  lofty  rbap- 
sody.'es  a  commonplace  of  the  inspired  song  of  triumph, 
in  which  the  seer  seems  to  leave  earth  so  far  beneath  him 
that  the  preciseneas  of  geographic  detail  Is  lost  to  his  view. 

'  Out  of  the  Wady  Feiran,  In  an  easterly  direction,  runs 
the  H'ody  SheiJck,  which  conducts  the  traveller  directly  to 
Cue  "modern  Horeb."  See  Kicpert's  imp. 


»  What  Hebrew  word  the  LXX.  read  here  Is  not  clear. 

b  See  the  Targum  of  the  passage ;  also  Buxtorf,  Lex. 
Talm.  s.  v.  3~)g ;  and  the  references  in  Laghtfoot,  Prospect 
<tf  Temple,  chap.  v. 

«  Gesenlus,  Thes.  11 23 a;  Fttrst,  Handwb.  H.  2356,  itc. 
Gesenlus  connects  pan-arim  with  a  similar  Perstnn  word, 
meaning  a  building  open  on  all  sides  to  the  sun  and  air. 

d  1.  "HH  ;  airoftjmi;  cubiculum;  once  only  "parlour1' 
in  1  Chr.  xxviil.  11 ;  elsewhere  usually  *  chamber,"  a  with 
drawing -room  (Ges.  448). 

2.  HSC'p ;  HaraXvua. ;  triclinium ;  usually  "  chamber/' 

3.  n'pJJ,  with  art.  in  each  instance  where  A.  V  has 
"parlour;"  TO  virepuov',  coenaculum ;  usually  "cham 
ber."     It  denotes  an  upper  chamber  in  2  Sam.  xviii.  33, 
•J  K.  xxiii.  12 


PARNACH 

by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Apostlps  to  this 
special  function  (Acts  vi.  5).  His  name  occurs  but 
this  once  in  Scripture;  and  ecclesiastical  history 
records  nothing  of  him  save  the  tradition  that  he 
suli'ered  martyrdom  at  Philippi  m  the  reign  of 
Trajan  (Baron,  ii.  55).  In  the  Calendar  of  the  By 
zantine  Church  he  and  Prochorus  are  commemorated 
on  July  28th.  [E,  H— s.] 

PAE'NACH  0131S  :  4-op^x  :  Pharnach}. 
Father  or  ancestor  of  Elizaphan  prince  of  the  tribe 
of  Zebulun  (Num.  xxxiv.  25). 

PA'ROSH  (Vy~fc :  *ap« ;  Alex.  Dope's  m 
Ezr.  ii.  3,  elsewhere  <&6pos  :  Pharos].  The  de 
scendants  of  Parosh,  in  number  2172,  returned 
from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  3 ;  Neh. 
vii.  8).  Another  detachment  of  150  males,  with 
Zechariah  at  their  head,  accompanied  Ezra  (Ezr. 
viii.  3).  Seven  of  the  family  had  married  foreign 
wives  (Ezr.  x.  25).  They  assisted  in  the  building 
of  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  25),  and  signed 
the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  14).  In  the 
last-quoted  passage  the  name  Parosh  is  clearly  that 
of  a  family,  and  not  of  an  individual. 

PARSHANDATHA  (NnTlBnS :  *ap<rax- 
ves  ;  Alex.  QapffavfO-rdv  :  Pharsandatha).  The 
eldest  of  Hainan's  ten  sons  who  were  slain  by  the 
Jews  in  Shushan  (Esth.  ix.  7).  Fiirst  (Handwb.) 
renders  it  into  old  Persian  frashnadata,  "  given  by 
prayer,"  and  compares  the  proper  name  IIapcrc<5»'8ijs, 
which  occurs  in  Diod.  ii.  33. 

PARTHIANS  (Udpeoi ;  Parthi)  occurs  only 
in  Acts  ii.  9,  where  it  designates  Jews  settled  in 
Parthia.  Parthia  Proper  was  the  region  stretching 
along  the  southern  flank  of  the  mountains  which 
separate  the  great  Persian  desert  from  the  desert  of 
Kharesm.  It  lay  south  of  Hyrcania,  east  of  Media, 
and  north  of  Sagartia.  The  country  was  pleasant, 
and  fairly  fertile,  watered  by  a  number  of  small 
streams  flowing  from  the  mountains,  and  absorbed 
after  a  longer  or  a  shorter  course  by  the  sands.  It 
is  now  known  as  the  Atak  or  "  skirt,"  and  is  still 
a  valuable  part  of  Persia,  though  supporting  only 
a  scanty  population.  In  ancient  times  it  seems  to 
have  been  densely  peopled ;  and  the  ruins  of  many 
large  and  apparently  handsome  cities  attest  its 
former  prosperity.  (See  Eraser's  Khorassan,  p, 
245.) 

The  ancient  Parthians  are  called  a  "  Scy thic >: 
race  (Strab.  xi.  9,  §2  ;  Justin,  xli.  1-4 ;  Arrian 
Fr.  1);  and  probably  belonged  to  the  great  Tura 
nian  family.  Various  stories  are  told  of  their 
origin.  Moses  of  Chorene  calls  them  the  descend' 
ants  of  Abraham  by  Keturah  (Hist.  Armen.  ii.  65) 
while  John  of  Malala  relates  that  they  were  Scy 
thians  whom  the  Egyptian  king  Sesostris  brough 
with  him  on  his  return  from  Scythia,  and  settled  ii 
a  region  of  Persia  (Hist.  Univ.  p.  26;  compare 
Arrian,  /.  s.  c.).  Really,  nothing  is  known  of  then- 
till  about  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  when  the\ 
are  found  in  the  district  which  so  long  retaine< 
their  name,  and  appear  as  faithful  subjects  of  th< 
Persian  monarchs.  We  may  fairly  presume  tha 
they  were  added  to  the  empire  by  Cyrus,  abou 
B.C.  550  ;  for  that  monarch  seems  to  have  been  th 
conqueror  of  all  the  north-eastern  pi  evinces.  He 
rodotus  speaks  of  them  as  contained  in  the  IGt! 
satrapy  of  Darius,  where  they  were  joined  witi 
the  ( 'hora.smi.ms,  the  Sogdians,  and  the  Arians,  o 
people  of  Herat  (Herod,  iii.  93).  He  also  mention 


PARTHIANS 


709 


bat  they  served  in  the  army  which  Xerxes  led  into 
Greece,  under  the  same  leader  as  the  Chorasmians 
vii.  66).  They  carried  bows  and  arrows,  and 
hort  spears  j  but  were  not  at  this  time  held  in 
mich  repute  as  soldiers.  In  the  final  struggle 
ietween  the  Greeks  and  Persians  they  remained 
aithful  to  the  latter,  serving  at  Arbela  (Arr.  Exp. 
Alex.  iii.  8),  but  offering  only  a  weak  resistance 
o  Alexander  when,  on  his  way  to  Bactria,  he 
utered  their  country  (ib.  25).  In  the  division  of 
Alexander's  dominions  they  fell  to  the  share  of 
iumenes,  and  Parthia  for  some  while  was  counted 
among  the  territories  of  the  Seleucidae.  About 
B.C.  256,  however,  they  ventured  upon  a  revolt, 
and  under  Arsaces  (whom  Strabo  calls  "  a  king  of 
.he  Dahae,"  but  who  was  more  probably  a  native 
eader)  they  succeeded  in  establishing  their  inde- 
>endence.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  great 
'arthian  empire,  which  may  be  regarded  as  rising 
out  of  the  ruins  of  the  Persian,  and  as  taking  its 
jlace  during  the  centuries  when  the  Roman  power 
was  at  its  height. 

Parthia,  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  of  the  Acts, 
would  designate  this  empire,  which  extended  from 
India  to  the  Tigris,  and  from  the  Chorasmian  desert 
;o  the  shores  of  the  Southern  Ocean.  Hence  the 
prominent  position  of  the  name  Parthians  in  the 
ist  of  those  present  at  Pentecost.  Parthia  waj  n 
power  almost  rivalling  Rome — the  only  existing 
power  which  had  tried  its  strength  against  Roma 
and  not  been  worsted  in  the  encounter.  By  the 
defeat  and  destruction  of  Crassus  near  Carrhae  (the 
Scriptural  Harran)  the  Parthians  acquired  that  cha 
racter  for  military  prowess  which  attaches  to  them 
in  the  best  writers  of  the  Roman  classical  period. 
(See  Hor.  Od.  ii.  13  ;  Sat.  ii.  1,  15;  Virg.  Georg. 
iii.  31 ;  Ov.  Art.  Am.  i.  209,  &c.)  Their  armies 
were  composed  of  clouds  of  horsemen,  who  were 
all  riders  of  extraordinary  expertness ;  their  chief 
weapon  was  the  bow.  They  shot  their  arrows 
with  wonderful  precision  while  their  horses  were 
in  full  career,  and  were  proverbially  remarkable 
for  the  injury  they  inflicted  with  these  weapons  on 
an  enemy  who  attempted  to  follow  them  in  their 
flight.  From  the  time  of  Crassus  to  that  of  Trajan 
they  were  an  enemy  whom  Rome  especially  dreaded, 
and  whose  ravages  she  was  content  to  repel  without 
revenging.  The  warlike  successor  of  Nerva  had 
the  boldness  to  attack  them;  and  his  expedition, 
which  was  well  conceived  and  vigorously  conducted, 
deprived  them  of  a  considerable  portion  of  their  ter 
ritories.  In  the  next  reign,  that  of  Hadrian,  the 
Parthians  recovered  these  losses  ;  but  their  military 
strength  was  now  upon  the  decline;  and  in  A.D. 
226,  the  last  of  the  Arsacidae  was  forced  to  yield 
his  kingdom  to  the  revolted  Persians,  who,  under 
Artaxerxes,  son  of  Sassan,  succeeded  in  re-establish 
ing  their  empire.  The  Parthian  dominion  thus 
lasted  for  nearly  five  centuries,  commencing  in  the 
third  century  before,  and  terminating  iii  ths  third 
century  after,  our  era, 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  the  Parthians 
were  a  Turanian  race.  Their  success  is  to  be  re 
garded  as  the  subversion  of  a  tolerably  advanced 
civilisation  by  a  comparative  barbarism — the  sub 
stitution  of  Tatar  coarseness  for  Arian  polish  and 
refinement.  They  aimed  indeed  at  adopting  the  art 
and  civilisation  of  those  whom  they  conquered  ;  but 
their  imitation  was  a  poor  travestie,  and  there  is 
something  ludicrously  grotesque  in  most  of  then- 
more  ambitious  efforts.  At  the  same  time,  they 
occasionally  exhibit  a  certain  amount  of  skill  and 


710 


PARTRIDGE 


taste,  more  especially  where  they  followed  Greek 
models.  Their  architecture  was  better  than  their 
sculpture.  The  famous  ruins  ofCtesiphon  have  a 
grandeur  of  effect  which  strikes  every  traveller ; 


Kjfure  of  Fame,  surmounting  the  Arch  at  Tackt-i-Bostan. 
(Sir  K.  K.  Porter's  Travels,  voL  ii.  fol.  62.) 

and  the  Parthian  constructions  at  Akkerkuf,  El 
Hammam,  &c.,  are  among  the  most  remarkable  ot 
Oriental  remains.  Nor  was  grandeur  of  general 
effect  the  only  merit  of  their  buildings.  There  is 
sometimes  a  beauty  and  delicacy  in  their  ornamen 
tation  which  is  almost  worthy  the  Greeks.  (For 


Ornamentation  of  Arch  at  Tackt-i-Bostan. 

specimens  of  Parthian  sculpture  and  architecture, 
see  the  Travels  of  Sir  R.  K.  Porter,  vol.  i.  plates 
19-24;  vol.  ii.  plates  62-66  and  82,  &c.  For  the 
general  history  of  the  nation,  see  Heeren's  Manual 
of  Ancient  History,  pp.  229-305,  Eng.  Tr. ;  and 
the  article  PARTHIA.  in  Diet,  of  Gr.  and  Horn. 
Geography.)  [G.  K.] 

PARTRIDGE  (tOp,  kore:  wep5i{,  VVKTI- 
ic6pa£ :  perdix)  occurs  only  1  Sam.  xxvi.  20,  where 
David  compares  himself  to  a  hunted  Kore  upon  the 
mountains,  and  in  Jer.  xvii.  11,  where  ,it  is  said, 
"  As  a  Kore  sitteth  on  eggs,  and  hatcheth  them  not ; 
so  he  that  getteth  riches,  and  not  by  right,  shall 
leave  them  in  the  midst  of  his  days,  and  at  his  end 
shall  be  a  fool."  The  translation  of  Kore  by 
"  partridge  "  is  supported  by  many  of  the  old  ver 
sions,  the  Hebrew  name,  as  is  generally  supposed, 
having  reference  to  the  "  call "  of  the  cock  bird ; 
compare  the  German  Rebhuhn  from  rufcn,  "  to 
call."  •  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  632)  has  attempted  to 
show  that  Kore  denotes  some  species  of  "  snipe," 
or  "  woodcock  "  (rusticola  ?)  ;  he  refers  the  Hebrew 
word  to  the  Arabic  Karia,  which  he  believes,  but 


u  "  Perdix  enira  nomen  suum  bebraiciim  {Op  1'ubet 
a  rocanda,  quemiuunodum  eadem  avis  Germanis  ilicitur 
/•'ijiluthn  a  ropen,  i.  e.  rufen,  vocare"  (Rosenmiill.  Schol. 
in  Jer.  xvii.  ll).  Mr.  Tristram  says  that  Kore  would  be 
«n  admirable  Imitation  of  the  tall-note  of  Caccabis  saxa 
tilis. 

*>  "The  partridge  of  the  mountains  I  suspect  to  be 
Ammoperdix  Ueyii,  familiar  as  it  must  have  been  to 


PARTRIDGE 

upon  very  insufficient  ground,  to  be  the  name  of 
some  one  of  these  birds.  Oedmann  (  Verm.  Samm. 
ii.  57)  identifies  the  Karia  of  Arabic  writers  with 
the  Merops  apiaster  (the  Bee-eater) ;  this  explana 
tion  has  deservedly  found  favour  with  no  commen 
tators.  What  the  Karia  of  the  Arabs  may  be  we 
have  been  unable  to  determine  ;  but  the  Kore  there 
can  be  no  doubt  denotes  a  partridge.  The  "  hunting 
this  bird  upon  the  mountains  "  b  f  1  Sam.  xxvi.  20) 
entirely  agrees  with  the  habits  of  two  well-known 
species  of  partridge,  viz.,  Caccabis  saxatilis  (the 
Greek  partridge)  and  Ammoperdix  Heyii.  The 
specific  name  of  the  former  is  partly  indhative  of 
the  localities  it  frequents,  viz.,  rocky  and  hilly 
ground  covered  with  brushwood. 


It  will  be  seen  by  the  marginal  reading  that  the 
passage  in  Jeremiah  may  bear  the  following  inter 
pretation  : — As  the  Kore  "  gathereth  young  which 
she  hath  not  brought  forth."  This  rendering  is 
supported  by  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.,  and  is  that 
which  Maurer  (Comment,  in  Jer.  1.  c.),  Rosen- 
miiller  (Sch.  in  Jer.  I.e.),  Gesenius  {Thes.  s. v.), 
Winer  (Realwb.  "Rebhuhn"),  and  scholars  gene 
rally,  adopt.  In  order  to  meet  the  requirements 
of  this  latter  interpretation,  it  has  been  asserted 
that  the  partridge  is  in  the  habit  of  stealing  the 
eggs  from  the  nests  of  its  congeners  and  of  sitting 
upon  them,  and  that  when  the  young  are  hatched 
they  forsake  their  false  parent;  hence,  it  is  said, 
the  meaning  of  the  simile:  the  man  who  has  be 
come  rich  by  dishonest  means  loses  his  inches,  as 
the  fictitious  partridge  her  stolen  brood  (see  Jerome 
in  Jerem.  \.  c.).  It  is  perhaps  almost  needless  to 
remark  that  this  is  a  mere  fable,  in  which,  how 
ever,  the  ancient  Orientals  may  have  believed. 
There  is  a  passage  in  the  Arabian  naturalist  Damir, 
quoted  by  Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  638),  which  shows 
that  in  his  time  this  opinion  was  held  with  regard 
to  some  kind  of  partridge.'  The  explanation  of  the 
rendering  of  the  text  of  the  A.  V.  is  obviously  as 
follows.  Partridges  were  often  "  hunted  "  in  ancient 
times  as  they  are  at  present,  either  by  hawking 
or  by  being  driven  from  place  to  place  till  they  be- 


David  whon  he  camped  by  the  cave  of  Adullam— a  bird 
more  difficult  by  far  to  be  induced  to  take  wing  than 
C.  saxatilis"  (H.  B.  Tristram). 

Partridges,  like  gallinaceous  birds  generally,  may 
occasionally  lay  their  fjws  in  the  nests  of  other  birds  of 
I  IK-  'iame  species:  it  is  hanlly  likely,  however,  that  this 
fact  should  have  attracted  the  attcnli"!i  of  the  ancients; 
neither  can  it  alone  be  sullicicul  tu  explain  the  simile. 


PARUAH 

come  fatigued,  when  they  arc  knocked  down  by  the 
clubs  or  zerwattijs  of  the  Arabs  (see  Shaw's  Trav.  i. 
425,  8vo.).  Thus,  nests  were  no  doubt  constantly 
disturbed,  and  many  destroyed :  as,  therefore,  is  a 
partridge  which  is  driven  from  her  eggs,  so  is  he 
that  enricheth  himself  by  unjust  means — "  he  shall 
leave  them  in  the  midst  of  his  days."  The  expres 
sion  in  Ecclus.  xi.  30,  "  like  as  a  partridge  taken 


PASHUK 


711 


(and  kept)  in  a  cage,"  clearly  refers,  as  Shaw  (Trav. 
1.  c.)  has  observed,  to  "  a  decoy  partridge,"  and  the 
Greek  irep8i£  Oypevriis  should  have  been  so  trans 
lated,  as  is  evident  both  from  the  context  and  the 
Creek  words  ;d  compare  Aristot.  Hist.Anim.  ix.  9, 
§  3  and  4.  Besides  the  two  species  of  partridge 
named  above,  the  Caccabis  chukai — the  red-leg  of 
India  and  Persia,  which  Mr.  Tristram  regards  as  dis 
tinct  from  the  Greek  partridge — is  found  about  the 
Jordan.  Our  common  partridge  (Perdix  cinerea), 
as  well  as  the  Barbary  (C.  petrosa)  and  red-leg 
( C.  rufa),  do  not  occur  in  Palestine.  There  are 
three  or  four  species  of  the  genus  Pterocles  (Sand- 
grouse)  and  Francolinus  found  in  the  Bible  lands, 
but  they  do  not  appear  to  be  noticed  by  any  distinct 
term.  [QUAIL.]  [W.  H.] 

PARU'AH  ((Tina :  *ova<ro!$5;  Alex.QatfCov: 
Pharue).  The  father  of  Jehoshaphat,  Solomon's 
commissariat  officer  in  Issachar  (1  K.  iv.  17). 

PARVA'IM  (D^ia  :  *opoui»,  the  name  of  a 
place  or  country  whence  the  gold  was  procured  for 
the  decoration  of  Solomon's  Temple  (2  Chr.  iii.  6). 
The  name  occurs  but  once  in  the  Bible,  and  there 
without  any  particulars  that  assist  to  its  identifi 
cation.  We  may  notice  the  conjectures  of  Hitzig 
(on  Dan.  x.  5),  that  the  name  is  derived  from  the 
Sanscrit  pant,  "  hill,"  and  betokens  the  StSujua  opi) 
in  Arabia,  mentioned  by  Ptolemy  (vi.  7,  §11) ;  of 
Knobel  (Volkert.  p.  191),  that  it  is  an  abbreviated 
form  of  Sepharvaim,  which  stands  in  the  Syriac 
version  and  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  for  the  Sephar 
of  Gen.  x.  30  ;  and  of  Wilford  (quoted  by  Geseuius, 
Thes.  ii.  1125),  that  it  is  derived  from  the  Sanscrit 
puna,  "  eastern,"  and  is  a  general  term  for  the 
East.  Bochart's  identification  of  it  with  Taprobane 
is  etymologically  incorrect.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PA'SACH  (^DS  :  *UO-<=K  ;  Alex.  fceoTJx* : 
PhosccJi).  Sou  of 'Japhlet  of  the  tribe  of  Asher 
(1  Chr.  vii.  33),  and  one  of  the  chiefs  of  his  tribe. 


A  Mr.  Tristram  tells  us  the  Caccabis  satatilia  makes 
an  admirable  decoy,  becoming  very  tame  and  clever.  He 
brought  one  home  with  him  from  Cyprus. 


PAS-DA  M'MIM  (DV3^  DSn  :  #00-080^7; 
Alex.  <ta(To5<)/tui>  :  Aphesdomiiii).  The  form  under 
which  in  1  Chr.  xi.  13  the  name  appears,  which  in 
1  Sam.'xvii.  1  is  given  more  at  length  as  EPHES- 
DAMMIM.  The  lexicographers  do  not  decide  which 
is  the  earlier  or  correcter  of  the  two.  Geseuius 
(Thes.  139)  takes  them  to  be  identical  in  meaning. 
It  will  be  observed  that  in  the  original  of  Pas- 
dammim,  the  definite  article  has  taken  the  place  of 
the  first  letter  of  the  other  form.  In  the  parallel 
narrative  of  2  Sam.  xxiii.,  the  name  appears  to  be 
corrupted*  to  charpham  (DS'IH),  in  the  A.  V. 
rendered  "  there."  The  present  text  of  Josephus 
(Ant.  vii.  12,  §4)  gives  it  as  Arasamos  ('Ap^crojuos). 

The  chief  interest  attaching  to  the  appearance  of 
the  name  in  this  passage  of  Chronicles  is  the  evi 
dence  it  aflbrds  that  the  place  was  the  scene  of 
repeated  encounters  between  Israel  and  the  Philis 
tines,  unless  indeed  we  treat  1  Chr.  xi.  13  (and  the 
parallel  passage,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11)  as  an  independent 
account  of  the  occurrence  related  in  1  Sam.  xvii.  — 
which  hardly  seems  possible. 

A  ruined  site  bearing  the  name  of  Damtin  or 
Chirbet  Damoun,  lies  near  the  road  from  Jerusalem 
to  Beit  Jibrin  (Van  de  Velde,  S.  $  P.  ii.  193  ; 
Tobler,  Site  Wand.  201),  about  three  miles  E.  of 
Shuweikeh  (Socho).  This  Van  de  Velde  proposes  to 
identify  with  Pas-dammim.  [G.j 


PASE'AH  (HDB  :    BecroV  ;    Alex. 

Phesse).  1.  Son  of  Eshton,  in  an  obscure  fragment 
of  the  genealogies  of  Judah  (1  Chr.  iv.  12).  He 
and  his  brethren  are  described  as  "  the  men  of 
Rechah,"  which  in  the  Targuui  of  R.  Joseph  is  ren 
dered  "  the  men  of  the  great  Sanhedrin." 

2.  (*a<r^7  Ezr.,  *ao-e'/c  Neh.  :  Phasea).  The 
"  sons  of  Paseah  "  were  among  the  Nethinim  who 
returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii.  49).  In  the 
A.  V.  of  Neh.  vii.  51,  the  name  is  written  PHA- 
SEAH.  Jehoiada,  a  member  of  the  family,  assisted 
in  rebuilding  the  old  gate  of  the  city  under  Nehe- 
miah  (Neh.  iii.  6). 


PA'SHUR  ("l-in^S  :  Tlaffxfy  '•  Phassur),  of 
uncertain  etymology,  although  Jer.  xx.  3  seems  to 
allude  to  the  meaning  of  it  :  comp.  Ruth  i.  20  ;  and 
see  Gesen.  s.  v. 

1.  Name  of  one  of  the  families  of  priests  of  the 
chief  house  of  Malchijah  (Jer.  xxi.  1,  xxxviii.  1; 
1  Chr.  ix.  12,  xxiv.  9;  Neh.  xi.  12).  In  the  time 
of  Nehemiah  this  family  appears  to  have  become  a 
chief  house,  and  its  head  the  head  of  a  course 
(Ezr.  ii.  38  ;  Neh.  vii.  41,  x.  3)  ;  and,  if  the  text 
can  be  relied  upon,  a  comparison  of  Neh.  x.  3  with 
xii.  2  would  indicate  that  the  time  of  their  return 
from  Babylon  was  subsequent  to  the  days  of  Zerub 
babel  and  Jeshua.  The  individual  from  whom  the 
family  was  named  was  probably  Pashur  the  sou  of 
Malchiah,  who  in  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  was  one  of 
the  chief  princes  of  the  court  (Jer.  xxxviii.  1).  He 
was  sent,  with  others,  by  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah  at 
the  time  when  Nebuchadnezzar  was  preparing  his 
attack  upon  Jerusalem,  to  inquire  what  would  be 
the  issue,  and  received  a  reply  full  of  forebodings  of 
disaster  (Jer.  xxi.).  Again  somewhat  later,  when 
the  temporary  raising  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by 
the  advance  of  Pharaoh  Hophra's  army  from  Egypt, 
had  inspired  hopes  in  king  and  people  that  Jere 


This  is  carefully  examined  by  Kennicott  (Mssertation, 
:.). 


p.  137,  &c.). 


712 


PASSAGE 


iniiih's  predictions  would  be  falsified,  Pashur  joined 
with  several  other  chief  men  in  petitioning  the  king 
that  Jereminh  might  be  put  to  death  as  a  traitor, 
who  weakened  the  hands  of  the  patriotic  party  by 
his  exhortations  to  surrender,  and  his  prophecies  of 
defeat,  and  he  proceeded,  with  the  other  princes, 
actually  to  cast  the  prophet  into  the  dry  well  wheie 
he  nearly  perished  (Jer.  xxxviii.).  Nothing  more  is 
known  of  Pashur.  His  descendant  Adaiah  seems  to 
have  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  ix.  12),  or 
whenever  the  census  there  quoted  was  taken. 

2.  Another  person  of  this  name,  also  a  priest 
and  "  chief  governor  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,"  is 
mentioned  in  Jer.  xx.  1.     He  is  described  as  "the 
son  of  Immer,"  who  was  the  head  of  the    16th 
course  of  priests  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  14),  and  probably 
the  same  as  Amariah,  Neh.  x.  3,  xii.  2,  &c.     In  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim  he  showed  himself  as  hostile  to 
Jeremiah  as  his  namesake  the  son  of  Malchiah  did 
afterwards,  and  put  him  in  the  stocks  by  the  gate 
of  Benjamin,  for  prophesying  evil  against  Jerusalem, 
and  left  him  there  all  night.     For  this  indignity  to 
God's  prophet,  Pashur  was  told  by  Jeremiah  that 
his  name  was  changed  to  Magor-missabib  (Terror  on 
every  side),  and  that  he  and  all  his  house  should  be 
carried  captives  to  Babylon  and  there  die  (Jer.  xx. 
1-6).     From  the  expression  in  v.  6,  it  should  seem 
that  Pashur  the  son  of  Immer  acted  the  part  of  a 
prophet  as  well  as  that  of  priest. 

3.  Father  of  Gedaliah( Jer.  xxxviii.  1).  [A.C.H.] 

PASSAGE."  Used  in  plur.  (Jer.  xxii.  20), 
probably  to  denote  the  mountain  region  of  Abarim, 
on  the  east  side  of  Jordan  [ABARIM]  (Raumer,  Pal. 
p.  62  ;  Ges.  p.  987  ;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  p.  204,  and 
App.  p.  503).  It  also  denotes  a  river-ford  or  a  moun 
tain  gorge  or  pass.  [MiCHMASH.]  [H.  W.  P.] 


a  1.     l3y  !  TO  irepov  Trjs 

2.  "13VO  ;  Suij3ao-«;  vadum  (Gen.  xxxii.  22);  also  a 
gorge  ( I  Sam.  xiii.  23). 

3.  rnSyD ;   ^apayf ;  transcensus  (Is.  x.  29).     "  A 
ford  "  (Is.  xvi.  2). 

i>  This  is  evidently  the  word  NHpS,  the  Aramaean 
form  of  riDS,  put  into  Greek  letters.  Some  have  taken 
the  meaning  of  PIDS,  the  root  of  HDS,  to  be  that  of 
"  passing  through,"  and  have  referred  its  application  here 
to  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea.  Hence  the  Vulgate  has 
rendered  PJDQ  by  transitus,  Philo  (De  Vit.  Mosis,  lib.  iil. 
c.  29)  by  Siaftarripia,  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  by  Sia- 
POUTW.  Augustine  takes  the  same  view  of  the  word ;  as  do 
also  Von  Bohlen  and  a  few  other  modern  critics.  Jerome 
applies  transitus  both  to  the  passing  over  of  the  destroyer 
and  the  passing  through  the  Red  Sea  (in  Matt.  xxvi.).  But 
the  true  sense  of  the  Hebrew  substantive  is  plainly  indi 
cated  in  Ex.  xii.  27  ;  and  the  best  authorities  are  agreed 
that  HpS  never  expresses  "  passing  through,"  but  that 
its  primary  meaning  is  "  leaping  over."  Hence  the  verb 
Is  regularly  used  with  the  preposition  7JJ.  But  since, 
when  we  Jump  or  step  over  anything,  we  do  not  tread 
upon  It,  the  word  has  a  secondary  meaning,  "  to  spare," 
or  "  to  show  mercy  "  (comp.  Is.  xxxi.  5,  with  Ex.  xil.  27). 
The  LXX.  have  therefore  used  <TKewd£eiv  in  Ex.  xli.  13 ; 
and  Onkelos  has  rendered  riDBTQT,  "  the  sacrifice  of 
the  Passover,"  by  D^H  n3"1,  "the  sacrifice  of  mercy." 
Joseplms  rightly  explains  nivxa  by  vnepftaa-Ca.  In  the 
same  purport,  agree  Aquila,  Theodotion,  Symmachus, 
.several  of  the  Fathers,  and  the  best  modern  critics.  Our 
own  translators,  by  using  the  word  "  Passover,"  have 
made  clear  Kx.  xii.  12,  23,  and  other  jKissages,  which  are 


PASSOVER 

PASSOVER  (HOB,  npBfl  JH 
phase,  id  est  transitus  :  also,  JlVVSn, 
TO  &^vfj.a ;  in  N.  T.  ^  topr^i  TUV  i^vfuev,  TJ/ic'pat 
r<av  k£vfuav.  azyma,  festum  azymorwri),  the  first 
of  the  three  great  annual  Festivals  of  the  Israelites, 
celebrated  in  the  month  Nisan,  from  the  14th  to 
the  21st. 

The  following  are  the  principal  passages  in  the 
Pentateuch  relating  to  the  Passover:  Ex.  xii.  1-51, 
in  which  there  is  a  full  account  of  its  original  insti 
tution  and  first  observance  in  Egypt,  Ex.  xiii. 
3-10,  in  which  the  unleavened  bread  is  spoken  of 
in  connexion  with  the  sancti'fication  of  the  first- 
born,  but  there  is  no  mention  of  the  paschal  lamb  ;c 
Ex.  xxiii.  14-19,  where,  under  the  name  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread,  it  is  first  connected  with 
the  other  two  great  annual  festivals,  and  also  with 
the  sabbath,  and  in  which  the  paschal  lamb  is  styled 
"My  sacrifice";  Ex.  xxxiv.  18-26,  in  which  the 
festival  is  brought  into  the  same  connexion,  with 
immediate  reference  to  the  redemption  of  the  first 
born,  and  in  which  the  words  of  Ex.  xxiii.  18, 
regarding  the  paschal  lamb,  are  repeated ;  Lev. 
xxiii.  4-14,  where  it  is  mentioned  in  the  same  con 
nexion,  the  days  of  holy  convocation  are  especially 
noticed,  and  the  enactment  is  prospectively  given 
respecting  the  offering  of  the  first  sheaf  of  harvest, 
with  the  offerings  which  were  to  accompany  it, 
when  the  Israelites  possessed  the  promised  land ; 
Num.  ix.  1-14,  in  which  the  Divine  word  repeats 
the  command  for  the  observance  of  the  Passover 
at  the  commencement  of  the  second  year  after  the 
Exodus,  and  in  which  the  observance  of  the  Pass 
over  in  the  second  month,  for  those  who  could  not 
participate  in  it  at  the  regular  time,  is  instituted ; 
Num.  xxviii.  16-25,  where  directions  are  given  for 


not  intelligible  in  the  LXX.  nor  In  several  other  versions. 
(See  Bahr,  Symbolik,  ii.  627 ;  Ewald,  AUerthumer.  p.  390; 
Gesenius,  Thes.  8.  v. ;  Suicer,  sub  waa^a- ',  Drusius,  A'otat 
Majores,  in  Ex.  xii.  27 ;  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  394.) 

The  explanation  of  jrao-xa  which  hinges  on  the  notion 
that  it  is  derived  from  n-ao^u  needs  no  refutation,  but  is 
not  without  Interest,  as  it  appears  to  have  given  rise  to 
the  very  common  use  of  the  word  passion,  as  denoting 
the  death  of  Our  Lord.  It  was  held  by  Irenaeus,  Tertullian, 
and  a  few  others.  Chrysostom  appears  to  avail  himself 
of  it  for  a  paronomasia  (Horn.  V.adl  Tim.),  as  in  another 
place  he  formally  states  the  true  meaning-  vire'p/JaoVs 
eori  Kaff  fpnTjveuiv  TO  iroo-xa.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus 
seems  to  do  the  same  (Oral,  xiii.),  since  he  elsewhere 
(as  is  stated  above)  explains  irocrxa  as  =  iia/Soo-tt.  See 
Suicer,  sub  wee.  Augustine,  who  took  this  latter  view, 
has  a  passage  which  Is  worth  quoting :  "  Pascha,  fratres, 
non  sicut  quidam  existimant,  Graecum  nomen  est,  sed 
Hebraeum  :  opportnnissime  tamen  occnrrit  In  hoc  nomine 
quaedam  congruentia  utrarumque  linguarum.  Quia  enim 
pati  Graece  iroo^tii'  dlcitur,  Ideo  Pascha  passio  putata 
est,  velut  hoc  nomen  a  passlone  sit  appellatum ;  in  sua 
vero  lingua,  hoc  est  in  Hebraea,  Pascha  transitus  dicitur  : 
propterea  tune  primum  Pascha  celebravit  populus  Dei, 
quando  ex  Egypto  fugientes,  rubrnm  mare  transierunt. 
Nunc  ergo  figura  ilia  prophetica  in  veritate  corapleta  cst, 
cum  sicut  ovls  ad  Immolandum  ducitur  Christns,  cujus 
sanguine  illitis  postibus  nostris,  id  est,  cujus  sfgno  crucis 
siguatis  frontibus  nostris,  a  perditione  hujus  secull  tan- 
quarn  a  captivitate  vel  interemptione  Aegyptia  liberamur ; 
et  agimus  saluberrimum  transitum,  cum  a  diabolo  trans- 
imus  ad  Christum,  et  ab  Isto  Instabili  seculo  ad  ejus  fuu- 
datlssimum  regnum,  Col.  i.  13"  (Tn  Joan.  Tract.  lv.). 

c  There  are  five  distinct  statutes  on  the  Passover  in  the 
12th  and  13th  chapters  of  Exodus  (xil.  U-4,  5-20,  21-28, 
12-51;  xiii.  1-10). 


PASSOVER 

the  offerings  \vliidi  were  to  be  made  on  each  of  th< 
seven  (lavs  of  the  festival  ;  iK-ut.  xvi.  1-0,  where 
the  command  is  prospectively  given  that  the  Pass 
over,  and  the  other  great  festivals,  should  be  ob 
served  in  the  place  which  the  Lord  might  choose 
in  the  land  of  promise,  and  where  there  appears  to 
be  an  allusion  to  the  Chagigah,  or  voluntary  peace- 
offerings  (see  p.  7176). 

I.  INSTITUTION  AND  FIRST  CELEBRATION  OF 
THE  PASSOVER. 

When  the  chosen  people  were  about  to  be  brought 
out  of  Egypt,  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  Moses 
and  Aaron,  commanding  them  to  instruct  all  the  con 
gregation  of  Israel  to  prepare  for  their  departure 
by  a  solemn  religious  ordinance.  On  the  tenth  day 
of  the  month  Abib,  which  had  then  commenced, 
the  head  of  each  family  was  to  select  from  the  flock 
either  a  lamb  or  a  kid,  a  male  of  the  first  year, 
without  blemish.  If  his  family  was  too  small  to 
eat  the  whole  of  the  lamb,  he  was  permitted  to 
invite  his  nearest  neighbour  to  join  the  party.  On 
the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month,  hed  was  to  kill 
his  lamb  while  the  sun  was  setting.*  He  was  then 
to  take  the  blood  in  a  basin,  and  with  a  sprig  of 
hyssop  to  sprinkle  it  on  the  two  side-posts  and  the 
lintel  of  the  door  of  the  house.  The  lamb  was 
then  thoroughly  roasted,  whole.  It  was  expressly 
forbidden  that  it  should  be  boiled,  or  that  a  bone  of 
it  should  be  broken.  Unleavened  bread  and  bitter 
herbs  were  to  be  eaten  with  the  flesh.  No  male 
who  was  uncircumcised  was  to  join  the  company. 
Each  one  was  to  have  his  loins  girt,  to  hold  a 
staff  in  his  hand,  and  to  have  shoes  on  his  feet. 
He  was  to  eat  in  haste,  and  it  would  seem  that 
he  was  to  stand  during  the  meal.  The  number  of 
the  party  was  to  be  calculated  as  nearly  as  pos 
sible,  so  that  all  the  flesh  of  the  lamb  might  be 
eaten  ;  but  if  any  portion  of  it  happened  to  remain, 
it  was  to  be  burned  in  the  morning.  No  morsel  of 
it  was  to  be  carried  out  of  the  house. 

The  legislator  was  further  directed  to  inform 
the  people  of  God's  purpose  to  smite  the  first-born 
of  the  Egyptians,  to  declare  that  the  Passover  was 
to  be  to  them  an  ordinance  for  ever,  to  give  them 
directions  respecting  the  order  and  duration  of  the 
festival  in  future  times,  and  to  enjoin  upon  them 
to  teach  their  children  its  meaning,  from  generation 
to  generation. 

When  the  message  was  delivered  to  the  people, 
they  bowed  their  heads  in  worship.  The  lambs 
were  selected,  on  the  fourteenth  they  were  slain  and 
the  blood  sprinkled,  and  in  the  following  evening, 
after  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  month  had  commenced, 
the  first  paschal  meal  was  eaten.  At  midnight  the 
first-bom  of  the  Egyptians  were  smitten,  from  the 
first-bora  of  Pharaoh  that  sat  on  his  throne  unto 
the  first-born  of  the  captive  that  was  in  the  dungeon, 
and  all  the  firstlings  of  the  cattle.*  The  king  and 
his  people  were  now  urgent  that  the  Israelites  should 
start  immediately,  and  readily  bestowed  on  them 


PASSOVER 


713 


supplies  for  the  journey.  In  such  haste  did  the 
Israelites  depart,  on  that  very  day  (Num.  xxxiii. 
3),  that  they  packed  up  their  kneading-troughs 
containing  the  dough  prepared  for  the  morrow's 
provision,  which  was  not  yet  leavened. 

Such  were  the  occurrences  connected  with  the 
institution  of  the  Passover,  as  they  are  related  in 
Ex.  xii.  It  would  seem  that  the  law  for  the  conse 
cration  of  the  first-born  was  passed  in  immediate 
connexion  with  them  (Ex.  xiii.  1, 13,  15,  16). 

II.  OBSERVANCE  OF  THE  PASSOVER  IN  LATER 
TIMES. 

1.  In  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  chapters  of  Exodus, 
there  are  not  only  distinct  references  to  the  observ 
ance  of  the  festival  in  future  ages  (e.  g.  xii.  2,  14, 
17,  24-27,  42,  xiii.  2,  5,  8-10) ;  but  there  are  se 
veral  injunctions  which  were  evidently  not  intended 
for  the  first  passover,  and  which  indeed  could  not 
possibly  have  been  observed.     The  Israelites,  for 
example,  could  not  have  kept  the  next  day,  the 
15th  of  Nisan,  on  which  they  commenced  their 
march   (Ex.  xii.  51 ;  Num.  xxxin.  3),  as  a  day  of 
holy  convocation  according  to  Ex.  xii.  16.    [FES 
TIVALS,  vol.  i.  p.  617.] 

In  the  later  notices  of  the  festival  in  the  books 
of  the  law,  there  are  particulars  added  which  appear 
as  modifications  of  the  original  institution.  Of  this 
kind  are  the  directions  for  offering  the  Omer,  or 
first  sheaf  of  harvest  (Lev.  xxiii.  10-14),  the  instruc 
tions  respecting  the  special  sacrifices  which  were  to 
be  offered  each  day  of  the  festival  week  (Num. 
xxviii.  16-25),  and  the  command  that  the  paschal 
lambs  should  be  slain  at  the  national  sanctuary,  and 
that  the  blood  should  be  sprinkled  on  the  altar, 
instead  of  the  lintels  and  door-posts  of  the  houses 
(Deut.  xvi.  1-6). 

Hence  it  is  not  without  reason  that  the  Jewish 
writers  have  laid  great  stress  on  the  distinction 
between  "  the  Egyptian  Passover "  and  "  the  per 
petual  Passover."  The  distinction  is  noticed  in  the 
Mishna  (Pesachim,  ix.  5).  The  peculiarities  of  the 
Egyptian  passover  which  are  there  pointed  out  are, 
the  selection  of  the  lamb  on  the  1  Oth  day  of  the 
month,  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  on  the  lintels 
and  door-posts,  the  use  of  hyssop  in  sprinkling,  the 
haste  in  which  the  meal  was  to  be  eaten,  and  the 
restriction  of  the  abstinence  from  unleavened  bread 
to  a  single  day.  Elias  of  Byzantium  £  adds,  that 
there  was  no  command  to  burn  the  fat  on  the  altar, 
that  the  pure  and  impure  all  partook  of  the  paschal 
meal  contrary  to  the  law  afterwards  given  (Num. 
xvin.  11),  that  both  men  and  women  were  then 
required  to  partake,  but  subsequently  the  command 
was  given  only  to  men  (Ex.  xxiii.  17 ;  Deut.  xvi 
16),  that  neither  the  Hallel  nor  any  other  hymn 
was  sung,  as  was  required  in  later  times  in  accord 
ance  with  Is.  xxx.  29,  that  there  were  no  days  of 
holy  convocation,  and  that  the  lambs  were  not  slain 
in  the  consecrated  place. h 

2.  The  following  was  the  general  order  of  the  f  b- 


d  The  words  translated  in  A.  V.  "  the  whole  assembly 
of  the  congregation "  (Ex.  xii.  6),  evidently  mean  every 
man  of  the  congregation  They  are  well  rendered  by 
Vitringa  (Observat.  Sac.  ii.  3,  {9),  "  universa  Israelitarum 

multitude  nemine  excepto."    The  word  7Hp,  though  it 
primarily  denotes  an  assembly,  must  here  signify  no 
more  than  a  complete  number  of  persons,  not  necessarily 
assembled  together. 
«  See  note  k,  p.  714. 
Michaelis  and  Kurtz  consider  that  this  visitation  was 


directed  against  the  sacred  animals,  "  the  gods  of  Egypt," 
mentioned  in  Ex  xii  12. 

6  Quoted  by  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  406.  For  other 
Jewish  authorities,  see  Otho's  Lexicon,  s.  v  Pascha.' 

h  Another  Jewish  authority  (Tosiphta  in  Pesachim, 
quoted  by  Olho)  adds  that  the  rule  that  no  one  who  par 
took  of  the  lamb  should  go  out  of  the  house  until  the 
morning  (Ex.  xii.  22)  was  observed  only  on  this  one 
occasion ;  a  point  of  interest,  as  bearing  on  the  question 
relating  to  our  Lord's  last  supper.  See  p.  7l9a. 


714 


PASSOVER 


•ervances  of  the  Passover  in  later  times  according  to 
the  direct  evidence  of  Scripture: — On  the  14th  of 
Nisan,  every  trace  of  leaven  was  put  away  from 
the  houses,  and  on  the  same  day  every  male  Israelite 
not  labouring  under  any  bodily  infirmity  or  cere 
monial  impurity,  was  commanded  to  appear  before 
the  Lord  at  the  national  sanctuary  with  an  offering 
of  money  in  proportion  to  his  means  (Ex.  xxiii. 
15;  Deut.  xvi.  16,  17).1  Devout  women  some 
times  attended,  as  is  proved  by  the  instances  of 
Hannah  and  Mary  (1  Sam.  i.  7 ;  Luke  ii.  41,  42). 
As  the  sun  was  setting,k  the  lambs  were  slain,  and 
the  fat  and  blood  given  to  the  priests  (2  Chr.  xxxv. 
5,  6  ;  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J.  vi.  9,  §3).  In  accordance 
with  the  original  institution  in  Egypt,  the  lamb 
was  then  roasted  whole,  and  eaten  with  unleavened 
.  bread  and  bitter  herbs ;  no  portion  of  it  was  to  be 
left  until  the  morning.  The  same  night,  after 
the  15th  of  Nisan  had  commenced,  the  fat  was 
burned  by  the  priest  and  the  blood  sprinkled  on  the 
altar  (2  Chr.  xxx.  16,  xxxv.  11).  On  the  15th, 
the  night  being  passed,  there  was  a  holy  convoca 
tion,  and  during  that  day  no  work  might  be  done, 
except  the  preparation  of  necessary  food  (Ex.  xii. 
16).  On  this  and  the  six  following  days  an  offering 
in  addition  to  the  daily  sacriHce  was  made  of  two 
young  bullocks,  a  ram,  and  seven  lambs  of  the  first 
year,  with  meat-offerings,  for  a  burnt-offering,  and 
a  goat  for  a  sin-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  19-23).  On 
the  16th  of  the  mouth,  "the  morrow  after  the 
sabbath  "  (»'.  e.  after  the  day  of  holy  convocation), 
the  first  sheaf  of  harvest  was  offered  and  waved  by 
the  priest  before  the  Lord,  and  a  male  lamb  was 
offered  as  a  burnt  sacrifice  with  a  meat  and  drink- 
offering.  Nothing  necessarily  distinguished  the  four 
following  days  of  the  festival,  except  the  additional 
burnt  and  sin-offerings,  and  the  restraint  from  some 
kinds  of  labour.  [FESTIVALS.]  On  the  seventh  day, 


*  This  offering  was  common  to  all  the  feasts.  According 
to  the  Mishna  (Chagigah,  i.  2),  part  of  it  wag  appropriated 
for  burnt-offerings,  and  the  rest  for  the  Chagigah. 

k  "Between  the  two  evenings,"  D^SP^il  J*3  (Ex.  xii. 
C ;  Lev.  xxiii.  5 ;  Num.  ix.  3,  5).  The  phrase  also  occurs 
in  reference  to  the  time  of  offering  the  evening  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxix.  39,  41;  Num.  xxviii.  4),  and  in  other  con 
nexions  (Ex.  xvi.  12,  xxx.  8).  Its  precise  meaning  is 
doubtful.  The  Karaites  and  Samaritans,  with  whom 
Alien  Ezra  (on  Ex.  xii.  6)  agrees,  consider  it  as  the  in 
terval  between  sunset  and  dark.  This  appears  to  be  in 
accordance  wjth  Deut  xvi.  6,  where  the  paschal  lamb  is 
commanded  to  be  slain  "  at  the  going  down  of  the  sun." 
But  the  Pharisees  and  Kubbinists  held  that  the  first 
evening  commenced  when  the  sun  began  to  decline 
(Sec'ATj  irpiaia),  and  that  the  second  evening  began  with 
the  setting  sun  (Sei'^Tj  6i|/t'a).  Josephus  says  that  the 
lambs  were  slain  from  the  ninth  hour  till  the  eleventh, 
i.  e.  between  three  and  five  o'clock  (B.  J.  vi.  9,  $3) ; 
the  Mishna  seems  to  countenance  this  (I'tsachim,  v.  3)  ; 
and  Maimonides,  who  says  they  were  killed  immediately 
after  the  evening  sacrifice.  A  third  notion  has  been  held 
by  Jarcbi  and  Kimchi,  that  the  two  evenings  are  the  time 
immediately  before  and  immediately  after  sunset,  so  that 
the  point  of  time  at  which  the  sun  sets  divides  them. 
Gesenius,  Bahr,  Winer,  and  most  other  critics,  hold  the 
first  opinion,  and  regard  the  phrase  as  equivalent  with 
2^y3  (Deut.  xvi.  6).  See  Gesenius,  The*,  p.  1065  ;  Bahr, 
Symbolik,  ii.  614 ;  Hupfeld,  De  Festis  Hebraeorum,  p.  15 ; 
Uosenmtiller  in  Kxod.  xii.  6  ;  Carpzov,  4pp.  Crit.  p.  68. 

»  The  seventh  day  of  the  Passover,  and  the  eighth  day 
of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (see  John  vii.  37),  had  a  cha 
racter  of  their  own,  distinguishing  them  from  the  first  days 
of  the  feasts  and  from  all  other  days  of  holy  convocation, 
with  the  exception  of  the  day  of  Pentecost.  [PEMTECOST.] 


PASSOVER 

the  21st  of  Nisan,  there  was  a  holy  convocation, 
and  the  day  appears  to  have  been  one  of  peculiar  so 
lemnity.1  As  at  all  the  festivals,  cheerfulness  was 
to  prevail  during  the  whole  week,  and  all  care  was 
to  be  laid  aside  (Deut.  xxvii.  7  ;  comp.  Joseph. 
Ant.  xi.  5;  Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  Art.  197). 
[PENTECOST]. 

3.  (a.)  The  Paschal  Lamb. — After  the  first  Pass 
over  in  Egypt  there  is  no  trace  of  the  lamb  having 
been  selected  before  it  was  wanted.  In  later  times,  we 
are  certain  that  it  was  sometimes  not  provided  before 
the  14th  of  the  month  (Luke  xxii.  7-9  ;  Mark  xiv. 
12-16).  The  law  formally  allowed  the  alternative 
of  a  kid  (Ex.  xii.  5),  but  a  lamb  was  preferred,1" 
and  was  probably  nearly  always  chosen.  It  was 
to  be  faultless  and  a  male,  in  accordance  with  the 
established  estimate  of  animal  perfection  (see  Mai. 
i.  14).  Either  the  head  of  the  family,  or  any  other 
person  who  was  not  ceremonially  unclean  (2  Chr. 
xxx.  17),  took  it  into  the  court  of  the  Temple  on 
his  shoulders.  According  to  some  authorities,  the 
lamb  might,  if  circumstances  should  render  it  de 
sirable,  be  slain  at  any  time  in  the  afternoon,  even 
before  the  evening  sacrifice,  if  the  blood  was  kept 
stirred,  so  as  to  prevent  it  from  coagulating,  until  the 
time  came  for  sprinkling  it  (Pesachim,  v.  3). 

The  Mishna  gives  a  particular  account  of  the 
arrangement  which  was  made  in  the  court  of  the 
Temple  (Pesachim,  v.  6-8).  Those  who  were  to 
kill  the  lamb  entered  successively  in  three  divisions. 
When  the  first  division  had  entered,  the  gates  were 
closed  and  the  trumpets  were  sounded  three  times. 
The  priests  stood  in  two  rows,  each  row  extending 
from  the  altar  to  the  place  where  the  people  were 
assembled.  The  priests  of  one  row  held  basins 
of  silver,  and  those  of  the  other  basins  of  gold. 
Each  Israelite*  then  slew  his  lamb  in  order,  and 
the  priest  who  was  nearest  to  him  received  the  blood 


This  is  indicated  in  regard  to  the  Passover  in  Deut  xvi.  8 . 
"  Six  days  thou  shall  eat  unleavened  bread ;  and  on  the 
seventh  day  shall  be  a  solemn  assembly  (]"n¥V)  to  the 
Lord."  See  also  Ex.  xiii.  6 :  "  Seven  days  thou  shall  eat 
unleavened  bread,  and  in  the  seventh  day  shall  be  a  feast 
to  the  Lord."  The  word  J"n¥J?  Is  used  in  like  manner 
for  the  last  day  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (Lev.  xxiil.  36, 
where  it  is  associated  with  BHpTOpQ,  "  a  holy  con 
vocation  ;"  Num.  xxix.  35 ;  2  Chr.  vii.  9 ;  Neb.  viii.  18). 
Our  translators  have  in  each  case  rendered  it  "  solemn 
assembly,"  but  have  explained  it  in  the  margin  by 
"  restraint"  The  LXX.  have  i£6&iov.  Michaelis  and 
Iken  imagined  the  primary  idea  of  the  word  to  be  re 
straint  from  labour.  Gesenius  shows  that  this  is  a  mis 
take,  and  proves  the  word  to  mean  assembly  or  con 
gregation.  Its  root  is  undoubtedly  "YH]},  to  shut  up, 
or  constrain.  Hence  Bahr  (Symbolik,  ii.  619)  reasonably 
argues,  from  the  occurrence  of  the  word  in  the  passages 
above  referred  to,  that  its  strict  meaning  is  that  of  Vie 
closing  assembly;  which  is  of  course  quite  consistent 
with  its  being  sometimes  used  for  a  solemn  assembly  in  a 
more  general  sense,  and  with  its  application  to  the  day  of 
Pentecost. 

™  The  Chaldee  interpreters  render  HK',  which  meant 
one  of  the  flock,  whether  sheep  or  goat,  by  "I!3N, 
a  lamb ;  and  Theodoret  no  doubt  represents  the  Jewish 
traditional  usage  when  he  says,  i'ro  6  piy  irpo^arov  txiav 
0ii<7ij  TOVTO*  6  &  <rira.i'i£<uv  irpo/3<XTOV  TOV  ipifyov  (on  Ex. 
xii.)'. 

»  Undoubtedly  the  usual  practice  was  for  the  head  of 
the  family  to  slay  his  own  lamb ;  but  on  particular  occa 
sions  (as  in  the  great  observances  of  the  Passover  !>y 
Hezekiah,  Josiah,  and  Ezra)  the  slaughter  of  the  lambs 
was  committed  to  the  Levltes.  Sec  p.  7186. 


PASSOVER 

in  his  basin,  which  he  handed  to  the  next  priest,  who 
gave  his  empty  basin  in  return.  A  succession  of 
full  basins  was  thus  passed  towards  the  altar,  and  a 
succession  of  empty  ones  towards  the  people.  The 
priest  who  stood  next  the  altar  threw  the  blood  out 
towards  the  base  in  a  single  jet.  When  the  first 
division  had  performed  their  work,  the  second  came 
in,  and  then  the  third.  The  lambs  were  skinned, 
and  the  viscera  taken  out  with  the  internal  fat. 
The  fat  was  carefully  separated  and  collected  in  the 
large  dish,  and  the  viscera  were  washed  and  replaced 
in  the  body  of  the  lamb,  like  those  of  the  burnt 
sacrifices  (Lev.  i.  9,  iii.  3-5  ;  comp.  Pesachim,  vi.  1). 
Maimonides  says  that  the  tail  was  put  with  the  fat 
(Not.  in  PCS.  \.  10).  While  this  was  going  on 
the  Hallel  was  sung,  and  repeated  a  second,  or  even 
a  third  time,  if  the  process  was  not  finished.  As 
\t  grew  dark,  the  people  went  home  to  roast  their 
lambs.  The  fat  was  burned  on  the  altar,  with  in 
cense,  that  same  evening.0  When  the  14th  of  Nisan 
fell  on  the  sabbath,  all  these  things  were  done  in  the 
same  manner  ;  but  the  court  of  the  Temple,  instead 
of  being  carefully  cleansed  as  on  other  occasions,  was 
merely  flooded  by  opening  a  sluice. 

A  spit  made  of  the  wood  of  the  pomegranate 
was  thrust  lengthwise  through  the  lamb  (Pesachim, 
vii.  1).  According  to  Justin  Martyr,  a  second 
spit,  or  skewer,  was  put  transversely  through  the 
shoulders,  so  as  to  form  the  figure  of  a  cross.?  The 
oven  was  of  earthenware,  and  appears  to  have  been 
in  shape  something  like  a  bee-hive  with  an  opening 
in  the  side  to  admit  fuel.  The  lamb  was  carefully 
so  placed  as  not  to  touch  the  side  of  the  oven,  lest 


PASSOVER 


715 


the  cooking  should  be  effected  in  part  by  hot  earth 
enware,  and  not  entirely  by  fire,  according  to  Ex. 
xii.  9  ;  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13.  If  any  one  concerned  in 
the  process  broke  a  bone  of  the  lamb  so  as  to  infringe 
the  command  in  Ex.  xii.  46,  he  was  subject  to  the 
punishment  of  forty  stripes.  The  flesh  was  to  be 
roasted  thoroughly  1  (Ex.  xii.  9).  No  portion  of  it 
was  allowed  to  be  carried  out  of  the  house,  and  if  any 
of  it  was  not  eaten  at  the  meal,  it  was  burned,  along 
with  the  bones  and  tendons,  in  the  morning  of  the 
16th  of  Nisan  ;  or,  if  that  day  happened  to  be  the 
sabbath,  on  the  17th. 

As  the  paschal  lamb  could  be  legally  slain,  and 
the  blood  and  fat  offered,  only  in  the  national  sanc 
tuary  (Deut.  xvi.  2),  it  of  course  ceased  to  be  offered 
by  the  Jews  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
The  spring  festival  of  the  modern  Jews  strictly  con 
sists  only  of  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread.' 

(6.)  The  Unleavened  Bread. — There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  unleavened  bread  eaten  in  the 
Passover  and  that  used  on  other  religious  occasions 
were  of  the  same  nature.  It  might  be  made  of 
wheat,  spelt,  barley,  oats,  or  rye,  but  not  of  rice  or 
millet  (Pesachim,  ii.  5).  It  appears  to  have  been 
usually  made  of  the  finest  wheat  flour'  (Buxt. 
Syn.  Jud.  c.  xviii.  p.  397).  The  greatest  care  was 
taken  that  it  should  be  made  in  perfectly  clean 
vessels  and  with  all  possible  expedition,  lest  the 
process  of  fermentation  should  be  allowed  to  com 
mence  in  the  slightest  degree  (Pesachim,  iii.  2-5). 
It  was  probably  formed  into  dry,  thin  biscuits,  not 
unlike  those  used  by  the  modern  Jews. 

The  command  to  eat  unleavened  bread  during 


0  The  remarkable  passage  in  which  this  is  commanded, 
which  occurs  Ex.  xxiii.  17,  18,  19,  and  is  repeated  Ex. 
xxxiv.  25,  26,  appears  to  be  a  sort  of  proverbial  caution 
respecting  the  three  great  feasts.  "Three  times  in  the 
year  all  thy  males  shall  appear  before  the  Lord  God. 
Thou  shall  not  offer  the  blood  of  my  sacrifice  with 
leavened  bread-  neither  shall  the  fat  of  my  sacrifice 
remain  until  the  morning.  The  first  of  the  first-fruits  of 
thy  land  thou  shall  bring  into  the  house  of  the  Lord  thy 
God.  Thou  shall  not  seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk." 
The  references  to  the  Passover  and  Pentecost  are  plain 
enough.  That  which  is  supposed  to  refer  to  Tabernacles 
(which  is  also  found  Deut  xiv.  21),  "Thou  shall  not 
seethe  a  kid  in  his  mother's  milk,"  is  explained  by  Abar- 
banel,  and  in  a  Karaite  MS.  spoken  of  by  Cudworlh,  as 
bearing  on  a  custom  of  boiling  a  kid  in  the  milk  of  its 
dam  as  a  charm,  and  sprinkling  fields  and  orchards  with 
the  milk  to  render  them  fertile  (Cudworth,  Trite  Notion 
of  the  Lord's  Supper,  pp.  36,  37  ;  Spencer,  Leg.  Heb.  ii.  8. 
For  other  interpretations  of  the  passage,  see  Rosenmiiller, 
in  Kxod.  xxiii.  19).  QIDOLATBY  ;  vol.  i.  859  &.] 

p  The  statement  is  in  Ihe  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  c.  40 : — 
Kai  TO  KcAcvadcv  vpoftarov  exeivo  cmrov  o\ov  yiveaOai, 
TOV  Trddov;  TOV  OTavpov,  4V  ov  ita.Gxf.iv  e/aeAAev  o  Xpi- 
O~TO<;,  <n!ji/3oAov  jji/.  TO  yap  OITTIOIJAVOV  irpofia.TOv  o"x>)jna- 
Ti^oit-tvov  bfxouof  T<a  o"X7)ju.aT(.  TOV  oravpou  ojrraTai.  ets 
yap  op0io<;  6/3cAt'<7KOf  fiaircpopaTai  diro  Tiav  Ka.TiaTa.Tia 
fiqptoi/  fif\p(.  Trjs  Ktc^aArjs,  xal  els  TraAil'  Kara  TO  jnera- 
<l>pfvov,  <a  Trpoo-apTWfTai  KOI  ai  \fipfS  TOV  wpofiaTOv. 

As  Justin  was  a  native  of  Flavla  Neapolis,  it  is  a  striking 
fact  that  the  modern  Samaritans  roast  their  paschal  lambs 
in  nearly  the  same  manner  at  this  day.  Mr.  George  Grove, 
who  visited  Nablous  in  1861,  in  a  letter  to  the  writer  of 
tliis  article,  says,  "  The  lambs  (they  require  six  for  the 
community  now)  are  roasted  all  together  by  stuffing  them 
vertically,  head  downwards,  into  an  oven  which  is  like  a 
small  well,  about  three  feet  diameter,  and  four  or  five  feet 
deep,  roughly  steaned,  in  which  a  fire  has  been  kept  up 
tor  .-evoral  hours.  After  Ihe  lambs  are  thrust  in,  the  top 
of  the  hole  is  covered  with  bushes  and  earth,  to  confine 
tlie  heat  till  they  are  done.  Kach  Iamb  has  a  stake  or 
spit  run  through  him  to  draw  him  up  by ;  and,  to  pre 


vent  the  spit  from  tearing  away  through  the  roast  meat 
with  the  weight,  a  cross  piece  is  put  through  the  lower 
end  of  it."  A  similar  account  is  given  in  Miss  Kogers' 
Domestic  Life  in  Palestine.  Vitringa,  Bochart,  and  Hot- 
tinger  have  taken  the  statement  of  Justin  as  representing 
the  ancient  Jewish  usage;  and,  with  him,  regard  the 
crossed  spits  as  a  prophetic  type  of  the  cross  of  our  Lord. 
But  it  would  seem  more  probable  that  the  transverse  spit 
was  a  mere  matter  of  convenience,  and  was  perhaps  never 
in  use  among  the  Jews.  The  Rabbinical  traditions  relate 
that  the  lamb  was  called  Gateatus,  "qul  quum  totus  assa- 
batur,  cum  capite,  cruribus,  et  Intestinis,  pedes  autem  et 
intestina  ad  latera  ligabantur  inter  assandum,  agnus  it* 
quasi  armatum  repraesentaveril,  qui  galea  in  capite  et 
ense  in  latere  esl  munitus"  (Otho,  Lex.  Rob.  p.  503) 

i  The  word  N3,  in  A.  V.  "  raw,"  is  rendered  "  alive  " 
by  Onkelos  and  Jonathan.  In  1  Sam.  ii.  15,  it  plainly  means 
raw.  But  Jarchi,  Abenezra,  and  other  Jewish  authorities, 
understand  it  as  half -dressed  (Rosenmiiller,  in  loc.). 

*  There  are  many  curious  particulars  in  the  mode  in 
which  the  modern  Jews  observe  this  festival  to  .be  found 
in  Buxt.  Syn.  Jud.  c.  xviii.  xix. ;  Picart,  Ceremonies  Beli- 
gieuses,  vol.  i. ;  Mill,  The  British  Jews  (London,  1853); 
Slauben,  Scenes  de  la  vie  Juive  en  Alsace  (Paris,  1860). 
The  following  appear  to  be  the  most  interesting :— A 
shoulder  of  lamb,  thoroughly  roasted,  is  placed  on  the 
table  to  take  the  place  of  the  paschal  lamb,  with  a  hard 
boiled  egg  as  a  symbol  of  wholeness.  Besides  the  sweet 
sauce,  to  remind  them  of  the  sort  of  work  carried  on  by 
their  fathers  in  Egypt  (see  p.  7 16  a),  there  is  sometimes 
a  vessel  of  salt  and  water,  to  represent  the  Red  Sea,  into 
which  they  dip  the  bitter  herbs.  But  the  most  remarkable 
usages  are  those  connected  with  the  expectation  of  the 
coming  of  Elijah.  A  cup  of  wine  is  poured  out  for  him , 
and  stands  all  night  upon  the  table.  Just  before  the  fill 
ing  of  the  cups  of  the  guests  the  fourth  time,  there  is  an 
interval  of  dead  silence,  and  the  door  of  the  room  is  opened 
for  some  minutes  to  admit  the  prophet. 

"  Ewald  (Alterthiiiner,  p.  391)  and  Hullman  (quoted  by 
Winer)  conjecture  the  original  unleavened  bread  of  the 
Passover  to  have  Ic-en  of  barley,  in  connexion  with  the 
commencement  of  barley  harvest. 


716 


PASSOVER 


the  seven  days  of  the  festival,  under  the  penalty  of 
being  cut  off  from  the  people,  is  given  with  marked 
emphasis,  as  well  ;is  that  to  put  away  all  leaven  from 
the  house  during  the  festival  (Ex.  xii.  15,  19,  20, 
xiii.  7).  But  the  rabbiuists  say  that  the  house  was 
carefully  cleansed  and  every  corner  searched  for  any 
fragment  of  leavened  bread  in  the  evening  before 
the  14th  of  Nisan,  though  leavened  bread  might  be 
eaten  till  the  sixth  hour  of  that  day,  when  all  that 
remained  was  to  be  burned  (Pesachim,  i.  1,  4;1 
and  citation  in  Lightfoot,  Temple  Sen.,  xii.  §1). 

(c.)  The  Bitter  Herbs  and  the  Sauce.— According 
to  Pesachim  (ii.  6)  the  bitter  herbs  (D'TlD  ;  iriKpi- 
Sts ;  lactucae  agrestes,  Ex.  xii.  8)  might  be  endive, 
chicory,  wild  lettuce,  or  nettles.  These  plants  were 
important  articles  of  food  to  the  ancient  Egyptians 
(as  is  noticed  by  Pliny),  and  they  are  said  to  con 
stitute  nearly  half  that  of  the  modern  Egyptians. 
According  to  Niebuhr  they  are  still  eaten  at  the 
Passover  by  the  Jews  in  the  East.  They  were  used 
in  former  times  either  fresh  or  dried,  and  a  portion 
of  them  is  said  to  have  been  eaten  before  the  un 
leavened  bread  (Pesach.  x.  3). 

The  sauce  into  which  the  herbs,  the  bread,  and 
the  meat  were  dipped  as  they  were  eaten  (John 
xiii.  26  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  23)  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Pentateuch.  It  is  called  in  the  Mishna  11011!"!. 
According  to  Bartenora  it  consisted  of  only  vinegar 
and  water ;  but  others  describe  it  as  a  mixture  of 
vinegar,  figs,  dates,  almonds,  and  spice.  The  same 
sauce  was  used  on  ordinary  occasions  thickened  with 
a  little  flour ;  but  the  rabbinists  forbad  this  at  the 
Passover,  lest  the  flour  should  occasion  a  slight  degree 
of  fermentation.  Some  say  that  it  was  beaten  up  to 
the  consistence  of  mortar  or  clay,  in  order  to  com 
memorate  the  toils  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  in  lay 
ing  bricks  (Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tal.  col.  831 ;  Pesachim, 
ii.  8,  x.  3,  with  the  notes  of  Bartenora,  Maimonides, 
and  Surenhusius). 

(d.)  The  Four  Cups  of  Wine. — There  is  no  men 
tion  of  wine  in  connexion  with  the  Passover  in  the 
Pentateuch ;  but  the  Mishna  strictly  enjoins  that 
there  should  never  be  less  than  four  cups  of  it  pro 
vided  at  the  paschal  meal  even  of  the  poorest 
Israelite  (Pes.  x.  1).  The  wine  was  usually  red, 
and  it  was  mixed  with  water  as  it  was  drunk  (Pes. 
vii.  13,  with  Bartenora's  note;  and  Otho's  Lex. 
p.  507).  The  cups  were  handed  round  in  succes 
sion  at  specified  intervals  in  the  meal  (see  p.  717a). 
Two  of  them  appear  to  be  distinctly  mentioned 
Luke  xxii.  17,  20.  "  The  cup  of  blessing  "  (1  Cor. 
x.  16)  was  probably  the  latter  one  of  these,  and 
is  generally  considered  to  have  been  the  third  of 
the  series,  after  which  a  grace  was  said ;  though  a 
comparison  of  Luke  xxii.  20  (where  it  is  called 
"the  cup  after  supper'')  with  Pes.  x.  7,  and  the 

designation  ??n  D13,  "  cup  of  the  Hallcl"  might 
rather  suggest  that  it  was  the  fourth  and  last  cup. 
Schoettgen,  however,  is  inclined  to  doubt  whether 
there  is  any  reference,  in  either  of  the  passages  of 
the  N.  T.,  to  the  formal  ordering  of  the  cups  of  the 
Passover,  and  proves  that  the  name  "  cup  of  bless 
ing"  (i"lD"12l  7^  D13)  was  applied  in  a  general 
way  to  any  cup  which  was  drunk  with  thanks 
giving,  and  that  the  expression  was  often  used 


*  Other  particulars  of  the  precautions  which  were  taken 
aie  given  in  1'esachim,  and  also  by  Maimonides,  in  his 
treatise  De  Fermentato  et  Azymo,  a  compendium  of  which 
is  given  by  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  404. 

"  Certain  precautions  to  avoid  pollution  were  taken 


PASSOVER 

metaphorically,  e.  g.  Ps.  cxvi.  13  (liar.  Heb.  in 
1  Cor.  x.  16.  See  also  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  p.  380"). 

The  wine  drunk  at  the  meal  was  not  restrictod 
to  the  four  cups,  but  none  could  be  taken  during 
the  interval  between  the  third  and  fourth  cups 
(Pes.  x.  7). 

(e.)  The  Hallel. — The  service  of  praise  sung  at 
the  Passover  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Law.  The  name 
is  contracted  from  rP"-1?;>n  (Hallelujah).  It  con 
sisted  of  the  series  of  Psalms  from  cxiii.  to  cxviii. 
The  first  portion,  comprising  Ps.  cxiii.  and  cxiv., 
was  sung  in  the  early  part  of  the  meal,  and  the 
second  part  after  the  fourth  cup  of  wine.  This  is 
supposed  to  have  been  the  "  hymn  "  sung  by  our 
Lord  and  his  Apostles  (Matt.  xxvi.  30 ;  Mark  *iv. 
26 ;  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Tal.  s.  v.  ^H,  and  Syn.  Jttd. 
p.  48;  Otho,  Lex.  p.  271;  Carpzov,  App.  Crit. 
p.  374). 

(/.)  Mode  and  Order  of  the  Paschal  Meal, — 
Adopting  as  much  from  Jewish  tradition  as  is  not 
inconsistent  or  improbable,  the  following  appears  to 
have  been  the  usual  custom.  All  work,  except  that 
belonging  to  a  few  trades  connected  with  daily  life, 
was  suspended  for  some  hours  before  the  evening  of 
the  14th  of  Nisan.  There  was,  however,  a  difference 
in  this  respect.  The  Galilaeans  desisted  from  work 
the  whole  day ;  the  Jews  of  the  south  only  after 
the  middle  of  the  tenth  hour,  that  is,  half-past 
three  o'clock.  It  was  not  lawful  to  eat  any  ordi 
nary  food  after  mid-day.  The  reason  assigned  for 
this  was,  that  the  paschal  supper  might  be  eaten 
with  the  enjoyment  furnished  by  a  good  appetite 
(Pes.  iv.  1-3,  x.  1,  with  Maimonides'  note).  But 
it  is  also  stated  that  this  preliminary  fasting  was 
especially  incumbent  on  the  eldest  son,  and  that  it 
was  intended  to  commemorate  the  deliverance  of  the 
first-born  m  Egypt.  This  was  probably  only  a  fancy 
of  later  times  (Buxt.  Syn.  Jud.  xviii.  p.  401). 

No  male  was  admitted  to  the  table  unless  he  was 
circumcised,  even  if  he  was  of  the  seed  of  Israel 
(Ex.  xii.  48).  Neither,  according  to  the  letter  of 
the  law,  was  any  one  of  either  sex  admitted  who 
was  ceremonially  unclean u  (Num.  ix.  6 ;  Joseph. 
B.  J.  vi.  9,  §3).  But  this  rule  was  on  special 
occasions  liberally  applied.  In  the  case  of  Heze- 
kiah's  Passover  (2  Chr.  xxx.)  we  find  that  a  greater 
degree  of  legal  purity  was  required  to  slaughter  the 
lambs  than  to  eat  them,  and  that  numbers  partook 
"otherwise  than  it  was  written,"  who  were  not 
"  cleansed  according  to  the  purification  of  the  sanc 
tuary."  The  Rabbinists  expressly  state  that  women 
were  permitted,  though  not  commanded,  to  partake 
(Pes.  viii.  1 ;  Chagigah,  i.  1 ;  comp.  Joseph.  B.  J. 
vi.  9,  §3),  in  accordance  with  the  instance*  in 
Scripture  which  have  been  mentioned  of  Hannah 
and  Mary  (p.  714a).  But  the  Karaites,  in  irore 
recent  times,  excluded  all  but  full-grown  men.  It 
was  customary  for  the  number  of  a  party  to  be 
not  less  than  ten  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vi.  9,  §3).  It  was 
perhaps  generally  under  twenty,  but  it  might  be  as 
many  as  a  hundred,  if  each  one  could  have  a  piece 
of  the  lamb  as  larje  as  an  olive  (Pes.  viii.  7). 

When  the  meal  was  prepared,  the  family  was 
placed  round  the  table,  the  paterfamilias  taking  a 
place  of  honour,  probably  somewhat  raised  above 
the  rest.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 


a  month  before  the  Passover.  Amongst  these  was  the 
annual  whitewashing  of  the  sepulchres  (cf.  Matt,  xxiii.  27) 
(Roland,  Ant.  iv.  2,  6).  In  John  xi.  55,  we  find  some  Jews 
coining  up  to  Jerusalem  to  purify  themselves  a  week 
before  the  feast. 


:  PASSOVER 

ancient  Hebrews  sat,  as  they  were  accustomed  to  do 
at  their  ordinary  meals  (see  Otho,  Lex.  p.  7).  But 
when  the  custom  of  reclining  at  table  had  become 
general,  that  posture  appeal's  to  have  been  enjoined, 
on  the  ground  of  its  supposed  significance.  The 
Mishua  says  that  the  meanest  Israelite  should 
recline  at  the  Passover  "  like  a  king,  with  the  ease 
becoming  a  free  man"  (Pes.  x.  1,  with  Maimonides" 
note).  He  was  to  keep  m  mind  that  when  his 
ancestors  stood  at  the  feast  in  Egypt  they  took  the 
posture  of  slaves  (R.  Levi,  quoted  by  Otho,  p.  504). 
Our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  conformed  to  the  usual  cus 
tom  of  their  time,  and  reclined  (Luke  xxii.  14,  &c.). 

When  the  party  was  arranged,  the  first  cup  of 
wine  was  filled,  and  a  blessing  was  asked  by  the 
head  of  the  family  on  the  feast,  as  well  as  a  special 
one  on  the  cup.  The  bitter  herbs  were  then  placed 
on  the  table,  and  a  portion  of  them  eaten,  either 
with  or  without  the  sauce.  The  unleavened  bread 
was  handed  round  next,  and  afterwards  the  lamb 
was  placed  on  the  table  in  front  of  the  head  of  the 
family  (Pes.  x.  3).  Before  the  lamb  was  eaten, 
the  second  cup  of  wine  was  filled,  and  the  son,  in 
accordance  with  Ex.  xii.  26,  asked  his  father  the 
meaning  of  the  feast.  In  reply,  an  account  was 
given  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, 
and  of  their  deliverance,  with  a  particular  explana 
tion  of  Deut.  xxvi.  5,  and  the  first  part  of  the 
Hallel  (Ps.  cxiii.,  cxiv.)  was  sung.  '  This  being  gone 
through,  the  lamb  was  carved  and  eaten.  The  third 
cup  of  wine  was  poured  out  and  drunk,  and  soon 
afterwards  the  fourth.  The  second  part  of  the 
Hallel  (Ps.  crv.  to  cxviii.)  was  then  sung  (Pes.  x. 
2-5).  A  fifth  wine-cup  appears  to  have  been  occa 
sionally  produced,  but  perhaps  only  in  later  times. 
What  was  termed  the  greater  Hallel  (Ps.  cxx.  to 
cxxxviii.)  was  sung  on  such  occasions  (Buxt.  Syn. 
Jud.  c.  xviii.).  The  meal  being  ended,  it  was  un 
lawful  for  anything  to  be  introduced  in  the  way 
of  dessert. 

The  Israelites  who  lived  in  the  country  appear 
to  have  been  accommodated  at  the  feast  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  in  their  houses,  so  far  as 
there  was  room  for  them  (Luke  xxii.  10-12  ;  Matt. 
xxvi.  18).  It  is  said  that  the  guests  left  in  return 
for  their  entertainment  the  skin  of  the  lamb,  the 
oven,  and  other  vessels  which  they  had  used.  Those 
who  could  not  be  received  into  the  city  encamped 
without  the  walls  in  tents,  as  the  pilgrims  now  do 
at  Mecca.  The  number  of  these  must  have  been 
very  great,  if  we  may  trust  the  computation  of 
Josephus  that  they  who  partook  of  the  Passover 
amounted,  in  the  reign  of  Nero,  to  above  2,700,000 
(B.  J.  vi.  9,  §3*).  It  is  not  wonderful  that 
seditions  were  apt  to  break  out  in  such  a  vast  multi 
tude  so  brought  together  (Jos.  Ant.  xvii.  9,  §2 ; 
B,  J.  i.  3,  &c. ;  comp.  Matt.  xxvi.  5 ;  Luke  xiii.  1). 

After  the  paschal  meal,  such  of  the  Israelites 
from  the  country  as  were  so  disposed  left  Jerusalem, 
and  observed  the  remainder  of  the  festival  at  their 
respective  homes  (Deut.  xvi.  7).  But  see  Light- 
foot,  on  Luke  ii.  43. 

(g.)  The  first  Sheaf  of  Harvest. — The  offering  of 
the  Omer,  or  sheaf  ("1DJJ ;  TO.  Spdy/j-ara ;  manipulus 
spicarurn)  is  mentioned  nowhere  in  the  law  except 
Lev.  xxiii.  10-14.  It  is  there  commanded  that 
when  the  Israelites  might  reach  the  land  of  promise, 
they  should  bring,  on  the  16th  of  the  month,  "the 

*  He  states  that  the  number  of  lambs  slain  in  a  single 
Passover  was  256.500.  It  is  difficult  to  imagine  how 
they  could  all  have  been  slain,  and  their  blood  sprinkled, 


PASSOVER 


717 


morrow  after  the  sabbath "  (i.  e.  the  day  of  holy 
convocation  [PENTECOST,  §1  note])  the  first  sheat 
of  the  harvest  to  the  priest,  to  be  waved  by  him 
before  the  Lord.  A  lamb,  with  a  meat-ottering 
and  a  drink-offering,  was  to  be  offered  at  the  same 
time.  Until  this  ceremony  was  performed,  no 
bread,  parched  corn,  or  green  ears,  were  to  be  eaten 
of  the  new  crop  (see  Josh.  v.  11,  12). 7  It  was 
from  the  day  of  this  offering  that  the  fifty  days 
began  to  be  counted  to  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Lev. 
xxiii.  15).  The  sheaf  was  of  barley,  as  being  the 
grain  which  was  first  ripe  (2  Kings  iv.  42).  Jose- 
phus  relates  (Ant.  iii.  10,  §5)  that  the  barley 
was  ground,  and  that  ten  handfuls  of  the  meal 
were  brought  to  the  altar,  one  handful  being  cast 
into  the  fire  and  the  remainder  given  to  the  priests. 
The  Mishna  adds  several  particulars,  and,  amongst 
others,  that  men  were  formally  sent  by  the  San 
hedrim  to  cut  the  barley  in  some  field  near  Jeru 
salem  ;  and  that,  after  the  meal  had  been  sifted 
thirteen  times,  it  was  mingled  with  oil  and  incense* 
(Menachoth,  x.  2-6). 

(A.)  The  Chagigah. — The  daily  sacrifices  are  enu 
merated  in  the  Pentateuch  only  in  Num.  xxviii. 
19-23,  but  reference  is  made  to  them  Lev.  xxiii.  8. 
Besides  these  public  offerings  (which  are  mentioned, 
p.  714a),  there  was  another  sort  of  sacrifice  con 
nected  with  the  Passover,  as  well  as  with  the  other 
great  festivals,  called  in  the  Talmud  nV3n  (Cha 
gigah,  i.  e.  " festivity").  It  was  a  voluntary  peace- 
offering  made  by  private  individuals.  The  victim 
might  be  taken  either  from  the  flock  or  the  herd. 
It  might  be  either  male  or  female,  but  it  must  be 
without  blemish.  The  offerer  laid  his  hand  upon 
its  head  and  slew  it  at  the  door  of  the  sanctuary. 
The  blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  and  the  i'at 
of  the  inside,  with  the  kidneys,  was  burned  by  the 
priest.  The  breast  was  given  to  the  priest  as  a 
wave-offering,  and  the  nght  shoulder  as  a  heave- 
offeiing  (Lev.  iii.  1-5,  vii.  29-34).  What  remained 
of  the  victim  might  be  eaten  by  the  offerer  and  his 
guests  on  the  day  on  which  it  was  slain,  and  on 
the  day  following ;  but  if  any  portion  was  left  till 
the  third  day,  it  was  burned  (Lev.  vii.  16-18; 
Pesach.  vi.  4).  The  connexion  of  these  free-will- 
peace-offerings  with  the  festivals,  appears  to  be 
indicated  Num.  x.  10 ;  Deut.  xiv.  26 ;  2  Chr. 
xxx.  22,  and  they  are  included  under  the  term 
Passover  in  Deut.  xvi.  2 — "  Thou  shalt  therefore 
sacrifice  the  passover  unto  the  Lord  thy  God,  of 
the  flock  and  of  the  herd."  Onkelos  here  under 
stands  the  command  to  sacrifice  from  the  flock,  to 
refer  to  the  paschal  lamb ;  and  that  to  sacrifice 
from  the  herd,  to  the  Chagigah.  But  it  seems 
more  probable  that  both  the  flock  and  the  herd 
refer  to  the  Chagigah,  as  there  is  a  specific  command 
respecting  the  paschal  lamb  in  vers.  5-7.  (See 
De  Muis'  note  in  the  Grit.  Sac. ;  and  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Heb.  on  John  xviii.  28.)  There  are  evidently 
similar  references,  2  Chr.  xxx.  22-24,  and  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  7.  Hezekiah  and  his  princes  gave  away  at  the 
great  Passover  which  he  celebrated,  two  thousand 
bullocks  and  seventeen  thousand  sheep;  and  Josiah, 
on  a  similar  occasion,  is  said  to  have  supplied  the 
people  at  his  own  cost  with  lambs  "  for  the  Passover 
offerings,"  besides  three  thousand  oxen.  From  these 
passages  and  others,  it  may  be  seen  that  the  eating 
of  the  Chag'gah  was  an  occasion  of  social  festivity 


as  described  in  the  Mishna.     See  p.  7146. 
y  On  this  text,  see  PENTECOST. 
1  There  is  no  mention  of  the  Omer  in  Peeachim. 


718 


PASSOVER 


connected  with  the  festivals,  and  especially  with  the 
Passover.  The  principal  day  for  sacrificing  the 
Passover  Chagigah,  was  the  15th  of  Nisan,  the 
first  day  of  holy  convocation,  unless  it  happened  to 
be  the  weekly  sabbath.  The  paschal  lamb  might 
be  slain  on  the  sabbath,  but  not  the  Chagigah. 
With  this  exception,  the  Chagigah  might  be  ottered 
on  any  day  of  the  festival,  and  on  some  occasions  a 
Chagigah  victim  was  slain  on  the  14th,  especially 
when  the  paschal  lamb  was  likely  to  prove  too 
small  to  serve  as  meat  for  the  party  (Pesach.  iv. 
4,  x.  3 ;  Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  c.  xii. ;  Reland, 
Ant.  iv.  c.  ii.  §2). 

That  the  Chagigah  might  be  boiled,  as  well  as 
roasted,  is  proved  by  2  Chr.  xxxv.  13,  "  And  they 
roasted  the  passover  with  fire  according  to  the  ordi 
nance  :  but  the  other  holy  offerings  sod  they  in  pots, 
and  in  caldrons,  and  in  pans,  and  divided  them 
speedily  among  the  people." 

(»'.)  Release  of  Prisoners. — It  is  a  question  whe 
ther  the  release  of  a  prisoner  at  the  Passover  (Matt, 
xxvii.  15  ;  Mark  xv.  6 ;  Luke  xxiii.  17 ;  John  xviii. 
39)  was  a  custom  of  Roman  origin  resembling  what 
took  place  at  the  lectisternium  (Liv.  v.  13);  and, 
in  later  times,  on  the  birthday  of  an  emperor ;  or 
whether  it  was  an  old  Hebrew  usage  belonging  to 
the  festival,  which  Pilate  allowed  the  Jews  to  retain. 
Grotius  argues  in  favour  of  the  former  notion  (On 
Matt,  xxvii.  15).  But  others  (Hottinger,  Schoett- 
gen,  Winer)  consider  that  the  words  of  St.  John — 
tffri  8e  ffvvfi8fia  vfuv — render  it  most  probable 
that  the  custom  was  essentially  Hebrew.  Schoett- 
gen  thinks  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  it  in  Pe- 
sachim  (viii.  6),  where  it  is  permitted  that  a  lamb 
should  be  slain  on  the  14th  of  Nisan  for  the  special 
use  of  one  in  prison  to  whom  a  release  had  been 
promised.  The  subject  is  discussed  at  length  by 
Hottinger,  in  his  tract  De  Ritu  dimittendi  Reum  in 
Festo  Paschatis,  in  the  Thesaurus  Novus  Theologico- 
Philologicus. 

(k.~)  The  Second,  or  Little  Passover. — When  the 
Passover  was  celebrated  the  second  year,  in  the  wil 
derness,  certain  men  were  prevented  from  keeping  it, 
owing  to  their  being  defiled  by  contact  with  a  dead 
body.  Being  thus  prevented  from  obeying  the 
Divine  command,  they  came  anxiously  to  Moses  to 
inquire  what  they  should  do.  He  was  accordingly 
instructed  to  institute  a  second  Passover,  to  be 
observed' on  the  14th  of  the  following  month,  for 
the  benefit  of  any  who  had  been  hindered  from 
keeping  the  regular  one  in  Nisan  (Num.  ix.  11). 
The  Talmudists  called  this  the  Little  Passover 
(|bp  HDS  .  It  was  distinguished,  according  to 
them,  from  the  Greater  Passover  by  the  rites  lasting 
only  one  day,  instead  of  seven  days,  by  it  not  being 
required  that  the  Hallel  should  be  sung  during  the 
meal,  but  only  when  the  lamb  was  slaughtered, 
and  by  it  not  being  necessary  for  leaven  to  be  put 
out  of  the  houses  (Pesach.  ix.  3 ;  Buxt.  Lex.  Tal. 
col.  1766). 

(/.)  Observances  of  the  Passover  recorded  in 
Scripture. — Of  these  seven  are  of  chief  historical 
importance. 

1.  The  first  Passover  in  Egypt  (Ex.  xii.). 

2.  The  first  kept  in  the  desert  (Num.  ix.). 


PASSOVER 

There  is  no  notice  of  the  observance  of  any  other 
Passover  in  the  desert ;  and  Hupfeld,  Keil.and  others 
have  concluded  that  none  took  place  between  this 
one  and  that  at  Gilgal.  The  neglect  of  circumcision 
may  render  this  probable.  But  Calvin  imagines 
that  a  special  permission  was  given  to  the  people 
to  continue  the  ordinance  of  the  Passover.  (See 
Keil  on  Joshua  v.  10.) 

3.  That  celebrated  by  Joshua  at  Gilgal  imme 
diately  after  the  circumcision  of  the  people,  when 
the  manna  ceased  (Josh.  v.). 

4.  That  which  Hezekiah  observed  on  the  occasion 
of  his  restoring  the  national  worship  (2  Chr.  xxx.). 
Owing  to  the  impurity  of  a  considerable  proportion 
of  the  priests  in  the  month  Nisan,  this  Passover 
was  not  held  till  the  second  month,  the  proper  time 
for  the  Little  Passover.    The  postponement  was  de 
termined  by  a  decree  of  the  congregation.     By  the 
same  authority,  the  festival  was  repeated  through 
a  second  seven  days  to  serve  the  need  of  the  vast 
multitude  who  wished  to  attend  it.     To  meet  the 
case  of  the  probable  impurity  of  a  great  number 
of  the  people,   the    Levites  were   commanded   to 
slaughter  the  lambs,  and  the  king  prayed  that  the 
Lord  would  pardon  every  one  who  was  penitent, 
though  his  legal  pollution  might  be  upon  him. 

5.  The  Passover  of  Josiah  in  the  eighteenth  year 
of  his  reign  (2  Chr.  xxrv.).     On  this  occasion,  as 
in  the  Passover  of  Hezekiah,  the  Levites  appear  to 
have  slain  the  lambs  (ver.  6),  and  it  is  expressly 
stated  that  they  flayed  them. 

6.  That  celebrated  by  Ezra  after  the  return  from 
Babylon  (Ezr.  vi.).     On  this  occasion,   also,   the 
Levites  slew  the  lambs,  and  for  the  same  reason  as 
they  did  in  Hezekiah's  Passover. 

7.  The  last  Passover  of  our  Lord's  life. 

III.  THE  LAST  SUPPER. 

1  Whether  or  not  the  meal  at  which  our  Lord 
instituted  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  was  the 
paschal  supper  according  to  the  law,  is  a  question 
of  great  difficulty.  No  point  in  the  Gospel  history 
has  been  more  disputed.  If  we  had  nothing  to 
guide  us  but  the  three  first  Gospels,  no  doubt  of  the 
kind  could  well  be  raised,  though  the  narratives 
may  not  be  free  from  difficulties  in  themselves. 
We  find  them  speaking,  in  accordance  with  Jewish 
usage,  of  the  day  of  the  supper  as  that  on  which 
"  the  Passover  must  be  killed,"  and  as  "  the  first  day 
of  unleavened  bread""  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark  xiv. 
12;  Luke  xxii.  7).  Each  relates  that  the  use  of 
the  guest-chamber  was  secured  in  the  manner  usual 
with  those  who  came  from  a  distance  to  keep  the 
festival.  Each  states  that  "  they  made  ready  the 
Passover,"  and  that,  when  the  evening  was  come, 
our  Lord,  taking  the  place  of  the  head  of  the  family, 
sat  down  with  the  twelve.  He  Himself  distinctly 
calls  the  meal  " this  Passover"  (Luke  xxii.  15, 16). 
After  a  thanksgiving,  he  passes  round  the  first  cup 
of  wine  (Luke  xxii.  17),  and,  when  the  supper  is 
ended,  the  usual  "  cup  ot  blessing"  (comp.  Luke  xxii. 
20  ;  1  Cor.  x.  16,  xi.  25).  A  hymn  is  then  sung 
(Matt.  xxvi.  30  ;  Mark  xiv.  26),  which  It  is  reason 
able  to  suppose  was  the  last  part  of  the  Hallel. 

If  it  be  granted  that  the  supper  was  eaten  on  the 


»  Josepbus  In  like  manner  calls  the  14th  of  Nisan  the 
first  day  of  unleavened  bread  (B.  J.  v.  3,  $1);  and  he 
speaks  of  the  festival  of  the  Passover  as  lasting  eight 
days  (Ant.  ii.  15,  }1).  But  he  elsewhere  calls  the  15th 
of  Nisan  "  the  commencement  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread."  (Ant.  HI.  10,  $5.)  KitliiT  mode  of  shaking  was 


evidently  allowable :  in  one  case  regarding  it  as  a  matter 
of  fact  that  the  eating  of  unleavened  bread  began  on  the 
14th;  and  in  the  other,  distinguishing  the  feast  of  un 
leavened  bread,  lasting  from  the  first  day  of  holy  convo 
cation  to  the  concluding  one,  from  the  paschal  meal. 


PASSOVER 

evening  of  the  14th  of  Nisan,  the  apprehension, 
tri.il,  and  crucifixion  of  our  Lord,  must  have  oc 
curred  on  Friday  the  15th,  the  day  of  holy  convo 
cation,  which  was  the  first  of  the  seven  days  of  the 
Passover  week.  The  weekly  sabbath  on  which  He 
lay  in  the  tomb  was  the  16th,  and  the  Sunday  of 
the  resurrection  was  the  17th. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  if  we  had  no  information 
but  that  which  is  to  be  gathered  from  St.  John's 
Gospel,  we  could  not  hesitate  to  infer  that  the  even 
ing  of  the  supper  was  that  of  the  13th  of  Nisan, 
the  day  preceding  that  of  the  paschal  meal.  It 
appears  to  be  spoken  of  as  occurring  before  the  feast 
of  the  Passover  (xiii.  1,  2).  Some  of  the  disciples 
suppose,  that  Christ  told  Judas,  while  they  were  at 
supper,  to  buy  what  they  "had  need  of  against  the 
feast"  (xiii.  29).  In  the  night  which  follows  the 
supper,  the  Jews  will  not  enter  the  praetorium  lest 
they  should  be  defiled  and  so  not  able  to  "  eat  the 
Passover"  (xviii.  28).  When  our  Lord  is  before 
Pilate,  about  to  be  led  out  to  crucifixion,  we  are 
told  that  it  was  "the  preparation  of  the  Passover" 
(xix.  14).  After  the  crucifixion,  the  Jews  are  soli 
citous,  "  because  it  was  the  preparation,  that  the 
bodies  should  not  remain  upon  the  cross  on  the 
Sabbath  day,  for  that  Sabbath  day  was  a  high  day  " 
(xix.  31). 

If  we  admit,  in  accordance  with  the  first  view  of 
these  passages,  that  the  last  supper  was  on  the  1 3th 
of  Nisan,  our  Lord  must  have  been  crucified  on  the 
14th,  the  day  on  which  the  paschal  lamb  was  slain 
and  eaten,  He  lay  in  the  grave  on  the  15th  (which 
was  a  "  high  day"  or  double  sabbath,  because  the 
weekly  sabbath  coincided  with  the  day  of  holy  eon- 
vocation),  and  the  Sunday  of  the  resurrection  was 
the  16th. 

It  is  alleged  that  this  view  of  the  case  is  strength 
ened  by  certain  facts  in  the  narratives  of  the  synop 
tical  gospels,  as  well  as  that  of  St.  John,  comparec 
with  the  law  and  with  what  we  know  of  Jewish 
customs  in  later  times.  If  the  meal  was  the  paschal 
supper,  the  law  of  Ex.  xii.  22,  that  none  "  shall  go 
out  of  the  door  of  his  house  until  the  morning,' 
must  have  been  broken,  not  only  by  Judas  (John 
xiii.  30),  but  by  our  Lord  and  the  other  disciples, 
(Luke  xxii.  39~).b  In  like  manner  it  is  said  tha 
the  law  for  the  observance  of  the  15th,  the  day  o 
holy  convocation  with  which  the  paschal  week  com 
menced  (Ex.  xii.  16 ;  Lev.  xxiii.  35  &c.),  and  some 
express  enactments  in  the  Talmud  regarding  lega 
proceedings  and  particular  details,  such  as  the  carry 
ing  of  spices,  must  have  been  infringed  by  th< 
Jewish  rulers  in  the  apprehending  of  Christ,  in  Hi 
trials  before  the  High-priest  and  the  Sanhedrim,  am 
in  His  crucifixion ;  and  also  by  Simon  of  Gyrene,  wh< 
'  was  coming  out  of  the  country  (  Mark  xv.  2 1 ;  Luk 
xxiii.  26),  by  Joseph  who  bought  fine  linen  (Mar 
xv.  46),  by  the  women  who  bought  spices  (Mark  xvi 
1 ;  Luke  xxiii.  56),  and  by  Nicodemus  who  brough 
to  the  tomb  a  hundred  pounds  weight  of  a  mixtur 
of  myrrh  and  aloes  (John  xix.  39).  The  sam 
objection  is  considered  to  lie  against  the  suppositio 
that  the  disciples  could  have  imagined,  on  the  even 
ing  of  the  Passover,  that  our  Lord  was  giving  direc 
tions  to  Judas  respecting  the  purchase  of  anythin 


PASSOVER 


719 


r  the  giving  of  alms  to  the  poor.     The  latter  act 
xcept  under  veiy  special  conditions)  would  have 
een  as  much  opposed  to  rabbinical  maxims  as  the 
ormer.* 

It  is  further  urged  that  the  expressions  of  our  Lord, 

My  time  is  at  hand"  (Matt.  xxvi.  18),  and  "this 

jassover"   (Luke  xxii.  15),  as  well  as  St.  Paul's 

esignating  it  as  "  the  same  night  that  He  was  be- 

rayed,"  instead  of  the  night  of  the  passover  (1  Cor. 

xi.   23),  and  his   identifying   Christ  as  our   slain 

>aschal  lamb  (1  Cor.  v.  7),  seem  to  point  to  the 

,ime  of  the  supper  as  being  peculiar,  and  to  the 

ime  of  the  crucifixion  as  being  the  same  as  that 

>f  the  killing  of  the  lamb  (Neander  and  Liicke). 

It  is  not  surprising  that  some  modern  critics 
should  have  given  up  as  hopeless  the  task  of  recon- 
:iling  this  difficulty.  Several  have  rejected  the 
narrative  of  St.  John  (Bretschneider,  Weisse),  but 

greater   number   (especially  De   Wette,   Usteri, 

wald,  Meyer,  and  Theile)  have  taken  an  opposite 

course,  and  have  been  content  with  the  notion  that 

the  three  first  Evangelists  made  a  mistake  and  con- 

ibunded  the  meal  with  the  Passover. 

2.  The  reconciliations  which  have  been  attempted 
fall  under  three  principal  heads : — 

i.  Those  which  regard  the  supper  at  which  our 
Lord  washed  the  feet  of  His  disciples  (John  xiii.), 
as  having  been  a  distinct  meal  eaten  one  or  more 
days  before  the  regular  Passover,  of  which  our  Lord 
partook  in  due  course  according  to  the  synoptical 
narratives. 

ii.  Those  in  which  n  is  endeavoured  to  establish 
that  the  meal  was  eaten  on  the  13th,  and  that  our 
Lord  was  crucified  on  the  evening  of  the  true 
paschal  supper. 

iii.  Those  in  which  the  most  obvious  view  of  the 
first  three  narratives  is  defended,  and  in  which  it  is 
attempted  to  explain  the  apparent  contradictions  in 
St.  John,  and  the  difficulties  in  reference  to  the 
law. 

(i.)  The  first  method  has  the  advantage  of  fur 
nishing  the  most  ready  way  of  accounting  for  St. 
John's  silence  on  the  institution  of  the  Holy  Com 
munion.  It  has  been  adopted  by  Maldonat,d  Light- 
foot,  and  Bengel,  and  more  recently  by  Kaiser.6 
Lightfoot  identifies  the  supper  of  John  xiii.  with 
the  one  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper  at  Bethany 
two  days  before  the  Passover,  when  Mary  poured 
the  ointment  on  the  head  of  our  Saviour  (Matt. 
xxvi.  6,  Mark  xiv.  3) ;  and  quaintly  remarks, 
"  While  they  are  grumbling  at  the  anointing  of  His 
head,  He  does  not  scruple  to  wash  their  feet."* 
Bengel  supposes  that  it  was  eaten  only  the  evening 
before  the  Passover.8 

But  any  explanation  founded  on  the  supposition 
of  two  meals  appears  to  be  rendered  untenable  by 
the  context.  The  fact  that  all  four  Evangelists 
introduce  in  the  same  connexion  the  foretelling  of 
the  treachery  of  Judas  with  the  dipping  of  the  sop, 
and  of  the  denials  of  St.  Peter  and  the  going  out  to 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  can  hardly  leave  a  doubt  that 
they  are  speaking  of  the  same  meal.  Besides  this, 
the  explanation  does  not  touch  the  greatest  diffi 
culties,  which  are  those  connected  with  "  the  day  of 
preparation." 


•>  It  has  been  stated  (p.  713  noteh)  that,  according  to 
Jewish  authorities,  this  law  was  disused  In  later  times. 
But  even  if  this  were  not  the  case,  it  does  not  seem  that 
there  can  be  much  difficulty  in  adopting  the  arrangement 
of  (Jroswell's  Harmony,  that  the  party  did  not  leave  the 
house  to  go  over  the  brook  till  after  midnight. 

«  Ligutlbot,  Urn:  Jleb.  on  Mutt,  xxvii.  1. 


*  On  John  xiii.  1. 

e  Chronolngie  und  Harnumie  der  vier  Ev.  Mentioned 
by  Tischendorf,  Synop.  Evang.  p.  xlv. 

'  Ex.  Heb.,  on  John  xiii.  2,  and  Matt.  xxvi.  6.  Also, 
'Gleanings  from  Exodus,"  No.  XIX. 

«  On  Matt.  xxvi.  17,  and  John  xviii.  28. 


720 


PASSOVER 


(ii.)  The  current  of  opinion  h  in  modem  times  has 
set  in  favour  of  taking  the  more  obvious  interpreta 
tion  of  the  passages  in  St.  John,  that  the  supper 
was  eaten  on  the  13th,  and  that  Our  Lord  was  cru 
cified  on  the  14th.  It  must,  however,  be  admitted 
that  most  of  those  who  advocate  this  view  in  some 
degree  ignore  the  difficulties  which  it  raises  in  any 
respectful  interpretation  of  the  synoptical  narratives. 
Tittmann  (Meletetnata,  p.  476)  simply  remarks 
that  if  irp&-n\  rwv  atynoor  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark 
xiv.  12)  should  be  explained  as  irporfpa  ra>v  a£vn.eov. 
Item  Alford,  while  he  believes  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John  "absolutely  excludes  such  a  supposition  as 
that  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  ate  the  usual  Pass 
over,"  acknowledges  the  difficulty  and  dismisses  it 
(on  Matt.  xxvi.  17). 

Those  who  thus  hold  that  the  supper  was  eaten 
on  the  13th  day  of  the  month  have  devised  various 
ways  of  accounting  for  the  circumstance,  of  which 
the  following  are  the  most  important.  It  will  be 
observed  that  in  the  first  three  the  supper  is  re 
garded  as  a  true  paschal  supper,  eaten  a  day  before 
the  usual  time ;  and  in  the  other  two,  as  a  meal  of  a 
peculiar  kind. 

(a.)  It  is  assumed  that  a  party  of  the  Jews,  pro 
bably  the  Sadducees  and  those  who  inclined  towards 
them,  used  to  eat  the  Passover  one  day  before  the 
rest,  and  that  our  Lord  approved  of  their  practice. 
But  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  historical  evidence  of 
the  existence  of  any  party  which  might  have  held 
such  a  notion  until  the  controversy  between  the 
Rabbinists  and  the  Karaites  arose,  which  was  not 
much  before  the  eighth  century.1 

(6.)  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  great  boay 
of  the  Jews  had  gone  wrong  in  calculating  the  true 
Passover-day,  placing  it  a  day  too  late,  and  that 
our  Lord  ate  the  Passover  on  what  was  really  the 
14th,  but  what  commonly  passed  as  the  13th. 
This  was  the  opinion  of  Beza,  Bucer,  Calovius,  and 
Scaliger.  It  is  favoured  by  Stier.  But  it  is  utterly 
unsupported  by  historical  testimony. 

(c.)  Calvin  supposed  that  on  this  occasion,  though 
our  Lord  thought  it  right  to  adhere  to  the  true 
legal  time,  the  Jews  ate  the  Passover  on  the  15th 
instead  of  the  14th,  in  order  to  escape  from  the 
burden  of  two  days  of  strict  observance  (the  day  of 
holy  convocation  and  the  weekly  sabbath)  coming 
together.*  But  that  no  practice  of  this  kind  could 
have  existed  so  early  as  our  Lord's  time  is  satis 
factorily  proved  in  Cocceius'  note  to  Sanhedrim, 
i.  §2.» 

(d.)  Grotius  m  thought  that  the  meal  was  a  iraerxa 
fi.vrifjiovf\mK6v  (like  the  paschal  feast  of  the  modern 
Jews,  and  such  as  might  have  been  observed  during 
the  Babylonian  captivity),  not  a  ira<rxa  Ovffijj.ov. 
But  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  such  a  mere 


PASSOVER 

commemorative  rite  was  ever  observed  till  after  tne 
destruction  of  the  Temple. 

(e.)  A  view  which  has  been  received  with  favour 
far  more  generally  than  either  of  the  preceding  is, 
that  the  Last  Supper  was  instituted  by  Christ  for 
the  occasion,  in  order  that  He  might  Himself  sutler 
on  the  proper  evening  on  which  the  paschal  lamb 
was  slain.  Neander  says,  "He  foresaw  that  He 
would  have  to  leave  His  disciples  before  the  Jewish 
Passover,  and  determined  to  give  a  peculiar  mean 
ing  to  His  last  meal  with  them,  and  to  place  it  in  a 
peculiar  relation  to  the  Passover  of  the  Old  Cove 
nant,  the  place  of  which  was  to  be  taken  by  the 
meal  of  the  New  Covenant "  (Life  of  Christ,  §265)." 
This  view  is  substantially  the  same  as  that  held  by 
Clement,  Origen,  Erasmus,  Calmet,  Kuinoel,  Winer, 
Altbrd.o 

Erasmus  (Paraphrase  on  John  xiii.  1,  xviii.  28, 
Luke  xxii.  7)  and  others  have  called  it  an  "  anticipa 
tory  Passover,"  with  the  intention,  no  doubt,  to  help 
on  a  reconciliation  between  St.  John  and  the  other 
Evangelists.  But  if  this  view  is  to  stand,  it  seems 
better,  in  a  formal  treatment  of  the  subject,  not  to 
call  it  a  Passover  at  all.  The  difference  between 
it  and  the  Hebrew  rite  must  have  been  essential. 
Even  if  a  lamb  was  eaten  in  the  supper,  it  can  hardly 
be  imagined  that  the  priests  would  have  performed 
the  essential  acts  of  sprinkling  the  blood  and  offering 
the  fat  on  any  day  besides  the  legal  one  (see  Mai- 
monides  quoted  by  Otho,  Lex.  p.  501).  It  could 
not  therefore  have  been  a  true  paschal  sacrifice. 

(iii.)  They  who  take  the  facts  as  they  appear  to  lie 
on  the  surface  of  the  synoptical  narratives  f  start  from 
a  simpler  point.  They  have  nothing  unexpected  in 
the  occurrences  to  account  for,  but  they  have  to 
show  that  the  passages  in  St.  John  may  be  fairly 
interpreted  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  interfere 
with  their  own  conclusion,  and  to  meet  the  objec 
tions  suggested  by  the  laws  relating  to  the  observ 
ance  of  the  festival.  We  shall  give  in  succession, 
as  briefly  as  we  can,  what  appear  to  be  their  best 
explanations  of  the  passages  in  question. 

(a.)  John  xiii.  1,  2.  Does  vpb  -Hjj  foprys  limit 
the  time  only  of  the  proposition  in  the  first  verse,  or 
is  the  limitation  to  be  carried  on  to  verse  2,  so  as  to 
refer  to  the  supper?  In  the  latter  case,  for  which 
De  Wette  and  others  say  there  is  "  a  logical  neces 
sity,"  fls  Tf'Xoj  yydirrifffv  avrovs  must  refer 
more  directly  to  the  manifestation  of  His  love 
which  He  was  about  to  give  to  His  disciples  in 
washing  their  feet ;  and  the  natural  conclusion  is, 
that  the  meal  was  one  eaten  before  the  paschal 
supper.  Bochart,  however,  contends  that  irpb  rfjs 
toprris  is  equivalent  to  Iv  T<£  irpoeoprltp,  "  quod 
ita  praecedit  f'estum,  ut  tamen  sit  pars  festi."  Stier 
agrees  with  him.  Others  take  ir<£(rxa  to  mean  the 


h  LUcke,  Ideler,  Tittmann,  Bleek,  De  Wette,  Neander, 
Tischendorf,  Winer,  Ebrard.  Alford,  Ellicott ;  of  earlier 
critics,  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Suicer,  Carpzov. 

*  Iken  (Dissertations,  vol.  ii.  diss.  10  and  12),  forget 
ting  the  late  date  of  the  Karaite  controversy,  supposed 
that  our  Lord  might  have  followed  them  In  taking  the 
day  which,  according  to  their  custom,  was  calculated  from 
the  first  appearance  of  the  moon.    Carpzov  (App.  Crit. 
p.  430)  advocates  the  same  notion,  without  naming  the 
Karaites.-     Ebrard  conjectures  that  some  of  the  poorer 
Galilaeans  may  have  submitted  to  eat  the  Passover  a  day 
too  early  to  suit  the  convenience  of  the  priests,  who  were 
overdone  with  I  he  labour  of  sprinkling  the  blood  and  (as 
he  strangely  imagines)  of  slaughtering  the  lambs. 

*  Harm,  in  Matt.  xxvl.  17,  ii.  305,  edit.  Tholuck. 
Surenhusius'  Miihna,  iv.  209. 


™  On  Matt.  xxvi.  19,  and  John  xiii.  1. 

»  Assuming  this  view  to  be  correct,  may  not  the  change 
in  the  day  made  by  Our  Lord  have  some  analogy  to  the 
change  of  the  weekly  day  of  rest  from  the  seventh  to  the 
first  day  ? 

0  Dean  EUlcott  regards  the  meal  as  "  a  paschal  supper  " 
eaten  twenty-four  hours  before  that  of  the  other  Jews 
41  within  what  were  popularly  considered  the  limits  of  the 
festival,"  and  would  understand  the  expression  in  Ex 
xii.  6,  "  between  the  two  evenings,"  as  denoting  the  time 
between  the  evenings  of  the  13th  and  14th  of  the  month. 
But  see  note*  p.  714.  A  somewhat  similar  explanation  is 
given  in  the  Journal  of  Sacred  Literature  for  Oct.  1861. 

v  Lightfoot,  Bochart,  Reland,  Schoettgen,  Tholuck,  Ols- 
hausen,  Stier,  Lange,  Hengstenberg,  Robinson,  Davidson, 
Fairbairn. 


PASSOVER 

seven  Jays  of  unleavened  bread  as  not  including  the 
eating  of  the  lamb,  and  justify  this  limitation  by 
St.  Luke  xxii.  1  (i]  topr^i  riav  dtypoav  i] 


PASSOVER 


721 


See  note  ',  p.  723.  But  not  a  few 
of  those  who  take  this  side  of  the  main  question 
(Olshausen,  Wieseler,  Tholuck,  and  others)  regard 
the  first  verse  as  complete  in  itself;  understanding 
its  purport  to  be  that  "  Before  the  Passover,  in 
the  prospect  of  his  departure,  the  Saviour's  love 
was  actively  called  forth  towards  his  followers,  and 
He  gave  proof  of  his  love  to  the  last."  Tholuck 
vemarks  that  the  expression  Sfiirvov  ytvofntvov 
(Tischeudorf  reads  •yivofj.tvov),  "  while  supper  was 
going  on"  (not  as  in  the  A.  V.,  "supper  being 
ended  ")  is  very  abrupt  if  we  refer  it  to  anything 
except  the  passover.  The  Evangelist  would  theu 
rather  have  used  some  such  expression  as,  KO.\ 
firuirjffav  aiirtf  fieiTrvov  ;  and  he  considers  that 
this  view  is  confirmed  by  xxi.  20,  where  this 
supper  is  spoken  of  as  if  it  was  something  familiarly 
known  and  not  peculiar  in  its  character  —  fcj  ical 
dvtTTffffv  tv  Ttf  Sf'nrvcf.  On  the  whole,  Neander 
himself  admits  that  nothing  can  safely  be  inferred 
from  John  xiii.  1,  2,  in  favour  of  the  supper  having 
taken  place  on  the  13th. 

.  (6.)  John  xiii.  29.  It  is  urged  that  the  things  of 
which  they  had  "  need  against  the  feast,"  might 
have  been  the  provisions  for  the  Chagigah,  perhaps 
.with  what  else  was  required  for  the  seven  days  of 
unleavened  bread.  The  usual  day  for  sacrificing 
the  Chagigah  was  the  15th,  which  was  then  com 
mencing  (see  p.  7  18,  a.).  But  there  is  another  diffi 
culty,  in  the  disciples  thinking  it  likely  either  that 
purchases  could  be  made,  or  that  alms  could  be 
given  to  the  poor,  on  a  day  of  holy  convocation. 
This  is  of  course  a  difficulty  of  the  same  kind 
as  that  which  meets  us  in  the  purchases  actually 
made  by  the  women,  by  Joseph  and  Nicodemus. 
Is'ow,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  we  have  no  proof 
that  the  strict  Rabbinical  maxims  which  have  been 
appealed  to  on  this  point  existed  in  the  time  of  our 
Saviour,  and  that  it  is  highly  probable  that  the 
letter  of  the  law  in  regard  to  trading  was  habitually 
relaxed  in  the  case  of  what  was  required  for  reli 
gious  rites,  or  for  burials.  There  was  plainly  a 
distinction  recognized  between  a  day  of  holy  convo 
cation  and  the  Sabbath  in  the  Mosaic  law  itself,  in 
respect  to  the  obtaining  and  preparation  of  food, 
under  which  head  the  Chagigah  might  come  (Ex.  xii. 
16)  ;  and  in  the  Mishna  the  same  distinction  is 
clearly  maintained  (Yom  Tob,  v.  2,  and  Megilla, 
i.  5).  It  also  appears  that  the  School  of  Hillel 
allowed  more  liberty  in  certain  particulars  on  fes 
tivals  and  fasts  in  the  night  than  in  the  day  time.i 
And  it  is  expressly  stated  in  the  Mishna,  that  on  the 
Sabbath  itself,  wine,  oil,  and  bread,  could  be  obtained 
by  leaving  a  cloak  (IV  ?t3),r  as  a  pledge,  and  when 
the  14th  of  Nisan  fell  on  a  Sabbath  the  paschal  lamb 

i  I'esachim,  iv.  5.  The  special  application  of  the  licence 
is  rather  obscure.  See  Bartenora's  note.  Comp.  also 
1'esach.  vi.  2. 

'  This  word  may  mean  an  outer  garment  of  any  form. 
lint  It  is  more  frequently  used  to  denote  the  fringed  scarf 
•worn  by  every  Jew  in  the  service  of  the  synagogue  (  Buxt. 
•Lex.  Talm.  col.  877). 

"  St.  Augustine  says,  "  O  impia  coecitas  !  Habitaculo 
videlicet  contaminarentur  alieno,  et  non  contaminarentur 
Rcelere  proprio  ?  Alienigenae  judicis  praetorio  contaminari 
timebant,  et  fratris  Innocentis  sanguine  non  timebant. 
1  lies  enim  agere  coeperant  azymorum  :  quibus  diebus  con- 
taminatio  illis  prat  in  alienigenae  habitaculum  intrare  " 
(Tract,  cxiv.  in  Joan,  xviii.  2). 
VOL.  II. 


could  be  obtained  in  like  manner  (Sabbath,  xn\\\.  1). 
Alms  also  could  be  given  to  the  poor  under  certain 
conditions  (Sabbath,  i.  1). 

(c.)  John  xviii.  28.  The  Jews  refused  to  enter  the 
praetorium,  lest  they  should  be  defiled  and  so  dis 
qualified  from  eating  the  Passover.  Neander  and 
others  deny  that  this  passage  can  possibly  refer  to 
anything  but  the  paschal  supper.  But  it  is  alleged 
that  the  words  tva  (pdyaxri  ri  iracr^a,  may  either 
be  taken  in  a  general  sense  as  meaning  "that  they 
might  go  on  keeping  the  passover,"  •  or  that  -rb 
irdtrxoi  niay  be  understood  specifically  to  denote  the 
Chagigah.  That  it  might  be  so  used  is  rendered 
probable  by  Luke  xxii.  1  ;  and  the  Hebrew  word 
which  it  represents  (nD3),  evidently  refers  equally 
to  the  victims  for  the  Chagigah  and  the  paschal 
lamb  (Deut.  xvi.  2),  where  it  is  commanded 
that  the  Passover  should  be  sacrificed  "  of  the 
flock  and  the  herd."*  In  the  plural  it  is  used 
in  the  same  manner  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  7,  9).  It  is 
moreover  to  be  kept  in  view  that  the  Passover 
might  be  eaten  by  those  who  had  incurred  a  degree 
of  legal  impurity,  and  that  this  was  not  the  case  in 
respect  to  the  Chagigah.'  Joseph  appears  not  to 
have  participated  in  the  scruple  of  the  other  rulers, 
as  he  entered  the  praetorium  to  beg  the  body  of 
Jesus  (Mark  xv.  43).  Lightfoot  (Ex.  Heb.  iu 
loc.)  goes  so  far  as  to  draw  an  argument  in  favour 
of  the  14th  being  the  day  of  the  supper  from  the 
very  text  in  question.  He  says  that  the  slight 
defilement  incurred  by  entering  a  Gentile  house, 
had  the  Jews  merely  intended  to  eat  the  supper  in 
the  evening,  might  have  been  done  away  in  good 
time  by  mere  ablution  ;  but  that  as  the  festival  had 
actually  commenced,  and  they  were  probably  just 
about  to  eat  the  Chagigah,  they  could  not  resort 
even  to  such  a  simple  mode  of  purification.1' 

(d.)  John  xix.  14.  "  The  preparation  of  the  Pass 
over"  at  first  sight  would  seem  as  if  it  must  be  the 
preparation  for  the  Passover  on  the  14th,  a  time  set 
apart  for  making  ready  for  the  paschal  week  and  for 
the  paschal  supper  in  particular.  It  is  naturally  so 
understood  by  those  who  advocate  the  notion  that  the 
last  supper  was  eaten  on  the  1 3th.  But  they  who 
take  the  opposite  view  affirm  that,  though  there 
was  a  regular  "  preparation  "  for  the  Sabbath,  there 
is  no  mention  of  any  "  preparation "  for  the  fes 
tivals  (Bochart,  Kelaud,  Tholuck,  Hengstenberg). 
The  word  vapour Ktwfi  is  expressly  explained  by 
•jrpoffd.f3l3a.Tov  (Mark  xv.  42 :  Lachmann  reads 
irpbs  ffdPfiaTOv.)  It  seems  to  be  essentially  con 
nected  with  the  Sabbath  itself  (John  xix.  31).r 
There  is  no  mention  whatever  of  the  preparation 
for  the  Sabbath  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  it  is 
mentioned  by  Josephus  (Ant.  xvi.  6,  §2),  and  it 
would  seem  from  him  that  the  time  of  preparation 
formally  commenced  at  the  ninth  hour  of  the 
sixth  day  of  the  week.  The  irpoffdfificlTov  is 


*  See  p.  717  6.,  and  Schoettgen  on  John  xviii.  28. 

"  See  2  Chr.  xxx.  17  ;  also  Pesadum,  vii.  4,  with  Mai. 
monides'  note. 

»  Dr.  Falrbairn  takes  the  expression,  "  that  they  might 
eat  the  Passover,"  in  its  limited  sense,  and  supposes  tha 
these  Jews,  in  their  determined  hatred,  were  willing  to  put 
off  the  meal  to  the  verge  of,  or  even  beyond,  the  legal  time 
(Hern.  Manual,  p.  341). 

i  It  cannot,  however,  be  denied  that  the  days  of  holy 
convocation  are  sometimes  designated  in  the  O.  T.  simply 
as  sabbaths  (Lev.  xvi.  31,  xxiii.  11,  32).  It  is  therefore 
not  quite  impossible  that  the  language  of  the  Gospels 
considered  by  itself,  might  refer  to  them.  [PENTECOST.! 

3  A 


722 


PASSOVER 


named  in  Judith  viii.  6  as  one  of  the  times  on 
which  devout  Jews  suspended  their  fasts.  It  was 
called  by  the  Rabbis  K^any,  quiet  est  712^  2ny 

(Buxt.  Lex.  Talm.  col.'  1659).  The  phrase  in 
John  xix.  14  may  thus  be  understood  as  the  pre 
paration  of  the  Sabbath  which  fell  in  the  Passover 
week.  This  mode  of  taking  the  expression  seems 
to  be  justified  by  Ignatius,  who  calls  the  Sabbath 
which  occurred  in  the  festival  adpfiarov  rov 
»o<rx«  (Ep-  °d  Phil.  13),  and  by  Socrates,  who 
calls  it  ffd&0arov  TTJJ  toprfis  (Hist.  Eccl.  v.  22). 
If  these  arguments  are  admitted,  the  day  of  the  pre 
paration  mentioned  in  the  Gospels  might  have  fallen 
ou  the  day  of  holy  convocation,  the  loth  of  Nisan. 

(e.)  John  xix.  31.  "  That  Sabbath  day  was  a  high 
day  " — rjntpa  (t.(yA\r\.  Any  Sabbath  occurring  in 
the  Passover  week  might  have  been  considered  "  a 
high  day,"  as  deriving  an  accession  of  dignity  from 
the  festival.  But  it  is  assumed  by  those  who  fix 
the  supper  on  the  13th  that  the  term  was  applied, 
owing  to  the  15th  being  "a  double  sabbath,''  from 
the  coincidence  of  the  day  of  holy  convocation  with 
the  weekly  festival.  Those,  on  the  other  hand,  who 
identify  the  supper  with  the  paschal  meal,  contend 
that  the  special  dignity  of  the  day  resulted  from  its 
being  that  on  which  the  Omer  was  offered,  and 
from  which  were  reckoned  the  fifty  days  to  Pen 
tecost.  One  explanation  of  the  term  seems  to  be  as 
good  as  the  other. 

(/.)  The  difficulty  of  supposing  that  our  Lord's 
apprehension,  trial,  and  crucifixion  took  place  on  the 
day  of  holy  convocation  has  been  strongly  urged.1 
If  many  of  the  rabbinical  maxims  for  the  observ 
ance  of  such  days  which  have  been  handed  down  to 
us  were  then  in  force,  these  occurrences  certainly 
could  not  have  taken  place.  But  the  statements 
which  refer  to  Jewish  usage  in  regard  to  legal  pro 
ceedings  on  sacred  days  are  very  inconsistent  with 
each  other.  Some  of  them  make  the  difficulty  equally 
great  whether  we  suppose  the  trial  to  have  taken 
place  on  the  14th  or  the  15th.  In  others,  there  are 
exceptions  permitted  which  seem  to  go  far  to  meet 
the  case  before  us.  For  example,  the  Mishna  forbids 
that  a  capital  offender  should  be  examined  in  the 
night,  or  on  the  day,  before  the  Sabbath  or  a  feast- 
day  (Sanhedrim,  iv.  1).  This  law  is  modified  by 
the  glosses  of  the  Gemara.*  But  if  it  had  been 
recognised  in  its  obvious  meaning  by  the  Jewish 
rulers,  they  would  have  outraged  it  in  as  great  a 
degree  on  the  preceding  day  (t.  e.  the  14th)  as  on 
the  day  of  holy  convocation  before  the  Sabbath. 
It  was  also  forbidden  to  administer  justice  on  a 
high  feast-day,  or  to  carry  arms  (  Yom  Tob,  v.  2). 
But  these  prohibitions  are  expressly  distinguished 
from  unconditional  precepts,  and  are  reckoned 
amongst  those  which  may  be  set  aside  by  circum 
stances.  The  members  of  the  Sanhedrim  were  for 
bidden  to  eat  any  food  on  the  same  day  after  con 
demning  a  criminal.1*  Yet  we  find  them  intending 
to  "  eat  the  Passover"  (John  xviii.  28)  after  pro 
nouncing  the  sentence  (Matt.  xxvi.  65,  66). 

It  was,  however,  expressly  permitted  that  the 


1  Especially  by  Greswell  (Dissert,  iii.  156). 

*  See  the  notes  of  Cocceius  in  Surenhusius,  Iv.  226. 

k  Bab.  Gem.  Sanhedrim,  quoted  by  Ltghtloot  on  Matt, 
xxvii.  1.  The  application  of  this  to  the  point  In  hand  will, 
however,  hinge  on  the  way  in  which  we  understand  It  not 
to  have  been  lawful  for  the  Jews  to  put  any  man  to  death 
(John  xviii.  31),  and  therefore  to  pronounce  sentence  in 
the  legal  sense.  If  we  suppose  that  the  Roman  govern 
ment  bad  not  deprived  them  of  the  power  of  life  and  death. 


PASSOVER 

Sanhedrim  might  assemble  on  the  Sabbath  as  well 
as  on  feast-days,  not  indeed  in  their  usual  chamber, 
but  in  a  place  near  the  court  of  the  women.*  And 
there  is  a  remarkable  passage  in  the  Mishna  in 
which  it  is  commanded  that  an  elder  not  submitting 
to  the  voice  of  the  Sanhedrim  should  be  kept  at 
Jerusalem  till  one  of  the  three  great  festivals,  and 
then  executed,  in  accordance  with  Deut.  xvii.  12,  13 
(Sanhedrim,  x.  4).  Nothing  is  said  to  lead  us  to 
infer  that  the  execution  could  not  take  place  on  one 
of  the  days  of  holy  convocation.  It  is,  however, 
hardly  necessary  to  refer  to  this,  or  any  similar 
authority,  in  respect  to  the  crucifixion,  which  w.-is 
carried  out  in  conformity  with  the  sentence  of  the 
Roman  procurator,  not  that  of  the  Sanhedrim. 

But  we  have  better  proof  than  either  the  Mishna 
or  the  Gemara  can  afford  that  the  Jews  did  not 
hesitate,  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  domination,  to 
carry  arms  and  to  apprehend  a  prisoner  on  a  solemn 
feast-day.  We  find  them  at  the  teast  of  Tabernacles, 
on  the  "  great  day  of  the  feast,"  sending  out  officers 
to  take  our  Lord,  and  rebuking  them  for  not  bring 
ing  Him  (John  vii.  32-45).  St.  Peter  also  was 
seized  during  the  Passover  (Acts  xii.  3,  4).  And, 
again,  the  reason  alleged  by  the  rulers  for  not  ap 
prehending  Jesus  was,  not  the  sanctity  of  the  festi 
val,  but  the  fear  of  an  uproar  among  the  multitude 
which  was  assembled  (Matt.  xxvi.  5). 

On  the  whole,  notwithstanding  the  express  de 
claration  of  the  Law  and  of  the  Mishna  that  the 
days  of  holy  convocation  were  to  be  observed  pre 
cisely  as  the  Sabbath,  except  iu  the  preparation  of 
food,  it  is  highly  probable  that  considerable  licence 
was  allowed  in  regard  to  them,  as  we  have 
already  observed.  It  is  very  evident  that  the 
festival  times  were  characterised  by  a  free  and 
jubilant  character  which  did  not  belong,  in  the 
same  degree,  to  the  Sabbath,  and  which  was  plainly 
not  restricted  to  the  days  which  fell  between  the 
days  of  holy  convocation  (Lev.'xxiii.  40;  Deut.  xii. 
7,  xiv.  26 :  see  p.  714).  It  should  also  be  observed 
that  while  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  was  enforced 
on  strangers  dwelling  amongst  the  Israelites,  such 
was  not  the  case  with  the  law  of  the  Festivals.  A 
greater  freedom  of  action  in  cases  of  urgent  need 
would  naturally  follow,  and  it  is  not  difficult  to 
suppose  that  the  women  who  "  rested  on  the  Sab 
bath-day  according  to  the  commandment "  had  pre 
pared  the  spices  and  linen  for  the  intombment  on 
the  day  of  holy  convocation.  To  say  nothing  of 
the  way  in  which  the  question  might  be  affected  by 
the  much  greater  licence  permitted  by  the  school  of 
Hillel  than  by  the  school  of  Shammai,  in  all  matters 
of  this  kind,  it  is  remarkable  that  we  find,  on  the 
Sabbath-day  itself,  not  only  Joseph  (Mark  xv.  43), 
but  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  coming  to  Pilate, 
and,  :vs  it  would  seem,  entering  the  praetorium 
(Matt,  xxvii.  62). 

3.  There  is  a  strange  story  preserved  in  the  Ge 
mara  (Sanhedrim,  vi.  2 )  that  Our  Lord  having  vainly 
endeavoured  during  forty  days  to  find  an  advocate, 
was  sentenced,  and,  on  the  14th  of  Nisan,  stoned, 
and  afterwards  hanged.  As  we  know  that  the 

it  may  have  been  to  avoid  breaking  their  law,  as  expressed 
tn  Sanhedrim,  Iv.  1,  that  they  wished  to  throw  the  matter 
on  the  procurator.  See  Biscoe,  Lectures  on  the  Acts,  p.  1 66 ; 
Scallger's  note  in  the  Critici  Sacri  on  John  xviii.  31  ; 
Lightfoot,  Ex.  Heb.,  Matt.  xxvi.  3,  and  John  xviii.  31, 
where  the  evidence  is  given  which  is  in  favour  of  the  Jews 
having  resigned  the  right  of  capital  punishment  forty  yours 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
c  Gem.  Sanhtdrim. 


PASSOVEK 

difficulty  of  the  Go<pel  narratives  had  been  per 
ceived  long  before  this  statement  could  have  been 
written,  and  as  the  two  opposite  opinions  on  the 
chief  question  were  both  current,  the  writer  might 
easily  have  taken  up  one  or  the  other.  The  state 
ment  cannot  be  regarded  as  worth  anything  hi  the 
way  of  evidence."1 

Not  much  use  can  be  made  in  the  controversy 
of  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers.  But  few  of 
them  attempted  to  consider  the  question  critically. 
Eusebius  (Hist.  Ecc.  v.  23,  24)  has  recorded  the 
traditions  which  were  in  favour  of  St.  John  having 
kept  Easter  on  the  14th  of  the  mouth.  It  has 
been  thought  that  those  traditions  gather  help  the 
conclusion  that  the  supper  was  ou  the  14th.  But 
the  question  on  which  Eusebius  brings  them  to  bear 
is  simply  whether  the  Christian  festival  should  be 
observed  on  the  14th,  the  day  tv  17  0{ifiy  -rb  trp6- 
&O.TOV  'lovbaiois  vporty6pev-ro,  on  whatever  day  of 
the  week  it  might  fall,  or  on  the  Sunday  of  the 
icsurrection.  It  seems  that  nothing  whatever  can 
be  safely  inferred  from  them  respecting  the  day  of 
the  month  of  the  supper  or  the  crucifixion.  Clement 
of  Alexandria  and  Origen  appeal  to  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John  as  deciding  in  favour  of  the  13th.  Chry- 
sostom  expresses  himself  doubtfully  between  the  two. 
•St.  Augustin  was  in  favour  of  the  I4th.« 

4.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John,  as  far  as  the  mere  succession  of  events  is 
concerned,  bears  consistent  testimony  in  favour  of 
the  last  supper  having  been  eaten  on  the  evening 
before  the  Passover.  That  testimony,  however, 
does  not  appear  to  be  so  distinct,  and  so  incapable 
of  a  second  interpretation,  as  that  of  the  synoptical 
Gospels,  in  favour  of  the  meal  having  been  the 
paschal  supper  itself,  at  the  legal  time  (see  espe 
cially  Matt.  xxvi.  17 ;  Mark  xiv.  1, 12  ;  Luke  xxii.  7). 
Whether  the  explanations  of  the  passages  in  St. 
John,  and  of  the  difficulties  resulting  from  the 
nature  of  the  occurrences  related,  compared  with 
the  enactments  of  the  Jewish  law,  be  considered 
satisfactory  or  not,  due  weight  should  be  given  to 
the  antecedent  probability  that  the  meal  was  no 
other  than  the  regular  Passover,  and  that  the  rea 
sonableness  of  the  contrary  view  cannot  be  main 
tained  without  some  artificial  theory,  having  no 
proper  foundation  either  in  Scripture  or  ancient 
testimony  of  any  kind. 

IV.  MEANING  OF  THE  PASSOVER. 
\.  Each  of  the  three  great  festivals  contained  a 


PASSOVER 


723 


reference  to  the  annual  course  of  nature.  Two,  at 
least,  of  them — the  first  and  the  last — also  comme 
morated  events  in  the  history  of  the  chosen  people. 
The  coincidence  of  the  times  of  their  observance  with 
the  most  marked  periods  in  the  process  of  gathering 
in  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  has  not  unnaturally  sug 
gested  the  notion  that  their  agricultural  significance 
is  the  more  ancient ;  that  in  fact  they  were  01  i- 
ginally  harvest  feasts  observed  by.  the  patriarchs, 
and  that  their  historical  meaning  was  superadded 
in  later  times  (Ewald,  Hupf'eldf ). 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  relation  to  the 
natural  year  expressed  in  the  Passover  was  less 
marked  than  that  in  Pentecost  or  Tabernacles,  while 
its  historical  import  was  deeper  and  more  pointed. 
It  seems  hardly  possible  to  study  the  history  of  the 
Passover  with  candour  and  attention,  as  it  stands  in 
the  Scriptures,  without  being  driven  to  the  con 
clusion  that  it  was,  at  the  very  first,  essentially  the 
commemoration  of  a  great  historical  fact.  That  part 
of  its  ceremonies  which  has  a  direct  agricultural 
reference — the  offering  of  the  Omer — holds  a  very 
subordinate  place. 

But  as  regai-ds  the  whole  of  the  feasts,  it  is  not 
very  easy  to  imagine  that  the  rites  which  belonged 
to  them  connected  with  the  harvest,  were  of  pa 
triarchal  origin.  Such  rites  were  adapted  for  the 
religion  of  an  agricultural  people,  not  for  that  of 
shepherds  like  the  patriarchs.  It  would  seem, 
therefore,  that  we  gain  but  little  by  speculating  on 
the  simple  impression  conveyed  in  the  Pentateuch, 
that  the  feasts  were  ordained  by  Moses  in  their 
integrity,  and  that  they  were  arranged  with  a  view 
to  the  religious  wants  of  the  people  when  they  were 
to  be  settled  in  the  Land  of  Promise. 

2.  The  deliverance  from  Egypt  was  regarded  as 
the  starting-point  of  the  Hebrew  nation.  The 
Israelites  were  then  raised  from  the  condition  of 
bondmen  under  a  foreign  tyrant  to  that  of  a  free 
people  owing  allegiance  to  no  one  but  Jehovah. 
"  Ye  have  seen,"  said  the  Lord,  "  what  I  did  unto 
the  Egyptians,  and  how  I  bare  you  on  eagles'  wings 
and  brought  you  unto  myself"  (Ex.  xix.  4). 
The  prophet  in  a  later  age  spoke  of  the  event  as 
a  creation  and  a  redemption  of  the  nation.  God 
declares  Himself  to  be  "  the  creator  of  Israel,"  in 
immediate  connexion  with  evident  allusions  to  His 
having  brought  them  out  of  Egypt;  such  as  His 
having  made  "  a  way  in  the  sea,  and  a  path  in  the 
mighty  waters,"  and  His  having  overthrown  "  the 
chariot  and  horse,  the  army  and  the  power"  (Is. 


A  Other  Rabbinical  authorities  countenance  the  state 
ment  that  Christ  was  executed  on  the  14th  of  the  month 
(see  Jost,  Judenth.  i.  404).  But  this  seems  to  be  a  case 
in  which,  for  the  reason  stated  above  numbers  do  not  add 
to  the  weight  of  the  testimony. 

•  Numerous  Patristic  authorities  are  stated  by  Mal- 
donat  on  Matt.  xxvi. 

1  Hupfeld  has  devised  an  arrangement  of  the  passages 
In  the  Pentateuch  bearing  on  the  Passover  so  as  to  show, 
according  to  this  theory,  their  relative  antiquity.  The 
order  is  as  follows: — (1)  Ex.  xxiii.  14-17 ;  (2)  Ex.  xxxiv. 
1S-26 ;  (3)  Ex.  xiil.  3-10;  (4)  Ex.  xii.  15-20  ;  (5)  Ex.  xii. 
1-14  ;  (6)  Ex.  xii.  43-50;  (7)  Num.  ix.  10-14. 

The  view  of  Baur,  that  the  Passover  was  an  astrono 
mical  festival  and  the  lamb  a  symbol  of  the  sign  Aries, 
and  that  of  Von  Bohlen,  that  it  resembled  the  sun-feast  of 
the  Peruvians,  are  well  exposed  by  Biihr  (Symbol ik).  Our 
own  Spencer  has  endeavoured  in  his  usual  manner  lo  show 
that  many  details  of  the  festival  were  derived  from  heathen 
sources,  though  he  admits  the  originality  of  the  whole. 

It  may  seem  at  first  sight  as  if  some  countenance  wcrr 
given  to  the  notion  that  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread 


was  originally  a  distinct  festival  from  the  Passover,  by 
such  passages  as  Lev.  xxiii.  6,  6  :  "  In  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord's  Passover ;  and  on 
the  fifteenth  day  of  the  same  month  is  the  feast  of  unlea 
vened  bread  unto  the  Lord :  seven  days  ye  must  eat  un 
leavened  bread  "  (see  also  Num.  xxviii.  16, 17).  Josephus 
in  like  manner  speaks  of  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread  as 
"following  the  Passover"  (Ant.  ill.  10,  $5).  But  such 
language  may  mean  no  more  than  the  distinction  between 
l  he  paschal  supper  and  the  seven  days  of  unleavened  bread, 
which  is  so  obviously  implied  in  the  fact  that  the  eating 
of  unleavened  bread  was  observed  by  the  country  Jews 
who  were  at  home,  though  they  could  not  partake  of  tho 
paschal  lamb  without  going  to  Jerusalem.  Every  member 
of  the  household  had  to  abstain  from  leavened  bread,  but 
some  only  went  up  to  the  paschal  meal.  (See  Maimon. 
De  Fermevtalo  et  Azymo.  vi.  1.)  It  is  evident  that  the 
common  usage,  in  later  times  at  least,  was  to  employ,  as 
equivalent  terms  thefeaft  of  tlie  Passover,  and  the  feast 
of  unleavened  bread  (Matt.  xxvi.  17;  Mark  xiv.  12; 
Luke  xxil.  l;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  2,  }l ;  X.  J.  \\.  1,  V3). 
Sec  note  ',  p.  718. 

3  A  2 


PASSOVER 

xliii.  1. 15-17).  The  Exodus  was  thus  looked  upon 
-as  the  birth  of  the  nation  ;  the  Passover  was  its 
annual  birth-day  feast.  Nearly  all  the  rites  of  the 
festival,  if  explained  in  the  most  natural  manner, 
appear  to  point  to  this  as  its  primary  meaning.  It 
was  the  yearly  memorial  of  the  dedication  of  the 
7>eople  to  Him  who  had  saved  their  first-born  from 
•tin1  destroyer,  in  order  that  they  might  be  made 
holy  to  Himself.  This  was  the  lesson  which  they 
were  to  teach  to  their  children  throughout  all 
generations.  When  the  young  Hebrew  asked  his 
father  regarding  the  paschal  lamb,  "  What  is  this  ?  " 
the  answer  prescribed  was,  "  By  strength  of  .hand 
the  Lord  brought  us  out  from  Egypt,  from  the  house 
of  bondage:  and  it  came  to  pass  when  Pharaoh 
•would  hardly  let  us  go,  that  the  Lord  slew  all  the 
first-bom  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  both  the  first-born 
of  man  and  the  first-born  of  beast ;  therefore  I 
sacrifice  to  the  Lord  all  that  openeth  the  womb, 
being  males ;  but  all  the  first-born  of  my  children 
I  redeem  "  (Ex.  xiii.  14,  15).  Hence,  in  the  periods 
of  great  national  restoration  in  the  times  of  Joshua, 
Hezekiah,  Josiah,  and  Ezra,  the  Passover  was  ob 
served  in  a  special  manner,  to  remind  the  people 
of  their  true  position,  and  to  mark  their  renewal  of 
the  covenant  which  their  fathers  had  made. 

3.  (a.)  The  paschal  lamb  must  of  course  be  re 
garded  as  the  leading  feature  in  the  ceremonial  of 
the  festival.  Some  Protestant  divines  during  the  last 
two  centuries  (Calov,  Cai-pzov),  laying  great  stress 
on  the  fact  that  nothing  is  said  in  the  law  respect 
ing  either  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  priest 
on  the  head  of  the  lamb,  or  the  bestowing  of  any 
portion  of  the  flesh  on  the  priest,  have  denied  that 
it  was  a  sacrifice  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word. 
They  appear  to  have  been  tempted  to  take  this  view, 
in  order  to  deprive  the  Romanists  of  an  analogical 
argument  bearing  on  the  Romish  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  They  Affirmed  that  the  lamb  was 
sacramentmi,  not  sacrificium.  But  most  of  their 
contemporaries  (Cudworth,  Bochart,  Vitringa),  and 
nearly  all  modern  critics,  have  held  that  it  was  in 
the  strictest  sense  a  sacrifice.  The  chief  charac 
teristics  of  a  sacrifice  are  all  distinctly  ascribed  to  it. 
It  was  offered  in  the  holy  place  (Deut.  xvi.  5,  6) ;  the 
blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  and  the  fat  was 
burned  (2  Chr.  xxx.  16,  xxxv.  11).  Philo  and 
Josephus  commonly  call  it  Ovpa  or  Bvala.  The 
language  of  Ex.  xii.  27,  xxiii.  18,  Num.  ix.  7,  Deut. 
xvi.  2,  5,  together  with  1  Cor.  v.  7,  would  seem  to 
lecide  the  question  beyond  the  reach  of  doubt. 

As  the  original  institution  of  the  Passover  in 
Egypt  preceded  the  establishment  of  the  priesthood 
and  the  regulation  of  the  service  of  the  tabernacle, 
it  necessarily  fell  short  in  several  particulars  of 
the  observance  of  the  festival  according  to  the 
fully  developed  ceremonial  law  (see  II.  1).  The 
head  of  the  family  slew  the  lamb  in  his  own  house, 
not  in  the  holy  place;  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on 
the  doorway,  not  on  the  altar.  But  when  the 
law  was  perfected,  certain  particulars  were  altered 


t  The  fact  which  has  been  noticed,  II.  3.  (/),  Is  re 
markable  in  this  connexion,  that  those  who  had  not 
incurred  a  degree  of  impurity  sufficient  to  disqualify 
them  from  eating  the  paschal  lamb,  were  yet  not  pure 
enough  to  take  the  priestly  part  In  slaying  It. 

h  Philo,  speaking  of  the  Passover,  says,  av^irav  rb 
IBvot  Itparai,  riav  Kara,  fic'pot  ««urrov  TOLS  iiirep  aiiTou 
OuCTi'as  avdyovTO<;  Tore  xai  xeipovpyoOi/TO?.  'O  fifv  ovv 
oAXos  arra?  Atcus  fyefySei  Kal  <f>niSpo<;  ^c,  f«ca<rrou 
vo/ii'<Jb»Tw  itpotrvrji  TeTifiijotfai. — De  Vit.  Mosis,  iii.  29, 
vol.  iv.  p.  250,  edit.  Tanch. 


PASSOVER 

in  order  to  assimilate  the  Passover  to  the  accus 
tomed  order  of  religious  service.  It  has  been  con 
jectured  that  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the 
priest  was  one  of  these  particulars,  though  it  is  not 
recorded  (Kurtz).  But  whether  this  was  the  case  or 
not,  the  other  changes-  which  have  been  stated  seem 
to  be  abundantly  sufficient  for  the  argument.  It  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  the  paschal  lamb  was  re 
garded  as  the  great  annual  peace-offering  of  the 
family,  a  thank-offering  for  the  existence  and  pre 
servation  of  the  nation  (Ex.  xiii.  14-16),  the  typical 
sacrifice  of  the  elected  and  reconciled  children  of  the 
promise.  It  was  peculiarly  the  Lord's  own  sacrifice 
(Ex.  xxiii.  18,  jcxxiv.  25).  It  was  more  ancient  than 
the  written  law,  and  called  to  mind  that  covenant 
on  which  the  law  was  based.  It  retained  in  a 
special  manner  the  expression  of  the  sacredness  of 
the  whole  people,  and  of  the  divine  mission  of  the 
head  of  every  family ,f  according  to  the  spirit  of  the 
old  patriarchal  priesthood.  No  part  of  the  victim 
was  given  to  the  priest  as  in  other  peace-offerings, 
because  the  father  was  the  priest  himself.  The 
custom,  handed  on  from  age  to  age,  thus  guarded 
from  superetition  the  idea  of  a  priesthood  placed  in 
the  members  of  a  single  tribe,  while  it  visibly  set 
forth  the  promise  which  was  connected  with  the 
deliverance  of  the  people  from  Egypt,  "  Ye  shall  be 
unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation  " 
(Ex.  xix.  6).h  In  this  way  it  became  a  testimony 
in  favour  of  domestic  worship.  In  the  historical 
fact  that  the  blood  in  later  times  sprinkled  on  the 
altar,  had  at  first  had  its  divinely  appointed  place 
on  the  lintels  and  door-posts,'  it  was  declared  that 
the  national  altar  itself  represented  the  sanctity 
which  belonged  to  the  house  of  every  Israelite,  not 
that  only  which  belonged  to  the  nation  as  a  whole. 

A  question,  perhaps  not  a  wise  one,  has  been 
raised  regarding  the  purpose  of  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  on  the  lintels  and  door-posts.  Some  have 
considered  that  it  was  meant  as  a  mark  to  guide 
the  destroying  angel.  Others  suppose  that  it  was 
merely  a  sign  to  confirm  the  faith  of  the  Israelites 
in  their  safety  and  deliverance.*  Surely  neither  of 
these  views  can  stand  alone.  The  sprinkling  must 
have  been  an  act  of  faith  and  obedience  which  God 
accepted  with  favour.  "  Through  faith  (we  are 
told)  Moses  kept  the  Passover  and  the  sprinkling 
of  blood,  lest  he  that  destroyed  the  first-born  should 
touch  them  "  (Heb.  xi.  28).  Whatever  else  it  may 
have  been,  it  was  certainly  an  essential  part  of  a 
sacrament,  of  an  "  effectual  sign  of  grace  and  of 
God's  good  will,"  expressing  the  mutual  relation 
into  which  the  covenant  had  brought  the  Creator 
and  the  creature.  That  it  also  denoted  the  purifi 
cation  of  the  children  of  Israel  from  the  abomina 
tions  of  the  Egyptians,  and  so  had  the  accustomed 
significance  of  the  sprinkling  of  blood  under  the  law 
(Heb.  ix.  22),  is  evidently  in  entire  consistency  with 
this  view. 

No  satisfactoiy  reason  has  been  assigned  for  the 
command  to  choose  the  lamb  four  days  before  the 

*  As  regards  the  mere  place  of  sprinkling  in  the  first 
Passover,  on  the  reason  of  which  there  has  been  gome 
speculation,  Bahr  reasonably  supposes  that  the  lintels 
and  door-posts  were  selected  as  the  parts  of  the  house 
most  obvious  to  passers-by,  and  to  which  Inscrip 
tions  of  different  kinds  were  often  attached.  Comp. 
Deut.  vi.  9. 

k  Especially  Bochart  and  Bahr.  The  former  says,  "  Hoc 
slgnum  Deo  non  datum  Bed  Hebracis  ut  eo  confinnati  de 
liberatione  certi  slut " 


PASSOVER 

paschal  supper.  Kurtz  (following  Hofmann)  fancies 
that  the  tour  days  signified  the  four  centuiies  of 
Egyptian  bondage.  As  in  later  times,  the  rule  ap 
pears  not  to  have  been  observed  (see  p.  714,6.),  the 
rtMson  of  it  was  probably  of  a  temporary  nature. 

That  the  lamb  was  to  be  roasted  and.  not  boiled, 
has  been  supposed  to  commemorate  the  haste  of  the 
departure  of  the  Israelites.10  Spencer  observes  on 
the  other  hand  that,  as  they  had  their  cooking 
vessels  with  them,  one  mode  would  have  been  as 
expeditious  as  the  other.  Some  think  that,  like 
the  dress  and  the  posture  in  which  the  first  Passover 
was  to  be  eaten,  it  was  intended  to  remind  the  people 
that  they  were  now  no  longer  to  regard  themselves 
as  settled  down  in  a  home,  but  as  a  host  upon  the 
inarch,  roasting  being  the  proper  military  mode  of 
dressing  meat.  Kurtz  conjectures  that  the  lamb 
was  to  be  roasted  with  fire,  the  purifying  element, 
because  the  meat  was  thus  left  pure,  without  the 
mixture  even  of  the  water,  which  would  have  en 
tered  into  it  in  boiling.  The  meat  in  its  purity 
would  thus  correspond  in  signification  with  the 
unleavened  bread  (see  II.  3  (6.) ). 

It  is  not  difficult  to  determine  the  reason  of  the 
command,  "  not  a  bone  of  him  shall  be  broken." 
The  lamb  was  to  be  a  symbol  of  unity  ;  the  unity  of 
the  family,  the  unity  of  the  nation,  the  unity  of 
God  with  His  people  whom  He  had  taken  into  cove 
nant  with  Himself.  While  the  flesh  was  divided 
into  portions,  so  that  each  member  of  the  family 
could  partake,  the  skeleton  was  left  one  and  entire 
to  remind  them  of  the  bonds  which  united  them. 
Thus  the  words  of  the  law  are  applied  to  the  body 
of  our  Saviour,  as  the  type  of  that  still  higher 
unity  of  which  He  was  Himself  to  be  the  author 
and  centre  (John  six.  36). 

The  same  significance  may  evidently  be  attached 
to  the  prohibition  that  no  part  of  the  meat  should 
be  kept  for  another  meal,  or  carried  to  another 
house.  The  paschal  meal  in  each  house  was  to  be 
one,  whole  and  entire. 

(6.)  The  unleavened  bread  ranks  next  in  import 
ance  t6  the  paschal  lamb.  The  notion  has  been 
very  generally  held,  or  taken  for  granted,  both  by- 
Christian  and  Jewish  writers  of  all  ages,  that  it 
was  intended  to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  un 
leavened  cakes  which  they  were  obliged  to  eat  in 
their  hasty  flight  (Ex.  xii.  34,  39).  But  there  is 
not  the  least  intimation  to  this  effect  in  the  sacred 
narrative.  On  the  contrary,  the  command  was  given 
to  Moses  and  Aaron  that  unleavened  bread  should 
be  eaten  with  the  lamb  before  the  circumstance 
occurred  upon  which  this  explanation  is  based. 
Comp.  Ex.  xii.  8  with  xii.  39. 

It  has  been  considered  by  some  (Ewald,  Winer, 
and  the  modem  Jews)  that  the  unleavened  bread 
and  the  bitter  herbs  alike  owe  their  meaning  to 
their  being  regarded  as  unpalatable  food.  The 


PASSOVEB  725 

expression  "bread  of  affliction,"  'JJJ  DIT>  (Deut. 
xvi.  3),  is  regarded  as  equivalent  to  fastiny -bread, 
and  on  this  ground  Ewald  ascribes  something  of  the 
character  of  a  fast  to  the  Passover.  But  this  seems 
to  be  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  pervading  joyous 
nature  of  the  festival.  The  bread  of  affliction  may 
mean  bread  which,  in  present  gladness,  commemo 
rated,  either  in  itself,  or  in  common  with  the  other 
elements  of  the  feast,  the  past  affliction  of  the 
people  (Bahr,  Kurtz,  Hofmann).  It  should  not  be 
forgotten  that  unleavened  bread  was  not  peculiar  to 
the  Passover.  The  ordinary  "  meat-offering"  was 
unleavened  (Lev.  ii.  4,  5,  vii.  12,  x.  12  &c.),  and 
so  was  the  shewbread  (Lev.  xxiv.  5-9).  The  use 
of  unleavened  bread  in  the  consecration  of  the  priests 
(Ex.  xxix.  23),  and  in  the  offering  of  the  Nazarite 
(Num.  vi.  19),  is  interesting  in  relation  to  the  Pass 
over,  as  being  apparently  connected  with  the  con 
secration  of  the  person.  On  the  whole,  we  are 
wan-anted  in  concluding  that  unleavened  bread  had 
a  peculiar  sacrificial  character,  according  to  the  law, 
and  it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  a  particular  kind 
of  food  should  have  been  offered  to  the  Lord  because 
it  was  insipid  or  unpalatable." 

It  seems  more  reasonable  to  accept  St.  Paul's  re 
ference  to  the  subject  (1  Cor.  v.  6-8)  as  furnishing- 
the  true  meaning  of  the  symbol.  Fermentation  is 
decomposition,  a  dissolution  of  unity.  This  must 
be  more  obvious  to  ordinary  eyes  where  the  leaven 
in  common  use  is  a  piece  of  sour  dough,  instead  of 
the  expedients  at  present  employed  in  this  country 
to  make  bread  light.  The  pure  dry  biscuit,  as  dis 
tinguished  from  bread  thus  leavened,  would  be  an 
apt  emblem  of  unchanged  duration,  and,  in  its 
freedom  from  foreign  mixture,  of  purity  also.0  If 
this  was  the  accepted  meaning  among  the  Jews, 
"  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincerity  and  truth " 
must  have  been  a  clear  and  familiar  expression  to 
St.  Paul's  Jewish  readers.  Bahr  conceives  that  as 
the  blood  of  the  lamb  figured  the  act  of  purifying, 
the  getting  rid  of  the  corruptions  of  Egypt,  the 
unleavened  bread  signified  the  abiding  state  of  con 
secrated  holiness. 

(c.)  The  bitter  herbs  are  generally  understood  by 
the  Jewish  writers  to  signify  the  bitter  sufferings 
which  the  Israelites  had  endured  v  (Ex.  i.  14).  But 
it  has  been  remarked  by  Abenezra  that  these  herbs 
are  a  good  and  wholesome  accompaniment  for  meat, 
and  are  now,  and  appear  to  have  been  in  ancient 
times,  commonly  so  eaten  (see  p.  716). 

(d.)  The  offering  of  the  Omer,  though  it  is  ob^ 
viously  that  part  of  the  festival  which  is  imme- 
diatelv  connected  with  the  course  of  the  seasons, 
bore  a  distinct  analogy  to  its  historical  significance. 
It  may  have  denoted  a  deliverance  from  winter,  as 
the  lamb  signified  deliverance  from  the  bondage  of 
;  Egypt,  which  might  well  be  considered  as  a  winter 
in°the  history  of  the  nation.'  Again,  the  consecia- 


•»  So  Bahr  and  most  of  the  Jewish  authorities. 
.  "  Hupfeld  imagines  that  bread  without  leaven,  being 
the  simplest  result  of  cooked  grain,  characterised  the  old 
agricultural  festival  which  existed  before  the  sacrifice  of 
the  lamb  was  Instituted. 

«  The  root  Y  ^^  signifies  "to  make  dry."  Kurtz  thinks 
that  dryness  rather  than  sweetness  is  the  idea  in  nWO- 
But  sweet  In  this  connexion  has  the  sense  of  uncorrupted, 
or  incorruptible,  and  hence  is  easily  connected  with  dry- 
ness.  Perhaps  our  authorized  version  has  lost  something 
In  expressiveness  by  substituting  the  term  "unleavened 
bread"  for  the  "  sweet  bread  "  of  the  older  versions,  which 
holds  its  plact  in  1  Ksd.  i.  19. 


P  "V"1D  istud  comedimus  quia  amaritudine  affecerunt 
Aegyptii  vitam  patrum  nostrorum  in  Aegypto. — Maimon. 
in  I'esachim,  vili.  4. 

I  1  This  application  of  the  rite  perhaps  derives  some 
support  from  the  form  in  which  the  ordinary  first-fruit 
offering  was  presented  in  the  Temple.  [Fiitsx  FRUITS.] 
The  call  of  Jacob  ("  a  Syrian  ready  to  perish"),  and  tho 
deliverance  of  his  children  from  Kgypt,  with  their  settle- 

1  ment  in  the  land  that  flowed  with  milk  and  honey,  were 
then  related  (Deut.  xxvi.  5-10).  It  is  worthy  of  notice 

!  that,  according  to  1'esachim,  an  exposition  of  this  passage 

1  was  an  important  part  of  the  reply  which  the  father  gave 
to  his  son's  inquiry  during  the  paschal  supper. 

!      The  account  of  the  procession  in  ottering  the  tirbt-lruiU 


726 


PASSOVER 


tion  of  the  first-fruits,  the  first-born  of  the  soil,  is 
an  easy  type  of  the  consecration  of  the  first- born  of 
the  Israelites.  This  seems  to  be  countenanced  by 
Ex.  xiii.  2-4,  where  the  sanctification  of  the  first 
born,  and  the  unleavened  bread  which  figured  it, 
seem  to  be  emphatically  connected  with  the  time  of 
year,  Abib,  the  month  of  green  ears.* 

4.  No  other  shadow  of  good  things  to  come  con 
tained  in  the  Law  can  vie  with  the  festival  of  the 
Passover  in  expressiveness  and  completeness.  Hence 
we  are  so  often  reminded  of  it,  more  or  less  dis 
tinctly,  in  the  ritual  and  language  of  the  Church. 
Its  outline,  considered  in  reference  to  the  great 
deliverance  of  the  Israelites  which  it  commemorated, 
and  many  of  its  minute  details,  have  been  appro 
priated  as  current  expressions  of  the  truths  which 
God  has  revealed  to  us  in  the  fulness  of  times  in 
sending  His  Son  upon  earth. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  ecclesiastical  writers 
should  have  pushed  the  comparison  too  far,  and 
exercised  their  fancy  in  the  application  of  trifling 
or  accidental  particulars  either  to  the  facts  of  Our 
Lord's  life  or  to  truths  connected  with  it.*  But, 
keeping  within  the  limits  of  sober  interpretation 
indicated  by  Scripture  itself,  the  application  is 
singularly  full  and  edifying.  The  deliverance  of 
Israel  according  to  the  flesh  from  the  bondage  of 
Egypt  was  always  so  regarded  and  described  by  the 
prophets  as  to  render  it  a  most  apt  type  of  the 
deliverance  of  the  spiritual  Israel  from  the  bondage 
of  sin  into  the  glorious  liberty  with  which  Christ 
has  made  us  free  (see  IV.  2).  The  blood  of  the 
first  paschal  lambs  sprinkled  on  the  doorways  of 
the  houses  has  ever  been  regarded  as  the  best 
defined  foreshadowing  of  that  blood  which  has 
redeemed,  saved,  and  sanctified  us  (Heb.  xi.  28). 
The  lamb  itself,  sacrificed  by  the  worshipper  with 
out  the  intervention  of  a  priest,  and  its  flesh  being 
eaten  without  reserve  as  a  meal,  exhibits  the  most 
perfect  of  peace-offerings,  the  closest  type  of  the 
atoning  Sacrifice  who  died  for  us  and  has  made  our 
peace  with  God  (Is.  liii.  7  ;  John  i.  29 ;  cf.  the 
expression  "  my  sacrifice,"  Ex.  xxxiv.  25,  also  Ex. 
rii.  27;  Acts  viii.  32  ;  1  Cor.  v.  7 ;  1  Pet.  i.  18, 
19).  The  ceremonial  law,  and  the  functions  of 
the  priest  in  later  times,  were  indeed  recognised  in 
the  sacrificial  rite  of  the  Passover ;  but  the  pre- 


PASSOVER 

vious  existence  of  the  rite  showed  that  they  were 
not  essential  for  the  personal  approach  of  trie  wor 
shipper  to  God  (see  IV.  3  (a.)  ;  Is.  Ixi.  6 ;  1  Pet. 
ii.  5,  9).  The  unleavened  bread  is  recognised  as  the 
figure  of  the  state  of  sanctification  which  is  the 
true  element  of  the  believer  in  Christ1  (1  Cor.  v. 
8).  The  haste  with  which  the  meal  was  eaten, 
and  the  girt-up  loins,  the  staves  and  the  sandals, 
are  fit  emblems  of  the  life  of  the  Christian  pilgrim, 
ever  hastening  away  from  the  world  towards  his 
heavenly  destination*  (Luke  xii.  35;  1  Pet.  i.  13, 
ii.  11;  Eph.  v.  15;  Heb.  xi.  13). 

It  has  been  well  observed  by  Kurtz  (on  Ex.  xii.  38), 
that  at  the  very  crisis  when  the  distinction  between 
Israel  and  the  nations  of  the  world  was  most  clearly 
brought  out  (Ex.  xi.  7),  a  "  mixed  multitude  "  went 
out  from  Egypt  with  them  (Ex.  xii.  38),  and  that 
provision  was  then  made  for  all  who  were  willing 
to  join  the  chosen  seed  and  participate  with  them 
in  their  spiritual  advantages  (Ex.  xii.  44).  Thus, 
at  the  very  starting-point  of  national  separation, 
was  foreshadowed  the  calling  in  of  the  Gentiles  to 
that  covenant  in  which  all  nations  of  the  earth 
were  to  be  blessed. 

The  offering  of  the  Omer,  in  its  higher  signifi 
cation  as  a  symbol  of  the  first-born,  has  been 
already  noticed  (IV.  3.  (d)  ).  But  its  meaning 
found  full  expression  only  in  that  First-born  of  all- 
creation,  who,  having  died  and  risen  again,  became 
"  the  First-fruits  of  them  that  slept "  ( 1  Cor.  xv.  20). 
As  the  first  of  the  first-fruits,  no  other  offering  of 
the  sort  seems  so  likely  as  the  Omer  to  have  imme 
diately  suggested  the  expressions  used,  Rom.  viii.  23, 
xi.  16  ;  Jam.  i.  18;  Hev.  xiv.  4. 

The  crowning  application  of  the  paschal  rites  to 
the  truths  of  which  they  were  the  shadowy  pro 
mises  appeal's  to  be  that  which  is  afforded  by  the 
fact  that  our  Lord's  death  occurred  during  the 
festival.  According  to  the  Divine  purpose,  the  true 
Lamb  of  God  was  slain  at  nearly  the  same  time  as 
"  the  Lord's  Passover,"  in  obedience  to  the  letter  of 
the  law.  It  does  not  seem  needful  that,  in  order 
to  give  point  to  this  coincidence,  we  should  (as 
some  have  done)  draw  from  it  an  a  priori  argu 
ment  in  favour  of  our  Lord's  crucifixion  having 
taken  place  on  the  14th  of  Nisan  (see  III.  2.  ii.).  It 
is  enough  to  know  that  our  own  Holy  Week  and 


in  the  Mishna  (Bikurim),  with  the  probable  reference  to 
the  subject  In  Is.  xxx.  29,  can  hardly  have  anything  to  do 
with  the  Passover.  The  connexion  appears  to  have  been 
suggested  by  the  tradition  mentioned  by  Abenezra,  that 
the  army  of  Sennacherib  was  smitten  on  the  night  of  the 
Passover.  Regarding  this  tradition,  Vitringa  says,  "  Non 
reclplo,  nee  sperno  "  (In  Jsaiam  xxx.  29). 

'  See  Gesenius,  Thes.  In  the  LXX  it  is  called  /«ji> 
TU>V  vtiav,  K.  xapirlav.  If  -Vi'«m  is  a  Semitic  word, 
Gesenius  thinks  that  It  means  the  month  of  Jlou-ers,  in 
agreement  with  a  passage  in  Macarius  (Horn,  xvii.)  in 
which  it  is  called  /oji»  riav  av6iav.  But  he  seems  inclined 
to  favour  an  explanation  of  the  word  suggested  by  a  Zend 
root,  according  to  which  It  would  signify  the  month  qf 
New  Year'g  day. 

*  The  crossed  spits  on  which  Justin  Martyr  laid  stress 
are  noticed,  II.  3.  (a).  The  subject  Is  expanded  by  Vi 
tringa.  Observat.  Sac.  Ii.  10.  The  time  of  the  new  moon,  at 
which  the  festival  was  held,  has  been  taken  as  a  type  of  the 
brightness  of  the  appearing  of  the  Messiah  ;  the  lengthen 
ing  of  the  days  at  that  season  of  the  year  as  figuring  the 
ever-increasing  light  and  warmth  of  the  Redeemer's 
kingdom;  the  advanced  hour  of  the  day  at  which  the 
*upper  was  eaten,  as  a  tepresentation  of  the  fulness  of 
times;  the  roasting  of  the  lamb,  as  the  effect  of  God's 
wrath  against  sin  ;  the  thorough  cooking  of  the  iamb,  as 


a  lesson  that  Christian  doctrine  should  be  well  arranged 
and  digested;  the  prohibition  that  any  part  of  the  flesh 
should  remain  till  the  morning,  as  a  foreshowing  of  the 
haste  in  which  the  body  of  Christ  was  removed  from  the 
cross ;  the  unfermented  bread,  as  the  emblem  of  a  humble 
spirit,  while  fermented  bread  was  the  figure  of  a  heart 
puffed  up  with  pride  and  vanity.  (See  Suicer,  sub  irao-^a.) 
In  the  like  spirit,  Justin  Martyr  and  Lactantius  take  up 
the  charge,  against  the  Jews  of  corrupting  the  O.  T.,  with 
a  view  to  deprive  the  Passover  of  its  clearness  as  a  witness 
for  Christ.  They  specifically  allege  that  the  following 
passage  has  been  omitted  in  the  copies  of  the  book  of 
Ezra : — "  Et  dixit  Esdras  ad  populum :  Hoc  pascha  sal- 
vator  noster  est,  et  refugium  nostrum.  Cogitate  et  ascendat 
in  cor  vestrum,  quoniam  habemus  humiliare  eum  in  signo : 
et  post  haec  sperablmug  in  eum,  ne  deseratur  hie  locus  in 
aeternum  tempus."  (Just.  Mart.  Dialog,  cum  Tn/p. ;  I-act. 
Inst.  iv.  18.)  It  has  been  conjectured  that  the  words 
may  have  been  inserted  between  vers.  20  and  21  in  Kzr.  vi. 
But  they  have  been  all  but  universally  regarded  as 
spurious. 

*  The  use  which  the  Fathers  made  of  this  may  be  seen 
in  Suicer,  s.  v.  d^i^io*. 

"  See  Theodoret,  Interrog.  XXIV.  in  Ftod.  There  is 
an  eloquent  passage  on  the  same  subject  in  Greg.  Xaz. 
Oral  XI. II. 


PASSOVER 

Easter  stand  as  the  anniversary  of  the  same  great 
facts  as  were  foreshown  in  those  events  of  which 
the  yearly  Passover  was  a  commemoration. 

As  compared  with  the  other  festivals,  the  Pass 
over  was  remarkably  distinguished  by  a  single 
victim  essentially  its  own,  sacrificed  in  a  very 
peculiar  manner.1  In  this  respect,  as  well  as  in 
•the  place  it  held  in  the  ecclesiastical  year,  it  had  a 
formal  dignity  and  character  of  its  own.  It  was 
the  representative  festival  of  the  year,  and  in  this 
unique  position  it  stood  in  a  certain  relation  to 
circumcision  as  the  second  sacrament  of  the  Hebrew 
Church  (Kx.  xii.  44).  We  may  see  this  in  what 
occurred  at  Gilgal,  when  Joshua,  in  renewing  the 
Divine  covenant,  celebrated  the  Passover  imme 
diately  after  the  circumcision  of  the  people.  But 
the  nature  of  the  relation  in  which  these  two  rites 
stood  to  each  other  did  not  become  fully  developed 
until  its  types  were  fulfilled,  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
took  its  place  as  the  sacramental  feast  of  the  elect 
people  of  God.?  Hupfeld  well  observes:  "  En  pul- 
cherrima  mysteriorum  nostrorum  exempla :  circum- 
cisio  quidem  baptismatis,  scilicet  signum  gratiae  di- 
.vinae  et  foederis  cum  Deo  pacti,  quo  ad  sanctitatem 
populi  sacri  vocamur ;  Paschalis  vero  agnus  et  ritus, 
continuatae  quippe  gratiae  divinae  et  servati  foederis 
cum  Deo  siguum  et  pignus,  quo  sacra  et  cum  Deo 
et  cum  coeteris  populi  sacri  membris  commumo 
usque  renovatur  et  alitur,  coenae  Christi  sacrae 
.typus  aptissimus !" 

LITERATURE.  —  Mishna,  Pesachim,  with  the 
notes  in  Surenhusius ;  Bahr,  Symbolik,  b.  iv.  c.  3  ; 
Hupfeld,  De  Fest.  Hebr. ;  Bochart,  De  Agno  Pas- 
chali  (vol.  i.  of  the  Hierozoicon)  ;  Ugolini,  De 
Ritibus  in  Coen.  Dom.  ex  Pasch.  illustr.  (vol.  xvii. 
of  the  Thesaurus) ;  Maimonides,  De  Fermentato  et 
Azymo\  Rosenmiiller,  Scholia  in  Ex.  xii.,  &c. ; 
Otho,  Lex.  Rab.  s.  Pascha ;  Carpzov,  App.  Grit. ; 
Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  and  Hor.  Hebr.  on  Matt. 
xxvi.,  John  xiii.,  &c. ;  Vitringa,  Obs.  Sac.  lib.  ii. 
3,  10 ;  Reland,  Antiq.  iv.  3 ;  Spencer,  De  Leg.  Hebr. 
ii.  4;  Kurtz,  History  of  the  Old  Covenant,  ii.  288 
seqq.  (Clark's  edit.)  ;  Hottinger,  De  Kita  dimittmdi 
Eeum  in  Fest.  Pasch.  (  Thes.  Nov.  T/ieologico-Phi- 
lolog.  vol.  ii.) ;  Buxtorf,  Si/nag.  Jud.  xviii. ;  Cud- 
worth,  True  Notion  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

More  especially  on  the  question  respecting  the 
Lord's  Supper,  Robinson,  Harmony  of  the  Gospels, 
and  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  Aug.  1845  ;  Tholuck,  on 
John  xiii. ;  Stier,  on  John  xii. ;  Kuinoel,  on  Matt, 
xxvi. ;  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  §265 ;  Greswell, 
Harm.  Evang.  and  Dissertations ;  Wieseler,  Chro- 
nol.  Synops.  der  vier  Evang. ;  Tischendorf,  Syn. 
Evany,  p.  xlv. ;  Bleek,  Dissert,  ueber  den  Mo- 
nathstag  des  Todcs  Christi  (Beitrage  zur  Evan- 
gelien-Kritik,  1846) ;  Frischmuth,  Dissertatio,  &c. 
(  Thes.  Theol.  Philolog.)  ;  Harenberg,  Demonstratio, 
&c.  (Thes.  Novus  Theol.  Phil.  vol.  ii.).  Tholuck 
praises,  Eude,  Demonstratio  quod  Chr.  in  Coen. 
trra.vp<affin<f  agnum paschalem  non  comederit,  Lips. 
1742.  Ellicott,  Lectures  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord, 
p.  320  ;  Fail  bairn,  Hermeneutical  Manual,  ii.  9  ; 
Davidson,  Introduction  to  N.  T.  i.  102.  [S.  C.] 


PATIIIIOS 


727 


1  The  only  parallel  case  to  this,  in  the  whole  range  of 
the  public  religious  observances  of  the  law,  seems  to  be 
that  of  the  scapegoat  of  the  day  of  atonement. 

1  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  modern  Jews  dis 
tinguish  these  two  rites  above  a'l  others,  as  being  imme 
diately  connected  with  the  grand  fulfilment  of  the  promises 
made  to  their  fathers.  Though  thry  refer  to  the  coming 
<>f  Klijuh  in  their  ordinary  grace  at  meals,  It  is  only  on 


PAT'ARA  (ndrapa:  the  noun  is  plural),  1 
Lycian  city  of  some  considerable  note.  One  of  its 
characteristics  in  the  heathen  world  was  that  it  was 
devoted  to  the  worship  of  A[K>llo,  and  was  the  seat 
of  a  famous  oracle  (Hor.  Od.  iii.  4,  64).  Fellows 
says  that  the  coins  of  all  the  district  around  show 
the  ascendancy  of  this  divinity.  Patara  was  situatal 
on  the  south-western  shore  of  I.ycia,  not  far  from 
the  left  bank  of  the  river  Xaivthus.  The  coast  here 
is  very  mountainous  and  bold.  Immediately  opposite 
is  the  island  of  RHODES.  Patara  was  practically  the 
seaport  of  the  city  of  Xanthus,  which  was  ten  miles 
distant  (Appian,  B.  C.  iv.  8 1 ).  These  notices  of  its 
position  and  maritime  importance  introduce  us  to 
the  single  mention  of  the  place  in  the  Bible  (Acts 
xxi.  1,  2).  St.  Paul  was  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem 
at  the  close  of  his  third  missionary  journey.  He  had 
just  come  from  Rhodes  (v.  1)  ;  and  at  Patara  he 
found  a  ship,  which  was  on  the  point  of  going  to 
Phoenicia  (v.  2),  and  in  which  he  completed  his 
voyage  (v.  3).  This  illustrates  the  mercantile  con 
nexion  of  Patara  with  both  the  eastern  and  western 
parts  of  the  Levant.  A  good  parallel  to  the  Apostle's 
voyage  is  to  be  found  in  Liv.  xxxvii.  16.  There 
was  no  time  for  him  to  preach  the  Gospel  here . 
but.  still  Patara  has  a  place  in  ecclesiastical  history, 
having  been  the  seat  of  a  bishop  (Hierocl.  p.  684;. 
The  old  name  remains  on  the  spot,  and  there  are  still 
considerable  ruins,  especially  a  theatre,  some  baths, 
and  a  triple  arch  which  was  one  of  the  gates  of  the 
city.  But  sand-hills  are  gradually  concealing  these 
ruins,  and  have  blocked  up  the  harbour.  For  fuller 
details  we  must  refer  to  Beaufort's  Karamania, 
the  Ionian  Antiquities  published  by  the  Dilettanti 
Society,  Fellows'  Lycia  and  Asia  Minor,  and  the 
Travels  in  Asia  Minor  by  Spratt  and  Forbes. 
[LvciA;  MYRA.]  [J.  S.  H.] 

PATHE'US  (Ilafleuos  ;  Alex.  *afla?oj:  Fac- 
teus).  The  same  as  PETHAHIAH  the  Levite  (1  Esdr. 
ix.  23 ;  comp.  Ezr.  x.  23). 

PATH'ROS  (D'nriQ  :  Ha6ovp-ns,  *a8upvs : 
Phetros,  Phatures,  Phatliures),  gent,  noun  PATH- 
RUSIM  (D'D~inS  :  Tlarpoffuvielfi:  Phetrusmi),  a 

part  of  Egypt,  and  a  Mizraite  tribe.  That  Pathros 
was  in  Egypt  admits  of  no  question :  we  have  to 
attempt  to  decide  its  position  more  nearly.  In  the 
list  of  the  Mizraites,  the  Pathrusim  occur  after  the 
Naphtuhim,  and  before  the  Casluhim  ;  the  latter 
being  followed  by  the  notice  of  the  Philistines,  and 
by  the  Caphtorim  (Gen.  x.  13,  14;  1  Chr.  i.  12). 
Isaiah  prophesies  the  return  of  the  Jews  "  from 
Mizraim,  and  fiom  Pathros,  and  from  Cush"  (xi. 
11).  Jeremiah  predicts  their  ruin  to  "  all  the  Jews 
which  dwell  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  which  dwell  at 
Migdol,  and  at  Tahpanhes,  and  at  Noph,  and  in  the 
country  of  Pathros"  (xliv.  1),  and  their  reply  is 
given,  after  this  introduction,  "  Then  all  the  men 
which  knew  that  their  wives  had  burned  incen?e 
unto  other  gods,  and  all  the  women  that  stood  by, 
a  great  multitude,  even  all  the  people  that  dwelt  in 
the  land  of  Egypt,  in  Pathros,  answered  Jeremiah  " 


these  occasions  that  their  expectation  of  the  harbinger  ot 
the  Messiah  is  expressed  by  formal  observances.  When  a 
child  is  circumcised,  an  emply  chair  is  placed  at  hand  tor 
the  prophet  to  occupy.  At  the  paschal  meal,  a  cup  of  \v  ine 
is  poured  out  for  him ;  and  at  an  appointed  momer  t  tlie 
door  of  the  room  is  solemnly  set  open  for  him  to  inter. 
(See  note  ',  p.  715.) 


728 


PATHROS 


(15).  Ezekiel  speaks  of  the  return  of  the  captive 
Egyptians  to  "  the  Land  of  Pathros,  into  the  land  of 
their  birth"  (xxix.  14),  and  mentions  it  with  Egyp 
tian  cities,  Noph  preceding  it,  and  Zoan,  No,  Sin, 
Noph  again,  Aven  (On),  Pi-beseth,  and  Tehaph- 
nehes  following  it  (xxx.  13-18).  From  the  place  of 
the  Pathrusim  in  the  list  of  the  Mizraites,  they 
might  be  supposed  to  have  settled  in  Lower  Egypt, 
or  the  more  northern  part  of  Upper  Egypt.  Four 
only  of  the  Mizraite  tribes  or  peoples  can  be  pro 
bably  assigned  to  Egypt,  the  last  four,  the  Philis 
tines  being  considered  not  to  be  one  of  these,  but 
merely  a  colony:  these  are  the  Naphtuhim,  Path 
rusim,  Casluhim,  and  Caphtorim.  The  first  were 
either  settled  in  Lower  Egypt,  or  just  beyond  its 
western  border ;  and  the  last  in  LTpper  Egypt,  about 
Coptos.  It  seems,  if  the  order  be  geographical,  as 
there  is  reason  to  suppose,  that  it  is  to  be  inferred 
that  the  Pathrusim  were  seated  in  Lower  Egypt,  or 
not  much  above  it,  unless  there  be  any  transposi 
tion  ;  but  that  some  change  has  been  made  is  pro 
bable  from  the  parenthetic  notice  of  the  Philistines 
following  the  Casluhim,  whereas  it  appears  from 
other  passages  that  it  should  rather  follow  the 
Caphtorim.  If  the  original  order  wei-e  Pathrusim, 
Caphtorim,  Casluhim,  then  the  first  might  have 
settled  in  the  highest  part  of  Upper  Egypt,  and  the 
other  two  below  them.  The  mention  in  Isaiah 
would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  Pathros  was  Upper 
Egypt,  if  there  were  any  sound  reason  for  the  idea 
that  Mizraim  or  Mazor  is  ever  used  for  Lower 
Egypt,  which  we  think  there  is  not.  Rodiger's 
conjecture  that  Pathros  included  part  of  Nubia  is 
too  daring  to  be  followed  (Encyclop.  Germ.  sect. 
iii.  torn.  xiii.  p.  312),  although  there  is  some  slender 
support  for  it.  The  occurrences  in  Jeremiah  seem 
to  favour  the  idea  that  Pathros  was  part  of  Lower 
Egypt,  or  the  whole  of  that  region  ;  for  although  it 
is  mentioned  in  the  prophecy  against  the  Jews  as  a 
region  where  they  dwelt  after  Migdol,  Tahpanhes, 
and  Noph,  as  though  to  the  south,  yet  we  are  told 
that  the  prophet  was  answered  by  the  Jews  "  that 
dwelt  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  in  Pathros,"  as  though 
Pathros  were  the  region  in  which  these  cities  were. 
We  have,  moreover,  no  distinct  evidence  that  Jere 
miah  ever  went  into  Upper  Egypt.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  may  be  replie!  that  the  cities  mentioned 
are  so  far  apart,  that  either  the  prophet  must  have 
preached  to  the  Jews  in  them  in  succession,  or  else 
have  addressed  letters  or  messages  to  them  (comp. 
xxix.).  The  notice  by  Ezekiel  of  Pathros  as  the 
land  of  the  birth  of  the  Egyptians  seems  to  favour 
the  idea  that  it  was  part  of  or  all  Upper  Egypt,  as 
the  Thebais  was  probably  inhabited  before  the  rest 
of  the  country  (comp.  Hdt.  ii.  15)  ;  an  opinion 
supported  by  the  tradition  that  the  people  of  Egypt 
came  from  Ethiopia,  and  by  the  1st  dynasty's  being 
of  Thinite  kings. 

Pathros  has  been  connected  with  the  Pathyrite 
nome,  the  Phaturite  of  Pliny  (H.  N.  v.  9,  §47), 
in  which  Thebes  was  situate.  The  first  form 
occurs  in  a  Greek  papyrus  written  in  Egypt  (IIo- 
Ovp'iT-ns  TTJJ  ©Tj£af5oj,  Papyr.  Anast.  vid.  Reu- 
vens,  Lcttres  a  M.  Letronne,  3  let.  p.  4,  30,  ap. 
Parthey,  Vocab.  s.  v.).  This  identification  may  be 
ns  old  as  the  LXX. ;  and  the  Coptic  version,  which 

reads  n<LIUOCnrpKC,n<LIin~OYpHC, 

does  not  contradict  it.  The  discovery  of  the  Egyp 
tian  name  of  the  town  after  which  the  nome  was 
called  puts  the  inquiry  on  a  safer  basis.  It  is  writ 
ten  HA-HAT-HEK,  "  The  Abode  of  Hat-her,"  the 


Egyptian  Venus.  It  may  perhaps  have  sometime* 
been  written  P-HA-HAT-HEK,  in  which  case  the 
P-H  and  T-H  would  have  coalesced  in  the  Hebrew 
form,  as  did  T-H  in  Caphtor.  [CAPHTOR.]  Such 
etymologies  for  the  word  Pathros  as  n~GT~~pHC» 
"  that  which  is  southern,"  and  for  the  form  in  the 
LXX.,  n<LTCnrpHC,  "the  southern  (region)" 
(Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.),  must  be  abandoned. 

On  the  evidence  here  brought  forward,  it  seems 
reasonable  to  consider  Pathros  to  be  part  of  Upper 
Egypt,  and  to  trace  its  name  in  that  of  the  Pathyrite 
nome.  But  this  is  only  a  veiy  conjectural  identi 
fication,  which  future  discoveries  may  overthrow'. 
It  is  spoken  of  with  cities  in  such  a  manner  that 
we  may  suppose  it  was  but  a  small  district,  and 
(if  we  have  rightly  identified  it),  that  when  it  occurs 
Thebes  is  especially  intended.  This  would  account 
for  its  distinctive  mention.  [K.  S.  P.] 

PATHRU'SIM.    [PATHKOS.J 

PAT'MOS  (Tldr/tos,  Rev.  i.  9).  Two  recent 
and  copious  accounts,  one  by  a  German,  the  other 
by  a  French,  traveller,  furnish  us  with  very  full  in 
formation  regarding  this  island.  Ross  visited  it  in 
1841,  and  describes  it  at  length  (Reisen  aitf  den 
griechischen  Inseln  des  ayaischen  Meeres,  ii.  123- 
139).  Gue"rin,  some  years  later,  spent  a  month 
there,  and  enters  into  more  detail,  especially  as  re 
gards  ecclesiastical  antiquities  and  traditions  (De 
scription  de  File  de  Patmos  et  de  Vile  de  Samos, 
Paris,  1856,  pp.  1-120).  Among  the  older  tra 
vellers  who  have  visited  Patmos  we  may  especially 
mention  Tournefort  and  Pococke.  See  also  Walpole's 
Turkey,  ii.  43. 

The  aspect  of  tne  island  is  peculiarly  rugged  and 
bare.  And  such  a  scene  of  banishment  for  St.  John 
in  the  reign  of  Domitian  is  quite  in  harmony  with 
what  we  read  of  the  custom  of  the  period.  It 
was  the  common  practice  to  send  exiles  to  the 
most  rocky  and  desolate  islands  ("in  asperrimas 
insularum").  See  Suet.  Tit.  8;  Juv.  Sat.  i.  73. 
Such  a  scene  too  was  suitable  (if  we' may  presume 
to  say  so)  to  the  sublime  and  awful  Revelation 
which  the  Apostle  received  there.  It  is  possible 
indeed  that  there  was  more  greenness  in  Patmos 
formerly  than  now.  Its  name  in  the  Middle  Ages 
was  Palmosa.  But  this  has  now  almost  entirely 
given  place  to  the  old  classical  name ;  and  there  is 
just  one  palm-tree  in  the  island,  in  a  valley  which 
is  called  "  the  Saint's  Garden "  (6  KTJITOS  TOO 
'Offiov),  Here  and  there  are  a  few  poor  olives, 
about  a  score  of  cypresses,  and  other  trees  in  the 
same  scanty  proportion. 

Patmos  is  divided  into  two  nearly  equal  parts,  a 
northern  and  a  southern,  by  a  very  narrow  isthmus, 
where,  on  the  east  side,  are  the  harbour  and  the 
town.  On  the  hill  to  the  south,  crowning  a  com 
manding  height,  is  the  celebrated  monastery,  which 
bears  the  name  of  "  John  the  Divine."  Halfway 
up  the  ascent  is  the  cave  or  grotto  where  tradition 
says  that  St.  John  received  the  Revelation,  and 
which  is  still  called  TO  a-ir-fi\a.iov  TTJS  'AwoKoAu- 
\l/ftas.  A  view  of  it  (said  by  Hoss  to  be  not  very  ac 
curate)  will  be  found  in  Choiseul-Gouffier,  i.  pi.  57. 
Both  Ross  and  Gue'rin  give  a  veiy  full,  and  a  very 
melancholy,  account  of  the  library  of  the  monastery. 
There  were  in  it  formerly  600  MSS.  There  are  now 
240,  of  which  Gue'rin  gives  a  catalogue.  Two 
ought  to  be  mentioned  here,  which  profess  to  furnish, 
under  the  title  of  ai  trtpiotioi  TOV  &fo\6yov,  an 
account  of  St.  John  after  the  ascension  of  oar  Lord. 


PATRIARCHS 

One  of  them  is  attributed  to  Prochorus,  an  alleged 
disciple  of  St.  John  ;  the  other  is  an  abridgment  of 
the  same  by  Nicetas,  archbishop  of  Thessalonica. 
Various  places  in  the  island  are  incorporated  in  the 
legend,  and  this  is  one  of  its  chief  points  of  interest. 
There  is  a  published  Latin  translation  in  the  Biblio- 
theca  Maxima  Patrum  (1677,  torn,  ii.),  but  with 
curious  modifications,  one  great  object  of  which  is 
to  disengage  St.  John's  martyrdom  from  Ephesus 
(where  the  legend  places  it),  and  to  fix  it  in 
Rome. 

We  have  only  to  add  that  Patmos  is  one  of  the 
Sporades,  and  is  in  that  part  of  the  Aegean  which 
is  called  the  Icarian  Sea.  It  must  have  been  con 
spicuous  on  the  right  when  St.  Paul  was  sailing 
(Acts  xx.  15,  xxi.  1)  from  SAMOS  to  Cos.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PATRIARCHS.  The  name  irarpiapx??*  is 
applied  in  the  N.  T.  to  Abraham  (Heb.  vii.  4),  to 
the  sons  of  Jacob  (Acts  vii.  8,  9),  and  to  David 
(Acts  ii.  29) ;  and  is  apparently  intended  to  be  equi 
valent  to  the  phrase  ITDX  JV3  K>fcO,  the  "  head" 
or  "  prince  of  a  tribe,"  so  often  found  in  the  0.  T. 
It  is  used  in  this  sense  by  the  LXX.  in  1  Chr. 
xxiv.  31,  xxvii.  22  ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  20,  xxvi.  12. 
In  common  usage  the  title  of  patriarch  is  assigned 
especially  to  those  whose  lives  are  recorded  in 
Scripture  previous  to  the  time  of  Moses.  By  the 
"  patriarchal  system  "  is  meant  that  state  of  society 
which  developed  itself  naturally  out  of  family  rela 
tions,  before  the  formation  of  nations  properly  so 
called,  and  the  establishment  of  regular  govern 
ment:  and  by  the  "patriarchal  dispensation"  the 
communion  into  which  God  was  pleased  to  enter 
with  the  families  of  Seth,  Noah,  and  Abraham, 
before  the  call  of  the  chosen  people. 

The  patriarchal  times  are  naturally  divided  into 
the  ante-diluvian  and  post-diluvian  periods. 

1.  In  the  former  the  Scripture  record  contains 
little  except  the  list  of  the  line  from  Seth,  through 
Enos,  Cainan,  Mahalaleel,  Jared,  Enoch,  Methu 
selah,  and  Lantech,  to  Noah  ;  with  the  ages  of  each 
at  their  periods  of  generation  and  at  their  deaths. 
[CHRONOLOGY.]  To  some  extent  parallel  to  this, 
is  given  the  line  of  Cain  ;  Enoch,  Irad,  Mehujael, 
Methusael,  Lantech,  and  the  sons  of  Lantech,  Jabal, 
Jubal,  and  Tubal-Cain.  To  the  latter  line  are 
attributed  the  first  signs  of  material  civilization, 
the  building  of  cities,  the  division  of  classes,  and 
the  knowledge  of  mechanical  arts ;  while  the  only 
•  moral  record  of  their  history  obscurely  speaks  of 
violence  and  bloodshed.  [LAMECH.]  In  the  former 
line  the  one  distinction  is  their  knowledge  of  the 
true  God  (with  the  constant  recollection  of  the  pro 
mised  "  seed  of  the  woman  "  )  which  is  seen  in  its 
fullest  perfection  in  Enoch  and  Noah ;  and  the  only 
allusion  to  their  occupation  (Gen.  v.  29)  seems  to 
show  that  they  continued  a  pastoral  and  agricul 
tural  race.  The  entire  corruption,  even  of  the 
chosen  family  of  Seth,  is  traced  (in  Gen.  vi.  1-4)  to 
the  union  between  "the  sons  of  God"  and  "the 
daughters  of  men"  (Heb.  "of  Adam").  This 
union  is  generally  explained  by  the  ancient  com 
mentators  of  a  contact  with  supernatural  powers  ol 
evil  in  the  persons  of  fallen  angels;  most  modern 


PATRIARCHS 


729 


»  The  Hebrew  text  is  here  taken  throughout :  for  the 
variations  in  the  LXX.  and  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  see 
CHIMNOIO  ,\. 

"It  is  likely  enough  that  the  year  (as  in  so  many 
autieiit  calendars)  may  be  a  lunar  year  of  354  or  355  days, 


nterpretation  refers  it  to  intermarriage  between  the 
lines  of  Seth  and  Cain.  The  latter  is  intended  to 
avoid  the  difficulties  attaching  to  the  comprehension 
of  the  former  view,  which  nevertheless  is  undoubt 
edly  far  more  accordant  with  the  usage  of  the 
phrase  "sons  of  God"  in  the  0.  T.  (comp.  Job 
i.  6,  xxxviii.  7),  and  with  the  language  of  the 
passage  in  Genesis  itself.  (See  Maitland's  Eruvm, 
Essay  vi.) 

One  of  the  main  questions  raised  as  to  the  ante 
diluvian  period  turns  on  the  longevity  assigned  to 
the  patriarchs.  With  the  single  exception  of  Enoch 
(whose  departure  from  the  earth  at  365  years  ot' 
age  is  exceptional  in  every  sense),  their  ages  vary 
from  777  (Lantech)  to  969  (Methuselah).  It  is 
to  be  observed  that  this  longevity  disappears  gra 
dually  after  the  Flood.  To  Sliem  are  assigned  600 
years  ;  and  thence  the  ages  diminish  down  to  Terah 
(205  years),  Abraham  (175),  Isaac  (180),  Jacob 
(147)," and  Joseph  (110).» 

This  statement  of  ages  is  clear  and  definite.  To 
suppose,  with  some,  that  the  name  of  each  patriarch 
denotes  a  clan  or  family,  and  his  age  its  duration, 
or,  with  others,  that  the  word  !"I3K>  (because  it 

T  T 

properly  signifies  "iteration")  may,  in  spite  of  its 
known  and  invariable  usage  for  "  year,"  denote  a 
lunar  revolution  instead  of  a  solar  one  (i.  e.  a  month 
instead  of  a  year)  in  this  passage,  appears  to  be  a 
mere  evasion  of  difficulty .b  It  must  either  be  ac: 
cepted,  as  a  plain  statement  of  fact,  or  regarded  as 
purely  fabulous,  like  the  legendary  assignment  of 
immense  ages  to  the  early  Indian  or  Babylonian  or 
Egyptian  kings. 

The  latter  alternative  is  adopted  without  scruple 
by  many  of  the  German  commentators,  some  of 
whom  attempt  to  find  such  significance  in  the  pa 
triarchal  names  as  to  make  them  personify  natural 
powers  or  human  qualities,  like  the  gods  and  demi 
gods  of  mythology.  It  belongs  of  course  to  the 
mythical  view  of  Scripture,  destroying  its  claim,  in 
any  sense,  to  authority  and  special  inspiration. 

In  the  acceptance  of  the  literal  meaning,  it  is  not 
easy  to  say  how  much  difficulty  is  involved.  With 
our  scanty  knowledge  of  what  is  really  meant  by 
"  dying  of  old  age,"  with  the  certainty  that  very 
great  effects  are  produced  on  the  duration  of  life, 
both  of  men  and  animals,  by  even  slight  changes  of 
habits  and  circumstances,  it  is  impossible  to  say 
what  might  be  a  priori  probable  in  this  respect  in 
the  antediluvian  period,  or  to  determine  under  what 
conditions  the  process  of  continual  decay  and  recon 
struction,  which  sustains  animal  life,  might  be  in 
definitely  prolonged.  The  constant  attribution  in 
all  legends  of  great  age  to  primeval  men  is  at  least 
as  likely  to  be  a  distortion  of  fact,  as  a  mere  inven 
tion  of  fancy.  But  even  if  the  difficulty  were 
greater  than  it  is,  it  seems  impossible  to  conceive 
that  a  book,  given  by  Inspiration  of  God  to  be  a 
treasure  for  all  ages,  could  be  permitted  to  contain 
a  statement  of  plain  facts,  given  undoubtingly,  and 
with  an  elaborate  show  of  accuracy,  and  yet  purely 
and  gratuitously  fabulous,  in  no  sense  bearing  on 
its  great  religious  subject.  If  the  Divine  origin  of 
Scripture  be  believed,  its  authority  must  be  accepted 
in  this,  as  in  other  cases;  and  the  list  of  the  ages 

or  even  a  year  of  10  months :  but  this  makes  no  real 
difference.  It  is  possible  that  there  may  l>e  some  corruj)- 
tlon  in  the  text,  which  may  affect  the  numbers  given;  but 
the  longevity  of  the  patriarchs  is  noticed  and  commented 
upon,  as  a  well-known  fact,  by  Josephus  (Ant.  \.  3,  $9). 


730 


PATRIARCHS 


of  the  patriarchs  be  held  to  be  (what  it  certainly 
claims  to  be)  a  statement  of  real  facts. 

2.  It  is  in  the  post-diluvian  periods  that  more 
is  gathered  as  to  the  nature  of  the  patriarchal  his 
tory. 

It  is  at  first  general  in  its  scope.  The  "  Cove 
nant  "  given  to  Noah  is  one,  free  from  all  condition, 
and  fraught  with  natural  blessings,  extending  to  all 
alike ;  the  one  great  command  (against  bloodshed) 
which  marks  it,  is  based  on  a  deep  and  universal 
ground ;  the  fulfilment  of  the  blessing,  "  Be  fruitful 
and  multiply,  and  replenish  the  earth,"  is  expressly 
connected,  first  with  an  attempt  to  set  up  an  uni 
versal  kingdom  round  a  local  centre,  and  then 
(in  Gen.  j.)  with  the  formation  of  the  various 
nations  by  conquest  or  settlement,  and  with  the 
peopling  of  all  the  world.  But  the  history  soon 
narrows  itself  to  that  of  a  single  tribe  or  family,  and 
afterwards  touches  the  general  history  of  the  ancient 
world  and  its  empires,  only  so  far  as  it  bears  upon 
this. 

It  is  in  this  last  stage  that  the  principle  of  the 
patriarchal  dispensation  is  most  clearly  seen.  It  is 
based  on  the  sacredness  of  family  ties  and  paternal 
authority.  This  authority,  as  the  only  one  which 
is  natural  and  original,  is  inevitably  the  foundation 
of  the  earliest  form  of  society,  and  is  probably  seen 
most  perfectly  in  wandering  tribes,  where  it  is  not 
affected  by  local  attachments  and  by  the  acquisition 
of  wealth.  It  is  one,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
limited  in  its  scope,  depending  irrre  on  its  sacred- 
ness  than  its  power,  and  giving  room  for  much  ex 
ercise  of  freedom  ;  and,  as  it  extends  from  the  family 
to  the  tribe,  it  must  become  less  stringent  and  less 
concentrated,  in  proportion  to  its  wider  diffusion. 
In  Scripture  this  authority  is  consecrated  by  an 
ultimate  reference  to  Clod,  as  the  God  of  the  pa 
triarch,  the  Father  (that  is)  both  of  him  and  his 
children.  Not,  of  course,  that  the  idea  of  God's 
Fatherhood  carried  with  it  the  knowledge  of  man's 
personal  communion  with  His  nature  (which  is  re 
vealed  by  the  Incarnation) ;  it  rather  implied  faith 
in  His  protection,  and  a  free  and  loving  obedience 
to  His  authority,  with  the  hope  (more  or  less 
assured)  of  some  greater  blessing  from  Him  in  the 
coming  of  the  promised  seed.  At  the  same  time, 
this  faith  was  not  allowed  to  degenerate,  as  it  was 
prone  to  do,  into  an  appropriation  of  God,  as  the 
mere  tutelary  God  of  the  tribe.  The  Lord,  it  is 
true,  suffers  Himself  to  be  called  "  the  God  of  Shem, 
of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob  ;"  but  He  also 
reveals  Himself  (and  that  emphatically,  as  though 
it  were  His  peculiar  title)  as  the  "  God  Almighty  " 
(Gen.  xvii.  1,  xxviii.  3,  xxxv.  11);  He  is  addressed 
as  the  "  Judge  of  all  the  earth  "  (xviii.  25),  and  as 
such  is  known  to  have  intercourse  with  Pharaoh 
and  Abimelech  (xii.  17,  xx.  '6-8),  to  hallow  the 
priesthood  of  Melchizedek  (xiv.  18-20),  and  to  exe 
cute  wrath  on  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  All  this 
would  confirm  what  the  generality  of  the  cove 
nant  with  Noah,  and  of  the  promise  of  blessing  to 
"all  nations"  in  Abraham's  seed  must  have  dis 
tinctly  taught,  that  the  chosen  family  were,  not 
substitutes,  but  representatives,  of  all  mankind,  and 
that  God's  relation  to  them  was  only  a  clearer  and 
more  perfect  type  of  that  in  which  He  stood 
to  all. 

Still  the  distinction  and  preservation  of  the 
chosen  family,  and  the  maintenance  of  the  paternal 
authority,  aie  the  spec  al  purposes,  which  give  a 
key  to  the  meaning  of  the  history,  and  of  the  insti- 


PATRIARCHS 

tntions  recorded.  For  this  the  birthright  (probably 
carrying  with  it  the  priesthood)  was  reserved  to 
the  first-born,  belonging  to  him  by  inheritance,  yet 
not  assured  to  him  till  he  received  his  father's 
blessing ;  for  this  the  sanctity  of  marriage  was  jea 
lously  and  even  cruelly  guarded,  as  in  Gen.  xxxiv. 
7,  13,  31  (Dinah),  and  in  xxxviii.  24  (Tamar), 
from  the  licence  of  the  world  without ;  and  all  in 
termarriage  with  idolaters  was  considered  as  treason 
to  the  family  and  the  God  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xxvi. 
34,  35,  xxrii.  46,  xxviii.  1,  6-9).  Natural  obe 
dience  and  affection  are  the  earthly  virtues  espe 
cially  brought  out  in  the  history,  and  the  sins 
dwelt  upon  (from  the  irreverence  of  Ham  to  the 
selling  of  Joseph),  are  all  such  as  offend  against 
these. 

The  type  of  character  fomied  under  it,  is  one 
imperfect  in  intellectual  and  spiritual  growth,  be 
cause  not  yet  tried  by  the  subtler  temptations,  or 
forced  to  contemplate  the  deeper  questions  of  life  ; 
but  it  is  one  remarkably  simple,  affectionate,  and 
free,  such  as  would  grow  up  under  a  natural  autho 
rity,  derived  from  God  and  centering  in  Him,  yet 
allowing,  under  its  unquestioned  sacredness,  a  fami 
liarity  and  freedom  cf  intercourse  with  Him,  which  is 
strongly  contrasted  with  the  stern  and  awful  cha 
racter  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation.  To  contemplate 
it  from  a  Christian  point  of  view  is  like  looking 
back  on  the  unconscious  freedom  and  innocence  of 
childhood,  with  that  deeper  insight  and  strength  of 
character  which  are  gained  by  the  experience  of  man 
hood.  We  see  in  it  the  germs  of  the  future,  of  the 
future  revelation  of  God,  and  the  future  trials  and 
development  of  man. 

It  is  on  this  fact  that  the  typical  interpretation  of 
its  history  depends,  an  interpretation  sanctioned 
directly  by  the  example  of  St.  Paul  (Gal.  iv. 
21-31;  Heb.  vii.  1-17),  indirectly  supported  by 
other  passages  of  Scripture  (Matt.  xxiv.  37-39; 
Luke  xvii.  28-32;  Horn.  ix.  10-13,  &c.),  and  in 
stinctively  adopted  by  all  who  have  studied  the 
history  itself. 

Even  in  the  brief  outline  of  the  ante-diluvian 
period,  we  may  r«  ognize  the  mam  features  of  the 
history  of  the  world,  the  division  of  mankind  into 
the  two  great  classes,  the  struggle  between  the 
power  of  evil  and  good,  the  apparent  triumph  of 
the  evil,  and  its  destruction  in  the  final  judgment. 
In  the  post-diluvian  history  of  the  chosen  family, 
is  seen  the  distinction  of  the  true  believers,  pos 
sessors  of  a  special  covenant,  special  revelation,  and 
special  privileges,  from  the  world  without.  In  it 
is  therefore  shadowed  out  the  histoi  y  of  the  Jewish 
Nation  and  Christian  Church,  as  regards  the  freedom 
of  their  covenant,  the  gradual  unfolding  of  their 
revelation,  and  the  peculiar  bless'ngs  and  tempta 
tions  which  belong  to  their  distinctive  position. 

It  is  but  natural  that  the  unfolding  of  the  cha 
racters  of  the  patriarchs  under  this  dispensation 
should  have  a  typical  interest.  Abraham,  as  the 
type  of  a  faith,  both  brave  and  patient,  gradually 
and  continuously  growing  under  the  education  of 
various  trials,  stands  contrasted  with  the  lower  cha 
racter  of  Jacob,  in  whom  the  same  faith  is  seen, 
tainted  with  deoeit  and  selfishness,  and  needing 
therefore  to  be  purged  by  disappointment  and  suffer 
ing.  Isaac  in  the  passive  gentleness  and  submis- 
siveness,  which  characterizes  his  whole  life,  and  is 
seen  especially  in  his  willingness  to  be  sacrificed  by 
the  hand  of  his  father,  and  Joseph,  in  the  moie 
active  spirit  of  love,  in  which  he  rejoiced  to  save 


PATKOBAS 

his  family  and  to  forgive  those  who  hau  persecuted 
and  sold  him,  set  forth  the  perfect  spirit  of  sonship, 
and  are  seen  to  be  types  especially  of  Him,  in  whom 
alone  that  spirit  dwelt  in  all  fulness. 

This  typical  character  in  the  hands  of  the  myth 
ical  school  is,  of  course,  made  an  argument  against 
the  historical  reality  of  the  whole ;  those  who  recog 
nise  an  unity  of  principle  in  God's  dispensations  at  all 
times,  will  be  prepared  to  find,  even  in  their  earliest 
and  simplest  form,  the  same  features  which  are  more 
fully  developed  in  their  later  periods.  [A.  B.] 

PAT'KOBAS  (narpo/Sas:  Patrobas).  A 
Christian  at  Home  to  whom  St.  Paul  sends  his 
salutation  (Rom.  xvi.  14).  According  to  late  and 
uncertain  tradition,  he  was  one  of  the  70  disciples, 
became  bishop  of  Puteoli  (Pseudo-Hippolytus,  De 
LXX.  Apostolis),  and  suffered  martyrdom  together 
with  Philologus  on  Nov.  4th  (Estius).  Like  many 
other  names  mentioned  in  Kom.  xvi.,  this  was  borne 
by  at  least  one  member  of  the  emperor's  household 
(Suet.  Galba,  20;  Martial,  Ep.  ii.  32,  3).  Pro 
bably  the  name  is  a  contraction,  like  others  of  the 
same  termination,  and  stands  for  TlarpAfiios  (see 
Wolf,  Cur.  Phiiolog.).  [VV.  T.  B.] 

PATROCLUS  (ndrPOK\os:  Patroclus),  the 
father  of  Nicanor,  the  famous  adversary  of  Judas 
Maccabaeus  (2  Mace.  viii.  9). 

PAU  (-1VS,  but  in  1  Chr.  i.  50,  PAI,  ^5,  though 
some  copies  agree  with  the  reading  in  Gen. :  Qoydp : 
'Phau),  the  capital  of  Hadar,  king  of  Edom  (Gen. 
xxxvi.  39).  Its  position  is  unknown.  The  only  name 
that  bears  any  resemblance  to  it  is  Phauara,  a  ruined 
place  in  Idumaea  mentioned  by  Seetzen.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PAUL  (noDXos:  Paulus),  the  Apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles. 

.  Original  Authorities. — Nearly  all  the  original 
materials  for  the  Life  of  St.  Paul  are  contained  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the  Pauline  Epis 
tles.  Out  of  a  comparison  of  these  authorities  the 
biographer  of  St.  Paul  has  to  construct  his  account 
of  the  really  important  period  of  the  Apostle's  life. 
The  early  traditions  of  the  Church  appear  to  have 
left  almost  untouched  the  space  of  time  for  which 
we  possess  those  sacred  and  abundant  sources  of 
knowledge  ;  and  they  aim  only  at  supplying  a  few 
particulars  in  the  biography  beyond  the  points  at 
which  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  begins  and  ter 
minates. 

The  history  and  the  Epistles  lie  side  by  side,  and 
are  to  all  appearance  quite  independent  of  one  an 
other.  It  was  not  the  purpose  of  the  historian  to 
write  a  life  of  St.  Paul,  even  as  much  as  the  re 
ceived  name  of  his  book  would  seem  to  imply. 
The  book  called  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  an 
account  of  the  beginnings  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
on  the  earth.  The  large  space  which  St.  Paul 
occupies  in  it  is  due  to  the  important  part  which 
he  bore  in  spreading  that  kingdom.  As  to  the 
Epistles,  nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  they 
were  written  without  reference  to  the  history  ;  and 
there  is  no  attempt  in  the  Canon  to  combine  them 
with  it  so  as  to  form  what  we  should  call  in  modem 
phrase  the  Apostle's  "  Life  and  Letters."  What 
amount  of  agreement,  and  what  amount  of  discre- 


PAUL 


731 


»  In  his  Paulus  der  Apostd  Jesu  Christi,  Stuttgart, 
1845. 

b  The  story  mentioned  by  Jerome  (Scrip.  Ecd.  Cat. 
'Paulus'),  that  St.  Paul's  parents  lived  at  Gischala  in 


pancy,  may  be  observed  between  these  independent 
authorities,  is  a  question  of  the  greatest  interest 
and  importance,  and  one  upon  which  various  opi 
nions  are  entertained.  The  most  adverse  and  extreme 
criticism  is  ably  represented  by  Dr.  Baur  of  Tubin 
gen,8  who  finds  so  much  opposition  between  what 
he  holds  to  be  the  few  authentic  Pauline  Epistles 
and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that  he  pronounces 
the  history  to  be  an  interested  fiction.  But  his 
criticism  is  the  very  caricature  of  captiousness. 
We  have  but  to  imagine  it  applied  to  any  history 
and  letters  of  acknowledged  authenticity,  and  we 
feel  irresistibly  how  arbitrary  and  unhistorical  it 
is.  Putting  aside  this  extreme  view,  it  is  not 
to  be  denied  that  difficulties  are  to  be  met  with 
in  reconciling  completely  the  Acts  and  the  received 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  What  the  solutions  of  such 
difficulties  may  be,  whether  there  are  any  direct  con 
tradictions,  how  far  the  apparent  differences  may 
be  due  to  the  purpose  of  the  respective  writers,  by 
what  arrangement  all  the  facts  presented  to  us  may 
best  be  dove-tailed  together, — these  are  the  various 
questions  which  have  given  so  much  occupation  to 
the  critics  and  expositors  of  St.  Paul,  and  upon 
some  of  which  it  seems  to  be  yet  impossible  to 
arrive  at  a  decisive  conclusion. 

We  shall  assume  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  to  be  a 
genuine  and  authentic  work  of  St.  Luke,  the  com 
panion  of  St.  Paul,  and  shall  speak  of  the  Epistles 
at  the  places  which  we  believe  them  to  occupy  in 
the  history 

Prominent  points  in  the  Life. — It  may  be  well 
to  state  beforehand  a  few  of  the  principal  occur 
rences  upon  which  the  great  work  done  by  St.  Paul 
in  the  world  is  seen  to  depend,  and  which  therefore 
serve  as  landmarks  in  his  life.  Foremost  of  all  is 
his  Conversion.  This  was  the  main  root  of  his 
whole  life,  outward  and  inward.  Next  after  this, 
we  may  specify  his  Labours  at  Antioch.  From 
these  we  pass  to  the  First  Missionary  Journey,  in 
the  eastern  part  of  Asia  Minor,  in  which  St.  Paul 
first  assumed  the  character  of  the  Apostle  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Gentiles.  The  Visit  to  Jerusalem, 
for  the  sake  of  settling  the  question  of  the  relation 
of  Gentile  converts  to  the  Jewish  law,  was  a  critical 
point,  both  in  the  history  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
Apostle.  The  introduction  of  the  Gospel  into 
Europe,  with  the  memorable  visits  to  Philippi, 
Athens,  and  Corinth,  was  the  boldest  step  in  the 
carrying  out  of  St.  Paul's  mission.  A  third  great 
missionary  journey,  chiefly  characterized  by  a  long 
staij  at  Ephesus,  is  further  interesting  from  its  con 
nexion  with  four  leading  Epistles.  This  was  imme 
diately  followed  by  the  apprehension  of  St.  Paul 
at  Jerusalem,  and  his  imprisonment  at  Caesarea. 
And  the  last  event  of  which  we  have  a  full  nar 
rative  is  the  Voyage  to  Home. 

The  relation  of  these  events  to  external  chrono 
logy  will  be  considered  at  the  end  of  the  article. 

Saul  of  Tarsus,  before  his  Conversion. — Up  to 
the  time  of  his  going  forth  as  an  avowed  preacher 
of  Christ  to  the  Gentiles,  the  Apostle  was  known 
by  the  name  of  Saul.  This  was  the  Jewish  name 
which  he  received  from  his  Jewish  parents.  But 
though  a  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews,  he  was  born  in 
a  Gentile  city.  Of  his  parents  we  know  nothing,1' 

Galilee,  and  that,  having  been  born  there,  the  infant  Saul 
emigrated  with  his  parents  to  Tarsus  upon  the  taking  of 
that  city  by  the  Romans,  is  inconsistent  with  the  fact 
that  Gischala  was  not  taken  until  a  much  later  time,  ami 


732 


PAUL 


except  that  his  father  was  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
(Phil.  iii.  5),  and  a  Pharisee  (Acts  xxiii.  6),  that 
he  had  acquired  by  some  means  the  Roman  fran 
chise  ("  I  was  free  born,"  Acts  xxii.  28),  and  that 
he  was  settled  in  Tarsus.  "  I  am  a  Jew  of  Tarsus, 
a  city  in  Cilicia,  a  citizen  of  no  mean  city"  (Acts 
xxi.  39).  Our  attention  seems  to  be  specially 
called  to  this  birthplace  and  early  home  of  Saul  by 
the  repeated  mention  of  it  in  connexion  with  his 
name.  Here  he  must  have  learnt  to  use  the 
Greek  language  with  freedom  and  mastery  in 
both  speaking  and  writing;  and  the  general  tone 
and  atmosphere  of  a  cultivated  community  cannot 
have  been  without  their  effect  upon  his  highly  sus 
ceptible  nature.  At  Tarsus  also  he  learnt  that 
trade  of  ffKijvovoi&s  (Acts  xviii.  3),  at  which  he 
afterwards  occasionally  wrought  with  his  own 
hands.  There  was  a  goat's-hair  cloth  called  Cili- 
cium,  manufactured  in  Cilicia,  and  largely  used 
for  tents.  Saul's  trade  was  probably  that  of  making 
tents  of  this  haircloth.  It  does  not  follow  that  the 
family  were  in  the  necessitous  condition  which 
such  manual  labour  commonly  implies;  for  it  was 
a  wholesome  custom  amongst  the  Jews,  to  teach 
every  child  some  trade,  though  there  might  be 
little  prospect  of  his  depending  upon  it  for  his 
living. 

When  St.  Paul  makes  his  defence  before  his 
countrymen  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxii.),  he  tells  them 
that  though  born  in  Tarsus,  he  had  been  "  brought 
up"  (a.va.rfOpa.fj.iJ.«vos)  in  Jerusalem.  He  must, 
therefore,  have  been  yet  a  boy,  when  he  was  re 
moved,  in  all  probability  for  the  sake  of  his  educa 
tion,  to  the  Holy  City  of  his  fathers.  We  may 
imagine  him  arriving  there,  perhaps  at  some  agec 
between  10  and  15,  already  a  Hellenist,  speaking 
Greek  and  familiar  with  the  Greek  version  of  the 
Scriptures,  possessing,  besides  the  knowledge  of  his 
trade,  the  elements  of  Gentile  learning, — to  be 
taught  at  Jerusalem  "  according  to  the  perfect 
manner  of  the  law  of  the  fathers."  He  learnt,  he 
says,  "  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel."  He  who  was  to 
resist  so  stoutly  the  usurpations  of  the  law,  had  for 
his  teacher  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  all  the 
doctors  of  the  law.  [GAMALIEL.]  It  is  singular, 
that  on  the  occasion  of  his  well-known  interven 
tion  in  the  Apostolical  history,  the  master's  coun 
sels  of  toleration  are  in  marked  contrast  to  the 
persecuting  zeal  so  soon  displayed  by  the  pupil. 
The  temper  of  Gamaliel  himself  was  moderate  and 
candid,  and  he  was  personally  free  from  bigotry; 
but  his  teaching  was  that  of  the  strictest  of  the 
Pharisees,  and  bore  its  natural  fruit  when  lodged  in 
the  ardent  and  thorough-going  nature  of  Saul. 
Other  fruits,  besides  that  of  a  zeal  which  persecuted 
the  Church,  may  no  doubt  be  leferred  to  the  time 
when  Saul  sat  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel.  A  thorough 
training  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  the  traditions  of 
the  elders  under  an  acute  and  accomplished  master, 
must  have  done  much  to  exercise  the  mind  of  Saul, 
and  to  make  him  feel  at  home  in  the  subjects  in 
which  lie  was  afterwards  to  be  so  intensely  inte 
rested.  And  we  are  not  at  all  bound  to  suppose 
that,  because  his  zeal  for  the  law  was  strong  enough 
to  set  him  upon  persecuting  the  believers  in  Jesus, 


with  the  Apostle's  own  statement  that  he  was  born  at 
Tursiis  (Acts  xxii.  3). 

0  His  words  in  the  speech  before  Agrippa  (Acts  xxvi. 
4,  5),  according  to  the  received  text,  refer  exclusively 
to  his  life  at  Jerusalem.  But  if  we  read,  with  the 


PAUL 

he  had  therefore  experienced  none  of  the  doubt* 
and  struggles  which,  according  to  his  subsequent 
testimony,  it  was  the  nature  of  the  law  to  produce. 
On  the  contrary,  we  can  scarcely  imagine  these  as 
absent  from  the  spiritual  life  of  Saul  as  he  passed 
from  boyhood  to  manhood.  Earnest  persecutors 
are,  oftener  than  not,  men  who  have  been  tormented 
by  inward  struggles  and  perplexities.  The  pupil 
of  Gamaliel  may  have  been  crushing  a  multitude  of 
conflicts  in  his  own  mind  when  he  threw  himself 
into  the  holy  work  of  extirpating  the  new  heresy. 

Saul  was  yet  "  a  young  man "  (vtavlcu,  Acts 
vii.  58),  when  the  Church  experienced  that  sudden 
expansion  which  was  connected  with  the  ordaining 
of  the  Seven  appointed  to  serve  tables,  and  with 
the  special  power  and  inspiration  of  Stephen. 
Amongst  those  who  disputed  with  Stephen  were 
some  "  of  them  of  Cilicia."  We  naturally  think  of 
Saul  as  having  been  one  of  these,  when  we  find 
him  afterwards  keeping  the  clothes  of  those  suborned 
witnesses  who,  according  to  the  law  (Deut.  xvii. 
7),  were  the  first  to  cast  stones  at  Stephen.  "  Saul," 
says  the  sacral  writer,  significantly,  "  was  consent 
ing  unto  his  death."  The  angelic  glory  that  shone 
from  Stephen's  face,  and  the  Divine  truth  of  his 
words,  failing  to  subdue  the  spirit  of  religious 
hatred  now  burning  in  Saul's  breast,  must  have 
embittered  and  aggravated  its  rage.  Saul  was 
passing  through  a  terrible  crisis  for  a  man  of  his 
nature.  But  he  was  not  one  to  be  moved  from  his 
stem  purpose  by  the  native  refinement  and  tender 
ness  which  he  must  have  been  stifling  within  him. 
He  was  the  most  unwearied  and  unrelenting  of  per 
secutors.  "  As  for  Saul,  he  made  havoc  of  the 
Church,  entering  into  every  house,  and  haling  men 
and  women,  committed  them  to  prison"  (Acts 
viii.  3). 

Saul's  Conversion. — The  persecutor  was  to  be  con 
verted.  What  the  nature  of  that  conversion  was,  w6 
are  now  to  observe. — Having  undertaken  to  follow  up 
the  believers  "  unto  strange  cities,"  Saul  naturally 
turned  his  thoughts  to  Damascus,  expecting  to  find, 
amongst  the  numerous  Jewish  residents  of  that  po 
pulous  city,  some  adherents  of  "the  way"  (rfjs 
6SoD),  and  trusting,  we  must  presume,  to  be 
allowed  by  the  connivance  of  the  governor  to  appre 
hend  them.  What  befell  him  as  he  journeyed  thi 
ther,  is  related  in  detail  three  times  in  the  Acts,  first 
by  the  historian  in  his  own  pei-son,  then  in  the  two 
addresses  made  by  St.  Paul  at  Jerusalem  and  before 
Agrippa.  These  three  narratives  are  not  repetitions 
of  one  another:  there  are  differences  between  them 
which  some  critics  choose  to  consider  irreconcile- 
able.  Considering  that  the  same  author  is  respon 
sible  for  all  the  accounts,  we  gain  nothing,  of  course, 
for  the  authenticity  of  their  statements  by  bringing 
them  into  agreement ;  but  it  seems  pretty  clear  that 
the  author  himself  could  not  have  been  conscious 
of  any  contradictions  in  the  narratives.  He  can 
scarcely  have  had  any  motive  for  placing  side  by 
side  inconsistent  reports  of  St.  Paul's  conversion  ; 
and  that  he  should  have  admitted  inconsistencies  on 
such  a  matter  through  mere  carelessness,  is  hardly 
credible.  Of  the  three  narratives,  that  of  the  his 
torian  himself  must  claim  to  be  the  most  purely 


better  authorities,  (v  ti  'Itp.  for  iv  'Itp.  he  may  bo 
speaking  of  the  life  he  led  "amongst  his  own  people" 
at  Tarsus  or  elsewhere,  as  wett  at  of  his  residence  at 
Jerusalem. 


PAUL 

historical :  St.  Paul's  subsequent  -accounts  were 
likely  to  be  affected  by  the  purpose  for  which  he 
introduced  them.  St.  Luke's  statement  is  to  be 
read  in  Acts  ix.  3-19,  where,  however,  the  words 
"  It  is  hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the  pricks,"  in 
cluded  in  the  Vulgate  and  English  version,  ought 
to  be  omitted.  The  sudden  light  from  heaven  ;  the 
voice  of  Jesus  speaking  with  authority  to  His  perse 
cutor;  Saul  struck  to  the  ground,  blinded,  over 
come  ;  the  three  days'  suspense ;  the  coming  of 
Ananias  as  a  messenger  of  the  Lord  ;  and  Saul's  bap 
tism  ; — these  were  the  leading  features,  in  the  eyes 
of  the  historian,  of  the  great  event,  and  in  these  we 
must  look  for  the  chief  significance  of  the  con 
version. 

Let  us  now  compare  the  historical  relation  with 
.those  which  we  have  in  St.  Paul's  speeches  (Acts 
xxii.  and  xxvi.).     The  reader  will  do  well  to  con- 
eider  each  in  its  place.     But  we  have  here  to  deal 
with   the   bare  facts  of  agreement   or   difference. 
With  regard  to  the  light,  the  speeches  add  to  what 
St.  Luke  tells  us  that  the  phenomenon  occurred 
at  mid-day,  and  that  the  light  shone  round,  and  was 
visible  to,  Saul's  companions  as  well  as  himself. 
The  2nd  speech  says,  that  at  the  shining  of  this 
light,  the  whole  company  (';we  all")  fell  to  the 
ground.     This  is  not  contradicted  by  what  is  said, 
ix.  7,  "  the  men  which  journeyed  with  him  stooc 
speechless,"  for  there  is  no  emphasis  on  "  stood,'1 
nor  is  the  standing  antithetical  to  Saul's  falling 
down.     We  have  but  to  suppose  the  others  rising 
before  Saul,  or  standing  still  afterwards  in  greatei 
perplexity,    through  not  seeing   or  hearing  wha 
Saul   saw  and  heard,   to  reconcile  the   narratives 
without  forcing  either.     After  the  question,  "  Whi 
persecutes!  thou  me?"  the  2nd  speech  adds,  "It  is 
hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the  goads."     Then 
both  the  speeches  supply  a  question  and  answer — 
"  I  answered,  who  art  thou,  Lord?    And  he  said, 
am  Jesus  (of  Nazareth),  whom  thou  persecutest.' 
In  the  direction  to  go  into  Damascus  and  awai 
orders  there,  the  1st  speech  agrees  with  Acts  ix 
But  whereas  according   to  that  chapter  the  men 
with  Saul  "heard  the  voice,"  in  the  1st  speech  i 
is  said  "  they  heard  not  the  voice  of  him  that  spak 
to  me."     It  seems  reasonable  to  conclude  from  th 
two  passages,  that  the  men  actually  heard  sounds 
but  not,  like  Saul,  an  articulate  voice.     With  regan 
to  the  visit  of  Ananias,  there  is  no  collision  betwee 
the  9th  chapter  and  the  1st  speech,  the  latter  onl; 
attributing  additional  words  to  Ananias.     The  2n 
speech  ceases  to  give  details  of  the  conversion  afte 
the  words,  "  I  am  Jesus,  whom  thou  persecutest 
But  rise  and  stand  on  thy  feet."     St.  Paul  adds 
from  the  mouth  of  Jesus,  an  exposition  of  the  pui 
pose  for  which  He  had  appeared  to  him.    It  is  easy  t 
say  that  in  ascribing  these  words  to  Jesus,  St.  Pau 
or  his  professed  reporter  is  violating  the  order  an 
sequence  of  the  earlier  accounts.     But,  if  we  bea 
'  in  mind  the  nature  and  purpose  of  St.  Paul's  addres 
before  Agrippa,  we  shall  surely  not  suppose  that  h 
is  violating  the  strict  truth,  when  he  adds  to  th 
words  which  Jesus  spoke  to  him  at  the  moment 
the  light  and  the  sound,  without  interposing  an 
reference  to  a  later  occasion,  that  fuller  expositio 
of  the  meaning  of  the  crisis  through  which  he  wr 
passing,  which  he  was  not  to  receive  till  afterward 
What  Saul  actually  heard  from  Jesus  on  the  wa 
as  he  journeyed,  was  afterwards  interpreted,  to  th 
mind  of  Saul,  into  those  definite  expressions. 
For  we  must  not  forget  that,  whatever  we  ho 


PAUL 


733 


s  to  the  external  nature  of  the  phenomena  we  are 
onsidering,  the  whole  transaction  was  essentially, 
n  any  case,  a  spiritual  communication.  That  the 
,ord  Jesus  manifested  Himself  as  a  Living  Person 
o  the  man  Saul,  and  spoke  to  him  so  that  His  very 
vords  could  be  undei stood,  is  the  substantial  fiirt 
eclared  to  us.  The  purport  of  the  three  narratives 
s  that  an  actual  conversation  took  place  between 
aul  and  the  Lord  Jesus.  It  is  remarkable  that  in 
one  of  them  is  Saul  said  to  have  seen  Jesus.  The 
p-ounds  for  believing  that  he  did  are  the  two  ex- 
iressions  of  Ananias  (Acts  ix.  17),  "  The  Lord  Jesus, 
who  appeared  unto  thee  in  the  way,"  and  (Acts 
xxii.  14}  "  That  thou  shouldest  see  the  Just  One," 
and  the  statement  of  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  8),  "  Last 
of  all  He  was  seen  of  me  also."  Comparing  these 
)assages  with  the  narratives,  we  conclude,  either 
,hat  Saul  had  an  instantaneous  vision  of  Jesus  as 
;he  flash  of  light  blinded  him,  or  that  the  "seeing" 
was  that  apprehension  of  His  presence  which  would 
;o  with  a  real  conversation.  How  it  was  that  Saul 
'  saw  "  and  "  heard  "  we  are  quite  unable  to  de- 
ermine.  That  the  light,  and  the  sound  or  voice, 
were  both  different  from  any  ordinary  phenomena 
with  which  Saul  and  his  companions  were  familiar, 
is  unquestionably  implied  in  the  narrative.  It  is 
also  implied  that  they  were  specially  significant  to 
Saul,  and  not  to  those  with  him.  We  gather  there 
fore  that  there  were  real  outward  phenomena, 
through  which  Saul  was  made  inwardly  sensible  of 
a  Presence  revealed  to  him  alone. 

Externally  there  was  a  flash  of  light.  Spiritually 
"  the  light  of  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of  the  Christ, 
who  is  the  image  of  God,"  shone  upon  Saul,  anu 
convicted  the  darkness  of  the  heart  which  had  shut 
out  Love  and  knew  not  the  glory  of  the  Cross. 
Externally  Saul  fell  to  the  ground.  Spiritually  he 
was  prostrated  by  shame,  when  he  knew  whom  he 
had  been  persecuting.  Externally  sounds  issued  out 
of  heaven.  Spiritually  the  Crucified  said  to  Saul, 
with  tender  remonstrance,  "  I  am  Jesus,  why  per 
secutest  thou  me?"  Whether  audibly  to  his' com 
panions,  or  audibly  to  the  Lord  Jesus  only,  Saul 
confessed  himself  in  the  spirit  the  servant  of  Him 
whose  name  he  had  hated.  He  gave  himself  up, 
without  being  able  to  see  his  way,  to  the  disposal 
of  Him  whom  he  now  knew  to  have  vindicated  His 
claim  over  him  by  the  very  sacrifice  which  for 
merly  he  had  despised.  The  Pharisee  was  con- 
verted,  once  for  all,  into  a  disciple  of  Jesus  the 
Crucified. 

The  only  mention  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  of 
the  outward  phenomena  attending  his  conversion 
is  that  in  1  Cor.  xv.  8,  "  Last  of  all  He  was  seen 
of  me  also."  But  there  is  one  important  passage 
in  which  he  speaks  distinctly  of  uis  conversion 
itself.  Dr.  Baur  (Paulas,  p.  64),  with  his  readi 
ness  to  find  out  discrepancies,  insists  that  this  pas 
sage  represents  quite  a  different  process  from  that 
recorded  in  the  Acts.  It  is  manifestly  not  a  repe 
tition  of  what  we  have  been  reading  and  considering, 
but  it  is  in  the  most  perfect  harmony  with  it.  In 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (i.  15,  16)  St.  Paul 
has  these  words:  "When  it  pleased  God,  who  sepa 
rated  me  from  my  mother's  womb,  and  called  me 
by  His  grace,  to  reveal  His  Son  in  me,  that  I 
might  preach  Him  among  the  heathen  .  .  ."  (diro- 
KaAi'4/cu  T}>V  vlbv  avrov  tv  f(j.oi).  What  words 
could  express  more  exactly  than  these  the  spiritual 
experience  which  occurred  to  Saul  on  the  way  to 
Damascus  ?  The  manifestation  of  Jesus  as  the  Son 


734  PAUL 

of  God  is  clearly  the  main  point  in  the  narrative. 
This  manifestation  was  brought  about  through  a 
removal  of  the  veils  of  prejudice  and  ignorance 
which  blinded  the  eyes  of  Saul  to  a  Crucified 
Deliverer,  conquering  through  sacrifice.  And,  what 
ever  part  the  senses  may  have  played  in  the  trans 
action,  the  essence  of  it  in  any  case  must  have  been 
Saul's  inward  vision  of  a  spiritual  Lord  close  to  his 
spirit,  from  whom  he  could  not  escape,  whose  every 
command  he  was  henceforth  to  obey  in  the  Spirit. 

It  would  be  groundless  to  assume  that  the  new 
convictions  of  that  mid-day  immediately  cleared  and 
M-ttli'd  themselves  in  Saul's  mind.  It  is  sufficient 
to  say  that  he  was  then  converted,  or  turned  round. 
For  a  while,  no  doubt,  his  inward  state  was  one  of 
awe  and  expectation.  He  was  being  "  led  by  the 
hand"  spiritually  by  his  Master,  as  well  as  bodily 
by  his  companions.  Thus  entering  Damascus  as  a 
servant  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  he  sought  the  house  of 
one  whom  he  had,  perhaps,  intended  to  persecute. 
Judas  may  have  been  known  to  his  guest  as  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord.  Certainly  the  fame  of  Saul's 
coming  had  preceded  him  ;  and  Ananias,  "a  devout 
man  according  to  the  law,"  but  a  believer  in  Jesus, 
when  directed  by  the  Lord  to  visit  him,  wonders  at 
what  he  is  told  concerning  the  notorious  persecutor. 
He  obeys,  however ;  and  going  to  Saul  in  the  name 
of  "  the  Lord  Jesus,  who  had  appeared  to  him  in 
the  way,"  he  puts  his  hands  on  him  that  he  may 
receive  his  sight  and  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Thereupon  Saul's  eyes  are  immediately  purged,  and 
his  sight  is  restored.  "  The  same  hour,"  says  St. 
Paul  (Acts  xxii.  13),  "  I  looked  up  upon  him.  And 
lie  said.  The  God  of  our  fathers  hath  chosen  thee, 
that  thou  shouldest  know  His  will,  and  see  the  Just 
One,  and  shouldest  hear  the  voice  of  His  mouth. 
For  thou  shalt  be  His  witness  unto  all  men  of  what 
thou  hast  seen  and  heard."  Every  word  in  this 
address  strikes  some  chord  which  we  hear  sounded 
again  and  again  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  The  new 
convert  is  not,  as  it  is  so  common  to  say,  converted 
from  Judaism  to  Christianity — the  Ood  of  the 
Jewish  fathers  chooses  him.  He  is  chosen  to  know 
God's  will.  That  will  is  manifested  in  the  Righteous 
One.  Him  Saul  sees  and  hears,  in  order  that  he 
may  be  a  witness  of  Him  to  all  men.  The  eternal 
•will  of  the  God  of  Abraham  ;  that  will  revealed  in 
a  Righteous  Son  of  God;  the  testimony  concerning 
Him,  a  Gospel  to  mankind : — these  are  the  essentially 
Pauline  principles  which  are  declared  in  all  the  teach 
ing  of  the  Apostle,  and  illustrated  in  all  his  actions. 

After  the  recovery  of  his  sight,  Saul  received  the 
washing  away  of  his  sins  in  baptism.  He  then 
broke  his  three  days'  fast,  and  was  strengthened: 
an  image,  again,  of  the  strengthening  of  his  faint 
and  hungering  spirit  through  a  participation  in  the 
Divine  life  of  the  Church  at  Damascus.  He  was  at 
once  received  into  the  fellowship  of  the  disciples, 
and  began  without  delay  the  work  to  which  Ananias 
had  designated  him ;  and  to  the  astonishment  of  all 
his  hearers  he  proclaimed  Jesus  in  the  synagogues, 
declaring  him  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  This  was  the 
natural  sequel  to  his  conversion:  he  was  to  pro 
claim  Jesus  the  Crucified,  first  to  the  Jews  as  their 
own  Christ,  afterwards  to  the  world  as  the  Sou  of 
the  Living  God. 

The  narrative  in  the  Acts  tells  us  simply  that  he 
Xvas  occupied  in  this  work,  with  increasing  vigour, 
lor  ''many  days/'  up  to  the  time  when  imminent 
danger  drove  him  from  Damascus..  From  the  Epistle 
to  the  Galatians  ^i.  17, 18)  we  learn  that  the  many 


PAUL 

days  were  at  least  a  good  part  of  "  three  years," 
and  that  Saul,  not  thinking  it  necessary  to  procure 
authority  to  preach  from  the  Apostles  that  were 
before  him,  went  after  his  conversion  into  Arabia, 
and  returned  from  thence  to  l>amascus.  We  know 
nothing  whatever  of  this  visit  to  Arabia — to  what 
district  Saul  went,  how  long  he  stayed,  or  for  what 
purpose  he  went  there.  From  the  antithetical  way 
in  which  it  is  opposed  to  a  visit  to  the  Apostles  at 
Jerusalem,  we  infer  that  it  took  place  before  he 
deliberately  committed  himself  to  the  task  of  pro 
claiming  Jesus  as  the  Christ ;  and  also,  with  some 
probability,  that  he  was  seeking  seclusion,  in  order 
that,  by  conferring  "  not  with  flesh  and  blood,"  but 
with  the  Lord  in  the  Spirit,  he  might  receive  more 
deeply  into  his  mind  the  commission  given  him  at  his 
conversion.  That  Saul  did  not  spend  the  greater 
portion  of  the  "  three  years "  at  Damascus  seem* 
probable,  for  these  two  reasons:  (1)  that  the  anger 
of  the  Jews  was  not  likely  to  have  home  with  two 
or  three  years  of  such  a  life  as  Saul's  now  was 
without  growing  to  a  height ;  and  (2)  that  the 
disciples  at  Jerusalem  would  not  have  been  likely 
to  mistrust  Saul  as  they  did,  if  they  had  heard  of 
him  as  preaching  Jesus  at  Damascus  for  the  same 
considerable  period.  But  it  does  not  follow  that 
Saul  was  in  Arabia  all  the  time  he  was  not  disput 
ing  at  Damascus.  For  all  that  we  know  to  the 
contrary  he  may  have  gone  to  Antioch  or  Tarsus 
or  anywhere  else,  or  he  may  have  remained  silent 
at  Damascus  for  some  time  after  returuing  from 
Arabia. 

Now  that  we  have  arrived  at  Saul's  departure 
from  Damascus,  we  aie  again  upon  historical  ground, 
and  have  the  double  evidence  of  St.  Luke  in  the 
Acts,  and  of  the  Apostle  in  his  2nd  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians.  According  to  the  former,  the  Jews 
lay  in  wait  for  Saul,  intending  to  kill  him,  and 
watched  the  gates  of  the  city  that  he  might  not 
escape  from  them.  Knowing  this,  the  disciples  took 
him  by  night  and  let  him  down  in  a  basket  from 
the  wall.  According  to  St.  Paul  (2  Cor.  xi.  32) 
it  was  the  ethnarch  under  Aretas  the  king  who 
watched  for  him,  desiring  to  apprehend  him.  There 
is  no  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  two  statements. 
We  might  similarly  say  that  our  Lord  was  put  to 
death  either  by  the  Jews  or  by  the  Roman  governor. 
There  is  more  difficulty  in  ascertaining  how  an 
officer  of  king  Aretas  should  be  governing  in  Da 
mascus,  and  why  he  should  lend  himself  to  the 
designs  of  the  Jews.  But  we  learn  from  secular 
history  that  the  affairs  of  Damascus  were,  at  the 
time,  in  such  an  unsettled  state  as  to  make  the  nar 
rative  not  improbable.  [ARETAS.]  Having  es 
caped  from  Damascus,  Saul  betook  himself  to  Je 
rusalem,  and  there  "  assayed  to  join  himself  to  the 
disciples;  but  they  were  all  afraid  of  him,  and 
believed  not  that  he  was  a  disciple."  In  this 
natural  but  trying  difficulty  Saul  was  befriended 
by  one  whose  name  was  henceforth  closely  asso 
ciated  with  his.  Barnabas  became  his  sponsor  to 
the  Apostles  and  Church  at  Jerusalem,  assuring 
them — from  some  personal  knowledge,  we  must 
presume — of  the  facts  of  Saul's  conversion  ami  MiK- 
sequent  behaviour  at  Damascus.  It  is  noticeable 
that  the  seeing  and  hearing  are  still  the  leading 
features  in  the  conversion,  and  the  name  of  Jesus 
in  the  preaching.  Barnabas  declared  how  "  Saul 
had  seen  the  Lord  in  the  way,  and  that  he  had 
spoken  to  him,  and  how  that  he  had  preached 
boldly  at  Damascus  in  the  name  of  Jesus."  Bar- 


PAUL 

nab:is's  introduction  removed  the  fears  of  the 
Ajtostles,  aud  Paul  "  was  with  them  comiug  in  and 
going  out  at  Jerusalem."  His  Hellenistical  educa 
tion  made  him,  like  Stephen,  a  successful  disputant 
against  the  "  Grecians ;"  and  it  is  not  strange  that 
the  former  persecutor  was  singled  out  from  the  other 
believers  as  the  object  of  a  murderous  hostility.  He 
was  therefore  again  urged  to  flee;  and  by  way  of 
Caesarea  betook  himself  to  his  native  city  Tarsus. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  St.  Paul  adds 
certain  particulars,  in  which  only  a  perverse  and 
captious  criticism  could  see  anything  contradictory 
to  the  facts  just  related.  He  tells  us  that  his  motive 
for  going  up  to  Jerusalem  rather  than  anywhere 
else  was  that  he  might  see  Peter ;  that  he  abode 
with  him  fifteen  days ;  that  the  only  Apostles  he 
saw  were  Peter  and  James  the  Lord's  brother  ;  and 
that  afterwards  he  came  into  the  regions  of  Syria 
and  Cilicia,  remaining  unknown  by  face,  though 
well-known  for  his  conversion,  to  the  churches  in 
Judaea  vhich  were  in  Christ.  St.  Paul's  object  in 
referring  to  this  connexion  of  his  with  those  who 
were  Apostles  before  him,  was  to  show  that  he 
had  never  accepted  his  apostleship  as  a  commission 
from  them.  On  this  point  the  narrative  in  the 
Acts  entirely  agrees  with  St.  Paul's  own  earnest 
asseverations  in  his  Epistles.  He  received  his  com 
mission  from  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  also  mediately 
through  Ananias.  This  commission  included  a 
special  designation  to  preach  Christ  to  the  Gentiles. 
Upon  the  latter  designation  he  did  not  act,  until 
circumstances  opened  the  way  for  it.  But  he  at 
once  began  to  proclaim  Jesus  as  the  Christ  to  his 
own  countrymen.  Barnabas  introduced  him  to  the 
Apostles,  not  as  seeking  their  sanction,  but  as  having 
seen  and  heard  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  as  having  boldly 
spoken  already  in  His  name.  Probably  at  first, 
Saul's  independence  as  an  Apostle  of  Christ  was  not 
distinctly  thought  of,  either  by  himself  or  by  the 
older  Apostles.  It  was  not  till  afterwards  that  it 
became  so  important ;  and  then  the  reality  of  it 
appeared  plainly  from  a  reference  to  the  beginning 
of  his  Apostolic  work. 

St.  Paul  at  Antioch. — While  Saul  was  at  Tarsus, 
a  movement  was  going  on  at  Antioch,  which  raised 
that  city  to  an  importance  second  only  to  that  of 
Jerusalem  itself  in  the  early  history  of  the  Church. 
In  the  life  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  Antioch 
claims  a  most  conspicuous  place.  It  was  there  that 
the  Preaching  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles  first 
took  root,  and  from  thence  that  it  was  afterwards 
piopagated.  Its  geographical  position,  its  political 
and  commercial  importance,  and  the  presence  of  a 
large  and  powerful  Jewish  element  in  its  popula 
tion,  were  the  more  obvious  characteristics  which 
adapted  it  for  such  a  use.  There  came  to  Antioch, 
when  the  persecution  which  arose  about  Stephen 
scattered  upon  their  different  routes  the  disciples 
who  had  been  assembled  at  Jerusalem,  men  of 
Cyprus  and  Gyrene,  eager  to  tell  all  who  would 
hear  them  the  good  news  concerning  the  Lord  Jesus. 
Until  Antioch  was  reached,  the  word  was  spoken 
*'  to  none  but  unto  Jews  only"  (Acts  xi.  19).  But 
here  the  Gentiles  also  (of  "EA.A.TjJ'tj) — not,  as  in 
the  A.  V.,  "the  Grecians,"  —  were  amongst  the 
hearers  of  the  word.  A  great  number  believed ; 
and  when  this  was  reported  at  Jerusalem,  Barnabas 
Was  sent  on  a  special  mission  to  Antioch. 

As  the  work  grew  under  his  hands,  and  "  much 
people  was  added  unto  the  Lord,"  Barnabas  felt  the 
need  of  help,  and  went  himself  to  Tarsus  to  seek  Saul. 


PAUL 


735 


Possibly  ab  Damascus,  certainly  at  Jerusalem,  he 
had  been  a  witness  of  Saul's  energy  and  devoted- 
ness,  and  skill  in  disputation.  He  had  been  drawn 
to  him  by  the  bond  of  a  most  brotherly  affection. 
He  therefore  longed  for  him  as  a  helper,  and  suc 
ceeded  in  bringing  him  to  Antioch.  There  they 
laboured  together  unremittingly  for  "  a  whole 
year,"  mixing  with  the  constant  assemblies  of  the 
believers,  and  "  teaching  much  people."  All  this 
time,  as  St.  Luke  would  give  us  to  understand, 
Saul  was  subordinate  to  Barnabas.  Until  "  Saul " 
became  "  Paul,"  we  read  of  "  Barnabas  and  Saul " 
(Acts  xi.  30,  xii.  25,  xiii.  2,  7).  Afterwards  the 
order  changes  to  "  Paul  and  Barnabas."  It  seems 
reasonable  to  conclude  that  there  was  no  marked 
peculiarity  in  the  teaching  of  Saul  during  the  An 
tioch  period.  He  held  and  taught,  in  common 
with  the  other  Jewish  believers,  the  simple  faith  in 
Jesus  the  Christ,  crucified  and  raised  from  the 
dead.  Nor  did  he  ever  afterwards  depart  from  the 
simplicity  of  this  faith.  But  new  circumstances 
stirred  up  new  questions;  and  then  it  was  to  Saul 
of  Tarsus  that  it  was  given  to  see,  more  clearly 
than  any  others  saw,  those  new  applications  of  the 
old  truth,  those  deep  and  world- wide  relations  of  it, 
with  which  his  work  was  to  be  permanently  asso 
ciated.  In  the  mean  time,  according  to  the  usual 
method  of  the  Divine  government,  facts  were  silently 
growing,  which  were  to  suggest  and  occasion  the 
future  developments  of  faith  and  practice,  and  of 
these  facts  the  most  conspicuous  was  the  unprece 
dented  accession  of  Gentile  proselytes  at  Antioch. 

An  opportunity  soon  occurred,  of  which  Bar 
nabas  and  Saul  joyfully  availed  themselves,  for 
proving  the  affection  of  these  new  disciples  towards 
their  brethren  at  Jerusalem,  and  for  knitting  the 
two  communities  together  in  the  bonds  of  practical 
fellowship.  A  manifest  impulse  from  the  Holy 
Spirit  began  this  work.  There  came  "  prophets " 
from  Jerusalem  to  Antioch:  "and  there  stood  up 
one  of  them,  named  Agabus,  and  signified  by  the 
Spirit  that  there  should  be  great  dearth  throughout 
all  the  world."  The  "  prophets  "  who  now  arrived 
may  have  been  the  Simeon  and  Lucius  and  Manaen, 
mentioned  in  xiii.  t.,  besides  Agabus  and  others. 
The  prediction  of  the  dearth  need  not  have  been 
purposeless ;  it  would  naturally  have  a  direct  re 
ference  to  the  needs  of  the  poorer  brethren  and  the 
duty  of  the  richer.  It  is  obvious  that  the  fulfil 
ment  followed  closely  upon  the  intimation  of  the 
cowing  famine.  For  the  disciples  at  Antioch  deter 
mined  to  send  contributions  immediately  to  Jeru 
salem  ;  and  the  gift  was  conveyed  to  the  elders  of 
that  Church  by  the  hands  of  Barnabas  and  Saul. 
The  time  of  this  dearth  is  vaguely  designated  in  the 
Acts  as  the  reign  of  Claudius.  It  is  ascertained 
from  Josephus's  history,  that  a  severe  famine  did 
actually  prevail  in  Judaea,  and  especially  at  Jeru 
salem,  at  the  very  time  fixed  by  the  event  recorded 
in  Acts  xii.,  the  death  of  Herod  Agrippa.  This 
was  in  A.D.  44.  [AGABUS.] 

It  could  not  have  been  necessary  for  the  mere 
safe  conduct  of  the  contribution  that  Barnabas  and 
Saul  should  go  in  person  to  Jerusalem.  We  are 
bound  to  see  in  the  relations  between  the  Mother- 
Church  and  that  of  Antioch,  of  which  this  visit  is 
illustrative,  examples  of  the  deep  feeling  of  the  ne 
cessity  of  union  which  dwelt  in  the  heart  of  the 
early  Church.  The  Apostles  did  not  go  forth  to 
teach  a  system,  but  to  enlarge  a  body.  The  Spirit 
which  directed  and  furthered  their  labours  was 


733 


PAUL 


essentially  the  Spirit  of  fellowship.  By  this  Spirit 
Saul  of  Tarsus  was  being  practically  trained  in 
strict  co-operation  with  his  elders  in  the  Church. 
The  habits  which  he  learnt  now  were  to  aid  in 
guarding  him  at  a  later  time  from  supposing  that 
the  independence  which  he  was  bound  to  claim, 
should  involve  the  slightest  breach  or  loosening  of 
the  bonds  of  the  universal  brotherhood. 

Having  discharged  their  errand,  Barnabas  and 
Saul  returned  to  Antioch,  bringing  with  them  an 
other  helper,  John  surnamed  Mark,  sister's  son  to 
Barnabas.  The  work  of  prophesying  and  teaching 
was  resumed.  Several  of  the  oldest  and  most  ho 
noured  of  the  believers  in  Jesus  were  expounding 
the  way  of  God  and  organizing  the  Church  in  that 
busy  metropolis.  Travellers  were  incessantly  pass 
ing  to  and  fro.  Antioch  was  in  constant  commu 
nication  with  Cilicia,  with  Cyprus,  with  all  the 
neighbouring  countries.  The  question  must  have 
forced  itself  upon  hundreds  of  the  "  Christians  "  at 
Antioch,  "  What  is  the  meaning  of  this  faith  of 
ours,  of  this  baptism,  of  this  incorporation,  of  this 
kingdom  of  the  Son  of  God,  for  the  world?  The 
Gospel  is  not  for  Judaea  alone:  here  are  we  called 
by  it  at  Antioch.  Is  it  meant  to  stop  here?"  The 
Church  was  pregnant  with  a  great  movement,  and 
the  time  of  her  delivery  was  at  hand.  We  forget 
the  whole  method  of  the  Divine  work  in  the  nurture 
of  the  Church,  if  we  ascribe  to  the  impulses  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  any  theatrical  suddenness,  and  discon 
nect  them  from  the  thoughts  which  were  brooding 
in  the  minds  of  the  disciples.  At  every  point  we  find 
both  circumstances  and  inward  reasonings  preparing 
the  crisis.  Something  of  direct  expectation  seems  to 
be  implied  in  what  is  said  of  the  leaders  of  the  Church 
at  Antioch,  that  they  were  "ministering  to  the 
Lord,  and  fasting,"  when  the  Holy  Ghost  spoke  to 
them.  Without  doubt  they  knew  it  for  a  seal  set 
upon  previous  surmises,  when  the  voice  came  clearly 
to  the  general  mind,  "  Separate  me  Barnabas  and 
Saul  for  the  work  whereuuto  I  have  called  them." 
That  "  work  "  was  partially  known  already  to  the 
Christians  of  Antioch :  who  could  be  so  fit  for  it 
as  the  two  brothers  in  the  faith  and  in  mutual 
affection,  the  son  of  exhortation,  and  the  highly  ac 
complished  and  undaunted  convert  who  had  from 
the  first  been  called  "a  chosen  vessel,  to  bear  the 
name  of  the  Lord  before  the  Gentiles,  and  kings, 
and  the  people  of  Israel  ?  " 

When  we  look  back,  from  the  higher  ground  of 
St.  Paul's  apostolic  activity,  to  the  years  that  passed 
between  his  conversion  and  the  first  missionary 
journey,  we  cannot  observe  without  reverence  the 
patient  humility  with  which  Saul  waited  for  his 
Master's  time.  He  did  not  say  for  once  only, 
"  Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ?  "  Obe 
dience  to  Christ  was  thenceforth  his  ruling  prin 
ciple.  Submitting,  as  he  believed,  to  his  Lord's 
direction,  he  was  content  to  work  for  a  long  time  as 
the  subordinate  colleague  of  his  seniors  in  the  faith. 
He  was  thus  the  better  prepared,  when  the  call 
came,  to  act  with  the  authority  which  that  call 
conferred  upon  him.  He  left  Antioch,  however, 
still  the  second  to  Barnabas.  Everything  was  done 
with  orderly  gravity  in  the  sending  forth  of  the 
two  missionaries.  Their  brethren,  after  fasting  and 
prayer,  laid  their  hands  on  them,  and  so  they  de 
parted. 

T,ic  first  Missionary  Journey. — Much  must  have 
been  hid  from  Barnabas  and  Saul  as  to  the  issues 
wf  tlii-  journey  MI  which  they  embarked.  But  one 


PAUL 

thing  was  clear  to  them,  that  they  were  sent  forth 
to  speak  the  icord  of  God.  They  did  not  go  in 
their  own  name  or  for  their  own  purposes :  they 
were  instruments  for  uttering  what  the  Eternal  God 
Himself  was  saying  to  men.  We  shall  find  in  the 
history  a  perfectly  definite  representation  of  what 
St.  Paul  announced  and  taught  as  lie  journeyed 
from  city  to  city.  But  the  first  characteristic  fea 
ture  of  his  teaching  was  the  absolute  conviction  that 
he  was  only  the  bearer  of  a  Heavenly  message.  It 
is  idle  to  discuss  St.  Paul's  character  or  views  with 
out  recognising  this  fact.  We  are  compelled  to 
think  of  him  as  of  a  man  who  was  capable  of  che 
rishing  such  a  conviction  with  perfect  assurance. 
We  are  bound  to  bear  in  mind  the  unspeakable 
influence  which  that  conviction  must  have  exerted 
upon  his  nature.  The  writer  of  the  Acts  proceeds 
upon  the  same  assumption.  He  tells  us  that  as 
soon  as  Barnabas  and  Saul  reached  Cyprus,  they 
began  to  "  announce  the  woi-d  of  God." 

The  second  fact  to  be  observed  is,  that  for  the 
present  they  delivered  their  message  in  the  syna 
gogues  of  the  Jews  only.  They  trod  the  old  path 
till  they  should  be  drawn  out  of  it.  But  when 
they  had  gone  through  the  island,  from  Salamis  to 
Paphos,  they  were  called  upon  to  explain  their  doc 
trine  to  an  eminent  Gentile,  Sergius  Paulus,  the 
proconsul.  This  Roman  officer,  like  so  many  of 
his  countrymen,  had  already  come  under  the  in 
fluence  of  Jewish  teaching ;  but  it  was  in  the 
corrupt  form  of  magical  pretensions,  which  throve 
so  luxuriantly  upon  the  godless  credulity  of  that 
age.  A  Jew,  named  Barjesus,  or  Elymas,  a  magus 
and  false  prophet,  had  attached  himself  to  the  go 
vernor,  and  had  no  doubt  interested  his  mind,  for  he 
was  an  intelligent  man,  with  what  he  had  told  him 
of  the  history  and  hopes  of  the  Jews.  [ELYMAS.] 
Accordingly,  when  Sergius  Paulus  heard  of  the 
strange  teachers  who  were  announcing  to  the  Jews 
the  advent  of  their  true  Messiah,  he  wished  to  see 
them  and  sent  for  them.  The  impostor,  instinct 
ively  hating  the  Apostles,  and  seeing  his  influence 
over  the  proconsul  in  danger  of  perishing,  did  what 
he  could  to  withstand  them.  Then  Saul,  "  who  is 
also  called  Paul,"  denouncing  Elymas  in  remarkable 
terms,  declared  against  him  God's  sentence  of  tem 
porary  blindness.  The  blindness  immediately  falls 
upon  him ;  and  the  proconsul,  moved  by  the  scene 
and  persuaded  by  the  teaching  of  the  Apostle,  be 
comes  a  believer. 

There  is  a  singular  parallelism  in  several  points 
between  the  history  of  St.  Paul  and  that  of  St. 
Peter  in  the  Acts.  Baur  presents  it  in  a  highly 
effective  form  (Paulus,  p.  91  &c.),  to  support  his 
theory  of  the  composition  of  this  book  ;  .and  this  is 
one  of  the  services  which  he  has  incidentally  ren 
dered  to  the  full  understanding  of  the  early  history 
of  the  Church.  Thus  St.  Paul's  discomfiture  of 
Elymas  reminds  us  of  St.  Peter's  denunciation  of 
Simon  Magus.  The  two  incidents  bring  strongly 
before  us  one  of  the  great  adverse  elements  with 
which  the  Gospel  had  to  contend  in  that  age. 
Everywhere  there  were  counterfeits  of  the  spiritual 
jiowers  which  the  Apostles  claimed  and  put  forth. 
It  was  necessary  for  the  preachers  of  Christ, — not 
so  much  to  prove  themselves  stronger  than  the  ma 
gicians  and  soothsayers,  as  to  guard  against  being 
confounded  with  them.  One  dbtingnuhing  mark 
of  the  true  sen-ants  of  tin;  Spirit  would  be  that  of 
not  trading  upon  their  spiritual  powers  (Acts  viii. 
20).  .  Another  would  be  that  of  shunning  every 


PAUL 

sort  of  concealment  and  artifiw,  and  courting  the 
daylight  of  open  truth.  St.  Piul's  language  to 
Elymas  is  studiously  directed  to  .he  reproof  of  the 
tricks  of  the  religious  impostor.  The  Apostle,  full  of 
the  true  Holy  Ghost,  looked  steadily  on  the  deceiver, 
cpoke  in  the  name  of  a  God  of  light  and  righteousness 
«nd  straightforward  ways,  and  put  forth  the  power 
01'  that  God  for  the  vindication  of  truth  against 
delusion.  The  punishment  of  Elymas  was  itself 
symbolical,  and  conveyed  "  teaching  of  the  Lord." 
He  had  chosen  to  create  a  spiritual  darkness  around 
him ;  and  now  there  fell  upon  him  a  mist  and  a  dark 
ness,  and  he  went  about,  seeking  some  one  to  lead 
him  by  the  hand.  If  on  reading  this  account  we 
refer  to  St.  Peter's  reproof  of  Simon  Magus,  we 
shall  lie  struck  by  the  differences  as  well  as  the 
resemblance  which  we  shall  observe.  But  we  shall 
undoubtedly  gain  a  stronger  impression  of  this  part 
of  the  Apostolic  work,  viz.,  the  conflict  to  be  waged 
between  the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  of  the  Church,  and 
the  evil  spirits  of  a  dark  superstition  to  which  men 
were  surrendering  themselves  as  slaves.  We  shall 
feel  the  worth  and  power  of  that  candid  and  open 
temper  in  which  alone  St.  Paul  would  commend  his 
cause;  and  in  the  conversion  of  Sergius  Paul  us  we 
shall  see  an  exemplary  type  of  many  victories  to  be 
won  by  the  truth  over  falsehood. 

This  point  is  made  a  special  crisis  in  the  history 
of  the  Apostle  by  the  writer  of  the  Acts.  Saul  now 
becomes  Paul,  and  begins  to  take  precedence  of 
Barnabas.  Nothing  is  said  to  explain  the  change 
of  name.  No  reader  could  resist  the  temptation  of 
supposing  that  there  must  be  some  connexion  be 
tween  Saul's  new  name  and  that  of  his  distinguished 
Roman  convert.  But  on  reflection  it  does  not  seem 
probable  that  St.  Paul  would  either  have  wished, 
or  have  consented,  to  change  his  own  name  for  that 
of  a  distinguished  convert.  If  we  put  Sergius 
Paulus  aside,  we  know  that  it  was  exceedingly  com 
mon  for  Jews  to  bear,  besides  their  own  Jewish 
name,  another  borrowed  from  the  country  with 
which  they  had  become  connected.  (See  Cony- 
beare  and  Howson,  i.  p.  163,  for  full  illustrations.) 
Thus  we  have  Simeon  also  named  Niger,  Barsabas 
also  named  Justus,  John  also  named  Marcus.  There 
is  no  reason  therefore  why  Saul  should  not  have 
borne  from  infancy  the  other  name  of  Paul.  In 
that  case  he  would  be  Saul  amongst  his  own  coun 
trymen,  Paulus  amongst  the  Gentiles.  And  we  must 
understand  St.  Luke  as  wishing  to  mark  strongly 
the  transition  point  between  Saul's  activity  amongst 
his  own  countiymen,  and  his  new  labours  as  the 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  by  calling  him  Saul  only, 
during  the  first,  and  Paul  only  afterwards. 

The  conversion  of  Sergius  Paulus  may  be  said, 
perhaps,  to  mark  the  beginning  of  the  work  amongst 
the  Gentiles  ;  otherwise,  it  was  not  in  Cyprus  that 
any  change  took  place  in  the  method  hitherto  fol 
lowed  by  Barnabas  and  Saul  in  preaching  the  Gospel. 
Their  public  addresses  were  as  yet  confined  to  the 
synagogues ;  but  it  was  soon  to  be  otherwise.  From 
Paphos,  "  Paul  and  his  company  "  set  sail  for  the 
mainland,  and  arrived  at  Perga  in  Pamphylia. 
Here  tlie  heart  of  their  companion  John  failed 
him,  and  he  returned  to  Jerusalem.  From  Perga 
they  travelled  on  to  a  place,  obscure  in  secular  his 
tory,  but  most  memorable  in  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  of  Christ, — Antioch  in  Pisidia.  [ANTIOCH 
IN  PISIPIA.]  Here  "  they  went  into  the  syna- 
gogt.  •  "m  the  sabbath-day,  and  sat  down."  Smal" 
as  tht  place  was,  it  contained  its  colony  of  Jews 
and  with  i-hem  proselytes  who  worshipped  the  Goc 

VOL.  IL 


1'AUL 


737 


of  the  Jews.  The  degree  to  which  the  Jews  haJ 
spread  and  settled  themselves  over  the  world,  and 
,he  influence  they  had  gained  over  the  more  respect 
able  of  their  Gentile  neighbours,  and  especially  ovei 
;he  women  of  the  better  class,  are  facts  difficult  to 
appreciate  justly,  but  proved  by  undoubted  evi 
dence,  and  very  important  for  us  to  bear  in  mini. 
This  Pisidian  Antioch  may  have  been  more  Jewish 
;han  most  similar  towns,  but  it  was  not  more  sc 
;han  many  of  much  greater  size  and  importance. 
What  took  place  here  in  the  synagogue  and  in  the 
:ity,  is  interesting  to  us  not  only  on  account  of  its 
aearing  on  the  history,  but  also  because  it  repre 
sents  more  or  less  exactly  what  afterwards  occurred 
in  many  other  places. 

It  cannot  be  without  design  that  we  have  single 
but  detailed  examples  given  us  in  the  Acts,  of  the 
various  kinds  of  addresses  which  St.  Paul  used  to 
deliver  in  appealing  to  his  different  audiences.  He 
to  address  himself,  in  the  course  of  his  mission 
ary  labours,  to  Jews,  knowing  and  receiving  the 
Scriptures ;  to  ignorant  barbarians ;  to  cultivated 
eeks;  to  mobs  enraged  against  himself  pei  son- 
ally  ;  to  magistrates  and  kings.  It  is  an  inesti 
mable  help  in  studying  the  Apostle  and  his  work, 
that  we  have  specimens  of  the  tone  and  the  argu 
ments  he  was  accustomed  to  use  in  all  these  situa 
tions.  These  will  be  noticed  in  their  places.  In 
what  he  said  at  the  synagogue  in  Antioch,  we 
recognize  the  type  of  the  addresses  in  which  he 
would  introduce  his  message  to  his  Jewish  fellow- 
countrymen. 

The  Apostles  of  Christ  sat  still  with  the  rest  of 
the  assembly,  whilst  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 
were  read.  They  and  their  audience  were  united 
in  reverence  for  the  sacred  books.  Then  the  rulers 
of  the  synagogue  sent  to  invite  them,  as  strangers 
but  brethren,  to  speak  any  word  of  exhortation 
which  might  be  in  them  to  the  people.  Paul  stood 
up,  and  beckoning  with  his  hand,  he  spoke. — The 
speech  is  given  in  Acts  xiii.  16-41.  The  charac 
teristics  we  observe  in  it  are  these.  The  speaker 
begins  by  acknowledging  "  the  God  of  this  people 
Israel."  He  ascribes  to  Him  the  calling  out  of  the 
nation  and  the  conduct  of  its  subsequent  history. 
He  touches  on  the  chief  points  of  that  history  up  to 
the  reign  of  David,  whom  he  brings  out  into  pro 
minence.  He  then  names  JESUS  as  the  promised 
Son  of  David.  To  convey  some  knowledge  of  Jesus 
to  the  minds  of  his  hearers,  he  recounts  the  chief 
facts  of  the  Gospel  history ;  the  preparatory  preach 
ing  and  baptism  of  John  (of  which  the  rumour  had 
spread  perhaps  to  Antioch),  the  condemnation  of 
Jesus  by  the  rulers  "  who  knew  neither  Him  nor 
the  prophets,"  and  His  resurrection.  That  Resur 
rection  is  declared  to  be  the  fulfilment  of  all  God's 
promises  of  Life,  given  to  the  fathers.  Through 
Jesus,  therefore,  is  now  proclaimed  by  God  Himself 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  full  justification.  The 
Apostle  concludes  by  drawing  from  the  prophets  a 
warning  against  unbelief.  If  this  is  an  authentic 
example  of  Paul's  preaching,  it  was  impossible  foi 
Peter  or  John  to  start  more  exclusively  from  the 
Jewish  covenant  and  promises  than  did  the  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles.  How  entirely  this  discourse 
resembles  those  of  St.  Peter  and  of  Stephen  in 
the  earlier  chapters  of  the  Actsl  There  is  omy 
one  specially  Pauline  touch  in  the  whole, — the 
words  in  ver.  39,  "  By  Him  all  that  believe  art 
justified  from  all  things,  from  which  ye  could  not 
be  justified  by  the  Law  of-  Moses."  '  Evidently 
foisted  in,'  says  Baur  (p.  103),  who  thinks  we  zii 

3  B 


738 


PAUL 


dealing  with  a  mere  fiction,  '  to  prevent  the  speech 
from  appearing  too  Petrine,  and  to  give  it  a  slightly 
Pauline  air.'  Certainly,  it  sounds  like  an  echo  of 
the  Epistles  to  the  1  tomans  and  Galatians.  But  is 
there  therefore  the  slightest  incongruity  between 
this  and  the  other  parts  of  the  address  ?  Does  not 
Jhat  "  forgiveness  of  sins  "  which  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul  proclaimed  with  the  most  perfect  agreement, 
connect  it>«lf  naturally,  in  the  thoughts  of  one 
exercised  by  the  law  as  Saul  of  Tarsus  had  been, 
with  justification  not  by  the  law  out  by  grace? 
If  we  suppose  that  Saul  had  accepted  just  the  faith 
which  the  older  Apostles  held  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
the  Messiah  of  the  Jews,  crucified  and  raised  from 
the  dead  according  to  the  teaching  of  the  prophets, 
and  in  the  remission  of  sins  through  Him  confirmed 
by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  and  that  he  had  also 
had  those  experiences,  not  known  to  the  older  Apos- 
t'es,  of  which  we  see  the  working  in  the  Epistles  to 
the  Romans  and  Galatians ;  this  speech,  in  all  its 
parts,  is  precisely  what  we  might  expect ;  this  is  the 
very  teaching  which  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles 
must  have  everywhere  and  always  set  forth,  when 
he  was  speaking  "  God's  word  "  for  the  first  time  to 
an  assembly  of  his  fellow-countrymen. 

The  discourse  thus  epitomized  produced  a  strong 
impression  ;  and  the  hearers  (not  "the  Gentiles"), 
requested  the  Apostles  to  repeat  their  message  on 
the  next  sabbath.  During  the  week  so  much  in 
terest  was  excited  by  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles, 
that  on  the  sabbath  day  "  almost  the  whole  city 
came  together,  to  hear  the  Word  of  God."  It  was 
this  concern  of  the  Gentiles  which  appears  to  have 
first  alienated  the  minds  of  the  Jews  from  what 
they  had  heard.  They  were  filled  with  envy.  They 
probably  felt  that  there  was  a  difference  between 
those  efforts  to  gain  Gentile  proselytes  in  which 
they  had  themselves  been  so  successful,  and  this 
new  preaching  of  a  Messiah  in  whom  a  justification 
which  the  Law  could  not  give  was  offered  to  men. 
The  eagerness  of  the  Gentiles  to  hear  may  have  con 
firmed  their  instinctive  apprehensions.  The  Jewish 
envy  once  roused  became  a  power  of  deadly  hos 
tility  to  the  Gospel ;  and  these  Jews  at  Antioch  set 
themselves  to  oppose  bitterly  the  words  which 
Paul  spoke. — We  have  here,  therefore,  a  new  phase 
in  the  history  of  the  Gospel.  In  these  foreign 
countries  it  is  not  the  Cross  or  Nazareth  which  is 
most  immediately  repulsive  to  the  Jews  in  the  pro 
claiming  of  Jesus.  It  is  the  wound  given  to  Jewish 
importance  in  the  association  of  Gentiles  with  Jews 
as  the  receivers  of  the  good  tidings.  If  the  Gentiles 
had  been  asked  to  become  Jews,  no  offence  would 
have  been  taken.  But  the  proclamation  of  the 
Christ  could  not  be  thus  governed  and  restrained. 
It  overleapt,  by  its  own  force,  these  narrowing  me 
thods.  It  was  felt  to  be  addressed  not  to  one  nation 
onh ,  but  to  mankind. 

The  new  opposition  brought  out  new  action  on 
the  part  of  the  Apostles.  Rejected  by  the  Jews, 
they  became  bold  and  outspoken,  and  turned  from 
them  to  the  Gentiles.  They  remembered  and  de 
clared  what  the  prophets  had  foretold  of  the  enlight 
ening  and  deliverance  of  the  whole  world.  In 
speaking  to  the  Gentiles,  therefore,  they  were 
simply  fulfilling  the  promise  of  the  Covenant.  The 
gift,  we  observe,  of  which  the  Jews  were  depriving 
themselves,  and  which  the  Gentiles  who  believed 
were  accepting,  is  described  as  "  eternal  life "  (rj 
Riuvios  fay).  It  was  the  life  of  which  the  risen 
/PSUS  was  the  fountain,  which  Peter  and  John  had 
declared  at  Jerus.'Uem,  and  of  which  all  a<as  of 


PAUL 

healing  were  set  forth  as  signs.  This  was  novr 
poured  out  largely  upon  the  Gentiles.  The  word 
of  the  Lord  was  published  widely,  and  had  much 
fruit.  Henceforth,  Paul  and  Barnabas  knew  it  to 
be  their  commission, — not  the  less  to  present  tneir 
message  to  Jews  first ;  but  in  the  absence  of  an 
adequate  Jewish  medium  to  deal  directly  with  the 
Gentiles.  But  this  expansion  of  the  Gospel  work 
brought  with  it  new  difficulties  and  dangers.  At 
Antioch  now,  as  in  every  city  afterwards,  the  un 
believing  Jews  used  their  influence  with  their  own 
adherents  amongst  the  Gentiles,  and  especially  the 
women  of  the  higher  class,  to  persuade  the  autho 
rities  or  the  populace  to  persecute  the  Apostles,  and 
to  drive  them  from  the  place. 

With  their  own  spirits  raised,  and  amidst  much 
enthusiasm  of  their  disciples,  Paul  and  Barnabas 
now  travelled  on  to  Iconium,  where  the  occurrences 
at  Antioch  were  repeated,  and  from  thence  to  the 
Lycaonian  country  which  contained  the  cities  Lystra 
and  Derbe.  Here  they  had  to  deal  with  uncivilized 
heathens.  At  Lystra  the  healing  of  a  cripple  took 
place,  the  narrative  of  which  runs  very  parallel  to 
the  account  of  the  similar  act  done  by  Peter  and 
John  at  the  gate  of  the  Temple.  The  agreement 
becomes  closer,  if  we  insert  here,  with  Lachmann, 
before  "  Stand  upright  on  thy  feet,"  the  words  "  1 
say  unto  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  The  parallel  leads  us  to  observe  more 
distinctly  that  every  messenger  of  Jesus  Christ  was  a 
herald  of  life.  The  spiritual  life — the  fo>9)  altivios — 
which  was  of  faith,  is  illustrated  and  expounded  by 
the  invigoration  of  impotent  limbs.  The  same 
truth  was  to  be  conveyed  to  the  inhabitants  of  Je 
rusalem,  and  to  the  heathens  of  Lycaonia.  The  act 
was  received  naturally  by  these  pagans.  They  took 
the  Apostles  for  gods,  calling  Barnabas,  who  was 
of  the  more  imposing  presence,  Zeus  (Jupiter),  and 
Paul,  who  was  the  chief  speaker,  Hermes  (Mercu- 
rius).  This  mistake,  followed  up  by  the  attempt  to 
offer  sacrifices  to  them,  gives  occasion  to  the  record 
ing  of  an  address,  in  which  we  see  a  type  of  what 
the  Apostles  would  say  to  an  ignorant  pagan  audi 
ence.  Appeals  to  the  Scriptures,  references  to  the 
God  of  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob,  would  have 
been  out  of  place.  The  Apostles  name  the  Living 
God,  who  made  heaven  and  earth  and  the  sea  and 
all  things  therein,  the  God  of  the  whole  world  and 
all  the  nations  in  it.  They  declare  themselves  to  be 
His  messengers.  They  expatiate  upon  the  tokens 
of  Himself  which  the  Father  of  men  had  not  with 
held,  in  that  He  did  them  good,  sending  rain  from 
heaven  and  fruitful  seasons,  the  supporters  of  life 
and  joy.  They  p-otest  that  in  restoring  the  cripple 
they  had  only  acted  as  instruments  of  the  Living  God. 
They  themselves  were  not  gods,  but  human  beings 
of  like  passions  with  the  Lycaonians.  The  Living 
God  was  now  manifesting  Himself  more  clearly  to 
men,  desiring  that  henceforth  the  nations  should  not 
walk  in  their  own  ways,  but  His.  They  therefore 
call  upon  the  people  to  give  up  the  vanities  of  idol 
worship,  and  to  turn  to  the  Living  God  (comp. 
1  Thess.  i.  9,  10).  In  this  address,  the  name  of 
Jesus  does  not  occur.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that 
the  Apostles  preached  Him  as  the  Son  of  that  Living 
God  to  whom  they  bore  witness,  telling  the  people 
of  His  death  and  resurrection,  and  announcing  His 
comii.g  again. 

Although  the  people  of  Lystra  haci  been  so  rendy 
to  worship  Paul  and  Barnabas,  the  repulse  of  their 
idolatrous  instincts  appeare  to  have  provoked  them, 
and  thev  allowed  ihem? elves  to  be  jersuaded  iotc 


PAUL 

hostility  by  Jews  who  came  from  Antioch  and  Ico- 
aium,  so  that  they  attacked  Paul  with  stones,  and 
thought  they  had  killed  him.  He  recovered,  how 
ever,  as  the  disciples  were  standing  round  him,  and 
went  again  into  the  city.  The  next  day  he  left  it 
with  Barnabas,  and  went  to  Derbe,  and  thence  they 
returned  once  more  to  Lystra,  and  so  to  Iconium 
and  Antioch,  renewing  their  exhortations  to  the 
disciples,  bidding  them  not  to  think  their  trials 
strange,  but  to  recognize  them  as  the  appointed 
door  through  which  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  into 
which  they  were  called,  was  to  be  entered.  In  order 
to  establish  the  Churches  after  their  departure,  they 
solemnly  appointed  "  elders  "  in  every  city.  Then 
they  came  down  to  the  coast,  and  from  Attalia  they 
sailed  home  to  Antioch  in  Syria,  where  they  related  the 
successes  which  had  been  granted  to  them,  and  espe 
cially  the  "  opening  of  the  door  of  faith  to  the  Gen 
tiles."  And  so  the  First  Missionary  Journey  ended. 

The  Council  at  Jerusalem.  (Acts  xv.  Gala- 
tians  ii.) — Upon  that  missionary  journey  follows 
most  naturally  the  next  important  scene  which  the 
historian  sets  before  us, — the  council  held  at  Jeru 
salem  to  determine  the  relations  of  Gentile  believers 
to  the  Law  of  Moses.  In  following  this  portion  of 
the  history,  we  encounter  two  of  the  greater  ques 
tions  which  the  biographer  of  St.  Paul  has  to  con 
sider.  One  of  these  is  historical,  What  were  the 
relations  between  the  Apostle  Paul  and  the  Twelve  ? 
The  other  is  critical,  How  is  Galatians  ii.  to  be 
connected  with  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  ? 

The  relations  of  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve  will 
best  be  set  forth  in  the  narrative.  But  we  must 
explain  here  why  we  accept  St.  Paul's  statements 
in  the  Galatian  Epistle  as  additional  to  the  history 
in  Acts  xv.  The  first  impression  of  any  reader 
would  be  a  supposition  that  the  two  writers  might 
be  referring  to  the  same  event.  The  one  would  at 
least  bring  the  other  to  his  mind.  In  both  he  reads 
of  Paul  and  Barnabas  going  up  to  Jerusalem,  re 
porting  the  Gospel  preached  to  the  uncircumcised, 
and  discussing  with  the  older  Apostles  the  terms  to 
be  imposed  upon  Gentile  believers.  In  both  the 
conclusion  is  announced,  that  these  believers  should 
be  entirely  free  from  the  necessity  of  circumcision. 
These  are  main  points  which  the  narratives  have 
in  common.  On  looking  more  closely  into  both, 
the  second  impression  upon  the  reader's  mind  may 
possibly  be  that  of  a  certain  incompatibility  between 
the  two.  Many  joints  and  members  of  the  transac 
tion  as  given  by  St.  Luke,  do  not  appear  in  St. 
Paul.  Others  in  one  or  two  cases  are  substituted. 
Further,  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  is  the  3rd  men 
tioned  in  the  Acts,  after  Saul's  conversion  ;  iu  Ga- 
Litians,  it  is  apparently  mentioned  as  the  2nd. 
Supposing  this  sense  of  incompatibility  to  remain, 
the  reader  will  go  on  to  inquire  whether  the  visit 
to  Jerusalem  mentioned  in  Galatians  coincides  better 
with  any  other  mentioned  in  the  Acts, — as  the  2nd 
(xi.  30)  or  the  4th  (xviii.  22).  He  will,  in  all 
probability,  conclude  without  hesitation  that  it  does 
not.  Another  view  will  remain,  that  St.  Paul 
refers  to  a  visit  not  recorded  in  the  Acts  at  all. 
This  is  a  perfectly  legitimate  hypothesis ;  and  it  is 
I'Dcommended  by  the  vigorous  sense  of  Paley.  But 
where  are  we  to  place  the  visit  ?  The  only  possible 
place  for  it  is  some  short  time  before  the  visit  of 
eh.  XY.  But  it  can  scarcely  be  denied,  that  the  lan 
guage  of  ch.  xv.  decidedly  implies  that  the  visit 
there  recorded  was  the  first  paid  by  Paul  aud  Bar 
nabas  to  Jerusalem,  after  their  .great  success  in 
preaching  he  Gospel  amongst  the  Gentiles. 


PAUL 


739 


We  suppose  tht  reader,  theiefore,  to  recur  to  h.'« 

st  impression.  He  will  then  have  to  ask  himself, 
"  Granting  the  considerable  differences,  ire  then 
after  all  any  plain  contradictions  between  the  two 
narratives,  taken  to  refer  to  the  same  occurrences  ?" 
The  answer  must  be,  "  There  are  no  plain  contra* 
dictions."  And  this,  he  will  perceive,  is  a  very 
weighty  fact.  When  it  is  recognized,  the  resem 
blances  first  observed  will  return  with  renewed 
force  to  the  mind. 

We  proceed  then  to  combine  the  two  narratives. — 
Whilst  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  staying  at  Antioch, 

certain  men  from  Judaea"  came  there  and  taught 
the  brethren  that  it  was  necessary  for  the  Gentile 
converts  to  be  circumcised.  This  doctrine  was 
vigorously  opposed  by  the  two  Apostles,  and  it  was 
determined  that  the  question  should  be  referred  to 
the  Apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem.  Paul  and 
Barnabas  themselves,  and  certain  others,  were  se 
lected  for  this  mission.  In  Gal.  ii.  2,  St.  Paiu 
says  that  he  went  up  "by  revelation"  (KOT'  faro- 
vtyiv},  so  that  we  are  to  understand  him  as 
receiving  a  private  intimation  from  the  Divine 
Spirit,  as  well  as  a  public  commission  from  the 
Church  at  Antioch.  On  their  way  to  Jerusalem, 
they  announced  to  the  brethren  in  Phoenicia  and 
Samaria  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles ;  and  the 
news  was  received  with  great  joy.  "  When  they 
were  come  to  Jerusalem,  they  were  received  by  the 
Church,  and  by  the  Apostles  and  elders,  and  they 
declared  all  things  that  God  had  done  with  them  ' 
(Acts  xv.  4).  St.  Paul  adds  that  he  communi 
cated  his  views  "  privately  to  them  which  were  of 
reputation,"  through  anxiety  as  to  the  success  of  his 
work  (Gal.  ii.  2).  The  Apostles  and  the  Church 
in  general,  it  appears,  would  have  raised  no  diffi 
culties  ;  but  certain  believers  who  had  been  Pha 
risees  thought  fit  to  maintain  the  same  doctrine 
which  had  caused  the  disturbance  at  Antioch.  In 
either  place,  St.  Paul  would  not  give  way  to  such 
teaching  for  a  single  hour  (Gal.  ii.  5).  It  became 
necessary,  therefore,  that  a  formal  decision  should 
be  come  to  upon  the  question.  The  Apostles  and 
elders  came  together,  and  there  was  much  disputing. 
Arguments  would  be  used  on  both  sides ;  but  when 
the  persons  of  highest  authority  spoke,  they  appealed 
to  what  was  stronger  than  arguments, — the  course 
of  facts,  through  which  the  will  of  God  had  been 
manifestly  shown.  St.  Peter,  reminding  his  hearers 
that  he  himself  had  been  first  employed  to  open  the 
door  of  faith  to  Gentiles  points  out  that  God  had 
Himself  bestowed  on  the  uncircumcised  that  which 
was  the  seal  of  the  highest  calling  and  fellowship  in 
Christ,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  Why  do  you 
not  acquiesce  in  this  token  of  God's  will  ?  Why 
impose  upon  Gentile  believers  ordinances  which  we 
ourselves  have  found  a  heavy  burden?  Have  not 
we  Jews  left  off  trusting  in  our  Law,  to  depend  only 
on  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ?" — Then, 
cany  ing  out  the  same  appeal  to  the  will  of  God  as 
shown  in  facts,  Barnabas  and  Paul  relate  to  the 
silent  multitude  the  wonders  with  which  God  had 
accompanied  their  preaching  amongst  the  Gentiles. 
After  they  had  done,  St.  James,  with  incomparatlo 
simplicity  and  wisdom,  binds  up  the  testimony  of 
recent  facts  with  the  testimony  of  ancient  prophecy, 
and  gives  a  practical  judgment  upon  the  question. 

The  judgment  was  a  decisive  on«.  The  injunc 
tion  that  the  Gentiles  should  abstain  from  pollu 
tions  of  idols  and  from  fornication  explained  itself. 
The  abstinence  from  things  strangled  and  from 
blood  is  desired  as  a  concession  to  the  customs  of 

3  B  2 


740 


PAUL 


the  Jews  who  were  to  be  found  in  every  city,  and 
tor  whom  it  w;is  still  right,  when  they  had  believed 
ill  Jesus  Christ,  to  observe  the  Law.  St.  Paul  had 
completely  gained  his  point.  The  older  Apostles, 
James,  Cephas,  and  John,  perceiving  the  grace 
which  had  been  given  him  (his  effectual  Apostle- 
ship),  gave  to  him  and  Barnabas  the  right  hand  of 
fellowship.  At  this  point  it  is  very  important  to 
observe  precisely  what  was  the  matter  at  stake  be 
tween  the  contending  parties  (compare  Prof.  Jowett 
o&  "  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve,  in  St.  Paul's 
Epistles,  i.  417).  St.  Peter  speaks  of  a  heavy 
yoke ;  St.  James  of  troubling  the  Gentile  converts, 
liut  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  they  mean  merely 
the  outward  trouble  of  conforming  to  the  Law  of 
Moses.  That  was  not  what  St.  Paul  was  protesting 
against.  The  case  stood  thus:  Circumcision  and 
the  ordinances  of  the  Law  were  witnesses  of  a 
separation  of  the  chosen  race  from  other  nations. 
The  Jews  were  proud  of  that  separation.  But  the 
Gospel  of  the  Son  of  Man  proclaimed  that  the  time 
had  come  in  which  the  separation  was  to  be  done 
away,  and  God's  goodwill  manifested  to  all  nations 
alike.  It  spoke  of  a  union  with  God,  through 
trust,  which  gave  hope  of  a  righteousness  that 
the  Law  had  been  powerless  to  produce.  Therefore 
to  insist  upon  Gentiles  being  circumcised  would 
have  been  to  deny  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  If  there 
was  to  be  simply  an  enlarging  of  the  separated 
nation  by  the  receiving  of  individuals  into  it,  then 
the  other  nations  of  the  world  remained  as  much 
on  the  outside  of  God's  covenant  as  ever.  Then 
there  was  no  Gospel  to  mankind ;  no  justification 
given  to  men.  The  loss,  in  such  a  case,  would 
have  been  as  much  to  the  Jew  as  to  the  Gentile. 
St.  Paul  felt  this  the  most  strongly ;  but  St.  Peter 
also  saw  that  if  the  Jewish  believers  were  thrown 
back  on  the  Jewish  Law,  and  gave  up  the  free  and 
absolute  grace  of  God,  the  Law  became  a  mere 
burden,  just  as  heavy  to  the  Jew  as  it  would  be  to 
the  Gentile.  The  only  hope  for  the  Jew  was  in  a 
Saviour  who  must  be  the  Saviour  of  mankind. 

It  implied  therefore  no  difference  of  belief  when 
it  was  agreed  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  should  go  to 
the  heathen,  while  James  and  Cephas  and  John 
undertook  to  be  the  Apostles  of  the  Circumcision. 
St.  Paul,  wherever  he  went,  was  to  preach  "  to  the 
Jew  first ;"  St.  Peter  was  to  preach  to  the  Jews  as 
free  a  Gospel,  was  to  teach  the  admission  of  the 
Gentiles  without  circumcision  as  distinctly  as  St. 
Paul  himself.  The  unity  of  the  Church  was  to  be 
preserved  unbroken  ;  and  in  order  to  nourish  this 
unity  the  Gentiles  were  requested  to  remember 
their  poorer  brethren  in  Palestine  (Gal.  ii.  10). 
How  zealously  St.  Paul  cherished  this  beautiful 
witness  of  the  common  brotherhood  we  have  seen 
in  part  already  (Acts  xi.  29,  30),  but  it  is  yet  to 
appear  more  strikingly. 

The  judgment  of  the  Church  was  immediately 
recorded  in  a  letter  addressed  to  the  Gentile  brethren 
n  Antiocb.  and  Syria  and  Cilicia.  That  this  letter 
might  carry  greater  authority  it  was  entrusted  to 
"  chosen  men  of  the  Jerusalem  Church,  Judas  sui 
named  Barsabas,  and  Silas,  :nief  met  among  the 
brethren."  The  letter  speaks  affectionately  of  Bar- 
nalias  and  Paul  (with  the  elder  Church  Barnabas 
*til!  retaired  the  precedence,  rv.  12,  25)  as  "  men 
who  hav«  hazarded  their  lives  for  the  name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."  So  Judas  and  Silas  come  down 
with  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Antioch,  and  comfort  the 
Church  there  with  their  message,  and  when  Judas 
-etunied  "  it  pleased  Silas  to  abide  there  still." 


PAUL 

It  is  usual  to  connect  with  this  jioriotl  of  Uw 
history  that  rebuke  of  St.  Peter  wnidi  St.  Pnnl 
records  in  Gal.  ii.  11-14.  The  connexion  of  sul  jert 
makes  it  convenient  to  record  the  incident  in  thit 
place,  although  it  is  possible  that  it  took  plaoe 
before  the  meeting  at  Jerusalem,  and  perhaps  most 
probable*  that  it  i:d  not  occur  till  later,  when 
St.  Paul  returned  from  his  long  tour  in  Greece  tr 
Antioch  (Acts  xviii.  22,  23).  St.  Peter  was  at 
Antioch,  and  had  shown  no  scruple  about  "  eating 
with  the  Gentiles,"  until  "  certain  came  from 
James."  These  Jerusalem  Christians  brought  their 
Jewish  exclusiveness  with  them,  and  St.  Peter's 
weaker  and  more  timid  mood  came  upon  him,  and 
through  fear  of  his  stricter  friends  he  too  began  to 
withdraw  himself  from  his  former  free  association 
with  the  Gentiles.  Such  an  example  had  a  dan 
gerous  weight,  and  Barnabas  and  the  other  Jews  at 
Antioch  were  being  seduced  by  it.  It  was  an  occa 
sion  for  the  intrepid .  faithfulness  of  St.  Paul.  He 
did  not  conceal  his  anger  at  such  weak  dissembling, 
and  he  publicly  remonstrated  with  his  elder  fellow- 
Apostle.  "  It  thou,  being  a  Jew,  livest  after  the 
manner  of  Gentiles,  and  not  as  do  the  Jews,  why 
compellest  thou  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the 
Jews  ?"  (Gal.  ii.  14).  St.  Peter  had  abandoned  the 
Jewish  exclusiveness,  and  deliberately  claimed  com 
mon  ground  with  the  Gentile :  why  should  he,  by 
separating  himself  from  the  uncircumcised,  requir> 
the  Gentiles  to  qualify  themselves  for  full  com  • 
munion  by  accepting  circumcision?  This  "with-' 
standing  "  of  St.  Peter  was  no  opposition  of  Pauline 
to  Petrine  views ;  it  was  a  faithful  rebuke  oi 
blameable  moral  weakness. 

Second  Missionary  Journey. — The  most  resolute 
courage,  indeed,  was  required  for  the  work  to  which 
St.  Paul  was  now  publicly  pledged.  He  woulil 
not  associate  with  himself  in  that  work  one  who 
had  already  shown  a  want  of  constancy.  This  was 
the  occasion  of  what  must  have  been  a  most  paintu. 
difference  between  him  and  his  comrade  in  the  faith 
and  in  past  perils,  Barnabas.  After  remaining 
awhile  at  Antioch,  Paul  proposed  to  Barnabas  to 
revisit  the  brethren  in  the  countries  of  their  former 
journey.  Hereupon  Barnabas  desired  that  his  nephew 
John  Mark  should  go  with  them.  But  John  had 
deserted  them  in  Pamphylia,  and  St.  Paul  would 
not  try  him  again.  "  And  the  contention  was  so 
sharp  between  them  that  they  departed  asunder  one 
from  the  other ;  and  so  Barnabas  took  Mark,  and 
sailed  unto  Cyprus ;  and  Paul  chose  Silas,  and  de 
parted."  Silas,  or  Silvanus,  becomes  now  a  chief, 
companion  of  the  Apostle.  The  two  went  together 
through  Syria  and  Cilicia,  visiting  the  churches, 
and  so  came  to  Derbe  and  Lystra.  Here  they  find 
Timotheus,  who  had  become  a  .lisciple  on  the 
former  visit  of  the  Apostle,  and  who  so  attracted 
the  esteem  and  love  of  St.  Paul  that  "  he  would 
have  him  go  forth  with  him."  Him  St.  Paul  took 
and  circumcised.  If  this  fact  had  been  omitted 
here  and  stated  in  another  narrative,  how  utterly 
irreconcilable  it  would  have  been,  in  the  eyes  t/ 
some  critics,  with  the  history  in  the  Acts  !  Paul 
and  Silas  were  actually  delivering  the  Jerusalem 
decree  to  all  the  churches  they  visited.  They  were 
no  doubt  triumphing  in  the  freedom  secured  to  the 
Gentiles.  Yet  at  this  very  time  our  Apostle  had 
the  wisdom  and  largeness  of  heart  to  consult  the 


e  The  presence  of  St.  Peter,  and  the  growth  of  Jewish 
prejudice,  are  more  easily  accounted  for,  if  we  suppose 
St.  Paul  to  have  left  Antioch  for  a  long  time. 


PAUL 

feelings  of  the  Jews  by  circumcising  Timothy. 
There  were  many  Jews  m  those  parts,  who  kuew 
tha*  Timothy's  father  was  a  Greek,  his  mother  a 
Jewess.  That  St.  Paul  should  have  had,  as  a  chief 
companion,  one  who  was  nncircumcisnl.  would  of 
itself  have  been  a  hindrance  to  him  in  preaching 
to  Jews;  but  it  would  have  been  a  still  greater 
stumbling-block  if  that  companion  were  half  a  Jew 
by  birth,  and  had  professed  the  Jewish  faith. 
Therefore  in  this  case  St.  Paul  "  became  unto  the 
."ews  r.s  a  Jew  that  he  might  gain  the  Jews." 

St.  Luke  now  steps  rapidly  over  a  considerable 
space  of  the  Apostle's  life  and  labours.  "  They 
went  throughout  Phrygia  and  the  region  of  Galatia" 
(xvi.  6).  At  this  time  St.  Paul  was  founding  "  the 
churches  of  Galatia"  (Gal.  i.  2).  He  himself  gives 
us  hints  of  the  circumstances  of  his  preaching  in 
that  region,  of  the  reception  he  met  with,  and  of 
the  ardent,  though  unstable,  character  of  the  people, 
in  the  following  words:  "  Ye  know  how  through 
infirmity  of  the  flesh  (Sri  Si'  affOeveiav  TTJS  <rap- 
icbs)  I  preached  the  Gospel  unto  you  at  the  first 
(rb  trpArepov),  and  my  temptation  which  was  in 
my  flesh  ye  despised  not  nor  rejected,  but  received 
me  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as  Christ  Jesus.  Where 
is  then  the  blessedness  ye  spake  of  (6  na.Kapifffj.bs ' 
u/u&jj')  ?  for  I  bear  you  record  that,  if  it  had  been 
possible,  ye  would  have  plucked  out  your  own  eyes, 
and  have  given  them  to  me"  (iv.  13).  It  is  not 
easy  to  decide  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words  5t' 
affBtveiav  TTJS  ffa.ptc6s.  Undoubtedly  their  gram 
matical  sense  implies  that  "  weakness  of  the  flesh  " 
— an  illness — was  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's  preach 
ing  in  Galatia ;  and  De  Wette  and  Alford  adhere  to 
this  interpretation,  understanding  St.  Paul  to  have 
been  detained  by  illness,  when  otherwise  he  would 
have  gone  rapidly  through  the  country.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  form  and  order  of  the  words  are 
not  what  we  should  have  expected  if  the  Apostle 
meant  to  say  this  ;  and  Professor  Jowett  prefers  to 
assume  an  inaccuracy  of  grammar,  and  to  under 
stand  St.  Paul  as  saying  that  it  was  tin  weakness  o 
the  flesh  that  he  preached  to  the  Galatians.  In 
either  case  St.  Paul  must  be  referring  to  a  more 
than  ordinary  pressure  of  that  bodily  infirmity 
which  he  speaks  of  elsewhere  as  detracting  from 
the  influence  of  his  personal  address.  It  is  hopeless 
to  attempt  to  determine  positively  what  this  infir 
mity  was.  But  we  may  observe  here — (1)  that  St 
Paul's  sensitiveness  may  have  led  him  to  exaggerate 
this  personal  disadvantage ;  and  (2)  that,  whatever 
it  was,  it  allowed  him  to  go  through  sufferings  an 
hardships  such  as  few  ordinary  men  could  bear 
And  it  certainly  did  not  repel  the  Galatians ;  it  ap 
pears  rather  to  have  excited  their  sympathy  ani" 
warmed  their  allection  towards  the  Apostle. 

St.  Paul  at  this  time  had  not  indulged  the  am 
bition  of  preaching  his  Gospel  in  Europe.  Hi 
views  rrere  limited  to  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor 
Having  gone  through  Phrygia  and  Galatia  he  in 
tended  to  visit  the  western  coast  [ASIA]  ;  bu 
"  they  were  forbidden  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  preaa 
the  word "  there.  Then,  being  on  the  borders  o 
Mysia,  they  thought  of  going  back  to  the  north -eas 
into  Bithynir. ;  brt  again  "the  Spirit  of  Jestk 
suffered  them  not."  So  they  passed  by  Mysia,  an 
came  down  to  Troas.  Here  the  Spirit  of  Jesus 
having  checked  them  on  other  sides,  revealed  t 
them  in  what  direction  they  were  to  go.  St.  Pau 


PAUL 


711 


'  Hay  not    this   metn  "your  calling  me  blessed" 
iu«kii:g  me  us  one  of  the  nanoptf  Otoi. 


\w  in  a  vision  a  man  of  Macedonia,  who  besought 
im,  saying,  "Come  over  into. Macedonia  and  help 
us."    The  vision  was  at  once  accepted  as  a  heavenly 
ntimation ;  the  help  wanted  by  the  Macedonian* 
fas  believed  to  be  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.     It 
i  at  this  point  that  the  historian,  speaking  of  St. 
'aul's  company,   substitutes  "  we  "  for  "  they.'' 
[e  says  nothing  of  himself;  we  can  only  infer  that 
t.  Luke,  to  whatever  country  he  belonged,  became 
companion  of  St.  Paul  at  Troas.     It  is  perhaps 
ot  too  arbitrary  a  conjecture,  that  the    Apostle, 
aving  recently  suffered  in  health,  derived  benefit 
rom  the  medical  skill  and  attendance  of  "  the  be- 
oved  physician."     The  party,  thus  reinforced,  im- 
nediately  set  sail  from  Troas,  touched  at  Samo- 
hrace,  then  landed  on  the  continent  at  Neapolis, 
ind  from  thence  journeyed  to  Philippi.     They  has- 
,ened  to  carry  the  "help"  that  had  been  asked  to 
he  first  considerable  city  in  Macedonia.     Philippi 
vas  no  inapt  representative  of  the  western  world. 
A  Greek  city,  it  had  received  a  body  of  Roman 
settlers,  and  was  politically  a  Colonia.     We  must 
lot  assume  that  to   Saul  of  Tarsus,  the  Roman 
citizen,  there  was  anything  very  novel  or  strange 
11  the  world  to  which  he  had  now  come.     But  the 
name  of  Greece  must  have  represented  very  im- 
wsing  ideas  to  the  Oriental  and  the  Jew ;  and  we 
may  silently  imagine  what  it  must  have  been  to 
St.  Paul  to  know  that  he  was  called  to  be  the 
lerald  of  his  Master,  the  Crucified  Jesus,  in  the 
centre  of  the  world's  highest  culture,  and  that  he 
was  now  to  begin  his  task.     He  began,  however, 
with  no  flourish  of  trumpets,  but  as  quietly  as 
ever,  and  in  the  old  way.     There  were  a  few  Jews, 
f  not  many,  at  Philippi ;  and  when  the  Sabbath 
came  round,  the  Apostolic  company  joined  their 
countrymen  at  the  place  by  the  river-side  where 
prayer  was  wont  to  be  made.     The  narrative  in 
this  part  is  very  graphic :  "  We  sat  down,"  says 
the  writer  (xvi.  13),  "  and  spoke  to  the  women 
who  had  come  together."     Amongst  these  women 
was   a   proselyte   from    Thyatira    ((TejSo/ufVTj  r&v 
Jeov),  named  Lydia,  a  dealer  in  purple.     As  sin: 
listened  "  the  Lord  opened  her  heart "  to  attend  to 
what  Paul  was  saying.     The  first  convert  in  Mace 
donia  was  but  an  Asiatic  woman  who  already  wor 
shipped  the  God  of  the  Jews ;  but  she  was  a  very 
earnest  believer,  and  besought  the  Apostle  and  hit 
friends  to  honour  her  by  staying  in  her  house.    They 
could  not  resist  her  urgency,  and  during  their  stay 
at  Philippi  they  were  the  guests  of  Lydia  (ver.  40) 
But  a  proof  was   given   before   long   that  the 
preachers  of  Christ  were  come  to  grapple  with  the 
powers  in  the  spiritual  world  to  which  heathenism 
was  then   doing   homage.      A  female   slave,  whc 
brought  gain  to  her  masters  by  her  powers  of  pre 
diction  when  she  was  in  the  possessed  state,  best/ 
Paul   and   his  company,  following  them  as  thcj 
went  to  the  place  of  prayer,  and  crying  out,  "  Thest 
men  are  servants  of  the  Most  High  God,  who  pub 
lish  to  you  (or  to  us)  the  way  of  salvation."     Paul 
was  vexed  by  her  cries,  and  addressing  the  spirit  in 
the  girl,  he  said,  "  I  command  thee  in  the  name  oi 
Jesus  Christ  to  come  out  of  her."     Comparing  the 
confession  of  this  "  spirit  of  divination "  with  the 
analogous  confessions  made  by  evil  spirits  to  our 
Lord,  we  see  the  same  singular  character  of  a  true 
acknowledgment  extorted  as  if  by  force,  and  reu- 
dered  with  a  certain  insolence  which  implied  that 
the  spirits,  though  subject,  were  not  willingly  sub 
ject.     The  cries  of  the  slave-girl  may  have  sounded 
|  like  &uuci*>i,  mimicking  what  she  had  heard  from 


742 


PAUL 


the  Apostles  themselves,  until  St.  Paul's  exorcism, 
"  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,"  was  seen  to  be 
effectual.  Then  he  might  be  recognized  as  in  truth 
a  servant  of  the  Most  High  God,  giving  an  example 
cf  the  salvation  which  he  brought,  in  the  deliverance 
of  this  poor  girl  herself  from  the  spirit  which  de 
graded  her. 

But  the  girl's  masters  saw  that  now  the  hope  of 
their  gains  was  gone.  Here  at  Philippi,  as  after 
wards  at  Ephesus,  the  local  trade  in  religion  began 
to  suffer  from  the  manifestation  of  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  and  an  interested  appeal  was  made  to  local 
and  national  feelings  against  the  dangerous  innova 
tions  of  the  Jewish  strangers.  Paul  and  Silas  were 
dragged  before  the  magistrates,  the  multitude  cla 
mouring  loudly  against  them,  upon  the  vague  charge 
of  "  troubling  the  citf ,"  and  introducing  observances 
which  were  unlawful  for  Romans.  If  the  magis 
trates  had  desired  to  act  justly  they  might  have 
doubted  how  they  ought  to  deal  with  the  charge. 
On  the  one  hand  Paul  and  Silas  had  abstained  care 
fully,  as  the  preachers  of  Christ  always  did,  from 
disturbing  public  order,  and  had  as  yet  violated  no 
express  law  of  the  state.  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  preaching  of  Jesus  as  King  and  Lord  was  un 
questionably  revolutionarj,  and  aggressive  upon  the 
public  religion,  in  its  effects ;  and  the  Roman  law 
was  decided,  in  general  terms,  against  such  innova 
tions  (see  reff.  in  Conyb.  and  Hows.  i.  324).  But 
the  praetors  or  duumviri  of  Philippi  were  very 
unworthy  representatives  of  the  Roman  magistracy. 
They  yielded  without  inquiry  to  the  clamour  of  the 
inhabitants,  caused  the  clothes  of  Paul  and  Silas  to 
be  torn  from  them,  and  themselves  to  be  beaten, 
and  then  committed  them  to  prison.  The  jailer, 
having  received  their  commands,  "  thrust  them  into 
the  inner  prison,  and  made  their  feet  fast  in  the 
stocks."  This  cruel  wrong  was  to  be  the  occasion 
of  a  signal  appearance  of  the  God  of  righteousness 
and  deliverance.  It  was  to  be  seen  which  were  the 
true  servants  of  such  a  God,  the  magistrates  or 
these  strangers.  In  the  night  Paul  and  Silas,  sore 
and  sleepless,  but  putting  their  trust  in  God,  prayed 
and  sang  praises  so  loudly  that  the  other  prisoners 
could  hear  them.  Then  suddenly  the  ground  be 
neath  them  was  shaken,  the  doors  were  opened,  and 
every  prisoner's  bands  were  struck  off  (compare  the 
similar  openings  of  prison-doors  in  xii.  6-10,  and 
v.  19).  The  jailer  awoke  and  sprang  up,  saw  with 
consternation  that  the  prison-doors  were  open,  and, 
concluding  that  the  prisoners  were  all  fled,  drew  his 
sword  to  kill  himself.  But  Paul  called  to  him 
loudly,  "  Do  thyself  no  haim ;  we  are  all  here." 
The  jailer's  fpars  were  then  changed  to  an  over 
whelming  awe.  What  could  this  be?  He  called 
for  lights,  sprang  in  and  fell  trembling  before  the 
feet  of  Paul  and  Silas.  Bringing  them  out  from 
the  inner  dungeon,  he  exclaimed,  "  Sirs,  what  must 
I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  (ri  fit  8««  iroitlv  Iva.  ataOu ;). 
They  answered,  "  Believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  thou  shalt  be  saved,  and  thy  house."  And  they 
went  on  to  speak  to  him  and  to  all  in  his  house 
"the  word  of  the  Lord."  The  kindness  he  now 
showed  them  reminds  us  of  their  miseries.  He 
washed  their  wounds,  took  them  into  his  own  house, 
and  spread  a  table  before  them.  The  same  night 
he  received  oaptism,  "  he  and  all  his  "  (including 
slaves),  and  rejoiced  in  his  new-found  faith  in  God. 

In  the  morning  the  magistrates,  either  having 
ntard  of  what  had  happened,  or  having  repented  of 
their  injustice,  or  having  done  all  they  meant  to  do 
by  way  of  pacifying  the  multitude,  sent  word  to 


PAUL 

the  prison  that  the  men  might  be  let  go.  But  Ugal 
justice  was  to  be  more  clearly  vindicated  it  the 
persons  of  these  men,  who  had  been  charged  •vith 
subverting  public  order.  St.  Paul  denounced  plainly 
the  unlawful  acts  of  the  magistrates,  informing 
them  moreover  that  those  whom  they  lial  beaten 
and  imprisoned  without  trial  were  Roman  citizens. 
"  And  now  do  they  thrust  us  out  privily  ?  Nay, 
verily,  but  let  them  come  themselves  and  fetch  us 
out.'  The  magistrates,  in  great  alarm,  saw  the 
necessity  of  humbling  themselves  ("  Facinus  ert 
vinciri  civem  Romanum,  scelus  verberari,"  Cicero, 
in  Verrem,  v.  66).  They  came  and  begged  them 
to  leave  the  city.  Paul  and  Silas  consented  to  dc 
so,  ami,  after  paying  a  visit  to  "the  brethren"  in 
the  house  of  Lydia,  they  departed. 

The  Church  thus  founded  at  Philippi,  as  the 
first-fruits  of  the  Gospel  in  Europe,  was  called,  as 
we  have  seen,  in  the  name  of  a  spiritual  deliverer, 
of  a  God  of  justice,  and  of  an  equal  Lord  of  freemen 
and  slaves.  That  a  warm  and  generous  feeling  dis 
tinguished  it  from  the  first,  we  learn  from  a  testi 
mony  of  St.  Paul  in  the  Epistle  written  long  after 
to  this  Church.  "  In  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel," 
as  soon  as  he  left  them,  they  began  to  send  him 
gifts,  some  of  which  reached  him  at  Thessalonica 
others  afterwards  (Phil.  iv.  15,  16).  Their  part 
nership  in  the  Gospel  (itoivuvla.  cii  rl  tva.yyt\iov) 
had  gladdened  the  Apostle  from  the  first  day  (Phil, 
i.  5). 

Leaving  St.  Luke,  and  perhaps  Timothy  for  a 
short  time,  at  Philippi,  Paul  and  Silas  travelled 
through  Amphipolis  and  Apollonia,  and  stopped 
again  at  Thessalonica.  At  this  important  city  there 
was  a  synagogue  of  the  Jews.  True  to  his  custom, 
St.  Paul  went  in  to  them,  and  for  three  Sabbath- 
days  proclaimed  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ,  as  he  would 
have  done  in  a  city  of  Judaea.  Aa  usual,  the  pro 
selytes  were  those  who  heard  him  most  gladly,  and 
among  them  were  many  women  of  station.  Again, 
as  in  Pisidian  Antioch,  the  envy  of  the  Jew;,  was 
excited.  They  contrived  to  stir  up  the  lower  class 
of  the  city  to  tumultuary  violence  by  representing 
the  preachers  of  Christ  as  revolutionary  disturbers, 
who  had  come  to  proclaim  one  Jesus  as  king  instead 
of  Caesar.  The  mob  assaulted  the  house  of  Jason, 
with  whom  Paul  and  Silas  were  staying  as  guests, 
and,  not  finding  them,  dragged  Jason  himself  and 
some  other  brethren  before  the  magistrates.  In  this 
case  the  magistrates,  we  are  told,  and  the  people 
generally,  were  "  troubled "  by  the  rumours  and 
accusations  which  they  heard.  But  they  seem  to 
have  acted  wisely  and  justly,  in  taking  security  of 
Jason  and  the  rest,  and  letting  them  go.  After 
these  signs  of  danger  the  brethren  immediately  sent 
away  Paul  and  Silas  by  night. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  were  written 
very  soon  after  the  Apostle's  visit,  and  contain  more 
particulars  of  his  work  in  founding  that  Church 
than  we  find  in  any  other  Epistle.  The  whole  of 
these  letters  ought  to  be  read  for  the  information 
they  thus  supply.  St.  Paul  speaks  to  the  Thessa- 
lonian  Christians  as  being  mostly  Gentiles.  He 
reminds  them  that  they  had  turned  from  idols  to 
serve  the  living  and  true  God,  and  to  wait  for  His 
Son  from  heaven,  whom  He  raised  from  the  dead, 
"  Jesus  who  delivers  us  from  the  coming  wrath  " 
(1  Thess.  i.  9, 10).  The  Apostle  had  evidently  spoken 
much  of  the  coming  and  presence  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  of  that  wrath  which  was  already  de 
scending  upon  the  Jews  (ii.  16,  10,  &c.).  His 
message  had  haii  5  wonderful  power  amongst  them, 


PAUL 

because  they  had  known  it  to  be  really  the  woiJ 
of  a  God  who  also  wrought  in  them,  having  hid 
helps  towards  this  conviction  in  the  zeal  and  dis 
interestedness  and  affection  with  which  St.  Paul 
(notwithstanding  his  recent  shameful  treatment  at 
Philippi)  proclaimed  his  Gospel  amongst  them  '  ii. 
2,  8-13).  He  had  purposely  wrought  with  his  own 
hands,  even  night  and  day,  that  his  disinterestedness 
might  be  more  apparent  (l  Thess.  ii.  9  ;  2  Thess.  iii. 
8).  He  exhorted  them  not  to  be  drawn  away  from 
patient  industry  by  the  hopes  of  the  kingdom  into 
which  they  were  called,  but  to  work  quietly,  and  to 
cultivate  purity  and  brotherly  love  (I  Thess.  iv.  3, 
9,  11).  Connecting  these  allusions  with  the  preach 
ing  in  the  synagogue  (Acts  xvii.  3),  we  see  clearly 
how  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  turned  upon  the  person 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Sou  of  the  Living  God,  pro 
phesied  of  in  the  Scriptures,  suffering  and  dying, 
raised  up  and  exalted  to  a  kingdom,  and  about  to 
appear  as  the  Giver  of  light  and  life,  to  the  destruc 
tion  of  his  enemies  and  the  saving  of  those  who 
trusted  in  him. 

When  Paul  and  Silas  left  Thessalonica  they  came 
to  Beroea.  Here  they  found  the  Jews  more  noble 
( f uyevtffrepoi') — more  disposed  to  receive  the  news 
of  a  rejected  and  crucified  Messiah,  and  to  examine 
the  Scriptures  with  candour — than  those  at  Thessa 
lonica  had  been.  Accordingly  they  gained  many 
converts,  both  Jews  and  Greeks;  but  the  Jews  of 
Thessalonica,  hearing  of  it,  sent  emissaries  to  stir 
up  the  people,  and  it  was  thought  best  that  St.  Paul 
should  himself  leave  the  city,  whilst  Silas  and 
Timothy  remained  behind.  Some  of  "  the  brethren  " 
went  with  St.  Paul  as  far  as  Athens,  where  they 
left  him,  carrying  back  a  request  to  Silas  and 
Timothy  that  they  would  speedily  join  him.  He 
apparently  did  not  like  to  preach  alone,  and  in 
tended  to  rest  from  his  apostolic  labour  until  they 
should  come  up  to  him :  but  how  could  he  refrain 
himself,  with  all  that  was  going  on  at  Athens 
round  him  ?  There  he  witnessed  the  most  profuse 
idolatry  side  by  side  with  the  most  pretentious 
philosophy.  Either  of  these  would  have  been 
enough  to  stimulate  his  spirit.  To  idolaters  and 
philosophei-s  he  felt  equally  urged  to  proclaim  his 
Master  and  the  Living  God.  So  he  went  to  his 
own  countrymen  and  the  proselytes  in  the  synagogue 
and  declared  to  them  that  the  Messiah  had  come ; 
but  he  also  spoke,  like  another  Socrates,  with  people 
in  the  market,  and  with  the  followers  of  the  two 
great  schools  of  philosophy,  Epicureans  and  Stoics, 
naming  to  all  Jesus  and  the  Resurrection.  The 
philosophers  encountered  him  with  a  mixture  of 
curiosity  and  contempt.  The  Epicurean,  teaching 
himself  to  seek  for  tranquil  enjoyment  as  the  chief 
object  of  life,  heard  of  One  claiming  to  be  the  Lord 
of  men,  who  had  shown  them  the  glory  of  dying 
to  self,  and  had  promised  to  those  who  fought  the 
good  fight  bravely  a  nobler  bliss  than  the  comforts 
of  life  could  yield.  The  Stoic,  cultivating  a  stem 
and  isolated  moral  independence,  heard  of  One 
whose  own  righteousness  was  proved  by  submission 
to  the  Father  in  heaven,  and  who  had  promised  to 
give  His  righteousness  to  those  who  trusted  not  in 
themselves,  but  in  Him.  To  all,  the  announcement 
of  a  Person  was  much  stranger  than  the  publishing 
of  any  theories  would  have  been.  So  far  as  they 
thought  the  preacher  anything  but  a  silly  trifler, 
he  seemed  to  them,  not  a  philosopher,  but  "  a  setter 
forth  of  strange  gode"  ({eVoiv  Saifj.oviuv  varayyf- 
A*fa).  But  any  one  with  a  novelty  was  welcome 
to  those  who  "  scent  their  time  in  notbmj;  else  but 


PAUL  7-J3 

either  to  hear  or  to  tell  some  new  tl  ing."  Thej 
brought  him  therefore  to  the  Areopagus,  that  he 
might  make  a  formal  exposition  of  his  doctrine  U 
an  assembled  audience. 

We  are  not  to  think  here  of  the  Council  or 
Court,  renowned  in  the  oldest  Athenian  history, 
which  took  its  name  from  Mars's  Hill,  but  only  of 
the  elevated  spot  where  the  council  met,  not  covered 
in,  but  arranged  with  benches  and  steps  of  stone, 
so  as  to  form  a  convenient  place  for  a  public  ad 
dress.  Here  the  Apostle  delivered  that  wonderfo. 
discourse,  reported  in  Acts  xvii.  22-31,  which  seems 
as  fresh  and  instructive  for  the  intellect  of  the  19th 
century  as  it  was  for  the  intellect  of  the  first.  In 
this  we  have  the  Pauline  Gospel  as  it  addressed 
itself  to  the  speculative  mind  of  the  cultivated 
Greeks.  How  the  "  report"  was  obtained  by  the 
writer  of  the  history  we  have  no  means  of  knowing. 
Possibly  we  have  in  it  notes  written  down  before  or 
after  the  delivery  of  this  address  by  St.  Paul  him 
self.  Short  as  it  is,  the  form  is  as  perfect  as  the 
matter  is  rich.  The  loftiness  and  breadth  of  the 
theology,  the  dignity  and  delicacy  of  the  argument, 
the  absence  of  self,  the  straightforward  and  reverent 
nature  of  the  testimony  delivered — all  the  charac 
teristics  so  strikingly  displayed  in  this  speech — help 
us  to  understand  what  kind  of  a  teacher  had  now 
appeared  in  the  Grecian  world.  St.  Paul,  it  is  well 
understood,  did  not  begin  with  calling  the  Athenians 
"  too  superstitious."  "  I  perceive  you,"  he  said, 
"  to  be  eminently  religious."  «  He  had  observed 
An  altar  inscribed  'Ayvt&ffrif  ©e£,  "  To  the  un 
known  God."  It  meant,  no  doubt,  "  To  some 
unknown  God."  "  I  come,"  he  said,  "  as  the 
messenger  of  that  unknown  God."  And  then  he 
proceeds  to  speak  of  God  in  terms  which  were  not 
altogether  new  to  Grecian  ears.  They  had  heard 
of  a  God  who  had  made  the  world  and  all  things 
therein,  and  even  of  One  who  gave  to  all  life,  and 
breath,  and  all  things.  But  they  had  never  learnt 
the  next  lesson  which  was  now  taught  them.  It 
was  a  special  truth  of  the  new  dispensation,  that 
"  God  had  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men,  for 
to  dwell  on  all  the  face  of  the  earth,  having  deter 
mined  the  times  assigned  to  them,  and  the  bounds 
of  their  habitation,  that  they  should  seek  the  Lord, 
if  haply  they  might  feel  after  him  and  find  him." 

Comparing  it  with  the  teaching  given  to  other 
audiences,  we  perceive  that  it  laid  hold  of  the 
deepest  convictions  which  had  ever  been  given  to 
Greeks,  whilst  at  the  same  time  it  encountered  the 
strongest  prejudices  of  Greeks.  We  see,  as  at  Ljrs- 
tra,  that  an  Apostle  of  Christ  had  no  need  to  rr'er 
to  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  when  he  spoke  to  those 
who  had  not  received  them.  He  could  speak  to 
men  as  God's  children,  and  subjects  of  God's  edu 
cating  discipline,  and  was  only  bringing  them  fur 
ther  tidings  of  Him  whom  they  had  been  always 
feeling  after.  He  presented  to  them  the  Son  of 
Man  as  acting  in  the  power  of  Him  who  had  made 
all  nations,  and  who  was  not  far  from  any  single 
man.  He  began  to  speak  of  Him  as  risen  from  the 
dead,  and  of  the  power  of  a  new  life  which  was  in 
Him  for  men  ;  but  his  audience  would  not  hear  of 
Him  who  thus  claimed  their  personal  allegiance. 
Some  mocked,  others,  more  courteously,  bilked  of 
hearing  him  again  another  time.  The  Apostle 
gained  but  few  converts  at  Athens,  and  he  soon 
took  his  departure  and  came  to  Corinth. 


*  See,  in  confirmation,  passages  quoted  from  ancient 
uulhurb  in  Conybeare  aud  llowson,  i.  389  iic. 


744 


PAUL 


Athens  still  retained  its  old  intellectual  predo 
minance  ;  but  Corinth  was  the  political  and  com 
mercial  capital  of  Greece.  It  was  in  places  of  living 
activity  that  St.  Paul  laboured  longest  and  most 
4ucne£8tiilly,  as  formerly  at  Antioch,  now  at  Corinth, 
and  afterwards  at  Ephesus.  The  rapid  spread  of 
the  Gospel  was  obviously  promoted  by  the  preach 
ing  of  it  in  cities  where  men  were  continually 
aiming  and  going  ;  but  besides  this  consideration, 
we  may  be  sure  that  the  Apostle  escaped  gladly 
from  dull  ignorance  on  the  one  side,  and  from  phi 
losophical  dilettantism  on  the  other,  to  places  in 
which  the  real  business  of  the  world  was  being 
done.  The  Gospel,  though  unworldly,  was  yet  a 
message  to  practical  and  inquiring  men,  and  it  had 
more  affinity  to  work  of  any  kind  than  to  torpor  or 
to  intellectual  frivolity.  One  proof  of  the  whole 
some  agreement  between  the  following  of  Christ 
and  ordinary  labour  was  given  by  St.  Paul  himself 
during  his  stay  at  Corinth.  Here,  as  at  Thessa- 
lonica,  he  chose  to  earn  his  own  subsistence  by 
working  at  his  trade  of  tent-making.  This  trade 
brought  him  into  close  connexion  with  two  persons 
who  became  distinguished  as  believers  in  Christ, 
Aquila  and  Priscilla.  They  were  Jews,  and  had 
lately  left  Rome,  in  consequence  of  an  edict  of  Clau 
dius  [see  CLAUDIUS];  and  as  they  also  were  tent- 
makers,  St.  Paul  "  abode  with  them  and  wrought." 
Labouring  thus  on  the  six  days,  the  Apostle  went 
to  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath,  and  there  by  ex 
pounding  the  Scriptures  sought  to  win  both  Jews 
and  proselytes  to  th«  belief  that  Jesus  was  the 
Christ. 

He  was  testifying  with  unusual  effort  and  anxiety 
(«W«IX«TO  ry  \6yci>},  when  Silas  and  Timothy 
came  from  Macedonia,  and  joined  him.  We  are 
left  in  some  uncertainty  as  to  what  the  movements 
of  Silas  and  Timothy  had  been,  since  they  were 
•with  Paul  at  Beroea.  From  the  statements  in  the 
Acts  (xvii.  15,  16)  that  Paul,  when  he  reached 
Athens,  desired  Silas  and  Timotheus  to  come  to  him 
with  all  speed,  and  waited  for  them  there,  com 
pared  with  those  in  1  Thess.  (iii.  1,  2),  "  When  we 
could  no  longer  forbear,  we  thought  it  good  to  be 
left  at  Athens  alone,  and  sent  Timotheus,  our  bro 
ther,  and  minister  of  God,  and  our  fellow-labourer 
in  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  to  establish  you  and  to 
comfort  you  concerning  your  faith,"  —  Paley  (florae 
Paulinae,  1  Thess.  No.  iv.)  reasonably  argues  that 
Silas  and  Timothy  had  come  to  Athens,  but  had 
soon  been  despatched  thence,  Timothy  to  Thessa- 
louica,  and  Silas  to  Philippi,  or  elsewhere.  From 
Macedonia  they  came  together,  or  about  the  same 
time,  to  Corinth  ;  and  their  arrival  was  the  occa 
sion  of  the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thes- 


This  is  the  first  h  extant  example  of  that  work 
by  which  the  Apostle  Paul  has  served  the  Church 
of  all  ages  in  as  eminent  a  degree  as  he  laboured  at 
the  founding  of  it  in  his  lifetime.  AH  commen 
tators  upon  the  New  Testament  have  been  accus- 
toired  to  notice  the  points  of  coincidence  between 
the  hutory  in  the  Acts,  and  these  Letters.  Paley's 
Horae  Paulinae  is  famous  as  a  special  work  upon 
this  subject.  But  more  recently,  important  attempts 
have  been  made  to  estimate  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
more  broadly,  by  considering  them  in  their  mutual 

h  Ewald  believes,  rather  capriciously,  that  the  Second 
Kp.  to  the  Thess.  was  written  Jirst,  and  was  sent  from 
lSp.Toen(f>ief!eiidsclireil>endfsAp<>stelsI'au1uf,\ip.  17,  IS). 

'  Aocungst  these,  the  works  of  IVof.  Jowttt  (Kpistles  to 


PAUL, 

order  and  relations,  and  in  their  bearing1  upon  tbt 
question  of  the  development  of  the  writer's  teach 
ing.  Such  attempts'  must  lead  to  a  better  under 
standing  of  the  Epistles  themselves,  and  to  a  6t~ 
appreciation  of  the  Apostle's  nature  and  work.  It  if 
notorious  that  the  order  of  the  Epistles  in  the  book 
of  the  N.  T.  is  not  their  real,  or  chronological 
order.  The  mere  placing  of  them  in  their  tru« 
sequence  throws  considerable  light  upon  the  his 
tory  ;  and  happily  the  time  of  composition  of  the 
more  important  Epistles  can  be  stated  with  suffi 
cient  certainty.  The  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalo- 
nians  belong, — and  these  alone, — to  the  present 
Missionary  Journey.  The  Epistles  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  Romans,  and  Corinthians,  were  written  during 
the  next  journey.  Those  to  Philemon,  the  Colos- 
siaus,  the  Ephesians,  and  the  Philippians,  belong  to 
the  captivity  at  Home.  With  regard  to  the  Pastoral 
Epistles,  there  are  considerable  difficulties,  which 
require  to  be  discussed  separately. 

Two  general  remarks  relating  to  St.  Paul's  Letters 
may  find  a  place  here.  (1.)  There  is  no  reason  to 
assume  that  the  extant  Letters  are  all  that  the 
Apostle  wrote.  On  the  contrary,  there  is  a  strong 
presumption,  and  some  slight  positive  evidence, 
that  he  wrote  many  which  have  not  been  preserved 
(Jowett,  i.  p.  195-201,  2nd  ed.).  (2.)  We  must 
be  on  our  guard  against  concluding  too  much  from 
the  contents  and  style  of  any  Epistle,  as  to  the 
fixed  bent  of  the  Apostle's  whole  mind  at  the  time 
when  it  was  written.  We  must  remember  that 
the  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  were  written  whilst 
St.  Paul  was  deeply  absorbed  in  the  peculiar  cir 
cumstances  of  the  Corinthian  Church ;  and  that  the 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  were  written  between 
those  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans.  These  facts 
are  sufficient  to  remind  us  of  the  versatility  of  the 
Apostle's  mind ; — to  show  us  how  thoroughly  the 
feelings  and  ideas  suggested  to  him  by  the  circum 
stances  upon  which  he  was  dwelling  had  the  power 
to  mould  his  utterances. 

The  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  was  pro 
bably  written  soon  after  his  arrival  at  Corinth,  and 
before  he  turned  from  the  Jews  to  the  Gentiles.  It 
was  drawn  from  St.  Paul  by  the  arrival  of  Silas  and 
Timothy.  [THESSALONIANS,  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO 
THE.]  The  largest  portion  of  it  consists  of  an  im 
passioned  recalling  of  the  facts  and  feelings  of  the 
time  when  the  Apostle  was  personally  with  them. 
But  we  perceive  gradually  that  those  expectations 
which  he  had  taught  them  to  entertain  of  the  ap 
pearing  and  presence  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  had. 
undergone  some  corruption.  There  were  symptoms 
in  the  Thessalonian  church  of  a  restle^n«>s  which 
speculated  on  the  times  and  seasons  of  the  future, 
and  found  present  duties  flat  and  unimportant.  This 
evil  tendency  St.  Paul  seeks  to  correct,  by  reviving 
the  first  spirit  of  faith  and  hope  and  mutual  fellow 
ship,  and  by  setting  forth  the  appearing  of  Jesus 
Christ — not  indeed  as  distant,  but  as  the  full  shining 
of  a  day  of  which  all  believers  in  Christ  were  already 
children.  The  ethical  characteristics  apparent  in 
this  letter,  the  degree  in  which  St.  Paul  identified 
himself  with  his  friends,  the  entire  surrender  of  hi? 
existence  to  his  calling  as  a  preacher  of  Christ,  his 
anxiety  for  the  good  fame  and  well-being  ol  his  con 
verts,  are  the  same  which  will  reappear  continually. 


the  Thest.,  Gal.,  and  Ran.),  of  Ewald  (Die  Srndtckreiben 
&c.),  and  of  Dr.  Wordsworth  (JCpistlu  qf  St.  1'aitl}.  may 
be  nmueti. 


PAUL 

Wh:u  interval  of  tune  hejwiratcd  the  Second  Letter  to 
she  Thessabnians  from  the  First,  we  have  no  means 
of  judging,  except  that  the  later  one  was  certainly 
written  before  St.  Paul's  departure  from  Corinth. 
THESSALONIANS,  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  THE.]  The 
Thessalonians  had  been  disturbed  by  announcements 
J.hat  those  convulsions  of  the  world  which  all  Chris 
tians  were  taught  to  associate  with  the  coming  of 
r'hrifct  were  immediately  impending.  To  meet  these 
assertions,  St.  Paul  delivers  express  predictions  in  a 
manner  not  usual  with  him  elsewhere ;  and  whilst 
re-affirming  all  he  had  ever  taught  the  Thessalo 
nians  to  believe  respecting  the  early  coming  of  the 
Saviour  and  the  blessedness  of  waiting  patiently  for 
it,  he  informs  them  that  certain  events,  of  which  he 
Ixad  spoken  to  them,  must  run  their  course  before  the 
full  manifestation  of  Jesus  Christ  could  come  to  pass. 
At  the  end  of  this  epistle  St.  Paul  guards  the  Thes 
salonians  against  pretended  letters  from  him,  by 
telling  them  that  every  genuine  letter,  even  if  not 
written  by  his  hand  throughout,  would  have  at 
least  an  autograph  salutation  at  the  close  of  it. 

We  return  now  to  the  Apostle's  preaching  at 
Corinth.  When  Silas  and  Timotheus  came,  he  was 
testifying  to  the  Jews  with  great  earnestness,  but 
with  little  success.  So  "  when  they  opposed  them 
selves  and  blasphemed,  he  shook  out  his  raiment," 
and  said  to  them,  in  words  of  warning  taken  from 
their  own  prophets  (Ezek.  xxxiii.  4) ;  "  Your  blood  be 
upon  your  own  heads ;  I  am  clean,  and  henceforth 
will  go  to  the  Gentiles."  The  experience  of  Pisi- 
dian  Antioch  was  repeating  itself.  The  Apostle 
went,  as  he  threatened,  to  the  Gentiles,  and  began 
to  preach  in  the  house  of  a  proselyte  named  Justus. 
Already  one  distinguished  Jew  had  become  a  be 
liever,  Crispus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  men 
tioned  (1  Cor.  i.  14)  as  baptized  by  the  Apostle 
himself:  and  manv  of  the  Gentile  inhabitants  were 
receiving  the  Gosple  and  being  baptized.  The  envy 
and  rage  of  the  Jews,  therefore,  were  excited  m  an 
unusual  degree,  and  seem  to  have  pressed  upon  the 
spirit  of  St.  Paul.  He  was  therefore  encouraged 
by  a  vision  of  the  Lord,  who  appeared  to  him  by 
night,  and  said,  "  Be  not  afraid,  but  speak,  and 
hold  not  thy  peace:  for  I  am  with  thee,  and  no 
man  shall  set  on  thee,  to  hurt  thee;  for  I  have 
much  people  in  this  city."  Corinth  was  to  be  an 
important  seat  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  distin 
guished,  not  only  by  the  number  of  believers,  but 
also  by  the  variety  and  the  fruitfulness  of  the  teach 
ing  to  be  given  there.  At  this  time  St.  Paul 
himself  stayed  there  for  a  year  and  six  months, 
"  teaching  the  word  of  God  amongst  them." 

Corinth  was  the  chief  city  of  the  province  of 
Achaia,  and  the  residence  of  the  proconsul.  During 
St.  Paul's  stay,  we  find  the  proconsular  office  held 
by  Gallic,  a  brother  of  the  philosopher  Seneca. 
[GALLIC.]  Before  him  the  Apostle  was  summoned 
by  his  Jewish  enemies,  who  hoped  to  bring  the 
Roman  authority  to  bear  upon  him  as  an  innovator 
in  religion.  But  Gallio  perceived  at  once,  before 
Paul  could  "  open  his  mouth "  to  defend  himself, 
that  the  movement  was  due  to  Jewish  prejudice, 
and  refused  to  go  into  the  question.  "  If  it  be  a 
question  of  words  and  names  and  of  your  law,"  he 
said  to  the  Jews,  speaking  with  the  tolei'ance  of  a 
Roman  magistrate,  "look  ye  to  it;  for  I  will  be  no 
judge  of  such  matters."  Then  a  singular  scene 
occurred.  The  Corinthian  spectators,  either  favour 
ing  St.  Paul,  or  actuated  only  by  anger  against  the 
Jew*,  seized  on  the  principal  person  of  those  who 
had  brought  the  charge,  and  beat  him  before  the 


PAUL 


746 


judgment-seat.  (See  on  the  other  hand  Ewald, 
Geschichte,  vi.  463-466.)  Gallio  left  these  reli 
gious  quarrels  to  settle  themselver  The  Apostle 
therefore  was  not  allowed  to  be  "  hurt,"  and 
remained  some  time  longer  at  Corinth  unmolested. 

We  do  not  gather  from  the  subsequent  Epistles 
to  the  Corinthians  many  details  of  the  founding  of  the 
Church  at  Corinth.  The  main  body  of  the  believers 
consisted  of  Gentiles, — ("  Ye  know  that  ye  were  Gen 
tiles,"  1  Cor.  xii.  2).  But,  partly  from  the  number 
who  had  been  proselytes,  partly  from  the  mixture  of 
Jews,  it  had  so  far  a  Jewish  character,  that  St.  Paul 
could  speak  of  "our  fathers"  as  having  been  under 
the  cloud  (1  Cor.  x.  1 ).  The  tendency  to  intellectual 
display,  and  the  traffic  of  sophists  in  philosophical 
theories,  which  prevailed  at  Corinth,  made  the 
Apostle  more  than  usually  anxious  to  be  independent 
in  his  life  and  simple  in  bearing  his  witness.  He 
wrought  for  his  living  that  he  might  not  appear  to 
be  taking  fees  of  his  pupils  (1  Cor.  is.  18)  ;  and  he 
put  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ,  crucified  and  risen, 
in  the  place  of  all  doctrines  (1  Cor.  ii.  1-5,  xv.  3,  4). 
What  gave  infinite  significance  to  his  simple  state 
ments,  was  the  nature  of  the  Christ  who  had  been 
crucified,  and  His  relation  to  men.  Concerning  these 
mysteries  St.  Paul  had  uttered  a  wisdom,  not  of  the 
world,  but  of  God,  which  had  commended  itself 
chiefly  to  the  humble  and  simple.  Of  these  God  had 
chosen  and  called  not  a  few  "  into  the  fellowship 
of  His  Son  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord  of  men  "  (1  Cor. 
ii.  6,  7,  i.  27,  9). 

Having  been  the  instrument  of  accomplishing  thw 
work,  St.  Paul  took  his  departure  for  Jerusalem, 
wishing  to  attend  a  festival  there.  Before  leaving 
Greece,  he  cut  off  his  hairk  at  Cenchreae,  in  fulfil 
ment  of  a  vow.  We  are  not  told  where  or  why  he 
had  made  the  vow  ;  and  there  is  considerable  diffi 
culty  in  reconciling  this  act  with  the  received  cus 
toms  of  the  Jews.  [Vows.]  A  passage  in  Josephus, 
if  rightly  understood  (B.  J.  ii.  15,  §1),  mentions  a 
vow  which  included,  besides  a  sacrifice,  the  cutting 
of  the  hair  and  the  beginning  of  an  abstinence  from 
wine  30  days  before  the  sacrifice.  If  St.  Paul's 
was  such  a  vow,  he  was  going  to  offer  up  a  sacrifice 
in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  "  shearing  of 
his  head  "  was  a  preliminary  to  the  sacrifice.  Thf 
principle  of  the  vow,  whatever  it  was,  must  havt 
been  the  same  as  that  of  the  Nazarite  vow,  which 
St.  Paul  afterwards  countenanced  at  Jerusalem. 
[NAZARITE,  p.  472.]  There  is  therefore  no  diffi 
culty  in  supposing  him  to  have  followed  in  this 
instance,  for  some  reason  not  explained  to  us,  a 
custom  of  his  countrymen. — When  he  sailed  from 
the  Isthmus,  Aquila  and  Priscilla  went  with  him  as 
far  as  Ephesus.  Paul  paid  a  visit  to  the  synagogue 
at  Ephesus,  but  would  not  stay.  He  was  anxious 
to  be  at  Jerusalem  for  the  approaching  feast,  but 
he  promised,  God  willing,  to  return  to  them  again. 
Leaving  Ephesus,  he  sailed  to  Caesarea,  and  from 
thence  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  "  saluted  the 
Church."  It  is  argued  (Wieseler,  pp.  48-50),  from 
considerations  founded  on  the  suspension  of  naviga 
tion  during  the  winter  months,  that  the  festival 
was  probably  the  Pentecost.  From  Jerusalem, 
almost  immediately,  the  Apostle  went  down  to 
Antioch,  thus  returning  to  the  same  place  from 
which  he  had  started  with  Silas. 

Third  Missionary  Journey,  including  the  stay  at 


k  Acts  xviii.  18.  The  act  may  be  thnt  of  Aquila,  bit 
the  historian  certainly  seems  to  be  speaking  not  of  him, 
but  of  Si.  1'aul. 


746 


PAUL 


Ephesua  (Acts  xviii.  2,i-xxi.  17). — Without  in 
venting  facts  or  discussions  for  which  we  have  no 
authority,  we  may  connect  with  this  short  visit  of 
St.  Paul  to  Jerusalem  a  very  serious  raising  of  the 
whole  question,  What  was  to  be  the  relation  of  the 
n«w  kingdom  of  Christ  to  the  law  and  covenant  of  the 
Jews?  Such  a  Church  as  that  at  Corinth,  with  its 
affiliated  communities,  composed  chiefly  of  Gentile 
members,  appeared  likely  to  overshadow  by  its  im- 
poi-tance  the  Mother  Church  in  Judaea.  The  jealousy 
of  the  more  Judaical  believers,  not  extinguished  by 
the  decision  of  the  council  at  Jerusalem,  began  now  to 
ahow  itself  everywhere  in  the  form  of  an  active  and 
intriguing  party-spirit.  This  disastrous  movement 
could  not  indeed  alienate  the  heart  of  St.  Paul  from 
the  law  or  the  calling  or  the  people  of  his  fathers — 
his  antagonism  is  never  directed  against  these ;  but 
it  drew  him  into  the  great  conflict  of  the  next  period 
of  his  life,  and  must  have  been  a  sore  trial  to  the 
intense  loyalty  of  his  nature.  To  vindicate  the 
freedom,  as  regarded,  the  Jewish  law,  of  believers 
in  Christ ;  but  to  do  this,  for  the  very  sake  of  main 
taining  the  unity  of  the  Church ; — was  to  be  the 
earnest  labour  of  the  Apostle  for  some  years.  In 
thus  labouring  he  was  cany  ing  out  completely  the 
principles  laid  down  by  the  elder  Apostles  af,  Jeru 
salem  ;  and  may  we  not  believe  that,  in  deep  sorrow 
at  appearing,  even,  to  disparage  the  law  and  the 
covenant,  he  was  the  more  anxious  to  prove  his 
fellowship  in  spirit  with  the^Church  in  Judaea,  by 
"  remembering  the  poor,"  as  "  James,  Cephas,  and 
John  "  had  desired  that  he  would  ?  (Gal.  ii.  10.)  The 
prominence  given,  during  the  journeys  upon  which 
we  are  now  entering,  to  the  collection  to  be  made 
amongst  his  Churches  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor  at 
Jerusalem,  seems  to  indicate  such  an  anxiety.  The 
great  Epistles  which  belong  to  this  period,  those  to 
the  Galatians,  Corinthians,  and  Romans,  show  how 
the  "  Judaizing  "  question  exercised  at  this  time  the 
Apostle's  mind. 

St.  Paul  "spent  some  time"  at  Antioch,  and 
during  this  stay,  as  we  are  inclined  to  believe,  his 
collision  with  St.  Peter  (Gal.  ii.  11-14),  of  which 
we  have  spoken  above,  took  place.  When  he  left 
Antioch,  he  "  went  over  all  the  country  of  Galatia 
and  Phrygia  in  order,  strengthening  all  the  dis 
ciples,"  and  giving  orders  concerning  the  collection 
for  the  saints  (I  Cor.  rvi.  1).  It  is  probable  that 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  written  soon  after 
this  visit.  [GALATIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THK.]  When 
he  was  with  them  he  had  found  the  Christian  com 
munities  infested  by  Judaizing  teachers.  He  had 
"  told  them  the  truth  "  (Gal.  iv.  16),  he  had  warned 
them  against  the  deadly  tendencies  of  Jewish  exclu- 
bivenesR,  and  had  re-affirmed  the  simple  Gospel, 
concerning  Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  which  he 
had  preached  to  them  on  his  first  visit  (rb  irp6- 
ripov,  Gal.  iv.  13).  But  after  he  left  them  the 
Judaizing  doctrine  raised  its  head  again.  The  only 
course  leTt  to  its  advocates  was  to  assail  openly  the 
authority  of  St.  Paul ;  and  this  they  did.  They 
represented  him  as  having  derived  his  commission 
from  the  older  Apostles,  and  as  therefore  acting  dis 
loyally  if  he  opposed  the  views  ascribed  to  Peter  and 
James.  The  fickle  minds  of  the  Galatian  Christians 
were  influenced  by  these  hardy  assertions ;  and  the 
Apostle  heard,  when  he  had  come  down  to  Ephesus, 
that  his  work  in  Galatia  was  being  undone,  and  his 
wmvijrts  were  being  seduced  from  the  true  faith  in 
Christ.  He  therefore  writes  the  Epistle  to  reinon- 
etrate  with  them — an  Epistle  full  of  indignation,  of 
naming,  of  direct  and  impassioned  teaching.  He 


PAUL 

recalls  to  their  minds  the  Gospel  which  he  had 
preached  amongst  them,  and  asserts  in  solemn  and 
even  awful  language  its  absolute  truth  (i.  8,  9) 
He  declares  that  he  had  received  it  directly  from 
Jesus  Christ  the  Lord,  and  that  his  position  toward* 
the  other  Apostles  had  always  been  that,  not  of  ? 
pupil,  but  of  an  independent  fellow-labourer.  lit 
sets  before  them  Jesus  the  Crucified,  the  Son  of 
God,  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  made  tc  Jie 
fathers,  and  as  the  pledge  and  giver  of  freedom  to 
men.  He  declares  that  in  Him,  and  by  the  powci 
of  the  Spirit  of  sonship  sent  down  through  Him 
men  have  inherited  the  rights  of  adult  sons  of  God ; 
that  the  condition  represented  by  the  Law  was  the 
inferior  and  preparatory  stage  of  boyhood.  He 
then,  most  earnestly  and  tenderly,  impresses  upon 
the  Galatians  the  responsibilities  of  their  fellowship 
with  Christ  the  Crucified,  urging  them  to  fruitful- 
ness  in  all  the  graces  of  their  spiritual  calling,  and 
especially  to  brotherly  consideration  and  unity. 

This  Letter  was,  in  all  probability,  sent  from 
Ephesus.  This  was  the  goal  of  the  Apostle's  journey- 
ings  through  Asia  Minor.  He  came  down  upon  Ephe 
sus  from  the  upper  districts  (rek  dvarrtputb  /ttprj)  of 
Phrygia.  What  Antioch  was  for  "  the  region  of 
Syria  and  Cilicia,"  what  Corinth  was  for  Greece, 
what  Rome  was, — we  may  add, — for  Italy  and  the 
West,  that  Ephesus  was  for  the  important  province 
called  Asia.  Indeed,  with  reference  to  the  spread  of 
the  Church  Catholic,  Ephesus  occupied  the  central 
position  of  all.  This  was  the  meeting  place  of  Jew, 
of  Greek,  of  Roman,  and  of  Oriental.  Accordingly, 
the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  was  to  stay  a  long  time 
here,  that  he  might  found  a  strong  Church,  which 
should  be  a  kind  of  mother-church  to  Christian 
communities  in  the  neighbouring  cities  of  Asia. 

A  new  element  in  the  preparation  of  the  world 
for  the  kingdom  of  Christ  presents  itself  at  the  be 
ginning  of  the  Apostle's  work  at  Ephesus.  He  finds 
there  certain  disciples  (rivks  /xa07jT<£s), — about 
twelve  in  number — of  whom  he  is  led  to  inquire, 
"  Did  ye  receive  the  Holy  Ghost  when  yc  believed  ? 
They  answered,  No,  we  did  not  even  hear  of  there 
being  a  Holy  Ghost.  Unto  what  then,  asked  Paul, 
were  ye  baptized?  And  they  said,  Unto  John's 
baptism.  Then  said  Paul,  John  baptized  with  the 
baptism  of  repentance,  saying  to  the  people  that 
they  should  believe  on  him  who  was  coming  after 
him,  that  is,  on  Jesus.  Hearing  this,  they  were 
baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and 
when  Paul  had  laid  his  hands  upon  them,  the  Holy 
Ghost  came  upon  them,  and  they  began  to  speak 
with  tongues  and  to  prophesy '  (Acts,  M.  1-7). — 
It  is  obvious  to  compare  this  incident  with  the 
Apostolic  act  of  Peter  and  John  in  Samaria,  and  tc 
see  in  it  an  assertion  of  the  full  Apostolic  dignity  of 
Paul.  But  besides  this  bearing  of  it,  we  see  in  it 
indications  which  suggest  more  than  they  distinctly 
express,  as  to  the  spiritual  movements  of  that  age. 
These  twelve  disciples  are  mentioned  immediately 
after  Apollos,  who  also  had  been  at  Ephesus  just 
before  St.  Paul's  arrival,  and  who  had  taught  dili 
gently  concerning  Jesus  (ra  irtpl  rov  'li)<rov). 
knowing  only  the  baptism  of  John.  But  Apollos 
was  of  Alexandria,  trained  in  the  intelligent  and  in 
quiring  study  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  which  li;id 
been  fostered  by  the  Greek  culture  of  that  capital. 
We  are  led  to  suppose  therefore  that  a  knov/ledgc 
of  the  baptism  of  John  and  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus 
had  spread  widely,  and  had  been  received  with  la- 
vour  by  some  of  those  who  knew  the  Scriptures  most 
thoroughly,  before  the  message  cuucerniug  the  ez- 


PAUL 

sltation  of  Jesus  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
had  been  r^eived.  What  the  exact  belief  ot  Apol- 
los  and  these  twelve  "  disciples"  was  concerning  the 
character  and  work  of  Jesus,  we  have  no  means  of 
knowing.  But  we  gather  that  it  was  wanting  in  a 
recognition  of  the  full  lordship  of  Jesus  and  of  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Pentecostal  faith  was 
tommunicated  to  Apollos  by  Aquila  and  Priscilla, 
to  the  other  disciples  of  the  Baptist  by  St.  Paul. 

The  Apostle  now  entered  upon  his  usual  work. 
He  went  into  the  synagogue,  and  for  three  months 
he  spoke  openly,  disputing  and  persuading  concern 
ing  "  the  kingdom  of  God."  At  the  end  of  this 
time  the  obstinacy  and  opposition  of  some  of  the 
Jews  led  him  to  give  up  frequenting  the  synagogue, 
and  he  established  the  believers  as  a  separate 
society,  meeting  "  in  the  school  of  Tyrannus." 
This  continued  (though  we  may  probably  allow 
for  an  occasional  absence  of  St.  Paul)  for  two 
years.  During  this  time  many  things  occurred,  of 
which  the  historian  of  the  Acts  chooses  two  ex 
amples,  the  triumph  over  magical  arts,  and  the 
great  disturbance  raised  by  the  silversmiths  who 
made  shrines  for  Artemis ;  and  amongst  which  we 
are  to  note  further  the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians. 

"  God  wrought  special  miracles,"  we  are  told 
(Swd/jifis  oil  reks  Tvxobffa.s\  "  by  the  hands  of 
Paul."  "  It  is  evident  that  the  arts  of  sorcery  and 
magic — all  those  arts  which  betoken  the  belief  in 
the  presence  of  a  spirit,  but  not  of  a  Holy  Spirit — 
were  flourishing  here  in  great  luxuriance.  Every 
thing  in  the  history  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament 
would  suggest  the  thought  that  the  exhibitions  of 
Divine  power  took  a  more  startling  form  where 
•superstitions  grounded  mainly  on  the  reverence  for 
diabolical  power  were  prevalent;  that  they  were 
the  proclamations  of  a  beneficent  and  orderly  go 
vernment,  which  had  been  manifested  to  counteract 
and  overcome  one  that  was  irregular  and  malevo 
lent  "  (Maurice,  Unity  of  the  New  Testament, 
p.  515).  The  powers  of  the  new  kingdom  took  a 
form  more  nearly  resembling  the  wonders  of  the 
kingdom  of  darkness  than  was  usually  adopted, 
when  handkerchiefs  and  aprons  from  the  body  of 
Paul  (like  the  shadow  of  Peter,  v.  15)  were  allowed 
to  be  used  for  the  healing  of  the  sick  and  the 
casting  out  of  devils.  But  it  was  to  be  clearly 
seen  that  all  was  done  by  the  healing  power  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Himself.  Certain  Jews,  and  among 
them  the  seven  sons  of  one  Sceva  (not  unlike  Simon 
Magus  in  Samaria),  fancied  that  the  effect  was  due 
to  a  magic  formula,  an  eVaiS-r).  They  therefore 
attempted  to  exorcise,  by  saying,  "  We  adjure  you 
by  Jesus  whom  Paul  preacheth."  But  the  evil 
spirit,  having  a  voice  given  to  it,  cried  out,  "  Jesus 
I  know,  and  Paul  I  know,  but  who  are  ye  ?"  And 
the  man  who  was  possessed  fell  furiously  upon  the 
exorcists  and  drove  them  forth.  The  result  of  this 
testimony  was  that  fear  fell  upon  all  the  inhabitants 
of  Ephesus,  and  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  was 
magnified.  And  the  impression  produced  bore 
striking  practical  fruits.  The  city  was  well  known 
for  its  'E<p(ffia.  •ypd/j./j.a.Ta,  forms  of  incantation, 
which  were  sold  at  a  high  price.  Many  of  those 
who  had  these  books  brought  them  together  and 
burned  them  before  all  men,  and  when  the  cost  of 
them  was  computed  it  was  found  to  be  50,000 
drachmae  =  17701.  "So  mightily  grew  the  word 
of  the  Lord,  and  prevailed." 

Wh'lst  St.  Paul  was  at  Ephesus  his  communi- 
aliens  with  the  Church  in  Achaia  were  not  alto- 


PAUL 


741 


;ether  suspended.  There  is  strong  i  eason  to  befiev* 
that  a  personal  visit  to  Corinth  was  made  by  him. 
and  a  letter  sent,  neither  of  which  is  mentioned  m 
the  Acts.  The  visit  is  inferred  from  several  allu 
sions  in  the  2nd  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  "  Be- 
lold,  the  third  time  I  am  ready  to  come  to  you" 
(2  Cor.  xii.  14).  "  This  is  the  third  time  I  am 
coming  to  you  "  (2  Cor.  xiii.  1).  The  visit  he  is  con- 
templating  is  plainly  that  mentioned  in  Acts  xx.  2, 
which  took  place  when  he  finally  left  Ephesus.  If 
that  was  the  third,  he  must  have  paid  a  second 
during  the  time  of  his  residence  at  Ephesus.  It 
seems  far-fetched,  with  Paley  (Horae  Paulinae, 
2  Cor.  No.  xi.),  to  conclude  that  St.  Paul  is  only 
affirming  a  third  intention,  and  that  the  second 
intention  had  not  been  carried  out.  The  context, 
in  both  cases,  seems  to  refer  plainly  to  visits,  and 
not  to  intentions.  Again,  "  I  determined  this  with 
myseff,  that  I  would  not  come  again  to  you  in 
heaviness"  (vd\iv  Iv  \fonj):  2  Cor.  ii.  1.  Here 
St.  Paul  is  apparently  speaking  of  a  previous  visit 
which  he  had  paid  in  sorrow  of  heart.  He  expresses 
an  apprehension  (2  Cor.  xii.  21)  lest  "again  when 
I  come,  my  God  should  humble  me  among  you  " 

l  ird\iv  i\66vros  /J.QV  Tcnrtiv^ffti  ju« — the 
ird\iv  appearing  certainly  to  refer  to  Ttnrfivt&fffi 
as  much  as  to  t\86vros).  The  words  in  2  Cor 
xiii.  2,  irpoelpriKa  Kal  vpo\tyu>,  &s  rrap&ii'  ri 

Tfpov  Kal  dTriav  vvv,  may  be  translated,  either 
"  as  t/  present  the  second  time,"  or  "  as  when  pre 
sent  the  second  time."  In  the  latter  case  we  have 
here  a  distinct  confirmation  of  the  supposed  visit. 
The  former  rendering  seems  at  first  sight  to  exclude 
it:  but  if  we  remember  that  the  thought  of  his 
special  admonition  is  occupying  the  Apostle's  mind, 
we  should  naturally  understand  it,  "  I  forewarn 
you  now  in  my  absence,  as  if  I  were  present  a 
second  time  to  do  it  in  person ;"  so  that  he  would 
be  speaking  of  the  supposed  visit  as  a  first,  with 
reference  to  the  purpose  which  he  has  in  his  mind. 
The  prima  facie  sense  of  these  passages  implies  a 
short  visit,  which  we  should  place  in  the  first  half 
of  the  stay  at  Ephesus.  And  there  are  no  strong 
reasons  why  we  should  not  accept  that  prima  facie 
sense.  St.  Paul,  we  may  imagine,  heard  of  dis 
orders  which  prevailed  in  the  Corinthian  Church. 
Apollos  had  returned  to  Ephesus  some  time  before 
the  1st  Epistle  was  written  (1  Cor.  xvi.  12),  and 
it  may  have  been  from  him  that  St.  Paul  learnt  the 
tidings  which  distressed  him.  He  was  moved  to  go 
himself  to  see  them.  He  stayed  but  a  short  time, 
but  warned  them  solemnly  against  the  licentious 
ness  which  he  perceived  to  be  creeping  in  amongst 
them.  If  he  went  directly  by  sea  to  Corinth  and 
back,  this  journey  would  not  occupy  much  time. 
It  was  very  natural,  again,  that  this  visit  should 
be  followed  up  by  a  letter.  Either  the  Apostle' 
own  reflections  after  his  return,  or  some  subsequent 
tidings  which  reached  him,  drew  from  him,  it  ap 
pears,  a  written  communication  in  which  he  gave 
them  some  practical  advice.  "  I  wrote  unto  you 
in  the  Epistle  not  to  keep  company  with  fornicator« 
(eypatya  iifj.1v  iv  rrj  itriffro\rj :  1  Cor.  v.  9).  Then, 
at  some  point  not  defined  in  the  course  of  the  stay 
at  Ephesus,  St.  Paul  announced  to  his  friends  a 
plan  of  going  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  and 
afterwards  visiting  Jerusalem  ;  adding,  "  After  1 
have  been  there,  I  must  also  see  Rome."  But  he  put 
oft' for  a  while  his  own  departure,  and  sent  before  him 
Timothy  and  Erastus  to  the  churches  in  Macedonia 
and  Achaia,  "  to  bring  them  into  vememtrance  oj 
his  vays  which  were  in  Christ"  (1  Cur.  iv.  17). 


748 


PAUL 


Whether  the  Ibt  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  was 
written  before  or  atler  the  tumult  excited  by  De 
metrius  cannot  be  positively  asserted.  He  makes 
an  allusion,  in  that  Epistle,  to  a  "  battle  with  wild 
beasts"  fought  at  Ephesus  (i6ifpwfidx'na'cl  ^v 
"E$>€<rq» :  1  Cor.  xv.  32),  which  it  is  usual  to  un 
derstand  figuratively,  and  which  is  by  many  con 
nected  with  that  tumult.  But  this  connexion  is 
arbiti-ary,  and  without  much  reason.™  And  as  it 
would  seem  from  Acts  xx.  1  that  St.  Paul  departed 
immediately  after  the  tumult,  it  is  probable  that 
the  Epistle  was  written  before,  though  not  long 
tefore,  the  raising  of  this  disturbance.  Here  then, 
while  the  Apostle  is  so  earnestly  occupied  with  the 
teaching  of  believers  and  inquirers  at  Ephesus  and 
from  tne  neighbouring  parts  of  "  Asia,"  we  find 
him  throwing  all  his  heart  and  soul  into  the  con- 
terns  of  the  Church  at  Corinth.  [CORINTHIANS, 
FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  THE.] 

There  were  two  external  inducements  for  writing 
this  Epistle.  (1.)  St.  Paul  had  received  informa- 
tiori  from  members  of  Chloe's  household  (4$ij\(a0ii 
HOI  fnrb  T<UV  XA<$7js,  i.  11)  concerning  the  state 
of  the  Church  at  Corinth.  (2.)  That  Church  had 
written  him  a  letter,  of  which  the  bearers  were 
Stephanas  and  Fortunatus  and  Achaicus,  to  ask  his 
judgment  upon  various  points  which  were  sub 
mitted  to  him  (vii.  1,  xvi.  17).  He  had  learnt 
that  there  were  divisions  in  the  Church ;  that 
parties  had  been  formed  which  took  the  names  of 
1'aul,  of  Apollos,  of  Cephas,  and  of  Christ  (i.  11, 
12) ;  and  also  that  moral  and  social  irregularities 
had  begun  to  prevail,  of  which  the  most  conspicuous 
and  scandalous  example  was  that  a  believer  had 
taken  his  father's  wife,  without  being  publicly  con 
demned  by  the  Church  (y.  1,  vi.  7,  xi.  17-22,  xiv. 
33-40).  To  these  evils  we  must  add  one  doctrinal 
error,  of  those  who  said  "  that  there  was  no  resur 
rection  of  the  dead"  (xv.  12).  It  is  probable  that 
the  teaching  of  Apollos  the  Alexandrian,  which  had 
been  characteristic  and  highly  successful  (Acts  xviii. 
27,  28),  had  been  the  first  occasion  of  the  "divi 
sions"  in  the  Church.  We  may  take  it  for  granted 
that  his  adherents  did  not  form  themselves  into  a 
party  until  he  had  left  Corinth,  and  therefore  that 
he  had  been  some  time  with  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus. 
But  after  he  was  gone,  the  special  Alexandrian 
features  of  his  teaching  were  remembered  by  those 
who  had  delighted  to  hear  him.  Their  Grecian 
intellect  was  captivated  by  his  broader  and  more 
spiritual  interpretation  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures. 
The  connexion  which  he  taught  them  to  perceive 
between  the  revelation  made  to  Hebrew  rulers  and 
prophets  and  the  wisdom  by  which  other  nations, 
mid  especially  their  own,  had  been  enlightened,  dwelt 
in  'their  minds.  That  which  especially  occupied  the 
Apoilcs  school  must  have  been  a  philosophy  of  the 
Scriptures.  It  was  the  tendency  of  this  party 
which  seemed  to  the  Apostle  particularly  dangerous 
amongst  the  Greeks.  He  hardly  seems  to  refer 
specially  in  his  letter  to  the  other  parties,  but  we 
can  scarcely  doubt  that  in  what  he  says  about  "  the 
wisdom  which  the  Greeks  sought"  (i.  22),  he  is 
referring  not  only  to  the  general  tendency  of  the 
Greek  mind,  but  to  that  tendency  as  it  had  been 
caught  and  influenced  by  the  teaching  of  Apollos. 
It  gives  him  an  occasion  of  delivering  his  most  cha 
racteristic  testimony.  He  recognizes  wisdom,  but 
it  is  the  wisdom  of  God ;  and  that  wisdom  was  not 


The  manner  of  the  allusion,  ei  cd>)pto/u.axi)<ra  4* 
tcru,  may  imply  «w  EwuM  (SendschreibeH,  211)  sug- 


PAUL 

nli/  i  2i><pia  or  a  .\6yos  through  whkh  God  had 
always  spoken  to  all  men ;  it  had  been  perfectly 
manifested  in  Jesus  the  Crucified.  Christ  crucifieT. 
was  both  the  Power  of  God  and  the  Wisdom  of  God. 
To  receive  Him  required  a  spiritual  discernment 
unlike  the  wisdom  of  the  great  men  of  the  world  ; 
a  discernment  given  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  and 
manifesting  itself  in  sympathy  with  humiliation  and 
in  love. 

For  a  detailed  description  of  the  Epistles  the 
reader  is  referred  to  the  special  articles  upon  each. 
But  it  belongs  to  the  history  of  St.  Paul  to  notice 
the  personal  characteristics  which  appear  in  them. 
We  mtist  not  omit  to  observe  therefore,  in  this 
Epistle,  how  loyally  the  Apostle  represents  Jesus 
Christ  the  Crucified  as  the  Lord  of  men,  the  Head 
of  the  body  with  many  members,  the  Centre  of 
Unity,  the  Bond  of  men  to  the  Father.  We  should 
mark  at  the  same  time  how  invariably  he  connects 
the  Power  of  the  Spirit  with  the  Name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus.  He  meets  all  the  evils  of  the  Corinthian 
Church,  the  intellectual  pride,  the  party  spirit,  the 
loose  morality,  the  disregard  of  decency  and  order, 
the  false  belief  about  the  Resurrection,  by  recalling 
their  thoughts  to  the  Person  of  Christ  and  to  the 
Spirit  of  God  as  the  Breath  of  a  common  life  to  the 
whole  body. 

We  observe  also  here,  more  than  elsewhere,  the 
tact,  universally  recognized  and  admired,  with 
which  the  Apostle  discusses  the  practical  problems 
brought  before  him.  The  various  questions  relating 
to  marriage  (ch.  vii.),  the  difficulty  about  meats 
offered  to  idols  (ch.  viii.,  x.),  the  behaviour  proper 
for  women  (ch.  xi.,  xiv.),  the  use  of  the  gifts  of 
prophesying  and  speaking  with  tongues  (ch.  xiv.). 
are  made  examples  of  a  treatment  which  may  be 
applied  to  all  such  questions.  We  see  them  all 
discussed  with  reference  to  first  principles;  the 
object,  in  every  practical  conclusion,  being  to  guard 
and  assert  some  permanent  principle.  We  see  St. 
Paul  no  less  a  lover  of  order  and  subordination 
than  of  freedom.  We  see  him  claiming  for  himself, 
and  prescribing  to  others,  great  variety  of  conduct 
in  varying  circumstances,  but  under  the  strict  obli 
gation  of  being  always  true  to  Christ,  and  always 
seeking  the  highest  good  of  men.  Such  a  character, 
so  stedfast  in  motive  and  aim,  so  versatile  in  action 
it  would  be  difficult  indeed  to  find  elsewhere  in 
history. 

What  St.  Paul  here  tells  us  of  his  own  doings 
and  movements  refers  chiefly  to  the  nature  of  his 
preaching  at  Corinth  (i.  ii.) ;  to  the  hardships  and 
dangers  of  the  apostolic  life  (iv.  9-13)  ;  to  his  che 
rished  custom  of  working  for  his  own  living  (ix.)  ; 
to  the  direct  revelations  he  had  received  (xi.  23, 
xv.  8) ;  and  to  his  present  plans  (xvi.).  He  bids 
the  Corinthians  raise  a  collection  for  the  Church  at 
Jerusalem  by  laying  by  something  on  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  as  he  had  directed  the  churches  in 
Galatia  to  do.  He  says  that  he  shall  tarry  at 
Ephesus  till  Pentecost,  and  then  set  out  on  a  jour 
ney  towards  Corinth  through  Macedonia,  so  as  per 
haps  to  spend  the  winter  with  them.  He  expresses 
his  joy  at  the  coming  of  Stephanas  and  his  com 
panions,  and  commends  them  to  the  respect  of  the 
Church. 

Having  despatched  this  Epistle  he  stayed  on  at 
Ephesus,  where  "  a  great  door  and  effectual  was 
opened  to  him,  and  there  were  many  adversaries." 


gests,   that  he   bad  mentioned  thU  conflict  to  the  Co- 
lictuians  \n  Uiv  previous  uou-cxtant  letter 


PAUL 

Tl,e  affairs  of  the  Church  oi  Corinth  continued  to 
be  an  object  of  the  gravest  anxiety  to  him,  iind  to 
give  him  occupation  at  Ephesus:  but  it  may  be 
most  convenient  to  put  off  the  further  notice  of 
these  till  we  come  to  the  time  when  the  2nd 
Epistle  was  written.  We  have  now  no  information 
as  to  the  work  of  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus,  until  that 
tumult  occurred  which  is  described  in  Acts  xix. 
24-41.  The  whole  narrative  may  be  read  there. 
We  learn  that  "  this  Paul "  had  been  so  successful, 
not  only  in  Ephesus,  but  "  almost  throughout  all 
Asia,"  in  turning  people  from  the  worship  of  gods 
made  with  hands,  that  the  craft  of  silversmiths, 
who  made  little  ehrines  for  Artemis,  were  alarmed 
for  their  manufacture.  They  raised  a  great  tumult, 
and  not  being  able,  apparently,  to  find  Paul,  laid 
hands  on  two  of  his  companions  and  dragged  them 
into  the  theatre.  Paul  himself,  not  willing  that 
nis  friends  should  suffer  in  his  place,  wished  to  go 
in  amongst  the  people:  but  the  disciples,  supported 
by  the  urgent  request  of  certain  magistrates  called 
Asiarchs,  dissuaded  him  from  his  purpose.  The 
account  of  the  proceedings  of  the  mob  is  highly 
graphic,  and  the  address  with  which  the  town-clerk 
finally  quiets  the  people  is  worthy  of  a  discreet 
and  experienced  magistrate.  His  statement  that 
"  these  men  are  neither  robbers  of  churches,  nor 
yet  blasphemers  of  your  goddess,"  is  an  incidental 
testimony  to  the  temperance  of  the  Apostle  and  his 
friends  in  their  attacks  on  the  popular  idolatry. 
But  St.  Paul  is  only  personally  concerned  in  this 
tumult  in  so  far  as  it  proves  the  deep  impression 
which  his  teaching  had  made  at  Ephesus,  and  the 
daily  danger  in  which  he  lived. 

lie  had  been  anxious  to  depart  from  Ephesus, 
and  this  interruption  of  the  work  which  had  kept 
him  there  determined  him  to  stay  no  longer.  He 
set  out  therefore  for  Macedonia,  and  proceeded  first 
to  Troas  (2  Cor.  ii.  12),  where  he  might  have 
preached  the  Gospel  with  good  hope  of  success. 
But  a  restless  anxiety  to  obtain  tidings  concerning 
the  Church  at  Corinth  urged  him  on,  and  he  ad 
vanced  into  Macedonia,  where  he  met  Titus,  who 
brought  him  the  news  for  which  he  was  thirsting. 
The  receipt  of  this  intelligence  drew  from  him  a 
letter  which  reveals  to  us  what  manner  of  man  St. 
Paul  was  when  the  fountains  of  his  heart  were  stirred 
to  their  inmost  depths.  [CORINTHIANS,  SECOND 
EPISTLE  TO  THE.]  How  the  agitation  which  ex 
presses  itself  in  every  sentence  of  this  Letter  was 
excited,  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  questions  we 
have  to  consider.  Every  reader  may  perceive  that, 
on  passing  from  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Second,  the 
scene  is  almost  entirely  changed.  In  the  First,  the 
faults  and  difficulties  of  the  Corinthian  Church  are 
before  us.  The  Apostle  writes  of  these,  with  spirit 
indeed  and  emotion,  as  he  always  does,  but  without 
passion  or  disturbance.  He  calmly  asserts  his  own 
authority  over  the  Church,  and  threatens  to  deal 
severely  with  offenders.  In  the  Second,  he  writes 
as  one  whose  personal  relations  with  those  whom 
he  addresses  have  undergone  a  most  painful  shock. 
The  acute  pain  given  by  former  tidings,  the  com 
fort  yielded  by  the  account  which  Titus  brought, 
the  vexation  of  a  sensitive  mind  at  the  necessity  of 
self-assertion,  contend  together  for  utterance.  What 
had  occasioned  this  excitement? 

We  have  seen  that  Timothy  had  been  sent  from 
Ephesus  to  Macedonia  and  Corinth.  He  had  re 
joined  St.  Paul  when  he  wrote  this  Second  Epistle, 
tor  he  is  associated  with  him  in  the  salutation  (2  Cor. 
i-  1N,.  We  have  no  account,  either  in  the  Acts  or 


PAUL 


749 


iu  the  Epistles,  of  this  journey  of  Timothy,  and 
some  have  thought  it  probable  that  he  never  reached 
Corinth.     Let  us  suppose,  however,  that  he  arrived 
there  soon  after  the  First  Epistle,  conveyed  by  Ste 
phanas  and  others,  had  been  received  by  the  Corin 
thian  Church.      He  found  that  a  movement  had 
arisen  in  the  heart  of  that  Church  which  threw  (let 
us  suppose)  the  case  of  the  incestuous  person  (1  Cor. 
v.  1-5)  into  the  shade.     This  was  a  deliberate  and 
sustained  attack  upon  the  Apostolic  authority  and 
personal  integrity  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 
The  party-spirit  which,  before  the  writing  of  the 
First  Epistle,  had  been  content  with  underrating 
the  powers  of  Paul  compared  with  those  of  Apollos, 
and  with  protesting  against  the  laxity  of  his  doc 
trine  of  freedom,  had  been  fanned  into  a  flame  by 
the  arrival  of  some  person  or  persons  who  came 
from  the  Judaean  Church,  armed  with  letters  of 
commendation,  and  who  openly  questioned  the  com 
mission  of  him  whom-  they  proclaimed  to  be  a  self- 
constituted  Apostle  (2  Cor.  iii.  1,  xi.  4,  12-15). 
As  the  spirit  of  opposition  and   detraction   grew 
strong,  the  tongue  of  some  member  of  the  Church 
(more  probably  a  Corinthian  than  the  stranger  him 
self)  was  loosed.     He  scoffed  at  St.  Paul's  courage 
and  constancy,  pointing  to  his  delay  in  coming  to 
Corinth,  and  making  light  of  his  threats  (i.  17, 23). 
He  demanded  proofs  of  his  Apostleship  (xii.  11, 12). 
He  derided  the  weakness  of  his  personal  presence 
and  the  simplicity  of  his  speech  (x.  10).     He  even 
threw  out  insinuations  touching  the  personal  honesty 
and  self-devotion  of  St.  Paul  (i.  12,  xii.  17,  18). 
When  some  such  attack  was  made  openly  upon  the 
Apostle,  the  Church  had  not  immediately  called  the 
offender  to  account ;  the  better  spirit  of  the  be 
lievers  being  cowed,  apparently,  by  the  confidence 
and  assumed  authority  of  the  assailants  of  St.  Paul. 
A  report  of  this  melancholy  state  of  things  was 
brought  to  the  Apostle  by  Timothy  or  by  others ; 
and  we  can  imagine  how  it  must  have  wounded  his 
sensitive  and  most  affectionate  nature,  and  also  how 
critical  the  juncture  must  have  seemed  to  him  for 
the  whole  Western  Church.     He  immediately  sent 
off  Titus  to  Corinth,  with  a  letter  containing  the 
sharpest   rebukes,  using  the  authority  which  had 
been  denied,  and  threatening  to  enforce  it  speedily 
by  his  personal  presence  (ii.  2, 3,  vii.  8).     As  soon 
as  the  letter  was  gone — how  natural  a  trait ! — he 
began  to  repent  of  having  written  it.     He  must 
have  hated  the  appearance  of  claiming  homage  to 
himself;  his  heart  must  have  been  sore  at  the  re 
quital  of  his  love ;  he  must  have  felt  the  deepest 
anxiety  as  to  the  issue  of  the  struggle.     We  can 
well  believe  him  therefore  when  he  speaks  of  what 
he  had  suffered : — "  Out  of  much  affliction  and  an 
guish  of  heart  I  wrote  to  you  with  many  tears'" 
(ii.  4) ;  "I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit"  (ii.   13); 
"  Our  flesh  had  no  rest,  but  we  were  troubled  on 
every  side;   without  were  fightings,  within  were 
fears"  (vii.  5).     It  appears  that  he  could  not  bring 
himself  to  hasten  to  Corinth  so  rapidly  as  he  had 
intended  (i.  15,  16) ;  he  would  wait  till  he  heard 
news  which  might  make  his  visit  a  happy  instead 
of  a  painful  one  (ii.  1).     When  he  had  reached  Ma 
cedonia,  Titus,  as  we  have  seen,  met  him  with  such 
reassuring  tidings.     The  offender  had  been  rebuked 
by  the  Church,  and  had  made  submission  (ii.  6,7); 
the  old  spirit  of  love  and  reverence  towards  St.  Paul 
had  been  awakened,  and  had  poured  itself  forth  in 
warm  expressions  of  shame  and  grief  ana  penitence. 
The  cloud  was  now  dispelled ;  fear  and  paai  gave 
place  to  hope  and  tenderness  and  thankfulness.    Bui 


760 


PAUL 


even  now  the  Apostle  would  not  start  at  once  foi 
Corinth.  He  may  have  had  important  work  to  do 
in  Macedonia.  But  another  letter  would  smooth 
the  way  still  more  effectually  for  his  personal  visit : 
and  he  accordingly  wrote  the  Second  Epistle,  am 
sent  it  by  the  hands  of  Titus  and  two  other  bre 
thren  to  Corinth. 

When  the  Epistle  is  read  in  the  light  of  the  cir 
cumstances  we  have  supposed,  the  symptoms  it  dis 
plays  of  a  highly  wrought  personal  sensitiveness, 
and  of  a  kind  of  ebb  and  flow  of  emotion,  are  as 
intelligible  as  they  are  noble  and  beautiful.  Nothing 
but  a  temporary  interruption  of  mutual  regard 
could  have  made  the  joy  of  sympathy  so  deep  and 
fresh.  If  he  had  been  the  object  of  a  personal  attack, 
bow  natural  for  the  Apostle  to  write  as  he  does  in 
ii.  5-10.  In  vii.  12,  "  he  that  suffered  wrong"  is 
Paul  himself.  All  his  protestations  relating  to  his 
Apostolic  work,  and  his  solemn  appeals  to  God  and 
Christ,  are  in  place ;  and  we  enter  into  his  feelings 
as  he  asserts  his  own  sincerity  and  the  openness  of 
the  truth  which  he  taught  in  the  Gospel  (Hi.,  iv.). 
We  see  what  sustained  him  in  his  self-assertion ; 
he  knew  that  he  did  not  preach  himself,  but  Christ 
Jesus  the  Lord.  His  own  weakness  became  an 
argument  to  him,  which  he  can  use  to  others  also, 
of  the  power  of  God  working  in  him.  Knowing  his 
own  fellowship  with  Christ,  and  that  this  fellowship 
*-as  the  right  of  other  men  too,  he  would  be  per 
suasive  or  severe,  as  the  cause  of  Christ  and  the 
good  of  men  might  require  (iv.,  v.).  If  he  was 
appearing  to  set  himself  up  against  the  churches  in 
Judaea,  he  was  the  more  anxious  that  the  collection 
which  he  was  making  for  the  benefit  of  those 
churches  should  prove  his  sympathy  with  them  by 
its  largeness.  Again  he  would  recur  to  the  main 
tenance  of  his  own  authority  as  an  Apostle  of  Christ, 
against  those  who  impeached  it.  He  would  make 
it  understood  that  spiritual  views,  spiritual  powers, 
were  real ;  that  if  he  knew  no  man  after  the  flesh, 
and  did  not  war  after  the  flesh,  he  was  not  the  less 
able  for  the  building  up  of  the  Church  (x.).  He 
would  ask  them  to  excuse  his  anxious  jealousy,  his 
folly  and  excitement,  whilst  he  gloried  in  the  prac 
tical  proofs  of  his  Apostolic  commission,  and  in  the 
infirmities  which  made  the  power  of  God  more 
manifest ;  and  he  would  plead  with  them  earnestly 
that  they  would  give  him  no  occasion  to  find  fault 
or  to  correct  them  (xi.,  xii.,  xiii.). 

The  hypothesis  upon  which  we  have  interpreted 
this  Epistle  is  not  that  which  is  most  commonly 
received.  According  to  the  more  common  view,  the 
offender  is  the  incestuous  person  of  1  Cor.  v.,  and 
the  letter  which  proved  so  shai-p  but  wholesome  a 
medicine,  the  First  Epistle.  But  this  view  does 
not  account  so  satisfactorily  for  the  whole  tone  of 
the  Epistle,  and  for  the  particular  expressions  re 
lating  to  the  offender;  nor  does  it  find  places  so 
consistently  for  the  missions  of  Timothy  and  Titus. 
It  does  not  seem  likely  that  St.  Paul  would  have 
treated  the  sin  of  the  man  who  took  his  father's 
wife  as  an  offence  against  himself,  nor  that  he 
torould  have  spoken  of  it  by  preference  as  a  wrong 
(£5iKi'a)  done  to  another  (supposed  to  be  the 
father).  The  view  we  have  adopted  is  said,  in 
De  Wette's  Exegetisches  Handbuch,  to  have  been 
held,  in  whole  or  in  part,  by  Bleek,  Credner,  Ols- 
hausen,  and  Neander.  More  recently  it  has  been 
advocated  with  great  force  by  Ewald,  in  his  Send- 
tchreiben  det  A.P.  pp.  223-232.  The  ordinary  ac 
count  is  retained  by  Stanley,  Alford,  and  Davidson, 
and  with  some  hesitation  by  Conybeare  and  Howson. 


PAUL 

The  pru  tkmlar  nature  of  this  Epirftle,  as  an  appeal 
to  facts  in  favour  of  his  own  Apostolic  authority, 
leads  to  the  mention  of  many  interesting  feature! 
of  St.  Paul's  life.     His  summary,  in  xi.  23-23,  of 
the  hardships  and  dangers  through  which  he  had 
gone,  proves  to  us  how  little  the  history  in  th« 
Acts  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  complete  account  of 
what  he  did  and  suffered.     Of  the  particular  facts 
stated  in  the  following  words,  "  Of  the  JCTTS  f.ve 
times  received  I  forty  stripes  save  one;  thrice  v.as 
I  beaten  with  rods,  once  was  I  stoned,  thrice  I 
suffered  shipwreck,  a  night  and  a  day  I  have  been 
in  the  deep," — we  know  only  of  one,  the  beating 
by  the  magistrates  at  Philippi,  from  the  Acts.   The 
daily  burden  of  "  the  care  of  all  the  churches " 
seems  to  imply  a  wide  and  constant  range  of  com 
munication,  by  visits,  messengers,  and  letters,  of 
which   we   have   found    it   reasonable   to    assume 
examples   in  his   intercourse  with  the  Church  of 
Corinth.     The  mention  of  "  visions  and  revelations 
of  the  Lord,"  and  of  the  "  thorn  (or  rather  stake) 
in  the  flesh,"  side  by  side,  is  peculiarly  charac 
teristic  both  of  the  mind  and  of  the  experiences  of 
St.  Paul.     As  an  instance  of  the  visions,  he  alludes 
to  a  trance  which  had  befallen  him  fourteen  years 
befbre,  in  which  he  had  been  caught  UD  into  para 
dise,  and  had  heard  unspeakable  words.     Whether 
this  vision  may  be  identified  with  any  that  is  re 
corded  in  the  Acts  must  depend  on  chronological 
considerations :  but  the  very  expressions  of  St.  Paul 
in  this  place  would  rather  lead  us  not  to  think  of 
an  occasion  in  which  words  that  could  be  reported 
were  spoken.     We  observe  that  he  speaks  with  tbe 
deepest  reverence  of  the  privilege  thus  granted  to 
him ;  but  he  distinctly  declines  to  ground  anything 
upon  it  as  regards  other  men.      Let  them  judge 
him,  he  says,  not  by  any  such  pretensions,  but  by 
facts  which  were   cognizable  to  them  (xii.  1-6). 
And  he  would  not,  even  inwardly  with  himself, 
glory  in  visions  and  revelations  without  remem 
bering  how  the  Lord  had  guarded  him  from  being 
puffed  up  by  them.     A  stake  in  the  flesh  (cKoXoty 
rfj  (rapid)  was  given  him,  a  messenger  of  Satan  to 
buffet  him,  lest  he  should  be  exalted  above  measure. 
The  different  interpretations  which  have  prevailed 
of  this  <TK.6\oi\i  have  a  certain  historical  significance. 
(1)  Roman  Catholic  divines  have  inclined  to  un 
derstand  by  it  strong  sensual  temptation,      (2) 
Luther  and  his  followers  take  it  to  mean  tempta 
tions  to  unbelief.     But  neither  of  these  would  be 
"  infirmities "  in  which  St.  Paul  could  "  glory." 
'3)  It  is  almost  the  unanimous  opinion  of  modem 
divines — and  the  authority  of  the  ancient  fathers 
on  the  whole  is  in  favour  of  it — that  the  o-AroAo^ 
represents    some    vexatious    bodily   infirmity    (see 
especially  Stanley  in  loco).     It  is  plainly  what  St. 
Paul  refers  to  in  Gal.  iv.  14 :  "  My  temptation  in 
my  flesh  ye  despised  not  nor  rejected."     This  in- 
irmity  distressed  him  so  much  that  he  besought 
Jie  Lord  thrice  that  it  might  depart  from  him. 
3ut  the  Lord  answered,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for 
;hee ;  for  my  strength  is  made  perfect  in  weakness." 
We  are  to  understand   therefore  the  affliction  as 
•emaining ;  but  Paul  is  more  than  resigned  under 
t,  he  even  glories  in  it  as  a  means  of  displaying 
more  purely  the  power  of  Christ  in  him.     That  we 
are  to  understand  the  Apostle,  in  accordance  with 
;his  passage,  as  labouring  under  some  degree  of  ill- 
lealth,  is  clear  enough.     But  we  must  remember 
Jiat  his  constitution  was  at  least  strong  enough,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  to  carry  him  through  the  hard 
ships  and  nnxie'.ifcs  and  toils  which  \w  himself  .'.> 


PAUL 

BCI  ibes  to  us,  and  to  sustain  the  pressure  of  the  long 
imprisonment  at  Caesarea  and  in  Home. 

After  writing  this  Epistle,  St.  Paul  travelled 
through  Macedonia,  perhaps  to  the  borders  of  Illy- 
ricum  (Rom.  xv.  19),  and  tnen  carried  out  the 
intention  of  which  he  had  spoken  so  often,  and 
arrived  himself  at  Corinth.  The  narrative  in  the 
Acts  tells  us  that  "  when  he  had  gone  over  those 
parts  (Macedonia^,  and  had  given  them  much  es- 
hortation,  lie  came  into  Greece,  and  there  abode 
three  months  "  (xx.  2,  3).  There  is  only  one  inci 
dent  which  we  can  connect  with  this  visit  to  Greece, 
but  that  is  a  very  important  one  —  the  writing  of 
another  great  Epistle,  addressed  to  the  Church  at 
Home.  [ROMANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.]  That  this 
was  written  at  this  time  from  Corinth  appears  from 
passages  in  the  Epistle  itself,  and  has  never  been 
doubted. 

It  would  be  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul 
was  insensible   to  the   mighty   associations  which 
connected  themselves  with  the  name  of  Rome.    The 
seat  of  the  imperial  government  to  which  Jerusalem 
itself,  with  the  rest  of  the  world,  was  then  subject, 
must  have  been  a  grand  object  to  the  thoughts  of 
the  Apostle  from  his  infancy  upwards.     He  was 
himself  a  citizen  of  Rome  ;  he  had  come  repeatedly 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  Roman  magistrates  ;  he 
had  enjoyed  the  benefits  of  the  equity  of  the  Roman 
law,  and  the  justice  of  Roman  administration.    And, 
besides   its   universal   supremacy,    Rome    was  the 
natural  head  of  the  Gentile  world,  as  Jerusalem 
was  the  head  of  the  Jewish  world.     In  this  august 
city  Paul  had  many  friends  and  brethren.     Romans 
who  had  travelled  into  Greece  and  Asia,  strangers 
from  Greece  and  Asia  who  had  gone  to  settle  at 
Rome,  had  heard  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  kingdom 
of  Heaven  from  Paul  himself  or  from  other  preachers 
of  Christ,  and  had  formed  themselves  into  a  com 
munity,  of  which  a  good  report  had  gone  forth 
throughout  the  Christian  world.     We  are  not  sur 
prised  therefore  to  hear  that  the  Apostle  was  very 
anxious  to  visit  Rome.     It  was  his  fixed  intention 
to  go  to  Rome,  and  from  Rome  to  extend  his  jour 
neys  as  far  as  Spain  (Rom.  xv.  24,  28).     He  would 
thus  bear  his  witness,  both  in  the  capital  and  to 
the  extremities  of  the  Western  or  Gentile  world. 
For  the  present  he  could  not  go  on  from  Corinth  to 
Rome,  because  he  was  drawn  by  a  special  errand  to 
Jerusalem  —  where  indeed  he  was  likely  enough  to 
meet  with  dangers  and  delays  (xv.  25-32).  But  from 
Jerusalem  he  proposed  to  turn  Romewards.    In  the 
meanwhile  he  would  write  them  a  letter  from  Corinth 
The  letter  is  a  substitute  for  the  personal  visit 
which  he  had  longed  "  for  many  years  "  to  pay  ; 
and,  as  he  would  have  made  the  visit,  so  now  h 
writes  the  letter,  because  he  is  the  Apostle  of  th 
Gentiles.     Of  this  office,  to  speak  in  common  lan 
guage,  St.  Paul  was  proud.     All  the  labours  anc 
dangers  of  it  he  would  willingly  encounter  ;  and  h 
would  also  jealously  maintain  its  dignity  and  it. 
powers.     He  held  it  of  Christ,  and  Christ's  com 
mission  should  not  be  dishonoured.     He  represents 


PAUL 


751 


To  the  Church  thus  composed,  the  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles  writes  to  declare  and  commend  the  Gospel 
which  he  everywhere  preaches.     That  Gospel  was 
nvariably  the  announcement  of  Jesus  Christ  the 
Son  of  God,  the  Lord  of  men,  who  was  made  man, 
lied,  and  was  raised  again,  and  whom  His  heralds 
>resent  to  the   faith   and   obedience   of  mankind. 
Such  a  K'fipvy/J.a  might  be  variously  commended 
o  different  hearers.      In  speaking  to  the  Roman 
Church,  St.  Paul  represents  the  chief  value  of  it  as 
consisting  in  the  fact  that,  through  it,  the  righteous- 
icss  of  God,  as  a  righteousness  not  for  God  only, 
)ut  also  for  men,  was  revealed.     It  is  natural  to 
isk  what  led  him  to  choose  and  dwell  upon  tnis 
aspect  of  his  proclamation  of  Jesus  Christ.     The 
bllowing  answers  suggest  themselves:  —  (I.)  As  he 
ooked  upon  the  condition  of  the  Gentile  world, 
with  that  coup  d'ceil  which  the  writing  of  a  letter 
x)  the  Roman  Church  was  likely  to  suggest,  he  was 
•truck  by  the  awful  wickedness,  the  utter  dissolu 
tion  of  moral  ties,  which  has  made  that  age  infa 
mous.      His  own  terrible  summary  (i.  21-32)  is 
well  known  to  be  confirmed  by  other  contemporary 
evidence.    The  profligacy  which  we  shudder  to  read 
of  was  constantly  under  St.  Paul's  eye.   Along  with 
the  evil  he  saw  also  the  beginnings  of  God's  judg 
ment  upon  it.     He  saw  the  miseries  and  disasters, 
begun  and  impending,  which  proved  that  God  in 
heaven  would  not  tolerate  the  unrighteousness  of 
(2.)  As  he  looked  upon  the  condition  of  the 
Jewish  people,  he  saw  them  claiming  an  exclusive 
righteousness,  which,  however,  had  manifestly  no 
power   to   preserve   them   from    being  really  un 
righteous.     (3.)  Might  not  the  thought  also  occur 
to  him,  as  a  Roman  citizen,  that  the  empire  which 
was  now  falling  to  pieces  through  unrighteousness 
had  been  built  up  by  righteousness,  by  that  love 
of  order  and  that  acknowledgment  of  rights  which 
were  the  great  endowment  of  the  Roman  people? 
Whether  we  lay  any  stress  upon  this  or  not,  it 
seems  clear  that  to  one  contemplating  the  world 
from  St.  Paul's  point  of  view,  no  thought  would 
be  so  naturally  suggested  as  that  of  the  need  of  the 
true  Righteousness  for  the  two  divisions  of  man 
kind.     How  he  expounds  that  God's  own  righteous 
ness  was  shown,  in  Jesus  Christ,  to  be  a  righteous 
ness  which  men  might  trust  in  —  sinners  though 
they  were  —  and  by  trusting  in  it  submit  to  it,  and 
so  receive  it  as  to  show  forth  the  fruits  of  it  in 
their  own  lives  ;  how  he  declares  the  union  of  men 
with  Christ  as  subsisting  in  the  Divine  idea  and  as 
realized  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit,  —  may  be  seen 
in  the  Epistle  itself.      The  remarkable  exposition 
contained  in  ch.  ix.,  x.,  xi.,  illustrates  the  personal 
character  of  St.  Paul,  by  showing  the  intense  love 
for  his  nation  which  he  retained  through  all  his 
struggles   with   unbelieving   Jews    and    Judaizing 
Christians,  and  by  what  hopes  he  reconciled  him 
self  to  the  thought  of  their  unbelief  and   their 
punishment.      Having  spoken  of  this  subject,  he 
goes  on  to  exhibit  in  practical  counsels  the  same 
love  of  Christian  unity,  moderation,  and  gentleness, 


himself  grandly  as  a  priest,  appointed  to  offer  up    the  same  respect  for  social  order,  the  same  tender- 


the  faith  of  the  Gentile  world  as  a  sacrifice  to  God 


ness  for  weak  consciences,  and  the  same  expectation 


(xv.  16).  And  he  then  proceeds  to  speak  with  of  the  Lord's  coming  and  confidence  in  the  future, 
pride  of  the  extent  and  independence  of  his  Apostolic  I  which  appear  more  or  less  strongly  in  all  his 
labours.  It  is  in  harmony  with  this  language  that  |  letters. 


lie  should  address  the  Roman  Church  as  consisting 
mainly  of  Gentiles :  but  we  find  that  he  speaks  to 
them  as  to  persons  deeply  interested  in  Jewish 
questions  (see  Prof.  Jowett's  and  Bp.  C ilenso's 
introductions  to  the  Epistle). 


Before  his  departure  from  Corinth,  St.  Paul  was 
joined  again  by  St.  Luke,  as  we  infer  from  the  change 
in  the  narrative  from  the  third  to  the  first  person. 
We  have  seen  already  that  he  was  bent  on  making  r. 
i  journey  to  Jerusalem,  for  a  speciaJ  purpose  and  with- 


752  ?AUL 

in  a  liaited  time.  With  this  view  he  was  intending 
to  go  by  sea  to  Syria.  But  he  was  made  aware  of 
some  plot  of  the  Jews  for  his  destruction,  to  be 
carried  out  through  this  voyage ;  and  he  deter 
mined  to  evade  their  malice  by  changing  his  route. 
Several  brethren  were  associated  with  him  in  this 
expedition,  the  bearers,  no  doubt,  of  the  collections 
made  in  all  the  Churches  for  the  poor  at  Jerusalem. 
These  were  sent  on  by  sea,  and  probably  the  money 
with  them,  to  Troas,  where  they  were  to  await 
St.  Paul.  He,  accompanied  by  St.  Luke,  went 
northwards  through  Macedonia.  The  style  of  an 
eye-witness  again  becomes  manifest.  "  From  Phi- 
lippi,"  says  the  writer,  "  we  sailed  away  after  the 
days  of  unleavened  bread,  and  came  unto  them  to 
Troas  in  five  days,  where  we  abode  seven  days." 
The  marks  of  time  throughout  this  journey  have 
given  occasion  to  much  chronological  and  geogra 
phical  discussion,  which  brings  before  the  reader's 
mind  the  difficulties  and  uncertainties  of  travel  in 
that  age,  and  leaves  the  precise  determination  of 
the  dates  of  this  history  a  matter  for  reasonable 
tonjecture  rather  than  for  positive  statement.  But 
no  question  is  raised  by  the  times  mentioned  which 
need  detain  us  in  the  course  of  the  narrative. 
During  the  stay  at  Troas  there  was  a  meeting  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week  "  to  break  bread,"  and 
Paul  was  discoursing  earnestly  and  at  length  with 
the  brethren.  He  was  to  depart  the  next  morning, 
and  midnight  found  them  listening  to  his  earnest 
speech,  with  many  lights  burning  in  the  upper 
chamber  in  which  they  had  met,  and  making  the 
atmosphere  oppressive.  A  youth  named  Eutychus 
was  sitting  in  the  window,  and  was  gradually  over 
powered  by  sleep,  so  that  at  iast  he  fell  into  the 
street  or  court  from  the  third  story,  and  was  taken 
up  dead.  The  meeting  was  interrupted  by  this 
accident,  and  Paul  went  down  and  fell  upon  him 
and  embraced  him,  saying,  "  Be  not  disturbed,  his 
life  is  in  him."  His  friends  then  appear  to  have 
taken  charge  of  him,  whilst  Paul  went  up  again, 
first  presided  at  the  breaking  of  bread,  afterwards 
took  a  meal,  and  continued  conversing  until  day 
break,  and  so  departed. 

Whilst  the  vessel  which  conveyed  the  rest  of  the 
party  sailed  from  Troas  to  Assos,  Paul  gained  some 
time  by  making  the  journey  by  land.  At  Assos  he 
went  on  board  again.  Coasting  along  by  Mitylene, 
Chios,  Samos,  and  Trogyllium,  they  arrived  at 
Miletus.  The  Apostle  was  thus  passing  by  the 
chief  Church  in  Asia ;  but  if  he  had  gone  to  Ephesus 
he  might  have  arrived  at  Jerusalem  too  late  for  the 
Pentecost,  at  which  festival  he  had  set  his  heart 
upon  being  present.  At  Miletus,  however,  there 
was  time  to  send  to  Ephesus ;  and  the  elders  of  the 
Church  were  invited  to  come  down  to  him  there. 
This  meeting  is  made  the  occasion  for  recording 
another  characteristic  and  representative  address  of 
St.  Paul  (Acts  xx.  18-35).  This  spoken  address  to 
the  elders  of  the  Ephesian  Church  may  be  ranked 
with  the  Epistles,  and  throws  the  same  kind  of 
light  upon  St.  Paul's  Apostolical  relations  to  the 
Churches.  Like  several  of  the  Epistles,  it  is  in 
great  part  an  appeal  to  their  memories  of  him  and 
of  his  work.  He  refers  to  his  labours  in  "  serving 

the  Lord"  amongst  them,  and  to  the  dangers  he  j  they  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  were  gladly  received 
.ncurred  from  the  plots  of  the  Jews,  and  asserts  j  by  the  brethren.     This  is  St.  Paul's  fifth  and  last 

visit  to  Jerusalem. 

St.  Paul's  Imprisonment :  Jerusalem  and  Cae- 


PAUL 

Jerusalem.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  the 
Apostle  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  press  on  in  spite 
of  these  warnings.  Having  fanned  his  plan  on  good 
grounds  and  in  the  sight  of  God,  he  did  not  see,  in 
dangers  which  might  even  touch  his  life,  however 
clearly  set  before  him,  reasons  for  changing  it. 
Other  arguments  might  move  him  from  a  fixed 
purpose — not  dangers.  His  one  guiding  principle 
was,  to  discharge  the  ministry  which  he  had  re 
ceived  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  testify  the  Gospel  o} 
the  grace  of  God.  Speaking  to  his  present  audience 
as  to  those  whom  he  was  seeing  for  the  last  time, 
he  proceeds  to  exhort  them  with  unusual  earnest 
ness  and  tenderness,  and  expresses  in  conclusion 
that  anxiety  as  to  practical  industiy  and  liberality 
which  has  been  increasingly  occupying  his  mind. 
In  terms  strongly  resembling  the  language  of  the 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  and  Corinthians,  he 
pleads  his  own  example,  and  entreats  them  to  follow 
it,  in  "  labouring  for  the  support  of  the  vt  eak." 
"  And  when  he  had  thus  spoken  he  kneeled  down 
and  prayed  with  them  all :  and  they  all  wept  sore, 
and  tell  on  Paul's  neck,  and  kissed  him,  sorrowing 
most  of  all  for  the  words  which  he  spake,  that  they 
should  see  his  face  no  more.  And  they  accom 
panied  him  to  the  ship."  ....  This  is  the  kind  of 
narrative  in  which  some  learned  men  think  they 
can  detect  the  signs  of  a  moderately  clever  fiction. 

The  course  of  the  voyage  from  Miletus  was  by 
Coos  and  Rhodes  to  Patara,  and  from  Patara  in 
another  vessel  past  Cyprus  to  Tyre.  Here  Paul 
and  his  company  spent  seven  days  ;  and  there  were 
disciples  "  who  said  to  Paul  through  the  Spirit, 
that  he  should  not  go  up  to  Jerusalem."  Again 
there  was  a  sorrowful  parting :  "  They  all  brought 
us  on  our  way,  with  wives  and  children,  till  we 
were  out  of  the  city ;  and  we  kneeled  down  on  the 
shore  and  prayed."  From  Tyre  they  sailed  to 
Ptolemais,  where  they  spent  one  day,  and  from 
Ptolemais  proceeded,  apparently  by  land,  to  Cae- 
savea.  In  this  place  was  settled  Philip  the  Evan 
gelist,  one  of  the  seven,  and  he  became  the  host 
of  Paul  and  his  friends.  Philip  had  four  unmarried 
daughters,  who  "  prophesied,"  and  who  repeated, 
no  doubt,  the  warnings  already  heard.  Caesarea 
was  within  an  easy  journey  of  Jerusalem,  and  Paul 
may  have  thought  it  prudent  not  to  be  too  long  in 
Jerusalem  before  the  festival;  otherwise  it  might 
seem  strange  that,  after  the  former  haste,  they  now 
"  tarried  many  days "  at  Caesarea.  During  this 
interval  the  prophet  Agabus  (Acts  xi.  28)  came 
down  from  Jerusalem,  and  crowned  the  previous 
intimations  of  danger  with  a  prediction  expressively 
delivered.  It  would  seem  as  if  the  approaching  im 
prisonment  were  intended  to  be  conspicuous  in  the 
eyes  of  the  Church,  as  an  agency  for  the  accomplish 
ment  of  God's  designs.  At  this  stage  a  final  effort 
was  made  to  dissuade  Paul  from  going  up  to  Jerusa 
lem,  by  the  Christians  of  Caesarea,  and  by  his  tra 
velling  companions.  But  "  Paul  answered,  What 
mean  ye  to  weep  and  to  break  mine  heart  ?  for  I 
am  ready  not  to  be  bound  only,  but  also  to  die  at 
Jerusalem  for  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  And 
when  he  would  not  be  persuaded,  we  ceased,  saying, 
The  will  of  the  Lord  be  done."  So,  a 


emphatically   the   unreserve   with    which   he  had 
taught  them.     He  then  mentions  a  fact  which  will 


come  before  us  again  presently,  that  he  was  re 
ceiving  inspired  warnings,  as  he  advanced  from  city 
to  city,  of  the  bonds  and  afflictions  awaiting  .'vim  at 


sarea. — He  who  was  thus  conducted  into  Jerusalen. 
by  a  company  of  anxious  friends  had  become  by 
this  time  a  mtvn  of  considerable  f.irne  amohgst  hi 


PAUL 

Countrymen.  He  was  widely  known  as  one  who 
nad  taught  with  pre-eminent  boldness  that  a  way 
into  God's  favour  was  opened  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
that  this  way  did  not  lie  through  the  door  of  the 
Jewish  Law.  He  had  moreover  actually  founded 
numerous  and  important  communities,  composed  of 
Jews  and  Gentiles  together,  which  stood  simply  on 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  apart  from  circumcision 
and  the  observance  of  the  Law.  He  had  thus 
roused  against  himself  the  bitter  enmity  of  that 
unfathomable  Jewish  pride  which  was  almost  as 
strong  in  some  of  those  who  had  professed  the  faith 
of  Jesus,  as  in  their  unconverted  brethren.  This 
enmity  had  for  years  been  vexing  both  the  body 
and  the  spirit  of  the  Apostle.  He  had  no  rest  from 
its  persecutions;  and  his  joy  in  proclaiming  the  free 
grace  of  God  to  the  world  was  mixed  with  a  con 
stant  sorrow  that  in  so  doing  he  was  held  to  be 
disloyal  to  the  calling  of  his  fathers.  He  was  now 
approaching  a  crisis  in  the  long  struggle,  and  the 
shadow  of  it  had  been  made  to  rest  upon  his  mind 
throughout  his  journey  to  Jerusalem.  He  came 
"  ready  to  die  for  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus," 
but  he  came  expressly  to  prove  himself  a  faithful 
Jew,  and  this  purpose  emerges  at  every  point  of 
the  history. 

St.  Luke  does  not  mention  the  contributions 
brought  by  Paul  and  his  companions  for  the  poor 
at  Jerusalem.  But  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  their 
first  act  was  to  deliver  these  funds  into  the  proper 
hands.  This  might  be  done  at  the  interview  which 
took  place  on  the  following  day  with  "  James  and 
all  the  elders."  As  on  former  occasions,  the  be 
lievers  at  Jerusalem  could  not  but  glorify  God  for 
what  they  heard ;  but  they  had  been  alarmed  by 
the  prevalent  feeling  concerning  St.  Paul.  They 
said  to  him,  "  Thou  seest,  brother,  how  many 
thousands  of  Jews  there  are  which  believe;  and 
they  are  all  zealous  of  the  law  ;  and  they  are  in 
formed  of  thee  that  thou  teachest  all  the  Jews 
which  are  among  the  Gentiles  to  forsake  Moses, 
saying  that  they  ought  not  to  circumcise  their  chil 
dren,  neither  to  walk  after  the  customs."  This 
report,  as  James  and  the  elders  assume,  was  not  a 
true  one ;  it  was  a  perversion  of  Paul's  real  teach 
ing,  which  did  not,  in  fact,  differ  from  theirs.  In 
order  to  dispel  such  rumours  they  ask  him  to  do 
publicly  an  act  of  homage  to  the  Law  and  its 
observances.  They  had  four  men  who  were  under 
the  Nazarite  vow.  The  completion  of  this  vow 
involved  (Num.  vi.  13-21)  a  considerable  expense 
for  the  offerings  to  be  presented  in  the  To.-nple; 
and  it  was  a  meritorious  act  to  provide  these 
offerings  for  the  poorer  Nazarites.  St.  Paul  was 
requested  to  put  himself  under  the  vow  with  those 
other  four,  and  to  supply  the  cost  of  their  offerings. 
He  at  once  accepted  the  proposal,  and  on  the  next 
day,  having  performed  some  ceremony  which  im 
plied  the  adoption  of  the  vow,  he  went  into  the 
Temple,  announcing  that  the  due  offerings  for  each 
Nazarite  were  about  to  be  presented  and  the  period 
of  the  vow  terminated.  It  appears  that  the  whole 
process  undertaken  by  St.  Paul  required  seven  days 
to  complete  it.  Towards  the  end  of  this  time  cer 
tain  Jews  from  "  Asia,"  who  had  come  up  for  the 
Pentecostal  feast,  and  who  had  a  personal  know 
ledge  both  of  Paul  himself  and  of  his  companion 
Trophimus,  a  Gentile  from  Ephesus,  saw  Paul  in 
flie  Temple.  They  immediately  set  upon  him,  and 
stirred  up  the  people  against  him,  crying  out, 
"  Men  of  Israel,  help :  this  is  the  man  that  teacheth 
til  mm  everywhere  against  the  people,  and  the 

VOL    11. 


PAUL 


753 


law,  and  this  place ;  and  further  brought  Greeks 
also  into  the  Temple,  and  hath  polluted  Ihis  holy 
place."  The  latter  charge  had  no  more  truth  in  it 
than  the  first:  it  was  only  suggested  by  thi.-ir 
having  seen  Trophimus  with  him,  not  in  the  Tem 
ple,  but  in  the  city.  They  raised,  however,  a  great 
commotion:  Paul  was  dragged  out  of  the  Temple, 
of  which  the  doors  were  immediately  shut,  and  the 
people,  having  him  in  their  hands,  were  proposing 
to  kill  him.  But  tidings  were  soon  carried  to  the 
commander  of  the  force  which  was  serving  as  a 
garrison  in  Jerusalem,  that  "  all  Jerusalem  was  in 
an  uproar ;"  and  he,  taking  with  him  soldiers  and 
centurions,  hastened  to  the  scene  of  the  tumult. 
Paul  was  rescued  from  the  violence  of'  the  multi 
tude  by  the  Roman  officer,  who  made  him  his  own 
prisoner,  causing  him  to  be  chained  to  two  soldiers, 
and  then  proceeded  to  inquire  who  he  was  and 
what  he  had  done.  The  inquiry  only  elicited  con 
fused  outcries,  and  the  "  chief  captain  "  seems  to 
have  imagined  that  the  Apostle  might  perhaps  be 
a  certain  Egyptian  pretender  who  had  recently 
stirred  up  a  considerable  rising  of  the  people.  The 
account  in  the  Acts  (xxi.  34-40)  tells  us  with 
graphic  touches  how  St.  Paul  obtained  leave  and 
opportunity  to  address  the  people  in  a  discourse 
which  is  related  at  length. 

This  discourse  was  spoken  in  Hebrew;  that  is, 
in  the  native  dialect  of  the  country,  and  was  on  that 
account  listened  to  with  the  more  attention.  It  is 
described  by  St.  Paul  himself,  in  his  opening  words, 
as  his  "  defence,"  addressed  to  his  brethren  and 
fathers.  It  is  in  this  light  that  it  ought  to  be  re 
garded.  As  we  have  seen,  the  desire  which  occu 
pied  the  Apostle's  mind  at  this  time,  was  that  of 
vindicating  his  message  and  work  as  those  of  a  faith 
ful  Jew.  The  discourse  spoken  to  the  angry  people 
at  Jerusalem  is  his  own  justification  of  himself. 
He  adopts  the  historical  method,  after  which  all  the 
recorded  appeals  to  Jewish  audiences  are  framed. 
He  is  a  servant  of  facts.  He  had  been  from  the 
first  a  zealous  Israelite  like  his  hearers.  He  had 
changed  his  course  because  the  God  of  his  fathers 
had  turned  him  from  one  path  into  another.  It 
is  thus  that  he  is  led  into  a  narrative  of  his  Conver 
sion.  We  have  alidad  y  noticed  the  differences,  in 
the  statement  of  bare  facts,  between  this  narrative 
and  that  of  the  9th  chapter.  The  business  of  the 
student,  in  this  place,  is  to  see  how  far  the  purpose 
of  the  Apostle  will  account  for  whatever  is  special 
to  this  address.  That  purpose  explains  the  detailed 
reference  to  his  rigorously  Jewish  education,  and  to 
his  history  before  his  Conversion.  It  gives  point 
to  the  announcement  that  it  was  by  a  direct  opera 
tion  from  without  upon  his  spirit,  and  not  by  the 
gradual  influence  of  other  minds  upon  his,  that  his 
course  was  changed.  Incidentally,  we  may  see  a 
reason  for  the  admission  that  his  companions  "  heard 
not  the  voice  of  him  that  spake  to  me  "  in  the  fact 
that  some  of  them,  not  believing  in  Jesus  with  their 
former  leader,  may  have  been  living  at  Jerusalem, 
and  possibly  present  amongst  the  audience.  In  this 
speech,  the  Apostle  is  glad  to  mention,  what  we 
were  not  told  before,  that  the  Ananias  who  inter 
preted  the  will  of  the  Lord  to  him  more  fully  at 
Damascus,  was  "  a  devout  man  according  to  the 
law,  having  a  good  report  of  all  the  Jews  which 
dwelt  there,"  and  that  ho  made  his  communication 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  saying 
"  The  God  of  our  fathers  hath  chosen  thee,  that, 
thou  shouldest  know  his  will,  and  see  the  Righteous 
Due,  and  hear  a  voice  out  of  his  mouth ;  for  thou 

3  C 


754 


PAUL 


chalt  be  a  witness  for  him  unto  all  men  of  what 
thou  hast  aeen  and  heard."  Having  thus  claimed, 
according  to  his  wont,  the  character  ot'a  simple  in 
strument  and  witness,  St.  Paul  goes  on  to  describe  an 
other  revelation  of  which  we  read  nothing  elsewhere. 
He  had  been  accused  of  being  an  enemy  to  the 
Temple.  He  relates  that  after  the  visit  to  Da 
mascus  he  went  up  again  to  Jerusalem,  and  was 
praying  once  in  the  Temple  itself,  till  he  fell  into  a 
trance.  Then  he  saw  the  Lord,  and  was  bidden  to 
leave  Jerusalem  quickly,  because  the  people  there 
would  not  receive  his  testimony  concerning  Jesus. 
His  own  impulse  was  to  stay  at  Jerusalem,  and  he 
pleaded  with  the  Lord  that  there  it  was  well  known 
how  he  had  persecuted  those  of  whom  he  was  now 
one, — implying,  it  would  appeal,  that  at  Jerusalem 
his  testimony  was  likely  to  be  more  impressive  and 
irresistible  than  elsewhere  ;  but  the  Lord  answered 
with  a  simple  command,  "  Depart :  for  1  will  send 
thee  far  hence  unto  the  Gentiles." 

Until  this  hated  word,  of  a  mission  to  the  Gen 
tiles,  had  been  spoken,  the  Jews  had  listened  to  the 
speaker.  They  could  bear  the  name  of  the  Na- 
zarenc,  though  they  despised  it ;  but  the  thought  of 
that  free  declaration  of  God's  grace  to  the  Gentiles, 
of  which  Paul  was  known  to  be  the  herald,  stung 
them  to  fury.  Jewish  pride  was  in  that  generation 
becoming  hardened  and  embittered  to  the  utmost ; 
and  this  was  the  enemy  which  St.  Paul  had  come 
to  encounter  in  its  stronghold.  "  Away  with  such 
a  fellow  from  the  earth,"  the  multitude  now 
shouted :  "  it  is  not  fit  that  he  should  live."  The 
Roman  commander,  seeing  the  tumult  that  arose, 
might  well  conclude  that  St.  Paul  had  committed 
some  heinous  offence ;  and  carrying  him  off,  he  gave 
orders  that  he  should  be  forced  by  scourging  to 
confess  his  crime.  Again  the  Apostle  took  advan 
tage  of  his  Roman  citizenship  to  protect  himself 
from  such  an  outrage.  To  the  rights  of  that  citi 
zenship,  he,  a  free-born  Roman,  had  a  better  title 
than  the  chief  captain  himself;  and  if  he  had  chosen 
to  assert  it  before,  he  might  have  saved  himself 
from  the  indignity  of  being  manacled. 

The  Roman  officer  was  bound  to  protect  a  citizen, 
and  to  suppress  tumult ;  but  it  was  also  a  part  of 
his  policy  to  treat  with  deference  the  religion  and 
the  customs  of  the  country.  St.  Paul's  present 
history  is  the  resultant  of  these  two  principles. 
The  chief  captain  set  him  free  from  bonds,  but  on 
the  next  day  called  together  the  chief  priests  and  the 
Sanhedrim,  and  brought  Paul  as  a  prisoner  before 
them.  We  need  not  suppose  that  this  was  a  regular 
legal  proceeding:  it  was  probably  an  experiment  of 
policy  and  courtesy.  If,  on  the  one  hand,  the  com 
mandant  of  the  garrison  had  no  power  to  convoke 
the  Sanhedrim ;  on  the  other  hand  he  would  not 
give  up  a  Roman  citizen  to  their  judgsnent.  As  it 
was,  the  affair  ended  in  confusion,  and  with  no 
semblance  of  a  judicial  termination.  The  incidents 
selected  by  St.  Luke  from  the  history  of  this  meet 
ing  form  striking  points  in  the  biography  of  St. 
Paul,  but  they  are  not  easy  to  understand.  The 
difficulties  arising  here,  not  out  of  a  comparison  of 
two  independent  narratives,  but  out  of  a  single  nar 
rative  which  must  at  least  have  appeared  consistent 
and  intelligible  to  the  writer  himself,  are  a  warning 
to  the  student  not  to  draw  unfavourable  inferences 
from  all  apparent  discrepancies. — St.  Paul  appears 
to  have  been  put  upon  his  defence,  and  with  the 
peculiar  habit,  mentioned  elsewhere  also  (Acts  xiii. 
9),  of  looking  steadily  when  about  to  speak  (en  «- 
),  he  began  to  say  "  Men  and  brethren,  I  have 


PAUL 

lived  in  all  good  conscience  (or,  to  give  the  force  <A 
irtiroAiTtu/MU,  I  have  lived  a  conscientiously  loyal 
life)  unto  God,  until  this  day."  Here  the  Higli- 
Priest  Ananias  commanded  them  that  stood  by  him 
to  smite  him  ou  the  mouth.  With  a  fearless  indig 
nation,  Paul  fexelaimed :  "  God  shall  smite  thee, 
thou  whited  wall :  for  sittest  thou  to  judge  me  after 
the  law,  and  commandest  me  to  be  smitten  contrary 
to  the  law  ?"  The  bystanders  said,  '•  Revilest  thou 
God's  High-Priest?"  Paul  answered,  "I  knew 
not,  brethren,  that  he  was  the  High-Priest ;  for  it  is 
written,  Thou  shalt  not  speak  evil  of  the  ruler 
of  thy  people."  The  evidence  furnished  by  this 
apology,  of  St.  Paul's  respect  both  for  the  Law  i  nd 
for  the  high  priesthood,  was  probably  the  reason  for 
relating  the  outburst  which  it  followed.  Whether 
the  writer  thought  that  outburst  culpable  or  not, 
does  not  appear.  St.  Jerome  (contra  Pelag,  iii., 
quoted  by  Baur)  draws  an  unfavourable  contrast 
between  the  vehemence  of  the  Apostle  and  the 
meekness  of  his  Master ;  and  he  is  followed  by  many 
critics,  as  amongst  others  De  Wette  and  Alford. 
But  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  He  who  was  led 
as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,  was  the  same  who  spoke 
of  "  whited  sepulchres,"  and  exclaimed,  "  Ye  ser 
pents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  shall  ye  escape 
the  damnation  of  hell  ?"  It  is  by  no  means  certain, 
therefore,  that  St.  Paul  would  have  been  a  truer 
follower  of  Jesus  if  he  had  held  his  tongue  under 
Ananias's  lawless  outrage.  But  what  does  his  an 
swer  mean  ?  How  was  it  possible  for  him  not  to 
know  that  he  who  spoke  was  the  High  Priest? 
Why  should  he  have  been  less  willing  to  rebuke  an 
iniquitous  High  Priest  than  any  other  member  of 
the  Sanhedrim,  "sitting  to  judge  him  after  the 
Law?"  These  are  difficult  questions  to  answer. 
It  is  not  likely  that  Ananias  was  personally  un 
known  to  St.  Paul ;  still  less  so,  that  the  High 
Priest  was  not  distinguished  by  dress  or  place  from 
the  other  members  of  the  Sanhedrim.  The  least 
objectionable  solutions  seem  to  be  that  for  some 
reason  or  other, — either  because  his  sigh  t  was  not 
good,  or  because  he  was  looking  another  way, — he 
did  not  know  whose  voice  it  was  that  ordered  him 
to  be  smitten ;  and  that  he  wished  to  correct  the 
impression  which  he  saw  was  made  upon  some  of 
the  audience  by  his  threatening  protest,  and  there 
fore  took  advantage  of  the  fact  that  he  really  did 
not  know  the  speaker  to  be  the  High-Priest,  to  ex  • 
plain  the  deference  he  felt  to  be  due  to  the  person 
holding  that  office.  The  next  incident  which  St. 
Luke  records  seems  to  some,  who  cannot  think  of 
the  Apostle  as  remaining  still  a  Jew,  to  cast  a  sha 
dow  upon  his  rectitude.  He  perceived,  we  are  told, 
that  the  council  was  divided  into  two  parties,  the 
Sadducees  and  Pharisees,  and  therefore  he  cried  out, 
"  Men  and  brethren,  I  am  a  Pharisee,  the  son  of  a 
Pharisee ;  concerning  the  hope  and  resurrection  of 
the  dead  I  am  called  in  question."  This  declaration, 
whether  so  intended  or  not,  had  the  effect  of  stirring 
up  the  party  spirit  of  the  assembly  to  such  a  degree, 
that  a  fierce  dissension  arose,  and  some  of  the  Pha 
risees  actually  took  Paul's  side,  saying,  "  We  find 
no  evil  in  this  man ;  suppose  a  spirit  or  an  angel 
has  spoken  to  him  ?" — Those  who  impugn  the  au 
thenticity  of  the  Acts  point  triumphantly  to  thin 
scene  as  an  utterly  impossible  one :  others  consider 
that  the  Apostle  is  to  be  blamed  for  using  a  disin 
genuous  artifice!  But  it  is  not  so  --lear  that  St 
Paul  was  using  an  artifice  at  all,  at  least  for  his 
own  interest,  in  identifying  himself  as  he  did  with 
the  professions  o<  the  Pharisees.  He  had  net  vdiiu 


PAUL 

to  Jerusalem  to  escape  out  of  the  way  of  danger, 
nor  was  the  course  lie  took  ca  this  occasion  the 
Bc.fest  he  could  have  chosen.  Two  objects,  we  must 
remember,  were  dearer  to  him  than  his  life :  (1)  to 
testify  of  Him  whom  God  had  raised  from  the  dead, 
and  (2)  to  prove  that  in  so  doing  he  was  a  faithful 
Israelite.  He  may  well  have  thought  that  both 
these  objects  might  be  promoted  by  an  appeal  to 
the  nobler  professions  of  the  Pharisees.  The  creed 
of  the  Pharisee  as  distinguished  from  that  of  the 
Sadducee,  was  unquestionably  the  creed  of  St.  Paul. 
His  belief  in  Jesus  seemed  to  him  to  supply  the 
ground  and  fulfilment  of  that  creed.  He  wished  to 
lead  his  brother  Pharisees  into  a  deeper  and  more 
living  apprehension  of  their  own  faith. 

Whether  such  a  result  was  in  any  degree  attained, 
we  do  not  know  :  the  immediate  consequence  of  the 
dissension  which  occurred  in  the  assembly  was  that 
Piul  was  like  to  be  torn  in  pieces,  and  was  earned 
off  by  the  Roman  soldiers.  In  the  night  he  had  a 
vision,  as  at  Corinth  (xviii.  9,  10)  and  on  the 
Voyage  to  Rome  (xxvii.  23,  24),  of  the  Lord  stand 
ing  by  him,  and  encouraging  him.  "  Be  of  good 
cheer,  Paul,"  said  his  Master;  "for  as  thou  hast 
testified  of  me  in  Jerusalem,  so  must  thou  bear 
witness  also  at  Rome."  It  was  not  safety  that  the 
Apostle  longed  for,  but  opportunity  to  bear  witness 
of  Christ. 

Probably  the  factious  support  which  Paul  had 
gained  by  his  manner  of  bearing  witness  in  the 
council  died  away  as  soon  as  the  meeting  was  dis 
solved.  On  the  next  day  a  conspiracy  was  formed, 
which  the  historian  relates  with  a  singular  fulness  of 
details.  More  than  forty  of  the  Jews  bound  them 
selves  under  a  curse  neither  to  eat  nor  to  drink 
until  they  had  killed  Paul.  Their  plan  was,  to 
persuade  the  Roman  commandant  to  send  down 
Paul  once  more  to  the  council,  and  then  to  set  upon 
him  by  the  way  and  kill  him.  This  conspiracy 
became  known  in  some  way  to  a  nephew  of  St. 
Paul's,  his  sister's  son,  who  was  allowed  to  see  his 
uncle,  and  inform  him  of  it,  and  by  his  desire  was 
taken  to  the  captain,  who  was  thus  put  on  his 
guard  against  the  plot.  This  discovery  baffled  the 
conspirators;  and  it  is  to  be  feared  that  they  ob 
tained  some  dispensation  from  their  vow.  The  con 
sequence  to  St.  Paul  was  that  he  was  hurried  away 
from  Jerusalem.  The  chief  captain,  Claudius  Ly- 
sias,  determined  to  send  him  to  Caesarea,  to  Felix 
the  governor,  or  procurator,  of  Judaea.  He  there 
fore  put  him  in  charge  of  a  strong  guard  of  soldiers, 
who  took  him  by  night  as  far  as  Antipatris.  From 
thence  a  smaller  detachment  conveyed  him  to  Cae 
sarea,  where  they  delivered  up  their  prisoner  into 
the  hands  of  the  governor,  together  with  a  letter, 
in  which  Claudius  Lysias  had  explained  to  Felix  hi 
reason  for  sending  Paul,  and  had  announced  that 
his  accusers  would  follow.  Felix,  St.  Luke  tells  us 
with  that  particularity  which  marks  this  portion  o' 
his  narrative,  asked  of  what  province  the  prisoner 
was:  and  being  told  that  he  was  of  Cilicia,  he  pro 
mised  to  give  him  a  hearing  when  his  accusers 
should  come.  In  the  meantime  he  ordered  him  to 
be  guarded. — chained  probably,  to  a  soldier, — in 
the  government-house,  which  had  been  the  palace 
of  Herod  the  Great. 

Imprisonment  at  Caesarea. — St.  Paul  was  hence 
forth,  to  the  end  of  the  period  embraced  in  the 
Acts,  if  not  to  the  end  of  his  life,  in  Roman  cur, 
tody.  This  custody  was  in  fact  a  protection  t 
h:m,  without  which  ho  would  have  fallen  a  victim 
to  i}\?  animosity  of  the  .'ews.  He  serins  to  havi 


PAUL 


76; 


>een  treated  throughout  with  humanity  and  consi- 
leration.     His  own  attitude  towards  Roman  magi.v 
•rates  was  invariably  that  of  a  respectful  but  inde- 
>endent  citizen ;  and  whilst  his  franchise  secured 
im  from  open  injustice,  his  character  and  conduct 
could  not  fail  to  win  him  the  goodwill  of  those  into 
whose  hands  he  came.     The  governor  before  whom 
e  was  now  to  be  tried,  according  to  Tacitus  and  Jo- 
sephus,  was  a  mean  and  dissolute  tyrant.  [FELIX.] 
'  Per  omnem  saevitiam    ac  libidir.em  jus  regiuir. 
servili   ingenio  exercuit"    (Tacitus,   Hist.  v.   9). 
But  these  characteristics,  except  perhaps  the  servile 
ingenium,   do   not  appear   in   our   history.     The 
orator  or  counsel  retained  by  the  Jews  and  brought 
down  by  Ananias  and  the  elders,  when  they  arrived 
n  the  course  of  five  days  at  Caesarea,  begins  the 
proceedings  of  the  trial  professionally  by  compli 
menting  the  governor.     The  charge  he  goes  on  to 
set  forth  against  Paul  shows  precisely  the  light  in 
which  he  was  regarded  by  the  fanatical  Jews.     He 
is  a  pestilent  fellow  (Aoi/teJs) ;  hi  stirs  up  divisions 
amongst  the  Jews  throughout  the  world ;  he  is  a 
ringleader  of  the  sect  (otpeVtois)  of  the  Nazarenes. 
His  last  offence  had  been  an  attempt  to  profane  the 
Temple.    St.  P.iul  met  the  charge  in  his  usual  man 
ner.    He  was  glad  that  his  judge  had  been  for  some 
years  governor  of  a  Jewish  province;  "  because  it  is 
in  thy  power  to  ascertain  that,  not  more  than  twelve 
days  since,  I  came  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship." 
The  emphasis  is  upon  his  coming  up  to  worship. 
He  denied  positively  the  charges  of  stirring  up  strife 
and  of  profaning  the  Temple.     But  he  admitted 
that  "  after  the  way  (rfyv  6S6v)  which  they  call  8 
sect,  or  a  heresy," — so  he  worshipped  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  believing  all  things  written  in  the  law 
and  in  the  prophets.     Again  he  gave  prominence  tc 
the  hope  of  a  resurrection,  which  he  held,  as  he 
said,  in  common  with  his  accusers.     His  loyalty  tc 
the  faith  of  his  fathers  he  had  shown  by  coming  up 
to  Jerusalem  expressly  to  bring  alms  for  his  nation 
and  offerings',  and  by  undertaking  the  ceremonies  of 
purification  in  the  Temple.     What  fault  then  could 
any  Jew  possibly  find  in  him  ? — The  Apostle's  an 
swer  was  straightforward  and  complete.     He  had 
not  violated  the  law  of  his  fathers ;  he  was  still  a 
true  and  loyal  Israelite.     Felix,  it  appears,  knew  a 
good  deal  about  "  the  way"  (TTJJ  65<w5),  as  well  as 
about  the  customs  of  the  Jews,  and  was  probably 
satisfied  that  St.  Paul's  account  was  a  true  one. 
He  made  an  excuse  for  putting  off  the  matter,  and 
gave  orders  that  the  prisoner  should  be  treated  with 
indulgence,  and  that  his  friends  should  be  allowed 
free  access  to  him.     After  a  while,  Felix  heard  him 
again.     His  wife  Drusilla  was  a  Jewess,  and  they 
were  both  curious  to  hear  the  eminent  preacher  of 
the  new  faith  in  Christ.     But  St.  Paul  was  not  a 
man  to  entertain  an  idle  curiosity.     He  began  to 
reason  concerning  righteousness,   temperance,   and 
the  coming  judgment,  in  a  manner  which  alarmed 
Felix  and  caused  him  to  put  an  end  to  the  con 
ference.     He  frequently  saw  him  afterwards,  how 
ever,  and  allowed  him  to  understand  that  a  bribo 
would  procure  his  release.     But  St.  Paul  would  not 
resort  to  this  method  of  escape,  and  he  remained  in 
custody  until  Felix  left  the  province.     The  unprin 
cipled  governor  had  good  reason  to  seek  to  ij.gra- 
tiate  himself  with  the  Jews ;  and  to  please  them,  he 
handed  over  Paul,  as  an  untried  prisone.%  <o  his 
successor  Festus. 

At  this  point,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  the  his 
tory  of  St.  Paul  comes  into  its  closest  contact  with 
external  chronology,  Festus,  like  Felix,  liss  n  placn 

3  C  2 


756 


PAUL 


j\  secular  history,  and  he  bears  a  much  better  cha 
racter.  Upon  his  arrival  m  the  province,  he  went 
up  without  delay  from  Caesarea  to  Jerusalem,  and 
the  leading  Jews  seized  the  opportunity  of  asking 
that  Paul  might  be  brought  up  there  for  trial,  in 
tending  to  assassinate  him  by  the  way.  But  Festus 
would  not  comply  with  their  request.  He  invited 
them  to  follow  him  on  his  speedy  return  to  Cae- 
•aif.-i,  and  a  trial  took  place  there,  closely  resem 
bling  that  before  Felix.  Festus  saw  clearly  enough 
thnt  Paul  had  committed  no  offence  against  the  law, 
but  ho  was  anxious  at  the  same  time,  if  lie  could, 
to  please  the  Jews.  "  They  had  certain  questions 
against  him  "  Festus  says  to  Agrippa,  "  of  their 
own  superstition  (or  religion),  and  of  one  Jesus, 
who  was  dead,  whom  Paul  alnrmed  to  be  aliv>. 
And  being  puzzled  for  my  part  as  to  such  inquiries, 
I  asked  him  whether  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem  to 
be  tried  there."  This  proposal,  not  a  very  likely 
one  to  be  accepted,  was  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's 
appeal  to  Caesar.  In  dignified  and  independent 
language  he  claimed  his  rights  as  a  Roman  citizen. 
We  can  scarcely  doubt  that  the  prospect  of  being 
forwarded  by  this  means  to  Rome,  the  goal  of  all 
nis  desires,  presented  itself  to  him  and  drew  him 
onwards,  as  he  virtually  protested  against  the  inde 
cision  and  impotence  of  the  provincial  governor,  and 
exclaimed,  I  appeal  unto  Caesar.  Having  heard 
this  appeal,  Festus  consulted  with  his  assessors, 
found  that  there  was  no  impediment  in  the  way  of  its 
prosecution,  and  then  replied,  "  Hast  thou  appealed 
to  Caesar  ?  To  Caesar  thou  shalt  go." 

Properly  speaking,  an  appeal  was  made  from  the 
sentence  of  an  inferior  court  to  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
higher.  But  in  St.  Paul's  case  no  sentence  had 
been  pronounced.  We  must  understand,  therefore, 
by  his  appeal,  a  demand  to  be  tried  by  the  imperial 
court,  and  we  must  suppose  that  a  Roman  citizen 
had  the  right  of  electing  whether  he  would  be  tried 
in  the  province  or  at  Rome.  [APPEAL.] 

The  appeal  having  been  allowed,  Festus  reflected 
that  he  must  send  with  the  prisoner  a  report  of 
"  the  crimes  laid  against  him."  And  he  found  that 
it  was  no  easy  matter  to  put  the  complaints  of  the 
Jews  in  a  form  which  would  be  intelligible  at  Rome. 
He  therefore  took  advantage  of  an  opportunity 
which  offered  itself  in  a  few  days  to  seek  some  help 
in  the  matter.  The  Jewish  prince  Agrippa  arrivad 
with  liis  sister  Berenice  on  a  visit  to  the  new 
governor.  To  him  Festus  communicated  his  per 
plexity,  together  with  an  account  of  what  had  oc 
curred  before  him  in  the  case.  Agrippa,  who  must 
have  known  something  of  the  sect  of  the  Nazarenes, 
and  had  probably  heard  of  Paul  himself,  expressed  a 
desire  to  hear  him  speak.  The  Apostle  therefore 
was  now  called  upon  to  bear  the  name  of  his  Master 
•*  before  Gentiles,  and  kings."  The  audience  which 
assembled  to  hear  him  was  the  most  dignified  which 
he  had  yet  addressed,  and  the  state  and  ceremony 
of  the  scene  proved  that  he  was  regarded  as  no  vulgar 
criminal.  Festus,  when  Paul  had  been  brought 
into  the  council-chamber,  explained  to  Agrippa  and 
the  rest  of  the  company  the  difficulty  in  which  he 
found  himself,  and  then  expressly  referred  the  matter 
to  the  better  knowledge  of  the  Jewish  king.  Paul 
therefore  was  to  give  an  account  of  himself  to 
Agrippa;  and  when  he  had  received  from  him  a 
courteous  permission  to  begin,  he  stretched  forth 
his  hand  and  made  his  defence. 

In  this  discourse  (Acts  xxvi.),  we  have  the  second 
explanation  from  St.  Paul  himself  of  the  manner  in 
ivhich  he  had  l>cen  led,  through  his  Conversion,  to 


PATTL 

serve  the  Lord  Jesus  instead  of  persecuting  His  dis 
ciples;  and  the  third  narrative  of  the  Con  version 
itself.  Speaking  to  Agrippa  as  to  one  thoroughly 
versed  in  the  customs  and  questions  prevailing 
amongst  the  Jews,  Paul  appeals  to  the  well-known 
Jewish  and  even  Pharisaical  strictness  of  his  youth 
and  early  manhood.  He  reminds  the  king  of  the 
great  hope  which  sustained  continually  the  worship 
of  the  Jewish  nation, — the  hope  of  a  deliverer,  pro 
mised  by  God  Himself,  who  should  be  a  conqueror 
of  death.  He  had  been  led  to  see  that  this  promu* 
was  fulfilled  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth ;  he  proclaimed 
His  resurrection  to  be  the  pledge  of  a  new  and  im 
mortal  life.  What  was  there  in  this  of  disloyalty 
to  the  traditions  of  his  fathers? — Did  his  country 
men  disbelieve  in  this  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  ?  So 
had  he  once  disbelieved  in  Him  ;  and  had  thought  it 
his  duty  to  be  earnest  in  hostility  against  His  name. 
But  his  eyes  had  been  opened :  he  would  tell  how 
and  when.  The  story  of  the  Conversion  is  modified 
in  this  address  as  we  might  fairly  expect  it  to  be. 
We  have  seen  that  there  is  no  absolute  contradiction 
between  the  statements  of  this  and  the  other  narra 
tives.  The  main  points, — the  light,  the  prostra 
tion,  the  voice  from  heaven,  the  instructions  from 
Jesus, — are  found  in  all  three.  But  in  this  account, 
the  words,  "  I  am  Jesus  whom  thou  persecutest." 
are  followed  by  a  fuller  explanation,  as  if  then 
spoken  by  the  Lord,  of  what  the  work  of  the 
Apostle  was  to  be.  The  other  accounts  defer  this 
explanation  to  a  subsequent  occasion.  But  when 
we  consider  how  fully  the  mysterious  communica 
tion  made  at  the  moment  of  the  Conversion  included 
what  was  afterwards  conveyed,  through  Ananias 
and  in  other  ways,  to  the  mind  of  Paul;  and  how 
needless  it  was  for  Paul,  in  his  present  address 
before  Agrippa,  to  mark  the  stages  by  which  the 
whole  lesson  was  taught,  it  seems  merely  captious 
to  base  upon  the  method  of  this  account  a  charge  of 
disagreement  between  the  different  parts  of  this  his 
tory.  They  bear,  on  the  contrary,  a  striking  mark 
of  genuineness  in  the  degree  in  which  they  approach 
contradiction  without  reaching  it.  It  is  most  na 
tural  that  a  story  told  on  different  occasions  should 
be  told  differently  ;  and  if  in  such  a  case  we  find  no 
contradiction  as  to  the  facts,  we  gain  all  the  firmer 
impression  of  the  substantial  truth  of  the  story. 
The  particulars  added  to  the  former  accounts  by  the 
present  narrative  are,  that  the  words  of  Jesus  were 
spoken  in  Hebrew,  and  that  the  first  question  to 
Saul  was  followed  by  the  saying,  "  It  is  hard  for 
thee  to  kick  against  the  goads."  (This  saying  is 
omitted  by  the  best  authorities  in  the  ixth  chapter.) 
The  language  of  the  commission  which  St.  Paul  says 
he  received  from  Jesus  deserves  close  study,  and  will 
be  found  to  bear  a  striking  resemblance  to  a  passage 
in  Colossians  (i.  12-14).  The  ideas  of  light,  redemp 
tion,  forgiveness,  inheritance  and  faith  in  Christ, 
belong  characteristically  to  the  Gospel  which  Paul 
preached  amongst  the  Gentiles.  Not  less  striking 
is  it  to  observe  the  older  terms  in  which  he  describes 
to  Agrippa  his  obedience  to  the  heavenly  vision. 
He  had  made  it  his  business,  he  says,  to  proclaim  to 
all  men  "  that  they  should  repent  and  turn  to  God, 
and  do  works  meet  for  repentance."  Words  such 
as  John  the  Baptist  uttered,  but  not  less  truly 
Pauline.  And  he  finally  reiterates  that  the  testi 
mony  on  account  of  which  the  Jews  sought  to  kill 
him  was  in  exact  agreement  with  Moses  and  the 
prophets.  Thty  had  taught  men  to  expect  that  the 
( 'lirist  should  suffer,  and  that  He  should  be  the  first 
that  bhould  rise  from  the  dead,  and  should  sbo* 


PAUL 

light  unto  the  peoplo  and  lo  l.he  Gentils.     Of  such 
a  Messiah  Saul  was  the  sa-vant  and  preacher.0 

At  tliis  point  Fcstus  begun  to  apprehend  what 
Deemed  to  him  a  manliest  absurdity.  He  inter 
rupted  the  Apostle  discourteously,  but  with  a  com 
pliment  contained  in  his  loud  remonstrance.  "  Thou 
art  mad,  Paul ;  thy  much  learning  is  turning  thee 
mad."  The  phrase  TO  TroAAa  ypdfj.fj.ara  may  pos 
sibly  have  been  suggested  by  the  allusion  to  Moses 
and  the  prophets ;  but  it  probably  refers  to  the 
books  with  which  St.  Paul  had  been  supplied,  and 
which  he  was  known  to  study,  during  his  imprison 
ment.  As  a  biographical  hint,  this  phrase  is  not  to 
be  overlooked.  "  I  am  not  mad,"  replied  Paul, 
"  most  noble  Festus :  they  are  words  of  truth  and 
soberness  which  I  am  uttering."  Then,  with  an 
".ppeal  of  mingled  diguity  and  solicitude,  he  turns 
to  the  king.  He  was  sure  the  king  understood  him. 
"  King  Agrippa,  believest  thou  the  prophets  ? — I 
know  that  thou  believest."  The  answer  of  Agrippa 
can  hardly  have  been  the  serious  and  encouraging 
remark  of  our  English  version.  Literally  rendered, 
it  appeai-s  to  be,  You  are  briefly  persuading  me  to 
become  a  Christian  ;  and  it  is  generally  supposed  to 
have  been  spoken  ironically.  "  I  would  to  God," 
is  Paul's  earnest  answer,  "  that  whether  by  a  brief 
process  or  by  a  long  one,  not  only  thou  but  all  who 
hear  me  to-day  might  become  such  as  I  am,  with 
the  exception  of  these  bonds."  He  was  wearing  a 
chain  upon  the  hand  he  held  up  in  addressing  them. 
With  this  prayer,  it  appears,  the  conference  ended. 
Festus  and  the  king,  and  their  companions,  con 
sulted  together,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  accused  was  guilty  of  nothing  that  deserved 
death  or  imprisonment.  And  Agrippa's  final  an 
swer  to  the  inquiry  of  Festus  was,  "  This  man  might 
have  been  set  at  liberty,  if  he  had  not  appealed  unto 
Caesar." 

Trie  Voyage  to  Home. — No  formal  trial  of  St. 
Paul  had  yet  taken  place..  It  appears  from  Acts 
xxviii.  18,  that  he  knew  how  favourable  the  judg 
ment  of  the  provincial  governor  was  likely  to  be. 
But  the  vehement  opposition  of  the  Jew?,  together 
with  his  desire  to  be  conveyed  to  Rome,  might  well 
induce  him  to  claim  a  trial  before  the  imperial 
court.  After  a  while  arrangements  were  made  to 
carry  "  Paul  and  certain  other  prisoners,"  in  the 
custody  of  a  centurion  named  Julius,  into  Italy ; 
and  amongst  the  company,  whether  by  favour  01 
from  any  other  reason,  we  rind  the  historian  of  the 
Acts.  The  narrative  of  this  voyage  is  accordingly 
minute  and  circumstantial  in  a  degree  which  ha» 
excited  much  attention.  The  nautical  and  geo 
graphical  details  of  St.  Luke's  account  have  been 
submitted  to  an  apparently  thorough  investigation 
by  several  competent  critics,  especially  by  Mr.  Smith 
of  Jordanhill,  in  an  important  treatise  devoted  to 
this  subject,  and  by  Mr.  Howson.  The  result  o 
this  investigation  has  been,  that  several  errors  in 
the  received  version  have  been  corrected,  that  th 
course  of  the  voyage  has  been  laid  down  to  a  ver; 
•ninute  degree  with  great  certainty,  and  that  the 
account  in  the  Acts  is  shown  to  be  written  by  an 
accurate  eye-witness,  not  himself  a  professional  sea 
man,  but  well  acquainted  with  nautical  matters 
We  shall  hasten  lightly  over  this  voyage,  referring 
the  reader  to  the  works  above  mentioned,  and  t 


PAUL 


757 


•  "  There  never  was  any  that  understood  the  Old  Tes 
/rineut  so  v  -:'.!  iis  St.  Paul,  except  John  the  Baptist,  an 

John  the  Divine Oh,  he  dearly  loved  Moses  and  Isaiah, 

v  it  Ihry,  together  with  king  David,  were  the  chief  prophets. 
1'he  words  am!  thinxs  of  St.  1'aul  are  taken  out  of  Moses 


ic  articles  in  this  Dictionary  01.  the  names  01 
laces  and  the  nautical  terms  which  occur  in  the 
ixrrative. 

The  centurion  and  his  prisoners,  amongst  whom 
.ristarchus  (Col.  iv.  10)  is  named,  embarked  a) 
aesarea  on  board  a  ship  of  Adramyttium,  and  set 
ail  for  the  coast  of  Asia.  On  the  next  day  they 
ouched  at  Sidon,  and  Julius  began  a  course  of 
indly  and  respectful  treatment  by  allowing  Paul 
o  go  on  shore  to  visit  his  friends.  The  westerly 
inds  still  usual  at  the  time  of  year  (late  in  the 
ummer)  compelled  the  vessel  to  run  northwards 
nder  the  lee  of  Cyprus.  Off  the  coast  of  Cilicia 
and  Pamphylia  they  would  mid  northerly  winds, 
hich  enabled  them  to  reach  Myra  in  Lycia.  Heie 
tie  voyagers  were  put  on  board  another  ship,  which 
ivas  come  from  Alexandria  and  was  bound  for  Italy, 
n  this  vessel  they  worked  slowly  to  windward, 
:eeping  near  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  till  they  came 
ver  against  Cnidus.  The  wind  being  still  con- 
rary,  the  only  course  was  now  to  run  southwards, 
under  the  lee  of  Crete,  passing  the  headland  ot 
•\ilmone.  They  then  gained  the  advantage  of  a 
weather  shore,  and  worked  along  the  coast  of  Crete 
s  far  as  Cape  Matala,  near  which  they  took  refuge 
n  a  harbour  called  Fair  Havens,  identified  with 
me  bearing  the  same  name  to  this  day. 

It  became  now  a  serious  question  what  course 
ihould  be  taken.     It  was  late  in  Ihe  year  for  the 
lavigation  of  those  days.     The  fast  of  the  day  of 
expiation  (Lev.  xxiii.  27—29),  answering  to  the  au- 
,umnal  equinox,  was  past,  and  St.  Paul  gave  it  as 
lis  advice  th«t  they  should  winter  where  they  were, 
iut  the  master  and  the  owner  of  the  ship  were 
willing  to  run  the   risk  of  seeking  a  more  com 
modious  harbour,  and  the  centurion  followed  their 
udgment.     It  was  resolved,  with  the  concurrence 
of  the   majority,  to   make   for   a    harbour  called 
Phoenix,  sheltered  from  the  S.W.  winds,  as  well  as 
Tom   the  N.W.      (The   phrase   /JAenwru  KOTO 
\lfia  is  rendered  either  "  looking  down  the  S.W." 
[Smith   and    Alford],    or   "  looking    towards  the 
S.W."  when  observed  from  the  sea  and  towards 
the  land  enclosing   it   [Howson].)      A  change  of 
wind  occurred  which  favoured  the  plan,  and  by 
the  aid  of  a  light  breeze  from  the  south  they  were 
sailing  towards  Phoenix  (now  Lutro),  when  a  vio 
lent  N.E.  wind  [EUROCLYDON]  came  down  from 
the  land   (/COT'  avrris,  scil.  KfMrjnjs),  caught  the 
vessel,  and  compelled  them  to  let  her  drive  before 
the  wind.     In  this  course  they  arrived  under  the 
lee  of  a  small  island  called  Clauda,  about  20  miles 
from  Crete,  where  they  took  advantage  of  com 
paratively  smooth  water  to  get  the  boat  on  board, 
and  to  undergird,  or  trap,  the  ship.     There  was  a 
fear  lest  they  should  be  driven  upon  the  Syrtis  on 
the  coast  of  Africa,  and  they  therefore  "  lowered 
the  gear,"  or  sent  down  upon  deck  the  gear  con 
nected  with  the  fair-weather  sails,  and  stood  out  to 
sea  "  with  storm-sails  set  and  on  the  starboard 
tack"  (Smith).     The  bad  weather  continued,  and 
the  ship  was   lightened   on  the   next  day  of  her 
cargo,  on  the   third   of  her   loose   furniture  and 
tackling.      For  many  days  neither  sun  nor  stars 
were  visible  to  steer  by,  the  storm  was  violent,  and 
all  began  to  despair  of  safety.     The  general  dis 
couragement    was   aggravated    by   the    abstinence 

and  the  prophets"  (Luther's  Table  Talk,  ccccxxviii.,  Kiigl, 
Trans.).  Another  striking  remark  of  Luther's  may  b« 
added  here :  "  Whoso  reads  Paul  may,  with  a  safe  con 
science,  build  upon  his  words"  (TaWe  Talk,  xxlll.). 


758 


PAUL 


caused  by  the  difficulty  of  preparing  food,  and  the 
spoiling  cf  it ;  and  in  order  to  raise  the  spints  of 
the  whole  company  Paul  stood  forth  one  morning 
to  relate  a  vision  which  had  occurred  to  him  in  the 
night.  An  angel  of  the  God  "  whose  he  was  and 
whom  he  served  "  had  appeared  to  him  and  said, 
"  Fear  not,  Paul :  thou  must  be  brought  before 
Caesar ;  and  behold,  God  hath  given  thee  all  them 
that  sail  with  thee."  At  the  same  time  he  pre 
dicted  that  the  vessel  would  be  cast  upon  an  island 
and  be  lost. 

This  shipwreck  was  to  happen  speedily.  On  the 
fourteenth  night,  as  they  were  drifting  through  the 
sea  [ADRIA],  about  midnight,  the  sailors  perceived 
indications,  probably  the  roar  of  breakers,  that  land 
was  near.  Their  suspicion  was  confirmed  by  sound 
ings.  They  therefore  cast  four  anchors  out  of  the 
stern,  and  waited  anxiously  for  daylight.  After  a 
while  the  sailors  lowered  the  boat  with  the  pro 
fessed  purpose  of  laying  out  anchors  from  the  bow, 
but  intending  to  desert  the  ship,  which  was  in 
imminent  danger  of  being  dashed  to  pieces.  St. 
Paul,  aware  of  their  intention,  informed  the  cen 
turion  and  the  soldiers  of  it,  who  took  care,  by 
cutting  the  ropes  of  the  boat,  to  prevent  its  being 
carried  out.  He  then  addressed  himself  to  the  task 
of  encouraging  the  whole  company,  assuring  them 
that  their  lives  would  be  preserved,  and  exhorting 
them  to  refresh  themselves  quietly  after  their  long 
abstinence  with  a  good  meal.  He  set  the  example 
himself,  taking  bread,  giving  thanks  to  God,  and 
beginning  to  eat  in  presence  of  them  all.  After  a 
general  meal,  in  which  there  were  276  persons  to 
partake,  they  further  lightened  the  ship  by  casting 
out  what  remained  of  the  provisions  on  board  (r&v 
fflrov  is  commonly  understood  to  be  the  "  wheat " 
which  formed  the  cargo,  but  the  other  interpreta 
tion  seems  more  probable).  When  the  light  of  the 
dawn  revealed  the  land,  they  did  not  recognize  it, 
but  they  discovered  a  creek  with  a  smooth  beach, 
and  determined  to  run  the  ship  aground  in  it.  So 
they  cut  away  the  anchors,  unloosed  the  rudder- 
paddles,  raised  the  foresail  to  the  wind,  and  made 
for  the  beach.  When  they  came  close  to  it  they 
found  a  narrow  channel  between  the  land  on  one 
side,  which  proved  to  be  an  islet, ,  and  the  shore ; 
and  at  this  point,  where  the  "  two  seas  met,"  they 
succeeded  in  driving  the  fore  part  of  the  vessel  fast 
into  the  clayey  beach.  The  stem  began  at  once  to 
go  to  pieces  under  the  action  of  the  breakers  ;  but 
•scape  was  now  within  reach.  The  soldiers  sug 
gested  to  their  commander  that  the  prisoners  should 
be  effectually  prevented  from  gaining  their  liberty 
by  being  killed  ;  but  the  centurion,  desiring  to  save 
Paul,  stopped  this  proposition,  and  gave  orders  that 
those  who  could  swim  should  cast  themselves  first 
into  the  sea  and  get  to  land,  and  that  the  rest 
should  follow  with  the  aid  of  such  spars  as  might 
be  available.  By  this  creditable  combination  of 
humanity  and  discipline  the  deliverance  was  made  as 
complete  as  St.  Paul's  assurances  had  predicted  it 
would  be. 

The  land  on  which  they  had  been  cast  was  found 
lo  belong  to  Malta.  [MELITA.]  The  very  point 
of  the  stranding  is  made  out  with  great  probability 
by  Mr.  Smith.  The  inhabitants  of  the  island  re 
ceived  the  wet  and  exhausted  voyagers  with  no 
ordinary  kindness,  and  immediately  lighted  a  fire 
to  warm  them.  This  particular  kindness  is  re 
corded  on  account  cf  a  curious  incident  connected 
with  it.  The  Apostle  was  helping  to  make  the 
fire,  and  had  gathered  a  bundle  of  sticks  and  laid 


PAUL 

them  on  the  fire,  when  a  viper  came  out  of  tin 
heat,  and  fastened  on  his  hand.  When  the  natives 
saw  the  creature  hanging  from  his  hand  they  be 
lieved  him  to  be  poisoned  by  the  bite,  and  said 
amongst  themselves,  "  No  doubt  this  man  is  a  .jur- 
derer,  whom,  though  he  has  escaped  from  the  sea, 
yet  Vengeance  suffers  not  to  live.  But  when  they 
saw  that  no  harm  came  of  it  they  changed  their 
minds  and  said  that  he  was  a  god.  This  circum 
stance,  as  well  as  the  honour  in  which  he  was  held 
by  Julius,  would  account  for  St.  Paul  being  invited 
with  some  others  to  stay  at  the  house  of  the  chief 
man  of  the  island,  whose  name  was  Publius.  By 
him  they  were  courteously  entertained  for  three 
days.  The  lather  of  Publius  happened  to  be  ill  of 
fever  and  dysentery,  and  was  healed  by  St.  Paul ; 
and  when  this  was  known  many  other  sick  persons 
were  brought  to  him  and  were  healed.  So  there 
was  a  pleasant  interchange  of  kindness  and  benefits. 
The  people  of  the  island  showed  the  Apostle  and 
his  company  much  honour,  and  when  they  were 
about  to  leave  loaded  them  with  such  things  as 
they  would  want.  The  Roman  soldiers  would  carry 
with  them  to  Rome  a  deepened  impression  of  the 
character  and  the  powers  of  the  kingdom  of  which 
Phul  was  the  herald. 

After  a  three  months'  stay  in  Malta  the  soldiers 
and  their  prisoners  left  in  an  Alexandrian  ship  for 
Italy.  They  touched  at  Syracuse,  where  they 
stayed  three  days,  and  at  Rhegium,  from  which 
place  they  were  carried  with  a  fair  wind  to  Puteoli, 
where  they  left  their  ship  and  the  sea.  At  Puteoli 
they  found  "  brethren,"  for  it  was  an  important 
place,  and  especially  a  chief  port  for  the  traffic 
between  Alexandria  and  Rome ;  and  by  these  brethren 
they  were  exhorted  to  stay  awhile  with  them.  Per 
mission  seems  to  have  been  granted  by  the  cen 
turion  ;  and  whilst  they  were  spending  seven  days 
at  Puteoli  news  of  the  Apostle's  arrival  was  sent 
on  to  Rome.  The  Christians  at  Rome,  on  their 
part,  sent  forth  some  of  their  number,  who  met 
St.  Paul  at  Appii  Forum  and  Tres  Taliernae ;  and 
on  this  first  introduction  to  the  Church  at  Rome 
the  Apostle  felt  that  his  long  desire  was  fulfilled  at 
last — "  He  thanked  God  and  took  courage." 

St.  Paul  at  Rome. — On  their  arrival  at  Rome 
the  centurion  delivered  up  his  prisoners  into  the 
proper  custody,  that  of  the  praetorian  prefect.  Paul 
was  at  once  treated  w'th  special  consideration,  and 
was  allowed  to  dwell  by  himself  with  the  soldier 
who  guarded  him.  He  was  not  released  from  this 
galling  annoyance  of  being  constantly  chained  to  a 
keeper ;  but  every  indulgence  compatible  with  this 
necessary  restraint  was  readily  allowed  him.  He 
was  now  therefore  free  "  to  preach  the  Gospel  to 
them  that  were  at  Rome  also ;"  and  proceeded 
without  delay  to  act  upon  his  rule — "  to  the  Jew 
first."  He  invited  the  chief  persons  amongst  the 
Jews  to  come  to  him,  and  explained  to  them  that 
though  he  was  brought  to  Rome  to  answer  charges 
made  against  him  by  the  Jews  in  Palestine,  he  had 
really  done  nothing  disloyal  to  his  nation  or  the 
Law,  nor  desired  to  be  considered  as  hostile  to  his 
fellow-countrymen.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  in 
custody  for  maintaining  that  "  the  hope  of  Israel " 
had  been  fulfilled.  The  Roman  Jews  replied  that 
they  had  received  no  tidings  to  his  prejudice.  The 
sect  of  which  he  had  implied  he  was  a  member 
they  knew  to  be  everywhere  spoken  against;  but 
they  were  willing  to  hear  what  he  had  to  say.  It 
has  been  thought  strange  that  such  an  attitude 
should  be  taken  towards  the  faith  of  CLrist  bv  the 


PAUL 

Jews  xt  Rome,  where  a  flourishing  branch  of  the 
Church  had  existed  for  some  years ;  and  an  argu 
ment  has  been  drawn  from  thrs  representation 
against  th«  authenticity  of  the  Acts.  But  it  may 
be  accounted  for  without  violence  from  what  we 
know  and  may  probably  conjecture.  (I.)  The 
Church  at  Rome  consisted  mainly  of  Gentiles, 
ILough  it  must  be  supposed  that  thev  had  been 
previously  for  the  most  part  Jewish  proselytes. 
(2.)  The  real  Jews  at  Rome  had  been  persecuted 
•vnd  sometimes  entirely  banished,  and  their  unsettled 
state  may  have  checked  the  contact  and  collision 
which  would  have  been  otherwise  likely.  (3.)  St. 
Paul  was  possibly  known  by  name  to  the  Roman 
Jews,  and  curiosity  may  have  persuaded  them  to 
listen  to  him.  Even  if  he  were  not  known  to  them, 
here,  as  in  other  places,  his  courteous  bearing  and 
•strong  expressions  of  adhesion  to  the  faith  of  his 
fathers  would  win  a  hearing  from  them.  A  day 
was  therefore  appointed,  on  which  a  large  number 
same  expressly  to  hear  him  expound  his  belief;  and 
from  morning  till  evening  he  bore  witness  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  persuading  them  concerning  Jesus, 
both  out  of  the  Law  of  Moses  and  out  of  the  pro 
phets.  So  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  had  not  yet 
unlearnt  the  original  Apostolic  method.  The  hope 
of  Israel  was  still  his  subject.  But,  as  of  old,  the 
reception  of  his  message  by  the  Jews  was  not 
favourable.  They  were  slow  of  heart  to  believe, 
?.t  Rome  as  at  Pisidian  Antioch.  The  judgment 
pronounced  by  Isaiah  was  come,  Paul  testified,  upon 
the  people.  They  had  made  themselves  blind  and 
deaf  and  gross  of  heart.  The  Gospel  must  be  pro 
claimed  to  the  Gentiles,  amongst  whom  it  would 
rind  a  better  welcome.  He  turned  therefore  again 
to  the  Gentiles,  and  for  two  years  he  dwelt  in  his 
own  hired  house,  and  received  all  who  came  to 
him,  proclaiming  the  kingdom  of  God  and  teaching 
concerning  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  with  all  confi 
dence,  no  man  forbidding  him. 

These  are  the  last  words  of  the  Acts.  This  his 
tory  of  the  planting  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  in 
the  world  brings'  us  down  to  the  time  when  the 
Gospel  was  openly  proclaimed  by  the  great  Apostle 
in  the  Gentile  capital,  and  stops  short  of  the  mighty 
convulsion  which  was  shortly  to  pronounce  that  king 
dom  established  as  the  Divine  commonwealth  for  all 
men.  The  work  of  St.  Paul  belonged  to  the  prepara- 
toiy  period.  He  was  not  to  live  through  the  time 
when  the  Son  of  Man  came  in  the  destruction  of  the 
Holy  City  and  Temple,  and  in  the  throes  of  the  New 
Age.  The  most  significant  part  of  his  work  was 
accomplished  when  in  the  Imperial  City  he  had 
declared  his  Gospel  "  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to 
the  Gentile."  But  his  career  is  not  abruptly  closed. 
Before  he  himself  fades  out  of  our  sight  in  the 
twilight  of  ecclesiastical  tradition,  we  have  letters 
written  by  himself,  which  contribute  some  parti 
culars  to  his  external  biography,  and  give  us  a 
for  more  precious  insight  into  his  convictions  and 
sympathies. 

Period  of  the  Later  Epistles. — We  might  natu 
rally  expect  that  St.  Paul,  tied  down  to  one  spoc  at 
Rome,  and  yet  free  to  speak  and  write  to  whom  he 
pleased,  would  pour  out  in  Letters  his  love  and 
anxiety  for  distant  Churches.  It  seems  entirely 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  author  of  the  extant 
Epistles  wrote  very  many  which  are  not  extant. 
To  suppose  this,  aids  us  perhaps  a  little  in  the  dif 
ficult  endeavour  to  conU:mplate  St.  Paul's  Epistles 
as  living  Letters.  It  is  difficult  crmigh  to  connect 
la  our  minds  the  witiny  of  these  Epistles  with  the 


PAUL 


759 


•xternal  conditions  of  a  human  life ;  to  think  dl 
Paul,  with  his  incessant  chain  and  soldier,  sitting 
down  to  write  or  dictate,  and  producing  ior  the 
world  an  inspired  Epistle.  But  it  is  almost  more 
difficult,  to  imagine  the  Christian  communities  of 
those  days,  samples  of  the  population  of  Macedonia 
or  Asia  Minor,  receiving  and  reading  such  Lettei-s 
But  the  Letters  were  actually  written ;  and  they 
must  of  necessity  be  accepted  as  representing  the 
kind  of  communications  which  marked  the  inter- 
course  of  the  Apostle  and  his  fellow-Christians. 
When  he  wrote,  he  wrote  out  of  the  fullness  of  his 
heart ;  and  the  ideas  on  which  he  dwelt  were  those  . 
of  his  dairy  and  hourly  thoughts.  To  that  impri 
sonment  to  which  St.  Luke  has  introduced  us, — the 
imprisonment  which  lasted  for  such  a  tedious  time, 
though  tempered  by  much  indulgence, — belongs  the 
noble  group  of  Letters  to  Philemon,  to  the  Colos 
sians,  to  the  Ephesians,  and  to  the  Philippians. 
The  three  former  of  these  were  written  at  one  time 
and  sent  by  the  same  messengers.  Whether  that 
to  the  Philippians  was  written  before  or  after  these, 
we  cannot  determine ;  but  the  tone  of  it  seems  to 
imply  that  a  crisis  was  approaching,  and  therefore 
it  is  commonly  regarded  as  the  latest  of  the  four. 

St.  Paul  had  not  himself  founded  the  Church  at 
Colossae.  But  during  his  imprisonment  at  Rome 
he  had  for  an  associate — he  calls  him  a  "  fellow-pri 
soner  "  (Philemon  23) — a  chief  teacher  of  the  Colos- 
sian  Church  named  Epaphras.  He  had  thus  become 
deeply  interested  in  the  condition  of  that  Church. 
It  happened  that  at  the  same  time  a  slave  named 
Onesimus  came  within  the  reach  of  St.  Paul's  teach 
ing,  and  was  converted  into  a  zealous  and  useful 
Christian.  This  Onesimus  had  run  away  from  his 
master ;  and  his  master  was  a  Christian  of  Colossae. 
St.  Kaul  determined  to  send  back  Onesimus  to  his 
nus'.or ;  and  with  him  he  determined  also  to  send 
his  old  companion  Tychicus  (Acts  xx.  4),  as  a  mes- 
seiigrr  to  the  Church  at  Colossae  and  to  neighbour 
ing  Churches.  This  was  the  occasion  of  the  letter 
to  Philemon,  which  commended  Onesimus,  in  lan 
guage  of  singular  tenderness  and  delicacy,  as  a 
faithful  and  beloved  brother,  to  his  injured  master ; 
and  dJso  of  the  two  letters  to  the  Colossians  and 
Ephesians.  That  to  the  Colossians,  being  drawn 
forth  by  the  most  special  circumstances,  may  be 
reasonably  supposed  to  have  been  written  first.  It 
was  intended  to  guard  the  Church  at  Colossae  from 
false  teaching,  which  the  Apostle  knew  to  be  infest 
ing  k.  For  the  characteristics  of  this  Epistle,  we 
must  refer  to  the  special  article.  [COLOSSIANS, 
EPISI'LE  TO  THE.]  The  end  of  it  (iv.  7-18)  names 
seveial  friends  who  were  with  St.  Paul  at  Rome,  as 
ArisUrchus,  Marcus  (St.  Mark),  Epaphras,  Luke, 
and  Demas.  For  the  writing  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Epl  Asians,  there  seems  to  have  been  no  mcie  special 
oecjsion,  than  that  Tychicus  was  passing  through 
Ejhesus.  [EPHESIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE.]  Ths 
highest  characteristic  which  these  two  Epistles,  to 
the  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  have  in  common,  is 
tfeit  of  a  presentation  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
fuller  and  clearer  than  we  fitid  in  previous  writings, 
as  the  Head  of  creation  and  of  mankind.  All  things 
created  through  Christ,  all  things  coherent  in  Him, 
all  things  reconciled  to  the  Father  by  Him,  the  eter 
nal  purpose  to  restore  and  complete  all  things  in 
Him, — such  are  the  "deas  which  grew  richer  anil 
more  distinct  in  the  mind  of  the  Apostle  as  he  medi 
tated  on  the  Gospel  which  he  had  been  preaching, 
and  the  truths  implied  in  it.  In  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians  this  Diviue  Headship  of  Christ  is  main- 


760 


PAUL 


lained  as  the  safeguard  against  the  fancies  which 
filled  the  heavens  with  secondary  divinities,  and 
which  laid  down  rules  for  an  artificial  sanctity  of 
men  upon  the  earth.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  the  eternity  and  universality  of  God's  redeem 
ing  purpose  in  Christ,  and  the  gathering  of  men 
unto  Him  as  His  members,  are  set  forth  as  gloriously 
revealed  in  the  Gospel.  In  both,  the  application  of 
the  truth  concerning  Christ  as  the  Image  of  God 
and  the  Head  of  men  to  the  common  relations  of 
human  life  is  dwelt  upon  in  detail. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  resembles  the 
Second  to  the  Corinthians  in  the  effusion  of  personal 
feeling,  but  differs  from  it  in  the  absence  of  all  sore 
ness.  The  Christians  at  Philippi  had  regarded  the 
Apostle  with  love  and  reverence  from  the  beginning, 
and  had  given  him  many  proofs  of  their  affection. 
They  hail  now  sent  him  a  contribution  towards  his 
maintenance  at  Rome,  such  as  we  must  suppose  him 
to  have  received  from  time  to  time  for  the  expenses 
of  "  his  own  hired  house."  The  bearer  of  this  con 
tribution  was  Epaphroditus,  an  ardent  friend  and 
fellow-labourer  of  St.  Paul,  who  had  fallen  sick  on 
the  journey  or  at  Rome  (Phil.  ii.  27).  The  Epistle 
was  written  to  be  conveyed  by  Epaphroditus  on  his 
return,  and  to  express  the  joy  with  which  St.  Paul 
had  received  the  kindness  of  the  Philippians.  He 
dwells  therefore  upon  their  fellowship  in  the  work 
of  spreading  the  Gospel,  a  work  in  which  he  was 
even  now  labouring,  and  scarcely  with  the  less  effect 
on  account  of  his  bonds.  His  imprisonment  had 
made  him  known,  and  had  given  him  fruitful  oppor 
tunities  of  declaring  his  Gospel  amongst  the  Impe 
rial  guard  (i.  13),  and  even  in  the  household  of  the 
Caesar  (iv.  22).  He  professes  his  undiminished 
sense  of  the  glory  of  following  Christ,  and  his  expec 
tation  of  an  approaching  time  in  which  the  Lord 
Jesus  should  be  revealed  from  heaven  as  a  deliverer. 
There  is  a  gracious  tone  running  through  this 
Epistle,  expressive  of  humility,  devotion,  kindness, 
delight  in  all  things  fair  and  good,  to  which  the 
favourable  circumstances  under  which  it  was  written 
gave  a  natural  occasion,  and  which  helps  us  to 
understand  the  kind  of  ripening  which  had  taken 
place  in  the  spirit  of  the  writer.  [PHILIPPIANS, 
EPISTLE  TO  THE.] 

In  this  Epistle  St.  Paul  twice  expresses  a  con 
fident  hope  that  before  long  he  may  be  able  to  visit 
the  Fhilippians  in  person  (i.  25,  oT5o  K.T.\.  ii.  24, 
vevoiOa  K.T.\.).  Whether  this  hope  was  fulfilled 
or  not,  belongs  to  a  question  which  now  presents 
itself  to  us,  and  which  has  been  the  occasion  of 
much  controversy.  According  to  the  general  opi 
nion,  the  Apostle  was  liberated  from  his  imprison 
ment  and  left  Rome,  soon  after  the  writing  of  the 
letter  to  the  Philippians,  spent  some  time  in  visits 
fcc  Greece,  Asia  Minor,  and  Spain,  returned  again  as 
a  prisoner  to  Rome,  and  was  put  to  death  there. 
In  opposition  to  this  view  it  is  maintained  by  some, 
that  he  was  never  liberated,  but  was  put  to  death 
at  Rome  at  an  earlier  period  than  is  commonly  sup 
posed.  The  arguments  addaced  in  favour  of  the 
common  view  are,  (1.)  the  hopes  expressed  by  St. 
Paul  of  visiting  Philippi  (already  named)  and  Colossae 
(Philemon  22) ;  (2.)  a  number  of  allusions  in  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  their  general  character ;  and 
(3.)  the  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  tradition.  The 
arguments  in  favour  of  the  singlt  imprisonment 
appear  to  be  wholly  negative,  and  to  aim  simply  at 
showing  that  there  is  no  proof  of  a  liberation,  or 
departure  from  Rome.  It  is  contended  that  St. 
Paul's  expectations  were  not  alwa.  s  realized,  and  | 


PAUL 

that  the  passages  from  Philemon  and  Philipuiam 
are  effectually  neutralized  by  Acts  xx.  25,  "  I  kiion 
that  ye  all  (at  Ephesus),  shall  see  my  face  no 
more ;"  inasmuch  as  the  supporters  of  thi;  ordinart 
view  hold  that  St.  Paul  went  again  to  Ephesus. 
This  is  a  fair  answer.  The  argument  from  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  is  met  most  simply  by  a  denial  of 
their  genuineness.  The  tradition  of  ecclesiastical 
antiquity  is  affirmed  to  have  no  real  weight. 

The  decision  must  turn  mainly  upon  the  view 
taken  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  It  is  true  that  there 
are  many  critics,  including  Wieseler  and  Dr.  David 
son,  who  admit  the  genuineness  of  these  Epistles, 
and  yet,  by  referring  1  Timothy  and  Titus  to  an 
earlier  period,  and  by  strained  explanations  of  the 
allusions  in  2  Timothy,  get  rid  of  the  evidence  they 
are  generally  understood  to  give  in  favour  of  a 
second  imprisonment.  The  voyages  required  by  the 
two  former  Epistles,  and  the  writing  if  them,  are 
placed  within  the  three  years  spent  chiefly  at  Ephe 
sus  (Acts  xx.  31).  But  the  hypothesis  of  voyages 
during  that  period  not  recorded  by  St.  Luke  is  just 
as  arbitrary  as  that  of  a  release  from  Rome,  which 
is  objected  to  expressly  because  it  is  arbitrary ;  and 
such  a  distribution  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  is  shown 
by  overwhelming  evidence  to  be  untenable.  The 
whole  question  is  discussed  in  a  masterly  and  de 
cisive  manner  by  Alford  in  his  Prolegomena  to  the 
Pastoral  Epistles.  ]f,  however,  these  Epistles  are 
not  accepted  as  genuine,  the  main  ground  for  the 
belief  iu  a  second  imprisonment  is  cut  away.  For 
a  special  consideration  of  the  Epistles,  let  the  reader 
refer  to  the  articles  on  TIMOTHY  and  TITUS. 

The  difficulties  which  have  induced  such  critics 
as  De  Wette  and  Ewald  to  reject  these  Epistles,  are 
not  inconsiderable,  and  will  force  themselves  upon 
the  attention  of  the  careful  student  of  St.  Paul. 
But  they  are  overpowered  by  the  much  greater  diffi 
culties  attending  any  hypothesis  which  assumes 
these  Epistles  to  be  spurious.  We  are  obliged  there 
fore  to  recognize  the  modifications  of  St.  Paul's 
style,  the  developments  in  the  history  of  the  Church, 
and  the  movements  of  various  persons,  which  have 
appeared  suspicious  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and 
Titus,  as  nevertheless  historically  true.  And  then 
without  encroaching  on  the  domain  of  conjecture, 
we  draw  the  following  conclusions.  (1.)  St.  Paul 
must  have  left  Rome,  and  visited  Asia  Minor  and 
Greece;  for  he  says  to  Timothy  (1  Tim.  i.  3),  "I 
besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus.  when  I  was 
setting  out  for  Macedonia."  After  being  once  at 
Ephesus,  he  was  purposing  to  go  there  again  (1  Tim. 
iv.  13),  and  he  spent  a  considerable  time  at  Ephesus 
(2  Tim.  i.  18).  (2.)  He  paid  a  visit  to  Crete,  and 
left  Titus  to  organize  Churches  there  (Titus  i.  5). 
He  was  intending  to  spend  a  winter  at  one  of  th» 
places  named  Nicopolis  (Tit.  iii.  12).  (3.)  He  tr? 
veiled  by  Miletus  (2  Tim.  iv.  20),  Troas  (2  Tim. 
iv.  13),  where  he  left  a  cloak  or  case,  and  some 
books,  and  Corinth  (2  Tim.  iv.  20).  (4.)  He  is  a 
prisoner  at  Rome,  "  suffering  unto  bonds  as  an  evil 
doer  "  (2  Tim.  ii.  9),  and  expecting  to  be  soon  con 
demned  to  death  (2  Tim.  iv.  6).  At  this  time  he 
felt  deserted  and  solitary,  having  only  Luke  of  hL- 
old  associates,  to  keep  him  company  ;  and  he  war 
very  anxious  that  Timothy  should  come  to  him 
without  delay  from  Ephesus,  and  bring  Mark  with 
him  (2  Tim.  i.  15,  iv.  16,  9-12). 

These  facts  may  be  amplified  by  probable  addi 
tions  from  conjecture  and  tradition.  There  aio 
strong  reasons  for  placing  the  three  Epistles  at  at 
advanced  a  date  as  possible,  and  not  Jar  from  cna 


PAUL 

mother.  The  peculiarities  of  style  and  diction  by  , 
which  these  are  distinguished  from  all  his  former 
Epistles,  the  affectionate  anxieties  of  an  eld  n».\ii  ,md 
the  glances  frequently  thrown  back  on  earlier  times 
and  scenes,  the  disposition  to  be  hortatory  rather  than 
speculative,  the  references  to  a  more  complete  and 
settled  organization  of  the  Church,  the  signs  of  a 
condition  tending  to  moral  corruption,  and  resem 
bling  that  described  in  the  apocalyptic  Letters  to  the 
Seven  Churches — would  incline  us  to  adopt  the 
latest  date  which  has  been  suggested  for  the  death 
of  St.  Paul,  so  as  to  interpose  as  much  time  as  pos 
sible  between  the  Pastoral  Epistles  and  the  former 
group.  Now  the  earliest  authorities  for  the  date  of 
St.  Paul's  death  are  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  who  place 
it,  the  one  (Chronic.  Ann.  2083)  in  the  13th,  the 
other  (Cat.  Script.  Eccl.  "Paulus")  in  the  14th 
year  of  Nero.  These  dates  would  allow  some  four 
or  five  years  between  the  First  Imprisonment  and 
the  Second.  During  these  years,  according  to  the 
general  belief  of  the  early  Church,  St.  Paul  accom 
plished  his  old  design  (Rom.  xv.  28)  and  visited 
Spain.  Ewald,  who  denies  the  genuineness  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  with  it  the  journeyings  in 
Greece  and  Asia  Minor,  believes  that  St.  Paul  was 
liberated  and  paid  this  visit  to  Spain  (Geschichte, 
vi.  pp.  621,  631,  632);  yielding  upon  this  point 
to  the  testimony  of  tradition.  The  first  writer 
quoted  in  support  of  the  journey  to  Spain  is 
one  whose  evidence  would  indeed  be  irresistible, 
if  the  language  in  which  it  is  expressed  were 
less  obscure.  Clement  of  Rome,  in  a  hortatory 
and  rather  rhetorical  passage  ( Ep.  1  ad  Cor.  c.  5) 
refers  to  St.  Paul  as  an  example  of  patience,  and 
mentions  that  he  preached  ev  re  rfj  a,i>aTo\rj  Kal 
fv  rfj  Svffft,  and  that  before  his  martyrdom  he 
went  eirl  rti  Ttppa  rfjs  Svtrfus.  It  is  probable, 
but  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  certain,  that  by  this 
expression,  "  the  goal  of  the  west,"  Clement  was  de 
scribing  Spain,  or  some  country  yet  more  to  the 
west.  The  next  testimony  labours  under  a  some 
what  similar  difficulty  from  the  imperfection  of  the 
text,  but  it  at  least  names  unambiguously  a  "  pro- 
lectionem  Pauli  ab  urbe  ad  Spaniam  proficiscentis." 
This  is  from  Muratori's  Fragment  on  the  Canon 
(Routh,  Bel.  Sac.  iv.  p.  1-12).  (See  the  passage 
quoted  and  discussed  in  Wieseler,  Chron.  Apost. 
Zeit.  p.  536,  &c.,  or  Alford,  iii.  p.  93.)  Afterwards 
Chrysostom  says  simply,  Mera  rb  yeveffQai  Hv 
'P(a/j.fj,  ira.\iv  els  rrjv  ~S.Tra.viav  &irri\9ei'  (on  2  Tim. 
iv.  20) ;  and  Jerome  speaks  of  St.  Paul  as  set  free 
by  Nero,  that  he  might  preach  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
"  in  Occidentis  quoque  partibus "  (Cat.  Script. 
Eccl.  "  Paulus  ").  Against  these  assertions  nothing 
is  produced,  except  the  absence  of  allusions  to  a 
journey  to  Spain  in  passages  from  some  of  the  fathers 
where  such  allusions  might  more  or  less  be  expected. 
Dr.  Davidson  (Introd.  New  Test.  iii.  15,  84)  gives 
a  long  list  of  critics  who  believe  in  St.  Paul's  re 
lease  from  the  first  imprisonment.  Wieseler  (p. 
521)  mentions  some  of  these,  with  references,  and 
adds  some  of  the  more  eminent  German  critics  who 
believe  with  him  in  but  one  imprisonment.  These 
include  Schrader,  Hemsen,  Winer,  and  Baur.  The 
only  English  name  of  any  weight  to  be  udded  to 
this  list  is  that  of  Dr.  Davidson. 

We  conclude  then,  that  after  a  wearing  impri 
sonment  of  two  years  or  more  at  Rome,  St.  Paul 


PAUL 


761 


p  For  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS,  see  the  article 
tinaer  that  head.  The  close  observation  of  the  life  ol 
St.  Paul  would  lead,  \vc  think,  to  the  conclusion,  that  tut 


was  set.  free,  and  spent  some  years  in  van  SUB  jour 
neyings  eastwards  and  westwards.  Towards  thi 
close  of  this  time  he  pours  out  the  warnings  of  his 
less  vigorous  but  still  brave  and  faithful  spirit  ic 
the  Letters  to  Timothy  and  Titup.  The  ^irst  to 
Timothy  and  that  to  Titus  were  evidently  written  at 
very  nearly  the  same  time.  After  these  were 
written,  he  was  apprehended  again  and  sent  to 
Rome.  As  an  eminent  Christian  teacher  St.  Paul 
was  now  in  a  far  more  dangerous  position  than  when 
he  was  first  brought  to  Rome.  The  Christians  haJ 
been  exposed  to  popular  odium  by  the  talse  charge 
of  being  concerned  in  the  great  Neronian  conflagra 
tion  of  the  city,  and  had  been  subjected  to  a  most 
cruel  persecution.  The  Apostle  appears  now  to 
have  been  treated,  not  as  an  honourable  state-pri 
soner,  but  as  a  felon  (2  Tim.  ii.  9).  But  he  was 
at  least  allowed  to  write  this  Second  Letter  to  his 
"  dearly  beloved  son  "  Timothy :  and  though  he  ex 
presses  a  confident  expectation  of  his  speedy  death, 
he  yet  thought  it  sufficiently  probable  that  it  might 
be  delayed  for  some  time,  to  warrant  him  in  urging 
Timothy  to  come  to  him  from  Ephesus.  Mean 
while,  though  he  felt  his  isolation,  he  was  not  in 
the  least  daunted  by  his  danger.  He  was  more 
than  ready  to  die  (iv.  6),  and  had  a  sustaining 
experience  of  not  being  deserted  by  his  Lord.  Once 
already,  in  this  second  imprisonment,  he  had  ap 
peared  before  the  authorities ;  and  "  the  Lord  then 
stood  by  him  and  strengthened  him,"  and  gave  him 
a  favourable  opportunity  for  the  one  thing  always 
nearest  to  his  heart,  the  public  declaration  of  his 
Gospel. 

This  Epistle,?  surely  no  unworthy  utterance  at 
such  an  age  and  in  such  an  hour  even  of  a  St.  Paul, 
brings  us,  it  may  well  be  presumed,  close  to  the 
end  of  his  life.  For  what  remains,  we  have  the 
concurrent  testimony  of  ecclesiastical  antiquity,  that 
he  was  beheaded  at  Rome,  about  the  same  time 
that  St.  Peter  was  crucified  there.  The  earliest 
allusion  to  the  death  of  St.  Paul  is  in  that  sentence 
from  Clemens  Romanus,  already  quoted,  M  ri> 
rep/j.a  TTJS  Sucrews  t\0i*>v  ical  /jiaprvpiiffa?  eirl  -riev 
riyovfj-evuv,  ovrus  ainr]\\dyri  TOV  K6fffi.ov,  which 
just  fails  of  giving  us  any  particulars  upon  which 
we  can  conclusively  rely.  The  next  authorities  are 
those  quoted  by  Eusebius  in  his  H.  E.  ii.  25.  Dio- 
nysius,  bishop  of  Corinth  (A.D.  170),  says  that  Peter 
and  Paul  went  to  Italy  and  taught  there  together, 
and  suffered  martyrdom  about  the  same  time.  This, 
like  most  of  the  statements  relating  to  the  death  e1 
St.  Paul,  is  mixed  up  with  the  tradition,  with  which 
we  are  not  here  immediately  concerned,  of  the  work 
of  St.  Peter  at  Rome.  Caius  of  Rome,  supposed  to 
be  wriling  within  the  2nd  century,  names  the  grave 
of  St.  Peter  on  the  Vatican,  and  that  of  St.  Paul 
on  the  Ostian  way.  Eusebius  himself  entirely 
adopts  the  tradition  that  St.  Paul  was  beheaded 
under  Nero  at  Rome.  Amongst  other  early  testi 
monies,  we  have  that  of  Tertullian,  who  says  (De 
Praescr.  Hacret.  36)  that  at  Rome  "  Petrus  pas- 
sioni  Dominicae  adequatur,  Paulus  Johannis  [the 
Baptist]  exitu  coronatur  ;"  and  that  of  Jerome  (Cat. 
Sc.  Paulus),  "  Hie  ergo  14to  Neronis  anno  (eodem 
die  quo  Petrus)  Romae  pro  Christo  capite  truncatus 
sepultusque  est,  in  via  Ostiensi."  It  would  be 
useless  to  enumerate  further  testimonies  of  what  is 
undisputed. 

thoughts  and  beliefs  of  that  Epistle,  to  whomsoever  tht 
composition  if  it  be  attributed,  are  by  no  means  alien  tc 
Uic  Apostle's  habits  of  mind. 


732 


PAUL 


It  would  also  be  beyond  the  scope  of  this  ar:icle 
to  attempt  to  exhibit  the  traces  of  St.  Paul's  Apo 
stolic  work  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  But  there 
is  one  indication,  so  exceptional  as  1o  deserve  special 
mention,  which  shows  that  the  difficulty  of  under 
standing  the  Gospel  of  St.  Paul  and  of  reconciling 
it  with  a  true  Judaism  was  very  early  felt.  This 
is  in  the  Apocryphal  wcrk  called  the  Clementines 
(T&  K\rtfjifVTia),  supposed  to  be  written  before  the 
end  of  the  2nd  century.  These  curious  composi 
tions  contain  direct  assaults  (for  though  the  name 
is  not  given,  the  references  are  plain  and  undis 
guised),  upon  the  authority  and  the  character  of  St. 
Paul.  St.  Peter  is  represented  as  the  true  Apostle, 
of  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  of  the  Jews,  and  St.  Paul 
as  6  tx^pb*  &v9po>iros,  who  opposes  St.  Peter  and 
St.  James.  The  portions  of  the  Clementines  which 
illustrate  the  writer's  view  of  St.  Paul  will  be 
found  in  Stanley's  Corinthians  (Introd.  to  2  Cor.)  ; 
and  an  account  of  the  whole  work,  with  references 
to  the  treatises  of  Schliemann  and  Baur,  in  Gieseler, 
Eccl.  Hist.  i.  §58. 

Chronology  of  St.  Paul's  Life. — It  is  usual  to 
distinguish  between  the  internal  or  absolute,  and 
the  external  or  relative,  chronology  of  St.  Paul's 
life.  The  former  is  that  which  we  have  hitherto 
followed.  It  remains  to  mention  the  points  at 
which  the  N.  T.  history  of  the  Apostle  comes  into 
contact  with  the  outer  history  of  the  world.  There 
are  two  principal  events  which  serve  as  fixed  dates 
for  determining  the  Pauline  chronology — the  death 
of  Herod  Agrippa,  and  the  accession  of  Festus ;  and 
of  these  the  latter  is  by  far  the  more  important. 
The  time  of  this  being  ascertained,  the  particulars 
given  in  the  Acts  enable  us  to  date  a  considerable 
portion  of  St.  Paul's  life.  Now  it  has  been  proved 
almost  to  certainty  that  Felix  was  recalled  from 
Judaea  and  succeeded  by  Festus  in  the  year  60 
(Wieseler,  pp.  66,  &c. ;  Conybeare  and  Howson,  ii. 
note  C  ).  in  the  autumn,  then,  of  A.D.  60  St.  Paul 
left  Caesarea.  In  the  spring  of  61  he  arrived  at 
Kome.  There  he  lived  two  years,  that  is,  till  the 
spring  of  63,  with  much  freedom  in  his  own  hired 
house.  After  this  we  depend  upon  conjecture;  but 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  give  us  reasons,  as  we  have 
seen,  for  deferring  the  Apostle's  death  until  67,  with 
Kusebius,  or  68,  with  Jerome.  Similarly  we  can 
go  backwards  from  A.D.  60.  St.  Paul  was  two 
years  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.  27)  ;  therefore  he 
arrived  at  Jerusalem  on  his  last  visit  by  the  Pente 
cost  of  58.  Before  this  he  had  wintered  at  Corinth 
(Acts  xx.  2,  3),  having  gone  from  Ephesus  to 
Greece.  He  left  Ephesus,  then,  in  the  latter  part 
of  57,  and  as  he  stayed  3  years  at  Ephesus 
(Acts  xx.  31),  he  must  have  come  thither  in  54. 
Previously  to  this  journey  he  had  spent  "  some 
time"  at  Antioch  (Acts  xviii.  23),  and  our  chro 
nology  becomes  indeterminate.  We  can  only  add 
together  the  time  of  a  hasty  visit  to  Jerusalem, 
tlitr  travels  of  the  great  second  missionary  journey, 
which  included  1J  year  at  Corinth,  another  inde 
terminate  stay  at  Autioch,  the  important  third  visit 
to  Jerusalem,  another  "  long"  residence  at  Antioch 
(Acts  xiv.  28),  the  first  missionary  journey,  again 
.\n  indeterminate  stay  at  Antioch  (Acts  xii.  25) — 
until  we  come  to  the  second  visit  to  Jerusalem, 
which  nearly  synchronised  with  the  death  of  Herod 
Agrippa,  in  A.D.  44  (Wieseler,  p.  130).  Within 
this  interval  of  some  10  years  the  most  important 
date  to  fix  is  that  of  the  third  visit  to  Jerusalem ; 
and  there  is  a  great  concurrence  of  the  best  autho- 
rAws  in  placing  this  visit  in  either  50  or  51. 


c'AUL 

St.  Paul  himself  usl.  ii.  1)  places  this  visit  *  14 
years  after  "  either  his  conversion  or  the  Hn>t  v  i»ii 
In  the  former  case  we  have  37  or  Ii8  for  the  date 
of  the  conversion.  The  conversion  was  followwi 
by  3  years  (Gal.  i.  18)  spent  in  Arabia  and  Da 
mascus,  and  ending  with  the  fii-st  visit  to  Jeru 
salem  ;  and  the  space  between  the  first  visit  (40 
or  41)  and  the  second  (44  or  45)  is  filled  up  by  an 
indeterminate  time,  presumably  2  or  3  /ears,  at 
Tai-sus  (Acts  ix.  30),  and  1  year  at  Antioch  (Acti 
xi.  26).  The  date  of  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen 
can  only  be  conjectured,  and  is  very  variously 
placed  between  A.D.  30  and  the  year  of  St.  Paul's 
conversion.  In  the  account  of  the  death  of  Stephen 
St.  Paul  is  called  "  a  young  man  "  (Acts  vii.  58). 
It  is  not  improbable  therefore  that  he  was  bora 
between  A.D.  0  and  A.D.  5,  so  that  he  might  be 
past  60  years  of  age  when  he  calls  himself  "  Paul 
the  aged "  in  Philemon  9.  More  detailed  conjec 
tures  will  be  found  in  almost  every  writer  on  St. 
Paul.  Comparative  chronological  tables  (showing 
the  opinions  of  30  and  34  critics)  are  given  by 
Wieseler  and  Davidson ;  tables  of  events  only  by 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  Alford,  Jowett,  and  many 
others. 

Personal  Appearance  and  Cfiaracter  of  St.  Paul. 
— We  have  no  very  trustworthy  sources  of  inform 
ation  as  to  the  personal  appearance  of  St.  Paul. 
Those  which  we  have  are  referred  to  and  quoted 
in  Conybeare  and  Howson  (i.  oh.  7,  end).  They  arc 
the  early  pictures  and  mosaics  described  by  Mrs. 
Jameson,  and  passages  from  Malalas,  Nicephorus, 
and  the  apocryphal  Acta  Pauli  et  Theclae  (con 
cerning  which  see  also  Conybearc  and  Howson,  i. 
197).  They  all  agree  in  ascribing  to  the  Apostle 
a  short  stature,  a  long  face  with  high  forehead,  an 
aquiline  nose,  close  and  prominent  eyebrows.  Other 
characteristics  mentioned  are  baldness,  gray  eyes, 
a  clear  complexion,  and  a  winning  expression.  01 
his  temperament  and  character  St.  Paul  is  himself 
the  best  painter.  His  speeches  and  letters  convey 
to  us,  as  we  read  them,  the  truest  impressions  of 
those  qualities  which  helped  to  make  him  The  great 
Apostle.  We  perceive  the  warmth  and  ardour  of 
his  nature,  his  deeply  affectionate  disposition,  the 
tenderness  of  his  sense  of  honour,  the  courtesy  and 
personal  dignity  of  his  bearing,  his  perfect  fearless 
ness,  his  heroic  endurance ;  we  perceive  the  rare 
combination  of  subtlety,  tenacity,  and  versatility  in 
his  intellect ;  we  perceive  also  a  practical  wisdom 
which  we  should  have  associated  with  a  cooler  tern* 
perament.  and  a  tolerance  which  is  seldom  united 
with  such  impetuous  convictions.  And  the  principle 
which  harmonised  all  these  endowments  and  directed 
them  to  a  practical  end  was,  beyond  dispute,  a 
knowledge  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Divine  Spirit. 
Personal  allegiance  to  Christ  as  to  a  living  Master, 
with  a  growing  insight  into  the  relation  of  Christ 
to  each  man  and  to  the  world,  carried  the  Apostle 
forwards  on  a  straight  course  through  every  vicissi 
tude  of  personal  fortunes  and  amidst  the  various', 
habits  of  thought  which  he  had  to  encounter.  Tli*? 
conviction  that  he  had  been  entrusted  with  a  Gospel, 
concerning  a  Lord  and  Deliverer  of  men  was  what 
sustained  and  purified  his  love  for  his  own  people^ 
whilst  it  created  in  him  such  a  love  for  mankind 
that  he  only  knew  himself  as  the  servant  of  other* 
for  Christ's  sake. 

A  remarkable  attempt  has  recently  been  ni;ule  b  •. 
Professor  Jowett,  in  his  Commentary  on  some  «of 
the  Epistles,  to  qualify  what  lie  considers  to  !*•  tl-,e 
blind  and  midiscriminatiug  admiratio  of  St.  Paurl. 

V 


PAUL 

fcy  representing  him  as  having  bppji.  with  all  his 
excellences,  a  man  "  whose  appearance  uiid  dis 
course  made  an  impression  of  feebleness,"  "  out  of 
harmony  with  life  and  nature,"  a  confused  thinker, 
uttering  himself  "in  broken  words  and  hesitating 
forms  of  speech,  with  no  beauty  or  comeliness  of 
style,"  and  so  undecided  in  his  Christian  belief  that 
he  was  preaching,  iu  the  14th  year  after  his  con 
version,  a  Gospel  concerning  Christ  which  he  him 
self,  in  four  years  more,  confessed  to  have  been 
carnal.  In  these  paradoxical  views,  however,  Pro 
fessor  Jowett  stands  almost  alone :  the  result  of  the 
freest,  as  of  the  most  reverent,  of  the  numerous  recent 
studies  of  St.  Paul  and  his  works  (amongst  which 
Professor  Jowett's  own  Commentary  is  one  of  the 
most  interesting)  having  been  only  to  add  an  inde 
pendent  tribute  to  the  ancient  admiration  of  Chris 
tendom.  Those  who  judge  St.  Paul  as  they  would 
judge  any  other  remarkable  man  confess  him  unani 
mously  to  have  been  "  one  of  the  greatest  spirits  of 
all  time ;"  whilst  those  who  believe  him  to  have  been 
appointed  by  the  Lord  of  mankind,  and  inspired  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  to  do  a  work  in  the  worM  of  almost 
unequalled  importance,  are  lost  in  wonder  as  they 
study  the  gifts  with  which  he  was  endowed  for 
Hat  work,  and  the  sustained  devotion  with  which 
he  gave  himself  to  it. 

Modern  Authorities. — It  has  not  been  thought 
necessaiy  to  load  the  pages  of  this  article  with 
references  to  the  authors  about  to  be  mentioned, 
because  in  each  of  them  it  is  easy  for  the  student 
to  turn  at  once  to  any  part  of  St.  Paul's  life  or 
writings  with  regard  to  which  he  may  desire  to 
consult  them.  A  very  long  catalogue  might  be 
made  of  authors  who  have  written  on  St.  Paul ; 
amongst  whom  the  following  may  be  recommended 
as  of  some  independent  value.  In  English,  the 
work  of  Messrs.  Conybeare  and  Howson,  on  the 
Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  is  at  once  the  most 
comprehensive  and  the  most  popular.  Amongst 
Commentaries,  those  of  Professor  Jowett  on  the 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians,  and  Ro 
mans,  and  of  Professor  Stanley  on  the  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians,  are  expressly  designed  to  throw 
light  on  the  Apostle's  character  and  work.  The 
general  Commentaries  of  Dean  Alford  and  Dr. 
Wordsworth  include  abundant  matter  upon  every- 
tning  relating  to  St.  Paul.  So  does  Dr.  Davidson's 
Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  which  gives 
also  in  great  profusion  the  opinions  of  all  former 
critics,  English  and  foreign.  Paley's  well-known 
Horae  Paulinae ;  Mr.  Smith's  work  on  the  Voyage 
and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul ;  Mr.  Tate's  Continuous 
History  of  St.  Paul ;  and  Mr.  Lewin's  St.  Paul, 
are  exclusively  devoted  to  Pauline  subjects.  Of 
,he  older  works  by  commentators  and  others, 
which  are  thoroughly  sifted  by  more  recent 
writers,  it  may  be  sufficient  to  mention  a  book 
which  had  a  great  reputation  in  the  last  century, 
that  of  Lord  Lyttelton  on  the  Conversion  of  St. 
Paul.  Amongst  German  critics  and  historians  the 
following  may  be  named : — Ewald,  in  his  Geschichte 
des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  vi.,  and  his  Sendschreiben 
des  Apostels  Paul  us ;  Wieseler,  Chronologic  des 


PEACOCKS  763 

Apostotischen  Zeitalters,  which  is  universally  ac 
cepted  as  the  best  work  on  the  chronology  of  St. 
Paul's  life  and  times ;  De  Wette,  in  his  Einleitung 
and  his  Exegetisches  Handbuch;  Neander,  Pflan- 
zung  und  Leitung  der  Christl.  Eirche ;  works  on 
Paulus,  by  Baur,  Hemsen,  Schrader,  Schnecken- 
burger ;  and  the  Commentaries  of  Olshausen,  Meyer 
&c.  In  French,  the  work  of  Salvador  on  Jesus 
Christ  et  sa  Doctrine,  in  the  chapter  St.  Paul  et 
I'Eglise,  gives  the  view  of  a  modern  Jew  ;  and  the 
Discourses  on  St.  Paul,  by  M.  de  Pressense,  are 
able  and  eloquent.  [J.  LI.  D.] 

PAVEMENT.     [GABBATHA.] 

PAVILION.  1.  Soc*  properly  an  enclosed 
place,  also  rendered  "  tabernacle,"  "  covert,"  and 
"  den,"  once  only  "  pavilion"  (Ps.  xxvii.  5). 

2.  Succdh*  usually  "  tabernacle  "  and  "  booth." 

[SUCCOTII.] 

3.  Shaphrurf  and  Shaphrtr,  a  word  used  once 
only  in  Jer.  xliii.  10,  to  signify  glory  or  splendour, 
and  hence  probably  to  be  understood  of  the  splendid 
covering  of  the  royal  throne.     It  is  explained  by 
Jarchi  and  others  "  a  tent."  [TENT.]   [H.  W.  P.] 

PEACOCKS  (D^n  and  D«3-in,  tucdyyim : 
rauvfs :  pavi).  Amongst  the  natural  products  of 
the  land  of  Tarshish  which  Solomon's  fleet  brought 
home  to  Jerusalem  mention  is  made  of  "  peacocks :" 
for  there  ron,  we  think,  be  no  doubt  at  all  that  the 
A.  V.  is  correct  in  thus  rendering  tucciyyim,  which 
word  occurs  only  in  1  K.  x.  22,  and  2  Chr.  ix.  21 ; 
most  of  the  old  versions,  with  several  of  the  Jewish 
Rabbis  being  in  favour  of  this  translation.  Some 
writers  have,  however,  been  dissatisfied  with  the 
rendering  of  "  peacocks,"  and  have  proposed  "  par 
rots,"  as  Huet  (Diss.  de  Nav.  Sal.  7,  §6)  and  one 
or  two  others.  Keil  (Diss.  de  Ophir.  p.  1 04,  ana 
Comment,  on  1  K.  x.  22),  with  a  view  to  support 
his  theory  that  Tarshish  is  the  old  Phoenician  Tar- 
tessus  in  Spain,  derives  the  Hebrew  name  from 
Tucca,  a  town  of  Mauretania  and  Numidia,  and 
concludes  that  the  "Aves  Numidicae"  (Guinea 
Vowls)  are  meant:  which  birds,  however,  in  spite 
of  their  name,  never  existed  in  Numidia,  nor  within 
a  thousand  miles  of  that  country ! 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Hebrew  word 
is  of  foreign  origin.  Gesenius  (Thcs.  p.  1502} 
cites  many  authorities  to  prove  that  the  tuccl 
is  to  be  traced  to  the  Tamul  or  Malabaric  toyei, 
"  peacock :"  which  opinion  has  been  recently  con 
firmed  by  Sir  E.  Tennent  (Ceylon,  ii,  p.  102,  and  i. 
p.  xx.  3rd  ed.),  who  says,  "  It  is  very  remarkable 
that  the  terms  by  which  these  articles  (ivory,  apes, 
and  peacocks)  are  designated  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip 
tures,  are  identical  with  the  Tamil  names,  by  which 
some  of  them  are  called  in  Ceylon  to  the  present 
day, — tukeyim  may  be  recognized  in  tokei,  the 
modern  name  for  these  birds."  Thus  Keil's  objec 
tion  "that  this  supposed  toget  is  not  yet  itself 
sufficiently  ascertained "  (Comment,  on  1  K.  x.  22) 
is  satisfactorily  met.d 

Peacocks  are  called  "  Persian  birds"  by  Aristo 
phanes,  Aves,  484 ;  see  also  Acharn.  63 ;  Diod.  Sic. 
ii.  53. 


a  "HO'  fr°m  "*pD,  "enclose"  (Ges.  952);  axTjnj ;  ta- 
l/ernaculiim,. 

b  H3D,  from  same  root ;  <TK:T)ITJ  ;  tabernacvlu,m ;  also 
2  S:im.  xxil.  12,  latibuium.  In  1  K.  xx.  16,  2oicx«W. 
•Miiliraculum. 

l  Kcri  "V"W  (Ues  1469). 


d  The  Hebrew  names  for  apes  and  ivory  are  clearly 
traceable  to  the  Sanscrit ;  but  though  togei  docs  not  ap 
pear  in  Sanscrit,  it  has  been  derived  from  the  Sanserif 
word  t'ikhin,  meaning  furnished  with  a  crest.  (Mur. 
Miiller,  Science  of  Language,  p.  190). 


754 


PEAUL 


Peacock*  were  doubtless  introduced  into  Persia 
from  India  or  Ceyion  ;  perhaps  their  first"  intro 
duction  dates  from  the  time  of  Solomon  ;  and 
they  gradually  extended  into  Greece,  Home,  and 
Europe  generally.  The  ascription  of  the  quality  of 
vanity  to  the  peacock  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Aris 
totle,  who  says  (Hist.  An.  i.  1,  §15),  "Some 
animals  are  jealous  and  vain  like  the  peacock." 
The  A.V.  in  Job  xxxix.  13,  speaks  of"  the  goodly 
wings  of  the  peacocks  ;  "  but  this  is  a  different 
Hebrew  word,  and  has  undoubted  reference  to  the 
"ostrich."  [W.  H.] 


PEARL  (B»33,  gdbish:    ya0ts:   eminentia). 

The  Heb.  word  occurs,  in  this  form,  only  m  Job 
xxviii.  18,  where  the  price  of  wisdom  is  contrasted 
with  that  of  rdrndth  ("  coral  ")  and  gdbish  ;  and 
the  same  word,  with  the  addition  of  the  syllable 

el  (*?N),  is  found  in  Ez.  xiii.  11,  13,  xxxviii.  22, 

with  abne,  "  stones,"  i.  e.  "  stones  of  ice."  The 
ancient  versions  contribute  nothing  by  way  of 
explanation.  Schultens  (Comment,  in  Job,  1.  c.) 
leaves  the  word  untranslated  :  he  gives  the  signi 
fication  of  "  pearls  "  to  the  Heb.  term  peninim 
(A.  V.  "  rubies  ")  which  occurs  in  the  same  verse. 
Gesenius,  Fiirst,  Rosenmiiller,  Maurer,  and  com 
mentators  generally,  understand  "  crystal  "  by  the 
term,  on  account  of  its  resemblance  to  ice.  Lee 
(Comment,  on  Job,  1.  c.)  translates  rdmot/i  vcgabisli 
"  things  high  and  massive."  Carey  renders  gabish 
by  "  inother-of-pearl,"  though  he  is  by  no  means 
content  with  this  explanation.  On  the  whole  the 
balance  of  probability  is  in  favour  of  "  crystal," 
since  gabish  denotes  "ice"  (not  "hailstones,"  as 
Carey  supposes,  without  the  addition  of  abne, 
"  stones  ")  in  the  passages  of  Ezekiel  where  the 
word  occurs.  There  is  nothing  to  which  ice  can  be 
so  well  compared  as  to  crystal.  The  objection  to 
this  interpretation  is  that  crystal  is  not  an  article 
of  much  value  ;  but  perhaps  reference  may  here  be 
made  to  the  beauty  and  pure  lustre  of  rock  crystal. 
or  this  substance  may  by  the  ancient  Orientals  have 
been  held  in  high  esteem. 

Pearls  (papy  apt-rat),  however,  are  frequently 
mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  :  comp.  Matt.  xiii.  45,  46, 
where  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened  unto  "  a 
merchant-man  seeking  goodly  pearls."  Pearls  formed 
part  of  women's  attire  (1  Tim.  ii.  9  ;  Rev.  xvii.  4). 
"  The  twelve  gates  "  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem 
were  twelve  pearls  (Rev.  xxi.  21)  ;  perhaps  "  mother- 
of-pearl  "  is  here  more  especially  intended. 

Pearls  are  found  inside  the  shells  of  various  species 
of  Hollusca.  They  are  formed  by  the  deposit  of  the 
nacreous  substance  around  .  some  foreign  body  as  a 
nucleus.  The  Unio  margaritiferus,  Mytilus  edulis, 
Ostrea  edulis,  of  our  own  country,  occasionally  fur 
nish  pearls  ;  but  "  the  pearl  of  great  price  "  is 
doubtless  a  fine  specimen  yielded  by  the  pearl  oyster 
(Avicula  margaritifera)  still  found  in  abundance 
in  the  Persian  Gulf,  which  has  long  been  celebrated 
for  its  pearl  fisheries.  In  Matt.  vii.  6  pearls  are 
used  metaphorically  for  any  thing  of  value;  or 
perhaps  more  especially  for  "  wise  sayings,"  which 
in  Arabic,  according  to  Schultens  (Hariri  Consess. 
i.  12,  ii.  102),  are  called  pearls.  (See  Parkham, 
Gr.  Lex.  s.  v.  Mapyapiriis.  As  to  D'O'JQ,  see 
RUBIES.)  [W.  H. 

PED'AHEL(^rn3:  *aSar)\:  Phedael).  The 
w.n  of  Ammihud,  and  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Naph- 
tali  'vNtim.  xxxiv.  28)  .  one  of  the  twe 


PEKAH 

to  divide  the  land  west  of  Jordan  among  the  iiiue 
and  a  half  tribes. 


PEDAH'ZUR  O-lYrnS  :  *uSa<T<rovp  :  Pkad- 

assur).  Father  of  Gamaliel,  the  chief  of  th.>  trib- 
of  Manasseh  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (Num.  i 
10,  ii.  20,  vii.  54,  59,  x.  23). 

PEDAI'AH  (iV-JB  :  *a5ai'\;  Alex.  Eif$Si\d: 

Phadaia).  I.  The  father  of  Zebudah,  mother  of 
king  Jehoiakim  (2  K.  xxiii.  36).  lie  is  described 
as  "  of  Rumah,"  which  has  not  with  certainty  betoi 
identified. 

2.  (*a5afas).  The  brother  of  Salathiel,  or  Sheal- 
tiel,  and  father  of  Zerubbabel,  who  is  usually  called 
the  "  son  of  Shealtiel,"  being,  as  Lord  A.  Hervey 
(Genealogies,  p.  100)  conjectures,  in  reality,  his 
uncle's  successor  and  heir,  in  consequence  of  the 
failure  of  issue  in  the  direct  line  (1  Chr.  iii.  17-19). 

3.  (*a5afa).     Son  of  Parosh,  that  is,  one  of  the 
family  of  that  name,  who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  re 
pairing  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  25). 

4.  (*aScuas).    Apparently  a  priest  ;  one  of  those 
who  stood  on  the  left  hand  of  Ezra,  when  he  read 
the  law  to  the  people  (Neh.  viii.  4).    In  1  Esdr.  ix. 
44,  he  is  called  PHALDAIUS. 

5.  (*a5afa;   F.A.  4>aAa<a).     A  Benjamite,  ait- 
cestor  of  Sallu  (Neh.  xi.  7). 

6.  (*a5erfa).  A  Levite  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah 
appointed  by  him  one  of  the  "  treasurers  over  th« 
treasury,"  whose  office  it  was  "  to  distribute  untc 
their  brethren"  (Neh.  xiii.  13). 

7.  (-inH^  :  *a8ttfo  ;  Alex.  *aA.Su.)  The  fether 
of  Joel,  prince  of  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  in  the 
reign  of  David  (1  Chi-,  xxvii.  20). 

PE'KAH  (nj?3:  *a/c€e  :  *cute'as,  Joseph.: 
Phaceae),  son  of  Remaliah,  originally  a  captain  of 
Pekahiah  king  of  Israel,  murdered  his  master,  seized 
the  throne,  and  became  the  18th  sovereign  (and  last 
but  one)  of  the  northern  kingdom.  His  native  coun 
try  was  probably  Gilead,  as  fifty  Gileadites  joined  him 
in  the  conspiracy  against  Pekahiah  ;  and  if  so,  he  fur 
nishes  an  instance  of  the  same  undaunted  energy 
which  distinguished,  for  good  or  evil,  so  many  of  the 
Israelites  who  spi-ang  from  that  country,  of  which 
Jephthah  and  Elijah  were  the  most  famous  exam 
ples  (Stanley,  S.  £  P.  327).  [ELIJAH.]  Under  his 
predecessors  Israel  had  been  much  weakened  through 
the  payment  of  enormous  tribute  to  the  Assyrians 
(see  especially  2  K.  xv.  20),  and  by  internal  waif 
and  conspiracies.  Pekah  seems  steadily  to  have  ap 
plied  himself  to  the  restoration  of  its  power.  Fo; 
this  purpose  he  sought  for  the  support  of  a  foreign 
alliance,  and  fixed  his  mind  on  the  plunder  of  thf 
sister  kingdom  of  Judah.  He  must  have  made  the 
treaty  by  which  he  proposed  to  share  its  spoil  with 
Rezin  king  of  Damascus,  when  Jotham  was  still  on 
the  throne  of  Jerusalem  (2  K.  xv.  37)  ;  but  its  exe 
cution  was  long  delayed,  probably  in  consequence 
of  that  prince's  righteous  and  vigorous  administra 
tion  (2  Chr.  xxvii.).  When,  however,  his  weak  son 
Ahaz  succeeded  to  the  crown  of  David,  the  allies 
no  longer  hesitated,  and  formed  the  siege  of  Jeru 
salem.  The  history  of  the  war,  which  is  sketched 
under  AHAZ,  is  found  in  2  K.  xvi.  and  '_'  Chr. 
xxviii.  ;  and  in  the  latter  (ver.  6)  we  read  thuf 
Pekah  "  slew  in  Judah  one  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand  in  one  day,  which  were  all  valiant  mt>n," 
a  statement  which,  even  if  we  should  1*  obliged  tt 
diminish  the  uumbornow  read  in  the  text,  from  the 
uiuvi  tainty  as  to  numbers  attaching  to  our  prebcxil 


PEKAHIAH 

MSS.  of  the  books  of  Chronicles  (ABIJAII  ;  CHRO- 
NICLICS;  Kennbott,  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Tes 
tament  Considered,  p.  532),  proves  that  the  charac 
ter  of  his  warfare  was  in  full  accordance  with  Gi- 
leodite  precedents  (Judg.  xi.  33,  xii.  6).  The  war 
is  famous  as  the  occasion  of  the  great  prophecies  in 
Isaiah  vii.-ix.  Its  chief  result  was  the  capture  of 
the  Jewish  port  of  Elath  on  the  Red  Sea ;  but  the 
unnatural  alliance  of  Damascus  and  Samaria  was 
punished  through  the  final  overthrow  of  the  fero 
cious  confederates  by  Tiglath-pileser,  king  of  Assy 
ria,  whom  Ahaz  called  to  his  assistance,  and  who 
seized  the  opportunity  of  adding  to  his  own  domi 
nions  and  crushing  a  union  which  might  have  been 
dangerous.  The  kingdom  of  Damascus  was  finally 
suppressed,  and  Rezin  put  to  death,  while  Pekah  was 
deprived  of  at  least  half  of  his  kingdom,  including  all 
i.he  northern  portion,  and  the  whole  district  to  the 
east  of  Jordan.  For  though  the  writer  in  2  K.  xv.  29 
tells  us  that  Tiglath-pileser  "  took  Ijon,  and  Abel- 
beth-maachah,  and  Janoah,  and  Kedesh,  and  Hazor, 
and  Gilead,  and  Galilee,  all  the  land  of  Naphtali," 
yet  from  comparing  1  Chr.  v.  26,  we  find  that 
Gilead  must  include  "  the  Reubenites  and  the  Gad- 
ites  and  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh."  The  inha 
bitants  were  carried  off,  according  to  the  usual 
practice,  and  settled  in  remote  districts  of  Assyria. 
Pekah  himself,  now  fallen  into  the  position  of  an 
Assyrian  vassal,  was  of  coui~se  compelled  to  abstain 
from  further  attacks  on  Judah.  Whether  his  con 
tinued  tyranny  exhausted  the  patience  of  his  sub 
jects,  or  whether  his  weakness  emboldened  them  to 
atUck  him,  we  do  not  know ;  but,  from  one  or  the 
other  cause,  Hoshea  the  son  of  Elah  conspired 
against  him,  and  put  him  to  death.  Joseph  us 
says  that  Hoshea  was  his  friend  (<pl\ov  rivbs  lirt- 
/3ov\€vffai'TOS  avr$,  Ant.  is.  13,  §1).  Comp.  Is. 
vii.  16,  which  prophecy  Hoshea  was  instrumental  in 
fulfilling.  [HOSHEA.]  Pekah  ascended  the  throne 
B.C.  757.  He  must  have  begun  to  war  against 
Judah  B.C.  740,  and  was  killed  B.C.  737.  The  or 
der  of  events  above  given  is  according  to  the  scheme 
of  Ewald's  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  vol.  iii. 
p.  602.  Mr.  Rawlinson  (Hampton  Lectures  for 
1859,  Lect.  iv.)  seems  wrong  in  assuming  two  in 
vasions  of  Israel  by  the  Assyrians  in  Pekah's  time, 
the  one  corresponding  to  2  K.  xv.  29,  the  other  to 
2  K.  xvi.  7-9.  Both  these  narratives  refer  to  the 
same  event,  which  in  the  first  place  is  mentioned 
briefly  in  the  short  sketch  of  Pekah's  reign,  while, 
in  the  second  passage,  additional  details  are  given  in 
the  longer  biography  of  Ahaz.  It  would  have  been 
scarcely  possible  for  Pekah,  when  deprived  of  half 
his  kingdom,  to  make  an  alliance  with  Rezin,  and 
to  attack  Ahaz.  We  learn  further  from  Mr.  Raw- 
liuson  that  the  conquests  of  Tiglath-pileser  ;ire 
mentioned  in  an  Assyrian  fragment,  though  there 
is  a  difficulty,  from  the  occurrence  of  the  name 
Menahem  in  the  inscription,  which  may  have  pro 
ceeded  from  a  mistake  of  the  engraver.  Comp. 
the  title,  son  of  Khumri  (Omri),  assigned  to  Jehu 
in  another  inscription  ;  and  see  Rawlinson,  note  35 
on  Lect.  iv.  As  may  be  inferred  from  Pekah's 
alliance  with  Rezin,  his  government  was  no  im 
provement,  morally  and  religiously,  on  that  of  his 
predecessors.  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 

PEKAHI'AH    (rVHjpS,    *o/ceo-iaj;    Alex.: 

taKfias  '.  Phaceja},  son  and  successor  of  Menahem, 
was  the  17th  king  of  the  separate  kingdom  of  Israel. 
After  a  brief  reign  of  scarcely  two  years,  a  con- 
ipiraoy  was  organized  against  him  by  "  one  of  his 


PELEG 


765 


stains'  (probably  ca  his  body  guard),  Pekah, 
so"  ft'  Remaliah,  and  who,  at  the  head  of  fifty 
Gileadites,  attacked  him  in  his  palace,  murdered 
him  and  his  friends  Argob  and  Arieh,  and  seized 
the  throne.  The  date  of  his  accession  is  B.C.  759, 
of  his  death  757.  Thjs  reign  w;is  no  better  than 
those  which  had  gone  before  ;  and  the  calf-worship 
was  retained  (2  K.  xv.  22-26).  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 

PEKO'D  (tipS),  an  appellative  applied  to  the 
Chaldaeans.  It  occurs  only  twice,  viz.  in  Jer.  1. 
21,  and  Ez.  xxiii.  23,  in  the  latter  of  which  it  is 
connected  with  Shoa  and  Koa,  as  though  these  three 
were  in  some  way  subdivisions  of  "  the  Babylonians 
and  all  the  Chaldaeans."  Authorities  are  undecided 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  term.  It  is  apparently 
connected  with  the  root  pakad,  "  to  visit,"  and  in 
its  secondary  senses  "to  punish,"  and  "to  appoint 
a  ruler  :"  hence  Pekod  may  be  applied  to  Babylon 
in  Jer.  1.  as  significant  of  its  impending  punishment, 
as  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.  "  visitation."  But 
this  sense  will  not  suit  the  other  passage,  and  hence 
Gesenius  here  assigns  to  it  the  meaning  of  "  prefect  " 
(  Thes.  p.  1  121),  as  though  it  were  but  another  form 
of  pdkid.  It  certainly  is  unlikely  that  the  same 
word  would  be  applied  to  the  same  object  in  two 
totally  different  senses.  Hitzig  seeks  for  the  origin 
of  the  word  in  the  Sanscrit  bhavdn,  "noble"  — 
Shoa  and  Koa  being  respectively  "prince"  and 
"  lord;"  and  he  explains  its  use  in  Jer.  1.  as  a  part 
for  the  whole.  The  LXX.  treats  it  as  the  name  of 
a  district  (*a/co<5«  ;  Alex.  *<>uS)  in  Ezekiel,  and  as 
a  verb  (eJcStKijo-op)  in  Jeremiah.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PELAI'AH  (rn6a  :  LXX.  om.  in  Neh.  viii., 
*eAfa  ;  Alex.  *eA«ta  :  Phalaia).  1.  A  son  of  Eli- 
senai,  one  of  the  last  members  of  the  royal  line  of 
Judah  (1  Chr.  iii.  24). 

2.  One  of  the  Levites  who  assisted  Ezra  in  ex 
pounding  the  law  (Neh.  viii.  7).  He  afterwards 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  i.  10). 
He  is  called  BIATAS  in  1  Esdr.  ix.  48. 


:   Phelelia}. 

The  son  of  Amzi,  and  ancestor  of  Adaiah  a  priest  at 
Jerusalem  after  the  return  from  Babylon  (Neh. 
xi.  12). 

PELATI'AH  (nn?^S  :  *o\6TT»'a:  Phaltias). 
1.  Son  of  Hananiah  the  son  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr. 
iii.  21).  In  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  he  is  further 
described  as  the  father  of  Jesaiah. 

2.  (*o\a«TT(o;  Alex.  ^aXcrrla).     One  of  the 
captains  of  the  marauding  band  of  five  hundred 
Simeonites,  who  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  made  an 
expedition  to  Mount  Seir  and  smote  the  fugitive 
Amalekites  (1  Chr.  iv.  42). 

3.  (<ba\rla:  Pheltid),     One  of  the  heads  of  the 
people,  and  probably  the  name  of  a  family,  who 
sealed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.  x.  22). 

4.  (-in^a  =  *o\rfoy  :  Pheltias).    The  son  of 

Benaiah,  and  one  of  the  princes  of  the  people  against 
whom  Ezekiel  was  directed  to  utter  the  words  of 
doom  recorded  in  Ez.  xi.  5-12.  The  prophet  in 
spirit  saw  him  stand  at  the  east  gate  of  the  Temple, 
and,  as  he  spoke,  the  same  vision  showed  him  Pela- 
tiah's  sudden  death  (Ez.  xi.  1,  13). 

PELEG  (3^3  :  *oA€7,  *oA€K  :  Phaleg),  a 
son  of  Eber,  and'  brother  of  Joktan  (Gen.  x.  25, 
xi.  16).  The  only  incident  connected  with  his  history 
is  the  statement  that  "  in  his  days  was  the  earth  di 
vided  "—an  event  which  was  embodied  in  his  name 


766 


PELET 


Peleg  meaning  "  division."  This  notice  refers,  not  I: 
the  general  dispersion  of  the  human  family  subse 
quently  to  the  Deluge,  but  to  a  division  of  the  family 
of  Eher  himself,  the  younger  branch  of  whom  (th 
Joktanids)  migrated  into  southern  Arabia,  while 
the  elder  remained  in  Mesopotamia.  The  occurrence 
of  the  name  Phaliga  for  a  town  at  the  junction  o 
the  Chaboras  with  the  Euphrates  is  observable  in 
consequence  of  the  remark  of  Winer  (Realwb.)  that 
there  is  no  geographical  name  corresponding  to 
Peleg.  At  the  same  time  the  late  date  of  the 
author  who  mentions  the  name  (Isidorus  of  Charax) 
prevents  any  great  stress  being  laid  upon  it.  The 
separation  of  the  Joktanids  from'  the  stock  whence 
the  Hebrews  sprang,  finds  a  place  in  the  Mosaic 
table,  as  marking  an  epoch  in  the  age  immediately 
succeeding  the  Deluge.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PEL'ET  (B^B  :  *o\««  ;  Alex.  *o\eV:  Phalet). 
1.  A  son  of  Jahdai  in  an  obscure  genealogy  (1  Chr. 
ii.  47). 

2.  ('Iw^aX^r;  Alex.  4>a\\-fir:  Phallet).  The 
son  of  Azmaveth,  that  is,  either  a  native  of  the 
place  of  that  name,  or  the  son  of  one  of  David's 
heroes.  He  was  among  the  Benjamites  who  joined 
David  in  Ziklag  (1  Chr.  xii.  3). 


PEL'ETH  (rB  :  fcaAt'0  :  Pheleth).     1.  The 

father  of  On  the  Reubenite,  who  joined  Dathan  and 
Abiram  in  their  rebellion  (Num.  xvi.  1).  Josephus 
{Ant.  iv.  2.  §2),  omitting  all  mention  of  On,  calls 
Peleth  $a\aovs,  apparently  identifying  him  with 
PHALLU  the  son  of  Reuben.  In  the  LXX.  Peleth  is 
made  the  son  of  Reuben,  as  in  the  Sam.  text  and 
version,  and  one  Heb.  MS.  supports  this  rendering. 
2.  (Phaletti).  Son  of  Jonathan  and  a  descendant 
of  Jerahmeel  through  Onam,  his  son  by  Atarah 
(1  Chr.  ii.  33). 

PEL'ETHITES  Or6s,  :  *f\e6l  :  Phelethf), 
mentioned  only  in  the  phrase  ^J"!7Si"l1  *rn3f"l, 
rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  the  Cherethites  and  the 
Pelethites."  These  two  collectives  designate  a  force 
that  was  evidently  David's  body-guard.  Their  names 
have  been  supposed  either  to  indicate  their  duties, 
or  to  be  gentile  nouns.  Gesenius  renders  them 
"  executioners  and  runners,"  comparing  the  ^ISH 
executioners  and  runners"  of  a  later 


time  (2  K.  xi.  4,  19)  ;  and  the  unused  roots  fl"l3 
and  rPS,  as  to  both  of  which  we  shall  speak 

later,  admit  this  sense.  In  favour  of  this  view,  the 
supposed  parallel  phrase,  and  the  duties  in  which 
these  guards  were  employed,  may  be  cited.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  retain  their 
names  untranslated  ;  and  the  Syriac  and  Targ.  Jon. 
translate  them  differently  from  the  rendering  above 
and  from  each  other.  In  one  place,  moreover,  the 
Gittites  are  mentioned  with  the  Cherethites  and 
Pelethites  among  David's  troops  (2  Sam.  xv.  18); 
nnd  elsewhere  we  read  of  the  Cherethim,  who  bear 
the  same  name  in  the  plural,  either  as  a  Philistine 
tribe  or  a*  Philistines  themselves  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14  ; 
Kz.  xxv.  16;  Zeph.  ii.  5).  Gesenius  objects  that 
David's  body-guard  would  scarcely  have  been  chosen 
from  a  nation  so  hateful  to  the  Israelites  as  the 
Philistines.  But  it  must  IH>  remembered  that  David 
in  his  later  years  may  have  mistrusted  his  Israelite 
soldiers,  and  relied  on  the  Philistine  troops,  some  of 
whom,  with  Ittai  the  Gittite,  who  was  evidently  a 
Philistine,  and  not  an  Israelite  from  Gath  [!TTAI], 


PELETHITES 

were  faithful  to  him  at  the  time  of  Absalom's  n- 
bellion.  He  also  argues  that  it  is  improbable  that 
two  synonymous  appellations  should  be  thus  usc.l 
together  ;  but  this  is  on  the  assumption  that  both 
names  signify  Philistines,  whereas  they  may  de 
signate  Philistine  tribes.  (See  T/tes.  pp.  719,  1  107). 
The  Egyptian  monuments  throw  a  fresh  light 
upon  this  subject.  From  them  we  find  that  kings 
of  the  xixth  and  xxth  dynasties  had  in  their  sei-vic* 
mercenaries  of  a  nation  called  SHAYRETANA, 
which  Rameses  III.  conquered,  under  the  nam* 
"  SHAYRETANA  of  the  Sea."  This  king  fought 
a  naval  battle  with  the  SHAYRETANA  of  the 
Sea,  in  alliance  with  the  TOKKAREE,  who  were 
evidently,  from  their  physical  characteristics,  a  kin 
dred  people  to  them,  and  to  the  PELESATU,  or 
Philistines,  also  conquered  by  him.  The  TOKKA 
REE  and  the  PELESATU  both  wear  a  peculiar 
dress.  We  thus  learn  that  there  were  two  peoples 
of  the  Mediterranean  kindred  to  the  Philistines, 
one  of  which  supplied  mercenaries  to  the  Egyptian 
kings  of  the  xixth  and  xxth  dynasties.  The  name 
SHAYRETANA,  of  which  the  first  letter  was 
also  pronounced  KH,  is  almost  letter  for  letter  the 
same  as  the  Hebrew  Cherethim  ;  and  since  the 
SHAYRETANA  were  evidently  cognate  to  the  Phi 
listines,  their  identity  with  the  Cherethim  cannot 
be  doubted.  But  if  the  Cherethim  supplied  mer 
cenaries  to  the  Egyptian  kings  in  the  thirteenth  cen 
tury  B.C.,  according  to  our  reckoning,  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  the  same  name  in  the  designation  of 
David's  body-guard  denotes  the  same  people  or  tribe. 
The  Egyptian  SHAYRETANA  of  the  Sea  are  pro 
bably  the  Cretans.  The  Pelethites,  who,  as  already 
remarked,  are  not  mentioned  except  with  the  Che 
rethites,  have  not  yet  been  similarly  traced  in 
Egyptian  geography,  and  it  is  rash  to  suppose 
their  name  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  the  Philistines, 
i?S,  for  *PIB7B  ;  for,  as  Gesenius  remarks,  this 
contraction  is  not  possible  in  the  Semitic  languages. 
The  similarity,  however,  of  the  two  names  would 
favour  the  idea  which  is  suggested  by  the  mention 
together  of  the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites,  that  the 
latter  were  of  the  Philistine  stock  as  well  as  tin 
former.  As  to  the  etymology  of  the  names,  both 
may  be  connected  with  the  migration  of  the  Phi 
listines.  As  already  noticed,  the  former  has  been 
derived  from  the  root  7113,  "  he  cut,  cut  off, 
destroyed,"  in  Niphal  "  he  was  cut  off  from  his 
countiy,  driven  into  exile,  or  expelled,"  so  that  we 
might  as  well  read  "exiles""  as  "  executioners." 
The  latter,  from  D79,  an  unused  root,  the  Arab. 


X\J,  "he  escaped,  fled,"  both  being  cognate  to 
j?S,  "  he  was  smooth,"  thence  "he  slipped  away 

escaped,  and  caused  to  escape,"  where  the  rendering 
'  the  fugitives"  is  at  least  as  admissible  as  "  the 
•unner*."  If  we  compare  these  two  names  so 
•endered  with  the  gentile  name  of  the  Philistine 

nation  itself,  ^FltTpE^  "  a  wanderer,  stranger,' 
rom  the  unused  root  CJ'bs,  "  he  wandered  or 

'migrated,  "  these  previous  inferences  seem  to  be 
come  irresistible.  The  appropriateness  of  the  names 
of  these  tribes  to  the  duties  of  David's  body- 


•  Michaelis  I'billstaeos  ^HIS  dictos  esse  censet,  ut- 
pote  exsules  (v.  »*a.  Niph.  no.  3)  ut  Idem  raleal  quo.l 
.  p.  7  IS). 


PELIAS 

guari,  .vould  then  be  accidental,  though  it  does 
iiot  seem  unlikely  that  they  should  have  given 
rise  to  the  adoption  in  later  times  of  other  appel 
lations  for  the  royal  body-guard,  definitely  signi 
fying  "  executioners  and  runners."  If,  however, 

Tl/Sni  'rnSH  meant  nothing  but  executioners 
and  runners,  it  is  difficult  to  explain  the  change 

nan.  [R.  s.  p.] 


PELONITE 


767 


ie  pelican  is  the  kdath  of  the  Htbrew  Scriptures, 
edmann's  opinion  that  the  J'clccar.us  gramlus,  the 
ag  cormorant  (  Verm.  Samm.  iii.  57),  and  Bochart's, 
lat  the  "  bittern  "  is  intended,  are  unsupported  by 
any  good  evidence.  The  P.  onocrotalus  (common 


PELT'AS  (UeSias  ;  Alex.  Tlcuoeias  :  Pelias). 
A  corruption  of  BEDEIAH  (1  Esd.  is.  34 ;  comp. 
Ezr.  x.  35).  Our  translators  followed  the  Vulgate. 

PELICAN  (JlXp,  kdath:    ireAe/ccii/,    opvtov, 

Xa/j.ai\f<av,  KaTafipaKTiis :  onocrotalus,  pelican). 
Amongst  the  unclean  birds  mention  is  mad?  of  the 
Idath  (Lev.  xi.  18  ;  Deut.  xiv.  17).  The  suppliant 
psalmist  compares  his  condition  to  "  a  kdath  in  the 
wilderness"  (Ps.  cii.  6).  As  a  mark  of  the  dese 
rtion  that  was  to  ccme  upon  Edom,  it  is  said  that 
"  the  kdath  and  the  bittern  should  possess  it"  (Is. 
xxxiv.  11).  The  same  words  are  spoken  of  Nineveh 
(Zeph.  ii.  14).  In  these  two  last  places  the  A.  V 
has  "  cormorant"  in  the  text,  and  "  pelican"  in  the 
margin.  The  best  authorities  are  in  favour  of  the 
pelican  being  the  bird  denoted  by  kdath.  The  ety 
mology  of  the  name,  from  a  word  meaning  "  to 
vomit,"  leads  also  to  the  same  conclusion,  for  it 
doubtless  has  reference  to  the  habit  which  this  bird 
has  of  pressing  its  under  mandible  against  its  breast, 
in  order  to  ussist  it  to  disgorge  the  contents  of  its 
capacious  pouch  for  its  young.  This  is,  with  good 
reason,  supposed  to  be  the  origin  of  the  fable  about 
the  pelican  feeding  its  young  with  its  own  blood,  the 
red  nail  on  the  upper  mandible  serving  to  complete 
the  delusion." 

The  expression  "  pelican  of  the  wilderness  "  has, 
with  no  good  reason,  been  supposed  by  some  to 
prove  that  the  kdath  cannot  be  denoted  by  this  bird. 
Shaw  (Trav.  ii.  303, 8vo.  ed.)  says  "  the  pelican  must 
of  necessity  starve  in  the  desert,"  as  it  is  essentially 
a  water  bird.  In  answer  to  this  objection,  it  will  be 
enough  to  observe  that  the  term  midbar  ("  wilder 
ness  " )  is  by  no  means  restricted  to  barren  sandy 
spots  destitute  of  water.  "  The  idea,"  says  Prof 
Stanley,  "  is  that  of  a  wide  open  space,  with  01 
without  actual  pastui-e ;  the  country  of  the  nomads 
as  distinguished  from  that  of  the  agriculture 
and  settled  people "  (S.  #  P.  p.  486,  5th  eJ.)> 
Pelicans  (Pelecanus  onocrotalus)  are  often  seen 
associated  in  large  flocks ;  at  other  times  singL 
individuals  may  be  observed  sitting  in  lonely  am 
pensive  silence  on  the  ledge  of  some  rock  a  few  fee' 
above  the  surface  of  the  water.  (See  Kitto,  Pict 
Bib.  on  Ps.  cii.  6.)  It  is  not  quite  clear  what  is 
the  particular  point  in  the  nature  or  character  o 
the  pelican  with  which  the  psalmist  compares  hi 
pitiable  condition.  Some  have  supposed  that  it  con 
sists  in  the  loud  cry  of  the  bird :  compare  "  the  voic 
of  my  sighing"  (ver.  5).  We  are  inclined  to  believ 
that  reference  is  made  to  its  general  aspect  as  it  sit 
in  apparent  melancholy  mood,  with  its  bill  resting  on 
its  breast.  There  is,  we  think,  little  doubt  but  tha 


r>elican)  and  the  P.  crispus  are  often  observed  in 
5alestino,  Egypt,  &c.  Of  the  latter  Mr.  Tristram  ob 
served  an  immense  flock  swimming  out  to  sea  within 
sight  of  Mount  Carmel  (Ibis,  i.  37).c  [W.  H.] 

PEL'ONITE,  THE  (^Sn :  6  *f\ui>i 
Alex.  6  4>a\\cavi,  1  Chr.  xi.  27;  6  *f\\<avl,  1  Chr. 
xi.  36 ;  6  IK  4-oAA.oCs,  1  Chr.  xsvii.  10 :  Phalonites 
Phelonites,  Pkallonites).  Two  of  David's  mighty 
men,  Helez  and  Ahijah,  are  called  Pelonites  ( 1  Chr. 
xi.  27,  36).  From  1  Chr.  xxvii.  10,  it  appears 
that  the  former  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  and 

Pelonite  "  would  therefore  be  an  appellation  de 
rived  from  his  place  of  birth  or  residence.  But  in 
the  Targum  of  R.  Joseph  it  is  evidently  regarded 
as  a  patronymic,  and  is  rendered  in  the  last  men 
tioned  passage  "  of  the  seed  of  Pelau."  In  the  list  of 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  Helez  is  called  (ver.  26)  "  the  Paltite," 
that  is,  as  Bertheau  (on  1  Chr.  xi.)  conjectures,  of 
Beth-Palet,  or  Beth-Phelet,  in  the  south  of  Judah. 
But  it  seems  probable  that  "  Pelonite  "  is  the  correct 
reading.  [See  PALTITE.]  "  Ahijah  the  Pelonite  " 
appears  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  34  as  "  Eliam  the  son  o( 
Ahithopliel  the  Gilonite,"  of  which  the  former  is  a 
corruption ;  "  Ahijah "  forming  the  first  part  of 
"  Ahithophel,"  and  "  Pelonite  "  and  "  Gilonite  "  dh- 
fering  only  by  Q  and  3.  If  we  follow  the  LXX.  of 
1  Chr.  xxvii.  the  place  from  which  Helez  toak  his 
name  would  be  of  the  form  Phallu.  but  there  is  no 
trace  of  it  elsewhere,  and  the  LXX.  must  have  had 
a  differently  pointed  text,  In  Heb.  peloni  corre 
sponds  to  the  Greek  6  5e<Va,  '•  such  a  one:"  it  still 


a  The  reader  is  referred  to  a  curious  work  by  a  Scotc 
Jivine,  Archibald  Simson  byname,  entitled '  Hieroglyphica 
Animalium,  Vegetabilium  et  Metallorum,  qua?  in  Scrip 
turis  sacrls  reperiuntur,'  Edinb.  1622,  4to.  In  this  wor 
are  some  wild  fancies  about  the  pelican,  which  serve  I 
show  the  state  of  zoology,  &c.,  ut  the  period  in  which  th 
Author  lived. 

11  As  «  matter  of  fat-t,  however,  the  pelican,  after  bavin 


filled  its  pouch  with  fUh  and  mollusks,  often  does  retlrs 
miles  inland  away  from  water,  to  some  spot  where  it 
consumes  the  contents  of  its  pouch. 

c  "  P.  crispus  breeds  in  vast  numbers  in  the  ilat  plain 
of  the  Dobrudscha  (in  European  Turkey)  ;  Itslabits  there 
bear  out  your  remark  of  the  pelican  retiring  nland  tc 
digest  its  food."— H.  B.  TRISTRAM. 


768 


PEN 


exists  in  Arabic  and  in  the  °panish  Don  Fitlano, 
"  Mr.  So-and-so."  [W.  A.  W.] 

PEN.    [WRITING.] 

PEN'IEL  (^N'3B  ,  Samar.  ^N  UD  :  «I8oi 
Oeov :  Phanuel,  and  so  also  Peshito).  The  name 
which  Jacob  gave  to  the  place  in  which  he  had 
wrestled  with  God  :  "  He  called  the  name  of  the 
place  '  Face  of  El,'  for  I  have  seen  Elohim  face  to 
face  "  (Gen.  zxxii.  30).  With  that  singular  corre 
spondence  between  the  two  parts  of  this  narrative 
which  has  been  already  noticed  under  MAHANAIM, 
there  is  apparently  an  allusion  to  the  bestowal  of  the 
name  in  xxxiii.  10,  where  Jac«b  says  to  Esau,  "  I 
have  seen  thy  face  as  one  sees  the  face  of  Elohim. 
In  xxxii.  31,  and  the  other  passages  in  which 
the  name  occurs,  its  form  is  changed  to  PENUEL. 
On  this  change  the  lexicographers  throw  no  light. 
It  is  perhaps  not  impossible  that  Penuel  was  the 
original  form  of  the  name,  and  that  the  slight 
change  to  Peniel  was  made  by  Jacob  or  by  the 
historian  to  suit  his  allusion  to  the  circumstance 
under  which  the  patriarch  first  saw  it.  The  Sama 
ritan  Pentateuch  has  Penu-el  in  all.  The  pro 
montory  of  the  Ras-es-Shukah,  on  the  coast  of 
Syria  above  Beirut,  was  formerly  called  Tkeou- 
prosopon,  probably  a  translation  of  Peniel,  or  its 
Phoenician  equivalent.  [G.] 

PENIN'NAH  (H335 :  #eiWw:  Phenenna), 
one  of  the  two  wives  of  Elkanah,  the  other  being 
Hannah,  the  mother  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  i.  2). 

PENNY,  PENNYWORTH.     In  the  A.  V., 

in  several  passages  of  the  N.  T.,  •'  penny,"  either 
alone  or  in  the  compound  "  pennyworth."  occurs  as 
the  rendering  of  the  Greek  Srivdpiov,  the  name  of 
the  Roman  denarius  (Matt.  xx.  2,  xxii.  19 ;  Mark  vi. 
.'57,  xii.  15  ;  Luke  xx.  24;  John  vi.  7  ;  Rev.  vi.  6). 
The  denarius  was  the  chief  Roman  silver  coin,  from 
the  beginning  of  the  coinage  of  the  city  to  the  early 
part  of  the  third  century.  Its  name  continued  to 
be  applied  to  a  silver  piece  as  late  as  the  time  of  the 
earlier  Byzantines.  The  states  that  arose  from  the 
ruins  of  the  Roman  empire  imitated  the  coinage 
of  the  imperial  mints,  and  in  general  called  their 
principal  silver  coin  the  denarius,  whence  the 
French  name  denier  and  the  Italian  denaro.  The 
chief  Anglo-Saxon  coin,  and  for  a  long  period  the 
only  one,  corresponded  to  the  denarius  of  the  Con 
tinent.  It  continued  to  be  current  under  the  Nor 
mans,  Plantagenets,  and  Tudors,  though  latterly 
little  used.  It  is  called  penny,  denarius,  or  denier, 
which  explains  the  employment  of  the  first  word  in 
the  A.  V.  [R.  S.  P.] 

PENTATEUCH,  THE.  The  Greek  name 
given"  to  the  five  books  commonly  called  the  Five 
Books  of  Moses  (ft  irfvrdTfvxos  sc.  fttP\os  ;  Pen- 
tateuchus  sc.  liber ;  the  fivefold  book ;  from  rtvj(os, 
which  meaning  originally  "  vessel,  instrument,"  &c., 
came  in  Alexandrine  Greek  to  mean  "  book  ").  In 
the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  it  was  called  "  the 
Law  of  Moses  "  (Ezr.  vii.  6) ;  or  "  the  book  of  the 
Law  of  Moses"  (Neh.  viii.  1);  or  simply  "the 
book  of  Moses"  (Ezr.  vi.  18;  Neh.  xiii.  1  ;  2  Chr. 
xrv.  4,  xxxv.  12).  This  was  beyond  all  reason 
able  doubt  our  existing  Pentateuch.  The  book 
which  was  discovered  in  the  temple  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  and  which  is  entitled  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  14), 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah  by  the  hand  of 
Moses,"  w»s  substantially  it  would  seem  the  same 
volume,  th> ^gh  it  may  have  undergone  some  revi 
sion  by  Ezra.  In  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  30,  it  is  styled 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

"the  took  of  the  Covenant,"  and  so  also  in  2  K 
xxiii.  2,  21,  whilst  in  2  K.  xxii.  8  Hilkiah  says,  I 
have  found  "the  book  of  the  Law."  Still  earlier  .'n 
the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat  we  mid  a  "  book  of  the  Law 
of  Jehovah  "  in  use  (2  Chr.  xvii.  9).  And  this  was 
probably  the  earliest  designation,  for  a  "  book  of  the 
Law"  is  mentioned  in  Deuteronomy  (xxxi.  26), 
though  it  is  questionable  whether  the  name  as  there 
used  refers  to  the  whole  Pentateuch,oronly  to  Deuter 
onomy  ;  probably,  as  we  shall  see,  it  applies  only  to 
the  latter.  The  present  Jews  usually  call  the  whole 
by  the  name  of  Torah,  i.  e.  "  the  Law,"  or  Torath 
Mosheh,  "the  Law  of  Moses."  The  Rabbinicd 

title  is  rntan  nj>'o-in  nif»n,  "the  five-fifths  of 

the  Law."  In  the  preface  to  the  Wisdom  of  Jesus 
the  son  of  Siracli,  it  is  called  "  the  Law,"  which  is 
also  a  usual  name  for  it  in  the  New  Testament 
(Matt.  xii.  5,  xxii.  36,  40  ;  Luke  x.  26;  John  viii. 
5,  17).  Sometimes  the  name  of  Moses  stands  briefly 
for  the  whole  work  ascribed  to  him  (Luke  rxiv.  27). 
Finally,  the  whole  Old  Testament  is  sometimes 
called  a  potiori  parte,  "  the  Law  "  (Matt.  v.  18  ; 
Luke  xvi.  17;  John  vii.  49,  x.  34,  xii.  34).  In 
John  xv.  25 ;  Rom.  iii.  19,  words  from  the  Psalms, 
and  in  1  Cor.  xiv.  21  from  Isaiah,  are  quoted  as 
words  of  the  Law. 

The  division  of  the  whole  work  into  five  parts 
has  by  some  writers  been  supposed  to  be  original. 
Others  (as  Leusden,  Havernick  and  v.  Lengerke), 
with  more  probability  think  that  the  division  was 
made  by  the  Greek  translators.  For  the  titles  of 
the  several  books  are  not  of  Hebrew  but  of  Greek 
origin.  The  Hebrew  names  are  merely  taken  from 
the  first  words  of  each  book,  and  in  the  first  in 
stance  only  designated  particular  sections  and  not 
whole  books.  The  MSS.  of  the  Pentateuch  form  a. 
single  roll  or  volume,  and  are  divided  not  into 
books,  but  into  the  larger  and  smaller  sections  called 
Parshiyoth  and  Sedarim.  Besides  this,  the  Jews 
distribute  all  the  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  under  the 
two  heads  of  affirmative  and  negative  precepts.  Of 
the  former  they  reckon  248  ;  because,  according  to 
the  anatomy  of  the  Rabbins,  so  many  are  the  parts 
of  the  human  body :  of  the  latter  they  make  365, 
which  is  the  number  of  days  in  the  year,  and  also 
the  number  of  veins  in  the  human  body.  Accord 
ingly  the  Jews  are  bound  to  the  observance  of  613 
precepts :  and  in  order  that  these  precepts  may  be 
perpetually  kept  in  mind,  they  are  wont  to  carry  a 
piece  of  cloth  foursquare,  at  the  four  corners  of 
which  they  have  fringes  consisting  of  8  threads 
a-piece,  fastened  in  5  knots.  These  fringes  arc 
called  JVV^y,  a  word  which  in  numbers  denote? 
600:  add  to  this  the  8  threads  and  the  5  knots, 
and  we  get  the  613  precepts.  The  five  knots  de 
note  the  five  books  of  Moses.  (See  Bab.  Talmud. 
Maccoth,  sect.  3 ;  Maimon.  Pref.  to  Jad  Jla- 
chazakah  ;  Leusdeu,  Philol.  p.  33.)  Both  Philo  (d« 
Abraham.,  ad  init.}  aud  Josephus  (c.  Apion.  i.  8) 
recognise  the  division  now  current.  As  no  reason 
for  this  division  can  satisfactorily  be  found  in  the 
structure  of  the  work  itself,  Vaihinger  supposes 
that  the  symbolical  meaning  of  the  number  five  led 
to  its  adoption.  For  ten  is  the  symbol  of  com 
pletion  or  perfection,  as  we  see  in  the  ten  commuid- 
ments  [and  so  in  Genesis  we  have  ten  "  generatior.e >;  j, 
suid  therefore  five  is  a  number  which  as  it  were 
confesses  imperfection  and  prophesies  completion. 
The  Law  is  not  perfect  without  the  Prophets,  for 
the  Prophets  are  in  a  special  sense  the  bearers  of 
the  Promise  ;  and  it  is  the  Promise  which  complete 


PJl-NTATEUOH.  THE 

the  Law  This  is  questionable.  There  can  be  no 
.  loubt,  hswever,  that  this  division  of  the  Pentateuch 
influenced  the  arrangement  of  the  Psalter  in  fiv 
books.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  five  Megil- 
ioth  of  the  Hagiographa  (Canticles,  Ruth,  Lamenta 
tions,  Ecclesiastes,  and  Esther),  which  in  many- 
Hebrew  Bibles  are  placed  immediately  after  th 
Pentateuch. 

For  the  several  names  and  contents  of  the  Five 
Books  we  refer  to  the  articles  on  each  Book,  where 
questions  affecting  their  integrity  and  genuineness 
are  also  discussed.  In  the  article  on  Genesis  the 
scope  and  design  of  the  whole  work  is  pointed  out. 
We  need  only  briefly  observe  here  that  this  work 
beginning  with  the  record  of  Creation  and  the  his 
tory  of  the  primitive  world,  passes  on  to  deal  more 
especially  with  the  early  history  of  the  Jewish 
thmily.  It  gives  at  length  the  personal  history 
of  the  three  great  Fathers  of  the  family:  it  then 
describes  how  the  family  grew  into  a  nation  in 
Egypt,  tells  us  of  its  oppression  and  deliverance, 
of  its  forty  years'  wandering  in  the  wilderness,  of 
the  giving  of  the  Law,  with  all  its  enactments  both 
civil  and  religious,  of  the  construction  of  the  taber 
nacle,  of  the  numbering  of  the  people,  of  the  rights 
and  duties  of  the  priesthood,  as  well  as  of  many 
important  events  which  befell  them  before  their 
entrance  into  the  Land  of  Canaan,  and  finally  con 
cludes  with  Moses'  last  discourses  and  his  death. 
The  unity  of  the  work  in  its  existing  form  is  now 
generally  recognized.  It  is  not  a  mere  collection  of 
loose  fragments  carelessly  put  together  at  different 
times,  but  bears  evident  traces  of  design  and  pur 
pose  in  its  composition.  Even  those  who  discover 
different  authors  in  the  earlier  books,  and  who  deny 
that  Deuteronomy  was  written  by  Moses,  are  still 
of  opinion  that  the  work  in  its  present  form  is  a 
connected  whole,  and  was  at  least  reduced  to  its 
present  shape  by  a  single  reviser  or  editor." 

The  question  has  also  been  raised,  whether  the 
Book  of  Joshua  does  not,  properly  speaking,  consti 
tute  an  integral  portion  of  this  work.  To  this 
question  Ewald  (Gesch.  i.  175),  Knobel  (Genesis, 
Vorbem.  §1,  2),  Lengerke  (Kenaan,  Ixxxiii.),  and 
stahelin  (Krit.  Unters.  p.  91)  give  a  reply  in  the 
affirmative.  They  seem  to  have  been  led  to  do  so, 
partly  because  they  imagine  that  the  two  documents, 
the  Elohistic  and  Jehovistic,  which  characterize  the 
earlier  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  may  still  be  traced, 
like  two  streams,  the  waters  of  which  never  wholly 
mingle  though  they  flow  in  the  same  channel, 
running  on  through  the  book  of  Joshua ;  and  partly 
because  the  same  work  which  contains  the  promise 
of  the  land  (Gen.  xv.)  must  contain  also — so  they 
argue — the  fulfilment  of  the  promise.  But  such 
grounds  are  far  too  arbitrary  and  uncertain  to  sup- 
ix>rt  the  hypothesis  which  rests  upon  them.  All 
that  seems  probable  is,  that  the  book  of  Joshua 
received  a  final  revision  at  the  hands  of  Ezra,  or 
some  earlier  prophet,  at  the  same  time  with  the 
books  of  the  Law. 

The  fact  that  the  Samaritans,   who  it  is  well 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


76S 


*  See  Ewald,  Geichidite,  i.  175 ;  and  Stiibelin,  Kritisck. 
Unters.  p.  1. 

b  It  is  strange  to  see  how  widely  the  misconception 
which  we  are  anxious  to  obviate  extends.  A  learned 
writer,  in  a  recent  publication,  says,  in  reference  to  the 
a!'.2ged  existence  of  different  documents  in  the  Penta- 
teneh .  "This  exclusive  use  of  the  one  Divine  Name  in 
some  portions,  and  of  the  other  in  other  portions,  it  is 
jaul,  chaiacterizes  two  different  authors  living  at  different 
tiuieb ;  and  consequently  Genesis  is  composed  of  two  dif • 

VOL.  II. 


known  did  not  possess  the  other  books  of  Scripture, 
have  besides  the  Pentateuch  a  book  of  Joshia  (see 
Chronicon  Samaritanum,  &c.,  ed.  Juynboll,  Lugd, 
Bat.  1848),  indicates  no  doubt  an  early  association  of 
the  one  with  the  other;  but  is  no  proof  that  they 
originally  constituted  one  work,  but  rather  the  con 
trary.  Otherwise  the  Samaritans  would  naturally 
have  adopted  the  canonical  recension  of  Joshua. 
We  may  therefore  regard  the  Five  Books  of  Moses 
as  one  separate  and  complete  work.  For  a  detailed 
view  of  the  several  books  we  must  refer,  as  we  have 
said,  to  the  Articles  where  they  are  severally  dis 
cussed.  The  questions  which  we  have  left  for  this 
article  are  those  connected  with  the  authorship  and 
date  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a  whole. 

It  is  necessary  here  at  the  outset  to  state  the 
exact  nature  of  the  investigation  which  lies  before 
us.  Many  English  readers  are  alarmed  when  they 
are  told,  for  the  first  time,  that  critical  investigation 
renders  it  doubtful  whether  the  whole  Pentateuch  in 
its  present  form  was  the  work  of  Moses.  On  thrs 
subject  there  is  a  strange  confusion  in  many  minds. 
They  suppose  that  to  surrender  the  recognized  au 
thorship  of  a  sacred  book  is  to  surrender  the  truth 
of  the  book  itself.  Yet  a  little  reflection  should  suffice 
to  correct  such  an  error.  For  who  can  say  now  who 
wrote  the  books  of  Samuel,  or  Ruth,  or  Job,  or  to 
what  authorship  many  of  the  Psalms  are  to  be 
ascribed  ?  We  are  quite  sure  that  these  books 
were  not  written  by  the  persons  whose  names  they 
bear.  We  are  scarcely  less  sure  that  many  of  the 
Psalms  ascribed  to  David  were  not  written  by  him, 
and  our  own  translators  have  signified  the  doubtful 
ness  of  the  inscriptions  oy  separating  them  from 
the  Psalms,  of  which  in  the  Hebrew  text  they  were 
made  to  form  a  constituent  part.  These  books  of 
Scripture,  however,  and  these  divine  poems,  lose 
not  a  whit  of  their  value  or  of  their  authority  be 
cause  the  names  of  their  authors  have  perished. 
Truth  is  not  a  thing  dependent  on  names.  So  like 
wise,  if  it  should  turn  out  that  portions  of  the  Pen 
tateuch  were  not  written  by  Moses,  neither  their 
nspiration  nor  their  trustworthiness  is  thereby  di 
minished.  All  will  admit  that  one  portion  at  least 
of  the  Pentateuch — the  34th  chapter  of  Deutero- 
omy,  which  gives  the  account  of  Moses'  death — 
vas  not  written  by  hitii.  But  in  making  this 
lmission  the  principle  for  which  we  contend  is 
conceded.  Common  sense  compels  us  to  regard  this 
chapter  as  a  later  addition.  Why  then  may  not 
ither  later  additions  have  been  made  to  the  work  ? 
f  common  sense  leads  us  to  such  a  conclusion  in 
one  instance,  critical  examination  may  do  so  on 
sufficient  grounds  in  another.b 

At  different  times  suspicions  have  been  entertained 
.hat  the  Pentateuch  as  we  now  have  it  is  not  the 
?'entateuch  of  the  earliest  age,  and  that  the  work 
must  have  undergone  various  modifications  and  addi- 
,ions  before  it  assumed  its  present  shape. 

So  early  as  the  second  century  we  find  the  author 
if  the  Clementine  Homilies  calling  in  question  the 
uthenticity  of  the  Mosaic  writings.  According  to 


erent  documents,  the  one  Elobistic,  the  other  Jehovistic, 
which  moreover  differ  in  statement;  and  consequently 
this  book  was  not  written  by  Moses,  and  Is  neither  in 
spired  nor  trustworthy  "  (Aids  to  Faith,  p.  190).  How  il 

bilows  that  a  book  is  neither  inspired  nor  trustworthy 

>ecause  its  authorship  is  unknown  we  are  at  a  loss  to 
conw!  /e.  A  large  part  of  the  canon  must  be  sacrificed, 

f  we  are  only  to  receive  books  whose  authorship  is  t-ati* 

factorily  ascertained. 

S  D 


770 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


him  the  Law  was  only  given  orally  by  Moses  to 
the  seventy  elders,  and  not  consigned  to  writing  till 
after  his  death ;  it  subsequently  underwent  many 
changes,  was  corrupted  more  and  more  by  means  of 
the  false  prophets,  and  was  especially  filled  with  erro 
neous  anthropomorphic  conceptions  of  God,  and  un 
worthy  representations  of  the  characters  of  the 
Patriarchs  (Horn.  ii.  38,  43,  iii.  4,  47 ;  Neander, 
Gnost.  Systemc,  380).  A  statement  of  this  kind, 
unsupported,  and  coming  from  an  heretical,  and 
therefore  suspicious  source,  may  seem  of  little  mo 
ment  :  it  is  however  remarkable,  so  far  as  it  indicates 
an  early  tendency  to  cast  off  the  received  traditions 
respecting  the  books  of  Scripture ;  whilst  at  the 
same  time  it  is  evident  that  this  was  done  cau 
tiously,  because  such  an  opinion  respecting  the  Pen 
tateuch  was  said  to  be  for  the  advanced  Christian 
only,  and  not  for  the  simple  and  unlearned. 

Jerome,  there  can  be  little  doubt,  had  seen  the 
difficulty  of  supposing  the  Pentateuch  to  be  alto 
gether,  in  its  present  form,  the  work  of  Moses  ;  for 
he  observes  (contra  Helvid.} :  "  Sive  Mosen  dicere 
valueris  auctorem  Pentateuchi  sive  Esram  ejusdem 
instauratorem  operis,"  with  reference  apparently  to 
the  Jewish  tradition  on  the  subject.  Aben  Ezra 
(fll67),  in  his  Comm.  on  Deut.  i.  1,  threw  out 
some  doubts  as  to  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  certain 
passages,  such  as  Gen.  xii.  6,  Deut.  iii.  10,  11, 
xxxi.  9,  which  he  either  explained  as  later  interpola 
tions,  or  left  as  mysteries  which  it  was  beyond  his 
power  to  unravel.  For  centuries,  however,  the 
Pentateuch  was  generally  received  in  the  Church 
without  question  as  written  by  Moses.  The  age 
of  criticism  had  not  yet  come.  The  first  signs  of 
its  approach  were  seen  in  the  17th  century.  In 
the  year  1651  we  find  Hobbes  writing:  "  Videtur 
Pentateuchus  potius  de  Mose  quam  a  Mose  scriptus" 
(Leviathan,  a.  33).  Spinoza  (Tract.  Theol.-Polit. 
c.  8,  9,  published  in  1679),  set  himself  boldly  to 
controvert  the  received  authorship  of  the  Penta 
teuch.  He  alleged  against  it  (1)  later  names  of 
places,  as  Gen.  xiv.  14  comp.  with  Judg.  xviii.  29 ; 

(2)  the  continuation  of  the  history  beyond  the  days 
of  Moses,  Exod.  xvi.  35  comp.  with  Josh.  v.  12; 

(3)  the  statement  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  31,  "  before  there 
reigned    any   king   over  the   children   of  Israel." 
Spinoza  maintained  that  Moses  issued  his  commands 
to  the  elders,  that  by  them  they  were  written  down 
and  communicated  to  the  people,  and  that  later 
they  were  collected  and  assigned  to  suitable  passages 
in  Moses'  life.     He  considered  that  the  Pentateuch 
was  indebted  to  Ezra  for  the  form  in  which  it  now 
appears.     Other  writers  began  to  suspect  that  the 
book  of  Genesis  was  composed  of  written  documents 
earlier  than  the  time  of  Moses.    So  Vitringa  (  Observ. 
Sacr.  i.  3)  ;  LeClerc  (de  Script.  Pentateuchi,  §11), 
and  R.  Simon  (Hist.  Critique  du  V.  T.  lib.  i.  c.  7, 
Rotterdam,  1685).     According  to  the  last  of  these 
•writers,  Genesis  was  composed  of  earlier  documents, 
the  Laws  of  the  Pentateuch  were  the  work  of  Moses, 
ajid  the  greater  portion  of  the  history  was  written 
l/y  the  public  scribe  who  is  mentioned  in  the  book. 
Le  Clerc  supposed  that  the  priest  who,  according  to 
2  K.  rvii.  27,  was  sent  to  instruct  the  Samaritan 
colonists,  was  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch. 

But  it  was  not  till  the  middle  of  the  last  century 
that  the  question  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Pen 
tateuch  was  handled  with  anything  like  a  discerning 
criticism.  The  first  attempt  was  made  by  a  lay- 
mau,  whos?  studies  we  might  have  supposed  would 
scarcely  have  led  him  to  such  an  investigation.  In 
lh«  year  1753,  there  appeared  at  Brussels  a  work,  J 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

entitled  :  "  Conjectures  sur  les  Me'moircs  originaux, 
dont  il  paroit  que  Moyse  s'est  servi  pour  compose! 
le  Livie  de  Gen&se."  It  was  written  in  his  60th 
year  by  Astruc,  Doctor  and  Professor  of  Medicine  in 
the  Royal  College  at  Paris,  and  Court  Pbysiciar.  tc 
Louis  XIV.  His  critical  ey«  had  observed  that 
throughout  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  as  far  as  the 
6th  chapter  of  Exodus,  traces  were  to  be  found  of 
two  original  documents,  each  characterised  by  a 
distinct  use  of  the  names  of  God ;  the  one  by  the 
name  Elohim,  and  the  other  by  the  name  Jehovah. 
Besides  these  two  principal  documents,  he  supposed 
Moses  to  have  made  use  of  ten  others  in  the  compo 
sition  of  the  earlier  part  of  liis  work.  Astruc  was 
followed  by  several  German  writers  on  the  path  which 
he  had  traced  ;  by  Jerusalem  in  his  Letters  on  the 
Mosaic  Writings  and  Philosophy  ;  by  Schultens,  in 
his  Dissertatio  qua  disquiritur,  unde  Moses  res  in 
libra  Geneseos  descriptas  didicerit ;  and  with  con 
siderable  learning  and  critical  acumen  by  Ilgen 
( Urkunden  der  Jerusalemischen  Tempelarchivs, 
ler  Theil,  Halle,  1798),  and  Eichhorn  (Einleitunf) 
in  d.  A.  T.). 

But  this  "documentary  hypothesis,"  as  it  is 
called,  was  too  conservative  and  too  rational  for 
some  critics.  Vater,  in  his  Commentar  ub.  den 
Pentateuch,  1815,  and  A.  T.  Hartmann,  in  his 
Linguist.  Einl.  in  d.  Stud,  der  Bucher  des  A.  Test. 
1818,  maintained  that  the  Pentateuch  consisted 
merely  of  a  number  of  fragments  loosely  strung 
together  without  order  or  design.  The  former  sup 
posed  a  collection  of  laws,  made  in  the  times  of  David 
and  Solomon,  to  have  been  the  foundation  of  the 
whole :  that  this  was  the  book  discovered  in  the  reign 
of  Josiah,  and  that  its  fragments  were  afterwards  in 
corporated  in  Deuteronomy.  All  the  rest,  consisting 
of  fragments  of  history  and  oflaws  written  at  different 
periods  up  to  this  time,  were,  according  to  him,  col 
lected  and  shaped  into  their  present  fomi  between  the 
times  of  Josiah  and  the  Babylonish  Exile.  Hartmann 
also  brings  down  the  date  of  the  existing  Pentateuch 
as  late  as  the  Exile.  This  has  been  called  the  "  Frag 
mentary  hypothesis."  Both  of  these  have  now  been 
superseded  by  the  "  Supplementary  hypothesis," 
which  has  been  adopted  with  various  modifications 
by  De  Wette,  Bleek,  Stahelin,  Tuch,  Lengerke,  Hup- 
feld,  Knobel.  Bunsen,  Kurtz,  Delitzsch,  Schultz, 
Vaihinger,  and  others.  Th:y  all  alike  recognize  two 
Documents  in  the  Pentaitach.  They  suppose  the 
narrative  of  the  Elohist,  the  more  ancient  writer,  to 
have  been  the  foundation  of  the  work,  and  that  the 
Jehovist  or  later  writer  making  use  of  this  docu- 
snt,  added  to  and  commented  upon  it,  sometimes 
transcribing  portions  of  it  intact,  and  sometimes 
incorporating  the  substance  of  it  into  his  own  work. 
But  though  thus  agreeing  in  the  main,  they  differ 
widely  in  the  application  of  the  theory.  Thus,  for 
instance,  De  Wette  distinguishes  between  the  Elohist 
and  the  Jehovist  in  the  first  four  Books,  and  attri 
butes  Deuteronomy  to  a  different  writer  altogether 
(Einl.  ins  A.  T.  §1 50  ff.).  So  also  Lengerke,  though 
with  some  differences  of  detail  in  the  portions  he 
assigns  to  the  two  editors.  The  last  places  the 
Elohist  in  the  time  of  Solomon,  and  the  Jehovistic 
editor  in  that  of  Hezekiah ;  whereas  Tuch  puts  the 
first  under  Saul,  and  the  second  under  Solomon. 
Stahelin,  on  the  other  hand,  declares  for  the  identity 
of  the  Deuteronomist  and  the  Jehovist;  and  sup 
poses  the  last  to  have  written  in  the  reign  of  Saul, 
and  the  Elohist  in  tne  time  of  the  Judges.  Hii]>f<Jd 
(die  Quellen  der  Genesis)  finds,  in  Genesis  at  least, 
tnuvs  of 'three  authors,  an  earlier  and  a  later  £''jhist , 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

.is  //ell  as  the  Jehovist.  He  is  peculiar  in  regarding 
the  Jehovistic  portion  as  an  altogether  original  docu 
ment,  written  in  entire  independence,  and  without 
the  knowledge  even  of  the  Elohistic  record.  A  later 
aditor  or  compiler,  he  thinks,  found  the  two  books, 
/ind  threw  them  into  one.  Vaihinger  (in  Herzog's 
Encyclopddie)  is  also  of  opinion  that  portions  of 
three  original  documents  are  to  be  found  in  the  first 
four  books,  to  which  he  adds  some  fragments  of  the 
32nd  and  34th  chapters  of  Deuteronomy.  The 
Fifth  Book,  according  to  him,  is  by  a  different  and 
much  later  writer.  The  Pre-elohist  he  supposes  to 
have  flourished  about  1200  B.C.,  the  Elohist  some 
200  years  later,  the  Jehovist  in  the  first  half  of  the 
8th  century  B.C.,  and  the  Deuteronomist  in  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah. 

Delitzsch  agrees  with  the  writers  above  men 
tioned  in  recognizing  two  distinct  documents  as  the 
basis  of  the  Pentateuch,  especially  in  its  earlier  por 
tions  ;  but  he  entirely  severs  himself  from  them  in 
maintaining  that  Deuteronomy  is  the  work  of  Moses. 
His  theory  is  this:  the  kernel  or  first  foundation  of 
the  Pentateuch  is  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant  (Ex.  xix.-xxiv.),  which  was  written  by 
Moses  himself,  and  afterwards  incorporated  into  the 
body  of  the  Pentateuch,  where  it  at  present  stands. 
The  rest  of  the  Laws  given  in  the  wilderness,  till 
the  people  reached  the  plains  of  Moab,  were  commu 
nicated  orally  by  Moses  and  taken  down  by  the 
priests,  whose  business  it  was  thus  to  provide  for 
their  preservation  (Deut.  xvii.  11,  comp.  xxiv.  8, 
xxxiii.  10;  Lev.  x.  11,  comp.  xv.  31).  Inasmuch 
is  Deuteronomy  does  not  pre-suppose  the  existence 
in  writing  of  the  entire  earlier  legislation,  but  on 
the  contrary  recapitulates  it  with  the  greatest 
freedom,  we  are  not  obliged  to  assume  that  the 
proper  codification  of  the  Law  took  place  during  the 
forty  years'  wandering  in  the  Desert.  This  was 
done,  however,  shortly  after  the  occupation  of  the 
land  of  Canaan.  On  that  sacred  soil  was  the  first 
definite  portion  of  the  history  of  Israel  written  ;  and 
the  writing  of  the  history  itself  necessitated  a  full 
and  complete  account  of  the  Mosaic  legislation.  A 
man,  such  as  Eleazar  the  son  of  Aaron,  the  priest 
(see  Num.  xxvi.  1,  xxxi.  21),  wrote  the  great  work 
beginning  with  the  first  words  of.Genesis,  including 
in  it  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  and  perhaps  gave 
only  a  short  notice  of  the  last  discourses  of  Moses, 
because  Moses  had  written  them  down  with  his  own 
hand.  A  second — who  may  have  been  Joshua  (see 
especially  Deut.  xxxii.  44 ;  Josh.  xxiv.  26,  and  comp. 
on  the  other  hand  1  Sam.  x.  25),  who  was  a  prophet, 
and  spake  as  a  prophet,  or  one  of  the  elders  on  whom 
Moses'  spirit  rested  (Num.  xi.  25),  and  many  of 
whom  survived  Joshua  (Josh.  xxiv.  31 ) — completed 
the  work,  taking  Deuteronomy,  which  Moses  had 
written,  for  his  model,  and  incorporating  it  into  his 
own  book.  Somewhat  in  this  manner  arose  the 
Torah  (or  Pentateuch),  each  narrator  further  avail 
ing  himself  when  he  thought  proper  of  other  written 
documents. 

Such  is  the  theory  of  Delitzsch,  which  is  in  many 
respects  worthy  of  consideration,  and  which  has 
been  adopted  in  the  main  by  Kurtz  ( Gesch.  d.  A.  B. 
i.  §20,  and  ii.  §99,  6),  who  formerly  was  opposed 
to  the  theory  of  different  documents,  and  sided 
rather  with  Hengstenberg  and  the  critics  of  the 
extreme  conservative  school.  There  is  this  difference, 
however,  that  Kurtz  objects  to  the  view  that 
Deuteronomy  existed  before  the  other  books,  and 
believes  that  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch  was  com 
mitted  to  writing  before,  not  after,  the  occupation  of 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


771 


the  Holy  Land.  Finally,  Schultz,  in  his  recent  work 
on  Deuteronomy,  recognizes  two  original  documents 
in  the  Pentateuch,  the  Elohistic  being  the  base  and 
groundwork  of  the  whole,  but  contends  that  the 
Jehovistic  portions  of  the  first  four  books,  as  well 
as  Deuteronomy,  except  the  concluding  portion,  were 
written  by  Moses.  Thus  he  agrees  with  Delitzsch 
and  Kurtz  in  admitting  two  documents  and  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  Deuteronomy,  and  with 
Stahelin  in  identifying  the  Deuteronomist  with  the 
Jehovist.  That  these  three  writers  more  nearly 
approach  the  truth  than  any  others  who  have 
attempted  to  account  for  the  phenomena  of  the 
existing  Pentateuch,  we  are  convinced.  Which  of 
the  three  hypotheses  is  best  supported  by  facts  and 
by  a  careful  examination  of  the  record  we  shall  see 
hereafter. 

One  other  theory  has,  however,  to  be  stated  before 
we  pass  on. 

The  author  of  it  stands  quite  alone,  and  it  is  not 
likely  that  he  will  ever  find  any  disciple  bold 
enough  to  adopt  his  theory :  even  his  great  admirei 
Bunsen  forsakes  him  here.  But  it  is  due  to  Ewald'a 
great  and  deserved  reputation  as  a  scholar,  and  to 
his  uncommon  critical  sagacity,  briefly  to  state 
what  that  theory  is.  He  distinguishes,  then,  seven 
different  authors  in  the  great  Book  of  Origines  or 
Primitive  History  (comprising  the  Pentateuch  and 
Joshua).  The  oldest  historical  work,  of  which  but 
a  very  few  fragments  remain,  is  the  Book  of  the 
Wars  of  Jehovah.  Then  follows  a  biography  of 
Moses,  of  which  also  but  small  portions  have  been 
preserved.  The  third  and  fourth  documents  are 
much  more  perfect :  these  consist  of  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant,  which  was  written  in  the  time  of  Samson, 
and  the  Book  of  Origines,  which  was  written  by  a 
priest  in  the  time  of  Solomon.  Then  comes,  in  the 
fifth  place,  the  third  historian  of  the  primitive 
times,  or  the  first  prophetic  narrator,  a  subject  of 
the  northern  kingdom  in  the  days  of  Elijah  or  Joel. 
The  sixth  document  is  the  work  of  the  fourth  his 
torian  of  primitive  times,  or  the  second  prophetic 
narrator,  who  lived  between  800  and  750.  Lastly 
comes  the  fifth  historian,  or  third  prophetic  nar 
rator,  who  flourished  not  long  after  Joel,  and  wlio 
collected  and  reduced  into  one  corpus  the  various 
works  of  his  predecessors.  The  real  purposes  of  the 
history,  both  in  its  prophetical  and  its  legal  aspects, 
began  now  to  be  discerned.  Some  steps  were  taken 
in  this  direction  by  an  unknown  writer  at  the 
beginning  of  the  7th  century  B.C.  ;  and  then  in  a 
far  more  comprehensive  manner  by  the  Deuterono 
mist,  who  flourished  in  the  time  of  Manasseh,  and 
lived  in  Egypt.  In  the  time  of  Jeremiah  appeared 
the  poet  who  wrote  the  Blessing  of  Moses,  as  it  is 
given  in  Deuteronomy.  A  somewhat  later  editor 
incorporated  the  originally  independent  work  of  the 
Deuteronomist,  and  the  lesser  additions  of  his  two 
colleagues,  with  the  history  as  left  by  the  fifth 
narrator,  and  thus  the  whole  was  finally  completed. 
"  Such,"  says  Ewald  (and  his  words,  seriously  meant, 
read  like  delicate  irony),  "  were  the  strange  fortunes 
which  this  great  work  underwent  before  it  reached 
its  present  form." 

Such  is  a  brief  summary  of  the  views  which  have 
been  entertained  by  a  large  number  of  critics,  many 
cf  them  men  of  undoubted  piety  as  well  as  learning, 
who  have  found  themselves  compelled,  after  careful 
investigation,  to  abandon  the  older  doctrine  of  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  to  adopt, 
in  some  form  or  other,  the  theory  of  a  compilatioi: 
from  earlier  documents. 

3  C  2 


772 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


On  the  other  side,  however,  stands  an  array  of 
names  scarcely  leas  distinguished  for  learning,  who 
maintain  not  only  that  there  is  a  unity  of  design 
in  the  Pentateuch — which  is  granted  by  many  of 
those  before  mentioned — but  who  contend  that  this 
unity  of  design  can  only  be  explained  on  the  sup 
position  of  a  single  author,  and  that  this  author 
oould  have  been  none  other  than  Moses.     This  is 
the   ground    taken    by   Hengstenberg,   Havernick, 
Prechsler,  Kanke,  Welte,  and  Keil.     The  first  men 
tioned  of  these  writers  has  no  doubt  done  admirable 
service  in  reconciling  and  removing  very  many  of 
tne  alleged  discrepancies  and  contradictions  in  the 
Pentateuch:    but   his    zeal    carries   him    in   some 
instances  to  attempt  a  defence  the  very  ingenuity 
of  which  betrays  how  unsatisfactory  it  is ;  and  his 
attempt  to  explain  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names,  by 
fliowing  that  the  writer  had  a  special  design  in  the 
use  of  the  one  or  the  other,  is  often  in  the  last 
degree  arbitrary.     Drechsler,  in  his  work  on  the 
Unity  and  Genuineness  of  Genesis  (1838),  fares  no 
better,  though  his  remarks  are  the  more  valuable 
because  in  many  cases  they  coincide,  quite  inde 
pendently,  with  those  of  Hengstenberg.    Later,  how 
ever,  Drechsler  modified  his  view,  and  supposed  that 
the  several  uses  of  the  Divine  Names  were  owing  to 
a  didactic  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  writer,  ac 
cording  as  his  object  was  to  show  a  particular  rela 
tion  of  God  to  the  world,  whether  as  Elohim  or  as 
Jehovah.     Hence  he  argued  that,  whilst  different 
streams  flowed  through  the  Pentateuch,  they  were 
not  from  two  different  fountain-heads,  but  varied 
according  to  the  motive  which  influenced  the  writer, 
and  according  to  the  fundamental  thought  in  par 
ticular    sections ;    and    on    this    ground,    too,    he 
explained  the  characteristic  phraseology  which  dis 
tinguishes  such  sections.      Kanke's  work   (  Unter- 
guchungen  iiber  den  Pentateuch}  is  a  valuable  con 
tribution  to  the  exegesis  of  the  Pentateuch.     He  is 
especially  successful  in  establishing  the  inward  unity 
of  the  work,  and  in  showing  how  inseparably  the 
several  portions,  legal,  genealogical,  and  historical, 
are  interwoven  together.      Kurtz  (in  his  Einheit 
der  Genesis,  1846,  and  in  the  first  edition  of  his 
first  volume  of  the  Geschichte  des  Alten  Bundes] 
followed  on  the  same  side ;  but  he  has  since  aban 
doned  the  attempt  to  ezplain  the  use  of  the  Divin 
Names  on  the  principle  of  the  different  meanings 
which  they  bear,  and  has  espoused  the  theory  of 
two  distinct  documents.     Keil,  also,  though  he  does 
not  despair  of  the  solution  of  the  problem,  confesses 
(Luther.  Zeitschr.  1851-2,  p.  235)  that "  all  attempts 
as  yet  made,  notwithstanding  the  acumen  which  has 
been  brought  to  bear  to  explain  the  interchange  o 
the  Divine  Names  in  Genesis  on  the  ground  of  the 
different  meanings  which  they  possess,  must  be  pro 
nounced  a  failure."    Ebrard  (Das  Alter  des  Jehova- 
Natnens]  and  Tiele  (Stud,  und  Krit.  1852-1)  mak 
newly  the  same  admission.     This  manifest  doubt 
fulness  in  some  cases,  and  desertion  in  others  fron 
the  ranks  of  the  more  conservative  school,  is  signi 
ficant.     And  it  is  certainly  unfair  to  claim  con 
sistency  and  unanimity  of  opinion  for  one  side  t< 
the  prejudice   of  the   other.      The  truth  is  tha 
diversities  of  opinion  are  to  be  found  among  those 


c  Delitzsch,  however,  will  not  allow  that  "1SD3  mean 
In  the  already  existing  book,  but  in  one  which  was  U 
be  taken  for  the  occasion ;  and  he  refers  to  Num.  v.  23 


PENTATEUCH,  THK 

ho  are  opposed  to  the  theory  of  different  docu 
ments,  as  well  as  amongst  those  who  advocate  it. 
can  a  theory  which  has  been  adopted  by 
)elitzsch,  and  to  which  Kurtz  has  become  a  con- 
rert,  be  considered  as  either  irrational  or  irreligious, 
t  may  not  be  established  beyond  doubt,  but  the 
(resumptions  in  its  favour  are  strong;  nor,  when 
iroperly  stated,  will  it  be  found  open  to  any  serious 
bjection. 

II.  We  ask  in  the  next  place  what  is  the  testi 
mony  of  the  Pentateuch  itself  with  regard  to  it* 
authorship  ? 

1.  We  find  on  reference  to  Ex.  xxiv.  3,  4,  that 
'  Moses  came  and  told  the  people  all  the  words  of 
lehovah  and  all  the  judgments,"  and  that  he  subse 
quently  "  wrote  down  all  the  words  of  Jehovah." 
These  were  written  on  a  roll  called  "  the  book  of 
,he  covenant"  (ver.  7),  and  "  read  in  the  audience 
of  the  people."     These  "  words  "  and  "judgments" 
were  no  doubt  the  Sinaitic  legislation  so  far  as  it 
lad  as  yet  been  given,  and  which  constituted  in  fact 
the  covenant  between  Jehovah  and  the  people.  Upon 
Jie  renewal  of  this  covenant  after  the  idolatry  o: 
,he  Israelites,  Moses  was  again  commanded  by  Je- 
icvah  to  "  write  these  words"  (xxxiv.  27).  "  And," 
t  is  added,  "  he  wrote  upon  the  tables  the  words  of 
;he  covenant,  the  ten  commandments."     Leaving 
Deuteronomy  aside  for  the  present,  there  are  only- 
two  other  passages  in  which  mention  is  made  of  the 
writing  of  any  part  of  the  Law,  and  those  are  Ex. 
xvii.  14,  where  Moses  is  commanded  to  write  the 
defeat  of  Amalek  in  a  book  (or  rather  in  the  book, 
one  already  in  use  for  the  purpose e) ;  and  Num. 
xxxiii.  2,  where  we  are  informed  that  Moses  wrote 
the  journeyings  of  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
desert  and  the  various  stations  at  which  they  en 
camped.     It  obviously  does  not  follow  from  these 
statements  that  Moses  wrote  all  the  rest  of  the  first 
four  books  which  bear  his  name.     Nor  on  the  other 
hand  does  this  specific  testimony  with  regard  to 
certain  portions  justify  us  in  coming  to  an  opposite 
conclusion.     So  far  nothing  can  be  determined  posi 
tively  one  way  or  the  other.     But  it  may  be  said 
that  we  have  an  express  testimony  to  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Law  in  Deut.  xxxi.  9-12,  where 
•we  are  told  that  "  Moses  wrote  this  Law  ''  (miflH 
ntttn),  and  delivered  it  to  the  custody  of  the  priesta 
with  a  command  that  it  should  be  read  before  all 
the  people  at  the  end  of  every  seven  years,  on  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles.     In  ver.  24  it  is  further  said, 
that  when  he  "  had  made  an  end  of  writing  the 
words  of  this  Law  in  a  book  till  they  were  finished," 
he  delivered  it  to  the  Levites  to  be  placed  in  the 
side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  Jehovah,  that  it 
might  be  preserved  as  a  witness  against  the  people. 
Such  a  statement  is  no  doubt  decisive,  but  the  ques 
tion  is,  how  tar  does  it  extend.    Do  the  words  "  this 
Law"  comprise  all   the  Mosaic  legislation  as  con 
tained  in   the   last  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch, 
or  must  they  be  confined  only  to  Deuteronomy? 
The  last  is  apparently  the. only  tenable  view.     Ii 
Deut.  xvii.  18,  the  direction  is  given  that  the  kir.g 
on  his  accession  "  shall  write  him  a  copy  of  this 
Law  in  a  book  out  of  that  which  is  before  the 

three  passages  to  which  he  refers  do  not  help  him.  In  thu 
first  two  a  particular  book  kept  for  the  purpose  is  pro 
bably  intended;  and  in  2  Sam.  xi.  15,  tltc  book  or  leal  it 


1  Sam.  x.  25,  2  Sam.  xi.  15,  for  a  similar  use  of  the  article     meant  which  bad  already  been  mentioned  in  the  previous 
~IDD  he  takes  here,  as  in  Is.  xxx.  8,  to  mean  a  rfparaie  i  verse.     Hence  the  article  »  indispensable, 
leaf  or  plate  on  which  the  rcocrd  was  to  be  made.  But  tl.e 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

rriests  the  Levites."  The  words  "  copy  ot  tins 
Law,"  are  literally  "  repetition  of  this  Law  " 
('TH  'HP!  n^P),  which  is  another  name  for  the 

book  of  Deuteronomy,  and  hence  the  LXX.  render 
here  rb  Sfvrfpov6fj.iov  rovto,  and  Philo  rfyv  ^iri- 
vOfilSa,  and  although  it  is  true  that  Onkelos  uses 
i"13t£'D  (Mishneh)  in  the  sense  of  "  copy,"  and  the 
Talmud  in  the  sense  of  "duplicate"  (Carpzov  on 
Schickard's  Jus  reg.  Hebraeor.  pp.  82-84),  yet  as 
regards  the  passage  already  referred  to  in  xxxi. 
9,  &c.,  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  second  Temple 
received  as  an  unquestionable  tradition  that  Deute 
ronomy  only,  and  not  the  whole  Law  was  read  at 
the  end  of  every  seven  years,  in  the  year  of  release. 
The  words  are  D'Hlin  H7N  tWin  fl/TinD, 
"  from  the  beginning  of  Deuteronomy "  (Sota.  c. 
7  ;  Maimon.  Jad  hu-chazakah  in  Hilchoth  Chagiga, 
.:.  3 ;  Heland,  Antiq.  Sac.  p.  iv.  §1  l).d 

Besides,  it  is  on  the  face  of  it  very  improbable 
that  the  whole  Pentateuch  should  have  been  read  at 
a  national  feast,  whereas  that  Deuteronomy,  summing 
up,  spiritualizing,  and  at  the  same  time  enforcing 
t*«>  Law  should  so  have  been  read,  is  in  the  highest 
degree  probable  and  natural.  It  is  in  confirmation 
of  this  view  that  all  the  later  literature,  and  espe 
cially  the  writings  of  the  Prophets,  are  full  of  re 
ferences  to  Deuteronomy  as  the  book  with  which 
they  might  expect  the  most  intimate  acquaintance 
on  the  part  of  their  hearers.  So  in  other  passages 
in  which  a  written  law  is  spoken  of  v.-e  are  driven 
to  conclude  that  only  some  part  and  not  the  whole 
cf  the  Pentateuch  is  meant.  Thus  in  chap,  xxvii. 
3,  8,  Moses  commands  the  people  to  write  "  all  the 
words  of  this  Law  very  plainly  "  on  the  stones  set 
up  on  Mount  Ebal.  Some  have  supposed  that  only 
the  Decalogue,  others,  that  the  blessings  and  curses, 
which  immediately  follow,  were  so  to  be  inscribed 
Others  again  (as  Schulz,  Deuteron.  p.  87)  think 
that  some  summary  of  the  Law  may  have  been  in 
tended  ;  but  it  is  at  any  rate  quite  clear  that  the 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


773 


cannot  be  meant,  but  either  the  book  of  Deuterw 

nomy  only,  or  some  summary  of  the  Mosau:  legib- 

lation.     In  any  case  nothing  can  be  argued  froiu 

any  of  the  passages  to  which  we  have  refe.  red  as  to 

the  authorship  of  the  first  four  books.     Schultz, 

indeed,  contends  that  with  chap.  xxx.  the  discourses 

;  Moses  end,  and  that  therefore  whilst  the  phrass 

this  law,"  whenever  it  occurs  in  chaps,  i.-xxx., 

means  only  Deuteronomy,  yet  in  chap.  xxxi.  whero 

ic  narrative  is  resumed  and  the  history  of  Moses 

rought  to  a  conclusion,    "this  law"  would  na- 

urally   refer    to    the   whole   previous   legislation. 

'napter  xsxi.  brings  as  he  says,  to  a  termination, 

ot  Deuteronomy  only,  but  the  previous  books  a:. 

veil ;  for  without  it  they  would  be  incomplete.     In 

section  therefore  which  concludes  the  whole,  it  is 

easonable  to  suppose  that  the  words  "  this  law' 

.esignate  the  whole.     He  appeals,  moreover  (against 

)elitzsch),  to  the  Jewish  tradition,  and  to  the  words 

)f  Josephus,  6    apxtfpevs    eirl   jSifj/uoTos    wj/rjAot> 

ra6e\s  .„  .  .  avayivtaffK€T<a    TOVS    vAfiovs   iratn, 

and  also  to  the  absence  of  the  article  in  xxxi.  24, 

where    Moses   is  said  to   have   made    an  end    ol 

writing  the  Law  in   a   Book  (1QD  7J7),  whereas 

when  different  portions  are  spoken  of,  they  are  said 

to  have  been  written  in  the  Book  already  existing 

(Ex.  xvii.  14;  1  Sam.  x.  25;  Josh.  xxiv.  26).      It 

s  scarcely  conceivable,  he  says,  that  Moses  should 

lave  provided  so  carefully  for  the  safe  custody  and 

;ransmission  of  his  own  sermons  on  the  Law,  and 

lave  made  no  like  provision  tor  the  Law  itself, 

though  given   by  the  mouth   of  Jehovah.      Even 

therefore  if  "this  Law"  in  xxxi.  9,  24,  applies  in 

the  first  instance  to  Deuteronomy,  it  must  indirectly 

include,  if  not  the  whole  Pentateuch,  at  any  rate  the 

whole  Mosaic  legislation.     Deuteronomy  everywhere 

supposes  the  existence  of  the  earlier  books,  and  it  is 

not  credible  that  at  the  end  of  his  life  the  great 

Legislator  should  have  been  utterly  regardless  of  the 

Law  which  was  the  text,  and  solicitous  only  about 


expression  "  all  the  words  of  this  Low  "  does  no 
refer  to  the  whole  Pentateuch.  This  is  confirmee 
by  Josh.  viii.  32.  There  the  history  tells  us  tha 
Joshua  wrote  upon  the  stones  of  the  altar  whici 
lie  had  built  on  Mount  Ebal  "  a  copy  of  the  Law  o 
Moses  (mishneh  torath  Mosheh — the  same  expression 
which  we  have  in  Deut.  xvii.  18),  which  he  wrot 
in  the  presence  of  the  children  of  Israel.  .  .  .  Anc 
afterward  he  read  all  the  words  of  the  Law,  th 
blessings  and  cursings,  according  to  all  that  i 
written  in  the  book  of  the  Law."  On  this  we  ob 
serve,  first,  that  "  the  blessings  and  the  cursings 
here  specified  as  having  been  engraven  on  the  plaste 
with  which  the  stones  were  covered,  are  those  re 
corded  in  Deut.  xxvii.,  xxviii.,  and  next  that  th 
language  of  the  writer  renders  it  probable  that  othc 
portions  of  the  Law  were  added.  If  any  reliance 
to  be  placed  on  what  is  apparently  the  oldest  Jewis 
tradition  (see  below  note  d),  and  if  the  words  ren 
dered  in  our  version  "  copy  of  the  Law,"  mea 
"  repetition  of  the  Law,"  »'.  e.  the  book  of  Deute 
ronomy,  then  it  was  this  which  was  engraven  upo 
the  stones  and  read  in  the  hearing  of  Israel.  . 
seems  clear  that  the  whole  of  the  existing  Pentateuc 


the  discourses  which  were  the  comment.  The  one 
would  have  been  unintelligible  apart  from  the  other. 
There  is  no  doubt  some  force  in  these  arguments  ; 
but  as  yet  they  only  render  it  probable  that  if  Moses 
were  the  author  of  Deuteronomy,  he  was  the  author 
of  a  great  part  at  least  of  the  three  previous  books. 

So  far  then  the  direct  evidence  from  the  Penta 
teuch  itself  is  not  sufficient  to  establish  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  every  portion  of  the  Five  Books. 
Certain  parts  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers. 
ai»d  the  whole  of  Deuteronomy  to  the  end  of  chap, 
xrx.,  is  all  that  is  expressly  said  to  have  been 
written  by  Moses. 

Two  questions  are  yet  to  be  answered.  Is  there 
evidence  that  parts  of  the  work  were  not  written  by 
Moses  ?  Is  there  evidence  that  parts  of  the  work 
are  later  than  his  time  ? 

2.  The  next  question  we  ask  is  this:  Is  there 
.my  evidence  to  show  that  he  did  not  write  portions 
of  the  work  which  goes  by  his  name  ?  We  have 
already  referred  to  the  last  chapter  of  Deuteronomy 
which  gives  an  account  of  his  death.  Is  it  probable 
that  Moses  wrote  the  words  in  Ex.  xi.  3,  "  More 
over  the  man  Moses  was  very  great  in  the  land  ol 
Egypt,  in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh's  servants,  and  in 


has  inherited  from  his  ancestors. 
else  bu 


weans  nothirj. 


uteronomy).    Not  this  exclu 
sively,  however,  because  in  ver.  19  Is  said,  to  observe  aU 


*  "  The  passage  of  the  Sifri,"  says  Delitzsch  on  Genesi 
p.  63,  "  one  of  the  oldest  Midrashim  of  the  school  of  Rat 
(+247),  on  Deut  xvii.  18,  to  which  Raschi  refers  on  So 

41",  is  as  clear  as  it  is  important:  '  Let  him  (the  king)  j  the  ^rds  of  thjs  Law>  If  go>  then  why  {„  Deuteronomy 
~°Py  'TH  Tin  !"13£'D  FIN  in  a  book  for  himsclf  in  '  only  mentioned?  Because  on  the  day  of  wsecbly  Dealer- 
Daxti  -ular  and  let  biiu  not  be  satisfied  with  one  that  he  1  onomy  only  was  read.'" 

I 


774 


PEN7TATEUCH,  THE 


the  sight  of  the  people  ;" — or  those  in  Num.  xii.  3, 
"  Now  the  man  Moses  was  very  meek,  above  all 
the  men  which  were  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  ?" 
On  the  other  hand,  are  not  such  words  of  praise 
Just  what  we  might  expect  from  the  friend  and  dis- 
dple — for  such  perhaps  he  was — who  pronounced 
his  eulogium  after  his  death — "  And  there  arose 
not  a  prophet  since  in  Israel  like  unto  Moses,  whom 
Jehovah  knew  face  to  face  "  (Deut.  xxxiv.  10)  ? 

3.  But  there  is  other  evidence,  to  a  critical  eye 
not  a  whit  less  convincing,  which  points  in  the 
same  direction.  If,  without  any  theory  casting  its 
shadow  upon  us,  and  without  any  fear  of  conse 
quences  before  our  eyes,  we  read  thoughtfully  only 
the  Book  of  Genesis,  we  can  hardly  escape  the  con 
viction  that  it  partakes  of  the  nature  of  a  com 
pilation.  It  has  indeed  a  unity  of  plan,  a  coherence 
of  parts,  a  shapeliness  and  an  order,  which  satisfy 
us  that  as  it  stands  it  is  the  creation  of  a  single 
mind.  But  it  bears  also  manifest  traces  of  having 
been  based  upon  an  earlier  work ;  and  that  earliei 
work  itself  seems  to  have  had  embedded  in  it  frag 
ments  of  still  more  ancient  documents.  Before  pro 
ceeding  to  prove  this,  it  may  not  be  unnecessary  tc 
state,  in  order  to  avoid  misconstruction,  that  such  a 
theory  does  not  in  the  least  militate  against  thi 
divine  authority  of  the  book.  The  history  contains 
in  Genesis  could  not  have  beea  narrated  by  Moses 
from  personal  knowledge ;  but  whether  he  was 
taught  it  by  immediate  divine  suggestion,  or  was 
directed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  use  of  earliei 
documents,  is  immaterial  in  reference  to  the  inspire 
tion  of  the  work.  The  question  may  therefore  be 
safely  discussed  on  critical  grounds  alone. 

We  begin,  then,  by  pointing  out  some  of  the 
phenomena  which  the  Book  of  Genesis  presents.  At 
the  very  opening  of  the  book,  peculiarities  of  styl 
znd  manner  are  discernible,  which  can  scarcely 
escape  the  notice  of  a  careful  reader  even  of  a 
translation,  which  certainly  are  no  sooner  pointec 
out  than  we  are  compelled  to  admit  their  existence. 

The  language  of  chapter  i.  1-ii.  3  (where  the 
first  chapter  ought  to  have  been  made  to  end)  is 
totally  unlike  that  of  the  section  which  follows, 
ii.  4— iii.  23.  This  last  is  not  only  distinguished  by 
a  peculiar  use  of  the  Divine  Names — for  here  and 
nowhere  else  in  the  whole  Pentateuch,  except  Ex. 
i.\.  30,  have  we  the  combination  of  the  two, 
Jehovah  Elohim — but  also  by  a  mode  of  expression 
peculiar  to  itself.  It  is  also  remarkable  for  pre 
serving  an  account  of  the  Creation  distinct  from 
that  contained  in  the  first  chapter.  It  may  be  said, 
indeed,  that  this  account  does  not  contradict  the 
former,  and  might  therefore  have  proceeded  from  the 
same  pen.  But,  fully  admitting  that  there  is  no  con 
tradiction,  the  representation  is  so  different  that  it 
is  far  more  natural  to  conclude  that  it  was  derived 
from  some  other,  though  not  antagonistic  source. 
It  may  be  argued  that  here  we  have,  not  as  in  the 
first  instance  the  Divine  idea  and  method  of  Cre 
ation,  but  the  actual  relation  of  man  to  the  world 
around  him,  and  especially  to  the  vegetable  and 
animal  kingdoms;  that  this  is  therefore  only  a 
resumption  and  explanation  of  some  things  which 
had  been  mentioned  more  broadly  and  generally 
before.  Still  in  any  rase  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
this  second  account  has  the  character  of  a  supple 
ment  ;  that  it  is  designed,  if  not  to  correct,  at  least 
to  explain  the  other.  And  this  fact,  taken  in  con 
nexion  with  the  peculiarities  of  the  phraseology  and 
the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  in  the  same  section,  is 
quite  sufficient  to  justify  the  supposition  that  we 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

liave  here  an  instance,  not  of  independent  nai  r.uivt 
but  of  compilation  from  different  sources. 

To  take  another  instance.  Chapter  xiv.  is  beyond 
all  doubt  an  ancient  monument — papyrus-roll  it 
may  have  been,  or  inscription  on  stoLe,  which  has 
been  copied  and  transplanted  in  its  original  form 
into  our  present  Book  of  Genesis.  Archaic  it  is  in 
its  whole  character:  distinct  too,  again,  from  the 
rest  of  the  book  in  its  use  of  the  name  of  God. 
Here  we  have  El  'Elyon,  "  the  Most  High  God,* 
used  by  Melchizedec  first,  and  then  by  Abraham, 
who  adopts  it  and  applies  it  to  Jehovah,  as  if  to 
show  that  it  was  one  God  whom  he  worshipped  and 
whom  Melchizedec  acknowledged,  though  they  knew 
Him  under  different  appellations. 

We  believe,  then,  that  at  least  these  two  portions 
of  Genesis — chap.  ii.  4—iii.  24,  and  chap.  xiv. — are 
original  documents,  preserved,  it  may  have  been, 
like  the  genealogies,  which  are  also  a  very  promi 
nent  feature  of  the  book,  in  the  tents  of  the  patri 
archs,  *nd  made  use  of  either  l>y  the  Elohist  or  the 
Jehovist  for  his  history.  Indeed  Eichhorn  seems 
to  be  not  far  from  the  truth  when  he  observes, 
"  The  early  portion  of  the  history  was  composed 
merely  of  separate  small  notices ;  whilst  the  family 
history  of  the  Hebrews,  on  the  contrary,  runs  on 
in  two  continuous  narratives :  these,  however,  again 
have  not  only  here  and  there  some  passages  inserted 
from  other  sources,  as  chap,  xiv.,  xxxiii.  18-xxxiv 
31,  xxrvi.  1-43,  xlix.  1-27,  but  even  where  the 
authors  wrote  more  independently  they  often  bring 
together  traditions  which  in  the  course  of  time  had 
taken  a  different  form,  and  merely  give  them  as 
they  had  received  them,  without  intimating  which 
is  to  be  preferred"  (EM.  in  A.  T.  iii.  91,  §412). 

We  come  now  to  a  more  ample  examination  of 
the  question  as  to  the  distinctive  use  of  the  Divine 
Names.     Is  it  the  fact,  as  Astruc  was  the  first  to 
surmise,  that  this  early  portion  of  the  Pentateuch, 
extending  from  Gen.  i.  to  Ex.  vi.,  does  contain  two 
original  documents  characterised  by  their  separate 
use  of  the  Divine  Names  and  by  other  peculiarities 
of  style  ?    Of  this  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
We  do  find,  not  only  scattered  verses,  but  whole 
sections  thus  characterised.     Throughout  this  por 
tion  of  the  Pentateuch  the  name  HliT  (Jehovah) 
prevails  in  some  sections,  and  QTDN  (Elohim)  in 
others.     There  are  a  few  sections  where  both  are 
employed  indifferently;  and  there  are,  finally,  sec 
tions  of  some  leagth  in  which  neither  the  one  nor 
the  other  occurs.     A  list  of  these  has  been  given 
in  another  article.    [GENESIS.]   And  we  find  more 
over  that  in  connexion  with  this  use  of  the  Divine 
Names  there  is  also  a  distinctive  and  characteristic 
phraseology.     The  style  and  idiom  of  the  Jehovah 
sections  is  not  the  same  as  the  style  and  idiom  of 
the  Elohim  sections.     After  Ex.  vi.  2-vii.  7,  the 
name  Elohim  almost  ceases  to  be  characteristic  of 
whole  sections ;   the  only  exceptions  to  this  rale 
being  Ex.  xiii.  17-19  and  chap,  xviii.     Such  a  phe. 
nomenon  as  this  cannot  be  without  significance.    If, 
as  Hengstenberg  and  those  who  agree  with  hira 
would  persuade  us,  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  is 
to  be  accounted  for  throughout  by  a  reference  to 
their  etymology — if  the  author  uses  the  one  when 
iis  design  is  to  speak  of  God  as  the  Creator  and  the 
Judge,  and  the  other  when  his  object  is  to  set  forth 
God   as  the   Redeemer — then   it  still   cannot  but 
appear  remarkable   that   only  up  to  a  particular 
K>int  do  these  names  stamp  separate  sections  of  the 
narrative,  whereas  afterwards  all  such  distinctiv2 
riterion  fails.     How  is  this  fact  to  be  accounted 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

for?  Why  is  it  that  up  to  Ex.  vi.  each  name  lias  I 
it*  own  province  in  the  narrative,  broad  and  clearly 
&tiued,  whereas  in  the  subsequent  portions  the 
name  Jehovah  prevails,  and  Elohim  is  only  inter 
changed  wivh  it  here  and  there?  But  the  alleged 
design  in  the  use  of  the  Divine  Names  will  not  bear 
a  close  examination.  It  is  no  doubt  true  that 
throughout  the  story  of  Creation  in  i.  1-ii.  3  we 
have  Elohim — and  this  squares  with  the  hypothesis. 
There  is  some  plausibility  also  in  the  attempt  to 
explain  the  compound  use  of  the  Divine  Names  in 
the  next  section,  by  the  fact  that  here  we  have  the 
traiiMtion  from  the  History  of  Creation  to  the  His 
tory  of  Redemption ;  that  here  consequently  we 
should  expect  to  find  God  exhibited  in  both  cha 
racters,  as  the  God  who  made  and  the  God  who 
redeems  the  world.  That  after  the  Fall  it  should 
be  Jehovah  who  speaks  in  the  history  of  Cain  and 
Abel  is  on  the  same  principle  intelligible,  viz.  that 
this  name  harmonises  best  with  the  features  of  the 
narrative.  But  when  we  come  to  the  history  of 
Noah  the  criterion  fails  us.  Why,  for  instance, 
should  it  be  said  that  "  Noah  found  grace  in  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah"  (vi.  8),  and  that  "Noah  walked 
with  Elohim"  (vi.  9)?  Surely  on  the  hypothesis 
it  should  have  been,  "  Noah  walked  with  Jehovah," 
for  Jehovah,  not  Elohim,  is  His  Name  as  the  God 
of  covenant  and  grace  and  self-revelation.  Heng- 
stenberg's  attempt  to  explain  this  phrase  by  an 
opposition  between  "  walking  with  God  "  and 
"  walking  with  the  world  "  is  remarkable  only  fin 
ite  ingenuity.  Why  should  it  be  more  natural  or 
more  forcible  even  than  to  imply  an  opposition 
between  the  world  and  its  Creator,  than  between 
the  world  and  its  Redeemer  ?  The  reverse  is  what 
we  should  expect.  To  walk  with  the  world  does 
not  mean  with  the  created  things  of  the  world,  but 
with  the  spirit  of  the  world ;  and  the  emphatic 
opposition  to  that  spirit  is  to  be  found  in  the  spirit 
which  confesses  its  need  and  lays  hold  of  the  promise 
of  Redemption.  Hence  to  walk  with  Jehivah  (not 
Elohim)  would  be  the  natural  antithesis  to  walking 
with  the  world.  So,  again,  how  on  the  hypothesis 
of  Hengstenberg,  can  we  satisfactorily  account  fbf  its 
being  said  in  vi.  22,  "  Thus  did  Noah ;  according  to 
all  that  God  (Elohim)  commanded  him,  so  did  he :" 
and  in  vii.  5,  "  And  Noah  did  according  unto  all 
that  Jehovah  commanded  him :"  while  again  in  vii.  9 
Elohim  occurs  in  the  same  phrase  ?  The  elaborate 
ingenuity  by  means  of  which  Hengstenberg,  Drech- 
sler,  and  others,  attempt  to  account  for  the  specific 
use  of  the  several  names  in  these  instances  is  in  fact 
its  own  refutation.  The  stern  constraint  of  a  theory 
could  alone  have  suggested  it. 

The  fact  to  which  we  have  referred  that  there  is 
this  distinct  use  of  the  names  Jehovah  and  Elohim 
in  the  earlier  portion  of  the  Pentateuch,  is  no 
doubt  to  be  explained  by  what  we  are  told  in  Ex. 
vi.  2,  "  And  Elohim  spake  unto  Moses,  and  said 
unto  him,  I  am  Jehovah :  and  I  appeared  unto 
Abraham,  unto  Isaac,  and  unto  Jacob  as  El-Shaddai, 
but  by  my  name  Jehovah  was  I  not  known  to 
them."  Does  this  mean  that  the  name  Jehovah 
was  literally  unknown  to  the  Patriarchs  ?  that  the 
first  revelation  of  it  was  that  made  to  Moses  in 
chap.  iii.  13,  14?  where  we  read:  "And  Moses 
eaid  unto  God,  Behold,  when  I  come  unto  the  chil 
dren  of  Israel,  and  shall  say  unto  them,  The  God  of 
your  fathers  hath  sent  me  unto  you  ;  and  they  shall 
say  to  me,  What  is  His  Name?  what  shall  I  say 
unto  them  ?  And  God  said  unto  Moses,  I  AM 
THAT  I  AM  and  He  said.  Thus  shall  thoti  say 


PENTATEUCH,  THE  776 

unto  the  children  of  Israel,  I  AM  hath  wnt  me 
unto  you." 

This  is  undoubtedly  the  first  explanation  of  the 
name.  It  is  now,  and  now  first,  that  Israel  is  to 
be  made  to  understand  the  full  import  of  thai 
Name.  This  they  are  to  learn  by  the  redemption 
out  of  Egypt.  By  means  of  the  deliverance  they 
are  to  recognize  the  character  of  their  deliverer. 
The  God  of  their  fathers  is  not  a  God  of  power 
only,  but  a  God  of  faithfulness  and  of  love,  the  God 
who  has  made  a  covenant  with  His  chosen,  and  who 
therefore  will  not  forsake  them.  This  seems  to  be 
the  meaning  of  the  "I  AM  THAT  I  AM  '  (PPHN 
fVflN  "tt?K)»  or  as  it  may  perhaps  be  Utter  ren 
dered,  "I  am  He- whom  I  prove  myself  to  be." 
The  abstract  idea  of  self-existence  can  hardly  be 
conveyed  by  this  name  ;  but  rather  the  idea  that 
God  is  what  He  is  in  relation  to  His  people.  Now, 
in  this  sense  it  is  clear  God  had  not  fully  made 
Himself  known  before. 

The  name  Jehovah  may  have  existed,  though  we 
have  only  two  instances  of  this  in  the  history, — the 
one  in  the  name  Moriah  (Gen.  xxii.  2),  and  tlic 
other  in  the  name  of  the  mother  of  Moses  (Ex.  vi. 
20),  who  was  called  Jochebed ;  both  names  formed 
by  composition  from  the  Divine  name  Jehovah.  It 
is  certainly  remarkable  that  during  the  patriarchal 
times  we  rind  no  other  instance  of  a  proper  name  so 
compounded.  Names  of  persons  compounded  with 
El  and  Shaddai  we  do  find,  but  not  with  Jehovah. 
This  fact  abundantly  shows  that  the  name  Jehovah 
was,  if  not  altogether  unknown,  at  any  rate  not 
understood.  And  thus  we  have  "  an  undesigne.1 
coincidence"  in  support  of  the  accuracy  of  the  nar 
rative.  God  says  in  Exodus,  He  was  not  known 
by  that  name  to  the  patriarchs.  The  Jehovistic 
writer  of  the  patriarchal  history,  whether  Moses  or 
one  of  his  friends,  uses  the  name  freely  as  one  with 
which  he  himself  was  familiar,  but  it  never  appears 
in  the  history  and  life  of  the  Patriarchs  as  one 
which  Was  familiar  to  them.  On  the  other  hand, 
passages  like  Gen.  iv.  26,  and  ix.  26,  seem  to  show 
that  the  name  was  not  altogether  unknown.  Hence 
Astruc  remarks :  "  Le  passage  de  1'Exode  bien  en- 
tendu  ne  prouve  point  que  le  nom  de  Jehova  fut 
un  nom  de  Dieu  inconnu  aux  Patriarches  et  reYe'id 
&  Moyse  le  premier,  mais  prouve  settlement  que 
Dieu  n'  avoit  pas  fait  connoitre  aux  Patriarches 
toute  I'&endue  de  la  signification  de  ce  nom,  an 
lieu  qu'il  1'a  manifested  a  Moyse."  The  expression 
in  Ex.  vi.  3,  "  I  was  not  known,  or  did  not  make 
myself  known,"  is  in  fact  to  be  understood  with  the 
same  limitation  as  when  (John  i.  17)  it  is  said,  that 
"  Grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ "  as  in 
opposition  to  the  Law  of  Moses,  which  does  not 
mean  that  there  was  no  Grace  or  Truth  in  the  Old 
Covenant;  or  as  when  (John  vii.  39)  it  is  said, 
"  The  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet,  because  Jesus  w;is 
not  yet  glorified,"  which  does  not  of  course  exclude 
all  operation  of  the  Spirit  before. 

Still  this  phenomenon  of  the  distinct  use  of  tne 
Divine  names  would  scarcely  of  itself  prove  the 
point,  that  there  are  two  documents  which  form  the 
groundwork  of  the  existing  Pentateuch.  But  there 
is  other  evidence  pointing  the  same  way.  We  find, 
for  instance,  the  same  story  told  by  the  two  writers, 
and  their  two  accounts  manifestly  interwoven ;  and 
we  find  also  certain  favourite  words  and  phrates 
which  distinguish  the  cne  writer  from  the  other. 

(1.)  In  proof  of  the  first,  it  is  sufficient  to  raid 
the  history  of  Noah. 


776 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


In  order  to  make  this  more  dear,  we  will  separate 
the  two  documents,  and  arrange  them  in  parallel 
columns : — 


JEHOVAH. 

Gen.  vi.  5.  And  Je 
hovah  saw  that  the  wick 
edness  of  man  was  great 
in  the  earth,  and  that 
every  imagination  of  the 
thoughts  of  his  heart  was 
only  evil  continually. 
And  it  repented  Jehovah, 

to. 

7.  And  Jehovah  said, 
I  will  blot  out  man  whom 
I  have  created  from  off 
the  face  of  the  ground. 


ELOHIX. 

Gen.  vi.  12.  And  Elo- 
him  saw  the  earth,  and 
behold  it  was  corrupt ; 
for  all  flesh  had  corrupted 
his  way  upon  the  earth. 


13.  And  Elohim  said  to 
Noah,  The  end  of  all  flesh 
is  come  before  me,  for  the 
tarth  is  filled  with  vio 
lence  because  of  them, 
and  behold  I  will  destroy 
them  with  the  earth. 

vi.  9.  Noah  a  righteous 
man  was  perfect  in  his 
generation.  With  Elohim 
did  Noah  walk. 

vi.  19.  And  of  every 
living  thing  of  all  flesh, 
two  of  all  shall  thou  bring 
into  the  ark  to  preserve 
alive  with  thee  :  male  and 
female  shall  they  be. 

20.  Of  fcwl  after  their 
kind,  and  of  cattle  after 
their  kind,  of  every  thing 
that  creepeth  on  the 
ground  after  his  kind, 
two  of  all  shall  come  unto 
thee  that  thou  mayest 
preserve  (them)  alive. 

vi.  17.  And  I,  behold  I 
do  bring  the  flood,  waters 
upon  the  earth,  to  destroy 
all  flesh  wherein  is  the 
breath  of  life,  from  under 
heaven,  all  that  is  in  the 
earth  shall  perish. 

vi.  22.  And  Noah  did 
according  to  all  that  Elo 
him  commanded  him ;  so 
did  he. 

Without  carrj'ng  this  parallelism  further  at 
length,  we  will  merely  indicate  by  references  the 
traces  of  the  two  documents  in  the  rest  of  the  nar 
rative  of  the  Flood  : — vii.  1,  6,  on  the  Jehovah  side, 
answer  to  vi.  18,  vii.  11,  on  the  Elohim  side;  vii. 
7,  8,  9,  17,  23,  to  vii.  13,  14,  15,  16,  18,  21,  22 ; 
viii.  21,  22,  toix.  8,  9,  10,  11. 

It  is  quite  true  that  we  find  both  in  earlier  and 
later  writers  repetitions,  which  may  arise  either 
from  accident  or  from  want  of  skill  on  the  part  of 
the  author  or  compiler ;  but  neither  the  one  iior  the 
other  would  account  for  the  constant  repetition 
which  here  runs  through  all  parts  of  the  narrative. 

(2.)  But  again  we  find  that  these  duplicate 
narratives  are  characterized  by  peculiar  modes  of 
expression ;  and  that,  generally,  the  Elohistic  and 
Jehovistic  sections  have  their  own  distinct  and  indi 
vidual  colouring. 

We  find  certain  favourite  phrases  peculiar  to  the 
Klnliistii:  passages.  Such,  for  instance,  are  !"UriX, 
"  possession  ;"  Q^-UD  }'^N,  "  land  of  sojourn- 
ings  ;"  D3»rrt-nS,  or  Dnhi*6,  <c  after  your,  or 


*ii.  1.  And  Jehovah 

said  to  Noah Thee 

have  I  seen  righteous  be 
fore  me  in  this  genera 
tion. 

vii.  2.  Of  all  cattle 
which  is  clean  thou  shalt 
take  to  thee  by  sevens, 
tnale  and  his  female,  and 
of  all  cattle  which  is  net 
clean,  two,  male  and  his 
female. 

3.  Also  of  fowl  of  the 
air  by  sevens,  male  and 
female,  to  preserve  seed 
alive  on  the  face  of  all 
the  earth. 


vii.  4.  For  in  yet 
seven  days  I  will  send 
rain  upon  the  earth  forty 
days  and  forty  nightn, 
and  I  will  blot  out  all  the 
substance  which  I  have 
made  from  off  the  face  of 
the  ground. 

vii.  5.  And  Noah  did 
according  to  all  that  Je 
hovah  commanded  him. 


PENTATEUCH,  THK 

their,  generations  ;"  13*0?,  or  FlJ'Dp,  "  after  hiv 
or  her,  krnd  ;"  n:tn  D1»n  DVJtt,  "  on  the  self- 
same  day;"  D1K  f^lS,  "PadanAiam"  —  for  which 
in  the  Jehovistic  portions  we  always  find  D1K 
"  Aram  Naharaim,"  or  simply  D"1^, 
"  Aram  ;"  ni"11  m3,  "  be  fruitful  and  multipij  ;' 
*n,  "establish  a  covenant"  —  the  Jeho 


vistic  phrase  being  JV"13  fl"13,  "  to  make  (lit. 
'  cut')  a  covenant."  So  again  we  find  JTnS  JYIN, 
"  sign  of  the  covenant  ;"  D71JJ  IV]3>  "  everlasting 
covenant;"  n3j33-1  "I3T,  "male  and  female"  (in 
stead  of  theT  Jehovistic  1FIBW 


"swarming  or  creeping  thing;"  and  f*")K>  :  and 
the  common  superscription  of  the  genealogical  por 
tions,  rril^n  H?N,'  "  these  are  the  generations 

of,"  &c.,  are,  if  not  exclusively,  yet  almost  exclu- 
sively,  characteristic  of  those  sections  in  which  the 
name  Elohim  occurs. 

There  is  therefore,  it  seems,  good  ground  for 
concluding  that,  besides  some  smaller  independent 
documents,  traces  may  be  discovered  of  two  ori 
ginal  historical  works,  which  form  the  basis  of  the 
present  book  of  Genesis  and  of  the  earlier  chapters 
of  Exodus. 

Of  these  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Elohistic 
is  the  earlier.  The  passage  in  Ex.  vi.  establishes 
this,  as  well  as  the  matter  and  style  of  the  document 
itself.  Whether  Moses  himself  was  the  author  of 
either  of  these  works  is  a  different  question.  Both 
are  probably  in  the  main  as  old  as  his  time  ;  the 
Elohistic  certainly  is,  and  perhaps  older.  But  other 
questions  must  be  considered  before  we  can  pro 
nounce  with  certainty  on  this  head. 

4.  But  we  may  now  advance  a  step  further. 
There  are  certain  references  of  time  and  place  which 
prove  clearly  that  the  work,  in  its  present  form,  is 
later  thf.n  the  time  of  Moses.  Notices  there  are 
scattered  here  and  there  which  can  only  be  ac 
counted  for  fairly  on  one  of  two  suppositions  —  viz., 
either  a  later  composition  of  the  whole,  or  the 
revision  of  an  editor  who  found  it  necessary  to 
introduce  occasionally  a  few  words  by  way  of  ex 
planation  or  correction.  When,  for  instance,  it  is 
said  (Gen.  xii.  6,  comp.  xiii.  7),  "  And  the  Canaanite 
was  then  (TK)  in  the  land,"  the  obvious  meaning 
of  such  a  remark  seems  to  be  that  the  state  of 
things  was  different  in  the  time  of  the  writer;  that 
now  the  Canaanite  was  there  no  longer  ;  and  the 
conclusion  is  that  the  words  must  have  been  written 
after  the  occupation  of  the  land  by  the  Israelites. 
In  any  other  book,  as  Vaihinger  justly  remarks, 
we  should  certainly  draw  this  inference. 

The  principal  notices  of  time  and  place  which 
have  been  alleged  as  bespeaking  for  the  Pentateuch 
a  later  date  are  the  following:  — 

(a.)  References  of  time.  Ex.  vi.  26,  27,  need 
not  be  regarded  as  a  later  addition,  for  it  obviously 
sums  up  the  genealogical  register  given  just  before. 
and  refers  back  to  ver.  13.  But  it  is  more  naturally 
reconcilable  with  some  other  authorship  than  that 
of  Moses.  Again,  Ex.  xvi.  33-36,  though  it  must 
have  been  introduced  after  the  rest  of  the  book  was 
written,  may  have  been  added  by  Moses  himself, 
supposing  him  to  have  composed  the  rest  of  the 
book.  Moses  there  directs  Aaron  to  'iy  uy  tli? 
manna  before  Jehovah,  ami  then  we  :«.*i:  "  Ai 
I 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

Jehovah  commanded  Moses,  so  Aaron  laid  it  up 
before  the  Testimony  (t.  e.  the  Ark)  to  be  kept. 
And  the  children  of  Israel  did  eat  manna  forty 
years,  until  they  came  to  a  land  inhabited ;  they 
did  eat  manna  until  they  came  unto  the  borders  of 
the  land  of  Canaan."  Then  follows  the  remark, 
"  Now  an  omer  is  the  tenth  part  of  an  ephah."  It 
is  clear  then  that  this  passage  was  written  not  only 
after  the  Ark  was  made,  but  after  the  Israelites 
had  entered  the  Promised  Land.  The  plain  and 
obvious  intention  of  the  writer  is  to  tell  us  when 
the  manna  ceased,  not,  as  Hengstenberg  contends, 
merely  how  long  it  continued.  So  it  is  said  (Josh. 
v.  12),  "And  the  manna  ceased  on  the  morrow 
after  they  had  eaten  of  the  old  com  of  the  land,"  &c. 
The  observation,  too,  about  the  oraer  could  only 
have  been  made  when  the  omer  as  a  measure  had 
fallen  into  disuse,  which  it  is  hardly  supposable 
could  have  taken  place  in  the  lifetime  of  Moses. 
Still  these  passages  are  not  absolutely  irreconcilable 
with  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  book.  Verse  35 
may  be  a  later  gloss  only,  as  Le  Clerc  and  Rosen- 
inuller  believed. 

The  difficulty  is  greater  with  a  passage  in  the 
book  of  Genesis.  The  genealogical  table  of  Esau's 
family  (chap,  xxxvi.)  can  scarcely  be  regarded  as  a 
later  interpolation.  It  does  not  interrupt  the  order 
and  connexion  of  the  book ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is 
a  most  essential  part  of  its  structure ;  it  is  one  of 
the  ten  "  generations "  or  genealogical  registers 
which  form,  so  to  speak,  the  backbone  of  the  whole. 
Here  we  find  the  remark  (ver.  31),  "  And  these 
are  the  kings  that  reigned  in  the  land  of  Edom, 
before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of 
Israel."  Le  Clerc  supposed  this  to  be  a  later  ad 
dition,  and  Hengstenberg  confesses  the  difficulty  of 
the  passage  (Auth.  d.  Pentat.  ii.  202).  But  the 
difficulty  is  not  set  aside  by  Hengstenberg's  remark 
that  the  reference  is  to  the  prophecy  already  deli 
vered  in  xxxv.  11,  '•  Kings  shall  come  out  of  thy 
loins."  No  unprejudiced  person  can  read  the  words, 
"  befoie  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children 
of  Israel,"  without  feeling  that  when  they  were 
written,  kings  had  already  begun  to  reign  over 
Israel.  It  is  a  simple  historical  fact  that  for  cen 
turies  after  the  death  of  Moses  no  attempt  was 
made  to  establish  a  monarchy  amongst  the  Jews. 
Gideon  indeed  (Judg.  viii.  22,  23)  might  have 
become  king,  or  perhaps  rather  military  dictator, 
but  was  wise  enough  to  decline  with  firmness  the 
dangerous  honour.  His  son  Abimelech,  less  scru 
pulous  and  more  ambitious,  prevailed  upon  the 
Shechemites  to  make  him  king,  and  was  acknow 
ledged,  it  would  seem,  by  other  cities,  but  he 
perished  after  a  turbulent  reign  of  three  years, 
without  being  able  to  perpetuate  his  dynasty.  Such 
facts  are  not  indicative  of  any  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
Israelites  at  that  time  to  be  ruled  by  kings.  There 
was  no  detp-rooted  national  tendency  to  monarchy 
which  could  account  for  the  observation  in  Gen.xxxvi. 
on  the  part  of  a  writer  who  lived  centuries  before 
a  monarchy"  was  established.  It  is  impossible  not 
to  feel  in  the  words,  as  Ewald  observes,  that  the 
narrator  almost  envies  Edom  because  she  had  en 
joyed  the  blessings  of  a  regular  well-ordered  king 
dom  so  long  before  Israel.  An  historical  remark 
of  this  kind,  it  must  be  remembered,  is  widely 
different  from  th?  provision  made  in  Deuteronomy 


PENTATEUCH,  THE  77? 

for  the  possible  case  that  at  some  later  time  a 
monarchy  would  be  established.  It  is  one  thing 
for  a  writer  framing  laws,  which  are  to  be  the 
heritage  of  his  people  and  the  basis  of  their  consti 
tution  for  all  time,  to  prescribe  what  shall  be  done 
when  they  shall  elect  a  king  to  reign  over  them. 
It  is  another  thing  for  a  writer  comparing  the  con 
dition  of  another  country  with  his  own  to  say  that 
the  one  had  a  monarchical  fonn  of  government  long 
before  the  other.  The  one  might  be  the  dictate  of 
a  wise  sagacity  forecasting  the  future ;  the  other 
could  only  be  said  at  a  time  when  both  nations 
alike  were  governed  by  kings.  In  the  former  case 
we  might  even  recognise  a  spirit  of  prophecy :  in 
the  latter  this  is  out  of  the  question.  Either  then 
we  must  admit  that  the  book  of  Genesis  did  not 
exist  as  a  whole  till  the  times  of  David  and  Solomon, 
or  we  must  regard  this  particular  verse  as  the  inter 
polation  of  a  later  editor.  And  this  last  \s  not  so 
improbable  a  supposition  as  Vaihinger  would  repre 
sent  it.  Perfectly  true  it  is  that  the  whole  genea 
logical  table  could  have  been  no  later  addition :  it 
is  manifestly  an  integral  part  of  the  book.  But  the 
words  in  question,  ver.  31,  may  have  been  inserted 
later  from  the  genealogical  table  in  1  Chr.  i.  43 ; 
and  if  so,  it  may  have  been  introduced  by  Ezra  in 
his  revision  of  the  Law.* 

Similar  remarks  may  perhaps  apply  to  Lev.  xviii. 
28  :  "  That  the  land  spue  not  you  out  also  when 
ye  defile  it,  as  it  spued  out  the  nation  that  was 
before  you."  This  undoubtedly  assumes  the  occu 
pation  of  the  Land  of  Canaan  by  the  Israelites. 
The  great  difficulty  connected  with  this  passage, 
however,  is  that  it  is  not  a  supplementary  remark 
of  the  writer's,  but  that  the  words  are  the  words 
of  God  directing  Moses  what  he  is  to  say  to  the 
children  of  Israel  (ver.  1).  And  this  is  not  set 
aside  even  if  we  suppose  the  book  to  have  been 
written,  not  by  Moses,  but  by  one  of  the  elders 
after  the  entrance  into  Canaan. 

(6.)  In  several  instances  older  names  of  places 
give  place  to  those  which  came  later  into  use  in 
Canaan.  In  Gen.  xiv.  14,  and  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  1, 
occurs  the  name  of  the  well-known  city  of  Dan. 
But  in  Josh.  xix.  47  we  are  distinctly  told  that 
this  name  was  given  to  what  was  originally  called 
Leshem  (or  Laish)  by  the  children  of  Dan  aftei 
they  had  wrested  it  from  the  Canaanites.  The 
same  account  is  repeated  still  more  circumstantially 
in  Judg.  xviii.  27-29,  where  it  is  positively  asserted 
that  "  the  name  of  the  city  was  Laish  at  the  first/' 
It  is  natural  that  the  city  should  be  called  Dan  it 
Deut.  xxxiv.,  as  that  is  a  passage  written  beyond 
all  doubt  after  the  occupation  of  the  Land  ol 
Canaan  by  the  Israelites.  But  in  Genesis  we  can 
only  fairly  account  for  its  appearance  by  supposing 
that  the  old  name  Laish  originally  stood  in  the 
MS.,  and  that  Dan  was  substituted  for  it  on  some 
later  revision.  [!)AN.] 

In  Josh.  xiv.  15  (comp.  xv.  13,  54)  and  Judg. 
5.  10  we  are  told  that  the  original  name  of  Hebron 
before  the  conquest  of  Canaan  was  Kirjath-Arba. 
In  Gen.  xxiii.  2  the  older  name  occurs,  and  the 
explanation  is  added  (evidently  by  some  one  who 
wrote  later  than  the  occupation  of  Canaan),  "  the 
same  is  Hebron."  In  Gen.  xiii.  18  we  find  the  name 
of  Hebron  standing  alone  and  without  any  ex- 
planation.  Hence  Keil  supposes  that  this  was  tin 


*  Psalm  xiv.  furnishes  a  curious  instance  of  the  way  in  passages  of  Scripture  to  his  quotation.  Hence  the  LXX 
which  a  passage  may  he  introduced  into  an  earlier  book,  have  transferred  these  passages  from  the  Kpistle  into  the 
St  Paul  quoting  this  psalm  in  Row.  iii.  10,  subjoins  other  |  Psalm,  and  have  bea>  followed  by  the  Vulg.  and  Arab. 


778 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


original  name,  that  the  place  came  to  be  called 
Kirjath-Arba  in  the  interval  between  Abraham  and 
Moses,  and  that  in  the  time  of  Joshua  it  was  cu.-,- 
tomary  to  speak  of  it  by  its  ancient  instead  of  its 
more  modern   name.      This  is  not  an  impossible 
supposition ;  but  it  is  more  obvious  to  explain  th 
apparent  anachronism  as  the  correction  of  a  late 
editor,  especially  as  the  correction  is  actually  give 
in  so  many  words  in  the  other  passage  (xxiii. 

Another  instance  of  a  similar  kind  is  the  occur 
rence  of  Hormah  in  Num.  xiv.  45,  xxi.  1-3,  com 
pared  with  Judg.  i.  17.  It  may  be  accounted  for 
however,  thus: — In  Num.  xxi.  3  we  have  the  origir 
of  the  name  explained.  The  book  of  Number  was 
written  later  than  this,  and  consequently,  even  in 
speaking  of  an  earlier  event  which  took  place  a 
the  same  spot,  the  writer  might  apply  the  name 
though  at  that  point  of  the  history  it  had  not  beei 
given.  Then  in  Judg.  i.  17  we  have  the  Canaanit 
name  Zephath  (for  the  Canaanites  naturally  wouli 
not  have  adopted  the  Hebrew  name  given  in  token 
of  their  victory),  and  are  reminded  at  the  same 
time  of  the  original  Hebrew  designation  given  in 
the  Wilderness. 

So  far,  then,  judging  the  work  simply  by  whal 
we  find  in  it,  there  is  abundant  evidence  to  show 
that,  though  the  main  bulk  of  it  is  Mosaic,  certain 
detached  portions  of  it  are  of  later  growth. 
are  not  obliged,  because  of  the  late  date  of  these 
portions,  to  bring  down  the  rest  of  the  book  to 
later  times.  This  is  contrary  to  the  express 
claim  advanced  by  large  portions  at  least  to  be 
ft-om  Moses,  and  to  other  evidence,  both  literary 
and  historical,  in  favour  of  a  Mosaic  origin.  On 
the  other  hand,  when  we  remember  how  entirely 
during  some  periods  of  Jewish  history  the  Law 
seems  to  have  been  forgotten,  and  again  how  neces 
sary  it  would  be  after  the  seventy  years  of  exile  to 
explain  some  of  its  archaisms  and  to  add  here  and 
there  short  notes  to  make  it  more  intelligible  to 
the  people,  nothing  can  be  more  natural  than  to 
suppose  that  such  later  additions  were  made  by 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

III.  We  are  now  to  consider  the  evidence  lyii 
outside  of  the  Pentateuch  itself,  which  bears  upon 
its  authorship  and  the  probable  date  of  its  compo 
sition.  This  evidence  is  of  three  kinds :  first,  direct 
mention  of  the  work  as  already  existing  in  the  later 
books  of  the  Bible ;  secondly,  the  existence  of  a  book 
substantially  the  same  as  the  present  Pentateuch 
amongst  the  Samaritans ;  and,  lastly,  allusions  less 
direct,  such  as  historical  references,  quotations,  and 
the  like,  which  presuppose  its  existence. 

1.  We  have  direct  evidence  for  the  authorship 
of  the  Law  in  Josh.  i.  7,  8,  "  according  to  all  the 
Law  which  Moses  my  servant  commanded  thee," — 
"this  book  of  the  Law  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth," — and  viii.  31,  34,  xxiii.  6  (in  xxiv.  26, 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  God "),  in  all  which 
places  Moses  is  said  to  have  written  it.  This  agrees 
with  what  we  have  already  seen  respecting  Deu 
teronomy  and  certain  other  portions  of  the  Penta 
teuch  which  are  ascribed  in  the  Pentateuch  itself 
to  Moses.  They  cannot,  however,  be  cited  as  prov 
ing  that  the  Pentateuch  in  its  present  form  and  in 
all  its  parts  is  Mosaic. 

The  book  of  Judges  does  not  speak  of  the  book 
of  the  Law.  A  reason  may  be  alleged  for  this 
difference  between  the  books  of  Joshua  and  Judges. 
In  the  eyes  of  Joshua,  the  friend  and  immediate 
successor  of  Moses,  the  Law  would  possess  unspeak 
able  value.  It  was  to  be  his  guide  as  the  Captain 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

of  the  people,  and  on  the  basis  of  the  Law  was  t« 
rest  all  the  life  of  the  people  both  civil  and  nil- 
gious,  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  He  had  received, 
moreover,  from  God  Himself,  an  express  charge  to 
observe  and  do  according  to  all  that  w<-is  written  ia 
the  Law.  Hence  we  are  not  surprised  at  the  pro 
minent  position  which  it  occupies  in  the  book  which 
tells  us  of  the  exploits  of  Joshua.  In  the  book  ol 
Judges  on  the  other  hand,  where  we  see  the  nation 
departing  widely  from  the  Mosaic  institutions,  lapsing 
into  idolatry  and  falling  under  the  power  of  foreign 
oppressors,  the  absence  of  all  mention  of  the  Book 
of  the  Law  is  easily  to  be  accounted  for. 

It  is  a  little  remarkable,  however,  that  no  direct 
mention  of  it  occurs  in  the  books  of  Samuel.  Con 
sidering  the  express  provision  made  for  a  monarchy 
in  Deuteronomy,  we  should  have  expected  that  on 
the  first  appointment  of  a  king  some  reference 
would  have  been  made  to  the  requirements  of  thf 
Law.  A  prophet  like  Samuel,  we  might  have 
thought,  could  not  fail  to  direct  the  attention  of  the 
newly  made  king  to  the  Book  in  accordance  with 
which  he  was  to  govern.  But  if  he  did  this,  UK 
history  does  not  tell  us  so;  though  there  are,  it 
is  true,  allusions  which  can  only  be  interpreted  on 
the  supposition  that  the  Law  was  known.  The 
first  mention  of  the  Law  of  Moses  after  the  esta 
blishment  of  the  monarchy  is  in  David's  charge  to 
his  son  Solomon,  on  his  death-bed  (IK.  ii.  3). 
From  that  passage  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  David 
had  himself  framed  his  rule  in  accordance  with  it, 
and  was  desirous  that  his  son  should  do  the  same. 
The  words  "  as  it  is  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses," 
how  that  some  portion,  at  any  rate,  of  our  present 
Pentateuch  is  referred  to,  and  that  the  Law  was  re 
ceived  as  the  Law  of  Moses.  The  allusion,  too, 
seems  to  be  to  parts  of  Deuteronomy,  and  therefore 
favours  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  that  book.  In 
viii.  9,  we  are  told  that  "  there  was  nothing  in  the 
irk  save  the  two  tables  of  stone  which  Moses  put 
there  at  Horeb."  In  viii.  53,  Solomon  uses  the 
words,  "  As  Thou  spakest  by  the  hand  of  Moses 
Thy  servant;"  but  the  reference  is  too  general  to 
)rove  anything  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
«uch.  The  reference  may  be  either  to  Ex.  six.  5, 
6,  or  to  Deut.  xiv.  2. 

In  2  K.  xi.  12,  "the  testimony"  is  put  into 
•he  hands  of  Joash  at  his  coronation.  This  must 
lave  been  a  book  containing  either  the  whole  of  the 
Mosaic  Law,  or  at  least  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy, 
a  copy  of  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  king  was  ex 
acted  to  make  with  his  own  hand  at  the  time  of 
lis  accession. 

In  the  Books  of  Chronicles  far  more  frequent  men- 
ion  is  made  of  "  the  Law  of  Jehovah,"  or  "  the 
of  the  Law  of  Moses :" — a  fact  which  may 
>e  accounted  for  partly  by  the  priestly  cnaracter  of 
liose  books.  Thus  we  rind  David's  preparation  for 
he  worship  of.  God  is  "  according  to  the  Law  of 
ehovah"  (1  Chr.  xvi.40).  In  his  charge  to  Solo- 
noa  occur  the  words  "  the  Law  of  Jehovah  thy 
3od,  the  statutes  and  the  judgments  which  Jehovah 
liarged  Moses  with  concerning  Israel"  (x.xii.  12, 
3).  In  2  Chr.  xii.  it  is  said  that  Rehoboam 
1  forsook  the  Law  of  Jehovah  ;"  in  xiv.  4,  that  Asa 
ommanded  Judah  "  to  seek  Jehovah  the  God  of 
leir  fathers,  and  to  do  the  law  and  the  command 
ment."  In  xv.  3,  the  prophet  Azariah  reminds 
\sa  that  "  now  for  a  long  season  Israel  hath  been 
nthout  the  true  God,  and  without  a  teaching 
riest,  and  without  Law  ;"  and  in  xvii.  9, 
find  Jehushaphat  appointing  certain  princes 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

together  with  priests  and  Levites,  to  teath  :  "  they 
iattght  in  Judah,  and  had  the  book  of  the  Law  of 
Jehovah  with  them."  In  xxv.  4,  Amaziah  is  said 
Ic  have  acted  in  a  particular  instance  "  as  it  is 
•written  in  the  Law  of  the  hook  of  Moses."  In 
zxxi.  b,  4,  21,  Hezekiah' s  regulations  are  expressly 
said  to  have  been  in  accordance  with  "  the  Law  of 
Jehovah."  In  xxxiii.  8,  the  writer  is  quoting  the 
word  of  God  in  reference  to  the  Temple : — "  so  that 
they  will  take  heed  to  do  all  that  I  have  commanded 
them,  according  to  the  whole  Law  and  the  statutes, 
and  the  ordinances  by  the  hand  of  Moses."  In 
xxxiv.  14,  occurs  the  memorable  passage  in  which 
Hilkiah  the  priest  is  said  to  have  "found  a  book  of 
the  Law  of  Jehovah  (given)  by  Moses."  This  hap 
pened  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
And  accordingly  we  are  told  in  xxxv.  26,  that 
Josiah's  life  had  been  regulated  in  accordance  with 
that  which  was  "  written  in  the  Law  of  Jehovah." 

In  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  we  have  mention  several 
times  made  of  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  here  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  our  present  Pentateuch  is  meant ; 
for  we  have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  any  later 
revision  of  it  took  place.  At  this  time,  then,  the 
existing  Pentateuch  was  regarded  as  the  work  of 
Moses.  Ezra  iii.  2,  "  as  it  is  written  in  the  Law  of 
Moses  the  man  of  God  ;"  vi.  18,  "  as  it  is  written  in 
the  book  of  Moses ;"  vii.  6,  Ezra  it  is  said  "  was 
a  ready  scribe  in  the  Law  of  Moses."  In  Neh. 
i.  7,  &c.,  "  the  commandments,  judgments,  &c.,  which 
Thou  commandedst  Thy  servant  Moses,"  viii.  1,  &c., 
we  have  the  remarkable  account  of  the  reading  of 
"  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Moscc."  See  also  ix.  3, 
14,  xiii.  1-3. 

The  Books  of  Chronicles,  though  undoubtedly 
based  upon  ancient  records,  are  probably  in  their 
present  form  as  late  as  the  time  of  Ezra.  Hence  it 
might  be  supposed  that  if  the  reference  is  to  the 
present  Pentateuch  in  Ezra,  the  present  Pentateuch 
must  also  be  referred  to  in  Chronicles.  But  this 
does  not  follow.  The  Book  of  Ezra  speaks  of 
the  Law  as  it  existed  in  the  time  of  the  writer ; 
the  books  of  Chronicles  speak  of  it  as  it  existed 
long  before.  Hence  the  author  of  the  latter  (who 
may  have  been  Ezra)  in  making  mention  of  the  Law 
of  Moses  refers  of  course  to  that  recension  of  it  which 
existed  at  the  particular  periods  over  which  his  his 
tory  travels.  Substantially,  no  doubt,  it  was  the 
same  book ;  and  there  was  no  special  reason  why 
the  Chronicler  should  tell  us  of  any  corrections  and 
additions  which  in  the  course  of  time  had  been  in 
troduced  into  it.  i 

In  Dan.  ix.  11,  13,  the  Law  of  Moses  is  men 
tioned,  and  here  again,  a  book  differing  in  nothing 
from  our  present  Pentateuch  is  probably  meant. 

These  are  all  the  passages  of  the  Old  Testament 
Canon  in  which  •'  the  Law  of  Moses,"  "  the  book 
of  the  Law,"  or  such  like  expressions  occur,  de 
noting  the  existence  of  a  particular  book,  the  author 
ship  of  which  was  ascribed  to  Moses.  In  the 
Prophets  and  in  the  Psalms,  though  there  are  many 
allusions  to  the  Law,  evidently  as  a  written  docu 
ment,  there  are  none  as  to  its  authorship.  But 
the  evidence  hitherto  adduced  from  the  historical 
books  is  unquestionably  strong ;  first,  in  favour  of 
an  early  existence  of  the  main  body  of  the  Penta- 


PENTATEUCH.  THE 


779 


teuch — more  particularly  of  Genesis  and  the  legal 
portions  of  the  remaining  books ;  and  next,  as  thow- 
ing  a  universal  belief  amongst  the  Jews  that  the 
work  was  written  by  Moses. 

2.  Conclusive  proof  of  the  early  composition  of 
the  Pentateuch,  it  has  been  argued,  exists  in  the 
fact  that  the  Samaritans  had  their  own  copies  of  it, 
not  differing  very  materially  from  those  possessed 
by  the  Jews,  except  in  a  tew  passages  which  had 
probably  been  purposely  tampered  with  and  altered , 
such  for  instance  as  Ex.  xii.  40  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  4. 
The  Samaritans,  it  is  said,  must  have  derived  their 
Book  of  the  Law  from  the  Ten  Tribes,  whose  land 
they  occupied ;  on  the  other  hand  it  is  out  of  the 
question  to  suppose  that  the  Ten  Tribes  would  be 
willing  to  accept  religious  books  from  the  Two. 
Hence  the  conclusion  seems  to  be  irresistible  that 
the  Pentateuch  must  have  existed  in  its  present  form 
before  the  separation  of  Israel  from  Judah ;  the  only 
part  of  the  0.  T.  which  was  the  common  heritage 
of  both. 

If  this  point  could  be  satisfactorily  established, 
we  should  have  a  limit  of  time  in  one  direction  for 
the  composition  of  the  Pentateuch.  It  could  not 
have  been  later  than  the  times  of  the  earliest  kings. 
It  must  have  been  earlier  than  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
and  indeed  than  that  of  Saul.  The  history  becomes 
at  this  point  so  full,  that  it  is  scarcely  credible  that 
a  measure  so  important  as  the  codification  of  the 
Law,  if  it  had  taken  place,  could  have  been  passed 
over  in  silence.  Let  us,  then,  examine  the  t-ridence. 
What  proof  is  there  that  the  Samaritens  received 
the  Pentateuch  from  the  Ten  Tribes  ?  According  to 
2  K.  xvii.  24-41,  the  Samaritans  were  originally 
heathen  colonists  belonging  to  different  Assyrian  and 
Arabian'  tribes,  who  were  transplanted  by  Shahna- 
neser  to  occupy  the  room  of  the  Israelites  whom  he 
had  carried  away  captive.  It  is  evident,  however, 
that  a  considerable  portion  of  the  original  Israelitish 
population  must  still  have  remained  in  the  cities  of 
Samaria.  For  we  find  (2  Chr.  xxx.  1-20)  that 
Hezekiah  invited  the  remnant  of  the  Ten  Tribes 
who  were  in  the  land  of  Israel  to  come  to  the  great 
Passover  which  he  celebrated,  and  the  different 
tribes  are  mentioned  (vers.  10,  11)  who  did,  or  did 
not  respond  to  the  invitation.  Later,  Esarhaddon 
adopted  the  policy  of  Shalmaneser  and  a  still  further 
deportation  took  place  (Ezr.  iv.  2).  But  even  after 
this,  though  the  heathen  element  in  all  probability 
preponderated,  the  land  was  not  swept  clean  of  its 
original  inhabitants.  Josiah,  it  is  true,  did  not 
like  Hezekiah  invite  the  Samaritans  to  take  part  in 
the  worship  at  Jerusalem.  But  finding  himself 
strong  enough  to  disregard  the  power  of  Assyria, 
now  on  the  decline,  he  virtually  claimed  the  land  of 
Israel  as  the  rightful  apanage  of  David's  throne, 
adopted  energetic  measures  for  the  suppression  of 
idolatry,  and  even  exterminated  the  Samaritan 
priests.  But  what  is  of  more  importance  as  show 
ing  that  some  portion  of  the  Ten  Tribes  was  stilj 
left  in  the  land,  is  the  fact,  that  when  the  collection 
was  made  for  the  repairs  of  the  Temple,  we  are 
told  that  the  Levites  gathered  the  money  "  of  the 
hand  of  Manasseh  and  Ephraim,  and  of  all  the  rem 
nant  of  Israel,"  as  well  as  "  of  Judah  and  Benjamin" 
(2  Chr.  xxxiv.  9).  And  so  also,  after  the  disco- 


'  It  lr-  a  curious  and  interesting  fact,  for  the  knowledge  with  Sanballat  in  the  government  of  Judaea,  as  well  as  the 

of  which  wo  are  indebted  to  Sir  H.  Rawlinson,  that  Sargon  mention  of  Arabians  in  the  army  of  Samaria  ('  Illustrations 

penetrated  far  into  the  Interior  of  Arabia,  and  carrying  off  of  Egyptian  History,'  &c.(  in  the  Ti-ans.  of  Jioy  Soc.  Lit 

ral  Arabian  tribes,  settled  them  in  Samuria.     This  1860,  part  i.  pp.  M8,  149) 


,  . 

how  Geshem  the  Arabian  came  to  be  associated 


780 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


rery  ol  the  Book  of  the  Law,  Josiah  bound  not  only 
"all  who  were  present  in  Judah  and  Benjamin"  to 
stand  to  the  covenant  contained  in  it,  but  he  "  took 
away  all  the  aborainations  out  of  all  the  countries 
that  i>ei  tained  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and  made 
all  that  were  present  in  Israel  to  serve,  even  to 
serve  Jehovah  their  God.  And  all  his  days  they 
depai-ted  not  from  serving  Jehovah  the  God  of  their 
fathers"  (2  Chr.  xmv.  32,  33). 

Later  yet,  during  the  vice-royalty  of  Gedaliah 
we  find  still  the  same  feeling  manifested  on  the  part 
of  the  Ten  Tribes  which  had  shown  itself  under  He- 
zekiah  and  Josiah.  Eighty  devotees  from  Shechem 
from  Shiloh,  and  from  Samaria,  came  with  all  the 
signs  of  mourning,  and  bearing  offerings  in  their 
hand,  to  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.  They  thus  tes 
tified  both  their  sorrow  for  the  desolation  that  had 
come  upon  it,  and  their  readiness  to  take  a  part  in 
the  worship  there,  now  that  order  was  restored. 
And  this,  it  may  be  nasonably  presumed,  was  only 
one  party  out  of  mary  who  came  on  a  like  errand 
All  these  facts  prove  that,  so  far  was  the  intercourse 
between  Judah  and  the  remnant  of  Israel  from  being 
embittered  by  religious  animosities,  that  it  was  the 
religious  bond  that  bound  them  together.  Hence 
it  would  have  been  quite  possible  during  any  por 
tion  of  this  period  for  the  mixed  Samaritan  popu 
lation  to  have  received  the  Law  from  the  Jews. 

This  is  far  more  probable  than  that  copies  of  the 
Pentateuch  should  have  been  pi-eserved  amongst 
those  families  of  the  Ten  Tribes  who  had  either 
escaped  when  the  land  was  shaven  by  the  razor 
of  the  king  of  Assyria,  or  who  had  straggled  back 
thither  from  their  exile.  If  even  in  Jerusalem 
itself  the  Book  of  the  Law  was  so  scarce,  and  had 
been  so  forgotten,  that  the  pious  king  Josiah  knew 
nothing  of  its  contents  till  it  was  accidentally  dis. 
covered ;  still  less  probable  is  it  that  in  Israel, 
given  up  to  idolatry  and  wasted  by  invasions,  any 
copies  of  it  should  have  survived. 

On  the  whole  we  should  be  led  to  infer  that 
there  had  been  a  gradual  fusion  of  the  heathen 
settlers  with  the  original  inhabitants.  At  first  the 
former,  who  regarded  Jehovah  as  only  a  local  and 
national  deity  like  one  of  their  own  false  gods, 
endeavoured  to  appease  Him  by  adopting  in  part 
the  religious  worship  of  the  nation  whose  land  they 
occupied.  They  did  this  in  the  first  instance,  not 
by  mixing  with  the  resident  population,  but  by 
sending  to  the  king  of  Assyria  for  one  of  the 
Israelitish  priests  who  had  been  carried  captive. 
But,  in  process  of  time,  the  amalgamation  of  races 
became  complete  and  the  worship  of  Jehovah  super 
seded  the  worship  of  idols,  as  is  evident  both  from 
the  wish  of  the  Samaritans  to  join  in  the  Temple- 
worship  after  the  Captivity,  and  from  the  absence 
of  al!  idolatrous  symbols  onGerizim.  So  far,  then, 
the  history  leaves  us  altogether  in  doubt  as  to  the 
time  at  which  the  Pentateuch  was  received  by  the 
Samaritans.  Copies  of  it  might  have  been  left  in 
the  northern  kingdom  after  Shalmaneser's  invasion, 
though  this  is  hardly  probable ;  or  they  might  have 
been  introduced  thither  during  the  religious  reforms 
of  Hezekiah  or  Jos.ah. 

But  the  actual  condition  of  the  Samaritan  Pen 
tateuch  is  against  any  such  supposition.  It  agrees 
so  remarkably  with  the  existing  Hebrew  Pentateuch, 
and  that,  too,  in  those  passages  which  are  mani- 
iestiy  interpolations  and  corrections  as  late  as  the 
time  cf  Ezra,  that  we  must  look  for  some  other 
period  to  which  to  refer  the  adoption  of  the  Books 
w"  Aloscs  by  the  Samaritans.  This  w  find  after 


PENTATEUCH,  THK 

the  Babylonish  exile,  at  the  time  of  the  iostitutcr 
of  the  rival  worship  on  Gerizim.  Till  the  return 
from  Babylon  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  Sama 
ritans  regarded  the  Jews  with  any  extraordinary 
dislike  or  hostility.  But  the  manifest  distrust  and 
suspicion  with  which  Nehemiah  met  their  advances 
when  he  was  rebuilding  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  pro 
voked  their  wrath.  From  this  time  forward,  they 
were  declared  and  open  enemies.  The  quarrel  be 
tween  the  two  nations  was  further  aggravated  by 
the  determination  of  Nehemiah  to  break  off  all  mar« 
riages  which  had  been  contracted  between  Jews  ami 
Samaritans.  Manasseh  the  brother  of  the  high- 
priest  (so  Josephus  calls  him,  Ant.  si.  7,  §2),  and 
himself  acting  high-priest,  was  one  of  the  offenders. 
He  refused  to.  divorce  his  wife,  and  took  refuge  with 
his  father-in-law  Sanballat,  who  consoled  him  for  th<- 
loss  of  his  priestly  privilege  in  Jerusalem  by  making 
him  high-priest  of  the  new  Samaritan  temple  on 
Gerizim.  With  Manasseh  many  other  apostate  Jews 
who  refused  to  divorce  their  wives,  fled  to  Samaria. 
It  seems  highly  probable  that  these  men  took  the 
Pentateuch  with  them,  and  adopted  it  as  the  basis 
of  the  new  religious  system  which  they  inaugurated. 
A  full  discussion  of  this  question  would  be  out  of 
place  here.  It  is  sufficient  merely  to  show  how  far 
the  existence  of  a  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  not  mate 
rially  differing  from  the  Hebrew  Pentateuch,  bears 
upon  the  question  of  the  antiquity  of  the  latter. 
And  we  incline  to  the  view  of  Prideaux  (Connect. 
Book  vi.  chap,  iii.)  that  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
was  in  fact  a  transcript  of  Ezra's  revised  copy.  The 
same  view  is  virtually  adopted  by  Gesenius  (De 
Pent.  Sam.  pp.  8,  9). 

3.  .We  are  now  to  consider  evidence  of  a  more 
indirect  kind,  which  bears  not  so  much  on  the 
Mosaic  authorship  as  on  the  early  existence  of  the 
work  as  a  whole.  This  last  circumstance,  how 
ever,  if  satisfactorily  made  out  is,  indirectly  at 
least,  an  argument  that  Moses  wrote  the  Pentateuch. 
Hengstenberg  has  tried  to  show  that  all  the  later 
books,  by  their  allusions  and  quotations,  presuppose 
the  existence  of  the  Books  of  the  Law.  He  traces 
moreover  the  influence  of  the  Law  upon  the  whole 
life  civil  and  religious  of  the  nation  after  their 
settlement  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  He  sees  its 
spirit  transfused  into  all  the  national  literature, 
historical,  poetic  and  prophetical:  he  argues  that 
except  on  the  basis  of  the  Pentateuch  as  already 
existing  before  the  entrance  of  the  Israelites  into 
Canaan,  the  whole  of  their  history  after  the  occu 
pation  of  the  land  becomes  an  inexplicable  enigma. 
It  is  impossible  not  to  feel  that  this  line  of  proof 
is,  if  established,  peculiarly  convincing,  just  in  pro 
portion  as  it  is  indirect  and  informal,  and  beyond 
the  reach  of  the  ordinary  weapons  of  criticism. 

Now,  beyond  all  doubt,  there  are  numerous  most 
striking  references  both  in  the  Prophets  and  in  the 
Books  of  Kings  to  passages  which  are  found  in  our 
present  Pentateuch.  One  thing  at  least  is  certain., 
that  the  theory  of  men  like  Von  Bohlen,  Vatke,  and 
others,  who  suppose  the  Pentateuch  to  have  been 
written  in  the  times  of  the  latest  kings,  is  utterly 
absurd.  It  is  established  in  the  most  convincing 
manner  that  the  legal  portions  of  the  Pentateuch 
already  existed  in  writing  before  the  separation  of 
the  two  kingdoms.  Even  as  regards  the  historical 
portions,  there  are  often  in  the  later  books  almost 
verbal  coincidences  of  expression,  which  render  it 
more  than  probable  that  these  also  existed  in  v;ritini;. 
All  this  has  been  argued  with  much  learning,  the 
most  indefatigable  research,  and  in  some  ii.6Ur.ccn 


PEXTATEUOH,  THE 

vriih  great  success  by  Hengstenberg  in  his  Authentie 
3cs  Pentateuchs.  We  will  satisfy  ourselves  with 
pointing  out  some  of  the  most  striking  passages  in 
which  the  coincidences  between  the  later  books  and 
the  Pentateuch  (omitting  Deuteronomy  for  the 
present)  appear. 

In  Joel,  who  prophesied  only  in  the  kingdom  of 
Judah  ;  in  Amos,  who  prophesied  in  both  kingdoms  ; 
and  in  Hosea,  whose  ministry  was  confined  to  Israel, 
we  find  references  which  imply  the  existence  of  a 
written  code  of  laws.  The  following  comparison  of 
passages  may  satisfy  us  on  this  point : — Joel  ii.  2 
with  Ex.  x.  14  ;  ii.  3  with  Gen.  ii.  8,  9  (comp.  xiii. 
10);  ii.  17  with  Num.xiv.  13;  ii.  20  with  Ex.  x.  19; 
iii.l  [ii.28,E.V.]withGen.vi.  12;  ii.  13  with  Ex. 
xxxiv.  6 ;  iv.  [iii.]  18  with  Num.  xxv.  1. — Again, 
Amos  ii.  2  with  Num.  xxi.  28  ;  ii.  7  with  Ex.  xxiii.  6, 
Lev.  xx.  3 ;  ii.  8  with  Ex.  xxii.  25  &c. ;  ii.  9  with 
Num.  xiii.  32  &c. ;  iii.  7  with  Gen.  xviii.  17  ;  iv.  4 
with  Lev.  xxiv.  3,  and  Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12  ;  v.  12 
with  Num.  xxxv.  31  (comp.  Ex.  xxiii.  6  and  Am. 
ii.  7);  v.  17  with  Ex.  xii.  12;  v.  21  &c.  with 
Num.  xxix.  35,  Lev.  xxiii.  36 ;  vi.  1  with  Num.  i. 
17  ;  vi.  6  with  Gen.  xxxvii.  25  (this  is  probably  the 
reference :  Hengstenberg's  is  wrong)  ;  vi.  8  wHh 
Lev.  xxvi.  19 ;  vi.  14  with  Num.  xxxiv.  8  ;  viii. 
6  with  Ex.  xxi.  2,  Lev.  xxv.  39  ;  ix.  13  with  Lev. 
xxvi.  3-5  (comp.  Ex.  iii.  8). — Again,  Hosea  i.  2 
with  Lev.  xx.  5-7  ;  ii.  1  [i-  10]  with  Gen.  xxii.  17, 
xxxii.  12  ;  ii.  2  [i.  11]  with  Ex.  i.  10  ;  iii.  2  with  Ex. 
xxi.  32  ;  iv.  8  with  Lev.  vi.  17  &c.,  and  vii.  1  &c. ; 
iv.  10  with  Lev.  xxvi.  26;  iv.  17  with  Ex.  xxxii.  9, 
10  ;  v.  6  with  Ex.  x.  9  ;  vi.  2  with  Gen.  xvii.  18  ; 
vii.  8  with  Ex.  xxxiv.  12-16  ;  xii.  6  [A.  V.  5]  with 
Ex.  iii.  15  ;  xii.  10  [9]  with  Lev.  xxiii.  43  ;  xii.  15 
[14]  with  Gen.  ix.  5. 

In  the  Books  of  Kings  we  have  also  references  as 
follows: — 1  K.  xx.  4^  to  Lev.  xxvii.  29  ;  xxi.  3  to 
Lev.  xxv.  23,  Num.  xxxvi.  8;  xxi.  10  to  Num. 
xxxv.  30,  comp.  Deut.  xvii.  6,  7,  xix.  15 ;  xxii.  17 
to  Num.  xxvii.  16,  17. — 2  K.  iii.  20  to  Ex.  xxix. 
38  &c.  ;  iv.  1  to  Lev.  xxv.  39  &c. ;  v.  27  to  Ex. 
iv.  6,  Num.  xii.  10  ;  vi.  18  to  Geu.  xix.  11 ;  vi.  28 
to  Lev.  xxvi.  29 ;  vii.  2,  19  to  Gen.  vii.  11 ;  vii.  3 
to  Lev.  xiii.  46  (comp.  Num.  v.  3). 

But  now  if,  as  appears  from  the  examination  of 
all  the  extant  Jewish  literature,  the  Pentateuch 
existed  as  a  canonical  book  ;  if,  moreover,  it  was  a 
book  so  well  known  that  its  words  had  become 
household  words  among  the  people ;  and  if  the 
prophets  could  appeal  to  it  as  a  recognized  and  well- 
«nown  document, — how  comes  it  to  pass  that  in 
the  reign  of  Josiah,  one  of  the  latest  kings,  its 
existence  as  a  canonical  book  seems  to  have  been 
almost  forgotten?  Yet  such  was  evidently  the 
fact.  The  circumstances,  as  narrated  in  2  Chr. 
xxxiv.  14,  &c.,  were  these: — In  the  eighteenth  yeai 
of  his  reign,  the  king,  who  had  already  taken  active 
measures  for  the  suppression  of  idolatry,  dettrminec 
to  execute  the  necessary  repairs  of  the  Temple 
which  had  become  seriously  dilapidated,  and  to 
restore  the  worship  of  Jehovah  in  its  purity.  He 
accordingly  directed  Hilkiah  the  high-priest  to  tak 
charge  of  the  monies  that  were  contributed  for  the 
purpose.  During  the  progress  of  the  work,  Hilkiah 
who  was  busy  in  the  Temple,  came  upon  a  copj 
jf  the  Book  of  the  Law — which  must  have  long  lain 


PENTATEUCH.  THE 


781 


K  See  Mr.  Grove's  very  interesting  paper  on  Nabloo 
rind  the  Samaritans  in  Vacation  Tawrists,  1861.  Speak 
ing  of  the  service  of  the  yom  kippoor  in  the  Samaritan 
synagogue ,  he  says  that  the  recitation  of  the  Pentateuc! 
was  cont'.nui-J  through  the  night,  "  without  even  th 


eglected  and  forgo  ;t3n — and  told  Shaphan  the  scriljc 
f  his  discovery.  The  effect  produced  by  this  was 
rery  remarkable.  The  king,  to  whom  Shaphan  read 
he  words  of  the  book,  was  filled  with  consternation 
when  he  learnt  for  the  first  time  how  far  the  nation 
lad  departed  from  the  Law  of  Jehovah.  He  sent 
lilkiah  and  others  to  consult  the  prophetess  Huldah, 
who  only  confirmed  his  fears.  The  consequence 
was  that  he  held  a  solemn  assembly  in  the  house 
if  the  Lord,  and  "  read  in  their  ears  all  the  words 
if  the  book  of  the  covenant  that  was  found  in  th" 
louse  of  the  Lord." 

How  are  we  to  explain  this  surprise  and  alarm  in 
,he  mind  of  Josiah,  betraying  as  it  does  such  utter 
gnorance  of  the  Book  of  the  Law,  and  of  the 
severity  of  its  threatenings — except  on  the  suppo 
sition  that  as  a  written  document  it  had  well  nigh 
jerished  ?  This  must  have  been  the  case,  and  it  is 
not  so  extraordinary  a  fact  perhaps  as  it  appears  at 
irst  sight.  It  is  quite  true  that  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoshaphat  pains  had  been  taken  to  make  the 
nation  at  large  acquainted  with  the  Law.  That 
monarch  not  only  instituted  "  teaching  priests,"  but 
we  are  told  that  as  they  went  about  the  country  they 
lad  the  Book  of  the  Law  with  them.  But  that  was 
300  years  before,  a  period  equal  to  that  between 
the  days  of  Luther  and  our  own ;  and  in  such  an 
interval  great  changes  must  have  taken  place.  It 
is  true  that  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  the  prophet  Isaiah 
directed  the  people,  who  in  their  hopeless  infatuation 
were  seeking  counsel  of  ventriloquists  and  necro- 
mancere,  to  turn  "  to  the  Law  and  to  the  Testi 
mony  ;"  and  Hezokiah,  who  succeeded  Ahaz,  had 
no  doubt  reigned  in  the  spirit  of  the  prophet's 
advice.  But  the  next  monarch  was  guilty  of  out 
rageous  wickedness,  and  filled  Jerusalem  with  idols. 
How  great  a  desolation  might  one  wicked  prince 
effect,  especially  during  a  lengthened  reign  !  To 
this  we  must  add,  that  at  no  time,  in  all  probability, 
were  there  many  copies  of  the  Law  existing  in 
writing.  It  was  probably  then  the  custom,  as  it 
still  is  in  the  East,  to  trust  largely  to  the  memory 
for  its  transmission.  Just  as  at  this  day  in  Egypt, 
persons  are  to  be  found,  even  illiterate  in  other 
respects,  who  can  repeat  the  whole  Kuran  by  heart, 
and  as  some  modern  Jews  are  able  to  recite  the 
whole  of  the  Five  Books  of  Moses,s  so  it  probably 
was  then :  the  Law,  for  the  great  bulk  of  the 
nation,  was  orally  preserved  and  inculcated.  The 
ritual  would  easily  be  perpetuated  by  the  mere 
force  of  observance,  though  much  of  it  doubtless 
became  perverted,  and  some  part  of  it  perhaps 
obsolete,  through  the  neglect  of  the  pritcts.  Still 
it  is  against  the  perfunctory  and  lifeless  manner  of 
their  worship,  not  against  their  total  neglect,  that 
the  burning  words  of  the  prophets  are  directed. 
The  command  of  Moses,  which  laid  upon  the  king 
the  obligation  of  making  a  copy  of  the  Law  for 
himself,  had  of  course  long  been  disregarded.  Here 
and  there  perhaps  only  some  prophet  or  righteous 
man  possessed  a  copy  of  the  sacred  book.  The  bulk 
of  the  nation  were  without  it.  Nor  was  there  any 
reason  why  copies  should  be  brought  under  the 
notice  of  the  king.  We  may  understand  this  by  a 
parallel  case.  How  easy  it  would  have  been  in  our 
own  country,  before  the  invention  of  printing,  for  a 
similar  circumstance  to  have  happened.  How  many 

feeble  lamp  which  on  every  other  night  of  the  year  but 
this  bums  ID  front  of  the  holy  books.  The  two  priest* 
aid  a  few  of  tbo  people  know  the  whole  of  the  Torab  bj 
leart "  (p.  346; 


782 


PKNTATKU3H.  THE 


oopiefl,  do  we  suppose,  of  the  Scriptures  were  made? 
Such  as  did  exist  would  be  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
iearned  men,  or  more  probably  in  the  libraries' of 
monasteries.*  Even  after  a  translation,  lik<>  Wiclif's, 
had  been  made,  the  people  as  a  whole  would  know 
nothing  whatever  of  the  Bible ;  and  yet  they  were  a 
Christian  people,  and  were  in  some  measure  at  least 
instructed  out  of  the  Scriptures,  though  the  volume 
itself  could  scarcely  ever  have  been  seen.  Even  the 
monarch,  unless  he  happened  to  be  a  man  of  lean* 
jng  or  piety,  would  remain  in  the  same  ignorance 
as  his  subjects.  Whatever  knowledge  there  was  of 
the  Bible  and  of  religion  would  bo  kept  alive  chiefly 
by  means  of  the  Liturgies  used  in  public  worship. 
So  it  was  in  Judah.  The  oral  transmission  of  the 
Law  and  the  living  witness  of  the  prophets  had 
supei-seded  the  written  document,  till  at  last  it  had 
become  so  scarce  as  to  be  almost  unknown.  But 
the  hand  of  God  so  ordered  it  that  when  king  and 
people  were  both  zealous  for  reformation,  and  ripest 
for  the  reception  of  the  truth,  the  written  document 
itself  was  brought  to  light. 

On  carefully  weighing  all  the  evidence  hitherto 
adduced,  we  can  hardly  question,  without  a  literary 
scepticism  which  would  be  most  unreasonable,  that 
the  Pentateuch  is  to  a  very  considerable  extent  as 
early  as  the  time  of  Moses,  though  it  may  have 
undergone  many  later  revisions  and  corrections,  the 
last  of  these  being  certainly  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Ezra.  But  as  regards  any  direct  and  unimpeach 
able  testimony  to  the  composition  of  the  whole 
work  by  Moses  we  have  it  not.  Only  one  book  out 
of  the  five — that  of  Deuteronomy — claims  in  express 
terms  to  be  from  his  hand.  And  yet,  strange  to 
say,  this  is  the  very  book  in  which  modern  criticism 
refuses  most  peremptorily  to  admit  the  claim.  It 
is  of  importance  therefore  to  consider  this  question 
separately. 

All  allow  that  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  in 
Exodus,  perhaps  a  great  part  of  Leviticus  and  some 
part  of  Numbers,  were  written  by  Israel's  greatest 
leader  and  prophet.  But  Deuteronomy,  it  is  alleged, 
is  in  style  and  purpose  so  utterly  unlike  the  genuine 
writings  of  Moses  that  it  is  quite  impossible  to 
believe  that  he  is  the  author.  But  how  then  set 
aside  the  express  testimony  of  the  book  itself? 
How  explain  the  fact  that  Moses  is  there  said  to 
have  written  all  the  words  of  this  Law,  to  have 
consigned  it  to  the  custody  of  the  priests,  and  to 
have  charged  the  Levites  sedulously  to  preserve  it 
by  the  side  of  the  ark  ?  Only  by  the  bold  assertion 
that  the  fiction  was  invented  by  a  later  writer, 
who  chose  to  personate  the  great  Lawgiver  in  order 
to  give  the  more  colour  of  consistency  to  his  work ! 
The  author  first  feigns  the  name  of  Moses  that  he 
may  gain  the  greater  consideration  under  the  shadow 
of  his  name,  and  then  proceeds  to  re-enact,  but  in  a 
broader  and  more  spiritual  manner,  and  with  true 
prophetic  inspiration,  the  chief  portions  of  the  earlier 
legislation. 

But  such  an  hypothesis  Is  devoid  of  all  proba 
bility.  For  what  writer  in  later  times  would  ever 
have  presumed,  unless  he  were  equal  to  Moses,  to 
correct  or  supplement  the  Law  of  Moses  ?  And  if 
he  were  equal  to  Moses  why  borrow  his  name  (as 
Ewald  supposes  the  Deuteronomist  to  have  done)  in 
order  to  lend  greater  weight  and  sanction  to  his 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

book?  The  truth  is,  those  who  make  such  a  eir«- 
position  import  modern  ideas  into  ancien*,  writing 
They  forget  that  what  might  be  allowable  in  a  mo 
dern  writer  of  fiction  would  not  have  been  tolerated 
in  one  who  claimed  to  have  a  Divine  commission, 
who  came  forward  as  a  prophet  to  rebuke  and  to 
reform  the  people.  Which  would  be  more  we/  hty 
to  win  their  obedience,  "  Thus  saith  Jehovah,"  or 
"  Moses  wrote  all  these  words"? 

It  has  been  argued  indeed  that  in  thus  assuming 
a  feigned  character  the  writer  does  no  more  than 
is  done  by  the  author  of  Ecclesiastes.  He  in  like 
manner  takes  the  name  of  Solomon  that  he  may 
gain  a  better  hearing  for  his  words  of  wisdom.  But 
the  cases  are  not  parallel .  The  Preacher  only  pre 
tends  to  give  an  old  man's  view  of  life,  as  seen  by 
one  who  had  had  a  large  experience  and  no  common 
reputation  for  wisdom.  Deuteronomy  claims  to  be 
a  Law  imposed  on  the  highest  authority,  and  de 
manding  implicit  obedience.  The  first  is  a  record 
of  the  struggles,  disappointments,  and  victory  of  a 
human  heart.  The  last  is  an  absolute  rule  of  life, 
to  which  nothing  may  be  added,  and  from  which 
nothing  may  be  taken  (iv.  2,  xxxi.  1). 

But,  besides  the  fact  that  Deuteronomy  claims  to 
have  been  written  by  Moses,  there  is  other  evidence 
which  establishes  the  great  antiquity  of  the  book. 

1.  It  is  remarkable  for  its  allusions  to  Egypt,1 
which  are  just  what  would  be  expected  supposing 
Moses  to  have  been  the  author.  Without  insisting 
upon  it  that  in  such  passages  as  iv.  15-18.  or  vi.  8, 
si.  18-20  (comp.  Ex.  xiii.  16),  where  the  command 
is  given  to  wear  the  Law  after  the  fashion  of  an 
amulet,  or  xxvii.  1-8,  where  writing  on  stones 
covered  with  plaster  is  mentioned,  are  probable 
references  to  Egyptian  customs,  we  may  point  to 
more  certain  examples.  In  xx.  5  there  is  an  allu 
sion  to  Egyptian  regulations  in  time  of  war;  in 
xxv.  2  to  the  Egyptian  bastinado;  in  xi.  10  to  the 
Egyptian  mode  of  irrigation.  The  references  which 
Delitzsch  sees  in  xxii.  5  to  the  custom  of  the 
Egyptian  priests  to  hold  solemn  processions  in  the 
masks  of  different  deities,  and  in  viii.  9  to  Egyptian 
mining  operations,  are  by  no  means  so  certain. 
Again,  among  the  curses  threatened  are  the  sick 
nesses  of  Egypt,  xxviii.  60  (comp.  vii.  15).  Ac 
cording  to  xxviii.  68,  Egypt  is  the  type  of  all  the 
oppressors  of  Israel :  "  Remember  that  thou  wast 
a  slave  in  the  land  of  Egypt,"  is  an  expression 
which  is  several  times  made  use  of  as  a  motive  in 
enforcing  the  obligations  of  the  book  (v.  15,  xxiv. 
18,  22  ;  see  the  same  appeal  in  Lev.  xix.  34,  a 
passage  occurring  in  the  remarkable  section  Lev. 
xvii.-xx.,  which  has  so  much  affinity  with  Deutero 
nomy).  Lastly,  references  to  the  sojourning  in 
Egypt  are  numerous :  "  We  were  Pharaoh's  bond 
men  in  Egypt,"  &c.  (vi.  21-23  ;  see  also  vii.  8,  18, 
zi.  3) ;  and  these  occur  even  in  the  laws,  as  in  the 
law  of  the  king  (xvii.  16),  which  would  be  very 
extraordinary  if  the  book  had  only  been  written  in 
the  time  of  Manasseh. 

The  phi-aseology  of  the  book,  and  the  archaisms 
found  in  it,  stamp  it  as  of  the  same  age  with  the 
rest  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  form  N1H,  instead 
of  K*!"l,  for  the  feminine  of  the  pronoun  (which 
occurs  in  all  195  times  in  the  Pentateuch),  is  found 
36  times  in  Deuteronomy.  Nowhere  do  we  meet 


h  That  even  in  monasteries  the  Bible  was  a  neglected 
Mid  inmost  unknown  book,  is  clear  from  the  story  of 
Luther's  conversion. 

'  It  is  a  sifniificant  fact  that  Kwald,  who  will  have  it 


that  Deuteronomy  was  written  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh, 
is  obliged  to  make  his  supposed  author  live  iu  Egypt, 
in  order  to  account  plausibly  for  the  acquaintance  vritb 
Egyptian  customs  which  is  discernible  in  the  jook 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 

with  NT1  in  this  book,  though  in  the  rest  of  the 
Pentateuch  it  occurs  11  times.  In  the  same  way, 
like  the  other  books,  Deuteronomy  has  1J73  of  a 
maiden,  instead  of  the  feminine  mj?3,  which  is  only 
used  once  (xxii.  19).  It  has  also  the  third  pers.  pret. 
^H,  which  in  prose  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch 
(Ewald,  Lehrbuch,  §1426).  The  demonstrative 
pronoun  7K!"1,  which  (according  to  Ewald,  §183  a, 
is  characteristic  of  the  Pentateuch)  occurs  in  Deut. 
iv.  42,  vii.  22,  six.  11,  and  nowhere  else  out  of  the 
books  of  Moses,  except  in  the  late  book,  1  Chr.  xx.  8, 
ant;  the  Aramaic  Ezra,  v.  15.  The  use  of  the  n 
locale,  which  is  comparatively  rare  in  later  writings, 
is  common  to  Deuteronomy  with  the  other  books  of 
the  Pentateuch  ;  and  so  is  the  old  and  rare  form  of 
writing  -rjX^OJ1},  and  the  termination  of  the  future 
m  J-1-.  The  last,  according  to  Konig  (A.  T.  Stud. 
2  Heft)  is  more  common  in  the  Pentateuch  than  in 
Any  other  book :  it  occurs  58  times  in  Deuteronomy. 
Twice  even  in  the  preterite,  viii.  3,  16,  a  like  ter 
mination  presents  itself;  on  the  peculiarity  of  which 
Ewald  (§1906,  note)  remarks,  as  being  the  ori 
ginal  and  fuller  form.  Other  archaisms  which  are 
common  to  the  whole  five  books  are :  the  shortening 
of  the  Hiphil,  mfW,  i.  33  ;  TB^,  xxvi.  12,  &c. ; 
the  use  of  fcOp=mp,  "  to  meet ;"  the  construction 
of  the  passive  with  J"IK  of  the  object  (for  instance, 
xx.  8) ;  the  interchange  of  the  older  3B/3  (xiv.  4) 
with  the  more  usual  KQ3  ;  the  use  of  "TOT  (instead 
of  "13T),  xvi.  16,  xx. 13,  a  form  which  disappears  al 
together  after  the  Pentateuch  ;  many  ancient  words, 

such  as  rrnK,  nip?,  "\y&  OI:B>,  EX.  xiii.  12). 

Amongst  these  are  some  which  occur  besides  only 
in  the  book  of  Joshua,  or  else  in  very  late  writers, 
like  Ezekiel,  who,  as  is  always  the  case  in  the  decay 
of  a  language,  studiously  imitated  the  oldest  forms  ; 
some  which  are  found  afterwards  only  in  poetry, 
as  D^S^N  (vii.  13,  xxviii.  4,  &c.),  and  DTIO,  so 
common  in  Deuteronomy.  Again,  this  book  has  a 
number  of  words  which  have  an  archaic  character. 
Such  are,  B>Cnn  (for  the  later  ^>|»),  N3tD  (instead 
of  ^D) ;  the  old  Canaanite  fXtfH  JTHri^J?,  "  off 
spring  of  the  flocks ;"  J-lltJ^,  which  as  a  name  of 
Israel  is  borrowed,  Is.  xliv.  2  ;  PHH,  i.  41,  "  to 
act  rashly;"  TVSDn,  "to  be  silent;"  p^VH  (xv. 
14),  "  to  give,"  lit.  "  to  put  like  a  collar  on  the  neck ;" 
"l!31tfin,  "  to  play  the  lord ;"  nV"JD,  "  sickness." 

2.  A  fondness  for  the  use  of  figures  is  another 
peculiarity  of  Deuteronomy.  See  xxix.  17,  18; 
xxviii.  13,44;  i.  31,44;  viii.  5  ;  xxviii.  29, 49.  Of 
similar  comparisons  there  are  but  few  (Delitzsch  says 
but  three)  in  the  other  books.  The  results  are  most 
surprising  when  we  compare  Deuteronomy  with  the 
Boc1:  of  the  Covenant  (Ex.  xix.-xxiv.)  on  the  one 
hand,  <-.-d  with  Ps.  xc.  (which  is  said  to  be  Mosaic) 
on  the  other.  To  cite  but  one  example :  the  images 
o'darouring  fire  and  of  the  bearing  on  eagles'  wings  j 
occur  only  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  and  in 
•Deuteronomy.  Comp.  Ex.  xxiv.  17,  with  Deut.  iv. 
24,  ix.  3;  and  Ex.  xix.  4,  with  Deut.  xxxii.  11. 
So  again,  not  to  mention  numberless  undesigned 
coincidences  between  Ps.  xc.  and  the  book  of  Deutero 
nomy ,  especially  chap,  xxxii.,  we  need  only  here  cite 


PENTATEUCH,  THE  783 

the  phrase  Q*T  HCJ'yO  (Ps.  xc.  17),  ;<  work  of  the 

hands,"  as  descriptive  of  human  action  generally 
which  runs  through  the  whole  of  Deut.  ii.  7,  xiv. 
29.  xvi.  15,  xxiv.  19,  xxviii.  12,  xxx.  9.  The  same 
close  affinity,  both  as  to  matter  and  style,  exists  be 
tween  the  section  to  which  we  have  already  referred 
in  Leviticus  (ch.  xvii.-xx.,  so  manifestly  different 
from  the  rest  of  that  book),  the  Book  of  the  Covenant 
(Ex.  xix.-xxiv.)  and  Deuteronomy. 

In  addition  to  all  this,  and  very  much  more 
might  be  said — for  a  whole  harvest  has  been  gleaned 
on  this  field  by  Schultz  in  the  Introduction  to  his 
work  on  Deuteronomy — in  addition  to  all  these 
peculiarities  which  are  arguments  for  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Book,  we  have  here,  too,  the  evi 
dence  strong  and  clear  of  post-Mosaic  times  and 
writings.  The  attempt  by  a  wrong  interpretation 
of  2  K.  xxii.  and  2  Chr.  xxxiv.  to  bring  down 
Deuteronomy  as  low  as  the  time  of  Manasseh  fails 
utterly.  A  century  earlier  the  Jewish  prophets 
borrow  their  words  and  their  thoughts  from  Deu 
teronomy.  Amos  shows  how  intimate  his  acquaint 
ance  was  with  Deuteronomy  by  such  passages  as 
ii.  9,  iv.  11,  ix.  7,  whose  matter  and  form  are  both 
coloured  by  those  of  that  book.  Hosea,  who  is 
richer  than  Amos  in  these  references  to  the  past, 
whilst,  as  we  have  seen,  full  of  allusions  to  the 
whole  Law  (vi.  7,  xii.  4  &c.,  xiii.  9,  10),  in  one 
passage,  viii.  1 2,  using  the  remarkable  expression  "  I 
have  written  to  him  the  ten  thousand  things  of  my 
Law,"  manifestly  includes  Deuteronomy  (comp.  xi. 
8  with  Deut.  xxix.  22),  and  in  many  places  shows 
that  that  book  was  in  his  mind.  Comp.  iv.  13  with 
Deut.  xii.  2;  viii.  13  with  Deut.  xxviii.  68;  xi.  3 
with  Deut.  i.  31 ;  xiii.  6  with  Deut.  viii.  11-14. 
Isaiah  begins  his  prophecy  with  the  words.  "  Hear, 
0  heavens,  and  give  ear,  0  earth,"  taken  from  the 
mouth  of  Moses  in  Deut.  xxxii.  1.  In  fact,  echoes 
of  the  tones  of  Deuteronomy  are  heard  throughout 
the  solemn  and  majestic  discourse  with  which  his 
prophecy  opens.  (See  Caspari,  Beitrdge  zur  EM. 
in  d.  Buck  lesaia,  p.  203-210.)  The  same  may 
be  said  of  Micah.  In  his  protest  against  the 
apostasy  of  the  nation  from  the  Covenant  with 
Jehovah,  he  appeals  to  the  mountains  as  the  sure 
foundations  of  the  earth,  in  like  manner  as  Moses, 
Deut.  xxxii.  1,  to  the  heavens  and  the  earth.  The 
controversy  of  Jehovah  with  His  people  (Mic.  vi. 
3-5)  is  a  compendium  as  it  were  of  the  history  of 
the  Pentateuch  from  Exodus  onwards,  whilst  the 
expression  Ds>12y  JV3,  "Slave-house"  of  Egypt  is 

•kken  from  Deut.  vii.  8,  xiii.  5.  In  vi.  8,  there  is 
no  doubt  an  allusion  to  Deut.  x.  12,  and  the  threat  - 
enings  of  vi.  13-16  remind  us  of  Deut.  xxviii.  as 
well  as  of  Lev.  xxvi. 

Since,  then,  not  only  Jeremiah  and  K/.ekiel,  but 
Amos  and  Hosea,  Isaiah  and  Micah,  speak  in  the 
words  of  Deuteronomy,  as  well  as  in  words  bor 
rowed  from  other  portions  of  the  Pentateuch,  we 
see  at  once  how  untenable  is  the  theory  of  those 
who,  like  Kwald,  maintain  that  Deuteronomy  was 
composed  during  the  reign  of  Manasseh,  or,  as  Vai- 
hinger  does,  during  that  of  Hezekiah. 

But,  in  truth,  the  Book  speaks  for  itself.  No 
imitator  could  have  written  in  such  a  strain.  We 
scarcely  need  the  express  testimony  of  the  work  to 
its  own  authorship.  But,  having  it,  we  find  all  the 
internal  evidence  conspiring  to  show  that  it  came 
from  Moses.  Those  magnificent  discourses,  the  grand 
roll  of  which  can  be  heard  and  felt  even  in  a  trans 
lation,  came  warm  from  the  heart  and  (Vesli  from 


784 


PENTATEUCH,  THE 


the  1  ips  ol  r«rael's  Lawgiver.  They  are  the  outpour 
ings  of  a  solicitude  which  is  nothing  less  than 
uarental.  It  is  the  father  uttering  his  dying  advice 
~M  his  children,  no  less  than  the  Prophet  counselling 
and  admonishing  his  people.  What  book  can  vie 
with  it  either  in  majesty  or  in  tenderness  ?  What 
words  ever  bore  more  surely  the  stamp  of  genuine 
ness  ?  If  Deuteronomy  be  only  the  production  of 
some  timorous  reformer,  who,  conscious  of  his  own 
weakness,  tried  to  borrow  dignity  and  weight  from 
the  name  of  Moses,  then  assuredly  all  arguments 
drawn  from  internal  evidence  for  the  composition 
of  any  work  are  utterly  useless.  We  can  never  tell 
whether  an  author  is  wearing  the  mask  of  another, 
or  whether  it  it  he  himself  who  speaks  to  us. 

In  spite  therefore  of  the  dogmatism  of  modern 
critics,  we  declare  unhesitatingly  for  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  Deuteronomy. 

Briefly,  then,  to  sum  up  the  results  of  our  inquiry. 

1.  The  Book  of  Genesis  rests  chiefly  on  docu 
ments  much  earlier  than  the  time  of  Moses,  though 
it  was  probably  brought  to  very  nearly  its  present 
shape  either  by  Moses  himself,  or  by  one  of  the 
elders  who  acted  under  him. 

2.  The  Books  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers, 
are  to  a  great  extent  Mosaic.     Besides  those  por 
tions  which  are   expressly  declared  to  have  been 
written  by  him  (see  above),  other  portions,  and 
especially  the  legal  sections,  wei-e,  if  not  actually 
written,  in  all  probability  dictated  by  him. 

3.  Deuteronomy,  excepting  the  concluding  part, 
is  entirely  the  work  of  Moses,  as  it  professes  to  be. 

4.  It  «  not  probable  that  this  was  written  before 
the  three  preceding  books,  because  the  legislation 
in  Exodus  and  Leviticus  as  being  the  more  formal 
is  manifestly  the  earlier,  whilst  Deuteronomy  is 
the  spiritual  interpretation  and  application  of  the 
Law.     But  the  letter  is  always  before  the  spirit ; 
the  thing  before  its  interpretation. 

5.  The  first  composition  of  the  Pentateuch  as  a 
whole  could  not  have  taken  place  till  after  the 
Israelites   entered   Canaan.      It   is   probable    that 
Joshua,  and  the  elders  who  were  associated  with 
him,    would    provide  for  its  formal  arrangement, 
custody,  and  transmission. 

6.  The  whole  work  did  not  finally  assume  its 
present  shape  till  its  revision  was  undertaken  by 
Ezra  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonish  captivity. 

IV.  Literature: 

1.  Amongst  the  earlier  Patristic  expositors  may 
be  mentioned — 

Augustine,  De  Genesi  contra  Manich. ;  De 
Genesi ad  littcram ;  Locutiones  (Gen. — Jud.) ;  and 
Quaestiones  in  ffeptateuchum. 

Jerome,  Liber  Quaestionum  Hebraicarum  in 
&enesim. 

Chrysostom,  In  Genesim,  Homiliae  et  Sermones. 
(Opp.  Montfaucon,  vol.  vi.  With  these  will  also  be 
found  those  of  Sevenan  of  Gabala.) 

Theodoret,  Quaestiones  in  Gen.,  Ex.,  Lev., 
Numer.,  Dent.,  &c. 

Ephraem  Syrus,  Explanat.  in  Genesin. 

Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Glaphyra  in  libros  Mosis. 

2.  In  the  middle  ages  we  have  the  Jewish  com 
mentators — Isaaki  or  Rashi  (an  abbreviation  of  his 
name  Rabbi   Solomon   Isaaki,  sometimes  wrongly 
called   Jarchi)   of  Troyes,   in   the   llth  century; 
Aben-Ezra  of  Toledo  in  the  12th ;  David  Kimchi 
of  Narbonne  in  the  13th. 

3.  Of  the  Reformation  period : — 

The  Commentary  of  Calvin  on  the  Five  Books  is 
>  masterpiece  of  exposition. 


PENTECOST 

Luther  wrote,  both  in  German  and  lu  Lntin, 
Commentaries  on  Genesis,  the  last  bjmg  finished 
but  a  short.  time  before  his  death. 

4.  Later  we  have  the  Commentaries  of  Cakvius, 
in  his  Biblia  Illustrata,  and  Mercerus,  in  Gentsinf 
Rivetus,  Exercitationes  in  Genesin,  and  Commen- 
tarii  in  Exodum,  in  his  Opp.  Theolog.  vol.  i.  Roter. 
1651  ;  Grotius,  Annot.  ad  Vet.  Test,  in  Opp.  vol.  i.; 
Le  Clerc  (Clericus),  Mosis  Prophetae,  Lib.  V.  ;  in 
the  1st  vol.  of  his  work  on  the  Old  Testament, 
Amst  1710,  with  a  special  dissertation,  De  Scrip- 
tore  Pentateuchi  Mose  ;  Spencer,  De  Legibus  He- 
braeorum. 

5.  The  number  of  books  written  on  this  subject 
in  Germany  alone,  during  the  last  century,  is  vory 
considerable.    Reference  may  be  made  to  the  General 
Introductions  of  Michaelis,  Eichhorn  (5  vols.  1823), 
Jahn  (1814),  De  Wette  (7th  ed.  1852),  Keil  (1st 
ed.  1853),  H&vernick  (1856),  Bleek  (1861),  Sta- 
helin  (1862).     Further,  on  the  one  hand,  to  Heng- 
stenberg's  Authentic  des  Pentat  euchs  (1836,  1839)  ; 
Ranke's   Untersuchungen  (1834);  Drechsler,  Ein- 
heit  $c.,  der  Genesis  (1838);  Konig,  Alt.  Stud. 
(2  Heft,  1839);  Kurtz,  Gesch.  des  Alien  Bundes 
(2nd   ed.   1853):    and   on   the  other  to   Ewald, 
Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israels  ;  Von  Lengerke,  Ke- 
naan  (1844)  ;    Stahelin,    Krit.    Untersuchungen 
(1843)  ;  Bertheau,  Die  Sieben  Gruppen,  &c. 

As  Commentaries  on  the  whole  or  parts  of  the 
Pentateuch  may  be  consulted  — 

(1)  Critical:  —  Rosenmiiller,  Scholia,  vol.  i.  3rd 
ed.  (1821);    Knobel    (on  all  the   books),    in  the 
Kurzgef.  Exeget.  Handbuch  ;  Tuch,  Die  Genesis 
(1838)  ;    Schumann,    Genesis    (1829)  ;    Bunsen, 
Bibelwerk. 

(2)  Exegetical:  —  Baumgarten,  Theol.  Comment. 
(1843),  Schroder,  Das  Erste  Bach  Mose  (1846); 
Delitzsch,  Genesis  (3rd  ed.  1861);   Schultz,  Deu- 
teronomium  (1859).     Much  will  be  found  bearing 
on  the  general  question  of  the  authorship  and  date 
of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Introductions  to  the  last 
two  of  these  works. 

In  England  may  be  mentioned  Graves'  Lectures 
on  the  last  four  Books  of  the  Pentateuch,  who 
argues  strenuously  for  the  Mosaic  authorsh.j  .  So 
also  do  Rawlinson  on  The  Pentateuch,  in  Aids  to 
Faith,  1862  ;  and  M'Caul  on  the  Mosaic  Cosmogony, 
in  the  same  volume  ;  though  the  former  admits  that 
Moses  made  free  use  of  ancient  documents  in  com 
piling  Genesis. 

Davidson,  on  the  other  hand,  in  Home's  Intro 
duction,  vol.  ii.  (10th  ed.  1856),  argues  for  two 
documents,  and  supposes  the  Jehovist  to  have  writ 
ten  in  the  time  of  the  Judges,  and  the  Elohist  in 
that  of  Joshua,  and  the  two  to  have  been  incor 
porated  in  one  work  in  the  reign  of  Saul  or  David. 
He  maintains,  however,  the  Mosaic  authorship  cf 
Deuteronomy. 

The  chief  American  writers  T'ho  have  treated  of 
the  Pentateuch  are  Stuart,  Introduction  to  the  Old 
Testament;  and  Bush,  Commentaries  on  the  Five 
Books.  f  J.  J.  S.  P.] 


PENTECOST  (ftoyo  n«3 

(Ex.  acxiii.  16)  ;  eopr^i  OepioyxoO 
/j-drcav  ;  solemnitas  messis  primitivorum  ;  "  the 
feast  of  harvest,  the  first  fruits  of  thy  labours  :" 
riy3B>  Jn  (Ex.  xxxiv.  22  ;  Deut.  xvi.  10)  ;  iopr) 
fBoopdowv  ;  solemnitas  hebdomadarum  "  the  feast 
of  weeks:"  D'T-ISSn  Dl»  (Num.  xxviii.  26,  ct.  Lev. 
ix:ii.  17);  fifii'pa  ru>v  vtuv  ;  dies  primitiwrum  ; 


PENTECOST 

•'  the  day  of  first  fruits."  in  later  times  it  appears 
to  have  been  called  D^OH  DV  («*  Joseph.  B.  J. 
ii.  3.  §1)  ;  and  hence,  r/.u/pa  TTJS  IlecTTjKooTrjs 
(Tob.  ii.  1  ;  2  Mace.  xii.  32 ;  Acts  ii.  1 ,  xx.  16  ; 
1  Cor.  xvi.  8).  But  the  more  common  Jewish  name 
was  rmj?»  (in  Chaldee,  SPnVJ?  ;  'AffapBa,  in 
Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  10.  §6).  The  second  of  the  great 
festivals  of  the  Hebrews.  It  fell  in  due  course  on 
the  sixth  day  of  Sivan,  and  its  rites,  according  to 
the  Law,  were  restricted  to  a  single  day.  The  most 
important  passages  relating  to  it  are,  Ex.  xxiii.  16, 
Lev.  xxiii.  15-22,  Num.  xxviii.  26-31,  Deut.  xvi. 
9-12. 

I.  The  time  of  the  festival  was  calculated  from 
the  second  day  of  the  Passover,  the  iBth  of  Nisan. 
The  Law  prescribes  that  a  reckoning  should  be  kept 
from  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath  "  b  (Lev.  xxiii. 
11,  15)  [PASSOVER,  II.  3]  to  the  morrow  after 
the  completion  of  the  seventh  week,  which  would 
of  course  be  the  fiftieth  day  (Lev.  xxiii.  15,  1.6  ; 
Deut.  xvi.  9).  The  fifty  days  formally  included 
the  period  of  grain-harvest,  commencing  with  the 
offering  of  the  first  sheaf  of  the  barley-harvest  in 
the  Passover,  and  ending  with  that  of  the  two  first 
loaves  which  were  made  from  the  wheat-harvest,  at 
this  festival. 

It  was  the  offering  of  these  two  loaves  which 
was  the  distinguishing  rite  of  the  day  of  Pentecost. 


PENTECOST 


785 


)  hoy  were  to  be  leavened.  Each  loaf  wa&  to  con 
tain  the  tenth  of  an  epliahc  (t.  e.  about  3j  quarts) 
of  the  finest  wheat-Hour  of  the  new  crop  (Lev. 
xxiii.  17).  The  rlour  was  to  be  the  pixluce  of  the 
"and.d  The  loaves,  along  with  a  peace-offering  of 
two  lambs  of  the  first  year,  were  to  be  waved  before 
the  Lord  and  given  to  the  priests.  At  the  same 
time  a  special  sacrifice  was  to  be  made  of  seven 
lambs  of  the  first  year,  one  young  bullock  and  two 
rams,  as  a  burnt-offering  (accompanied  by  the  proper 
meat  and  drink  offerings),  and  a  kid  for  a  sin-offering 
(Lev.  xxiii.  18,  19).  Besides  these  offerings,  if  we 
adopt  the  interpretation  of  the  Rabbinical  writers, 
it  appeai-s  that  an  addition  was  made  to  the  daily 
sacrifice  of  two  bullocks,  one  ram,  and  seven  lambs, 
as  a  burnt-offering  (Num.  xxviii.  27).e  At  this,  as 
well  as  the  other  festivals,  a  free-will  offering  was 
to  be  made  by  each  person  who  came  to  the  sanc 
tuary,  according  to  his  circumstances  (Deut.  xvi. 
10).  [PASSOVER,  p.  714,  note  '.]  It  would  seem 
that  its  festive  character  partook  of  a  more  free  and 
hospitable  liberality  than  that  of  the  Passover,  which 
was  rather  of  the  kind  which  belongs  to  the  mere 
family  gathering.  In  this  respect  it  resembled  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles.  The  Levite,  the  stranger,  the 
fatherless,  and  the  widow,  were  to  be  brought  within 
its  influence  (Deut.  xvi.  11,  14).  The  mention  of 
the  gleanings  to  be  left  in  the  fields  at  harvest  for 
"  the  poor  and  the  stranger,"  in  connexion  with 


»  This  word  in  the  0.  T.  is  applied  to  the  seventh  day 
of  the  Passover  and  the  eighth  day  of  Tabernacles,  but  not 
to  the  day  of  Pentecost.  [PASSOVER,  note  ',  p.  714.]  On 
its  application  to  Pentecost,  which  is  found  in  the  Mishna 
(Roth  Itash.  i.  2,  and  Chagigali,  ii.  4.  &c.),  in  the  Targum 
(Num.  xxviii.  26),  in  Josephus,  and  elsewhere  (see  }  v.). 

b  There  has  been  from  early  times  some  difference  o: 

opinion  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words  nSBTI  milD- 
It  has  however  been  generally  held,  by  both  Jewish  and 
Christian  writers  of  all  ages,  that  the  sabbath  here  spoken 
of  is  the  first  day  of  holy  convocation  of  the  Passover,  the 
15th  of  Nisan,  mentioned  Lev.  xxiii.  1.  In  like  manner 

the  word  TlStJ*  is  evidently  used  as  a  designation  of  the 
day  of  atonement  (Lev.  xxiii.  32) ;  and  JlflSK*  (sdbbati 
observatio)  is  applied  to  the  first  and  eighth  days  of  Ta 
bernacles  and  to  the  Feast  of  Trumpets.  That  the  LXX. 
so  understood  the  passage  in  question  can  hardly  be 
doubted  from  their  calling  it  "  the  morrow  after  the  first 
day"  (i.  e.  of  the  festival)  :  17  tirouipiov  TJJS  n-pconjs.  The 
word  in  vers.  15  and  16  has  also  been  understood  as 
"  week,"  used  in  the  same  manner  as  <raj3/3aTa  in  the  N.  1'. 
(Matt,  xxviii.  1 ;  Luke  xviil.  12 ;  John  xx.  ] ,  &c.).  But  some 
have  insisted  on  taking  the  Sabbath  to  mean  nothing  but 
the  seventh  day  of  the  week,  or  "  the  sabbath  of  creation," 
as  the  Jewish  writers  have  called  it ;  and  they  see  a  diffi 
culty  in  understanding  the  same  word  in  the  general  sense 
of  week  as  a  period  of  seven  days,  contending  that  it  can 
only  mean  a  regular  week,  beginning  with  the  first  day, 
and  ending  with  the  Sabbath.  Hence  the  Baithusian  (or 
Sadducean)  party,  and  in  later  times  the  Karaites,  sup 
posed  that  the  omer  was  offered  on  the  day  following  the 
weekly  Sabbath  which  might  happen  to  fall  within  the 
seven  days  of  the  Passover.  The  day  of  Pentecost  would 
thus  always  fall  on  the  first  day  of  the  week.  Hitzig 
(Ostem  und  Pfmgsten,  Heidelberg,  1 H37)  has  put  forth  the 
notion  that  the  Hebrews  regularly  began  a  new  week  at 
the  commencement  of  the  year,  so  that  the  7th,  14th,  and 
21nt  of  Nisan  were  always  Sabbath  days.  He  imagines 
that  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath"  from  which  Pente 
cost  was  reckoned,  was  the  22nd  day  of  the  month,  the  day 
after  the  proper  termination  of  the  Passover.  He  is  well 
answered  by  Biihr  (Symbolik,  ii.  620),  who  refers  espe 
cially  to  Josh.  v.  11.  as  proving,  in  connexion  with  the  law 
in  Lev.  xxiii.  14,  t'oat  the  omer  was  offered  on  tlie  10th 


of  the  month.  It  should  be  observed  that  the  words  in 
that  passage,  f^NH  "VQJJ,  mean  merely  corn  of  the 
land,  not  as  in  A.  V.  "  the  old  corn  of  the  land."  "  The 
morrow  after  the  Passover"  (HpSH  mTO)  might  at 
first  sight  seem  to  express  the  15th  of  Nisan;  but  the 
expression  may,  on  the  whole,  with  more  probability, 
be  taken  as  equivalent  with  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sab 
bath,"  that  is,  the  16th  day.  See  Keil  on  Josh.  v.  11 ; 
Masius  and  Drusius,  on  the  same  text.  In  the  Grit.  Sac.- 
Bahr,  Symb.  ii.  621 ;  Selden,  De  Anno  Civili,  ch.  7  ;  Bar 
tenora,  in  Chagigah,  ii.  4 ;  Buxt  Syn.  Jud.  xx. ;  Fagius, 
in  Lev.  xxiii.  15 ;  Urusius,  NotaeMajores  in  Leu.  xxiii.  16. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  LXX.  omit  rjj  ewavpiov 
roil  Trdcrxa,  according  to  the  texts  of  Tischendorf  and 
Theile. 

c  The  \TWy.  or  tenth  (in  A.  V.  "  tenth  deal "),  is  ex 
plained  in  Num.  v.  15,  ilQ^Kn  JVVbjJ,  "  the  tenth 
part  of  an  ephah."  It  is  sometimes  called  "TOP,  omer, 
literally,  a  handful  (Ex.  xvi.  36),  the  same  word  which 
is  applied  to  the  first  sheaf  of  the  Passover.  (See  Joseph. 
Ant.  viii.  2,  $9.)  [WEIGHTS  AND  MEASUBES.] 

*  This  is  what  is  meant  by  the  words  in  Lev.  xxiii.  17, 
which  stand  in  the  A.  V.  "out  of  your  habitations,"  and 
in  the  Vulgate,  "  ex  omnibus  habltaculis  vestris."  The 
Hebrew  word  is  not  JV2,  a  house,  as  the  home  of  a 
family,  but  itJ'ID,  o  place  of  abode,  as  the  territory 
of  a  nation.  The  LXX.  has,  airb  TTJS  KaroiKtas  vjuaii/; 
Jonathan,  "e  loco  habitationum  vestrum."  See  Drusius, 
in  C'rit.  Sac. 

<»  The  differing  statements  respecting  the  proper  sacri 
fices  for  the  day  in  Lev.  xxiii.  18,  and  Num.  xxviii.  27,  are 
thus  reconciled  by  the  Jewish  writers  (Mishna,  Menaciiotii, 
iv.  2,  with  the  notes  of  Bartenora  and  Malmonides). 
Josephus  appears  to  add  the  two  statements  together, 
not  quite  accurately,  and  does  not  treat  them  as  relating 
to  two  distinct  sacrifices  (Ant.  iii.  10.  $6).  He  enumerate:, 
as  the  whole  of  the  offerings  for  the  day,  a  single  loaf,  two 
lambs  for  a  peace-offering,  three  bullocks,  two  rams  and 
fourteen  lambs  for  a  burnt-offering,  and  two  kills  for  a  sin- 
offering.  Biihr,  Winer,  anJ  other  modem  critics,  regard 
the  statements  as  discordant,  and  prefer  that  of  Num. 
xxviii.  as  being  most  in  harmony  with  the  sacrifices  wh'cb 
belong  to  the  other  festivals. 

3  E 


786 


PENTECOST 


Peuteoobt,  n<ny  perhaps  have  a  bearing  on  the  libe 
rality  which  belonged  to  the  festival  (Lev.  xxiii. 
22).  At  Pentecost  (as  at  the  Passover)  the  people 
were  to  be  reminded  of  their  bondage  in  Egypt,  and 
Ihey  were  especially  admonished  of  their  obligation 
to  keep  the  divine  law  (Deut.  xvi.  12). 

II.  Of  the  information  to  be  gathered  from 
Jewish  writers  respecting  the  observance  of  Pente 
cost,  the  following  particulars  appear  to  be  the  best 
worthy  of  notice.  The  flour  for  the  loaves  was 
sifted  with  peculiar  care  twelve  times  over.  They 
were  made  either  the  day  before,  or,  in  the  event 
of  a  Sabbath  preceding  the  day  of  Pentecost,  two 
days  before  the  occasion  (Menackoth,  vi.  7,  xi.  9). 
They  are  said  to  have  been  made  in  a  particular  form. 
They  were  seven  palms  in  length  and  four  in  breadth 
(Mcnachoth,  xi.  4,  with  Maimonides'  note).  The  two 
lambs  for  a  peace-offering  were  to  be  waved  by  the 
priest,  before  they  were  slaughtered,  along  with  the 
loaves,  and  afterwards  the  loaves  were  waved  a 
second  time  along  with  the  shoulders  of  the  lambs. 
One  loaf  was  given  to  the  high-priest  and  the  other 
to  the  ordinary  priests  who  officiated f  (Maimon.  in 
Tumid,  c.  8,  quoted  by  Otho).  The  bread  was  eaten 
ihat  same  night  in  the  Temple,  and  no  ft-agment  of 
it  was  suffered  to  remain  till  the  morning  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  vi.  5,  §3;  Ant.  iii.  10,  §6). 

Although,  according  to  the  Law,  the  observance  of 
I'enteoost  lasted  but  a  single  day,  the  Jews  in  foreign 
countries,  since  the  Captivity,  have  prolonged  it  to 
two  days.  They  have  treated  the  Feast  of  Trum 
pets  in  the  same  way.  The  alteration  appears  to 
have  been  made  to  meet  the  possibility  of  an  error 
in  calculating  the  true  day.f  It  is  said  by  Barte- 
nora  and  Maimonides  that,  while  the  Temple  was 
standing,  though  the  religious  rites  were  confined 
to  the  day,  the  festivities,  and  the  bringing  in  of 
gifts,  continued  through  seven  days  (Notes  to  Cha- 
gigah,  ii.  4).  The  Hallel  is  said  to  have  been  sung 
at  Pentecost  as  well  as  at  the  Passover  (Lightfoot, 
Temple  Service,  §5).  The  concourse  of  Jews  who 
attended  Pentecost  in  later  times  appears  to  have 
been  very  great  (Acts  ii. ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  13, 
§14,  xvii.  10,  §2 ;  B.  J.  ii.  3,  §1). 

No  occasional  offering  of  first-fruits  could  be 
made  in  the  Temple  before  Pentecost  (Biccurim, 
i.  3,  6).  Hence  probably  the  two  loaves  were  desig 
nated  "  the  first  of  the  first-fruits"  (Ex.  xxiii.  19) 
[PASSOVER,  p.  715,  note  °],  although  the  offering 
of  the  omer  had  preceded  them.  The  proper  time 
for  offering  first-fruits  was  the  interval  between 
Pentecost  and  Tabernacles  {Bice.  i.  6,  10;  comp. 
Ex.  xxiii.  16).  [FIRST  FRUITS.] 

The  connexion  between  the  omer  and  the  two 


PENTECOST 

loaves  of  Pentecost  appears  never  ts  have  bten  iost 
sight  of.  The  former  was  called  by  Philo,  -ptt- 
6prtos  irfpas  loprijj  fj.fi(ovos  h  (be  Sept.  §21, 
v.  25  ;  comp.  De  Decem  Orac.  iv.  302,  ed.  Tauch) 
The  interval  between  the  Passover  and  Pentecost 
was  evidently  regarded  as  a  religious  sewon.1  The 
custom  has  probably  been  handed  down  from  ancient 
times,  which  is  observed  by  the  modern  Jews,  of 
keeping  a  regular  computation  of  the  fifty  dijs  ty 
a  formal  observance,  beginning  with  a  short  prayer 
on  the  evening  of  the  day  of  the  omer,  and  con 
tinued  on  each  succeeding  day  by  a  solemn  declara 
tion  of  its  number  in  the  succession,  at  evening 
prayer,  while  the  members  of  the  family  are  stand 
ing  with  respectful  attention11  (Buxt.  Syn.  Jud. 
xx.  p.  440). 

III.  Doubts  have  been  cast  on  the  common  inter 
pretation  of  Acts  ii.  1,  according  to  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  given  to  the  Apostles  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost.  Lightfoot  contends  that  the  passage,  i 


means,  when  the  day  of  Pentecost  had  passed, 
and  considers  that  this  rendering  is  countenanced 
by  the  words  of  the  Vulgate,  "  cum  complerentur 
dies  Pentecostes."  He  supposes  that  Pentecost  fell 
that  year  on  the  Sabbath,  and  that  it  was  on  the 
ensuing  Lord's  day  that  ?iaav  Secures  fytoflu/iaS&v 
M  rb  avr6  (Exercit.  in  Act.  ii.  1).  Hitzig,  on 
the  other  hand  (  Ostern  und  Pfingsten,  Heidelberg, 
1837),  would  render  the  words,  "  As  the  day  of 
Pentecost  was  approaching  its  fulfilment."  Neander 
has  replied  to  the  latter,  and  has  maintained  the 
common  interpretation  (Planting  of  the  Christian 
Church,  i.  5,  Bohn's  ed.). 

The  question  on  what  day  of  the  week  this 
Pentecost  fell,  must  of  course  be  determined  by  the 
mode  in  which  the  doubt  is  solved  regarding  the 
day  on  which  the  Last  Supper  was  eaten.  [PASS 
OVER,  III.]  If  it  was  the  legal  paschal  supper,  on 
the  14th  of  Nisan,  and  the  Sabbath  during  which 
our  Lord  lay  in  the  grave  was  the  day  of  the  omer, 
Pentecost  must  have  followed  on  the  Sabbath.  But 
if  the  supper  was  eaten  on  the  13th,  and  He  was 
crucified  on  the  14th,  the  Sunday  of  the  Resurrec 
tion  must  have  been  the  r*ay  of  the  omer,  and 
Pentecost  must  have  occurred  on  the  first  day  of 
the  week. 

IV.  There  is  no  clear  notice  in  the  Scriptures  of 
any  historical  significance  belonging  to  Pentecost. 
But  most  of  the  Jews  of  later  times  have  regarded 
the  day  as  the  commemoration  of  the  giving  of  the 
Law  on  Mount  Sinai.  It  is  made  out  from  Ex.  xix. 
that  the  Law  was  delivered  on  the  fiftieth  day  after 
the  deliverance  from  Egypt  (Selden,  De  Jur.  Nat. 


f  In  like  manner,  the  leavened  bread  which  was  offered 
with  the  ordinary  peace-offering  was  waved  and  given  to 
the  priest  who  sprinkled  the  blood  (Lev.  vil.  13,  14). 

«  Lightfoot,  Exercit.  Heb.  Acts  ii.  1 ;  Reland,  Ant.  iv. 
4, 5 ;  Selden,  De  Ann.  Civ.  c.  vil. 

h  He  elsewhere  mentions  the  festival  of  Pentecost  with 
the  same  marked  respect  He  speaks  of  a  peculiar  feast 
Kept  by  the  Therapeutae  as  npocoprios  fieyurn)?  eopiTJs 
JC.  Hevrr,icoo"rii<;  (De  Vit.  Cantemp.  v.  334). 

i  According  to  the  most  generally  received  interpretation 
of  the  word  iturepoirpwro?  (Luke  vi.  1),  the  period  was 
marked  by  a  regularly  designated  succession  of  Sabbaths, 
similar  to  the  several  successions  of  Sundays  In  our  own 
Calendar.  It  is  assumed  that  the  day  of  the  omer  was 
called  Seiirepa  (in  the  LXX.,  Lev.  xxiii.  11,  ij  en-av'piox 
njf  n-puTrj?).  The  Sabbath  which  came  next  after  it  was 
termed  &evrfp6npuirov ;  the  second,  SevrepoSevrepov ;  the 
fclttl,  fevrtpoTpiroc ;  and  so  onwards,  till  Pentecost.  This 


explanation  was  first  proposed  by  Scaliger  (Dt  Emend.  Temp. 
lib.  vi.  p.  557),  and  has  been  adopted  by  Frischmnth,  Pe- 
tavius,  Casaubon,  Lightfoot,  Godwyn,  Carpzov,  and  many 
others. 

k  The  less  educated  of  the  modern  Jews  regard  the  fifty 
days  with  strange  superstition,  and,  It  would  seem,  are 
always  impatient  for  them  to  come  to  an  end.  I.mrii'g 
their  continuance,  they  have  a  dread  of  sudden  death,  of  the 
effect  of  malaria,  and  of  the  influence  of  evil  spirits  over 
children.  They  relate  with  gross  exaggeration  the  case  of  a 
great  mortality  which,  during  the  first  twenty-three  days 
of  the  period,  befel  the  pupils  of  Akiba,  the  great  Mishnical 
doctor  of  the  second  century,  at  Jaffa.  They  do  not  ride, 
or  drive,  or  go  on  the  water,  unless  they  are  impelled  by 
absolute  necessity.  They  are  careful  not  to  whistle  In  the 
evening,  lest  It  should  bring  ill  luck.  They  scrupulously 
put  off  marriages  till  Pentecost.  (Stauben,  La  VieJuive  en 
Altact  (Paris,  I860),  p.  124  ;  Mills,  Britifh  Jews,  p.  207.) 


PENTECOST 

"t  Gent.  iii.  11).  It  has  been  conjectured  that  n 
connexion  between  the  event  and  the  festival  may 
possibly  be  hinted  at  in  the  reference  to  the  ob 
servance  of  the  Law  in  Deut.  xvi.  12-  But  neither 
Philon  nor  Josephus  has  a  word  on  the  subject. 
There  is,  however,  a  tradition  of  a  custom  which 
Schottgen  supposes  to  be  at  least  as  ancient  as  the 
Apostolic'times,  that  the  night  before  Pentecost  was 
ii  time  especially  appropriated  for  thanking  God  for 
the  gift  of  the  Law."  Several  of  the  Fathers  noticed 
tne  coincidence  of  the  day  of  the  giving  of  the  Law 
with  that  of  the  festival,  and  made  use  of  it.  Thus 
Jerome  says,  "  Supputemus  numerum,  et  inve- 
niemus  quinquageaimo  die  egressionis  Israel  ex 
Aegypto  in  vertiee  mentis  Sinai  legem  datam. 
(Jnde  et  Pentecostes  celebratur  solemnitas,  et  postea 
Evangelii  saeramentum  Spiritus  Sancti  descensione 
completur  "  (Epist.  ad  Fabiolam,  Mansio  XII.). 
St.  Augustin  speaks  in  a  similar  manner :  "  Pente- 
ccsten  etiam,  id  est,  a  passione  et  resurrectione 
Do.nmi,  qumquagesimum  diem  celebramus,  quo 
nobis  Sanctum  Spiritum  Paracletum  quern  pro- 
miserat  misit:  quod  futurum  etiam  per  Judaeorum 
pascha  significatum  est,  cum  quinquagesimo  die 
post  celebrationem  ovis  occisae,  Moyses  digito  Dei 
sriptam  legem  accepit  in  monte  "  (Contra  Faustum, 
lib.  xxxii.  c.  12).  The  later  Rabbis  spoke  with 
confidence  of  the  coir.'ffiemoration  of  the  Law  as  a 
prime  object  in  the  institutijn  of  the  feast.  Mai- 
monides  says,  "  Kestum  septimanarum  est  dies  ille, 
quo  lex  data  fait.  Ad  hujus  diei  honorem  pertinet 
quod  dies  a  praecedenti  solenni  festo  (Pascha)  ad 
ilium  usque  diem  numerantur  "  (More  Nevochim, 
iii.  41).  Abarbanel  recognises  the  fact,  but  denies 
that  it  had  anything  to  do  with  the  institution  of 
the  feast,  observing,  "  lex  divina  non  opus  habet 
sanctificatione  diei,  quo  ejus  memoria  recolatur." 
He  adds,  "  causa  festi  septimanarum  est  initium 
messis  tritici "  (in  Leg.  262).  But  in  general  the 
Jewish  writers  of  modern  times  have  expressed 
themselves  on  the  subject  without  hesitation,  and, 
in  the  rites  of  the  day,  as  it  is  now  observed,  the 
gift  of  the  Law  is  kept  prominently  in  view.0 

V.  If  the  feast  of  Pentecost  stood  without  an 
organic  connexion  with  any  other  rites,  we  should 
have  no  certain  warrant  in  the  Old  Testament  for 
regarding  it  as  more  than  the  divinely  appointed 
solemn  thanksgiving  for  the  yearly  supply  of  the 
most  useful  sort  of  food.  Every  reference  to  its 
meaning  seems  to  bear  immediately  upon  the  com 
pletion  of  the  grain-harvest.  It  might  have  been  a 
Gentile  festival,  having  no  proper  reference  to  the 
election  of  the  chosen  race.  It  might  have  taken  a 
place  in  the  religion  of  any  people  who  merely  felt 
that  it  is  God  who  gives  rain  from  heaven  and 
fruitful  seasons,  and  who  fills  our  hearts  with  food 
and  gladness  (Acts  xiv.  17).  But  it  was,  as  we 
have  seen,  essentially  linked  on  to  the  Passover,  that 
festival  which,  above  all  others,  expressed  the  fact 
of  a  race  chosen  and  separated  from  other  nations. 

m  Phllo  expressly  states  that  it  was  at  the  Feast  of 
Trumpets  that  the  giving  of  the  Law  was  commemorated 
(Lie  Se.pt.  c.  22).  [TRUMPETS,  FEAST  OF.] 

"  Hor.  Eeb.  in  Act.  ii.  1.  Schottgen  conjectures  that  the 
Apostles  on  the  occasion  there  spoken  of  were  assembled  to 
gether  for  tills  purpose,  in  accordance  with  Jewish  custom. 

0  Some  of  the  Jews  adorn  their  houses  with  flowers,  and. 
wear  wreaths  on  their  heads,  with  the  declared  purpose  of 
tetifying  their  Joy  in  the  possession  of  the  Law.  They  also 
eat,  such  food  as  is  prepared  with  milk,  because  the  purity 
of  the  divine  law  is  likened  to  milk.  (Compare  the  ex 
pression.  "  the  sincere  milk  of  the  word,"  1  I'et.  ii.  2.) 


PENTECOST 


787 


It  was  not  an  insulated  day.  It  stood  a.i  tho  n  \- 
minating  point  of  the  Pentecostal  season.  Jf  thi 
offering  of  the  omer  was  a  supplication  for  the 
Divine  blessing  on  the  harvest  which  was  just  com 
mencing,  and  the  offering  of  the  two  loaves  was  a 
thanksgiving  for  its  completion,  each  rite  was 
brought  into  a  higher  significance  in  consequence 
of  the  omer  forming  an  integral  part  of  the  Pass 
over.  It  was  thus  set  forth  that  He  who  had 
delivered  His  people  from  Egypt,  who  had  raised 
them  from  the  condition  of  slaves  to  that  of  free 
men  in  immediate  covenant  with  Himself,  was  the 
same  that  was  sustaining  them  with  bread  from  year 
to  year.  The  inspired  teacher  declared  to  God's 
chosen  one,  "  He  maketh  peace  in  thy  borders,  He 
filleth  thee  with  the  finest  of  the  wheat"  (Ps. 
cxlvii.  14).  If  we  thus  regard  the  day  of  Pente 
cost  as  the  solemn  termination  of  the  consecrated 
period,  intended,  as  the  seasons  came  round,  to 
teach  this  lesson  to  the  people,  we  may  see  the 
fitness  of  the  name  by  which  the  Jews  have  mostly 
called  it,  J"n¥y,  the  concluding  assembly?  [PASS 
OVER,  p.  7 14°,  note  J.] 

As  the  two  loaves  were  leavened,  they  could  not 
be  ofFeriid  on  the  altar,  like  the  unleavened  sacrificial 
bread.  [PASSOVKR,  IV.  3  (6).]  Abarbanel  (in 
Lev.  xxiii.)  has  proposed  a  reason  for  their  not 
being  leavened  which  seems  hardly  to  admit  of  a 
doubt.  He  thinks  that  they  were  intended  to  re 
present  the  best  produce  of  the  earth  in  the  actual 
condition  in  which  it  ministers  to  the  support  ot 
human  life.  Thus  they  express,  in  the  most  signi 
ficant  manner,  what  is  evidently  the  idea  of  the 
festival. 

We  need  not  suppose  that  the  grain-harvest  in 
the  Holy  Land  was  in  all  ysars  precisely  completed 
between  the  Passover  and  Pentecost.  The  period  of 
seven  weeks  was  evidently  appointed  in  conformity 
with  the  Sabbatical  number,  which  so  frequently 
recurs  in  the  arrangements  of  the  Mosaic  Law. 
[FEASTS  ;  JUBILEE.]  Hence,  probably,  the  prevail 
ing  use  of  the  name,  "  The  Feast  of  Weeks,"  which 
might  always  have  suggested  the  close  religious  con 
nexion  in  which  the  festival  stood  to  the  Passover. 

It  is  not  surprising  that,  without  any  direct  autho 
rity  in  the  0.  T.,  the  coincidence  of  the  day  on  which 
the  festival  was  observed  with  that  on  which  the  Law 
appears  to  have  been  given  to  Moses,  should  have 
strongly  impressed  the  minds  of  Christians  in  the 
early  ages  of  the  Church.  The  Divine  Providence 
had  ordained  that  the  Holy  Spirit  should  come 
down  in  a  special  manner,  to  give  spiritual  life  and 
unity  to  the  Church,  on  that  very  same  day  in  th« 
year  on  which  the  Law  had  been  bestowed  on  the 
children  of  Israel  which  gave  to  them  national  life 
and  unity.  They  must  have  seen  that,  as  the  pos 
session  of  the  Law  had  completed  the  deliverance  of 
the  Hebrew  race  wrought  by  the  hand  of  Moses,  so 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit  perfected  the  work  of  Christ 
in  the  establishment  of  His  kingdom  upon  earth. 


It  is  a  fact  of  some  interest,  though  in  no  wise  con 
nected  with  the  present  argument,  that,  in  the  servic* 
of  the  synagogue,  the  book  of  Ruth  is  read  through 
at  Pentecost,  from  the  connexion  of  its  suhjtct  with  har 
vest.  (Buxt.  Syn.  Jua.  xx. ;  La  Vie  Juive  en  Alsace 
pp.  129, 142.) 

p  So  Godwyn,  Lightfoot,  Reland,  Biihr.  The  full  name 
appears  to  have  been  HDB  ?&  PTfSy,  the  concIwdi'Mj 
assembly  of  the  Passover.  The  designation  of  the  o7er- 
ing  of  the  omer  used  by  Philo,  irpoedpnor  cre'pat  40(71)1 
uei'tfovof ,  strikingly  tends  to  the  same  purpose. 

H  £  2 


788 


PENUEL 


It  may  have  been  on  this  account  that  Pentorost 
was  the  last  Jewish  festival  (as  far  as  we  know) 
which  St.  Paul  was  anxious  to  observe  (Acts  xx.  IB, 
1  Cor.  xvi.  8),  and  that  Whitsuntide  came  to  be 
the  first  annual  festival  instituted  in  the  Christian 
Church  (Hessey's  Hampton  Lectures,  pp.  88,  96). 
It  was  rightly  regarded  as  the  Church's  birthday, 
and  the  Pentecostal  season,  the  period  between  it 
and  Easter,  bearing  as  it  does  such  a  clear  analogy 
to  the  fifty  days  of  the  old  L;iw,  thus  became  the 
ordinary  time  for  the  baptism  of  conveits  (Tertullian, 
De  Bapt.  c.  19;  Jerome,  in  Zech.  xiv.  8). 

(Cai-pzov,  App.  Grit.  iii.  5  ;  Keland,  Ant.  iv.  4  ; 
Lightfoot,  Temple  Service,  §3;  Exercit.  in  Act. 
ii.  1  ;  Bahr,  Symbolik,  iv.  3  ;  Spencer,  DC  Leg.  Heb. 
i.  ir.  2,  in.  viii.  2  ;  Meyer,  De  Fest.  Heb.  ii.  13  ; 
Hupfeld,  De  Fest.  Heb.  ii.  ;  Iken,  De  Duobus  Pani- 
bus  Pentecost.  Brem.  1729  ;  Mishna,  Menachoth 
and  Biccurim,  with  the  Notes  in  Surcnhusius  ; 
Drusius,  Notae  Majores  in  Lev.  xxiii.  15,  21  (Grit. 
Sac.};  Otho,  Lex.  Rah.  s.  Festa  ;  Buxtorf,  Si/n. 
Jud.  c.  xx.)  [S.  C.] 

PEN'UEL  (^N13S  :  in  Gen.  JSos  0eoC,  else 
where  Qavovl}\  :  Phanuel}.  The  usual,  and  pos 
sibly  the  original,  form  of  the  name  of  a  place  which 
first  appears  under  the  slightly  different  forai  of 
PENIEL  vGen.  xxxii.  30,  31).  From  this  narrative 
it  is  evident  that  it  lay  somewhere  between  the 
torrent  Jabbok  and  Succoth  (comp.  xxxii.  22  with 
xxxiii.  17).  This  is  in  exact  agreement  with  the 
terms  of  its  next  occurrence,  when  Gideon,  pursuing 
the  hosts  of  the  Midianites  across  the  Jordan  into  the 
uplands  of  Gilead,  arrives  first  at  Succoth,  and  from 
thence  mounts  to  Penuel  (Judg.  viii.  5,  8).  It  had 
then  a  tower,  which  Gideon  destroyed  on  his  return, 
at  the  same  time  slaying  the  men  of  the  place 
because  they  had  refused  him  help  before  (ver.  17). 
Penuel  was  rebuilt  or  fortified  by  Jeroboam  at  the 
commencement  of  his  reign  (1  K.  xii.  25),  no  doubt 
on  account  of  its  commanding  the  fords  of  Sutcoth 
and  the  road  from  the  east  of  Jordan  to  his  capital 
city  of  Shechem,  and  also  perhaps  as  being  an  ancient 
sanctuary.  Succoth  has  been  identified  with  toler 
able  certainty  at  Sakut,  but  no  trace  has  yet  been 
found  of  Penuel.  [G.] 

PE'OR  ("liyBH,  "  the  Peor,"  with    the    def. 


article  :  rov  *&oy<i>p  :  mons  PhoAor).  A  mountain 
in  Moab,  from  whence,  after  having  without  effect 
ascended  the  lower  or  less  sacred  summits  of  Bamoth- 
Baal  and  Pisgah,  the  prophet  Balaam  was  conducted 
by  Balak  for  his  final  conjurations  (Num.  xxiii.  28 
only). 

Peor  —  or  more  accurately,  "the  Peor"  —  was 
"  facing  Jeshimon."  The  same  thing  is  said  of  Pisgah. 
But  unfortunately  we  are  as  yet  ignorant  of  the 
position  of  all  three,  so  that  nothing  can  be  inferred 
from  this  specification. 

In  the  Onomasticon  ("  Fogor  ;"  "  Bethphogor  ;" 
"  Danaba")  it  is  stated  to  be  above  the  town  of 
Libias  (the  ancient  Beth-aram),  and  opposite  Jericho. 
Tie  towns  of  Bethpeor  and  Dinhaba  were  on  the 
mountain,  six  miles  from  Libias,  and  seven  from 
Heshbon,  respectively.  A  place  named  Fukharah  is 
mentioned  in  the  list  of  towns  south  of  Es-Salt  in 
the  appendix  to  the  1st  edit,  of  Dr.  Robinson's 
Bib.  Res.  (iii.  App.  169),  and  this  is  placed  by 
Van  de  Velde  at  the  head  of  the  Wady  Eshteh, 

*  The  LXX.  have  here  represented  the  Hebrew  letter 
Ain  by  g,  as  they  have  ako  in  Rajn^l,  Gomorrah, 
Aiballah.  &c. 


PERAZIM,  MOUNT 

8  miles  N.  E.  of  ffcsbdn.  But  in  our  pre-jcct  ifp.o- 
ranee  of  these  regions  all  this  must  be  mere  conjectu.-'s. 

Gesenius  (Thes.  11 19  a)  gives  it  as  his  opinica 
that  Baal-Peor  derived  his  name  from  the  mountain, 
not  the  mountain  from  him. 

A  Peor,  under  its  Greek  garb  of  Phagor,  appears 
among  the  eleven  names  added  by  the  LXX.  to  the 
list  of  the  allotment  of  Judah,  between  Bethlehem 
and  Ait-Hi  (Etham).  It  was  known  to  Ensebius 
and  Jerome,  and  is  mentioned  by  the  latter  in  his 
translation  of  the  Onoinasticon  as  Phaora.  It 
probably  still  exists  under  the  name  of  Beit  FdgMr 
or  Kirbet  FdghAr,  5  miles  S.W.  of  Bethlehem, 
larely  a  mile  to  the  left  of  the  road  from  Hebron 
(Tobler,  3tte  Wanderung).  It  is  somewhat  singular 
that  both  Peor  and  Pisgah,  names  so  prominently 
connected  with  the  East  of  Jordan,  should  be  found 
also  on  the  West. 

The  LXX.  also  read  the  name,  which  in  the  He 
brew  text  is  Pan  and  Pai,  as  Peor;  since  in  both 
cases  they  have  Phogor. 

2.  ("lijJB,  without  the  article :  Qaytap  :  idolum 
Phehor;  Phohor;  Beel  Phegor).  In  four  passages 
(Num.  xxv.  18,  twice;  xxxi.  16;  Josh.  xxii.  17) 
Peor  occurs  as  a  contraction  for  Baal-peor ;  always 
in  reference  to  the  licentious  rites  of  Shittim  which 
brought  such  destruction  on  Israel.  In  the  three 
first  cases  the  expression  is,  the  "  matter,"  or  "  for 
the  sake"  (literally  "  word"  in  each)  "of  Peor;" 
in  the  fourth,  "  iniquity,  or  crime,  of  Peor."  [G.] 

PERA'ZIM,  MOUNT  (D^S~in  :  Spos  *«- 
/3w»'»:  mows  divisiorutri).  A  name  which  occurs  in 
Is.  xxviii.  21  only, — unless  the  place  which  it  desig 
nates  be  identical  with  the  BAAL-PERAZIM  men 
tioned  as  the  scene  of  one  of  David's  victories  over 
the  Philistines.  Isaiah,  as  his  manner  was  (comp. 
x.  26),  is  referring  to  some  ancient  triumphs  of  the 
arms  of  Israel  as  symbolical  of  an  event  shortly  to 
happen — 

Jehovah  shall  rise  up  as  at  Mount  Perazim, 
He  shall  be  wroth  as  in  the  valley  of  Gibeon. 
The  commentators  almost  unanimously  take  his 
reference  to  be  to  David's  victories,  above  alluded  to, 
at  Baal  Perazim,  and  Gibeon  (Gesenius ;  Strachey), 
or  to  the  former  of  these  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Joshua's  slaughter  of  the  Canaanites  at  Gibeon  and 
Beth-horon  on  the  other  (Eichhorn  ;  Rosenmiiller ; 
Michaelis).  Ewald  alone — perhaps  with  greater 
critical  sagacity  than  the  rest — doubts  that  David's 
victory  is  intended.  "  because  the  prophets  of  this 
period  are  not  in  the  habit  of  choosing  such  examples 
from  his  history  "  (Propheten,  i.  261). 

If  David's  victory  is  alluded  to  in  this  passage  of 
the  prophet,  it  furnishes  an  example,  similar  to  that 
noticed  under  OREB,  of  the  slight  and  casual  manner 
in  which  events  of  the  gravest  importance  are  some 
times  passed  over  in  the  Bible  narrative.  But  for 
this  later  reference  no  one  would  infer  that  the 
events  reported  in  2  Sam.  v.  18-25,  and  1  Chr.  xiv. 
8-17,  had  been  important  enough  to  serve  as  a 
parallel  to  one  of  Jehovah's  most  tremendous  judg 
ments.  In  the  account  of  Josephus  (Ant.  vii. 
4,  §1),  David's  victory  assumes  -much  larger  pro 
portions  than  in  Samuel  and  Chronicles.  The  attack 
is  made  not  by  the  Philistines  only,  but  by  "  all  Syria 
and  Phoenicia,  with  many  other  warlike  nations  be 
sides."  This  is  a  good  instance  of  the  manner  iu 

•  Perhaps  considering  the  word  as  derived  from  ytJ>"l 
which  the  LXX.  usually  render  by  aatftqt 


PBKKBH 

wA:nr,h  Jobephus,  apparently  from  records  now  lost 
U>  us,  supplements  and  completes  the  scanty  narra 
tives  of  the  Bible,  in  agreement  with  the  casual 
references  of  the  Prophets  or  Psalmists.  He  places 
the  scene  of  the  encounter  in  the  "  groves  of  weep 
ing"  as  if  alluding  to  the  Baca  of  Ps.  Ixxxiv. 

The  title  Mount  Perazim,  when  taken  in  con 
nexion  with  the  Baal  Perazim  of  2  Sam.  v.  seems 
to  imply  that  it  was  an  eminence  with  a  heathen 
sanctuary  of  Baal  upon  it.  [BAAL,  vol.  i. 
p.  148.]  [G.] 

PE'RESH  (EhS  :  tapes :  Pharos).  The  son 
of  Macliir  by  his  wile  Maachah  (1  Chr.  vii.  16). 

PE'REZ(pB:  *ap«'j:  Phares);  The  "  chil 
dren  of  Perez,"  or  Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah,  appear 
to  have  been  a  family  of  importance  for  many  cen 
turies.  In  the  reign  of  David  one  of  them  was 
chief  of  all  the  captains  of  the  host  for  the  first 
month  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  3) ;  and  of  those  who  returned 
from  Babylon,  to  the  number  of  468,  some  occu 
pied  a  prominent  position  in  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
and  are  mentioned  by  name  as  living  in  Jerusalem 
(Neh.  xi.  4,  6).  [PHARKZ.] 

PE'REZ-UZZA  (NW  pQ  :  Aieucomft  '€>£«  : 
divisio  Oza),  1  Chr.  xiii.  11 ;  and 

PE'REZ-UZ'ZAH  (W  'B  :  percussio  Oza), 
2  Sam.  vi.  8.  The  title  which  David  conferred  on 
the  threshing-floor  of  Nachon,  or  Cidon,  in  comme 
moration  of  the  sudden  death  of  Uzzah :  "  And 
David  was  wroth  because  Jehovah  had  broken  this 
breach  on  Uzzah  and  he*  called  the  place  '  Uzzah's 
breaking'  unto  this  day."  The  word  perez  was  a 
favourite  with  David  on  such  occasions.  He  em 
ploys  it  to  commemorate  his  having  "  broken  up  " 
the  Philistine  force  in  the  valley  of  Rephaim  (2  Sam. 
v.  20).  [BAAL  PERAZIM.]  He  also  uses  it  in  a 
subsequent  reference  to  Uzzah's  destruction  in 
1  Chr.  xv.  13. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  statement  of  the  con 
tinued  existence  of  the  name  should  be  found  not  only 
in  Samuel  and  Chronicles,  but  also  in  Josephus.  who 
tays  (Ant.  vii.  4,  §2),  as  if  from  his  own  observation, 
"  the  place  where  he  died  is  even  now  (frt  vvv) 
called  « the  cleaving  of  Oza.1 " 

The  situation  of  the  spot  is  not  known.  [NACHON.] 
If  this  statement  of  Josephus  may  be  taken  literally, 
it  would  however  be  worth  while  to  make  some 
search  for  traces  of  the  name  between  Jerusalem  and 
Kirjath-jearim.  [G.] 

PERFUMES  (rnbp).  The  free  use  of  per 
fumes  was  peculiarly  grateful  to  the  Orientals 
(Prov.  xxvii.  9),  whose  olfactory  nerves  are  more 
than  usually  sensitive  to  the  offensive  smells  en 
gendered  by  the  heat  of  their  climate  (Burckhardt's 
Travels,  ii.  85).  The  Hebrews  manufactured  their 
perfumes  chiefly  from  spices  imported  from  Arabia, 
though  to  a  certain  extent  also  from  aromatic  plants 
growing  in  their  own  country.  [SPICES.]  The 
modes  in  which  they  applied  them  were  various : 
occasionally  a  bunch  of  the  plant  itself  was  worn 
altout  the  person  as  a  nosegay,  or  enclosed  in  a  bag 
(Caiit.  i.  I !?)  ;  or  the  plant  was  reduced  to  a  powder 
and  used  in  the  way  of  fumigation  (Cant.  iii.  6) ; 
or,  again,  the  aromatic  qualities  were  extracted  by 

a  Or,  with  equal  accuracy,  and  perhaps  more  conve- 
uic!-;re,  "  one  called  it,"  that  Is,  "  It  was  called  "—as  In 
Z  K.  xviii.  4.    [NEHUSHTAN.] 
•>  K'BSn  ''fia  ;  lit.  •'  houses  of  the  soul." 
1  A  similar  usage  is  recorded  of  the  Indian  princes  .— 


PERGAMOS 


78« 


some  process  of  boiling,  and  were  then  mired  will- 
oil,  so  as  to  be  applied  to  the  person  in  the  way  of 
ointment  (John  xii.  3) ;  or,  lastly,  the  scent  wa* 
carried  about  in  smelling-bottles  b  suspended  from 
the  girdle  (Is.  iii.  20).  Perfumes  entered  largely 
into  the  Temple  service,  in  the  two  fonns  of  incense 
and  ointment  (Ex.  xxx.  22-38).  Nor  were  they 
less  ifsed  in  private  life:  not  only  were  they  applied 
to  the  person,  but  to  garments  (Ps.  xlv.  8  ;  Cant. 
iv.  11),  and  to  articles  of  furniture,  such  as  beds 
(Prov.  vii.  17).  On  the  arrival  of  a  guest  the 
same  compliments  were  probably  paid  in  ancient  as 
in  modern  times;  the  rooms  were  fumigated;  the 
person  of  the  guest  was  sprinkled  with  rose-water ; 
and  then  the  incense  was  applied  to  his  face  and 
beard  (Dan.  ii.  46  ;  Lane's  Mod.  Eg.  ii.  14).  Whet 
a  royal  personage  went  abroad  in  his  litter,  attend 
ants  threw  up  "  pillars  of  smoke  "  c  about  his  path 
(Cant.  iii.  6;.  Nor  is  it  improbable  that  other 
practices,  such  as  scenting  the  breath  by  chewing 
frankincense  (Lane,  i.  246),  and  the  skin  by  washing 
in  rose-water  (Burckhardt's  Arab.  i.  68),  and  fumi 
gating  drinkables  (Lane,  i.  185;  Burckhardt,  i.  52), 
were  also  adopted  in  early  times.  The  use  of  per 
fumes  was  omitted  in  times  of  mourning,  whence 
the  allusion  in  Is.  iii.  24,  "  instead  of  sweet  smel! 
there  shall  be  stink."  The  preparation  of  perfumes 
in  the  form  cither  of  ointment  or  incense  was  a 
recognised  profession d  among  the  Jews  (Ex.  xxx. 
25,  35;  Eccl.  x.  1).  [W.  L.  B.] 

PER'GA  (Tlipyrj),  an  ancient  and  important 
city  of  Pamphylia,  situated  on  the  river  Cestius, 
at  a  distance  of  60  stadia  from  its  mouth,  and  cele 
brated  in  antiquity  for  the  worship  of  Artemis 
(Diana),  whose  temple  stood  on  a  hill  outside  the 
town  (Strab.  xiv.  667 ;  Cic.  Verr.  i.  20 ;  Plin.  v. 
26 ;  Mela,  i.  14 ;  Ptol.  v.  5,  §7).  The  goddess  and 
the  temple  are  represented  in  the  coins  of  Perga. 
The  Cestius  was  navigable  to  Perga ;  and  St.  Paul 
landed  here  on  his  voyage  from  Paphos  (Acts  xiii. 
13).  He  visited  the  city  a  second  time  on  his  return 
from  the  interior  of  Pamphylia,  and  preached  the 
Gospel  there  (Acts  xiv.  25).  For  further  details  see 
FAJIPHYLIA.  There  are  still  extensive  remains  of 
Perga  at  a  spot  called  by  the  Turks  Eski-Kalesi, 
(Leake,  Asia  Minor,  p.  132  ;  Fellows,  Asia  Minor, 
p.  190). 

PER'GAMOS  (y  Ufpyapos,  or  rb  Tlepya- 
fiov).  A  city  of  Mysia,  about  three  miles  to  the  N. 
of  the  river  Bakyr-tchai,  the  Caicus  of  antiquity,  and 
twenty  miles  from  its  present  mouth.  The  name 
was  originally  given  to  a  remarkable  hill,  presenting 
a  conical  appearance  when  viewed  from  the  plain. 
The  local  legends  attached  a  sacred  character  to  this 
place.  Upon  it  the  Cabin  were  said  to  have  been 
witnesses  of  the  birth  of  Zeus,  and  the  whole  of  the 
land  belonging  to  the  city  of  the  same  name  which 
afterwards  grew  up  around  the  original  Pergamos, 
to  have  belonged  to  these.  The  sacred  character  of 
the  locality,  combined  with  its  natural  strength, 
seems  to  have  made  it,  like  some  others  of  the 
ancient  temples,  a  bank  for  chiefs  who  desired  to 
accumulate  a  large  amount  of  specie;  and  Lysi- 
machus,  one  of  Alexander's  successors,  deposited 
there  an  enormous  sum — no  less  than  9000 
talents — in  the  care  of  an  Asiatic  eunuch  named 


"  Quum  rex  semet  In  publlco  oonspicl  patitur,  turibula 
argentea  ministri  ferunt,  totumque  iter  per  quod  ferri 
destlnavit  odoribus  complent"  (Cnrtius  viii.  9,  }23;. 
d  Hpl ;  A.  V.  "apothecary." 


790 


TKRGAMOS 


Philetatrns.  In  the  troublous  times  which  fol-' 
Jowed  the  break  up  of  the  Macedonian  conquests, 
this  officer  betrayed  his  trust,  and  by  successful 
temporizing,  and  perhaps  judicious  employment  of 
the  funds  at  his  command,  succeeded  in  retaining 
the  treasure  and  transmitting  it  at  the  end  of  twenty 
years  to  his  nephew  Eumones,  a  petty  dynast  in  the 
ueighbourhood.  Eumenes  was  succeeded  by  his 
cousin  Attalus,  the  founder  of  the  Attalic  dynasty 
of  Pergamene  kings,  who  by  allying  himself  with 
the  rising  Roman  power  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
future  greatness  of  his  house.  His  successor,  Eu 
menes  II.,  was  rewarded  for  his  fidelity  to  the 
Romans  in  their  wars  with  Antiochus  and  Perseus 
by  a  gift  of  all  the  territory  which  the  former  had 
possessed  to  the  north  of  the  Taurus  range.  The 
g:eat  wealth  which  accrued  to  him  from  this  source 
he  employed  in  laying  out  a  magnificent  residential 
city,  and  adorning  it  with  temples  and  other  public 
buildings.  His  passion,  and  that  of  his  successor, 
for  literature  and  the  fine  arts,  led  them  to  form  a 
library  which  rivalled  that  of  Alexandria ;  and  the 
impulse  given  to  the  art  of  preparing  sheepskins 
for  the  purpose  of  transcription,  to  gratify  the  taste 
of  the  royal  dilettanti,  has  left  its  record  in  the 
name  parchment  (charta  pergamena).  Eumenes's 
successor,  Attalus  II.,  is  said  to  have  bid  600,000 
sesterces  for  a  picture  by  the  painter  Aristides,  at 
the  sale  of  the  plunder  of  Corinth  ;  and  by  so  doing 
to  have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Roman  general 
Mummius  to  it,  who  sent  it  oft'  at  once  to  Rome, 
where  no  foreign  artist's  work  had  then  been  seen. 
For  another  picture  by  the  same  artist  he  paid  100 
talents.  But  the  great  glory  of  the  city  was  the 
so-called  Nicephorium,  a  grove  of  extreme  beauty, 
laid  out  as  a  thank-offering  for  a  victory  over 
Antiochus,  in  which  was  an  assemblage  of  temples, 
probably  of  all  the  deities,  Zeus,  Athenfc,  Apollo, 
Aesculapius,  Dionysus,  and  Avhrodit^.  The  temple 
of  the  last  was  of  a  most  elaborate  character.  Its 
facade  was  perhaps  inlaid  after  the  manner  of 
pietra  dura  work  ;  for  Philip  V.  of  Macedonia,  who 
was  repulsed  in  an  attempt  to  surprise  Pergamos 
during  the  reign  of  Attalus  II.,  vented  his  spite  in 
cutting  down  the  trees  of  the  grove,  and  not  only 
destroying  the  Aphrodisium,  but  injuring  the 
stones  in  such  a  way  as  to  prevent  their  being  used 
again.  At  the  conclusion  of  peace  it  was  made 
a  special  stipulation  that  this  damage  should  be  made 
good. 

The  Attalic  dynasty  terminated  B.C.  133,  when 
Attalus  III.,  dying  at  an  early  age,  made  the  Ro 
mans  his  heirs.  His  dominions  formed  the  province 
of  Asia  propria,  and  the  immense  wealth  which 
was  directly  or  indirectly  derived  from  this  legacy, 
contributed  perhaps  even  more  than  the  spoils  of 
Carthage  and  Corinth  to  the  demoralization  of  Ro 
man  statesmen. 

The  sumptuousness  of  the  Attalic  princes  had 
raised  Pergamos  to  the  rank  of  the  first  city  in  Asia 
as  regards  splendour,  and  Pliny  speaks  of  it  as  with 
out  a  rival  in  the  province.  Its  prominence,  how 
ever,  was  not  that  of  a  commercial  town,  like 
Ephesus  or  Corinth,  but  arose  from  its  peculiar 
features.  It  was  a  sort  of  union  of  a  pagan  cathedral 
city,  an  university  town,  and  a  royal  residence, 
embellished  during  a  succession  of  years  by  kings 
who  all  had  a  passion  for  expenditure  and  ample 
means  of  gratifying  it.  Two  smaller  streams,  which 
flowed  from  the  north,  embii<±i£  the  town  between 
them,  and  then  fell  into  the  Caicus,  afforded  ample 
means  of  storing  water,  without  which,  in  those 


PEBGAMOB 

latitudes,  ornamental  cultivation  (or  indeed  enlti 
vation  of  any  kind)  is  out  of  the  question.  Th< 
larger  of  those  streams — the  BeryamO'tchai,  or 
Cetius  of  antiquity — has  a  fall  of  more  than  150 
feet  between  the  hills  to  the  north  of  Pergninoi 
and  its  junction  with  the  Caicus,  and  it  bring? 
down  a  very  considerable  body  of  water.  Both  the 
Nicephorium,  which  has  been  spoken  of  above,  and 
the  Grove  of  Aesculapius,  which  became  yet  more 
celebrated  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  empire,  doubt 
less  owed  their  existence  to  the  means  of  irrigation 
thus  available ;  and  furnished  the  appliances  for 
those  licentious  rituals  of  pagan  antiquity  which 
flourished  wherever  there  were  groves  and  hill- 
altars.  Under  the  Attalic  kings,  Pergamos  became  a 
city  of  temples,  devoted  to  a  sensuous  worship ;  ant) 
being  in  its  origin,  according  to  pagan  notions,  asacred 
place,  might  not  unnaturally  be  viewed  by  Jews  and 
Jewish  Christians,  as  one  "  where  was  the  throne  of 
Satan  "  (oVou  6  Op6vos  rov  ~2.ara.va.,  Rev.  ii.  13). 

After  the  extinction  of  its  independence,  the  sacred 
character  of  Pergamos  seems  to  have  been  put  even 
more  prominently  forward.  Coins  and  inscriptions 
constantly  describe  the  Pergamenes  as  vtoinopoi  or 
vtiaKupoi  irptaToi  TTJJ  'Affias.  This  title  always 
indicates  the  duty  of  maintaining  a  religious  worship 
of  some  kind  (which  indeed  naturally  goes  together 
with  the  usufruct  of  religious  property).  What  the 
deities  were  to  which  this  title  has  reference  espe 
cially,  it  is  difficult  to  say.  In  the  time  of  Martial, 
however,  Aesculapius  had  acquired  so  much  promi 
nence  that  he  is  called  Pergameus  deus.  His  grove 
was  recognised  by  the  Roman  senate  in  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  as  possessing  the  rights  of  sanctuary.  Pau- 
sauias,  too,  in  the  course  of  his  work,  refers  more 
than  once  to  the  Aesculapian  ritual  at  Pergamus  as 
a  sort  of  standard.  From  the  circumstance  of  this 
notoriety  of  the  Pergamene  Aesculapius,  from  the 
title  'Star^ip  being  given  to  him,  from  the  serpent 
(which  Judaical  Christians  would  regard  as  a  symbol 
of  evil)  being  his  characteristic  emblem,  and  from 
the  fact  that  the  medical  practice  of  antiquity  in 
cluded  charms  and  incantations  among  its  agencies, 
it  has  been  supposed  that  the  expressions  6  8p6vos 
rov  Saraj'a  and  oirov  6  "S,ara.vM  KuroiKti  have 
an  especial  reference  to  this  one  pagan  deity,  and  not 
to  the  whole  city  as  a  sort  of  focus  of  idolatrous 
worship.  But  although  undoubtedly  the  Aescu 
lapius  worship  of  Pergamos  was  the  most  famous, 
and  in  later  times  became  continually  more  pre 
dominant  from  the  fact  of  its  being  combined  with 
an  excellent  medical  school  (which  among  others 
produced  the  celebrated  Galen),  yet  an  inscription  of 
the  time  of  Marcus  Antoninus  distinctly  puts  Zeus, 
Athene,  Dionysus,  and  Asclepius  in  a  co-ordinate 
rank,  as  all  being  special  tutelary  deities  of  Per 
gamos.  It  seems  unlikely,  therefore,  that  the  ex 
pressions  above  quoted  should  be  so  interpreted  as  to 
isolate  one  of  them  from  the  rest. 

It  may  be  added,  that  the  charge  against  a  portion 
of  the  Pergamene  Church  that  some  among  them 
were  of  the  school  of  Balaam,  whose  policy  was  "  to 
put  a  stumbling-block  before  the  children  of  Israel, 
by  inducing  them  <f>ayt?y  (tS<a\vBvra  Kal  irop- 
vtvffai"  (Rev.  ii.  14),  is  in  both  its  particulars  veiy 
inappropriate  to  the  Aesculapian  ritual.  It  points 
rather  to  the  Dionysus  and  AphroditA  worship ;  and 
the  sin  of  the  Nicolaitans,  which  is  condemned,  seems 
to  have  consisted  in  a  participation  in  this,  arising 
out  of  a  social  amalgamation  of  themselves  with  the 
native  population.  Now,  from  the  tin?  of  tiie  war 
with  Autioi;hus  at  least,  it  is  certain  UiJt  there  wai 


PEKIDA. 

a  oou£iileialilt>  Jewish  population  in  Pergamene  ter 
ritory.  The  decree  of  the  Pergnmenes  quoted  by 
Josephus  (Ant.  xiv.  10,  §22),  seems  to  indicate 
that  the  Jews  had  farmed  the  tolls  in  some  of  the 
harbours  of  their  territory,  and  likewise  were  Holders 
of  land.  They  are — in  accordance  with  the  expressed 
desire  of  the  Homan  senate — allowed  to  levy  port- 
dues  upon  all  vessels  except  those  belonging  to  king 
Ptolemy.  The  growth  of  a  large  and  wealthy  class 
naturally  leads  to  its  obtaining  a  share  in  political 
rights,  and  the  only  bar  to  the  admission  of  Jews  to 
privileges  of  citizenship  in  Pergamos  would  be  their 
unwillingness  to  take  any  part  in  the  religious  cere 
monies,  which  were  an  essential  part  of  every  rela 
tion  of  life  in  pagan  times.  The  more  lax,  however, 
might  regard  such  a  proceeding  as  a  purely  formal 
act  of  civil  obedience,  and  reconcile  themselves  to  it 
as  Naaman  did  to  "  bowing  himself  in  the  house  of 
Kimmon"  when  in  attendance  upon  his  sovereign. 
It  is  perhaps  worth  noticing,  with  inference  to  this 
point,  that  a  Pergamene  inscription  published  by 
Lioeckh,  mentions  by  tuco  naires  (Jiii  ostratus,  who 
is  also  called  Trypho}  an  individual  who  served  the 
office  of  gymnasiarch.  Of  these  t\vo  names  the 
latter,  a  foreign  one,  is  likely  to  have  V«en  borne  by 
him  among  some  special  body  to  whu'ji  he  belonged, 
and  the  former  to  have  been  adopted  when,  by  ac 
cepting  the  position  of  an  official,  he  merged  himself 
in  the  general  Greek  population. 

(Strab.  xiii.  4 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv. ;  Martial,  ix.  17  ; 
Plin.  H.  N.  xxxv.  4,  10 ;  Liv.  xxm  33,  4  ;  Polyb. 
xvi.  1,  xxxii,  23 ;  Boeckh,  Inscript.  Nos.  3538, 
3550,  3553 ;  Philostratus,  De  Vit.  Soph.  p.  45, 106 ; 
Tchihntchetf',  Asie  Mineure,  p.  230 ;  Arundell,  Disco 
veries  in  Asia  Minor,  ii.  p.  304.)  [J.  VV.  B.] 

PER'IDA  (KT"IS  :  *tpiS<i ;  Alex.  *apej5a  : 
Pharidd).  The  children  of  Perida  returned  from 
Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  ii7).  In  Ezr. 
ii.  55  the  name  appears  as  PEKUDA,  and  in  1  Esd. 
v.  33  as  PHARIRA.  One  of  Kenuicott's  MSS.  has 
"  Peruda"  in  Neh. 

PERIZZITE,  THE,  and  PERIZ'ZITES 
(''•T'lSn,  in  all  cases  in  the  Heb.  singular :  ol  4>epe- 

Coloj;  in  Ezr.  only  6  QepeffBd:  Pherezaeus).  One 
of  the  nations  inhabiting  the  Land  of  Promise  before 
and  at  the  time  of  its  conquest  by  Israel. .  They  are 
not  named  in  the  catalogue  of  Gen.  x. ;  so  that  their 
origin,  like  that  of  other  small  tribes,  such  as  the 
Avites,  and  the  similarly  named  Gerizzites,  is  left  in 
obscurity.  They  are  continually  mentioned  in  the 
formula  so  frequently  occurring  to  express  the  Pro 
mised  L%nd  (Gen.  xv.  20;  Ex.  iii.  8,  17,  xxiii.  23, 
xxxiii.  2,  xxxiv.  11 ;  Deut.  vii.  1,  xx.  17  ;  Josh.  iii. 
10,  ix.  1,  xxiv.  11 ;  Judg.  iii.  5;  Ezr.  ix.  1 ;  Neh. 
ix.  8).  They  appear,  however,  with  somewhat  greater 
distinctness  on  several  occasions.  On  Abram's  first 
entrance  into  the  land  it  is  said  to  have  been  occu 
pied  by  "  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite  "  (Gen. 
xiii.  7).  Jacob  also,  after  the  massacre  of  the  She- 
chemites,  uses  the  same  expression,  complaining  that 
his  sons  had  "  made  him  to  stink  among  the  inha 
bitants  of  the  land,  among  the  Canaanite  and  the 
Perizzite"  ( xxxiv.  30).  So  also  in  the  detailed  records 
of  the  conquest  given  in  the  opening  of  the  book  of 
Judg«  (evidently  from  a  distinct  source  to  those  in 
Joshua),  Judah  and  Simeon  are  said  to  have  found 
their  territory  occupied  by  "  the  Canaanite  and  the 


PEKSEPOLJS 


791 


Perizzite"  (Judg.  i.  4,  5),  with  Bezek  (a  place  not 
yet  discovered)  as  their  stronghold,  and  Adoni-bezet 
their  most  noted  chief.  And  thus  too  a  late  tradi 
tion,  preserved  in  2  Esdr.  i.  21,  mentions  only 
the  Canaanites,  the  Pheresites,  and  the  Philistines," 
is  the  original  tenants  of  the  country.  The  notice 
ust  cited  from  the  book  of  Judges  locates  them  in 
;he  southern  part  of  the  Holy  Land.  Another  inde 
pendent  and  equally  remarkable  fragment  of  the 
listory  of  the  conquest  seems  to  speak  of  them  as 
occupying,  with  the  Rephaim,  or  giants,  the  '  forest 
country"  on  the  western  flanks  of  Mount  •CarmeJ 
(Josh.  xvii.  15-18).  Here  again  the  Canaanites 
only  are  named  with  them.  As  a  tribe  of  moun 
taineers,  they  are  enumerated  in  company  with 
Amorite,  Hittite,  and  Jebusite  in  Josh.  xi.  3,  xii.  8 ; 
and  they  are  catalogued  among  the  remnants  of  the 
old  population  whom  Solomon  reduced  to  bondage, 
both  in  1  K.  ix.  20,  and  2  Chr.  viii.  7.  By  Josephus 
the  Perizzites  do  not  appear  to  be  mentioned. 

The  signification  of  the  name  is  not  by  any  means 
clear.  It  possibly  meant  rustics,  dwellers  in  open, 
unwalled  villages,  which  are  denoted  by  a  similar 
word.b  Ewald  (Geschichte,  i.  317)  inclines  to  believe 
that  they  were  the  same  people  with  the  Hittites. 
But  against  this  there  is  the  fact  that  both  they  and 
the  Hittites  appear  in  the  same  lists ;  and  that  not 
only  in  mere  general  formulas,  but  in  the  records  of 
the  conquest,  as  above.  Redslob  has  examined  the 
whole  of  these  names  with  some  care  (in  his  Alt- 
testam.  Namender  Israelitenstaats,  1846),  and  his 
conclusion  (p.  1 03)  is  that,  while  the  Chawoth  were 
villages  of  tribes  engaged  in  the  care  of  cattle,  the 
Perazoth  were  inhabited  by  peasants  engaged  in 
agriculture,  like  the  Fellahs  of  the  Arabs.  [G.] 

PERSEP'OLIS  (nepo-fTToAis ;  Persepolis)  is 
mentioned  only  in  2  Mace.  ix.  2,  where  we  hear  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  attempting  to  bum  its  temples, 
but  provoking  a  resistance  which  forced  him  to  fly 
ignominiously  from  the  place.  It  was  the  capital 
of  Persia  Proper,  and  the  occasional  residence  of  the 
Persian  court  from  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis, 
who  seems  to  have  been  its  founder,  to  the  invasion 
of  Alexander.  Its  wanton  destruction  by  that 
conqueror  is  well  known.  According  to  Q.  Curtius 
the  destruction  was  complete,  as  the  chief  building 
material  employed  was  cedar-wood,  which  caused 
the  conflagration  to  be  rapid  and  general  (De  Eebus 
Alex.  Magn.  v.  7).  Perhaps  the  temples,  which 
were  of  stone,  escaped.  At  any  rate,  if  ruined, 
they  must  have  been  shortly  afterwards  restored, 
since  they  were  still  the  depositories  of  treasure  in 
the  time  of  Epiphanes. 

Persepolis  has  been  regarded  by  many  as  identical 
with  Pa«argadae,  the  famous  capital  of  Cyrus  (see 
Niebuhr's  Lectures 'on  Ancient  History,  i.  115; 
Ouseley,  Travels,  ii.  316-318).  But  the  positions 
are  carefully  distinguished  by  a  number  of  ancient 
writers  (Stiab.  xv.  3,  §6,  7  ;  Plin.  H.  N.  vi.  26 ; 
Arrian,  Exp.  Alex.  vii.  I ;  Ptolem.  vi.  4)  ;  and  the 
ruins,  which  are  identified  beyond  any  reasonable 
doubt,  show  that  the  two  places  were  more  than 
40  miles  apart.  Pasargadae  was  at  Murgaub,  where 
the  tomb  of  Cyrus  may  still  be  seen;  Persepolis 
was  42  miles  to  the  south  of  this,  near  Istakher, 
on  the  site  now  called  the  CheM-Minar,  or  Forty 
Pillars.  Here,  on  a  platform  hewn  out  of  the  solid 
rock,  the  sides  of  which  face  the  four  cardinal  points, 


•  See  MANASSEH,  vol.  ii.  220a. 

*"  Copher  Jiap-perazi,  A.  V.  "  country  villages  "  (1  Sam 
vi.  18) :  Arei  hap-perazi,  "  umvalled  towns  "  (Deut.  iii.  5) 
In  loth  those  passages  the  LXX.  unci-rstaiul  the  IVvi/,.iU.s- 


to  be  alluded  to,  and  translate  accordingly.  ]u  Josh.  xvi. 
10  they  mid  the  Perizzites  to  the  Canaanites  as  i'jb:il>kai>U 
of  Gezer. 


792 


PERSEUS 


'.re  the  remains  of  two  great  palaces,  built  respec 
tively  by  Darius  Hystaspis  and  his  son  Xerxes, 
besides  a  number  of  other  edifices,  chiefly  temples. 
These  ruins  have  been  so  frequently  described  that 
it  is  unnecessary  to  do  more  than  refer  the  reader 
to  the  best  accounts  which  have  been  given  of  them 
(Niebuhr,  Reise,  ii.  121;  Chardin,  Voyages,  ii. 
245  ;  Ker  Porter,  Travels,  i.  576  ;  Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  i.  143-196 ;  Rich,  Residence  in  Kurdistan, 
vol.  ii.  pp.  218-222  ;  Fergusson,  Palaces  of  Nineveh 
and  Persepolis  Restored,  pp.  89-124,  &c.).  They 
are  of  great  extent  and  magnificence,  covering  an  area 
of  many  acres.  At  the  foot  of  the  rock  on  which 
they  are  placed,  in  the  plain  now  called  Merdasht, 
stood  probably  the  ancient  town,  built  chiefly  of 
wood,  and  now  altogether  effaced. 

Persepolis  may  be  regarded  as  having  taken  the 
place  of  Pasargadae,  the  more  ancient  cnpital  of 


1'KKSIA 

Persia  Proper,  from  the  time  of  DU-H..I  Hystaspin 
No  exact  reason  can  be  given  for  this  change,  which 
perhaps  arose  from  mere  royal  caprice,  Darius  having 
taken  a  fancy  to  the  locality,  near  which  he  erected 
his  tomb.  According  to  Athenaeus  the  court  re 
sided  at  Persepolis  during  three  months  of  each 
year  (Deipnosoph.  xii.  p.  513,  F.),  but  the  conflicting 
statements  of  other  writers  (Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6, 
§22,  Plut.  de  Exit.  ii.  p.  604;  Zonar.  iii.  26,  &c.) 
make  this  uncertain.  We  cannot  doubt,  however, 
that  it  was  one  of  the  royal  residences ;  and  we 
may  well  believe  the  statement  of  Strabo,  that, 
in  the  later  times  of  the  empire,  it  was,  next  to 
Susa,  the  richest  of  all  the  Persian  cities  (Geograph. 
xv.  3,  §6).  It  does  not  seem  to  ha-?e  long  survived 
the  blow  inflicted  upon  it  by  Alexander ;  for  after 
the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  it  disappears  alto 
gether  from  history  as  an  inhabited  place.  [G.  R.] 


PersepoliB 


PERSEUS  (Tlepcrfvs:  Perses},  the  eldest  (ille 
gitimate  or  supposititious?)  son  of  Philip  V.  and 
last  king  of  Macedonia.  After  his  father's  death 
(u.C.  179)  he  continued  the  preparations  for  the  re 
newal  of  the  war  with  Rome,  which  was  seen  to  be 
inevitable.  The  war,  which  broke  out  in  B.C.  171, 
was  at  first  ably  sustained  by  Perseus ;  but  in  168 
he  was  defeated  by  L.  Aemilius  Paullus  at  Pydna, 
and  shortly  afterwards  surrendered  with  his  family  to 
his  conquerors.  He  graced  the  triumph  of  Paullus, 
and  died  in  honourable  retirement  at  Alba.  The 
defeat  of  Perseus  put  an  end  to  the  independence  of 
Macedonia,  and  extended  even  to  Syria  the  terror  of 


the  Roman  name  (1  Mace.  viii.  5).        [B.  F.  W.] 


fetradrachm  of  Perseil 


Peraeui,  King  of  Macedonia. 


PEK'SIA  (DnS,  i.e.  Paras:  n^j:  Persis\ 
was  strictly  the  name  of  a  tract  of  no  very  large 
dimensions  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  which  is  still  known 
as  Pars,  or  Farsistan,  a  corruption  of  the  ancient 
appellation.  This  tract  was  bounded,  on  the  west,  by 
Susiana  or  Elam,  on  the  north  by  Media,  on  the  south 
by  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  on  the  east  by  Carmania,  the 
modem  Herman.  It  was,  speaking  generally,  an  arid 
and  unproductive  region  (Herod,  ix.  122  ;  Arr.  Exp 
Alex.  v.  4  ;  Plat.  Leg.  iii.  p.  695,  A.)  ;  but  contained 
some  districts  of  considerable  fertility.  The  worst 
part  of  the  country  was  that  towards  the  south,  on 
the  borders  of  the  Gulf,  which  has  a  climate  and  soil 
like  Arabia,  being  sandy  and  almost  without  streams, 
subject  to  pestilential  winds,  and  in  many 
places  covered  with  particles  of  salt.  Above 
this  miserable  region  is  a  tract  very  far 
superior  to  it,  consisting  of  rocky  moun 
tains — the  continuation  of  Zagros,  among 
which  are  found  a  good  many  fertile  valleys 
and  plains,  especially  towards  the  north, 
in  the  vicinity  of  Shiraz.  Here  is  an  im 
portant  stream,  the  Bendamir,  which  flow 
ing  through  the  beautiful  valley  of  Mer- 
daskt,  and  by  the  ruins  of  Persepolis,  is  then 
separated  into  numerous  channels  for  the 
purpose  of  irrigation,  and,  after  fertilizing 


feme...  (Attic  talent).     Obv.  Head  of  Kinr,  r.  bound  with     F  " '  6  I 

fillet     Rev.    BA2IAEQ2    rTEPSEQS,  Kaglt  on  thunderbolt-  M!     lar?e  tract  of  country  (the  district  of 

within  wrca'ii.  /«»)»  finds  its  course  in  the  salt  lake  of  Bak- 


PERSIANS 

fycwi.  Vines,  oranges,  and  lemons,  are  produced 
abundantly  in  this  region ;  and  the  wine  of  Shiraz  is 
celebrated  throughout  Asia.  Further  north  an  arid 
Oountry  again  succeeds,  the  outskirts  of  the  Great 
Desert,  which  extends  from  Kerman  to  Mazenderan, 
and  from  Kashan  to  Lake  Zerrah. 

Ptolemy  (Qeograph.  vi.  4)  divides  Persia  into  a 
number  of  provinces,  among  which  the  most  im 
portant  are  Paraetacen6  on  the  north,  which  was 
sometimes  reckoned  to  Media  (Herod,  i.  101 ;  Steph. 
Byz.  ad  voc.  napaira/ca), .  and  Mardyen6  on  the 
south  coast,  the  country  of  the  Mardi.  The  chief 
towns  were  Pasargadae,  the  ancient,  and  Persepolis, 
the  later  capital.  Pasargadae  was  situated  near  the 
modern  village  of  Murgavb,  42  miles  nearly  due 
north  of  Persepolis,  and  appears  to  have  been  the 
capital  till  the  time  of  Darius,  who  chose  the  far 
more  beautiful  site  in  the  valley  of  the  Bendamir, 
where  the  Ghehl  Minar  or  "  Forty  Pillars  "  still 
stand.  [See  PERSEPOLIS.]  Among  other  cities  of 
less  importance  were  Paraetaca  and  Gabae  in  the 
mountain  country,  and  Taoce"  upon  the  coast. 
(See  Strab.  xv.  3,  §1-8  ;  Plin.  H.  N.  vi.  25, 
26 ;  Ptolem.  Geog.  vi.  4 ;  Kinneir's  Persian 
Empire,  pp.  54-80;  Malcolm,  History  of 
Persia.  '.  'J-  K<r  Porter,  Travels,  i.  458, 
&c. ;  Rich,  Journey  from.  Bushire  to  Per 
sepolis,  &c.) 

While  the  district  of  Ears  is  the  true 
original  Persia,  the  name  is  more  commonly 
applied,  both  in  Scripture  and  by  profane 
authors,  to  the  entire  tract  which  came  by 
degrees  to  be  included  within  the  limits  of 
the  Persian  Empire.  This  empire  extended 
at  one  time  from  India  on  the  east  to  Egypt 
and  Thrace  upon  the  west,  and  included, 
besides  portions  of  Europe  and  Africa,  the 
whole  of  Western  Asia  between  the  Black 
Sea,  the  Caucasus,  the  Caspian,  and  the 
Jaxartes  upon  the  north,  the  Arabian  desert, 
the  Persian  Gulf, and  the  Indian  Ocean  upon 
the  south.  According  to  Herodotus  (iii.  89), 
it  was  divided  into  twenty  governments, 
or  satrapies ;  but  from  the  inscriptions  it 
would  rather  appear  that  the  number  varied 
at  different  times,  and,  when  the  empire 
was  most  flourishing,  considerably  exceeded 
twenty.  In  the  inscription  upon  his  tomb 
at  Nakhsh-i-Rustam  Darius  mentions  no 
fewer  than  thirty  countries  as  subject  to 
him  besides  Persia  Proper.  These  are — 
Media,  Susiana,  Parthia,  Aria,  Bactria,  Sog- 


PE11SIANS 


798 


native  fomi  of  the  name  is  Parsa,  which  the  Hebrew 
^D"1S  fairly  represents,  and  which  remains  but  little 
changed  in  the  modern  "  porsee."  It  is  conjectureo 
to  signify  "  the  Tigers.'' 

1 .  Character  of  the  nation. — The  Persians  were 
a  people  of  lively  and  impressible  minds,  brave  anil 
impetuous  in  war,  witty,  passionate,  for  Orientals 
truthful,  not  without  some  spirit  of  generosity,  and 
of  more  intellectual  capacity  than  the  generality  of 
Asiatics.  Their  faults  were  vanity,  Impulsiveness, 
a  want  of  perseverance  and  solidity,  and  an  almost 
slavish  spirit  of  sycophancy  and  servility  towards 
their  lords.  In  the  times  anterior  to  Cyrus  they 
were  noted  for  the  simplicity  of  their  habits,  which 
offered  a  strong  contrast  to  the  luxuriousness  of  the 
M«des ;  but  from  the  date  of  the  Median  overthrow, 
this  simplicity  began  to  decline  ;  and  it  was  not  very 
long  before  their  manners  became  as  soft  and  effemi 
nate  as  those  of  any  of  the  conquered  peoples.  They 
adopted  the  flowing  Median  robe  (Fig.  1)  which  was 
probably  of  silk,  in  lieu  of  the  old  national  costume 


Fig.  1.  Mcd: 


Fig.  2.  Old  Persia 


diana,  Chorasmia,  Zarangia,  Arachosia,  Sattagydia,  I  (Fig.  2)— a  close-fitting  tunic  and  trousers  of  leather 
Gaudaria,  India,  Scythia,  Babylonia,  Assyria,  Arabia,  I  (Herod,  i.  71 ;  compare  i.  135);  beginning  at  the  same 
Egypt,  Armenia,  Cappadocia,  Saparda,  Ionia,  (Euro-  time  the  practice  of  wearing  on  their  persons  chains, 


pean)  Scythia,  the  islands  (of  the  Egean),  the  country 
of  the  Scodrae,  (European)  Ionia,  the  lands  of  the 
Tacabri,  the  Budians,  the  Cushites  or  Ethiopians, 
the  Mardians,  and  the  Colchians. 

The  only  passage  in  Scripture  where  Persia  de 
signates   the   tract  which   has   been   called   above 


"  Persia  Proper  "  is  Ez.  xxxviii.  5. 
re  is  intended. 


Elsewhere  the 


PER'SIANS 


[G.  R.] 
3"1S  :  tlfpcrai :  Persac}.    The 


;vime  of  the  people  who  inhabited  the  country  called 
above  "  Persia  Proper,"  and  who  thence  conquered 
a  mighty  empire.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that 
'he  Persians  were  of  the  same  race  as  the  Medea, 
Doth  being  branches  of  the  great  Arian  stock,  which 
under  various  names  established  their  sway  over  the 
whole  tract  between  Mesopotamia  and  Burmah.  The 


bracelets,  and  collars  of  gold,  with  which  precious 
metal  they  also  adorned  their  horses.  Polygamy 
was  commonly  practised  among  them  ;  and  besides 
legitimate  wives  a  Persian  was  allowed  any  number 
of  concubines.  They  were  fond  of  the  pleasures  ol 
the  table,  indulging  in  a  great  variety  of  food,  and 
spending  a  long  time  over  their  meals,  at  which 
they  were  accustomed  to  swallow  large  quantities 
of  wine.  In  war  they  fought  bravely,  but  without 
discipline,  generally  gaining  their  victories  by  the 
vigour  of  their  first  attack ;  if  they  were  strenu 
ously  resisted,  they  soon  flagged  ;  and  if  they  suffered 
a  repulse,  all  order  was  at  once  lost,  and  the  retreat 
speedily  became  a  rout. 

2.  Religion. — The  religion  which  the  Persians 
brought  with  them  into  Persia  Proper  seems  tc 
have  been  of  a  very  simple  character,  differing  from 


7t>4  PERSIAN* 

natural  religion  in  little,  except  that  it  was  deeply 
tainted  with  Dualism.  Like  the  other  Aryans,  the 
Persians  worshipped  one  Supreme  God,  whom  they 
called  Awa-mazda  (Oromasdos) — a  term  signifying 
(as  is  believed)  "  the  Great  Giver  of  Life."  From 
Oromasdes  came  all  blessings — "  he  gave  the  earth, 
he  gave  the  heavens,  he  gave  mankind,  he  gave  life 
to  mankind  "  (Inscriptions,  passim) — he  settled  the 
P<  rsian  kings  upon  their  thrones,  strengthened  them, 
established  them,  and  granted  them  victory  over  all 
their  enemies.  The  royal  inscriptions  rarely  men 
tion  any  other  god.  Occasionally,  however,  they 
indicate  a  slight  and  modified  polytheism.  Oro- 
masdes  is  "  the  chief  of  the  gods,"  so  that  there  are 
other  gods  besides  him ;  and  the  highest  of  these  is 
evidently  Mithra,  who  is  sometimes  invoked  to  pro 
tect  the  monarch,  and  is  beyond  a  doubt  identical 
with  "  the  sun."  To  the  worship  of  the  sun  as 
Mithra  was  probably  attached,  as  in  India,  the 
worship  of  the  moon,  under  the  name  of  Homa,  as 
the  third  greatest  god.  Entirely  separate  from 
these — their  active  resister  and  antagonist — was 
Ahriman  (Arimanius)  "the  Death-dealing" — the 
powerful,  and  (probably)  self-existing  Evil  Spirit, 
from  whom  war,  disease,  frost,  hail,  poverty,  sin, 
death,  and  all  other  evils,  had  their  origin.  AJtriman 
was  Satan,  carried  to  an  extreme — believed  to  have 
an  existence  of  his  own,  and  a  real  power  of  resisting 
and  defying  God.  Ahriman  could  create  spirits,  and 
as  the  beneficent  Auramazda  had  surrounded  himself 
with  good  angels,  who  were  the  ministers  of  his  mer 
cies  towards  mankind,  so  Ahriman  had  surrounded 
himself  with  evil  spirits,  to  carry  out  his  malevolent 
purposes.  Worship  was  confined  to  Auramazda,  and 
his  good  spirits ;  Ahriman  tnd  his  demons  were  not 
worshipped,  but  only  hated  and  feared. 

The  character  of  the  original  Persian  worship  was 
simple.  They  were  not  destitute  of  temples,  as 
Herodotus  asserts  (Herod,  i.  131 ;  compare  Beh. 
Inscr.  col.  i.  par.  14,  §5)  ;  but  they  had  probably 
no  altars,  and  certainly  no  images.  Neither  do  they 
appear  to  have  had  any  priests.  Processions  were 
formed,  and  religious  chants  were  sung  in  the 
temples,  consisting  of  prayer  and  praise  intermixed, 
whereby  the  favour  of  Auramazda  and  his  good 
spirits  was  supposed  to  be  secured  to  the  worship 
pers.  Beyond  this  it  does  not  appear  that  they  had 
any  religious  ceremonies.  Sacrifices,  apparently, 
were  unknown ;  though  thank-offerings  may  have 
been  made  in  the  temples. 

From  the  first  entrance  of  the  Persians,  as  immi 
grants,  into  their  new  territory,  they  were  probably 
brought  into  contact  with  a  form  of  religion  very 
different  from  their  own.  Magianism,  the  religion 
of  the  Scythic  or  Turanian  population  of  Western 
Asia,  had  long  been  dominant  over  the  greater  por 
tion  of  the  region  lying  between  Mesopotamia  and 
India.  The  essence  of  this  religion  was  worship  of 
the  elements — more  especially,  of  the  subtlest  of 
all,  fire.  It  was  an  ancient  and  imposing  system, 
guarded  by  the  venerable  hierarchy  of  the  Magi, 
boasting  its  fire-alters  where  from  time  immemorial 
the  sacred  flame  had  burnt  without  intermission, 
and  claiming  to  some  extent  mysterious  and  mira 
culous  powers.  The  simplicity  of  the  Aryan  reli 
gion  was  speedily  corrupted  by  its  contact  with 
this  powerful  rival,  which  presented  special  attrac 
tions  to  a  rude  and  credulous  people.  There  was 
a  short  struggle  for  pre-eminence,  after  which  the 
rival  systems  came  to  terms.  Dualism  was  re- 
lained,  together  with  the  names  of  Auramazda  and 
Ahrimau,  and  the  special  worship  of  the  sun  and 


PERSIANS 

moon  under  the  appellations  of  Mithra  and  Homa  ; 
but  to  this  was  superadded  the  worship  of  the  ele 
ments  and  the  whole  ceremonial  of  Magianism,  in 
cluding  the  divination  to  which  theMagian  priesthood 
made  pretence.  The  worship  of  other  deities  as 
Tanata  or  Anaitis,  was  a  still  later  addition  to  the 
religion,  which  grew  more  complicated  as  time 
went  on,  but  which  always  maintained  as  its  lead 
ing  and  most  essential  element  that  Dualistic  prin 
ciple  whereon  it  was  originally  based. 

3.  Language. — The  language  of  the  ancient  Per 
sians  was  closely  akin  to  the  Sanskrit,  or  ancient 
language  of  India.     We  find  it  in  its  earliest  stage 
in  the  Zendavesta — the  sacred  book  of  the  whole 
Aryan  race,  where,  however,  it  is  corrupted  by  a 
large  admixture  of  later  forms.     The  inscriptions 
of  the  Achaemenian  kings  give  us  the  language  in 
its  second  stage,  and,  being  free  from  these  later  ad 
ditions,  are  of  the  greatest  importance  towards  deter 
mining  what  was  primitive,  and  what  more  recent 
in  this  type  of  speech.     Modern  Persian  is  its  dege 
nerate  representative,  being,  as  it  is,  a  motley  idiom, 
largely  impregnated  with  Arabic;  still,  however, 
both  in  its  grammar  and  its  vocabulary,  it  is  mainly 
Aryan ;  and  historically,  it  must  be  regarded  as  the 
continuation  of  the  ancient  tongue,  just  as  Italian  is 
of  Latin,  and  modern  of  ancient  Greek. 

4.  Division  into  tribes,  fyc. — Herodotus  tells  us 
that  the  Persians  were  divided  into  ten  tribes,  of 
which  three  were  noble,  three  agricultural, and  four 
nomadic.     The  noble  tribes  were  the  Pasargadae, 
who  dwelt,  probably,  in  the  capital  and  its  imme 
diate  neighbourhood  ;  the  Maraphians.  who  are  per 
haps  represented  by  the  modem  Mdfee,  a  Persian 
tribe  which  prides  itself  on  its  antiquity ;  and  the 
Maspiaus,  of  whom  nothing  more  is  known.     The 
three  tribes  engaged  in  agriculture  were  called  the 
Panthialaeans,  the  Derusiaeans,  and  the  Germanians, 
or  (according  to  the  true  orthography)  the  Carma- 
niaiis.    These  last  were  either  the  actual  inhabitants 
of  Herman,  or  settlei-s  of  the  same  race,  who  re 
mained  in  Persia  while  their  fellow-tribesmen  occu 
pied  the  adjoining  region.     The  nomadic  tribes  are 
said  to  have  been  the  Da'ni,  who  appear  in  Scripture 
as  the  "  Dehavites"  (Ezr.  iv.  9),  the  Mardi,  mouu- 
taineers  famous  for  their  thievish  habits   (Steph. 
Byz.),  together  with  the  Sagartians  and  the  Der- 
bices  or  Dropici,  colonists  from  the  regions  east  of 
the  Caspian.     The  royal  race  of  the  Achaemenidae 
was  a  phratry  or  clan  of  the  Pasargadae  (Herod,  i. 
126) ;  to  which  it  is  probable  that  most  of  the  noble 
houses  likewise  belonged.     Little  is  heard  of  the 
Maraphians,  and  nothing  of  the  Maspians,  in  his 
tory  ;  it  is  therefore  evident  that  their  nobility  wsis 
very  inferior  to  that  of  the  leading  tribe. 

5.  History. — In  remote  antiquity  it  would  appear 
that  the  Persians  dwelt  in  the  region  east  of  the 
Caspian,  or  possibly  in  a  tract  still  nearer  India. 
The  first  Fargard  of  the  Vendidad  seems  to  describt 
their  wanderings  in  these  countries,  and  shows  the 
general  line  of  their  progress  to  have  been  from  east  to 
west,  down  the  course  of  the  Oxus,  and  then,  along 
the  southern  shores  of  the  Caspian  Sea,  to  I ; 

and  Media.  It  it  impossible  to  determine  the  pcriiM 
of  these  movements;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
they  were  anterior  to  B.C.  880,  at  which  time  th«> 
Assyrian  kings  seam  for  the  first  time  to  have  come 
in  contact  with  Aryan  tribes  east  of  Mount  Zagros. 
Probably  the  Persians  accompanied  the  Medes  iu 
their  migration  from  Khorassan,  and,  after  the  latter 
people  tock  possession  of  the  tract  extending  from 
the  river  Kur  to  Ispahan,  proceeded  still  lui  the) 


i-EKSIANS 

south,  and  occupied  the  region  between  M*«lia  anil 
the  Persian  Gulf.  It  is  uncertain  whether  they  are 
to  be  identified  with  the  Bartsu  or  Partsu  of  the 
Assyrian  monuments.  If  so,  we  may  say  that  from 
the  middle  of  the  9th  to  the  middle  of  the  8th 
century  B.C.  they  occupied  south-eastern  Armenia, 
but  by  the  end  of  the  8th  century  had  removed  into 
the  country,  which  thenceforth  went  by  their  name. 
The  leader  of  this  last  migration  would  seem  to 
have  been  a  certain  Achaemenes,  who  was  recog 
nized  as  king  of  the  newly-occupied  territory,  and 
founded  the  famous  dynasty  of  the  Achaemenidae, 
about  B.C.  700.  Very  little  is  known  of  the  his 
tory  of  Persia  between  this  date  and  the  accession 
of  Cyrus  the  Great,  near  a  century  and  a  half  later. 
The  crown  appears  to  have  descended  in  a  right  lina 
through  four  princes — Telspes,  Cambyses  I.,  Cyrus  I., 
and  Cambyses  II.,  who  was  the  lather  of  Cyrus 
the  Conqueror.  Teispes  must  have  been  a  prince 
of  some  repute,  for  his  daughter,  Atossa,  married 
Pharnaces,  king  of  the  distant  Cappadocians  (Died, 
".ic.  ap.  Phot.  Uibliothec.  p.  1158).  Later,  however, 
the  Persians  found  themselves  unable  to  resist  the 
growing  strength  of  Media,  and  became  tributary  to 
that  power  about  B.C.  630,  or  a  little  earlier.  The 
line  of  native  kings  was  continued  on  the  throne,  and 
the  internal  administration  was  probably  untouched ; 
but  external  independence  was  altogether  lost 
until  the  revolt  under  Cyrus. 

Of  the  circumstances  under  which  this 
revolt  took  place  we  have  no  certain  know 
ledge.  The  stories  told  by  Herodotus  (i. 
108-129)  and  Nicolas  of  Damascus  (Fr.  66) 
are.  internally  improbable  ;  and  they  are  also 
at  variance  with  the  monuments,  which 
prove  Cyrus  to  have  been  the  son  of  a  Per 
sian  king.  [See  CYRUS.]  We  must  therefore 
discard  them,  and  be  content  to  know  that 
after  about  seventy  or  eighty  years  of  sub 
jection,  the  Persians  revolted  from  the  Medes, 
engaged  in  a  bloody  struggle  with  themj  and 
linally  succeeded,  not  only  in  establishing 
their  independence,  but  in  changing  places 
with  their  masters,  and  becoming  the  ruling 
people.  The  probable  date  of  the  revolt  is  B.C.  558. 
Its  success,  by  transferring  to  Persia  the  dominion 
previously  iu  the  possession  of  the  Medes,  placed 
her  at  the  head  of  an  empire,  the  bounds  of  which 
were  the  Halys  upon  the  west,  the  Euxine  upon 
the  north,  Babylonia  upon  the  south,  and  upon  the 
east  the  salt  desert  of  Iran.  As  usual  in  the  East, 
this  success  led  on  to  others.  Croesus  the  Lydian 
monarch,  who  had  united  most  of  Asia  Minor  under 
his  sway,  venturing  to  attack  the  newly- risen  power, 
in  the  hope  that  it  was  not  yet  firmly  established, 
was  first  repulsed,  and  afterwards  defeated  and 
made  prisoner  by  Cyrus,  who  took  his  capital,  and 
added  the  Lydian  empire  to  his  dominions.  This 
conquest  was  followed  closely  by  the  submission  of 
the  Greek  settlements  on  the  Asiatic  coast,  and  by 
the  reduction  of  Caria,  Caunus,  and  Lycia  The 
empire  was  soon  afterwards  extended  greatly  to 
wards  the  north-east  and  east.  Cyrus  rapidly  over 
ran  the  fiat  countries  beyond  the  Caspian,  planting 
a  city,  which  he  called  after  himself  (Arr.  Exp. 
Alex.  iv.  3),  on  the  Jaxailes  (Jyhun) ;  after  which 
he  seems  to  have  pushed  his  conquests  still  further 
to  the  east,  adding  to  his  dominions  the  districts  ot 
Herat,  Cabul,  Candahar,  Seistan,  and  Beloochistan, 
which  were  thenceforth  included  iu  the  empire. 
'Sec  Ctei.  Pcrs.  Exc.  \  5,  et  seqq. ;  and  compare 
Plic.  H.  N.  vi.  23.)  In  B.C.  539  or  538,  Babylon 


PERSIANS 


7D5 


was  attacked,  an<l  after  a  stout  defer,  «e  fell  before 
his  irresistible  bauds.  [PABYLON.]  This  victory 
first  brougnt  the  Persians  into  contact  with  the 
Jews.  The  conquerors  found  in  Babylon  an  op 
pressed  race — like  themselves,  abhorrers  of  idols — 
and  professors  of  a  religion  in  which  to  a  great 
extent  they  could  sympathize.  This  race,  which 
the  Babylonian  monarchs  had  torn  violently  from 
their  native  land  and  settled  in  the  vicinity  of  Ba 
bylon,  Cyrus  determined  to  restore  to  their  own 
country ;  which  he  did  by  the  remarkable  edict  re 
corded  in  the  first  chapter  of  Ezra  (Ezr.  i.  2-4). 
Thus  commenced  that  friendly  connexion  between 
the  Jews  and  Persians,  which  prophecy  had  already 
foreshadowed  (Is.  xliv.  28,  xlv.  1-4),  and  which 
forms  so  remarkable  a  feature  in  the  Jewish  history. 
After  the  conquest  of  Babylon,  and  the  consequent 
extension  of  his  empire  to  the  borders  of  Egypt, 
Cyrus  might  have  been  expected  to  carry  out  the 
design,  which  he  is  said  to  have  entertained  (Herod. 
i.  153),  of  an  expedition  against  Egypt.  Some 
danger,  however,  seems  to  have  threatened  the 
north-eastern  provinces,  in  consequence  of  which 
his  purpose  was  changed ;  and  he  proceeded  against 
the  Massagetae  or  the  Derbices,  engaged  them,  but 
was  defeated  and  slain.  He  reigned,  according  to 
Herodotus,  twenty-nine  years. 


Persian  Warriors.     (From  Persepolis.) 


Under  his  son  and  successor,  Cambyses  III.,  the 
conquest  of  Egypt  took  place  (B.C.  525),  and  the 
Persian  dominions  were  extended  southward  to 
Elephantin^  and  westward  to  Euesperidae  on  the 
North-African  coast.  This  prince  appears  to  be  the 
Ahasuerus  of  Ezra  (iv.  6),  who  was  asked  to  alter 
Cyrus's  policy  towards  the  Jews,  but  (apparently) 
declined  all  interference.  We  have  in  Herodotus 
(book  iii.)  a  very  complete  account  of  his  warlike 
expeditions,  which  at  first  resulted  in  the  successes 
above  mentioned,  but  were  afterwards  Unsuccessful, 
and  even  disastrous.  One  army  perished  in  an 
attempt  to  reach  the  temple  of  Ammon,  ivhile 
another  was  reduced  to  the  last  straits  in  an  expe 
dition  against  Ethiopia.  Perhaps  it  was  in  con 
sequence  of  these  misfortunes  that,  in  the  absence 
of  Cambyses  with  the  army,  a  conspiracy  was 
fonned  against  him  at  court,  and  a  Magian  priest, 
Gomates  (Gaumata)  by  name,  professing  to  be 
Smerdis  (Bardiya),  the  son  of  Cyrus,  whom  his 
brother,  Cambyses,  had  put  to  death  secretly, 
obtained  quiet  possession  of  the  throne.  Cam 
byses  was  in  Syria  when  news  reached  him  of 
this  bold  attempt ;  and  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that,  seized  with  a  sudden  disgust,  and  despair 
ing  of  thp  recovery  of  his  crown,  he  fled  to  the 
last  resort  of  the  unfortunate,  and  ended  his  life 
by  suicide  (Bchistun  Inscription,  col.  i.  par.  11, 


706 


PERSIANS 


§10).  His  reign  had  lasted  seven  years  and  five 
months. 

Gomates  the  Magian  found  himself  thus,  with 
out  a  struggle,  master  of  Persia  (B.C.  522).  His 
situation,  however,  was  one  of  great  danger  and 
delicacy.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  he  owed 
his  elevation  to  his  fellow-religionists,  whose  object 
in  placing  him  upon  the  throne  was  to  secure  the 
triumph  of  Magianism  over  the  Dualism  of  the 
Persians.  It  was  necessary  for  him  therefore  to 
accomplish  a  religious  revolution,  which  was  sure 
to  be  distasteful  to  the  Persians,  while  at  the  same 
time  he  had  to  keep  up  the  deception  on  which  his 
claim  to  the  crown  was  professedly  based,  and  to 
prevent  any  suspicion  arising  that  he  was  not 
Smerdis,  the  son  of  Cyrus.  To  combine  these  two 
aims  was  difficult ;  and  it  would  seem  that  Gomates 
soon  discarded  the  latter,  and  entered  on  a  course 
which  must  have  soon  caused  his  subjects  to  feel 
that  their  ruler  was  not  only  no  Achaemenian,  but 
no  Persian.  He  destroyed  the  national  temples, 
substituting  for  them  +he  fire-altars,  and  abolished 
tne  religious  cnants  and  other  sacred  ceivmonies  of 
the  Oromasdians.  He  reversed  the  policy  of  Cyrus 
with  respect  to  the  Jews,  and  forbad  by  an  edict 
the  further  building  of  the  Temple  (Ezr.  iv.  17- 
22).  [ARTAXERXKS.]  He  courted  the  favour 
of  the  subject-nations  generally  by  a  remission  of 
tribute  for  three  years,  and  an  exemption  during 
the  same  space  from  forced  military  service  (Herod, 
iii.  67).  Towards  the  Persians  he  was  haughty 
and  distant,  keeping  them  as  much  as  possible  aloof 
from  his  person,  and  seldom  showing  himself  beyond 
the  walls  of  his  palace.  Such  conduct  made  him 
very  unpopular  with  the  proud  people  which  held 
the  first  place  among  his  subjects,  and,  the  suspicion 
that  he  was  a  mere  pretender  having  after  some 
months  ripened  into  certainty,  a  revolt  broke  out, 
headed  by  Darius,  the  son  of  Hystaspes,  a  prince 
of  the  blood-royal,  which  in  a  short  time  was  crowned 
with  complete  success.  Gomates  quitted  his  capital, 
and,  having  thrown  himself  into  a  fort  in  Media, 
was  pursued,  attacked,  and  slain.  Darius,  then,  as 
the  chief  of  the  conspiracy,  and  after  his  father  the 
next  heir  to  the  throne,  was  at  once  acknowledged 
king.  The  reign  of  Gomates  lasted  seven  months. 

The  first  efibrts  of  Darius  were  directed  to  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Oromasdian  religion  in  all 
its  purity.  He  "  rebuilt  the  temples  which  Gomates 
the  Magian  had  destroyed,  and  restored  to  the  people 
the  religious  chants  and  the  worship  of  which 
Gomates  the  Magian  had  deprived  them "  (Beh. 
Tnscr.  col.  i.  par.  14).  Appealed  to,  in  his  second 
year,  by  the  Jews,  who  wished  to  resume  the  con 
struction  of  their  Temple,  he  not  only  allowed 
them,  confirming  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  but  assisted 
the  work  by  grants  from  his  own  revenues,  whereby 
the  Jews  were  able  to  complete  the  Temple  as  early 
as  his  sixth  year  (Ezr.  vi.  1-15).  During  the  first 
part  of  the  reign  of  Darius  the  tranquillity  of  the 
empire  was  disturbed  by  numerous  revolts.  The 
provinces  regretted  the  loss  of  those  exemptions 
which  they  had  obtained  from  the  weakness  of  the 
Pseudo-Smerdis,  and  hoped  to  shake  off  the  yoke 
of  the  new  prince  before  he  could  grasp  firmly  the 
reins  of  government.  The  first  revolt  was  that 
of  Babylon,  where  a  native,  claiming  to  be  Nebu 
chadnezzar,  the  son  of  Nabonadius,  was  made  king ; 
but  Darius  speedily  crushed  this  revolt  and  executed 
the  pretender.  Shortly  afterwards  a  far  more  ex 
tensive  rebellion  broke  out.  A  Mede,  named  Phra- 
oites,  came  forward  and,  announcing  himself  to  be 


PERSIANS 

'  Xathvites,  of  the  race  of  Cyaxares,"  assumed  tht 
royal  title.  Media,  Armenia,  and  Assyria  imme 
diately  acknowledged  him — the  Median  soldiers  at 
the  Persian  court  revolted  to  him — Parthia  anu 
Hyrcania  after  a  little  while  declared  in  his  favoui 
— while  in  Sagartia  another  pretender,  making  a 
similar  claim  of  descent  from  Cyaxares,  induced  the 
Sagartians  to  revolt ;  and  in  Margiana,  Arachotia,  and 
even  Persia  Proper,  there  were  insurrections  against 
the  authority  of  the  new  king.  His  courage  and 
activity,  however,  seconded  by  the  valour  of  his 
Persian  troops  and  the  fidelity  of  some  satraps, 
carried  him  successfully  through  these  and  otbei 
similar  difficulties ;  and  the  result  was,  that,  after 
five  or  six  years  of  struggle,  he  became  as  firmly 
seated  on  his  throne  as  any  previous  monarch.  His 
talents  as  an  administrator  were,  upon  this,  brought 
into  play.  He  divided  the  whole  empire  intc 
satrapies,  and  organised  that  somewhat  compli 
cated  system  of  government  on  which  they  were 
henceforth  administered  (Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  ii. 
555-568).  He  built  himself  a  magnificent  palace 
at  Persepolis,  and  another  at  Susa  [PERSEPOLIB, 
SHUSH  AN].  He  also  applied  himself,  like  his 
predecessors,  to  the  extension  of  the  empire ;  con 
ducted  an  expedition  •  into  European  Scythia,  from 
which  he  returned  without  disgrace;  conquered 
Thrace,  Paeonia,  and  Macedonia  towards  the  west, 
and  a  large  portion  of  India  on  the  east,  besides 
(apparently)  bringing  into  subjection  a  number  of 
petty  nations  (see  the  Nakhsh-i-Rustam  Inscrip 
tion).  On  the  whole  he  must  be  pronounced,  next 
to  Cp-us,  the  greatest  of  the  Persian  monarchs. 
The  latter  part  of  his  reign  was,  however,  clouded 
by  reverses.  The  disaster  of  Mardonius  at  Mount 
Athos  was  followed  shortly  by  the  defeat  of  Datis 
at  Marathon ;  and,  before  any  attempt  could  be 
made  to  avenge  that  blow,  Egypt  rose  in  revolt 
(B.C.  486),  massacred  its  Persian  garrison,  and 
declared  itself  independent.  In  the  palace  at  the 
same  time  there  was  dissension ;  and  when,  after  a 
reign  of  thirty-six  years,  the  fourth  Persian  monarch 
died  (B.C.  485),  leaving  his  throne  to  a  young  prince 
of  strong  and  ungoverned  passions,  it  was  evident  that 
the  empire  had  reached  its  highest  point  of  great 
ness,  and  was  already  verging  towards  its  decline. 

Xerxes,  the  eldest  son  ot  Darius  by  Atossa,  daugh 
ter  of  Cyrus,  and  the  first  sou  born  to  Darius  after 
he  mounted  the  throne,  seems  to  have  obtained  the 
crown,  in  part  by  the  favour  of  his  father,  ovei 
whom  Atossa  exercised  a  strong  influence,  in  part 
by  right,  as  the  eldest  male  descendant  of  Cyrus 
the  founder  of  the  empire.  His  first  act  was  to 
reduce  Egypt  to  subjection  (B.C.  484),  after  whid; 
he  began  at  once  to  make  preparations  for  his-  inva 
sion  of  Greece.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  the 
Ahasuerus  of  Esther.  [AHASUERUS.]  The  great 
feast  held  in  Shushan  the  palace  in  the  third  year 
of  his  reign,  and  the  repudiation  of  Vash^i,  fall  into 
the  period  preceding  the  Grecian  expedition,  while 
it  is  probable  that  he  kept  open  house  for  the 
"  princes  of  the  provinces,"  who  would  from  time 
to  time  visit  the  court,  in  order  to  report  the  state 
of  their  preparations  for  the  war.  The  marriage 
with  Esther,  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,  falls 
into  the  year  immediately  following  his  flight  from 
Greece,  when  he  undoubtedly  returned  to  Susa, 
relinquishing  warlike  enterprises,  and  henceforth 
devoting  himself  to  the  pleasures  of  the  seraglio. 
It  is  unnecessary  to  give  an  account  of  the  well- 
known  expedition  against  Greece,  which  ended  so 
disastrously  for  the  invaders.  Persia  was  taught 


PETER 


797 


by  the  dcfiftts  of  Salamis  and  Plataea  the  danger  of 
encountering  the  Greeks  on  their  side  of  the  Aegean, 
while  she  learned  at  Mycate  the  retaliation  which 
she  had  to  expect  on  her  own  shores  at  the  hands 
of  her  infuriated  enemies.  For  a  while  some  vague 
idea  of  another  invasion  seems  to  have  been  enter 
tained  hy  the  court ;  •  but  discreeter  counsels  pre 
vailed,  and,  relinquishing  all  aggressive  designs, 
Persia  from  this  point  in  her  history  stood  upon 
the  defensive,  and  only  sought  to  maintain  her  own 
territories  intact,  without  anywhere  trenching  upon 
tier  neighbours.  During  the  rest  of  the  reign  of 
Xerxes,  and  during  part  of  that  of  his  son  and  suc 
cessor,  Artaxerxes,  she  continued  at  war  with  the 
Greeks,  who  destroyed  her  fleets,  plundered  her 
coasts,  and  stirred  up  revc  t  in  her  provinces;  but 
at  last,  in  B.C.  449,  a  peace  was  concluded  between 
the  two  powers,  who  then  continued  on  terms  of 
amity  for  half  a  century. 

A  conspiracy  in  the  seraglio  having  carried  off 
Xerxes  (B.C.  465),  Artaxerxes  his  son,  called  by  the 
Greeks  Maicp6xeip,  or  "  the  Long-Handed,"  suc 
ceeded  him,  after  an  interval  of  seven  months, 
during  which  the  conspirator  Artabanus  occupied 
the  throne.  This  Artaxerxes,  who  reigned  forty 
years,  is  beyond  a  doubt  the  king  of  that  name 
who  stood  in  such  a  friendly  relation  towards  Ezra 
fEzr.  vii.  11-28)  and  Nehemiah  (Neh.  ii.  1-9,  &c.). 
[ARTAXERXES.]  His  character,  as  drawn  by 
Ctesias,  is  mild  but  weak ;  and  under  his  rule  the 
disorders  of  the  empire  seem  to  have  increased 
rapidly.  An  insurrection  in  Bactria,  headed  by  his 
brother  Hystaspes,  was  with  difficulty  put  down  in 
the  first  year  of  his  reign  (B.C.  464),  after  which  a 
revolt  broke  out  in  Egypt,  headed  by  Inarus  the 
Libyan  and  Amyrtaeus  the  Egyptian,  who,  receiving 
the  support  of  an  Athenian  fleet,  maintained  them 
selves  for  six  years  (B.C.  460-455)  against  the 
whole  power  of  Persia,  but  were  at  last  overcome 
by  Megabyzus,  satrap  of  Syria.  This  powe-ful 
and  haughty  noble  soon  afterwards  (B.C.  447),  on 
occasion  of  a  difference  with  the  court,  himself 
became  a  rebel,  and  entered  into  a  contest  with  his 
sovereign,  which  at  once  betrayed  and  increased  the 
weakness  of  the  empire.  Artaxerxes  is  the  last  of 
the  Persian  kings  who  had  any  special  connexion 
with  the  Jews,  and  the  last  but  one  mentioned  in 
Scripture.  His  successors  were  Xerxes  II.,  Sog- 
dianus,  Darius  Nothus,  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  Ar 
taxerxes  Ochus,  and  Darius  Codomannus,  who  is 
probably  the  "  Darius  the  Persian "  of  Nehemiah 
(xii.  22U  These  monarchs  reigned  from  B.C.  424 
to  B.C.  330.  None  were  of  much  capacity  ;  and 
during  their  reigns  the  decline  of  the  empire  was 
scarcely  arrested  for  a  day,  unless  it  were  by 
Ochus,  who  reconquered  Egypt,  and  gave  some 
other  signs  of  vigour.  Had  the  younger  Cyrus 
succeeded  in  his  attempt,  the  regeneration  of  Persia 
was,  perhaps,  possible.  After  his  failure  the  seraglio 
grew  at  once  more  powerful  and  more  cruel. 
Eunuchs  and  women  governed  the  kings,  and  dis 
pensed  the  favours  of  the  crown,  or  wielded  its 
terrors,  as  their  interests  or  passions  moved  them 
Patriotism  and  loyalty  were  alike  dead,  and  the 
empire  must  have  fallen  many  years  before  it  did 
had  not  the  Persians  early  learnt  to  turn  the  swords 
of  the  Greeks  against  one  another,  and  at  the  sam 
'.line  raised  the  character  of  their  own  armies  by 


»  The  force  collected  in  Pamphylia,  which  Cimon  de 
feated  and  dispersed  (B.C.  466),  seems  to  have  been  in 
tended  for  aggressive  purposes. 


he  employment,  on  a  large  scale,  of  Greek  mer- 
enaries.  The  collapse  of  the  empire  under  thg 
ttack  of  Alexander  is  well  known,  and  requires  lie 
.escription  here.  On  the  division  of  Alexander's 
ominions  among  his  generals  Persia  fell  to  the 
Seleucidae,  under  whom  it  continued  till  after  the 
eath  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  when  the  conquering 
Jarthians  advanced  their  frontier  to  the  Euphrates, 
nd  the  Persians  came  to  be  included  among  their 
ubject-tribes  (B.C.  164).  Still  their  nationality 
vas  not  obliterated.  In  A.D.  226,  three  hundred 
ind  ninety  years  after  their  subjection  to  the  Par- 
hians,  and  five  hundred  and  fifty-six  years  after 
he  loss  of  their  independence,  the  Persians  shook 
ff  the  yoke  of  their  oppressors,  and  once  more 
became  a  nation.  The  kingdom  of  the  Sassanidae, 
hough  not  so  brilliant  as  that  of  Cyrus,  still  had 
ts  glories ;  but  its  history  belongs  to  a  time  which 
scarcely  comes  within  the  scope  of  the  present  work. 

(See,  for  the  history  of  Persia,  besides  Herodotus, 
Ctesias,  Excerpta  Persica ;  Plutarch,  Vit.  Ar- 
axerx. ;  Xenophon,  Anabasis ;  Heeren,  Asiatic 
Nations,  vol.  i. ;  Malcolm,  History  of  Persia  from 
'he  Earliest  Ages  to  the  Present  Times,  2  vols.  4to., 
London,  1816  ;  and  Sir  H.  Rawlinson's  Memoir  on 
the  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Ancient  Persia,  pub- 
ished  in  the  Journal  of  the  Asiatic  Society,  vols.  x. 
and  xi.  For  the  religion  see  Hyde,  De  Eeligione 
Veterum  Persarum  ;  Brockhaus,  Vendidad-Sade  ; 
Bunsen,  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal  History,  iii. 
472-506;  and  Rawlinson's  Herodotus,  i.  426-431. 
For  the  system  of  government,  see  Rawlinson's 
Herodotus,  ii.  555-568.)  [G.  R.] 

PERSIS  (lltpffls}.  A  Christian  woman  at 
Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  12)  whom  St.  Paul  salutes,  ami 
commends  with  special  affection  on  account  of  some 
work  which  she  had  performed  with  singular  dili 
gence  (see  Origen  in  loc-o).  [W.  T.  B.] 

PER'UDA  (fin-inS  :  -baoovpd:  Pharudd).  Th« 
same  as  PERIDA  (Ezr."  ii.  55).  The  LXX.  reading 
is  supported  by  one  of  Keunicott's  MSS. 

PESTILENCE.    [PLAGUE.] 

PETER  (Tlerpos,  the  Greek  for  KS»3,  K^'as. 
Cephas, i.e.  "a. stone "  or  " rock,"  on  which  name  see 
Note  at  the  end  of  this  article).  His  original  name 
was  Simon,  fiypK>,  i.  e.  "  hearer."  The  two  namea 
are  commonly  combined,  Simon  Peter,  but  in  the 
early  part  of  his  history,  and  in  the  interval  be 
tween  our  Lord's  death  and  resurrection,  he  is  more 
frequently  named  Simon  ;  after  that  event  he  bears 
almost  exclusively  the  more  honourable  designation 
Peter,  or,  as  St.  Paul  sometimes  writes,  Cephas. 
The  notices  of  this  Apostle's  early  life  are  few,  but 
not  unimportant,  and  enable  us  to  form  some  esti 
mate  of  the  circumstances  under  which  his  cha 
racter  was  formed,  and  prepared  for  his  great  work. 
He  was  the  son  of  a  man  named  Jonas  (Matt.  xvi. 
17  ;  John  i.  43,  xxi.  16),  and  was  brought  up  in 
his  father's  occupation,  a  fisherman  on  the  sea  oi 
Tiberias.*  The  occupation  was  of  course  a  humble 
one,  but  not,  as  is  often  assumed,  mean  or  servile, 
or  incompatible  with  some  degree  of  mental  culture. 
His  family  were  probably  in  easy  circumstances. 
He  and  his  brother  Andrew  were  partneis  of  John 
and  James,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  who  had  hired 
servants  ;  and  from  various  indications  in  the  sacred 

»  There  Is  a  tradition  that  his  mother's  name  was 
Johanna  (Coteler,  Patt.  Apost.  ii.  631. 


798 


PKTKH 


narrative  wo  are  led  to  the  conclusion  that  their 
social  position  brought  them  into  contact  with  men 
of  education.  In  fact  the  trade  of  fishermen,  sup 
plying  some  of  the  important  cities  on  the  coasts 
of  that  inland  lake,  may  have  been  tolerably  remu 
nerative,  while  all  the  necessaries  of  life  were  cheap 
and  abundant  in  the  singularly  rich  and  fertile  dis 
trict  where  the  Apostle  resided.  He  did  not  live, 
as  a  mere  labouring  man,  in  a  hut  by  the  sea-side, 
but  first  at  Bethsaida,  and  afterwards  in  a  house  at 
Capernaum,  belonging  to  himself  or  his  mother-in- 
law,  which  must  have  been  rather  a  large  one,  since 
he  received  in  it  not  only  our  Lord  and  his  fellow- 
disciples,  but  multitudes  who  were  attracted  by  the 
miracles  and  preaching  of  Jesus.  It  is  certain  that 
when  he  left  all  to  follow  Christ,  he  made  what  he 
regarded,  and  wnat  seems  to  have  been  admitted  by 
his  Master,  to  have  been  a  considerable  sacrifice. 
The  habits  of  such  a  life  were  by  no  means  un- 
ik\  ourable  to  the  development  of  a  vigorous,  earnest, 
and  practical  character,  such  as  he  displayed  in 
after  years.  The  labours,  the  privations,  and  the 
perils  of  an  existence  passed  in  great  part  upon  the 
waters  of  that  beautiful  but  stormy  lake,  the  long 
and  anxious  watching  through  the  nights,  were  cal 
culated  to  test  and  increase  his  natural  powers,  his 
torucuuc,  energy,  ana  perseverance.  In  the  city  he 
must  have  been  brought  into  contact  with  men  en 
gaged  in  traffic,  with  soldiers,  and  foreigners,  and 
may  have  thus  acquired  somewhat  of  the  flexibility 
and  geniality  of  temperament  all  but  indispensable 
to  the  attainment  of  such  personal  influence  as  he 
exercised  in  after-life.  It  is  not  probable  that  he 
and  his  brother  were  wholly  uneducated.  The  Jews 
regarded  instruction  as  a  necessity,  and  legal  enact 
ments  enforced  the  attendance  of  youths  in  schools 
maintained  by  the  community.11  The  statement  in 
Acts  iv.  13,  that  "  the  council  perceived  they  (»'.  e. 
Peter  and  John)  were  unlearned  and  ignorant  men," 
is  not  incompatible  with  this  assumption.  The 
translation  of  the  passage  in  the  A.  V.  is  rather 
exaggerated,  the  word  rendered  "  unlearned  "  (I5io>- 
TCU.)  being  nearly  equivalent  to  "  laymen,"  »'.  e,  men 
"f  ordinary  education,  as  contrasted  with  those  who 
were  specially  trained  in  the  schools  of  the  Rabbis. 
A  man  might  be  thoroughly  conversant  with  the 
Scriptures,  and  yet  be  considered  ignorant  and  un 
learned  by  the  Rabbis,  among  whom  the  opinion 
was  already  prevalent  that  "  the  letter  of  Scripture 
was  the  mere  shell,  an  earthen  vessel  containing 
heavenly  treasures,  which  could  only  be  discovered 
by  those  who  had  been  taught  to  search  for  the 
hidden  cabalistic  meaning."  Peter  and  his  kinsmen 
were  probably  taught  to  read  the  Scriptures  in 
childhood.  The  history  of  their  country,  especially 
of  the  great  events  of  early  days,  must  have  been 
familiar  to  them  as  attendants  at  the  synagogue, 
and  their  attention  was  there  directed  to  those  por 
tions  of  Holy  Writ  from  which  the  Jews  derived 
their  anticipations  of  the  Messiah. 

The  language  of  the  Apostles  was  of  course  the 
form  of  Aramaic  spoken  in  northern  Palestine,  a 
sort  of  patois,  partly  Hebrew,  but  more  nearly 

b  A  law  to  this  effect  was  enacted  by  Simon  ben-Shelach, 
one  of  the  great  leaders  of  the  Pharisaic  party  under  the 
Asmonean  princes.  See  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Judentkums, 
i.246. 

c  See  E.  Rcnan,  Histoire  des  tongues  S&mitiques,  p.  224. 
The  only  extant  specimen  of  that  patois  is  the  Book  of 
Adam  or  'Codex  Nasiraeus,'  edited  by  Norberg,  Lond. 
tfoth.  1815,  6. 

*.  v. 


PETER 

allied  to  the  8jmac.e  Hebrew,  even  in  'its  t-c 
form,  was  then  spoken  only  by  men  of  learning,  the 
leaders  of  the  pharisees  and  scribes.*  The  men  of 
Galil»e  were,  however,  noted  for  rough  and  inaccu 
rate  language,  and  especially  for  vulgarities  of  pro 
nunciation.0  It  is  doubtful  whether  our  Apostle 
was  acquainted  with  Greek  in  early  life.  It  is  cer 
tain  that  there  was  more  intercourse  with  foreigners 
in  Galilee  than  in  any  district  of  Palestine,  and 
Greek  appears  to  have  been  a  common,  if  not  the 
principal,  medium  of  communication.  Within  a  few 
years  after  his  call  St.  Peter  seems  to  have  con 
versed  fluently  in  Greek  with  Cornelius,  at  least 
there  is  no  intimation  that  an  interpreter  was  em 
ployed,  while  it  is  highly  improbable  that  Cornelius, 
a  Roman  soldier,  should  have  used  the  language  of 
Palestine.  The  style  of  both  of  St.  Peter's  Epistles 
indicates  a  considerable  knowledge  of  Greek — it  is 
pure  and  accurate,  and  in  grammatical  structure 
equal  to  that  of  St.  Paul.  That  may,  however,  be 
accounted  for  by  the  fact,  for  which  there  is  very 
ancient  authority,  that  St.  Peter  employed  an  inter 
preter  in  the  composition  of  his  Epistles,  if  not  in 
his  ordinary  intercourse  with  foreigners.*  There 
are  no  traces  of  acquaintance  with  Greek  authors, 
or  of  the  influence  of  Greek  literature  upon  his 
mind,  such  as  we  find  in  St.  Paul,  nor  could  we 
expect  it  in  a  person  of  his  station  even  had  Greek 
been  his  mother-tongue.  It  is  on  the  whole  pro 
bable  that  he  had  some  rudimental  knowledge  of 
Greek  in  early  life,?  which  may  have  been  after 
wards  extendoi  when  the  need  was  felt,  but  not 
more  than  would  enable  him  to  discourse  intelligibly 
on  practical  and  devotional  subjects.  That  he  was 
an  affectionate  husband,  married  in  early  life  to  a 
wife  who  accompanied  him  in  his  Apostolic  journeys, 
are  facts  interred  from  Scripture,  while  very  ancient 
traditions,  recorded  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  (whose 
connexion  with  the  church  founded  by  St.  Mark 
gives  a  peculiar  value  to  his  testimony)  and  by 
other  early  but  less  trustworthy  writers,  inform  us 
that  her  name  was  Perpetua,  that  she  bore  a  daugh 
ter,  or  perhaps  other  children,  and  suffered  mar 
tyrdom.  It  is  uncertain  at  what  age  he  was  called 
by  our  Lord.  The  general  impression  of  the  Fathers 
is  that  he  was  an  old  man  at  the  date  of  his  death, 
A.D.  64,  but  this  need  not  imply  that  he  was  much 
older  than  our  Lord.  He  was  probably  between 
thirty  and  forty  years  of  age  at  the  date  of  his  call. 
That  call  was  preceded  by  a  special  preparation. 
He  and  his  brother  Andrew,  together  with  their 
partners  James  and  John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  were 
disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  (John  i.  35j.  They 
were  in  attendance  upon  him  when  they  were  first 
called  to  the  service  of  Christ.  From  the  circum 
stances  of  that  call,  which  are  recorded  with  graphic 
minuteness  by  St.  John,  we  learn  some  important 
facts  touching  their  state  of  mind  and  the  personal 
character  of  our  Apostle.  Two  disciples,  one  named 
by  the  Evangelist  St.  Andrew,  the  other  in  all  pro 
bability  St.  John  himself,  were  standing  with  the 
Baptist  at  Bethany  on  the  Jordan,  when  he  pointed 
out  Jesus  as  He  walked,  and  said,  Behold  the 


«  See  Reuss,  Gexhichte  der  ff.  S.  $41. 

'  Reuss  (I.  c.  $49)  rejects  this  as  a  mere  hypothesis,  but 
gives  no  reason.  The  tradition  rests  on  the  authority  <j 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  Irenaeus,  and  Tertulllan.  See  the 
notes  on  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39,  v.  8,  and  vi.  25. 

f  Even  highly  educated  Jews,  like  Josep'nus,  spoke 
Greek  imperfectly  (seeAnt.  xx.  11,  }2).  On  tlie  antagonism 
to  Greek  influence,  see  Jost,  1.  c.  i.  198,  and  M.  Nicolas 
Lts  Doctrines  rdiyieuses  da  Juijt.  \.  c.  3. 


PETEB 

Lamb  of  Ood  1  That  is,  the  antitype  of  the  victims 
whose  blood  (as  all  true  Israelites,  and  they  more 
distinctly  under  the  teaching  of  John,h  believed) 
prefigured  the  atonement  for  sin.  The  two  at  once 
followed  Jesus,  and  upon  His  invitation  abode  with 
Him  that  day.  Andrew  then  went  to  his  brother 
Simon,  and  saith  unto  him,  We  have  found  the 
Messias,  the  anointed  One,  of  whom  they  had  read 
in  the  prophets.  Simon  went  at  once,  and  when 
Jesus  looked  on  him  He  said,  Thou  art  Simon  the 
eon  of  Joiia;  thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas.  The 
change  of  name  is  of  course  deeply  significant.  As 
son  of  Jona  (a  name  of  doubtful  meaning,  according 
to  Lampe  equivalent  to  Johanan  or  John,  t.  e.  grace 
of  the  Lord;  according  to  Lange,  who  has  some 
striking  but  fanciful  observations,  signifying  dove) 
he  bore  as  a  disciple  the  name  Simon,  i.  e.  hearer,  but 
as  an  Apostle,  one  of  the  twelve  on  whom  the  Church 
was  to  be  erected,  he  was  hereafter  (/cAr/fl^cr??)  to 
be  called  Rock  or  Stone.  It  seems  a  natural  im 
pression  that  the  words  refer  primarily  to  the  ori 
ginal  character  of  Simon:  that  our  Lord  saw  in 
him  a  man  firm,  stedfast,  not  to  be  overthrown, 
though  severely  tried ;  and  such  was  generally  the 
view  taken  by  the  Fathers:  but  it  is  perhaps  a 
deeper  and  truer  inference  that  Jesus  thus  describes 
Simon,  not  as  what  he  was,  but  as  what  he  would 
become  under  His  influence — a  man  with  predis- 
positicjji  and  capabilities  not  unfitted  for  the  office 
he  was  to  hold,  but  one  whose  permanence  and 
stability  would  depend  upon  union  with  the  living 
Rock.  Thus  we  may  expect  to  find  Simon,  as  the 
natural  man,  at  once  rough,  stubborn,  and  mutable, 
whereas  Peter,  identified  with  the  Rock,  will  remain 
firm  and  unmoveable  unto  the  end.' 

This  first  call  led  to  no  immediate  change  in  St. 
Peter's  external  position.  He  and  his  fellow  dis 
ciples  looked  henceforth  upon  our  Lord  as  their 
teacher,  but  were  not  commanded  to  follow  him  as 
regular  disciples.  There  were  several  grades  of 
disciples  amcng  the  Jews,  from  the  occasional  hearer, 
to  the  follower  who  gave  up  all  other  pursuits  in 
order  to  serve  a  master.  At  the  time  a  recognition 
of  His  Person  and  office  sufficed.  They  returned  to 
Capernaum,  where  they  pursued  their  usual  business, 
waiting  for  a  further  intimation  of  His  will. 

The  second  call  is  recorded  by  the  other  three 
Evangelists :  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke  being  appa 
rently  supplementary  k  to  the  brief,  and  so  to  speak 
official  accounts  given  by  Matthew  and  Mark.  It 
took  place  on  the  sea  of  Galilee  near  Capernaum — 
where  the  four  disciples,  Peter  and  Andrew,  James 
and  John,  were  fishing.  Peter  and  Andrew  were 
first  called.  Our  Lord  then  entered  Simon  Peter's 
boat,  and  addressed  the  multitude  on  the  shore ; 
after  the  conclusion  of  the  discourse  He  wroughl 
the  miracle  by  which  He  foreshadowed  the  success 
of  the  Apostles  in  the  new,  but  analogous,  occupa 
tion  which  was  to  be  theirs,  that  of  fishers  of  men 
The  call  of  James  and  John  followed.  From  thai 
time  the  four  were  certainly  enrolled  formally 
among  His  disciples,  and  although  as  yet  investei 
with  no  official  character,  accompanied  Him  in 


PETEli 


709 


lis   journeys,  those    especially    in    the    north    ol 
'alestine. 

Immediately  after  that  call  our  Lord  went  to 
he  house  of  Peter,  where  He  wrought  the  miracle 
f  healing  on  Peter's  wife's  mother,  a  miiacle  suc- 
:eeded  by  other  manifestations  of  divine  power 
which  produced  a  deep  impression  upon  the  people 
Some  time  was  passed  afterwards  in  attendance 
jipon  our  Lord's  public  ministrations  in  Galilee,  LV- 
lapolis,  Peraea,  and  Judaea:  though  at  intervals 
;he  disciples  returned  to  their  own  city,  and  we?  i 
witnesses  of  many  miracles,  of  the  call  of  Levi,  ana 
>f  their  Master's  reception  of  outcasts,  whom  they 
n  common  with  their  zealous  but  prejudiced  coun- 
;rymen  had  despised  and  shunned.  It  was  a  period 
of  training,  of  mental  and  spiritual  discipline  prepa 
ratory  to  their  admission  to  the  higher  office  tc 
which  they  were  destined.  Even  then  Peter  re 
ceived  some  marks  of  distinction.  He  was  selected, 
together  with  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  to  witness 
the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter. 

The  special  designation  of  Peter,  and  his  eleven 
fellow  disciples  took  place  some  time  afterwards, 
when  they  were  set  apart  as  our  Lord's  immediate 
attendants,  and  as  His  delegates  to  go  forth  wher 
ever  He  might  send  them,  as  apostles,  announcers 
of  His  kingdom,  gifted  with  supernatural  powers  as 
credentials  of  their  supernatural  mission  (see  Matt.  x. 
2-4  ;  Mark  iii.  13-19,  the  most  detailed  account — 
Luke  vi.  13).  They  appear  then  first  to  have 
received  formally  the  name  of  Apostles,  and  from 
that  time  Simon  bore  publicly,  and  as  it  would 
seem  all  but  exclusively,  the  name  Peter,  which 
had  hitherto  been  used  rather  as  a  characteristic 
appellation  than  as  a  proper  name. 

From  this  time  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  St. 
Peter  held  the  first  place  among  the  Apostles,  to 
whatever  cause  his  precedence  is  to  be  attributed. 
There  was  certainly  much  in  his  character  which 
marked  him  as  a  representative  man  ;  both  in  his 
strength  and  in  his  weakness,  in  his  excellences  and 
his  defects  he  exemplifies  the  changes  which  the 
natural  man  undergoes  in  the  gradual  transforma 
tion  into  the  spiritual  man  under  the  personal  in 
fluence  of  the  Saviour.  The  precedence  did  not 
depend  upon  priority  of  call,  or  it  would  have 
devolved  upon  his  brother  Andrew,  or  that  other 
disciple  who  first  followed  Jesus.  It  seems  scarcely 
probable  that  it  depended  upon  seniority,  even  sup 
posing,  which  is  a  mere  conjecture,  that  he  was 
older  than  his  fellow  disciples.  The  special  desig 
nation  by  Christ,  alone  accounts  in  a  satisfactory 
way  for  the  facts  that  he  is  named  first  in  every 
list  of  the  Apostles,  is  generally  addressed  by  our 
Lord  as  their  representative,  and  on  the  most  solemn 
occasions  speaks  in  their  name.  Thus  when  the 
first  great  secession  took  place  in  consequence  of  the 
offence  given  by  our  Lord's  mystic  discourse  at 
Capernaum  (see  John  vi.  66-69),  "  Jesus  said  unto 
the  twelve,  Will  ye  also  go  away  ?  Then  Simon 
Peter  answered  Him,  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go? 
Thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life :  and  we  believe 
and  are  sure  that  Thou  art  that  Christ,  the  Son  of 


B  See  Luoke,  Tholuck,  and  Lange,  on  the  Gospel  o 
St.  John. 

*  Lticke  describes  this  character  well,  as  that  firmness, 
or  rather  hardness  of  power,  which,  if  not  purified,  easily 
becomes  violence.  The  deepest  and  most  beautiful  ob 
servations  are  those  of  Origen  on  John,  torn.  ii.  c.  30. 

k  This  is  a  point  of  great  difficulty,  and  hotly  contested. 
Many  writers  of  great  weight  hold  the  occurrences  to  be 
iltogether  distinct;  but  the  ganerality  of  commentators, 


including  some  of  the  most  earnest  and  devout  in  Germany 
and  England,  appear  now  to  concur  in  the  view  which  I 
have  here  taken.  Thus  Trench  On  the  Parables,  Neander, 
Liicke,  Lange,  and  Ebrard.  The  object  of  Strauss,  who 
denies  the  identity,  is  to  make  out  that  St.  Luke's  account 
is  a  mere  myth.  The  most  satisfactory  attempt  to  areount 
for  the  variations  is  that  of  Spanheim.  1 1  tibia  Kw.ngfJ.ica. 
U.  341. 


HUi) 


PETER 


the  living  God."  Thus  again  at  Cnesareu  Philippi,  j 
soon  after  the  return  of  the  twelve  from  their  first 
missi<*n*ry  tour,  St.  Peter  (speaking  as  before  in  j 
the  name  of  the  twelve,  though,  as  appears  from  j 
our  Lord's  words,  with  a  peculiar  distinctness  of 
personal  conviction)  repeated  that  declaration, "  Thou 
art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  The 
confirmation  of  our  Apostle  in  his  special  position 
in  the  Church,  his  identification  with  the  rock  on 
which  that  Church  is  founded,  the  ratification  of 
the  powers  and  duties  attached  to  the  apostolic 
office,10  and  the  promise  of  permanence  to  the  Church, 
followed  as  a  reward  of  that  confession.  The  early 
Church  regarded  St.  Peter  generally,  and  most 
especially  on  this  occasion,  as  the  representative  of 
the  apostolic  body,  a  very  distinct  theory  from  that 
which  makes  him  their  head,  or  governor  in  Christ's 
itead.  Even  in  the  time  of  Cyprian,  when  com 
munion  with  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  St.  Peter's 
successor  for  the  first  time  was  held  to  be  indis 
pensable,  no  powers  of  jurisdiction,  or  supremacy, 
were  supposed  to  be  attached  to  the  admitted  pre 
cedency  of  rank."  Primus  inter  pares  Peter  held  no 
distinct  office,  and  certainly  never  claimed  any 
powers  which  did  not  belong  equally  to  all  his 
fellow  Apostles. 

This  great  triumph  of  Peter,  however,  brought 
other  points  of  his  character  into  strong  relief.  The 
distinction  which  he  then  received,  and  it  may  be 
his  consciousness  of  ability,  energy,  zeal,  and  abso 
lute  devotion  to  Christ's  person,  seem  to  have 
developed  a  natural  tendency  to  rashness  and  for 
wardness  bordering  upon  presumption.  On  this 
occasion  the  exhibition  of  such  feelings  brought 
upon  him  the  strongest  reproof  ever  addressed  to  a 
disciple  by  our  Lord.  In  his  affection  and  self-con 
fidence  Peter  ventured  to  reject  as  impossible  the 
announcement  of  the  sufferings  and  humiliation 
which  Jesus  predicted,  and  heard  the  sharp  words — 
"  Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan,  thou  art  an  offence 

11  The  accounts  which  have  been  given  of  the  precise 
import  of  this  declaration  may  be  summed  up  under  these 
heads :— 1.  That  our  Lord  spoke  of  Himself,  and  not  of 
St.  Peter,  as  the  rock  on  which  the  Church  was  to  be 
founded.  This  Interpretation  expresses  a  great  truth,  but 
it  is  irreconcileable  with  the  context,  and  could  scarcely 
have  occurred  to  an  unbiassed  reader,  and  certainly  does 
n  it  give  the  primary  and  literal  meaning  of  our  Lord's 
words.  It  has  been  defended,  however,  by  candid  and 
learned  critics,  as  Glass  and  Dathe.  2.  That  our  Lord 
addresses  Peter  as  the  type  or  representative  of  the  Church, 
in  his  capacity  of  chief  disciple.  This  is  Augustine's  view, 
and  it  was  widely  adopted  in  the  early  Church.  It  is 
hardly  borne  out  hy  the  context,  and  seems  to  Involve  a 
false  metaphor.  The  Church  would  In  that  case  be  founded 
on  itself  in  Its  type.  3.  That  the  rock  was  not  the  person 
of  Peter,  but  his  confession  of  faith.  This  rests  on  much 
better  authority,  and  is  supported  by  stronger  arguments. 
The  authorities  for  it  are  given  by  Suicer,  v.  IleVpos,  $1, 
n.  3.  Yet  it  seems  to  have  been  originally  suggested  as 
an  explanation,  rather  than  an  interpretation,  which  it 
certainly  is  not  in  a  literal  sense.  4.  That  St.  Peter  him 
self  was  the  rock  on  which  the  Church  would  be  built,  as 
the  representative  of  the  Apostles,  as  professing  In  their 
name  the  true  faith,  and  as  entrusted  specially  with  the 
duty  of  preaching  it,  and  thereby  laying  the  foundation 
of  the  Church.  Many  learned  and  candid  Protestant 
divines  have  acquiesced  In  this  view  (e.  g.  Pearson, 
Hammond,  Bengel,  Rosenmuller,  Schleusner,  Kuinoel, 
Bloomficla,  &c.).  It  is  borne  out  by  the  facts  that  St. 
I'eter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  during  the  whole 
prrlod  of  the  establishment  of  the  Church,  was  the  chief 
agent  in  all  the  work  of  the  ministry,  in  preaching,  in 
trtmUting  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  laying  down  the 


PETER 

unto  me — for  thou  savourest  no*  th'  things  tlint  IK 
of  God,  but  those  that  be  of  men."  That  w;is 
Peter's  first  fall ;  a  very  ominous  one;  not  a  rook, 
but  a  stumbling  stone,0  not  a  defender,  but  an  anta 
gonist  and  deadly  enemy  of  the  faith,  when  the 
spiritual  should  give  place  to  the  lower  nature  hi 
dealing  with  the  things  of  God.  It  is  remarkable 
that  on  other  occasions  when  St.  Peter  signalized 
his  faith  and  devotion,  he  displayed  at  the  time,  or 
immediately  afterwards,  a  more  than  usuid  defi 
ciency  in  spiritual  discernment  and  consistency. 
Thus  a  few  days  after  that  fall  he  was  selected 
together  with  John  and  James  to  witness  the 
transfiguration  of  Christ,  but  the  words  which 
he  then  uttered  prove  that  he  was  completely  bewil 
dered,  and  unable  at  the  time  to  comprehend  the 
meaning  of  the  transaction.?  Thus  again,  when 
his  zeal  and  courage  prompted  him  to  leave  the 
ship  and  walk  on  the  water  to  go  to  Jesus  (Matt. 
xiv.  29),  a  sudden  failure  of  faith  withdrew  the 
sustaining  power;  he  was  about  to  sink  when  he 
was  at  or.ce  reproved  and  saved  by  his  master. 
Such  traits,  which  occur  not  unfrequently,  prepare 
us  for  his  last  great  fall,  as  well  as  for  his  conduct 
after  the  Resurrection,  when  his  natural  gifts  wei« 
perfected  and  his  deficiencies  supplied  by  '  tli# 
power  from  on  High."  We  find  a  mixture  of  zeal 
and  weakness  in  his  conduct  when  calleu  upon  to 
pay  tribute-money  for  himself  and  his  Lord,  but 
faith  had  the  upper  hand,  and  was  rewarded  by  a 
significant  miracle  (Matt.  xvii.  24-27).  The  ques 
tion  which  about  the  same  time  Peter  asked  cm- 
Lord  as  to  the  extent  to  which  forgiveness  of  sins 
should  be  carried,  indicated  a  great  advance  in  spi 
rituality  from  the  Jewish  standing  point,  while  it 
showed  how  far  as  yet  he  and  his  fellow  disciples 
were  from  understanding  the  true  principle  of  Chris 
tian  love  (Matt,  rviii.  21).  We  find  a  similar 
blending  of  opposite  qualities  in  the  declaration 
recorded  by  the  synoptical  evangelists  (Matt.  xix. 


terms  of  communion.  This  view  is  wholly  incompatible 
with  the  Roman  theory,  which  makes  him  the  repre 
sentative  of  Christ,  not  personally,  but  in  virtue  of  an 
office  essential  to  the  permanent  existence  and  authority 
of  the  Church.  Passaglia,  the  latest  and  ablest  cun:io 
versialist,  takes  more  pains  to  refute  this  than  any  other 
view ;  but  wholly  without  success :  it  being  clear  that 
St.  Peter  did  not  retain,  even  admitting  that  he  did  at 
first  hold,  any  primacy  of  rank  after  completing  his  own 
special  work ;  that  he  never  exercised  any  authority  over 
or  independently  of  the  other  Apostles ;  that  he  certainly 
did  not  transmit  whatever  position  he  ever  held  to  an.v 
of  his  colleagues  after  bis  decease.  At  Jerusalem,  t  wn 
during  his  residence  there,  the  chief  authority  rested  with 
St.  James;  nor  is  there  any  trace  of  a  central  power  or 
jurisdiction  for  centuries  after  the  foundation  of  the 
Church.  The  same  arguments,  mutatis  mutandit,  apply 
to  the  keys.  The  promise  was  literally  fulfilled  when 
St.  Peter  preached  at  Pentecost,  admitted  the  first  con 
verts  to  baptism,  confirmed  the  Samaritans,  and  received 
Cornelius,  the  representative  of  the  Gentiles,  into  the 
Church.  Whatever  privileges  may  have  belonged  to  him 
personally  died  with  him.  The  authority  required  for  the 
permanent  government  of  the  Church  was  believed  by  the 
Fathers  to  be  deposited  in  the  episcopate,  as  representing 
the  apostolic  body,  and  succeeding  to  its  claims. 

»  See  an  admirable  discussion  of  this  question  in  Rothe't 
Awfange  der  Chriitlichen  Kirche. 

°  Lightfoot  suggests  that  such  may  have  been  the  real 
meaning  of  the  term  "  rock."  An  amusing  instance  cf 
t\e  blindness  of  party  feeling.  See  Borax  Ifeb.  on  John. 
vol.  xii.  p.  237. 

P  As  usual,  the  least  favourable  view  of  St.  Peter'i 
conduct  and  feelings  is  given  by  St.  Mark.  i.  (..  Vy  himstOf 


PETER 

27;  Mark  z.  28;  Luke  xviii.  28),  Lo,  we  have 
left  all  and  followed  Thee.  It  certainly  bespeaks  a 
consciousness  of  sincerity,  a  spirit  of  self-devotion 
and  self-sacrifice,  though  it  conveys  an  impression 
of  something  like  ambition  ;  but  in  that  instance 
th?  good  undoubtedly  predominated,  as  is  shown  by 
oui  Lord's  answer.  He  does  not  reprove  Peter, 
who  spoke,  as  usual,  in  the  name  of  the  twelve, 
but  takes  that  opportunity  of  uttering  the  strongest 
prediction  touching  the  future  dignity  and  para 
mount  authority  of  *he  Apostles,  a  prediction  re 
corded  by  St.  Matthew  only. 

Towards  the  close  of  our  Lord's  ministry  St. 
Peter's  characteristics  become  especially  prominent. 
Together  with  his  brother,  and  the  two  sons  of 
Zebedee,  ho  listened  to  the  last  awful  predictions 
And  warnings  delivered  to  the  disciples  in  reference 
to  the  second  advent  (Matt.  xxiv.  3 ;  Mark  xiii.  3, 
who  alone  mentions  these  names ;  Lukexxi.  7).  At 
i-he  last  supper  Peter  seems  to  have  been  particu 
larly  earnest  in  the  request  that  the  traitor  might 
be  pointed  out,  expressing  of  course  a  general  feeling, 
to  which  some  inward  consciousness  of  infirmity 
may  have  added  force.  After  the  supper  his  words 
drew  out  the  meaning  of  the  significant,  almost 
sacramental  act  of  our  Lord  in  washing  His  disciples' 
feet,  an  occasion  on  which  we  find  the  same  mixture 
of  goodness  and  frailty,  humility  and  deep  affection, 
with  a  certain  taint  of  self-will,  which  was  at  once 
hushed  into  submissive  reverence  by  the  voice  of 
Jesus.  Then  too  it  was  that  he  made  those  re 
peated  protestations  of  unalterable  fidelity,  so  soon 
to  be  falsified  by  his  miserable  fall.  That  event  is, 
however,  of  such  critical  import  in  its  bearings 
upon  the  character  and  position  of  the  Apostle,  that 
it  cannot  be  dismissed  without  a  careful,  if  not  an 
exhaustive  discussion. 

Judas  had  left  the  guest-chamber  when  St.  Peter 
put  the  question,  Lord,  whither  goestThou?  words 
which  modern  theologians  generally  represent  as 
savouring  of  idle  curiosity,  or  presumption,  but  in 
which  the  early  Fathers  (as  Chrysostom  and  Angus- 
tine)  recognized  the  utterance  of  love  and  devotion. 
The  answer  was  a  promise  that  Peter  should  follow 
his  Master,  but  accompanied  with  an  intimation  of 
present  unfitness  in  the  disciple.  Then  came  the 
first  protestation,  which  elicited  the  sharp  and  stern 
rebuke,  and  distinct  prediction  of  Peter's  denial 
(John  xiii.  36-38).  From  comparing  this  account 
with  those  of  the  other  evangelists  (Matt.  xxvi.  33- 
35 ;  Mark  xiv.  29-31 ;  Luke  xxii.  33,  34),  it  seems 
evident  that  with  some  diversity  of  circumstances 
both  the  protestation  and  warning  were  thrice  re 
peated.  The  tempter  was  to  sift  all  the  disciples, 
our  Apostle's  faith  was  to  be  preserved  from  failing 
by  the  special  intercession  of  Christ,  he  being  thus 
singled  out  either  as  the  representative  of  the  whole 
body,  or  as  seems  more  probable,  because  his  cha 
racter  was  cne  which  had  special  need  of  super 
natural  aid.  St.  Mark,  as  usual,  ^ecords  two  points 
which  enhance  the  force  of  the  warning  and  the 
guilt  of  Peter,  viz.,  that  the  cock  would  crow  twice, 
and  that  after  such  warning  he  repeated  his  pro 
testation  with  greater  vehemence.  Chrysostom,  who 
judges  the  Apostle  with  fairness  and  candour,  attri- 
nutes  this  vehemence  to  his  great  love,  and  more 
particularly  to  the  delight  which  he  felt  when 
assured  that  he  was  not  the  traitor,  yet  not  without 
a  certain  admixture  of  forwardness  and  ambition 
euch  as  had  previously  been  shown  in  the  dispute 
for  pre-eminence.  The  fiery  trial  soon  came.  After 
•lie  agony  of  Gethsemane,  when  the  three,  Peter, 

VOL.  1J. 


PETER 


801 


Jimes,  and  John  were,  as  on  former  occasions,  B&- 
lected  to  be  with  our  Lord,  the  only  witnesses  of 
His  passion,  where  also  all  three  had  alike  failed  to 
prepare  themselves  by  pi-ayer  and  watching,  the 
arrest  of  Jesus  took  place.  Peter  did  not  shrink 
from  the  danger.  In  the  same  spirit  which  had 
dictated  his  promise  he  drew  his  sword,  alone  against 
the  armed  throng,  and  wounded  the  servant  (rbi> 
Sov\ov,  not  a  servant)  of  the  high-priest,  probably 
the  leader  of  the  band.  When  this  bold  but  unau 
thorized  attempt  at  rescue  was  reproved,  he  did  nof 
yet  forsake  his  Master,  but  followed  Him  with  St. 
John  into  the  focus  of  danger,  the  house  of  the 
high-priest.  There  he  sat  in  the  outer  hall.  He 
must  have  been  in  a  state  of  utter  confusion :  his 
faith,  which  from  first  to  last  was  bound  up  with 
hope,  his  special  characteristic,  was  for  the  tiim 
powerless  against  temptation.  The  danger  found 
him  unarmed.  Thrice,  each  time  with  greater 
vehemence,  the  last  time  with  blasphemous  asse 
veration,  he  denied  his  Master.  The  triumph  of 
Satan  seemed  complete.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  it 
was  an  obscuration  of  faith,  not  an  extinction.  It 
needed  but  a  glance  of  his  Lord's  eye  to  bring 
him  to  himself.  His  repentance  was  instantaneous, 
and  effectual.  The  light  in  which  he  himself  re 
garded  his  conduct,  is  clearly  shown  by  the  tenns 
in  which  it  is  related  by  St.  Mark.  The  inferences 
are  weighty  as  regards  his  personal  character,  which 
represents  more  completely  perhaps  than  any  in  the 
New  Testament,  the  weakness  of  the  natural  and  the 
strength  of  the  spiritual  man :  still  more  weighty 
as  bearing  upon  his  relations  to  the  apostolic  body, 
and  the  claims  resting  upon  the  assumption  that  he 
stood  to  them  in  the  place  of  Christ. 

On  the  morning  of  the  resurrection  we  have 
proof  that  St.  Peter,  though  humbled,  was  not 
crushed  by  his  fall.  He  and  St.  John  were  the  first 
to  visit  the  sepulchre ;  he  was  the  first  who  entered 
it.  We  are  told  by  Luke  (in  words  still  used  by 
the  Eastern  Church  as  the  first  salutation  on  Easter 
Sunday)  and  by  St.  Paul,i  that  Christ  appeared  to 
him  first  among  the  Apostles — he  who  most  needed 
the  comfort  was  the  first  who  received  it,  and  with 
it,  as  may  be  assumed,  an  assurance  of  forgiveness. 
It  is  observable,  however,  that  on  that  occasion  he 
is  called  by  his  original  name,  Simon,  not  Peter ; 
the  higher  designation  was  not  restored  until  he  had 
been  publicly  reinstituted,  so  to  speak,  by  his 
Master.  That  reinstitution  took  place  at  the  sea 
of  Galilee  (John  xxi.),  an  event  of  the  very  highest 
import.  We  have  there  indications  of  his  best  na 
tural  qualities,  practical  good  sense,  promptness 
and  energy ;  slower  than  St.  John  to  recognize  their 
Lord,  Peter  was  the  first  to  reach  Him  :  he  brought 
the  net  to  land.  The  thrice  repeated  question  of 
Christ,  referring  doubtless  to  the  three  protestations 
and  denials,  were  thrice  met  by  answers  full  of  love 
and  faith,  and  utterly  devoid  of  his  hitherto  charac 
teristic  failing,  presumption,  of  which  not  a  trace  is 
to  be  discerned  in  his  later  history.  He  then  re 
ceived  the  formal  commission  to  feed  Christ's  sheep- 
not  certainly  as  one  endued  with  exclusive  or  pai«> 
mount  authority,  or  as  distinguished  from  hi* 
fellow-disciples,  whose  fall  had  been  marked  by  fai 
less  aggravating  circumstances ;  rather  as  one  wh< 
had  forfeited  his  place,  and  could  not  resume  it 
without  such  an  authorization.  Then  followed  the 


«  A  fact  very  perplexing  U>  the  Tiibingcn  school,  being 
utterly  irreconcileable  with  their  theory  of  antagoiiltn) 
between  the  Apostles. 

3  F 


802 


PETER 


prediction  of  his  martyrdom,  in  which  he  yras  to 
find  the  fulfilment  of  his  request  to  be  permitted  to 
follow  the  Lord. 

With  this  event  closes  the  first  part  of  St.  Peter's 
history.  It  has  been  a  period  of  transition,  during 
which  the  fisherman  of  Galilee  had  been  trained 
first  by  the  Baptist,  then  by  our  Lord,  for  the  great 
work  of  his  life.  He  had  learned  to  know  the 
Person  and  appreciate  the  offices  of  Christ:  while 
his  own  character  had  been  chastened  and  elevated 
by  special  privileges  and  humiliations,  both  reach 
ing  their  climax  in  the  last  recorded  transactions. 
Henceforth,  he  with  his  colleagues  were  to  establish 
and  govern  the  Church  founded  by  their  Lord,  with 
out  the  support  of  His  presence. 

The  first  part  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  occu 
pied  by  the  record  of  transactions,  in  nearly  all  of 
which  Peter  stands  forth  as  the  recognized  leaderof  the 
Apostles ;  it  being,  however,  equally  clear  that  he 
neither  exercises  nor  claims  any  authority  apart  from 
them,  much  less  over  them.  In  the  first  chapter  it 
is  Peter  who  points  out  to  the  disciples  (as  in  all  his 
discourses  and  writings  drawing  his  arguments  from 
prophecy)  the  necessity  of  supplying  the  place  of 
Judas.  He  states  the  qualifications  of  an  Apostle, 
but  takes  no  special  part  in  the  election.  The  can 
didates  are  selected  by  the  disciples,  while  the  deci 
sion  is  left  to  the  searcher  of  hearts.  The  extent 
and  limits  of  Peter's  primacy  might  be  inferred 
with  tolerable  accuracy  from  this  transaction  alone. 
To  have  one  spokesman,  or  foreman,  seems  to  accord 
with  the  spirit  of  order  and  humility  which  ruled 
the  Church,  while  the  assumption  of  power  or  su 
premacy  would  be  incompatible  with  the  express 
command  of  Christ  (see  Matt,  xxiii.  10).  In  the 
2nd  chapter  again,  St.  Peter  is  the  most  prominent 
pei-son  in  the  greatest  event  after  the  resurrection, 
when  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  the  Church  was  first 
invested  with  the  plenitude  of  gifts  and  powers. 
Then  Peter,  not  speaking  in  his  own  name,  but  with 
the  eleven  (see  ver.  14),  explained  the  meaning  of 
the  miraculous  gifts,  and  shewed  the  fulfilment  of 
prophecies  (accepted  at  that  time  by  all  Hebrews  as 
Messianic),  both  in  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  in  the  resurrection  and  death  i/f  our 
Lord.  This  discourse,  which  bears  all  the  marks  of 
Peter's  individuality,  both  of  character  and  doctrinal 
views,1  ends  with  an  appeal  of  remarkable  boldness. 

It  is  the  model  upon  which  the  apologetic  dis 
courses  of  the  primitive  Christians  were  generally 
constructed.  The  conversion  and  baptism  of  three 
thousand  persons,  who  continued  steadfastly  in  the 
Apostle's  doctrine  and  fellowship,  attested  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  which  spake  by  Peter  on  that  occasion. 

The  first  miracle  after  Pentecost  was  wrought 
by  St.  Peter  (Acts  iii.) ;  and  St.  John  was  joined 
with  him  in  that,  as  in  most  important  acts  of  his 
ministry ;  but  it  was  Peter  who  took  the  cripple 
by  the  hand,  and  bade  him  "  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  rise  up  and  walk,"  and  when  the 
people  ran  together  to  Solomon's  porch,  where  the 
Apostles,  following  their  Master's  example  were 
wont  to  teach,  Peter  was  the  speaker :  he  convinces 
the  people  of  their  sin,  warns  them  of  their  danger, 
points  out  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  and  the  spe- 


r  See  Schmid,  Biblische  Theologie,  il.  153;  and  Weiss, 
Der  Petrinitche  Lehrbegriff,  p.  19. 

•  This  speech  is  at  once  strikingly  characteristic  of 
St.  Peter,  and  a  proof  of  the  fundamental  harmony  between 
Uia  teaching  and  the  more  developed  and  systematic  doc 
trines  of  St.  Paul :  differing  in  form,  to  an  extent  utterly 
incompatible  with  the  theory  of  Baur  and  Schwcgler 


PETER 

cal  objects  for  which  God  sent  His  Son  first  to  Iht 
children  of  the  old  covenant.* 

The  boldness  of  the  two  Apostles,  of  Peter  monc 
especially  as  the  spokesman,  when  "  filled  with  th* 
Holy  Ghost "  he  confronted  the  full  assembly,  headed 
by  Annas  and  Caiaphas,  produced  a  deep  impression 
upon  those  cruel  and  unscrupulous  hypocrites ;  an 
impression  enhanced  by  the  fact  that  the  words 
came  from  ignorant  and  unlearned  men.  The  words 
spoken  by  both  Apostles,  when  commanded  not  to 
speak  at  all  nor  teach  in  the  name  of  Jesus,  have  ever 
since  been  the  watchwords  of  martyrs  (iv.  19,  20). 

This  first  miracle  of  healing  was  soon  followed 
by  the  first  miracle  of  judgment.  The  fiist  open 
and  deliberate  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  a  sin 
combining  ambition,  fraud,  hypocrisy,  and  blas 
phemy,  was  visited  by  death,  sudden  and  awful  as 
under  the  old  dispensation.  St.  Peter  was  the  mi 
nister  in  that  transaction.  As  he  had  first  opened 
the  gate  to  penitents  (Acts  ii.  37,  38),  he  now 
closed  it  to  hypocrites.  The  act  stands  alone,  with 
out  a  precedent  or  parallel  in  the  Gospel ;  but  Peter 
acted  simply  as  an  instrument,  not  pronouncing  the 
sentence,  but  denouncing  the  sin,  and  that  in  the 
name  of  his  fellow  Apostles  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Penalties  similar  in  kind,  though  far  different  in 
degree,  were  inflicted,  or  commanded  on  various 
occasions  by  St.  Paul.  St.  Peter  appears,  perhaps 
in  consequence  of  that  act,  to  have  become  the 
object  of  a  reverence  bordering,  as  it  would  seem, 
on  superstition  (Acts  v.  15),  while  the  numerous 
miracles  of  healing  wrought  about  the  same  time, 
snowing  the  true  character  of  the  power  dwelling 
in  the  Apostles,  gave  occasion  to  the  second  perse 
cution.  Peter  then  came  into  contact  with  the 
noblest  and  most  interesting  character  among  the 
Jews,  the  learned  and  liberal  tutor  of  St.  Paul, 
Gamaliel,  whose  caution,  gentleness,  and  dispas 
sionate  candour,  stand  out  in  strong  relief  contrasted 
with  his  colleagues,  but  make  a  faint  imprcssio.i 
compared  with  the  steadfast  and  uncompromising 
principles  of  the  Apostles,  who  after  undergoing  an 
illegal  scourging,  went  forth  rejoicing  that  they 
were  counted  worthy  to  suffer  shame  for  the  name 
of  Jesus.  Peter  is  not  specially  named  in  connexion 
with  the  appointment  of  deacons,  an  important  step 
in  the  organization  of  the  Church ;  but  when  the 
Gospel  was  first  preached  beyond  the  precincts  of 
Judea,  he  and  St.  John  were  at  once  sent  by  the 
Apostles  to  confirm  the  converts  at  Samaria,  a 
very  important  statement  at  this  critical  point, 
proving  clearly  his  subordination  to  the  whole  body, 
of  which  he  was  the  most  active  and  able  member. 

Up  to  that  time  it  may  be  said  that  the  Apostles 
had  one  great  work,  viz.,  to  convince  the  Jews  that 
Jesus  was  the  Messiah ;  in  that  work  St.  Peter  was 
the  master  builder,  the  whole  stiucture  rested  upon 
the  doctrines  of  which  lie  was  the  principal  teacher : 
hitherto  no  words  but  his  are  specially  recorded  by 
the  writer  of  the  Acts.  Henceforth  he  remains 
prominent,  but  not  exclusively  prominent,  among 
the  propagators  of  the  Gospel.  At  Samaria  he  and 
John  established  the  precedent  for  the  most  im 
portant  rite  not  expressly  enjoined  in  Holy  Writ, 
viz.,  confirmation,  which  the  Western  Church '  has 


teaching  the  object  of  the  writer  of  the  Acts ;  identical  in 
spirit,  as  issuing  from  the  same  source. 

«  Not  so  the  Eastern,  which  combines  the  act  witli 
baptism,  and  leaves  it  to  the  officiating  priest  It  is  out 
of  the  points  upon  which  Photius  and  other  Eastern  con 
troversialists  lay  special  stress. 


PETEK 

Mways  held  to  belong  exclusively  to  the  functions 
of  bishops  as  successors  to  the  ordinary  powers  of 
the  Apostolate.     Then  also  St.  Peter  was  confronted 
with   Simon  Magus,  the  first  teacher  of  heresy. 
{"SiMON  MAGDS.]  As  in  the  case  of  Ananias  he  had 
danounced  the  first  sin  against  holiness,  so  in  this 
case  he  first  declared  the  penalty  due  to  the  sin 
called  after  Simon's  name.     About  three  years  later 
(compare  Acts  ix.  26,  and  Gal.  i.  17,  18)  we  have 
two  accounts  of  the  first  meeting  of  St.  Peter  and 
St.  Paul.     In  the  Acts  it  is  stated  generally  that 
Saul  was  at  first  distrusted  by  the  disciples,  and 
received  by  the  Apostles  upon  the  recommendation 
of  Barnabas.     From  the  Galatians  we  learn  that 
St  Paul  went  to  Jerusalem  specially  to  see  Peter ; 
that  he  abode  with  him  fifteen  days,  and  that  James 
was  the  only  other  Apostle  present  at  the  time.    It 
is  important  to  note  that  this  account,  which  while 
it  establishes  the  independence  of  St.  Paul,  marks 
the  position  of  St.  Peter  as  the  most  eminent  of  the 
Apostles,  rests  not  on  the  authority  of  the  writer 
of  the  Acts,  but  on  that  of  St.  Paul — as  though  it 
were  intended  to  obviate  all  possible  misconceptions 
touching  the  mutual  relations  of  the  Apostles  of  the 
Hebrews   and   the   Gentiles.     This  interview  was 
followed   by   other   events   marking    Peter's   posi 
tion — a  general  apostolical  tour  of  visitation  to  the 
Churches   hitherto    established    (5iepx6(jLfvov   8ik 
ifdvToiv,  Acts  ix.  32),  in  the  course  of  which  two 
great  miracles  were  wrought  on  Aeneas  and  Tabitha, 
and  in  connexion  with  which  the  most  signal  trans 
action  after  the  day  of  Pentecost  is  recorded,  the 
baptism  of  Cornelius.     That  was  the  crown  and 
consummation  of  Peter's  ministry.     Peter  who  had 
first  preached  the  resurrection  to  the  Jews,  baptized 
the  first  converts,  confirmed  the  first  Samaritans, 
now,  without  the  advice  or  co-operation  of  any  of 
his  colleagues,  under  direct   communication  from 
heaven,  first  threw  down  the  barrier  which  sepa 
rated  proselytes  of  the  gate"  from  Israelites,  first 
establishing  principles  which  in  their  gradual  appli 
cation  and  full  development  issued  in  the  complete 
fusion  of  the  Gentile  and  Hebrew  elements  in  the 
Church.     The  narrative  of  this  event,  which  stands 
alone  in  minute  circumstantiality  of  incidents,  and 
accumulation  of  supernatural  agency,  is  twice  re 
corded  by  St.  Luke.     The  chief  points  to  be  noted 
are,  first  the  peculiar  fitness  of  Cornelius,  both  as  a 
representative  of  Roman  force  and  nationality,  and 
as  a  devout  and  liberal  worshipper,  to  be  a  recipient 
of  such  privileges;  and  secondly,  the  state  of  the 
Apostle's  )wn  mind.    Whatever  may  have  been  his 
hopes  or  fears  touching  the  heathen,  the  idea  had 
certainly  not  yet  crossed  him  that  they  could  be 
come  Christians  without  first  becoming  Jews.     As 
a  loyal  and  believing  Hebrew  he  could  not  contem 
plate  the  removal  of  Gentile  disqualifications,  with 
out  a  distinct  assurance  that  the  enactments  of  the 
law  which  concerned  them  were  abrogated  by  the 
divine  legislator.     The  vision  could  not  therefore 
h<xve  been  the  product  of  a  subjective  impression. 
It  was,  strictly  speaking,  objective,  presented  to  his 
roiid  by  an  external  influence.     Yet  the  will  of  the 
Apostle  was  not  controlled,  it  was  simply  enlight 
ened.     The  intimation  in  the  state  of  trance  did  not 
at  once  overcome  his  reluctance.     It  was  not  until 
his  consciousness  war,  fully  restored,  and  he  had 
A  ell  considered  the  meaning  of  the  vision,  that  he 
learned  that  the  distinction  of  cleanness  and  uuclean- 


PETEB 


803 


ness  in  outwara  things  belonged  to  a  temporary 
dispensation.  It  was  no  mere  acquiescence  in  a 
positive  command,  but  the  development  of  a  spirit 
full  of  generous  impulses,  which  found  utterance 
in  the  words  spoken  by  Peter  on  that  occasion — 
both  in  the  presence  of  Cornelius,  and  afterwards 
at  Jerusalem.  His  conduct  gave  gieat  offence  to 
all  his  countrymen  (Acts  xi.  2),  and  it  needed  all 
his  authority,  corroborated  by  a  special  manifesta 
tion  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  induce  his  fellow-Apostles 
to  recognize  the  propriety  of  this  great  act,  in 
which  both  he  and  they  saw  an  earnest  of  the  ad 
mission  of  Gentiles  into  the  Church  on  the  sing'.e 
condition  of  spiritual  repentance.  The  establish 
ment  of  a  Church  in  great  part  of  Gentile  origin  at 
Autioch,  and  the  mission  of  Ba'rnabas,  between  whose 
family  and  Peter  there  were  the 'bonds  of  near  inti 
macy,  set  the  seal  upon  the  work  thus  inaugurated 
by  St.  Peter. 

This  transaction  was  soon  followed  by  the  im 
prisonment  of  our  Apostle.  Herod  Agrippa  having 
first  tested  the  state  of  feeling  at  Jerusalem  by 
the  execution  of  James,  one  of  the  most  eminent 
Apostles,  arrested  Peter.  The  hatred,  which  at 
that  time  first  showed  itself  as  a  popular  feeling, 
may  most  probably  be  attributed  chiefly  to  the 
offence  given  by  Peter's  conduct  towards  Cornelius. 
His  mivadulous  deliverance  marks  the  close  of  this 
second  great  period  of  his  ministry.  The  special 
work  assigned  to  him  was  completed.  He  had 
founded  the  Church,  opened  its  gates  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  and  distinctly  laid  down  the  conditions  of 
admission.  From  that  time  we  have  no  continuous 
history  of  Peter.  It  is  quite  clear  that  he  retained 
his  rank  as  the  chief  Apostle,  equally  so,  tha'u  he . 
neither  exercised  nor  claimed  any  right  to  control 
their  proceedings.  At  Jerusalem  the  government 
of  the  Church  devolved  upon  James  the  brother  of 
our  Lord.  In  other  places  Peter  seems  to  have 
confined  his  ministrations  to  his  countrymen — as 
Apostle  of  the  circumcision.  He  left  Jerusalem, 
but  it  is  not  said  where  he  went.  Certainly  not  to 
Rome,  where  'there  are  no  traces  of  his  presence 
before  the '  last  years  of  his  life ;  he  probably  re 
mained  in  Jiidea,  visiting  and  confirming  the 
Churches ;  some  old  but  not  trustworthy  traditions 
represent  him  as  preaching  in  Caesarea  and  other 
cities  on  the  western  coast  of  Palestine  ;  six  years 
later  we  find  him  once  more  at  Jerusalem,  when 
the  Apostles  and  elders  came  together  to  consider 
the  question  whether  converts  should  be  circum 
cised.  Peter  took  the  lead  in  that  discussion,  and 
urged  with  remarkable  cogency  the  principles  settled 
in  the  case  of  Cornelius.  Purifying  faith  and  saving 
grace  (xv.  9  and  11)  remove  all  distinctions  be 
tween  believers.  His  arguments,  adopted  and  en 
forced  by  James,  decided  that  question  at  once  and 
for  ever.  It  is,  however,  to  be  remarked,  that  on 
that  occasion  he  exercised  no  one  power  which  Ro 
manists  hold  to  be  inalienably  attached  to  the  chair 
of  Peter.  He  did  not  preside  at  the  meeting ;  he 
neither  summoned  nor  dismissed  it ;  he  neither  col 
lected  the  suffrages,  nor  pronounced  the  decision." 

It  is  a  disputed  point  whether  the  meeting  be 
tween  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter,  of  which  we  have  an 
account  in  the  Galatians  (ii.  1-10)  took  place  at 
this  time.  The  great  majority  of  critics  believe 
that  it  did,  and  this  hypothesis,  though  not  with 
out  difficulties,  seems  more  probable  than  any  othei 


•  A  term  to  which  objection  has  been  made,  but  shewn 

fcy  Jo;  t  to  l>»  strictly  correct. 


In  accordance  wi$i  this  representation,  St.  Paul  nr.rcof 


J«unes  before  Cephas  ar.d  John  (Gal.  ii.  9). 


3  F  'J. 


R04 


I'ETER 


•jrhich  has  been  suggested.*  The  only  point  of  real  im 
portance  was  certainly  determined  before  the  Apostles 
separated,  the  work  of  converting  the  Gentiles  being 
henceforth  specially  entrusted  to  Paul  and  Barnabas, 
while  the  charge  of  preaching  to  the  circumcision 
was  assigned  to  the  elder  Apostles,  and  more  parti 
cularly  to  Peter  (Gal.  ii.  7-9).  This  arrangement 
cannot,  however,  have  been  an  exclusive  one.  St. 
Paul  always  addressed  himself  first  to  the  Jews  in 
every  city :  Peter  and  his  old  colleagues  undoubt 
edly  admitted  and  sought  to  make  converts  among 
-he  Gentiles.  It  may  have  been  in  full  force  only 
when  the  old  and  new  Apostles  resided  in  the  same 
city.  Such  at  least  was  the  case  at  Antioch,  where 
St.  Peter  went  soon  afterwards.  There  the  painful 
collision  took  place  between  the  two  Apostles ;  the 
most  remarkable,  and,  in  its  bearings  UJMMI  contro 
versies  at  critical  periods,  one  of  the  most  important 
events  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  St.  Peter  at 
first  applied  the  principles  which  he  had  lately 
defended,  carrying  with  him  the  whole  Apostolic 
body,  and  on  his  arrival  at  Antioch  ate  with  the 
Gentiles,  thus  showing  that  he  believed  all  cere 
monial  distinctions  to  be  abolished  by  the  Gospel: 
in  that  he  went  far  beyond  the  strict  letter  of  the 
injunctions  issued  by  the  Council.*  That  step  was 
marked  and  condemned  by  certain  members  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  sent  by  Jam<?s.  It  appeared 
to  them  one  thing  to  recognize  Gentiles  as  fellow 
Christians,  another  to  admit  them  to  social  inter 
course,  whereby  ceremonial  defilement  would  be 
contracted  under  the  law  to  which  all  the  Apostles, 
Barnabas  and  Paul  included,  acknowledged  alle 
giance.*  Peter,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  circumcision, 
fearing  to  give  offence  to  those  who  were  his  special 
charge,  at  once  gave  up  the  point,  suppressed  or 
disguised  his  feelings,b  and  separated  himself  not 
from  communion,  but  from  social  intercourse  with 
the  Gentiles.  St.  Paul,  as  the  Apostle  of  the  Gen 
tiles,  saw  clearly  the  consequences  likely  to  ensue, 
and  could  ill  brook  the  misapplication  of  a  rule 
often  laid  down  in  his  own  writings  concerning 
compliance  with  the  prejudices  of  weak  brethren. 
He  held  that  Peter  was  infringing  a  great  principle, 
withstood  him  to  the  face,  and  using  the  same  ar 
guments  which  Peter  had  urged  at  the  Council, 
pronounced  his  conduct  to  be  indefensible.  The 
statement  that  Peter  compelled  the  Gentiles  to 
Judaize,  probably  means,  not  that  he  enjoined  cir 
cumcision,  but  that  his  conduct,  if  persevered  in, 
would  have  that  effect,  since  they  would  naturally 
take  any  steps  which  might  remove  the  barriers  to 
familiar  intercourse  with  the  first  Apostles  of  Christ. 
Peter  was  wrong,  but  it  was  an  error  of  judgment ; 
an  act  contrary  to  his  own  feelings  and  wishes,  in 


PETER 

deference  to  those  whom  he  looked  upon  as  repre 
senting  the  mind  of  the  Church ;  that  he  waj 
actuated  by  selfishness,  national  pride,  or  any  re 
mains  of  superstition,  is  neither  asserted  nor  implied 
n  the  strong  censure  of  St.  Paul :  nor,  much  as  we 
must  admire  the  earnestness  and  wisdom  of  St. 
Paul,  whose  clear  and  vigorous  intellect  was  in  this 
case  stimulated  by  anxiety  for  his  own  special 
charge,  the  Gentile  Church,  should  we  overlook 
Peter's  singular  humility  in  submitting  to  public 
•eproof  from  one  so  much  his  jwnior,  or  his  mag 
nanimity  both  in  adopting  St.  Paul's  conclusions 
as  we  must  infer  that  he  did  from  the  absence  of 
all  trace  of  continued  resistance),  and  in  remaining 
on  terms  of  brotherly  communion  (as  is  testified  by 
lis  own  written  words),  to  the  end  of  his  life  (1  Pet. 
v.  10 ;  2  Pet.  Hi.  15,  16). 

From  this  time  until  the  date  of  his  Epistles, 
we  have  no  distinct  notices  in  Scripture  of  Peter's 
abode  or  work.  The  silence  may  be  accounted  foi 
by  the  fact  that  from  that  time  the  great  work 
of  propagating  the  Gospel  was  committed  to  the 
marvellous  energies  of  St.  Paul.  Peter  was  pro 
bably  employed  for  the  most  part  in  building  up, 
and  completing  the  organization  of  Christian  com 
munities  in  Palestine  and  the  adjoining  districts. 
There  is,  however,  strong  reason  to  believe  that 
he  visited  Corinth  at  an  early  period ;  this  seems 
to  be  implied  in  several  passages  of  St.  Paul's 
first  epistle  to  that  Church,6  and  it  is  a  natural 
inference  from  the  statements  of  Clement  of  Rome 
(1  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  c.  4).  The  fact 
is  positively  asserted  by  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Co 
rinth  (A.D.  180  at  the  latest),  a  man  of  excellent 
judgment,  who  was  not  likely  to  be  misinformed, 
nor  to  make  such  an  assertion  lightly  in  an 
epistle  addressed  to  the  Bishop  and  Church  of 
Rome.*  The  reference  to  collision  between  parties 
who  claimed  Peter,  Apollos,  Paul,  and  even  Christ 
for  their  chiefs,  involves  no  opposition  between  the 
Apostles  themselves,  such  as  the  fabulous  Cle- 
ment'nes  and  modem  infidelity  assume.  The  name 
of  Peter  as  founder,  or  joint  founder,  is  not  asso 
ciated  with  any  local  Church  save  those  of  Corinth, 
Antioch,6  or  Rome,  by  early  ecclesiastical  tradition. 
That  of  Alexandria  may  have  been  established  by 
St.  Mark  after  Peter's  death.  That  Peter  preached 
the  Gospel  in  the  countries  of  Asia,  mentioned  in 
his  first  Epistle,  appears  from  Origen's  own  words' 
(KfKrjpvKevat  lojKev)  to  be  a  mere  conjecture,  not 
in  itself  improbable,  but  of  little  weight  in  the 
absence  of  all  positive  evidence,  and  of  all  personA 
reminiscences  in  the  Epistle  itself.  From  that 
Epistle,  however,  it  is  to  be  inferred  that  towards 
the  end  of  his  life,  St.  Peter  either  visited,  or  resided 


r  Lange  (Das  apostolische  Zeitalter,  ii.  378)  fixes  the 
date  about  three  years  after  the  Council.  Wieseler  has  a 
long  excursus  to  shew  that  it  must  have  occurred  after 
St.  Paul's  second  apostolic  journey.  He  gives  some  weighty 
reasons,  but  wholly  fails  in  the  attempt  to  account  for  the 
presence  of  Barnabas,  a  fatal  objection  to  his  theory.  Sec 
Der  Brief  an  die  Galater,  Excursus,  p.  579.  On  the  other 
side  are  Theodoret,  Pearson,  Eichhorn,  Olshausen,  Meyer, 
Neander,  Howson,  Schaff,  &c. 

*  This  decisively  overthrows  the  whole  system  of  Baur, 
which  rests  upon  an  assumed  antagonism  between  St.  Paul 
and  the  elder  Apostles,  especially  St.  Peter.     St.  Paul 
grounds  big  reproof  upon  the  inconsistency  of  Peter,  not 
upon  his  judaizing  tendencies. 

»  See  Acts  xvlii.  18-21,  xx.  16,  xxi.  18-24,  passages 
borne  out  by  numerous  statements  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles 

*  vff«TT«\A«»,   <rvwirtKpi6ri<ra.v,  "un-oKpi<7is,    must    be 


understood  in  this  sense.  It  was  not  hypocrisy  in  tha 
sense  of  an  affectation  of  holiness,  but  in  that  of  an  out 
ward  deference  to  prejudices  which  certainly  neither  Peter 
nor  Barnabas  any  longer  shared. 

*  See  Routh,  Rett.  Sacrae,  i.  IY9. 

d  The  attempt  to  set  aside  the  evidence  of  Dionysius, 
on  the  ground  that  he  makes  an  evident  mistake  in  attri 
buting  the  foundation  of  the  Corinthian  Church  to  Peter 
and  Paul,  is  futile.  If  Peter  took  any  pan  In  organizing 
the  Church,  he  would  be  spoken  of  as  a  joint  founder. 
Schaff  supposes  that  Peter  may  have  first  visited  Corir.tl 
on  his  way  to  Rome  towards  the  end  of  his  life 

«  It  is  to  be  observed  that  even  St.  Leo  represents  tht 
relation  of  St.  Peter  to  Antioch  as  precisely  the  same  will 
that  In  which  he  stands  to  Rome  (Kp.  92). 

'  Origen.ap.  Kuseb.  ill.  1,  adopted  by  Kpiphanlus  (  Haft 
xxvii.)  and  Jerome  (Catal.  c.  I). 


PETER 

P>r  some  time  at  Babylon,  which  at  that  time,  anJ 
for  some  hundreds  of  yeai-s  afterwards  was  a  chief 
acat  of  Jewish  culture.  This  of  course  depends 
upon  the  assumption,  which  on  the  whole  seems  8 
most  probable,  that  the  word  Babylon  is  not  used 
as  a  mystic  designation  of  Rome,  but  as  a  proper 
name,  and  that  not  of  an  obscure  city  in  Egypt,  but 
of  the  ancient  capital  of  the  East.  There  were 
many  inducements  for  such  a  choice  of  abode.  The 
Jewish  families  formed  there  a  separate  community,* 
they  were  rich,  prosperous,  and  had  established  set- 
•Foments  in  many  districts  of  Asia  Minor.  Their 
language,  probably  a  mixture  of  Hebrew  and  Naba- 
tean,  must  have  borne  a  near  affinity  to  the  Galilean 
dialect.  They  were  on  far  more  familiar  terms 
than  in  other  countries  with  their  heathen  neigh 
bours,  while  their  intercourse  with  Judea  was 
carried  on  without  intermission.  Christianity  cer 
tainly  made  considerable  progress  at  an  early  time 
in  that  and  the  adjoining  districts,  the  great  Chris 
tian  schools  at  Edessa  and  Nisibis  probably  owed 
their  origin  to  the  influence  of  Peter,  the  general 
tone  of  fiie  writers  of  that  school  is  what  is  now 
commonly  designated  as  Petrine.  It  is  no  unrea 
sonable  supposition  that  the  establishment  of  Chris 
tianity  in  those  districts  may  have  been  specially 
connected  with  the  residence  of  Peter  at  Babylon. 
At  that  time  there  must  have  been  some  communi 
cations  between  the  two  great  Apostles,  Peter  and 
Paul,  thus  stationed  at  the  two  extremities  of  the 
Christian  world.  St.  Mark,  who  was  certainly 
employed  about  that  time  by  St.  Paul,  was  with  St. 
Peter  when  he  wrote  the  Epistle.  Silvanus,  St. 
Paul's  chosen  companion,  was  the  bearer,  probably 
the  amanuensis  of  St.  Peter's  Epistle :  not  impro 
bably  sent  to  Peter  from  Rome,  and  charged  by 
him  to  deliver  that  epistle,  written  to  support  Paul's 
authority,  to  the  Churches  founded  by  that  Apostle 
on  his  return. 

More  important  in  its  bearings  upon  later  con 
troversies  is  the  question  of  St.  Peter's  connexion 
with  Rome. 

It  may  be  considered  as  a  settled  point  that  he 
did  not  visit  Rome  before  the  last  year  of  his  life. 
Too  much  stress  may  perhaps  be  laid  on  the  fact 
that  there  is  no  notice  of  St.  Peter's  labours  or 
presence  in  that  city  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans ; 
but  that  negative  evidence  is  not  counterbalanced 
by  any  statement  of  undoubted  antiquity.  The 
date  given  by  Eusebius'  rests  upon  a  miscalcula 
tion,  and  is  irreconcileable  with  the  notices  of  St. 


PETER 


805 


Peter  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Protestant 
critics,  with  scarcely  one  exception,11  aie  unanimous 
upon  this  point,  and  Roman  controversialists  are  far 
from  being  agreed  in  their  attempts™  to  remove 
the  difficulty. 

The  fact,  however,  of  St.  Peter's  martyrdom  at 
Rome  rests  upon  very  different  grounds.  The  evi 
dence  for  it  is  complete,  while  there  's  a  total 
absence  of  any  contrary  statement  in  the  writings 
of  the  early  Fathers.  We  have  in  the  first  place 
the  certainty  of  his  martyrdom,  in  our  Lord's  OWE 
prediction  (John  xxi.  18,  19).  Clement  of  Rome, 
writing  before  the  end  of  the  first  century,  speaks 
of  it,"  but  does  not  mention  the  place,  that  being 
of  course  well-known  to  his  readers.  Ignatius,  in 
the  undoubtedly  genuine  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
(ch.  iv.),  speaks  of  St.  Peter  in  terms  which  imply 
a  special  connexion  with  theii  Church.  Other 
early  notices  of  less  weight  coincide  with  this,  as 
that  of  Papias  (Euseb.  ii.  15),  and  the  apocryphal 
Praedicatio  Petri,  quoted  by  Cyprian.  In  the 
second  century,  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  in  the  Epistle 
to  Soter,  bishop  of  Rome  (ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  25), 
states,  as  a  fact  universally  known  and  accounting 
for  the  intimate  relations  between  Corinth  and 
Rome,  that  Peter  and  Paul  both  taught  in  Italy, 
and  suffered  martyrdom  about  the  same  time.0 
Irenaeus,  who  was  connected  with  St.  John,  being 
a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  a  hearer  of  that  Apostle, 
and  thoroughly  conversant  with  Roman  matters, 
bears  distinct  witness  to  St.  Peter's  presence  at 
Rome  (Adv.  Haer.  iii.  1  and  3).  It  is  incredible 
that  he  should  have  been  misinformed.  In  the 
next  century  there  is  the  testimony  of  Caius,  the 
liberal  and  learned  Roman  presbyter  (who  speaks 
of  St.  Peter's  tomb  in  the  Vatican),  that  of  Origen, 
Tertullian,  and  of  the  ante-  and  post-  Nicene  Fathers, 
without  a  single  exception.  In  short,  the  Churches 
most  nearly  connected  with  Rome,  and  those  least 
affected  by  its  influence,  which  was  as  yet  but  in 
considerable  in  the  East,  concur  in  the  statement 
that  Peter  was  a  joint  founder  of  that  Church,  and 
suffered  death  in  that  city.  What  the  early  Fathers 
do  not  assert,  and  indeed  implicitly  deny,  is  that 
Peter  was  the  scle  Founder  or  resident  head  of  that 
Church,  or  that  the  See  of  Rome  derived  from  him 
any  claim  to  supremacy :  at  the  utmost  they  place 
him  on  a  footing  of  equality  with  St.  Paul.P  That 
fact  is  sufficient  for  all  purposes  of  fair  controversy 
The  denial  of  the  statements  resting  on  such  evi. 
dence  seeus  almost  to  indicate  an  uneasy  conscious- 


s  On  the  other  hand,  the  all  but  unanimous  opinion  of 
pncient  commentators  that  Rome  is  designated  has  been 
adopted,  and  maintained  with  great  Ingenuity  and  some 
very  strong  arguments,  by  Schaff  (Geschichte  der  Christ- 
lichen  Kirche,  p.  300),  Neander,  Steiger,  De  Wette,  and 
Wieseler.  Among  ourselves,  Pearson  takes  the  name 
Babylon  literally,  though  with  some  difference  as  to  the 
place  BO  named. 

h  For  many  interesting  and  valuable  notices  see  Jost, 
Geschichte  des  Judenthums,  1.  337,  Ii.  127. 

*  He  gives  A.D.  42  In  the  CJtronicon  (i.  e.  in  the  Arme 
nian  text),  and  says  that  Peter  remained  at  Rome  twenty 
years.    In  this  he  Is  followed  by  Jerome,  C'aial.  c.  1  (who 
Kives  twenty-five  years),  and   by  most  Roman  Catholic 
writers. 

*  Thiersch  Is  the  only  exception.    He  belongs  to  the 
irvlngite  sect,  which  can  scarcely  be  called  Protestant. 
See  Vergvck,  p.  104.  His  ingenious  arguments  are  answered 
\yj  Lange,  Das  apostolische  ZeUalter,  p.  381,  and  by  Schaff, 
Kirchenyetchichtc,  p.  306 

•n  The  most  ingenious  attempt  is  that  of  Windischmanti, 
1'indicia.c  1'etrinae,  p.  112  f.  He  assuniu«  that  Fctcr  weut 


to  Home  immediately  after  his  deliverance  from  prison 
(Acts  xii.),  i.  e,  A.D.  44,  and  left  in  consequence  of  the 
Claudian  persecution  between  A.D.  49  and  51. 

11  /napTUpij<ras  eiropevflr)  til  TOV  o^eiXdfievoi'  TOTTOV  trft 
5of TJS  (1  Cor.  v.).  The  first  word  might  simply  mean  "  bore 
public  witness ;"  but  the  last  are  conclusive. 

o  One  of  the  most  striking  instances  of  the  hypercritical 
scepticism  of  the  Tubingen  school  is  Baur's  attempt  te 
move  that  this  distinct  and  positive  statement  was  a 
mere  inference  from  the  epistle  of  Clement.  The  inter 
course  between  the  two  churches  was  unbroken  from  the 
Apostles'  times. 

p  Coteler  has  collected  a  large  number  of  passages  from 
the  early  Fathers,  In  which  the  name  of  Paul  precede* 
that  of  Peter  (Fat.  Apost.  i.  414 :  see  also  Valesius,  Eus. 
H.  E.  UL  21).  Fabricius  observes  tnat  this  is  the  general 
usage  of  the  Greek  Fathers.  It  is  also  to  be  remarked 
that  when  the  Fathers  of  the  4tn  and  5th  centuries — for 
instance,  Chrysostom  and  Augustine— use  the  words 
o  'Airoo-ToXos,  or  Apostolut,  they  mean  Paul,  not  Petee, 
A  very  weighty  fact. 


80C 


PETER 


ness,  ti  uly  remarkable  in  those  who  believe  that 
they  have,  and  who  in  fact  really  have,  irrefragable 
grounds  for  rejecting  the  pretensions  of  the  Papacy. 

The  time  and  manner  of  the  Apostle's  martyrdom 
are  less  certain.  The  early  writers  imply,  or  dis 
tinctly  state,  that  he  suffered  at,  or  about  the  same 
time  (Dionysius,  icori  rbv  avrbv  xa.ip6v)  with  St. 
Paul,  and  in  the  Neronian  persecution.  All  agree 
that  he  was  crucified,  a  point  sufficiently  determined 
by  our  Lord's  prophecy.  Origen  (ap.  Eus.  iii.  1), 
who  could  easily  ascertain  the  fact,  and  though 
fanciful  in  speculation,  is  not  inaccurate  in  histo 
rical  matters,  says  that  at  his  own  request  he  was 
crucified  with  his  head  downwards.  This  statement 
was  generally  received  by  Christian  antiquity:  nor 
does  it  seem  inconsistent  with  the  fervent  tempera 
ment  and  deep  humility  of  the  Apostle  to  have  chosen 
such  a  death :  one,  moreover,  not  unlikely  to  have 
beeii  inflicted  in  mockery  by  the  instruments  of 
Nero's  wanton  and  ingenious  cruelty. 

The  legend  found  in  St.  Ambrose  is  interesting, 
and  may  have  some  foundation  in  fact.  When  the 
persecution  began,  the  Christians  at  Rome,  anxious 
to  preserve  their  great  teacher,  persuaded  him  to 
flee,  a  coui-se  which  they  had  Scriptural  warrant 
.to  recommend,  and  he  to  follow  ;  but  at  the  gate 
he  met  our  Lord.  Lord,  whither  goest  thou? 
asked  the  Apostle,  I  go  to  Rome,  was  the  answer, 
there  once  more  to  be  crucified.  St.  Peter  well 
understood  the  meaning  of  those  words,  returned  at 
once  and  was  crucified.i 

Thus  closes  the  Apostle's  life.  Some  additional 
facts,  not  perhaps  unimportant,  may  be  accepted  on 
early  testimony.  From  St.  Paul's  words  it  may 
be  inferred  with  certainty  4hat  he  did  not  give 
up  the  ties  of  family  life  when  he  forsook  hu>  tem 
poral  calling.  His  wife  accompauicH  him  in  his 
wanderings.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  a  wiiter  well 
informed  in  matters  of  ecclesiastical  interest,  and 
thoroughly  trustworthy,  says  (Strom.  ii;.  p.  448) 
that  "  Peter  and  Philip  had  children,  and  that  both 
took  about  their  wives,  who  acted  as  their  coad 
jutors  in  ministering  to  women  at  their  own  homes; 
by  their  means  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord  penetrated 
without  scandal  into  the  privacy  of  women's  apart 
ments."  Peter's  wife  is  believed,  on  the  same  au 
thority,  to  have  suffered  martyrdom,  and  to  have 
)>een  supported  in  the  hour  of  trial  by  her  husband's 
exhortation.  Some  critics  believe  that  she  is  referred 
to  in  the  salutation  at  the  end  of  the  first  Epistle 
of  St.  Peter.  The  Apostle  is  said  to  have  employed 
interpreters.  Basilides,  an  early  Gnostic,  professed 
to  derive  his  system  from  Glaucias,  one  of  these 
interpreters.  This  shows  at  least  the  impression, 
that  the  Apostle  did  not  understand  Greek,  or  did 
not  speak  it  with  fluency.  Of  far  more  importance 
is  the  statement  that  St.  Mark  wrote  his  gospel 
under  the  teaching  of  Peter,  or  that  he  embodied  in 


PKTKB 

that  gospel  tne  substance  of  our  Apostles  oral 
instructions.  This  statement  rests  upon  such  AD 
amount  of  external  evidence/  and  is  corroborated 
by  so  many  internal  indications,  that  they  would 
scarcely  be  questioned  in  the  absence  of  a  strong 
theological  bias.  The  fact  is  doubly  important  in 
its  bearings  upon  the  Gospel,  and  upon  the  cha 
racter  of  our  Apostle.  Chrysostom,  who  it>  fol 
lowed  by  the  most  judicious  commentators,  seems 
first  to  have  drawn  attention  to  the  fact,  that  in 
St.  Mark's  gospel  every  defect  in  Peter's  character 
and  conduct  is  brought  out  clearly,  without  the 
slightest  extenuation,  while  many  noble  acts  and 
peculiar  marks  of  favour  are  either  omitted,  01 
stated  with  far  less  force  than  by  any  other  Evan 
gelist.  Indications  of  St.  Peter's  influence,  even  in 
St.  Mark's  style,  much  less  pure  than  that  of  St. 
Luke,  are  traced  by  modem  criticism.1 

The  only  written  documents  which  St.  Peter  has 
left,  are  the  First  Epistle,  about  which  no  doubt  has 
ever  been  entertained  in  the  Church  ;  and  the  Second, 
which  has  both  in  early  times,  and  in  our  own,  been 
a  subject  of  earnest  controversy. 

FIKST  EPISTLE. — The  external  evidence  of  authen 
ticity  is  of  the  strongest  kind.  Referred  to  in  the 
Second  Epistle  (iii.  1) ;  known  to  Polycarp,  and  fre 
quently  alluded  to  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  5 
recognized  by  Papias  (ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  iii.  39); 
repeatedly  quoted  by  Irenaeus,  Clemens  of  Alex 
andria,  Tertullian,  and  Origen  ;  it  was  accepted 
without  hesitation  by  the  universal  Church.*  The 
internal  evidence  is  equally  strong.  Schwegler  the 
most  reckless,  and  De  Wette  the  most  vacillating 
of  modern  critics,  stand  almost  alone  in  their  denial 
of  its  authenticity. 

It  was  addressed  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor, 
which  had  for  the  most  part  been  founded  by  St. 
Paul  and  his  companions.  Supposing  it  to  have 
been  written  at  Babylon  (see  above),  it  is  a  pro 
bable  conjecture  that  Silvanus,  by  whom  it  was 
transmitted  to  those  Churches,  had  joined  St.  Peter 
after  a  tour  of  visitation,  either  in  pursuance 
of  instructions  from  St.  Paul,  then  a  prisoner  at 
Rome,  or  in  the  capacity  of  a  minister  of  high 
authority  in  the  Church,  and  that  his  account  of 
the  condition  of  the  Christians  in  those  districts  de 
termined  the  Apostle  to  write  the  Epistle.  From 
the  absence  of  personal  salutations,  and  other  indi 
cations,  it  may  perhaps  be  inferred  that  St.  Peter 
had  not  hitherto  visited  the  Churches ;  but  it  is 
certain  that  he  was  thoroughly  acquainted  both 
with  their  external  circumstances  and  spiritual  state. 
It  is  clear  that  Silvanus  is  not  regarded  bv  St. 
Peter  as  one  of  his  own  coadjutors,  but  as  one 
whose  personal  character  he  had  sufficient  oppor 
tunity  of  appreciating  (v.  12).  Such  a  testimonial 
us  the  Apostle  gives  to  the  soundness  of  his  faith, 
would  of  course  have  the  greatest  weight  with  the 


«  See  Titlemont,  Mem.  i.  p.  187,  and  555.  He  shows 
that  the  account  of  Ambrose  (which  is  not  to  be  found  in 
tcs  Bened.  edit.)  is  contrary  to  the  apocrypbal  legend. 
Later  writers  rather  value  it  as  reflecting  upon  St.  Peter's 
want  of  courage  or  constancy.  That  St.  Peter,  like  all 
good  men,  valued  his  life,  and  suffered  reluctantly,  may 
be  inferred  from  our  Lord's  words  (John  xxl.) ;  but  his 
flight  is  more  in  hvrutony  with  the  principles  of  a  Christian 
lhan  wilful  exposure  to  persecution.  Origen  refers  to  the 
words  then  said  to  have  been  spoken  by  our  Lord,  but 
quotes  an  apocryphal  work  (On  St.  John,  torn.  ii.). 

'  Papias  and  Clem.  Alex.,  referred  to  by  Eusebius, 
H.  K.  Ii.  15 ;  Tertullian,  c.  Marc.  iv.  c.  5 ;  Ireuaeus,  iii.  1, 
uxl  iv.  9.  Petavios  (on  Epiphanius,  p.  428)  observes  that 


Papias  derived  his  information  from  John  the  Presbyter. 
For  other  passages  see  Fabriclus  (BM.  Gr.  torn.  111.  132). 
The  slight  discrepancy  between  Eusebius  and  Papias  indi 
cates  independent  sources  of  information. 

•  Gieseler,  quoted  by  Davidson. 

*  No  importance  can  be  attached  to  the  omission  in  the 
mutilated  fragment  on  the  Canon,  published  by  Muratorl. 
See  Kouth,  Kelt.  Sac.  i.  396,  and  the  note  of  Freindaller, 
which  Routh  quotes,  p.  424.    Theodoras  of  MopsuestU, 
a  shrewd  but  rash  critic.  Is  said  to  have  rejected  all,  or 
some,  of  the  Catholic  epistles;  but  the  statement  is  ambi 
guous.    See  Davidson  (Int.  iii.  391).  whose  translation  is 
incorrect. 


PETER 

Hebrew  Christians,  lo  whom  the  Epistle  appears  to 
have  been  specially ,  though  not  exclusively  addressed.1 
The  assumption  that  Silvanus  was  employed  in  the 
composition  of  the  Epistle  is  not  home  out  hy  the 
expression,  "  hy  Silvanus,  I  have  written  unto  you," 
such  words  according  to  ancient  usage  applying  rather 
to  the  bearer  than  to  the  writer  or  amanuensis. 
Still  it  is  highly  probable  that  Silvanus,  considering 
his  rank,  character,  and  special  connexion  with  those 
Churches,  and  with  their  great  Apostle  and  founder, 
would  be  consulted  by  St.  Peter  throughout,  and 
that  they  would  together  read  the  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  especially  those  addressed  to  the  Churches  in 
those  districts:  thus,  partly  with  direct  intention, 
partly  it  may  be  unconsciously,  a  Pauline  colouring, 
amounting  in  passages  to  something  like  a  studied 
imitation  of  St.  Paul's  representations  of  Christian 
truth,  may  have  been  introduced  into  the  Epistle. 
It  has  been  observed  above  that  there  is  good  reason 
to  suppose  that  St.  Peter  was  in  the  habit  of  em 
ploying  an  interpreter ;  nor  is  there  anything  incon 
sistent  with  his  position  or  character  in  the  suppo 
sition  that  Silvanus,  perhaps  also  St.  Mark,  may 
have  assisted  him  in  giving  expression  to  the  thoughts 
suggested  to  him  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  We  have  thus 
at  any  rate,  a  not  unsatisfactory  solution  of  the 
difficulty  arising  from  correspondences  both  of  style 
and  modes  of  thought  in  the  writings  of  two 
Apostles  who  differed  so  widely  in  gifts  and  acquire 
ments." 

The  objects  of  the  Epistle,  as  deduced  from  its 
contents,  coincide  with  these  assumptions.  They 
were : — 1.  To  comfort  and  strengthen  the  Christians 
in  a  season  of  severe  trial.  2.  To  enforce  the  prac 
tical  and  spiritual  duties  involved  in  their  calling. 
3.  To  warn  them  against  special  temptations  attached 
to  their  position.  4.  To  remove  all  doubt  as  to  the 
soundness  and  cr-mpleteness  of  the  religious  system 
which  they  had  already  received.  Such  an  attesta 
tion  was  especially  needed  by  the  Hebrew  Christians, 
who  were  wont  to  appeal  from  St.  Paul's  authority 
to  that  of  the  elder  Apostles,  and  above  all  to  that 
of  Peter.  The  last,  which  is  perhaps  the  very  prin 
cipal  object,  is  kept  in  view  throughout  the  Epistle, 
and  is  distinctly  stated,  ch.  v.  ver.  12. 

These  objects  may  come  out  more  clearly  in  a 
brief  analysis. 

The  Epistle  begins  with  salutations  and  general 
description  of  Christians  (i.  1,  2),  followed  by  a 
statement  of  their  present  privileges  and  future  in 
heritance  (3-5) ;  the  bearings  of  that  statement 
upon  their  conduct  under  pei'secution  (6-9) ;  re 
ference,  according  to  the  Apostle's  wont,  to  pro- 
nhecies  concerning  both  the  sufferings  of  Christ  and 
the  salvation  of  His  people  (10-12)  ;  exhortations 
based  upon  those  promises  to  earnestness,  sobriety, 
hope,  obedience,  and  holiness,  as  results  of  know 
ledge  of  redemption,  of  atonement  by  the  blood  of 
Jesus,  and  of  the  resurrection,  and  as  proofs  of  spi 
ritual  regeneration  by  the  word  of  God.  Peculiar 
stress  is  laid  upon  the  cardinal  graces  of  faith,  hope, 
and  brotherly  love,  each  connected  with  and  rest 
ing  upon  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel 
(13-25).  Abstinence  from  the  spiritual  sins  most 


PETER 


807 


directly  opposed  to  those  graces  is  then  enforced 
(ii.  1)  ;  spiritual  growth  is  represented  as  dependent 
upon  the  nourishment  supplied  by  the  same  Word 
which  was  the  instrument  of  regeneration  (2,  3)  ; 
and  then,  by  a  change  of  metaphor,  Christians  are 
represented  as  a  spiritual  house;  collectively  and 
individually  as  living  stones,  and  royal  priests, 
elect,  and  brought  out  of  darkness  into  light  (4-10). 
This  portion  of  the  Epistle  is  singularly  rich  in 
thought  and  expression,  and  bears  the  peculiar 
impress  of  the  Apostle's  mind,  in  which  Judaism  is 
spiritualized,  and  finds  its  full  development  in  Christ. 
From  this  condition  of  Christians,  and  more  directly 
from  the  fact  that  they  are  thus  separated  from  the 
world,  pilgrims  and  sojourners,  St.  Peter  deduces 
an  entire  system  of  practical  and  relative  duties, 
self-control,  care  of  reputation,  especially  for  the 
sake  of  Gentiles ;  submission  to  all  constituted 
authorities;  obligations  of  slaves,  urged  with  re 
markable  earnestness,  and  founded  upon  the  example 
of  Christ  and  His  atoning  death  (ll-'/>5) ;  and  duties 
of  wives  and  husbands  (iii.  1-7).  Then  generally 
all  Christian  graces  are  commended,  those  which 
pertain  to  Christian  brotherhood,  and  those  which 
are  especially  needed  in  times  of  persecution,  gentle 
ness,  forbearance,  and  submission  to  injury  (8-17): 
all  the  precepts  being  based  on  imitation  of  Christ, 
with  warnings  from  the  history  of  the  deluge,  and 
with  special  reference  to  the  baptismal  covenant. 

In  the  following  chapter  (iv.  1,  2)  the  analogy 
between  the  death  of  Christ  and  spiritual  mortifi 
cation,  a  topic  much  dwelt  on  by  St.  Paul,  is  urged 
with  special  reference  to  the  sins  committed  by 
Christians  before  conversion,  and  habitual  to  the 
Gentiles.  The  doctrine  of  a  future  judgment  is 
inculcated,  both  with  reference  to  their  heathen 
persecutors  as  a  motive  for  endurance,  and  to  their 
own  conduct  as  an  incentive  to  sobriety,  watchful 
ness,  fervent  charity,  liberality  in  all  external  acts 
of  kindness,  and  diligent  discharge  of  all  spiritual 
duties,  with  a  view  to  the  glory  of  God  through 
Jesus  Christ  (3-11). 

This  Epistle  appears  at  the  first  draught  to  have 
terminated  here  with  the  doxology,  but  the  thought 
of  the  fiery  trial  to  which  the  Christians  were 
exposed  stirs  the  Apostle's  heart,  and  suggests  addi 
tional  exhortations.  Christians  are  taught  to  rejoice 
in  partaking  of  Christ's  sufferings,  being  thereby 
assured  of  sharing  His  glory,  which  even  in  this 
life  rests  upon  them,  and  is  especially  manifested 
in  their  innocence  and  endurance  of  persecution: 
judgment  must  come  first  to  cleanse  the  house  of 
God,  then  to  reach  the  disobedient :  suffering  accord 
ing  to  the  will  of  God,  they  may  commit  their  souls  to 
Him  in  well  doing  as  unto  a  faithful  Creator.  Faith 
and  hope  are  equally  conspicuous  in  these  exhorta 
tions.  The  Apostle  then  (v.  1-4)  addresses  the 
presbyters  of  the  Churches,  warning  them  as  one  of 
their  own  body,  as  a  witness  (fjuiprvs)  of  Christ's 
sufferings,  and  partaker  of  future  glory,  against 
negligence,  covetousness,  and  love  of  power :  the 
younger  members  he  exhorts  to  submission  and 
humility,  and  concludes  this  part  with  a  warning 
against  their  spiritual  enemy,  and  a  solemn  and 


a  This  Is  the  general  opinion  of  the  ablest  commentators. 
The  ancients  were  nearly  unanimous  in  holding  that  it 
wag  written  for  Hebrew  converts.  But  several  passages 
are  evidently  meai  t  for  Gentiles:  e.  g.  i.  14, 18 ;  li.  9, 10 ; 
Iii.  6 ;  Iv.  3.  Reuss,  an  original  and  able  writer,  Is  almost 
alone  in  the  opinion  that  it  was  addressed  chiefly  to 
Qcr.tila  converts  (p.  133).  He  takes  n-apoixoi  and  irop- 
eiriSjfuoi  as  =  Q^J,  Israelites  by  faith,  Dat  by  ceremonial 


observance  (nitAt  nach  dan  CuUut).     See  also  Weiss, 
Der  Petrinische  Lehrbegriff,  p.  28,  n.  2. 

*  The  question  has  been  thoroughly  discussed  by  Hug, 
Ewald,  Bertholdt,  Weiss,  and  other  critics.  The  moBt 
striking  resemblances  are  perhaps  1  Pet  1. 3,  with  Eph.  i.  3; 
ii.  18,  with  Eph.  vl.  5 ;  ill.  1,  with  Eph.  v.  22  ;  and  v.  5,  witii 
v.  21 :  but  allusions  nearly  as  distinct  arc  found  to  the  .Ro 
mans,  Corinthians,  Colossians,  Thessalonians ,  and  Philemoa 


308 


PETER 


most  benutiful  prayer  to  the  God  of  all  grace. 
Lastly,  he  mentions  Silvanus  with  special  com 
mendation,  and  states  very  distinctly  what  we  have 
seen  reason  to  believe  was  a  principal  object  of  the 
Epistle,  viz.,  that  the  principles  inculcated  by  their 
former  teachers  were  sound,  the  true  grace  of  God, 
to  which  they  are  exhorted  to  adhere.7  A  salutation 
from  the  Church  in  Babylon  and  from  St.  Mark, 
with  a  parting  benediction,  closes  the  Epistle. 

The  harmony  of  such  teaching  with  that  of  St. 
Paul  is  sufficiently  obvious,  nor  is  the  general  ar 
rangement  or  mode  of  discussing  the  topics  unlike 
that  of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles ;  still  the  indi 
cations  of  originality  and  independence  of  thought 
are  at  least  equally  conspicuous,  and  the  Epistle  is 
full  of  what  the  Gospel  narrative  and  the  discourses 
in  the  Acts  prove  to  have  been  characteristic  pecu 
liarities  of  St.  Peter.  He  dwells  more  frequently 
than  St.  Paul  upon  the  future  manifestation  of 
Christ,  upon  which  he  bases  nearly  all  his  exhoita- 
tions  to  patience,  self-control,  and  the  discharge  of 
all  Christian  duties.  There  is  not  a  shadow  of 
opposition  here,  the  topic  is  not  neglected  by  St. 
Paul,  nor  does  St.  Peter  omit  the  Pauline  argument 
from  Christ's  sufferings;  still  what  the  Gentians 
call  the  eschatological  element  predominates  over  all 
others.  The  Apostle's  mind  is  full  of  one  thought, 
the  realization  of  Messianic  hopes.  While  St.  Paul 
dwells  with  most  earnestness  upon  justification  by 
our  Lord's  death  and  merits,  and  concentrates  his 
energies  upon  the  Christian's  present  struggles,  St. 
Peter  fixes  his  eye  constantly  upon  the  future  coming 
of  Christ,  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  the  mani 
festation  of  the  promised  kingdom.  In  this  he  is 
the  true  representative  of  Israel,  moved  by  those 
feelings  which  were  best  calculated  to  enable  him 
to  do  his  work  as  the  Apostle  of  the  circumcision. 
Of  the  three  Christian  graces  hope  is  his  special 
theme.  He  dwells  much  on  good  works,  but  not 
so  much  because  he  sees  in  them  necessary  results 
of  faith,  or  the  complement  of  faith,  or  outward 
manifestations  of  the  spirit  of  love,  aspects  most 
prominent  in  St.  Paul,  St.  James,  and  St.  John,  as 
because  he  holds  them  to  be  tests  of  the  soundness 
and  stability  of  a  faith  which  rests  on  the  fact  of 
the  resurrection,  and  is  directed  to  the  future  in 
the  developed  form  of  hope. 

But  while  St.  Peter  thus  shows  himself  a  genuine 
Israelite,  his  teaching  is  directly  opposed  to  Judaizing 
tendencies.  He  belongs  to  the  school,  or,  to  speak 
more  correctly,  is  the  leader  of  the  school,  which  at 
once  vindicates  the  unity  of  the  Law  and  the  Gospel, 
and  puts  the  superiority  of  the  latter  on  its  true 
basis,  that  of  spiritual  development.  All  his  prac 
tical  injunctions  are  drawn  from  Christian,  not 
Jewish  principles,  from  the  precepts,  example,  life, 
death,  resurrection,  and  future  coming  of  Christ. 
The  Apostle  of  the  circumcision  says  not  a  word  in 
this  Epistle  of  the  perpetual  obligation,  the  dignity, 
or  even  the  bearings  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  He  is  full 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  his  style  and  thoughts  are 
charged  with  its  imagery,  but  he  contemplates  and 
applies  ;ts  teaching  in  the  light  of  the  Gospel ;  he 
regards  the  privileges  and  glory  of  the  ancient 
people  of  God  entirely  in  their  spiritual  develop 
ment  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  Only  one  who  had 
been  brought  up  as  a  Jew  could  have  had  his  spirit 
•o  impregnated  with  these  thoughts ;  only  one  who 
bad  been  thoroughly  emancipated  by  the  Spirit  of 


PETER 

Christ  could  have  risen  so  completely  above  the  prcju. 
dices  of  his  age  and  country.  This  is  a  point  of  gnat 
importance,  showing  how  utterly  opposed  the  teach 
ing  of  the  original  Apostles,  whom  St.  Peter  certainly 
represents,  was  to  that  Judaistic  narrowness  which 
speculative  rationalism  has  imputed  to  all  the  early 
followers  of  Christ,  with  the  exception  of  St.  Paul. 
There  are  in  tact  more  traces  of  what  are  called 
Judaizing  views,  more  of  sympathy  with  national 
hopes,  not  to  say  prejudices,  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  Galatians,  than  in  this  work.  In  this 
we  see  the  Jew  who  has  been  born  again,  and  ex 
changed  what  St.  Peter  himself  calls  the  unbear 
able  yoke  of  the  law  for  the  liberty  which  is  in 
Christ.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  admitted  that 
our  Apostle  is  far  from  tracing  his  principles  to 
their  origin,  and  from  drawing  out  their  conse 
quences  with  the  vigour,  spiritual  discernment, 
internal  sequence  of  reasoning,  and  systematic  com 
pleteness  which  are  characteristic  of  St.  Paul.1  A 
few  great  facts,  broad  solid  principles  on  which 
faith  and  hope  may  rest  securely,  with  a  spirit  of 
patience,  confidence,  and  love,  suffice  for  his  un- 
speculative  mind.  To  him  objective  truth  was  the 
main  thing ;  subjective  struggles  between  the  ir- 
tellect  and  spiritual  consciousness,  such  as  we  find 
in  St.  Paul,  and  the  intuitions  of  a  spirit  absorbed 
in  contemplation  like  that  of  St.  John,  though  not 
by  any  means  alien  to  St.  Peter,  were  in  him  wholly 
subordinated  to  the  practical  tendencies  of  a  simple 
and  energetic  character.  It  has  been  observed  with 
truth,  that  both  in  tone  and  in  form  the  teaching  of 
St.  Peter  bears  a  peculiarly  strong  .esemblance  to 
that  of  our  Lord,  in  discourses  bearing  directly  upon 
practical  duties.  The  great  value  of  the  Epistle 
to  believers  consists  in  this  resemblance ;  they  feel 
themselves  in  the  hands  of  a  safe  guide,  of  one  who 
will  help  them  to  trace  the  hand  of  their  Master  in 
both  dispensations,  and  to  confirm  and  expand  their 
faith. 

SECOND  EPISTLE. — The  Second  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter  presents  questions  of  far  greater  difficulty 
than  the  former.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
whether  we  consider  the  external  or  the  internal 
evidence,  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  demonstrate  its 
genuineness.  We  have  few  references,  and  none  o{ 
a  very  positive  character,  in  the  writings  of  the 
early  Fathers ;  the  style  differs  materially  from  that 
of  the  First  Epistle,  and  the  resemblance,  amount 
ing  to  a  studied  imitation,  between  this  Epistle 
and  that  of  St.  Jude,  seems  scarcely  recoucileable 
with  the  position  of  St.  Peter.  Doubts  as  to  its 
genuineness  were  entertained  by  the  giratest  critics 
of  the  early  Church;  in  the  time  of  Eusebius  it 
was  reckoned  among  the  disputed  books,  and  was 
not  formally  admitted  into  the  Canon  until  th« 
year  393,  at  the  Council  of  Hippo.  The  opinion  of 
critics  of  what  is  called  the  liberal  school,  including 
all  shades  from  Liicke  to  Baur,  has  been  decidedly 
unfavourable,  and  that  opinion  has  been  adopted  by 
some  able  writers  in  England.  There  are,  however, 
very  strong  reasons  why  this  verdict  should  be  recon 
sidered.  No  one  ground  on  which  it  rests  is  unassail 
able.  The  rejection  of  this  book  affects  the  authority 
of  the  whole  Canon,  which,  in  the  opinion  of  one  of 
the  keenest  and  least  scrupulous  critics  (Reuss)  of 
modern  Germany,  is  free  from  any  other  error.  It 
is  not  a  question  as  to  the  possible  authoiship  of  a 
work  like  that  of  the  Hebrews,  which  does  not  bear 


J  The  reading  OTIJT*  is  in  all  points  preferable  to  that 
of  the  ttxtut  ruxptui.  evrqicaTc. 


"  Thus  Kouss,  Pierre  n'a.  pas  de  sytttme.     S<«  alss 
Bruckner  and  Weiss,  pp.  14.  17- 


PETEB 

Ihe  writer's  name :  this  Epistle  must  either  be  dis 
missed  as  a  deliberate  forgery,  or  accepted  as  the 
last  production  of  the  first  among  the  Apostles  of 
Christ.  The  Church,  which  for  more  than  fourteen 
centuries  has  received  it,  has  either  been  imposed 
npon  by  what  must  in  that  case  be  regarded  as  a 
Satanic  device,  or  derived  from  it  spiritual  instruc 
tion  of  the  highest  importance.  If  received,  it  bears 
attestation  to  some  of  the  most  important  facts  in 
our  Lord's  history,  casts  light  upon  the  feelings  of 
the  Apostolic  body  in  relation  to  the  elder  Church 
and  to  each  other,  and,  while  it  confirms  many 
doctrines  generally  inculcated,  is  the  chief,  if  not  the 
only,  voucher  for  eschatological  views  touching  the 
destruction  of  the  framework  of  creation,  which  from 
an  early  period  have  been  prevalent  in  the  Church. 

The  contents  of  the  Epistle  seem  quite  in  accord 
ance  with  its  asserted  origin. 

The  customary  opening  salutation  is  followed  by 
an  enumeration  of  Christian  blessings  and  exhortation 
to  Christian  duties,  with  special  reference  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  truth  which  had  been  already 
communicated  to  the  Church  (i.  1-13).  Referring 
then  to  his  approaching  death,  the  Apostle  assigns 
as  grounds  of  assurance  for  believers  his  own  per 
sonal  testimony  as  eye-witness  of  the  transfiguration, 
and  the  sure  word  of  prophecy,  that  is  the  testimony 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  (14-21).  The  danger  of  being 
misled  by  false  prophets  is  dwelt  upon  with  great 
earnestness  throughout  the  second  chapter,  their  cove- 
tousness  and  gross  sensuality  combined  with  pretences 
to  spiritualism,  in  short  all  the  permanent  and 
fundamental  characteristics  of  Antinomianism,  are 
described,  while  the  overthrow  of  all  opponents  of 
Christian  truth  is  predicted  (ii.  1-29)  in  connexion 
with  prophecies  touching  the  second  advent  of  Christ, 
the  destruction  of  the  world  by  fire,  and  the  promise 
of  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth  wherein  dwelleth 
righteousness.  After  an  exhortation  to  attend  to 
St.  Paul's  teaching,  in  accordance  with  the  less 
explicit  admonition  in  the  previous  Epistle,  and  an 
emphatic  warning,  the  Epistle  closes  with  the  cus 
tomary  ascription  of  glory  to  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ. 

We  may  now  state  briefly  the  answers  to  the 
objections  above  stated. 

1.  With  regard  to  its  recognition  by  the  early 
Church,  we  observe  that  it  was  not  likely  to  be 
quoted  frequently ;  it  was  addressed  to  a  portion 
of  the  Church  not  at  that  time  much  in  intercourse 
with  the  rest  of  Christendom:11  the  documents  of 
the  primitive  Church  are  far  too  scanty  to  give  weight 
to  the  argument  (generally  a  questionable  one)  from 
omission.  Although  it  cannot  be  proved  to  have 
been  referred  to  by  any  author  earlier  than  Origen, 
yet  passages  from  Clement  of  Rome,  Hermas,  Justin 
Martyr,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  and  Irenaeus,  suggest 
an  acquaintance  with  this  Epistle : b  to  these  may  be 
added  a  probable  reference  in  the  Martyrdom  of 
Ignatius,  quoted  by  Westcott,  On  the  Canon,  p.  87, 
and  another  in  the  Apology  of  Melito,  published  in 
Syriac  by  Dr.  Cureton.  It  is  also  distinctly  stilted 
by  Eusebius,  H.  E.  vi.  14,  and  by  Photius,  cod. 


PETEK 


809 


lot),  that  Clement  ol  Alexandria  wrcte  a  com 
mentary  on  all  the  disputed  Epistles,  in  which  thi» 
was  certainly  included.  It  is  quoted  twice  by 
Ongen,  but  unfortunately  in  the  translation  of 
Ruffinus,  which  cannot  be  relied  upon.  Didymus 
refers  to  it  very  frequently  in  his  great  work  ou  the 
Trinity.  It  was  certainly  included  in  the  collection 
of  Catholic  Epistles  known  to  Eusebius  and  Origen, 
a  very  important  point  made  out  by  Olshausen, 
Opuscula  Theol.  p.  29.  It  was  probably  known 
in  the  third  century  in  different  parts  of  the  Chris 
tian  world :  in  Cappadocia  to  Firmilian,  in  Africa 
to  Cyprian,  in  Italy  to  Hippolytus,  in  Phoenicia  to 
Methodius.  A  large  number  of  passages  has  been 
collected  by  Dieblein,  which,  though  quite  insuffi 
cient  to  prove  its  reception,  add  somewhat  to  the 
probability  that  it  was  read  by  most  of  the  early 
Fathers.  The  historical  evidence  is  certainly  incon 
clusive,  but  not  such  as  to  require  or  to  warrant  the 
rejection  of  the  Epistle.  The  silence  of  the  Fathers 
is  accounted  for  more  easily  than  its  admission  into 
the  Canon  after  the  question  as  to  its  genuineness 
had  been  raised.  It  is  not  conceivable  that  it 
should  have  been  received  without  positive  attesta 
tion  from  the  Churches  to  which  it  was  first  ad 
dressed.  We  know  that  the  autographs  of  Apostolic 
writings  were  preserved  with  care.  It  must  also  be 
observed  that  all  motive  for  forgery  is  absent.  This 
Epistle  does  not  support  any  hierarchical  preten 
sions,  nor  does  it  bear  upon  any  controversies  of  a 
later  age. 

2.  The  difference  of  style  may  be  admitted.  The 
only  question  is,  whether  it  is  greater  than  can  be 
satisfactorily  accounted  for,  supposing  that  tne 
Apostle  employed  a  different  person  as  his  amanu 
ensis.  That  the  two  Epistles  could  not  have 
been  composed  and  written  by  the  same  person  is 
a  point  scarcely  open  to  doubt.  Olshausen,  one  of 
the  fairest  and  least  prejudiced  of  critics,  points 
out  eight  discrepancies  of  style,  some  perhaps  un 
important,  but  others  almost  conclusive,  the  most 
important  being  the  appellations  given  to  our 
Saviour,  and  the  comparative  absence  of  references 
to  the  Old  Testament  in  this  Epistle.  If,  however, 
we  admit  that  some  time  intervened  between  the 
composition  of  the  two  works,  that  in  writing  the 
first  the  Apostle  was  aided  by  Silvanus,  and  in 
the  second  by  another,  perhaps  St.  Mark,  that  the 
circumstances  of  the  Churches  addressed  by  him 
were  considerably  changed,  and  that  the  second  was 
written  in  greater  haste,  not  to  speak  of  a  possible 
decay  of  faculties,  the  differences  may  be  regarded 
as  insufficient  to  justify  more  than  hesitation  in 
admitting  its  genuineness.  The  resemblance  U 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  may  be  admitted  without 
affecting  our  judgment  unfavourably.  Supposing, 
as  some  eminent  critics  have  believed,  that  this 
Epistle  was  copied  by  St.  Jude,  we  should  have  the 
strongest  possible  testimony  to  its  authenticity  ;  * 
but  if,  on  the  other  hand,  we  accept  the  more 
general  opinion  of  modern  critics,  that  the  writor 
of  this  Epistle  copied  St.  Jude,  the  following  con 
siderations  have  great  weight.  It  seems  quite 


a  Eitscbl's  observations  on  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  are 
at  least  equally  applicable  to  this.  It  would  be,  compa 
ratively  speaking,  little  known  to  Gentile  converts,  while 
the  Jewish  party  gradually  died  out,  and  was  not  at  any 
time  mixed  up  with  the  general  movement  of  the  Church. 
The  only  literary  documents  of  the  Hebrew  Christians 
were  written  by  Ebionitot,,  to  whom  this  Epistle  would  be 
uiost  distasteful.  Had  the  book  not  been  supported  by 


strong  external  credentials,  its  general  reception  or  circu 
lation  seem  unaccountable. 

t>  The  passages  are  quoted  by  Guerike,  EMeitung, 
p.  462. 

«  See  Dr.  Wordsworth's  Commentary  on  2  Peter.  HU 
chief  ground  is  that  St.  Peter  predicts  a  state  of  attain 
which  St.  Jude  describes  as  actually  existing.  A  very 
strong  ground,  admitting  the  authenticity  of  buth  Kpfetlee 


310 


PETER 


incredible  that  a  forger,  personating  the  chief  among 
Uic  Apostles,  should  select  the  least  important  of 
nil  the  Apostolical  writings  for  imitation ;  whereas 
it  is  probable  that  St.  Peter  might  choose  to  give 
the  stamp  of  his  personal  authority  to  a  document 
bearing  so  powerfully  upon  practical  and  doctrinal 
errors  in  the  Churches  which  he  addressed.  Con 
sidering,  too,  the  characteristics  of  our  Apostle, 
his  humility,  his  impressionable  mind,  so  open  to 
personal  influences,  and  his  utter  forgetfulness  of 
self  when  doing  his  Master's  work,  we  should  hardly 
be  surprised  to  find  that  part  of  the  Epistle  which 
treats  of  the  same  subjects  coloured  by  St.  Jude's 
style.  Thus  in  the  First  Epistle  we  find  everywhere, 
especially  in  dealing  with  kindred  topics,  distinct 
traces  of  St.  Paul's  influence.  This  hypothesis  has 
moreover  the  advantage  of  accounting  for  the  most 
striking,  if  not  all  the  discrepancies  of  style  between 
the  two  Epistles. 

3.  The  doubts  as  to  its  genuineness  appear  to 
have  originated  with  the  critics  of  Alexandria, 
where,  however,  the  Epistle  itetlf  was  formally 
recognised  at  a  very  early  period.  Those  doubts, 
however,  were  not  quite  so  strong  as  they  are  now 
generally  represented.  The  three  greatest  names 
of  that  school  may  be  quoted  on  either  side.  On 
the  one  hand  there  were  evidently  external  cre 
dentials,  without  which  it  could  never  have  ob 
tained  circulation ;  on  the  other,  strong  subjective 
impressions,  to  which  these  critics  attached  scarcely 
less  weight  than  some  modern  inquirers.  They  rested 
entirely,  so  far  as  can  be  ascertained,  on  the  difference 
of  style.  The  opinions  of  modem  commentators  may 
be  summed  up  under  three  heads.  Many,  as  we  have 
seen,  reject  the  Epistle  altogether  as  spurious,  sup 
posing  it  to  have  been  directed  against  forms  of 
Gnosticism  prevalent  in  the  early  part  of  the  second 
century.  A  few d  consider  that  the  first  and  last 
chapters  were  written  by  St.  Peter  or  under  his  dic 
tation,  but  that  the  second  chapter  was  interpolated. 
So  far,  however,  is  either  of  these  views  from  repre 
senting  the  general  results  of  the  latest  investigations, 
that  a  majority  of  names,"  including  nearly  all  the 
writers  of  Germany  opposed  to  Rationalism,  who  in 
point  of  learning  and  ability  are  at  least  upon  a  par 
with  their  opponents,  may  be  quoted  in  support  of 
the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  this  Epistle. 
The  statement  that  all  critics  of  eminence  and  im 
partiality  concur  in  rejecting  it  is  simply  untrue, 
unless  it  be  admitted  that  a  belief  in  the  reality  of 
objective  revelation  is  incompatible  with  critical 
impartiality,  that  belief  being  the  only  common 
point  between  the  numerous  defenders  of  the 
Oanonicity  of  this  document.  If  it  were  a  question 
now  to  be  decided  for  the  first  time  upon  the 
external  or  internal  evidences  still  accessible,  it  may 
be  admitted  that  it  would  be  far  more  difficult 
to  maintain  this  than  any  other  document  in  the 
New  Testament ;  but  the  judgment  of  the  early 
Church  is  not  to  be  reversed  without  far  stronger 
arguments  than  have  been  adduced,  more  especially 
as  the  Epistle  is  entirely  free  from  objections  which 
might  be  brought,  with  more  show  of  reason,  against 
j'Jiers  now  all  but  universally  received  :  inculcating 
no  new  doctrine,  bearing  on  no  controversies  of  post- 


FETER 

Apostolical  origin,  supporting  no  hierarchical  inno 
vations,  but  simple,  earnest,  devout,  ai.d  eminently 
practical,  full  of  the  characteristic  graces  of  the 
Apostle,  who,  as  we  believe,  bequeathed  this  la>t 
proof  of  laith  and  hope  to  the  Churcn. 


Some  Apocryphal  writings  of  very  early  date 
obtained  currency  in  the  Church  as  containing  the 
substance  of  the  Apostle's  teaching.  The  fitigments 
which  remain  are  not  of  much  importance,  nor 
could  they  be  conveniently  discussed  in  this  notice. 
The  Preaching  (icfipvypa)  or  Doctrine  (5i8ax^)  ol 
Peter,'  probably  identical  with  a  work  called  th« 
Preaching  of  Paul,  or  of  Paul  and  Peter,  quoted  by 
Lactantius,  may  have  contained  some  traces  of  the 
Apostle's  teaching,  if,  as  Grabe,  Ziegler,  and  others 
supposed,  it  was  published  soon  after  his  death. 
The  passages,  however,  quoted  by  Clement  of  Alex 
andria  are  for  the  most  part  wholly  unlike  St. 
Peter's  mode  of  treating  doctrinal  or  practical  sub- 
jects.s  Another  work,  called  the  Revelation  of  Peter 
(airoKa\vtyis  TleTpov),  was  held  in  much  esteem 
for  centuries.  It  was  commented  on  by  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  quoted  by  Theodotus  in  the  Eclogue, 
named  together  with  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  in 
the  Fragment  on  the  Canon  published  by  Muratori 
(but  with  the  remark,  "  quam  quidam  ex  nostris 
legi  in  Ecclesia  noluut "),  and  according  to  Sozo- 
men  (E.  H.  vii.  19)  was  read  once  a  year  in  some 
Churches  of  Palestine.  It  is  said,  but  not  on  good 
authority,  to  have  been  preserved  among  the  Coptic 
Christians.  Eusebius  looked  on  it  as  spurious,  but 
not  of  heretic  origin.  From  the  fragments  and 
notices  it  appears  to  have  consisted  chiefly  of  denun 
ciations  against  the  Jews,  and  predictions  of  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem,  and  to  have  been  of  a  wild  fanatical 
character.  The  most  complete  account  of  this 
curious  work  is  given  by  Liicke  in  his  general 
introduction  to  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  p.  47. 

The  legends  of  the  Clementines  are  wholly  devoid 
of  historical  worth ;  but  from  those  fictions,  ori 
ginating  with  an  obscure  and  heretical  sect,  havt 
been  derived  some  of  the  most  mischievous  specula 
tions  of  modern  rationalists,  especially  as  regards 
the  assumed  antagonism  between  St.  Paul  and  the 
earlier  Apostles.  It  is  important  to  observe,  how 
ever,  that  in  none  of  these  spurious  documents,  which 
belong  undoubtedly  to  the  two  first  centuries,  are 
there  any  indications  that  our  Apostle  was  regarded 
as  in  any  peculiar  sense  connected  with  the  Church 
or  see  of  Rome,  or  that  he  exercised  or  claimed  any 
authority  over  the  Apostolic  body,  of  which  he  was 
the  recognised  leader  or  representative.  [F.  C.  C.~] 


[CEPHAS  (Kij^Sj)  occurs  in  the  following  pu- 
sages :  John  i.  42  ;  1  Cor.  i.  12 ;  iii.  22,  ix.  5,  xv.  5 ; 
Gal.  ii.  9,  i.  18,  ii.  10,  14  (the  last  three  according 
to  the  text  of  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf ).  Cephas 
is  the  Chaldee  word  Cepha,  KB*3,  itself  a  corrup 
tion  of,  or  derivation  from,  the  Hebrew  Ceph, 
P|3,  "  a  rock,"  a  rare  word,  found  only  in  Job  xxx.  6, 
and  Jer.  iv.  29.  It  must  have  been  the  word  actually 
pronounced  by  our  Lord  in  Matt.  xvi.  18,  and  on 
subsequent  occasions  when  the  Apostle  was  addressed 


*  E.  g.  Bunsen.  Ullmann,  and  Lange. 

•  Nitzsche,  Flatt,  Dahlman,  Windischmann,  Heyden- 
reteh,  Guerike,  Pott,  Augusti,  OlshauseU  TWersch,  Stier, 
and  Dietlein. 

'  The  two  names  are  believed  by  rjirics  —  f .  e.  Cave, 
Urobe,  Ittig.  Mill,  &c.  — to  bel&ng  to  Uie  &omc  wcrk.    Sec 


Schliemann,  Die  C'lcmtntiwn,  p.  253. 

g  Ruffinns  and  Jerome  allude  to  a  work  which  they  call 
"  .indicium  Petri ;"  for  which  Cave  accounts  by  a  happy 
conjecture,  adopted  by  Nitzsche,  Mayerhoff;  Reuss,  and 
Schliemanu,  that  Ruffinus  found  xpiia  for  »u;pi/yM<n  and 
read  xptfui. 


PETHAHIAH 

y  Him  or  other  Hebrews  by  his  new  name.  By  it 
he  was  known  to  the  Corinthian  Christians.  In  the 
ancient  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Test.  (Peshito), 
it  is  uniformly  found  where  the  Greek  has  Petros. 
When  we  consider  that  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles 
spoke  Chaldee,  and  that  therefore  (as  already  re 
marked)  the  Apostle  must  have  been  always  addressed 
as  Cephas,  it  is  certainly  remarkable  that  through 
out  the  Gospels,  no  less  than  97  times,  with  one 
exception  only,  the  name  should  be  given  in  the 
Greek  form,  which  was  of  later  introduction,  and 
unintelligible  to  Hebrews,  though  intelligible  to  the 
far  wider  Gentile  world  among  which  the  Gospel 
was  about  to  begin  its  course.  Even  in  St.  Mark, 
where  more  Chaldee  words  and  phrases  are  retained 
than  in  all  the  other  Gospels  put  together,  this  is 
the  case.  It  is  as  if  in  our  English  Bibles  the  name 
were  uniformly  given,  not  Peter,  but  Rock ;  and  it 
suggests  that  the  meaning  contained  in  the  appel 
lation  is  of  more  vital  importance,  and  intended  to 
be  more  carefully  seized  at  each  recurrence,  than 
we  are  apt  to  recollect.  The  commencement  of 
the  change  from  the  Chaldee  name  to  its  Greek 
synonym  is  well  marked  in  the  interchange  of  the  two 
in  Gal.  ii.  7,  8, 9  (Stanley,  Apostolic  Age,  1 16,  7).] 

PETHAHI'AH  (rpnn^  :  *erata. ;  Alex.  *e- 
Otta:  Phettia).  1.  A  priest,  over  the  19th  course 
in  the  reign  of  David  (1  Chr.  xxiv.  16). 

2.  (*€0efa:  Phatala,  Phathahia.}  A  Levite  in 
the  time  of  Ezra,  who  had  married  a  foreign  wife 
(Ezr.  x.  23).     He  is  probably  the  same  who,  with 
others  of  his  tribe,  conducted  the  solemn  service  on 
the  occasion  of  the  fast,  when  "  the  seed  of  Israel 
separated  themselves  from  all  strangers"  (Neh.  ix. 
5),  though  his  name  does  not  appear  among  those 
who  sealed  the  covenant  (Neh.  x.). 

3.  (*aflafa:  Phathathia.}  The  son  of  Mesheza- 
beel  and  descendant  of  Zerah   the   son  of  Judah 
(Neh.  xi.  24),  who  was  "  at  the  king's  hand  in  all 
matters  concerning  the  people."     The  "king"  here 
is  explained  by  Kashi  to  be  Darius:  "he  was  an 
associate  in  the  counsel  of  the  king  Darius  for  all 
matters  affecting  the  people,  to  speak  to  the  king 
concerning  them." 

PETHO'R  ("fins  :  QaOovpt),*  town  of  Meso 
potamia  where  Balaam  resided  (Num.  xxii.  5  ;  Deut. 
xxiii.  4).  Its  position  is  wholly  unknown.  [W.  L.  B.] 

PETH'UEL  (WinS:  Ba0ot>M :  Phatuel). 
The  father  of  the  prophet  Joel  (Joel  i.  1). 

PEULTHA'I  (»n^  :  *e\a.ei;  Alex.  *OA- 
Aofli :  Phollathi).  Properly  "  Peullethai  ;"  the 
eighth  son  of  Obed-edom  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  5). 

PHA'ATH  MO'AB  (*0a\ei  Ma>a0e?s  ;  Alex. 
*aa#  Ma>aj3  :  Phocmo),  1  Esd.  v.  11=PAHATH 
MOAU.  In  this  passage  the  number  (2812)  agrees 
with  that  in  Ezra,  and  disagrees  with  Nehemiah. 

PHACAE'ETH  (*axop«'0;  Alex.  *a/cape'0  : 
Sachareth]  —  PoCHERETll  of  Zebaim  (1  Esd.  v.  34). 

PHAI'SUB  (Qaiffovp  ;  Alex.  $aicrov :  Fosere). 
PASIIUR,  the  priestly  family  (1  Esdr.  ix.  22). 

PHALDAI'US  (*oX8a?os  :  Faldeus)  =  PK- 
DAIAH  4  (1  Esdr.  ix.  44). 

PHALE'AS  (*aAai'os  :  ffellu)  =  PADON  (1 
Esdr.  v.  29). 

PHA'LEC  (*aA.« K  :  Phalegj.  PELEG  the  son 
n(  Kber  (Luke  iii.  35). 

PIIAL'LU  (N-173  :  *aAAo's  :  Alex.  tpa\\ov5 : 


PHARAOH  811 

Phallu).   Pallu  the  son  of  Reuben  w  so  called  in  the 
A.  V.  of  Gen.  xlvi.  9. 

PHAL'TI  (»B^B:  *«\rl:  Phalli).  The  son 
of  Laish  of  Gallim,  to  whom  Saui  gave  Michhl  in 
marriage  after  his  mad  jealousy  had  driven  David 
forth  as  an  outlaw  (1  Sam.  xxv.  44).  Iu  2  Sam. 
iii.  15  he  is  called  PHALTIEL.  Ewald  (Gesch.  iii. 
129)  suggests  that  this  forced  marriage  wan  a  piece 
of  policy  on  the  part  of  Saul  to  attach  Phalti  to  hig 
house.  With  the  exception  of  this  brief  mention 
of  his  name,  and  the  touching  little  episode  in 
2  Sam.  iii.  16,  nothing  more  is  heard  of  Phalti. 
Michal  is  there  restored  to  David.  "  Her  husband 
went  with  her  along  weeping  behind  her  to  Bahu- 
rim,"  and  there,  in  obedience  to  Abner's  abrupt 
command,  "  Go,  return,"  he  turns  and  disappears 
from  the  scene. 

PHAL'TIEL  (ta'B^B  :  *O\T^A.:  Phaltiel}. 
The  same  as  PHALTI  (2  Sam.  iii.  15). 

PHAN'UEL  ($twoirfi\ :  Phanuel).  The  father 
of  Anna,  the  prophetess  of  the  tribe  of  Aser  (Luke 
ii.  36). 

PHAR'ACIM  (*opaKe/x;  Alex.  GapaKeift: 
Fanon).  The  "  sons  of  Pharacim  "  were  among  the 
servants  of  the  Temple  who  returned  with  Zerub- 
bahel,  according  to  the  list  in  1  Esdr.  v.  SI.  No 
corresponding  name  is  found  in  the  parallel  narra 
tives  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

PHA'RAOH  (riyiB:  *apad>:  Pharao),  the 
common  title  of  the  native  kings  of  Egypt  in  the 
Bible,  corresponding  to  P-RA  or  PH-RA,  "the 
Sun,"  of  the  hieroglyphics.  This  identification, 
respecting  which  there  can  be  no  doubt,  is  due  to  the 
Duke  of  Northumberland  and  General  Felix  (Rawlin- 
son's  Herod,  ii.  p.  293).  It  has  been  supposed  that; 
the  original  was  the  same  as  the  Coptic  OYDOj 
"the  king,"  with  the  article,  TUOTpOj 
CpOTpO  ;  but  this  word  appears  not  to  have 
been  written,  judging  from  the  evidence  of  the 
Egyptian  inscriptions  and  writings,  in  the  times  to 
which  the  Scriptures  refer.  The  conjecture  arose 
from  the  idea  that  Pharaoh  must  signify,  instead 
of  merely  implying,  "  king,"  a  mistake  occasioned 
by  a  too  implicit  confidence  in  the  exactness  of 
ancient  writers  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  6,  §2  ;  Euseb. 
ed.  Seal.  p.  20,  v.  1). 

By  the  ancient  Egyptians  the  king  was  called  "  the 
Sun,"  as  the  representative  on  earth  of  the  god  RA, 
or  "  the  Sun."  It  was  probably  on  this  account 
that  more  than  one  of  the  Pharaohs  bear  in  the 
nomen,  in  the  second  royal  ring,  the  title  "  ruler  ol 
Heliopolis,"  the  city  of  Ra,  HAK-AN,  as  in  the  case 
of  Rameses  III.,  a  distinction  shared,  though  in  an 
inferior  degree,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  frequency 
of  the  corresponding  title,  by  Thebes,  but  by  scarcely 
any  other  city.*  One  of  the  most  common  regal  titles, 
that  which  almost  always  precedes  the  nomen,  is 
"  Son  of  the  Sun,"  SA-HA.  The  prenomen,  in  the 
first  royal  ring,  regularly  commences  with  a  disk, 
the  character  which  represents  the  sun,  and  this 
name,  which  the  king  took  on  his  accession,  thus 
comprises  the  title  Pharaoh :  for  instance,  the  pre 
nomen  of  Psammitichus  II.,  the  successor  of  Necho, 
is  RA-NUFR-H  AT,  "  Pharaoh  "  or  "  Ra  of  the  good 
heart."  In  the  period  before  the  vith  dynasty,  when 


•  The  kings  who  bear  the  former  title  are  chiefly  of  the 
name  Rameses,  "  Born  of  Ra,"  the  god  of  Heliopolis,  whicli 
tenders  the  title  especially  appropriate. 


812 

there  was  out  a  single  ring,  the  use  of  the  word  RA 
was  not  invariable,  many  names  not  commencing 
with  it,  as  SHUKU  or  KHUFU,  the  king  of  the  ivth 
dynasty  who  built  the  Great  Pyramid.  It  is  diffi 
cult  to  determine,  in  rendering  these  names,  whether 
the  king  or  the  divinity  be  meant :  perhaps  in  royal 
names  no  distinction  is  intended,  both  Pharaoh 
and  Ra  being  meant. 

The  word  Pharaoh  occurs  generally  in  the  Bible, 
and  always  in  the  Pentateuch,  with  no  addition,  for 
the  king  of  Egypt.  Sometimes  the  title  "  king  of 
Egypt "  follows  it,  and  in  the  cases  of  the  last  two 
native  kings  mentioned,  the  proper  name  is  added, 
Pharaoh-Necho,  Pharaoh-Hophra,  with  sometimes 
the  further  addition  "king,  or  the  king,  of 
Egypt."  It  is  remarkable  that  Shishak  and  Zerah 
(if,  as  we  believe,  the  second  were  a  king  of  Egypt), 
and  the  Ethiopians  So  and  Tirhakah,  are  never  dis 
tinctly  called  Pharaoh  (the  mention  of  a  Pharaoh 
during  the  time  of  the  Ethiopians  probably  referring 
to  the  Egyptian  Sethos),  and  that  the  latter  were 
foreigners  and  the  former  of  foreign  extraction. 

As  several  kings  are  only  mentioned  fcy  the  title 
"  Pharaoh  "  in  the  Bible,  i{  is  important  to  endea 
vour  to  discriminate  them.  We  shall  therefore  here 
state  what  is  known  respecting  them  in  order, 
adding  an  account  of  the  two  Pharaohs  whose  proper 
names  follow  the  title. 

1.  The  Pharaoh  of  Abraham. — The  Scripture 
narrative  does  not  afford  us  any  clear  indications 
for  the  identification  of  the  Pharaoh  of  Abraham. 
At  the  time  at  which  the  patriarch  went  into 
Egypt,  according  to  Hales's  as  well  as  Ussher's 
chronology,  it  is  generally  held  that  the  country, 
or  at  least  Lower  Egypt,  was  ruled  by  the  Shepherd 
kings,  of  whom  the  first  and  most  powerful  line  was 
the  xvth  dynasty,  the  undoubted  territories  of  which 
would  be  first  entered  by  one  coming  from  the  east. 
Manetho  relates  that  Salatis,  the  head  of  this  line, 
established  at  Avaris,  the  Zoan  of  the  Bible,  on  the 
eastern  frontier,  what  appears  to  have  been  a  great 
permanent  camp,  at  which  he  resided  for  part  of 
each  year.  [ZOAN.]  It  is  noticeable  that  Sarah 
seems  to  have  been  taken  to  Pharaoh's  house  imme 
diately  after  the  coming  of  Abraham ;  and  if  this 
were  not  so,  yet,  on  account  of  his  flocks  and  herds, 
the  patriarch  could  scarcely  have  gone  beyond  the 
part  of  the  country  which  was  always  more  or 
less  occupied  by  nomad  tribes.  It  is  also  probable 
that  Pharaoh  gave  Abraham  camels,  for  we  read, 
that  Pharaoh  "entreated  Abram  well  for  Sarah's 
sake:  and  he  had  sheep,  and  oxen,  and  he  asses, 
and  menservants,  and  maidservants,  and  she  asses, 
and  camels"  (Gen.  xii.  16),  where  it  appears  that 
this  property  was  the  gift  of  Pharaoh,  and  the  cir 
cumstance  that  the  patriarch  afterwards  held  an 
Egyptian  bondwoman,  Hagar,  confirms  the  infer 
ence.  If  so,  the  present  of  camels  would  argue 
that  this  Pharaoh  was  a  Shepherd  king,  for  no  evi 
dence  has  been  found  in  the  sculptures,  paintings, 
and  inscriptions  of  Egypt,  that  in  the  Pharaonic 
ages  the  camel  was  used,  or  even  known  there,b 
and  this  omission  can  be  best  explained  by  the  sup 
position  that  the  animal  was  hateful  to  the  Egyptians 
as  of  great  value  to  their  enemies  the  Shepherds. 

The  date  at  which  Abraham  visited  Egypt  (ac 
cording  to  the  chronology  we  hold  most  probable), 
was  about  B.C.  2081,  which  would  accord  with  the 


h  It  has  been  erroneously  asserted  that  a  hieroglyphic 
representing  the  head  and  ucck  of  the  camel  is  fouud  on 
monuments. 


PHARAOH 

timt  of  Salatis,  the  head  of  the  xvth  dynasty,  accord- 
ing  to  our  reckoning. 

2.  The  Pharaoh  of  Joseph. — The  history  of  Joseph 
contains  many  particulars  as  to  the  Pharaoh  whose 
minister  he  became.  We  first  near  of  him  as  the 
arbitrary  master  who  imprisoned  his  two  servants, 
and  then,  on  his  birthday-feast,  reinstated  the  one  and 
hanged  the  other.  We  next  read  of  his  dreams,  how 
he  consulted  the  magicians  and  wise  men  of  Egypt, 
and  on  their  failing  to  interpret  them,  by  the  advice 
of  the  chief  of  the  cupbearers,  sent  for  Joseph  from 
the  prison,  and  after  he  had  heard  his  inteipretation 
and  counsel,  chose  him  as  governor  of  the  country, 
taking,  as  it  seems,  the  advice  of  his  servants.  The 
sudden  advancement  of  a  despised  stranger  to  the 
highest  place  under  the  king  is  important  as  show 
ing  his  absolute  power  and  manner  of  governing. 
From  this  time  we  read  more  of  Joseph  than  of 
Pharaoh.  We  are  told,  however,  that  Pharaoh  libe 
rally  received  Joseph's  kindred,  allowing  them  to 
dwell  in  the  land  of  Goshen,  where  he  had  cattle. 
The  last  mention  of  a  Pharaoh  in  Joseph's  history 
is  hi  the  account  of  the  death  and  burial  of  Jacob. 
It  has  been  supposed  from  the  following  passage 
that  the  position  of  Joseph  had  then  become  changed. 
"  Joseph  spake  unto  the  house  of  Pharaoh,  saying, 
If  now  I  have  found  grace  in  your  eyes,  speak, 
I  pray  you,  in  the  ears  of  Pharaoh,  saying,  My 
father  made  me  swear,  saying,  Lo,  I  die:  in  my 
grave  which  I  have  digged  for  me  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  there  shalt  thou  buiy  me.  Now  therefore 
let  me  go  up,  I  pray  thee,  and  bury  my  father, 
and  I  will  come  again.  And  Pharaoh  said,  Go  up 
and  bury  thy  father,  according  as  he  made  thee 
swear"  (Gen.  1.  4-6).  The  account  of  the  em 
balming  of  Jacob,  in  which  we  are  told  that 
"  Joseph  commanded  his  servants  the  physicians  to 
embalm  his  father"  (ver.  2),  shows  the  position  of 
Joseph,  which  is  more  distinctly  proved  by  the  nar 
rative  of  the  subsequent  journey  into  Palestine. 
"  And  Joseph  went  up  to  bury  his  father :  and 
with  him  went  up  all  the  servants  of  Pharaoh,  the 
elders  of  his  house,  and  all  the  elders  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  all  the  house  of  Joseph,  and  his  brethren, 
and  his  father's  house :  only  their  little  ones,  and 
their  flocks,  and  their  herds,  they  left  in  the  land 
of  Goshen.  And  there  went  up  with  him  both 
chariots  and  hoi-semen:  and  it  was  a  very  great 
company"  (7-9).  To  make  such  an  expedition  as 
this,  with  perhaps  risk  of  a  hostile  encounter, 
would  no  doubt  require  special  permission,  and  from 
Joseph's  whole  history  we  can  understand  that  he 
would  have  hesitated  to  ask  a  favour  for  himself 
while  it  is  most  natural  that  he  should  have  ex 
plained  that  he  had  no  further  motive  in  the  journey. 
The  fear  of  his  brethren  that  after  their  father's 
death  he  would  take  vengeance  on  them  for  their 
former  cruelty,  and  his  declaration  that  he  would 
nourish  them  and  their  little  ones,  prove  he  still 
held  a  high  position.  His  dying  charge  does  not  indi 
cate  that  the  persecution  had  then  commenced,  and 
that  it  had  not  seems  quite  clear  from  the  narrative 
at  the  beginning  of  Exodus.  It  thus  appears  that 
Joseph  retained  his  position  until  Jacob's  death  ; 
and  it  is  therefore  probable,  nothing  being  stated 
to  the  contrary,  that  the  Pharaoh  who  made  Joseph 
governor  was  on  the  throne  during  the  time  that  lie 
seems  to  have  held  office,  twenty-six  years.  \\'a 
may  suppose  that  the  "new  king"  "  whbh  knew 
not  Joseph"  (Ex.  i.  8)  was  head  of  a  new  dynasty 
It  is  very  unlikely  that  he  w;is  the  immediate  suc 
cessor  of  thih  Pharaoh,  as  the  iutcrv;J  from  tl* 


PHARAOH 

•rpointment  of  the  governor  to  the  beginning  of 
the  oppression  was  not  less  than  eighty  years,  and 
probably  much  more. 

The  chief  points  for  the  identification  of  the  line 
to  which  this  Pharaoh  belonged,  are  that  he  was  a 
despotic  monarch,  ruling  all  Egypt,  who  followed 
Egyptian  customs,  but  did  not  hesitate  to  set  them 
aside  when  he  thought  fit ;  that  he  seems  to  have 
desired  to  gain  complete  power  over  the  Egyptians ; 
and  that  he  favoured  strangers.     These  particulars 
certainly  appear  to  lend  support  to  the  idea  that  he 
was    an    Egyptianized    foreigner    rather    than    an 
Egyptian ;  and  M.  Marietta's  recent  discoveries  at 
Zoan,  or  Avaris,  have  positively  settled  what  was 
the  great  difficulty  to  most  scholars  in  the  way  of 
this    view,   for    it   has  been  ascertained   that   the 
Shepherds,    of   at    least    oi^e   dynasty,    were    so 
thoroughly   Egyptianized  that  they  executed  mo 
numents  of  an  Egyptian  character,  differing  alone 
in  a  peculiarity  of  style.    Before,  however,  we  state 
the  main  heads  of  argument  in  favour  of  the  idea 
that  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  a  Shepherd,  it  will 
be  well  to  mention  the  grounds  of  the  theories  that 
make  him  an  Egyptian.     Baron  Bunsen  supposed 
that  he  was  Sesertesen  I.,  the  head  of  the  xiith 
dynasty,  on  account  of  the  mention  in  a  hieroglyphic 
inscription  of  a  famine  in  that  king's  reign.     This 
identification,  although  receiving  some  support  from 
the  statement  of  Herodotus,  that  Sesostris,  a  name 
reasonably  traceable  to  Sesertesen,  divided  the  land 
and  raised  his  chief  revenue  from  the  rent  paid  by 
tne  holders,  must  be  abandoned,  since  the  calamity 
recorded   does    not   approach    Joseph's   famine   in 
character,  and  as  the  age  is  almost  certainly  too 
remote.    According  to  our  reckoning  this  king  began 
to  reign  about  B.C.  2080,  and  Baron  Bunsen  places 
him  much  earlier,  so  that  this  idea  is  not  tenable, 
unless  we  take  the  long  chronology  of  the  Judges,  and 
hold  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  to  have  lasted  430  years. 
If  we  take  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the  Exoius,  Jo 
seph's  Pharaoh  would   have   been  a  king   of  the 
xviiith  dynasty,  unless,  with  Bunsen,  we  lengthen 
the  Hebrew  chronology  before  the  Exodus  as  arbi 
trarily  as,  in  adopting  that  date,  we  shorten  it  afte: 
the  Exodus.     To  the  idea  that  this  king  was  of  the 
xviiith  dynasty  there  is  this  objection,  which  we  hold 
to  be  fatal,  that  the  monuments  of  that  line,  often 
recording  the  events  of  almost  every  year,  presenl 
no  trace  of  the  remarkable  circumstances  of  Joseph's 
rule.      Whether  we  take  Ussher's  or  Hales's  date 
of  the    Exodus,   Joseph's   government   would   fal 
before  the  xviiith  dynasty,  and  during  the  Shepherc 
period.    (By  the  Shepherd  period  is  generally  under 
stood  the  period  after  the  xiith  dynasty  and  before 
the  xviiith,  during  which  the  foreigners  were  domi 
nant  over  Egypt,  although  it  is  possible  that  they 
already  held  part  of  the  country  at  an  earlier  time.) 
If,  discarding  the  idea  that  Joseph's  Pharaoh  was 
an  Egyptian,  we  turn  to  the  old  view  that  he  was 
one  of  the  Shepherd  kings,  a  view  almost  inevitabl 
if  we   infer  that  he  ruled  during  the  Shepherd 
period,  we  are  struck  with  the  fitness  of  all  thi 
circumstances  o*"   the   Biblical   narrative.      These 
foreign  rulers,  or  at  least  some  of  them  were  Egyp 
tianized,  yet  the  accoun..  of  Manetho,  if  we  some 
what   lessen  the  colouring  that  we  may  suppos< 
national  hatred  gave  it,  is  now  shown  to  be  correct  ii 
making  them  disregard  the  laws  and  religion  of  the 
country  they  had  subdued.     They  were  evidentl] 
powerful  military  despots.      As  foreigners  rulinj 
what  was  treated  as  a  conquered  country,  if  no 
actually  won  by  force  of  arms,  they  would  have 


PHARAOH 


813 


ncouraged  foreign  settlers,  particularly  in  their 
wn  especial  region  in  the  east  of  Lower  Egypt, 
where  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  seems  to  have  had 
attle  (Gen.  xlvii.  5,  6).  It  is  very  unlikely,  un- 
ess  we  suppose  a  special  interposition  of  Provi- 
ience,  that  an  Egyptian  Pharaoh,  with  the  acquies- 
ence  of  his  counsellors,  should  have  chosen  a  Hebrew 
ave  as  his  chief  officer  of  state.  It  is  stated  by 
lusebius  that  the  Pharaoh  to  whom  Jacob  came 
tvas  the  Shepherd  Apophis ;  and  although  it  may 
>e  replied  that  this  identification  was  simply  a 
result  of  the  adjustment  of  the  dynasties  to  his  view 
if  Hebrew  chronology,  it  should  be  observed  that 
le  seems  to  have  altered  the  very  dynasty  of 
Apophis,  both  in  its  number  (making  it  the  xviith 
nstead  of  the  xvth),  and  in  its  duration,  as  though 
IB  were  convinced  that  this  king  was  really  the 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph,  and  must  therefore  be  brought 
;o  his  time.  Apcphis  belonged  to  the  xvth  dynasty, 
which  was  certainly  of  Shepherds,  and  the  most 
powerful  foreign  line,  for  it  seems  clear  that  there 
was  at  least  one  if  not  two  more.  This  dynasty, 
according  to  our  view  of  Egyptian  chronology,  ruled 
'or  either  284  years  (Africanus),  or  259  years  1C 
months  (Josephus),  from  about  B.C.  2080.  If 
Hales's  chronology,  which  we  would  slightly  modify, 
be  correct,  the  government  of  Joseph  fell  under  this 
dynasty,  commencing  about  B.C.  1876,  which  would 
be  during  the  reign  of  the  last  but  one  or  perhaps 
the  last  king  of  the  dynasty,  was  possibly  in  the  time 
of  Apophis,  who  ended  the  line  according  to  Africanus. 
It  is  to  be  remarked  that  this  dynasty  is  said  to  have 
been  of  Phoenicians,  and  if  so  was  probably  of  a 
stock  predominantly  Shemite,  a  circumstance  in 
perfect  accordance  with  what  we  know  of  the  go 
vernment  and  character  of  Jqseph's  Pharaoh,  whose 
act  in  making  Joseph  his  chief  minister  finds  its 
parallels  in  Shemite  history,  and  in  that  of  nations 
which  derived  their  customs  from  Shemites.  An 
Egyptian  king  would  scarcely  give  so  high  a  place 
to  any  but  a  native,  and  that  of  the  military  or 
priestly  class;  but,  as  already  remaiked,  this  may 
have  been  due  to  Divine  interposition. 

This  king  appears,  as  has  been  already  shewn, 
to  have  reigned  from  Joseph's  appointment  (or, 
perhaps,  somewhat  earlier,  since  he  was  already 
on  the  throne  when  he  imprisoned  his  servants), 
until  Jacob's  death,  a  period  of  at  least  twenty-six 
years,  from  B.C.  cir.  1876  to  1850,  and  to  have 
been  the  fifth  or  sixth  king  of  the  xvth  dynasty. 

3.  The  Pharaoh  of  the  Oppression. — The  first 
persecutor  of  the  Israelites  may  be  distinguished  as 
the  Pharaoh  of  the  Oppression,  from  the  second,  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  especially  as  he  commenced, 
and  probably  long  carried  on,  the  persecution.  Here, 
as  in  the  case  of  Joseph's  Pharaoh,  there  has  been 
difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  line  to  which  the 
oppressor  belonged.  The  general  view  is  that  he 
was  an  Egyptian,  and  this  at  first  sight  is  a  pro 
bable  inference  from  the  narrative,  if  the  line  under 
which  the  Israelites  were  protected  be  supposed  to 
have  been  one  of  Shepherds.  The  Biblical  history 
here  seems  to  justify  clearer  deductions  than  before. 
We  read  that  Joseph  and  his  brethren  and  that  ge 
neration  died,  and  that  the  Israelites  multiplied  and 
became  very  mighty  and  filled  the  land.  Of  the 
events  of  the  interval  between  Jacob's  death  and  the 
oppression  we  know  almost  nothing ;  but  the  cala 
mity  to  Ephraim's  house,  in  the  slaughter  of  his  sons 
by  the  men  of  Gath,  born  as  it  seems  in  Egypt 
[BERiAiiJ,  renders  it  probable  that  the  Israel  .tes  had 
btcome  a  tributary  tribe,  settled  in  Goshen,  ind  be- 


814  FHAKAOH 

ginning  Vo  show  that  warlike  vigour  that  is  so  strong 
a  feature  in  the  character  of  Abraham,  that  is  not 
wanting  in  Jacob's,  and  that  fitted  their  posterity 
for  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  The  beginning  of  the 
oppression  is  thus  narrated : — "  Now  there  arose  a 
new  king  over  Egypt,  which  knew  not  Joseph  "  (Ex. 
i.  8).  The  expression  "a  new  king"  (comp.  "  an 
other  king,"  Acts  vii.  18)  does  not  necessitate  the 
idea  of  a  change  of  dynasty,  but  favours  it.  The 
next  two  verses  are  extremely  important: — "And 
he  said  unto  his  people,  Behold,  the  people  of  the 
children  of  Israel  [are]  more  and  mightier  than 
we :  come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely  with  them ;  lest 
they  multiply,  and  it  come  to  pass  that,  when 
there  falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also  unto  our 
enemies,  and  fight  against  us,  and  [so]  get  them  up 
out  of  the  land  "  (9,  10).  Here  it  is  stated  that 
Pharaoh  ruled  a  people  of  smaller  numbers  and  less 
strength  than  the  Israelites,  whom  he  feared  lest 
they  should  join  with  some  enemies  in  a  possible 
war  in  Egypt,  and  so  leave  the  country.  In  order 
to  weaken  the  Israelites  he  adopted  a  subtle  policy 
which  is  next  related.  "  Therefore  they  did  set 
over  them  taskmasters  to  afflict  them  with  their 
burdens.  And  they  built  for  Pharaoh  treasure 
sities,  Pithom  and  Raamses"  (11).  The  name  of 
the  second  of  these  cities  has  been  considered  a 
most  important  point  of  evidence.  They  multiplied 
notwithstanding,  and  the  persecution  apparently  in 
creased.  They  were  employed  in  brickmaking  and 
other  labour  connected  with  building,  and  perhaps 
also  in  making  pottery  (Ps.  Ixxxi.  6).  This  bondage 
producing  no  effect,  Pharaoh  commanded  the  two 
Hebrew  midwives  to  kill  every  male  child  as  it 
was  born ;  but  they  deceived  him,  and  the  people 
continued  to  increase.  He  then  made  a  fresh  attempt 
to  enfeeble  them.  "  And  Pharaoh  charged  all  his 
people,  saying,  Every  son  that  is  born  ye  shall 
cast  into  the  river,  and  every  daughter  ye  shall 
save  alive"  (22).  How  long  this  last  infamous 
command  was  in  force  we  do  not  know,  probably 
but  for  a  short  time,  unless  it  was  constantly 
evaded,  otherwise  the  number  of  the  Israelites 
would  have  been  checked.  It  may  be  remarked  that 
Aaron  was  three  years  older  than  Moses,  so  that  we 
might  suppose  that  the  command  was  issued  after 
his  birth ;  but  it  must  also  be  observed  that  the 
fear  of  the  mother  of  Moses,  at  his  birth,  may  have 
been  because  she  lived  near  a  royal  residence,  as 
appears  from  the  finding  of  the  child  by  Pharaoh's 
daughter.  The  story  of  his  exposure  and  rescue 
shows  that  even  the  oppressor's  daughter  could  fnel 
pity,  and  disobey  her  father's  command ;  while  iu 
her  saving  Moses,  who  was  to  ruin  her  house,  is 
seen  the  retributive  justice  that  so  often  makes  the 
tyrant  pass  by  and  even  protect,  as  Pharaoh  must 
have  done,  the  instrument  of  his  future  punish 
ment.  The  etymology  of  the  name  of  Moses  does 
not  aid  us:  if  Egyptian,  it  may  have  been  given 
by  a  foreigner ;  if  foreign,  it  may  have  been  given 
oy  an  Egyptian  to 'a  foreign  child.  It  is  important 
that  Pharaoh's  daughter  adopted  Moses  as  her  son, 
and  that  he  was  taught  in  all  the  wisdom  of  Egypt. 
The  persecution  continued,  "  And  it  came  to  pass 
m  those  days,  when  Moses  was  grown,  that  he 
went  out  unto  his  brethren,  and  looked  on  their 
burdens :  and  he  spied  an  Egyptian  smiting  an  He 
brew,  one  of  his  brethren.  And  he  looked  this  way 
tui  that  way,  and  when  he  saw  that  [there  was] 


«••  When  Moses  went  to  see  his  people  and  slew  the 
Egyptian,  be  does  not  seem  to  have  made  any  journey, 


PHARAOH 

no  man ,  he  slew  the  Egyptian,  and  hid  him  :n  th< 
sand"  (ii.  11,  12).  When  Pharaoh  attempted  t» 
slay  Moses  he  fled  into  the  land  of  Midian.  Froiu 
the  statement  in  Hebrews  that  he  "  refused  to  be 
called  the  son  of  Pharaoh's  daughter ;  choosing 
rather  to  suffer  affliction  with  the  people  of  God, 
than  to  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season ; 
esteeming  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches  than 
the  treasures  in  Egypt "  (xi.  24-26),  it  is  evident  tha*. 
the  adoption  was  no  mere  form,  and  this  is  a  point  of 
evidence  not  to  be  slighted.  While  Moses  was  in  Mi- 
dian  Pharaoh  died,  and  the  narrative  implies  that  thie 
was  shortly  before  the  events  preceding  the  Exodus. 
This  Pharaoh  has  been  generally  supposed  to 
have  been  a  king  of  the  xviiith  or  xixth  dynasty : 
we  believe  that  he  was  of  a  line  earlier  than  either. 
The  chief  points  in  the  evidence  in  favour  of  the 
former  opinion  are  the  name  of  the  city  Raamses, 
whence  it  has  been  argued  that  one  of  the  oppressoi-s 
was  a  king  Rameses,  and  the  probable  change  of 
line.  The  first  king  of  this  name  known  was  head 
of  the  xixth  dynasty,  or  last  king  of  the  xviiith. 
According  to  Manetho's  story  of  the  Exodus,  a 
story  so  contradictory  to  historical  truth  as  scarcely 
to  be  worthy  of  mention,  the  Israelites  left  Egypl 
in  the  reign  of  Menptah,  who  was  great  grandson 
of  the  first  Rameses,  and  son  and  successor  of  the 
second.  This  king  is  held  by  some  Egyptologists  to 
have  reigned  about  the  time  of  the  Rabbinical  date 
of  the  Exodus,  which  is  virtually  the  same  as  that 
which  has  been .  supposed  to  be  obtainable  from  the 
genealogies.  There  is  however  good  reason  to  place 
these  kings  much  later;  in  which  case  Rameses  I. 
would  be  the  oppressor ;  but  then  the  building  of 
Raamses  could  not  be  placed  in  his  reign  without 
a  disregard  of  Hebrew  chronology.  But  the  argu 
ment  that  there  is  no  earlier  known  king  Rameses 
loses  much  of  its  weight  when  we  bear  in  mind  that 
one  of  the  sons  of  Aahmes,  head  of  the  xviiith  dy 
nasty,  who  reigned  about  two  hundred  years  before 
Rameses  I'.,  bore  the  same  name,  besides  that  very 
many  names  of  kings  of  the  Shepherd-period,  per 
haps  of  two  whole  dynasties,  are  unknown.  Against 
this  one  fact,  which  is  certainly  not  to  be  disre 
garded,  we  must  weigh  the  general  evidence  of  the 
history,  which  shows  us  a  king  apparently  governing 
a  part  of  Egypt,  with  subjects  inferior  to  the  Is 
raelites,  and  fearing  a  war  in  the  country.  Like 
the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  he  seems  to  have  dwelt 
in  Lower  Egypt,  probably  at  Avaris.e  Compare  this 
condition  with  the  power  of  the  kings  of  the  later 
part  of  the  xviiith  and  of  the  xixth  dynasties  ; 
rulers  of  an  empire,  governing  a  united  country 
from  which  the  head  of  their  line  had  driven  the 
Shepherds.  The  view  that  this  Pharaoh  was  of 
the  beginning  or  middle  of  the  xviiith  dynasty 
seems  at  first  sight  extremely  probable,  especially 
if  it  be  supposed  that  the  Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was 
a  Shepherd  king.  The  expulsion  of  the  Shepherds 
at  the  commencement  of  this  dynasty  would  have 
naturally  caused  an  immediate  or  gradual  oppres 
sion  of  the  Israelites.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  what  we  have  just  said  of  the  power  of  some 
kings  of  this  dynasty  is  almost  as  true  of  their 
predecessors.  The  silence  of  the  historical  monu 
ments  is  also  to  be  weighed,  when  we  bear  in 
mind  how  numerous  they  are,  and  that  we  might 
expect  many  of  the  events  of  the  oppression  to  be 
recorded  if  the  Exodus  were  not  noticed.  If  w« 

aril  the  burying  in  sand  shews  that  the  place  was  In  e 
part  of  Kgypt  like  Goslen,  encompassed  by  solid?  deeer;s 


PHARAOH 

assign  this  Pharaoh  to  the  age  before  the  xviiith 
dynasty,  which  our  view  of  Hebrew  chronology 
•>7ould  probably  oblige  us  to  do,  we  have  still  to 
determine  whether  he  were  a  Shepherd  or  an  Egyp 
tian.  If  a  Shepherd,  he  must  have  been  of  the 
rvith  or  the  xviith  dynasty ;  and  that  he  was  Egyp- 
tianized  does  not  afford  any  argument  against  this 
supposition,  since  it  appeal's  that  foreign  kings,  who 
can  only  be  assigned  to  one  of  these  two  lines,  had 
Egyptian  names.  In  corroboration  of  this  view  we 
quote  a  remarkable  passage  that  does  not  seem 
otherwise  explicable:  "  My  people  went  down  afore 
time  into  Egypt  to  sojourn  there  ;  and  the  Assyrian 
oppressed  them  without  cause  "  (Is.  lii.  4)  :  which 
may  be  compared  with  the  allusions  to  the  Exodus 
in  a  prediction  of  the  same  prophet  respecting  As 
syria  (x.  24,  26).  Our  inference  is  strengthened  by 
the  discovery  that  kings  bearing  a  name  almost  cer- 
ttiinly  an  Egyptian  translation  of  an  Assyrian  or 
Babylonian  regal  title  are  among  those  apparently  of 
the  Shepherd  age  in  the  Turin  Papyrus  (Lepsius, 
KSnigsbuch,  ta^xviii.  xix.  275,  285). 

The  reign  of  this  king  probably  commenced  a 
little  before  the  birth  of  Moses,  which  we  place 
B.C.  1732,  and  seems  to  have  lasted  upwards  of 
forty  years,  perhaps  much  more. 

4.  The  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus. — What  is  known 
of  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus  is  rather  biographical 
than  historical.  It  does  not  'add  much  to  our 
means  of  identifying  the  line  of  the  oppressors  ex 
cepting  by  the  indications  of  race  his  character 
affords.  His  life  is  spoken  of  in  other  articles. 
[PLAGUES,  &c.]  His  acts  show  us  a  man  at  once 
impious  and  superstitious,  alternately  rebelling  and 
submitting.  At  first  he  seems  to  have  thought 
that  his  magicians  could  work  the  same  wonders 
as  Moses  and  Aaron,  yet  even  then  he  begged  that 
the  frogs  might  be  taken  away,  and  to  the  end  he 
prayed  that  a  plague  might  be  removed,  promising 
a  concession  to  the  Israelites,  and  as  soon  as  he  was 
respited  failed  to  keep  his  word.  This  is  not  strange 
in  a  character  principally  influenced  by  fear,  and 
history  abounds  in  parallels  to  Pharaoh.  His  vacil 
lation  only  ended  when  he  lost  his  army  in  the  Red 
Sea,  and  the  Israelites  were  finally  delivered  out  ol 
his  hand.  Whether  he  himself  was  drowned  has  been 
considered  matter  of  uncertainty,  as  it  is  not  so 
stated  in  the  account  of  the  Exodus.  Another  pas 
sage,  however,  appears  to  affirm  it  (Ps.  cxxxvi.  15) 
It  seems  to  be  too  great  a  latitude  of  criticism  eithei 
to  argue  that  the  expression  in  this  passage  indi 
cates  the  overthrow  but  not  the  death  of  the  king 
especially  as  the  Hebrew  expression  "shaked  off"  or 
"  threw  in "  is  very  literal,  or  that  it  is  only  a 
strong  Semitic  expression.  Besides,  throughout  th< 
preceding  history  his  end  is  foreshadowed,  and  is 
perhaps,  positively  foretold  in  Ex.  ix.  15  ;  thougl 
this  passage  may  be  rendered  "  For  now  I  might  hav 
stretched  out  my  hand,  and  might  have  smitten  the 
and  thy  people  with  pestilence  ;  and  thou  wouldes 
h-vve  been  cut  off  from  the  earth,"  as  by  Kalisc 
(Commentary  in  loc.),  instead  of  as  in  the  A.  V. 

Although  we  have  already  stated  our  reasons  fo 
abandoning  the  theory  that  places  the  Exodus  unde 
the  xixth  dynasty,  it  may  be  well  to  notice  an  add 
tional  and  conclusive  argument  for  rejecting  as  unhi: 
torical  the  tale  preserved  by  Manetho,  which  make 
Menptah,  the  son  of  Rameses  II.,  the  Pharaoh  i 
^rhose  reign  the  Israelites  left  Egypt.  This  tale  wa 
commonly  current  in  Egypt,  but  it  must  be  remarke 
that  the  historian  gives  it  only  on  the  authority 
trediiioc.  M.  Mariette's  recent  discoveries  hav 


PHARAOH 


815 


dded  to  the  evidence  we  already  had  on  tlie  subject, 
i  this  story  the  secret  of  the  success  of  the  rebelc 
as  that  they  hnd  allotted  to  them  by  Amenophis, 
r  Menptuh,  the  city  of  Avaris  formerly  hold  by 
ic  Shepherds,  but  then  in  ruins.  That  the  people 
o  whom  this  place  was  given  were  working  in  th<- 
uarries  east  of  the  Nile  is  enough  of  itself  to  throw  a 
oubt  on  the  narrative,  for  there  appear  to  have  been 
o  quarries  north  of  those  opposite  Memphis,  from 
•hich  Avaris  was  distant  nearly  the  whole  length 
f  the  Delta  ;  but  when  it  is  found  that  this  very 
ing,  as  well  as  his  father,  adorned  the  great  temple 
f  Avaris,  the  story  is  seen  to  be  essentially  false, 
et  it  is  not  improbable  that  some  calamity  oc- 
urred  about  this  time,  with  which  the  Egyptians 
Ifully  or  ignorantly  confounded  the  Exodus:  if 
ley  did  so  ignorantly,  there  would  be  an  argument 
hat  this  event  took  place  during  the  Shepherd 
)criod,  which  was  probably  in  after  times  an 
bscure  part  of  the  annals  of  Egypt. 

The  character  of  this  Pharaoh  finds  its  parallel 
mong  the  Assyrians  rather  than  the  Egyptians, 
he  impiety  of  the  oppressor  and  that  of  Senna  • 
herib  are  remarkably  similar,  though  Sennacherib 
eems  to  have  been  more  resolute  in  his  resistance 
han  Pharaoh.  This  resemblance  is  not  to  be  over- 
ooked,  especially  as  it  seems  to  indicate  an  idio- 
yncracy  of  the  Assyrians  and  kindred  nations,  for 
ational  character  was  more  marked  in  antiquity 
han  it  is  now  in  most  peoples,  doubtless  because 
solation  was  then  general  and  is  now  special.  Thus, 
-he  Egyptian  monuments  show  us  a  people  highly 
•everencing  their  gods  and  even  those  of  other 
nations,  the  most  powerful  kings  appearing  as  sup- 
>liants  in  the  representations  of  the  temples  and 
lOmbs ;  in  the  Assyrian  sculptures,  on  the  con- 
,rary,  the  kings  are  seen  rather  as  protected  by 
the  gods  than  as  worshipping  them,  so  that  we 
understand  how  in  such  a  country  the  famous 
decree  of  Darius,  which  Daniel  disobeyed,  could  be 
enacted.  Again  the  Egyptians  do  not  seem  to 
lave  supposed  that  their  enemies  were  supported 

gods  hostile  to  those  of  Egypt,  whereas  the  Assy 
rians  considered  their  gods  as  more  powerful  than 
those  of  the  nations  they  subdued.  This  is  im 
portant  in  connection  with  the  idea  that  at  least  one 
of  the  Pharaohs  of  the  oppression  was  an  Assyrian. 

Respecting  the  time  of  this  king  we  can  only  say 
that  he  was  reigning  for  about  a  year  or  more  before 
the  Exodus,  which  we  place  B.C.  1652. 

Before  speaking  of  the  later  Pharaohs  we  may 
mention  a  point  of  weight  in  reference  to  the  iden 
tification  of  these  earlier  ones.  The  accounts  of  the 
campaigns  of  the  Pharaohs  of  the  xviiith,  xixth  and 
xxth  dynasties  have  not  been  found  to  contain  any 
reference  to  the  Israelites.  Hence  it  might  be  sup 
posed  that  in  their  days,  or  at  least  during  the 
greater  part  of  their  time,  the  Israelites  were  not 
yet  in  the  Promised  Land.  There  is,  however, 
an  almost  equal  silence  as  to  the  Canaanite  nations. 
The  land  itself,  XANANA  or  KANAAN,  is  indeed 
mentioned  as  invaded,  as  wel  1  as  those  of  KHETA  and 
AMAR,  referring  to  the  Hittites  and  Amorites ;  but 
the  latter  two  must  have  been  branches  of  those  na 
tions  seated  in  the  valley  of  the  Orontes.  A  recently- 
discovered  record  of  Thothtnes  III.  published  by 
M.  de  Rouge,  in  the  Revue  Archeologique  (Nov. 
1861,  pp  344,  seqq.},  contains  many  names  of 
Canaanite  towns  conquered  by  that  king,  but  not 
one  recognized  as  Israelite.  These  Canaanite  names 
are,  moreover,  on  the  Israelite  borders,  not  in  th« 
htart  of  the  country.  It  is  interesting  tha*  a  §re;\t 


813 


PHARAOH 


battle  is  shown  to  have  been  won  by  this  king 
at  Megiddo.  It  seems  probable  that  the  Kjryj>- 
tians  either  abstained  from  attacking  the  Israelites 
from  a  recollection  of  the  calamities  of  the  £xodus, 
or  that  they  were  on  friendly  terms.  It  is  very 
remarkable  that  the  Egyptians  were  granted  privi 
leges  in  the  Law  (Deut.  xxiii.  7),  and  that  Shishak, 
the  first  king:  of  Egypt  after  the  Exodus  whom 
we  know  to  have  invaded  the  Hebrew  territories, 
was  of  foreign  extraction,  if  not  actually  a  foreigner. 

5.  Pharaoh,  father-in-law  of  Mered. — In   the 
genealogies  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  mention  is  made  of 
the  daughter  of  a  Pharaoh,  married  to  an  Israelite ; 
"Bithiah  the  daughter  of  Pharaoh,  which  Mered 
took"  (1  Chr.  iv.  18).     That  the  name  Pharaoh 
here  probably  designates  an  Egyptian  king  we  have 
already  shown,  and  observed  that  the  date  of  Mered 
is  doubtful,  although  it  is  likely  that  he  lived  before, 
or  not  much  after,  the  Exodus.     [BITHIAH.]     It 
may  be  added  that  the  name  Miriam,  of  one  of  the 
family  of  Mered  (17),  apparently  his  sister,  or  per 
haps  a  daughter  by  Bithiah,  suggests  that  this  part 
of  the  genealogies  may  refer  to  about  the  time  of 
the  Exodus.     This  marriage  may  tend  to  aid  us 
m  determining  the  age  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.    It 
is  perhaps  less  probable  that  an  Egyptian  Pharaoh 
would  have  given  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  an 
Israelite,  than  that  a  Shepherd  king  would  have 
done  so,  before  the  oppression.    But  Bithiah  may 
have  been  taken  in  war  after  the  Exodus,  by  the 
surprise  of  a  caravan,  or  in  a  foray. 

6.  Pharaoh,  father-in-law  of  Hadad  the  Edom- 
ite. — Among    the    enemies   who   were   raised   up 
against  Solomon  was  Hadad,  an  Edomite  of  the 
blood  royal,  who  had  escaped  as  a  child  from  the 
slaughter  of  his  nation  by  Joab.     We  read  of  him 
and  his  servants,  "  And  they  arose  out  of  Midian, 
and  came  to  Paran :  and  they  took  men  with  them 
out  of  Paran,  and  they  came  to  Egypt,  unto  Phai-aoh 
king  of  Egypt ;  who  gave  him  an  house,  and  ap 
pointed  him  victuals,  and  gave   him  land.     And 
Hadad  found  great  favour  in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh, 
so  that  he  gave  him  to  wife  the  sister  of  his  own 
wife,  the  sister  of  Tahpenes  the  queen.     And  the 
sister  of  Tahpenes   bare   him  Genubath   his  son, 
whom  Tahpenes  weaned  in  Pharaoh's  house :  'and 
Genubath  was  in  Pharaoh's  houshold  among  the 
sons  of  Pharaoh  "  (1  K.  xi.  18-20).     When,  how 
ever,  Hadad  heard  that  David  and  Joab  were  both 
dead,  he  asked  Pharaoh  to  let  him  return  to  his 
country,  and  was  unwillingly  allowed  to  go  (21, 
22).     Probably  the  fugitives   took   refuge   in   an 
Egyptian  mining-station  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai, 
and  so  obtained  guides  to  conduct  them  into  Egypt. 
There,  they  were  received  in  accordance  with  the 
Egyptian  policy,  but  with  the  especial  favour  that 
sieems  to  have  been  shown  about  this  time  towards 
the  eastern  neighbours  of  the  Pharaohs,  which  may 
reasonably  be  supposed  to  have  led  to  the  establish 
ment  of  the  xxiind  dynasty  of  foreign  extraction. 
For  the  identification  of  this  Pharaoh  we  have  chro 
nological   indications,  and  the   name  of  his  wife. 
Unfortunately,  however,  the  history  of  Egypt  at 
this  time  is  extremely  obscure,  neither  the  monu 
ments  nor  Manetho  giving  us  clear  information  as 
wo  the  kings.     It  appeal's  that  towards  the  latter 
part  of  the  xxth  dynasty  the  high-priests  of  Amen, 
the  god  of  Thebes,  gained  great  power,  and  at  last 
supplanted  the  Rameses  family,  at  least  in  Upper 
Egypt.    At  the  same  time  a  line  of  Tanite  kings, 
Manetho's  xxist  dynasty,  seems  to  have  ruled  in 
Low  fc'gypt.     From  the  latest  part  of  the  nth 


PHARAOH 

dynasty  three  houses  appear  to  have  reigned  at  th" 
same  time.  The  feeble  xxth  dynasty  was  probably 
soon  extinguished,  but  the  priest-rulers  and  tlit 
Tanites  appear  to  have  reigned  contemporaneously 
until  they  were  both  succeeded  by  the  Bubastites  of 
the  xxiind  dynasty,  of  whom  Sheshonk  I.,  the  Shishak 
of  the  Bible,  was  the  first.  The  monuments  have 
preserved  the  names  of  several  of  the  high-priests, 
perhaps  all,  and  probably  of  some  of  the  Tanites ; 
but  it  is  a  question  whether  Manetho's  Tanite 
line  does  not  include  some  of  the  former,  and  we 
have  no  means  of  testing  the  accuracy  of  its  num 
bers.  It  may  be  reasonably  supposed  that  the 
Pharaoh  or  Pharaohs  spoken  of  in  the  Bible  as 
ruling  in  the  time  of  David  and  Solomon  were 
Tanites,  as  Tanis  was  nearest  to  the  Israelite  terri 
tory.  We  have  therefore  to  compare  the  chrono 
logical  indications  of  Scripture  with  the  list  of 
this  dynasty.  Shishak,  as  we  have  shown  else 
where,  must  have  begun  to  reign  in  about  the  24th 
or  25th  year  of  Solomon  (B.C.  cir.  990-989). 
[CHRONOLOGY.]  The  conquest  of  Edom  probably 
took  place  some  50  years  earlier.  It  may  there 
fore  be  inferred  that  Hadad  fled  to  a  king  of  Egypf 
who  may  have  ruled  at  least  25  years,  probably 
ceasing  to  govern  before  Solomon  married  the 
daughter  of  a  Pharaoh  early  in  his  reign ;  for  it 
seems  unlikely  that  the  protector  of  David's  enemy 
would  have  given  1iis  daughter  to  Solomon,  unless 
he  were  a  powerless  king,  which  appears  was  not 
the  case  with  Solomon's  father-in-law.  This  would 
give  a  reign  of  25  years,  or  25  + x  separated 
from  the  close  of  the  dynasty  by  a  period  of  24  or 
25  years.  According  to  Africanus,  the  list  of  the 
xxist  dynasty  is  as  follows :  Smendes,  26  years ; 
Psusennes,  46 ;  Nephelcheres,  4  ;  Amenothis,  9 ; 
Osochor,  6 ;  Psinarhes,  9  ;  Psusennes,  14 ;  but 
Eusebius  gives  the  second  king  41,  and  the  last, 
35  years,  and  his  numbers  make  up  the  sum  of 
130  years,  which  Africanus  and  he  agree  in  assign 
ing  to  the  dynasty.  If  we  tike  the  numbers  of 
Eusebius,  Osochor  would  probably  be  the  Pharaoh 
to  whom  Hadad  fled,  and  Psusennes  II.  the  father- 
in-law  of  Solomon ;  but  the  numbers  of  Africanus 
would  substitute  Psusennes  L,  and  probably  Psina- 
ches.  We  cannot,  however,  be  sure  that  the  reigns 
did  not  overlap,  or  were  not  separated  by  intervals, 
and  the  numbers  are  not  to  be  considered  reliable 
until  tested  by  the  monuments.  The  royal  names 
of  the  period  have  been  searched  in  vain  for  any  one 
resembling  Tahpenes.  If  the  Egyptian  equivalent 
to  the  similar  geographical  name  Tahpanhes,  &c., 
were  known,  we  might  have  some  clue  to  that  of 
this  queen.  [TAHPENES  ;  TAHPANHES.] 

7.  Pharaoh,  father-in-law  of  Solomon. — In  the 
narrative  of  the  beginning  of  Solomon's  reign,  alter 
the  account  of  the  deaths  of  Adonijah,  Joab,  and 
Shimei,  and  the  deprivation  of  Abiathar,  we  read : 
"  And  the  kingdom  was  established  in  the  hand  of 
Solomon.  And  Solomon  made  affinity  with  Pharaoh 
king  of  Egypt,  and  took  Pharaoh's  daughter,  and 
brought  her  into  the  city  of  David,  until  he  had 
made  an  end  of  building  his  own  house,  and  the 
house  of  the  LORD,  and  the  wall  of  Jerusalem  round 
about "  (1  K.  ii.  46,  iii.  I).  The  events  mentioned 
before  the  marriage  belong  altogether  to  the  very 
commencement  of  Solomon's  reign,  excepting  the 
matter  of  Shimei,  which  extending  through  three 
years  is  carried  on  to  its  completion.  The  mentioc 
that  the  queen  was  brought  into  the  city  of  David, 
while  Solomon's  house,  and  the  Temple,  and  the 
city-wall,  were  building,  shows  that  the  man  Lag* 


PHARAOH 

toek  place  not  later  than  the  eleventh  J  ear  of  the 
king,  when  the  Temple  was  finished,  having  been 
commenced  in  the  fourth  year  (vi.  1,  37,  38).  It 
is  also  evident  that  this  alliance  was  before  Solomon's 
falling  away  into  idolatry  (iii.  3),  of  which  the 
Egyptian  queen  does  not  seem  to  have  been  one  of 
the  causes.  From  this  chronological  indication  it 
appears  that  the  marriage  must  have  taken  place  be 
tween  about  24  and  11  years  before  Shishak's  acces 
sion.  It  must  be  recollected  that  it  seems  certain 
that  Solomon's  father-in-law  was  not  the  Pharaoh 
who  was  reigning  when  Hadad  left  Egypt.  Both 
Pharaohs,  as  already  shown,  cannot  yet  be  identified 
in  Manetho's  list.  [PHARAOH'S  DAUGHTER.] 

This  Pharaoh  led  an  expedition  into  Palestine, 
which  is  thus  incidentally  mentioned,  where  the 
building  of  Gezer  by  Solomon  is  recorded  :  "  Pha 
raoh  king  of  Egypt  had  gone  up,  and  taken  Gezer, 
and  burnt  it  with  fire,  and  slain  the  Canaanites 
that  dwelt  in  the  city,  and  given  it  [for]  a  present 
unto  his  daughter,  Solomon's  wife"  (ix.  16).  This 
is  a  very  curious  historical  circumstance,  for  it 
shows  that  in  the  reign  of  David  or  Solomon,  more 
probably  the  latter,  an  Egyptian  king  apparently  on 
terms  of  friendship  with  the  Israelite  monarch, 
conducted  an  expedition  into  Palestine,  and  besieged 
and  captured  a  Canaanite  city.  This  occurrence  warns 
us  against  the  supposition  that  similar  expeditions 
could  not  have  occurred  in  earlier  times  without  a  war 
with  the  Israelites.  Its  incidental  mention  also  shows 
the  danger  of  inferring,  from  the  silence  of  Scripture 
as  to  any  such  earlier  expedition,  that  nothing  of  the 
kind  took  place.  [PALESTINE,  p.  667,  a.] 

This  Egyptian  alliance  is  the  first  indication, 
after  the  days  of  Moses,  of  that  leaning  to  Egypt 
which  was  distinctly  forbidden  in  the  Law,  and 
produced  the  most  disastrous  consequences  in  later 
times.  The  native  kings  of  Egypt  and  the  Ethio 
pians  readily  supported  the  Hebrews,  and  were 
unwilling  to  make  war  upon  them,  but  they  ren 
dered  them  mere  tributaries,  and  exposed  them  to 
the  enmity  of  the  kings  of  Assyria.  If  the  Hebrews 
did  not  incur  a  direct  punishment  for  their  leaning 
to  Egypt,  it  must  have  weakened  their  trust  in  the 
Divine  favour,  and  paralysed  their  efforts  to  defend 
the  country  against  the  Assyrians  and  their  party. 

The  next  kings  of  Egypt  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
are  Shishak,  probably  Zerah,  and  So.  The  first 
and  second  of  these  were  of  the  xxiind  dynasty,  if 
the  identification  of  Zerah  with  Userken  be  accepted, 
and  the  third  was  doubtless  one  of  the  two  Shebeks 
of  the  xxvth  dynasty,  which  was  of  Ethiopians. 
The  xxiind  dynasty  was  a  line  of  kings  of  foreign 
origin,  who  retained  foreign  names,  and  it  is  notice 
able  that  Zerah  is  called  a  Cushile  in  the  Bible 
(2  Chr.  xiv.  9 ;  comp.  xvi.  8).  Shebek  was  pro 
bably  also  a  foreign  name.  The  title  "  Pharaoh  " 
is  probably  not  once  given  to  these  kings  in  the 
Bible,  because  they  were  not  Egyptians,  and  did 
not  bear  Egyptian  names.  The  Shepherd  kings,  it 
must  be  remarked,  adopted  Egyptian  names,  and 
therefore  some  of  the  earlier  sovereigns  called  Pha 
raohs  in  the  Bible  may  be  conjectured  to  have  been 
BLepherds  notwithstanding  that  they  bear  this  title. 
[SHISHAK  ;  ZERAH  ;  So.] 

8.  Pharaoh,  the  opponent  of  Sennacherib. — In 


PHARAOH 


817 


the  narrative  of  Sennacherib's  war  with  Hczekian, 
mention  is  made  not  only  of  "  Tirhakah  king  of 
Gush,"  but  also  of"  Pharaoh  king  of  Mizrainr.."  Rab- 
shakeh  thus  taunted  the  king  of  Judah  for  having 
sought  the  aid  of  Pharaoh :  "  Lo,  thou  trustest  in 
the  staff'  of  this  broken  reed,  on  Egypt ;  whereon  if 
a  man  lean,  it  will  go  into  his  hand,  and  pierce  it  r 
so  [is]  Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt  to  all  that  trust  in 
him  "  (Is.  xxxvi.  6).  The  comparison  of  Pharaoh 
to  a  broken  reed  is  remarkable,  as  the  common  hiero 
glyphics  for  "  king,"  restricted  to  Egyptian  sove 
reigns,  SU-TEN,  strictly  a  title  of  the  ruler  of  Upper 
Egypt,  commence  with  a  bent  reed,  which  is  an 
ideographic  symbolical  sign  proper  to  this  word, 
and  is  sometimes  used  alone  without  any  phonetic 
complement.  This  Pharaoh  can  only  be  the  Sethos 
whom  Herodotus  mentions  as  the  opponent  of  Sen 
nacherib,  and  who  may  be  reasonably  supposed  to 
be  the  Zet  of  Manetho,  the  last  king  of  his  xxiiird 
dynasty.  Tirhakah,  as  an  Ethiopian,  whether  then 
ruling  in  Egypt  or  not,  is,  like  So,  apparently  not 
called  Pharaoh.  [TIRHAKAH.] 

9.  Pharaoh  Necho. — The  first  mention  in  the 
Bible  of  a  proper  name  with  the  title  Pharaoh  is 
in  the  case  of  Pharaoh  Necho,  who  is  also  called 
Necho  simply.  His  name  is  written  Necho,  133? 
and  Nechoh,  n'33,  and  in  hieroglyphics  NEKU. 
This  king  was  of  the  Salte  xxvith  dynasty,  of 
which  Manetho  makes  him  either  the  fifth  ruler 
(Africanus)  or  the  sixth  (Eusebius).  Herodotus 
calls  him  Nekos,  and  assigns  to  him  a  reign  of  sixteen 
years,  which  is  confirmed  by  the  monuments.*5 
He  seems  to  have  been  an  enterprising  king,  as  he 
is  related  to  have  attempted  to  complete  the  canal 
connecting  the  Red  Sea  with  the  Nile,  and  to  have 
sent  an  expedition  of  Phoenicians  to  circumnavi 
gate  Africa,  which  was  successfully  accomplished. 
At  the  commencement  of  his  reign  (B.C.  610) 
he  ma'de  war  against  the  king  of  Assyria,  and, 
being  encountered  on  his  way  by  Josiah,  de 
feated  and  slew  the  king  of  Judah  at  Megiddo. 
The  empire  of  Assyria  was  then  drawing  to  a 
close,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Nceho's  expe 
dition  tended  to  hasten  its  fall.  He  was  marching 
against  Carchemish  on  the  Euphrates,  a  place  already 
of  importance  in  the  annals  of  the  Egyptian  wars  of 
the  xixth  dynasty  (Sel.  Pap.  Saltier,  2).  As  he 
passed  along  the  coast  of  Palestine,  Josiah  disputed 
his  passage,  probably  in  consequence  of  a  treaty  with 
Assyria.  The  king  of  Egypt  remonstrated,  sending 
ambassadors  to  assure  him  that  he  did  not  make 
war  upon  him,  and  that  God  was  on  his  side.  "  Ne 
vertheless  Josiah  would  not  turn  his  face  from  him, 
but  disguised  himself,  that  he  might  fight  with 
him,  and  hearkened  not  unto  the  words  of  Necho 
from  the  mouth  of  God,  and  came  to  fight  in  th* 
valley  of  Megiddo."  Here  he  was  wounded  by  the 
archers  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  and  died  (comp.  2  Chr. 
xxxv.  20-24 ;  2  K.  xxiii.  29,  30).  Necho's  asser 
tion  that  he  was  obeying  God's  command  in  warring 
with  the  Assyrians  seems  here  to  be  confirmed. 
Yet  it  can  scarcely  be  understood  as  more  than  a 
conviction  that  the  war  was  predestined,  for  it 
ended  in  the  destruction  of  Necho's  army  and  the 
curtailment  of  his  empire.  Josiah  seems  from  the 


a  According  to  this  historian,  he  was  the  son  of  Psam- 
mptlcbus  I. :  this  the  monuments  do  not  corroborate. 
Dr.  Brugscli  says  that  he  married  NEET-AKERT,  Nito- 
als,  daughter  of  Psammetichns  I.  and  queen  SHEPDN- 
I'EI'KT,  who  appears,  liko  her  mother,  to  bave  been 
VOL.  11. 


the  heiress  of  an  Egyptian  royal  line,  and  supposes  thai 
he  was  the  son  of  Psammetichus  by  another  wife  (see 
Histoire  d'Egypte,  p.  252',  comp,  248).  If  ha  married 
Nitocris,  he  may  have  been  called  by  Herodotna  by  mistakt 
the  SOD  of  Psammetichus. 

3  G 


818 


PHARAOH 


narrative  to  have  known  he  was  wrong  in  opposing 
the  king  of  Egypt ;  otherwise  an  act  so  contrary 
to  the  Egyptianizing  policy  of  his  house  would 
scarcely  have  led  to  his  destruction  and  be  con 
demned  in  the  history.  Herodotus  mentions  this 
battle,  relating  that  Necho  made  war  against  the 
Syrians,  and  defeated  them  at  Magdolus,  after  which 
he  took  Cadytis,  "a  large  city  of  Syria"  (ii.  159). 
There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  Magdolus  is 
Megiddo,  and  not  the  Egyptian  town  of  that  name 
[MIGDOL],  but  the  identification  of  Cadytis  is  diffi 
cult.  It  has  been  conjectured  to  be  Jerusalem,  and 
its  name  has  been  supposed  to  correspond-  to  the 
ancient  title  "  the  Holy,"  flBTlpn,  but  it  is 
elsewhere  mentioned  by  Herodotus  as  a  great  coast- 
town  of  Palestine  near  Egypt  (iii.  5),  and  it  has 
therefore  been  supposed  to  be  Gaza.  The  difficulty 
that  Gaza  is  not  beyond  Megiddo  would  perhaps  be 
removed  if  Herodotus  be  thought  to  have  confounded 
Megiddo  with  the  Egyptian  Magdolus,  but  this  is 
not  certain.  (See  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson's  note  to 
Her.  ii.  159,  ed.  Rawlinson.)  It  seems  possible 
that  Kadytis  is  the  Hittite  city  KETESH,  on  the 
Orontes,  which  was  the  chief  stronghold  in  Syria 
of  those  captured  by  the  kings  of  the  xviiith  and 
xixth  dynasties.  The  Greek  historian  adds  that 
Necho  dedicated  the  dress  he  wore  on  these  oc 
casions  to  Apollo  at  the  temple  of  Branchidae 
(/.  c.).  On  Josiah's  death  his  son  Jehoahaz  was 
set  up  by  the  people,  but  dethroned  three  months 
afterwards  by  Pharaoh,  who  imposed  on  the  land 
the  moderate  tribute  of  a  hundred  talents  of  silver 
and  a  talent  of  gold,  and  put  in  his  place  another 
son  of  Josiah,  Eliakim,  whose  name  he  changed  to 
Jehoiakim,  conveying  Jehoahaz  to  Egypt,  where 
he  died  (2  K.  xxiii.  30-34  ;  2  Chr.  xxxvi.  1-4). 
Jehoiakim  appears  to  have  been  the  elder  son,  so 
that  the  deposing  of  his  brother  may  not  have  been 
merely  because  he  was  made  king  without  the  per 
mission  of  the  conqueror.  Necho  seems  to  have 
soon  returned  to  Egypt:  perhaps  he  was  on  his 
way  thither  when  he  deposed  Jehoahaz.  The  army 
was  probably  posted  at  Carchemish,  and  was 
there  defeated  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Necho  (B.C.  607),  that  king  not  being,  as 
it  seems,  then  at  its  head  (Jer.  xlvi.  1,  2,  6,  10). 
This  battle  led  to  the  loss  of  all  the  Asiatic  domi 
nions  of  Egypt;  and  it  is  related,  after  the  mention 
of  the  death  of  Jehoiakim,  that  "  the  king  of  Egypt 
came  not  again  any  more  out  of  his  land :  for  the 
king  of  Babylon  had  taken  from  the  river  of  Egypt 
unto  the  river  Euphrates  all  that  pertained  to  the 
king  of  Egypt"  (SK.xxiv.  7).  Jeremiah's  prophecy 
of  this  great  defeat  by  Euphrates  is  followed  by 
another,  of  its  consequence,  the  invasion  of  Egypt 
tself ;  but  the  latter  calamity  did  not  occur  in  the 
reign  of  Necho,  nor  in  that  of  his  immediate  suc 
cessor,  Psammetichus  II.,  but  in  that  of  Hophra, 
and  it  was  yet  future  in  the  last  king's  reign  when 
Jeremiah  had  been  carried  into  Egypt  after  the  de 
struction  of  Jerusalem. 

10.  Pharaoh  Hophra. — The  next  king  of  Egypt- 
mentioned  in  the  Bible  is  Pharaoh  Hophra,  the  se 
cond  successor  of  Necho,  from  whom  he  was  sepa- 
rrted  by  the  six  years'  reign  of  Psammetichus  II. 
The  name  Hophra  is  in  hieroglyphics  WAH-(P)RA- 
HAT,  and  the  last  syllable  is  equally  omitted  by  He 
rodotus,  who  writes  Apries,  and  by  Manetho,  who 
writes  Uaphris.  He  came  to  the  throne  About  B.C. 
589,  and  ruled  nineteen  years.  Herodotus  makes  him 
Km  of  Psammetichus  II.,  whom  he  calls  Psaminis, 
mid  great-grandson  of  Psammetichus  I.  The  his- 


PHAHAUH 

torian  relates  his  great  prosperity,  how  he  attacked 
Sidon,  and  fought  a  battle  at  sea  with  the  king 
of  Tyre,  until  at  length  an  army  vhich  he  had 
dispatched  to  conquer  Cyrene  was  routed,  and  tie 
Egyptians,  thinking  he  had  purposely  caused  its 
overthrow  to  gain  entire  power,  no  doubt  by  sub 
stituting  mercenaries  for  native  troops,  revolted,  and 
set  up  Amasis  as  kmg.  Apries,  only  supported  by 
the  Carian  and  Ionian  mercenaries,  was  routed  in  a 
pitched  battle.  Herodotus  remarks  in  narrating 
this,  "  It  is  said  that  Apr.es  believed  that  there  wa» 
not  a  god  who  could  cast  him  down  from  his  emi 
nence,  so  firmly  did  he  think  that  he  had  established 
himself  in  bis  kingdom."  He  was  taken  prisoner, 
and  Amasis  for  a  while  treated  him  with  kindness, 
but  when  the  Egyptians  blamed  him, "  he  gave  Apries 
over  into  the  hands  of  his  former  subjects,  to  deal 
with  as  they  chose.  Then  the  Egyptians  took  him 
and  strangled  him  "  (ii.  161-169).  In  the  Bible  it 
is  related  that  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah,  was 
aided  by  a  Pharaoh  against  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  ful 
filment  of  a  treaty,  and  that  an  army  came  out  of 
Egypt,  so  that  the  Chaldeans  were  obliged  to  raise  the 
siege  of  Jerusalem.  The  city  was  first  besieged  in  the 
ninth  year  of  Zedekiah,  B.C.  590,  and  was  captured 
in  his  eleventh  year,  B.C.  588.  It  was  evidently 
continuously  invested  for  a  length  of  time  before  it 
was  taken,  so  that  it  is  most  probable  that  Pharaoh's 
expedition  took  place  during  590  or  589.  There 
may,  therefore,  be  some  doubt  whether  Psamme 
tichus  II.  be  not  the  king  here  spoken  of;  but  it 
must  be  remembered  that  the  siege  may  be  sup 
posed  to  have  lasted  some  time  before  the  Egyptians 
could  have  heard  of  it  and  marched  to  relieve  ths 
city,  and  also  that  Hophra  may  have  come  to  th« 
throne  as  early  as  B.C.  590.  The  Egyptian  army 
returned  without  effecting  its  purpose  (Jer.  xxvii. 
5-8;  Ez.  xvii.  11-18;  comp.  2  K.  xxv.  1-4). 
Afterwards  a  remnant  of  the  Jews  fled  to  Egypt, 
and  seem  to  have  been  kindly  received.  From  the 
prophecies  against  Egypt  and  against  these  fugitives 
we  learn  more  of  the  history  of  Hophra  ;  and  here 
the  narrative  of  Herodotus,  of  which  we  have  given 
the  chief  heads,  is  a  valuable  commentary.  Ezekie! 
speaks  of  the  arrogance  of  this  king  in  words  which 
strikingly  recall  those  of  the  Greek  historian.  The 
prophet  describes  him  as  a  great  crocodile  lying  in 
his  rivers,  and  saying  "  My  river  [is]  mine  own, 
and  I  have  made  [it]  for  myself"  (xxix.  3). 
Pharaoh  was  to  be  overthrown  and  his  country  in 
vaded  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (xxix.,  xxx.,  xxxi.,  xxxii.). 
This  prophecy  was  yet  unfulfilled  iu  B.C.  572  (xxix. 
17-20).  Jeremiah,  in  Egypt,  yet  more  distinctly 
prophesied  the  end  of  Pharaoh,  warning  the  Jews, 
— "  Thus  saith  the  LORD  ;  Behold,  I  will  give 
Pharaoh-hophra  king  of  Egypt  into  the  hand  of  hi.' 
enemies,  and  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  his  life ; 
as  I  gave  Zedekiah  king  of  Judah  into  the  hand  01 
Nebuchadrezzar  king  of  Babylon,  his  enemy,  and  that 
sought  his  life  "  (xliv.  30).  In  another  place,  wheii 
foretelling  the  defeat  of  Necho's  anny,  the  same  pro 
phet  says, — "  Behold,  I  will  punish  Amon  in  No 
and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with  their  gods,  and  thcii 
kings;  even  Pharaoh,  and  [all]  them  that  trust  ir 
him :  and  I  will  deliver  them  into  the  hand  oi 
those  that  seek  their  lives,  and  into  the  hand  of 
Nebuchadrezzar  king  of  Babylon,  and  into  the  hand 
of  his  servants"  (xlvi.  25,  26).  These  pa.- 
which  entirely  agree  with  the  account  Herodotus 
gives  of  the  death  of  Apries,  make  it  not  impro 
bable  that  the  invasion  of  Nel»uchadni>/./..-ir  was 
the  cause  of  that  disalleetion  of  his  subjects  which 


PHARAOH'S  DAUGHTER 

ended  in  the  overthrow  and  death  of  this  Pharaoh. 
The  invasion  is  not  spoken  of  by  any  reliable  pro 
fane  historian,  excepting  Berosus  (Cory,  Anc.  Frag. 
2nd  ed.  pp.  37,  38),  but  the  silence  of  Herodotus  and 
others  can  no  longer  be  a  matter  of  surprise,  as  we  now 
know  from  the  Assyrian  records  in  cuneiform  of  con 
quests  of  Egypt  either  unrecorded  elsewhere  or  only 
mentioned  by  second-rate  annalists.  No  subsequent 
Pharaoh  is  mentioned  in  Scripture,  but  there  are  pre 
dictions  doubtless  referring  to  the  misfortunes  of  later 
princes  until  the  second  Persian  conquest,  when  the 
prophecy  "  there  shall  be  no  more  a  prince  of  the  land 
of  Egypt "  (Ez.  xxx.  13)  was  fulfilled.  [R.  S.  P.] 

PHARAOH'S  DAUGHTER ;  PHARAOH, 
THE  DAUGHTER  OF.  Three  Egyptian  prin 
cesses,  daughters  of  Pharaohs,  are  mentioned  in  the 
Bible. 

1.  The  preserver  of  Moses,  daughter  of  the  Pha 
raoh  who  first  oppressed  the  Israelites.  She  appeal's 
from  her  conduct  towards  Moses  to  have  been 
heiress  to  the  throne,  something  more  than  ordinary 
adoption  seeming  to  be  indicated  in  the  passage  in 
Hebrews  respecting  the  faith  of  Moses  (xi.  23-26), 
and  the  designation  "  Pharaoh's  daughter,"  perhaps 
here  indicating  that  she  was  the  only  daughter.  She 
probably  lived  for  at  least  forty  years  after  she  saved 
Moses,  for  it  seems  to  be  implied  in  Hebrews  (I.  c.) 
that  she  was  living  when  he  fled  to  Midian.  Arta- 
panus,  or  Artabanus,  a  historian  of  uncertain  date, 
who  appears  to  have  preserved  traditions  current 
amoug  the  Egyptian  Jews,  calls  this  princess  Merrhis, 
and  her  father,  the  oppressor,  Palmanothes,  and 
relates  that  she  was  married  to  Chenephres,  who 
ruled  in  the  country  above  Memphis,  for  that  at  that 
time  there  were  many  kings  of  Egypt,  but  that 
this  one,  as  it  seems,  became  sovereign  of  the  whole 
country  (Frag.  Hist.  Graec.  iii.  pp.  220  seqq.). 
Palmanothes  may  be  supposed  to  be  a  corruption  of 
Amenophis,  the  equivalent  of  Amen-hept,  the  Egyp 
tian  name  of  four  kings  of  the  xviiith  dynasty,  and 
also,  but  incorrectly,  applied  to  one  of  the  xixth, 
whose  Egyptian  name,  Menptah,  is  wholly  different 
from  that  of  the  others.  No  one  of  these  however 
had,  as  far  as  we  know,  a  daughter  with  a  name 
resembling  Merrhis,  nor  is  there  any  king  with  a 
name  like  Ghenephres  of  this  time.  These  kings 
Amenophis,  moreover,  do  not  belong  to  the  period 
of  contemporary  dynasties.  The  tradition  is  appa 
rently  of  little  value  excepting  as  showing  that  one 
quite  different  from  that  given  by  Mauetho  and  other; 
was  anciently  current.  [See  PHARAOH,  3.] 

2.  Bithiah,  wife  of  Mered  an  Israelite,  daughter 
of  a  Pharaoh  of  an  uncertain  age,  probably  of  about 
the  time  of  the  Exodus.     [See  BITHIAH  ;  PHA 
RAOH,  5.] 

3.  A  wife  of  Solomon,  most  probably  daughter  of 
.  a  king  of  the  xxist  dynasty.  She  was  married  to  Solo- 
mot:,  early  in  his  reign,  and  apparently  treated  wit! 
distinc'Ion.     It  has  been  supposed  that  the  Song  of 
Solomoc  was  written  on  the  occasion  of  this  marriage ; 
but  the  idea  is,  we  think,  repugnant  to  sound  criti 
cism.   She  was  at  first  brought  into  the  city  of  David 
(1  K.  iii.  1),  and  afterwards  a  house  was  built  for 
he»  '"ii.  8,  ix.  24),  because  Solomon  would  not  have 
her  dwell  in  the  house  of  David,  which  had  been 
rendered  holy  by  the  ark  having  been  there  (2  Chr. 
viii.  11).     [See  PHARAOH,  7.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

PHARAOH,  THE  WIFE  OF.  The  wife  of 
une  Pharaoh,  the  king  who  received  Hadad  the 
Ktlomite,  is  mentioned  in  Scripture.  She  is  called 


PHAREZ 


81S 


"  queen,"  and  her  name,  Tahpene»,  is  given.  Hei 
husband  was  most  probably  of  the  xxist  dynasty. 
[TAHPENKS;  PHARAOH,  6.]  [R.  S.  P.] 


PHAR'ATHONI'  (<f>apa.e6v;  Joseph. 
Peshito,  Pherath.  ;  Vulg.  Phara).  One  of  the  cities 
of  Judaea  fortified  by  Bacchides  during  his  contests 
with  Jonathan  Maccabaeus  (1  Mace.  ix.  50).  In 
both  MSS.  of  the  LXX.  the  name  is  joined  to  the 
preceding  —  Thamnatha-Pharathon  ;  but  iu  Joseph  us, 
iie  Syriac,  and  Vulgate,  the  two  are  separated. 
iwald  (Geschichte,  iv.  373)  adheres  to  the  former. 
Pharathon  doubtless  represents  an  ancient  Pirathon, 
though  hardly  that  of  the  Judges,  since  that  was  in 
Mt.  Ephraim,  probably  at  Ferata,  a  few  miles  west 
of  Nablus,  too  far  north  to  be  included  in  Judaea 
properly  so  called.  [G.] 

PHA'RES  (Gapes  :  Phares),  PHAREZ  or  PEREZ, 
the  son  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  3  ;  Luke  iii.  33). 

PHA'REZ.  1.  (PEREZ,  1  Chr.  xxvii.  3; 
PHARES,  Matt.  i.  3,  Luke  iii.  33,  1  Esd.  v.  5),  (pS; 
*ape's  :  Pliares,  "  a  breach."  Gen.  xxxviii.  29),  twin 
son,  with  Zarah,  or  Zerah,  of  Judah  and  Tamar  his 
daughter-in-law.  The  circumstances  of  his  birth 
are  detailed  in  Gen.  xxxviii.  Pharez  seems  to  have 
kept  the  right  of  primogeniture  over  his  brother 
as,  in  the  genealogical  lists,  his  name  comes  first. 
The  house  also  which  he  founded  was  far  more 
numerous  and  illustrious  than  that  of  the  Zarhites. 
Its  remarkable  fertility  is  alluded  to  in  Ruth  iv.  12, 

Let  thy  house  be  like  the  house  of  Pharez,  whom 
Tamar  bare  unto  Judah."  Of  Pharez's  personal 
history  or  character  nothing  is  known.  We  can 
only  speak  of  him  therefore  as  a  demarch,  and 
exhibit  his  genealogical  relations.  At  the  time  of 
the  sojourn  in  the  wilderness  the  families  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  were  :  of  Shelah,  the  family  of  the 
Shelanites,  or  Shilonites  ;  of  Pharez,  the  family  of 
the  Pharzites  ;  of  Zerah,  the  family  of  the  Zarhites. 
And  the  sons  of  Pharez  were,  of  Hezron  the  family 
of  the  Hezronites,  of  Hamul  the  family  of  the 
Hamulites  (Num.  xsvi.  20,  21).  After  the  death, 
therefore,  of  Er  and  Onan  without  children,  Pharez 
occupied  the  rank  of  Judah's  second  son,  and  more 
over,  from  two  of  his  sons  sprang  two  new  chief 
houses,  those  of  the  Hezronites  and  Hamulites. 
From  Hezron's  second  son  Ram,  or  Aram,  sprang 
David  and  the  kings  of  Judah,  and  eventually  Jesus 
Christ.  [GENEALOGY  OF  JESUS  CHRIST.]  The 
house  of  Caleb  was  also  incorporated  into  the  house 
of  Hezron  [CALEii],  and  so  were  reckoned  among 
the  descendants  of  Pharez.  Another  line  of  Pharez'f. 
descendants  were  reckoned  as  sons  of  Manasseh  by 
the  second  marriage  of  Hezroii  with  the  daughter 
of  Machir  (1  Chr.  ii.  21-23).  In  the  census  of  the 
house  of  Judah  contained  in  1  Chr.  iv.,  drawn  up 
apparently  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  (iv.  41),  the 
houses  enumerated  in  ver.  1  are  Pharez,  Hezron, 
Carmi,  Hur,  and  Shobal.  Of  these  all  but  Carmi 
(who  was  a  Zarhite,  Josh.  vii.  1)  were  descendants 
of  Pharez.  Hence  it  is  not  unlikely  that,  as  is 
suggested  in  the  margin  of  A.  V.,  Carmi  is  an  error 
for  Chelubai.  Some  of  the  sons  of  Shelah  are  men 
tioned  separately  at  ver.  21,22.  [PAHATH-MOAiJ  ] 
In  the  reign  of  David  the  house  of  Pharez  seems 
to  have  been  eminently  distinguished.  The  cuief  of 
all  the  captains  of  the  host  for  the  first  month, 


»  Whence  our  translators  borrowed  the  final  '  of  this 
name  does  not  appear :  there  is  nothing  in  either  of  U* 
originals  to  suggest  It.  The  Geneva  Vers.  has  It  too. 

3  G  2 


820 


PHAREZ. 


« 

' 


»•      j          S  o  "5  i>  S  «T  o  ~  'e  •£  ^   •  O  :s 

I  I  -lIMflQKJ?. 


FHAKEZ 

Jafiiiojeam,  the  son  of  Zabdiel  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  2,  3), 
so  famous  for  his  prowess  (1  Chr.  xi.  11),  and 
called  "  the  chief  among  the  captains''*  (ib.  and 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  8),  was  of  the  sons  of  Perez,  or 
Pharez.  A  considerable  number  of  the  other  mighty 
men  seem  also,  from  their  patronymic  or  gentile 
names,  to  have  been  of  the  same  house,  those  namely 
who  are  called  Bethlehemites,  Paltites  (1  Chr.  ii. 
33,  47)  Tekoites,  Netophathites,»  and  Ithrites 
(1  Chr.  ii.  53,  iv.  7).  Zabad  the  son  of  Ahlai,  and 
Joab,  and  his  brothers,  Abishai  and  Asahel,  we  know 
were  Pharzites  (1  Chr.  ii.  31,  36, 54,  xi.  41).  And 
the  royal  house  itself  was  the  head  of  the  family. 
We  have  no  means  of  assigning  to  their  respective 
families  those  members  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  who 
are  incidentally  mentioned  after  David's  reign,  as 
Adnah,  the  chief  captain  of  Judah  in  Jehoshaphat's 
reign,  and  Jehohanan  and  Amasiah,  his  companions 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  14-16)  ;  but  that  the  family  of  Pharez 
continued  to  thrive  and  multiply,  we  may  conclude 
from  the  numbers  who  returned  from  captivity. 
At  Jerusalem  alone  468  of  the  sons  of  Perez,  with 
Athaiah,  or  Uthai,  at  their  head,  were  dwelling  i-n 
the  days  of  Zerubbabel  (1  Chr.  ix.  4 ;  Neh.  xi.  4-6), 
Zerubbabel  himself  of  course  being  of  the  family 
(1  Esdr.  v.  5).  Of  the  lists  of  returned  captives 
ill  Ezr.  ii.,  Neh.  vii.,  in  Nehemiah's  time,  the  fol 
lowing  seem  to  have  been  of  the  sons  of  Pharez, 
judging  as  before  from  the  names  of  their  ancestors, 
or  the  towns  to  which  they  belonged :  the  children 
of  Bani  (Ezr.  ii.  10 ;  comp.  1  Chr.  ix.  4) ;  of  Big- 
vai  (ii.  14;  comp.  Ezr.  viii.  14);  of  Ater  (ii.  16; 
comp.  1  Chr.  ii.  26,  54)  ;  of  Jorah,  or  Hariph 
(ii.  18;  Neh.  vii.  24;  comp.  1  Chr.  ii.  51); 
of  Beth-lehem  and  Netophah  (ii.  21,  22  ;  comp. 
1  Chr.  ii.  54);  of  Kirjath-arim  (ii.  25;  comp.  1 
Chr.  ii.  50,  53) ;  of  Harim  (ii.  32 ;  comp.  1  Chr. 
iv.  8)  ;  and,  judging  from  their  position,  many  of 
the  intermediate  ones  also  (comp.  also  the  lists  in 
Ezr.  x.  25-43 ;  Neh.  x.  14-27).  Of  the  builders 
of  the  wall  named  in  Neh.  iii.  the  following  were 
of  the  house  of  Pharez:  Zaccur  the  son  of  Imri 
(ver.  2,  by  comparison  with  1  Chr.  ix.  4,  and  Ezr. 
viii.  14,  where  we  ought,  with  many  MSS.,  to  read 
Zaccur  for  Zabbud)  ;  Zadok  the  son  of  Baaim  (ver. 
4,  by  comparison  with  2  Sam.  xxiii.  29,  where  we 
find  that  Baanah  was  a  Netophathite,  which  agrees 
with  Zadok's  place  here  next  to  the  Tekoites,  since 
Beth-lehem,  Netophah,  and  Tekoa,  are  often  in  close 
juxtaposition,  comp.  1  Chr.  ii.  54,  iv.  4,  5,  Ezr.  ii. 
21,  22,  Neh.  vii.  26,  and  the  situation  of  the  Neto- 
phathites  close  to  Jerusalem,  among  the  Benjamites, 
Neli.  xii.  28,  29,  compared  with  the  mixture  of 
Benjamites  with  Pharzites  and  Zarhites  in  Neh.  iii. 
2-7) ;  the  Tekoites  (ver.  5  and  27,  compared  with 
1  Chr.  ii.  24,  iv.  5) ;  Jehoiada,  the  son  of  Paseah 
(ver.  6,  compared  with  1  Chr.  iv.  12,  where  Paseah, 
a  Chelubite,  is  apparently  descended  from  Ashur, 
the  father  of  Tekoa)  ;  Rephaiah,  the  son  of  Hur 
(ver.  9,  compared  with  1  Chr.  ii.  20,  50,  iv.  4, 
12,  Beth-Kaphah)  ;  Hanuii  (ver.  13  and  30),  with 
the  inhabitants  of  Zanoah  (compai^d  with  1  Chr. 
iv.  18) ;  perhaps  Malchiah  the  son  of  Rechab 
(ver.  14,  compared  with  1  Chr.  ii.  55) ;  Nehe- 
mml.,  son  of  Azbuk,  ruler  of  Beth-zur  (ver.  16, 
compared  with  1  Chi1,  ii.  45) ;  and  perhaps  Baruch, 
son  of  Zabba,  or  Zaccai  (ver.  20),  if  for  Zaccai  we 
read  Zaccur  as  the  mention  of  "  the  other,  or 


PHAH1SEES 


82  J 


"  Maharai  the  Netophathite  was  however  a  Zarhite 
(1  Cbr.  xxvii.  13),  while  Heldal,  or  Hclcd,  the  descendant 
of  Otliniel,  wae  a  Pbanutc  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  15). 


second,  piece "  makes  probable,  as  well  as  hu 
proximity  to  Meremoth  in  this  second  piece,  as 
Zaccur  was  to  Meremofh  in  their  lirst  pieces,  (ver. 
2,4). 

The  table  on  the  opposite  page  displays  the  chief 
descents  of  the  house  of  Pharez,  and  show:;  its  rela 
tive  greatness,  as  compared  with  the  other  houses  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah.  It  will  be  observed  that  many  of 
the  details  are  more  topographical  than  genealogical, 
and  that  several  towns  in  Dan,  Simeon,  and  Ben 
jamin,  as  Eshtaol,  Zorah,  Etam,  and  Gibea,  seern 
to  have  been  peopled  with  Pharez's  descendants. 
The  confusion  between  the  elder  and  younger  Caleb 
is  inextricable,  and  suggests  the  suspicion  that  the 
elder  Caleb  or  Chelubai  may  have  had  no  real,  but 
only  a  genealogical  existence,  intended  to  embrace 
all  those  families  who  on  the  settlement  in  Canaan 
were  reckoned  to  the  house  of  Caleb,  the  son  of 
Jephunneh,  the  Kenezite. 

2.  (*6pos :  Phares)  =  PAROSH  (1  Esdr.  viii.  30 ; 
comp.  Ezr.  viii.  3).  [A.  C.  H.] 

PHAR'IRA  (*apipe£;  Alex.  *api5<£:  Phasida) 
=  PERIDA  or  PERUDA  (1  Esdr.  v.  33). 

PHAEISEES  (*apj(rau»i:  Pharisaet),  a 'reli 
gious  party  or  school  amongst  the  Jews  at  the  time 
of  Christ,  so  called  from  Perishin,  the  Aramaic  form 
of  the  Hebrew  word  Perushim,  "separated."  The 
name  does  not  occur  either  in  the  Old  Testament 
or  in  the  Apocrypha ;  but  it  is  usually  considered 
that  the  Pharisees  were  essentially  the  same  with 
the  Assideans  (i.  e.  cha&dim  =  godly  men,  saints) 
mentioned  in  the  1st  Book  of  Maccabees  ii.  42,  vii. 
13-17,  and  in  the  2nd  Book  xiv.  6.  And  those  who 
admit  the  existence  of  Maccabean  Psalms  find  allu 
sions  to  the  Assideans  in  Psalms  Ixxix.  2,  xcvn.  10, 
cxxxii.  9,  16,  cxlix.  9,  where  cha&dim  is  translated 
"  saints  "  in  the  A.  V.  (See  Fiirst's  Jfandworterbuch, 
i.  420, 6.)  In  the  2nd  Book  of  Maccabees,  supposed 
by  Geiger  to  have  been  written  by  a  Pharisee  (  Ur- 
schrift  und  Uebersetzungen  der  Bibel,  p.  226),  there 
are  two  passages  which  tend  to  illustrate  the  meaning 
of  the  word  "  separated  ;"  one  in  xiv.  3,  where  Alci- 
mus,  who  had  been  high-priest,  is  described  as  hav 
ing  defiled  himself  wilfully  "  in  the  times  of  the 
mingling  " — Iv  TOIS  TTJS  iwtpu^lut  xp6vois, — 
and  another  in  xiv.  38,  where  the  zealous  Razis  is 
said  to  have  been  accused  of  Judaism,  "  in  the 
former  times  when  there  was  no  mingling,"  if 
rots  epirpoffOfv  ^pAvcis  -rrjs  a.  p.  1 £  /  a  s.  In  both 
cases  the  expression  "  mingling  "  refers  to  the  time 
when  Antiochus  Epiphanes  had  partially  succeeded 
in  breaking  down  the  barrier  which  divided  the 
Jews  from  his  other  subjects ;  and  it  was  in  the 
resolute  determination  to  resist  the  adoption  of 
Grecian  customs,  and  the  slightest  departure  from 
the  requirements  of  their  own  law,  that  the  "  Sepa 
rated  "  took  their  rise  as  a  party.  Compare  1  Mace. 
i.  13-15,  41-49,  62,  63.  Subsequently,  however 
(and  perhaps  not  wholly  at  first),  this  by  no 
means  exhausted  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  Pha 
risees." 

A  knowledge  of  the  opinions  and  practices  of  this 
party  at  the  time  of  Christ  is  of  great  importance 
for  entering  deeply  into  the  genius  of  the  vJii/istian 
religion.  A  cursory  perusal  of  the  Gospeis  is  sutP. 
cient  to  show  that  Christ's  teaching  was  in  some 
respects  thoroughly  antagonistic  to  theirs.  He  de 
nounced  them  in  the  bitterest  language  ;  and  in  tha 
sweeping  charges  of  hypocrisy  which  He  made  against 
them  ;ih  a  class,  Hi  m  ght  even,  ajt  first  sight,  seem 


822 


PHARISEES 


to  have  departed  from  that  spirit  of  meekness,"  of 
gentleness  in  judging  others,  and  of  abstinence  from 
the  imputation  of  improper  motives,  which  is  one  of 
the  most  characteristic  and  original  charms  of  His 
own  precepts.  See  Matt.  xv.  7,  8,  xxiii.  5,  13,  14, 
15,  23;  Mark  vii.  6;  Luke  xi.  42-44,  and  com 
pare  Matt.  vii.  1-5,  xi.  29,  xii.  19,  20  ;  Luke  vi. 
28,  37-42.  Indeed  it  is  difficult  to  avoid  the  con 
clusion  that  His  repeated  denunciations  of  the  Pha 
risees  mainly  exasperated  them  into  taking  measures 
for  causing  his  death  ;  so  that  in  one  sense  He  may 
be  said  to  have  shed  His  blood,  and  to  have  laid 
down  His  life  in  protesting  against  their  practice  and 
spirit.  (See  especially  verses  53,  54  in  the  xith 
chapter  of  Luke,  which  follow  immediately  upon 
the  narration  of  what  he  said  while  dining  with  a 
Pharisee.)  Hence  to  understand  the  Pharisees  is, 
by  contrast,  an  aid  towards  understanding  the  spirit 
of  uncorrupted  Christianity. 

Authorities. — The  sources  of  information  respect 
ing  the  Pharisees  are  mainly  threefold.  1st.  The 
writings  of  Joseph  us,  who  was  himself  a  Pharisee 
(  Vit.  2),  and  who  in  each  of  his  great  works  pro 
fesses  to  give  a  direct  account  of  their  opinions 
(B.  J.  ii.  8,  §2-14;  Ant.  xviii.  1,  §2,  and  com 
pare  xiii.  10,  §5-6,  xvii.  2,  §4,  xiii.  16,  §2,  and 
Vit.  38).  The  value  of  Josephus's  accounts  would 
be  much  greater,  if  he  had  not  accommodated  them, 
more  or  less,  to  Greek  ideas,  so  that  in  order  to 
arrive  at  the  exact  truth,  not  only  much  must  be 
added,  but  likewise  much  of  what  he  has  written, 
must  be  re-translated,  as  it  were,  into  Hebrew  con 
ceptions.  2ndly.  The  New  Testament,  including 
St.  -Paul's  Epistles,  in  addition  to  the  Gospels  and 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  St.  Paul  had  been  in 
structed  by  an  illustrious  Rabbi  (Acts  xxii.  3) ;  he 
had  been  a  rigid  Pharisee  (xxiii.  6,  xxvi.  5),  and  the 
remembrance  of  the  galling  bondage  from  which  he 
had  escaped  (Gal.  iv.  9,  10,  v.  1)  was  probably  a 
human  element  in  that  deep  spirituality,  and  that 
uncompromising  opposition  to  Jewish  ceremonial 
observances,  by  which  he  pre-eminently  contributed 
to  make  Christianity  the  religion  of  the  civilized 
world.  3rdly.  The  first  portion  of  the  Talmud, 
called  the  Mishna,  or  "  second  law."  This  is  by 
far  the  most  important  source  of  information  re 
specting  the  Pharisees ;  and  it  may  safely  be  asserted 
that  it  is  nearly  impossible  to  have  adequate  con 
ceptions  respecting  them,  without  consulting  that 
work.  It  is  a  digest  of  the  Jewish  traditions,  and 
a  compendium  of  the  whole  ritual  law,  reduced  to 
writing  in  its  present  form  by  Rabbi  Jehudah  the 
Holy,  a  Jew  of  great  wealth  and  influence,  who 
flourished  in  the  2nd  century.  He  succeeded  his 
father  Simeon  as  patriarch  of  Tiberias,  and  held 
chat  office  at  least  thirty  years.  The  precise 
date  of  his  death  is  disputed ;  some  placing  it  in 
a  year  somewhat  antecedent  to  194,  A.  p.  (see 
Graetz,  Geschichte  der  Juden,  iv.  p.  251),  while 
others  place  it  as  late  as  220  A.D.,  when  he  would 


*  This  is  thus  noticed  by  Milton,  from  the  point  of  view 
of  his  own  peculiar  ecclesiastical  opinions : — "  The  invin 
cible  warrior  Zeal,  shaking  loosely  the  slack  reins,  drives 
over  the  heads  of  scarlet  prelates,  and  such  as  are  insolent 
to  maintain  traditions,  bruising  their  stiff  necks  under  his 
flaming  wheels.  Thus  did  the  true  prophets  of  old  combat 
with  the  false.  Thus  Christ  Himself,  the  fountain  of  meek- 
nest,  found  acrimony  enough  to  be  still  galling  and  vexing 
the  prelatical  I'hansees" — Apology  for  Smectymnuos. 

*>  There  are  two  Gcmaras :  one  of  Jerusalem,  in  wliicb 
there  is  .-aid  to  be  no  passage  which  can  be  proved  to  be 
later  than  the  first  half  of  the  4th  century ;  and  the  other 


PHARISEES 

hare  been  about  81  years  old  (Jost's  Geschichti 
des  Judenthums  und  seiner  Sekten,  ii.  p.  118). 
The  Mishna  is  very  concisely  written,  and  requires! 
notes.  This  circumstance  led  to  the  Commen 
taries  called  Gemarab  (f.  e.  Supplement,  Com 
pletion,  according  to  Buxtorf).  which  form  the 
second  part  of  the  Talmud,  and  which  are  very 
commonly  meant  when  the  word  "Talmud"  is 
used  by  itself.  The  language  of  the  Mishna  is  that 
of  the  later  Hebrew,  purely  written  on  the  whole, 
though  with  a  few  grammatical  Aramaisms,  and 
interspersed  with  Greek,  Latin,  and  Aramaic  words 
which  had  become  naturalized.  The  work  is  dis 
tributed  into  six  great  divisions  or  orders.  The  first 
(Zeraim)  relates  to  "  seeds,"  or  productions  of  the 
land,  and  it  embraces  all  matters  connected  with 
the  cultivation  of  the  soil,  and  the  disposal  of  its  pro 
duce  in  offerings  or  tithes.  It  is  preceded  by  a  trea 
tise  on  "  Blessings"  (Beracoth}.  The  2nd  (Moed) 
relates  to  festivals  and  their  observances.  The  3rd 
(Nashim)  to  women,  and  includes  regulations  re 
specting  betrothals,  marriages,  and  divorces.  The 
4th  (Nezikin")  relates  to  damages  sustained  by  means 
of  man,  beasts,  or  things;  with  decisions  on  points  at 
issue  between  man  and  man  in  commercial  dealings 
and  compacts.  The  5th  (KodaslArri)  treats  of  holy 
things,  of  offerings,  and  of  the  Temple-service.  The 
6th  (Toharoth)  treats  of  what  is  clean  and  unclean. 
These  6  Orders  are  subdivided  into  61  Treatises,  as 
reckoned  by  Maimonides ;  but  want  of  space  precludes 
describing  their  contents ;  and  the  mention  of  the 
titles  would  give  little  information  without  such 
description.  For  obtaining  accurate  knowledge  on 
these  points,  the  reader  is  referred  to  Surenhusius's 
admirable  edition  of  the  Mishna  in  6  vols.  folio, 
Amsterdam,  1698,  1703,  which  contains  not  only 
a  Latin  translation  of  the  text,  but  likewise  ample 
prefaces  and  explanatory  notes,  including  those  of 
the  celebrated  Maimonides.  Others  may  prefer  the 
German  translation  of  Jost,  in  an  edition  of  the 
Mishna  wherein  the  Hebrew  text  is  pointed ;  but 
the  German  is  in  Hebrew  letters,  3  vols.  4to., 
Berlin.  And  an  English  reader  may  obtain  an  ex 
cellent  idea  of  the  whole  work  from  an  English 
translation  of  18  of  its  Treatises  by  DeSola  and 
Raphall,  London,  1843.  There  is  no  reasonable 
doubt,  that  although  it  may  include  a  few  passages 
of  a  later  date,  the  Mishna  was  composed,  as  a 
whole,  in  the  2nd  century,  and  represents  the  tra 
ditions  which  were  current  amongst  the  Pharisees 
at  the  time  of  Christ.  This  may  be  shown  in  the 
following  way.  1st.  Josephus,  whose  Autobio 
graphy  was  apparently  not  written  later  than  A.D. 
100,  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Trajan,  is  a» 
authority  to  show  that  up  to  that  period  no  im 
portant  change  had  been  introduced  since  Christ's 
death ;  and  the  general  facts  of  Jewish  history  render 
it  morally  imposs/ble  that  there  should  have  beek 
any  essential  alteration  either  in  the  reign  of  Trajan, 
the  epoch  of  the  great  Jewish  revolts  in  Egypt, 

of  Babylon,  completed  about  500  A.D.  The  latter  is  the 
most  important,  and  by  for  the  longest  It  was  estimated 
by  Chiariui  to  be  fifteen  times  as  long  as  the  Mishna 
The  whole  of  the  Gemaras  has  never  been  translated ; 
though  a  proposal  to  make  such  a  translation  was  brought 
before  the  public  by  Chiarini  (Thearie  du  Jutlaisme  ap- 
pliqu*.  a  la  Rfforme  des  Israelite!.  A.D.  1830).  But  Chia 
rini  died  in  1832.  Fifteen  treatises  of  the  Jerusalem  Ge- 
mara,  and  two  of  the  Babylonian,  are  given,  accompanied 
by  a  Latin  translation,  in  Ujjolino's  Tlirftiuritf,  vols.  xv:i.- 
XX.  Some  interpret  (ietuara  to  be  iduitiual  in  mfuniue 
with  Talmud,  signifying  "doctrine.'' 


PHARISEES 

Cyrene,  aid  Cyprus;  or  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian, 
during  which  there  was  the  disastrous  second  rebel 
lion  in  Judaea.  And  it  was  at  the  time  of  the 
suppression  of  this  rebellion  that  Rabbi  Jehudah 
was  born ;  the  tradition  being  that  his  birth  was  on 
the  very  same  day  that  Rabbi  Akiba  was  flayed  alive 
and  pui  to  death,  A.D.  136-137.  2ndly.  There  is 
frequent  reference  in  the  Mishna  to  the  sayings  and 
decisions  of  Hillel  and  Shammai,  the  celebrated 
leaders  of  two  schools  among  the  Pharisees,  differing 
from  each  other  on  what  would  seem  to  Christians 
to  be  comparatively  unimportant  points.  But  Hillel 
and  Shammai  flourished  somewhat  before  the  birth 
of  Christ ;  and,  except  on  the  incredible  supposition 
of  forgeries  or  mistakes  on  a  very  large  scale,  their 
decisions  conclusively  furnish  particulars  of  the  ge 
neral  system  in  force  among  the  Pharisees  during 
the  period  of  Christ's  teaching.  There  is  likewise 
occasional  reference  to  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  Gama 
liel,  the  grandson  of  Hillel,  and  the  teacher  of  St. 
Paul.  Srdly.  The  Mishiia  contains  numerous  cere 
monial  regulations,  especially  in  the  5th  Order, 
which  pre-suppose  that  the  Temple-service  is  still 
subsisting,  and  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  these 
were  invented  after  the  destruction  of  the  Temple 
by  Titus.  But  these  breathe  the  same  general  spirit 
as  the  other  traditions,  and  there  is  no  sufficient 
reason  for  assuming  any  difference  of  date  between 
the  one  kind  and  the  other.  Hence  tor  facts  con 
cerning  the  system  of  the  Pharisees,  as  distinguished 
from  an  appreciation  of  its  merits  or  defects,  the 
value  of  the  Mishna  as  an  authority  is  greater 
than  that  of  all  other  sources  of  information  put  to 
gether. 

Referring  to  the  Mishna  for  details,  it  is  proposed 
in  this  article  to  give  a  general  view  of  the  pecu 
liarities  of  the  Pharisees ;  afterwards  to  notice  their 
opinions  on  a  future  life  and  on  free-will ;  and 
finally,  to  make  some  remarks  on  the  proselytizing 
spirit  attributed  to  them  at  the  time  of  Christ. 
Points  noticed  elsewhere  in  this  Dictionary  will  be 
as  far  as  possible  avoided.  Hence  information  re 
specting  Corban  and  Phylacteries,  which  in  the  New 
Testament  are  peculiarly  associated  with  the  Pha 
risees,  must  be  sought  for  under  the  appropriate 
titles.  See  CORBAN  and  FRONTLETS. 

I.  The  fundamental  principle  of  the  Pharisees 
common  to  them  with  all  orthodox  modern  Jews  is, 
that  by  the  side  of  the  written  law  regarded  as  a 
summary  of  the  principles  and  general  laws  of  the 
Hebrew  people,  there  was  an  oral  law  to  complete 
and  to  explain  the  written  law.  It  was  an  article 
of  faith  that  in  the  Pentateuch  there  was  no  precept, 
and  no  regulation,  ceremonial,  doctrinal,  or  legal, 
of  which  God  had  not  given  to  Moses  all  explana 
tions  necessary  for  their  application,  with  the  order 
to  transmit  them  by  word  of  mouth  (Klein's  Verite 
siir  le  Talmud,  p.  9).  The  classical  passage  in  the 
Mishna  on  this  subject  is  the  following: — "Moses 
received  the  (oral)  law  from  Sinai,  and  delivered  it  to 
Joshua,  and  Joshua  to  the  elders,  and  the  elders  to  the 
prophets,  and  the  prophets  to  the  men  of  the  Great 

•  A  passage  in  Deuteronomy  (xvii.  8-11)  has  been  inter 
preted  BO  as  to  serve  as  a  basis  for  an  oral  law.  But  that 
passage  seems  merely  to  prescribe  obedience  to  the  priests, 
the  Levites,  and  to  the  judges  in  civil  and  criminal  matters 
of  controversy  between  man  and  man.  A  fanciful  appli 
cation  oi  the  words  ^Q~7j?  in  ver.  11  has  favoured  the 

rabbinical  interpretation.  In  the  '  Festival  Prayers '  of  the 
Knglish  Jews,  p  69  for  Pentecost,  it  IB  stated,  of  Ood.  in  a 


PHARISEES 


82: 


j  Synagogue"  (Pvrke  Aboth,\.\  This  remarkable  stata- 
!  ment  is  so  destitute  of  what  would  at  the  present  day 
|  be  deemed  historical  evidence,  and  would,  it  might 
be  supposed,  have  been  rendered  so  incredible  to  a 
Jew  by  the  absence  of  any  distinct  allusion  c  to  the 
fact  in  the  Old  Testament,  that  it  is  interesting  to 
consider  by  what  process  of  argument  the  principle 
could  ever  have  won  acceptance.  It  may  be  con 
ceived  in  the  following  way.  The  Pentateuch,  ac 
cording  to  the  Rabbins,  contains  613  laws;  in 
cluding  248  commands,  and  365  prohibitions ;  but 
whatever  may  be  the  number  of  the  laws,  how 
ever  minutely  they  may  be  anatomized,  or  intc 
whatever  form  they  may  be  thrown,  there  is  no 
where  an  allusion  to  the  duty  of  prayer,  or  to  the 
doctrine  of  a  future  life.  The  absence  of  the  doc 
trine  of  a  future  life  has  been  made  familiar  tc 
English  theologians  by  the  author  of  "  The  divine 
Legation  of  Moses ;"  and  the  fact  is  so  undeniable, 
that  it  is  needless  to  dwell  upon  it  farther.  The 
absence  of  any  injunction  to  pray  has  not  attracted 
equal  attention,  but  seems  to  be  almost  equally 
certain.  The  only  passage  which  by  any  ingenuity 
has  ever  been  interpreted  to  enjoin  prayer  is  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  25.  where  the  words  are  used,  "  And' ye  shall 
serve  Jehovah  your  God."  But  as  the  Pentateuch 
abounds  with  specific  injunctions  as  to  the  mode  of 
serving  Jehovah ;  by  sacrifices,  by  meat-offerings, 
by  drink-offerings,  by  the  rite  of  circumcision,  by 
observing  festivals,  such  as  the  Sabbath,  the  Pass 
over,  the  feast  of  weeks,  and  the  feast  of  taber 
nacles,  by  obeying  all  His  ceremonial  and  moral 
commands,  and  by  loving  Him,  it  is  contrary  to 
sound  rules  of  construction  to  import  into  the 
general  word  "  serve  "  Jehovah  the  specific  mean 
ing  "pray  to"  Jehovah,  when  that  particulai 
mode  of  service  is  nowhere  distinctly  commanded 
in  the  law.  There  being  then  thus  no  mention 
either  of  a  future  life,  or  of  prayer  as  a  duty,d 
it  would  be  easy  for  the  Pharisees  at  a  time  when 
prayer  was  universally  practised,  and  a  future  life 
was  generally  believed  in  or  desired,  to  argue  from 
the  supposed  inconceivability  of  a  true  revelation 
not  commanding  prayer,  or  not  asserting  a  future 
life,  to  the  necessity  of  Moses  having  treated  of 
both  orally.  And  when  the  principle  of  an  oral 
tradition  in  two  such  important  points  was  once 
admitted,  it  was  easy  for  a  skilful  controversialist  to 
carry  the  application  of  the  principle  much  farther 
by  insisting  that  there  was  precisely  the  same  evi 
dence  for  numerous  other  traditions  having  come 
from  Moses  as  for  those  two-;  and  that  it  was  illo 
gical,  as  well  as  presumptuous  to  admit  the  two 
only,  and  to  exercise  the  right  of  selection  and  pri 
vate  judgment  respecting  the  rest. 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  all  the  traditions 
which  bound  the  Pharisees  were  believed  to  be 
direct  revelations  to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai.  In 
addition  to  such  revelations,  which  were  not  dis 
puted,  although  there  wa»  no  proof  from  the  written 
law  to  support  them,  and  in  addition  to  interpreta 
tions  received  from  Moses,  which  were  either  implied 


prayer,  "  He  explained  it  (the  law)  to  His  people  face  to 
face,  and  on  every  point  are  ninety-eight  explanations." 
<»  Mahomet  was  preceded  both  by  Christianity  and  by 
the  latest  development  of  Judaism:  from  both  of  which  ho 
borrowed  much.  See,  as  to  Judaism,  Geiger's  essay,  Wat 
hat  Mohammed  aus  dem  Judenthum  aufgenommen  ?  Still, 
one  of  the  most  marked  characteristics  of  the  Koran  is  ttw 
unwearied  reiteration  of  the  duty  of  prayer,  and  of  the 
certainty  of  a  future  state  of  retribution 


324  PHARISEES 

m  tne  written  law  or  to  be  elicited  from  them  f>y 
reasoning,  there  were  three  other  classes  of  tradi 
tions.  1st.  Opinions  on  disputed  points,  which 
were  the  result  of  a  majority  of  votes.  To  this 
class  belonged  the  secondary  questions  on  which 
Inert  was  a  difference  between  the  schools  of  Hillel 
and  Shjmmai.  2nd!;*.  Decrees  made  by  prophets 
and  wise  men  in  different  ages,  in  conformity  with 
a  saying  attributed  to.  the  men  of  the  Great  Syna 
gogue,  "  Be  deliberate  in  judgment ;  train  up  many 
disciples ;  and  make  a  fence  for  the  law."  These 
carried  prohibitions  farther  than  the  written  law  or 
oral  law  of  Moses,  in  order  to  protect  the  Jewish 
people  from  temptations  to  sin  or  pollution.  For 
example,  the  injunction  "  Thou  shalt  not  seethe  a 
kid  in  his  mother's  milk,"  e  Ex.  xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26 ; 
Deut.  xiv.  21  ;  was  interpreted  by  the  oral  law  to 
mean  that  the  flesh  of  quadrupeds  might  not  be 
.cooked,  or  in  any  way  mixed  with  milk  for  food; 
so  that  even  now  amongst  the  oithodox  Jews  milk 
may  not  be  eaten  for  some  hours  after  meat.  But 
this  was  extended  by  the  wise  men  to  the  flesh  of 
birds ;  and  now,  owing  to  this  "  fence  to  the  law," 
the  admixture  of  poultry  with  any  milk,  or  its  pre 
parations,  is  rigorously  forbidden.  When  once  a 
decree  of  this  kind  had  been  passed,  it  could  not  be 
reversed ;  and  it  was  subsequently  said  that  not 
even  Elijah  himself  could  take  away  anything  from 
the  18  points  which  had  been  determined  on  by 
the  school  of  Shammai  and  the  school  of  Hillel. 
•3rdly.  Legal  decisions  of  proper  ecclesiastical  autho 
rities  on  disputed  questions.  Some  of  these  were 
attributed  to  Moses,  some  to  Joshua,  and  some  to 
Ezra.  Some  likewise  to  Rabbis  of  later  date,  such 
as  Hillel  and  Gamaliel.  However,  although  in  these 
several  ways,  all  the  traditions  of  the  Pharisees 
were  not  deemed  direct  revelations  from  Jehovah, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  all  became  invested,  more  or 
less,  with  a  peculiar  sanctity;  so  that,  regarded 
collectively,  the  study  of  them  and  the  observance 
of  them  becan.e  as  imperative  as  the  study  and  ob 
servance  of  the  precepts  in  the  Bible. 

Viewed  as  a  whole,  they  treated  men  like  chil 
dren,  formalizing  and  defining  the  minutest  par 
ticular  of  ritual  observances.  The  expressions  of 
"  bondage,"  of  "  weak  and  beggarly  elements,"  and 
of  "  burdens  too  heavy  for  men  to  bear,"  faithfully 
represent  the  impression  produced  by  their  multi 
plicity.  An  elaborate  argument  might  be  advanced 
for  many  of  them  individually,  but  the  sting  of 
them  consisted  in  their  aggregate  number,  which 
would  have  a  tendency  to  quench  the  fei-vour  and 
the  freshness  of  a  spiritual  religion.  They  varied 
in  character,  and  the  following  instances  may  be 
given  of  three  different  classes : — 1st,  of  those  which, 
admitting  certain  principles,  were  points  reasonable 
'o  define ;  2ndly,  of  points  defined  which  were 
superfluously  particularized ;  and  Srdly,  of  points 
defined  where  the  discussion  of  them  at  all  was 
superstitious  and  puerile.  Of  the  first  clfiss  the 
very  first  decision  in  the  Mishna  is  a  specimen. 
It  defines  the  period  up  to  which  a  Jew  is  bound, 
f\s  his  evening  service,  to  repeat  the  Shema.  The 
Shema  is  the  celebrated  passage  in  Deut.  vi.  4-9, 
commencing,  "  Hear,  O  Israel :  the  Lord  our  God 
is  one  Lord,  and  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and 
with  all  thy  might."  It  is  a  tradition  that  every 


PHARISEES 

Israelite  is  bound  to  recite  this  passage  twice  in  the 
twenty-four  hours,  morning  and  evening — for  which 
authority  is  supposed  to  be  found  in  verse  7,  wher« 
it  is  said  of  these  words,  "  Thou  shalt  talk  of  them 
.  .  .  .  when  thou  liest  down  and  when  thou  risest 
up."  The  compulsory  recitation  of  even  these  woi-ds 
twice  a  day  might  be  objected  to  as  leading  to 
formalism;  but,  accepting  the  recitation  as  a  reli 
gious  duty,  it  might  not  be  unreasonable  that  the 
range  of  time  permitted  for  the  recitation  should  be 
defined.  The  following  is  the  decision  on  this  point 
in  the  Mishna,  Beracoth  i.  "  From  what  time  do 
they  recite  the  Shema  in  the  evening  ?  From  th* 
time  that  the  priests  are  admitted  to  eat  their  obla 
tions  till  the  end  of  the  first  watch.  The  words  of 
Rabbi  Eliezer :  but  the  wise  men  say,  up  to  mid 
night.  Rabban  Gamaliel  says,  until  the  column  of 
dawn  has  arisen.  Case:  His  sons  returning  from 
a  house  of  entertainment  said,  We  have  not  yet 
recited  the  Shema;  to  whom  he  said,  If  the  column 
of  dawn  has  not  yet  arisen,  you  are  bound  to  recite 
it.  But  not  this  alone;  but  wherever  the  wise  men 
have  said  '  to  midnight,'  their  injunction  is  in  force 

until  the  column  of  dawn  has  arisen If  so, 

why  did  the  wise  men  say  till  midnight?  In  order 
to  keep  men  far  from  transgression."  The  following 
is  an  instance  of  the  second  class.  It  relates  to  the 
lighting  candles  on  the  eve  of  the  Sabbath,  which 
is  the  duty  of  every  Jew:  it  is  found  in  the 
Mishna,  in  the  treatise  Shabbath,  c.  ii.,  and  it 
printed  in  the  Hebrew  and  English  Prayer-Book, 
according  to  the  form  of  the  German  and  Polisl 
Jews,  p.  66,  from  which,  to  avoid  objections,  thii 
translation,  and  others,  where  it  is  possible,  are  taken. 
"  With  what  sort  of  wick  and  oil  are  the  candlet 
of  the  Sabbath  to  be  lighted,  and  with  what  arc 
they  not  to  be  lighted  ?  They  are  not  to  be  lighted 
with  the  woolly  substance  that  grows  upon  cedars, 
nor  with  undressed  flax,  nor  with  silk,  nor  with 
rushes,  nor  with  leaves  out  of  the  wilderness,  no* 
with  moss  that  grows  on  the  surface  of  water,  nor 
with  pitch,  nor  with  wax,  nor  with  oil  made  of 
cotton-seed,  nor  with  the  fat  of  the  tail  or  th« 
entrails  of  beasts.  Nathan  Hamody  saith  it  may 
be  lighted  with  boiled  suet;  but  the  wise  men  say, 
be  it  boiled  or  not  boiled,  it  may  not  be  lighted 
with  it.  It  may  not  be  lighted  with  burnt  oil  on 
festival-days,  Rabbi  Ishmael  says  it  may  not  b« 
lighted  with  train-oil  because  of  honour  to  the  Sab 
bath  ;  but  the  wise  men  allow  of  all  sorts  of  oil ; 
with  mixed  oil,  with  oil  of  nuts,  oil  of  radish-seed, 
oil  of  fish,  oil  of  gourd-seed,  of  rosin  and  gum. 
Rabbi  Tarphun  saith  they  are  not  to  be  lighted  but 
with  oil  of  olives.  Nothing  that  grows  out  of  the 
woods  is  used  for  lighting  but  flax,  and  nothing 
that  grows  out  of  woods  doth  not  pollute  by  the 
pollution  of  a  tent  but  flax  :  the  wick  of  cloth  that 
is  doubled,  and  has  not  been  singed,  Rabbi  Elcazni 
saith  it  is  unclean,  and  may  not  be  lighted  withal ; 
Rabbi  Akibah  saith  it  is  clean,  nnd  may  be  lighted 
withal.  A  man  may  not  split  a  shell  of  an  egg 
and  fill  it  with  oil  and  put  it,  in  the  socket  of  a 
candlestick,  because  it  shall  blaze,  though  the  candle 
stick  be  of  earthenware ;  but  Rabbi  Jehudah  per 
mits  it:  if  the  potter  made  it  with  a  hole  through 
at  first,  it  is  allowed,  because  it  is  the  same  vessel. 
No  man  shall  fill  a  platter  with  oil,  and  give  it 
pkice  next  to  the  lamp,  and  put  the  head  of  th« 


•  Although  this  prohibition  occurs  three  times,  no  light 
!ii  thrown  upon  its  meaning  by  the  context.  The  most  pro- 
table  conjecture  is  that  given  under  the  head  of  IDOLATKI 


(I.  859  6),  that  it  was  aimed  against  some  practice  of  ido 
laters.  Mr.  Lalng  gives  a  similar  explanation  of  the  Chrlfr 
tian  prohibition  in  Scandinavia  against  eating  borae-Secb 


PHAKISEES 

Tick  in  a  platter  to  make  it  drop  the  oil ;  but ' 
Rabbi  Jehndah  permits  it."  Now  in  regard  to 
details  of  this  kind,  admitting  it  w<u  not  unreason 
able  to  make  some  regulations  concerning  lighting 
candles,  it  certainly  seems  that  the  above  particulars 
we  too  minute,  and  that  all  which  was  really  essen 
tial  could  have  been  brought  within  a  much  smaller 
compass.  3rdly.  A  specimen  of  the  3rd  class  may 
be  pointed  out  in  the  beginning  of  the  treatise 
on  festivals  (Moed),  entitled  Beitzah,  an  Egg, 
from  the  following  case  of  the  egg  being  the  first 
point  discussed  in  it.  We  are  gravely  informed 
that  "  an  egg  laid  on  a  festival  may  be  eaten,  ac 
cording  to  the  school  of  Shammai ;  but  the  school 
of  Hillel  says  it  must  not  be  eaten."  In  order  to 
understand  this  important  controversy,  which  re 
winds  us  of  the  two  parties  in  a  well-known  work, 
who  took  their  names  from  the  end  on  which  each 
held  that  an  egg  ought  to  be  broken,  it  must  be 
observed  that,  for  a  reason  into  which  it  is  unne 
cessary  to  enter  at  present,  it  was  admitted  on  all 
hands,  both  by  the  school  of  Hillel  and  the  school 
of  Shammai,  that  if  a  bird  which  was  neither  to 
be  eaten  nor  killed  laid  an  egg  on  a  festival,  the  egg 
was  not  to  be  eaten.  The  only  point  of  controversy 
was  respecting  an  egg  laid  by  a  hen  that  would  be 
afterwards  eaten.  Now  the  school  of  Hillel  inter 
dicted  the  eating  of  such  an  egg,  on  account  of  a 
passage  in  the  5th  verse  of  the  16th  chapter  of 
Exodus,  wherein  Jehovah  said  to  Moses  respecting 
the  people  who  gathered  manna,  "  on  the  sixth  day 
they  shall  prepare  that  which  they  bring  in."  For 
it  was  inferred  from  these  words  that  on  a  common 
day  of  the  week  a  man  might  "  prepare  "  for  the 
Sabbath,  or  prepare  for  a  feast-day,  but  that  he 
might  not  prepare  for  the  Sabbath  on  a  feast-day, 
nor  for  a  feast-day  on  the  Sabbath.  Now,  as  an 
egg  laid  on  any  particular  day  was  deemed  to  have 
been  "  prepared "  the  day  before,  an  egg  laid  on  a 
feast-day  following  a  Sabbath  might  not  be  eaten, 
because  it  was  prepared  on  the  Sabbath,  and  the 
eating  of  it  would  involve  a  breach  of  the  Sabbath. 
And  although  all  feast-days  did  not  fall  on  a  day 
following  the  Sabbath,  yet  as  many  did,  it  was 
deemed  better,  ex  majori  cauteld,  "  as  a  fence  to 
the  law,"  to  interdict  the  eating  of  an  egg  which 
had  been  laid  on  any  feast-day,  whether  such  day 
was  or  was  not  the  day  after  the  Sabbath  (see 
Surenhusius's  Mishna,  ii.  282).  In  a  world  wherein 
the  objects  of  human  interest  and  wonder  are  nearly 
endless,  it  certainly  does  seem  a  degradation  of  hu 
man  intelligence  to  exercise  it  on  matters  so  trifling 
and  petty. 

In  order,  however,  to  observe  regulations  on 
points  of  this  kind,  mixed  with  others  less  objec 
tionable,  and  with  some  which,  regarded  from  a 
certain  point  of  view,  were  in  themselves  indivi 
dually  not  unreasonable,  the  Pharisees  formed  a 
kind  of  society.  A  member  was  called  a  chaber 
("\3f"l),  and  those  among  the  middle  and  lower 

classes  who  were  not  members  were  called  "  the 
people  of  the  land,"  or  the  vulgar.  Each  member 
undertook,  in  the  prasence  of  three  other  members, 
that  he  would  remain  true  to  the  laws  of  the  asso 
ciation.  The  conditions  were  various.  One  of  tran- 
Dcendant  importance  was  that  a  member  should 
refrain  from  everything  that  was  not  tithed  (comp. 
Matt, xxiii.  23,  and  Luke  xviii.  12).  The  Mishna  says, 
"  He  who  undertakes  to  be  trustworthy  (a  word  with 
a  technical  Pharisaical  meaning)  tithes  whatever  he 
fiats,  and  whatever  he  sells,  and  whatever  he  buys,  and 


PHAKISEES 


825 


doss  not  eat  and  drink  with  the  people  of  the  land." 
This  was  a  point  of  peculiar  delicacy,  fcr  the  por 
tion  of  produce  reserved  as  tithes  for  the  priests  and 
Levites  was  holy,  and  the  enjoyment  of  what  va\s 
holy  was  a  deadly  sin.  Hence  a  Pharisee  w.i» 
bound,  not  only  to  ascertain  as  a  buyer  whether 
the  articles  which  he  purchased  had  been  duly 
tithed,  but  to  have  the  same  certainty  in  regard  to 
what  he  eat  in  his  own  house  and  when  taking  hi» 
meals  with  others.  And  thus  Christ,  in  eating  with 
publicans  and  sinners,  ran  counter  to  the  first  prin 
ciples,  and  shocked  the  most  deeply-rooted  preju 
dices,  of  Pharisaism ;  for,  independently  of  other 
obvious  considerations,  He  ate  and  drank  with  "  the 
people  of  the  land,"  and  it  would  have  been  assumed 
as  undoubted  that  He  partook  on  such  occasions  of 
food  which  had  not  been  duly  tithed. 

Perhaps  some  of  the  most  characteristic  laws  of 
the  Pharisees  related  to  what  was  clemi  (tahor) 
and  unclean  (tame).  Among  all  Oriental  nations 
there  has  been  a  certain  tendency  to  symbolism  in 
religion  ;  and  if  any  symbolism  is  admitted  on  such 
a  subject,  nothing  is  more  natural  than  to  symbolize 
purity  and  cleanliness  of  thought  by  cleanliness  of 
person,  dress,  and  actions.  Again,  in  all  climates, 
but  especially  in  warm  climates,  the  sanitary  ad 
vantages  of  such  cleanliness  would  tend  to  confirm 
and  perpetuate  this  kind  of  symbolism ;  and  when 
once  the  principle  was  conceded,  superstition  would 
be  certain  to  attach  an  intrinsic  moral  value  to  the 
rigid  observance  of  the  symbol.  In  addition  to  what 
might  be  explained  in  this  manner,  there  arose 
among  the  .lews — partly  from  opposition  to  idola 
trous  practices,  or  to  what  savoured  of  idolatry, 
partly  from  causes  which  it  is  difficult  at  the  pre 
sent  day  even  to  conjecture,  possibly  from  mere  pre 
judice,  individual  antipathy,  or  strained  fanciful 
analogies — peculiar  ideas  concerning  what  was  clean 
and  unclean,  which  at  first  sight  might  appear 
purely  conventional.  But,  whether  their  origin  was 
symbolical,  sanitary,  religious,  fanciful,  or  conven 
tional,  it  was  a  matter  of  vital  importance  to  a 
Pharisee  that  he  should  be  well  acquainted  with 
the  Pharisaical  regulations  concerning  what  was 
clean  and  what  was  unclean ;  for,  as  among  the 
modern  Hindoos  (some  of  whose  customs  are  very 
similar  to  those  of  the  Pharisees),  every  one  tech 
nically  unclean  is  cut  off  from  almost  every  reli 
gious  ceremony,  so,  according  to  the  Levitical  law 
every  unclean  person  was  cut  off  from  all  religious 
privileges,  and  was  regarded  as  defiling  the  sanc 
tuary  of  Jehovah  (Num.  xix.  20 ;  compare  Ward's 
Hindoo  History,  Literature,  and  Religion,  ii.  147). 
Ou  principles  precisely  similar  to  those  of  the 
Levitical  laws  (Lev.  xx.  25,  xxii.  4-7),  it  was 
possible  to  incur  these  awful  religious  penalties 
either  by  eating  or  by  touching  what  was  unclean 
in  the  Pharisaical  sense.  In  reference  to  eating, 
independently  of  the  slaughtering  of  holy  sacrifices, 
which  is  the  subject  of  two  other  treatises,  the 
Mishna  contains  one  treatise  called  Cholin,  which 
is  specially  devoted  to  the  slaughtering  of  fowls 
and  cattle  for  domestic  use  (see  Surenhusius,  v. 
114;  and  De  Sola  and  Raphall,  p.  325).  One 
point  in  its  very  first  section  is  by  itself  vitally  dis 
tinctive  ;  and  if  the  treatise  had  contained  no  other 
regulation,  it  would  still  have  raised  an  insuperable 
barrier  between  the  free  social  intercourse  of  Jews 
and  other  nations.  This  point  is,  "  that  any  thing 
slaughtered  by  a  heathen  should  be  deemed  unfit  to 
be  eaten,  like  the  carcase  of  an  animal  that  had  died 
of  itself,  and  like  such  carcase  should  pollute  tltt 


826 


PHARISEES 


oerson  who  carried  it."'  On  the  reasonable  assump 
tion  that  under  such  circumstances  animals  usex 
for  food  would  be  killed  by  Jewish  slaughterers 
regulations  the  most  minute  are  laid  down  for  their 
guidance.  In  reference  likewise  to  touching  what  is 
unclean,  the  Mishna  abounds  with  prohibitions  and 
distinctions  no  less  minute  ;  and  by  far  the  greatest 
portion  of  the  6th  and  last  "  Order"  relates  to  im 
purities  contracted  in  this  manner.  Referring  to 
that  "  Order  "  for  details,  it  may  be  observed  thai 
to  any  one  fresh  from  the  perusal  of  them,  and  ol 
:  there  already  adverted  to,  the  words  "  Touch  not, 
taste  not,  handle  not,"  seem  a  correct  but  almost 
a  pale  summary  of  their  drift  and  purpose  (Col.  ii. 
21) ;  and  the  stern  antagonism  becomes  vividly 
visible  between  them  and  Him  who  proclaimed 
boldly  that  a  man  was  defiled  not  by  any  thing  he 
ate,  but  by  the  bad  thoughts  of  the  heart  alone 
(Matt.  xv.  11)  ;  and  who,  even  when  the  guest  ol 
a  Pharisee,  pointedly  abstained  from  washing  his 
hands  before  a  meal,  in  order  to  rebuke  the  super 
stition  which  attached  a  moral  value  to  such  a 
ceremonial  act.  (See  Luke  xi.  37-40 ;  and  compare 
the  Mishna  vi.  480,  where  there  is  a  distinct  treatise, 
Yadaim,  on  the  washing  of  hands.)  « 

It  is  proper  to  add  that  it  would  be  a  great  mis 
take  to  suppose  that  the  Pharisees  were  wealthy 
and  luxurious,  much  more  that  they  had  degene 
rated  into  the  vices  which  were  imputed  to  some  of 
the  Roman  popes  and  cardinals  during  the  200  years 
preceding  the  Reformation.  Josephus  compared  the 
Pharisees  to  the  sect  of  the  Stoics.  He  says  that 
they  lived  frugally,  in  no  respect  giving  in  to 
luxury,  but  that  they  followed  the  leadership  of 
reason  in  what  it  had  selected  and  transmitted  as  a 
good  (Ant.  xviii.  1,  §  3).  With  this  agrees  what 
he  states  in  another  passage,  that  the  Pharisees 
had  so  much  weight  with  the  multitude,  that  if 
they  said  anything  against  a  king  or  a  high  priest 
they  were  at  once  believed  (xiii.  10,  §  5)  ;  for  this 
kind  of  influence  is  more  likely  to  be  obtained  by  a 
religious  body  over  the  people,  through  austerity 
and  self-denial,  than  through  wealth,  luxury,  and 
self-indulgence.  Although  there  would  be  hypo 
crites  among  them,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to 
charge  all  the  Pharisees  as  a  body  with  hypocrisy, 
in  the  sense  wherein  we  at  the  present  day  use  the 
word.  A  learned  Jew,  now  living,  charges  against 
them  rather  the  holiness  of  works  than  hypocritical 
holiness  —  Werkheiligkeit,  nicht  Schcinheiligkeit 
(Hei-zfeld,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  iii.  359). 
At  any  rate  they  must  be  regarded  as  having  been 
some  of  the  most  intense  for malists  whom  the  world 
has  ever  seen ;  and,  looking  at  the  average  standard 
of  excellence  among  mankind,  it  is  nearly  certain 
<hat  men  whose  lives  were  spent  in  the  ceremonial 
observances  of  the  Mishna,  would  cherish  feelings 
of  self-complacency  and  spiritual  pride  not  justified 

f  At  the  present  day  a  strict  orthodox  Jew  may  not  eat 
meat  of  any  animal,  unifejs  it  has  been  killed  by  a  Jewish 
butcher.  According  to  Mr.  I.  Disraeli  (The  Genius  <tf 
Judaism,  p.  154),  the  butcher  searches  the  animal  for  any 
blemish,  and,  on  his  approval,  causes  a  leaden  seal, 
stamped  with  the  Hebrew  word  cdshdr  (lawful),  to  be 
attached  to  the  meat,  attesting  its  "  cleanness."  Mr.  Dis 
raeli  likewise  points  out  that  iii  Herodotus  (ii.  38)  a  seal 
is  recorded  to  have  been  used  for  a  similar  purpose  by 
Egyptian  priests,  to  attest  that  a  bull  about  to  be  sacri 
ficed  was  "  clean,"  Kadapoc.  The  Greek  and  Hebrew  words 
we  perhaps  akin  In  origin,  «  and  th  being  frequently  inter- 
uutnged  in  language. 

«  The  Egyptians  appear  to  ha«o  had  id  Mi  of  "  unckan- 


I'HARISEES 

by  intrinsic  moral  excellence.  The  supercilious  con 
tempt  towards  the  poor  publican,  «uiJ  towards  th« 
tender  penitent  love  that  bathed  Christ's  feet  with 
tears,  would  be  the  natural  result  of  such  a  system 
of  life. 

It  was  alleged  against  them,  on  the  highest  spi 
ritual  authority,  that  they  "  made  the  word  of  God 
of  no  effect  by  their  traditions."  This  would  b« 
true  in  the  largest  sense,  from  the  purest  form  oi 
religion  in  the  Old  Testament  being  almost  incom 
patible  with  such  endless  forms  (Mic.  vi.  8) ;  but 
it  was  true  in  another  sense,  from  some  of  the  tra 
ditions  being  decidedly  at  variance  with  genuine  re 
ligion.  The  evasions  connected  with  Corban  are 
well  known.  To  this  may  be  added  the  following 
instances : — It  is  a  plain  precept  of  morality  and 
religion  that  a  man  shall  pay  his  debts  (Ps.  xxxvii. 
21);  but,  according  to  the  treatise  of  the  Mishna 
called  Avodah  zarah,  i.  1,  a  Jew  was  prohibited  from 
paying  money  to  a  heathen  three  days  before  any 
heathen  festival,  just  as  if  a  debtor  had  any  business 
to  meddle  with  the  question  of  how  his  creditor 
might  spend  his  own  money.  In  this  way,  Cato  or 
Cicero  might  have  been  kept  for  a  while  out  of  his 
legal  rights  by  an  ignoble  Jewish  money-dealer  in 
the  Transtiberine  district.  In  some  instances,  such 
a  delay  in  the  payment  of  debts  might  have  ruined 
a  heathen  merchant.  Again,  it  was  an  injunction 
of  the  Pentateuch  that  an  Israelite  should  "  love  his 
neighbour  as  himself"  (Lev.  xix.  18) ;  and  although 
in  this  particular  passage  it  might  be  argued  that 
by  "neighbour"  was  meant  a  brother  Israelite,  it 
is  evident  that  the  spirit  of  the  precept  went  much 
farther  (Luke  x.  27-29,  &c.).  In  plain  violation  of 
it,  however,  a  Jewish  midwife  is  forbidden,  in  the 
Avodah  zarah,  ii.  1,  to  assist  a  heathen  mother  in 
the  labours  of  childbirth,  so  that  through  this  pro 
hibition  a  heathen  mother  and  child  might  have  been 
left  to  perish  for  want  of  a  Pharisee's  professional 
assistance.  A  great  Roman  satirist,  in  holding  up 
to  view  the  unsocial  customs  of  the  Roman  Jews, 
specifies  as  two  of  their  traditions  that  they  were 
not  to  show  the  way,  or  point  out  springs  of  water 
to  any  but  the  circumcised. 

"  Tradldit  arcane  quodcunque  volumine  Moses, 
Non  monstrare  vias  eadem  nisi  sacra  colenti, 
Quaesitum  ad  fontem  solos  deducere  verpos." 

JUVENAL,  xiv.  102-4 
Now  the  truth  of  this  statement  has  in  our  times  been 
formally  denied,  and  it  seems  certain  that  neither  ol 
these  particular  prohibitions  is  found  in  the  Mishna 
but  the  regulation  respecting  the  Jewish  midwives 
was  more  unsocial  and  cruel  than  the  two  practices 
referred  to  in  the  satirist's  lines;  and  individual 
Pharisees,  while  the  spirit  of  antagonism  to  the 
Romans  was  at  its  height,  may  have  supplied  in 
stances  of  the  imputed  churlishness,  although  not 
justified  by  the  letter  of  their  traditions.  In  fact 


ness  "  through  tasting,  touching,  and  handling,  precisely 
analogous  to  those  of  the  Levltical  law  and  of  the  Pharisees. 
The  priests  would  not  endure  even  to  look  at  beans, 
deeming  them  not  dean,  vonifrvrfs  oil  Ka.6a.p6v  fur 
elvai.  otrirpiov  (na.8a.p6v  is  the  Greek  word  In  the  LXX.  for 
taMr).  *  No  Egyptian."  says  Herodotus,  "  would  salute 
a  Greek  with  a  kiss,  nor  use  a  Greek  knife,  or  spits,  or 
cauldron ;  or  taste  the  meat  of  an  ox  which  had  been  cu' 
by  a  Greek  knife.  They  drank  out  of  bronze  vessels, 
rinsing  them  perpetually.  And  if  any  cue  Accidentally 
uui-lnd  a  pig,  he  would  plunge  into  the  Nile,  without 
topping  to  undress"  (Jlerodot.  ii.  37, 41, 47).  Just  as  the 
Tews  rc-garded  all  other  nations,  the  Egyptians  regarded 
all  other  nations,  including  the  Jews:  viz.,  as  UDjleui. 


PHARISEES 

Juvenal  did  really  somewhat  understate  what  was 
true  in  principle,  not  T>f  the  Jews  universally,  but 
of  the  most  important  religious  party  among  the 
Jews,  at  the  time  when  he  wrote. 

An  analogy  has  been  pointed  out  by  Geiger  (p. 
104)  between  the  Pharisees  and  our  own  Puritans ; 
aud  in  some  points  there  are  undoubted  features  oi 
wnilarity,  beginning  eveu  with  tb.eir  names.  Both 
were  innovators :  the  one  against,  the  legal  ortho 
doxy  of  the  Sadducees,  the  others  against  Episco 
pacy.  Both  of  them  had  republican  tendencies : 
the  Pharisees  glorifying  the  office  of  rabbi,  which 
depended  on  learning  and  personal  merit,  rather 
than  that  of  priest,  which,  being  hereditary,  de 
pended  on  the  accident  of  birth ;  while  the  Puritans 
in  England  abolished  monarchy  and  the  right  of 
hereditary  legislation.  Even  in  their  zeal  for  reli 
gious  education  there  was  some  resemblance:  the 
Pharisees  exerting  themselves  to  instruct  disciples  in  ' 
their  schools  with  an  earnestness  never  equalled  in 
Rome  or  Greece;  while  in  Scotland  the  Puritans 
set  the  most  brilliant  example  to  modern  Europe  of 
parochial  schools  for  the  common  people.  But  here 
comparison  ceases.  In  the  most  essential  points  of 
religion  they  were  not  only  not  alike,  but  they  were 
directly  antagonistic.  The  Pharisees  were  under 
the  bondage  of  forms  in  the  manner  already  de 
scribed ;  while,  except  in  the  strict  observance  of 
the  Sabbath,  the  religion  of  the  Puritans  was  in 
theory  purely  spiritual,  and  they  assailed  even  the 
ordinary  forms  of  Popeiy  and  Prelacy  with  a  bitter 
ness  of  language  copied  from  the  denunciations  of 
Christ  against  the  Pharisees. 

II.  In  regard  to  a  future  state,  Josephus  presents 
the  ideas  of  the  Pharisees  in  such  a  light  to  his 
Greek  readers,  that  whatever  interpretation  his  am 
biguous  language  might  possibly  admit,  he  obvi 
ously  would  have  produced  the  impression  on  Greeks 
that  the  Pharisees  believed  in  the  transmigration 
of  souls.  Thus  his  statement  respecting  them  is, 
"  They  say  that  every  soul  is  imperishable,  but  that 
the  soul  of  good  men  only  passes  over  (or  transmi 
grates)  into  another  body — (ifTufiaivfiv  els  erfpov 
(Tc?/xa — while  the  soul  of  bad  men  is  chastised  by 
eternal  punishment"  (B.  J.  ii.  8,  §14;  compare 
iii.  8,  §5,  and  Ant.  xviii.  1,  §3,  and  Boettcher, 
De  Inferis,  pp.  519,  552).  And  there  are  two 
passages  in  the  Gospels  which  might  countenance 
this  idea:  one  in  Matt.  xiv.  2,  where  Herod  the 
tetrarch  is  represented  as  thinking  that  Jesus  was 
John  the  Baptist  risen  from  the  dead  (though  a  dif 
ferent  colour  is  given  to  Herod's  thoughts  in  the 
<orresponding  passage,  Luke  ix.  7-9) ;  and  another 
in  John  ix.  2,  where  the  question  is  put  to  Jesus 
whether  the  blind  man  himself1  had  sinned,  or  his 
parents,  that  he  was  born  blind  ?  Notwithstanding 
these  passages,  however,  there  does  not  appear  to  be 
sufficient  reason  for  doubting  that  the  Pharisees  be 
lieved  in  a  resurrection  of  the  dead  very  much  in 
the  same  sense  as  the  early  Christians.  This  is 
most  in  accordance  with  St.  Paul's  statement  to 


PHARIPKK8 


827 


k  At  least  five  different  explanations  have  been  sug 
gested  of  the  passage  John  ix.  2.  First,  That  it  alludes 
to  a  Jewish  doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls 
?r.dly.  That  it  refers  to  an  Alexandrine  doctrine  of  the 
pre-txistence  of  souls,  but  not  to  their  transmigration 
3rdly.  That  the  words  mean,  "  Did  this  man  sin,  as  tht 
Ureeks  say,  or  did  his  parents  sin,  as  we  say,  that  he  was 
born  blind?"  4thly.  That  it  involves  the  Rabbinical  ides 
of  the  possibility  of  an  infant's  simiing  in  his  mother's 
womb.  5thly.  That  it  is  founded  on  the  prcdcBtiuariai 
nolion  that  the  blindueos  from  birth  wan  » 


the  chief  priests  and  council  (Acts  xxiii.  (1),  that  he 
was  a  Pharisee,  the  son  of  a  Pharisee,  and  that  h-» 
was  called  in  question  for  the  hope  and  resurrection 
of  the  dead — a  statement  which  would  have  been 
peculiarly  disingenuous,  if  the  Pharisees  had  mereiv 
believed  in  the  transmigration  of  souls ;  and  it  is 
likewise  almost  implied  in  Christ's  teaching,  whfch 
does  not  insist  on  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life  as 
anything  new,  but  assumes  it  as  already  adopted  bj 
his  hearers,  except  by  the  Sadducees,  although  he 
condemns  some  unspiritual  conceptions  of  its  nature, 
as  erroneous  (Matt.  xxii.  30 ;  Mark  xii.  25 ;  Luke 
xx.  34-36).  On  this  head  the  Mishna  is  an  illus 
tration  of  the  ideas  in  the  Gospels,  as  distinguished 
from  any  mere  transmigration  of  souls ;  and  the 
jeculiar  phrase,  "  the  world  to  come,"  of  which 
a.l<at>  6  epxa/jievos  was  undoubtedly  only  the  trans- 

ation,  frequently  occurs  in  it  (N3H  D?ij?n,  Awih, 

i.  7,  iv.  16  ;  comp.  Mark  x.  30  ;  Luke  xviii.  30). 
This  phrase  of  Christians,  which  is  anterior  to 
Christianity,  but  which  does  not  occur  in  the  0.  T., 
though  fully  justified  by  certain  passages  to  be  found 
n  some  of  its  latest  books,1  is  essentially  different 
Vom  Greek  conceptions  on  the  same  subject ;  and 
jenerally,  in  contradistinction  to  the  purely  tem 
poral  blessings  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  the  Chris- 
,ian  ideas  that  this  world  is  a  state  of  probation,  and 
that  every  one  after  death  will  have  to  render  a 
strict  account  of  his  actions,  were  expressed  by  Phari 
sees  in  language  which  it  is  impossible  to  misunder 
stand  : — "  This  world  may  be  likened  to  a  court 
yard  in  comparison  of  the  world  to  come  ;  therefore 
prepare  thyself  in  the  antechamber  that  thou  mayest 
nter  into  the  dining-room"  (Avoth,  iv.  16). 
"  Everything  is  given  to  man  on  security,  and  a 
net  is  spread  over  every  living  creature ;  the  shop 
is  open,  and  the  merchant  credits ;  the  book  is  open, 
and  the  hand  records ;  and  whosoever  chooses  to 
borrow  may  come  and  borrow:  for  the  collectors 
are  continually  going  round  daily,  and  obtain  pay 
ment  of  man,  whether  with  his  consent  or  without 
it ;  and  the  judgment  is  true  justice ;  and  all  are 
prepared  for  the  feast"  (Avoth,  iii.  16).  "Those 
who  are  born  are  doomed  to  die,  the  dead  to  live, 
and  the  quick  to  be  judged ;  to  make  us  know 
understand,  and  be  informed  that  He  is  God  ;  He 
is  the  Former,  Creator,  Intelligent  Being,  Judge, 
Witness,  and  suing  Party,  and  will  judge  the*1 
hereafter.  Blessed  be  He ;  for  in  His  presence  there 
is  no  unrighteousness,  forgetfulness,  respect  of  per 
sons,  nor  acceptance  of  a  bribe ;  for  everything  ie 
His.  Know  also  that  everything  is  done  according 
to  the  account,  and  let  not  thine  evil  imagination 
persuade  thee  that  the  grave  is  a  place  of  refuge  for 
thee :  for  against  thy  will  wast  thou  formed,  and 
against  thy  will  wast  thou  bom ;  and  against  thy 
will  dost  thou  live,  and  against  thy  will  wilt  ihou 
die ;  and  against  thy  will  must  thou  hereafter  ren 
der  an  account,  and  receive  judgment  in  the  pre 
sence  of  the  Supreme  King  of  kings,  the  Holy  God, 

punishment  for  sins  which  the  blind  man  afterwards  com 
mitted  :  just  as  it  has  been  suggested,  in  a  remarkable 
passage,  that  the  death  before  1688  of  the  Princess  Anne's 
infant  children  (three  in  number)  was  a  preceding  punish- 
meut  for  her  subsequent  abandonment  of  her  father, 
James  II.  See  Stewart's  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  App.  vl.,  nod 
the  Commentaries  of  De  Wette  and  Lttcke,  ad  locum. 

i  The  earliest  text  in  support  of  the  expression  is  per 
haps  "  the  new  heavens  and  the  new  earth  "  promised  by 
Isaiah  (Is.  Ixv.  17-22).  Compare  Dun.  vii.  27,  ii.  44  ;  It 
xxvi.  19. 


828 


PHARISEES 


blessfti  is  He "  (Avoth.  iv.  22).  Still  it  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  the  actions  of  which  such  a 
strict  account  was  to  be  rendered  were  not  merely 
those  referred  to  by  the  spiritual  prophets  Isaiah 
and  Micah  (Is.  i.  16, 17  ;  Mic.  vi.  8),  nor  even  those 
enjoined  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  included  those 
fabulously  supposed  to  have  been  orally  transmitted 
by  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai,  and  the  whole  body  of 
the  traditions  of  the  elders.  They  included,  in  fact, 
all  those  «eremonial  "  works,"  against  the  efficacy 
of  which,  in  the  deliverance  of  the  human  soul,  St. 
Paul  so  emphatically  protested. 

III.  In  reference  to  the  opinions  of  the  Pharisees 
concerning  the  freedom  of  the  will,  a  difficulty 
.arises  from  the  very  prominent  position  which 
they  occupy  in  the  accounts  of  Josephus,  whereas 
nothing  vitally  essential  to  the  peculiar  doctrines  of 
the  Pharisees  seems  to  depend  on  those  opinions, 
and  some  of  his  expressions  are  Greek,  rather  than 
Hebrew.  "  There  were  three  sects  of  the  Jews,"  he 
sap,  "which  had  different  conceptions  respecting 
human  affairs,  of  which  one  was  called  Pharisees, 
the  second  Sadducees,  and  the  third  Essenes.  The 
Pharisees  say  that  some  things,  and  not  all  things, 
are  the  work  of  fate ;  but  that  some  things  are  in 
our  own  power  to  be  and  not  to  be.  But  the 
Essenes  declare  that  Fate  rules  all  things,  and  that 
nothing  happens  to  man  except  by  its  decree.  The 
Sadducees,  on  the  other  hand,  take  away  Fate, 
holding  that  it  is  a  thing  of  nought,  and  that  human 
affairs  do  not  depend  upon  it ;  but  in  their  estimate 
all  things  are  in  the  power  of  ourselves,  as  being 
ourselves  the  causes  of  our  good  things,  and  meet 
ing  with  evils  through  our  own  inconsiderateness " 
(comp.  xviii.  1,  §3,  and  B.  J.  ii.  8,  §14).  On 
reading  this  passage,  and  the  others  which  bear  on 
the  same  subject  in  Josephus's  works,  the  suspicion 
naturally  arises  that  he  was  biassed  by  a  desire  to 
make  the  Greeks  believe  that,  like  the  Greeks,  the 
Jews  had  philosophical  sects  amongst  themselves. 
At  any  rate  his  words  do  not  represent  the  opinions 
as  they  were  really  held  by  the  three  religious 
parties.  We  may  feel  certain,  that  the  influence  of 
fate  was  not  the  point  on  which  discussions  respect 
ing  free-will  turned,  though  there  may  have  been 
differences  as  to  the  way  in  which  the  interposition 
of  God  in  human  affaire  was  to  be  regarded.  Thus 
the  ideas  of  the  Essenes  are  likely  to  have  been  ex 
pressed  in  language  approaching  to  the  words  of 
Christ  (Matt.  x.  29,  30,  vi.  25-34),  and  it  is  very 
difficult  to  believe  that  the  Sadducees,  who  accepted 
the  authority  of  the  Pentateuch  and  other  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  excluded  God,  in  their  concep 
tions,  from  all  influence  on  hunvui  actions.  On 
the  whole,  in  reference  to  this  point,  the  opinion  of 
Graetz  ( Geschichte  der  Juden,  iii.  509)  seems  not 
improbable,  that  the  real  difference  between  the 
Pharisees  and  Sadducees  was  at  first  practical  and 
political.  He  conjectures  that  the  wealthy  and 
aristocratical  Sadducees  in  their  ware  and  negotia 
tions  with  the  Syrians  entered  into  matters  of  policy 
and  calculations  of  prudence,  while  the  zealous  Pha 
risees,  disdaining  worldly  wisdom,  laid  stress  on 
doing  what  seemed  right,  and  on  leaving  the  event 
lo  God :  and  that  this  led  to  differences  in  formal 
theories  and  metaphysical  statements.  The  precise 
nature  of  those  differences  we  do  not  certainly 
know,  as  no  writing  of  a  Sadducee  on  the  subject 
has  been  preserved  by  the  Jews,  and  on  matters  of 
this  kind,  it  is  unsafe  to  trust  unreservedly  the 
statements  of  an  adversary.  [SADDUCEKS.] 

JV.   In    reference   to  the   spirit   of  proselytism 


PHARISEES 

imong  the  Pharisees,  there  is  indisputable  authority 
for  the  statement  that  it  prevailed  to  a  vpry  great 
extent  at  the  time  of  Christ  (Matt,  xxiii.  15) ;  and 
attention  is  now  called  to  it  on  account  of  its  pro 
bable  importance  in  having  paved  the  way  for  the 
early  diffusion  of  Christianity.  The  district  of 
Palestine,  which  was  long  in  proportion  to  ite 
breadth,  and  which  yet,  from  Dan  to  Beersheba, 
was  only  160  Roman  miles,  or  not  quite  148 
English  miles  long,  and  which  is  represented  as 
having  been  civilized,  wealthy,  and  populous  1000 
years  before  Christ,  would  under  any  circumstanoec 
have  been  too  small  to  continue  maintaining  the 
whole  growing  population  of  its  children.  But, 
through  kidnapping  (Joel  iii.  6),  through  leading 
into  captivity  by  military  incursions  and  victorious 
enemies  (2  K.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  11,  xxiv.  15;  Am.  i. 
6,  9),  through  flight  (Jer.  xliii.  4-7),  through 
commerce  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2,  §3),  and  probably 
through  ordinary  emigration,  Jews  at  the  time  of 
Christ  had  become  scattered  over  the  fairest  portions 
of  the  civilized  world.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
that  great  festival  on  which  the  Jews  suppose 
Moses  to  have  brought  the  perfect  law  down  from 
heaven  (Festival  Prayers  for  Pentecost,  p.  6),  Jews 
are  said  to  have  been  assembled  with  one  accord  in 
one  place  at  Jerusalem,  "  from  every  region  under 
heaven."  Admitting  that  this  was  an  Oriental 
hyperbole  (comp.  John  xxi.  25),  there  must  have 
been  some  foundation  for  it  in  fact ;  and  the  enu 
meration  of  the  various  countries  from  which  Jews 
are  said  to  have  been  present  gives  a  vivid  idea 
of  the  widely-spread  existence  of  Jewish  commu 
nities.  Now  it  is  not  unlikely,  though  it  cannot 
be  proved  from  Josephus  (Ant.  xx.  2,  §3),  that 
missions  and  organized  attempts  to  produce  conver 
sions,  although  unknown  to  Greek  philosophers, 
existed  among  the  Pharisees  (De  Wette,  Exegetisches 
Handbuch,  Matt,  xxiii.  15).  But,  at  any  rate,  the 
then  existing  regulations  or  customs  of  synagogues 
afforded  facilities  which  do  not  exist  now  either  in 
synagogues  or  Christian  churches  for  presenting 
new  views  to  a  congregation  (Acts  xvii.  2 ;  Luke 
iv.  16).  Under  such  auspices  the  proselytizing 
spirit  of  the  Pharisees  inevitably  stimulated  a  thirst 
for  inquiry,  and  accustomed  the  Jews  to  theological 
controversies.  Thus  there  existed  precedents  and 
favouring  circumstances  for  efforts  to  make  prose 
lytes,  whe^i  the  greatest  of  all  missionaries,  a  Jew  by 
race,  a  Pharisee  by  education,  a  Greek  by  language, 
and  a  Roman  citizen  by  birth,  preaching  the  resur 
rection  of  Jesus  to  those  who  for  the  most  part 
already  believed  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
confronted  the  elaborate  ritual-system  of  the  writtet 
and  oral  law  by  a  pure  spiritual  religion :  and  thus 
obtained  the  co-operation  of  many  Jews  themselves 
in  breaking  down  every  barrier  between  Jew,  Pha 
risee,  Greek,  and  Roman,  and  in  endeavouring  to 
unite  all  mankind  by  the  brotherhood  of  a  common 
Christianity. 

Literature. — In  addition  to  the  New  Testament, 
Josephus,  and  the  Mishna,  it  is  proper  to  read 
Epiphanius  Adversity  Haereses,  lib.  I.  rvi.;  and 
the  Notes  of  Jerome  to  Matth.  xxii.  23,  xxiii. 
6,  &c.,  though  the  information  given  by  both  these 
writers  is  very  imperfect. 

In  modern  literature,  see  several  treatises  iii  Ugo- 
imo's  Thesaurus,  vol.  xxii. ;  and  Lightfoot's  fforas 
Hebraicae  on  Matth.  iii.  7,  where  a  curious  Rab 
binical  description  is  given  of  seven  sects  of  Pha 
risees,  which,  from  its  being  destitute  of  any  intrinsic 
value,  is  not  inserted  in  this  article.  Sec  likewise 


PHARO8H 

ferueker's  Hisloria  Critica  Philosophiae,  ii.  744- 
759  ;  Milman's  History  of  the  Jews,  ii.  71  ;  Ewald':. 
fteschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,  iv.  415-419  ;  ana 
the  Jahrhundert  des  Heils,  p.  5  &c.  of  Gfrdrer, 
who  has  insisted  strongly  on  the  importance  of  the 
Mishna,  and  has  made  great  use  of  the  Talmud  ge- 
uerally.  See  also  the  following  works  by  modern 
learned  Jews:  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Judenthums 
und  seiner  Sekten,  i.  196  ;  Graetz,  Geschichte  der 
Juden,  iii.  508-518  ;  Herzfeld,  Qeschichte  des 
Volkes  Israel,  iii.  358-362  ;  and  Geiger,  Urschrift 
and  Uebersetzungen  der  Bibel,  p.  103  &c.  [E.  T.] 

PHA'KOSH  (BTjS  :  *o>os  :  Pharos^  Else 
where  PAROSH.  The  same  variation  is  found  in  the 
Geneva  Version  (Ezr.  viii.  3). 


PHASfcLlS 


82* 


PHAR'PAR  OS'iS,  ».  e.  Parpar:  "' 
Alex.  Qaptpotpa  :  Pharphar).     The  second  of  the 
two  "  rivers  of  Damascus  "  —  Abana  and  Pharpar  — 
alluded  to  by  Naaman  (2  K.  v.  12). 

The  two  principal  streams  in  the  district  of  Da 

mascus  are  the  Barada  and  the  Awaj:  —  in  fact, 

there  are  no  others  worthy  of  the  name  of  "  river." 

There  are  good  grounds  for  identifying  the  Barada 

with  the  Abana,  and  there  seems  therefore  to  be  no 

alternative  but  to  consider  the  Awaj  as  being  the 

Pharpar.     But  though  in  the  region  of  Damascus, 

the  Awaj  has  not,  like  the  Barada,  any  connexion 

with  the  city  itself.     It  does  not  approach  it  nearer 

than  8  miles,  and  is  divided  from  it  by  the  ridge 

of  the  Jebel  Aswad.     It  takes  its  rise  on  the  S.E. 

slopes  of  Hermon,  some  5  or  6  miles  from  Beit 

fenn,  close  to  a  village  called  Arny,  the  name  of 

which  it  bears  during  the  first  part  of  its  course. 

It  then  runs  S.E.  by  Kefr  Hauwar  and  Sasa,  but 

soon  recovering  itself  by  a  turn  northwards,  ulti 

mately   ends    in   the    Bahret  Hijaneh,   the  most 

southerly  of  the  three   lakes   or   swamps  of  Da 

mascus,  nearly  due  east  of,  and  about  40  miles 

from,  the  point  at  which  it  started.     The  Awaj  has 

been  investigated  by  Dr.  Thomson,  and  is  described 

by  him  in  the  Bibliotheca.  Sacra  for  May,  1849  ;  see 

also  Robinson  (B.  E.  iii.  447,  8).     It  is  evidently 

much  inferior  to  the  Barada,  for  while  that  is  extra 

ordinarily  copious,  and  also  perennial  in  the  hottest 

seasons,  this  is  described  as  a  small  lively  b  stream, 

not  unfrequently  dry  in  the  lower  part  of  its  course. 

On  the  maps  of  Kiepert  (1856)  and  Van  de  Velde 

(1858)  the  name  of  Wady  Barbar  is  found,  appa 

rently  that  of  a  valley  parallel  to  the  Arny  near  Kefr 

Hauwar]  but  what  the  authority  for  this  is  the 

writer  has  not  succeeded  in  discovering.     Nor  has 

he  found  any  name  on  the  maps  or  in  the  lists  of 

Dr.  Robinson  answering   to   Ta&rah, 

which  Pharpar  is  rendered  in  the  Arabic  version  of 
2  K.  v.  12. 


The  tradition  of  the  Jews  of  Damascus,  as  re 
ported  by  Schwarz  (54,  also  20,  27),  is  curiously 
s-.'bversive  of  our  ordinary  ideas  regarding  these 
streams.  They  call  the  river  Fijeh  (that  is  the 
Barada)  the  Pharpar,  and  give  the  name  Amana 
or  Karmion  (an  old  Talmudic  name,  see  vol.  i. 
p.  26)  to  a  stream  which  Schwarz  describes  as 
running  from  a  fountain  called  el  Barady,  1%  mile 
from  Beth  Djana  (Beit  Jenn),  in  a  N.E.  direction, 
to  Damascus  (see  also  the  reference  to  the  Nubian 


geographer  by  Geseniug,  Thes.  1132  a).  What  ii 
intended  by  this  the  writer  is  at  a  loss  to  know.  [G.J 
PHAR'ZITES,  THE  (npBil :  &  *ap«n: 
Alex.  *ape's:  Pharesitae).  The  descendants  of 
Pharez,  the  son  of  Judah  (Num.  xxvi.  20).  They 
were  divided  into  two  tranches,  the  Hezronites  and 
the  Hamulitez. 

PHASE'AH  (HD3 :    *«(rt? ;    Alex.   <f>cw<r^ 
Phased).     PASEAH  2  (Neh.  vii.  51). 

PHASE'LIS(*a,nj\(s:  Phaselis).   A  town  on 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  on  the  confines  of  Lycia  and 
Pamphylia,  and  consequently  ascribed  by  the  ancient 
writers  sometimes   to  one   and   sometimes  to  the 
other.     Its  commerce  was  considerable  in  the  sixth 
century  B.C.,  for  in  the  reign  of  Amasis  it  was  one 
of  a  number  of  Greek  towns  which  carried  on  trade 
somewhat  in  the   manner   of  the   Hanseutic   con 
federacy  in  the  middle  ages.     They  had  a  common 
temple,  the  Hellenium,  at  Naucratis  in  Egypt,  and 
nominated  Trpotrrdrai  for  the  regulation  of  com 
mercial  questions  and  the  decision  of  disputes  arising 
out   of  contracts,  like  the   preud'hommes  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  who  presided  over  the  courts  of  pie 
powder  (pieds  poudre's,  pedlars)  at  the  different 
staples.    In  later  times  Phaselis  was  distinguished  as 
a  resort  of  the  Pamphylian  and  Cilician  pirates.    Its 
port  was  a  convenient  one  to  make,  for  the  lofty 
mountain  of  Solyma  (now  Takhtalu),  which  backed 
it  at  a  distance  of  only  five  miles,  is  nearly  8000 
feet  in  height,  and  constitutes  an  admirable  land 
mark  from  a  great  distance.     Phaselis  itself  stood 
on  a  rock  of  50  or  100  feet  elevation  above  the  sea, 
and  was  joined  to  the  main  by  a  low  isthmus,  in 
the  middle  of  which  was  a  lake,  now  a  pestiferous 
marsh.     On  the  eastern  side  of  this  were  a  closed 
port  and  a  roadstead,  and  on  the  western  a  larger 
artificial  harbour,  formed  by  a  mole  run  out  into 
the  sea.     The  remains  of  this  may  still  be  traced 
to  a  considerable  extent  below  the  surface  of  the 
water.     The  masonry  of  the  pier  which  protected 
the  small  eastern  port  is  nearly  perfect.     In  this 
sheltered  position  the  pirates  could  lie  safely  while 
they  sold  their  booty,  and  also  refit,  the  whole 
region   having   been  anciently   so  thickly  covered 
with  wood  as  to  give  the  name  of  Pityusa  to  tine 
town.     For  a  time  the  Phaselites  confined  their 
relations  with  the   Pamphyliaus  to  the  purposes 
just  mentioned  ;  but  they  subsequently  joined  the 
piratical  league,  and   suffered   in  consequence  the 
loss  of  their  independence  and  their  town  lands  in 
the  war  which  was  waged  by  the  Roman  consul 
Publius  Servilius  Isauricus  in  the  years  77-75  B.C. 
But  at  the  outset  the  Romans  had  to  a  great  extent 
fostered  the  pirates,  by  the  demand  which  sprang 
up  for  domestic  slaves  upon  the  change  of  manners 
brought  about  by  the  spoliation  of  Carthage  and 
Corinth.    It  is  said  that  at  this  time  many  thousand 
slaves  were  passed  through  Delos — which  was  the 
mart  between  Asia  and  Europe— in  a  single  day^; 
and  the  proverb  grew  up  there,  "Epiropf,  Kara- 
ir\evffov  f£f\ov-  irdv-ra  Tre'irpoToi.    But  when  the 
Cilicians  had  acquired  such  power  and  audacity  as 
to  sweep  the  seas  as  far  as  the  Italian  coast,  and 
interrupt  the  supplies  of  corn,  it  became  time  to 
interfere,  and  the  expedition  of  Servilius  commenced 
the   work    which    was    afterwards    completed    by 
Pompey  the  Great. 


«  The  A  at  the  commencement  of  this  name  suggests 
tlio  Hebrew  definite  article ;  but  no  trace  of  it  appears  In 
lie  Hebrew  MS£ 


*>  Such  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  Pharpar,  treated  as 
Hebrew,  according  to  Gestnius  and  FUrst.  Dr.  Pusey 
however  (Cnmm.  on  Amos  1.  3),  renders  it  "crooked  " 


830 

It  is  in  the  interval  between  the  growth  of  the 
Cilician  piracy  and  the  Servilian  expedition  that 
the  incidents  related  in  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees 
occurred.  The  Romans  are  represented  as  requiring 
all  their  allies  to  render  up  to  Simon  the  high- 
priest  any  Jewish  exiles  who  may  have  taken  refuge 
among  them.  After  naming  Ptolemy,  Demetrius 
(king  of  Syria),  Attalus  (king  of  Pergamus), 
Ariarathes  (of  Pontus),  and  Arsaces  (of  Parthia), 
as  recipients  of  these  missives,  the  author  adds  that 
the  consul  also  wrote : — fls  icatras  ras  x<6pas  Kal 
2a/i^o^7)  (Grotius  conjectures  Aa/^a/cu,  and  one 
MS.  has  Meffaviffffy)  Kal  'Sirapridrats  Kal  fls 
ArjAoj'  Kai  fls  MvvSov  Kal  els  ~2.'.Kvu>va  Kal  fls 
T)JV  Kapiav  Kal  fls  2a,uov  Kal  fls  rty  Tlap<pv\lav 
KO\  fls  rv.v  AvKtav  Kal  fls  'A.\iKapvaffffbv,  Kal 
fls  'P6Sov  Kal  fls  *  a  a  77  A  i  S  a  KOI  fls  K«  Kal 
fls  2l5riv  Kal  fls  "ApaSov  Kal  els  ItyniW  Kal 
KvlSov,  Kal  Ktrirpoj/  Kal  Kvp^vnv  (1  Mace.  xv.  23). 
It  will  be  observed  that  all  the  places  named,  with 
the  exception  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene,  lie  on  the 
highway  of  marine  traffic  between  Syria  and  Italy. 
The  Jewish  slaves,  whether  kidnapped  by  their  own 
countrymen  (Ex.  xxi.  16)  or  obtained  by  raids 
(2  K.  y.  2),  appear  in  early  times  to  have  been 
transmitted  to  the  west  coast  of  Asia  Minor  by  this 
route  (see  Ez.  xxvii.  13  ;  Joel  iii.  6). 

The  existence  of  the  mountain  Solyma,  and  a  town 
of  the  same  name,  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood 
of  Phaselis,  renders  it  probable  that  the  descendants 
of  some  of  these  Israelites  formed  a  population  of 
some  importance  in  the  time  of  Strabo  (Herod,  ii. 
178  ;  Strab.  xiv.  c.  3 ;  Liv.  xxxvii.  23;  Mela,  i.  14 ; 
Beaufort,  Karamania,  pp.  53-56).  [J.  W.  B.] 

PHAS'IKON  (Goffipdv :  Phaseron ;  Pasiron), 
the  name  of  the  head  of  an  Arab  tribe,  "  the  children 
of  Phasiron"  (1  Mace.  ix.  66),  defeated  by  Jonathan, 
but  of  whom  nothing  more  is  known.  [B.  F.  W.] 

PHAS'SAEON(*oo-(roupos:  Phasurius).  PA- 
SHUii  (1  Esdr.  v.  25). 

PHE'BE.     [PHOEBE.] 

PHENICE.  1.  See  PHOENICE.  PHOENICIA. 
2.  More  properly  PHOENIX  (*oh/i{,  Acts  xxvii.  12), 
though  probably  our  translators  meant  it  to  be 
pronounced  Phenice  in  two  syllables,  as  opposed  to 
Phenice  (QoiviKij,  Acts  xi.  19)  in  three. 

The  place  under  our  present  consideration  was  a 
town  and  harbour  on  the  south  coast  of  CRETE  : 
and  the  name  was  doubtless  derived  from  the  Greek 
word  for  the  palm-tree,  which  Theophrastus  says 
was  indigenous  in  the  island.  [PALM-TREE.]  The 
ancient  notices  of  Phoenix  converge  remarkably  to 
establish  its  identity  with  the  modern  Lutro.  Besides 
Ptolemy's  longitudes,  we  have  Pliny's  statement  that 
it  was  (as  Lutro  is)  in  the  narrowest  part  of  the  island. 
Moreover,  we  find  applied  to  this  locality,  by  the 
modern  Greeks,  not  only  the  word  Phinika,  which 
is  clearly  Phoenix,  but  also  the  words  Anopolis  and 
Aradena.  Now  Stephanus  Byzantinus  says  that 
Anopolis  is  the  same  with  Aradena,  and  Hierocles 
says  that  Aradena  is  the  same  with  Phoenix.  The 
last  authority  adds  also  that  the  island  of  CLAUDA 
is  very  near.  We  see  further  that  all  these  indi 
cations  correspond  exactly  with  what  we  read  in 
the  Acts.  St.  Paul's  ship  was  at  FAIR  HAVENS, 
which  is  some  miles  to  the  E.  of  Lutro ;  but  she  was 
bound  to  the  westward,  and  the  sailors  wished  to 
reach  Phoenix  (xxvii.  8-12);  and  it  was  in  making 
the  attempt  that  they  were  caught  by  the  gale  and 
tlriven  to  Clauda  (ib.  13-16). 


PHILADELPHIA 

Still  there  were  till  lately  two  difficulties  in  Uw 
matter :  and  the  recent  and  complete  removal  of 
them  is  so  satisfactory,  that  they  deserve  to  be 
mentioned.  First,  it  used  to  Le  asserted,  by  persons 
well  acquainted  with  this  coast,  that  there  is  no  such 
harbour  hereabouts  at  all  affording  a  safe  anchorage. 
This  is  simply  an  error  of  fact.  The  iratter  is  set 
at  rest  by  abundant  evidence,  and  especially  by  the 
late  survey  of  our  own  officers,  an  extract  from 
whose  drawing,  showing  the  excellent  soundings  of 
the  harbour,  was  first  published  (1852)  in  the  first 
edition  of  the  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  ii. 
p.  332.  An  account  by  recent  travellers  will  be 
found  in  the  second  edition  of  Smith's  Voyage  and 
Shipwreck  of  8t.  Paul,  p.  256.  The  other  difficulty 
is  a  verbal  one.  The  sailors  in  the  Acts  describe 
Phoenix  as  \tfj.eva  TTJS  Kprj-rrjs  j8A«rojra  Kuril 
Af|8a  Kal  Kara  x&pov,  whereas  Lutro  is  precisely 
sheltered  from  these  winds.  But  it  ought  to  have 
been  remembered  that  seamen  do  not  recommend  a 
harbour  because  of  its  exposure  to  certain  winds ;  and 
the  perplexity  is  at  once  removed  either  by  taking 
Kara  as  expressing  the  direction  in  which  the  wind 
blows,  or  by  bearing  in  mind  that  a  sailor  speaks  of 
everything  from  his  own  point  of  view.  The  harbour 
of  Phoenix  or  Lutro  does  "  look" — -from  the  verier 
towards  the  land  which  encloses  it — in  the  direction 
of  "south-west  and  north-west."  [J.  S.  H.] 

PHEE'ESITES  (*<•/>«£««>' :  Pherezaet),  1  Esd. 
viii.  69  ;=  PERIZZITES;  comp.  Ezr.  ix.  1. 

PHER'EZITE  ;  PHEK'EZITES  (o  **,*- 
ftuos :  Pherezaeus ;  Pherezaef),  Jud.  v.  16 ;  2  Esd. 
i.  21.  The  latter  of  these  passages  contains  a  state 
ment  in  accordance  with  those  of  Gen.  xiii.  7,  xxxiv. 
30 ;  Judg.  i.  4,  &c.,  noticed  under  PERIZZITE. 

PHI'CHOL  (^>b'B ;  Samar.  ^3  <B :  *iXdA  ; 
Alex.  4>i/co\  ;  Joseph.  4>iKoAos  :  Phichof),  chief 
captain  of  the  army  of  Abimelech,  king  of  the  Phi 
listines  of  Gerar  in  the  days  of  both  Abraham  (Gen. 
xxi.  22,  32)  and  Isaac  (xxvi.  26).  Josephus  men 
tions  him  on  the  second  occasion  only.  On  the  other 
hand  the  LXX.  introduce  Ahuzzath,  Abimelech's 
other  companion,  on  the  first  also.  By  Gesenins 
the  name  is  treated  as  Hebrew,  and  as  meaning  the 
"mouth  of  all."  By  Fiirst  (ffandvcb.  ii.  215 a), 
it  is  derived  from  a  root  ?3B,  to  be  strong.  But 

Hitzig  (Phitistaer,  §57)  refers  it  to  the  Sanscrit 
pitschula,  a  tamarisk,  pointing  out  that  Abraham 
had  planted  a  tamarisk  in  Beersheba,  and  comparing 
the  name  with  Elah,  Berosus,  Tappnach,  and  other 
names  of  persons  and  places  signifying  different  kinds 
of  trees  ;  and  with  the  name  &iya\os,  a  village  of 
Palestine  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4,  §2),  and  $tyoAla  in 
Greece.  Stark  (Gaza,  &e.,  p.  96)  more  cautiously 
avoids  such  speculations.  The  natural  conclusion 
from  these  mere  conjectures  is  that  Phichol  is  a 
Philistine  name,  the  meaning  and  derivation  of 
which  are  lost  to  us.  [G.] 

PHILADELPHIA  (i,  *tAa5«A^6«o:  Phila 
delphia).  A  town  on  the  confines  of  Lydia  and 
Phrygia  Catacecaumene,  built  by  Attains  II.,  king 
of  Pergamus.  It  was  situated  on  the  lower  slopes 
of  Tmolus,  on  the  southern  side  of  the  valley  of  the 
Ain-e-cjhiul  Sou,  a  river  which  is  probably  the  Co- 
gamus  of  antiquity,  and  falls  into  the  Wadis-tchai 
(the  Hermus)  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sart- Kalesi 
(Sardis),  about  25  miles  to  the  west  of  the  site  c< 
Philadelphia.  This  latter  is  still  represented  by  a 
town  caljed  Allah-shehr  (city  of  God).  Its  eleva 
tion  is  952  feet  above  the  sea.  The  region  . 


PHI  LARCHES 

is  hsgh!y  volcanic,  and  geologically  speaking  belongs 
to  the  district  of  Fhrygia  Catacecaumene,  on  the 
western  edge  of  which  it  lies.  The  soil  was  ex 
tremely  favourable  to  the  growth  of  vines,  cele 
brated  by  Virgil  for  the  soundness  of  the  wine  they 
produced;  and  in  all  probability  Philadelphia  was 
built  by  Attains  as  a  mart  for  the  great  wine- 
producing  region,  extending  for  500  stades  iu  length 
by  400  in  breadth ;  for  its  coins  have  on  them  the 
head  of  Bacchus  or  a  female  Bacchant.  Strabo 
compares  the  soil  with  that  in  the  neighbourhood 
cf  Catana  in  Sicily ;  and  modem  travellers  describe 
the  appearance  of  the  country  as  resembling  a 
billowy  sea  of  disintegrated  lava,  with  here  and 
there  vast  trap-dykes  protruding.  The  original 
Imputation  of  Philadelphia  seems  to  have  been 
Macedonian,  and  the  national  character  to  have 
been  retained  even  in  the  time  of  Pliny.  There 
was,  however,  as  appeal's  from  Rev.  iii.  9,  a 
synagogue  of  Hellenizing  Jews  there,  as  well  as 
a  Christian  Church.  The  locality  continued  to  be 
subject  to  constant  earthquakes,  which  in  the  time 
of  Strabo  rendered  even  the  town-walls  of  Phila 
delphia  unsafe;  but  its  inhabitants  held  pertina 
ciously  to  the  spot,  perhaps  from  the  profit  which 
naturally  accrued  to  them  from  their  city  being  the 
staple  of  the  great  wine-district.  But  the  expense 
jf  reparation  was  constant,  and  hence  perhaps  the 
poverty  of  the  members  of  the  Christian  Church 
(oT5a  .  .  .  '6ri  /j.iKpav  txfls  SiWjtui/,  Rev.  iii.  8), 
who  no  doubt  were  a  portion  of  the  urban  popu 
lation,  and  heavily  taxed  for  public  purposes,  as 
well  as  subject  to  private  loss  by  the  destruction 
of  their  own  property.  Philadelphia  was  not  of 
sufficient  importance  in  the  Roman  times  to  have 
law-courts  of  its  own,  but  belonged  to  a  jurisdiction 
of  which  Sardis  was  the  centre. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  that  Philadelphia 
occupied  the  site  of  another  town  named  Callatebus, 
of  which  Herodotus  speaks,  in  his  account  of  Xerxes's 
march,  as  famous  for  the  production  of  a  sugar 
from  the  holcus  sorghum  and  sweet  wort  (tv  -rfj 
&i>Spts  StlfJ-ioepyol  jueAt  e/c  nvpiKr/s  Te  Kal  irvpuu 
iroiftiffi,  vii.  31).  But  by  the  way  in  which  he 
mentions  Callatebus  (of  which  the  name  is  only 
known  from  him)  it  would  seem  to  have  been  not 
tar  from  the  Maeander,  from  which  the  ruins  of 
Allah-shehr  cannot  be  less  distant  than  from  30  to 
40  miles,  while  they  are  very  near  the  Cogamus. 
The  enormous  plane-tree,  too,  which  struck  Xerxes's 
attention,  and  the  abundance  of  the  /j-vpiic-ri,  point 
to  a  region  well  furnished  with  springs  of  water, 
which  is  the  case  with  the  northern  side  of  the 
Maeander,  where  Xerxes  crossed  it,  and  not  so  with 
the  vicinity  of  Allah-shehr.  At  the  same  time  the 
Persian  king,  in  his  two  days'  march  from  Cydrara 
to  Sardis,  must  have  passed  very  near  the  site  of 
the  future  Philadelphia.  (Strab.  zii.  c.  8,  xiii. 
c.4;  Virg.  Georg.  ii.  98;  Herod,  vii.  31  ;  Plin. 
H.  N.  v.  29 ;  Arundell,  Discoveries  in  Asia 
Minor,  i.  34  &c. ;  Tchihatcheff,  Asie  Mineure, 
p.  237  &c.  [J.  W.  B.] 

PIIILAB'CHES.  This  word  occurs  as  a  proper 
came  in  A.V.  in  2  Mace.  viii.  32,  where  it  is  really  the 
name  of  an  office  (6  <pv\dpx~n^  =  6  <p6\apxos,  "  the 
commander  of  the  cavalry."  The  Greek  text  seems 
to  be  decisive  as  to  the  true  rendering ;  but  the  Latin 
version  (**et  Philarchen  qui  cum  Timotheo  erat . . . ") 
might  easily  give  rise  to  the  error,  which  is  very 
rtrangely  supported  by  Grimm,  ad  loc.  [B.  ¥.  W.] 

PHILE'MON  (*iAir/fiau/ :  Philemon),  the  name 


PHILEMON 


831 


of  the  Christian  to  whom  Paul  addressed  his  Kpistlt 
in  behalf  of  Onesimus.  He  was  a  native  probably 
of  Colossae,  or  at  all  events  lived  in  that  city  whe'i 
the  Apostle  wrote  to  him  ;  first,  because  Onesunus 
was  a  Colossian  (Col.  iv.  9)  ;  and  secondly,  because 
Archippus  was  a  Colossian  (Col  iv.  17),  whom 
Paul  associates  with  Philemon  at  the  beginning 
of  his  letter  (Philem.  1,  2).  Wieseler  (Chronologic, 
p.  452)  argues,  indeed,  from  Col.  iv.  17,  that 
Archippus  was  a  Laodicean ;  but  the  efrrarf  in  that 
passage  on  which  the  point  turns,  refers  evidently 
to  the  Colossians  (of  whom  Archippus  was  oua 
therefore),  and  not  to  the  church  at  Laodicaea 
spoken  of  in  the  previous  verse,  as  Wieseler  inad 
vertently  supposes.  Theodoret  (Prooem.  in  Epist. 
ad  Phil.')  states  the  ancient  opinion  in  saying  that 
Philemon  was  a  citizen  of  Colossae,  and  that  his 
house  was  pointed  out  there  as  late  as  the  fifth 
century.  The  legendary  history  supplies  nothing 
on  which  we  can  rely.  It  is  related  that  Philemon 
became  bishop  of  Colossae  (Constit.  Apost.  vii.  46), 
and  died  as  a  martyr  under  Nero. 

It  is  evident  from  the  letter  to  him  that  Philemon 
was  a  man  of  property  and  influence,  since  he  is 
represented  as  the  head  of  a  numerous  household, 
and  as  exercising  ail  expensive  liberality  towards 
his  friends  and  the  poor  in  general.  He  was  in 
debted  to  the  Apostle  Paul  as  the  medium  of  his 
personal  participation  in  the  Gospel.  All  inter 
preters  agree  in  assigning  that  significance  to  atav- 
r6v  fioi  irpo<ro<pfl\(is  in  Philem.  19.  It  is  not 
certain  under  what  circumstances  they  became 
known  to  each  other.  If  Paul  visited  Colossae 
when  he  passed  through  Phrygia  on  his  second  mis 
sionary  journey  (Acts  xvi.  6),  it  was  undoubtedly 
there,  and  at  that  time,  that  Philemon  heard  the 
gospel  and  attached  himself  to  the  Christian  party. 
On  the  contrary,  if  Paul  never  visited  that  city  in 
pereon,  as  many  critics  infer  from  Col.  ii.  1,  then 
the  best  view  is  that  he  was  converted  during 
Paul's  protracted  stay  at  Ephesus  (Acts  xix.  10), 
about  A.D.  54-57.  That  city  was  the  religious 
and  commercial  capital  of  Western  Asia  Minor. 
The  Apostle  laboured  there  with  such  success  that 
"  all  they  who  dwelt  in  Asia  heard  the  word  of  the 
Lord  Jesus."  Phrygia  was  a  neighbouring  province, 
and  among  the  strangers  who  repaired  to  Ephesus 
and  had  an  opportunity  to  hear  the  preaching  of 
Paul,  may  have  been  the  Colossian  Philemon. 

It  is  evident  that  on  becoming  a  disciple,  he  gave 
no  common  proof  of  the  sincerity  and  power  of  his 
faith.  His  character,  as  shadowed  forth  in  the 
epistle  to  him,  is  one  of  the  noblest  which  the  sacred 
record  makes  known  to  us.  He  was  full  of  faith 
and  good  works,  was  docile,  confiding,  grateful,  was 
forgiving,  sympathizing,  charitable,  and  a  man  who 
on  a  question  of  simple  justice  needed  only  a  hint 
of  his  duty  to  prompt  him  to  go  even  beyond  it 
(virfp  &  \ey<a  Trorfjffeis).  Any  one  who  studies 
the  epistle  will  perceive  that  it  ascribes  to  him  these 
varied  qualities;  it  bestows  on  him  a  measure  of 
commendation,  which  forms  a  striking  contrast 
with  the  ordinary  reserve  of  the  sacred  writers.  It 
was  through  such  believers  that  the  primitive 
Christianity  evinced  its  divine  origin,  and  spread 
so  rapidly  among  the  nations.  [H.  B.  II.] 

PHILE'MON,  THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL 
TO,  is  one  of  the  letters  (the  others  are  Ephesians, 
Colossians,  Philippians)  which  the  Apostle  wrote 
during  his  first  captivity  at  Rome.  The  argu 
ments  which  show  that  he  wrote  the  epistle  to  the 
Colossiaus  in  that  city  and  at  that  period,  invol  e 


332 


PHILEMON,  THE  TOTSTLK  OP  PAUL  TO 


the  same  conclusion  in  regard  to  this;  for  It  is 
evident  from  Col.  iv.  7,  9,  as  compared  with  the 
contents  of  this  epistle,  that  Paul  wrote  the  two 
letters  at  the  same  time,  and  forwarded  them  to 
their  destination  by  the  hands  of  Tychicus  and 
Onesimus  who  accompanied  each  other  to  Colossae. 
A.  few  modem  critics,  as  Schulz,  Schott,  Bottg-er, 
Meyer,  maintain  that  this  letter  and  the  ethers 
assigned  usually  to  the  first  Roman  captivity,  were 
written  during  the  two  years  that  Paul  was  impri 
soned  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiii.  35,  xxiv.  27).  But 
this  opinion,  though  supported  by  some  plausible 
arguments,  can  be  demonstrated  with  reasonable 
cei-tainty  to  be  incorrect.  CCoLOSSiANS,  EPISTLE 
ro  THE.] 

The  time  when  Paul  wrote  may  be  fixed  with 
much  precision.  The  Apostle  at  the  close  of  the 
letter  expresses  a  hope  of  his  speedy  liberation. 
He  speaks  in  like  manner  of  his  approaching  deli 
verance,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians  (ii.  23, 
24),  which  was  written  during  the  same  imprison 
ment.  Presuming,  therefore,  that  he  had  good 
reasons  for  such  an  expectation,  and  that  he  was  not 
disappointed  in  the  result,  we  may  conclude  that 
this  letter  was  written  by  him  about  the  year 
A.D.  63,  or  early  in  A.D.  64 ;  for  it  was  in  the 
latter  year,  according  to  the  best  chronologists,  that 
he  was  freed  from  his  first  Roman  imprisonment. 

Nothing  is  wanting  to  confirm  the  genuineness 
of  this  epistle.  The  external  testimony  is  unim 
peachable.  It  is  not  quoted  so  often  by  the  earlier 
Christian  fathers  as  some  of  the  other  letters ;  its 
brevity  and  the  fact  that  its  contents  are  not  di 
dactic  or  polemic,  account'  for  that  omission.  We 
need  not  urge  the  expressions  in  Ignatius,  cited  as 
evidence  of  that  apostolic  Father's  knowledge  and 
use  of  the  epistle ;  though  it  is  difficult  to  regard 
the  similarity  between  them  and  the  language  in 
v.  20  as  altogether  accidental.  See  Kirchhofer's 
Quellensammlung,  p.  205.  The  Canon  of  Muratori 
which  comes  to  us  from  the  second  century  (Cred- 
ner,  Geschichte  des  Kanons,  p.  69),  enumerates 
this  as  one  of  Paul's  epistles.  Tertullian  men 
tions  it,  and  says  that  Marcion  admitted  it  into 
his  collection.  Sinope  in  Pontus,  the  birth-place 
of  Marcion,  was  not  far  from  Colossne  where  Phile 
mon  lived,  and  the  letter  would  find  its  way  to  the 
neighbouring  churchesat  an  early  period.  Origen 
and  Eusebius  include  it  among  the  universally  ac 
knowledged  writings  (6ft.o\oyo6fj.eva)  of  the  early 
Christian  times.  It  is  so  well  attested  historically, 
that  as  De  Wette  says  (Einleitung  ins  Neue  Testa 
ment,  p.  278),  its  genuineness  on  that  ground  is 
beyond  doubt. 

Nor  does  the  epistle  itself  offer  anything  to  con 
flict  with  this  decision.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive 
of  a  composition  more  strongly  marked  within  the 
same  limits  by  those  unstudied  assonances  of  thought, 
sentiment,  and  expression,  which  indicate  an  author's 
hand,  than  this  short  epistle  as  compared  with 
Paul's  other  productions.  Paley  has  a  paragraph 
in  his  Horae  Paulinae,  which  illustrates  this  feature 
of  the  letter  in  a  very  just  and  forcible  manner.  It 
will  be  found  also  that  all  the  historical  allusions 
which  the  Apostle  makes  to  events  in  his  own  life, 
or  to  other  persons  with  whom  he  was  connected, 
harmonize  perfectly  with  the  statements  or  inci 
dental  intimations  contained  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  or  the  other  epistles  of  Paul.  It  belongs 
to  a  commentary  to  point  out  the  instt  ices  of  such 
agreement. 

Baur  (Pauha,  p.  475)  would  divest  the  Epistle 


ot  its  historical  character,  and  laake  it  the  per 
sonified  illustration  from  some  later  writer,  c.'Uie 
idea  that  Christianity  unites  and  equalises  in  a 
higher  sense  those  whom  outward  circumstances 
have  separated.  He  does  not  impugn  the  external 
evidence.  But,  not  to  leave  his  theory  wholly  un 
supported,  he  suggests  some  linguistic  objections  t . 
Paul's  authorship  of  the  letter,  which  must  be  pro 
nounced  unfounded  and  frivolous.  He  finds,  foi 
example,  certain  words  in  the  Epistle,  which  are 
alleged  to  be  not  Pauline ;  but  to  justify  that  asser 
tion,  he  must  deny  the  genuineness  of  such  other 
letters  of  Paul,  as  happen  to  contain  these  words. 
He  admits  that  the  Apostle  could  have  said  trirKdy- 
Xva  twice,  but  thinks  it  suspicious  that  he  should 
say  it  three  times.  A  few  terms  he  adduces,  which 
are  not  used  elsewhere  in  the  epistles;  but  to  argue 
from  these  that  they  disprove  the  apostolic  origin 
of  the  epistle,  is  to  assume  the  absurd  principle 
that  a  writer,  after  having  produced  two  or  three 
compositions,  must  for  the  future  confine  himself  to 
an  unvarying  circle  of  words,  whatever  may  be  the 
subject  he  discusses,  or  whatever  the  interval  of 
time  between  his  different  writings. 

The  arbitrary  and  purely  subjective  character  of 
such  criticisms  can  have  no  weight  against  the 
varied  testimony  admitted  as  decisive  by  Christian 
scholars  for  so  many  ages,  upon  which  the  canonical 
authority  of  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  is  founded. 
They  are  worth  repeating  only  as  illustrating  Baur's 
own  remark,  that  modern  criticism  in  assailing  this 
particular  book  runs  a  greater  risk  of  exposing  itself 
to  the  imputation  of  an  excessive  distrust,  a  morbid 
sensibility  to  doubt  and  denial,  than  in  questioning 
the  claims  of  any  other  epistle  ascribed  to  Paul. 

Our  knowledge  respecting  the  occasion  and  object 
of  the  letter  we  must  derive  from  declarations  or 
inferences  furnished  by  the  letter  itself.  For  the 
relation  of  Philemon  and  Onesimus  to  each  other, 
the  iviader  will  see  the  articles  on  those  names. 
Paul,  so  intimately  connected  with  the  master  and 
the  servant,  was  anrious  naturally  to  effect  a  recon 
ciliation  between  them.  He  wished  also  (waiving 
the  aviJKov,  the  matter  of  duty  or  right)  to  give 
Philemon  an  opportunity  of  manifesting  his  Chris 
tian  love  in  the  treatment  of  Onesimus,  and  his 
regard,  at  the  same  time,  for  the  personal  con 
venience  and  wishes,  not  to  say  official  authority, 
of  his  spiritual  teacher  and  guide.  Paul  used  his 
influence  with  Onesimus  ((Wire/mJ/a,  in  ver.  12)  to 
induce  him  to  return  to  Colossae,  and  place  himself 
again  at  the  disposal  of  his  master.  Whether 
Onesimus  assented  merely  to  the  proposal  of  the 
Apostle,  or  had  a  desire  at  the  same  time  to  revisit 
his  former  home,  the  epistle  does  not  enable  us  to 
determine.  On  his  departure,  Paul  put  into  his 
hand  this  letter  as  evidence  that  Onesimus  was  a 
true  and  approved  disciple  of  Christ,  and  entitle*1 
as  such  to  be  received  not  as  a  servant,  but  above 
a  servant,  as  a  brother  in  the  faith,  as  the  repre 
sentative  and  equal  in  that  respect  of  the  Apostle 
himself,  and  worthy  of  the  same  consideration  and 
love.  It  is  instructive  to  observe  how  entirely 
Paul  identifies  himself  with  Onesimus,  and  pleads 
his  (muse  as  if  it  were  his  own.  He  intercedes  for 
him  as  his  own  child,  promises  reparation  if  he  had 
done  any  wrong,  demands  for  him  not  only  a  re 
mission  of  all  penalties,  but  the  reception  of  sym 
pathy,  affection,  Christian  brotherhood ;  and  whil« 
he  solicits  these  favours  for  another,  consents  to 
receive  them  with  the  same  gratitude  and  sense  of 
obligation  as  if  they  were  bestowed  on  himself, 


PHILEMON.  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO 

Such  was  the  purpose  and  such  the  argument  of 
the  Epistle. 

The  result  of  the  appeal  cannot  be  doubted.  It 
may  be  assumed  from  the  character  of  Philemon 
that  the  Apostle's  intercession  for  Onesimus  was 
not  unavailing.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
agreeably  to  the  express  instructions  of  the  letter, 
the  past  was  forgiven ;  the  master  and  the  servant 
were  reconciled  to  each  other;  and,  if  the  liberty 
which  Onesimus  had  asserted  in  a  spirit  of  inde 
pendence  was  not  conceded  as  a  boon  or  right,  it 
was  enjoyed  at  all  events  under  a  form  of  servitude 
which  henceforth  was  such  in  name  only.  So  much 
must  be  regarded  as  certain ;  or  it  follows  that  the 
Apostle  was  mistaken  in  his  opinion  of  Philemon's 
character,  and  his  efforts  for  the  welfare  of  Onesi 
mus  were  frustrated.  Chrysostom  declares,  in  his 
impassioned  style,  that  Philemon  must  have  been 
»ess  than  a  man,  must  have  been  alike  destitute  of 
seusibii-.tyf  and  reason  (iroios  \tOos,  •KOLOV  6-fipiov), 
not  to  be  moved  by  the  arguments  and  spirit  of 
such  a  letter  to  fulfil  eveiy  wish  and  intimation 
of  the  Apostle.  Surely  no  fitting  response  to  his 
pleadings  for  Onesimus  could  involve  less  than  a 
cessation  of  eveiything  oppressive  and  harsh  in  his 
civil  condition,  as  far  as  it  depended  on  Philemon  to 
mitigate  or  neutralise  the  evils  of  a  legalised  system 
of  bondage,  as  well  as  a  cessation  of  everything 
violative  of  his  rights  as  a  Christian.  How  much 
further  than  this  an  impartial  explanation  of  the 
epistle  obliges  us  or  authorises  us  to  go,  has  not 
yet  been  settled  by  any  veiy  general  consent  of 
interpreters.  Many  of  the  best  critics  construe 
certain  expressions  (T&  ayaffbv  in  ver.  14,  and  virtp 
ft  \eyta  in  ver.  21)  as  conveying  a  distinct  ex 
pectation  on  the  part  of  Paul  that  Philemon  would 
liberate  Onesimus.  Nearly  all  agree  that  he  could 
hardly  have  failed  to  confer  on  him  that  favour, 
even  if  it  was  not  requested  in  so  many  words, 
after  such  an  appeal  to  his  sentiments  of  humanity 
and  justice.  Thus  it  was,  as  Dr.  Wordsworth 
remarks  (St.  Paufs  Epistles,  p.  328),  "  by  Chris 
tianising  the  master  that  the  Gospel  enfranchised 
the  slave.  It  did  not  legislate  about  mere  names 
and  forms,  but  it  went  to  the  root  of  the  evil,  it 
spoke  to  the  heart  of  man.  When  the  heart  of  the 
master  was  filled  with  divine  grace  and  was  warmed 
with  the  love  of  Christ,  the  rest  would  soon  follow. 
Tho  lips  would  speak  kind  words,  the  hands  would 
do  liberal  things.  Eveiy  Onesimus  would  be  treated 
by  every  Philemon  as  a  beloved  brother  in  Christ." 

The  Kpistle  to  Philemon  has  one  peculiar  feature — 
its  aesthetical  character  it  may  be  termed — which 
distinguishes  it  from  all  the  other  epistles,  and 
demands  a  special  notice  at  our  hands.  It  has  been 
admired  deservedly  as  a  model  of  delicacy  and  skill 
in  the  department  of  composition  to  which  it  belongs. 
The  writer  had  peculiar  difficulties  to  overcome. 
He  was  the  common  friend  of  the  parties  at  variance. 
He  must  conciliate  a  man  who  supposed  that  he 
had  good  reason  to  be  offended.  He  must  commend 
the  offender,  and  yet  neither  deny  nor  aggravate 
the  imputed  fault.  He  must  assert  the  new  ideas 
of  Christian  equality  in  the  face  of  a  system  which 
hardly  recognised  the  humanity  of  the  enslaved. 
He  could  have  placed  the  question  on  the  ground 
of  his  own  personal  rights,  and  yet  must  waive 
them  in  order  to  secure  an  act  of  spontaneous  kind 
ness.  His  success  must  be  a  triumph  of  love,  and 
nothing  be  demanded  for  the  sake  of  the  justice 
which  could  have  claimed  everything.  He  limits 
his  request  to  a  forgiveness  of  !he  alleged  wrong, 

VOL.  II. 


PHILETUS 


833 


and  a  restoration  to  favour  and  the  enjoyment  of 
futuie  sympathy  and  affection,  and  yet  would  so 
guard  his  words  as  to  leave  scope  for  all  the  gen<>- 
rosity  which  benevolence  might  prompt  towards 
one  whose  condition  admitted  of  so  much  allevia 
tion.  These  are  contrarieties  not  easy  to  har 
monise  ;  but  Paul,  it  is  confessed,  has  shown  a 
degree  of  self-denial  and  a  tact  in  dealing  with 
them,  which  in  being  equal  to  the  occasion  could 
hardly  be  greater. 

There  is  a  letter  extant  of  the  younger  Plin} 
(Epist.  ix.  21)  which  he  wrote  to  a  friend  whos* 
servant  had  deserted  him,  in  which  he  intercedes 
for  the  fugitive,  who  was  anxious  to  return  to  hi? 
master,  but  dreaded  the  effects  of  his  anger.  Thus 
the  occasion  of  the  correspondence  was  similar  to 
that  between  the  Apostle  and  Philemon.  It  has 
occurred  to  scholars  to  compare  this  celebrated 
letter  with  that  of  Paul  in  behalf  of  Onesimus ; 
and  as  the  result  they  hesitate  not  to  say,  that  not 
only  in  the  spirit  of  Christian  love,  of  which  Pliny 
was  ignorant,  but  in  dignity  of  thought,  argument, 
pathos,  beauty  of  style,  eloquence,  the  communica 
tion  of  the  Apostle  is  vastly  superior  to  that  of  the 
polished  Roman  writer. 

Among  the  later  Commentaries  on  this  Epistle 
may  be  mentioned  those  of  Rothe  (Interpretatio 
Historico-Exegetica,  Bremae,  1844),  Hagenbach 
(one  of  his  early  efforts,  Basel,  1829),  Zhoch  (Ziirich, 
1846,  excellent),  Meyer,  De  Wette,  Ewald  (brief 
notes  with  a  translation,  Gottingen,  1857),  Alford, 
Wordsworth,  Ellicott,  and  the  Bible  Union  (U.  S.  A. 
1860).  The  celebrated  Lavater  preached  thirty-nine 
sermons  on  the  contents  of  this  brief  composition, 
and  published  them  in  two  volumes.  [H.  B.  H.] 

PHILETUS  (*(\T\TOS:  Phiktus)  was  possibly 
a  disciple  of  Hymenaeus,  with  whom  he  is  associated 
in  2  Tim.  ii.  17,  and  who  is  named  without  him  in 
an  earlier  Epistle  (1  Tim.  i.  20).  Waterland  (Im- 
portance  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  ch. 
iv.,  Works,  iii.  459)  condenses  in  a  few  lines  the 
substance  of  many  dissertations  which  have  been 
written  concerning  their  opinions,  and  the  sentence 
which  was  inflicted  upon  at  least  one  of  them. 
"  They  appear  to  have  been  persons  who  believed 
the  Scriptures  of  the  O.  T.,  but  misinterpreted 
them,  allegorizing  away  the  doctrine  of  the  Resur 
rection,  and  resolving  it  all  into  figure  and  metaphor. 
The  delivering  over  unto  Satan  seems  to  have  been 
a  form  of  excommunication  declaring  the  person 
reduced  to  the  state  of  a  heathen;  and  in  the 
Apostolical  age  it  was  accompanied  with  super 
natural  or  miraculous  effects  upon  the  bodies  of  the 
persons  so  delivered."  Walchius  is  of  opinion  that 
they  were  of  Jewish  origin ;  Hammond  connects 
them  with  the  Gnostics ;  Vitringa  (with  less  pro 
bability)  with  the  Sadducees.  They  understood 
resurrection  to  signify  the  knowledge  and  profession 
of  the  Christian  religion,  or  regeneration  and  con 
version,  according  to  J.  G.  Walchius,  whose  lengthy 
dissertation,  De  Hymenaeo  et  Phileto,  in  his  Mis 
cellanea  Sacfa,  1744,  pp.  81-121,  seems  to  exhaust 
the  subject.  Amongst  writers  who  preceded  him 
may  be  named  Vitringa,  Obsero.  Sacr.  iv.  9,  pp. 
922-930  ;  Buddaeus,  Ecclesia  Apostolica,  v.  pp. 
297-305.  See  also,  on  the  heresy.  Burton,  Bampton 
Lectures,  and  Dean  Ellicott's  notes  on  the  Pastoral 
Epistles ;  and  Potter  on  Church  Government,  ch.  v., 
with  reference  to  the  sentence.  The  names  of  Phi- 
letus  and  Hymenaeus  occur  separately  among  there 
of  Caesar's  household  whose  relics  have  beeu  <bnnd 
in  the  Columbaria  at  Rome.  [W.  T.  B.] 

3  H 


834        PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 

PHILIP  (#fAiinro«  •  Fhilipput}.  1.  The  father 
cf  Alexander  the  Great  (1  Mace.  i.  1  ;  vi.  2),  king  of 
Macedonia,  B.C.  359-336. 

2.  A   Phrygian,    left   by  Antiochus  Epiph.  as 
governor  at  Jerusalem  (c.  B.C.  170),  where  he  be 
haved  with  great  cruelty  (2  Mace.  v.  22),  burning 
the  fugitive  Jews  in  caves  (2  Mace.  vi.  11),  and 
taking  the  earliest  measures  to  check  the  growing 
power  of  Judas  Mace.  (2  Mace.  viii.  8).     He  is 
commonly  identified  with, 

3.  The  foster-brother  (fftvrpoQos,  2  Mace.  ix. 
29)  of  Antiochus  Epiph.,  whom  the  king  upon  his 
death-bed  appointed  regent  of  Syria  and  guardian  of 
his  son  Antiochus  V.,  to  the  exclusion  of  Lysias 
(B.C.  164,  1  Mace.  vi.  14,  15;  55).     He  returned 
with  the  royal  forces  from  Persia  (1  Mace.  vi.  56) 
to  assume  the  government,  and  occupied  Antioch. 
But  Lysias,  who  was  at  the  time  besieging  "  the 
Sanctuary"  at  Jerusalem,  hastily  made  terms  with 
Judas,  and  marched  against  him.     Lysias  stormed 
Antioch,  and,  according  to  Josephus  (Ant.  xri.  9, 
§7),  put  Philip  to  death.     In  2  Mace.  Philip  is 
^aid  to  have  fled  to  Ptol.  Philometor  on  the  death 
of  Antiochus  (2  Mace.  ix.  29),  though  the  book 
contains  traces  of  the  other  account  (xiii.  23).    The 
attempts  to  reconcile  the  narratives  (Winer,  s.  «.) 
have  no  probability. 

4.  Philip  V.,  king  of  Macedonia,  B.C.  220-179. 
His  wide  and  successful  endeavours  to  strengthen 
and  enlarge  the  Macedonian  dominion  brought  him 
into  conflict  with  the  Romans,  when  they  were  en 
gaged  in  the  critical  war  with  Carthage.    Desultory 
warfare  followed  by  hollow  peace  lasted,  till  the  vic- 
toiy  of  Zama  left  the  Romans  free  for  more  vigorous 
measures.     Meanwhile  Philip  had  consolidated  his 
power,  though  he  had  degenerated  into  an  unscru 
pulous  tyrant.     The  first  campaigns  of  the  Romans 
on  the  declaration  of  war  (B.C.  200)  were  not  attended 
by  any  decisive  result,  but  the  arrival  of  Flamininuc 
(B.C.  198)  changed  the  aspect  of  atfairs.     Philip 
was  driven   from   his   commanding  position,   and 
made  unsuccessful  overtures  for  peace.    In  the  next 
year  he  lost  the  fatal  battle  of  Cynoscephalae,  and 
was  obliged  to  accede  to  the  terms  dictated  by  his 
conquerors.     The  remainder  of  his  life  was  spent  in 
vain  endeavours  to  regain  something  of  his  former 
power ;  and  was  embittered  by  cruelty  and  remorse. 
In  1  Mace.  viii.  5,  the  defeat  of  Philip  is  coupled 
with  that  of  Perseus  as  one  of  the  noblest  triumphs 
of  the  Romans.  [B.  F.  W.] 


Philip  V.  of  Macedon. 

Mdrachm  ofPhilip  V.  (Attic  talent).  Obv. :  Head  of  king,  r  bound 
with  flllei.  Rev.:  BA2IAEO2  *IAI1IIIOY;  club  of 
Hcrculn  :  all  within  wreath. 

PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE  (*t\i*w.  Phi- 
lippus).  The  Gospels  contain  comparatively  scanty 
notices  of  this  disciple.  He  is  mentioned  as  being 


•  Greswelt's  suggestion  (Dittert.  on  Harmony,  xxxii.) 
lh«t  the  Apostle  was  an  Inhabitant  (i»rb)  of  Bethsaida. 
>iit  a  native  («)  of  Capernaum,  is  to  be  noticed,  but 
h*:Jly  to  be  received. 


PHILIP  THE  APOHTLE 

of  Bethsaida,  the  city  of  Andrew  and  Peter"  (Jo!:n 
i.  44),  and  apparently  was  among  the  GalPuena 
peasants  of  that  district  who  flocked  to  hear  the 
preaching  of  the  Baptist.  The  manner  in  which 
St.  John  speaks  of  him,  the  repetition  by  him  of 
the  selfsame  words  with  which  Andrew  had  brought 
to  Peter  the  good  news  that  the  Christ  had  at  last 
appeared,  all  indicate  a  previous  friendship  with 
the  sons  of  Jonah  and  of  Zebedee,  and  a  consequent 
participation  in  their  Messianic  hopes.  The  cloai 
union  of  the  two  in  John  vi.  and  xii.  suggests  that 
he  may  have  owed  to  Andrew  the  first  tidings 
that  the  hope  had  been  fulfilled.  The  statement 
that  Jesus  found  him  (John  i.  43)  implies  a  pre 
vious  seeking.  To  him  first  in  the  whole  circle 
of  the  disciplesb  were  spoken  the  words  so  full  of 
meaning,  "  Follow  me"  (Ibid.).  As  soon  as  he  has 
learnt  to  know  his  Master,  he  is  eager  to  communi 
cate  his  discovery  to  another  who  had  also  shared 
the  same  expectations.  He  speaks  to  Nathanael, 
probably  on  his  arrival  in  Caua  (comp.  John  xxi.  2, 
Ewald,  Oesch.  v.  p.  251),  as  though  they  had  not 
seldom  communed  together,  of  the  intimations  of 
a  better  time,  of  a  divine  kingdom,  which  they 
found  in  their  sacred  books.  We  may  well  believe 
that  he,  like  his  friend,  was  an  "  Israelite  indeed  in 
whom  there  was  no  guile."  In  the  lists  of  the 
twelve  Apostles,  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  his  name 
is  as  uniformly  at  the  head  of  the  second  group  of 
four,  as  the  name  of  Peter  is  at  that  of  the  first 
(Matt.  x.  3  ;  Mark  iii.  18 ;  Luke  vi.  14)  ;  and  the 
facts  recorded  by  St.  John  give  the  reason  of  this 
priority.  In  those  lists  again  we  find  his  name 
uniformly  coupled  with  that  of  Bartholomew,  and 
this  has  led  to  the  hypothesis  that  the  latter  is 
identical  with  the  Nathanael  of  John  i.  45,  the  one 
being  the  personal  name,  the  other,  like  Barjonah 
or  Bartimaeus,  a  patronymic.  Donaldson  (Jashar, 
p.  9)  looks  on  the  two  as  brothers,  but  the  precise 
mention  of  "  rbv  ISiov  &$t\<f>ov  in  v.  41,  and  its 
omission  here,  is,  nsAlford  remarks  (on  Matt.  x.  3), 
against  this  hypothesis. 

Philip  apparently  was  among  the  first  company 
of  disciples  who  were  with  the  Lord  at  the  com 
mencement  of  His  ministry,  at  the  marriage  of 
Cana,  on  His  first  appearance  as  a  prophet  in 
Jerusalem  (John  ii.).  When  John  was  cast  into 
prison,  and  the  work  of  declaring  the  glad  tidings 
of  the  kingdom  required  a  new  company  of 
preachers,  we  may  believe  that  he,  like  his  com 
panions  and  friends,  received  a  new  call  to  a  more 
constant  discipleship  (Matt.  iv.  18—22).  When 
the  Twelve  were  specially  set  apart  for  their  office, 
he  was  numbered  among  them.  The  first  three 
Gospels  tell  us  nothing  more  of  him  individually. 
St.  John,  with  his  characteristic  fullness  of  personal 
reminiscences,  records  a  few  significant  utterances. 
The  earnest,  simple-hearted  faith  which  showed 
itself  in  his  first  conversion,  required,  it  would 
seem,  an  education  ;  one  stage  of  this  may  be  traced, 
according  to  Clement  of  Alexandria  (Strom,  iii.  25), 
in  the  history  of  Matt.  viii.  21.  He  assumes,  as  a 
recognized  fact,  that  Philip  was  the  disciple  who 
urged  the  plea,  "  Suffer  me  first  to  go  and  bury  my 
father,"  and  who  was  reminded  of  a  higher  duty, 
perhaps  also  of  the  command  previously  given,  by 
the  command, "  Let  the  dead  buiy  their  dead ;  follow 


b  It  has  been  assumed,  on  the  authority  of  patristic 
tradition  ( m/r.),  that  his  call  to  the  apostleship  Involved 
toe  abandonment,  for  a  time,  of  bis  wife  and  daughter. 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 

Lhou  me."  When  the  Galilaean  crowds  had  hu.ted 
on  their  way  to  Jerusalem  to  he<w  the  preaching  tf 
Jesus  (John  vi.  5-9),  and  were  faint  with  hunger, 
it  was  to  Philip  that  the  question  was  put,  "  Whence 
shall  we  buy  bread  that  these  may  eat?  "  "  And 
this  he  said,"  St.  John  adds,  "  to  prove  him,  for 
He  himself  knew  -vhat  He  would  do."  The  answer, 
"  Two  hundred  pennyworth  of  bread  is  not  sufficient 
for  them  that  every  one  may  take  a  little,"  shows 
how  little  he  was  prepared  tor  the  work  of  divine 
power  that  followed.0  It  is  noticeable  that  here,  as 
in  John  i.,  he  appears  in  close  connexion  with 
Andrew. 

Another  incident  is  brought  before  us  in  John  xii. 
20-22.  Among  the  pilgrims  who  had  come  to  keep 
the  passover  at  Jerusalem  were  some  Gentile  prose 
lytes  (Hellenes)  who  had  heard  of  Jesus,  and  desired 
to  see  Him.  The  Greek  name  of  Philip  may  have 
attracted  them.  The  zealous  love  which  he  had 
shown  in  the  case  of  Nathanael  may  have  made 
him  prompt  to  offer  himself  as  their  guide.  But  it 
is  characteristic  of  him  that  he  does  not  take  them 
at  once  to  the  presence  of  his  Master.  "  Philip 
cometh  and  telleth  Andrew,  and  again  Andrew  and 
Philip  tell  Jesus.''  The  friend  and  fellow- townsman 
to  whom  probably  he  owed  his  own  introduction  to 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  to  introduce  these  strangers  also.d 

There  is  a  connexion  not  difficult  to  be  traced 
between  this  fact  and  that  which  follows  on  the  last 
recurrence  of  Philip's  name  in  the  history  of  the 
Gospels.  The  desire  to  see  Jesus  gave  occasion  to 
the  utterance  of  words  in  which  the  Lord  spoke 
more  distinctly  than  ever  of  the  presence  of  His 
Father  with  Him,  to  the  voice  from  heaven  which 
manifested  the  Father's  will  (John  xii.  28).  The 
words  appear  to  have  sunk  into  the  heart  of  at 
least  one  of  the  disciples,  and  he  brooded  over 
them.  The  strong  cravings  of  a  passionate  but 
unenlightened  faith  led  him  to  feel  that  one  thing 
was  yet  wanting.  They  heard  their  Lord  speak  of 
His  Father  and  of  their  Father.  He  was  going  to 
His  Father's  house.  They  were  to  follow  Him 
there.  But  why  should  they  not  have  even  now  a 
vision  of  the  Divine  glory.?  It  was  part  of  the 
child-like  simplicity  of  his  nature  that  no  reserve 
should  hinder  the  expression  of  the  craving, "  Lord, 
shew  us  the  Father,  and  it  sufficeth  us"  (John  xiv.  8). 
And  the  answer  to  that  desire  belonged  also  specially 
to  him.  He  had  all  along  been  eager  to  lead  others 
to  see  Jesus.  He  had  been  with  Him,  looking  on 
Him  from  the  very  commencement  of  His  ministry, 
Und  yet  he  had  not  known  Him.  He  had  thought 
of  the  glory  of  the  Father  as  consisting  in  some 
thing  else  ihan  the  Truth,  Righteousness,  Love  that 
he  had  witnessed  in  the  Son.  "Have  I  been  so 
long  time  with  you,  and  yet  hast  thou  not  known 
me,  Philip  ?  He  that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the 
Father.  How  sayest  thou,  Shew  us  the  Father  ?  " 
No  other  fact  connected  with  the  name  of  Philip  is 
recorded  in  the  Gospels.  The  close  relation  in 
which  we  have  seen  him  standing  to  the  sons  of 
Zebedee  and  Nathanael  might  lead  us  to  think  of 
him  as  one  of  the  two  unnamed  disciples  in  the  list 
of  fishermen  on  the  Sea  of  Tiberias  who  meet  us  in 
John  xsi.  He  is  among  the  company  of  disciples 
at  Jerusalem  after  the  Ascension  (Acts  i.  13),  and 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 


PHILIP  THE  APOSTLE 


835 


«  Be-agel  draws  from  this  narrative  the  inference  that 
it  was  part  of  Pnilip's  work  to  provide  for  the  daily 
sustenance  of  the  Company  of  the  Twelve. 

d  The  national  pride  of  some  Spanish  theologians  has 
tad  them  to  ciairn  these  li^ir.irers  as  their  countrymen, 


After  this  all  is  uncertain  and  apocryphal.  He 
is  mentioned  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  as  having 
had  a  wife  and  children,  and  as  having  sanctioned 
the  marriage  of  his  daughters  instead  of  binding 
them  to  vows  of  chastity  (Strom,  iii.  52  ;  Kuseb. 
If.  E.  iii.  30),  and  is  included  .n  the  list  of  those  who 
had  borne  witness  of  Christ  in  their  lives,  out  had 
not  died  what  was  commonly  looked  on  as  a  martyr'* 
death  (Strom,  iv.  73).  Polycrates  (Euseb.  //.  E. 
iii.  31),  bishop  of  Ephesus,  speaks  of  him  as  having 
fallen  asleep  in  the  Phrygian  Hierapolis,  as  having 
had  two  daughters  who  had  grown  old  unmarried, 
and  a  third,  with  special  gifts  of  inspiration  (it 
'hylif  TlvftipaTt  iro\irtvffaiJLtvri),  who  had  died  at 
Ephesus.  There  seems,  however,  in  this  mention 
of  the  daughters  of  Philip,  to  be  some  confusion 
between  the  Apostle  and  the  Evangelist.  Eusebius 
in  the  same  chapter  quotes  a  passage  from  Caius 
in  which  the  four  daughters  of  Philip,  prophetesses, 
are  mentioned  as  living  with  their  father  at  Hiera 
polis  and  as  buried  there  with  him,  and  himself 
connects  this  fact  with  Acts  xxi.  8,  as  though  they  re 
ferred  to  one  and  the  same  person.  Polycrates  in  like 
manner  refers  to  him  in  the  Easter  Controversy,  as 
an  authority  for  the  Quartodeciman  practice  (Euseb 
H.  E.  v.  24).  It  is  noticeable  that  even  Augustine 
(Serm.  266)  speaks  with  some  uncertainty  as  to  tht 
distinctness  of  the  two  Philips.  The  apocryphal 
'  Acta  Philippi '  are  utterly  wild  and  fantastic,  and 
if  there  is  any  grain  of  truth  in  them,  it  is  probably 
the  bare  fact  that  the  Apostle  or  the  Evangelist 
laboured  in  Phrygia,  and  died  at  Hieropolis.  He 
arrives  in  that  city  with  his  sister  Mariamne  and 
his  friend  Bartholomew  .•  The  wife  of  the  pro 
consul  is  converted.  The  people  are  drawn  away 
from  the  worship  of  a  great  serpent.  The  priests  and 
the  proconsul  seize  on  the  Apostles  and  put  them  to 
the  torture.  St.  John  suddenly  appears  with  words 
of  counsel  and  encouragement.  Philip,  in  spite  of  the 
warning  of  the  Apostle  of  Love  reminding  him  that 
he  should  return  good  for  evil,  curses  the  city,  and 
the  earth  opens  and  swallows  it  up.  Then  his 
Lord  appeai-s  and  reproves  him  for  his  vindictive 
anger,  and  those  who  had  descended  to  the  abyss 
are  raised  out  of  it  again.  The  tortures  which 
Philip  had  suffered  end  in  his  death,  but,  as  a  punish 
ment  for  his  offence,  he  is  to  remain  for  forty  days 
excluded  from  Paradise.  After  his  death  a  vine 
springs  up  on  the  spot  where  his  blood  had  fallen, 
and  the  juice  of  the  grapes  is  used  for  the  Eucha- 
ristic  cup  (Tischendorf,  Acta  Apocrypha,  p.  75- 
94).  The  book  which  contains  this  narrative  is 
apparently  only  the  last  chapter  of  a  larger  history, 
and  it  fixes  tht  journey  and  the  death  as  after  the 
eighth  year  of  Trajan.  It  is  uncertain  whether  the 
other  apocryphal  fragment  professing  to  give  an 
account  of  his  labours  in  Greece  is  part  of  the  same 
work,  but  it  is  at  least  equally  legendary.  He 
arrives  in  Athens  clothed  like  the  other  Apostles, 
as  Christ  had  commanded,  in  an  outer  cloak  and  a 
linen  tunic.  Three  hundred  philosophers  dispute 
with  him.  They  find  themselves  baffled,  and  send  for 
assistance  to  Ananias  the  high-priest  at  Jerusalem. 
He  puts  on  his  pontifical  robes,  and  goes  to  Athens 
at  the  head  of  five  hundred  warriors.  They  attempt 
to  seize  on  the  Apostle,  and  are  all  smitten  with 
blindness.  The  heavens  open  ,  the  form  of  the  Son 


saint  of  so  many  of  their  kings  on  a  level  with  Sant  lago 
as  the  patron  saint  of  the  people  (Acta  Sanctorum,  May  I)L 
e  The  union  of  the  two  names  is  significant,  and  points 
to  the  Apostle. 

3  H  2 


536    PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST 

of  Man  appears,  and  all  the  idols  of  Athens  fall  to 
ihe  ground  ;  and  so  on  through  a  succession  of  mar 
vels,  ending  with  his  remaining  two  years  in  the 
city,  establishing  a  Church  there,  and  then  going 
to  preach  the  Gospel  in  Parthia  (Tischendorf,  Acta 
Apocr.  p.  95-104;.  Another  tradition  represents 
Scythia  as  the  scene  of  his  labours  (Abdias,  Hist. 
Apost.  in  Fabricius,  Cod.  Apoo.  N.  T.  \.  739),  and 
throws  the  guilt  of  his  death  upon  the  Ebionites 
'Acta  Sanctorum,  May  1).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST.  The  first 
mention  of  this  name  occurs  in  the  account  of  the 
dispute  between  the  Hebrew  and  Hellenistic  disciples 
in  Acts  vi.  He  is  one  of  the  Seven  appointed  to 
superintend  the  daily  distribution  of  food  and  alms, 
and  so  to  remove  all  suspicion  of  partiality.  The 
fact  that  all  the  seven  names  are  Greek,  makes  it  at 
least  very  probable  that  they  were  chosen  as  be 
longing  to  the  Hellenistic  section  of  the  Church, 
representatives  of  the  class  which  had  appeared 
before  the  Apostles  in  the  attitude  of  complaint. 
The  name  of  Philip  stands  next  to  that  of  Stephen  ; 
and  this,  together  with  the  fact,  that  these  are  the 
only  two  names  (unless  Nicolas  be  an  exception ; 
comp.  NICOLAS)  of  which  we  hear  again,  tends  to 
the  conclusion  that  he  was  among  the  most  pro 
minent  of  those  so  chosen.  He  was,  at  any  rate, 
well  reported  of  as  "  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
wisdom,"  and  had  so  won  the  affections  of  the  great 
body  of  believers  as  to  be  amoug  the  objects  of  their 
free  election,  possibly  (assuming  the  votes  of  the 
congregation  to  have  been  taken  for  the  different 
candidates)  gaining  all  but  the  highest  number  of 
suffrages.  Whether  the  office  to  which  he  was 
thus  appointed  gave  him  the  position  and  the  title 
of  a  Deacon  of  the  Church,  or  was  special  and  ex 
traordinary  in  its  character,  must  remain  uncertain 
(comp.  DEACON). 

The  after-history  of  Philip  warrants  the  belief, 
in  any  case,  that  his  office  was  not  simply  that  of 
the  later  Diaconate.  It  is  no  great  presumption  to 
think  of  him  as  contributing  hardly  less  than  Ste 
phen  to  the  great  increase  of  disciples  which  fol 
lowed  on  this  fresh  organisation,  as  sharing  in  that 
wider,  more  expansive  teaching  which  shows  itself 
for  the  first  time  in  the  oration  of  the  proto-martyr, 
and  in  which  he  was  the  forerunner  of  St.  Paul. 
We  should  expect  the  man  who  had  been  his  com 
panion  and  fellow-worker  to  go  on  with  the  work 
which  he  left  unfinished,  and  to  break  through  the 
barriers  of  a  simply  national  Judaism.  And  so 
accordingly  we  find  him  in  the  next  stage  of  his 
history.  The  persecution  of  which  Saul  was  the 
leader  must  have  stopped  the  "  daily  ministrations  " 
of  the  Church.  The  teachers  who  had  been  most 
prominent  were  compelled  to  take  to  flight,  and 
Philip  was  among  them.  The  cessation  of  one  form 
of  activity,  however,  only  threw  him  forward  into 
another.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  city  of  Samaria 
is  the  first  scene  of  his  activity  (Acts  viii.).  He  is 
the  precursor  of  St.  Paul  in  his  work,  as  Stephen 
had  been  in  his  teaching.  It  falls  to  his  lot,  rather 
than  to  that  of  an  Apostle,  to  take  that  first  step  in 
the  victory  over  Jewish  prejudice  and  the  expansion 
of  thz  Church,  according  to  its  Lord's  command. 
As  a  preparation  for  that  work  there  may  have 
teen  the  Messianic  hopes  which  were  cherished  by 
the  Samaritans  no  less  than  by  the  Jews  (John 
v.  25),  the  recollection  of  the  two  days  which  had 

*  The  verse  which  inserts  the  requirement  of  a  oon- 
luwlon  of  faith  as  the  condition  of  baptism  appears  to 
have  l>«n  the  work  of  a  transcriber  anxious  to  bring  the 


PHILIP  THE  EVANGELIST' 

witnessed  the  presence  there  of  Chri.4  and  H*  din- 
ciples  (John  iv.  40),  even  perhaps  the  craving 
for  spiritual  powers  which  had  been  roused  by  the 
strange  influence  of  Simon  the  Sorcerer.  The  scene 
which  brings  the  two  into  contact  with  each  other, 
in  which  the  magician  has  to  acknowledge  a  power 
over  nature  greater  than  his  own,  is  interesting, 
rather  as  belonging  to  the  life  of  the  heresiarch 
than  to  that  of  the  Evangelist.  [SIMON  MAGUS.] 
It  suggests  the  inquiry  whether  we  can  trace  through 
the  distortions  and  perversions  of  the  "  hero  of  the 
romance  of  heresy,"  the  influence  of  that  phase  of 
Chiistian  truth  which  was  likely  to  be  presented 
by  the  preaching  of  the  Hellenistic  Evangelist. 

This  step  is  followed  by  another.  He  is  directed 
by  an  angel  of  the  Lord  to  take  the  road  that  led 
down  from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza  on  the  way  to  Egypt. 
(For  the  topographical  questions  connected  with 
this  history,  see  GAZA.)  A  chariot  passes  by  in 
which  there  is  a  man  of  another  race,  whose  com 
plexion  or  whose  dress  showed  him  to  be  a  native 
of  Ethiopia.  From  the  time  of  Psammetichus 
[comp.  MANASSEH]  there  had  been  a  large  body 
of  Jews  settled  in  that  region,  and  the  eunuch  or 
chamberlain  at  the  court  of  Candace  might  easily 
have  come  across  them  and  their  sacred  books, 
might  have  embraced  their  faith,  and  become  by 
circumcision  a  proselyte  of  righteousness.  He  had 
been  on  a  pilgrimage  to  Jerusalem.  He  may  have 
heard  there  of  the  new  sect.  The  history  tliat  fol 
lows  is  interesting  as  one  of  the  few  records  in  the 
N.  T.  of  the  process  of  individual  conversion,  and 
one  which  we  may  believe  St.  Luke  obtained,  during 
his  residence  at  Caesarea,  from  the  Evangelist  him 
self.  The  devout  proselyte  reciting  the  prophecy 
which  he  does  not  understand — the  Evangelist- 
preacher  running  at  full  speed  till  he  overtakes  the 
chariot — the  abrupt  question — the  simple-hearted 
answer — the  unfolding,  from  the  starting-point  of 
the  prophecy,  of  the  glad  tidings  of  Jesus — the 
craving  for  the  means  of  admission  to  the  blessing 
of  fellowship  with  the  new  society — the  simple 
baptism  in  the  first  stream  or  spring1 — the  in 
stantaneous,  abrupt  departure  of  the  missionary- 
preacher,  as  of  one  carried  away  by  a  Divine 
impulse — these  help  us  to  represent  to  ourselves 
much  of  the  life  and  work  of  that  remote  past. 
On  the  hypothesis  which  has  just  been  suggested, 
we  may  think  of  it  as  being  the  incident  to  which 
the  mind  of  Philip  himself  recurred  with  most 
satisfaction. 

A  brief  sentence  tells  us  that  he  continued  big 
work  as  a  preacher  at  Azotus  (Ashdod)  and  among 
the  other  cities  that  had  formerly  belonged  to  the 
Philistines,  and,  following  the  coast-line,  came  to 
Caesarea.  Here  for  a  long  period,  not  less  than 
eighteen  or  nineteen  yeans,  we  lose  sight  of  him. 
He  may  have  been  there  when  the  new  convert 
Saul  passed  through  on  his  way  to  Tarsus  (Acts 
ix.  30).  He  may  have  contributed  by  his  labours 
to  the  eager  desire  to  be  guided  further  into  the 
Truth  which  led  to  the  conversion  of  Cornelius. 
We  can  hardly  think  of  him  as  giving  up  all  a'. 
once  the  missionary  habits  of  lu's  life.  Caesarea, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  the  centre  of  his 
activity.  The  last  glimpse  of  him  in  the  N.  T.  ii 
in  the  account  of  St.  Paul's  journey  to  Jerusalem. 
It  is  to  his  house,  as  to  one  well  known  to  them, 
that  St.  Paul  and  his  companions  turn  for  shelter. 


narrative  Into  harmony  with  ecclesiastical  aMip.    (Comp 
Alford,  Meyer,  Tischendorf,  in  Joe.) 


PHILIP 

Hi  u  etill  known  as  "  one  of  the  Seven."  His  work 
has  gained  for  him  the  yet  higher  titia  of  Evangelist 
(comp.  EVANGELIST).  He  has  four "  daughters, 
who  possess  the  gift  of  prophetic  utterance,  and 
who  apparently  give  themselves  to  the  work  ol 
teaching  instead  of  entering  on  the  life  of  home 
(Acts  xxi.  8,  9).  He  is  visited  by  the  prophets  and 
elders  of  Jerusalem.  At  such  a  place  as  Caesarea 
the  work  of  such  a  man  must  have  helped  to  bridge 
over  the  ever-widening  gap  which  threatened  to 
separate  the  Jewish  and  the  Gentile  Churches. 
One  who  had  preached  Christ  to  the  hated  Sama 
ritan,  the  swarthy  African,  the  despised  Philistine, 
the  men  of  all  nations  who  passed  through  the  sea 
port  of  Palestine,  might  well  welcome  the  arrival 
of  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  (comp.  J.  P.  Lange, 
in  Herzog's  Real-encyclopM.  s.  v.  "  Philippus"). 

The  traditions  in  which  the  Evangelist  and  the 
Apostle  who  bore  the  same  name  are  more  or  less 
confounded  have  been  given  under  PHILIP  THE 
APOSTLE.  According  to  another,  relating  more  dis 
tinctly  to  him,  he  died  Bishop  of  Tralles  (Acta  Sanct. 
June  6).  The  house  in  which  he  and  his  daughters 
had  lived  was  pointed  out  to  travellers  in  the  time 
of  Jerome  (Epit.  Paulae,  §8).  (Comp.  Ewald, 
Geschichte,vi.  175,208-214;  Baumgarten,  Apostcl- 
Geschichte,  §15,  16.)  [E.  H.  P.J 

PHILIP  HEKOD  I.,  II.  [HEROD  ;  vol.  i. 
p.  794.] 

PHILIP'PI  (*rxi7riro« :  Philippi).  A  city  of 
Macedonia,  about  nine  miles  fi  om  the  sea,  to  the 
N.  W.  of  the  island  of  Thasos,  which  is  twelve  miles 
distant  from  its  port  Neapolis,  the  modem  Kcmalla. 
1 1  is  situated  in  a  plain  between  the  ranges  of  Pangaeus 
and  Haemus.  St.  Paul,  when,  on.  his  first  visit  to  Ma 
cedonia  in  company  with  Silas,  he  embarked  at  Troas, 
made  a  straight  run  to  Samothrace,  and  from  thence 
to  Neapolis,  which  he  reached  on  the  second  day  (Acts 
xvi.  11).  This  was  built  on  a  rocky  promontory, 
on  the  western  side  of  which  is  a  roadstead,  furnish- 
lug  a  safe  refuge  from  the  Etesian,  winds.  The  town 
is  cut  off  from  the  interior  by  a  steep  line  of  hills, 
anciently  called  Symbolum,  connected  towards  the 
N.E.  with  the  western  extremity  of  Haemus,  and 
towards  the  S.W.,  less  continuously,  with  the  eastern 
extremity  of  Pangaeus.  A  steep  track,  following 
the  course  of  an  ancient  paved  road,  leads  over  Sym 
bolum  to  Philippi,  the  solitary  pass  being  about 
1600  feet  above  the  sea-level.  At  this  point  the 
traveller  arrives  in  little  more  than  half  an  hour's 
riding,  and  almost  immediately  begins  to  descend 
by  a  yet  steeper  path  into  the  plain.  From  a  point 
near  the  watershed,  a  simultaneous  view  is  obtained 
both  of  Kavalla  and  of  the  ruins  of  Philippi. 
Between  Pangaeus  and  the  nearest  part  of  Sym 
bolum  the  plain  is  veiy  low,  and  there  are  large 
accumulations  of  water.  Between  the  foot  of  Sym 
bolum  and  the  site  of  Philippi,  two  Turkish  ceme 
teries  are  passed,  the  gravestones  of  which  are  all 
derived  from  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  city,  and  in 
the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  one  first  reached 
is  the  modern  Turkish  village  Bereketli.  This  is 
the  nearest  village  to  the  ancient  ruins,  which  are 
not  at  the  present  time  inhabited  at  all.  Near  the 
second  cemetery  are  some  ruins  on  a  slight  emi 
nence,  and  al-so  a  khan,  kept  by  a  Greek  family. 
Here  is  a  large  monumental  block  of  marble,  12  feet 
high  and  7  feet  square,  apparently  the  pedestal  of  a 
statue,  as  on  the  top  a  hole  exists,  which  was  ob 
viously  intended  for  its  receptior  This  hole  is 
pointed  out  bv  local  tradition  as  the  crib  out  of 


PHILIPPI 


837 


which  Alexander's  horse,  Bucephalus,  was  accug» 
tomed  to  eat  his  oats.  On  two  sides  cf  the  block  is 
a  mutilated  Latin  inscription,  in  which  the  names 
of  Caius  Vibius  and  Cornelius  Quartus  may  be  deci 
phered.  A  stream  employed  in  turning  a  mill  bursts 
out  from  a  sedgy  pool  in  the  neighbourhood,  and 
probably  finds  its  way  to  the  marshy  ground  men 
tioned  as  existing  in  the  S.W.  portion  of  the  plain. 

After  about  twenty  minutes'  ride  from  the  khan, 
over  ground  thickly  strewed  with  fragments  of 
marble  columns,  and  slabs  that  have  been  employed 
in  building,  a  river-bed  66  feet  wide  is  crossed, 
through  which  the  stream  rushes  with  great  force, 
and  immediately  on  the  other  side  the  walls  of  the 
ancient  Philippi  may  be  traced.  Their  direction  is 
adjusted  to  the  course  of  the  stream  ;  and  at  only 
350  feet  from  its  margin  there  appears  a  gap  in  their 
circuit  indicating  the  former  existence  of  a  gate. 
This  is,  no  doubt,  the  gate  out  of  which  the  Apostle 
and  his  companion  passed  to  the  "  prayer  meeting  " 
on  the  banks  of  a  river,  where  they  made  the  acquaint 
ance  of  Lydia,  the  Thyatiran  seller  of  purple.  The 
locality,  just  outside  the  walls,  and  with  a  plentiful 
supply  of  water  for  their  animals,  is  exactly  the  one 
which  would  be  appropriated  as  a  market  for  itine 
rant  traders,  "  quorum  cophinus  foenumque  su- 
pellex,"  as  will  appear  from  the  parallel  case  of 
the  Egerian  fountain  near  Rome,  of  whose  desecra 
tion  Juvenal  complains  (Sot.  Hi.  13).  Lydia  had 
an  establishment  in  Philippi  for  the  reception  of  the 
dyed  goods  which  were  imported  from  Thyatira 
and  the  neighbouring  towns  of  Asia ;  and  were  dis 
persed  by  means  of  pack-animals  among  the  moun 
tain  clans  of  the  Haemus  and  Pangaeus,  -the  agents 
being  doubtless  in  many  instances  her  own  co-reli 
gionists.  High  up  in  Haemus  lay  the  tribe  of  the 
Satrae,  where  was  the  oracle  of  Dionysus,— not 
the  rustic  deity  of  the  Attic  vinedressers,  but  the 
prophet-god  of  the  Thracians  (6  ®py£l  pArris, 
Eurip.  Hecub.  1267).  The  "damsel  with  the 
spirit  of  divination "  (ircuSiffmi  %xovfftt  "Kvevfj.* 

Btevo)  may  probably  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
hierodules  of  this  establishment,  hired  by  Philippian 
citizens,  and  frequenting  the  country-market  to 
practise  her  art  upon  the  villagers  who  brought 
produce  for  the  consumption  of  the  town.  The 
fierce  character  of  the  mountaineers  would  render 
it  imprudent  to  admit  them  within  the  walls  of  the 
city ;  just  as  in  some  of  the  towns  of  North  Africa, 
the  Kabyles  are  not  allowed  to  enter,  but  have  a 
market  allotted  to  them  outside  the  walls  for  the 
sale  of  the  produce  they  bring.  Over  such  an 
assemblage  only  a  summaiy  jurisdiction  can  be  ex 
ercised  ;  and  hence  the  proprietors  of  the  slave, 
when  they  considered  themselves  injured,  and  hur 
ried  Paul  and  Silas  into  the  town,  to  the  agora, — 
the  civic  market  where  the  magistrates  'Apxovres] 
sat, — were  at  once  turned  over  to  the  military  au 
thorities  (ffrparyyol),  and  these,  naturally  assum 
ing  that  a  stranger  frequenting  the  extra-mural 
market  must  be  a  Thracian  mountaineer  or  an 
itinerant  trader,  proceeded  to  inflict  upon  the  osten 
sible  cause  of  a  riot  (the  merits  of  which  they  would 
not  attempt  to  understand),  the  usual  treatment  in 
such  cases.  The  idea  of  the  Apostle  possessing  the 
Roman  franchise,  and  consequently  an  •  xemption 
from  corporal  outrage,  never  occurred  to  the  rough 
soldier  who  ordered  him  to  be  scourged ;  and  the 
whole  transaction  seems  to  have  posse  I  so  rapidly 
that  he  had  no  time  to  plead  his  citizenship,  of 
which  the  military  authorities  first  ne<trd  th«  next 
day.  But  the  illegal  treatment  CuBais}  obviously 


\ 


338  PHILIPPI 

made  a  deep  impression  on  the  mind  of  its  victim, 
as  is  evident,  not  only  from  his  ivfusal  to  take  his 
discharge  from  prison  the  next  morning  (Acts  xvi. 
37),  but  from  a  passage  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Church  at  Thessalonica  (1  Thess.  ii.  2),  in  which 
he  reminds  them  of  the  circumstances  under  which 
he  first  preached  the  Gospel  to  them  (irpoira66vTes 
Kal  v&piff8(VTfs,  Ka.9ws  otSaTf,  tv  <J>iA.i7T7rois). 
And  subsequently  at  Jerusalem,  under  parallel  cir 
cumstances  of  tumult,  he  warns  the  officer  (to  the 
great  surprise  of  the  latter)  of  his  privilege  (Acts 
xxii.  25). 

The  Philippi  which  St.  Paul  visited,  the  site  of 
which  has  been  described  above,  was  a  Roman  colony 
founded  by  Augustus,  and  the  remains  which  strew 
the  ground  are  no  doubt  derived  from  that  city. 
The  establishment  of  Philip  of  Macedonia  was  pro 
bably  not  exactly  on  the  same  site  ;  for  it  is  described 
by  Appian  as  being  on  a  hill,  and  it  may  perhaps 
be  looked  for  upon  the  elevation  near  the  second 
cemetery.  Philip  is  said  to  have  occupied  it  and 
fortified  the  position  byway  of  a  defence  against  the 
neighbouring  Thracians,  so  that  the  nucleus  of  his 
town,  at  any  rate,  would  have  been  of  the  nature 
of  an  acropolis.  Nothing  would  be  more  natural 
than  that  the  Roman  town  should  have  been  built 
in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  existing 
Greek  one,  on  a  site  more  suitable  for  architectural 
display. 

Philip,  when  he  acquired  possession  of  the  site, 
found  there  a  town  named  Dalits  or  Datum,  which 
was  in  all  probability  in  its  origin  a  factory  of  the 
Phoenicians,  who  were  the  first  that  worked  the 
gold-mines  in  the  mountains  here,  as  in  the  neigh 
bouring  Thasos.  Appian  says  that  those  were  in  a 
hill  (A(J<pos)  not  far  from  Philippi,  that  the  hill 
was  sacred  to  Dionysus,  and  that  the  mines  went 
by  the  name  of  "  the  sanctuary  "  (ra  &ffv\a).  But 
he  shows  himself  quite  ignorant  of  the  locality,  to 
the  extent  of  believing  the  plain  of  Philippi  to  lie 
open  to  the  river  Strymon,  whereas  the  massive  wall 
of  Pangaeus  is  really  interposed  between  them.  In 
all  probability  the  "hill  of  Dionysus"  and  the 
"  sanctuary "  are  the  temple  of  Dionysus  high  up 
the  mountains  among  the  Satrae,  who  preserved 
their  independence  against  all  invaders  down  to  the 
time  of  Herodotus  at  least.  It  is  more  likely  that 
the  gold-mines  coveted  by  Philip  were  the  same  as 
those  at  Scapte  Hyle,  which  was  certainly  in  this 
immediate  neighbourhood.  Before  the  great  expe 
dition  of  Xerxes,  the  Thasians  had  a  number  of 
settlements  on  the  main,  and  this  among  the  number, 
which  produced  them  80  talents  a  year  as  rent  to 
the  state.  In  the  year  463  B.C.,  they  ceded  their 
possessions  on  the  continent  to  the  Athenians ;  but 
the  colonists,  10,000  in  number,  who  had  settled  on 
the  Strymon  and  pushed  their  encroachments  east 
ward  as  far  as  this  point,  were  crushed  by  a  simul 
taneous  effort  of  the  Thracian  tribes  (Thucydides, 
i.  100,  iv.  102;  Herodotus,  ix.  75;  Pausanias,  i. 
29,  4).  From  that  time  until  the  rise  of  the  Mace 
donian  power,  the  mines  seem  to  have  remained  in 
the  hands  of  native  chiefs ;  but  when  the  affiiirs  of 
Southern  Greece  became  thoroughly  embroiled  by 
the  policy  of  Philip,  the  Thasians  made  an  attempt 
to  repossess  themselves  of  this  valuable  territory, 
and  sent  a  colony  to  the  site — then  going  by  the 
name  of  "  the  Springs  "  (Kpiji/fSes).  Philip,  how 
ever,  aware  of  the  importance  of  the  position, 
axpclled  them  and  founded  Philippi,  the  last  of  all 
hie  creations.  The  mines  at  that  time,  as  was  not 
wonderful  under  the  circumstances,  had  become 


PHILIPPI 

almost  insignificant  in  their  produce ;  but  their  nrw 
owner  contrived  to  extract  more  than  1000  talent* 
a  year  from  them,  with  which  he  minted  the  gold 
coinage  called  by  his  name. 

The  proximity  of  the  gold-mines  was  of  cours* 
the  origin  of  so  large  a  city  as  Philippi,  but  the 
plain  in  which  it  lies  is  of  extraordinary  fertility. 
The  position  too  was  on  the  main  road  from  Home 
to  Asia,  the  Via  Egnatia,  which  from  Thessalonica 
to  Constantinople  followed  the  same  course  as  the 
existing  post-road.  The  usual  course  was  to  take 
ship  at  Brundisium  and  land  at  Dyrrachium,  from 
whence  a  route  led  across  Epirus  to  Thessalonica. 
Ignatius  was  earned  to  Italy  by  this  route,  when 
sent  to  Rome  to  be  cast  to  wild  beasts. 

The  ruins  of  Philippi  are  very  extensive,  but 
present  no  striking  feature  except  two  gateways, 
which  are  considered  to  belong  to  the  time  of  Clau 
dius.  Traces  of  an  amphitheatre,  theatre,  or  stadium 
— for  it  does  not  clearly  appear  which — are  also 
visible  in  the  direction  of  the  hills  on  the  N.E.  side. 
Inscriptions  both  in  the  Latin  and  Greek  languages, 
but  more  generally  in  the  former,  are  found. 

St.  Paul  visited  Philippi  twice  more,  once  imme 
diately  after  the  disturbances  which  arose  at  Ephesus 
out  of  the  jealousy  of  the  manufacturers  of  silver 
shrines  for  Artemis.  By  this  time  the  hostile  rela 
tion  in  which  the  Christian  doctrine  necessarily 
stood  to  all  purely  ceremonial  religions  was  per 
fectly  manifest ;  and  wherever  its  teachers  appeared, 
popular  tumults  were  to  be  expected,  and  the  jea 
lousy  of  the  Roman  authorities,  who  dreaded  civil 
disorder  above  everything  else,  to  be  feared.  It 
seems  not  unlikely  that  the  second  visit  of  the 
Apostle  to  Philippi  was  made  specially  with  the 
view  of  counteracting  this  particular  danger.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  which  was  written  to 
them  from  Rome,  indicates  that  at  that  time  some 
of  the  Christians  there  were  in  the  custody  of  the 
military  authorities  as  seditious  persons,  through 
some  proceedings  or  other  connected  with  their 
faith  (v/uv  ixaplffOii  rb  inrep  Xpiffrov,  ov  ft.6vov 
ri  elf  avrbv  iciffTfvfiv  a\\a  Kal  rb  int\p  avrov 
Ttaffxeiv  rbv  avrbit  a,y<ava  ?x°*'TeJ 
olov  fltitre  iv  4/j.ol  Kal  vvv  attoiifff 
iv  «' /i o t ;  Phil.  i.  29).  The  reports  of  the  pro 
vincial  magistrates  to  Rome  would  of  course  describe 
St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Philippi  as  the  origin  of  the 
troubles  there ;  and  if  this  were  believed,  it  would 
be  put  together  with  the  charge  against  him  by  the 
Jews  at  Jerusalem  which  induced  him  to  appeal  to 
Caesar,  and  with  the  disturbances  at  Ephesus  and 
elsewhere ;  and  the  general  conclusion  at  which  the 
Government  would  arrive,  might  not  improbably  be 
.that  he  was  a  dangerous  person  and  should  be  got 
rid  of.  This  will  explain  the  rtrong  exhortation  in 
the  first  eighteen  verses  of  chapter  ii.,  and  the  pe 
culiar  way  in  which  it  winds  up.  The  Philippian 
'  Christians,  who  are  at  the  same  time  suffering  for 
their  profession,  are  exhorted  in  the  most  earnest 
manner,  not  to  firmness  (as  one  might  have  ex- 
pocted),  but  to  moderation,  to  abstinence  from  all 
provocation  and  ostentation  of  their  own  sentiments 
(JUT^X  Kara  Ipi6tiav  /X7j5e  KfvoSo£tav,  ver.  ;'») 
to  humility,  and  consideration  for  the  interests  of 
others.  They  are  to  achieve  their  salvation  with 
fear  and  trembling,  and  without  quarreling  and  dis 
puting,  in  order  to  escape  all  blame — from  such 
charges,  that  is,  as  the  Roman  colonists  would  bring 
against  them.  If  with  all  this  prudt'iice  and  tem 
perance  in  the  profession  of  their  faith,  their  faith 
is  still  made  a  penal  offence,  the  Apostle  is  well 


PHILIPPI 

Bt-atcnt  to  take  the  consequences,  —  to  precede  them 
it)  martyrdom  for  it.  —  to  be  the  libation  poured  out 
upon  them  the  victims  (el  iced  fftrfvoo/j.ai  tvl  rij 


ffiv  vfjuv,  ver.  17).  Of  course  the 
Jewish  formalists  in  Philippi  were  the  parties  most 
likely  to  misrepresent  the  conduct  of  the  new  con- 
Terts  ;  and  hence  (after  a  digression  on  the  subject 
of  Epaphroditus)  the  Apostle  reverts  to  cautions 
against  them,  such  precisely  as  he  had  given 
before,  —  consequently  by  word  of  mouth.  "  Beware 
of  those  dogs  "—  (for  they  will  not  be  children  at 
the  table,  but  eat  the  crumbs  underneath)  —  "  those 
doers  (and  bad  doers  too)  of  the  law  —  those  flesh- 
manglers  (for  circumcised  I  won't  call  them,  we 
being  th«  true  circumcision,  &c."  (iii,  2,  3).  Some 
of  these  enemies  St.  Paul  found  at  Rome,  who  "  told 
the  story  of  Christ  insincerely  "  (Kar-fiyyei\av  oi>x 
vyvus,  i.  17)  in  the  hope  to  increase  the  severity 
of  his  imprisonment  by  exciting  the  jealousy  of  the 
Court.  These  he  opposes  to  such  as  "preached 
Christ"  (f'K'f]pv£av)  loyally,  and  consoles  himself 
with  the  reflection  that,  at  all  events,  the  story 
circulated,  whatever  the  motives  of  those  who  cir 
culated  it 

The  Christian  community  at  Philippi  distin 
guished  itself  in  liberality.  On  the  Apostle's  first 
visit  he  was  hospitably  entertained  by  Lydia,  and 
when  he  afterwards  went  to  Thessalonica,  where 
his  reception  appears  to  have  been  of  a  very  mixed 
character,  the  Philippians  sent  him  supplies  more 
than  once,  and  were  the  only  Christian  community 
that  did  so  (Phil.  iv.  15).  They  also  contributed 
readily  to  the  collection  made  for  the  relief  of  the 
poor  at  Jerusalem,  which  St.  Paul  conveyed  to 
them  at  his  last  visit  (2  Cor.  viii.  1-6).  And  it 
would  seem  as  if  they  sent  further  supplies  to  the 
Apostle  after  his  arrival  at  Rome.  The  necessity  for 
these  seems  to  have  been  urgent,  and  some  delay  to 
have  taken  place  in  collecting  the  requisite  funds  ; 
so  that  Epaphroditus,  who  carried  them,  risked  his 
life  in  the  endeavour  to  make  up  for  lost  time 
Qa.vi.rov  fjyyiffev  irapaf}ov\fvffdfjifi'os  TJJ 
fj,  1vct  a.vair\i)pcao"ri  rb  vfiuv  vffTfpri/j.a  rrjs 
irpij  fie  \eiTovpylas,  Phil.  ii.  30).  The  delay, 
however,  seems  to  have  somewhat  stung  the 
Apostle  at  the  time,  who  fancied  his  beloved  flock 
had  forgotten  him  (see  iv.  10-17).  Epaphroditus 
fell  ill  with  fever  from  his  efforts,  and  nearly  died. 
On  recovering  he  became  home-sick,  and  wandering 
in  miud  (aSij/jLOVcav)  from  the  weakness  which  is 
the  sequel  of  fever  ;  and  St.  Paul,  although  intend 
ing  soon  to  send  Timothy  to  the  Philippian  Church, 
thought  it  desirable  to  let  Epaphroditus  go  without 
delay  to  them,  who  had  already  heard  of  his  sickness, 
and  carry  with  him  the  letter  which  is  included  in  the 
Canos  —  one  which  was  written  after  the  Apostle's 
imprisonment  at  Rome  had  lasted  a  considerable 
time.  Some  domestic  troubles  connected  with  re 
ligion  had  already  broken  out  in  the  community. 
Euodia  (the  name  of  a  female,  not  Euodias,  as  in 
A.  V.  :  see  EUODIAS)  and  Syntyche,  perhaps  dea- 
coL?sses.  are  exhorted  to  agree  with  one  another  in 
the  matter  of  their  common  faith  ;  and  St.  Paul 
entreats  some  one,  whom  he  calls  "  true  yoke 
fellow,"  to  "help"  these  women,  that  is,  in  the 
work  of  their  reconciliation,  sinie  they  had  done 
pood  service  to  the  Apostle  in  his  trials  at  Philippi. 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE    839 

I  Possibly  a  claim  on  the  part  of  these  females  to 
superior  insight  in  spiritual  matters  may  have  caused 
some  irritation ;  for  the  Apostle  immediately  goes 
on  to  remind  his  readers,  that  the  peace  of  God  is 
something  superior  to  the  highest  intelligence  (vtrtp- 
exovffa  irdvra  vovv). 

When  St.  Paul  passed  through  Philippi  a  third 
time  he  does  not  appear  to  have  made  any  consider 
able  stay  there  (Acts  xx.  6).  He  and  his  companion 
are  somewhat  loosely  spoken  of  as  sailing  from  Phi 
lippi  ;  but  this  is  because  in  the  common  apprehen 
sion  of  travellers  the  city  and  its  port  were  regarded 
as  one.  Whoever  embarked  at  the  Piraeus  might  in 
the  same  way  be  said  to  set  out  on  a  voyage  from 
Athens.  On  this  occasion  the  voyage  to  Troas  took 
the  Apostle  five  days,  the  vessel  being  probably 
obliged  to  coast  in  order  to  avoid  the  contrary  wind, 
until  coming  off  the  headland  of  Sarpedon,  whence 
she  would  be  able  to  stand  across  to  Troas  with  an 
E.  or  E.N.E.  breeze,  which  at  that  time  of  year  (after 
Easter)  might  be  looked  for.  (Strab.  Fragment, 
lib.  vii.;  Thucyd.  i.  100,  iv.  102;  Herod,  ix.  75  ; 
Diod.  Sic.  xvi.  3  seqq. ;  Appian.  Bell.  Civ.  iv. 
101  seqq. ;  Pausan.  i.  28,  §4;  Hackett's  Journey 
to  Philippi  in  the  Bible  Union  Quarterly  for  Au 
gust,  1860.)  [J.  W.  B.] 
PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE. 
1.  The  canonical  authority,  Pauline  authorship  and 
integrity  of  this  Epistle  were  unanimously  acknow 
ledged  up  to  the  end  of  the  1 8th  century.  Marcion 
(A.D.  140)  in  the  earliest  known  Canon  held  com 
mon  ground  with  the  Church  touching  the  autho 
rity  of  this  Epistle  (Tertullian,  Adv.  Marcion.  iv. 
5,  v.  20) :  it  appears  in  the  Muratorian  Fragment 
(Routh,  Reliquiae  Sacrae,  i.  395) ;  among  the 
"  acknowledged "  books  in  Eusebius  (H.  E.  iii. 
25) ;  in  the  lists  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  A.D. 
365,  and  the  Synod  of  Hippo,  393  ;  and  in  all  sub 
sequent  Itsts,  as  well  as  in  the  Peshito  and  later 
versions.  Even  contemporary  evidence  may  be 
claimed  for  it.  Philippian  Christians  who  had  con 
tributed  to  the  collections  for  St.  Paul's  support  at 
Rome,  who  had  been  eye  and  ear-witnesses  of  the 
return  of  Epaphroditus  and  the  first  reading  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistle,  may  have  been  still  alive  at  Philippi 
when  Polycarp  wrote  (A.D.  107)  his  letter  to  them, 
in  which  (ch.  2,  3)  he  refers*  to  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
as  a  well-known  distinction  belonging  to  the  Phi 
lippian  Church.  It  is  quoted  as  St.  Paul's  by 
Irenaeus,  iv.  18,  §4  ;  Clem.  Alex.  Paedag.  i.,  6, 
§52,  snd  elsewhere ;  Tertullian,  Adv.  Mar.  v. 
20,  De  Res.  Cam.  ch.  23.  A  quotation  froa  it 
(Phil.  ii.  6)  is  found  in  the  Epistle  of  the  Churcfi'* 
of  Lyons  and  Vienne,  A.D.  177  (Eusebius,  H.  E. 
v.  2).  The  testimonies  of  later  writers  are  innu 
merable.  But  F.  C.  Baur  (1845),  followed  by 
Schwegler  (1846),  has  argued  from  the  phraseology 
of  the  Epistle  and  other  internal  marks,  that  it  is 
the  work  not  of  St.  Paul,  but  of  some  Gnostic 
forger  in  the  2nd  century.  He  has  been  answered 
by  Liinemann  (1847),  Bruckner  (1848),  and  Resoh 
(1850).  Even  if  his  inference  were  a  fair  conse 
quence  from  Baur's  premises,  it  would  still  be  neu 
tralized  by  the  strong  evidence  in  favour  of  Pauline 
authorship,  which  Paley,  fforae  Paulinae,  ch.  7. 
has  drawn  from  the  Epistle  as  it  stands.  The  argu 
ments  of  the  Tiibingen  school  are  briefly  stated  in 
Reuss,  Gesch.  N.  T.  §130-133,  and  at  greater 


*  Tertullian  refers  to  it  in  the  same  way,  De  Praescrip-  of  the  Apostles  presldp  over  their  regions,  in  whlca  the 
tumt,  xxxvi.,  naming  i'hillppi  as  one  of  those  Apostolic  authentic  epistles  themselves  of  the  Apostles  ara  read, 
churches  "  in  which  at  this  day  [AJ>.  200]  the  very  seats  I  speaK'tig  with  the  voice  and  representing  the  tacc  of  each. 


840 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


length  in  Wiesinger't  Commentary.  Most  persons 
who  read  them  will  be  disposed  to  concur  in  the 
opinion  of  Dean  Alford  (N.  T.  vol.  iii.  p.  27,  ed. 
1856),  who  regards  them  as  an  instance  of  the  in 
sanity  of  hyper-criticism.  The  canonical  authority 
and  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  may  be  considered 
as  unshaken. 

There  is  a  break  in  the  sense  at  the  end  of  the 
second  chapter  of  the  Epistle,  which  every  careful 
reader  must  have  observed.  It  is  indeed  quite  na 
tural  that  an  Epistle  written  amid  exciting  circum 
stances,  personal  dangers,  and  various  distractions 
should  bear  in  one  place  at  least  a  mark  of  interrup 
tion.  Le  Moyne  (1685)  thought  it  was  anciently 
divided  into  two  pails.  Hemrichs(1810)  followed 
by  Paulus  (1817)  has  conjectured  from  this  abrupt 
recommencement  that  the  two  parts  are  two  distinct 
epistles,  of  which  the  first,  together  with  the  con 
clusion  of  the  Ep.  (iv.  21-23)  was  intended  for 
public  use  in  the  Church,  and  the  second  exclu 
sively  for  the  Apostle's  special  friends  in  Philippi. 
It  is  not  easy  to  see  what  sufficient  foundation 
exists  for  this  theory,  or  what  illustration  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Epistle  could  be  derived  from  it. 
It  has  met  with  a  distinct  reply  from  Krause  (1811 
and  1818) ;  and  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  has  not 
been  questioned  by  recent  critics.  Ewald  (Send- 
schreiben  des  A.  Paulus,  p.  431)  is  of  opinion  that 
St.  Paul  sent  several  epistles  to  the  Philippians :  and 
he  refers  to  the  texts  ii.  12  and  iii.  18,  as  partly 
proving  this.  But  some  additional  confirmation  or 
explanation  of  his  conjecture  is  requisite  before  it 
can  be  admitted  as  either  probable  or  necessary. 

2.  Where  written. — The  constant  tradition  that 
this  Epistle  was  written  at  Rome  by  St.  Paul  in  his 
captivity,  was  impugned  first  by  Oeder  (1731), 
who,  disregarding  the  fact  that  the  Apostle  was  in 
prison,  i.  7,  13,  14,  when  he  wrote,  imagined  that 
he  was  at  Corinth  (see  Wolf's  Curae  PMlologicae, 
iv.  168,  270);  and  then  by  Paulus  (1799),  Schulz 
(1829),   Bottger   (1837)  and   Rilliet   (1841),   in 
whose  opinion  the  Epistle  was  written  during  the 
Apostle's  confinement  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.  23)  ; 
but  the  references  to  the  "palace"  (praetorium, 
i.  13),  and  to  "Caesar's  household,"  iv.  22,  seem 
to  point  to  Rome  rather  than  to  Caesarea  ;  and  there 
is  no  reason  whatever  for  supposing  that  the  Apostle 
felt  in  Caesarea   that  extreme  uncertainty  of  life 
connected   with    the  approaching  decision   of   his 
cause,  which  he  must  have  felt  towards  the  end 
of  his  captivity  at  Rome,  and  which  he  expresses 
in  this  Epistle,  i.  19,  20,  ii.  17,  iii.  10;  and  fur 
ther,  the  dissemination  of  the  Gospel  described  in 
Phil.  i.  12-18,  is  not  even  hinted  at  in  St.  Luke's 
account  of  the  Caesarean  captivity,  but  is  described 
by  him  as  taking  place  at  Rome:   compare  Acts 
xxiv.  23  with  xxviii.  30,  31.     Even  Reuss  (Gesch. 
N.  T.  I860),  who  assigns  to  Caesarea  three  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles,  which  are  generally  considered  to 
have  been  written  at  Rome,  is  decided  in  his  con 
viction   that   the   Epistle  to  the  Philippians  was 
written  at  Rome. 

3.  When    written. — Assuming    then    that    the 
Kjiistle  was  written  at  Rome  during  the  imprison 
ment  mentioned  in  the  last  chapter  of  the  Acts,  it 
may  be  shown  from   a  single  fact  that  it  could 
n«t  have  been  written  long  before  the  end  of  the 
two  years.     The  distress  of  the  Philippians  on  ac 
count  of  Epaphroditus'  sickness  was  known  at  Rome 
when  the  Epistle  was  written;    this  implies  four 
tournies,  separated  by  some  indefinite  intervals,  to 
ir  from  Philippi  and  Rome,  between  the  commence 


ment  of  St.  Paul's  captivity  and  tht  writing  of  th* 
Epistle.  The  Philippians  ware  informed  of  his  im 
prisonment,  sent  Epaphroditus,  were  informed  of 
their  messenger's  sickness,  sent  their  message  oi 
condolence.  Further,  the  absence  of  St.  Luke'e 
name  from  the  salutations  to  a  Church  where  h? 
was  well-known,  implies  that  he  was  absent  fronr 
Rome b  when  the  Epistle  was  written :  so  does  St 
Paul's  declaration,  ii.  20,  that  no  one  who  remained 
with  him  felt  an  equal  interest  with  Timothy  in  the 
welfare  of  the  Philippians.  And;  ^y  comparing  the 
mention  of  St.  Luke  in  Col.  iv.  14,  and  Philem. 
24  with  the  abrupt  conclusion  of  his  narrative  ia 
the  Acts,  we  are  led  to  the  inference  that  he  left 
Rome  after  those  two  Epistles  were  written  and 
before  the  end  of  the  two  years'  captivity.  Lastly, 
it  is  obvious  from  Phil.  i.  20,  that  St.  Paul,  when 
he  wrote,  felt  his  position  to  be  very  critical,  and 
we  know  that  it  became  more  precarious  as  the 
two  years  drew  to  a  close.  In  A.D.  62  the  in 
famous  Tigellinus  succeeded  Burrus  the  upright 
Praetorian  praefect  in  the  charge  of  St.  Paul's  per 
son;  and  the  marriage  of  Poppaea  brought  his 
imperial  judge  under  an  influence,  which  if  exerted, 
was  hostile  to  St.  Paul.  Assuming  that  St.  Paul's 
acquittal  and  release  took  place  in  63,  we  may  date 
the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  early  in  that  year. 

4.  The  writer's  acquaintance  with  the  Philip 
pians. — St.  Paul's  connexion  with  Philippi  was  of 
a  peculiar  character,  which  gave  rise  to  the  writing 
of  this  Epistle.  That  city,  important  as  a  mart  for 
the  produce  of  the  neighbouring  gold-mines,  and  as 
a  Roman  stronghold  to  check  the  rude  Thracian 
mountaineers,  was  distinguished  as  the  scene  of  the 
great  battle  fatal  to  Brutus  and  Cassius,  B.C.  42. 
[PHILIPPI.]  In  A.D.  51  St.  Paul  entered  its 
walls,  accompanied  by  Silas,  who  had  been  with 
him  since  he  started  from  Antioch,  and  by  Timothy 
and  Luke,  whom  he  had  afterwards  attached  to 
himself;  the  former  at  Derbe,  the  latter  quite  re 
cently  at  Troas.  It  may  well  be  imagined  that  the 
patience  of  the  zealous  Apostle  had  been  tried  by 
his  mysterious  repulse,  first  from  Asia,  then  from 
Bithynia  and  Mysia,  and  that  his  expectations  had 
been  stirred  up  by  the  vision  which  hastened  hii 
departure  with  his  new-found  associate,  Luke,  front 
Troas.  A  swift  passage  brought  him  to  the  Eu 
ropean  shore  at  Neapolis,  whence  he  took  the  road 
about  ten  miles  long  across  the  mountain  ridge 
called  Symbolum  to  Philippi  (Acts  xvi.  12).  There, 
at  a  greater  distance  from  Jerusalem  than  any 
Apostle  had  yet  penetrated,  the  long-restrained 
energy  of  St.  Paul  was  again  employed  in  laying 
the  ifoundation  of  a  Christian  Church.  Seeking  first 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel,  he  went  on 
a  sabbath-day  with  the  few  Jews  who  resided  ir 
Philippi,  to  their  small  Proseucha  on  the  bank  o/ 
the  river  Gangitas.  The  missionaries  sat  down  and 
spoke  to  the  assembled  women.  One  of  them, 
Lydia,  not  bora  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  but  a  pro 
selyte,  whose  name  and  occupation,  as  well  as  her 
birth,  connect  her  with  Asia,  gave  heed  unto  St. 
Paul,  and  she  and  her  household  were  baptized, 
perhaps  on  the  same  sabbath-day.  Her  hcnse  be 
came  the  residence  of  the  missionaries.  Many  days 
they  resorted  to  the  Proseucha,  and  the  result  of 
their  short  sojourn  in  Philippi  was  the  conversion 
of  many  persons  (xvi.  40),  including  at  last  their 
jailer  and  his  household.  Philippi  was  endeared  **> 


fc  Was  St.  Luke  at  Pbilippi?— Uw 
mentioned  in  1».  3 


true  yokefellow* 


PHILIPPIANS,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


841 


St.  Paul,  not  only  by  the  nospitality  of  Lydia,  the 
deep  sympathy  of  the  converts,  and  the  remarkable 
miracle  which  set  a  seal  on  his  preaching,  but  also 
by  the  successful  exercise  of  his  missionary  activity 
after  a  long  suspense,  and  by  the  happy  conse 
quences  of  his  undaunted  endurance  of  ignominies, 
which  remained  in  his  memory  (Phil.  i.  30)  after  a 
long  interval  o.'  eleven  years.  Leaving  Timothy 
and  Luke  to  watch  over  the  infant  church,  Paul 
and  Silas  went  to  Thessalonica  (1  Thess.  ii.  2), 
whither  they  were  followed  by  the  alms  of  the  Phi- 
lippians  (Phil.  iv.  16),  and  thence  southwards. 
Timothy  having  probably  carried  out  similar  direc 
tions  to  those  which  were  given  to  Titus  (i.  5)  in 
Crete,  soon  rejoined  St.  Paul.  We  know  not  whether 
Luke  remained  at  Philippi.  The  next  six  years  of 
his  life  are  a  blank  in  our  records.  At  the  end  of  that 
period  he  is  found  again  (Acts  xx.  6)  at  Philippi. 

After  the  lapse  of  five  years,  spent  chiefly  at 
Corinth  and  Ephesus,  St.  Paul,  escaping  from  the 
incensed  worshippers  of  the  Ephesian  Diana,  passed 
through  Macedonia,  A.D.  57,  on  his  way  to  Greece, 
accompanied  by  the  Ephesians  Tychicus  and  Tro- 
phimus,  and  probably  visited  Philippi  for  the  second 
time,  and  was  there  joined  by  Timothy.  His  be 
loved  Philippians  free,  it  seems,  from  the  contro 
versies  which  agitated  other  Christian  Churches, 
became  still  dearer  to  St.  Paul  on  account  of  the 
solace  which  they  afforded  him  when,  emerging 
from  a  season  of  dejection  (2  Cor.  vii.  5),  oppressed 
by  weak  bodily  health,  and  anxious  for  the  stead 
fastness  of  the  churches  which  he  had  planted  in 
Asia  and  Achaia,  he  wrote  at  Philippi  his  second 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

On  returning  from  Greece,  unable  to  take  ship 
there  on  account  of  the  Jewish  plots  against  his 
life,  he  went  through  Macedonia,  seeking  a  favour- 
Able  port  for  embarking.  After  parting  from  his 
x>mpanions  (Acts  xx.  4-j,  he  again  found  a  refuge 
among  his  faithful  Philippians,  where  he  spent  some 
days  at  Easter,  A.D.  58,  with  St.  Luke,  who  accom 
panied  him  when  he  sailed  from  Neapolis. 

Once  more,  in  his  Roman  captivity  (A.D.  62) 
their  care  of  him  revived  again.  They  sent  Epa- 
phroditus,  bearing  their  alms  for  the  Apostle's  sup 
port,  and  ready  also  to  tender  his  personal  service 
(Phil.  ii.  25).  He  stayed  some  time  at  Rome,  and 
while  employed  as  the  organ  of  communication 
between  the  imprisoned  Apostle  and  the  Christians, 
and  inquirers  in  and  about  Rome,  he  fell  danger 
ously  ill.  When  he  was  sufficiently  recovered,  St 
Paul  sent  him  back  to  the  Philippians,  to  whom  he 
was  very  dear,  and  with  him  our  Epistle. 

5.  Scope  and  contents  of  the  Epistle. — St.  Paul's 
aim  in  writing  is  plainly  this :  while  acknowledging 
the  alms  of  the  Philipplins  and  the  peisonal  ser 
vices  of  their  messenger,  to  give  them  some  informa 
tion  respecting  his  own  condition,  and  some  advice 
respecting  theirs.  Perhaps  the  intensity  of  his 
feelings  and  the  distraction  of  his  prison,  prevente< 
the  following  out  his  plan  with  undeviating  close 
ness.  For  the  preparations  for  the  departure  o 
Epaphroditus,  and  the  thought  that  he  would  soon 
arrive  among  the  warm-hearted  Philippians,  fillec 
St.  Paul  with  recollections  of  them,  and  revived  his 
old  feelings  towards  those  fellow-heirs  of  his  hopeo 
glory  who  were  so  deep  in  his  heart,  i.  7,  aiid  so 
often  in  his  prayers,  i.  4. 

After  the  inscription  (i.  1-2)  in  which  Timoth] 


as  the  second  father  of  the  Church  is  joino.l  with 
~'aul,  he  sets  forth  his  own  condition  (i.  3-26),  his 
>rayers,  care,  and  wishes  for  his  Philippians,  with 
;he  troubles  and  uncertainty  of  his  imprisonment, 
ind  his  hope  of  eventually  seeing  them  again.  Then 
[i.  27-ii.  18)  he  exhorts  them  to  those  particular 
virtues  which  he  would  rejoice  to  see  them  prac« 
tising  at  the  present  time — fearless  endurance  of 
jersecution  from  the  outward  heathen  ;  unity  among 
themselves,  built  on  Christ-like  humility  and  love  ; 
and  an  exemplary  life  in  the  face  of  unbelievers. 
He  hopes  soon  to  hear  a  good  report  of  them  (ii. 
19-30),  either  by  sending  Timothy,  or  by  going 
limself  to  them,  as  he  now  sends  Epaphroditus 
whose  diligent  service  is  highly  commended.  Re 
verting  (iii.  1-21)  to  the  tone  of  joy  which  runs 
through  the  preceding  descriptions  and  exhortations 
—as  in  i.  4,  18,  25,  ii.  2,  16,  17,  18,  28— he  bids 
them  take  heed  that  their  joy  be  in  the  Lord,  and 
warns  them  as  he  had  often  previously  warned  them 
(probably  in  his  last  two  visits),  against  admitting 
tinerant  Judaising  teachers,  the  tendency  of  whose 
doctrine  was  towards  a  vain  confidence  in  mere 
earthly  things ;  in  contrast  to  this,  he  exhorts  them 
to  follow  him  in  placing  their  trust  humbly  but 
entirely  in  Christ,  and  in  pressing  forward  in  their 
Christian  course,  with  the  Resurrection-day  c  con 
stantly  before  their  minds.  Again  (iv.  1-9),  ad 
verting  to  their  position  in  the  midst  of  unbelievers, 
he  beseeches  them,  even  with  personal  appeals,  to  be 
firm,  united,  joyful  in  the  Lord ;  to  be  full  of 
prayer  and  peace,  and  to  lead  such  a  life  as  must 
approve  itself  to  the  moral  sense  of  all  men.  Lastly 
(iv.  10-23),  he  thanks  them  for  the  contribution 
sent  by  Epaphroditus  for  his  support,  and  concludes 
with  salutations  and  a  benediction. 

6.  Effect  of  the  Epistle. — We  have  no  account 
of  the  reception  of  this  Epistle  by  the  Philippians. 
Except  doubtful  traditions  that  Erastus  was  their 
first  bishop,  and  with  Lylia  and  Parmeuas  was 
martyred  in  their  city,  nothing  is  recorded  of  them 
for  the  next  forty-four  years.  But,  about  A.D.  107, 
Philippi  was  visited  by  Ignatius,  who  was  con 
ducted  through  Neapolis  and  Philippi,  and  across 
Macedonia  in  his  way  to  martyrdom  at  Rome.  And 
his  visit  was  speedily  followed  by  the  arrival  of  a 
letter  from  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  which  accompanied, 
in  compliance  with  a  characteristic  request  of  the 
warm-hearted  Philippians,  a  copy  of  all  the  letters 
of  Ignatius  which  were  in  the  possession  of  the 
Church  of  Smyrna.  It  is  interesting  to  compare 
the  Philippians  of  A.D.  63,  as  drawn  by  St.  Paul 
with  their  successors  in  A.D.  107  as  drawn  by  the 
disciple  of  St.  John.  Steadfastness  in  the  faith, 
and  a  joyful  sympathy  with  sufferers  for  Christ's 
sake,  seem  to  have  distinguished  them  at  both 
periods  (Phil.  i.  5,  and  Polyc.  Ep.  i.).  The  cha 
racter  of  their  religion  was  the  same  throughout, 
practical  and  emotional  rather  than  speculative :  in 
both  Epistles  there  are  many  practical  suggestions, 
much  interchange  of  feeling,  and  an  absence  of  doc 
trinal  discussion.  The  Old  Testament  i?  scarcely., 
if  at  all,  quoted :  as  if  the  Philippian  Chris  t.ans  had 
been  gathered  for  the  most  part  directly  from  the 
heathen.  At  each  period  false  teachers  were  seek 
ing,  apparently  in  vain,  an  entrance  into  the  Phi 
lippian  Church,  first  Judaising  Christians,  seemingly 
putting  out  of  sight  the  Resurrection  and  the  Jndg 
ment  which  afterwards  the  Gnosticising  Christians 


"  The  denial  of  an  actual  Resurrection  was  one  of  the 
errors  in  the  Christian  Church.    (See  1  Cor.  >:v.  12 


2  Tim.  Ii.  18;  I'olycarp,  vii.;  Ircnaeus,  II.  31;  and  the 
other  passages  qu-  teU  by  Dean  Ellicott  on  2  J'iui.  il.  13.) 


842 


PHILIPPIAN8,  EPISTLE  TO  THE 


openly  denied  (Phil,  iii.,  and  Polyc.  vi.,  vii.).  At 
both  periods  the  «ame  tendency  to  petty  internal 
quarrel*  seems  to  prevail  (Phil.  i.  27,  ii.  14, 
iv.  '2,  and  Polyc.  ii.,  iv.,  v.,  rii.).  The  student 
of  ecclesiastical  history  will  observe  the  faintly- 
inarked  organisation  of  bishops,  deacons,  and  female 
coadjutors  to  which  St.  Paul  refers  (Phil.  1.  1, 
iv.  3),  developed  afterwards  into  broadly-distin 
guished  priests,  deacons,  widows,  and  virgins  (Polyc. 
iv.,  v.,  vi.).  Though  the  Macedonian  Churches  in 
general  were  poor,  at  least  as  compared  with  com 
mercial  Corinth  (2  Cor.  viii.  2),  yet  their  gold 
mines  probably  exempted  the  Philippians  from  the 
common  lot  of  their  neighbours,  and  at  first  enabled 
them  to  be  conspicuously  liberal  in  alms-giving, 
and  afterwards  laid  them  open  to  strong  warnings 
against  the  love  of  money  (Phil.  iv.  15 ;  2  Cor.  viii. 
3  ;  and  Polyc.  iv.,  vi.,  xi.). 

Now,  though  we  cannot  trace  the  immediate 
effect  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle  on  the  Philippians,  yet 
no  one  can  doubt  that  it  contributed  to  form  the 
character  of  their  Church,  as  it  was  in  the  time  of 
Polycarp.  It  is  evident  from  Polycarp's  Epistle 
that  the  Church,  by  the  grace  of  God  and  the 
guidance  of  the  Apostle,  had  passed  through  those 
trials  of  which  St.  Paul  warned  it,  and  had  not 
gone  back  from  the  high  degree  of  Christian  attain 
ments  which  it  reached  under  St.  Paul's  oral  and 
written  teaching  (Polyc.  i.,  iii.,  Lx.,  xi.).  If  it  had 
made  no  great  advance  in  knowledge,  still  unsound 
teachers  were  kept  at  a  distance  from  its  members. 
Their  sympathy  with  martyrs  and  confessors  glowed 
with  as  warm  *.  flame  as  ever,  whether  it  was 
claimed  by  Ignatius  or  by  Paul.  And  they  main 
tained  their  ground  with  meek  firmness  among  the 
heathen,  and  still  held  forth  the  light  of  an  exem-  | 
plary,  though  not  a  perfect  Christian  life.d 

7.    The   Church  at  Rome.— The  state  of  the  ' 
Church  at  Rome  should  be  considered  before  enter 
ing  on  the  study  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians.  j 
Something  is  to  be  learned  of  its  condition  about ; 
A.D.   58  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  about  | 
A.D.  61  from  Acts  xxviii.    Possibly  the  Gospel  was 
planted  there  by  some  who  themselves  received  the 
seed  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  ii.  10).     The 
converts  were  drawn  chiefly  from  Gentile  proselytes 
to  Judaism,  partly  also  from  Jews  who  were  such 
by  birth,  with  possibly  a  few  converts  direct  from 
heathenism.     In  A.D.  58,  this  Church  was  already 
eminent  for  its  faith  and  obedience :  it  was  exposed 
to  the  machinations  of  schismatical  teachers ;  and  it 
included  two  conflicting  parties,  the  one  insisting 
more  or  less  on  observing  the  Jewish  law  in  addi 
tion  to  faith  in  Christ  as  necessary  to  salvation,  the 
other  repudiating  outward  observances  even  to  the 
extent  of  depriving  their  weak  brethren  of  such  as 
to  them   might   be   really   edifying.     We   cannot 
gather  from  the  Acts  whether  the  whole  Church  of 
Rome  had  then  accepted  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  as 
conveyed  in  his  Epistle  to  them.     But  it  is  certain 
that  when  he  had  been  two  years  in  Rome,  his  oral 
teaching  was  partly  rejected  by  a  party  which  per-  i 
haps  may  have  been  connected  with  the  former  of  J 
those  above  mentioned.  St.  Paul's  presence  in  Rome, 
the  freedom  of  speech  allowed  to  him,  and  the  per 


sonal  freedom  of  his  fellow-labourers  were  the  menui 
of  infusing  fresh  missionary  activity  into  the  Church 
(Phil.  i.  12-14).  It  was  in  the  went  uf  Christ 
that  Epaphroditus  was  worn  out  (ii.  30).  Mes 
sages  and  letters  passed  between  the  Apostle  and 
distant  Churches ;  and  doubtless  Churches  near  to 
Rome,  and  both  members  of  the  Church  and  in- 
quirers  into  the  new  faith  at  Rome  addressad  them 
selves  to  the  Apostle,  and  to  those  who  wei  e  known 
to  be  in  constant  personal  communication  with 
him.  And  thus  in  his  bondage  he  was  a  cause  of 
the  advancement  of  the  Gospel.  From  his  prison, 
as  from  a  centre,  light  streamed  into  Caesar's  house 
hold  and  far  beyond  (iv.  22,  i.  12-19). 

8.  Characteristic  features  of  the  Epistle. — 
Strangely  full  of  joy  and  thanksgiving  amidst  ad 
versity,  like  the  Apostle's  midnight  hymn  from  the 
depth  of  his  Philippian  dungeon,  this  Epistle  went 
forth  from  his  prison  at  Rome.  In  most  other 
epistles  he  writes  with  a  sustained  effort  to  instruct, 
or  with  sorrow,  or  with  indignation ;  he  is>  striving 
to  supply  imperfect,  or  to  correct  erroneous  teach 
ing,  to  put  down  scandalous  impurity,  or  to  heal 
schism  in  the  Church  which  he  addresses.  But  in 
this  Epistle,  though  he  knew  the  Philippians  inti 
mately,  and  was  not  blind  to  the  faults  and  ten 
dencies  to  fault  of  some  of  them,  yet  he  mentions 
no  evil  so  characteristic  of  the  whole  Church  as  to 
call  for  general  censure  on  his  part,  or  amendment 
on  theirs.  Of  all  his  Epistles  to  Churches,  none 
has  so  little  of  an  official  character  as  this.  He 
withholds  his  title  of  "  Apostle  "  in  the  Inscription. 
We  lose  sight  of  his  high  authority,  and  of  the  sub 
ordinate  position  of  the  worshippers  by  the  river 
side ;  and  we  are  admitted  to  see  the  free  action  of 
a  heart  glowing  with  inspired  Christian  love,  and 
to  hear  the  utterance  of  the  highest  friendship  ad 
dressed  to  equal  friends  conscious  of  a  connexion 
which  is  not  earthly  and  temporal,  but  in  Christ, 
for  eternity.  Who  that  bears  in  mind  the  condi 
tion  of  St.  Paul  in  his  Roman  prison,  can  read  un 
moved  of  his  continual  prayers  for  his  distant 
friends,  his  constant  sense  of  their  fellowship  with 
him,  his  joyful  remembrance  of  their  past  Christian 
course,  his  confidence  in  their  future,  his  tender 
yearning  after  them  all  in  Christ,  his  eagerness  to 
communicate  to  them  his  own  circumstances  and 
feelings,  his  carefulness  to  prepare  them  to  repel 
any  evil  from  within  or  from  without  which  might 
dim  the  brightness  of  their  spiritual  graces  ?  Love, 
at  once  tender  and  watchful,  that  love  which  "  is  of 
God,"  is  the  key-note  of  this  Epistle:  and  in  this 
Epistle  only  we  hear  no  undertone  of  any  different 
feeling.  Just  enough,  and  no  more,  is  shown  of  his 
own  harassing  trials  to  let  us  see  how  deep  in  his 
heart  was  the  spring  of  that  feeling,  and  how  ha 
was  refreshed  by  its  sweet  and  soothing  flow. 

9.  Text,  translation,  and  commentaries. — The 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  is  found  in  all  the  prin 
cipal  uncial  manuscripts,  viz.  in  A,  B,  C,  D,  E,  F, 
G,  J,  K.  In  C,  however,  the  verses  preceding  i. 
22,  and  those  following  iii.  5,  are  wanting. 

Our  A.  V.  of  the  Epistle  published  in  1611,  was 
the  work  of  that  company  of  King  James's  trans 
lators  who  sat  at  Westminster,  consisting  of  seven 


d  It  is  not  easy  to  suppose  that  Polycarp  was  without  a 
copy  of  St  Paul's  Epistle.  Yet  it  Is  singular  that  though 
he  mentions  It  twice,  it  Is  almost  the  only  Epistle  of 
St.  Paul  which  he  does  not  quote.  This  fact  may  at  least 
b*  regarded  as  additional  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of 
Polycarp'g  Kpistle.  No  forger  would  have  been  guilty 
af  Bnch  at  ou.i>Mc)ii.  Its  authenticity  was  first  questioned 


by  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators,  and  by  Dailie,  whom 
Pearson  answered  (  Vindiciae  Ignat.  1.5);  also  by  Semler ; 
and  more  recently  by  Zeller,  Schliemann,  Bunsea,  am' 
others:  of  whose  criticism  Ewald  says,  that  it  ia  the 
greatest  irjustice  to  Polycarp  that  men  in  the  present  ag^ 
should  deny  that  this  Kpistle  proceeded  from  him 
Isr.  vli.  277,  cd.  18C9). 


PHILI8TIA 

persons,  of  whom  Dr.  Barlow,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Kochester,  was  one.  It  is,  however,  substantially 
the  same  as  the  translation  made  by  some  unknown 
person  for  Archbishop  Parker,  published  in  the 
Bishops'  Bible,  1568.  See  Bagster's  Hexapla,  pie- 
tace.  A  revised  edition  of  the  A.  V.  by  Four  Clergy 
men,  is  published  (1861)  by  Parker  and  Bourn. 

A  complete  list  of  works  connected  with  this 
Epistle  may  be  found  in  the  Commentary  of  Rhein- 
wald.  Of  Patristic  commentaries,  those  of  Chry- 
sostom  (translated  in  the  Oxford  Library  of  the 
Fathers,  1843),  Theodoret,  and  Theophylact,  are 
still  extant ;  perhaps  also  that  of  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia  in  an  old  Latin  translation  (see  Journ.  of 
Class,  and  Sac.  Phil.  iv.  302).  Among  later  works 
may  be  mentioned  those  of  Calvin,  1539  ;  Estius, 
16H  ;  Daille,  1659  (translated  by  Sherman,  1843) ; 
Ridley,  1548  ;  Airay's  Sermons,  1618  ;  J.  Ferguson, 
1 656 ;  the  annotated  English  New  Testaments  of 
Hammond,  Fell,  Whitby,  and  Macknight ;  the  Com 
mentaries  of  Peirce,  1733  ;  Storr,  1783  (translated 
in  the  Edinburgh  Biblical  Cabinet) ;  Am  Ende,  1798 ; 
Kheinwald,  1827  ;  T.  Passavant,  1834;  St.Matthies, 
1835;  Van  Hengel,  1838;  Holemann,  1839;  Rilliet, 
1841 ;  De  Wette,  1847  ;  Meyer,  1847  ;  Neander, 

1849  (translated  into  English,  1851);  Wiesinger, 

1850  (translated   into   English,   1850);    Kahler, 
1855;  Professor  Eadie;  Dean  EHicott,  1861,  and 
those  included  in  the  recent  editions  of  the  Greek  N.  T. 
by  Dean  Alford  and  Canon  Wordsworth.   [W.  T.  B.] 

PHJLISTIA  (riB^a,  Pelesheth :  d\\6<t>v\oi : 
alienigenae).  The  word  thus  translated  (in  Ps.  Ix. 
8 ;  Ixxxvii.  4 ;  cviii.  9)  is  in  the  original  identical 
with  that  elsewhere  rendered  PALESTINE.  [See  that 
article,  p.  6606.]  "  Palestine"  originally  meant 
nothing  but  the  district  inhabited  by  the  "  Phi 
listines,"  who  are  called  by  Josephus  fla.Xaiar'ivoi, 
"  Palestines."  In  fact  the  two  words  are  the  same, 
and  the  difference  in  their  present  form  is  but  the 
result  of  gradual  corruption.  The  form  Philistia 
Hoes  not  occur  anywhere  in  LXX.  or  Vulgate.  The 
nearest  approach  to  it  is  Luther's  Philistaa.  [G.] 

PHILISTINES  (''PXf?^:  *uA.»(mef/i,  'A,V 

\6(f>v\oi :  Philistiim).  The  origin  of  the  Philistines 
is  nowhere  expressly  stated  in  the  Bible ;  but  as  the 
fvophets  describe  them  as  "  the  Philistines  from 
Caphtor"  (Am.  ix.  7),  and  "the  remnant  of  the 
maritime  district  of  Caphtor  "  (Jer.  xlvii.  4),  it  is 
primd  facie  probable  that  they  were  the  "  Caph- 
torims  which  came  out  of  Caphtor "  who  expelled 
the  Avim  from  their  territory  and  occupied  it  in 
their  place  (D»ut.  ii.  23),  and  that  these  again  were 
the  Caphtorhn  mentioned  in  the  Mosaic  genealogical 
table  among  the  descendants  of  Mizraim  (Gen.  x. 
14).  But  in  establishing  this  conclusion  certain 
difficulties  present  themselves :  in  the  first  place,  it 
is  observable  that  in  Gen.  x.  14  the  Philistines  are 
connected  with  the  Casluhim  rather  than  the  Caph- 
torim.  It  has  generally  been  assumed  that  the 


b  The  name  is  derived  from  the  root  BOB  and  the 
Aethiopic/otaa.  "  to  migrate;"  a  term  which  is  said  to 
be  still  current  in  Abyssinia  (Knobel,  Volkert.  p.  281). 
In  Egyptian  monuments  it  appears  under  the  form  of 
I'oulost  (Brugsch,  Hitt.  $  Egypt,  p.  187).  The  rendering 
of  the  name  in  the  LXX.,  'AAAo<f>vAoi,  "  strangers,"  is 
probably  in  reference  to  the  etymological  meaning  of  the 
name,  though  It  may  otherwise  be  regarded  as  having 
with  the  Israelites,  to  whom  the  Philistines 


843 

text  has  suffered  a  transposition,  and  that  the  pa 
renthetical  clause  "  out  of  whom  came  Philistim ' 
ought  to  follow  the  words  "  and  Caphtorim."  Thi* 
explanation  is,  however,  inadmissible:  for  (1)  there 
is  no  external  evidence  whatever  of  any  variation  it 
the  text,  either  here  or  in  the  parallel  passage  in 
1  Chr.  i.  12 ;  and  (2)  if  the  transposition  were 
effected,  the  desired  sense  would  not  be  gained  ;  for 
the  words  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "  out  of  whom  "  • 
really  mean  "  whence,"  and  denote  a  local  move 
ment  rather  than  a  genealogical  descent,  so  that,  as 
applied  to  the  Caphtorim,  they  would  merely  indi 
cate  a  sojourn  of  the  Philistines  in  their  land,  and 
not  the  identity  of  the  two  races.  The  clause  seems 
to  have  an  appropriate  meaning  in  its  present  posi 
tion  :  it  looks  like  an  interpolation  into  the  original 
document  with  the  view  of  explaining  when  and 
where  the  name  Philistine  was  first  applied  to  the 
people  whose  proper  appellation  was  Caphtorim. 
It  is  an  etymological  as  well  as  an  historical  memo 
randum  ;  for  it  is  based  on  the  meaning  of  the  name 
Philistine,11  viz.  "  emigrant,"  and  is  designed  to 
account  for  the  application  of  that  name.  But  a 
second  and  more  serious  difficulty  arises  out  of  the 
language  of  the  Philistines;  for  while  the  Caph 
torim  were  Hamitic,  the  Philistine  language  is  held 
to  have  been  Semitic.0  It  has  hence  been  inferred 
that  the  Philistines  were  in  reality  a  Semitic  race, 
and  that  they  derived  the  title  of  Caphtorim  simply 
from  a  residence  in  Caphtor  (Ewald.  i.  331 ;  Mo 
vers,  Phoeniz.  iii.  258),  and  it  has  been  noticed  in 
confirmation  of  this,  that  their  land  is  termed  Ca 
naan  (Zeph.  ii.  5).  But  this  is  inconsistent  with 
the  express  assertion  of  the  Bible  that  they  were 
Caphtorim  (Deut.  ii.  23),  and  not  simply  that  they 
came  from  Caphtor ;  and  the  term  Canaan  is  applied 
to  their  country,  not  ethnologically  but  etymolo- 
gically,  to  describe  the  trading  habits  of  the  Phi 
listines.  The  difficulty  arising  out  of  the  question 
of  language  may  be  met  by  assuming  either  that 
the  Caphtorim  adopted  the  language  of  the  con 
quered  Avim  (a  not  unusual  circumstance  where 
the  conquered  form  the  bulk  of  the  population),  or 
that  they  diverged  from  the  Hamitic  stock  at  a 
period  when  the  distinctive  features  of  Hamitism 
and  Semitism  were  yet  in  embryo.  A  third  objec 
tion  to  their  Egyptian  origin  is  raised  from  the 
application  of  the  term  "  uncircumcised  "  to  them 
(1  Sam.  xvii.  26  ;  2  Sam.  i.  20),  whereas  the  Egyp 
tians  were  circumcised  (Herod,  ii.  36).  But  this 
objection  is  answered  by  Jer.  ix.  25,  26,  where  the 
same  term  is  in  some  sense  applied  to  the  Egyptians, 
however  it  may  be  reconciled  with  the  statement 
of  Herodotus. 

The  next  question  that  arises  relates  to  the  early 
movements  of  the  Philistines.  It  has  been  very 
generally  assumed  of  late  years  that  Caphtor  repre 
sents  Crete,  and  that  the  Philistines  migrated  from 
that  island,  either  directly  or  through  Egypt,  into 
Palestine.  This  hypothesis  presupposes  the  Semitic 
origin  of  the  Philistines  ;  for  we  believe  that  there 


were  «UAo<J>vAoi,  as  opposed  to  6;u6</>vAoi  (Stack's  Gaza, 
p.  67  ff.).  Other  derivations  of  the  name  Philistine  have 
been  proposed,  as  that  it  originated  in  a  transposition  of  the 

word  shephflah  (n?QK>).  applied  to  the  Philistine  plain  ; 
or,  again,  that  it  is  connected  with  Pelasgl,  as  Hitzi, 
supposes. 

c  Hitzig.lnhis  Urgeschichte A.P hiL .however, main tain« 
that  the  language  is  Indo-European,  with  a  view  to  prove 
the  Philistines  to  be  Pelasgi.  He  is,  wt  beliete,  slugnUj 
iii  his  view. 


644 


PHILISTINES 


we  no  '.races  of  Hamitic  settlements  in  Crete,  anc 
consequently  the  Biblical  statement  that  Caphtorim 
*vas  descended  from  Mizraim  forms  an  a  priori  ob 
jection  to  the  view.  Moreover,  the  name  Caphtor 
can  only  be  identified  with  the  Egyptian  Coptos 
[CAPHTOR.]  But  the  Cretan  origin  of  the  Philis 
tines  has  been  deduced,  not  so  much  from  the  iiam 
Caphtor,*  as  fiom  that  of  the  Cherethites.  This 
name  in  its  Hebrew  form*  bears  a  close  resem 
blance  to  Crete,  and  is  rendered  Cretans  in  the 
LXX.  A  furtner  link  between  the  two  terms  has 
been  apparently  discovered  in  the  term  cdri,f  which 
is  applied  to  the  royal  guard  (2  K.  xi.  4,  19),  anc 
which  sounds  like  Carians.  The  latter  of  these 
arguments  assumes  that  the  Cherethites  of  David's 
guard  were  identical  with  the  Cherethites  of  the 
Philistine  plain,  which  appears  in  the  highest 
degree  improbable.*  With  regard  to  the  former 
argument,  the  mere  coincidence  of  the  names  cannot 
pass  for  much  without  some  corroborative  testi 
mony.  The  Bible  furnishes  none,  for  the  name 
occurs  but  thrice  (1  Sam.  xxx.  14;  Ez.  xxv.  16; 
Zeph.  ii.  5),  and  apparently  applies  to  the  occu 
pants  of  the  southern  district;  the  testimony  ol 
the  LXX.  is  invalidated  by  the  feet  that  it  is  based 
upon  the  mere  sound  of  the  word  (see  Zeph.  ii.  6, 
where  ceroth  is  also  rendered  Crete):  and  lastly, 
we  have  to  account  for  the  introduction  of  the  clas 
sical  name  of  the  island  side  by  side  with  the  He 
brew  term  Caphtor.  A-certain  amount  of  testimony 
is  indeed  adduced  in  favour  of  a  connexion  between 
Crete  and  Philistia ;  but,  with  the  exception  of  the 
vague  rumour,  recorded  but  not  adopted  by  Ta 
citus  fc  (Hist.  v.  3),  the  evidence  is  confined  to  the 
town  of  Gaza,  and  even  in  this  case  is  not  wholly 
satisfactory.1  The  town,  according  to  Stephanus 
Byzantinus  (s.  e.  Fctfa),  was  termed  Minoa,  as 
having  been  founded  by  Minos,  and  this  tradition 
may  be  traced  back  to,  and  was  perhaps  founded 
on,  an  inscription  on  the  coins  of  that  city,  con 
taining  the  letters  MEINfl ;  but  these  coins  are 
of  no  higher  date  than  the  first  century  B.C.,  and 
belong  to  a  period  when  Gaza  had  attained  a  decided 
Greek  character  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  6,  §3).  Again, 
the  worship  of  the  god  Mama,  and  its  identity  with 
the  Cretan  Jove,  are  frequently  mentioned  by  early 
writers  (Movers,  Phoenix,  i.  662) ;  but  the  name 
is  Phoenician,  being  the  maran,  "  lord "  of  1  Cor. 
xvi.  22,  and  it  seems  more  probable  that  Gaza  and 
Crete  derived  the  worship  from  a  common  source, 


Phoenicia.  Without  therefore  asserting  that  mi£r> 
tions  may  not  have  taken  place  from  Crete  to  Phi 
listia,  we  hold  that  the  evidence  adduced  to  prove 
that  they  did  is  insufficient. 

The  last  point  to  be  decided  in  connexion  with 
the  early  history  ot  the  Philistines  is,  the  time 
when  they  settled  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  If  we 
were  to  restrict  ourselves  to  the  statements  of  the 
Bible,  we  should  conclude  that  this  took  place  before 
the  time  of  Abraham :  for  they  are  noticed  in  his 
day  as  a  pastoral  tribe  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Gerar  (Gen.  zxi.  32,  34,  xxvi.  1,  8) :  and  this  posi 
tion  accords  well  with  the  statement  in  Deut.  ii. 
23,  that  the  Avim  dwelt  in  Hazerim,  i.  e.  in  nomad 
encampments ;  for  Gerar  lay  in  the  south  country, 
which  was  just  adapted  to  such  a  life.  At  the  time 
of  the  exodus  they  were  still  in  the  same  neigh 
bourhood,  but  grown  sufficiently  powerful  to  inspire 
the  Israelites  with  fear  (Ex.  xiii.  17,  xv.  14).  When 
the  Israelites  arrived,  they  were  in  full  possession 
of  the  Shephelah  from  the  "  river  of  Egypt "  (el* 
Arish)  in  the  south,  to  Ekron  in  the  north  (Josh.  xv. 
4, 47),  and  had  formed  a  confederacy  of  five  powerful 
cities*— Gaza,  Ashdod,  Ashkelon,  Gath,  and  Ekron 
(Josh.  xiii.  3).  The  interval  that  elapsed  between 
Abraham  and  the  exodus  seems  sufficient  to  allow  for 
the  alteration  that  took  place  in  the  position  of  the 
Philistines,  and  their  transformation  from  a  pastoral 
tribe  to  a  settled  and  powerful  nation.  But  such  a 
view  has  not  met  with  acceptance  among  modern 
critics,  partly  because  it  leaves  the  migrations  of 
the  Philistines  wholly  unconnected  with  any  known 
historical  event,  and  partly  because  it  does  not 
serve  to  explain  the  great  increase  of  their  power 
in  the  time  of  the  Judges.  To  meet  these  two 
requirements  a  double  migration  on  the  part  of 
the  Philistines,  or  of  the  two  branches  of  that 
nation,  has  been  suggested.  Knobel,  for  instance, 
regards  the  Philistines  proper  as  a  branch  of  the 
same  stock  as  that  to  which  the  Hyksos  belonged, 
and  he  discovers  the  name  Philistine  in  the  oppro 
brious  name  Philition,  or  Philitis,  bestowed  on  the 
shepherd  kings  (Herod,  ii.  128) :  their  first  entrance 
into  Canaan  from  the  Casluhim  would  thus  be  sub 
sequent  to  the  patriarchal  age,  and  coincident  with 
the  expulsion  of  the  Hyksos.  The  Cherethites  he 
identifies  with  the  Caphtorim  who  displaced  the 
Avim ;  and  these  he  regards  as  Cretans  who  did  not 
enter  Canaan  before  the  period  of  the  Judges.  The 
former  part  of  his  theory  is  inconsistent  with  the 


*  The  only  ground  furnished  by  the  Bible  for  this  view 
Is  the  application  of  the  term  rendered  "  island "   to 
Caphtor  in  Jer.  xlvii.  4.     But  this  term  also  means 
maritime  district ;  and  "  the  maritime  district  of  Caphtor  " 
is  but  another  term  for  Philistia  itself. 

*  DTT-3.  '  n3. 

B  It  has  been  held  by  Ewald  (I.  330)  and  others,  that 
the  Cberethites  and  Pelethltes  (2  Sam.  xx.  23)  were  Che- 
retliites  and  Philistines.  The  objections  to  this  view  are : 
( 1)  that  it  is  highly  improbable  that  David  would  select 
his  officers  from  the  hereditary  foes  of  bis  country,  parti 
cularly  so  immediately  after  he  had  enforced  their  sub 
mission  j  (2)  that  there  seems  no  reason  why  an  undue 
prominence  should  have  been  given  to  the  Cherethites  by 
ploritig  that  name  first,  and  altering  Philistines  into  Pe- 
letliites,  so  as  to  produce  a  paronomasia;  (3)  that  the 
names  subsequently  applied  to  the  same  body  <"i  K.  xi.  19) 
are  appellatives ;  and  (4)  that  the  terms  admit  of  a  pro 
bable  explanation  from  Hebrew  roots. 

*  Among  other  accounts  of  the  origin  of  the  Jews,  bs 
gives  this : — "  Judaeos,  Creta  insula  profugos,  novissima 
Llbyae  insedisse:"  and,  as  part  of  the  same  tradition, 


adds  that  the  name  Jndaeus  was  derived  from  Ida, — • 
circumstance  which  suggests  a  foundation  for  the  story. 
The  statement  seems  to  have  no  more  real  weight  than 
the  reported  connexion  between  Hierosolyma  and  the 
Solymi  of  Lycla.  Yet  it  is  accepted  as  evidence  that  the 
Philistines,  whom  Tacitus  is  supposed  to  describe  as  Jews, 
came  from  Crete. 

'  The  resemblance  between  the  names  Apt  era  and 
Caphtor  (Keil,  EinUit.  ii.  236),  Phalasarna  and  Philistine 
Ewald,  i.  330),  Is  too  slight  to  be  of  any  weight.  Added 
to  which,  those  places  lie  in  the  part  of  Crete  most  remote 
rom  Palestine. 

j  At  what  period  these  cities  were  originally  founded, 
we  know  not :  but  there  are  good  grounds  for  believing 
hat  they  were  of  Canaan!  tish  origin,  and  had  previously 
>een  occupied  by  the  Avim.  The  name  Gath  is  certainly 
lanaanitish :  so  most  probably  are  Gaza,  Ashdod,  and 
Ckron.  Ashkelon  is  doubtful ;  and  the  terminations  both 
f  this  and  Ekron  may  be  Philistine.  Gaza  is  mentioned 
s  early  as  In  Gen.  x.  19  as  a  city  of  the  Canaanites ;  anJ 
his  as  well  as  Ashdod  and  Ekron  were  in  Joshua's  time 
be  asylum  of  the  Canaan!  tish  Anakim  ( Josh.  xi.  22). 


PHILISTINES 

Aotices  of  the  Philistines  in  the  book  of  Genesis ; 
these,  therefore,  he  regards  as  additions  of  a  later 
datek  (  VSlkert.  p.  218  ff.).  The  view  adopted  by 
Movers  is,  that  the  Philistines  were  carried  west 
ward  from  Palestine  into  Lower  Egypt  by  the 
stream  of  the  Hyksos  movement  at  a  period  subse 
quent  to  Abraham  ;  from  Egypt  they  passed  to 
Crete,  and  returned  to  Palestine  in  the  early  period 
of  the  Judges  (Phoeniz.  iii.  258).  This  is  incon 
sistent  with  the  notices  in  Joshua.1  Ewald,  in  the 
second  edition  of  his  Geschichte  propounds  the  hypo 
thesis  of  a  double  immigration  from  Crete,  the  first 
of  which  took  place  in  the  ante-patriarchal  period, 
as  a  consequence  either  of  the  Canaanitish  settle 
ment  or  of  the  Hyksos  movement,  the  second  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges  (Gesch.  i.  329-331).  We  can 
not  regard  the  above  views  in  any  other  light  than 
as  speculations,  built  up  on  very  slight  data,  and 
unsatisfactory,  inasmuch  as  they  fail  to  reconcile 
the  statements  of  Scripture.  For  they  all  imply 

(1)  that  the  notice  of  the  Caphtorim  in  Gen.  x. 
14  applies  to  an  entirely  distinct  tribe  from   the 
Philistines,  as  Ewald  (i.  331,  note)  himself  allows ; 

(2)  that  either  the  notices  in  Gen.  xx.,  xxvi.,  or 
those  in  Josh.  xv.  45-47,  or  perchance  both,  are 
interpolations ;   and  (3)  that  the  notice  in  Deut. 
ii.  §3,  which  certainly  bears  marks  of  high  anti 
quity,  belongs  to  a  late  date,  and  refers  solely  to 
the  Cherethites.     But,  beyond  these  inconsistencies, 
there   are   two  points   which   appear  to   militate 
against  the  theory  of  the  second  immigration  in  the 
time  of  the  Judges :  (1)  that  the  national  title  of 
the  nation  always  remained  Philistine,  whereas,  ac 
cording  to  these  theories,  it  was  the  Cretan  or  Che- 
rethite  element  which  led  to  the  great  development 
of  power  in  the  time  of  the  Judges;  and  (2)  that  it 
remains  to  be  shown  why  a  sea-faring  race  like  the 
Cretans,  coming  direct  from  Caphtor  in  their  ships 
(as  Knobel,  p.  224,  understands  "Caphtorim  from 
Caphtor"   to  imply),   would   seek  to  occupy  the 
quarters  of  a  nomad  race  living  in  encampments,  in 
the  wilderness  region  of  the  south.1"    We  hesitate, 
therefore,  to  endorse  any  of  the  proffered  explana 
tions,  and,  while  we  allow  that  the  Biblical  state 
ments  are  remarkable  for  their   fragmentary  and 
parenthetical  nature,  we  are  not  prepared  to  fill  up 
the  gaps.     If  those  statements  cannot  be  received  as 
they  stand,  it  is  questionable  whether  any  amount 
of  criticism  will  supply  the  connecting  links.     One 
point  can,  we  think,  be  satisfactorily  shown,  viz., 
that  the  hypothesis  of  a  second  immigration  is  not 
needed  in  order  to  account  for  the  growth  of  the 
Philistine  power.     Their  geographical  position  and 
their  relations  to  neighbouring  nations  will  account 
for  it.    Between  the  times  of  Abraham  and  Joshua, 
the  Philistines  had  changed  their  quarters,  and  had 
advanced  northwards  into  the  Shephelah  or  plain  of 
Philistia.     This  plain  has  been  in  all  ages  remark 
able  fir  the  extreme  richness  of  its  soil ;  its  fields  of 
stand:  ng  corn,  its  vineyards  and  olive-yards,  are  in- 

k  The  sole  ground  for  questioning  the  historical  value 
of  these  notices  is  that  Abimelech  is  not  termed  king  of 
the  Philistines  in  xx.  2,  but  king  of  Gerar.  The  land  is, 
however,  termed  the  Philistines'  land.  It  is  gratuitously 
assumed  that  the  latter  is  a  case  of  prolepsit,  and  that  the 
subsequent  notice  of  the  king  of  the  Philistines  in  xxvi.  1 
ts  the  work  of  a  later  writer  who  was  misled  by  the 
prvlepsit. 

i  The  grounds  for  doubting  the  genuineness  of  Josh.  xv. 
45-47  are :  (,1)  the  omission  of  the  total  number  of  the 
lowns ;  and  (2)  the  notice  of  the  "  daughters,"  or  de- 
pcTMlcut  towns,  and  "  villages."  The  second  objection 


PHILISTINES 


845 


cidentally  mentioned  in  Scripture  (J  adg  TT  5)  > 
and  in  time  of  famine  the  land  of  the  Philistines 
was  the  hope  of  Palestine  (2  K.  viii.  2).  We  thou'd. 
however,  fail  to  form  a  just  idea  of  its  capacities 
from  the  scanty  notices  in  the  Bible.  The  crops 
which  it  yielded  were  alone  sufficient  to  ensure  na 
tional  wealth.  It  was  also  adapted  to  the  growth 
of  military  power  ;  for  while  the  plain  itself  per 
mitted  the  use  of  war-chariots,  which  were  the  chief 
arm  of  offence,  the  occasional  elevations  which  rise 
out  of  it  offered  secure  sites  for  towns  and  strong 
holds.  It  was,  moreover,  a  commercial  country ; 
from  its  position  it  must  have  been  at  all  times 
the  great  thoroughfare  between  Phoenicia  and 
Syria  in  the  north,  and  Egypt  and  Arabia  in  the 
south.  Ashdod  and  Gaza  were  the  keys  of  Egypt, 
and  commanded  the  transit  trade,  and  the  stores  of 
frankincense  and  myrrh  which  Alexander  captured 
in  the  latter  place  prove  it  to  have  been  a  depot  of 
Arabian  produce  (Plut.  Alex.  cap.  25).  We  have 
evidence  in  the  Bible  that  the  Philistines  traded 
in  slaves  with  Edom  and  southern  Arabia  (Am.  i. 
6  ;  Joel  iii.  3,  5),  and  their  commercial  character  L: 
indicated  by  the  application  of  the  name  Canaan  tc 
their  land  (Zeph.  ii.  5).  They  probably  possessed 
a  navy ;  for  they  had  ports  attached  to  Gaza  and 
Ashkelon ;  the  LXX.  speaks  of  their  ships  in  its 
version  of  Is.  xi.  14 ;  and  they  are  represented  as 
attacking  the  Egyptians  out  of  ships.  The  Phili 
stines  had  at  an  early  period  attained  proficiency  in 
the  arts  of  peace ;  they  were  skilful  as  smiths 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  20),  as  armourers  (1  Sam.  xvii.  5, 
6),  and  as  builders,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  pro 
longed  sieges  which  several  of  their  towns  sustained. 
Their  images  and  the  golden  mice  and  emerods 
(1  Sam.  vi.  11)  imply  an  acquaintance  with  the 
founder's  and  goldsmith's  arts.  Their  wealth  was 
abundant  (Judg.  xvi.  5,  18),  and  they  appear  in  all 
respects  to  have  been  a  prosperous  people. 

Possessed  of  such  elements  of  power,  the  Phili 
stines  had  attained  in  the  time  of  the  Judges  an 
important  position  among  eastern  nations.  Their 
history  is,  indeed,  almost  a  blank ;  yet  the  few  par 
ticulars  preserved  to  us  are  suggestive.  About 
B.C.  1209  we  find  them  engaged  in  successful  war 
with  the  Sidonians,  the  effect  of  which  was  so 
serious  to  the  latter  power  that  it  involved  the 
transference  of  the  capital  of  Phoenicia  to  a  more 
secure  position  on  the  island  of  Tyre  (Justin,  xviii. 
3).  About  the  same  period,  but  whether  before  or 
after  is  uncertain,  they  were  engaged  in  a  naval 
war  with  Rameses  III.  of  Egypt,  in  conjunction 
with  other  Mediterranean  nations:  in  these  ware 
they  were  unsuccessful  (Brugsch,  Ifist.  d'Egypie, 
p.  185,  187),  but  the  notice  of  them  proves  their 
importance,  and  we  cannot  therefore  be  surprised 
that  they  were  able  to  extend  their  authority  over 
the  Israelites,  devoid  as  these  were  of  internal 
union,  and  harassed  by  external  foes.  With  regard 
to  their  tactics  and  the  objects  that  they  had  in 


furnishes  the  answer  to  the  first;  for  as  the  "daughters" 
are  not  enumerated,  the  totals  could  not  possibly  be  given. 
And  the  "daughters"  are  not  enumerated,  because  they 
were  not  actually  in  possession  of  the  Israelites,  and  indeed 
were  not  known  by  name. 

m  The  Avim  probably  lived  in  the  district  between 
Gerar  and  Gaza.  This  both  accords  best  with  the  notice 
of  their  living  in  tiazerim,  and  is  also  the  district  in 
which  the  remnant  of  them  lingered ;  for  in  Josh,  xiil, 
3,  4,  the  words  "  from  the  south  "  are  best  connected  willi 
"  the  Avltes,"  as  in  the  Vulgate. 


846 


PHILISTINES 


view  ill  their  attacks  on  the  Israelites,  we  may  roiin 
a  fair  idea  from  the  scattered  notices  in  the  book 
of  Judges  and  Samuel.     The  warfare  was  of  a  gu 
rilla  character,  and  consisted  of  a  series  ot  rate 
into  the    enemy's  country.     Sometimes   these  ex 
tended  only  just  over  the  border,  with  the  view  o 
plundering  the  threshing-floors  of  the  agriculture 
produce  (1  Sam.   xxiii.   1);   but  more  general! 
they  penetrated  into  the  heart  of  the  country  an 
seized  i  commanding  position  on  the  edge  of  th 
Jordan  Bailey,  whence  they  could  secure  themselves 
against  a  combination  of  the  trans-  and  cis-Jordanit 
divisions  of  the  Israelites,  or  prevent  a  return  of  th 
fugitives  who  had  hurried  across  the  river  on  th 
alarm  of  their  approach.     Thus  at  one  time  w 
find  them  crossing  the  central  district  of  Benjamin 
and  posting  themselves  at  Michmash  (1  Sam.  xiii 
16),  at  another  time  following  the  coast  road  tc 
the  plain  of  Ksdraelon  and  reaching  the  edge  of  th 
Jordan  valley  by  Jezreel  (1  Sam.  xxix.  11).    From 
Biich  posts  as  their  head-quarters,  they  sent  out  de 
tached  bands  to  plunder  the  surrounding  country 
(1  Sam.  xiii.  17),  and,  having  obtained  all  the; 
could,  they  erected  a  column  •  as  a  token  of  thei 
supremacy  (1  Sam.  x.  5,  xiii.  3),  and  retreated  t< 
their  own  country.     This  system  of  incursion*  ^ep 
the   Israelites  in  a  state  of  perpetual  disquietude 
all  commerce  was  suspended,  from  the  insecurity  o 
the  roads  ( Judg.  v.  6) ;  and  at  the  approach  of  th 
foe   the   people   either   betook  themselves   to   thi 
natural  hiding-places  of  the  country,  or  fled  across 
the   Jordan    (1    Sam.   xiii.    6,   7).      By   degrees 
the  ascendancy  became  complete,  and  a  virtual  dis 
armament  of  the  population  was  effected  by  th< 
suppression  of  the  smiths  (1  Sam.  xiii.  19).     Th< 
profits  of  the  Philistines  were  not  confined  to  th( 
goods  and  chattels  they  carried  off  with  them.    They 
seized  the  persons  of  the  Israelites  and  sold  them 
for  slaves;    the  earliest   notice  of  this  occurs   in 
1  Sam.  xiv.  21,  where,  according  to  the  probably 
correct  reading*  followed  by  the  LXX.,  we  find 
that  there  were  numerous  slaves  in  the  camp  at 
Michmash :  at  a  later  period  the  prophets  inveigh 
against  them  for  their  traffic  in  human  flesh  (Joel 
iii.  6  ;  Am.  i.  6  ) :  at  a  still  later  period  we  heai 
that  "  the  merchants  of  the  country  "  followed  the 
army  of  Gorgias  into  J.udaea  for  the  purpose  oi 
buying  the  children  of  Israel  for  slaves  (1  Mace, 
iii.  41),  and  that  these  merchants  were  Philistines 
is  a  fair  inference  from  the  subsequent  notice  that 
Nicanor  sold  the  captive  Jews  to  the  "  cities  upon 
the  sea  coast"  (2  Mace.  viii.  11).     There  can  be 
little  doubt,  too,  that  tribute  was  exacted  from  the 
Israelites,  but  the  notices  of  it  are  confined  to  pas 
sages  of  questionable  authority,  such  as  the  render 
ing  of  1  Sam.  xiii.  21  in  the  LXX.,  which  represents 


PHILISTINES 

the  Philistines  as  making  a  charge  of  thiec  shekels  t 
tool  tor  siiar]it<uiiig  them  ;  and  again  the  ei pieesioo 
"  Metheg-ammiih  '  in  2  Sam.  viii.  1,  whicl  is  ren 
dered  in  the  Vulg.  frenuin  tributi,  and  bj  Sym- 
machus  r^v  t£ov(riav  rov  ty&pov.*  In  each  of  th<> 
passages  quoted,  the  versions  presuppose  a  tpyt,  which 
yields  a  better  sense  than  the  existing  one. 

And  now  to  recur  to  the  Biblical  narrative: — 
The  territory  of  the  Philistines,  having  been  once 
occupied  by  the  Canaanites,  formed  a  portion  of 
the  promised  land,  and  was  assigned  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  2,  12,  45-47).  No  portion, 
however,  of  it  was  conquered  in  the  lifetime  of 
Joshua  (Josh.  xiii.  2),  and  even  after  his  death  no 
permanent  conquest  was  effected  (Judg.  iii.  3). 
though,  on  the  authority  of  a  somewhat  doubtful 
passage,*  we  are  informed  that  the  three  cities  oi 
Gaza,  Ashkelon,  and  Ekron  were  taken  (Judg.  i. 
18).  The  Philistines,  at  all  events,  soon  recovered 
these,  and  commenced  an  aggressive  policy  against 
the  Israelites,  by  which  they  gained  a  complete 
ascendancy  over  them.  We  are  unable  to  say  at 
what  intervals  their  incursions  took  place,  as 
nothing  is  recorded  of  them  in  the  early  period  of 
the  Judges.  But  they  must  have  been  frequent, 
inasmuch  as  the  national  spirit  of  the  Israelites  was 
so  entirely  broken  that  they  even  reprobated  any 
attempt  at  deliverance  (Judg.  xv.  12).  Individual 
heroes  were  raised  up  from  time  to  time  whose 
achievements  might  well  kindle  patriotism,  such  as 
Shamgar  the  son  of  Anath  (Judg.  iii.  31),  and  still 
more  Samson  (Judg.  xiii.-xvi.) :  but  neither  of 
these  men  succeeded  in  permanently  throwing  ofl 
the  yoke.'  Of  the  former  only  a  single  daring  feat 
is  recorded,  the  effect  of  which  appeai-s,  from  Judg. 
v.  6,  7,  to  have  been  very  shortlived.  The  true 
series  of  deliverances  commenced  with  the  latter, 
of  whom  it  was  predicted  that  "  he  shall  begin  to 
deliver"  (Judg.  xiii.  5),  and  were  carried  on  bj 
Samuel,  Saul,  and  David.  The  history  of  Samson 
furnishes  us  with  some  idea  of  the  relations  which 
existed  between  the  two  nations.  As  a  "  borderer  " 
of  the  tribe  oi  Dan,  he  was  thrown  into  frequent 
contact  with  the  Philistines,  whose  supremacy  was 
so  established  that  no  bar  appears  to  have  been 
placed  to  free  intercourse  with  their  country.  His 
;arly  life  was  spent  on  the  verge  of  the  Shephelah 
Between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol,  but  when  his  actions 
iod  aroused  the  active  hostility  of  the  Philistines 
le  withdrew  into  the  central  district  and  found  a 
secure  post  on  the  rock  of  Etam,  to  the  S.W.  of 
Bethlehem.  Thither  the  Philistines  followed  him 
without  opposition  from  the  inhabitants.  His 
achievements  belong  to  his  personal  history:  it  is 
ilear  that  they  were  the  isolated  acts  of  an  indi- 
•idual,  and  altogether  unconnected  with  any  na- 


0  The  Hebrew  term  netzib,  which  implies  this  practice, 
to  rendered  "  garrison  "  in  the  A.  V.,  which  neither  agrees 
wtth  the  context  nor  gives  a  true  Idea  of  the  Philistine 
tactics.  Stark,  however,  dissents  from  this  view,  and  ex 
plains  the  term  of  military  officers  (Gaza,  p.  164). 
j.  and  not 


*  The  true  text  may  have  been  HIGH,  instead  of 


1  The  apparent  discrepancy  between  Judg.  1.  18,  Hi.  3, 
nag  led  to  suspicions  as  t&  the  text  of  the  former,  which 
are  strengthened  by  the  rendering  in  the  LXX.,  KO.I  OVK 
v,  presupposing  in  the  Hebrew  the  reading 

1,  instead  of  15)7*1.     The  testimony  of  the 
VXX.  is  weakened  by  the  circumstances  (1)  that  it  inter 


polates  a  notice  of  Ashdod  and  its  suburbs  (irepurropia, 

a  peculiar  term  in  lieu  of  the  opia  applied  to  the  tbreo 

ther  towns);  and  (2)  that  the  term  exA?)poi'6fii)<m>  is 

jiven  as  the  equivalent  for  "13?,  which  occurs  in  DO 
ther  instance.  Of  the  two,  therefore,  the  Greek  text  if 
tore  open  to  suspicion.  Stark  (Gaza,  p.  129)  regards  the 
lassage  as  an  interpolation. 

'  A  brief  notice  occurs  in  Judg.  x.  7  of  invasions  by  the 
'hilistines  and  Ammonites,  followed  by  parti;  ulars  \\liuii 
pply  exclusively  to  the  latter  people.  It  has  been  hence 
upposed  that  the  brief  reference  to  the  Philistines  Is  in 
anticipation  of  Samson'u  history.  In  Herzog's  fieal-Encyc. 
t.  >'.  "  Philister  ")  it  is  rather  unnecessarily  assumed  that 
le  text  is  imperfect,  and  that  the  words  "  that  year " 
efer  to  the  Philistines,  and  the  "  eighteen  years"  to  tht, 
naoionites. 


PHILISTINES 

tunal  movement ;  for  the  revenge  of  the  Philistines 
was  throughout  directed  against  Samson  personally. 
Under  Eii  there  was  an  organised  but  unsuccessful 
Rsistance  to  the  encroachments  of  the  Philistines, 
who  had  penetrated  into  the  central  distiict  and 
were  met  at  Aphek  (1  Sam.  iv.  1).  The  produc 
tion  of  the  ark  on  this  occasion  demonstrates  the 
greatness  of  the  emei-gency,  and  its  loss  marked  the 
lowest  depth  of  Israel's  degradation.  The  next  action 
took  place  under  Samuel's  leadership,  and  the  tide 
of  success  tumed  in  Israel's  favour :  the  Philistines 
had  again  penetrated  into  the  mountainous  country 
Mar  Jerusalem :  at  Mizpeh  they  met  the  cowed 
iiost  of  the  Israelites,  who,  encouraged  by  the  signs 
of  Divine  favour,  and  availing  themselves  of  the 
panic  produced  by  a  thunderstorm,  inflicted  on 
them  a  total  defeat.  For  the  first  time,  the  Israelites 
erected  their  pillar  or  "  stele  "  at  Eben-ezer  as  the 
token  of  victory.  The  results  were  the  recovery 
of  the  border  towns  and  their  territories  "from 
Ekron  even  unto  Gath,"  t.  e.  in  the  northern  dis 
trict.  The  success  of  Israel  may  be  partly  attri 
buted  to  their  peaceful  relations  at  this  time  with 
the  Amorites  (1  Sam.  vii.  9-14).  The  Israelites 
now  attributed  their  past  weakness  to  their  want 
of  unity,  and  they  desired  a  king,  with  the  special 
object  of  leading  them  against  the  foe  (1  Sam.  viii. 
20).  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  Saul  first  felt 
inspiration  in  the  presence  of  a  pillar  (A.  V.  "  gar 
rison")  erected  by  the  Philistines  in  commemoration 
of  a  victory  (1  Sam.  x.  5,  10).  As  soon  as  he  was 
prepared  to  throw  off  the  yoke,  he  occupied  with 
his  army  a  position  at  Michmash,  commanding  the 
defiles  leading  to  the  Jordan  valley,  and  his  heroic 
general  Jonathan  gave  the  signal  for  a  rising  by 
overthrowing  the  pillar  which  the  Philistines  had 
placed  there.  The  challenge  was  accepted ;  the 
Philistines  invaded  the  central  district  with  an 
immense  force,1  and,  having  dislodged  Saul  from 
Michmash,  occupied  it  themselves,  and  sent  forth 
predatory  bands  into  the  surrounding  country. 
The  Israelites  shortly  after  took  up  a  position  on 
the  other  side  of  the  ravine  at  Gcba,  and,  availing 
themselves  of  the  confusion  consequent  upon  Jona 
than's  daring  feat,  inflicted  a  tremendous  slaughter 
upon  the  enemy  (1  Sam.  xiii.  xiv.).  No  attempt 
was  made  by  the  Philistines  to  regain  their  supre 
macy  for  about  twenty-five  years,  and  the  scene  of 
the  next  contest  shows  the  altered  strength  of  the 
two  parties  :  it  was  no  longer  in  the  central  country, 
but  in  a  ravine  leading  down  to  the  Philistine  plain, 
the  valley  of  Elah,  the  position  of  which  is  about 
14  miles  S.W.  of  Jerusalem:  on  this  occasion  the 
prowess  of  young  David  secured  success  to  Israel, 
and  the  foe  was  pursued  to  the  gates  of  Gath  and 
Ekron  (1  Sam.  xvii.).  The  power  of  the  Philistines 
was,  however,  still  intact  on  their  own  territory, 
as  proved  by  the  flight  of  David  to  the  court  ol 
Achish  (1  Sam.  xxi.  10-15),  and  his  subsequent  abode 


PHILISTINES  847 

at  Ziklag  (1  Sam.  xxvii.),  where  he  was  secured 
"rom  the  attacks  of  Saul.  The  border  warfare  was 
continued  ;  captures  and  reprisals,  such  as  are  de 
scribed  as  occurring  at  Keilah  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  1-5). 
Deing  probably  frequent.  The  scene  of  the  ne»t 
:onflict  was  far  to'  the  north,  in  the  valley  of 
Esdraelon,  whither  the  Philistines  may  have  mad* 
a  plundering  incursion  similar  to  that  of  the  Mi- 
dianites  in  the  days  of  Gideon.  The  battle  on  thif 
occasion  proved  disastrous  to  the  Israelites :  Saul 
tiimself  perished,  and  the  Philistines  penetrated 
across  the  Jordan,  and  occupied  the  forsaken  cities 
(1  Sam.  xxxi.  1-7).  The  dissensions  which  followed 
the  death  of  Saul  were  naturally  favourable  to  thfi 
Philistines :  and  no  sooner  were  these  brought  to  8 
close  by  the  appointment  of  David  to  be  king  over 
the  united  tribes,  than  the  Philistines  attempted  to 
counterbalance  the  advantage  by  an  attack  on  the 
person  of  the  king :  they  therefore  penetrated  into 
the  valley  of  Rephaim,  S.W.  of  Jerusalem,  and  even 
pushed  forward  an  advanced  post  as  far  as  Beth 
lehem  (1  Chr.  xi.  16).  David  twice  attacked  them 
at  the  former  spot,  and  on  each  occasion  with  signal 
success,  in  the  first  case  capturing  their  images,  in 
the  second  pursuing  them  "  from  Geba  until  thou 
came  to  Gazer"'  (2  Sam.  v.  17-25;  1  Chr.  xiv. 
8-16). 

Henceforth  the  Israelites  appear  as  the  aggressors : 
about  seven  years  after  the  defeat  at  Rephaim, 
David,  who  had  now  consolidated  his  power,  at 
tacked  them  on  their  own  soil,  and  took  Gath  with 
its  dependencies  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1),  and  thus  (ac 
cording  to  one  interpretation  of  the  obscure  expres 
sion  "  Metheg-ammah "  in  2  Sam.  viii.  1)  "he  too* 
the  arm-bridle  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Philistines 
(Bertheau,  Comm.  on  1  Chron.),  or  (according  tc 
another)  "  he  took  the  bridle  of  the  metropolis 
out  of  the  hand  of  the  Philistines"  (Gesen.  Thes. 
p.  113) — meaning  in  either  case  that  their  ascend 
ancy  was  utterly  broken.  This  indeed  was  the  case : 
for  the  minor  engagements  in  David's  lifetime  pro 
bably  all  took  place  within  the  borders  of  Philistia: 
Gob,  which  is  given  as  the  scene  of  the  second  and 
third  combats,  being  probably  identical  with  Gath, 
where  the  fourth  took  place  (2  Sam.  xxi.  15-22 ; 
comp.  LXX.,  some  of  the  copies  of  which  read  r«0 
instead  of  FVfjS).  The  whole  of  Philistia  was  in 
cluded  in  Solomon's  empire,  the  extent  of  which  is 
described  as  being  "  from  the  river  unto  the  land 
of  the  Philistines,  unto  the  border  of  Egypt"0 
(1  K.  iv.  21 ;  2  Chr.  ix.  26),  and  again  "  from 
Tiphsah  even  unto  Gaza"  (1  K.  iv.  24;  A.  V. 
"  Azzah").  The  several  towns  probably  remained 
under  their  former  governors,  as  in  the  case  of  Gath 
(1  K.  ii.  39),  and  the  sovereignty  of  Solomon  was 
acknowledged  by  the  payment  of  tribute  (1  K.  iv. 
21).  There  are  indications,  however,  that  his  hold  on 
the  Philistine  country  was  by  no  means  established : 
for  we  find  him  securing  the  passes  that  led  up 


«  The  text  states  the  force  at  30.000  chariots  and  6000 
iiorsemen  (1  Sam.  xiii,  5) :  these  numbers  are,  however 
quite  out  of  proportion.  The  chariots  were  probably  1000 
the  present  reading  being  a  mistake  of  a  copyist  who  re 
peated  the  final  p  of  Israel,  and  thus  converted  the  num 
her  into  30,000. 

*  There  is  some  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  geogra 
phical  statements  in  the  narrative  of  this  campaign 
Instead  of  the  "  Geba"  of  Samuel,  we  have  "  Gibeon  "  in 
Chronicles.  The  latter  lies  N.W.  of  Jerusalem ;  and  there 
IB  a  Geba  in  the  same  neighbourhood,  lying  more  to  the  E 
But  the  valley  of  Rephaim  is  placed  S.W.  of  Jerusalem 
near  to  neither  of  these  places.  Thenius  (on  2  Sam.  v. 


transplants  the  valley  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem  ;  while 
Bertheau  (on  1  Chr.  xiv.  16)  identifies  Geba  with  the 
Gibeah  of  Josh.  xv.  57,  and  the  Jeba'h  noticed  by  Robinson 
(it  6,  16)  as  lying  W.  of  Bethlehem.  Neither  of  these 
explanations  can  be  accepted.  We  must  assume  that  the 
direct  retreat  from  the  valley  to  the  plain  was  cut  off,  and 
that  the  Philistines  were  compelled  to  flee  northwards, 
and  regained  the  plain  by  the  pass  of  Bethhoron,  which  lay 
between  Gibeon  (as  wel!  as  between  Geba)  and  Gaeer. 

u  The  Hebrew  text,  as  it  at  present  stands,  in  1  K.  iv 
21,  will  not  bear  the  sense  here  put  upon  it ;  but  a  com 
parison  with  the  parallel  passage  in  2  Chr.  shows  that  tkt 
word  "1JM  has  dropped  out  before  tho  "  land  of  the  P." 


848 


PHILISTINES 


from  the  plain  to  the  central  district  by  the  fortift* 
cation  of  Gezer  and  Bethhoron  (1  K.  ix.  17),  while 
no  mention  is  made  either  of  Gaza  or  Ashdod,  which 
fully  commanded  the  coast-road.  Indeed  the  ex 
pedition  of  Pharaoh  against  Gezer,  which  stood  at 
the  head  of  the  Philistine  plain,  and  which  was 
quite  independent  of  Solomon  until  the  time  of  his 
marriage  with  Pharaoh's  daughter,  would  lead  to 
the  inference  that  Egyptian  influence  was  para 
mount  in  Philistia  at  this  period  (1  K.  ix.  16). 
The  division  of  the  empire  at  Solomon's  death  was 
favourable  to  the  Philistine  cause:  Rehoboam  se 
cured  himself  against  them  by  fortifying  Gath  and 
other  cities  bordering  on  the  plain  (2  Chr.  xi.  8) : 
the  Israelite  monarchs  were  either  not  so  prudent 
or  not  so  powerful,  for  they  allowed  the  Philistines 
to  get  bold  of  Gibbethon,  commanding  one  of  the 
defile*  leading  up  from  the  plain  of  Sharon  to 
Samaria,  the  recovery  of  which  involved  them  in  a 
protracted  struggle  in  the  reigns  of  Nadab  and 
Zimri  (1  K.  xv.  27,  xvi.  15).  Judah  meanwhile 
had  lost  the  tribute ;  for  it  is  recorded,  as  an  oc 
currence  that  marked  Jehoshaphat's  success,  that 
"some  of  the  Philistines  brought  presents"  (2  Chr. 
xvii.  11).  But  this  subjection  was  of  brief  duration : 
in  the  reign  of  his  son  Jehoram  they  avenged  them 
selves  by  invading  Judah  in  conjunction  with  the 
Arabians,  and  sacking  the  royal  palace  (2  Chr.  xxi. 
16,  17).  The  increasing  weakness  of  the  Jewish 
monarchy  under  the  attacks  of  Hazael  led  to  the 
recovery  of  Gath,  -which  had  been  captured  by  that 
monarch  in  his  advance  on  Jerusalem  from  the 
western  plain  in  the  reign  of  Jehoash  (2  K.  xii. 
17),  and  was  probably  occupied  by  the  Philistines 
after  his  departure  as  an  advanced  post  against 
Judah .  at  all  events  it  was  in  their  hands  in  the  time 
of  Uzziah,  who  dismantled  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  6)  and  pro 
bably  destroyed  it :  for  it  is  adduced  by  Amos  as 
an  example  of  Divine  vengeance  (Am.  vi.  2),  and 
then  disappears  from  history.  Uzziah  at  the  same 
time  dismantled  Jabneh  (Jamnia)  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  plain,  and  Ashdod,  and  further  erected 
forts  in  different  parts  of  the  country  to  intimidate 
the  inhabitants*  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  6).  The  prophecies 
of  Joel  and  Amos  prove  that  these  measures  were 
provoked  by  the  aggressions  of  the  Philistines,  who 
appear  to  have  formed  leagues  both  with  the  Edom- 
ites  and  Phoenicians,  and  had  reduced  many  of  the 
Jews  to  slavery  (Joel  iii.  4-6 ;  Am.  i.  6-10).  How 
far  the  means  adopted  by  Uzziah  were  effectual  we 
are  not  informed;  but  we  have  reason  to  suppose 
that  the  Philistines  were  kept  in  subjection  until 
the  time  of  Ahaz,  when,  relying  upon  the  difficulties 
produced  by  the  Syrian  attacks,  they  attacked  the 
border-cities  in  the  Shephelah,  and  "  the  south  "  of 
Judah  (2  Chr.  xxviii.  18).  Isaiah's  declarations 
(xiv.  29-32)  throw  light  upon  the  events  subse 
quent  to  this:  from  them  we  learn  that  the  Assy 
rians,  whom  Ahaz  summoned  to  his  aid,  proved 
themselves  to  be  the  "  cockatrice  that  should  come 
out  of  the  serpent's  (Judah's.)  root,"  by  ravaging 
the  Philistine  plain.  A  few  years  later  the  Philis 
tines,  in  conjunction  with  the  Syrians  and  Assyrians 
("the  adversaries  of  Rezin"),  and  perhaps  as  the 
subject-allies  of  the  latter,  carried  on  a  series  of 
attacks  on  the  kingdom  of  Israel  (Is.  ix.  11,  12). 


«  The  passage  in  Zech.  ix.  6-7  refers,  in  the  opinion  of 
those  who  assign  an  earlier  date  to  the  concluding  chap 
ters  of  the  book,  to  the  successful  campaign  of  Uzziah. 
Internal  evidence  Is  in  favour  of  this  view.  The  alliance 
with  Tyre  is  described  as  "  the  expectation  "  of  Ekron : 
vi»c*  was  to  !ose  her  king,  i.  e  her  independence  :  Asb- 


PHILISTINE8 

Hezckiah's  reign  inaugurated  a  new  policy,  i-j  which 
the  Philistines  were  deeply  interested  :  that  monarrn 
formed  an  alliance  with  the  Egyptians,  as  a  countei 
poise  to  the  Assyrians,  and  the  possession  of  Phi 
listia  became  henceforth  the  turning-point  of  th* 
struggle  between  the  two  great  empires  of  the  East 
Hezekiah,  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign,  re-established 
his  authority  over  the  whole  of  it,  "  even  unto 
Gaza "  (2  K.  xviii.  8).  This  movement  was  evi 
dently  connected  with  his  rebellion  against  the  king 
of  Assyria,  and  was  undertaken  in  conjunction  witn 
the  Egyptians;  for  we  find  fie  latter  people  shortly 
after  in  possession  of  the  five  Philistine  cities,  tc 
which  alone  are  we  able  to  refer  the  prediction  in 
Is.  xix.  18,  when  coupled  with  the  fact  that  both 
Gaza  and  Ashkelon  are  termed  Egyptian  cities  in 
the  annals  of  Sargon  (Bunsen's  Egypt,  iv.  603). 
The  Assyrians  under  Tartan,  the  general  of  Sargon, 
made  an  expedition  against  Egypt,  and  took  Ashdod, 
as  the  key  of  that  country  (Is.  xx.  1,  4,  5).  Under 
Sennacherib  Philistia  was  again  the  scene  of  im 
portant  operations:  in  his  first  campaign  against 
Egypt  Ashkelon  was  taken  and  its  dependencies 
were  plundered ;  Ashdod,  Ekron,  and  Gaza  sub 
mitted,  and  received  as  a  reward  a  portion  of  Heze 
kiah 's  territory  (Rawlinson,  i.  477):  in  his  second 
campaign  other  towns  on  the  verge  of  the  plain, 
such  as  Libnah  and  Lachish,  were  also  taken  (2  K. 
xviii.  14,  xix.  8).  The  Assyrian  supremacy,  though 
shaken  by  the  failure  of  this  second  expedition,  was 
restored  by  Esar-haddon,  who  claims  to  have  CAO- 
quered  Egypt  (Rawlinson,  i.  481);  and  it  se<m» 
probable  that  the  Assyrians  retained  their  hold  on 
Ashdod  until  its  capture,  after  a  long  siege,  by  the 
Egyptian  monarch  Psammetichus  (Herod,  ii.  157), 
the  effect  of  which  was  to  reduce  the  population  of  that 
important  place  to  a  mere  "  remnant "  (Jer.  xxv. 
20).  It  was  about  this  time,  and  possibly  while 
Psammetichus  was  engaged  in  the  siege  of  Ashdo-1, 
that  Philistia  was  traversed  by  a  vast  Scythian  horde 
on  their  way  to  Egypt:  they  were,  however,  di 
verted  from  their  purpose  by  the  king,  and  retraced 
their  steps,  plundering  on  .their  retreat  the  rich 
temple  of  Venus  at  Ashkelon  (Herod,  i.  105).  The 
description  of  Zephaniah  (ii.  4-7),  who  was  con 
temporary  with  this  event,  may  well  apply  to  th:s 
terrible  scourge,  though  more  generally  referred  to 
a  Chaldaean  invasion.  The  Egyptian  ascendancy 
was  not  as  yet  re-established,  for  we  find  the  next 
king,  Neco,  compelled  to  besiege  Gaza  (the  Cadytis 
of  Herodotus,  ii.  159)  on  his  return  from  the  batth 
of  Megiddo.  After  the  death  of  Neco,  the  contest 
was  renewed  between  the  Egyptians  and  the  Chal- 
daeans  under  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  result  was 
specially  disastrous  to  the  Philistines:  Gaza  was 
again  taken  by  the  former,  and  the  population  oi 
the  whole  plain  was  reduced  to  a  mere  "  remnant " 
by  the  invading  armies  (Jer.  xlvii.).  The  "  old 
hatred "  that  the  Philistines  bore  to  the  Jews  was 
exhibited  in  acts  of  hostility  at  the  time  of  the 
Babylonish  captivity  (Ez.  xxv.  15-17):  but  on  the 
return  this  was  somewhat  abated,  for  some  of  tht 
Jews  married  Philistine  women,  to  the  great  scandal 
of  their  rulers  (Neh.  xiii.  23,  24).  From  this  time 
the  history  of  Philistia  is  absorbed  in  the  struggle; 
of  the  neighbouring  kingdoms.  In  B.C.  332,  Alex- 

kelon  should  be  depopulated :  a  "  bastard,"  t.  e.  one  who 
was  excluded  from  the  congregation  of  Israel  on  tl  e  soort 
of  impure  blood,  should  dwell  in  Ashdod,  holding  't  as  » 
dependency  of  Judah  :  and  Ekron  should  beconv  •  as  0 
Jebuslie,"  subject  to  JutUvh. 


PHILISTINES 

under  the  dcat  traversed  it  on  his  way  to  Egypt, 
and  captured  Gaza,  then  held  by  the  Persians  under 
Betis,  after  a  two  months'  siege.  In  312  the  armies 
of  Demetrius  Poliorcetes  and  Ptolemy  fought  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Gaza.  In  198  Antiochus  the 
Great,  in  his  war  against  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  in 
vaded  Philistia  and  took  Gaza.  In  166  the  Phili 
stines  joined  the  Syrian  army  under  Gorgias  in  its 
attack  on  Judaea  (I  Mace.  iii.  41).  In  148  the 
adherents  of  the  rival  kings  Demetrius  II.  and 
Alexander  Balas,  under  Apollonius  and  Jonathan 
respectively,  contended  in  the  Philistine  plain : 
Jonathan  took  Ashdod,  triumphantly  entered  Ash- 
«celon,  and  received  Ekron  as  his  reward  (1  Mace. 
x.  69-89).  A  few  years  later  Jonathan  again  de 
scended  into  the  plain  in  the  interests  of  Antiochus 
VI.,  and  captured  Gaza  (1  Mace.  xi.  60-62).  No 
further  notice  of  the  country  occurs  until  the  cap 
ture  of  Gaza  in  97  by  the  Jewish  king  Alexander 
Jannaeus  in  his  contest  with  Lathyrus  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xiii.  13,  §3 ;  B.  J.  i,  4,  §2).  In  63  Pompey 
annexed  Philistia  to  the  province  of  Syria  (Ant.  xiv. 
4,  §4),  with  the  exception  of  Gaza,  which  ivas  as 
signed  to  Herod  (xv.  7,  §3),  together  with  Jamnia, 
Ashdod,  and  Ashkelon,  as  appears  from  xvii.  11, 
§5.  The  three  List  fell  to  Salome  after  Herod's 
death,  but  Gaza  was  re-annexed  to  Syria  (xvii.  11, 
§4,  5).  The  latest  notices  of  the  Philistines  as  a 
nation,  under  their  title  of  a\^6<t>v\oi,  occur  in 
1  Mace,  iii.— v.  The  extension  of  the  name  from 
the  district  occupied  by  them  to  the  whole  country, 
under  the  familiar  form  of  PALESTINE,  has  already 
been  noticed  under  that  head. 

With  regard  to  the  institutions  of  the  Philistines 
our  information  is  very  scanty.  The  five  chief 
cities  had,  as  early  as  the  days  of  Joshua,  consti 
tuted  themselves  into  a  confederacy,  restricted, 
however,  in  all  probability,  to  matters  of  offence 
and  defence.  Each  was  under  the  government  of  a 
prince  whose  official  title  was  serent  (Josh.  xiii.  3; 
Judg.  iii.  3  &c.),  and  occasionally  sar  *  (1  Sam. 
xviii.  30,  xxix.  6).  Gaza  may  be  regarded  as  hav 
ing  exercised  an  hegemony  over  the  others,  for  in 
the  lists  of  the  towns  it  is  mentioned  the  first 
(Josh.  xiii.  3 ;  Am.  i.  7,  8),  except  where  there 
is  an  especial  ground  for  giving  prominence  to 
another,  as  in  the  case  of  Ashdod  (1  Sam.  vi.  17). 
Ekron  always  stands  last,  while  Ashdod,  Ash 
kelon,  and  Gath  interchange  places.  Each  town 
possessed  its  own  territory,  as  instanced  in  the 
•jase  of  Gath  (1  Chr.  xviii.  1),  Atshdod  (1  Sam. 
v.  6),  and  others,  and  each  possessed  its  dependent 
towns  or  "daughters"  (Josh.  xv.  45-47;  1  Chr. 
xviii.  1  ;  2  Sam.  i.  20;  Ez.  xvi.  27,  57),  and  its 
villages  (Josh.  I.  c.).  In  later  times  Gaza  had  a 
senate  of  five  hundred  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  13,  §3). 
The  Philistines  appear  to  have  been  deeply  imbued 
with  superstition :  they  carried  their  idols  with 
them  on  their  campaigns  (2  Sam.  v.  21),  and  pro 
claimed  their  victories  in  their  presence  (1  Sam. 
xsxi.  9). .  They  also  carried  about  their  persons 
charms  of  some  kind  that  had  been  presented  before 
the  idols  (2  Mace.  xii.  40).  The  gods  whom  they 
chiefly  worshipped  were  Dagon,  who  possessed 
temples  both  at  Gaza  (Judg.  xvi.  23)  and  at  Ashdod 
(1  Sam.  v.  3-5;  1  Chr.  x.  10 ;  1  Mace.  x.  83); 
Ashtaroth,  whose  temple  at  Ashkelon  was  far-famed 
^l  Sam.  xxxi.  10  ;  Herod,  i.  105)  ;  Baal-zebub, 


*  }]}D.    Two  derivations  have  been  proposed  for  this 
word,  viz. :  ~VP  by  Kwald  (i.  332),  }^D,  "  axle,"  by  Ge- 
6eniu8    (TUes.  p.  9T2)  and    Keil  in'  josh.  ilii.   3,   tbe 
VOL.   II. 


PHILOSOPHY  84fi 

whose  fane  at  Ekron  was  consulted  by  Ah.i*isn 
(2  K.  i.  2-6);  and  Derceto,  who  was  honoured  at 
Ashkelon  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4),  though  unnoticed  in  the; 
Bible.  Priests  and  diviners  (1  Sam.  vi.  2)  were 
attached  to  the  various  seat-?  of  worship.  (The 
special  authorities  for  the  history  of  the  Philistines 
are  Stark's  Gaza ;  Knobel's  Volkertafel ;  Movers' 
Phocnizien;  and  Hit-tig's  Urgeschichte.)  [W.L.  B.] 

PHILOL'OGUS  (*t\6\o>Yos:  PhMogus).  A 
Christian  at  Rome  to  whom  St.  Paul  sends  his 
salutation  (Rom.  xvi.  1 5).  Origen  conjectures  that 
he  was  the  master  of  a  Christian  household  which 
included  the  other  persons  named  with  him.  Pseudo- 
Hippolytus  (De  LXX.  Apostolis)  makes  him  one  of 
the  70  disciples,  and  bishop  of  Sinope.  His  name  is 
found  in  the  Columbarium  "of  the  freedmenof  Livia 
Augusta"  at  Rome  ;  which  shows  that  there  was  a 
Philologus  connected  with  the  imperial  household  at 
the  time  when  it  included  many  Julias.  [W.  T.  B.] 

PHILOSOPHY.  It  is  the  object  of  the  fol 
lowing  article  to  give  some  account  (I.)  of  that  de 
velopment  of  thought  among  the  Jews  which  an 
swered  to  the  philosophy  of  the  West ;  (II.)  of  the 
recognition  of  the  preparatory  (propaedeutic)  office 
of  Greek  philosophy  in  relation  to  Christianity  ; 
(III.)  of  the  systematic  progress  of  Greek  philosophy 
as  forming  a  complete  whole;  and  (IV.)  of  the 
contact  of  Christianity  with  philosophy.  The  limits 
of  the  article  necessarily  exclude  everything  but 
broad  statements.  Many  points  of  great  interest 
must  be  passed  over  unnoticed ;  and  in  a  fuller 
treatment  there  would  be  need  of  continual  excep 
tions  and  explanations  of  detail,  which  would  only 
create  confusion  in  an  outline.  The  history  of 
ancient  philosophy  in  its  religious  aspect  has  been 
strangely  neglected..  Nothing,  as  far  as  we  are  aware, 
has  been  written  on  the  pre-Christian  era  answering 
to  the  clear  and  elegant  essay  of  Matter  on  post- 
Christian  philosophy  (Histoire  de  la  Philosophic 
dans  ses  rapports  avec  la  Religion  depuis  I'ere 
Chretienne,  Paris,  1854).  There  are  useful  hints  in 
Carovd's  Vorhalle  des  Christenthums  (Jena,  1851), 
and  Ackermann's  Das  Christliche  im  Plato  (Hamb. 
1835).  The  treatise  of  Denis,  Histoire  des  Theo 
ries  et  des  Idees  morales  dans  VAntiquite  (Paris, 
1856),  is  limited  in  range  and  hardly  satisfactory. 
Dollinger's  Vorhalle  zur  Gesch.  d.  Christenihwins 
(Regensbg.  1857)  is  comprehensive,  but  covers  too 
large  a  field.  The  brief  survey  in  l)e  Pressense"s 
Hist,  des  trots  premiers  Sitcles  de  I'Eglise  Chre 
tienne  (Paris,  1858)  is  much  more  vigorous,  and 
on  the  whole  just.  But  no  one  seems  to  have  ap 
prehended  the  real  character  and  growth  of  Greek 
philosophy  so  well  as  Zeller  (though  with  no  special 
attention  to  its  relations  to  religion)  in  his  history  (Die 
Philosophic  der  Griechen,  2te  Aufl.  Tub.  1856), 
which  tor  subtlety  and  completeness  is  unrivalled. 

I.  THE  PHILOSOPHIC  DISCIPLINE  OP  THE  JEWS. 
Philosophy,  if  we  limit  the  word  strictly  to  de 
scribe  the  free  pursuit  of  knowledge  of  which  truth 
is  the  one  complete  end,  is  essentially  of  Western 
growth.  In  the  East  the  search  after  wisdom  has 
always  been  connected  with  practice:  it  has  re 
mained  there,  what  it  was  in  Greece  at  first,  a  part 
of  religion.  The  history  of  the  Jews  offers  no  ex 
ception  to  this  remark :  there  is  no  Jewish  philo- 

latter  being  supported  by  ttc  analogy  cf  an  Arabic 
expression. 

3  I 


850 


PHILOSOPHY 


aophy  properly  so  called.  Yet  on  the  other  hand 
speculation  and  action  meet  in  truth ;  and  perhaps 
the  most  obvious  lesson  of  the  Old  Testament  lies 
in  the  gradual  construction  of  a  divine  philosophy 
by  fact,  and  not  by  speculation.  The  method  of 
Greece  was  to  proceed  from  life  to  God  ;  the  method 
of  Israel  (so  to  speak)  was  to  proceed  from  God  to 
life.  The  axioms  of  one  system  are  the  conclusions 
of  the  othei .  The  one  led  to  the  successive  abandon 
ment  of  the  noblest  domains  of  science  which  man  had 
claimed  originally  as  his  own,  till  it  left  bare  systems 
of  morality  ;  the  other,  in  the  fulness  of  time,  pre 
pared  many  to  welcome  the  Christ — the  Truth. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  follows  that  the 
philosophy  of  the  Jews,  using  the  word  in  a  large 
sense,  is  to  be  sought  for  rather  in  the  progress  of 
the  national  life  than  in  special  books.  These, 
indeed,  furnish  important  illustrations  of  the  growth 
of  speculation,  but  the  history  is  written  more  in 
r.cts  than  in  thoughts.  Step  by  step  the  idea  of 
the  family  was  raised  into  that  of  the  people ;  and 
the  kingdom  furnished  the  basis  of  those  wider  pro 
mises  which  included  all  nations  in  one  kingdom  of 
heaven.  The  social,  the  political,  the  cosmical  relations 
of  man  were  traced  out  gradually  in  relation  to  God. 

The  philosophy  of  the  Jews  is  thus  essentially  a 
moral  philosophy,  resting  on  a  definite  connexion 
with  God.  The  doctrines  of  Creation  and  Provi 
dence,  of  an  Infinite  Divine  Person  and  of  a  respon 
sible  human  will,  which  elsewhere  form  the  ultimate 
limits  of  speculation,  are  here  assumed  at  the  out 
set.  The  difficulties  which  they  involve  are  but 
rarely  noticed.  Even  when  they  are  canvassed 
most  deeply,  a  moral  answer  drawn  from  the  great 
duties  of  life  is  that  in  which  the  questioner  finds 
repose.  The  earlier  chapters  of  Genesis  contain  an 
introduction  to  the  direct  training  of  the  people 
which  follows.  Premature  and  partial  developments, 
kingdoms  based  on  godless  might,  stand  in  contrast 
with  the  slow  foundation  of  the  divine  polity.  To 
distinguish  rightly  the  moral  principles  which  were 
successively  called  out  :n  this  latter  work,  would 
lie  to  write  a  history  of  Israel ;  but  the  philoso 
phical  significance  of  the  great  crises  through  which 
the  people  passed,  lies  upon  the  surface.  The  call 
of  Abraham  set  forth  at  once  the  central  lesson  of 
faith  in  the  Unseen,  on  which  all  others  were  raised. 
The  father  of  the  nation  was  first  isolated  from  all 
natural  ties  before  he  received  the  promise :  his  heir 
was  the  son  of  his  extreme  age :  his  inheritance  was 
to  him  "  as  a  strange  land."  The  history  of  the 
patriarchs  brought  out  into  yet  clearer  light  the 
sovereignty  of  God:  the  younger  was  preferred 
before  the  elder:  suffering  prepared  the  way  for  safety 
and  triumph.  God  was  seen  to  make  a  covenant 
with  man,  and  his  action  was  written  in  the  records 
of  a  chosen  family.  A  new  era  followed.  A  nation 
grew  up  in  the  presence  of  Egyptian  culture.  Per 
secution  united  elements  which  seem  otherwise  to 
have  been- on  the  point  of  being  absorbed  by  foreign 
powers.  God  revealed  Himself  now  to  the  people 
in  the  wider  relations  of  Lawgiver  and  Judge.  The 
solitary  discipline  of  the  desert  familiarized  them 
with  His  majesty  and  His  mercy.  The  wisdom  of 
Egypt  was  hallowed  to  new  uses.  The  promised 
land  was  gained  by  the  open  working  of  a  divine 
Sovereign.  The  outlines  of  national  faith  were 
written  in  defeat  and  victory  ;  and  the  work  of  the 
theocracy  closed.  Human  passion  then  claimed  a 
dominant  influence.  The  people  required  a  king. 
A  fixpo.  Temple  was  substituted  for  the  shifting 
Tabernacle.  Times*  of  disruption  and  disaster  fol- 


pmLoeopmr 

lowed  ;  and  the  voice  cf  prophets  declared  Lie  spi 
ritual  meaning  of  the  kingdom.  In  the  midst  ol 
sorrow  and  defeat  and  desolation,  the  horizon  of 
hope  was  extended.  The  kingdom  whicn  man  had 
prematurely  founded  was  seen  to  be  the  image  of  a 
nobler  "  kingdom  of  God."  The  nation  learned  its 
connexion  with  "all  the  kindred  of  the  earth." 
The  Captivity  confirmed  the  lesson,  and  after  it  the 
Dispersion.  The  moral  effects  of  these,  and  the  in 
fluence  which  Persian,  Greek,  and  Roman,  the  inhe 
ritors  of  all  the  wisdom  of  the  East  and  West, 
exercised  upon  the  Jews,  have  been  elsewhere  no 
ticed.  [CVRUS ;  DISPERSION.]  The  divine  dis 
cipline  closed  before  the  special  human  discipline 
began.  The  personal  relations  of  God  to  the  indi 
vidual,  the  family,  the  nation,  mankind,  were  esta 
blished  in  ineffaceable  history,  and  then  other  truths 
were  brought  into  harmony  with  these  in  the  long 
period  of  silence  which  separates  the  two  Testa 
ments.  But  the  harmony  was  not  always  perfect. 
Two  partial  forms  of  religious  philosophy  arose. 
On  the  one  side  the  predominance  of  the  Persian 
element  gave  rise  to  thb  Kabbala :  on  the  other  the 
predominance  of  the  Greek  element  issued  in  Alex 
andrine  theosophy. 

Before  these  one-sided  developments  of  the  truth 
were  made,  the  fundamental  ideas  of  the  Divine 
government  found  expression  in  words  as  well  as 
in  life.  The  Psalms,  which,  among  the  other  in 
finite  lessons  which  they  convey,  give  a  deep  insight 
into  the  need  of  a  personal  apprehension  of  truth, 
everywhere  declare  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  God 
over  the  material  and  moral  worlds.  The  classical 
scholar  cannot  fail  to  be  struck  with  the  frequency 
of  natural  imagery,  and  with  the  close  connexion 
which  is  assumed  to  exist  between  man  and  nature 
as  parts  of  one  vast  Order.  The  control  of  all  the 
elements  by  One  All-wise  Governor,  standing  out  in 
clear  contrast  with  the  deification  of  isolated  objects, 
is  no  less  essentially  characteristic  of  Hebrew  as 
distinguished  from  Greek  thought.  In  the  world 
of  action  Providence  stands  over  against  fate,  the 
universal  kingdom  against  the  individual  state, 
the  true  and  the  right  against  the  beautiful.  Pure 
speculation  may  find  little  scope,  but  speculation 
guided  by  these  great  laws  will  never  cease  to  affect 
most  deeply  the  intellectual  culture  of  men.  (Com 
pare  especially  Ps.  viii.,  xix.,  xxix. ;  1.,  Ixv.,  Irviii. ; 
Ixxvii.,  Ixxviii.,  Ixxxix.  ;  xcv.,  xcvii.,  civ. ;  cvi., 
cxxxvi.,  cxlvii.,  &c.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  same 
character  is  found  in  Psalms  of  every  date.)  For  a 
late  and  veiy  remarkable  development  of  this  philo 
sophy  of  Nature  see  the  article  BOOK  OP  ENOCH 
[vol.  i.  556] ;  Dillmann,  Das  B.  Henoch,  xiv.,  XT. 

One  man  above  all  is  distinguished  among  the 
Jews  as  "  the  wise  man."  The  description  which 
is  given  of  his  writings  serves  as  a  commentary  on 
the  national  view  of  philosophy.  "  And  Solomon's 
wisdom  excelled  the  wisdom  of  all  the  children  of 
the  east  country  and  all  the  wisdom  of  Egypt.  .  .  . 
And  he  spake  three  thousand  proverbs;  and  his 
songs  were  a  thousand  and  five.  And  he  spake  of 
trees,  from  the  cedar  that  is  in  Lebanon  even  unto 
the  hyssop  that  springeth  out  of  the  wall :  he  spake 
also  of  beasts,  and  of  fowl,  and  of  creeping  things, 
and  of  fishes "  (1  K.  iv.  30-33).  The  lesson  of 
practical  duty,  the  full  utterance  of  "  a  large  heart  " 
(Ibid.  29),  the  careful  study  of  God's  creatures: 
this  is  the  sum  of  wisdom.  Yet  in  fact  the  very 
practical  aim  of  this  philosophy  leads  to  the  revela 
tion  of  the  most  sublime  truth.  Wisdom  was  gra 
dually  telt  to  be  a  Person,  throned  by  God,  and 


PHILOSOPHY 

holding  converse  with  men  (Prov.  ^iii.).  She  was  i 
seen  to  stand  in  open  enmity  with  "  the  strange 
woman,"  who  sought  to  draw  them  aside  by  sen 
suous  attractions ;  and  thus  a  new  step  was  made 
towards  the  central  doctrine  of  Christianity — the 
Incarnation  of  the  Word. 

Two  books  of  the  Bible,  Job  and  Ecclesiastes, 
of  which  the  latter  at  any  rate  belongs  to  the  period 
of  the  close  of  the  kingdom,  approach  more  nearly 
than  any  others  to  the  type  of  philosophical  discus 
sions.  But  in  both  the  problem  is  moml  and  not 
metaphysical.  The  one  deals  with  the  evils  which 
afflict  "  the  perfect  and  upright ;"  the  other  with 
the  vanity  of  all  the  pursuits  and  pleasures  of  earth. 
In  the  one  we  are  led  for  an  answer  to  a  vision  of 
"the  enemy"  to  whom  a  partial  and  temporary 
power  over  man  is  conceded  (Job  i.  6-12) ;  in  the 
other  to  that  great  future  when  "  God  shall  bring 
every  work  to  judgment"  (Eccl.  xii.  14).  The 
metnod  of  inquiry  is  in  both  cases  abrupt  and  irre 
gular.  One  clue  after  another  is  followed  out,  and 
at  length  abandoned  ;  and  the  final  solution  is  ob 
tained,  not  by  a  consecutive  process  of  reason,  but 
oy  an  authoritative  utterance,  which  faith  welcomes 
as  the  truth,  towards  which  all  partial  efforts  had 
tended.  (Compare  Maurice,  Moral  and  Metaphy 
sical  Philosophy,  first  edition.) 

The  Captivity  necessarily  exercised  a  profound 
influence  upon  Jewish  thought.  [Comp.  CYRUS, 
\/yol.  i.  p.  380.]  The  teaching  of  Persia  seems  to 
/itave  been  designed  to  supply  important  elements  in 
the  education  of  the  chosen  people.  But  it  did  yet 
more  than  this.  The  imagery  of  Ezekiel  (chap,  i.), 
gave  an  apparent  sanction  to  a  new  form  of  mystical 
speculation.  It  is  uncertain  at  what  date  this 
earliest  Kabbah  (i.  e.  Tradition)  received  a  definite 
form ;  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  two 
great  divisions  of  which  it  is  composed,  "  the  cha 
riot  "  (Mercabah,  Ez.  i.)  and  "  the  Creation " 
(Bereshith,  Gen.  i.),  found  a  wide  development 
before  the  Christian  era.  The  first  dealt  with  the 
manifestation  of  God  in  Himself ;  the  second  with 
His  manifestation  in  Nature;  and  as  the  doctrine 
was  handed  down  orally,  it  received  naturally,  both 
from  its  extent  and  form,  great  additions  from 
foreign  sources.  On  the  one  side  it  was  open  to  the 
Persian  doctrine  of  emanation,  on  the  other  to  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation ;  and  the  tradi 
tion  was  deeply  impressed  by  both  before  it  was  first 
committed  to  writing  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  cen 
tury.  At  present  the  original  sources  for  the  teach 
ing  of  the  Kabbala  are  the  Sepher  Jetzirah,  or  Book 
of  Creation,  and  the  Sepher  Hazohar,  or  Book  of 
Splendour.  The  former  of  these  dates  in  its  present 
form  from  the  eighth,  and  the  latter  from  the  thir 
teenth  century  (Zunz,  Gottesd.  Vortr.  d.  Juden, 
165;  Jellipeic,  Moses  ben  Schemtob  de  Leon, 
Leipsic,  1851).  Both  are  based  upon  a  system  of 
Pantheism.  In  the  Book  of  Creation  the  Cabba 
listic  ideas  are  given  in  their  simplest  form,  and 
offer  some  points  of  comparison  with  the  system  of 
the  Pythagoreans.  The  book  begins  with  an  enu 
meration  of  the  thirty-two  ways  of  wisdom  seen  iu  the 
constitution  of  the  world ;  and  the  analysis  of  this 
cumber  is  supposed  to  contain  the  key  to  the  mys 
teries  of  Nature.  The  primary  division  is  into 
10  +  22.  The  number  10  represents  the  ten  Sephi- 
roth  (figures),  which  answer  to  the  ideal  world  ;  22, 
ou  the  other  hand,  the  number  of  the  Hebrew  alpha 
bet,  answers  to  the  world  of  objects ;  the  object  being 
related  to  the  idea  as  a  word,  formed  of  letters,  to  a 
number.  Twenty-two  again  is  equal  to  3  +  7  -J-  1 2 


PHILOSOPHY 


351 


and  each  of  these  numbers,  which  constantly  recur 
u  tne  0.  T.  Scriptures,  is  invested  with  a  peculiai 
meaning.  Generally  the  fundamental  conceptioni 
of  the  book  may  be  thus  represented.  The  ultimate 
Being  is  Divine  Wisdom  (Chocmah,  ffofyia).  The 
universe  is  originally  a  harmonious  thought  of 
Wisdom  (Number,  Sephirah) ;  and  the  thought  is 
afterwards  expressed  in  lettere,  which  form,  as 
words,  the  germ  of  things.  Man,  with  his  twofold 
nature,  thus  represents  in  some  sense  the  whole 
universe.  He  is  the  Microcosm,  in  which  the  body 
clothes  and  veils  the  soul,  as  the  phenomenal  world 
veils  the  spirit  of  God.  It  is  impossible  to  follow 
out  here  the  details  of  this  system,  and  its  develop 
ment  in  Zohar ;  bat  it  is  obvious  how  great  an  in 
fluence  it  must  have  exercised  on  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture.  The  calculation  of  the  numerical 
worth  of  words  (comp.  Rev.  xiii.  18;  Gematria, 
Buxtorf,  Lex.  Rabb.  446),  the  resolution  of  words 
into  initial  letters  of  new  words  (Notaricon,  Bux 
torf,  1339),  and  the  transposition  or  interchange  ol 
letters  (Temwah),  were  used  to  obtain  the  inner 
meaning  of  the  text ;  and  these  practices  have  con 
tinued  to  affect  modern  exegesis  (Lutterbeck,  Neu- 
test.  Lehrbegriff,  i.  223-254 ;  Reuss,  Kabbala,  in 
Herzog's  Encyklop. ;  Joel,  Die  Relig.-Phil.  d. 
Zohar,  1849;  Jellinek,  as  above ;  Westcott,  Introd. 
to  Gospels,  131-134  ;  Franck,  La  Kabbale,  1843 
OLD  TESTAMENT,  B  §1). 

The  contact  of  the  Jews  with  Persia  thus  gave 
rise  to  a  traditional  mysticism.  Their  contact  with 
Greece  was  marked  by  the  rise  of  distinct  sects. 
In  the  third  centuiy  B.C.  the  great  doctor  Anti- 
gonus  of  Socho  bears  a  Greek  name,  and  popular 
belief  pointed  to  him  as  the  teacher  of  Sadoc  and 
Boethus,  the  supposed  founders  of  Jewish  ration 
alism.  At  any  rate,  we  may  date  from  this  time 
the  twofold  division  of  Jewish  speculation  which 
corresponds  to  the  chief  tendencies  of  practical  phi 
losophy.  The  Sadducees  appear  as  the  supporters 
of  human  freedom  in  its  widest  scope ;  the  Pharisees 
of  a  religious  Stoicism.  At  a  later  time  the  cycle  of 
doctrine  was  completed,  when  by  a  natural  reaction 
the  Essenes  established  a  mystic  Asceticism.  The 
characteristics  of  these  sects  are  noticed  elsewhere. 
It  is  enough  now  to  point  out  the  position  which 
they  occupy  in  the  history  of  Judaism  (comp.  Introd. 
to  Gospels,  pp.  60-66).  At  a  later  period  the  FOURTH 
BOOK  OF  MACCABEES  (q.  v.)  is  a  very  interesting 
example  of  Jewish  moral  (Stoic)  teaching. 

The  conception  of  wisdoia  which  appears  in  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  was  elaboi  ated  with  greater  detail 
afterwards  [ WISDOM  OP  SOLOMON],  both  in  Pa 
lestine  [ECCLESIASTICUS]  ai.d  in  Egypt;  but  the 
doctrine  of  the  Word  is  of  greater  speculative  in 
terest.  Both  doctrines,  indeed,  sprang  from  the 
same  cause,  and  indicate  the  desire  to  find  some 
mediating  power  between  God  and  the  world,  and 
to  remove  the  direct  appearance  and  action  of  God 
from  a  material  sphere.  The  personification  of 
Wisdom  represents  only  a  secondary  power  in  rela 
tion  to  God;  the  Logos,  in  the  double  sense  of 
Reason  (\6yos  (vSidBeros)  and  Word  (\6yos  icpit- 
<popii(6s},  both  in  relation  to  God  and  in  relation  to 
the  universe.  The  first  use  of  the  term  Word 
(Memra),  based  upon  the  common  formula  of  the 
f^-ophets,  is  in  the  Targum  of  Oukelos  (first  cen", 
B.C.),  in  which  "  the  Word  of  God  ''  is  commonlj 
substituted  for  God  in  His  immediate,  personal  rela 
tions  with  man  (Introd.  to  Gospels,  p.  137) ;  and 
it  is  probable  that  round  this  traditional  rendering 
a  fuller  doctrine  grew  up.  But  there  is  a  cleat 

S  12 


852 


PHILOSOPHY 


difference  between  the  idea  of  the  Word  then  pre 
valent  in  Palestine  and  that  current  at  Alexandria. 
In  Palestine  the  Word  appears  as  the  outward  me 
diator  between  God  and  man,  like  the  Angel  of  the 
Covenant ;  at  Alexandria  it  appears  as  the  spiritual 
Connexion  which  opens  the  way  to  revelation.  The 
preface  to  St.  John's  Gospel  includes  the  element 
of  truth  in  both.  In  the  Greek  apocryphal  books 
there  is  no  mention  of  the  Woi-d  (yet  comp.  Wisd. 
xviii.  15).  For  the  Alexandrine  teaching  it  is  neces 
sary  to  look  alone  to  Philo.  (c.  B.C.  20 — A.D.  50) ; 
and  the  ambiguity  in  the  meaning  of  the  Greek 
term,  which  has  been  already  noticed,  produces  the 
greatest  confusion  in  his  treatment  of  the  subject. 
In  Philo  laiiguage  domineers  over  thought.  He 
has  no  one  clear  and  consistent  view  of  the  Logos. 
At  times  he  assigns  to  it  divine  attributes  and 
personal  action ;  and  then  again  he  affirms  decidedly 
the  absolute  indivisibility  of  the  Divine  nature. 
The  tendency  of  his  teaching  is  to  lead  to  the  con 
ception  of  a  twofold  personality  in  the  Godhead, 
though  he  shrinks  from  the  recognition  of  such  a 
doctrine  (De  Monarch.  §5 ;  De  Somn.  §37  ;  Qmd. 
det.  pot.  ins.  §24 ;  De  Swnn.  §39,  &e.).  Above 
all,  his  idea  of  the  Logos  was  wholly  disconnected 
from  all  Messianic  hopes,  and  was  rather  the  philo 
sophic  substitute  for  them.  (Introd.  to  Gospels, 
138-141 ;  Dahne,  Jvd.-Alex.  Belig.-Philos.  1834; 
Gfrorer,  Philo,  &c.  1835  ;  Dorner,  Die  Lehre  v.d. 
Person  Christi,  i.  23  ff. ;  Liicke,  Comm.  i.  207,  who 
gives  an  account  of  the  earlier  literature.) 

II.  THE  PATRISTIC  RECOGNITION  OP  THE  PRO 
PAEDEUTIC  OFFICE  OF  GREEK  PHILOSOPHY. 

The  Divine  discipline  of  the  Jews  was,  as  has 
been  seen,  in  nature  essentially  moral.  The  lessons 
which  it  was  designed  to  teach  were  embodied  in 
the  family  and  the  nation.  Yet  this  was  not  in 
itself  a  complete  discipline  of  our  nature.  The 
reason,  no  less  than  the  will  and  the  affections,  had 
an  office  to  discharge  in  preparing  man  for  the 
Incarnation.  The  process  and  the  issue  in  the  two 
cases  were  widely  different,  but  they  were  in  some 
sense  complementary.  Even  in  time  this  relation 
holds  good.  The  divine  kingdom  of  the  Jews  was 
just  overthrown  when  free  speculation  arose  in  the 
Ionian  colonies  of  Asia.  The  teaching  of  the  last 
prophet  nearly  synchronised  with  the  death  of 
Socrates.  All  other  differences  between  the  disci 
pline  of  reason  and  that  of  revelation  are  implicitly 
included  in  their  fundamental  difference  of  method. 
In  the  one,  man  boldly  aspired  at  once  to  God,  in 
the  other,  God  disclosed  Himself  gradually  to  man. 
Philosophy  failed  as  a  religious  teachor  practically 
(Rom.  i.  21,  22),  but  it  bore  noble  witness  to  an 
inward  law  (Rom.  ii.  14,  15).  It  laid  open  in 
stinctive  wants  which  it  could  not  satisfy.  It 
'Jeared  away  error,  when  it  could  not  found  truth. 
It  swayed  the  foremost  minds  of  a  nation,  when  it 
left  the  mass  without  hope.  In  its  purest  and 
grandest  forms  it  was  "  a  schoolmaster  to  bring  men 
to  Christ"  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  §28). 

This  function  of  ancient  philosophy  is  distinctly 
recognised  by  many  of  the  greatest  of  the  fathers. 
The  principle  which  is  involved  in  the  doctrine  of 
Justin  Martyr  on  "  the  Seminal  Word  "  finds  a 
clear  and  systematic  expression  in  Clement  of  Alex 
andria.  (Comp.  Redepenning,  Origenes,  i.  p. 
137-9.)  "  Every  race  of  men  participated  in  the 
Word.  And  they  who  lived  with  the  Word  were 
Christians,  even  if  they  were  held  to  be  godless 
),  as  for  example,  among  the  Greeks,  Socrates 


PHILOSOPHY 

and  Heraclitus,  and  those  like  them  '  (Just.  Mart. 
Ap.  i.  46;  comp.  Ap.  i.  5,  28;  and  ii.  10,  13). 
"  Philosophy,"  says  Clement,  "  before  the  coming  of 
the  Lord,  was  necessary  to  Greeks  for  righteousness  ; 
and  now  it  proves  useful  for  godliness,  being  in 
some  sort  a  preliminary  discipline  (irpoiraiStta  TIS 
oiffa)  for  those  who  reap  the  fruits  of  the  faith 
through  demonstration.  .  .  .  Perhaps  we  may  say 
that  it  was  given  to  the  Greeks  with  this  special 
object  (irpoijyovfjifvtaf),  for  it  brought  (tiraitia- 
7(6761)  the  Greek  nation  to  Christ,  as  the  Law 
brought  the  Hebrews"  (Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  i.  5, 
§28 ;  comp.  9,  §43,  and  16,  §80).  In  this  sense 
he  doef  uot  scruple  to  say  that  "  Philosophy  was 
given  as  a  peculiar  testament  (SiaB^miv)  to  the 
Greeks,  as  forming  the  basis  of  the  Christian  philo 
sophy  "(S^rom.  vi.  8,  §67;  comp.  5,  §41).  Origen, 
himself  a  pupil  of  Ammonius  Saccas,  speaks  with  less 
precision  as  to  the  educational  power  of  Philosophy, 
but  his  whole  works  bear  witness  to  its  influence. 
The  truths  which  philosophers  taught,  he  says,  re 
ferring  to  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  were  from  God,  for 
"  God  manifested  these  to  them,  and  all  things  that 
have  been  nobly  said"  (c.  Gels.  vi.  3;  Philoc.  15). 
Augustine,  while  depreciating  the  claims  of  the 
great  Gentile  teachers,  allows  that  "  some  of  them 
made  great  discoveries,  so  far  as  they  received  help 
from  Heaven,  while  they  erred  as  far  as  they  were 
hindered  by  human  frailty "  (Aug.  De  Civ.  ii.  7 ; 
comp.  De  Doctr.  Chr.  ii.  18).  They  had,  as  he 
elsewhere  says,  a  distant  vision  of  the  truth,  and 
learnt  from  the  teaching  of  nature  what  prophet* 
learnt  from  the  Spirit  (Serm.  Ixviii.  3,  cxl.  &c.). 

But  while  many  thus  recognised  in  Philosophy 
the  free  witness  of  the  Word  speaking  among  men, 
the  same  writers  in  other  pkces  sought  to  explain 
the  partial  harmony  of  Philosophy  and  Revelation 
by  an  original  connexion  of  the  two.  This  attempt, 
which  in  the  light  of  a  clearer  criticism  is  seen  tc 
be  essentially  fruitless  and  even  suicidal,  was  a< 
least  more  plausible  in  the  first  centuries.  A  mul 
titude  of  writings  were  then  current  bearing  the 
names  of  the  Sibyl  or  Hystaspes,  which  were  obvi 
ously  based  on  the  O.  T.  Scriptures,  and  as  long  as 
they  were  received  as  genuine  it  was  impossible  to 
doubt  that  Jewish  doctrines  were  spread  in  the  West 
before  the  rise  of  Philosophy.  And  on  the  othei 
hand,  when  the  Fathers  ridicule  with  the  bitterest 
scorn  the  contradictions  and  errors  of  philosophers, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  they  spoke  often  fresh 
from  a  conflict  with  degenerate  professors  of  systems 
which  had  long  lost  all  real  life.  Some,  indeed, 
there  were,  chiefly  among  the  Latins,  who  con 
sistently  inveighed  against  Philosophy.  But  even 
Tertullian,  who  is  among  its  fiercest  adversaries, 
allows  that  at  times  the  philosophers  hit  upon 
truth  by  a  happy  chance  or  blind  good  fortune,  and 
yet  more  by  that  "  general  feeling  with  which  God 
was  pleased  to  endow  the  soul "  (Tert.  De  An.  2). 
The  use  which  was  made  of  heathen  speculation  by 
heretical  writers  was  one  great  cause  of  its  dis 
paragement  by  their  catholic  antagonists.  Irenaeus 
endeavours  to  reduce  the  Guostic  teachers  to  a 
dilemma :  either  the  philosophers  with  whom  they 
argued  knew  the  truth  or  they  did  not ;  if  they  did, 
the  Incarnation  was  superfluous;  if  they  did  not, 
whence  comes  the  agreement  of  the  true  and  the 
false?  (Ado.  Haer.  ii.  14,  7).  Hippolytus  follows 
out  the  connexion  of  different  sects  with  earlier 
teachers  in  elaborate  detail.  Tertullian,  with  cha 
racteristic  energy,  declares  that  "  Philosonhy  fur 
nishes  the  amis  and  the  subjects  of  herety  Wh? 


PHILOSOPHY 

(he  asks)  has  Athens  in  common  with  Jerusalem  f 
the  Academy  with  the  Church  ?  heretics  with 
Christians?  Our  training  is  from  the  Porch  of 
Solomon.  .  .  .  Let  those  look  to  it  who  bring  for 
ward  a  Stoic,  a  Platonic,  a  dialectic  Christianity. 
We  have  no  need  of  curious  inquiries  after  the 
coming  of  Christ  Jesus,  nor  of  investigation  after 
the  Gospel "  (Tert.  De  Praescr.  Haer.  7). 

This  variety  of  judgment  in  the  heat  of  contro 
versy  was  inevitable.  The  full  importance  of  the 
history  of  ancient  Philosophy  was  then  first  seen 
when  all  rivalry  was  over,  and  it  became  possible 
to  contemplate  it  as  a  whole,  animated  by  a  great 
law,  ol'ten  trembling  on  the  verge  of  Truth,  and 
sometimes  by  a  "  bold  venture  "  claiming  the  heri 
tage  of  Faith.  Yet  even  now  the  relations  of  the 
"  two  old  covenants  " — Philosophy  and  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures — to  use  the  language  of  Clement — have 
been  traced  only  imperfectly.  What  has  been  done 
may  encourage  labour,  but  it  does  not  supersede  it. 
In  the  porticoes  of  Eastern  churches  Pythagoras 
and  Plato  are  pictured  among  those  who  prepared 
the  way  for  Christianity  (Stanley,  p.  41)  ;  but  in 
the  West,  Sibyls  and  not  Philosophers  are  the  chosen 
representatives  of  the  divine  element  in  Gentile 
teaching. 

III.  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  GREEK  PHILOSOPHY. 

The  complete  fitness  of  Greek  Philosophy  to  per 
form  this  propaedeutic  office  for  Christianity,  as  an 
exhaustive  effort  of  reason  to  solve  the  great  pro 
blems  of  being,  must  be  apparent  after  a  detailed 
f-tudy  of  its  progress  and  consummation ;  and  even 
the  simplest  outline  of  its  history  cannot  fail  to 
preserve  the  leading  traits  of  the  natural  (or  even 
necessary)  law  by  which  its  development  was 
governed. 

The  various  attempts  which  have  been  made  to 
derive  Western  Philosophy  from  Eastern  sources 
have  signally  failed.  The  external  evidence  in  favour 
of  this  opinion  is  wholly  insufficient  to  establish  it 
(Ritter,  Gesch.  d.  Phil.  i.  159  &c. ;  Thirl  wall,  Hist, 
of  Gr.  ii.  130;  Zeller,  Gesch.  d.  Phil.  d.  Griechen, 
i.  18-34;  Max  Miiller,  On  Language,  84note),  and 
on  internal  grounds  it  is  most  improbable.  It  is 
true  that  in  some  degree  the  character  of  Greek 
speculation  may  have  been  influenced,  at  least  in  its 
earliest  stages,  by  religious  ideas  which  were  ori 
ginally  introduced  from  the  East ;  but  this  indirect 
influence  does  not  affect  the  real  originality  of  the 
great  Greek  teachers.  The  spirit  of  pure  philosophy 
is  (as  has  been  already  seen)  wholly  alien  from 
Eastern  thought ;  and  it  was  comparatively  late 
when  even  a  Greek  ventured  to  separate  philosophy 
from  religion.  But  in  Greece  the  separation,  when 
it  was  once  effected,  remained  essentially  complete. 
The  opinions  of  the  ancient  philosophers  might  or 
might  not  be  outwardly  reconcileable  with  the 
popular  faith ;  but  philosophy  and  faith  were  in 
dependent.  The  very  value  of  Greek  teaching  lies 
in  the  fact  that  it  was,  as  tar  as  is  possible,  a  result 
of  simple  Reason,  or,  if  Faith  asserts  its  prerogative, 
the  distinction  is  sharply  marked.  In  this  we  have 
a  record  of  the  power  and  weakness  of  tne  human 
mind  written  nt  once  on  the  grandest  scale  and  in 
the  fairest  characters. 

Of  the  various  classifications  of  the  Greek  schools 
which  have  been  proposed  the  simplest  and  truest 
aeetns  to  be  that  which  divides  the  history  of  Phi 
losophy  into  three  great  periods,  the  first  reaching 
to  the  era  of  the  Sophists,  the  next  to  the  death  of 
Aristotle,  the  third  to  the  Christian  era.  In  the 


PHILOSOPHY  85.1 

first  period  the  world  objectively  is  the  gieat  centie 
of  inquiry,  in  the  second,  the  "ideas"  of  things, 
truth,  and  being;  in  the  third,  the  chief  interest  of 
philosophy  falls  back  upon  the  practical  conduct  ot 
life.  Successive  systems  overlap  each  other,  bot.1' 
in  time  and  subjects  of  speculation,  but  broadly  the 
sequence  which  has  been  indicated  will  hold  good 
(Zeller,  Die  Philosophic  der  Griechcn,  i.  Ill  &c.). 
Alter  the  Christian  era  philosophy  ceased  to  have 
any  true  vitality  in  Greece,  but  it  made  fresh  efforts 
to  meet  the  changed  conditions  of  life  at  Alexandria 
and  Rome.  At  Alexandria  Platonism  was  vivified 
by  the  spirit  of  Oriental  mysticism,  and  afterwards 
of  Christianity:  at  Home  Stoicism  was  united  with 
the  vigorous  virtues  of  active  life.  Each  of  these 
great  divisions  must  be  passed  in  rapid  review. 

1.  The  pre-Socratic  Schools.— The  first  Greek 
philosophy  was  little  more  than  an  attempt  to 
follow  out  in  thought  the  mythic  cosmogonies  of 
earlier  poets.  Gradually  the  depth  and  variety  of 
the  problems  included  in  the  idea  of  a  cosmogony 
became  apparent,  and,  after  each  clue  had  been 
followed  out,  the  peiiod  ended  in  the  negative 
teaching  of  the  Sophists.  The  questions  of  creation, 
of  the  immediate  relation  of  mind  and  matter,  were 
pronounced  in  fact,  if  not  in  word,  insoluble,  and 
speculation  was  turned  into  a  new  direction. 

What  is  the  one  permanent  element  which  under 
lies  the  changing  forms  of  things  ? — this  was  the 
primary  inquiry  to  which  the  Ionic  school  endea 
voured  to  find  an  answer.  THALES  (cir.  B.C.  610- 
625),  following,  as  it  seems,  the  genealogy  of 
Hesiod,  pointed  to  moisture  (water)  as  the  one 
source  and  supporter  of  life.  ANAXIMENES  (cir. 
B.C.  5?0-480)  substituted  air  for  water,  as  the  more 
subtle  and  all-pervading  element ;  but  equally  with 
Thales  he  neglected  all  consideration  of  the  force 
which  might  be  supposed  to  modify  the  one  primal 
substance.  At  a  much  later  date  (cir.  B.C.  450) 
DIOGENES  of  Apollonia,  to  meet  this  difficulty, 
represented  this  elementary  "  air "  as  endowed 
with  intelligence  (yoijffis),  but  even  he  makes  no 
distinction  between  the  material  and  the  intelligent. 
The  atomic  theory  of  DEMOCRITDS  (cir.  B.C.  460- 
357),  which  stands  in  close  connexicn  with  this 
form  of  Ionic  teaching,  offered  another  and  mcie 
plausible  solution.  The  motion  of  his  atoms  in 
cluded  the  action  of  force,  but  he  wholly  omitted 
to  account  for  its  source.  Meanwhile  another 
mode  of  speculation  had  arisen  in  the  same  school, 
In  place  of  one  definite  element  ANAXIMANDER 
(B.C.  610-547)  suggested  the  unlimited  (rb  &irftpoi/) 
as  the  adequate  origin  of  all  special  existences.  Anc 
somewhat  more  than  a  century  later  ANAXAGORAS 
summed  up  the  result  of  such  a  line  of  speculation : 
"  All  things  were  together;  then  mind  (vovs)  came 
and  disposed  them  in  order  "  (Diog.  Laert.  ii.  6). 
Thus  we  are  left  face  to  face  with  an  ultimate 
dualism. 

The  Eleatic  school  started  from  an  opposite 
point  of  view.  Thales  saw  moisture  present  in  ma 
terial  things,  and  pronounced  this  to  be  their  fun 
damental  principle:  XENOPHANES  (cir.  B.C.  530- 
50)  "  looked  up  to  the  whole  heaven  and  said  that 
the  One  is  God"  (Arist.  Met.  i.  5,  rt>  tv  tiva.1 
<£TJ<TJ  T^>V  Ot6v).  "  Thales  saw  gods  in  all  things: 
Xenophanes  saw  all  things  in  God "  (Thirlwall, 
Hist,  of  Gr.  ii.  136).  That  which  is,  according  to 
Xenophanes,  must  be  one,  eternal,  infinite,  immo 
vable,  unchangeable.  PARMENIDES  of  Elea  (B.C. 
500)  substituted  abstract,  "  being  "  for  "  God  "  in 
the  system  of  Xenophanes,  and  distinguished  with 


854 


PHILOSOPHY 


precision  the  functions  of  sense  and  reason.  Sense 
teaches  us  of  "  the  many,"  the  false  (phenomena) : 
Reason  of  "  the  one,"  the  true  (the  absolute).  ZENO 
of  Elea  (cir.  ii.C.  450)  developed  with  logical  inge 
nuity  the  contradictions  involved  in  our  perceptions 
of  things  (in  the  idea'  of  motion,  for  instance),  and 
thus  formally  prepared  the  way  for  scepticism.  If 
the  one  alone  is,  the  phenomenal  world  is  an 
illusion.  The  sublime  aspiration  of  Xenophane:1-, 
when  followed  out  legitimately  to  its  consequent  s, 
ended  in  blank  negation. 

The  teaching  of  HERACLITUS  (B.C.  500)  offers  a 
complete  contrast  to  that  of  the  Eleatics,  and 
stands  far  in  advance  of  the  earlier  Ionic  school, 
with  which  he  is  historically  connected.  So  far 
tVom  contrasting  the  existent  and  the  phenomenal, 
he  boldly  identified  being  with  change.  "  There 
ever  was,  and  is,  and  shall  be,  an  everliving  fire, 
unceasingly  kindled  and  extinguished  in  due  mea 
sure  "  (airr6/jt(vov  fjitrpa.  KOI  o-voff^fwufjifvov 
utrpa,  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  v.  14,  §105).  Rest 
and  continuance  is  death.  That  which  is  is  the 
instantaneous  balance  of  contending  powers  (Diog. 
Laert.  ix.  7,  Sta,  rf/s  evavnorpoirris  ripfj.6<r6ai  TCI 
Hfrct).  Creation  is  the  play  of  the  Creator. 
Everywhere,  as  fiir  as  his  opinions  can  be  grasped, 
Heraclitus  makes  noble  "  guesses  at  truth  ;"  yet  he 
eaves  "fate"  (e«/xap/ci«'zT/)  as  the  supreme  creator 
(Stob.  Eel.  \.  p.  59,  ap.  Ritter  &  Preller,  §42). 
The  cycles  of  lite  and  death  run  on  by  its  lav .  It 
may  have  been  by  a  natural  reaction  that  from 
these  wider  speculations  he  turned  his  thoughts 
inwards.  "  I  investigated  myself,"  he  says,  with 
conscious  pride  (PI tit.  ado.  Col.  11} 8,  c.)  ;  and  in 
this  respect  he  foreshadows  the  teaching  of  Socrates, 
as  Zeno  did  that  of  the  Sophists. 

The  philosophy  of  PYTHAGORAS  (cir.  B.C.  840- 
510)  is  subordinate  in  interest  to  his  social  and 
political  theories,  though  it  supplies  a  link  in  the 
course  of  speculation  ;  others  had  laboured  to  trace 
a  unity  in  the  world  in  the  presence  of  one  underly 
ing  element  or  in  the  idea  of  a  whole ;  he  sought  to 
combine  the  separate  harmony  of  parts  with  total 
unity.  Numerical  unity  includes  the  finite  and 
the  infinite ;  and  in  the  relations  of  number  there 
is  a  perfect  symmetry,  as  all  spring  out  of  the 
fundamental  unit.  Thus  numbers  seemed  to  Pytha 
goras  to  be  not  only  "  patterns  "  of  things  (r&v 
otnuv),  but  causes  of  their  being  (TTJS  ou<r/os). 
How  he  connected  numbers  with  concrete  being  it 
is  impossible  to  determine;  but  it  may  not  be 
wholly  fanciful  to  see  in  the  doctrine  of  transmi 
gration  of  souls  an  attempt  to  trace  in  the  succes 
sive  forms  of  life  an  outward  expression  of  a 
harmonious  law  in  the  moral  as  well  as  in  the 
physical  world.  (The  remains  of  the  pre-Socratic 
philosophers  have  been  collected  in  a  very  con 
venient  form  by  F.  Mullach  in  Didot's  Biblioth.  Gr., 
Paris,  1860.) 

The  first  cycle  of  philosophy  was  thus  com 
pleted.  All  the  great  primary  problems  of  thought 
had  been  stated,  and  typical  answers  rendered. 
The  relation  of  spirit  and  matter  was  still  unsolved. 
Speculation  issued  in  dualism  (Anaxagoras),  mate 
rialism  (Democritus),  or  pantheism  (Xenophanes). 
On  one  side  reason  was  made  the  sole  criterion  of 
truth  (Parmenides)  ;  on  the  other,  experience  (Hera 
clitus).  As  yet  there  was  no  rest,  and  the  Sophists 
piepared  the  way  for  a  new  method. 

Whatever  may  be  the  moral  estimate  which  is 
formed  of  the  Sophists,  there  can  be  little  doubt  as  [ 
to  the  importance  of  their  teaching  as  preparatory  i 


PHILOSOPHY 

to  that  of  Socrates.  All  attempts  to  arrive  at 
certainty  by  a  study  of  the  world  had  failed  :  might 
it  not  seem,  then,  that  truth  is  subjective?  "  Mau 
ii  the  measure  of  all  things."  Sensations  are 
modified  by  the  individual ;  and  may  net  this  hold 
good  universally  ?  The  conclusion  was  applied  to 
morals  and  politics  with  fearless  skill.  The  belief 
in  absolute  truth  and  right  was  well-nigh  banished  ; 
but  meanwhile  the  Sophists  were  perfecting  thf 
instrument  which  was  to  be  turned  against  them. 
Language,  in  their  hands,  acquired  a  precision 
unknown  before,  when  words  assumed  the  place  of 
things.  Plato  might  ridicule  the  pedantry  of  Pro 
tagoras,  but  Socrates  reaped  a  rich  harvest  from  it. 

2.  The  Socratic  Schools. — lu  the  second  period 
of  Greek  philosophy  the  scene  and  subject  were 
both  changed.  Athens  became  the  centre  of  specula 
tions  which  had  hitherto  chiefly  found  a  home 
among  the  more  mixed  populations  of  the  colonies. 
And  at  the  same  time  inquiry  was  turned  from  the 
outward  world  to  the  inward,  from  theories  of  the 
origin  and  relation  of  things  to  theories  of  our 
knowledge  of  them.  A  philosophy  of  ideas,  using 
the  term  in  its  widest  sense,  succeeded  a  philosophy 
of  nature.  In  three  generations  Greek  speculation 
reached  its  greatest  glory  in  the  teaching  of  Socrates, 
Plato,  and  Aristotle.  When  the  sovereignty  of 
Greece  ceased,  all  higher  philosophy  ceased  with  it. 
In  the  hopeless  turmoil  of  civil  disturbances  which 
followed,  men's  thoughts  were  chiefly  directed  to 
questions  of  personal  duty. 

The  famous  sentence  in  which  Aristotle  (Met. 
M.  4)  characterizes  the  teaching  of  SOCRATES  (B.C. 
468-399)  places  his  scientific  position  in  the  clearest 
light.  There  are  two  things,  he  says,  which  we  may 
rightly  attribute  to  Socrates,  inductive  reasoning, 
and  general  definition  (TOUJ  T' firaKTiitovs  \6yovt 
Kal  rb  upi£fff6ai  Kad6\ov}.  By  the  first  he  endea 
voured  to  discover  the  permanent  element  which 
underlies  the  changing  forms  of  appearances  and 
the  varieties  of  opinion :  by  the  second  he  fixed  the 
truth  which  he  had  thus  gained.  But,  besides  this, 
Socrates  rendered  another  service  to  truth.  He 
changed  not  only  the  method  but  also  the  subject 
of  philosophy  (Cic.  Acad.  Post.  i.  4).  Ethics 
occupied  in  his  investigations  the  primary  place 
which  had  hitherto  been  held  by  Physics.  The 
great  aim  of  his  induction  was  to  establish  the 
sovereignty  of  Virtue;  and  before  entering  on  other 
speculations  he  determined  to  obey  the  Delphian 
maxim  and  "know  himself"  (Plat.  Phaedr.  229). 
It  was  a  necessary  consequence  of  a  first  effort  in 
this  direction  that  Socrates  regarded  all  the  results 
which  he  derived  as  like  in  kind.  Knowledge 
(fTriffrfipi])  was  equally  absolute  and  authoritative, 
whether  it  referred  to  the  laws  of  intellectual 
operations  or  to  questions  of  morality.  A  conclu 
sion  in  geometry  and  a  conclusion  on  conduct  wer» 
set  forth  as  true  in  the  same  sense.  Thus  vice  was 
only  another  name  for  ignorance  (Xen.  Mem.  iii. 
9,  4 ;  Arist.  Eth.  Eitd.  i.  5).  Everyone  was  sup 
posed  to  have  within  him  a  faculty  absolutely 
leading  to  right  action,  just  as  the  mind  necessarily 
decides  rightly  as  to  relations  of  space  and  number, 
when  each  step  in  the  proposition  is  clearly  stated. 
Socrates  practically  neglected  the  detenni native 
power  of  the  will.  His  great  glory  was,  however, 
clearly  connected  with  this  fundamental  error  in  his 
system.  He  affirmed  the  existence  of  a  universal 
law  of  right  and  wrong.  He  connected  philosophy 
with  action,  both  in  detail  and  in  general.  On  the 
one  sidr  he  upheld  the  supremacy  of  Conscience,  ot 


PHILOSOPHY 

ih«  other  the  working  of  Providence.  Not  the 
least  fruitful  characteristic  of  his  teaching  was 
what  may  be  called  ite  desultoriness.  He  formed 
no  complete  system.  He  wrote  nothing.  He 
attracted  and  impressed  his  readers  by  his  many- 
sUed  nature.  He  helped  others  to  give  birth  to 
thoughts,  to  use  his  favourite  image,  but  he  was 
barren  himself  (Plat.  Theaet.  p.  150).  As  a 
result  of  this,  the  most  conflicting  opinions  were 
maintained  by  some  of  his  professed  followers  who 
carried  out  isolated  fragments  of  his  teaching  to 
extreme  conclusions.  Some  adopted  his  method 
(Euclides,  cir.  B.C.  400,  the  Megarians) ;  others  his 
subject.  Of  the  latter,  one  section,  following  out 
his  proposition  of  the  identity  of  self-commaiid 
(iyicpdrtia)  with  virtue,  professed  an  utter  disregard 
of  everything  material  (Antisthenes,  cir.  B.C.  366, 
the  Cynics),  while  the  other  (Aristippus,  cir.  B.C. 
366,  the  Cyrenaics),  inverting  the  maxim  that 
virtue  is  necessarily  accompanied  by  pleasure,  took 
immediate  pleasure  as  the  rule  of  action. 

These  "  minor  Socratic  schools  "  were,  however, 
premature  and  imperfect  developments.  The  truths 
which  they  distorted  were  embodied  at  a  later  time 
in  more  reasonable  forms.  PLATO  alone  (B.C.  430- 
347),  by  the  breadth  and  nobleness  of  his  teaching, 
was  the  true  successor  of  Socrates  ;  with  fuller  detail 
and  greater  elaborateness  of  parts,  his  philosophy 
was  as  manysided  as  that  of  his  master.  Thus  it 
is  impossible  to  construct  a  consistent  Platonic 
system,  though  many  Platonic  doctrines  are  suffi 
ciently  marked.  Plato,  indeed,  possessed  two  com 
manding  powers,  which,  though  apparently  incom 
patible,  are  in  the  highest  sense  complementary :  a 
matchless  destructive  dialectic,  and  a  creative  imagi 
nation.  By  the  first  he  refuted  the  great  fallacies 
of  the  Sophists  on  the  uncertainty  of  knowledge  and 
right,  carrying  out  in  this  the  attacks  of  Socrates ; 
by  the  other  he  endeavoured  to  bridge  over  the 
interval  between  appearance  and  reality,  and  gain  an 
approach  to  the  eternal.  His  famous  doctrines  of 
Ideas  and  Recollection  (accfytj'Tjfm)  are  a  solution  by 
imagination  of  a  logical  difficulty.  Socrates  had 
shown  the  existence  of  general  notions ;  Plato  felt 
constrained  to  attribute  to  them  a  substantive 
existence  (Arist.  Met.  M.  4).  A  glorious  vision 
gave  completeness  to  his  view.  The  unembodied 
spirits  were  exhibited  in  immediate  presence  of  the 
"  ideas "  of  things  (Phaedr.  247) ;  the  law  of 
their  embodiment  was  sensibly  portrayed  ;  and  the 
more  or  less  vivid  remembrance  of  supramundane 
realities  in  this  life  was  traced  to  antecedent  facts. 
All  men  were  thus  supposed  to  have  been  face  to 
face  with  Truth :  the  object  of  teaching  was  to 
bring  back  impressions  latent  but  uneffaced. 

The  "myths"  of  Plato,  to  one  of  the  most 
famous  of  which  reference  has  just  been  made,  play 
a  most  important  part  in  his  system.  They  answer 
in  the  philosopher  to  Faith  in  the  Christian.  In 
dealing  with  immortality  and  judgment  he  leaves 
the  way  of  reason,  and  ventures,  as  he  says,  on  a 
rude  raft  to  brave  the  dangers  of  the  ocean  (Phaed. 
85  D  ;  Gorg.  523  A).  "  The  peril  and  the  prize 
are  noble  and  the  hope  is  great "  (Phaed.  1 14, 
C,  J"-\  Such  tales,  he  admits,  may  seem  puerile 
ind  ridiculous ;  and  if  there  were  other  surer  and 
clearer  means  of  gaining  the  desired  end,  the  judg 
ment  would  be  just  (Gorg.  527  A).  But,  as  it  is, 
thus  only  can  he  connect  the  seen  and  the  unseen. 
The  myths,  then,  mark  the  limit  of  his  dialectics. 
They  are  not  merely  a  poetical  picture  of  truth 
already  gained,  or  a  popular  illustration  of  ms> 


PHILOSOPHY 


855 


teaching,  but  real  efforts  to  penetrate  beyond  tht 
depths  of  argument.  They  show  that  his  method 
was  not  commensurate  with  his  instinct. ve  desires; 
and  point  out  in  intelligible  outlines  the  subjects  on 
which  man  looks  for  revelation.  Such  are  the 
relations  of  the  human  mind  to  truth  (Phaedr.  246- 
249) ;  the  pre-existence  and  immortality  of  the 
s«ul  (Meno,  81-3  ;  Phaedr.  110-2;  Tim.  41); 
the  state  of  future  retribution  (Gorg.  523-5:  Rep. 
x.  614-6) ;  the  revolutions  of  the  world  (Polit.  269 
Compare  also  Sympos.  189-91 ;  203-5 ;  Zeller, 
Philos.  d.  Griech.  361-3,  who  gives  the  literature  of 
the  subject). 

The  great  difference  between  Plato  and  ARISTOTLE 
(B.C.  384-322)  lies  in  the  use  which  Plato  thus  made 
of  imagination  as  the  exponent  of  instinct.  The  dia 
lectic  of  Plato  is  not  interior  to  that  of  Aristotle, 
and  Aristotle  exhibits  traces  of  poetic  power  net 
unworthy  of  Plato ;  but  Aristotle  never  allows 
imagination  to  influence  his -final  decision.  He 
elaborated  a  perfect  method,  and  he  used  it  with 
perfect  fairness.  His  writings,  if  any,  contain  the 
highest  utterance  of  pure  reason.  Looking  back  011 
all  the  earlier  efforts  of  philosophy,  he  pronounced 
a  calm  and  final  judgment.  For  him  many  of  the 
conclusions  which  others  had  maintained  were 
valueless,  because  he  showed  that  they  rested  on 
feeling,  and  not  on  argument.  This  stern  severity 
of  logic  gives  an  indescribable  pathos  to  those 
passages  in  which  he  touches  on  the  highest  hopes 
of  men ;  and  perhaps  there  is  no  more  truly  affect 
ing  chapter  in  ancient  literature  than  that  in  which 
he  states  in  a  few  unimpassioned  sentences  the  issue 
of  his  inquiry  into  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 
Part  of  it  may  be  immortal,  but  that  part  is  im 
personal  (De  An.  iii.  5).  This  was  the  sentence 
of  reason,  and  he  gives  expression  to  it  without 
a  word  of  protest,  and  yet  as  one  who  knew  the 
extent  of  the  sacrifice  which  it  involved.  The 
conclusion  is,  as  it  were,  the  epitaph  of  free  specu 
lation.  Laws  of  observation  and  argument,  rules 
of  action,  principles  of  government  remain,  but 
there  is  no  hope  beyond  the  grave. 

It  follows  necessarily  that  the  Platonic  doctrine  ol 
ideas  was  emphatically  rejected  by  Aristotle,  who 
gave,  however,  the  final  development  to  the  original 
conception  of  Socrates.  With  Socrates  "  ideas '' 
(general  definitions)  were  mere  abstractions;  with 
Plato  they  had  an  absolute  existence ;  with  Aristotl* 
they  had  no  existence  separate  from  things  in  which 
they  were  realized,  though  the  form  (jiop^-fi],  whicL 
answers  to  the  Platonic  idea,  was  held  to  be  the 
essence  of  the  thing  itself  (comp.  Zeller,  Philos.  d. 
Griech.  i.  119,  120). 

There  is  one  feature  common  in  essence  to  the 
systems  of  Plato  and  Aristotle  which  has  not  yet 
been  noticed.  In  both,  Ethics  is  a  part  of  Politics. 
The  citizen  is  prior  to  the  man.  In  Plato  this 
doctrine  finds  its  most  extravagant  development  in 
theory,  though  his  life,  and,  in  some  places,  his 
teaching,  were  directly  opposed  to  it  (e.  g.  Gorg. 
p.  527  D).  This  practical  inconsequence  was  due,  it 
may  be  supposed,  to  the  condition  of  Athens  at  the 
time,  for  the  idea  was  in  complete  harmony  with 
the  national  feeling ;  and,  in  fact,  the  absolute 
subordination  of  the  individual  to  the  body  includes 
one  of  the  chief  lessons  of  the  ancient  world.  In 
Aristotle  the  "  political "  character  of  man  is 
defined  with  greater  precision,  and  brought  within 
narrower  limits.  The  breaking-up  of  the  small  Greek 
states  had  prepared  the  way  for  more  "lomprehen- 
cive  views  of  human  fellowship,  without  destroying 


856 


PHILOSOPHY 


the  fundamental  truth  of  the  necessity  of  social 
union  for  perfect  life.  But  in  the  next  generation 
this  was  lost.  The  wars  of  the  Succession  obliterated 
the  idea  of  society,  and  Philosophy  was  content  with 
timing  at  individual  happiness. 

The  coming  change  was  indicated  by  the  rise  of  a 
school  of  sceptics.  The  scepticism  of  the  Sophists 
marked  the  close  of  the  first  period,  and  in  like 
manner  the  scepticism  of  the  Pyrrhonists  marks  the 
close  of  the  second  (SriLPO,  cir.  B.C.  290 ;  PYR- 
RHON,  cir.  B.C.  290).  But  the  Pyrrhonists  rendered 
no  positive  service  to  the  cause  of  Philosophy,  as  the 
Sophists  did  by  the  refinement  of  language.  Their 
immediate  influence  was  limited  in  its  range,  and  it 
is  oniy  as  a  symptom  that  the  rise  of  the  school  is 
important.  But  in  this  respect  it  foreshows  the 
character  of  after-Philosophy  by  denying  the  foun 
dation  of  all  higher  speculations.  Thus  all  interest 
was  turned  to  questions  of  practical  morality. 
Hifaertc  morality  had  been  based  as  a  science  upon 
mental  analysis,  but  by  the  Pyrrhonists  it  was 
made  subservient  to  law  and  custom.  Immediate 
experience  was  held  to  be  the  rule  of  life  (comp. 
Ritter  and  Preller,  §350). 

3.  The  post-Socratic  Schools. — After  Aristotle, 
Philosophy,  as  has  been  already  noticed,  took  a  new 
direction.  The  Socratic  schools  were,  as  has  been 
shown,  connected  by  a  common  pursuit  of  the  perma 
nent  element  which  underlies  phenomena.  Socrates 
placed  Virtue,  truth  in  action,  in  a  knowledge  of 
the  ideas  of  things.  Plato  went  further,  and  main 
tained  that  these  ideas  are  alone  truly  existent. 
Aristotle,  though  differing  in  terms,  yet  only  fol 
lowed  in  the  same  direction,  when  he  attributed  to 
Form,  not  an  independent  existence,  but  a  fashion 
ing,  vivifying  power  in  all  individual  objects.  But 
from  this  point  speculation  took  a  mainly  personal 
direction.  Philosophy,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 
word,  ceased  to  exist.  This  was  due  both  to  the 
circumstances  of  the  time  and  to  the  exhaustion 
consequent  on  the  failure  of  the  Socratic  method  to 
solve  the  deep  mysteries  of  being.  Aristotle  had, 
indeed,  laid  the  wide  foundations  of  an  inductive 
system  of  physics,  but  few  were  inclined  to  continue 
his  work.  The  physical  theories  which  were  brought 
forward  were  merely  adaptations  from  earlier  phi 
losophers. 

In  dealing  with  moral  questions  two  opposite 
systems  are  possible,  and  have  found  advocates  in 
nil  ages.  On  the  one  side  it  may  be  said  that  the 
chai-acter  of  actions  is  to  be  judged  by  their  results  ; 
on  the  other,  that  it  is  to  be  sought  only  in  the 
actions  themselves.  Pleasure  is  the  test  of  right 
in  one  case ;  an  assumed,  or  discovered,  law  of  our 
nature  in  the  other.  If  the  world  were  perfect  and 
the  balance  of  human  faculties  undisturbed,  it  is 
evident  that  both  systems  would  give  identical 
results.  As  it  is,  there  is  a  tendency  to  error  on 
each  side,  which  is  clearly  seen  in  the  rival  schools 
of  the  Epicureans  and  Stoics,  who  practically  divided 
the  suffrages  of  the  mass  of  educated  men  in  the 
centuries  before  and  after  the  Christian  era. 

EPICURUS  (B.C.  352-270)  defined  the  object  of 
Philosophy  to  be  the  attainment  of  a  happy  life. 
The  pursuit  of  truth  for  its  own  sake  he  regarded 
as  superfluous.  He  rejected  dialectics  as  a  useless 
study,  and  accepted  the  senses,  in  the  widest  ac 
ceptation  of  the  term  [EPICUREANS,  i.  570],  as 
the  criterion  of  truth.  Physics  he  subordinated 


PHILOSOPHY 

entirely  to  Ethics  (Cic.  de  Fin.  i.  7).  Bat  ho 
differed  widely  from  the  Cyrenaics  in  his  view  of 
happiness.  The  happiness  at  which  the  wise  man 
aims  is  to  be  found,  he  said,  not  in  momentary 
gratification,  but  in  lifelong  pleasure.  It  does  not 
consist  necessarily  in  excitement  or  motion,  but 
often  in  absolute  tranquillity  (&-rapa£la).  "  The 
wise  man  is  happy  even  on  the  rack  "  (Diog.  Laert. 
x.  118),  for  "virtue  alone  is  inseparable  from  plea 
sure"  (id.  138).  To  live  happily  and  to  live 
wisely,  nobly,  and  justly,  are  convertible  phrases 
(id.  140).  But  it  followed  as  a  corollary  from  his 
view  of  happiness,  that  the  Gods,  who  were  assumed 
to  be  supremely  happy  and  eternal,  were  absolutely 
free  from  the  distractions  and  emotions  consequent 
on  any  care  for  the  world  or  man  (id.  139;  comp. 
Lucr.  ii.  645-7).  All  thing?  were  supposed  to  come 
into  being  by  chance,  and  so  pass  away ;  and  the 
study  of  Nature  was  chiefly  useful  as  dispelling  the 
superstitious  fears  of  the  Gods  and  death  by  which 
the  multitude  are  tormented.  It  is  obvious  how 
such  teaching  would  degenerate  in  practice.  The 
individual  was  left  master  of  his  own  life,  free  from 
all  regard  to  any  higher  law  than  a  refined  selfish 
ness. 

While  Epicurus  asserted  in  this  manner  the  claims 
of  one  part  of  man's  nature  in  the  conduct  of  life, 
ZENO  of  Citium  (cir.  B.C.  280),  with  equal  partiality, 
advocated  a  purely  spiritual  (intellectual)  morality. 
The  opposition  between  the  two  was  complete.  The 
infinite,  chance-formed  worlds  of  the  one  stand  over 
against  the  one  harmonious  world  of  the  other.  On 
the  one  side  are  Gods  regardless  of  material  things, 
on  the  other  a  Being  permeating  and  vivifying  all 
creation.  This  difference  necessarily  found  its  chiet 
expression  in  Ethics.  For  when  the  Stoics  taught 
that  there  were  only  two  principles  of  things,  Matter 
(rb  irdffxov),  and  God,  Fate,  Reason — for  the  names 
were  many  by  which  it  was  fashioned  and  quickened 
(TO  votovv} — it  followed  that  the.  active  principle 
in  man  is  of  Divine  origin,  and  that  his  duty  is  to 
live  conformably  to  nature  (rb  dpo\oyov/j.fvuis  [ry 
fyvffei]  (fiv).  By  "  Nature  "  some  understood  the 
nature  of  man,  others  the  nature  of  the  universe ; 
but  both  agreed  in  regarding  it  as  a  general  law  of 
the  whole,  and  not  particular  passions  or  impulses. 
Good,  therefore,  was  but  one.  All  external  things 
were  indifferent.  Reason  was  the  absolute  sovereign 
of  man.  Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  Stoics,  like  thai 
of  Epicurus,  practically  left  man  to  himself.  But 
it  was  worse  in  its  final  results  than  Epicurism,  for 
it  made  him  his  own  god.» 

In  one  point  the  Epicureans  and  Stoics  were 
agreed.  They  both  regarded  the  happiness  and 
culture  of  the  individual  as  the  highest  good.  Both 
systems  belonged  to  a  period  of  corruption  and 
decay.  They  were  the  efforts  of  the  man  to  sup 
port  himself  in  the  ruin  of  the  state.  But  at  ths 
same  time  this  assertion  of  individual  independence 
and  breaking  down  of  local  connexions  performed 
an  important  work  in  preparation  for  Christianity. 
It  was  for  the  Gentile  world  an  influence  cor 
responding  to  the  Dispersion  for  the  Jews.  Men,  as 
men,  owned  their  fellowship  as  they  had  not  done 
before.  Isolating  superstitions  were  shattered  by 
the  arguments  of  the  Epicureans.  The  unity  of  the 
human  conscience  was  vigorously  affirmed  by  the 
Stoics  (comp.  Atitoninus,  iv.  4,  33,  with  Gataker's 
notes). 


*  This  statement,  wliirli  is  true  generally,  is  open  to 
many  exceptions.    The  famous  hymn  of  Cleanthee  is  ono 


of  the  noblest  expressions  of  belief  in   Hviiie  Power 
(rrtnllach,  Fragm.  PhUot.  p.  151). 


PHILOSOPHY 

Meanwhile  in  the  New  Academy  Platonism  de 
generated  into  scepticism.  Epicurus  found  an  au 
thoritative  rule  in  the  senses.  The  Stoics  took 
refuge  in  what  seems  to  answer  to  the  modern  doc 
trine  of  *•'  common  sense,"  and  maintained  that  the 
senses  give  a  direct  knowledge  of  the  object.  CAR- 
NEADES  ^B.c.  213-129)  combated  these  views,  and 
showed  that  sensation  cannot  be  proved  to  declare 
the  real  nature,  but  only  some  of  the  effects,  ot 
things.  1«hus  the  slight  philosophical  basis  of  the 
later  schools  was  undermined.  Scepticism  remained 
as  the  last  issue  of  speculation ;  and,  if  we  may 
believe  the  declaration  o)'  Seneca  (Quaest.  Nat.  vii. 
32),  Scepticism  itself  soon  ceased  to  be  taught  as  a 
system.  The  great  teachers  had  sought  rest,  and 
in  the  end  they  found  unvest.  No  science  of  life 
could  be  established.  The  reason  of  the  few  failed 
to  create  an  esoteric  rule  of  virtue  and  happiness. 
For  in  this  they  all  agreed,  that  the  blessings  of 
philosophy  were  not  for  the  mass.  A  "  Gospel 
preached  to  the  poor  "  was  as  yet  unknown. 

But  though  the  Greek  philosophers  fell  short  of 
their  highest  aim,  it  needs  no  words  to  show  the 
work  which  they  did  as  pioneers  of  a  universal 
Church.  They  revealed  the  wants  and  the  instincts 
of  men  with  a  clearness  and  vigour  elsewhere  un 
attainable,  for  their  sight  was  dazzled  by  no  reflec 
tions  from  a  purer  faith.  Step  by  step  great  ques 
tions  were  proposed — Fate,  Providence — Conscience, 
Law — the  State,  the  Man — and  answers  were  given, 
which  are  the  more  instructive  because  they  are 
generally  one-sided.  The  discussions,  which  were 
primarily  restricted  to  a  few,  in  time  influenced  the 
opinions  of  the  many.  The  preacher  who  spoke  of 
"  an  unknown  God  "  had  an  audience  who  could 
understand  him,  not  at  Athens  only  or  Rome,  but 
throughout  the  civilized  world. 

The  complete  course  of  Philosophy  was  run  before 
the  Christian  era,  but  there  were  yet  two  mixed 
systems  afterwards  which  offered  some  novel 
features.  At  Alexandria  Platonism  was  united 
with  various  elements  of  Eastern  speculation,  and 
for  several  centuries  exercised  an  important  in 
fluence  on  Christian  doctrine.  At  Rome  Stoicism 
was  vivified  by  the  spirit  of  the  old  republic,  and 
exhibited  the  extreme  Western  type  of  Philosophy. 
Of  the  first  nothing  can  be  said  here.  It  arose  only 
when  Christianity  was  a  recognised  spiritual  power, 
and  was  influenced  both  positively  and  negatively 
by  the  Gospel.  The  same  remark  applies  to  the 
efforts  to  quicken  afresh  the  forms  of  Paganism, 
which  found  their  climax  in  the  reign  of  Julian. 
These  have  no  independent  value  as  an  expression 
of  original  thought;  but  the  Roman  Stoicism  calls 
for  brief  notice  from  its  supposed  connexion  with 
Christian  morality  (SENECA,  t  A.D.  65 ;  Eric- 
TETUS,  f  cir.  A.D.  115;  M.  AuRELiOS  ANTO 
NINUS,  121-180).  The  belief  in  this  connexion 
found  a  singular  expression  in  the  apocryphal  cor 
respondence  of  St.  Paul  and  Seneca,  which  was 
widely  received  in  the  early  Church  (Jerome,  De 
Vir.  ill.  xii.).  And  lately  a  distinguished  writer 


PHILOSOPHY 


857 


(Mill,    On   Liberty,   p.    58,   quoted    by   Stanley, 
Eastern  Ch.  Lect.  VI.,  apparently  with  approba 
tion)  has  speculated  on  the  "  tragical  fact"   that 
Constantine,  and  not  Marcus  Aurelius,  was  the  firet 
Christian  emperor.     The  superficial  coincidences  of 
Stoicism  with  the  N.  T.  are  certainly  numerous. 
Coincidences   of  thought,   and   even    of  language, 
might  easily  be   multiplied   (Gataker,  Antoninus, 
Praef.  pp.  xi.  &c.),  and  in  considering  these  it  is 
impossible  not  to  remember  that  Semitic  thought 
and  phraseology  must  have  exercised  great  influence 
on  Stoic  teaching  (Grant,   Oxford  Essays,  1858, 
p.  82).b     But  beneath  this  external  resemblance  of 
Stoicism  to  Christianity,  the  later  Stoics  were  fun 
damentally  opposed  to  it.     For  good  and  for  evil 
they   were   the   Pharisees   of  the   Gentile   world. 
Their  highest  aspirations  are  mixed  with  the  thanks 
giving  "  that  they  were  not  as  other  men  are  " 
(comp.  Anton,  i.).     Their  worship  was  a  sublime 
egotism.6     The  conduct  of  life  was  regarded  as  an 
art,  guided   in  individual   actions  by  a  conscious 
reference  to  reason  (Anton,  iv.  2,  3,  v.  32),  and  not 
a  spontaneous  process  rising  naturally  out  of  one 
vital  principle.11     The  wise  man,  "  wrapt  in  him 
self"  (vii.  28),  was  supposed  to  look  with  perfect 
indifference  on  the  changes  of  time  (iv.  49)  ;  and 
yet  beneath  this  show  of  independence  he  was  a 
jrey  to  a  hopeless  sadness.     In  words  he  appealed 
;o  the  great  law  of  fate  which  rapidly  sweeps  all 
ihings  into  oblivion  as  a  source  of  consolation  (iv. 
2,  14,  vi.  15)  ;  but  there  is  no  confidence  in  any 
future  retribution.     In  a  certain  sense  the  elements 
of  which  we  are  composed  are  eternal  (v.  13),  for 
they  are  incorporated  in  other  parts  of  the  universe, 
but  we  shall  cease   to   exist   (iv.  14,  21,  vi.  24, 
vii.  10).     Not  only  is  there  no  recognition  of  com 
munion  between  an  immortal  man  and  a  personal 
God,  but  the  idea  is  excluded.    Man  is  but  an  atom 
in  a  vast  universe,  and  his  actions  and  sufferings 
are  measured  solely  by  their  relation  to  the  whole 
(Anton,  x.  5,  G,  20,  xii.  26,  vi.  45,  v.  22,  vii.  9). 
God  is  but  another  name  for  "  the  mind  of  the 
universe  "  (6  rov  '6\ov  vovs,  v.  30),  "  the  soul  of 
the  world"  (iv.  40),  "the  reason  that  ordereth 
matter"  (vi.  1),  "universal  nature"  (ij  T&V  '6\tai> 
£u<m,  vii.  33,  ix.  1  ;  comp.  x.  1),  and  is  even 
identified  with  the  world  itself  (rov  yevvf)ffa.vros 
K6fffwv,  xii.  1  ;  comp.  Gataker  on  iv.  23).     Thus 
the  Stoicism  of  M.  Aurelius   gives   many  of  the 
moral   precepts   of  the    Gospel    (Gataker,   Fraef. 
p.  xviii.),  but  without  their  foundation,  which  can 
find  no  place  in  his  system.     It  is  impossible  t3 
read  his  reflections  without  emotion,  but  they  hm  a 
no  creative  energy.     They  are  the  last  strain  ot  a 
dying  creed,   and   in  themselves   have   no  special 
affinity  to  the  new  faith.     Christianity  necessarily 
includes  whatever   is  noblest   in  them,  but  thej 
affect  to  supply  the  place  of  Christianity,  and  do 
not  lead  to  it.     The  real  elements  of  greatness  in 
M.  Aurelius  are  many,  and  truly  Roman  ;  but  the 
study  of  his  Meditations  by  the  side  of  the  N.  T. 
can  leave  little  doubt  that  he  could  not  have  helped 


>>  Cltium,  the  birthplace  of  Zeno,  was  a  Phoenician  co 
lony  ;  Herillus,  bis  pupil,  was  a  Carthaginian ;  Chrysippus 
was  horn  at  Soli  or  Tarsus ;  of  his  scholars  and  successors, 
Zen 3  and  Antipater  were  natives  of  Tarsus,  and  Diogenes 
of  Babylonia.  In  the  next  generation,  Posidonius  was 
native  of  Aparaea  in  Syria ;  and  Epictetus,  the  noblest  of 
Stoics,  was  born  at  Hlt>rapolis  in  I'hrygia. 

«  Seneca,  Ep.  53,  11  :  "  Kst  aliquid  quo  sapiens  ante- 
ccdat  I  team :  illc  bcneficio  naturae  non  timet,  suo  sapiens." 
Comp.  Ep.  -11.  Antun.  xii.  26,  6  «oorou  vovi  flebs  KOJ. 


fKiWev  en-eppurjice,     Comp.  V.  10. 

d  This  explains  the  well-known  reference  of  Marcus 
Anrelius  to  the  Christians.  They  were  ready  to  die  "  ol 
mere  obstinacy  "  (Kara  \l/i\riv  irapaTal-iv,  i.  e.  faith)  j 
whereas,  he  says,  this  readiness  ought  to  come  "  from 
personal  judgment  after  due  calculation  "  (an-b  iiiiojs 
KpiVews  ....  X<rAoyicr|u.eVa>s  .  .  .  .  xi.  3).  So  also  Eplctetuf 
(Digs.  ix.  7,  6)  contrasts  the  fortitude  gained  by  "  habit,1' 
by  the  Galilueans,  with  the  true  fortitude  based  on  "  reaso.l 
and  ileuionstratioD  " 


858 


PHILOSOPHY 


to  give   a   national   standing-place  to   a   Catholic 
Church.* 

IV.  CHRISTIANITY  IN  CONTACT  WITH  ANCIENT 
PHILOSOPHY. 

The  only  direct  trace  of  the  contact  of  Chris 
tianity  with  Western  Philosophy  in  the  N.  T.  is  in 
the  account  of  St.  Paul's  visit  to  Athens,  where 
'•  certain  philosophers  of  the  Epicureans  and  of  the 
Stoics"  (Acts  xvii.  18) — the  representatives,  that 
is,  of  the  two  great  moral  schools  which  divided  the 
West — "  encountered  him ; "  and  there  is  nothing  in 
the  apostolic  writings  to  show  that  it  exercised  any 
important  influence  upon  the  early  Church  (comp. 
1  Cor.  i.  22-4.).  But  it  was  otherwise  with  Eastern 
speculation,  which,  as  it  was  less  scientific  in  form, 
penetrated  more  deeply  through  the  mass  of  the 
people.  The  "philosophy"  against  which  the  Cc- 
lossians  were  warned  (Col.  ii.  8)  seems  undoubtedly 
to  have  been  of  Eastern  origin,  containing  elements 
similar  to  those  which  were  afterwards  embodied  in 
various  shapes  of  Gnosticism,  as  a  selfish  asceticism 
and  a  superstitious  reverence  for  angels  (Col.  ii.  16- 
23);  and  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy,  addressed  to 
Ephesus,  in  which  city  St.  Paul  anticipated  the  rise 
of  false  teaching  (Acts  xx.  30),  two  distinct  forms  of 
error  may  be  traced,  in  addition  to  Judaism,  due 
more  or  less  to  the  same  influence.  One  of  these 
was  a  vain  spiritualism,  insisting  on  ascetic  observ 
ances  and  interpreting  the  resurrection  as  a  moral 
change  (1  Tim.  iv.  1-7;  2  Tim.  ii.  16-18);  the 
other  a  materialism  allied  to  sorcery  (2  Tim.  iii. 
13,  7(frjTes).  The  former  is  that  which  is  pecu 
liarly  "  false-styled  gnosis"  (1  Tim.  vi.  20),  abound 
ing  in  "  profane  and  old  wives'  fables "  (1  Tim. 
iv.  7)  and  empty  discussions  (i.  6,  vi.  20) ;  the 
latter  has  a  close  connexion  with  earlier  tendencies 
at  Ephesus  (Acts  six.  19),  and  with  the  traditional 
accounts  of  Simon  Magus  (comp.  Acts  viii.  9),  whose 
working  on  the  early  Church,  however  obscure,  was 
unquestionably  most  important.  These  antagonistic 
and  yet  complementary  forms  of  heresy  found  a 
wide  development  in  later  times  ;  but  it  is  remark 
able  that  no  trace  of  dualism,  of  the  distinction  of 
the  Creator  and  the  Redeemer,  the  Demiurge  and 
the  true  God,  which  formed  so  essential  a  tenet  of 
the  Gnostic  schools,  occurs  in  the  N.  T.  (comp. 
Thiersch,  Versuch  zur  Herst*  d.  hist.  Standp.  &c., 
231-304). 

The  writings  of  the  sub-apostolic  age,  with  the 
exception  of  the  famous  anecdote  of  Justin  Martyr 
(Dial.  2-4),  throw  little  light  upon  the  relations 
of  Christianity  and  Philosophy.  The  heretical  sys 
tems  again  are  too  obscure  and  complicated  to  illus 
trate  more  than  the  general  admixture  ct'  foreign 
(especially  Eastern)  tenets  with  the  apostolic  teach 
ing.  One  book,  however,  has  been  preserved  in 
various  shapes,  which,  though  still  unaccountably 
neglected  in  Church  histories,  contains  a  vivid  deli 
neation  of  the  speculative  struggle  which  Christian 
ity  had  to  maintain  with  Judaism  and  Heathenism. 
The  Clementine  Homilies  (ed.  Dressel,  1853)  and 
Recognitions  (ed.  Gersdorf,  1838)  are  a  kind  of 
Philosophy  of  Religion,  and  in  subtlety  and  rich 
ness  of  thought  yield  to  no  early  Christian  writings. 
The  picture  which  the  supposed  author  draws  of 
his  early  religious  doubts  is  evidently  taken  from 


•  The  writings  of  Epictetus  contain  in  the  main  the 
same  system,  but  with  somewhat  lese  arrogance.  It  may 
b«  remarked  that  the  silence  of  Epictetus  and  M.  Aurellus 
on  tne  teaching  of  Christianity  can  hardly  be  explained  by 


PIIINEE8 

life  (Clem.  Recogn.  i.  1-3 ;  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.  i. 
43,  E.  T.) ;  and  in  the  discussions  which  'bliow 
there  are  clear  traces  of  Western  as  well  as  Eastern 
philosophy  (Uhlhora,  Die  ffom.  u.  Eecogn.  d.  Clem. 
Rom.  pp.  404  &c.). 

At  the  close  of  the  second  century,  when  the 
Church  of  Alexandria  came  into  marked  intellectual 
pre-eminence,  the  mutual  influence  of  Christianity 
and  Neo-Platonism  opened  a  new  fielc  of  specula 
tion,  or  rather  the  two  systems  were  presented  in 
forms  designed  to  meet  the  acknowledged  wants  of 
tiie  time.  According  to  the  commonly  received 
report,  Origen  was  the  scholar  of  Ammonius  Saccas, 
who  first  gave  consistency  to  the  later  Platonisin, 
and  for  a  long  time  he  was  the  contemporary  of 
1'lotinus  (A.D.  205-270),  who  was  its  noblest  expo 
sitor.  Neo-Platonism  was,  in  fact,  an  attempt  to 
seize  the  spirit  of  Christianity  apart  from  its  his 
toric  basis  and  human  elements.  The  separation 
between  the  two  was  absolute ;  and  yet  the  splen 
dour  of  the  one-sided  spiritualism  of  the  Neo-Pla- 
tonists  attracted  in  some  cases  the  admiration  of 
the  Christian  Fathers  (Basil,  Theodoret),  and  the 
wide  circulation  of  the  writings  of  the  pseudo-Dio- 
nysius  the  Areopagite  served  to  propagate  many  oi 
their  doctrines  under  an  orthodox  name  among  the 
schoolmen  and  mystics  of  the  middle  ages  (Vogt, 
Neu-Platonismus  u.  Christenthum,  1836  ;  Herzog, 
Encyklop.  s.  v.  Neu-Platonismus). 

The  want  which  the  Alexandrine  Fathers  endea 
voured  to  satisfy  is  in  a  great  measure  the  want  of 
our  own  time.  If  Christianity  be  Truth,  it  must 
have  points  of  special  connexion  with  all  nations 
and  all  periods.  The  difference  of  character  in  the 
constituent  writings  of  the  N.  T.  are  evidently 
typical,  and  present  the  Gospel  in  a  form  (if  tech 
nical  language  may  be  used)  now  ethical,  now 
logical,  now  mystical.  The  varieties  of  aspect  thus 
indicated  combine  to  give  the  idea  of  a  harmonious 
whole.  Clement  rightly  maintained  that  there  is  a 
"  gnosis "  in  Christianity  distinct  from  the  errors 
of  Gnosticism.  The  latter  was  a  premature  attempt 
to  connect  the  Gospel  with  earlier  systems;  the 
"ormer  a  result  of  conflict  grounded  on  Faith  (Mob. 
er,  Patrohgie,  424  &c.).  Christian  Philosophy 
may  be  in  one  sense  a  contradiction  in  terms,  for 
Christianity  confessedly  derives  its  first  principles 
from  revelation,  and  not  from  simple  reason ;  but 
there  is  no  less  a  true  Philosophy  of  Christianity, 
which  aims  to  show  how  completely  these,  by  their 
form,  their  substance,  and  their  consequences,  meet 
the  instincts  and  aspirations  of  all  ages.  The  expo 
sition  of  such  a  Philosophy  would  be  the  work  of  a 
modem  Origer  [B.  F.  W.] 

PHIN'EES  (Givets:  Phinees).  1.  The  sor 
of  Eleazar  son  of  Aaron,  the  great  hero  of  tht 
Jewish  priesthood  (1  Esdr.  v.  5;  viii.  2,  29 ;»  :i 
Esdr.  i.  26  ;  Ecclus.  xlv.  23  ;  1  Mace.  ii.  26). 

2.  Phinehas  the  son  of  Eli,  2  Esdr.  i.  2a :  but 
the  insertion  of  the  name  in  the  genealogy  of  Ezra 
(in  this  place  only)  is  evidentlv  an  error,  since  Ezra 
belonged  to  the  line  of  EJeazar,  and  Eli  to  that  oi 
Ithamar.     It  probably   arose  from  a  confusion  of 
the  name  with  that  of  the  great  Phinehas,  wbc  ivae 
Ezra's  forefather. 

3.  A  Priest  or  Levite  of  the  time  of  Ezra,  fi.thei 
of  Eleazar  (1  Esdr.  viii.  63). 


ignorance.  It  seems  that  the  philosopher  would  not  notice 
(in  word)  the  believer.  Comp.  Lardncr,  Works,  vli,  36S-7. 
"  Here  the  LTX.  has  *opo«. 


4. 


PHINEHAS 

e:  Sinone)  1  Esdr.  v.  31. 


PHINEHAS 


859 


[G.] 

PHIN'EHAS  (Dro»B,  i.  e.  Pinchas:  *„/«'*; 
but  once  in  Pent,  and  uniformly  elsewhere,  Qtivets  ; 
Jos.  *ic eeVr/s :  Phinees}.  Son  of  Eleazar  and  grand 
son  of  Aaron  (Ex.  vi.  25).  His  mother  is  recorded 
aa  one  of  the  daughters  of  Putiel,  an  unknown 
person,  who  is  identified  by  the  Rabbis  with  Jethro 
the  Midianite  (Targ.  Pseudojon.  on  Exod.  vi.  25. 
Wagenseil's  Sota  viii.  6).  Phinehas  is  memorable 
for  having  while  quite  a  youth,  by  his  zeal  and 
energy  at  the  critical  moment  of  the  licentious  idola 
try  of  Shittim,  appeased  the  divine  wrath  and  put  a 
stop  to  the  plague  which  was  destroying  the  nation 
'vNum.  xxv.  7).  For  this  he  was  rewarded  by  the 
special  approbation  of  Jehovah,  and  by  a  promise  that 
the  priesthood  should  remain  in  his  family  for  ever 
(10-13).  This  seems  to  have  raised  him  at  once  to 
a  very  high  position  in  the  nation,  and  he  was 
appointed  to  accompany  as  priest  the  expedition 
by  which  the  Midianites  were  destroyed  (xxxi.  6). 
Many  years  later  he  also  headed  the  party  who 
were  despatched  from  Shiloh  to  remonstrate  against 
the  Altar  which  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes  were 
reported  to  have  built  near  Jordan  (Josh.  xxii. 
13-32).  In  the  partition  of  the  country  he  received 
an  allotment  of  his  own — a  hill  on  Mount  Ephraim 
which  bore  his  name — Gibeath-Pinchas.  Here  his 
father  was  buried  (Josh.  xxiv.  33). 

During  the  life  of  Phinehas  he  appears  to  have 
been  the  chief  of  the  great  family  of  the  Korahites 
or  Korhites  who  guarded  the  entrances  to  the  sacred 
tent  and  the  whole  of  the  sacred  camp    (1  Chr. 
ix.  20).      After  Eleazar's  death  he  became  high 
priest — the  3rd  of  the  series.     In  this  capacity  he 
is   introduced   as  giving  the  oracle  to  the  nation 
during  the  struggle  with  the  Benjamites  on  the 
matter  of  Gibeah  (Judg.  xx.  28).     Where  the  Ark 
and  tabernacle  were  stationed  at  that  time  is  not 
clear.     From   ver.    1    we   should  infer  that  they 
were  at  Mizpeh,  while  from  vers.  18,  26,  it  seems 
equally  probable  that  they  were  at  Bethel  (which 
is  also  the  statement  of  Josephus,  Ant.  v.  2,  §11). 
Or  the  Hebrew  words  in  these  latter  vei-ses  may 
mean,  not  Bethel  the  town,  but,  as  they  are  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.,  "  house  of  God,"  and  refer  to  the  taber 
nacle  at  Shiloh.     But  wherever  the  Ark  may  have 
been,  there  was  the  aged  priest  "standing  before 
it,"   and  the  oracle  which  he  delivered  was   one 
which  must  have  been  fully  in  accordance  with  his 
own  vehement  temper, "  Shall  we  go  out  to  battle  .  . . 
or  shall  we  cease  ?"    And  the  answer  was,  "  Go  up : 
for  to-morrow  I  will  deliver  them  into  your  hand." 
The  memory  of  this  champion  of  Jehovah  was 
very  dear  to  the  Jews.     The  narrative  of  the  Pen 
tateuch  presents  him  as  the  type  of  an  ardent  and 
devoted  priest.     The  numerous  references  to  him 
in  the  later  literature  all  adopt  the  same  tone.     He 
is  commemorated  in  one  of  the  Psalms  (cvi.  30,  31) 
in  the  identical  phrase  which  is  consecrated  for  ever 
by  its  use  in  reference  to  the  great  act  of  faith  of  Abra 
ham  ;  a  phrase  which  perhaps  more  than  any  other 
in  the  Bible  binds  together  the  old  and  new  dispen 
sation — "  that  was  counted  to  him  for  righteous 
ness  onto  all  generations   for  evermore "    (comp. 
Gen.  xv.  6;  Rom.  iv.  3).     The  "covenant"  made 
with  him  is  put  into  the  same  rank  for  dignity  and 
certainty  with  that  by  which  the  throne  was  assured 
to    King   David    (Ecclus.  xiv.    25).     The  zeal  of 
Mattathias  the  Muccabee  is  sufficiently  praised  by 
;i  comparison  with  that  of  "  Phinees  against  Zambi  i  i 


the  sou  of  Salom"  (1  Mace.  ii.  26).  The  priests 
who  returned  from  the  captivity  are  enrolled  in  the 
official  lists  as  the  sons  of  Fhinehas  (Ezr.  viii.  2 
1  Esdr.  v.  5).  In  the  Seder  Olam  (ch.  xx.)  he  is 
identified  with  "  the  Prophet"  of  Judg.  vi.  8. 

Josephus  (Ant.  iv.  6,  §12),  out  of  the  venerable 
traditions  which  he  uses  with  such  excellent  effect, 
adds  to  the  narrative  of  the  Pentateuch  a  statement 
that  "  so  great  was  his  courage  and  so  remarkable 
his  bodily  strength,  that  he  would  never  relinquish 
any  undertaking,  however  difficult  and  dangerous, 
without  gaming  a  complete  victory."  The  later 
Jews  are  fond  of  comparing  him  to  Elijah,  if  indeed 
they  do  not  regard  them  as  one  aad  the  same  indi 
vidual  (see  the  quotations  in  Meyer,  Chron.  Hebr 
845  ;  Fabricius,  Codex  pseudepig.  894  note). 
In  the  Targum  Pseudojonathan  of  Num.  xxv.  the 
slaughter  of  Zimri  and  Cozbi  is  accompanied  by 
twelve  miracles,  and  the  covenant  made  with  Phi 
nehas  is  expanded  into  a  promise,  that  he  shall 
be  "  the  angel  of  the  covenant,  shall  live  for  ever, 
and  shall  proclaim  redemption  at  the  end  of  the 
world."  His  Midianite  origin  (already  noticed)  is 
brought  forward  as  adding  greater  lustre  to  his  zeal 
against  Midian,  and  enhancing  his  glorious  destiny. 
The  verse  which  closes  the  Book  of  Joshua  is  as 
cribed  to  Phinehas,  as  the  description  of  the  death 
of  Moses  at  the  end  of  Deuteronomy  is  to  Joshua 
(Baha  Bathra,  in  Fabricius,  893).  He  is  also  re 
ported  to  be  the  author  of  a  work  on  sacred  names 
(ibid.),  which  however  is  so  rare  that  Fabricius  had 
never  seen  it. 

The  succession  of  the  posterity  of  Phinehas  in 
the  high-priesthood  was  interrupted  when  Eli,  of 
the  race  of  Ithamar,  was  priest ;  but  it  was  resumed 
in  the  person  of  Zadok,  and  continued  in  the  same 
line  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  [HIGH 
PRIEST,  vol.  i.  809,  &c.]  One  of  the  members 
of  the  family — Manasseh  son  of  Johanan,  and  bro 
ther  of  Jaddua — went  over  to  the  Samaritans,  and 
they  still  boast  that  they  preserve  the  succession 
(see  their  Letter  to  Scaliger,  in  Eichhom's  Reperto- 
riwn,  xiii.  262). 

The  tomb  of  Phinehas,  a  place  of  great  resort  to 
both  Jews  and  Samaritans,  is  shown  at  Awertah, 
four  miles  S.  E.  of  Nablus.  It  stands  in  the 
centre  of  the  village,  enclosed  within  a  little  area  or 
compound,  which  is  overshadowed  by  the  thickly- 
trellised  foliage  of  an  ancient  vine.  A  small 
mosque  joins  the  wall  of  tne  compound.  Outside 
the  village,  on  the  next  hill,  is  a  larger  enclosure, 
containing  the  tomb  of  Eleazar,  and  a~cave  ascribed 
to  Elijah,  overshadowed  by  two  venerable  terebinth 
trees,  surrounded  by  arcades,  and  forming  a  retired 
and  truly  charming  spot.  The  local  tradition  as 
serts  that  Awertah  and  its  neighbourhood  are  the 
"  Hill  of  Phinehas." 

In  the  Apocryphal  Books  his  name  is  given  as 
PHINEES. 

2.  Second  son   of  Eli  (1   Sam.  i.  3  ;    ii.   34 ; 
iv,  4,  11,   17,  19  ;  xiv.  3.)     He  was  not  of  the 
same  line  as  his  illustrious  and  devoted  namesake, 
but  of  the  family  of  Ithamar.    [ELI.]     Phinehas 
was  killed  with  his  brother  by  the  Philistines  when 
the  ark  was  captured.     He  had  two  sons,  Ahitub, 
the  eldest — whose  sons  Ahijah  and  Ahimelech  were 
high-priests  at  Shiloh  and  Nob  in  the  time  of  Saul 
(xiv.  3) — and  Ichabod.  He  is  introduced,  apparently 
by  mistake,  in  the  genealogy  of  Ezra  in  2  Esdr   i 
2a.  ["PHINEES,  2.] 

3.  A  Levitc  of  Ezra's  time  CEzi ,  viii  33),  unl"* 


860 


PHISON 


the  meaning  be  that  Eleazar  was  of  the  family  of 
the  great  Phinehas.  In  the  parallel  passage  of 
I  Esdr.  he  is  called  PHINEES.  •  [G."| 

PHI'SON  (Qfiffuv  ;  Alex.  Guruv  :  Phison}. 
The;  Greek  form  of  the  name  PlSON  (Ecclus.  xxiv. 
25). 

PHLEG'ON  (*\eyui> :  Phlegon).  A  Christian 
at  Rome  whom  St.  Paul  salutes  (Rom.  xvi.  14). 
Pseudo-IIippolytus  (De  LXX.  Apostolis)  makes  him 
one  of  the  .seventy  disciples  an;  bishop  of  Marathon. 
He  is  said  to  have  suffered  martyrdom  on  April  8th 
(Martyrologium  Romanian,  apud  Estium),  on  which 
day  he  is  commemorated  in  the  calendar  of  the 
Byzantine  Church.  [W.  T.  B.] 

PHOE'BE  (#oi'j87» :  Phoebe),  the  first,  and  one 
of  the  most  important,  of  the  Christian  persons  the 
detailed  mention  of  whom  fills  nearly  ill  the  last 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  What  is 
said  of  her  (Rom.  xvi.  1,  2)  is  worthy  of  especial 
notice,  because  of  its  bearing  on  the  question  of  the 
deaconesses  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  On  this  point 
we  have  to  observe,  (1)  that  the  term  SIO.KOVOS, 
here  applied  to  her,  though  not  in  itself  necessarily 
an  official  term,  is  the  term  which  would  be 
applied  to  her,  if  it  were  meant  to  be  official; 
(2)  that  this  term  is  applied  in  the  Apostolical 
Constitutions  to  women  who  ministered  officially,  the 
deaconess  being  called  fi  Sidicovos,  as  the  deao.on  is 
called  6  SidKovos ;  (3)  that  it  is  now  generally  ad 
mitted  that  in  1  Tim.  iii.  11,  St.  Paul  applies  it  so 
himself;  (4)  that  in  the  passage  before  us  Phoebe 
is  called  the  SMKOVOS  of  a  particular  church,  which 
seems  to  imply  a  specific  appointment;  (5)  that 
the  church  of  CENCHREAE,  to  which  she  belonged, 
could  only  have  been  a  small  church :  whence  we 
may  draw  a  fair  conclusion  as  to  what  was  cus 
tomary,  in  the  matter  of  such  female  ministration, 
in  the  larger  churches ;  (6)  that,  whatever  her 
errand  to  Rome  might  be,  the  independent  manner 
of  her  going  there  seems  to  imply  (especially  when 
we  consider  the  secluded  habits  of  Greek  women) 
not  only  that  she  was  a  widow  or  a  woman  of 
mature  age,  but  that  she  was  acting  officially ; 
(7)  that  she  had  already  been  of  great  service  to 
St.  Paul  and  others  (irpoffT&ri'i  iro\\S>v,  Kal  ifiov 
avrov),  either  by  her  woalth  or  her  energy,  or 
both ;  a  statement  which  closely  corresponds  with 
the  description  of  the  qualifications  of  the  enrolled 
widows  in  1  Tim.  v.  10 ;  (8)  that  the  duty  which  we 
here  see  Phoebe  discharging  implies  a  personal  cha 
racter  worthy  of  confidence  and  respect.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PHOENI'CE,  PHOENICIA  (*o(v//crj:  Phoe- 
nice :  rarely  in  Latir.  Phoenicia :  see  Facciolati's 
Lexicon,  s.  v.),  a  tract  of  country,  of  which  Tyre 
and  Sidon  were  the  principal  cities,  to  the  north  of 
Palestine,  alcag  the  joastof  the  Mediterranean  Sea  ; 
bounded  by  that  sea  :>n  the  west,  and  by  the  moun 
tain  raHge  of  Lebanon  on  the  east.  The  name  was 
not  the  one  by  which  its  native  inhabitants  called 
it,  but  was  given  to  it  by  the  Greeks;  probably 
from  the  palm-tree,  <j>oivi£,  with  which  it  may 
then  have  abounded  ;  just  as  the  name  Brasil  was 
given  by  Europeans  to  a  large  territory  in  South 
America,  from  the  Brasil-wood  which  a  part  of  it 
supplied  to  Europe.  The  palm-tree  is  seen,  as  an 
emblem,  on  some  coins  of  Aradus,  Tyre,  and  Sidon ; 


PHOENICE,  PHOENICIA 

and  there  are  now  several  palm-trees  within  Uw  cir 
cuit  of  modern  Tyre,  and  along  the  coast  at  various 
points ;  but  the  tree  is  not  at  the  present  day  mo 
of  the  characteristic  features  of  the  country.  The 
native  name  of  Phoenicia  was  Kenaan  (Canaan)  or 
Knft,  signifying  lowland,  so  named  in  contrast  to  the 
adjoining  Aram,  t.  e.  Highland  ;  the  Hebrew  name 
of  Syria.  The  name  Kenaan  is  preserved  on  a  coin 
of  Laodicea,  of  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
whereon  Laodicea  is  styled  "  a  mother  city  in  Ca 
naan,"  |J?333  QK  fcWl&6^.  And  KnA  or  Chna 
(Xva)  is  mentioned  distinctly  by  Herodian*  the 
grammarian,  as  the  old  name  of  Phoenicia.  (See 
Tltpl  fiovf)pous  At|ea>s,  under  the  word  'ABrjva.) 
Hence,  as  Phoenicians  or  Canaanites  were  the  most 
powerful  of  all  tribes  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  its 
.invasion  by  Joshua,  the  Israelites,  in  speaking  of 
their  own  territory  as  it  was  before  the  conquest, 
called  it  "  the  land  of  Canaan." 

The  length  of  coast  to  which  the  name  Phoenicia 
was  applied  varied  at  different  times,  and  may  be 
regarded  under  different  aspects  before  and  after 
the  loss  of  its  independence.  1.  What  may  be 
termed  Phoenicia  Proper  was  a  narrow  undulating 
plain,  extending  from  the  pass  of  Rds  el-Beyad  or 
Abyad,  the  "  Promontorium  Album  "  of  the  ancients, 
about  six  miles  south  of  Tyre,  to  the  Nahr  el-Attly, 
the  ancient  Bostrenus,  two  miles  north  of  Sidon  (Ro 
binson's  Bib.  Res.  ii.  473).  The  plain  is  only 
28  miles  in  length,  and,  considering  the  great  im 
portance  of  Phoenicia  in  the  world's  history,  this 
may  well  be  added  to  other  instances  in  Greece, 
Italy,  and  Palestine,  which  show  how  little  the  in 
tellectual  influence  of  a  city  or  state  has  depended 
on  the  extent  of  its  territory.  Its  average  breadth 
is  about  a  mile  (Porter's  Handbook  for  Syria,  ii. 
396)  ;  but  near  Sidon,  the  mountains  retreat  to  a 
distance  of  two  miles,  and  near  Tyre  to  a  distance  of 
five  miles  (Kenrick's  Phoenicia,  p.  19).  The  whole 
of  Phoenicia,  thus  understood,  is  called  by  Josephus, 
(Ant.  v.  3,  §1),  the  great  plain  of  the  city  of  Sidon, 
rb  fjLfja  TreSioi/  2i5&j^os  infAewj.  In  it,  near  its 
northern  extremity  was  situated  Sidon,  in  the  north 
latitude  of  33°  34'  05"  ;  and  scarcely  more  than 
17  geographical  miles  to  the  south  was  Tyre,  in 
the  latitude  of  33°  17'  (Admiral  Smyth's  Mediter 
ranean,  p.  469) :  so  that  in  a  straight  line  those 
two  renowned  cities  were  less  than  20  English 
miles  distant  from  each  other.  Zarephath,  the  Sa- 
repta  of  the  New  Testament,  was  situated  between 
them,  eight  miles  south  of  Sidon,  to  which  it  belonged 
(1  K.  xvii.  9  ;  Obad.  20 ;  Luke  iv.  26).  2.  A  still 
longer  district,  which  afterwards  became  fairly  en 
titled  to  the  name  of  Phoenicia,  extended  up  th« 
coast  to  a  point  marked  by  the  island  of  Aradus 
and  by  Antaradus  towards  the  north ;  the  southern 
boundary  remaining  the  same  as  in  Phoenicia  Proj>er. 
Phoenicia,  thus  defined,  is  estimated  by  Mr.  Grot* 
(History  of  Greece,  iii.  354)  to  have  been  about 
120  miles  in  length;  while  its  breadth,  between 
Lebanon  and  the  sea,  never  exceeded  20  miles,  and 
was  generally  much  less.  This  estimate  is  most 
reasonable,  allowing  for  the  bends  of  the  coast ;  as 
the  direct  difference  in  latitude  between  Tyre  and 
Antaradus  (Tortosa)  is  equivalent  to  106  English 
miles  ;  and  six  miles  to  the  south  of  Tyre,  as  ah-eady 
mentioned,  intervene  before  the  beginning  of  the  pass 


•  Through  mistake,  a  sentence  of  Herodian,  TO  Xra, 
OUTCO  yap  irpoTcpov  ^  *oi»'i<cij  cxaAeiro,  is  printed  in  the 
Fragments.  Hittoricnrum  Graecorum,  p.  17  (Paris,  1841),  as 
ac  extract  from  Hecataens  of  Miletus,  and  ib  usually  quoted 


as  from  Hecataeus.  It  is,  however,  in  fact,  merely  U-.d 
assertion  of  the  grammarian  himself ;  though  it  Is  moat 
probable  that  be  had  in  hU  mind  the  usage  of  llc-atatoa. 


t 


PHOENICE,  PHOENICIA 

tit  BAs  et-Abydd.  The  claim  of  the  whole  of  this 
district  to  the  name  of  Phoenicia  rests  on  the  pro 
bable  fact,  that  the  whole  of  it,  to  the  north  of 
the  great  plain  of  Sidon,  was  occupied  by  Phoenician 
colonists ;  not  to  mention,  that  there  seems  to  have 
been  some  kind  of  political  connexion,  however 
loose,  between  all  the  inhabitants  (Diodorus,  xvi. 
4-1).  Scarcely  16  geographical  miles  farther  north 
than  Sidon  was  Berytus ;  with  a  roadstead  so  well 
suited  for  the  purposes  of  modern  navigation  that, 
under  the  modern  name  of  Beirout,  it  has  eclipsed 
both  Sidon  and  Tyre  as  an  emporium  for  Syria. 
Whether  this  Berytus  was  identical  with  the  Be- 
rothah  and  Berothai  of  Ezekiel  xlvii.  16,  and  of 
2  Samuel  viii.  8,  is  a  disputed  point.  [BE- 
KOTHAH.]  Still  farther  north  was  Byblus,  the 
Gebal  of  the  Bible  (Ez.  xxvii.  9),  inhabited  by  sea 
men  and  calkers.  Its  inhabitants  are  supposed  to 
oe  alluded  to  in  the  word  Qiblim,  translated  "  stone- 
squarers"  in  the  authorized  version  of  1  K.  v. 
18  (32).  It  still  retains  in  Arabic  the  kindred 
name  of  Jebeil.  Then  came  Tripolis  (now  Tard- 
bulus},  said  to  have  been  founded  by  colonists  from 
Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Aradus,  with  three  distinct  towns, 
each  a  furlong  apart  from  one  another,  each  with 
its  own  walls,  and  each  named  from  the  city 
which  supplied  its  colonists.  General  meetings  of 
the  Phoenicians  seem  to  have  been  held  at  Tri 
polis  (Diod.  xvi.  41),  as  if  a  certain  local  jealousy 
had  prevented  the  selection  for  this  purpose  of 
Tyre,  Sidon,  or  Aradus.  And  lastly,  towards  the 
extreme  point  north  was  Aradus  itself,  the  Arvad  of 
Gen.  x.  18,  and  Ez.  xxvii.  8  ;  situated,  like  Tyre, 
on  a  small  island  near  the  mainland,  and  founded 
by  exiles  from  Sidon.  The  whole  of  Phoenicia 
Proper  is  well  watereo.  by  various  streams  from  the 
adjoining  hills:  of  these  the  two  largest  are  the 
Khasimiyeh,  a  few  miles  north  of  Tyre — the  ancient 
name  of  which,  strange  to  say,  is  not  certain, 
though  it  is  conjectured  to  have  been  the  Leontes — 
and  the  Bostrenus,  already  mentioned,  north  of 
Sidou.  The  soil  is  fertile,  although  now  generally 
ill-cultivated ;  but  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Sidon 
there  are  rich  gardens  and  orchards;  "and  here," 
says  Mr.  Porter,  "are  oranges,  lemons,  figs,  al 
monds,  plums,  apricots,  peaches,  pomegranates, 
pears,  and  bananas,  all  growing  luxuriantly,  and 
forming  a  forest  of  finely-tinted  foliage"  {Handbook 
for  Syria,  ii.  398).  The  havens  of  Tyre  and  Sidon 
afforded  water  of  sufficient  depth  for  all  the  require 
ments  of  ancient  navigation,  and  the  neighbouring 
range  of  the  Lebanon,  in  its  extensive  forests,  fur 
nished  what  then  seemed  a  nearly  inexhaustible 
supply  of  timber  for  ship-building.  To  the  north 
of  Bostrenus,  between  that  river  and  Beirout,  lies 
the  only  bleak  and  barren  part  of  Phoenicia.  It  is 
crossed  by  the  ancient  Tamyras  or  Damuras,  the 
modem  Nahr  ed-Damur.  From  Beirout,  the  plains 
are  again  fertile.  The  principal  streams  are  the 
Lycus,  now  the  Nahr  el-Kelb,  not  far  north  from 
Beirout ;  the  Adonis,  now  the  Nahr  Ibrahim,  about 
five  miles  south  of  Gebal;  and  the  Eleutherus,  now 
the  Nahr  el-Kebir,  in  the  bend  between  Tripolis 
and  Antaradus. 

In  reference  to  the  period  when  the  Phoenicians 
had  lost  their  independence,  scarcely  any  +wo  Greek 
and  Roman  writers  give  precisely  the  same  geogra 
phical  boundaries  to  Phoenicia.  Herodotus  uses  an 
expression  which  seems  to  imply  that  he  regarded 
its  northern  extremity,  as  corresponding  with  the 


PHOENICIANS 


361 


Myriandrian  Bay,  or  Bay  of  Issus  (iv.  38),  It  is 
doubtful  where  exactly  he  conceived  it  to  terminate 
at  the  south  (iii.  5).  Ptolemy  is  distinct  in  making 
the  river  Eleutherus  the  boundary,  on  the  north, 
and  the  river  Chorseus,  on  the  south.  The  Chorseus 
is  a  small  stream  or  torrent,  south  of  Mount  Carmel 
and  of  the  small  Canaanitish  city  Dor,  the  inha 
bitants  of  which  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  was  con 
fessedly  unable  to  drive  out  (Judg.  i.  27).  This 
southern  line  of  Ptolemy  coincides  very  closely  with 
the  southern  boundary  of  Pliny  the  Elder,  who  in 
cludes  Dor  in  Phoenicia,  though  the  southern  boun 
dary  specified  by  him  is  a  stream  called  Crocodilon, 
now  Nahr  Zurka,  about  two  miles  to  the  north  of 
Caesarea.  Pliny's  northern  boundary,  however,  is 
different,  as  he  makes  it  include  Antaradus.  Again, 
the  geographer  Strabo,  who  was  contemporary  with 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  aera,  differs  from 
Herodotus,  Ptolemy,  and  Pliny,  by  representing 
Phoenicia  as  the  district  between  Orthosia  and  Pelu- 
sium  (xvi.  21),  which  would  make  it  include  not 
only  Mount  Carmel,  but  likewise  Caesarea,  Joppa, 
and  the  whole  coast  of  the  Philistines. 

In  the  Old  Testament,  the  word  Phoenicia  does 
not  occur,  as  might  be  expected  from  its  being  a 
Greek  name.  In  the  Apocrypha,  it  is  net  defined, 
though  spoken  of  as  being,  with  Coele-Syria,  under 
one  military  commander  (2  Mace.  iii.  5,  8,  yiii. 
8,  x.  11 ;  3  Mace.  iii.  15).  In  the  New  Testament, 
the  word  occurs  only  in  three  passages,  Acts  xi.  19, 
xv.  3,  xxi.  2  ;  and  not  one  of  these  affords  a  clue  as 
to  how  far  the  writer  deemed  Phoenicia  to  extend. 
On  the  other  hand,  Josephus  possibly  agreed  with 
Strabo ;  for  he  expressly  says  that  Caesarea  is  situ 
ated  in  Phoenicia  (Ant.  xv.  9,  §6) ;  and  although 
he  never  makes  a  similar  statement  respecting  Joppa, 
yet  he  speaks,  in  one  passage,  of  the  coast  of  Syria, 
Phoenicia,  and  Egypt,  as  if  Syria  and  Phoenicia  ex 
hausted  the  line  of  coast  on  the  Mediterranean  Sea  to 
the  north  of  Egypt  (B.  J.  iii.  9,  §2).  [E.  T.] 

PHOENICIANS.  The  name  of  the  race  who 
in  earliest  recorded  history  inhabited  Phoenicia,  and 
who  were  the  great  maritime  and  commercial  people 
of  the  ancient  world.  For  many  centuries  they 
bore  somewhat  of  the  same  relation  to  other  nations 
which  the  Dutch  bore,  though  less  exclusively,  to 
the  rest  of  Europe  in  the  17th  century.  They  were, 
moreover,  pre-eminent  in  colonization  as  well  as  in 
trade  ;  and  in  their  settlement  of  Carthage,  produc 
ing  the  greatest  general  of  antiquity,  they  proved 
the  most  formidable  of  all  antagonists  to  Rome  in 
its  progress  to  universal  empire.  A  complete  his 
tory,  therefore,  of  the  Phoenicians  would  occupy  a 
large  extent  of  ground  which  would  be  foreign  to 
the  objects  of  this  Dictionary.  Still  some  notice  is 
desirable  of  such  an  important  people,  who  were  in 
one  quarter  the  nearest  neighbours  of  the  Israelites, 
and  indirectly  influenced  their  history  in  various 
ways.  Without  dwelling  on  matters  which  belong 
more  strictly  to  the  articles  TYRE  and  SIDON,  it 
may  be  proper  to  touch  on  certain  points  connected, 
with  the  language,  race,  trade,  and  religion  of  the 
Phoenicians,  which  may  tend  to  throw  light  on 
Biblical  history  and  literature.  The  communica> 
tion  of  letters  by  the  Phoenicians  to  the  European 
nations  will  likewise  deserve  notice. 

I.  The  Phoenician  language  belonged  to  that 
family  of  languages  which,  by  a  name  not  alto 
gether  free  from  objection,  but  now  generally 
adopted,  is  called  "  Semitic."  ••  Under  this  name  are 


B  So  called  from  the  descendants  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.    are  known  to  have  spoken  cognate  languages.   Tbero  have 
21 -2»^;  aearly  all  of  whom,  as  represented  by  nations,    been  hitherto  two  objections  to  the  name:— 1st    That  the 


862 

included  three  distinct  branches: — 1st,  Arabic,  to 
which  belongs  Aethiopian  as  an  offshoot  of  the 
Southern  Arabic  or  Himyaritic.  2ndly,  Aramaic, 
the  vernacular  language  of  Palestine  at  the  time  of 
Christ,  in  which  the  few  original  words  of  Christ 
which  have  been  preserved  in  writing  appear  to  have 
been  spoken  (Matt,  xxvii.  46;  Mark  v.  41 ;  and  mark 
especially  Matt.  xvi.  18,  which  is  not  fully  significant 
either  in  Gieek  or  Hebrew).  Aramaic,  as  used  in 
Christian  literature,  is  called  Syriac,  and  as  used  in 
the  writings  of  the  Jews,  has  been  very  generally 
called  Chaldee.  Srdly,  Hebrew,  in  which  by  far 
the  greatest  part  of  the  Old  Testament  was  com 
posed.  Now  one  of  the  most  interesting  points  to 
the  Biblical  student,  connected  with  Phoenician,  is, 
that  it  does  not  belong  to  either  of  the  two  first 
branches,  but  to  the  third ;  and  that  it  is  in  feet  so 
closely  allied  to  Hebrew,  that  Phoenician  and  He 
brew,  though  different  dialects,  may  practically  be 
regarded  as  the  same  language.  This  may  be  shown 
iu  the  following  way: — 1st,  in  passages  which  have 
been  frequently  quoted  (see  especially  Gesenius's 
Monumenta  Scripturae  Linguaeque  Phoeniciae,  p. 
231),  testimony  is  borne  to  the  kinship  of  the  two 
languages  by  Augustine  and  Jerome,  in  whose  time 
Phoenician  or  Carthaginian  was  still  a  living  lan 
guage.  Jerome,  who  was  a  good  Hebrew  scholar, 
after  mentioning,  in  his  Commentaries  on  Jeremiah, 
lib.  v.  c.  25,  that  Carthage  was  a  Phoenician 


PHOENICIANS 

through  which  languages  they  have  become  widelj 
known,  and  having  sometimes  111  those  language* 
occasioned  false  etymologies,  become  really  signi 
ficant  in  Hebrew.  Thus  through  Hebrew  it  i« 
known  that  Tyre,  as  Tz&r,  signifies  "  a  rock,"  re 
ferring  doubtless  to  the  rocky  island  on  which  the 
city  was  situated :  that  Sidon,  as  Tzidon,  mean* 
"  Fishing ''  or  "  Fishery,"  which  was  probably  the 
occupation  of  its  first  settlers :  that  Carthage,  or,  as 
it  was  originally  called,  "  Carthada,"  means  "  New 
Town,"  or  •'  Newton  :"  and  that  Byrsa,  which,  as  a 
Greek  name,  suggested  the  etymological  mythus  or 
the  Bull's  Hide  (Aeneid,  i.  366-7),  was  simply  the 
citadel  of  Carthage — Carthaginis  arcem,  as  Virgil 
accurately  termed  it:  the  Carthaginian  name  of  it, 
softened  by  the  Greeks  into  Bupcro,  being  merely 
the  Hebrew  word  Botzrah,  "  citadel ;"  identical  with 
the  word  called  Bozi-ah  in  the  English  Version  of 
Isaiah  Ixiii.  1.  Again,  through  Hebrew,  the  names 
of  celebrated  Carthaginians,  though  sometimes  dis 
figured  by  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  acquire  a 
meaning.  Thus  Dido  is  found  to  belong  to  the 
same  root  as  David,b  "  beloved ;  "  meaning  "  his 
love,"  or  "  delight ;"  »'.  e.  the  love  or  delight  either 
of  Baal  or  of  her  husband :  Hasdrubal  is  the  man 
"whose  help  Baal  is:"  Hamilcar  the  man  whom 
the  god  "  Milcar  graciously  granted "  (comp.  Ha- 
naneel ;  &(6S<apos) :  and,  with  the  substitution  of 
Baal  for  El  or  God,  the  name  of  the  renowned  Han 


colony,  proceeds  to  state — "  Unde  et  Poeni  sermone  |  nibal  is  found  to  be  identical  in  form  and  meaning 
corrupto  quasi  Phoeni  appellantur,  quorum  lingua  with  the  name  of  Hanniel,  who  is  mentioned  in 
Hebraeae  linguae  magna  ex  parte  confinis  est."  Num.  xxxiv.  23  as  the  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Ma- 
And  Augustin,  who  was  a  native  of  Africa,  and  u  nasseh :  Hanniel  meaning  the  grace  of  God,  and 


bishop  there  of  Hippo,  a  Tyrian  colony,  has  left  on 
record  a  similar  statement  several  times.  In  one 
passage  he  says  of  the  two  languages,  "  Istae  linguae 
non  multum  inter  se  differunt"  (Quaestiones  in 
Heptateuchum,  vii.  16).  In  another  passage  he 
says,  "  Cognatae  sunt  istae  linguae  et  vicinae,  He- 
braea,  et  Punica,  et  Syra"  (In  Joann.  Tract.  15). 
Again,  on  Gen.  xviii.  9,  he  says  of  a  certain  mode 
of  speaking  (Gen.  viii.  9),  "  Locutio  est,  quam 
propterea  Hebraeam  puto,  quia  et  Punicae  linguae 
familiarissima  est,  in  qua  multa  invenimus  Hebraeis 
verbis  consonantia"  (lib.  i.  locut.  24).  And  on 
another  occasion,  remarking  on  the  word  Messias, 
he  says,  "  quod  verbum  Punicae  linguae  consonum 
est,  sicut  alia  Hebraea  multa  et  poene  omnia" 
(Contra  liieras  Petiliani,  ii.c.  104).  2ndly.  These 
statements  are  fully  confirmed  by  a  passage  of  Car 
thaginian  preserved  in  the  Poenuhts  of  Plautus, 
act  v.  scene  1 ,  and  accompanied  by  a  Latin  trans 
lation  as  part  of  the  play.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  Carthaginians  and  the  Phoenicians  were  the 
same  race ;  and  the  Carthaginian  extract  is  un 
deniably  intelligible  through  Hebrew  to  Hebrew 
scholars  (see  Bochart's  Canaan ;  and  especially  Ge- 
seniuij's  Monumenta  Phoeniciae,  p.  357-382,  where 
the  passage  is  translated  with  notes,  and  full  justice 
is  done  to  the  previous  translation  of  Bochart). 
Srdly.  The  close  kinship  of  the  two  languages  is, 
moreover,  strikingly  confirmed  by  very  many  Phoe 
nician  and  Carthaginian  names  of  places  and  persons, 
which,  destitute  of  meaning  in  Greek  and  Latin, 


Hannibal  the  grace  of  Baal.  4thly.  The  same  con 
clusion  arises  from  the  examination  of  Phoenician 
inscriptions,  preserved  to  the  present  day :  ail  of 
which  can  be  interpreted,  with  more  or  less  cer 
tainty,  through  Hebrew.  Such  inscriptions  are  of 
three  kinds: — 1st,  on  gems  and  seals;  2ndly,  on 
coins  of  the  Phoenicians  and  of  their  colonies; 
Srdly,  on  stone.  The  first  class  are  few,  unim 
portant,  and  for  the  most  part  of  uncertain  origin. 
The  oldest  known  coins  with  Phoenician  words 
belong  to  Tarsus  and  other  Cilician  cities,  and  were 
struck  in  the  period  of  the  Persian  domination.  But 
coins  are  likewise  in  existence  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  and 
other  cities  of  Phoenicia  ;  though  all  such  are  of  later 
date,  and  belong  to  the  period  either  of  the  Seleu- 
cidae,  or  of  the  Romans.  Moreover,  other  coins  have 
been  found  belonging  to  cities  in  Sicily,  Sardinia, 
Africa,  and  Spain.  The  inscriptions  on  stone  are 
either  of  a  public  or  a  private  character.  The 
former  are  comparatively  few  in  number,  but  relate 
to  various  subjects :  such,  for  example,  as  the  dedi 
cation  of  a  temple,  or  the  commemoration  of  a 
Numidian  victory  over  the  Romans.  The  private 
inscriptions  were  either  in  the  nature  of  votive 
tablets  erected  as  testimonials  of  gratitude  to  some 
deity,  or  were  sepulchral  memorials  engraven  on 
tombstones.  Phoenician  inscriptions  on  stone  have 
been  found  not  only  in  all  the  countries  last  men 
tioned,  except  Spain,  but  likewise  in  the  island  of 
Cyprus  near  Citium,  in  Malta,  at  Athens,  at  Mar 
seilles,  and  at  Sidon.0 


language  of  the  Elamites  and  Assyrians  (see  ver.  22) 
belonged  to  a  different  family.  2ndly.  That  the  Phoe 
nicians,  as  Canaanites,  are  derived  from  Ham  (Gen.  x.  6). 
If  the  recent  interpretations  of  Assyrian  Inscriptions  are 
admitted  to  prove  the  identity  of  Assyrian  with  Aramaic 
or  Syrian,  the  objectiort  to  the  word  "Semitic"  nearly 
disappears.  Mr.  Max  Mttller,  a  high  authority  on  such 
a  point,  regards  it  as  certain,  that  the  inscriptions  of 


Nineveh,  as  well  as  of  Babylon,  are  Semitic.  —iMtnrtt  an 
the  Science  of  Language,  p.  265. 

b  Movers  and  FUrst,  supported  by  the  Ejymologicum 
Magnum,  adopt  "  nedlda,"  or  "  nedldah,"  as  the  etymo 
logy  of  Dido,  in  the  »ense  of  "  travel-tost,"  or  "  wanderer.  * 
Although  a  possible  derivation,  this  seems  less  probable  in 
itself,  and  less  countenanced  by  Hebrew  analogies. 

c  In  1837  a  collection  of  all  Phoenician  inscriptions 


PHOENICIANS 

II.  Concerning  the  original  race  to  which  the 
Phoenicians  belonged,  nothing  can  be  known  with 
certainty,  because  they  are  found  already  established 
along  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  at  the  earliest  dawn  of 
authentic  history,  and  for  centuries  afterwards  there 
is  no  record  of  their  origin.  According  to  Herodotus 
(vii.  89),  they  said  of  themselves  in  his  time  that 
they  came  in  days  of  old  from  the  shores  of  the 
Ked  Sea — and  in  this  there  would  be  nothing  in  the 
•1  ightest  degree  improbable,  as  they  spok?  a  language 
cognate  to  that  of  the  Arabians,  who  inhabited  the 
east  coast  of  that  sea ;  and  both  Hebrew  and  Arabic, 
as  well  as  Aramaic,  are  seemingly  derived  from 
some  one  Semitic  language  now  lost.  Still  neither 
the  truth  nor  the  falsehood  of  the  tradition  can  now 
be  proved  ;  for  language,  although  affording  strong 
presumptions  of  race,  is  not  conclusive  on  the  point, 
as  is  shown  by  the  language  at  present  spoken  by 
the  descendants  of  the  Normans  in  France.  But 
there  is  one  point  respecting  their  race  which  can 
be  proved  to  be  in  the  highest  degree  probable,  and 
which  has  peculiar  interest  as  bearing  on  the  Jews, 
viz.  that  the  Phoenicians  were  of  the  same  race  as 
the  Canaanites.  This  remarkable  fact,  which,  taken 
in  connexion  with  the  language  of  the  Phoenicians, 
leads  to  some  interesting  results,  is  rendered  pro 
bable  by  the  following  circumstances: — 1st.  The 
native  name  of  Phoenicia,  as  already  pointed  out, 
was  Canaan,  a  name  signifying  "  lowland."  [PHOE 
NICIA.]  This  was  well  given  to  the  narrow 
slip  of  plain  between  the  Lebanon  and  the  Medi 
terranean  Sea,  in  contrast  to  the  elevated  mountain 
range  adjoining ;  but  it  would  have  been  inappro 
priate  to  that  part  of  Palestine  conquered  by  the 
Israelites,  which  was  undoubtedly  a  hill-country 
(see  Movers,  Das  Phoenizische  Alterthum,  Theil  1 
p.  5)  ;  so  that,  when  it  is  known  that  the  Israelites 
at  the  time  of  their  invasion  found  in  Palestine  a 
powerful  tribe  called  the  Canaanites,  and  from  them 
called  Palestine,  the  land  of  Canaan,  it  is  obviously 
suggested  that  the  Canaanites  came  originally  from 
the  neighbouring  plain,  called  Canaan,  along  the  sea- 
coast.  2ndly.  This  is  further  confirmed  through 
the  name  in  Africa  whereby  the  Carthaginian  Phoe 
nicians  called  themselves,  as  attested  by  Augustine, 
who  states  that  the  peasants  in  his  part  of  Africa, 
if  asked  of  what  race  they  were,  would  answer,  in 
Punic  or  Phoenician,  "  Canaanites."  "  Interrogati 
rustici  nostri  quid  sint,  Punic^  respondentes,  Canani, 
corrupts,  scilicet  sicut  in  talibus  una  littera  (accu 
rate  enim  dicere  debebant  Chanani)  quid  aliud 
respondent  quam  Chananaei"  (Opera  Omnia,  iv. 
1235;  Exposit.  Epist.  ad  Rom.  §13).  Srdly. 
The  conclusion  thus  suggested  is  strongly  supported 
by  the  tradition  that  the  names  of  persons  and 
places  in  the  land  of  Canaan — not  only  when  the 
Israelites  invaded  it,  but  likewise  previously,  when 
"  there  were  yet  but  a  few  of  them,"  and  Abraham 
is  said  to  have  visited  it — were  Phoenician  or  He 
brew:  such,  for  example,  as  Abimelek,  "Father  of 
the  king"  (Gen.  xx.  2);  Melchizedek,  "King  of 
righteousness"  (xiv.  18);  Kirjath-sepher,  "city  ol 
the  book  "  (Josh.  xv.  15). 


PHOENICIANS 


863 


then  known,  with  translations  and  notes,  was  published 
by  Gesenius,  the  great  Hebrew  lexicographer,  who  by  his 
vast  knowledge  and  unrivalled  clearness  has  done  more 
than  any  one  scholar  since  Buxtorf  to  facilitate  the  study 
nf  Hebrew.  His  opinion  on  the  relation  of  Phoenician  to 
Hebrew  is :  "  Omnino  hoc  tenendum  est,  pleraque  et  potne 
otuuia  cum  Hebraeis  convenire,  sive  radices  spectas,  sive 
/crborum  et  formandorum  et  flectendorum  rationem ' 
<Jlon.  I'hoen.  p.  335). 
d  It  seems  to  he  admitted  by  philologers  that  neither 


As  th>i  ol«nously  leads  to  the  conclusion  tliat  the 
Hebrews  adopted  Phoenician  as  their  own  Lnguage, 
or,  in  other  words,  that  what  is  called  the  Hebrew 
anguage  was  in  fact  "  the  language  of  Canaan,"  as 
i  prophet  called  it  (Is.  xix.  1 8),  and  this  not  merely 
x>etically,  but  literally  and  in  philological  truth ; 
and  as  this  is  repugnant  to  some  preconceived  no- 
•ions  respecting  the  peculiar  people,  the  question 
arises  whether  the  Israelites  might  not  have  trau&- 
ated  Canaanitish  names  into  Hebrew.  On  this 
lypothesis  the  names  now  existing  in  the  Bible  for 
persons  and  places  in  the  land  of  Canaan  would  not 
ae  the  original  names,  but  merely  the  translations 
of  those  names.  The  answer  to  this  question  is, 
1st.  That  there  is  not  the  slightest  direct  mention, 
nor  any  indirect  trace,  in  the  Bible,  of  any  such  trans 
lation.  2ndly.  That  it  is  contrary  to  the  analogy  of 
the  ordinary  Hebrew  practice  in  other  cases ;  as,  for 
example,  in  reference  to  the  names  of  the  Assyrian 
monarchs  (perhaps  of  a  foreign  dynasty)  Pul,  Tig- 
lath-Pileser,  Sennacherib,  or  of  the  Persian  monarchs 
Darius,  Ahasuerus,  Artaxerxes,  which  remain  un 
intelligible  in  Hebrew,  and  can  only  be  understood 
through  other  Oriental  languages.  Srdly.  That 
there  is  an  absolute  silence  in  the  Bible  as  to  there 
having  been  any  difference  whatever  in  language 
between  the  Israelites  and  the  Canaanites,  although 
in  other  cases  where  a  difference  existed,  that  differ 
ence  is  somewhere  alluded  to,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Egyptians  (Ps.  Ixxxi.  5,  cxiv.  1),  the  Assyrians  (Is. 
xxxvi.  11),  and  the  Chaldees  (Jer.  v.  15).  Yet  in 
the  case  of  the  Canaanites  there  was  stronger  reason 
for  alluding  to  it ;  and  without  some  allusion  to  it, 
if  it  had  existed,  the  narration  of  the  conquest  of 
Canaan  under  the  leadership  of  Joshua  would  have 
been  singularly  imperfect. 

It  remains  to  be  added  on  this  point,  that  although 
the  previous  language  of  the  Hebrews  must  be 
mainly  a  matter  for  conjecture  only,  yet  it  is  most 
in  accordance  with  the  Pentateuch  to  suppose  that 
they  spoke  originally  Aramaic.  They  came  through 
Abraham,  according  to  their  traditions,  from  Ur  of 
the  Chaldees  in  Mesopotamia,  where  Aramaic  at  a 
later  period  is  known  to  have  been  spoken ;  they 
are  instructed  in  Deuteronomy  to  say  that  an 
Aramaean  (Syrian)  ready  to  perish  was  their  father 
(xxvi.  5) ;  and  the  two  earliest  words  of  Aramaic 
contained  in  the  Bible,  Yegar  sahaduthd,  are,  in 
the  Book  of  Genesis,  put  into  the  mouth  of  Laban, 
the  son  of  Abraham's  brother,  and  first  cousin  of 
Isaac  (xxxi.  47).d 

III.  In  regard  to  Phoenician  trade,  as  connected 
with  the  Israelites,  the  following  points  are  worthy 
of  notice.  1.  Up  to  the  time  of  David,  not  one  of 
the  twelve  tribes  seems  to  have  possessed  a  single 
harbour  on  the  sea-coast:  it  was  impossible  there 
fore  that  they  could  become  a  commercial  people. 
It  is  true  that  according  to  Judg.  i.  31,  combined 
with  Josh.  xix.  26,  Accho  or  Acre,  with  its  excellent 
harbour,  had  been  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Asher ; 
but  from  the  same  passage  in  Judges  it  seems  cer 
tain  that  the  tribe  of  Asher  did  not  really  obtain 
possession  of  Acre,  which  continued  to  be  held  by 

Hebrew,  Aramaic;  nor  Arabic,  is  derived  the  one  from  the 
other ;  just  as  the  same  may  be  said  of  Italian,  Spanish, 
and  Portuguese  (see  Lewis,  On  the  Romance  Language*, 
p.  42).  It  is  a  question,  however,  which  of  the  three 
languages,  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  and  Arabic,  is  likely  to  re 
semble  most  the  original  Semitic  language.  Ftirst,  one 
of  the  best  Aramaic  scholars  now  living,  is  in  favour  ol 
Aramaic  (Lehrgebaude  der  Aramaischen  Idiome,  p.  2). 
But  his  opinion  has  been  strongly  impugned  in  favour  ol 
Hebrew  (Block's  EinleUung  in  das  A.  T.  p.  76). 


864 


PHOENICIANS 


the  Canaanites.     However  wistfully,  therefore,  th 
Isn^lites  might  regard  the  wealth  accruing  to  thei 
neighbours  the  Phoenicians  from  trade,  to  vie  wit! 
them  in  this  respect  was  out  of  the  question.     Bu 
from  the  time  that  David  had  conquered  Edom,  an 
opening  for  trade  was  afforded  to  the  Israelites 
The  command  of  Ezion-geber  near  Elath,  in  the 
land  of  Edom,  enabled  them  to  engage  in  the  navi 
gation  of  the   Red  Sea.     As   they  were  novices 
however,  at  sailing,  as  the  navigation  of  the  Re( 
Sea,  owing  to  its  currents,  winds,  and  rocks,  is 
dangerous  even  to  modern  sailors,  and  as  the  Phoe 
nicians,  during  the  period  of  the  independence  o 
Edom,  were  probably  allowed  to  trade  from  Ezion- 
geber,  it  was  politic  in  Solomon  to  permit  the  Phoe 
nicians  of  Tyre  to  have  docks,  and  build  ships  al 
Ezion-^eber  on  condition  that  his  sailors  and  vessels 
might  have  the  benefit  of  their  experience.     The 
results   seem    to   have  been  strikingly  successful. 
The  Jews  and  Phoenicians  made  profitable  voyages 
to  Ophir  in  Arabia,  whence  gold  was  imported  into 
Judaea  in  large  quantities ;  and  once  in  three  years 
still  longer  voyages  were  made,  by  vessels  which 
may  possibly  have  touched  at  Ophir,  though  their 
imports  were  not  only  gold,  but  likewise  silver, 
ivory,  apes,  and  peacocks,  1  K.  x.  22.  [TARSHISH.] 
There  seems  at  the  same  time  to  have  been  a  great 
direct  trade  with  the  Phoenicians  for  cedar-wood 
(ver.  27),  and  generally  the  wealth  of  the  kingdom 
i-eached  an  unprecedented  point.     If  the  union  of 
the  tribes  had  been  maintained,  the  whole  sea-coast 
of  Palestine  would  have  afforded  additional  sources 
of  revenue  through  trade;  and  perhaps  even  ulti 
mately  the  "  great  plain  of  Sidon"  itself  might  have 
formed  part  of  the  united  empire.     But  if  any  pos 
sibilities  of  this  kind  existed,  they  were  destroyed 
by  the   disastrous  secession   of  the  ten  tribes;  a 
heavy  blow  from  which  the  Hebrew  race  has  never 
yet  recovered  during  a  period  of  nearly  3000  years.* 
2.  After  the  division  into  two   kingdoms,  the 
curtain  falls  on  any  commercial  relation  between 
the  Israelites  arid  Phoenicians   until  a  relation  is 
brought  to  notice,  by  no  means  brotherly,  as  in  the 
fleets  which  navigated  the  Red  Sea,  nor  friendly,  as 
between  buyers  and  sellers,  but  humiliating  and 
exasperating,  as  between  the  buyers  and  the  bought. 
The  relation  is  meant  which  existed  between  the 
two  nations  when  Israelites  were  sold  as  slaves  by 
Phoenicians.     It  was  a  custom  in  antiquity,  when 
one  nation  went  to  war  against  another,  for  mer 
chants  to  be  present  in  one  or  other  of  the  hostile 
camps,  in  order  to  purchase  prisoners  of  war  as 
slaves.     Thus  at  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  when 
a  large  army  was  sent  by  Lysias  to  invade  and  sub 
due  the  land  of  Judah,   it  is  related  that   "the 
merchants  of  the  country,   hearing   the   fame   of 
them,  took  silver  and  gold  very  much  with  servants, 
and  came  into  the  camp  to  buy  the  children  of  Israel 
for  slaves"  (1  Mace.  iii.  41),  and  when  it  is  related 
that,  at  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes,  the  enormous  number  of  40,000  men  were 
*liin  in  battle,  it  is  added  that  there  were  "  no  fewer 

e  After  the  disruption,  the  period  of  union  was  looked 
bock  to  with  endless  longing. 

In  „  Del  ill.  6  (Heb.  iv.  6),  "  sons  of  the  lonlans,"  i.e. 
of  thn  '.ireeks,  is  the  most  natural  translation  of  Benei- 
Yaviamm.  But  there  is  a  Yawan  mentioned  in  Arabia 
reiix,  and  there  is  still  a  Yawan  In  Yemen :  and 
both  Crodner  and  Knrst  think  that,  looking  to  Am. 
I.  9,  ac  Arabian  people,  and  not  Grecians,  are  here 
alluded  to.  The  threat,  however,  of  selling  the  Phoe 
nicians  In  torn  to  the  Sabaoans,  "  a  people  far  off/' 


PHOENICIANS 

M>M  t'<an  slain"  (2  Mace.  v.  14;  Creditor's  7<v7, 
p.  2«J).  Now  this  practice,  which  is  th:u  illus 
trated  by  details  at  a  much  later  period,  undoubt 
edly  prevailed  in  earlier  times  (Odyssey,  xv.  4^'7  • 
Herod,  i.  1),  and  is  alluded  to  in  a  threatening 
manner  against  the  Phoenicians  by  the  prophet* 
(Joel  iii.  4,  and  Am.  i.  9,  10),  about  800  v.-.-n-s 
before  Christ.'  The  circumstances  which  led  to  thi» 
state  of  things  may  be  thus  explained.  After  the 
division  of  the  two  kingdoms,  there  is  no  trace  of 
any  friendly  relation  between  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
and  the  Phoenicians:  the  interest  of  the  latter 
rather  led  them  to  cultivate  the  friendship  of  the 
kingdom  of  Israel ;  and  the  Israelitish  king,  Ahab, 
had  a  Sidonian  princess  as  his  wife  (1  K.  xvi.  31). 
Now,  not  improbably  in  consequence  of  these  rela 
tions,  when  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah  endeavoured 
to  restore  the  trade  of  the  Jews  in  the  Red  Sea,  and 
for  this  purpose  built  large  ships  at  Ezion-geber  to 
go  to  Ophir  for  gold,  he  did  not  admit  the  Phoeni 
cians  to  any  participation  in  the  venture,  and  when 
king  Ahaziah,  Ahab's  son,  asked  to  have  a  share  in 
it,  his  request  was  distinctly  refused  (1  K.  xxii. 
48,  49).  That  attempt  to  renew  the  trade  of  the 
Jews  in  the  Red  Sea  failed,  and  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoram,  Jehoshaphat's  son,  Edom  revolted  from 
Judah  and  established  its  independence;  so  that  if 
the  Phoenicians  wished  to  despatch  trading  vessels 
from  Ezion-geber,  Edom  was  the  power  which  it 
was  mainly  their  interest  to  conciliate,  and  not  Judah. 
Under  these  circumstances  the  Phgenicians  seem, 
not  only  to  have  purchased  and  to  have  sold  again 
as  slaves,  and  probably  in  some  instances  to  have 
kidnapped  inhabitants  of  Judah,  but  even  to  have 
sold  them  to  their  enemies  the  Edomites  (Joel, 
Amos,  as  above).  This  was  regarded  with  reason  as 
a  departure  from  the  old  brotherly  covenant,  when 
Hiram  was  a  great  lover  of  David,  and  subsequently 
md  the  most  friendly  commercial  relations  with 
David's  son  :  and  this  may  be  regarded  as  the  ori 
ginal  foundation  of  the  hostility  of  the  Hebre\? 
M-ophets  towards  Phoenician  Tyre.  (Is.  xxiii. ;  Ez. 
xxviii.) 

3.  The  only  other  notice  in  the  Old  Testament 
of  trade  between  the  Phoenicians  and  the  Israelite* 
s  in  the  account  given  by  the  prophet  Ezekiel  of 
the  trade  of  Tyre  (xxvii.  17).  While  this  account 
supplies  valuable  information  respecting  the  various 
commercial  dealings  of  the  most  illustrious  of  Phoe- 
lician  cities  [TrRE],  it  likewise  makes  direct  men- 
ion  of  the  exports  to  it  from  Palestine.  These 
vere  wheat,  honey  (i.  e.  syrup  of  grapes),  oil,  and 
balm.  The  export  of  wheat  deserves  attention  (con 
cerning  the  other  exports,  see  HONEY,  OIL,  BALM), 
>ecause  it  shows  how  important  it  must  have  been 
o  the  Phoenicians  to  maintain  friendly  relations 
with  their  Hebrew  neighbours,  and  especially  with 
he  adjoining  kingdom  of  Israel.  The  wheat  is  called 
wheat  of  Minnith,e  which  was  a  town  of  the  Am 
monites,  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  only  once 
mentioned  elsewhere  in  the  Bible:  and  it  is  not 
certain  whether  Minnith  was  a  great  inland  empo- 


•hich  seems  to  imply  that  the  Yawanim  were  not  "  fai 
ff,"  tends  to  make  it  improbable  thnt  the  Yawaiilnj 

ere  near  the  Sabaeans,  as  they  would  have  been  in 

rabia  Felix. 

*  In  ver.  17  the  word  "  Pannag"  occurs,  which  is  not 
ound  elsewhere.  Opinions  are  divided  as  to  whether  it 
s  the  name  of  a  place,  like  Minnith,  or  the  name  of  an 

tide  of  food ;  "  sweet  cake,"  for  example.  Perhaps  nt 
ne  can  really  do  more  than  make  a  guess  on  the  point 
'he  evidence  for  each  inclining  is  inconclusive. 


PHOENICIANS 

hum,  where  large  purchases  of  corn  were  made,  or 
whether  the  wheat  in  its  neighbourhood  was  pecu 
liarly  good,  and  gave  its  name  to  all  wheat  of  a 
certain  fineness  in  quality.     Still,  whatever  may 
be  the  correct  explanation  respecting  Minnith,  the 
only  countries  specified  for  exports  of  wheat  are 
Judah  and  Israel,  and  it  was  through  the  territory 
of  Israel  that  the  wheat  would  be  imported  into 
Phoenicia.     It  is  suggested  by  Heereu  in  his  His 
torical  Researches,  ii.  117,  that  the  fact  of  Pales 
tine  being  thus,  as  it  were,  the  granary  of  Phoenicia, 
explains  in  the  clearest  manner  the  lasting  peace 
that  prevailed  between  the  two  countries.     He  ob 
serves  that  with  many  of  the  other  adjoining  nations 
the  Jews  lived  in  a  state  of  almost  continual  war 
fare  ;  but  that  they  never  once  engaged  in  hosti 
lities  with  their  nearest  neighbours  the  Phoenicians. 
The  fact  itself  is  certainly  worthy  of  special  notice  ; 
and  is  the  more  remarkable,  as   there  were   not 
wanting  tempting  occasions  for  the  interference  of 
the  Phoenicians  in  Palestine  if  they  had  desired  it. 
When   Elijah   at   the    brook  Kishon,  at    the  dis 
tance  of  not  more  than  thirty  miles  in  a  straight 
line  from   Tyre,  put   to    death    450  prophets  of 
Baa.  (1  K.  xriii.  40),  we    can  well  conceive  the 
agitation  and  anger  which  such  a  deed  must  have 
produced  at  Tyre.     And  at  Sidon,  more  especially, 
which    was    only    twenty    miles    farther    distant 
from    the    scene  of  slaughter,   the  first   impulse 
of  the  inhabitants   must    have    been    to    march 
forth   at   once  in   battle  array  to  strengthen   the 
hands  of  Jezebel,  their  own   princess,   in    behalf 
of  Baal,  their  Phoenician  God.     When  again  after 
wards,  by  means  of  falsehood  and  treachery,  Jehu  was 
enabled  to  massacre  the  worshippers  of  Baal  in  the 
land  of  Israel,  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  intelligence 
was  received  in  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  the  other  cities  of 
Phoenicia,  with  a  similar  burst  of  horror  and  indig 
nation  to  that  with  which  the  news  of  the  Massacre  on 
St.  Bartholomew's  day  was  received  in  all  Protestant 
countries ;  and  there  must  have  been  an  intense  desire 
in  the  Phoenicians,  if  they  had  the  power,  to  invade 
the  territories  of  Israel  without  delay  and  inflict 
signal  chastisement  on  Jehu  (2  K.  x.  18-28).     The 
fact  that  Israel  was  their  granary  would  undoubt 
edly  have  been  an  element  in  restraining  the  Phoe 
nicians,  even  on  occasions  such  as  these ;  but  pro 
bably  still  deeper  motives  were  likewise  at  work. 
It  seems  to  have  been  part  of  the  settled  policy  oi 
the  Phoenician  cities  to  avoid  attempts  to  make 
conquests  on  the  continent  of  Asia.     For  this  there 
were  excellent  reasons  in  the  position  of  their  small 
territory,  which  with  the  range  of  Lebanon  on  one 
side  as  a  barrier,  and  the  sea  on  the  other,  was 
easily  defensible  by  a  wealthy  power  having  com 
mand   of   the    sea,   against   second   or   third-rate 
powers,  but  for  the  same  reason  was  not  well  situ 
ated  for  offensive  war  on  the  land  side.     It  may 
be  added  that  a  pacific  policy  was  their  manifest 
interest  as  a  commercial  nation,  unless  by  war  they 
were  morally  certain  to  obtain  an  important  acces 
sion  of  territory,  or  unless  a  warlike  policy  was  an 
absolute  necessity  to  prevent  the  formidable  pre 
ponderance  of  any  one  great  neighbour.     At  last 
indeed,  they  even  carried  their  system  of  non-inter 
vention  in  continental  wars  too  far,  if  it  would  hav< 
been  possible  for  them  by  any  alliances  in  Syria 
and  Coele-Syria  to  prevent  the  establishment  on 
the  other  side  of  the  Lebanon  of  one  great  empire 
For  from  that  moment  their  ultimate  doom  wa 
certain,  and  it  was  merely  a  question  of  time  as  it 
the  arrival  of  the  fatal  hour  when  they  would  lose 
VOL.  II. 


PHOENICIANS 


865 


,heir  independence.  But  too  little  .s  known  of  the 
letails  of  their  history  to  warrant  an  opinion  as  to 
hether  they  might  at  any  time  by  any  course  of 
Kilicy  have  raised  up  a  barrier  against  the  empire 
f  the  Assyrians  or  Chaldees. 

IV.  The  religion  of  the  Phoenicians  is  a  subject 
of  vast  extent  and  considerable  perplexity  in  details, 
)ut  of  its  general  features  as  bearing  upon  the 
religion  of  the  Hebrews  there  can  be  no  doubt. 
As  opposed  to  Monotheism,  it  was  a  Pantheistical 
personification  of  the  forces  of  nature,  and  in  its 
nest  philosophical  shadowing  forth  of  the  Supreme 
powers,  it  may  be  said  to  have  represented  the 
nnale  and  female  principles  of  production.  In  its 
popular  form,  it  was  especially  a  worship  of  the  sun, 
moon,  and  five  planets,  or,  as  it  might  have  been 
expressed  according  to  ancient  notions,  of  the  seven 
planets — the  most  beautiful,  and  perhaps  the  mobt 
natural,  form  of  idolatry  ever  presented  to  the 
human  imagination.  These  planets,  however,  were 
not  regarded  as  lifeless  globes  of  matter,  obedient  to 
physical  laws,  but  as  intelligent  animated  powers, 
influencing  the  human  will,  and  controlling  human 
destinies.  An  account  of  the  different  Phoenician 
gods  named  in  the  Bible  will  be  found  elsewhere 
[see  BAAL,  ASHTAROTH,  ASHEEAH,  &c.]  ;  but  it 
will  be  proper  here  to  point  out  certain  effects  which 
the  circumstance  of  their  being  worshipped  in  Phoe 
nicia  produced  upon  the  Hebrews. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  their  worship  was  a  constant 
temptation  to  Polytheism  and  idolatry.  It  is  the  gene 
ral  tendency  of  trade,  by  making  merchants  acquainted 
with  different  countries  and  various  modes  of  thought, 
to  enlarge  the  mind,  to  promote  the  increase  of 
knowledge,  and,  in  addition,  by  the  wealth  which 
it  diffuses,  to  afford  opportuuities  in  various  ways 
for  intellectual  culture.  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted 
that,  owing  to  these  circumstances,  the  Phoenicians, 
as  a  great  commercial  people,  were  more  generally 
intelligent,  and  as  we  should  now  say  civilized,  thau 
the  inland  agricultural  population  of  Palestine. 
When  the  simple-minded  Jews,  therefore,  came  in 
contact  with  a  people  more  versatile  and,  appa 
rently,  more  enlightened  thau  themselves,  but  who 
nevertheless,  either  in  a  philosophical  or  in  a  popular 
form,  admitted  a  system  of  Polytheism,  an  influence 
would  be  exerted  on  Jewish  minds,  tending  to  make 
them  regard  their  exclusive  devotion  to  their  own 
one  God,  Jehovah,  however  transcendant  His  attri 
butes,  as  unsocial  and  morose.  It  is  in  some  such 
way  that  we  must  account  for  the  astonishing  fact 
that  Solomon  himself,  the  wisest  of  the  Hebrew 
race,  to  whom  Jehovah  is  expressly  stated  to  have 
appeared  twice — once,  not  long  after  his  m:irringe 
with  an  Egyptian  princess,  on  the  night  after  his 
sacrificing  1000  burnt  offerings  on  the  high  place 
of  Gibeon,  and  the  second  time,  after  the  consecra 
tion  of  the  Temple — should  have  been  so  far  beguiled 
by  his  wives  in  his  old  age  as  to  become  a  Poly- 
theist,  worshipping,  among  other  deities,  the  Phoe 
nician  or  Sidonian  goddess  Ashtaroth  (1  K.  iii.  1-5, 
ix.  2,  xi.  1-5).  This  is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  so 
interpreted,  as  if  he  ever  ceased  to  worship  Jehovah, 
to  whom  he  had  erected  the  magnificent  Temple, 
which  in  history  is  so  generally  connected  with 
Solomon's  name.  Probably,  according  to  his  own 
erroneous  conceptions,  he  never  ceased  to  regard 
himself  as  a  loyal  worshipper  of  Jehovah,  but  he  at 
the  same  time  deemed  this  not  incompatible  with 
sacrificing  at  the  altars  of  other  gods  likewise. 
Still  the  fact  remains,  that  Solomon,  who  by  hit 
Temple  in  it-s  ultimate  results  did  so  much  fo» 

•A  K 


866 


PHOENICIANS 


•«ta1>lishing  the  doctrine  of  one  only  God,  died 
himself  a  practical  Polytheist.  And  if  this  was 
the  case  with  him,  Polytheism  in  other  sovereigns 
of  inferior  excellence  can  excite  no  surprise.  With 
such  an  example  before  him,  it  is  no  wonder  that 
Ahab,  an  essentially  bad  man,  should  after  his 
marriage  with  a  Sidonian  princess  not,  only  openly 
tolerate,  but  encourage,  the  worship  of  Baal ;  though 
it  is  to  be  remembered  even  in  him,  that  he  did  not 
disavow  the  authority  of  Jehovah,  but,  when  re 
buked  by  his  great  antagonist  Elijah,  he  rent  his 
clothes,  and  put  sackcloth  on  his  flesh,  and  showed 
other  signs  of  contrition  evidently  deemed  sincere 
(1  K.  xvi.  31,  xxi.  27-29).  And  it  is  to  be  observed 
generally  that  although,  before  the  reformation  of 
Josiah  (2  K.  ixiii.),  Polytheism  prevailed  in  Judah 
as  well  as  Israel,  yet  it  seems  to  have  been  more 
intense  and  universal  in  Israel,  as  might  have  been 
expected  from  its  greater  proximity  to  Phoenicia : 
and  Israel  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  if  it  had  set 
the  bad  example  to  Judah  (2  K.  xvii.  19  ;  Jer.  iii.  8) : 
though,  considering  the  example  of  Solomon,  this 
cannot  be  accepted  as  a  strict  historical  statement. 

2.  The  Phoenician  religion  was  likewise  in  other 
respects  deleterious  to  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine, 
being  in  some  points  essentially  demoralizing.  For 
example,  it  sanctioned  the  dreadful  superstition  of 
burning  children  as  sacrifices  to  a  Phoenician  god. 
"  They  have  built  also,"  says  Jeremiah,  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  (xix.  5),  "  the  high  places  of  Baal, 
to  bum  their  sons  with  fire  for  burnt  offerings  unto 
Baal,  which  I  commanded  not,  nor  spake  it,  neither 
came  it  into  my  mind"  (comp.  Jer.  xxxii.  35). 
This  horrible  custom  was  probably  in  its  origin 
founded  on  the  idea  of  sacrificing  to  a  god  what 
was  best  and  most  valuable  in  the  eyes  of  the 
suppliant  ;h  but  it  could  not  exist  without  having  a 
tendency  to  stifle  natural  feelings  of  affection,  and 
to  harden  the  heart.  It  could  scarcely  have  been 
first  adopted  otherwise  than  in  the  infancy  of  the 
Phoenician  race  ;  but  grown-up  men  and  grown-up 
nations,  with  their  moral  feelings  in  other  respects 
cultivated,  are  often  _he  slaves  in  particular  points 
of  an  early-implanted  superstition,  and  it  is  worthy 
of  note  that,  more  than  250  years  after  the  death 
of  Jeremiah,  the  Carthaginians,  when  their  city  was 
besieged  by  Agathocles,  offered  as  burnt  sacrifices  to 
the  planet  Saturn,  at  the  public  expense,  200  boys 
of  the  highest  aristocracy ;  and,  subsequently,  when 
they  had  obtained  a  victory,  sacrificed  the  most  beau 
tiful  captives  in  the  like  manner  (Diod.  xx.  14,  65). 
If  such  things  were  possible  among  the  Cartha 
ginians  at  a  period  so  much  later,  it  is  easily  con 
ceivable  how  common  the  practice  of  sacrificing 
children  may  have  been  at  the  time  of  Jeremiah 
among  the  Phoenicians  generally:  and  if  this  were 
so,  it  would  have  been  certain  to  prevail  among 
the  Israelites  who  worshipped  the  same  Phoenician 
gods;  especially  as,  owing  to  the  intermarriages  of 
their  forefathers  with  Canaan ites,  there  were  pro 
bably  few  Israelites  who  may  not  have  had  some 
Phoenician  blood  in  their  veins  (Judg.  iii.  5). 
Again,  juris  of  the  Phoenician  religion,  especially 


•»  Whatever  else  the  arrested  sacrifice  of  Isaac  sym 
bolizes  (Gen.  xxii.  131,  it  likewise  symbolizes  the  substi 
tution  in  sacrifices  of  the  inferior  animals  for  children. 
Kai  tli,  if  commanded,  was  ready  to  sacrifice  even  children ; 
but  the  Hebrews  were  spared  this  dreadful  trial,  and  were 
permitted  to  substitute  sheep,  and  goats,  and  bulls. 

1  In  Hebrew  there  is  a  root  Kadam,  from  which  is 
Sedan,  a  noun  with  the  Amble  meaning  of  the  "Kast" 
»nU  ..  aacjem  time."  With  the  former  sense,  Cadm=s 


PHOKNICIANS 

the  worship  of  Astartc,  tended  to  encourage  disso 
luteness  in  the  relations  of  the  sexes,  ami  even  tj 
sanctify  impurities  of  the  most  abominable  descrip 
tion.  Connected  with  her  temples  and  images 
there  were  male  and  female  prostitutes,  whose 
polluted  gains  formed  part  of  the  sacred  fund 
appropriated  to  the  service  of  the  goddess.  And, 
to  complete  the  deification  of  immorality,  the) 
were  even  known  by  the  name  of  the  "  consecrated." 
Nothing  can  show  more  clearly  how  deeply  this 
baneful  example  had  eaten  into  the  hearts  and  habits 
of  the  people,  notwithstanding  positive  prohibitions 
and  the  rej>eated  denunciations  of  the  Hebrew  pro 
phets,  than  the  almost  incredible  fact  that,  previous 
to  the  reformation  of  Josiah,  this  class  of  persons 
was  allowed  to  have  houses  or  tents  close  to  the 
temple  of  Jehovah,  whose  treasury  was  perhaps 
even  replenished  by  their  gains.  (2  K.  xxiii.  7  ; 
Deut.  xxiii.  17, 18 ;  IK.  xiv.  24,  TV.  12,  xxii.  46; 
Hos.  iv.  14  ;  Job  xxxvi.  14  ;  Lucian,  Lucius,  35. 
De  Ded  Syra,  27,  51  ;  Gesenius,  Thesaurus,  s.  v, 
EHJ5,  p.  1196 ;  Movers,  Pkoenizicr,  i.  p.  678,  &c.; 
Spencer,  De  Legibus  Hebraeorum,  i.  p.  561.) 

V.  The  most  important  intellectual  invention  of 
man,  that  of  letters,  was  universally  asserted  by 
the  Greeks  and  Romans  to  have  been  communicated 
by  the  Phoenicians  to  the  Greeks.  The  earliest 
written  statement  on  the  subject  is  in  Herodotus, 
v.  57,  58,  who  incidentally,  in  giving  an  account  of 
Harmodius  and  Aristogeiton,  says  that  they  were 
by  race  Gephyraeans ;  and  that  he  had  ascertained 
by  inquiry  that  the  Gephyraeans  were  Phoenicians, 
amongst  those  Phoenicians  who  came  over  with 
Cadmus'  into  Boeotia,  and  instructing  the  Greeks  in 
many  other  arts  and  sciences,  taught  them  likewise 
letters.  It  was  an  easy  step  from  this  to  believe,  as 
many  of  the  ancients  believed,  that  the  Phoenicians 
invented  letters. 

"  Phoenices  primi,  famae  si  creditur,  ansi 
MaHsuram  rudibus  vocem  signare  figurls." 

LUCAN'S  Pharsal.  111.  220,  221. 

This  belief,  however,  was  not  universal ;  and  Pliny 
the  Elder  expresses  his  own  opinion  that  they  were 
of  Assyrian  origin,  while  he  relates  the  opinion  of 
Gellius  that  they  were  invented  by  the  Egyptians, 
and  of  others  that  they  were  invented  by  the 
Syrians  (Nat.  Hist.  vii.  57).  Now,  as  Phoenician 
has  been  shown  to  be  nearly  the  same  language  as 
Hebrew,  the  question  arises  whether  Hebrew  throws 
any  light  on  the  time  or  the  mode  of  the  invention 
of  letters,  on  the  question  of  who  invented  them,  or 
on  the  universal  belief  of  antiquity  that  the  know 
ledge  of  them  was  communicated  to  the  Greeks  by 
the  Phoenicians.  The  answer  is  as  follows:  Hebrew 
literature  is  as  silent  as  Greek  literature  respecting 
the  precise  date  of  the  invention  of  letters,  and  the 
name  of  the  inventor  or  inventors ;  but  the  names 
of  the  letters  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet  are  in 
accordance  with  the  belief  that  the  Phoenician? 
communicated  the  knowledge  of  letters  to  the 
Greeks :  for  many  of  the  names  of  letters  in  the 
Greek  alphabet,  though  without  meaning  in  Greek, 

might  mean  "  Eastern,"  or  one  from  the  East,  like  the 
name  "Norman,"  or  "Fleming,"  or,  still  more  closely,  the 
"  Western,"  or  "  Southern,"  in  English.  With  the  latter 
sense  for  Kedem,  the  name  would  mean  "Olden"  or 
"  Antient,"  and  an  etymological  significance  might  bo 
given  to  a  line  of  Sophocles,  in  which  Cadmus  is  ne.T 
tioned : 

"ft  TcVfa   KaSflov    TOV    waAai   via.  Tfxx'vtj. 

OeJif.    Tyr  1. 


PHOENICIANS 

fiave  a  meaning  in  the  corresponding  letters  of 
Hebrew.  For  example :  the  four  first  letters  of 
the  Greek  alphabet,  .nipha,  Beta,  Gamma,  Lteita, 
•are  not  to  be  explained  through  the  Greek  language  ; 
but  the  corresponding  four  first  letters  of  the  He 
brew  alphabet,  viz.  Aleph,  Beth,  Gimel,  Daleth, 
being  essentially  the  same  words,  are  to  be  explained 
ji  Hebrew.  Thus  in  Hebrew  Aleph  or  Eleph 
means  an  ox ;  Beth  or  Bayith  a  house ;  Gamal  a 
camel ;  and  Deleth  a  door.  And  the  same  is 
essentially,  though  not  always  so  clearly,  the  case 
with  almost  all  the  sixteen  earliest  Greek  letters 
said  to  have  been  brought  over  from  Phoenicia  by 
Cadmus,  A  B  T  A  E  F I  K  A  M  N  O  IT  P  2  T  ;k  and 
called  on  this  account  Phoenician  or  Cadmeian 
letters  (Herodot.  1.  c.  ;  Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  vii.  57; 
Jelfs  Greek  Gram.  i.  p.  2).  Moreover,  as  to 
writing,  the  ancient  Hebrew  letters,  substantially 
the  same  as  Phoenician,  agree  closely  with  ancient 
Greek  letters — a  fact  which,  taken  by  itself,  would 
not  prove  that  the  Greeks  received  them  from  the 
Phoenicians,  as  the  Phoenicians  might  possibly  have 
received  them  from  the  Greeks ;  but  which,  viewed 
in  connexion  with  Greek  traditions  on  the  subject, 
and  with  the  significance  of  the  letters  in  Hebrew, 
seems  reasonably  conclusive  that  the  letters  were 
transported  from  Phoenicia  into  Greece.  It  is  true 
that  modem  Hebrew  writing  and  the  later  Greek 
writing  of  antiquity  have  not  much  resemblance  to 
each  other ;  but  this  is  owing  partly  to  gradual 
changes  in  the  writing  of  Greek  letters,  and  partly 
to  the  fact  that  the  character  in  which  Hebrew  Bibles 
are  now  printed,  called  the  Assyrian  or  square  charac 
ter,  was  not  the  one  originally  in  use  among  the  Jews, 
but  seems  to  have  been  learnt  in  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  and  afterwards  gradually  adopted  by  them 
on  their  return  to  Palestine.  (Gesenius,  Geschichte 
der  Hebraischen  Sprache  und  Schrift,  p.  156.) 

As  to  the  mode  in  which  letters  were  invented, 
some  clue  is  afforded  by  some  of  the  early  Hebrew 
and  the  Phoenician  characters,  which  evidently 
aimed,  although  very  rudely,  like  the  drawing  o 
very  young  children,  to  represent  the  object  which 
the  name  of  the  letter  signified.  Thus  the  earliest 
Alpha  has  some  vague  resemblance  to  an  ox's  head 
Gimel  to  a  camel's  back,  Daleth  to  the  door  of  a 
tent,  Vau  to  a  hook  or  peg.  Again,  the  written 
.etters,  called  respectively,  Lamed  (an  ox-goad),  Ayin 
''an  eye),  Qoph  (the  back  of  the  head),  Reish  or  Roash 
(the  head),  and  Tav  (a  cross),  are  all  efforts,  more  o 
Jess  successful,  U,  pourtray  the  things  signified  b) 
the  names.  It  is  said  that  this  is  equally  true  o 
Egyptian  phonetic  hieroglyphics ;  but,  however  thi 
may  be,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  understanding  in 
this  way  the  formation  of  an  alphabet ;  when  th 
idea  of  representing  the  component  sounds  or  half 
sounds  of  a  word  by  figures  was  once  conceived 
But  the  original  idea  of  thus  representing  sounds 
though  peculiarly  felicitous,  was  by  no  mean 
obvious,  and  millions  of  men  lived  and  died  withou 
its  occurring  to  any  one  of  them. 

In  conclusion,  it  may  not  be  unimportant  t 
observe  that,  although  so  many  letters  of  the  Gree 
alphabet  have  a  meaning  in  Hebrew  or  Phoenician 


PHOENICIANS 


867 


et  their  Greek  names  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  or 
^hoenician,  but  in  the  Aramaic  form.     There  is  n 
eculiar  form  of  the  noun  in  Aramaic,  called  by 
rammarians  the  status  emphaticus,  in  which  the 
ermination  a  (K  )  is  added  to  a  noun,  modifying 
;  according  to  certain  laws.     Originally  this  termi- 
ation   was   probably  identical   with    the   definite 
j-ticle  "  ha ;"  which,  instead  of  being  prefixed,  was 
ubjoined  to  the  noun,  as  is  the  case  now  with  the 
efinite  article  in  the  Scandinavian  languages.    This 
orm  in  a  is  found  to  exist  in  the  oldest  specimen 
>f  Aramaic  in   the  Bible,   Yegar  sahadvtkd,  in 
3enesis  xxxi.    47,  where  sahaduth,  testimony,  is 
used  by  Laban  in  the  status  emphaticus.     Now  it 
s  worthy  of  note  that  the  names  of  a  considerable 
>roporlion    of   the    "  Cadmeian    letters "    in   the 
Jreek  alphabet  are   in   this  Aramaic  form,  such 
as  Alpha,  Beta,  Gamma,  Delta,  Eta,  Theta,  Iota, 
Cappa,  Lamda ;  and  although  this  fact  by  itself  is 
lot  sufficient  to  support  an  elaborate  theory  on  the 
iubject,  it  seems  in  favour,  as  far  as  it  goes,  of  the 
conjecture  that  when  the  Greeks  originally  received 
he  knowledge  of  letters,  the  names  by  which  the 
several  letters  were  taught  to  them  were  Aramaic. 
[t  has  been  suggested,  indeed,  by  Gesenius,  that  the 
reeks  themselves  made  the  addition  in  all  these 
cases,  in  order  to  give  the  words  a  Greek  termina 
tion,  as  "  they  did  with  other  Phoenician  words, 
as  melet,  nd\8a,  nevel,  vd&\a."     If,  however,  a 
list  is  examined  of  Phoenician  words  naturalized  in 
Greek,  it  will  not  be  found  that  the  ending  in  d 
has   been  the  favourite  mode  of  accommodating 
them  to  the  Greek  language.     For  example,  the 
following    sixteen   words   are   specified   by   Bleek 
(EMeitung  in  das  A.  T.,  p.  69),  as  having  been 
communicated    through    the    Phoenicians    to    the 
Greeks :    vdpSos  =  ndred  ;    KLvvd.fj.ojfj.ov  =  kinna- 
mon ;  ffdirtyftpos  =  sapplr ;  f-iv^fsa,  p&pov  —  mor 
xarria,    Kcurtrla  =  ketziah  ;     Sffffwiros  =  Szov  ; 
\ifiavos,  Ai/SewwTo'j  =  levonah ;  fivffffos  =  bfitz ; 
Kvfiivov  =  kammon :  \tAvva.  =  msln ;  <f>C«o  j  =  puk ; 
ffvifdpivos  =  shikmah ;  vdfi\a  =  ngvel ;  Kiv&pa.  = 
kinnfir  ;    K<£/OJ\OS  =  g&mal  ;    ij^ajScs?  =  eravon. 
Now  it  is  remarkable  that,  of  these  sixteen,  only  four 
end  in  a  in  Greek  which  have  not  a  similar  tei-mi- 
nation  in  Hebrew  ;  and,  of  these  four,  one  is  a  late 
Alexandrine   translation,   and  two   are   names  of 
musical  instruments,  which,  very  probably,  may 
first  have  been  communicated  to  Greeks,  through 
Syrians,  in  Asia  Minor.     And,  under  any  circum 
stances,  the  proportion  of  the  Phoenician  wordf 
which  end  in  a  in  Greek  is  too  small  to  warrant 
the  inference   that  any  common  practice  of  th« 
Greeks  in  this  respect  will  account  for  the  seem 
ing  fact  that  nine  out  of  the  sixteen  Cadmeian  letters 
are  in  the  Aramaic  status  emphaticus.    The  infer 
ence,  therefore,   from  their  endings  in  a  remain? 
unshaken.     Still  this  must  not  be  regarded  in  any 
way  as  proving  that  the  alphabet  was  invented  by 
those  who  spoke  the  Aramaic  language.    This  is  a 
wholly  distinct  question,  and  far  more  obscure ; 
though  much  deference  on  the  point  is  due  to  the 
opinion  of  Gesenius,  who,  from  the  internal™  evi 
dence   of  the  names  of  the  Semitic   letters,  hat 


k  The  sixtb  letter,  afterwards  disused,  and  now  gene 
rally  known  by  the  name  of  Digamma  (from  Dionysius, 
20),  was  unquestionably  the  same  as  the  Hebrew  lette 
Vau  (a  hook). 

">  The  strongest  argument  of  Gesenius  against  th 
Aramaic  invention  of  the  letters  Is,  that  although  doubtles 
many  of  the  names  are  both  Aramaic  and  Hebrew,  som 
of  them  are  not  Aramaic;  at  least  not  in  the  Ilebre 


signification :  while  the  Syrians  nse  other  words  to  express 
the  same  ideas.  Thus  SpJ<  fn  Aramaic  means  only  1000, 
and  not  an  ox;  the  word  for  "door"  in  Aramaic  is  not 
nS*l'  but  jnn  =  while  the  si*  following  names  of  CtA 
meian  letters  are  no'  Aramaic :  )<\,  "jV.  D'O.  KB  (Sy> 

D-1B).  SI'IP-  ^n- 

3  K  2 


868 


PHORO8 


arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  they  were  invented 
by  the  Phoenicians  (Paldographie,  p.  294). 

Literature.  —  In  English,  see  Kenrick's  Phoe 
nicia,  London,  1855  :  in  Latin,  the  second  part 
of  Bochart's  Geographia  Sacra,  under  the  title 
"  Canaan,"  and  Gesenius's  work,  Scriptwae  Lin- 
guaeque  Phoeniciae  Monumenta  quotqitot  supersunt, 
Lipsiae,  1837  :  in  German,  the  exhaustive  work 
of  Movers,  Die  Phoenizier,  and  Das  Phoenizische 
Alterthum,  5  vols.,  Berlin,  1841-1856  ;  an  article 
on  the  same  subject  by  Movers,  in  Ersch  and  Gru- 
ber's  Encyclopaedia,  and  an  article  in  the  same 
work  by  Gesenius  on  Palaographie.  See  likewise, 
Gesenius's  Getchichte  der  Hebrdischen  Sprache  und 
Schrift,  Leipzig,  1815  ;  Bleek's  Einleitung  in  das 
Alte  Testament,  Berlin,  1860.  Phoenician  inscri])- 
tions  discovered  since  the  time  of  Gesenius  have 
oeen  published  by  Judas,  Etude  demonstrative  de 
la  langue  PMnkienne  et  de  la  langue  Libyque, 
Paris,  1847,  and  forty-five  other  inscriptions  have 
b«en  published  by  the  Abbe  Bourgade,  Paris,  1852, 
fol.  In  1845  a  votive  tablet  was  discovered  at 
Marseilles,  respecting  which  see  Movers'  Phoeni 
zische  Texte,  1847.  In  1855,  an  inscription  was 
discovered  at  Sidon  on  the  sarrx>phagus  of  a  Sidonian 
king  named  Eschmunazar,  respecting  which  see 
Dietrich's  Zwei  Sidonische  Inschriften,  und  eine 
alte  Phoenizische  KSnigsinschrift,  Marburg,  1855, 
and  Ewald's  ErklSrung  der  grossen  Phoenizischen 
Inschrift  von  Sidon,  Gottingen,  1856,  4to.  ;  from 
the  seventh  volume  of  the  Abhandlungen  der  K6- 
niglicher  Gesellscliaft  zu  Gdttingen.  Information 
respecting  these  works,  and  others  on  Phoenician 
inscriptions,  is  given  by  Bleek,  pp.  64,  65.  [E.  T.] 

PHOR'OS  (*6pos  :  Phares,  Foro)  =  PAROSH 
(1  Esdr.  v.  9,  is.  26). 

PHRYG'IA  (tpvyla:  Phrygid).  Perhaps  there 
is  no  geographical  term  in  the  New  Testament  which 
is  less  capable  of  an  exact  definition.  Many  maps 
convey  the  impression  that  it  was  co-ordinate  with 
such  terms  as  Bithynia,  Cilicia,  or  Galatia.  But  in 
fact  there  was  no  Roman  province  of  Phrygia  till 
considerably  after  the  first  establishment  of  Chris 
tianity  in  the  peninsula  of  Asia  Minor.  The  word 
was  rather  ethnological  than  political,  and  denoted, 
in  a  vague  manner,  the  western  part  of  the  central 
region  of  that  peninsula.  Accordingly,  in  two  of  the 
three  places  where  it  is  used,  it  is  mentioned  in  a 
manner  not  intended  to  be  precise  (&if\06vTfS  r^iv 
Qpvyiav  *ol  r))V  TaXartK^v  x<S>pa.v,  Acts  xvi.  6  ; 


i',  Acts  xviii.  23),  the  former  having  reference 
to  the  second  missionary  journey  of  St.  Paul,  the  latter 
to  the  third.  Nor  is  the  remaining  passage  (Acts 
ii.  10)  inconsistent  with  this  view,  the  enumeration 
of  those  foreign  Jews  who  came  to  Jerusalem  at 
Pentecost  (though  it  does  follow,  in  some  degree,  a 
^graphical  order)  having  no  reference  to  political 
boundaries.  By  Phrygia  we  must  understand  an 
extensive  district,  which  contributed  portions  to 
several  Roman  provinces,  and  varying  portions  at 
different  times.  As  to  its  physical  characteristics, 
it  was  generally  a  table-land,  but  with  considerable 
variety  of  appearance  and  soil.  Several  towns  men 
tioned  in  the  New  Testament  were  Phrygian  towns  ; 
such,  for  instance,  as  Iconium  and  Colossae  :  but  it 
is  better  to  class  them  with  the  provinces  to  which 
thfy  politically  belonged.  All  over  this  district  the 
Jews  were  probably  numerous.  They  were  first 
introduced  there  by  Antiochus  the  Great  (Joseph. 
Ant,  iii.  :3>  §4)  :  and  we  have  abundant  proof  of  their 


PHUT.  PUT 

presence  there  from  Acts  xiii.  14,  xiv.  1, 1ft,  as  wrll 
as  from  Acts  ii.  10.  [See  PHILIP,  8o4  a.]  [J.  S.  H.J 

PHUD  (*oi53)  =  PncT  (Jud.  ii.  23;  comp.  Ez. 
xxvii.  10). 

PHU'EAH  (rPlB:  *ap<£:  Pharc.).  Gideon's 
servant,  probably  his  armour-bearer  (comp.  1  Sam. 
xiv.  I),  who  accompanied  him  in  his  midnight  visit 
to  the  camp  of  the  Midianites  (Judg.  vii.  10, 11). 

PHU'RIM  (rS>v  4>povpai :  phurim),  Esth.  xi.  1. 

[PORIM.] 

PHUT,  PUT  (ID-IB:  *ofa,  A//3v«:  Phvth, 
Phut,  Libyes,  Libya,  Africa),  the  third  name  in 
the  list  of  the  sons  of  Ham  (Gen.  x.  6 ;  1  Chr.  i.  8), 
elsewhere  applied  to  an  African  country  or  people. 
In  the  list  it  follows  Cush  and  Mizraim,  and  pre 
cedes  Canaan.  The  settlements  of  Cush  extended 
from  Babylonia  to  Ethiopia  above  Egypt,  those  of 
Mizraim  stretched  from  the  Philistine  territory 
through  Egypt  and  along  the  northern  coast  of 
Africa  to  the  west ;  and  the  Canaanites  were  esta 
blished  at  first  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  but  after 
wards  were  spread  abroad.  The  order  seems  to  be 
ascending  towards  the  north :  the  Cushite  chain  of 
settlements  being  the  most  southern,  thi  Mizraite 
chain  extending  above  them,  though  perhaps  through 
a  smaller  region,  at  least  at  the  first,  and  the  Ca 
naanites  holding  the  most  northern  position.  We 
cannot  place  the  tract  of  Phut  out  of  Africa,  and  it 
would  thus  seem  that  it  was  almost  parallel  to  that 
of  the  Mizraites,  as  it  could  not  be  further  to  the 
north  :  this  position  would  well  agree  with  Libya. 
But  it  must  be  recollected  that  the  order  of  the 
nations  or  tribes  of  the  stocks  of  Cush,  Mizraim, 
and  Canaan,  is  not  the  same  as  that  we  have  in 
ferred  to  be  that  of  the  principal  names,  and  that  it 
is  also  possible  that  Phut  may  be  mentioned  in  a 
supplementary  manner,  perhaps  as  a  nation  or 
countiy  dependent  on  Egypt. 

The  few  mentions  of  Phut  in  the  Bible  clearly 
indicate,  as  already  remarked,  a  country  or  people 
of  Africa,  and,  it  must  be  added,  probably  not  far 
from  Egypt.  It  is  noticeable  that  they  occur  only 
in  the  list  of  Noah's  descendants  and  in  the  pro 
phetical  Scriptures.  Isaiah  probably  makes  men 
tion  of  Phut  as  a  remote  nation  or  countiy,  where 
the  A.  V.  has  Put,  as  in  the  Masoretic  text 
(Is.  Ixvi.  19).  Nahum,  warning  Nineveh  by  the 
fall  of  No-Amon,  speaks  of  Cush  and  Mizraim  as 
the  strength  of  the  Egyptian  city,  and  Phut  and 
Lubim  as  its  helpers  (iii.  9).  Jeremiah  tells  of 
Phut  in  Necho's  army  with  Cush  and  the  Ludim 
(xlvi.  9).  Ezekiel  speaks  of  Phut  with  Persia  and 
Lud  as  supplying  mercenaries  to  Tyre  (xxvii.  10), 
and  as  sharing  with  Cush,  Lud,  and  other  helpers 
of  Egypt,  in  her  fall  (xxx.  5)  ;  and  again,  with 
Persia,  and  Cush,  perhaps  in  the  sense  of  merce 
naries,  as  warriors  of  the  army  of  Gog  (xxxviii.  5). 

From  these  passages  we  cannot  infer  anything  as 
to  the  exact  position  of  this  country  or  people-, 
unless  indeed  in  Nahum,  Cush  and  Phut,  Mizraim 
and  Lubim,  are  respectively  connected,  which  might 
indicate  a  position  south  of  Egypt  The  serving  it 
the  Egyptian  army,  and  importance  of  Phut  tc 
Egypt,  make  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  its  posi 
tion  was  very  near. 

In  the  ancient  Egyptian  inscriptions  we  find  two 
names  that  may  be  compared  to  the  Biblical  Phut. 
The  tribes  or  peoples  called  the  Nine  Bows,  IX 
PETU  or  IX  NA-PETU,  might  partly  or  wholly 
represent  Phut.  Their  situation  is  doubtful,  and 
they  are  never  found  in  a  geographical  list,  but  only 


PHUT,  PUT 

in  the  general  statements  of  the  power  and  prowess 
a(  the  kings.  If  one  people  be  indicated  by  them, 
we  may  compare  the  Naphtuhim  of  the  Bible. 
[NAPHTUHIM.]  It  seems  unlikely  that  the  Nine 
Bows  should  correspond  to  Phut,  as  their  name 
does  not  occur  as  a  geographical  term  in  use  in  the 
directly  historical  inscriptions,  though  it  may  be 
supposed  that  several  well-known  names  there  take 
its  place  as  those  of  individual  tribes  ;  but  this  is 
an  improbable  explanation.  The  second  name  is 
that  of  Nubia,  TO-PET,  "  the  region  of  the  Bow," 
also  called  TO-MERU-PET,  "  the  region,  the  island 
of  the  Bow,"  whence  we  conjecture  the  name  of 
Meroe  to  come.  In  the  geographical  lists  the  latter 
form  occurs  in  that  of  a  people,  ANU-MEKU-PET, 
found,  unlike  all  others,  in  the  lists  of  the  southern 
peoples  and  countries  as  well  as  the  northern.  The 
character  we  read  PET  is  an  unstrung  bow,  which 
until  lately  was  read  KENS,  as  a  strung  bow  is 
found  following,  as  if  a  determinative,  the  latter 
word,  which  is  a  name  of  Nubia,  perhaps,  however, 
not  including  so  large  a  territory  as  the  names 
before  mentioned.  The  reading  KENS  is  extremely 
doubtful,  because  the  word  does  not  signify  bow  in 
Egyptian,  as  far  as  we  are  aware,  and  still  more 
because  the  bow  is  used  as  the  determinative  of  its 
name  PET,  which  from  the  Egyptian  usage  as  to 
determinatives  makes  it  almost  impossible  that  it 
should  be  employed  as  a  determinative  of  KENS. 
The  name  KENS  would  therefore  be  followed  by 
the  bow  to  indicate  that  it  was  a  part  of  Nubia. 
This  subject  may  be  illustrated  by  a  passage  of 
Herodotus,  explained  by  Mr.  Harris  of  Alexandria, 
if  we  premise  that  the  unstrung  bow  is  the  com 
mon  s.'gn,  and,  like  the  strung  bow,  is  so  used  as 
to  be  the  symbol  of  Nubia.  The  historian  relates 
that  the  king  of  the  Ethiopians  unstrung  a  bow, 
and  gave  it  to  the  messengers  of  Cambyses,  telling 
them  to  say  that  when  the  king  of  the  Persians 
could  pull  so  strong  a  bow  so  easily,  he  might  come 
against  the  Ethiopians  with  an  army  stronger  than 
their  force?  (iii.  21,  22,  ed.  Rawlinson:  Sir  G. 
Wilkinson's  note).  For  the  hieroglyphic  names  see 
Brugsch's  Geogr.  Inschr. 


PI-BESETH 


869 


The  Coptic  l^^-I^-T"  must  ^^  be  com~ 
pared  with  Phut.  The  first  syllable  being  the  article, 
the  word  nearly  resembles  the  Hebrew  name.  It  is 
applied  to  the  western  part  of  Lower  Egypt  beyond 
the  Delta  ;  and  Champollion  conjectures  it  to  mean 
the  Libyan  part  of  Egypt,  so  called  by  the  Greeks, 
comparing  the  Coptic  name  of  the  similar  eastern 


portion,  '^.pA.I^.,         ^-p^--IA.,  the 

older  Arabian  part  of  Egypt  and  Arabian  Nome 
(L'Egypte  sous  les  Pharaons,  ii.  pp.  28-31,  243). 
Be  this  as  it  may,  the  name  seems  nearer  to 
NAPHTUHIM  than  to  Phut.  To  take  a  broad  view 
of  the  question,  all  the  names  which  we  have  men 
tioned  may  be  reasonably  connected  with  the  Hebrew 
Phut  ;  and  it  may  be  supposed  that  the  Naph 
tuhim  were  Mizraites  in  the  territory  of  Phut, 
perhaps  intermixed  with  peoples  of  the  latter  stock. 
It  is,  however,  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  PET 
of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  as  a  geographical  desig 
nation,  corresponds  to  the  Phut  of  the  Bible,  which 
would  therefore  denote  Nubia  or  the  Nubians,  the 
fcrmer,  if  we  are  strictly  to  follow  the  Egyptian 
usage.  This  identification  would  account  for  the 
position  of  Phut  after  Mizraim  in  the  list  in  Ge 
nesis,  notwithstanding  the  order  of  the  other  names  ; 
for  Nubia  has  been  from  remote  tjnes  a  depeuu- 


ency  of  Egypt,  excepting  in  the  short  period  oi 
Ethiopian  supremacy,  and  the  longer  time  of  Ethi 
opian  independence.  The  Egyptian  name  of  Cush, 
KEESH,  is  applied  to  a  wider  region  well  corre 
sponding  to  Ethiopia.  The  governor  of  Nubm  in 
the  time  of  the  Pharaohs  was  called  Prince  of 
KEESH,  perhaps  because  his  authority  extended 
beyond  Nubia.  The  identification  of  Phut  with 
Nubia  is  not  repugnant  to  the  mention  in  the  pro 
phets:  on  the  contrary,  the  great  importance  of 
Nubia  in  their  time,  which  comprehended  that  of 
the  Ethiopian  supremacy,  would  account  for  their 
speaking  of  Phut  as  a  support  of  Egypt,  and  a« 
furnishing  it  with  warriors. 

The  identification  with  Libya  has  given  rise  to 
attempts  to  find  the  name  in  African  geography, 
which  we  shall  not  here  examine,  as  such  mere  simi 
larity  of  sound  is  a  most  unsafe  guide.  [R.  S.  P.] 

PHU'VAH  (riJS  :  *ow<£  :  Phud).  One  of  the 
sons  of  Issachar  (Gen.  xlvi.  13),  and  founder  of 
the  family  of  the  PUNITES.  In  the  A.  V.  of  Num. 
xxvi.  23  he  is  called  PUA,  though  the  Heb.  is  the 
same  ;  and  in  1  Chr.  vii.  1,  PUAH  is  another  form 
of  the  name. 


PHYGEL'LUS  (*vyf\\os,  or  *6yf  \os  :  Phi- 
gelus),  2  Tim.  i.  15.  A  Christian  connected  with 
those  in  Asia  of  whom  St.  Paul  speaks  as  turned 
away  from  himself.  It  is  open  to  question  whether 
their  repudiation  of  the  Apostle  was  joined  with  a  de 
clension  from  the  faith  (see  Buddaeus,  Eccl.  Apostol. 
ii.  310),  and  whether  the  open  display  of  the  feeling 
of  Asia  took  place  —  at  least  so  far  as  Phygellus  and 
Hermogenes  were  concerned  —  at  Rome.  It  was  at 
Rome  that  Onesiphorus,  named  in  the  next  verse, 
showed  the  kindness  for  which  the  Apostle  invokes 
a  blessing  on  his  household  in  Asia  :  so  perhaps  it 
was  at  Rome  that  Phygellus  displayed  that  change 
of  feeling  towards  St.  Paul  which  the  Apostle's 
former  followers  in  Asia  avowed.  It  seems  unlikely 
that  St.  Paul  would  write  so  forcibly  if  Phygellus 
had  merely  neglected  to  visit  him  in  his  captivity 
at  Rome.  He  may  have  forsaken  (see  2  Tim.  iv. 
16)  the  Apostle  at  some  critical  time  when  his  sup 
port  was  expected  :  or  he  may  have  been  a  leader 
of  some  party  of  nominal  Christians  at  Rome,  such 
as  the  Apostle  describes  at  an  earlier  period  (Phil. 
i.  15,  16)  opposing  him  there. 

Dean  Ellicott,  on  2  Tim.  i.  15,  who  is  at  variance 
with  the  ancient  Greek  commentators  as  to  the 
exact  force  of  the  phrase  "  they  which  are  in  Asia," 
states  various  opinions  concerning  their  aversion 
from  St.  Paul.  The  Apostle  himself  seems  to  have 
foreseen  it  (Acts  xx.  30)  ;  and  there  is  nothing  in 
the  fact  inconsistent  with  the  general  picture  of  the 
state  of  Asia  at  a  later  period  which  we  have  in  the 
first  three  chapters  of  the  Revelation.  [W.  T.  B.] 
PHYLACTERY.  [FRONTLETS.] 
PI-BES'ETH  (nD3-»S  :  Bovpcurw  :  Bn- 
bastus],  a  town  of  Lower  Egypt,  mentioned  but 
once  in  the  Bible  (Ez.  xxx.  17).  In  hieroglyphics 
its  name  is  written  BAHEST,  BAST,  and  HA- 
BAHEST,  followed  by  the  determinative  sign  for  an 
Egyptian  city,  which  was  probably  not  pronounced. 

The  Coptic  forms  are  £j.£.C  |  »  witn  the  article 

ni   prefixed, 


>   and  the  Greek,  BovjBwmr,  B»- 
/3a<TT«j.     The  first  and  second  hieroglyphic  names 


870 


PI-BESETI1 


•re  the  name  as  tnose  cf  the  goddess  of  the  place, 
und  the  third  signifies  the  aboie  of  BAREST,  that 
goddess.  It  is  probable  that  BAREST  is  an  archaic 
mode  of  writing,  and  that  the  word  was  always  pro 
nounced,  as  it  wns  sometimes  written,  BAST.  It 
seems  as  if  the  civil  name  was  BAREST,  and  the 
bacred,  HA-BAHEST.  It  is  diffioult  to  trace  the 
first  syllable  of  the  Hebrew  and  o*  the  Coptic 
and  Greek  forms  in  the  hieroglyphic  equivalents. 
There  is  a  similar  case  in  the  names  HA-HESAR, 

RoiTCIpI,    IlcnrCIpI>  Boiffiflis,  Busiris. 
Dr.  Brugsch  and  M.  Devdria  read  PE  or  PA,  in 
stead  of  HA ;  but  this  is  not  proved.     It  may  be 
conjectured  that   in   pronunciation   the   masculine 
definite  article  PEPA  or  PEE  was  prefixed  to  HA 
as  could  be  done  in  Coptic:  in  the  ancient  language 
the  word  appears  to  be  common,  whereas  it  is  mas 
culine  in  the  later.     Or  it  may  be  suggested  that 
the  first  syllable  or  first  letter  was  a  prefix  of  the 
vulgar  dialect,  for  it  is  frequent  in  Coptic.     The 
name  of  Philae  may  perhaps  afford  a  third  explana 
tion,  for   it  is  written   EELEK-T,  EELEK,  ane 
P-EELEK  (Brugsch,   Geogr,  Insc/ir.  i.  156,  Nos 
626,  627) ;  whence  it  would  seem  that  the  sign 
city  (not  abode)  was  common,  as  in  the  first  form  the 
feminine  article,  and  in  the  last,  the  masculine  one, 
is   used,   and    this   would    admit   of  the   reading 
PA-BAST,  "the  [city]  of  Bubastis  [the  goddess]." 
Bubastis  was  situate  on  the  west  bank  of  the 
Pclusiac  or  Bubastite  blanch  of  the  Nile,  in  the 
Bubastite  nome,  about  40  miles  from  the  central 
part  of  Memphis.     Herodotus  speaks  of  its  site  as 
Living  been  raised  by  those  who  dug  the  canals  for 
Sesostris,  and  afterwards  by  the  labour  of  criminals 
under  Sabacos  the  Ethiopian,  or,  rather,  the  Ethio 
pian  dominion.    He  mentions  the  temple  of  the  god 
dess  Bubastis  as  well  worthy  of  description,  being 
more  beautiful  than  any  other  known  to  him.     It 
lay  in  the  midst  of  the  city,  which,  having  been  raised 
on  mounds,  overlooked  it  on  every  side.     An  arti 
ficial  canal  encompassed  it  with  the  waters  of  the 
Nile,  and  was  beautified  by  trees  on  its  bank.    There 
was  only  a  narrow  approach  leading  to  a  lofty  gate 
way.     The  enclosure  thus  formed  was  surrounded 
by  a  low  wall,  bearing  sculptures  ;  within  was  the 
temple,  surrounded  by  a  grove  of  fine  trees  (ii. 
137,  138).     Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  observes  that 
the   ruins  of  the  city  and   temple   confirm    this 
account.     The  height  of  the  mounds  and  the  site 
of  the   temple   are  very  remarkable,  as  well  as 
the   beauty   of  the   latter,   which   was    "  of  the 
finest   red   granite."     It   "  was  surrounded   by  a 
sacred  enclosure,  about  600  feet  square  .  .  .  beyond 
which  was  a  larger  circuit,  measuring  940  feet  by 
1200,  containing  the  minor  one  and  the  canal. 
The  temple  is  entirely  ruined,  but  the  names  of 
Rameses  II.  of  the  xixth  dynasty,  Userken  I.  (Osor- 
«hou  I.)  of  the  zxiind,  and  Nekht-har-heb  (Necta- 
nebo  I.)  of  the  xxxth,  have  been  found  here,  as  well 
as  that  of  the  eponymous  goddess  BAST.     There 
are  also  remains  of  the  ancient  houses  of  the  town, 
and,  "  amidst  the  houses  on  the  N.W.  side  are  the 
thick  walls  of  a  fort,  which  protected  the  tempk 
below  "  (Notes  by  Sir  G.  Wilkinson  in  RawHnson'g 
Herodotus,  vol.  ii.  pp.  2 1 9,  plan,  and  1 02).  Bubastis 
thus  had  a  fort,  besides  being  strong  from  its  height. 


PIECE  OF  GOLD 

The  goddess  BAST,  who  was  here  the  chief  olject 
of  worship,  was  the  same  as  PESHT,  the  goddess 
of  fire.  Both  names  accompany  a  lion-headed  figure 
and  the  cat  was  sacred  to  them.  Herodotus  con 
siders  the  goddess  Bubnstis  to  te  the  same  as  Arte 
mis  (ii.  137),  and  that  this  was  the  current  opinion 
in  Egypt  in  the  Greek  period  is  evident  from  the 
name  Specs  Artemidos  of  a  rock  temple  dedicated 
to  PESHT,  and  probably  of  a  neighbouring  town 
or  village.  The  historian  speaks  of  the  annual  fes 
tival  of  the  goddess  held  at  Bubastis  as  the  chief 
and  most  largely  attended  of  the  Egyptian  festivals. 
It  was  evidently  the  most  popular,  and  a  scene  of 
great  licence,  like  the  great  Muslim  festival  of  the 
Seyyid  el-Bedawee  celebrated  at  Tanteh  in  the  Delta 
(ii.  59,  60). 

There  are  scarcely  any  historical  notices  of  Bu 
bastis  in  the  Egyptian  annals.  In  Man«tho's  list 
it  is  related  that  in  the  time  of  Boethos,  or  Bochos, 
first  king  of  the  iind  dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  2470),  a 
chasm  of  the  earth  opened  at  Bubastis,  and  many 
perished  (Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  2nd  ed.  pp. 
98,  99).  This  is  remarkable,  since  though  shocks 
of  earthquakes  are  frequent  in  Egypt,  the  actual 
earthquake  is  of  very  rare  occurrence.  The  naxt  event 
in  the  list  connected  with  Bubastis  is  the  accession 
of  the  xxiind  dynasty  (B.C.  cir.  990),  a  line  of 
Bubastite  kings  (Ibid.  pp.  124,  125).  These  were 
either  foreigners  or  partly  of  foreign  extraction,  and 
it  is  probable  that  they  chose  Bubastis  as  their 
capital,  or  as  an  occasional  residence,  on  account  ot 
its  nearness  to  the  military  settlements.  [Mio- 
DOL.]  Thus  it  must  have  been  a  city  of  great 
importance  when  Ezekiel  thus  foretold  its  doom : 
"  The  young  men  of  Aven  and  of  Pi-beseth  shall 
fall  by  the  sword:  and  these  [cities]  shall  go  into 
captivity  "  (xxx.  17).  Heliopolis  and  Bubastis  are 
near  together,  and  both  in  the  route  of  an  invader 
from  the  East  marching  against  Memphis.  [R.  S.  P.] 
PICTURE.*  In  two  of  the  three  passages  in 
which  "picture"  is  used  in  A.  V.  it  denotes 
idolatrous  representations,  either  independent  images, 
or  more  usually  stones  "  portrayed,"  i.  e.  sculptured 
in  low  relief,  or  engraved  and  coloured  (Ez.  xxiii. 
14;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  ii.  306,  308).  Movable 
pictures,  in  the  modem  sense,  were  doubtless  un 
known  to  the  Jews ;  but  coloured  sculptures  and 
drawings  on  walls  or  on  wood,  as  mummy-cases, 
must  have  been  familiar  to  them  in  Egypt  (see 
Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  277).  In  later  times  we 
read  of  portraits  (tlKAvas),  perhaps  busts  or  intagli 
sent  by  Alexandra  to  Antony  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  2. 
.  The  "pictures  of  silver"  of  Prov.  xxv.  11, 
were  probably  wall-surfaces  or  cornices  with  carv 
ings,  and  the  "  apples  of  gold "  representations  ot 
fruit  or  foliage,  like  Solomon's  flowers  and  pome 
granates  (1  K.  vi.,  vii.).  The  walls  of  Babylon 
were  ornamented  with  pictures  on  enamelled  brick. 
;BRICKS.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PIECE  OF  GOLD.     The  A.  V.,  in  rendering 
the  elliptical  expression  "six  thousand  of  gold,"  in 
passage    respecting    Naaman,    relating   that   he 
took  with  him  ten  talents  of  silver,  and  six  thou 
sand  of  gold,  and  ten  changes  of  raiment"  (2  K. 
v.  5) — supplies  "pieces"  as  the  word  understood. 
The  similar  expression  respecting  silver,  in  which 


»  1.  JV3SW,  from  nDK>,  "behold,"  with  pK;  Autes 
«ricoiros;  initgnis  lapit  (Lev.  xxvi.  1) ;  A.  V.'"' "'  figured 
Btone"  (Num.  xxxlii.  52);  vKontd;  tituliit.  In  K/.  viii. 
12,  with  i  jn  ;  KOLTVIV  (cpuTTTos ;  ctbsconditu-M  ciibiculi ; 
A.y.  "  chamber  of  Imagery ;"  Luther,  sc/timtten  kammcr. 


2.  n'3B>,  from  same  root  (Is.  ii.  16);  6ia  (v\ouav)  «t<iA- 
,ous;  quod  vtsu  pulchrum  ett;  Prov.  xxv.  11,  "Apple? 
f  gold  in  pictures  of  silver  ;"  J,XX  iv  bpmaiof  vap&iau ; 
n  kctis  argenteis  ;  Luther,  Schalen. 


PIECE  OF  SILVER 

the  word  understood  appears  to  be  shekels,  probaoly 
justifies  the  insertion  of  that  definite  word.  [PiECE 
C?  SILVER.]  The  same  expression,  if  a  weight 
of  gold  be  here  meant,  is  also  found  in  the  follow 
ing  passage:  "  And  king  Solomon  made  two  hun 
dred  targets  [of]  beaten  gold :  six  hundred  of  gold 
went  to  one  target"  (1  K.  x.  16).  Here  ths  A.  V. 
supplies  the  word  "  shekels,"  and  there  seems  no 
doubt  that  it  is  right,  considering  the  number 
mentioned,  and  that  a  common  weight  must  be 
intended.  That  a  weight  of  gold  is  meant  in 
Naaman's  case  may  be  inferred,  because  it  is  ex 
tremely  unlikely  that  coined  money  was  already 
invented  at  the  time  referred  to,  and  indeed  that 
,-t  was  known  in  Palestine  before  the  Persian  period. 
|  MONEY  ;  DARIC.]  Rings  or  ingots  of  gold  may 
have  been  in  use,  but  we  are  scarcely  warranted  in 
supposing  that  any  of  them  bore  the  narr°  of  shekels, 
since  the  practice  was  to  weigh  money.  The  render 
ing  "  pieces  of  gold"  is  therefore  very  doubtful ; 
and  "shekels  of  gold,''  as  designating  the  value  of 
the  whole  quantity,  not  individual  pieces,  is  pre 
ferable.  [R.  S.  P.] 

PIECE  OF  SILVER.  The  passages  in  the 
O.  T.  and  those  in  the  N.  T.  in  which  the  A.  V. 
uses  this  term  must  be  separately  considered. 

I.  In  the  0.  T.  the  word  "  pieces  "  is  used  in  the 
A.  V.  for  a  word  understood  in  the  Hebrew,  if  we 
except  one  case  to  be  afterwards  noticed.  The  phrase 
is  always  "  a  thousand  "  or  the  like  "  of  silver  " 
(Gen.  xx.  16,  xxxvii.  28,  xlv.  22  ;  Judg.  ix.  4,  xvi.  5 
2  K.  vi.  25 ;  Hos.  iii.  2 ;  Zech.  xi.  12, 13).  In  similar 
passages  the  word  "  shekels  "  occurs  in  the  Hebrew, 
and  it  must  be  observed  that  these  are  either  in  the 
Law,  or  relate  to  purchases,  some  of  an  importam 
legal  character,  as  that  of  the  cave  and  field  of 
Machpelah,  that  of  the  threshing-floor  and  oxen  o: 
Araunah,  or  to  taxes,  and  the  like  (Gen.  xxiii.  15 
16  ;  Ex.  xxi.  32  ;  Lev.  xxvii.  3,»6,  16  ;  Josh,  vii 
21 ;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24 ;  1  Chr.  xxi.  25,  where,  how 
ever,  shekels  of  gold  are  spoken  of;  2  K.  xv.  20 
Neh.  v.  15 ;  Jer.  xxxii.  9).  There  are  other  pas 
tages  in  which  the  A.  V.  supplies  the  word  "  she 
kels"  instead  of  "pieces"  (Deut.  xxii.  19,  29 
Judg.  xvii.  2,  3,  4,  10 ;  2  Sam.  xviii.  11, 12),  an 
of  these  the  first  two  require  this  to  be  done.  I 
becomes  then  a  question  whether  there  is  anj 
ground  for  the  adoption  of  the  word  "  pieces,' 
which  is  vague  if  actual  coins  be  meant,  and  in 
accurate  if  weights.  The  shekel,  be  it  remembered 
was  the  common  weight  for  money,  and  therefor 
most  likely  to  be  understood  in  an  elliptical  phrase 
When  we  find  good  reason  for  concluding  that  in  tw 
pissages  (Deut.  xxii.  19,  20)  this  is  the  word  under 
stood,  it  seems  incredible  that  any  other  should  b 
in  the  other  places.  The  exceptional  case  in  whic 
a  word  corresponding  to  "pieces"  is  found  in  th 
Hebrew  is  in  the  Psalms,  where  presents  of  submis 
sion  are  prophesied  to  be  made  of  "  pieces  of  silver, 

*ip?~^n  cixviii-  3°»  Heb- 3i)-  The  w°rd  n 

which  occurs  nowhere  else,  if  it  preserve  its  radica 
meaning,  from  f*¥1,  must  signify  a  piece  broke 
off,  or  a  fragment:  there  is  no  reason  to  suppos 
that  a  coin  is  meant. 

II.  In  the  N.  T.  two  words  are  rendered  by  tl 
phrase  "  piece  of  silver,"  drachma,  Spaxn'f),  ai 
apyvpiov.  (1.)  'IV  first  (Luke  xv.  8,  9)  shnu 
be  represented  by  drachm*.  It  was  a  Greek  silv 
;-,in,  equivalent,  &'<.  the  tune  of  St.  Luke,  to  tl 
Reman  denarius,  wh:ch  is  probably  intended  by  tl 


PI-HAH1KOTH 


87  i 


vangelist,  as  it  had  then  wholly  or  almost  super- 
eded  the  former.     [DRACHMA.]     (2.)  The  second 
ord  is  very  properly  thus  rendered.     It  occurs  in 
ie  account  of  the  betrayal  of  our  Lord  for  "  thirty 
icces  of  silver"  (Matt.  xxvi.  15,  ixvii.  3,  5,  6,  9;. 
t  is  difficult  to  ascertain  what  ccins  are  here  in- 
nded.   If  the  most  common  silver  pieces  be  meant, 
ley  would  be  denarii.      The  parallel  passage  in 
echariah  (xi.  12, 13)  must,  however,  be  taken  into 
onsideration,  where,  if  our  view  be  correct,  shekels 
must  be  understood.    It  may,  however,  be  suggested 
nat  the  two  thirties  may  correspond,  not  as  of 
xactly  the  same  coin,  but  of  the  chief  current  coin. 
x>me  light  may  be  thrown  on  our  difficulty  by  the 
umber  of  pieces.     It  can  scarcely  be  a  coincidence 
hat  thirty  shekels  of  silver  was  the  price  of  blood 
n  the  case  of  a  slave  accidentally  killed  (Ex.  xxi. 
52).     It  may  be  objected  that  there  is  no  reason  to 
uppose  that  shekels  were  current  in  our  Lord'* 
ime ;  but  it  must  be  replied  that  the  tetradrachms 
>t  depreciated  A  ttic  weight  of  the  Greek  cities  of 
yria  of  that  time  were  of  the  same  weight  as  the 
hekels  which  we  believe  to  be  of  Simon  the  Mac- 
cabee  [MOKEY],  so  that  Josephus  speaks  of  the 
hekei  as  equal  to  four  Attic  drachmae  (Ant.  iii.  8, 
|2).    These  tetradrachms  were  common  at  the  time 
of  our  Lord,  and  the  piece  of  money  found  by  St. 
'eter  in  the  fish  must,  from  its  name,  have  been  of 
Ms  kind.     [STATER.]     It  is  therefore  more  pro 
bable  that  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  were  tetra 
drachms  than  that  they  were  denarii.     There  is  no 
difficulty  in  the  use  of  two   terms,  a  name  de 
signating  the  denomination  and  "  piece  of  silver," 
whether  the  latter  mean  the  tetradrachm  or  the 
denarius,  as  it  is  a  vague  appellation  that  implies 
a  more  distinctive  name.     In  the  received  text  of 
St.  Matthew  the  prophecy  as  to  the  Uji'ty  pieces  of 
silver  is  ascribed  to  Jeremiah,  and  noOo  Zechariah, 
and  much  controversy  has  thus  been  occasioned. 
The  true  explanation  seems  to  be  suggested  by  the 
absence  of  any  prophet's  name  in  the  Syriac  version, 
and  the  likelihood  that  similarity  of  styfe  would  have 
caused  a  copyist  inadvertently  to  insert  the  name  of 
Jeremiah  instead  of  that  of  Zechariah.       [R.  S.  P.] 
PIETY.     This  word  occurs  but  once  in  A.  V. : 
Let  them  learn  first  to  show  piety  at  home  "  (rbi/ 
iov  oiicov  tvatfieiv,  better,  "towards  their  own 
household,"  1  Tim.  v.  4).     The  choice  of  this  word 
here  instead  of  the  more  usual  equivalents  of  "  god 
liness,"  "  reverence,"  and  the  like,  was  probably 
determined  by  the  special  sense  of  pietas,  as  "  erga 
parentes"   (Cic.  Partit.  22,  Rep.  vi.  15,  Inv.  ii. 
22).     It  does  not  appear  in  the  earlier  English  ver 
sions,  and  we  may  recognise  in  its  application  in 
this  passage  a  special  felicity.     A  word  was  wanted 
for  fvffffiflv  which,  unlike  "  showing  godliness," 
would  admit  of  a  human  as  well  as  a  divine  object, 
and  this  piety  supplied.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PIGEON.      [TURTLE-DOVE.] 

PI-HAHI'ROTH  (ITVnn  'B,  HTPIH :  ^ 
tirav\is,  rb  a-rApa.  EiptaO,  Elpud:  Pkihaldrotli)i 
a  place  before  or  at  which  the  Israelites  encamped, 
at  the  close  of  the  third  march  from  Rameses, 
when  they  went  out  of  Egypt.  Pi-hahiroth  was 
before  Migdol,  and  on  the  other  hand  were  »iol- 
zephon  and  the  sea  ^Ex.  xiv.  2,  9;  Num.  xxxiii. 
7,  8).  The  name  is  crobably  that  of  a  natural  loca 
lity,  from  the  unlikelihood  that  there  should  have 
been  a  town  or  village  in  both  parts  of  the  country 
where  it  is  piaced  in  addition  to  Migdol  and  ivaal- 
zephou,  which  seem  to  have  been,  if  not  towns,  ni 


872 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


least  military  stations,  and  its  name  is  susceptible 
of  an  Egyptian  etymology  giving  a  sense  apposite 
to  this  idea.  The  first  part  of  the  word  is  appa 
rently  treated  by  its  omission  as  a  separate  prefix 
(Num.  xxxiii.  8),  and  it  would  therefore  pppear  to 
be  the  ma-sculine  definite  article  PE,  PA,  or  PEE. 


Jablonsky  proposed  the  Coptic  T 
ptOT",  "  the  place  where  sedge  grows,"  and  this, 
or  a  similar  name,  the  late  M.  Fulgence  Fresnel 
recognised  in  the  modern  Qhuweybet-el-boos,  "the 
bed  of  reeda."  It  is  remarkable  that  this  flame  occurs 
near  where  we  suppose  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea 
to  have  taken  place,  as  well  as  near  Suez,  in  the 
neighbourhood  usually  chosen  as  that  of  this  miracle; 
but  nothing  could  b»  interred  as  to  place  from  such 
a  name  being  now  found,  as  the  vegetation  it  describes 
is  fluctuating.  [EXODUS,  THE.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

PI'LATE,  PON'TIUS  (H&tnios  nt\aros  : 
Pontius  Pilatus,  his  praenomen  being  unknown). 
The  name  indicates  that  he  was  connected,  by  descent 
or  adoption,  with  the  gens  of  the  Pontii,  tirst  con 
spicuous  in  Roman  history  in  the  person  of  C. 
Pontius  Telesinus,  the  great  Samnite  general.*  He 
was  the  sixth  Roman  procurator  of  Judaea,  and 
under  him  our  Lord  worked,  suffered,  and  died,  as 
we  learn,  not  only  from  the  obvious  Scriptural 
authorities,  but  from  Tacitus  (Ann.  xv.  44, 
"  Christus,  Tiberio  imperitante,  per  procuratorem 
Pentium  Pilatum  supplicio  adfectus  erat).b  A 
procurator  (IvirpOTCos,  Philo,  Leg.  ad  Caium,  and 
Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  9,  §2  ;  but  less  correctly  ^•yru&j', 
Matt,  xxvii.  2;  and  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1)  was 
generally  a  Roman  knight,  appointed  to  act  under  the 
governor  of  a  province  as  collector  of  the  revenue,  and 
judge  in  causes  connected  with  it.  Strictly  speaking, 
procuratores  Caesaris  were  only  required  in  the 
imperial  provinces,  »'.  e.  those  which,  according  to 
the  constitution  of  Augustus,  were  reserved  for 
the  special  administration  of  the  emperor,  with 
out  the  intervention  of  the  senate  and  people,  and 
governed  by  his  legate.  In  the  senatorian  pro 
vinces,  governed  by  proconsuls,  the  corresponding 
duties  were  discharged  by  quaestors.  Yet  it  appears 
that  sometimes  procuratores  were  appointed  in  those 
provinces  also,  to  collect  certain  dues  of  the  fiscus 
(the  emperor's  special  revenue),  as  distinguished 
from  those  of  the  aerarium  (the  revenue  administered 
by  the  senate).  Sometimes  in  a  small  territory, 
especially  in  one  contiguous  to  a  larger  province, 
and  dependent  upon  it,  the  procurator  was  head  of 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

the  administration,  and  had  full  militaiy  and  judicial 
authority,  though  he  was  responsible  to  the  governor 
of  the  neighbouring  province.  Thus  Judaea  was 
attached  to  Syria  upon  the  deposition  of  Archelaus 
(A.  D.  6),  and  a  procurator  appointed  to  govern  it, 
with  Caesarea  for  its  capital.  Already,  during  a 
temporary  absence  of  Archelaus,  it  had  been  in 
charge  of  the  procurator  Sabinus ;  then,  after  the 
ethnarch's  banishment,  came  Coponius;  the  third 
procurator  was  M.  Ambivius ;  the  fourth  Annius 
Rufus ;  the  fifth  Valerius  Gratus ;  and  the  sixth 
Pontius  Pilate  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2,  §2),  who 
was  appointed  A.D.  25-6,  in  the  twelfth  year  of 
Tiberius.  One  of  his  first  acts  was  to  remove  tl« 
headquarters  of  the  army  from  Caesarea  to  Jeru 
salem.  The  soldiers  of  course  took  with  them 
their  standards,  bearing  the  image  of  the  emperor, 
into  the  Holy  City.  No  previous  governor  had 
ventured  on  such  an  outrage.*  Pilate  had  been 
obliged  to  send  them  in  by  night,  and  there  were 
no  bounds  to  the  rage  of  the  people  on  discovering 
what  had  thus  been  done.  They  poured  down  in 
crowds  to  Caesarea  where  the  Procurator  was  then 
residing,  and  besought  him  to  remove  the  images. 
After  five  days  of  discussion,  he  gave  the  signal  to 
some  concealed  soldiers  to  surround  the  petitioners, 
and  put  them  to  death  unless  they  ceased  to  trouble 
him ;  but  this  only  strengthened  their  determina 
tion,  and  they  declared  themselves  ready  rather 
to  submit  to  death  than  forego  their  resistance  to 
an  idolatrous  innovation.  Pilate  then  yielded,  and 
the  standards  were  by  his  orders  b/ought  down  to 
Caesarea  (Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1,  2,  B.  J.  ii.  9, 
§2-4).  On  two  other  occasions  he  nearly  drove  the 
Jews  to  insurrection  ;  the  first  when,  in  spite  of  this 
warning  about  the  images,  he  hung  up  in  his  palace 
at  Jerusalem  some  gilt  shields  inscribed  with  the 
names  of  deities,  which  were  only  removed  by  an 
order  from  Tiberius  (Philo,  ad  Caium,  §38,  ii.  589) ; 
the  second  when  he  appropriated  the  revenue 
arising  from  the  redemption  of  vows  (Corban  ; 
comp.  Mark  vii.  11)  to  the  construction  of  an 
aqueduct.  This  order  led  to  a  riot,  which  he  sup 
pressed  by  sending  among  the  crowd  soldiers  with 
concealed  daggers,  who  massacred  a  great  number, 
not  only  of  rioters,  but  of  casual  spectators'1  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  9,  §4).  To  these  specimens  of  his  administra 
tion,  which  rest  on  the  testimony  of  profane  authors, 
we  must  add  the  slaughter  of  certain  Galileans, 
which  was  told  to  our  Lori  as  a  piece  of  news 
(cnrayy t \\oirfs,  Luke  xiii.  1),  and  on  which  He 


a  The  cognomen  Pilatus  has  received  two  explana 
tions.  (1.)  As  armed  with  the  pilum  or  javelin ;  comp. 
"  ptlata  agmina,"  Virg.  Aen.  xil.  121.  (2.)  As  contracted 
from  pileatus.  The  fact  that  the  pileus  or  cap  was  the 
badge  of  manumitted  slaves  (comp.  Suetonius,  Nero,  c.  57, 
Tiber,  c.  4),  makes  it  probable  that  the  epithet  marked 
him  out  as  a  libertus.  or  as  descended  from  one. — [E.  H.  P.] 

«  Of  the  early  history  of  Pilate  we  know  nothing; 
but  a  German  legend  fills  up  the  gap  strangely  enough. 
Pilate  Is  the  bastard  son  of  Tyrus,  king  of  Mayence.  His 
father  sends  him  to  Rome  as  a  hostage.  There  he  is  guilty 
of  a  murder ;  but  being  sent  to  Pontus,  rises  into  notice 
aa  subduing  the  barbarous  tribes  there,  receives  In  con 
sequence  the  new  name  of  Pontius,  and  Is  sent  to  Judaea. 
It  hag  been  suggested  that  the  twenty-second  legion, 
which  was  in  Palestine  at  the  time  of  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  was  afterwards  stationed  at  Mayence,  may 
have  been  in  this  case  either  the  bearers  of  the  tradition 
or  the  inventors  of  the  fable.  (Comp.  Vilmar's  Veutsch. 
Hation.  Liter.  i.  p.21Y).-[K.  H.  P.] 

•  Herd  the  Great,  it  is  true,  hud  placed  the  Roman 
i»gle  on  one  of  his  new  buildings;  but  this  had  been  fol 


lowed  by  a  violent  outbreak,  and  the  attempt  had  not  beer, 
repeated  (Ewald,  Geschicitie,  iv.  509).  The  extent  to  which 
the  scruples  of  the  Jews  on  this  point  were  respected  by 
the  Roman  governors,  is  shewn  by  the  fact  that  no  effigy 
of  either  god  or  emperor  is  found  on  the  money  coined  by 
them  in  Judaea  before  the  war  under  Nero  (ibid.  T.  33, 
referring  to  De  Saulcy,  Ktcherchet  tur  la  Numismatique 
Judaique,  pi.  viil.  ix.).  Assuming  this,  the  denarius  with 
Caesar's  image  and  superscription  of  Matt,  xxili.  must 
have  been  a  coin  from  the  Roman  mint,  or  tliat  of  some 
other  province.  The  latter  was  probably  current  for  tlie 
common  purposes  of  life.  The  shekel  alone  was  received 
as  a  Temple-offering. — [E.  H.  P.] 

d  Ewald  suggests  that  the  Tower  of  Siloam  may  have 
been  part  of  the  same  works,  and  that  this  was  the  reason 
why  its  fall  was  looked  on  as  a  judgment  (Gtschidite,  vi. 
40 ;  Luke  xiii.  4).  The  Pharisaic  reverence  for  whatever 
was  set  apart  for  the  Corban  (Mark  vii.  11),  and  their 
scruples  as  to  admitting  into  it  \nything  that  bad  m: 
mpure  origin  (Matt,  xxvii.  6),  it*ty  be  legarrtea,  pernapa 
OB  outgrowths  of  the  same  feeling.— {E.  H.  P.] 


I1LATE.  PONTIUS 

founded  some  remarks  on  the  connexion  between 
sin  and  calamity.  It  must  have  occurred  at  some 
feast  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  outer  court  of  the  Temple, 
Biuce  the  blood  of  the  worshippers  was  mingled  with 
their  sacrifices  ;  but  the  silence  of  Josephus  about 
it  seems  to  show  that  riots  and  massacres  on  such 
occasions  were  so  frequent  that  it  was  needless  to 
recount  them  all. 

It  was  the  custom  for  the  procurators  to  reside 
{<t  Jarusalem  during  the  great  feasts,  to  preserve 
oi-der,  and  accordingly,  at  the  time  of  our  Lord's 
last  passover,  Pilate  was  occupying  his  official  resi 
dence  in  Herod's  palace ;  and  to  the  gates  of  this 
palace  Jesus,  condemned  on  the  charge  of  blas 
phemy,  was  brought  early  in  the  morning  by  the 
chief  priests  and  officers  of  the  Sanhedrim,  who 
were  unable  to  enter  the  residence  of  a  Gentile,  lest 
they  should  be  defiled,  and  unfit  to  eat  the  passover 
(John  xviii.  28).  Pilate  therefore  came  out  to 
learn  their  purpose,  and  demanded  the  nature  of 
the  charge.  At  first  they  seem  to  have  expected 
that  he  would  have  carried  out  their  wishes  without 
further  inquiiy,  and  therefore  merely  described 
our  Lord  as  a  K<iKoiroi6s  (disturber  of  the  public 
peace),  but  as  a  Koman  procurator  had  too  much 
respect  for  justice,  or  at  least  understood  his  busi 
ness  too  well  to  consent  to  such  a  condemnation, 
nnd  as  they  knew  that  he  would  not  enter  into 
theological  questions,  any  more  than  Gallic  after 
wards  did  on  a  somewhat  similar  occasion  (Acts 
xviii.  14),  they  were  obliged  to  devise  a  new 
charge,  and  therefore  interpreted  our  Lord's  claims 
in  a  political  sense,  accusing  him  of  assuming  the 
royal  title,  perverting  the  nation,  and  forbidding 
the  payment  of  tribute  to  Rome  (Luke  xxiii.  3  ;  an 
account  plainly  presupposed  in  John  xviii.  33).  It 
is  plain  that  from  this  moment  Pilate  was  dis 
tracted  between  two  conflicting  feelings :  a  fear  of 
offending  the  Jews,  who  had  already  grounds  of 
accusation  against  him,  which  would  be  greatly 
strengthened  by  any  show  of  lukewarmness  in  pun 
ishing  an  offence  against  the  imperial  government, 
and  a  conscious  conviction  that  Jesus  was  innocent, 
since  it  was  absurd  to  suppose  that  a  desire  to  free 
the  nation  from  Koman  authority  was  criminal  in 
the  eyes  of  the  Sanhedrim.  Moreover,  this  last 
feeling  was  strengthened  by  his  own  hatred  of  the 
Jews,  whose  religious  scruples  had  caused  him 
frequent  trouble,  and  by  a  growing  respect  for  the 
calm  dignity  and  meekness  of  the  sutferer.  First 
ne  examined  our  Lord  privately,  and  asked  Him 
whether  He  was  a  king  ?  The  question  which  He 
in  return  put  to  His  judge,  "  Sayest  thou  this  of 
thyself,  or  did  others  tell  it  thee  of  me?"  seems  to 
imply  that  there  was  in  Pilate's  own  mind  a  suspi 
cion  that  the  prisoner  really  was  what  He  was 
charged  with  being ;  a  suspicion  which  shows  itself 
again  in  the  later  question,  "  Whence  art  thou?" 
(John  xix.  8),  in  the  increasing  desire  to  release 
Him  (12),  and  in  the  refusal  to  alter  the  inscription 
on  the  cross  (22).  In  any  case  Pilate  accepted  as 
satisfactory  Christ's  assurance  that  His  kingdom  was 
not  of  this  world,  that  is,  not  worldly  in  its  nature 
or  objects,  and  therefore  not  to  be  founded  by  this 
world's  weapons,  though  he  could  not  understand 
the  assertion  that  it  was  to  be  established  by  bearing 
witness  to  the  truth.  His  famous  reply,  "  What  is 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


873 


truth!''  was  the  question  of  a  worldly-minded  poli 
tician,  sceptical  because  he  was  indifferent,  one  whc 
thought  truth  an  empty  name,  or  at  least  could  not 
see  "  any  connexion  between  aX-tjOeta.  and  Paai\eia. 
truth  and  policy"  (Dr.  C.  Wordsworth,  Comm.  in 
loco).  With  this  question  he  brought  the  interview 
to  a  close,  and  came  out  to  the  Jews  and  declared 
the  prisoner  innocent.  To  this  they  replied  that 
His  teaching  had  stirred  up  all  the  people  from 
Galilee  to  Jerusalem.  The  mention  of  Galilee  sug 
gested  to  Pilate  a  new  way  of  escaping  from  hit 
dilemma,  by  sending  on  the  case  to  Herod  Antipas. 
tetrarch  of  that  country,  who  had  come  up  tc 
Jerusalem  to  the  feast,  while  at  the  same  time  this 
gave  him  an  opportunity  for  making  overtures  of 
reconciliation  to  Herod,  with  whose  jurisdiction  he 
had  probably  in  some  recent  instance  interfered. 
But  Herod,  though  propitiated  by  this  act  of 
courtesy,  declined  to  enter  into  the  matter,  and 
merely  sent  Jesus  back  to  Pilate  dressed  in  a 
shining  kingly  robe  (foOTJTa  Xapirpiiv,  Luke  xxiii. 
11),  to  express  his  ridicule  of  such  pretensions,  and 
contempt  for  the  whole  bnsiness.  So  Pilate  was 
compelled  to  come  to  a  decision,  and  first,  having 
assembled  the  chief  priests  and  also  the  people, 
whom  he  probably  summoned  in  the  expectation 
that  they  would  be  favourable  to  Jesus,  he  an 
nounced  to  them  that  the  accused  had  done  nothing 
worthy  of  death,  but  at  the  same  time,  in  hopes  of 
pacifying  the  Sanhedrim,  he  proposed  to  scourge 
Him  before  he  released  Him.  But  as  the  accusers 
were  resolved  to  have  His  blood,  they  rejected  this 
concession,  and  therefore  Pilate  had  recourse  to  a 
fresh  expedient.  It  was  the  custom  for  the  Roman 
governor  to  grant  every  year,  in  honour  of  the 
passover,  pardon  to  one  condemned  criminal.  The 
origin  of  the  practice  is  unknown,  though  we  may 
connect  it  with  the  fact  mentioned  by  Livy  (v.  13) 
that  at  a  Lectisternium  "  vinctis  quoque  dempta 
vincula."  Pilate  therefore  offered  the  people  their 
choice  between  two,  the  murderer  Barabbas,e  and 
the  prophet  whom  a  few  days  before  they  had 
hailed  as  the  Messiah.  To  receive  their  decision  he 
ascended  the  jSrj/ua,  a  portable  tribunal  which  was 
carried  about  with  a  Roman  magistrate  to  be 
placed  wherever  he  might  direct,  and  which  in  the 
present  case  was  erected  on  a  tessellated  pavement 
(\id6ffTpwTov)  in  front  of  the  palace,  and  called  ic 
Hebrew  Gabbatha,  probably  from  being  laid  down 
on  a  slight  elevation  (rQjl,  "  to  be  high").  As  soon 
as  Pilate  had  taken  his  seat,  he  received  a  mys 
terious  message  from  his  wife,  according  to  tradition 
a  proselyte  of  the  gate  (6fOffe^s),  named  Procla 
or  Claudia  Procula  (Evang.  Nicod.  ii.),  who  had 
"  suffered  many  things  in  a  dream,"  which  impelled 
her  to  entreat  her  husband  not  to  condemn  the  Just 
One.  But  he  had  no  longer  any  choice  in  the 
matter,  for  the  rabble,  instigated  of  course  by  the 
priests,  chose  Barabbas  for  pardon,  and  clamoured 
for  the  death  of  Jesus ;  insurrection  seemed  immi 
nent,  and  Pilate  reluctantly  yielded.  But,  before 
issuing  the  fatal  order,  he  washed  his  hands  before 
the  multitude,  as  a  sign  that  he  was  innocent  of  the 
crime,  in  imitation  probably  of  the  ceremony  en 
joined  in  Deut.  xxi.,  where  it  is  ordered  that  when 
the  perpetrator  of  a  murder  is  not  discovered,  the 
elders  of  the  city  in  which  it  occurs  shall  wash 


«  Comp.  BAEABBAS.  Ewald  suggests  that  tte  insurrec- 
fion  of  which  St.  Mark  speaks  must  have  been  that  con 
nected  with  the  appropriation  of  the  Corban  (supra),  and 
Uint  this  explains  the  eagerness  with  which  the  po.iiir 


demanded  his  release.  He  infers  further,  from  bis  name, 
that  he  was  the  son  of  a  Jlabbl  (Abba  was  a  Rabbinic 
title  of  honour),  and  thuj  accounts  for  the  jiart  taken  in 
his  favour  by  tlie  members  of  the  Sauhcilrim.— [E.  H.  P.] 


874 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 


their  hands,  with  the  declaration,  "  Our  hands  have 
not  shed  this  blood,  neither  have  our  eyes  seen  it." 
Such  a  practice  might  naturally  be  adopted  even  by 
A  Roman,  as  intelligible  to  the  Jewish  multitude 
around  him.  As  in  the  present  case  it  produced  no 
effect,  Pilate  ordered  his  soldiers  to  inflict  the 
scourging  preparatory  to  execution ;  but  the  sight 
of  urjust  suffering  so  patiently  borne  seems  again  to 
have  troubled  his  conscience,  and  prompted  a  new 
effort  in  favour  of  the  victim.  He  brought  Him  out 
bleeding  from  the  savage  punishment,  and  decked 
in  the  scarlet  robe  and  crown  of  thorns  which  the 
soldiers  had  put  on  Him  in  derision,  and  said  to  the 
people,  "  Behold  the  man !"  hoping  that  such  a 
spectacle  would  rouse  them  to  shame  and  compas 
sion.  But  the  priests  only  renewed  their  clamours 
for  His  death,  and,  fearing  that  the  political  charge 
of  treason  might  be  considered  insufficient,  returned 
to  their  first  accusation  of  blasphemy,  and  quoting 
the  law  of  Moses  (Lev.  xxiv.  16),  which  punished 
blasphemy  with  stoning,  declared  that  He  must  die 
"  because  He  made  himself  the  Son  of  God."  But 
this  title  vibs  deov  augmented  Pilate's  superstitious 
fears,  already  aroused  by  his  wife's  dream  (/xaXAoc 
tyo/8V)t>ij,  John  xix.  7)  ;  he  feared  that  Jesus  might 
be  one  of  the  heroes  or  demigods  of  his  own 
mythology ;  he  took  Him  again  into  the  palace, 
and  inquired  anxiously  into  his  descent  ("  Whence 
ait  thou  ?  ")  and  his  claims,  but,  as  the  question  was 
only  prompted  by  fear  or  curiosity,  Jesus  made  no 
reply.  When  Pilate  reminded  Him  of  his  own 
absolute  power  over  Him,  He  closed  this  last  con 
versation  with  the  irresolute  governor  by  the 
mournful  remark,  "  Thou  couldest  have  no  power  at 
all  against  me,  except  it  were  given  thee  from  above ; 
therefore  he  that  delivered  me  unto  thee  hath  the 
greater  sin."  God  had  given  to  Pilate  power  over 
Him,  and  power  only,  but  to  those  who  delivered 
Him  up  God  had  given  the  means  of  judging  of  His 
claims ;  and  therefore  Pilate's  sin,  in  merely  exer 
cising  this  power,  was  less  than  theirs  who,  being 
God's  own  priests,  with  the  Scriptures  before  them, 
and  the  word  of  prophecy  still  alive  among  them 
(John  xi.  50,  xviii.  14),  had  deliberately  conspired 
for  His  death.  The  result  of  this  interview  was 
one  last  effort  to  save  Jesus  by  a  fresh  appeal  to 
the  multitude ;  but  now  arose  the  formidable  cry, 
"  If  thou  let  this  man  go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's 
friend,"  and  Pilate,  to  whom  political  success  was 
as  the  breath  of  life,  again  ascended  the  tribunal, 
and  finally  pronounced  the  desired  condemnation.' 

So  ended  Pilate's  share  in  the  greatest  crime 
which  has  been  committed  since  the  world  began. 
That  he  did  not  immediately  lose  his  feelings  of 
anger  against  the  Jews  who  had  thus  compelled  his 
acquiescence,  and  of  compassion  ana  awe  for  the 


PILATE,  PONTIUS 

Sufferer  whom  he  had  unrighteously  sentenced,  k 
plain  from  his  curt  and  angry  refusal  to  alter  the 
inscription  which  he  had  prepared  for  the  ci-oss 
Ch  ytypcupa,  yfypcufta),  his  ready  acquiescence  in 
the  request  made  by  Joseph  of  Arimathaea  that  the 
Lord's  body  might  be  given  up  to  him  rather  thac 
consigned  to  the  common  sepulchre  reserved  for 
those  who  had  suffered  capita)  punishment,  ar.d  his 
sullen  answer  to  the  demand  of  the  Sanhedrim  that 
the  sepulchre  should  be  guarded.8  And  here,  as  far 
as  Scripture  is  concerned,  our  knowledge  of  Pilate's 
life  ends.  But  we  learn  from  Josephus  (Ant.  \viii. 
4,  §1)  that  his  anxiety  to  avoid  giving  offence  to 
Caesar  did  not  save  him  from  political  disaster. 
The  Samaritans  were  unquiet  and  rebellious.  A 
leader  of  their  own  race  had  promised  to  disclose  to 
them  the  sacred  treasures  which  Moses  was  reported 
to  have  concealed  in  Mount  Gerizim. fc  Pilate  led 
his  troops  against  them,  and  defeated  them  easily 
enough.  The  Samaritans  complained  to  Vitellius, 
now  president  of  Syria,  and  he  sent  Pilate  to  Home 
to  answer  their  accusations  before  the  emperor 
(Ibid.  §2).  When  he  reached  it,  he  found  Tiberius 
dead  and  Caius  (Caligula)  on  the  throne,  A.u.  36. 
Eusebius  adds  (H.  E.  ii.  7)  that  soon  afterwards, 
"  wearied  with  misfortunes,  he  killed  himself.  As 
to  the  scene  of  his  death  there  are  various  traditions. 
One  is,  that  he  was  banished  to  Vienna  Allobrogum 
(Vienne  on  the  Rhone),  where  a  singular  monument, 
a  pyramid  on  a  quadrangular  base,  52  feet  high, 
is  called  Pontius  Pilate's  tomb  (Dictionary  of  Geo 
graphy,  art.  "Vienna").  Another  is,  that  he 
sought  to  hide  his  sorrows  on  the  mountain  by  the 
lake  of  Lucerne,  now  called  Mount  Pilatus ;  and  there, 
after  spending  years  in  its  recesses,  in  remorse  and 
despair  rather  than  penitence,  plunged  into  the 
dismal  lake  which  occupies  its  summit.  According 
to  the  popular  belief,  "  a  form  is  often  seen  tw 
emerge  from  the  gloomy  waters,  and  go  through 
the  action  of  one  washing  his  hands ;  and  when  he 
does  so,  dark  clouds  of  mist  gather  first  round  the 
bosom  of  the  Infernal  Lake  (such  it  has  been  styled 
of  old),  and  then,  wrapping  the  whole  upper  part 
of  the  mountain  in  darkness,  presage  a  tempest  01 
hurricane,  which  is  sure  to  follow  in  a  short  space." 
(Scott,  Anne  of  Geierstein,  ch.  i.)  (See  below.) 

We  learn  from  Justin  Martyr  (Apol.  i.  pp.  76, 84), 
Tertullian  (ApoL  c.  21),  Eusebius  (H.  E.  ii.  2), 
and  others,  that  Pilate  made  an  official  report  tr 
Tiberius  of  our  Lord's  trial  and  condemnation ;  and 
in  a  homily  ascribed  to  Chrysostom,  though  marked 
as  spurious  by  his  Benedictine  editors  (Horn,  viii 
in  Pasch.  vol.  viii.  p.  968,  D),  certain  vTrofiyjifiara 
(Acta,  or  Commentarii  Pilati)  are  spoken  of  as  well- 
known  documents  in  common  circulation.  That  he 
made  such  a  report  is  highly  probable,  and  it  may 


*  The  proceedings  of  Pilate  In  our  Ix>rd's  trial  supply 
teany  interesting  illustrations  of  the  accuracy  of  the 
Evangelists,  from  the  accordance  of  their  narrative  with 
the  known  customs  of  the  time.  Thus  Pilate,  being  only 
.1  procurator,  had  no  quaestor  to  conduct  the  trial,  and 
therefore  examined  th*  prisoner  himself.  Again,  in  early 
times  Roman  magistrate';  had  not  been  allowed  to  take 
their  wives  with  them  iiX(j  the  provinces,  but  this  pro 
hibition  had  fallen  into  neglect,  and  latterly  a  proposal 
mode  by  Caecina  to  enforce  it  had  been  rejected  (Tac. 
Ann.  ill.  33,  34).  Grotius  points  out  that  the  word 
avewf^ev,  used  when  Pilate  sends  our  Lord  to  Herod 
(Luke  xxiii.  7)  Is  "  propria  Roman!  juris  vox :  nam 
remittitur  reus  qui  alicubi  comprehensus  mittitur  ad 
juilic'-iii  autoriginisauthabitationls"  (see  Alford,  in  loco). 
The  tessellated  pavement  (AiOoCTTpuTOiO  was  so  necessary 
to  the  lorin.-  of  justice,  as  well  as  the  fop-a,  that  Julius 


Caesar  carried  one  about  with  him  on  his  expeditions 
(Suet  Jul.  c.  46).  The  power  of  life  and  death  was  taken 
from  the  Jews  when  Judaea  became  a  province  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xx.  9,  $1).  Scourging  before  execution  was  a  well- 
known  Roman  practice. 

K  Matt,  xxvii.  65,  «xrre  Kovtrrto&iav  \nrdytrt,  atr^m- 
\ia-aade  (is  oiiSare.  Ellicott  would  translate  this,  "  TOSH 
a  guard,"  on  the  ground  that  the  watchers  were  Roman 
soldiers,  who  were  not  under  the  command  of  the  priesta. 
But  some  might  have  been  placed  at  their  disposal  during 
the  feast,  and  we  should  rather  expect  Aa/Sere  if  the 
sentence  were  imperative. 

h  Ewald  (Geecfiichte.  v.  43)  ventures  on  the  conjecture 
that  this  Samaritan  leader  may  have  been  Simon  Magus. 
The  description  fits  In  well  enough ;  but  the  class  of  snci 
impostors  was  so  large,  that  there  are  but  slight  grounds 
for  fixing  on  him  in  particular. — [E.  H.  P.] 


PILATE.  PONTIUS 

hava  '/aen  in  existence  in  Chrysostom's  time ;  but 
the  Acta  Pilati  now  extant  in  Greek,  and  two  Latin 
epistles  from  him  to  the  emperor  (Fabric.  Apocr.  i. 
'287,  298,  iii.  Ill,  456),  are  certainly  spurious. 
(For  further  particulars  see  below.) 

The  character  of  Pilate  may  be  sufficiently  in- 
fsrred  from  the  sketch  given  above  of  his  conduct 
at  our  Lord's  trial.  He  was  a  type  of  the  rich  and 
corrupt  Romans  of  his  age  ;  a  worldly-minded  states 
man,  conscious  of  no  higher  wants  than  those  of  this 
life,  jet  by  no  means  unmoved  by  feelings  of  justice 
and  mercy.  His  conduct  to  the  Jews,  in  the  in 
stances  quoted  from  Josephus,  though  severe,  was 
not  thoughtlessly  cruel  or  tyrannical,  considering 
the  general  practice  of  Roman  governors,  and  the 
difficulties  of  dealing  with  a  nation  so  arrogant  and 
perverse.  Certainly  there  is  nothing  in  the  facts 
recorded  by  profane  authors  inconsistent  with  his 
desire,  obvious  from  the  Gospel  narrative,  to  save 
our  Lord.  But  all  his  better  feelings  were  over 
powered  by  a  selfish  regard  for  his  own  security. 
He  would  not  encounter  the  least  hazard  of  personal 
annoyance  in  behalf  of  innocence  and  justice ;  the 
unrighteous  condemnation  of  a  good  man  was  a  trifle 
in  comparison  with  the  fear  of  the  emperor's  frown 
ind  the  loss  of  place  and  power.  While  we  do  not 
differ  from  Chrysostom's  opinion  that  he  was  iropo- 
vofnos  (Chrys.  i.  802,  adv.  Judaeos,  vi.),  or  that 
recorded  in  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  (v.  14), 
lhat  he  was  &vavSpos,  we  yet  see  abundant  reason 
for  our  Lord's  merciful  judgment,  "  He  that  deli- 
vered  me  unto  thee  hath  the  greater  sin."  At  the 
same  time  his  history  furnishes  a  proof  that  world- 
liness  and  want  of  principle  are  sources  of  crimes 
no  less  awful  than  those  which  spring  from  delibe 
rate  and  reckless  wickedness.  The  unhappy  notoriety 
given  to  his  name  by  its  place  in  the  two  universal 
creeds  of  Christendom  is  due,  not  to  any  desire  of 
singling  him  out  for  shame,  but  to  the  need  of  fixing 
the  date  of  our  Lord's  death,  and  so  bearing  witness 
to  the  claims  of  Christianity  to  rest  on  a  historical 
basis  (August.  De  Fide  et  Symb.  c.  v.  vol.  vi.  p.  156  ; 
Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  pp.  239,  240,  ed.  Burt,  and 
the  authorities  quoted  in  note  c).  The  number  of 
dissertations  on  Pilate's  character  and  all  the  cir 
cumstances  connected  with  him,  his  "  facinora,"  his 
"  Christum  servandi  studium,"  his  wife's  dream, 
his  supposed  letter  to  Tiberius,  which  have  been 
published  during  the  last  and  present  centuries,  is 
quite  overwhelming.  The  student  may  consult 
with  advantage  Dean  Alford's  Commentary ;  Elli- 
cott,  Historical  Lectures  on  the  Life  of  our  Lord, 
sect.  vii. ;  Neander's  Life  of  Christ,  §285  (Bohn) ; 
Winer,  Realw&rterbuch,  art.  "  Pilatus ;"  Ewald, 
Geschichte,  v.  30,  &c.  [G.  E.  L.  C.] 

ACTA  PILATI. — The  number  of  extant  Acta 
Pilati,  in  various  forms,  is  so  large  as  to  show 
that  very  early  the  demand  created  a  supply  of 
documents  manifestly  spurious,  and  we  have  no 
reason  for  looking  on  any  one  of  those  that  remain 
as  more  authentic  than  the  others.  The  taunt  of 
Celsus  that  the  Christians  circulated  spurious  or 
distorted  narratives  under  this  title  (Orig.  c.  Cels.)£ 
jnd  the  complaint  of  Eusebius  (If.  E.  ix.  5)  that 
the  heathens  made  them  the  vehicle  of  blasphemous 
calumnies,  show  how  largely  the  machinery  of  falsi 
fication  was  used  on  either  side.  Such  of  these 
documents  as  are  extant  are  found  in  the  collections 

'  This  reference  is  given  in  an  article  by  Leyrer  in 
Hcr7/)K's  Real-Kncycl.,  but  the  writer  has  been  unable  to 
Verify  it.  The  nearest  approach  seems  to  be  the  assertion 


PILATE,  PONTIUS  g?5 

of  Fabricius,  Thilo,  .ind  Tischendorf.  Some  of  them 
are  but  weak  paraphiases  of  the  Gospel  history.  The 
most  extravagant  are  perhaps  the  most  interesting, 
as  indicating  the  existence  of  modes  of  thought  at 
variance  with  the  prevalent  traditions.  Of  these 
anomalies  the  most  striking  is  that  known  as  the 
Paradosis  Pilati  (Tischendorf  Evang.  Apoc.  p.  426). 
The  emperor  Tiberius,  startled  at  the  universaJ 
darkness  that  had  fallen  on  the  Roman  Empire  on 
the  day  of  the  Crucifixion,  summons  Pilate  to 
answer  for  having  caused  it.  He  is  condemned  to 
death,  tut  before  his  execution  he  prays  to  the 
Lord  Jesus  that  he  may  not  be  destroyed  with  the 
wicked  Hebrews,  and  pleads  his  ignorance  as  an 
excuse.  The  prayer  is  answered  by  a  voice  from 
Heaven,  assuring  him  that  all  generations  shall  call 
him  blessed,  and  that  he  shall  be  a  witness  for 
Christ  at  His  second  coming  to  judge  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel.  An  angel  receives  his  head,  and 
his  wife  dies  filled  with  joy,  and  is  buried  with 
him.  Startling  as  this  imaginaiy  history  may  be» 
it  has  its  counterpart  in  the  traditional  customs  of 
the  Abyssinian  Church,  in  which  Pilate  is  recog 
nised  as  a  saint  and  martyr,  and  takes  his  place  in 
the  calendar  on  the  25th  of  June  (Stanley,  Eastern 
Church,  p.  13 ;  Neale,  Eastern  Church,  i.  806). 
The  words  of  Tertullian,  describing  him  as  "  jam 
pro  sua  conscientia  Christianus"  (Apol.  c.  21). 
indicate  a  like  feeling,  and  we  find  traces  of  it  also 
in  the  Apocryphal  Gospel,  which  speaks  of  him  a» 
"  uncircumcised  in  flesh,  but  circumcised  in  heart  " 
(Evang.  Nicod.  i.  12,  in  Tischendorf,  Evang.  Apoc. 
p.  236). 

According  to  another  legend  (Mors  Pilati,  in 
Tischeudorf's  Evang.  Apoc.  p.  432),  Tiberius,  hear 
ing  of  the  wonderful  works  of  healing  that  had  been 
wrought  in  Judaea,  writes  to  Pilate,  bidding  him 
to  send  to  Rome  the  man  that  had  this  divine 
power.  Pilate  has  to  confess  that  he  has  crucified 
him ;  but  the  messenger  meets  Veronica,  who  gives 
him  the  cloth  which  had  received  the  impress  of 
the  divine  features,  and  by  this  the  emperor  is 
healed.  Pilate  is  summoned  to  take  his  trial,  and 
presents  himself  wearing  the  holy  and  seamless 
tunic.  This  acts  as  a  spell  upon  the  emperor,  and 
he  forgets  his  wonted  severity.  After  a  time  Pilate 
is  thrown  into  prison,  and  there  commits  suicide. 
His  body  is  cast  into  the  Tiber,  but  as  storms  and 
tempests  followed,  the  Romans  take  it  up  and  senc, 
it  to  Vienne.  It  is  thrown  into  the  Rhone ;  but 
the  same  disasters  follow,  and  it  is  sent  on  tc 
Losania  (Lucerne  or  Lausanne  ?).  There  it  is  sunk 
in  a  pool,  fenced  round  by  mountains,  and  even  thene 
the  waters  boil  or  bubble  strangely.  The  interest 
of  this  story  obviously  lies  in  its  presenting  an  earlj 
form  (the  existing  text  is  of  the  14th  century)  ol 
the  local  traditions  which  connect  the  name  of  the 
procurator  ol  Judaea  with  the  Mount  Pilatus  thai 
overlooks  the  Lake  of  Lucerne.  The  received  ex 
planation  (Ruskin,  Modern  Painters,  v.  p.  128)  ol 
the  legend,  as  originating  in  a  distortion  of  the  de 
scriptive  name  Mons  Pileatus  (the  "  cloud-capped  "), 
supplies  a  curious  instance  of  the  genesis  of  a 
mythus  from  a  false  etymology ;  but  it  may  be 
questioned  whether  it  rests  on  sufficient  grounds, 
and  is  not  rather  the  product  of  a  pseudo-criticism 
finding  in  a  name  the  starting-point,  not  the  em 
bodiment  of  a  legend.  Have  we  any  evidence  that 

thi;  no  judgment  fell  on  Pilate  for  Ids  alleged  criiuo 
(ii.  ^ 


876 


PILDA8II 


the  mountain  was  known  as  "  Pileatus  "  before  the 
legend  ?  Have  we  not,  in  the  apocryphal  story  just 
cited,  the  legend  independently  of  the  name  ?  k  (comp. 
Vilmar,  Deutsch.  Nation.  Liter,  i.  217). 

Pilate's  wife  is  also,  as  might  be  expected,  pro 
minent  in  these  traditions.  Her  name  is  given  as 
Claudia  Procula  (Niceph.  H.  E.  i.  30)."  She  had 
been  a  proselyte  to  Judaism  before  the  Crucifixion 
(Evang.  Nicod.  c.  2).  Nothing  certain  is  known  as 
to  her  history,  but  the  tradition  that  she  became  a 
Christian  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Origen  (Horn,  in 
Matt.  xxrv.).  The  system  of  administration  under 
the  Republic  forbade  the  governors  of  provinces  to 
take  their  wives  with  them,  but  the  practice  had 
gained  ground  under  the  Empire,  and  Tacitus  (Ann. 
iii.  33)  records  the  failure  of  an  attempt  to  reinforce 
the  old  regulation.  (See  p.  874,  note '.)  [E.H.  P.] 

PIL'DASH  (En^B  :  *oA.5es  ;  Alex.  *aA5c£y : 
Phcldas) .  On«  of  the  eight  sons  of  Nahor,  Abraham's 
brother,  by  his  wife  and  niece,  Milcah  (Gen.  xxii.  22). 
The  settlement  of  his  descendants  has  not  been  iden 
tified  with  any  degree  of  probability.  Bunsen  (Bibel- 
werk,  Gen.  xxii.  2'2)  compares  Ripalthas,  a  place  in 
the  north-east  of  Mesopotamia ;  but  the  resemblance 
of  the  two  names  is  probably  accidental. 

PIL'EHA  (Knbs :  *oAof :  Phalea).  The  name 
of  one  of  the  chief  of  the  people,  probably  a  family, 
who  signed  the  covenant  with  Nehemiah  (Neh.x.  24). 

PILLAR.'  The  notion  of  a  pillar  is  of  a  shaft 
or  isolated  pile,  either  supporting  or  not  supporting 
a  roof.  Pillars  form  an  important  feature  in  Oriental 
architecture,  partly  perhaps  as  a  reminiscence  of  the 
tent  with  its  supporting  poles,  and  partly  also  from 
the  use  of  flat  roofs,  in  consequence  of  which  the 
chambers  were  either  narrower  or  divided  into  por 
tions  by  columns.  The  tent-principle  is  exemplified  in 
the  open  halls  of  Persian  and  other  Eastern  buildings, 
of  which  the  fronts,  supported  by  pillars,  are  shaded 
by  curtains  or  awnings  fastened  to  the  ground  out 
side  by  pegs,  or  to  trees  in  the  garden-court  (Esth. 
i.  6 ;  Chardin,  Voy.  vii.  387,  ix.  469,  470,  and 
plates  39,  81 ;  Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  pp.  530,  648  ; 
Burckhardt,  Notes  on  Bed.  i.  37).  Thus  also  a 
figurative  mode  of  describing  heaven  is  as  a  tent  or 
canopy  supported  by  pillars  (Ps.  civ.  2  ;  Is.  xl.  22), 
and  the  earth  as  a  flat  surface  resting  on  pillars 
(1  Sam.  ii.  8;  Ps.  Ixxv.  3). 

It  may  be  remarked  that  the  word  "  place,"  in 
1  Sam.  xv.  12,  is  in  Hebrew  "  hand."  b  In  the 
Arab  tent  two  of  the  posts  are  called  yed  or  "  hand  " 
(Burckhardt,  Bed.  i.  87). 

The  general  practice  in  Oriental  buildings  of  sup 
porting  flat  roofs  by  pillars,  or  of  covering  open 
spaces  by  awnings  stretched  from  pillars,  led  to  an 


PILLAR 

extensive  use  of  them  in  construction.  In  Inr.bu 
architecture  an  enormous  number  of  pillars,  some 
times  amounting  to  1000,  is  found.  A  similar 
principle  appears  to  have  been  carried  out  at  Perse* 
polis.  At  Nineveh  the  pillars  were  probably  of 
wood  [CEDAR],  and  it  is  very  likely  that  the  same 
construction  pre^ojled  in  the  "  house  of  the  forest 
of  Lebanon,"  with  its  hall  and  porch  of  pillars 
(IK.  vii.  2,  6).  The  "chapiters"  of  the  two 
pillars  Jachin  and  Boaz  resembled  the  tall  capitals 
of  the  Persepolitan  columns  (Layard,  Nin.  <£  Bab. 
252,  650 ;  A'meceh,  ii.  274 ;  Fergusson,  Handbk. 
8,  174,  178,  J88,  190,  196,  198,  231-233;  Ro 
berts,  Sketches,  No.  182,  184,  190,  198;  Euseb. 
Vit.  Const,  iii.  34,  38 ;  Burckhardt,  Trav.  in  Ara 
bia,  i.  244,  245). 

But  perhaps  the  earliest  application  of  the  pillar 
was  the  votive  or  monumental.  This  in  early  times 
consisted  of  nothing  but  a  single  stone  or  pile  of 
stones.  Instances  are  seen  in  Jacob's  pillars  (Gen. 
xxviii.  18,  xxxi.  46,  51, 52,  xxxv.  14) ;  in  the  twelve 
pillars  set  up  by  Moses  at  Mount  Sinai  (Ex.  xxiv. 
4)  ;  the  twenty- four  stones  erected  by  Joshua  (Josh, 
iv.  8,  9 ;  see  also  Is.  xix.  19,  and  Josh.  xxiv.  27). 
The  trace  of  a  similar  notion  may  probably  be 
found  in  the  holy  stone  of  Mecca  (Burckhardt, 
Trav.  i.  297).  Monumental  pillars  have  also  beon 
common  in  many  countries  and  in  various  styles 
of  architecture.  Such  were  perhaps  the  obelisks  of 
Egypt  (Fergusson,  6,  8,  115,  246,  340;  Ibu  Rv- 
tuta,  Trav.  p.  Ill ;  Strabo,  iii.  p.  171, 172 ;  Herod, 
ii.  106  ;  Amm.  Marc.  xvii.  4;  Joseph.  Ant.  i.  2,  §3, 
the  pillars  of  Seth). 

The  stone  Ezel  (1  Sam.  xx.  19)  was  probably  a 
terminal  stone  or  a  waymark. 

The  "place"  set  up  by  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  12)  is 
explained  by  St.  Jerome  to  be  a  trophy,  Vulg.  for- 
nicem  triumphalem  (Jerome,  Qwest.  Hebr.  in  lib.  i. 
Seg.  iii.  1339).  The  word  used  is  the  same  as 
that  for  Absalom's  pillar,  Matstsebah,  called  by 
Josephus  x«*ipa  (Ant.  vii.  10,  §3),  which  was  clearly 
of  a  monumental  or  memorial  character,  but  not 
necessarily  carrying  any  representation  of  a  hand  in 
its  structure,  as  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  case. 
So  also  Jacob  set  up  a  pillar  over  Rachel's  grave 
(Gen.  xxxv.  20,  and-  Robinson,  i.  218).  The  mono 
lithic  tombs  and  obelisks  of  Petra  are  instances  of 
similar  usage  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  422  ;  Robeiis, 
Sketches,  105  ;  Irby  and  Mangles,  Travels,  125). 

But  the  word  Matstsebali,  "  pillar,"  is  more 
often  rendered  "statue"  or  "image"  (e.  g.  Deut. 
vii.  5.  xii.  3,  xvi.  22  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  1 ;  Ex.  xxiii.  24, 
xxxiv.  13 ;  2  Chr.  xiv.  3,  xxxi.  1 ;  Jer.  xliii.  13 
Hos.  iii.  4,  x.  1 ;  Mic.  v.  13).  This  agrees  with 
the  usage  of  heathen  nations,  and  practised,  as  we 
have  seen,  by  the  patriarch  Jacob,  of  erecting  blocks 


k  The  extent  to  which  the  terror  connected  with  the 
belief  formerly  prevailed  is  somewhat  startling.  If  a  stone 
were  thrown  into  the  lake,  a  violent  storm  would  follow. 
No  one  was  allowed  to  visit  it  without  a  special  permis 
sion  from  the  authorities  of  Lucerne.  The  neighbouring 
shepherds  were  bound  by  a  solemn  oath,  renewed  annually, 
never  to  guide  a  stranger  to  it  (Gessner,  Descript.  Mont 
I'i'at.  p.  40,  Zurich.  1555).  The  spell  was  broken  In  1584 
by  Johannes  MUUer,  cure  of  Lucerne,  who  was  bold  enough 
to  throw  stones  and  abide  the  consequences.  (Golbery, 
Univert  I'ittoresqw  de  Suisse,  p.  327.)  It  ts  striking  that 
traditions  of  Pilate  attach  themselves  to  several  localities  in 
the  South  of  France  (comp.  Murray's  Handbook  of  Prance, 
Route  125). 

•  If  It  were  possible  to  attach  any  value  to  the  Codex 
of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  of  which  portions  Lave  bcun 


published  by  Simonides,  as  belonging  to  the  1st  century 
the  name  of  Pempele  might  claim  precedence. 

a  1.  IJJpD  (1  K.  x.  12) ;  viro<rrtip[yna.Ta. ;  fu  lara,  from 
"1J?D,  "support;"  marg.  "rails." 

2.  i"Q-)?D  ;  the  same,  or  nearly  so. 

3.  J"QttD,  from  3V3,  "place;"  <mjA»j;   titulut;  • 
pile  of  stones,  or  monumental  pillar. 

4.  TV3  ;  (mjAij;  ttatua  (Gen.  xix.  26),  of  Lot's  wife; 
from  same  root  as  2  and  3. 

5.  ^1¥D;  nerpa;  munitio;   "tower;"   only  In  Hab 
H.  1 ;  elsewhere  "  strong  city,"  i.  e.  *  place  of  defence 
from  *V| V.  "press,"  "confine." 

6.  "1-lSy  ;  orvAo* ;  columna ;  from  "IDV,  -  ctand." 
b  1*  ;  \(ipa. ',  fvrnicem  triumphalem 


PILLAR,  PLAIN  OF  TIIE 

Or  piles  of  wood  or  stone,  which  in  later  times  grew 
into  ornamented  pillars  in  honour  of  the  deity 
idem.  Alex.  Co\.  ad  Gent.  c.  »v.;  Strom,  i.  24"). 
Instances  of  this  are  seen  in  the  Attic  Hermae  (Paus. 
iv.  33,  4),  seven  pillars  significant  of  the  planets 
viii.  21,  9,  also  vii.  17,  4,  and  22,  2,  viii.  37) ;  and 
Arnobius  mentions  the  practice  of  pouring  libations 
of  oil  upon  them,  which  again  recalls  the  case  of 
Jacob  (Adv.  Gent.  i.  335,  ed.  Gauthier). 

The  termini  or  boundary-marks  were  originally, 
perhaps  always,  rough  stones  or  posts  of  wood, 
which  received  divine  honours  (Ov.  Fast.  ii.  641, 
684).  [IDOL.  p.  850  6.] 

Lastly,  the  figurative  use  of  the  term  "  pillar," 
in  reference  to  the  cloud  and  fire  accompanying  the 
Israelites  on  their  march,  or  as  in  Cant.  iii.  6  and 
Rev.  x.  1 ,  is  plainly  derived  from  the  notion  of  an 
isolated  column  not  supporting  a  roof.  [H.  W.  P.] 

PILLAR,  PLAIN  OF  THE  (2-VD  |^K  : 

rrj  /3a,\dv<p  rfj  evpfryb  TTJS  ffrdcrecas  ;  Alex,  omits 
•n?  evpfrfj :  quercum  quae  stabat),  or  rather  "  oakc 
of  the  pillar" — that  being  the  real  signification  of 
>Jie  Hebrew  word  elon.  A  tree  which  stood  near 
ilhechem,  and  at  which  the  men  of  Shechem  and 
the  house  of  Millo  assembled,  to  crown  Abimelech 
son  of  Gideon  (Judg.  ix.  6).  There  is  nothing  said 
by  which  its  position  can  be  ascertained.  It  possibly 
derived  its  name  of  Muttsdb  from  a  stone  or  pillar 
set  up  under  it;  and  reasons  have  been  already 
adduced  for  believing  that  this  tree  may  have  been 
the  same  with  that  under  which  Jacob  buried  the 
idols  and  idolatrous  trinkets  of  his  household,  and 
under  which  Joshua  erected  a  stone  as  a  testimony 
of  the  covenant  there  re-executed  between  the  people 
and  Jehovah.  [MEONENIM.]  There  was  both 
time  and  opportunity  during  the  period  of  commo 
tion  which  followed  the  death  of  Joshua  for  this 
sanctuary  to  return  into  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites. 
and  the  stone  left  standing  there  by  Joshua  to  be 
come  appropriated  to  idolatrous  purposes  as  one  of 
the  Mattsebahs  in  which  the  religion  of  the  abori 
gines  of  the  Holy  Land  delighted.  [IDOL,  p.  850.] 
The  terms  in  which  Joshua  speaks  of  this  very  stone 
(Josh.  xxiv.  27)  almost  seem  to  overstep  the  bounds 
of  mere  imagery,  and  would  suggest  and  warrant 
its  being  afterwards  regarded  as  endowed  with  mi 
raculous  qualities,  and  therefore  a  fit  object  for 
veneration.  Especially  would  this  be  the  case  if  the 
singular  expression,  '« it  hath  heard  all  the  words 
of  Jehovah  our  God  which  He  spake  to  us,"  were 
intended  to  indicate  that  this  stone  had  been  brought 
from  Sinai,  Jordan,  or  some  other  scene  of  the  com 
munications  of  Jehovah  with  the  people.  The  Sa 
maritans  still  show  a  range  of  stones  on  the  summit 
of  Gerizim  as  those  brought  from  the  bed  of  Jordan 
by  the  twelve  tribes.  [G.] 

PILLED  (Gen.  xxx.  37, 38) :  PEELED  (Is.  xviii. 
2;  Ez.  xxix.  18).  The  verb  "to  pill"  appears  in 
old  Eng.  as  identical  in  meaning  with  "  to  peel  = 
to  strip,"  and  in  this  sense  is  used  in  the  above 
passages  from  Gen.  Of  the  next  stage  in  its  mean- 

•  OTjfJacVei  6  arvAos  TO  aveiKOVKTTOV  rov  8eoO. 
t>  A  double  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word:  evpt-rfj 
originated  in  the  erroneous  idea  that  the  word  is  con 
nected  with  X¥O  "  to  flnd-" 
e  This  is  given  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V. 
«  Comp.  "  peeling  their  prisoners,"  Milton,  P.  R.  Iv. 
"  To  peel  the  chiefs,  the  people  to  devour." 

Dryden,  Homer.  Iliad  (Richardson) 


PINNACLE 


877 


ing  as  =  plunder,  we  have  traces  in  the  word  "  pil 
lage,"  pilfer.  If  the  difference  between  the  twc 
forms  be  more  than  accidental,  it  would  seem,  as  if 
in  the  English  of  the  17th  century  "peel"  was 
used  for  the  latter  signification.  The  "  people 
scattered  and'  peeled,"  are  these  that  have  been 
plundered  of  all  they  have.d  The  soldiers  of  Nebu. 
chadnezzar's  army  (Ez.  xxix.  18),  however,  have 
their  shoulder  peeled  in  the  literal  sense.  The  skin  is 
worn  off  with  carrying  earth  to  pile  up  the  mound* 
during  the  protracted  siege  of  Tyre.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PIL'TAI  CD^Q:  *e\frl:  Phellf).     The  ra 

presentative  of  the  priestly  house  of  Moadiah,  01 
Maadiah,  in  the  time  of  Joiakim  the  son  of  Jeshua 
(Neh.  xii.  17). 

PINE-TREE.  1.  Tidhdr,"  from  a  root  signify 
ing  to  revolve.  What  tree  is  intended  is  not  certain. 
Gesenius  inclines  to  think  the  oak,  as  implying  du 
ration.  It  has  been  variously  explained  to  be  the 
Indian  plane,  the  larch,  and  the  elm  (Celsius, 
Hierob.  ii.  271).  But  the  rendering  "  pine,"  seems 
least  probable  of  any,  as  the  root  implies  either  cur 
vature  or  duration,  of  which  the  latter  is  not  parti 
cularly  applicable  to  the  pine,  and  the  former 
remarkably  otherwise.  The  LXX.  rendering  in  Is. 
xli.  19,  Ppa.dvSa.dp,  appears  to  have  arisen  from  a 
confused  amalgamation  of  the  words  berosh  and 
tidhdr,  which  follow  each  other  in  that  passage 
Of  these  berosh  is  sometimes  rendered  "  cypress," 
and  might  stand  for  "juniper."  That  species  of 
juniper  which  is  called  savin,  is  in  Greek  fipaOv. 
The  word  Sadp  is  merely  an  expression  in  Greek 
letters  for  tidkar.  (Pliny,  xxiv.  11,61;  Schleusner, 
s.  v.;  Celsius,  Hierob.  i.  78.)  [FiR.] 

2.  Shemen1  (Neh.  viii.  15),  is  probably  the  wild 
olive.  The  cultivated  olive  was  mentioned  just 
before  (Ges.  p.  1437).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PINNACLE  (rb  irTtpvyiov  ;  pinna,  pinna- 
culum  :  only  in  Matt.  iv.  5,  and  Luke  iv.  9).  Th« 
word  is  used  in  0.  T.  to  render,  1.  Cdnaph,Z  a  wing 
or  border,  e.g.  of  a  garment  (Num.  xv.  38  ;  1  Sam. 
xv.  27,  xxiv.  4).  2.  Snappir,  fin  of  a  fish  (Lev. 
xi.  9.  So  Arist.  Anim.  i.  5,  14).  3.  Kdtsah,  edge; 
A.  V.  end  (Ex.  xxviii.  26).  Hesychius  explains  irr. 
as  aicpaiT^fnov. 

It  is  plain,  1.  that  rb  irrep.  is  not  a  pinnacle, 
but  the  pinnacle.  2.  That  by  the  won!  itself  we 
should  understand  an  edge  or  border,  like  a  feather 
or  a  fin.  The  only  part  of  the  Temple  which  an 
swered  to  the  modern  sense  of  pinnacle  was  the 
golden  spikes  erected  on  the  roof,  to  prevent  birds 
from  settling  there  (Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  5,  §6).  To 
meet  the  sense,  therefore,  of  "  wing,"  or  to  use  our 
modern  word  founded  on  the  same  notion,  "  aisle," 
Lightfoot  suggests  the  porch  or  vestibule  which 
projected,  like  shoulders  on  each  side  of  the  Temple 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  v.  5,  §4  ;  Vitruv.  iii.  2). 

Another  opinion  fixes  on  the  royal  porch  adjoin 
ing  the  Temple,  which  rose  to  a  total  height  cl 
400  cubits  above  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  (Joseph. 
Ant.  xv.  11,  §5,  xx.  9,  §7). 


•  "I!"!*])1)  ;   JT«V'<O)  ;  pinut  (Is.  Ix.  13);    from  "VI  1 

"  revolve"  (Ges.  p.  323).     In  Is.  x'.i.  19,    j3po0v£aaj> 
ulmiis. 

t  JO"'  ;  £vAo»>  Kvirapicra-ivov  ;  lignum  pulcherrjnwn 
S  1.  »p3  ;  impvytov  ;  angulut. 

2.  "V33D  ;  jrrep.    pinnula. 

3    n^fp  ;  Trrep.  ;  tummitai. 


878 


MKON 


Kusebius  tells  us  that  it  was  from  "  the  pinnacle" 
(rb  irr«f>.)  that  St.  James  was  precipitated,  and  it  is 
said  to  have  remained  until  the  4th  century  (Euseb. 
H.  E.  ii.  23;  Williams,  Holy  City,  ii.  338). 

Perhaps  in  any  case  rb  irrep.  means  the  battle 
ment  ordered  by  law  to  be  added  to  every  root'.  It 
is  in  favour  of  this  that  the  word  Canaph  is  used 
to  indicate  the  top  of  the  Temple  (Dan.  ix.  27  ; 
Hammond,  Grotius,  Calmet,  De  Wette,  Lightfoot, 
H.  Hebr.  on  Matth.  iv.).  [H-  w-  p-3 

PI'NON  (jlPB:  QfivAv-  Phinon).  One  of  the 
"  dukes  "  of  Edom  ;  that  is,  head  or  founder  of  a 
tribe  of  that  nation  (Gen.  xxxvi.  41  ;  1  Chr.J.  52). 
By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (  Onomasticon,  Qivwv,  and 
"  Fenon")  the  seat  of  the  tribe  is  said  to  have  been 
at  PUNON,  one  of  the  stations  of  the  Israelites  in 
the  Wilderness  ;  which  again  they  identify  with 
Phaeno,  "  between  Petra  and  Zoar,"  the  site  of  the 
famous  Roman  copper-mines.  No  name  answering 
to  Pinon  appears  to  have  been  yet  discovered  in 
Arabic  literature,  or  amongst  the  existing  tribes. 


PIPE  (n,  chattl).     The  Hebrew  word  so 

rendered  is  derived  from  a  root  signifying  "to  bore, 
perforate,"  and  is  represented  with  sufficient  cor 
rectness  by  the  English  "pipe"  or  "flute,"  as  in 
the  margin  of  1  K.  i.  40.  It  is  one  of  the  simplest 
and  therefore,  probably,  one  of  the  oldest  of  musical 
instruments,  and  in  consequence  of  its  simplicity 
of  form  there  is  reason  to  suppose  that  the  "  pipe  " 
of  the  Hebrews  did  not  differ  materially  from  that 
of  the  ancient  Egyptians  and  Greeks.  It  is  asso 
ciated  with  the  tabret  (toph)  as  an  instrument  of  a 
peaceful  and  social  character,  just  as  in  Shakspere 
(Much  Ado,  ii.  3),  "  I  have  known  when  there  was 
no  music  with  him  but  the  drum  and  fife,  and 
now  had  he  rather  hear  the  tabor  and  the  pipe  "  — 
the  constant  accompaniment  of  meiriment  and  fes 
tivity  (Luke  vii.  32),  and  especially  characteristic 
of  "  the  piping  time  of  peace."  The  pipe  and 
tabret  were  used  at  the  banquets  of  the  Hebrews 
(Is.  v.  12),  and  their  bridal  processions  (Mishna, 
Baba  metsia,  vi.  1),  and  accompanied  the  simpler 
religious  services,  when  the  young  prophets,  return 
ing  from  the  high-place,  caught  their  inspiration 
from  the  harmony  (1  Sam.  x.  5)  ;•  or  the  pilgrims, 
on  their  way  to  the  great  festivals  of  their  ritual, 
beguiled  the  weariness  of  the  march  with  psalms 
sung  to  the  simple  music  of  the  pipe  (Is.  xxx.  29). 
When  Solomon  was  proclaimed  king  the  whole 
people  went  up  after  him  to  Gihon,  piping  with 
pipes  (1  K.  i.  40).  The  sound  of  the  pipe  was 
apparently  a  soft  wailing  note,  which  made  it 
appropriate  to  be  used  in  mourning  and  at  funerals 
(Matt.  ix.  23),  and  in  the  lament  of  the  prophet 
over  the  destruction  of  Moab  (  Jer.  xlviii.  36).  The 
pipe  was  the  type  of  perforated  wind-instruments, 
as  the  harp  was  of  stringed  instruments  (1  Mace. 
iii.  45),  and  was  even  used  in  the  Temple-choir,  as 
appears  from  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  7,  where  "  the  players  on 
instruments"  are  properly  "  pipers."  Twelve  days 
in  the  year,  according  to  the  Mishna  (Arach.  ii.  3), 
the  pipes  sounded  before  the  altar  :  at  the  slaying 
of  the  First  Passover,  the  slaying  of  the  Second 
Passover,  the  first  feast-day  of  the  Passover,  the 
first  feast-day  of  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  and  the  eight 
days  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  On  the  last- 
mentioned  occasion  the  playing  on  pipes  accom 
panied  the  drawing  of  water  from  the  fountain  of 
Siioah  (/SMCCO/I,  iv.  1,  v.  1)  for  five  and  six  days. 
The  pipes  which  were  played  befor-:  the  altar  were 


PIPE 

of  reed,  and  not  of  copper  or  broni«,  because  Git 
former  gave  a  softer  sound.  Of  these  there  were 
not  less  than  two  nor  more  than  twelve.  In  later 
times  the  office  of  mourning  at  funerals  became  & 
profession,  and  the  funeral  and  deathbed  were  never 
without  the  professional  pipers  or  flute-players 
(auA.7/T(£s,  Matt.  ix.  23),  a  custom  which  still 
exists  (comp.  Ovid,  Fast.  vi.  660,  "  cantabat  moestis 
tibia  funeribus  ").  It  was  incumbent  on  even  the 
poorest  Israelite,  at  the  death  of  his  wife,  to  provide 
at  least  two  pipers  and  one  woman  to  make  lament 
ation.  [Music,  vol.  ii.  p.  444  6.] 

In  the  social  and  festive  life  of  the  Egyptians  the 
pipe  played  as  prominent  a  part  as  among  the 
Hebrews.  "  While  dinner  was  preparing,  the  party 
was  enlivened  by  the  sound  of  music ;  and  a  band, 
consisting  of  the  harp,  lyre,  guitar,  tambourine, 
double  and  single  pipe,  flute,  and  other  instruments, 
played  the  favourite  airs  and  songs  of  the  country  " 
(Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  222).  In  the  different 
combinations  of  instruments  used  in  Egyptian 
bands,  we  generally  find  either  the  double  pipe  or 
the  flute,  and  sometimes  both ;  the  former  being 
played  both  by  men  and  women,  the  latter  exclu 
sively  by  women.  The  Egyptian  single  pipe,  as 
described"  by  Wilkinson  (Anc.  Eg.  ii.  308),  was 
"  a  straight  tube,  without  any  increase  at  the 
mouth ;  and,  when  played,  was  held  with  both 
hands.  It  was  of  moderate  length,  apparently  not 
exceeding  a  foot  and  a  half,  and  many  have  been 
found  much  smaller ;  but  these  may  have  belonged 
to  the  peasants,  without  meriting  a  place  among 
the  instruments  of  the  Egyptian  band.  .  .  .  Some 
have  three,  others  four  holes  .  .  .  and  some  were 
furnished  with  a  small  mouthpiece"  of  reed  or 
thick  straw.  This  instrument  must  have  been 
something  like  the  Nay,  or  dervish's  flute,  whicn 
is  described  by  Mr.  Lane  (Mod.  Eg.  ii.  chap,  v.)  as 
"  a  simple  reed,  about  18  inches  in  length,  seven- 
eighths  of  an  inch  in  diameter  at  the  upper  ex 
tremity,  and  three-quarters  of  an  inch  at  the  lower. 
It  is  pierced  with  six  holes  in  front,  and  generally 
with  another  hole  at  the  back.  ...  In  the  hands 
of  a  good  performer  the  nay  yields  fine,  mellow 
tones;  but  it  requires  much  practice  to  sound  it 
well."  The  double  pipe,  which  is  found  as  fre 
quently  in  Egyptian  paintings  as  the  single  one, 
"  consisted  of  two  pipes,  perhaps  occasionally  united 
together  by  a  common  mouthpiece,  and  played  each 
with  the  corresponding  hand.  It  was  common  to 
the  Greeks  and  other  people,  and,  from  the  mode 
of  holding  it,  received  the  name  of  right  and  left 
pipe,  the  tibia  dextra  and  sinistra  of  the  Romans : 
the  latter  had  but  few  holes,  and,  emitting  a  deep 
sound,  served  as  a  bass.  The  other  had  more  holes, 
and  gave  a  sharp  tone"  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii. 
309,  310).  It  was  played  on  chiefly  by  women, 
who  danced  as  they  played,  and  is  imitated  by  the 
modern  Egyptians  in  their  zummdra,  or  double 
reed,  a  rude  instrument,  used  principally  by  peasants 
and  camel-drivers  out  of  doors  (ibid.  pp.  311,  312) 
In  addition  to  these  is  also  found  in  the  earliest 
sculptures  a  kind  of  flute,  held  with  both  hands, 
and  sometimes  so  long  that  the  player  was  obliged 
to  stretch  his  arms  to  their  full  length  while 
playing. 

Any  of  the  instruments  abore  described  would 
have  been  called  by  the  Hebrews  by  the  generla 
term  chdlil,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  they 
might  have  derived  their  knowledge  of  them  from 
Egypt.  The  single  pipe  is  said  to  have  l*en  the 
invention  of  the  Ksrypthms  alone,  whf  attribute  it 


PIRA 

to  Gt.iris  (Jul.  Poll.  Onoinust.  \v.  10),  and  as  the  I 
autterial  of  which  it  vas  made  was  the  lotus-wood 
(Ovid,  Fast.  iv.  190,  "  horrendo  lotos  adunea  sono") 
there  may  be  some  foundation  for  the  conjecture. 
Other  materials  mentioned  by  Julius  Pollux  are 
reed,  brass,  box-wood,  and  horn.  Pliny  (xvi.  66) 
adds  silver  and  the  bones  of  asses.  Bartenora,  in 
his  note  on  Arachin,  ii.  3,  above  quoted,  identifies 
the  chalU  with  the  French  chalumeau,  whicli  is  the 
German  schalmeie  and  our  shawm  or  shalm,  of 
which  thi  clarionet  is  a  modern  improvement.  The 
shawm,  si/s  Mr.  Chappell  (Pop.  Mus.  i.  35,  note  6), 
"  was  played  with  a  reed  like  the  wayte,  or  hautboy, 
but  being  a  bass  instrument,  with  about  the  com- 
paso  of  an  octave,  had  probably  more  the  tone  of  a 
bassoon."  This  can  scarcely  be  correct,  or  Dray- 
ton's  expression,  "the  shrillest  shawm"  (1'olyol.  iv. 
3o6),  would  be  inappropriate.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PI'RA  (of  IK  rieipas),  1  Esdr.  v.  19.  Appa 
rently  a  repetition  of  the  name  CAPHIRA  in  the 
Conner  part  of  the  verse. 


PI'EAM  (DK")S  :  *«5^;  Alex,  ttpad/j.  :  Php- 
rcari).  The  Amorite  king  of  Jarmuth  at  the  time 
of  Joshua's  conquest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  x.  3).  With 
his  four  confederates  he  was  defeated  in  the  great 
battle  before  Gibeon,  and  fled  for  refuge  to  the  cave 
at  Makkedah,  the  entrance  to  which  was  closed  by 
Joshua's  command.  At  the  close  of  the  long  day's 
slaughter  and  pursuit,  the  five  kings  were  brought 
from  their  hiding-place,  and  hanged  upon  five  trees 
till  sunset,  when  their  bodies  were  taken  down  and 
cast  into  the  cave  "  wherein  they  had  been  hid  " 
(Josh.  x.  27). 

PIR'ATHON    (pnjnS:     *apaO^  ;    Alex. 

tyaadwp  :  Pharathon),  "  in  the  land  of  Ephraim 
in  the  mount  of  the  Amalekite  ;"  a  place  named 
nowhere  but  in  Judg.  xii.  15,  and  there  recorded 
only  as  the  burial-place  of  Abdon  ben-Hillel  the 
Pirathonite,  one  of  the  Judges.  Ita  site  was  not 
known  to  Eusebius  or  Jerome  ;  but  H  is  mentioned 
by  the  accurate  old  traveller  hap-Parchi  as  lying 
about  two  hours  west  of  Shechem,  and  called  Fer'ata 
(Asher's  Benjamin  of  Tud.  ii.  426).  Where  it  stood 
in  the  14th  cent,  it  stands  still,  and  is  called  by  the 
same  name.  It  was  reserved  for  Dr.  Robinson  to 
rediscover  it  on  an  eminence  about  a  mile  and  a  half 
south  of  the  road  from  Jaffa  by  Hableh  to  Nablus, 
and  just  six  miles,  or  two  hours,  from  the  last  (Ro 
binson,  iii.  134). 

Of  the  remarkable  expression,  "  the  mount  (or 
mountain  district)  of  the  Amalekite,"  no  explanation 
has  yet  been  discovered  beyond  the  probable  fact 
that  it  commemorates  a  very  early  settlement  of  that 
roving  people  in  the  highlands  of  the  country. 

Another  place  of  the  same  name  probably  existed 
near  the  south.  But  beyond  the  mention  of  PHA- 
RATHONI  in  1  Mace.  ix.  50,  no  trace  has  been  found 
of  it.  I  G.] 

PIRATHONITE  (tfmjnB  and 


#apaflui/e/TTjy,  QapaBcavfi,  IK  QapaOuv  :  Pha- 
rat/ionites]  ,  the  native  of,  or  dweller  in,  PIRATHON. 
Two  such  are  named  in  the  Bible.  1.  Abdon  ben- 
Hillel  (Judg.  xii.  13,  15),  one  of  the  minor  judges 


*  The  singular  manner  in  which  the  LX.X.  translators 
of  the  Pentateuch  have  fluctuated  in  their  renderings  of 
Pisgah  between  the  proper  name  and  the  appellative,  leads 
to  the  inference  that  tbeir  Hebrew  text  was  different  in 
*ome  of  the  passages  to  wire.  Mr.  \V.  A.  Wright  has 
suggested  that  in  the  latter  cases  they  may  have  read 


PISGAH  879 

of  Israel.  In  the  original  the  definite  article  is  pre 
sent,  and  it  should  be  rendered  "  the  Pirathonite." 
2.  From  the  same  place  came  "  Benaiah  th.9 
Pirathonite  of  the  children  of  Ephraim,"  captaiu 
of  the  eleventh  monthly  course  of  David's  army 
(1  Chr.  xxvii.  14)  and  one  of  the  king's  guard 
(2  Sam.  xxiii.  30  ;  1  Chr.  xi.  31).  [G.j 

PIS'GAH(rt|pSn,  with  the  def.  article:  *o<r- 
7<£,  in  Dent.  iii.  17,  xxxiv.  1,  and  in  Joshua;  else 
where  rb  \(\a£fVfj.(vov  a  or  ^  \a|euT^  :  Phasga'). 
An  ancient  topographical  name  which  is  found,  in  the. 
Pentateuch  and  Joshua  only,  in  two  connexions. 

1.  The  top,  or  head,  of  the  Pisgah  ('Bil  tJ'tO), 

Num.  xxi.  20,  xxiii.  14 ;  Deut.  iii.  27,  xxxir.  1. 

2.  Ashdoth  hap-Pisgah,  perhaps  the  springs,  or 
roots,  of  the  Pisgah,  Deut.  iii.  17,  iv.  49  ;  Josh, 
xii.  3,  xiii.  20. 

The  latter  has  already  been  noticed  under  its 
own  head.  [AsHDOTH-PiSGAH.]  Of  the  former 
but  little  can  be  said.  "  The  Pisgah  "  must  have 
been  a  mountain  range  or  district,  the  same  as,  or 
a  part  of  that  called  the  mountains  of  Abarim 
(comp.  Deut.  xxxii.  49  with  xxxiv.  1).  It  lay  on 
the  east  of  Jordan,  contiguous  to  the  field  of  Moab, 
and  immediately  opposite  Jericho.  The  field  of 
Zophim  was  situated  on  it,  and  its  highest  point  or 
summit — its  "  head" — was  the  Mount  Nebo.  If  it 
was  a  proper  name  we  can  only  conjecture  that  it 
denoted  the  whole  or  part  of  the  range  of  the  high 
lands  on  the  east  of  the  lower  Jordan.  In  the  late 
Targums  of  Jerusalem  and  Pseudqjonathan,  Pisgah 
is  invariably  rendered  by  ramatha*  a  term  in  com 
mon  use  for  a  hill.  It  will  be  observed  that  the 
LXX.  also  do  not  treat  it  as  a  proper  name.  On 
the  other  hand  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomasticon, 
"  Abarim,"  "  Fasga")  report  the  name  as  existing 
in  their  day  in  its  ancient  locality.  Mount  Abarim 
and  Mount  Nabau  were  pointed  out  on  the  road 
leading  from  Livias  to  Heshbon  (i.  e.  the  Wad;/ 
ffcsbari),  still  bearing  their  old  names,  and  close  to 
Mount  Phogor  (Peor),  which  also  retained  its  name, 
whence,  says  Jerome  (d  quo),  the  contiguous  region 
was  even  then  called  Phasgo.  This  connexion  be 
tween  Phogor  and  Phasgo  is  puzzling,  and  suggests 
a  possible  error  of  copyists. 

No  traces  of  the  name  Pisgah  have  been  met 
with  in  later  times  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  but  in 
the  Arabic  garb  of  Has  el-Feshkah  (almost  identical 
with  the  Hebrew  Rosh  hap-pisgah)  it  is  attached  to 
a  well-known  headland  on  the  north-western  end  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  a  mass  of  mountain  bounded  on  the 
south  by  the  Wady  en-Nar,  and  on  the  north  by 
the  Wady  Sidr,  and  on  the  northern  part  of  which 
is  situated  the  great  Mussulman  sanctuary  of  Neby 
M&sa  (Moses).  This  association  of  the  names  of 
Moses  and  Pisgah  on  the  west  side  of  the  Dead  S«a 
— where  to  suppose  that  Moses  ever  set  foot  would 
be  to  stultify  the  whole  narrative  of  his  decease — is 
extremely  startling.  No  explanation  of  it  has  yet 
been  offered.  Certainly  that  of  M.  DC  Sanlcy  and 
of  his  translator,'  that  the  Ras-el-Feshkah  is  iden 
tical  with  Pisgah,  cannot  be  entertained.  Against 
this  the  words  of  Deut.  iii.  27,  "  Thou  shalt  not  go 
over  this  Jordan,"  are  decisive. 


for  H3DD'  from  ?DQ>  a  word  which  they  ac 
tually  translate  by  k.a£fveiv  in  Ex.  xxxiv.  1, 4,  l)ei\t.  x.  1. 

b  Probably  the  origin  of  the  marginal  reading  of  the 
A.  V.  "  the  hill." 

«  See  De  Saulcy's  Voyage,  &c.,  and  the  ncl«r.  to  ii.  60-46 
of  the  Knjtlish  edition. 


880 


PtSIDIA 


Had  the  name  of  Moses  alone  existed  here,  it 
might  with  some  plausibility  be  conceived  that 
the  reputation  for  sanctity  had  been  at  some  time, 
during  the  long  struggles  of  the  country,  transferred 
from  east  to  west,  when  the  original  spot  was  out 
of  the  reach  of  the  pilgrims.  But  the  existence  of 
the  name  Feshkah — and,  what  is  equally  curious, 
its  non-existence  on  the  east  of  Jordan — seems  to 
preclude  this  suggestion.  [G.] 

PISID'IA  (IL<r«8fo :  Pisidia)  was  a  district  of 
Asia  Minor,  which  cannot  be  very  exactly  defined. 
But  It  may  be  described  sufficiently  by  saying  that  it 
was  to  the  north  of  PAMPHYLIA,  and  stretched  along 
the  range  of  Taurus.  Northwards  it  reached  to,  and 
was  partly  included  in,  PHKYGIA,  which  was  simi 
larly  an  indefinite  district,  though  far  more  extensive. 
Thus  ANTIOCH  IN  PISIDIA  was  sometimes  called  a 
Phrygian  town.  The  occurrences  which  took  place 
at  this  town  give  a  great  interest  to  St.  Paul's 
first  visit  to  the  district.  He  passed  through  Pisidia 
twice,  with  Barnabas,  on  the  first  missionary  jour 
ney,  t.  e.  both  in  going  from  PERGA  to  ICONIUM 
(Acts  xiii.  13,  14,  51),  and  in  returning  (xiv.  21, 
24,  21;  compare  2  Tim.  iii.  11).  It  is  probable 
also  that  he  traversed  the  northern  part  of  the 
district,  with  Silas  and  Timotheus,  on  the  second 
missionary  journey  (xvi.  6)  :  but  the  word  Pisidia 
does  not  occur  except  in  reference  to  the  former 
journey.  The  characteristics  both  of  the  country 
and  its  inhabitants  were  wild  and  rugged ;  and  it 
is  very  likely  that  the  Apostle  encountered  here 
some  of  those  "  perils  of  robbers  "  and  "  perils  of 
rivers  "  which  he  mentions  afterwards.  His  routes 
through  this  region  are  considered  in  detail  in  Life 
and  Epp.  of  St.  Paul  (2nd  ed.  vol.  i.  pp.  197-207, 
240,  241),  where  extracts  from  various  travellers 
are  given.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PI'SON  (jiCJ»B :  tturfo:  Phison).  One  of  the 
four  "  heads  "  into  which  the  stream  flowing  through 
Eden  was  divided  (Gen.  ii.  11).  Nothing  is  known 
of  it ;  the  principal  conjectures  will  be  found  under 
EDEN  [vol.  i.  p.  484]. 

PISTAH  (nSDS.    *cur<t>d:    Phaspha).     An 

Asherite  :    one  of  the   sons  of  Jether,  or  Ithran 
(1  Chr.  vii.  38). 

PIT.  In  the  A.  V.  this  word  appears  with  a 
figurative  as  well  as  a  literal  meaning.  It  passes 
from  the  facts  that  belong  to  the  outward  aspect  of 
Palestine  and  its  cities  to  states  or  regions  of  the 
spiritual  World.  With  this  power  it  is  used  to  re 
present  several  Hebrew  words,  and  the  starting  point 
which  the  literal  meaning  presents  for  the  spiritual 
is,  in  each  case,  a  subject  of  some  interest. 

1.  SM61  &X&\  in  Num.  xvi.  30,   33;  Job 
xvii.  16.     Here  the  word  is  one  which  is  used  only 
of  the  hollow,  shadowy  world,  the  dwelling  of  the 
dead,  and  as  such  it  has  been  treated  of  under  HELL. 

2.  Shaehath  (TinE*).     Here,  as  the  root  TOE* 
»hows,  the  sinking  of  the  pit  is  the  primary  thought 
(Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.).     It  is  dug  into  the  earth  (Ps. 
ix.  1 8,  cxix.  85).    A  pit  thus  made  and  then  covered 
lightly  over,  served  as  a  trap  by  which  animals  or 
men  might  be  ensnai'ed  (Ps>.  xxxv.  7).     It  thus  be- 
eame  a  .jpe  of  sorrow  and  confusion,  from  which  a 
man  could  not  extricate  himself,  of  the  great  doom 
which  comes  to  all  men,  of  the  dreariness  of  death 
(Job  xxxiii.  18,  24,  28,  30).     To  "  go  down  to  the 
pit,"  is  to  die  without  hope.     It  is  the  penalty  of 


PITCH 

evil-doers,  that  from  which  the  righteous  are  deli* 
vered  by  the  hand  of  God. 

3.  B6r  (^3).  In  this  woi-d,  as  in  the  cognate 
Bier,  the  special  thought  is  that  of  a  pit  or  well 
dug  for  water  (Gesen.  Thes.  s.  v.).  The  process 
of  desynonymising  which  goes  on  in  all  languages, 
seems  to  have  confined  the  former  to  the  state  of 
the  well  or  cistern,  dug  into  the  rock,  but  no  longer 
filled  with  water.  Thus,  where  the  sense  in  both 
cases  is  figurative,  and  the  same  English  word 
is  used,  we  have  pit  (beer)  connected  with  the 
"  deep  water,"  "  the  wateiflood,"  "  the  deep  "  (Ps. 
Ixix.  16),  while  in  pit  (=1^3),  there  is  nothing 
but  the  "miry  clay"  (Ps.  xl.  2).  Its  dreariest 
feature  is  that  there  is  "  no  water"  in  it  (Zech.  ix. 
11).  So  far  the  idea  involved  has  been  rather  that 
of  misery  and  despair  than  of  death.  But  in 
the  phrase  "  they  that  go  down  to  the  pit"  (113;. 
it  becomes  even  more  constantly  than  the  syno 
nyms  already  noticed  (Sheol,  ShachatK),  the  repre 
sentative  of  the  world  of  the  dead  (Kzek.  xxxi.  14, 
16,  xxxii.  18,  24;  Ps.  xxviii.  1,  cxliii.  7).  Thene 
may  have  been  two  reasons  for  this  transfer.  1.  Th* 
wide  deep  excavation  became  the  place  of  burial . 
The  "  graves  were  set  in  the  sides  of  the  pit "  (Mr) 
(Ezek.  xxxii.  24).  To  one  looking  into  it  it  was 
visibly  the  home  of  the  dead,  while  the  vaguer; 
more  mysterious  Sheol  carried  the  thoughts  further 
to  an  invisible  home.  2.  The  pit,  however,  in  this 
sense,  was  never  simply  equivalent  to  burial-place. 
There  is  always  implied  in  it  a  thought  of  scorn  and 
condemnation.  This  too  had  its  origin  apparently 
in  the  use  made  of  the  excavations,  which  had  either 
never  been  wells,  or  had  lost  the  supply  of  water. 
The  prisoner  in  the  land  of  his  enemies,  was  left  to 
perish  in  the  pit  (bar)  (Zech.  ix.  11).  The  greatest 
of  all  deliverances  is  that  the  captive  exile  is  released 
from  the  slow  death  of  starvation  in  it  (shachath, 
Is.  li.  14)  The  histoiy  of  Jeremiah,  cast  into  the 
dungeon,  or  pit  (bar)  (Jer.  xxxviii.  6,  9),  let  down 
into  its  depths  with  cords,  sinking  into  the  filth  at 
the  bottom  (here  also  there  is  no  water),  with  death 
by  hunger  staring  him  in  the  face,  shows  how  ter 
rible  an  instrument  of  punishment  was  such  a  pit. 
The  condition  of  the  Athenian  prisoners  in  the  stone- 
quarries  of  Syracuse  (Thuc.  vii.  87),  the  Persian 
punishment  of  the  OTTO'O'OJ  (Ctesias,  Pers.  48),  th«i 
oubliettes  of  mediaeval  prisons  present  instances  oi 
cruelty,  more  or  less  analogous.  It  is  not  strange 
that  with  these  associations  of  material  horror  clus 
tering  round,  it  should  have  involved  more  of  tha 
idea  of  a  place  of  punishment  for  the  haughty  or 
unjust,  than  did  the  sheol  or  the  grave. 

In  Rev.  ix.  1,  2,  and  elsewhere,  the  "bottomless 
pit,"  is  the  translation  of  rb  <ppfap  rfjs  a&vffffov 
The  A.  V.  has  rightly  taken  typtap  here  as  the  equi 
valent  of  b6r  rather  than  beer.  The  pit  of  the 
abyss  is  as  a  dungeon.  It  is  opened  with  a  key 
(Rev.  ix.  1,  xx.  1).  Satan  is  cast  into  it,  as  a  pri 
soner  (xx.  2).  [E.  H.  P.] 

PITCH  (nBT.  1On,  "IBS :  *i<r<rri  :  pix}. 
The  three  Hebrew  terms  above  given  all  represent 
the  same  object,  viz.  mineral  pitch  or  asphalt,  in  its 
different  aspects:  zepheth  (the  zift  or  the  modern 
Arabs,  Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  120)  in  ite  liquid 
state,  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  flow ;"'  cMm&r,  in 
its  solid  state,  from  its  red  colour,  though  also  ex 
plained  in  reference  to  the  manner  in  which  it  boih- 
up  (the  former,  however,  being  more  coasistent  with 
the  appearance  of  the  two  terms  in  juxtaposition  ^r 
Ex.  ki.  3;  A.  V.  "pitch  and  slime");  and  copper, 


PITCHES 

In  reference  to  its  use  in  overlaying  wood-work 
(Gen.  vi.  14).  Asphalt  is  an  opaque,  inflammable 
substance,  which  bubbles  up  from  subterranean 
fountains  in  a  liquid  state,  and  hardens  by  exposure 
to  the  air,  but  readily  melts  under  the  influence  of 
heat.  In  the  latter  state  it  is  very  tenacious,  and 
was  used  as  a  cement  in  lieu  of  mortar  in  Babylonia 
(Gen.  xi.  3;  Strab.  xvi.  p.  743  ;  Herod,  i.  179),  as 
well  as  for  coating  the  outsides  of  vessels  (Gen.  vi. 
14 ;  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §4),  and  particularly  for 
making  the  papyrus  boats  of  the  Egyptians  water 
tight  (Ex.  ii.  3;  Wilkinson,  ii.  120).  The  Baby- 
loi.ians  obtained  their  chief  supply  from  springs  at 
Is  (the  modern  Hit),  which  are  still  in  existence 


PLAGUE,  THE  8bl 

PI'THOM  (QhS:  IIci0<£:  Mithom),  cue  ol 
the  store-cities  built  by  the  Israelites  for  the  first 
oppressor,  the  Pharaoh  '  which  knew  not  Joseph  " 
(Ex.  i.  11).  In  the  Heb.  these  cities  are  two, 
Pithom  and  l!;\amses:  the  LXX.  adds  On,  as  a  third. 
It  is  probable  that  Pithom  lay  in  the  most  eastern 
part  of  Lower  Egypt,  like  Haamses,  if,  as  is  reason 
able,  we  suppose  the  latter  to  be  the  Rameses  men 
tioned  elsewhere,  and  that  the  Israelites  were  occupied 
in  public  works  within  or  near  to  the  land  of  Goshen. 
Herodotus  mentions  a  town  called  Patumus,  n<£- 
TOV/J.OS,  which  seems  to  be  the  same  as  the  Thoum  or 
Thou  of  the  Itinerary  of  Antoninus,  probably  the 
military  station  Thohu  of  the  Notitia.  Whether  or 


(Herod,  i.  179).  The  Jews  and  Arabians  got  theirs  i  not  Patumus  ^  the  pithom  of  Scripture,  there  can 
in  large  quantities  from  the  Dead  Sea,  which  hence  be  ]ittle  doubt  thafc  the  name  fa  identicaL  The  n,,st 
received  its  classical  name  of  Locus  Asphaltites.  ^  js  the  ^g  ^  in  Bu-bastis  and  Bu-siris,  either 


the  definite  article  masculine,  or  a  possessive  pronoun, 
unless  indeed,  with  Brugsch,  we  read  the  Egyptian 
word  "  abode  "  PA,  and  suppose  that  it  commences 


The  latter  was  particularly  prized  for  its  purple  hue 
(Plin.  xxviii.  23).  In  the  early  ages  of  the  Bible 
the  slime-pit*  (Gen.  xiv.  10),  or  springs  of  asphalt, 

were  apparent  in  the  vale  of  Siddirn,  at  the  southern  j  t'h"ese  names>  rpj.^^-.]  The  second  pa,.t  ap_ 
end  of  the  sea.  They  are  now  concealed  through  I  pears  to  ^  the  name  of  AT(JM  M.  TUM)  a  divinity 
the  submergence  of  the  plain,  and  the  asphalt  pro-  i  vvorshipped  at  On,  or  Heliopolis,  as  well  as  Ra,  both 
bably  forms  itself  into  a  crust  on  the  bed  of  the  lake,  <  being  fonng  of  the  sun  rON-,  and  jt  jg  noticeable 
whence  it  is  dislodged  by  earthquakes  or  other  causes.  that  Thoum  or  Thou  was  near  the  Heliopoljte 
Early  writers  describe  the  masses  thus  thrown  up  on  i  nome>  and  ^^  more  ^i^iy  within  it>  and 
the  surface  of  the  lake  as  of  very  considerable  size  that  a  monurnent  at  Aboo-Kesheyd  shews  that  the 


f  Joseph.  B.  J.  iv.  8,  §4 ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  6 ;  Diod.  Sic. 
ii.  48).    This  is  now  a  rare  occurrence  (Robinson,  i. 


worship  of  Heliopolis  extended  along  the  valley  of 
the   Canal  of  the    Red  Sea.     As  we  find  Thoum 


517),  though  small  pieces  may  constantly  be  picked  \  and  Patumus  and  fortieses  in  or  near  to  the  land 
up  on  the  shores.    The  inflammable  nature  of  pitch    of    Goshen)   &en    can    be    no    reasonable    doubt 


is  noticed  in  Is.  xxxiv.  9. 


[W.  L.  B.] 


PITCHER.*  The  word  "pitcher"  is  used  in 
A.  V.  to  denote,  the  water-jars  or  pitchers  with 
one  or  two  handles,  used  chiefly  by  women  for  car 
rying  water,  as  in  the  story  of  Rebecca  (Gen.  xxiv. 
15-20;  but  see  Mark  xiv.  13;  Luke  xxii.  10). 
This  practice  has  been,  and  is  still  usual  both  in 
the  East  and  elsewhere.  The  vessels  used  for  the 


that  we  have  here  a  correspondence  to  Pithom 
and  Raamses,  and  the  probable  connexion  in  both 
cases  with  Heliopolis  confiims  the  conclusion.  It 
is  remarkable  that  the  Coptic  version  of  Gen.  xlvi. 
28  mentions  Pithom  for,  or  instead  of,  the  He- 
roopolis  of  the  LXX.  The  Hebrew  reads,  "  And 
he  sent  Judah  before  him  unto  Joseph,  to  direct 
his  face  unto  Goshen ;  and  they  came  into  the 


of  Goshen."   Here  the  LXX.  has,  Ka.6'  ' 
,  tls  "fyv  'Paft€<r<T7J,  but  the  Coptic, 

J^,.,< 
<6eit 

Layard,  Nin.  $  Bab.  p.  578;  Roberts,  Sketches,    Itp£JUL<LCCR.  Whether  Patumus  and  Thoum 
pi.    164;    Arvieux,    Trav.   p.    203;    Burckhardt,    be  the  same,  and  the  position  of  one  or  both,  have 


purpose  are  generally  carried  on  the  head  or  the 
shoulder.  The  Bedouin  women  commonly  use 
skin-bottles.  Such  was  the  "bottle"  carried  by 
Hagar  (Gen.  xxi.  14;  Banner,  Obs.  iv.  246  ; 


Notes  on  Bed.  i.  351). 

The  same  word  cad  is  used  of  the  pitchers  em 
ployed  by  Gideon's  300  men  (Judg.  vii.  16),  where 
the  use  made  of  them  marks  the  material.  Also 
the  vessel  (A.  V.  barrel)  in  which  the  meal  of  the 
Sareptan  widow  was  contained  (\  K.  xvii.  12), 
and  the  "  barrels "  of  water  used  by  Elijah  at 
Mount  Carmel  (xviii.  33).  It  is  also  used  figu 
ratively  of  the  life  of  man  (Eccles.  xii.  6).  It  is 
thus  probable  that  earthen  vessels  were  used  by  the 
Jews  as  they  were  by  the  Egyptians  for  containing 
both  liquids  and  dry  provisions  (Birch,  Anc.  Pot 
tery,  i.  43).  In  the  view  of  the  Fountain  of  Naza 
reth  [vol.  i.  p.  632],  may  be  seen  men  and  women 
with  pitchers  which  scarcely  differ  from  those  in 
use  in  Egypt  and  Nubia  (Roberts,  Sketches,  plates 
29,  164).  The  water-pot  of  the  woman  of  Samaria 
was  probably  one  of  this  kind,  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  much  larger  amphorae  of  the  marriage- 
feast  at  Cana.  [FOUNTAIN  ;  CUUSE  ;  BOTTLE  ; 


FLAGON  ;  POT.] 


[H.  W.  P.] 


a  1.  H3  ;  v&pia.;  hydria,  lagena;  akin  to  Sanskrit  kut 
Mid  KaBos.     Also  "barrel"  (1  K.  xvii.  12,  xviil.  33). 
Oes  p.  660 ;  Eichoff,  Vergleich.  der  Sprache,  p.  219.) 
2.  ^33  and  733 ;  ayyetoi/;  vat;  A.V.  "bottle,"  only 
VOL.  II. 


yet  to  be  determined,  before  we  can  speak  positively 
as  to  the  Pithom  of  Exodus.  Herodotus  places  Pa 
tumus  in  the  Arabian  nome  upon  the  Canal  of  the 
Red  Sea  (ii.  48).  The  Itinerary  of  Antoninus  puts 
Thou  50  Roman  miles  from  Heliopolis,  and  48  from 
Pelusium  ;  but  this  seems  too  far  north  for  Patu 
mus,  and  also  for  Pithom,  if  that  place  were  near 
Heliopolis,  as  its  name  and  connexion  with  Raamses 
seem  to  indicate.  Under  Raamses  is  a  discussion  of 
the  character  of  these  cities,  and  of  their  importance 
in  Egyptian  history.  [RAMESES.]  [R.  S.  P.] 


PITHON(|iJVB: 


Phithon).    One  of 


the  four  sons  of  Micah,  the  son  of  Meribbaal,  or 
Mephibosheth  (1  Chr.  viii.  35,  is.  41). 

PLAGUE,  THE.  The  disease  now  called  the 
Plague,  which  has  ravaged  Egypt  and  neighbouring 
countries  in  modern  times,  is  supposed  to  have  pre 
vailed  there  in  former  ages.  Manetho,  the  Egyptian 
historian,  speaks  of  "  a  very  great  plague  "  in  the 
reign  of  Semempses,  the  seventh  king  of  the  first 


once  a  " pitcher  "  (Lain.  iv.  2),  where  it  is  joined  witi 


"in,  an  earthen  vessel  (Ges.  522). 

3.  In  N.  T.  Kepa/iioc,  twice  only    Mark  xiv.  13,  lagenc 
Luke  xxii.  10,  amphora. 

3   L 


882 


PLAGUE,  THE 


dynasty,  B.C.  cir.  2500.  The  difficulty  of  deter 
mining  the  chaiacter  of  the  pestilences  of  ancient 
an<{  mediaeval  times,  even  when  carefully  described, 
warns  us  not  to  conclude  that  every  such  mention 
refers  to  the  Plague,  especially  as  the  cholera  has, 
since  its  modem  appearance,  been  almost  as  severe 
a  scourge  to  Egypt  as  the  more  famous  disease, 
which,  indeed,  as  an  epidemic  seems  there  to  have 
been  succeeded  by  it.  Moreover,  if  we  admit,  as 
we  must,  that  there  have  been  anciently  pestilences 
very  nearly  resembling  the  modern  Plague,  we  must 
still  hesitate  to  pronounce  any  recorded  pestilence  to 
be  of  this  class  unless  it  be  described  with  some 
distinguishing  particulars. 

The  Plague  in  recent  times  has  not  extended 
far  beyond  the  Turkish  Empire  and  the  kingdom  of 
Persia.  It  has  been  asserted  that  Egypt  is  its  cradle, 
but  this  does  not  seem  to  be  corroborated  by  the 
later  history  of  the  disease.  It  is  there  both  spo 
radic  and  epidemic ;  in  the  first  form  it  has  appeared 
almost  annually,  in  the  second  at  rarer  intervals. 
As  an  epidemic  it  takes  the  character  of  a  pestilence, 
sometimes  of  the  greatest  severity.  Our  subsequent 
remarks  apply  to  it  in  this  form.  It  is  a  much- 
vexed  question  whether  it  is  ever  endemic :  that 
such  is  the  case  is  favoured  by  its  rareness  since  j 
sanitary  measures  have  been  enforced. 

The  Plague  when  most  severe  usually  appears  first 
on  the  northern  coast  of  Egypt,  having  previously  | 
broken  out  in  Turkey  or  North  Africa  west  of  Egypt,  j 
It  ascends  the  river  to  Cairo,  rarely  going  much  j 
further.    Thus  Mr.  Lane  has  observed  that  the  great ; 
plague  of  1835   "  was  certainly  introduced  from  ; 
Turkey  "  (Modern  Egyptians,  5th  ed.  p.  3,  not*  1).  ! 
It  was  first  noticed  at  Alexandria,  ascended  to  Cairo, 
and  further  to  the  southern  part  of  Egypt,  a  few 
cases  having  occurred  at  Thebes  ;  and  it  "  extended 
throughout  the  whole  of  Egypt,  though  its  ravages  '. 
were  not  great   in   the  southern  parts"  (Ibid.),  j 
The  mortality   is  often   enormous,  and  Mr.  Lane 
remarks  of  the  plague  just  mentioned : — "  It  de-  j 
stroyed  not  less  than  eighty  thousand  persons  in  j 
Cairo,  that  is,  one-third  of  the  population  ;  and  far  , 
more,   I   believe,  than  two  hundred  thousand  in 
all  Egypt"    (Ibid.).*     The  writer  was  in  Cairo 
on  the  last  occasion  when   this  pestilence  visited 
Egypt,  in  the  summer  of  1843,  when  the  deaths 
were  not  numerous,  although,  owing  to  the  Go-  i 
vernment's    posting    a   sentry   at   each    house   in  | 
which  any  one  had  died  of  the  disease,  to  enforce 
quarantine,  there  was  much  concealment,  and  the 
number  was  not  accurately  known    (Mrs.  Poole, 
Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  ii.  32-35).      Although 
since  then  Egypt  has  been  free  from  this  scourge, 
Benghazee  (Hesperides),  in  the  pashalic  of  Tripoli, 
was  almost  depopulated  by  it  during  part  of  the 
years  1860  and   1861.      It   generally   appears   in 
Egypt  in  mid-winter,  and  lasts  at  most  for  about  six 
months. 

The  Plague  is  considered  to  be  a  severe  kind  of 
typhus,  accompanied  by  buboes.  Like  the  cholera 
it  is  most  violent  at  the  first  outbreak,  causing 
almost  instant  death ;  later  it  may  last  three  days, 
ind  even  longer,  but  usually  it  is  fatal  in  a  few 
hours.  It  has  never  been  successfully  treated,  except 
in  isolated  cases  or  when  the  epidemic  has  seemed  to 
nave  worn  itself  out.  Depletion  and  stimulants 
have  been  tried,  as  with  cholera,  and  stimulants 
with  far  better  results.  Great  difference  of  opinion 


«•  A  curious  story  connected  with  this  plague  is  given 
In  the  notes  to  the  Thousand  and  One  Jfig/Ut,  cK  lii. 


PLAGUE,  THE 

has  obtained  as  to  whether  it  is  contagious  -_r  thit 
Instances  have,  however,  occurred  in  whiDh  no 
known  cause  except  contagion  could  have  conveyed 
the  disease. 

In  noticing  the  places  in  the  Bible  wh:  di  might 
be  supposed  to  refer  to  the  Plague  we  must  bear 
in  mind  that,  unless  some  of  its  distinctive  charac 
teristics  are  mentioned,  it  is  not  safe  to  infer  that 
this  disease  is  intended. 

In  the  narrative  of  the  Ten  Plagues  there  is,  aa 
we  point  out  below  [p.  886a],  none  con-esponding 
to  the  modem  Plague.  The  plague  of  boils  has  in 
deed  some  resemblance,  and  it  might  be  urged,  that, 
as  in  other  cases  known  scourges  were  sent  (their 
;  miraculous  nature  being  shown  by  their  opportune 
occurrence  and  their  intense  character),  so  in  this 
case  a  disease  of  the  country,  if  indeed  the  Plague 
anciently  prevailed  in  Egypt,  might  have  been 
employed.  Yet  the  ordinary  Plague  would  rather 
exceed  in  severity  this  infliction  than  the  contrary, 
which  seems  fatal  to  this  supposition.  [PLAGUES, 
THE  TEN.] 

Several  Hebrew  words  are  translated  "  pestilence* 
or  "plague."  (1)  "1111;!,  properly  "destruction,' 
hence  "  a  plague ;"  in  LXX.  commonly  6o.va.ros. 
It  is  used  with  a  wide  signification  for  different 
pestilences,  being  employed  even  for  murrain  in 
the  account  of  the  plague  of  murrain  (Ex.  is.  3). 
(2)  filtD,  properly  "  death,"  hence  "  a  deadly  dis 
ease,  pestilence."  Gesenius  compares  the  Schmirzcr 
Tud,  or  Black  Death,  of  the  middle  ages.  (3)  f)J3 
and  nQiO,  properly  anything  with  which  people 
are  smitten,  especially  by  God,  therefore  a  plague 
or  pestilence  sent  by  Him.  (4)  3tDj5,  "  pestilence  * 

(Deut.  xxxii.  24,  A.  V.  "destruction"  ;  Ps.  xci.  6 
"  the  pestilence  [that]  walketh  in  darkness  "),  and 
perhaps  also  2t3p,  if  we  follow  Gesenius,  instead  oi 
reading  with  the  A.  V.  "  destruction,"  in  Hos.  xiii. 
14.  (5)  SjtJn,  properly  "  a  flame."  hence  "  a 
burning  fever,"  "  a  plague  "  (Deut.  xxxii.  24 ;  Hab. 
iii.  5,  where  it  occurs  with  ~O?!)*  1*  's  evident 
that  not  one  of  these  words  can  be  considered  as 
designating  by  its  signification  the  Plague.  Whether 
the  disease  be  mentioned  must  be  judged  from  the 
sense  of  passages,  not  from  the  sense  of  words. 

Those  pestilences  which  were  sent  as  special 
judgments,  and  were  either  supernatural ly  rapid  in 
their  effects,  or  in  addition  directed  against  par 
ticular  culprits,  are  beyond  the  reach  of  human 
inquiry.  But  we  also  read  of  pestilences  which, 
although  sent  as  judgments,  have  the  characteristics 
of  modern  epidemics,  not  being  rapid  beyond  nature, 
nor  directed  against  individuals.  Thus  in  the  it>- 
markable  threatenings  in  Leviticus  and  Deutero 
nomy,  pestilence  is  spoken  of  as  one  of  the  enduring 
judgments  that  were  gradually  to  destroy  the  dis 
obedient.  This  passage  in  Leviticus  evidently  refers 
to  pestilence  in  besieged  cities :  "  And  I  will  bring 
a  sword  upon  you,  that  shall  avenge  the  quarrel  of 
[my]  covenant :  and  when  ye  are  gathered  together 
within  your  cities,  I  will  send  the  pestilence  among 
you ;  and  ye  shall  be  delivered  into  the  hand  of  the 
enemy''  (xrvi.  25).  Famine  in  a  besieged  city 
would  occasion  pestilence.  A  special  disease  may 
be  indicated  in  the  parallel  portion  of  Deuteronom} 
fxxviii.  21):  "  The  LORD  shall  nvike  the  pestilence 
cleave  unto  thee,  until  he  [or  "  it"]  have  consumed 
thue  fioin  off  the  land  whither  ihou  goest  to  posses*' 


PLAQUES,  THE  TEN 

it."  The  word  rendered  "pestilence"  may,  how 
ever,  have  a  general  signification,  and  comprise  ca- 
amities  mentioned  afterwards,  for  there  follows  an 
enumeration  of  several  other  diseases  arid  similar 
scourges  (xxviii.  21,  22).  The  first  disease  here 
mentioned,  has  been  supposed  to  be  the  Plague 
(Bunsen,  BibelwerK).  It  is  to  be  remembered  that 
"  the  botch  of  Egypt "  is  afterwards  spoken  of  (27), 
by  which  it  is  probable  that  ordinary  boils  are  in 
tended,  which  are  especially  severe  in  Egypt  in  the 
present  day,  and  that  later  still  "all  the  diseases  of 
Egypt"  are  mentioned  (60).  It  therefore  seems  un 
likely  that  so  grave  a  disease  as  the  Plague,  if  then 
known,  should  not  be  spoken  of  in  either  of  these 
two  passages.  In  neither  place  does  it  seem  certain 
that  the  Plague  is  specified,  though,  in  the  one,  if 
\t  were  to  be  in  the  land  it  would  fasten  upon  the 
population  of  besieged  cities,  and  in  the  other,  if 
then  known,  it  would  probably  be  alluded  to  as  a 
terrible  judgment  in  an  enumeration  of  diseases. 
The  notices  in  the  prophets  present  the  same  diffi 
culty;  for  they  do  not  seem  to  afford  sufficiently 
positive  evidence  that  the  Plague  was  known  in 
those  times.  With  the  prophets,  as  in  the  Penta 
teuch,  we  must  suppose  that  the  diseases  threatened 
or  prophesied  as  judgments  must  have  been  known, 
or  at  least  called  by  the  names  used  for  those  that 
were  known.  Two  passages  might  seem  to  be  ex 
plicit.  In  Amos  we  read,  "  I  have  sent  among  you 
the  pestilence  after  the  manner  of  Egypt ':  your  young 
men  have  I  slain  with  the  sword,  and  have  taken 
away  your  horses;  and  I  have  made  the  stink  of 
your  camps  to  come  up  unto  your  nostrils  "  (Am. 
iv.  10).  Here  the  reference  is  perhaps  to  the  death 
of  the  firstborn,  for  the  same  phrase,  "  after  the 
manner  of  Egypt,"  is  used  by  Isaiah  (x.  24,  26), 
with  a  reference  to  the  Exodus,  and  perhaps  to  the 
oppression  preceding  it ;  and  an  allusior-  +o  past  his- 
*ory  seems  probable,  as  a  comparison  with  the  over- 
tarow  of  the  cities  of  the  plain  immediately  follows 
(Am.  iv.  11).  The  prophet  Zechariah  also  speaks 
of  a  plague  with  which  the  Egyptians,  if  refusing 
to  serve  God,  should  be  smitten  (xiv.  18),  but  the 
name,  and  the  description  which  appears  to  apply 
to  this  scourge  seem  to  show  that  it  cannot  be  the 
Piague  (12). 

Hezekiah's  disease  has  been  thought  to  have  been 
hhe  Plague,  and  its  fatal  nature,  as  well  as  the 
mention  of  a  boil,  makes  this  not  improbable.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  is  no  mention  of  a  pestilence 
among  his  people  at  the  time. 

There  does  not  seem,  therefore,  to  be  any  distinct 
notice  of  the  Plague  in  the  Bible,  and  it  is  most 
probable  that  this  can  be  accounted  for  by  supposing 
either  that  no  pestilence  of  antiquity  in  the  East 
Was  as  marked  in  character  as  the  modern  Plague, 
or  that  the  latter  disease  then  frequently  broke  out 
there  as  an  epidemic  in  crowded  cities,  instead  of 
following  a  regular  course. 

(See  Russell's  Natural  History  of  Aleppo  ;  Clot- 
Dey,  De  la  Peste,  and  Apercu  General  stir  FEgypte, 
ii.  348-350.)  [R.  S.  P.] 

PLAGUES,  THE  TEN.  In  considering  the 
nutory  of  the  Ten  Plagues  we  have  to  notice  the 
place  where  they  occurred,  and  the  occasion  on 
which  they  were  sent,  and  to  examine  the  narrative 
of  each  judgment,  with  a  view  to  ascertain  what  it 
was,  and  in  what  manner  Pharaoh  and  the  Egyp 
tians  were  punished  by  it,  as  well  as  to  see  if  we 
can  trace  any  general  connexion  between  the  several 
judgments. 

I.   The  Place. — Although  it  is  distinctly  stated 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN         38i 

t«at  the  plagues  prevailed  throughout  Egypt,  save, 
in  ttie  case  of  some,  the  Israelite  territory,  the  land 
of  Goshen,  yet  the  descriptions  seem  principally 
to  apply  to  that  part  of  Egypt  which  lay  nearest  to 
Goshen,  and  more  especially  to  "  the  field  of  Zoan,'* 
or  the  tract  about  that  city,  since  it  seems  ahrout 
certain  that  Pharaoh  dwelt  in  Zoan,  and  that  ter 
ritory  is  especially  indicated  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  W. 
That  the  capital  at  this  time  was  not  more  distant 
from  Rameses  than  Zoan  is  evident  from  the  time 
in  which  a  message  could  be  sent  from  Pharaoh  to 
Moses  on  the  occasion  of  the  Exodus.  The  descrip 
tions  of  the  first  and  second  plagues  seem  especially 
to  refer  to  a  land  abounding  in  streams  and  lakes, 
and  so  rather  to  the  Lower  than  to  the  Upper 
Country.  We  must  therefore  look  especially  t<> 
Lower  Egypt  for  our  illustrations,  while  bearing  in 
mind  the  evident  prevalence  of  the  plagues  through 
out  the  land. 

II.  The  Occasion. — When   that   Pharaoh   who 
seems  to  have  been  the  first  oppressor  was  dead, 
God  sent  Moses  to  deliver  Israel,  commanding  him 
to  gather  the  elders  of  his  people  together,  and  to 
tell  them  his  commission.     It  is  added,  "And  they 
shall  hearken  to  thy  voice :  and  thou  shalt  come, 
thou  and  the  elders  of  Israel,  unto  the  king  of 
Egypt,  and  ye  shall  say  unto  him,  The  LORD  God 
of  the  Hebrews  hath  met  with  us:  and  now  let  us 
go,  we  beseech  thee,  three  days'  journey  into  the 
wilderness,  that  we  may  sacrifice  to  the  LORD  our 
God.     And  I  am  sure  that  the  king  of  Egypt  will 
not  let  you  go,  no,  not  by  a  mighty  hand.     And  1 
will  stretch  out  my  hand,  and  smite  Egypt  witli 
all  my  wonders   which    I    will   do   in  the   midst, 
thereof:  and  after  that  he  will  let  you  go  "  (Ex.  iii. 
18-20).     From   what   follows,  that  the   Israelites 
should   borrow  jewels   and    raiment,    and   "  spoil 
Egypt"  (21,  22),  it  seems  evident  that  they  were 
to  leave  as  if  only  for  the  purpose  of  sacrificing  ; 
but  it  will  be  seen  that  if  they  did  so,  Pharaoh,  by 
his  armed  pursuit  and  overtaking  them  when  they 
had  encamped  at  the  close  of  the  third  day's  journey, 
released  Moses  from  his  engagement. 

When  Moses  went  to  Pharaoh,  Aaron  went  with 
him,  because  Moses,  not  judging  himself  to  be 
eloquent,  was  diffident  of  speaidng  to  Pharaoh. 
"  And  Moses  said  before  the  LORD,  Behold,  I  [am] 
of  uncircumcised  lips,  and  how  shall  Pharaoh 
hearken  unto  me?  And 'the  LOKD  said  unto  Moses 
See,  I  have  made  thee  a  god  to  Pharaoh :  and 
Aaron  thy  brother  shall  be  thy  prophet'"  (Ex.  vi. 
30,  vii.  1  ;  comp.  iv.  10-16).  We  are  therefore  to 
understand  that  even  when  Moses  speaks  it  is  rather 
by  Aaron  than  himself.  It  is  perhaps  worthy  of 
note  that  in  the  tradition  of  the  Exodus  which 
Manetho  gives,  the  calamities  preceding  the  eve -it 
are  said  to  have  been  caused  by  the  king's  consulting 
an  Egyptian  prophet ;  for  this  suggests  a  course 
which  Pharaoh  is  likely  to  have  adopted,  rendering 
it  probable  that  the  magicians  were  sent  for  as  the 
priests  of  the  gods  of  the  country,  so  that  Mosee 
was  exalted  by  contrast  with  these  vain  objects  of 
worship.  We  may  now  examine  the  narrative  of 
each  plague. 

III.  The  Plagues.— 1.  The  Plague  of  Blood. — 
When  Moses  and  Aaron  came  before  Pharaoh,  a 
miracle  was  required  of  them.     Then  Aaron's  rod 
became  "a  serpent"  (A.  V.),  or  rather  "  a  croco 
dile"  (f*|FI).      Its  being  changed  into  an  animal 
reverenced  by  all  the  Egyptians,  or  by  some  of  them, 
would  have  been  an  especial  warning  to  Pharaoh. 
The  Egyptian  magicians  called  by  the  king  produced 

:5  L  2 


884 


PLAGUES.  THE  TEN 


ofhat  seemed  to  be  tne  same  wonder,  yet  Aaron's 
»od  swallowed  up  the  others  (vii.  3-12).  This 
passage,  taken  alone,  would  appear  to  indicate  that 
the  magicians  succeeded  in  working  wonders,  but,  if 
it  is  compared  with  those  others  relating  their  oppo 
sition  on  the  occasions  of  the  first  three  plagues,  a 
contrary  inference  seems  more  reasonable.  In  this 
eise  the  expression,  "  they  also  did  in  like  manner 
with  their  enchantments"  (11)  is  used,  and  it  is 
repeated  in  the  cases  of  their  seeming  success  on 
the  occasions  of  the  tint  plague  (22),  and  the  second 
(viii.  7),  as  well  as  when  they  failed  on  the  occasion 
of  the  third  plague  (18).  A  comparison  with  other 
passages  strengthens  us  in  the  inference  that  the  magi 
cians  succeeded  merely  by  juggling.  [MAGIC.]  Yet, 
even  if  they  were  able  to  produce  any  real  effects 
oy  magic,  a  broad  distinction  should  be  drawn 
between  the  general  and  powerful  nature  of  the 
wonders  wrought  by  the  hand  of  Moses  and  Aaron 
and  their  partial  and  weak  imitations.  When  Pha 
raoh  had  refused  to  let  the  Israelites  go,  Moses  was 
sent  again,  and,  on  the  second  refusal,  wascommanded 
to  smite  upon  the  waters  of  the  river  and  to  turn  them 
and  all  the  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood.  The  miracle 
was  to  be  wrought  when  Pharaoh  went  forth  in  the 
morning  to  the  river.  Its  general  character  is  very 
remarkable,  for  not  only  was  the  water  of  the  Nile 
smitten,  but  all  the  water,  even  that  in  vessels, 
throughout  the  country.  'The  fish  died,  and  the 
river  stank.  The  Egyptians  could  not  drink  of  it, 
and  digged  around  it  for  water.  This  plague 
appears  to  have  lasted  seven  days,  for  the  account 
of  it  ends,  "  And  seven  days  were  fulfilled,  after 
that  the  LORD  had  smitten  the  river"  (vii.  13-25), 
and  the  narrative  of  the  second  plague  immedi 
ately  follows,  as  though  the  other  had  then  ceased. 
Some  difficulty  has  been  occasioned  by  the  mention 
that  the  Egyptians  digged  for  water,  but  it  is  not 
stated  that  they  so  gained  what  they  sought, 
although  it  may  be  conjectured  that  only  the  water 
that  was  seen  was  smitten,  in  order  that  the  nation 
should  not  perish.  This  plague  was  doubly  humi 
liating  to  the  religfon  of  the  country,  as  the  Nile 
was  held  sacred,  as  well  as  some  kinds  of  its  fish, 
not  to  speak  of  the  crocodiles,  which  probably  were 
destroyed.  It  may  have  been  a  marked  reproof  for 
the  cruel  edict  that  the  Israelite  children  should 
be  drowned,  and  could  scarcely  have  failed  to  strike 
guilty  consciences  as  such,  though  Pharaoh  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  alarmed  by  it.  He  saw  what 
was  probably  an  imitation  wrought  by  the  magi 
cians,  who  accompanied  him,  as  if  he  were  engaged 
in  some  sacred  rites,  perhaps  connected  with  the 
worship  of  the  Nile.  Events  having  some  resem 
blance  to  this  are  mentioned  by  ancient  writers : 
the  most  remarkable  is  related  by  Manetho,  accord 
ing  to  whom  it  was  said  that,  in  the  reign  of  Ne- 
phercheres,  seventh  king  of  the  iind  dynasty,  the 
Nile  flowed  mixed  with  honey  for  eleven  days. 
Some  of  the  historical  notices  of  the  earliest  dy 
nasties  seem  to  be  of  very  doubtful  authenticity, 
and  Manetho  seems  to  treat  this  one  as  a  fable,  or, 
Derhaps  as  a  tradition.  Nephercheres,  it  must  be 
remarked;  reigned  several  hundred  years  before  the 
Exodus.  Those  who  have  endeavoured  to  explain 
this  plague  by  natural  causes,  have  referred  to  the 
changes  of  colour  to  which  the  Nile  is  subject,  the 
appearance  of  the  Ked  Sea,  and  the  so-called  rain 
and  dew  of  blood  of  the  middle  ages  ;  the  last  two 
occasioned  ly  small  fungi  of  very  rapid  growth. 
But  such  theories  do  not  explain  why  the  wonder 
at  a  time  of  year  when  the  Nile  is  most 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

clear,  nor  why  it  killed  the  fish  and  made  the  watei 
unfit  to  be  drunk.  These  are  the  leally  weighty 
points,  rather  than  the  change  into  blood,  which 
seems  to  mean  a  change  into  the  semblance  of 
blood.  The  employment  of  natural  means  in  ef 
fecting  a  miracle  is  equally  seen  in  the  passage  of 
the  Red  Sea ;  but  the  Divine  power  is  proved  by 
the  intensifying  or  extending  that  means,  and  the 
opportune  occurrence  of  the  result,  and  its  fitnes* 
for  a  great  moral  purpose. 

2.  The  Plague  of  Frogs. — When  seven  days  had 
passed  after  the  smiting  of  the  river,  Pharaoh  was 
threatened  with  another  judgment,  and,  on  his  re 
fusing  to  let  the  Israelites  go,  the  second  plague  was 
sent.     The  river  and  all  the  open  waters  of  Egypt 
brought  forth  countless  frogs,  which  not  only  covered 
the  land,  but  filled  the  houses,  even  in  their  driest 
parts  and  vessels,  for  the  ovens  and  kneading- troughs 
are  specified.     The  magicians  again  had  a  seeming 
success  in  their  opposition ;    yet   Pharaoh,  whose 
very  palaces  were  filled  by  the  reptiles,  entreated 
Moses  to  pray  that  they  might  be  removed,  pro 
mising  to  let  the  Israelites  go;  but,  on  the  removai 
of  the  plague,  again  hardened  his  heart  (vii.  25, 
viii.   1-15).     This  must  have  been  an  especially 
trying  judgment  to  the  Egyptians,  as  frogs  wei-e 
included  among  the  sacred  animals,  probably  not 
among   those  which  were  reverenced   throughout 
Egypt,  like  the  cat,  but  in  the  second  class  of  local 
objects  of  worship,  like  the  crocodile.     The  frog 
was  sacred  to  the  goddess  HEKT,  who  is  represented 
with  the  head  of  this  reptile.    In  hieroglyphics  the 
frog  signifies  "  very  many,"  "  millions."  doubtless 
from   its  abundance.      In   the   present  day  frogs 
abound  in  Egypt,  and  in  the  summer  and  autumn 
their  loud  and  incessant  croaking  in  all  the  waters 
of  the  country  gives  some  idea  of  this  plague.   They 
are  not,  however,  heard  in  the  spring,  nor  is  there 
any  record,  excepting  the  Biblical   one,  of  their 
having  been  injurious  to  the  inhabitants.     It  must 
be  added  that  the  supposed  cases  of  the  same  kind 
elsewhere,  quoted  from  ancient  authors,  are  of  very 
doubtful  authenticity. 

3.  The  Plague  of  Lice. — The  account  of  the 
third  plague  is  not  preceded  by  the  mention  of  any 
warning  to  Pharaoh.    We  read  that  Aaron  was  com 
manded  to  stretch  out  his  rod  and  smite  the  dust, 
which  became,  as  the  A.  V.  reads  the  word,  "  lice" 
in  man  and  beast.     The  magicians  again  attempted 
opposition ;  but,  failing,  confessed  that  the  wonder 
was  of  God  (riii.  16-19).    There  is  much  difficulty 
as  to  the  animals  meant  by  the  term  033.     The 
Masoretic  punctuation  is  033,  which  would  pro 
bably  make  it  a  collective  noun  with  0  formative  ; 
but  the  plural  form  D*|3  also   occurs   (ver.   16 
[Heb.  12j;  Ps>  cv.  31),  of  which  we  once  find  the 
singular  |3  in  Isaiah  (li.  6).    It  is  therefore  reason 
able  to  conjecture  that  the  first  form  should  be 
punctuated  033,  as  the  defective  writing  of  0*33 ; 
and  it  should  also  be  observed  that  the  Samaritan 
has  0*33.    The  LXX.  has  owlets,  and  the  Vulg. 
sciniphes,  mosquitos,  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (ii. 
95),  and  Philo  (De  Vita  Mosis,  i.  20,  p.  97,  ed. 
Mang.),    as    troublesome    in    Egypt.      Josephus, 
however,  makes  the  033  lice  (Ant.  ii.   14,  §3), 
with  which  Bochart  agrees  (Hieroz.  ii.  572,  seqq.) 
The  etymology  is  doubtful,  and  perhaps  the  woro. 
is  Egyptian.     The  narrative  does  not  enable  us  to 
decide   which    is  the   more  probable  of  the   two 
renderings,  excepting,  indeed,  that  il'  it  be  meant 


PLAGUES,  THU  TEN 

that  exactly  the  same  kind  of  animal  attacked  man 
&nd  beast,  mosquitos  would  be  the  more  likely 
translation.  In  this  case  the  plague  does  not  seem 
tj  be  especially  directed  against  the  superstitions  of 
the  Egyptians  :  if,  however,  it  were  of  lice,  it 
v;ould  have  been  most  distressing  to  their  priests, 
who  were  very  cleanly,  apparently,  like  the  Mus 
lims,  as  a  religious  duty.  In  the  present  day  both 
mosquitos  and  lice  are  abundant  in  Egypt:  the 
.'.atter  may  be  avoided,  but  there  is  no  escape  from 
the  former,  which  are  so  distressing  an  annoyance 
that  an  increase  of  them  would  render  life  almost 
insupportable  to  beasts  as  well  as  men. 

4.   The  Plague  of  Flies. — In   the   case   of  the 
'"mirth  plague,  as  in  that  of  the  first,  Moses  was 
commanded  to  meet  Pharaoh  in  the  morning  as  he 
came  forth  to  the  water,  and  to  threaten  him  with 
a  judgment  if  he  still  refused  to  give  the  Israelites 
leave  to  go  and  worship.    He  was  to  be  punished  by 
my»  which  the  A.  V.  renders  "  swarms  [of  flies]," 
"a  swarm  [of  flies],"  or,  in  the  margin,  "a mixture 
[of  noisome  beasts]."      These   creatures  were   to 
cover  the  people,  and  fill  both  the  houses  and  the 
ground.     Here,  for  the  first  time,  we  read  that  the. 
land  of  Gosheu,  where  the  Israelites  dwelt,  was  to 
be  exempt  from  the  plague.     So  terrible  was  it 
that  Pharaoh  granted  permission  for  the  Israelites 
to  sacrifice  in  the  land,  which  Moses  refused  to  do,  as 
the  Egyptians  would  stone  his  people  for  sacrificing 
their  "  abomination."     Then  Pharaoh  gave  them 
leave  to  sacrifice  in  the  wilderness,  provided  they  did 
not  go  far ;  but,  on  the  plague  being  removed,  broke 
his  agreement  (viii.  20-32).     The  proper  meaning 
of  the  word  21JJ  is  a  question  of  extreme  difficulty. 
The  explanation  of  Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  14,  §3),  and 
almost  all  the  Hebrew  commentators,  is  that  it 
means  "  a  mixture,"  and  here  designates  a  mixture 
of  wild  animals,  in  accordance  with  the  derivation 
from  the  root  3"iy,   "  he  mixed."     Similarly,  Je 
rome  i-enders  it  omne  genus  muscarum,  and  Aquila 
irdnnvia.    The  LXX.,  however,  and  Philo  (De  Vita 
Mosis,  i.  23,  ii.   101,  ed.   Mang.),  suppose  it  to 
be  a  dog-fly,  KtW/uwa.     The  second  of  these  expla 
nations  seems  to  be  a  compromise  between  the  first 
•fj\d  the  third.     It   is   almost   certain,  from    two 
passages  (Ex.  viii.  29,  31;  Hebrew,  25,  27),  that 
a  single  creature  is  intended.     If  so,  what  reason  is 
there  in  favour  of  the  LXX.  rendering  ?    Oedmann 
•(Verm.  Sammlungen,  ii.  150,  ap.  Ges.  Thes.  s.  v.) 
proposes  the  blatta  orientalis,   a   kind  of  beetle, 
instead  of  a  dog-fly  ;   but  Gesenius  objects  that  this 
creature  devours  things  rather  than  stings  men, 
whereas  it  is  evident  that  the  animal  of  this  plague 
attacked  or  at  least  annoyed  men,  besides  apparently 
injuring  the  land.    From  Ps.  Ixxviii.  45,  where  we 
read,  "  He  sent  the  Tty,  which  devoured  them," 
it  must  have  been  a  creature  of  devouring  habits, 
as  is  observed   by   Kalisch  (Comment,  on  Exod. 
p.  138),  who  supports  the  theory  that  a  beetle  is 
intended.     The  Egyptian  language  might  be  hoped 
to  give  us  a  clue  to  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  and 
Philo.  In  hieroglyphics  a  fly  is  AF,  and  a  bee  SHEB, 
or  KHEB,  SH  and  KH  being  interchangeable,  in 
dillerent  dialects;  and  in  Coptic  these  two  words 
are  confounded  in  £.£.q,   <LCJ?  £.&,  £,£- 
musca,  apis,  scarabaeus.     We  can  therefore  only 
judge  from  the  description  of  the  plague ;  and  here 
Gesenius  seems  to  have  too  hastily  decided  against 
the  rendering  "beetle,"  since  the  beetle  sometimes 
attacks  men.     Yet  our  experience  does  not  bear  owf. 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN          386 

-he  idea  that  any  kind  of  beetle  is  injuii.-jr,  to  mail 
n  Egypt ;  but  there  is  a  kind  of  gad-fl/  found  in 
,hat  country  which  sometimes  stings  men,  though 
isually  attacking  beasts.  The  difficulty,  howevei, 
n  the  way  of  the  supposition  that  a  htingiug  fly  is 
meant  is  that  all  such  flies  are,  like  this  one,  plagues 
.o  boasts  rather  than  men ;  and  if  we  conjecture 
;hat  a  fly  is  intended,  perhaps  it  is  more  reasonable 
;o  infer  that  it  was  the  common  fly,  which  in  the 
iresent  day  is  probably  the  most  troublesome  insect 
n  Egypt.  That  this  was  a  more  severe  plague  than 
;hose  preceding  it,  appears  from  its  effect  on  Pha- 
•aoh,  rather  than  from  the  mention  of  the  exemption 
if  the  Israelites,  for  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed  that 
;he  earlier  plagues  affected  them.  As  we  do  not 
enow  what  creature  is  here  intended,  we  cannot  say 
f  there  were  any  reference  in  this  case  to  the  Egyp 
tian  religion.  Those  who  suppose  it  to  have  been  a 
seetle  might  draw  attention  to  the  great  reverence 
n  which  that  insect  was  held  among  the  sacred 
animals,  and  the  consequent  distress  that  the  Egyp 
tians  would  have  felt  at  destroying  it,  even  ii 
;hey  did  so  unintentionally.  As  already  noticed, 
no  insect  is  now  so  troublesome  in  Egypt  as  the 
common  fly,  and  this  is  not  the  case  with  any  kind 
of  beetle,  which  fact,  from  our  general  conclusions, 
will  be  seen  to  favour  the  evidence  for  the  former. 
In  the  hot  season  the  flies  not  only  cover  the  food  and 
drink,  but  they  torment  the  people  by  settling  on 
their  faces,  and  especially  round  their  eyes,  thus 
promoting  ophthalmia. 

5.  The  Plague  of  the  Murrain  of  Beasts. — Pha 
raoh  was  next  warned  that,  if  he  did  not  let  tin- 
people  go,  there  should  be  on  the  day  following  "  a 
very  grievous  murrain,"  upon  the  horses,  asses, 
camels,  oxen,  and  sheep  of  Egypt,  whereas  those  of 
the  children  of  Israel  should  not  die.  This  came  to 
pass,  and  we  read  that  "all  the  cattle  of  Egypt 
died :  but  of  the  cattle  of  the  children  of  Israel  died 
not  one."  Yet  Pharaoh  still  continued  obstinate 
(Ex.  ix.  1-7).  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  expres 
sion  "  all  the  cattle "  cannot  IK  understood  to  be 
universal,  but  only  general,  for  the  narrative  of  the 
plague  of  hail  shows  that  there  were  still  at  a  later 
time  some  cattle  left,  and  that  the  want  of  universal 
terms  in  Hebrew  explains  this  seeming  difficulty. 
The  mention  of  camels  is  important,  since  it  appeal's 
to  favour  our  opinion  that  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus  was  a  foreigner,  camels  apparently  not 
having  been  kept  by  the  Egyptians  of  the  time  of 
the  Pharaohs.  This  plague  would  have  been  a 
heavy  punishment  to  the  Egyptians  as  falling  upor 
their  sacred  animals  of  two  of  the  kinds  specified 
the  oxen  and  the  sheep ;  but  it  would  have  been 
most  felt  in  the  destruction  of  the  greatest  part  of 
their  useful  beasts.  In  modern  times  murrain  if 
not  an  unfrequent  visitation  in  Egypt,  and  is  sup 
posed  to  precede  the  Plague.  Tho  writer  witnessed 
a  very  severe  murrain  in  that  country  in  184V!. 
which  lasted  nine  months,  during  the  latter  half  ol 
that  yew  and  the  spring  of  the  following  one,  and 
was  succeeded  by  the  Plague,  as  had  been  anticipated 
(Mrs.  Poole,  Englishwoman  in  Egypt,  ii.  32,  i.  59, 
114).  "  '  A  very  grievous  murrain,'  forcibly  re 
minding  us  of  that  which  visited  this  same  country 
in  the  days  of  Moses,  has  prevailed  during  the  last 
three  months" — the  letter  is  dated  October  18th, 
1842 — ,  "and  the  already  distressed  peasants  feel 
the  calamity  severely,  or  rather  (I  should  say)  the 
few  who  possess  cattle.  Among  the  rich  men  ol 
the  country,  the  loss  has  been  enormous.  During 
6ur  voyage  up  the  Nile  "  in  the  July  preceding,  "  vrc 


386 


PL A(J U ES,  THE  TEN 


olwen  sd  several  dead  cows  and  buffaloes  lying  in 
the  rirer,  as  I  mentioned  in  a  former  letter  ;  and 
some  f.-iends  who  followed  us,  two  months  after,  saw 
*nany  on  the  banks ;  indeed,  up  to  this  time,  great 
mrmbers  of  cattle  are  dying  in  every  part  of  the 
country"  (Id.  i.  114,  115).  The  similarity  of  the 
calamity  in  character  is  remarkably  in  contrast  with 
its  difference  in  duration :  the  miraculous  murrain 
seems  to  have  been  as  sudden  and  nearly  as  brief  as 
the  destruction  of  the  firstborn  (though  far  less  ter 
rible),  and  to  have  therefore  produced,  on  ceasing, 
less  effect  than  other  plagues  upon  Pharaoh,  nothing 
remaining  to  be  removed. 

6.  The  Plague  of  Boils. — The  next  judgment 
appears  to  have  been  preceded  by  no  warning,  ex 
cepting  indeed  that,  when  Moses  publicly  sent  it 
abroad  in  Egypt,  Pharaoh  might  no  doubt  have  re 
pented  at  the  last  moment.  We  read  that  Moses 
and  Aaron  were  to  take  ashes  of  the  furnace,  and 
Moses  was  to  "  sprinkle  it  toward  the  heaven  in  the 
sight  of  Pharaoh."  It  was  to  become  "small 
dust"  throughout  Egypt,  and  "  be  a  boil  breaking 
forth  [with]  blains  upon  man,  and  upon  beast." 
This  accordingly  came  to  pass.  The  magicians  now 
once  more  seem  to  have  attempted  opposition,  for  it 
is  related  that  they  "  could  not  stand  before  Moses 
because  of  the  boil  ;  for  the  boil  was  upon  the  magi 
cians,  and  upon  all  the  Egyptians."  Notwithstand 
ing,  Pharaoh  still  refused  to  let  the  Israelites  go 
(iy  8-12).  This  plague  may  be  supposed  to  have 
beei.  either  an  infliction  of  boils,  or  a  pestilence  like 
the  Plague  of  modern  times,  which  is  an  extremely 
severe  kind  of  typhus  fever,  accompanied  by  swell 
ings.  [PLAGUE.]  The  former  is,  however,  the  more 
likely  explanation,  since,  if  the  plague  had  been  of  the 
latter  nature,  it  probably  would  have  been  'ess  severe 
than  the  ordinary  pestilence  of  Egypt  has  been  in 
this  nineteenth  century,  whereas  with  other  plagues 
which  can  be  illustrated  from  the  present  pheno 
mena  of  Egypt,  the  reverse  is  the  case.  That  this 
plague  followed  that  of  the  murrain  seems,  however, 
an  argument  on  the  other  side,  and  it  may  be  asked 
whether  it  is  not  likely  that  the  great  pestilence  of 
the  country,  probably  known  in  antiquity,  would 
have  been  one  of  the  ten  plagues ;  but  to  this  it  may 
be  replied  that  it  is  more  probable,  and  in  accord 
ance  with  the  whole  narrative,  that  extraordinary 
and  unexpected  wonders  should  be  effected  than 
what  could  be  paralleled  in  the  history  of  Egypt. 
The  tenth  plague,  moreover,  is  so  much  like  the  great 
Egyptian  disease  in  its  suddenness,  that  it  might 
rather  be  compared  to  it  if  it  were  not  so  wholly 
miraculous  in  every  respect  as  to  be  beyond  the 
reach  of  human  inquiry.  The  position  of  the  ma 
gicians  must  be  noticed  as  indicative  of  the  gradation 
o('  the  plagues :  at  first  they  succeeded,  as  we  suppose, 
by  deception,  in  imitating  what  was  wrought  by 
Moses,  then  they  failed,  and  acknowledged  the  finger 
of  God  in  the  wonders  of  the  Hebrew  prophet,  and 
at  last  they  could  not  even  stand  before  him,  being 
themselves  smitten  by  the  plague  he  t^B>mmis- 
lioned  to  send. 

7.  The  Plague  of  Hail.—  The  account  of  the 
seventh  plague  is  preceded  by  a  warning,  which 
Moses  was  commanded  to  deliver  to  Pharaoh,  re 
specting  the  terrible  nature  of  the  plagues  that 
were  to  ensue  if  he  remained  obstinate.  And  first 
of  all  of  the  hail  it  is  said,  "  Behold,  to-morrow  about 
this  time,  I  will  cause  it  to  rain  a  very  grievous 
hail,  such  as  hath  not  been  in  Egypt  since  the  foun 
dation  thereof  even  until  now."  He  was  then  told 
to  collect  his  cattle  and  men  into  shelter,  for  that 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

everything  hailed  upon  should  die.  Accordi  ,igly,  biich 
of  Pharaoh's  servants  as  "  feared  the  LORD,"  brought 
in  their  servants  and  cattle  from  the  field.  We  read 
that  "  Moses  stretched  forth  his  rod  toward  heaven : 
and  the  LOKD  sent  thunder  and  hail,  and  the  fire  r.io 
along  upon  the  ground."  Thus  man  and  beast  were 
smitten,  and  the  herbs  and  every  tree  broken,  save 
in  the  land  of  Goshen.  Upon  this  Pharaoh  acknow 
ledged  his  wickedness  and  that  of  his  people,  and  tin 
righteousness  of  God,  and  promised  if  the  plague 
were  withdrawn  to  let  the  Israelites  go.  Theu 
Moses  went  forth  from  the  city,  and  spread  out  his 
hands,  and  the  plague  ceased,  when  Pharaoh,  sup 
ported  by  his  servants,  again  broke  his  promise 
(ix.  13-35).  The  character  of  this  and  the  follow 
ing  plagues  must  be  carefully  examined,  as  the 
warning  seems  to  indicate  an  important  turning 
point.  The  ruin  caused  by  the  hail  was  evidently 
far  greater  than  that  effected  by  any  of  the  earlier 
plagues ;  it  destroyed  men,  which  those  others  seem 
not  to  have  done,  and  uot  only  men  but  beasts 
and  the  produce  of  the  earth.  In  this  case  Moses, 
while  addressing  Pharaoh,  openly  warns  his  servants 
how  to  save  something  from  the  calamity.  Pharaoh 
for  the  first  time  acknowledges  his  wickedness.  We 
also  learn  that  his  people  joined  with  him  in  the 
oppression,  and  that  at  this  time  he  dwelt  in  a  city. 
Hail  is  now  extremely  rare,  but  not  unknown,  in 
Egypt,  and  it  is  interesting  that  the  narrative  seems 
to  imply  that  it  sometimes  falls  there.  Thunder 
storms  occur,  but,  though  very  loud  and  accom 
panied  by  rain  and  wind,  they  rarely  do  serious 
injury.  We  do  not  remember  to  have  heard  while 
in  Egypt  of  a  person  struck  by  lightning,  nor  of  any 
ruin  excepting  that  of  decayed  buildings  washed 
down  by  rain. 

8.  The  Plague  of  Locusts. — Pharaoh  was  now 
threatened  with  a  plague  of  locusts,  to  begin  the 
next  day,  by  which  everything  the  hail  had  left 
was  to  be  devoured.  This  was  to  exceed  any  like 
visitations  that  had  happened  in  the  time  of  the 
king's  ancestors.  At  last  Pharaoh's  "wn  servants, 
who  had  before  supported  him,  remonstrated,  for 
we  read:  "And  Pharaoh's  servants  said  unto  him, 
How  long  shall  this  man  be  a  snare  unto  us  ?  let 
the  men  go,  that  they  may  serve  the  LORD  their 
God :  knowest  thou  not  yet  that  Egypt  is  de 
stroyed?"  Then  Pharaoh  sent  for  Moses  and 
Aaron,  and  offered  to  let  the  people  go,  but  refused 
when  they  required  that  all  should  go,  even  with 
their  flocks  and  herds :  "  And  Moses  stretched  forth 
his  rod  over  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the  LORD 
brought  an  east  wind  upon  the  land  all  that  day, 
and  all  [that]  night ;  [and]  when  it  was  morning, 
the  east  wind  brought  the  locusts.  And  the  locust* 
went  up  over  all  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  rested  in 
all  the  coasts  of  Egypt :  very  grievous  [were  they]  ; 
before  them  there  were  no  such  locusts  as  they, 
neither  after  them  shall  be  such.  For  they  covered 
the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  so  that  the  land  was  dark 
ened  ;  and  they  did  eat  every  herb  of  the  land,  and 
all  the  fruit  of  the  trees  which  the  hail  had  left : 
and  there  remained  not  any  green  thing  in  the 
trees,  or  in  the  herbs  of  the  field,  through  all  the 
land  of  Egypt."  Then  Pharaoh  hastily  sent  for 
Moses  and  Aaron  and  confessed  his  sin  against  God 
and  the  Israelites,  and  begged  them  to  forgive  him. 
"  Now  therefore  forgive,  I  pray  thee,  my  sin  only 
this  once,  and  intreat  the  LORD  your  God,  that  He 
may  take  away  from  me  this  death  only."  Mose» 
accordingly  prayed.  "  And  the  LOUD  turned  s 
mighty  strong  west  wind,  which  took  away  th« 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

locusts,  and  cast  them  into  the  Red  sea ;  there  re 
mained  not  one  locust  in  all  the  coasts  of  Egypt." 
The  plague  being  removed,  Pharaoh  again  would 
not  let  the  people  go  (x.  1-20).  This  plague  has 
not  the  unusual  nature  of  the  one  that  preceded  it, 
but  it  even  exceeds  it  in  severity,  and  so  occupies 
its  place  in  the  gradation  of  the  more  terrible  judg 
ments  that  form  the  later  part  of  the  series.  Its 
severity  can  be  well  understood  by  those  who,  like  the 
writer,  have  been  in  Egypt  in  a  part  of  the  country 
where  a  flight  of  locusts  has  alighted.  In  this  case 
the  plague  was  greater  than  an  ordinary  visitation, 
since  it  extended  over  n  far  wider  space,  rather  than 
because  it  was  more  intense ;  for  it  is  impossible  to 
imagine  any  more  complete  destruction  than  that 
always  caused  by  a  swarm  of  locusts.  So  well  did 
the  people  of  Egypt  know  what  these  creatures 
effected,  that,  when  their  coming  was  threatened, 
Pharaoh's  servants  at  once  remonstrated.  In  the 
present  day  locusts  suddenly  appear  in  the  cultivated 
land,  coming  from  the  desert  in  a  column  of  great 
length.  They  fly  rapidly  across  the  country,  dark 
ening  the  air  with  their  compact  ranks,  which  are 
undisturbed  by  the  constant  attacks  of  kites,  crows, 
and  vultures,  and  making  a  strange  whizzing  sound 
like  that  of  fire,  or  many  distant  wheels.  Where 
they  alight  they  devour  every  green  thing,  even 
stripping  the  trees  of  their  leaves.  Rewards  are 
offered  for  their  destruction,  but  no  labour  can 
seriously  reduce  their  numbers.  Soon  they  con 
tinue  their  course,  and  disappear  gradually  in  a 
short  time,  leaving  the  place  where  they  have  been 
a  desert.  We  speak  from  recollection,  but  we  are 
permitted  to  extract  a  careful  description  of  the 
effects  of  a  flight  of  locusts  from  Mr.  Lane's  manu 
script  notes.  He  writes  of  Nubia:  "Locusts  not 
unfrequently  commit  dreadful  havock  inthiscountry. 
In  my  second  voyage  up  the  Nile,  when  before  the 
village  of  Boostan,  a  little  above  Ibreem,  many 
locusts  pitched  upon  the  boat.  They  were  beau 
tifully  variegated,  yellow  and  blue.  In  the  follow 
ing  night  a  southerly  wind  brought  other  locusts,  in 
immense  swarms.  Next  morning  the  air  was  dark 
ened  by  them,  as  by  a  heavy  fall  of  snow ;  and  the 
surface  of  the  river  was  thickly  scattered  over  by 
those  which  had  fallen  and  were  unable  to  rise 
again.  Great  numbers  came  upon  and  within  the 
boat,  and  alighted  upon  our  persons.  They  were 
different  from  those  of  the  preceding  day ;  being  of 
a  bright  yellow  colour,  with  brown  marks.  The 
desolation  they  made  was  dreadful.  In  four  hours 
a  field  of  young  durah  [millet]  was  cropped  to  the 
ground.  In  another  field  of  durah  more  advanced 
only  the  stalks  were  left.  Nowhere  was  there  space 
on  the  ground  to  set  the  foot  without  treading  on 
many.  A  field  of  cotton-plants  was  quite  stripped. 
Even  the  acacias  along  the  banks  were  made  bare, 
and  palm-trees  were  stripped  of  the  fruit  and  leaves. 
Last  night  we  heard  the  creaking  of  the  sakiyehs 
[water-wheels],  and  the  singing  of  women  driving 
the  cows  which  turned  them  :  to-day  not  one  sakiyeh 
was  in  motion,  and  the  women  were  going  about 
howling,  and  vainly  attempting  to  frighten  away 
the  locusts.  On  the  preceding  day  I  had  preserved 
two  of  the  more  beautiful  kind  of  these  creatures 
with  a  solution  of  arsenic :  on  the  next  day  some  of 
the  other  locusts  ate  them  almost  entirely,  poisoned 
as  they  wen-,  unseen  by  me  till  they  had  nearly 
finished  their  meal.  On  the  third  day  they  were 
less  numerous,  and  gradually  disappeared.  Locusts 
are  eaten  by  most  of  the  Bedawe«s  of  Arabia,  and 
by  some  of  the  Nubians.  We  at*  a  few.  <ii  pssed  in 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


887 


the  most  approved  manner,  being  stripped  i;f  tht 
legs,  wings,  and  head,  and  fried  in  butter.  They 
had  a  flavour  somewhat  like  that  of  the  wo>docck, 
owing  to  their  food.  The  Arabs  preserve  them  as  a 
common  article  of  provision  by  parboiling  them  in 
salt  and  water,  and  then  drying  them  in  the  sun." 

The  parallel  passages  in  the  prophecy  of  Joel 
form  a  remarkable  commentary  on  the  description 
of  the  plague  in  Exodus,  and  a  few  must  be  here 
quoted,  for  they  describe  with  wonderful  exactness 
and  vigour  the  devastations  of  a  swai-m  of  locusts. 
"  Blow  ye  the  trumpet  in  Zion,  and  sound  an  alarm 
in  my  holy  mountain:  let  all  the  inhatitants  ol 
the  land  tremble:  for  the  day  of  the  LORD  cometh, 
for  [it  is]  nigh  at  hand  ;  a  day  of  darkness  and  of 
gloominess,  a  day  of  cloi  is  and  of  thick  darkness, 
as  the  morning  spread  upon  the  mountains :  a  greal 
people  and  a  strong ;  there  hath  not  been  ever  the 
like,  neither  shall  be  any  more  after  it,  [even]  to 
the  years  of  many  generations.  A  fire  devoureth 
before  them ;  and  behind  them  a  flame  burneth : 
the  land  [is]  as  the  garden  of  Eden  before  them, 
and  behind,  a  desolate  wilderness;  yea,  and  nothing 
shall  escape  them.  The  appearance  of  them  [is]  as 
the  appearance  of  horses  ;  and  as  horsemen,  so  shall 
they  run.  Like  the  noise  of  chariots  on  the  tops  of 
the  mountains  shall  they  leap,  like  the  noise  of  a 
flame  of  fire  that  devoureth  the  stubble,  as  a  strong 
people  set  in  battle  array.  .  .  .  They  shall  run  like 
mighty  men ;  they  shall  climb  the  wall  like  men  of 
war,  and  they  shall  march  every  one  on  his  ways, 
and  they  shall  not  break  their  ranks.  .  .  .  The 
earth  shall  quake  before  them ;  the  heavens  shall 
tremble:  the  sun  and  the  moon  shall  be  dark,  and 
the  stars  shall  withdraw  their  shining"  (ii.  1-5, 
7,  10;  see  also  6,  8,  9,  11-25,  Rev.  ix.  1-12). 
Here,  and  probably  also  in  the  parallel  passage  of 
Rev.,  locusts  are  taken  as  a  type  of  a  destroying 
army  or  horde,  since  they  are  more  terrible  in  the 
devastation  they  cause  than  any  other  creatures. 

9.  The  Plague  of  Darkness. — After  the  plague 
of  locusts  we  read  at  once  of  a  fresh  judgment. 
"  And  the  LORD  said  unto  Moses,  Stretch  out  thine 
hand  toward  heaven,  that  there  be  darkness  over 
the  land  of  Egypt,  that  [one]  may  feel  darkness. 
And  Moses  stretched  forth  his  hand  toward  heaven  ; 
and  there  was  a  thick  darkness  in  all  the  land  of 
Egypt  three  days :  they  saw  not  one  another,  neithei 
rose  any  from  his  place  for  three  days :  but  all  the 
children  of  Israel  had  light  in  their  dwellings." 
Pharaoh  then  gave  the  Israelites  leave  to  go  if  only 
they  left  their  cattle,  but  when  Moses  required 
that  they  should  take  these  also,  he  again  refused 
(x.  21-29).  The  expression  we  have  rendered  "  that 
[one]  may  feel  darkness,"  according  to  the  A.  V. 
in  the  margin,  where  in  the  text  the  freer  transla 
tion  "  darkness  [which]  may  be  felt"  is  given,  ]("•- 
occasioned  much  difficulty.  The  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
give  this  rendering,  and  the  moderns  generally 
follow  them.  It  has  been  proposed  to  read  "aud 
they  shall  grope  in  darkness,"  by  a  slight  change 
of  rendering  and  the  supposition  that  the  particle 
3  is  understood  (Kalisch,  C'omm.  on  Ex.  p.  171).  It 
is  unreasonable  to  argue  that  the  forcible  words  of  the 
A.  V.  are  too  strong  for  Semitic  phraseology.  The 
difficulty  is,  however,  rather  to  be  solved  by  a  con 
sideration  of  the  nature  of  the  plague.  It  has  been 
illustrated  by  reference  to  the  Samoom  and  the  hot 
wind  of  the  Khamaseen.  The  former  is  a  sand 
storm  whi<h  occurs  in  the  desert,  seldom  lasting 
according  to 'Mr  Lane,  more  than  a  quarter  of  an 
hiM<!  »i  •  I'von'  v  mimiti':-  ;.>/.>./.  /-.',/  -r>th  ed.  p. -') ; 


888 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 


but  for  the  time  often  causing  the  darkness  of  twi 
light,  and  affecting  man  and  beast.  Mrs.  Foole, 
on  Mr.  Lane's  authority,  has  described  the  Samoom 
AS  follows: — "The  'Samoom,'  which  is  a  very 
violent,  hot,  and  almost  suffocating  wind,  is  of 
more  rare  occurrence  than  the  Khamaseen  winds, 
and  of  shelter  duration ;  its  continuance  being  more 
brief  in  proportion  to  the  intensity  of  its  parching 
heat,  and  the  impetuosity  of  its  course.  Its  direc 
tion  is  generally  from  the  south-east,  or  south-south 
east.  It  is  commonly  preceded  by  a  fearful  calm. 
As  it  approaches,  the  atmosphere  assumes  a  yellow 
ish  hue,  tir.ged  with  red ;  the  sun  appears  of  a  deep 
blood  Colour,  and  gradually  becomes  quite  concealed 
before  the  hot  blast  is  felt  in  its  full  violence.  The 
sand  and  dust  raised  by  the  wind  add  to  the  gloom, 
;id  increase  the  painful  effects  of  the  hent  and 
. j-ity  of  the  air.  Respiration  becomes  uneasy,  per- 
.liration  seems  to  be  entirely  stopped ;  the  tongue 
s  dry,  the  skin  parched,  and  a  prickling  sensation 
xperienced,  as  if  caused  by  electric  sparks.  It 
s,  sometimes  impossible  for  a  person  to  remain  erect, 
jn  account  of  the  force  of  the  wind ;  and  the  sand 
and  dust  oblige  all  who  are  exposed  to  it  to  keep 
their  eyes  closed.  It  is,  however,  most  distressing 
when  it  overtakes  travellers  in  the  desert.  My 
brother  encountered  at  Koos,  in  Upper  Egypt,  a 
samoom  which  was  said  to  be  one  of  the  most 
violent  ever  witnessed.  It  lasted  less  than  half  an 
hour,  and  a  very  violent  samoom  seldom  continues 
longer.  My  brother  is  of  opinion  that,  although  it 
is  extremely  distressing,  it  can  never  prove  fatal, 
unless  to  persons  already  brought  almost  to  the 
point  of  death  by  disease,  fatigue,  thirst,  or  some 
other  cause.  The  poor  camel  seems  to  suffer  from 
it  equally  with  his  master;  and  will  often  lie  down 
with  his  back  to  the  wind,  close  his  eyes,  stretch 
out  his  long  neck  upon  the  ground,  and  so  remain 
ui  il  the  storm  has  passed  over"  (Englishwoman 
M.  Egypt,  i.  96,  97).  The  hot  wind  of  the  Kha 
maseen  usually  blows  for  three  days  and  nights, 
and  carries  so  much  sand  with  it,  that  it  pro 
duces  the  appearance  of  a  yellow  fog.  It  thus 
resembles  the  Samoom,  though  far  less  powerful 
ind  far  less  distressing  in  its  effects.  It  is  not  known 
to  cause  actual  darkness ;  at  least  the  writer's  re 
sidence  in  Egypt  afforded  no  example  either  on 
experience  or  hearsay  evidence.  By  a  confusion  of 
the  Samoom  and  the  Khamaseen  wind  it  has  even 
been  supposed  that  a  Samoom  in  its  utmost  violence 
usually  lasts  three  days  (Kalisi-h,  Com.  Ex.  p. 
170),  but  this  is  an  error.  The  plague  may, 
however,  have  been  an  extremely  severe  sandstorm, 
miraculous  in  its  violence  and  its  duration,  for  the 
length  of  three  days  does  not  make  it  natural,  since 
the  severe  storms  are  always  very  brief.  Perhaps 
the  three  days  was  the  limit,  as  about  the  longest 
period  that  the  people  could  exist  without  leaving 
their  houses.  It  has  been  supposed  that  this  plague 
rather  caused  a  supernatural  terror  than  actual 
suffering  and  loss,  but  this  is  by  no  means  certain. 
The  impossibility  of  moving  about,  and  the  natural 
fear  of  darkness  which  affects  beasts  and  birds  as  well 
as  men,  as  in  a  total  eclipse,  would  have  caused  suffer 
ing,  and  if  the  plague  were  a  sandstorm  of  unequalled 
severity,  it  would  have  produced  the  conditions  of 
fever  by  its  parching  heat,  besides  causing  much 
distress  of  other  kinds.  An  evidence  in  favour  of 
the  wholly  supernatural  character  of  this  plague  is 
its  preceding  the  last  judgment  of  all,  the  death  of 
the  firstbon,  as  though  it  were  a  terrible  fore 
shadowing  of  that  great  calamitv. 


PLAGUES,  THE  TEN 

10.  The  Death  of  the  Firstborn.  —  Before  the 
tenth  plague  Moses  went  to  warn  Pharaoh.  "  Ai-.J 
Moses  said,  Thus  saith  the  LORD,  About  midnight 
will  I  go  out  into  the  midst  of  Egypt :  and  all  th' 
firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt  shall  die,  from  tnc 
firstborn  of  Pharaoh  that  sitteth  upon  his  throne, 
even  unto  the  firstborn  of  the  maidservant  that  [isj 
behind  the  mill ;  and  all  the  firstborn  of  beasts. 
And  there  shall  be  a  great  cry  throughout  all  th.3 
land  of  Egypt,  such  as  there  was  none  like  it,  nor 
shall  be  like  it  any  more."  He  then  foretells  that 
Pharaoh's  servants  would  pray  him  to  go  forth. 
Positive  as  is  this  declaration,  it  seems  tc  have  been 
a  conditional  warning,  for  we  read,  "  And  he  went 
out  from  Pharaoh  in  heat  of  anger,"  and  it  is  added, 
that  God  said  that  Pharaoh  would  not  hearken  to 
Moses,  and  that  the  king  of  Egypt  still  refused  to 
let  Israel  go  (xi.  4-10).  The  passover  was  then 
instituted,  and  the  houses  of  the  Israelites  sprinkled 
with  the  blood  of  the  victims.  The  firstborn  of  the 
Egyptians  were  smitten  at  midnight,  as  Moses  had 
forewarned  Pharaoh.  "  And  Pharaoh  rose  up  in 
the  night,  he,  and  all  his  servants,  and  all  the 
Egyptians ;  and  there  was  a  great  cry  in  Egypt ; 
for  [there  was]  not  a  house  where  [there  was]  not 
one  dead"  (xii.  30).  The  clearly  miraculous  nature 
of  this  plague,  in  its  severity,  its  falling  upon  man 
and  beast,  and  the  singling  out  of  the  firstborn,  puts 
it  wholly  beyond  comparison  with  any  natural  pesti 
lence,  even  the  severest  recorded  in  history,  whether 
of  the  peculiar  Egyptian  Plague,  or  other  like  epi 
demics.  The  Bible  affords  a  parallel  in  the  smiting 
of  Sennacherib's  army,  and  still  more 'closely  in 
some  of  the  punishments  of  murmurers  in  the  wil 
derness.  The  prevailing  customs  of  Egypt  furnished 
a  curious  illustration  of  the  narrative  of  this  plague 
to  the  writer.  "  It  is  well  known  that  many  ancient 
Egyptian  customs  are  yet  observed.  Among  these 
one  of  the  most  prominent  is  the  wailing  for  the 
dead  by  the  women  of  the  household,  as  well  as 
those  hired  to  mourn.  In  the  great  cholera  of 
1848  I  was  at  Cairo.  This  pestilence,  as  we  all 
know,  frequently  follows  the  course  of  rivers. 
Thus,  on  that  occasion,  it  ascended  the  Nile,  and 
showed  itself  in  great  strength  at  Boolak,  the  port 
of  Cairo,  distant  from  the  city  a  mile  and  a  half  to 
the  westward.  For  some  days  it  did  not  traverse 
this  space.  Every  evening  at  sunset,  it  was  oui 
custom  to  go  up  to  the  terrrce  on  the  roof  of  our 
house.  There,  in  that  calm  still  time,  I  heard  each 
night  the  wail  of  the  women  of  Boolak  *x>r  their 
dead  borne  along  in  a  great  wave  of  tcuna  a  dis 
tance  of  two  miles,  the  lamentation  of  a  city  stricken 
with  pestilence.  So,  when  the  firstborn  were  smitten, 
'  there  was  a  great  cry  in  Egypt.' " 

The  history  of  the  ten  plagues  strictly  ends 
with  the  death  of  the  firstborn.  The  pursuit  and 
the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  are  discussed  elsewhere. 
[Exonus,  THE;  RED  SEA,  PASSARI*.  OF.]  Here 
it  is  only  necessary  to  notice  that  with  the  event 
last  mentioned  the  recital  of  the  wonders  wrought 
in  Egypt  concludes,  and  the  histoiy  of  Israel  as  B 
separate  people  begins. 

Having  examined  the  narrative  of  the  ten  plagues, 
we  can  now  speak  of  their  general  character. 

In  the  first  place,  we  have  constantly  kept  in 
view  the  arguments  of  those  who  hold  that  the 
plagues  were  not  miraculous,  and,  while  fully  ad 
mitting  all  the  illustration  that  the  physical  histoi-j 
of  Egypt  has  afforded  us,  both  in  our  own  observa 
tion  and  the  observation  of  othei-s,  we  have  f'o.Uid 
no  reason  for  the  naturalistic  view  in  a  single  in- 


PLAGUES.  THE  TEN 

tancc,  while  in  many  instances  the  illustrations  from 
known  phenomena  have  been  so  different  as  to 
bring  out  the  miraculous  element  in  the  narrative 
with  the  greatest  force,  and  in  every  case  that 
element  has  been  necessary,  unless  the  nan-ative  be 
deprived  of  its  rights  as  historical  evidence.  Yet 
more,  we  have  found  that  the  advocates  of  a  na 
turalistic  explanation  have  been  forced  by  their  bias 
into  a  distortion  and  exaggeration  of  natural  phe 
nomena  in  their  endeavour  to  find  in  them  an  expla 
nation  of  the  wonders  recorded  in  the  Bible. 

In  the  examination  we  have  made  it  will  have 
been  seen  that  the  Biblical  narrative  has  been  illus 
trated  by  reference  to  the  phenomena  of  Egypt  and 
the  manners  of  the  inhabitants,  and  that,  through 
out,  its  accuracy  in  minute  particulars  has  been 
remarkably  shown,  to  a  degi-ee  that  is  sufficient  of 
itself  to  prove  its  historical  truth.  This  in  a  nar 
rative  of  wonders  is  of  no  small  importance. 

Respecting  the  character  of  the  plagues,  they  were 
evidently  nearly  all  miraculous  in  time  of  occurrence 
and  degree  rather  than  essentially,  in  accordance  with 
the  theory  that  God  generally  employs  natural  means 
in  producing  miraculous  effects.  They  seem  to  have 
been  sent  as  a  series  of  warnings,  each  being  some 
what  more  severe  than  its  predecessor,  to  which  we 
see  an  analogy  in  the  warnings  which  the  provi 
dential  government  of  the  world  often  put*  before 
the  sinner.  The  first  plague  corrupted  the  sweet 
water  of  the  Nile  and  slew  the  fish.  The  second 
filled  the  land  with  frogs,  which  corrupted  the 
whole  country.  The  third  covered  man  and  beast 
with  vermin  or  other  annoying  insects.  The  fourth 
was  of  the  same  kind  and  probably  a  yet  severer 
judgment.  With  the  fifth  plague,  the  murrain  of 
be.ists,  a  loss  of  property  began.  The  sixth,  the 
plague  of  boils,  was  worse  than  the  earlier  plagues 
that  had  atlected  man  and  beast.  The  seventh 
plague,  that  of  hail,  exceeded  those  that  went 
before  it,  since  it  destroyed  everything  in  the  field, 
man  and  beast  and  herb.  The  eighth  plague  was 
evidently  still  more  grievous,  since  the  devastation 
by  locusts  must  have  been  far  more  thorough  than 
that  by  the  hail,  and  since  at  that  time  no  greater 
calamity  of  the  kind  could  have  happened  than 
the  destruction  of  all  remaining  vegetable  food.  ! 
The  ninth  plague  we  do  not  sufficiently  understand  j 
to  be  sure  that  it  exceeded  this  in  actual  injury,  , 
but  it  is  clear  from  the  narrative  that  it  must  have 
caused  great  terror.  The  last  plague  is  the  only 
out  that  was  general  in  the  destruction  of  human 
life,  for  the  effects  of  the  hail  cannot  have  been 
comparable  to  those  it  produced,  and  it  completes 
the  climax,  unless  indeed  it  be  held  that  the  passage 
of  the  Red  Sea  was  the  crowning  point  of  the  whole 
series  of  wonders,  rather  than  a  separate  miracle. 
In  this  case  its  magnitude,  as  publicly  destroying 
the  king  and  his  whole  army,  might  even  surpass 
that  of  the  tenth  plague. 

The  gradual  increase  in  severity  of  the  plagues 
is  perhaps  the  best  key  to  their  meaning.  They 
seem  to  have  been  sent  as  warnings  to  the  oppressor, 
to  afford  him  a  means  of  seeing  God's  will  and  an 
opportunity  of  repenting  before  Egypt  was  ruined. 
It  is  true  that  the  hardening  of  Pharaoh's  heart  is 


PLAINS 


869 


a  mystery  which  St.  Paul  leaves  unexplained,  an 
sweriug  the  objector,  "  Nay  but,  0  nuvi,  who  art 
thou  thai  repliest  against  God  ?"  (Rom.  is.  20). 
Yet  the  Apostle  is  arguing  that  we  have  no  right 
to  question  God's  righteousness  for  not  having  mercy 
on  all,  and  speaks  of  His  long-suffering  towards  tho 
wicked.  The  lesson  that  Pharaoh's  career  teache? 
us  seems  to  be,  that  there  are  men  whom  the  most 
signal  judgments  do  not  affect  so  as  to  cause  any 
lasting  repentance.  In  this  respect  the  after-history 
of  the  Jewish  people  is  a  commentary  upon  that  of 
their  oppressor.  [R.  S.  P.j 

PLAINS.  This  one  term  does  duty  in  the 
Authorised  Version  for  no  less  than  seven  distinct 
Hebrew  words,  each  of  which  had  its  own  inde 
pendent  and  individual  meaning,  and  could  not  be — 
at  least  is  not — interchanged  with  any  other ;  some 
of  them  are  proper  names  exclusively  attached  to  one 
spot,  and  one  has  not  the  meaning  of  plain  at  all. 

1.  Abel  "•  (yDN).     This  word   perhaps  answers 

more  nearly  to  our  word  "  meadow "  than  any 
other,  its  root  having,  according  to  Gesenius,  the 
force  of  moisture  like  that  of  grass.  It  occurs  in 
the  names  of  ABEL-MAIM.  ABEL-MEHOLAH,  ABEL- 
SHITTIM,  and  is  rendered  "  plain"  in  Judg.  xi.  33, 
"  plain  of  vineyards." 

2.  Bik'dh  (nyp3).  From  a  root  signifying  "  to 
cleave  or  rend  "  (Gesen.  Thes.  232 ;  Fiirst,  Handwb. 
i.  212).     Fortunately  we  are  able  to  identify  the 
most  remarkable  of  the  Bikahs  of  the  Bible,  and 
thus  to  ascertain  the  force  of  the  term.     The  great 
Plain  or  Valle/  of  Coele-Syria,  the  "  hollow  land  " 
of  the  Greeks,   which   separates   the   two   ranges 
of  Lebanon  and  Antilebanon,  is  the  most  remark 
able  of  them  all.     It  is  called  in  the  Bible  the 
Bika'ath  Aven  (Am.  i.  5),  and  also  probably  the 
Bika'ath  Lebanon  (Josh.  xi.  17,  xii.  7)  and  Bika'ath- 
Mizpeh  (xi.  8),    and   is   sti)l    known   throughout 
Syria  by  its  old  name,  as  el-Bekaa,  or  Ard  el- 
BekcCa.     "  A  long  valley,  though  broad,"  says  Dr. 
Pusey  (Comment,  on  Am.  i.  5),  "if  seen  from  a 
height  looks  like  a  cleft ;"  and  this  i<,  eminently 
the  case  with  the  •'  Valley  of  Lebanon  "  when  ap 
proached   by  the   ordinary   roads   from   north   or 
south  .b     It  is  of  great  extent,  more  than  60  miles 
long  by  about  5  in  average  breadth,  and  the  two 
great  ranges  shut  it  in  on  either  hand,  Lebanon 
especially,  with  a  very  wall-like  appearance.     Not 
unlike  it  in  this  effect   is  the   Jordan  Valley  at 
Jericho,  which  appears  to  be  once  mentioned  under 
the  same  title  in  Deut.  xxxiv.  3  (A.  V.  "  the  valley 
of  Jericho  ")      This,  however,  is  part  of  the  Arabah, 
the  proper  name  of  the  Jordan  Valley.     Besides 
these  the  "plain  of  Megiddo"  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  22, 
Zech.  xii.  11,  A.  V.  "  valley  of  M.")  and  "the  plain 
of  Ono"  (Neh.  vi.  2)  have  not  been  identified. 

Out  of  Palestine  we  find  denoted  by  the  word 
Bik'aJi  "the  plain  in  the  land  of  Shinar"  (Gen. 
xi.  2),  the  "  plain  of  Mesopotamia"  (Ez.  iii.  22,  2.'i, 
viii.  4,  xxxvii.  1 ,  2),  and  the  "  plain  in  the  province 
of  Dura"  (Dan.  iii.  1). 

Bik'dh  perhaps  appears,  with  other  Arabic* 
words,  in  Spanish  as  Vega,  a  term  applied  to  well- 


»  An  entirely  different  word  in  Hebrew  (though  iden-  carmenes,  a  term  derived  through  the  Arabic  from  the 

tlcal  in  English)  from  the  name  of  the  son  of  Adam,  Hebrew  cerem,    a   vineyard,    a    rich    spot  —  a  Camiel 

vhich  is  Hebel.  Another  Semitic  word  naturalized  In  Spain  is  Seville  (see 

o  for  instance,  from  the  mountain  between  Zebdany  further  down,  No.  6).   But  indeed  they  are  most  numerou*. 

and  Haalbec,  half  an  hour  past  the  Roman  bridge.  For  other  examples  see  Glossaire  dug  Mots 

c  For  instance,  the  farm-houses  which  "  sparkle  amid  dei'i-jft  dc  I'Arabc,  par  Knee- Imomi,  I^cydtn,  1801, 
On  eternal  verdure  of  the  Vega  o  Granada''  arc  calloJ 


390 


PLAINS 


watered  valleys  between  hills  (Ford,  Hamdbk.  sect 
iii.),  and  especially  to  the  valley  of  Granada,  thr 
most  extensive  and  most  fmrtfu!  of  them  all,  o 
which  the  Moore  were  acr.ustomec  to  boast  that  it 
was  larger  and  richer  than  the  Ghuttah,  the  Oasi 
of  Damascus. 

3.  Hac-Cicc&r  (133H).    This,  though  applied 
to  a  plain,  has  not  (if  the  lexicographers  are  right) 
the  force  of  flatness  or  extent,  but  rather  seems  to 
be  derived  from  a  root  signifying  roundness.    In  its 
topographical  sense  (for  it  has  other  meanings,  such 
;is  a  coin,  a  cake,  or  flat  loaf)  it  is  confined  to  the 
Joi-dan  valley.     This  sense  it  bears  in  Gen.  xiii.  10, 
11,  12,  xix.  17,  25-29;  Deut.  xxxiv.  3;  2  Sain, 
iviii.  23;  1  K.  vii.  46;  2  Chr.  iv.  17;  Neh.  iii. 
22,  xii.  28.     The  LXX.  translate  it  by  irfpixu 
and  -xfploiKos,  the  former  of  which  is  often  found 
in  the  N.  T.,  where  the  English  reader  is  familiar 
with  it  as  "  the  region  round  about."     It  must  be 
confessed  that  it  is  not  easy  to  trace  any  connexion 
between  a  "  circular  form "   and   the   nature   or 
aspect  of  the  Jordan  valley,  and  it  is  difficult  not 
to  suspect  that  Ciccar  is  an  archaic  term  which 
existed  before  the  advent  of  the  Hebrews,  and  was 
afterwards  adopted  into  their  language. 

4.  Ham-Mishor  (liB»lSn).  This  is  by  the  lexi 
cographers  explained  as  meaning  "  straightforward," 
"  plain,"  as  if  from  the  root  ydshar,  to  be  just  or 
upright ;  but  this  seems  far-fetched,  and  it  is  more 
probable  that  in  this  case  also  we  have  an  archaic 
term  existing  from  a  pre-historic  date.     It  occurs 
in  the  Bible  in  the  following  passages: — Deut.  iii. 
10,  iv.  43 ;  Josh.  xiii.  9,  16,  17,  21,  xx.  8 ;   1  K. 
xx.  23,  25;  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10;  Jer.  xlviii.  8,  21. 
In  each  of  these,  with  one  exception,  it  is  used  for 
the  district  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Heshbon  and 
Dibou — the  Belka.  of  the  modern  Arabs,  their  most 
noted  pasture-ground ;  a  district  which,  from  the 
scanty  descriptions  we  possess  of  it,  seems  to  re 
semble  the  "  Downs  "  of  our  own  country  in  the 
regularity  of  its  undulations,  the  excellence  of  its 
turf,  and  its  fitness  for  the  growth  of  flocks.    There 
is  no  difficulty  in  recognising  the  same  district  in 
the  statement  of  2  Chr.  xxvi.  10.    It  is  evident  from 
several  circumstances  that  Uzziah  had  been  a  great 
conqueror  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  as  well  as  on  the 
shore  of  the  Mediterranean  (see  Ewald's  remarks, 
Geschichte,  iii.  588  note),  and  he  kept  his  cattle  on 
the  rich  pastures  of  Philistines  on  the  one  hand, 
and  Ammonites  on  the  other.      Thus  in  all  the 
passages  quoted  above  the  word  Mishor  seems  to 
be  restricted  to  one  special  district,  and  to  belong 
to  it  as  exclusively  as  Shefelah  did  to  the  low  land 
of  Philistia,  or  Arabah  to  the  sunken  district  of  the 
Jordan  valley.    And  therefore  it  is  puzzling  to  find 
it  used  in  one  passage  (1  K.  xx,  23,  25)  apparently 
with  the  mere  general  sense  of  low  land,  or  rather 
flat  land,  in  which  chariots  could  be  manoeuvred — 
as  opposed  to  uneven  mountainous  ground.    There  is 
some  reason  to  believe  that  the  scene  of  the  battle  in 
question  was  on  the  east  side  of  the  Sea  of  Gennesa- 
reth  in  the  plain  of  Jaulan  ;  but  this  is  no  explana 
tion  of  the  difficulty,  because  wo  are  not  warranted 
in  extending  the  Mishor  further  than  the  mountains 
which  bounded  it  on  the  north,  and  where  the  dis 
tricts  began  which  bore,  like  it,  their  own  distinc 
tive  names  of  Gilead,  Bashan,  Argob,  Golan,  Hauran, 
v'i.-j      Perhaps  the  most  feasible  explanation  is  that 


•'  Jerome,  again,  probably  followed  theTargum  orotber 
Jewish  authorities,  and  they  usually  employ  the  rendtr- 
iUK  ibove  mentioned.  J-'Urst  alone  endeavours  to  find  a 


PLAINS 

the  word  was  used  by  the  Syrians  of 
without  any  knowledge  of  its  strict  signification, 
in  the  same  manner  indeed  that  it  n-as  employed 
in  the  later  Syro-Chaldee  dialect,  in  which  tnesJirc 
is  the  favourite  tenn  to  express  several  natura. 
features  which  in  the  older  and  stricter  language 
were  denominated  each  by  its  own  special  name. 

5.  Ha-Ardb&h  (!"Q"1JJn).     This  again  had   an 

absolutely  definite  meaning — being  restricted  to  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan,  and  to  its  continuation  south 
of  the  Dead  Sea.  [See  ARABAH,  vol.  i.  87,  88  ;  and 
for  a  description  of  the  aspect  of  the  region,  PALM- 
TINE,  vol.  ii.  674,  675.]  No  doubt  the  Arubah 
was  the  most  remarkable  plain  of  the  Holy  Land — 
but  to  render  it  by  so  general  and  common  a  term  (as 
our  translators  have  done  in  the  majority  of  cases), 
is  materially  to  diminish  its  force  and  significance 
in  the  narrative.  This  is  equally  the  case  with 

6.  Ha-Shefelah  (n?Bt^n),  the  invariable  desig 
nation  of  the  depressed,  flat  or  gently  undulating, 
region  which  intervened  between  the  highlands  of 
Judah  and  the  Mediterranean,  and  was  commonly 
in  possession  of  the  Philistines.  [PALESTINE,  672  ; 
SEPHELA.]     To  the  Hebrews  this,  and  this  only, 
was  The  Shefelah  ;  and  to  have  spoken  of  it  by  any 
more  general  term  would  have  been  as  impossible  as 
for  natives  of  the  Carse  of  Stirling  or  the  Weald  cf 
Kent  to  designate  them  differently.     Shefelah  has 
some  claims  of  its  own  to  notice.    It  was  one  of  the 
most  tenacious  of  these  old  Hebrew  terms.     It  ap 
pears  in  the  Greek  text  and  in  the  Authorised  Ver- 
;ion  of  the  Book  of  Maccabees  (1  Mace.  xii.  38), 

and  is  preserved  on  each  of  its  other  occurrences, 
even  in  such  corrupt  dialects  as  the  Samaritan  Ver 
sion  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  Targums  of  Pseudo- 
Jonathan,  and  of  Rabbi  Joseph.  And  although  it 
would  appear  to  be  no  longer  known  in  its  original 
seat,  it  has  transferred  itself  to  other  countries,  and 
appears  in  Spain  as  Seville,  and  on  the  east  coast  of 
Africa  as  Sofala. 

*  -L 

7.  Eton   (p/K).      Our   translators   have   uni 
formly  rendered  this  word  "  plain,"  doubtless  follow- 

ng  the  Vulgate,*  which  in  about  half  the  passages 
has  convallis.  But  this  is  not  the  verdict  of  the  ma 
jority  or  the  most  trustworthy  of  the  ancient  ver 
sions.  They  regard  the  word  as  meaning  an  "  oak  *" 
or  "  grove  of  oaks,"  a  rendering  supported  by  all,  or 
nearly  all,  the  coir.rnentators  and  lexicographers  of 
the  present  day.  It  has  the  advantage  also  of  being 
much  more  picturesque,  and  throws  a  new  light  (tc 
'.he  English  reader)  over  many  an  incident  in  the 
ives  of  the  Patriarchs  and  early  heroes  of  the  Bible. 
The  passages  in  which  the  word  occurs  erroneously 
translated  "  plain,"  are  as  follows: — Plain  of  Moreh 
Gen.  xii.  6 ;  Deut.  xi.  30),  Plain  of  Mam  re  (Gen. 
xiii.  18,  xiv.  13  ;  xviii.  1),  Plain  of  Zaanaim  (Judg. 
v.  11),  Plain  of  the  Pillar  (Judg.  ix.  6),  Plain  of 
Meonenim  (ix.  37),  Plain  of  Tabor  (1  Sam.  x.  3). 

8.  The  Plain  of  Esdraelon  which  to  the  modern 
;raveller  in  the  Holy  Land  forms  the  third  of  iti 
.hree  most  remarkable  depressions,  is  designated  in 
he  original  by  neither  of  the  above  terms,  but  by 

emek,  an  appellative  noun  frequently  employed  in 
he  Bible  for  the  smaller  valleys  of  the  conn- 
try — "the  valley  of  Jezreel."  Perhaps  Esdraelon 
may  anciently  have  been  considered  as  consisting 
of  two  portions  ;  the  Valley  of  Jezreel  the  Eastern 


eason  for  It— not  a  satisfactory  ona  :  ••  because  trees  fre- 
[ucnt  plains  or  meadows"  (Eandwb.  1.  906). 


PLASTER 

and  smaller,  the  Plain  of  Megiddo  the  Western  and 
more  extensive  of  the  two.  [G.] 

PLASTER.'  The  mode  of  making  plaster- 
cement  has  been  described  above.  [MORTER.] 
Plaster  is  mentioned  thrice  in  Scripture:  1.  (Lev. 
xiv.  *2,  48),  where  when  a  house  was  infected 
with  "  leprosy,"  the  priest  was  ordered  to  take 
away  the  portion  of  infected  wall  and  re-plaster  it 
(Michaelis,  Laws  of  Moses,  §211,  iii.  297-305,  ed. 
Smith).  [HOUSE;  LEPROSY.]. 

2.  The  words  of  the  law  were  ordered  to  be  en-, 
graved  on  Mount  Ebiil  on  stones  which  had  been 
previously  coated  with  plaster  (Deut.  xxvii.  2,  4; 
Josh.  viii.  32).     The  process  here  mentioned  was 
probably  of  a  similar  kind  to  that  adopted  in  Egypt 
for  receiving  bas-reliefs.     The  wall  was  first  made 
smooth,  and  its  interstices,  if  necessary,  filled  up 
with  plaster.     When  the  figures  had  been  drawn, 
and  the  stone  adjacent  cut  away  so  as  to  leave  them 
iii  relief,  a  coat  of  lime  whitewash  was  laid  on,  and 
followed  by  one  of  varnish  after  the  painting  of  the 
figures  was  complete.     In  the  case  of  the  natural 
rock  the  process  was  nearly  the  same.     The  ground 
was  covered  with  a  thick  layer  of  fine  plaster,  con 
sisting  of  lime  and  gypsum  carefully  smoothed  and 
polished.     Upon  this  a  coat  of  lime  whitewash  was 
laid,  and  on  it  the  colours  were  painted,  and  set  by 
meiius  of  glue  or  wax.     The  whitewash  appears  in 
most  instances  to  have  been  made  of  shell-limestone 
not  much  burnt,  which  of  itself  is  tenacious  enough 
without    glue   or   other    binding    material   (Long, 
quoting  from  Belzoni,  Eg.  Ant.  ii.  49-50). 

At  Behistun  in  Persia,  the  surface  of  the  inscribed 
rock-tablet  was  covered  with  a  varnish  to  preserve 
it  from  weather ;  but  it  seems  likely  that  in  the 
case  of  the  Ebal  tablets  the  inscription  was  cut 
while  the  plaster  was  still  moist  (Layard,  Nineveh, 
ii.  188  ;  Vaux,  Nin.  $  Persep.  p.  172). 

3.  It  was  probably  a  similar  coating  of  cement, 
on  which  the  fatal  letters  were  traced  by  the  mystic 
hand  "  on  the  plaster  of  the  wall  "  of  Belshazzar's 
(Xiluce  at  Babylon  (Dan.  v.  5).    We  here  obtain  an 
incidental   confirmation  of  the  Biblical  narrative. 
For  while  at  Nineveh  the  walls  are  panelled  with 
ilabaster  slabs,  at  Babylon,  where  no  such  mate 
rial  is  found,  the  builders  were  content  to  cover 
their  tiles  or  bricks  with  enamel  or  stucco,  fitly 
termed  plaster,  fit  for  receiving  ornamental  designs 
(Lavard,    Nin.    and  Bab.  p.  529;    Diod.  ii.  8). 
[BRICKS.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

PLEIADES.  The  Heb.  word  (PlD'3,  dmali) 
so  rendered  occurs  in  Job  ix.  9,  xxxviii.  31,  and 
Am.  v.  8.  In  the  last  passage  our  A.  V.  has  "  the 
seven  stars,"  although  the  Geneva  version  translates 
the  word  "  Pleiades  "  as  in  the  other  cases.  In  Job 
the  LXX.  has  Tl\fids,  the  order  of  the  Hebrew 
words  having  been  altered  [see  ORION],  while  in 
Amos  there  is  no  trace  of  the  original,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  imagine  what  the  translators  had  before 
them.  The  Vulgate  in  each  passage  has  a  different 
rendering:  Hyades  in  Job  ix.  9,  Pleiades  in  Job 
xxxviii.  31,  and  Arcturus  in  Am.  v.  8.  Of  the 
other  versions  the  Peshito-Syriacand  Chaldee  merely 
adopt  the  Hebrew  word;  Aquila  in  Job  xxxviii., 
Svmmachus  in  Job  xxxviii.  and  Amos,  and  Theo- 
dotion  in  Amos  give  "  Pleiades,"  while  with  re 
markable  inconsistency  Aquila  in  Amos  has  "  Arc- 

8  1.  13,  Tf  Ch.  NTS  ;  Kovia;  calx.    In  Is.  xxvii. 9, 
'  chalk-stone." 
2.  "1*8?     KO-'ia;  calx. 


PLEIADES 


8S1 


turus."  The  Jewish  commeiitato/s  are  no  less  al 
variance.  R.  David  Kimchi  in  his  Lexicon  says 
"  R.  Jonah  wrote  that  it  was  a  collection  of  stirs 
called  in  Arabic  Al  Thuraiya.  And  the  w?<*>  Rabin 
Abraham  A  ben  Ezra,  of  blessed  memory,  wrote  tha 
the  ancients  said  Cimah  is  seven  stars,  and  the* 
are  at  the  end  of  the  constellation  Aries,  and  those 
which  are  seen  are  six.  And  he  wrote  that  what 
was  right  in  his  eyes  was  that  it  was  a  single  star, 
and  that  a  great  one,  which  is  called  the  left  '-ye  of 
Taurus  ;  and  Cesil  is  a  great  star,  the  heart  of  the 
constellation  Scorpio."  On  Job  xxxviii.  31 ,  Kimchi 
continues :  "  Our  Rabbis  of  blessed  memcry  have 
said  (Berachoth,  58,  2),  Cimah  hath  great  cold 
and  bindeth  up  the  fruits,  and  Cesil  hath  great 
heat  and  ripeneth  the  fruits :  therefore  He  said,  '  or 
loosen  the  bands  of  Cesil,'  for  it  openeth  the  fruits 
and  bringeth  them  forth."  In  addition  to  the  evi 
dence  of  R.  Jonah,  who  identifies  the  Hebrew 
cimdh  with  the  Arabic  Al  Thuraiyd,  we  have  the 
testimony  of  R.  Isaac  Israel,  quoted  by  Hyde  in 
his  notes  on  the  Tables  of  Ulugh  Beigh  (pp.  31-33, 
ed.  1665)  to  the  same  effect.  That  Al  Thuraiija 
and  the  Pleiades  are  the  same  is  proved  by  the 
words  of  Aben  Ragel  (quoted  by  Hyde,  p.  33): 
"  Al  Thuraijrft  is  the  mansion  of  the  moon,  in  the 
sign  Taurus,  and  it  is  called  the  celestial  hen  with  hei 
chickens."  With  this  Hyde  compares  the  Fr.  pnl- 
siniere,  and  Eng.  Hen  and  chickens,  which  are  old 
names  for  the  same  stars  :  and  Niebuhr  (Descr.  de 
I' Arabie,  p.  101)  gives  as  the  result  of  his  inquiry 
of  the  Jew  at  Sana,  "  Kimeh,  Pleiades,  qu'on  ap- 
pelle  aussi  en  Allemagne  la  poule  qui  glousse." 
The  "Ancients,"  whom  Aben  Ezra  quotes  (on  Job 
xxxviii.  31),  evidently  understood  by  the  seven 
small  .stars  at  the  end  of  the  constellation  Aries  the 
Pleiades,  which  are  indeed  in  the  left  shoulder  of 
the  Bull,  but  so  near  the  Rain's  tail,  that  their 
position  might  properly  be  defined  with  reference 
to  it.  With  the  statement  that  "  those  which  are 
seen  are  six"  may  be  compared  the  words  of  Didy- 
mus  on  Homer,  T.UV  5e  IIAeiaoW  ovtriav  eTrrck, 
irdvv  a/xoupby  6  ej85o/tos  acrrrip,  and  of  Ovid 
(Fast.  iv.  170)— 

"  Quae  septem  dlci,  sex  taraen  esse  sclent." 

The  opinion  of  Aben  Ezra  himself  has  been  fre 
quently  misrepresented.  He  held  that  Cimdfi  was 
a  single  large  star,  Aldebaran  the  brightest  of  the 
Hyades,  while  Cesil  [A.  V.  "  Orion  "]  was  Antares 
the  heart  of  Scorpio.  "  When  theee  rise  in  the 
east,"  he  continues,  "  the  effects  which  are  recorded 
appear."  He  describes  them  as  opposite  each  other 
and  the  difference  in  Right  Ascension  between  Al 
debaran  and  Antares  is  as  nearly  as  possible  twelve 
hours.  The  belief  of  Aben  Ezra  had  probably  the 
same  origin  as  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate,  Hyades. 

One  other  point  is  deserving  of  notice.  The 
Rabbis  as  quoted  by  Kimchi,  attribute  to  Cimdh 
great  cold  and  the  property  of  checking  vegetation, 
while  Cesil  works  the  contrary  effects.  But  the 
words  of  R.  Isaac  Israel  on  Job  xxxviii.  31  (quoted 
by  Hyde,  p.  72),  are  just  the  reverse.  He  says, 
"  the  stars  have  operations  in  the  ripening  of  the 
fruits,  and  such  is  the  operation  of  Cirndli.  And 
some  of  them  retard  and  delay  the  fruits  from  ripen 
ing,  and  this  is  the  operation  of  Cesil.  The  inter 
pretation  is,  «  Wilt  thou  bind  the  fruits  which  the 
constellation  Ci,inali  ripeueth  and  openeth  ;  or  wilt 
thou  open  the  fruits  which  the  constellation  C«,ii 
contracteth  aiiii  bindeth  up?'" 

On  thn  whole  then,  though  it   is  imporaable  fe 


892 


PLEDGE 


Arrive  at  any  certain  conclusion  it  appears  that  our 
translators  were  perfectly  justified  in  rendering 
CirnAh  by  "  Pleiades."  The  "  seven  stains"  in  Amos 
clearly  denoted  the  same  cluster  in  the  language  of 
the  17th  century,  for  Cotgrave  in  his  French  Dic 
tionary  gives  "  Pleiade,  f.,  one  of  the  seven  stars." 

Hyde  maintained  that  the  Pleiades  were  again 
mentioned  in  Scripture  by  the  name  SucCoth  Be- 
noth.  The  discussion  of  this  question  must  be 
reserved  to  the  Article  on  that  name. 

The  etymology  of  cimdh  is  referred  to  the  Arab. 

-    j 

SLo»J  ,  "  a  heap,"  as  being  a  heap  or  cluster  of 
stars.  The  full  Arabic  name  given  by  Gesenins  is 

Z~3        3  O^ 


JOlC,  "  the  knot  of  the  Pleiades  ;"  and,  in 
accordance  with  this,  most  modem  commentator 
render  Job  xxxviii.  31,  "Is  it  thou  that  bindest 
the  knots  of  the  Pleiades,  or  loosenest  the  bands  of 
Orion?"  Simonis  (Lex.  Hebr.)  quotes  the  Green 
land  name  for  this  cluster  of  stars,  "  Killukturset, 
i.  e.  Stellas  colligatas,"  as  an  instance  of  the  existence 
of  the  same  idea  in  a  widely  different  language. 
The  rendering  "  sweet  influences"  of  the  A.  V.  is  a 
relic  of  the  lingering  belief  in  the  power  which  the 
stai-s  exerted  over  human  destiny.  The  marginal 
note  0:1  the  word  "  Pleiades  "  in  the  Geneva  Version 
is,  "  which  starres  arise  when  the  sunne  is  in  Taurus, 
which  is  the  -spring  tyme,  and  bring  flowers,"  thus 
agreeing  with  the  explanation  of  K.  Isaac  Israel 
quoted  above. 

For  authorities,  in  addition  to  those  already 
refeired  to,  see  Michaelis  (Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Hebr. 
No.  1136),  Simonis  (Lex.  ffebr.),  and  Gesenius 
(Thesaurus}.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PLEDGE.    [LOAN.] 

PLOUGH.    [AGRICULTURE.] 

POCHER'ETH  (rnDb:  *aXfpd0  ;  Alex. 
taKfpde  in  Ezr.,  QaKapj.6  ;  Alex.  *ax<xpd0  in 
Nch.  :  P/wchereth).  The  children  of  Pochereth  of 
Zebaim  were  among  the  children  of  Solomon's  ser 
vants  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  ii. 
57  ;  Neh.  vii.  59).  He  is  called  in  1  Esd.  v.  34, 
PHACARETH. 

POETRY,  HEBREW.  The  subject  of  Hebrew 
Poetry  has  been  treated  at  great  length  by  many 
writers  of  the  last  three  centuries,  but  the  results 
of  their  speculations  have  been,  in  most  instances, 
in  an  inverse  ratio  to  their  length.  That  such 
would  be  the  case  might  have  been  foretold  as  a 
natural  consequence  of  their  method  of  investiga 
tion.  In  the  16th  and  17th  centuries  the  influence 
of  classical  studies  upon  the  minds  of  the  learned 
was  so  great  as  to  imbue  them  with  the  belief  that 
the  writers  of  Greece  and  Rome  were  the  models  of 
all  excellence,  and  consequently,  when  their  learning 
and  critical  acumen  were  directed  to  the  records  of 
another  literature,  they  were  unable  to  divest  them 
selves  of  the  prejudices  of  early  education  and 
habits,  and  sought  for  the  same  excellences  which 
they  admired  in  their  favourite  models.  That  this 
has  been  the  case  with  regard  to  most  of  the  specu 
lations  on  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews,  and  that  the 
failure  of  those  speculations  is  mainly  due  to  this 
cause,  will  be  abundantly  manifest  to  any  one  who 
is  acquainted  with  the  literature  of  the  subject. 
But,  however  barren  of  results,  the  history  of  the 
various  theories  which  have  been  framed  with 
regard  to  the  external  form  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  a 


POETRY,  HEltUEW 

necessary  \Ari  of  the  present  art  irk-,  and  will 
in  some  measure  as  a  warning,  to  any  who  may 
hereafter  attempt  the  solution  of  the  problem,  what 
to  avoid.  The  attributes  which  are  common  to  all 
poetry,  and  which  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  pos 
sesses  in  a  higher  degree  perhaps  than  the  literature 
of  any  other  people,  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  de 
scribe.  But  the  points  of  contrast  are  so  numerous, 
and  the  peculiarities  which  distinguish  Hebrew 
poetry  so  remarkable,  that  these  alone  require  a 
full  and  careful  consideration.  It  is  a  phenomenon 
which  is  universally  observed  in  the  literatures  cf 
all  nations,  that  the  earliest  fonn  in  which  thf 
thoughts  and  feelings  of  a  people  find  utterance  is 
the  poetic.  Prose  is  an  aftergrowth,  the  vehicle  of 
less  spontaneous,  because  more  formal,  expression. 
And  so  it  is  in  the  literature  of  the  Hebrews.  We 
find  in  the  sober  narrative  which  tells  us  of  the 
fortunes  of  Cain  and  his  descendants  the  earliest 
known  specimen  of  poetry  on  record,  the  song  of 
Lamech  to  his  wives,  "  the  swoid  song,"  as  Herder 
terms  it,  supposing  it  to  commemorate  the  dis 
covery  of  weapons  of  war  by  his  son  Tubal-Cain. 
But  whether  it  be  a  song  of  triumph  for  the  im 
punity  which  the  wild  old  chief  might  now  enjoy 
for  his  son's  discoveiy,  or  a  lament  for  some  deed 
of  violence  of  his  own,  this  chant  of  Lamech  has 
of  itself  an  especial  interest  as  connected  with  the 
oldest  genealogical  document,  and  as  possessing  the 
characteristics  of  Hebrew  poetry  at  the  earliest 
period,  with  which  we  are  acquainted.  Its  origin 
is  admitted  by  Ewald  to  be  pre-Mosaic,  and  its 
antiquity  the  most  remote.  Its  lyrical  character 
is  consistent  with  its  early  date,  for  lyrical  poetry 
is  of  all  foims  the  earliest,  being,  as  Ewald  (Dicht. 
des  A.  B.  1  Th.  i.  §2,  p.  11)  admirably  describes 
it,  "  the  daughter  of  the  moment,  of  swift-rising 
powerful  feelings,  of  deep  stirrings  and  fiery  emo 
tions  of  the  soul."  This  first  fragment  which  has 
come  down  to  us  possesses  thus  the  eminently 
lyrical  character  which  distinguishes  the  poetry 
of  the  Hebrew  nation  from  its  earliest  existence  to 
its  decay  and  fall.  It  has  besides  the  further  cha 
racteristic  of  parallelism,  to  which  reference  will 
be  hereafter  made. 

Of  the  three  kinds  of  poetry  which  are  illustrated 
by  the  Hebrew  literature,  the  lyric  occupies  the 
foremost  place.  The  .Shemitic  nations  have  nothing 
approaching  to  nn  epic  poem,  and  in  proportion  to 
this  defect  the  lyric  element  prevailed  more  greatly, 
commencing,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  pre-Mosaic 
times,  flourishing  in  rude  vigour  during  the  earlier 
periods  of  the  Judges,  the  heroic  age  of  the  Hebrews, 
growing  with  the  nation's  growth  and  strengthening 
with  its  strength,  till  it  reached  its  highest  excellence 
in  David,  the  warrior-poet,  and  from  .thenceforth 
began  slowly  to  decline.  Gnomic  poetry  is  the 
product  of  a  more  advanced  age.  It  arises  from 
the  desire  felt  by  the  poet  to  express  the  results 
of  the  accumulated  experiences  of  life  in  a  form  of 
beauty  and  permanence.  Its  thoughtful  character 
requires  for  its  development  a  time  of  peacefulness 
and  leisure ;  for  it  gives  expression,  not  like  the 
lyric  to  the  sudden  and  impassioned  feelings  of  the 
moment,  but  to  calm  and  philosophic  reflection. 
Being  less  spontaneous  in  its  origin,  its  fcrm  is 
of  necessity  more  artificial.  The  gnomic  poetry  of 
the  Hebrews  has  not  its  measured  flow  disturbed 
by  the  shock  of  arms  or  the  tumult  of  camps;  it 
rises  silentlv,  like  the  Temple  of  old,  without,  the 
sound  of  a  wea|>on,  and  it*  groundwork  is  the  home 
'life  of  the  nation.  The  period  during  which  :t 


POETRY,  HEBUEW 

flourished  corresponds  to  its  domestic  and  settled 
character.      From   the    time    of    David    onwards 
through  the  reigns  of  the  earlier  kings,  when  the 
nation  was  quiet  and  at  peace,  or,  if  not  at  peace, 
at  least  so  firmly  fixed  in  its  acquired  territory 
that   its   wars   were    no    struggle    for    existence, 
gnomic  poetry  blossomed  arid  bare  fruit.    We  meet 
with  it  at  intervals  up  to  the  time  of  the  Captivity, 
and,  as  it  is  chiefly  characteristic  of  the  age  of  the 
monarchy,  Evyald  has  appropriately  designated  this 
era  the  "  artificial  period  "  of  Hebrew  poetry.    From 
the  end  of  the  8th  century  B.C.  the  decline  of  the 
yiatiou  was  rapid,  and  with  its  glory  departed  the 
chief  glories  of  its  literature.     The  poems  of  this 
period  are  distinguished  by  a  smoothness  of  diction 
and   an    external    polish   which    betray    tokens   of 
labour  and  art  ;  the  style  is  less  flowing  and  easy, 
and,  except  in  rare  instances,  there  is  no  dash  of 
the  ancient  vigour.     After  the  Captivity  we  have 
nothing  but  the  poems  which  formed  part  of  the 
liturgical  services  of  the  Temple.    Whether  dramatic 
poetry,  properly  so  called,  ever  existed  among  the 
Hebrews,  is,  to  say  the  least,  extremely  doubtful. 
In  the  opinion  of  some  writers  the  Song  of  Songs, 
ia  its  external  form,  is  a  rude  dr.ima,  designed  for 
a  simple  stage.     But  the  evidence  for  this  view  is 
extremely  slight,  and  no  good  and  sufficient  reasons 
have  been  adduced  which  would  lead  us  to  con 
clude  that  the  amount  of  dramatic  action  exhibited 
in  that  poem  is  more  than  would  be  involved  in  an 
animated  poetic  dialogue  iu  which  more  than  two 
persons    take   part.       Philosophy   and    the   drama 
appear  alike  to  have   been    peculiar  to  the  Indo- 
(Jermanic  nations,  and  to  have  manifested  them 
selves    among   the    Shemitic   tribes   only   in  their 
crudest  and  most  simple  form. 

I.  Lyrical  Poctri/.  —  The  literature  of  the  He 
brews  abounds  with  illustrations  of  all  forms  of 
lyrical  poetry,  in  its  most  manifold  and  wide- 
embracing  compass,  from  such  short  ejaculations  as 
the  songs  of  the  two  Lamechs  and  Pss.  xv.,  cxvii., 
and  others,  to  the  longer  chants  of  victory  and 
thanksgiving,  like  the  songs  of  Deborah  and  David 
(Judg.  v.,  Ps.  xviii.).  The  thoroughly  national 
character  of  all  lyrical  poetry  has  been  already 
alluded  to.  It  is  the  utterance  of  the  people's  life 
in  all  its  varied  phases,  and  expresses  all  its  most 
earnest  strivings  and  impulses.  In  proportion  as 
this  expression  is  vigorous  and  animated,  the  idea 
embodied  in  lyric  song  is  in  most  cases  narrowed 
or  rather  concentrated.  One  truth,  and  even  one 
side  of  a  truth,  is  for  the  time  invested  with  the 
greatest  prominence.  All  these  characteristics  will 
be  found  in  perfection  in  the  lyric  poetry  of  the 
Hebrews.  One  other  feature  which  distinguishes  it 
is  its  form  and  its  capability  for  being  set  to  a 
musical  accompaniment.  The  names  by  which  the 
various  kinds  of  songs  were  known  among  the 
Hebrews  will  supply  some  illustration  of  this. 

1.  'VB',  slur,  a  song  in  general,  adapted  for  the 
voice  alone. 

2.  I'lDTp,  mizmor,  which  Ewald  considers  a  lyric 
«ong,  properly  so  called,  but  whicli  rather  seems  to 
correspond  with  the  Greek  vJ/aA.jio's,  a  psalm,  or  song 
to  be  sung  with  any  instrumental  accompaniment. 

3.  flyJ3,  neginah,  which  Ewald  is  of  opinion  is 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


893 


A  lyrical  song  requiring  nice  musical  skill,  it  it 
difficult  to  give  any  more  probable  explanation. 
[MASCHIL.] 

5.  DFOO,  mictdm,  a  term  of  extremely  doubtful 
meaning*.  '  ^[MiCHTAM.] 

6.  |VaK>,  shiggdyon  (Ps.  vii.  1),  a  wild,  irreguW, 
dithyrambic  song,  as  the  word  appears  to  denote  ; 
or,  according  to  some,  a  song  to  be  sung  with  va 
riations.    The  former  is  the  more  probable  meaning. 
[SHIGGAION.]     The  plural  occurs  in  Hab.  iii.  1. 

But,  besides  these,  there  are  other  divisions  of 
lyrical  poetiy  of  great  importance,  which  have  re 
gard  rather  to  the  subject  of  the  poems  than  to  their 
form  or  adaptation  for  musical  accompaniments.  Of 
these  we  notice  :  — 

1.  n?i"jn,  tehUldh,  a  hymn  of  praise.  The 
plural  tehittim  is  the  title  of  the  Book  of  Psalms  in 
Hebrew.  The  145th  Psalm  is  entitled  "  David's 
(Psalm)  of  praise;"  and  the  subject  of  the  psalm  is 
in  accordance  with  its  title,  which  is  apparently 
suggested  by  the  concluding  verse,  "  the  praise 
of  Jehovah  my  mouth  shall  speak,  and  let  all  flesh 
bless  His  holy  name  for  ever  and  ever."  To  this 
class  belong  the  songs  which  relate  to  extraordinary 
deliverances,  such  as  the  songs  of  Moses  (Ex.  xv.) 
and  of  Deborah  (Judg.  v.),  and  the  Psalms  xviii. 
and  Ixviii.,  which  have  all  the  air  of  chants  to  be 
sung  in  triumphal  processions.  Such  were  the 
hymns  sung  in  the  Temple  services,  and  by  a  bold 
figure  the  Almighty  is  apostrophised  as  "  Thou 
that  inhabitest  the  praises  of  Israel,"  which  rose  in 
the  holy  place  with  the  fragrant  clouds  of  incense 
(Ps.  xxii.  3).  To  the  same  class  also  Ewald  let'ers 
the  shorter  poems  of  the  like  kind  with  those  already 
quoted,  such  as  Pss.  xxx.,  xxxii.,  cxxxviii.,  and  Is. 
xxxviii.,  which  relate  to  less  general  occasions,  and 
commemorate  more  special  deliverances.  The  songs 
of  victory  sung  by  the  congregation  in  the  Temple, 
as  Pss.  xlvi.,  xlviii.,  xxiv.  7-10,  which  is  a  short 
triumphal  ode,  and  Ps.  xxix.,  which  praises  Jehovah 
on  the  occasion  of  a  great  natural  phenomenon,  are 
likewise  all  to  be  classed  in  this  division  of  lyric 


poetry. 
2.  H 


Next  to  the  hymn  of  praise  may  be  noticed, 
kindti,  the  lament,  or  dirge,  of  which 


equivalent  "to  the  Greek  tf/aXjurfs,  is  more  probably  a 
uelody  expressly  adapted  for  stringed  instruments. 
4.  b'255t3,  mascil,  of  which  it  may  be  said  that 
if  Ewald's  su^o-estion  be  not  correct,  that  it  denotes 


there  are  many  examples,  whether  uttered  over  an 
individual  or  as  an  outburst  of  grief  for  the  cala 
mities  of  the  land.  The  most  touchingly  pathetic 
of  all  is  perhaps  the  lament  of  David  for  the  death 
of  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam.  i.  19-27),  in  which 
passionate  emotion  is  blended  with  touches  of  ten 
derness  of  which  only  a  strong  nature  is  capable. 
Compare  with  this  the  lament  for  Abner  (2  Sam. 
iii.  33,  34)  and  for  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xviii.  33). 
Of  the  same  character  also,  doubtless,  were  the 
songs  which  the  singing  men  and  singing  women 
spake  over  Josiah  at  his  death  (2  Chr.  xxxv.  25), 
and  the  songs  of  mourning  for  the  disasters  which 
befel  the  hapless  land  of  Judah,  of  which  Psaims 
xlix.,  lx.,  Ixjciii.,  cxxxvii.,  are  examples  (comp.  Jer. 
vii.  29,  ix.  10  [9]),  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jere 
miah  the  most  memorable  instances. 

3.  ri"P"p  "VE>,  shir  yedidoth,  a  love  song  (Ps. 

xlv.  1),  in  its  external  form  at  least.  Other  kinds 
of  poetry  there  are  which  occupy  the  middle  ground 
between  the  lyric  and  gnomic,  being  lyric  in  form 
and  spirit,  but  gnomic  in  subject.  These  may  be 
classed  as 

4.  PB'G,  mdshdl,  properly  a  similitude,  and  then 
a  parable,  or  sententious  saying,  couched  in  poetic 


894 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


language.*  Such  are  the  songs  of  Balaam  (Num. 
jixiii.  7,  18;  xxiv.  3,  15,  20,  21,  23),  which  are 
eminently  lyrical  in  character  ;  the  mocking  ballad 
in  Num.  xxi.  27-30,  which  has  been  conjectured  to 
be  a  fragment  of  an  old  Amorite  war-song  [NUM 
BERS,  p.  584  a]  ;  and  the  apologue  of  Jotham  ( Judg. 
is.  7-20),  both  which  last  are  strongly  satirical  in 
tone.  But  the  finest  of  all  is  the  magnificent  pro 
phetic  song  of  triumph  over  the  fall  of  Babylon  (Is. 
iriv.  4-27).  iWn,  chiddh,  an  enigma  (like  the 
riddle  of  Samson,  Judg.  xiv.  14),  or  "  dark  saying," 
as  the  A.  V.  has  it  in  Ps.  xlix.  5,  Ixxviii.  2.  The 
former  passage  illustrates  the  musical,  and  therefore 
lyric  character  of  these  "  dark  sayings :"  "  I  will 
incline  mine  ear  to  a  parable,  I  will  open  my  dark 
«aying  upon  the  harp."  Mashal  and  chiddJi  are 
used  as  convertible  terms  in  Ez.  xvii.  2.  Lastly, 
fa  this  class  belongs  iiy^B,  meTttsdh,  a  mocking, 
ironical  poem  (Hab.  ii.  6). 

5.  npBR,  tiphtilah,  prayer,  is  the  title  of  Pss. 
rvii.,  Ixxxvi.,  xc.,  cii.,  cxlii.,  and  Hab.  iii.  All  these 
are  strictly  lyrical  compositions,  and  the  title  may 
have  been  assigned  to  them  either  as  denoting  the 
object  with  which  they  were  written,  or  the  use  to 
which  they  were  applied.  As  Ewald  justly  observes, 
all  lyric  poetry  of  an  elevated  kind,  in  so  far  ns  it 
reveals  the  soul  of  the  poet  in  a  pure  swift  out 
pouring  of  itself,  is  of  the  nature  of  a  prayer;  and 
hence  the  term  "  prayer"  was  applied  to  a  collection 
of  David's  songs,  of  which  Ps.  Ixxii.  formed  the 
conclusion. 

II.  Gnomic  Poetry. — The  second  grand  division 
of  Hebrew  poetry  is  ocaupied  by  a  class  of  poems 
which  are  peculiarly  Shemitic,  and  which  represent 
the  nearest  approaches  made  by  the  people  of  that 
race  to  anything  like  philosophic  thought.  Reason 
ing  there  is  none :  we  have  only  results,  and  those 
rather  the  product  of  observation  and  reflection 
than  of  induction  or  argumentation.  As  lyric  poetry 
is  the  expression  of  the  poet's  own  feelings  and  im 
pulses,  so  gnomic  poetry  is  the  form  in  which  the 
desire  of  communicating  knowledge  to  others  find 
vent.  There  might  possibly  be  an  intermediate 
stage  in  which  the  poets  gave  out  their  experiences 
for  their  own  pleasure  merely,  and  afterwards  ap 
plied  them  to  the  instruction  of  others,  but  this 
could  scarcely  have  been  of  long  continuance.  The 
impulse  to  teach  makes  the  teacher,  and  the  teachei 
must  have  an  audience.  It  has  been  already  re 
marked  that  gnomic  poetry,  as  a  whole,  requires 
for  its  development  a  period  of  national  tranquillity. 
Its  germs  are  the  floating  proverbs  which  pass  cur 
rent  in  the  mouths  of  the  people,  and  embody  the 
experiences  of  many  with  the  wit  of  one.  From 
this  small  beginning  it  arises,  at  a  time  when  the 
experience  of  the  nation  has  become  matured,  anc 
the  mass  of  truths  which  are  the  result  of  such 
experience  have  passed  into  circulation.  The  fam 
of  Solomon's  wisdom  was  so  great  that  no  less  than 
three  thousand  proverbs  are  attributed  to  him 
this  being  the  form  in  which  the  Hebrew  mine 
found  its  most  congenial  utterance.  The  sayer  o 
sententious  sayings  was  to  the  Hebrews  the  wise 
man,  the  philosopher.  Of  the  earlier  isolated  pro 
verb?  but  few  examples  remain.  One  of  the  earlies 
occurs  in  the  mouth  of  David,  and  in  his  time  it 


POETRY,  1IEBHEW 

•was  the  p/overb  of  the  ancients:  "  from  the  wicked 
oometh  wickedness  "  (1  Sam.  xiiv.  13  [14]).  Later 
on,  when  the  fortunes  of  the  nation  were  obscured, 
;heir  experience  was  embodied  in  terms  of  sadness 
and  despondency :  "  The  days  are  prolonged,  and 
every  vision  faileth,"  became  a  saying  and  a  by 
word  (Ez.  xii.  22) ;  and  the  feeling  that  the  people 
were  suffering  for  the  sins  of  their  fathers  took  the 
ibrm  of  a  sentence.  "  The  fathers  have  eaten  sour 
grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge" 
^Ez.  xviii.  2).  Such  were  the  models  which  the 
gnomic  poet  had  before  him  for  imitation.  These 
detached  sentences  may  be  fairly  assumed  to  be  the 
earliest  form,  of  which  the  fuller  apophthegm  is 
the  expansion,  swelling  into  sustained  exhortations, 
and  even  dramatic  dialogue. 

III.  Dramatic  Poetry. — It  is  impossible  to  assert 
that  no  form  of  the  drama  existed  among  the  He 
brew  people ;  the  most  that  can  be  done  is  to 
examine  such  portions  of  their  literature  as  have 
come  down  to  us,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
how  far  any  traces  of  the  drama  proper  are  dis 
cernible,  and  what  inferences  may  be  made  from 
them.  It  is  unquestionably  true,  as  Ewald  observes, 
that  the  Arab  reciters  of  romances  will  many  times 
in  their  own  persons  act  out  a  complete  drama  in 
recitation,  changing  their  voice  and  gestures  with 
the  change  of  person  and  subject.  Something  of 
this  kind  may  possibly  have  existed  among  the 
Hebrews  ;  but  there  is  no  evidence  that  it  did 
exist,  nor  any  grounds  for  making  even  a  probable 
conjecture  with  regard  to  it.  A  rude  kind  of  farce  is 
described  by  Mr.  Lane  (Mod.  Eg.  ii.  chap,  vii.),  the 
players  of  which  "  are  called  Mohhabbazee'n.  These 
frequently  perform  at  the  festivals  prior  to  weddings 
and  circumcisions,  at  the  houses  of  the  great ;  and 
sometimes  attract  rings  of  auditors  and  spectators 
in  the  public  places  in  Cairo.  Their  performances 
are  scarcely  worthy  of  description :  it  is  chiefly  by 
vulgar  gestures  and  indecent  actions  that  they  amuse 
and  obtain  applause.  The  actors  are  only  men  and 
boys :  the  part  of  a  woman  being  always  performed 
by  a  man  or  boy  in  female  attire."  Then  follows 
a  description  of  one  of  these  plays,  the  plot  of 
which  was  extremely  simple.  But  the  mere  fact 
of  the  existence  of  these  rude  exhibitions  among  the 
Arabs  and  Egyptians  of  the  present  day  is  of  no 
weight  when  the  question  to  be  decided  is,  whether 
the  Song  of  Songs  was  designed  to  be  so  represented, 
as  a  simple  pastoral  drama.  Of  course,  in  con 
sidering  such  a  question,  reference  is  made  only  to 
the  external  form  of  the  poem,  and,  in  order  to 
prove  it,  it  must  be  shown  that  the  dramatic  is  the 
only  form  of  representation  which  it  could  assume, 
and  not  that,  by  the  help  of  two  actors  and  a 
chorus,  it  is  capable  of  being  exhibited  in  a  dramatic 
form.  All  that  has  been  done,  in  our  opinion,  is 
the  latter.  It  is  but  fair,  however,  to  give  the 
views  of  those  who  hold  the  opposite.  Ewald 
maintains  that  the  Song  of  Songs  is  designed  for  a 
simple  stage,  because  it  develops  a  complete  action 
and  admits  of  definite  pauses  in  the  action,  which 
are  only  suited  to  the  drama.  He  distinguishes  it 
in  this  respect  from  the  Book  of  Job,  which  u> 
dramatic  in  form  only,  thoueh,  ns  it  is  occur  iod 
with  a  sublime  subject,  he  compares  it  with  tragedy, 
while  the  Song  of  Songs,  being  taken  from  the  com 
mon  life  of  the  nation,  may  be  compared  to  comedy. 


•  1/ov.th  (Is.  xiv.  4)  understands  mashdl  to  be  "  tin 
peneral  name  for  poetic  style  among  the  Hebrews,  in 
cltuUng  every  sort  of  it,  as  ranging  under  one,  or  other 


of  all   the   characters,   of  sententious,  figurative,  and 
sublime." 


VOETRY,  IIEBJtKW 

The  one  comparison  is  probably  as  appropriate  as 
the  other.  In  Ewald's  division  the  poem  falls  into 
13  cantos  of  tolerably  equal  length,  which  have  a 
certain  beginning  and  ending,  with  a  pause  after 
each.  The  whole  forms  four  acts,  for  which  three 
actors  are  sufficient :  a  hero,  a  maiden,  and  a 
chorus  of  women,  these  being  all  who  would  be  on 
the  stage  at  once.  The  following  are  the  divisions 
i.f  the  acts  : — 

FirstAct.i.S-ii.T    ...{^-f'tSL 
Second  Act,  ,i.  8-iii.  5..  {«    -    ,«;  £»• 

5th  „  iii.  6— 11. 
6th  „  iv.  1—7. 
7th  „  iv.  8— v.  1. 

Third  Act,  iii.  6-viiI.  4 

10th  „     vi.  4— vii.  1. 
llth  „     Til.  2—10. 
12tli  „    vli.  10— viii.  4. 
Fourth  Act,  vlii.  5—14  .  .     13th  canto. 

The  latest  work  on  the  subject  is  that  of  M. 
Uemm  (Le  Cantique  dcs  Cantiqucs),  who  has  given 
»  spirited  translation  of  the  poem,  and  arranged  it 
in  acts  and  scenes,  according  to  his  own  theory  of 
the  manner  in  which  it  was  intended  to  be  repre 
sented.  He  divides  the  whole  into  16  cantos,  which 
form  five  acts  and  an  epilogue.  The  acts  and  scenes 
are  thus  arranged  : 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


895 


I  Scene  1. 

<  .,     2. 
I     ..     3. 
( Scene  1. 
*     .,     2. 
|  Scene  1. 

<  ,      2. 


i.  2—6. 
i.  7—11. 
i.  12— ii.  7. 
ii.  8—17. 
iii.  1—5. 
iii.  6-11. 
Iv.  1—6. 

[     „     Z.      iv.  7— v.  1. 
of  a  single  scene. 
Scene  1.      vi.  4-9. 
„      2.      vi.  10— vii.  11. 
„     3.     vii.  J  2— viii.  4. 
„      4.    viii.  5—7. 


First  Act,  1.2— lit.  .  . 
Second  Act,  ii.  8— iii.  6  . 

Third  Act,  iiL  6-v.  1    . 
Fourth  Act,  v.  2— vi.  3 . 

Fifth  Act,  Tl  4— vlii.  7 . 

Epilogue,  viii.  8—14. 

But  M.  Renan,  who  is  compelled,  in  accordance 
with  his  own  theory  of  the  mission  of  the  Shemitic 
races,  to  admit  that  no  trace  of  anything  approach 
ing  to  the  regular  drama  is  found  among  them,  does 
not  regard  the  Song  of  Songs  as  a  drama  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  products  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
theatres,  but  as  dramatic  poetry  in  the  widest  ap 
plication  of  the  term,  to  designate  any  composition 
conducted  in  dialogue  and  corresponding  to  an 
action.  The  absence  of  the  regular  drama  he 
attributes  to  the  want  of  a  complicated  mythology, 
analogous  to  that  possessed  by  the  Indo-European 
peoples.  Monotheism,  the  characteristic  religious 
belief  of  the  Shemitic  races,  stifled  the  growth  of  a 
mythology  and  checked  the  development  of  the 
drama.  Be  this  as  it  may,  dramatic  representation 
nppeai-s  to  have  been  alien  to  the  feelings  of  the 
Hebrews.  At  n*  period  of  their  history  before  the 
age  of  Herod  is  there  the  least  trace  of  a  theatre  at 
Jerusalem,  whatever  other  foreign  innovations  may 
have  been  adopted,  and  the  burst  of  indignation 
which  the  high-priest  Jason  incurred  for  attempting 
10  establish  a  gymnasium  and  to  introduce  the 
Greek  games  is  a  significant  symptom  of  the  re 
pugnance  which  the  people  felt  for  such  spectacles. 
The  same  antipathy  remains  to  the  present  day 
Among  the  Arabs,  and  the  attempts  to  introduce 
theatres  at  Beyrout  and  in  Algeria  have  signally 
failed.  But,  says  M.  Renan,  the  Song  of  Songs  is  a 
dramatic  poem :  there  were  no  publ';'  performances 
in  Palestine,  therefore  it  nmst  have  been  repre- 
wuted  ill  private;  and  he  is  compelled  to  frame 


the  following  hypothesis  concerning  i* :  that  it  M 
a  libretto  intended  to  be  completed  b;-  the  play  of 
the  actors  and  by  music,  and  represented  in  private 
families,  probably  at  marriage-feasts,  the  repre 
sentation  being  extended  over  the  several  days  o: 
the  feast.  The  last  supposition  removes  a  difficulty 
which  h%s  been  felt  to  be  almost  i'atal  to  the  idea 
<J>at  thi  poem  is  a  continuously  developed  drama. 
K"fh  no1,  is  complete  in  itself;  there  is  no  suspended 
intrr»*fc,  nnd  the  structure  of  the  poem  is  obvious 
ami  rat'i.'al  if  we  regard  each  act  as  a  separate 
draina  i  r  ended  fnr  one  of  the  days  of  the  feast. 
W<>  rrww  look  for  a  parallel  to  it  in  the  middle 
ages,  when,  besides  the  mystery  plays,  there  were 
scenic  representations  sulh'ciently  developed.  The 
Song  of  Songs  occupies  the  middle  place  between 
the  regular  drama  and  the  eclogue  or  pastoral 
dialogue,  and  finds  a  perfect  analogue,  both  as 
regards  subject  and  scenic  arrangement,  in  the  most 
celebrated  of  the  plays  of  Arras,  Le  Jen  de  Robin 
et  Marion.  Such  is  M.  Renan's  explanation  of  the 
outward  form  of  the  Song  of  Songs,  regarded  as  a 
portion  of  Hebrew  literature.  It  has  been  due  to 
his  great  learning  and  reputation  to  give  his  opinion 
somewhat  at  length  ;  but  his  arguments  In  support 
of  it  are  so  little  convincing  that  it  must  be  re 
garded  at  best  but  as  an  ingenious  hypothesis,  the 
groundwork  of  which  is  taken  away  by  M.  Renan's 
own  admission  that  dramatic  representations  are 
alien  to  the  spirit  of  the  Shemitic  races.  The 
simple  corollary  to  this  proposition  must  be  that 
the  Song  of  Songs  is  not  a  drama,  but  in  its 
external  form  partakes  more  of  the  nature  of  an 
eclogue  or  pastoral  dialogue. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  after  this  to  discuss  the 
question  whether  the  Book  of  Job  is  a  dramatic 
poem  or  not.  Inasmuch  as  it  represents  an  action 
and  a  progress,  it  is  a  drama  as  truly  and  really  as 
any  poem  can  be  which  develops  the  working  of 
passion,  and  the  alternations  of  faith,  hope,  distrust, 
triumphant  confidence,  and  black  despair,  in  the 
struggle  which  it  depicts  the  human  mind  as  en 
gaged  in,  while  attempting  to  solve  one  of  the  most 
intricate  problems  it  can  be  called  upon  to  regard. 
It  is  a  drama  as  life  is  a  drama,  the  most  powerful 
of  all  tragedies ;  but  that  it  is  a  dramatic  poem, 
intended  to  be  represented  upon  a  stage,  or  capable 
of  being  so  represented,  may  be  confidently  denied. 

One  characteristic  of  Hebrew  poetry,  not  indeed 
peculiar  to  it,  but  shared  by  it  in  common  with  the 
literature  of  other  nations,  is  its  intensely  national 
and  local  colouring.  The  writers  were  Hebrews  of 
the  Hebrews,  drawing  their  inspiration  from  the 
mountains  and  rivers  of  Palestine,  which  they  have 
immortalised  in  their  poetic  figures,  and  even  whCe 
uttering  the  sublimest  and  most  universal  truths 
never  forgetting  their  own  nationality  in  its  nar 
rowest  and  intensest  form.  Their  images  and  meta 
phors,  says  Hunk  (Palestine,  p.  444  a),  "  are  taken 
chiefly  from  nature  and  the  phenomena  of  Palestine 
and  the  surrounding  countries,  from  the  pastoral 
life,  from  agriculture  and  the  national  history.  The 
stars  of  heaven,  the  sand  of  the  sea-shore,  are  tht 
image  of  a  great  multitude.  Would  they  speak  of 
a  mighty  host  of  enemies  invading  the  country, 
they  are  the  swift  torrents  or  the  roaring  waves  oi 
the  sea,  or  the  clouds  that  bring  on  a  tempest ;  the 
war-chariots  advance  swiftly  like  lightning  or  the 
whirlwinds.  Happiness  .rises  as  the  dawn  and 
shines  like  the  daylight;  the  blessing  of  God  de 
scends  like  the  dew  or  the  bountiful  rain  ;  the  angei 
of  Heaven  is  a  devouring  fire  that  annihilates  tH 


896 


I-OETRY.  HEBREW 


POETRY.  HEJJREW 


wicked  as  the  flame  which  devours  the  stubble 
Dnhuppiness  is  likened  to  days  of  clouds  and  dark 
ness ;  at  times  of  great  catastrophes  the  sun  set 
in  broad  day,  the  heavens  are  shaken,  the  earth 
trembles,  the  stars  disappear,  the  sun  is  changw 
into  darkness  and  the  moon  into  blood,  and  so  on 
The  cedars  of  Lebanon,  the  oaks  of  Bashan,  are  the 
image  of  the  mighty  man,  the  palm  and  the  reec 
of  the  great  and  the  humble,  briers  and  thorns  o 
the  wicked ;  the  pious  man  is  an  olive  ever  green 
or  «  tree  planted  by  the  water-side.  The  anima 
kin£.lom  furnished  equally  a  large  number  o 
images:  the  lion,  the  image  of  power,  is  also,  lik 
the  wolf,  bear.  &c.,  that  of  tyrants  and  violent  am 
rapacious  men ;  and  the  pious  who  suffers  is  a 
feeble  sheep  led  to  the  slaughter.  The  strong  am 
powerful  man  is  compared  to  the  he-goat  or  thi 
bull  of  Bashan :  the  kine  of  Bashan  figure,  in  thi 
discourses  of  Amos,  as  the  image  of  rich  and  volup 
tuous  women ;  the  people  who  rebel  against  thi 
Divine  will  are  a  refractory  heifer.  Other  images 
are  borrowed  from  the  country  life  and  from  the 
life  domestic  and  social :  the  chastisement  of  G« 
weighs  upon  Israel  like  a  waggon  laden  with 
sheaves ;  the  dead  cover  the  earth  as  the  dung 
which  covers  the  surface  of  the  fields.  The  im 
pious  man  sows  crime  and  reaps  misery,  or  he  sows 
the  wind  and  reaps  the  tempest.  The  people  yield 
ing  to  the  blows  of  their  enemies  are  like  the  com 
crushed  beneath  the  threshing  instrument.  Go( 
tramples  the  wine  in  the  wine-press  when  He  chas 
tises  the  impious  and  sheds  their  blood.  The  wrath 
of  Jehovah  is  often  represented  as  an  intoxicating 
cup,'  which  He  causes  those  to  empty  who  have 
merited  His  chastisement :  terrors  and  anguish  an 
often  compared  to  the  pangs  of  childbirth.  Peoples, 
towns,  and  states  are  represented  by  the  Hebrew 
poets  under  the  image  of  daughters  or  wives ;  in 
their  impiety  they  are  courtesans  or  adulteresses 
The  historical  allusions  of  most  frequent  occurrence 
are  taken  from  the  catastrophe  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrha,  the  miracles  of  the  departure  from  Egypt 
and  tiie  appeaiance  of  Jehovah  on  Sinai."  Examples 
might  easily  be  multiplied  in  illustration  of  this 
remarkable  characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  poets:  they 
stand  thick  upon  every  page  of  their  writings,  and 
in  striking  contrast  to  the  vague  generalisations  oi 
the  Indian  philosophic  poetry. 

In  Hebrew,  as  in  other  languages,  there  is  a  pecu 
liarity  about  the  diction  used  in  poetry — a  kind  ol 
poetical  dialect,  characterized  by  archaic  and  irre 
gular  foims  of  words,  abrupt  constructions,  and 
unusual  inflexions,  which  distinguish  it  from  the 
contemporary  prose  or  historical  style.  It  is  uni 
versally  observed  that  archaic  forms  and  usages  of 
words  linger  in  the  poetry  of  a  language  after  they 
have  fallen  out  of  ordinary  use.  A  tew  of  these 
forms  and  usages  are  here  given  from  Gesenius' 
Lehrgeb&ude.  The  Piel  and  Hiphil  voices  are  used 
intransitively  (Jer.  li.  56  ;  Ez.  x.  7  ;  Job  xxix.  24)  : 
the  apocopated  future  is  used  as  a  present  (Job  rv. 
33 ;  Ps.  xi.  6  ;  Is.  xlii.  6).  The  termination  JV  is 
tmnd  for  the  ordinary  feminine  !"|-  (Ex.  xv.  2  ;  Gen. 
xlix.  22  ;  Ps.  cxxxii.  4)  ;  and  for  the  plural  Q"1-  we 
liave  p:  (Job  xv.  13;  Ez.  xxvi.  18)  and  *-  (Jer. 
xxii.  14;_Am.  vii.  1).  The  verbal  suffixes,  ID, 
1D^,  and  1D^  (Ex.  xv.  9),  and  the  pronominal  suf 
fixes  to  nouns,  ID-  for  Q-,  and  -in*-  for  V~  (Hab. 
iii.  10),  are  peculiar  to  the  poetical  books  ;  as  are 
'tf  (Ps  cxvi.  12),  to'-  (Deut.  xxxii.  37 ;  Ps.  xi.  7), 


and  the  moie  iimisiKil  forms,  nft!T-  (Ez.  xl.  1C) 
n3n\-  (Ez.  i.  11),  H33\-  (Ez.  »ii.  26).  In  pwtical 
language  also  we  find  ID?  for  17  or  DH?,  ioV  for 

7,  1D3  for  3,  1D3  for  3  ;  the  plural  forms  of  th« 
prepositions,  V?K  for  7K,   HJ7  for  "jy,    ty  ;   and 
the  peculiar  forms  of  the  nouns,  'Tin  for  *~)n 

nnn  for  nn,  D^DDJ;  for  tansy,  and  so  on. 

But  the  form  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  its  distinguish 
ing  characteristic,  and  what  this  form  is,  has  been  a 
vexed  question  for  many  ages.  The  Therapeutae, 
as  described  by  Philo  (de  Vita  Contempt.  §3,  vol.  ii. 
p.  475,  ed.  Mang.),  sang  hymns  and  psalms  of  thanks 
giving  to  God,  in  divers  measures  and  strains  ;  and 
these  were  either  new  or  ancient  ones  composed  by 
the  old  poets,  who  had  left  behind  them  measures 
and  melodies  of  trimeter  verses,  of  processional 
songs,  of  hymns,  of  songs  sung  at  the  offering  of 
libations,  or  before  the  altar,  and  continuous  choral 
songs,  beautifully  measured  out  in  strophes  of  in 
tricate  character  (§10,  p.  484).  The  value  of  Philo's 
testimony  on  this  point  may  be  estimated  by  another 
passage  in  his  works,  in  which  he  claims  for  Moses 
a  knowledge  of  numbers  and  geometry,  the  theory  of 
rhythm,  harmony,  and  metre,  and  the  whole  science 
of  music,  practical  and  theoretical  (de  Vita  Mosis, 
i.  5,  vol.  ii.  p.  84).  The  evidence  of  Josephus  is  as 
little  to  be  relied  upon.  Both  these  writers  laboured 
to  magnify  the  greatness  of  their  own  nation,  and 
to  show  that  in  literature  and  philosophy  the  Greeks 
had  been  anticipated  by  the  Hebrew  barbarians. 
This  idea  pervades  all  their  writings,  and  it  must 
always  be  borne  in  mind  as  the  key-note  of  their 
testimony  on  this  as  on  other  points.  According  to 
Josephus  (Ant.  ii.  16,  §4),  the  Song  of  Moses  at  the 
Red  Sea  (Ex.  xv.)  was  composed  in  the  hexameter 
measure  (iy  £|ajutrp<p  r6vif>)  ;  and  again  (Ant.  iv. 

8,  §44),  the  song  in  Deut.  xxxii.  is  described  as  a 
hexameter  poem.     The  Psalms  of  David  were  in 
various  metres,  some   trimeters  and  some   penta 
meters  (Ant.  vii.   12,  §3).     Eusebius  (de  Praep. 
Evang.  xi.  3,  p.  514,  ed.  Col.  1688)  characterises 
the  great  Song  of  Moses  and  the  118th  (119th) 
Psalm  as  metrical  compositions  in  what  the  Greeks 
call  the  heroic  metre.     They  are  said  to  be  hexa 
meters  of  sixteen  syllables.    The  other  verse  compo 
sitions  of  the  Hebrews  are  said  to  be  in  trimeters. 
This  saying  of  Eusebius  is  attacked  by  Julian  (Cy- 
rill.  contr.  Jul.  vii.  2),  who  on  his  part  endea 
voured  to  prove  the  Hebrews  devoid  of  all  culture. 
Jerome  (Praef.  in  Hiob)  appeals  to  Philo,  Josephus, 
Origen,  and  Eusebius,  for  proof  that  the  Psalter, 
the  lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  and  almost  all  the 
songs  of  Scripture,  are  composed  in  metre,  like  the 
odes  of  Horace,  Pindar,  Alcaeus,  and  Sappho.  Again. 
he  says  that  the  Book  of  Job,  from  iii.  3  to  xlii.  6, 
is  in  hexameters,  with  dactyls  and  spondees,  and  fre- 
ouently,  on  account  of  the  peculiarity  of  the  Hebrew 
language,  other  feet  which  have  not  the  same  syl 
lables  but  the  same  time.     In  Epist.  ad  Paulam 
[  Opp.  ii.  709,  ed.  Martianey)  occurs  a  passage  which 
shows  in  some  measure  how  far  we  are  to  under 
stand  literally  the  terms  which  Jerome  has  borrowed 
from  the  verse  literature  of  Greece  and  home,  ..lid 
applied  to  the  poetry  of  the  Hebrews.     The  conclu 
sion  seems  inevitable  that  these  terms  are  employed 
simply  to   denote  a  general  external  resemblance, 
ind  by  no  means  to  indicate  the  existence,  among 

he  poets  of  the  Old  Testament,  ofaknowledge  ofth-> 
aws  of  metre,  a~i  we  are  accustomed  to  understand 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

the  term  There  are,  says  Jerome,  tour  alphabetical 
Psalms,  the  tlOth  (lllth),  111th  (112th),  118th 
(119th),  and  the  144th  (145th).  In  the  first  two, 
one  letter  corresponds  to  each  clause  or  versicle, 
which  is  written  in  trimeter  iambics.  The  others 
are  in  tetrameter  iambics,  like  the  song  in  Deutero 
nomy.  In  Ps.  118  (119),  eight  verses  follow 
each  letter:  in  Ps.  144  (145)  a  letter  corresponds 
to  a  verse.  In  Lamentations  we  have  four  alpha 
betical  acrostics,  the  first  two  of  which  are  written 
in  a  kind  of  Sapphic  metre  ;  for  three  clauses  which 
are  connected  together  and  begin  with  one  letter 
(t.  e.  in  the  first  clause)  close  with  a  period  in  heroic 
measure  (Heroici  comma).  The  third  is  written 
in  trimeter,  and  the  verses  in  threes  each  begin 
with  the  wme  letter.  The  fourth  is  like  the  first 
and  second.  The  Proverbs  end  with  an  alphabetical 
poem  in  tetrameter  iambics,  beginning,  "  A  virtuous 
woman  who  can  find  ?"  In  the  Praef.  in  Chron. 
Euseb.  Jerome  compares  the  metres  of  the  Psalms 
to  those  of  Horace  and  Pindar,  now  running  in 
Iambics,  now  ringing  with  Alcaics,  now  swelling 
with  Sapphics,  now  beginning  with  a  half  foot. 
What,  he  asks,  is  more  beautiful  than  the  song  of 
Deuteronomy  and  Isaiah  ?  What  more  weighty 
than  Solomon  ?  What  more  perfect  than  Job  ? 
All  which,  as  Josephus  and  Origen  testify,  are  com 
posed  in  hexameters  and  pentameters.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  these  terms  are  mere  generalities, 
and  express  no  more  than  a  certain  rough  resem 
blance,  so  that  the  songs  of  Moses  and  Isaiah  may 
be  designated  hexameters  and  pentameters,  with  as 
much  propriety  as  the  first  and  second  chapters  of 
Lamentations  may  be  compared  to  Sapphic  odes. 
The  resemblance  of  the  Hebrew  verse  composition 
to  the  classic  metm,  is  expressly  denied  by  Gregory 
of  Nyssa  (1  Tract,  in  Psalm,  cap.  iv.).  Augustine 
(Ep.  131  ad  Numeriurn)  confesses  his  ignorance  of 
Hebrew,  but  adds  that  those  skilled  in  the  language 
believed  the  Psalms  of  David  to  be  written  in  metre. 
Isidore  of  Seville  (Onjgr.  i.  18)  claims  for  the  heroic 
metre  the  highest  antiquity,  inasmuch  as  the  Song 
of  Moses  was  composed  in  it,  and  the  Book  of  Job, 
who  was  contemporaiy  with  Moses,  long  before  the 
times  of  Pherecydes  and  Homer,  is  written  in  dactyls 
and  spondees.  Joseph  Scaliger  (Animadv.  ad  Eus. 
Cliron.  p.  6  6,  &c.)  was  one  of  the  first  to  point  out 
the  fallacy  of  Jerome's  statement  with  regard  to  the 
metres  of  the  Psalter  and  the  Lamentations,  and  to 
assert  that  these  books  contained  no  verse  bound  by 
metrical  laws,  but  that  their  language  was  merely 
prose,  animated  by  a  poetic  spirit.  He  admitted 
the  Song  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy,  the  Proverbs, 
and  Job,  to  be  the  only  books  in  which  there  was 
necessarily  any  trace  of  rhythm,  and  this  rhythm 
he  compares  to  that  of  two  dimeter  iambics,  some 
times  of  more,  sometimes  of  fewer  syllables  as  the 
sense  required.  Gerhard  Vossius  (de  Nat.  et  Const. 
Artis  PoSt.  lib.  1,  c.  13,  §2)  says,  that  in  Job  and 
the  Proverbs  there  is  rhythm  but  no  metre ;  that 
is,  regard  is  had  to  the  number  of  syllables  but  not 
to  their  quantity.  In  the  Psalms  and  Lamentations 
not  even  rhythm  is  observed. 

But,  in  spite  of  the  opinions  pronounced  by  these 
high  authorities,  there  were  still  many  who  believed 
in  the  existence  of  a  Hebrew  metre,  and  in  the  possi 
bility  of  recovering  it.  The  theories  proposed  for 
thk  purpose  wore  various.  Gomarus,  professor  at 
Groaiugen  (Davidis  Lyra,  Lugd.  Bat.  1637),  advo 
cated  both  rhymes  and  metre;  for  the  hitter  he 
bid  down  the  .following  rules.  The  vowel  alone,  as  it 
is  long  or  short,  determines  the  length  of  a  syllable. 


POETBY,  HEBREW 


897 


S/tgva  forms  no  syllable.  The  periods  or  versicles 
of  the  Hebrew  jwems  never  contain  less  than  a 
distich,  or  two  verses,  but  in  proportion  as  the 
periods  are  longer  they  contain  more  verses.  The 
last  syllable  of  a  verse  is  indifferently  Ion*  or  short. 
This  system,  if  system  it  may  be  called  'for  it  is 
equally  adapted  for  prose),  was  supported  by  many 
men  ot  note ;  amoij^  othere  by  the  younger  Buxtorf, 
Heinsius,  L.  de  Li.-u.  Constautin  1'Kmpereur,  and 
Hottinger.  On  tl>t  other  hand  it  was  vigorously 
attacked  by  L.  Caepellus,  Calonus,  Danhauer, 
PteiHer,  and  Solomon  Van  Til.  Towards  the  close 
of  the  17th  century  Marcus  Mtibomins  announced 
to  Ihe  world,  with  an  amount  of  pompous  assurance 
which  is  charming,  that  he  had  discovered  the  lost 
metrical  system  of  the  Hebrews.  By  the  help  of 
this  mysterious  secret,  which  he  attributed  to  divine 
revelation,  he  proposed  to  restore  not  only  the  Psalms 
but  the  whole  Hebrew  Scriptures,  to  their  pristine 
condition,  and  thus  confer  upon  the  world  a  know 
ledge  of  Hebrew  greater  than  any  which  had  existed 
since  the  ages  which  preceded  the  Alexandrine  trans 
lators.  But  Meibomius  did  not  allow  his  enthusiasm 
to  get  the  better  of  his  prudence,  and  the  condition 
on  which  this  portentous  secret  was  to  be  made 
public  was,  that  six  thousand  curious  men  should 
contribute  51.  sterling  a-piece  for  a  copy  of  his  book, 
which  was  to  be  printed  in  two  volumes  folio.  It 
is  almost  needless  to  add  that  his  scheme  fell  to  the 
ground.  He  published  some  specimens  of  his  res 
toration  of  ten  Psalms,  and  six  entire  chapters  of  the 
Old  Testament  in  1690.  The  glimpseu  w^ich  he 
gives  of  his  grand  secret  are  not  such  as  would 
make  us  regret  that  the  knowledge  of  it  perished 
with  him.  The  whole  Book  of  Psalms,  he  says,  is 
written  in  distichs,  except  the  first  Psalm,  which  is 
in  a  different  metre,  and  serves  as  an  introduction 
to  the  rest.  They  were  therefore  intended  to  be 
sung,  not  by  one  priest,  or  by  one  chorus,  but  by 
two.  Meibomius  "  was  severely  chastised  by  J.  H. 
Mains,  B.  H.  Gebhardus.  and  J.  G.  Zentgravius" 
(Jfibb,  Sacr.  Lit.  p.  11).  In  the  last  century  the 
learned  Francis  Hare,  bishop  of  Chichester,  pub 
lished  an  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Psalms,  metrically 
divided,  to  which  he  prefixed  a  dissertation  on  the 
ancient  poetiy  of  the  Hebrews  (Psalm,  lib.  in  versi- 
culos  metrice  divisus,  Sic.,  Lond.'  1736).  Bishop 
Hare  maintained  that  in  Hebrew  poetry  no  regard 
was  had  to  the  quantity  of  syllables.  He  regarded 
S/IKCOS  ns  long  vowels,  and  long  vowels  as  short  at 
his  pleasure.  The  rules  which  he  laid  down  are 
the  following.  In  Hebrew  poetry  all  the  feet  are 
dissyllables,  and  no  regard  is  had  to  the  quantity  of 
a  syllable.  Clauses  consist  of  an  equal  or  unequal 
number  of  syllables.  If  the  number  of  syllab'es  be 
equal,  the  verses  are  trochaic ;  if  unequal,  iambic. 
Periods  for  the  most  part  consist  of  two  verses,  often 
three  or  four,  sometimes  more.  Clauses  of  the  same 
periods  are  of  the  same  kind,  that  is,  either  iambic  or 
trochaic,  with  very  few  exceptions.  Trochaic  clauses 
generally  agree  in  the  number  of  the  feet,  which  are 
sometimes  three,  as  in  Pss.  xciv.  1,  cvi.  1,  and  this  is 
the  most  frequent ;  sometimes  five,  as  in  Ps.  is.  5. 
In  iambic  clauses  the  number  of  feet  is  sometimes  the 
same,  but  they  generally  differ.  Both  kinds  of  verse, 
are  mixed  in  the  same  poem.  In  order  to  carry  out 
these  rules  they  are  supplemented  by  one  which 
gives  to  the  versifier  the  widest  licence.  Words  and 
verses  are  contracted  or  lengthened  at  will,  by  syn 
cope,  elision,  &c.  In  addition  to  this,  the  bishop 
was  unuer  the  necessity  of  maintaining  that  all 
grammarians  had  hitherto  erred  in  laying  down  the 

3  M 


398 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


rules  of  ordinaiy  punctuation.  His  system,  if  it 
may  be  so  called,  carries  its  own  refutation  with  it, 
but  was  considered  by  Lowth  to  be  worthy  a  reply 
under  the  title  of  Metricae  Harianae  Brevis  Confu- 
tatio,  printed  at  the  end  of  his  De  Sacra  Poes.  Heb. 
Praelcctiones,  &c. 

Anton  ( Conject.  de  Metro  Heb.  Ant.  Lips.  1770), 
admitting  the  metre  to  be  regulated  by  the  accents, 
endeavoured  to  prove  that  in  the  Hebrew  poems  was 
a  highly  artistic  and  regular  system,  like  that  of 
the  Greeks  and  Romans,  consisting  of  strophe*, 
antistrophes,  epodes.and  the  like;  but  his  method  i; 
as  arbitrary  as  Hare's.  The  theory  of  Lautwein 
( Versuch  eincr  richtifjen  Tlicorie  ton  der  bibl. 
Vers/iunst,  Tub.  1775)  is  an  improvement  upon 
those  of  his  predecessors,  inasmuch  as  he  rejects  the 
measurement  of  verse  by  long  and  short  syllables, 
and  marks  the  scansion  by  the  tone  accent.  He 
assumes  little  more  than  a  free  rhythm :  the  verses 
are  distinguished  by  a  certain  relation  in  their  con 
tents,  and  connected  hy  a  poetic  euphony.  Sir  W. 
Jones  (Comment.  Poes.  Asiat.  1774)  attempted  to 
apply  the  rules  of  Arabic  metre  to  Hebrew.  He 
regarded  as  a  long  syllable  one  which  terminated  in 
a  consonant  or  quiescent  letter  (X,  H,  *) ;  but  he 
did  not  develope  any  system.  The  present  Arabic 
prosody,  however,  is  of  comparatively  modern  in 
vention  ;  and  it  is  not  consistent  with  probability 
that  there  could  be  any  system  of  versification 
among  the  Hebrews  like  that  imagined  by  Sir  W. 
Jones,  when  in  the  example  he  quotes  of  Cant.  i.  5, 
he  refers  the  first  clause  of  the  verse  to  the  second, 
and  the  last  to  the  fifteenth  kind  of  Arabic  metre. 
Greve  (Ultima  Capita  Job:,  &c.,  1791)  believed 
that  in  Hebrew,  as  in  Arabic  and  Syriac,  there  was 
a  metre,  but  that  it  was  obscured  by  the  false  ortho 
graphy  of  the  Masorets.  He  therefore  assumed  for 
the  Hebrew  an  Arabic  vocalisation,  and  with  this 
modification  he  found  iambic  trimeters,  dimeters, 
and  tetrameters,  to  be  the  most  common  forms  of 
verse,  and  lays  down  the  laws  of  versification  ac 
cordingly.  Bellermann  (  Versuch  fiber  die  Metrik 
dcr  Hebraer,  1813)  was  the  last  who  attempted  to 
set  forth  the  old  Hebrew  metres.  He  adopted  the 
Masoretic  orthography  and  vocalisation,  and  deter 
mined  the  quantity  of  syllables  by  the  accentuation, 
and  what  he  termed  the  "  Morensystem,"  denoting  by 
moren  the  compass  of  a  single  syllable.  Each  syl 
lable  which  has  not  the  tone  accent  must  have  three 
•noren;  every  syllable  which  has  the  tone  accent 
may  have  either  four  or  two,  but  generally  three. 
The  moren  are  reckoned  as  follows :  a  long  vowel 
has  two  ;  a  short  vowel,  one  ;  every  consonant,  whe 
ther  single  or  double,  has  one  more.  Shewa  simple 
or  composite  is  not  reckoned.  The  quieicent  letters 
have  no  more.  Dagesh  forte  compensative  has 
one  ;  so  has  mctaeg.  The  majority  of  dissyllable  and 
trisyllable  words,  having  the  accent  on  the  last  syl 
lable,  will  thus  form  iambics  and  anapaests.  But 
as  many  have  the  accent  on  the  penultimate,  these 
will  form  trochees.  The  most  common  kinds  of  feet 
are  iambics  and  anapaests,  interchanging  with 
trochees  and  tribrachs.  Of  verses  composed  of  these 
feet,  though  not  uniform  as  regards  the  numbers  of 
the  feet,  consist,  according  to  Bellermann,  the  poems 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

Among  those  who  believed  in  the  existence  of  a 
Hebrew  metre,  but  in  the  impossibility  of  recovering 
it  were,  Carpzov,  Lowth,  Pfeiffer,  Herder  to  a  certain 
extent,  Jahn,  Bauer,  and  Buxtorf.  The  opinions  of 
I-owth,  with  regard  to  Hebrew  metre,  are  summed 
np  by  Jebb  (Sacr.  Lit.  p.  16)  as  follows:  "He 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

begins  by  asserting,  that  certain  of  the  Hebrew 
writings  are  not  only  animated  with  the  true  poetic 
spirit,  but,  in  some  degree,  couched  in  poetic  num 
bers  ;  yet,  he  allows,  that  the  quantity,  the  rhythm, 
or  modulation  of  Hebrew  poetry,  not  only  is  un 
known,  but  admits  of  no  investig?  tion  by  human 
art  or  industry ;  he  states,  after  Abarbanel,  that  the 
Jews  themselves  disclaim  the  very  memory  of  me 
trical  composition  ;  he  acknowledges,  that  the  arti 
ficial  conformation  of  the  sentences,  is  the  sole 
indication  of  metre  in  these  poems;  he  barely  main 
tains  the  credibility  of  attention  having  been  paid 
to  numbers  or  feet  in  their  compositions ;  and,  at 
the  same  time,  he  confesses  the  utter  impossibility 
of  determining,  whether  Hebrew  poetry  was  modu 
lated  by  the  ear  alone,  or  according  to  any  definite 
and  settled  rules  of  prosody."  The  opinions  of 
Scaliger  and  Vossius  have  been  already  referred  to. 
Vitringa  allows  to  Isaiah  a  kind  of  oratorial  measure, 
but  adds  that  it  could  not  on  this  account  be  rightly 
termed  poetry.  Michaelis  (Not.  4  in  Prael.  iii.) 
in  his  notes  on  Lowth,  held  that  there  never  was 
metre  in  Hebrew,  but  only  a  free  rhythm,  as  in 
recitative,  though  even  less  trammelled.  He  declared 
himself  against  the  Masorethic  distinction  of  long 
and  short  vowels,  and  made  the  rhythm  to  depend 
upon  the  tone  syllable ;  adding,  with  regard  to  fixed 
and  regular  metre,  that  what  has  evaded  such 
diligent  search  he  thought  had  no  existence.  On 
the  subject  of  the  rhythmical  character  of  Hebrew 
poetry,  as  opposed  to  metrical,  the  remarks  of  Jebb 
are  remarkably  appropriate.  "  Hebrew  poetry,"  he 
says  (Sacr.  Lit.  p.  20),  "  is  universal  poetry :  the 
poetry  of  all  languages,  and  of  all  peoples:  the 
collocation  of  words  (whatever  may  have  been  the 
sound,  for  of  this  we  are  quite  ignorant)  is  primarily 
directed  to  secure  the  best  possible  announcement 
and  discrimination  of  the  sense :  let,  then,  a  trans 
lator  only  be  literal,  and,  so  far  as  the  genius  of  his 
language  will  permit,  let  him  preserve  the  original 
order  of  the  words,  and  he  will  infallibly  put  the 
reader  in  possession  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  that  the 
Hebrew  text  can  give  to  the  best  Hebrew  scholar 
of  the  present  day.  Now,  had  there  been  originally 
metre,  the  case,  it  is  presumed,  could  hardly  have 
been  such  ;  somewhat  must  have  been  sacrificed  to 
the  importunities  of  metrical  necessity;  the  sense 
could  not  have  invariably  predominated  over  the 
sound ;  and  the  poetry  could  not  have  been,  as  it 
unquestionably  and  emphatically  is,  a  poetry,  net 
of  rounds,  or  of  words,  but  of  things.  Let  not  this 
last  assertion,  however,  be  misinterpreted  :  I  would 
be  understood  merely  to  assert  that  sound,  and 
words  in  subordination  to  sound,  do  not  in  Hebrew, 
as  in  classical  poetry,  enter  into  the  essence  of  the 
thing ;  but  it  is  happily  undeniable,  that  the  words 
of  the  poetical  Scriptures  are  exquisitely  fitted  to 
convey  the  sense  ;  and  it  is  highly  probable,  that,  in 
the  lifetime  of  the  language,  the  sounds  wtre  ouifi- 
ciently  harmonious :  when  I  say  sufficiently  narmo- 
nious,  I  mean  so  harmonious  as  to  render  the  poetry 
grateful  to  the  ear  in  recitation,  and  suitable  to  musical 
accompaniment ;  for  which  purpose,  the  cadence  of 
well  modulated  prose  would  fully  answer ;  a  fact, 
which  will  not  be  controverted  by  any  person  with 
a  moderately  good  ear,  that  has  ever  heard  a  chapter 
of  Isaiah  skilfully  read  from  our  authorised  transla 
tion  ;  that  has  ever  listened  to  one  of  Kent's  Anthem* 
well  performed,  or  to  a  song  from  the  Messiah  of 
Handel." 

Abarbanel  (on  Is.  v.)  iwKes  three  divisions  ol 
Hebrew  poeti-y,  including  in  the  first  the  modern 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

poems  which,  in  imitation  of  the  Arnbic,  are  con 
structed  according  to  modern  principles  of  versificn- 
tion.  Amonjr  the  ^eond  class  he  arranges  such  as 
have  no  metre,  but  are  adapted  to  melodies.  In 
these  occur  the  poetical  forms  of  words,  lengthened 
and  abbreviated,  and  the  like.  To  this  class  belong 
the  songs  of  Moses  in  Ex.  xv.,  Deut.  xxxii.,  the  song 
of  Deborah,  and  the  song  of  David.  The  third  class 
includes  those  compositions  which  are  distinguished 
not  by  their  form  but  by  the  figurative  character  c.f 
their  descriptions,  as  the  Song  of  Songs,  and  the 
Song  of  Isaiah. 

Among  those  who  maintain  the  absence  of  any 
regularity  perceptible  to  the  ear  in  the  composition 
of  Hebrew  poetry,  may  be  mentioned  Richard  Simon 
(Hist.  Crh.  du  V.  T.  i.  c.  8,  p.  57),  Wasmuth 
(Inst.  Ace.  Hebr.  p.  14),  Alstedius  (Enc.  Bibl.  c. 
27,  p.  257),  the  author  of  the  book  Cozri,  and  R. 
Azariah  de  Rossi,  in  his  book  entitled  Meor  Enayim. 
The  author  of  the  book  Cozri  held  that  the  Hebrews 
had  no  metre  bound  by  the  laws  of  diction,  because 
their  poetry  being  intended  to  be  sung  was  there 
fore  independent  of  metrical  laws.  K.  Azariah  ex 
presses  his  approbation  of  the  opinions  of  Cozri  and 
Abarbauel,  who  deny  the  existence  of  songs  in  Scrip 
ture  composed  after  the  manner  of  modern  Hebrew 
poems,  but  he  adds  nevertheless,  that  beyond  doubt 
there  are  other  measures  which  depend  upon  the 
sense.  Mendelssohn  (on  Ex.  xv.)  also  rejects  the 
system  of  myi3ni  nniV  (literally,  pegs  and 
vowels).b  Rabbi  Azariah  appears  to  have  antici 
pated  Bishop  Lowth  in  his  theory  of  parallelism  : 
'  at  any  rate  his  treatise  contains  the  germ  which 
Lowth  developed,  and  may  be  considered,  as  Jebb 
calls  it,  the  technical  basis  of  his  system.  But  it 
also  contains  other  elements,  which  will  be  alluded 
to  hereafter.  His  conclusion,  in  Lowth's  words 
(Isaiah,  prel.  diss.),  was  as  follows : — "  That  the 
sacred  songs  have  undoubtedly  certain  measures  and 
proportions  which,  however,  do  not  consist  in  the 
number  of  syllables,  perfect  or  imperfect,  accordin 
to  the  form  of  the  modern  verse  which  the  Jews 
make  use  of,  and  which  is  borrowed  from  the  Ara 
bians  (though  the  Arabic  prosody,  he  observes,  is 
too  complicated  to  be  applied  to  the  Hebrew  lan 
guage)  ;  but  in  the  number  of  things,  and  of  the 
parts  of  things, — that  is,  the  subject,  and  the  pre- 
licate,  and  their  adjuncts,  in  every  sentence  and 
proposition.  Thus  a  phrase,  containing  two  parts 
of  a  proposition,  consists  of  two  measures ;  add  an 
other  containing  two  more,  and  they  become  four 
measures  ;  another  again,  containing  three  parts  ot 
a  proposition,  consists  of  three  measures;  add  to  it 
another  of  the  like,  and  you  have  six  measures." 

The  following  example  will  serve  for  an  illustra 
tion  : — 

Thy-rlght-hand,  0-Jehovah,  Is-glorious  in-power, 

Thy-right-hand,  0-Jehovah,  bath-crushed  the-enemy. 

The  words  connected  by  a  hyphen  form  a  term ,  and 
the  two  lines,  forming  four  measures  each,  may  be 
called  tetrameters.  "  Upon  the  whole,  the  author 
concludes,  that  the  poetical  parts  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  are  not  composed  according  to  the  rules 
and  measures  of  certain  feet,  dissyllables,  trisyl 
lables,  or  the  like,  as  the  poems  of  the  modern 
Jews  are ;  but  nevertheless  have  undoubtedly  other 
measures  which  depend  on  things,  as  above  ex- 
pkintd.  For  which  reason  they  are  more  excellent 


»  *^JV  is  a  syllable,  simple  <  r  compound,  beginning 
•with  a  consonant  bearing  movinp.  S/'eca  (Mason  and  Ber 
nard's  lieb.  C,r.  ii.  103). 


POETRY,  HEBREW  HUH 

than  those  which  consist  of  certain  feet,  tccordine 
to  the  number  and  quantity  of  syllables.  Of  this, 
ays  he,  you  may  judge  yourself  in  the  Songs  of 
the  Prophets.  For  do  you  not  see,  if  you  translate 
some  of  them  into  another  language,  that  they  still 
•ceep  and  retain  their  measure,  if  not  wholly,  at  Ira.sf 
in  part?  whii;h  cannot  be  the  case  in  those  verses, 
the  measures  of  which  arise  from  a  certain  quantity 
and  number  ot  syllables."  Lowth  expresses  his 
general  agreement  with  R.  Azariah's  exposition  ol' 
the  rhythm  us  of  things;  but  instead  of  regarding 
terms,  or  phrases,  or  senses,  in  single  lines,  as  mea 
sures,  he  considered  "only  that  relation  and  propor 
tion  of  one  verse  to  another,  which  arises  from  the 
correspondence  of  terms,  and  from  the  form  of 
construction ;  from  whence  results  a  rhythmus  of 
propositions,  and  a  harmony  of  sentences."  But 
Lowth's  system  of  parallelism  was  more  completely 
anticipated  by  Schoettgen  in  a  treatise,  of  the  exist 
ence  of  which  the  bishop  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  aware.  It  is  found  in  his  Horae  Hebralcae, 
vol.  i.  pp.  1249-1263,  diss.  vi.,  "  de  Exergasia 
Sacra."  This  exergasia  he  defines  to  be,  the  con 
junction  of  entire  sentences  signifying  the  same 
thing :  so  that  exergasia  bears  the  same  relation  to 
sentences  that  synonymy  does  to  words.  It  is  only 
found  in  those  Hebrew  writings  which  rise  al»ove 
the  level  of  historical  narrative  and  the  ordinary 
kind  of  speech.  Ten  canons  are  then  laid  down, 
each  illustrated  by  three  examples,  from  which  it 
will  be  seen  how  far  Schoettgen's  system  corre 
sponded  with  Lowth's.  (1.)  Perfect  exergasia  is 
when  the  members  of  the  two  clauses  correspond, 
each  to  each  ;  as  in  Ps.  xxxiii.  7  ;  Num.  xxiv.  17  ; 
Luke  i.  47.  (2.)  Sometimes  in  the  second  clause  the 
subject  is  omitted,  as  in  Is.  i.  18  ;  Prov.  vii.  19  ; 
Ps.  cxxix.  3.  (3.)  Sometimes  part  of  the  subject  is 
omitted,  as  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  30,  cii.  28  ;  Is.  liii.  5. 
(4.)  The  predicate  is  sometimes  omitted  in  the  second 
clause,  as  in  Num.  xxiv.  5;  Ps.  xxxiii.  12;  cxxiii.  6. 
(5.)  Sometimes  part  only  of  the  predicate  is  omitted, 
? s  in  Ps.  Ivii.  9,  ciii.  1 ,  cxxix.  7.  (6.)  Words  are  added 
in  one  member  which  are  omitted  in  the  other,  as  in 
Num.  xxiii.  18  ;  Ps.  cii.  29  ;  Dan.  xii.  3.  (7.)  Some 
times  two  propositions  will  occur,  treating  of  different 
things,  but  referring  to  one  general  proposition,  as 
in  Ps.  xciv.  9,  cxxviii.  3 ;  Wisd.  iii.  16.  (8.)  Cases 
occur,  in  which  the  second  proposition  is  the  con 
trary  of  the  first,  as  in  Prov.  xv.  8,  xiv.  1,  11. 
(9.)  Entire  propositions  answer  each  to  each,  al 
though  the  subject  and  predicate  are  not  the  same,  KS 
in  Ps.  li.  7,  cxix.  168  ;  Jer.  viii.  22.  (10.)  Exergasia 
is  found  with  three  members,  as  in  Ps.  i.  1,  cxxx.  5, 
Iii.  9.  These  canons  Schoettgen  applied  to  the  in 
terpretation  of  Scripture,  of  which  he  gives  examples 
in  the  remainder  of  this  and  the  following  Disser 
tation. 

But  whatever  may  have  been  achieved  by  his 
predecessors,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  deli 
very  of  Lowth's  lectures  on  Hebrew  Poetry,  and  the 
subsequent  publication  of  his  translation  of  Isainh, 
formed  an  era  in  the  literature  of  the  subject,  more 
marked  than  any  that  had  preceded  it.  Of  his 
system  it  will  be  necessary  to  give  a  somewhat  de 
tailed  account ;  for  whatever  may  have  been  done 
since  his  time,  and  whatever  modifications  of  hia 
arrangement  may  have  been  introduced,  all  subse 
quent  writers  have  confessed  their  obligations  to  the 
two  works  aliovementioned,  and  have  drawn  their 
inspiration  from  them.  Starting  with  the  alpha 
betical  poems  es  the  basis  of  his  investigation, 
because  that  in  them  the  verses  or  staazas  wert 
3  M  2 


300 


POFTRY,  HEBREW 


mere  distinctly  marked,  Lowth  came  to  the  conclu- 
sion  that  they  consist  of  verses  properly  so  called, 
"of  verses  regulated  by  some  observation  of  har- 
rnoay  or  cadence ;  of  measure,  numbers,  or  rhythm," 
and  that  this  harmony  does  not  arise  from  rhyme, 
but  from  what  he  denominates  parallelism.  Paral 
lelism  he  defines  to  be  the  correspondence  of  one 
verse  cr  line  with  another,  and  divides  it  into  three 
classes,  synonymous,  antithetic,  and  synthetic. 

1.   Parallel  lines  synonymous  correspond  to  each 
other  by  expressing  tne  same  sense  in  different  but 
equivalent  terms,  as  in  the  following  examples,  which 
are  only  two  of  the  many  given  by  Lowth : — 
"  OJ'jhovah,  in-thy-strength  the-king  snail-rejoice; 

And-in-thy-salvation  how  greatly  shall-he-exult ! 

The-desire  ot'-his-heart  tbou-hast-granted  unto-him ; 

And-the-request  of-his-lips  thou-hast-not  denied." 

Ps.  xxi.  1,  2. 
"  For  the-moth  shall-consume-them  llke-a-garment ; 

And-the-worm  shall-eat-them  like  wool : 

But-my-rigbteonsness  shall-endure  for-ever; 

And-my-salvation  to-tbe-age  ot-ages."— Is.  li.  7,  8. 

It  will  be  obsei-ved  from  the  examples  which 
Lowth  gives  that  the  parallel  lines  sometimes  con 
sist  of  three  or  more  synonymous  terms,  sometimes 
of  two,  sometimes  only  of  one.  Sometimes  the 
lines  consist  each  of  a  double  member,  or  two  pro 
positions,  as  Ps.  cxliv.  5,  6;  Is.  Ixv.  21,  22. 
Parallels  are  formed  also  by  a  repetition  of  part 
of  the  first  sentence  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  1, 11, 16 ;  Is.  xxvi. 
5,  6  ;  Hos.  vi.  4) ;  and  sometimes  a  part  has  to  be 
supplied  from  the  former  to  complete  the  sentence 
(2  Sam.  xxii.  41 ;  Job  xxvi.  5 ;  Is.  xli.  28).  Parallel 
triplets  occur  in  Job  iii.  4,  6,  9;  Ps.  cxii.  10;  Is. 
ix.  20;  Joel  iii.  13.  Examples  of  parallels  of  four 
lines,  in  which  two  distichs  form  one  stanza,  are 
Ps.  xxxzii.  1,2;  Is.  i.  3,  xlix.  4;  Am.  i.  2.  In 
periods  of  five  lines  the  odd  line  sometimes  comes  in 
between  two  distichs,  as  in  Job  viii.  5,  6  ;  Is.  xlvi. 
7 ;  Hos.  xiv.  9  ;  Joel  iii.  16 :  or  after  two  distichs 
closes  the  stanza,  as  in  Is.  xliv.  26.  Alternate 
parallelism  in  stanzas  of  four  lines  is  found  in 
Ps.  ciii.  11,12;  Is.  xxx.  16  ;  but  the  most  striking 
examples  of  the  alternate  quatrain  are  Deut.  xxxii. 
25,  42,  the  first  line  forming  a  continuous  sense 
with  the  third,  and  the  second  with  the  fourth 
(comp:  Is.  xxxiv.  6  ;  Gen.  xlix.  6).  In  Is.  1.  10  we 
find  an  alternate  quatrain  followed  by  a  fifth  line. 
To  this  first  division  of  Lowth's  Jebb  objects  that 
the  name  synonymous  is  inappropriate,  for  the 
second  clause,  with  few  exceptions,  "  diversifies  the 
preceding  clause,  and  generally  so  as  to  rise  above 
it,  forming  a  sort  of  climax  in  the  sense."  This 
peculiarity  was  recognised  by  Lowth  himself  in  his 
4th  Praelection,  where  he  says,  "  idem  iterant,  va 
riant,  augent,"  thus  marking  a  cumulative  force  in 
this  kind  of  parallelism.  The  same  was  observed 
by  Abp.  Newcome  in  his  Preface  to  Ezekiel,  where 
examples  are  given  in  which  "  the  following  clauses 
so  diversify  the  preceding  ones  as  to  rise  above 
them"  (Is.  xlii.  7,  xliii.  16;  Ps.  xcv.  2,  civ.  1). 
Jebb,  in  support  of  his  own  opinion,  appeals  to  the 
passages  quoted  by  Lowth  (Ps.  xxi.  12,  cvii.  38 ; 
Is.  Iv.  6,  7),  and  suggests  as  a  more  appropriate 
name  for  parallelism  of  this  kind,  cognate  parallelism 
(Sacr.  Lit.  p.  38). 

2.  Lowth's  second  division  is  antithetic  paral 
lelism  ;  when  two  lines  correspond  with  each  other 
by  an  opposition  of  terms  and  sentiments ;  when 
the  second  is  contrasted  with  the  first,  sometimes 
in  expressions,  sometimes  in  sense  only,  so  thai 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

he  degrees  of  antithesis  are  various.     Ae  ,or  ax- 
imple — 
"  A  wise  son  rejolceth  his  father ; 

But  a  foolish  son  is  the  grief  of  his  mother."—  Pro*.  *.  L 
"  The  memory  of  the  ju..t  is  a  blessing ; 

But  the  name  of  the  wicked  shall  rot." — Plov.  z.  7. 

The  gnomic  poetry  of  the  Hebrews  abounds  with 
llustrations  of  antithetic  parallelism.  Other  ex 
amples  are  Ps.  xx.  7,  8 : — 

These  In  chariots,  and  those  in  horses 

But  we  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  our  God  will  be  strong. 

They  are  bowed  down,  and  fallen ; 

But  we  are  risen,  and  maintain  ourselves  firm." 

Compare  also  Ps.  xxx.  5,  xxxvii.  10,  11;  Is.  liv. 
10,  ix.  10.  On  these  two  kinds  of  parallelism  Jebb 
appropriately  remarks: — "  The  Antithetic  Paral 
lelism  serves  to  mark  the  broad  distinctions  between 
truth  and  falsehood,  and  good  and  evil :  the  Cognate 
Parallelism  discharges  the  more  difficult  and  more 
critical  function  of  discriminating  between  different 
degrees  of  truth  ami  good  on  the  one  hand,  of  false 
hood  and  evil  on  the  other  "  (Sacr.  Lit.  p.  39). 

3.  Synthetic  or  constructive  parallelism,  where 
the  parallel  "  consists  only  in  the  similar  form  of 
construction;  in  which  word  does  not  answer  to 
word,  and  sentence  to  sentence,  as  equivalent  or 
opposite ;  but  there  is  a  correspondence  and  equality 
between  different  propositions,   in   respect  of  the 
shape  and  turn  of  the  whole  sentence,  and  of  the 
constructive  parts — such  as  noun  answering  to  noun, 
verb  to  verb,  member  to  member,  negative  to  nega 
tive,  interrogative  to  interrogative."     One  of  the 
examples  of  constructive  parallels  given  by  Lowth 
is  Is.  1.  5,  6 : — 

"  The  Lord  Jehovah  hath  opened  mine  ear, 
And  I  was  not  rebellious; 
Neither  did  I  withdraw  myself  backward— 
I  gave  my  back  to  the  smitere, 
And  my  cheeks  to  them  that  plucked  off  the  hair ; 
My  face  1  hid  not  from  shame  and  spitting." 

Jebb  gives  as  an  illustration  Ps.  xix.  7-10: — 
The  law  of  Jehovah  is  perfect,  converting  the  soul. 
The  testimony  of  Jehovah  is  sure,  making  wise  the 

simple,"  &c. 

It  is  instructive,  as  showing  how  difficult,  if  not 
impossible,  it  is  to  make  any  strict  classification  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  to  observe  that  this  very  passage  is 
given  by  Geseuius  as  an  example  of  synonymous 
parallelism,  while  De  Wette  calls  it  synthetic.  Tht 
illustration  'of  synthetic  parallelism  quoted  by  Gese- 
nius  is  Ps.  xxvii.  4 : — 
"  One  thing  I  ask  from  Jehovah. 

It  will  1  seek  after — 
My  dwelling  In  the  house  of  Jehovah  all  the  days 

of  my  life, 

To  behold  the  beauty  of  Jehovah, 
And  to  inquire  in  his  temple." 

In  this  kind  of  parallelism,  as  Nordheimer  (Gram 
Ana.1.  p.  87)  observes,  "  an  idea  is  neither  repeated 
nor  followed  by  its  opposite,  but  is  kept  in  view 
by  the  writer,  while  he  proceeds  to  develope  and 
enforce  his  meaning  by  accessory  ideas  and  modi 
fications." 

4.  To  the  three  kinds  of  parallelism  above  described 
Jebb  adds  a  fourth,  which  seems  rather  to  be  an 
unnecessary  refinement  upon  than  distinct  from  the 
others.     He  denominates  it  introverted  parallelism, 
in  which  he  says,  "  there  are  stanzas  so  constructed 
that,  whatever  be  the  number  of  lines,  the  first  line 
shall  be  parallel  with  the  last;  the  second  with  the 
penultimate ;  and  so  throughout  in  an  order  that 


POETRY,  HEBREW 

looks  inward,  or,  to  borrow  a  military  phras;,  from 
flanks  to  centre  "  (Sacr.  Lit.  p.  53).     Thus — 
"  My  son,  if  thine  heart  be  wise, 
My  heart  also  shall  rejoice ; 
Yea,  my  reins  shall  rejoice 
When  thy  lips  speak  right  things." 

Prov.  xxiii.  15,  16. 
•Unto Thee  do  I  lift  up  mine  eyes,  OThou  that  dwellest 

in  the  heavens ; 
Behold  as  the  eyes  of  servants  to  the  hand  of  their 

masters ; 

As  the  eyes  of  a  maiden  to  the  hands  of  her  mistress : 
Even  so  look  our  eyes  to  Jehovah  our  God,  until  he  have 

mercy  upon  us."— Ps.  cxxiii.  1,  2. 
Upon  examining  these  and  the  other  examples 
quoted  by  Bishop  Jebb  in  support  of  his  new  divi 
sion,  to  which  he  attaches  great  importance,  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  peculiarity  consists  in  the  structure 
of  the  stanza,  and  not  in  the  nature  of  the  paral 
lelism  ;  and  any  one  'who  reads  Ewald's  elaborate 
treatise  on  this  part  of  the  subject  will  rise  from 
the  reading  with  the  conviction  that  to  attempt  to 
classify  Hebrew  poetiy  according  to  the  character 
of  the  stanzas  employed  will  be  labour  lost  and  in 
vain,  resulting  only  in  a  system  which  is  no  system, 
and  in  rules  to  which  the  exceptions  are  more  nu 
merous  than  the  examples. 

A  few  words  may  now  be  added  with  respect  to 
the  classification  proposed  by  De  Wette,  in  which 
more  regard  was  had  to  the  rhythm.  The  four 
kinds  of  parallelism  are — 1.  That  which  consists  in 
au  equal  number  of  words  in  each  member,  as  in 
Gen.  iv.  23.  This  he  calls  the  original  and  perfect 
kind  of  parallelism  of  members,  which  correspondr 
with  metre  and  rhyme,  without  being  identica 
with  them  (Die  Psalmen,  EM.  §7).  Under  this 
head  are  many  minor  divisions. — 2.  Unequal  paral 
lelism,  in  which  the  number  of  words  in  the  mem 
bers  is  not  the  same.  This  again  is  divided  into — 
a.  The  simple,  as  Ps.  Ixviii.  33.  6.  The  composite 
consisting  of  the  synonymous  (Job  x.  1 ;  Ps.  xxxvi 
7),  the  antithetic  (Ps.  xv.  4),  and  the  syntheti 
(Ps.  xv.  5).  c.  That  in  which  the  simple  membe 
is  disproportionately  small  (Ps.  xl.  10).  d.  Wher 
the  composite  member  grows  up  into  three  am 
more  sentences  (Ps.  i.  3,  Ixv.  10).  e.  Instead  o 
the  close  parallelism  there  sometimes  occurs  a  shor 
additional  clause,  as  in  Ps.  xxiii.  3. — 3.  Out  of  th 
parallelism  which  is  unequal  in  consequence  of  th 
composite  character  of  one  member,  another  is  de 
veloped,  so  that  both  members  are  composite  (Ps 
xxxi.  11).  This  kind  of  parallelism  again  admit 
of  three  subdivisions. — 4.  Rhythmical  parallelism 
which  lies  merely  in  the  external  form  of  the  die 
tion.  Thus  in  Ps.  xix.  11  there  is  nearly  an  equa 
number  of  words : — 

"  Moreover  by  them  was  thy  servant  warned, 

In  keeping  of  them  there  is  great  reward." 
In  Ps.  xxx.  3  the  inequality  is  remarkable.  I 
Ps.  xiv.  7  is  found  a  double  and  a  single  membe 
and  in  Ps.  xxxi.  23  two  double  members.  De  Wet 
also  held  that  there  were  in  Hebrew  poetry  tl 
beginnings  of  a  composite  rhythmical  structure  HI 
our  strophes.  Thus  in  Ps.  xlii.,  xliii.,  a  refrain  mart 
the  conclusion  of  a  larger  rhythmical  period.  Som 
thing  similar  is  observable  in  Ps.  cvii.  This  ait 
ficial  structure  appears  to  belong  to  a  late  perio 
or  Hebrew  literature,  and  to  the  same  period  ma 
probably  be  assigned  the  remarkable  gradation 
rhythm  whioh  appears  in  the  Songs  of  Degree 
e.  a.  P».  cxxi.  It  must  be  observed  that  this  gr 
dational  rhythm  is  very  different  from  the  cum 


1'OETRY,  HEBREW 


901 


;i  ¥e  parallelism  of  the  Song  of  Deborah,  which  is 

a  much  earlier  date,  and  bears  traces  of  less  cllbrt 

the  composition.     Strophes  of  a  certain  kind  art 

und  in  the  alphabetical  pieces  in  wluct  severn! 

asorethic  clauses  belong  to  one  letter  (Ps.  ix.,  x., 

:xvii.,  cxix. ;  Lam.  iii.),  but  the  nearest  approach 

anything  like  a  strophical  character  is  found  in 

iems  which  are  divided  into  smaller  portions  by  a 

frain,  and  have  the  initial  or  final  verse  the  same 

r  similar  (Ps.  xxxix.,  xlii.,  xliii.).     In  the  opinion 

some  the  occurrence  of  the  word  Selah  is  supposed 

>  mark  the  divisions  of  the  strophes. 

It  is  impossible  here  to  do  more  than  refer  to  the 

say  of  Koester  (Theol.  Stud,  und  Krit.  1831. 

p.  40-114)  on  the  strophes,  or  the  parallelism  01 

erses  in  Hebrew  poetry ;  in  which  he  endeavours 

show  that  the  verses  are  subject  to  the  same  laws 

'  symmetry  as  the  verse  mem  here  ;  and  that  con- 

equently  Hebrew  poetry  is  essentially  strophical  in 

aracter.     Ewald's  treatise  requires  more  careful 

onsideration ;  but  it  must  be  read  itself,  and  a 

ight sketch  only  can  here  be  given.    Briefly  thus: 

— Verses  are  divided  into  verse-members  in  which 

number  of  syllables  is  less  restricted,  as  there 

no  syllabic  metre.     A  verse-member  generally 

ontains  from  seven  to  eight  syllables.     Two  mem- 

jers,  the  rise  and  fall,  are  the  fundamental  con- 

tituents:  thus  (Judg.  v.  3j: — 

"  Hear,  ye  kings !  give  ear,  ye  princes ! 

1  to  Jahve,  I  will  sing." 

'o  this  all  other  modifications  must  be  capable  oi 
jeiug  reduced.  The  variations  which  may  take 
jlace  may  be  either  amplifications  or  continuations 
>f  the  rhythm,  or  compositions  in  which  a  complete 
hythm  is  made  the  half  of  a  new  compound,  01 
we  may  have  a  diminution  or  enfeeblement  of  the 
original.  To  the  two  members  correspond  two 
thoughts  which  constitute  the  life  of  the  verse,  and 
each  of  these  again  may  distribute  itself.  Gradations 
of  symmetry  are  formed — 1.  By  the  echo  of  the 
whole  sentence,  where  the  same  sense  which  is 
riven  in  the  first  member  rises  again  in  the  second, 
n  order  to  exhaust  itself  more  thoroughly  (Gen.  iv. 
23 ;  Prov.  i.  8).  An  important  word  of  the  first 
member  often  reserves  its  force  for  the  second,  as  in 
Ps.  xx.  8 ;  and  sometimes  in  the  second  member  .» 
principal  part  of  the  sense  of  the  first  is  further 
developed,  as  Ps.  xlix.  5  [6].— 2.  When  the  thought 
trails  through  two  members  of  a  verse,  as  in  Ps. 
ex.  5,  it  gives  rise  to  a  less  animated  rhythm 
(comp.  also  Ps.  cxli.  10). — 3.  Two  sentences  may 
be  brought  together  as  protasis  and  apodosis,  or 
simply  to  form  one  complex  thought ;  the  external 
harmony  may  be  dispensed  with,  but  the  harmony 
of  thought  remains.  This  may  be  called  the  inter 
mediate  rhythm.  The  forms  of  structure  assumed 
by  the  verse  are  many.  First,  there  is  the  single 
member,  which  occurs  at  the  commencement  ot  a 
series  in  Ps.  xviii.  2,  xxiii.  1 ;  at  the  end  of  a  series 
in  Ex.  xv.  18,  Ps.  xcii.  9 ;  and  in  the  middle,  after 
a  short  pause,  in  Ps.  xxix.  7.  The  bimembral  verse 
is  most  frequently  found,  consisting  of  two  member! 
of  nearly  equal  weight.  Verses  of  more  than  twc 
members  are  formed  either  by  increasing  the  num 
ber  of  members  from  two  to  three,  so  that  the 
complete  fall  may  be  reserved  for  the  third,  all 
three  possessing  the  same  power ;  or  by  combining 
four  members  two  and  two,  as  in  Ps.  xviii.  7, 
xxviii.  1. 

The  varieties  of  this  structure  of  verse  are  too 
numerous  to  be  recounted,  and  the  laws  of  rhythm 
in  Hebrew  poetry  are  so  free,  that  of  necessity  the 


902 


POETRY,  HEBREW 


varieties  of  verse  structure  must  be  manifold.  The 
gnomic  or  sententious  rhythm,  Kwald  remarks,  is 
the  one  which  is  perfectly  symmetrical.  Two  mem 
bers  of  seven  or  eight  syllables,  corresponding  to 
«ach  other  as  rise  and  fall,  contain  a  thesis  and  anti 
thesis,  a  subject  and  its  image.  This  is  the  constant 
form  of  genuine  gnomic  sentences  of  the  best  period. 
Those  of  a  later  date  have  many  members  or  trail 
themselves  through  many  verses.  The  animation 
of  the  lyrical  rhythm  makes  it  break  through  all 
such  restraints,  and  leads  to  an  amplification  or  re 
duplication  of  the  normal  form ;  or  the  passionate 
rapidity  of  the  thoughts  may  disturb  the  simple 
concord  of  the  membei's,  so  that  the  unequal  struc 
ture  of  verse  intrudes  with  all  its  varieties.  To 
show  how  impossible  it  is  to  attempt  a  classification 
of  vei-se  uttered  under  such  circumstances,  it  will 
be  only  necessary  to  quote  Kwald's  own  words. 
"  All  these  varieties  of  rhythm,  however,  exert  a 
pert'ectly  free  influence  upon  every  lyrical  song, 
just  according  as  it  suits  the  mood  of  the  moment 
to  vary  the  simple  rhythm.  The  most  beautiful 
songs  of  the  flourishing  period  of  poetry  allow,  in 
fact,  the  verse  of  many  members  to  predominate 
whenever  the  diction  rises  with  any  sublimity ; 
nevertheless,  the  standard  rhythm  still  returns  in 
each  when  the  diction  flags,  and  the  different  kinds 
of  the  more  complex  rhythm  are  employed  with 
equal  freedom  and  ease  of  variation,  just  as  they 
severally  accord  with  the  fluctuating  hues  of  the 
mood  of  emotion,  and  of  the  sense  of  the  diction. 
The  late  alphabetical  songs  are  the  first  in  which 
the  fixed  choice  of  a  particular  versification,  a  choice, 
too,  made  with  designed  art,  establishes  itself  firmly, 
and  maintains  itself  symmetrically  throughout  all 
the  verses"  (Dichter  des  A.  B.  i.  p.  83  ;  trans,  in 
Kitto's  Journal,  i.  p.  318).  It  may,  however,  be 
generally  observed,  that  the  older  rhythms  are  the 
most  animated,  as  if  accompanied  by  the  hands  and 
feet  of  the  singer  (Num.  xxi. ;  Ex.  xv. ;  Judg.  v.), 
and  that  in  the  time  of  David  the  rhythm  had 
attained  its  most  perfect  development.  By  the  end 
of  the  8th  century  B.C.  the  decay  of  versification 
begins,  and  to  this  period  belong  the  artificial  forms 
of  verse. 

It  remains  now  only  to  notice  the  rules  of  Hebrew 
)x>etty  as  laid  down  by  the  Jewish  grammarians,  to 
which  reference  was  made  in  remarking  upon  the 
system  of  R.  Azariah.  They  have  the  merit  of 
being  extremely  simple,  and  are  to  be  found  at 
length,  illustrated  by  many  examples,  in  Mason  and 
Bernard's  Heb.  Gram.  vol.  ii.  let.  57,  and  accom 
panied  by  an  interesting  account  of  modern  Hebrew 
versification.  The  rules  are  briefly  these : — 1.  That 
a  sentence  may  be  dividad  into  members,  some  of 
which  contain  two,  three.,  or  evsn  four  words,  and 
are  accordingly  termed  Binary,  Ternary,  and  Qua 
ternary  members  respectively.  2.  The  sentences 
are  composed  either  of  Binary,  Ternary,  or  Qua 
ternary  members  entirely,  or  of  these  different 
members  intermixed.  3.  That  in  two  consecutive 
members  it  is  an  elegance  to  express  the  same  idea 
in  different  words.  4.  That  a  word  expressed  in 
either  of  these  parallel  members  is  often  not  ex 
pressed  in  the  alternate  member.  5.  That  a  word 
without  an  accent,  being  joined  to  another  word  by 
Makkiph,  is  generally  (though  not  always)  reckoned 
with  that  second  word  as  one.  It  will  be  seen  that 
these  rules  are  essentially  the  same  with  those  of 
I.owth,  De  Wette,  and  other  writers  on  parallelism, 
and  from  their  simplicity  are  less  open  to  objection 
than  any  that  have  been  given. 


POISON 

In  conclusion,  after  reviewing  the  various  theories 
which  have  l>een  trained  with  regaid  to  the  struc 
ture  of  Hebrew  poetry,  it  must  be  confessed  thai 
beyond  the  discovery  of  very  broad  general  lawc, 
little  has  been  done  towards  elaborating  a  satisfac 
tory  system.  Probably  this  want  of  success  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  there  is  no  system  to  discover,  and 
that  Hebrew  poetiy,  while  possessed,  in  the  highest 
degree,  of  all  sweetness  and  variety  of  rhythm  and 
melody,  is  not  fettered  hv  laws  of  versification  as 
we  understand  the  term. 

For  the  literature  of  the  subject,  in  addition  to 
the  works  already  quoted,  reference  may  be  made 
to  the  following: — Carpzov,  Intr.  ad  Libr.  Can. 
Bibl.  pt.  2,  c.  1 ;  Lowth,  De  Sacra  Poesi  ffebrae- 
ornm  Praelectioncs,  with  notes  by  J.  D.  Michaelii 
and  Rosenmiiller  (Oxon.  1828);  the  Preliminary 
Dissertation  in  his  translation  of  Isaiah  ;  Herder, 
Gcist  der  Ilebr.  Poesie  ;  Jebb,  Sacred  Literature ; 
Saalschutz,  Von  der  Form  der  Hebr.  Poesie,  K6- 
nigsberg,  1825,  which  contains  the  most  complete 
account  of  all  the  various  theories;  De  Wette, 
Ueber  die  Psalmen  ;  Meier,  Gesch.  der  poet.  Na- 
tional-Literatur  der  Hebr&er  ;  Delitzsch,  Com- 
mentar  iibcr  den  Psalter;  and  Hupfeld,  Die 
Psalmen.  [W.  A.  W.] 

POISON.  Two  Hebrew  words  are  thus  ren 
dered  in  the  A.  V.  but  they  are  so  general  as  to 
throw  little  light  upon  the  knowledge  and  practice 
of  poisons  among  the  Hebrews.  1.  The  first  of 
these,  HOn,  c/temdh,  from  a  root  signifying,  "to 

be  hot,"  is  used  of  the  heat  produced  by  wine  (Hos. 
vii.  5),  and  the  hot  passion  of  anger  (Deut.  xxix. 
27,  &c.),  as  well  as  of  the  burning  venom  of  poisonous 
serpents  (Deut.  xxxii.  24,  33 ;  Ps.  Iviii.  4,  cxl.  3). 
It  in  all  cases  denotes  animal  poison,  and  not  veget 
able  or  mineral.  The  only  allusion  to  its  applica 
tion  is  in  Job  vi.  4,  where  reference  seems  to  be  made 
to  the  custom  of  anointing  arrows  with  the  venonr. 
of  a  snake,  a  practice  the  origin  of  which  is  of  very 
remote  antiquity  (comp.  Horn.  Od.  i.  261,  262 
Ovid,  Trist.  iii.  10,  64,  Fast.  v.  397,  &c.;  Plin. 
xviii.  1).  The  Soanes,  a  Caucasian  race  mentioned 
by  Strabo  (xi.  p.  499),  were  especially  skilled  in  the 
art.  Pliny  (vi.  34)  mentions  a  tribe  of  Arab  pirates 
who  infested  the  Red  Sea,  and  were  armed  with 
poisoned  arrows  like  the  Malays  of  the  coast  of 
Borneo.  For  this  purpose  the  berries  of  the  yew- 
tree  (Plin.  xvi.  20)  were  employed.  The  Gauls 
(Plin.  xxvii.  76)  used  a  poisonous  herb,  limeum, 
supposed  by  some  to  be  the  "  leopard's  bane,"  and  the 
Scythians  dipped  their  arrow  points  in  viper's  venom 
mixed  with  human  blood.  These  were  so  deadly, 
that  a  slight  scratch  inflicted  by  them  was  tatal 
(P)in.  3d.  115).  The  practice  was  so  common  that 
the  name  To^inSv,  originally  a  poison  in  which 
arrows  were  dipped,  was  applied  to  poison  generally. 
2.  B>iO  (once  BTl,  Deut.  xxxii.  32«),  rosh,  if  a 
poison  at  all,  denotes  a  vegetable  poison  primarily, 
and  is  only  twice  CDeut.  xxxii.  33 ;  Job  jut.  16) 
used  of  the  venom  ot  a  serpent.  In  other  passages 
where  it  occurs,  it  is  translated  "gall"  in  the  A.  V., 
except  in  Hos.  x.  4,  where  it  is  rendered  "  hem 
lock."  In  the  margin  of  Deut.  xxix.  18,  our  trans 
lators,  feeling  the  uncertainty  of  the  wovi,  give  as 
an  alternative  "  rosh,  or,  a  poisonful  herb.''  Beyond 
the  fact  that,  whether  poisonous  or  not,  it  vras  a 
plant  of  bitter  taste,  nothing  can  be  inferred.  That 


»  In  some  MSS.  this  reading  occurs  in  other 
of  which  a  li^t  is  Riven  l>y  Michael's  (Suppl.  p.  2223). 


POLLUX 

itUrness  was.  its  prevailing  characteristic  is  evident 
from  its  being  associated  with  wormwood  (Deut. 
xxix.  18  [17];  Lam.  iii.  19;  Am.  ri.  12),  and 
from  the  allusions  to  "water  of  rosh"  in  Jer.  viii. 
14,  ix.  15,  xxiii.  15.  It  was  not  a  juice  or  liquid 
•^Ps.  Ixix.  21  [22];  comp.  Mark  xv.  23),  but  pro 
bably  a  bitter  berry,  in  which  case  the  expression 
in  Deut.  xxxii.  32,  "grapes  of  rosh,"  may  be  taken 
literally.  Gesenius,  on  the  ground  that  the  word 
in  Hebrew  also  signifies  "  head,"  rejects  the  hem 
lock,  colocynth,  and  darnel  of  other  writers,  and 
proposes  the  "  poppy  "  instead  ;  from  the  "  heads  " 
in  which  its  seeds  are  contained.  "  Water  of  rosh, " 
is  then  "opium,"  but  it  must  be  admitted  that 
there  appears  in  none  of  the  above  passages  to  be 
any  allusion  to  the  characteristic  effects  of  opium. 
The  effects  of  the  rosh  are  simply  nausea  and  loath 
ing.  It  was  probably  a  general  term  for  any  bitter 
or  nauseous  plant,  whether  poisonous  or  not,  and  be 
came  afterwards  applied  to  the  venom  of  snakes,  as 
the  corresponding  word  in  Chaldee  is  frequently  so 
used.  [GALL.] 

There  is  a  clear  case  of  suicide  by  poison  related 
in  2  Mace.  x.  13,  where  Ptolemeus  Macron  is  said  to 
bave  destroyed  himself  by  this  means.  But  we  do 
not  find  a  trace  of  it  among  the  Jews,  and  certainly 
poisoning  in  any  form  was  not' in  favour  with  them. 
Nor  is  there  any  reference  to  it  in  the  N.  T.,  though 
the  practice  was  fatally  common  at  that  time  in 
Home  (Suet.  Nero,  33,  34,  35 ;  Tib.  73;  Claud.  1). 
U  has  been  suggested,  indeed,  that  the  (pap/jiaKeia 
of  Gal.  v.  20  (A.  V.  "  witchcraft"),  signifies  poison 
ing,  but  this  is  by  no  means  consistent  with  the 
usage  of  the  word  in  the  LXX.  (comp.  Ex.  vii.  11, 
viii.  7,  18,  &c.),  and  with  its  occurrence  in  Rev. 
ix.  21,  where  it  denotes  a  crime  clearly  distinguished 
from  murder  (see  Rev.  xxi.  8,  xxii.  15).  It  more 
probably  refers  to  the  concoction  of  magical  potions 
and  love  philtres. 

On  the  question  of  the  wine  mingled  with  myrrh, 
see  App.  A,  art.  GALL.  [W.  A.  W.] 

POLLUX.     [CASTOR  AND  POLLUX.] 
POLYGAMY.     [MARRIAGE.] 

POMEGRANATE  (P13-|,  rimmon:  f>od,  £oid, 
fioi'ff/cos,  Kt&Scav :  malum  punicum,  malum  gra- 
natum,  malogranatuin)  by  universal  consent  is 
acknowledged  to  denote  the  Heb.  rimmon,  a  word 
which  occurs  frequently  in  the  0.  T.,  and  is  used 
to  designate  either  the  pomegranate-tree  or  its  fruit. 
The  pomegranate  was  doubtless  early  cultivated  in 
Egypt :  hence  the  complaint  of  the  Israelites  in  the 
wilderness  of  Zin  (Num.  xx.  5),  this  "  is  no  place 
of  figs,  or  of  vines,  or  of  pomegranates."  The  tree, 
with  its  characteristic  calyx-crowned  fruit,  is  easily 
recognised  on  the  Egyptian  sculptures  (Anc.  Egypt. 
i.  36,  ed.  1854).  The  spies  brought  to  Joshua  "  of 
the  pomegranates  "  of  the  land  of  Canaan  (Num. 
siii.  23  ;  comp.  also  Deut.  viii.  8).  The  villages  or 
towns  of  Rimmon  (Josh.  xv.  32),  Gath-rimmon 
(xxi.  25),  En-rimmon  (Neh.  xi.  29),  possibly  de 
rived  their  namas  from  pomegranate-trees  which 
grew  in  their  vicinity.  These  trees  suffered  occa 
sionally  from  the  devastations  of  locusts  (Joel  i.  12  ; 
see  also  Hag.  ii.  19).  Mention  is  made  of  "an 
orchard  of  pomegranates"  in  Cant.  iv.  13  ;  and  in 
iv.  3,  the  cheeks  (A.  V.  "temples")  of  the  Be 
loved  are  compared  to  a  section  of  "  pomegranate 
within  the  locks,"  in  allusion  to  the  beautiful  rosy 
colour  of  the  fruit.  Carved  figures  of  the  pome 
granate  adorned  the  tops  o*'  the  pillars  in  Solomon's 


POMMELS 


905s 


Templfi  (I  K.  vii.  18,  20,  &c.);  and  worked  repre 
sentations  ot  this  fruit,  in  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet, 
ornamented  the  hem  of  the  robe  of  the  ephod  (Ex. 
xxviii.  33,  34).  Mention  is  made  of  "  spiced  wine 

<i«>  juice  of  the  pomegranate"  in  Cant.  viii.  2  ; 
wnn  this  may  be  compared  the  pomegranate-wine 

trijs  olvos)  of  which  Dioscorides  (v.  34)  speaks, 
and  which  is  still  used  in  the  East.  Chardin  says 
that  great  quantities  of  it  were  made  in  Persia,  both 
for  home  consumption  and  for  exportation,  in  his 
time  (Script.  Herb.  p.  399 ;  Banner's  06s.  i.  377). 
Russell  (Nat.  Hist,  of  Aleppo,  i.  85,  2nd  ed.)  slate; 
"  that  the  pomegranate  "  (rumman  in  Arabic,  the 
same  word  as  the  Heb.)  "  is  common  in  all  tr.^ 
gardens."  He  speaks  of  three  varieties,  "  one  sweet . 
another  very  acid,  and  a  third  that  partakes  of  both 
qualities  equally  blended.  The  juice  of  the  sour  sort 
is  used  instead  of  vinegar  :  the  others  are  cut  open 
when  served  up  to  table  ;  or  the  grains  taken  out, 
and,  besprinkled  with  sugar  and  rose-water,  are 
brought  to  table  in  saucers."  He  adds  that  the 
trees  are  apt  to  suffer  much  in  severe  winters  from 
extraordinary  cold. 


The  pomegranate-tree  (Punica  granatum)  derives 
its  name  from  the  Latin  pomum  granatum,  "grained 
apple."  The  Romans  gave  it  the  name  of  Punica,  as 
the  tree  was  introduced  from  Carthage ;  it  belongs 
to  the  natural  order  Myrtaceae,  being,  however, 
rather  a  bush  than  a  tree.  The  foliage  if  dark  green, 
the  flowers  are  crimson ;  the  fruit  is  red  when  ripe 
which  in  Palestine  is  about  the  middle  of  October, 
and  contains  a  quantity  of  juice.  The  rind  is  used  in 
the  manufacture  of  morocco  leather,  and,  together 
with  the  bark,  is  sometimes  used  medicinally  U 
expel  the  tape- worm.  Pomegranates  without  seeds 
are  said  to  grow  near  the  river  Cabul.  Dr.  Royle 
(Kitto's  Cyc.  art.  "  Rimmon  ")  states  that  this  tree 
is  a  native  of  Asia,  and  is  to  be  tractd  from  Syria 
through  Persia  even  to  the  mountains  of  Northern 
India.'  [W.  H.] 

POMMELS,  only  in  2  Chr.  iv.  12,  13.  Ir 
1  K.  vii.  41,  "bowls."  The  word  signifies  con 
vex  projections  belonging  to  the  capitals  of  pillars 
[BOWL  :  CHAPITER.  '  1"H.  W.  F  .1 


904 


POND 


POND  Agam*  The  ponds  of  Egypt  (Ex.  vii. 
19,  viii.  5)  .vere  doubtless  water  left  by  the  inun 
dation  of  the  Nile.  In  Is.  xix.  10,  where  Vulg. 
has  qui  faciebant  lacunas  ad  capiendos  pisces, 
I. XX.  lias  01  rbv  £vdov  iroiovvres,  they  who  make 
the  beer.  This  rendering  so  characteristic  of  Egypt 
(Her.  ii.  77  ;  Diod.  i.  34;  Strabo,  p.  799)  arises 
from  regarding  dgdm  as  denoting  a  result  indicated 
by  its  root,  i.  e.  a  fermented  liquor.  St.  Jerome, 
who  alludes  to  beer  cnlled  by  the  name  of  Sabaius, 
explains  ogam  to  mean  water  fermenting  from  stag 
nation  (Hieron.  Com.  on  fs.  lib.  vii.  vol.  iv.  p.  292  ; 
Calmet;  Stanley,  S.  $  P.  App.  §57).  [H.  W.  1'.] 

PONTIUS  PILATE.  [PILATE.] 
PONTUS  (IldVros),  a  large  district  in  the 
north  of  Asia  Minor,  extending  along  the  coast  of 
the  Pontus  Euxinus,  from  which  circumstance  the 
name  was  derived.  It  is  three  times  mentioned  in 
the  N.  T.  It  is  spoken  of  along  with  Asia,  Cappa- 
docia,  Phrygia,  and  Pamphylia  (Acts  ii.  9,  10),  as 
one  of  the  regions  whence  worshippers  came  to 
Jerusalem  at  Pentecost :  it  is  specified  (Acts  xviii.  2) 
as  the  native  country  of  Aquila  ;  and  its  "  scattered 
strangers"  are  addressed  by  St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  1), 
along  with  those  of  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  and 
Bithynia.  All  these  passages  agree  in  showing  that 
there  were  many  Jewish  residents  in  the  district.  As 
to  the  annals  of  Pontus,  the  one  brilliant  passage  of 
its  histoiy  is  the  life  of  the  great  Mithridates  ;  but 
this  is  also  the  period  of  its  coming  under  the  sway 
of  Rome.  Mithridates  was  defeated  by  Pompey,  and 
the  western  part  of  his  dominions  was  incorporated 
with  the  province  of  Bithynia,  while  the  rest  was 
divided,  for  a  considerable  time,  among  various 
chieftains.  Under  Nero  the  whole  region  was  made 
a  Roman  province,  bearing  the  name  of  Pontus. 
The  last  of  the  petty  monarchs  of  the  district  was 
Polemo  II.,  who  married  Berenice,  the  great-grand 
daughter  of  Herod  the  Great.  She  was  probably 
with  Polemo  when  St.  Paul  was  travelling  in  this 
neighbourhood  about  the  year  52.  He  saw  her 
afterwards  at  Caesarea,  about  the  year  60,  with  her 
brother,  Agrippa  II.  [J.  S.  H.] 

POOL.  1 .  Agdm,  see  POND.  2.  Ber&cah  b  in 
pi.  once  only,  pools  (Ps.  Ixxxiv.  6).  3.  The  usual 
word  is  Berecah,  closely  connected  with  the  Arabic 
Birkeh,  and  the  derived  Spanish  with  the  Arabic 
article,  Al-berca.  A  reservoir  for  water.  These 
pools,  like  the  tanks  of  India,  are  in  many  parts  of 
Palestine  and  Syria  the  only  resource  for  water 
during  the  dry  season,  and  the  failure  of  them  in 
volves  drought  and  calamity  (Is.  xlii.  15).  Some 
are  supplied  by  springs,  and  some  are  merely  recep 
tacles  tor  rain-water  (Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  314). 
Of  the  various  pools  mentioned  in  Scripture,  as  of 
Hebron,  Samaria,  &c.  (for  which  see  the- Articles  on 
those  places),  perhaps  the  most  celebrated  are  the 
pools  of  Solomon  near  Bethlehem,  called  by  the  Arabs 
el-Bwak,  from  which  ai  aqueduct  was  carried  which 
still  supplies  Jerusalem  with  water  (Eccl.  ii.  6; 
Ecclus.  xxiv.  30,  31).  They  are  three  in  number, 
partly  hewn  out  of  the  rock,  and  partly  built  with 


D3N ;  eAo? ;  pains ;  plnr.  In  Jer.  11. 32 ;  A.  V.  "  reeds," 
i. «.  reedy  places ;  owni/Kara ;  paludes ;  also  "  pool." 
*>  2.  !"13^2  ;  icoiAas  ;  vallis. 

3.  rU^O  ;  Kprjvrj ;  piscina,  aquaeductus  (Cant.  vii. 
*) ;  KoAv/xj3>}dpa,  AI/AIT)  ;  from  ^3,  "  fall  on  (he  knees  " 
(see  Judg.  vii.  &  6Y  In  N.  T/mtaMhfty*  only  in 
John  v.  2;  ix. 


POOR 

masonry,  but  all  lined  with  cement,  and  formed  or. 
successive  levels  with  conduit-,  leading  from  the 
upper  to  the  lower,  and  flights  of  steps  from  the 
top  to  the  bottom  of  each  (Sandys,  Trav.  p.  1  ."><!}. 
They  are  all  formed  in  the  sides  of  the  valley  of 
Etham,  with  a  dam  across  its  opening,  which  form* 
the  E.  side  of  the  lowest  pool.  Their  dimensions 
are  thus  given  by  Dr.  Robinson  : — (1.)  Upper  pool, 
length  380  feet ;  breadth  at  E.  2:56,  at  W.  229  ; 
depth  at  E.  25  feet;  distance  above  middle  pool, 
160  feet.  (2.)  Middle  pool,  length  423  feet; 
breadth  at  E.  250,  at  W.  160  ;  depth  39  ;  distance 
above  lower  pool  248  feet.  (3.)  Lower  pool,  length 
582  feet ;  breadth  at  E.  207,  at  W.  148 ;  depth 
50  feet.  They  appear  to  be  supplied  mainly  from 
a  spring  in  the  ground  above  (FOUNTAIN  ;  CIS 
TERN;  JERUSALEM,  vol.  i.  p.  994;  CONDUIT 
Robinson,  Ees.  i.  348,  474).  [H.  W.  P.] 

POOR.*  The  general  kindly  spirit  of  the  law 
towards  the  poor  is  sufficiently  shown  by  such  jxis- 
sages  as  Deut.  xv.  7  for  the  reason  that  (ver.  1 1 ), 
"  the  poor  shall  never  cease  out  of  the  land,"  and  a 
remarkable  agreement  with  some  of  its  directions  is 
expressed  in  Job  xx.  19,  xxiv.  3,  foil.,  where  among 
:icts  of  oppression  are  particularly  mentioned  "  taking 
(away)  a  pledge,"  and  withholding  the  sheaf  from 
the  poor,  vere.  9,  10  [LOAN],  xxix.  12,  16,  xxxi. 
17,  "eating  with"  the  poor  (comp.  Deut.  xxvi. 
12,  &c).  See  also  such  passages  as  Ez.  xviii.  12, 
16,  17,  xxii.  29;  Jer.  xxii.  13,  16,  v.  28;  Is.  x. 
2;  Am.  ii.  7;  Zech.  vii.  10,  and  Ecclus.  iv.  1,  4, 
vii.  32  ;  Tob.  xii.  8,  9.  [ALMS.] 

Among  the  special  enactments  in  their  favour 
the  following  must  be  mentioned.  ] .  The  right  of 
gleaning.  The  "  corners "  of  the  field  were  not 
to  be  reaped,  nor  all  the  grapes  of  the  vineyard  to 
be  gathered,  the  olive-trees  not  to  be  beaten  a 
second  time,  but  the  stranger,  fatherless,  and  widow 
to  be  allowed  to  gather  what  was  left.  So  too  if  a 
sheaf  forgotten  was  left  in  the  field,  the  owner  was 
not  to  return  for  it,  but  leave  it  for  them  (Lev.  xix. 
9,  10;  Deut.  xxiv.  19,  21).  Of  the  practice  in 
such  cases  in  the  times  of  the  Judges,  the  story  of 
Ruth  is  a  striking  illustration  (Ruth  ii.  2,  &c.\ 
[CORNER;  GLEANING.] 

2.  From  the  produce  of  the  land  in  sabbatical 
years,  the  poor  and  the  stranger  were  to  have  their 
portion  (Ex.  xxiii.  11 ;  Lev.  xxv.  6). 


8  1.  P*3K  ;  irnoxos  i  pauper. 

2.  Tn  ;  ireViTs ;  pauper. 

3.  nD?n  ;  JTTCOXOS  i  pauper. 

4.  }3pp  ;  TreVijs;  pauper;  a  word  of  later  usage, 

S       o 
connected  with       XLvovo-  probably  the  original  of  met- 

chino,  mesquin,  &c.  (Ges.  p.  954) 

5.  njj|,  Chald.  (Dan.  iv.  27);  wtnjs;  pauper;   from 
same  root  as, 

6.  *}]},  the  word    most   usually  "poor"  in  A.  V.; 
n-ecixpw,  ITTWXOS,  ire'njs  ;  indigent,  pauper.    Also  Zed), 
ix.  9,  and  Is.  xxvi.  G.^irpann ;  pauper. 

7.  EH,  part,  of  KM") ;  Taireii/os ;  pauper.    In  2  Sam 
xii.  1,  K'fcO;  TreVijs,  wrtaxos. 

8.  Poverty;    "110110  ;    ei/Sei'a  ;   cgcstat.      In   N".  T.. 
nruxbs,  pauper,  and  Tre'njs ;   cytnus,  once  only,  2  Cor- 
ix.  9.     "Poor"  is  also  used  In  llie  sense  of  "afllictfd." 
"  hurabU1."  4c. ;  e.  0.  Matt  T.  *. 


POOH 

3.  Ko-entry  upon  land  in  the  jubilee  year,  with 
the  limitation  as  to  town  homes  (Lev.  xxv.  25-30). 
[JUBILEE.] 

4.  Prohibition   of   usury,   and   of  retention   of 
pledges,  i.  e.  loans  without  interest  enjoined  (Lev. 
zxv.  35,  3-7 ;  Ex.  xxii.  25-27 ;  Deut.  xv.  7,  8,  xxiv. 
10-13).    [LOAN.] 

5.  Permanent    bondage   forbidden,   and    manu 
mission  of  Hebrew  bondsmen  or  bondswomen  en 
joined  in  the  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years,  even  when 
bound  to  a  foreigner,  and  redemption  of  such  pre 
vious  to  those  years  (Deut.  xv.  12-15;  Lev.  xxv. 
39-42,  47-54). 

6.  Portions  from  the  tithes  to  be  shared  by  the 
poor  after  the  Levites  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12,  13). 
[TiTHES.p 

7.  The  poor  to  partake  in  entertainments  at  the 
feasts  of  Weeks  and  Tabernacles  (Deut.  xvi.  11,  14  ; 
see  Neh.  viii.  10). 

8.  Daily  payment  of  wages  (Lev.  xix.  13). 

On  the  other  hand,  while  equal  justice  was  com 
manded  to  be  done  to  the  poor  man,  he  was  not 
allowed  to  take  advantage  of  his  position  to  ob 
struct  the  administration  of  justice  (Ex.  xxiii.  3  ; 
Lev.  xix.  15).  • 

On  the  law  of  gleaning  the  Rabbinical  writers 
founded  a  variety  of  definitions  and  refinements, 
which  notwithstanding  their  minute  and  frivolous 
character,  were  on  the  whole  strongly  in  favour  of 
the  poor.  They  are  collected  in  the  treatise  of  Mai- 
monides  Mithnoth  Ainim,  de  jure  pauperis,  trans 
lated  by  Prideaux  (Ugolini,  viii.  721),  and  specimens 
of  their  character  will  appear  in  the  following  titles. 

There  are,  he  says,  13  precepts,  7  affirmative 
and  6  negative,  gathered  from  Lev.  xix.,  xxiii. ; 
Deut.  xiv.,  xv.,  xxiv.  On  these  the  following  ques 
tions  are  raised  and  answered,  What  is  a  "corner," 
a  "handful?"  What  is  to  "forget"  a  sheaf? 
What  is  a  "  sti'anger  "?  What  is  to  be  done  when  a 
field  or  a  single  tree  belongs  to  two  persons ;  and 
further,  when  one  of  them  is  a  Gentile,  or  when  it 
is  divided  by  a  road,  or  by  water ; — when  insects 
or  enemies  destroy  the  crop?  How  much  grain 
must  a  man  give  by  way  of  alms  ?  Among  prohi 
bitions  is  one  forbidding  any  proprietor  to  frighten 
away  the  poor  by  a  savage  beast.  An  Israelite  is 
forbidden  to  take  alms  openly  from  a  Gentile.  Un 
willing  almsgiving  is  condemned,  on  the  principle 
expressed  in  Job  xxx.  25.  Those  who  gave  less 
than  their  due  proportion,  to  be  punished.  Mendi 
cants  are  divided  into  two  classes,  settled  poor  and 
vagrants.  The  former  were  to  be  relieved  by  the 
authorised  collectors,  but  all  are  enjoined  to  maintain 
themselves  if  possible.  [ALMS.]  Lastly,  the  claim 
of  the  poor  to  the  portions  prescribed  is  laid  down 
as  a  positive  right. 

Principles  similar  to  those  laid  down  by  Moses 
are  inculcated  in  N.  T.,  as  Luke  iii.  11,  xiv.  13; 
Acts  vi.  1 ;  Gal.  ii.  10 ;  Jas.  ii.  15.  In  later 
times,  mendicancy,  which  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  contemplated  by  Moses,  became  frequent.  In 
stances  actual  or  hypothetical  may  be  seen  in  the 
following  passages:  Luke  xvi.  20,  21,  xviii.  35  ; 
Mark  x.  46  ;  John  ix.  8  ;  Acts  iii.  2.  On  the  whole 
subject,  besides  the  treatise  above-named,  see  Mishna, 
Peak,  i.  2,  3,  4,  5;  ii.  7 ;  Pesach.  iv.  8  ;  Selden, 
de  Jure  Natur.  vi.  6,  p.  735,  &c. ;  Saalschtitz, 
Arch.  Heb.  ii.  p.  256;  Michaelis,  §142,  vol.  ii.  p. 
248  ;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  308.  [H.  W.  1'.] 

•  Arbor  lac  emittens  mellis  instar,  quo  ct  suffltus  fit : 
•rtdetur  esse  Styracis  .arbor.  Kim.  Dj.  See  Freytag, 

1<K-   aTOt)  S.  V. 


POPLAR  905 

POPLAR  (n.33^,  Hbneh:  c-rvpdKtvos,  in  Gea 
xxx.  37  ;  Aeu/cTj,  in  Hos.  iv.  13  :  populus),  the  ren 
dering  of  the  above-named  H'.brew  word,  which 
occurs  only  in  the  two  places  cited.  Peeled  rods 
of  the  libneh  were  put  by  Jacob  before  Laban  »  ling- 
streaked  sheep.  This  tree  is  mentioned  with  the  oak 
and  the  terebinth,  by  Hosea,  as  one  under  which 
idolatrous  Israel  used  to  sacrifice. 

Several  authorities,  Celsius  amongst  the  number 
(Hierob.  i.  292),  are  in  favour  of  the  render 
ing  of  the  A.V.,  and  think  the  "white  poplar" 
(Populus  alba)  is  the  tree  denoted  ;  others  under 
stand  the  "  storax  tree"  (Styrax  officinale,  Linn.). 
This  opinion  is  confirmed  by  the  LXX.  translator 
of  Genesis,  and  by  the  Arabic  version  of  Saadias, 

.-oj 

which    has    the    term    lubna  (_jukJ),   i.  e.   the 
"  Styrax  tree."  • 

Both  poplars'"  and  styrax  or  storax  trees  nre 
common  in  Palestine,  and  either  would  suit  the 
pa^sasres  where  the  Heb.  term  occurs.  Dioscorides 
(i.  79)  and  Pliny  (N.  H.  xii.  17  and  25)  both 
speak  of  the  Styrax  officinale,  and  mention  se 
veral  kinds  of  exudation.  Pliny  says,  "  that  pan 
of  Syria  which  adjoins  Judaea  above  Phoenicia  pro 
duces  storax,  which  is  found  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Gabala  (Jebeif)  and  Marathus,  as  also  of  Casius, 
a  mountain  of  Seleucia.  .  .  .  That  which  comes 
from  the  mountain  of  Amanus  in  Syria  is  highly 
esteemed  for  medicinal  pin-poses,  and  even  more  so 
by  the  perfumers." 


ujficutale. 


Stonix  (ffropa£)  is  mentioned  in  Ecclus.  xxiv.  15, 
together  with  other  aromatic  substances.  The  mo 
dem  Greek  name  of  the  tree,  as  we  learn  from  Sih- 
thorpe  (Flor.  Graec.  i.  275)  is  a-TovpaKi,  and  is  a 
common  wild  shrub  in  Greece  and  in  most  partv 
of  the  Levant.  The  resin  exudes  either  sponta 
neously  or  after  incision.  This  property,  however, 


b  "  I'opulu*  alba  and  P.  Euphralica  1  saw.    P.  dilafnta 
and  nigra,  are  also  soiil  to  grow  in  Syria"  (J  1;  11  >ukcr). 


906 


POBATHA 


it  would  seem,  is  only  for  the  most  part  possessed 
by  trees  which  grow  in  a  warm  country  ;  for  English 
-specimens,  though  they  flower  profusely,  do  not  pro 
duce  the  drug.  Mr.  Dan.  Hanbury,  who  has  discussed 
the  whole  subject  of  the  storax  plants  with  much 
'jave  (see  the  Pharmaceutical  Journal  and  Trans 
actions  for  Feb.  1857),  tells  us  that  a  friend  of  his 
quite  failed  to  obtain  any  exudation  from  Styrax 
officinale,  by  incisions  made  in  the  hottest  part  of 
the  summer  of  1856,  on  specimens  growing  in  the 
botanic  garden  at  Montpellier.  "  The  experiment 
was  quite  unsuccessful  ;  neither  aqueous  sap  nor 
resinouc  jvw-e  flowed  from  the  incisions."  Still 
Mr.  Hanbury  quotes  two  authorities  to  show  that 
under  certain  favourable  circumstances  the  tree 
may  exude  a  fragrant  resin  even  in  France  and 
Italy. 

The  Styrax  officinale  is  a  shrub  from  nine  to 
twelve  feet  high,  with  ovate  leaves,  which  are  white 
underneath  ;  the  flowers  are  in  racemes,  and  are 
white  or  cream-coloured.  This  white  appearance 
agrees  with  the  etymology  of  the  Heb.  libneh. 
The  liquid  storax  of  commerce  is  the  product  of  the 
Liquidambar  Orientale,  Mill,  (see  a  fig.  in  Mr. 
Hanbury's  communication),  an  entirely  different 
plant,  whose  resin  was  probably  unknown  to  the 
ancients.  r\y.  jj  i 


PO'BATHA  (NrniS  :  *apaSaed;  Alex.  Bap- 
Sa0d  :  Phorathii).  One  of  the  ten  sons  of  Haman 
slain  by  the  Jews  in  Shushan  the  pilace  (Esth.  ix. 
8).  Perhaps  "  Poradatha"  was  the  full  form  of  the 
name,  which  the  LXX.  appear  to  have  had  before 
them  (compare  Aridatha,  Parshandatha). 

PORCH.  1.  Ulim*  or  ulam.  2.  Misderdn 
uldm,  strictly  i  vestibule  (Ges.  p.  43),  was  probably 
a  son  of  verandah  chamber  in  the  works  of  Solomon, 
open  in  front  and  at  the  sides,  but  capable  of  being 
enclosed  with  awnings  or  curtains,  like  that  of  the 
royal  palace  at  Ispahan  described  by  Chardin  (vii. 
886,  and  pi.  39).  The  word  is  used  in  the  Talmud 
(Middoth,  iii.  7). 

Mis'd'ron  was  probably  a  corridor  or  colonnade 
connecting  the  principal  rooms  of  the  house  (Wil 
kinson,  A.  E.  i.  p.  11).  The  porch  b  (Matt.  xxvi. 
71),  was  probably  the  passage  from  the  street  into 
the  first  court  of  the  house,  in  which,  in  Eastern 
houses  is  the  mastdbah  or  stone-bench,  for  the  porter 
or  persons  waiting,  and  where  also  the  master  of 
the  house  often  receives  visitors  and  transacts  busi 
ness  (Lane,  Mod.  Eg.  i.  32  ;  Shaw,  Trav.  p.  207). 
[HOUSE.]  The  word  in  the  parallel  passage  (Mark 
xiv.  68)  is  trpoav\iov,  the  outer  court.  The  scene 
therefore  of  the  denial  of  our  Lord  took  place, 
either  in  that  court,  or  in  the  passage  from  it  to 
the  house-door.  The  term  trroa,  is  u.sed  for  the 
colonnade  or  portico  of  Bethesda,  and  also  for  that. 


•  1.  D>1X,  or  D7K  ;  avAo^;  porticus  (1  Chr.  xxviii. 
11);  i/ao?  ;  porticut. 

2.  1  1  ™Dw  ;  jTopaoros  ;  porticus  ;  only  once  used 
Judg.  iii.  23. 

b  irvAwp. 

«  The  two  words  are  in  fact  quite  distinct,  being  derived 
from  different  roots.  "Porter"  in  the  modern  sense  is 
from  the  French  parteur.  The  similarity  between  the 
two  is  alluded  to  in  a  passage  quoted  from  Watts  by 
Dr.  Johnson. 


' 


flpior  ;  front. 
aiAa/j.  ;  vvsi&ulum. 


POT 

of  the  Temple  allied  Solouon's  porch  (John  v.  2 
x.  23;  Acts  iii.  11,  v.  12). 

Josephus  describes  the  porticoes  or  cloisters  whir.fc 
suiTounded  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  and  also  tht 
royal  portico.  These  porticoes  are  described  by 
Tacitus  as  forming  an  important  line  of  defunct 
during  the  siege  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  3,  §9,  xv.  11, 
§3, 5 ;  B.  J.  v.  5,  §2 ;  Tac.  Hist.  v.  12).  [TEMPI.K 
SOLOMON'S  PORCH.]  [H.  W.  P.^ 

PORCIUS  FESTU8.  [FESTUS.] 
PORTER.  This  word  when  used  in  the  A.  V 
does  not  bear  its  modem  signification  of  a  carrier 
of  burdens,'  but  denotes  in  every  case  a  gate-keeper, 
from  the  Latin  pwtarius,  the  man  who  attended  to 
theporta.  In  the  original  the  word  is  *"IJflK>,  sMer 
from  ")J?K>,  sha'ar,  a  gate :  GvpapAs,  and  irv\cop6s  : 
portarius,  and  janitor.  This  meaning  is  evidently 
implied  in  1  Chr.  ix.  21 ;  2  Chr.  xxiii.  19,  xxxv.  15 ; 
John  x.  3.  It  is  generally  employed  in  reference 
to  the  Levites  who  had  charge  of  the  entrances  to 
the  sanctuary,  but  is  used  also  in  other  connexions 
in  2  Sam.  xviii.  26;  2  K.  vii.  10,  11  ;  Mark  xiii 
34;  John  x.  3,  xviii.  16,  17.  In  two  passages 
(1  Chr.  xv.  23,  24)  the  Hebrew  word  is  rendered 
"  doorkeepers,"  and  in  John  xviii.  16, 17,  T)  6upup6s 
is  "  she  that  kept  the  door."  [G.] 

POSIDO'NIUS  (HoffiStivios:  Posidonius'),  an 
envoy  sent  by  Nicanor  to  Judas  (2  Mace.  xiv.  19). 

POSSESSION.    [DEMONIACS.] 

POST.  I.  1.  Ajil*  a  word  indefinitely  rendered 
by  LXX.  and  Vulg.  Probably,  as  Gesenius  argues, 
the  door-case  of  a  door,  including  the  lintel  and 
side-posts  (Ges.  Thes.  p.  43).  Akin  to  this  is  allam* 
only  used  in  plur.  (Ez.  xl.  16,  &c.),  probably  a 
portico,  and  so  rendered  by  Symm.  and  Syr  Ven> 
(Ges.  p.  48). 

2.  Amman}  usually  "  cubit,"  once  only  "post'' 
(Is.  vi.  4). 

3.  Mezuzahf  from  a  root  signifying  to  shine 
i.  e.  implying  motion  (on  a  centre). 

4.  Saphp  usually  "  threshold." 

The  ceremony  of  boring  the  ear  of  a  voluntary 
bondsman  was  performed  by  placing  the  ear  against 
the  door-post  of  the  house  (Ex.  xxi.  6  ;  see  Juv. 
Sat.  i.  103,  and  Plaut.  Poen.  v.  2,  21).  [SLAVE ; 
PILLAR.] 

The  posts  of  the  doors  of  the  Temple  were  of 
olive-wood  (1  K.  vi.  33). 

II.  Mts,*  A.  V.  "post"  (Esth.  iii.  13), elsewhere 
"  runner,"  and  also  "  guard."  A  courier  or  carriei 
of  messages,  used  among  other  places  in  Job  ix.  25. 
[ANGAREUO.]  [H.  W.  P.j 

POT.  The  term  "pot"a  is  applicable  to  so 
many  sorts  of  vessels,  that  it  can  scarcely  be  re- 


f  i"IZ3N  ;  v-rrepevpov  ;  superlitninarc. 
8  riT'lTP  ;  Trafyid?,  <f>Ata;  postis,  from  f!)f,  mico. 
h  P|D  ;   $Aia ;   limen ;   in  plur.  ra  rrpdirvAa ;   super 
liminaria  (Am.  ix.  1). 

1  P"T,  part,  of  ^!p,  "  run  ;"  j3ij3Aio4>op<K  ;  cursor. 
•  1.  ^j}DN  ;  ayyeloK  (2  K.  iv.  2),  applied  to  oil. 

2.  I?'3H  ;   (r-pafiioi- ;   tcyp/ius  (Jer.  xxzv.  5;   Uea 
p,  280) ;  usually     bowl "  or  "  cup." 

3-  "HI  >  totfuyos ;  cophinus ;  also  "  basket  " 
4.   y3  ;  cTKcvot ;  vat ;  ususJly  "  vessel,"  cnce  oiili 
"  pot "  (LeV.  vi.  28). 


POTIPHAR 

jtrkted  to  any.tne  in  pirticular.     [BOWL-  CAL 
DRON  ;  BASIN  •  Cui',  &c.] 

But  from  il.i  places  wliere  the  word  is  us&.  we 
may  collect  the  uses,  and  also  in  part  the  materials 
of  the  utensils  implied. 

1.  Asuc,   an   earthen    jar,    deep    and    narrow, 
without   handles,  probably,    like  the    Roman   and 
Egyptian  amphora,   inserted  in  a  stand  of  wood  or 
stoue  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eij.  i.  47  ;  Sandys,  Trav. 
p.  150). 

2.  Cheres,   an    earthen    vessel    for   stewing    or 
seething.     Such  a  vessel  was  used  for  baking  (Ez. 
iv.  9).     It  is  contrasted  in  the  same  passage  (Lev. 
vi.  28)  with  a  metal  vessel  for  the  same  purpose. 
[VESSEL.] 

3.  JJAd,   a  vessel   for  culinary   purposes,  men 
tioned  (1  Sam.  ii.  14)  in  conjunction  with  "  cal 
dron  "   and    "  kettle,"   and  so  perhaps  of  smaller 
size. 

4.  Sir  is  combined  with  other  words  to  denote 
special  uses,  as  busker,  "  flesh"  (Ex.  xvi.  3)  ;  ra- 
chutz,  "washing"   (Ps.  Ix.  8;  LXX.  has  Xe'/Srjs 
"Jjs    t\iri8os)  ;    matsreph,    "fining-pot"    (Prov. 
xxvii.  21). 

The  blackness  which  such  vessels  would  contract 
is  alluded  to  in  Joel  ii.  6. 

The  "  pots,"  gebii/im,  set  before  the  Rechabites 
(Jer.  xxxv.  5),  were  probably  bulging  jars  or 
bowls. 

The  water-pots  of  Cana  appear  to  have  been 
large  amphorae,  such  as  are  in  use  at  the  present 
day  in  Syria  (Fisher,  Views,  p.  56  ;  Jolliffe,  i.  33). 
These  were  of  stone  or  hard  earthenware;  but  gold, 
silver,  brass,  or  copper,  were  also  used  for  vessels 
both  for  domestic  and  also,  with  marked  preference, 
for  ritual  use  (1  K.  vii.  45,  x.  21  ;  2  Chr.  iv.  16, 
ix.  20  ;  Mark  vii.  4 ;  Heb.  ix.  4 ;  John  ii.  6  ; 
Michaelis,  Laics  of  Moses,  §'217,  iii.  335,  ed. 
Smith). 

Crucibles  for  refining  metal  are  mentioned  (Prov. 
xxvi.  23,  xxvii.  21). 

The  water-pot  of  the  Samaritan  woman  may 
have  been  a  leathern  bucket,  such  as  Bedouin  wo 
men  use  (Burckhardt,  Notes,  i.  45). 

The  shapes  of  these  vessels  we  can  only  conjecture, 
as  very  few  remains  have  yet  been  discovered,  but 
it  is  certain  that  pottery  formed  a  branch  of  native 
Jewish  manufacture.  [POTTERY.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

POT'IPHAR  O&'P'IS:  TlereQprjs,  nfrre- 
(ppris,  Htvr«pprjS :  Putiphar),  an  Egyptian  pr.  n 
also  written  JHQ  HOIS,  POTIPIIEKAH.  That  these 
,.re  but  two  forms  of  one  name  is  shown  by  the 
ancient  Egyptian  equivalent,  PET-P-IIA,  which  may 
have  been  pronounced,  at  least  in  Lower  Egypt 
PET-PH-RA.  It  signifies  "  Belonging  to  the  Sun.' 
Rosellini  remarks  that  it  is  of  very  frequent  occur 
rence  on  the  Egyptian  monuments  (Monument 
Storiti,  i.  117,  118).  The  fuller  form  is  clearlj 
nearer  to  the  Egyptian. 

Potiphar  is  described  as  "  an  officer  of  Pharaoh 
chief  of  the  executioners  (DT}3t|>n  ib  HjnS  Dnp) 
MI  Egyptian  "  (Gen.  xxxix.  1 ;  comp.  xxxvii.  30) 
The  word  we  render  "  officer,"  as  in  the  A.  V.,  is 
literally  "eunuch,"  and  the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  sc 
translate  it  hare  (<nr<£5a;».  eunuchus);  but  it  is  als( 


6.  "VD  ;  Ae/Srjs;  otta;  used  with  fTIQJ  (Jer.  i.  13) 
t  Beetbing-pot." 

S.  ">1"lB  ;  \a\Kclov,  -*eabus. 

1.  D3V3Y    at^vo'\    ww(Kx.  xvi.  33;  Heb  is.  4) 


POTTER'S-FIELD,  THE         90* 

is<;d  for  an  officer  of  the  court,  and  this  is  ilmor.1 
•ertainly  the  meaning  here,  as  Potiphar  wa;  tniir 
•ied,  which  is  seldom  the  case  with  eunuchs,  though 
ome,  as  those  which  have  the  custody  of  th* 
vti'abeh  at  Mekkeh  are  exceptions,  and  his  office 
ivas  one  which  would  not  usually  be  held  by  per- 
,ons  of  a  class  ordinarily  wanting  in  coui'age, 
although  here  again  we  must  except  the'  occasional 
isage  of  Muslim  sovereigns,  whose  executioners 
were  sometimes  eunuchs,  as  Haroon  er-Rasheed's 
Uesroor,  in  order  that  they  might  be  able  to  carry 
out  the  royal  commands  even  in  the  hareems  of  the 
ubjects.  Potiphar's  office  was  "  chief  of  the  execu- 
ioners,"  not,  as  the  LXX.  makes  it,  "  of  the  cooks  " 
apxif-d/yetpos),  for  the  prison  was  in  his  house, 
or,  at  least,  in  that  of  the  chief  of  the  executioners, 
.irobably  a  successor  of  Potiphar,  who  committed 
;he  disgraced  servants  of  Pharaoh  to  Joseph's 
:harge  (xl.  2-4).  He  is  called  an  Egyptian,  though 
lis  master  was  probably  a  Shepherd-king  of  the 
xvth  dynasty  ;  and  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  his  name 
contains  that  of  an  Egyptian  divinity,  which  does 
not  seem  to  be  the  case  with  the  names  of  the  kings 
of  that  line,  though  there  is  probably  an  instance  in 
that  of  a  prince.  [CHRONOLOGY,  vol.  i.  p.  322.] 
He  appears  to  have  been  a  wealthy  man,  having 
property  in  the  field  as  well  as  in  the  house,  over 
which  Joseph  was  put,  evidently  in  an  important 
post  (xxxix.  4-6).  In  this  position  Joseph  was 
tempted  by  his  master's  wife.  The  view  we  have 
of  Potiphar's  household  is  exactly  in  accordance  with 
the  representations  on  the  monuments,  in  which  we 
see  how  carefully  the  produce  of  the  land  was  regis 
tered  and  stored  up  in  the  house  by  overseers,  as 
well  as  the  liberty  that  the  women  of  all  ranks 
enjoyed.  When  Joseph  was  accused,  his  master 
contented  himself  with  casting  him  into  prison 
(19,  20),  probably  being  a  merciful  man,  although 
he  may  have  been  restrained  by  God  from  acting 
more  severely.  After  this  we  hear  no  more  of 
Potiphar,  unless,  which  is  unlikely,  the  chief  of  the 
executioners  afterwards  mentioned  be  he.  [Se; 
JOSEPH.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

POTIPHE'KAH  (JHB  'BIS  :  nere^pi),  n«i> 
TftypTJ,  TlfVTeQpri,  TlfvreQpi  :  Putiphare),  all 
Egyptian  pr.  n.,  also  written  "IQ^piQ,  POTIPHAU. 
corresponding  to  the  PET-P-RA,  "  Belonging  to  the 
Sun,"  of  the  hieroglyphics. 

Potipherah  was  priest  or  prince  of  On  (}°K  JiTD), 
and  his  daughter  Asenath  was  given  Joseph  to  wife  by 
Pharaoh  (xli.  45,  50,  xlvi.  20).  His  name,  implying 
devotion  to  the  sun,  is  very  appropriate  to  a  Heliopo- 
lite,  especially  to  a  priest  of  Heliopolis,  and  therefore 
the  rendering  "  priest  "  is  preferable  in  his  case, 
though  the  other  can  scarcely  be  asserted  to  be 
untenable.  [ON  ;  ASENATH  ;  JOSEPH.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

POTSHERD  (Bnn:    forpaKov:    testa,  ras 

fictile):  also  in  A.  V.  "  sherd"  (f.  e.  anything  ui- 
vided  or  separated,  from  share,  Richardson's  Diet.], 
a  piece  of  earthenware,  broken  either  by  the  heat 
of  the  furnace  in  the  manufacture,  by  fire  when 
used  as  a  crucible  (Prov.  xxvi.  23),  or  otherwise. 

[POTTEKY.]  [H.  W.  P.] 

POTTER'S-FIELD,    THE    (6    aypbs  rci 


8.  D^BK>;  (cAijpoi;  cteri;  "  allotments  of  laztfJ* 

9.  tJ^IH  ;    oxcvot    oorpaKii/oi/  ;    vas  ftftili   (1-C* 


908        POTTER'S-FIELD,  THE 

Kc/Ufitwf :  ager  fiffuli).  A  piece  of  ground  which, 
according  to  the  statement  of  St.  Matthew  (xxvii.  7), 
was  purchased  by  the  priests  with  the  thirty  pieces 
of  silver  rejected  by  Judas,  and  converted  into  a 
burial-place  for  Jews  not  belonging  to  the  city  (see 
Alford,  adloc.).  In  the  narrative  of  the  Acts  the 
purchase  is  made  by  Judas  himself,  and  neither 
the  potter's  field,  its  connexion  with  the  priests, 
nor  its  ultimate  application  are  mentioned,  [ACEL- 

1>AMA.] 

That  St.  Matthew  was  well  assured  of  the  accu 
racy  of  his  version  of  the  occurrence  is  evident  from 
his  adducing  it  (ver.  9)  a?  a  fulfilment  of  an  ancient 
prediction.  What  that  prediction  was,  and  who 
made  it,  is  not,  however,  at  all  clear.  St.  Matthew 
names  Jeremiah:  but  there  is  no  passage  in  the 
Book  of  Jeremiah,  as  we  possess  it  (either  in  the 
Hebrew  or  LXX.),  resembling  that  which  he  gives ; 
and  that  in  Zechariah,  which  is  usually  supposed 
W  be  alluded  to,  has  only  a  very  imperfect  likeness 
to  it.  This  will  be  readily  seen : — 


Zech.  xi.  12. 

And  I  said  unto  them, 
"  If  ye  think  good,  give 
my  price  ;  and  if  not,  for 
bear."  So  they  weighed 
for  my  price  thirty  pieces 
of  silver.  And  Jehovah 
said  unto  me,  "Cast  it 
unto  the  potter ;  a  goodly 
price  that  I  was  prised  at 
hythem!"  And  I  took  the 
thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and 
cast  them  to  the  potter  in 
the  house  of  Jehovah. 

And  even  this  is  doubtful ;  for  the  word  above 
translated  "  potter  "  is  in  the  LXX.  rendered  "  fur 
nace,"  and  by  modem  scholars  (Gesenius,  Fiirst, 
Ewald,  De  Wette,  Herxheimer — following  the  Tar- 
gum,  Peshito-Syriac,  and  Kimchi)  "  treasury  "  •  or 


St.  Matt,  xxvii.  9. 
Then  was  fulfilled  that 
which  was  spoken  by  Je 
remy  the  prophet,  saying, 
"  And  they  took  the  thirty 
pieces  of  silver,  the  price 
of  him  that  was  valued, 
whom  they  of  the  children 
of  Israel  did  value,  and 
gave  them  for  the  potter's 
field,  as  the  Lord  ap 
pointed  me." 


POTTERY 

"  treasurer."  Supposing,  however,  this  passage  to 
be  that  which  St.  Matthew  refers  to,  three  explana 
tions  suggest  themselves : — 

1.  That  the  Evangelist  unintentionally  substi 
tuted  the  name  of  Jeremiah  for  that  of  Zechariah, 
at  the  same  time  altering  the  passage  to  suit  his 
immediate  object,  in  the  eame  way  that  St.  Paul 
has  done  in  Rom.  x.  6-9  (compared  with  Deut.  viii. 
17,  xxx.  11-14),  1  Cor.  xv.  45  (comp.  with  Gen. 
ii.  7).     See  Jowett's  St.  Paul's  Epistles  (Essay  on 
Quotations,  &c.). 

2.  That  this  portion  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah — a 
book  the  different  portions  of  which  there  is  reason 
to  believe  are  in  different  styles  and  by  different 
authors  — was  in  the  time  of  St.  Matthew  attributed 
to  Jeremiah. 

3.  That  the  reference  is  to  ..ome  passage  of  Jere 
miah  which  has  been  lost  from  its  place  in   his 
book,  and  exists  only  in  the  Evangelist.      Some 
slight  support  is  afforded  to  this  view  by  the  fact 
that  potters  and  the  localities  occupied  by  them  are 
twice  alluded  to  by  Jeremiah.     Its  partial  corre 
spondence  with  Zech.  xi.  12,  13,  is  no  argument 
against  its  having  at  one  time  formed  a  part  of  the 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah:  for  it  is  well  known  to  every 
student  of  the  Bible  that  similar  correspondences  are 
continually  found  in  the  prophets.  See,  for  instance, 
Jer.  xlviii.  45,  comp.  with  Num.  xxi.  27,  28,  xxiv. 
17  ;  Jer.  xlix.  27,  comp.  with  Am.  i.  4.     For  other 
examples,  see  Dr.  Pusey's  Commentary  on  Amos  and 
Micah. 

The  position  of  ACELDAMA  has  been  treated  of 
under  that  head.  But  there  is  not  now  any  pot 
tery  in  Jerusalem,  nor  within  several  miles  of  the 
city.  [G.] 

POTTERY.  The  art  of  pottery  is  one  of  the 
most  common  and  most  ancient  of  all  manufactures. 
The  modem  Arab  culinary  vessels  are  chiefly  of 
wood  or  copper  (Niebuhr,  Voy.  i.  188) ;  but  it  is 
abundantly  evident,  both  that  the  Hebrews  used 


"•  "IV  r  H.    If  this  be  the  right  translation,  the  passage, 
instead  of  being  in  agreement,  is  directly  at  variance  with 


the  statement  of  Matt,  xxvli.  6,  that  the  silver  was  not  put 
into  the  treasury. 


POUND 

earthenware  vessels  in  the  wilderness,  where  there 
would  be  little  facility  for  making  them,  and  that, 
the  potters'  trade  was  afterwards  carried  on  in  Pa 
lestine.  They  had  themselves  been  concerned  in  the 
potters'  trade  in  Egypt  (Ps.  Ixxxi.  6),  and  the  wall- 
paintings  minutely  illustrate  the  Egyptian  process, 
which  agrees  with  such  notices  of  the  Jewish  prac 
tice  as  are  found  in  the  Prophets,  and  also  in  many 
respects  with  the  process  as  pursued  in  the  present 
day.  The  clay,  when  dug,  was  trodden  by  men's  feet 
so  as  to  form  a  paste  (Is.  xli.  25;  Wisd.  xv.  7) 
[BRICKS]  ;  then  placed  by  the  potter*  on  the  wheel 
beside  which  he  sat,  and  shaped  by  him  with  his 
hands.  How  early  the  wheel  came  into  use  in 
Palestine  we  know  not,  but  it  seems  likely  that  it 
was  adopted  from  Egypt.  It  consisted  of  a  wooden 
disc  b  placed  on  another  larger  one,  and  turned  by 
the  hand  by  an  attendant,  or  worked  by  a  treadle 
|Is.  xlv.  9  ;  Jer.  xviii.  3;  Ecclus.  xxxviii.  29,  30  ; 
see  Tennant,  Ceylon,  i.  452).  The  vessel  was  then 
smoothed  and  coated  with  a  glaze,c  and  finally 
burnt  in  a  furnace  (Wilkinson,  Anc.  Eg.  ii.  108). 
'ATe  find  allusions  to  the  potsherds, »'.  e.  broken  pieces'1 
jf  vessels  used  as  crucibles,  or  burst  by  the  furnace, 
and  to  the  necessity  of  keeping  the  latter  clean 
Is.  xxx.  14,  xlv.  9  ;  Job  ii.  8 ;  Ps.  xxii.  16 ;  Prov. 
xxvi.  23  ;  Ecclus.  u.  s.). 

Earthen  vessels  were  used,  both  by  Egyptians  and 
Jews,  for  various  purposes  besides  culinary.  Deeds 
were  kept  in  them  (Jer.  xxxii.  14).  Tiles  with 
patterns  and  writing  were  common  both  in  Egypt 
and  Assyria,  and  were  also  in  use  in  Palestine  (Ez. 
iv.  1).  There  was  at  Jerusalem  a  royal  establishment 
of  potters  (1  Chr.  iv.  23),  from  whose  employment, 
and  from  the  fragments  cast  away  in  the  process, 
the  Potter's  Field  perhaps  received  its  name  (Is. 
xxx.  14).  Whether  the  term  "  potter  "  (Zech.  xi, 
13)  is  to  be  so  interpreted  may  be  doubted,  as 
it  may  be  taken  for  "  artificer "  in  general,  and 
also  "  treasurer,"  as  if  the  coin  mentioned  were  to  be 
weighed,  and  perhaps  melted  down  to  be  recoined 
(Ges.  p.  619  ;  Grotius,  Calmet,  St.  Jerome,  Hitzig, 
Birch,  Hist,  of  Pottery,  i.  152  ;  Saalschutz,  ffebr. 
Arch.  i.  14,  11).  [H.  W.  P.] 

POUND.  1.  A  weight.  See  WEIGHTS  AND 
MEASURES. 

2.  (Mva.)  A  money  of  account,  mentioned  in 
the  parable  of  the  Ten  Pounds  (Luke  xix.  12-27), 
as  the  talent  is  in  the  parable  of  the  Talents  (Matt, 
xxv.  14-30),  the  comparison  of  the  Saviour  to  a 
master  who  entrusted  money  to  his  servants  where 
with  to  trade  in  his  absence  being  probably  a  fre 
quent  lesson  in  our  Lord's  teaching  (comp.  Mark 
xiii.  32-37).  The  reference  appears  to  be  to  a 
Greek  pound,  a  weight  used  as  a  money  of  account, 
of  which  sixty  went  to  the  talent,  the  weight  de 
pending  upon  the  weight  of  the  talent.  At  this 
time  the  Attic  talent,  reduced  to  the  weight  of  the 
earlier  Phoenician,  which  was  the  same  as  the 
Hebrew,  prevailed  in  Palestine,  though  other  sys- 
teihs  must  hcve  been  occasionally  used.  The  Greek 
name  doubtless  came  either  from  the  Hebrew  maneh 
or  from  a  common  origin ;  but  it  must  be  remem 
bered  that  the  Hebrew  talent  contained  but  fifty 
manehs,  and  that  we  have  no  authority  for  sup 
posing  that  the  inaneh  was  called  in  Palestine  by 
the  Greek  name,  so  that  it  is  most  reasonable  to 


1.  1VV,  part,  of  1XV  "  press ;"  Kepa^eus    fgulus. 

2.  "inS,  only  in  Dan.  ii.  41 ;  flgvlut. 

T   V 

,  lit  "  two  stones ;"  \idoi ;  rota  (gee  Ges.  p.  16). 


PRAETORIUM  90'J 

cotsider  the  Greek  weight  to  be  meant    [1 ALENT, 
WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

PRAETO'RIUM  (vpan&ptov).  The  head- 
quarters  or'  the  Roman  military  governor,  whereve: 
he  happened  to  be.  In  time  of  peace  some  one  oi 
the  best  buildings  of  the  city  which  was  the  re 
sidence  of  the  proconsul  or  praetor  was  selected  for 
this  purpose.  Thus  Verres  appropriated  the  palace 
of  king  Hiero  at  Syracuse ;  at  Caesarea  that  of  Herod 
the  Great  was  occupied  by  Felix  (Acts  xxiii.  35) ; 
and  at  Jerusalem  the  new  palace  erected  by  the 
same  prince  was  the  residence  of  Pilate.  This  las» 
was  situated  on  the  western,  or  more  elevated,  hill  of 
Jerusalem,  and  was  connected  with  a  system  of  forti 
fications,  the  aggregate  of  which  constituted  the  Trap- 

3o\^,  or  fortified  barrack.  It  was  the  dominant 
position  on  the  Western  hill,  and — at  any  rate  on 
one  side,  probably  the  Eastern — was  mounted  by  a 
flight  of  steps  (the  same  from  which  St.  Paul  made 
his  speech  in  Hebrew  to  the  angiy  crowd  of  Jews, 
Acts  xxii.  1  seqq.).  From  the  level  below  the 
barrack,  a  terrace  led  eastward  to  a  gate  opening 
into  the  western  side  of  the  cloister  surrounding  the 
Temple,  the  road  being  carried  across  the  valley  ot 
Tyropoeon  (separating  the  Western  from  the  Temple 
hill)  on  a  causeway  built  up  of  enormous  stone 
blocks.  At  the  angle  of  the  Temple  cloister  just 
above  this  entrance,  i.  e.  the  N.W.  comer  [see 
JERUSALEM,  p.  1006,  and  p.  1023]  stood  the  old 
citadel  of  the  Temple  hill,  the  fiapis,  or  Byrsa, 
which  Herod  rebuilt  and  called  by  the  name  An 
tonia,  after  his  friend  and  patron  the  triumvir. 
After  the  Roman  power  was  established  in  Judaea, 
a  Roman  guard  was  always  maintained  in  the  An 
tonia,  the  commander  of  which  for  the  time  being 
seems  to  be  the  official  teiined  arpmnybs  rov 
lepov  in  the  Gospels  and  Acts.  The  guard  in  the 
Antonia  was  probably  relieved  regularly  from  the 
cohort  quartered  in  the  irapt/x/SoXlj,  and  hence  the 
plural  form  ffrparityol  is  sometimes  used,  the 
officers,  like  the  privates,  being  changed  every  watch ; 
although  it  is  very  conceivable  that  a  certain  num 
ber  of  them  should  have  been  selected  for  the  service 
from  possessing  a  superior  knowledge  of  the  Jewish 
customs,  or  skill  in  the  Hebrew  language.  Besides 
the  cohort  of  regular  legionaries  there  was  probably 
an  equal  number  of  local  troops,  who  when  on  service 
acted  as  the  "supports"  (8e{t<fA.aj8oi,  caterers  of 
the  right  flank,  Acts  xxiii.  23)  of  the  former,  and 
there  were  also  a  few  squadrons  of  cavalry ;  although 
it  seems  likely  that  both  these  and  the  local  troops 
had  separate  barracks  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  the 
7rape/i/3o\}j,  or  praetorian  camp,  was  appropriated 
to  the  Roman  cohort.  The  ordinary  police  of  the 
Temple  and  the  city  seems  to  have  been  in  the 
hands  of  the  Jewish  officials,  whose  attendants 
(virflprrai)  were  provided  with  dirks  and  clubs,  but 
without  the  regular  armour  and  the  discipline  of 
the  legionarie«.  When  the  latter  were  required  to 
assist  this  gendarmei~ie,  either  from  the  apprehen 
sion  of  serious  tumult,  or  because  the  service  was 
one  of  great  importance,  the  Jews  would  apply  to 
the  officer  in  command  at  the  Antonia,  who  would 
act  so  far  under  their  orders  as  the  commander  of  a 
detachment  in  a  manufacturing  town  does  under 
the  orders  of  the  civil  magistrate  at  the  time  of  a 
riot  CActs  iv.  1,  v.  24).  But  the  power  of  life  and 


XpiV/aa  (Ecclus.  I.  c.\ 

ifrpaxov ;  testa.    See  I'm,  9  (note). 


910 


PBAETORIUM 


death,  or  of  regular  scourging,  restee  5nly  with  tli 
praetor,  or  the  person  representing  him  and  com 
missioned  by  him.  This  power,  and  that  whicl 
would  always  go  with  it, — the  ngnt  to  press  what 
ever  men  or  things  were  required  by  the  publi 
exigencies, — appears  to  be  denoted  by  the  teim 
t£ovarla,  a  term  perhaps  the  translation  of  the  Latin 
imperium,  and  certainly  its  equivalent.  It  was  in 
herent  in  the  praetor  or  his  representatives — henc 
themselves  popularly  called  t£ovfflcu,  or  ^ovtriu 
inrtprfpcu  (Rom.  xiii.  1,  3) — and  would  be  com 
municated  to  all  military  officers  in  command  of 
detached  posts,  such  as  the  centurion  at  Capernaum 
who  describes  himself  as  possessing  summary  powers 
of  this  kind  because  he  was  inr'  t£ovffi(f,  covered  by 
the  privilege  of  the  imperium  (Matt.  viii.  9).  The 
forced  purveyances  (Matt.  v.  40),  the  requisitions 
for  baggage  animals  (Matt.  v.  41),  the  summary 
punishments  following  transgression  of  orders 
(Matt.  v.  39)  incident  to  a  military  occupation  ol 
the  country,  of  course  must  have  been  a  perpetual 
source  of  irritation  to  the  peasantry  along  the  lines 
of  the  military  roads,  even  when  the  despotic  au 
thority  of  the  Roman  officers  might  be  exercised 
Tith  moderation.  But  such  a  state  of  things  also 
afforded  constant  opportunities  to  an  unprincipled 
soldier  to  extort  money  under  the  pretence  of  a 
loan,  as  the  price  of  exemption  from  personal  services 
which  he  was  competent  to  insist  upon,  or  as  a  bribe 
to  buy  off  the  prosecution  of  some  vexatious  charge 
before  a  military  tribunal  (Matt.  v.  42 ;  Luke 
iii.  14). 

The  relations  of  the  military  to  the  civil  autho 
rities  in  Jerusalem  come  out  very  clearly  from  the 
history  of  the  Crucifixion.  When  Judas  first  makes 
his  proposition  to  betray  Jesus  to  the  chief  priests, 
a  conference  is  held  between  them  and  the  <rrpa- 
rriyol  as  to  the  mode  of  effecting  the  object  (Luke 
xxii.  4).  The  plan  involved  the  assemblage  of  a 
large  number  of  the  Jews  by  night,  and  Roman 
jealousy  forbad  such  a  thing,  except  under  the  sur 
veillance  of  a  military  officer.  An  arrangement 
was  accordingly  made  for  a  military  force,  which 
would  naturally  be  drawn  from  the  Antonia.  At 
the  appointed  hour  Judas  comes  and  takes  with 
him  "the  troops,"'-  together  with  a  number  of 
police  (yirrjpe'raj)  under  the  orders  of  the  high- 
priests  and  Pharisees  (John  xviii.  3).  When  the 
apprehension  of  Jesus  takes  place,  however,  there 
is  scarcely  any  reference  to  the  presence  of  the  mili 
tary.  Matthew  and  Mark  altogether  ignore  their 
taking  any  part  in  the  proceeding.  From  St.  Luke's 
account  one  is  led  to  suppose  that  the  military 
commander  posted  his  men  outside  the  garden,  and 
entered  himself  with  the  Jewish  authorities  (xxii. 
52).  This  is  exactly  what  might  be  expected  under 
the  circumstances.  It  was  the  business  of  the 
Jewish  authorities  to  apprehend  a  Jewish  offender, 
and  of  the  Roman  officer  to  take  care  that  the  pro 
ceeding  led  to  no  breach  of  the  public  peace.  But 
when  apprehended,  the  Roman  officer  became  re 
sponsible  for  the  custody  of  the  offender,  and  accord 
ingly  he  would  at  once  chain  him  by  the  wrists  to 
two  soldiers  (Acts  xxi.  33)  and  carry  him  off.  Here 
St.  John  accordingly  gives  another  glimpse  of  the 
presence  of  the  military : — "  the  troops  then,  and 
the  chiliarch  and  the  officers  of  the  Jews  apprehended 
Jesus,  and  put  him  in  bonds  and  led  him  away,  first 
of  all  to  Annas"  (xviii.  12).  The  insults  which 


»  Called  rriv  virtlpay,  although  of  course  only  A  detach 
ment  from  the  cohort. 


I'RAETORIUM 

Si.  Luke  mentions  (xxii.  63),  are  apparently  I)K 
barbarous  sport  of  the  ruffianly  soldiers  and  police 
while  waiting  with  their  prisoner  for  the  assembling 
of  the  Sanhedrim  in  the  hall  of  Caiaphas  ;  but  the 
blows  inflicted  are  those  with  the  vine-stick,  which 
the  centurions  carried,  anl  with  which  they  stioick 
the  soldiers  on  the  heud  and  face  (Juvenal,  Sat. 
viii.  247),  not  a  ilagellatian  by  the  hands  of  lictora 
When  Jesus  was  condemned  by  the  Sanhedrim 
and  accordingly  sent  to  Pilate,  the  Jewi:;h  officials 
certainly  expected  that  no  enquiry  would  be  made 
into  the  merits  of  the  case,  but  that  Jesus  would  tie 
simply  received  as  a  convict  on  the  authority  of  his 
own  countrymen's  tribunal,  thrown  into  a  dungeon, 
and  on  the  first  convenient  opportunity  executed. 
They  are  obviously  surprised  at  the  question,  "  What 
accusation  bring  ye  against  this  man  ? "  and  at  tnt 
apparition  of  the  governor  himself  outside  the  pre 
cinct  of  the  praetorium.  The  cheapness  in  which 
he  had  held  the  life  of  the  native  population  on  a 
former  occasion  (Luke  xiii.  1),  must  have  led  them 
to  expect  a  totally  different  course  from  him.  His 
scrupulosity,  most  extraordinary  in  any  Roman, 
stands  in  striking  contrast  with  the  recklessness  of 
the  commander  who  proceeded  at  once  to  put  St. 
Paul  to  torture,  simply  to  ascertain  why  it  was 
that  so  violent  an  attack  was  made  on  him  by  the 
crowd  (Acts  xxii.  24).  Yet  this  latter  is  undoubt 
edly  a  typical  specimen  of  the  feeling  which  pre 
vailed  among  the  conquerors  of  Judaea  in  reference 
to  the  conquered.  The  ordering  the  execution  of  a 
native  criminal  would  in  ninety-nine  instances  out 
of  a  hundred,  have  been  regarded  by  a  Roman  mag 
nate  as  a  simply  ministerial  act, — one  which  indeed 
only  he  was  competent  to  perform,  but  of  which 
the  performance  was  unworthy  of  a  second  thought. 
It  is  probable  that  the  hesitation  of  Pilate  was 
due  rather  to  a  superstitious  fear  of  his  wife's 
dream,  than  to  a  sense  of  justice  or  a  feeling  of 
humanity  towards  an  individual  of  a  despised  race  ; 
at  any  rate  such  an  explanation  is  more  in  accord 
ance  with  what  we  know  of  the  feeling  prevalert 
among  his  class  in  that  age. 

When  at  last  Pilate's  effort  to  save  Jesus  was 
defeated  by  the  determination  of  the  Jews  to  claim 
Barabbas,  and  he  had  testified,  by  washing  his 
lands  in  the  presence  of  the  people,  that  he  did  not 
consent  to  the  judgment  passed  oc  the  prisoner  by 
the  Sanhedrim,  but  must  be  regarded  as  performing 
a  merely  ministerial  act, — he  proceeds  at  once  te 
;he  foi-mal  infliction  of  the  appropriate  penalty, 
iis  lictors  take  Jesus  and  inflict  the  punishment 
of  scourging  upon  Him  in  the  presence  of  all  (Matt, 
xxvii.  26).  This,  in  the  Roman  idea,  was  the  neces- 
•ary  preliminary  to  capital  punishment,  and  hac 
Tesus  not  been  an  alien,  his  head  would  have  been 
struck  off  by  the  lictors  immediately  afterwards. 
Jut  crucifixion  being  the  customary  punishment  in 
;hat  case,  a  different  course  becomes  necessary. 
The  execution  must  take  place  by  the  hands  of  the 
military,  and  Jesus  is  handed  over  from  the  lictors 
o  these.  They  take  Him  into  the  praetorium,  and 
muster  the  whole  cohort — not  merely  that  portion 
which  is  on  duty  at  the  time  (Matt,  xxvii.  27 ; 
Mark  xv.  16).  While  a  centurion's  guard  is  being 
old  off  for  the  purpose  of  executing  Jesus  and  tL>. 
wo  criminals,  the  rest  of  the  soldiers  divert  them 
selves  in  mocking  the  reputed  King  of  the  Jews 
Matt,  xxvii.  28-30;  Mark  xv.  17-19;  John  six. 
2-3),  Pilate,  who  in  the  meantime  has  gone  in 
>eing  probably  a  witness  of  the  pitiallo  spectacle, 
lis  wif?  dream  still  haints  him,  and  although  hf 


PRAETOBIUM 

has  already  delivered  Jesus  over  to  execution,  and 
what  is  taking  place  is  merely  the  ordinary  course,1* 
he  conies  out  again  to  the  people  to  protest  that  he 
is  passive  in  the  matter,  and  that  they  must  take 
the  prisoner,  there  before  their  eyes  in  the  garb  of 
mockery,  and  crucify  Him  (John  six.  4-6).  On 
their  reply  that  Jesus  had  asserted  Himself  to  be 
the  Son  of  God,  Pilate's  fears  are  still  more  roused, 
and  at  last  he  is  only  induced  to  go  on  with  the 
military  execution,  for  which  he  is  himself  respon 
sible,  by  the  threat  of  a  charge  of  treason  against 
Caesar  in  the  event  of  his  not  doing  so  (John  xix. 
7-13).  Sitting  then  solemnly  on  the  bema,  and  pro 
ducing  Jesus,  who  in  the  meantime  has  had  His  own 
clothes  put  upon  Him,  he  formally  delivers  Him  up 
to  be  crucified  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  it 
appear  that  he  is  acting  solely  in  the  discharge  of 
his  duty  to  the  emperor  (John  xix.  13-16). 

The  centurion's  guard  now  proceed  with  the  pri 
soners  to  Golgotha,  Jesus  himself  carrying  the  cross- 
piece  of  wood  to  which  His  hands  were  to  be  nailed. 
Weak  from  loss  of  blood,  the  result  of  the  scourging, 
tie  is  unable  to  proceed ;  but  just  as  they  are 
leaving  the  gate  they  meet  Simon  the  Cyrenian, 
and  at  once  use  the  military  right  of  pressing 
(a.yyapfvew)  him  for  the  public  service.  Arrived 
at  the  spot,  four  soldiers  are  told  oft'  for  the  business 
of  the  executioner,  the  remainder  keeping  the 
ground.  Two  would  be  required  to  hold  the  hands, 
and  a  third  the  feet,  while  the  fourth  drove  in  the 
r  nails.  Hence  the  distribution  of  the  garments  into 
four  parts.  The  centurion  in  command,  the  prin 
cipal  Jewish  officials  and  their  acquaintance  (hence 
probably  St.  John  xviii.  15),  and  the  nearest  rela 
tions  of  Jesus  (John  xix.  26,  27),  might  naturally 
be  admitted  within  the  cordon — a  square  of  perhaps 
100  yards.  The  people  would  be  kept  outside  of 
this,  but  the  distance  would  not  be  too  great  to 
read  the  title,  "  Jesus  the  Nazarene,  the  King  of  the 
Jews,"  or  at  any  rate  to  gather  its  general  meaning.0 
The  whole  acquaintance  of  Jesus,  and  the  women 
who  had  followed  Him  from  Galilee — too  much 
afflicted  to  mix  with  the  crowd  in  the  immediate 
vicinity,  and  too  numerous  to  obtain  admission 
inside  the  cordon — looked  on  from  a  distance  (curb 
ua.Kp6dft>),  doubtless  from  the  hill  on  the  other  side 
of  the  valley  of  Kedron — a  distance  of  not  more 
than  600  or  700  yards,  according  to  Mr.  Fergusson's 
view  of  the  site  of  Golgotha.d  The  vessel  containing 
vinegar  (John  xix.  29)  was  set  within  the  cordon 
for  the  benefit  of  the  soldiers,  whose  duty  it  was  to 
remain  under  arms  (Matt,  xxvii.  36)  until  the  death 
of  the  prisoners,  the  centurion  in  command  being 
responsible  for  their  not  being  taken  down  alive. 
Had  the  Jews  not  been  anxious  for  the  removal  of 
the  bodies,  in  order  not  to  shock  the  eyes  of  the 
people  coming  in  from  the  country  on  the  following 
day,  the  troops  would  have  been  relieved  at  the  end 
jf  their  watch,  and  their  place  supplied  by  others 
until  death  took  place.  The  jealousy  with  which 
any  interference  with  the  regular  course  of  a  mili 
tary  execution  was  regarded  appears  from  the  ap 
plication  of  the  Jews  to  Pilate — not  to  the  centu 
rion — to  have  the  prisoners  dispatched  by  breaking 


PRAYER 


911 


>>  Herod's  guard  had  pursued  precisely  the  same  brutal 
conduct  just  before. 

•     «  The  latter  supposition  is  perhaps  the  more  correct,  as 
the  four  Kvangelists  give  four  different  forms. 

d  The  two  first  Evangelists  name  Mary  Magdalen  among 
these  women  (Matt,  xxvii.  56;  Mark  xv.  40).  St.  John 
names  her,  together  vifv  the  Lord's  mother,  and  Mary 
£,  as  at  the  side  of  the  cross. 


their  legs.  For  the  performance  of  this  duty  othei 
soldiers  were  dispatched  (xix.  32),  not  merely  per 
mission  given  to  the  Jews  to  have  the  operatic  c 
performed.  Even  for  the  watching  of  the  sepulchre 
recourse  is  had  to  Pilate,  who  bids  the  applicants 
"  take  a  guard"  (Matt,  xxvii.  65),  which  the}  do, 
and  put  a  seal  on  the  stone  in  the  presence  of  the 
soldiers,  in  a  way  exactly  analogous  to  that  prac 
tised  in  the  custody  of  the  sacred  robes  of  the  high 
priest  in  the  Antonia  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  11,  §4). 

The  Praetorian  camp  at  Rome,  to  which  St.  Paui 
refers  (Phil.  i.  13),  was  erected  by  the  Emperor 
Tiberius,  acting  under  the  advice  of  Sejanus.  Before 
that  time  the  guards  were  billetted  in  different 
parts  of  the  city.  It  stood  outside  the  walls,  at 
some  distance  short  of  the  fourth  milestone,  and  sc 
near  either  to  the  Salarian  or  the  Nomentane  road, 
that  Nero,  in  his  flight  by  one  or  the  other  of  them 
to  the  house  of  his  freedman  Phaon,  which  was 
situated  between  the  two,  heard  the  cheers  of  the 
soldiers  within  for  Galba.  In  the  time  of  Vespasian 
the  houses  seem  to  have  extended  so  far  as  to  reach 
it  (Tacitus,  Annul,  iv.  2 ;  Suetonius,  Tib.  87, 
Neron.  48 ;  Plin.  H.  N.  iii.  5).  From  the  first, 
buildings  must  have  sprung  up  near  it  for  sutlers 
and  others.  St.  Paul  appeai-s  to  have  been  per 
mitted  for  the  space  of  two  years  to  lodge,  so  to 
speak,  "within  the  rules"  of  the  Praetorium  (Acts 
xxviii.  30),  although  still  under  the  custody  of  a 
soldier.  '  [J.  W.  B.] 

PRAYER.  The  words  generally  used  in  the  0.  T. 
are  113110  (from  root  J3H,  "  to  incline,"  "  to  be 
gracious,''  whence  in  Hithp.  "  to  entreat  grace  or 
mercy  ")  :  LXX.  (generally),  Sevens  :  Vulg.  depre- 

catio :  and  n?Qn  (from  root  ??E3,  "  to  judge," 
whence  in  Hithp.  "to  seek  judgment"):  LXX. 
irpoffevx'h  '•  Vulg.  oratio.  The  latter  is  used  to 
express  intercessory  prayer.  The  two  words  point 
to  the  two  chief  objects  sought  in  prayer,  viz.  the 
prevalence  of  right  and  truth,  and  the  gift  of  mercy. 

The  object  of  this  article  will  be  to  touch  briefly 
on  (1)  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  as  to  the  nature 
and  efficacy  of  prayer ;  (2)  its  directions  as  to  time, 
place,  and  manner  of  prayer ;  (3)  its  types  and 
examples  of  prayer. 

(1.)  Scripture  does  not  give  any  theoretical  ex 
planation  of  the  mystery  which  attaches  to  prayer. 
The  difficulty  of  understanding  its  real  efficacy  arises 
chiefly  from  two  sources :  from  the  belief  that  man 
lives  under  general  laws,  which  in  all  cases  must 
be  fulfilled  unalterably ;  and  the  opposing  belief 
that  he  is  master  of  his  own  destiny,  and  need  pray 
for  no  external  blessing.  The  first  difficulty  is  even 
increased  when  we  substitute  the  belief  in  a  Per 
sonal  God  for  the  sense  of  an  Impersonal  Destiny ; 
since  not  only  does  the  predestination  of  God  seem 
to  render  prayer  useless,  but  His  wisdom  and  love, 
giving  freely  to  man  all  that  is  good  for  him,  appear 
to  make  it  needless. 

The  difficulty  is  familiar  to  all  philosophy,  the 
former  element  being  far  the  more  important :  the 
logical  inference  from  it  is  the  belief  in  the  absolute 
uselessness  of  prayer.1  But  the  universal  instinct 

*  See  the  well-known  lines : — 

"  Permittes  ipsis  expendere  Nuininibus,  quid 
Conveniat  nobis,  rebusque  sit  utile  nostris. 
Carior  cst  illis  homo  quam  sibi." 

Juv.  Sat.  z.  319-349. 

And  the  older  quotation,  referred  to  by  Tlnto  (/U'c.  tt 
p  154):— 

" 


312 


PRAYER 


of  prayer,  being  too  strong  for  such  reasoning, 
generally  exacted  as  a  compromise  the  use  of  prayer 
for  good  in  the  abstract  (the  "  mens  sana  in  corpore 
lano ") ;  a  :ompromise  theoretically  liable  to  the 
same  difficulties,  but  wholesome  in  its  practical 
effect.  A  far  more  dangerous  compromise  was  that 
adopted  by  some  philosophers,  rather  than  by  man 
kind  at  large,  which  separated  internal  spiritual 
growth  from  the  external  circumstances  which  give 
scope  thereto,  and  claimed  the  former  as  belonging 
entirely  to  man,  while  allowing  the  latter  to  be  gifts 
of  the  gods,  and  therefore  to  be  fit  objects  of  prayer.1* 

The  most  obvious  escape  from  these  difficulties  is 
to  fall  back  on  the  mere  subjective  efl'ect  of  prayer, 
and  to  suppose  that  its  only  object  is  to  produce  on 
the  mind  that  consciousness  of  dependence  which 
leads  to  faith,  and  that  sense  of  God's  protection 
and  mercy  which  fosters  love.  These  being  the 
conditions  of  receiving,  or  at  least  of  rightly  entering 
into,  God's  blessings,  it  is  thought  that  in  its  en 
couragement  of  them  all  the  use  and  efficacy  of 
prayer  consist. 

Now  Scripture,  while,  by  the  doctrine  of  spiritual 
influence,  it  entirely  disposes  of  the  latter  difficulty, 
does  not  so  entirely  solve  that  part  of  the  mystery 
which  depends  on  the  nature  of  God.  It  places  it 
clearly  before  us,  and  emphasizes  most  strongly 
those  doctrines  on  which  the  difficulty  turns.  The 
reference  of  all  events  and  actions  to  the  will  or 
permission  of  God,  and  of  all  blessings  to  His  free 
grace,  is  indeed  the  leading  idea  of  all  its  parts, 
historical,  prophetic,  and  doctrinal ;  and  this  general 
idea  is  expressly  dwelt  upon  in  its  application  to 
the  subject  of  prayer.  The'  principle  that  our 
"  Heavenly  Father  knoweth  what  things  we  have 
need  of  before  we  ask  Him,"  is  not  only  enunciated 
in  plain  terms  by  our  Lord,  but  is  at  all  times 
implied  in  the  very  form  and  nature  of  all  Scrip 
tural  prayers ;  and  moreover,  the  ignorance  of  man, 
who  "  knows  not  what  to  pray  for  as  he  ought," 
and  his  consequent  need  of  the  Divine  guidance  in 
prayer,  are  dwelt  upon  with  equal  earnestness. 
Yet,  while  this  is  so,  on  the  other  hand  the  instinct 
of  prayer  is  solemnly  sanctioned  and  enforced  in 
every  page.  Not  only  is  its  subjective  effect  as 
serted,  but  its  real  objective  efficacy,  as  a  means 
appointed  by  God  for  obtaining  blessing,  is  both 
implied  and  expressed  in  the  plainest  terms.  As 
we  are  bidden  to  pray  for  general  spiritual  blessings, 
in  which  instance  it  might  seem  as  if  prayer  were 
simply  a  means  of  preparing  the  heart,  and  so 
making  it  capable  of  receiving  them ;  so  also  are 
we  encouraged  to  ask  special  blessings,  both  spi 
ritual  and  temporal,  in  hope  that  thus  (and  thus 
only)  we  may  obtain  them,  and  to  use  intercession 
for  others,  equally  special  and  confident,  in  trust 
that  an  effect,  which  in  this  case  cannot  possibly 
be  subjective  to  ourselves,  will  be  granted  to  our 
pray  PIS.  The  command  is  enforced  by  direct  pro 
mise:;,  such  as  that  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
(Matt.  vii.  7,  8),  of  the  clearest  and  most  com- 
prrhensive  character ;  by  the  example  of  all  saints 
au'l  of  our  Lord  Himself;  and  by  historical  records 
of  such  effeci  as  granted  to  prayer  again  and  again. 

Thus,  as  usual  in  the  case  of  such  mysteries,  the 
two  apparently  opposite  truths  are  emphasized,  be 
cause  they  are  needful  to  man's  conception  of  his 
relation  to  God ;  their  reconcilement  is  not,  perhaps 


,  TO  fttv  c<r0Aa  KCU  ev\oit.evoi.<i  <cai 

fVKTOtt 

itSou'  Ta  Se  Seivo.  icai  cv^ojxevou  diraAefe. 


PRAYER 

cr.nnot  be,  fully  revealed.  For,  in  fact,  it  is  involved 
in  that  inscrutable  mystery  which  attends  on  lh» 
conception  of  any  free  action  of  man  as  necessary  for 
the  working  out  of  the  general  laws  of  God's  un 
changeable  will. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  clearly  implied  that  such 
a  reconcilement  exists,  and  that  all  the  apparently 
isolated  and  independent  exertions  of  man's  spirit  in 
prayer  are  in  some  way  perfectly  subordinated  to 
the  One  supreme  will  of  God,  so  as  to  form  a  part  of 
His  scheme  of  Providence.  This  follows  from  the 
condition,  expressed  or  undei-stood  in  eveiy  prayer, 
"  Not  my  will,  but  Thine  be  done."  It  is  seen  in 
the  distinction  between  the  granting  of  our  peti 
tions  (which  is  not  absolutely  promised),  and  the 
certain  answer  of  blessing  to  all  faithful  prayer ; 
a  distinction  exemplified  in  the  case  of  St.  Paul's 
prayer  against  the  "  thorn  in  the  flesh,"  and  of  our 
Lord's  own  agony  in  Gethsemane.  It  is  distinctly 
enunciated  by  St.  John  (1  John  v.  14, 15)  :  "  If  we 
ask  any  thing  according  to  His  will,  He  heareth  us : 
and  if  we  know  that  He  hear  us,  whatsoever  wt 
ask,  we  know  that  we  have  the  petitions  that  we 
desired  of  Him." 

It  is  also  implied  that  the  key  to  the  mystery 
lies  in  the  fact  of  man's  spiritual  unity  ^rith  God, 
in  Christ,  and  of  the  consequent  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  All  true  and  prevailing  prayer  is  to  be 
offered  "in  the  name  of  Christ"  (John  xiv.  13, 
xv.  16,  xvi.  23-27),  that  is,  not  only  for  the  sake 
of  His  Atonement,  but  also  in  dependence  on  His 
Intercession  ;  which  is  therefore  as  a  central  influ 
ence,  acting  on  all  prayers  offered,  to  throw  ofl 
whatever  in  them  is  evil,  and  give  efficacy  to  all 
that  is  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  will.  So  akc 
is  it  said  of  the  spiritual  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
on  each  individual  mind,  that  while  "  we  know  not 
what  to  pray  for,"  the  indwelling  "  Spirit  makes 
intercession  for  the  saints,  according  to  the  will  of 
God"  (Rom.  viii.  26,  27).  Here,  as  probably  in 
all  other  cases,  the  action  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the 
soul  is  to  free  agents,  what  the  laws  of  nature  are 
to  things  inanimate,  and  is  the  power  which  har 
monises  free  individual  action  with  the  universal 
will  of  God.  The  mystery  of  prayer  therefore,  like 
all  others,  is  seen  to  be  resolved  into  that  great 
central  mystery  of  the  Gospel,  th«  communion  of 
man  with  God  in  the  Incarnation  of  Christ.  Beyond 
this  we  cannot  go. 

(2.)  There  are  no  directions  as  to  prayer  given 
in  the  Mosaic  law:  the  duty  is  rather  taken  for 
granted,  as  an  adjunct  to  sacrifice,  than  enforced  or 
elaborated.  The  Temple  is  emphatically  designated 
as  "  the  House  of  Prayer  "  (Is.  Ivi.  7) ;  it  could  not 
be  otherwise,  if  "  He  who  hears  prayer "  (Ps.  Ixv. 
2)  there  manifested  His  special  Presence;  and  the 
prayer  of  Solomon  offered  at  its  consecration  (1  K. 
viii.  30,  35,  38)  implies  that  in  it  were  offered, 
both  the  private  prayers  of  each  single  man,  and 
the  public  prayers  of  all  Israel. 

It  is  hardly  conceivable  that,  even  from  the  bo 
ginning,  public  prayer  did  not  follow  every  public 
sacrifice,  whether  propitiatory  or  eucharistic,  as 
regularly  as  the  incense,  which  was  the  symbol  of 
prayer  (see  Ps.  cxli.  2 ;  Rev.  viii.  3,  4).  Such  a 
practice  is  alluded  to  as  common,  iu  Luke  i.  10  4 
and  in  one  instance,  at  the  offering  of  the  first- 
fruits,  it  was  ordained  in  a  striking  form  (Dent, 

b  "  Sed  satis  est  orare  Jovem,  quae  donat  et  aufert, 
Det  vitam,  del  opes;  aequum  mi  aniraum  ipsc  poiabo.' 
HOB.  Ep.  i.  xviii.  1 1 1    -crop.  Cic.  Dt  Sat.  Den:  iil.  S6 


PBAYEK 

*rrvi.  12-15).  In  later  times  it  certainly  grew  into 
a  regular  service,  both  in  the  Temple  and  in  the 
Synagogue. 

But,  besides  this  public  prayer,  it  was  the  custom 
af  all  at  Jerusalem  to  go  up  to  the  Temple,  at  re 
gular  hours  if  possible,  for  private  prayer  (see  Luke 
iviii.  10  ;  Acts  iii.  1)  ;  and  those  who  were  absent 
were  wont  to  "  open  their  windows  towards  Jeru 
salem,"  and  pray  "  towards "  the  place  of  God's 
Presence  (I  K.  viii.  46-49  ;  Dan.  vi.  10  ;  Ps.  v.  7, 
xxviii.  2;  cxxxviii.  2).  The  desire  to  do  this  was 
possibly  one  reason,  independently  of  other  and 
more  cbvious  ones,  why  the  house-top  or  the 
mountain-top  were  chosen  places  of  private  prayer. 

The  regular  hours  of  prayer  seem  to  have  been 
three  (see  Ps.  Iv.  17;  Dan.  vi.  10),  "  the  evening," 
that  is,  the  ninth  hour  (Acts  iii.  1,  x.  3),  the  hour 
of  the  evening  sacrifice  (Dan.  ix.  21) ;  the  "  morn 
ing,"  that  is,  the  third  hour  (Acts  ii.  15),  that  of 
the  morning  sacrifice ;  and  the  sixth  hour,  or  "  noon 
day."  To  these  would  naturally  be  added  some 
prayer  at  rising  and  lying  down  to  sleep;  and 
thence  might  easily  be  developed  (by  the  love  of 
the  mystic  number  seven),  the  "  seven  times  a  day  " 
of  Ps.  cxix.  164,  if  this  is  to  be  literally  understood, 
and  the  seven  hours  of  prayer  of  the  ancient  Church. 
Some  at  least  of  these  hours  seem  to  have  been  ge 
nerally  observed  by  religious  men  in  private  prayer 
at  home,  or  in  the  midst  of  their  occupation  and  in 
the  streets  (Matt.  vi.  5).  Grace  before  meat  would 
seem  to  have  been  an  equally  common  practice  (see 
Matt.  xv.  36 ;  Acts  xxvii.  35). 

The  posture  of  prayer  among  the  Jews  seems  to 
nave  been  most  often  standing  (1  Sam.  i.  26  ;  Matt. 
vi.  5;  Mark  xi.  25;  Luke  xviii.  11);  unless  the 
prayer  were  offered  with  especial  solemnity,  and 
humiliation,  which  was  naturally  expressed  by 
kneeling  (1  K.  viii.  54;  comp.  2  Chr.  vi.  13  ;  Ezr. 
ix.  5;  Ps.  xcv.  6;  Dan.  vi.  10);  or  prostration 
(Josh.  vii.  6  ;  1  K.  xviii.  42  ;  Neh.  viii.  6).  The 
hands  were  "lifted  up,"  or  "spread  out"  before 
the  Lord  (Ps.  xxviii.  2,  cxxxiv.  2 ;  Ex.  ix.  33, 
&c.  &c.)  In  the  Christian  Church  no  posture  is 
mentioned  in  the  N.  T.  excepting  that  of  kneeling  ; 
see  Acts  vii.  60  (St.  Stephen)  ;  ix.  40  (St.  Peter)  ; 
xx.  36,  xxi.  5  (St.  Paul) ;  perhaps  from  imitation  of 
the  example  of  our  Lord  in  Gethsemane  (on  which 
occasion  alone  His  posture  in  prayer  is  recorded). 
In  after-times,  as  is  well  known,  this  posture  was 
varied  by  the  custom  of  standing  in  prayer  on  the 
I.ord's-day,  and  during  the  period  from  Easter  to 
Whit-Sunday,  in  order  to  commemorate  His  resur 
rection,  and  our  spiritual  resurrection  in  Him. 

(3.)  The  only  Form  of  Prayer  given  for  per 
petual  use  in  the  0.  T.  is  the  one  in  Deut.  xxvi. 
5-15,  connected  with  the  offering  of  tithes  and  first- 
fruits,  and  containing  in  simple  form  the  important 
elements  of  prayer,  acknowledgment  of  God's  mercy, 
self-dedication,  and  prayer  for  future  blessing.  To 
this  may  perhaps  be  added  the  threefold  blessing  of 
Num.  vi.  24-26,  couched  as  it  is  in  a  precatory 
form  ;  and  the  short  prayers  of  Moses  (Num.  x.  35, 
36)  at  the  moving  and  resting  of  the  cloud,  the 
former  of  which  was  the  germ  of  the  68th  Psalm. 

Indeed  the  forms  given,  evidently  with  a  view  to 
preservation  and  constant  use,  are  rather  hymns  01 
songs  than  prayers  properly  so  called,  although  they 
often  contain  supplication.  Scattered  through  the 
historical  books,  we  have  the  Song  of  Moses,  taught 
to  the  children  of  Israel  (Deut.  xxxii.  1-43)  ;  his 
ICE.;  important  songs  after  the  passage  of  the  Red 
Sea  (Ex.  xv.  1-19)  and  at  the  springing  out  oi  the 

VOL.  II. 


TKAYER  (»13 

water  (Num.  xxi.  17,  18);  the  Song  of  IteUnvii 
and  Barak  (Judg.  v.)  ;  the  Song  of  Hannah  in  1  San., 
ii.  1-10  (the  effect  of  which  is  seen  by  reference  to 
the  Magnificat) ;  and  the  Song  of  David  (Ps. 
xviii.),  singled  out  in  2  Sam.  xxii.  But  aflei 
David's  time,  the  existence  and  use  of  the  Psalms. 
r.nd  the  poetical  form  of  the  Prophetic  books,  and 
of  the  prayers  which  they  contain,  must  have  tended 
to  fix  this  Psalmic  character  on  all  Jewish  prayer. 
The  effect  is  seen  plainly  in  the  font,  of  Hezekiah  * 
prayers  in  2  K.  xix.  15-19 ;  Is.  xxxviii.  9-20. 

But  of  the  prayers  recorded  in  the  0.  T.,  the 
two  most  remarkable  are  those  of  Solomon  at  the 
dedication  of  the  Temple  (1  K.  vii-i.  23-53),  and  of 
Joshua  the  high-priest,  and  his  colleagues,  after  the 
captivity  (Neh.  ix.  5-38)."  The  former  is  a  prayer 
for  God's  presence  with  His  people  in  time  of  na 
tional  defeat  (vers.  33,  34),  famine  or  pestilence 
(35-37),  war  (44,  45),  and  captivity  (46-50),  and 
with  each  individual  Jew  and  stranger  (41-43)  who 
may  worship  in  the  Temple.  The  latter  contains  a 
recital  of  all  God's  blessings  to  the  childien  of  Israel 
from  Abraham  to  the  captivity,  a  confession  of  their 
continual  sins,  and  a  fresh  dedication  of  themselves 
to  the  Covenant.  It  is  clear  that  both  are  likely 
to  have  exercised  a  strong  liturgical  influence,  and 
accordingly  we  find  that  the  public  prayer  in  the 
Temple,  already  referred  to,  had  in  our  Lord's  time 
grown  into  a  kind  of  liturgy.  Before  and  during 
the  sacrifice  there  was  a  prayer  that  God  would 
put  it  into  their  hearts  to  love  and  fear  Him  ;  then 
a  repeating  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  of  the 
passages  written  on  their  phylacteries  [FRONT 
LETS];  next  three  or  four  prayers,  and  ascrip 
tions  of  glory  to  God  ;  and  the  blessing  from  Num. 
vi.  24-26,  "  The  Lord  bless  thee,"  &c.,  closed  this 
service.  Afterwards,  at  the  offering  of  the  meat 
offering,  there  followed  the  singing  of  psalms,  regu 
larly  fixed  for  each  day  of  the  week,  or  specially 
appointed  for  the  great  festivals  (sec  Bingham,  b. 
xiii.  ch.  v.  sect.  4).  A  somewhat  similar  liturgy 
formed  a  regular  part  of  the  Synagogue  worship,  in 
which  there  was  a  regular  minister,  as  the  leader  of 

prayer  ("1-13-Vn    HvE',  "legatus  ecclesiae");  and 

public  prayer.as  well  as  private,  was  the  special  object 
of  the  Proseuchae.  It  appears  also,  from  the  question 
of  the  disciples  in  Luke  xi.  1,  and  from  Jewish  tra 
dition,  that  the  chief  teachers  of  the  day  gave  special 
forms  of  prayer  to  their  disr.iples,  as  the  badge  of 
their  discipleship  and  the  best  fruits  of  their  learning. 
All  Christian  prayer  is,  of  course,  based  on  tho 
Lord's  Prayer ;  but  its  spirit  is  also  guided  by  that 
of  His  prayer  in  Gethsemane,  and  of  the  prayer 
recorded  by  St.  John  (ch.  xvii.),  the  beginning  of 
His  great  work  of  intercession.  The  first  is  the 
comprehensive  type  of  the  simplest  and  most  uni 
versal  prayer ;  the  second  justifies  prayers  for  special 
blessings  of  this  life,  while  it  limits  them  by  perfect 
resignation  to  God's  will ;  the  last,  dwelling  as  it 
does  on  the  knowledge  and  glorification  of  <!od. 
and  the  communion  of  man  with  Him,  as  the  one 
object  of  prayer  and  life,  is  the  type  of  the  highest 
and  most  spiritual  devotion.  The  Lord's  Prayei 
has  given  the  form  and  tone  of  all  ordinary  Chris 
tian  prayer ;  it  has  fixed,  as  its  leading  principles, 
simplicity  and  confidence  in  Our  Father,  community 
of  sympathy  with  all  men,  and  practical  reference 
to  our  own  life ;  it  has  shown,  as  its  true  objects, 
first  the  glory  of  God,  and  next  the  needs  of  mant 


»  To  thtse  may  be  added  Dan.  Ix.  4-19. 
3  K 


51 4-  PRESENTS 

To  the  intercessory  prayer,  we  may  trace  up  its 
transcendental  element,  its  des:re  of  that  commu 
nion  through  love  with  the  nature  of  God,  which  is 
the  secret  of  all  individual  holiness,  and  of  all  com 
munity  with  men. 

The  influence  of  these  prayers  is  more  distinctly 
traced  in  the  prayers  contained  in  the  Epistles  (see 
Eph.  iii.  14-21 ;  Rom.  xvi.  25-27  ;  Phil.  i.  3-11  ; 
Col.  i.  9-15;  Heb.  xiii.  20,  21 ;  1  Pet.  v.  10,  11, 
&c.),  than  in  those  recorded  in  the  Acts.  The  public 
prayer,  which  from  the  beginning  became  the  prin 
ciple  of  life  and  unity  in  the  Church  (see  Acts  ii. 
42 ;  and  comp.  i.  24,  25,  iv.  24-30,  vi.  6,  xii.  5, 
xiii.  2,  3,  xvi.  25,  xx.  36,  xxi.  5),  although  doubt 
less  always  including  the  Lord's  Prayer,  probably 
In  the  first  instance  took  much  of  its  form  and  style 
from  the  prayers  of  the  synagogues.  The  only  form 
given  (besides  the  very  short  one  of  Acts  i.  24,  25), 
dwelling  as  it  does  (Acts  iv.  24-30)  on  the  Scrip 
tures  of  the  0.  T.  in  their  application  to  our  Lord, 
seems  to  mark  this  connexion.  It  was  probably  by 
degrees  that  they  assumed  the  distinctively  Chris 
tian  character. 

In  the  record  of  prayers  accepted  and  granted  by 
God,  we  observe,  as  always,  a  special  adaptation  to 
the  period  of  His  dispensation,  to  which  they  belong. 
In  the  patriarchal  period,  they  have  the  simple  and 
childlike  tone  of  domestic  supplication  for  the  simple 
and  apparently  trivial  incidents  of  domestic  life. 
Such  are  the  prayers  of  Abraham  for  children 
(Gen.  xv.  2,  3) ;  for  Ishmael  (xvii.  18) ;  of  Isaac 
for  Rebekah  (xxv.  21)  ;  of  Abraham's  servant  in 
Mesopotamia  (xxiv.  12-14);  although  sometimes 
they  take  a  wider  range  in  intercession,  as  with 
Abraham  for  Sodom  (Gen.  xviii.  23-32),  and  for 
Abimelech  (xx.  7,  17).  In  the  Mosaic  period 
they  assume  a  more  solemn  tone  and  a  national 
bearing;  chiefly  that  of  direct  intercession  for  the 
chosen  people;  as  by  Moses  (Num.  xi.  2,  xii.  13, 
xxi.  7) ;  by  Samuel  (1  Sam.  vii.  5,  xii.  19,  23) ; 
by  David  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  17,  18) ;  by  Hezekiah 
(2  K.  xix.  15-19);  by  Isaiah  (2  K.  xix.  4;  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  20);  by  Daniel  (Dan.  ix.  20,  21):  or  of 
prayer  for  national  victory,  as  by  Asa  (2  Chr. 
riv.  11);  Jehoshaphat  (2  Chr.  xx.  6-12).  More 
rarely  are  they  for  individuals,  as  in  the  prayer  of 
Hannah  (1  Sam.  i.  12)  ;  in  that  of  Hezekiah  in  his 
sickness  (2  K.  xx.  2) ;  the  intercession  of  Samuel 
for  Saul  (1  Sam.  xv.  11,  35),  &c.  A  special  class 
are  those  which  precede  and  refer  to  the  exercise  of 
miraculous  power;  as  by  Moses  (Ex.  viii.  12,  30, 
xv.  25) ;  by  Elijah  at  Zarephath  (1  K.  xvii.  20) 
;»nd  Carmel  (IK.  xviii.  36,  37)  ;  by  Elisha  at 
Shunem  (2  K.  iv.  33)  and  Dothan  (vi.  17,  18) ; 
by  Isaiah  (2  K.  xx.  11) :  by  St.  Peter  for  Tabitha 
(Acts  ix.  40)  ;  by  the  elders  of  the  Church  (James 
v.  14,  15,  16).  In  the  New  Testament  they  have 
a  more  directly  spiritual  bearing ;  such  as  the 
prayer  of  the  Church  for  protection  and  grace 
(Acts  iv.  24-30) ;  of  the  Apostles  for  their  Sa 
maritan  converts  (viii.  15);  of  Cornelius  for  guid- 
wice  (x.  4,  31) ;  of  the  Church  for  St.  Peter  (xii. 
5) ;  of  St.  Paul  at  Philippi  (xvi.  25)  ;  of  St.  Paul 
against  the  thorn  in  the  flesh  answered,  although 
not  granted  (2  Cor.  xii.  7-9),  &c.  It  would  seem 
the  intention  of  Holy  Scripture  to  encourage  all 
prayer,  more  especially  intercession,  in  all  relations, 
end  for  all  righteous  objects.  [A.  B.] 

PRESENTS.    [GIFTS.] 

PRESIDENT.     Sarac,*  or  Sorted,  only  used 


or  XD~ID  ;  TOXTUCCK  ;  prtwcg*. 


PRIEST 

Dan.  vi.,  the  Chaldee  equivalent  for  Hebrew  ShStfr, 
probably  from  Sara,  Zend,  a  "  head  "  (see  Strabo, 
xi.  p.  331).  Sopairopaj  =  K€<J>aAoT(J/tos  is  con 
nected  with  the  Sanskrit  siras  or  firos,  and  ia 
traced  in  Sargon  and  other  words  (Eichoff,  Vergl. 
Spr.  p.  129,  415;  see  Her.  iii.  89,  where  he  calls 
Satrap  a  Persian  word).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PRIEST  ()ma,  cohen:  itptir; :  tacerdo$). 
Name. — It  is  unfortunate  that  there  is  nothing 
like  a  consensus  of  interpreters  as  to  the  etymology 
of  this  word.  Its  root-meaning,  uncertain  as  far  as 
Hebrew  itself  is  concerned,  is  referred  by  Gesenius 
( Thesaurus,  s.  v.)  to  the  idea  of  prophecy.  The 
Cohen  delivers  a  divine  message,  stands  as  a  me 
diator  between  God  and  man,  represents  each  to  the 
other.  This  meaning,  however,  belongs  to  the 
Arabic,  not  to  the  Hebrew  form,  and  Ewald  con 
nects  the  latter  with  the  verb  p3n  (A&in),  to 
array,  put  in  order  (so  in  Is.  Ixi.  10),  seeing  in  it 
a  reference  to  the  primary  office  of  the  priests  as 
arranging  the  sacrifice  on  the  altar  (Alterthum.  p. 
272).  According  to  Saalschiitz  (Archaol.  der  Hebr. 
c.  78),  the  primary  meaning  of  the  word  =  minister, 
and  he  thus  accounts  for  the  wider  application  of 
the  name  (infra).  Bahr  (Symbolik,  ii.  p.  15)  con 
nects  it  with  an  Arabic  root  =  mp,  to  draw  near. 
Of  these  etymologies,  the  last  has  the  merit  of 
answering  most  closely  to  the  received  usage  of  the 
word.  In  the  precise  terminology  of  the  law,  it  is 
used  of  one  who  may  "  draw  near  "  to  the  Divine 
Presence  (Ex.  xix.  22,  xxx.  20)  while  others  remain 
afar  off,  and  is  applied  accordingly,  for  the  most 
part,  to  the  sons  of  Aaron,  as  those  who  were  alone 
authorized  to  offer  sacrifices.  In  some  remarkable 
passages  it  takes  a  wider  range.  It  is  applied  to 
the  priests  of  other  nations  or  religions,  to  Mel- 
chizedek  (Gen.  xiv.  18),  Potipherah  (Gen.  xii.  45), 
Jethro  (Ex.  ii.  16),  to  those  who  discharged  priestly 
functions  in  Israel  before  the  appointment  of  Aaron 
and  his  sons  (Ex.  xix.  22).  A  case  of  greater  diffi 
culty  presents  itself  in  2  Sam.  viii.  18,  where  the 
sons  of  David  are  described  as  priests  (Cohdntm), 
and  this  immediately  after  the  name  had  been 
applied  in  its  usual  sense  to  the  sons  of  Aaron. 
The  writer  of  1  Chr.  xviii.  17,  as  if  reluctant  to 
adopt  this  use  of  the  title,  or  anxious  to  guard 
against  mistake,  gives  a  paraphrase,  "  the  sons  of 
David  were  first  at  the  king's  hand"  (A.  V.  "chief 
about  the  king"  ).  The  LXX.  and  A.  V.  suppress 
the  difficulty,  by  translating  Coh&ntm  into  aii\dp- 
X<u,  and  "  chief  officers."  The  Vulgate  more  ho 
nestly  gives  "  sacerdotes."  Luther  and  Coverdale 
follow  the  Hebrew  strictly,  and  give  "  priests."  The 
received  explanation  is,  that  the  word  is  used  here  in 
what  is  assumed  to  be  its  earlier  and  wider  meaning, 
as  equivalent  to  rulers,  or,  giving  it  a  more  restricted 
sense,  that  the  sons  of  David  were  Vicarii  Regis  as 
the  sons  of  Aaron  were  Vicarii  Dei  (comp.  Patrick, 
Michaelis,  Rosenmuller,  in  loc.,  Keil  on  1  Chr.  xviii. 
17).  It  can  hardly  be  said,  however,  that  this  ac 
counts  satisfactorily  for  the  use  of  the  same  title  in 
two  successive  verses  in  two  entirely  different  senses. 
Ewald  accordingly  (Alterthiim.  p.  276)  sees  in  it 
an  actual  suspension  of  the  usu<il  law  in  favour  of 
members  of  the  royal  house,  and  finds  a  parallel 
instance  in  the  acts  of  David  (2  Sam.  vi.  14)  and 
Solomon  (1  K.  iii.  15).  De  Wette  and  Gesenius,  in. 
like  manner,  look  on  it  as  a  revival  of  the  old 
household  priesthoods.  These  theories  are  in  their 
turn  unsatisfactory,  as  contradicting  the  whol? 
spirit  and  policy  of  David's  reign,  \vhich  WT«. 


PRIEST 

throughout  tliat  of  reverence  for  the  Law  of  Je- 
hcvah,  and  the  priestly  order  which  it  established. 
A  conjecture  midway  between  these  two  extremes 
is  perhaps  permissible.  David  and  his  sous  may 
nave  been  admitted,  not  to  distinctively  priestly 
acts,  such  as  burning  incense  (Num.  xvi.  40  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  18),  but  to  an  honorary,  titular  priesthood. 
To  wear  the  ephod  in  processions  (2  Sam.  vi  14), 
at  the  time  when  this  was  the  special  badge  of  the 
order  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  to  join  the  priests  and 
Levites  in  their"  songs  and  dances,  might  have  been 
conceded,  with  no  deviation  from  the  law,  to  the 
members  of  the  royal  house.*  There  are  some  in 
dications  that  these  functions  (possibly  this  litur 
gical  retirement  from  public  life)  were  the  lot  of 
the  members  of  the  royal  house  who  did  not  come 
into  the  line  of  succession,  and  who  belonged,  by 
descent  or  incorporation,  a  the  house  of  Nathan  as 
ilistinct  from  that  of  David  (Zech.  xii.  12).  The 
very  name  Nathan,  connected,  as  it  is,  with  Nethi- 
nim,  suggests  the  idea  of  dedication.  [NETHINIM.] 
The  title  Cohen  is  given  to  Zabud,  the  son  of 
Nathan  (1  K.  iv.  5).  The  genealogy  of  the  line  of 
Nathan  in  Luke  iii.  includes  many  names — Levi, 
Eliezer,  Malchi,  Jochanan,  Mattathias,  Heli — which 
appear  elsewhere  as  belonging  to  the  priesthood. 
The  mention  in  1  Esdr.  v.  5,  of  Joiakim  as  the 
son  of  Zerubbabel,  while  in  Neh.  xii.  10  he  appears 
;is  the  son  of  Jeshua,  the  son  of  Josedek,  indicates, 
either  a  strange  confusion  or  a  connexion,  as  yet 
imperfectly  understood,  between  the  two  families.b 
The  same  explanation  applies  to  the  parallel  cases  of 
Ira  the  Jairite  (2  Sam.  xx.  26),  where  the  LXX. 
gives  iepevs.  It  is  noticeable  that  this  use  of  the 
title  is  confined  to  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solo 
mon,  and  that  the  synonym  "  at  the  king's  hand  " 
of  1  Chr.  xviii.  17  is  used  in  1  Chr.  xxv.  2  of  the 
sons  of  Asaph  as  "  prophesying "  under  their  head 
or  father,  and  of  the  relation  of  Asaph  himself  to 
David  in  the  choral  service  of  the  Temple. 

Origin. — The  idea  of  a  priesthood  connects  itself, 
in  all  its  forms,  pure  or  corrupted,  with  the  consci 
ousness,  more  or  less  distinct,  ofsin.  Men  feel  that 
they  have  broken  a  law.  The  power  above  them  is 
holier  than  they  are,  and  they  dare  not  approach  it. 
They  crave  for  the  intervention  of  some  one  of  whom 


PRIEST  915 

they  can  think  as  likely  to  be  more  acceptable  than 
themselves.  He  must  offer  up  their  prayers,  thanks- 
givings,  sacrifices.  He  becomes  their  representative 
in  "  things  pertaining  unto  God."  :  He  may  be- 
come  also  (though  this  does  not  always  follow)  the 
representative  of  God  to  man.  The  functions  of 
the  priest  and  prophet  may  exist  in  the  same  person. 
The  reverence  which  men  pay  to  one  who  bears 
this  consecrated  character  may  lead  them  to  acknow 
ledge  the  priest  as  being  also  their  king.  The  claim 
to  fill  the  office  may  rest  on  characteristics  belong 
ing  only  to  the  individual  man,  or  confined  to  a 
single  family  or  tribe.  The  conditions  of  the  priest 
hood,  the  office  and  influence  of  the  priests,  as 
they  are  among  the  most  conspicuous  facts  of  all 
religions  of  the  ancient  world,  so  do  they  occupy 
a  like  position  in  the  history  of  the  religion  of 
Israel. 

No  trace  of  an  hereditary  or  caste-priesthood 
meets  us  in  the  worship  of  the  patriarchal  age. 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  perform  priestly  acts, 
offer  sacrifices,  "  draw  near"  to  the  Lord  (Gen.  xii. 
8,  xviii.  23,  xxvi.  25,  xxxiii.  20).  To  the  eldest 
son,  or  to  the  favoured  son  exalted  to  the  place  of 
the  eldest,  belongs  the  "goodly  raiment"  (Gen. 
xxvii.  15),  the  "coat  of  many  colours"  (Gen. 
\xxvii.  3),  in  which  we  find  perhaps  the  earliest 
trace  of  a  sacerdotal  vestment d  (comp.  Blunt,  Scrip- 
tural  Coincid.  i.  1 ;  Ugolini,  xiii.  138).  Once, 
and  once  only,  does  the  word  Cohen  meet  us  as  be 
longing  to  a  ritual  earlier  than  the  time  of  Abraham. 
Melchizedek  is  "  the  priest  of  the  most  high  God  " 
(Gen.  xiv.  18).  The  argument  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  has  an  historical  foundation  in  the  fact 
that  there  are  no  indications  in  the  narrative  of  Gen. 
xiv.  of  any  one  preceding  or  following  him  in  that 
office.  The  special  Divine  names  which  are  con 
nected  with  him  as  the  priest  of  "  the  most  high 
God,  the  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth,"  render  it 
probable  that  he  rose,  in  the  strength  of  those  threat 
thoughts  of  God,  above  the  level  of  the  other  inha 
bitants  of  Canaan.  Jn  him  Abraham  recognized  a 
faith  like  his  own,  a  life  more  entirely  consecrated, 
the  priestly  character  in  its  perfection  [comp.  MEL 
CHIZEDEK].  In  the  worship  of  the  patriarchs  them 
selves,  the  chief  of  the  family,  as  such,  acted  as  the 


R  The  apocryphal  literature  of  the  N.  T.,  worthless  as 
»  witness  to  a  fact,  may  perhaps  be  received  as  an  indi 
cation  of  the  feeling  which  saw  in  the  house  and  lineage 
of  David  a  kind  of  quasi-sacerdotal  character.  Joseph, 
though  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  is  a  priest  living  in  the 
Temple  (Hist.  Joteph.  c.  2,  in  Tischendorf,  Evang.  Apoc.). 
The  kindred  of  Jesus  are  recognized  as  taking  tithes  of  the 
people  (Kvang.  Ificod.  1.  16,  ibid.).  In  what  approaches 
more  nearly  to  history,  James  the  Just,  the  brother  of  the 
Lord,  Is  admitted  (partly,  it  is  true,  as  a  Nazarite)  into 
the  Holy  Place,  and  wears  the  linen  dress  of  the  priests 
'Hegesipp.  ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  li.  23).  The  extraordinary 
btory  found  in  Suidas,  s.  v.  'Ijjo-oDs,  represents  the  priests 
of  Jerusalem  as  electing  the  "Son  of  Joseph"  to  a  vacant 
office  In  the  priesthood,  on  the  ground  that  the  two  families 
had  been  so  closely  connected,  that  there  was  no  great 
deviation  from  usage  In  admitting  one  of  the  Uncage  of 
David  to  the  privileges  of  the  sons  of  Aaron.  Augustine 
was  inclined  to  see  in  this  intermingling  of  the  royal  and 
priestly  lines  a  possible  explanation  of  the  apocryphal 
traditions  that  the  Mother  of  the  lx>rd  was  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi  (c.  Faust,  xxili.  9).  The  marriage  of  Aaron  him 
self  with  the  sister  of  the  prince  of  Judah  (fcx.  vil.  23), 
that  of  Jehoiada  with  Jehoshabeath  (2  Chr.  xxii.  11),  and 
of  Joseph  with  one  who  was  "  cousin  "  to  a  daughter  of 
Aaron  (Luke  i.  36),  are  historical  instances  of  this  con 
nexion.  The  statement  of  Eutychius  (=  Sayd  ibn  Batrik), 


patriarch  of  Alexandria  (Selden,  De  Success.  Pont.  1.  13), 
that  Aristobulus  was  a  priest  of  the  house  of  David,  sug 
gests  a  like  explanaticpn. 

b  Comp.  the  remarkable  passage  in  Augustine,  De  divers. 
Quaest.  Ixi. :  "  A  David  enim  in  duas  families,  regiam  et 
sacerdotalem,  orlgo  ilia  distributa  est,  quarura  diiarum  fa- 
miliarum,  sicut  dictum  est,  regiam  descendens  Matthaeus, 
sacerdotalem  adscendens  Lucas  secutus  est,  ut  Domimis 
noster  Jesus  Christus,  rex  et  sacerdos  noster,  et  cogna- 
tionem  duceret  de  stirpe  sacerdotal!,  et  non  esset  tamen 
de  trlou  sacerdotall."  The  cognatio  he  supposes  to  have 
been  the  marriage  of  Nathan  with  one  of  the  daughters 
of  Aaron. 

«  The  true  Idea  of  the  priesthood,  as  distinct  from  all 
other  ministerial  functions  like  those  of  the  Levites.  is 
nowhere  given  more  distinctly  than  in  Nam.  xvi.  5.  The 
priest  is  Jehovah's,  Is  "  holy,"  is  "  chosen,"  "  draws  near  " 
to  the  Lord.  In  all  these  points  he  represents  the  ideal 
life  of  the  people  (Ex.  xix.  3-6).  His  highest  act,  that 
which  is  exclusively  sacerdotal  (Num.  xvi.  40 ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  is),  is  to  offer  the  incense  which  is  the  symbol  of 
the  prayers  of  the  worshippers  (Ps.  cxli.  2 ;  Rev.  vili.  3). 

»  In  this  sacerdotal,  dedicated  character  of  Joseph's 
youth,  we  find  the  simplest  explanation  of  the  words 
which  speak  of  him  as  "  the  separated  oce  "  "  ttic  Na 
zarite"  (Nazir),  among  his  brethren  (Gen.  zliz.  26;  l)cut 
xxxiii.  16). 

3  N  2 


316 


P1HKST 


priMl.  The  office  descended  with  the  birthright,  and 
might  apparently  be  transferred  with  it.  As  the 
family  expanded,  the  head  of  each  section  probably 
stood  in  the  same  relation  to  it.  The  thought  of  the 
special  consecration  of  the  first-born  was  recognized 
at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  (infra).  A  priesthood  of 
a  like  kind  continued  to  exist  in  other  Semitic 
tribes.  The  Book  of  Job,  whatever  may  be  its  date, 
ignores  altogether  the  institutions  of  Israel,  and  re 
presents  the  man  of  Uz  as  himself  "  sanctifying " 
his  sons,  and  offering  burnt-offerings  (Job  i.  5). 
Jethro,  is  a  "  priest  of  Midian  "  (Ex.  ii.  16,  iii.  1), 
Balak  himself  offers  a  bullock  and  a  ram  upon  the 
seven  altars  on  Pisgah  (Num.  xxiii.  2,  &c.). 

In  Egypt  the  Israelites  came  into  contact  with  a 
priesthood  of  another  kind,  and  that  contact  must 
nave  been  for  a  time  a  very  close  one.  The  mar 
riage  of  Joseph  with  the  daughter  of  the  priest  of 
On — a  priest,  as  we  may  infer  from  her  name,  of  the 
goddess  Neith— (Gen.  xli.  45)  [ASENATH],  the 
special  favour  which  he  showed  to  the  priestly  caste 
in  the  years  of  famine  (Gen.  xlvii.  26),  the  train 
ing  of  Moses  in  the  palace  of  the  Pharaohs,  probably 
in  the  colleges  and  temples  of  the  priests  (Acts  vii. 
22) — all  this  must  have  impressed  the  constitution, 
the  dress,  the  outward  form  of  life  upon  the  minds 
of  the  lawgiver  and  his  contemporaries.  Little  as 
we  know  directly  of  the  life  of  Egypt  at  this  remote 
period,  the  stereotyped  fixedness  of  the  customs  of 
that  country  warrants  us  in  referring  to  a  tolerably 
distant  past  the  facts  which  belong  historically  to  a 
later  period,  and  in  doing  so,  we  find  coincidences 
with  the  ritual  of  the  Israelites  too  numerous  to  be 
looked  on  as  accidental,  or  as  the  result  of  forces 
which  were  at  work,  independent  of  each  other, 
but  taking  parallel  directions.  As  circumcision  was 
common  to  the  two  nations  (Herod,  ii.  37),  so  the 
shaving  of  the  whole  body  (ibid.)  was  with  both 
part  of  the  symbolic  purity  of  the  priesthood,  once 
for  all  with  the  Levites  of  Israel  (Num.  viii.  7), 
every  third  day  with  those  of  Egypt.  Both  are  re 
stricted  to  garments  of  linea  (Herod,  ii.  37,  81 ; 
Plutarch,  De  lad.  e.  4 ;  Juven.  vi.  533;  Ex.  xxviii. 
39  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  18).  The  sandals  of  byblus  worn 
by  the  Egyptian  priests  were  but  little  removed 
from  the  bare  feet  with  which  the  sons  of  Aaron 
went  into  the  sanctuary  (Herod,  ii.  37).  For  both 
there  were  multiplied  ablutions.  Both  had  a  public 
maintenance  assigned,  and  had  besides  a  large  share 
in  the  flesh  of  the  victims  offered  (Herod.  I.  c.). 
Over  both  there  was  one  high-priest.  In  both  the 
law  of  succession  was  hereditary  (ibid. ;  comp.  also 
Spencer,  De  Leg.  Hebr.  c.  iii.  1,  5,  11 ;  Wilkinson, 
Ancient  Egyptians,  iii.  p.  116). 

Facts  such  as  these  leave  scarcely  any  room  for 
doubt  that  there  was  a  connexion  of  some  kind 
between  the  Egyptian  priesthood  and  that  of  Israel. 
The  latter  was  not,  indeed,  an  outgrowth  or  imita 
tion  of  th?  former.  The  faith  of  Israel  in  Jehovah, 
the  one  Lora,  the  living  God,  of  whom  there  was 
no  form  or  similitude,  presented  the  strongest  pos 
sible  contrast  to  the  multitudinous  idols  of  the  poly 
theism  of  Egypt.  The  symbolism  of  the  one  was 
cosmic,  "  of  the  earth,  earthy,"  that  of  the  other, 


PRIEST 

chiefly,  if  not  altogether,  ethical  and  spiritual.  But 
ooking,  as  we  must  look,  at  the  law  and  ritual  of 
the  Israelites  as  designed  for  the  education  ot  a 
people  who  were  in  danger  of  sinking  into  such  a 
polytheism,  we  may  readily  admit  that  the  educa- 
;ion  must  have  started  from  some  point  which  the 
ubjects  of  it  had  already  reached,  must  have  em 
ployed  the  language  of  symbolic  acts  and  rites  with 
which  they  were  already  familiar.  The  same  alpha 
bet  had  to  be  used,  the  same  root-forms  employed 
as  the  elements  of  speech,  though  the  thoughts 
which  they  were  to  be  the  instruments  of  uttering 
were  widely  different.  The  details  of  the  religion 
of  Egypt  might  well  be  used  to  make  the  protest 
against  the  religion  itself  at  once  less  startling  and 
more  attractive.* 

At  the  time  of  the  Exodus  there  was  as  yet  no 
priestly  caste.  The  continuance  of  solemn  sacrifices 
(Ex.  v.  1,  3),  implied,  of  course,  a  priesthood  of 
some  kind,  and  priests  appear  as  a  recognized  body 
before  the  promulgation  of  the  Law  on  Sinai  (Ex. 
xix.  22).  It  has  been  supposed  that  these  were 
identical  with  the  "  young  men  of  the  children  ot 
Israel"  who  offered  burnt -offerings  and  peace- 
offerings  (Ex.  xxiv.  5)  either  as  the  first-born,'  or 
as  representing  in  the  freshness  of  their  youth  the 
purity  of  acceptable  worship  (comp.  the  analogous 
case  of  "  the  young  man  the  Levite  "  in  Jndg.  rvii., 
and  Ew&]d,Alt«rthwn.  p.  273).  On  the  principle, 
however,  that  difference  of  title  implies  in  most 
cases  difference  of  functions,  it  appears  more  pro 
bable  that  the  "  young  men  "  were  not  those  who 
had  before  performed  priestly  acts,  but  were  chosen 
by  the  lawgiver  to  be  his  ministers  in  the  solemn 
work  of  the  covenant,  representing,  in  their  youth, 
the  stage  in  the  nation's  life  on  which  the  people 
were  then  entering  (Keil,  in  loc.).  There  are  signs 
that  the  priests  of  the  older  ritual  were  already 
dealt  with  as  belonging  to  an  obsolescent  system. 
Though  they  were  known  as  those  that  "come 
near"  to  the  Lord  (Ex.  xix.  22),  yet  they  are  not 
permitted  to  approach  the  Divine  Presence  on  Sinai. 
They  cannot  "  sanctify  "  themselves  enough  to  en 
dure  that  trial.  Aaron  alone,  the  future  high-priest, 
but  as  yet  not  known  as  such,  enters  with  Moses 
into  the  thick  darkness.  It  is  noticeable  also  that 
at  this  transition-stage,  when  the  old  order  was 
passing  away,  and  the  new  was  not  yet  established, 
there  is  the  proclamation  of  the  truth,  wider  and 
higher  than  both,  that  the  whole  people  was  to  be 
"a  kingdom  of  priests"  (Ex.  xix.  6).  The  idea  of 
the  life  of  the  nation  was,  that  it  was  to  be  as  a  priest 
and  a  prophet  to  the  rest  of  mankind.  They  were 
called  to  a  universal  priesthood  (comp.  Keil,  in  toe.). 
As  a  people,  however,  they  needed  a  long  discipline 
before  they  could  make  the  idea  a  reality.  They 
drew  back  from  their  high  vocation  (Ex.  xx.  18-21). 
As  for  other  reasons  so  also  for  this,  that  the  central 
truth  required  a  rigid,  unbending  form  for  its  out- 
ward  expression,  a  distinctive  priesthood  was  to  be 
to  the  nation  what  the  nation  was  to  mankind. 
The  position  given  to  the  ordinances  of  the  priest 
hood  indicated  with  sufficient  clearness,  tiiat  it  was 
subordinate,  not  primary,  a  means  and  not  an  end. 


•  For  a  temperate  discussion  of  the  connexion  between 
the  cultus  of  Israel  and  that  of  Egypt,  on  views  opposed 
to  Spencer,  see  Bahr's  Symbolik;  Elnleit  ($4,  ti.  c.  i,  $3); 
and  Fairbairn's  Typology  of  Scripture  (b.  iii.  c.  3,  }3). 

f  The  Targiims  both  of  Babylon  and  Jerusalem  give 
"  first-born  "  as  an  equivalent  (Saubert,  De  Sacerd.  Hebr 
in  Ugolini,  Tlut.  jr.ii.  2;  comp.  also  xlii.  135).  Jewish 


Interpreters  (Saadias,  Rashi,  Aben-Ezra)  take  the  game 
view ;  and  the  Talmud  (Sevach.  xlv.  4)  expressly  asserts 
the  priesthood  of  the  first-born  in  the  pre-Mosaic  times 
It  has,  however,  been  denied  by  Vitrlnga  and  ethers 
(Comp.  Bahr's  Symbolik,  il.  4  ;  ^elden,  De  .fyfudr.  i  1€ 
De  iS'uccew.  font.  c.  i.). 


PRIEST 

tot  In  tlw  first  proclamation  of  the  great  laws  of 
duty  iu  the  Decalogue  (Ex.  xx.  1-17),  nor  in  the 
applications  of  those  laws  to  the  chief  contingencies 
of  the  people's  life  in  the  wilderness,  does  it  find  a 
place.  It  appears  together  with  the  Ark  and  the 
Tabernacle,  as  taking  its  position  in  the  education 
by  which  the  people  were  to  be  led  toward  the  mark 
of  their  high  calling.  As  such  we  have  to  con- 
iider  it. 

Consecration. — The  functions  of  the  HIGH-PRIEST, 
the  position  and  history  of  the  LEVITES  as  the  con 
secrated  tribe,  have  been  discussed  fully  under  those 
heads.  It  remains  to  notice  the  characteristic  facts 
connected  with  "  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron,"  as 
standing  between  the  two.  Solemn  as  was  the  sub- 
tequent  dedication  of  the  LEVITES,  that  of  the 
priests  involved  a  yet  higher  consecration.  A  special 

word  (5Jnp,  kadash)  was  appropriated  to  it.    Their 

old  garments  were  laid  aside.  Their  bodies  were 
washed  with  clean  water  (Ex.  xxix.  4 ;  Lev.  viii.  6) 
and  anointed  with  the  perfumed  oil,  prepared  after 
a  prescribed  formula,  and  to  be  used  for  no  lower 
purposes  (Ex.  xxix.  7,  xxx.  22-33).  The  new 
garments  belonging  to  their  office  were  then  put  on 
them  (infra).  The  truth  that  those  who  intercede 
for  others  must  themselves  have  been  reconciled, 
was  indicated  by  the  sacrifice  of  a  bullock  as  a  sin- 
offering,  on  which  they  solemnly  laid  their  hands, 
as  transferring  to  it  the  guilt  which  had  attached 
to  them  (Ex.  xxix.  10  ;  Lev.  viii.  18).  The  total 
surrender  of  their  lives  was  represented  by  the  ram 
slain  as  a  burnt-offering,  a  "  sweet  savour  "  to  Je 
hovah  (Ex.  xxix.  18;  Lev.  viii.  21).  The  blood  of 
these  two  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar,  offered  to  the 
Lord.  The  blood  of  a  third  victim,  the  ram  of  con 
secration,  was  used  for  another  purpose.  With  it 
Moses  sprinkled  the  right  ear  that  was  to  be  open 
to  the  Divine  voice,  the  right  hand  and  the  right 
foot  that  were  to  be  active  in  divine  ministrations 
(Ex.  xxix.  20 ;  Lev.  viii.  23, 4).  Lastly,  as  they  were 
to  be  the  exponents,  not  only  of  the  nation's  sense 
of  guilt,  but  of  its  praise  and  thanksgiving,  Moses 
was  to  "  fill  their  hands  "h  with  cakes  of  unleavened 
bread  and  portions  of  the  sacrifices,  which  they 
vere  to  present  before  the  Lord  as  a  wave-offering. 
The  whole  of  this  mysterious  ritual  was  to  be  re 
peated  for  seven  days,  during  which  they  remained 
within  the  Tabernacle,  separated  from  the  people, 
and  not  till  then  was  the  consecration  perfect  (comp. 
on  the  meaning  of  all  these  acts  Bahr,  Symbolik,  ii. 
c.  v.  §2).  Moses  himself,  as  the  representative  of 
the  Unseen  King,  is  the  consecrator,  the  sacrifice!- 
throughout  these  ceremonies  ;  as  the  channel  through 
which  the  others  receive  their  office,  he  has  for  the 
time  a  higher  priesthood  than  that  of  Aaron  (Selden, 
De  Synedr.  i.  16;  Ugolini,  xii.  3).  In  accordance 
with  the  principle  which  runs  through  the  history 
of  Israel,  he,  the  ruler,  solemnly  divests  himself  of 
the  priestly  office  and  transfers  it  to  another.  The 


PRIEST 


911 


feet  that  he  haa  been  a  priest,  was  merged  in  his 
work  as  a  lawgiver.  Only  once  in  the  language  ol 
a  later  period  was  the  word  Cohen  applied  to  him 
(Ps.  xcix.  6). 

The  consecrated  character  thus  imparted  did  not 
need  renewing.  It  was  a  perpetual  inheritance 
transmitted  from  father  to  son  through  all  the  cen 
turies  that  followed.  We  do  not  read  of  its  bning 
renewed  in  the  case  of  any  individual  priest  of  the 
sons  of  Aaron.1  Only  when  the  line  of  succession 
was  broken,  and  the  impiety  of  Jeroboam  intruded 
the  lowest  of  the  people  into  the  sacred  office,  do 
we  find  the  re-appearance  of  a  like  form  (2  Chr. 
xiii.  9),  of  the  same  technical  word.  The  previous 
history  of  Jeroboam  and  the  character  of  the  worship 
which  he  introduced  make  it  probable  that,  in  that 
case  also,  the  ceremonial  was,  to  some  extent,  Egyp 
tian  iu  its  origin. 

Dress. — The  "  sons  of  Aaron  "  thus  dedicated 
were  to  wear  during  their  ministrations  a  special 
apparel — at  other  times  apparently  they  wore  the 
common  dress  of  the  people.  The  material  Was 
linen,  but  that  word  included  probably,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Egyptian  priests,  the  byssus,  and  the 
cotton  stuffs  of  that  country  (Ex.  xxviii.  42  ;  comp. 
COTTON) J  Linen  drawers  from  the  loins  to  the 
thighs  were  "  to  cover  their  nakedness."  The  verc- 
cundia  of  the  Hebrew  ritual  in  this  and  in  other 
places  (Ex.  xx.  26,  xxviii.  42)  was  probably  a 
protest  against  some  of  the  fouler  forms  of  nature- 
worship,  as  e.  g.  in  the  worship  of  Peor  (Maimo- 
nides,  More  Nevochim,  iii.  45,  in  [Jgolini,  xiii.  p, 
385),  and  possibly  also,  in  some  Egyptian  rites 
(Herod,  ii.  60).  Over  the  drawers  was  worn  the 
cetoneth,  or  close-fitting  cassock,  also  of  fine  linen, 
white,  but  with  a  diamond  or  chess-board  pattern 
on  it  (Bahr,  Symb.  ii.  c.  iii.  §2).  This  came  nearly 
to  the  feet  (iroS^pr]!  xtr®v'  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  7, 
§1),  and  was  to  be  woven  in  its  garment-shape  (not 
cut  out  and  then  sewed  together),  like  the  xir^v 
&fi{>a<f>os  of  John  xix.  23,  in  which  some  inter 
preters  have  even  seen  a  token  of  the  priesthood  of 
him  who  wore  it  (Ewald,  Gesch.  v.  177  ;  Ugolini, 
xiii.  p.  218).k  The  white  cassock  was  gathered 
round  the  body  with  a  girdle  of  needlework,  into 
which,  as  in  the  more  gorgeous  belt  of  the  high- 
priest,  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet,  were  intermingled 
with  white,  and  worked  in  the  form  of  flowers 
(Ex.  xxviii.  39,  40,  xxxii.  2  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  17- 
19).  Upon  their  heads  they  were  to  wear  caps  or 
bonnets  (in  the  English  of  the  A.  V.  the  two  words 
are  synonymous)  in  the  form  of  a  cup-shaped  flower, 
also  of  fine  linen.  These  garments  they  might  wear 
at  any  time  in  the  Temple,  whether  on  duty  or 
not,  but  they  were  not  to  sleep  in  them  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  v.  5,  §7).  When  they  became  soiled,  they 
were  not  washed  or  used  again,  but  torn  up  to 
make  wicks  for  the  lamps  in  the  Tabernacle  (Selden, 
De  Synedr.  xiii.  11).  They  had  besides  them  other 
"  clothes  of  service,"  which  were  probably  simpler, 


B  The  sons  of  Aaron,  it  may  be  noticed,  were  simply 
jprinkled  with  the  precious  oil  (Lev.  viii.  30).  Over 
Aaron  himself  it  was  poured  till  it  went  down  to  the 
skirts  of  his  clothing  (Ibid.  12  ;  Ps.  cxxxiii.  2). 

h  This  nppears  to  have  been  regarded  as  the  essential 
part  of  the  consecration  ;  and  the  Hebrew,  "  to  till  the 
liand,"  is  accordingly  used  as  a  synonyme  for  "  to  con 
secrate  "  (Kx.  xxix.  9;  2  Chr.  xiii.  9). 

'  Ewald  (Alterthum.  p.  289-291)  writes  as  if  the  cere 
monies  of  consecration  were  repeated  on  the  admission  of 
'•very  priest  to  the  performance  of  his  functions;  but 
•Ula  ia  on  the  assumption,  apparently,  that  Kx.  xxix.  and 


Ijcv.  viii.  are  not  historical,  but  embody  the  customs  of  a 
later  period.  Bahr  (Sumbolik,  1.  c.)  leaves  it  as  an  open 
question,  and  treats  it  as  of  no  moment. 

i  The  reason  for  fixing  on  this  material  is  given  in  Ki. 
xliv.  18 ;  but  the  feeling  that  there  was  something  uu- 
clean  in  clothes  made  from  the  skin  or  wool  of  an  animal 
was  common  to  other  nations.  Egypt  has  been  already 
mentioned.  The  Arab  priests  in  the  time  of  Mahomet 
wore  linen  only  (Ewald,  Alterth.  p.  289). 

k  Here  also  modern  Eastern  customs  present  an  aralogy 
in  the  woven,  seamless  iArom  worn  by  the  llerca  pilgrirni 
(Kwaid,  AUertli.  p.  28»). 


918 


L'lilEST 


Prera  ,1!  F-trypHan  PHeots.    (Wilkinson.) 


Rut  are  not  described  (Ex.  xxxi.  10  ;  Ez.  xlii.  14). 
In  all  their  acts  of  ministration  they  were  to  be  bare 
footed."  Then,  as  now,  this  was  the  strongest  recog 
nition  of  the  sanctity  of  a  holy  place  which  the  Oriental 
mind  could  think  of  (Ex.  iii.  5 ;  Josh.  v.  15),  and 
throughout  the  whole  existence  of  the  Temple  service, 


Dnm  of  Egyptian  High-Priest 


tven  though  it  drew  upon  them  the  scorn  of  the 
heathen  (Juven.  £0*.  vi.  159),  and  seriously  affected 
tne  health  of  the  priests  (Ugolini,  viii.  p.  976,  xiii. 


p.  405),  it  was  scrupulously  adhered  to.J  In  the 
earlier  liturgical  costume,  the  ephod  is  mentioned 
as  belonging  to  the  high-priest  only  (Ex.  xxviii.  6- 
12,  xxxix.  2-5).  Al  a  later  period  it  is  used  appa 
rently  by  all  the  priests  (1  Sam.  xxii.  18),  and 
even  by  others,  not  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  engaged  in 
religious  ceremonial  (2  Sam.  vi.  14).  [EPHOD.] 

Regulations. — The  idea  of  a  consecrated  life, 
which  was  thus  asserted  at  the  outset,  was  carried 
through  a  multitude  of  details.  Each  probably 
had  a  symbolic  meaning  of  its  own.  Collec 
tively  they  formed  an  education  by  which  the 
power  of  distinguishing  between  things  holy  and 
profane,  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean,  and 
so  ultimately  between  moral  good  and  evil,  was 
awakened  and  developed  (Ezek.  xliv.  23).  Be 
fore  they  entered  the  tubernacle  they  were  to  wash 
their  hands  and  their  feet  (Exod.  xxx.  17-21, 
xl.  30-32).  During  the  time  of  their  ministration 
they  were  to  drink  no  wine  or  strong  drink  (Lev. 
x.  9;  Ez.  xliv.  21).  Their  function  was  to  be 
more  to  them  than  the  ties  of  friendship  or  of 
blood,  and,  except  in  the  case  of  the  nearest  leia- 
tionships  (six  degrees  are  specified,  Lev.  xxi.  1-5 ; 
Ez.  xliv.  25),  they  were  to  make  no  mourning 
for  the  dead.  The  high-priest,  as  carrying  the 
consecrated  life  to  its  highest  point,  was  to  be 
above  the  disturbing  power  of  human  sorrow  even 
in  these  instances.  Customs  which  appear  to  have 
been  common  in  other  priesthoods  were  (probably 
for  that  reason)  forbidden  them.  They  were  not 
to  shave  their  heads.  They  were  to  go  through 
their  ministrations  with  the  serenitv  of  a  reve- 


m  This  :»  inferred  (1)  from  the  absence  of  any  Erection  »  Bahr  (Symbolik,  li.  c.  ili.  $1 , 2)  finds  a  mystic  meaning 
M  to  a  covering  for  the  feet ;  (2)  from  the  later  custom;  In  the  number,  material,  colour,  shape,  of  the  priest!> 
(3)  from  the  universal  feeling  of  the  East.  Shoes  were  j  vestments,  discusses  each  point  elaborately,  and  ..(veils  13 
worn  as  a  protection  against  defilement  In  a  sanctutrj  |  $3  on  the  a,i$erenct*  between  them  aui  tuoic  »t  UM 
there  v.-rs  nothing  that  could  defile.  I  Egyptian  priesthou<L 


PfilEST 

rential  awe,  not  with  the  orgiastic  wildness  which 
led  the  priests  of  Baal  in  their  despair  to  make 
cuttings  in  their  flesh  (Lev.  xix.  28 ;  IK.  xviii. 
28),  and  carried  those  of  whom  Atys  was  a  type 
to  a  more  terrible  mutilation  (Deut.  xxiii.  'l). 
The  same  thought  found  expression  in  two  other 
forms  affecting  the  priests  of  Israel.  The  priest 
was  to  be  one  who,  as  the  representative  of  other 
men,  was  to  be  physically  as  well  as  liturgically 
perfect.0  As  the  victim  was  to  be  without 
blemish  so  also  was  the  sacrificer  (comp.  Bahr, 
Symbol,  ii.  c.  ii.  §3).  The  law  specified  in  broad 
outlines  the  excluding  defects  (Lev.  xxi.  17-21), 
and  these  were  such  as  impaired  the  purity,  or  at 
least  the  dignity,  of  the  ministrant.  The  morbid 
casuistry  of  the  later  rabbis  drew  up  a  list  of  not 
less  than  142  faults  or  infirmities  which  involved 
permanent,  of  22  which  involved  temporary  de 
privation  from  the  priestly  office  (Carpzov.  App. 
Critic,  p.  92,  93  ;  Ugolini,  xii.  54,  xiii.  903) ;  and 
the  original  symbolism  of  the  principle  (Fhilo,  De 
Viet,  and  De  Monarch,  ii.  5)  was  lost  in  the 
prurient  minuteness  which,  here  as  elsewhere, 
often  makes  the  study  of  rabbinic  literature  a  some 
what  repulsive  task.  If  the  Christian  Church  has 
sometimes  seemed  to  approximate,  in  the  conditions 
it  laid  down  for  the  priestly  character,  to  the  rules 
of  Judaism,  it  was  yet  careful  to  reject  the  Jewish 
principles,  and  to  rest  its  regulations  simply  on  the 
grounds  of  expediency  (Constt.  Apost.  77,  78V 
The  marriages  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  were,  in  like 
manner,  hedged  round  with  special  rules.  There 
is.  indeed,  no  evidence  for  what  has  sometimes  been 
asserted  that  either  the  high-priest  (Philc,  De 
Monarch,  ii.  11,  ii.  229,  ed.  Mang. ;  Evvald,  Alterth. 
p.  302)  or  the  other  sons  of  Aaron  (Ugolini,  xii.  52) 
were  limited  in  their  choice  to  the  women  of  their 
own  tribe,  and  we  have  some  distinct  instances  to 
the  contrary.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  the 
priestly  families  frequently  intermarried,  and  it  is 
certain  that  they  were  forbidden  to  marry  an  un 
chaste  woman,  or  one  who  had  been  divorced,  or  the 
widow  of  any  but  a  priest  (Lev.  xxi.  7,  14;  Kzek. 
xliv.  22).  The  prohibition  of  marriage  with  one  of 
;m  alien  race  was  assumed,  though  not  enacted  in 
the  law ;  and  hence  the  reforming  zeal  of  a  later 
time  compelled  all  who  had  contracted  such  marri 
ages  to  put  away  their  strange  wives  (Ezr.  x.  18), 
and  counted  the  offspring  of  a  priest  and  a  woman 
taken  captive  in  war  as  illegitimate  (Joseph.  Ant. 
iii.  10,  xi.  4;  c.  Apion.  i.  7),  even  though  the 
priest  himself  did  not  thereby  lose  his  function 
(Ugolini,  xii.  924).  The  high-priest  was  to  carry 
the  same  idea  to  a  yet  higher  point,  and  was  to 
marry  none  but  a  virgin  in  the  first  freshness  of 
her  youth  (Lev.  xxi.  13).  Later  casuistry  fixed 
the  age  within  the  narrow  limits  of  twelve  and 
twelve  and  a  half  (Carpzov.  App.  Grit.  p.  88).  It 
followed  as  a  matter  of  necessity  from  these  regu 
lations,  that  the  legitimacy  of  every  priest  depended 
on  his  genealogy.  A  single  missing  or  faulty  link 
vnuld  vitiate-the  whole  succession.  To  those  gen 
alogies,  accordingly,  extending  back  unbroken  tor 
2000  years,  the  priests  could  point,  up  to  the  time 
of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  (Joseph,  c.  Apion. 
\.  7).  In  later  times,  wherever  the  priest  might 
live — 'Egypt,  Babylon,  Greece — he  was  to  send  the 
register  of  all  marriages  in  his  family  to  Jerusalem 
They  could  be  referred  to  in  any  doubtful 


•  The  Idea  of  thn  perfect  body,  as  symbolising  UIP  holy 
soul,  r/as,  as  might  be  expected,  wide-spread  among  the 


PRIEST  9iy 

or  disputed  case  (Ezr.  ii.  62 ;  Neh.  vii.  64).  la 
them  was  registered  the  name  of  every  mother  as 
well  as  of  every  father  (ibid. ;  comp.  also  the 
story  already  referred  to  in  Suidas,  a.  v.  'ITJO-OVJ). 
It  was  the  distinguishing  K  ark  of  a  priest,  not  of 
the  Aaronic  line,  that  he  was  iiirdrwp,  d/ttVJTa'p, 
ayf^fa\Ayrjros  (Heb.  vii.  3),  with  no  father  or. 
mother  named  as  the  ground  of  his  title. 

The  age  at  which  the  sons  of  Aaron  might 
enter  upon  their  duties  was  not  defined  by  the 
law,  as  that  of  the  Levites  was.  Their  office  did 
not  call  for  the  same  degree  of  physical  strength ; 
and  if  twenty-five  in  the  ritual  of  the  Tabernacle 
(Num.  viii.  24)  and  twenty  in  that  of  the  Temple 
(1  Chron.  xxiii.  27)  was  the  appointed  age  for  the 
latter,  the  former  were  not  likely  to  be  kept 
waiting  till  a  later  period.  In  one  remarkable 
instance,  indeed,  we  have  an  example  of  a  yet 
earlier  age.  The  boy  Aristobulus  at  the  age  of 
seventeen  ministered  in  the  Temple  in  his  pontifical 
robes,  the  admired  of  all  observers,  and  thus  stirred 
the  treacherous  jealousy  of  Herod  to  remove  so 
dangerous  a  rival  (Joseph.  Ant.  xv.  3,  §3).  This 
may  have  been  exceptional,  but  the  language  of  the 
rabbis  indicates  that  the  special  consecration  of  the 
priest's  life  began  with  the  opening  years  of  man 
hood.  As  soon  as  the  down  appealed  011  his  cheek 
the  young  candidate  presented  himself  before  the 
Council  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and  his  genealogy  was 
carefully  inspected.  If  it  failed  to  satisfy  his  judges, 
he  left  the  Temple  clad  in  black,  and  had  to  seek 
another  calling :  if  all  was  right  so  far,  another 
ordeal  awaited  him.  A  careful  inspection  was  to 
determine  whether  he  was  subject  to  any  one  of 
the  144  defects  which  would  invalidate  his  priestly 
acts.  If  he  was  found  free  from  all  blemish,  he 
was  clad  in  the  white  linen  tunic  of  the  priests,  and 
entered  on  his  ministrations.  If  the  result  of  the 
examination  was  not  satisfactory,  he  was  relegated 
to  the  half-menial  office  of  separating  the  sound 
wood  for  the  altar  from  that  which  was  decayed 
and  worm-eaten,  but  was  not  deprived  of  the 
emoluments  of  his  office  (Lightfoot,  Temple  Service, 
c.  6). 

Functions. — The  work  of  the  priesthood  of  Israel 
was,  from  its  very  nature,  more  stereotyped  by 
the  Mosaic  institutions  than  any  other  element  of 
the  national  life.  The  functions  of  the  Levites — 
less  defined,  and  therefore  more  capable  of  expan 
sion — altered,  as  has  been  shown  [LEVITES],  from 
age  to  age ;  but  those  of  the  priests  continued 
throughout  substantially  the  same,  whatever  changes 
might  be  brought  about  in  their  social  position  and 
organization.  The  duties  described  in  Exodus  and 
Leviticus  are  the  same  as  those  recognized  in  the 
Books  of  Chronicles,  as  those  which  the  prophet- 
priest  Ezekiel  sees  in  his  vision  of  the  Temple  of 
the  future.  They,  assisting  the  high-priest,  wen 
to  watch  over  the  fire  on  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offerings  and  to  keep  it  burning  evermore  both  by 
day  and  night  (Lev.  vi.  12;  2  Chr.  xiii.  11),  tc 
feed  the  golden  lamp  outside  the  veil  with  oi: 
(Ex.  xxvii.  20,  21  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  2),  to  offer 
the  morning  and  evening  sacrifices,  each  accom 
panied  with  a  meat-offering  and  a  drink-offering,  at 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  (Ex.  xxix.  38-44) 
These  were  the  fixed,  invariable  duties ;  but  the* 
chief  function  was  that  of  being  always  at  hand 
to  do  the  priest's  office  for  any  guilty,  or  penitent, 

religions  of  heathenism.  "Sac«rdos  non  mtogri  ccrporii 
quasi  inalJ  ouiinis  res  vltauda  est"  (Seneca.  Cmtrvr  'v.  2") 


»>20 


PRIEST 


or  rejoicing  Israelite.  The  worshipper  migh*  C'-tne 
at  any  time.  If  he  were  rich  and  brought  a 
bullock,  it  wns  the  priest's  duty  to  slay  the  victim, 
to  place  the  wood  upon  the  altar,  to  light  the 
fire,  to  sprinkle  the  altar  with  the  bloocl  (Lev. 
i.  5).  If  he  were  poor  and  brought  a  pigeon,  the 
priest  was  to  wring  its  neck  (Lev.  i.  15).  In 
either  case,  he  was  to  burn  the  meat-offering  and 
the  peace-offering  which  accompanied  the  sacrifice 
(Lev.  ii.  2,  9,  iii.  11).  After  the  birth  of  every 
child,  the  mother  was  to  come  with  her  sacrifice 
of  turtle-doves  or  pigeons  (Lev.  xii.  6 ;  Luke  ii. 
22-24),  and  was  thus  to  be  purified  from  her 
uncleanness.  A  husband  who  suspected  his  wife 
of  unfaithfulness  might  bring  her  to  the  priest,  and 
it  belonged  to  him  to  give  her  the  water  of 
jealousy  as  an  ordeal,  and  to  pronounce  the  formula 
of  execration  (Num.  v.  11-31).  Lepers  were  to 
come,  day  by  day,  to  submit  themselves  to  the 
priest's  inspection,  that  he  might  judge  whether 
they  were  clean  or  unclean,  and  when  lJiey  were 
healed  perform  for  them  the  ritual  of  purification 
(Lev.  xiii.  xiv.,  and  comp.  Mark  i.  44).  All  the 
numerous  accidents  which  the  law  looked  on  as  defile 
ments  or  sins  of  ignorance  had  to  be  expiated  by  a 
sacrifice,  which  the  priest,  of  course,  had  to  offer 
(Lev.  xv.  1-33).  As  they  thus  acted  as  mediators 
for  those  who  weie  labouring  under  the  sense  of 
guilt,  so  they  were  to  help  others  who  were  striv 
ing  to  attain,  if  only  for  a  season,  the  higher 
standard  of  a  consecrated  life.  The  Nazarite  was 
to  come  to  them  with  his  sacrifice  and  his  wave- 
offering  (Num.  vi.  1-21). 

Other  duties  of  a  higher  and  more  ethical  character 
were  hinted  at,  but  were  not,  and  probably  could 
not  be,  the  subject  of  a  special  regulation.  They 
were  to  teach  the  children  of  Israel  the  statutes  of 
the  Lord  (Lev.  x.  11 ;  Deut.  xxxiii.  10 ;  2  Chr.  xv. 
3  ;  Ezek.  xliv.  23,  24).  The  "  priest's  lips  "  (in 
the  language  of  the  last  prophet  looking  back  upon 
the  ideal  of  the  order)  were  to  "  keep  knowledge  " 
(Mai.  ii.  7).  Through  the  whole  history,  with 
the  exception  of  the  periods  of  national  apostasy, 
these  acts,  and  others  like  them,  formed  the  daily 
life  of  the  priests  who  were  on  duty.  The  three 
great  festivals  of  the  year  were,  however,  their 
seasons  of  busiest  employment.  The  pilgrims  who 
came  up  by  tens  of  thousands  to  keep  the  feast, 
came  each  with  his  sacrifices  and  oblations.  The 
work  at  such  times  was,  on  some  occasions  at  least, 
beyond  the  strength  of  the  priests  in  attendance, 
ml  the  Levites  had  to  be  called  in  to  help  them 
(2  Chron.  xxix.  34,  xxxv.  14).  Other  acts  of 
the  priests  of  Israel,  significant  as  they  were,  were 
less  distinctively  sacerdotal.  They  were  to  bless 
the  people  at  every  solemn  meeting ;  and  that  this 
part  of  thair  office  might  never  fall  into  disuse,  a 
special  formula  of  benediction  was  provided  (Num. 
vi.  22-27).  During  the  journeys  in  the  wilder 
ness  it  belonged  to  them  to  cover  the  ark  and  all 
the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary  with  a  purple  or  scarlet 
cloth  before  the  Levites  might  approach  them 
(Num.  iv.  5-15).  As  the  people  started  on  each 
day's  march  they  were  to*  blow  "  an  alarm  "  with 


PRIEST 

lohg  silver  trumpets  (Num.  x.  1-8), — with  two  ii 
the  whole  multitude  were  to  be  assembled,  \;ith 
one  if  there  was  to  be  a  special  council  of  thti 
elders  and  princes  of  Israel.  With  the  same  in 
struments  they  were  to  proclaim  the  commence 
ment  of  all  the  solemn  days,  and  days  of  gladness 
(Num.  x.  10)  ;  and  throughout  all  the  changes 
in  the  religious  history  of  Israel  this  adhered  to 
them  as  a  characteristic  mane.  Other  instruments 
of  music  might  be  used  by  thn  more  highly  trained 
Levites  and  the  schools  of  the  Prophets,  but  the 
trumpets  belonged  only  to  the  priests.  They  blew 
them  in  the  solemn  march  round  Jericho'  (Josh, 
vi.  4),  in  the  religious  war  which  Judah  waged 
against  Jeroboam  (2  Chr.  xiii.  \.i.h  when  they 
summoned  the  people  to  a  solemn  penitential  fast 
(Joel  ii.  1,  15).  In  the  service  of  the  second 
temple  there  were  never  to  be  less  than  21  or 
more  than  84  blowers  of  trumpets  present  in  the 
temple  daily  (Ugolini,  xiii.  p.  1011).  The  presence 
of  the  priests  on  the  field  of  battle  for  this  purpose, 
often  in  large  numbers,  armed  for  war,  and  sharing 
in  the  actual  contest  (1  Chr.  xii.  23,  27;  2  Chr. 
xx.  21,  22),  led,  in  the  later  periods  of  Jewish 
history,  to  the  special  appointment  at  such  times  of 
a  war-priest,  deputed  by  the  Sanhedrim  to  be  the 
representative  of  the  high-priest,  and  standing  next 
but  one  to  him  in  the  order  of  precedence  (comp. 
Ugolini,  xii.  1031,  De  Sacerdote  Cctstrensi;  and 
xiii.  871).« 

Other  functions  were  hinted  at  in  Deuteronomy 
which  might  have  given  them  gi  eater  influence  as 
the  educators  and  civilizers  of  the  people.  They 
were  to  act  (whether  individually  or  collectively 
does  not  distinctly  appear)  as  a  court  of  appeal  in 
the  more  difficult  controversies  in  criminal  or  civil 
cases  (Deut.  xvii.  8-13).  A  special  reference  w;is 
to  be  made  to  them  in  cases  of  undetected  murder, 
and  they  were  thus  to  check  the  vindictive  blood- 
feuds  which  it  would  otherwise  have  been  likely  to 
occasion  (Deut.  xxi.  5).  It  must  remain  doubtful, 
however,  how  far  this  oi-der  kept  its  ground  during 
the  storms  and  changes  that  followed.  The  judicial 
and  the  teaching  functions  of  the  priesthood  re 
mained  probably  for  the  most  part  in  abeyance 
through  the  ignorance  and  vices  of  the  priests. 
Zealous  reformers  kept  this  before  them  as  an  ideal 
(2  Chr.  xvii.  7-9,  xix.  8-10;  Ez.  xliv.  24),  but  the 
special  stress  laid  on  the  attempts  to  realize  it  shows 
that  they  were  exceptional.' 

Maintenance. — Functions  such  as  these  were 
clearly  incompatible  with  the  common  activities  of 
men.  At  first  the  small  number  of  the  priests 
must  have  made  the  work  almost  unintermittent, 
and  even  when  the  system  of  rotation  had  been 
adopted,  the  periodical  absences  from  home  could 
not  fail  to  be  disturbing  and  injurious,  had  they 
been  dependent  on  their  own  labours.  The  serenity 
of  the  priestly  character  would  have  been  disturbed 
had  they  had  to  look  for  support  to  the  lower  indu* 
tries.  It  may  have  been  intended  (supra)  that  their 
time,  when  not  liturgically  employed,  should  be  given 
to  the  study  of  the  Law,  or  to  instructing  others  in  it. 
On  these  grounds  therefore  a  distinct  provision  was 


v  In  this  case,  however,  the  trumpets  were  of  rains' 
horns,  not  of  silver. 

i  Jost  (Judenth.  i.  153)  regards  the  war-priest  as  belong 
ing  to  tin-  ideal  system  of  the  later  Rabbis,  not  to  the 
historical  constitution  of  Israel.  Deut.  xx.  2,  however, 
supplies  '.lie  germ  out  of  which  sucli  an  office  might  na- 
'jirally  grow.  Judas  Maccabaeus,  iu  his  wnrs,  does  \vhtt 


the  war-priest  was  said  to  do  (1  Mace.  iil.  56). 

'  The  teaching  functions  of  the  priest  have  probably 
been  unduly  magnified  by  writers  like  Mlchuells,  who  aim 
at  bringing  the  institutions  of  Israel  to  the  standard  cf 
modern  expediency  (Comm.  on  Latcs  of  Motes,  i.  35-62), 
as  they  have  been  unduly  depreciated  by  SaftlschtiU  and 
John. 


PKIEST 

made  for  them.  This  consisted* — (1)  of  one-tent!-, 
of  the  tithes  which  the  people  paid  to  t.^a  Levites, 
one  per  cent.  t.  e.  on  the  whole  produce  of  the 
country  (Num.  xviii.  26-28).  (2)  Of  a  special 
tithe  every  third  year  (Deut.  xiv.  28,  xxvi.  12). 
(3)  Of  the  redemption-money,  paid  at  the  fixed 
rate  of  five  shekels  a  head,  for  the  first-born  of  man 
or  beast  (Num.  xviii.  14-19).'  (4)  Of  the  redemp 
tion-money  paid  in  like  manner  for  men  or  thiiigs 
specially  dedicated  to  the  Lord  (Lev.  xxvii.).  (5) 
Of  spoil,  captives,  cattle,  and  the  like,  taken  in  war 
(Num.  xxxi.  25-47).  (6)  Of  what  may  be  de 
scribed  as  the  perquisites  of  their  sacrificial  func 
tions,  the  shew-bread,  the  flesh  of  the  bumt- 
offerings,  peace-offerings,  trespass-offerings  (Num. 
xviii.  8-14;  Lev.  vi.  26,  29,  vii.  6-10),  and,  in 
particular,  the  heave-shoulder  and  the  wave-breast 
(Lev.  x.  12-15).  (7)  Of  an  undefined  amount  of 
the  first-fruits  of  com,  wine,  and  oil  (Ex.  xxiii.  19  ; 
Lev.  ii.  14  ;  Deut.  xxvi.  1-10).  Of  some  of  these,  as 
"  most  holy,"  none  but  the  priests  were  to  partake 
(Lev.  vi.  29).  It  was  lawful  for  their  sous  and 
daughters  (Lev.  x.  14),  and  even  in  some  cases  for 
their  home-born  slaves,  to  eat  of  others  (Lev.  xxii. 
1 1).  The  stranger  and  the  hired  servant  were  in 
all  cases  excluded  (Lev.  xxii.  10).  (8)  On  their 
settlement  in  Canaan  the  priestly  families  had 
thirteen  cities  assigned  them,  with  "  suburbs "  or 
pasture-grounds  for  their  flocks  (Josh.  xxi.  13-19). 
While  the  Levites  were  scattered  over  all  the 
conquered  country,  the  cities  of  the  priests  were 
within  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Simeon,  and  Benjamin, 
and  this  concentration  was  not  without  its  influence 
on  their  subsequent  history.  [Comp.  LEVITES.] 
These  provisions  were  obviously  intended  to  secure 
the  religion  of  Israel  against  the  dangers  of  a  caste 
of  pauper-priests,  needy  and  dependent,  and  unable 
to  bear  their  witness  to  the  true  faith.  They  were, 
on  the  other  hand,  as  far  as  possible  removed  from 
the  condition  of  a  wealthy  order.  Even  in  the  ideal 
state  contemplated  by  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy, 
the  Levite  (here  probably  used  generically,  so  as  to 
include  the  priests)  is  repeatedly  marked  out  as  an 
object  of  charity,  along  with  the  stranger  and  the 
widow  (Deut.  xii.  12, 19,  xiv.  27-29).  During  the 
long  periods  of  national  apostasy,  tithes  were  pro 
bably  paid  with  even  less  regularity  than  they  were 
in  the  more  orthodox  period  that  followed  the 
return  from  the  Captivity  (Neh.  xiii.  10 ;  Mai.  iii. 
8-10).  The  standard  of  a  priest's  income,  even  in 
the  earliest  days  after  the  settlement  in  Canaan, 
was  miserably  low  (Judg.  xvii.  10).  Large  por 
tions  of  the  priesthood  fell,  under  the  kingdom,  into 
a  state  of  abject  poverty  (comp.  1  Sam.  ii.  36).  The 
clinging  evil  throughout  their  history  was  not  that 
they  were  too  powerful  and  rich,  but  that  they 
sank  into  the  state  from  which  the  Law  was  in 
tended  to  preserve  them,  and  so  came  to  "  teach  for 
hire"  (Mic.  iii.  11 ;  comp.  Saalschiitz,  Archdologie 
der  ffebr&er,  ii.  344-355). 

Classification  and  Statistics. — The  earliest  his 
torical  trace  of  any  division  of  the  priesthood,  and 
corresponding  cycle  of  services,  belongs  to  the  time 
of  David.  Jewish  tradition  indeed  recognizes  an 
earlier  division,  even  during  the  life  of  Aaron,  into 


PKIEST  y^i 

eight  houses  (Gem.  Hieros.  Taanith,  in  Ugolini, 
xiii.  873),  augmented  during  the  period  of  the 
Shiloh-worship  to  sixteen,  the  two  families  of  Eleazar 
and  Ithamar  standing  in  both  cases  on  an  equality 
It  is  hardly  conceivable,  however,  that  there  could 
have  been  any  rotation  of  service  while  the  number 
of  priests  was  so  small  as  it  must  have  been  during 
the  forty  years  of  sojourn  in  the  wilderness,  if  we 
believe  Aaron  and  his  lineal  descendants  to  have 
been  the  only  priests  officiating.  The  difficulty  of 
realizing  in  what  way  the  single  family  of  Aaron 
were  able  to  sustain  all  the  burden  of  the  worship 
of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  sacrifices  of  individual 
Israelites,  may,  it  is  true,  suggest  the  thought  that 
possibly  in  this,  as  in  other  instances,  the  Hebrew 
idea  of  sonship  by  adoption  may  have  extended  the 
title  of  the  "  Sons  of  Aaron  "  beyond  the  limits  of 
lineal  descent,  and,  in  this  case,  there  may  be  some 
foundation  for  the  Jewish  tradition.  Nowhere  in 
the  later  history  do  we  find  any  disproportion  like 
that  of  three  priests  to  22,000  Levites.  The  office 
of  supervision  over  those  that  "  kept  the  charge  01 
the  sanctuary,"  entrusted  to  Eleazar  (Num.  iii.  32), 
implies  that  some  others  were  subject  to  it  besides 
Ithamar  and  his  children,  while  these  very  keepers 
of  the  sanctuary  are  identified  in  ver.  38  with  the 
sons  of  Aaron  who  are  encamped  with  Moses  and 
Aaron  on  the  east  side  of  the  Tabernacle.  The 
allotment  of  not  less  than  thirteen  cities  to  those 
who  bore  the  name,  within  little  more  than  forty 
years  from  the  Exodus,  tends  to  the  same  conclu 
sion,  and  at  any  rate  indicates  that  the  priesthood 
were  not  intended  to  be  always  in  attendance  at  the 
Tabernacle,  but  were  to  have  homes  of  their  own. 
and  therefore,  as  a  necessary  consequence,  fixed 
periods  only  of  service.  Some  notion  may  be 
formed  of  the  number  on  the  accession  of  David 
from  the  facts  (1)  that  not  less  than  3700  tendered 
their  allegiance  to  him  while  he  was  as  yet  reigning 
at  Hebron  over  Judah  only  (1  Chr.  xii.  27),  and 
(2)  that  one-twenty-fourth  part  were  sufficient  for 
all  the  services  of  the  statelier  and  more  frequentei1 
worship  which  he  established.  To  this  reign  be 
longed  accordingly  the  division  of  the  priesthood 
into  the  four-and-twenty  "  courses "  or  orders 

(TVlp?nC,  Siaipefffis,  f<pri/j.€piai,  1  Chr.  xxiv.  1-19; 

2  Chr.  xxiii.  8;  Luke  i.  5),  each  of  which  was  to 
serve  in  rotation  for  one  week,  while  the  further 
assignment  of  special  services  during  the  week  was 
determined  by  lot  (Luke  i.  9).  Each  course  ap 
pears  to  have  commenced  its  work  on  the  Sabbath, 
the  outgoing  priests  taking  the  morning  sacrifice, 
and  leaving  that  of  the  evening  to  their  successors 
(2  Chr.  xxiii.  8  ;  Ugolini,  xiii.  319).  In  this  divi 
sion,  however,  the  two  great  priestly  houses  did  not 
stand  on  an  equality.  The  descendants  of  Ithamar 
were  found  to  have  fewer  representatives  than 
those  of  Eleazar,*  and  sixteen  courses  accordingly 
were  assigned  to  the  latter,  eight  only  to  the  former 
(1  Chr.  xxiv.  4  ;  comp.  Carpzov.  App.  Crit.  p.  98). 
The  division  thus  instituted  was  confirmed  by  Solo 
mon,  and  continued  to  be  recognized  as  the  typical 
number  of  the  priesthood.  It  is  to  be  noted,  how 
ever,  that  this  arrangement  was  to  some  extent 


•  The  later  Rubins  enumerate  no  less  than  twenty-fonr 
sources  of  emolument.  Of  these  the  chief  only  are  given 
here  (Ugolini,  xiii.  1124). 

t  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  Law,  by  recognizing  the 
substitution  of  the  Levites  for  the  first-born,  and  ordering 
payment  only  for  the  small  number  of  the  latter  in  excess 


of  the  former,  deprived  Aaron  and  his  sons  of  a  large  sum 
which  would  otherwise  have  accrued  to  them  (Num.  ill. 
44-51). 

u  This  diminution  may  have  been  caused  partly  by  th« 
slaughter  of  the  priests  who  accompanied  HophrJ  anJ 
1'hinei.as  (Ps.  bcxviii.  64),  partly  by  the  niuss-xcrc  at  Nt*. 


922  PRIEST 

elic-tic.  Any  priest  might  be. present  at  anv  time, 
and  even  perform  priestly  acts,  so  long  as  he  did 
not  interfere  with  the  functions  of  those  who  were 
officiating  in  their  course  (Ugolini,  xiii.  881),  and 
at  the  great  solemnities  of  the  year,  as  well  as  on 
special  occasions  like  the  opening  of  the  Temple, 
they  were  present  in  great  numbers.  On  the  return 
from  the  Captivity  there  were  found  but  four 
courses  out  of  the  twenty-four,  each  containing,  in 
round  numbers,  about  a  thousand"  (Ezr.  ii.  36-39). 
Out  of  these,  however,  to  revive,  at  least,  the  idea 
of  the  old  organization,  the  four-and-twenty  courses 
were  reconstituted,  bearing  the  same  names  as 
before,  and  so  continued  till  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  If  we  may  accept  the  numbers  given 
by  Jewish  writers  as  at  all  trustworthy,  the  pro 
portion  of  the  priesthood  to  the  population  of  Pales 
tine  during  the  last  century  of  their  existence  as  an 
order  must  have  been  far  greater  than  that  of  the 
clergy  has  ever  been  in  any  Christian  nation.  Over 
and  above  those  that  were  scattered  in  the  country 
and  took  their  turn,  there  were  not  fewer  than 
24,000  stationed  permanently  at  Jerusalem,  and 
12,000  at  Jericho  (Gemai-.  Hieros.  Taanith,  fol. 
6*7,  in  Carpzov.  App.  Grit.  p.  100).  It  was  a 
Jewish  tradition  that  it  had  never  fallen  to  the  lot 
of  any  priest  to  offer  incense  twice  (Ugolini,  xii. 
1 8).  Oriental  statistics  are,  however,  always  open 
to  some  suspicion,  those  of  the  Talmud  not  least 
so ;  and  there  is,  probably,  more  truth  in  the  com 
putation  of  Josephus,  who  estimates  the  total  num 
ber  of  the  four  houses  of  the  priesthood,  referring 
apparently  to  Ezr.  ii.  36,  at  about  20,000  (c. 
Apion.  ii.  7).  Another  indication  of  number  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  a  "  great  multitude  "  could 
attach  themselves  to  the  "  sect  of  the  Nazarenes" 
(Acts  vi.  7),  and  so  have  cut  themselves  off,  sooner 
or  later,  from  the  Temple  services,  without  any 
perceptible  effect  upon  its  ritual.  It  was  almost 
inevitable  that  the  great  mass  of  the  order,  under 
such  circumstances,  should  sink  in  character  and 
reputation.  Poor  and  ignorant,  despised  and  op 
pressed  by  the  more  powerful  members  of  their 
own  body,  often  robbed  of  their  scanty  maintenance 
by  the  rapacity  of  the  high-priests,  they  must 
have  been  to  Palestine  what  the  clergy  of  a 
later  period  have  been  to  Southern  Italy,  a  dead 
weight  on  its  industry  and  strength,  not  compen 
sating  for  their  unproductive  lives  by  any  services 
rendered  to  the  higher  interests  of  the  people.  The 
Habbinic  classification  of  the  priesthood,  though 
belonging  to  a  somewhat  later  date,  reflects  the 
contempt  into  which  the  order  had  fallen.  There 
were — (1)  the  heads  of  the  twenty-four  courses, 
known  sometimes  as  dpxtePe'y  j  (2)  the  large  num 
ber  of  reputable  officiating  but  inferior  priests ; 

*  The  causes  of  this  great  reduction  are  not  stated,  but 
large  numbers  must  have  perished  in  the  siege  and  storm 
of  Jerusalem  (Lam.  iv.  16),  and  many  may  have  preferred 
remaining  in  Babylon. 

J  Another  remarkable  instance  of  the  connexion  between 
the  Nazarite  vow,  when  extended  over  the  whole  life,  and 
a  liturgical,  quasi-priestly  character,  is  found  in  the  history 
of  the  Bechabites.  They,  or  others  like  them,  are  named 
hy  Amos  (ii.  11)  as  having  a  vocation  like  that  of  the 
orophets.  They  are  received  by  Jeremiah  into  the  house 
of  the  Lord,  into  the  chamber  of  .a  prophet-priest  (Jer. 
xxxv.  4).  The  solemn  blessing  which  the  prophet  pro- 
uounces  (xxxv.  19)  goes  beyond  the  mere  perpetuation 
of  the  name.  The  term  he  uses,  "  to  stanl  before  me" 

i.s  one  of  special  siguUicuxtr.     It  is  used 


PKIEST 

(3)  the  piebeii,  or  (to  use  the  extremest  foimula  o* 
Rabbinic  scorn)  the  "  priests  of  the  people  of  tl* 
earth,"  ignorant  and  unlettered  ;  (4)  those  that, 
through  physical  disqualifications  cr  other  causes, 
were  non-efficient  members  of  the  order,  though 
entitled  to  receive  their  tithes  (Ugolini,  xii.  18  ; 
Jost,  Judenthum,  i.  156). 

History. — The  new  priesthood  did  not  establish 
itself  without  a  struggle.  The  rebellion  oi  Koran, 
at  the  head  of  a  portion  of  the  Levites  as  repre 
sentatives  of  the  first-born,  with  Dathan  and  Abiram 
as  leaders  of  the  tribe  of  the  first-bora  son  of  Jacob 
(Num.  xvi.  1),  showed  that  some  looked  back  to 
the  old  patriarchal  order  rather  than  forward  to  the 
new,  and  it  needed  the  witness  of"  Aaron's  rod  that 
budded  "  to  teach  the  people  that  the  latter  had  it 
it  a  vitality  and  strength  which  had  departed  frorc 
the  former.  It  may  be  that  the  exclusion  of  all  but 
the  sons  of  Aaron  from  the  service  of  the  Tabernacl* 
drove  those  who  would  not  resign  their  claim  to 
priestly  functions  of  some  kind  to  the  worship  (pos 
sibly  with  a  rival  tabernacle)  of  Moloch  and  Chiun 
(Am.  v.  25,  26  ;  Ez.  xx.  16).  Prominent  as  was 
the  part  taken  by  the  priests  in  the  daily  march  of 
the  host  of  Israel  (Num.  x.  8),  in  the  passage  of  the 
Jordan  (Josh.  iii.  14,  15),  in  the  destruction  of 
Jericho  (Josh.  vi.  12-16),  the  history  of  Micah 
shows  that  within  that  century  there  was  a  strong 
tendency  to  relapse  into  the  system  of  a  household 
instead  of  an  hereditary  priesthood  (Judg.  xvii.). 
The  frequent  invasions  and  conquests  during  the 
period  of  the  Judges  must  have  interfered  (as  stated 
above)  with  the  payment  of  tithes,  with  the  main 
tenance  of  worship,  with  the  observance  of  all 
festivals,  and  with  this  the  influence  of  the  priest 
hood  must  have  been  kept  in  the  back-ground.  If 
the  descendants  of  Aaron,  at  some  unrecorded  crisis 
in  the  history  of  Israel,  rose,  under  Eli,  into  the 
position  of  national  defenders,  it  was  only  to  sink 
in  his  sons  into  the  lowest  depth  of  sacerdotal 
corruption.  For  a  time  the  prerogative  of  the  line 
of  Aaron  was  in  abeyance.  The  capture  of  the  Ark, 
the  removal  of  the  Tabernacle  from  Shiloh,  threw 
everything  into  confusion,  and  Samuel,  a  Levite, 
but  not  within  the  priestly  family  [SAMUEL], 
sacrifices,  and  "comes  near"  to  the  Lord:  his 
training  under  Eli,  his  Nazarite  life^  his  prophetic 
office,  being  regarded  apparently  as  a  special  con 
secration  (comp.  August,  c.  Faust,  xii.  33 ;  De 
Civ.  Dei,  xvii.  4).  For  the  priesthood,  as  for  the 
people  generally,  the  time  of  Samuel  must  have 
been  one  of  a  great  moral  reformation,  while  the 
expansion,  if  not  the  foundation,  of  the  Schools  of 
the  Prophets,  at  once  gave  to  it  the  support  of 
an  independent  order,  and  acted  at.  a  check  on  its 
corruptions  and  excesses,  a  perpetual  safeguard 


emphatically  of  ministerial  functions,  like  those  of  the 
prophet  (1  K.  xvii.  1,  xviii.  15;  Jer.  xv.  19),  or  the 
priest  (I)eut.  x.  8,  xviii.  5-7  ;  Judg.  xx.  28).  The  Targrnn 
of  Jonathan  accordingly  gives  this  meaning  to  it  here. 
Strangely  enough,  we  have  in  the  history  of  the  death 
of  James  the  Just.  (Hegesipp.  in  Bus.  H.  K.  ii.  23)  an 
indication  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  blessing  in  this  sense. 
Among  the  priests  who  are  present,  there  is  one  "  belong 
ing  to  the  Rechabim  of  whom  Jeremiah  had  spoken." 
The  mention  of  the  house  of  Rccbab  among  the  "  families 
of  the  scribes,"  In  1  Chr.  ii.  55,  points  to  something  of  the 
same  nature.  The  title  prefixed  in  the  LXX.  and  Vulg. 
to  Ps.  ixxi.  connects  it  with  the  "  sons  of  Jonadab,  Uw 
first  that  went  into  captivity."  Augustine  takes  this  ai 
the  starting-point  for  Ilis  interpretation  (i'nOT.  in  I'ScJn 


PRIEST 

9gainst  the  development  from  it  of  any  Egyptian 
or  Brahminic  caste-system  (Ewald,  Gesch.  Isr.  ii. 
185),  standing  to  it  in  much  the  same  relation 
as  the  monastic  and  mendicant  orders  stood,  each 
in  its  turn,  to  the  secular  clergy  of  the  Christian 
Church.      Though  Shiloh  had  become  a  deserted 
sanctuary,  Nob  (1  Sam.  xxi.  1)  was  made  for  a 
time  the  centre  of  national  worship,  and  the  sym 
bolic  ritual  of  Israel  was  thus  kept  from   being 
forgotten.     The  reverence  which  the  people  feel  for 
them,  and  which  compels  Saul  to  have  recourse  to 
one  of  alien  bl/jod  (Doeg  the  Edomite)  to  carry  his 
murderous  counsel  into  act,  shows  that  there  must 
nave  been  a  great   step  upwards   since  the  time 
when  the  sons  of  Eli  "  made  men  to  abhor  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord"  (1  Sam.  xxii.  17,  18).     The 
reign  of  Sr.ul  was,  however,  a  time  of  suffering  for 
them.     He  had  manifested  a  disposition  to  usurp 
the  priest's  office  (1  Sam.  xiii.  9).     The  massacre 
of  the  priests  at  Nob  showed  how  insecure  their 
lives  were  against  any  unguarded  or  savage  im 
pulse.1     They  could  but  wait   in  silence  for  the 
coming  of  a  deliverer  in  David.    One  at  least  among 
them  shared  his  exile,  and,  so  far  as  it  was  possible, 
lived  m  his  priestly  character,  performing  priestly 
acts,  among  the  wild  company  of  Adullam  (1  Sam. 
xxiii.  6,  9).      Others  probably  were  sheltered  by 
their  remoteness,  or  found  shelter  in  Hebron  as  the 
largest  and  strongest  of  the  priestly  cities.     When 
the  death  of  Saul  set  them  free  they  came  in  large 
numbers  to  the  camp  of  David,  prepared  apparently 
not  only  to  testify  their  allegiance,  but  also  to  sup 
port  him,  armed  for  battle,  against  all  rivals  (1  Clir. 
xii.  27).     They  were  summoned  from  their  cities 
to  the  great  restoration  of  the  worship  of  Israel, 
when  the  Ark  was  brought  up  to  the  new  capi 
tal  of  the  kingdom  (1  Chr.  xv.  4).     For  a  time, 
however  (another   proof  of  the   strange  confusion 
into  which   the   religious   life   of  the  people  had 
fallen),   the    Ark   was    not    the    chief    centre  of 
worship ;    and  while  the  newer  ritual  of  psalms 
and  minstrelsy  gathered  round  it  under  the  mini 
stration   of  the  Levites,   headed   by   Benaiah  and 
Jahaziel  as  priests  (1  Chr.  xvi.   5,  6),  the  older 
order  of  sacrifices  was  carried  on  by  the   priests 
in   the    tabernacle   on   the   high-place   at    Gibeon 
(1  Chr.  xvi.  37-39,  xxi.  29  ;    2  Chr.  i.  3).     We 
cannot  wonder  that  first  David  and  then  Solomon 
should   have  sought   to   guard   against   the  evils 
incidental  to  this  separation  of  the  two  orders,  and 
to  unite  in  one  great  Temple  priests  and  Levites, 
the  symbolic  worship  of  sacrifice  and  the  spiritual 
oftering  of  praise. 

The  reigns  of  these  two  kings  were  naturally 
the  culminating  period  of  the  glory  of  the  Jewish 
priesthood.  They  had  a  king  whose  heart  was 
with  them,  and  who  joined  in  their  services  dressed 
as  they  were  (1  Chr.  xv.  27),  while  he  yet 
scrupulously  abstained  from  all  interference  with 
their  functions.  The  name  which  they  bore  was 
accepted  (whatever  explanation  may  be  given  of  the 
fact)  as  the  highest  title  of  honour  that  could  be 
borne  by  the  king's  sous  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  supra). 
They  occupied  high  places  in  the  king's  councU 
(1  K.  iv.  2,  4),  and  might  even  take  their  places, 
as  in  the  case  of  Benaiah,  at  the  head  of  his  armies 
(1  Chr.  xii.  27,  xxvii.  5),  or  be  recognized,  as 
Zabud  the  son  of  Nathan  was,  as  the  "  king's 


PRIEST 


923 


'  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  while  the  Hob.  text  gives 
85  as  'he  number  of  priests  slain,  the  LXX.  increases  it 
to  305,  ,lir8«pbus  (Ant.  VI.  12,  tt)  to  385. 


friends,"  the  keepers  of  the  king's  oonsciencs  (IK. 
iv.  5  ;  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  334). 

The  position  of  the  priests  under  the  monarchy 
of  Judah    deserves  a  closer   examination    than    it 
has   yet  received.      The   system  which   has   been 
described   above    gave   them   for    every   week    of 
service  in  the  Temple  twenty-three  weeks  in  which 
they  had  no  appointed  work.      Was   it   intended 
that  they  should  be  idle  during  this  period  ?     Were 
they  actually  idle  ?     They  had  no  territorial  pos 
sessions  to  cultivate.     The  cities  assigned  to  them 
and  to  the  Levites  gave  but  scanty  pasturage  to 
their   flocks.      To   what  employment  could   they 
turn  ?    (1)  The  more  devout  and  thoughtful  found, 
probably,  in  the  schools  of  the  prophets  that  which 
satisfied  them.     The  histoiy  of  the  Jews  presents 
numerous  instances  of 'the  union  of  the  two  offices. 
[Comp.  LEVITES.]     They  became  teaching-priests 
(2  Chr.  xv.  3),  students,  and  interpreters  of  the 
Divine  Law.     From  such  as  these,  men  might  be 
chosen  by  the  more  zealous  kings  to  instruct  the 
people  (2  Chr.  xvii.   8),  or  to  administer  justice 
(2  Chr.   rix.   8).     (2)  Some  perhaps,   as   stated 
above,  served  in  the  king's  army.     We  have  no 
ground   for   transferring   our   modern   conceptions 
of  the    peacefulness   of  the    priestly   life   to   the 
remote  past  of  the  Jewish  people.    Priests,  as  we 
have  seen,  were  with  David  at  Hebron  as  men  ot 
war.      They    were    the    trumpeters    of   Abijah't 
army  (2  Chr.  xiii.  12).     The  Temple  itself  was  a 
great  armoury    (2   Chr.   xxiii.    9).      The    heroic 
struggles  of  the  Maccabees  were  sustained  chiefly 
by  their  kindred  of  the  same  family  (2  Mace.  viii. 
1).      (3)  A  few   chosen   ones   might  enter   more 
deeply  into  the  divine   life,  and   so   receive,  like 
Zechariah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  a  special  call  to  the 
office  of  a  prophet.      (4)  We   can   hardly  escape 
the   conclusion  that  many  did    their  work  in  the 
Temple  of  Jehovah  with  a  divided  allegiance,  and 
acted  at  other  times  as  priests  of  the  high-places 
(Ewald,    Gesch.    iii.    704).      Not    only    do    we 
read  of  no  protests  against  the  sins  of  the  idola 
trous  kings,  except  from  prophets  who  stood  forth, 
alone  and  unsupported,  to  bear  their  witness,  but 
the  priests  themselves  were  sharers  in  the  worship 
of  Baal  (Jer.  ii.  §),  of  the  sun  and  moon,  and  of 
the  host  of  heaven  (Jer.  viii.  1,  2).     In  the  very 
Temple  itself  they  "  ministered  before  their  idols  ' 
(Ez.  xliv.  12),  and  allowed  others,  "  uncircumcised 
in  heart,  and  uncircumcised  in  flesh,"  to  join  them 
(ibid.  7).     They  ate  of  unclean  things  and  polluted 
the  Sabbaths.     There  could  be  no  other  result  of 
this  departure  from  the  true  idea  of  the  priest 
hood  than  a  general  degradation.    Those  who  ceased 
to  be  true  shepherds  of  the  people  found  nothing 
in  their  ritual  to  sustain  or  elevate  them.     They 
became  as  sensual,  covetous,   tyrannical,   as  ever 
the  clergy  of  the  Christian  Church  became  in  its 
darkest    periods  ;    conspicuous    as  drunkards    and 
adulterers  (Is.  xxviii.  7,  8,  Ivi.  10-12).     The  pro 
phetic  order,  instead  of  acting  as  a  check,  became 
sharers  in  their  corruption  (Jer.  v.  31 ;  Lam.  iv. 
13;  Zeph.  iii.  4).      For  the  most  part  the  few 
effoits  after  better  things  are  not  the  result  of  a 
spontaneous  reformation,  but  of  conformity  to  the 
wishes  of  a  reforming  king.     In  the  one  inr'ance 
in  which  they  do  act  spontaneously — their  resist 
ance  to   the   usurpation   of  the   priest's  functions 
by  Uzziah — their  protest,  however  right  in  itself, 
was   yet  only  too   compatible   with  a  wrong    use 
of  the  office  which  they  claimed  as  belonging  exclu 
sively   to    themselves    (2    Chr.   xxvi.    17).      The 


924 


PRIEST 


discipline  of  the  Captivity,  however,  was  not 
without  its  fruits.  A  large  proportion  of  the 
priests  had  eithei  perished  or  were  content  to 
remain  in  the  lana  of  their  exile ;  but  those  who 
did  return  were  active  in  the  work  of  restoration. 
Under  Ezra  they  submitted  to  the  stem  duty  of 
repudiating  their  heathen  wives  (Ezr.  x.  18,  19). 
They  took  part — though  here  the  Levites  were 
the  more  prominent — in  the  instruction  of  the 
people  (Ezr.  iii.  2;  Neh.  viii.  9-13).  The  root- 
evils,  however,  soon  reappeared.  The  work  of  the 
priesthood  was  made  the  instrument  of  covetous- 
ness.  The  piiests  of  the  time  of  Malachi  required 
payment  for  every  ministerial  act,  and  would  not 
even  "  shut  the  doors  "  or  "  kindle  lire  "  for  nought 
(Mai.  i.  10).  They  "  corrupted  the  covenant  of 
Levi "  (Mai.  ii.  8).  The  idea  of  the  priest  as 
the  angel,  the  messenger,  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts, 
was  forgotten  (Mai.  ii.  7  ;  comp.  Eccles.  v.  6). 
The  inevitable  result  was  that  they  again  lost 
their  influence.  They  became  "  base  and  con 
temptible  before  all  the  people"  (Mai.  ii.  9). 
The  office  of  the  scribe  rose  in  repute  as  that  of 
the  priest  declined  (Jost,  Judentfi.  i.  37,  148). 
The  sects  that  multiplied  during  the  last  three 
centuries  of  the  national  life  of  Judaism  were 
proofs  that  the  established  order  had  failed  to  do 
its  work  in  maintaining  the  religious  life  of  the 
people.  No  great  changes  affected  the  outward 
position  of  the  priests  under  the  Persian  govern 
ment.  When  that  monarchy  fell  before  the  power 
of  Alexander,  they  were  ready  enough  to  transfer 
thtir  allegiance.*  Both  the  Persian  govemmait 
and  Alexander  had,  however,  respected  the  religion 
of  their  subjects ;  and  the  former  had  conferred 
on  the  priests  immunities  from  taxation  (Ezr.  vi. 
8,  9,  vii.  24;  Jos.  Ant.  xi.  8).  The  degree  to 
which  this  recognition  was  carried  by  the  imme 
diate  successors  of  Alexander  is  shown  by  the  work 
01  restoration  accomplished  by  Simon  the  son  of 
Onias  (Ecclus.  1.  12-20) ;  and  the  position  which 
they  thus  occupied  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  not 
less  than  the  devotion  with  which  his  zeal  inspired 
them,  prepared  them  doubtless  for  the  great 
struggle  which  was  coming,  and  in  which,  under 
the  priestly  Maccabees,  thev  were  the  chief  de 
fenders  of  their  country's  freedom.  Some,  indeed, 
at  that  crisis,  were  found  among  the  apostates. 
Under  the  guidance  of  Jason  (the  heathenised 
form  of  Joshua)  they  forsook  the  customs  of 
their  fathers ;  and  they  who,  as  priests,  were  to 
be  patterns  of  a  self-respecting  purity,  left  their 
work  in  the  Temple  to  run  naked  in  the  circus 
which  the  Syrian  king  had  opened  in  Jerusalem 
(2  Mace.  iv.  13,  14).  Some,  at  an  earlier  period, 
had  joined  the  schismatic  Onias  in  establishing  a 
rival  worship  (Jos.  Ant.  xii.  3,  §4).  The  ma 
jority,  however,  were  true-hearted ;  and  the  Mac- 
cabean  struggle  which  left  the  government  of  the 
country  in  the  hands  of  tlieii  own  order,  and. 
until  the  Roman  conquest,  with  a  certain  measure 
of  independence,  must  have  given  to  the  higher 


•  A  rea\  submission  is  hardly  concealed  by  the  narrative 
of  the  Jewish  historian.    The  account  of  the  effect  pro 
duced  on  the  mind  of  the  Macedonian  king  by  the  solemn 
procession  of  priests  in  their  linen  ephods  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi. 
8/,  stands  probably  on  the  same  footing  as  Livy'a  account 
of  the  retreat  of  1'orsena  from  the  walls  of  unconquered 
Koine. 

*  It  deserves  notice  that  from  these  priests  may  have 
Come  the  statements  as  to  what  passed  within  the  Temple 


PRIEST 

members  of  tne  order  a  position  of  security  an>J 
influence.  The  martyr-spirit  showed  itse'f  again 
in  the  calmness  with  which  they  carried  on  the 
ministrations  in  the  Temple,  when  Jerusalem  was 
besieged  by  Pompey,  till  they  were  slain  even  in 
the  act  of  sacrificing  (Jos.  Ant.  xiv.  4,  §8 ;  B.  J. 
i.  7,  §5).  The  reign  of  Herod,  on  the  other  hand, 
in  which  the  high-priesthood  was  kept  in  abey 
ance,  or  transferred  from  one  to  another  at  the 
will  of  one  who  was  an  alien  by  birth  and  half  a 
heathen  in  character,  must  have  tended  to  depress 
them. 

It  will  be  interesting  to  bring  together  the  few 
facts  that  indicate  their  position  in  the  N.  T.  period 
of  their  history.  The  division  into  four-and-twenty 
courses  is  still  maintained  (Luke  i.  5  ;  Joseph.  Vit. 
1),  and  the  heads  of  these  courses  together  with 
those  who  have  held  the  high-priesthood  (the  office 
no  longer  lasting  for  life),  are  "chief  priests" 
(lipXifpfts)  by  courtesy  (Carpzov.  App.  Crit.  p. 
102),  and  take  their  place  in  the  Sanhedrim.  The 
number  scattered  throughout  Palestine  was,  as  has 
been  stated,  very  large.  Of  these  the  greater  num 
ber  were  poor  and  ignorant,  despised  by  the  more 
powerful  members  of  their  own  order,  not  gaining 
the  respect  or  afiection  of  the  people.  The  picture 
of  cowardly  selfishness  in  the  priest  of  the  parable 
of  Luke  x.  31,  can  hardly  be  thought  of  as  othei 
than  a  representative  one,  indicating  the  estimate 
commonly  and  truly  formed  of  the  character  of  the 
class.  The  priestly  order,  like  the  nation,  was  di 
vided  between  contending  sects.  The  influence  of 
Hyrcanus,  himself  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life  a 
Sadducee  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  10,  §6),  had  probably 
made  the  tenets  of  that  party  popular  among  the 
wealthier  and  more  powerful  membei's,  and  the 
chief  priests  of  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts,  the  whole 
apxifparucbv  ytvos  (Acts  iv.  1,  6,  v.  17)  were 
apparently  consistent  Sadducees,  sometimes  com 
bining  with  the  Pharisees  in  the  Sanhedrim,  some 
times  thwarted  by  them,  persecuting  the  followers 
of  Jesus  because  they  preached  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead.  The  great  multitude  (SxAos),  on  the 
other  hand,  who  received  that  testimony*  (Acts 
vi.  7)  m-ust  have  been  free  from,  or  must  have 
overcome  Sadducean  prejudices.  It  was  not  strange 
that  those  who  did  not  welcome  the  truth  which 
would  have  raised  them  to  .1  higher  life,  should 
sink  lower  and  lower  into  an  ignorant  and  ferocious 
fanaticism.  Few  stranger  contrasts  meet  us  in  the 
history  of  religion  than  that  presented  in  the  lite  of 
the  priesthood  in  the  last  half-century  of  the  Tem 
ple,  now  going  through  the  solemn  sacrificial  rites, 
and  joining  in  the  noblest  hymns,  now  raising  a 
fierce  clamour  at  anything  which  seemed  to  them 
a  profanation  of  the  sanctuary,  and  rushing  to  dash 
out  the  brains  of  the  bold  or  incautious  intruder,0 
or  of  one  of  thf.ir  own  order  who  might  enter  while 
under  some  ceremonial  defilement,  or  with  a  half- 
humourous  cruelty  setting  fire  to  the  clothes  of  the 
Levites  who  were  found  sleeping  when  they  ought  to 
have  been  watching  at  their  posts  (Lightfoot,  Temple 


at  the  time  of  the  Crucifixion  (Matt,  xsvii.  51).  and  that 
these  facts  may  hcve  had  some  influence  in  determining 
their  belief.  They,  at  any  rate,  would  be  brought  intc 
frequent  o>ntact  with  the  teachers  who  continued  dally  lu 
the  Temple  and  taught  in  Solomon's  porch  (Acts  v.  12). 

«  It  belonged  to  the  priests  to  act  as  sentinels  over  the 
Holy  Place,  an  to  the  Levites  to  guard  the  wider  area  oj 
the  precincts  of  the  Temple  (Ugolini,  xiii.  1052). 


PRIEST 

Scrvic-?,  c  i.).  The  rivalry  which  led  the  Levites  ! 
to  claim  privileges  which  had  hitherto  belonged  to 
the  priests  has  been  already  noticed.  [LEVITES.] 
In  the  scenes  of  the  last  tragedy  of  Jewish  history 
the  order  passes  away,  without  honour,  "  dying  as 
a  fool  dieth."  The  high-priesthood  is  given  to  the 
lowest  and  vilest  of  the  adherents1  of  the  frenzied 
Zealots  (Jos.  B.  J.  iv.  3,  §6).  Other  priests  appear 
as  deserting  to  the  enemy  (Ibid.  vi.  6,  §1).  It  is 
from  a  priest  that  Titus  receives  the  lamps,  and  gems, 
and  costly  raiment  of  the  sanctuary  (Ibid.  vi.  8,  §3). 
Priests  report  to  their  conquerors  the  terrible  utter 
ance  "  Let  us  depart,"  on  the  last  Pentecost  ever 
celebrated  in  the  Temple  (Ibid.  vi.  5,  §3).  It  is  a 
oriest  who  fills  up  the  degradation  of  his  order  by 
dwelling  on  the  fall  of  his  country  with  a  cold 
blooded  satisfaction,  and  finding  in  Titus  the  fulfil 
ment  of  the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  0.  T.  (Ibid. 
vi.  5,  §4).  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  deprived 
the  order  at  one  blow  of  all  but  an  honorary  distinc 
tion.  Their  occupation  was  gone.  Many  families 
must  have  altogether  lost  their  genealogies.  Those 
who  still  prided  themselves  on  their  descent,  were 
no  longer  safe  against  the  claims  of  pretenders. 
The  jealousies  of  the  lettered  class,  which  had  been 
kept  under  some  restraint  as  long  as  the  Temple 
stood,  now  had  full  play,  and  the  influence  of  the 
Rabbis  increased  with  the  fall  of  the  priesthood. 
Their  position  in  mediaeval  and  modem  Judaism 
has  never  risen  above  that  of  complimentary  recog 
nition.  Those  who  claim  to  take  their  place  among 
the  sons  of  Aaron,  are  entitled  to  receive  the  re 
demption-money  of  the  first-born,  to  take  the  Law 
from  its  chest,  to  pronounce  the  benediction  in  the 
synagogues  (Ugolini,  xii.  48). 

The  language  of  the  N.  T.  writers  in  relation  to 
the  priesthood  ought  not  to  be  passed  over.  They 
recognize  in  Christ,  the  first-born,  the  king,  the 
Anointed,  the  representative  of  the  true  primeval 
priesthood  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek  (Heb. 
vii.,  viii.),  from  which  that  of  Aaron,  however 
necessary  for  the  time,  is  now  seen  to  have  been  a 
deflection.  But  there  is  no  trace  of  an  order  in  the 
new  Christian  society,  bearing  the  name,  and  exer 
cising  functions  like  those  of  the  priests  of  the  older 
Covenant.  The  Synagogue  and  not  the  Temple 
furnishes  the  pattern  for  the  organization  of  the 
Church.  The  idea  which  pervades  the  teaching  of 
the  Epistles  is  that  of  an  universal  priesthood.  All 
true  believers  are  made  kings  and  priests  (Rev.  i.  6  ; 
1  Pet.  ii.  9),  offer  spiritual  sacrifices  (Rom.  xii.  1), 


PRIEST 


925 


may  draw  near,  may  enter  .nto  the  holiest  ("  leb.  z. 
19-22)  as  having  received  a  true  priestly  a  nsecr* 
tion.  They  too  have  been  washed  and  sprinkled  as 
the  sons  of  Aaron  were  (Heb.  x.  22).  It  was  the 
thought  of  a  succeeding  age  that  the  old  classifica 
tion  of  the  high-priest,  priests,  and  Levites  was 
reproduced  in  the  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  of 
the  Christian  Church.d  The  iflea  which  was  thus 
expressed  rested,  it  is  true,  on  the  broad  analogy 
of  a  threefold  gradation,  and  the  terms,  "  priest/' 
"  altar,"  "  sacrifice,"  might  be  used  without  in 
volving  more  than  a  legitimate  symbolism,  but 
they  brought  with  them  the  inevitable  danger  of 
reproducing  and  perpetuating  in  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  many  of  the  feelings  which  be 
longed  to  Judaism,  and  ought  to  have  been  left 
behind  with  it.  If  the  evil  has  not  proved  so  fatal 
to  the  life  of  Christendom  as  it  might  have  done,  it 
is  because  no  bishop  or  pope,  however  much  he 
might  exaggerate  the  harmony  of  the  two  systems, 
has  ever  dreamt  of  making  the  Christian  priesthood 
hereditary.  We  have  perhaps  reason  to  be  thankful 
that  two  errors  tend  to  neutralize  each  other,  and  that 
the  age  which  witnessed  the  most  extravagant  sacer 
dotalism  was  one  in  which  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy 
was  first  exalted,  then  urged,  and  at  last  enforced. 

The  account  here  given  has  been  based  on  the  be 
lief  that  the  books  of  the  0.  T.  give  a  trustworthy 
account  of  the  origin  and  history  of  the  priesthood 
of  Israel.  Those  who  question  their  authority  have 
done  so,  for  the  most  part,  on  the  strength  of  some 
preconceived  theoiy.  Such  a  hierarchy  as  the  Pen 
tateuch  prescribes,  is  thought  impossible  in  the 
earlier  stages  of  national  life,  and  therefore  the 
reigns  of  David  and  Solomon  are  looked  on,  not  as 
the  restoration,  but  as  the  starting-point  of  the 
order  (Von  Bohlen,  Die  Genesis,  Einl.  §16).  It  is 
alleged  that  there  could  have  been  no  tribe  like  that 
of  Levi,  for  the  consecration  of  a  whole  tribe  is 
without  a  parallel  in  history  (Vatke,  Bibl.  T/ieol. 
i.  p.  222).  Deuteronomy,  assumed  for  once  to  be 
older  than  the  three  books  which  precede  it,  repre 
sents  the  titles  of  the  priest  and  Levite  as  standing 
on  the  same  footing,  and  the  distinction  between 
them  is  therefore  the  work  of  a  later  period  (Georga. 
Die  alteren  Jiid.  Feste,  p.  45,  51 ;  comp.  Bahr 
Symbolik,  b.  ii.  c.  i.  §1,  whence  these  references 
are  taken).  It  is  hardly  necessary  here  to  do  more 
than  state  these  theories.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PRINCE,"  PRINCESS.  The  only  special 
uses  of  the  word  "prince"  are — 1.  "Princes  of 


*  The  history  of  language  presents  few  stranger  facts 
than  those  connected  with  these  words.  Priest,  our  only 
equivalent  for  iepevs,  comes  to  us  from  the  word  which 
was  chosei  bf cause  it  excluded  the  idea  of  a  sacerdotal 
character.  Bisltop  has  narrowly  escaped  a  like  perversion, 
occurring,  as  it  docs  constantly,  in  Wyklyf 's  version  as  the 
translation  of  dpxicpev?  (e.g.  John  xviii.  15,  Heb.  viii.  1). 
»  1.  jnb,  only  In  a  few  places;  commonly  "  priest." 

2.  "P33  ;   apxiav,  6  ^ov'/oiei/os  ;    dwf;    applied  to 
Messiah  (Dan.  ix.  25). 

«.  2H3,  properly  "  willing,"  chiefly  in  poet.  (Ges.  p. 
«53) ;  ipxwi'  i  princeps. 

4.  ^03,  from  ":]D3,  "  prince,"  an  anointed  One;  apx<av ; 
jYincepg/also  in  A.  V.  "duke"  (Josh.  xiii.  21). 

b.  N^3,  verb.  adj.  from  ^^3,  "  raise ;"  ap\<av  -liyov- 
nefos,  yyfuuv,  /3<x(riAeu'«;  princeps,  dux;  also  in  V  V. 
"  ruler,"  "  chief,"  "  captain."  This  word  appears  on  the 
twins  of  Simon  Maccabaeus  (Ges.  917). 


6.  PVp ;  apxny°s,  Op\<aV,  prineeps;  also  "captain" 
and  "  ruler." 

I.  ?T\,  an  adj.  "  great,"  also  as  a  subst.  "  captain,"  and 
used  ^composition,  as  Rab-saris;  S.px<av  yye^wv;  optimtis. 

8.  jjn,  part,  of  Jfl,  "bear,"  a  poet,  word;  <rarpa.inft 
Svcaonjs ;  princeps,  legum  conditor. 

9.  "ii? ;   apx""'  5  princeps ;   also  in  A.  V.  "  captain ' 
"  ruler,"  prefixed  to  words  of  office,  as  "  chief-baker,"  &c 
mt^  ;  apxov<ra. ;  regina. 

10.  t3'l?K',   "  ruler,"  "  captain  ;"    K>vK>,  "  captate," 
"prince;"  Tpurranjs;  dux. 

II.  Inplur.only,  D^JVIQ;  akintoSanskr.prai/ww/ui 
primus ;  evSofot ;  inclyti  (Esth.  1.  3). 

12.  D^SD  ;  apxoires ;  magistrate ;  usually  "nilem.*" 

13.  D^JDK'n  ;  jrpeVjSds ;  legati;  only  inPs.lxvlii,  31, 

14.  N^Vl^nN  and 
nijTai' ;  ealrapae ;  a  Persian  word. 


B2»j  PR18CA 

provinces"  b  (1  K.  xx.  14),  who  were  probably  local 
governors  or  magistrates,  who  took  refuge  in  Sa 
maria  during  the  invasion  of  Benhadad,  and  their 
"  young  men  "  were  their  attendants,  vatSdpia, 
Vedissequi  (Thenius,  Ewald,  Gesch.  iii.  495). 
Josephus  says,  viol  riav  riytfj.6vuy  {Ant.  viii.  14, 
|2).  2.  The  "  princes "  mentioned  in  Dan.  vi.  1 
^see  Esth.  i.  1)  were  the  predecessors,  either  in  fact 
or  in  place,  of  the  satraps  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (Her. 
iii.  89).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PRIS'CA  (Tlpla-Ka:  Prisca}  2   Tim.   iv.   19. 

[PftlSCILLA.] 

PRISOIL'LA  (Tlpiffitltea:  Priscilla).  •  To 
what  has  been  said  elsewhere  under  the  head  of 
AijUiLA  the  following  may  oe  added.  The  name  is 
Prisca  (UpiffKa)  in  2  Tim.  iv.  19,  and  (according  to 
the  true  reading)  in  Rom.  xvi.  3,  and  also  (according 
to  some  of  the  best  MSS.)  in  1  Cor.  xvi.  19.  Such 
variation  in  a  Roman  name  is  by  no  means  unusual. 
We  find  that  the  name  of  the  wife  is  placed  before 
that  of  the  husband  in  Rom.  xvi.  3,  2  Tim.  iv.  19, 
nnd  (according  to  some  of  the  best  MSS.)  in  Acts 
xviii.  26.  It  is  only  in  Acts  xviii.  2  and  1  Cor.  xvi. 
19  that  Aquila  has  unequivocally  the  first  place. 
Hence  we  should  be  disposed  to  conclude  that  Pris 
cilla  was  the  more  energetic  character  of  the  two : 
and  it  is  particularly  to  be  noticed  that  she  took 
part,  not  only  in  her  husband's  exercise  of  hospi 
tality,  but  likewise  in  the  theological  instruction  of 
Ai'OLLOS.  Yet  we  observe  that  the  husband  and 
the  wife  are  always  mentioned  together.  In  fact 
we  may  say  that  Priseilla  is  the  example  of  what 
the  married  woman  may  do,  for  the  general  service 
of  the  Church,  in  conjunction  with  home  duties,  as 
PHOEBE  is  the  type  of  the  unmarried  servant  of 
the  Church,  or  deaconess.  Such  female  minis 
tration  was  of  essential  importance  in  the  state  of 
society  in  the  midst  of  which  the  early  Christian 
communities  were  formed.  The  remarks  of  Arch 
deacon  Evans  on  the  position  of  Timothy  at  Ephesus 
are  very  just.  "  In  his  dealings  with  the  female 
part  of  his  flock,  which,  in  that  time  and  country, 
required  peculiar  delicacy  and  discretion,  the  counsel 
of  the.  experienced  Priscilla  would  be  invaluable. 
Where,  for  instance,  could  he  obtain  more  prudent 
And  faithful  advice  than  hers,  in  the  selection  of 
widows  to  be  placed  upon  the  eleemosynary  list  of 
the  Church,  and  of  deaconesses  for  the  ministry?" 
(Script.  J3iog.  ii.  298).  It  seems  more  to  our 
purpose  to  lay  stress  on  this  than  on  the  theological 
learning  of  Priscilla.  Yet  Winer  mentions  a  mono 
graph  de  Priscilla,  Aquilae  uxore,  tanquam  femi- 
narum  e  gente  Judaica  erudUarum  specimine,  by 
G.  G.  Zeltner  (Altorf,  1709).  [J.  S.  H.] 

PRISON.'  For  imprisonment  as  a  punishment, 
see  PUNISHMENTS.  The  present  article  will  only 
treat  of  prisons  as  places  of  confinement. 


b  r)13*  jD  ;  x<apa.t. ;  provinciae. 

c  1.  "TlDK,  Aramaic  for  "VIDK,  "a  chain,"  is  Joined 

with  JV3,  and  rendered  a  prison ;  olicos  5f<ryjov;  career. 

2.  K?3,   &0/3,   and  Kv3>   with  JV3  ;  olitos  <f>v- 
Vcucrjs  (Jer.  xxxvii.  15). 

3.  rGSnO,  from   ^QH,   "  turn,"   or  "  twist,"  the 
stocks  (Jer.  xx.  2). 

4.  mBD  and  &OCDO  ;  4>uA.oKt) ;  career  (Ges.  879). 

5.  13DO ;  Se 


PBOCON8UL 

In  Egypt  it  is  plain  both  that  special  places  wert 
used  aa  prisons,  and  that  they  were  under  the  cus 
tody  of  a  military  officer  (Gen.  xl.  3,  xlii.  17). 

During  the  wandering  in  the  desert  we  read  cu 
two  occasions  of  confinement  "  in  ward "  (Lev. 
xxiv.  12 ;  Num.  xv.  34) ;  but  as  imprisonment  wa§ 
not  directed  by  the  Law,  so  we  hear  of  none  till 
the  time  of  the  kings,  when  the  prison  appeal's  as 
an  appendage  to  the  palace,  or  a  special  part  of  it 
^1  K.  xxii.  27).  Later  still  it  is  distinctly  described 
as  being  in  the  king's  house  (Jer.  xxxii.  2,  xxxvii. 
21 ;  Neh.  iii.  25).  This  was  the  case  also  at 
Babylon  (2  K.  xxv.  27).  But  private  house* 
were  sometimes  used  as  places  of  confinement  (Jer. 
xxxvii.  15),  probably  much  as  Chardin  describes 
Persian  prisons  in  his  day,  viz.  houses  kept  by  pri 
vate  speculators  for  prisoners  to  be  maintained 
there  at  their  own  cost  (Voy.  vi.  100).  Public 
prisons  other  than  these,  though  in  use  by  the 
Janaanitish  nations  (Judg.  xvi.  21,  25),  were  un- 
mown  in  Judaea  previous  to  the  Captivity.  Under 
the  Herods  we  hear  again  of  royal  prisons  attached 
to  the  palace,  or  in  royal  fortresses  (Luke  iii.  20 ; 
Acts  xii.  4, 10 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  5,  §2  ;  Machae- 
rus).  By  the  Romans  Antonia  was  used  as  a  prison 
•xt  Jerusalem  (Acts  xxiii.  10),  and  at  Caesarea  the 
praetorium  of  Herod  (ib.  35).  The  sacerdotal  au 
thorities  also  had  a  prison  under  the  superintendence 
of  special  officers,  $fff/j.o<f>v\a.Kts  (Acts  v.  18-23, 
viii.  3,  xxvi.  10).  The  royal  prisons  in  those  days 
were  doubtless  managed  after  the  Roman  fashion, 
and  chains,  fetters,  and  stocks  used  as  means  of  con  • 
finement  (see  Acts  xvi.  24,  and  Job  xiii.  27). 

One  of  the  readiest  places  for  confinement  was  c 
dry  or  partially  dry  well  or  pit  (see  Gen.  xxxvii.  24 
and  Jer.  xxxviii.  6-11);  but  the  usual  place  ap 
pears,  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  and  in  general,  to 
have  been  accessible  to  visitors  (Jer.  xxxvi.  5  ;  Matt, 
xi.  2,  xxv.  36,  39  ;  Acts  xxiv.  23).  [H.  W.  P.] 

PKOCH'OEUS  (npoxopos).  One  of  the  seven 
deacons,  being  the  third  on  the  list,  and  named  next 
after  Stephen  and  Philip  (Acts  vi.  5).  No  further 
mention'  of  him  is  made  in  the  N.  T.  There  is  a 
tradition  that  he  was  consecrated  by  St.  Peter  bishop 
of  Nicomedia  (Baron,  i.  292).  In  the  Magna  Biblio- 
theca  Patrwn,  Colon.  Agripp.  1618,  i.  49-69,  will 
be  found  a  fabulous  "  Historia  Prochori,  Christ! 
Discipuli,  de  vita  B.  Joannis  apostoli."  [E.  H — s."] 

PROCONSUL.  The  Greek  ovfliJirarov,  for 
which  this  is  the  true  equivalent,  is  rendered  uni 
formly  "deputy"  in  the  A.  V.  of  Acts  xiii.  7,  8, 
12,  xix.  38,  and  the  derived  verb  avOinrarfvu  in 
Acts  xviii.  12,  is  translated  "  to  be  deputy."  At 
the  division  of  the  Roman  provinces  by  Augustus 
in  the  year  B.C.  27,  into  Senatorial  and  Imperial, 
the  emperor  assigned  to  the  senate  such  portions  of 


6-  "!OCTp  ;  6v\aKi'i ;  custodia ;  also  piur.  rPEE'D 
.  V.  "taM." 


7.  ~)VV  <  angustia  ;  rajreiWo-i?  (Ges.  1059). 

8.  mp~npQ  (Is.  Ixi.  1),  more  properly  written  ^n  cr.« 
word;  a»/a/3Ae^is;  apertio  (Ges.  1121). 

9.  "IHD  ;  oxu/xofia;  career:  properly  a  tower. 

10.  rnp3n~rV3  ;   olxCa  nv^iaro*-,   domtu  careen's. 
JV3    is   also   sometimes  "  prison"   in  A  V.,  us  G«-n. 
xxxlx.  20. 

11.  pJ^V ;  (caToppaicTTjs;  career;  probably  "  the  stocks" 
(as  A.  V.)  or  some  such  instrument  of  contiucmont;  pcrhapt 
understood  by  LXX.  as  a  sower  or  undergroun 


PROCURATOR 

fen  itcry  as  were  peaceable  and  could  be  held  with 
out  force  of  arms  (Suet.  Oct.  47 ;  Strabo,  xvii.  p. 
840 ;  Dio  Ca»s.  liii.  12),  an  arrangement  which  re- 
oiaiiied  with  frequent  alterations  till  the  3rd  cen 
tury.  Over  these  senatorial  provinces  the  senate 
appointed  by  lot  yearly  an  officer,  who  was  called 
"  proconsul"  (Dio  (Jass.  liii.  1 3),  who  exercised  purely 
civil  functions,  had  no  power  over  life  and  death, 
and  was  attended  by  one  or  more  legates  (Dio  Cass. 
liii.  14).  He  was  neither  girt  with  the  sword  nor 
wore  the  military  dress  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  13).  The 
provinces  were  in  consequence  called  "  proconsular." 
With  the  exception  of  Africa  and  Asia,  which  were 
assigned  to  men  who  had  passed  the  office  of  consul, 
the  senatorial  provinces  were  given  to  those  who 
had  been  praetors,  and  were  divided  by  lot  each 
year  among  those  who  had  held  this  office  five  years 
previously.  Tlieir  term  of  office  was  one  year. 
Among  the  senatorial  provinces  in  the  first  arrange 
ment  by  Augustus,  were  Cyprus,  Achaia,  an.1  Asia 
within  the  Halys  and  Taurus  (Strabo,  xvii.  p.  840). 
The  first  and  last  of  these  are  alluded  to  in  Acts 
xiii.  7,  8,  12,  xix.  38,  as  under  the  government  of 
proconsuls.  Achaia  became  an  impei  ial  province  in 
the  second  year  of  Tiberius,  A.D.  16,  and  was  go 
verned  by  a  procurator  (Tac.  Ann.  i.  76),  but  was 
restored  to  the  senate  by  Claudius  (Suet.  Claud. 
25),  and  therefore  Gallic,  before  whom  St.  Paul 
was  brought,  is  rightly  termed  "proconsul"  in 
Acts  xviii.  1.2.  Cyprus  also,  after  the  battle  of 
Actium,  was  first  made  an  imperial  province  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  12),  but  five  years  afterwards  (B.C.  22) 
it  was  given  to  the  senate,  and  is  reckoned  by 
Strabo  (xvii.  p.  840)  ninth  among  the  provinces  of 
the  people  governed  by  ffrpariiyol,  as  Achaia  is  the 
seventh.  These  ffrparriyoi,  or  propraetors,  had  the 
title  of  proconsul.  Cyprus  and  Narbonese  Gaul 
were  given  to  the  senate  in  exchange  for  Dalmatia, 
and  thus,  says  Dio  Cassius  (liv.  4),  proconsuls  (a>>8- 
{/iraroi)  began  to  be  sent  to  those  nations.  In 
Boeckh's  Cot-pus  Inscriptionum,  No.  2631,  is  the 
following  relating  to  Cyprus:  ^  ir6\is  K.6'ivTOV 
'lov\iov  K.6pSov  avdvirarov  ayveias.  This  Quintus 
Julius  Cordus  appears  to  have  been  proconsul  of 
Cyprus  before  the  12th  year  of  Claudius.  He  is 
mentioned  in  the  next  inscription  (No.  2632)  as 
the  predecessor  of  another  proconsul,  Lucius  Annius 
Bassus.  The  date  of  this  last  inscription  is  the 
12th  year  of  Claudius,  A.D.  52.  The  name  of  an 
other  proconsul  of  Cyprus  in  the  time  of  Claudius 
occurs  on  a  copper  coin,  of  which  an  engraving  is 
given  in  vol.  i.  p.  377.  A  coin  of  Ephesus  [see 
vol.  i.  564]  illustrates  the  usage  of  the  word  dvO- 
tfiraTOS  in  Acts  sir.  38.  [W.  A.  W.j 

PROCURATOR.  The  Greek  ftye^v,*'  ren- 
dsnJ  "governor"  in  the  A.  V.,  is  applied  in  the 
N.  T.  to  the  officer  who  presided  over  the  imperial 
province  of  Judaea.  It  is  used  of  Pontius  Pilate 
(Matt,  xxvii.),  of  Felix  (Acts  xxiii.,  xxiv.),  and  of 
Fcstus  (Acts  xxvi.  30).  In  all  these  cases  the 
Vulgate  equivalent  is  praeses.  The  office  of  pro 
curator  (rjyf/jLOvla)  is  mentioned  in  Luke  iii.  1,  and 
in  this  passage  the  rendering  of  the  Vulgate  is  more 
close  (procurante  Pontio  Pilato  Judaearn).  It  is 


PROCURATOR 


927 


uiv  is  the  general  term,  which  is  applied  also  to 
the  governor  (praeses)  of  the  imperial  province  of  Syria 
(Luke  ii.  2)  •  the  Greek  equivalent  of  procurator  is  strictly 
urtTpoTTO?  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  6,  $2,  8,  $5 ;  comp.  xx.  5,  $1),  and 
his  office  is  called  en-tTpomj  (Jos.  Ant.  xx.  5,  }1). 

i>  A  curious  illustration  of  this  is  given  by  Tacitus 
[Ann.  xiii.  1),  where  he  describes  the  poisoning  of  Junius 


explained,  under  the  head  of  PROCONSUL,  that 
after  the  battle  of  Actium,  B.C.  27,  the  provinces 
of  the  Roman  empire  were  divided  by  Augustuc 
into  two  portions,  giving  some  to  the  senate,  and 
reserving  to  himself  the  rert.  The  imperial  pro 
vinces  were  administered  by  legates,  called  legati 
Augusti pro  praetore,  sometimes  with  the  ad  lition 
of  consular*  potestate,  and  sometimes  legati  con- 
sulares,  or  legati  or  consulares  alone.  They  were 
selected  from  among  men  who  had  been  consuls  or 
praetors,  and  sometimes  from  the  inferior  senators 
(Dio  Cass.  liii.  13,  15).  Their  term  of  office  was 
indefinite,  and  subject  only  to  the  will  of  the  em 
peror  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  13).  These  officers  were 
also  called  praesides,  a  term  which  in  later  times 
was  applied  indifferently  to  the  governors  both  of 
the  senatorial  and  of  the  imperial  provinces  (Suet. 
Claud.  17).  They  were  attended  by  six  lictors, 
used  the  military  dress,  and  wore  the  sword  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  13).  No  quaestor  came  into  the  emperor's 
provinces,  but  the  property  and  revenues  of  the 
imperial  treasury  were  administered  by  the  Ra 
tionales,  Procuratores  and  Actores  of  the  emperor, 
who  were  chosen  from  among  his  freedmen,  or 
from  among  the  knights  (Tac.  Hist.  v.  9  ;  Dio 
Cass.  liii.  15).  These  procurators  were  sent  both 
to  the  imperial  and  to  the  senatorial  provinces  (Dio 
Cass.  liii.  15b).  Sometimes  a  province  was  governed 
by  a  procurator  with  the  functions  of  a  praeses, 
This  was  especially  the  case  with  the  smaller  pro 
vinces  and  the  outlying  districts  of  a  larger  province  •, 
and  such  is  the  relation  in  which  Judaea  stood  to 
Syria.  After  the  deposition  of  Archelaus  Judaea 
was  annexed  to  Syria,  and  the  first  procurator  was 
Coponius,  who  was  sent  out  with  Quirinus  to  take 
a  census  of  the  property  of  the  Jews  and  to  con 
fiscate  that  of  Archelaus  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  1,  §1). 
His  successor  was  Marcus  Ambivius,  then  Annius 
Rufus,  in  whose  time  the  emperor  Augustus  died. 
Tiberius  sent  Valerius  Gratus,  who  was  procurator 
for  eleven  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  Pontius 
Pilate  (Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §2),  who  is  called  by 
Josephus  (Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1)  yytfuev,  as  he  is  in 
the  N.  T.  He  was  subject  to  the  governor  (praeses} 
of  Syria,  for  the  council  of  the  Samaritans  denounced 
Pilate  to  Vitellius,  who  sent  him  to  Rome  and  put 
one  of  his  own  friends,  Marcellus,  in  his  place  (Jos. 
Ant.  xviii.  4,  §2).  The  head-quarters  of  the  pro 
curator  were  at  Caesarea  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  9,  §2 ; 
Acts  xxiii.  23),  where  he  had  a  judgment-seat  (Acts 
xxv.  6)  in  the  audience  chamber  (Acts  xxv.  23e), 
and  was  assisted  by  a  council  (Acts  xxv.  12)  whom 
he  consulted  in  cases  of  difficulty,  the  assesspres 
(Suet.  Galb.  14),  or  i)ye/j.6ves,  who  are  mentioned 
by  Josephus  (B.  J.  ii.  16,  §1)  as  having  been  con 
sulted  by  Cestius,  the  governor  of  Syria,  when 
certain  charges  were  made  against  Floras,  the  pro 
curator  of  Judaea.  More  important  cases  were  laid 
before  the  emperor  (Acts  xxv.  12  ;  comp.  Jos.  Ant. 
xx.  6,  §2).  The  procurator,  as  the  representative 
of  the  emperor,  had  the  power  of  life  and  death 
over  his  subjects  (Dio  Cass.  liii.  14 ;  Matt,  xxvii. 
26),  which  was  denied  to  the  proconsul.  In  the 
N.  T.  we  see  the  procurator  only  in  his  judicial 
capacity.  Thus  Christ  is  brought  'before  Pontius 

Silanns,  proconsul  of  Asia,  by  P.  Ce'er,  a  Roman  knight, 
and  Helius,  a  freedman,  who  had  the  care  of  the  im 
perial  revenues  in  Asia  (rei  familtaris  principis  in  Aiia 
impositi). 

«  Unless  the  ixpoa-Tripiov  (A.  V.  "place  of  hearing", 
was  the  great  stadium  mentioned  by  Josef  bus  (B.  J.  <i 
9,  J2). 


928 


PROPHET 


Pilate  as  a  political  offender  (Matt,  zxvii.  2,  11), 
juvl  the  accusation  is  heard  by  the  procurator,  who 
is  seated  on  the  judgment-seat  (Matt,  xxvii.  19). 
Felix  heard  St.  Paul's  accusation  and  defence  from 
the  judgment-seat  at  Caesarea  (Acts  xxiv.),  which 
was  in  the  open  air  in  the  great  stadium  (Jos. 
B.  J.  ii.  9,  §2),  and  St.  Paul  calls  him  "judge" 
(Acts  xxiv.  10),  as  if  this  term  described  his  chief 
functions.  The  procurator  (rjyt/jtuv}  is  again  alluded 
to  in  his  judicial  capacity  in  1  Pet.  ii.  14.  He  was 
attended  by  a  cohort  as  body-guard  (Matt,  xxvii. 
27),  and  apparently  went  up  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
time  of  the  high  festivals,  and  there  resided  in  the 
palace  of  Herod  (Jos.  B.  J.  ii.  14,  §3 ;  Philo,  De 
Leg.  ad  Caium,  §37,  ii.  589,  ed.  Mang.),  in  which 
was  the  praetorium,  or  "judgment-hall,"  as  it 
is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  (Matt,  xxvii.  27;  Mark 
xv.  16 ;  comp.  Acts  xxiii.  35).  Sometimes  it  ap 
pears  Jerusalem  was  made  his  winter  quarters 
(Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  3,  §1).  The  High-Priest  was  ap 
pointed  and  removed  at  the  will  of  the  procurator 
(Jos.  Ant.  xviii.  2,  §2).  Of  the  oppression  and 
extortion  practised  by  one  of  these  officers,  Gessius 
Florus,  which  resulted  in  open  rebellion,  we  have 
an  account  in  Josephus  (Ant.  xx.  11,  §1 ;  B.  J.  ii. 
14,  §2).  The  same  laws  held  both  for  the  go 
vernors  of  the  imperial  and  senatorial  provinces, 
that  they  could  not  raise  a  levy  or  exact  more  than 
an  appointed  sum  of  money  from  their  subjects, 
and  that  when  their  successors  came  they  were  to 
return  to  Rome  within  three  months  (Dio  Cass. 
liii.  15).  For  further  information  see  Walter, 
Gesck.  des  Rom.  Rechts.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PROPHET  (K'33:  irpo^tiis :  propheta). 
I.  THE  NAME. — The  ordinary  Hebrew  word  for 
prophet  is  ndbi  (1013),  derived  from  the  verb  fcO3> 
connected  by  Gesenius  with  y33,  "  to  bubble 
forth,"  like  a  fountain.  If  this  etymology  is  cor 
rect,  the  substantive  would  signify  either  a  person 
who,  as  it  were,  involuntarily  bursts  forth  with 
spiritual  utterances  under  the  divine  influence 
(cf.  Ps.  xlv.  1,  "  My  heart  is  bubbling  up  of  a  good 
matter ")  or  simply  one  who  pours  forth  words. 
The  analogy  of  the  word  C]t3*  (ndtaph),  which  has 
the  force  of  "  dropping "  as  honey,  and  is  used  by 
Micah  (ii.  6, 11),  Ezekiel  (xxi.  2),  and  Amos  (vii.  16), 
in  the  sense  of  prophesying,  points  to  the  last  signi 
fication.  The  verb  K33  is  found  only  in  the  niphal 
and  hithpael,  a  peculiarity  which  it  shares  with 
many  other  words  expressive  of  speech  (cf.  loqui, 
fari,  vociferari,  concionari,  <f>6eyyofj.cu,  as  weJl  as 
u.arrfvofi.a.1  and  vaticinari).  Bunsen  (Gott  in  Ge- 
Kchichte,  p.  141)  and  Davidson  (Intr.  Old  Test.  ii. 


•  In  1  Sam.  ix.  9  we  read,  "  He  that  Is  now  called  a 
ptophet  (N6ln)  was  beforetime  called  a  seer  (Roeh)? 
from  whence  Dr.  Stanley  (Lett,  on  Jewith,  Church)  has 
concluded  that  lloeh  was  "  the  oldest  designation  of  the 
prophetic  office,"  "  superseded  by  Ndbi  shortly  after 
Samuel's  time,  when  Xabi  first  came  into  use "  (I^ect. 
xvili.,  xix.).  This  seems  opposed  to  the  fact  that  A'ubt 
is  the  word  commonly  used  in  the  Pentateuch,  whereas 
Roth  does  not  appear  until  the  days  of  Samuel.  The 
passage  in  the  book  of  Samuel  is  clearly  a  parenthetical 
Insertion,  perhaps  made  by  the  JVdbi  Nathan  (or  whoever 
was  the  original  author  of  the  book),  perhaps  added  at 
a  later  date,  with  the  view  of  explaining  how  It  was 
that  Samuel  bore  the  title  of  Roeh,  instead  of  tho  now 
usual  appellation  of  Nabi.  To  the  writer  the  days  of 
Samuel  were  "  beforetime,"  and  he  explains  that  in  those 
undent  days,  that  is  the  days  of  Samuel,  the  word  used 
for  prophet  was  Roeh.  not  Nubi.  But  that  does  not. 


PROPHET 

430)  suppose  Ndbi  to  signify  the  man  to  whom  an 
nouncements  are  made  by  God, »'.  e .  inspired.  But  it 
is  more  in  accordance  with  the  etymology  and  unaga 
of  the  word  to  regard  it  as  signifying  (actively)  on<> 
who  announces  or  pours  forth  the  declarations  ot 
God.  The  latter  signification  is  preferred  by  Ewald, 
Havernick,  Oehler,  Hengstenberg,  lileek,  Lee,  Pusey, 
M'Caul,  and  the  great  majority  of  Biblical  critics. 

Two  other  Hebrew  words  are  msed  to  designate  a 
prophet,  Hfcp,  Roeh,  and  nth.  Chozeh,  both  sig 
nifying  one  who  sees.  They  are  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  by  "  seer ;"  in  the  LXX.  usually  by  /SAe'irw* 
or  6pa>v,  sometimes  by  irpo^rrjs  (1  Chr.  xxvi.  28  ; 
2  Chr.  xvi.  7, 10).  The  three  words  seem  to  be  con 
trasted  with  each  other  in  1  Chron.  xxix.  29.  "  The 
acts  of  David  the  king,  first  and  last,  behold  they 
are  written  in  the  book  of  Samuel  the  seer  (Roeh), 
and  in  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet  (Nabf),  and 
in  the  book  of  Gad  the  seer  (Chozeh)."  Roeh  is  a 
title  almost  appropriated  to  Samuel.  It  is  only 
used  ten  times,  and  in  seven  of  these  it  is  applied  to 
Samuel  (1  Sam.  ix.  9,  11,  18,  19 ;  1  Chr.  ix.  22 ; 
xxvi.  28 ;  rxix.  29).  On  two  other  occasions  it  is 
applied  to  Hanani  (2  Chr.  xvi.  7,  10).  Once  it  is 
used  by  Isaiah  (Is.  xxx.  10)  with  no  reference  tt 
any  particular  person.  It  was  superseded  in  gene 
ral  use  by  the  word  Nabi,  which  Samuel  (himseh 
entitled  Ndbi  as  well  as  Roeh,  1  Sam.  iii.  20 ; 
2  Chr.  xxxv.  18)  appears  to  have  revived  after  a 
period  of  desuetude  (1  Sam.  ix.  9),  and  to  have 
applied  to  the  prophets  organized  by  him.a  The 
verb  riNI,  from  which  it  is  derived,  is  the  common 
prose  word  signifying  "  to  see :"  iltn — whence  the 
substantive  flTf!,  Chozeh,  is  derived — is  more 
poetical.  Chozeh  is  rarely  found  except  in  the 
Books  of  the  Chronicles,  but  jfyn  is  the  word  con 
stantly  used  for  the  prophetical  vision.  It  is  found 
in  the  Pentateuch,  in  Samuel,  in  the  Chronicles,  in 
Job,  and  in  most  of  the  prophets. 

Whether  there  is  any  difference  in  the  usage  of 
these  three  words,  and,  if  any,  what  that  difference 
is,  has  been  much  debated  (see  Witsius,  Miscell. 
Sacra,  i.  1,  §19;  Carpzovius,  Introd.  ad  Libros 
Canon.  V.  T.  iii.  1,  §2;  Winer,  Real-Worierbuch, 
art.  "  Propheten  ").  Havernick  (Einleitung,  Th.  i. ; 
Abth.  i.  s.  56)  considers  Ndbi  to  express  the  title 
of  those  who  officially  belonged  to  the  prophetic 
order,  while  Roeh  and  C/tozeh  denote  those  who 
received  a  prophetical  revelation.  Dr.  Lee  (Inspii-a- 
tion  of  Holy  Scripture,  p.  543),  agrees  with  Haver 
nick  in  his  explanation  of  Ndbi,  but  he  identifies 
Roeh  in  meaning  rather  with  Ndbi  than  with 
Chozeh.  He  further  throws  out  a  suggestion  that 

imply  that  Roeh.  was  the  primitive  word,  and  that  Kalii 
first  came  into  use  subsequently  to  Samuel  (see  Heng 
stenberg,  BeitrSge  twr  Einleitung  int  A.  T.  iii.  335). 
Dr.  Stanley  represents  Chozeh  as  "  another  antique 
title."  But  on  no  sufficient  grounds.  Chozeh  Is  first 
found  in  2  Sam.  xxiv.  11 ;  so  that  it  does  not  seem  to 
have  come  into  use  until  Roeh  had  almost  disp.ppeare.l 
It  is  also  found  in  the  books  of  Kings  (2  K.  xvil.  13) 
and  Chronic es  (frequently),  in  Amos  (vii.  12),  Liaiah 
(xxix.  10),  Micah  (Hi.  7),  and  the  derivatives  of  the  verb 
cliuzah  are  used  by  the  prophets  to  designate  their 
visions  down  to  the  Captivity  (cf.  Is.  i.  1 ;  Dan.  viii.  1  ; 
Zech.  xiii.  4).  The  derivatives  of  rd'tUi  are  rarer,  and,  as 
being  prose  words,  are  chiefly  used  by  Daniel  (cf.  lie. 
1.  1;  Dan.  x.  7).  On  examination  we  find  that  MM 
existed  before  and  after  and  alongside  of  both  lio&i  RIU* 
Chozeh,  but  that  Chozeli  was  siimewLat  more  mt,de:r 
tban  Jintli,, 


PROPHET 

Chozeh  is  the  special  designation  of  the  prophet 
attached  to  the  royal  household.     In  2  Sam.  xxiv. 

II,  Gad  is  described  as  "the  prophet  (Ndbi)  Gad, 
David's  seer  (Chozeh)"  and  elsewhere  he  is  mlled 
''  David's  seer  (Chozeh)"  (I  Chr.  xxi.  9),  "  the  king's 
seer  (Chozeh) "  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25).     "  The  case  of 
Gad,"  Dr.  Lee  thinks,  "  affords  the  clue  to  the  diffi 
culty,  as  it  clearly  indicates  that  attached  to  the  royal 
establishment  there  was  usually  an  individual  styled 
•  the  king's  seer,'  who  might  at  the  same  time  be  a 
Ndbi."   The  suggestion  is  ingenious  (see,  in  addition 
to  places  quoted  above,  1  Chr.  xxv.  5,  xxix.  29 ; 
2  Chr.  xxix.  30,  xxxv.  15),  but  it  was  only  David 
(possibly  also  Manasseh,  2  Chr.  xxriii.  18)  who,  so 
far  as  we  read,  had  this  seer  attached  to  his  person ; 
and  in   any  case   there   is    nothing   in   the   word 
Chozeh  to  denote  the  relation  of  the  prophet  to  the 
king,  but  only  in  the  connection  in  which  it  stands 
with  the  word  king.     On  the  whole  it  would  seem 
that  the  same  persons  are  designated  by  the  three 
words  Ndbi,  Roeh,  and  Chozeh ;  the  last  two  titles 
being  derived  from  the  prophets'  power  of  seeing 
the  visions  presented  to  them  by  God,  the  first  from 
their  function  of  revealing  and  proclaiming  God's 
truth  to  men.     When  Gregory  Kaz.  (Or.  28)  calls 
Ezekiel  o   TU>V  fj.fyd\cav  ^TTO'TTTTJS  Kal    Qr)yi)T)]S 
uuffTypicav,  he  gives  a  sufficiently  exact  translation 
of  the  two  titles  Chozeh  or  Roeh,  and  Ndbi. 

The  word  Ndbi  is  uniformly  translated  in  the 
LXX.  by  irpo<J>^JT7js,  and  in  the  A.  V.  by  "  prophet." 
In  classical  Greek,  •nyxw^TTjs  signifies  one  who 
speaks  for  another,  specially  one  who  speaks  for  a 
god  and  so  inteiprets  his  will  to  man  (Liddell  & 
Scott,  s.  D.).  Hence  its  essential  meaning  is  "  an 
interpreter."  Thus  Apollo  is  a  irpod)^Tr;s  as  being 
the  interpreter  of  Zeus  (Aesch.  Eum.  19).  Poets 
are  the  Prophets  of  the  Muses,  as  being  their  in 
terpreters  (Plat.  Phaedr.  262  D).  The  irpo^rai 
attached  to  heathen  temples  are  so  named  from  their 
interpreting  the  oracles  delivered  by  the  inspired  and 
unconscious  /j.dvrfis  (Plat.  Tim.  72  B  ;  Herod,  vii. 

III,  note,  ed.  Baehr) .  We  have  Plato's  authority  for 
deriving  /J.O.VTIS  from  (taivoficu  (I.  c.).     The  use  of 
the  word  irptx^TTjs  in  its  modern  sense  is  post- 
classical,  and  is  derived  from  the  LXX. 

From  the  mediaeval  use  of  the  word  i 
prophecy  passed  into  the  English  language  in  the 
sense  of  prediction,  and  this  sense  it  has  retained 
as  its  popular  meaning  (see  Richardson,  s.  t>.). 
The  larger  sense  of  interpretation  has  not,  however, 
been  lost.  Thus  we  find  in  Bacon,  "  An  exercise 
commonly  called  prophesying,  which  was  this  : 
that  the  ministers  within  a  precinct  did  meet  upon 
a  week  day  in  some  principal  town,  where  there  was 
some  ancient  grave  ministei  that  was  president,  and 
an  auditory  admitted  of  gentlemen  or  other  persons 
of  leisure.  Then  every  minister  successively,  be 
ginning  with  the  youngest,  did  handle  one  and  the 
same  part  of  Scripture,  spending  severally  some 
quarter  of  an  hour  or  better,  and  in  the  whole  some 
two  hours.  And  so  the  exercise  being  begun  and 
concluded  with  prayer,  and  the  president  giving  a 
text  for  the  next  meeting,  the  assembly  was  dis 
solved  "  (Pacification  of  the  Church).  This  mean- 

•>  It  seems  to  be  incorrect  to  say  that  the  English  word 
was  "  originally  "  used  in  the  wider  sense  of  "  preaching," 
and  that  it  became  "  limited  "  to  the  meaning  of  "  pre 
dicting,"  in  the  seventeenth  century,  in  consequence  of  "  an 
etymological  mistake  "  (Stanley,  Lect.  xix.  xx.).  The  word 
entered  into  the  English  language  in  Its  sense  of  predict 
ing.  It  could  not  have  been  otherwise,  for  at  the  time 
of  the  formation  of  the  Knglisli  language,  the  word  ttpo- 
VOL.  II. 


PROPHET 


929 


ing  of  the  word  is  made  further  familiar  tc  us  by 
the  title  of  Jeremy  Taylor's  treatise  "  On  Liberty 
of  Prophesying."  Nor  was  there  any  risk  of  the 
title  of  a  book  published  in  our  own  days,  "  On  the 
Prophetical  Office  of  the  Church"  (Oxf.  1838), 
being  misunderstood.  In  fact  the  English  word 
prophet,  like  the  word  inspiration,  has  always  been 
used  in  a  larger  and  in  a  closer  sense.  In  the  larger 
sense  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  a  "  prophet,"  Moses 
is  a  "  prophet,"  Mahomet  is  a  "  prophet."  The 
expression  means  that  they  proclaimed  and  pub 
lished  a  new  religious  dispensation.  In  a  similar 
though  not  identical  sense,  the  Church  is  said  to 
have  a  "  prophetical,"  t.  e.  an  expository  and  inter 
pretative  office.  But  in  its  closer  sense  the  word, 
according  to  usage  though  not  according  to  ety 
mology,  involves  the  idea  of  foresight.  And  this 
is  and  always  has  been  its  more  usual  acceptation.11 
The  different  meanings,  or  shades  of  meaning,  in 
which  the  abstract  noun  is  employed  in  Scripture, 
have  been  drawn  out  by  Locke  as  follows : — •"  Pro 
phecy  comprehends  three  things:  prediction;  sing 
ing  by  the  dictate  of  the  Spirit ;  and  understanding 
and  explaining  the  mysterious,  hidden  sense  of 
Scripture,  by  an  immediate  illumination  and  motion 
of  the  Spirit "  (Paraphrase  of  1  Cor.  xii.  note, 
p.  121,  Lond.  1742).  It  is  in  virtue  of  this  last 
signification  of  the  word,  that  the  prophets  of  the 
N.  T.  are  so  called  (1  Cor.  xii.) :  by  virtue  of  the 
second,  that  the  sons  of  Asaph,  &c.  are  said  to  have 
"  prophesied  with  a  harp  "  (1  Chr.  xxv.  3),  and 
Miriam  and  Deborah  are  termed  "  prophetesses." 
That  the  idea  of  potential  if  not  actual  prediction 
enters  into  the  conception  expressed  by  the  word 
prophecy,  when  that  word  is  used  to  designate  the 
function  of  the  Hebrew  prophets,  seems  to  be  proved 
by  the  following  passages  of  Scripture,  Deut.  xviii. 
22;  Jer.  xxviii.  9 ;  Acts  ii.  30,  iii.  18,  21  ;  1  Pet. 
i.  10  ;  2  Pet.  i.  19, 20,  iii.  2.  Etymologically,  how 
ever,  it  is  certain  that  neither  prescience  nor  predic 
tion  are  implied  by  the  term  used  in  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  or  English  language. 

II.  PROPHETICAL  ORDER. — The  sacerdotal  order 
was  originally  the  instrument  by  which  the  mem 
bers  of  the  Jewish  Theocracy  were  taught  and 
governed  in  things  spiritual.  Feast  and  fast,  sacri 
fice  and  offering,  rite  and  ceremony,  constituted  a 
varied  and  ever-recurring  system  of  training  and 
teaching  by  type  and  symbol.  To  the  priests,  too, 
was  entrusted  the  work  of  "  teaching  the  children 
of  Israel  all  the  statutes  which  the  Lord  hath 
spoken  unto  them  by  the  hand  of  Moses  "  (Lev.  x. 
1 1).  Teaching  by  act  and  teach.ng  by  word  were 
alike  their  task.  This  task  they  adequately  ful 
filled  for  some  hundred  or  more  years  after  the 
giving  of  the  Law  at  Mount  Sinai.  But  during 
the  time  of  the  Judges,  the  priesthood  sank  into  a 
state  of  degeneracy,  and  the  people  were  no  longer 
affected  by  the  acted  lessons  of  the  ceremonial 
service.  They  required  less  enigmatic  warnings 
and  exhortations.  Under  these  circumstances  a 
new  moral  power  was  evoked  —  the  Prophetic 
Order.  Samuel,  himself  a  Levite,  of  the  family 
of  Kohath  (1  Chr.  vi.  28),  and  almost  certainly  a 


</>7jT«ca  had,  by  usage,  assumed  popularly  the  meaning  of 
prediction.  And  we  find  it  ordinarily  employed,  by  early 
as  well  as  by  late  writers,  in  this  sense  (sen  Polydore 
Virgil,  History  of  England,  iv.  161,  Camilen.  ed.  1846: 
Coventry  Mysteries,  p.  65,  Shakspeare  Soc.  Ed.,  1841,  ana 
Richardson,  s.  u.).  It  is  probable  that  the  meaning  wae 
"  limited  "  to  "  prediction  "  as  much  and  as  little  befor* 
Ihe  seventeenth  century  as  it  has  been  sin  ». 

3  0 


030 


PROPHET 


priest/:  was  the  instrument  used  at  once  for  effect 
ing  a  reform  in  the  sacerdotal  order  (1  Chr.  ix.  22), 
uiul  for  giving  to  the  prophets  a  position  of  im 
portance  which  they  had  never  before  held.  So 
important,  was  the  work  wrought  by  him,  that 
he  is  classed  in  Holy  Scripture  with  Moses  (Jer. 
xv.  1  ;  Ps.  xcix.  6 ;  Acts  iii.  24),  Samuel  being 
the  great  religious  reformer  and  organizer  of  the 
prophetical  order,  as  Moses  was  the  great  legislator 
and  founder  of  the  priestly  rule.  Nevertheless, 
it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Samuel  created  the 
prophetic  order  as  a  new  thing  before  unknown. 
The  germs  both  of  the  prophetic  and  of  the  regal 
order  are  found  in  the  Law  as  given  to  the  Israelites 
by  Moses  (Deut.  xiii.  1,  xviii.  20,  xvii.  18),  but 
they  were  not  yet  developed,  because  there  was  not 
yet  the  demand  for  them.  Samuel,  who  evolved 
the  one,  himself  saw  the  evolution  of  the  other. 
The  title  of  prophet  is  found  before  the  legislation 
of  Mount  Sinai.  When  Abraham  is  called  a  prophet 
\Gen.  xx.  7),  it  is  probably  in  the  sense  of  a  friend 
of  God,  to  whom  He  makes  known  His  will;  and 
in  the  same  sense  the  name  seems  to  be  applied  to 
the  patriarchs  in  general  (Ps.  cv.  15).d  Moses  is 
more  specifically  a  prophet,  as  being  a  proclaimer 
of  a  new  dispensation,  a  revealer  of  God's  will,  and 
in  virtue  of  his  divinely  inspired  songs  (Ex.  xv. ; 
Deut.  xxxii.,  xxxiii. ;  Ps.  xc.),  but  his  main  work 
was  not  prophetical,  and  he  is  therefore  formally 
distinguished  from  prophets  (Num.  xii.  6)  as  well 
as  classed  with  them  (Deut.  xviii.  15,  xxxiv.  10). 
Aaron  is  the  prophet  of  Moses  (Ex.  vii.  1)  ;  Miriam 
(Ex.  xv.  20)  is  a  prophetess  ;  and  we  find  the 
prophetic  gift  in  the  eldeis  who  "  prophesied " 
when  li  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  rested  upon  them," 
and  in  Eldad  and  Medad,  who  "  prophesied  in  the 
camp"  (Num.  xi.  27).  At  the  time  of  the  sedi 
tion,  of  Miriam,  the  possible  existence  of  prophets 
is  recognized  (Num.  xii.  fi).  In  the  days  of  the 
Judges  we  find  that  Deborah  (Judg.  iv.  4)  is  a 
prophetess ;  a  prophet  (Judg.  vi.  8)  rebukes  and 
sxhorts  the  Israelites  when  oppressed  by  the  Mi- 
diahites;  and,  in  Samuel's  childhood,  "a  man  of 
God  "  predicts  to  Eli  the  death  of  his  two  sons,  and 
the  curse  that  was  to  fall  on  his  descendants  (1  Sam. 
ii.  27). 

Samuel  took  measures  to  make  his  work  of 
restoration  permanent  as  well  as  effective  for  the 
moment.  For  this  purpose  he  instituted  Com 
panies,  or  Colleges  of  Prophets.  One  we  find  in 
his  lifetime  at  Ramah  (1  Sam.  xix.  19,  20)  ;  others 


PROPHET 

afterwards  at  Bethel  (2  K.  ii.  3),  Jericho  (2  K.  ii 
5),  Gilgal  (2  K.  iv.  38),  and  elsewhere  (2  K. 
vi.  1).  Their  constitution  and  object  were  similai 
to  those  of  Theological  Colleges.  Into  them  were 
gathered  promising  students,  and  here  they  were 
trained  for  the  office  which  they  were  afterwards 
destined  to  fulfil.  So  successful  were  these  insti 
tutions,  that  from  the  time  of  Samuel  to  the  clos 
ing  of  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  there 
seems  never  to  have  been  wanting  a  due  supply 
of  men  to  keep  up  the  line  of  official  projJiets.* 
The  apocryphal  books  of  the  Maccabees  (i.  iv.  4(>t 
ix.  27,  xiv.  41)  and  of  Ecclesiasticus  (xxxvi.  15) 
represent  them  as  extinct.  The  colleges  appear  to 
have  consisted  of  students  differing  in  number. 
Sometimes  they  were  very  numerous  (1  K.  xviii.  4, 
xxii.  6;  2  K.  ii.  16).  One  elderly,  or  leading 
prophet,  presided  over  them  (1  Sam.  rix.  20), 
called  their  Father  (1  Sam.  x.  12),  or  Master 
(2  K.  ii.  3),  who  was  apparently  admitted  to  his 
office  by  the  ceremony  of  anointing  (I  K.  xix.  16  ; 
Is.  Ixi.  1;  Ps.  cv.  15).  They  were  called  his 
sons.  Their  chief  subject  of  study  was,  no 
doubt,  the  Law  and  its  interpretation  ;  oral,  as 
distinct  from  symbolical,  teaching  being  hence 
forward  tacitly  transferred  from  the  priestly 
to  the  prophetical  order.*  Subsidiary  subjects 
of  instruction  were  music  and  sacred  poetry, 
both  of  which  had  been  connected  with  piophecy 
from  the  time  of  Moses  (Ex.  xv.  20)  aud  the 
Judges  (Judg.  iv.  4,  v.  1).  The  prophets  that  meet 
Saul  "  came  down  from  the  high  place  with  a 
psaltery  and  a  tabret,  and  a  pipe  and  a  harp  before 
them"  (1  Sam.  x.  5).  Elijah  calls  a  minstrel  to 
evoke  the  prophetic  gift  in  himself  (2  K.  iii.  15). 
David  "separates  to  the  service  of  the  son?  of 
Asaph  and  of  Heman  and  of  Jeduthun,  who  should 
prophesy  with  harps  and  with  psalteries  and  with 
cymbals.  .  .  All  these  were  under  the  hands  of 
their  father  for  song  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  with 
cymbals,  psalteries,  and  harps  for  the  service  of 
the  house  of  God"  (1  Chr.  xxv.  16).  Hymns,  or 
sacred  songs,  are  found  in  the  Books  of  Jonah 
(ii.  2),  Isaiah  (xii.  1,  xxvi.  1),  Habakkuk  (iii. 
2).  And  it  was  probably  the  duty  of  the  pro 
phetical  students  to  compose  verses  to  be  sung  in 
the  Temple.  (See  Lowth,  Saci-ed  Poetry  of  the 
Hebrews,  Lect.  xviii.)  Having  been  themselves 
trained  and  taught,  the  prophets,  whether  still  re 
siding  within  their  college,  or  having  left  its  pre 
cincts,  had  the  task  of  teaching  others.  From 


«  Dr.  Stanley  (Lect.  xviii.)  declares  it  to  be  "doubtful 
if  he  was  of  LevltlcaL  descent,  and  certain  that  he  was 
not  a  priest."  If  the  record  of  1  Chr.  vi.  28  is  correct, 
it  is  certain  that  he  was  a  Levite  by  descent  though 
»n  Ephrathlte  by  habitation  (1  Sam.  1.  1).  There  is  every 
probability  that  he  was  a  priest  (cf.  1  Sam.  i.  22,  ii.  11, 
18,  vli.  5,  17,  x.  1,  xiil.  ll)-and  no  presumption  to  the 
Contrary.  The  fact  on  which  Dr.  Stanley  relies,  that 
Samuel  lived  "not  at  Gibeon  or  at  Nob  but  at  Kamah," 
and  that  "  the  prophetic  schools  were  at  Ramah,  and  at 
Bethel,  and  at  Gilgal,  not  at  Hebron  and  Anathoth," 
does  not  suffice  to  raise  a  presumption.  As  Judge, 
Samuel  would  have  lived  where  it  was  most  suitable 
for  the  Judge  to  dwell.  Of  the  three  colleges,  that  at 
Itecnah  was  alone  founded  by  Samuel,  of  course  where 
he  liveJ,  himself,  and  even  where  Ramah  was  we  do  not 
know :  one  of  the  lato*t  hypotheses  places  it  two  miles 
.*rt>m  Hebron. 

d  According  to  Hengstenberg's  view  of  prophecy, 
A  brahaia  was  a  prophet  because  he  received  revelations 
fcy  the  meant  qf  dream  and  vision  (Gen.  xv.  12). 

«  There  seems  no  sufficient  ground   for  the  common 


statement  that,  after  the  schism,  the  colleges  existed  only 
in  the  Israelltish  kingdom,  or  for  Knobels  supposition 
that  they  ceased  with  Elisha  (Prophetismus,  ii.  39), 
nor  again  for  Bishop  Lowth's  statement  that  "  they 
existed  from  the  earliest  times  of  the  Hebrew  republic  " 
(Sacred  Poetry,  Lect.  xviii.),  or  for  M.  Nicolas'  assertion 
that  their  previous  establishment  can  be  inferred  from 
1  Sam.  v:ii.  ix.  x.  (Etudes  critiquet  sur  la  Bible,  p.  365). 
We  have,  however,  no  actual  p>-oof  of  their  existence 
except  in  the  days  of  Samuel  and  of  Elijah  and  Klisha. 

t  It  is  a  vulgar  error  respecting  Jewish  history  to 
suppose  that  there  was  an  antagonism  between  the 
prophets  and  the  priests.  There  is  not  a  trace  of  such 
antagonism.  Isaiuh  may  denounce  a  wicked  hierarchy 
(i.  10),  but  it  is  because  it  is  wicked,  not  because  it  is 
a  hierarchy.  Malachi  "sharply  reproves"  the  priests 
(ii.  1),  but  It  is  in  order  to  support  the  priesthood 
(cf.  i.  14).  Mr.  F.  \\.  Newman  even  designates  Ezekiel's 
writings  as  "  hard  sacerdotalism,"  "  tedious  and  iinedify- 
Ing  as  1-eviticus  Itself"  (ffebr.  Monarch,  p.  330).  Tbe 
Prophetical  Order  was,  in  truth,  supplemental  not  an 
tagonistic  to  the  SaoerdoUL, 


PROPHET 

the  question  addressed  to  the  Shunamite  by  her 
Dusbaud,  "  Wherefore  wilt  thou  go  to  him  to-day? 
It  i*  neither  new  moon  nor  Sabbath"  (2  K.  iv. 
23),  it  appears  that  weekly  and  monthly  religious 
meetings  were  held  as  an  ordinary  practice  by  the 
prophets  (see  Patrick,  Comm.  in  foe.).  Thus  we 
find  that  "  Elisha  sat  in  his  house,"  engaged  in  his 
official  occupation  (cf.  Ezek.  viii.  1,  xiv.  1,  xx.  IV 
"  and  the  elders  sat  with  him "  (2  K.  vi.  32), 
when  the  King  of  Israel  sent  to  slay  him.  It  was 
lit  these  meetings,  probably,  that  many  of  the 
warnings  and  exhortations  on  morality  and  spiritual 
religion  were  addressed  by  the  prophets  to  their 
countrymen.  The  general  appearance  and  life  of 
the  prophet  were  very  similar  to  those  of  the 
Eastern  dervish  at  the  present  day.  His  dress 
was  a  hairy  garment,  girt  with  a  leathern  girdle 
(Is.  xx.  2 ;  Zech.  xiii.  4 ;  Matt.  iii.  4).  He  was 
married  or  unmarried  as  he  chose ;  but  his  manner 
of  life  and  diet  were  stern  and  austere  (2  1C.  iv. 
10,  38  ;  IK.  xix.  6  ;  Matt.  iii.  4). 

III.  THE  PROPHETIC  GIFT. — We  have  been 
speaking  of  the  Prophetic  Order.  To  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order  and  to  possess  the  prophetic  gift 
are  not  convertible  terms.  There  might  be  mem 
bers  of  the  prophetic  order  to  whom  the  gift  of 
prophecy  was  not  vouchsafed.  There  might  be 
inspired  prophets,  who  did  not  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order.  Generally,  the  inspired  prophet 
came  from  the  College  of  the  Prophets,  and  be 
longed  to  the  prophetic  order ;  but  this  was  not 
always  the  case.  In  the  instance  of  the  Prophet 
Amos,  the  rule  and  the  exception  are  both  mani 
fested.  When  Amaziah,  the  idolatrous  Israelitish 
priest,  threatens  the  prophet,  and  desires  him  to 
"flee  away  into  the  land  of  Judah,  and  there  eat 
bread  and  prophesy  there,  but  not  to  prophesy 
again  any  more  at  Bethel,"  Amos  in  reply  says, 
"  I  was  no  prophet,  neither  was  I  a  prophet's  son ; 
but  I  was  an  herdsman,  and  a  gatherer  of  sycamore 
fruit ;  and  the  Lord  took  me  as  I  followed  the  rlock, 
and  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  Go  prophesy  unto  my 
people  Israel"  (vii.  14).  That  is,  though  called 
to  the  prophetic  office,  he  did  not  belong  to  the 
prophetic  order,  and  had  not  been  trained  in  the 
prophetical  colleges ;  and  this,  he  indicates,  was  an 
unusual  occurrence.  (See  J.  Smith  on  Prophecy, 
c.  ix.). 

The  sixteen  prophets  whose  books  are  in  the 
Canon  have  therefore  that  place  of  honour,  because 
they  were  endowed  with  the  prophetic  gift  as  well 
as  ordinarily  (so  far  as  we  know)  belonging  to  the 
prophetic  order.  There  were  hundreds  of  prophets 
contemporary  with  each  of  these  sixteen  prophets ; 
and  no  doubt  numberless  compositions  in  sacred 
poetry  and  numberless  moral  exhortations  were 
issued  from  the  several  schools,  but  only  sixteen 
books  find  their  place  in  the  Canon.  Why  is  this  ? 
Because  these  sixteen  had  what  their  brother- 
collegians  had  not,  the  Divine  call  to  the  office  of 
prophet,  and  the  Divine  illumination  to  enlighten 
them.  It  was  not  sufficient  to  have  been  taught 
and  trained  in  preparation  for  a  future  call.  Teach 
ing  and  training  served  as  a  preparation  only. 
When  the  schoolmaster's  work  was  done,  then,  if 
the  instrument  was  worthy,  God's  work  began. 


PROPHET 


931 


Moses  had  an  external  call  at  the  burning  bush 
(Ex.  iii.  2).  The  Lord  called  Samuel,  so  fh;it  L\. 
perceived,  and  Samuel  learned,  that  it  was  the  Lord 
who  called  him  (I  Sam.  iii.  10).  Isaiah  (vi.  81. 
Jeremiah  (i.  5),  Ezekiel  (ii.  4),  Amos  (vii.  15), 
declare  their  special  mission.  Nor  was  it  sufficient 
for  this  call  to  have  been  made  once  for  all.  Each 
prophetical  utterance  is  the  result  of  a  communi 
cation  of  the  Divine  to  the  human  spirit,  received 
either  by  "  vision"  (Is.  vi.  1)  or  by  "  the  word  of 
the  Lord"  (Jer.  ii.  1).  (See  Aids  to  Faith,  Essay 
iii.,  "  On  Prophecy.")  What  then  are  the  charac 
teristics  of  the  sixteen  prophets,  thus  called  and 
commissioned,  and  entrusted  with  the  messages  of 
God  to  His  people  ? 

(1.)  They  were  the  national  poets  of  Judaea. 
We  have  already  showu  that  music  and  poetry, 
chants  and  hymns,  were  a  main  part  of  the  studies  of 
the  class  from  which,  generally  speaking,  they  were 
derived.  As  is  natural,  we  find  not  only  the  songs 
previously  specified,  but  the  rest  of  their  compo 
sitions,  poetical  or  breathing  the  spirit  of  poetry  .C 
(2.)  They  were  annalists  and  historians.  A  great 
portion  of  Isaiah,  of  Jeremiah,  of  Daniel,  of  Jonah, 
of  Haggai,  is  direct  or  indirect  history. 

(3.)  They  were  preachers  of  patriotism ;  their 
patriotism  being  founded  on  the  religious  motive. 
To  the  subject  of  the  Theocracy,  the  enemy  of  his 
nation  was  the  enemy  of  God,  the  traitor  to  the 
public  weal  was  a  traitor  to  his  God  ;  a  denunciation 
of  an  enemy  was  a  denunciation  of  a  representa 
tive  of  evil,  an  exhortation  in  behalf  of  Jerusalem 
was  an  exhortation  in  behalf  of  God's  Kingdom  on 
earth,  "  the  city  of  our  God,  the  mountain  of 
holiness,  beautiful  for  situation,  the  joy  of  the 
whole  earth,  the  city  of  the  great  King "  (Ps. 
xlviii.  1,  2). 

(4.)  They  were  preachers  of  morals  and  of  spiri 
tual  religion.  The  symbolical  teaching  of  the  Law 
had  lost  much  of  its  effect.  Instead  of  learning  the 
necessity  of  purity  by  the  legal  washings,  the  ma 
jority  came  to  rest  in  the  outward  act  as  in  itself 
sufficient.  It  was  the  work,  then,  of  the  prophets  to 
hold  up  before  the  eyes  of  their  countrymen  a  high 
and  pure  morality,  not  veiled  in  symbols  and  acts, 
but  such  as  none  could  profess  to  misunderstand. 
Thus,  in  his  first  chapter,  Isaiah  contrasts  ceremo 
nial  observances  with  spiritual  morality :  "  Your 
new  moons  and  your  appointed  feasts  my  soul 
hateth :  they  are  a  trouble  to  me ;  I  am  weary  to 

bear  them Wash  you,  make  you  clean  ;  put 

away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine  eyes ; 
cease  to  do  evil ;  learn  to  do  well ;  seek  judgment ; 
relieve  the  oppressed,  judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for 
the  widow"  (i.  14-17).  He  proceeds  to  denounce 
God's  judgments  on  the  oppression  and  covetous- 
ness  of  the  rulers,  the  pride  of  the  women  (c.  iii.}, 
on  grasping,  profligacy,  iniquity,  injustice  (c.  v.), 
and  so  on  throughout.  The  system  of  morals  put 
forward  by  the  prophets  if  not  higher,  or  sterner, 
or  purer  than  that  of  the  Law,  is  more  plainly  de 
clared,  and  with  greater,  because  now  more  needed, 
vehemence  of  diction.* 

(5.)  They  were  extraordinary,  but  yet  authorized, 
exponents  of  the  Law.  As  an  instance  of  this,  we 
may  take  Isaiah's  description  of  a  true  fast  (Iviii. 


g  Bishop  Lowth  "  esteems  the  whole  Book  of  Isaiah 
poetical,  a  few  passages  exempted,  which,  if  brought 
together,  would  not  at  most  exceed  the  bulk  of  fivg  ?r 
six  chapters,"  "  half  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah,"  ••  the 
greater  part  of  Ezekiel."  The  rest  of  the  prophets  are 
mainly  poetical,  but  Haggai  is  "  prosaic,"  and  Jonah  and 


Daniel  are  plain  prose  (Sacred  Poetry,  Lect.  xxi.). 

t>  "  Magna  fides  et  grandis  audacia  Prophetarum,"  says 
Sf  Jerome  (in  Ezek).  This  was  their  general  character 
istic,  but  that  gifts  and  graces  might  be  disseveral,  is 
proved  by  the  cases  of  Balaam,  Jonah,  Caiaphas,  and  ilu 
disobedient  prophet  of  JxuUih. 

a  o  2 


932 


PROPHET 


3-7) ;  E«pkii'l's  explanation  of  the  sins  of  the  fathei 
teing  visited  on  the  children  <r.  xviii.)  ;  Micah '&  pre 
ference  of  "  doing  justly,  loving  mercy,  and  walking 
humbly  with  God,"  to  "  thousands  of  rams  and  te 
thousands  of  rivers  of  oil "  (vi.  6-8).  In  these 
as  in  other  similar  cases  (cf.  Hos.  vi.  6 ;  Amos 
v.  21),  it  was  the  task  of  the  prophets  to  restor 
the  balance  which  had  been  overthrown  by  the 
Jews  and  their  teachers  dwelling  on  one  side  or  on 
the  outer  covering  of  a  truth  or  of  a  duty,  anc 
leaving  the  other  side  or  the  inner  meaning  out  o" 
right. 

(6.)  They  held,  as  we  have  shown  above,  a 
jiastoval  or  quasi-pastoral  office. 

(7.)  They  were  a  political  power  in  the  state. 
Strong  in  the  safeguard  of  their  religious  character, 
they  were  able  to  serve  as  a  counterpoise  to  the 
royal  authority  when  wielded  even  by  an  Ahab. 

(8.)  But  the  prophets  were  something  more  than 
national  poets  and  annalists,  preachei's  of  patriotism, 
moral  teachers,  exponents  of  the  Law,  pastors,  and 
politicians.  We  have  not  yet  touched  upon  theii 
most  essential  characteristic,  which  is,  that  they 
were  instruments  of  revealing  God's  will  to  man, 
as  in  other  ways,  so,  specially,  by  predicting 
future  events,  and,  in  particular,  by  foretelling  the 
incarnation  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  re 
demption  effected  by  Him.1  There  are  two  chief 
ways  of  exhibiting  this  fact:  one  is  suitable  when 
discoursing  with  Christians,  the  other  when  argu 
ing  with  unbelievers.  To  the  Christian  it  is 
enough  to  show  that  the  truth  of  the  New  Testa 
ment  and  the  truthfulness  of  its  authors,  and  of 
the  Lord  Himself,  are  bound  up  with  the  truth 
of  the  existence  of  this  predictive  element  in  the 
prophets.  To  the  unbeliever  it  is  necessary  to  show 
that  facts  have  verified  their  predictions. 

(a.)  In  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  the  first  chapter, 
we  find  a  quotation  from  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  "Be 
hold  a  virgin  shall  be' with  child,  and  shall  bring 
forth  a  son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name  Em 
manuel  ;"  and,  at  the  same  time,  we  find  a  state 
ment  that  the  birth  of  Christ  took  place  as  it  did 
"  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  of  the 
Lord  by  the  prophet,"  in  those  words  (i.  22,  23). 
This  means  that  the  prophecy  was  the  declaration 
01  God's  purpose,  and  that  the  circumstances  of  the 
birth  of  Christ  were  the  fulfilment  of  that  purpose. 
Then,  either  the  predictive  element  exists  in  the 
Book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  or  the  authority  of  the 
Evangelist  St.  Matthew  must  be  given  up.  The 
same  Evangelist  testifies  to  the  same  Prophet  having 


PROPHET 

"  qwken  of "  John  the  Baptist  (iii.  3)  in  worot 
which  he  quc'.es  from  Is.  xl.  3.  He  saja  (ir.  IS 
IS)  that  Jesus  came  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum, 
"  that "  other  words  "  spoken  by  "  the  same  Pro 
phet  (ix.  1)  "might  be  fulfilled."  He  says  (viii. 
17)  that  Jesus  did  certain  acts,  "  that  it  might  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet " 
(Is.  liii.  4).  He  says  (xii.  17)  that  Jesus  acted  in 
a  particular  manner,  "  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet"  in  words 
quoted  from  chap.  xlii.  1.  Then,  if  we  believe  St. 
Matthew,  we  must  believe  that  in  the  pages  cf  the 
Prophet  Isaiah  there  was  predicted  that  which 
Jesus  some  seven  hundred  years  afterwards  fulfilled.1- 
But,  further,  we  have  not  only  the  evidence  of  the 
Evangelist ;  we  have  the  evidence  of  the  Lord  Him 
self.  He  declares  (Matt.  xiii.  14)  that  in  the  Jews 
of  his  age  "  is  fulfilled  the  prophecy  of  Esaias,  which 
saith — "  (Is.  vi.  9).  He  says  (Matt.  xv.  7)  "  Esaias 
well  prophesied  of  them"  (Is.  xxix.  13).  Then,  if  we 
believe  our  Lord's  sayings  and  the  record  of  them, 
we  must  believe  in  prediction  as  existing  in  the 
Prophet  Isaiah.  This  prophet,  who  is  cited  be 
tween  fifty  and  sixty  times,  may  be  taken  as  a 
sample ;  but  the  same  argument  might  be  brought 
forward  with  respect  to  Jeremiah  (Matt.  ii.  18; 
Heb.  viii.  8),  Daniel  (Matt.  xxiv.  15),  Hosea  (Matt, 
ii.  15;  Rom.  ix.  25),  Joel  (Acts  ii.  17),  Amos 
(Acts  vii.  42  ;  xv.  16),  Jonah  (Matt.  xii.  40),  Micah 
(Matt.  xii.  7),  Habakkuk  (Acts  xiii.  41),  Haggai 
(Heb.  xii.  26),  Zechariah  (Matt.  xxi.  5 ;  Mark  xiv. 
27;  Joh.  xix.  37),  Malachi  (Matt.  xi.  10;  Mark  i. 
2  ;  Luke  vii.  27).  With  this  evidence  for  so  many 
of  the  prophets,  it  would  be  idle  to  cavil  with 
respect  to  Ezekiel,  Obadiah,  Nahum,  Zephaniah ; 
the  more,  as  "the  Prophets"  are  frequently 
spoken  of  together  (Matt.  ii.  23;  Acts  xiii.  40;  xv. 
15)  as  authoritative.  The  Psalms  are  quoted  no 
less  than  seventy  times,  and  very  frequently  as 
being  predictive. 

(/}.)  The  argument  with  the  unbeliever  does  not 
admit  of  being  brought  to  an  issue  so  concisely. 
Here  it  is  necessary  (1)  to  point  out  the  existence 
of  certain  declarations  as  to  future  events,  the  pro 
bability  of  which  was  not  discernible  by  human 
sagacity  at  the  time  that  the  declarations  were 
made ;  (2)  to  show  that  certain  events  did  after 
wards  take  place  corresponding  with  these  declara 
tions  ;  (3)  to  show  that  a  chance  coincidence  is  not 
an  adequate  hypothesis  on  which  to  account  for 
that  correspondence. 

Davison,  in  his  valuable  Discourses  on  Prophecy, 


1  Dr.  Davidson  pronounces  it  as  "  now  commonly 
admitted  that  the  essential  part  of  biblical  prophecy  does 
not  lie  in  predicting  contingent  events,  but  in  divining 
the  essentially  religions  in  the  course  of  history.  ...  In 
no  prophecy  can  it  be  shown  that  the  literal  predicting  of 
distant  historical  events  Is  contained.  ...  In  conformity 
with  the  analogy  of  prophecy  generally,  special  predic 
tions  concerning  Christ  do  not  appear  in  the  Old  Testa 
ment."  Dr.  Davidson  must  mean  that  this  Is  "  now 
commonly  admitted "  by  writers  like  himself,  who,  fol 
lowing  Kichhorn,  resolve  "  the  prophet's  delineations  of 
the  future "  into  "  in  essence  nothing  but  forebodings 
— efforts  of  the  tpirilual  eye  to  bring  up  before  itself 
the  distinct  form  of  the  future.  The  prevision  of  the 
prophet  Is  intensified  presentiment."  Of  course,  if  the 
Dowers  of  the  prophets  were  simply  "  forebodings  "  and 
"presentiments"  of  the  human  spirit  in  "its  pre- 
tonscious  region,"  they  could  not  do  more  than  make 
Indefinite  guesses  about  the  future.  But  this  is  not 
the  Jewish  nsr  the  Christian  theory  of  prophecy.  See 
ii.  Basil  (in  Etai.  lit.),  S.  Chrys.  (Horn.  xxlL  t.  v. 


137,  ed.  1612),  Clem.  Alex.  (Strom.  1.  ii.),  Euseb.  (Dem. 
Evang.  v.  132,  ed.  1544),  and  Justin  Martyr  (Dial,  cum 
Tryph.  p.  224,  ed.  1636).  (See  Suicer,  *.  v.  irpo^jJTTjs.) 

This  conclusion  cannot  be  escaped  by  pressing  the 
words  Iva  ir\rip<a6fj,  for  if  they  do  not  mean  that  certain 
things  were  done  In  order  that  the  Divine  predestination 
might  be  accomplished,  which  predestination  was  already 
declared  by  the  Prophet,  they  must  mean  that  Jesus 
Christ  knowingly  moulded  his  acts  so  as  to  be  In  accord 
ance  with  what  was  said  in  an  ancient  book  which  in 
reality  had  no  reference  to  him,  a  thing  which  is  entirely 
at  variance  with  the  character  drawn  of  him  by  St.  Mat 
thew,  and  which  would  make  him  a  conscious  impostor, 
nasmuch  as  he  himself  appeals  to  the  prophecies.  Further, 
t  would  Imply  (as  in  Matt.  i.  22)  that  God  Himself  con- 
;rived  certain  events  (as  those  connected  wit*  the  birth 
of  Christ),  not  in  order  that  they  might  be  in  accordance 
with  His  will,  but  in  order  that  they  might  be  agreeabla 
to  the  declarations  of  a  cerUin  book— than  which  nothing 
could  well  be  more  absurd. 


PROPHET 

fires  a  "Ciitevion  of  Prophecy,"  and  in  accord 
ance  with  it  he  describes  "  the  conditions  which 
would  confer  cogency  of  evidence  on  single  ex 
amples  of  prophecy,"  in  the  following  manner: 
first,  "the  known  promulgation  of  the  prophecy 
prior  to  the  event ;  secondly,  the  clear  and  pal 
pable  fulfilment  of  it;  lastly,  the  nature  of  the 
event  itself,  if  when  the  prediction  of  it  was 
given,  it  lay  rtmote  from  human  view,  and  was 
such  as  could  not  be  foreseen  by  any  suppos- 
able  effort  of  reason,  or  be  deduced  upon  princi 
ples  of  calculation  derived  from  probability  and 
experience "  (Disc.  viii.  p.  378).  Applying  his 
test,  the  learned  writer  finds  that  the  establishment 
of  the  Christian  Religion  and  the  person  of  its 
Founder  were  predicted  when  neither  reason  nor 
experience  could  have  anticipated  them ;  and  that 
the  predictions  respecting  them  have  been  clearly 
fulfilled  in  history.  Here,  then,  is  an  adequate 
proof  of  an  inspired  prescience  in  the  prophets 
who  predicted  these  things.  He  applies  his  test  to 
the  prophecies  recorded  of  the  Jewish  people,  and 
their  actual  state,  to  the  prediction  of  the  great 
apostasy  and  to  the  actual  state  of  corrupted  Chris 
tianity,  and  finally  to  the  prophecies  relating  to 
Nineveh,  Babylon,  Tyre,  Egypt,  the  Ishmaelites, 
and  the  Four  Empires,  and  to  the  events  which 
have  befallen  them ;  and  in  each  of  these  cases  he 
finds  proof  of  the  existence  of  the  predictive  ele 
ment  in  the  prophets. 

In  the  Book  of  Kings  we  find  Micaiah  the  son  of 
Imlah  uttering  a  challenge,  by  which  his  predic 
tive  powers  were  to  be  judged.  He  had  pronounced, 
by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  that  Ahab  should  fall  at 
Ramoth-Gilead.  Ahab,  in  return,  commanded  him 
to  be  shut  up  in  prison  until  he  came  back  in 
peace.  "  And  Micaiah  said,  If  thou  return  at  all  in 
peace"  (that  is,  if  the  event  does  not  verify  my 
words),  "  the  Lord  hath  not  spoken  by  me  "  (that 
is,  I  am  no  prophet  capable  of  predicting  the  future) 
(IK.  xxii.  28).  The  test  is  sound  as  a  negative  test, 
and  so  it  is  laid  down  in  the  Law  (Deut.  xviii.  22)  ; 
but  as  a  positive  test  it  would  not  be  sufficient. 
Ahab's  death  at  Ramoth-Gilead  did  not  prove  Mi- 
caiah's  predictive  powers,  though  his  escape  would 
have  disproved  them.  But  here  we  must  notice  a 
very  important  difference  between  single  prophecies 
and  a  series  of  prophecy.  The  fulfilment  of  a 
single  prophecy  does  not  prove  the  prophetical 
power  of  the  prophet,  but  the  fulfilment  of  a  long 
series  of  prophecies  by  a  series  or  number  of  events 
does  in  itself  constitute  a  proof  that  the  prophecies 
were  intended  to  pi-edict  the  events,  and,  conse 
quently,  that  predictive  power  resided  in  the  pro 
phet  or  prophets.  We  may  see  this  in  the  so  far 
parallel  cases  of  satirical  writings.  We  know  for 
certain  that  Aristophanes  refers  to  Cleon,  Pericles, 
Nicias  (and  we  should  be  equally  sure  of  it  were 
his  satire  more  concealed  than  it  is)  simply  from 
the  fact  of  a  number  of  satirical  hits  converging 
together  on  the  object  of  his  satire.  One,  two,  or 
three  strokes  might  be  intended  for  more  persons 
than  one,  but  the  addition  of  each  stroke  makes  the 
aim  more  apparent,  and  when  we  have  a  sufficient 
number  before  us  we  can  no  longer  possibly  doubt 
his  design.  The  same  may  be  said  of  fables,  and 
rtill  more  of  allegories.  The  fact  of  a  complicated 
lock  being  opened  by  a  key  shows  that  the  lock  and 
key  were  meant  for  each  other.  Now  the  Messianic 
picture  drawn  by  the  prophets  as  a  body  contains 
At  least  as  many  traits  as  these : — That  salvation 
should  come  through  the  family  of  Abraham,  Isaac, 


PROPHET 


<J33 


Jacob,  Judah,  David  :  that  at  the  time  of  the  final 
absorption  of  the  Jewish  power,  Shiloh  (the  trail 
quilliser)  should  gather  the  nations  under  his  rule, 
that  there  should  be  a  great  Prophet,  typified  bj 
Moses ;  a  King  descended  from  David  ;  a  Priest  foi 
ever,  typified  by  Melchisedek :  that  there  should  be 
born  into  the  world  a  child  to  be  called  Mighty 
God,  Eternal  Father,  Prince  of  Peace :  that  there 
should  be  a  Righteous  Servant  of  God  on  whom  the 
Lord  would  lay  the  iniquity  of  all:  that  Messiah 
the  Prince  should  be  cut  off,  but  not  for  himself: 
that  an  everlasting  kingdom  should  be  given  by  the 
Ancient  of  Days  to  one  like  the  Son  of  Man.  It 
seems  impossible  to  harmonise  so  many  apparent 
contradictions.  Nevertheless  it  is  an  undoubted 
fact  that,  at  the  time  seemingly  pointed  out  by  one 
or  more  of  these  predictions,  there  was  born  into 
the  world  a  child  of  the  house  of  David,  and  there 
fore  of  the  family  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  .Jacob,  and 
Judah,  who  claimed  to  be  the  object  of  these  and 
other  predictions ;  who  is  acknowledged  as  Prophet. 
Priest,  and  King,  as  Mighty  God  and  yet  as  God's 
Righteous  Servant  who  bears  the  iniquity  of  all ; 
who  was  cut  off,  and  whose  death  is  acknowledged 
not  to  have  been  for  his  own,  but  for  others'  good  ; 
who  has  instituted  a  spiritual  kingdom  on  earth, 
which  kingdom  is  of  a  nature  to  continue  for  ever, 
if  there  is  any  continuance  beyond  this  world  and 
this  life ;  and  in  whose  doings  and  sufferings  on 
earth  a  number  of  specific  predictions  were  minutely 
fulfilled.  Then  we  may  say  that  we  have  here  a 
series  of  prophecies  which  are  so  applicable  to  the 
person  and  earthly  life  of  Jesus  Christ  as  to  be 
thereby  shown  to  have  been  designed  to  apply  to 
Him.  And  if  they  were  designed  to  apply  to  Him, 
prophetical  prediction  is  proved. 

Objections  have  been  urged: — 1.  Vagueness. — It 
has  been  said  that  the  prophecies  are  too  darkly 
and  vaguely  worded  to  be  proved  predictive  by  the 
events  which  they  are  alleged  to  foretell.  This 
objection  is  stated  with  clearness  and  force  by  Am- 
mon.  He  says,  "  Such  simple  sentences  as  the  fol 
lowing:  Israel  has  not  to  expect  a  king,  but  a 
teacher ;  this  teacher  will  be  born  at  Bethlehem 
during  the  reign  of  Herod;  he  will  lay  down  his 
life  under  Tiberius,  in  attestation  of  the  truth  of 
his  religion  ;  through  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  the  complete  extinction  of  the  Jewish  state,  lie 
will  spread  his  doctrine  in  every  quarter  of  the 
world — a  few  sentences  like  these,  expressed  in 
plain  historical  prose,  would  not  only  bear  the 
character  of  true  predictions,  but,  when  once  their 
genuineness  was  proved,  they  would  be  of  incom 
parably  greater  worth  to  us  than  all  the  oracles  of 
the  Old  Testament  taken  together"  (Christology, 
p.  12).  But  to  this  it  might  be  answered,  and 
has  been  in  effect  answered  by  Hengsteiiberg — 1. 
That  God  never  forces  men  to  be!kve,  but  that 
there  is  such  an  union  of  definiteness  and  vagueness 
in  the  prophecies  as  to  enable  those  who  are  willing 
to  discover  the  truth,  while  the  wilfully  blind  are 
not  forcibly  constrained  to  see  it.  2.  That,  had  the 
prophecies  been  couched  in  the  form  of  direct  de 
clarations,  their  fulfilment  would  have  thereby 
been  rendered  impossible,  or,  at  least,  capable  ol 
frustration.  3.  That  the  effect  of  prophecy  (e.g. 
with  reference  to  the  time  of  the  Messiah's  coining) 
would  have  been  far  less  beneficial  to  believei-s,  as 
being  less  adapted  to  keep  them  in  a  state  of  con 
stant  expectation.  4.  That  the  Messiah  of  Revela 
tion  could  not  be  so  clearly  portrayed  in  hi< 
varied  character  as  God  and  Man,  as  1'rophtt,  Fr.cat 


J34 


PROPHET 


and  King,  if  he  had  been  the  mere  "  teacher " 
which  is  all  that  Amnion  Acknowledges  him  to  be. 
5.  That  the  state  of  the  Prophets,  at  the  time  of 
receiving  the  Divine  revelation,  was  (as  we  shall 
presently  sho;v)  such  as  necessarily  to  make  their 
predictions  fragmentary,  figurative,  and  abstracted 
from  the  relations  of  time.  6.  That  some  portions 
of  the  prophecies  were  intended  to  be  of  double  appli 
cation,  and  some  portions  to  be  understood  only  on 
their  fulfilment  (cf.  John,  xiv.  29 ;  Ez.  xxxvi.  33). 

2.  Obscurity  of  a  part  or  parts  of  a  prophecy 
otherwise  clear. — The  objection  drawn  from  "  the 
unintelligibleness  of  one  part  of  a  prophecy,  as  in 
validating  the  proof  of  foresight  arising  from  the 
evident  completion  of  those  parts  which  are  under 
stood"  is  akin  to  that  drawn  from  the  vagueness  of 
the  whole  of  it.     And  it  may  be  answered  with  the 
same  arguments,  to  which  we  may  add  the  con 
sideration   urged    by   Butler   that   it   is,   for   the 
argument  in  hand,  the  same  as  if  the  parts  not 
understood  were  written  in  cipher  or  not  written 
at  all  : — "  Suppose  a  writing,  partly  in  cipher  and 
partly   in   plain   words  at   length ;    and   that  in 
the  part  one  understood   there  appeared   mention 
of  several  known  facts — it  would  never  come  into 
any  man's  thought  to  imagine  that,  if  he  under 
stood  the  whole,  perhaps  he  might  find  that  these 
tacts  were  not  in  reality  known  by  the  writer" 
(Analogy,  pt.  ii.  c.  vii.).     Furthermore,  if  it  be 
true  that  prophecies  relating  to  the  first  coming 
of  ths   Messiah  refer  also   to   his  second  coming, 
some  part  of  those  prophecies  must  necessarily  be  as 
yet  not  fully  understood. 

It  would  appear  from  these  considerations  that 
Dayison's  second  "  condition,"  above  quoted,  "  the 
clear  and  palpable  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy," 
should  be  so  far  modified  as  to  take  into  account 
tne  necessary  difficulty,  more  or  less  great,  in  re 
cognising  the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy  which  re 
sults  from  the  necessary  vagueness  and  obscurity  of 
the  prophecy  itself. 

3.  Application  of  the  several  prophecies  to  a 
more  immediate  subject. — It  has  been  the  task  of 
many  Biblical  critics  to  examine  the  different  pas 
sages  which  are  alleged  to  be  predictions  of  Christ, 
and  to  show  that  they  were  delivered  in  reference  to 
some  person  or  thing  contemporary  with,  or  shortly 
subsequent  to,  the  time  of  the  writer.     The  con 
clusion  is  then  drawn,  sometimes  scornfully,  some 
times  as  an  inference  not  to  be  resisted,  that  the 
passages  in  question  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Messiah.      We  have  here  to  distinguish  carefully 
between  the  conclusion  proved,  and  the  corollary 
drawn  from  it.     Let  it  be  granted  that  it  may  be 
proved   of  all  the  predictions  of  the  Messiah — it 
certainly  may  be  proved  of  many — that  they  pri 
marily  apply  to  some  historical  and  present  fact: 
in  that  case  a  certain  law,  under  which  God  vouch 
safes  his  prophetical  revelations,  is  discovered  ;  but 
there  is  no  semblance  of  disproof  of  the  further 
Messianic  interpretation  of  the  passages  under  con 
sideration.    That  some  such  law  does  exist  has  been 
argued  at  length  by  Mr.  Davison.      He  believes, 
however,  that  "  it  obtains  only  in  some  of  the  more 
distinguished  monuments  of  prophecy,"  such  as  the 
prophecies  founded  on,  and  having  primary  reference 
to,  the    kingdom  of  David,  the  restoration  of  the 
Jews,  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ( On  Prophecy, 
Disc.  v.).     Dr.  Lee  thinks  that  Davison  "  exhibits  j 
too  great  reserve  in  the  application  of  this  important  I 
nrinciple  "  (On  Inspiration,  Lect  iv.).   He  considers  j 
it  to  be  of  universal  application;  and  uptn  it  he! 


PROPHET 

found*  the  doctrine  of  the  "  double  sense  of 
phecy,"  according  to  which  a  prediction  is 
in  two  or  even  more  distinct  hut  analogous  subjects : 
first  in  type,  then  in  antitype ;  and  after  that  pei- 
haps  awaits  a  still  further  and  more  complete  fulfil 
ment.  This  view  of  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
seems  necessary  for  the  explanation  of  our  Lord  s 
prediction  on  the  mount,  relating  at  once  to  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem  and  to  the  end  of  the  Chiistian  di.v 
pensation.  It  is  on  this  principle  that  Pearson 
writes :  '•  Many  are  the  prophecies  which  concern 
Him,  many  the  promises  which  are  made  of  Him ; 
but  yet  some  of  them  very  obscure.  .  .  .  Where 
soever  He  is  spoken  of  as  the  Anointed,  it  may  well 
be  first  understood  of  some  other  person  ;  except 
one  place  in  Daniel,  where  Messiah  is  foretold  '  U 
be  cut  off' "  (On  the  Creed,  Art.  II.). 

Whether  it  can  be  proved  by  an  investigation 
of  Holy  Scripture,  that  this  relation  between 
Divine  announcements  for  the  future  and  certain 
present  events  does  so  exist  as  to  constitute  a  law, 
and  whether,  if  the  law  is  proved  to  exist,  it  is  oi 
universal,  or  only  of  partial  application,  we  do  not 
pause  to  determine.  But  it  is  manifest  that  the 
existence  of  a  primary  sense  cannot  exclude  the 
possibility  of  a  secondary  sense.  The  question, 
therefore,  really  is,  whether  the  prophecies  are 
applicable  to  Christ :  if  they  are  so  applicable,  the 
previous  application  of  each  of  them  to  some  histo 
rical  event  would  not  invalidate  the  proof  that 
they  were  designed  as  a  whole  to  find  their  full 
completion  in  Him.  Nay,  even  if  it  could  be 
shown  that  the  prophets  had  in  their  thoughts 
nothing  beyond  the  primary  completion  of  their 
words  (a  thing  which  we  at  present  leave  undeter 
mined),  no  inference  could  thence  be  drawn  against 
their  secondary  application;  for  such  an  inference 
would  assume,  what  no  believer  in  inspiration  will 
grant,  viz.,  that  the  prophets  are  the  sole  authors 
of  their  prophecies.  The  rule,  Nihil  in  scripto 
quod  non  prius  in  scriptore,  is  sound ;  but,  the 
question  is,  who  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  true  author 
of  the  prophecies— the  human  instrument  or  the 
Divine  Author?  (See  Hengstenberg,  Christology, 
Appendix  VI.,  p.  433.) 

4.  Miraculous  character.— It  is  probable  that 
this  lies  at  the  root  of  the  many  and  various  680118 
made  to  disprove  the  predictive  power  of  the  pro 
phets.  There  is  no  question  that  if  miracles  are, 
either  physically  or  morally,  impossible,  then  pre 
diction  is  impossible ;  and  those  passages  which 
have  ever  been  accounted  predictive,  must  be  ex 
plained  away  as  being  vague,  as  being  obscure,  as 
applying  only  to  something  in  the  writer's  lifetime, 
or  on  some  other  hypothesis.  This  is  only  saying 
that  belief  in  prediction  is  not  compatible  with  the 
theory  of  Atheism,  or  with  the  philosophy  which 
rejects  the  overruling  Providence  of  a  personal  God. 
And  this  is  not  to  be  denied. 

IV.  THE  PROPHETIC  STATE. — We  learn  from 
Holy  Scripture  that  it  was  by  the  agency  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  that  the  prophets  received  the  Divine 
communication.  Thus,  on  the  appointment  of  the 
seventy  elders,  "  The  Lord  said,  I  will  take  of  the 
Spirit  which  is  upon  thee,  and  will  put  it  upon 

them And   the   Lord  .  .  .  took  cf  the 

Spirit  that  was  upon  him,  and  gave  it  unto  the 
seventy  elders ;  and  it  came  to  pass  that  when 
the  Spirit  rested  upon  them,  they  prophesied  and 

did  not  cease And  Moses  said,  Would  Go7* 

that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets,  and  that 
the  Lord  would  put  his  Spirit  upon  them  "  (Nvm 


PROPHET 

Ki.  17,  25,  29).  Here  we  see  that  what  made 
the  seventy  prophesy,  was  their  being  endued  with 
tlw  Lord's  Spirit  by  the  Lord  Himself.  So  it  is  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  which  made  Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  6) 
and  his  messengers  (1  Sam.  six.  20)  prophesy.  And 
thus  St.  Peter  assures  us  that  "prophecy  came 
not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man,  but  holy  men 
of  God  spake,  moved  (<ptp6iJi.svoi)  by  the  Holy 
Ghost"  (2  Pet.  i.  21),  while  false  prophets  are 
described  as  those  "  who  speak  a  vision  of  their 
own  heart,  and  not  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  " 
(Jer.  xxiii.  16),  "  who  prophesy  out  of  their  own 
hearts,  .  .  who  follow  their  own  spirit,  and  have 
seen  nothing"  (Ez.  xiii.  2,  3).m  The  prophet  held 
an  intermediate  position  in  communication  between 
God  and  man.  God  communicated  with  him  by 
His  Spirit,  and  he,  having  received  this  communi 
cation,  was  "  the  spokesman  "  of  God  to  man  (cf. 
Ex.  vii.  1  and  ir.  1(5).  But  the  means  by  which 
the  Divine  Spirit  communicated  with  the  human 
spirit,  and  the  conditions  of  the  human  spirit  under 
which  the  Divine  communications  were  received, 
have  not  been  clearly  declared  to  us.  They  are, 
however,  indicated.  On  the  occasion  of  the  sedi 
tion  of  Miriam  and  Aaron,  we  read,  "And  the 
Lord  said,  Hear  now  my  words:  If  there  be  a 
prophet  among  you,  I  the  Lord  will  make  myself 
known  unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will  speak  unto 
him  in  a  dream.  My  servant  Moses  is  not  so,  who 
is  faithful  in  all  mine  house :  with  him  will  I  speak 
mouth  to  mouth,  even  apparently,  and  not  in  dark 
speeches,  and  the  similitude  of  the  Lord  shall  he 
behold "  (Num.  xii.  6-8).  Here  we  have  an 
exhaustive  division  of  the  different  ways  in  which 
the  revelations  of  God  are  made  to  man.  1.  Direct 
declaration  and  manifestation,  "  I  will  speak  mouth 
to  mouth,  apparently,  and  the  similitude  of  the 
Lord  shall  he  behold."  2.  Vision.^  3.  Dream.  It 
is  indicated  that,  at  least  at  this  time,  the  vision 
and  the  dream  were  the  special  means  of  conveying 
a  revelation  to  a  prophet,  while  the  higher  form  of 
direct  declaration  and  manifestation  was  reserved 
for  the  more  highly  favoured  Moses."  Joel's  pro 
phecy  appears  to  make  the  same  division,  "  Your  old 
men  shall  dream  dreams,  and  your  young  men  shall 
see  visions,"  these  being  the  two  methods  in  which 
the  promise,  "  your  sons  and  your  daughters  shall 
prophesy,"  are  to  be  carried  out  (ii.  28).  And  of 
Daniel  we  are  told  that  "  he  had  understanding 
in  all  visions  and  dreams"  (Dau.  i.  17).  Can 
these  phases  of  the  prophetic  state  be  distinguished 
from  each  other  ?  and  in  what  did  they  consist  ? 

According  to  the  theory  of  Philo  and  the  Alex 
andrian  school,  the  prophet  was  in  a  state  of  entire 
unconsciousness  at  the  time  that  he  was  under  the 
influence  of  Divine  inspiration,  "  for  the  human 
understanding,"  says  Philo,  ".takes  its  departure  on 
the  arrival  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  and,  on  the  removal 
of  the  latter,  again  returns  to  its  home,  for  the 
mortal  must  not  dwell  with  the  immortal"  (Quis 
Ror.  Div.  Haer.  t.  i.  p.  511).  Balaam  is  described 
by  him  as  an  unconscious  instrument  through 


PROPHET 


93fi 


Wliom  God  sp,ke  (De  Vitd  Mosis.  lib.  I.  t.  ii. 
p.  124).  Josephus  makes  Balaam  excuse  himsell 
to  Balak  on  the  same  principle:  "  When  the  Spirit 
of  God  seizes  us,  It  utters  whatsoever  sounds  and 
words  It  pleases,  withcut  any  knowledge  on  our 
part,  .  .  .  for  when  It  has  come  into  us,  thcje  is 
nothing  in  us  which  remains  our  own"  (Antiq. 
iv.  6.  §5,  t,  i.  p.  216).  This  theoiy  identifies 
Jewish  prophecy  in  all  essential  points  witli  the 
heathen  /j.avriKil],  or  divination,  as  distinct  from 
irpo<pT)Tfia,  or  interpretation.  Moutanism  adopted 
the  same  view :  "  Defendimus,  in  causa  novae 
prophethe,  gratiae  exstasin,  id  est  amentiam,  con- 
venire.  In  spiritu  enim  homo  constitutus,  prae- 
sertim  cum  gloriam  Dei  conspicit,  vel  cum  per 
ipsum  Deus  loquitur,  necesse  est  excidat  sensu, 
obumbratus  scilicet  virtute  divina ,  de  quo  inter 
nos  et  Psychicos  (catholicos)  quaestio  est"  (Ter- 
tullian,  Adv.  Marcion.  iv.  22).  According  to  the 
belief,  then,  of  the  heathen,  of  the  Alexandrian 
Jews,  and  of  the  Montanists,  the  vision  of  the 
prophet  was  seen  while  he  was  in  a  state  of 
ecstatic  unconsciousness,  and  the  enunciation  of 
the  vision  was  made  by  him  in  the  same  state. 
The  Fathers  of  the  Church  opposed  the  Montanist 
theory  with  great  unanimity.  In  Eusebius'  His 
tory  (v.  17)  we  read  that  Miltiades  wrote  a  book 
TTfpl  TOV  ft.^  Sfiv  irpocp-firriv  4v  iifffTafffi  \a\tlv. 
St.  Jerome  writes:  "  Non  loquitur  propheta  iv 
fKffrdfffi,  ut  Montanus  et  Prisca  Maximillaque 
delirant,  sed  quod  prophetat  liber  est  visionis 
iutelligentis  universa  quae  loquitur"  (Prolog,  in 
Nahum).  And  again  :  "  Neque  vero  ut  Montanus 
cum  insauis  faeminis  somniat,  prophetae  in  ecsfcisi 
locuti  sunt  ut  nescierint  quid  loquerentur,  et 
cum  alios  erudirent  ipsi  ignorarent  quid  dicerent" 
(Prolog,  in  Esai.*).  Origen  (Contr.  Celsum,  vii. 
4),  and  St.  Basil  (Commentary  on  Isaiah,  Prooem. 
c.  5),  contrast  the  prophet  with  the  soothsayer, 
on  the  ground  of  the  latter  being  deprived  of  his 
senses.  St.  Chrysostom  draws  out  the  contrast : 
TOI/TO  yap  fjid.vr«as  ifSjoi/,  TO  ^{errTTj/cfVoj,  TO 
avdyXijv  virofntveiv,  TO  u>6f'iffOai,  TO  e\Kecr6ai, 
TO  ffvpfcrQai  &(rwtp  /j.cuvdfj.fi'ov.  'O  8e  irpotyriTijs 
oi/x  OVTUJS,  a\\a  /ifcTO  Siavoias  vrityoiHrys  Kal 
trtatppovoi/ffris  Karcumiffeus,  Kal  tltiois  a  fydty- 
yerai,  <pr]ffli>  Hiravra-  &<rre  ital  trpb  TTJS  ficfid- 
fff<af  KavTev6fjs  yv<i>pi£e  rbv  pavTiv  Kal  TOP 
irpo^JTTjj'  (Horn.  xxix.  in  Epist.  ad  Corinth.'). 
At  the  same  time,  while  drawing  the  distinction 
sharply  between  heathen  soothsaying  and  Mon- 
tanist  prophesying  on  the  one  side,  and  Hebrew 
prophecy  on  the  other,  the  Fathers  use  expres 
sions  so  strong  as  almost  to  represent  the  Pro 
phets  to  be  passive  instruments  acted  on  by  the 
Spirit  of  God.  Thus  it  is  that  they  describe 
them  as  musical  instruments, — the  pipe  (Athe- 
nagoras,  Leg.  pro  Christianis,  c.  ix. ;  Clem.  Alex. 
Cohort,  ad  Gent.  c.  i.),  the  lyre  (Justin  Martyr, 
Co/tort,  ad  Grace,  c.  viii. ;  Ephraem  Syr.  Rhythm. 
xxix. ;  Chrysostom,  Ad  Pop.  Antioch.  Horn.  i. 
t.  ii.)  :  or  as  pens  (St.  Greg.  Magn.  Praef.  in 


m  Hence  the  emphatic  declarations  of  the  Great  Pro 
phet  of  the  Church  that  he  did  not  speak  of  Himself 
(John  vii.'  11,  &c.). 

»  Maimonides  has  drawn  out  the  points  in  which  Moses 
is  considered  superior  to  all  other  prophets  as  follows : — 
•  1.  All  the  other  prophets  saw  the  prophecy  in  a  dream 
or  in  a  vision,  but  our  Kabbi  Moses  saw  it  whilst  awake. 
2.  To  all  the  other  prophets  it  was  revealed  through  the 
medium  of  an  angel,  and  therefore  they  saw  that  which 
Lb*y'£«w  m  an  allegory  or  enigma,  but  to  Moses  it  is 
Eiiil:  With  him  will  I  speak  month  to  mo-.ith  (Numb. 


xii.  8)  and  face  to  face  (Ex.  xxxiii.  11).  3.  All  the  ether 
prophets  were  terrified,  but  with  Moses  it  was  not  eo; 
and  this  is  what  the  Scripture  says :  As  a  man  speaketh 
unto  his  friend  (Ex.  xxxiii.  11).  4.  All  the  other  prophets 
could  not  prophesy  at  any  time  that  they  wisted,  but 
with  Moses  it  was  not  so,  but  at  any  time  that  he  wished 
for  it,  tne  Holy  Spirit  came  upon  him ;  so  that  it  was  not 
necessary  for  him  to  prepare  his  mind,  for  he  was  alwaye 
ready  for  it,  like  the  ministering  angels"  (Yad  UiichOr 
zalcah,  c.  Tii.,  Bernard's  transl.  p.  116.  quoted  by  Leo 
p.  467), 


938 


PROPHET 


Expressions  such  as  tnese  (many  .  visions  are  unconnected  and  fro. 
quoted  by  Dr.  Lee,  Appendix  G.)    as  they  are  not  the  subject  of 


of  which  are 

must  be  set  against  the  passages  which  wer 
directed  against  the  Montanists.  Nevertheless 
there  is  a  very  appreciable  difference  between  thei 
view  and  that  of  Tertullian  and  Philo.  Which  i 
most  in  accordance  with  the  indications  of  Holy 
Scripture  ? 

It  does  not  seem  possible  to  draw  any  very  pre 
cise  distinction  between  the  prophetic  "  dream ' 
and  the  prophetic  "  vision."  In  the  case  of  Abra 
ham  (Gen.  xv.  1)  and  of  Daniel  (Dan.  vii.  1),  thej 
seem  to  melt  into  each  other.  In  both,  the  externa 
senses  are  at  rest,  reflection  is  quiescent,  and  in 
tuition  energizes.  The  action  of  the  ordinary  fa 
culties  13  suspended  in  the  one  case  by  natural,  in 
the  other  by  supernatural  or  extraordinary  causes 
(See  Lee,  Inspiration,  p.  173.)  The  state  into  which 
the  prophet  was,  occasionally,  at  least,  thrown  by 
the  ecstasy,  or  vision,  or  trance,  is  described  poeti 
cally  in  the  Book  of  Job  (iv.  13-16,  xxxiii.  15), 
and  more  plainly  in  the  Book  of  Daniel.  In 
the  case  of  Daniel,  we  find  first  a  deep  sleep  (viii. 
18,  x.  9)  accompanied  by  terror  (viii.  17,  x.  8). 
Then  he  is  raised  upright  (viii.  18)  on  his  hands 
and  knees,  and  then  on  his  feet  (x.  10,  11).  He 
then  receives  the  Divine  revelation  (viii.  19,  x.  12). 
After  which  he  falls  to  the  ground  in  a  swoon  (x. 
15,  17);  he  is  faint,  sick,  and  astonished  (viii.  27). 
Here,  then,  is  an  instance  of  the  ecstatic  state ;  noi 
is  it  confined  to  the  Old  Testament,  though  we  do 
not  find  it  in  the  New  Testament  accompanied  by 
such  violent  effects  upon  the  body.  At  the  Trans 
figuration,  the  disciples  fell  on  their  face,  being 
overpowered  by  the  Divine  glory,  and  were  re 
stored,  like  Daniel,  by  the  touch  of  Jesus'  hand. 
St.  Peter  fell  into  a  trance  (SKO-TCWIS)  before  he 
receiveJ  his  vision,  instructing  him  as  to  the  ad 
mission  of  the  Gentiles  (Acts  x.  10,  xi.  5).  St. 
Paul  was  in  a  trance  (4v  litffraffei)  when  he  was 
commanded  to  devote  himself  to  the  conversion  of 
the  Gentiles  (Acts  xxii.  17),  and  when  he  was 
caught  up  into  the  third  heaven  (2  Cor.  xii.  1). 
St.  John  was  probably  in  the  same  state  (tv 
Trvfvjj.aTi)  when  he  received  the  message  to  the 
seven  churches  (Rev.  i.  10).  The  prophetic  trance, 
then,  must  be  acknowledged  as  a  Scriptural  ac 
count  of  the  state  in  which  the  prophets  and  other 
inspired  persons,  sometimes,  at  least,  received 
Divine  revelations.  It  would  seem  to  have  been  of 
the  following  nature. 

(!.")  The  bodily  senses  were  closed  to  external 
objects  as  in  deep  sleep.  (2.)  The  reflective  and 
discursive  faculty  was  still  and  inactive.  (3.)  The 
spiritual  faculty  (irveO/ua)  was  awakened  to  the 
highest  state  of  energy.  Hence  it  is  that  revela 
tions  in  trances  are  described  by  the  prophets 
as  "seen  "  or  "heard"  by  them,  for  the  spiritual 
faculty  energizes  by  immediate  perception  on  the 
part  of  the  inward  sense,  not  by  inference  and 
thought.  Thus  Isaiah  "saw  the  Lord  sitting" 
(Is.  vi.  1).  Zechariah  "lifted  up  his  eyes  and 
saw"  (Zech.  ii.  1);  "the  word  of  the  Lord  which 
Micah  saw"  (Mic.  i.  1);  "the  wonder  which 
Habakkuk  iid  see "  (Hab.  i.  1).  "  Peter  sate 
heaven  op-^ed  .  .  .  and  there  came  a  voice  to  him  " 
Paul  was  "in  a  trance,  and  saw 
(Acts  xxii.  18).  John  "heard  a 
and  saw  seven  golden  candlesticks  " 


;Acte  x.  11). 
Him  saying  " 
great  voice  . . 
(fiev.  i.  12). 

•  This  view  is  advocated  also  by  Velthusen  (De 
rwnfuturanandacri^ione),  Jahn  ^Eaikit.  in  du'gbtt- 


Hence  it  is,  too,  that  the  prophets' 


the  reflective  but  ol 

the  perceptive  faculty.  They  described  what  the) 
saw  and  heard,  not  what  they  had  themselves 
thought  out  and  systematized.  Hence,  tjo,  suc 
cession  in  time  is  disregarded  or  unno'Jced.  The 
subjects  of  the  vision  being,  to  the  pi  oj  bets'  sight, 
in  juxtaposition  or  enfolding  each  other,  some  in 
the  foreground,  some  in  the  background,  are  neces 
sarily  abstracted  from  the  relations  of  time.  Hence, 
too,  the  imageiy  with  which  the  prophetic  writing* 
are  coloured,  and  the  dramatic  cast  in  which  they 
are  moulded ;  these  peculiarities  resulting,  as  we 
have  already  said,  in  a  necessary  obscurity  and  diffi 
culty  of  interpretation. 

But  though  it  must  be  allowed  that  Scripture 
language  seems  to  point  out  the  state  of  dream  and 
of  trance,  or  ecstasy,  as  a  condition  in  which  the 
human  instrument  i-eceived  the  Divine  communica 
tions,  it  does  not  follow  that  all  the  prophetic 
revelations  were  thus  made.  We  must  acknowledge 
the  state  of  trance  in  such  passages  as  Is.  vi.  (called 
ordinarily  the  vision  of  Isaiah),  as  Ez.  i.  (called  the 
vision  of  Ezekiel),  as  Dan.  vii.  viii.  x.  xi.  xii.  (called 
the  visions  of  Daniel),  as  Zech.  i.  iv.  v.  vi.  (called 
the  visions  of  Zechariah),  as  Acts  x.  (called  the 
vision  of  St.  Peter),  as  2  Cor.  xii.  (called  the  vision 
of  St.  Paul),  and  similar  instances,  which  are  indi 
cated  by  the  language  used.  But  it  does  not  seem 
true  to  say,  with  Hengstenberg,  that "  the  difference 
between  these  prophecies  and  the  rest  is  a  vanishing 
one,  and  if  we  but  possess  the  power  and  the  ability 
to  look  more  deeply  into  them,  the  marks  of  the 
vision  may  be  discerned"  (Christology,  vol.  iv. 
p.  417).°  St.  Paul  distinguishes  "revelations" 
from  "  visions"  (2  Cor.  xii.  1).  In  the  books  of 
Moses  "  speaking  mouth  to  mouth "  is  contrasted 
with  "  visions  and  dreams  "  (Num.  xii.  8).  It  is 
true  that  in  this  last-quoted  passage,  "  visions  and 
dreams"  alone  appear  to  be  attributed  to  the 
prophet,  while  "  speaking  mouth  to  mouth "  is 
reserved  for  Moses.  But  when  Moses  was  dead, 
the  cause  of  this  difference  would  cease.  During 
the  era  of  prophecy  there  were  none  nearer  to 
God,  none  with  whom  He  would,  we  may  sup 
pose,  communicate  more  openly  than  the  prophets. 
We  should  expect,  then,  that  they  would  be 
ihe  recipients,  not  only  of  visions  in  the  state  of 
dream  or  ecstasy,  but  also  of  the  direct  revelations 
ivhich  are  called  speaking  mouth  to  mouth.  The 
greater  part  of  the  Divine  communications  we  may 
suppose  to  have  been  thus  made  to  the  prophets 
n  their  waking  and  ordinary  state,  while  the 
visions  were  exhibited  to  them  either  in  the  state 
of  sleep,  or  in  the  state  of  ecstasy.  "  The  nr.ore 
•rdinary  mode  through  which  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
as  far  as  we  can  trace,  came,  was  through  a  divine 
mpulse  given  to  the  prophet's  own  thoughts  " 
Stanley,  p.  426).  Hence  it  follows  that,  while  the 
fathers  in  their  opposition  to  Montanism  and  p.avla 
were  pushed  somewhat  too  far  in  their  denial  of 
;he  ecstatic  state,  they  were  yet  perfectly  exact  in 
their  descriptions  of  the  condition  under  which  the 
(reater  part  of  the  prophetic  revelations  wei> 
•eceived  and  promulgated.  No  truer  desciiptioi 
las  been  given  of  them  than  that  of  Hippolytus, 
ind  that  of  St.  Basil :  Ou  yap  «'£  ISias  SiW/utaii 
'eyyovro,  oiiSi  &irfp  avrol  I$OV\OVTO  ruvra 
pvrrov,  dXAa  irpiarov  n*v  Sia  rov  Adyov 
tffo<pi£ovTo  'opQias,  lireira  Si'  upafj.dro>v  -rpofti- 


ichen  Bteher  da  A..B.},  Tholuck  (Vie  l-ropluJcn  uni 


PROPHET 

TO.  fj.f\\ovra  KoAoJs-  (10'  oSrta  ir«- 
rturpfrot  $\eyov  ravra  airtp  avro'is  i)r  fiAvot 
oirj>  TOV  @fov  &iroK(Kpv/j.(jifva  (Hippol.  De  An 
iichristo,  c.  ii.).  Ilws  irpof<t>^rfvov  at  Kctdapa, 
xal  Siavyets  tyvxai  ;  oiovel  KaroTrrpa  yivA^n 
TT/S  ®das  tvepyfias,  TT\V  H/n<paffiv  pav^v 
o.<Tvy-)(vTOV  Kal  ovS^v  4iri6o\oufji.evtjv  tic  TUV 
•naQiav  rrjs  erap/cbs  tirefiflicvvvTO'  irafft  p.\v  yap 
Trdpfo-Ti  rb  "Ayiov  IJyeC/ta  (St.  Basil,  Comm,  in 
Esai.  Prooem.). 

Had  the  prophet1'  a  full  knowledge  of  that  which 
they  predicted?  It  follows  from  what  we  have 
already  said  that  they  had  not,  and  could  not  have. 
They  were  the  "spokesmen"  of  God  (Ex.  vii.  1), 
the  "  mouth  "  by  which  His  words  were  uttered, 
or  they  were  enabled  to  view,  and  empowered  to 
describe,  pictures  presented  to  their  spiritual  intui 
tion  ;  but  there  are  no  grounds  for  believing  that, 
contemporaneously  with  this  miracle,  there  was 
wrought  another  miracle  enlarging  the  understand 
ing  of  the  prophet  so  as  to  grasp  the  whole  of  the 
Divine  counsels  which  he  was  gazing  into,  or 
which  he  was  the  instrument  of  enunciating.  We 
should  not  expect  it  beforehand  ;  and  we  have  the 
testimony  of  the  prophets  themselves  (Dan.  xii.  8 ; 
Zech.  iv.  5),  and  of  St.  Peter  (1  Pet.  i.  10),  to  the 
fact  that  they  frequently  did  not  comprehend  them. 
The  passage  in  St.  Peter's  Epistle  is  very  instrua 
tive :  "  Of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have 
enquired  and  searched  diligently,  who  prophesied  of 
the  grace  that  should  come  unto  you  :  searching 
what,  or  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
which  was  in  them  did  signify,  when  it  testified 
beforehand  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the  glory 
that  should  follow.  Unto  whom  it  was  revealed, 
that  not  unto  themselves,  but  unto  us  they  did 
minister  the  things,  which  are  now  reported  unto 
you  by  them  that  have  preached  the  gospel  unto 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  sent  down  from  heaven." 
It  is  here  declared  (1)  that  the  Holy  Ghost  through 
the  prophet,  or  the  prophet  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
testified  of  Christ's  sufferings  and  ascension,  and  of 
the  institution  of  Christianity  ;  (2)  that  after 
having  uttered  predictions  on  those  subjects,  the 
minds  of  the  prophets  occupied  themselves  in 
searching  into  the  full  meaning  of  the  words  that 
they  had  uttered  ;  (3)  that  they  were  then  divinely 
informed  that  their  predictions  were  not  to  find 
their  completion  until  the  last  days,  and  that  they 
themselves  were  instruments  for  declaring  good 
things  that  should  come  not  to  their  own  but  to  a 
future  generation.  This  is  exactly  what  the  pro 
phetic  state  above  described  would  lead  us  to  expect. 
While  the  Divine  communication  is  being  received, 
the  human  instrument  is  simply  passive.  He  sees 
or  hears  by  his  spiritual  intuition  or  perception, 
and  declares  what  he  has  seen  or  heard.  Then  the 
reflective  faculty  which  had  been  quiescent  but 
never  so  overpowered  as  to  be  destroyed,  awakens  to 


PKOPHET 


937 


the  consideration  of  the  message  or  vision  received, 
and  it  strives  earnestly  to  understand  it,  and  rnort 
especially  to  look  at  the  revelation  as  in  instead  cl 
out  of  time.  The  result  is  failure  ;  but  this  failure 
is  softened  by  the  Divine  intimation  that  the  time 
is  not  yet.*  The  two  questions,  What  did  the  pro 
phet  understand  by  this  prophecy  ?  and,  What  wat 
the  meaning  of  this  prophecy  ?  are  totally  different 
in  the  estimation  of  every  one  who  believes  that 
"  the  Holy  Ghost  spake  by  the  Prophets,'  ci  who 
considers  it  possible  that  he  did  so  speak. « 

V.  INTERPRETATION  OF  PREDICTIVE  PRO 
PHECY. — We  have  only  space  for  a  few  rales,  de 
duced  from  the  account  which  we  have  given  of  the 
nature  of  prophecy.  They  are,  (1.)  Interpose  dis 
tances  of  time  according  as  history  may  show  them 
to  be  necessary  with  respect  to  the  past,  or  inference 
may  show  them  to  be  likely  in  respect  to  the  future, 
because,  as  we  have  seen,  the  prophetic  visions  are 
abstracted  from  relations  in  time.  (2.)  Distinguish 
the  form  from  the  idea.  Thus  Isaiah  (xi.  15) 
represents  the  idea  of  the  removal  of  all  obstacles 
from  before  God's  people  in  the  form  of  the  Lord's 
destroying  the  tongue  of  the  Egyptian  sea,  and 
smiting  the  river  into  seven  streams.  (3.)  Distin 
guish  in  like  manner  figure  from  what  is  repre 
sented  by  it,  e.  fj.,  in  the  verse  previous  to  that 
quoted,  do  not  understand  literally,  "  They  shall 
fly  upon  the  shoulders  of  the  Philistines "  (Is.  si. 
14).  (4.)  Make  allowance  for  the  imagery  of  the 
prophetic  visions,  and  for  the  poetical  diction  in 
which  they -are  expressed.  (5.)  In  respect  to  things 
past,  interpret  by  the  apparent  meaning,  checked 
by  reference  to  events ;  in  respect  to  things  future, 
interpret  by  the  apparent  meaning,  checked  by  re 
ference  to  the  analogy  of  the  faith.  (6.)  Interpret 
according  to  the  principle  which  may  be  deduced 
from  the  examples  of  visions  explained  in  the  Old 
Testament.  (7.)  Interpret  according  to  the  prin- . 
ciple  which  may  be  deduced  from  the  examples  of 
prophecies  interpreted  in  the  New  Testament. 

VI.  USE  OF  PROPHECY. — Predictive  prophecy  is 
at  once  a  part  and  an  evidence  of  revelation  :  at  the 
time  that  it  is  delivered,  and  until  its  fulfilment,  a 
part ;  after  it  has  been  fulfilled,  an  evidence.  St. 
Peter  (Ep.  2,  i.  19)  describes  it  as  "  a  light  shining 
in  a  dark  place,"  or  "  a  taper  glimmering  where  there 
s  nothing  to  reflect  its  rays,"  that  is,  throwing 
some  light,  but  only  a  feeble  light  as  compared  with 
what  is  shed  from  the  Gospel  history.  To  this 
light,  feeble  as  it  is,  "  you  do  well,"  says  the 
Apostle,  "  to  take  heed."  And  he  warns  them  not 
to  be  offended  at  the  feebleness  of  the  light,  because 
it  is  of  the  nature  of  prophecy  until  its  fulfilment — 
[in  the  case  of  Messianic  predictions,  of  which  he 
Is  speaking,  described  as  "  until  the  day  dawn,  and 
;he  day  star  arise  in  your  hearts") — to  shed  only  a 
"eeble  light.  Nay,  he  continues,  even  the  prophets 
could  not  themselves  interpret  its  meaning,*  "foi 


t  See  Keble,  Christian  Tear,  13th  S.  aft.  Trin.,  and 
iee,  Inspiration,  p.  210. 

1  It  is  on  this  principle  rather  than  as  it  is  explained 
ty  Dr.  M'Caul  (Aids  to  Faith)  that  the  prophecy  of  Hosea 
xl.  1  Is  to  be  Interpreted.  Hosea,  we  may  well  believe, 
understood  In  his  own  words  no  more  than  a  reference  to 
the  historical  fact  that  the  children  of  Israel  came  out  of 
Egypt.  But  Hosea  was  not  the  author  of  the  prophecy- 
he  was  the  instrument  by  which  it  was  promulgated. 
The  Holy  Spirit  intended  something  furlher— and  what 
this  something  was  He  informs  us  by  the  Evangelist  St. 
y.atthew  (Matt.  ii.  15).  The  two  facts  of  the  Israelites 
being  led  out  of  Egypt  and  of  Christ's  return  from  Egypt 
•4'Uwxr  to  Professor  Jowett  so  Distinct  that  the  refer- 


:nce  by  St.  Matthew  to  the  Prophet  is  to  him  inexplio 
ible  except  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  mistake  on  the  part  of 
the  Evangelist  (see  Joweti's  Essay  on  the  Interpretation 
of  Scripture).  A  deeper  insight  into  Scripture  shows  that 
'  the  Jewish  people  themselves,  their  history,  their  ritual, 
their  government,  all  present  one  grand  prophecy  of  the 
'mure  Redeemer  "  (Lee,  p.  107).  Consequently  "  Israel " 
s  one  of  the/ocnw  naturally  taken  in  the  prophetic  vision 
>y  the  idea  "  Messiah." 

This  is  a  more  probable  meaning  of  the  words  i£i'a« 
vcreus  oil  yiverai  than  that  given  by  Pearson  (On 
he  Creed,  art.  i.  p.  17,  Ed.  Burton),  "  that  no  prophecy 
lid  so  proceed  from  the  prophet  that  he  of  himself  or  bj 
"  is  awn  instinct  did  open  his  mouth  to  prophesy." 


938 


PROPHET 


PBOPHET 


Lhe  pi-ophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the  vrll  of  cated  by  Nathan,  and  do  not  go  beyond  the  aii 
man,"  i.e.  the  prophets  were  not  the  authors  of  nouncement  made  by  Nathan.  The  sama  may  be 
their  predictions,  "but  holy  men  of  old  spake  by  said  of  Ps.  Ixxxix.,  which  was  composed  Ljr  a  later 
the  impulse  (<t>tp6/j.tvoi)  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  This,  '  writer.  Pss.  ii.  and  ex.  rest  upon  the  same  promise 
then,  was  the  use  of  prophecy  before  its  fulfilment,  as  their  foundation,  but  add  new  features  to  iv, 
— to  act  as  a  feeble  light  in  the  midst  of  darkness,  The  Son  of  David  is  to  be  the  Son  of  God  (ii.  7), 
which  it  did  not  dispel,  but  through  which  it  threw  the  anointed  of  the  Lord  (ii.  2),  not  only  the  King 
its  rays  in  such  a  way  as  to  enable  a  true  hearted  of  Ziou  (ii.  6,  ex.  1),  hut  the  inheritor  and  lord  ot 
believer  to  direct  his  steps  and  guide  his  anticipa-  the  whole  earth  (ii.  8,  ex.  6),  and,  besides  this,  a 
tions  (cf.  Acts  xiii.  27).  But  after  fulfilment,  Priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek  (ex 
St.  Peter  says,  "  the  word  of  prophecy  "  becomes  4).  At  the  same  time  he  is,  as  typified  by  his  pro- 
"  mere  sure*  than  it  was  before,  that  is,  it  is  no  genitor,  to  be  full  of  suffering  and  affliction  (Pss. 
longer  merely  a  feeble  light  to  guide,  but  it  is  a  xxii.,  Ixxi.,  cii.,  cix.) :  brought  down  to  the  grave, 
firm  ground  of  confidence,  and,  combined  with  I  yet  raised  to  life  without  seeing  corruption  (Ps. 
the  apostolic  testimony,  serves  as  a  trustworthy  xvi.).  In  Pss.  xlv.,  Ixxii.,  the  sons  of  Koran 
evidence  of  the  faith  ;  so  trustworthy,  that  even  and  Solomon  describe  his  peaceful  reign.  Be- 
after  he  and  his  brother  Apostles  are  dead,  those  tween  Solomon  and  Hezekiah  intervened  some  200 
whom  he  addressed  will  feel  secure  that  they  years,  during  which  the  voice  of  prophecy  wai. 
'  had  not  followed  cunningly  devised  fables,"  but  silent.  The  Messianic  conception  entertained  at  thi? 

time  by  the  Jews  might  have  been  that  of  a  Kinj, 


the  truth. 

As  an  evidence,  fulfilled  prophecy  is  as  satisfactory 
as  anything  can  be,  for  who  can  know  the  future 


of  the  royal  house  of  David  who  would  arise,  and 
gather  under  his  peaceful  sceptre  his  own  people 


except  the  Ruler  who  disposes  future  events  ;  and    and  strangers.    Sufficient  allusion  to  his  prophetical 
from  whom  can  come  prediction  except  from  Him    and  priestly  offices  had  been  made  to  create  thought 
ful  consideration,  but  as  yet  there  was   no  clear 


who  knows  the  future  ?      After  all  that  has  been 
said  and  unsaid,  prophecy  and  miracles,  each  rest- 


delineation   of  him   in   these   chai-acters.      It  was 


ing  on   their  own  evidence,  must  always  be  the    reserved  for  the  Prophets  to  bring  out  these  features 
chief  and  direct  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the  Di-    more   distinctly.      The  sixteen   Prophets   may  be 


vine  character  of  a  religion.  Where  they  exist, 
a  Divine  power  is  proved.  Nevertheless,  they 
should  never  be  rested  on  alone,  but  in  combination 
with  the  general  character  of  the  whole  scheme  to 
which  they  belong.  Its  miracles,  its  prophecies,  its 
morals,  its  propagation,  and  its  adaptation  to  human 
needs,  are  the  chief  evidences  of  Christianity.  None 
of  these  must  be  taken  separately.  The  fact  of 
their  conspiring  together  is  the  strongest  evidence 
of  all.  That  one  object  with  which  predictions  are 
delivered  is  to  serve  in  an  after  age  as  an  evidence 
on  which  faith  may  reasonably  rest,  is  stated  by 
our  Lord  Himself:  "  And  now  I  have  told  you 
before  it  come  to  pass,  that  when  it  is  come  to 
pass  ye  might  believe  "  (John  xiv.  29). 

VII.  DEVELOPMENT  OF  MESSIANIC  PROPHECY. 
— Prediction,  in  the  shape  of  promise  and  threaten 
ing,  begins  with  the  Book  of  Genesis.  Immediately 
upon  the  Fall,  hopes  of  recovery  and  salvation  are 
held  out,  but  the  manner  in  which  this  salvation  is 
to  be  effected  is  left  altogether  indefinite.  All  that 
is  at  first  declared  is  that  it  shall  come  through  a 
child  of  woman  (Gen.  iii.  15).  By  degrees  the  area 
is  limited:  it  is  to  come  through  the  family  of 
Shem  (Gen.  ix.  26),  through  the  family  of  Abra 
ham  (Gen.  xii.  3),  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.  18),  of  Jacob 
(Gen.  xxviii.  14),  of  Judah  (Gen.  xlix.  10).  Balaam 


seems  to  say  that  it  will  be  wrought  by  a  warlike    triumph.   By  the  path  of  humiliation  and  expiatory 


Israelitish  King  (Num.  xxiv.  17,;  Jacob, bya  peace 
ful  Ruler  of  the  earth  (Gen.  xlix.  10) ;  Moses,  by  a 
Prophet  like  himself,  ».  e.  a  revealer  of  a  new 
religious  dispensation  (Deut.  xviii.  15).  Nathan's 
ftnnouncemeut  (2  Sam.  vii.  16)  determines  further 
that  the  salvation  is  to  come  through  the  house  01 
David,  and  through  a  descendant  of  David  whc 
•shall  ba  himself  a  king.  This  promise  is  developed 
by  David  himself  in  the  Messianic  Psalms.  Pss 
sviii.  and  !xi.  are  founded  on  the  promise  communi- 


•  The  modem  Jews,  In  opposition  to  their  ancien* 
exposition,  have  been  driven  to  a  non-Messianic  inter 
pretation  of  Is.  liii.  Among  Christians  the  non-Messiank. 
interpretation  commenced  with  Grotlus.  He  applies  thb 
chapter  to  Jeremiah.  According  to  Itoederlcin,  Schustei, 
Stephaai,  Eichhorn,  Uosonmiiller,  Ilitzlg,  Handcwerk, 


divided  into  four  groups:  the  Prophets  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,—  Hosea,  Amos,  Joel,  Jonah; 
the  Prophets  of  the  Southern  Kingdom, — Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Obadiah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk, 
Zephaniah  ;  the  Prophets  of  the  Captivity, — Kzekiel 
and  Daniel ;  the  Prophets  of  the  Return, — Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  In  this  great  period  of  prc- 
phetism  there  is  no  longer  any  chronological  deve 
lopment  of  Messianic  Prophecy,  as  in  the  earlier 
period  previous  to  Solomon.  Each  prophet  adds  a 
feature,  one  more,  another  less  clearly:  combine 
the  features,  and  we  have  the  portrait ;  but  it  does 
not  grow  gradually  and  perceptibly  under  the  hands 
of  the  several  artists.  Here,  therefore,  the  task  of 
tracing  the  chronological  progress  of  the  revelation 
of  the  Messiah  comes  to  an  end:  its  culminating 
point  is  found  in  the  prophecy  contained  in  Is.  Iii. 
13-15,  and  liii.  We  here  read  that  there  should  be 
a  Servant  of  God,  lowly  and  despised,  full  of  grief 
and  suffering,  oppressed,  condemned  as  a  malefactor, 
and  put  to  death.  But  his  sufferings,  it  is  said, 
are  not  for  his  own  sake,  for  he  had  never  been 
guilty  of  fraud  or  violence  :  they  are  spontaneously 
taken,  patiently  borne,  vicarious  in  their  character 
and,  by  God's  appointment,  they  have  an  atoning, 
reconciling,  and  justifying  efficacy.  The  result  of 
his  sacrificial  offering  is  to  be  his  exaltation  and 


suffering,  he  is  to  reach  that  state  of  glory  foreshown 
by  David  and  Solomon.  The  prophetic  character 
of  the  Messiah  is  drawn  out  by  Isaiah  in  other 
parts  of  his  book  as  the  atouicg  work  here.  By 
the  time  of  Hezekiah  therefore  (for  Hengstenberg, 
Ckristology,  vol.  ii.,  has  satisfactorily  disproved  the 
theory  of  a  Deutero-Isaiah  of  the  days  of  the  Cap 
tivity)  the  portrait  of  the  QedvOpanros — at  onct 
King,  Priest,  Prophet,  and  Redeemer — was  drawn 
in  all  its  essential  features."  The  contemporary 

Iviister  (after  the  Jewish  expositors,  Jarchi,  Abcnetra, 
Kimchi,  Abarbanel,  Lipmnnn),  the  subject  of  the  pro 
phecy  Is  the  Israelitish  people.  According  to  Efker- 
111:11111,  Ewald,  Cleek,  it  Is  the  ideal  Israelitish  people. 
According  to  Paulus,  Ammoti,  nlaurer,  Theniur.  KncbeV 
it  is  the  godly  portion  of  the  Israelitish  f«oplo.  Accord- 


PROPHET 

J:K!  later  Prophets  (cf.  Mic.  v.  2  ;  Dan.  vii.  9 ; 
Zech.  vi.  13;  Mai.  iv.  2)  added  some  particulars 
and  details,  and  so  the  conception  was  left  to  await 
its  realizition  after  an  interval  of  some  400  years 
from  the  date  of  the  last  Hebrew  Prophet. 

It  is  the  opinion  of  Hengstenberg  (Christology, 
i.  235)  and  of  Pusey  (Minor  Prophets,  Part  i. 
Introd.)  that  the  writings  of  the  Minor  Prophets  are 
chronologically  placed.  Accordingly,  the  former  ar 
ranges  the  list  of  the  Prophets  as  follows:  Hosea, 
Joel,  Amas,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micah,  Isaiah  ("the 
principal  prophetical  figure  in  the  first  or  Assyrian 
period  of  canonical  prophetism''),  Nahum,  Habak- 
kuk,  Zephaniah,  Jeremiah  ("  the  principal  pro 
phetical  figure  in  the  second  or  Babylonian  period 
of  canonical  prophetism"),  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  Calmet  (Diet.  Bibl,  s.  v. 
"  Prophet ")  as  follows :  Hosea,  Amos,  Isaiah,  Jonah, 
Micah,  Nahum,  Jeremiah,  Zephaniah,  Joel,  Daniel, 
Ezekiel,  Habakkuk,  Obadiah,'  Haggai,  Zechariah, 
Malachi.  Dr.  Stanley  (Lcct.  xix.)  in  the  follow 
ing  order :  Joel,  Jonah,  Hosea,  Amos,  Isaiah, 
Micah,  Nahum,  Zechariah,  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk, 
Obadiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Isaiah,  Daniel,  Haggai, 
Zechariah,  Malachi.  Whence  it  appears  that  Dr. 
Stanley  recognizes  two  Isaiahs  and  two  Zechariahs, 
unless  "  the  author  of  Is.  xl-lxvi.  is  regarded  as  the 
older  Isaiah  transported  into  a  style  and  position 
later  than  his  own  time  "  (p.  423). 

VIII.  PROPHETS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. — 
So  far  as  their  predictive  powers  are  concerned, 
the  Old  Testament  prophets  find  their  New  Testa 
ment  counterpart  in  the  writer  of  the  Apocalvpse 
[REVELATIONS  ;  ANTICHRIST,  in  Appendix  B]  ; 
but  in  their  general  character,  as  specially  illumined 
revealei-s  of  God'w  will,  their  counterpart  will  rather 
be  found,  first  in  the  Great  Prophet  of  the  Church, 
and  his  forerunner  John  the  Baptist,  and  next  in 
all  those  persons  who  were  endowed  with  the 
extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  the  speakers  with  tongues  and  the  inter 
preters  of  tongues,  the  prophets  and  the  discerners 
of  spirits,  the  teachers  and  workers  of  miracles 
^1  Cor.  xii.  10,  28).  The  connecting-link  between 
the  0.  T.  prophet  and  the  speaker  with  tongues 
is  the  state  of  ecstasy  in  which  the  former  at 
times  received  his  visions  and  in  which  the  latter 
uttered  his  words.  The  0.  T.  prophet,  however, 
was  his  own  interpreter :  he  did  not  speak  in  the 
state  of  ecstasy :  he  saw  his  visions  in  the  ecstatic, 
and  declared  them  in  the  ordinary  state.  The 
N.  T.  discerner  of  spirits  has  his  prototype  in  such 
as  Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah  (IK.  xxii.  22),  the 
worker  of  miracles  in  Elijah  and  Elisha,  the  teacher 
in  each  and  all  of  the  prophets.  The  prophets  of 
the  N.  7.  represented  their  namesakes  of  the  0.  T. 
as  being  expounders  of  Divine  truth  and  inter 
preters  of  the  Divine  will  to  their  auditors. 


PROPHET 


932 


That  "rediotive  powers  did  oca  si  anally  exist  in 
the  N.  T.  prophets  is  proved  by  the  case  of  Agaluu; 
(Acts  xi.  28),  but  this  was  not  their  characteristic. 
They  were  not  an  order,  like  apostles,  bishops  or 
presbyters,  and  deacons,  but  they  were  men  or  women 
(Acts  xxi.  9)  who  had  the  x^P'fftJ-a  irpoQri-Titas 
vouchsafed  them.  If  men,  they  might  at  th* 
same  time  be  apostles  (1  Cor.  xiv.);  and  there 
was  nothing  to  hinder  the  different  xaptffnaTa  of 
wisdom,  knowledge,  faith,  teaching,  miracles,  pro 
phecy,  discernment,  tongues,  and  interpretation 
(l  Cor.  xii.),  being  all  accumulated  on  one  person, 
and  this  person  might  or  might  not  be  a  presbyter. 
St.  Paul  describes  prophecy  as  being  effective  foi 
the  conversion,  apparently  the  sudden  and  imme 
diate  conversion,  of  unbelievers  (1  Cor.  xiv.  24), 
ar.d  for  the  instruction  and  consolation  of  believers 
(76.31).  This  shows  its  nature.  It  was  a  spiritual 
gift  which  enabled  men  to  understand  and  to  teach 
the  truths  of  Christianity,  especially  as  veiled  in 
the  Old  Testament,  and  to  exhort  and  warn  with 
authority  and  effect  greater  than  human  (see  Locke, 
Paraphrase,  note  on  1  Cor.  xii.,  and  Conybeare 
and  Howson,  i.  461).  The  prophets  of  the  N.  T. 
were  supernaturally-illuminated  expounders  and 
preachei-s. 

S.  Augustinus,  De  Civitate  Dei,  lib.  xviii.  c. 
xxvii.  et  scq.,  Op.  torn.  vii.  p.  508,  Paris,  1685. 
D.  J.  G.  Carpzovius,  Introd.  ad  Libras  Canonicos, 
Lips.  1757.  John  Smith,  Select  Discourses:  On 
Prophecy,  p.  179,  Lond.  1821,  and  prefixed  in  Latin 
to  Le  Clerc's  Commentary,  Amst.  1731.  Lowth, 
De  Sacra  Poesi  Hebraeorum,OxoTi.  1821,  and  trans 
lated  by  Gregoiy,  Lond.  1835.  Davison,  Discourses 
on  Prophecy,  Oxf.  1839.  Butler,  Analogy  of  Reli 
gion,  Oxf.  1849.  Horsley,  Biblical  Criticism, 
Lond.  18'20.  Home,  Introduction  to  Holy  Scrip 
ture,  c.  iv.  §3,  Lond.  1828.  Van  Mildert,  Boyle 
Lectures,  S.  xxii.,  Lond.  1831.  Eichhom,  Die  He- 
brdischen  Propheten,  Getting.  1816.  Knobel,  Der 
Prophetismus  der  Hebraer,  Bresl.  1837.  Koster,  Die 
Propheten  des  A.  und  N.  T.,  Leipz.  1838.  Kwald, 
Die  Propheten  des  Alien  Bundes,  Stuttg.  1840. 
Hofmann,  Weissagung  und  Erfiillung  im  A.  und 
N.  T.,  Nordl.  1841.  Hengstenberg,  Christology 
of  the  Old  Testament,  in  T.  T.  Clark's  Trans 
lation,  Edinb.  1854.  Fairbaim,  Prophecy,  its 
Nature,  Functions,  and  Interpretation,  Edinb. 

1856.  Lee,  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  Lond. 

1857.  Oehler,  s.  v.  Prophetenthum  des  A.  T.  in 
Herzog's  Real  Encyclopadie,  Goth.  1860.     Pusej. 
The  Minor  Prophets,  Oxf.  1861.     Aids  to  Faith, 
art.  "  Prophecy"  and  "  Inspiration,"  Lond.  1861. 
R.  Payne  Smith,  Messianic  Interpretation  of  the 
Prophecies    of    Isaiah,    Oxf.     1862.      Davidson. 
Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  ii.  422.  On 
"  Prophecy,"  Lond.  1862.     Stanley,   Lectures  rm 
the  Jewish  Church,  Lond.  1863.  [F.  M.] 


ing  to  De  Wette,  Gesenius,  Schenkel,  Umbreit,  Hofmann, 
it  is  the  prophetical  body.  Augusti  refers  it  to  king 
Uzziah ;  Konynenburg  and  Buhrdt  to  Hezekiah  ;  Staudlin 
to  Isaiah  himself;  Bolten  to  the  house  of  David.  Ewald 
thinks  that  no  historical  person  was  intended,  but  that 
the  author  of  the  chapter  has  misled  his  readers  by  insert 
ing  a  passage  from  an  older  book,  in  which  a  martyr  was 
e poken  of.  "  This,"  he  says,  "  quite  spontaneously  sug 
gested  itself,  and  has  impressed  itself  on  his  mind  more 
and  more ;"  and  he  thinks  that  "  controversy  on  chap, 
liii,  will  never  cease  until  this  truth  is  acknowledged" 
(I'ropheten,  il.  S.  407).  Hcngstenberg  gives  the  follow 
ing  list  of  German  commentators  who  have  maintained 
toe  Messiiuu'c  explanation :— Dathe  Uonslur,  Kochcr, 


Koppe,  Mlchaelis,  Schmleder,  Storr,  Hansi,  Krtiger, 
Jahn,  Steudel,  Sack,  Kelnke,  Tholuck,  Havernick,  Stier. 
Hengstenberg's  own  exposition,  and  criticism  of  the  ex 
positions  of  others,  is  well  worth  consultation  (Christo 
logy,  vol.  ii.). 

t  Obadiah  is  generally  considered  to  have  lived  at  a 
later  date  than  is  compatible  with  a  chronological  arrange 
ment  of  the  canon,  in  consequence  of  his  reference  to  tht 
capture  of  Jerusalem.  But  such  an  inference  is  nol 
necessary,  for  the  prophet  might  have  thrown  himself  ic 
imagination  forward  to  the  date  of  his  prophecy  ('Heng 
stenberg),  or  the  words  which,  as  translated  by  me  A.  V, 
are  a  remonstrance  as  to  the  past,  may  be  really  but  ui 
imperative  as  to  the  future  (Pusey). 


940 


PROSELYTES 


PROSELYTES  (DnS:  irpofffavrou  1  Chr. 
xxii.  22,  &c. :  ytiupai,  Ex.  xii.  19:  Proselytf). 
The  Hebrew  word  thus  translated  is  in  the  A.  V. 
commonly  rendered  "stranger"  (Gen.  xv.  13,  Ex. 
ii.  22,  Is.  v.  17,  &c.).  The  LXX.,  as  above,  com 
monly  gives  the  equivalent  in  meaning  (irpofffavTot 
tbrb  TOV  Trpofff\i<i\vdei>ai  KO.IVTI  Kal  <f>i\oOt(f  iro\t- 
Tflq,,  Philo  and  Suidas,  s.  t>.),  but  sometimes  sub 
stitutes  a  Hellenized  form  (ytuapas)  of  the  Aramaic 
form  fcOVa.  In  the  N.  T.  the  A.  V.  has  taken  the 

word  in  a  more  restricted  meaning,  and  translated 
it  accordingly  (Matt,  xxiii.  15,  Acts  ii.  10,  vi.  5). 

The  existence,  through  all  stages  of  the  histoiy 
of  the  Israelites,  of  a  body  of  men,  not  of  the  same 
race,  but  holding  the  same  faith  and  adopting  the 
same  ritual,  is  a  fact  which,  from  its  very  nature, 
requires  to  be  dealt  with  historically.  To  start  with 
the  technical  distinctions  and  regulations  of  the  later 
Rabbis  is  to  invert  the  natural  order,  and  leads  to 
inevitable  confusion.  It  is  proposed  accordingly  to 
consider  the  condition  of  the  proselytes  of  Israel  in 
the  live  great  periods  into  which  the  history  of  the 
people  divides  itself:  viz.  (I.)  the  age  of  the  patri 
archs;  (II.)  from  the  Exodus  to  the  commencement 
of  the  monarchy ;  (III.)  the  period  of  the  monarchy  ; 
(IV.)  from  the  Babylonian  captivity  to  the  destruc 
tion  of  Jerusalem ;  (V.)  from  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  downwards. 

I.  The  position  of  the  family  of  Israel  as  a  dis 
tinct  nation,  with  a  special  religious  character,  ap 
pears  at  a  very  early  period  to  have  exercised  a 
power  of  attraction  over  neighbouring  races.     The 
slaves  and  soldiers  of  the  tribe  of  which  Abraham 
was  the  head  (Gen.  xvii.  27),  who  were  included 
with  him  in  the  covenant  of  circumcision,  can  hardly 
perhaps  be  classed  as  proselytes  in  the  later  sense. 
The  case  of  the  Shechemites,  however  (Gen.  xxxiv.), 
presents  a  more  distinct  instance.     The  converts  are 
swayed  partly  by  passion,  partly  by  interest.     The 
sons  of  Jacob  then,  as  afterwards,  require  circum 
cision  as  an  indispensable  condition  (Gen.  xxxiv.  14). 
This,  and  apparently  this  only,  was  required  of  pros 
elytes  in  the  pre-Mosaic  period. 

II.  The  life  of  Israel  under  the  Law,  from  the 
very  first,  presupposes  and  provides  for  the  incor 
poration  of  men  of  other  races.     The  "  mixed  mul 
titude  "  of  Ex.  xii.  38  implies  the  presence  of  pros 
elytes  more  or  less  complete.     It  is  recognised  in 
the  earliest  rules  for  the  celebration  of  the  Passover 
(Ex.  xii.  19).  The  "stranger"  of  this  and  other  laws 
in  the  A.  V.  answers  to  the  word  which  distinctly 
means  "  proselyte,"  and  is  so  translated  in  the  LXX., 
and  the  prominence  of  the  class  may  be  estimated 
by  the  frequency  with  which   the   word    recurs : 
9  times  in  Exodus,  20  in  Leviticus,  11  in  Num 
bers,  19  in  Deuteronomy.     The  laws  clearly  point 
to  the  position  of  a  convert.     The  "  stranger  "  is 
bound  by  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  (Ex.  xx.  10,  xxiii. 
12;  Deut.  v.  14).      Circumcision  is  the  condition 
of  any  fellowship  with  him  (Ex.  xii.  48  ;  Num.  ix. 

'  14).  He  is  to  be  present  at  the  Passover  (Ex.  xii. 
19),  the  Feast  of  Weeks  (Deut.  xvi.  11),  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles  (l)eut.  xvi.  14),  the  Day  of  Atone 
ment  (Lev.  xvi.  29).  The  laws  of  prohibited  mar 
riages  (Lev.  xviii.  20)  and  abstinence  from  blood 
(Lev.  xvii.  10)  are  binding  upon  him.  He  is  liable 
to  the  same  punishment  for  Molech- worship  (Lev. 
xx.  2)  and  ibr  blasphemy  (Lev.  xxiv.  16),  may 
claim  the  same  right  of  asylum  as  the  Israelites  in 
the  c-ties  of  refuge  (N-um.  xxxv.  15  ;  Josh.  xx.  9). 
On  the  other  side  b«  is  subjected  to  some  draw- 


PROSELYTE8 

Lacks.  He  cannot  hold  land  (Lev.  xix.  10).  He 
has  no  jtu  connubii  with  the  descendants  of  Aarou 
(Lev.  xxi.  14).  His  condition  is  assumed  to  be,  for 
the  most  part,  one  of  poverty  (Lev.  xxiii.  22),  often 
of  servitude  (Deut.  xxix.  11).  For  this  reason  hf 
is  placed  under  the  special  protection  of  the  law 
(Deut.  x.  18).  He  is  to  share  in  the  right  of  gleaning 
(Lev.  xix.  10),  is  placed  in  the  same  category  as  the 
fatherless  and  the  widow  (Deut.  xxiv.  17,  19,  xxvi 
12,  xxvii.  19),  is  joined  with  the  Levite  as  entitled 
to  the  tithe  of  every  third  year's  produce  (Deut. 
xiv.  29,  xxvi.  12).  Among  the  proselytes  of  this 
period  the  KENITES,  who  under  HOBAB  accom 
panied  the  Israelites  in  their  wanderings,  and  ulti 
mately  settled  in  Canaan,  were  probably  the  most 
conspicuous  (Judg.  i.  16).  The  presence  of  the  class 
was  recognised  in  the  solemn  declaration  of  blessings 
and  curses  from  Ebal  and  Gerizim  (Josh.  viii.  33). 

The  period  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  was 
not  favourable  to  the  admission  of  proselytes.  The 
people  had  no  strong  faith,  no  commanding  position. 
The  Gibeonites  (Josh,  ix.)  furnish  the  only  instance 
of  a  conversion,  and  their  condition  is  rather  that 
of  slaves  compelled  to  conform  than  of  free  pros 
elytes.  [NETHINIM.] 

III.  With  the  monarchy,  and  the  consequent  fame 
and  influence  of  the  people,  there  was  more  to 
attract  stragglers  from  the  neighbouring  nations, 
and  we  meet  accordingly  with  many  names  which 
suggest  the  presence  of  men  of  another  race  con 
forming  to  the  faith  of  Israel.  Doeg  the  Edomite 
(I  Sam.  xxi.  7),  Uriah  the  Hittite  (2  Sam.  xi.  3), 
Araunah  the  Jebusite  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  23),  Zelek  the 
Ammonite  (2  Sam.  xxni.  37),  Ithmah  the  Moabite 
(1  Chr.  xi.  46) — these  two  in  spite  of  an  express 
law  to  the  contrary  (Deut.  xxiii.  3) — and  at  a  later 
period  Shebna  the  scribe  (probably,  comp.  Alexander 
on  Is.  xxii.  15),  and  Ebed-Melech  the  Ethiopian  (Jer. 
xxxviii.  7),  are  examples  that  such  proselytes  might 
rise  even  to  high  offices  about  the  person  of  the 
king.  The  CHERETHITES  and  PELETHITES  con 
sisted  probably  of  foreigners  who  had  been  attracted 
to  the  service  of  David,  and  were  content  for  it  to 
adopt  the  religion  of  their  master  (Ewald,  Gesch. 
i.  330,  iii.  183).  The  vision  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  of  a 
time  in  which  men  of  Tyre,  Egypt,  Ethiopia,  Phi- 
listia,  should  all  be  registered  among  the  citizens  of 
Zion,  can  hardly  fail  to  have  had  its  starting-point 
in  some  admission  of  proselytes  within  the  memory 
of  the  writer  (Ewald  and  De  Wette  in  loc.).  A 
convert  of  another  kind,  the  type,  as  it  has  been 
thought,  of  the  later  proselytes  of  the  gate  (see 
below)  is  found  in  Naamaii  the  Syrian  (2  K.  v.  15, 
18)  recognising  Jehovah  as  his  God,  yet  not  binding 
himself  to  any  rigorous  observance  of  the  Law. 

The  position  of  the  proselytes  during  this  period 
appears  to  have  undergone  considerable  changes. 
On  the  one  hand  men  rose,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
power  and  fortune.  The  case  for  which  the  Law 
provided  (Lev.  xxv.  47)  might  actually  occur,  and 
they  might  be  the  creditors  of  Israelite  debtors, 
the  marten  of  Israelite  slaves.  R  might  well  be  a 
sign  of  the  times  in  the  later  days  of  the  monarchy 
that  they  became  "  very  high,''  the  "  head  "  and 
not  the  "  tail  "  of  the  people  (Deut.  xxviii.  43,  4). 
The  picture  had,  however,  another  side.  They  were 
treated  by  David  and  Solomon  as  a  subject-class, 
brought  (like  Perioeci,  almost  like  Helots)  undor  a 
system  of  compulsory  labour  from  which  others 
were  exempted  (1  Chr.  xxii.  2  ;  2  Chr.  ii.  17,  18). 
The  statistics  of  this  period,  taken  probably  tor 
that  pui-pose,  give  their  number  (probably,  i.  e.  th« 


PROSELYTES 

number  ct  adult  working  males)  at  153,600  (•&.)• 
They  were  subject  at  other  times  to  wanton  inso 
lence  and  outrage  (Ps.  xciv.  6).  As  some  compen 
sation  for  their  sufferings  they  became  the  special 
objects  of  the  care  and  sympathy  of  the  prophets. 
One  after  another  of  the  "  goodly  fellowship  "  pleads 
the  cause  of  the  proselytes  as  warmly  as  that  of  the 
widow  and  the  fatherless  (Jer.  vii.  6,  xxii.  3 ;  Ez. 
ixii.  7,  29;  Zech.  vii.  10;  Mai.  iii.  5).  A  large 
accession  of  converts  enters  into  all  their  hopes  of 
the  Divine  Kingdom  (Is.  ii.  2,  xi.  10,  Ivi.  3-6  ;  Mic. 
iv.  1).  The  sympathy  of  one  of  them  goes  still 
further.  He  sees,  in  the  far  future,  the  vision  of  a 
time  when  the  last  remnant  of  inferiority  shall  be 
removed,  and  the  proselytes,  completely  emanci 
pated,  shall  be  able  to  hold  and  inherit  land  even  as 
the  Israelites  (Ez.  xlvii.  22).« 

IV.  The  proselytism  of  the  period  after  the  cap 
tivity  assumed  a  different  character.  It  was  tor 
the  most  part  the  conformity,  not  of  a  subject  race, 
but  of  willing  adherents.  Even  as  early  as  the 
return  from  Babylon  we  have  traces  of  those  who 
were  drawn  to  a  faith  which  they  recognised  as 
holier  than  their  own,  and  had  "  separated  them 
selves"  unto  the  law  of  Jehovah  (Neh.  x.  28). 
The  presence  of  many  foreign  names  among  the 
NETHINIM  (Neh.  vii.  46-59)  leads  us  to  believe 
that  many  of  the  new  converts  dedicated  themselves 
specially  to  the  service  of  the  new  Temple.  With 
the  conquests  of  Alexander,  the  wars  between  Egypt 
and  Syria,  the  struggle  under  the  Maccabees,  the 
expansion  of  the  Roman  empire,  the  Jews  became 
more  widely  known  and  their  power  to  proselytise 
increased.  They  had  suffered  for  their  religion  in 
the  persecution  of  Antiochus.  and  the  spirit  of  mar 
tyrdom  was  followed  naturally  by  propagandism. 
Their  monotheism  was  rigid  and  unbending.  Scat 
tered  through  the  East  and  West,  a  marvel  and  a 
portent,  wondered  at  and  scorned,  attracting  and 
repelling,  they  presented,  in  an  age  of  shattered 
creeds,  and  corroding  doubts,  the  spectacle  of  a 
faith,  or  at  least  a  dogma  which  remained  unshaken. 
The  influence  was  sometimes  obtained  well,  and  ex 
ercised  for  good.  In  most  of  the  great  cities  of  the 
empire,  there  were  men  who  had  been  rescued  from 
idolatry  and  its  attendant  debasements,  and  brought 
under  the  power  of  a  higher  moral  law.  It  is 
possible  that  in  some  cases  the  purity  of  Jewish 
life  may  have  contributed  to  this  result,  and  attracted 
men  or  women  who  shrank  from  the  unutterable 
contamination,  in  the  midst  of  which  they  lived  .b 
The  converts  who  were  thus  attracted,  joined,  with 
varying  strictness  (infra)  in  the  worship  of  the 
Jews.  They  were  present  in  their  synagogues  (Acts 
xiii.  42,  43,  50,  xvii.  4,  xviii.  7).  They  came  up 
as  pilgrims  to  the  great  feasts  at  Jerusalem  (Acts 
ii.  10).  In  Palestine  itself  the  influence  was  often 
stronger  and  better.  Even  Roman  centurions  learnt 
to  love  the  conquered  nation,  built  synagogues  for 
them  (Luke  vii.  5),  fasted  and  prayed,  and  gave 
alms,  after  the  pattern  of  the  strictest  Jews  (Acts 
x.  2,  30),  and  became  preachers  of  the  new  faith  to 
the  soldiers  under  them  (»6.  v.  7).  Such  men, 
drawn  by  what  was  best  in  Judaism,  were  naturally 


PROSELYTES 


941 


a  The  significance  of  this  passage  in  its  historical  con 
nexion  with  1's.  Lxxxvil.,  already  referred  to,  and  its  spi 
ritual  fulfilment  in  the  language  of  St.  Paul  (Eph.  11.  19), 
deserve  a  fuller  notice  than  they  have  yet  received. 

b  This  influence  is  not  perhaps  to  be  altogether  ex 
cluded,  but  it  has  sometimes  been  enormously  exaggerated. 
Comp.  Dr.  Temple's  '  Essay  on  the  Education  of  the  World ' 
(tXeays  and  HevUu-t,  p  12). 


among  the  readiest  receivers  of  the  new  tiuth  which 
rose  out  of  it,  and  became,  in  many  coses,  the 
nucleus  of  a  Gentile  Church. 

Proselytism  had,  however,  its  darker  side.  The 
Jews  of  Palestine  were  eager  to  spread  their  faith 
by  the  same  weapons  as  those  with  which  they  hart 
defended  it.  Had  not  the  power  of  the  Empire 
stood  in  the  way,  the  religion  of  Moses,  stripped  of 
its  higher  elements,  might  have  been  propagated 
far  and  wide,  by  force,  as  was  afterwards  the  religion 
of  Mahomet.  As  it  was,  the  Idumaeans  had  the 
alternative  offered  them  by  John  Hyrcanus  of  death, 
exile,  or  circumcision  (Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  9,  §3).  The 
Ituraeans  were  converted  in  the  same  way  by  Aris- 
tobulus  (ib.  xiii.  11,  §3).  In  the  more  frenzied 
fanaticism  of  a  later  period,  the  Jews  under  Jo- 
sephus  could  hardly  be  restrained  from  seizing  and 
circumcising  two  chiefs  of  Trachonitis  who  had 
come  as  envoys  (Joseph.  Vit.  23).  They  compelled 
a  Roman  centurion,  whom  they  had  taken  prisoner, 
to  purchase  his  life  by  accepting  the  sign  of  the 
covenant  (Joseph.  B.J.  ii.  11,  §10).  Where  force 
was  not  in  their  power  (the  "  veluti  Judaei,  co- 
gemus "  of  Hor.  Sat.  i.  4,  142,  implies  that  they 
sometimes  ventured  on  it  even  at  Rome),  they  ob 
tained  their  ends  by  the  most  unscrupulous  fraud. 
They  appeared  as  soothsayers,  diviners,  exorcists, 
and  addressed  themselves  especially  to  the  fears  and 
superstitions  of  women.  Their  influence  over  these 
became  the  subject  of  indignant  satire  (Juv.  Sat. 
vi.  543-547).  They  persuaded  noble  matrons  to 
send  money  and  purple  to  the  Temple  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xviii.  3,  §5).  At  Damascus  the  wives  of  nearly 
half  the  population  were  supposed  to  be  tainted 
with  Judaism  (Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  10,  §2).  At  Rome 
they  numbered  in  their  ranks,  in  the  person  of 
Poppaea,  even  an  imperial  concubine  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xx.  7,  §11).  The  converts  thus  made,  cast  off  all 
ties  of  kindred  and  affection  (Tac.  Hist.  \.  9). 
Those  who  were  most  active  in  proselytizing  were 
precisely  those  from  whose  teaching  all  that  was 
most  true  aad  living  had  departed.  The  vices  of 
the  Jew  were  engrafted  on  the  vices  of  the  heathen. 
A  repulsive  casuistry  released  the  convert  from 
obligations  which  he  had  before  recognised,'  while 
in  other  things  he  was  bound,  hand  and  foot,  to  an 
unhealthy  superstition.  It  was  no  wonder  that  he 
became  "  twofold  more  the  child  of  Gehenna " 
(Matt,  xxiii.  15)  than  the  Pharisees  themselves. 

The  position  of  such  proselytes  was  indeed  every 
way  pitiable.  At  Rome,  and  in  other  large  cities, 
they  became  the  butts  of  popular  scurrility.  The 
words  "curtus,"  "  verpes,"  met  them  at  every  corner 
(Hor.  Sat.  i.  4,  142  ;  Mart.  vii.  29,  34,  81,  xi.  95, 
xii.  37).  They  had  to  share  the  fortunes  of  the 
people  with  whom  they  had  cast  in  their  lot,  might 
be  banished  from  Italy  (Acts  xviii.  2 ;  Suet.  Claud. 
25),  or  sent  to  die  of  malaria  in  the  most  unhealthy 
stations  of  the  empire  (Tac.  Ann.  ii.  85).  At  a  later 
time,  they  were  bound  to  make  a  public  profession  of 
their  conversion,  and  to  pay  a  special  tax  (Suet. 
Domit.  xii.).  If  they  failed  to  do  this  and  were  sus 
pected,  they  might  be  subject  to  the  most  degrading 
examination  to  ascertain  the  fact  of  their  being  prose- 


«  The  Law  of  the  Corban  may  serve  as  one  instance 
(Matt.  xv.  4-6).  Another  is  found  in  the  Rabbinic 
teaching  as  to  marriage.  Circumcision,  like  a  new  birth, 
cancelled  all  previous  relationships,  and  unions  within 
the  nearest  degrees  of  blood  were  therefore  no  longei 
incestuous  (Maimon.  ex  Jebam.  p.  982 :  Selden.  dt  Jurt 
Nat.  el  Hent.  ii.  4.  I'xur  Htl/r.  ii.  13). 


342 


PROSELYTES 


lytes  (ibid.}.  Among  the  Jews  themselves  their  case 
was  not  much  better.  For  the  most  part  the  convert 
gained  but  little  honour  even  from  those  who  gloried 
in  having  brought  him  over  to  their  sect  and  party. 
The  popular  Jewish  feeling  about  them  was  like 
the  popular  Christian  feeling  about  a  converted 
Jew.  They  were  regarded  (by  a  strange  Rabbinic 
perversion  of  Is.  xiv.  1)  as  the  leprosy  of  Israel, 
"  cleaving  "  to  the  house  of  Jacob  (Jebam.  47,  4 ; 
Kidduah.  70,  6).  An  opprobrious  proverb  coupled 
them  with  the  vilest  profligates  ("  proselyti  et  paede- 
rastae")  as  hindering  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
(Lightfbot,  Hor.  ffeb.  in  Matt,  xxiii.  5).  It  became 
a  recognised  maxim  that  no  wise  man  would  trust 
a  proselyte  even  to  the  twenty-fourth  generation 
(Jalkuth  Kuth,  (.  163  a). 

The  better  Rabbis  did  their  best  to  guard  against 
these  evils.  Anxious  to  exclude  all  unworthy  con 
verts,  they  grouped  them,  according  to  their  motives, 
with  a  somewhat  quaint  classification. 

(1.)  Love-proselytes,  where  they  were  drawn  by 
the  hope  of  gaining  the  beloved  one.  (The  story 
of  Syllaeus  and  Salome,  Joseph.  Ant.  xvi.  7, 
§6,  is  an  example  of  a  half-finished  conversion 
of  this  kind.) 

(2.)  Man-for-Woman,  or  Woman-for-Man  prose 
lytes,  where  the  husband  followed  the  religion 
of  the  wife,  or  conversely. 

(3.)  Esther-proselytes,  where  conformity  was  as 
sumed  to  escape  danger,  as  in  the  original 
Purim  (Esth.  viii.  17). 

(4.)  King's-table-proselytes,  who  were  led  by  the 
hope  of  court  favour  and  promotion,  like  the 
converts  under  David  and  Solomon. 

(5.}  Lion-proselytes,  where  the  conversion  ori 
ginated  in  a  superstitious  dread  of  a  divine 
judgment,  as  with  the  Samaritans  of  2  K. 
xvii.  26. 

(Gem.  Hieros.  Kiddush.  65,  6 ;  Jost,  Judenth.  \. 
448.)  None  of  these  were  regarded  as  fit  for  admis 
sion  within  the  covenant.  When  they  met  with 
one  with  whose  motives  they  were  satisfied,  he  was 
put  to  a  yet  further  ordeal.  He  was  warned  that 
in  becoming  a  Jew  he  was  attaching  himself  to  a 
persecuted  people,  that  in  this  life  he  was  to  expect 
only  suffering,  and  to  look  for  his  reward  in  the 
next.  Sometimes  these  cautions  were  in  their  turn 
carried  to  an  extreme,  and  amounted  to  a  policy  of 
exclusion.  A  protest  against  them  on  the  part  of 
a  disciple  of  the  Great  Hillel  is  recorded,  which 
throws  across  the  dreary  rubbish  of  Rabbinism  the 
momentary  gleam  of  a  noble  thought.  "  Our  wise 
men  teach,"  said  Simon  ben  Gamaliel,  "  that  when 
a  heathen  comes  to  enter  into  the  covenant,  our 
part  is  to  stretch  out  our  hand  to  him  and  to  bring 
him  under  the  wings  of  God"  (Jost,  Judenth. 
i.  447). 

Another  mode  of  meeting  the  difficulties  of  the 
case  was  characteristic  of  the  period.  Whether  we 
may  transfer  to  it  the  full  formal  distinction  be 
tween  Proselytes  of  the  Gate  and  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness  (infra)  may  be  doubtful  enough,  but 
we  find  two  distinct  modes  of  thought,  two  distinct 
policies  in  dealing  with  converts.  The  history  of 
Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene,  and  her  son  Izates, 
presents  the  two  in  collision  with  each  other.  They 
had  been  converted  by  a  Jewish  merchant,  Ananias, 
but  the  queen  feared  lest  the  circumcision  of  her 
sou  should  disquiet  and  alarm  her  subjects.  Ananias 
assured  her  that  it  was  not  necessary.  1  lei-  son  might 
worship  God,  study  ihe  iaw,  keep  the  command- 


PROSELYTES 

ments,  without  it.  Soon,  however,  a  stricter  teaehei 
came,  Kleazar  of  Galilee.  Finding  Izates  reading 
the  law,  he  told  him  sternly  that  it  was  of  littlo 
use  to  study  that  which  he  disobeyed,  and  so  worked 
upon  his  fears,  that  the  young  devotee  vas  eager  to 
secure  the  safety  of  which  his  uncircumcision  had 
deprived  him  (Joseph.  Ant.  xx.  2,  §5 ;  Jost,  Ju 
denth.  i.  341).  On  the  part  of  some,  therefore, 
there  was  a  disposition  to  dispense  with  what 
others  looked  on  as  indispensable.  The  centurions 
of  Luke  vii.  (probably)  and  Acts  x.,  possibly  the 
Hellenes  of  John  xii.  20  and  Acts  xiii.  42,  are  in 
stances  of  men  admitted  on  the  fonner  footing.  The 
phrases  ol  <re/3o'/*«*'0'  itfOffitKvTOi  (Acts  xiii.  43), 
ol  (T(l36/ji.fvoi  (xvii.  4, 17 ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiv.  7,  §2), 
&vSpts  firXajSeij  (Acts  ii.  5,  vii.  2)  are  often,  but 
inaccurately,  supposed  to  describe  the  same  class 
— the  Proselytes  of  the  Gate.  The  probability  is, 
either  that  the  terms  were  used  generally  of  ali 
converts,  or,  if  with  a  specific  meaning,  were  applied 
to  the  full  Proselytes  of  Righteousness  (comp.  a 
full  examination  of  the  passages  in  question  by  N. 
Lardner,  On  the  Decree  of  Acts  xv. ;  Works  xi.  305). 
The  two  tendencies  were,  at  all  events,  at  work,  and 
the  battle  between  them  was  renewed  ail'erwards 
on'  holier  ground  and  on  a  wider  scale.  Ananias 
and  Eleazar  were  represented  in  the  two  parties  of 
the  Council  of  Jerusalem.  The  germ  of  truth  had 
been  quickened  into  a  new  life,  and  was  emancipating 
itself  from  the  old  thraldom.  The  decrees  of  the 
Council  were  the  solemn  assertion  of  the  principle 
that  believers  in  Christ  were  to  stand  on  the  footing 
of  Proselytes  of  the  Gate,  not  of  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness.  The  teaching  of  St.  Paul  as  to 
righteousness  and  its  conditions,  its  dependence  on 
faith,  its  independence  of  circumcision,  stands  out 
in  sharp  clear  contrast  with  the  teachers  who  taught 
that  that  rite  was  necessary  to  salvation,  and  con 
fined  the  term  "  righteousness  "  to  the  circumcised 
convert. 

V.  The  teachers  who  carried  on  the  Rabbinical 
succession  consoled  themselves,  as  they  saw  the  new 
order  waxing  and  their  own  glory  waning,  by  de 
veloping  the  decaying  system  with  an  almost  micro 
scopic  minuteness.  They  would  at  least  transmit 
to  future  generations  the  full  measure  of  the 
religion  of  their  fathers.  In  proportion  as  they 
ceased  to  have  any  power  to  proselytize,  they  dwelt 
with  exhaustive  fulness  on  the  question  how  pros 
elytes  were  to  be  made.  To  this  period  accord 
ingly  belong  the  rules  and  decisions  which  are  often 
carried  back  to  an  earlier  age,  and  which  may  now 
be  conveniently  discussed.  The  precepts  of  the 
Talmud  may  indicate  the  practices  and  opinions  of 
the  Jews  from  the  2nd  to  the  5th  century.  They 
are  very  untrustworthy  as  to  any  earlier  time. 
The  points  of  interest  which  present  themselves  for 
inquiry  are,  (1.)  The  Classification  of  Proselytes. 
(2.)  The  ceremonies  of  their  admission. 

The  division  which  has  been  in  part  antici 
pated,  was  recognised  by  the  Talmudic  Rabbis,  but 
received  its  full  expulsion  at  the  hands  of  Mai- 
monides  (ffilc.  Mel.  i.  6).  They  claimed  for  it  a 
remote  antiquity,  a  divine  authority.  The  term 
Proselytes  of  the  Gate  (ly^H  ^3),  was  derived 
from  the  frequently  occurring  description  in  the 
Law,  "  the  stranger  (13)  that  is  within  thy  gates" 
(Ex.  xx.  10,  &c.).  They  were  known  also  as  the 
sojouruers  (2Knn  ^3),  with  a  reference  to  Lev. 
xxv.  47,  &c.  To  them  were  referred  the  greater 


PROSELYTES 

part  of  the  precepts  of  the  Law  as  to  the  "  stranger." 
The  Targums  of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  give  this  as 
the  equivalent  in  Deut.  xxiv.  21.  Converts  of  this 
class  were  not  bound  by  circumcision  and  the  other 
special  laws  of  the  Mosaic  code.  It  was  enough 
for  them  to  observe  the  seven  precepts  of  Noah 
(Otho,  Lex.  Rabb.  "  Noachida ;"  Selden,  De  Jur. 
Nat.  et  Gent.  i.  10),  ».  e.  the  six  supposed  to 
have  been  given  to  Adam,  (1)  against  idolatry, 
(2)  against  blaspheming,  (3)  against  bloodshed, 
(4)  against  uncleanness,  (5)  against  theft,  (6)  of 
obedience,  with  (7)  the  prohibition  of  "flesh  with 
the  blood  thereof"  given  to  Noah.  The  proselyte 
was  not  to  claim  the  privileges  of  an  Israelite,  might 
not  redeem  his  first-born,  or  pay  the  half-shekel 
(Leyrer,  ut  inf.).  He  was  forbidden  to  study  the 
Law  under  pain  of  death  (Otho,  I.  c.).  The  later 
Rabbis,  when  Jerusalem  had  passed  into  other  hands, 
held  that  it  was  unlawful  for  him  to  reside  within 
the  holy  city  (Maimon.  Beth-haccher,  vii.  14).  In 
return  they  allowed  him  to  offer  whole  burnt- 
offerings  for  the  priest  to  sacrifice,  and  to  contribute 
money  to  the  Corban  of  the  Temple.  They  held 
out  to  him  the  hope  of  a  place  in  the  paradise  of 
the  world  to  come  (Leyrer).  They  insisted  that 
the  profession  of  his  faith  should  be  made  solemnly 
in  the  presence  of  three  witnesses  (Maimon.  Hilc. 
Mel.  viii.  10).  The  Jubilee  was  the  proper  season 
for  his  admission  (M filler,  De  Pros,  in  Ugolini  xxii. 
841). 

All  this  seems  so  full  and  precise,  that  we  cannot 
wonder  that  it  has  led  many  writers  to  look  on  it  as 
representing  a  reality,  and  most  commentators  ac 
cordingly  have  seen  these  Proselytes  of  the  Gate  in 
the  ffefioufvoi,  euAaj8e?s,  (pofiov/j.fvoi  T&V  &ebv  of 
the  Acts.  It  remains  doubtful,  however,  whether 
it  was  ever  more  than  a  paper  scheme  of  what  ought 
to  be,  disguising  itself  as  having  actually  been. 
The  writers  who  are  most  full,  who  claim  for  the 
distinction  the  highest  antiquity,  confess  that  there 
had  been  no  Proselytes  of  the  Gate  since  the  Two 
Tribes  and  a  half  had  been  carried  away  into  cap 
tivity  (Maimon.  Hilc.  Melc.  i.  6).  They  could 
only  be  admitted  at  the  jubilee,  and  there  had  since 
then  been  no  jubilee  celebrated  (Mtiller,  /.  c.).  All 
that  can  be  said  therefore  is,  that  in  the  time  of  the 
N.  T.  we  have  independent  evidence  (ut  supra)  of 
the  existence  of  converts  of  two  degrees,  and  that 
the  Talmudic  division  is  the  formal  systematising  of 
an  earlier  fact.  The  words  "  proselytes,"  and  ot 
fff/36[j.€voi  rbv  ®fbv,  were,  however,  in  all  proba 
bility  limited  to  the  circumcised. 

In  contrast  with  these  were  the  Proselytes  of 
Righteousness  (pTVH  H3),  known  also  as  Pros 
elytes  of  the  Covenant,  perfect  Israelites.  By 
some  writers  the  Talmudic  phrase,  proselyti  tracti 
(D'T-'HS)  is  applied  to  them  as  drawn  to  the  cove 
nant  by  spontaneous  conviction  (Buxtorf,  Lexic. 
s.  v.),  while  others  (Kimchi)  refer  it  to  those  who 
were  constrained  to  conformity,  like  the  Gibeonites. 
Here  also  we  must  receive  what  we  find  with  the 
same  limitation  as  before.  All  seems  at  first  clear 
and  defin-te  enough.  The  proselyte  was  first  cate 
chised  as  to  his  motives  (Maimon.  ut  supra).  If 
these  were  satisfactory,  he  was  first  instructed  as 
to  the  Divine  protection  of  the  Jewish  people,  and 
then  circumcised.  In  the  case  of  a  convert  already 


PROSELYTES 


t>43 


circumcised  (a  Midianite,  e.  g.  or  an  Egyptian),  it 
was  still  necessary  to  draw  a  few  drops  of  "  this 
blood  of  the  covenant  "  (Gem.  Bab.  Shabb.  f. 
135  a).  A  special  prayer  was  appointed  to  accom 
pany  the  act  of  circumcision.  Often  the  proselyt; 
took  a  new  name,  opening  the  Hebrew  Bible  and 
accepting  the  first  that  came  (Leyrer,  ut  infr.) 

All  this,  however,  was  not  encugh.  The  convert 
was  still  a  "  stranger."  His  children  would  be 
counted  as  bastards,  i.  e.  aliens.  Baptism  was  re 
quired  to  complete  his  admission.  When  the  wound 
was  healed,  he  was  stripped  of  all  his  clothes,  in  the 
presence  of  the  three  witnesses  who  had  acted  as  his 
teachers,  and  who  now  acted  as  his  sponsors,  the 
"fathers"  of  the  proselyte  (Ketubh.  xi.,  Erubh. 
xv.  1),  and  led  into  the  tank  or  pool.  As  he  stood 
there,  up  to  his  neck  in  water,  they  repeated  the 
great  commandments  of  the  Law.  These  he  pro 
mised  and  vowed  to  keep,  and  then,  with  an  accom 
panying  benediction,  he  plunged  under  the  water. 
To  leave  one  hand-breadth  of  his  body  unsubmerged 
would  have  vitiated  the  whole  rite  (Otho,  Lex. 
Rabb.  "  Baptismus  ;"  Reisk.  De  Bapt.  Pros,  in 
Ugolini  xxii.).  Strange  as  it  seems,  this  part  of 
the  ceremony  occupied,  in  the  eyes  of  the  later 
Rabbis,  a  co-ordinate  place  with  circumcision.  The 
latter  was  incomplete  without  it,  for  baptism  also 
was  of  the  fathers  (Gem.  Bab.  Jebam.  f.  461,  2). 
One  Rabbi  appears  to  have  been  bold  enough  to  de 
clare  baptism  to  have  been  sufficient  by  itself  (ibid.)  ; 
but  for  the  most  part,  both  were  reckoned  as  alike 
indispensable.  They  carried  back  the  origin  of  the 
baptism  to  a  remote  antiquity,  finding  it  in  the 
command  of  Jacob  (Gen.  xxxv.  2)  and  of  Moses 
(Ex.  xix.  10).  The  Targum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan 
inserts  the  word  "  Thou  shalt  circumcise  and 
baptise "  in  Ex.  xii.  44.  Even  in  the  Ethiopic 
version  of  Matt,  xxiii.  15,  we  find  "  compass  sea 
and  land  to  baptise  one  proselyte"  (Winer,  Rwb. 
s.  v.).  Language,  foreshadowing,  or  caricaturing, 
a  higher  truth  was  used  of  this  baptism.  It  was 
a  new  birth.d  (Jebam.  f.  62.  1 ;  92.  1  ;  Maimon. 
Tssur.  Bich.  c.  14 ;  Lightfoot,  Harm,  of  Gospels, 
iii.  14  ;  Exerc.  on  John  iii.).  The  proselyte  became 
a  little  child.  He  received  the  Holy  Spirit  (Jebam. 
f.  22  a,  48  6.).  All  natural  relationships,  as  we 
have  seen,  were  cancelled. 

The  baptism  was  followed,  as  long  as  the  Temple 
stood,  by  the  offering  or  Corban.  It  consisted,  like 
the  offerings  after  a  birth  (the  analogy  apparently 
being  carried  on),  of  two  turtle-doves  or  pigeons 
(Lev.  xii.  18).  When  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 
made  the  sacrifice  impossible,  a  vow  to  offer  it  as 
soon  as  the  Temple  should  be  rebuilt  was  substi 
tuted.  For  women-proselytes,  there  were  only 
baptism  •  and  the  Corban,  or,  in  later  times,  baptism 
by  itself. 

It  is  obvious  that  this  account  suggests  many 
questioas  of  grave  interest.  Was  this  ritual  ob 
served  as  early  as  the  commencement  of  the  first 
century?  If  so,  was  the  baptism  of  John,  or  that 
of  the  Christian  Church  in  any  way  derived  from, 
or  connected  with  the  baptism  of  proselytes?  If 
not,  was  the  latter  in  any  way  borrowed  from  the 
former  ? 

It  would  be  impossible  here  to  enter  at  all  into 
the  literature  of  this  controversy.  The  list  of 
works  named  by  Leyrer  occupies  nearly  a  page  of 


<l  This  thought  probably  had  its  starting-point  in  the 
language  of  Ps.  Ixxxvii.  There  also  the  proselytes  of  Ba 
bylon  and  Kgypt  are  registered  as  "  bora  "  in  Zlon. 


e  The  Galilean  female  proselytes  were  sail  to  have  ob 
jected  to  this,  as  causing  barrenness  (Winer,  Jkalwb.). 


944 


PROSELYTES 


Herat's  Real-Encyclopadie.  It  will  be  enough  to 
sum  up  the  conclusions  which  seem  fairly  to  be 
irawn  from  them. 

(1.)  There  is  no  direct  evidence  of  the  practice 
being  in  use  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
The  statements  of  the  Talmud  as  to  its  having 
come  from  the  fathers,  and  their  exegesis  of  the 
0.  T.  in  connexion  with  it,  are  alike  destitute  of 
authority. 

(2.)  The  negative  argument  drawn  from  the 
silence  of  the  0.  T.,  of  the  Apocrypha,  of  Philo, 
and  of  Josephus,  is  almost  decisive  against  the  belief 
that  there  was  in  their  time,  a  baptism  of  pros 
elytes,  with  as  much  importance  attached  to  it  as 
we  find  in  the  Talmudists. 

(3.)  It  remains  probable,  however,  that  there 
was  a  baptism  in  use  at  a  period  considerably  earlier 
than  that  for  which  we  have  direct  evidence.  The 
symbol  was  in  itself  natural  and  fit.  It  fell  in 
with  the  disposition  of  the  Pharisees  and  others  to 
multiply  and  discuss  "washings"  (£airri(r/uol, 
Mark  vh.  4)  of  all  kinds.  The  tendency  of  the 
later  Rabbis  was  rather  to  heap  together  the  customs 
and  traditions  of  the  past  than  to  invent  new  ones. 
If  there  had  not  been  a  baptism,  there  would  have 
been  no  initiatory  rite  at  all  for  female  proselytes. 

(4.)  The  history  of  the  N.  T.  itself  suggests  the 
existence  of  such  a  custom.  A  sign  is  seldom  chosen 
unless  it  already  has  a  meaning  for  those  to  whom 
it  is  addressed.  The  fitness  of  the  sign  in  this  case 
would  be  in  proportion  to  the  associations  already 
connected  with  it.  It  would  bear  witness  on  the 
assumption  of  the  previous  existence  of  the  pros 
elyte-baptism,  that  the  change  from  the  then  con 
dition  of  Judaism  to  the  kingdom  of  God  was  as 
great  as  that  from  idolatry  to  Judaism.  The  ques 
tion  of  the  Priests  and  Levites,  "  Why  baptixest 
thou  then?  "  (John  i.  25),  implies  that  they  won 
dered,  not  at  the  thing  itself,  but  at  its  being  done 
for  Israelites  by  one  who  disclaimed  the  names 
which,  in  their  eyes,  would  have  justified  the  intro 
duction  of  a  new  order.  In  like  manner  the  words 
of  our  Lgrd  to  Nicodemus  (Johniii.  10),  imply  the 
existence  of  a  teaching  as  to  baptism  like  that  above 
referred  to.  He,  "  the  teacher  of  Israel,"  had  been 
familiar  with  "  these  things  " — the  new  birth,  the 
gift  of  the  Spirit — as  words  and  phi-ases  applied  to 
heathen  proselytes.  He  failed  to  grasp  the  deeper 
truth  which  lay  beneath  them,  and  to  see  that 
they  had  a  wider,  an  universal  application. 

(5.)  It  is,  however,  not  improbable  that  there 
may  have  been  a  reflex  action  in  this  matter,  from 
the  Christian  upon  the  Jewish  Church.  The  Rabbis 
saw  the  new  society,  in  proportion  as  the  Gentile 
element  in  it  became  predominant,  throwing  off  cir 
cumcision,  relying  on  baptism  only.  They  could 
not  ignore  the  reverence  which  men  had  for  the 
outward  sign,  their  belief  that  it  was  all  but  iden 
tical  with  the  thing  signified.  There  was  every 
thing  to  lead  them  to  give  a  fresh  prominence  to 
what  had  been  before  subordinate.  If  the  Nazarenes 
attracted  men  by  their  baptism,  they  would  show 
that  they  had  baptism  as  well  as  circumcision.  The 
necessary  absence  of  the  Corban  after  the  destruction 
of  the  Temple  would  also  tend  to  give  more  import 
ance  to  the  remaining  rite. 

Two  facts  of  some  interest  r;main  to  be  noticed. 
(1.)  It  formed  part  of  the  Rabbinic  hopes  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah  that  then  there  should  be 
no  more  proselytes.  The  distinctive  name,  with 
its  b<-and  of  inferiority,  should  be  laid  aside,  and  ail, 
».ven  the  Nethinim  and  the  Mumxcrim  (children  of 


PROVERBS.  BOOR  OF 

marriages)  should  be  counted  pure  ^Sehoett» 
gta,  //or.  Ifeb.  ii.  p.  614).  (2.)  Pa'rtly,  perhaps, 
as  connected  with  this  feeling,  partly  in  conse 
quence  of  the  ill-repute  into  which  the  won!  had 
fallen,  there  is,  throughout  the  N.  T.  a  sedulous 
avoidance  of  it.  The  Christian  convert  from  hea 
thenism  is  not  a  proselyte,  but  a  ve6<pvros  (1  T:'m. 
iii.  6). 

Literature.  —  Information  more  or  less  accurate 
is  to  be  found  in  the  Archaeologies  of  Jahn,  Carp- 
zov,  Saalschiitz,  Lewis,  Leusden.  The  treatises 
cited  above  in  Ugolini's  Thesaurus,  xxii.  ;  Slenogt. 
de  Proselytis  ;  Miiller,  de  Proselytis  ;  Reisk.  d«. 
Bapt.  Judaeorum  ;  Danz.  Bapt.  Proselyt.,  are  all 
of  them  copious  and  interesting.  The  article  by 
Leyrer  in  Herzog's  Real-Encyclop.  s.  v.  "  Prose- 
lyten,"  contains  the  fullest  and  most  satisfying  dis 
cussion  of  the  whole  matter  at  present  accessible. 
The  writer  is  indebted  to  it  for  much  of  the  materials 
of  the  present  article,  and  for  most  of  the  Talmudic 
references.  [E.  H.  P.] 

PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF.  t.  Title.—  The 
title  of  this  book  in  Hebrew  is,  as  usual,  taken 


from  the  first  word,  'vK'O,  mishle,  or,  more  fully, 
nfcfrK>  'hvfo,  mishle  ShelSmoh,  and  is  in  this  case 
appropriate  to  the  contents.  By  this  name  it  is 
commonly  known  in  the  Talmud  ;  but  among  the 
later  Jews,  and  even  among  the  Talmudists  them 
selves,  the  title  HO3n  "ISO,  sepher  chocmdh, 
"  book  of  wisdom,"  is  said  to  have  been  given  to  it. 
It  does  not  appear,  however,  from  the  passages  of 
the  Josephoth  to  the  Baba  Bathra  (fol.  14  6),  that 
this  is  necessarily  the  case.  All  that  is  there  said 
is  that  the  Books  of  Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes  are 
both  "books  of  wisdom,"  with  a  reference  rather  to 
theii  contents  than  to  the  titles  by  which  they  were 
known.  In  the  early  Christian  Church  the  title 
Trapo^uicti  SoAojutoj/Tos  was  adopted  from  the  trans 
lation  of  the  LXX.  ;  and  the  book  is  also  quoted  as 
ffo<j>ia,  "  wisdom,"  or  j]  Travdperos  ffoQia,  "  wisdom 
that  is  the  sum  of  all  virtues."  This  last  title  is 
given  to  it  by  Clement  in  the  Ep.  ad  Cor.  i.  57, 
where  Prov.  i.  23-31  is  quoted  with  the  introduc 
tion  ovTtas  yh,p  \4yti  i]  iravApfros  <ro<f>ta;  and 
Eusebius  (H.  E.  iv.  22)  says  that  not  only  Hege- 
sippus,  but  Irenaeus  and  the  whole  band  of  ancient 
writers,  following  the  Jewish  unwritten  tradition, 
called  the  Proveibs  of  Solomon  wavdptrov  ffo<f>(cu>. 
According  to  Melito  of  Sardes  (Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  26), 
the  Proverbs  were  also  called  <rod>ia,  "  wisdom,' 
simply  ;  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  refers  to  them 
(Orat.  xi.)  as  iraiSayuyiKfy  <rotf>ia.  The  title  in 
the  Vulgate  is  Liber  Proverbiorum,  quern  ffebraet 
Misk  appellant. 

The  significance  of  the  Hebrew  title  may  here 
be  appropriately  discussed.  /K'D,  mdshdl,  rendered 
in  the  A.  V.  "  by-word,"  "  parable,"  "  proverb," 
expresses  all  and  even  more  than  is  conveyed  by 
these  its  English  representatives.  It  is  derived  from 
a  root,  ?K>D,  mdshal,  "  to  be  like,"  a  and  the  pri 
mary  idea  involved  in  it  is  that  of  likeness,  com- 


Compare   Arab.    VA*O.   mathala,    "  to   be   like  ;" 

B~~ 
,  mitlil.  "likeness;"  and  the  adj.  JJLc,  mathal 


"  like."    The  cognate  Aethiop'c  and  Syriac  roots  have 
the  same  moaning. 


JL'llO  VERBS.  BOOK  OF 

piinBOD  This  form  of  comparison  would  very  na 
turally  be  taken  by  the  bhort  pithy  sentences  whicli 
passed  into  use  as  popular  savings  and  proverbs, 
especially  when  employed  in  mockery  and  sarcasm, 
as  in  Mic.  ii.  4,  Hab.  ii.  6,  and  even  in  the  more 
developed  taunting  song  of  triumph  for  the  fall 
of  Babylon  in  Is.  xiv.  4.  Probably  all  proverbial 
sayings  were  at  first  of  the  nature  of  similes,  but 
the  term  mashal  soon  acquired  a  more  extended 
significance.  It  was  applied  to  denote  such  short, 
pointed  sayings,  as  do  not  involve  a  comparison 
directly,  but  still  convey  their  meaning  by  the  help 
of  a  figure,  as  in  1  Sam.  x.  12,  Ez.  xii.  22,  23, 
xvii.  2,  3  (comp.  irapaPo^,  Luke  iv.  23).  From 
this  stage  of  its  application  it  passed  to  that  of  sent 
entious  maxims  generally,  as  in  1'rov.  i.  1,  x.  1, 
xxv.  1,  xxvi.  7,  9,  Eccl.  xii.  9,  Job  xiii.  12,  many 
of  which,  however,  still  involve  a  comparison  (Prov. 
xxv.  3,  11,  12,  13,  14,  &c.,  xxvi.  1,  2,  3,  &c.). 
Such  comparisons  are  either  expressed,  or  the  things 
compared  are  placed  side  by  side,  and  the  compar 
ison  left  for  the  hearer  or  reader  to  supply.  Next 
we  find  it  used  of  those  longer  pieces  in  which  a 
single  idea  is  no  longer  exhausted  in  a  sentence,  but 
forms  the  geim  of  the  whole,  and  is  worked  out 
into  a  didactic  poem.  Many  instances  of  this  kind 
occur  in  the  first  section  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs : 
others  are  found  in  Job  xxvii.,  xxix.,  in  both  which 
chapters  Job  takes  up  his  mashal,  or  "  parables,"  as 
it  is  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  The  "parable"  of 
Balaam,  in  Num.  xxiii.  7-10,  xxiv.  3-9,  15-19,  20, 
21-22,  23-24,  are  prophecies  conveyed  in  figures; 
but  mashal  also  denotes  the  "  parable  "  proper,  as 
in  Ez.  xvii.  2,  xx.  49  (xxi.  5),  xxiv.  3.  Lowth,  in 
his  notes  on  Is.  xiv.  4,  speaking  of  mashal,  says : 
"  I  take  this  to  be  the  general  name  tor  poetic  style 
among  the  Hebrews,  including  every  sort  of  it,  as 
ranging  under  one,  or  other,  or  all  of  the  characters, 
of  sententious,  figurative,  and  sublime ;  which  are 
all  contained  in  the  original  notion,  or  in  the  use 
and  application  of  the  word  mashal.  Parables  or 
proverbs,  such  as  those  of  Solomon,  are  always  ex 
pressed  in  short,  pointed  sentences  ;  frequently  figur 
ative,  being  formed  on  some  comparison,  both  in 
the  matter  and  the  form.  And  such  in  general  is 
the  style  of  the  Hebrew  poetry.  The  verb  mashal 
signifies  to  rule,  to  exercise  authority  ;  to  make 
equal,  to  compare  one  thing  with  another ;  to  utter 
parables,  or  acute,  weighty,  and  powerful  speeches, 
in  the  form  and  manner  of  parables,  though  not 
properly  such.  Thus  Balaam's  first  prophecy, 
Num.  xxiii.  7-10,  is  called  his  mashal;  though  it 
has  hardly  anything  figurative  in  it:  but  it  is  beau 
tifully  sententious,  and,  from  the  very  form  and 
manner  of  it,  has  great  spirit,  force,  and  energy. 
Thus  Job's  last  speeches,  in  answer  to  the  three 
friends,  chaps,  xxvii. -xxxi.,  are  called  mashals,  from 
no  one  pai  ticular  character  which  discriminates  them 
from  the  rest  of  the  poem,  but  from  the  sublime,  the 
figurative,  the  sententious  manner,  which  equally 
prevails  through  the  whole  poem,  and  makes  it  one 
of  the  first  and  most  eminent  examples  extant  of  the 
truly  great  and  beautiful  in  poetic  style."  But 
the  Book  of  Proverbs,  according  to  the  introductory 
verses  which  describe  its  character,  contains,  besides 
several  varieties  of  the  mashal,  sententious  sayings 
of  other  kinds,  mentioned  in  i.  6.  The  first  of  these 

is  the  !Wn,  chidah,  rendered  in  the  A.  V.  "dark 

saying,"  "dark speech,"  "hard  question,"  "riddle," 
and  once  (Hab.  ii.  6)  "proverb."  It  is  applied  to 
Samson's  riddle  in  Judg.  xiv.,  to  the  hard  questions 

VOL.  1L 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF          945 

with  which  the  queen  of  Sheba  plied  Solomon  (1  K. 
x.  1 ;  2  (!hr.  ix.  1),  and  is  used  almost  synonymously 
with  mashal  in  Ez.  xvii.  2,  and  in  Ps.  xlix.  4  (5,, 
Ixxviii.  2,  in  which  last  passages  the  poetical  cha 
racter  of  both  is  indicated.  The  word  appears  to 
denote  a  knotty,  intricate  saying,  the  solution  of 
which  demanded  experience  and  skill :  that  it  was 
obscure  is  evident  from  Num.  xii.  8.  In  addition 

to  the  chidah  was  the  i"l¥vP>  melttsali  (Prov.  i.  6, 

A.  V.  "  the  interpretation,"  maig.  "  an  eloquent 
speech  "),  which  occurs  in  Hab.  ii.  6  in  connexion 
both  with  chidd/t  and  mashal.  It  has  been  variously 
explained  as  a  mocking,  taunting  speech  (Ewald)  ; 
or  a  speech  dark  and  involved,  such  as  needed  a 
m$lUs,  or  interpreter  (cf.  Gen.  xlii.  23;  2  Chr. 
xxxii.  31  ;  Job  xxxiii.  23  ;  Is.  xliii.  27);  or  again, 
as  by  Delitzsch  ('l)er  prophet  Hnbakuk,  p.  59),  a 
brilliant  or  splendid  saying  ("  Glam-  odcr  Wuhl- 
rede,  oratio  splendida,.  elegans,  luminilnts  ornata '''). 
This  last  interpretation  is  based  upon  the  usage  of 
the  word  in  modem  Hebrew,  but  it  certainly  does 
not  appear  appropriate  to  the  Proverbs ;  and  tiie 
first  explanation,  which  Ewald  adopts,  is  as  little 
to  the  point.  It  is  better  to  understand  it  as  a  dark 
enigmatical  saying,  which,  like  the  mashal,  might 
assume  the  character  of  sarcasm  and  irony,  though 
not  essential  to  it. 

2.  Canonicity  of  the  book  and  its  place  in  the 
Canon. — The  cauonicity  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs 
has  never  been  disputed  except  by  the  Jews  them 
selves.  It  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  points 
urged  by  the  school  of  Shammai,  that  the  contra 
dictions  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  rendered  it  apocry 
phal.  In  the  Talmud  (Shabbath,  fol.  306)  it  is 
said :  "  And  even  the  Book  of  Proverbs  they  sought 
to  make  apocryphal,  because  its  words  were  contra 
dictory  the  one  to  the  other.  And  wherefore  did 
they  not  make  it  apocryphal  ?  The  words  of  the 
book  Koheleth  [are]  not  [apocryphal]  we  have 
looked  and  found  the  sense:  here  also  we  must 
look."  That  is,  the  book  Koheleth,  in  spite  of  the 
apparent  contradictions  which  it  contains,  is  allowed 
to  be  canonical,  and  therefore  the  existence  of  similar 
contradictions  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs  forms  no 
ground  for  refusing  to  acknowledge  its  canonicity. 
It  occurs  in  all  the  Jewish  lists  of  canonical  books,  and 
is  reckoned  among  what  are  called  the  "  writings  " 
(CetlMini)  or  Hagiographa,  which  form  the  third 
great,  division  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  Their 
order  in  the  Talmud  (Baba  liathra,  fol.  146)  is 
thus  given :  Kuth,  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Eccle 
siastes,  Song  of  Songs,  Lamentations,  Daniel,  Esther, 
Ezra  (including  Nehemiah),  and  Chronicles.  It  is 
in  the  Tosephoth  on  this  passage  that  Proverbs  and 
Ecclesiastes  are  styled  "  books  of  wisdom."  In  the 
German  MSS.  of  the  Hebrew  0.  T.  the  Proverbe 
are  placed  between  the  Psalms  and  Job,  while  ill 
the  Spanish  MSS.,  which  follow  the  Masorah,  the 
order  is,  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs.  This  .atter  is  the 
order  obsei-ved  in  the  Alexandrian  MS.  of  the  LXX. 
Melito,  following  another  Greek  MS.,  arranges  the 
Hagiographa  thus :  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
Song  of  Songs,  Job,  as  in  the  list  made  out  by  the 
Council  of  Laodicea;  and  the  same  order  is  given 
by  Origen,  except  that  the  Book  of  Job  is  separated 
from  the  others  by  the  prophets  Isaiah,  Jeremiah. 
Daniel,  and  Ezekiel.  But  our  present  arrangement 
existed  in  the  time  of  Jerome  ( see  Praef.  in  libr 
Regum  iii. ;  "  Tertius  ordo  aytoypaQa  possidet.  Et 
primus  liber  inoipit  ab  Job.  Secundus  a  David.  .  .  . 
Teitius  est  Salomon,  tres  libros  habens:  Pii  vcrbia. 


946 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


qufte  illi  parabolas,  id  est  Masaloth  appellant : 
Kcclesiastes,  id  est,  Coeleth:  Cauticum  Canticorum, 
.jii<-m  titulo  Sir  Asirim  praenotant ").  In  the 
Peshito  Syriac,  Job  is  placed  before  Joshua,  while 
Proverbs  and  Ecclesiastes  follow  the  Psalms,  and 
are  separated  from  the  Song  of  Songs  by  the  Book 
of  Ruth.  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  apparently  from 
the  exigencies  of  his  verse,  arranges  the  writings  of 
Solomon  in  this  order,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Songs, 
Proverbs.  Pseudo-Epiphanius  places  Proverbs, 
Kcclesiastes,  and  Song  of  Songs  between  the  1  st  and 
2nd  Books  of  Kings  and  the  minor  prophets.  The 
Proverbs  are  frequently  quoted  or  alluded  to  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  canonicity  of  the  Book 
thereby  confirmed.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the 
principal  passages: — 

Prov.  i.  16  compare    Rom.  ili.  10,  15. 

HI.  7  '    „  Rom.  xil.  16. 

ill.  11,  12          „  Heb.  xii.5,6;  see  also  Rev. 

ill.  19. 

Ui.  34  „  Jam.  iv.  6. 

x.  12  „  1  Pet.  iv.  8. 

xt  31  „  1  Pet.  Iv.  18. 

xvll.  13  „  Rom.  xil.  17 ;  1  Tbess.  v. 

15;  1  Pet.  ili.  9. 

xvii.  27  „  Jam.  i.  19. 

xx.  9  ,.1  John  i.  8. 

xx.  20  „  Matt.  xv.  4 ;  Mark  vii.  10. 

xxii.  8  (LXX.)    „  2  Cor.  ix.  7. 

xxv.  21,  22  „  Rom.  xil.  20. 

xxvi.  11  „  2  Pet.  ii.  22. 

xxvii.  1  „  Jam.  iv.  13, 14. 

3.  Authorship  and  date. — The  superscriptions 
which  are  affixed  to  several  portions  of  the  Book 
of  Proverbs,  in  i.  1,  x.  1,  xxv.  1,  attribute  the 
authorship  of  those  portions  to  Solomon,  the  son  of 
David,  king  of  Israel.  With  the  exception  of  the 
last  two  chapters,  which  are  distinctly  assigned  to 
other  authors,  it  is  probable  that  the  statement  of 
the  superscriptions  is  in  the  main  correct,  and  that 
the  majority  of  the  proverbs  contained  in  the  book 
were  uttered  or  collected  by  Solomon.  It  was 
natural,  and  quite  in  accordance  with  the  practice 
of  other  nations,  that  the  Hebrews  should  connect 
Solomon's  name  with  a  collection  of  maxims  and 
precepts  which  form  a  part  of  their  literature  to 
which  he  is  known  to  have  contributed  most  largely 
(IK.  iv.  32).  In  the  same  way  the  Greeks  attri 
buted  most  of  their  maxims  to  Pythagoras;  the 
Arabs  to  Lokman,  Abn  Obeid,  Al  Mofaddel,  Mci- 
dani,  and  Zamakhshari;  the  Persians  to  Ferid 
Attar ;  and  the  northern  people  to  Odin.  But  there 
can  be  no  question  that  the  Hebrews  were  much 
more  justified  in  assigning  the  Proverbs  to  Solemon, 
than  the  nations  which  have  just  been  enumerated 
were  in  attributing  the  collections  of  national  maxims 
to  the  traditional  authors  above  mentioned.  The 
parallel  may  serve  as  an  illustration,  but  must 
not  be  carried  too  far.  According  to  Bartolocci 
(.Bibl.  Rabb.  iv.  373  6),  quoted  by  Carpzov  (Introd. 
pt.  ii.  c.  4,  §4),  the  Jews  ascribe  the  composition 
of  the  Song  of  Songs  to  Solomon's  youth,  the  Pro- 
verbs  to  his  mature  manhood,  and  the  Ecclesiastes 
to  his  old  age.  But  in  the  Seder  Olam  Eabba  (ch .  xv. 
p.  41,  ed.  Meyer)  they  are  all  assigned  to  the  end 
rf  his  life.  There  is  nothing  unreasonable  in  the 
supposition  that  many,  or  most  of  the  proverbs 
in  the  first  twenty-nine  chapters  may  have  ori- 
puated  with  Solomon.  Whether  they  were  left 
by  him  in  their  present  form  is  a  distinct  question, 
ind  may  now  be  considered.  Before  doing  so,  how 
ler,  it  will  be  necessary  to  examine  the  different 
into  which  the  liook  is  naturally  divided. 


PROVERBS.  BOOK  OF 

Sneaking  roughly,  it  consists  of  three  main  divi 
sibns,  with  two  appendices.  1.  Chaps,  i.-ix.  form 
a  connected  mdshdl,  in  which  Wisdom  is  praised 
and  the  youth  exhorted  to  devote  themselves  to  her. 
This  portion  is  preceded  by  an  introduction  and 
title  describing  the  character  and  general  aim  of  the 
book.  2.  Chaps,  x.  1-xxiv.,  with  the  title,  "  the 
Proverbs  of  Solomon,"  consist  of  three  parts: — 
x.  1-xxii.  16,  a  collection  of  single  proverbs,  and  de 
tached  sentences  out  of  the  region  of  moral  teaching 
and  worldly  prudence;  xxii.  17-xxiv.  21,  a  more 
connected  mdshdl,  with  an  introduction,  xxii.  17-22 , 
which  contains  precepts  of  righteousness  and  pru 
dence  :  xxiv.  23-34,  with  the  inscription,  "  these 
also  belong  to  the  wise,"  a  collection  of  unconnected 
maxiins,  which  serve  as  an  appendix  to  the  pre 
ceding.  Then  follows  the  third  division,  xxv.-xxix., 
which,  according  to  the  superscription,  professes  tc 
be  a  collection  of  Solomon's  proverbs,  consisting  of 
single  sentences,  which  the  men  of  the  court  of  Heze- 
kiah  copied  out.  The  first  appendix,  ch.  xxx.,  "  the 
words  of  Agur,"  is  a  collection  of  partly  proverbial 
and  partly  enigmatical  sayings ;  the  second,  ch.  xxxi., 
is  divided  into  two  parts,  "the  words  of  king 
Lemuel "  ( 1-6),  and  an  alphabetical  acrostic  in 
praise  of  a  virtuous  woman,  which  occupies  the  rest 
of  the  chapter.  Rejecting,  therefore,  ibr  the  present, 
the  two  last  chapters,  which  do  not  even  profess  to 
be  by  Solomon,  or  to  contain  any  of  his  teaching, 
we  may  examine  the  other  divisions  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  whether  any  conclusion  as  to  their 
origin  and  authorship  can  be  arrived  at.  At  first 
sight  it  is  evident  that  there  is  a  marked  difference 
between  the  collections  of  single  maxims  and  the 
longer  didactic  pieces,  which  both  come  under  the 
general  head  mdshdl.  The  collection  of  Solomon's 
proverbs  made  by  the  men  of  Hezekiah  (xxv.-xxix.) 
belongs  to  the  former  class  of  detached  sentences,  and 
in  this  respect  corresponds  with  those  in  the  second 
main  division  (x.  1-xxii.  16).  The  expression  in 
xxv.  1,  "these  also  are  the  proverbs  of  Solomon," 
implies  that  the  collection  was  made  as  an  appendix 
to  another  already  in  existence,  which  we  may  not 
unreasonably  presume  to  have  been  that  which 
stands  immediately  before  it  in  the  present  arrange 
ment  of  the  book.  Upon  one  point  most  modern 
critics  are  agreed,  that  the  germ  of  the  book  in  its 
present  shape  is  the  portion  x.  1-xxii.  16,  to  which 
is  prefixed  the  title,  "  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon." 
At  what  time  it  was  put  into  the  form  in  which 
we  have  it,  cannot  be  exactly  determined.  Ewald 
suggests  as  a  probable  date  about  two  centuries 
after  Solomon.  The  collector  gathered  many  of 
that  king's  genuine  sayings,  but  must  have  mixed 
with  them  many  by  other  authors  and  from  other 
times,  earlier  and  later.  It  seems  clear  that  he 
must  have  lived  before  the  time  of  Heztkiah,  from 
the  expression  in  xxv.  1,  to  which  reference  has 
already  been  made.  In  this  portion  many  proverbs 
are  repeated  in  the  same,  or  a  similar  form,  a  fact 
which  of  itself  militates  against  the  supposition  that 
all  the  proverbs  contained  in  it  proceeded  from  one 
author.  Compare  xiv.  12  with  xvi.  25  and  x.\i.  2»; 
xxi.  9  with  xxi.  19;  x.  1»  with  xv.  20»;  x.  2»  with 
xi.  4b;  x.  15«  with  xviii.  11»;  xv.  33b  with  xviii. 
12b;  xi.  21»  with  xvi.  5b;  xiv.  31*  with  xvii.  5f-; 
xix.  12"  with  xx.  2".  Such  repetitions,  as  Bertheau 
remarks,  we  do  not  expect  to  find  in  a  work  which 
proceeds  immediately  from  the  hands  of  its  author. 
But  if  we  suppose  the  contents  of  this  portion  ot 
the  book  to  have  been  collected  by  one  man  ou' 
of  divers  sources,  oral  as  will  a*  written,  tue  iopb 


PROVERBS.  BOOK  OK 

titions  become  intelligible.  Bertholdt  argues  that 
many  of  the  proverbs  could  not  have  proceeded 
from  Solomon,  because  they  presuppose  an  author 
in  different  circumstances  of  life.  His  arguments 
are  extremely  weak,  and  will  scarcely  bear  examin 
ation.  For  example,  he  asserts  that  the  author 
of  x.  5,  xii.  10,  11 ,  xiv.  4,  xx.  4,  must  have  been  a 
landowner  or  husbandman;  that  x.  15,  points  to 
a  man  living  in  want ;  xi.  14,  xiv.  20,  to  a  private 
man  living  under  a  well-regulafed  government ;  xi. 
26,  to  a  tradesman  without  wealth  ;  xii.  4,  to  a  man 
not  living  in  polygamy;  xii.  9,  to  one  living  in  the 
country ;  xiii.  7,  8,  xvi.  8,  to  a  man  in  a  middle 
station  of  life ;  xiv.  1,  xv.  25,  xvi.  11,  xvii.  2,  xix. 
13,  14,  xx.  10,  14,  23,  to  a  man  of  the  rank  of  a 
citizen;  xiv.  21,  xvi.  19,  xviii.  23,  to  a  man  of 
low  station;  xvi.  10,  12-15,  xix.  12,  xx.  2,  26, 
28,  to  a  man  who  was  not  a  king;  xxi.  5,  to  one 
who  was  acquainted  with  the  course  of  circum 
stances  in  the  common  citizen  life ;  xxi.  1 7,  to  one 
who  was  an  enemy  to  luxury  and  festivities.  It 
must  be  confessed,  however,  that  an  examination  of 
these  passages  is  by  no  means  convincing  to  one 
who  reads  them  without  having  a  theory  to  main- 
lain.  That  all  the  proverbs  in  this  collection  are 
not  Solomon's  is  extremely  probable  ;  that  the  ma 
jority  of  them  are  his  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt, 
and  this  fact  would  account  for  the  general  title  in 
which  they  are  all  attributed  to  him.  It  is  obvious 
that  between  the  proverbs  in  this  collection  and 
those  that  precede  and  follow  it,  there  is  a  marked 
difference,  which  is  sufficiently  apparent  even  in 
the  English  Version.  The  poetical  style,  says  Ewald, 
is  the  simplest  and  most  antique  imaginable.  Most 
of  the  proverbs  are  examples  of  antithetic  paral 
lelism,  the  second  clause  containing  the  contrast  to 
the  first.  Each  verse  consists  of  two  members, 
with  generally  three  ov  four,  but  seldom  five  words 
in  each.  The  only  exception  to  the  first  law  is 
xix.  7,  which  Ewald  accounts  for  by  supposing  a 
clause  omitted.  This  supposition  may  be  necessary 
to  his  theoiy,  but  cannot  be  admitted  on  any  true 
principle  of  criticism.  Furthermore,  the  proverbs 
in  this  collection  have  the  peculiarity  of  being  con 
tained  in  a  single  verse.  Each  verse  is  complete  in 
tself,  and  embodies  a  perfectly  intelligible  senti 
ment;  but  a  thought  in  all  its  breadth  and  definite- 
ness  is  not  necessarily  exhausted  in  a  single  verse, 
though  each  verse  must  be  a  peifect  sentence,  a 
proverb,  a  lesson.  There  is  one  point  of  great  im- 
Dortance  to  which  Ewali  drav.rs  attention  in  con 
nexion  with  this  portion  of  the  book ;  that  it  is  not 
to  be  regarded,  like  the  collections  of  proverbs 
which  exist  among  other  nations,  as  an  accumulation 
of  the  popular  maxims  ol  lower  life  which  passed 
t.urrent  among  the  people  and  were  gathered  thence 
by  a  learned  man  ;  but  rather  as  the  efforts  of  poets, 
artistically  and  scientifically  arranged,  to  compre 
hend  in  short  sharp  sayings  the  truths  of  religion  as 
applied  to  the  infinite  cases  and  possibilities  of  life. 
While  admitting,  however,  this  artistic  and  scientific 
arrangement,  it  is  difficult  to  assent  to  Ewald's 
further  theoiy,  that  the  collection  in  its  original 
shape  had  running  through  it  a  continuous  thread, 
binding  together  what  was  manifold  and  scattered, 
and  that  in  this  respect  it  differed  entirely  from  the 
form  in  which  it  appears  at  present.  Here  and 
'.here,  it  is  true,  we  meet  with  verses  grouped 
together  apparently  with  a  common  object,  but 
these  are  the  exceptions,  and  a  rule  so  general  cannot 
be  derived  from  them.  No  doubt  the  original  col 
lection  of  Solomon's  proverbs,  if  such  there  were, 


riiOVKKBS,  BOOK  OF          947 

from  which  the  presci  t  was  made,  underwent 
many  changes,  by  abbreviation,  transposition,  and 
interpolation,  in  the  two  centuries  which,  according 
to  Ewald's  theory,  must  have  elapsed  before  tlif* 
compiler  of  the  present  collection  put  them  in  th« 
shape  in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us ;  but 
evidence  is  altogether  wanting  to  show  what  that 
original  collection  may  have  been,  or  how  many 
of  the  three  thousand  proverbs  which  Solomon  is 
said  to  have  spoken,  have  been  preserved.  Tin  re  is 
less  difficulty  in  another  proposition  of  Ewald's, 
to  which  a  ready  assent  will  be  yielded :  that  Solo 
mon  was  the  founder  of  this  species  of  poetry:  and 
that  in  fact  many  of  the  proverbs  here  collected 
may  be  traced  back  to  him,  while  all  are  inspired 
with  his  spirit.  The  peace  and  internal  tranquil 
lity  of  his  reign  were  favourable  to  the  growth  of  a 
contemplative  spirit,  and  it  is  just  at  such  a  time 
that  we  should  expect  to  find  gnomic  poetry  de 
veloping  itself  and  forming  an  epoch  in  literature. 

In  addition  to  the  distinctive  form  assumed  by 
the  proverbs  of  this  earliest  collection,  may  be  no 
ticed  the  occurrence  of  favourite  and  peculiar  words 
and  phrases.  "  Fountain  of  life"  occurs  in  Frov. 
x.  11,  xiii.  14,  xiv.  27,  xvi.  22  (comp.  Ps.  xxxvi. 
9  [10])  ;  "tree  of  life,"  Prov.  xi.  30,  xiii.  12,  xv. 
4  (comp.  iii.  18);  "snares  of  death,"  Prov.  xiii. 
14,  xiv.  27  (comp.  Ps.  xviii.  5  [6]);  XB"11D, 

marpe,  "healing,  health,"  Prov.  xii.  18,  xiii.  17, 
xvi.  24  (comp.  xiv.  30,  xv.  4),  but  this  expression 
also  occurs  in  iv.  22,  vi.  15  (comp.  iii.  8),  and  is 
hardly  to  be  regarded  as  peculiar  to  the  older  portion 
of  the  book ;  nor  is  it  fair  to  say  that  the  passages 
in  the  early  chapters  in  which  it  occurs  are  imita 
tions  ;  nfinQ,  mechittah,  "  destruction,"  Prov.  x. 
14,  15,  29,  xiii.  3,  xiv.  28,  xviii.  7,  xxi.  15,  and 
nowhere  else  in  the  book;  rVQ\  yaphiach,  which 
Ewald  calls  a  participle,  but  which  may  he  regarded 
as  a  future  with  the  relative  omitted,  Prov.  xii.  17, 
xiv.  5,  25,  xix.  5,  9  (comp.  vi.  19);  P|?D,  seleph, 

"  perverseness,"  Prov.  xi.  13,  xv.  4;  t)?D,  sillep/t, 
the  verb  from  the  preceding,  Prov.  xiii.  6,  xix.  3, 
xxii.  12;  n£3*  K7,  16  yinn&keh,  "shall  not  be 
acquitted,"  Prov.  xi.  21,  xvi.  5,  xvii.  5,  xix.  5,  9 
(comp.  vi.  29,  xxviii.  20) ;  f\^,  riddeph  "  pur 
sued,"  Prov.  xi.  19,  xii.  11,  xiii.  21,  xv.  9,  xix.  7 
(comp.  xxviii.  19).  The  antique  expressions  HJJ 
nj?*3"lK,  'ad  argi'dh,  A.  V.,  "  but  for  a  moment," 
Prov.'xii.  19 ;  "vS  T,  yad  Mydci,  lit.  "  hand  to 
hand,"  Prov.  xK'21/xvi.  5;  S^nn,  hithgalla', 
"meddled  with,"  Prov.  xvii.  14,  xviii.  1,  xx.  3  ; 
}3^3,  nil-gun,  "  whisperer,  talebearer,"  Prov.  xvi. 
28,  xviii.  18  (comp.  xxvi.  20,  22),  are  almost 
confined  to  this  portion  cf  the  Proverbs.  There 
is  also  the  peculiar  usage  of  B",  ye&k,  "  there 
is,"  in  Prov.  xi.  24,  xii.  18,  xiii.  7,  2:5,  xiv.  li>. 
xvi.  25,  xviii.  24,  xx.  15.  It  will  be  obseived 
that  the  use  of  these  words  and  phrases  by  no 
means  assists  in  deteimining  the  authorship  cl  thit 
section,  but  gives  it  a  distinctive  character. 

With  regard  to  the  other  collections,  opinions 
differ  widely  both  as  to  their  date  and  authorship. 
Ewald  places  next  in  order  chaps,  xxv.-xxix.,  the 
superscription  to  which  fixes  their  date  abou1  tne 
end  of  the  8th  century  B.C.  "  Tl  -se  also  :ir«  t*it 

3  r  * 


948 


FUOVERBS,  BOOK  OF 


proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  the  men  of  Hezekiah 
copied  out,"  or  compiled.  The  memory  of  these 
learned  men  of  Hezckiah's  court  is  perpetuated  in 
Jewish  tradition.  In  the  Talmud  (Baba  Bathra, 
fol.  15  a)  they  are  called  the  njPD,  si' ah,  "  society" 

or  "  academy "  of  Hezekiah,  and  it  is  there  said, 
"  Hezekiah  and  his  academy  wrote  Isaiah,  Proverbs, 
Song  of  Songs.  Ecclesiastes."  R.  Gedaliah  (Shalshe- 
kth  Hakkabbahah,  fol.  66  6),  quoted  by  Carpzov 
(fnt)-od.  part.  ii.  c.  4,  §4),  says,  "  Isaiah  wrote  his 
own  book  and  the  Proverbs,  and  the  Song  of 
Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes."  Many  of  the  proverbs 
in  this  collection  are  mere  repetitions,  with  slight 
variations,  of  some  which  occur  in  the  previous 
tection.  Compare,  for  example,  xxv.  24  with  xxi. 
9  ;  xxvi.  13  with  xxii.  13;  xxvi.  15  with  xix.  24; 
xxvi.  22  with  xviii.  8;  xxvii.  13  with  x*.  16; 
xxvii.  15  with  xix.  13 ;  xxvii.  21  with  xvii.  3 ; 
xxviii.  6  with  xix.  1  ;  xxviii.  19  with  xii.  11  ;  xxix. 
22  with  xv.  18,  &c.  We  may  infer  from  this, 
with  Bertheau,  that  the  compilers  of  this  section 
made  use  of  the  same  sources  from  which  the  earlier 
collection  was  derived.  Hitzig  (Die  Sprvche  So 
lomo's,  p.  258)  suggests  that  there  is  a  proba 
bility  that  a  great,  or  the  greatest  part  of  these 
proverbs  were  of  Ephraimitic  origin,  and  that  after 
the  destruction  of  the  northern  kingdom,  Hezekiah 
sent  his  learned  men  through  the  land  to  gather 
together  the  fragments  of  literature  which  remained 
current  among  the  people  and  had  survived  the 
general  wreck.  There  does  not  appeal'  to  be  the 
slightest  ground,  linguistic  or  otherwise,  for  this 
hypothesis,  and  it  is  therefore  properly  rejected  by 
Bertheau.  The  question  now  arises,  in  this  as  in 
the  former  section ;  were  all  thfse  proverbs  Solo 
mon's  ?  Jahn  says  Yes ;  Bertholdt,  No ;  for  xxv. 
2-7  could  not  have  been  by  Solomon  or  any  king, 
but  by  a  man  who  had  lived  for  a  long  time  at  a 
court.  In  xxvii.  11,  it  is  no  monarch  who  speaks, 
but  an  instructor  of  youth  ;  xxviii.  16  censures  the 
very  errors  which  stained  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
and  the  effect  of  which  deprived  his  son  and  suc 
cessor  of  the  ten  tribes;  xxvii.  23-27  must  have 
been  written  by  a  sage  who  led  a  nomade  life. 
There  is  more  force  in  these  objections  of  Bertholdt 
than  in  those  which  he  advanced  against  the  previous 
section.  Hensler  (quoted  by  Bertholdt.)  finds  two 
or  three  sections  in  this  division  of  the  book,  which  he 
regards  as  extracts  from  as  many  different  writings 
of  Solomon.  But  Bertholdt  confesses  that  his  argu 
ments  are  not  convincing. 

The  peculiarities  of  this  section  distinguish  it 
from  the  older  proverbs  in  x.-xxii.  16.  Some  of 
these  may  be  briefly  noted.  The  use  of  the  inter 
rogation  "seest  thou?"  in  xxvi.  12,  xxix.  20  (comp. 
xxii.  29),  the  manner  of  comparing  two  things  by 
simply  placing  them  side  by  side  and  connecting 
ihem  with  the  simple  copula  "  and,"  as  in  xxv.  3, 
20,  xxvi.  3,  7,  9,  21,  xxvii.  15,  20.  We  miss  the 
pointed  antithesis  by  which  the  first  collection  was 
distinguished.  The  verses  are  no  longer  of  two 
fquai  members;  one  member  is  frequently  shorter 
than  the  other,  and  sometimes  even  the  verse  is 


•>  Hitzig's  theory  about  the  Book  of  Proverbs  in  its 
present  shape  is  this :  that  the  oldest  portion  consists  of 
•haps,  i.-lx.,  to  which  was  added,  probably  after  the  year 
?50  B.C.,  the  second  part,  x.-xxil.  16,  xxviii.  17-xxix. : 
that  in  the  last  quarter  of  thn  same  century  the  anthology, 
xxv.-zxvii.,  was  formed,  and  coming  into  the  hands  of  a 
SIKH  who  already  possessed  the  other  two  parts,  inspired 


I'ROVEUUS.  BOOK  OF 

extended  to  three  members  in  order  fully  to  exhaust 
the  thought.  Sometimes,  again,  the  same  sense  ii 
extended  over  two  or  more  verses,  as  in  xxv.  4,  b. 
6,  7,  8-10 ;  and  in  a  few  cases  a  series  of  connect**! 
verses  contains  longsr  exhortations  to  morality  and 
rectitude,  as  in  xxvi.  23-28,  xxvii.  23-27.  The 
character  of  the  proverbs  is  clearly  distinct.  Theii 
construction  is  looser  and  weaker,  and  there  is  nc 
longer  that  sententious  brevity  which  gives  weight 
and  point  to  the  proverbs  in  the  preceding  section. 
Ewald  thinks  that  in  the  contents  of  this  portion 
of  the  book  there  are  traceable  the  mnrks  of  a  later 
date ;  pointing  to  a  state  of  society  which  had  become 
more  dangerous  and  hostile,  in  which  the  quiet  do 
mestic  life  had  reached  greater  perfection,  but  tht 
state  and  public  security  and  confidence  had  sunk 
deeper.  There  is,  he  says,  a  cautious  and  mournful 
tone  in  the  language  when  the  rulers  are  spoken  of; 
the  breath  of  that  untroubled  joy  tor  the  king  ami 
the  high  reverence  paid  to  iiim ,  which  marked  the 
former  collection,  does  not  animate  these  proverbs. 
The  state  of  society  at  the  end  of  the  8th  century 
B.C.,  with  which  we  are  thoroughly  acquainted 
from  the  writings  of  the  prophets,  corresponds  with 
the  condition  of  things  hinted  at  in  the  proverbs 
of  this  section,  and  this  may  therefore,  in  accord 
ance  with  the  superscription,  be  accepted  as  the 
date  at  which  the  collection  was  made.  Such  is 
Ewald's  conclusion.  It  is  true  we  know  much 
of  the  later  times  of  the  monarchy,  and  that  the 
condition  of  those  times  was  such  as  to  call  forth 
many  of  the  proverbs  of  this  section  as  the  result 
of  the  observation  and  experience  of  their  authons, 
but  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  whole  section 
partakes  of  this  later  tone  ;  or  that  many  or  most 
of  the  proverbs  may  not  reach  back  as  far  as  the 
time  of  Solomon,  and  so  justify  the  general  title 
which  is  given  to  the  section,  "  These  also  are  the 
proverbs  of  Solomon."  But  of  the  state  of  society  in 
the  age  of  Solomon  himself  we  know  so  little,  every 
thing  belonging  to  that  period  is  encircled  with 
such  a  halo  of  dazzling  splendour,  in  which  the 
people  almost  disappear,  that  it  is  impossible  to 
assert  that  the  circumstances  of  the  times  might 
not  have  given  birth  to  many  of  the  maxims  which 
apparently  carry  with  them  the  marks  of  a  later 
period.  At  best  such  reasoning  from  internal  evi 
dence  is  unceitain  and  hypothetical,  and  the  in 
ferences  drawn  vary  with  each  commentator  who 
examines  it.  Ewald  discovers  traces  of  a  later  age 
in  chapters  xxviii.,  xxix.,  though  he  retains  them  in 
this  section,  while  Hitzig  regards  xxviii.  17-xxix. 
27  as  a  continuation  of  xxii.  16,  to  which  they 
were  added  probably  after  the  year  750  B.c>  This 
apparent  precision  in  the  assignment  of  the  dates  of 
the  several  sections,  it  must  be  confessed,  has  very 
little  foundation,  and  the  dates  are  at  best  but  con 
jectural.  All  that  we  know  about  the  section 
xxv.— xxix.,  is  that  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  that  is. 
in  the  last  quarter  of  the  8th  century  B.C.  it  was 
supposed  to  contain  what  tradition  had  handed  dowo 
as  the  proverbs  of  Solomon,  and  that  the  majority 
of  the  proverbs  were  believed  to  be  his  there  seems 
no  good  reason  to  doubt.  Beyond  this  we  know 


him  with  the  composition  of  xxii.  17-xxiv.  34,  which  he 
placed  before  the  anthology,  and  inserted  the  two  bcforf 
the  lasl  sheet  of  the  second  part  Then,  finding  tha« 
xxviii.  17  was  left  without  a  beginning,  being  separated 
from  xxii.  1-1U,  he  wrote  xxviii.  1-16  on  his  last  bhuit  leal 
This  was  after  tt-e  exile. 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OB' 

nothing.  Ewald,  we  have  seen,  assigns  the  whole 
•of  this  section  to  the  close  of  the  8th  century  B.C., 
long  before  which  time,  he  says,  most  of  the  pro- 
/erbs  were  certainly  not  written.  But  he  is  then 
compelled  to  account  for  the  fact  that  in  the  super 
scription  they  are  called  "  the  proverbs  of  Solomon." 
lie  docs  so  MI  this  way.  Some  of  the  proverbs 
actually  reach  back  into  the  age  of  Solomon,  and 
those  which  are  not  immediately  traceable  to  Solo 
mon  or  his  time,  are  composed  with  similar  artistic 
flow  and  impulse.  If  the  earlier  collection  rightly 
bears  the  name  of  "  the  proverbs  of  Solomon"  after 
the  mass  which  are  his,  this  may  claim  to  bear 
such  a  title  of  honour  after  some  important  ele 
ments.  The  argument  is  certainly  not  sound,  that, 
l>ecai,se  a  collection  of  proverbs,  the  majority  of 
which  are  Solomon's,  is  distinguished  by  the  general 
title  "  the  proverbs  of  Solomon,"  therefore  a  col 
lection,  in  which  at  most  but  a  few  belong  to  Solo 
mon  or  his  time,  is  appropriately  distinguished  by 
the  same  superscription.  It  will  be  seen  afterwards 
that  Kwald  attributes  the  superscription  in  xxv.  1 
to  the  compiler  of  xxii.  17-xxv.  1. 

The  date  of  the  sections  i.-ix.,  xxii.  17-xxv.  1, 
has  been  variously  assigned.  That  they  were  added 
about  the  same  period  Ewald  infers  from  the  oc 
currence  of  favourite  words  and  constructions,  and 
that  that  period  was  a  late  one  he  concludes  from 
the  traces  which  are  manifest  of  a  degeneracy  from 
the  purity  of  the  Hebrew.  It  will  be  interesting 
to  examine  the  evidence  upon  this  point,  for  it  is  a 
remarkable  fact,  and  one  which  Is  deeply  instructive 
as  showing  the  extreme  difficulty  of  arguing  from 
internal  evidence,  that  the  same  details  lead  Ewald 
and  Hitzig  to  precisely  opposite  conclusions ;  the 
former  placing  the  date  of  i.-ix.  in  the  first  half  of 
the  7th  century,  while  the  latter  regards  it  as  the 
oldest  portion  of  the  book,  and  assigns  it  to  the  9th 
century.  To  be  sure  those  points  on  which  Ewald 
relies  as  indicating  a  late  date  for  the  section,  Hitzig 
summarily  disposes  of  as  in  te  isolations.  Among 
the  favourite  words  which  occur  in  these  chapters 
are  nilMH,  chocmoth,  "  wisdoms,"  for  "  wisdom  " 
in  the  abstract,  which  is  found  only  in  i.  20,  is.  1, 
xxiv.  7  ;  PHT,  zarah,  "  the  strange  woman,"  and 
i"i*~p3,  nocriyydh,  "  the  foreigner,"  the  adulteress 
who  seduces  youth,  the  antithesis  of  the  virtuous 
wife  or  true  wisdom,  only  occur  in  the  first  col 
lection  in  xxii.  14,  but  are  frequently  found  in  this, 
ii.  16,  v.  3,  20,  vi.  24,  vii.  5,  xxiii.  27.  Traces 
of  the  decay  of  Hebrew  are  seen  in  such  passages 
as  v.  2,  where  D'HSE?,  a  dual  fern.,  is  constructed 
with  a  verb  masc.  pi.,  though  in  v.  3  it  has  pro 
perly  the  feminine.  The  unusual  plural  D^'X 
(viii.  4),  says  Ewald,  would  hardly  be  found  in 
writings  before  the  7th  century.  These  difficulties 
are  avoided  by  Hitzig,  who  regards  the  passages  in 
which  they  occur  as  interpolations.  When  we  come 
to  the  internal  historical  evidence  these  two  autho 
rities  are  no  less  at  issue  with  regard  to  their  con 
clusions  from  it.  There  are  many  passages  which 
point  to  a  condition  of  things  in  the  highest  degree 
confused,  in  which  robbers  and  lawless  men  roamed 
;it  large  through  the  laud  and  endeavoured  to  draw 
aside  their  younger  contemporaries  to  the  like  dis 
solute  life  (i.  11-19,  ii.  12-15,  iv.  14-17,  xxiv.  15). 
In  this  Ewald  sees  traces  of  a  late  date.  But  Hitzig 
avoids  this  conclusion  by  asserting  that  at  all  times 
there  are  individuals  who  arc  reckless  and  at  war 
w'th  societv  and  who  attach  themselves  to  bands 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF         949 

of  robbers  and  freebooters  (comp.  Judg.  ix.  4,  xi.  3 
1  Sam.  xxii.  2;  Jer.  vii.  11),  and  to  such  allusion 
is  made  in  Prov.  i.  10;  but  there  is  nowhere  ii. 
these  chapters  (i.-ix.)  a  complaint  of  the  genera! 
depravity  of  society.  So  far  he  is  unquestionably 
correct,  and  no_  inference  with  regard  to  the  da*e 
of  the  section  can  be  drawn  from  these  references. 
Further  evidence  of  a  late  date  Ewald  finds  in  the 
warnings  against  lightly  rising  to  oppose  the  public 
order  of  things  (xxiv.  21),  and  in  the  beautiful 
ezhortation  (xxiv.  11)  to  rescue  with  the  sacrifice 
of  one's  self  the  innocent  who  is  being  dragged  to 
death,  which  points  to  a  confusion  of  right  per 
vading  the  whole  state,  of  which  we  nowhere  see 
•"-mces  in  the  older  proverbs.  With  these  conclu- 
«iOns  Hitzig  would  not  disagree,  for  he  himself 
assigns  a  late  date  to  the  section  xxii.  17-xxiv.  34. 
We  now  come  to  evidence  of  another  kind,  and  the 
conclusions  drawn  fiom  it  depend  mainly  upon  the 
date  assigned  to  the  Book  of  Job.  In  this  collection, 
says  Ewald,  there  is  a  new  danger  of  the  heart 
warned  against,  which  is  not  once  thought  of  in 
the  older  collections,  envy  at  the  evident  prosperity 
of  the  wicked  (iii.  31,  xxiii.  17,  xxiv.  1,  19),  a 
subject  which  for  the  first  time  is  brought  into  the 
region  of  reflection  and  poetry  in  the  Book  of  Job. 
Other  parallels  with  this  book  are  found  in  the 
teaching  that  man,  even  in  the  chastisement  of  God, 
should  see  His  love,  which  is  the  subject  of  Prov.  iii., 
and  is  the  highest  argument  in  the  Book  of  Job  ; 
the  general  apprehension  of  Wisdom  as  the  Creator 
and  Disposer  of  the  world  (Prov.  iii.,  viii.)  appears 
as  a  further  conclusion  from  Job  xxviii. ;  and  though 
the  author  of  the  first  nine  chapters  of  the  Proverbs 
does  not  adopt  the  language  of  the  Book  of  Job,  but 
only  in  some  measure  its  spirit  and  teaching,  yet 
some  images  and  words  appear  to  be  re-echoed  here 
from  that  book  (comp.  Prov.  viii.  25  with  Job 
xxxviii.  6;  Prov.  ii.  4,  iii.  14,  viii.  11,  19,  with 
Job  xxviii.  12-19;  Prov.  vii.  23  with  Job  xvi.  13, 
xx.  25  ;  Prov.  iii.  23,  &c.,  with  Job  v.  22,  &c.). 
Consequently  the  writer  of  this  section  must  have 
been  acquainted  with  the  Book  of  Job,  and  wrote  at 
a  later  date,  about  the  middle  of  the  7th  century 
B.C.  Similar  resemblances  between  passages  in  the 
early  chapters  of  the  Proverbs  and  the  Book  of  Job 
are  observed  by  Hitzig  (comp.  Prov.  iii.  25  with 
Job  v.  21  ;  Prov.  ii.  4,  14  with  Job  iii.  21,  22; 
Prov.  iv.  12  with  Job  xviii.  7;  Prov.  iii.  11,  13 
with  Job  v.  17;  Prov.  viii.  25  with  Job  xv.  7), 
but  the  conclusion  which  he  derives  is  that  the 
writer  of  Job  had  already  resid  the  Book  of  Pro 
verbs,  and  that  the  latter  is  the  more  ancient. 
Reasoning  from  evidence  of  the  like  kind  he  places 
this  section  (i.-ix.)  later  than  the  Song  of  Songs, 
but  earlier  than  the  second  collection  (x.  1-xxii.  16, 
xxviii.  17-xxix.),  which  existed  before  the  time  of 
Hezekiah,  and  therefore  assigns  it  to  the  9th  CCL- 
tury  B.C.  Other  arguments  in  support  of  this  early 
date  are  the  fact  that  idolatry  is  nowhere  mei-« 
tioned,  that  the  offerings  had  not  ceased  (vii.  14), 
nor  the  congregations  (v.  14).  The  twa  last  would 
agree  as  well  with  a  late  as  with  an  early  date,  and 
no  argument  from  the  silence  with  respect  to  idolatry 
can  be  allowed  any  weight,  for  it  would  equally 
apply  to  the  9th  century  as  to  the  7th.  To  all 
appearances,  Hitzig  continues,  there  was  peace  in  the 
land,  and  commerce  was  kept  up  with  Egypt  (vii. 
16).  The  author  may  have  lived  in  Jerusalem 
(i.  20,  21,  vii.  12,  viii.  3)  ;  vii.  16,  17  points  <c 
the  luxury  of  a  largo  city,  and  the  educated  lau- 
guage  belongs  to  a  citizen  of  the  capital.  After  2 


050          PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

careful  consideration  of  all  the  arguments  which 
have  been  adduced,  by  Ewald  for  the  Lit*,  and  by 
Hitzig  for  the  early  date  of  this  section,  it  must  be 
confessed  that  they  are  by  no  means  conclusive,  and 
that  we  must  ask  for  further  ev.Jence  before  pro 
nouncing  so  positively  as  they  have  done  upon  a 
pojnt  so  doubtful  and  obscure.  In  one  respect  they 
are  agreed,  namely,  with  regard  to  the  unity  of  the 
section,  which  Ewald  considers  as  an  original  whole, 
perfectly  connected  and  flowing  as  it  were  from  one 
outpouring.  It  would  be  a  well  ordered  whole, 
says  Hitzig,  if  the  interpolations,  especially  vi. 
1-19,  iii.  22-26,  viii.  4-12,  14-16,  ix.  7-10,  &c., 
are  rejected.  It  never  appears  to  strike  him  that 
such  a  proceeding  is  arbitrary  and  uncritical  in  the 
highest  degree,  though  he  clearly  plumes  himself  on 
his  critical  sagacity.  Ewald  finds  in  these  chapters 
a  certain  development  which  shows  that  they  must 
be  regarded  as  a  whole  and  the  work  of  one  author. 
The  poet  intended  them  as  a  general  introduction 
to  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  to  recommend  wisdom 
in  general.  The  blessings  of  wisdom  as  the  reward 
of  him  who  boldly  strives  after  her  are  repeatedly 
set  forth  in  the  most  charming  manner,  as  on  the 
other  hand  lolly  is  represented  with  its  disappoint 
ment  and  enduring  miseiy.  There  are  three  main 
divisions  after  the  title,  i.  1-7.  (a.)  i.  8-iii.  35; 
a  general  exhortation  to  the  youth  to  fellow  wis 
dom,  in  which  all,  even  the  higher  arguments,  are 
touched  upon,  but  nothing  fully  completed.  (6.)  iv. 
1-vi.  19  exhausts  whatever  is  individual  and  par 
ticular  ;  while  in  (c.)  the  language  rises  gradually 
with  ever-increasing  power  to  the  most  universal 
and  loftiest  themes,  to  conclude  in  the  sublimest 
and  almost  lyrical  strain  (vi.  20-ix.  18).  But,  as 
Bertheau  remarks,  there  appears  nowhere  through 
out  this  section  to  be  any  reference  to  what  follows, 
which  must  have  been  the  case  had  it  been  intended 
for  an  introduction.  The  development  and  progress 
which  Ewald  observes  in  it  are  by  no  means  so 
striking  as  he  would  have  us  believe.  The  unity 
of  plan  is  no  more  than  would  be  found  in  a 
collection  of  admonitions  by  different  authors  re 
ferring  to  the  same  subject,  and  is  not  such  as  to 
necessitate  the  conclusion  that  the  whole  is  the 
work  of  one.  There  is  observable  throughout  the 
section,  when  compared  with  what  is  called  the 
earlier  collection,  a  complete  change  in  the  form 
of  the  proverb.  The  single  proverb  is  seldom  met 
with,  and  is  rather  the  exception,  while  the  charac 
teristics  of  this  collection  are  connected  descriptions, 
continuous  elucidations  of  a  truth,  and  longer 
speeches  and  exhoitations.  The  style  is  more 
highly  poetical,  the  parallelism  is  synonymous  and 
not  antithetic  or  synthetic,  as  in  x.  1-xxii.  16  ;  and 
another  distinction  is  the  usage  of  Elohim  in  ii.  5, 
17,  iii.  4,  which  does  not  occur  in  x.  1-xxii.  16. 
Amidst  this  general  likeness,  however,  there  is  con 
siderable  diversity.  It  is  not  necessary  to  lay  so 
much  stress  as  Bertheau  appears  to  do  upon  the 
fact  that  certain  paragraphs  are  distinguished  from 
those  with  which  they  are  placed,  not  merely  by 
their  contents,  but  by  their  external  foi-m  ;  nor  to 
argue  from  this  that  they  are  therefore  the  work 
of  different  authors.  Some  paragraphs,  it  is  true, 
are  completed  in  ten  verses,  as  i.  1U-19,  iii.  1-10, 
11-20,  iv.  10-19,  viii.  12-21,  22-31;  but  it  is  too 
much  to  assert  that  an  author,  because  he  some 
times  wrote  paragraphs  often  verses,  should  always 
do  so,  or  to  s;iy  with  Bertheau,  if  the  whole  weie 
the  work  of  one  author  it  would  be  very  remark- 
.ibb  if  he  ouly  now  and  then  bound  himself  by  the 


I'ROVKUBS,  BOOK  OF 

strict  law  of  numliers.  Thi;  argument  assume-,  the 
strictness  of  the  law,  and  then  attempts  \r.  Lind 
the  writer  to  observe  it.  There  is  more  force  ic 
the  appeal  to  the  difference  in  the  formation  of  sen 
tences  and  the  whole  manner  of  the  language  as 
indicating  diversity  of  authorship.  Compare  ch.  ii. 
with  vii.  4-27,  where  the  same  subject  is  treated 
of.  In  the  former,  one  sentence  is  wearily  dragged 
through  22  verses,  while  in  the  latter  the  languag* 
is  easy,  flowing,  and  appropriate.  Again  the  con 
nexion  is  interrupted  by  the  insertion  of  vi.  1-19. 
In  the  previous  chapter  the  exhortation  to  listen  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  speaker  is  followed  by  the  warn 
ing  against  intercourse  with  the  adulteress.  In  vi. 
1-19  the  subject  is  abruptly  changed,  and  a  series 
of  proverbs  applicable  to  different  relations  of  life 
is  introduced.  From  all  this  Bertheau  concludes 
against  Ewald  that  these  introductory  chapters 
could  not  have  been  the  product  of  a  single  author, 
forming  a  gradually  developed  and  consistent  whole, 
but  that  they  are  a  collection  of  admonitions  by 
different  poets,  which  all  aim  at  rendering  the 
youth  capable  of  i-eceiving  good  instruction,  and 
inspiring  him  to  strive  after  the  possession  of  wis 
dom.  This  supposition  is  somewhat  favoured  by 
the  frequent  repetitions  of  favourite  figures  or  im 
personations  :  the  strange  woman  and  wisdom  occur 
many  times  over  in  this  section,  which  would  hardly 
have  been  the  case  if  it  had  been  the  work  of  one 
author.  But  the  occurrence  of  these  repetitions, 
if  it  is  against  the  unity  of  authorship,  indicates 
that  the  different  portions  of  the  section  must  have 
been  contemporaneous,  and  were  written  at  a  time 
when  such  vivid  impersonations  of  wisdom  and  its 
opposite  were  current  and  familiar.  The  tone  o 
thought  is  the  same,  and  the  question  therefore  to 
lie  considered  is  whether  it  is  more  probable  that  a 
writer  would  repeat  himself,  or  that  fragments  of 
a  number  of  writers  should  be  found,  distinguished 
by  the  same  way  of  thinking,  and  by  the  use  of  the 
same  striking  figures  and  personifications.  If  the 
proverbs  spoken  by  one  man  were  circulated  orally 
for  a  time,  and  after  his  death  collected  and  ar 
ranged,  there  would  almost  of  necessity  be  a  recur 
rence  of  the  same  expressions  and  illustrations,  and 
from  this  point  of  view  the  argument  from  repeti 
tions  loses  much  of  its  force.  With  regard  to  th« 
date  as  well  as  the  authorship  of  this  section  it  is 
impossible  to  pronounce  with  certainty.  In  its  pre 
sent  form  it  did  not  exist  till  probably  some  long 
time  after  the  proverbs  which  it  contains  were 
composed.  There  is  positively  no  evidence  which 
would  lead  us  to  a  conclusion  upon  this  point,  and 
consequently  the  most  opposite  results  have  been 
arrived  at:  Ewald,  as  we  have  seen,  placing  it  in 
the  7th  century,  while  Hitzig  refers  it  to  the  9th. 
At  whatever  time  it  may  have  reached  its  present 
shape  there  appears  no  sufficient  reason  to  conclude 
that  Solomon  may  not  have  uttered  many  or  most 
of  the  proverbs  which  are  here  collected,  although 
Ewald  positively  asserts  that  we  here  find  no  pro- 
veib  of  the  Solomonian  period.  He  assumes,  and 
it  is  a  mere  assumption,  that  the  form  of  the  true 
Solomonian  proverb  is  that  which  distinguishes  the 
section  x.  1-xxii.  16,  and  has  already  been  remarked. 
Bleek  regards  chaps,  i.-ix.  as  a  connected  mdskal. 
the  work  of  the  last  editor,  written  by  him  as  an 
introduction  to  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  which  fol 
low,  while  i.  1-6  was  intended  by  him  as  a  super 
scription  to  indicate  the  aim  of  the  book,  less  with 
reference  to  his  own  mdshdl  than  to  the  whole 
book,  and  especially  to  the  proverbs  of  Solomon 


PliOVERBS,  BOOK  OF 

contained  in  it.  Bertholdt  argues  against  Solomon 
being  the  author  of  these  early  chapters,  that  it 
ivas  impossible  for  him,  -with  his  large  harem,  to 
have  given  so  forcibly  the  precept  about  the  bless 
ings  of  a  single  wife  (v.  18,  &c.)  ;  nor,  with  the 
knowledge  that  his  mother  became  the  wife  of 
David  through  an  act  of  adultery,  to  warn  so 
strongly  against  intercourse  with  the  wife  of  an 
other  (vi.  24,  &c.,  vii.  5-23).  These  arguments 
do  not  appear  to  us  so  strong  as  Bertholdt  regarded 
them.  Eichhom,  on  the  contrary,  maintains  that 
Solomon  wrote  the  introduction  in  the  first  nine 
chapters.  From  this  diversity  of  opinion,  which 
be  it  remarked  is  entirely  the  result  of  an  exami 
nation  of  internal  evidence,  it  seems  to  follow  natu 
rally  that  the  evidence  vhich  leads  to  such  varying 
conclusions  is  of  itself  insufficient  to  decide  the 
question  at  issue. 

We  now  pass  on  to  another  section,  xxii.  1 7-xxiv., 
which  contains  a  collection  of  proverbs  marked  by 
certain  peculiarities.  These  are,  1 .  The  structure 
of  the  verses,  which  is  not  so  regular  as  in  the  pre 
ceding  section,  x.  1-xxii.  16.  We  rind  verses  of  eight, 
seven,  or  six  words,  mixed  with  others  of  eleven 
(xxii.  29,  xxiii.  31,  35),  fourteen  (xxiii.  29),  and 
eighteen  words  (xxiv.  12).  The  equality  of  the 
verse  members  is  very  much  disturbed,  and  there 
is  frequently  no  fa-ace  of  parallelism.  2.  A  sen 
tence  is  seldom  completed  in  one  verse,  but  most 
frequently  in  two ;  three  verses  are  often  closely 
connected  (xxiii.  1-3,6-8,  19-21);  and  sometimes 
as  many  as  rive  (xxiv.  30-34).  3.  The  form  of 
address,  "  my  son,"  which  is  so  frequent  in  the 
first  nine  chapters,  occurs  also  here  in  xxiii.  19,  26, 
xxiv.  13 ;  and  the  appeal  to  the  hearer  is  often 
made  in  the  second  pel-son.  Ewald  regards  this 
section  as  a  kind  of  appendix  to  the  earliest  col 
lection  of  the  proverbs  of  Solomon,  added  not  long 
after  the  introduction  in  the  first  nine  chapters, 
though  not  by  the  same  author.  He  thinks  it  pro 
bable  that  the  compiler  of  this  section  added  also 
the  collection  of  proverbs  which  was  made  by  the 
learned  men  of  the  court  of  Hezekiah,  to  which  he 
wrote  the  superscription  in  xxv.  1.  This  theory  of 
course  only  allects  the  date  of  the  section  in  its 
present  form.  When  the  proverbs  were  written 
there  is  nothing  to  determine.  Bertheau  maintains 
that  they  in  great  part  proceeded  from  one  poet,  in 
consequence  of  a  peculiar  construction  which  he 
employs  to  give  emphasis  to  his  presentation  of  a 
subject  or  object  by  repeating  the  pronoun  (xxii. 
19;  xxiii.  14,  15,  19,  20,  28;  xxiv.  6,  27,  32). 
The  compiler  himself  appears  to  have  added  xxii. 
17-21  as  a  kind  of  introduction.  Another  addition 
(xxiv.  23-34)  is  introduced  with  "  these  also  be 
long  to  the  wise,"  and  contains  apparently  some  of 
"  the  words  of  the  wise"  to  which  reference  is  made 
in  i.  6.  Jahn  regards  it  as  a  collection  of  proverbs 
not  by  Solomon.  Hensler  says  it  is  an  appendix  to 
a  collection  of  doctrines  which  is  entirely  lost  and 
unknown ;  and  with  regard  to  the  previous  part  of 
the  section  xxii.  17-xxiv.  22,  he  leaves  it  uncertain 
whether  or  not  the  author  was  a  teacher  to  whom 
the  son  of  a  distinguished  man  was  sent  for  instruc 
tion.  Hitzig's  theoiy  has  already  been  given. 

After  what  has  been  said,  the  reader  must  he  left 
tc  judge  for  himself  whether  Keil  is  justified  in 
asscTting  so  positively  as  he  does  the  single  author 
ship  of  chaps,  i.-xxix.,  and  in  maintaining  that 
"  the  contents  in  all  parts  of  the  collection  shew 
on«  and  the  same  historical  background,  correspond 
ing  only  to  the  relations,  ideas,  and  circumstances, 


PROVERBS,  BOOK  OF          951 

as  well  as  to  the  progress  of  the  culture  and  expe 
riences  of  life,  acquired  by  the  political  development 
of  the  people  in  the  time  of  Solomon." 

The  concluding  chapters  (xxx.,  xxxi.)  are  in  every 
way  distinct  from  the  rest  and  from  each  other. 
The  former,  according  to  the  superscription,  contains 
"  the  words  of  Agur  the  son  of  Jakeh."  Who  wa» 
Agur,  and  who  was  Jakeh,  are  questions  whi:h 
have  been  often  asked,  and  never  satisfactoi  ily 
answered.  The  Kabbins,  according  to  IJashi,  and 
Jerome  after  them,  interpreted  the  name  symbo 
lically  of  Solomon,  who  "  collected  understanding  " 
(from  "I3K,  agar,  "  to  collect,"  "  gather"),  and  is 
elsewhere  called  "  Koheleth."  All  that  can  be  said 
of  him  is  that  he  is  an  unknown  Hebrew  sage,  the 
son  of  an  equally  unknown  Jakeh,  and  that  he  lived 
after  the  time  of  Hezekiah.  Ewald  attributes  to 
him  the  authorship  of  xxx.  1-xxxi.  9,  and  places 
him  not  earlier  than  the  end  of  the  7th  or  beginning 
of  the  6th  cent.  B.C.  Hitzig,  as  usual,  has  a  strange 
theoiy :  that  Agur  and  Lemuel  were  brothers,  both 
sons  of  the  queen  of  Massa.  a  district  in  Arabia,  and 
that  the  father  was  the  reigning  king.  [See  JAKEH.] 
Bunsen  {Bibelwerk,  i.  p.  clxxviii.),  following  Hitzig, 
contends  that  Agur  was  an  inhabitant  of  Massa,  and 
a  descendant  of  one  of  the  five  hundred  Simeonites 
who  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  drove  out  the  Ama- 
lekites  from  Mount  Seir.  All  this  is  mere  conjecture. 
Agur,  whoever  he  was,  appears  to  have  had  for  his 
pupils  Ithiel  and  Ucal,  whom  he  addresses  in  xxx. 
1-6,  which  is  followed  by  single  proverbs  of  Agur's. 
Chap.  xxxi.  1-9  contains  "  the  words  of  king  Lemuel, 
the  prophecy  that  his  mother  taught  him."  Lemuel, 
like  Agur,  is  unknown.  It  is  even  uncertain  whe 
ther  he  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  real  personage,  or 
whether  the  name  is  merely  symbolical,  as  Eichhorn 
and  Ewald  maintain.  If  the  present  text  be  retained 
it  is  difficult  to  see  what  other  conclusion  can  be 
arrived  at.  If  Lemuel  were  a  real  personage  he 
must  have  been  a  foreign  neighbour-king  or  the 
chief  of  a  nomade  tribe,  and  in  this  case  the  pro 
verbs  attributed  to  him  must  have  come  to  the 
Hebrews  from  a  foreign  source,  which  is  highly 
improbable  and  contrary  to  all  we  know  of  the 
people.  Dr.  Davidson  indeed  is  in  favour  of  altering 
the  punctuation  of  xxx.  1,  with  Hitzig  and  Ber 
theau,  by  which  means  Agur  and  Lemuel  become 
brothers,  and  both  sons  of  a  quaeu  of  Massa.  Rea 
sons  against  this  alteration  of  the  text  are  given 
under  the  article  JAKKH.  Eichhorn  maintains  mat 
Lemuel  is  a  figurative  name  appropriate  to  the 
subject.  [LEMUEL,.] 

The  last  section  of  all,  xxxi.  10-31,  is  an  alpha 
betical  acrostic  in  praise  of  a  virtuous  woman.  Its 
artificial  form  stamps  it  as  the  production  of  a  fate 
period  of  Hebrew  literature,  perhaps  about  the  7th 
century  B.C.  The  colouring  and  language  point 
to  a  different  author  from  the  previous  section, 
xxx.  1-xxxi.  9. 

To  conclude,  it  appears,  from  a  corsideration  cf 
the  whole  question  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
Book  of  Proverbs  arrived  at  its  present  shape,  that 
the  nucleus  of  the  whole  was  the  collection  of  Solo 
mon's  proverbs  in  x.  1-xxii.  16  ;  that  to  this  was 
added  the  further  collection  made  by  the  learned 
men  of  the  court  of  Hezekiah,  xxv.-xxix. ;  that 
these  two  were  put  together  and  united  with  xxii. 
17-xxiv.,  and  that  to  this  as  a  whole  the  intro 
duction  i.-ix.  was  affixed,  but  that  whether  it  was 
compiled  by  the  same  writer  who  added  xxii.  16- 
xxiv.  cannot  be  determined.  Nor  is  it  possiile  tc 
assert  that  this  same  compiler  may  not  have  a>M.x' 


a  52  PROVINCE 

the  concluding  chapters  of  the  book  to  his  previous 
collection.  With  regard  to  the  date  at  which  the 
several  portions  of  the  book  were  collected  and  put 
in  their  present  shape,  the  conclusions  of  various 
critics  are  uncertain  and  contradictory.  The  chief 
of  these  have  already  been  given. 

Th;  nature  of  the  contents  of  the  Book  of  Pro- 
rarbs  precludes  the  possibility  of  giving  an  outline 
jf  its  plan  and  object.  Such  would  be  more  appro 
priate  to  the  pages  of  a  commentary.  The  chief 
authorities  which  have  been  consulted  in  the  pre- 
. 'filing -pages  are  the  introductions  of  Carpzov, 
Eichhorn,  Bertholdt,  Jahn,  De  Wette,  Keil,  David 
son,  and  Bleek ;  Rosenmuller,  ScMia ;  Ewald,  Die 
Dicht.  des  A.  B.  4  Th. ;  Bertheau,  Die  Spruche 
Salonw's ;  Hitzdg,  Die  Spruche  Satorno's ;  Elster, 
Die  Salomonischen  Spruche.  To  these  may  be 
added,  as  useful  aids  in  reading  the  Proverbs,  the 
commentaries  of  Albert  Schultens,  of  Eichel  in 
Mendelssohn's  Bible  (perhaps  the  best  of  all),  of 
Loewenstein,  Umbreit,  and  Moses  Stuart.  There  is 
also  a  new  translation  by  Dr.  Noyes,  of  Harvard  Uni 
versity,  of  the  three  Books  of  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes, 
and  Canticles,  which  may  be  consulted,  as  well  as  the 
older  works  of  Hodgson  and  Holden.  [VV.  A.  \V.] 

PROVINCE  (nanp :  ^«vx^«,  N.  T.  ;  x<fy*». 

LXX. :  provincid).  It  is  not  intended  here  to  do 
more  than  indicate  the  points  of  contact  which  this 
word  presents  with  Biblical  history  and  literature. 

(1).  In  the  0.  T.  it  appeai-s  in  connexion  with 
the  wars  between  Ahab  and  Benhadad  (1  K.  xx. 
14,  15,  19).  The  victory  of  the  former  is  gained 
chiefly  "  by  the  young  men  of  the  princes  of  the  pro 
vinces,"  i.  e.  probably,  of  the  chiefs  of  tribes  in  the 
Gilead  country,  recognizing  the  supremacy  of  Ahab, 
and  having  a  common  interest  with  the  Israelites 
in  resisting  the  attacks  of  Syria.  They  are  specially 
jistinguished  in  ver.  15  from  "  the  children  of  Israel." 
Not  the  hosts  of  Ahab,  but  the  youngest  warriors 
("  armour-bearers,"  Keil,  in  loc.)  of  the  land  of 
Jephthah  and  Elijah,  righting  with  a  fearless  faith, 
are  to  carry  off  the  glory  of  the  battle  (comp.  Ewald, 
Gesch.  iii.  492). 

(2).  More  commonly  the  word  is  used  of  the 
divisions  of  the  Chaldaean  (Dan.  ii.  49,  iii.  1,  30) 
and  the  Persian  kingdoms  (Ezr.  ii.  1  ;  Neh.  vii.  6  ; 
Esth.  i.  1,  22,  ii.  3,  &c.).  The  occurrence  of  the 
word  in  Eccles.  ii.  8,  v.  8,  may  possibly  be  noted 
as  an  indication  of  the  later  date  now  commonly 
ascribed  to  that  book. 

The  facts  as  to  the  administration  of  the  Persian 
provinces  which  come  within  our  view  in  these 
passages  are  chiefly  these : — Each  province  has  its 
own  governor,  who  communicates  more  or  less  re 
gularly  with  the  central  authority  for  instructions 
(Ezr.  iv.  and  v.).  Thus  Tatnai,  governor  of  the 
pi-evinces  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  applies 
to  Darius  to  know  how  he  is  to  act  as  to  the  con 
flicting  claims  of  the  Apharsachites  and  the  Jews 
(Ezr.  v.).  Eacn  province  has  its  own  system  of 
tinance,  subject  to  the  king's  direction  (Herod,  iii. 
89).  The  "  treasurer  "  is  ordered  to  spend  a  given 
amount  upon  the  Israelites  (Ezr.  vii.  22),  und  to 
exempt  them  from  all  taxes  (vii.  24).  [TAXES.] 
The  total  number  ot'  the  provinces  is  given  at  127 
(Esth.  i.  1,  viii.  9).  Through  the  whole  extent  of 
the  kingdom  there  is  carried  something  like  a  postal 
c/itsni.  The  king's  couriers  (f}i0\t6<t>oooi,  the 


PfiOYIMOE 

Ayyapot  of  Uerod.  viii.  98)  convey  his  letteis  Ot 
decrees  (Eeth.  i,  22,  iii.  1,5).  From  all  provinces 
concubines  are  collected  for  his  harem  (ii.  3). 
Horses,  mules,  or  dromedaries,  are  employed  on 
this  service  (viii.  10).  (Comp.  Herod,  viii.  98; 
Xen.  Cyrop.  viii.  6  ;  Heeren's  Persians,  ch.  ii.) 

The  word  is  used,  it  must  be  remembered,  of  the 
smaller  sections  of  a  satrapy  rather  than  of  tnf 
satrapy  itself.  While  the  provinces  are  127,  the 
satrapies  are  only  20  (Herod,  iii.  89).  The  Jew* 
who  returned  from  Babylon  are  described  as  "  chil 
dren  of  the  province"  (Ezr.  ii.  1  ;  Neh.  vii.  6",  and 
have  a  separate  governor  [TiRSHATHA]  of  theii 
own  race  (Ezr.  ii.  63;  Neh.  v.  14,  viii.  9) ;  while 
they  are  subject  to  the  satrap  (DPIS)  of  the  whole 
province  west  of  the  Euphrates  (Ezr.  v.  7,  vi.  fi). 

(3).  In  the  N.  T.  we  are  brought  into  contact 
with  the  administration  of  the  provinces  of  the 
Roman  empire.  The  classification  given  by  Strabo 
(xvii.  p.  840)  of  provinces  (fjrapx'at)  supposed  to 
need  military  control,  and  therefore  placed  under 
the  immediate  government  of  the  Caesar,  and 
those  still  belonging  theoretically  to  the  republic, 
and  administeied  by  the  senate;  and  of  the  latter 
again  into  proconsular  (inrariKal)  and  praetorian 
(<TT partly iKai ) ,  is  recognized,  more  or  less  distinctly, 
in  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts.  Cyrenius  (Quirinus) 
is  the  riyfubiv  of  Syria  (Luke  ii.  2),  the  word  being 
in  this  case  used  for  praeses  or  proconsul.  Pilate 
was  the  rjyf^iav  of  the  sub-province  of  Judaea 
(Luke  iii.  1,  Matt,  xxvii.  2,  &c.),  as  procurator 
with  the  power  of  a  legatus  ;  and  the  same  title  is 
given  to  his  successors,  Felix  and  Festus  (Acts  xxiii. 
24,  xxv.  1,  xxvi.  30).  The  governors  of  the  sena 
torial  provinces  of  Cyprus,  Achaia,  and  Asia,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  rightly  described  as  avOviraroi, 
proconsuls  (Acts  xiii.  7,  xviii.  12,  xix.  38).fc  In 
the  two  formei  cases  the  province  had  been  ori 
ginally  an  imperial  one,  but  had  been  transferred, 
Cyprus  by  Augustus  (Dio  Cass.  liv.  4),  Achaia 
by  Claudius  (Sueton.  Claud.  25),  to  the  senate. 
The  crrpariiyol  of  Acts  xvi.  22  ("  magistrates," 
A.  V.),  on  the  other  hand,  were  the  duumviri,  or 
praetors  of  a  Roman  colony.  The  duty  of  the  legati 
and  other  provincial  governors  to  report  special  cnsfti 
to  the  emperor  is  recognized  in  Acts  xxv.  26,  and 
furnished  the  groundwork  tor  the  spurious  Acta 
Pilati.  [PILATE.]  The  right  of  any  Roman  citizen 
to  appeal  from  a  provincial  governor  to  the  emperor 
meets  us  as  asserted  by  St.  Paul  (Acts  xxv.  11). 
In  the  council  (trvn^ovKiov)  of  Acts  xxv.  12  wt 
recognize  the  assessors  who  were  appointed  to  t;ik< 
part  in  the  judicial  functions  of  the  governor.  The 
authority  of  the  legatus,  proconsul,  or  procuratr1 
extended,  it  need  hardly  be  said,  to  capital  punish 
ment  (subject,  in  the  case  of  Roman  citizens,  to  the 
right  of  appeal),  and,  in  most  cases,  the  power  ol 
inflicting  it  belonged  to  him  exclusively.  It  wv; 
necessary  for  the  Sanhedrim  to  gain  Pi'ate's  consent 
to  the  execution  of  our  Lord  (John  xviii.  ,-!!).  The 
strict  letter  of  the  law  forbade  governor  ot  pro 
vinces  to  take  their  wives  with  them,  but  the 
cases  of  Pilate's  wife  (Matt,  xxvii.  19)  and  Drnsilla 
(Acts  xxiv.  24)  shew  that  it  had  fallen  into  disus.-. 
Tacitus  (Ann.  iii.  315,  34)  records  an  unsuccessful 
attempt  to  revive  the  old  prartirr. 

The  financial  administration  of  the  Roman  pro 
vinces  is  discussed  under  lYuucAXS  and  TAXI >. 

[K.H.IVJ 


•  The  A.  V.  rendering  "  deputy  "  had,  it  should  lx>  re-  j  and  James  than  it  In*  tor  us.     The  governor  of  IT 
a  mme  definite  vnine  in  the  day*  nt  KIu.ibe.tb  :  was  officially  •  the  Lord  IVoutv." 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

PSALMS,  BOOK  OF.  1.  The  Collection  as 
(  Whole. — It  does  not  appear  how  the  Psaltr.s  were, 
as  a  whole,  anciently  designated.  Their  present 
Hebrew  appellation  is  Dv!"in,  "  Praises."  But  in 

the  actual  superscriptions  of  the  psalms  the  word 

L 
rpiin  is  applied  only  to  one,  Ps.  cxiv.,  which  is 

indeed  emphatically  a  praise-hymn.  The  LXX. 
entitled  them  Ya\/iol,  or  "Psalms,"  using  the 
word  $a\[j.bs  at  the  same  time  as  the  translation 
of  "ttOTD,  which  signifies  strictly  a  rhythmical 
composition  (Lowth,  Praelect.  III.),  and  which  was 
probably  applied  in  practice  to  any  poem  specially 
intended,  by  reason  of  its  rhythm,  for  musical  per 
formance  with  instrumental  accompaniment.  But 
the  Hebrew  word  is,  in  the  0.  T.,  never  used  in 
the  plural ;  and  in  the  superscriptions  of  even  the 
Davidic  psalms  it  is  applied  only  to  some,  not  to  all ; 
probably  to  those  which  had  been  composed  most 
expressly  for  the  harp.  The  notice  at  the  end  of 
Ps.  Ixxii.  has  suggested  that  the  Psalms  may  in 
the  earliest  times  have  been  known  as  nV5Bn, 
"  Prayers;"  and  in  fact  "  Prayer"  is  the  title  pre 
fixed  to  the  most  ancient  of  all  the  psalms,  that 
of  Moses,  Ps.  xc.  But  the  same  designation  is  in 
the  superscriptions  applied  to  only  three  besides, 
Pss.  xvii.,  Ixxxvi.,  cii. :  nor  have  all  the  psalms 
the  character  of  prayers.  The  other  special  designa 
tions  applied  to  particular  psalms  are  the  following  : 
"VK*,  "  Song,"  the  outpouring  of  the  soul  in  thanks 
giving,  used  in  the  first  instance  of  a  hymn  of  pri 
vate  gratitude,  Ps.  xxx.,  afterwards  of  hymns  of  great 
national  thanksgiving,  Pss.  xlvi.,  xlviii.  Ixv.,  &c. ; 

b'OK'O,  maschil,  "  Instruction "  or  "  Homily," 
!'ss.  xxxii.,  xlii.,  xliv.,  &c.  (comp.  the  "p<O£'K,  "  I 
will  instruct  thee,"  in  Ps.  xxxii.  8);  DfDD,  mich- 
t/nn,  "  Private  Memorial,"  from  the  root  DHD 
(perhaps  also  with  an  ana  grammatical  allusion  to 
the  root  "]DJ"I,  "  to  support,"  "  maintain,"  comp. 
Ps.  xvi.  5),  Pss.  xvi.,  Ivi.-lix. ;  DHI?,  eduth,  "  Tes 
timony,"  Pss.  lx.,  Ixxx.  ;  and  JVJ{£*,  shiggaion, 
"  Irregular  or  Dithyrambic  Ode,"  Ps.  vii.  The 
strict  meaning  of  these  terms  is  in  general  to  be 
gathered  from  the  earlier  superscriptions.  Once 
made  familiar  to  the  psalmists,  they  were  afterwards 
employed  by  them  more  loosely. 

The  Christian  Church  obviously  received  the 
Psalter  from  the  Jews  not  only  as  a  constituent 
portion  of  the  sawed  volume  of  Holy  Scripture, 
but  also  as  the  liturgical  hymn-book  which  the 
Jewish  Church  had  regularly  used  in  the  Temple. 
The  number  of  separate  psalms  contained  in  it  is, 
by  the  concordant  testimony  of  all  ancient  autho 
rities,  one  hundred  and  fifty  ;  the  avowedly  "  super 
numerary  "  psalm  which  appeal's  at  the  end  of  the 
Greek  and  Syriac  Psalteis  being  manifestly  apocry 
phal.  This  total  number  commends  itself  by  its 
internal  probability  as  having  proceeded  from  the 
last  sacred  collector  and  editor  of  the  Psalter.  In 
the  details,  however,  of  the  numbering,  both  the 
(ireek  ami  Syriac  Psalters  differ  from  the  Hebrew. 
The  (iretk  translatoi-s  joined  together  Pss.  ix.,  x. 
snd  Pss.  cxiv.,  cxv.,  and  then  divided  Ps.  cxvi.  and 
Po.  cxlvii. :  this  was  perpetuated  in  the  versions 
lerived  from  the  Greek,  and  amongst  others  in  the 
Latin  Vulgate.  The  Syriac  so  far  followed  the 
Greek  as  to  join  together  Pss.  cxiv.,  cxv.,  and  to 
divide  Ps.  cxlvii.  Of  the  three  divergent  systems 
nf  numbering,  the  Hebrew  (as  followed  in  oui 
A.  V.)  is,  even  on  internal  grounds,  tol>e  preferred 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


95S 


t  is  decisive  against  the  Greek  numbering  that 
*s.  cxvi.,  being  symmetrical  in  its  construction, 
will  not  bear  to  be  divided  ;  and  against  the  Syriac, 
,hat  it  destroys  the  outward  correspondence  in  nu 
merical  place  between  the  three  great  triumphal 
isalms,  Pss.  xviii.,  Ixviii.,  cxviii.,  as  also  between 
,he  two  psalms  containing  the  praise  of  the  Law, 
?ss.  xix.,  cxix.  There  are  also  some  discrepancies 
n  the  versual  numberings.  That  of  our  A.  V.  fre 
quently  differs  from  that  of  the  Hebrew  in  conse 
quence  of  the  Jewish  practice  of  reckoning  the 
superscription  as  the  first  verse. 

2.  Component  Parts  of  the  Collection. — Ancient 
;radition  and  internal  evidenc'-  concur  in  parting 
;he  Psalter  into  five  great  divisions  or  books.  The 
ancient  Jewish  tradition  is  preserved  to  us  by  the 
ibundant  testimonies  of  the  Christian  Fathers.  And 
if  the  indications  which  the  sacred  text  itself  con 
tains  of  this  division  the  most  obvious  are  the  dox- 
ologies  which  we  find  at  the  ends  of  Pss.  xli.,  Ixxii., 
xxxix.,  cvi.,  and  which,  having  for  the  most  pait 
no  special  connexion  with  the  psalms  to  which  they 
are  attached,  mark  the  several  ends  of  the  first  four 
of  the  five  Books.  It  suggests  itself  at  once  that 
these  Books  must  have  been  originally  formed  at 
different  periods.  This  is  by  various  further  consi 
derations  rendered  all  but  certain,  while  the  few 
difficulties  which  stand  in  the  way  of  admitting  it 
vanish  when  closely  examined. 

Thus,  there  is  a  remarkable  difference  between 
the  several  Books  in  their  use  of  the  divine  names 
Jehovah  and  Elohim,  to  designate  Almighty  God. 
In  Book  I  the  former  name  prevails:  it  is  found 
272  times,  while  Elohim  occurs  but  15  times.  (We 
here  take  no  account  ot  the  superscriptions  or  dox- 
ology,  nor  yet  of  the  occurrences  of  Elohim  when 
inflected  with  a  possessive  suffix.)  On  the  other 
hand,  in  Book  II.  Elohim  is  found  more  than  five 
times  as  often  as  Jehovah.  In  Book  111.  the  pre 
ponderance  of  Elohim  in  the  earlier  is  balanced  by 
that  of  Jehovah  in  the  later  psalms  of  the  Book. 
In  Book  IV.  the  name  Jehovah  is  exclusively 
employed  ;  and  so  also,  virtually,  in  Book  V., 
Elohim  being  there  found  only  in  two  passages 
incorporated  from  earlier  psalms.  Those  who  main 
tain,  therefore,  that  the  psalms  were  all  collected  and 
arranged  at  once,  contend  that  the  collector  distri 
buted  the  psalms  according  to  the  divine  name? 
which  they  severally  exhibited.  But  to  this  theory 
the  existence  of  Book  III.,  in  which  the  preferential 
use  of  the  Elohim  gradually  yields  to  that  of  the  Je 
hovah,  is  fatal.  The  large  appearance,  in  fact,  of  the 
name  Elohim  in  Books  II.  and  III.  depends  in  great 
measure  on  the  period  to  which  many  of  the  psalms 
of  those  Books  belong ;  the  period  from  the  reign  of 
Solomon  to  that  of  Hezekiah,  when  through  certain 
causes  the  name  Jehovah  was  exceptionally  disused. 
The  preference  for  the  name  Elohim  in  most  of  the 
Davidic  psalms  which  are  included  in  Book  II.,  is 
closely  allied  with  that  character  of  those  psalms 
which  induced  David  himself  to  exclude  them  from 
his  own  collection,  Book  I.;  while,  lastly,  the 
sparing  use  of  the  Jehovah  in  Ps.  Ixviii.,  and  the 
three  introductory  palms  which  piecede  it,  is  de 
signed  to  cause  the  name,  when  it  occurs,  and 
above  all  JAH,  which  is  emphatic  for  Jehovah,  to 
shine  out  with  greater  force  and  splendour. 

This,  however,  brings  us  to  the  observance  ol 
the  superscriptioi.s  which  mark  the  authorship  ol 
the  several  psalm*;  and  here  again  we  find  th. 
several  groups  of  psalms  which  form  the  rcspecliv* 
five  Books  distinguished,  in  great  measure,  by  Uni; 


*5±  PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

superscriptions  fiom  each  other.  Book  I.  is  ex 
clusively  Davidic.  Of  the  forty-one  psalms  of 
wnicn  it  consists,  thirty-seven  have  David's  name 
prefixed;  and  of  the  remaining  four,  Pss.  i.,  ii.,  are 
probably  outwardly  anonymous  only  by  reason  of 
their  prefatory  character,  Pss.  x.,  xxxiii.,  by  reason 
of  their  close  connexion  with  those  which  they  im 
mediately  succeed.'  Book  11.  (in  which  the  appm'eut 
anonymousness  of  Pss.  xliii.,  Ixvi.,  Ixvii.,  Ixxi.,  may 
be  similarly  explained)  falls,  by  the  superscriptions 
of  its  psalms,  into  two  distinct  subdivisions,  a 
Levitic  and  a  Davidic.  The  former  consists  of  Pss. 
xlii.-xlix.,  ascribed  to  the  Sons  of  Korah,  and  Ps. 
1.,  "  A  Psalm  of  Asaph :"  the  latter  comprises 
Pss.  li.-lxxi.,  bearing  the  name  of  David,  and  sup 
plemented  by  Ps.  Ixxii.,  the  psalm  of  Solomon.  In 
Book  111.  (Pss.  Ixxiii.-lxxxix.),  where  the  Asaphic 
psalms  precede  those  of  the  Sons  of  Korah,  the 
psalms  are  all  ascribed,  explicitly  or  virtually,  to 
the  various  Levite  singers,  except  only  Ps.  Ixxxvi., 
which  bears  the  name  of  David :  this,  however,  is 
not  set  by  itself,  but  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  rest. 
In  Books  IV.,  V.,  we  have,  in  all,  seventeen  psalms 
marked  with  David's  name.  They  are  to  a  certain 
extent,  as  in  Book  111.,  mixed  with  the  rest,  some 
times  singly,  sometimes  in  groups.  But  these 
Books  difler  from  Book  III.  in  that  the  non-Davidic 
psalms,  iustead  of  being  assigned  by  superscriptions 
to  the  Levite  singers,  are  left  anonymous.  Special 
attention,  in  respect  of  authorship,  is  drawn  by  the 
superscriptions  only  to  Ps.  xc.,  "  A  Prayer  of 
Moses,"  &c. ;  Ps.  cii.,  "  A  Prayer  of  the  afflicted," 
&c. ;  and  Ps.  cxxvii.,  marked  with  the  name  of 
Solomon. 

In  reasoning  from  the  phenomena  of  the  super 
scriptions,  which  indicate  in  many  instances  not 
only  the  authors,  but  also  the  occasions  of  the 
several  psalms,  as  well  as  the  mode  of  their  musical 
performance,  we  have  to  meet  the  preliminary  en 
quiry  which  has  been  raised,  Are  the  superscrip 
tions  authentic  ?  For  the  affirmative  it  is  contended 
that  they  form  an  integral,  and  till  modem  times 
almost  undisputed,  portion  of  the  Hebrew  text  of 
Scripture;1"  that  they  are  in  analogy  with  other 
biblical  super-  or  subscriptions,  Davidic  or  other 
wise  (comp.  2  Sam.  i.  18,  probably  based  on  an  old 
superscription ;  ib.  xxiii.  1  ;  Is.  xxxviii.  9  ;  Hab.  iii. 
1,  19);  and  that  their  diversified,  unsystematic, 
ar.d  often  obscure  and  enigmatical  character  is  in 
consistent  with  the  theory  of  their  having  originated 
at  a  later  period.  On  the  other  hand  is  urged 
their  analogy  with  the  untrustworthy  subscriptions 
of  the  N.  T.  epistles ;  as  also  the  fact  that  many 
arbitrary  superscriptions  are  added  in  the  Greek 
version  of  the  Psalter.  The  above  represents,  how 
ever,  but  the  outside  of  the  controversy.  The  real 
pith  of  it  lies  in  this:  Do  they,  when  individually 
sifted,  approve  themselves  as  so  generally  correct, 
and  as  so  free  from  any  single  fatal  objection  to 
their  credit,  as  to  claim  our  universal  confidence? 
This  can  evidently  not  be  discussed  here.  We  must 
simply  avow  our  conviction,  founded  on  thorough 
examination,  that  they  are,  when  rightly  inter 
preted,  fully  trustworthy,  and  that  every  separate 
objpttfon  that  has  been  made  to  the  correctness  of 
any  cne  of  them  can  be  fairly  met.  Moreover, 


•  An  old  Jewish  canon,  which  may  be  deemed  to  hold 
C".>d  lor  the  earlier  but  not  for  the  later  Books,  enacts 
Dial  all  anonymous  psalms  be  accounted  the  compo- 
silionsof  the  "Wilburs  named  in  the  superscriptions  lust 
BTcmttitc. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

some  of  the  argumeuts  of  their  assailants  ol> 
viously  recoil  upon  themselves.  Thus  wnen  it  u 
alleged  that  the  contents  of  Ps.  xxxiv.  have  no  con 
nexion  with  the  occasion  indicated  in  the  super 
scription,  we  reply  that  the  fact  of  the  connexion 
not  being  readily  apparent  renders  it  improlablc 
that  the  supei-scription  should  have  been  prefixed 
by  any  but  David  himself. 

Let  us  now  thwi  trace  the  bearing  of  the  super- 
scriptions  upon  the  date  and  method  of  coropilatior 
of  the  several  Books.  Book  I.  is,  by  thfc  super 
scriptions,  entirely  Davidic;  nor  do  we  find  in  it 
a  trace  of  any  but  David's  authorship.  No  such 
trace  exists  in  the  mention  of  the  "  Tenure "  (v. 
7),  for  that  word  is  even  in  1  Sam.  i.  9,  iii.  3 
applied  to  the  Tabeniacle  ;  nor  yet  in  the  phrase 
"  bringeth  back  the  captivity  "  (xiv.  7),  which  is 
elsewhere  used,  idiomatically,  with  great  latitude 
of  meaning  (Job  xlii.  10;  Hos.  vi.  11;  Ez.  xvi. 
53) ;  nor  yet  in  the  acrosticism  of  Pss.  xxv.,  &c., 
for  that  all  acrostic  psalms  are  of  late  date  is  a 
purely  gratuitous  assumption,  aiid  some  even  of  the 
most  sceptical  critics  admit  the  Davidic  authorship 
of  the  partially  acrostic  Pss.  ix.,  x.  All  the  jisaJms 
of  Book  I.  being  thus  Davidic,  we  may  well  believe 
that  the  compilation  of  the  Book  was  also  David's 
work.  In  favour  of  this  is  the  circumstance  that 
it  does  not  comprise  all  David's  psalms,  nor  his 
latest,  which  yet  would  have  been  all  included  in 
it  by  any  subsequent  collector  ;  also  the  circum 
stance  that  its  two  prefatoiy  psalms,  although  not 
superscribed,  are  yet  shown  by  internal  evidence  to 
have  proceeded  fiom  David  himself;  and  further- 
move,  that  of  the  two  recensions  of  the  same  hymn, 
Pss.  xiv.,  liii.,  it  prefers  that  which  seems  to  have 
been  more  specially  adapted  by  its  royal  author  to 
the  temple-service.  Book  II.  appears  by  the  date 
of  its  latest  psalm,  Ps.  xlvi.,  to  have  been  compiled 
in  the  reign  of  King  Hezekiah.  It  would  naturally 
comprise,  1st,  several  or  most  of  the  Levitical 
psalms  anterior  to  that  date ;  and  2ndly,  the  re 
mainder  of  the  psalms  of  David,  previously  uncom- 
piled.  To  these  latter  the  collector,  after  properly 
appending  the  single  psalm  of  Solomon,  has  affixed 
the  notice  that  "  the  prayers  of  David  the  son  of 
Jesse  are  ended"  (Ps.  Ixxii.  20);  evidently  imply 
ing,  at  least  on  the  primd  facie  view,  that  no  more 
compositions  of  the  royal  psalmist  remained.  How 
then  do  we  find,  in  the  later  Books  111.,  IV.,  V., 
further  psalms  yet  marked  with  David's  name? 
Another  question  shall  help  us  to  reply.  How  do 
we  find,  in  Book  III.  rather  than  Book  II.,  eleven 
psalms,  Pss.  Ixxiii.-lxxxiii.,  bearing  the  name  o. 
David's  contemporary  musician  Asaph?  Clearly 
because  they  proceeded  not  froin  Asaph  hmveit. 
No  critic  whatever  contends  that  all  thef?  eleven 
belong  to  the  age  of  David ;  and,  in  real  truth, 
internal  evidence  is  in  every  single  instance  in 
favour  of  a  later  origin.  They  were  composed  then 
by  the  "sons  of  Asaph"  (2  Chr.  xxix.  13,  XXXT. 
15,  &c.),  the  members,  by  hereditary  descent,  of 
the  choir  which  Asaph  founded.  It  was  to  be  ex 
pected  that  these  psalmists  would,  in  superscribing 
their  psalms,  prefer  honouring  and  perpetuating  the 
memory  of  their  ancestor  to  obtruding  their  own 
personal  names  on  the  Church:  a  consideration 


b  Well  says  Bossuet,  IXstert.  $28 :  "  Qui  titulos  non  unc 
nxxlo  intelligant,  video  esse  quam  plurtmos:  qui  de  liiu 
loruin  auctorltate  dubil&rit,  ox  aiitiquis  umnino  nemiiicui. 
Theodore  uf  Jlopsucstiu  forms  an  cxceplluu. 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

*hii;h  both  explains  the  present  superscriptions, 
and  also  renders  it  improbable  that  the  person  in- 
widcd  in  them  could,  according  to  a  frequent  but 
now  waning  hypothesis,  be  any  second  Asaph,  of 
younger  generation  and  of  inferior  fame.  The  su 
perscriptions  of  Pss.  Lxxxviii.,  l.xx.xix.,  "  Maschil  of 
Ileman,"  "  Maschil  of  Ethan,"  have  doubtless  a  like 
purport ;  the  one  psalm  having  been  written,  as  in 
fact  the  rest  of  its  superscription  states,  by  the 
Sons  of  Korah,  the  choir  of  which  Heman  was  the 
founder ;  and  the  ofher  correspondingly  proceeding 
from  the  third  Levitical  choir,  which  owed  its  origin 
to  Ethan  or  Jeduthun.  If  now  in  the  times  pos 
terior  to  those  of  David  the  Levite  choirs  prefixed 
to  the  psalms  which  they  composed  the  names  of 
Asaph,  Heman,  and  Ethan,  out  of  a  feeling  of  vene 
ration  for  their  memories ;  how  much  moi-e  might 
the  name  of  David  be  prefixed  to  the  utterances  of 
those  who  were  not  merely  his  descendants,  but 
also  the  representatives  for  the  time  being,  and  so 
in  some  sort  the  pledges,  of  the  perpetual  royalty 
of  his  lineage !  The  name  David  is  used  to  denote, 
in  other  parts  of  Scripture,  after  the  original  David's 
death,  the  then  head  of  the  Davidic  family ;  and 
so,  in  prophecy,  the  Messiah  of  the  seed  of  David, 
who  was  to  sit  on  David's  throne  (1  K.  xii.  16; 
Hos.  iii.  5  ;  Is.  Iv.  3 ;  Jer.  xxx.  9 ;  Ez.  xxxiv.  23, 
24).  And  thus  then  we  may  explain  the  meaning 
of  the  later  Davidic  superscriptions  in  the  Psalter. 
The  psalms  to  which  they  belong  were  written  by 
Hezekiah,  by  Josiah,  by  Zerubbabel,  or  others  of 
David's  posterity.  And  this  view  is  confirmed  by 
various  considerations.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  cir 
cumstance  that  in  the  later  Books,  and  even  in 
Book  V.  taken  alone,  the  psalms  marked  with 
David's  name  are  not  grouped  all  together.  It  is 
confirmed  in  some  instances  by  the  internal  evidence 
of  occasion  :  thus  Psalm  ci.  can  ill  be  reconciled  with 
the  historical  circumstances  of  any  period  of  David's 
life,  but  suits  exactly  with  those  of  the  opening  of  the 
reign  of  Josiah.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  extent  to 
which  some  of  these  psalms — Pss.  Ixxxvi.,  cviii., 
cxliv. — are  compacted  of  passages  from  previous 
psalms  of  David.  And  it  is  confirmed  lastly  by  the 
fact  that  the  Hebrew  text  of  many  (see,  above  all, 
Ps.  cxxxix.)  is  marked  by  grammatical  Chaldaisms, 
which  are  entirely  unparalleled  in  Pss.  i.-lxxii., 
and  which  thus  afford  sure  evidence  of  a  compa 
ratively  recent  date.  They  cannot  therefore  be 
David's  own :  yet  that  the  superscriptions  are  not 
on  that  account  to  be  rejected,  as  false,  but  must 
rather  be  properly  interpreted,  is  shown  by  the  im 
probability  that  any  would,  carelessly  or  presump 
tuously,  have  prefixed  David's  name  to  various 
psalms  scattered  through  a  collection,  while  yet 
leaving  the  rest — at  least  in  Books  IV.,  V. — altoge 
ther  unsuperscribed. 

The  above  explanation  removes  all  serious  diffi 
culty  respecting  the  history  of  the  later  Books  of 
the  Psalter.  Book  III.,  the  interest  of  which  centres 
in  the  times  of  Hezekiah,  stretches  out,  by  its  last 
two  psalms,  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh  :  it  was  pro 
bably  compiled  in  the  reign  of  Josiah.  Book  IV. 
contains  the  remainder  of  the  psalms  up  to  the  date 
of  the  Captivity ;  Book  V.  the  psalms  of  the  Return. 
There  is  nothing  to  distinguish  these  two  Books 
from  each  other  in  respect  of  outward  decoration  or 
arrangement,  and  they  may  have  been  compiled 
together  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah. 

The  superscriptions,  and  the  places  which  the 
p&ahns  themselves  severally  occupy  in  fho  Psalter, 
*rc  thus  the  two  guiding  clues  by  whi<-h,  in  con- 


PS  ALMS,  BOOK  OF 


956 


junction  with  the  internal  evidence,  their  varioiic 
authors,  dates,  and  occasions,  are  to  be  determined. 
In  the  critical  results  obtained  on  these  points  by 
those  scholars  who  have  recognized  and  used  these 
helps  there  is,  not  indeed  uniformity,  but  at  least  f 
visible  tendency  towards  it.  The  same  cannot  bt  ' 
said  for  the  results  of  the  judgments  of  those,  of 
whatever  school,  who  have  neglected  or  rejected 
them ;  nor  indeed  is  it  easily  to  be  imagined  that 
internal  evidence  alone  s-honld  suffice  to  assign  one 
hundred  and  fifty  devotional  hymns,  even  approxi 
mately,  to  their  several  epochs. 

It  would  manifestly  be  impossible,  in  the  compass 
of  an  article  like  the  present,  to  exhibit  in  detail 
the  divergent  views  which  have  been  taken  of  thj 
dates  of  particular  psalms.  There  is,  however,  one 
matter  which  must  not  be  altogether  passed  over  in 
silence:  the  assignment  of  various  psalms,  by  * 
large  number  of  critics,  to  the  age  of  the  Maccabees. 
Two  preliminary  difficulties  fatally  beset  such  pro 
cedure:  the  hypothesis  of  a  Maccabean  authorship 
of  any  portion  of  the  Psalter  can  ill  be  reconciled 
either  with  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  canon,  or  with 
that  of  the  translation  of  the  LXX.  But  the  diffi 
culties  do  not  end  here.  How, — for  we  shall  not 
here  discuss  the  theories  of  Hitzig  and  his  followers 
Lengerke  and  Justus  Olshausen,  who  would  repre 
sent  the  greater  part  of  the  Psalter  as  Maccabean, — 
how  is  it  that  the  psalms  which  one  would  most 
naturally  assign  to  the  Maccabean  period  meet  us  not 
in  the  close  but  in  the  middle,  i.  e.  in  the  Second  and 
Third  Books  of  the  Psalter?  The  three  named  by  De 
Wette  (Einl.  in  das  A.  T.  §270)  as  bearing,  appa 
rently  a  Maccabean  impress,  are  Pss.  xliv.,  lx., 
Ixxiv. ;  and  in  fact  these,  together  with  Ps.  Ixxix.,  are 
perhaps  all  that  would,  when  taken  alone,  seriously 
suggest  the  hypothesis  of  a  Maccabean  date.  Whence 
then  arise  the  early  places  in  the  Psalter  which 
these  occupy  ?  But  even  in  the  case  of  these,  the 
internal  evidence,  when  more  narrowly  examined, 
proves  to  be  in  favour  of  an  earlier  date.  In  the 
first  place  the  superscription  of  Ps.  lx.  cannot  pos 
sibly  have  been  invented  from  the  historical  books, 
inasmuch  as  it  disagrees  with  them  in  its  details. 
Then  the  mention  by  name  in  that  psalm  of  the 
Israelitish  tribes,  and  of  Moab,  and  Philistia,  is  un- 
suited  to  the  Maccabean  epoch.  In'  Ps.  xliv.  the 
complaint  is  made  that  the  tree  of  the  nation  of 
Israel  was  no  longer  spreading  over  the  territory 
that  Gcd  had  assigned  it.  Is  it  conceivable  that  a 
Maccabean  psalmist  should  have  held  this  language 
without  making  the  slightest  allusion  to  the  Baby 
lonish  captivity ;  as  though  the  tree's  growth  were 
now  first  being  seriously  impeded  by  the  wild  stocks 
around,  notwithstanding  that  it  had  once  been  en 
tirely  transplanted,  and  that,  though  restored  to  its 
place,  it  had  been  weakly  ever  since  ?  In  Ps.  Ixxiv. 
it  is  complained  that  "  there  is  no  more  any  pro* 
phet."  Would  that  be  a  natural  complaint  at  a 
time  when  Jewish  prophecy  had  ceased  for  more 
than  two  centuries?  Lastly,  in  Ps.  Ixxix.  the 
mention  of  "  kingdoms  "  in  ver.  6  ill  suits  the  Mao- 
cabean  time  ;  while  the  way  in  which  the  psalm  is 
cited  by  the  author  of  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees 
(vii.  16,  17),  who  omits  those  words  which  are 
foreign  to  his  purpose,  is  such  as  would  have  hardly 
been  adopted  in  reference  to  a  contemporary  com 
position. 

3.  Connexion  of  the  Psalms  with  the  Israclitish 
history. — In  tracing  this  we  shall,  of  course,  assume 
the  truth  of  the  conclusions  at  which  in  the  pre 
vi'  >ua  section  we  have  arrived. 


9f><>  I'SALMS.  BOOK  OF 

The  psalms  grew,  essentially  and  gradually,  out 
of  the  personal  and  national  career  of  David  and 
of  Israel.  That  of  Moses,  Psalm  xc.,  which,  though 
it  contributed  little  to  the  production  of  the  rest,  is 
yet,  in  j»oiut  of  actual  date,  the  earliest,  faithfully 
reflects  the  long,  weary  wanderings,  the  multiplied 
wovocations,  and  the  consequent  punishments  of 
l:it-  wilderness;  and  it  is  well  that  the  Psalter 
should  coi. tain  at  least  one  memorial  of  those  forty 
years  of  toil.  It  is,  however,  with  David  that 
IsraelitUh  psalmody  may  be  said  virtually  to  com 
mence.  Previous  mastery  over  his  harp  had  pro 
bably  already  prei>aied  the  way  for  his  future 
drains,  when  the  anointing  oil  of  Samuel  descended 
upon  him,  and  h»  began  to  drink  in  special  mea 
sure,  from  that  day  forward,  of  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord.  It  was  then  that,  victorious  at  home  over 
the  mysterious  melancholy  of  Saul  and  in  the 
field  over  the  vaunting  champion  of  the  Philistine 
hosts,  he  sang  how  from  even  babes  and  suck 
lings  God  had  ordained  strength  because  of  His 
enemies  (Ps.  viii.).  His  next  psalms  are  of  a 
different  character:  his  persecutions  at  the  hands  of 
Saul  had  commenced.  Ps.  Iviii.  was  probably 
written  after  Jonathan's  disclosures  of  the  murder 
ous  designs  of  the  court:  Ps.  lix.  when  his  house 
was  being  watched  by  Saul's  emissaries.  The  in- 
hospitality  of  the  court  of  Achish  at  Gath,  gave 
rise  to  Ps.  Ivi. :  Ps.  xxxiv.  was  David's  thanks 
giving  for  deliverance  from  that  court,  not  unmm- 
gled  with  shame  for  the  unworthy  stratagem  to 
which  he  had  there  temporarily  had  recourse.  The 
associations  connected  with  the  cave  of  Adullam 
are  embodied  in  Ps.  Ivii.:  the  feelings  excited  by 
the  tidings  of  Doeg's  servility  in  Ps.  lii.  The  escape 
from  Keilah,  in  consequence  of  a  divine  warning, 
suggested  Ps.  xxxi.  Ps.  liv.  was  written  when  the 
Ziphites  officiously  informed  Saul  of  David's  move 
ments.  Pss.  xxxv.,  xxxvi.,  recall  the  colloquy  at 
Kngedi.  Nabal  of  Carmel  was  probably  the  original 
ot  the  fool  of  Ps.  liii. ;  though  in  this  case  the 
closing  verse  of  that  psalm  must  have  been  added 
when  it  was  further  altered,  by  David  himself,  into 
Ps.  xiv.  The  most  thoroughly  idealized  picture 
suggested  by  a  retrospect  of  all  the  dangers  of  his 
outlaw-life  is  that  presented  to  us  by  David  in  Ps. 
xxii.  But  in  Ps.  xxiii.,  which  forms  a  side-piece 
to  it,  and  the  imagery  of  which  is  drawn  from  his 
earlier  shepherd-days,  David  acknowledges  that  his 
past  career  had  had  its  brighter  as  well  as  its  darker 
side ;  nor  had  the  goodness  and  mercy  which  were 
to  follow  him  all  the  days  of  his  life  been  ever 
really  absent  from  him.  Two  more  psalms,  at 
least,  must  be  referred  to  the  period  before  David 
ascended  the  throne,  viz.  xxxviii.  and  xxxix.,  which 
naturally  associate  themselves  with  the  distressing 
scene  at  Ziklag  af«r  the  inroad  of  the  Amalekites. 
Ps.  xl.  may  perhaps  be  the  thanksgiving  for  the 
retrieval  of  the  disaster  that  had  there  befallen. 

When  David's  reign  has  commenced,  it  is  still 
with  the  most  exciting  incidents  of  his  history, 
private  or  public,  that  his  psalms  are  mainly  asso 
ciated.  There  are  none  to  which  the  period  of  his 
reign  at  Hebron  can  lay  exclusive  claim.  But  after 
the  conquest  of  Jerusalem  his  psalmody  opened 
afresh  with  the  solemn  removal  of  the  ark  to  Mount 
Zion  ;  and  in  Pss.  xxiv.-xxix.,  which  belong  together, 
we  have  the  earliest  definite  instance  of  David's 
systematic  composition  or  arrangement  of  psalms 
for  public  use.  Ps.  xxx.  is  of  the  same  date:  it 
was  composed  for  tne  dedication  of  David's  m'\v 
fii.lace,  which  took  place  cm  the  same  day  with  the 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OP 

establishment  of  the  ark  in  its  new  tabernacle 
Other  psalms  (and  in  these  first  do  we  trace  an; 
allusions  to  the  promise  of  peipetual  royalty  now 
conveyed  through  Nathan)  show  the  feelings  ot 
David  in  the  midst  of  his  foreign  wars.  Th« 
imagery  of  Pi.  ii.  is  perhaps  drawn  from  the  events 
of  this  period  ;  Pss.  Ix. ,  Ixi.  belong  to  the  campaign 
against  Edom  ;  Ps.  xx.  to  the  second  campaign, 
conducted  by  David  in  person,  of  the  war  against 
the  allied  Ammonites  and  Syrians  ;  and  Ps.  xxi.  to 
the  termination  of  that  war  by  the  capture  ot 
Kabbah.  Intermediate  in  date  to  the  last-mentioned 
two  psalms  is  Ps.  li.  ;  connected  with  the  dark 
episode  which  made  David  tremble  not  only  for 
himself,  but  also  for  the  city  whereon  he  had 
laboured,  and  which  he  had  partly  named  by  his 
own  name,  lest  God  should  in  displeasure  not 
permit  the  future  Temple  to  be  reared  on  Mount 
Zion,  nor  the  yet  imperfect  walls  of  Jerusalem  to 
be  completed.  But  rich  above  all,  in  the  psalms  to 
which  it  gave  rise,  is  the  period  of  David's  flight 
from  Absalom.  To  this  we  may  refer  Pss.  iii.-vii. 
(the  "  Cush  "  of  Ps.  vii.  being  Shimei)  ;  also  Ps.  lv., 
which  reflects  the  treachery  of  Ahithophel,  Ps.  Ixii., 
which  possibly  alludes  to  the  falsehood  of  both 
Ziba  and  Mephibosheth,  and  Ps.  Ixiii.,  written  in 
the  wilderness  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Jordan. 

Even  of  those  psalms  which  cannot  be  referred  to 
any  definite  occasion,  several  reflect  the  general  his- 
torical  circumstances  of  the  times.  Thus  Ps.  ix. 
is  a  thanksgiving  for  the  deliverance  of  the  land  ol 
Israel  from  its  former  heathen  oppressors.  Ps.  x.  is 
a  prayer  for  the  deliverance  of  the  Church  from  the 
high-handed  oppression  exercised  from  within.  The 
succeeding  psalms  dwell  on  the  same  theme,  the 
virtual  internal  heathenism  by  which  the  Church  of 
God  was  weighed  down.  So  that  there  remain  very 
few,  e.  g.  Pss.  xv.-xvii.,  xix.,  xxxii.  (with  its  choral 
appendage  xxxiii.),  xxxvii.,  of  which  some  historical 
account  may  not  be  given ;  and  even  of  these  some 
are  manifestly  connected  with  psalms  of  historical 
origin,  e.  g.  Ps.  xv.  with  Ps.  xxiv. ;  and  of  others 
the  historical  reference  may  be  more  reasonably 
doubted  than  denied. 

A  season  of  repose  near  the  close  of  his  reign 
induced  David  to  compose  his  grand  personal  thanks 
giving  for  the  deliverances  of  his  whole  life,  Ps.  xviii. ; 
the  date  of  which  is  approximately  determined  by 
the  place  at  which  it  is  inserted  in  the  history 
(2  Sam.  xxii.).  It  was  probably  at  this  period  that 
he  finally  arranged  for  the  sanctuary-service  that 
collection  of  his  psalms  which  now  constitutes  the 
First  Book  of  the  Psalter.  From  this  he  designedly 
excluded  all  (Pss.  li.-lxiv.)  that,  from  manifest 
private  reference,  or  other  cause,  were  unfitted  tor 
immediate  public  use ;  except  only  where  he  so 
fitted  them  by  slightly  generalizing  the  language, 
and  by  mostly  substituting  for  the  divine  nanoa 
Elohim  the  more  theocratic  name  Jehovah  ;  as  we 
see  by  the  instance  of  Ps.  xiv.  =  liii.,  where  bcth 
the  altered  and  original  copies  of  the  hymn  happen 
to  be  preserved.  To  the  collection  thus  formed  he 
prefixed  by  way  of  preface  Ps.  i.,  a  simple  moral 
contrast  between  the  ways  of  the  godly  and  the 
ungodly,  and  Ps.  ii.,  a  prophetical  picture  of  the 
reign  of  that  promised  Ruler  of  whom  he  knew  him 
self  to  be  but  the  type.  The  concluding  psalm  of 
the  collection,  Ps.  xli.,  seems  to  be  a  sort  of  ideal 
summary  of  the  whole. 

The  course  of  David's  reign  was  not,  however,  at 
yet  complete.  The  solemn  as>ciut>ly  convened  Ijy 
him  for  the  dedication  of  the  materials  of  the  future 


PSALMS,  BUCK  OF 

?hr.  xxviii.,  xxix.)  wcuid  naturally  will 
forth  a  ren»wai  of  his  best  efforts  to  glorify  the 
God  of  Israel  in  psalms  ;  and  to  this  ocaision  we 
doubtless  owe  the  great  festal  hymns  Pss.  Ixv.- 
ixvii.,  Ixviii.,  containing  a  large  review  of  the  past 
history,  present  position,  and  prospective  glories  of 
God's  chosen  people.  The  supplications  of  Ps.  Ixix. 
suit  best  with  the  renewed  distress  occasioned  by 
the  sedition  of  Adonijah.  Ps.  Ixxi.,  to  which 
Ps.  Ixx.,  a  fragment  of  a  former  psalm,  ia  intro 
ductory,  forms  David's  parting  strain.  Yet  that 
the  psalmody  of  Israel  may  not  seem  finally  to 
terminate  with  him,  the  glories  of  the  future  are 
forthwith  anticipated  by  his  son  in  Ps.  Ixxii.  And 
BO  closes  the  first  great  blaze  of  the  lyrical  devotions 
of  Israel.  David  is  not  merely  the  soul  of  it ;  he 
stands  in  it  absolutely  alone.  It  is  from  the  events 
of  his  own  career  that  the  greater  part  of  the  psalms 
have  sprung ;  he  is  their  author,  and  on  his  harp 
are  they  first  sung  ;  to  him  too  is  due  the  design  of 
the  establishment  of  regular  choirs  for  their  future 
sacred  performance;  his  are  all  the  arrangements 
by  which  that  design  is  carried  out ;  and  even  the 
improvement  of  the  musical  instruments  needed  for 
the  performance  is  traced  up  to  him  (Amos  vi.  5). 

For  a  time  the  single  psalm  of  Solomon  remained 
the  only  addition  to  those  of  David.  Solomon's 
own  gifts  lay  mainly  in  a  different  direction ;  and  no 
sufficiently  quickening  religious  impulses  mingled 
with  the  generally  depressing  events  of  the  reigns  of 
Kehoboam  and  Abijah  to  raise  up  to  David  any  lyrical 
successor.  If,  however,  religious  psalmody  were  to 
revive,  somewhat  might  be  not  unreasonably  antici 
pated  from  the  great  assembly  of  King  Asa  (2  Chr. 
xv.)  ;  and  Ps.  1.  suits  so  exactly  with  the  circum 
stances  of  that  occasion,  that  it  may  well  be  assigned 
to  it.  Internal  evidence  renders  it  more  likely  that 
this  "  Psalm  of  Asaph  "  proceeded  from  a  descendant 
of  Asaph  than  from  Asaph  himself;  and  possibly  its 
author  may  be  the  Azariah  the  son  of  Oded,  who 
had  been  moved  by  the  Spirit  of  God  to  kindle  Asa's 
zeal.  Another  revival  of  psalmody  more  certainly 
occurred  under  Jehoshaphat  at  the  time  of  the 
Moabite  and  Ammonite  invasion  (2  Chr.  xx.).  Of 
this,  Pss.  xlvii.,  xlviii.  were  the  fruits;  and  we 
may  suspect  that  the  Levite  singer  Jahaziel,  who 
foretold  the  Jewish  deliverance,  was  their  author. 
The  great  prophetical  ode  Ps.  xlv.  connects  itself 
most  readily  with  the  splendours  of  Jehobhaphat's 
reign.  And  after  that  psalmody  had  thus  definitely 
revived,  there  would  be  no  reason  why  it  should 
not  thenceforward  manifest  itself  in  seasons  of 
anxiety,  as  well  as  of  festivity  and  thanksgiving. 
Hence  Ps.  xlix.  Yet  the  psalms  of  this  period  flow 
but  sparingly.  Pss.  xlii.-xliv.,  Ixxiv.,  are  best 
assigned  to  the  reign  of  Ahaz  ;  they  delineate  that 
monarch's  desecration  of  the  sanctuary,  the  sighings 
of  ths  faithful  \vho  had  exiled  themselves  in  conse 
quence  from  Jerusalem,  and  the  political  humiliation 
to  which  the  kingdom  of  Judah  was,  through  the 
proceedings  of  Ahaz,  reduced.  The  reign  of  Heze- 
Iciah  is  naturally  rich  in  psalmody.  Pss.  xlvi.,  Ixxiii., 
Ixxv.,  Ixxvi.,  connect  themselves  with  the  resistance 
to  the  supremacy  of  the  Assyrians  and  the  divine 
destruction  of  their  host.  The  first  of  these  psalms 
indeed  would  by  its  place  in  the  Psalter  more 
naturally  belong  to  the  deliverance  in  the  days  of 
Jehoshaphat,  to  which  some,  as  Delitzsch,  actually 
refer  it ;  but  if  internal  evidence  be  deemed  to 
establish  sufficiently  its  later  date,  it  may  have 
be<m  exceptionally  permitted  to  appear  in  Book  II. 
in  acccunt  of  its  similarity  iu  style  to  Pss.  xlvii., 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


957 


ylviii.  \V*>  are  now  brought  to  a  scries  of  psalnit 
of  peculiar  interest,  springing  out  of  the  politicai 
and  religious  history  of  the  separated  t«n  tribes. 
In  date  of  actual  composition  they  commence  oetwe 
the  times  of  Hezekiah.  The  earliest  is  probably 
Ps.  Ixxx.,  a  supplication  for  the  Israelitisb  people  at 
the  time  of  the  Syrian  oppression.  Ps.  Ixxxi.  is  an 
earnest  appeal  to  them,  indicative  of  what  God 
would  yet  do  for  them  if  they  would  hearken  tc 
his  voice:  Ps.  Ixxxii.  a  stern  reproof  of  the  internal 
oppression  prevalent,  by  the  testimony  of  Amos,  in 
the  realm  of  Israel.  In  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  we  have  a 
prayer  for  deliverance  from  that  extensive  con 
federacy  of  enemies  from  all  quarters,  of  which  the 
traces  meet  us  in  Joel  iii.,  Amos  i.,  and  which 
probably  was  eventually  crushed  by  the  contem 
poraneous  victories  of  Jeroboam  II.  of  Israel  and 
Uzziah  of  Judah.  All  these  psalms  are  referred  by 
their  superscriptions  to  the  Levite  singers,  and  thus 
bear  witness  to  the  efforts  of  the  Levites  to  reconcile 
the  two  branches  of  the  chosen  nation.  In  Ps.  Ixxviii., 
belonging,  probably,  to  the  opening  of  Hezekiah's 
reign,  the  psalmist  assumes  a  bolder  tone,  and,  re 
proving  the  disobedience  of  the  Israelites  by  the 
parable  of  the  nation's  earlier  rebellions,  sets  forth 
to  them  the  Tern  pie  at  Jerusalem  as  the  appointed 
centre  of  religious  worship,  and  the  heir  of  the 
house  of  David  as  the  sovereign  of  the  Lord's  choice. 
This  remonstrance  may  have  contributed  to  the 
partial  success  of  Hezekiah's  messages  of  invitation  to 
the  ten  tribes  of  Israel.  Ps.  Ixxxiv.  represents  the 
thanks  and  prayers  of  the  northern  pilgrims,  coming 
up,  for  the  first  time  in  two  hundred  and  fifty 
years,  to  celebrate  the  passover  in  Jerusalem : 
Ps.  Ixxxv.  may  well  be  the  thanksgiving  for  the 
happy  restoration  of  religion,  of  which  the  advent 
of  those  pilgrims  formed  part.  Ps.  Ixxvii.,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  the  lamentation  of  the  Jewish  Church 
for  the  terrible  political  calamity  which  speedily 
followed,  whereby  the  inhabitants  of  the  northern 
kingdom  were  carried  into  captivity,  and  Joseph  lost, 
the  second  time,  to  Jacob.  The  prosperity  of  Heze 
kiah's  own  reign  outweighed  the  sense  of  this  heavy 
blow,  and  nursed  the  holy  faith  whereby  the  king 
himself  in  Ps.  Ixxrvi.,  and  the  Levites  in  Ps.  Ixxxvii., 
anticipated  the  future  welcome  of  ail  the  Gentiles 
into  the  Church  of  God.  Ps.  Ixxix.  (an  Asaphic 
psalm,  and  therefore  placed  with  the  others  of  like 
authorship)  may  best  be  viewed  as  a  picture  of  the 
evil  days  that  followed  through  the  transgressions 
of  Manasseh.  And  in  Pss.  Ixxxviii.,  Ixxxix.  we 
have  the  pleadings  of  the  nation  with  God  under 
the  severest  trial  that  it  had  yet  experienced,  the 
captivity  of  its  anointed  sovereign,  and  the  apparent 
failure  of  the  promises  made  to  David  and  his 
house. 

The  captivity  of  Manasseh  himself  proved  to  be 
but  temporary ;  but  the  sentence  which  his  sins 
had  provoked  upon  Judah  and  Jerusalem  still 
remained  to  be  executed,  and  precluded  the  hope 
that  God's  salvation  could  be  revealed  till  after 
such  an  outpouring  of  His  judgments  as  the  nation 
never  yet  had  known.  Labour  and  sorrow  must 
be  the  lot  of  the  present  generation  ;  through  these 
mercy  might  occasionally  gleam,  but  the  glory 
which  was  eventually  to  be  manifested  must  be  fo? 
posterity  alone.  The  psalms  of  Book  IV.  bear 
generally  the  impress  of  this  feeling.  The  Mosaic 
Psalm  xc.,  from  whatever  cause  here  placed,  har 
monizes  with  it.  Pss.  xci.,  xcii.  are  of  a  peaceful, 
simple,  liturgical  character  ;  but  in  the  series  o/ 
psalms  Pss.  xciii.-c.,  which  foretell  the  future 


^58  PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

advent  of  God's  kingdom,  the  days  of  adversity  of 
the  Chaldean  oppression  loom  in  the  foreground. 
Psf.  ci.,  ciii.,  "  of  David,"  readily  refer  them* 
selves  to  Josiah  as  their  author;  the  former  em 
bodies  his  early  resolutions  of  piety;  the  latter 
belongs  to  the  period  of  the  solemn  renewal  of  the 
covenant  after  the  discovery  of  the  book  of  the  Law, 
and  after  the  assurance  to  Josiah  that  for  his  ten 
derness  of  heart  he  should  be  graciously  spared  from 
beholding  the  approaching  evil.  Intermediate  to 
these  in  place,  and  perhaps  in  date,  is  Ps.  cii.,  "  A 
Prayer  of  the  afflicted,"  written  by  one  who  is 
almost  entirely  wrapped  up  in  the  prospect  of  the 
impending  desolation,  though  he  recognizes  withal 
the  diviue  favour  which  should  remotely  but 
eventually  be  manifested.  Ps.  civ.,  a  meditation  on 
the  providence  of  God,  is  itself  a  preparation  for 
that  "hiding  of  God's  face"  which  should  ensue 
ere  the  Church  were,  like  the  face  of  the  earth, 
renewed;  and  in  the  historical  Pss.  cv.,  cvi.,  the 
one  the  story  of  God's  faithfulness,  the  other  of  the 
people's  transgressions,  we  have  the  immediate  pre 
lude  to  the  captivity,  together  with  a  prayer  for 
eventual  deliverance  from  it. 

We  pass  to  Book  V.  Ps.  cvii.  is  the  opening 
psalm  of  the  return,  sung  probably  nt  the  first 
Keast  of  Tabernacles  (Ezr.  iii.).  The  ensuing 
I~>avidic  psalms  may  well  be  ascribed  to  Zorubbabel ; 
Ps.  cviii.  (drawn  from  Pss.  Ivii.,  Ix.)  being  in 
anticipation  of  the  returning  prosperity  of  the 
Church  ;  Ps.  cix.,  a  prayer  against  the  efforts  of  the 
Samaritans  to  hinder  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple  ; 
Ps.  ex.,  a  picture  of  the  triumphs  of  the  Church  in 
the  days  of  the  future  Messiah,  whose  union  of 
royalty  and  priesthood  had  been  at  this  time  set 
forth  in  the  type  and  prophecy  of  Zech.  vi.  ll-13.c 
Ps.  cxviii.,  with  which  Pss.  cxiv.-cxvii.  certainly, 
and  in  the  estimation  of  some  Ps.  cxiii.,  and  even 
Pss.  cxi.,  cxii.,  stand  connected,  is  the  festal  hymn 
sung  at  the  laying  of  the  foundations  of  the 
second  Temple.  We  here  pass  over  the  questions 
connected  with  Ps.  cxix. ;  but  a  directly  historical 
character  belongs  to  Pss.  cxx.-cxxxiv.,  styled  in 
our  A.  V.  "  Songs  of  Degrees."  [DEGREES,  SONGS 
OF,  where  the  different  interpretations  of  the  He 
brew  title  are  given.]  Internal  evidence  refers  these 
to  the  period  when  the  Jews  under  Nehemiah  were, 
in  the  very  face  of  the  enemy,  repairing  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem ;  and  the  title  may  well  signify 
"  Songs  of  goings  up  (as  the  Hebrew  phrase  is) 
upon  the  walls,"  the  psalms  being,  from  their 
brevity,  well  adapted  to  be  sung  by  the  workmen 
and  guards  while  engaged  in  their  respective  duties. 
As  David  cannot  well  be  the  author  of  Pss.  cxxii., 
cxxiv.,  cxxxi.,  cxxxiii.,  marked  with  his  name,  so 
neither,  by  analogy,  can  Solomon  well  be  the  actual 
author  of  Ps.  cxxvii.  Theodoret  thinks  that  by 
"  Solomon  "  Zerubbabel  is  intended,  both  as  deriving 
his  descent  from  Solomon,  and  as  renewing  Solo 
mon's  work :  with  yet  greater  probability  we  might 
ascribe  the  psalm  to  Nehemiah.  Pss.  cxxxv., 
cxxxvi.,  by  their  parallelism  with  the  confession  of 
sins  in  Neh.  ix.,  connect  themselves  with  the 
national  fast  of  which  that  chapter  speaks.  Of 
somewhat  earlier  date,  it  mny  be,  are  Ps.  cxxxvii. 
and  the  ensuing  Davidic  psalms.  Of  these, 
Ps.  cxxxix.  is  a  psalm  of  the  new  birth  of  Israel, 
from  the  womb  of  the  Babylonish  captivity,  to  a 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

life  of  righteousness;  Pss.  cxl.-cxliii.  may  be  n 
picture  of  the  trials  to  which  the  uni-estored  eiiles 
were  still  exposed  in  the  reaims  of  the  Gentiles, 
Henceforward,  as  we  approach  the  close  of  tht 
Psalter,  its  strains  rise  in  cheerfulness ;  and  it 
fittingly  terminates  with  Pss.  cxlvii.-cl.,  which 
were  probably  sung  on  the  occasion  of  the  thanks 
giving  procession  of  Neh.  xii.,  after  the  rebuilding  ol 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  had  been  completed. 

4.  Moral  Characteristics  of  the  Psalms. — Fore 
most  among  these  meets  us,  undoubtedly,  the  uni 
versal  recourse  to  communion  with  God.  "  My 
voice  is  unto  God,  and  I  will  cry"  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  1), 
might  well  stand  as  a  motto  to  the  whole  of  the 
Psalter;  for,  whether  immersed  in  the  depths,  01 
whether  blessed  with  greatness  and  comfort  on  every 
side,  it  is  to  God  that  the  psalmist's  voice  seems 
ever  to  soar  spontaneously  aloft.  Alike  in  the  wel 
come  of  present  deliverance  or  in  the  contemplation 
of  past  mercies,  he  addresses  himself  straight  to  God 
as  the  object  of  his  praise.  Alike  in  the  persecutions 
of  his  enemies  and  the  desertions  of  his  friends,  in 
wretchedness  of  body  and  in  the  agonies  of  inwanl 
repentance,  in  the  hour  of  impending  danger  and  in 
the  hour  of  apparent  despair,  it  is  diiect  to  God 
that  he  utters  forth  his  supplications.  Despair,  we 
say ;  for  such,  as  far  as  the  description  goes,  is  the 
psalmist's  state  in  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  But  meanwhile  he 
is  praying;  the  apparent  impossibility  of  deliveranc-r 
cannot  restrain  his  God-ward  voice ;  and  so  the 
very  force  of  communion  with  God  canies  him, 
almost  unawares  to  himself,  through  the  trial. 

Connected  with  this  is  the  faith  by  which  he 
everywhere  lives  in  God  rather  than  in  himself. 
God's  mercies,  God's  greatness  form  the  sphere  in 
which  his  thoughts  are  ever  moving :  even  when 
through  excess  of  affliction  reason  is  rendered  power 
less,  the  naked  contemplation  of  God's  wonders  of 
old  forms  his  effectual  support  (Ps.  Ixxvii.). 

It  is  of  the  essence  of  such  faith  that  the 
psalmist's  view  of  the  perfections  of  God  should  be 
true  and  vivid.  The  Psalter  describes  God  as  He  is : 
it  glows  with  testimonies  to  His  power  and  provi 
dence,  His  love  and  faithfulness,  His  holiness  and 
righteousness.  Correspondingly  it  testifies  against 
every  form  of  idol  which  men  would  substitute  in 
the  living  God's  place :  whether  it  be  the  outward 
image,  the  work  of  men's  hands  (Ps.  cxv.),  or  whe 
ther  it  be  the  inward  vanity  of  earthly  comfort  or 
prosperity,  to  be  purchased  at  the  cost  of  the 
honour  which  cometh  from  God  alone  (Ps.  iv.). 
The  solemn  "  >'ee  that  there  is  no  idol-way  ("JIT 
3¥V)  in  me"  of  Ps.  cxxxix.,  the  striving  of  the 
heart  after  the  very  truth  and  nought  beside,  is 
the  exact  anticipation  of  the  "  Little  children,  keep 
yourselves  from  idols,"  of  the  loved  Apostle  in 
the  N.  T. 

The  Psalms  not  only  set  forth  the  perfections  of 
God :  they  proclaim  also  the  duty  of  worshipping 
Him  by  the  acknowledgment  and  adoration  of  His 
perfections.  They  encourage  all  outward  rites  and 
means  of  worship:  new  songs,  use  of  musical  in 
struments  of  all  kinds,  appearance  in  God's  courts, 
lifting  up  of  hands,  prostration  at  His  footstool, 
holy  apparel  (A.  V.  "  beauty  of  holiness  ").  Among 
these  they  recognize  the  ordinance  of  sacrifice  (Pss 
iv.,  v.,  xxvii.,  li.)  as  an  expression  of  the  wor 
shipper's  consecration  of  himself  to  God's  service 


A  very  strong  feeling  exists  that  Mark  xii.  36,  &c., 

-w  Ps.  ex.  to  have  been  composed  by  David  himself.    To 

writer  of  this  article  it  appears,  thai  AS  our  Saviour's 


argument  remains  the  same  from  whichever  of  His  ancestor; 
the  psalm  proceed* •<!,  M>  HK  words  do not  necessarily  iir\r«ly 
more  than  is  intended  in  the  superscription  of  the  psa'ic; 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 

But  not  the  less  do  they  repudiate  the  outward  rite 
v/hen  separated  from  that  which  it  was  designed  to 
express  (Pss.  xl.,  Ixix.) :  a  broken  and  contrite  heart 
is,  from  erring  man,  the  genuine  sacrifice  which 
God  requires  (Ps.  li.). 

Similar  depth  is  observable  in  the  view  taken  by 
the  psalmists  of  human  sin.  It  is  to  be  traced  not 
only  in  its  outward  manifestations,  but  also  in  the 
inward  workings  of  the  heart  (Ps.  txxvi.),  and  is  to 
be  primarily  ascribed  to  man's  innate  corruption 
(Pss.  li.,  Iviii.).  It  shows  itself  alike  in  deeds,  in 
words  (Pss.  xvii.,  cxli.),  and  in  thoughts  (Ps. 
exxxix.) ;  nor  is  even  the  believer  able  to  discern  all 
its  various  ramifications  (Ps.  xix.).  Connected  with 
this  view  of  sin  is,  on  the  one  hand,  the  picture  of 
the  utter  corruption  of  the  ungodly  world  (Ps.  xiv.)  ; 
on  the  other,  the  encouragement  to  genuine  repent 
ance,  the  assurance  of  divine  forgiveness  (Ps.  xxxii.), 
and  the  trust  in  God  as  the  source  of  complete 
redemption  (Ps.  cxxx.). 

In  regard  of  the  law,  the  psalmist,  while  warmly  j 
acknowledging  its  excellence,  feels  yet  that  it  cannot  | 
so  effectually  guide  his  own  unassisted  exertions  as 
lo  preserve  him  from  error  (Ps.  xix.).     He  needs 
an  additional  grace  from  above,  the  grace  of  God's 
Holy  Spirit  (Ps.  li.).    But  God's  Spirit  is  also  A  free  ] 
spirit  (»'&.) :  led  by  this  he  will  discern  the  law, 
with  all  its  precepts,  to  be  no  arbitrary  rule  of 
bondage,  but  rather  a  charter  and  instrument  of 
liberty  (Ps.  cxix.). 

The  Psalms  bear  repeated  testimony  to  the  duty 
of  instructing  others  in  the  ways  of  holiness  (Pss. 
xxxii.,  xxxiv.,  li.).  They  also  indirectly  enforce  the 
duty  of  love,  even  to  our  enemies  (Ps.  vii.  4,  xxxv. 
13,  cix.  4).  On  the  other  hand  they  imprecate,  in 
the  strongest  terms,  the  judgments  of  God  on  trans 
gressors.  Such  imprecations  are  levelled  at  trans 
gressors  as  a  body,  and  are  uniformly  uttered  on 
the  hypothesis  of  their  wilful  persistence  in  evil,  in 
which  case  the  overthrow  of  the  sinner  becomes  a 
necessary  part  of  the  uprooting  of  sin.  They  are  in 
no  wise  inconsistent  with  any  efforts  to  lead  sinners 
individually  to  repentance. 

This  brings  us  to  notice,  lastly,  the  faith  of  the 
psalmists    in   a    righteous  recompense  to  all  men  • 
according  to  their  deeds  (Ps.  xxxvii.,  &c.).     They  i 
generally  expected  that  men  would   receive   such  ! 
recompense  in  great  measure  during  their  own  life 
time.     Yet  they  felt  withal  that  it  was  not  then 
complete:    it  perpetuated  itself  to  their  children  j 
(Ps.  xxxvii.  25,  cix.  12,  &c.) ;  and  thus  we  find  set 
forth  in  the  Psalms,  with   sufficient   distinctness, 
though  in  an  unmatured  and  consequently  imperfect 
form,  the  doctrine  of  a  retribution  after  death. 

5.  Prophetical  Character  of  the  Psalms. — The 
moral  struggle  between  godliness  and  ungodliness, 
so  vividly  depicted  in  the  Psalms,  culminates,  in 
Holy  Scripture,  in  the  life  of  the  Incarnate  Son  of  j 
God  upon  earth.  It  only  remains  to  sho-.v  that  the 
Psalms  themselves  definitely  anticipated  this  culmi 
nation.  Now  there  are  in  the  Psalter  at  least  three 
psalms  of  which  the  interest  evidently  centres  in  a 
person  distinct  from  the  speaker,  and  which,  since  j 
they  cannot  without  violence  to  the  language  be 
interpreted  of  any  but  the  Messiah,  may  be  termed 
directly  and  exclusively  Messianic.  We  refer  to 
Pss.  ii.,  xiv.,  ex.;  to  which  may  perhaps  be  added 
Ps.  Ixxii. 

It  would  be  strange  if  these  few  psalms  stood,  in 
their  prophetical  significance,  absolutely  alone  among 
the  rest:  the  more  so,  int^much  as  Ps.  ii.  forms 
pr.rt  of  the  prefaci  to  the  First  Book  of  the  Psalter, 


PSALMS,  BOOK  OF 


it  5li 


and  wciald,  as  such,  be  entirely  out  of  place,  did  not 
its  general  theme  virtually  extend  itself  over  thost 
which  follow,  in  which  the  interest  generally  centi  e» 
in  the  figure  of  the  suppliant  or  worshipper  himself. 
And  hence  the  impossibility  of  viewing  the  psalms 
generally,  notwithstanding  the  historical  drapery  in 
which  they  are  outwardly  clothed,  as  simply  the  past 
devotions  of  the  historical  David  or  the  historical 
Israel.  Other  arguments  to  the  same  effect  are 
furnished  by  the  idealized  representations  which 
many  of  them  present;  by  the  outward  points  01 
contact  between  their  language  and  the  actual 
earthly  career  of  our  Saviour ;  by  the  frequent 
references  made  to  them  both  by  our  Saviour  Him 
self  and  by  the  Evangelists  ;  and  by  the  view  taket 
of  them  by  the  Jews,  as  evidenced  in  several  passage; 
of  the  Targutn.  There  is  yet  another  circumstanc* 
well  worthy  of  note  in  its  bearing  upon  this  subject 
Alike  in  the  earlier  and  in  the  later  portions  of  thi 
Psalter,  ail  those  psalms  which  are  of  a  personal 
rather  than  of  a  national  character  are  marked  in 
the  superscriptions  with  the  name  of  David,  as  pro 
ceeding  either  from  David  himself  or  from  one  o) 
his  descendants.  It  results  from  this,  that  whili. 
the  Davidic  psalms  are  partly  personal,  partly  na 
tional,  the  Levitic  psalms  are  uniformly  national. 
Exceptions  to  this  rule  exist  only  in  appearance: 
thus  Ps.  Ixxiii.,  although  couched  in  the  first  person 
singular,  is  really  a  prayer  of  the  Jewish  faithfu. 
against  the  Assyrian  invaders;  and  in  Pss.  xlii., 
xliii.,  it  is  the  feelings  of  an  exiled  company  rather 
than  of  a  single  individual  to  which  utterance  it 
given.  It  thus  follows  that  it  was  only  thost 
psalmists  who  were  types  of  Christ  by  external 
office  and  lineage  as  well  as  by  inward  piety,  that 
were  charged  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  set  forth  before 
hand,  in  Christ's  own  name  and  person,  the  suffer 
ings  that  awaited  him  and  the  glory  that  should 
follow.  The  national  hymns  of  Israel  are  indeed 
also  prospective ;  but  in  general  they  anticipate 
rather  the  struggles  and  the  triumphs  of  the  Chris 
tian  Church  than  those  of  Christ  Himself. 

We  annex  a  list  of  the  chief  passages  in  thf 
Psalms  which  are  iu  anywise  quoted  or  embodied 
in  the  N.  T. :— Ps.  ii.  1,  2,  7,  8,  9,  iv.  4,  v.  9, 
vi.  3,8,  viii.  2,  4-6,  x.  7,  xiv.  1-3,  xvi.  8-11,  xviii. 
4,  49,  xix.  4,  xxii.  1,  8,  18,  22,  sxiii.  H,  xxiv.  1, 
xxxi.  5,  xxxii.  1,  2,  xxxiv.  8,  12-16,  20,  xxxv.  9 
xxxvi.  1,  xxxvii.  11,  xl.  6-8,  xli.  9,  xliv.  22,  xiv. 
6.  7,  xlviii.  2,  li.  4,  Iv.  22,  Lxviii.  18,  Ixix.  4,  9, 
22,  23,  25,  Ixxv.  8,  Ixxviii.  2,  24,  Ixxxii.  6,  Ixxxvi. 
9,  Ixxxix.  20,  xc.  4,  xci.  11,  12,  xcii.  7,  xciv.  11, 
xcv.  7-11,  cii.  25-27,  civ.  4,  cix.  8,  ex.  1,4,  cxii.  9, 
cxvi.  10,cxvii.  l.cxviii.  6.  22,  23,  25,  26,  cxxv.  5, 
cxl.  3. 

6.  Literature. — The  list  of  Jewish  commentator* 
on  the  Psalter  includes  the  names  of  Saadiah  (who 
wrote  in  Arabic),  Jarchi,  Aben  Ezra,  and  Kimchi. 
Among  later  perfonnances  that  of  Sforno  (f  1550) 
is  highly  spoken  of  (reprinted  in  a  Furth  Psalter 
of  1804) ;  and  special  mention  is  also  due  to  the 
modern  German  translation  of  Mendelssohn  (f  1 786), 
to  which  again  is  appended  a  comment  by  Joel 
Bril.  In  the  Christian  Church  devotional  fami 
liarity  with  the  Psalter  has  rendered  the  number 
of  commentators  on  it  immense ;  and  in  modern 
times  even  the  number  of  private  translations  of  it 
has  been  so  large  as  to  preclude  enumeration  here. 
Among  the  Greek  Fathers,  Theodoret  is  the  ^est 
commentator,  Chrysostom  the  best  homilist,  on  the 
Psalms:  for  the  rest,  a  catena  of  the  Greek  com 
ments  was  formed  by  the  Jesuit  Corderius.  Iu  tlw 


960 


PSALTEKY 


West  the  jiithy  expositions  of  Hilary  and  tin-  srr- 
moiis  of  Augustine  are  the  main  patristic  helps. 
A  list  of  the  chief  mediaeval  comments,  which  are 
of  a  devotional  and  mystical  rather  than  of  a  critical 
character,  will  be  found  in  Neale's  Commentary 
(vol.  i.  1860),  which  is  mainly  derived  from  them, 
and  favourably  introduces  them  to  modem  English 
readers.  Later  Roman  Catholic  labourers  on  the 
Psalms  arc  Genebrard  (1587),  Agellius  (1606), 
Bellarmine  (1617),  Lorinus  (1619),  and  De  Muis 
(1650):  the  valuable  critical  commentary  of  the 
last-named  has  been  reprinted,  accompanied  by  the 
able  preface  and  terse  annotations  of  Bossuet. 
Among  the  Refonners,  of  whom  Luther,  Zw ingle, 
Bucer,  and  Calvin,  all  applied  themselves  to  the 
Psalms,  Calvin  naturally  stands,  as  a  commentator, 
pre-eminent.  Of  subsequent  works  those  of  Geier 
(1668)  and  Venema  (1762,  &c.)  are  still  held  in 
some  repute ;  while  Rosenrnuller's  Scholia  give,  of 
coui'se,  the  substance  of  otheis.  The  modern  Ger 
man  labourers  on  the  Psalms,  commencing  with 
DP  Wette,  are  very  numerous.  Maurer  shines  as 
an  elegant  grammatical  critic :  E-vald  (Dichter  des 
A.  B.  i.  and  ii.)  as  a  translator.  Hengstenberg's 
Commentary  holds  a  high  place.  The  two  latest 
Commentaries  are  that  of  Hupfeld  (in  progress),  a 
work  of  high  philological  merit,  but  written  in 
strong  opposition  to  Hengstenberg,  and  from  an 
unsatisfactory  point  of  theological  view ;  and  that 
of  Delitzsch  (1859-60),  the  diligent  work  of  a 
sober-minded  theologian,  whose  previous  Symbolae 
ad  Pss.  illustr.  isagogicae  had  been  a  valuable 
contribution  to  the  external  criticism  of  the  Psalms. 
Of  English  works  we  may  mention  the  Paraphrase 
of  Hammond  ;  the  devotional  Commentary  of  Bishop 
Home,  and  along  with  this  the  unpretending  but 
useful  Plain  Commentary  recently  published  ; 
Merrick's  Annotations ;  Bishop  Horsley's  Transla 
tion  and  Notes  (1815,  posthumous) ;  Dr.  Mason 
Good's  Historical  Outline,  and  also  his  Translation 
with  Notes  (both  posthumous ;  distinguished  by 
taste  and  originality  rather  than  by  sound  judgment 
or  accurate  scholarship)  ;  Phillips's  Text,  with 
Commentary,  for  Hebrew  students ;  J.  Jebb's 
Literal  Translation  and  Dissertations  (1846); 
and  lastly  Thrupp's  Introduction  to  the  Psalms 
(1860),  to  which  the  reader  is  referred  for  a  fuller 
discussion  of  the  various  matters  treated  of  in  this 
article.  In  the  Press,  a  new  Translation,  &c.,  by 
Perowne,  of  which  specimens  have  appeared.  A 
catalogue  of  commentaries,  treatises,  and  sermons 
on  the  Psalms,  is  given  in  Darling's  Cyclop.  Biblio- 
g  aphica,  (subjects)  p.  374-514. 

7.  Psalter  of  Solomon. — Under  this  title  is  extant, 
in  a  Greek  translation,  a  collection  of  eighteen 
hymns,  evidently  modelled  on  the  canonical  psalms, 
breathing  Messianic  hopes,  and  forming  a  favourable 
specimen  of  the  later  popular  Jewish  literature. 
They  have  been  variously  assigned  by  critics  to  the 
times  of  the  persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(Ewald,  Dillmann),  or  to  those  of  the  rule  of  Herod 
(Movers,  Delitzsch).  They  may  be  found  in  the  Codex 
Pseudepigraphus  V.  T.  of  Fabricius.  [J.  F.  T."| 

PSALTERY.  The  psaltery  was  a  stringed  in 
strument  of  music  to  accompany  the  voice.  The 
Hebrew  ^33,  nebel,  or  733,  nebel,  is  so  rendered 
in  the  A .  V.  in  all  passages  where  it  occurs,  except 
ui  Is.  v.  12,  xiv.  11,  xxii.  24  marg. ;  Am.  v.  23, 
n.  5,  where  it  is  translated  viol,  following  the  Ge 
nera  Version,  which  has  viole  in  all  cases,  except 
2  Sam.  vi.  5 ;  1  K.  x.  12  ("psaltery")  ;  2  Esd. 


VSAI.TKRY 

22;  Kcchw.  xl.  21  ("  psalterion ")  ;  Is.  xxii.  21 
("  musicke");  and  Wisd.  xix.  IH  ("  instrument  ot 
musike").  The  ancient  viol  was  a  six-string»d 
juitar.  "  Viols  had  six  strings,  and  the  position  ot 
the  fingers  was  marked  on  the  finger-board  by 
as  in  the  guitars  of  the  present  day "  (Chappell, 
Pop.  Mia.  i.  246V  In  the  Prayer  Book  version  o) 
the  Psalms,  the  Hebrew  word  is  rendered  "  lute." 
This  instrument  resembled  the  guitar,  but  was  su 
perior  in  tone,  "  being  larger,  and  having  a  convex 
back,  somewhat  like  the  vertical  section  of  a  gourd, 
or  more  nearly  resembling  that  of  a  pear.  .  .  It 
had  virtually  six  strings,  because,  although  the 
number  was  eleven  or  twelve,  five,  at  least,  wei* 
doubled ;  the  first  or  treble,  being  sometimes  a  single 
string.  The  head  in  which  the  pegs  to  turn  the 
strings  were  inserted,  receded  almost  at  a  right 
angle"  (Chappell,  i.  102).  These  three  instru 
ments,  the  psaltery  or  sautry,  the  viol,  and  the  lute, 
are  frequently  associated  in  the  old  English  poets, 
and  were  clearly  instruments  resembling  each  other, 
though  still  different.  Thus  in  Chaucer's  Plover 
and  ~Leaf,  337,— 

"  And  before  hem  went  mlnstreles  many  one, 
As  barpes,  pipes,  lutes,  and  sautry." 

and  again  in  Drayton's  Polyolbion,  iv.  356: 
"  The  trembling  lute  some  touch,  some  strain  the  m'nl 
best." 

The  word  psaltery  in  its  present  form  appeal's  to 
have  been  inti-oduced  about  the  end  of  the  16th 
century,  for  it  occurs  hi  the  unmodified  form  psal 
terion  in  two  passages  of  the  Gen.  Version  (1560). 
Again,  in  North's  Plutarch  (Them.  p.  124,  ed. 
1 595;  we  read  that  Themistocles,  "  being  mocked 
...  by  some  that  had  studied  humanitie,  and  other 
liberal!  sciences,  he  was  driuen  for  reuenge  and  his 
owne  defence,  to  aunswer  with  greate  and  stoute 
words,  saying,  that  in  deed  he  could  no  skill  to  tune 
a  harpe,  nor  a  violl,  nor  to  play  of  a  psalterion ; 
but  if  they  did  put  a  citie  into  his  hands  that  was 
of  small  name,  weake,  and  litle,  he  knew  wayes 
tnough  how  to  make  it  noble,  strong,  and  great." 
The  Greek  ^a\ri\piov,  from  which  our  word  is  de 
rived,  denotes  an  instrument  played  with  the  fingers 
instead  of  a  plectrum  or  quill,  the  verb  <(«£\A«ix 
being  used  (Eur.  Bacch.  784),  of  twanging  the 
bowstring  (comp.  i|/oA/uo2  r6^tav,  Eur.  Ion,  173). 
But  it  only  occurs  in  the  LXX.  as  the  rendering  of  ^ 
the  Heb.  nfbel  or  nebel  in  Neh.  xii.  27.  and  is.  v. 
12,  and  in  all  the  passages  of  the  Psalms,  except  Ps. 
Ixii.  22  (<J«i\ju<$s),  and  Ps.  Ixxxi.  2  (KiBdpa],  while 
in  Am.  v.  23,  vi.  5  the  general  term  Spyavov  is 
employed.  In  all  other  cases  c<£j8\a  represents 
nebel  or  nebel.  These  various  renderings  are  suffi 
cient  to  show  that  at  the  time  the  translation  of  the 
LXX.  was  made,  there  was  no  certain  identification 
of  the  Hebrew  instrument  with  any  known  to  the 
translators.  The  rendering  vd&\a  commends  itself 
on  account  of  the  similarity  of  the  Greek  word  with 
the  Hebrew.  Josephus  appears  to  have  regarded 
them  as  equivalent,  and  his  is  the  only  direct  evi 
dence  upon  the  point.  He  tells  us  (Ant.  vii.  12, 
§3)  that  the  difference  between  the  Kiviipa.  (Heb. 
"ft33,  cinnor)  and  the  i/a/3\a  was,  that  the  firmer 
had  ten  strings  and  was  played  with  the  plectrum, 
the  latter  had  twelve  notes  and  was  played  with 
the  hand.  Forty  thousand  of  these  instruments. 
he  adds  (Ant.  viii.  3.  §8),  were  made  by  Solomojn 
of  electrum  for  the  Temple  choir.  R;ishi 
v.  12)  say§  that  the  nebel  had  more  strings  ami)  /* 


PSALTERY 

pegs  than  the  cinndr.  That  nabla  was  a  foreign 
name  is  evident  from  Straho  (x.  p.  471),  and  from 
Athenaeus  (iv.  p.  175),  where  its  origin  is  said 
to  be  Sidonian.  Beyond  this,  and  that  it  was  a 
gtringed  instrument  (Ath.  iv.  p.  175),  played 
by  the  hand  (Ovid,  Art.  Am.  lii.  327),  we  know 
nothing  of  it,  but  in  these  facts  we  have  strong 
presumptive  evidence  that  nabla  and  nebel  are 
the  same ;  and  that  the  nabla  and  psalterion  are 
identical  appears  from  the  Glossary  of  Philoxenus, 
where  nablio  =  $d\riis,  and  nablizo  =  i^dXAw,  and 
from  Suidas,  who  makes  psalterion  and  naula,  or 
nabla,  synonymous.  Of  the  Psaltery  among  the 
Greeks  there  appear  to  have  been  two  kinds.  The 
Ki)Kris,  which  was  of  Persian  (Athen.  xiv.  p.  636) 
or  Lydian  (ibid.  p.  635)  origin,  and  the  juayaSis. 
The  former  had  only  two  (Athen.  iv.  p.  183)  or 
three  (ibid.}  strings ;  the  latter  as  many  as  twenty 
(Athen.  xiv.  p.  634),  though  sometimes  only  five 
(ibid.  p.  637).  They  are  sometimes  said  to  be  the 
^me,  and  were  evidently  of  the  same  kind.  Both 
/sidorus  (de  Origg.  iii.  21 )  and  Cassiodorus  (Praef. 
m  Psal.  c.  iv.)  describe  the  psaltery  as  triangular  in 
shape,  like  the  Greek  A,  with  the  sounding-board 
above  the  strings,  which  were  struck  downwards. 
The  latter  adds  that  it  was  played  with  a  plectrum, 
BO  that  he  contradicts  Josephus  if  the  psaltery  and 
nebel  are  really  the  same.  In  this  case  Josephus  is  the 
rather  to  be  trusted.  St.  Augustine  (on  Ps.  xxxii. 
[xxxiii.]  )  makes  the  position  of  the  sounding-board 
the  point  in  which  the  cithara  and  psaltery  differ ; 
in  the  former  it  is  below,  in  the  latter  above  the 
strings.  His  language  implies  that  both  were  played 
with  the  plectrum.  The  distinction  between  the 
cithara  and  psaltery  is  observed  by  Jerome  (Prol. 
in  Psal.}.  From  these  conflicting  accounts  it  is 
impossible  to  say  positively  with  what  instrument 
the  nebel  of  the  Hebrew  exactly  corresponded.  It 
was  probably  of  various  kinds,  as  Kimchi  says  in 
his  note  on  Is.  xxii.  24,  differing  from  each  other 
both  with  regard  to  the  position  of  the  pegs  and 
the  number  of  the  strings.  In  illustration  of  the 
descriptions  of  Isidorus  and  Cassiodorus  reference 
may  be  made  to  the  drawings  from  Egyptian  mu 
sical  instruments  given  by  Sir  Card.  Wilkinson 
(Anc.  Eg.  ii.  280,  287),  some  one  of  which  may 
correspond  to  the  Hebrew  nebel.*'  Munk  (Palestine, 
plate  16,  figs.  12,  13)  gives  an  engraving  of  an 
instrument  which  Niebuhr  saw.  Its  form  is  that 
of  an  inverted  delta  placed  upon  a  round  box  of  wood 
covered  with  skin. 

The  nebel  'dsor  (Ps.  xxxiii.  2,  xcii.  3  [4],  cxliv.  9) 
appears  to  have  been  an  instrument  of  the  psaltery 
kind  which  had  ten  strings,  and  was  of  a  trapezium 
shape,  ?vccording  to  some  accounts  (Forkel,  Gesch.  d. 
Mvs.  1. 1 33).  Aben  Ezra  (on  Ps.  cl.  3)  says  the  nebel 
hnrl  ten  holes.  So  that  he  must  have  considered  it 
to  oe  a  kind  of  pipe. 

From  the  fact  that  nebel  in  Hebrew  also  signifies  a 
wine-bottle  or  skin,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  the 
term  when  applied  to  a  musical  instrument  denotes 
a  kind  of  bagpipe,  the  old  English  cornamute,  Fr. 
cornemuse,  but  it  seems  clear,  whatever  else  may  be 
obscure  concerning  it,  that  the  nebel  was  a  stringed 
instrument.  In  the  Mishna  (Celim,  xvi.  7)  mention  is 
made  of  a  case  (\)T\  =  O^KTJ)  in  which  it  was  kept. 

Its  first  appearance  in  the  history  of  the  0.  T.  is 
in  connexion  with  the  "string"  of  prophets  who 


PTOLEMEB 


961 


•  Abraham  de  Porta- Leone,  the  author  of  ShiUe  ffaggib- 

lyrirr.  (c.  6)  identifies  the  nebel  with  the  Italian  Unto,  the 

lute.,  or  rather  with  the  particular  kind  called  Uvto  Aitar- 

VOL.  It. 


met  S.vil  as  they  came  down  from  the  high  pla« 
(1  Sam.  x.  5).  Here  it  is  clearly  used  in  a  religious 
service,  as  again  (2  Sam.  vi.  5 ;  1  Chr.  xiii.  8), 
when  David  brought  the  ark  from  Kirjath-jearim. 
In  the  temple  band  orppnized  by  David  were  thf 
players  on  psalteries  (1  Chr.  xv.  16,  20),  who  ac 
companied  the  ark  from  the  house  of  Obed-edom 
(1  Chr.  xv.  28).  They  played  when  the  ark  was 
brought  into  the  temple  (2  Chr.  v.  12) ;  at  the 
thanksgiving  for  Jehoshaphat's  victory  (2  Chr.  xx. 
28) ;  at  the  restoration  of  the  temple  under  Heze- 
kiah  (2  Chr.  xxix.  25),  and  the  dedication  of  the 
walls  of  Jerusalem  after  they  were  rebuilt  by  Ne 
hemiah  (Neh.  xii.  27).  In  all  these  cases,  and  in 
the  passages  in  the  Psalms  where  allusion  is  made 
to  it,'  the  psaltery  is  associated  with  religious  ser 
vices  (comp.  Am.  v.  23 ;  2  Esdr.  x.  22).  But  it 
had  its  part  also  in  private  festivities,  as  is  evident 
from  Is.  v.  12,  xiv.  11,  xxii.  24 ;  Am.  vi.  5,  where 
it  is  associated  with  banquets  and  luxurious  in 
dulgence.  It  appears  (Is.  riv.  11)  to  have  had  a 
soft  plaintive  note. 

The  psalteries  of  David  were  made  of  cypress 
(2  Sam.  vi.  5),  those  of  Solomon  of  algum  or 
almug-trees  (2  Chr.  ix.  11).  Among  the  instru 
ments  of  the  band  which  played  before  Nebuchad 
nezzar's  golden  image  on  the  plains  of  Dura,  we 
again  meet  with  the  psaltery  (JHRIIDS,  Dan.  iii. 
5,  10,  15;  jntMDB,  p&santirin). '  The  Chaldee 

word  appears  to  be  merely  a  modification  of  the 
Greek  \j/a\r-fipiot>.  Attention  is  called  to  the  fact 
that  the  word  is  singular  in  Gesenius  (Thes.  p. 
1116),  the  termination  J*  -  corresponding  to  the 
Greek  -lov.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PTOL'EMEE  and  PTOLEME'US  (n-roAe- 
:  Ptolemaeus).  1.  "The  son  of  Dorymenes' 
(1  Mace.  iii.  38 ;  2  Mace.  iv.  45  ;  comp.  Polyb. 
v.  61),  a  courtier  who  possessed  great  influence 
with  Antiochus  Epiph.  He  was  induced  by  a 
bribe  to  support  the  cause  of  Menelaus  (2  Mace, 
iv.  45-50) ;  and  afterwards  took  an  active  pirt 
in  forcing  the  Jews  to  apostatize  (2  Mace.  vi.  8, 
according  to  the  true  reading):  When  Judas  had 
successfully  resisted  the  first  assaults  of  the  Syrians, 
Ptolemy  took  part  in  the  great  expedition  which 
Lysias  organized  against  him,  which  ended  in  the 
defeat  at  Emmaus  (B.C.  166),  but  nothing  is  saivl 
of  his  personal  fortunes  in  the  campaign  (1  Mace, 
iii.  38). 

2.  The  son  of  Agesarchus  (Ath.  vi.  p.  246  C), 
a  Megalopolitan,  surnamed  Macron  (2  Mace.  x.  12), 
who  was  governor  of  Cyprus  during  the  minority 
of  Ptol.  Philometor.  This  office  he  discharged 
with  singular  fidelity  (Polyb.  xxvii.  12) ;  but  after 
wards  he  deserted  the  Egyptian  service  to  join  An 
tiochus  Epiph.  He  stood  high  in  the  favour  01 
Antiochus,  and  received  from  him  the  government 
of  Phoenicia  and  Coele-Syria  (2  Mace.  viii.  b,  x. 
11,  12).  On  the  accession  of  Ant.  Eupator,  his 
conciliatory  policy  towards  the  Jews  brought  him 
in.,0  suspicion  at  court.  He  was  deprived  of  his 
government,  and  in  consequence  of  this  disgrace  he 
poisoned  himself  c.  B.C.  164  (2  Mace.  x.  13). 

Ptol.  Macron  is  commonly  identified  with  Ptol. 
"  the  son  of  Dorymenes,"  and  it  seems  likely  from  a 
comparison  of  1  Mace.  iii.  38  with  2  Mace.  viii.  8, 9 

ronato  (the  Germ,  mandoline),  the  thirteen  strings  of  whicfc 
wore  of  gut  or  sinew,  anc  vcre  struck  with  a  quill. 

3  Q 


962 


r'TOLEMAEUS 


that  they  weie  confused  in  the  popular  account  of 
UK  war.  But  the  testimony  of  Athenaeus  dis 
tinctly  separates  the  governor  of  Cyprus  from  "  the 
son  of  Dorymenes"  by  his  parentage.  It  is  also 
doubtful  whether  Ptol.  Macron  had  left  Cyprus  as 
flftrly  as  B.C.  1 70,  when  "  the  son  of  Dorymenes  " 
»vas  at  Tyre  (2  Mace.  iv.  45),  though  there  is  no 
authority  for  the  common  statement  that  he  gave 
up  the  island  into  the  hands  of  Antiochus,  who  did 
not  gain  it  till  B.C.  168. 

3.  The  son  of  Abubus,  who  married  the  daughter 
of  Simon  the  Maccabee.  He  was  a  man  of  great 
wealth,  and  being  invested  with  the  government  of 
the  district  of  Jericho,  formed  the  design  of  usurp 
ing  the  sovereignty  of  Judaea.  With  this  view  he 
treacherously  murdered  Simon  and  two  of  his  sons 
(1  Mace.  xvi.  11-16;  Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  7,  §4;  8, 
§1,  with  some  variations)  ;  but  Johannes  Hyrcanus 
received  timely  intimation  of  his  design,  and  escaped. 
Hyrcanus  afterwards  besieged  him  in  his  strong 
hold  of  D6k,  but  in  consequence  of  the  occurrence 
of  the  Sabbatical  year,  he  was  enabled  to  make  his 
escape  to  Zeno  Cotylas  prince  of  Philadelphia 
^Joseph.  Ant.  xiii.  8,  §1). 

4.  A  citizen  of  Jerusalem,  father  of  Lysimachus, 
the  Greek  translator  of  Esther  (Esth.  xiii.).  [LYSI 
MACHUS  1.]  [B.  F.  W.] 


PTOLEMAEUS 

FTOLEMAE'US  (in  A.  V.  PTOL'OMEE 
and  PTOLEME'US— UroAf/tiaros,  "  the  war- 
like,"  •JTT<JX«^OJ  =  WXf/xos),  the  dynastic  name  oi 
the  Greek  kings  of  Egypt.  The  name,  which  occurs 
in  early  legends  (II.  iv.  228 ;  Paus.  x.  5),  appears 
first  in  the  historic  period  in  the  time  of  Alexander 
the  Great,  and  became  afterwards  very  frequent 
among  the  states  which  arose  out  of  his  con 
quests. 

For  the  civil  history  of  the  Ptolemies  the  srudent 
will  find  ample  references  to  the  original  authoritii* 
in  the  articles  in  the  Dictionary  of  Biography,  ii. 
581,  &c.,  and  in  Pauly's  Real-EncyclopRdie. 

The  literature  of  the  subject  in  its  religious 
aspects  has  been  already  noticed.  [ALEXANDRIA; 
DISPERSION.]  A  curious  account  of  the  literary 
activity  of  Ptol.  Philadelphia  is  given — by  Simon 
de  Magistris — in  the  Apologia  sent.  Pat.  de  LXX. 
Vers.,  appended  to  Daniel  sec.  LXX.  (Romae, 
1772),  but  this  is  not  always  trustworthy.  More 
complete  details  of  the  history  of  the  Alexandrine 
Libraries  are  given  by  Ritschl,  Die  Alexandrinischen 
Bibliotheken,  Breslau,  1838;  and  Parthey,  Das 
Alexandr.  Museum,  Berlin,  1838. 

The  following  table  gives  the  descent  of  the 
royal  line  as  far  as  it  is  connected  with  Biblical 
history.  [B.  F.  W.] 


GENEALOGICAL  TABLE  OF  THE  PTOLEMIES 


1.  PTOLKMAKUS  I.  SOTER  (son  of  Lagus),  c.  B.C.  323-285. 

I 


Arsinoe  =  2.  PTOL.  II.  PHILADELPHIA  (B.C.  285-247)  =  3.  Arsinoe. 

I 


I 

4.   PrOL.  III.  EUERGKTBS  1.  (B.C.  247-222). 


5.  Berenice  =  Antiochus  II. 


6.  PTOL.  IV.  PHILOPATOR  (B.C.  222-205)  =  7.  Arsinoe. 


8.  PTOL.  V.  EFIPTIAMES  (B.C.  205-181)  =  Cleopatra  (d.  of  Antiochus  M.). 


9.  PTOL.  VI.  PHILOMETOB 

(B.C.  181-1 4S), 
= Cleopatra  (11). 


10.  PTOL.  VII.  EDERGETKS  II.  (Pliyscon)  =  ll.  Cleopatra. 

(BX.  171-146-117)  =  (2)  Cleopatra  (14). 


(12)  Cleopatra, 
=  Alex.  T 
=  Demetrius  IJ. 


j 
13.  Ptol.  Eiipator. 


14.  Cleopatra. 


15.  PTOL.  VIII.  SOTER  II. 
(B.C.  117-81). 


PTOLEMAE'US  I.  SOTER,  known  as  the 
Bin  of  Lagus,  a  Macedonian  01  low  rank,  was  gene 
rally  supposed  to  have  been  an  illegitimate  son  of 
Philip.  He  distinguished  himself  greatly  during 
the  campaigns  of  Alexander ;  at  whose  death,  fore 
seeing  the  necessary  subdivision  of  the  empire,  he 
secured  for  himself  the  government  of  Egypt,  where 
he  proceeded  at  once  to  lay  the  foundations  of  a 
kingdom  (B.C.  323).  His  policy  during  the  wars 
of  the  succession  was  mainly  directed  towards  the 
consolidation  of  his  power,  and  not  to  wide  con 
quests.  He  maintained  himself  against  the  attacks 
of  Perdiccas  (B.C.  321),  and  Demetrius  (B.C.  312), 
and  gained  a  precarious  footing  in  Syria  and  Phoe 
nicia.  In  B.C.  307  he  suffered  a  very  severe  defeat 
at  sea  off  Cyprus  from  Antigonus,  but  successfully 
defended  Egypt  against  invasion.  After  the  final 
defeat  of  Antigonus,  B.C.  301,  he  was  obliged  to 
concede  the  debateable  provinces  of  Phoenicia  and 
to  Seleucus  ;  and  durinj;  the  remainfipr 


of  his  reign  his  only  important  achievement  aoroad 
was  the  recovery  of  Cyprus,  which  he  permanently 
attached  to  the  Egyptian  monarchy  (B.C.  295). 
He  abdicated  in  favour  of  his  youngest  son  Ptol.  II. 
Philadelphus,  two  years  before  his  death,  which 
took  place  in  B.C.  283. 

Ptol.  Soter  is  described  very  briefly  in  Daniel 
(xi.  5)  as.  one  of  those  who  sho:ild  receive  part  of 
the  empire  of  Alexander  when  it  was  "  divided  to 
ward  the  four  winds  of  heaven."  "  The  king  of 
the  south  [Egypt  in  respect  of  Judaea]  shall  be 
strong  •  and  one  of  his  princes  [Seleucus  Nicator, 
shall  be  strong]  ;  and  he  [Seleucus]  shall  be  strong 
above  him  [Ptolemy],  and  have  dominion."  Seleu 
cus,  who  is  here  mentioned,  fled  from  Babylon,  where 
Antigonus  sought  his  life,  to  Egypt  in  B.C.  316,  and 
attached  himself  to  Ptolemy.  At  last  the  decisive 
victory  of  Ipsus  (B.C.  301),  which  was  mainly 
gained  by  his  services,  gave  him  the  command  of 
a.i  empire  which  was  greater  than  an-,'  other  held 


PTOLEMAEU8 

by  Alexander's  successors ;  and  "  his  dominion  teas 
r.  great  dominion  "  (Dan.  /.  c.).» 

In  one  of  his  expeditions  into  Syria,  probably 
B.C.  320,  Ptolemy  treacherously  occupied  Jerusalem 
on  the  Sabbath,  a  fact  which  arrested  the  attention 
of  the  heathen  historian  Agatharcides  (ap.  Joseph, 
c.  Ap.  i.  22  ;  Ant.  xii.  I).  He  carried  away  many 
Jews  and  Samaritans  captive  to  Alexandria;  but, 
aware  probably  of  the  great  importance  of  the  good 
will  of  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine  in  the  event  of 
a  Syrian  war,  he  gave  them  the  full  privileges  of 
citizenship  in  the  new  city.  In  the  campaign  of 
Gaza  (B.C.  312)  he  reaped  the  fruits  of  his  liberal 
policy ;  and  many  Jews  voluntarily  emigrated  to 
Egypt,  though  the  colony  was  from  the  first  dis 
turbed  by  internal  dissensions  (Joseph,  as  above ; 
Hecat.  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  1.  c.).  [B.  F.  W.] 


Ptolemy  I.,  King  of  Egypt. 

Fentedrarhm  of  Ptolemy  I.  (Alexandrian  talent).  Obv.  Head 
of  king,  r.  f.,  bound  with  fillet  Eev.  HTOAEMAIOY 
2OTHPO2.  Eagle,  L,  on  thunderbolt  (Struck  at  Ty»«.) 

PTOLEMAE'US  H.  PHILADEL'PHUS, 

the  youngest  son  of  Ptol.  I.,  was  made  king  two 
years  before  his  death,  to  confirm  the  irregular  suc 
cession.  The  conflict  between  Egypt  and  Syria  was 
renewed  during  his  reign  in  consequence  of  the  in 
trigue  of  his  half-brother  Magas.  "  But  in  the  end 
of  years  they  [the  kings  of  Syria  and  Egypt]  joined 
themselves  together  [in  friendship].  For  the  king's 
daughter  of  the  south  [Berenice,  the  daughter  of 
Ptol.  Philadelphus]  came  [as  bride]  to  the  king  of 
the  north  [Antiochus  II.],  to  make  an  agreement " 
(Dan.  xi.  6).  The  unhappy  issue  of  this  marriage 
has  been  noticed  already  [ANTIOCHUS  II.,  vol.  i. 
p.  74] ;  and  the  political  events  of  the  reign  of  Pto 
lemy,  who,  however,  retained  possession  of  the  dis 
puted  provinces  of  Phoenicia  and  Coele-Syria,  offer 
no  further  points  of  interest  in  connexion  with 
Jewish  history. 

In  other  respects,  however,  this  reign  was  a 
critical  epoch  for  the  development  of  Judaism,  as  it 
was  for  the  intellectual  history  of  the  ancient  world. 
The  liberal  encouragement  which  Ptolemy  bestowed 
on  literature  and  science  (following  out  in  this  the 
designs  of  his  father)  gave  birth  to  a  new  school 
of  writers  and  thinkers.  The  critical  faculty  was 
called  forth  in  place  of  the  creative,  and  learning  in 
some  sense  supplied  the  place  of  original  speculation. 
Eclecticism  was  the  necessary  result  of  the  con 
currence  and  comparison  of  dogmas ;  and  it  was 
impossible  that  the  Jew,  who  was  now  become  as 
true  a  citizen  of  the  world  as  fhe  Greek,  should 
remain  passive  in  the  conflict  of  opinions.  The 
origin  and  influence  of  the  translation  of  the  LXX. 
will  be  considered  in  another  place.  [SEPTUAGINT.] 
It  is  enough  now  to  observe  the  greatness  of  the 
consequences  involved  in  the  union  of  Greek  lan- 


Jerome  (ad  Dan.  1.  c.)  very  strangely  refers  the  latter 
of  the  verse  to  Ptol.  Philadelphus,  "  whose  empire 
iiirpassed  that  of  his  father."    The  whole  tenor  of  the 


PTOLEMAEUS  9(>;i 

truage  with  Jewish  thought.  From  ,hb  time  the 
Jew  was  familiarized  with  the  great  types  of 
Western  literature,  and  in  some  degree  aimed  at 
imitating  them.  Ezechiel  (6  ruv  'lovSaiKO>v  vpa- 
yifSicav  irojrj'Hjj,  Clem.  Alex.  Str.  i.  23,  §155) 
wrote  a  drama  on  the  subject  of  the  Exodus,  of 
which  considerable  fragments,  in  fair  iambic  verse, 
remain  (Euseb.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  28,  29  ;  Clem.  Alex. 
/.  c.),  though  he  does  not  appear  to  have  adhered 
strictly  to  the  laws  of  classical  composition.  An 
elder  Philo  celebrated  Jerusalem  in  a  long  hexameter 
poem — Eusebius  quotes  the  14th  book — of  which 
the  few  corrupt  lines  still  preserved  (Euseb.  Praep. 
Ev.  ix.  20,  24,  28)  convey  no  satisfactory  notion. 
Another  epic  poem,  "on  the  Jews,"  was  written 
by  Theodotus,  and  as  the  extant  passages  (Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  ix.  22)  treat  of  the  history  of  Sichem, 
it  has  been  conjectured  that  he  was  a  Samaritan. 
The  work  of  ARISTOBULUS  on  the  interpretation  of 
the  Law  was  a  still  more  important  result  of  the 
combination  of  the  old  faith  with  Greek  culture,  as 
forming  the  groundwork  of  later  allegories.  And 
while  the  Jews  appropriated  the  fruits  of  Western 
science,  the  Greeks  looked  towards  the  East  with  a 
new  curiosity.  The  histories  of  Berosus  and  Manetho 
and  Hecataeus  opened  a  world  as  wide  and  novel  as 
the  conquests  of  Alexander.  The  legendary  sibyls 
were  taught  to  speak  in  the  language  of  the  prophets. 
The  name  of  Orpheus,  which  was  connected  with  the 
first  rise  of  Greek  polytheism,  gave  sanction  to  verses 
which  set  forth  nobler  views  of  the  Godhead  (Euseb. 
Praep.  Ev.  xiii.  12,  &c.).  Even  the  most  famous 
poets  were  not  free  from  interpolation  (Ewald, 
Gesch.  iv.  297,  note).  Everywhere  the  intellectual 
approximation  of  Jew  and  Gentile  was  growing 
closer,  or  at  least  more  possible.  The  later  specific 
forms  of  teaching  to  which  this  syncretism  of  East 
and  West  gave  rise  have  been  already  noticed. 
[ALEXANDRIA,  vol.  i.  pp.  47,  8.]  A  second  time 
and  in  a  new  fashion  Egypt  disciplined  a  people  of 
God.  It  first  impressed  upon  a  nation  the  firm 
unity  of  a  family,  and  then  in  due  time  reconnected 
a  matured  people  with  the  world  from  which  it 
had  been  called  out.  [B.  F.  W.] 


Ptolemy  II. 

Octodrachm  of  Ptolemy  II.  Obv.  AAEA*fiN.  Busts  of  Pto 
lemy  II.  and  Arsinoe,  r.  Rev.  6EQN.  Busts  of  Ptolemy  I. 
and  Berenice,  r. 

PTOLEMAE'US  III.  EUER'GETES  was 

the  eldest  son  of  Ptol.  Philad.  and  brother  of  Bere 
nice  the  wife  of  Antiochus  II.  The  repudiation  and 
murder  of  his  sister  furnished  him  with  an  occasion 
for  invading  Syria  'c.  B.C.  246).  He  "  stood  up,  a 
branch  out  of  her  stock  [sprung  from  the  same  pa 
rents]  in  his  [father's]  estate ;  and  set  himself  at 
[the  head  of]  his  army,  and  came  against  the  for 
tresses  of  the  king  of  the  north  [Antiochus],  and  dealt 


passage  requires  the  contrast  of  the  two  klngrtoua  OB 
which  the  fortunes  of  Judaea  hung. 

3  Q  2 


964 


PTOLEMAEUS 


agninst  them  and  prevailed"  (Dan.  xi.  7).  He  ex 
tended  his  conquests  as  far  as  Antioch,  and  then 
eastwards  to  Babylon,  but  was  recalled  to  Egypt  by 
tidings  of  seditions  which  had  broken  out  there.  His 
success  was  brilliant  and  complete.  "  He  carried  cap. 
five  into  Egypt  the  gods  [of  the  conquered  nations] 
with  their  molten  images,  and  with  their  precious 
vessels  of  silver  and  gold"  (Dan.  xi.  8).  This  capture 
of  sacred  trophies,  which  included  the  recovery  of 
images  taken  from  Egypt  by  Cambyses  (Jerome, 
ad  loo.),  earned  for  the  king  the  name  Euergetes — 
"  Benefactor  " — from  the  superstitious  Egyptians, 
and  was  specially  recorded  in  the  inscriptions  which 
he  set  up  at  Adule  in  memory  of  his  achievements 
(Cosmas  Ind.  ap.  Clint.  F.  H.  382  n).  After  his 
return  to  Egypt  (cir.  B.C.  243)  he  suffered  a  great 
part  of  the  conquered  provinces  to  fall  again  under 
the  power  of  Seleucus.  But  the  attempts  which  Se- 
leucus  made  to  attack  Egypt  terminated  disastrously 
to  himself.  He  first  collected  a  fleet  which  was  almost 
totally  destroyed  by  a  storm  ;  and  then,  «'  as  if  by 
some  judicial  infatuation,"  "  he  came  against  the 
realm  of  the  king  of  the  south  and  [being  defeated] 
returned  to  his  own  land  [to  Antioch]  "  (Dan.  xi.  9  ; 
Justin,  xxvii.  2).  After  this  Ptolemy  "desisted 
some  years  from  [attacking]  the  king  of  the  north  " 
(Dan.  xi.  8),  since  the  civil  war  between  Seleucus 
and  Antiochus  Hierax,  which  he  fomented,  secured 
him  from  any  further  Syrian  invasion.  The  re 
mainder  of  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  seems  to  have  been 
spent  chiefly  in  developing  the  resources  of  the  em 
pire,  which  he  raised  to  the  highest  pitch  of  its 
prosperity.  His  policy  towards  the  Jews  was 
similar  to  that  of  his  predecessors,  and  on  his  occu 
pation  of  Syria  he  "  offered  sacrifices,  after  the 
custom  of  the  Law,  in  acknowledgment  of  his  suc 
cess,  in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  added  gifts 
worthy  of  his  victory  "  (Joseph,  c.  Ap.  ii.  5).  The 
famous  story  of  the  manner  in  which  Joseph  the 
son  of  Tobias  obtained  from  him  the  lease  of  the 
revenues  of  Judaea  is  a  striking  illustration  both  of 
the  condition  of  the  country  and  of  the  influence  of 
individual  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4).  [OsiAS.] 

[B.  F.  W.] 


Ptolemy  III. 

Uctodrachm  of  Ptolemy  III.  (Egyptian  talent).  Obv.  Dost  of 
king,  r..  wearing  radiate  diadem,  and  carrying  trident  Rev 
BA2IAEQ2  HTOAEMAIOY.  Radiate  cornucopia. 

PTOLEMAE'US    IV.    PHILOPATOR. 

After  the  death  of  Ptol.  Euergetes  the  line  of  the 
Ptolemies  rapidly  degenerated  (Strabo,  xvi.  12,  13, 
p.  798).  Ptol.  Philopator,  his  eldest  son,  who  suc 
ceeded  him,  was  to  the  last  degree  sensual,  effemi 
nate,  and  debased.  But  externally  his  kingdom 
retained  its  power  and  splendour;  and  when  cir 
cumstances  forced  him  to  action,  Ptolemy  himself 
showed  ability  not  unworthy  of  his  race.  The  de 
scription  of  the  campaign  of  Raphia  (B.C.  217)  in 
the  Book  of  Daniel  gives  a  vivid  description  of  his 


»  Jerome  (ad  Dan.  xi.  14)  places  the  flight  ot  Oniss  to 
Egypt  and  the  foundation  of  the  temple  of  I^eontopolis  in 


PTOLEMAEU8 

character.  "  The  sons  of  Seleucus  [Seleucus  Ce- 
raunus  and  Antiochus  the  Great]  were  stirred  up 
and  assembled  a  multitude  of  great  forces  ;  and  one 
of  them  [Antiochus]  came  and  overflowed  and 
passed  through  [even  to  Pelusium :  Polyb.  v.  62]  ; 
and  he  returned  [from  Seleucia,  to  which  he  had 
retired  during  a  faithless  truce :  Polyb.  v.  66] , 
and  they  [Antiochus  and  Ptolemy!  were  stirred  up 
[in  war]  even  to  his  [Antiochus']  fortress.  Ana 
the  king  of  the  south  [Ptol.  Philopator]  was  movea 
with  choler,  and  came  forth  and  fought  with  him 
[at  Raphia]  ;  and  he  set  forth  a  great  multitude ; 
and  the  multitude  was  given  into  his  hand  [to  lead 
to  battle] .  And  the  multitude  raised  itself  [proudly 
for  the  conflict],  and  his  heart  was  lifted  up,  and 
he  cast  down  ten  thousands  (cf.  Polyb.  r.  86) ;  but 
he  was  not  vigorous  "  [to  reap  the  fruits  of  his  vic 
tory]  (Dan.  xi.  10-12 ;  cf.  3  Mace.  i.  1-5).  After 
this  decisive  success  Ptol.  Philopator  visited  the 
neighbouring  cities  of  Syria,  and  among  others 
Jerusalem.  After  offering  sacrifices  of  thanksgiving 
in  the  Temple  he  attempted  to  enter  the  sanctuary. 


Ptolemy  IV. 

Tetradrachm  of  Ptolemy  IV.  (Egyptian  talent).  Ob».  Bust  of 
king,  r ,  bound  with  fillet  Rev.  HTOAEMAIOY  *IAO- 
II ATOPO2.  Eagle,  L,  on  thunderbolt  (Struck  at  Tyre.) 

A  sudden  paralysis  hindered  his  design ;  but  when 
he  returned  to  Alexandria  he  determined  to  inflict 
on  the  Alexandrine  Jews  the  vengeance  for  his  dis 
appointment.  In  this,  however,  he  was  again  hin 
dered  ;  and  eventually  he  confirmed  to  them  the 
full  privileges  which  they  had  enjoyed  before. 
[3  MACCABEES.]  The  recklessness  of  his  reign 
was  further  marked  by  the  first  insurrection  of  the 
native  Egyptians  against  their  Greek  rulers  (Polyb. 
v.  107).  This  was  put  down,  and  Ptolemy,  during 
the  remainder  of  his  life,  gave  himself  up  to  un 
bridled  excesses.  He  died  B.C.  205,  and  was  suc 
ceeded  by  his  only  child,  Ptol.  V.  Epiphanes,  who 
was  at  the  time  only  four  or  five  years  old  (Jerome, 
ad  Dan.  xi.  10-12).  [B.  F.  W.] 

PTOLEMAE'US  V.  EPIPH'ANES.    The 

reign  of  Ptol.  Epiphanes  was  a  critical  epoch  in  the 
history  of  the  Jews.  The  rivalry  between  the 
Syrian  and  Egyptian  parties,  which  had  for  some 
time  divided  the  people,  came  to  an  open  rupture 
in  the  struggles  which  marked  his  minority.  The 
Syrian  faction  openly  declared  for  Antiochus  the 
Great,  when  he  advanced  on  his  second  expedition 
against  Egypt;  and  the  Jews,  who  remained  faith 
ful  to  the  old  alliance,  fled  to  Egypt  in  great  num 
bers,  where  Onias,  the  rightful  successor  to  the 
high-priesthood,  not  long  afterwards  established  the 
temple  at  Leontopolis.*  [ONIAS.]  In  the  strong 
language  of  Daniel,  "  The  robbers  of  the  people 
exalted  themselves  to  establish  the  vision"  (Dan 
xi.  14) — to  confirm  by  the  issue  of  their  attempt 
the  truth  of  *he  prophetic  word,  and  at  the  same 

the  reign  of  Ptol.  Kpiphanes.  But  Onlas  was  still  a  youtk 
at  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  cir.  B.C.  171. 


PTOLEMAEES 

Mine  to  foiward  unconsciously  the  establishment 
of  the  heavenly  kingdom  which  they  sought  to 
anticipate.  The  accession  of  Ptolemy  and  the  con 
fusion  of  a  disputed  regency  furnished  a  favourable 
opportunity  for  foreign  invasion.  "  Many  stood  up 
against  the  king  of  the  south"  under  Antiochus  the 
Great  and  Philip  III.  of  Macedonia,  who  formed  a 
league  foi  the  dismemberment  of  his  kingdom.  "  £0 
the  king  of  the  north  [Antiochus]  came,  and  cast 
up  a  mount,  and  took  the  most  fenced  city  [Sidon, 
to  which  Scopas,  the  general  of  Ptolemy,  had  fled : 
Jerome,  ad  foe.],  and  the  arms  of  the  south  did  not 
withstand"  [at  Paneas,  B.C.  198,  where  Antiochus 
gained  a  decisive  victory]  (Dan.  si.  14,  15).  The 
interference  of  the  Romans,  to  whom  the  regents 
had  turned  for  help,  checked  Antiochus  in  his 
career ;  but  in  order  to  retain  the  provinces  of  Coele- 
Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Judaea,  which  he  had  recon 
quered,  really  under  his  power,  while  he  seemed 
to  comply  with  the  demands  of  the  Romans,  who 
required  them  to  be  surrendered  to  Ptolemy,  "  he 
gave  him  [Ptolemy,  his  daughter  Cleopatra]  a  young 
maiden"  [as  his  betrothed  wife]  (Dan.  xi.  17). 
But  in  the  end  his  policy  only  partially  succeeded. 
After  the  marriage  of  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra  was 
consummated  (B.C.  193),  Cleopatra  did  "  not  startd 
on  his  side,"  but  supported  her  husband  in  main 
taining  the  alliance  with  Rome.  The  disputed  pro 
vinces,  however,  remained  in  the  possession  of  An 
tiochus  ;  and  Ptolemy  was  poisoned  at  the  time 
when  he  was  preparing  an  expedition  to  recover 
them  from  Seleucus,  the  unworthy  successor  of 
Antiochus,  B.C.  181.  [B.  F.  W.] 


Ptolemy  V. 

1'etradrachm  of  Ptolemy  V.  (Egyptian  talent).  Obv.  Bust  of  king, 
r.,  bound  with  fillet  adorned  with  ears  of  wheat.  Rev. 
BA2IAEO2  IITOAEMAIOY.  Eagle,  L,  on  thunderbolt 

PTOLEMAE'US    VI.    PHILOME'TOR. 

On  the  death  of  Ptol.  Epiphanes,  his  wife  Cleopatra 
held  the  regency  for  her  young  son,  Ptol.  Philo- 
metor,  and  preserved  peace  with  Syria  till  she  died, 
B.C.  173.  The  government  then  fell  into  unworthy 
hands,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  recover  Syria 
(comp.  2  Mace.  iv.  21).  Antiochus  Epiphanes  seems 
to  have  made  the  claim  a  pretext  for  invading 
Egypt.  The  generals  of  Ptolemy  were  defeated 
near  Pelusium,  probably  at  the  close  of  B.C.  171 
(Clinton,  F.  H.  iii.  319;  1  Mace.  i.  16  ff.);  and 
in  the  next  year  Antiochus,  having  secured  the  per 
son  of  the  young  king,  reduced  almost  the  whole  of 
Effypt  (comp.  2  Mace.  v.  1 ).  Meanwhile  Ptol.  Euer- 
getes  II.,  the  younger  brother  of  Ptol.  Philometor, 
assumed  the  suprencve  power  at  Alexandria;  and 
Antiochus,  under  the  pretext  of  recovering  the 
crown  for  Philometor,  besieged  Alexandria  in  B.C. 
169.  By  this  time,  however,  his  selfish  designs 
were  apparent :  the  brothers  were  reconciled,  and 
Antiochus  was  obliged  to  acquiesce  for  the  time  iu 


PTOLEMAEU8  966 

the  arrangement  which  they  made.  But  while 
doing  so  he  prepared  for  another  invasion  of  Egypt, 
and  was  already  approaching  Alexandria,  when  he 
was  met  by  the  Roman  embassy  led  by  C.  Popilliua 
Laenas,  who,  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  senate,  in 
sisted  on  his  immediate  retreat  (B.C.  168),  a  com 
mand  which  the  Life  victory  at  Pydna  made  it  im 
possible  to  disobey.* 


Ptolemy  VI. 

Tetradrachm  of  Ptolemy  VI.  (Egyptian  talent).  Obv.  Heed  oi 
king,  r.,  bound  with  fillet.  Rev.  IITOAEMAIOY  *IAO- 
MHTOPO2.  Eagle,  L,  with  palm-branch,  on  thunderbolt. 

These  campaigns,  which  are  intimately  connected 
with  the  visits  of  Antiochus  to  Jerusalem  in  B.C. 
170,  168,  are  briefly  described  in  Dan.  xi.  25-30: 
"  He  [Antiochus]  shall  stir  up  his  power  and  his 
courage  against  the  king  of  the  south  with  a  great 
army;  and  the  king  of  the  south  [Ptol.  Philometor] 
shall  be  stirred  up  to  battle  with  a  very  great  and 
mighty  army ;  but  he  shall  not  stand :  for  the;/ 
[the  ministers,  as  it  appears,  in  whom  he  trusted] 
shall  forecast  devices  against  him.  Yea,  they  that 
feed  of  the  portion  of  his  meat  shall  destroy  him, 
and  his  army  shall  melt  away,  and  many  shall  fall 
down  slain.  And  both  these  kings'  hearts  shall  be 
to  do  mischief,  and  they  shall  speak  lies  at  one 
table  [Antiochus  shall  profess  falsely  to  maintain 
the  cause  of  Philometor  against  his  brother,  and 
Philometor  to  trust  in  his  good  faith]  ;  but  it  shall 
not  prosper  [the  resistance  of  Alexandria  shall  pre 
serve  the  independence  of  Egypt]  ;  for  the  end  shall 
be  at  the  time  appointed.  Then  shall  he  [Antiochus] 
return  into  his  land,  and  his  heart  shall  be  against 
the  holy  covenant ;  and  he  shall  do  exploits,  and 
return  to  his  own  land.  At  the  time  appointed  lie 
shall  return  and  come  towards  the  south ;  but  it 
shall  not  be  as  the  former  so  also  the  latter  time. 
[His  career  shall  be  checked  at  once]  for  the  ships 
of  Chittim  [comp.  Num.  xxiv.  24 :  the  Roman  fleet] 
shall  come  against  him :  therefore  he  shall  be  dis 
mayed  and  return  and  have  indignation  against 
the  holy  covenant." 

After  the  discomfiture  of  Antiochus,  Philometor 
was  for  some  time  occupied  in  resisting  the  am 
bitious  designs  of  his  brother,  who  made  two  at 
tempts  to  add  Cyprus  to  the  kingdom  of  Cyrene, 
which  was  allotted  to  him.  Having  effectually  put 
down  these  attempts,  he  turned  his  attention  again 
to  Syria.  During  the  brief  reign  of  Antiochus 
Eupator  he  seems  to  have  supported  Philip  against 
the  regent  Lysias  (Comp.  2  Mace.  ix.  29).  Attev 
the  murder  of  Eupator  by  Demetrius  I.,  Philometor 
espoused  the  cause  of  Alexander  Bains,  the  rival 
claimant  to  the  throne,  because  Demetrius  had  made 
an  attempt  on  Cyprus ;  and  when  Alexander  haJ 
defeated  and  slain  his  rival,  he  accepted  the  over 
tures  which  he  made,  and  gave  him  his  daughter 
Cleopatra  in  marriage  (B.C.  150  :  1  Mace.  x.  51-58X 


•  Others  reckon  only  three  campaigns  of  Antiochus 
npxinst  Egj-pt  in  171,  170,  168  (Grimm  on  1  Mace.  i.  18). 
Yet  tho  campaign  of  169  seems  clearly  distinguished  from 


those  In  the  years  before  and  after;  though  in  the  de 
scription  of  Daniel  the  campaigns  of  IfO  \nd  169  are  tot 
noticed  separately. 


966 


PTOLEMAEUS 


But,  according  to  1  Mace.  xi.  1, 10,  &c.,  the  alliance 
waa  not  made  in  good  faith,  but  only  as  a  means  to 
wards  securing  possession  of  Syria.  According  to 
others,  Alexander  himself  made  a  treacherous  attempt 
on  the  life  of  Ptolemy  (comp.  1  Mace.  xi.  10),  which 
caused  him  to  transfer  his  support  to  Demetrius  II., 
to  whom  also  he  gave  his  daughter,  whom  he  had 
Taken  from  Alexander.  The  whole  of  Syria  was 
quickly  subdued,  and  he  was  crowned  at  Antioch 
king  of  Egypt  and  Asia  (1  Mace.  xi.  13).  Alexander 
made  an  effort  to  recover  his  crown,  but  was 
defeated  by  the  forces  of  Ptolemy  and  Demetrius, 
and  shortly  afterwards  put  to  death  in  Arabia.  But 
Ptolemy  did  not  long  enjoy  his  success.  He  fell 
from  his  horse  in  the  battle,  and  died  within  a  few 
days  (1  Mace.  xi.  18),  B.C.  145. 

Ptolemaeus  Philometor  is  the  last  king  of 
Egypt  who  is  noticed  in  Sacred  history,  and  his 
reign  was  marked  also  by  the  erection  of  the 
Temple  at  Leontopolis.  The  coincidence  is  worthy 
of  notice,  for  the  consecration  of  a  new  centre  of 
worship  placed  a  religious  as  well  as  a  political 
barrier  between  the  Alexandrine  and  Palestinian 
Jews.  Henceforth  the  nation  was  again  divided. 
The  history  of  the  Temple  itself  is  extremely  ob 
scure,  but  even  in  its  origin  it  was  a  monument  of 
sivil  strife.  Onias,  the  son  of  Onias  III.,*  who  was 
murdered  at  Antioch,  B.C.  171,  when  he  saw  that 
he  was  excluded  from  the  succession  to  the  high- 
priesthood  by  mercenary  intrigues,  fled  to  Egypt, 
either  shortly  after  his  father's  death  or  upoii  the 
transference  of  the  office  to  Alcimus,  B.C.  162 
(Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  9,  §7).  It  is  probable  that  his 
retirement  must  be  placed  at  the  later  date,  for  he 
was  a  child  (irais,  Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  5,  §1)  at  the 
time  of  his  father's  death,  and  he  is  elsewhere  men 
tioned  as  one  of  those  who  actively  opposed  the 
Syrian  party  in  Jerusalem  (Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  1). 
In  Egypt  he  entered  the  service  of  the  king  and  rose, 
with  another  Jew,  Dositheus,  to  the  supreme  com 
mand.  In  this  office  he  rendered  important  ser 
vices  during  the  war  which  Ptol.  Physcon  waged 
against  his  brother  ;  and  he  pleaded  these  to  induce 
the  king  to  grant  him  a  ruined  temple  of  Diana 
(TTJS  dyplas  B<>v/3dffTf<as  at  Leontopolis,  as  the  site 
of  a  Temple,  which  he  proposed  to  build  "  after  the 
pattern  of  that  at  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  same  dimen 
sions."  His  alleged  object  was  to  unite  the  Jews 
in  one  body  who  were  at  the  time  "divided  into 
hostile  factions,  even  as  the  Egyptians  were,  from 
their  differences  in  religious  services  "  (Joseph.  Ant. 
xiii.  3,  §1).  In  defence  of  the  locality  which  he 
chose  he  quoted  the  words  of  Isaiah  (Is.  xix.  18, 
19),  who  spoke  of  "an  altar  to  the  Lord  in  the 
midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,"  and  according  to  one 
interpretation  mentioned  "  the  city  of  the  Sun " 
(D^nn  "VJJ),  by  name.  The  site  was  granted  and 
the  Temple  built ;  but  the  original  plan  was  not 
exactly  carried  out.  The  Naos  rose  "  like  a  tower 
to  the  height  of  sixty  cubits"  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  10, 
§3,  irvpytf  irapair^fftov  .  .  .  tls  f^KOvra  tr^tis 
dveo-TTj/coVa).  The  altar  and  the  offerings  were 
similar  to  those  at  Jerusalem  ;  but  in  place  of  the 
seven-branched  candlestick,  was  "  a  single  lamp  of 
gold  suspended  by  a  golden  chain."  The  service  was 
performed  by  priests  and  Levites  of  pure  descent;  and 
the  Temple  possessed  considerable  revenues,  which 
were  devoted  to  their  support  and  to  the  adequate 


«  Joseptius  In  one  place  (B.f.  vii.  10,  }2)  calls  him  "  the 
wn  of  b.n.jn,"  and  IIP  appears  under  the  same  name  In 
Vu  i.4i  Rf;eiii'>  ;  but  it  svonis  certain  that  this  »'as  a  mere 


PTOLEMAEUS 

celebration  of  the  divine  ritual  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii.  10, 
§3  ;  Ant.  xiii.  3,  §3).  The  object  of  Ptol.  Philometoi 
in  furthering  the  design  of  Onias,  was  doubtless  the 
same  as  that  which  led  to  the  erection  of  the 
"golden  calves"  in  Israel.  The  Jewish  residents 
in  Egypt  were  numerous  and  powerful ;  and  when 
Jerusalem  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Syrians,  it  be 
came  of  the  utmost  importance  to  weaken  their 
connexion  with  their  mother  city.  In  this  respect 
the  position  of  the  Temple  on  the  eastern  border  of 
the  kingdom  was  peculiarly  important  ( Jost,  Gesch. 
d.  Judenthums,  i.  117).  On  the  other  hand  it  is 
probable  that  Onias  saw  no  hope  in  the  hellenized 
Judaism  of  a  Syrian  province;  and  the  triumph  of 
the  Maccabees  was  still  unachieved  when  the  Temple 
at  Leontopolis  was  founded.  The  date  of  this  event 
cannot  indeed  be  exactly  determined.  Josephus 
says  (B.  J.  vii.  10,  §4)  that  the  Temple  had  ex 
isted  "  343  years  "  at  the  time  of  its  destruction, 
cir.  A.D.  71;  but  the  text  is  manifestly  corrupt. 
Eusebius  (ap.  Hieron.  viii.  p.  507,  ed.  Migne)  no 
tices  the  flight  of  Onias  and  the  building  of  the 
Temple  under  the  same  year  (B.C.  162),  possibly 
from  the  natural  connexion  of  the  events  without 
regard  to  the  exact  date  of  the  latter.  Some  time 
at  least  must  be  allowed  for  the  military  service  of 
Onias,  and  the  building  of  the  Temple  may  perhaps 
be  placed  after  the  conclusion  of  the  last  war  with 
Ptol.  Physcon,  (c.  B.C.  154),  when  Jonathan  "  began 
to  judge  the  people  at  Machmas"  (1  Mace.  ix.  73). 
In  Palestine  the  erection  of  this  second  Temple  was 
not  condemned  so  strongly  as  might  have  been  ex 
pected.  A  question  indeed  was  raised  in  later  times 
whether  the  service  was  not  idolatrous  (Jerus.  Joma 
43c7,  ap.  Jost,  Gesch.  d.  Judenth.  i.  119),  but  the 
Mishna,  embodying  without  doubt  the  old  decisions, 
determines  the  point  more  favourably.  "  Priests 
who  had  served  at  Leontopolis  were  forbidden  to 
serve  at  Jerusalem ;  but  were  not  excluded  from 
attending  the  public  services."  "  A  vow  might  be 
discharged  rightly  at  Leontopolis  as  well  as  at  Je 
rusalem,  but  it  was  not  enough  to  discharge  it  at 
the  former  place  only"  (Menach.  109a,  ap.  Jost, 
as  above).  The  circumstances  under  which  the  new 
Temple  was  erected  were  evidently  accepted  as  in 
some  degree  an  excuse  for  the  irregular  worship. 
The  connexion  with  Jerusalem,  though  weakened 
in  popular  estimation,  was  not  broken ;  and  the 
spiritual  significance  of  the  one  Temple  remained 
unchanged  for  the  devout  believer  (Philo,  de 
Monarch,  n.  §1,  &c.).  [ALEXANDRIA,  vol.  i.  46.] 
The  Jewish  colony  in  Egypt,  of  which  Leon- 
topolis  was  the  immediate  religious  centre,  wa« 
Formed  of  various  elements  and  at  different  times. 
The  settlements  which  were  made  under  the  Greek 
sovereigns,  though  the  most  important,  were  by  no 
means  the  first.  In  the  later  times  of  the  kingdom 
of  Judah  many  "trusted  in  Egypt,"  and  took  refug* 
there  (Jer.  xliii.  6,  7);  and  when  Jeremiah  was 
taken  to  Tahpanhes  he  spoke  to  "  all  the  Jews 
which  dwell  in  the  laud  of  Egypt,  which  dwell  at 
Migdol  and  Tahpanhes,  and  at  Noph,  and  in  the 
country  of  Pathros"  ( Jer.  xliv.  1 ).  This  colony, 
formed  against  the  command  of  God,  was  devoted  to 
complete  destruction  (Jer.  xliv.  27),  but  when  the 
connexion  was  once  formed,  it  is  probable  that  tlw 
Persians,  atting  on  the  same  policy  as  the  Pto 
lemies,  encouraged  the  settlement  of  Jews  in 


irror,  occasioned  by  the  patronymic  of  the  m<st  fci.mud 
Onias  icomp.  Hcrzfeld,  fltsch.  Jud  ii  65') 


PTOLEMAIS 

Egypt   to   keep   in   check   the   native   population. 
After  the  Return  the  spirit  of  commerce  must  have 
contributed  to  increase  the  number  of  emigrants ; 
but  the  history  of  the  Egyptian  Jews  is  involved  in 
the  same  deep  obscurity  as  that  of  the  Jews  of  Pa 
lestine  till  the  invasion  of  Alexander.     There  can 
not,  however,  be  any  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the 
power  and  influence  of  the  colony  ;  and  the  mere 
feet  of  its  existence  is  an  important  consideration  in 
estimating  the  possibility  of  Jewish  ideas  finding 
their  way  to  the  west.     Judaism  had  secured  in 
old  times  all  the  treasures  of  Egypt,  and  thus  the 
first  instalment  of  the  debt  was  repaid.     A  prepa 
ration  was  already  made  for  a  great  work  when  the 
founding  of  Alexandria  opened  a  new  era  in  the 
history  of  the  Jews.     Alexander,  according  to  the 
policy  of  all  great  conquerors,  incorporated  the  con 
quered  in  his  armies.     Samaritans  (Joseph.   Ant. 
xi.  8,  §6)  and  Jews  (Joseph.  Ant.  xi.  8,  §5 ;  Hecat. 
up.  Joseph,  c.  Ap.  i.  22)  are  mentioned  among  his 
troops ;  and  the  tradition  is  probably  true  which 
reckons  them  among  the  first  settlers  at  Alexandria 
(Joseph.  B.  J.  ii.  18,  §7 ;  c.  Ap.  ii.  4).     Ptolemy 
Soter  increased  the  colony  of  the  Jews  in  Egypt 
both   by   force   and   by   policy ;    and   their   num 
bers  in  the  next  reign  may  be  estimated  by  the 
statement  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  2,  §1)  that  Ptol.  Phi- 
ladelphus  gave  freedom  to  120,000.     The  position 
occupied  by  Joseph  (Joseph.  Ant.  xii.  4)  at  the 
court  of  Ptol.  Euergetes  I.,  implies  that  the  Jews 
were  not  only  numerous  but  influential.     As  we 
go  onwards,  the  legendary  accounts  of  the  persecu 
tion  of  Ptol.  Philopator  bear  witness  at  least  to  the 
great  number  of  Jewish  residents  in  Egypt  (3  Mace, 
iv.  15,  17),  and  to  their  dispersion  throughout  the 
Delta.     In  the  next  reign  many  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Palestine  who  remained  faithful  to  the  Egyptian 
alliance  fled  to  Egypt  to  escape  from  the  Syrian  rul 
(comp.  Jerome  ad  Dan.  xi.  14,  who  is  however 
confused  in  his  account).     The  consideration  which 
their  leaders  must  have  thus  gained,  accounts  for 
the  rank  which  a  Jew,  Aristobulus,  is  said  to  have 
held  under  Ptol.  Philometor,  as  "  tutor  of  the  king'" 
(5»5<i<r(caAos,  2  Mace.  i.  10).     The  later  history  o 
the  Alexandrine  Jews  has  been  noticed  before  (vol 
i.  p.  466).    They  retained  their  privileges  under  th< 
Romans,  though  they  were  exposed  to  the  illega 
oppression  of  individual  governors,  and  quietly  ac 
quiesced  in  the  foreign  dominion  (Joseph.  B.  J.  vii 
10,  §1).     An  attempt  which  was  made  by  some  o 
the  fugitives  from  Palestine  to  create  a  rising  in 
Alexandria  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  en 
tirely  failed ;  but  the  attempt  gave  the  Romans  an 
excuse  for  plundering,  and  afterwards  (B.C.  71)  fo 
closing  entirely  the  Temple  at  Leontopolis  (Joseph 
B.  J.  vii.  10).  [B.  F.  W.] 

PTOLEMA'IS  (riToA^afs  :  Ptolemais).  Thi 
article  is  merely  supplementary  to  that  on  ACCHO 
The  name  is  in  fact  an  intei-polation  in  th 
history  of  the  place.  The  city  which  was  calle 
Accho  in  the  earliest  Jewish  annals,  and  which  i 
again  the  Akka  or  St.  Jean  d 'Acre  of  crusadin 
and  modern  times,  was  named  Ptolemais  in  th 
Macedonian  and  Roman  periods.  In  the  former 
tnese  periods  it  was  the  most  important  town  upo 
the  coast,  and  it  is  prominently  mentioned  in  th 
first  book  of  Maccabees,  v.  15,  55,  x.  1,  58,  6C 
xii.  48.  In  the  latter  its  eminence  was  far  ou 
done  by  Herod's  new  city  of  CAESAREA.'  Still 


PUBLICAN 


967 


"  It  Is  worthy  of  notice  that  Herod,  on  his  return  fro 
Uniy  to  Syria,  laiidcdat  I'tolemais  (Joseph.  Ant-  xlv.  15,  Jl 


e  N.  T.  Ptolemais  is  a  marked  point  ii  St.  Paul's 
ravels  both  by  land  and  sea.  He  must  have 
assed  through  it  on  all  his  journeys  alonjr  the 
•eat  coast-road  which  connected  Caesarea  and  An- 
och  (Acts  xi.  30,  xii.  25,  XT.  2,  30,  xviii.  22); 
id  the  distances  are  given  both  in  the  Antonine 
id  Jerusalem  itineraries  (Wesseling,  Itin.  158, 
J4).  But  it  is  specifically  mentioned  in  Acts  xxi. 
as  containing  a  Christian  community,  visited  for 
ne  day  by  St.  Paul.  On  this  occasion  he  came  to 
tolemais  by  sea.  He  was  then  on  his  return 
oyage  from  the  third  missionary  journey.  The 
si  harbour  at  which  he  had  touched  was  Tyre 
•er.  3).  From  Ptolemais  he  proceeded,  apparently 
y  land,  to  Caesarea  (ver.  8),  and  thence  to  Jeru 
salem  (ver.  17).  [J.  S.  H.] 

PU'Adl-IS:  *ot><£:  Phua]  properly  Puvvah. 
HUVAH  the  son  of  Issachar  (Num.  xxvi.  23). 

PU'AH  (rjKIB  :  *ovd :  Phua).  1.  The  fathtr 
•  Tola,  a  man  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  and  judge 
f  Israel  after  Abimelech  (Judg.  x.  1).  In  the 
ulgate,  instead  of  "  the  son  of  Dodo,"  he  is  called 

the  uncle  of  Abimelech  ;"  and  in  the  LXX.  Tola 
s  said  to  be  "  the  son  of  Phua,  the  son  (vl6s)  of  his 
ather's  brother  ;"  both  versions  endeavouring  to 
ender  "  Dodo"  as  an  appellative,  while  the  latter 
itroduces  a  remarkable  genealogical  difficulty. 

2.  The  son  of  Issachar  (1  Cur.  vii.  1),  elsewhere 
ailed  PHUVAH  and  PUA. 

3.  (ny-1S).    One  of  the  two  midwives  to  whom 
'haraoh  gave  instructions  to  kill  the  Hebrew  male 
hildren  at  their  birth  (Ex.  i.  15).     In  the  A.  V. 
hey  are  called  "  Hebrew  midwives,"  a  rendering 
rhich  is  not  required  by  the  original,  and  which  is 
loubtful,  both  from  the  improbability  that  the  king 

would  have  entrusted  the  execution  of  such  a  task 
o  the  women  of  the  nation  he  was  endeavouring  to 
lestroy,  as  well  as  from  the  answer  of  the  women 
hemselves  in  ver.  19,  "  for  the  Hebrew  women  are 
lot  like  the  Egyptian  women ;"  from  which  we 
may  infer  that  they  were  accustomed  to  attend  upon 
the  latter,  and  were  themselves,  in  all  probability, 
Igyptians.  If  we  translate  Ex.  i.  18  'in  this  way, 
And  the  king  of  Egypt  said  to  the  women  who 
acted  as  midwives  to  the  Hebrew  women,"  this 
difficulty  is  removed.  The  two,  Shiphrah  and  Puah, 
are  supposed  to  have  been  the  chief  and  repre 
sentatives  of  their  profession  ;  as  Aben  Ezra  says, 
'  They  were  chiefs  over  all  the  midwives :  for  no 
doubt  there  were  more  than  five  hundred  midwives, 
but  these  two.  were  chiefs  over  them  to  give  tribute 
to  the  king  of  the  hire."  According  to  Jewish  tra 
dition,  Shiphrah  was  Jochebed,  and  Puah,  Miriam  ; 
because,  says  Rashi,  "  she  cried  and  talked  and 
murmured  to  the  child,  after  the  manner  of  the 
women  that  lull  a  weeping  infant."  The  origin  of 
all  this  is  a  play  upon  the  name  Puah,  which  is 
derived  from  a  root  signifying  "  to  cry  out,"  as  in 
Is.  xlii.  14,  and  used  in  Rabbinical  writers  of  the 
bleating  of  sheep.  [W.  A.  W.] 

PUBLICAN  (T6\e$v7js:  publicanus).  The 
word  thus  translated  belongs  only,  in  the  N.  T.,  to 
the  three  Synoptic  Gospels.  The  class  designated 
by  the  Greek  word  were  employed  as  collectors  of 
the  Roman  revenue.  The  Latin  word  from  which 
the  English  of  the  A.  V.  has  been  taken  was  applied 
to  a  higher  order  of  men.  It  will  be  necessaiy  to 
glance  at  the  financial  administration  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  order  to  understand  the  relation  of  the 
two  classes  to  each  other,  and  the  grounds  of  the 


P6g 


PUBLICAN 


hatred  and   scorn  which  appear   m  the  N.  T.  to 
have  fallen  on  tho  former. 

The  I  toman  senate  had  found  it  convenient,  at  a 
period  as  early  as,  if  not  earlier  than,  the  second 
Punic  war,  to  farm  the  vectijalia  (direct  taxes) 
ana  tne  portoria  (customs,  including  the  octroi 
on  goods  carried  into  or  out  of  cities)  to  capitalists 
who  undertook  to  pay  a  given  sum  into  the  trea 
sury  (in  publicurn),  and  so  received  the  name 
of  publicani  (Liv.  xxxii.  7).  Contracts  of  this  kind 
fell  naturally  into  the  hands  of  the  equites,  as  the 
richest  class  of  Romans.  Not  unfrequently  they 
went  beyond  the  means  of  any  individual  capitalist, 
and  a  joint-stock  company  (aocietas)  was  formed, 
with  one  of  the  partners,  or  an  agent  appointed  by 
them,  acting  as  managing  director  (magister  ;  Cic. 
ad  Div.  xiii.  9).  Under  this  officer,  who  resided 
commonly  at  Rome,  transacting  the  business  of  the 
company,  paying  profits  to  the  partners  and  the 
like,  were  the  sub-magistri,  living  in  the  provinces. 
Under  them,  in  like  manner,  were  the  portitores, 
the  actual  custom-house  officers  (douaniers),  who 
examined  each  bale  of  goods  exported  or  imported, 
assessed  its  value  more  or  less  arbitrarily,  wrote  out 
the  ticket,  and  enforced  payment.  The  latter  were 
commonly  natives  of  the  province  in  which  they 
were  stationed,  as  being  brought  daily  into  contact 
with  all  classes  of  the  population.  The  word 
Tf\S>vai,  which  etymologically  might  have  been 
used  of  the  pnblicani  properly  so  called  (re\ij, 
wi/foftcu),  was  used  popularly,  and  in  the  N.  T. 
exclusively,  of  the  portitores. 

The  publicani  were  thus  an  important  section  of 
the  equestrian  order.  An  orator  wishing,  for  poli 
tical  purposes,  to  court  that  order,  might  describe 
them  as  "  flos  equitum  Romanorum,  ornamentum 
civitatis,  firmamentum  Reipublicae"  (Cic.  pro 
Plane.  9).  The  system  was,  however,  essentially 
a  vicious  one,  the  most  detestable,  perhaps,  of  all 
modes  of  managing  a  revenue  (comp.  Adam  Smith, 
Wealth  of  Nations,  v.  2),  and  it  bore  its  natural 
fruits.  The  publicani  were  banded  together  to 
support  each  other's  interest,  and  at  once  resented 
and  defied  all  interference  (Liv.  xxv.  3).  They 
demanded  severe  laws,  and  put  every  such  law  into 
execution.  Their  agents,  the  portitores,  were  en 
couraged  in  the  most  vexatious  or  fraudulent  exac 
tions,  and  a  remedy  was  all  but  impossible.  The 
popular  feeling  ran  strong  even  against  the  eques 
trian  capitalists.  The  Macedonians  complained,  as 
soon  as  they  were  brought  under  Roman  govern 
ment,  that,  "  ubi  publicanus  est,  ibi  aut  jus  pub- 
licum  vanum,  aut  libertas  sociis  nulla "  (Liv.  xlv. 
18).  Cicero,  in  writing  to  his  brother  (ad  Quint, 
i.  1,  11),  speaks  of  the  difficulty  of  keeping  the 
publicani  within  bounds,  and  yet  not  offending  them, 
f»  the  hardest  task  of  the  governor  of  a  province. 
Tacitus  counted  it  as  one  bright  feature  of  the  ideal 
life  of  a  people  unlike  his  own,  that  there  "  nee 
publicanus  atterit "  (Germ.  29).  For  a  moment 
the  capricious  liberalism  of  Nero  led  him  to  enter 
tain  the  thought  of  sweeping  away  the  whole  sys 
tem  of  portoria,  but  the  conservatism  of  the  senate, 
bcrvilc  as  it  was  in  all  things  else,  rose  in  arms 
against  it,  and  the  scheme  was  dropped  (Tac.  Ann. 
ziii.  50):  and  the  "  immodestia  publicanorum " 
(i'6.)  remained  unchecked. 


PUBLICAN 

If  this  was  the  case  with  the  directors  of  the 
company,  we  may  imagine  how  it  stood  with  the 
underlings.  They  overcharged  whenever  thev  nad 
an  opportunity  (Luke  iii.  13).  They  brought  false 
charges  of  smuggling  in  the  hope  of  extorting  hush- 
money  (Luke  six.  8).  They  detained  and  opened 
letters  on  mere  suspicion  (Terent.  Phorm.  i.  2,  99  ; 
Plaut  Trinumm.  iii.  3,  64).  The  injuriae  porti- 
torum,  rather  than  the  portoria  themselves,  were 
in  most  cases  the  subject  of  complaint  (Cic.  ad 
Quint,  i.  1,  11).  It  was  the  basest  of  all  liveli 
hoods  (Cic.  de  Offic.  i.  42).  They  were  the  wolves 
and  bears  of  human  society  (Stobaeus,  Serm.  ii.  34). 
"  llavrts  TcA.cvi/ai,  iriivrfs  fipirtryes"  had  become  a 
proverb,  even  under  an  earlier  regime,  and  it  was 
truer  than  ever  now  (Xeno.  Comic,  op.  Dicaearch. 
Mcineke,  Fray.  Com.  iv.  596)." 

All  this  was  enough  to  bring  the  class  into  ill- 
favour  everywhere.  In  Judaea  and  Galilee  there 
were  special  circumstances  of  aggravation.  The 
employment  brought  out  all  the  besetting  vices  of 
the  Jewish  character.  The  strong  feeling  of  many 
Jews  as  to  the  absolute  unlawfulness  of  paying 
tribute  at  all  made  matters  worse.  The  Scribes 
who  discussed  the  question  (Matt.  xxii.  15),  for  the 
most  part  answered  it  in  the  negative.  The  fol 
lowers  of  JUDAS  of  GALILEE  had  made  this  the 
special  grievance  against  which  they  rose.  In  addi 
tion  to  their  other  faults,  accordingly,  the  Publicans 
of  the  N.  T.  were  regarded  as  traitors  and  apostates, 
defiled  by  their  frequent  intercourse  with  the  hea 
then,  willing  tools  of  the  oppressor.  They  were 
classed  with  sinners  (Matt.  ix.  11,  xi.  19),  with 
harlots  (Matt.  xxi.  31,  32),  with  the  heathen 
(Matt,  xviii.  17).  In  Galilee  they  consisted  pro 
bably  of  the  least  reputable  members  of  the  fisher 
man  and  peasant  class.  Left  to  themselves,  men 
of  decent  lives  holding  aloof  from  them,  their  only 
friends  or  companions  were  found  among  those 
who  like  themselves  were  outcasts  from  the  world's 
law.  Scribes  and  people  alike  hated  them  as  priests 
and  peasants  in  Ireland  have  hated  a  Roman  Ca 
tholic  who  took  service  in  collecting  tithes  or  evict 
ing  tenants. 

The  Gospels  present  us  with  some  instances  of 
this  feeling.  To  eat  and  drink  "  with  Publicans," 
seems  to  the  Pharisaic  mind  incompatible  with  the 
character  of  a  recognized  Rabbi  (Matt.  ix.  11). 
They  spoke  in  their  scorn  of  Our  Lord  as  the  friend 
of  Publicans  (Matt.  xi.  19).  Rabbinic  writings 
furnish  some  curious  illustrations  of  the  same  feeling. 
The  Chaldee  Targum  and  R.  Solomon  find  in  "  the 
archers  who  sit  by  the  waters  "  of  Judg.  v.  1 1,  a  de 
scription  of  the  TeKSivai  sitting  on  the  banks  of  rivers 
or  seas  in  ambush  for  the  wayfarer.  The  casuistry 
of  the  Talmud  enumerates  three  classes  of  men  with 
whom  promises  need  not  be  kept,  and  the  three  are 
murderers,  thieves,  and  publicans  (Nedar.  iii.  4).  No 
money  known  to  come  from  them  was  received  into 
the  alms-box  of  the  synagogue  or  the  Corban  of  the 
Temple  (Baba  kama,  x.  1).  To  write  a  publican's 
ticket,  or  even  to  caiTy  the  ink  for  it  on  the  sab 
bath-day  was  a  distinct  breach  of  the  commandment 
(Shabb.  viii.  2).  They  were  not  fit  to  sit  in  judg 
ment,  or  even  to  give  testimony  (Sanhedr.  f.  25,  2). 
Sometimes  there  is  an  exceptional  notice  in  their 
favour.  It  was  recorded  as  a  special  excellence  in 


Amusing  instances  of  the  continuance  of  this  feeling 
may  be  seen  In  the  extracts  from  Chrysostom  and  other 


writers,  quoted  by  Suicer,  *.  v. 


In  part  these  are 


the  Gospels ;  but  It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  they  testify 
also  to  the  never-dying  dislike  of  the  tax-payer  to  the  tix- 
collector.  Their  vehement  denunciators  stand  almost  on 


perhaps  rhetorical  amplifications  of  what  they  found  in  I  a  footing  with  Johnson's  definition  of  an  exciseman. 


PUBfJUB 

the  father  of  a  Rabbi  that,  having  been  a  publican 
fjr  thirteen  years,  lie  had  lessened  instead  of  in 
creasing  the  pressure  of  taxation  (ibid.}.*  (The 
references  are  taken,  for  the  most  part,  from  Light- 
foot.) 

The  class  thus  practieally  excommunicated  fur 
nished  some  of  the  earliest  disciples  both  of  the 
Baptist  and  of  Our  Lord.  Like  the  outlying,  so- 
called  "dangerous  classes"  of  other  times,  they 
were  at  least  free  from  hypocrisy.  Whatever  mo 
rality  they  had,  was  real  and  not  conventional.  We 
may  think  of  the  Baptist's  preaching  as  having  been 
to  them  what  Wesley's  was  to  the  colliers  of  Kings- 
wood  or  the  Cornish  minc-rs.  The  Publican  who 
L-ried  in  the  bitterness  of  his  spirit,  "  God  be  merciful 
to  me  a  sinner  "  (Luke  xviii.  13),  may  be  taken  as 
the  representative  of  those  who  had  come  under  this 
influence  (Matt.  xxi.  32).  The  Galilaean  fisher 
men  had  probably  learnt,  even  before  their  Master 
taught  them,  to  overcome  their  repugnance  to  the 
Publicans  who  with  them  had  been  sharers  in  the 
same  baptism.  The  Publicans  (Matthew  perhaps 
imong  them),  had  probably  gone  back  to  their  work 
learning  to  exact  no  more  than  what  was  appointed 
them  (Luke  iii.  13).  However  startling  the  choice 
of  Matthew  the  publican  to  be  of  the  number  of  the 
Twelve  may  have  seemed  to  the  Pharisees,  we  have 
no  trace  of  any  perplexity  or  offence  on  the  part  of 
the  disciples. 

The  position  of  Zacchaeus  as  an  apxtTf\<afi)s 
(Luke  xix.  2),  implies  a  gradation  of  some  kind 
among  the  persons  thus  employed.  Possibly  the 
balsam  trade,  of  which  Jericho  was  the  centre,  may 
have  brought  larger  profits,  possibly  he  was  one  of 
the  sub-magistri  in  immediate  communication  with 
the  Bureau  at  Rome.  That  it  was  possible  for  even 
a  Jewish  publican  to  attain  considerable  wealth,  we 
find  from  the  history  of  John  the  Te\t!)fi)s  (Joseph. 
B.  J.  ii.  14,  §4),  who  acts  with  the  leading  Jews 
and  offers  a  bribe  of  eight  talents  to  the  Procurator, 
Gessius  Floras.  The  tact  that  Jericho  was  at  this 
time  a  city  of  the  priests — 12,000  aie  said  to  have 
lived  there — gives,  it  need  hardly  be  said,  a  special 
significance  to  Our  Lord's  preference  of  the  house 
of  Zacchaeus.  [E.  H.  P.J 

PUB'LIUS  (noV\ios :  Publius).  The  chief 
man — probably  the  governor — of  Melita,  who  re 
ceived  and  lodged  St.  Paul  and  his  companions  on  the 
occasion  of  their  being  shipwrecked  off  that  island 
(Acts  xxviii.  7).  It  soon  appeared  that  he  was  en 
tertaining  an  angel  unawares,  for  St.  Paul  gave  proof 
of  his  divine  commission  by  miraculously  healing 
the  father  of  Publius  of  a  fever,  and  afterwards 
working  other  cures  on  the  sick  who  were  brought 
unto  him.  Publius  possessed  property  in  Melita : 
the  distinctive  title  given  to  him  is  "  the  first  of 
the  island ;"  and  two  inscriptions,  one  in  Greek, 
the  other  in  Latin,  have  been  found  at  Cetta  Vecchia, 
in  which  that  apparently  official  title  occurs  (Alford). 
Publius  may  perhaps  have  been  the  delegate  of  the 
Roman  praetor  of  Sicily  to  whose  jurisdiction  Melita 
or  Malta  belonged.  The  Roman  Martyrologies  assert 
that  he  was  the  first  bishop  of  the  island,  and  that 
he  was  afterwards  appointed  to  succeed  Dionysius  as 
bishop  of  Athens.  St.  Jerome  records  a  tradition  that 


PUDENS 


96& 


>>  We  have  a  singular  parallel  to  this  in  the  statues 
rta  KaAws  TeAwwjo-avTi,  mentioned  by  Suetonius,  aa 
prected  by  the  cities  of  Asia  to  Sablnus,  the  father  of 
Vespasian  (Suet.  Vesp.  1). 

o  This  Timothy  is  said  to  have  preached  the  Uospcl  in 


he  was  crowned  with  martyrdom  (De  Viris  Tllust. 
xix. ;  Baron,  i.  554).  [E.  H— s.] 

PU'DENS  (Ilofo-ns:  Pudens),  a  Christian 
friend  of  Timothy  at  Home.  St.  Paul,  writing  about 
A.D.  08,  says,  "  Eubulus  gretteth  thee,  and  Pudens, 
and  Linus,  and  Claudia"  (2  Tim.  iv.  21).  He  is 
commemorated  in  the  Byzantine  Church  on  April 
14th  ;  in  the  Roman  Church  on  May  19th.  He  is 
included  in  the  list  of  the  seventy  disciples  given 
by  Pseudo-Hippolytus.  Papebroch,  the  Bollandist 
editor  (Acta  Sanctorum,  Maii,  torn.  iv.  p.  296), 
while  printing  the  legendary  histories,  distinguishes 
between  two  saints  of  this  name,  both  Roman 
senators ;  one  the  host  of  St.  Peter  and  friend  of 
St.  Paul,  martyred  under  Nero ;  the  other,  the 
grandson  of  the  former,  living  about  A.D.  150, 
the  father  of  Novatus,  Timothy,0  Praxedis,  and 
Pudentiana,  whose  house,  iu  the  valley  between 
the  Viminal  hill  and  the  Esquiline,  served  in  his 
lifetime  for  the  assembly  of  Roman  Christians,  and 
afterwards  gave  place  to  a  church,  now  the  church 
of  S.  Pudenziana,  a  short  distance  at  the  back  of 
the  Basilica  of  Sta.  Maria  Maggiore.  Earlier  writers 
(as  Baronius,  Ann.  44,  §61 ;  Ann.  59,  §18  ;  Ann. 
162)  are  disposed  to  believe  in  the  existence  of 
one  Pudens  only. 

About  the  end  of  the  16th  century  it  was  ob 
served  (F.  de  Monceaux,  Eccl.  Christianae  veteris 
Britannicae  incunabula,  Toumay,  1614  ;  Estius,  or 
his  editor ;  Abp.  Parker,  De  Antiquit.  Britann. 
Eccl.  1605;  M.  Alford,  Annales  Ecc.  Brit.  1663; 
Camden,  Britannia,  1586)  that  Martial,  the  Spanish 
poet,  who  went  to  Rome  A.D.  66,  or  earlier,  in  his 
23rd  year,  and  dwelt  there  for  nearly  forty  years, 
mentions  two  contemporaries,  Pudens  and  Claudia, 
as  husband  and  wife  (Epig.  iv.  13) ;  that  he  men 
tions  Pudens  or  Aulus  Pudens  in  i.  32,  iv.  29, 
v.  48,  vi.  58,  vii.  11,97;  Claudia  or  Claudia  Rufina 
in  viii.  60,  xi.  53 ;  and,  it  might  be  added,  Linus, 
in  i.  76,  ii.  54,  iv.  66,  xi.  25,  xii.  49.  That  Timothy 
and  Martial  should  have  each  three  friends  bearing 
the  same  names  at  the  same  time  and  place  is  at 
least  a  very  singular  coincidence.  The  poet's  Pudens 
was  his  intimate  acquaintance,  an  admiring  critic 
of  his  epigrams,  an  immoral  man  if  judged  by  the 
Christian  rule.  He  was  an  Umbrian  and  a  soldier : 
first  he  appeal's  as  a  centurion  aspiring  to  become 
a  primipilus;  afterwards  he  is  on  military  duty  in 
the  remote  north ;  and  the  poet  hopes  that  on  his 
return  thence  he  may  be  raised  to  Equestrian  rank. 
His  wife  Claudia  is  described  as  of  British  birth, 
of  remarkable  beauty  and  wit,  and  the  mother  of  a 
flourishing  family. 

A  Latin  inscription  d  found  in  1723  at  Chichestcr 
connects  a  [Pudjcns  with  Britain  and  with  the  Clau- 
dian  name.  It  commemorates  the  erection  of  a 
temple  by  a  guild  of  carpenters,  with  th*  sanction 
of  King  Tiberius  Claudius  Cogidubnus,  the  site  oemg 
the  gift  of  [Pudjens  the  son  of  Pudentinus.  Cogi 
dubnus  was  a  native  king  appointed  and  supported 
by  Rome  (Tac.  Agricola,  14).  He  reigned  with 
delegated  power  probably  from  A.D.  52  to  A.D.  76. 
If  he  had  a  daughter  she  would  inherit  the  name 
Claudia  and  might,  perhaps  as  a  hostage,  be  educated 
at  Rome. 


d  "  [NJeptuno  et  Minervae  templum  [pr]o  salute  domus 
divinae,  auctoritate  Tiberii  Claudii  [Cojgldubni  regis  legati 
augusti  In  Brit,  [colle]glum  fabrorum  et  qui  in  eo  [a  sacris 
sunt]  de  suo  dedicaverunt,  donante  aream  [Pudjente,  Puden- 
tini  filio."  A  corner  of  the  stone  was  broken  off,  and  tha 
letters  within  brackets  have  been  inserted  on  oonjcctii'  fc. 


970 


PUH1TES,  THE 


Another  link  seems  to  connect  the  Romanising 
Britons  of  that  time  with  Claudia  Hufina  and  with 
Christianity  (see  Musgrave,  quoted  by  Fabricius, 
Lux  Evangelii,  p.  702).  The  wife  of  Aulus  Plau- 
tius,  who  commanded  in  Britain  from  A.D.  43  to 
A.D.  52,  was  Pomponia  Graecina,  and  the  Rufi  were 
a  branch  of  her  house.  She  was  accused  at  Rome, 
A.D.  57,  on  a  capital  charge  of  "  foreign  supersti 
tion;"  was  acquitted,  and  lived  for  nearly  forty 
years  in  a  state  of  austere  and  mysterious  melan 
choly  (Tac.  Ann.  xiii.  32).  We  know  from  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  (xvi.  13)  that  the  Rufi  were 
well  represented  among  the  Roman  Christians  in 
A.D.  58. 

Modern  researches  among  the  Columbaria  at  Rome 
appropriated  to  members  of  the  Imperial  household 
have  brought  to  light  an  inscription  in  which  the 
name  of  Pudens  occurs  as  that  of  a  servant  of 
Tiberius  or  Claudius  (Journal  of  Classical  and  Sacred 
Philology,  iv.  76). 

On  the  whole,  although  the  identity  of  St.  Paul's 
Pudens  with  any  legendaiy  or  heathen  namesake  is 
not  absolutely  proved,  yet  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  these  facts  add  nothing  to  our  knowledge  of 
the  friend  of  Paul  and  Timothy.  Future  discoveria 
may  go  beyond  them,  and  decide  the  question.  They 
are  treated  at  great  length  in  a  pamphlet  entitled 
Claudia  and  Pudens,  by  Archdeacon  Williams, 
Llandovery,  1848,  pp.  58 ;  and  more  briefly  by 
Dean  Alford,  Greek  Testament,  iii.  104,  ed.  1856 ; 
and  by  Conybeare  and  Howson,  Life  of  St.  Paul, 
ii.  594,  ed.  1858.  They  are  ingeniously  woven  into 
a  pleasing  romance  by  a  writer  in  the  Quarterly 
Review,  vol.  97,  pp.  100-105.  See  also  Ussher, 
Eccl.  Brit.  Antiquitates,  §3,  and  Stillingfleet's  An 
tiquities.  [W.  T.  B.] 

PU'HITES,  THE  ('JVIBn :  VLiQiOlp ;  Alex. 
'H(p i0tiv :  Aphuthei).  According  to  1  Chr.  ii.  53, 
the  "  Puhites  "  or  "  Puthites  "  belonged  to  the 
families  of  Kirjath-jearim.  There  is  a  Jewisn  tradi 
tion,  embodied  in  the  Targum  of  R.  Joseph,  that 
these  families  of  Kirjath-jearim  were  the  sons  of 
Moses  whom  Zipporah  bare  him,  and  that  from 
them  were  descended  the  disciples  of  the  prophets 
of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 

PUL  (>1S:  *ou5;  some  codd.  #oM:  Africa}, 
a  country  or  nation  once  mentioned,  if  the  Masoretic 
text  be  here  correct,  in  the  Bible  (Is.  Ixvi.  19). 
The  name  is  the  same  as  that  of  Pul,  king  of  Assyria. 
It  is  spoken  of  with  distant  nations :  "  the  nations 
(D?ian),  [to]  Tarshish,  Pul,  and  Lud,  that  draw 

the  bow,  [to]  Tubal,  and  Javan,  [to]  the  isles 
afar  off."  If  a  Mizraite  Lud  be  intended  [Luo, 
LDDIM],  Pul  may  be  African.  It  has  accordingly 
been  compared  by  Bochart  (Phaleg,  iv.  26)  and  J.  D. 
Michaelis  (Spicileg.  i.  256 ;  ii.  114)  with  the  island 

Philae,  called  in  Coptic  IieX<LK,    lUX^K, 

lUX^-K^  ;  the  hieroglyphic  name  being  EELEK, ' 
P-EELEK,  EELEK-T.  If  it  be  not  African,  the 
identity  with  the  king's  name  is  to  be  noted,  as  we 
find  Shishak  (ptJ"^)  as  the  name  of  a  king  of  Egypt 
cf  Babylonian  or  Assyrian  race,  and  Sheshak 
dfyV?'),  which  some  rashly  take  to  be  artificially 
tbrmed  after  the  cabbalistic  manner  from  Babel 


PUL 

(732),  for  Bahylou  itself,  the  difference  in  the  final 
letter  probably  arising  from  the  former  name  being 
taken  from  the  Egyptian  SHESHENK.  In  the  lin* 
of  Shishak,  the  name  TAKELAT  has  been  com 
pared  by  Birch  with  forms  of  that  of  the  Tigris 


which  Gesenius  has  thought  to  be  identical 

with  the  first  part  of  the  name  of  Tiglath  Pileser 
(Thes.  s.  v.). 

The  common  LXX.  reading  suggests  that  the  Heb. 
had  originally  Phut  (Put)  in  this  place,  although  w>. 
must  remember,  as  Gesenius  observes  (Thes.  s.  \. 
7-1S),  that  *OTA  could  be  easily  changed  to  +OTA 
by  the  error  of  a  copyist.  Yet  in  three  other  places 
Put  and  Lud  occur  together  (Jer.  xlvi.  9  ;  Ez.  xxvii. 
10,  xxx.  5).  [LODiM.]  The  circumstance  that  this 
name  is  mentioned  with  names  or  designations  of  im 
portance,  makes  it  nearly  certain  that  some  great  and 
well-known  country  or  people  is  intended.  The  balance 
of  evidence  is  therefore  almost  decisive  in  favour  of 
the  African  Phut  or  Put.  [PHUT.]  [R.  S.  P.] 


PUL  (-1B:  *ouA,  *oA<6x:'  ^«f)  was  an 
Assyrian  king,  and  is  the  first  of  those  monarchs 
mentioned  in  Scripture.  He  made  an  expedition 
against  Menahem,  king  of  Israel,  about  B.C.  770. 
Menahem  appears  to  have  inherited  a  kingdom 
which  was  already  included  among  the  depen 
dencies  of  Assyria  ;  for  as  early  as  B.C.  884,  Jehu 
gave  tribute  to  Shalmaneser,  the  Black-Obelisk 
king  (see  vol.  i.  p.  1296),  and  if  Judaea  was,  as 
she  seems  to  have  been,  a  regular  tributary  from 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of1  Amaziah  (B.C.  838;, 
Samaria,  which  lay  between  Judaea  and  Assyria, 
can  scarcely  have  been  independent.  Under  the 
Assyrian  system  the  monarchs  of  tributary  king 
doms,  on  ascending  the  throne,  applied  for  "con 
firmation  in  their  kingdoms  "  to  the  Lord  Para 
mount,  and  only  became  established  on  receiving 
it.  We  may  gather  from  2  K.  xv.  19,  20,  that 
Menahem  neglected  to  make  any  such  application 
to  his  liege  lord-,  Pul  —  a  neglect  which  would  have 
been  regarded  as  a  plain  act  of  rebellion.  Possibly, 
he  was  guilty  of  more  overt  and  flagrant  hostility. 
"Menahem  smote  Tiphsah"  (2  K.  xv.  16),  we  are 
told.  Now  if  this  Tiphsah  is  the  same  with  the 
Tiphsah  of  1  K.  iv.  24,  which  is  certainly  Thapsacus, 
—  and  it  is  quite  a  gratuitous  supposition  to  hold 
that  there  were  two  Tiphsahs  (Winer,  Realub.,  ii. 
613),  —  we  must  regard  Menahem  as  having 
attacked  the  Assyrians,  and  deprived  them  for  a 
while  of  their  dominion  west  of  the  Euphrates, 
recovering  in  this  direction  the  boundary  fixed  for 
his  kingdom  by  Solomon  (1  K.  iv.  24).  However 
this  may  have  been,  it  is  evident  that  Pul  looked 
upon  Menahem  as  a  rebel.  He  consequently  marched 
an  army  into  Palestine  for  the  purpose  of  punishing 
his  revolt,  when  Menahem  hastened  to  make  his 
submission,  and  having  collected  by  means  of  a  poll- 
tax  the  large  sum  of  a  thousand  talents  of  go'd,  he 
paid  it  over  to  the  Assyrian  monarch,  who  con 
sented  thereupon  to  "  confirm  "  him  as  king.  This 
is  ail  that  Scripture  tells  us  of  Pul.  The  Assyrian 
monuments  have  a  king,  whose  name  is  read  very 
doubtfully  as  Vul-lush  or  Iva-lush,  at  about  tbr 


Other  readings  of  this  name  are  tovci,  *oi>Aa,  and        *>  This  is  perhaps  implied  in  the  words  "  the  kinprtor 

iwit  conjirmed  in  his  hand  "  (2  K.  xiv.  5  ,  couip.  xv.  10). 


PULSE 

period  when  Pul  must  have  reigned.  This  monarch 
is  the  grandson  of  Shalmaneser  (the  Black  Obelisk 
king,  who  warred  with  Benhadad  and  Hazael,  and 
took  tribute  from  Jehu),  while  he  is  certainly  an 
terior  to  the  whole  line  of  monarchs  forming  the 
lower  dynasty — Tiglath-pileser,  Shalmaneser,  Sar- 
gon,  &c.  His  probable  date  therefore  is  B.C.  800-750, 
while  Pul,  as  we  have  seen,  ruled  over  Assyria  in 
B.C.  770.  The  Hebrew  nair.e  Pul  is  undoubtedly 
curtailed  ;  for  no  Assyrian  name  consists  of  a  single 
element.  If  we  take  the  "  Phalos  "  or  "  Phaloch  " 
of  the  Septuagint  as  probably  nearer  to  the  original 
type,  we  have  a  form  not  very  different  from  Vul- 
lush  or  Iva-lush.  If,  on  these  grounds,  the  identi 
fication  of  the  Scriptural  Pul  with  the  monumental 
Vul-lush  be  regarded  as  established,  we  may  give 
some  further  particulars  of  him  which  possess  con 
siderable  interest.  Vul-lush.  reigned  at  Calah 
(Nimntd)  from  about  B.C.  800  to  B.C.  750.  He 
states  that  he  made  an  expedition  into  Syria,  wherein 
he  took  Damascus  ;  and  that  he  received  .  tribute 
from  the  Medes,  Armenians,  Phoenicians,  Samaritans, 
Damascenes,  Philistines,  and  Edomites.  He  also 
tells  us  that  he  invaded  Babylonia  and  received  the 
submission  of  the  Chaldeans.  His  wife,  who  appears 
to  have  occupied  a  position  of  more  eminence  than 
any  other  wife  of  an  Assyrian  monarch,  bore  the 
name  of  Semiramis,  and  is  thought  to  be  at  once 
the  Babylonian  queen  of  Herodotus  (i.  184),  who 
lived  six  generations  before  Cyrus,  and  the  pro 
totype  of  that  earlier  sovereign  of  whom  Ctesias 
told  such  wonderful  stories  (Diod.  Sic.  ii.  4-20), 
and  who  long  maintained  a  great  local  reputation 
in  Western  Asia  (Strab.  xvi.  1,  §2).  It  is  not  im 
probable  that  the  real  Semiramis  was  a  Babylonian 
princess,  whom  Vul-lusk  married  on  his  reduction 
of  the  country,  and  whose  son  Nabonassar  (accord 
ing  to  a  further  conjecture)  he  placed  upon  the 
Babylonian  throne.  He  calls  himself  in  one  inscrip 
tion  "  the  monarch  to  whose  son  Asshur,  the  chief 
of  the  gods,  has  granted  the  kingdom  of  Babylon." 
He  was  probably  the  last  Assyrian  monarch  of  his 
race.  The  list  of  Assyrian  monumental  kings,  which 
is  traceable  without  a  break  and  in  a  direct  line  to 
him  from  his  seventh  ancestor,  here  comes  to  a  stand ; 
no  son  of  Vitl-lush  is  found;  and  Tiglath-pileser, 
who  seems  to  have  been  Vul-'.ush's  successor,  is 
evidently  a  usurper,  since  he  makes  no  mention  of 
his  father  or  ancestors.  The  circumstances  of  Vul- 
lush's  death,  and  of  the  revolution  which  established 
the  lower  Assyrian  dynasty,  are  almost  wholly  un 
known,  no  account  of  them  having  come  down  to 
us  upon  any  good  authority.  Not  much  value  can 
be  attached  to  the  statement  in  Agathias  (ii.  25, 
p.  119)  that  the  last  king  of  the  upper  dynasty  was 
succeeded  by  his  own  gardener.  [G.  K.] 

PULSE  (D'JTIT,  zeroim,  and  D^'yiT,  zer'onim : 
Sirirpta;  Theod.  ffirtp/j.ara:  leguminae)  occurs  only 
in  the  A.  V.  in  Dan.  i.  12, 16,  as  the  translation  of 
the  above  plural  nouns,  the  literal  meaning  of  which 
is  "  seeds "  of  any  kind.  The  zeroim  on  which 
"  the  four  children  "  thrived  for  ten  days  is  perhaps 
not  to  be  restricted  to  what  we  now  understand  by 
"  pulse,"  i.  e.  the  grains  of  leguminous  vegetables: 
tne  term  proiably  includes  edible  seeds  in  general. 
G<5enius  translates  the  words  "  vegetables,  herbs, 
such  as  are  eaten  in  a  half-fast,  as  opposed  to  flesh 
ond  more  delicate  food."  Probably  the  term  denotes 
riicooked  grains  of  any  kind,  whether  baa-ley,  wheat, 

[W.H.] 


PUNISHMENTS 


971 


imllet,  veicnes,  &c. 
PUNISHMENTS. 


The   earliest    theory   of 


punishment  current  among  mankind  is  doubtless 
the  one  of  simple  retaliation,  "blood  for  blool" 
[BLOOD,  REVENGER  OF],  a  view  which  in  a 
limited  form  appears  even  in  the  Mosaic  law. 
Viewed  historically,  the  first  case  of  punishment 
for  crime  mentioned  in  Scripture,  next  to  the  Fall 
itself,  is  that  of  Cain  the  first  murderer.  His  pun 
ishment,  however,  was  a  substitute  for  the  retalia 
tion  which  might  have  been  looked  for  from  the 
hand  of  man,  and  the  mark  set  on  him,  whatever  it 
was,  served  at  once  to  designate,  protect,  and  per 
haps  con-ect  the  criminal.  That  death  was  regarded 
as  the  fitting  punishment  for  murder  appears  plain 
from  the  remark  of  Lamech  (Gen.  iv.  24).  In  the 
post-diluvian  code,  if  we  may  so  call  it,  retribution 
by  the  hand  of  man,  even  in  the  case  of  an  offend 
ing  animal,  for  blood  shed,  is  clearly  laid  down 
(Gen.  ix.  5,  6) ;  but  its  terms  give  no  sanction  to 
that  "wild  justice"  executed  even  to  the  present 
day  by  individuals  and  families  on  their  own  behalf 
by  so  many  of  the  uncivilized  races  of  mankind. 
The  prevalence  of  a  feeling  of  retribution  due  for 
bloodshed  may  be  remarked  as  arising  among  the 
brethren  of  Joseph  in  reference  to  their  virtual  fra 
tricide  (Gen.  xlii.  21). 

Passing  onwards  to  Mosaic  times,  we  find  the 
sentence  of  capital  punishment,  in  the  case  of  murder, 
plainly  laid  down  in  the  law.  The  murderer  was 
to  be  put  to  death,  even  if  he  should  have  taken 
refuge  at  God's  altar  or  in  a  refuge  city,  and  the 
same  principle  was  to  be  canned  out  even  in  the 
case  of  an  animal  (Ex.  xxi.  12, 14,  28,  36  ;  Lev.  xxiv. 
17,21;  Num.  xxxv.  31;  Deut.  six.  11, 12  :  and  see 
1  K.  ii.  28,  34). 

I.  The  following  offences  also  are  mentioned  in 
the  Law  as  liable  to  the  punishment  of  death : 

1.  Striking,  or  even  reviling,  a  parent  (Ex.  xxi. 

15,  17). 

2.  Blasphemy  (Lev.  xxiv.  14,  16,  23:  see  Philo, 
V.  M.  iii.  25  ;  1  K.  xxi.  10  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  65,  66). 

3.  Sabbath-breaking  (Num.  xv.  32-36  ;  Ex.  x«i. 
14,  xxxv.  2). 

4.  Witchcraft,  and  false  pretension  to  prophecy 
(Ex.  xxii.  18;   Lev.  xx.  27;   Deut.  xiii.  5,  xviii. 
20  ;  1  Sam.  xxviii.  9). 

5.  Adultery  (Lev.  xx.  10;  Deut.  xxii.  22:  see 
John  viii.  5,  and  Joseph.  Ant.  iii.  12,  §1). 

6.  Unchastity,  a.  previous  to  marriage,  but  de 
tected  afterwards  (Deut.  xxii.  21).    b.  In  a  betrothed 
woman  with  some  one  not  affianced  to  her  (ib.  ver. 
23).  c.  In  a  priest's  daughter  (Lev.  xxi.  9). 

7.  Rape  (Deut.  xxii.  25). 

8.  Incestuous  and   unnatural   connexions   (Lev. 
xx.  11,  14,  16;  Ex.  xxii.  19). 

9.  Man-stealing  (Ex.  xxi.  16;  Deut.  xxiv.  7). 

10.  Idolatry,  actual  or  virtual,    in  any   shape 
(Lev.  xx.  2;  Deut.  xiii.  6,  10,  15,  xvii.  2-7:  see 
Josh.  vii.  and  xxii.  20,  and  Num.  xxv.  8). 

11.  False  witness  in  certain   cases   (Deut.  xix. 

16,  19). 

Some  of  the  foregoing  are  menticoed  as  being  ia 
earlier  times  liable  to  capital  or  severe  punishment 
by  the  hand  either  of  God  or  of  man,  as  (6.)  Gen. 
xxxviii.  24;  (1.)  Gen.  ix.  25;  (8.)  Gen.  xix., 
xxxviii.  10;  (5.)  Gen.  xii.  17,  xx.  7,  xxxix.  19. 

II.  But  there  is  a  large  number  of  offences,  sonx 
of  them  included  in  this  list,  which  are  named  in  the 
Law  as  involving  the  penalty  of  "  cutting  •  off  from 
the  people."  On  the  meaning  of  this  expression 


972 


PUNISHMENTS 


some  controversy  has  arisen.  There  are  altogether 
thirty-six  or  thirty-seven  cases  in  the  Pentateuch  in 
which  this  formula  is  used,  which  may  be  thus 
classified :  a.  Breach  of  Morals.  6.  Breach  of  Co 
venant,  c.  Breach  of  Ritual. 

1.  Wilful  sin  in  general  (Num.  xv.  30,  31). 
*15  cases   of  incestuous  or  unclean   connexion 

»Lev.  xviii.  29,  and  xx.  9-21). 

2.  *fUncircumcision  (Gen.  xvii.  14;  Ex.  iv.  24). 

Neglect  of  Passover  (Num.  ix.  13). 
*Sabbath-breaking  (Ex.  xxxi.  14). 
Neglect  of  Atonement-day  (Lev.  xxiii.  29). 
fWork  done  on  that  day  (Lev.  xxiii.  30). 
'•(•Children  offered  to  Molcch  (Lev.  xx.  3). 
*f  Witchcraft  (Lev.  xx.  6). 

Anointing  a  stranger  with  holy  oil  (Ex. 

xxx.  33). 
3.     Eating  leavened  bread  during  Passover  (Ex. 

xii.  15,  19). 

Eating  fat  of  sacrifices  (Lev.  vii.  25). 
Eating  blood  (Lev.  vii.  27,  xvii.  14). 
*Eating  sacrifice  in   an  unclean   condition 

(Lev.  vii.  20,  21,  xxii.  3,  4,  9). 
Offering  too  late  (Lev.  xix.  8). 
Making   holy    ointment   for   private    use 

(Ex.  xxx.  32,  33). 
Making   perfume   for    private    use    (Ex. 

j  KX.  38). 
Neglect  of  purification  in  general  (Num. 

y\.  13,  20). 
Not  bringing  offering  after  slaying  a  beast 

for  food  (Lev.  xvii.  9). 
Not  slaying  the  animal  at  the  tabernacle- 
door  (Lev.  xvii.  4). 

*fTouching  holy  things  illegally  (Num.  iv. 
15, 18,  20  :  and  see  2  Sam.  vi.  7  ;  2  Chr. 
xxvi.  21). 

In  the  foregoing  list,  which,  it  will  be  seen,  is 
classified  according  to  the  view  supposed  to  be  taken 
by  the  Law  of  the  principle  of  condemnation,  the 
cases  marked  with  *  are  (a)  those  which  are  ex 
pressly  threatened  or  actually  visited  with  death, 
as  well  as  with  cutting  off.  In  those  (6)  marked 
t  the  hand  of  God  is  expressly  named  as  the  instru 
ment  of  execution.  We  thus  find  that  of  (a)  there 
are  in  class  1,  7  cases,  all  named  in  Lev.  xx.  9-16. 
do.  2,  4  cases, 
do.  3,  2  cases, 

while  of  (6)  we  find  in  class  2,  4  cases,  of  which 
3  belong  also  to  (a),  and  in  class  3,  1  case.  The 
question  to  be  determined  is,  whether  the  phrase 
"  cut  off"  be  likely  to  mean  death  in  all  cases,  and 
to  avoid  that  conclusion  Le  Clerc,  Michaelis,  and 
others,  have  suggested  that  in  some  cf  them,  the 
ceremonial  ones,  it  was  intended  to  be  commuted 
for  banishment  or  privation  of  civil  rights  (Mich. 
Laws  of  Moses,  §237,  vol.  iii.  p.  436,  trans.). 
Rabbinical  writers  explained  "  cutting  off"  to  mean 
excommunication,  and  laid  down  three  degrees  of 
severity  as  belonging  to  it  (Selden,  de  Sijn.  i.  6). 
[ANATHEMA.]  But  most  commentators  agree,  that, 
in  accordance  with  the  prinid  facie  meanmg  of  Heb. 
x.  28,  the  sentence  of  "cutting  off"  must  be  under 
stood  to  be  death-punishment  of  some  sort.  Saal- 
nchiitz  explains  it  to  be  premature  death  by  God's 
hand,  as  if  God  took  into  his  own  hand  such  cases 
of  ceremonial  defilement  as  would  create  difficulty 
for  human  judges  to  decide.  Knobel  thinks  death- 
punishment  absolutely  is  meant.  So  Cora,  a  La- 
pide  and  Ewald.  Jahn  explains,  that  when  God 
is  said  to  cut  off,  an  act  of  divine  Providence  is 


PUNISHMENTS 

meant,  which  in  the  end  destroys  the  family,  but 
that  "  cutting  off "  in  general  means  stoning  to 
death  as  the  usual  capital  punishment  of  the  Law. 
Calmet  thinks  it  means  privation  of  all  rights  be 
longing  to  the  Covenant.  It  may  be  remarked, 
(a)  that  two  instances  are  recorded,  in  which  viola 
tion  of  a  ritual  command  took  place  without  the 
actual  infliction  of  a  death-punishment :  (I.)  that  of 
the  people  eating  with  the  blood  (1  Sam.  xiv.  32) ; 
(2.)  that  of  Uzziah  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  19,  21)— and  that 
in  the  latter  case  the  offender  was  in  fact  excom 
municated  for  life ;  (6),  that  there  are  also  instances 
of  the  directly  contrary  course,  viz.  in  which  the 
offenders  were  punished  with  death  for  similar 
offences, — Nadab  and  Abihu  (Lev.  x.  1,  2),  Korah 
and  his  company  (Num.  xvi.  10,  33),  who  "  pe 
rished  from  the  congregation,"  Uzzah  (2  Sam.  vi. 
7), — and  further,  that  the  leprosy  inflicted  on  Uzziah 
might  be  regarded  as  a  virtual  death  (Num.  xii.  12). 
To  whichever  side  of  the  question  this  case  may  be 
thought  to  incline,  wo  may  perhaps  conclude  that 
the  primary  meaning  of  "  cutting  off"  is  a  sentence 
of  death  to  be  executed  in  some  cases  without  remis 
sion,  but  in  others  voidable:  (1.)  by  immediate 
atonement  on  the  offender's  part ;  (2.)  by  direct  in 
terposition  of  the  Almighty,  f.  e.  a  sentence  of 
death  always  "  recorded,"  but  not  always  executed. 
And  it  is  also  probable,  that  the  severity  of  the 
sentence  produced  in  practice  an  immediate  recourse 
to  the  prescribed  means  of  propitiation  in  almost 
every  actual  case  of  ceremonial  defilement  (Num. 
xv.  27,  28 ;  Saalschutz,  Arch.  Hebr.  x.  74,  75,  vol. 
ii.  299;  Knobel,  Calmet,  Com.  a  Lapide  on  Gen. 
xvii.  13,  14;  Keil,  Bibl.  Arch.  vol.  ii.  264,  §153; 
Ewald,  Gcsch.  App.  to  vol.  iii.  p.  158 ;  Jahn,  Arch, 
liibl.  §257). 

III.  Punishments  in  themselves  are  twofold, 
Capital  and  Secondary. 

(a.)  Of  the  former  kind,  the  following  only  are 
prescribed  by  the  Law.  (1.)  Stoning,  which  was 
the  ordinary  mode  of  execution  (Ex.  xvii.  4 ;  Luke 
xx.  6 ;  John  x.  31 ;  Acts  xiv.  5).  We  find  it 
ordered  iu  the  cases  which  are  marked  in  the  lists 
above  as  punishable  with  death ;  and  we  may  re 
mark  further,  that  it  is  ordered  also  in  the  case  of 
an  offending  animal  (Ex.  xxi.  29,  and  xix.  13). 
The  false  witness  also  in  a  capital  case  would  by  the 
law  of  retaliation  become  liable  to  death  (Deut.  xix. 
19  ;  Maccotfi,  i.  1,  6).  In  the  case  of  idolatry,  and 
it  may  be  presumed  in  other  cases  also,  the  wit 
nesses,  of  whom  there  were  to  be  at  least  two,  were 
required  to  cast  the  first  stone  (Deut.  xiii.  9, 
xvii.  7  ;  John  viii.  7 ;  Acts  vii.  58).  The  Rab 
binical  writers  add,  that  the  first  stone  was  cast 
by  one  of  them  on  the  chest  of  the  convict,  and  if 
this  failed  to  cause  death,  the  bystanders  proceeded 
to  complete  the  sentence  (Sanhedr.  vi.  1,  3,  4; 
Goodwyn,  Moses  and  Aaron,  p.  121).  The  body 
was  then  to  be  suspended  till  sunset  (Deut.  xxi.  -!M  ; 
Josh.  x.  26;  Joseph.  Ant.  iv.  8,  §24),  and  not 
buried  in  the  family  grave  (SanJtedr.  vi.  5). 

(2.)  Hanging  is  mentioned  as  a  distinct  punish 
ment  (Num.  xxv.  4;  2  Sam.  xxi.  6,  9);  but  is 
generally,  in  the  case  of  Jews,  spoken  of  as  follow 
ing  death  by  some  other  means. 

(3.)  Burning,  in  pre-Mosaic  times,  was  the 
punishment  for  unchastity  (Gen.  xxxviii.  -'4 '. 
Under  the  Law  it  is  ordered  in  the  case  of  a  priest's 
daughter  (Lev.  xxi.  9),  of  which  an  instance  is 
mentioned  (Sanhedr.  vii.  2).  Also  in  case  of  incest 
(Lev.  xx.  14)  ;  but  it  is  also  mentioned  as  following 
death  by  other  means  (Josh.  rii.  25),  and  soun 


PUNISHMENTS 

have  thought  it  was  never  used  excepting  after 
death.  A  tower  of  burning  embers  is  mentioned 
in  2  Mace.  xiii.  4-8.  The  Rabbinical  account  of 
burning  by  means  of  molten  lead  poured  down  the 
throat  has  no  authority  in  Scripture. 

(4.)  Death  by  the  sword  or  spear  is  named  in  the 
Law  (Ex.  xix.  13,  xxxii.  27;  Num.  xxv.  7;)  but 
two  of  the  cases  may  be  regarded  as  exceptional ; 
but  it  occurs  frequently  in  regal  and  post-Baby 
lonian  times  (IK.  ii.  25,  34,  xix.  1 ;  2  Chr.  xxi.  4, 
Jer.  xxvi.  23  ;  2  Sam.  i.  15,  iv.  12,  xx.  22  ;  1  Sam. 
xv.  33,  xxii.  18 ;  Judg.  ix.  5 ;  2  K.  x.  7 ;  Matt. 
xiv.  8,  10),  a  list  in  which  more  than  one  case  of 
assassination,  either  with  or  without  legal  forms,  is 
included. 

(5.)  Strangling  is  said  by  the  Rabbins  to  have 
been  regarded  as  the  most  common  but  least  severe 
of  the  capital  punishments,  and  to  have  been  per 
formed  by  immersing  the  convict  in  clay  or  mud, 
and  then  strangling  him  by  a  cloth  twisted  round 
the  neck  (Goodwyn,  M.  and  A.  p.  122  ;  Otho,  Lex. 
Rab.  B.  v.  "  Supplicia ; "  Sanhedr.  vii.  3  ;  Ker  Por 
ter,  Trav.  ii.  177 ;  C. .  B.  Michaelis,  De  Judiciis, 
ap.  Pott,  St/ll.  Comm.  iv.  §10,  12). 

This  Rabbinical  opinion,  founded,  it  is  said,  on 
oral  tradition  from  Moses,  has  no  Scripture  au 
thority. 

(6.)  Besides  these  ordinary  capital  punishments, 
we  read  of  others,  either  of  foreign  introduction  or 
of  an  irregular  kind.  Among  the  former,  (1.) 
CRUCIFIXION  is  treated  alone  (vol.  i.  p.  369),  to 
which  article  the  following  remark  may  be  added, 
that  the  Jewish  tradition  of  capital  punishment, 
independent  of  the  Roman  governor,  being  inter 
dicted  for  forty  years  previous  to  the  Destruction, 
appeai-s  in  fact,  if  not  in  time,  to  be  justified 
(John  xviii.  31,  with  De  Wette's  Comment.  ; 
Goodwyn,  p.  121;  Keil,  ii.  p.  264;  Joseph.  Ant. 
xx.  9,  §1). 

(2.)  Drowning,  though  net  ordered  under  the 
Law,  was  practised  at  Rome,  and  is  said  by  St. 
Jerome  to  have  been  in  use  among  the  Jews  (Cic. 
pro  Sext.  Rose.  Am.  25 ;  Jerome,  Cam.  on  Matth. 
lib.  iii.  p.  138  ;  Matt,  xviii.  6  ;  Mark  ix.  42). 

(3.)  Sawing  asunder  or  crushing  beneath  iron 
instruments.  The  former  is  said  to  have  been  prac 
tised  on  Isaiah.  The  latter  may  perhaps  not  have 
always  caused  death,  and  thus  have  been  a  torture 
rather  than  a  capital  punishment  (2  Sam.  xii.  31, 
and  perhaps  Prov.  xx.  26  ;  Heb.  xi.  37  ;  Just.  Mail. 
Tryph.  120).  The  process  of  sawing  asunder,  as 
practised  in  Barbaiy,  is  described  by  Shaw  ( Trav. 
p.  2S4). 

(4).  Pounding  in  a  mortar,  or  beating  to  death, 
is  alluded  to  in  Prov.  xxvii.  22,  but  not  as  a  legal 
punishment,  and  cases  are  described  (2  Mace.  vi. 
28,  30).  Pounding  in  a  mortar  is  mentioned  as  a 
Cingalese  punishment  by  Sir  E.  Tennant  (Ceylon, 
ii.  88). 

(5.)  Precipitation,  attempted  in  the  case  of  our 
Lord  at  Nazareth,  and  carried  out  in  that  of 
captives  from  the  Edomites,  and  of  St.  James,  who 
is  said  to  have  been  cast  from  "  the  pinnacle  "  of 
the  Temple.  Also  it  is  said  to  have  been  executed 
on  some  Jewish  women  by  the  Syrians  (2  Mace, 
vi.  10  ;  Luke  iv.  29  ;  Euseb.  H.  E.  ii.  23  ;  2  Chr. 
xxv.  12). 

Criminals  executed  by  law  were  buried  outside 
the  city -gates,  and  heaps  of  stones  were  flung  upon 
their  graves  (Josh.  vii.  25,  26  :  2  Sam.  xviii.  17  ; 
Jei.  xxii.  19).  Mohammedans  to  this  day  cast 
stoats,  ::i  passing,  at  thn  supposed  tomb  of  Absalom 


PUNISHMENTS 


97S 


(Fabri,   Evagatorium,  i.  409 ;   Sandys,    Trav.  p 
189  ;  Raumer,  Palaest.  p.  272). 

(c.)  Of  secondary  punishments  among  the  Jew* 
the  original  principles  were,  (1.)  retaliation,  "  eye 
for  eye,"  &c.  (Ex.  xxi.  24,  25  ;  see  Cell.  Noct.  Ati. 
xx.  1). 

(2.)  Compensation,  identical  (restitution)  or  ana 
logous  ;  payment  for  loss  of  time  or  of  power  (Ex. 
xxi.  18-36  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  18-21 ;  Deut.  xix.  21).  The 
man  who  stole  a  sheep  or  an  ox  was  required  to 
restore  four  sheep  for  a  sheep  and  five  oxen  for  an 
ox  thus  stolen  (Ex.  xxii.  1).  The  thief  caught  in 
the  fact  in  a  dwelling  might  even  be  killed  or  sold, 
or  if  a  stolen  animal  wert  found  alive,  he  might  be 
compelled  to  restore  double  (Ex.  xxii.  2-4).  Damage 
done  by  an  animal  was  to  be  fully  compensated 
(ib.  ver.  5).  Fire  caused  to  a  neighbour's  corn  was 
to  be  compensated  (ver.  6).  A  pledge  stolen,  and 
found  in  the  thief's  possession,  was  to  be  com 
pensated  by  double  (ver.  7).  All  trespass  was  to 
pay  double  (ver.  9).  A  pledge  lost  or  damage  i 
was  to  be  compensated  (ver.  12,  13).  A  pledge 
withheld,  to  be  restored  with  20  per  cent,  of  the 
value  (Lev.  vi.  4,  5).  The  "  seven-fold  "  of  Prov. 
vi.  31,  by  its  notion  of  completeness,  probably  in 
dicates  servitude  in  default  of  full  restitution  (Ex. 
xxii.  2-4).  Slander  against  a  wife's  honour  was 
to  be  compensated  to  her  parents  by  a  fine  of  1 00 
shekels,  and  the  traducer  himself  to  be  punished 
with  stripes  (Deut.  xxii.  18,  19). 

(3.)  Stripes,  whose  number  was  not  to  exceed 
forty  (Deut.  xxv.  3) ;  whence  the  Jews  took  care 
not  to  exceed  thirty-nine  (2  Cor.  xi.  24 ;  Joseph. 
Ant.  iv.  8,  §21).  The  convict  was  stripped  to  the 
waist  and  tied  in  a  bent  position  to  a  low  pillar, 
and  the  stripes,  with  a  whip  of  three  thongs,  weit 
inflicted  on  the  back  between  the  shoulders.  A 
single  stripe  in  excess  subjected  the  executioner  tc 
punishment  (Maccoth,  iii.  1,  2,  3,  13,  14).  It  is 
remarkable  that  the  Abyssinians  use  the  same  num 
ber  (Wolff,  Trav.  ii.  276). 

(4.)  Scourging  with  thorns  is  mentioned  Judg. 
viii.  16.  The  stocks  are  mentioned  Jer.  xx.  2; 
passing  through  fire,  2  Sam.  xii.  31  ;  mutilation, 
Judg.  i.  6,  2  Mace.  vii.  4,  and  see  2  Sam.  iv. 
12 ;  plucking  out  hair,  Is.  1.  6  ;  in  later  times, 
imprisonment,  and  confiscation  or  exile,  Ezr.  vii. 
26;  Jer.  xxxvii.  15,  xxxviii.  6;  Acts  iv.  3,  v.  18, 
xii.  4.  As  in  earlier  times  imprisonment  formed 
no  part  of  the  Jewish  system,  the  sentences  were 
executed  at  once  (see  Esth.  vii.  8-10;  Selden,  De 
Si/n.  ii.  c.  13,  p.  888).  Before  death  a  grain  of 
frankincense  in  a  cup  of  wine  was  given  to  the  cri 
minal  to  intoxicate  him  (ib.  889).  The  command 
for  witnesses  to  cast  the  first  stone  shows  that  the 
duty  of  execution  did  not  belong  to  any  special  officer 
(Deut.  xvii.  7). 

Of  punishments  inflicted  by  other  nations  we 
have  the  following  notices : — In  Egypt  the  power 
of  life  and  death  and  imprisonment  rested  with  the 
king,  and  to  some  extent  also  with  officers  of  high 
rank  (Gen.  xl.  3,  22,  xlii.  20).  Death  might  be 
commuted  for  slavery  (xlii.  19,  xliv.  9,  33).  The 
law  of  retaliation  was  also  in  use  in  Egypt,  and  the 
punishment  of  the  bastinado,  as  represented  in  the 
paintings,  agrees  better  with  the  Mosaic  directions 
than  with  the  Rabbinical  (Wilkinson,  A.  E.  ii.  214. 
215,217).  In  Egypt,  and  also  in  Babylon,  the 
chief  of  the  executioners,  Rab-  Tabbachim,  was  a 
great  officer  of  state  (Gen.  xxxvii.  36,  xxxix.,  xl. ; 
Dan.  ii.  14;  Jer.  xxxix.  13,  xii.  10,  xliii.  6,  Iii.  15, 
16;  Michaelis,  iii.  412;  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  8,  §5 


974 


PUNITKS 


[CHERETHIM]  ;  Mark  vi.  27).     He  was  sometimes 
a  eunuch  (Joseph.  Ant.  vii.  5,  §4). 

Putting  out  the  eyes  of  captives,  and  other 
cruelties,  as  flaying  alive,  burning,  tearing  out  the 
tongue,  &c.,  were  practised  by  Assyrian  and  Baby 
lonian  conquerors  ;  and  parallel  instances  of  despotic 
cruelty  are  found  in  abundance  in  both  ancient  and 
modern  times  in  Persian  and  other  history.  The 
execution  of  Hainan  and  the  story  of  Daniel  are 
pictures  of  summary  Oriental  procedure  (2  K.  xxv. 
7;  Esth.  vii.  9,  10;  Jer.  xxix.  22;  Dan.  iii.  6, 
vi.  7,  24;  Her.  vii.  39,  ix.  112,  113;  Chardin, 
Voy.  vi.  21,  118;  Layard,  Nineveh,  ii.  369,  374 
377,  Nin.  &  Bab.  456,  457).  And  the  duty  of 
counting  the  numbers  of  the  victims,  which  is 
there  represented,  agrees  with  the  story  of  Jehu 
(2  K.  x.  7),  and  with  one  recorded  of  Shah  Abbas 
Mirza,  by  Ker  Porter  (Travels,  ii.  524,  525 ;  see  also 
Burckhardt,  Syria,  p.  57 ;  and  Malcolm,  Sketches 
of  Persia,  p.  47). 

With  the  Romans,  stripes  and  the  stocks,  ireire- 
fftpiyyov  tf\ov,  nervus  and  columbar,  were  in  use, 
and  imprisonment,  with  a  chain  attached  to  a  soldier. 
There  were  also  the  liberate  custodiae  in  private 
houses  [PRISON]  (Acts  xvi.  23,  xxii.  24,  xxviii.  16 ; 
Xen.  Hell.  iii.  3, 11 ;  Herod,  ix.  37 ;  Plautus,  Rud. 
iii.  6,  30,  34,  38,  50;  Arist.  Eq.  1044  (ed. 
Bekker)  ;  Joseph.  Ant.  xviii.  6,  §7,  xix.  6,  §1 ; 
Sail.  Cat.  47  ;  Diet,  of  Antiq.  "  Flagrum  "). 

Exposure  to  wild  beasts  appears  to  be  mentioned 
by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  32 ;  2  Tim.  iv.  17),  but 
not  with  any  precision.  [H.  W.  P.] 

PU'NITES,  THE  (^-IBH :  6  *ovaf :  Phualtae). 

The  descendants  of  Pua,  or  Phuvah,  the  son  of 
Issachar  (Num.  xxvi.  23). 

PUN'ON  (JJ-1S,  i.  e.  Phunon  ;  Samarit.  fJ'B  : 
*««v<6;  Alex.  *jf«:  Phinon).  One  of  the  halting- 
places  of  the  Israelite  host  during  the  last  portion 
of  the  Wandering  (Num.  xxxiii.  42,  43).  It  lay 
next  beyond  Zalmonah,  between  it  and  Oboth,  and 
three  days'  journey  from  the  mountains  of  Abarim, 
which  formed  the  boundary  of  Moab. 

By  Eusebius  and  Jerome  (Onomasticon,  QivSiv, 
"Fenon")  it  is  identified  with  Pinon,  the  seat 
of  the  Edomite  tribe  of  that  name,  and,  further, 
with  Pliaeno,  which  contained  the  copper-mines  so 
notorious  at  that  period,  and  was  situated  between 
Petra  and  Zoar.  This  identification  is  supported  by 
the  form  of  the  name  in  the  LXX.  and  Samaritan  ; 
and  the  situation  falls  in  with  the  requirements  of 
the  Wanderings.  No  trace  of  such  a  name  appears 
to  have  been  met  with  by  modern  explorers.  [G.] 

PURIFICATION.  The  term  "  purification," 
in  its  legal  and  technical  sense,  is  applied  to  the 
ritual  observances  whereby  an  Israelite  was  formally 
absolved  from  the  taint  of  uncleanness,  whether  evi- 
deaoed  by  any  overt  act  or  state,  or  whether  con 
nected  with  man's  natural  depravity.  The  cases 
that  demanded  it  in  the  former  instance  are  defined 
.  in  the  Levitical  law  [UNCLEANNESS]  :  with  regard 
to  the  latter,  it  is  only  possible  to  lay  down  the 
general  rule  that  it  was  a  fitting  prelude  to  any 
aearer  approach  to  the  Deity ;  as,  for  instance,  in 
the  admission  of  a  proselyte  to  the  congregation 
[PROSELYTE],  in  the  baptism  (icaBapuruSs,  John 
iii.  25)  of  the  Jews  as  a  sign  of  repentance  [BAP 
TISM],  in  the  consecration  of  priests  aoJ  Levites 
[PiUEST  ;  LEVITE],  or  in  the  performance  of  special 
teligious  acts  (Lev.  xvi.  4;  2  Chr.  xxx.  19).  In 
the  present  article  we  are  concerned  solelv  with  the 


PURIFICATION 

former  clots,  inasmuch  as  in  this  alone  were  the  ntiiai 
observances  of  a  special  character.  The  essence  ol 
purification,  indeed,  in  all  cases,  consisted  in  the  use 
of  water,  whether  by  way  of  ablution  or  aspersion ; 
but  in  the  majora  delicta  of  legal  uncleanness,  sacri 
fices  of  various  kinds  were  added,  and  the  ceremonies 
throughout  bore  an  expiatory  character.  Simplt 
ablution  of  the  person  was  required  after  sexual 
intercourse  (Lev.  xv.  18;  2  Sam.  xi.  4):  ablution 
of  the  clothes,  after  touching  the  carcase  of  an  un 
clean  beast,  or  eating  or  carrying  the  carcase  of  a 
clean  beast  that  had  died  a  natural  death  (Lev.  xi. 
25,  40):  ablution  both  of  the  person  and  of  the 
defiled  garments  in  cases  of  gonorrhea  dormientinm 
(Lev.  xv.  16,  17) — the  ceremony  in  each  of  the 
above  instances  to  take  place  on  the  day  on  which 
the  uncleanness  was  contracted.  A  higher  degree  of 
uncleanness  resulted  from  prolonged  gonorrhea  in 
males,  and  menstruation  in  women :  in  these  cases 
a  probationary  interval  of  seven  days  was  to  be 
allowed  after  the  cessation  of  the  symptoms ;  on  the 
evening  of  the  seventh  day  the  candidate  for  purifi 
cation  performed  an  ablution  both  of  the  person 
and  of  the  garments,  and  on  the  eighth  offered  two 
turtle-doves  or  two  young  pigeons,  one  for  a  sin- 
ofiering,  the  other  for  a  burnt-ofiering  (Lev.  xv. 
1-15,  19-30).  Contact  with  persons  in  the  above 
states,  or  even  with  clothing  or  furniture  that  had 
been  used  by  them  while  in  those  states,  involved 
uncleanness  in  a  minor  degree,  to  be  absolved  by 
ablution  on  the  day  of  infection  generally  (Lev.  xv. 
5-11,  21-23),  but  in  one  particular  case  after  an 
interval  of  seven  days  (Lev.  xv.  24).  In  cases  of 
childbirth  the  sacrifice  was  increased  to  a  lamb  of 
the  first  year  with  a  pigeon  or  turtle-dove  (Lev. 
xii.  6),  an  exception  being  made  in  favour  of  the 
poor  who  might  present  the  same  offering  as  in  the 
preceding  case  (Lev.  xii.  8;  Luke  ii.  22-24).  The 
purification  took  place  forty  days  after  the  birth  of 
a  son,  and  eighty  after  that  of  a  daughter,  the 
difference  in  the  interval  being  based  on  physical 
considerations.  The  uncleannesse?  already  specified 
were  comparatively  of  a  mild  character :  the  more 
severe  were  connected  with  death,  which,  viewed  as- 
the  penalty  of  sin,  was  in  the  highest  degree  conta 
minating.  To  this  head  we  refer  the  two  cases  of 
(1.)  touching  a  corpse,  or  a  grave  (Num.  xix.  16). 
or  even  killing  a  man  in  war  (Num.  xxxi.  19) ;  and 
(2.)  leprosy,  which  was  regarded  by  the  Hebrews 
as  nothing  less  than  a  living  death.  The  ceremonies 
of  purification  in  the  first  of  these  two  cases  are 
detailed  in  Num.  xix.  A  peculiar  kind  of  water, 
termed  the  water  of  uncleanness  a  (A.  V.  "  water 
of  separation"),  was  prepared  in  the  following 
manner : — An  unblemished  red  heifer,  on  which  the 
yoke  had  not  passed,  was  slain  by  the  eldest  son  of 
the  high-priest  outside  the  camp.  A  portion  of  its 
blood  was  sprinkled  seven  times  towards  b  the  sanc 
tuary  ;  the  rest  cf  it,  and  the  whole  of  the  carcase, 
including  even  its  dung,  were  then  burnt  iii  the 
sight  of  the  officiating  priest,  together  with  cedar- 
wood,  hyasop,  and  scarlet.  The  ashes  were  collected 
by  a  clean  man  and  deposited  in  a  clean  place  out 
side  the  camp.  Whenever  occasion  required,  a 
portion  of  the  ashes  was  mixed  with  spring  water  in 
a  jar,  and  the  unclean  person  was  sprinkled  with  it 
on  the  third,  and  again  on  the  seventh  day  after  the 


•  rnarno. 

b  \3S  rO3~7K.     The  A.  V.   Incorrectly  renders   it 
directly  before." 


PURIFICATION 

contraction  of  the  uncleanncss.  That  the  water  livl 
an  expiatory  efficacy,  is  implied  in  the  term  sin- 
offering*  (A.  V.  "purification  for  sin")  applied  to 
it  (Num.  xix.  9),  and  all  the  particulars  connected 
with  its  preparation  had  a  symbolical  significance 
appropriate  to  the  object  sought.  The  sex  of  the 
Victim  (female,  and  hence  life-giving),  its  red  colour 
(the  colour  of  blood,  the  seat  of  life),  its  unimpaired 
vigour  (never  having  borne  the  yoke),  its  youth, 
and  the  absence  in  it  of  spot  or  blemish,  the  cedar 
and  the  hyssop  (possessing  the  qualities,  the  former 
of  incorruption,  the  latter  of  purity),  and  the 
scarlet  (again  the  colour  of  blood) — all  these  sym 
bolized  life  in  its  fulness  and  freshness  as  the  an 
tidote  of  death.  At  the  same  time  the  extreme 
virulence  of  the  uncleanness  is  taught  by  the  regu 
lations  that  the  victim  should  be  wholly  consumed 
outside  the  camp,  whereas  generally  certain  parts 
were  consumed  on  the  altar,  and  the  offal  only  out 
side  the  camp  (comp.  Lev.  iv.  11,  12);  that  the 
blood  was  sprinkled  towards,  and  not  before  the 
sanctuary ;  that  the  officiating  minister  should  be 
neither  the  high-priest,  nor  yet  simply  a  priest,  but 
the  presumptive  high-priest,  the  office  being  too 
impure  for  the  first,  and  too  important  for  the 
second ;  that  even  the  priest  and  the  person  that 
burnt  the  heifer  were  rendered  unclean  by  reason 
of  their  contact  with  the  victim ;  and,  lastly,  that 
the  purification  should  be  effected,  not  simply  by 
the  use  of  water,  but  of  water  mixed  with  ashes 
which  served  as  a  lye,  and  would  therefore  have 
peculiarly  cleansing  qualities. 

The  purification  of  the  leper  was  a  yet  more 
formal  proceeding,  and  indicated  the  highest  pitch 
of  uncleanness.  The  rites  are  thus  described  in 
Lev.  xiv.  4-32: — The  priest  having  examined  the 
leper  and  pronounced  him  clear  of  his  disease,  took 
for  him  two  birds  "  alive  and  clean,"  with  cedar, 
scarlet,  and  hyssop.  One  of  the  birds  was  killed 
under  the  priest's  directions  over  a  vessel  filled  with 
spring  wafer,  into  which  its  blood  fell ;  the  other, 
with  the  adjuncts,  cedar,  &c.,  was  dipped  by  the 
priest  into  the  mixed  blood  and  water,  and,  after 
the  unclean  person  had  been  seven  times  sprinkled 
with  the  same  liquid,  was  permitted  to  fly  away 
"  into  the  open  field."  The  leper  then  washed 
himself  and  his  clothes,  and  shaved  his  head.  The 
above  proceedings  took  place  outside  the  camp,  and 
formed  the  first  stage  of  purification.  A  proba 
tionary  interval  of  seven  days  was  then  allowed, 
which  period  the  leper  was  to  pass  "  abroad  out  of 
his  tent :"  d  on  the  last  of  these  days  the  washing  was 
repeated,  and  the  shaving  was  more  rigidly  per 
formed,  even  to  the  eyebrows  and  all  his  hair. 
The  second  stage  of  the  purification  took  place  on 
the  eighth  day,  and  was  performed  "before  the 
LORD  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega 
tion."  The  leper  brought  thither  an  offering  con 
sisting  of  two  he-lambs,  a  yearling  ewe-lamb,  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil,  and  a  log  of  oil :  in  cases  of 
jioverty  the  offering  was  reduced  to  one  lamb,  and 
two  turtle-doves,  or  two  young  pigeons,  with  a  less 
quantity  of  fine  flour,  and  a  log  of  oil.  The  priest 
slew  one  of  the  he-lambs  as  a  trespass-offering,  and 
p.pplied  a  portion  of  its  blood  to  the  right  ear,  right 


PURIFICATION 


975 


thumb,  and  great  toe  of  the  right  foot  3/1  the  leper: 
he  next  sprinkled  a  portion  of  the  oil  seven  time* 
before  the  LORD,  applied  another  portion  of  it  to  the 
parts  of  the  body  already  specified,  and  poured  the 
remainder  over  the  leper's  head.  The  other  he- 
lamb  and  the  ewe-lamb,  or  the  two  birds,  as  the 
case  might  be,  were  then  offered  as  a  sin-offering, 
and  a  burnt-offering,  together  with  the  meat-offer^ 
ing.  The  significance  of  the  ?edar,  the  scarlet,  and 
the  hyssop,  of  the  running  water,  and  of  the  "  alive 
(full  of  life)  and  clean"  condition  of  the  birds,  is 
the  same  as  in  the  case  previously  described.  The 
two  stages  of  the  proceedings  indicated,  the  first, 
which  took  place  outside  the  camp,  the  re-admission 
of  the  leper  to  the  community  of  men  ;  the  second, 
before  the  sanctuary,  his  re-admission  to  communion 
with  God.  In  the  first  stage,  the  slaughter  of  the 
one  bird  and  the  dismissal  of  the  other,  symbolized 
the  punishment  of  death  deserved  and  fully  remitted. 
In  the  second,  the  use  of  oil  and  its  application  to 
the  same  parts  of  the  body  as  in  the  consecration  of 
priests  (Lev.  viii.  23,  24),  symbolized  the  re-dedi 
cation  of  the  leper  to  the  service  of  Jehovah. 

The  ceremonies  to  be  observed  in  the  purification 
of  a  house  or  a  garment  infected  with  leprosy,  were 
identical  with  the  first  stage  of  the  proceedings  used 
for  the  leper  (Lev.  xiv.  33-53). 

The  necessity  of  purification  was  extended  in  tha 
post-Babylonian  period  to  a  variety  of  unauthorized 
cases.  Cups  and  pots,  brasen  vessels  and  couches, 
were  washed  as  a  matter  of  ritual  observance  (Mark 
vii.  4).  The  washing  of  the  hands  before  meals 
was  conducted  in  a  formal  manner  (Mark  vii.  3), 
and  minute  regulations  are  laid  down  on  this  subject 
in  a  treatise  of  the  Mishna,  entitled  Yadaim.  Thes» 
ablutions  required  a  large  supply  of  water,  and 
hence  we  find  at  a  marriage  feast  no  less  than  six 
jars  containing  two  or  three  firkins  apiece,  prepared 
for  the  purpose  (John  ii.  6).  We  meet  with  refer 
ences  to  purification  after  childbirth  (Luke  ii.  22), 
and  after  the  cure  of  leprosy  (Matt.  viii.  4 ;  Luke  xvii. 
14),  the  sprinkling  of  the  water  mixed  with  ashes 
being  still  retained  in  the  latter  case  (Heb.  ix.  13). 
What  may  have  been  the  specific  causes  of  unclean- 
ness  in  those  who  came  up  to  purify  themselves 
before  the  Passover  (John  xi.  55),  or  in  those  who 
had  taken  upon  themselves  the  Nazarite's  vow 
(Acts  xxi.  24,  26),  we  are  not  informed ;  in  either 
case  it  may  have  been  contact  with  a  corpse,  though 
in  the  latter  it  would  rather  appear  to  have  been  a 
general  purification  preparatory  to  the  accomplish 
ment  of  the  vow. 

In  conclusion  it  may  be  observed,  that  the  dis 
tinctive  feature  in  the  Mosaic  rites  of  purification  is 
their  expiatory  character.  The  idea  of  uncleanness 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jew :  it  was  attached  by 
the  Greeks  to  the  events  of  childbirth  and  death 
(Thucyd.  iii.  104 ;  Eurip.  Iph.  in  Taur.  383),  and 
by  various  nations  to  the  case  of  sexual  intercourse 
(Herod,  i.  198,  ii.  64 ;  Pers.  ii.  16).  But  with  all 
these  nations  simple  ablution  sufficed  :  no  sacrifices 
were  demanded.  The  Jew  alone  was  taught  by  the 
use  of  expiatory  offerings  U  discern  to  its  full  extent 
the  connexion  between  the  outward  sign  and  the  in 
ward  fount  of  impurity.  [W.  L.  B.] 


d  The  Rabbinical  explanation  of  this  was  in  conformity 
with  the  addition  in  the  Chaldee  version,  "  et  non  accedet 
ad  latns  uxcrls  suae."  The  words  cannot,  however,  be  thus 
restricted :  they  are  designed  to  mark  the  partial  restora 
tion,  of  the  leper— inside  the  camp,  but  outside  his  tent. 


'  Various  opinions  are  held  with  regard  to  the  terra 
irvynfi.  The  meaning  "with  the  fist"  is  in  accor lance 
with  the  general  tenor  of  the  Rabbinical  usages,  the  ham', 
used  in  washing  the  other  being  closed  lest  the  palm  sliouU 
contract  uncleanness  n  the  act. 


976 


PI  RIM 


PURIM 

:  •  Qpovpal : k   Phurim :   also, 
>O)  (Esth.  ix.  26,  31)  :  dies  sortium},  the 

annual  lestival  instituted  to  commemorate  the  pre 
servation  of  the  Jews  in  Persia  from  the  massacre 
with  which  they  were  threatened  through  the 
machinations  of  Hainan  (Esth.  ix. ;  Joseph.  Ant. 
xi.  6,  §13).  [ESTHER.]  It  was  probably  called 
Purim  by  the  Jews  in  irony.  Their  great  enemy 
Haman  appears  to  have  been  very  superstitious  and 
much  given  to  casting  lots  (Esth.  iii.  7).  They 
gave  the  name  Purim,  or  Lots,  to  the  commemo 
rative  festival,  because  he  had  thrown  lots  to  ascer 
tain  what  day  would  be  auspicious  for  him  to  carry 
into  effect  the  bloody  decree  which  the  king  had 
issued  at  his  instance  (Esth.  ix.  24). 

The  festival  lasted  two  days,  and  was  regularly 
observed  on  the  14th  and  15th  of  Adar.  But  if 
the  14th  happened  to  fall  on  the  Sabbath,  or  on  the 
second  or  fourth  day  of  the  week,  the  commence 
ment  of  the  festival  was  deferred  till  the  next  day. 
It  is  not  easy  to  conjecture  what  may  have  been 
the  ancient  mode  of  observance,  so  as  to  have  given 
the  occasion  something  of  the  dignity  of  a  national 
religious  festival.  The  traditions  of  the  Jews,  and 
their  modern  usage  respecting  it  are  curious.  It 
is  stated  that  eighty-five  of  the  Jewish  elders  ob 
jected  at  first  to  the  institution  of  the  feast,  when 
it  was  proposed  by  Mordecai  (Jerus.  Gem.  Megillah 
— Lightfoot  on  John  x.  21).  A  preliminary  fast 
was  appointed,  called  "the  fast  of  Esther,"  to  be 
observed  on  the  13th  of  Adar,  in  memory  of  the 
fast  which  Esther  and  her  maids  observed,  and 
which  she  enjoined,  through  Mordecai,  on  the  Jews 
of  Shushan  (Esth.  iv.  16).  If  the  13th  was  a 
Sabbath,  the  fast  was  put  back  to  the  fifth  day 
of  the  week ;  it  could  not  be  held  on  the  sixth 
day,  because  those  who  might  be  engaged  in 
preparing  food  for  the  Sabbath  would  necessarily 
have  to  taste  the  dishes  to  prove  them.  According 
to  modern  custom,  as  soon  as  the  stars  begin  to 
appear,  when  the  14th  of  the  month  has  com 
menced,  caudles  are  lighted  up  in  token  of  rejoicing, 
and  the  people  assemble  in  the  synagogue.'  After  a 
short  prayer  and  thanksgiving,  the  reading  of  the 
Book  of  Esther  commences.  The  book  is  written 
in  a  peculiar  manner,  on  a  roll  called  KO.T'  ^£oxV> 

"  the  Roll "  (H;>jp,  Megillah\A  The  reader  trans 
lates  the  text,  as  he  goes  on,  into  the  vernacular 
tongue  of  the  place,  and  makes  comments  on  parti 
cular  passages.  He  reads  in  a  histrionic  manner, 
suiting  his  tones  and  gestures  to  the  changes  in  the 
subject  matter.  When  he  comes  to  the  name  of 
Haman  the  whole  congregation  cry  out,  "  May 
his  name  be  blotted  out,"  or  "  Let  the  name  of 
the  ungodly  perish."  At  the  same  time,  in  some 


•  The  word  I-IQ  (pur)  is  Persian.  In  the  modern 
language,  It  takes  the  form  of  pdreh,  and  "  is  cognate 
with  pars  and  part  (Gesen.  Thes.).  It  Is  explained,  Esth. 

WL  7  and  ix.  24,  by  the  Hebrew  ?"tf  5  ;  leAijpoi;  sortes. 

»  It  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  the  conjecture  of 
thft  editor  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglot  (approved  by 
Qrotius,  in  Esth.  ili.  7,  and  by  Schleusner,  Lex.  in  LXX. 
s.  &povpat)  Is  correct,  and  that  the  reading  should  be 
*oupal.  In  like  manner,  the  modern  editors  of  Josephus 
Dave  changed  *poupoioi  into  4>ovp<uoi  (Ant.  xi.  6,  $13). 
The  old  editors  imagined  that  Josephus  connected  the 
word  with  (fipovptlv. 

c  This  service  is  said  to  have  taken  plac«  in  former  times 
on  the  15th  in  walled  towns,  but  on  the  14th  in  the  country 
end  unwal'cd  towns,  according  to  Koth  ix.  18,  IP. 


PURIM 

places,  the  boys  who  are  present  make  a  great 
noise  with  their  hands,  with  mallets,  and  with 
pieces  of  wood  or  stone  on  which  they  have  written 
the  name  of  Haman,  and  which  they  nib  together 
so  as  to  obliterate  the  writing.  When  the  names 
of  the  sons  of  Haman  are  read  (ix.  7,  8,  9)  the 
reader  utters  them  witi  a  continuous  enunciation, 
so  as  to  make  them  into  one  word,  to  signify  that 
they  were  hanged  all  at  once.  When  the  Megillah 
is  read  through,  the  whole  congregation  exclaim, 
"  Cursed  he  Haman ;  blessed  be  Mordecai ;  cursed 
be  Zoresh  (the  wife  of  Haman) ;  blessed  be  Esther  ; 
cursed  be  all  idolaters ;  blessed  be  all  Israelites,  and 
blessed  be  Harbonah  who  hanged  Haman."  The 
volume  is  then  solemnly  rolled  up.  All  go  home 
and  partake  of  a  repast  said  to  consist  mainly  of 
milk  and  eggs.  In  the  morning  service  in  the 
synagogue,  on  the  14th,  after  the  prayers,  the  pas 
sage  is  read  from  the  Law  (Ex.  xvii.  8-16)  which 
relates  the  destruction  of  the  Amalekites,  the  people 
of  Agag  (1  Sam.  xv.  8),  the  supposed  ancestor  of 
Haman  (Esth.  iii.  1).  The  Megillah  is  then  read 
again  in  the  same  manner,  and  with  the  same 
responses  from  the  congregation,  as  on  the  preceding 
evening.  All  who  possibly  can  are  bound  to  hear 
the  reading  of  the  Megillah — men,  women,  children, 
cripples,  invalids,  and  even  idiots — though  they 
may,  if  they  please,  listen  to  it  outside  the  syna 
gogue  (Mishna,  Eosh.  Hash.  iii.  7). 

The  14th  of  Adar,*  as  the  very  day  of  the  de 
liverance  of  the  Jews,  is  more  solemnly  kept  than 
the  13th.  But  when  the  service  in  the  synagogue 
is  over,  all  give  themselves  up  to  merrymaking. 
Games  of  all  sorts  with  dancing  and  music  com 
mence.  In  the  evening  a  quaint  dramatic  enter 
tainment,  the  subject  of  which  is  connected  with 
the  occasion,  sometimes  takes  place,  and  men  fre 
quently  put  on  female  attire,  declaring  that  the 
festivities  of  Purim,  according  to  Esth.  ix.  22,  sus 
pend  the  law  of  Deut.  xxii.  5,  which  forbids  one  sex 
to  wear  the  dress  of  the  other.  A  dainty'meal  then 
follows,  sometimes  with  a  free  indulgence  of  wine, 
both  unmixed  and  mulled.  According  to  the  Gemara 
(Megillah,  vii.  2),  "  tenetur  homo  in  festo  Purim  eo 
usque  inebriari,  ut  nullum  discrimen  norit,  inter  ma- 
ledictionem  Hamanis  et  benedictionem  Mardochaei."  * 

On  the  15th  the  rejoicing  is  continued,  and  gifts, 
consisting  chiefly  of  sweetmeats  and  other  eatables, 
are  interchanged.  Offerings  for  the  poor  are  also 
made  by  all  who  can  afford  to  do  so,  in  proportion 
to  their  means  (Esth.  ix.  19,  22). 

When  the  month  Adar  used  to  be  doubled,  in 
the  Jewish  leap-year,  the  festival  was  repeated  on 
the  14th  and  15th  of  the  second  Adar. 

It  would  seem  that  the  Jews  were  tempted  to 
associate  the  Christians  with  the  Persians  and 
Amalekites  in  the  curses  of  the  synagogue.s  Hence 


d  Five  books  of  the  0.  T.  (Ruth,  Esther,  Ecclesiasles, 
Canticles,  and  Lamentations)  are  designated  by  the  Rab 
binical  writers  "the  Five  Rolls,"  because,  as  it  Trould 
seem,  they  used  to  be  written  in  separate  volumes  for  the 
use  of  the  synagogue  (Gesen.  Thes.  s.  ??3).  [ESTHKS, 
BOOK  OF.] 

•  It  Is  called  ij  Mop&>\<uin|  rift-epa.,  2  Mace.  xv.  36. 

f  Buxtorf  remarks  on  this  passage :  "  Hoc  est.  nesciat 
supputare  numerum  qui  ex  singularum  vocum  literis  ei> 
struitur:  nam  literae  »3T1O  "P"^  et  ]®^  "NTO  lr 
Gematria  eundem  numerum  conflciunt.  1'erinde  est  ae 
si  dlceretur,  posse  illos  In  tantum  bibere,  ut  quinque 
maims  digitos  numerare  amplius  non  possint" 

*  See  Cod.  Theodos.  lib.  xvi.  tit.  viii.  18:  "  Judaeos, 
quodatn  festivitatis  siiae  solemn!.  Am.in,  ad  poonno  quoa 


rUHIM 

firohahly  .\n,fe  11::  popularity  of  tlu>  feist  Dt  Pnrirn 
ir»  those  iges  in  wliich  the  feeling  of  enn  :ty  wis  sc 
Wrongly  manifested  between  Jfws  and  Dhristians 
Several  Jewish  proverbs  are  preservad  which 
strikingly  show  the  way  in  which  f'urim  was 
regarded,  such  is,  "The  Temple  may  fail,  but 
Pcirim  never ;"  "  The  Prophets  *nay  fail,  but  not 
the  Megillah."  It  was  said  that  no  books  wouh 
survive  in  the  Messiah's  kingdom  except  the  Law 
and  the  Megillah.  This  affection  for  the  book  and 
the  festival  connected  with  it  is  the  more  remark 
able  because  the  events  on  which  they  are  foundec 
affected  only  an  exiled  portion  of  the  Hebrew  race 
and  because  there  was  so  much  in  them  to  shock 
the  principles  and  prejudices  of  the  Jewish  mind. 

Ewald,  in  support  of  his  theory  that  there  was  in 
patriarchal  times  a  religious  festival  at  every  new 
and  full  moon,  conjectures  that  Purim  was  originally 
the  full  moon  feast  of  Adar,  as  the  Passover  was 
that  of  Nisan,  and  Tabernacles  that  of  Tisri. 

It  was  suggested  first  by  Kepler  that  the  eoprij 
rS>v  'lovSaiuv  of  John  v.  1,  was  the  feast  of 
Purira.  The  notion  has  been  confidently  espoused 
by  Petavius,  Olshausen,  Stier,  Wieseler,  Winer, 
and  Anger  (who,  according  to  Winer,  has  proved 
the  point  beyond  contradiction),  and  is  favoured 
by  Alford  and  Ellicott.  The  question  is  a  difficult 
one.  It  seems  to  be  generally  allowed  that  the  opi 
nion  of  Chiysostom,  Cyril,  and  most  of  the  Fathers, 
which  was  taken  up  by  Erasmus,  Calvin,  Beza, 
and  Bengel,  that  the  feast  was  Pentecost,  and  that 
of  Cocceius,  that  it  was  Tabernacles  (which  is  coun 
tenanced  by  the  reading  of  one  inferior  MS.),  are 
precluded  by  the  general  course  of  the  narrative, 
and  especially  by  John  iv.  35  (assuming  that  the 
words  of  our  Lord  which  are  there  given  were 
spoken  in  seed -time) h  compared  with  v.  1.  The 
interval  indicated  by  a  comparison  of  these  texts 
could  scarcely  have  extended  beyond  Nisan.  The 
choice  is  thus  left  between  Purim  and  the  Passover. 

The  principal  objections  to  Purim  are,  (a)  that  it 
was  not  necessary  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  keep 
the  festival ;  (6)  that  it  is  not  very  likely  that  our 
Lord  would  have  made  a  point  of  paying  especial 
honour  to  a  festival  which  appeal's  to  have  had  but 
a  veiy  small  religious  element  in  it,  and  which 
seems  rather  to  have  been  the  means  of  keeping 
alive  a  feeling  of  national  revenge  and  hatred.  It 
is  alleged  on  the  other  hand  that  our  Lord's  attend 
ing  the  feast  would  be  in  harmony  with  His  deep 
sympathy  with  the  feelings  of  the  Jewish  people, 
which  went  further  than  His  merely  "  fulfilling  all 
righteousness"  in  carrying  out  the  precepts  of  the 
Mosaic  law.  It  is  further  urged  that  the  narrative  of 
St.  John  is  best  made  out  by  supposing  that  the  inci 
dent  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  occurred  at  the  festival 
which  was  characterised  by  showing  kindness  to  the 
poor,  and  that  our  Lord  was  induced,  by  the  enmity 
of  the  Jews  then  evinced,  not  to  remain  at  Jerusalem 
till  the  Passover,  mentioned  John  vi.  4  (Stier). 
The  identity  of  the  Passover  with  the  feast  in 


rt.uii  recordatlonem  Incendere,  ct  crucls  adsirmilatam 
speciem  in  contemptu  Ohristlanae  fidei  sacrilega  mente 
exurere,  l*rovinciarum  Rectores  problbeant :  ne  locis  suls 
fidnl  nostrae  signnm  immisceaTit,  sed  rims  snos  infra  con- 
temptum  Christianae  legis  retineant,  amtesuri  sine  dubio 
permissa  hactenus,  nisi  ab  illicitls  temperaverint" 

h  This  supposition  does  not  appear  to  be  materially 
weakened  by  our  taking  as  a  proverb  Terpa/uiji-os  i<rnv 
ita:  o  0epKT/u.6s  «px*T<u.  Whether  the  expression  was  such 
or  not,  it  surely  adds  point  to  our  lord's  words,  if  \vo 
suppose  the  figurative  language  to  have  been  suggested 
VOl.  II. 


PU1181S  977 

question  has  l>cen  maintained  by  Jrennein,  Euseliius, 
and  Theodoret,  and,  in  modern  times,  by  Lulher, 
Soaliger,  Grotius,  Hengstenberg,  Gresswell,  Neandrr, 
Tholuck,  Robinson,  and  the  majority  of  commen 
tators.  The  principal  difficulties  in  the  way  are, 
(a)  the  omission  of  the  article,  involving  the  impro 
bability  that  the  great  festival  of  the  year  should 
be  spoken  of  as  "a  hast  of  the  Jews ;"  (6)  that  as 
our  Lord  did  not  go  up  to  the  Passover  mentioned 
John  vi.  4,  He  must  have  absented  himself  from 
Jerusalem  for  a  year  and  a  half,  that  is,  till  the 
feast  of  Tabernacles  (John  rii.  2).  Against  these 
points  it  is  contended,  that  the  application  of  foprr) 
without  the  article  to  the  Passover  is  countenanced 
by  Matt,  xxvii.  15 ;  Luke  xxiii.  17  (comp.  John  xviii. 
39)  ;  that  it  is  assigned  as  a  reason  for  His  staying 
away  from  Jerusalem  for  a  longer  period  than  usual, 
that  "  the  Jews  sought  to  kill  him  "  (John  vii.  1  ; 
cf.  v.  18);  that  this  long  period  spKsfactorily  ac 
counts  for  the  surprise  expressed  by  His  brethren 
(John  vii.  3),  and  that,  as  it  was  evidently  His 
custom  to  visit  Jerusalem  once  a  year,  He  went  up 
to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  (vii.  2)  instead  of  going 
to  the  Passover. 

On  the  whole,  the  only  real  objection  to  the 
Passover  seems  to  be  the  want  of  the  article  before 
r^.1  That  the  language  of  the  New  Testament 
will  not  justify  our  regarding  the  omission  as  ex 
pressing  emphasis  on  any  general  ground  of  usage, 
is  proved  by  Winer  (Grammar  of  the  N.  T.  dialect, 
in.  19).  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  difficulty  is 
no  small  one,  though  it  does  not  seem  to  be  sufficient 
to  outweigh  the  grave  objections  which  lie  against 
the  feast  of  Purim. 

The  arguments  on  one  side  are  best  set  forth  by 
Stier  and  Olshausen  on  John  v.  1,  by  Kepler 
(Eclogae  Chronicae,  Francfort,  1615),  and  by  Anger 
(de  temp,  in  Act.  Apost.  i.  24) ;  those  on  the  other 
side,  by  Robinson  (ffai-mony,  note  on  the  Scconn 
Passover),  and  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  §143.  See 
also  Lightfoot,  Kuinoel,  and  Tholuck,  on  John  v.  1  ; 
and  Gresswell,  Diss.  viii.  vol.  ii. ;  Ellicott,  Lect.  135. 

See  Carpzov,  App.  Crit.  iii.  11 ;  Reland,  Ant.  iv. 
9  ;  Schickart,  Purim  sive  Bacchanalia  Judaeorum 
'Grit.  Sac.  iii.  col.  1184)  ;  Buxtorf,  Syn.  Jud.  xxi.r. 
The  Mishnical  treatise,  Mctjilla,  contains  directions 
respecting  the  mode  in  which  the  scroll  should  he 
written  out  and  in  which  it  should  be  read,  with 
other  matters,  not  much  to  the  point  in  hand,  coll 
ected  with  the  service  of  the  synagogue.  Stauben, 
La  Vie  Juive  en  Alsace;  Mills,  British  Jews, 
p.  188.  [S.  C.] 

PURSE.  The  Hebrews,  when  on  a  journey 
were  provided  with  a  bag  (variously  termed  cts,* 
sitror,  and  clidrit),  in  which  they  carried  their 
money  (Gen.  xlii.  35;  Proy.  i.  14,  vii.  20;  Is. 
xlvi.  6),  and,  if  they  were  merchants,  also  their 
weights  (Deut.  xxv.  13  ;  Mic.  vi.  11).  This  bag  is 
[escribed  in  the  N.  T.  by  the  terms  fiakdm-tov 
peculiar  to  St.  Luke,  x.  4,  xii.  33,  xxii.  35,  36), 
and  y\uffff6itofjioi/  (peculiar  to  St.  John,  xii.  6, 


>y  what  was  actually  going  on  in  the  fields  before  the  eyes 

if  Himself  and  His  hearers. 
'  Tischendorf  inserts  the  article  in  bis  text,  and  Winer 

.Hows  that  there  is  much  authority  In  its  favour.    But 

be  nature  of  the  case  seems  to  be  such,  that  the  Insertion 

f  the  article  in  later  MSS.  may  be  more  easily  accounted 

or  than  its  omission  In  the  older  ones. 
8  D'3,   "THV.  and  I3*">n.    The  last  occurs  cn'.y  in 
K.  v.  23  "bags;"  Is.  ill.  22,  A.  V.   " crisping-pins." 

'be  latter  Is  supposed  to  refer  to  the  long  round  furmot 

tie  purse. 

3  R 


978 


FUTEOLI 


nil.  29).  Tot  former  is  a  classical  term  (Plat. 
Honviv.  p.  ]i*0,  E.  ffvffxaffTa  fia\di>Tia) :  the  l:itt. •; 
Is  connected  with  the  classical  y\a>ffffOKofi€'tov, 
which  ongmally  meant  the  bag  in  which  musicians 
carried  the  mouthpieces  of  their  instruments.  In 
the  LXX.  the  term  is  applied  to  the  chest  for  the 
offerings  at  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxiv.  8,  10,  11), 
and  was  hence  adopted  by  St.  John  to  describe  the 
common  puree  carried  by  the  disciples.  The  girdle 
a'.so  served  as  a  purse,  and  hence  the  term  £<ivri 
occurs  in  Matt.  x.  9,  Mark  vi.  8.  [GIRDLE.] 
Ladies  wore  ornamental  purses  (Is.  iii.  23).  The 
Rabbinists  forbade  any  one  passing  through  the 
Temple  with  stick,  shoes,  and  puree,  these  three 
being  the  indications  of  travelling  '(Mishn.  Berach. 
9,  §5).  [W.  L.  B.] 

PUT,  1  Chr.  i.  8;  Nah.  iii.  9.     [PHUT.] 

PUTE'OLI  (norfoAoi)  appears  alike  in  Josephus 
(  Vit.  3  ;  Ant.  xvii.  12,  §1,  xviii.  7,  §2)  and  in  th« 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  ^xxvii.  13)  in  its  characteristic 
position  under  the  early  Roman  emperors,  viz.  as 
the  great  landing-place  of  travellers  to  Italy  from 
the  Levant,  and  as  the  harbour  to  which  the  Alex 
andrian  com-ships  brought  their  cargoes.  These 
two  features  of  the  place  in  fact  coincided  ;  for  in 
that  day  the  movements  of  travellers  by  sea  de 
pended  on  merchant-vessels.  Puteoli  was  at  that 
period  a  place  of  very  great  importance.  We  can 
not  elucidate  this  better  than  by  saying  that  the 
celebrated  bay  which  is  now  "  the  bay  of  Naples," 
and  in  early  times  was  "  the  bay  of  Cumae,"  was 
then  called  "  Sinus  Puteolanus."  The  city  was  at 
the  north-eastern  angle  of  the  bay.  Close  to  it  was 
Baiae,  one  of  the  most  fashionable  of  the  ROIFTO 
watering-places.  The  emperor  Caligula  once  built  a 
ridiculous  bridge  between  the  two  towns ;  and  the 
remains  of  it  must  have  been  conspicuous  when  St. 
Paul  lauded  at  Puteoli  in  the  Alexandrian  ship  which 
brought  him  from  Malta.  [CASTOR  AND  POLLUX  ; 
MELITA  ;  RHEGIUM  ;  SYRACUSE.]  In  illustration 
of  the  arrival  here  of  the  corn-ships  we  may  refer 
to  Seneca  (Ep.  77)  and  Suetonius  (Octav.  98). 

The  earlier  name  of  Puteoli,  when  the  lower 
part  of  Italy  was  Greek,  was  Dicaearchia ;  and  this 
name  continued  to  be  used  to  a  late  period.  Josephus 
uses  it  in  two  of  the  passages  above  referred  to :  in 
the  third  ( Vit.  3)  he  speaks  of  himself  ''after  the 
shipwreck  which,  like  St.  Paul,  he  had  recently  gone 
through)  as  StaffwBels  eh  T^V  AncaMpxtav?  V 
lloTi6\ovs  'IroXol  Ka\ov(ni>.  So  Philo,  in  de 
scribing  the  curious  interview  which  he  and  his 
fellow  Jewish  ambassadors  had  here  with  Caligula, 
uses  the  old  name  (Legat.  ad  Caium,  ii.  521).  The 
word  Puteoli  was  a  true  Roman  name,  and  arose 
(whether  a  puteis  or  a  putendo)  from  the  strong 
mineral  springs  which  are  characteristic  of  the 
place.  Its  Roman  history  may  be  said  to  have 
begun  with  the  Second  Punic  War.  It  rose  con 
tinually  into  greater  importance,  from  the  causes 
above  mentioned.  No  part  of  the  Campanian  shore 
was  more  frequented.  The  associations  of  Puteoli 
*ith  historical  personages  are  very  numerous. 
Scipio  sailed  from  hence  to  Spain.  Cicero  had  a 
Tilla  (his  "  Puteolanum  ")  in  the  neighbourhood. 
Here  Nero  planned  the  murder  of  his  mother. 
Vespasian  gave  to  this  city  peculiar  privileges,  and 
here  Hadrian  was  buried.  In  the  5th  century 
Puteoli  was  ravaged  both  by  Alaric  and  Genseric, 
sad  it  never  afterwards  recovered  its  former  emi 
nence.  It  is  now  a  fourth-rate  Italian  town,  still 
retaining  the  name  of  Pozzuoli. 


PYGARC4 

In  connexion  with  St.  Paul's  movorr.ants,  We 
must  notice  its  communications  in  Nero's  rt-iga 
along  the  mainland  with  Home.  The  <.-n.-ist-n,;i<i 
leading  northwards  to  Simu'ssa  was  not  made  till 
the  reign  of  Domitian;  but  there  was  a  cross-road 
leading  to  Capua,  and  there  joining  the  App.an 
Way.  [APPH  FORUM  ;  THRKE  TAVERNS.]  The 
remains  of  this  road  may  be  traced  at  intervals ; 
and  thus  the  Apostle's  route  can  be  followed  almost 
step  by  step.  We  should  also  notice  the  fart  thaf 
there  were  Jewish  residents  at  Puteoli.  We  might 
be  sure  of  this  from  its  mercantile  impoitance ;  but 
we  are  positively  informed  of  it  by  Josephus  (Ant. 
xvii.  12,  §1)  in  his  account  of  the  visit  of  the  pre 
tended  Herod-Alexander  to  Augustus;  and  the  cir 
cumstance  shows  how  natural  it  was  that  the 
Apostle  should  find  Christian  "  brethren "  there 
immediately  on  landing. 

The  remains  of  Puteoli  arc  considerable.  The 
aqueduct,  the  reservoirs,  portions  (probably)  of 
baths,  the  great  amphitheatre,  the  building  called 
the  temple  of  Serapis,  which  affords  very  curious  in 
dications  of  changes  of  level  in  the  soil,  are  all  well 
worthy  of  notice.  But  our  chief  interest  here  is  con 
centrated  on  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  mole,  which 
is  formed  of  the  concrete  called  Pozzolana,  and  six 
teen  of  the  piers  of  which  still  remain.  No  Roman 
harbour  has  left  so  solid  a  memorial  of  itself  as  this 
one  at  which  St.  Paul  landed  in  Italy.  [J.  S.  H.] 

PU'TIEL  (biOB-1B :  *ovrrf,\:  P/intieT).  One 
of  the  daughtere  of  Putiel  was  wife  of  Eleazar  the 
son  of  Aaron,  and  mother  of  Phinehas  (Ex.  vi.  25). 
Though  he  does  not  appear  again  in  the  Bible 
records,  Putiel  has  some  celebrity  in  more  modem 
Jewish  traditions.  They  identify  him  with  Jethro 
the  Midianite,  "  who  fatted  the  caivcs  for  idolatrous 
worship "  (Targum  Pseudojon.  on  Ex.  vi.  25 ; 
Gemara  ofSota  by  Wagenseil,  viii.  §6).  What  ai« 
the  grounds  for  the  tradition  or  for  such  an  accusa 
tion  against  Jethro  is  not  obvious.  [G.j 

PYGARG  (i'lB^,  dishon:  vvyapyos :  pyg- 
argus)  occurs  only  (Deut.  xiv.  5)  in  the  list  of  clean 
animals  as  the  rendering  of  the  Heb.  dishon,  the 
name  apparently  of  some  species  of  antelope,  though 
it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  identify  it.  The  Greek 
ir6yapyos  denotes  an  animal  with  a  "  white  rump," 
and  is  used  by  Herodotus  (iv.  192)  as  the  mime  of 
some  Libyan  deer  or  antelope.  Aelian  (vii.  19)  also 
mentions  the  irvyapyos,  but  gives  no  more  than  the 
name ;  comp.  also  Juvenal  (Sat.  xi.  138).  It  is 
usual  to  identify  the  pygarg  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  with  the  addax  of  North  Africa,  Nubia,  &c. 
(Addax  nasomaculatus)  ;  but  we  cannot  regard  this 
point  as  satisfactorily  settled.  In  the  first  place, 
this  antelope  does  not  present  at  all  the  required 
characteristic  implied  by  its  name ;  and,  in  the 
second,  there  is  much  reason  for  believing,  with 
Riippell  (Atlas  zu  der  Reise  im  NSrd.  Afi-ik, 
p.  21),  and  Hamilton  Smith  (Griffith's  Cuvier's 
Anim.  King.  iv.  193),  that  the  Addax  is  identical 
with  the  Strepsiceros  of  Pliny  (N.  H.  xi.  37), 
which  animal,  it  must  be  observed,  the  Roman  na 
turalist  distinguishes  from  the  pygargus  -viii.  .Vi  . 
Indeed  we  may  regard  the  identity  of  the  Addax  and 
Pliny's  Strepsiceros  as  established ;  for  when  this 
species  was,  after  many  years,  at  length  rediscovered 
by  Hemprich  and  Riippell,  it  was  found  to  be  called 
by  the  Arabic  name  of  akas  or  ados,  the  veiy  name 
which  Pliny  gives  as  the  local  one  of  his  Strepsiceros. 
'the  pi/ijargits,  therefore,  must  be  sought  for  in  some 
animal  different  from  the  addax.  There  are  several 


QUAILS 

antelopes  which  have  the  characteristic  white  croup 
required ;  many  of  which,  however,  are  inhabitants 
of  South  Africa,  such  as  the  Spring-bok  (Antidorcas 
euchore)  and  the  Bonte-bok  (Damalis  pygarga*). 
We  arc  inclined  to  consider  the  irtyapyos,  or 
pygargus,  as  a  generic  name  to  denote  any  of  the 
white-rumped  antelopes  of  North  Africa,  Syria,  &c., 
such  as  the  Ariel  gazelle  (Antilope  Arabica,  Hem- 
(>rich),  the  Isabella  gazelle  (Oazella  Isabellina) ; 
perhaps  too  the  raohr,  both  of  Abyssinia  (G.  Soem- 
tneringii)  and  of  Western  Africa  ((?.  Mohr),  may 
be  included  under  the  term.  Whether,  however, 
the  LXX.  and  Vulg.  are  correct  in  their  inter 
pretation  of  dishon  is  another  question  ;  but  there 
is  no  collateral  evidence  of  any  kind  beyond  the 
authority  of  the  two  most  important  versions  to 
aid  us  in  our  investigation  of  this  word,  of  which 
various  etymologies  have  been  given  from  which 
nothing  definite  can  be  learnt.  [W.  H.] 


QUAILS  (fw,  selAv ;  but  in  Keri  fk&,  seldiv : 
opTvyofj.-firpa :  coturnix).  Various  opinions  have 
been  held  as  to  the  nature  of  the  food  denoted  by 
the  Heb.  selav,  which  on  two  distinct  occasions  was 
supplied  to  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness ;  see  Ex. 
xvi.  13,  on  which  occasion  the  people  were  between 
Sin  and  Sinai ;  and  Num.  xi.  31,  32,  when  at  the 
station  named  in  consequence  of  the  judgment  which 
befel  them,  Kibroth-hattaavah.  That  the  Heb.  word 
is  correctly  rendered  "  quails,"  is  we  think  beyond 
a  shadow  of  doubt,  notwithstanding  the  different  in 
terpretations  which  have  been  assigned  to  it  by 
several  writers  of  eminence.  Ludolf,  for  instance,  an 
author  of  high  repute,  has  endeavoured  to  show 
that  the  selav  were  locusts ;  see  his  Dissertatio  dc 
Locustis,  cum  Diatriba,  &c..  Franc,  ad  Moen. 
1694.  His  opinion  has  been  fully  advocated  and 
adopted  by  Patrick  (Comment,  on  Num.  xi.  31,  32) ; 
the  Jews  in  Arabia  also,  as  we  learn  from  Niebuhr 
(Beschreib.  von  Arab.  p.  172),  "  are  convinced  that 
the  birds  which  the  Israelites  ate  in  such  numbers 
were  only  clouds  of  locusts,  and  they  laugh  at  those 
translators  who  suppose  that  they  found  quails 
where  quails  were  never  seen."  Rudbeck  (Ichthyol. 
Bibl.  Spec,  i.)  has  argued  in  favour  of  the  selav 
meaning  "  flying-fish,"  some  species  of  the  genus 
Exocetus ;  Michaelis  at  one  time  held  the  same 
opinion,  but  afterwards  properly  abandoned  it  (see 
Hosenmiiller,  Not.  ad  Bochart,  Hieroz.  ii.  649). 
A  later  writer,  Ehrenberg  (Geograph.  Zeit.  ix.  85), 
from  having  observed  a  number  of  "  flying-fish  " 
(gurnards,  of  the  genus  Trigla  of  Oken,  Dactylo- 
pterus  of  modern  icthyologists),  lying  dead  on  the 
shore  near  Elim,  believed  that  this  was  the  food  of 
the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness,  and  named  thn  fish 
"  Trigla  Israelitarum."  Hermann  von  der  Hardt 
supposed  that  the  locust  bird  (Pastor  Roseus),  was 
intended  by  sll&v  ;  an  \  recently  Mr.  Forster  (  Voice 
of  Israel,  p.  98),  has  advanced  an  opinion  that 
"  red  geese  "  of  the  genus  Casarca  are  to  be  under 
stood  by  the  Hebrew  term ;  a  similar  explanation 
has  been  suggested  by  Stanley  (S.  $  P.  p.  82)  and 
adopted  by  Tennent  (Ceylon,  i.  487  note}:  this  is 
apparently  an  old  conceit,  for  Patrick  (Numb.  xi.  31) 
alludes  to  such  an  explanation,  but  we  have  been 
unable  to  trace  it  to  its  origin.  Some  writers, 
while  they  hold  that  the  original  word  denotes 
''ouailfi."  are  of  opinion  that  »  species  of  Sand-grouse 


QUAILS  979 

(Pterocles  alchatd),  frequent  in  the  Bible-lands,  L; 
also  included  under  the  term  ;  see  Winer  (Bibl.  Real- 
todrt.  ii.  77'2) ;  Kosenmiiller  (Not.  ad  Hieroz.  ii. 
649);  Faber  (ad  Harmer,  ii.  p.  442);  Gesenius 
(Thes.  s.  v.  1>E>).  It  is  usual  to  refer  to  Hassel- 
quist  as  the  authority  for  believing  that  the  Kata 
(Sand-grouse)  is  denoted :  this  traveller,  however, 
was  rather  inclined  to  believe,  with  some  of  the 
writers  named  above,  that  "  locusts"  and  not 
birds,  are  to  be  understood  (p.  443) ;  and  it  is 
difficult  to  make  cut  what  he  means  by  Tetrao 
Israelitarum.  Linnaeus  supposed  he  intended  by  it 
the  common  "  quail :"  in  one  paragraph  he  states 
that  the  Arabians  call  a  bird  "  of  a  greyish  colour 
and  less  than  our  partridge,"  by  the  name  of  Katta. 
He  adds  "  An  Selaw  ?"  This  cannot  be  the  Pte 
rocles  akhata. 


PHrotla  oictata. 

The  view  taken  by  Ludolf  may  be  dismissed 
with  a  very  few  words.  The  expression  in  Ps. 
h-xviii.  27  of  "feathered  fowl"  (SJ33  S|iy),  which 
is  used  in  reference  to  the  selav,  clearly  denotes 
some  bird,  and  Ludolf  quite  fails  to  prove  that  it 
may  include  winged  insects ;  again  there  is  not  a 
shadow  of  evidence  to  support  the  opinion  that 
sllav  can  ever  signify  any  "  locust,"  this  term  being 
used  in  the  Arabic  and  the  cognate  languages  to 
denote  a  "  quail."  As  to  any  species  of  "  flying- 
fish,"  whether  belonging  to  the  genus  Dactylo- 
pterus,  or  to  that  of  Exocetus,  being  intended,  it 
will  be  enough  to  state  that  "  flying-fish"  are 
quite  unable  to  sustain  their  flight  above  a  few 
hundred  yards  at  the  most,  and  never  could  have 
been  taken  in  the  Red  Sea  in  numbers  sufficient  to 
supply  the  Israelitish  host.  The  interpretation  of 
stildv  by  "  wild  geese,"  or  "  wild  cranes,"  or  any 
"  wild  fowl,"  is  a  gratuitous  assumption  without  a 
particle  of  evidence  in  its  favour.  The  Casarca, 
with  which  Mr.  Forster  identifies  the  sSldv,  is  the 
C.  rutila,  a  bird  of  about  the  size  of  a  Mallard, 
which  can  by  no  means  answer  the  supposed  requi 
site  of  standing  three  feet  high  from  the  ground. 
"  The  large  red-legged  cranes,"  of  which  Professor 
Stanley  speaks,  are  evidently  white  storks  (Ciconia 
alba),  and  would  fulfil  the  condition  as  to  height ;  but 
the  flesh  is  so  nauseous  that  no  Israelite  could  ever 
have  done  more  than  have  tasted  it.  With  respect  to 
the  Pterocles  alchata,  neither  it,  nor  indeed  any  other 
species  of  the  genus,  can  square  with  the  Scriptural 
account  of  the  selav  ;  the  Sand-grouse  are  birds  ot 
strong  wing  and  of  unwearied  flight,  and  nevei 
could  have  been  captured  in  any  numbers  by  the 
Israelitish  multitudes.  We  much  question,  mcmwi , 
wVther  the  people  would  have  eaten  to  excess — foi 

3  k  '> 


980 


QUAILS 


w>  much  the  expression  translated  "  fully  satisfied" 
(1*8.  Ixrviii.  29)  implies  —  of  tn<t  tl"sh  of  this  liird, 
for,  according  to  the  testimony  of  travellers  from 
Dr.  Russell  (Hist,  of  Aleppo,  ii.  194,  2nd  ed.)  down 
to  observers  of  to-day,  the  riesh  of  the  Sand  -grouse 
is  hard  and  tasteless.  It  is  clear,  however,  that  the 
seldv  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  105th  Ps.  denotes 
the  common  "  quail  "  (Coturnix  dactylisonans), 
and  no  ether  bird.  In  the  first  place,  the  Heb.  word 
V?t?  is  unquestionably  identical  with  the  Arabic 


),  a  "  quail."  According  to  Schul- 
tens  (Orig.  Heb.  i.  231)  the  Heb.  ^fc>  is  derived 
from  an  Arabic  root  "  to  be  fat  ;"  the  round  plump 
form  of  the  quail  is  eminently  suitable  to  this 
etvmology  ;  indeed  its  fatness  is  proverbial.  The 
objections  which  have  been  urged  by  Patrick  and 
others  against  "  quails  "  being  intended  are  very 
easily  refuted.  The  expression,  "  as  it  were  two 
cubits  (high)  upon  the  face  of  the  earth"  (Num. 
xi.  31)  is  explained  by  the  LXX.,  by  the  Vulg., 
and  by  Josepnus  (Ant.  iii.  1,  §5),  to  refer  to  the 
height  at  which  the  quails  flew  above  the  ground, 
in  their  exhausted  condition  from  then  long  flight. 
As  to  the  enormous  quantities  which  the  least  suc 
cessful  Israelite  is  said  to  have  taken,  viz.  "  ten 
homers,"  in  the  space  of  a  night  and  two  days,  there 
is  every  reason  for  believing  that  the  "homers" 
here  spoken  of  do  not  denote  strictly  the  measure  of 
that  name,  but  simply  "  a  heap  :"  this  is  the  ex 
planation  given  by  Onkelos  and  the  Arabic  versions 
of  Saadias  and  Erpenius,  in  Num.  xi.  31. 

The  quail  migrates  in  immense  numbers,  see 
Pliny  (H.  N.  x.  23),  and  Tournefort  (  Voyage,  i. 
329),  who  says  that  all  the  islands  of  the  Archi 
pelago  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year  are  covered 
with  these  birds.  Col.  Sykes  states  that  such 
quantities  were  once  caught  in  Capri,  near  Naples, 
as  to  have  afforded  the  bishop  no  small  share 
of  his  revenue,  and  that  in  consequence  he  has 
been  called  Bishop  of  Quails.  The  same  writer 
mentions  also  (Trans.  Zool.  Soc.  ii.)  that  160,000 
quails  have  been  netted  in  one  season  on  this  little 
island  ;  according  to  Temminck  100,000  have  been 
taken  near  Nettuno,  in  one  day.  The  Israelites 
would  have  had  little  difficulty  in  capturing  large 
quantities  of  these  birds,  as  they  are  known  to 
arrive  at  places  sometimes  so  completely  exhausted 
by  their  flight  as  to  be  readily  taken,  not  in  nets 
only,  but  by  the  hand.  See  Diod.  Sic.  (i.  p.  82, 
ed.  Dindorf)  ;  Prosper  Alpinus  (Rerum  Aegypt. 
iv.  1)  ;  Josephus  (Ant.  iii.  1,  §5).  Sykes  (I.  c.~), 
says  "  they  arrive  in  spring  on  the  shores  of 
Provence  so  fatigued  that  for  the  first  few  days 
they  allow  themselves  to  be  taken  by  the  hand." 
The  Israelites  "  spread  the  quails  round  about 
the  camp  ;"  this  was  for  the  purpose  of  drying 
them.  The  Egyptians  similarly  prepared  these 
birds:  see  Herodotus  (ii.  77),  and  Maillet  (Lettres 
sur  fEgypte,  ix.  p.  21,  iv.  p.  130).  The  expression 
,  "  quails  from  the  sea,"  Num.  xi.  31,  must  not  be 
restricted  to  denote  that  the  birds  came  from  the 
sea  as  their  starting  point,  but  it  must  be  taken  to 
ihow  the  direction  from  which  they  were  coming  ; 
the  quails  were,  at  the  time  of  the  event  narrated  in 
the  sacred  writings,  on  their  spring  journey  of  migra 
tion  northwards,  an  interesting  proof,  as  Col.  Sykes 
has  remarked,  of  the  perpetuation  of  an  instinct 


•  "  On  two  successive  year?  I  observed  enormous  flights 
of  quails  on  the  N.  coast  of  Algeria,  which  arrived  from 
the  South  in  (Ac  night,  and  were  at  daj'brcak  in  such  num. 


QUAILS 

through  some  3300  years;  the  flight  which  fed  tlu 
multitudes  at  Kibroth-hattaavah  ini^ht  Imvc  stai-tH 
from  Southern  Egypt  and  crossed  the  lied  Son  near 
Ifcu?  Mohammed,  and  so  up  the  gulf  of  Akalxih  into 
Arabia  Petraea.  It  is  interesting  to  note  the  time 
specified,  "  it  was  at  even "  that  they  began  to 
arrive  ;  and  they,  no  doubt,  continued  to  come  all 
the  night.  Many  observers  have  recorded  that  the 
quail  migrates  by  night,  though  this  is  denied  by 
Col.  Montagu  (Ornitkol.  Diet.  art. '  Quail ').»  The 
flesh  of  the  quail,  though  of  an  agreeable  quality,  is 
said  by  some  writers  to  be  heating,  and  it  has  been 
supposed  by  some  that  the  deaths  that  occurred 
from  eating  the  food  in  the  wilderness  resulted 
partly  from  these  birds  feeding  on  hellebore  (Phny, 
H.  N.  x.  23)  and  other  poisonous  plants ;  see 
Winer,  Bib.  Realwb.  ii.  773  ;  but  this  is  exceedingly 
improbable,  although  the  immoderate  gratification 
of  the  appetite  for  the  space  of  a  whole  month 
(Num.  xi.  20)  on  such  food,  in  a  hot  climate,  and 
in  the  case  of  a  people  who  at  the  time  of  the  wan 
derings  rarely  tasted  flesh,  might  have  induced  dan 
gerous  symptoms.  "  The  plague  "  seems  to  have 
been  directly  sent  upon  the  people  by  God  as  a 
punishment  for  their  murmurings,  and  perhaps  is 
not  even  in  a  subordinate  sense  to  be  attributed  to 
natural  causes. 


Cttunux  rvlra  u. 

The  quail  (Coturnix  dactylisonans'),  the  only 
species  of  the  genus  known  to  migrate,  has  a  very 
wide  geographical  range,  being  found  in  China, 
India,  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  and  England,  and, 
according  to  Temminck,  in  Japan.  See  Col.  Sykes's 
paper  on  "  The  Quails  and  Hemipodii  of  India  " 
(Trans,  of  Zool.  Soc.  ii.). 

The  oprvyoft.'firpa  of  the  LXX.  should  not  be 
passed  over  without  a  brief  notice.  It  is  not  easy 
to  determine  what  bird  is  intended  by  this  term  as 
used  by  Aristotle  and  Pliny  (ortyyotneira) ;  accord 
ing  to  the  account  given  of  this  bird  by  the  Greek 
and  Latin  writers  on  Natural  History  just  men 
tioned,  the  ortygometra  precedes  the  quail  in  its 
migrations,  and  acts  as  a  sort  of  leader  to  the  flight. 
Some  ornithologists,  as  Belon  and  Fleming  (lirit. 
Anim.  p.  98)  have  assigned  this  term  to  the  "  Land 
rail"  (Crex  pratensis),  the  Roi  des  Cailles  of  the 
French,  Re  di  Quaglie  of  the  Italians,  and  the 


bers  through  the  plains,  that  scores  of  sportsmen  hod  cnlj 
to  shoot  as  fast  as  they  could  reload"  (H.  15  Tristwa) 


QUAKTUS 


QUEEN  OF  HEAVEN 


NncfcitMaWg-of  the  Germans,    but    with   what    reading  followed  in  the  LXX., 
irtison  we  are  unable  to  say;   probably  the  LXX. 
use  the  term  as  a  synonym  ot'-fyrruf,  or  to  express 
the  good  condition   in  which   the  birds  were,  for 
Hesychius  explains  bp-rvyo^Tpa.  by  Spru{  virep- 


s,  i.  e.  "  a  quail  of  large  size." 
Thus,  in  point  of  etymology,  zoology,  history, 
and  the  authority  of  almost  all  the  important  old 
Versions,  we  have  as  complete  a  chain  of  evidence 
in  proof  of  the  Quail  being  the  true  representative 
of  the  Seldo  as  can  possibly  be  required.  [W.  H.] 

QUAKTUS  (Korfopros  :  Quartws),  a  Christian 
of  Corinth,  whose  salutations  St.  Paul  sends  to  the 
brethren  at  Rome  (Rom.  xvi.  23).  There  is  the  usual 
tradition  that  he  was  one  of  the  Seventy  disciples  ; 
and  it  is  also  said  that  he  ultimately  became  bishop 
of  Berytus  (Tillemout,  i.  334).  [E.  H—  s.] 

QUATERNION  (rfrpdStof  :  qitaternio),  a 
military  term,  signifying  a  guard  of  four  soldiers, 
two  of  whorr>  were  attached  to  the  person  of  a 
prisoner,  while  the  other  two  kept  watch  outside 
tne  door  of  his  cell  (Vegetius,  De  Re  mil.  iii.  8  ; 
Polyb.  vi.  33,  §7).  Peter  was  delivered  over  to 
four  such  bodies  of  four  (Acts  xii.  4),  each  of  which 
took  charge  of  him  for  a  single  watch  of  the 
night.  [W.  L.  B.] 


981 

"  the  dclrr," 

according  better  with  the  context.         [W.  L.  B.]  • 
QUEEN  OF  HEAVEN.      In  Jer.  vii.  18 


QUEEN 


rVV3J).  Of  the  three 


Hebrew  terms  cited  as  the  equivalents  of  "  queen  " 
in  the  A.  V.,  the  first  alone  is  applied  to  a  queen- 
regnant  ;  the  first  and  second  equally  to  a  queen- 
consort,  without,  however,  implying  the  dignity 
which  in  European  nations  attaches  to  that  position  ; 
and  the  third  to  the  queen-mother,  to  whom  that 
dignity  is  transferred  in  Oriental  courts.  The  ety 
mological  force  of  the  words  accords  with  their 
application.  Malcah  is  the  feminine  of  melech, 
"  king  ;"  it  is  applied  in  its  first  sense  to  the  queen 
of  Sheba  (1  K.  x.  1),  and  in  its  second  to  the  wives 
of  the  first  rank,  as  distinguished  from  the  concu 
bines,  in  a  royal  harem  (Esth.  i.  9  ff.,  vii.  1  ff.  ; 
Cant.  vi.  8):  the  term  "princesses"  is  similarly 
used  in  1  K.  xi.  3.  Shegdl  simply  means  "  wife  ;" 
it  is  applied  to  Solomon's  bride  (Ps.  xlv.  9),  and  to 


xliv.  17,  18,  19,  25,  the  Heb.    D?OB>n 

melcccth  hashshdinayim,  is  thus  rendered  in  the 
A.  V.  In  the  margin  is  given  "  frame  or  work 
manship  of  heaven,"  for  in  twenty  of  Kennicott's 

MSS.  the  reading  is  TDK/D,  intleceth,  of  which 

this  is  the  translation,  and  the  same  is  tl  e  case  in 
fourteen  MSS.  of  Jer.  xliv.  18,  and  in  thirteen  of 
Jer.  xliv.  19.  The  latter  reading  is  followed  by 
the  LXX.  and  Peshito  Syriac  in  Jer.  vii.  18,  but  in 
all  the  other  passages  the  received  text  is  adopted, 
as  by  the  Vulgate  in  every  instance.  Kimchi  says 

"  K  is  wanting,  and  it  is  as  if  J"l2fcOO,  '  workman 
ship  of  heaven,'  i.  e.  the  stars  ;  and  some  interpret 
'  the  queen  of  heaven,'  i.  e,  a  great  star  which  is  in 
the  heavens."  •  Rashi  is  in  favour  of  the  latter ; 
and  the  Targum  renders  throughout  "  the  star  of 
heaven."  Kircher  was  in  favour  of  some  con 
stellation,  the  Pleiades  or  Hyades.  It  is  generally 
believed  that  the  "  queen  of  heaven"  is  the  moon 
(comp.  "  siderum  regina,"  Hor.  Carm.  Sec.  35,  and 
"  regina  coeli,"  Apul.  Met.  xi.  657),  worshipped 
as  Ashtaroth  or  Astarte,  to  whom  the  Hebrew 
women  offered  cakes  in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem. 
Hitzig  (Der  Proph.  Jeremja,  p.  64)  says  the 
Hebrews  gave  this  title  to  the  Egyptian  Neith, 
whose  name  in  the  form  Ta-nith,  with  the  Egyp 
tian  article,  appears  with  that  of  Baal  Hanmian, 
on  four  Carthaginian  inscriptions.  It  is  little 
to  the  purpose  to  inquire  by  what  other  names 
this  goddess  was  known  among  the  Phoenician 
colonists :  the  Hebrews,  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah, 
appear  not  to  have  given  her  any  special  title. 
The  Babylonian  Venus,  according  to  Harpocration 
(quoted  by  Selden,  de  Dis  Syris,  synt.  2,  cap.  6, 
p.  220,  ed.  1617),  was  also  styled  "  the  queen  of 
heaven."  Mr.  Layard  identifies  Hem,  "  the  second 
deity  mentioned  by  Diodorus,  with  Astarte,  My- 
litta,  or  Venus,"  and  with  the  "  '  queen  of  heaven,' 
frequently  mentioned  in  the  sacred  volumes. 


Coaldee  and  Persian  monarchs  (Dan.  v.  2,  3 ;  Neh. 
ii.  S).  Gebirdh,  on  the  other  hand,  is  expressive  of 
authority  ;  it  means  "  powerful  "  or  "  mistress."  It 
would  therefore  be  applied  to  the  female  who  exer 
cised  the  highest  authority,  and  this,  in  an  Oriental 
household,  is  not  the  wife  but  the  mother  of  the 
master.  Strange  as  such  an  arrangement  at  first 
sight  appears,  it  is  one  of  the  inevitable  results  of 
polygamy :  the  number  of  the  wives,  their  social 
position  previous  to  marriage,  and  the  precariousness 
of  their  hold  on  the  allections  of  their  lord,  combine 
to  annihilate  their  influence,  which  is  transferred  to 
the  mother  as  being  the  only  female  who  occupies 
a  fixed  and  dignified  position.  Hence  the  applica 
tion  of  the  term  gelArdh  to  the  queen-moMer,  the 
extent  of  whose  influence  is  well  illustrated  by  the 
narrative  of  the  interview  of  Solomon  and  Bath- 
nheba,  as  given  in  1  K.  ii.  19  ff.  The  term  is 
applied  to  Maachah,  Asa's  mother,  who  was  deposed 
from  her  dignity  in  consequence  of  her  idolatry 
(1  K.  xv.  13;  2  Chr.  xv.  16);  to  Jezebel  as  con- 
tasted  with  Joram  (2  K.  x.  13,  "  the  children  of 
the  king,  and  the  children  of  the  queen  ")  ;  and  to 
the  mother  of  Jehoiachin  or  Jeconiah  (Jer.  xiii.  18  ; 
compare  2  K.  xxiv.  12;  Jer.  xxix.  2).  In  1  K.  xi. 
19.  the  text  probably  requires  einendatkm,  the 


the  wives  of  the  first  rank  iii  the  harems  of  the    The  planet  which  bore  her  name  was  sacred  to  her, 

and  in  the  Assyrian  sculptures  a  star  is  placed  upon 
her  head.  She  was  called  Beltis,  because  she  was 
the  female  form  of  the  great  divinity,  or  Baal ;  the 
two,  there  is  reason  to  conjecture,  having  been  ori 
ginally  but  one,  and  androgyne.  Her  worship  pene 
trated  from  Assyria  into  Asia  Minor,  where  its 
Assyrian  origin  was  recognised.  In  the  rock  tablets 
of  Pterium  she  is  represented,  as  in  those  of  Assyria, 
standing  erect  on  a  lion,  and  crowned  with  a  tower 
or  mural  coronet;  which,  we  learn  from  Lucian., 
was  peculiar  to  the  Semitic  figure  of  the  goddess. 
This  may  have  been  a  modification  of  the  high  cap 
of  the  Assyrian  bas-reliefs.  To  the  Shemites  she 
was  known  under  the  names  of  Astarte,  Ashtaroth, 
Mylitta,  and  Alitta,  according  to  the  various  dia 
lects  of  the  nations  amongst  which  her  worship 
prevailed"  (Nineveh,  ii.  pp.  454,  456,  457).  It  is 
so  difficult  to  separate  the  worship  of  the  moon- 
goddess  from  that  of  the  planet  Venus  in  tha  Assy 
rian  mythology  when  introduced  among  the  western 
nations,  that  the  two  are  frequently  confused. 
Movers  believes  that  Ashtoreth  was  originally  the 
moon-goddess,  while  according  to  Rawlinson  (Jferod. 
i.  521)  Ishtar  is  the  Babylonian  Venus,  one  ol 
whose  titles  in  the  Sardanapalus  inscriptions  ii 
"  the  mistress  of  heaven  and  earth." 


QUICKSANDS 


,   camdnim  : 


982 

With  the 

which  were  offered  in  her  honour,  with  incense 
and  libations,  Selden  compares  the  irlrupa  (A.  V. 
"  bran")  of  Ep.  of  Jer.  43,  which  were  burnt  by  the 
women  who  sat  by  the  wayside  near  the  idolatrous 
temples  for  the  purposes  of  prostitution.  These 
TiVupo  were  offered  in  sacrifice  to  Hecate,  while 
invoking  her  aid  for  success  in  love  (Theocr.  ii.  33). 
The  Targum  gives  j^p-I^PS,  carduttn,  which  else 
where  appears  to  be  the  Greek  x(tP^°>T^> a  sleeved 
tunic.  Hash!  says  the  cakes  had  the  image  of  the 
god  stamped  upon  them,  and  Theodoret  that  they 
contained  pine-cones  and  raisins.  [W.  A.  W.] 


QUICKSANDS,  THE  (ij  Upris:  Syrtis), 
more  properly  THE  SYRTIS  (Acts  xxvii.  17),  the 
broad  and  deep  bight  on  the  North  African  coast 
between  Carthage  and  Cyrene.  The  name  is  derived 
from  Sert,  an  Arabic  word  for  a  desert.  For  two 
reasons  this  region  was  an  object  of  peculiar  dread  to 
the  ancient  navigators  of  the  Mediterranean,  partly 
because  of  the  drifting  sands  and  the  heat  along  the 
shore  itself,  but  chiefly  because  of  the  shallows  and 
the  uncertain  currents  of  water  in  the  bay.  Jose- 
phus,  who  was  himself  once  wrecked  in  this  part  of 
the  Mediterranean,  makes  Agrippa  say  (B.  J.  ii.  16, 
§4),  tpofifpal  Koi  roTs  axovovcn  'Svprets.  So  noto 
rious  were  these  danger,  that  they  became  a  common 
place  with  the  poets  (see  Hor.  Od.  i.  22,  5;  Ov.  Fast. 
i  v.  499  ;  Virg.  Am.  i.  1  1  1  ;  Tibull.  iii.  4,  9  1  ;  Lucan, 
Phars.  ix.  431).  It  is  most  to  our  purpose  here, 
however,  to  refer  to  Apollonius  Rhodius,  who  was 
ramiliar  with  all  the  notions  of  the  Alexandrian 
sailors.  In  the  4th  book  of  his  Argonaut.  1232-1237, 
he  supplies  illustrations  of  the  passage  before  us,  in 
more  respects  than  one  —  in  the  sudden  violence 
(iu>apir<iy$-ni>)  of  the  terrible  north  wind 
Bope'oo  OueAAa),  in  its  long  duration  (^we' 
N«5»tTos  fyiws  Kal  r6ffffa  tpfp'  ^juara),  and  in  the 
terror  which  the  sailors  felt  of  being  driven  into  the 
Syrtis  (Tlpoirpb  fid\'  tvtioOi  ~S,vpriv,  Sff  ovKtri 
yJtrros  oirlffffu  NV<T<  W\et)-  [See  CLADDA  and 
EUROCLYDON.]  There  were  properly  two  Syrtes, 
the  eastern  or  larger,  now  called  the  Gulf  of  Sidra, 
and  the  western  or  smaller,  now  the  Gulf  of  Cabes. 
It  is  the  former  to  which  our  attention  is  directed 
in  this  passage  of  the  Acts.  The  ship  was  caught 
by  a  north-easterly  gale  on  the  south  coast  of 
CRETE,  near  Mount  Ida,  and  was  driven  to  the 
island  of  Clauda.  This  line  of  drift,  continued, 
would  strike  the  greater  Syrtis  :  whence  the  natural 
apprehension^  the  sailors.  [SHIP.]  The  best  modem 
account  of  this  part  of  the  African  coast  is  that  which 
is  given  (in  his  Memoir  on  the  Mediterranean,  pp, 
87-91,  186-190)  by  Admiral  Smyth,  who  was  him 
self  the  first  to  survey  this  bay  thoroughly,  and  to 
divest  it  of  many  of  its  terrors.  [J.  S.  H.] 

QUINTUS  MEMMIUS,  2  Mace.  xi.  34.  [S« 
MANLiusT.  vol.  ii.  2286.] 

QUIVER.  Two  distinct  Hebrew  terms  are 
represented  by  this  word  in  the  A.  V. 

(1.)  vR,  thill.  This  occurs  only  in  Gen.  xxvii. 
3  —  "take  thy  weapons  (lit.  "thy  things"),  thy 
quivsr  and  thy  bow."  It  is  derived  (by  Gesenius, 
Thes.  1504,  and  Fiirst,  Handwb.  ii.  528)  from  a 
root  which  has  the  force  of  hanging.  The  passage 
itself  affords  no  clue  to  its  meaning.  It  may  there 
fore  signify  either  a  quiver,  or  a  suspended  weapon 
—•for  instance,  such  a  sword  as  in  our  own  language 
was  formerly  called  a  "  hanger."  Between  these 


QUIVER 

two  significations  the  interpreters  are  divided.  Tl< 
LXX.,  Vulgate,  and  Targum  Pseudojon.  adhere  t<J 
the  former ;  Onkelos,  the  Peshito  an  I  Arabic  Ver 
sions,  to  the  latter. 


Warrior  with  Quiver. 


(2.)  HSK'N,  ashpdh.  The  root  of  this  word  it 
uncertain  (Gesenius,  Thes.  161).  From  two  of  .t< 
occurrences  its  force  would  seem  to  be  that  of  con 
taining  or  concealing  (Ps.  cxxvii.  5 ;  Is.  xlix.  2). 
It  is  connected  with  arrows  only  in  Lam.  iii.  13. 
Its  other  occurrences  are  Job  xxxix.  23,  Is.  xxii.  6, 
and  Jer.  v.  16.  In  each  of  these  the  LXX.  translate 
it  by  "  quiver  "  (<paperpa),  with  two  exceptions,  Job 
xxxix.  23,  and  Ps.  cxxvii.  5,  in  the  former  of  which 
they  render  it  by  "  bow,"  in  the  latter  by  4iri6vfj.ia. 

As  to  the  thing  itself,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible 
to  indicate  either  its  form  or  material,  or  in  what 
way  it  was  carried.  The  quivers  of  the  \ssyrians 


A--.-vn.iti  Cluuiol  with  y 


BABBAH 


983 


we  rarely  shewn  in -the  sculptures.  When  they  do 
appear  they  are  worn  iit  the  back,  with  the  top 
between  the  shoulders  of  the  wearer,  or  hung  at  the 
side  of  the  chariot. 

The  Egyptian  warriors,  on  the  other  hand,  wore 
them  slung  nearly  horizontal,  drawing  out  the 
arrows  from  beneath  the  arm  (Wilkinson,  Popular 
Account,  i.  354).  The  quiver  was  about  4  inches 
diameter,  supported  by  a  bdt  passing  over  the 
shoulder  and  across  the  breast  to  the  opposite  side. 
When  not  in  actual  use,  it  was  shitted  behind. 

The  English  word  "quiver"  is  a  variation  of 
"  cover" — from  the  French  coutvir;  and  therefore 
answers  to  the  second  of  the  two  Hebrew  words.  [G .] 


R 


BA'AMAH  (nOJH:  'Pey^d,  Gen.  x.  7; 
'Pojitjuo,  Ez.  xxvii.  22:  Regma,  Reema).  A  son  of 
Cush,  and  father  of  the  Cushite  Sheba  and  Dedan. 
The  tribe  of  Raamah  became  afterwards  renowned 
as  traders;  in  Ezekiel's  lamentation  for  Tyre  it  is 
written,  "  the  merchants  of  Sheba  and  Kaamah, 
they  [were]  thy  merchants  ;  they  occupied  in  thy 
fairs  with  chief  of  all  the  spices,  and  with  all 
precious  stones  and  gold  "  (xxvii.  22).  The  general 
question  of  the  identity,  by  intermarriage,  &c.,  of 
the  Cushite  Sheba  and  Dedan  with  the  Keturahites 
of  the  same  names  is  discussed,  and  the  27th  chapter 
of  Ezekiel  examined,  in  art.  DEDAN.  Of  the  settle 
ment  of  Kaamah  on  the  shores  of  the  Persian  gulf 
there  are  several  indications.  Traces  of  Dedan  are 
very  faint  ;  but  Kaamah  seems  to  be  recovered, 
through  the  LXX.  reading  of  Gen.  x.  7,  in  the 
'Ptypd  of  Ptol.  vi.  7,  and  'Prjy/ta  of  Steph. 
Byzant.  Of  Sheba,  the  other  son  of  Raamah, 
the  writer  has  found  a  trace  in  a  ruined,  city  so 


&,  Sheba)  on  the  island  of  Awal  (Marasid, 

s.  v.),  belonging  to  the  province  of  Arabia  called 
El-Bahreyn  on  the  shores  of  the  gulf.  [SHEBA.] 
This  identification  strengthens  that  of  Raamah  with 
'Peypd  ;  and  the  establishment  of  these  Cushite 
settlements  on  the  Persian  gulf  is  of  course  im 
portant  to  the  theory  of  the  identity  of  these 
Cushite  and  Keturahite  tribes:  but,  besides  etymo 
logical  grounds,  there  are  the  strong  reasons  stated 
in  DEDAN  for  holding  that  the  Cushites  colonized 
that  region,  and  for  connecting  them  commercially 
with  Palestine  by  the  great  desert  route. 

The  town  mentioned  by  Niebuhr  called  Reymeh 

(xjj  .,  Descr.  de  F  Arabic)  cannot,  on  etymological 

grounds,  be  connected  with  Raamah,  as  it  wants  an 
equivalent  for  the  ]}  ;  nor  can  we  suppose  that  it  is  to 
be  probably  traced  three  days'  journey  from  San'a 
[UZAL],  the  capital  of  the  Yemen.          [E.  S.  P.] 
RAAMI'AHliVOjn:  'Pf*\»d;  FA  Saefua 
Raamias).     One  of  the  chiefs  who  returned  with 
Zerubbabel  (Neh.  vii.  7).     In  Ezr.  ii.  2  he  is  called 
REELAIAH,  and  the  Greek  equivalent  of  the  name 


•  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out  that  the  title  Rabbi 
is  directly  derived  from  the  same  root. 

•>  In  Deut.  iii.  5  it  is  rg  ajcpa  riav  v'uav  'An/jnav  in  both 
MSS.  In  Josh.  xiii.  25  the  Vat.  has*Apa£a  y  i<mv  (card 
irooaia-nov  'ApdJ,  where  the  first  and  last  wotus  of  tho 
l»ntence  seem  to  have  changed  places. 

«  The  statement  of  Eusebius  (Onow  "  Amman  "j  that 


a  the  LXX.  of  Neh.  appears  to  have  arisen  from  a 
confusion  of  the  two  readings,  unless,  as  llurringtoi 
Geneal.  ii.  68)  suggests,  'PecAua  is  an  error  of  the 
:opyist  for  'Pee\am,  the  uncial  letters  AI  having 
>een  mistaken  for  M.  In  1  Esd.  v.  2  the  mane 
ippears  as  REESAIAS. 

RAAM'SES,  Ex.  i.  10.  [RAME8E8.J 
RAB'BAH.  The  name  of  several  ancient  pi  tee* 
:>oth  East  and  West  of  the  Jordan.  The  root  is 
•ab,  meaning  "  multitude,"  and  thence  "  greatness," 
of  size  or  importance*  (Gesenius,  Thes.  1254  j 
Kiirst,  Handwb.  ii.  347).  The  word  survives  in 
Arabic  as  a  common  appellative,  and  is  also  in  use 
as  the  name  of  places — e.  gr.  Rabba  on  the  east  of 
the  Dead  Sea;  Rabbah,  a  temple  in  the  tribe  of 
Medshidj  (Freytag,  ii.  107a) ;  and  perhaps  also 
Rabat  in  Morocco. 

1.  (Han :  *'PaP0dO,  'Papd0,  i]  'PaWd :  Rabba, 
Rabbath.)  A  very  strong  place  on  the  East  of  Jordan, 
which  when  its  name  is  first  introduced  in  the 
sacred  records  was  the  chief  city  of  the  Ammonites. 
In  five  passages  (Deut.  iii.  11;  2  Sam.  xii.  26, 
xvii.  27  ;  Jer.  xlix.  2  ;  Ez.  xxi.  20)  it  is  styled  at 
length  Rabbath-bene- Amman,  A.  V.  Rabbath  of  the 
Ammonites,  or,  children  of  Ammon  ;  but  elsewhere 
(Josh.  xiii.  25  ;  2  Sam.  xi.  1,  xii.  27,  29  ;  1  Chr. 
xx.  1 ;  Jer.  xlix.  3 ;  Ez.  xxv.  5  ;  Amos  i.  14) 
simply  RABBAH. 

It  appears  in  the  sacred  records  as  the  single 
city  of  the  Ammonites,  at  least  no  other  bears  any 
distinctive  name,  a  fact  which,  as  has  been  already 
remarked  (vol.  i.  60  a),  contrasts  strongly  with  the 
abundant  details  of  the  city-life  of  the  Moabites. 

Whether  it  was  originally,  as  some  conjecture, 
the  HAM  of  which  the  Zuzim  were  dispossessed  by 
Chedorlaomer  (Gen.  xiv.  5),  will  probably  remain 
for  ever  a  ccnjecture.0  When  first  named  it  is  in 
the  hands  of  the  Ammonites,  and  is  mentioned  as  con 
taining  the  bed  or  sarcophagus  of  the  giant  Og 
(Deut.  iii.  11),  possibly  the  trophy  of  some  suc 
cessful  war  of  the  younger  nation  of  Lot,  and  more 
recent  settler  in  the  country,  against  the  more 
ancient  Rephaim.  With  the  people  of  Lot,  their 
kinsmen  the  Israelites  had  no  quarrel,  and  Rabbath- 
of-the-children-of-Ammon  remained  to  all  appear 
ance  unmolested  during  the  first  period  of  the 
Israelite  occupation.  It  was  not  included  in  the 
territory  of  the  tribes  east  of  Jordan ;  the  border 
of  Gad  stops  at  "  Aroer,  which  faces  Rabbah " 
(Josh.  xiii.  25).  The  attacks  of  the  Bene-Ammon 
on  Israel,  however,  brought  these  peaceful  relations 
to  an  end.  Saul  must  have  had  occupation  enough 
on  the  west  of  Jordan  in  attacking  and  repelling 
the  attacks  of  the  Philistines  and  in  pursuing  David 
through  the  woods  and  ravines  of  Judah  to  prevent 
his  crossing  the  river,  unless  on  such  special  occasions 
as  the  relief  of  Jabesh.  At  any  rate  we  never  hear 
of  his  having  penetrated  so  far  in  that  direction  as 
Rabbah.  But  David's  armies  were  often  engaged 
against  both  Moab  and  Ammon. 

His  first  Ammonite  campaign  appears  to  have 
occurred  early  in  his  reign.  Apart  of  the  army, 
under  Abishai,  was  sent  as  far  as  Rabbah  to  keej 
the  Ammonites  in  check  (2  Sam.  x.  10,  14),  tut 


it  was  originally  a  city  of  the  Rephaim,  implies  that  it 
was  the  Ashteroth  Karnaim  of  Gen.  xiv.  In  agreement 
with  this  is  the  fact  that  it  was  in  later  times 
known  as  A  start*  (Steph.  Byz.,  quoted  by  Rtttei,  1155Y 
In  this  case  the  dual  ending  of  Karnam  may  point,  as 
some  have  conjectured  in  Jcrushalaun,  to  tlie 
nature  of  the  city — a  lower  town  aiid  a  cito<M. 


984 


BAliBAil 


the  main  force  under  Joab  remained  at  McJeb.i 
(1  Chr.  xix.  7).  The  following  year  was  occupied 
in  the  great  expedition  by  David  in  person  against 
the  Syrians  at  Mclain,  wherever  that  may  have 
been  (2  Sam.  x.  15-19).  After  their  defeat  the 
Ammonite  war  was  resumed,  and  this  time  Kabbah 
was  made  the  main  point  of  attack  (xi.  1).  Joab 
took  the  command,  and  was  followed  by  the  whole 
of  the  army.  The  expedition  included  Ephraim 
and  Benjamin,  as  well  as  the  king's  own  tribe 
(ver.  11);  the  "king's  slaves"  (ver.  1,  17,  24); 
probably  David's  immediate  body  guard,  and  the 
thirty-seven  chief  captains.  Uriah  was  certainly 
theie,  and  if  a  not  improbable  Jewish  tradition  may 
be  adopted,  Ittai  the  Gittite  was  there  also.  [!TTAI.] 
The  ark  accompanied  the  camp  (ver.  11),  the  only 
time  d  that  we  hear  of  its  doing  so,  except  that  me 
morable  battle  with  the  Philistines,  when  its  capture 
caused  the  death  of  the  high-priest.  David  alone, 
to  his  cost,  remained  in  Jerusalem.  The  country 
was  wasted,  and  the  roving  Ammonites  were  driven 
with  all  their  property  (xii.  30)  into  their  single 
stronghold,  as  the  Bedouin  Kenites  were  driven 
fi-om  their  tents  inside  the  walls  of  Jerusalem 
when  Judah  was  overrun  by  the  Chaldeans. 
[RECHABITES.]  The  siege  must  have  lasted  nearly, 
•r  not  quite,  two  years ;  since  during  its  progress 
David  formed  his  connexion  with  Bathsheba,  s.nd 
the  two  children,  that  which  died  and  Solomon, 
were  successively  bom.  The  sallies  of  the  Am 
monites  appear  to  have  formed  a  main  feature  of 
the  siege  (2  Sam.  xi.  17,  &c.).  At  the  end  of 
that  time  Joab  succeeded  in  capturing  a  portion 
of  the  place — the  "  city  of  waters,"  that  is.  the 
lower  town,  so  called  from  its  containing  the  per 
ennial  stream  which  rises  in  and  still  flows 
through  it.  The  fact  (which  seems  undoubted) 
that  the  source  of  the  stream  was  within  the  lower 
city,  explains  its  having  held  out  for  so  long.  It 

was  also  called  the  "royal  city"  (rO-1?Cin  "VJJ), 

perhaps  from  its  connexion  with  Molech  or  Milcom 
— the  "  king  " — more  probably  from  its  containing 
the  palace  of  Hanun  and  Nahash.  But  the  citadel, 
which  rises  abruptly  on  the  north  side  of  the  lower 
town,  a  place  of  very  great  strength,  still  remained 
to  be  taken,  and  the  honour  of  this  capture,  Joab 
(with  that  devotion  to  David,  which  runs  like  a 
bright  thread  through  the  dark  web  of  his  character) 
insists  on  reserving  for  the  king.  "  I  have  fought," 
writes  he  to  his  uncle,  then  living  at  ease  in  the 
harem  at  Jerusalem,  in  all  the  satisfaction  of  the 
birth  of  Solomon — "  I  have  fought  against  Rabbah, 
aad  have  taken  e  the  city  of  waters ;  but  the  citadel 
•till  remains:  now  therefore  gather  the  rest  of  the 
people  together  and  come ;  put  yourself  at  the  head 
of  the  whole  army,  renew  the  assault  against  the 
citadel,  take  it,  and  thus  finish  the  siege  which  I 
have  carried  so  far,"  and  then  he  ends  with  a 
rough  banter' — half  jest,  half  earnest — "lest  I 
take  the  city  and  in  future  it  go  under  my  name." 
-  The  water*  of  the  lower  city  once  in  the  hands  of 
the  besiegers  the  fate  of  the  citadel  was  certain, 
for  that  fortress  possessed  in  itself  (as  we  learn 
from  the  invaluable  notice  of  Joscphus,  Ant.  vii. 
7,  §5)  but  one  well  of  limited  supply,  quite  in- 


d  On  a  former  occasion  (Num.  xxxi.  6)  the  "holy 
things  "  tmly  are  specified ;  an  expression  which  hardly 
bccm.s  iu  include  tbc  ark. 

•  The  Vulgate  alters  the  force  of  the  whole  passage  by 
•  uideriiig  tills  et  capienda  ett  urbs  atjuarum,  •'  the  city 


RABBAH 

adequate  to  the  throng  which  crowded  its  walls 
The  provisions  also  were  at  last  exhausted,  and 
shortly  after  David's  arrival  the  fortress  was  taken, 
and  its  inmates,  with  a  very  great  booty,  and  th* 
idol  of  Molech,  with  all  its  costly  adornments,  fell 
into  the  hands  of  David.  [ITTAI ;  Moi.KCH.] 

We  are  not  told  whether  the  city  was  demolished 
or  whether  Davi  was  satisfied  with  the  slaughter 
of  its  inmates.  In  the  time  of  Amos,  two  cen 
turies  and  a  half  later,  it  had  again  a  "  wall  "  anrf 
"  palaces,"  and  was  still  the  sanctuary  of  Molech — 
"the  king"  (Am.  i.  14).  So  it  was  also  at  the 
date  of  the  invasion  of  Nebuchadnezzar  ( Jer.  xlix. 
2,  3),  when  its  dependent  towns  ("daughters")  are 
mentioned,  and  when  it  is  named  in  such  terms  as 
imply  that  it  was  of  equal  importance  with  Jeru 
salem  (Ez.  xxi.  20).  At  Rabbah,  no  doubt  B;ialis, 
king  of  the  Bene-Ammon  (Jer.  xl.  14),  held  such 
court  as  he  could  muster,  and  within  its  walls  was 
plotted  the  attack  of  Ishmael  which  cost  Gedaliah 
his  life, and  drove  Jeremiah  into  Egypt.  [ISHMAEL 
6,  vol.  i.  p.  895  a.]  The  denunciations  of  the  pro 
phets  just  named  may  have  been  fulfilled,  either  at 
the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  five 
years  afterwards,  when  the  Assyrian  armies  overran 
the  country  east  of  Jordan  on  their  road  to  Egypt 
(Joseph.  Ant.  x.  9,  §7).  See  Jerome,  en  Amos  i.  41. 

In  the  period  between  the  Old  and  New  Testa 
ments,  Rabbath-Ammon  appears  to  have  been  a 
place  of  much  importance,  and  the  scene  of  many 
contests.  The  natural  advantages  of  position  and 
water  supply  which  had  always  distinguished  it, 
still  made  it  an  important  citadel  by  turns  to 
each  side,  during  the  contentions  which  raged  for  so 
long  over  the  whole  of  the  district.  It  lay  on  the 
road  between  Heshbon  and  Bosra,  and  was  the  last 
place  at  which  a  stock  of  water  could  be  obtained 
for  the  journey  across  the  desert,  while  as  it  stood 
on  the  confines  of  the  richer  and  more  civilized 
country,  it  formed  an  important  garrison  station, 
for  repelling  the  incursions  of  the  wild  tribes  of  the 
desert.  From  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  (B.C.  285- 
247)  it  received  the  name  of  Philadelpheia  (Jerome 
on  Ez.  xxv.  1 ),  and  the  district  either  then  or  sub 
sequently  was  called  Philadelphene  (Joseph.  B.  J. 
iii.  3,  §3),  or  Arabia  Philadelphensis  (Epiphanius, 
in  Ritter,  Syrien,  1155).  .In  B.C.  218  it  was  taken 
from  the  then  Ptolemy  (Philopator)  by  Antiochus 
the  Great,  after  a  long  and  obstinate  resistance  fi-om 
the  besieged  in  the  citadel.  A  communication  with 
the  spring  in  the  lower  town  had  been  made  since 
(possibly  in  consequence  of)  David's  siege,  by  a  long 
secret  subterranean  passage,  and  had  not  this  been 
discovered  to  Antiochus  by  a  prisoner,  the  citadel 
might  have  been  enabled  to  hold  out  (Polybius,  v. 
17,  in  Ritter,  Syrien,  1155).  During  the  struggle 
between  Antiochus  the  Pious  (Sidetes),  and  Ptolemy 
the  son-in-law  of  Simon  Maccabaeus  (cir.  B.C.  134), 
it  is  mentioned  as  being  governed  by  a  tyrant  named 
Cotylas  (Ant.  xiii.  8,  §1).  Its  ancient  name, 
though  under  a  cloud,  was  still  used;  it  is  men 
tioned  by  Polybius  (v.  71)  under  the  hardly  altered 
form  of  Rabbatamana  ('Pa/SjSara/xaj'a).  About 
the  year  65  we  hear  of  it  as  in  the  hands  of  A  retas 
(one  of  the  Arab  chiefs  of  that  name),  who  retired 
thither  from  Judaea  when  menaced  by  Scaurus, 

of  waters  is  about  to  be  taken."    But  neither  Hebrew  not 
LXX.  will  bear  this  interpretation 

'  Very  characteristic  of  Joab.  See  a  similar  ttiain 
2  Sam.  xix.  6. 


R  ARM  ATT 


985 


Ammtn.  from  the  East :  shewing  the  perennial  stream  and  pan  of  the  citadel-hill.    From  a  sketch  by  \Vm.  Tipping, 


Pompey's  general  (Joseph.  B.  J.  i.  6,  §3).  The 
Arabs  probably  held  it  till  the  year  B.C.  30,  when 
they  were  attacked  there  by  Herod  the  Great.  But 
the  account  of  Josephus  (B.  J.  i.  19,  §5,  6)  seems 
to  imply  that  the  city  was  not  then  inhabited, 
and  that  although  the  citadel  formed  the  main 
point  of  the  combat,  yet  that  it  was  only  occupied 
on  the  instant.  The  water  communication  above 
alluded  to  also  appears  not  to  have  been  then  in 
existence,  for  the  people  who  occupied  the  citadel 
quickly  surrendered  from  thirst,  and  the  whole 
affair  was  over  in  six  days. 

At  the  Christian  era  Philadelpheia  formed  the  I 
eastern  limit  of  the  region  of  Peraea  (B.  J.  iii.  3, 
§3).  It  was  one  of  the  cities  of  the  Decapolis,  and 
as  far  down  as  the  4th  century  was  esteemed  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  and  strongest  cities  of  the 
whole  of  Coele-Syria  (Eusebius,  Onom.  "Amman;" 
\mmianus  Marc,  in  Ritter,  1157).  Its  magnificent 
theatre  (said  to  be  the  largest  s  in  Syria),  temples, 
odeon,  mausoleum,  and  other  public  buildings  were 
probably  erected  during  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries, 
like  those  of  Jerosh,  which  they  resemble  in  style, 
though  their  scale  and  design  are  grander  (Lindsay). 
Amongst  the  ruins  of  an  "  immense  temple  "  on  the 
citadel  hill,  Mr.  Tipping  saw  some  prostrate 
columns  5  ft.  diameter.  Its  coins  are  extant, 
some  bearing  the  figure  of  Astarte,  some  the  word 
Herakleion,  implying  a  worship  of  Hercules,  pro 
bably  the  continuation  of  that  of  Molech  or  Milcom. 
From  Stephanus  of  Byzantium  we  learn  that  it  was 
also  called  Astarte,  doubtless  from  its  containing  a 
temple  of  that  goddess.  Justin  Martyr,  a  native 
of  Shechem,  writing  about  A.D.  140,  speaks  of  the 
city  as  containing  a  multitude  of  Ammonites  (Dial, 
with  Trypho),  though  it  would  probably  not  be  safe 
to  interpret  this  too  strictly. 

Philadelpheia  became  the  seat  of  a  Christian  bishop, 


K  Mr.  Tipping  gives  the  following  dimensions  In  bis 
journal.  Breadth  240  ft.;  bcight  42  steps:  viz.,  first  row 
Hi.  si-coud  14.  third  18. 


and  was  one  of  the  nineteen  sees  of  "  Palestina  ter- 
tia,"  which  were  subordinate  to  Bostra  (Reland, 
Pal.  228).  The  church  still  remains  "  in  excellent 
preservation  "  with  its  lofty  steeple  (Lord  Lindsay  . 
Some  of  the  bishops  appear  to  have  signed  under 
the  title  of  Bakatha ;  which  Bakatha  is  by  Epipha- 
nius  (himself  a  native  of  Palestine)  mentioned  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  imply  that  it  was  but  another 
name  for  Philadelpheia,  derived  from  an  Arab  tribe 
in  whose  possession  it  was  at  that  time  (A.D.  cir. 
400.)  But  this  is  doubtful.  (See  Reland,  Pcu. 
612;  Ritter,  1157.) 

Amman*  lies  about  22  miles  from  the  Joi-dan 
at  the  eastern  apex  of  a  triangle,  of  which  Heshbon 
and  es-Salt  form  respectively  the  southern  and 
northern  points.  It  is  about  14  miles  from  the 
former,  and  12  from  the  latter.  Jerash  is  due 
north,  more  than  20  miles  distant  in  a  straight 
line,  and  35  by  the  usual  road  (Lindsay,  278).  It 
lies  in  a  valley  which  is  a  branch,  or  perhaps  the 
main  course,  of  the  Wady  Zerka,*  usually  iden 
tified  with  the  Jabbok.  The  Moiet-Amman,  or 
water  of  Amman,  a  mere  streamlet,  rises  within  the 
basin  which  contains  the  ruins  of  the  town.  The 
main  valley  is  a  mere  winter  torrent,  but  appears 
to  be  perennial,  and  contains  a  quantity  of  fish,  by 
one  observer  said  to  be  trout  (see  Burckhardt,  358  ; 
G.  Robinson,  ii.  174 ;  "  a  perfect  fishpond,"  Tip 
ping).  The  stream  runs  from  west  to  east,  and 
north  of  it  is  the  citadel  on  its  isolated  hill. 

When  the  Moslems  conquered  Syria  they  found 
the  city  in  ruins  (Abulfeda  in  Ritter,  1158  ;  and  in 
note  to  Lord  Lindsay)  ;  and  in  ruins  remarkable  for 
their  extent  and  desolation  even  for  Syria,  the 
"  Land  of  ruins,"  it  still  remains.  The  public 
buildings  are  said  to  be  Roman,  in  general  character 


h       l^p.  essentially  the  same  word  as  the  Hebrew 

Ammvn. 

i  Tuis  is  distinctly  stated  by  Abulfedu  (Hitter,  110B 
UiuUay,  Hole  37). 


986 


KABBAH 


like  those  at  Jerasli,  except  the  citadel,  which  is 
described  as  of  large  square  stones  put  together 
without  cement,  and  which  is  probably  more 
ancient  than  the  rest.  The  remains  of  private 
houses  scattered  on  both  sides  of  the  stream  are 
veiy  extensive.  They  have  been  visited,  and  de 
scribed  in  more  or  less  detail,  by  Burckhardt  (Syria, 
&57-360),  who  gives  a  plan ;  Seetzen  (Reisen,  i. 
396,  iv.  212-214)  ;  Irby  (June  14) ;  Buckingham, 
E.  Syria,  68-82 ;  Lord  Lindsay  (5th.  ed.  278-284) ; 
G.  Robinson  (ii.  172-178);  Lord  Claud  Hamilton 
(in  Keith,  Evid.  of  Proph.  ch.  vi.).  Burckhardt's 
plan  gives  a  general  idea  of  the  disposition  of  the 
place,  but  a  comparison  with  Mr.  Tipping's  sketch 
(on  the  accuracy  of  which  every  dependence  may 
be  placed),  seems  to  show  that  it  is  not  correct  as 
V>  the  proportions  of  the  different  parts.  Two 
views  are  given  by  Laboi-de  (  Vues  en  Syrie),  one 
of  a  tomb,  the  other  of  the  theatre ;  but  neither 
of  these  embraces  the  characteristic  features  of  the 
plac» — the  streamlet  and  the  citadel.  The  accom 
panying  view  has  been  engraved  (for  the  first  time) 
from  one  of  several  careful  sketches  made  in  1840 
by  William  Tipping,  Esq.,  and  by  him  kindly 
placed,  with  some  valuable  information,  at  the 
Jisposal  of  the  author.  It  is  taken  looking  towards 
the  east.  On  the  right  is  the  beginning  of  the 
citadel  hill.  In  front  is  an  arch  (also  mentioned  by 
Burckhardt)  which  spans  the  stream.  Below  and 
in  front  of  the  arch  is  masonry,  showing  how  the 
stream  was  formerly  embanked  or  quayed  in. 

No  inscriptions  have  been  yet  discovered.  A 
lengthened  and  excellent  summary  of  all  the  infor 
mation  respecting  this  city  will  be  found  in  Ritter's 
Erdkunde,  Syrien  (1145-1159). 


RABBI 

ancient  appellations.  Rabba  lies  on  the  highianb 
at  the  S.E.  quarter  of  the  Dead  Sea,  betwrni  Kerak 
and  Jibel  Sliihan.  Its  ruins,  which  are  unimportant, 
are  described  by  Burckhardt  (July  15),  SeetztQ 
(Reisen,  i.  til),  and  De  Saulcy  (Jan.  18). 


3. 


,  with  the  definite  article: 


Alex.  Apt/8/3a  •  Arebba.)  A  city  of  Judah,  named 
with  Kirjath-jearim,  in  Josh.  rv.  60  only.  No  trace 
of  ite  existence  has  yet  been  discovered. 

4.  In  one  passage  (Josh.  xi.  8)  ZIDON  is  men 
tioned  with  the  affix  Rabbah  —  Zidon-rabbah.  ThL 
is  preserved  in  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.,  though  'n 
the  text  it  is  translated  "  great  Zidon."  [G  | 

EAB'BATH  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OP 
AMMON,  a_d  R.  OF  THE  AMMONITP]S. 
(The  former  is  the  more  accurate,  the  Hebrew  being 
in  both  cases  p£y  *J21  D3"1  :  77  &*pa  rtav  vliav 

'A.fj.fj.uiv,  'PojSjSofl  vliav  "A/ijucii/  :  Rabbath  filiorum 
Ammm).  This  is  the  full  appellation  of  the  place 
commonly  given  as  RABBAH.  It  occurs  only  in 
Deut.  iii.  11  and  Ezek.  xxi.  20.  The  th  is  merely 
the  Hebrew  mode  of  connecting  a  word  ending  in 


ah  with  one  following  it. 

BEATH,  KlRJATH,  &C.) 

RAB'BI  (<3T : 


(Comp.  RAMATH,  Gi- 
[G.] 

A  title  of  respect  given 


by  the  Jews  to   their  doctors   and  teachers,  and 
often  addressed  to   our   Lord    (Matt,  xxiii.  7,  8, 
xxvi.  25,  49;  Mark  ix.  5,  xi.  21,  xiv.  45;  John 
i.  39,  50,  iii.  2,  26,  iv.  31,  vi.  25,  ix.  2,  xi.  8> 
The  meaning  of  the  title  is  interpreted  in  express 
words   by   St.  John,    and   by   implication   in   St. 
Matthew,  to  mean  Master,  Teacher;   AiSaoxoAt, 
John  i.  39   (compare  xi.  28,  xiii.   13),  and  Matt, 
xxiii.  8,  where  recent  editors  (Tisch- 
endorf,   Wordsworth,  Alford),   on 
the  authority  of  MSS.,  read  &  81- 
SdffKa\os,  instead  of  &  KaOijyirrlis 
of  the  Textus  Receptus.    The  same 
interpretation  is  given  by  St.  John 
of  the  kindred  title  RABBONI,  'Pa/3- 
Povvi   (John  xx.   16),  which  also 
occurs  in  Mark  x.  35,  where  the 
Textus  Receptus,  with  less  autho 
rity,  spells  the  word  'Pap&ovl.  The 
reading  in  John  xx.  16,  which  has 
perhaps  the  greatest  weight  of  au- 

Coro  of  Philadelphia,  showing  the  Tent  or  Shrine  of  Heraklu,  the  Greek  equivalent  to    f,       .£  , 

Molech.    Obv.:   AVT'KAICM-AVP-ANTOWINV,   Bust  of  M.  Aureliu.,  r.    *•««*•  makeS  «1   addition   to   t] 

ReT.:  *IAKOCYPHPAKA€ION   PMA  [A.V.C.  6901  Shrtae  in  quadriga,  r.  commontext:  "  bhe  turned  herself 
[»lAAAfcA*enN  KOIAUC  CYP1AC  HPAKAtlON].  and  said  unto  Him,  in  the  Hebrew 

tongue  ('E£f>ai<rTf),Rabboni;  which 


2.  Although  there  is  no  trace  of  the  fact  in  the 
Bible,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  name  of 
Rabbah  was  also  attached  in  biblical  times  to  the 
chief  city  of  Moab.  Its  biblical  name  is  AR,  but 
we  have  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  (Onomast. 
"  Moab  ")  that  in  the  4th  century  it  possessed  the 
special  title  of  Rabbath  Moab,  or  as  it  appears  in  the 
corrupted  orthography  of  Stephanus  of  Byzantium, 
the  coins,  and  the  Ecclesiastical  Lists,  Rabathmoba, 
Rabbathmoma,  scndRatba  orRobbaMoabitis  (Reland, 
957,  226  ;  Seetzen,  Reisen,  iv.  227 ;  Ritter,  1220). 
This  name  was  for  a  time  displaced  by  Areopolis, 
in  the  same  manner  that  Rabbath- A  mmon  had  been 
£7  Philadelphia:  these,  however,  were  but  the 
names  imposed  by  the  temporary  masters  of  the 
country,  and  employed  by  them  in  their  official 
documents,  and  when  they  passed  away,  the  original 
names,  which  had  never  lost  their  place  in  the 
mouths  of  the  common  people,  reappeared,  and 
and  Amman  still  remain  to  testily  to  the 


is  to  say,  Master."  The  *  which  is  added  to  these 
titles,  3T  (rob)  and  p3T  (rabbvn),  or  }3T  (rabbdn), 

has  been  thought  to  be  the  pronominal  affix  "  My;" 
but  it  is  to  be  noted  that  St.  John  does  not 
translate  either  of  these  by  "My  Master,"  but 
simply  "  Master,"  so  that  the  »  would  seem  to 
have  lost  any  especial  significance  as  a  possessive 
pronoun  intimating  appropriation  or  endearment, 
and,  like  the  "  my "  in  titles  of  respect  among 
ourselves,  or  in  such  terms  as  J/onseigneur,  Mon 
sieur,  to  be  merely  part  of  the  formal  address. 
Information  on  these  titles  may  be  found  in  Light- 
foot,  Harmony  of  the  Four  Evangelists,  John  i.  38 ; 
Horae  Hebraicae  et  Talnaidicae,  Matt,  xxiii.  7. 

The  Latin  translation,  Magister  (connected  with 
magnus,  magis),  is  a  title  formed  on  the  same 
principle  as  Rabbi,  from  rab,  "  great."  Eab  enters 
into  the  composition  of  many  nan.es  of  dignity  and 
oilice.  [IvABSHAKKH ;  RABSARIS;  R*BMAG.] 


RABBITH 

The  title  Rabbi  is  not  known  to  have  been  used 
kifore  the  reign  of  Herod  the  Great,  and  is  thought 
to  have  taken  its  rise  about  the  time  of  the  dis 
putes  between  the  rival  schools  of  Hillel  and 
Shammai.  Before  that  period  the  prophets  and 
the  men  of  the  great  synagogue  were  simply  called 
by  their  proper  names,  and  the  first  who  had  a 
title  is  said  to  be  Simeon  the  son  of  Hillel,  who 
is  supposed  by  some  to  be  the  Simeon  who  took 
our  Saviour  in  his  arms  in  the  temple:  he  was 
called  Rabban,  and  from  his  time  such  titles  came 
to  be  in  fashion.  Rabbi  was  considered  a  higher 
title  than  Rab,  and  Rabbau  higher  than  Rabbi  ; 
yet  it  Was  said  in  the  Jewish  books  that  greater 
was  he  who  was  called  by  his  own  name  than  even 
he  who  was  called  Rabban.  Some  account  of  the 
Rabbis  and  the  Mishnical  and  Talmadical  writings 
may  be  found  in  Prideaux,  Connection,  part  i. 
book  5,  under  the  year  B.C.  446  ;  part  ii.  book  8, 
under  the  year  B.C.  37  ;  and  a  sketch  of  the 
history  of  the  school  of  rabbinical  learning  at 
Tiberias,  founded  by  Rabbi  Judah  Hakkodesh,  the 
compiler  of  the  Mishnah,  in  the  second  century 
after  Christ,  is  given  in  Robinson's  Biblical  He- 
searches,  ii.  391.  See  also  note  14  to  Burton's 
Bamptan  Lectures,  and  the  authorities  there  quoted, 
for  instance,  Bruker,  vol.  ii.  p.  820,  and  Basnage, 
Hist,  des  Juifs,  iii.  6,  p.  138.  [E.  P.  E.] 

RAB'BITH  (nn,  with  the  def.  article. 


Aaftfipdv  ;  Alex.  'Pa/3/3w0  :  Rabbith}.  A  town  in 
the  territory,  perhaps  on  the  boundary,  of  Issachar 
(Josh.  xix.  20  only).  It  is  not  again  mentioned, 
nor  is  anything  yet  known  of  it,  or  of  the  places 
named  in  company  with  it.  [G.] 

EABBO'NI,  John  xx.  16.  [RABBI.] 
RAB-MAG  (JIO-UV.  'Paft-^dy,  'Pa^a^x- 
Rebmag*)  is  found  only  in  Jer.  xxxix.  3  and  13.  In 
both  places  it  is  a  title  borne  by  a  certain  Nergal- 
sharezer,  who  is  mentioned  among  the  "  princes  " 
that  accompanied  Nebuchadnezzar  to  the  last  siege 
of  Jerusalem.  It  has  already  been  shown  that 
Nergal-sharezer  is  probably  identical  with  the  king, 
called  by  the  Greeks  Neriglissar,  who  ascended  the 
throne  of  Babylon  two  years  after  the  death  of  Ne 
buchadnezzar.  [NERGAL-SHAREZER.]  This  king, 
as  well  as  certain  other  important  personages,  is 
found  to  bear  the  title  in  the  Babylonian  inscrip 
tions.  It  is  written  indeed  with  a  somewhat  different 
vocalisation,  being  read  as  Rabu-Emga  by  Sir  H. 
Rawlinson.  The  signification  is  somewhat  doubtful. 
Rabu  is  most  certainly  "great,"  or  "chief,"  an 
exact  equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  3^,  whence  Rabbi, 
"  a  great  one,  a  doctor  ;"  but  Mag,  or  Emga,  is  an 
obscure  term.  It  has  been  commonly  identified 
with  the  word  "  Magus  "  (Gesenius,  ad  voc.  3D  ; 
Calmet,  Commentaire  litteral,  vi.  203,  &c.)  ;  but 
this  identification  is  very  uncertain,  since  an  entirely 
different  word  —  one  which  is  read  as  Magusu  —  is 
used  in  that  seise  throughout  the  Behistun  inscrip 
tion  (Oppert,  Expedition  Scientifique  en  Meso- 
potamie,  ii.  209).  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  inclines  to 
translate  emga  by  "  priest,"  but  does  not  connect  it 
with  the  Magi,  who  in  the  time  of  Neriglissar  had 
no  footing  in  Babylon.  He  regards  this  rendering, 
however,  as  purely  conjectural,  and  thinks  we  can 
only  say  at  present  that  the  office  was  one  of  great 
power  and  dignity  at  the  Babylonian  court,  and 
probably  gave  its  possessor  special  facilities  for 
jbtoiuing  the  throne.  \G.  R.] 


RABSHAKEH  987 

RAB'SACES  ('Po^aKT/j  Rabsaccs).  RAB 
SHAKEH  (Efclus.  xlviii.  18). 

RAB'-SARIS  (OnO'ITI:  'Pa<(>ls;  Alex.  'Pa£. 
(rapes  :  Rabsaris,  Rabsares).  1.  An  officer  of  the 
king  of  Assyria  sent  up  with  Tartan  and  Rabshakeh 
against  Jerusalem  in  the  time  uf  Hezekiah  f>2  K 
xviii.  17). 

2.  (Nafiova-apfls ;  Alex.  Na0ou£op»y.)  One  of 
the  princes  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  was  present  at 
the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  B.C.  588,  when  Zede- 
kiah,  after  endeavouring  to  escape,  was  taken  and 
blinded  and  sent  in  chains  to  Babylon  (Jer.  xxxix. 
3).  Rabsaris  is  mentioned  afterwards  (ver.  13) 
among  the  other  princes  who  at  the  command  of 
the  king  were  sent  to  deliver  Jeremiah  out  of  the 
prison. 

Rabsaris  is  probably  rather  the  ntme  of  an  office 
than  of  an  individual,  the  word  signifying  chief 
eunuch  ;  in  Dan.  i.  3,  Ashpenaz  is  called  the  master 
of  the  eunuchs  (Rab-sarisim).  Luther  translates 
the  word,  in  the  three  places  where  it  occurs,  as  a 
name  of  office,  the  arch-chamberlain  (der  Erzkam- 
merer,  der  oberste  Kammerer).  Josephus,  Ant.  x.  8, 
§2,  takes  them  as  the  A.  V.  does,  as  proper  names. 
The  chief  officers  of  the  court  were  present  attend 
ing  on  the  king ;  and  the  instance  of  the  eunuch 
Narses,  would  show  that  it  was  not  impossible  for 
the  Rabsaris  to  possess  some  of  the  qualities  fitting 
him  for  a  military  command.  In  2  K.  xxv.  19,  an 
eunuch  (D^D,  Saris,  in  the  text  of  the  A.  V. 
"  officer,"  in  the  margin  "  eunuch  ")  is  spoken  of 
as  set  over  the  men  of  war  ;  and  in  the  sculptures 
at  Nineveh  "  eunuchs  are  represented  as  command 
ing  in  war ;  fighting  both  on  chariots  and  on  horse 
back,  and  receiving  the  prisoners  and  the  heads  of  the 
slain  after  battle."  Layard's  Nineveh,  vol.  ii.  325. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  in  Jeremiah  xxxix.  we 
have  not  only  the  title  of  the  Rabsaris  given,  but  his 
name  also,  either  Sarsechim  (ver.  3)  or  (ver.  13) 
Nebu-shasban  (worshipper  of  Nebo,  Is.  xlvi.  1),  in 
the  same  way  as  Nergal  Sharezer  is  given  in  the  same 
passages  as  the  name  of  the  Rab-mag.  [E.  P.  E.] 

RAB'SHAKEH  ((rtpKai:  'PotUicTjj,  2  K. 


xviii.,  xix.;  'Pa/3<n£/c7jy,  Is.  xxxvi.,  xxxvii. :  Rob- 
saces).  One  of  the  officers  of  the  king  of  Assyria 
sent  against  Jerusalem  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
Sennacherib,  having  taken  other  cities  of  Judah,  was 
now  besieging  Lachish,  and  Hezekiah,  terrified  at  his 
progress,  and  losing  for  a  time  his  firm  faith  in 
God,  sends  to  Lachish  with  an  offer  of  submission 
and  tribute.  This  he  strains  himself  to  the  utmost 
to  pay,  giving  for  the  purpose  not  only  all  the 
treasures  of  the  Temple  and  palace,  but  stripping 
off  the  gold  plates  with  which  he  himself  in  the 
beginning  of  his  reign  had  overlaid  the  doors  and 
pillars  of  the  house  of  the  Lord  (2  K.  xviii.  16; 
2  Chr.  xxix.  3  ;  see  Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lectures, 
iv.  p.  141 ;  Layard  s  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  p.  145). 
But  Sennacherib,  not  content  with  this,  his  cu 
pidity  being  excited  rather  than  appeased,  sends  a 
great  host  against  Jerusalem  under  Tartan ,  ftah<«u-;s. 
and  Rabshakeh  ;  not  so  much,  apparently,  with  f'ns 
object  of  at  present  engaging  in  the  siege  of  the 
dty,  as  with  the  idea  that,  in  its  present  disheartened 
state,  the  sight  of  an  army,  combined  with  the  threats 
and  specious  promises  of  Rabshakeh,  might  induce  a 
surrender  at  once. 

In  Isaiah  xxxvi.,  xxxvii.,  Rabshakeh  alone  is  men 
tioned,  the  reason  of  which  would  seem  tr>  I*,  th.it 
he  acted  a.s  ambassador  and  spokc-siiKm,  aii'l  cutue  to 


988 


BAB8HAKEH 


much  more  prominently  In-fore  the  people  than  the 
ethers.  Keil  thinks  that  Tartan  had  the  .snjnvim- 
command,  inasmuch  as  in  '1  K.  lie  is  mentioned 
first,  and,  according  to  Is.  xx.  1,  conducted  the  siei;e 
of  Ashdod.  In  2  Chr.  xxxii.,  where,  with  the  addi 
tion  of  some  not  unimportant  circumstances,  there 
is  given  an  extract  of  these  events,  it  is  simply  said 
that  (ver.  9)  "Sennacherib  king  of  Assyria  sent  his 
servants  to  Jerusalem."  Rabshakeh  seems  to  have 
discharged  his  mission  with  much  zeal,  addressing 
himself  not  only  to  the  officers  of  Hezekiah,  but  to 
the  people  on  the  wall  of  the  city,  setting  forth 
the  hopelessness  of  trusting  to  any  power,  human 
or  divine,  to  deliver  them  out  of  the  hand  of  "  the 
great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria,"  and  dwelling  on 
the  many  advantages  to  be  gained  by  submission. 
Many  have  imagined,  from  the  familiarity  of  Rab 
shakeh  with  Hebrew,4  that  he  either  was  a  Jewish 
deserter  or  an  apostate  captive  of  Israel.  Whether 
this  be  so  or  not,  it  is  not  impossible  that  the 
assertion  which  he  makes  on  the  part  of  his  master, 
that  Sennacherib  had  even  the  sanction  and  com 
mand  of  the  Lord  Jehovah  for  his  expedition  against 
Jerusalem  ("  Am  I  now  come  up  without  the 
Lord  to  destroy  it  ?  The  Lord  said  to  me,  Go  up 
against  this  land  to  destroy  it")  may  have  reference 
to  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (viii.  7,  8,  x.  5,  6)  con 
cerning  the  desolation  of  Judah  and  Israel  by  the 
Assyrians,  of  which,  in  some  form  more  or  less 
correct,  he  had  received  information.  Being  unable 
to  obtain  any  promise  of  submission  from  Heze 
kiah,  who,  in  the  extremity  of  his  peril  returning 
to  trust  in  the  help  of  the  Lord,  is  encouraged  by 
the  words  and  predictions  of  Isaiah,  Rabshakeh  goes 
back  to  the  king  of  Assyria,  who  had  now  departed 
from  Lachish. 

The  English  version  takes  Rabshakeh  as  the  name 
of  a  pei-son  ;  it  may,  however,  be  questioned  whether 
it  be  not  rather  the  name  of  the  office  which  he 
held  at  the  court,  that  of  chief  cupbearer,  in  the 
same  way  as  RAB-SARIS  denotes  the  chief  eunuch, 
and  RAB-MAG  possibly  the  chief  priest. 

Luther  in  his  version  is  not  quite  consistent, 
sometimes  (2  K.  rviii.  17;  Is.  xxxvi.  2)  giving 
Rabshakeh  as  a  proper  name,  but  ordinarily  trans 
lating  it  as  a  title  of  office,  arch-cupbearer  (der 
Erzschenke). 

The  word  Rab  may  be  found  translated  in  many 
places  of  the  English  version,  for  instance,  2  K.  xxv. 
8,  20;  Jer.  xxxix.  11  ;  Dan.  ii.  14  (D'HSt^Tl), 
Ral-tabbachim,  "captain  of  the  guard ,"  in  the 
margin  "  chief  marshal,"  "  chief  of  the  execu 
tioners."  Dan.  i.  3,  Rab-sarisim,  "  master  of  the 
eunuchs;"  ii.  48  (pjp"3n),  Rab-signin,  "chief 

"  The  difference  between  speaking  in  the  Hebrew  and 
the  Aramean,  "  in  the  Jews'  language"  OVI-liT,  J'- 
hudith).  and  In  the  "Syrian  language"  (TVEriK,  Aramith), 
would  be  rather  a  matter  of  pronunciation  and  dialect 
than  of  essential  difference  of  language.  See  for  the 
"  Syrian  tongue,"  Ezr.  Iv.  1 ;  Dan.  1L  4. 

<>  In  this  name  cA  Is  sounded  like  hard  c,  as  the  repre 
sentative  of  the  Hebrew  caph.  In  Rachel,  on  the  other 
liand,  it  represents  cheth,  and  should  properly  be  pro 
nounced  like  a  guttural  h  (see  A.  V.  of  Jer.  xxxi.  15). 

«  Thenius,  with  his  usual  rashness,  says  "  Racal  is  a 
residuum  of  Cannel." 

d  It  ig  not  obvious  how  our  translators  came  to  spell 
the  name  ?fn  as  they  do  in  their  final  revision  of  1611, 
vi/.  Rachel.  Their  practice— almost,  If  not  quite,  in  va 
riable- throughout  the  Old  Test,  of  that  udiUou,  Is  to  rc- 

i 


RACHEL 

of  the  governors;"  iv.  9,  v.  11  (ptpD"in*3")), Sab' 
chartumniin,  "master  of  the  majjiri  ins  ;"  Jonah 
i.  6  (?3hn  3^,  llab-hachobel,  "  shipmaster."  It 
enters  into  the  titles,  Rabbi,  Habboni,  and  the  name 
Rabbah.  [E.  P.  E.] 

RA'CA  ('Peucrf),  a  term  of  reproach  used  by  the 
Jews  of  our  Saviour's  age  (Matt.  v.  22).  Critics 
are  agreed  in  deriving  it  from  the  Chaldee  term 
NpH  with  the  sense  of  "  worthless,"  but  they 

T      ••  * 

differ  as  to  whether  this  term  should  be  connected 
with  the  root  p-11,  conveying  the  notion  of  empti 
ness  (Gesen.  Thcs.  p.  1279),  or  with  one  of  th« 
cognate  roots  pjTl  (Tholuck),  or  J?J51  (Ewald), 
conveying  the  notion  of  thinness  (Olshausen,  De 
Wette,  on  Matt.  v.  22).  The  first  of  these  views  is 
probably  correct.  We  may  compare  the  use  of  pH, 
"  vain,"  in  Judg.  ix.  4,  xi.  3,  al.,  and  of  Kfvt  in 
Jam.  ii.  20.  [W.  L.  B.] 

RACE.    [GAMES,  vol.  i.  p.  650.] 

RA'CHAB  ('Paxdft :  Ralwb).  RAHAB  the 
harlot  (Matt.  i.  5). 

KA'CHALb  (^31:  Rachaf).  One  of  the  places 

which  David  and  his  followers  used  to  haunt  during 
the  period  of  his  freebooting  life,  and  to  the  people 
of  which  he  sent  a  portion  of  the  plunder  taken 
from  the  Amalekites.  It  is  named  in  1  Sam.  xxx. 
29  only.  The  Vatican  LXX.  inserts  five  names  in 
this  passage  between  "  Eshtemoa"  and  "  the  Jerah- 
meelites."  The  only  one  of  these  which  has  any 
similarity  to  Racal  is  Cannel,  which  would  suit  very 
well  as  far  as  position  goes ;  but  it  is  impossible  to 
consider  the  two  as  identical  without  further  ev,- 
dence.c  No  name  like  Racal  has  been  found  in  the 
south  of  Judah.  [G.] 

RA'CHEL  (^m,d   "a  ewe;"  the  word  rahel 

•*  T 

occurs  in  Gen.  xxxi.  38,  xxxii.  14,  Cant.  vi.  6,  Is. 
liii.  7 :  A.  V.  rendered  "  ewe '"  and  "  sheep :" 
•xfa :  Rachel).  The  younger  of  the  daughteis  of 
Laban,  the  wife  of  Jacob,  the  mother  of  Joseph  and 
Benjamin.  The  incidents  of  her  life  may  be  found  in 
Gen.  xxix.-xxxiii.,  xxxv.  The  story  of  Jacob  and 
Rachel  has  always  had  a  peculiar  interest ;  there  is 
that  in  it  which  appeals  to  some  of  the  deepest  feelings 
of  the  human  heart.  The  beauty  of  Rachel,  the  deep 
love  with  which  she  was  loved  by  Jacob  from  their 
first  meeting  by  the  well  of  Haran,  when  he  showed 
to  her  the  simple  courtesies  of  the  desert  life,  and 
kissed  her  and  told  her  he  was  Rebekah's  son  ;  the 
long  servitude  with  which  he  patiently  served  for 


present  f],  the  hard  guttural  aspirate,  by  h  (e.g.  Halah  for 

.  .  :  the  ch  (hard,  of  course)  they  / eservc  with  equal 
consistency  for  3.  On  this  principle  Kachel  should  have 
Seen  given  throughout  "  Kahel,"  as  indeed  it  is  in  one  case, 
retained  in  the  most  modern  editions — Jer.  xxxi.  15.  And 
in  the  earlier  editions  of  the  English  Bible  (e.  g.  1540, 
1551, 1566)  we  find  Rahel  throughout.  It  is  difficult  not  to 
suspect  that  Rachel  (however  originating)  was  a  favourite 
woman's  name  in  the  latter  part  of  the  16th  and  begin 
ning  of  the  17th  centuries,  and  that  it  was  substituted  for 
the  less  familiar  though  more  accurate  Rahel  in  deference 
to  that  fact,  and  in  obedience  to  the  rule  laid  down  for  the 
guidance  of  the  translators,  that  "  the  names  in  the  text 
are  to  be  retained  as  near  as  may  be,  accordingly  as  they 
are  vulgarly  used." 

Rachael  (so  common  In  the  literature  of  a  century  ago) 
Is  a  corruption,  as  K<.bcou»  of  Rcbckah.  t'l.? 


RACHEL 

her,  in  which  the  seven  years  "  seemed  to  him  but, 
ft  few  days,  for  the  love  he  had  to  her;"  their  mar 
riage  at  lust,  after  the  cruel  disappointment  through 
the  fraud  which  substituted  the  elder  sister  in  the 
place  of  the  younger;  and  the  death  of  Rachel  at 
the  very  time  when  in  giving  birth  to  another  son 
her  own  long-delayed  hopes  were  accomplished ,  and 
she  had  become  still  more  endeared  to  her  husl«ind ; 
his  deep  grief  and  ever-living  regrets  for  her  loss 
(Gen.  xlviii.  7):  these  things  make  up  a  touching 
tale  of  personal  and  domestic  history  which  has 
kept  alive  the  memory  of  Rachel — the  beautiful, 
the  beloved,  the  untimely  taken  away — and  has 
preserved  to  this  day  a  reverence  for.  her  tomb ;  the 
very  infidel  invaders  of  the  Holy  Land  having 
respected  the  traditions  of  the  site,  arid  erected  over 
the  spot  a  small  rude  shrine,  which  conceals  what 
ever  remains  may  have  once  bren  found  of  the 
pillar  fii-st  set  up  by  her  mourning  husband  over 
her  grave. 

Yet  from  what  is  related  to  us  concerning 
Rachel's  character  there  dees  not  seem  much  to 
claim  any  high  degree  of  admiration  and  esteem. 
The  discontent  and  fretful  impatience  shown  in  her 
grief  at  being  for  a  time  childless,  moved  even  her 
fond  husband  to  anger  (Gen.  xxx.  1,  2).  She  ap 
pears  moreover  to  have  shared  all  the  duplicity 
and  falsehood  of  her  family,  of  which  we  have  such 
painful  instances  in  Rebekah,  in  Laban,  and  not 
least  in  her  sister  Leah,  who  consented  to  bear  her 
part  in  the  deception  practised  upon  Jacob.  See, 
for  instance,  Rachel's  stealing  her  father's  images, 
and  the  ready  dexterity  and  presence  of  mind 
with  which  she  concealed  her  theft  (Gen.  xxxi.) : 
we  seem  to  detect  here  an  apt  scholar  in  her 
father's  school  of  untruth.  From  this  incident  we 
may  also  infer  (though  this  is  rather  the  mis 
fortune  of  her  position  and  circumstances)  that  she 
was  not  altogether  free  from  the  superstitions  and 
idolatry  which  prevailed  in  the  land  whence  Abra 
ham  had  been  called  (Josh.  xxiv.  2,  14),  and  which 
still  to  some  degree  infected  even  those  families 
among  whom  the  true  God  was  known. 

The  events  which  preceded  the  death  of  Rachel 
are  of  much  interest  and  worthy  of  a  brief  con 
sideration.  The  presence  in  his  household  of  these 
idolatrous  images,  which  Rachel  and  probably  others 
also  had  brought  from  the  East,  seems  to  have  been 
either  unknown  to  or  connived  at  by  Jacob  for 
some  years  after  his  return  from  Haran ;  till,  on 
being  reminded  by  the  Lord  of  the  vow  which  he 
had  made  at  Bethel  when  he  fled  from  the  face  of 
Ksau,  and  being  bidden  by  Him  to  ei-ect  an  altar  to 
the  God  who  appeared  to  him  there,  Jacob  felt  the 
glaring  impiety  of  thus  solemnly  appearing  before 
God  with  the  taint  of  impiety  cleaving  to  him  or 
his,  and  "  said  to  his  household  and  all  that  were 
with  him,  Put  away  the  strange  gods  from  among 
you"  (Gen.  xxxv.  2).  After  thus  casting  out  the 
polluting  thing  from  his  house,  Jacob  journeyed  to 
Bethel,  where,  amidst  the  associations  of  a  spot 
consecrated  by  the  memories  of  the  past,  he  received 
from  God  an  emphatic  promise  and  blessing,  and, 
the  name  of  the  Supplanter  being  laid  aside,  he  had 
given  to  him  instead  the  holy  name  of  Israel. 
Then  it  was.  after  his  spirit  had  been  there  purified 
and  strengthened  by  communion  with  God,  by  the 


RACHEL 


989 


•  Hebrew  Cibr&li;  in  the  LXX.  here,  xlviii.  7,  and  2  K, 
19,  XaBpaBd.    This  seems  to  have  been  accepted  as 
the  came  of  the  spot  (Demetrius  in  Kus.  Pr.  Ev.  ix.  21) 
anil  to  have  l)pon  actually  encountered  there  by  a  tra 
veller  in  the  12th  mt.  (Burchard  do  Strasburg,  by  Siiitit 


assurance  of  the  Divine  love  and  favour,  ry  the 
consciousness  of  evil  put  away  and  duties  performed, 
;hen  it  was,  as  he  journeyed  away  from  Bethel, 
;hat  the  chastening  blow  fell  and  Rachel  died. 
These  circumstances  are  alluded  to  here  not  sc 
much  for  their  bearing  upon  the  spiritual  discipline 
of  Jacob,  but  rather  with  reference  to  Rachel  her 
self,  as  suggesting  the  hope  that  they  may  have 
tad  their  effect  in  bringing  her  to  a  higher  sense  ot 
ner  relations  to  that  Great  Jehovah  in  whom  hei 
husband,  with  all  his  faults  of  character,  so  firmly 
believed. 

Rachel's  tomb. — "  Rachel  died  and  was  buried  in 
the  way  to  Ephrath,  which  is  Bethlehem.  And  Jacob 
set  a  pillar  upon  her  grave :  th;:t  is  the  pillar  of 
Rachel's  grave  unto  this  day"  (Gen.  xxxv.  19,  20). 
As  Rachel  is  the  first  related  instance  of  death  in 
childbearing,  so  this  pillar  over  her  grave  is  the 
first  recorded  example  of  the  setting  up  of  a  sepul 
chral  monument ;  caves  having  been  up  to  this 
time  spoken  of  as  the  usual  places  of  burial.  The 
spot  was  well  known  in  the  time  of  Samuel  and 
Saul  (1  Sam.  x.  2) ;  and  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  by 
a  poetic  figure  of  great  force  and  beauty,  represents 
the  buried  Rachel  weeping  for  the  loss  and  cap 
tivity  of  her  children,  as  the  bands  of  the  exiles, 
led  away  on  their  road  to  Babylon,  passed  near  her 
tomb  (Jer.  xxxi.  15-17).  St.  Matthew  (ii.  17, 18) 
applies  this  to  the  slaughter  by  Herod  of  the  infants 
at  Bethlehem. 

The  position  of  the  Ramah  here  spoken  of  is  one 
of  the  disputed  questions  in  the  topography  of 
Palestine ;  but  the  site  of  Rachel's  tomb,  "  on  the 
way  to  Bethlehem,"  "a  little  way*  to  come  to 
Epnrath,"  "  in  the  border  of  Benjamin,"  has  never 
been  questioned.  It  is  about  2  miles  S.  of  Jeru 
salem,  and  one  mile  N.  of  Bethlehem.  "  It  is=  one 
of  the  shrines  which  Muslems,  Jews,  and  Chris 
tians  agree  in  honouring,  and  concerning  whicli 
their  traditions  are  identical."  It  was  visited  by 
Maundrell,  1697.  The  description  given  by  Dr. 
Robinson  (i.  218)  may  serve  as  the  representative 
of  the  many  accounts,  all  agreeing  with  each  other, 
which  may  be  read  in  almost  eveiy  book  of  Eastern 
travel.  It  is  "  merely  an  ordinary  Muslim  Wely, 
or  tomb  of  a  holy  person,  a  small  square  building 
of  stone  with  a  dome,  and  within  it  a  tomb  in  the 
ordinary  Mahommedan  form,  the  whole  plastered 
over  with  mortar.  Of  course  the  building  is  not 
ancient:  in  the  seventh  century  there  was  here 
only  a  pyramid  of  stones.  It  is  now  neglected  and 
falling  to  decay,*  though  pilgrimages  are  still  made 
to  it  by  the  Jews.  The  naked  walls  are  covered 
with  names  in  several  languages,  many  of  them  in 
Hebrew.  The  general  correctness  of  the  tradition 
which  has  fixed  upon  this  spot  for  the  tomb  of  Rachel 
cannot  well  be  drawn  in  question,  since  it  is  fully 
supported  by  the  circumstances  of  the  Scriptural 
narrative.  It  is  also  mentioned  by  the  Itin.  Hicros., 
A.D.  333,  and  by  Jerome  (Ep.  Ixxxvi.,  ad  Eustoch. 
Epitaph.  Paulae)  in  the  same  century." 

Those  who  take  an  interest  in  such  interpreta 
tions  may  find  the  whole  story  of  Rachel  and  Leah 
allegorised  by  St.  Augustine  (contra  Faustum,  Md- 
nichaeum,  xxii.  li.-lviii.  vol.  viii.  432,  &c.,  ed. 
Migne),  and  Justin  Martyr  (Dialogue  with  Trypho, 
c.  134,  p.  360).  [E.  P.  E.] 


Genois,  p.  35),  who  gives  the  Arabic  name  of  Rachel's 
tomb  as  Cabrata  or  Carbata. 

1  Since  Robinson's  last  visit,  it  has  been  enlarged  by 
the  addition  of  a  squaie  court  on  the  east  side,  wi 
walla  and  arches  (l.iUcr  Kesearches,  ~2T.fi. 


990 


RADDAI 


RAD'DAl  ('IP :  Za55o«  ;  Alex.  ZaflScu  ; 
Joseph.  'Pdr]\os :  ItiiJdci).  One  of  David  s  brathei-s. 
St'th  son  of  Jesse  (1  Chr.  ii.  14).  He  does  not 
appear  in  the  Bible  elsewhere  than  in  this  list, 
unites  he  be,  as  Ewald  conjectures  (Geschichte,  iii. 
266  note),  identical  with  REI.  But  this  does  not 
seem  probable.  Fiirst  (Handwb.  ii.  355  6)  considers 
the  final  i  of  the  name  to  be  a  remnant  of  Jah  or 
Jehovah.  [G.] 

RAGAU  ('Pa7ot; :  Ragau).  1.  A  place  named 
only  in  Jud.  i.  5,  15.  In  the  latter  passage  the 
"  mountains  of  Ragau "  are  mentioned.  It  is  pro 
bably  identical  with  RAGES. 

2.  One  of  the  ancestors  of  our  Lord,  son  of  Phalec 
(Luke  iii.  35).  He  is  the  same  person  with  RKU 
son  of  Peleg ;  and  the  difference  in  the  name  arises 
from  our  translators  having  followed  the  Greek  form, 
in  which  the  Hebrew  V  was  frequently  expressed 
by  7,  as  is  the  case  in  Raguel  (which  once  occurs 
for  Reuel),  Gomorrha,  Gotholiah  (for  Atholiah), 
Phogor  (for  Peor),  &c.  [G.] 

RA'GES  CPdyi],  'Pd.yoi,  'Payav  :  Rages,  Ra- 
<jau~)  was  an  important  city  in  north-eastern  Media, 
where  that  country  bordered  upon  Parthia.  It  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  but  occurs 
frequently  in  the  Book  of  Tobit  (i.  14,  v.  5,  ri.  9, 
and  12,  &c.),  and  twice  in  Judith  (i.  5  find  15). 
According  to  Tobit,  it  was  a  place  to  which  some 
of  the  Israelitish  captives  taken  by  Shalnwneser 
(Enemessar)  had  been  transported,  and  thither  the 
angel  Raphael  conducted  the  young  Tobiah.  In  the 
book  of  Judith  it  is  made  the  scene  of  the  great 
battle  between  Nabuchodonosor  and  Arphaxad, 
wherein  the  latter  is  said  to  have  been  defeated  and 
taken  prisoner.  Neither  of  these  accounts  can  be 
regarded  as  historic ;  but  the  latter  may  conceal 
a  fact  of  some  importance  in  the  history  of  the 
city. 

Rages  is  a  place  mentioned  by  a  great  number  of 
profane  writers.  It  appears  as  Ragha  in  the  Zen- 
davesta,  in  Isidore,  and  in  Stephen  ;  as  Raga  in  the 
inscriptions  of  Darius ;  Rhagae  in  Duris  of  Samos  (Fr. 
25),  Strabo  (xi.  9,  §1),  and  Arrian  (Exp.  Alex.  iii. 
20)  ;  and  Rhagaea  in  Ptolemy  (vi.  5).  Properly 
speaking,  Rages  is  a  town,  but  the  town  gave  name  to 
a  province,  which  is  sometimes  called  Rages  or  Rha 
gae,  sometimes  Rhagiana.  It  appears  from  the  Zen- 
davesta  that  here  was  one  of  the  earliest  settlements 
of  the  Arians,  who  were  mingled,  in  Rhagiana,  with 
two  other  races,  and  were  thus  brought  into  contact 
with  heretics  (Bunsen,  Philosophy  of  Universal 
History,  iii.  485).  Isidore  calls  Rages  "  the  greatest 
city  in  Media"  (p.  6),  which  may  have  been  true 
in  his  day ;  but  other  writers  commonly  regard  it 
as  much  inferior  to  Ecbatana.  It  was  the  place  to 
which  Frawartish  (Phraortes),  the  Median  rebel, 
fled,  when  defeated  by  Darius  Hystaspis,  and  at 
which  he  was  made  prisoner  by  one  of  Darius' 
generals  (Beh.  Inscr.  col.  ii.  par.  13).  [MEDIA.] 
This  is  probably  the  fact  which  the  apocryphal 
writer  of  Judith  had  in  his  mind  when  he  spoke  of 
Arphaxad  as  having  been  captured  at  Ragau.  When 
Darius  Codomannus  fled  from  Alexander,  intending 
»/>  make  a  final  stand  in  Bactria,  he  must  have 
rasoeu  through  Rages  on  his  way  to  the  Caspian 
Gates  ,  and  so  we  find  that  Alexander  arrived  there 
in  pursuit  of  his  enemy,  on  the  eleventh  day  after 
he  quitted  Ecbatana  (Arrian,  Exp.  Alex.  iii.  20). 
In  the  troubles  which  followed  the  death  of  Alex 
ander,  Rages  appears  to  have  gone  to  decay,  but  it 
w»s  soo;i  after  icbuilt  by  Seleucus  I.  (Nicator). 


RAGUEL 

whu  gave  it  the  name  of  Europus  (Strab.  jd.  IS, 
§(»;  Steph.  Byz.  ad  coc.).  When  the  Parthian* 
took  it,  the)  called  it  Arsacia,  after  the  Arsacei  of 
the  day ;  but  it  soon  afterwards  recovered  its  ancient 
appellation,  as  we  see  by  Strabo  and  Isidore.  That 
appellation  it  has  ever  since  retained,  with  only  a 
slight  corruption,  the  ruins  being  still  known  \  y 
the  name  of  Rhey.  These  ruins  lie  about  five  miln 
south-east  of  Teheran,  and  cover  a  space  4500  yards 
long  by  3500  yards  broad.  The  walls  are  welt 
marked,  and  are  of  prodigious  thickness ;  they  appear 
to  have  been  flanked  by  strong  towers,  and  are  con 
nected  with  a  lofty  citadel  at  their  north-eastern 
angle.  The  importance  of  the  place  consisted  in  its 
vicinity  to  the  Caspian  Gates,  which,  in  a  certain 
sense,  it  guarded.  Owing  to  the  barren  and  deso 
late  character  of  the  great  salt  desert  of  Iran,  eveiy 
army  which  seeks  to  pass  from  Bactria,  India,  and 
Afghanistan  to  Media  and  Mesopotamia,  or  vice 
versa,  must  skirt  the  range  of  mountains  which 
runs  along  the  southern  shore  of  the  Caspian.  These 
mountains  send  out  a  rugged  and  precipitous  spur 
in  about  long.  52°  25'  E.  from  Greenwich,  which 
runs  far  into  the  desert,  and  can  only  be  roundel 
with  the  extremest  difficulty.  Across  this  spur  is 
a  single  pass — the  Pylae  Caspiae  of  the  ancients — 
and  of  this  pass  the  possessors  of  Rhages  must  have 
at  all  times  held  the  keys.  The  modern  Teheran, 
built  out  of  its  ruins,  has  now  superseded  Rhey; 
and  it  is  perhaps  mainly  from  the  importance  of  its 
position  that  it  has  become  the  Persian  capital. 
(For  an  account  of  the  ruins  of  Rhey,  see  Ker  Por 
ter's  Travels,  i.  357-364;  and  compare  Eraser's 
Khorassan,  p.  286.)  [G.  R.] 

RAG'UEL,  or  REU'EL  ^WJTI)  :  'Payot^A/ . 

I.  A  prince-priest  of  Midian,  the  father  of  Zipporah 
according  to  Ex.  ii.  21,  and  of  Hobab  according  to 
Num.  x.  29.     As  the   father-in-law   of  Moses  is 
named  Jethro  in  Ex.  iii.  1,  and  Hobab  in  Judg.  iv. 

II,  and  perhaps  in  Num.  x.  29  (though  the  latter 
passage  admits  of  another  sense),  the  primd  facie 
view  would   be  that  Raguel,  Jethro,  and  Hobab 
were   different    names   for   the    same    individual. 
Such  is  probably  the  case  with  regard  to  the  two 
first  at  all  events,  if  not  with  the  third.    [HOBAB.] 
One  of  the  names  may  represent  an  official  title, 
but  whether  Jethro  or  Raguel,  is  uncertain,  both 
being  appropriately  significant : a  Josephus  was  in 
favour  of  the  former  (rovro,  i.  e.  'Ie6ey\aios,  -f\v 
<hn'/cAi7/ua  T<p  'Payovfi\(f,  Ant.  ii.  12,  §1),  and  this 
is  not  unlikely,  as  the  name  Reuel  was  not  an 
uncommon  one.     The  identity  of  Jethro  and  Reuel 
is  supported  by  the  indiscriminate  use  of  the  names 
in  the  LXX.  (Ex.  ii.  16,  18) ;  and  the  application 
of  more  than  one  name  to  the  same  individual  was 
an  usage  familiar  to  the  Hebrews,  as  instanced  in 
Jacob  and  Israel,  Solomon  and  Jedidiah,  and  other 
similar  cases.     Another  solution  of  the  difficulty 
has  been  sought  in  the  loose  use  of  terms  of  rela 
tionship  among  the  Hebrews;  as  that  chothen*  in 
Ex.  iii.  1,  xviii.  1,  Num.  x.  29,  may  signify  any 
relation  by  marriage,  and  consequently  that  Jethro 
and  Hobab  were  brothers-in-law  of  Moses ;  or  that 
the  terms  a&«  and  bath*  in  Ex.  ii.  16,  21,  mean 
grandfather  and  granddaughter.     Neither  of  these 
assumptions    is   satisfactory,    the    former   in    the 


»  Jethro=" pre-eminent,"  from  ~\T\S,  "to  e.vxl,"  n;id 

i        "T 
Raguel="  friend  of  God,"  from  ?N  ^JR- 


RAHAB 

absence  of  any  corroborative  evidence,  the  latter 
because  the  omission  of  Jethro  the  father's  name 
in  so  circumstantial  a  narrative  as  in  Ex.  ii.  is 
inexplicable,  nor  can  we  conceive  the  indiscriminate 
use  of  the  terms  father  and  grandfather  without 
good  cause.  Nevertheless  this  view  has  a  strong 
weight  of  authority  in  its  favour,  being  supported 
by  the  Targum  Jonathan,  Aben  Ezra,  Michnelis, 
Winer,  and  others.  [W.  L.  B.] 

2.  Another  transcription  of  the  name  REUEL, 
occurring  in  Tobit,  where  Raguel,  a  pious  Jew  of 
"  Ecbatane,  a  city  of  Media,"  is  father  of  Sara,  the 
wife  of  Tobias  (Tob.  iii.  7, 17,  &c.).  The  name  was 
not  uncommon,  and  in  the  book  of  Enoch  it  is  applied 
to  one  of  the  great  guardian  angels  of  the  universe, 
who  was  charged  with  the  execution  of  the  Divine 
judgments  on  the  (material)  world  and  the  stars 
'ccfxx.  4,  xxiii.  4,  ed.  Dillmann).  [B.  F.  W.] 

RA'HAB,  or  RA'CHAB  (3PH :  'Pax*?,  and 
Paa/8 :  Rahab,  and  RaaV),  a  celebrated  woman  of 
Jericho,  who  received  the  spies  sent  by  Joshua  to 
spy  out  the  land,  hid  them  in  her  house  from  the 
pursuit  of  her  countrymen,  was  saved  with  all  her 
family  when  the  Israelites  sacked  the  city  ;  and  be 
came  the  wife  of  Salmon,  and  the  ancestress  of  the 
Messiah. 

Her  history  may  be  told  in  a  few  words.  At 
the  time  of  the  arrival  of  the  Israelites  in  Canaan 
she  was  a  young  unmarried  woman,  dwelling  in  a 
house  of  her  own  alone,  though  she  had  a  father  and 
mother,  and  brothers  and  sisters,  living  in  Jericho. 
She  was  a  "  harlot,"  and  probably  combined  the 
trade  of  lodging-keeper  for  wayfaring  men.  She 
seems  also  to  have  been  engaged  in  the  manufac 
ture  of  linen,  and  the  art  of  dyeing,  for  which  the 
Phoenicians  were  early  famous ;  since  we  find  the 
flat  roof  of  her  house  covered  with  stalks  of  flax  put 
there  to  dry,  and  a  stock  of  scarlet  or  crimson 
035^)  line  in  her  house:  a  circumstance  which, 
coupled  with  the  mention  of  Babylonish  garments  at 
vii.  21,  as  among  the  spoils  of  Jericho,  indicates 
the  existence  of  a  trade  in  such  articles  between 
Phoenicia  and  Mesopotamia.  Her  house  was  situated 
on  the  wall,  probably  near  the  town  gate,  so  as 
to  be  convenient  for  persons  coming  in  and  going 
out  of  the  city.  Traders  coming  from  Mesopo 
tamia  or  Egypt  to  Phoenicia,  would  frequently 
pass  through  Jericho,  situated  as  it  was  near  the 
fords  of  the  Jordan  ;  and  of  these  many  would  re 
sort  to  the  house  of  Rahab.  Rahab  therefore  had 
been  well  informed  with  regard  to  the  events  of  the 
Exodus.  She  had  heard  of  the  passage  through  the 
Red  Sea,  of  the  utter  destruction  of  Sihon  and  Og, 
and  of  the  irresistible  progress  of  the  Israelitish 
bost.  The  effect  upon  her  mind  had  been  what  one 
would  not  have  expected  in  a  person  of  her  way  of 
life.  It  led  her  to  a  firm  faith  in  Jehovah  as  the 
true  God,  and  to  the  conviction  that  He  purposed 
to  give  the  land  of  Canaan  to  the  Israelites.  When 
therefore  the  two  spies  sent  by  Joshua  came  to  her 
house,  they  found  themselves  under  the  roof  of  one 
who,  alone  probably  of  the  whole  population,  was 
friendly  to  their  nation.  Their  coming,  however, 
was  quickly  known ;  and  the  king  of  Jericho,  having 
received  information  of  it,  while  at  supper,  accord 
ing  to  Josephus,  sent  that  very  evening  to  require 
her  to  deliver  them  up.  It  is  very  likely  that,  her 
house  being  a  public  one,  some  one  who  resorted 
there  may  have  seen  and  recognised  the  spies,  aud 
gone  off  at  once  to  report  the  matter  to  the  autho- 
'ities.  But  not  without  awakening  Rahab's  suspi- 


RAHAB 


991 


cions:  for  she  immediately  hid  the  men  among 
the  flax-stalks  which  were  piled  on  tl.e  flat-roof  of 
her  house,  and,  on  the  arrival  of  the  officers  sent  to 
search  her  house,  was  ready  with  the  stoiy  that 
two  men,  of  what  country  she  knew  not,  had,  it 
was  true,  been  to  her  house,  but  had  left  it  just 
before  the  gates  were  shut  for  th«.  night.  If  they 
pursued  them  at  once,  she  added,  they  would  be 
sure  to  overtake  them.  Misled  by  the  false  infor 
mation,  the  men  started  in  pursuit  to  the  fords  of  the 
Jordan,  the  gates  having  been  opened  to  let  them  out, 
and  immediately  closed  again.  When  all  was  quiet, 
and  the  people  were  gone  to  bed,  Rahab  stole  up  to 
the  house-top,  told  the  spies  what  had  happened,  and 
assured  them  of  her  faith  in  the  God  of  Israel,  and 
her  confident  expectation  of  the  capture  of  the  whole 
land  by  them ;  an  expectation,  she  added,  which 
was  shared  by  her  countrymen,  and  had  produced  a 
great  panic  amongst  them.  She  then  told  them 
her  plan  for  their  escape.  It  was  to  let  them  down 
by  a  cord  from  the  window  of  her  house  which 
looked  over  the  city  wall,  and  that  they  should  flee 
into  the  mountains  which  bounded  the  plains  of 
Jericho,  and  lie  hid  there  for  three  days,  by  which 
time  the  pursuers  would  have  returned,  and  the 
fords  of  the  Jordan  be  open  to  them  again.  She 
asked,  in  return  for  her  kindness  to  them,  that  they 
should  swear  by  Jehovah,  that  when  their  country 
men  had  taken  the  city,  they  would  spare  her  life, 
and  the  lives  of  her  father  and  mother,  brothers  and 
sisters,  and  all  that  belonged  to  them.  The  men 
readily  consented,  and  it  was  agreed  between  them 
I  that  she  should  hang  out  her  scarlet  line  at  the 
window  from  which  they  had  escaped,  and  bring  all 
her  family  under  her  roof.  If  any  of  her  kindred 
went  out  of  doors  into  the  street,  his  blood  would 
be  upon  his  own  head,  and  the  Israelites  in  that 
case  would  be  guiltless.  The  event  proved  the 
wisdom  of  her  precautions.  The  pursuers  returned  to 
Jericho  after  a  fruitless  search,  and  the  spies  got  safe 
back  to  the  Israelitish  camp.  The  news  they  brought 
of  the  terror  of  the  Canaanites  doubtless  inspired 
Israel  with  fresh  courage,  and,  within  three  days  of 
their  return,  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  was  effected. 
In  the  utter  destruction  of  Jericho,  which  ensued, 
Joshua  gave  the  strictest  orders  for  the  preserva 
tion  of  Rahab  and  her  family;  and  accordingly, 
before  the  city  was  burnt,  the  two  spies  were  sent 
to  her  house,  and  they  brought  out  her,  her  father 
and  mother,  and  brothers,  and  kindred,  and  all  that 
she  had,  and  placed  them  in  safety  in  the  Israelitish 
camp.  The  narrator  adds,  "  and  she  dwelleth  in 
Israel  unto  this  day ;"  not  necessarily  implying  that 
she  was  alive  at  the  time  he  wrote,  but  that  the 
family  of  strangers  of  which  she  was  reckoned  the 
head,  continued  to  dwell  among  the  children  of 
Israel.  May  not  the  345  "  children  of  Jericho," 
mentioned  in  Ezr.  ii.  34,  Neh.  vii.  36,  and  "  the  men 
of  Jericho"  who  assisted  Nehemiah  in  rebuilding 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (Neh.  iii.  2),  have  been 
their  posterity?  Their  continued  sojourn  among 
the  Israelites,  as  a  distinct  family,  would  be  exactly 
analogous  to  the  cases  of  the  Kenites,  the  house  of 
Rechab,  the  Gibeonites,  the  house  of  Caleb,  and 
perhaps  others. 

As  regards  Rahab  herself,  we  learn  from  Matt.  i. 
5,  that  she  became  the  wife  of  Salmon  the  son  of 
Naasson,  and  the  mother  of  Boaz,  Jesse's  grand 
father.  The  suspicion  naturally  arises  that  Salmon 
may  have  been  one  of  the  spies  whose  life  she  saved, 
and  that  gratitude  for  so  great  a  benefit,  led  in  his 
case  to  a  more  tender  passion,  and  obliterate  -\  the 


992 


RAHAB 


memory  of  any  past  disgi-ace  attaching  to  her  name. 
We  are  expressly  told  that  the  spies  were  "  young 
men"  (Josh.  vi.  23),  vfavlfficovs,  ii.  l.;LXX. ; 
and  the  example  of  the  former  spies  who  were  sent 
from  Kadesh-Bamea,  who  were  all  "  heads  of 
Israel "  (Num.  xiii.  3),  as  well  as  the  importance 
of  the  service  to  be  performed,  would  lead  one  to 
expect,  that  they  would  be  persons  of  high  station. 
But,  however  this  may  be,  it  is  certain,  on  the  au 
thority  of  St.  Matthew,  that  Rahab  became  the 
mother  of  the  line  from  which  sprung  David,  and 
oventually  Christ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt 
(hat  it  was  so  stated  in  the  public  archives  from 
which  the  Evangelist  extracted  our  Lord's  genealogy, 
in  which  only  four  women  are  named,  viz.  Thamar, 
Rachab,  Ruth,  and  Bathsheba,  who  were  all  appa 
rently  foreigners,  and  named  for  that  reason. 
TfiATH-SHUA.]  For  that  the  Rachab  mentioned  by 
St.  Matthew  is  Rahab  the  harlot,  is  as  certain  as  that 
David  in  the  genealogy  is  the  same  person  as  David 
in  the  books  of  Samuel.  The  attempts  that  have 
been  made  to  prove  Rachab  different  from  Rahab,a 
in  order  to  get  out  of  the  chronological  difficulty, 
are  singularly  absurd,  and  all  the  more  so, 
because,  even  if  successful,  they  would  not  dimi 
nish  the  difficulty,  as  long  as  Salmon  remains  as 
the  son  of  Naasson  and  the  father  of  Boaz.  How 
ever,  as  there  are  still  found b  those  who  follow 
Outhov  in  his  opinion,  or  at  least  speak  doubtfully, 
it  may  be  as  well  to  call  attention,  with  Dr.  Mill 
(p.  131),  to  the  exact  coincidence  in  the  age  of 
Salmon, -as  the  son  of  Nahshon,  who  was  prince  of 
the  children  of  Judah  in  the  wilderness,  and  Itahab 
the  harlot ;  and  to  observe  that  the  only  conceiv 
able  reason  for  the  mention  of  Rachab  in  St. 
Matthew's  genealogy  is,  that  she  was  a  remarkable 
and  well-known  person,  as  Tamar,  Ruth,  and  Bath 
sheba  were.0  The  mention  of  an  utterly  unknown 
Rahab  in  the  line  would  be  absurd.  The  allusions 
to  "Rahab  the  harlot"  in  Heb.  xi.  31,  Jam.  ii.  25, 
by  classing  her  among  those  illustrious  for  their 
faith,  make  it  still  more  impossible  to  suppose  that 
St.  Matthew  was  speaking  of  any  one  else.  The 
four  successive  generations,  Nahshon,  Salmon,  Boaz, 
Obed,  are  consequently  as  certain  as  words  can  make 
them. 

The  character  of  Rahab  has  much  and  deep  in 
terest.  Dismissing  as  inconsistent  with  truth,  and 
with  the  meaning  of  Hi'lT  and  iropvfi,  the  attempt 
to  clear  her  character  of  stain  by  saying  that  she 
was  only  an  innkeeper,  and  not  a  harlot  (TravSo- 
K€urpta,  Chrysostom  and  Chald.  Vers.),  we  may 
yet  notice  that  it  is  very  possible  that  to  a  woman 
of  her  country  and  religion  such  a  calling  may  have 
implied  a  far  less  deviation  from  the  standard  of 
morality  than  it  does  with  us  ("  vitae  genus  vile 
magis  quam  flagitiosum,"  Grotius),  and  moreover, 
that  with  a  purer  faith  she  seems  to  have  entered 
upon  a  pure  life. 

As  a  case  of  casuistry,  her  conduct  in  deceiving  the 
king  of  Jericho's  messengers  with  a  false  tale,  and, 
above  all,  in  taking  part  against  her  own  country 
men,  has  been  much  discussed.  With  regard  to 


a  Chiefly  by  Outhov,  a  Dutch  professor,  in  the  Biblioth. 
Hremens.  The  earliest  expression  of  any  doubt  is  by 
Thcophylact  In  the  1Kb  century. 

b  V'alpy's  Greek  Test  with  Kng.  notes,  on  Matt.  1.  5 ; 
Burrlngton,  On  tlie  Genealogiei.  i.  192-4,  &c. ;  Kuinoel  on 
Matt.  i.  5 ;  Olshausen,  ib. 

c  There  does  not  seem  to  be  an  7  force  in  Bengal's 
remark,  adopted  by  Olshauson,  that  the  article  («  TTJS 


RAHAB 

the  firs*,  strict  truth,  either  in  Jew  or  ht>nthe:». 
was  a  virtue  so  utterly  unknown  before  the  pro 
mulgation  of  the  Gospel,  that,  as  far  as  Rahab  is 
concerned,  the  discussion  is  quite  superfluous.  The 
question  as  regards  ourselves,  whether  in  any  case 
a  falsehood  is  allowable,  say  to  save  our  own  life 
or  that  of  another,  is  different,  but  need  not  be 
argued  here.d  With  regard  to  her  taking  part 
against  her  own  countrymen,  it  can  only  be  justified, 
but  is  fully  justified,  by  the  circumstance  that 
fidelity  to  her  country  would  in  her  case  have  been 
infidelity  to  God,  and  that  the  higher  duty  to  her 
Maker  eclipsed  the  lower  duty  to  her  native  land. 
Her  anxious  provision  for  the  safety  of  her  father's 
house  shows  how  alive  she  was  to  natural  affections, 
and  seems  to  prove  that  she  was  not  influenced  by 
a  selfish  insensibility,  but  by  an  enlightened  pre 
ference  for  the  service  of  the  true  God  over  the 
abominable  pollutions  of  Canaanite  idolatry.  If 
her  own  life  of  shame  was  in  any  way  connected 
with  that  idolatry,  one  can  readily  understand  what 
a  further  stimulus  this  would  give,  now  that  her 
heart  was  purified  by  faith,  to  her  desire  for  the  over 
throw  of  the  nation  to  which  she  belonged  by  birth, 
and  the  establishment  of  that  to  which  she  wished 
to  belong  by  a  community  of  faith  and  hope.  Any 
how,  allowing  for  the  difference  of  circumstances, 
her  feelings  and  conduct  were  analogous  to  those  of 
a  Christian  Jew  in  St.  Paul's  time,  who  should 
have  preferred  the  triumph  of  the  Gospel  to  the 
triumph  of  the  old  Judaism ;  or  to  those  of  a  con 
verted  Hindoo  in  our  own  days,  who  should  side 
with  Christian  Englishmen  against  the  attempts  of 
his  own  countrymen  to  establish  the  supremacy 
either  of  Brahma  or  Mahomet. 

This  view  of  Rahab's  conduct  is  fnlly  borne  out 
by  the  references  to  her  in  the  N.  T.  The  author 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  tells  us  that  "  by  faith 
the  harlot  Rahab  perished  not  with  them  that  be 
lieved  not,  when  she  had  received  the  spies  with 
peace"  (Heb.  xi.  31);  and  St.  James  fortifies  his 
doctrine  of  justification  by  works,  by  asking,  "  Was 
not  Rahab  the  harlot  justified  by  works,  when  she 
had  received  the  messengers,  and  had  sent  them  out 
another  way?"  (Jam.  ii.  25.)  And  in  like  manner 
Clement  of  Rome  says  "  Rahab  the  harlot  was  saved 
for  her  faith  and  hospitality  "  (ad  Corinth,  xii.). 

The  Fathers  generally  (miro  consensu,  Jacobson\ 
consider  the  deliverance  of  Rahab  as  typical  of  sal 
vation,  and  the  scarlet  line  hung  out  at  her  window 
as  typical  of  the  blood  of  Jesus,  in  the  same  way  n? 
the  ark  of  Noah,  and  the  blood  of  the  paschal 
lamb  were  ;  a  view  which  is  borne  out  by  the  ana 
logy  of  the  deliverances,  and  by  the  language  of 
Heb.  xi.  31  (roTy  aireiOJiffcunv,  "  the  disobedient"), 
compared  with  1  Pet.  iii.  20  (a.irfi6-fi<rcur[i>  irore). 
Clement  (ad  Corinth,  xii.),  is  the  first  to  do  so. 
He  says  that  by  the  symbol  of  the  scarlet  line  it 
was  "  made  manifest  that  there  shall  be  redemption 
through  the  blood  of  the  Lord  to  all  who  believe 
and  trust  in  God  ;"  and  adds,  that  Rahab  in  this 
was  a  prophetess  as  well  as  a  believer,  a  sentiment 
in  which  he  is  followed  by  Origen  (in  lib.  Jes.,  Horn 
iii.).  Justin  Martyr  in  like  manner  calls  the  scarlet 


'Pax<ij3)  proves  that  Rahab  of  Jericho  is  meant,  seeing 
that  all  the  proper  names  in  the  genealogy,  which  are  in 
the  oblique  case,  have  the  article,  though  many  of  then; 
occur  nowhere  else ;  and  that  it  is  omitted  More  Mopm? 
in  ver.  16. 

A  The  question,  in  reference  both  to  Ral>ab  and  to  Chris 
tians,  is  well  discussed  by  Augustine  amtr.  Mendajiur? 
(Ofifi.  vi.  33,  34  :  comp.  HullinRi-r,  3nJ  /'.<•.  Sern.  iv.X 


BAHAB 

line  "the  symbol  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  by  which 
those  of  all  nations,  who  once  were  harlots  and  un 
righteous,  are  saved ;  "  and  in  a  like  spirit  Irenaeus 
draws  from  the  story  of  Rahab  the  conversion  of 
the  Gentiles,  and  the  admission  of  publicans  and 
harlots  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  through  the 
symbol  of  the  scarlet  line,  which  he  compares  with 
the  Passover  and  the  Exodus.  Ambrose,  Jerome, 
Augustine  (who,  like  Jerome  and  Cyril,  takes  Ps. 
Ixxxvii.  4  to  refer  to  Rahab  the  harlot),  and  Theo- 
doret,  all  follow  in  the  same  track ;  but  Origen, 
as  usual,  carries  the  allegory  still  further.  Irenaeus 
makes  the  singular  mistake  of  calling  the  spies 
three,  and  makes  them  symbolical  of  the  Trinity ! 
The  comparison  of  the  scarlet  line  with  the  scarlet 
thread  which  was  bound  round  the  hand  of  Zarah 
is  a  favourite  one  with  them.' 

The  Jews,  as  might  perhaps  be  expected,  are 
embarrassed  as  to  what  to  say  concerning  Rahab. 
They  praise  her  highly  for  her  conduct ;  but  some 
Rabbis  give  out  that  she  was  not  a  Canaanite,  but 
of  some  other  Gentile  race,  and  was  only  a  sojoumer 
in  Jericho.  The  Gemara  of  Babylon  mentions  a 
tradition  that  she  became  the  wife  of  Joshua,  a  tra 
dition  unknown  to  Jerome  (adv.  Jovin.},  and  eight 
persons  who  were  both  priests  and  prophets  sprung 
from  her,  and  also  Huldah  the  prophetess,  men 
tioned  2  K.  xxii.  14  (see  Patrick,  ad  foe.).  Josephus 
describes  her  as  an  innkeeper,  and  her  house  as  an  inn 
(Karaydryiov),  and  never  applies  to  her  the  epithet 
*6pvi),  which  is  the  term  used  by  the  LXX. 

Rahab  is  one  of  the  not  very  numerous  cases  of 
the  calling  of  Gentiles  before  the  coming  of  Christ; 
and  her  deliverance  from  the  utter  destruction  which 
fell  upon  her  countrymen  is  so  beautifully  illus 
trative  of  the  salvation  revealed  in  the  Gospel,  that 
it  is  impossible  not  to  believe  that  it  was  in  the 
fullest  sense  a  type  of  the  redemption  of  the  world 
by  Jesus  Christ. 

See  the  articles  JERICHO  ;  JOSHUA.  Also  Bengcl, 
Lightfoot,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  and  Olshausen  on 
Matt.  i.  5  ;  Patrick,  Grotius,  and  Hitzig  on  Josh.  ii. ; 
Dr.  Mill,  Descent  and  Parentage  of  the  Samour ; 
Ewald,  Geschichte,  ii.  320,  &c. ;  Josephus,  Ant.  \. 
1 ;  Clemens  Rom.  ad  Corinth,  cap.  xii. ;  Irenaeus, 
c.  Her.  iv.  xx. ;  Just.  Mart,  contr.  Tryph.  p.  1 1 ; 
Jerome,  adv.  Jovin.  lib.  i. ;  Epist.  xxxiv.  ad  Nepot. ; 
Breoiar.  in  Ps.  Ixxxvi. ;  Origen,  Horn,  in  Jesum 
Nave,  iii.  and  vi. ;  Comm.  in  Matth.  xxvii. ;  Chry- 
sost.  Horn.  3  in  MMh.,  also  3  in  Ep.  ad  Rom. ; 
Ephr.  Syr.  Rhythm  1  and  7  on  Nativ.,  Rhythm  1 
•)n  the  Faith;  Cyril  of  Jerus.,  Catechct.  Lect.  ii.  9, 
x.  1 1  ;  Bullinger,  1.  c. ;  Tyndale,  Doctr.  Treat. 
(Parker  Soc.),  pp.  119,  120  ;  Schleusner,  Lexic. 
N.  T.  s  T  iro>T7.  [A.  C.  H.] 

BA'HABdrn:  'PocijS:  Rahab'),  a  poetical 
name  of  Egypt.  The  same  word  signifies  "  fierce 
ness,  insolence,  pride;"  if  Hebrew  when  applied  to 
Egypt,  it  would  indicate  the  national  character  of 
tha  inhabitants.  Gesenius  thinks  it  was  probably 
of  Egyptian  origin,  but  accommodated  tb  Hebrew, 
although  no  likely  equivalent  has  been  found  in 
Coptic,  or,  we  may  add,  in  ancient  Egyptian  (Thes. 
s.  v.).  That  the  Hebrew  meaning  is  alluded  to  in 
connexion  with  the  proper  name,  does  not  seem  to 
prove  that  the  latter  is  Hebrew,  but  this  is  rendered 
very  probable  by  its  apposite  character,  and  its  sole 
use  in  poetical  books. 


"  BulUnger  (5th  Dec.  Scrm.  vl.)  views  the  Une  as  a  sign 
wid  seal  of  the  covenant  b*lween  the  Israelites  and  Rabat). 


993 

This  word  occurs  in  a  passage  in  Job,  where  it  is 
usually  translated,  as  in  the  A.  V.,  instead  of  being 
treated  as  a  proper  name.  Yet  if  the  jwssage  1* 
compared  with  parallel  ones,  there  can  scarcely  be  a 
doubt  that  it  refers  to  the  Exodus,  "  He  divideth 
the  sea  with  His  power,  and  by  His  understanding 
He  smiteth  through  the  proud"  [or  "Rahab"] 
(xxvi.  12).  The  prophet  I.saiah  calls  on  the  arm 
of  the  Lord,  "  [Art]  not  thou  it  that  hath  cul 
Rahab,  [and]  wounded  the  dragon  ?  [Art]  not  thou 
it  which  hath  dried  the  sea,  the  waters  of  th>  great 
deep  ;  that  hath  made  the  depths  of  the  sea  a  way 
for  the  ransomed  to  pass  over?"  (Ii.  9,  10  ;  comp. 
15.)  In  Ps.  Ixxiv.  the  division  of  the  sea  is  men 
tioned  in  connexion  with  breaking  the  heads  of  the 
dragons  and  the  heads  of  Leviathan  (13,  14).  So 
too  in  Ps.  Ixxxix.  God's  power  to  subdue  the  sen 
is  spoken  of  immediately  before  a  mention  of  his 
having  "  broken  Rahab  in  pieces"  (9,  10).  Rahab, 
as  a  name  of  Egypt,  occurs  once  only  without  re 
ference  to  the  Exodus  :  this  is  in  Psalm  Ixxxvii., 
where  Rahab,  Babylon,  Philistia,  Tyre,  and  Cush, 
are  compared  with  Zion  (4,  5).  In  one  othei 
passage  the  name  is  alluded  to,  with  reference  to 
its  Hebrew  signification,  where  it  is  prophesied  that 
the  aid  of  the  Egyptians  should  not  avail  those  who 
sought  it,  and  this  sentence  follows:  DH  2m 


^»  "Insolence  [i.  e.  'the  insolent'],  they  sit 
still  "  (Is.  xxx.  7),  as  Gesenius  reads,  considering  it  to 
be  undoubtedly  a  proverbial  expression.  [R.  S.  P.] 

EA'HAM  (Drn  :    'Pof>  :    Raham}.     In  the 

genealogy  of  the  descendants  of  Caleb  the  son  of 
Hezron  (I  Chr.  ii.  44),  Raham  is  described  as  the 
son  of  Shema  and  father  of  Jorkoam.  Rashi  and 
the  author  of  the  Quaest.  in  Paril.,  attributed  to 
Jerome,  regard  Jorkoam  as  a  place,  of  which  Raham 
was  founder  and  prince. 

RA'HEL  (^>rn  :  'Pax^A.  :  Rachel).   The  more 

accurate  form  of  the  familiar  name  elsewhere  ren 
dered  RACHEL.  In  the  older  English  versions  it  is 
employed  throughout,  but  survives  in  the  Au 
thorized  Version  of  1611,  and  in  our  present  Bibles, 
in  Jer.  xxxi.  15  only.  [G.] 

BAIN.  1B»  (motor},  and  also  Dt?j  (geshem), 
which,  when  it  differs  from  the  more  common  word 
"II3J3,  signifies  a  more  violent  rain  ;  it  is  also  used 
as  a  generic  term,  including  the  early  and  latter 
rain  (Jer.  v.  24  ;  Joel  ii.  23). 

EARLY  RAIN,  the  rains  of  the  autumn,  PHI* 
(yoreK),  part,  subst.  from  m*,  "  he  scatteral  " 
(Deut.  xi.  14;  Jer.  v.  24);  also  the  hiphil  part. 
rniE  (Joel  ii.  23)  :  ie-rbf  vptii'ifios,  LXX. 

LATTER  RAIN,  the  rain  of  springl  B>ip?£  (mal- 
kfish),  (Prov.  xvi.  15;  Job  xxix.  23;  Jer.  iii.  3; 
Hos.  vi.  3;  Joel  ii.  23;  Zech.  x.  1):  vfTos  tytpos 
The  early  and  latter  rains  are  mentioned  together 
(Deut.  xi.  14  ;  Jer.  v.  24  ;  Joel  ii.  23  ;  Hos.  vi.  3  ; 
James  v.  7). 

Another  word,  of  a  more  poetical  character,  ie 
D'1*3T  (rebibim,  a  plural  form,  connected  viti 
rob,  "  many,"  from  the  multitude  of  the  drops) 
translated  in  our  version  "showers'"  (Deut.  xxxii. 
2;  Jer.  iii.  3,  xiv.  22;  Mic.  v.  7  (Heb.  6);  Ps. 
Ixv.  10  (Heb.  11),  Ixxii.  6).  The  Hebrews  have 
also  the  word  D^lt  (zerem),  expressing  violent  mini 

3  S 


094 


RAIN 


ttorni,  tempest,  accompanied  with  hail — -in  Job 
xxiv.  3,  the  heavy  rain  which  comes  down  on 
mountains ;  and  the  word  "V"13D  (sagrir),  which 
occurs  only  in  Prov.  xxvii.  15,  continuous  and  heavy 
rain,  *v  iifj.(pa  %f 'Mff'l/?7- 

In  a  country  comprising  so  many  varieties  of 
elevation  as  Palestine,  there  must  of  necessity  occur 
sorresponding  varieties  of  climate  ;  an  account  that 
might  correctly  describe  the   peculiarities  of  the 
district  of  Lebanon,  would  be  in  many  respects  in 
accurate  when  applied  to  the  deep  depression  and 
almost  tropical  climate  of  Jericho.     In  any  general 
statement,  therefore,  allowance  must  be  made  for 
not  inconsiderable  local  variations.     Compared  with 
England,  Palestine  would  be  a  country  in  which 
rain  would  be  much  less  frequent  than  with  our 
selves  ;  contrasted  with  the  districts  most  familiar 
to  the  children  of  Israel  before  their  settlement  in 
the  land  of  promise,  Egypt  and  the  Desert,  rain 
might  be  spoken  of  as  one  of  its  distinguishing  cha 
racteristics  (Deut.  xi.  10,  11  ;  Herodotus,  iii.  10). 
For  six  months  in  the  year  no  rain  falls,  and  the 
harvests  are  gathered  in  without  any  of  the  anxiety 
with  which  we  are  so  familiar  lest  the  work  be  in 
terrupted  by  unseasonable  storms.     In  this  respect 
at  least  the  climate  has  remained  unchanged  since 
the  time  when  Boaz  stept  by  his  heap  of  corn  ;  and 
the  sending  thunder  and  rain  in  wheat  harvest  was 
a  miracle  which  filled  the  people  with  fear  and 
wonder  (1  Sam.  xii.  16-18)  ;  and  Solomon  could 
speak  of  "  rain  in  harvest "  as  the  most  forcible  ex 
pression  for  conveying  the  idea  of  something  utterly 
out  of  place  and  unnatural  (Prov.  xxvi.  1).     There 
are,  however,  very  considerable,  and  perhaps  more 
than  compensating,  disadvantages  occasioned  by  this 
long  absence  of  rain :  the  whole  land  becomes  dry, 
parched,  and  brown,  the  cisterns  are  empty,  the 
springs  and  fountains  fail,  and  the  autumnal  rains 
are  eagerly  looked  for,  to  prepare  the  earth  for  the 
reception  of  the  seed.     These,  the  early  rains,  com 
mence  about  the  latter  end  of  October  or  beginning 
of  November,  in  Lebanon  a  mouth  earlier :  not  sud 
denly  but  by  degrees;   the  husbandman  has  thus 
the  opportunity  of  sowing  his  fields  of  wheat  and 
barley.     The  rains  come  mostly  from  the  west  or 
south-west  (Luke  xii.  54),  continuing  for  two  or 
three  days  at  a  time,  and  falling  chiefly  during  the 
night ;  the  wind  then  shifts  round  to  the  north  or 
east,  and  several  days  of  fine  weather  succeed  (Prov. 
xxv.  23).     During  the  months  of  November  and 
December  the  rains  continue  to  fall  heavily,  but  at 
intervals ;   afterwards  they  return,  only  at  longer 
intervals,  and  are  less  heavy ;   but  at  no   period 
during  the  winter  do  they  entirely  cease.     January 
and  February  are  the  coldest  months,  and  snow 
falls,  sometimes  to  the  depth  of  a  foot  or  more,  at 
Jerusalem,  but   it  does  not  lie   long;  it  is  very 
seldom  seen  along  the  coast  and  in  the  low  plains. 
Thin  ice  occasionally  covers  the  pools  for  a  few  days, 
and  while  Porter  was  writing  his  Handbook,  the 
snow  was  eight  inches  deep  at  Damascus,  and  the  ice 
n  quarter  of  an  inch  thick.     Rain  continues  to  fall 
more  or  less  during  the  month  of  March ;  it  is  veiy 
rare  in  April,  and  even  in  Lebanon  the  showers  that 
occur  are  generally  light.     In   the  valley  of  the 
Jordan  the  barley  harvest  begins  as  early  as  the 
middle  of  April,  and  the  wheat  a  fortnight  later ;  in 
Lebanon  the  grain  is  seldom  ripe  before  the  midd'e 
of  June.      (See  Robinson,  Biblical  Kesearcftf.s,  i. 
429  ;  and  Porter,  Handbook,  xlviii.)    [PALEST  INK, 
p.  692.] 


RAIN 

With  respect  to  the  distinction  between 
ana  the  latter  rains,  Robinson  observes  tnat  there 
are  not  at  the  present  day  "  any  jKirticular  periods 
of  rain  or  succession  of  showers,  which  might  be 
regarded  as  distinct  rainy  seasons.  The  whole  period 
from  October  to  Maich  now  constitutes  only  on« 
continued  season  of  rain  without  any  regularly  in 
tervening  term  of  prolonged  fine  weather.  Unlfss, 
therefore,  there  has  been  some  change  in  the  climate, 
the  early  and  the  latter  rains  for  which  the  hus 
bandman  waited  with  longing,  seem  rather  to  have 
implied  the  first  showers  of  autumn  which  revived 
the  parched  and  thirsty  soil  and  prepared  it  for  the 
seed  ;  and  the  later  showers  of  spring,  which  conti 
nued  to  refresh  and  forward  both  the  ripening  crops 
and  the  vernal  products  of  the  fields  (James  v.  7 ; 
Prov.  xvi.  15)." 

In  April  and  May  the  sky  is  usually  serene; 
showers  occur  occasionally,  but  they  are  mild  and 
refreshing.  On  the  1st  of  May  Robinson  experienced 
showers  at  Jerusalem,  and  "  at  evening  there  was 
thunder  and  lightning  (which  are  frequent  in  winter), 
with  pleasant  and  reviving  rain.  The  6th  of  May 
was  also  remarkable  for  thunder  and  for  seveml 
showers,  some  of  which  were  quite  heavy.  The 
rains  of  both  these  days  extended  far  to  the  north 
...  but  the  occurrence  of  rain  so  late  in  the  season 
was  regained  as  a  very  unusual  circumstance." 
(B.  B.  i.  430 :  he  is  speaking  of  the  year  1838.) 

In  1856,  however,  "there  was  very  heavy  rain 
accompanied  with  thunder  all  over  the  region  of 
Lebanon,  extending  to  Boyrout  and  Damascus,  on 
the  28th  and  29th  May ;  but  the  oldest  inhabitant 
had  never  seen  the  like  before,  and  it  created,  says 
Porter  (Handbook,  xlviii.),  almost  as  much  asto 
nishment  as  the  thunder  and  rain  which  Samuel 
brought  upon  the  Israelites  during  the  time  of 
wheat  harvest." 

During  Dr.  Robinson's  stay  at  Beyrout  on  his 
second  visit  to  Palestine,  in  1852,  there  were  heavy 
rains  in  March,  once  for  five  days  continuously, 
and  the  weather  continued  variable,  with  occasional 
heavy  rain,  till  the  close  of  the  first  week  in  April. 
The  "latter  rains"  thus  continued  this  season  for 
nearly  a  month  later  than  usual,  and  the  result  was 
afterwards  seen  in  the  very  abundant  crops  of 
winter  grain  (Robinson,  B.  B.  iii.  9). 

These  details  will,  it  is  thought,  better  than  any 
generalized  statement,  enable  the  reader  to  form  his 
judgment  on  the  "  former "  and  "  latter  "  rains  of 
Scripture,  and  may  serve  to  introduce  a  remark  or 
two  on  the  question,  about  which  some  interest  has 
been  felt,  whether  there  has  been  any  change  in  the 
frequency  and  abundance  of  the  rain  in  Palestine, 
or  in  the  periods  of  its  supply.  It  is  asked  whether 
"  these  stony  hills,  these  deserted  valleys,"  can  be  the 
land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey  ;  the  land  which 
God  cared  for ;  the  land  upon  which  were  always 
the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  from  the  beginning  of  the  year 
to  the  end  of  the  year  (Deut.  xi.  12).  As  far  as 
relates  to  the  other  considerations  which  may 
account  for  diminished  fertility,  such  as  the  de 
crease  of  population  and  nidus-try,  the  neglect  ot 
terrace-culture  and  irrigation,  and  husbanding  the 
supply  of  water,  it  may  suffice  to  refer  to  the 
article  on  AGRICULTURE,  and  to  Stanley  (Sinai 
and  Palestine,  120-123).  With  respect  to  our 
more  immediate  subject,  it  is  urged  that  the 
very  expression  "flowing  with  milk  and  honey" 
implies  abundant  rains  to  keep  alive  the  grass  tor 
the  pasture  of  the  numerous  herds  supplying  the 
milk,  and  to  nourish  the  flowers  clothing  the  no* 


KAIN 

bore  hill-sides,  from  whence  the  bees  might  gather 
their  stores  of  honey.  It  is  urged  that  the  supply 
of  rain  in  its  due  season  seems  to  be  promised  as 
contingent  upon  the  fidelity  of  the  people  (Deut. 
xi.  13-15;  Lev.  xxvi.  3-5),  and  that  as  from  time 
to  time,  to  punish  the  people  for  their  transgressions, 
"  the  showers  have  been  withholden,  and  there  hath 
been  no  latter  rain  "  ( Jer.  iii.  3 ;  1  K.  xvii.,  xviii.), 
so  now,  in  the  great  and  long-continued  apostasy 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  there  has  come  upon 
even  the  land  of  their  forfeited  inheritance  a  like 
long-continued  withdrawal  of  the  favour  of  God, 
who  claims  the  sending  of  rain  as  one  of  His  special 
prerogatives  (Jer.  xiv.  22). 

The  early  rains,  it  is  urged,  are  by  comparison 
scanty  and  interrupted,  the  latter  rains  have  alto 
gether  ceased,  and  hence,  it  is  maintained,  the  curse 
has  been  fulfilled,  "  Thy  heaven  that  is  over  thy 
head  shall  be  brass,  and  the  earth  that  is  under 
thee  shall  be  iron.  The  Lord  shall  make  the  rain 
of  thy  land  powder  and  dust"  (Deut.  xxriii.  33, 
24;  Lev.  xxvi.  19).  Without  entering  here  into 
the  consideration  of  the  justness  of  the  interpreta 
tion  which  would  assume  these  predictions  of  the 
withholding  of  rain  to  be  altogether  different  in  the 
manner  of  their  infliction  from  the  other  calamities 
denounced  in  these  chapters  of  threatening,  it 
would  appear  that,  as  far  as  the  question  of  fact 
is  concerned,  there  is  scarcely  sufficient  reason  to 
imagine  that  any  great  and  marked  changes  with 
respect  to  the  rains  have  taken  place  in  Palestine. 
In  early  days  as  now,  rain  was  unknown  for  half 
the  year ;  and  if  we  may  judge  from  the  allusions 
in  Prov.  xvi.  15  ;  Job  xxix.  23,  the  latter  rain  was 
even  then,  while  greatly  desired  and  longed  for, 
that  which  was  somewhat  precarious,  by  no  means 
to  be  absolutely  counted  on  as  a  matter  of  course. 
If  we  are  to  take  as  correct,  our  translation  of  Joel 
ii.  23,  "  the  latter  rain  in  the  first  (month*),"  *.  e. 
Nisan  or  Abib,  answering  to  the  latter  part  of 
March  and  the  early  part  of  April,  the  times  of  the 
latter  rain  in  the  days  of  the  prophets  would  coin 
cide  with  those  in  which  it  falls  now.  The  same  con 
clusion  would  be  arrived  at  from  Amos  iv.  7,  "  I 
have  withholden  the  rain  from  you  when  there 
were  yet  three  months  to  the  harvest."  The  rain 
here  spoken  of  is  the  latter  rain,  and  an  interval  of 
three  months  between  the  ending  of  the  rain  and 
the  beginning  of  harvest,  would  seem  to  be  in  an 
average  year  as  exceptional  now  as  it  was  when 
Amos  noted  it  as  a  judgment  of  God.  We  may 
infer  also  from  the  Song  of  Solomon  ii.  11-13,  where 
is  given  a  poetical  description  of  the  bursting  forth 
of  vegetation  in  the  spring,  that  when  the  "  winter  " 
was  past,  the  rain  also  was  over  and  gone :  we  can 
hardly,  by  any  extension  of  the  term  "  winter," 
bring  it  down  to  a  later  period  than  that  during 
which  the  rains  still  fall. 

It  may  be  added  that  travellers  have,  perhaps 
unconsciously,  exaggerated  the  barrenness  of  the 
land,  from  confining  themselves  too  closely  to  the 
.southern  portion  of  Palestine ;  the  northern  por 
tion,  Galilee,  of  such  peculiar  interest  to  the 
readers  of  the  Gospels,  is  fertile  and  beautiful  (see 
Stanhy,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  chap,  x.,  and  Van  de 
Velde,  there  quoted),  and  in  his  description  of  the 
vnlley  of  Nablus,  the  ancient  Shechem,  Robinson 

*  The  word  "  month "  is  supplied  by  our  translators, 
and  their  rendering  is  not  supported  by  either  the  LXX. 
(jcaftos  f/un-poffOw)  or  the  Vulg.  (sicut  in  principw). 
/mother  interpretation  is  indeed  equally  probable ;  but 


RAINBOW 


995 


(/<  R.  ii.  275)  becomes  almost  enthusiastic :  "  Here 
a  scene  or  luxuriant  and  almost  unparalleled  \  er  jure 
burst  upon  our  view.  The  whole  valley  was  filled 
with  gardens  of  vegetables  and  orchards  of  all  kinds 
of  fruits,  watered  by  several  fountains,  which  burst 
forth  in  various  parts  and  flow  westward  in  ref.esh- 
ing  streams.  It  came  upon  us  suddenly,  like  a  scene 
of  fairy  enchantment.  We  saw  nothing  like  it  in 
all  Palestine."  The  account  given  by  a  recent  lady 
traveller  (Egyptian  Sepulchres  and  Syrian  Shrines, 
by  Miss  Beaufort)  of  the  luxuriant  fruit-trees  and 
vegetables  which  she  saw  at  Meshullam's  farm  in 
the  valley  of  Urtas,  a  little  south  of  Bethlehsm 
(possibly  the  site  of  Solomon's  gardens.  Eccl.  ii.  4-6), 
may  serve  to  prove  how  much  now,  as  ever,  may 
be  effected  by  irrigation. 

Rain  frequently  furnishes  the  writers  of  the  Old 
Testament  with  forcible  and  appropriate  metaphors, 
varying  in  their  character  according  as  they  regard 
it  as  the  beneficent  and  fertilizing  shower,  or  the 
destructive  storm  pouring  down  the  mountain  side 
and  sweeping  away  the  labour  of  years.  Thus 
Prov.  xxviii.  3,  of  the  poor  that  oppresseth  the 
poor;  Ez.  xxxviii.  22,  of  the  just  punishments  and 
righteous  vengeance  of  God  (compare  Ps.  xi.  6 ;  Jot 
xx.  23).  On  the  other  hand,  we  have  it  used  of 
speech  wise  and  fitting,  refreshing  the  souls  of  men, 
of  words  earnestly  waited  for  and  heedful  ly  listened 
to  (Deut.  xxxii.  2 ;  Job  xxix.  23) ;  of  the  cheering 
favour  of  the  Lord  coming  down  once  more  upon 
the  penitent  soul ;  of  the  gracious  presence  and  in 
fluence  for  good  of  the  righteous  ting  among  hij 
people ;  of  the  blessings,  gifts,  and  graces  of  the 
reign  of  the  Messiah  (Hos.  vi.  3  ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  4  ; 
Ps.  Ixxii.  6).  [E.  P.  E.] 

RAINBOW  (ni?3  (».  e.  a  bow  with  which  to 
shoot  arrows),  Gen.  ix.  13-16,  Ez.  i.  28:  T6£ov,  so 
Ecclus.  xliii.  11 :  areus.  In  N.  T.,  Rev.  iv.  3,  x.  1, 
?p«y).  The  token  of  the  covenant  which  God  made 
with  Noah  when  he  came  forth  from  the  ark,  that 
the  waters  should  no  more  become  a  flood  to 
destroy  all  flesh.  With  respect  to  the  covenant 
itself,  as  a  charter  of  natural  blessings  and  mercies 
(  "  the  World's  covenant,  not  the  Church's  "  ),  re 
establishing  the  peace  and  order  of  Physical  Nature, 
which  in  the  flood  had  undergone  so  great  a 
convulsion,  see  Davison  On  Prophecy,  lect.  iii. 
p.  76-80.  With  respect  to  the  token  of  the  cove 
nant,  the  right  interpretation  of  Gen.  ix.  13  seems 
to  be  that  God  took  the  rainbow,  which  had  hitherto 
been  but  a  beautiful  object  shining  in  the  heavens 
when  the  sun's  rays  fell  on  falling  rain,  and  conse 
crated  it  as  the  sign  of  His  love  and  the  witness  of 
His  promise. 

The  following  passages,  Num.  xiv.  4;  1  Sam. 
xii.  13 ;  1  K.  ii.  35,  are  instances  in  which  J713 
(ndthan,  lit.  "give"),  the  word  used  in  Gen.  ix. 
13,  "  I  do  set  my  bow  in  the  cloud,"  is  employed 
in  the  sense  of  "  constitute,"  "  appoint."  Accord 
ingly  there  is  no  reason  for  concluding  that  ignorance 
of  the  natural  cause  of  the  rainbow  occasioned  the 
account  given  of  its  institution  in  the  Book  of 
Genesis. 

The  figurative  and  symbolical  use  of  the  rainbow 
as  an  emblem  of  God's  mercy  and  faithfulness 
must  not  be  passed  over.  In  the  wondrous  visiop 


the  following  passages.  Gen.  vlii.  13,  Num._ix.  5,  f.z.  jxix. 
]»,  rlv.  18,  21,  justify  the  rendering  jiK'N"}3  "  In  tU« 
first  (month)  " 

352 


996 


RAISINS 


4iowu  to  St.  John  in  the  Apocalypse  (Rev.  IT.  3), 
it  is  said  that  "  there  was  a  rainbow  round  about 
the  throne,  in  sight  like  uiito  an  emerald:"  amidst 
Hie  awful  vision  of  surpassing  glory  is  seen  the  sym 
bol  of  Hope,  the  bright  emblem  of  Mercy  and  of 
Love.  "  Look  upon  the  rainbow,"  saith  the  son  of 
Sirach  (Ecclus.  xliii.  11,  12),  "and  praise  Him 
that  made  it :  very  beautiful  it  is  in  the  bright 
ness  thereof;  it  compasseth  the  heaven  about  with 
a  glorious  circle,  and  the  hands 'of  the  most  High 
have  bended  it."  [E.  P.  E.] 

RAISINS.    [VINE.] 

RA'KEM  (Dpi,  in  pause  Dpi :  'POK<$/X  ;  om. 
in  Alex. :  Recen).  Among  the  descendants  of  Machir 
the  son  of  Manasseh,  by  his  wife  Maachah,  are  men 
tioned  Ulam  and  Rakem,  who  are  apparently  the 
sons  of  Sheresh  (1  Chr.  vii.  16).  Nothing  is  known 
of  them. 

RAK'KATH  (JljT) :  ['n/xoeo]5o(Cf  6  :  Alex. 
'PfKKaB :  Reccath).  One  of  the  fortified  towns  of 
Naphtali,  named  between  HAMMATH  and  CHIN- 
NERETH  (Josh.  six.  35).  Hammath  was  probably 
at  the  hot  springs  of  Tiberias ;  but  no  trace  of  the 
name  of  Rakkath  has  been  found  in  that  or  any 
other  neighbourhood.  The  nearest  approach  is 
Kerak,  fomierly  Tarichaeae,  three  miles  further 
down  the  shore  of  the  lake,  close  to  the  embouchure 
of  the  Jordan.  [G.] 

RAK.'KON,(ppnn,    with    the    def.    article: 

'ItpaKuv.  Arecon).  One  of  the  towns  in  the  in 
heritance  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  46),  apparently  not 
far  distant  from  Joppa.  The  LXX.  (both  MSS.) 
give  only  one  name  (that  quoted  above)  for  this 
and  Me-jarkon,  which  in  the  Hebrew  text  precedes 
it.  This  fact,  when  coupled  with  the  similarity  of 
the  two  names  in  Hebrew,  suggests  that  the  one 
may  be  merely  a  repetition  of 
the  other.  Neither  has  been 
yet  discovered.  [G.] 

RAM  (DT  :  'Apd/i  ;  Alex. 
'Afipdv  in  Ruth ;  'Opdp  and 
*Apa/i  in  1  Chr. :  Aram).  1. 
Son  of  Hezron  and  father  of 
Amminadab.  He  was  born  in 
Egypt  alter  Jacob's  migration 
there,  as  his  name  is  not  men 
tioned  in  Gen.  xlvi.  4.  He 
first  appears  in  Ruth  iv.  19. 
The  genealogy  in  1  Chr.  ii.  9, 
10,  25,  adds  no  further  infor 
mation  concerning  him,  except 
that  he  was  the  second  son  ot 
Hezron,  Jerahmeel  being  the 
first-bom.  He  appears  in  the 
N.  T.  only  in  the  two  lists  of 
the  ancestry  of  Christ  (Matt.  i. 
3,  4 ;  Luke  iii.  33),  where  he 
:s  called  ARAM,  after  the  LXX. 
and  Vulgate.  [AMMINA  DAB  ; 
NAHSHON.]  "  [A.  C.  H.] 

2.  ('P<*M:  Ram.)  The  first- 
bora  of  Jerahmeel,  and  there 
fore  nephew  of  the  preceding 
(1  Chr.  ii.  25,  27).     He  had 
three  sons,  Maaz,  Jamin,  and 
Eker. 

3.  Elihu,  the  son  of  Bara- 
diel  the  Buzite,  is  described  as 
'•of  the  kindred  of  lUni"  (JoK 


RAM.  BATTERING 

xxxii.  •!}.  Hashi's  note  on  the  passage  is  cunona: 
"  '  of  the  family  of  Ram  ;'  Abraham,  for  it  is  said, 
'  the  greatest  man  among  the  Anakim  '  (Josh,  xrv.)  ; 
this  [is]  Abraham."  Ewald  identifies  Ram  with 
Aram,  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxii.  21  in  connexion  with 
Huz  and  Buz  (Gesch.  i.  414).  Elihu  would  thus 
be  a  collateral  descendant  of  Abraham,  and  this 
may  have  suggested  the  extraordinary  explanation 
given  by  Rashi.  [VV.  A.  W.] 

RAM.    [SHEEP;  SACRIFICES^ 

RAM,    BATTERING   (13:    jBfArftrrtiru, 
aries).     This  instrument  of  ancient  siege 


operations  is  twice  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  (Kz.  iv. 
2,  xxi.  22  [27])  ;  and  as  both  references  are  to  the 
battering-rams  in  use  among  the  Assyrians  and 
Babylonians,  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  describe 
those  which  are  known  from  the  monuments  to 
have  been  employed  in  their  sieges.  With  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  there  is  but 
little  doubt.  It  denotes  an  engine  of  war  which 
was  called  a  ram,  either  because  it  had  an  iron  head 
shaped  like  that  of  a  ram,  or  because,  when  used 
for  battering  down  a  wall,  the  movement  was  like 
the  butting  action  of  a  ram. 

In  attacking  the  walls  of  a  fort  or  city,  the  first 
step  appears  to  have  been  to  form  an  inclined  plane 
or  bank  of  earth  (comp.  Ez.  iv.  2,  "  cast  a  mount 
against  it"),  by  which  the  besiegers  could  bring 
their  battering-rams  and  other  engines  to  the  foot  of 
the  walk.  "  The  battering-rams,"  says  Mr.  Layard, 
"  were  of  several  kinds.  Some  were  joined  to 
moveable  towers  which  held  warriors  and  armed 
men.  The  whole  then  formed  one  great  temporary 
building,  the  top  of  which  is  represented  in  sculp 
tures  as  on  a  level  with  the  walls,  and  even  tur 
rets,  of  the  besieged  city.  In  some  bas-reliefs  the 
battering-ram  is  without  wheels  ;  it  was  then  per- 


Bxlierinc  lUm. 


ttAMAH 


997 


haps  constructed  upon  the  spot,  and  was  not  in 
tended  to  be  moved.  The  inoveable  tower  was 
probably  sometimes  unprovided  with  the  ram,  but 
I  have  not  met  with  it  so  represented  in  the  sculp 
tures When  the  machine  containing  the 

battering-ram  was  a  simple  framework,  and  did  not 
form  an  artificial  tower,  a  cloth  or  some  kind  of 
drapery,  edged  .with  fringes  and  otherwise  orna 
mented,  appears  to  have  been  occasioL^Jy  thrown 
over  it.  Sometimes  it  may  have  been  covered  with 
hides.  It  moved  either  on  four  or  on  six  wheels, 
and  was  provided  with  one  ram  or  with  two.  The 
mode  of  working  the  rams  cannot  be  determined 
from  the  Assyrian  sculptures.  It  may  be  presumed, 
from  the  representations  in  the  bas-reliefs,  that  they 
were  partly  suspended  by  a  rope  fastened  to  the 
outside  of  the  machine,  and  that  men  directed  and 
impelled  them  from  within.  Such  was  the  plan 
adopted  by  the  Egyptians,  in  whose  paintings  the 
warriors  working  the  ram  may  be  seen  through 
the  frame.  Sometimes  this  engine  was  ornamented 
by  a  carved  or  painted  figure  of  the  presiding 
divinity,  kneeling  on  one  knee  and  drawing  a  bow. 
The  artificial  tower  was  usually  occupied  by  two 
warriors:  one  discharged  his  arrows  against  the 
besieged,  whom  he  was  able,  from  his  lofty  posi 
tion,  to  harass  more  effectually  than  if  he  had  been 
below ;  the  other  held  up  a  shield  for  his  com 
panion's  defence.  Warriors  are  not  unfrequently 
represented  as  stepping  from  the  machine  to  the 

battlements Archers  on  the  walls  hurled 

stones  from  slings,  and  discharged  their  arrows 
against  the  warriors  in  the  artificial  towers ;  whilst 
the  rest  of  the  besieged  were  no  less  active  in  en 
deavouring  to  frustrate  the  attempts  of  the  assail 
ants  to  make  breaches  in  their  walls.  By  dropping 
a  doubled  chain  or  rope  from  the  battlements,  they 
caught  the  ram,  and  could  either  destroy  its  efficacy 
altogether,  or  break  the  force  of  its  blows.  Those 
below,  however,  by  placing  hooks  over  the  engine, 
and  throwing  their  whole  weight  upon  them, 
struggled  to  retain  it  in  its  place.  The  besieged,  if 
unable  to  displace  the  battering-ram,  sought  to 
destroy  it  by  fire,  and  threw  lighted  torches  or  fire 
brands  upon  it ;  but  water  was  poured  upon  the 
flames  through  pipes  attached  to  the  artificial  tower" 
(Nineveh,  atid  its  Remains,  ii.  367-370).  [W.  A.  W.] 

KA'MA  ('Papa:  Rama),  Matt.  ii.  18,  referring 
to  Jer.  xxxi.  15.  The  original  passage  alludes  to  a 
massacre  of  Benjamites  or  Ephraimites  (comp.  ver. 
9,  18),  at  the  Ramah  in  Benjamin  or  in  Mount 
Ephraim.  This  is  seized  by  the  Evangelist  and  turned 
into  a  touching  reference  to  the  slaughter  of  the 
Innocents  at  Bethlehem,  near  to  which  was  (and  is) 
the  sepulchre  of  Rachel.  The  name  of  Rama  is 
alleged  to  have  been  lately  discovered  attached  to  a 
spot  close  to  the  sepulchre.  If  it  existed  there  in 
St.  Matthew's  day,  it  may  have  prompted  his  allu 
sion,  though  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  this,  since 
tha  point  of  the  quotation  does  not  lie  in  the  name 
Ramah,  but  in  the  lamentation  of  Rachel  for  the 
children,  as  is  shown  by  the  change  of  the  viols  of 
the  original  ..o  TtKva.  [G.] 

a  So  Sir  H.  C.  Rawlinson,  in  Athenaeum,  No.  1799, 
p.  530. 

i>  Its  place  in  the  list  of  Joshua  (mentioned  above), 
vir,  between  Gibcon  and  Beerotn,  suits  the  present  Ram- 
JillaJi;  but  the  considerations  named  in  the  text  make 
it  very  difficult  to  identify  any  other  site  with  it  than 
tr-Jldm. 

<•-  in  tils  commentary  on  Ilos.  v.  8,  Jerown  mentions 


BA'MAH  (HDnn,  with  the  definite  article, 
excepting  a  few  cases  named  below).  A  word 
which  in  its  simple  or  compound  shape  forms  the 
name  of  several  places  in  the  Holy  Land ;  one  of 
those  which,  like  Gibeah,  Geba,  Gibeon,  or  Mizpeh, 
betrays  the  aspect  of  the  country.  The  lexico 
graphers  with  unanimous  consent  derive  it  from  a 
root  which  has  the  general  sense  of  elevation — & 
root  which  produced  the  name  of  Aram,'  "  the  high 
lands,"  and  the  various  modifications  of  Ram,  Ramah, 
Ramath,  Ramoth,  Remeth,  Ramathaim,  Arimathaea, 
in  the  Biblical  records.  As  an  appellative  it  is  found 
only  in  one  passage  (Ez.  xvi.  24-39),  in  which  it 
occurs  four  times,  each  time  rendered  in  the  A.  V. 
"  high  place."  But  in  later  Hebrew  ramtha  is  a 
recognized  word  for  a  hill,  and  as  such  is  employed 
in  the  Jewish  versions  of  the  Pentateuch  for  the 
rendering  of  Pisgah. 

1.  ('Pdfia;  'PaajuS;  Ba^ua,  &c. ;  Alex.  lajua, 
a/i^uaj/ ;  'Pa/ta  :  Rama.)  One  of  the  cities  of  the 
allotment  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xviii.  25),  a  member 
of  the  group  which  contained  Gibeon  and  Jeru 
salem.  Its  place  in  the  list  is  between  Gibeon  and 
Beeroth.  There  is  a  more  precise  specification  of 
its  position  in  the  invaluable  catalogue  of  the  places 
north  of  Jerusalem  which  are  enumerated  by  Isaiah 
as  disturbed  by  the  gradual  approach  of  the  king  ot 
Assyria  (Is.  x.  28-32).  At  Michmash  he  crosses  the 
ravine ;  and  then  successively  dislodges  or  alarms 
Geba,  Ramah,  and  Gibeah  of  Saul.  Each  of  these 
may  be  recognized  with  almost  absolute  certainty  at 
the  present  day.  Geba  is  Jeba,  on  the  south  brink 
of  the  great  valley  ;  and  a  mile  and,  a  half  beyond 
it,  directly  between  it  and  the  main  road  to  the 
city,  is  er-Ram  (its  name  the  exact  equivalent  of 
ha-Ramah)  on  the  elevation  which  its  ancient  name 
implies.*  Its  distance  from  the  city  is  two  hours, 
»".  e.  five  English  or  six  Roman  miles,  in  perfect 
accordauce  with  the  notice  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
in  the  Onamasticon  ("  Rama  "),c  and  nearly  agree 
ing  with  that  of  Josephus  (Ant.  viii.  12,  §3),  who 
places  it  40  stadia  north  of  Jerusalem. 

Its  position  is  also  in  close  agreement  with  the 
noticts  of  the  Bible.  The  palm-tree  of  Deborah 
(Judg.  iv.  5)  was  "between  Ramah*  and  Bethel," 
in  one  of  the  sultry  valleys  enclosed  in  the  lime 
stone  hills  which  compose  this  district.  The  Levite 
and  his  concubine  in  their  journey  from  Bethlehem 
to  Ephraim  passed  Jerusalem,  and  pressed  on  to 
Gibeah,  or  even  if  possible  beyond  it  to  Ramah 
(Judg.  xix.  13).  In  the  struggles  between  north 
and  south,  which  followed  the  disruption  of  the 
kingdom,  Ramah,  as  a  frontier  town,  the  possession 
of  which  gave  absolute  command  of  the  north  road 
from  Jerusalem  (1  K.  xv.  17),  was  taken,  fortified, 
and  retaken  (ibid.  21,  22 ;  2  Chr.  xvi.  1,  5,  6). 

After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  it  appears  to 
have  been  used  as  the  depot  for  the  prisoners  (Jer. 
xl.  1 ) ;  and,  if  the  well-known  passage  of  Jeremiah 
(xxxi.  15),  in  which  he  introduces  the  mother  of 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin  weeping  over  the  loss  of  her 
children,  alludes  to  this  Ramah,  and  not  to  one 
nearer  to  her  sepulchre  at  Bethlehem,  it  was  pro- 


Rama  as  "juxta  Gabaa  in  septimo  lapide  a  lerosolymis 
stta." 

<»  The  Targum  on  this  passage  substitutes  for  the  Palm 
of  Deborah,  Ataroth-Deborah,  no  doubt  referring  to  the 
town  of  Ataroth.  This  has  everything  In  its  farour 
since  'Atara  is  still  found  on  the  left  hand  of  tlw 
north  mod,  very  nearly  midway  between  er-Htm  and 


S^H  RAMAH 

bably  also  the  scene  of  the  slaughter  of  such  of  the 
captives  as  from  age,  weakness,  or  poverty,  were 
not  worth  the  long  transport  across  the  desert  to 
Babylon.  [RAMA.']  *Its  proximity  to  Gibeah  is  im 
plied  in  1  Sam.  xxii.  6« ;  Hos.  v.  8 ;  Ezr.  ii.  26; 
Neh.  vii.  30 :  the  last  two  of  which  passages  show 
also  that  its  people  returned  after  the  Captivity.  The 
Ramah  in  Neh.  xi.  33  occupies  a  different  position  in 
the  list,  and  may  be  a  distinct  place  situated  further 
west,  nearer  the  plain.  (This  and  Jer.  xxxi.  15  are 
the  only  passages  in  which  the  name  appears  with 
out  the  article.)  The  LXX.  find  an  allusion  to 
Ramah  in  Zech.  xiv.  10,  where  they  render  the 
words  which  are  translated  in  the  A.  V.  "and  shall 
be  lifted  up  (HD&O),  and  inhabited  in  her  place," 

T  V  T 

by  "  Ramah  shall  remain  upon  her  place. 

Er-Ram  was  not  unknown  to  the  mediaeval 
travellers,  by  some  of  whom  (e.  gr.  Brocardus, 
Descr.  ch.  vii.)  it  is  recognized  as  Ramah,  but 
it  was  reserved  for  Dr.  Robinson  to  make  the  iden 
tification  certain  and  complete  (Bib.  Res.  i.  576). 
He  describes  it  as  lying  on  a  high  hill,  commanding 
a  wide  prospect — a  miserable  village  of  a  few  halt- 
deserted  houses,  but  with  remains  of  columns, 
squared  stones,  and  perhaps  a  church,  all  indicating 
former  importance. 

In  the  catalogue  of  1  Esdr.  v.  (20)  the  name 
appears  as  CiRAMA. 

2.  ("ApfjidOat/j.  in  both  MSS.,  except  only  1  Sam. 
xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3,  where  the  Alex,  has  'Po^ia).  The 
home  of  Elkanah,  Samuel's  father  (1  Sam.  i.  19, 
ii.  11),  the  birth-place  of  Samuel  himself,  his  home 
and  official  resfdence,  the  site  of  his  altar  (vii.  17, 
viii.  4,  xv.  34,  rvi.  13,  xix.  18),  and  finally  his 
burial-place  (xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3).  In  the  present 
instance  it  is  a  contracted  form  of  RAMATII AIM- 
ZOPHIM,  which  in  the  existing  Hebrew  text  is  given 
at  length  but  once,  although  the  LXX.  exhibit 
Armathaim  on  every  occasion. 

All  that  is  directly  said  as  to  its  situation  is 
that  it  was  in  Mount  Ephraim  (1  Sam.  i.  1),  and 
this  would  naturally  lead  us  to  seek  it  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Shechem.  But  the  whole  tenor 
of  the  narrative  of  the  public  life  of  Samuel  (in 
connexion  with  which  alone  this  Ramah  is  men 
tioned)  is  so  restricted  to  the  region  of  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  and  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Gibeah  the 
residence  of  Saul,  that  it  seems  impossible  not  to 
look  for  Samuel's  city  in  the  same  locality.  It 
appears  from  1  Sam.  vii.  17  that  his  annual  func 
tions  as  prophet  and  judge  were  confined  to  the 
narrow  round  of  Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Mizpeh — the 
first  the  north  boundary  of  Benjamin,  the  second 
near  Jericho  at  its  eastern  end,  and  the  third  on  the 
ridge  in  more  modern  times  known  as  Scopus,  over 
looking  Jerusalem,  and  therefore  near  the  southern 
confines  of  Benjamin.  In  the  centre  of  these  was 
Gibeah  of  Saul,  the  royal  residence  during  the  reign 
of  the  first  king,  and  the  centre  of  his  operations. 
It  would  be  doing  a  violence  to  the  whole  of  this 
part  of  the  history  to  look  for  Samuel's  residence 
outside  these  narrow  limits. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  boundaries  of  Mount 
Ephraim  are  nowhere  distinctly  set  forth.  la  the 


KAMAH 

mouth  of  an  ancient  Hebrew  the  expression  would 
mean  that  portion  of  the  mountainous  district  which 
was  at  the  time  of  speaking  in  the  possession  of 
the  tribe  of  Ephraim.  "  Little  Benjamin  "  was  for 
so  long  in  close  alliance  with  and  dependence  on  its 
more  powerful  kinsman,  that  nothing  is  more  pro 
bable  than  that  the  name  of  Ephraim  may  have 
been  extended  over  the  mountainous  region  which 
was  allotted  to  the  younger  son  of  Rachel.  Of  this 
there  are  not  wanting  indications.  The  palm-tree 
of  Deborah  was  "  in  Mount  Ephraim,"  between 
Bethel  and  Katnah,  and  is  identified  with  great 
plausibility  by  the  author  of  the  Targum  on  Judg. 
iv.  5  with  Ataroth,  one  of  the  landmarks  on  the 
south  boundary  of  Ephraim,  which  still  survives 
in  'Atdra,  2J  miles  north  of  Ramah  of  Benjamin 
(er-Rdm).  Bethel  itself,  though  in  the  catalogue 
of  the  cities  of  Benjamin  (Josh,  xriii.  22),  was 
appropriated  by  Jeroboam  as  one  of  his  idol 
sanctuaries,  and  is  one  of  the  "  cities  of  Mount 
Ephraim"  which  were  taken  from  him  by  Baasha 
and  restored  by  Asa  (2  Chr.  xiii.  19,  rv.  8).  Jere 
miah  (ch.  xxxi.)  connects  Ramah  of  Benjamin  with 
Mount  Ephraim  (vcrs.  6,  9,  15,  18). 

In  this  district,  tradition,  with  a  truer  instinct 
than  it  sometimes  displays,  has  placed  the  resident* 
of  Samuel.  The  earliest  attempt  to  identify  it  is  in 
the  Onomasticon  of  Eusebius,  and  was  not  so  happy. 
His  words  are,  "  Annathem  Seipha :  the  city  of 
Helkana  and  Samuel ;  it  lies  near'  (tr\i\ff[ov )  Dios- 
polls :  thence  came  Joseph,  in  the  Gospels  said  to  b» 
from  Arimathaea."  Diospolis  is  Lydda,  the  modern 
Lucid,  and  the  reference  of  Eusebius  is  no  doubt  to 
Ramleh,  the  well-known  modern  town  two  miles 
from  L&dd.  But  there  is  a  fatal  obstacle  to  this 
identification,  in  the  fact  that  Ramleh  ("  the 
sandy ")  lies  on  the  open  face  of  the  maritime 
plain,  and  cannot  in  any  sense  be  said  to  be  in 
Mount  Ephraim,  or  any  other  mountain  district. 
Eusebius  possibly  refers  to  another  Ramah  named 
in  Neh.  xi.  33  (see  below,  No.  6). 

But  there  is  another  tradition,  that  just  alluded  to, 
common  to  Moslems,  Jews,  and  Christians,  up  to  the 
present  day,  which  places  the  residence  of  Samuel  on 
the  lofty  and  remarkable  eminence  of  Neby  Samwil, 
which  rises  four  miles  to  the  N.W.  of  Jerusalem, 
and  which  its  height  (greater  than  that  of  Jeru 
salem  itself),  its  commanding  position,  and  its  pe 
culiar  shape,  render  the  most  conspicuous  object 
in  all  the  landscapes  of  that  district,  and  make  the 
names  of  Ramah  and  Zophim  exceedingly  appro 
priate  to  it.  The  name  first  appears  in  the  travels 
of  Arculf  (A.D.  cir.  700),  who  calls  it  Saint  Samuel. 
Before  that  date  the  relics  of  the  Prophet  had  been 
transported  from  the  Holy  Land  to  Thrace  by  the 
emperor  Arcadius  (see  Jerome  contr.  Vigilantium, 
§5),  and  Justinian  had  enlarged  or  completed  "a 
well  and  a  wall"  for  the  sanctuary  (Procopius,  de 
Aedif.v.c&p.  9).  True,  neither  of  these  notices  names 
the  spot,  but  they  imply  that  it  was  well  known,  and 
so  far  support  the  placing  it  at  Neby  Samicil.  Since 
the  days  of  Arculf  the  tradition  appears  to  have  been 
continuous  (see  the  quotations  in  Hob.  B.  R.  i.  459 ; 
Tobler,  881,  &c.).  The  modern  village,  though 
miserable  even  among  the  wretched  collections  of 


•  This  passage  may  either  be  translated  (with  Junius, 
Mlcbaelig,  De  Wette,  and  Bunsen),  «•  Saul  abode  in  Gibeah 
under  the  tamarisk  on  the  height "  (In  which  case  it  will 
add  one  to  the  scanty  number  of  cases  In  which  the  word 
i*  used  otherwise  than  as  a  proper  name),  or  It  may 


render  the  words  "  on  the  hill  under  the  field  in  Bama." 
Eusebius,  in  the  Onomasticon  ('Po/io),  characterizes  Ram&L 
as  the  "  city  of  Saul." 

<  Jerome  agrees  with  Eusebius  in  his  translation  of  Una 
passage;  but  in  the  Epitaphium  I'aulae  (Epist  cvill.)  he 


imply  th:it  Ramah  was  included  within  the  precincts  of    connects  Ramleh  with  Arimathaea  only,  and  placet  il 
U>e  king's  city.    The  LXX.  read  Bama  for  Ramah,  and     'xwdprooula  Lyddd. 


RAM  AH 

bevels  which  crown  the  hills  in  this  neiehbcur- 
hood,  bears  marks  of  antiquity  in  cisterns  and  other 
traces  of  former  habitation.  The  mosque  is  said  to 
stand  on  the  foundations  of  a  Christian  church,  pro 
bably  that  which  Justinian  built  or  added  to.  The 
ostensible  tomb  is  a  mere  wooden  box ;  but  below 
it  is  a  cave  or  chamber,  apparently  excavated,  like 
that  of  the  patriarchs  at  Hebron,  from  the  solid 
rock  of  the  hill,  and,  like  that,  closed  against  all 
access  except  by  a  narrow  aperture  in  the  top, 
through  which  devotees  are  occasionally  allowed  to 
transmit  their  lamps  and  petitions  to  the  sacred 
vault  below. 

Here,  then,  we  are  inclined,  in  the  present  state 
of  the  evidence,  to  place  the  Ramah  of  Samuel.« 
And  there  probably  would  never  have  been  any 
\-esistance  to  the  traditional  identification  if  it  had 
not  been  thought  necessary  to  make  the  position 
of  Ramah  square  with  a  passage  with  which  it 
does  not  seem  to  the  writer  to  have  necessarily 
any  connexion.  It  is  usually  assumed  that  the 
city  in  which  Saul  was  anointed  by  Samuel  (1 
Sam.  ix.  x.)  was  Samuel's  own  city  Ramah.  Jose 
phus  certainly  (Ant.  vi.  4,  §1)  does  give  the 
name  of  the  city  as  Armathem,  and  in  his  version 
of  the  occurrence  implies  that  the  Prophet  was 
at  the  time  in  his  own  house ;  but  neither  the 
Hebrew  nor  the  LXX.  contains  any  statement 
which  confirms  this,  if  we  except  the  slender  fact 
that  the  "  land  of  Zuph "  (ix.  5)  may  be  con 
nected  with  the  Zophim  of  Ramathaim-zophim. 
The  words  of  the  maidens  (ver.  12)  may  equally 
imply  either  that  Samuel  had  just  entered  one  of 
his  cities  of  circuit,  or  that  he  had  just  returned  to 
his  own  house.  But,  however  this  may  be,  it 
follows  from  the  minute  specification  of  Saul's 
route  in  1  Sam.  x.  2,  that  the  city  in  which  the 
interview  took  place  was  near  the  sepulchre  of 
Rachel,  which,  by  Gen.  xxxv.  16,  19  and  other 
reasons,  appears  to  be  fixed  with  certainty  as  close 
to  Bethlehem.  And  this  supplies  a  strong  argu 
ment  against  its  being  Ramathaim-zophim,  since, 
while  Mount  Ephraim,  as  we  have  endeavoured 
already  to  show,  extended  to  within  a  few  miles 
north  of  Jerusalem,  there  is  nothing  to  warrant  the 
supposition  that  it  ever  reached  so  far  south  as 
the  neighbourhood  of  Bethlehem.  Saul's  route 
will  be  most  conveniently  discussed  under  the  head 
of  SAUL;  but  the  question  of  both  his  outward 
and  his  homeward  journey,  minutely  as  they  are 
detailed,  is  beset  with  difficulties,  which  have  been 
increased  by  the  assumptions  of  the  commentators. 
For  instance,  it  is  usually  taken  for  granted  that 
his  father's  house,  and  therefore  the  starting-point 
of  his  wanderings,  was  Gibeah.  True,  Saul  himself, 
after  he  was  king,  lived  at  Gibeah;  but  the  resi 
lience  of  Kish  would  appear  to  have  been  at  ZELA  k 
where  his  family  sepulchre  was  (2  Sam.  xxi  14), 
and  of  Zela  no  trace  has  yet  been  found.  The 
Authorized  Version  has  added  to  the  difficulty  by 
introducing  the  word  "  meet "  in  x.  3  as  the  trans 
lation  of  the  term  which  they  have  more  accu 
rately  rendered  "find"  in  the  preceding  verse. 
Again,  where  was  the  "  hill  of  God,"  the  gibeath- 


BAMA11 


999 


Elohim,  with  the  netsib »  of  the  Philistines  ?  A 
netsib  of  the  Philistines  is  mentioned  later  in  Saul's 
history  (1  Sam.  xiii.  3)  as  at  Geba  opposite  Mich, 
mash.  But  this  is  three  miles  north  of  Gibeah 
of  Saul,  and  does  not  at  all  agree  with  a  situation 
near  Bethlehem  for  the  anointing  of  Saul.  The 
Targum  interprets  the  "hill  of  God"  as  "the 
place  where  the  ark  of  God  was,"  meaning  Kirjath- 
jearim. 

On  the  assumption  that  Ramathaim-zophim  was 
the  city  of  Saul's  anointing,  various  attempts  have 
been  made  to  find  a  site  for  it  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Bethlehem.  (a)  Gesenius  (Thes.  1276a)  sug 
gests  the  Jebel  Fureidis,  four  miles  south-east  of 
Bethlehem,  the  ancient  Herodium,  the  "  Frank 
mountain"  of  more  modem  times.  The  drawback 
to  this  suggestion  is  that  it  is  not  supported  by 
any  hint  or  inference  either  in  the  Bible,  Josephus 
(who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  Herodion),  or 
more  recent  authority.  (6)  Dr.  Robinson  (Bib.  Res. 
ii.  8)  proposes  Soba,  in  tho  mountains  six  miles 
west  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  possible  representative  of 
Zophirn:  but  the  hypothesis  has  little  besides  its 
ingenuity  to  recommend  it,  and  is  virtually  given 
up  by  ite  author  in  a  foot-note  to  the  passage,  (c) 
Van  de  Velde  (Syr.  $  Pal.  ii.  50),  following  the 
lead  of  Wolcott,  argues  for  Rameh  (or  Ramet  el~ 
Khalil,  Rob.  i.  216),  a  well-known  site  of  ruins 
about  two  and  a  half  miles  north  of  Hebron.  His 
main  argument  is  that  a  castle  of  S.  Samuel  is 
mentioned  by  F.  Fabri  in  1483k  (apparently)  as 
north  of  Hebron ;  that  the  name  Raineh  is  iden 
tical  with  Ramah  ;  and  that  its  position  suits  the 
requirements  of  1  Sam.  x.  2-5.  This  is  also  sup 
ported  by  Stewart  (Tent  and  Khan,  247).  (d) 
Dr.  Bonar  (Land  of  Promise,  178,  554-)  adopts 
er-Ram,  which  he  places  a  short  distance  north  of 
Bethlehem,  east  of  Rachel's  sepulchre.  Euscbius 
(Onom.  'PojSeSe')  says  that  "Rama  of  Benjamin" 
is  near  (irtpl)  Bethlehem,  where  the  "voice  in 
Rama  was  heard ;"  and  in  our  times  the  name  is 
mentioned,  besides  Dr.  Bonar,  by  Prokesch  and 
Salzbacher  (cited  in  Rob.  B.  JR.  ii.  Snote),  but  this 
cannot  be  regarded  as  certain,  and  Dr.  Stewart  has 
pointed  out  that  it  is  too  close  to  Rachel's  monu 
ment  to  suit  the  case. 

Two  suggestions  in  an  opposite  direction  must  be 
noticed :  — 

(a)  That  of  Ewald  (Geschichte,  ii.  550),  who 
places  Ramathaim-zophim  at  Ram-attah,  a  mile 
west  of  el-Bireh,  and  nearly  five  noiih  of  Neby 
Samwil.  The  chief  ground  for  the  suggestion 
appears  to  be  the  affix  Allah,  as  denoting  that  a 
certain  sanctity  attaches  to  the  place.  This  would 
be  more  certainly  within  the  limits  of  Mount 
Ephraim,  and  merits  investigation.  It  is  men 
tioned  by  Mr.  Williams  (Diet,  of  Geogr.  "  Ra- 
matha  ")  who,  however,  gives  his  decision  in  favour 
of  Neby  Samwil. 

(6)  That  of  Schwarz  (152-158),  who,  starting 
from  Gibeah-of-Saul  as  the  home  of  Kish,  fixes 
upon  Rameh  north  of  Samaria  and  west  of  Sanur, 
which  he  supposes  also  to  be  Ramoth  or  Jannuth, 


g  "Bethhoron  and  her  suburbs"  were  allotted  to  the 
Kohathite  Levltes,  of  whom  Samuel  was  one  by  descent. 
Perhaps  the  village  on  the  top  of  Neby  Samwil  may  have 
been  dependent  on  the  more  regularly  fortified  Bethhoron 
(1  K.  Ix.  17). 

i>  Zela  (y?¥)  is  quite  a  distinct  name  from  Zelzach 
)•  wi*k  which  some  would  identify  it  («.  gr. 


Stewart,  Tent  and  Khan,  247;  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir. 
&c.  &c.). 

'  The  meaning  of  this  word  is  uncertain.  It  may 
signify  a  garrison,  an  officer,  or  a  commemoration  column 
— a  trophy. 

k  In  the  time  of  Benjamin  of  Tudela  it  was  known  ai 
the  "  house  of  Abraham  "  (B.  of  T.,  ed.  Ashcr,  11.  93). 


1000 


RAMAH 


the  Leviticalm  city  of  Issachar.     Schwarz's  tr 
ments  must  be  read  to  be  appreciated. 

3.  ('Apa^A;»    Alex.  'Pa/ua:    Arama.)    One  of 
the   nineteen   fortified   places   of  Naphtali    (Josh. 
kix.  36)  named  between  Adamah  and  Hazor.     It 
would  appear,  if  the  order  of  the  list  may  be 
accepted,  to  have  been  in  the  mountainous  country 
N.VV.  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth.     In  this  district 
»  place  bearing  the  name  of  Rameh  has  been  dis 
covered  by  Dr.  Robinson  (B.  R.  iii.  78),  which  is 
not  improbably  the  modern  representative  of  the 
Ramah  in  question.      It  lies  on  the  main  track 
between  Akka  and  the   north   end  of  the  Sea  of 
Galilee,  and  about  eight  miles  E.S.E.  of  Safed.     It 
is,  perhaps,  worth  notice  that,  though  the  spot  is 
distinguished  by  a  very  lofty  brow,  commanding 
one  of  the  most  extensive  views  in  all  Palestine 
(Rob.  78),  and  answering  perfectly  to  the  name  of 
Ramah,  yet  that  the  village  of  Rameh  itself  is  on 
the  lower  slope  of  the  hill. 

4.  ('Pa/ia :  fforma.)     One  of  the  landmarks  on 
the  boundary  (A.  V.  "coast")  of  Asher  (Josh.  xix. 
29),  apparently  between  Tyre  and  Zidon.     It  does 
not  appear  to  be  mentioned  by  the  ancient  geogra 
phers  or  travellers,  but  two   places  of  the  same 
name  have  been  discovered  in  the  district  allotted 
to  Asher ;  the  one  east  of  Tyre,  and  within  about 
three  miles  of  it  (Van  de  Velde,  Map,  Memoir), 
the  other  more  than  ten  miles  off,  and  south-east  of 
the  same   city  (Van  de  Velde,   Map ;    Robinson, 
B.  R.  iii.  64).     The  specification  of  the  boundary 
of  Asher  is  very  obscure,  and  nothing  can  yet  be 
gathered  from  it ;    but,  if  either  of  these  places 
represent  the  Ramah  in  question,  it  certainly  seems 
safer  to  identify  it  with  that  nearest  to  Tyre  and 
the  sea-coast. 

5.  ('Pf/Jtp<a8,  Alex.  'Pa/jiuO  ;  'Papd  in  both  cases : 
Ramoth.)     By  this   name   in  2   K.  viii.  29  and 
2  Chr.  xxii.  6,  only,  is  designated  RAMOTH-GILEAD. 
The  abbreviation  is  singular,  since,  in  both  cases,  the 
full  name  occurs  in  the  preceding  verse. 

6.  A  place  mentioned  in  the  catalogue  of  those 
i-e-inhabited  by  the  Benjamites  after  their  return 
from  the  Captivity  (Neh.  xi.  33).     It  may  be  the 
Ramah  of  Benjamin  (above,  No.  1)  or  the  Ramah 
of  Samuel,  but  its  position  in  the  list  (remote  from 
Geba,  Michmash,   Bethel,  ver.  31,  comp.  Ezr.  ii. 
26,  28)  seems  to  remove  it  further  west,  to  the 
neighbourhood  of  Lod,  Hadid,  and  Ono.     There  is 
no  further  notice  in  the  Bible  of  a  Ramah  in  this 
direction,  but  Eusebius  and  Jerome  allude  to  one, 
though  they  may  be  at  fault  in  identifying  it  with 
Ramathaim   and    Arimathaea    (Onom.   "  Armatha 
Sophim ;"  and  the  remarks  of  Robinson,  B.  R.  ii. 
239).     The  situation  of  the  modern  Ramleh  agrees 
very  well  with  this,  a  town  too  important  and  too 
well  plac«d   not   to   have   existed   in  the   ancient 
times.0     The  consideration  that  Ramleh  signifies 
"  sand,"  and  Ramah  "  a  height,"  is  not  a  valid  ar 
gument  against  the  one  being  the  legitimate  suc- 
jcessor  of  the  other.     If  so,  half  the  identifications 
of  modem  travellers   must  be  reversed.    Beit-ur 
can  no  longer  be  the  representative  of  Beth-horon, 
because  dr    means    "  eye,"    while    horon   means 

m  But  Ramoth  was  allotted  to  the  Gershonites,  while 
Samuel  was  a  Kobathlte. 

•  For  the  preceding  name  —  Adamah  —  they  give 
Ap/uat'0. 

0  This  is  evidenced  by  the  attempts  of  Benjamin  of 
Tudela  and  others  to  make  out  Kamleb  to  be  Gath, 
Gezer.  ic, 


RAMATII  OF  THE  SOUTH 

"caves;"  nor  Beit-lahm,  of  Bethlehem,  becntut 
littttn  is  "  flesh,"  and  lehem  "  bread;"  nor  el-Aal, 
of  Elealeh,  because  el  is  in  Arabic  the  article',  and 
in  Hebrew  the  name  of  God.  In  these  cases  th» 
tendency  of  language  is  to  retain  the  sound  at  th» 
expense  of  the  meaning.  [G.] 

RA'MATH-LEHI  (>r6  TOT :  'Aw/Mini 
ffiayAvos :  Ramathlechi,  quad  interpretatur  elevatio 
maxillae).  The  name  which  purports  to  have  been 
bestowed  by  Samson  on  the  scene  of  his  slaughter 
of  the  thousand  Philistines  with  the  jaw-bone  (Judg. 
xv.  17).  "  He  cast  away  the  jaw-bone  out  of  his 
hand,  and  called  that  place  '  Ramath-lehi,'  " — as  if 
"  heaving  of  the  jaw-bone."  In  this  sense  the  name 
(wisely  left  untranslated  in  the  A.  V.)  is  rendered 
by  the  LXX.  and  Vulgate  (as  above).  But  Gesenius 
has  pointed  out  (Thes.  752a)  that  to  be  consistent 
with  this  the  vowel  points  should  be  altered,  and 

the  words  become  *CP  DO"! ;  and  that  as  they  at 
present  stand  they  are  exactly  parallel  to  Ramath- 
mizpeh  and  Ramath-negeb,  and  mean  the  "  height 
of  Lechi."  If  we  met  with  a  similar  account  in 
ordinary  history  we  should  say  that  the  name  had 
already  been  Ramath-lehi,  and  that  the  writer  of 
the  narrative,  with  that  fondness  for  paronomasia 
which  distinguishes  these  ancient  records,  had  in 
dulged  himself  in  connecting  the  name  with  a  pos 
sible  exclamation  of  his  hero.  But  the  fact  of  the 
positive  statement  in  this  rase  may  make  us  hesitate 
in  coming  to  such  a  conclusion  in  less  authoritative 
records.  [G.] 

KA'MATH-MIZTEH  (nSV»n  n»>  with 
def.  article :  'Apa/S&fl  KOT&  r^v  yicur<rri<f>a ;  Alex. 
'Pdyuoofl0  K.  T.  Mcu7<£a :  Ramath,  Misphe).  A  place 
mentioned,  in  Josh.  xiii.  26  only,  in  the  specifica 
tion  of  the  territory  of  Gad,  apparently  as  one  of 
its  northern  landmarks,  Heshbon  being  the  limit  on 
the  south.  But  of  this  our  ignorance  of  the  topo 
graphy  east  of  the  Jordan  forbids  us  to  speak  at 
present  with  any  certainty. 

There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  it  is  the  same 
place  with  that  early  sanctuary  at  which  Jacob  and 
Laban  set  up  their  cairn  of  stones,  and  which  re 
ceived  the  names  of  MIZPEH,  Galeed,  and  Jegar 
Sahadutha :  and  it  seems  very  probable  that  all 
these  are  identical  with  Ramoth-Gilead,  so  notorious 
in  the  later  history  of  the  nation.  In  the  Books  of 
Maccabees  it  probably  appears  in  the  garb  of  Maspha 
(1  Mace.  v.  35),  but  no  information  is  afforded  us 
in  either  Old  Test,  or  Apocrypha  as  to  its  position. 
The  lists  of  places  in  the  districts  north  ot  es-Salt 
collected  by  Dr.  Eli  Smith,  and  given  by  Dr.  Ro 
binson  (B.  R.  1st  edit.  App.  to  vol.  iii.),  contain 
several  names  which  may  retain  a  trace  of  Ramath, 
viz.  Rumemin  (1676),  Reim&n  (166a),  Rwnrama 
(165a),  but  the  situation  of  these  places  is  not 
accurately  known,  and  it  is  impossible  to  say  whether 
they  are  appropriate  to  Ramath-Mizpeh  or  not. 

[G.] 

RA'MATH  OF  THE  SOUTH  (333  HCn  : 
juefl  Ka-ru  \l&a  ;  Alex,  by  double  transl.  Oeptjp 


*  This  reading  of  Bamotb  for  Ramath  Is  countenanced 
by  one  Hebrew  MS.  collated  by  Kennicott.  It  is  also  fol 
lowed  by  the  Vulgate,  which  gives  Hamoth,  Masphe  (tin- 
reading  in  the  text  is  from  the  Benedictine  Edition  of  the 
Bibliotheca  Divina).  On  the  other  hand  there  Is  no  war 
rant  whatever  for  separating  the  two  words,  as  If  belong 
ing  to  distinct  places,  as  is  done  in  both  tlie  Latin  texts. 


RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM 

.  .  .  Mfj.t6  K.  A.  :  Ramath  contra  auatralnn 
plttgam),  more  accurately  I  Jamah  of  the  Soucn. 
One  of  the  towns  in  the  allotment  of  Simeon  (Josh. 
lix.  8),  apparently  at  its  extreme  south  limit.  It 
appears  from  this  passage  to  have  been  another 
aame  for  BAALATH-BEER.  Hamah  is  not  men 
tioned  in  the  list  of  Judah  (cornp.  Josh.  xv.  21-32), 
nor  in  that  of  Simeon  in  1  Chr.  iv.  28-33,  nor  is  it 
mentioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  Van  de  Velde 
(Memoir,  342)  takes  it  as  identical  with  Ramath- 
Lehi,  which  he  finds  at  Tell  el-Lekiyeh  ;  but  this 
appeal's  to  be  so  far  south  as  to  be  out  of  the  circle 
of  Samson's  adventures,  and  at  any  rate  must  wait 
for  further  evidence. 

It  is  in  all  probability  the  same  place  as  SOUTH 
P.AMOTH  (1  Sam.  xxx.  27),  and  the  towns  in  com 
pany  with  which  we  find  it  in  this  passage  confirm 
the  opinion  given  above  that  it  lay  very  much  to 
the  south.  [G.] 


RAMATHITE,  THE 


1001 


KAMATHA'IM  ZOTHIM  (D'Qi* 

'App-adalp.  2€<4>d;  Alex.  A.  2<*><f>i/u  :  Ramathaim 
Kophiiri).  The  full  form  of  the  name  of  the  town 
in  which  Elkanah,  the  father  of  the  prophet  Samuel, 
resided.  It  is  given  in  its  complete  shape  in  the 
Hebrew  text  and  A.  V.  but  once  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  Else 
where  '(\.  19,  ii.  11,  vii.  17,  viii.  4,  xv.  34,  xvi. 
13,  xix.  18,  19,  22,  23,  xx.  1,  xxv.  1,  xxviii.  3)  it 
occurs  in  the  shorter  form  of  Ramah.  [HAMAH,  2.] 
The  LXX.,  however  (in  both  MSS.),  give  it  through 
out  as  Armathaim,  and  insert  it  in  i.  3  after  the 
words  "  his  city,"  where  it  is  wanting  in  the  He 
brew  and  A.  V. 

Ramathaim,  if  interpreted  as  a  Hebrew  word,  is 
dual  —  "  the  double  eminence."  This  may  point  to 
a  peculiarity  in  the  shape  or  nature  of  the  place,  or 
may  be  an  instance  of  the  tendency,  familiar  to  all 
students,  which  exists  in  language  to  force  an 
archaic  or  foreign  name  into  an  intelligible  form. 
This  has  been  already  remarked  in  the  case  of  Jeru 
salem  (vol.  i.  982a)  ;  and,  like  that,  the  present 
name  appears  in  the  form  of  RAMATHEM,  as  well 
as  that  of  Ramathaim. 

Of  the  force  of  "  Zophim"  no  feasible  explana 
tion  has  been  given.  It  was  an  ancient  name  on 
the  east  of  Jordan  (Num.  xxiii.  14),  and  there,  as 
here,  was  attached  to  an  eminence.  In  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan,  Eamathaim-zophim  is  rendered  "  Ra- 
matha  of  the  scholars  of  the  prophets  ;"  but  this  is 
evidently  a  late  interpretation,  arrived  at  by  regard 
ing  the  prophets  as  watchmen  (the  root  of  zophim, 
also  that  of  mizpeh,  having  the  force  of  looking 
out  afar),  coupled  with  the  fact  that  at  Naioth  in 
Ramah  there  was  a  school  of  prophets.  It  will  not 
escape  observation  that  one  of  the  ancestors  of 
Elkanah  was  named  Zophai  or  Zuph  (1  Chr.  vi. 
26,  35),  and  that  when  Saul  approached  the  city 
in  which  he  encountered  Samuel  he  entered  the 
land  of  Zuph  ;  but  no  connexion  between  these 
names  and  that  of  Ramathaim-zophim  has  yet  been 
established. 

Even  without  the  testimony  of  the  LXX.  there 
is  no  doubt,  from  the  narrative  itself,  that  the 
Ramah  of  Samuel  —  where  he  lived,  built  an  altar, 
died,  and  \v«s  Duried  —  was  the  same  place  as  the 
Ramah  or  Ramathaim-Zophim  in  which  he  was 
born.  It  is  implied  by  Josephus,  and  affirmed  by 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  in  the  Onomasticon  ("  Arma- 
them  Seipha"),  nor  would  it  ever  have  been  ques 
tioned  bad  there  not  been  other  Ramahs  mentioned 
in  the  sacred  history. 

Of  its  position  nothing,  or  next  to  nothing,  can 


be  gathered  from  the  narrative.  It  was  in  Mount 
Ephraim  (1  Sam.  i.  1).  It  had  apparently  at 
tached  to  it  a  place  called  NAIOTH,  at  which  the 
"  company"  (or  "school,"  as  it  is  called  in  modern 
times)  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  was  maintained 
(xix.  18,  &c.,  xx.  1  )  ;  and  it  had  also  in  its  neighbour 
hood  (probably  between  it  and  Gibeah-of-Saul)  a 
great  well  known  as  the  well  of  Has-Sechu  (xix.  22). 
[SECHU.]  But  unfortunately  these  scanty  particulars 
throw  no  light  on  its  situation.  Naioth  and  Sechu 
have  disappeared,  and  the  limits  of  Mount  Ephraim 
are  uncertain.  In  the  4th  century  Ramathaim- 
Zophim  (Onomasticon,  "  Armatha-sophim")  was 
located  near  Diospolis  (Lydda),  probably  at  Ramleh  ; 
but  that  is  quite  untenable,  and  quickly  disappeared 
in  favour  of  another,  probably  older,  certainly  more 
feasible  tradition,  which  placed  it  on  the  lofty  and 
remarkable  hill  four  miles  N.W.  of  Jerusalem, 
known  to  the  early  pilgrims  and  Crusaders  as 
Saint  Samuel  and  Mont  Joye.  It  is  now  universally 
designated  Neby  Samwil  —  the  "  Prophet  Samuel"  ; 
and  in  the  mosque  which  crowns  its  long  ridge 
(itself  the  successor  of  a  Christian  church),  his 
sepulchre  is  still  reverenced  alike  by  Jews,  Moslems, 
and  Christians. 

There  is  no  trace  of  the  name  of  Ramah  or 
Zophim  having  ever  been  attached  to  this  hill  since 
the  Christian  era,  but  it  has  borne  the  name  of  the 
great  Prophet  certainly  since  the  7th  century,  and 
not  improbably  from  a  still  earlier  date.  It  is  not 
too  far  south  to  have  been  within  the  limits  of 
Mount  Ephraim.  It  is  in  the  heart  of  the  district 
where  Saul  resided,  and  where  the  events  in  which 
Samuel  took  so  large  a  share  occurred.  It  com 
pletes  the  circle  of  the  sacred  cities  to  which  the 
Prophet  was  in.  the  habit  of  making  his  annual 
circuit,  and  which  lay  —  Bethel  on  the  north, 
Mizpeh8  on  the  south,  Gilgal  on  the  east,  and  (if 
we  accept  this  identification)  Ramathaim-zophim  on 
the  west  —  round  the  royal  city  of  Gibeah,  in  which 
the  King  resided  who  had  been  anointed  to  his 
office  by  the  Prophet  amid  such  universal  expecta 
tion  and  good  augury.  Lastly,  as  already  remarked, 
it  has  a  tradition  in  its  favour  of  early  date  and  of 
great  persistence.  It  is  true  that  even  these  grounds 
are  but  slight  and  shifting,  but  they  are  more  than 
can  be  brought  in  support  of  any  other  site  ;  and 
the  task  of  proving  them  fallacious  must  be  under 
taken  by  those  who  would  disturb  a  tradition  so  old, 
and  which  has  the  whole  of  the  evidence,  slight  as 
that  is,  in  its  favour. 

This  subject  is  examined  in  greater  detail,  and  in 
connexion  with  the  reasons  commonly  alleged  against 
the  identification,  under  RAMAH,  No.  2.  [G.] 

EA'MATHEM  (Paeapftv,  Mai  and  Alex.; 
Joseph.  'PafjLaOa  :  Ramathari).  One  of  th«  thre? 
"  governments  "  (yafiol  and  roirapx^0*)  which  were 
added  to  Juda«i  by  king  Demetrius  Nicator,  out  c/ 
the  country  of  Samaria  (1  Mace.  xi.  34)  ;  the  others 
were  Apherema  and  Lydda.  It  no  doubt  derived 
its  name  from  a  town  of  the  name  of  RAMATHAIM, 
probably  that  renowned  as  the  birthplace  of  Samuel 
the  Prophet,  though  this  cannot  be  stated  with  cei- 
tainty.  [G"-l 

EA'MATHITE,  THE  OniTin  :  & 


Alex.  6  'Pa/j.a8aios  :  Romathites).  Shimei  the  Ra- 
mathite  had  charge  of  the  royal  vineyards  of  King 
David  (1  Chr.  xxvii.  27).  The  name  implies  that  h« 


a  On  the  ridge  of  Scopus,  according  to  the  opinion  of  O»« 
writer  (see  MurAii,  p.  389). 


1002 


BAMESE8 


svas  native  of  a  place  called  Ramah.but  of  the  various 
Hamahs  mentioned  none  is  said  to  have  been  re 
markable  for  vines,  nor  is  there  any  tradition  or 
n*her  clue  by  which  the  particular  Ramah  to  which 
this  worthy  belonged  can  be  identified.  [G-] 

KAM'ESES  (Dppyi :  'Papeov? :  Ramesses) 
or  BAAM'SES  (DDpJH :  'Pa/*e<nrTj :  Ramesses) 
*  city  and  district  of  Lower  Egypt.  There  can  be 
no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  same  city  is  designated 
by  the  Rameses  and  Raamses  of  the  Heb.  text,  and 
that  this  was  the  chief  place  of  the  land  of  Rameses, 
all  the  passages  referring  to  the  same  region.  The 
name  is  Egyptian,  the  same  as  that  of  several  kings 
of  the  empire,  of  the  xviiith,  xi.xt  li,  and  xxth  dy 
nasties.  In  Egyptian  it  is  written  RA-MESES  or 
RA-MSES,  it  being  doubtful  whether  the  short 
vowel  understood  occurs  twice  or  once:  the  first 
vowel  is  represented  by  a  sign  which  usually  corre 
sponds  to  the  Hebrew  ]},  in  Egyptian  transcriptions 
of  Hebrew  names,  and  Hebrew,  of  Egyptian. 

The  first  mention  of  Rameses  is  in  the  narrative 
of  the  settling  by  Joseph  of  his  father  and  brethren 
in  Egypt,  where  it  is  related  that  a  possession  was 
given  them  "in  the  land  of  Rameses"  (Gen.  xlvii. 
11).  This  land  of  Rameses,  DDOyn  pK,  either 
corresponds  to  the  land  of  Goshen,  or  was  a  district 
if  it,  more  probably  the  former,  as  appears  from  a 
comparison  with  a  parallel  passage  (6).  The  name 
next  occurs  as  that  of  one  of  the  two  cities  built  for 
the  Pharaoh  who  first  oppressed  the  children  of 
Israel .  "  And  they  built  for  Pharaoh  treasure 
cities  (Tl'USpD  njj),  Pithom  and  Raamses"  (Ex. 
i.  11).  So  'in  the"  A.  V.  The  LXX.,  however, 
reads  ir<f\ets  oxvpdi,  aud  the  Vulg.  urbes  taberna- 
culonim,  as  if  the  root  had  been  p{J>.  The  signifi 
cation  of  the  word  fl133DK)  is  decided  by  its  use 
for  storehouses  of  com,  wine,  and  oil,  which  Heze- 
kiah  had  (2  Chr.  xxxii.  28).  We  should  therefore 
here  read  store-cities,  which  may  have  been  the 
meaning  of  our  translators.  The  name  of  PITHOM 
'ndicates  the  region  near  Heliopolis,  and  therefore 
ihe  neighbourhood  of  Goshen  or  that  tract  itself, 
and  there  can  therefore  be  no  doubt  that  Raamses 
is  Rameses  in  the  land  of  Goshen.  In  the  narrative 
of  the  Exodus  we  read  of  Rameses  as  the  starting- 
point  of  the  journey  (Ex.  xii.  37 ;  see  also  Num. 
xxxiii. -3,  5). 

If  then  we  suppose  Rameses  or  Raamses  to  have 
t>een  the  chief  town  of  the  land  of  Rameses,  either 
Goshen  itself  or  a  district  of  it,  we  have  to  endea 
vour  to  determine  its  situation.  Lepsius  supposes 
that  Aboo-Kesheyd  is  on  the  site  of  Rameses  (see 
Map,  vol.  i.  p.  598).  His  reasons  are,  that  in  the 
LXX.  Heroopolis  is  placed  in  the  land  of  Rameses 
(ica.6'  'Hpdtav  ir6\iv,  Iv  yfj  'Pa/wo-trij,  or  «'j 
yrjv  'Pafj-fffffrj),  in  a  passage  where  the  Heb.  only 
mentions  "the  land  of  Goshen"  (Gen.  xlvi.  28), 
and  that  there  is  a  monolithic  group  at  Aboo-Ke 
sheyd  representing  Turn,  and  Ra,  and,  between  them, 
Rameses  II,,  who  was  probably  there  worshipped. 
There  would  seem  therefore  to  be  an  indication  of 
the  situation  of  the  district  and  city  from  this  men 
tion  of  Heroopolis,  and  the  statue  of  Rameses  might 
mark  a  place  named  after  that  king.  It  must,  how 
ever,  be  remembered  fa)  that  the  situation  of  He 
roopolis  is  a  matter  of  great  doubt,  and  that  there 
fore  we  din  scarcely  take  any  proposed  situation  as 
an  indication  of  that  of  Rameses ;  (6)  that  the  land  of 
fcunescs  may  be  that  of  Goshen,  as  already 


BAMOTH 

in  which  case  the  passage  would  not  affo.M  any 
more  precise  indication  of  the  position  of  the  city 
Rameses  than  that  it  was  in  Goshen,  as  is  evident 
from  the  account  of  the  Exodus  ;  and  (c}  that  the 
mention  of  Heroopolis  in  the  LXX.  would  seem  M 
be  a  gloss.  It  is  also  necessary  to  consider  the  evi 
dence  in  the  Biblical  narrative  of  the  position  of 
Rameses,  which  seems  to  point  to  the  western  part  of 
the  land  of  Goshen,  since  two  full  marches,  and  pait 
at  least  of  a  third,  brought  the  Israelites  from  this 
town  to  the  Red  Sea ;  and  the  narrative  appears  to 
indicate  a  route  for  the  chief  part  directly  towards 
the  sea.  After  the  second  day's  journey  they  "  en 
camped  in  Etham,  in  the  edge  of  the  wilderness " 
(Ex.  xiii.  20),  and  on  the  third  day  they  appear  to 
have  turned.  If,  however,  Rameses  was  w-here 
Lepsius  places  it,  the  route  would  have  been  almost 
wholly  through  the  wilderness,  and  mainly  along 
the  tract  bordering  th  i  Red  Sea  in  a  southerly 
direction,  so  that  they  would  have  turned  almost 
at  once.  If  these  difficulties  are  not  thought  insu 
perable,  it  must  be  allowed  that  they  render  Lep- 
sius's  theory  extremely  doubtful,  and  the  one  fact 
that  Aboo-Kesheyd  is  within  about  eight  miles 
of  the  ancient  head  of  the  gulf,  seems  to  us  fatal 
to  his  identification.  Even  could  it  be  proved 
that  it  was  anciently  called  Rameses,  the  cas3 
would  not  be  made  out,  for  there  is  good  reason  to 
suppose  that  many  cities  in  Egypt  bore  this  name. 
Apart  from  the  ancient  evidence,  we  may  mention 
that  there  is  now  a  place  called  "  Remsees '"  or 
"  Ramsees  "  in  the  Boheyreh  (the  great  province  on 
the  west  of  the  Rosetta  branch  of  the  Nile),  men 
tioned  in  the  list  of  towns  and  villages  of  Egypt  in 
De  Sacy's  "  Abd-allatif,"  p.  664.  It  gave  to  its 
district  the  name  of  "  H6T-Hemsees  "  or  "  Ramsees." 
This  "  Hof"  must  not  be  confounded  with  the 
"  Hof"  commonly  known,  which  was  in  the  district 
ofBilbeys. 

An  argument  for  determining  under  what  dynasty 
the  Exodus  happened  has  been  founded  on  the  name 
Rameses,  which  has  been  supposed  to  indicate  a 
royal  builder.  This  argument  has  been  stated  else 
where  :  here  we  need  only  repeat  that  the  highest 
date  to  which  Rameses  I.  can  be  reasonably  assigned 
s  consistent  alone  with  the  Rabbinical  date  of  the 
Exodus,  and  that  we  find  a  prince  of  the  same  name 
wo  centuries  earlier,  and  therefore  at  a  time  perhaps 
consistent  with  Ussher's  date,  so  that  the  place 
might  have  taken  its  name  either  from  this  prince, 
or  a  yet  earlier  king  or  prince  Rameses.  [CHRONO 
LOGY  ;  EGYPT  ;  PHARAOH.]  [R.  S.  P.] 

KAMES'SE  ( 'Pa/**  ffffTJ  :  om.  in  Vulg.)  = 
RAMESES  (Jud.  i.  9). 

BAMI'AH  (rPOn:  'Pa/Jo:  Remna).  A  lay 
man  of  Israel,  one  of  the  sons  of  Parosh,  who  put 
away  his  foreign  wife  at  Ezra's  command  (Ezr.  x. 
25).  He  is  called  HIERMAS  in  1  Esd.  ix.  26. 

A'MOTH(ntoaO:  r)'-pa.nM:RamotK).  One 
of  the  four  Levitical  cities  of  Issachar  according 
o  the  catalogue  in  1  Chr.  (vi.  73).  In  the 
parallel  list  in  Joshua  (xxi.  28,  29),  amongst  clher 
•ariations,  Jarmuth  appears  in  place  of  Ramoth. 
t  appears  impossible  to  decide  which  is  the  correct 
reading;  or  whether  again  REMETII,  a  town  of 
ssachar,  is  distinct  from  them,  or  one  and  tli€ 
«ame.  No  place  has  been  yet  discovered  which  can 
>e  plausibly  identified  with  either.  [G.J 

EA'MOTH  (niDT  :  Mij^v:  Alex. 'Pi^urf: 
Jl'tntoth).  An  Israelite  layman,  of  the  sons  o'  llaui 


BAMOTH  GILEAD 

who  had  taken  a  strange  wite,  and  at  Ezra  s  insti 
gation  agreed  to  separate  from  her  (Ezv.  x.  29). 
In  the  parallel  passage  of  1  Esdras  (ix.  30)  the  name 
is  given  as  HIEREMOTH.  LG0 

KATttOTH  GIITEAD  OJ?>3 

fffi/j.&j6,  and  'Pajuo>0,  Ta\adS; 
Alex.'Pa/i/iia>0;  Joseph. 'Apeytafla:  Ramoth  Galaad) 
the  "  heights  of  Gilead."  One  of  the  great  fast 
nesses  on  the  east  of  Jordan,  and  the  key  to  an 
important  district,  as  is  evident  not  only  from  the 
direct  statement  of  1  K.  iv.  13,  that  it  commanded 
the  regions  of  Argob  and  of  the  towns  of  Jair,  but 
also  from  the  obstinacy  with  which  it  was  attacked 
and  defended  by  the  Syrians  and  Jews  in  the  reigns 
of  Ahab,  Ahaziah,  and  Joram. 

It  seems  probable  that  it  was  identical  with 
Ramath-Mizpeh,  a  name  which  occurs  but  once 
(Josh.  xiii.  26),  and  which  again  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe  occupied  the  spot  on  which  Jacob 
had  made  his  covenant  with  Laban  by  the  simple 
rite  of  piling  up  a  heap  of  stones,  which  heap  is  ex 
pressly  stated  to  have  borne  the  names  of  both 
GILEAD  and  MI/PEH,  and  became  the  great  sanct 
uary  of  the  regions  east  of  Jordan.  The  variation 
of  Ramoth  and  Ramath  is  quite  feasible.  Indeed, 
it  occurs  in  the  case  of  a  town  of  Judah.  Probably 
from  its  commanding  position  in  the  territory  of 
Gad,  as  well  as  its  sanctity  and  strength,  it  was 
chosen  by  Moses  as  the  City  of  Refuge  for  that 
tribe.  It  is  in  this  capacity  that  its  name  is  first 
introduced  (Deut.  iv.  43;  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  38). 
We  next  encounter  it  as  the  residence  of  one  of 
Solomon's  commissariat  officers,  Ben-geber,  whose 
authority  extended  over  the  important  region  ol 
Argob,  and  the  no  less  important  district  occupied 
by  the  towns  of  Jair  (1  K.  iv.  13). 

In  the  second  Syrian  war  Ramoth-Gilead  playec 
a  conspicuous  part.  During  the  invasion  relatec 
in  1  K.  xv.  20,  or  some  subsequent  incursion,  this 
important  place  had  been  seized  by  Benhadad  I 
from  Omri  (Joseph.  Ant.  viii.  15,  §3).  Ahab  hat 
beeu  too  much  occupied  in  repelling  the  attacks  o; 
Syria  on  his  interior  to  attempt  the  recovery  of  a 
place  so  distant,  but  as  soon  as  these  were  at  an 
end  and  he  could  secure  the  assistance  of  Jeho- 
shaphat,  the  great  and  prosperous  king  of  Judah 
he  planned  an  attack  (1  K.  xxii. ;  2  Chr.  xviii.) 
The  incidents  of  the  expedition  are  well  known :  th 
attempt  failed,  and  Ahab  lost  his  life.  [JEZREEL 
MICAIAH  ;  NAAMAN  ;  ZEDEKIAH.] 

During  Ahaziah's  short  reign  we  hear  nothing  o 
Ramoth,  and  it  probably  remained  in  possession  of  th 
Syrians  till  the  suppression  of  the  Moabite  rebellion 
gave  Joram  time  to  renew  the  siege.  He  allied  himse 
for  the  purpose  as  his  father  had  done,  and  as  h 
himself  had  done  on  his  late  campaign,  with  hi 
relative  the  king  of  Judah.  He  was  more  fortunat 
than  Ahab.  The  town  was  taken  by  Israel  (Joseph 
Ant.  ix.  6,  §1),  and  held  in  spite  of  all  the  effort 
of  Hazael  (who  was  now  on  the  throne  of  Damascus 
to  regain  it  (2  K.  ix.  14).  During  the  eucounte 
Joram  himself  narrowly  escaped  the  fate  of  h 
father,  being  (as  we  learn  from  the  LXX.  versio 
of  2  Chr.  xxii.  6,  and  from  Josephus)  wounded  b 


»  Es  Satt  appears  to  be  an  Arabic  appropriation  of  th 
Bcdesiastical  name  Salton  hieratican — the  sacred  forest 
which  occurs  in  lists  of  the  episcopal  cities  on  the  Kast 
Jordan  (Reland,  Pal.  315,  317).    It  has  now,  as  is  usu 
in  such  cases,  acquired  a  new  meaning  of  its  own — "  th 
brond  Star."    (Compare  ELEALEH.) 

*>  .In  this  connection  ii  w  curious  that  the  Jews  should  d 
rive  JerasV  (which  they  write  EJH3),  l>y  ccatraciiou,  from 


RAMOTH  IN  GILEAD        100b 

e  of  the  Syrian  arrows,  and  that  so  severely  as  w 
ecessitate  his  leaving  the  army  and  retiring  to  his 
alace  at  Jezreel  (2  K.  viii.  28,  ix.  15;  2  Chr. 
xii.  6).  The  fortress  was  left  in  charge  of  Jehu. 
ut  he  was  quickly  called  away  to  the  more  irr 
itant  and  congenial  task  of  rebelling  against  his 
aster.  He  drove  off  from  Ramoth-Gilead  as  if  on 
me  errand  of  daily  occurrence,  but  he  did  not 
eturn,  and  does  not  appear  to  have  revisited  the 
ace  to  which  he  must  mainly  have  owed  his 
•putation  and  his  advancement. 

Henceforward  Ramoth-Gilead  disappears  from  our 
iew.  In  the  account  of  the  Gileadite  campaign 
f  the  Maccabees  it  is  not  recognizable,  unless  it  be 
nder  the  name  of  Maspha  (Mizpeh).  Carnaim 
ppears  to  have  been  the  great  sanctuary  of  the  dis- 
:ict  at  that  time,  and  contained  the  sacred  close 
•ffj.fvos)  of  Ashtaroth,  in  which  fugitives  took 
efuge  (1  Mace.  v.  43). 

Eusebius  and  Jerome  specify  the  position  of  Ra- 
icth  as  15  miles  from  Philadelphia  (Amman). 
.'heir  knowledge  of  the  country  on  that  side  of  the 
ordan  was  however  very  imperfect,  and  in  this  case 
hey  are  at  variance  with  each  other,  Eusebius  placing 
t  west,  and  Jerome  east  of  Philadelphia.  The 
atter  position  is  obviously  untenable.  The  former 
s  nearly  that  of  the  modern  town  of  es-Salt,*  which 
Gesenius  (notes  to  Burckhardt,  p.  1061)  proposes 
to  identify  with  Ramoth-Gilead.  Ewald  (Gesch. 
ii.  500  note),  indeed,  proposes  a  site  further 
loAh  as  more  probable.  He  suggests  Eeimun, 
n  the  northern  slopes  of  the  Jebel  Ajlim,  a  few 
miles  west  of  Jerash,  and  between  it  and  the 
well-known  fortress  of  Kulat  er-Rvbud.  The 
x>sition  assigned  to  it  by  Eusebius  answers  toler 
ably  well  for  a  site  bearing  the  name  of  Jel'dd 


*  exactly  identical  with  the  ancient  He- 

new  Gilead,  which  is  mentioned  by  Seetzen  (Reisen, 
March  11,  1806),  and  marked  on  his  map  (Ibid., 
iv.)  and  that  ofVandeVelde  (1858)  as  four  or 
five  miles  north  of  es-Salt.  And  probably  this 
situation  is  not  very  far  from  the  truth.  If  Ra 
moth-Gilead  and  Ramath-Mizpeh  are  identical,  a 
more  northern  position  than  es-Salt  would  seen: 
inevitable,  since  Ramath-Mizpeh  was  in  the  northeir; 
portion  of  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh.  xiii.  26).  This 
view  is  supported  also  by  the  Arabic  version  of  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  which  gives  Ramah  el-Jeresh,  i.  e. 
the  Gerasa  of  the  classical  geographers,  the  modern 
Jerash  ;  with  which  the  statement  of  the  careful 
Jewish  traveller  Parchi  agrees,  who  says  that 
"  Gilead  is  at  present  b  Djerash  "  (Zunz  in  Asher's 
Benjamin,  405).  Still  the  fact  remains  that  the 
name  of  Jebel  JiFad,  or  Mount  Gilead,  is  attached 
to  the  mass  of  mountain  between  the  Wady  Sho'eib 
on  the  south,  and  Wady  Zerka  on  the  north,  the 
highest  part,  the  Ramoth,  of  which,  is  the  Jebel 
Osha.  [G.] 

BA'MOTH  IN  GIL'EAD  OJ/>|3  nblO  : 
^  'Pa/j.u>0  tv  ToAaciS,  Apr/jucufl,  'PejuyuaO  ToAaaS  , 
Alex.  'Pau/J.uO,  'Pa/ua>0:  Ramoth  in  Galaad),  Deut. 
iv.  43  ;  Josh.  xx.  8,  xxi.  38  ;  IK.  xxii.  3.«  Else 
where  the  shorter  form,  RAMOTH  GILEAD,  is  used. 

6CJ"Vnnt5n3*'  Jegar  Sahadutha,  one  of  the  names  con 
ferred  on  Mizpeh  (Zunz,  as  above). 

c  The  "  In  "  in  this  last  passage  (though  not  distinguished 
by  italics}  is  a  mere  inteipolation  of  the  translator:  th« 
Hebrew  words  do  not  contain  the  preposition,  as  they  do 
in  tfce  three  other  passages,  but  are  exactly  those  whisb 
elsewhere  ave  rendered  "  Kamoth-lnlead." 


1004 


RAMS   HORNS 


RAMS'  HORNS.    [CORNET;  JUUILEE.J 
RAMS'  SKINS  DYED  RED  (D^'K  r 
D'CHNO,  'oroth  elim  meodddmtm  :  Sep/iora 

1)cv0po$a.i><a/jtfva:  pelles  arietuir,  rubricatae)  formec 
part  of  the  materials  that  the  Israelites  were  orderec 
to  present  as  offerings  for  the  making  of  the  Taber 
nacle  (Ex.  xxv.  5)  ;  of  which  they  served  as  one  oi 
the  innei  coverings,  there  being  above  the  rams' 
skins  an  outer  covering  of  badgers'  skius.  [But  see 
BADGER,  App.  A.] 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  A.  V.,  following  the 
LXX.  and  Vulgate,  and  the  Jewish  interpreters,  i: 
correct.  The  original  words,  it  is  true,  admit  ol 
being  rendered  thus  —  "  skins  of  red  rams,"  in  which 
case  meodddmtm  agrees  with  elim  instead  of  'oroth 
(see  Ewald,  Chr.  §570).  The  red  ram  is  by  Ham. 
Smith  (Kitto,  Cycl.  s.  v.)  identified  with  the 
Aoudad  sheep  (Ammotragus  Tragelaphus  ;  see  a 
figure  in  App.  A),  "  whose  normal  colour  is  red, 
from  bright  chestnut  to  rufous  chocolate."  It  is 
much  more  probable,  however,  that  the  skins  were 
those  of  the  domestic  breed  of  rams,  which,  as 
Rashi  says,  "  were  dyed  red  after  they  were  pre 
pared."  [W.  H.] 

RATHA  (flQV.   'PaQaia:   Rapha).     Son  of 

Binea,  among  the  descendants  of  Saul  and  Jonathan 
(1  Chr.  viii.  37).  He  is  called  REPHAIAH  in 
1  Chr.  ix.  43. 

RAPH'AEL  ('Pa^a^\  =  ^Nan,    "  the  divine 


healer  ").  "  One  of  the  seven  holy  angels  which 
....  go  in  and  out  before  the  glory  of  the  Holy 
One  "  (Tob.  xii.  15).  According  to  another  Jewish 
tradition,  Raphael  was  one  of  the  four  angels  which 
stood  round  the  throne  of  God  (Michael,  Uriel, 
Gabriel,  Raphael).  His  place  is  said  to  have  been 
behind  the  throne,  by  the  standard  of  Ephraim 
(comp.  Num.  ii.  18),  and  his  name  was  interpreted 
as  foreshadowing  the  healing  of  the  schism  of  Jero 
boam,  who  arose  from  that  tribe  (1  K.  xi.  26  ; 
Buxtorf,  Lex.  Rabb.  p.  47).  In  Tobit  he  appears 
as  the  guide  and  counsellor  of  Tobias.  By  his  help 
Sara  was  delivered  from  her  plague  (vi.  16,  17), 
and  Tobit  from  his  blindness  (xi.  7,  8).  In  the 
book  of  Enoch  he  appears  as  "  the  angel  of  the 
spirits  of  men"  (xx.  3  ;  comp.  Dillmann,  ad  foe.). 
His  symbolic  character  in  the  apocryphal  narrative 
is  clearly  indicated  when  he  describes  himself  as 
"  Azarias  the  son  of  Ananias  "  (Tob.  v.  12),  the 
messenger  of  the  Lord's  help,  springing  from  the 
Lord's  mercy.  [TOBIT.]  The  name  occurs  in 
1  Chr.  xxvi.  7  as  a  simple  proper  name.  [RE 
FUEL.]  [B.  F.  W.] 

RAPHA'IM  ('Pa<f>erfj'  =  D'lKa'),  Raphaim,  Ra- 
phain).  The  name  of  an  ancestor  of  Judith  (Jud. 
viii.  1  ).  In  some  MSS.  this  name,  with  three  others, 
is  omitted.  [B.  F.  W.] 

RA'PHON  ("Pafttfo  ;  Alex,  and  Joseph.  'Po- 
1><ei>  :  Pesli.  ^-x25>  :  Rapkon).  A  city  of  Gilead, 
under  the  walls  of  which  Judas  Maccabaeus  defeated 
Timotheus  (1  Mace.  v.  37  only).  It  appears  to  have 
stood  on  the  eastern  side  of  an  important  wady, 
and  at  no  great  distance  from  Carnaim—  probably 
Ashteroth-Karnaim.  It  may  have  been  identical 
with  Raphana,  which  is  mentioned  by  Pliny  (N.  H. 
v.  16)  as  one  of  the  cities  of  the  Decapolis,  but  with 
no  specification  of  its  position.  Nor  is  there  any 
thing  in  the  narrative  of  1  Mace.,  of  2  Mace,  (xii.'), 


RAVEN 

or  of  Josephus  (Ant.  xii.  8,  §3),  to  enable  ,u>  to 
decide  whether  the  torrent  in  question  is  (he  Hiero 
max,  the  Zurka,  or  any  other. 

In  Kiepert's  map  accompanying  Wetzstein's  Hatt- 
ran,  &c.  (I860),  a  place  named  Er-It&fe  is  mai -kwl, 
on  the  east  of  Wady  Hrer,  one  of  the  branches  of 
the  Wady  Mandhur,  and  close  to  the  great  road 
leading  to  Sanamein,  which  last  has  some  claims 
to  be  identified  with  Ashteroth  Carnaim.  But  in 
our  present  ignorance  of  the  district  this  can  only  be 
taken  as  mere  conjecture.  If  Er-Rafe  be  Raphana 
we  should  expect  to  find  large  ruins.  [G.] 

RA'PHU(N-lEn:  'Pa^ou:  Raphu).  The  father 

of  Palti,  the  spy  selected  from  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
(Num.  xiii.  9). 

RAS'SES,  CHILDREN  OF  (viol  '?a<r<rt?t : 
filti  Tharsis).  One  of  the  nations  whose  country 
was  ravaged  by  Holofernes  in  his  approach  to  Juduea 
(Jud.  ii.  23  only).  They  are  named  next  to  Lud 
(Lydia),  and  apparently  south  thereof.  The  old 
Latin  version  reads  Thiras  et  Rasis,  with  which 
the  Peshito  was  probably  in  agreement  before  the 
present  corruption  of  its  text.  Wolff  (Las  Buck 
Judith,  1861,  pp.  95,  96)  restores  the  original 
Chaldee  text  of  the  passage  as  Thars  and  Roses,  and 
compares  the  latter  name  with  Rhesus,  a  place  on 
the  Gulf  of  Issus,  between  the  Ras  el-Khamir 
(Rhossicus  scopulus)  and  Iskender&n,  or  Alexan- 
dretta.  If  the  above  restoration  of  the  original  text 
is  correct,  the  interchange  of  Meshech  and  Rosos, 
as  connected  with  Thar  or  Thiras  (see  Gen.  x.  2), 
is  very  remarkable ;  since  if  Meshech  be  the  original 
of  Muscovy,  Rosos  can  hardly  be  other  than  that 
of  Russia.  [RosH.]  [G.] 

RATH'UMUS    ('Pdevnos;    Alex.    'PdOvos 
Rathimus).  "  Rathumus  the  story  writer"  of  1  Esd. 
ii.  16,  17,  25,  30,  is  the  same  as  "REHUM  the 
chancellor"  of  Ezr.  iv.  8,  9,  17,  23. 

RAVEN  (3ny,  'oreb  :    Kopat  :    corpus),  the 

well-known  bird  of  that  name  which  is  mentioned  in 
various  passages  in  the  Bible.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the  Heb.  'oreb  is  correctly  translated,  the  old 
versions  agreeing  on  the  point*  and  the  etymology, 
from  a  root  signifying  "  to  be  black,"  favouring  this 
rendering.  A  raven  was  sent  out  by  Noah  from  the 
ark  to  see  whether  the  waters  were  abated  (Gen. 
viii.  7).  This  bird  was  not  allowed  as  food  by  the 
Mosaic  law  (Lev.  xi.  15) :  the  word  'oreb  is  doubt, 
less  used  in  a  generic  sense,  and  includes  other 
species  of  the  genus  Corvus,  such  as  the  crow  ( C. 
corone),  and  the  hooded  crow  (C.  comix).  Ravens 
were  the  means,  under  the  Divine  command,  of 
supporting  the  prophet  Elijah  at  the  brook  Cherith 
(1  K.  xvii.  4,  6).  They  are  expressly  mentioned 
as  instances  of  God's  protecting  love  and  goodness 
(Job  xxxviii.  41,  Luke  xii.  24,  Ps.  cxlvii.  9). 
They  are  enumerated  with  the  owl,  the  bittern,  &c., 
as  marking  the  desolation  of  Edom  (Is.  xxxiv.  1 1). 
"  The  locks  of  the  beloved "  are  compared  to  the 
lossy  blackness  of  the  raven's  plumage  (Cant, 
v.  11).  The  raven's  carnivorous  habits,  and 
esi>ecialiy  his  readiness  to  attack  the  eye,  are 
alluded  to  in  Prov.  xxx.  17. 

The  LXX.  and  Vulg.  differ  materially  from  the 
lebrew  and  our  Authorised  Version  in  Gen.  viii.  7, 
nor  whereas  in  the  Hebrew  we  read  "  that  the  raven 
went  forth  to  and  fro  [from  the  ark]  until  the 
waters  were  dried  up,"  in  the  two  old  vei-slons 
named  above,  together  with  the  Syriac,  the  raven 


RAZIS 

is  represented  as  "  ntt  returning  -Jntil  the  water 
was  dried  from  oft'  the  earth."  On  this  subject  the 
reader  may  refer  to  Houbigant  (Not.  Grit.  i.  12), 
Bochart  (Hieroz.  ii.  801),  Rosenmiiller  (Schol.  in  V. 
T.~),  Kalisch  (Genesis),  and  Patrick  (Commentary}, 
who  shews  the  manifest  incorrectness  of  the  LXX. 
in  representing  the  raven  as  keeping  away  from  the 
s.rk  while  the  waters  lasted,  but  as  returning  to  it 
when  they  were  dried  up.  The  expression  "  to  and 
fro"  clearly  proves  that  the  raven  must  have  re 
turned  to  the  ark  at  intervals.  The  bird  would 
doubtless  have  found  food  in  the  floating  carcasses 
of  the  Deluge,  but  would  require  a  more  solid 
resting-ground  than  they  could  afford. 

The  subject  of  Elijah's  sustenance  at  Cherith  by 
means  of  ravens  has  given  occasion  to  much  fanci 
ful  speculation.  It  has  been  attempted  to  shew 
that  the  'orebim  ("  ravens ")  were  the  people  of 
Orbo,  a  small  town  near  Cherith ;  this  theory  has 
been  well  answered  by  Reland  (Palaest.  ii.  913). 
Others  have  found  in  the  ravens  merely  merchants ; 
while  Michaelis  has  attempted  to  shew  that  Elijah 
merely  plundered  the  ravens'  nests  of  hares  and 
other  game  !  Keil  (Comment,  in  K.  xvii.)  makes 
the  following  just  observation :  "  The  text  knows 
nothing  of  bird-catching  and  nest-robbing,  but  ac 
knowledges  the  Lord  and  Creator  of  the  creatures, 
who  commanded  the  ravens  to  provide  His  servant 
with  bread  and  flesh." 

Jewish  and  Arabian  writers  tell  strange  stories  of 
this  bird  and  its  cruelty  to  its  young ;  hence,  say 
some,  the  Lord's  express  care  for  the  young  ravens, 
after  they  had  been  driven  out  of  the  nests  by  the 
parent  birds  ;  but  this  belief  in  the  raven's  want  of 
affection  to  its  young  is  entirely  without  founda 
tion.  To  the  fact  of  the  raven  being  a  common 
bird  in  Palestine,  and  to  its  habit  of  flying  rest 
lessly  about  in  constant  search  for  food  to  satisfy  its 
voracious  appetite,  may  perhaps  be  traced  the 
reason  for  its  being  selected  by  our  Lord  and  the 
inspired  writers  as  the  especial  object  of  God's 
providing  care.  The  raven  belongs  to  the  order 
Insessores,  family  Corvidae,  [W.  H.] 

KA'ZIS  ('Pa&l s :  Razias).  "  One  of  the  elders 
of  Jerusalem,"  who  killed  himself  under  peculiarly 
terrible  circumstances,  that  he  might  not  fall  "  into 
the  hands  of  the  wicked  "  (2  Mace.  xiv.  37-46). 
In  dying  he  is  reported  to  have  expressed  his  faith 
in  a  resurrection  (ver.  46) — a  belief  elsewhere  cha 
racteristic  of  the  Maccabaean  conflict.  This  act  oi 
suicide,  which  was  wholly  alien  to  the  spirit  of  the 
Jewish  law  and  people  (Ewald,  Alterth.  198  ;  John 
viii.  22 ;  oomp.  Grot.  De  Jure  Belli,  II.  xix.  5),  has 
been  the  subject  of  considerable  discussion.  It  was 
quoted  by  the  Donatists  as  the  single  fact  in  Scrip 
ture  which  supported  their  fanatical  contempt  01 
life  (Aug.  Ep.  104,  6).  Augustine  denies  the  fit 
ness  of  the  model,  and  condemns  the  deed  as  that 
of  a  man  "  non  eligendae  mortis  sapiens,  sed  ferendai 
humilitatis  impatiens "  (Aug.  I.  c. ;  cornp.  c.  Gaud 
\.  36-39).  At  a  later  time  the  favour  with  which 
the  writer  of  2  Mace,  views  the  conduct  of  Razis — 
a  fact  which  Augustine  vainly  denies — wai  urgec 
rightly  by  Protestant  writers  as  an  argument  .igains 
the  inspiration  of  the  book.  Indeed  the  whole  nar 
rative  breathes  the  spirit  of  pagan  heroism,  or  of  th 
Inter  zealots  (comp.  Jos.  B.  J.  iii.  7,  iv.  1,  §10),  an 


KEBEKAH 


1005 


ie  deaths  of  Samson  and  Saul  offer  no  satisfactory 
arallel  (comp.  Grimm,  ad  loc.).          [B.  F.  W.] 

EAZOB."  Besides  other  usages,  the  practica 
'  shaving  the  head  after  the  completion  of  a  vow, 
ust  have  created  among  the  Jews  a  necessity  for 
ie  special  trade  of  a  barber  (Num.  vi.  9,  18,  viii 
;  Lev.  xiv.  8 ;  Judg.  xiii.  5 ;  Is.  vii.  20 ;  Ez.  v.  1  ; 
cts  xviii.  18).  The  instruments  of  his  work  were 
robably,  as  in  modern  times,  the  razor,  the  basin, 
ie  mirror,  and  perhaps  also  the  scissors,  such  as 
re  described  by  Lucian  (Adv.  Indoct.  p.  395,  vol. 
.  ed.  Amst. ;  see  2  Sam.  xiv.  26).  The  process  of 
oriental  shaving,  and  especially  of  the  head,  is  mi- 
utely  described  by  Chardin  (Voy.  iv.  144).  It 
wy  be  remarked  that,  like  the  Levites,  the  Egyp- 
an  priests  were  accustomed  to  shave  their  whole 
odies  (Her.  ii.  36,  37).  [H.  W.  P.] 

BEAI'A(rPJO:  'Prix*:  Re'ia).  A  Reubenite, 
on  of  Micah,  and  apparently  prince  of  his  tribe 
1  Chr.  v.  5).  The  name  is  identical  with 

KEAI'AH(rVNn:  'PdSa;  Alex.  'Peitf :  Ram}. 
..  A  descendant  of  Shubal,  the  son  of  Judah  (1 
Chr.  iv.  2). 

2.  ('Paid,  Ezr.  ;  'Paaid,  Neh. :  Raaia}  The 
hildren  of  Reaiah  were  a  family  of  Nethinim  wh3 
eturned  from  Babylon  with  Zerubbabel  (Ezr.  i., 
r7 ;  Neh.  vii.  50).  The  name  appeal's  as  AiRUS 
n  1  Esd.  v.  31. 

RE'BA  (JDT:  'PO&&K  in  Num.,  'Po£e  in  Josh. : 

Rebe).  One  of  the  five  kings  of  the  Midianites  slain 
>y  the  children  of  Israel  in  their  avenging  expe 
dition,  when  Balaam  fell  (Num.  xxxi.  8  ;  Josh.  xiii. 
1).  The  different  equivalents  for  the  name  in  the 
LXX.  of  Numbers  and  Joshua  seem  to  indicate  that 
;hese  books  were  not  translated  by  the  same  hand. 

REBEC'CA  ('PfpeKKa :  Rebecca).  The  Greek 
form  of  the  name  REBEKAH  (Rom.  ix.  10  only). 

REBEK'AH  (Hj?^,  i.e.  Ribkah:  'PefleW: 

Rebecca),  daughter  of  Bethuel  (Gen.  xxii.  23)  and 
sister  of  Laban,  married  to  Isaac,  who  stood  in 
the  relation  of  a  first  cousin  to  her  father  and  tc 
Lot.  She  is  first  presented  to  us  in  the  account  of 
the  mission  of  Eliezer  to  Padan-aram  (Gen.  xxiv.), 
in  which  his  interview  with  Rebekah,  her  consent  and 
marriage,  are  related.  The  whole  chapter  has  been 
pointed  out  as  uniting  most  of  the  circumstances  of 
a  pattern-marriage.  The  sanction  of  parents,  the 
guidance  of  God,  the  domestic  occupation  of  Rebekah, 
her  beauty,  courteous  kindness,  willing  consent  and 
modesty,  and  success  in  retaining  her  husbat.d's 
love.  For  nineteen  years  she  was  childless :  then, 
after  the  prayers  of  Isaac  and  her  journey  to  in 
quire  of  the  Lord,  Esau  and  Jacob  were  born, 
and  while  the  younger  was  more  particularly  the 
companion  and  favourite  of  his  mother  (xxv.  19-28) 
the  elder  became  a  grief  of  mind  to  her  (xxvi.  35). 
When  Isaac  was  driven  by  a  famine  into  the  lawless 
country  of  the  Philistines,  Rebekah's  beauty  became, 
as  was  apprehended,  a  source  of  danger  to  her  hus 
band.  But  Abimelech  was  restrained  by  a  sense 
of  justice  such  as  the  conduct  of  his  predecessor 
(xx.)  in  the  case  of  Sarah  would  not  lead  Isaac  to 
expect.  It  was  probably  a  considerable  time  after 
wards  when  Rebekah  suggested  the  deceit  that  waa 


a  1 .  miO  ;  iriSripos,  £vpov ;  novaada,  ferrum :  from 
mD,  "  scrape,"  or  "  sweep."  Gescnius  connects  it  with 
•ie  oct  NT,  "  to  fear"  (Thes.  819). 


2.  "iypl ;  potato. ;  yladius. 

3.  3?  3  ;  icoupevs ;  tontor  (2  Sam.  xx.  8).    In  the  Syriac 
Vers.  of  2  Sam.  XT.  K,  gal>bo  is  "  a  razor  "  (Gee.  f.  283). 


1006 


HECHAB 


practised  by  Jacob  on  his  blind  fi.thcr.  She  dirertnl 
and  aided  him  in  currying  it  out,  foresaw  the  pro 
bable  consequence  of  Esau's  anger,  and  prevented  it 
by  moving  Isaac  to  send  Jacob  away  to  Padan-aram 
(xxvii.)  to  her  own  kindred  (xxix.  12).  The  Targum 
Pseudojon.  states  (Gen.  xxxv.  8)  that  the  news  of  her 
death  was  brought  to  Jacob  at  A  lion-bach  uth.  It 
has  been  conjectured  that  she  died  during  his 
sojourn  in  Padan-aram ;  for  her  nurse  appears  to 
have  left  Isaac's  dwelling  and  gone  back  to  Padan- 
aram  before  that  period  (compare  xxiv.  59  and 
xxxv.  8),  and  Rebekah  is  not  mentioned  when  Jacob 
returns  to  his  father,  nor  do  we  hear  of  her  burial 
till  it  is  incidentally  mentioned  by  Jacob  on  his 
deathbed  (xlix.  31). 

St.  Paul  (Rom.  ix.  10)  refers  to  her  as  being 
made  acquainted  with  the  purpose  of  God  regarding 
her  children  before  they  were  bora. 

For  comments  on  the  whole  history  of  Hebekah, 
tee  Origen,  Horn,  in  Gen.  x.  and  xii. ;  Chrysostom, 
Horn,  in  Genesin,  48-54.  Rebekah  s  inquiry  of 
fiod,  and  the  answer  given  to  her,  are  discussed  by 
Deyling,  Obser.  Sac.  i.  12,  p.  53  seq.,  and  in  an 
essay  by  J.  A.  Schmid  in  Nov.  Thcs.  Theol.-Phi- 
lolog.  i.  188.  [W.T.  B.] 

RE'CHAB  (33n  =  "  the  horseman,"  from 
33*1,  rdcab,  "  to  ride"  :  'Prjx<*0  :  Rechab).  Three 
persons  bearing  this  name  are  mentioned  in  the 
0.  T. 

1.  The  father  or  ancestor  of  Jehonadab  (2  K.  x. 
15,  23;  1  Chr.  ii.  55;  Jer.  xxxv.  6-19),  identified 
by  some  writers,  but  conjecturally  only,  with  Hobab 
(Arias  Montanus  on  Judg.  i. ;  Sanctius,  quoted  by 
Calmet,  Diss.  sur  les  Rechabites).   [RECHABITES.] 

2.  One  of  the  two  "captains  of  bands"  (fiyoii- 
fifi-oi  arvffTpefi.fj.d.Tui',  principes  latronurri),  whom 
Ishbosheth  took  into  his  service,  and  who,  when  his 
cause  was  failing,  conspired  to  murder  him  (2  Sam. 
iv.  2).    Josephus  (Ant.  vii.  2,  §1)  calls  him  Qivvos. 
[BAANAH  ;  ISHBOSHETH,  vol.  i.  p.  891.) 

3.  The  father  of  Malchiah,  ruler  of  part  of  Beth- 
haccerem  (Neh.  iii.  14),  named  as  repairing  the 
dung-gate  in  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem  under 
Kehemiah.  [E.  H.  P.] 

BE'CHABITES  (D-QDn :  'Apxafck,  'A*x«- 
3« iv :  Rechabitae).  The  tribe  thus  named  appears 
before  us  in  one  memorable  scene.  Their  history 
before  and  after  it  lies  in  some  obscurity.  We  are 
left  to  search  out  and  combine  some  scattered  notices, 
and  to  get  from  them  what  light  we  can. 

(I.)  In  1  Chr.  ii.  55,  the  house  of  Rechab  is 
identified  with  a  section  of  the  Kenites,  who  came 
into  Canaan  with  the  Israelites  and  retained  their 
nomadic  habits,  and  the  name  of  Hammath  is 
mentioned  as  the  patriarch  of  the  whole  tribe. 
[KENITES  :  HEMATH.]  It  has  been  inferred  from 
this  passage  that  the  descendants  of  Rechab  be 
longed  to  a  branch  of  the  Kenites  settled  from  the 
first  at  Jabez  in  Judah.  [JEHONADAB.]  The  fact, 
however,  that  Jehonadab  took  an  active  part  in  the 
revolution  which  placed  Jehu  on  the  throne,  seems 
to  indicate  that  he  and  his  tribe  belonged  to  Israel 
rather  than  to  Judah,  and  the  late  date  of  1  Chr., 
taken  together  with  other  facts  (infra),  makes  it 
more  probable  that  this  passage  refers  to  the  locality 
occupied  by  the  Rechabites  after  their  return  from 
the  captivity.*  Of  Rechab  himself  nothing  is  known. 


KECIIAB1TES 

He  may  have  been  the  fattier,  he  may  have  been  tht 
remote  ancetvr  of  Johonadab.  The  meaniLg  of  th« 
word  makes  it  probable  enough  that  it  was  an 
epithet  passing  into  a  proper  name.  It  may  have 
pointed,  as  in  the  robber-chief  of  2  Sam.  iv.  2,  to 
a  conspicuous  form  of  the  wild  Bedouin  life,  and 
Jehonadab,  the  son  of  the  Rider,  may  have  been,  in 
part  at  least,  for  that  reason,  the  companion  and 
friend  of  the  fierce  captain  of  Isitiel  who  drives  as 
with  the  fury  of  madness  (2  K.  ix.  20). 

Another  conjecture  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
name  is  ingenious  enough  to  merit  a  disrntennent 
from  the  forgotten  learning  of  the  sixteenth  cen 
tury.  Boulduc  (De  Eccles.  ante  Leg.  iii.  10)  inters 
from  2  K.  ii.  12,  xiii.  14,  that  the  two  great  pro 
phets  Elijah  and  Elisha  were  known,  each  of  them 
in  his  time,  as  the  chariot  (33/1,  Recheb)  of  Israel, 
».  e.  its  strength  and  protection.  He  infers  from 
this  that  the  special  disciples  of  the  prophets,  who 
followed  them  in  all  their  austerity,  were  known  as 
the  "  sons  of  the  chariot,"  B'ne  Receb,  and  that 
afterwards,  when  the  original  meaning  had  been  lost 
sight  of,  this  was  taken  as  a  patronymic,  and  re 
ferred  to  an  unknown  Rechab.  At  present,  of  course, 
the  different  vowel-points  of  the  two  words  are 
sufficiently  distinctive ;  but  the  strange  reading  of 
the  LXX.  in  Judg.  i.  19  (oVj  'Prixafr  Sifffrti\aro 
auTots,  where  the  A.  V.  has  "  because  they  had 
chariots  of  iron")  shows  that  one  word  might 
easily  enough  be  taken  for  the  other.  Apart  from 
the  evidence  of  the  name,  and  the  obvious  proba 
bility  of  the  fact,  we  have  the  statement  (valeat 
quantum)  of  John  of  Jerusalem  that  Jchouadat 
was  a  disciple  of  Elisha  (De  Instit.  Monach.  c.  25; 

(II.)  The  personal  history  of  JEHONADAB  has 
been  dealt  with  elsewhere.  Here  we  have  to  notice 
the  new  character  which  he  impressed  on  the  tribe, 
of  which  he  was  the  head.  As  his  name,  his 
descent,  and  the  part  which  he  played  indicate,  he 
and  his  people  had  all  along  been  worshippers  of 
Jehovah,  circumcised,  and  so  within  the  covenant 
of  Abraham,  though  not  reckoned  as  belonging  to 
Israel,  and  probably  therefore  not  considering  them 
selves  bound  by  the  Mosaic  law  and  ritual.  The 
worship  of  Baal  introduced  by  Jezebel  and  Ahab 
was  accordingly  not  less  offensive  to  them  than  to 
the  Israelites.  The  luxury  and  licence  of  Phoeni 
cian  cities  threatened  the  destruction  of  the  sim 
plicity  of  their  nomadic  life  (Amos  ii.  7,  8,  vi.  3-6). 
A  protest  was  needed  against  both  evils,  and  as  in 
the  case  of  Elijah,  and  of  the  Nazarites  of  Amos  ii. 
11,  it  took  the  form  of  asceticism.  There  wai  to 
be  a  more  rigid  adherence  than  ever  to  the  old  Arab 
life.  What  had  been  a  traditional  habit,  was  en 
forced  by  a  solemn  command  from  the  sheikh  anc 
prophet  of  the  tribe,  the  destroyer  of  idolatry, 
which  no  one  dared  to  transgress.  They  were  to 
drink  no  wine,  nor  build  house,  nor  sow  seed,  nor 
plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any.  All  their  days  they 
were  to  dwell  in  tents,  as  remembering  that  they 
were  strangers  in  the  land  (Jer.  xxxv.  6,  7).  This 
was  to  be  the  condition  of  their  retaining  a  distinct 
tribal  existence.  For  two  centuries  and  a  half  they 
adhered  faithfully  to  this  rule ;  but  we  have  no 
record  of  any  part  taken  by  them  in  the  history  of 
the  period.  We  may  think  of  them  as  presenting 
the  same  picture  which  other  tribes,  uniting  the 
nomade  life  with  religious  austerity,  have  presented 
in  later  periods. 


*  In  confirmation  of  this  view,  it  may  be  noticed  that    rendezvous  of  the  nomade  tribe  of  the  Kenites,  with  UH.T 
the  -sliea-iinj-Uuiibt!"  ofi  K.x.14  was  prubably  the  known     flocfa  of  Awv\>     !S»IKAUINC;-HOL-SE.J 


RECHABITES 

Th«  Nabathaeans,  of  whom  Diodorus  Siculus 
upeaks  (xix.  94)  as  neither  sowing  seed,  nor  planting 
fruit-tree,  nor  using  nor  building  house,  and  enforc 
ing  these  transmitted  customs  under  pain  of  death, 
five  us  one  striking  instanced  Another  is  found 
in  the  prohibition  of  wine  by  Mahomet  (Sale's 
Koran,  Prelim.  Diss.  §5).  A  yet  more  interesting 
parallel  is  found  in  the  rapid  growth  of  the  sect 
of  the  Wahabys  during  the  last  and  present  cen 
turies.  Abd-ul-Wahab,  from  whom  the  sect  takes 
its  name,  reproduces  the  old  type  of  character  in  all 
its  completeness.  Anxious  to  protect  his  country 
men  from  the  revolting  vices  of  the  Turks,  as 
Jehonadab  had  been  to  protect  the  Kenites  from 
the  like  vices  of  the  Phoenicians,  the  Bedouin  re 
former  felt  the  necessity  of  returning  to  the  old 
austerity  of  Arab  life.  What  wine  had  been  to  the 
earlier  preacher  of  righteousness,  the  outward  sign 
and  incentive  of  a  fatal  corruption,  opium  and 
tobacco  were  to  the  later  prophet,  and,  as  such, 
were  rigidly  proscribed.  The  rapidity  with  which 
the  Wahabys  became  a  formidable  party,  the  Puri 
tans  of  Islam,  presents  a  striking  analogy  to  the 
strong  political  influence  of  Jehonadab  in  2  K.  x. 
15,  23  (comp.  Burckhardt,  Bedouins  and  Wahabys, 
p.  283,  &c.). 

(III.)  The  invasion  of  Judah  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
in  B.C.  607,  drove  the  Rechabites  from  their  tents. 
Possibly  some  of  the  previous  periods  of  danger 
may  have  led  to  their  settling  within  the  limits 
of  the  territory  of  Judah.  Some  inferences  may 
be  safely  drawn  from  the  facts  of  Jer.  xxxv.  The 
names  of  the  Rechabites  show  that  they  continued 
to  be  worshippers  of  Jehovah.  They  are  already 
known  to  the  prophet.  One  of  them  (ver.  3)  bears 
the  same  name.  Their  rigid  Nazarite  life  gained 
tor  them  admission  into  the  house  of  the  Lord,  into 
one  of  the  chambers  assigned  to  priests  and  Levites, 
within  its  precincts.  They  were  received  by  the 
sons  or  followei-s  of  a  "  man  of  God,"  a  prophet 
or  devotee,  of  special  sanctity  (ver.  4).  Here  they 
are  tempted  and  are  proof  against  the  temptation, 
and  their  steadfastness  is  turned  into  a  reproof  for 
the  unfaithfulness  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  [JERE 
MIAH.]  The  history  of  this  trial  ends  with  a 
special  blessing,  the  full  import  of  which  has,  for 
the  most  part,  not  been  adequately  apprehended: 
"  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  shall  not  want  a  man 
to  stand  before  me  for  ever  "  (ver.  19).  Whether 
we  look  on  this  as  the  utterance  of  a  true  prophet, 
or  as  a  vaticinium  ex  eventu,  we  should  hardly 
expect  at  this  precise  point  to  lose  sight  altogether 
of  those  of  whom  they  were  spoken,  even  if  the 
words  pointed  only  to  the  perpetuation  of  the  name 
mid  tribe.  They  have,  however,  a  higher  meaning. 

The  words  "  to  stand  before  me  "  (»3B?  T?ty),  are 


RECHABITES 


1007 


h  The  fact  that  the  Nabathaeans  habitually  drank  "  wild 
boney  "  (/oieAe.  iypiov)  mixed  with  water  (Diod.  Sic.  xlx.  94), 
Mid  that  the  Bedouins  as  habitually  still  make  locusts  an 
irticle  of  food  (Burckhardt,  Bedouins,  p.  270),  shews  very 
itrongly  that  the  Baptist's  life  was  fashioned  after  the 
Hechabite  as  well  as  the  Nazarite  type. 

«  It  may  be  worth  while  to  refer  to  a  few  authorities 
*greeing  in  the  general  interpretation  here  given,  though 
lUTering  as  to  details.  Vatablus  (Crit.  Sac.  in  loc.)  men 
tions  a  Jewish  tradition  (R.  Judah,  as  cited  by  Kimchi  ; 
oomp.  Scaliger,  Etench.  Trtitaeres.  Serrar.  p.  26)  that  the 
daughters  of  the  Rechabites  married  Levites,  and  that 
thus  their  children  came  to  minister  in  the  Temple. 
Clarius  (Ibid.)  conjectures  that  th<;  Rechabites  themselves 
were  cltosoi  to  sit  in  the  great  Council.  Sanctius  and 


essentially  liturgical.  The  tribe  of  Levi  is  choseu 
to  "  stand  before"  the  Lord  (Deut.  x.  8,  xviii.  5,  7). 
In  Gen.  xviii.  22  ;  Judg.  xx.  28  ;  Ps.  cxxxiv.  I ;  Jer. 
xv.  19,  the  liturgical  meaning  is  equally  prominent 
and  unmistakeable  (comp.  Gesen.  Thes .  s.  v. ;  Grotius 
in  loc.).  The  fact  that  this  meaning  is  given  ("  minis 
tering  before  me  ")  in  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  is  evi 
dence  (1)  as  to  the  received  meaning  of  the  phrase; 

(2)  that  this  rendering  did  not  shock  the  feelings 
of  studious  and  devout  Rabbis  in  Our  Lord's  time  ; 

(3)  that  it  was  at  least  probable,  that  there  existed 
representatives  of  the    Rechabites   connected   with 
the  Temple  services  in  the  time  of  Jonathan.     This 
then,  was  the  extent  of  the  new  blessing.     The 
Rechabites  were  solemnly  adopted  into  the  families 
of  Israel,  and  were  recognised  as  incorporated  into 
the  tribe  of  Levi.c     Their  purity,  their  faithfulness, 
their  consecrated  life  gained  for  them,  as  it  gained 
for  other  Nazarites  that  honour  (comp.  PRIESTS^. 
In  Lam.  iv.  7,  we  may  perhaps  trace  a  reference  to 
the  Rechabites,  who  had  been  the  most  conspicuous 
examples  of  the  Nazarite  life  in  the  prophet's  time, 
and  most  the  object  of  his  admiration. 

(IV.)  It  remains  for  us  to  see  whether  there  are 
any  traces  of  their  after-history  in  the  Biblical  or 
later  writers.  It  is  believed  that  there  are  such 
traces,  and  that  they  confirm  the  statements  made 
in  the  previous  paragraph. 

(1.)  We  have  the  singular  heading  of  the  Ps. 
kxi.  in  the  LXX.  version  (r$  Aam'5,  viwv  'loava- 
8ebj8,  Kal  T<av  irpiartav  a(XMa^a)T"r^*J'TQ"')»  ev'* 
dence,  of  course,  of  a  corresponding  Hebrew  title  in 
the  3rd  century  B.C.,  and  indicating  that  the  "  sons 
of  Jonadab"  shared  the  captivity  of  Israel,  and 
took  their  place  among  the  Levite  psalmists  who 
gave  expression  to  the  sorrows  of  the  people.* 

(2.)  There  is  the  significant  mention  of  a  son 
of  Rechab  in  Neh.  iii.  14,  as  co-operating  with  the 
priests,  Levites,  and  princes  in  the  restoration  of 
the  wall  of  Jerusalem. 

(3.)  The  mention  of  the  house  of  Rechab  in 
1  Chr.  ii.  55,  though  not  without  difficulty,  points, 
there  can  be  little  doubt,  to  the  same  conclusion. 
The  Rechabites  have  become  Scribes  (DHQ1D,  S6- 

pherim).  They  give  themselves  to  a  calling  which, 
at  the  time  of  the  return  from  Babylon  was  chiefly 
if  not  exclusively,  in  the  hands  of  Levites.  The 
other  names  (TIBATIIITES,  SHIJIEATHITES,  and 
SUCHATHITKS  in  A.  V.)  seem  to  add  nothing  to 
our  knowledge.  The  Vulg.  rendering,  however 
(evidence  of  a  traditional  Jewish  interpretation  in 
the  time  of  Jerome),  gives  a  translation  based  on 
etymologies,  more  or  less  accurate,  of  the  proper 
names,  which  strikingly  confirms  the  view  now 
taken.  "  Cognationes  quoque  Scribarum  habitan- 
tiun>  in  Jabes,  canentes  atque  resonantes,  et  in 

way  as  the  Nethlnim  (Calmet,  Diss.  sur  Its  RAAab.  in 
Comni.  vi.  p.  xviii.  1726).  Serrarius  (Trihaeres.')  identifies 
them  with  the  Essenes ;  Scaliger  (1.  c.)  with  the  Chasidim, 
in  whose  name  the  priests  offered  special  daily  sacrifices 
and  who,  in  this  way,  were  "standing  before  che  Lord" 
continually. 

d  Neither  Ewald,  nor  Hengstcnberg,  nor  De  Wette, 
notices  this  inscription.  Ewald,  however,  refers  the  Psalm 
to  the  time  of  the  captivity.  Hengstenberg,  who  asserts 
its  Davidic  authorship,  indicates  an  alphabetic  relation 
between  it  and  Ps.  Ixx.,  which  is  at  least  presumptive  evi 
dence  of  a  later  origin,  and  points,  with  some  fair  proba 
bility,  to  Jeremiah  as  the  writer.  (Comp.  LAMENTATIONS.) 
It  is  noticed,  however,  by  Augustine  (Enarr.  in  Ps.  Ixx.  63) 
and  1>  referred  by  him  to  the  Rechabites  of  Jer.  xxxv. 


Calm?',  suppose  them  to  have  tcmmteml  in  the  same  j 


1008 


RECHABITES 


KED-HEIFER 


tabernaculiscommorantes."8    Thus  interpreted,  the  I  flocks  and  henls,  abstained   iVom  wine  and  flesh, 


passage  points  to  a  resumption  of  the  outward  form 
of  their  old  life  and  its  union  with  their  new  func 
tions.  K  deserves  notice  also  that  while  in  1  Chr. 
A.  54, 55,  tne  Rechabites  and  Netophathites  are  men 
tioned  in  close  connexion,  the  "  sons  of  the  singers  " 
in  Neh.  xii.  28  appear  as  coming  in  large  numbers 
from  the  villages  of  the  same  Netophathites.  The 
close  juxtaposition  of  the  Rechabites  with  the  de 
scendants  of  David  in  1  Chr.  iii.  1,  shows  also  in 
how  honourable  an  esteem  they  were  held  at  the 
time  when  that  book  was  compiled. 

(4.)  The  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  James 
the  Just  given,  by  Hegesippus  (Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  23) 
brings  the  name  of  the  Rechabites  once  more  before 
us,  and  in  a  very  strange  connexion.  While  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  were  stoning  him,  "one  of 
the  priests  of  the  sons  of  Rechab,  the  son  of  Re- 
ehabim,  who  are  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  the  pro 
phet,"  cried  out,  protesting  against  the  crime.  Dr. 
Stanley  (Sermons  and  Essays  on  the  Apostolic  Age, 
p.  333),  struck  with  the  seeming  anomaly  of  a 
priest,  "  not  only  not  of  Levitical,  but  not  even  of 
Jewish  descent,"  supposes  the  name  to  have  been 
used  loosely  as  indicating  the  abstemious  life  of 
James  and  other  Nazarites,  and  points  to  the  fact 
that  Epiphanius  (Jfaer.  Ixxviii.  14)  ascribes  to 
Symeon  the  brother  of  James  the  words  which 
Hegesippus  puts  into  the  mouth  of  the  Rechabite, 
as  a  proof  that  it  denoted  merely  the  Nazarite 
Ibrm  of  life.  Calmet  (Diss.  sur  les  Rechab.  1.  c.) 
supposes  the  man  to  have  been  one  of  the  Rechabite 
Nethinim,  whom  the  informant  of  Hegesippus  took, 
in  his  ignorance,  for  a  priest.  The  view  which  has 
been  here  taken  presents,  it  is  believed,  a  more 
satisfactory  solution.  It  was  hai-dly  possible  that 
a  writer  like  Hegesippus,  living  at  a  time  when 
the  details  of  the  Temple-services  were  fresh  in  the 
memories  of  men,  should  have  thus  spoken  of  the 
Rechabim  unless  there  had  been  a  body  of  men  to 
whom  the  name  was  commonly  applied.  He  uses  it 
as  a  man  would  do  to  whom  it  was  familiar,  without 
being  struck  by  any  apparent  or  real  anomaly.  The 
Targum  of  Jonathan  on  Jer.  xxxv.  19,  indicates,  as 
has  been  noticed,  the  same  fact.  We  may  accept 
Hegesippus  therefore  as  an  additional  witness  to  the 
existence  of  the  Rechabites  as  a  recognized  body  up 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  sharing  in  the  ritual 
of  the  Temple,  partly  descended  from  the  old  "  sons 
of  Jonadab,"  partly  recruited  by  the  incorporation 
into  their  ranks  of  men  devoting  themselves,  as  did 
James  and  Symeon,  to  the  same  consecrated  life. 
The  form  of  austere  holiness  presented  in  the  life 
of  Jonadab,  and  the  blessing  pronounced  on  his 
descendants,  found  their  highest  representatives  in 
the  two  Brothers  of  The  Lord. 

(5.)  Some  later  notices  are  not  without  interest. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela,  in  the  12th  century  (Edit. 
Asher,  1840,  i.  112-114),  mentions  that  near  El 
Jubar  ( =  Pumbeditha)  he  found  Jews  who  were 
named  Rechabites.  They  tilled  the  ground,  kept 


•  The  etymologies  on  which  this  version  rests  are,  H 
must  be  confessed,  somewhat  doubtful.  Scaliger  (Elench. 
Trihaer.  Serrar.  c,  23)  rejects  them  with  scorn.  Pell ican  and 
Calmet,  on  the  other  hand,  defend  the  Vulg.  rendering,  and 
0111  (in  lac.)  does  not  dispute  It  Most  modern  interpreters 
folljw  the  A.  V.  in  taking  the  words  as  proper  names. 

'  A  paper  "  On  recent  Notices  of  the  Uechabites,"  by 


and  gave  tithes  to  teachers  who  devoted  themselves 
to  studying  the  Law,  and  weeping  for  Jerusalem 
They  were  100,000  in  number,  and  were  governed 
by  a  prince,  Salomon  han-Nasi,  who  traced  hid 
genealogy  up  to  the  house  of  David,  and  ruled  over 
the  city  of  Thema  and  Telmas.  A  later  traveller 
Dr.  Wolff,  gives  a  yet  stranger  and  more  detailed 
report.  The  Jews  of  Jerusalem  and  Yemen  toW 
him  that  he  would  find  the  Rechabites  of  Jer.  xxxv. 
living  near  Mecca  (Journal,  1829,  ii.  334).  When 
he  came  near  Senaa  he  came  in  contact  with  a  tribe, 
the  Beni-Khaibr,  who  identified  themselves  with  the 
sons  of  Jonadab.  With  one  of  them,  Mousa,  Wolrf 
conversed,  and  reports  the  dialogue  as  follows : 
"  I  asked  him,  «  Whose  descendants  are  you  ? ' 
Mousa  answered,  '  Come,  and  1  will  show  you,' 
and  read  from  an  Arabic  Bible  the  woi-ds  of  Jer. 
xxxv.  5-11.  He  then  went  on.  '  Come,  and  you 
will  find  us  60,000  in  number.  You  see  the  words 
of  the  Prophet  have  been  fulfilled,  Jonadab  the  son 
of  Rechab  shall  not  want  a  man  to  stand  before 
me  for  ever"'  (ibid.  p.  335).  In  a  later  journal 
(Journ.  1839,  p.  389)  he  mentions  a  second  inter 
view  with  Mousa,  describes  them  as  keeping  strictly 
to  the  old  rule,  calls  them  now  by  the  name  of  the 
B'ne-Arhab,  and  says  that  B'nl  Israel  of  the  tribe 
of  Dan  live  with  them.'  [E.  H.  P.] 

RE'OHAH  (POT:  'P»?x^ ;  Alex. 
Eecha).  In  1  Chr.  iv.  12,  Beth-rapha,  Paseah,  and 
Tehinnah  the  father,  or  founder,  of  Ir-nahash,  are 
said  to  have  been  "  the  men  of  Rechah."  In  the 
Targum  of  R.  Joseph  they  are  called  "  the  men 
of  the  great  Sanhedrin,"  the  Targumist  apparently 
reading  H31. 

RECORDER  (T3 J»),  an  officer  of  high  rank 

in  the  Jewish  state,  exercising  the'  functions,  not 
simply  of  an  annalist,  but  of  chancellor  or  president 
of  the  privy  council.  The  title  itself  may  perhaps 
have  reference  to  his  office  as  adviser  of  the  king : 
at  all  events  the  notices  prove  that  he  was  more 
than  an  annalist,  though  the  superintendence  of  the 
records  was  without  doubt  entrusted  to  him.  In 
David's  court  the  recorder  appears  among  the  high 
officers  of  his  household  (2  Sam.  viii.  16,  xx.  24; 
1  Chr.  rviii.  15).  In  Solomon's,  he  is  coupled  with 
the  three  secretaries,  and  is  mentioned  last,  probably 
as  being  their  president  (1  K.  iv.  3).  Under  Heze- 
kiah,  the  recorder,  in  conjunction  with  the  prefect 
of  the  palace  and  the  secretary ,  represented  the  king 
(2  K.  xviii.  18,  37) :  the  patronymic  of  the  recorder 
at  this  time,  Joah  the  son  of  Asaph,  makes  it  pro 
bable  that  he  was  a  Levite.  Under  Josiah  the 
recorder,  the  secretary,  and  the  governor  of  the 
city  were  entrusted  with  the  superintendence  of  the 
repairs  of  the  Temple  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  8).  These 
notices  are  sufficient  to  prove  the  high  position  held 


by  him. 
KED-HEIFER. 


[W.  L.  B.] 
[SIN-OFFERING,  p.  1324.] 


Signer  Pierotti,  hat  been  read,  since  the  above  was  it 
type,  at  the  Cambridge  Meeting  of  the  British  Association 
(October,  1862).  He  met  with  a  tribe  calling  themselves  bj 
that  name  near  the  Dead  Sea,  about  two  miles  S.K.  from  it 
They  had  a  Hebrew  Bible,  and  said  their  prayers  at  tlif 
tomb  of  a  Jewish  Rabbi.  They  told  him  precisely  the  samt 
stories  as  had  been  told  to  Wolff  thirty  years  before. 


END  OF  THE  SECOND  VOLUME. 


CLOWES  ANT>  WINS,  LIMITED,  STAMFORP  STREET  AM-  CRARnri 


BS  A  Dictionary  of  the  Bibl< 


.868 


vol.   2 


e>s 

MMO